Title: History for ready reference, Volume 1, A-Elba
Author: J. N. Larned
Illustrator: Alan C. Reiley
Release date: May 10, 2021 [eBook #65306]
Most recently updated: October 18, 2024
Language: English
Credits: Don Kostuch
[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 "{123}") are usually placed between paragraphs. In this
case the page number is preceded and followed by an empty line.
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
APPENDIX F on page xxi provides additional details, including
URLs of available internet versions.
----------Subject: End----------
indicates the end of a long group of subheadings or other
large block.
End Transcriber's Notes.]
-----------------------------------------------------------
History For Ready Reference, Volume 1 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 I--A To Elba
Springfield, Massachusetts.
The C. A. Nichols Company., Publishers
MDCCCXCV
Copyright,1893,
By J. N. Larned.
The Riverside Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
United States Of America
Printed by H. O. Houghton & Company.
Preface.
This work has two aims: to represent and exhibit the better
Literature of History in the English language, and to give it
an organized body--a system--adapted to the greatest
convenience in any use, whether for reference, or for reading,
for teacher, student, or casual inquirer.
The entire contents of the work, with slight exceptions readily
distinguished, have been carefully culled from some thousands of
books,--embracing the whole range (in the English language) of
standard historical writing, both general and special: the
biography, the institutional and constitutional studies, the
social investigations, the archeological researches, the
ecclesiastical and religious discussions, and all other important
tributaries to the great and swelling main stream of historical
knowledge. It has been culled as one might pick choice fruits,
careful to choose the perfect and the ripe, where such are found,
and careful to keep their flavor unimpaired.
The flavor of the Literature of History, in its best examples,
and the ripe quality of its latest and best thought, are
faithfully preserved in what aims to be the garner of a fair
selection from its fruits.
History as written by those, on one hand, who have depicted its
scenes most vividly, and by those, on the other hand, who have
searched its facts, weighed its evidences, and pondered its
meanings most critically and deeply, is given in their own words.
If commoner narratives are sometimes quoted, their use enters but
slightly into the construction of the work. The whole matter is
presented under an arrangement which imparts distinctness to its
topics, while showing them in their sequence and in all their
large relations, both national and international.
For every subject, a history more complete, I think, in the
broad meaning of "History," is supplied by this mode than could
possibly be produced on the plan of dry synopsis which is common
to encyclopedic works. It holds the charm and interest of many
styles of excellence in writing, and it is read in a clear light
which shines directly from the pens that have made History
luminous by their interpretations.
Behind the Literature of History, which can be called so in the
finer sense, lies a great body of the Documents of History, which
are unattractive to the casual reader, but which even he must
sometimes have an urgent wish to consult. Full and carefully
chosen texts of a large number of the most famous and important
of such documents--charters, edicts, proclamations, petitions,
covenants, legislative acts and ordinances, and the constitutions
of many countries--have been accordingly introduced and are easily
to be found.
The arrangement of matter in the work is primarily alphabetical,
and secondarily chronological. The whole is thoroughly indexed,
and the index is incorporated with the body of the text, in the
same alphabetical and chronological order.
Events which touch several countries or places are treated fully
but once, in the connection which shows their antecedents and
consequences best, and the reader is guided to that ampler
discussion by references from each caption under which it may be
sought. Economies of this character bring into the compass of
five volumes a body of History that would need twice the number,
at least, for equal fulness on the monographic plan of
encyclopedic works.
Of my own, the only original writing introduced is in a general
sketch of the history of Europe, and in what I have called the
"Logical Outlines" of a number of national histories, which are
printed in colors to distinguish the influences that have been
dominant in them. But the extensive borrowing which the work
represents has not been done in an unlicensed way. I have felt
warranted, by common custom, in using moderate extracts without
permit. But for everything beyond these, in my selections from
books now in print and on sale, whether under copyright or
deprived of copyright, I have sought the consent of those,
authors or publishers, or both, to whom the right of consent or
denial appears to belong. In nearly all cases I have received
the most generous and friendly responses to my request, and
count among my valued possessions the great volume of kindly
letters of permission which have come to me from authors and
publishers in Great Britain and America. A more specific
acknowledgment of these favors will be appended to this preface.
The authors of books have other rights beyond their rights of
property, to which respect has been paid. No liberties have been
taken with the text of their writings, except to abridge by
omissions, which are indicated by the customary signs. Occasional
interpolations are marked by enclosure in brackets. Abridgment by
paraphrasing has only been resorted to when unavoidable, and is
shown by the interruption of quotation marks. In the matter of
different spellings, it has been more difficult to preserve for
each writer his own. As a rule this is done, in names, and in the
divergences between English and American orthography; but, since
much of the matter quoted has been taken from American editions
of English books, and since both copyists and printers have
worked under the habit of American spellings, the rule may not
have governed with strict consistency throughout.
J. N. L.
The Buffalo Library,
Buffalo, New York, December, 1893.
Acknowledgments.
In my preface I have acknowledged in general terms the courtesy
and liberality of authors and publishers, by whose permission I
have used much of the matter quoted in this work. I think it now
proper to make the acknowledgment more specific by naming those
persons and publishing houses to whom I am in debt for such kind
permissions. They are as follows:
Authors.
Professor Evelyn Abbott;
President Charles Kendall Adams;
Professor Herbert B. Adams;
Professor Joseph H. Allen;
Sir William Anson, Bart.;
Reverend Henry M. Baird;
Mr. Hubert Howe Bancroft;
Honorable S. G. W. Benjamin;
Mr. Walter Besant;
Professor Albert S. Bolles;
John G. Bourinot, F. S. S.;
Mr. Henry Bradley;
Reverend James Franck Bright;
Daniel G. Brinton, M. D.;
Professor William Hand Browne;
Professor George Bryce;
Right Honorable James Bryce, M. P.;
J. B. Bury, M. A.;
Mr. Lucien Carr;
Gen. Henry B. Carrington;
Mr. John D. Champlin, Jr.;
Mr. Charles Carleton Coffin;
Honorable Thomas M. Cooley;
Professor Henry Coppée;
Reverend Sir George W. Cox, Bart.;
Gen. Jacob Dolson Cox;
Mrs. Cox (for "'Three Decades of Federal Legislation," by the
late Honorable Samuel S. Cox);
Professor Thomas F. Crane;
Right Reverend Mandell Creighton, Bishop of Peterborough;
Honorable J. L. M. Curry;
Honorable George Ticknor Curtis;
Professor Robert K. Douglas;
J. A. Doyle, M. A.;
Mr. Samuel Adams Drake;
Sir Mountstuart E. Grant-Duff;
Honorable Sir Charles Gaven Duffy;
Mr. Charles Henry Eden;
Mr. Henry Sutherland Edwards;
Orrin Leslie Elliott, Ph. D.;
Mr. Loyall Farragut;
The Ven. Frederic William Farrar, Archdeacon of Westminster;
Professor George Park Fisher;
Professor John Fiske;
Mr. William. E. Foster;
Professor William Warde Fowler;
Professor Edward A. Freeman;
Professor James Anthony Froude;
Mr. James Gairdner;
Arthur Gilman, M. A.;
Mr. Parke Godwin;
Mrs. M. E. Gordon (for the "History of the Campaigns of the
Army of Virginia under Gen. Pope," by the late Gen. George H.
Gordon);
Reverend Sabine Baring-Gould;
Mr. Ulysses S. Grant, Jr. (for the "Personal Memoirs" of the
late Gen. Grant);
Mrs. John Richard Green (for her own writings and for those
of the late John Richard Green);
William Greswell, M. B.;
Major Arthur Griffiths;
Frederic Harrison, M. A.;
Professor Albert Bushnell Hart;
Mr. William Heaton;
Colonel Thomas Wentworth Higginson;
Professor B. A. Hinsdale;
Miss Margaret L. Hooper (for the writings of the late
Mr. George Hooper);
Reverend Robert F. Horton;
Professor James K. Hosmer;
Colonel Henry M. Hozier;
Reverend William Hunt;
Sir William Wilson Hunter;
Professor Edmund James;
Mr. Rossiter Johnson;
Mr. John Foster Kirk;
The Very Reverend George William Kitchin, Dean of Winchester;
Colonel Thomas W. Knox;
Mr. J. S. Landon;
Honorable Emily Lawless;
William E. H. Lecky, LL. D., D. C. L.;
Mrs. Margaret Levi (for the "History of British Commerce,"
by the late Dr. Leone Levi);
Professor Charlton T. Lewis;
The Very Reverend Henry George Liddell, Dean of Christ Church, Oxford;
Honorable Henry Cabot Lodge;
Richard Lodge, M. A.;
Reverend W. J. Loftie;
Mrs. Mary S. Long (for the "Life of General Robert E. Lee," by
the late Gen. A. L. Long);
Mrs. Helen Lossing (for the writings of the late Benson J. Lossing);
Charles Lowe, M. A.;
Charles P. Lucas, B. A.;
Justin McCarthy, M. P.;
Professor John Bach McMaster;
Honorable Edward McPherson,
Professor John P. Mahaffy;
Capt. Alfred T. Mahan, U. S. N.;
Colonel George B. Malleson;
Clements R. Markham, C. B., F. R. S.;
Professor David Masson;
The Very Reverend Charles Merivale, Dean of Ely;
Professor John Henry Middleton;
Mr. J. G. Cotton Minchin;
William R. Morfill, M. A.;
Right Honorable John Morley, M. P.;
Mr. John T. Morse, Jr.;
Sir William Muir;
Mr. Harold Murdock;
Reverend Arthur Howard Noll;
Miss Kate Norgate;
C. W. C. Oman, M. A.;
Mr. John C. Palfrey (for "History of New England," by the late
John Gorham Palfrey);
Francis Parkman, LL. D.;
Edward James Payne, M. A.;
Charles Henry Pearson, M. A.;
Mr. James Breck Perkins;
Mrs. Mary E. Phelan (for the "History of Tennessee," by the
late James Phelan);
Colonel George E. Pond;
Reginald L. Poole, Ph. D.;
Mr. Stanley Lane-Poole;
William F. Poole, LL. D.;
Major John W. Powell;
Mr. John W. Probyn;
Professor John Clark Ridpath;
Honorable Ellis H. Roberts;
Honorable Theodore Roosevelt;
Mr. John Codman Ropes;
J. H. Rose, M. A.;
Professor Josiah Royce;
Reverend Philip Schaff;
James Schouler, LL. D.;
Honorable Carl Schurz;
Mr. Eben Greenough Scott;
Professor J. R. Seeley;
Professor Nathaniel Southgate Shaler;
Mr. Edward Morse Shepard;
Colonel M. V. Sheridan (for the "Personal Memoirs" of the
late Gen. Sheridan);
Mr. P. T. Sherman (for the "Memoirs" of the late Gen. Sherman);
Samuel Smiles, LL. D.;
Professor Goldwin Smith;
Professor James Russell Soley;
Mr. Edward Stanwood;
Leslie Stephen, M. A.;
H. Morse Stephens, M. A.;
Mr. Simon Sterne;
Charles J. Stillé, LL. D.;
Sir John Strachey;
Right Reverend William Stubbs, Bishop of Peterborough;
Professor William Graham Sumner;
Professor Frank William Taussig;
Mr. William Roscoe Thayer;
Professor Robert H. Thurston;
Mr. Telemachus T. Timayenis;
Henry D. Traill, D. C. L.;
Gen. R. de Trobriand;
Mr. Bayard Tuckerman;
Samuel Epes Turner, Ph. D.;
Professor Herbert Tuttle;
Professor Arminius Vambéry;
Mr. Henri Van Laun;
Gen. Francis A. Walker;
Sir D. Mackenzie Wallace;
Spencer Walpole, LL. D.;
Alexander Stewart Webb, LL. D.;
Mr. J. Talboys Wheeler;
Mr. Arthur Silva White;
Sir Monier Monier-Williams;
Justin Winsor, LL. D.;
Reverend Frederick C. Woodhouse;
John Yeats, LL: D.;
Miss Charlotte M. Yonge.
Publishers.
London:
Messrs.
W. H. Allen & Company;
Asher & Company;
George Bell & Sons;
Richard Bentley & Son;
Bickers & Sons;
A. & C. Black;
Cassell & Company;
Chapman & Hall;
Chatto & Windus:
Thomas De La Rue & Company;
H. Grevel & Company;
Griffith, Farran & Company;
William Heinemann:
Hodder & Stoughton;
Macmillan & Company;
Methuen & Company;
John Murray;
John C. Nimmo;
Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Company;
George Philip & Son;
The Religious Tract Society;
George Routledge & Sons;
Seeley & Company;
Smith, Elder & Company;
Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge;
Edward Stanford;
Stevens & Haynes;
Henry Stevens & Son;
Elliot Stock;
Swan Sonnenschein & Company;
The Times;
T. Fisher Unwin;
Ward, Lock, Bowden & Company;
Frederick Warne & Company;
Williams & Norgate.
New York:
Messrs.
D. Appleton & Company;
Armstrong & Company;
A. S. Barnes & Company;
The Century Company;
T. Y. Crowell & Company;
Derby & Miller:
Dick & Fitzgerald;
Dodd, Mead & Company;
Harper & Brothers;
Henry Holt & Company;
Townsend MacCoun;
G. P. Putnam's Sons;
Anson D. F. Randolph & Company;
D. J. Sadler & Company;
Charles Scribner's Sons;
Charles L. Webster & Company;
Edinburgh:
Messrs.
William Blackwood & Sons;
W. & R. Chambers;
David Douglas;
Thomas Nelson & Sons;
W. P. Nimmo;
Hay & Mitchell;
The Scottish Reformation Society.
Philadelphia:
Messrs.
L. H. Everts & Company;
J. B. Lippincott Company;
Oldach & Company;
Porter & Coates.
Boston:
Messrs.
Estes & Lauriat;
Houghton, Mifflin & Company;
Little, Brown & Company;
D. Lothrop Company;
Roberts Brothers.
Dublin:
Messrs.
James Duffy & Company;
Hodges, Figgis & Company;
J. J. Lalor.
Chicago:
Messrs.
Callaghan & Company;
A. C. McClurg & Company;
Cincinnati:
Messrs.
Robert Clarke & Company;
Jones Brothers Publishing Company;
Hartford, Connecticut:
Messrs.
O. D. Case & Company;
S. S. Scranton & Company;
Albany:
Messrs.
Joel Munsell's Sons.
Cambridge, England:
The University Press.
Norwich, Connecticut:
The Henry Bill Publishing Company;
Oxford:
The Clarendon Press.
Providence, R. I.
J. A. & R. A. Reid.
A list of books quoted from will be given in the final volume. I
am greatly indebted to the remarkable kindness of a number of
eminent historical scholars, who have critically examined the
proof sheets of important articles and improved them by their
suggestions. My debt to Miss Ellen M. Chandler, for assistance
given me in many ways, is more than I can describe.
In my publishing arrangements I have been most fortunate, and I
owe the good fortune very largely to a number of friends, among
whom it is just that I should name Mr. Henry A. Richmond,
Mr. George E. Matthews, and Mr. John G. Milburn. There is no
feature of these arrangements so satisfactory to me as that which
places the publication of my book in the hands of the Company of
which Mr. Charles A. Nichols, of Springfield, Massachusetts, is
the head.
I think myself fortunate, too, in the association of my work with
that of Mr. Alan C. Reiley, from whose original studies and
drawings the greater part of the historical maps in these volumes
have been produced.
J. N. Larned.
List Of Maps And Plans.
'Ethnographic map of Modern Europe,'
Preceding the title-page.
Map of American Discovery and Settlement,
To follow page 46
Plan of Athens, and Harbors of Athens,
On page 145 Plan of Athenian house,
On page 162 Four development maps of Austria,
To follow page 196
Ethnographic map of Austria-Hungary,
On page 197
Four development maps of Asia Minor and the Balkan Peninsula,
To follow page 242
Map of the Balkan and Danubian States, showing changes during
the present century,
On page 244
Map of Burgundy under Charles the Bold,
To follow page 332
Development map showing the diffusion of Christianity,
To follow page 432
Logical Outlines, In Colors.
Athenian and Greek history, To follow page 144.
Austrian history, To follow page 198.
Chronological Tables.
The Seventeenth Century:
First half and second half, To follow page 208.
To the Peloponnesian War, and Fourth and Third Centuries, B. C.,
To follow page 166.
Appendices To Volume I.
A. Notes to Ethnographic map;
by Mr. A. C. Reiley.
B. Notes to four maps of Asia Minor and the Balkan Peninsula;
by Mr. A. C. Reiley.
C. Notes to map of the Balkan Peninsula in the present century;
by Mr. A. C. Reiley.
D. Notes to map showing the diffusion of Christianity;
Mr. A. C. Reiley.
E. Notes on the American Aborigines;
by Major J. W. Powell and
Mr. J. Owen Dorsey, of the United States Bureau of Ethnology.
F. Bibliography of America
(Discovery, Exploration, Settlement, Archæology, and Ethnology),
and of Austria.
{1}
History For Ready Reference.
A. C. Ante Christum;
used sometimes instead of the more familiar abbreviation,
B. C.--Before Christ.
A. D. Anno Domini;
The Year of Our Lord.
See ERA, CHRISTIAN.
A. E. I. O. U.
"The famous device of Austria, A. E. I. O. U., was first used
by Frederic III. [1440-1493], who adopted it on his plate,
books, and buildings. These initials stand for 'Austriae Est
Imperare Orbi Universo'; or, in German, 'Alles Erdreich Ist
Osterreich Unterthan': a bold assumption for a man who was not
safe in an inch of his dominions."
H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, volume 2, page 89, foot-note.
A. H. Anno Hejiræ.
See ERA, MAHOMETAN.
A. M.
"Anno Mundi;" the Year of the World, or the year from the
beginning of the world, according to the formerly accepted
chronological reckoning of Archbishop Usher and others.
A. U. C., OR U. C.
"Ab urbe condita," from the founding of the city; or "Anno
urbis Conditæ," the year from the founding of the city; the
Year of Rome.
See ROME: B. C. 753.
AACHEN.
See AIX-LA-CHAPELLE.
AARAU, Peace of (1712).
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1652-1789.
ABÆ, Oracle of.
See ORACLES OF THE GREEKS.
ABBAS I. (called The Great), Shah of Persia; A. D. 1582-1627
Abbas II., A. D. 1641-1666.
Abbas III., A. D. 1732-1736.
ABBASSIDES, The rise, decline and fall of the.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST, &c.: A. D. 715-750; 763; and 815-945;
also BAGDAD: A. D. 1258.
ABBEY.--ABBOT.--ABBESS.
See MONASTERY.
ABDALLEES, The.
See INDIA: A. D. 1747-1761.
ABDALMELIK, Caliph, A. D. 684-705.
ABD-EL-KADER,
The War of the French in Algiers with.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1830-1846.
ABDICATIONS.
Alexander, Prince of Bulgaria.
See BULGARIA: A. D. 1878-1886.
Amadeo of Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1866-1873.
Charles IV. and Ferdinand VII. of Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1807-1808.
Charles V. Emperor.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1552-1561,
and NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1555.
Charles X. King of France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1815-1830.
Charles Albert, King of Sardinia.
See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849.
Christina, Regent of Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1833-1846.
Christina, Queen of Sweden.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1644-1697.
Diocletian, Emperor.
See ROME: A. D. 284-305.
Ferdinand, Emperor of Austria.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1848-1849.
Louis Bonaparte, King of Holland.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1806-1810.
Louis Philippe.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1841-1848.
Milan, King of Servia.
See SERVIA: A. D. 1882-1889.
Pedro I., Emperor of Brazil, and King of Portugal.
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1824-1889,
and BRAZIL: A. D. 1825-1865.
Ptolemy I. of Egypt.
See MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 297-280.
Victor Emanuel I.
See ITALY: A. D. 1820-1821.
William I., King of Holland.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1830-1884.
ABDUL-AZIZ, Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1861-1876.
ABDUL-HAMID, Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1774-1789.
Abdul-Hamid II., 1876-.
ABDUL-MEDJID, Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1839-1861.
ABEL, King of Denmark, A. D. 1250-1252.
ABENCERRAGES, The.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1238-1273, and 1476-1492.
ABENSBURG, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).
ABERCROMBIE'S CAMPAIGN IN AMERICA.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A.D. 1758.
ABERDEEN MINISTRY, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1851-1852, and 1855.
ABIPONES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
ABJURATION OF HENRY IV.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1591-1593.
ABNAKIS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONKIN FAMILY.
ABO, Treaty of (1743).
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1740-1762.
ABOLITIONISM IN AMERICA, The Rise of.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1828-1832; and 1840-1847.
ABORIGINES, AMERICAN.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES.
ABOUKIR, Naval Battle of (or Battle of the Nile).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1798 (MAY-AUGUST).
Land-battle of (1799).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799 (AUGUST-AUGUST).
ABRAHAM, The Plains of.
That part of the high plateau of Quebec on which the memorable
victory of Wolfe was won, September 13, 1759. The plain was so
called "from Abraham Martin, a pilot known as Maitre Abraham,
who had owned a piece of land here in the early times of the
colony."
F. Parkman, Montcalm and Wolfe, volume 2, page 289.
For an account of the battle which gave distinction to the
Plains of Abraham,
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1759, (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
ABSENTEEISM IN IRELAND.
In Ireland, "the owners of about one-half the land do not live
on or near their estates, while the owners of about one fourth do
not live in the country. ... Absenteeism is an old evil, and
in very early times received attention from the government.
... Some of the disadvantages to the community arising from
the absence of the more wealthy and intelligent classes are
apparent to everyone. Unless the landlord is utterly
poverty-stricken or very unenterprising, 'there is
a great deal more going on' when he is in the country. ... I
am convinced that absenteeism is a great disadvantage to the
country and the people. ... It is too much to attribute to it
all the evils that have been set down to its charge. It is,
however, an important consideration that the people regard it
as a grievance; and think the twenty-five or thirty millions
of dollars paid every year to these landlords, who are rarely
or never in Ireland, is a tax grievous to be borne."
D. B. King, The Irish Question, pages 5-11.
{2}
ABSOROKOS, OR CROWS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.
ABU-BEKR, Caliph, A. D. 632-634.
ABU KLEA, Battle of (1885).
See EGYPT: A. D. 1884-1885.
ABUL ABBAS, Caliph, A. D. 750-754.
ABUNA OF ABYSSINIA.
"Since the days of Frumentius [who introduced Christianity
into Abyssinia in the 4th century] every orthodox Primate of
Abyssinia has been consecrated by the Coptic Patriarch of the
church of Alexandria, and has borne the title of Abuna"--or
Abuna Salama, "Father of Peace."
H. M. Hozier, The British Expedition to Abyssinia,
page 4.
ABURY, OR AVEBURY.--STONEHENGE.--CARNAC.
"The numerous circles of stone or of earth in Britain and
Ireland, varying in diameter from 30 or 40 feet up to 1,200,
are to be viewed as temples standing in the closest possible
relation to the burial-places of the dead. The most imposing
group of remains of this kind in this country [England] is
that of Avebury [Abury], near Devizes, in Wiltshire, referred
by Sir John Lubbock to a late stage in the Neolithic or to the
beginning of the bronze period. It consists of a large circle of
unworked upright stones 1,200 feet in diameter, surrounded by
a fosse, which in turn is also surrounded by a rampart of
earth. Inside are the remains of two concentric circles of
stone, and from the two entrances in the rampart proceeded
long avenues flanked by stones, one leading to Beckhampton,
and the other to West Kennett, where it formerly ended in
another double circle. Between them rises Silbury Hill, the
largest artificial mound in Great Britain, no less than 130
feet in height. This group of remains was at one time second
to none, 'but unfortunately for us [says Sir John Lubbock] the
pretty little village of Avebury [Abury], like some beautiful
parasite, has grown up at the expense and in the midst of the
ancient temple, and out of 650 great stones, not above twenty
are still standing. In spite of this it is still to be classed
among the finest ruins in Europe. The famous temple of Stonehenge
on Salisbury Plain is probably of a later date than Avebury,
since not only are some of the stones used in its construction
worked, but the surrounding barrows are more elaborate than
those in the neighbourhood of the latter. It consisted of a
circle 100 feet in diameter, of large upright blocks of sarsen
stone, 12 feet 7 inches high, bearing imposts dovetailed into
each other, so as to form a continuous architrave. Nine feet
within this was a circle of small foreign stones ... and
within this five great trilithons of sarsen stone, forming a
horse-shoe; then a horse-shoe of foreign stones, eight feet
high, and in the centre a slab of micaceous sandstone called
the altar-stone. ... At a distance of 100 feet from the outer
line a small ramp, with a ditch outside, formed the outer
circle, 300 feet in diameter, which cuts a low barrow and
includes another, and therefore is evidently of later date
than some of the barrows of the district."
W. B. Dawkins; Early Man in Britain, chapter 10.
"Stonehenge ... may, I think, be regarded as a monument of the
Bronze Age, though apparently it was not all erected at one time,
the inner circle of small, unwrought, blue stones being
probably older than the rest; as regards Abury, since the
stones are all in their natural condition, while those of
Stonehenge are roughly hewn, it seems reasonable to conclude
that Abury is the older of the two, and belongs either to the
close of the Stone Age, or to the commencement of that of
Bronze. Both Abury and Stonehenge were, I believe, used as
temples. Many of the stone circles, however, have been proved
to be burial places. In fact, a complete burial place may be
described as a dolmen, covered by a tumulus, and surrounded by
a stone circle. Often, however, we have only the tumulus,
sometimes only the dolmen, and sometimes again only the stone
circle. The celebrated monument of Carnac, in Brittany,
consists of eleven rows of unhewn stones, which differ greatly
both in size and height, the largest being 22 feet above ground,
while some are quite small. It appears that the avenues
originally extended for several miles, but at present they are
very imperfect, the stones having been cleared away in places for
agricultural improvements. At present, therefore, there are
several detached portions, which, however, have the same
general direction, and appear to have been connected together.
... Most of the great tumuli in Brittany probably belong to the
Stone Age, and I am therefore disposed to regard Carnac as
having been erected during the same period."
Sir J. Lubbock, Prehistoric Times, chapter 5.
ABYDOS.
An ancient city on the Asiatic side of the Hellespont,
mentioned in the Iliad as one of the towns that were in
alliance with the Trojans. Originally Thracian, as is
supposed, it became a colony of Miletus, and passed at
different times under Persian, Athenian, Lacedæmonian and
Macedonian rule. Its site was at the narrowest point of the
Hellespont--the scene of the ancient romantic story of Hero
and Leander--nearly opposite to the town of Sestus. It was in
the near neighborhood of Abydos that Xerxes built his bridge
of boats; at Abydos, Alcibiades and the Athenians won an
important victory over the Peloponnesians.
See GREECE: B. C. 480, and 411-407.
ABYDOS, Tablet of.
One of the most valuable records of Egyptian history, found in
the ruins of Abydos and now preserved in the British Museum. It
gives a list of kings whom Ramses II. selected from among his
ancestors to pay homage to. The tablet was much mutilated when
found, but another copy more perfect has been unearthed by M.
Mariette, which supplies nearly all the names lacking on the
first.
F. Lenormant, Manual of Ancient History of the East,
volume 1, book 3.
ABYSSINIA: Embraced in ancient Ethiopia.
See ETHIOPIA.
ABYSSINIA: Fourth Century.
Conversion to Christianity.
"Whatever may have been the effect produced in his native
country by the conversion of Queen Candace's treasurer,
recorded in the Acts of the Apostles [chapter VIII.], it would
appear to have been transitory; and the Ethiopian or
Abyssinian church owes its origin to an expedition made early
in the fourth century by Meropius, a philosopher of Tyre, for
the purpose of scientific inquiry. On his voyage homewards, he
and his companions were attacked at a place where they had
landed in search of water, and all were massacred except two
youths, Ædesius and Frumentius, the relatives and pupils of
Meropius. These were carried to the king of the country, who
advanced Ædesius to be his cup-bearer, and Frumentius to be
his secretary and treasurer. On the death of the king, who
left a boy as his heir, the two strangers, at the request of
the widowed queen, acted as regents of the kingdom until the
prince came of age. Ædesius then returned to Tyre, where he
became a presbyter. Frumentius, who, with the help of such
Christian traders as visited the country, had already
introduced the Christian doctrine and worship into Abyssinia,
repaired to Alexandria, related his story to Athanasius, and
... Athanasius ... consecrated him to the bishoprick of Axum
[the capital of the Abyssinain kingdom]. The church thus
founded continues to this day subject to the see of
Alexandria."
J. C. Robertson, History of the Christian Church,
book 2, chapter 6.
{3}
ABYSSINIA: 6th to 16th Centuries.
Wars in Arabia.
Struggle with the Mahometans.
Isolation from the Christian world.
"The fate of the Christian church among the Homerites in
Arabia Felix afforded an opportunity for the Abyssinians,
under the reigns of the Emperors Justin and Justinian, to show
their zeal in behalf of the cause of the Christians. The
prince of that Arabian population, Dunaan, or Dsunovas, was a
zealous adherent of Judaism; and, under pretext of avenging
the oppressions which his fellow-believers were obliged to
suffer in the Roman empire, he caused the Christian merchants
who came from that quarter and visited Arabia for the purposes
of trade, or passed through the country to Abyssinia, to be
murdered. Elesbaan, the Christian king of Abyssinia, made this
a cause for declaring war on the Arabian prince. He conquered
Dsunovas, deprived him of the government, and set up a
Christian, by the name of Abraham, as king in his stead. But
at the death of the latter, which happened soon after,
Dsunovas again made himself master of the throne; and it was a
natural consequence of what he had suffered, that he now
became a fiercer and more cruel persecutor than he was before.
... Upon this, Elesbaan interfered once more, under the reign
of the emperor Justinian, who stimulated him to the
undertaking. He made a second expedition to Arabia Felix, and
was again victorious. Dsunovas lost his life in the war; the
Abyssinian prince put an end to the ancient, independent
empire of the Homerites, and established a new government
favourable to the Christians."
A. Neander, General History of the Christian Religion
and Church, second period, section 1.
"In the year 592, as nearly as can be calculated from the
dates given by the native writers, the Persians, whose power
seems to have kept pace with the decline of the Roman empire,
sent a great force against the Abyssinians, possessed
themselves once more of Arabia, acquired a naval superiority
in the gulf, and secured the principal ports on either side of
it."
"It is uncertain how long these conquerors retained their
acquisition; but, in all probability their ascendancy gave way
to the rising greatness of the Mahometan power; which soon
afterwards overwhelmed all the nations contiguous to Arabia,
spread to the remotest parts of the East, and even penetrated
the African deserts from Egypt to the Congo. Meanwhile
Abyssinia, though within two hundred miles of the walls of
Mecca, remained unconquered and true to the Christian faith;
presenting a mortifying and galling object to the more zealous
followers of the Prophet. On this account, implacable and
incessant wars ravaged her territories. ... She lost her
commerce, saw her consequence annihilated, her capital
threatened, and the richest of her provinces laid waste. ...
There is reason to apprehend that she must shortly have sunk
under the pressure of repeated invasions, had not the
Portuguese arrived [in the 16th century] at a seasonable
moment to aid her endeavours against the Moslem chiefs."
M. Russell, Nubia and Abyssinia, chapter 3.
"When Nubia, which intervenes between Egypt and Abyssinia,
ceased to be a Christian country, owing to the destruction of
its church by the Mahometans, the Abyssinian church was cut
off from communication with the rest of Christendom. ... They
[the Abyssinians] remain an almost unique specimen of a
semi-barbarous Christian people. Their worship is strangely
mixed with Jewish customs."
H. F. Tozer, The Church and the Eastern Empire, chapter 5.
ABYSSINIA: Fifteenth-Nineteenth Centuries.
European Attempts at Intercourse.
Intrusion of the Gallas.
Intestine conflicts.
"About the middle of the 15th century, Abyssinia came in
contact with Western Europe. An Abyssinian convent was endowed
at Rome, and legates were sent from the Abyssinian convent at
Jerusalem to the council of Florence. These adhered to the
Greek schism. But from that time the Church of Rome made an
impress upon Ethiopia. ... Prince Henry of Portugal ... next
opened up communication with Europe. He hoped to open up a
route from the West to the East coast of Africa [see PORTUGAL:
A. D. 1415-1460], by which the East Indies might be reached
without touching Mahometan territory. During his efforts to
discover such a passage to India, and to destroy the revenues
derived by the Moors from the spice trade, he sent an
ambassador named Covillan to the Court of Shoa. Covillan was
not suffered to return by Alexander, the then Negoos [or
Negus, or Nagash--the title of the Abyssinian sovereign]. He
married nobly, and acquired rich possessions in the country.
He kept up correspondence with Portugal, and urged Prince
Henry to diligently continue his efforts to discover the
Southern passage to the East. In 1498 the Portuguese effected
the circuit of Africa. The Turks shortly afterwards extended
their conquests towards India, where they were baulked by the
Portuguese, but they established a post and a toll at Zeyla,
on the African coast. From here they hampered and threatened
to destroy the trade of Abyssinia," and soon, in alliance with
the Mahometan tribes of the coast, invaded the country. "They
were defeated by the Negoos David, and at the same time the
Turkish town of Zeyla was stormed and burned by a Portuguese
fleet." Considerable intimacy of friendly relations was
maintained for some time between the against the Turks.
{4}
Abyssinians and the Portuguese, who assisted in defending them
"In the middle of the 16th century ... a
migration of Gallas came from the South and swept up to and
over the confines of Abyssinia. Men of lighter complexion and
fairer skin than most Africans, they were Pagan in religion
and savages in customs. Notwithstanding frequent efforts to
dislodge them, they have firmly established themselves. A
large colony has planted itself on the banks of the Upper
Takkazie, the Jidda and the Bashilo. Since their establishment
here they have for the most part embraced the creed of
Mahomet. The province of Shoa is but an outlier of Christian
Abyssinia, separated completely from co-religionist districts
by these Galla bands. About the same time the Turks took a
firm hold of Massowah and of the lowland by the coast, which
had hitherto been ruled by the Abyssinian Bahar Nagash.
Islamism and heathenism surrounded Abyssinia, where the lamp
of Christianity faintly glimmered amidst dark superstition in
the deep recesses of rugged valleys." In 1558 a Jesuit mission
arrived in the country and established itself at Fremona. "For
nearly a century Fremona existed, and its superiors were the
trusted advisors of the Ethiopian throne. ... But the same
fate which fell upon the company of Jesus in more civilized
lands, pursued it in the wilds of Africa. The Jesuit
missionaries were universally popular with the Negoos, but the
prejudice of the people refused to recognise the benefits
which flowed from Fremona." Persecution befell the fathers,
and two of them won the crown of martyrdom. The Negoos,
Facilidas, "sent for a Coptic Abuna [ecclesiastical primate]
from Alexandria, and concluded a treaty with the Turkish
governors of Massowah and Souakin to prevent the passage of
Europeans into his dominions. Some Capuchin preachers, who
attempted to evade this treaty and enter Abyssinia, met with
cruel deaths. Facilidas thus completed the work of the Turks
and the Gallas, and shut Abyssinia out from European influence
and civilization. ... After the expulsion of the Jesuits,
Abyssinia was torn by internal feuds and constantly harassed
by the encroachments of and wars with the Gallas. Anarchy and
confusion ruled supreme. Towns and villages were burnt down,
and the inhabitants sold into slavery. ... Towards the middle
of the 18th century the Gallas appear to have increased
considerably in power. In the intestine quarrels of Abyssinia
their alliance was courted by each side, and in their country
political refugees obtained a secure asylum." During the early
years of the present century, the campaigns in Egypt attracted
English attention to the Red Sea. "In 1804 Lord Valentia, the
Viceroy of India, sent his Secretary, Mr. Salt, into
Abyssinia;" but Mr. Salt was unable to penetrate beyond Tigre.
In 1810 he attempted a second mission and again failed. It was
not until 1848 that English attempts to open diplomatic and
commercial relations with Abyssinia became successful. Mr.
Plowden was appointed consular agent, and negotiated a treaty
of commerce with Ras Ali, the ruling Galla chief."
H. M. Hozier, The British Expedition to Abyssinia,
Introduction.
ABYSSINIA: A. D. 1854-1889.
Advent of King Theodore.
His English captives and the Expedition which released them.
"Consul Plowden had been residing six years at Massowah when
he heard that the Prince to whom he had been accredited, Ras
Ali, had been defeated and dethroned by an adventurer, whose
name, a few years before, had been unknown outside the
boundaries of his native province. This was Lij Kâsa, better
known by his adopted name of Theodore. He was born of an old
family, in the mountainous region of Kwara, where the land
begins to slope downwards towards the Blue Nile, and educated
in a convent, where he learned to read, and acquired a
considerable knowledge of the Scriptures. Kâsa's convent life
was suddenly put an end to, when one of those marauding Galla
bands, whose ravages are the curse of Abyssinia, attacked and
plundered the monastery. From that time he himself took to the
life of a freebooter. ... Adventurers flocked to his standard;
his power continually increased; and in 1854 he defeated Ras
Ali in a pitched battle, and made himself master of central
Abyssinia." In 1855 he overthrew the ruler of Tigre. "He now
resolved to assume a title commensurate with the wide extent
of his dominion. In the church of Derezgye he had himself
crowned by the Abuna as King of the Kings of Ethiopia, taking
the name of Theodore, because an ancient tradition declared
that a great monarch would some day arise in Abyssinia." Mr.
Plowden now visited the new monarch, was impressed with
admiration of his talents and character, and became his
counsellor and friend. But in 1860 the English consul lost his
life, while on a journey, and Theodore, embittered by several
misfortunes, began to give rein to a savage temper. "The
British Government, on hearing of the death of Plowden,
immediately replaced him at Massowah by the appointment of
Captain Cameron." The new Consul was well received, and was
entrusted by the Abyssinian King with a letter addressed to
the Queen of England, soliciting her friendship. The letter,
duly despatched to its destination, was pigeon-holed in the
Foreign Office at London, and no reply to it was ever made.
Insulted and enraged by this treatment, and by other evidences
of the indifference of the British Government to his
overtures, King Theodore, in January, 1864, seized and
imprisoned Consul Cameron with all his suite. About the same
time he was still further offended by certain passages in a
book on Abyssinia that had been published by a missionary
named Stern. Stern and a fellow missionary, Rosenthal with the
latter's wife, were lodged in prison, and subjected to flogging
and torture. The first step taken by the British Government,
when news of Consul Cameron's imprisonment reached England,
was to send out a regular mission to Abyssinia, bearing a
letter signed by the Queen, demanding the release of the
captives. The mission, headed by a Syrian named Rassam, made
its way to the King's presence in January, 1866. Theodore
seemed to be placated by the Queen's epistle and promised
freedom to his prisoners. But soon his moody mind became
filled with suspicions as to the genuineness of Rassam's
credentials from the Queen, and as to the designs and
intentions of all the foreigners who were in his power. He was
drinking heavily at the time, and the result of his "drunken
cogitations was a determination to detain the mission--at any
rate until by their means he should have obtained a supply of
skilled artisans and machinery from England."
{5}
Mr. Rassam and his companions were accordingly put into
confinement, as Captain Cameron had been. But they were
allowed to send a messenger to England, making their situation
known, and conveying the demand of King Theodore that a man be
sent to him "who can make cannons and muskets." The demand was
actually complied with. Six skilled artisans and a civil
engineer were sent out, together with a quantity of machinery
and other presents, in the hope that they would procure the
release of the unfortunate captives at Magdala. Almost a year
was wasted in these futile proceedings, and it was not until
September, 1867, that an expedition consisting of 4,000
British and 8,000 native troops, under General Sir Robert
Napier, was sent from India to bring the insensate barbarian
to terms. It landed in Annesley Bay, and, overcoming enormous
difficulties with regard to water, food-supplies and
transportation, was ready, about the middle of January, 1868,
to start upon its march to the fortress of Magdala, where
Theodore's prisoners were confined. The distance was 400
miles, and several high ranges of mountains had to be passed
to reach the interior table-land. The invading army met with
no resistance until it reached the Valley of the Beshilo, when
it was attacked (April 10) on the plain of Aroge or Arogi, by
the whole force which Theodore was able to muster, numbering a
few thousands, only, of poorly armed men. The battle was
simply a rapid slaughtering of the barbaric assailants, and
when they fled, leaving 700 or 800 dead and 1,500 wounded on
the field, the Abyssinian King had no power of resistance
left. He offered at once to make peace, surrendering all the
captives in his hands; but Sir Robert Napier required an
unconditional submission, with a view to displacing him from
the throne, in accordance with the wish and expectation which
he had found to be general in the country. Theodore refused
these terms, and when (April 13) Magdala was bombarded and
stormed by the British troops--slight resistance being
made--he shot himself at the moment of their entrance to the
place. The sovereignty he had successfully concentrated in
himself for a time was again divided. Between April and June
the English army was entirely withdrawn, and "Abyssinia was
sealed up again from intercourse with the outer world."
Cassell's Illustrated History of England,
volume 9, chapter 28.
"The task of permanently uniting Abyssinia, in which Theodore
failed, proved equally impracticable to John, who came to the
front, in the first instance, as an ally of the British, and
afterwards succeeded to the sovereignty. By his fall (10th
March, 1889) in the unhappy war against the Dervishes or
Moslem zealots of the Soudan, the path was cleared for Menilek
of Shoa, who enjoyed the support of Italy. The establishment
of the Italians on the Red Sea littoral ... promises a new era
for Abyssinia."
T. Nöldeke, Sketches from Eastern History, chapter 9.
ALSO IN
H. A. Stern, The Captive Missionary.
H. M. Stanley, Coomassie and Magdala, part 2.
ACABA, the Pledges of.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 609-632.
ACADEMY, The Athenian.
"The Academia, a public garden in the neighbourhood of Athens,
was the favourite resort of Plato, and gave its name to the
school which he founded. This garden was planted with lofty
plane-trees, and adorned with temples and statues; a gentle
stream rolled through it."
G. H. Lewes, Biog. History of Philosophy, 6th Epoch.
The masters of the great schools of philosophy at Athens "chose
for their lectures and discussions the public buildings which
were called gymnasia, of which there were several in different
quarters of the city. They could only use them by the sufferance
of the State, which had built them chiefly for bodily
exercises and athletic feats. ... Before long several of the
schools drew themselves apart in special buildings, and even
took their most familiar names, such as the Lyceum and the
Academy, from the gymnasia in which they made themselves at
home. Gradually we find the traces of some material
provisions, which helped to define and to perpetuate the
different sects. Plato had a little garden, close by the
sacred Eleusinian Way, in the shady groves of the Academy,
which he bought, says Plutarch, for some 3,000 drachmæ. There
lived also his successors, Xenocrates and Polemon. ...
Aristotle, as we know, in later life had taught in the Lyceum,
in the rich grounds near the Ilissus, and there he probably
possessed the house and garden which after his death came into
the hands of his successor, Theophrastus."
W. W. Capes, University life in Ancient Athens,
pages. 31-33.
For a description of the Academy, the Lyceum, and other
gymnasia of Athens.
See GYMNASIA GREEK.
Concerning the suppression of the Academy,
See ATHENS: A. D. 529.
ACADIA.
See NOVA SCOTIA.
ACADIANS, The, and the British Government.
Their expulsion.
See NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1713-1730; 1749-1755, and 1755.
ACARNANIANS.
See AKARNANIANS.
ACAWOIOS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
ACCAD.--ACCADIANS.
See BABYLONIA, PRIMITIVE.
ACCOLADE.
"The concluding sign of being dubbed or adopted into the order
of knighthood was a slight blow given by the lord to the
cavalier, and called the accolade, from the part of the body,
the neck, whereon it was struck. ... Many writers have
imagined that the accolade was the last blow which the soldier
might receive with impunity: but this interpretation is
not correct, for the squire was as jealous of his honour as
the knight. The origin of the accolade it is impossible to
trace, but it was clearly considered symbolical of the
religious and moral duties of knighthood, and was the only
ceremony used when knights were made in places (the field of
battle, for instance), where time and circumstances did not
allow of many ceremonies."
C. Mills, History of Chivalry, page 1, 53, and foot-note.
ACHÆAN CITIES, League of the.
This, which is not to be confounded with the "Achaian League"
of Peloponnesus, was an early League of the Greek settlements
in southern Italy, or Magna Græca. It was "composed of the
towns of Siris, Pandosia, Metabus or Metapontum, Sybaris with
its offsets Posidonia and Laus, Croton, Caulonia, Temesa,
Terina and Pyxus. ... The language of Polybius regarding the
Achæan symmachy in the Peloponnesus may be applied also to
these Italian Achæans; 'not only did they live in federal and
friendly communion, but they made use of the same laws, and
the same weights, measures and coins, as well as of
the same magistrates, councillors and judges.'"
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 1, chapter 10.
{6}
ACHÆAN LEAGUE.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
ACHÆMENIDS, The.
The family or dynastic name (in its Greek form) of the kings
of the Persian Empire founded by Cyrus, derived from an
ancestor, Achæmenes, who was probably a chief of the Persian
tribe of the Pasargadæ. "In the inscription of Behistun, King
Darius says: 'From old time we were kings; eight of my family
have been kings, I am the ninth; from very ancient times we
have been kings.' He enumerates his ancestors: 'My father was
Vistaçpa, the father of Vistaçpa was Arsama; the father of
Arsama was Ariyaramna, the father of Ariyaramna was Khaispis,
the father of Khaispis was Hakhamanis; hence we are called
Hakhamanisiya (Achæmenids).' In these words Darius gives the
tree of his own family up to Khaispis; this was the younger
branch of the Achæmenids. Teispes, the son of Achaemenes, had
two sons; the elder was Cambyses (Kambujiya) the younger
Ariamnes; the son of Cambyses was Cyrus (Kurus), the son of
Cyrus was Cambyses II. Hence Darius could indeed maintain that
eight princes of his family had preceded him; but it was not
correct to maintain that they had been kings before him and
that he was the ninth king."
M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, volume 5, book 8, chapter 3.
ALSO IN
G. Rawlinson, Family of the Achæmenidæ, appendix to
book 7 of Herodotus.
See, also, PERSIA, ANCIENT.
ACHAIA:
"Crossing the river Larissus, and pursuing the northern coast
of Peloponnesus south of the Corinthian Gulf, the traveller
would pass into Achaia--a name which designated the narrow
strip of level land, and the projecting spurs and declivities
between that gulf and the northernmost mountains of the
peninsula. ... Achaean cities--twelve in number at least, if
not more--divided this long strip of land amongst them, from
the mouth of the Larissus and the northwestern Cape Araxus on
one side, to the western boundary of the Sikyon territory on
the other. According to the accounts of the ancient legends
and the belief of Herodotus, this territory had been once
occupied by Ionian inhabitants, whom the Achaeans had
expelled."
G. Grote, History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 4 (volume 2).
After the Roman conquest and the suppression of the Achaian
League, the name Achaia was given to the Roman province then
organized, which embraced all Greece south of Macedonia and
Epirus.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
"In the Homeric poems, where ... the 'Hellenes' only appear in
one district of Southern Thessaly, the name Achæans is employed
by preference as a general appelation for the whole race. But
the Achæans we may term, without hesitation, a Pelasgian
people, in so far, that is, as we use this name merely as the
opposite of the term 'Hellenes,' which prevailed at a later
time, although it is true that the Hellenes themselves were
nothing more than a particular branch of the Pelasgian stock.
... [The name of the] Achæans, after it had dropped its
earlier and more universal application, was preserved as the
special name of a population dwelling in the north of the
Peloponnese and the south of Thessaly."
Georg Friedrich Schömann, Antiquity of Greece:
The State, Introduction.
"The ancients regarded them [the Achæans] as a branch of the
Æolians, with whom they afterwards reunited into one national
body, i.e., not as an originally distinct nationality or
independent branch of the Greek people. Accordingly, we hear
neither of an Achæan language nor of Achæan art. A manifest
and decided influence of the maritime Greeks, wherever the
Achæans appear, is common to the latter with the Æolians.
Achæans are everywhere settled on the coast, and are always
regarded as particularly near relations of the Ionians. ...
The Achæans appear scattered about in localities on the coast
of the Ægean so remote from one another, that it is impossible
to consider all bearing this name as fragments of a people
originally united in one social community; nor do they in fact
anywhere appear, properly speaking, as a popular body, as the
main stock of the population, but rather as eminent families,
from which spring heroes; hence the use of the expression
'Sons of the Achæans' to indicate noble descent."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapter 3.
ALSO IN
M. Duncker, History of Greece,
book 1, chapter 2, and book 2, chapter 2.
See, also,
ACHAIA,
and
GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS.
ACHAIA: A. D. 1205-1387.
Mediæval Principality.
Among the conquests of the French and Lombard Crusaders in
Greece, after the taking of Constantinople, was that of a
major part of the Peloponnesus--then beginning to be called
the Morea--by William de Champlitte, a French knight, assisted
by Geffrey de Villehardouin, the younger--nephew and namesake
of the Marshal of Champagne, who was chronicler of the
conquest of the Empire of the East. William de Champlitte was
invested with this Principality of Achaia, or of the Morea, as
it is variously styled. Geffrey Villehardouin represented him
in the government, as his "bailly," for a time, and finally
succeeded in supplanting him. Half a century later the Greeks,
who had recovered Constantinople, reduced the territory of the
Principality of Achaia to about half the peninsula, and a
destructive war was waged between the two races. Subsequently
the Principality became a fief of the crown of Naples and
Sicily, and underwent many changes of possession until the
title was in confusion and dispute between the houses of
Anjou, Aragon and Savoy. Before it was engulfed finally in the
Empire of the Turks, it was ruined by their piracies and
ravages.
G. Finlay, History of Greece from its Conquest by the
Crusaders, chapter 8.
ACHMET I., Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1603-1617.
Achmet II., 1691-1695.
Achmet III., 1703-1730.
ACHRADINA.
A part of the ancient city of Syracuse, Sicily, known as the
"outer city," occupying the peninsula north of Ortygia, the
island, which was the "inner city."
ACHRIDA, Kingdom of.
After the death of John Zimisces who had reunited Bulgaria to
the Byzantine Empire, the Bulgarians were roused to a struggle
for the recovery of their independence, under the lead of four
brothers of a noble family, all of whom soon perished save
one, named Samuel. Samuel proved to be so vigorous and able a
soldier and had so much success that he assumed presently the
title of king. His authority was established over the greater
part of Bulgaria, and extended into Macedonia, Epirus and
Illyria. He established his capital at Achrida (modern
Ochrida, in Albania), which gave its name to his kingdom. The
suppression of this new Bulgarian monarchy occupied the
Byzantine Emperor, Basil II., in wars from 981 until 1018,
when its last strongholds, including the city of Achrida, were
surrendered to him.
G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine Empire from 716 to
1057, book 2, chapter 2, section 2.
{7}
ACKERMAN, Convention of (1826).
See TURKS: A. D. 1826-1829.
ACOLAHUS, The.
See MEXICO, ANCIENT: THE TOLTEC EMPIRE.
ACOLYTH, The.
See VARANGIAN or WARING GUARD.
ACRABA, Battle of, A. D. 633.
After the death of Mahomet, his successor, Abu Bekr, had to
deal with several serious revolts, the most threatening of
which was raised by one Moseilama, who had pretended, even in
the life-time of the Prophet, to a rival mission of religion.
The decisive battle between the followers of Moseilama and
those of Mahomet was fought at Acraba, near Yemama. The
pretender was slain and few of his army escaped.
Sir W. Muir, Annals of the Early Caliphate, chapter 7.
ACRABATTENE, Battle of.
A sanguinary defeat of the Idumeans or Edomites by the Jews
under Judas Maccabæus, B. C. 164.
Josephus, Antiquity of the Jews, book 12, chapter 8.
ACRAGAS.
See AGRIGENTUM.
ACRE (St. Jean d'Acre, or Ptolemais): A. D. 1104.
Conquest, Pillage and Massacre by the Crusaders and Genoese.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1104-1111.
ACRE: A. D.1187.
Taken from the Christians by Saladin.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1149-1187.
ACRE: A. D. 1189-1191.
The great siege and reconquest by the Crusaders.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1188-1192.
ACRE: A. D. 1256-1257.
Quarrels and battles between the Genoese and Venetians.
See VENICE: A. D. 1256-1257.
ACRE: A. D. 1291.
The Final triumph of the Moslems.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1291.
ACRE: 18th Century.
Restored to Importance by Sheik Daher.
"Acre, or St. Jean d'Acre, celebrated under this name in the
history of the Crusades, and in antiquity known by the name of
Ptolemais, had, by the middle of the 18th century, been almost
entirely forsaken, when Sheik Daher, the Arab rebel, restored
its commerce and navigation. This able prince, whose sway
comprehended the whole of ancient Galilee, was succeeded by
the infamous tyrant, Djezzar-Pasha, who fortified Acre, and
adorned it with a mosque, enriched with columns of antique
marble, collected from all the neighbouring cities."
M. Malte-Brun, System of Univ. Geog., book 28 (volume 1).
ACRE: A. D. 1799.--Unsuccessful Siege by Bonaparte.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799 (AUGUST-AUGUST).
ACRE: A. D. 1831-1840.
Siege and Capture by Mehemed Ali.
Recovery for the Sultan by the Western Powers.
See TURKS: A. D.1831-1840.
ACROCERAUNIAN PROMONTORY.
See KORKYRA.
ACROPOLIS OF ATHENS, The.
"A road which, by running zigzag up the slope was rendered
practicable for chariots, led from the lower city to the
Acropolis, on the edge of the platform of which stood the
Propylæa, erected by the architect Mnesicles in five years,
during the administration of Pericles. ... On entering through
the gates of the Propylæa a scene of unparalleled grandeur and
beauty burst upon the eye. No trace of human dwellings
anywhere appeared, but on all sides temples of more or less
elevation, of Pentelic marble, beautiful in design and
exquisitely delicate in execution, sparkled like piles of
alabaster in the sun. On the left stood the Erectheion, or
fane of Athena Polias; to the right, that matchless edifice
known as the Hecatompedon of old, but to later ages as the
Parthenon. Other buildings, all holy to the eyes of an
Athenian, lay grouped around these master structures, and, in
the open spaces between, in whatever direction the spectator
might look, appeared statues, some remarkable for their
dimensions, others for their beauty, and all for the legendary
sanctity which surrounded them. No city of the ancient or
modern world ever rivalled Athens in the riches of art. Our
best filled museums, though teeming with her spoils, are poor
collections of fragments compared with that assemblage of gods
and heroes which peopled the Acropolis, the genuine Olympos of
the arts."
J. A. St. John, The Hellenes, book 1, chapter 4.
"Nothing in ancient Greece or Italy could be compared with the
Acropolis of Athens, in its combination of beauty and grandeur,
surrounded as it was by temples and theatres among its rocks,
and encircled by a city abounding with monuments, some of
which rivalled those of the Acropolis. Its platform formed one
great sanctuary, partitioned only by the boundaries of the ...
sacred portions. We cannot, therefore, admit the suggestion of
Chandler, that, in addition to the temples and other monuments on
the summit, there were houses divided into regular streets.
This would not have been consonant either with the customs or
the good taste of the Athenians. When the people of Attica
crowded into Athens at the beginning of the Peloponnesian war,
and religious prejudices gave way, in every possible case, to the
necessities of the occasion, even then the Acropolis remained
uninhabited. ... The western end of the Acropolis, which
furnished the only access to the summit of the hill, was one
hundred and sixty eight feet in breadth, an opening so narrow
that it appeared practicable to the artists of Pericles to
fill up the space with a single building which should serve
the purpose of a gateway to the citadel, as well as of a
suitable entrance to that glorious display of architecture and
sculpture which was within the inclosure. This work [the
Propylæa], the greatest production of civil architecture in
Athens, which rivalled the Parthenon in felicity of execution,
surpassed it in boldness and originality of design. ... It may be
defined as a wall pierced with five doors, before which on
both sides were Doric hexastyle porticoes."
W. M. Leake, Topography of Athens, section 8.
See, also, ATTICA.
ACT OF ABJURATION, The.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581.
ACT OF MEDIATION, The.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1803-1848.
ACT OF SECURITY.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1703-1704.
ACT OF SETTLEMENT (English).
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1701.
ACT OF SETTLEMENT (Irish).
See IRELAND: A. D. 1660-1665.
{8}
ACT RESCISSORY.
See SCOTLAND; A. D. 1660-1666.
ACTIUM: B. C. 434.
Naval Battle of the Greeks.
A defeat inflicted upon the Corinthians by the Corcyrians, in
the contest over Epidamnus which was the prelude to the
Peloponnesian War.
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 4, chapter 1.
ACTIUM: B. C. 31.
The Victory of Octavius.
See ROME: B. C. 31.
ACTS OF SUPREMACY.
See SUPREMACY, ACTS OF;
and ENGLAND: A. D. 1527-1534; and 1559.
ACTS OF UNIFORMITY.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1559 and 1662-1665.
ACULCO, Battle of (1810).
See MEXICO: A. D. 1810-1819.
ACZ, Battle of (1849).
See AUSTRIA, A. D. 1848-1849.
ADALOALDUS, King of the Lombards, A. D. 616-626.
ADAMS, John, in the American Revolution.
See
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1774 (MAY-JUNE);
1774 (SEPTEMBER); 1775 (MAY-AUGUST);
1776 (JANUARY-JUNE), 1776 (JULY).
In diplomatic service.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1782 (APRIL); 1782 (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER).
Presidential election and administration.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A.D. 1796-1801.
ADAMS, John Quincy.
Negotiation of the Treaty of Ghent.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1814 (DECEMBER).
Presidential election and administration.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1824-1829.
ADAMS, Samuel, in and after the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1772-1773;
1774 (SEPTEMBER); 1775(MAY); 1787-1789.
ADDA, Battle of the (A. D. 490).
See ROME: A. D. 488-526.
AD DECIMUS, Battle of (A. D. 533).
See VANDALS: A. D. 533-534.
ADEL.--ADALING.--ATHEL.
"The homestead of the original settler, his house,
farm-buildings and enclosure, 'the toft and croft,' with the
share of arable and appurtenant common rights, bore among the
northern nations [early Teutonic] the name of Odal, or Edhel;
the primitive mother village was an Athelby, or Athelham; the
owner was an Athelbonde: the same word Adel or Athel signified
also nobility of descent, and an Adaling was a nobleman.
Primitive nobility and primitive landownership thus bore the
same name."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 3, section 24.
See, also, ALOD, and ETHEL.
ADELAIDE, The founding and naming of.
See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1800-1840.
ADELANTADOS.-ADELANTAMIENTOS.
"Adelantamientos was an early term for gubernatorial districts
[in Spanish America, the governors bearing the title of
Adelantados], generally of undefined limits, to be extended by
further conquests."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 6 (Mexico, volume 3), page 520.
ADEODATUS II., Pope, A. D. 672-676.
ADIABENE.
A name which came to be applied anciently to the tract of
country east of the middle Tigris, embracing what was
originally the proper territory of Assyria, together with
Arbelitis. Under the Parthian monarchy it formed a tributary
kingdom, much disputed between Parthia and Armenia. It was
seized several times by the Romans, but never permanently
held.
G. Rawlinson, Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, page 140.
ADIRONDACKS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ADIRONDACKS.
ADIS, Battle of (B. C. 256).
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
ADITES, The.
"The Cushites, the first inhabitants of Arabia, are known in
the national traditions by the name of Adites, from their
progenitor, who is called Ad, the grandson of Ham."
F. Lenormant, Manual of Ancient History, book 7, chapter 2.
See ARABIA: THE ANCIENT SUCCESSION AND FUSION OF RACES.
ADJUTATORS.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1647 (APRIL-AUGUST).
ADLIYAH, The.
See ISLAM.
ADOLPH (of Nassau), King of Germany, A. D. 1291-1298.
ADOLPHUS FREDERICK, King of Sweden, A. D. 1751-1771.
ADOPTIONISM.
A doctrine, condemned as heretical in the eighth century,
which taught that "Christ, as to his human nature, was not
truly the Son of God, but only His son by adoption." The dogma
is also known as the Felician heresy, from a Spanish bishop,
Felix, who was prominent among its supporters. Charlemagne
took active measures to suppress the heresy.
J. I. Mombert, History of Charles the Great,
book 2, chapter 12.
ADRIA, Proposed Kingdom of.
See ITALY: A. D. 1343-1389.
ADRIAN VI., Pope, A. D. 1522-1523.
ADRIANOPLE.--HADRIANOPLE.
A city in Thrace founded by the Emperor Hadrian and designated
by his name. It was the scene of Constantine's victory over
Licinius in A. D. 323 (see ROME: 'A. D. 305-323), and of the
defeat and death of Valens in battle with the Goths (see GOTHS
(VISIGOTHS): A. D. 378). In 1361 it became for some years the
capital of the Turks in Europe (see TURKS: A. D. 1360-1389).
It was occupied by the Russians in 1829, and again in 1878
(see TURKS: A. D. 1826-1829, and A. D. 1877-1878), and gave
its name to the Treaty negotiated in 1829 between Russia and
the Porte (see GREECE: A. D. 1821-1829).
ADRIATIC, The Wedding of the.
See VENICE: A. D. 1177, and 14TH CENTURY.
ADRUMETUM.
See CARTHAGE, THE DOMINION OF.
ADUATUCI, The.
See BELGÆ.
ADULLAM, Cave of.
When David had been cast out by the Philistines, among whom he
sought refuge from the enmity of Saul, "his first retreat was the
Cave of Adullam, probably the large cavern not far from
Bethlehem, now called Khureitun. From its vicinity to
Bethlehem, he was joined there by his whole family, now
feeling themselves insecure from Saul's fury. ... Besides
these were outlaws from every part, including doubtless some
of the original Canaanites--of whom the name of one at least
has been preserved, Ahimelech the Hittite. In the vast
columnar halls and arched chambers of this subterranean
palace, all who had any grudge against the existing system
gathered round the hero of the coming age."
Dean Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Jewish
Church, lecture 22.
ADULLAMITES, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1865-1868.
{9}
ADWALTON MOOR, Battle of (A. D. 1643).
This was a battle fought near Bradford, June 29, 1643, in the
great English Civil War. The Parliamentary forces, under Lord
Fairfax, were routed by the Royalists, under Newcastle.
C. R. Markham, Life of the Great Lord Fairfax, chapter 11.
ÆAKIDS (Æacids).
The supposed descendants of the demi-god Æakus, whose grandson
was Achilles. (See MYRMIDONS.) Miltiades, the hero of Marathon,
and Pyrrhus, the warrior King of Epirus, were among those
claiming to belong to the royal race of Eakids.
ÆDHILING.
See ETHEL.
ÆDILES, Roman.
See ROME: B. C. 494-492.
ÆDUI.--ARVERNI.--ALLOBROGES.
"The two most powerful nations in Gallia were the Ædui [or
Hædui] and the Arverni. The Ædui occupied that part which lies
between the upper valley of the Loire and the Saone, which river
was part of the boundary between them and the Sequani. The
Loire separated the Ædui from the Bituriges, whose chief town
was Avaricum on the site of Bourges. At this time [B. C.121]
the Arverni, the rivals of the Ædui, were seeking the
supremacy in Gallia. The Arverni occupied the mountainous
country of Auvergne in the centre of France and the fertile
valley of the Elaver (Allier) nearly as far as the junction of
the Allier and the Loire. ... They were on friendly terms with
the Allobroges, a powerful nation east of the Rhone, who
occupied the country between the Rhone and the Isara (Isère).
... In order to break the formidable combination of the
Arverni and the Allobroges, the Romans made use of the Ædui,
who were the enemies both of the Allobroges and the Arverni.
... A treaty was made either at this time or somewhat earlier
between the Ædui and the Roman senate, who conferred on their
new Gallic friends the honourable title of brothers and
kinsmen. This fraternizing was a piece of political cant which
the Romans practiced when it was useful."
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 1, chapter 21.
See, also, GAULS.
Ægæ.
See EDESSA (MACEDONIA).
ÆGATIAN ISLES, Naval Battle of the (B. C. 241).
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
ÆGEAN, The.
"The Ægean, or White Sea, ... as distinguished from the
Euxine."
E. A. Freeman, Historical Geography of Europe,
page 413, and foot-note.
ÆGIALEA.--ÆGIALEANS.
The original name of the northern coast of Peloponnesus, and
its inhabitants.
See GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS.
ÆGIKOREIS.
See PHYLÆ.
ÆGINA.
A small rocky island in the Saronic gulf, between Attica and
Argolis. First colonized by Achæans it was afterwards occupied
by Dorians (see GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS) and was unfriendly to
Athens. During the sixth century B. C. it rose to great power
and commercial importance, and became for a time the most
brilliant center of Greek art. At the period of the Persian
war, Ægina was "the first maritime power in Greece." But the
Æginetans were at that time engaged in war with Athens, as the
allies of Thebes, and rather than forego their enmity, they
offered submission to the Persian king. The Athenians
thereupon appealed to Sparta, as the head of Greece, to
interfere, and the Æginetans were compelled to give hostages
to Athens for their fidelity to the Hellenic cause. (See
GREECE: B. C. 492-491.) They purged themselves to a great
extent of their intended treason by the extraordinary valor
with which they fought at Salamis. But the sudden pre-eminence
to which Athens rose cast a blighting shadow upon Ægina, and
in 429 B. C. it lost its independence, the Athenians taking
possession of their discomfited rival.
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, volume 1, chapter 14.
Also in
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, volume 4, chapter 36.
See, also, ATHENS: B. C. 489-480.
ÆGINA: B. C. 458-456.
Alliance with Corinth in war with Athens and Megara.--Defeat
and subjugation.
See GREECE: B. C. 458-456.
ÆGINA: B. C. 431.
Expulsion of the Æginetans from their island by the Athenians.
Their settlement at Thyrea.
See GREECE: B. C. 431-429.
ÆGINA: B. C. 210. Desolation by the Romans.
The first appearance of the Romans in Greece, when they
entered the country as the allies of the Ætolians, was
signalized by the barbarous destruction of Ægina. The city
having been taken, B. C. 210, its entire population was
reduced to slavery by the Romans and the land and buildings
of the city were sold to Attalus, king of Pergamus.
E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government,
chapter 8, section 2.
ÆGINETAN TALENT.
See TALENT.
ÆGITIUM, Battle of (B. C. 426).
A reverse experienced by the Athenian General, Demosthenes, in
his invasion of Ætolia, during the Peloponnesian War.
Thucydides, History, book 3, section 97.
ÆGOSPOTAMI (Aigospotamoi), Battle of.
See GREECE: B. C. 405.
ÆLFRED.
See ALFRED.
ÆLIA CAPITOLINA.
The new name given to Jerusalem by Hadrian.
See JEWS: A. D. 130-134.
ÆLIAN AND FUFIAN LAWS, The.
"The Ælian and Fufian laws (leges Ælia and Fufia) the age of
which, unfortunately we cannot accurately determine. ...
enacted that a popular assembly [at Rome] might be dissolved,
or, in other words, the acceptance of any proposed law
prevented, if a magistrate announced to the president of the
assembly that it was his intention to choose the same time for
watching the heavens. Such an announcement (obnuntiatio) was
held to be a sufficient cause for interrupting an assembly."
W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 6, chapter 16.
ÆMILIAN WAY, The.
"M. Æmilius Lepidus, Consul for the year 180 B. C. ...
constructed the great road which bore his name. The Æmilian
Way led from Ariminum through the new colony of Bononia to
Placentia, being a continuation of the Flaminian Way, or great
north road, made by C. Flaminius in 220 B. C. from Rome to
Ariminum. At the same epoch, Flaminius the son, being the
colleague of Lepidus, made a branch road from Bononia across
the Appenines to Arretium."
H. G. Liddell, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 41.
ÆMILIANUS, Roman Emperor, A. D. 253.
{10}
ÆOLIANS, The.
"The collective stock of Greek nationalities falls, according
to the view of those ancient writers who laboured most to
obtain an exact knowledge of ethnographic relationships, into
three main divisions, Æolians, Dorians and Ionians. ... All
the other inhabitants of Greece [not Dorians and Ionians] and
of the islands included in it, are comprised under the common
name of Æolians--a name unknown as yet to Homer, and which was
incontestably applied to a great diversity of peoples, among
which it is certain that no such homogeneity of race is to be
assumed as existed among the lonians and Dorians. Among the
two former races, though even these were scarcely in any
quarter completely unmixed, there was incontestably to be
found a single original stock, to which others had merely been
attached, and as it were engrafted, whereas, among the peoples
assigned to the Æolians, no such original stock is
recognizable, but on the contrary, as great a difference is
found between the several members of this race as between
Dorians and lonians, and of the so-called Æolians, some stood
nearer to the former, others to the latter. ... A thorough and
careful investigation might well lead to the conclusion that
the Greek people was divided not into three, but into two main
races, one of which we may call Ionian, the other Dorian,
while of the so-called Æolians some, and probably the greater
number, belonged to the former, the rest to the latter."
G. F. Schöman, Antiquity of Greece: The State,
part 1, chapter 2.
In Greek myth, Æolus, the fancied progenitor of the Æolians,
appears as one of the three sons of Hellen. "Æolus is
represented as having reigned in Thessaly: his seven sons were
Kretheus, Sisyphus, Athamas, Salmoneus, Deion, Magnes and
Perieres: his five daughters, Canace, Alcyone, Peisidike,
Calyce and Permede. The fables of this race seem to be
distinguished by a constant introduction of the God Poseidon,
as well as by an unusual prevalence of haughty and
presumptuous attributes among the Æolid heroes, leading them
to affront the gods by pretences of equality, and sometimes
even by defiance."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 1, chapter 6.
See, also, THESSALY, DORIANS AND IONIANS,
and ASIA MINOR: THE GREEK COLONIES.
ÆQUIANS, The.
See OSCANS; also LATIUM;
and ROME; B. C. 458.
ÆRARIANS.
Roman citizens who had no political rights.
See CENSORS, ROMAN.
ÆRARIUM, The.
See FISCUS.
ÆSOPUS INDIANS.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
ÆSTII, or ÆSTYI, The.
"At this point [beyond the Suiones] the Suevic Sea [the
Baltic], on its eastern shore, washes the tribes of the Æstii,
whose rites and fashions and styles of dress are those of the
Suevi, while their language is more like the British. They
worship the mother of the gods and wear as a religious symbol
the device of a wild boar. ... They often use clubs, iron
weapons but seldom. They are more patient in cultivating corn
and other produce than might be expected from the general
indolence of the Germans. But they also search the deep and
are the only people who gather amber, which they call
glesum."--"The Æstii occupied that part of Prussia which is to
the north-east of the Vistula. ... The name still survives in
the form Estonia."
Tacitus, Germany, translated by Church and Brodribb,
with note.
See, also, PRUSSIAN LANGUAGE, THE OLD.
ÆSYMNETÆ, An.
Among the Greeks, an expedient "which seems to have been tried
not unfrequently in early times, tor preserving or restoring
tranquility, was to invest an individual with absolute power,
under a peculiar title, which soon became obsolete: that of
æsymnetæ. At Cuma, indeed, and in other cities, this was the
title of an ordinary magistracy, probably of that which
succeeded the hereditary monarchy; but when applied to an
extraordinary office, it was equivalent to the title of
protector or dictator."
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 10.
ÆTHEL.--ÆTHELING.
See ETHEL, and ADEL.
ÆTHELBERT, ÆTHELFRITH, ETC.
See ETHELBERT, etc.
ÆTOLIA.--ÆTOLIANS.
"Ætolia, the country of Diomed, though famous in the early
times, fell back during the migratory period almost into a
savage condition, probably through the influx into it of an
Illyrian population which became only partially Hellenized.
The nation was divided into numerous tribes, among which the
most important were the Apodoti, the Ophioneis, the Eurytanes
and the Agræans. There were scarcely any cities, village life
being preferred universally. ... It was not till the wars
which arose among Alexander's successors that the Ætolians
formed a real political union, and became an important power
in Greece."
G. Rawlinson, Manual of Ancient History, book 3.
See also,
AKARNANIANS, and GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS.
ÆTOLIAN LEAGUE, The.
"The Achaian and the Ætolian Leagues, had their constitutions
been written down in the shape of a formal document, would
have presented but few varieties of importance. The same
general form of government prevailed in both; each was
federal, each was democratic; each had its popular assembly,
its smaller Senate, its general with large powers at the head
of all. The differences between the two are merely those
differences of detail which will always arise between any two
political systems of which neither is slavishly copied from
the other. ... If therefore federal states or democratic
states, or aristocratic states, were necessarily weak or
strong, peaceful or aggressive, honest or dishonest, we should
see Achaia and Ætolia both exhibiting the same moral
characteristics. But history tells another tale. The political
conduct of the Achaian League, with some mistakes and some
faults, is, on the whole, highly honourable. The political
conduct of the Ætolian League is, throughout the century in
which we know it best [last half of third and first half of
second century B. C.] almost always simply infamous. ... The
counsels of the Ætolian League were throughout directed to
mere plunder, or, at most, to selfish political
aggrandisement."
E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government, chapter 6.
The plundering aggressions of the Ætolians involved them in
continual war with their Greek kindred and neighbours, and
they did not scruple to seek foreign aid. It was through their
agency that the Romans were first brought into Greece, and it
was by their instrumentality that Antiochus fought his battle
with Rome on the sacredest of all Hellenic soil. In the end,
B. C. 189, the League was stripped by the Romans of even its
nominal independence and sank into a contemptible servitude.
E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government, chapter 7-9.
ALSO IN C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 63-66.
{11}
AFGHANISTAN: B. C. 330.
Conquest by Alexander the Great.
Founding of Herat and Candahar.
See MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 330-323;
and INDIA: B. C. 327-312.
AFGHANISTAN: B. C. 301-246.
In the Syrian Empire.
See SELEUCIDÆ; and MACEDONIA, &c.: 310-301 and after.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 999-1183.
The Ghaznevide Empire.
See TURKS: A. D. 999-1183;
and INDIA: A. D. 977-1290.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 13th Century.
Conquests of Jinghis-Khan.
See MONGOLS: A. D. 1153-1227;
and INDIA: A. D. 977-1290.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1380-1386.
Conquest by Timour.
See Timour.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1504.
Conquest by Babar.
See INDIA: A. D. 1399-1605.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1722.
Mahmoud's conquest of Persia.
See PERSIA: A. D. 1499-1887.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1737-1738.
Conquest by Nadir Shah.
See INDIA: A. D. 1662-1748.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1747-1761.
The Empire of the Dooranie, Ahmed Abdallee.
His Conquests in India.
See INDIA; A. D. 1747-1761.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1803-1838.
Shah Soojah and Dost Mahomed.
English interference.
"Shah Soojah-ool Moolk, a grandson of the illustrious Ahmed
Shah, reigned in Afghanistan from 1803 till 1809. His youth
had been full of trouble and vicissitude. He had been a
wanderer, on the verge of starvation, a pedlar, and a bandit,
who raised money by plundering caravans. His courage was
lightly reputed, and it was as a mere creature of circumstance
that he reached the throne. His reign was perturbed, and in
1809 he was a fugitive and an exile. Runjeet Singh, the Sikh
ruler of the Punjaub, defrauded him of the famous Koh-i-noor,
which is now the most precious of the crown jewels of England,
and plundered and imprisoned the fallen man. Shah Soojah at
length escaped from Lahore. After further misfortunes he at
length reached the British frontier station of Loodianah, and
in 1816 became a pensioner of the East India Company. After
the downfall of Shah Soojah, Afghanistan for many years was a
prey to anarchy. At length in 1826, Dost Mahomed succeeded in
making himself supreme at Cabul, and this masterful man
thenceforward held sway until his death in 1863,
uninterruptedly save during the three years of the British
occupation. Dost Mahomed was neither kith nor kin to the
legitimate dynasty which he displaced. His father Poyndah Khan
was an able statesman and gallant soldier. He left twenty-one
sons, of whom Futteh Khan was the eldest, and Dost Mahomed one
of the youngest. ... Throughout his long reign Dost Mahomed
was a strong and wise ruler. His youth had been neglected and
dissolute. His education was defective, and he had been
addicted to wine. Once seated on the throne, the reformation
of our Henry V. was not more thorough than was that of Dost
Mahomed. He taught himself to read and write, studied the
Koran, became scrupulously abstemious, assiduous in affairs,
no longer truculent, but courteous. ... There was a fine
rugged honesty in his nature, and a streak of genuine
chivalry; notwithstanding the despite he suffered at our
hands, he had a real regard for the English, and his loyalty
to us was broken only by his armed support of the Sikhs in the
second Punjaub war. The fallen Shah Soojah, from his asylum in
Loodianah, was continually intriguing for his restoration. His
schemes were long inoperative, and it was not until 1832 that
certain arrangements were entered into between him and the
Maharaja Runjeet Singh. To an application on Shah Soojah's
part for countenance and pecuniary aid, the Anglo-Indian
Government replied that to afford him assistance would be
inconsistent with the policy of neutrality which the
Government had imposed on itself; but it unwisely contributed
financially toward his undertaking by granting him four
months' pension in advance. Sixteen thousand rupees formed a
scant war fund with which to attempt the recovery of a throne,
but the Shah started on his errand in February, 1833. After a
successful contest with the Ameers of Scinde, he marched on
Candahar, and besieged that fortress. Candahar was in
extremity when Dost Mahomed, hurrying from Cabul, relieved it,
and joining forces with its defenders, he defeated and routed
Shah Soojah, who fled precipitately, leaving behind him his
artillery and camp equipage. During the Dost's absence in the
south, Runjeet Singh's troops crossed the Attock, occupied the
Afghan province of Peshawur, and drove the Afghans into the
Khyber Pass. No subsequent efforts on Dost Mahomed's part
availed to expel the Sikhs from Peshawur, and suspicious of
British connivance with Runjeet Singh's successful aggression,
he took into consideration the policy of fortifying himself by
a counter alliance with Persia. As for Shah Soojah, he had
crept back to his refuge at Loodianah. Lord Auckland succeeded
Lord William Bentinck as Governor-General of India in March,
1836. In reply to Dost Mahomed's letter of congratulation, his
lordship wrote: 'You are aware that it is not the practice of
the British Government to interfere with the affairs of other
independent States;' an abstention which Lord Auckland was
soon to violate. He had brought from England the feeling of
disquietude in regard to the designs of Persia and Russia
which the communications of our envoy in Persia had fostered
in the Home Government, but it would appear that he was wholly
undecided what line of action to pursue. 'Swayed,' says
Durand, 'by the vague apprehensions of a remote danger
entertained by others rather than himself, he despatched to
Afghanistan Captain Burnes on a nominally commercial mission,
which, in fact, was one of political discovery, but without
definite instructions. Burnes, an able but rash and ambitious
man, reached Cabul in September, 1837, two months before the
Persian army began the siege of Herat. ... The Dost made no
concealment to Burnes of his approaches to Persia and Russia,
in despair of British good offices, and being hungry for
assistance from any source to meet the encroachments of the
Sikhs, he professed himself ready to abandon his negotiations
with the western powers if he were given reason to expect
countenance and assistance at the hands of the Anglo-Indian
Government. ... The situation of Burnes in relation to the
Dost was presently complicated by the arrival at Cabul of a
Russian officer claiming to be an envoy from the Czar, whose
credentials, however, were regarded as dubious, and who, if
that circumstance has the least weight, was on his return to
Russia utterly repudiated by Count Nesselrode. The Dost took
small account of this emissary, continuing to assure Burnes
that he cared for no connection except with the English, and
Burnes professed to his Government his fullest confidence in
the sincerity of those declarations.
{12}
But the tone of Lord Auckland's reply, addressed
to the Dost, was so dictatorial and supercilious as to
indicate the writer's intention that it should give offence.
It had that effect, and Burnes' mission at once became
hopeless. ... The Russian envoy, who was profuse in his
promises of everything which the Dost was most anxious to
obtain, was received into favour and treated with distinction,
and on his return journey he effected a treaty with the
Candahar chiefs which was presently ratified by the Russian
minister at the Persian Court. Burnes, fallen into discredit
at Cabul, quitted that place in August 1838. He had not been
discreet, but it was not his indiscretion that brought about
the failure of his mission. A nefarious transaction, which
Kaye denounces with the passion of a just indignation,
connects itself with Burnes' negotiations with the Dost; his
official correspondence was unscrupulously mutilated and
garbled in the published Blue Book with deliberate purpose to
deceive the British public. Burnes had failed because, since
he had quitted India for Cabul, Lord Auckland's policy had
gradually altered. Lord Auckland had landed in India in the
character of a man of peace. That, so late as April 1837, he
had no design of obstructing the existing situation in
Afghanistan is proved by his written statement of that date,
that 'the British Government had resolved decidedly to
discourage the prosecution by the ex-king Shah
Soojah-ool-Moolk, so long as he may remain under our
protection, of further schemes of hostility against the chiefs
now in power in Cabul and Candahar.' Yet, in the following
June, he concluded a treaty which sent Shah Soojah to Cabul,
escorted by British bayonets. Of this inconsistency no
explanation presents itself. It was a far cry from our
frontier on the Sutlej to Herat in the confines of Central
Asia--a distance of more than 1,200 miles, over some of the
most arduous marching ground in the known world. ... Lord
William Bentinck, Lord Auckland's predecessor, denounced the
project as an act of incredible folly. Marquis Wellesley
regarded 'this wild expedition into a distant region of rocks
and deserts, of sands and ice and snow,' as an act of
infatuation. The Duke of Wellington pronounced with prophetic
sagacity, that the consequence of once crossing the Indus to
settle a government in Afghanistan would be a perennial march
into that country."
A. Forbes, The Afghan Wars, chapter 1.
ALSO IN;
J. P. Ferrier, History of the Afghans, chapter 10-20.
Mohan Lal, Life of Amir Dost Mohammed Khan, volume 1.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1838-1842.
English invasion, and restoration of Soojah Dowlah.
The revolt at Cabul.
Horrors of the British retreat.
Destruction of the entire army, save one man, only.
Sale's defence of Jellalabad.
"To approach Afghanistan it was necessary to secure the
friendship of the Sikhs, who were, indeed, ready enough to
join against their old enemies; and a threefold treaty was
contracted between Runjeet Singh, the English, and Shah Soojah
for the restoration of the banished house. The
expedition--which according to the original intention was to
have been carried out chiefly by means of troops in the pay of
Shah Soojah and the Sikhs--rapidly grew into an English
invasion of Afghanistan. A considerable force was gathered on
the Sikh frontier from Bengal; a second army, under General
Keane, was to come up from Kurrachee through Sindh. Both of
these armies, and the troops of Shah Soojah, were to enter the
highlands of Afghanistan by the Bolan Pass. As the Sikhs would
not willingly allow the free passage of our troops through
their country, an additional burden was laid upon the armies,-
the independent Ameers of Sindh had to be coerced. At length,
with much trouble from the difficulties of the country and the
loss of the commissariat animals, the forces were all
collected under the command of Keane beyond the passes. The
want of food permitted of no delay; the army pushed on to
Candahar. Shah Soojah was declared Monarch of the southern
Principality. Thence the troops moved rapidly onwards towards
the more important and difficult conquest of Cabul. Ghuznee, a
fortress of great strength, lay in the way. In their hasty
movements the English had left their battering train behind,
but the gates of the fortress were blown in with gunpowder,
and by a brilliant feat of arms the fortress was stormed. Nor
did the English army encounter any important resistance
subsequently. Dost Mohamed found his followers deserting him,
and withdrew northwards into the mountains of the Hindoo
Koosh. With all the splendour that could be collected, Shah
Soojah was brought back to his throne in the Bala Hissar, the
fortress Palace of Cabul. ... For the moment the policy seemed
thoroughly successful. The English Ministry could feel that a
fresh check had been placed upon its Russian rival, and no one
dreamt of the terrible retribution that was in store for the
unjust violence done to the feelings of a people. ... Dost
Mohamed thought it prudent to surrender himself to the English
envoy, Sir William Macnaghten, and to withdraw with his family
to the English provinces of Hindostan [November, 1840]. He was
there well received and treated with liberality; for, as both
the Governor General and his chief adviser Macnaghten felt, he
had not in fact in any way offended us, but had fallen a
victim to our policy. It was in the full belief that their
policy in India had been crowned with permanent success that
the Whig Ministers withdrew from office, leaving their
successors to encounter the terrible results to which it led.
For while the English officials were blindly congratulating
themselves upon the happy completion of their enterprise, to
an observant eye signs of approaching difficulty were on all
sides visible. ... The removal of the strong rule of the
Barrukzyes opened a door for undefined hopes to many of the
other families and tribes. The whole country was full of
intrigues and of diplomatic bargaining, carried on by the
English political agents with the various chiefs and leaders.
But they soon found that the hopes excited by these
negotiations were illusory. The allowances for which they had
bargained were reduced, for the English envoy began to be
disquieted at the vast expenses of the Government. They did
not find that they derived any advantages from the
establishment of the new puppet King, Soojah Dowlah; and every
Mahomedan, even the very king himself, felt disgraced at the
predominance of the English infidels.
{13}
But as no actual insurrection broke out, Macnaghten, a man of
sanguine temperament and anxious to believe what he wished, in
spite of unmistakable warnings as to the real feeling of the
people, clung with almost angry vehemence to the persuasion
that all was going well, and that the new King had a real hold
upon the people's affection. So completely had he deceived
himself on this point, that he had decided to send back a
portion of the English army, under General Sale, into
Hindostan. He even intended to accompany it himself to enjoy
the peaceful post of Governor of Bombay, with which his
successful policy had been rewarded. His place was to be taken
by Sir Alexander Burnes, whose view of the troubled condition
of the country underlying the comparative calm of the surface
was much truer than that of Macnaghten, but who, perhaps from
that very fact, was far less popular among the chiefs. The
army which was to remain at Candahar was under the command of
General Nott, an able and decided if somewhat irascible man.
But General Elphinstone, the commander of the troops at Cabul,
was of quite a different stamp. He was much respected and
liked for his honourable character and social qualities, but
was advanced in years, a confirmed invalid, and wholly wanting
in the vigour and decision which his critical position was
likely to require. The fool's paradise with which the English
Envoy had surrounded himself was rudely destroyed. He had
persuaded himself that the frequently recurring disturbances,
and especially the insurrection of the Ghilzyes between Cabul
and Jellalabad, were mere local outbreaks. But In fact a great
conspiracy was on foot in which the chiefs of nearly every
important tribe in the country were implicated. On the evening
of the 1st of November [1841] a meeting of the chiefs was
held, and It was decided that an immediate attack should be
made on the house of Sir Alexander Burnes. The following morning
an angry crowd of assailants stormed the houses of Sir
Alexander Burnes and Captain Johnson, murdering the inmates,
and rifling the treasure-chests belonging to Soojah Dowlah's
army. Soon the whole city was in wild insurrection. The
evidence is nearly irresistible that a little decision and
rapidity of action on the part of the military would have at
once crushed the outbreak. But although the attack on Burnes's
house was known, no troops were sent to his assistance.
Indeed, that unbroken course of folly and mismanagement which
marked the conduct of our military affairs throughout this
crisis had already begun. Instead of occupying the fortress of
the Bala Hissar, where the army would have been in comparative
security, Elphlnstone had placed his troops in cantonments far
too extensive to be properly defended, surrounded by an
entrenchment of the most insignificant character, commanded on
almost all sides by higher ground. To complete the unfitness
of the position, the commissariat supplies were not stored
within the cantonments, but were placed in an isolated fort at
some little distance. An ill-sustained and futile assault was
made upon the town on the 3d of November, but from that time
onwards the British troops lay with incomprehensible
supineness awaiting their fate in their defenceless position.
The commissariat fort soon fell into the hands of the enemy
and rendered their situation still more deplorable. Some
flashes of bravery now and then lighted up the sombre scene of
helpless misfortune, and served to show that destruction might
even yet have been averted by a little firmness. ... But the
commander had already begun to despair, and before many days
had passed he was thinking of making terms with the enemy.
Macnaghten had no course open to him under such circumstances
but to adopt the suggestion of the general, and attempt as
well as he could by bribes, cajolery, and intrigue, to divide
the chiefs and secure a safe retreat for the English. Akbar
Khan, the son of Dost Mohamed, though not present at the
beginning of the insurrection, had arrived from the northern
mountains, and at once asserted a predominant influence in the
insurgent councils. With him and with the other insurgent
chiefs Macnaghten entered into an arrangement by which he
promised to withdraw the English entirely from the country if
a safe passage were secured for the army through the passes.
... While ostensibly treating with the Barrukzye chiefs, he
intrigued on all sides with the rival tribes. His double
dealing was taken advantage of by Akbar Khan. He sent
messengers to Macnaghten proposing that the English should
make a separate treaty with himself and support him with their
troops in an assault upon some of his rivals. The proposition
was a mere trap, and the envoy fell into it. Ordering troops
to be got ready, he hurried to a meeting with Akbar to
complete the arrangement. There he found himself in the
presence of the brother and relatives of the very men against
whom he was plotting, and was seized and murdered by Akbar's
own hand [December 23]. Still the General thought of nothing
but surrender. The negotiations were entrusted to Major
Pottinger. The terms of the chiefs gradually rose, and at
length with much confusion the wretched army marched out of
the cantonments [January 6, 1842], leaving behind nearly all
the cannon and superfluous military stores. An Afghan escort
to secure the safety of the troops on their perilous journey
had been promised, but the promise was not kept. The horrors
of the retreat form one of the darkest passages in English
military history. In bitter cold and snow, which took all life
out of the wretched Sepoys, without proper clothing or
shelter, and hampered by a disorderly mass of thousands of
camp-followers, the army entered the terrible defiles which
lie between Cabul and Jellalabad. Whether Akbar Khan could,
had he wished it, have restrained his fanatical followers is
uncertain. As a fact the retiring crowd--it can scarcely be
called an army--was a mere unresisting prey to the assaults of
the mountaineers. Constant communication was kept up with
Akbar; on the third day all the ladies and children with the
married men were placed in his hands, and finally even the two
generals gave themselves up as hostages, always in the hope
that the remnant of the army might be allowed to escape."
J. F. Bright, History of England, volume 4, pages 61-66.
{14}
"Then the march of the army, without a general, went on again.
Soon it became the story of a general without an army; before
very long there was neither general nor army. It is idle to
lengthen a tale of mere horrors. The straggling
remnant of an army entered the Jugdulluk Pass--a dark,
steep, narrow, ascending path between crags. The miserable
toilers found that the fanatical, implacable tribes had
barricaded the pass. All was over. The army of Cabul was
finally extinguished in that barricaded pass. It was a trap;
the British were taken in it. A few mere fugitives escaped
from the scene of actual slaughter, and were on the road to
Jellalabad, where Sale and his little army were holding their
own. When they were within sixteen miles of Jellalabad the
number was reduced to six. Of these six five were killed by
straggling marauders on the way. One man alone reached
Jellalabad to tell the tale. Literally one man, Dr. Brydon,
came to Jellalabad [January 13] out of a moving host which had
numbered in all some 16,000 when it set out on its march. The
curious eye will search through history or fiction in vain for
any picture more thrilling with the suggestions of an awful
catastrophe than that of this solitary survivor, faint and
reeling on his jaded horse, as he appeared under the walls of
Jellalabad, to bear the tidings of our Thermopylae of pain and
shame. This is the crisis of the story. With this at least the
worst of the pain and shame were destined to end. The rest is
all, so far as we are concerned, reaction and recovery. Our
successes are common enough; we may tell their tale briefly in
this instance. The garrison at Jellalabad had received before
Dr. Brydon's arrival an intimation that they were to go out
and march toward India in accordance with the terms of the
treaty extorted from Elphinstone at Cabul. They very properly
declined to be bound by a treaty which, as General Sale
rightly conjectured, had been 'forced from our envoy and
military commander with the knives at their throats.' General
Sale's determination was clear and simple. 'I propose to hold
this place on the part of Government until I receive its order
to the contrary.' This resolve of Sale's was really the
turning point of the history. Sale held Jellalabad; Nott was
at Candahar. Akbar Khan besieged Jellalabad. Nature seemed to
have declared herself emphatically on his side, for a
succession of earthquake shocks shattered the walls of the
place, and produced more terrible destruction than the most
formidable guns of modern warfare could have done. But the
garrison held out fearlessly; they restored the parapets,
re-established every battery, retrenched the whole of the
gates and built up all the breaches. They resisted every
attempt of Akbar Khan to advance upon their works, and at
length, when it became certain that General Pollock was
forcing the Khyber Pass to come to their relief, they
determined to attack Akbar Khan's army; they issued boldly out
of their forts, forced a battle on the Afghan chief, and
completely defeated him. Before Pollock, having gallantly
fought his way through the Khyber Pass, had reached Jellalabad
[April 16] the beleaguering army had been entirely defeated and
dispersed. ... Meanwhile the unfortunate Shah Soojah, whom we
had restored with so much pomp of announcement to the throne
of his ancestors, was dead. He was assassinated in Cabul, soon
after the departure of the British, ... and his body, stripped
of its royal robes and its many jewels, was flung into a
ditch."
J. McCarthy, History of our own Times,
volume 1, chapter 11.
ALSO IN
J. W. Kaye, History of the War in Afghanistan.
G. R. Gleig, Sale's Brigade in Afghanistan.
Lady Sale, Journal of the Disasters in Afghanistan.
Mohan Lal, Life of Dost Mohammed,
chapters 15-18 (volume 2).
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1842-1869.
The British return to Cabul.
Restoration of Dost Mahomed.
It was not till September that General Pollock "could obtain
permission from the Governor-General, Lord Ellenborough, to
advance against Cabul, though both he and Nott were burning to
do so. When Pollock did advance, he found the enemy posted at
Jugdulluck, the scene of the massacre. 'Here,' says one
writer, 'the skeletons lay so thick that they had to be
cleared away to allow the guns to pass. The savage grandeur of
the scene rendered it a fitting place for the deed of blood
which had been enacted under its horrid shade, never yet
pierced in some places by sunlight. The road was strewn for
two miles with mouldering skeletons like a charnel house.' Now
the enemy found they had to deal with other men, under other
leaders, for, putting their whole energy into the work, the
British troops scaled the heights and steep ascents, and
defeated the enemy in their strongholds on all sides. After
one more severe fight with Akbar Khan, and all the force he
could collect, the enemy were beaten, and driven from their
mountains, and the force marched quietly into Cabul. Nott, on
his side, started from Candahar on the 7th of August, and,
after fighting several small battles with the enemy, he
captured Ghuzni, where Palmer and his garrison had been
destroyed. From Ghuzni General Nott brought away, by command
of Lord Ellenborough, the gates of Somnauth [said to have been
taken from the Hindu temple of Somnauth by Mahmoud of Ghazni,
the first Mohammedan invader of India, in 1024], which formed
the subject of the celebrated 'Proclamation of the Gates,' as
it was called. This proclamation, issued by Lord Ellenborough,
brought upon him endless ridicule, and it was indeed at first
considered to be a satire of his enemies, in imitation of
Napoleon's address from the Pyramids; the Duke of Wellington
called it 'The Song of Triumph.' ... This proclamation, put
forth with so much flourishing of trumpets and ado, was really
an insult to those whom it professed to praise, it was an
insult to the Mohammedans under our rule, for their power was
gone, it was also an insult to the Hindoos, for their temple
of Somnauth was in ruins. These celebrated gates, which are
believed to be imitations of the original gates, are now lying
neglected and worm-eaten, in the back part of a small museum
at Agra. But to return, General Nott, having captured Ghuzni
and defeated Sultan Jan, pushed on to Cabul, where he arrived
on the 17th of September, and met Pollock. The English
prisoners (amongst whom were Brigadier Shelton and Lady Sale),
who had been captured at the time of the massacre, were
brought, or found their own way, to General Pollock's camp.
General Elphinstone had died during his captivity. It was not
now considered necessary to take any further steps; the bazaar
in Cabul was destroyed, and on the 12th of October Pollock and
Nott turned their faces southwards, and began their march into
India by the Khyber route. The Afghans in captivity were sent
back, and the Governor-General received the troops at Ferozepoor.
{15}
Thus ended the Afghan war 01 1838-42. ... The war
being over, we withdrew our forces into India, leaving the son
of Shah Soojah, Fathi Jung, who had escaped from Cabul when
his father was murdered, as king of the country, a position
that he was unable to maintain long, being very shortly
afterward, assassinated. In 1842 Dost Mahomed, the ruler whom
we had deposed, and who had been living at our expense in
India, returned to Cabul and resumed his former position as
king of the country, still bearing ill-will towards us, which
he showed on several occasions, notably during the Sikh war,
when he sent a body of his horsemen to fight for the Sikhs,
and he himself marched an army through the Khyber to Peshawur
to assist our enemies. However, the occupation of the Punjab
forced upon Dost Mahomed the necessity of being on friendly
terms with his powerful neighbour; he therefore concluded a
friendly treaty with us in 1854, hoping thereby that our power
would be used to prevent the intrigues of Persia against his
kingdom. This hope was shortly after realized, for in 1856 we
declared war against Persia, an event which was greatly to the
advantage of Dost Mahomed, as it prevented Persian
encroachments upon his territory. This war lasted but a short
time, for early in 1857 an agreement was signed between
England and Persia, by which the latter renounced all claims
over Herat and Afghanistan. Herat, however, still remained
independent of Afghanistan, until 1863, when Dost Mahomed
attacked and took the town, thus uniting the whole kingdom,
including Candahar and Afghan Turkestan, under his rule. This
was almost the last act of the Ameer's life, for a few days
after taking Herat he died. By his will he directed that Shere
Ali, one of his sons, should succeed him as Ameer of
Afghanistan. The new Ameer immediately wrote to the
Governor-General of India, Lord Elgin, in a friendly tone,
asking that his succession might be acknowledged. Lord Elgin,
however, as the commencement of the Liberal policy of
'masterly inactivity' neglected to answer the letter, a
neglect which cannot but be deeply regretted, as Shere Ali was
at all events the de facto ruler of the country, and even had
he been beaten by any other rival for the throne, it would
have been time enough to acknowledge that rival as soon as he
was really ruler of the country. When six months later a cold
acknowledgement of the letter was given by Sir William
Denison, and when a request that the Ameer made for 6,000
muskets had been refused by Lord Lawrence, the Ameer concluded
that the disposition of England towards him was not that of a
friend; particularly as, when later on, two of his brothers
revolted against him, each of them was told by the Government
that he would be acknowledged for that part of the country
which he brought under his power. However, after various
changes in fortune, in 1869 Shere Ali finally defeated his two
brothers Afzool and Azim, together with Afzool's son,
Abdurrahman."
P. F. Walker, Afghanistan, pages 45-51.
ALSO IN
J. W. Kaye, History of the War in Afghanistan.
G. B. Malleson, History of Afghanistan, chapters 11.
AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1869-1881.
The second war with the English and its causes.
The period of disturbance in Afghanistan, during the struggle
of Shere Ali with his brothers, coincided with the vice
royalty of Lord Lawrence in India. The policy of Lord
Lawrence, "sometimes slightingly spoken of as masterly
inactivity, consisted in holding entirely aloof from the
dynastic quarrels of the Afghans ... and in attempting to
cultivate the friendship of the Ameer by gifts of money and
arms, while carefully avoiding topics of offence. ... Lord
Lawrence was himself unable to meet the Ameer, but his
successor, Lord Mayo, had an interview with him at Umballah in
1869. ... Lord Mayo adhered to the policy of his predecessor. He
refused to enter into any close alliance, he refused to pledge
himself to support any dynasty. But on the other hand he
promised that he would not press for the admission of any
English officers as Residents in Afghanistan. The return
expected by England for this attitude of friendly
non-interference was that every other foreign state, and
especially Russia, should be forbidden to mix either directly
or indirectly with the affairs of the country in which our
interests were so closely involved. ... But a different view
was held by another school of Indian politicians, and was
supported by men of such eminence as Sir Bartle Frere and Sir
Henry Rawlinson. Their view was known as the Sindh Policy as
contrasted with that of the Punjab. It appeared to them
desirable that English agents should be established at Quetta,
Candahar, and Herat, if not at Cabul itself, to keep the
Indian Government completely informed of the affairs of
Afghanistan, and to maintain English influence in the country.
In 1874, upon the accession of the Conservative Ministry, Sir
Bartle Frere produced a memorandum in which this policy was
ably maintained. ... A Viceroy whose views were more in
accordance with those of the Government, and who was likely to
be a more ready instrument in [its] hands, was found in Lord
Lytton, who went to India intrusted with the duty of giving
effect to the new policy. He was instructed. ... to continue
payments of money, to recognise the permanence of the existing
dynasty, and to give a pledge of material support in case of
unprovoked foreign aggression, but to insist on the acceptance
of an English Resident at certain places in Afghanistan in
exchange for these advantages. ... Lord Lawrence and those who
thought with him in England prophesied from the first the
disastrous results which would arise from the alienation of
the Afghans. ... The suggestion of Lord Lytton that an English
Commission should go to Cabul to discuss matters of common
interest to the two Governments, was calculated ... to excite
feelings already somewhat unfriendly to England. He [Shere
Ali] rejected the mission, and formulated his grievances. ...
Lord Lytton waived for a time the despatch of the mission, and
consented to a meeting between the Minister of the Ameer and
Sir Lewis Pelly at Peshawur. ... The English Commissioner was
instructed to declare that the one indispensable condition of
the Treaty was the admission of an English representative
within the limits of Afghanistan. The almost piteous request
on the part of the Afghans for the relaxation of this demand
proved unavailing, and the sudden death of the Ameer's envoy
formed a good excuse for breaking off the negotiation.
{16}
Lord Lytton treated the Ameer as incorrigible, gave
him to understand that the English would proceed to secure
their frontier without further reference to him, and withdrew
his native agent from Cabul. While the relations between the
two countries were in this uncomfortable condition,
information reached India that a Russian mission had been
received at Cabul. It was just at this time that the action of
the Home Government seemed to be tending rapidly towards a war
with Russia. ... As the despatch of a mission from Russia was
contrary to the engagements of that country, and its reception
under existing circumstances wore an unfriendly aspect, Lord
Lytton saw his way with some plausible justification to demand
the reception at Cabul of an English embassy. He notified his
intention to the Ameer, but without waiting for an answer
selected Sir Neville Chamberlain as his envoy, and sent him
forward with an escort of more than 1,000 men, too large, as
it was observed, for peace, too small for war. As a matter of
course the mission was not admitted. ... An outcry was raised
both in England and in India. ... Troops were hastily
collected upon the Indian frontier; and a curious light was
thrown on what had been done by the assertion of the Premier
at the Guildhall banquet that the object in view was the
formation of a 'scientific frontier;' in other words, throwing
aside all former pretences, he declared that the policy of
England was to make use of the opportunity offered for direct
territorial aggression. ... As had been foreseen by all
parties from the first, the English armies were entirely
successful in their first advance [November, 1878]. ... By the
close of December Jellalabad was in the hands of Browne, the
Shutargardan Pass had been surmounted by Roberts, and in
January Stewart established himself in Candahar. When the
resistance of his army proved ineffectual, Shere Ali had taken
to flight, only to die. His refractory son Yakoob Khan was
drawn from his prison and assumed the reins of government as
regent. ... Yakoob readily granted the English demands,
consenting to place his foreign relations under British
control, and to accept British agencies. With considerably
more reluctance, he allowed what was required for the
rectification of the frontier to pass into English hands. He
received in exchange a promise of support by the British
Government, and an annual subsidy of £60,000. On the
conclusion of the treaty the troops in the Jellalabad Valley
withdrew within the new frontier, and Yakoob Khan was left to
establish his authority as best he could at Cabul, whither in
July Cavagnari with an escort of twenty-six troopers and
eighty infantry betook himself. Then was enacted again the sad
story which preluded the first Afghan war. All the parts and
scenes in the drama repeated themselves with curious
uniformity--the English Resident with his little garrison
trusting blindly to his capacity for influencing the Afghan
mind, the puppet king, without the power to make himself
respected, irritated by the constant presence of the Resident,
the chiefs mutually distrustful and at one in nothing save
their hatred of English interference, the people seething with
anger against the infidel foreigner, a wild outbreak which the
Ameer, even had he wished it, could not control, an attack
upon the Residency and the complete destruction [Sept., 1879]
after a gallant but futile resistance of the Resident and his
entire escort. Fortunately the extreme disaster of the
previous war was avoided. The English troops which were
withdrawn from the country were still within reach. ... About
the 24th of September, three weeks after the outbreak, the
Cabul field force under General Roberts was able to move. On
the 5th of October it forced its way into the Logar Valley at
Charassiab, and on the 12th General Roberts was able to make
his formal entry into the city of Cabul. ... The Ameer was
deposed, martial law was established, the disarmament of the
people required under pain of death, and the country scoured
to bring in for punishment those chiefly implicated in the late
outbreak. While thus engaged in carrying out his work of
retribution, the wave of insurrection closed behind the
English general, communication through the Kuram Valley was
cut off, and he was left to pass the winter with an army of
some 8,000 men connected with India only by the Kybur Pass.
... A new and formidable personage ... now made his appearance
on the scene. This was Abdurahman, the nephew and rival of the
late Shere Ali, who upon the defeat of his pretensions had
sought refuge in Turkestan, and was supposed to be supported
by the friendship of Russia. The expected attack did not take
place, constant reinforcements had raised the Cabul army to
20,000, and rendered it too strong to be assailed. ... It was
thought desirable to break up Afghanistan into a northern and
southern province. ... The policy thus declared was carried
out. A certain Shere Ali, a cousin of the late Ameer of the
same name, was appointed Wali or Governor of Candahar. In the
north signs were visible that the only possible successor to
the throne of Cabul would be Abdurahman. ... The Bengal army
under General Stewart was to march northwards, and,
suppressing on the way the Ghuznee insurgents, was to join the
Cabul army in a sort of triumphant return to Peshawur. The
first part of the programme was carried out. ... The second
part of the plan was fated to be interrupted by a serious
disaster which rendered it for a while uncertain whether the
withdrawal of the troops from Afghanistan was possible. ...
Ayoob had always expressed his disapproval of his brother's
friendship for the English, and had constantly refused to
accept their overtures. Though little was known about him,
rumours were afloat that he intended to advance upon Ghuznee,
and join the insurgents there. At length about the middle of
June [1880] his army started. ... But before the end of June
Farah had been reached and it seemed plain that Candahar would
be assaulted. ... General Burrows found it necessary to fall back
to a ridge some forty-five miles from Candahar called
Kush-y-Nakhud. There is a pass called Maiwand to the north of
the high-road to Candahar, by which an army avoiding the
position on the ridge might advance upon the city. On the 27th
of July the Afghan troops were seen moving in the direction of
this pass. In his attempt to stop them with his small force,
numbering about 2,500 men, General Burrows was disastrously
defeated. With difficulty and with the loss of seven guns,
about half the English troops returned to Candahar.
{17}
General Primrose, who was in command, had no
choice but to strengthen the place, submit to an investment,
and wait till he should be rescued. ... The troops at Cabul
were on the point of withdrawing when the news of the disaster
reached them. It was at once decided that the pick of the army
under General Roberts should push forward to the beleaguered
city, while General Stewart with the remainder should carry
out the intended withdrawal. ... With about 10,000 fighting
men and 8,000 camp followers General Roberts brought to a
successful issue his remarkable enterprise, ... falling upon
the army of the Ameer and entirely dispersing it a short
distance outside the city. All those at all inclined to the
forward policy clamoured for the maintenance of a British
force in Candahar. But the Government firmly and decisively
refused to consent to anything approaching to a permanent
occupation. ... The struggle between Abdurahman and Ayoob
continued for a while, and until it was over the English
troops remained at Quetta. But when Abdurahman had been
several times victorious over his rival and in October [1881]
occupied Herat, it was thought safe to complete the
evacuation, leaving Abdurahman for the time at least generally
accepted as Ameer."
J. F. Bright, History of England, period 4, pages
534-544.
ALSO IN
A. Forbes, The Afghan Wars, part 2.
Duke of Argyll, The Afghan Question from 1841 to
1878.
G. B. Malleson, The Russo-Afghan Question.
----------AFGHANISTAN: End----------
AFRICA: The name as anciently applied.
See LIBYANS.
AFRICA: The Roman Province.
"Territorial sovereignty over the whole of North Africa had
doubtless already been claimed on the part of the Roman
Republic, perhaps as a portion of the Carthaginian
inheritance, perhaps because 'our sea' early became one of the
fundamental ideas of the Roman commonwealth; and, in so far,
all its coasts were regarded by the Romans even of the
developed republic as their true property. Nor had this claim
of Rome ever been properly contested by the larger states of
North Africa after the destruction of Carthage. ... The
arrangements which the emperors made were carried out quite
after the same way in the territory of the dependent princes
as in the immediate territory of Rome; it was the Roman
government that regulated the boundaries in all North Africa,
and constituted Roman communities at its discretion, in the
kingdom of Mauretania no less than in the province of Numidia.
We cannot therefore speak, in the strict sense, of a Roman
subjugation of North Africa. The Romans did not conquer it
like the Phœnicians or the French; but they ruled over Numidia
as over Mauretania, first as suzerains, then as successors of
the native governments. ... As for the previous rulers, so
also doubtless for Roman civilization there was to be found a
limit to the south, but hardly so for the Roman territorial
supremacy. There is never mention of any formal extension or
taking back of the frontier in Africa. ... The former
territory of Carthage and the larger part of the earlier
kingdom of Numidia, united with it by the dictator Cæsar, or,
as they also called it, the old and new Africa, formed until
the end of the reign of Tiberius the province of that name
[Africa], which extended from the boundary of Cyrene to the
river Ampsaga, embracing the modern state of Tripoli, as well
as Tunis and the French province of Constantine. ...
Mauretania was not a heritage like Africa and Numidia. ... The
Romans can scarcely have taken over the Empire of the
Mauretanian kings in quite the same extent as these possessed
it; but ... probably the whole south as far as the great
desert passed as imperial land."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 8, chapter 13.
See, also, CARTHAGE, NUMIDIA, and CYRENE.
AFRICA: The Mediæval City.
See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1543-1560.
AFRICA:
Moslem conquest and Moslem States in the North.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST, &c.: A. D. 640-646; 647-709,
and 908-1171;
also BARBARY STATES; EGYPT: A. D. 1250-1517, and after;
and SUDAN.
AFRICA:
Portuguese Exploration of the Atlantic Coast.
The rounding of the Cape.
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1415-1460, and 1463-1498.
AFRICA:
Dutch and English Colonization.
See SOUTH AFRICA.
AFRICA: A. D. 1787-1807.
Settlement of Sierra Leone.
See SIERRA LEONE.
AFRICA: A. D. 1820-1822.
The founding of Liberia.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1816-1847.
AFRICA: A. D. 1884-1891.
Partition of the interior between European Powers.
"The partition of Africa may be said to date from the Berlin
Conference of 1884--85 [see CONGO FREE STATE]. Prior to that
Conference the question of inland boundaries was scarcely
considered. ... The founding of the Congo Independent State
was probably the most important result of the Conference. ...
Two months after the Conference had concluded its labours,
Great Britain and Germany had a serious dispute in regard to
their respective spheres of influence on the Gulf of Guinea.
... The compromise ... arrived at placed the Mission Station
of Victoria within the German sphere of influence." The
frontier between the two spheres of influence on the Bight of
Biafra was subsequently defined by a line drawn, in 1886, from
the coast to Yola, on the Benué. The Royal Niger Company,
constituted by a royal charter, ... "was given administrative
powers over territories covered by its treaties. The regions
thereby placed under British protection ... apart from the Oil
Rivers District, which is directly administered by the Crown,
embrace the coastal lands between Lagos and the northern
frontier of Camarons, the Lower Niger (including territories
of Sokoto, Gandu and Borgo), and the Benué from Yola to its
confluence." By a Protocol signed December 24, 1885, Germany
and France "defined their respective spheres of influence and
action on the Bight of Biafra, and also on the Slave Coast and
in Senegambia." This "fixed the inland extension of the German
sphere of influence (Camarons) at 15° East longitude, Greenwich.
... At present it allows the French Congo territories to
expand along the western bank of the M'bangi ... provided no
other tributary of the M'bangi-Congo is found to the west, in
which case, according to the Berlin Treaty of 1884-85, the
conventional basin of the Congo would gain an extension." On
the 12th of May, 1886, France and Portugal signed a convention
by which France "secured the exclusive control of both banks
of the Casamanza (in Senegambia), and the Portuguese frontier
in the south was advanced approximately to the southern limit
of the basin of the Casini.
{18}
On the Congo, Portugal retained the Massabi district, to which
France had laid claim, but both banks of the Loango were left
to France." In 1884 three representatives of the Society for
German Colonization--Dr. Peters, Dr. Jühlke, and Count
Pfeil--quietly concluded treaties with the chiefs of Useguha,
Ukami, Nguru, and Usagara, by which those territories were
conveyed to the Society in question. "Dr. Peters ... armed
with his treaties, returned to Berlin in February, 1885. On
the 27th February, the day following the signature of the
General Act of the Berlin Conference, an Imperial Schutzbrief,
or Charter of Protection, secured to the Society for German
Colonization the territories ... acquired for them through Dr.
Peters' treaties: in other words, a German Protectorate was
proclaimed. When it became known that Germany had seized upon
the Zanzibar mainland, the indignation in colonial circles
knew no bounds. ... Prior to 1884, the continental lands
facing Zanzibar were almost exclusively under British
influence. The principal traders were British subjects, and
the Sultan's Government was administered under the advice of
the British Resident. The entire region between the Coast and
the Lakes was regarded as being under the nominal suzerainty
of the Sultan. ... Still, Great Britain had no territorial
claims on the dominions of the Sultan." The Sultan formally
protested and Great Britain championed his cause; but to no
effect. In the end the Sultan of Zanzibar yielded the German
Protectorate over the four inland provinces and over Vitu, and
the British and German Governments arranged questions between
them, provisionally, by the Anglo-German Convention of 1886,
which was afterwards superseded by the more definite
Convention of July 1890, which will be spoken of below. In
April 1887, the rights of the Society for German Colonization
were transferred to the German East Africa Association, with
Dr. Peters at its head. The British East Africa Company took
over concessions that had been granted by the Sultan of
Zanzibar to Sir William Mackinnon, and received a royal
charter in September, 1888. In South-west Africa, "an
enterprising Bremen merchant, Herr Lüderitz, and subsequently
the German Consul-General, Dr. Nachtigal, concluded a series
of political and commercial treaties with native chiefs,
whereby a claim was instituted over Angra Pequeña, and over
vast districts in the Interior between the Orange River and
Cape Frio. ... It was useless for the Cape colonists to
protest. On the 13th October 1884 Germany formally notified to
the Powers her Protectorate over South-West Africa. ... On 3rd
August 1885 the German Colonial Company for South-West Africa
was founded, and .... received the Imperial sanction for its
incorporation. But in August 1886 a new Association was
formed--the German West-Africa Company--and the
administration of its territories was placed under an Imperial
Commissioner. ... The intrusion of Germany into South-West
Africa acted as a check upon, no less than a spur to, the
extension of British influence northwards to the Zambezi.
Another obstacle to this extension arose from the Boer
insurrection." The Transvaal, with increased independence had
adopted the title of South African Republic. "Zulu-land,
having lost its independence, was partitioned: a third of its
territories, over which a republic had been proclaimed, was
absorbed (October 1887) by the Transvaal; the remainder was
added (14th May 1887) to the British possessions.
Amatonga-land was in 1888 also taken under British protection.
By a convention with the South African Republic, Britain
acquired in 1884 the Crown colony of Bechuana-land; and in the
early part of 1885 a British Protectorate was proclaimed over
the remaining portion of Bechuana-land." Furthermore, "a
British Protectorate was instituted [1885] over the country
bounded by the Zambezi in the north, the British possessions
in the south, 'the Portuguese province of Sofala' in the east,
and the 20th degree of east longitude in the west. It was at
this juncture that Mr. Cecil Rhodes came forward, and, having
obtained certain concessions from Lobengula, founded the
British South Africa Company, ... On the 29th October 1889,
the British South Africa Company was granted a royal charter.
It was declared in this charter that the principal field of
the operations of the British South African Company shall be
the region of South Africa lying immediately to the north of
British Bechuanaland, and to the north and west of the South
African Republic, and to the west of the Portuguese
dominions.'" No northern limit was given, and the other
boundaries were vaguely defined. The position of Swazi-land
was definitely settled in 1890 by an arrangement between Great
Britain and the South African Republic, which provides for the
continued independence of Swazi-land and a joint control over
the white settlers. A British Protectorate was proclaimed over
Nyassa-Viand and the Shiré Highlands in 1889-90. To return now
to the proceedings of other Powers in Africa: "Italy took
formal possession, in July 1882, of the bay and territory of
Assab. The Italian coast-line on the Red Sea was extended from
Ras Kasar (18° 2' North Latitude) to the southern boundary of
Raheita, towards Obok. During 1889, shortly after the death of
King Johannes, Keren and Asmara were occupied by Italian
troops. Menelik of Shoa, who succeeded to the throne of
Abyssinia after subjugating all the Abyssinian provinces,
except Tigré, dispatched an embassy to King Humbert, the
result of which was that the new Negus acknowledged (29th
September, 1889) the Protectorate of Italy over Abyssinia, and
its sovereignty over the territories of Massawa, Keren and
Asmara." By the Protocols of 24th March and 15th April, 1891,
Italy and Great Britain define their respective Spheres of
Influence in East Africa. "But since then Italy has
practically withdrawn from her position. She has absolutely no
hold over Abyssinia. ... Italy has also succeeded in
establishing herself on the Somál Coast." By treaties
concluded in 1889, "the coastal lands between Cape Warsheikh
(about 2° 30' North latitude), and Cape Bedwin (8° 3' North
latitude)--a distance of 450 miles--were placed under Italian
protection. Italy subsequently extended (1890) her
Protectorate over the Somál Coast to the Jub river. ... The
British Protectorate on the Somál Coast facing Aden, now
extends from the Italian frontier at Ras Hafún to Ras Jibute
(43° 15' East longitude). ... The activity of France in her
Senegambian province, ... during the last hundred years ...
has finally resulted in a considerable expansion of her
territory. ... The French have established a claim over the
country intervening between our Gold Coast Colony and Liberia.
{19}
A more precise delimitation of the frontier between Sierra
Leone and Liberia resulted from the treaties signed at
Monrovia on the 11th of November, 1887. In 1888 Portugal
withdrew all rights over Dehomé. ... Recently, a French sphere
of influence has been instituted over the whole of the Saharan
regions between Algeria and Senegambia. ... Declarations were
exchanged (5th August 1890) between [France and Great Britain]
with the following results: France became a consenting party
to the Anglo-German Convention of 1st July 1890. (2.) Great
Britain recognised a French sphere of influence over
Madagascar. ... And (3) Great Britain recognised the sphere of
influence of France to the south of her Mediterranean
possessions, up to a line from Say on the Niger to Barrua on
Lake Tsad, drawn in such a manner as to comprise in the sphere
of action of the British Niger Company all that fairly belongs
to the kingdom of Sokoto." The Anglo-German Convention of
July, 1890, already referred to, established by its main
provisions the following definitions of territory: "The
Anglo-German frontier in East Africa, which, by the Convention
of 1886, ended at a point on the eastern shore of the Victoria
Nyanza was continued on the same latitude across the lake to
the confines of the Congo Independent State; but, on the
western side of the lake, this frontier was, if necessary, to
be deflected to the south, in order to include Mount M'fumbiro
within the British sphere. ... Treaties in that district were
made on behalf of the British East Africa Company by Mr.
Stanley, on his return (May 1889) from the relief of Emin
Pasha. ... (2.) The southern boundary of the German sphere of
influence in East Africa was recognised as that originally
drawn to a point on the eastern shore of Lake Nyassa, whence
it was continued by the eastern, northern, and western shores
of the lake to the northern bank of the mouth of the River
Songwé. From this point the Anglo-German frontier was
continued to Lake Tanganika, in such a manner as to leave the
Stevenson Road within the British sphere. (3.) The Northern
frontier of British East Africa was defined by the Jub River
and the conterminous boundary of the Italian sphere of
influence in Galla-land and Abyssinia up to the confines of
Egypt; in the west, by the Congo State and the Congo-Nile
watershed. (4.) Germany withdrew, in favor of Britain, her
Protectorate over Vitu and her claims to all territories on
the mainland to the north of the River Tana, as also over the
islands of Patta and Manda. (5.) In South-West Africa, the
Anglo-German frontier, originally fixed up to 22 south
latitude, was confirmed; but from this point the boundary-line
was drawn in such a manner eastward and northward as to give
Germany free access to the Zambezi by the Chobe River. (6.)
The Anglo-German frontier between Togo and Gold Coast Colony
was fixed, and that between the Camarons and the British Niger
Territories was provisionally adjusted. (7.) The Free-trade
zone, defined by the Act of Berlin (1885) was recognised as
applicable to the present arrangement between Britain and
Germany. (8.) A British Protectorate was recognised over the
dominions of the Sultan of Zanzibar within the British coastal
zone and over the islands of Zanzibar and Pemba. Britain,
however, undertook to use her influence to secure (what have
since been acquired) corresponding advantages for Germany
within the German coastal zone and over the island of Mafia.
Finally (9), the island of Heligoland, in the North Sea, was
ceded by Britain to Germany." By a treaty concluded in June,
1891, between Great Britain and Portugal, "Great Britain
acquired a broad central sphere of influence for the expansion
of her possessions in South Africa northward to and beyond the
Zambezi, along a path which provides for the uninterrupted
passage of British goods and British enterprise, up to the
confines of the Congo Independent State and German East
Africa. ... Portugal, on the East Coast secured the Lower
Zambezi from Zumbo, and the Lower Shiré from the Ruo
Confluence, the entire Hinterland of Mosambique up to Lake
Nyassa and the Hinterland of Sofala to the confines of the
South African Republic and the Matabele kingdom. On the West
Coast, Portugal received the entire Hinterland behind her
provinces in Lower Guinea, up to the confines of the Congo
Independent State, and the upper course of the Zambezi. ... On
May 25th 1891 a Convention was signed at Lisbon, which has put an
end to the dispute between Portugal and the Congo Independent
State as to the possession of Lunda. Roughly speaking, the
country was equally divided between the disputants. ... Lord
Salisbury, in his negotiations with Germany and Portugal, very
wisely upheld the principle of free-trade which was laid down by
the Act of Berlin, 1885, in regard to the free transit of
goods through territories in which two or more powers are
indirectly interested."
A. S. White, The Development of Africa, Second Ed.,
Revised., 1892.
ALSO IN:
J. S. Keltie, The Partition of Africa, chapter 12-23.
See, also, SOUTH AFRICA, and UGANDA.
AFRICA: The inhabiting races.
The indigenous races of Africa are considered to be four in
number, namely: the Negroes proper, who occupy a central zone,
stretching from the Atlantic to the Egyptian Sudan, and who
comprise an enormous number of diverse tribes; the Fulahs
(with whom the Nubians are associated) settled mainly between
Lake Chad and the Niger; the Bantus, who occupy the whole
South, except its extremity, and the Hottentots who are in
that extreme southern region. Some anthropologists include
with the Hottentots the Bosjesmans or Bushmen. The Kafirs and
Bechuanas are Bantu tribes. The North and Northeast are
occupied by Semitic and Hamitic races, the latter including
Abyssinians and Gallas.
A. H. Keane, The African Races (Stanford's Compendium:
Africa, appendix).
ALSO IN:
R. Brown, The Races of Mankind, volume 2-3.
R. N. Cust, Sketch of the Modern Languages of
Africa.
See, also, SOUTH AFRICA.
----------AFRICA: End----------
AGA MOHAMMED KHAN, Shah of Persia, A. D. 1795-1797.
AGADE.
See BABYLONIA: THE EARLY (CHALDEAN) MONARCHY.
AGAPETUS II., Pope, A. D. 946-956.
AGAS.
See SUBLIME PORTE.
AGATHO, Pope, A. D. 678-682.
AGATHOCLES, The tyranny of.
See SYRACUSE: B. C. 317-289.
AGE OF STONE.--AGE OF BRONZE, &c.
See STONE AGE.
{20}
AGELA.--AGELATAS.
The youths and young men of ancient Crete were publicly
trained and disciplined in divisions or companies, each of
which was called an Agela, and its leader or director the
Agelatas.
G. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece: The State,
part 3, chapter 2.
AGEMA, The.
The royal escort of Alexander the Great.
AGEN, Origin of.
See NITIOBRIGES.
AGENDICUM OR AGEDINCUM.
See SENONES.
AGER PUBLICUS.
"Rome was always making fresh acquisitions of territory in her
early history. ... Large tracts of country became Roman land,
the property of the Roman state, or public domain (ager
publicus), as the Romans called it. The condition of this
land, the use to which it was applied, and the disputes which
it caused between the two orders at Rome, are among the most
curious and perplexing questions in Roman history. ... That
part of newly acquired territory which was neither sold nor
given remained public property, and it was occupied, according
to the Roman term, by private persons, in whose hands it was a
Possessio. Hyginus and Siculus Flaccus represent this
occupation as being made without any order. Every Roman took
what he could, and more than he could use profitably. ... We
should be more inclined to believe that this public land was
occupied under some regulations, in order to prevent disputes;
but if such regulations existed we know nothing about them.
There was no survey made of the public land which was from
time to time acquired, but there were certainly general
boundaries fixed for the purpose of determining what had
become public property. The lands which were sold and given
were of necessity surveyed and fixed by boundaries. ... There
is no direct evidence that any payments to the state were
originally made by the Possessors. It is certain, however,
that at some early time such payments were made, or, at least,
were due to the state."
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, chapter 11.
AGGER.
See CASTRA.
AGGRAVIADOS, The.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827.
AGHA MOHAMMED KHAN, Shah of Persia, A. D. 1795-1797.
AGHLABITE DYNASTY.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST AND EMPIRE: A. D.715-750.
AGHRIM, OR AUGHRIM, Battle of (A. D. 1691).
See IRELAND: A. D. 1689-1691.
AGILULPHUS, King of the Lombards. A. D. 590-616.
AGINCOURT, Battle of (1415).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1415.
AGINNUM.--Modern Agen.
See NITIOBRIGES.
AGNADEL, Battle of (1509).
See VENICE: A. D. 1508-1509.
AGNATI.--AGNATIC.
See GENS, ROMAN.
AGNIERS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: AGNIERS.
AGOGE, The.
The public discipline enforced in ancient Sparta; the
ordinances attributed to Lycurgus, for the training of the
young and for the regulating of the lives of citizens.
G. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece:
The State, part 3, chapter 1.
AGORA, The.
The market-place of an ancient Greek city was, also, the
centre of its political life. "Like the gymnasium, and even
earlier than this, it grew into architectural splendour with
the increasing culture of the Greeks. In maritime cities it
generally lay near the sea; in inland places at the foot of
the hill which carried the old feudal castle. Being the oldest
part of the city, it naturally became the focus not only of
commercial, but also of religious and political life. Here
even in Homer's time the citizens assembled in consultation,
for which purpose it was supplied with seats; here were the
oldest sanctuaries; here were celebrated the first festive
games; here centred the roads on which the intercommunication,
both religious and commercial, with neighbouring cities and
states was carried on; from here started the processions which
continually passed between holy places of kindred origin,
though locally separated. Although originally all public
transactions were carried on in these market-places, special
local arrangements for contracting public business soon became
necessary in large cities. At Athens, for instance, the gently
rising ground of the Philopappos hill, called Pnyx, touching
the Agora, was used for political consultations, while most
likely, about the time of the Pisistratides, the market of
Kerameikos, the oldest seat of Attic industry (lying between
the foot of the Akropolis, the Areopagos and the hill of
Theseus), became the agora proper, i. e., the centre of
Athenian commerce. ... The description by Vitruvius of an
agora evidently refers to the splendid structures of
post-Alexandrine times. According to him it was quadrangular
in size [? shape] and surrounded by wide double colonades. The
numerous columns carried architraves of common stone or of
marble, and on the roofs of the porticoes were galleries for
walking purposes. This, of course, does not apply to all
marketplaces, even of later date; but, upon the whole, the
remaining specimens agree with the description of Vitruvius."
E. Guhl and W. Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans,
translated by Hueffer, part 1, section 26.
In the Homeric time, the general assembly of freemen was
called the Agora.
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 1, chapter 20.
AGRÆI, The.
See AKARNANIANS.
AGRARIAN LAWS, Roman.
"Great mistakes formerly prevailed on the nature of the Roman
laws familiarly termed Agrarian. It was supposed that by these
laws all land was declared common property, and that at
certain intervals of time the state resumed possession and
made a fresh distribution to all citizens, rich and poor. It
is needless to make any remarks on the nature and consequences
of such a law; sufficient it will be to say, what is now known
to all, that at Rome such laws never existed, never were
thought of. The lands which were to be distributed by Agrarian
laws were not private property, but the property of the state.
They were, originally, those public lands which had been the
domain of the kings, and which were increased whenever any
City or people was conquered by the Romans; because it was an
Italian practice to confiscate the lands of the conquered, in
whole or in part."
H. G. Liddell, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 8.
See ROME: B. C. 376, and B. C. 133-121.
{21}
AGRI DECUMATES, The.
"Between the Rhine and the Upper Danube there intervenes a
triangular tract of land, the apex of which touches the
confines of Switzerland at Basel; thus separating, as with an
enormous wedge, the provinces of Gaul and Vindelicia, and
presenting at its base no natural line of defence from one river
to the other. This tract was, however, occupied, for the most
part, by forests, and if it broke the line of the Roman
defences, it might at least be considered impenetrable to an
enemy. Abandoned by the warlike and predatory tribes of
Germany, it was seized by wandering immigrants from Gaul, many
of them Roman adventurers, before whom the original
inhabitants, the Marcomanni, or men of the frontier, seem to
have retreated eastward beyond the Hercynian forest. The
intruders claimed or solicited Roman protection, and offered
in return a tribute from the produce of the soil, whence the
district itself came to be known by the title of the Agri
Decumates, or Tithed Land. It was not, however, officially
connected with any province of the Empire, nor was any attempt
made to provide for its permanent security, till a period much
later than that on which we are now engaged [the period of
Augustus]."
C. Merivale, History of the Roman, chapter 36..
"Wurtemburg, Baden and Hohenzollern coincide with the Agri
Decumates of the Roman writers."
R G. Latham, Ethnology of Europe, chapter 8.
See, also, ALEMANNI, and SUEVI.
AGRICOLA'S CAMPAIGNS IN BRITAIN.
See BRITAIN: A. D. 78-84.
AGRIGENTUM.
Acragas, or Agrigentum, one of the youngest of the Greek
colonies in Sicily, founded about B. C. 582 by the older
colony of Gela, became one of the largest and most splendid
cities of the age, in the fifth century B. C., as is testified
by its ruins to this day. It was the scene of the notorious
tyranny of Phalaris, as well as that of Theron. Agrigentum was
destroyed by the Carthagenians, B. C. 405, and rebuilt by
Timoleon, but never recovered its former importance and
grandeur.
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 4, chapter 3.
See, also, PHALARIS, BRAZEN BULL OF.
Agrigentum was destroyed by the Carthagenians in 406 B. C.
See SICILY: B. C. 409-405.
Rebuilt by Timoleon, it was the scene of a great defeat of the
Carthagenians by the Romans, in 262 B. C.
See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.
AGRIPPINA AND HER SON NERO.
See ROME: A. D. 47-54, and 54-64.
AHMED KHEL, Battle of (1880).
See AFGHANISTAN: A. D. 1869-1881.
AIGINA.
See ÆGINA.
AIGOSPOTAMOI, Battle of.
See GREECE: B. C. 405.
AIGUILLON, Siege of.
A notable siege in the "Hundred Years' War," A. D. 1346. An
English garrison under the famous knight, Sir Walter Manny,
held the great fortress of Aiguillon, near the confluence of
the Garonne and the Lot, against a formidable French army.
J. Froissart, Chronicles, volume 1, book 1, chapter 120.
AIX, Origin of.
See SALYES.
AIX-LA-CHAPELLE:
The Capital of Charlemagne.
The favorite residence and one of the two capitals of
Charlemagne was the city which the Germans call Aachen and the
French have named Aix-la-Chapelle. "He ravished the ruins of
the ancient world to restore the monumental arts. A new Rome
arose in the depths of the forests of Austrasia--palaces,
gates, bridges, baths, galleries, theatres, churches,--for the
erection of which the mosaics and marbles of Italy were laid
under tribute, and workmen summoned from all parts of Europe.
It was there that an extensive library was gathered, there
that the school of the palace was made permanent, there that
foreign envoys were pompously welcomed, there that the monarch
perfected his plans for the introduction of Roman letters and
the improvement of music."
P. Godwin, History of France:
Ancient Gaul, book 4, chapter 17.
AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, Treaty of (A. D. 803).
See VENICE: A. D. 697-810.
AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, Treaty of (A. D. 1668).
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1668.
AIX-LA-CHAPELLE,
The Congress and Treaty which ended the War of the Austrian
Succession (1748).
The War of the Austrian Succession, which raged in Europe, and
on the ocean, and in India and America, from 1740 to 1748 (see
AUSTRIA: A. D. 1718-1738, 1740-1741, and after), was brought
to an end in the latter year by a Congress of all the
belligerents which met at Aix-la-Chapelle, in April, and which
concluded its labors on the 18th of October following. "The
influence of England and Holland ... forced the peace upon
Austria and Sardinia, though both were bitterly aggrieved by
its conditions. France agreed to restore every conquest she
had made during the war, to abandon the cause of the Stuarts,
and expel the Pretender from her soil; to demolish, in
accordance with earlier treaties, the fortifications of
Dunkirk on the side of the sea, while retaining those on the
side of the land, and to retire from the conquest without
acquiring any fresh territory or any pecuniary compensation.
England in like manner restored the few conquests she had
made, and submitted to the somewhat humiliating condition of
sending hostages to Paris as a security for the restoration of
Cape Breton. ... The disputed boundary between Canada and Nova
Scotia, which had been a source of constant difficulty with
France, was left altogether undefined. The Assiento treaty for
trade with the Spanish colonies was confirmed for the four
years it had still to run; but no real compensation was
obtained for a war expenditure which is said to have exceeded
sixty-four millions, and which had raised the funded and
unfunded debt to more than seventy-eight millions. Of the
other Powers, Holland, Genoa, and the little state of Modena
retained their territory as before the war, and Genoa remained
mistress of the Duchy of Finale, which had been ceded to the king
of Sardinia by the Treaty of Worms, and which it had been a
main object of his later policy to secure. Austria obtained a
recognition of the election of the Emperor, a general
guarantee of the Pragmatic Sanction, and the restoration of
everything she had lost in the Netherlands, but she gained no
additional territory. She was compelled to confirm the cession
of Silesia and Glatz to Prussia, to abandon her Italian
conquests, and even to cede a considerable part of her former
Italian dominions. To the bitter indignation of Maria Theresa,
the Duchies of Parma, Placentia and Guastella passed to Don
Philip of Spain, to revert, however, to their former
possessors if Don Philip mounted the Spanish throne, or died
without male issue. The King of Sardinia also obtained from
Austria the territorial cessions enumerated In the Treaty of
Worms [see ITALY: A. D. 1743], with the important exceptions
of Placentia, which passed to Don Philip, and of Finale, which
remained with the Genoese.
{22}
For the loss of these he obtained no compensation. Frederick
[the Great, of Prussia] obtained a general guarantee for the
possession of his newly acquired territory, and a long list of
old treaties was formally confirmed. Thus small were the
changes effected in Europe by so much bloodshed and treachery,
by nearly nine years of wasteful and desolating war. The
design of the dismemberment of Austria had failed, but no
vexed questions had been set at rest. ... Of all the ambitious
projects that had been conceived during the war, that of
Frederick alone was substantially realized."
W. E. H. Lecky, History of England, 18th Century,
chapter 3.
"Thus ended the War of the Austrian succession. In its origin
and its motives one of the most wicked of all the many
conflicts which ambition and perfidy have provoked in Europe,
it excites a peculiarly mournful interest by the gross
inequality in the rewards and penalties which fortune assigned
to the leading actors. Prussia, Spain and Sardinia were all
endowed out of the estates of the house of Hapsburg. But the
electoral house of Bavaria, the most sincere and the most
deserving of all the claimants to that vast inheritance, not
only received no increase of territory, but even nearly lost
its own patrimonial possessions. ... The most trying problem
is still that offered by the misfortunes of the Queen of
Hungary [Maria Theresa]. ... The verdict of history, as
expressed by the public opinion, and by the vast majority of
writers, in every country except Prussia, upholds the justice
of the queen's cause and condemns the coalition that was
formed against her."
H. Tuttle, History of Prussia, 1745-1756, chapter 2.
ALSO IN
W. Russell, History of Modern Europe, part 2, letter 30.
W. Coxe, History of the House of Austria,
chapter 108 (volume 3).
See, also, NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1745-1748.
AIZNADIN, Battle of (A. D. 634).
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 632-639.
AKARNANIAN LEAGUE, The.
"Of the Akarnanian League, formed by one of the least
important, but at the same time one of the most estimable
peoples in Greece ... our knowledge is only fragmentary. The
boundaries of Akarnania fluctuated, but we always find the
people spoken of as a political whole. ... Thucydides speaks,
by implication at least, of the Akarnanian League as an
institution of old standing in his time. The Akarnanians had,
in early times, occupied the hill of Olpai as a place for
judicial proceedings common to the whole nation. Thus the
supreme court of the Akarnanian Union held its sittings, not
in a town, but in a mountain fortress. But in Thucydides' own
time Stratos had attained its position as the greatest city of
Akarnania, and probably the federal assemblies were already
held there. ... Of the constitution of the League we know but
little. Ambassadors were sent by the federal body, and
probably, just as in the Achaian League, it would have been
held to be a breach of the federal tie if any single city had
entered on diplomatic intercourse with other powers. As in
Achaia, too, there stood at the head of the League a General
with high authority. ... The existence of coins bearing the
name of the whole Akarnanian nation shows that there was unity
enough to admit of a federal coinage, though coins of
particular cities also occur."
E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government.,
chapter 4, section 1.
AKARNANIANS (Acarnanians).
The Akarnanians formed "a link of transition" between the
ancient Greeks and their barbarous or non-Hellenic neighbours
in the Epirus and beyond. "They occupied the territory between
the river Acheloûs, the Ionian sea and the Ambrakian gulf:
they were Greeks and admitted as such to contend at the
Pan-Hellenic games, yet they were also closely connected with
the Amphilochi and Agræi, who were not Greeks. In manners,
sentiments and intelligence, they were half-Hellenic and
half-Epirotic,--like the Ætolians and the Ozolian Lokrians.
Even down to the time of Thucydides, these nations were
subdivided into numerous petty communities, lived in
unfortified villages, were frequently in the habit of
plundering each other, and never permitted themselves to be
unarmed. ... Notwithstanding this state of disunion and
insecurity, however, the Akarnanians maintained a loose
political league among themselves. ... The Akarnanians appear
to have produced many prophets. They traced up their mythical
ancestry, as well as that of their neighbours the
Amphilochians, to the most renowned prophetic family among the
Grecian heroes,--Amphiaraus, with his sons Alkmæôn and
Ampilochus: Akarnan, the eponymous hero of the nation, and
other eponymous heroes of the separate towns, were supposed to
be the sons of Alkmæôn. They are spoken of, together with the
Ætolians, as mere rude shepherds, by the lyric poet Alkman,
and so they seem to have continued with little alteration
until the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, when we hear of
them, for the first time, as allies of Athens and as bitter
enemies of the Corinthian colonies on their coast. The contact
of those colonies, however, and the large spread of Akarnanian
accessible coast, could not fail to produce some effect in
socializing and improving the people. And it is probable that
this effect would have been more sensibly felt, had not the
Akarnanians been kept back by the fatal neighbourhood of the
Ætolians, with whom they were in perpetual feud,--a people the
most unprincipled and unimprovable of all who bore the
Hellenic name, and whose habitual faithlessness stood in
marked contrast with the rectitude and steadfastness of the
Akarnanian character."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 24.
AKBAR (called The Great), Moghul Emperor or Padischah of India,
A. D. 1556-1605.
AKHALZIKH, Siege and capture of (1828).
See TURKS: A. D. 1826-1829.
AKKAD.--AKKADIANS.
See BABYLONIA, PRIMITIVE.
AKKARON.
See PHILISTINES.
AKROKERAUNIAN PROMONTORY.
See KORKYRA.
ALABAMA:
The Aboriginal Inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: APALACHES: MUSKHOGEE FAMILY;
CHEROKEES.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1539-1542.
Traversed by Hernando de Soto.
See FLORIDA: A. D. 1528-1542.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1629.
Embraced in the Carolina grant to Sir Robert Heath.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1629.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1663.
Embraced in the Carolina grant to Monk, Shaftesbury, and others.
See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.
{23}
ALABAMA: A. D. 1702-1711.
French occupation and first settlement.
The founding of Mobile.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1698-1712.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1732.
Mostly embraced in the new province of Georgia.
See GEORGIA: A. D. 1732-1739.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1763.
Cession and delivery to Great Britain.
Partly embraced in West Florida.
See SEVEN YEARS' WAR;
and FLORIDA: A. D. 1763:
and NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1763.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1779-1781.
Reconquest of West Florida by the Spaniards.
See FLORIDA: A. D. 1779-1781.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1783.
Mostly covered by the English cession to the United States.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1783 (SEPTEMBER).
ALABAMA: A. D. 1783-1787.
Partly in dispute with Spain.
See FLORIDA: A. D. 1783-1787.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1798-1804.
All but the West Florida District embraced in Mississippi Territory.
See MISSISSIPPI: A. D. 1798-1804.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1803.
Portion acquired by the Louisiana purchase.
See LOUISIANA: A.D. 1798-1803.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1813.
Possession of Mobile and West Florida taken from the Spaniards.
See FLORIDA: A. D. 1810-1813.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1813-1814.
The Creek War.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1813-1814 (AUGUST-APRIL).
ALABAMA: A. D. 1817-1819.
Organized as a Territory.
Constituted a State, and admitted to the Union.
"By an act of Congress dated March 1, 1817, Mississippi
Territory was divided. Another act, bearing the date March 3,
thereafter, organized the western [? eastern] portion into a
Territory, to be known as Alabama, and with the boundaries as
they now exist. ... By an act approved March 2, 1819, congress
authorized the inhabitants of the Territory of Alabama to form
a state constitution, 'and that said Territory, when formed
into a State, shall be admitted into the Union upon the same
footing as the original States.' ... The joint resolution of
congress admitting Alabama into the Union was approved by
President Monroe, December 14, 1819."
W. Brewer, Alabama, chapter 5.
ALABAMA: A. D. 1861 (January).
Secession from the Union.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY).
ALABAMA: A. D. 1862.
General Mitchell's Expedition.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (APRIL--MAY: ALABAMA).
ALABAMA: A. D. 1864 (August).
The Battle of Mobile Bay.
Capture of Confederate forts and fleet.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864(AUGUST: ALABAMA).
ALABAMA: A. D. 1865 (March-April).
The Fall of Mobile.
Wilson's Raid.
End of the Rebellion.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (APRIL-MAY).
ALABAMA: A. D. 1865-1868.
Reconstruction.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (MAY-JULY), to 1868-1870.
----------ALABAMA: End----------
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1861-1862.
In their Origin.
The Earlier Confederate cruisers.
Precursors of the Alabama.
The commissioning of privateers, and of more officially
commanded cruisers, in the American civil war, by the
government of the Southern Confederacy, was begun early in the
progress of the movement of rebellion, pursuant to a
proclamation issued by Jefferson Davis on the 17th of April,
1861. "Before the close of July, 1861, more than 20 of those
depredators were afloat, and had captured millions of property
belonging to American citizens. The most formidable and
notorious of the sea-going ships of this character, were the
Nashville, Captain R. B. Pegram, a Virginian, who had
abandoned his flag, and the Sumter [a regularly commissioned
war vessel], Captain Raphael Semmes. The former was a
side-wheel steamer, carried a crew of eighty men, and was
armed with two long 12-pounder rifled cannon. Her career was
short, but quite successful. She was finally destroyed by the
Montauk, Captain Worden, in the Ogeechee River. The career of
the Sumter, which had been a New Orleans and Havana packet
steamer named Marquis de Habana, was also short, but much more
active and destructive. She had a crew of sixty-five men and
twenty-five marines, and was heavily armed. She ran the
blockade at the mouth of the Mississippi River on the 30th of
June, and was pursued some distance by the Brooklyn. She ran
among the West India islands and on the Spanish Main, and soon
made prizes of many vessels bearing the American flag. She was
everywhere received in British Colonial ports with great
favor, and was afforded every facility for her piratical
operations. She became the terror of the American merchant
service, and everywhere eluded National vessels of war sent
out in pursuit of her. At length she crossed the ocean, and at
the close of 1861 was compelled to seek shelter under British
guns at Gibraltar, where she was watched by the Tuscarora.
Early in the year 1862 she was sold, and thus ended her
piratical career. Encouraged by the practical friendship of
the British evinced for these corsairs, and the substantial
aid they were receiving from British subjects in various ways,
especially through blockade-runners, the conspirators
determined to procure from those friends some powerful
piratical craft, and made arrangements for the purchase and
construction of vessels for that purpose. Mr. Laird, a
ship-builder at Liverpool and member of the British
Parliament, was the largest contractor in the business, and,
in defiance of every obstacle, succeeded in getting pirate
ships to sea. The first of these ships that went to sea was
the Oreto, ostensibly built for a house in Palermo, Sicily.
Mr. Adams, the American minister in London, was so well
satisfied from information received that she was designed for
the Confederates, that he called the attention of the British
government to the matter so early as the 18th of February,
1862. But nothing effective was done, and she was completed
and allowed to depart from British waters. She went first to
Nassau, and on the 4th of September suddenly appeared off
Mobile harbor, flying the British flag and pennants. The
blockading squadron there was in charge of Commander George H.
Preble, who had been specially instructed not to give offense
to foreign nations while enforcing the blockade. He believed
the Oreto to be a British vessel, and while deliberating a few
minutes as to what he should do, she passed out of range of
his guns, and entered the harbor with a rich freight. For his
seeming remissness Commander Preble was summarily dismissed
from the service without a hearing--an act which subsequent
events seemed to show was cruel injustice. Late in December
the Oreto escaped from Mobile, fully armed for a piratical
cruise, under the command of John Newland Maffit. ... The name
of the Oreto was changed to that of Florida."
B. J. Lossing, Field Book of the Civil War,
volume 2, chapter 21.
{24}
The fate of the Florida is related below--A. D. 1862-1865.
R. Semmes, Memoirs of Service Afloat, chapter 9-26.
ALSO IN
J. Davis, Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government,
chapter 30-31 (volume 2).
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1862-1864.
The Alabama, her career and her fate.
"The Alabama [the second cruiser built in England for the
Confederates] ... is thus described by Semmes, her commander:
'She was of about 900 tons burden, 230 feet in length, 32 feet
in breadth, 20 feet in depth, and drew, when provisioned and
coaled for cruise, 15 feet of water. She was
barkentine-rigged, with long lower masts, which enabled her to
carry large fore and aft sails, as jibs and try-sails. ... Her
engine was of 300 horse-power, and she had attached an
apparatus for condensing from the vapor of sea-water all the
fresh water that her crew might require. ... Her armament
consisted of eight guns.' ... The Alabama was built and, from
the outset, was 'intended for a Confederate vessel of war.'
The contract for her construction was signed by Captain
Bullock on the one part and Messrs. Laird on the other.' ...
On the 15th of May [1862] she was launched under the name of
the 290. Her officers were in England awaiting her completion,
and were paid their salaries 'monthly, about the first of the
month, at Fraser, Trenholm & Co.'s office in Liverpool.' The
purpose for which this vessel was being constructed was
notorious in Liverpool. Before she was launched she became an
object of suspicion with the Consul of the United States at
that port, and she was the subject of constant correspondence
on his part with his Government and with Mr. Adams. ... Early
in the history of this cruiser the point was taken by the
British authorities--a point maintained throughout the
struggle--that they would originate nothing themselves for
the maintenance and performance of their international duties,
and that they would listen to no representations from the
officials of the United States which did not furnish technical
evidence for a criminal prosecution under the Foreign
Enlistment Act. ... At last Mr. Dudley [the Consul of the
United States at Liverpool] succeeded in finding the desired
proof. On the 21st day of July, he laid it in the form of
affidavits before the Collector at Liverpool in compliance
with the intimations which Mr. Adams had received from Earl
Russell. These affidavits were on the same day transmitted by
the Collector to the Board of Customs at London, with a
request for instructions by telegraph, as the ship appeared to
be ready for sea and might leave any hour. ... It ... appears
that notwithstanding this official information from the
Collector, the papers were not considered by the law advisers
until the 28th, and that the case appeared to them to be so
clear that they gave their advice upon it that evening. Under
these circumstances, the delay of eight days after the 21st in
the order for the detention of the vessel was, in the opinion
of the United States, gross negligence on the part of Her
Majesty's Government. On the 29th the Secretary of the
Commission of the Customs received a telegram from Liverpool
saying that the vessel 290 came out of dock last night, and
left the port this morning.' ... After leaving the dock she
proceeded slowly down the Mersey.' Both the Lairds were on
board, and also Bullock. ... The 290 slowly steamed on to
Moelfra Bay, on the coast of Anglesey, where she remained 'all
that night, all the next day, and the next night.' No effort
was made to seize her. ... When the Alabama left Moelfra Bay
her crew numbered about 90 men. She ran part way down the
Irish Channel, then round the north coast of Ireland, only
stopping near the Giant's Causeway. She then made for
Terceira, one of the Azores, which she reached on the 10th of
August. On 18th of August, while she was at Terceira, a sail
was observed making for the anchorage. It proved to be the
'Agrippina of London, Captain McQueen, having on board six
guns, with ammunition, coals, stores, &c., for the Alabama.'
Preparations were immediately made to transfer this important
cargo. On the afternoon of the 20th, while employed
discharging the bark, the screw-steamer Bahama, Captain
Tessier (the same that had taken the armament to the Florida,
whose insurgent ownership and character were well known in
Liverpool), arrived, 'having on board Commander Raphael Semmes
and officers of the Confederate States steamer Sumter.' There
were also taken from this steamer two 32-pounders and some
stores, which occupied all the remainder of that day and a
part of the next. The 22d and 23d of August were taken up in
transferring coal from the Agrippina to the Alabama. It was
not until Sunday (the 24th) that the insurgents' flag was
hoisted. Bullock and those who were not going in the 290 went
back to the Bahama, and the Alabama, now first known under
that name, went off with '26 officers and 85 men.'"
The Case of the United States before the Tribunal of
Arbitration at Geneva (42d Congress, 2d Session,
Senate Ex. Doc., No. 31, pages 146-151).
The Alabama "arrived at Porto Praya on the 19th August.
Shortly thereafter Capt. Raphael Semmes assumed command.
Hoisting the Confederate flag, she cruised and captured
several vessels in the vicinity of Flores. Cruising to the
westward, and making several captures, she approached within
200 miles of New York; thence going southward, arrived, on the
18th November, at Port Royal, Martinique. On the night of the
19th she escaped from the harbour and the Federal steamer San
Jacinto, and on the 20th November was at Blanquilla. On the
7th December she captured the steamer Ariel in the passage
between Cuba and St. Domingo. On January 11th, 1863, she sunk
the Federal gunboat Hatteras off Galveston, and on the 30th
arrived at Jamaica. Cruising to the eastward, and making many
captures, she arrived on the 10th April, at Fernando de
Noronha, 'and on the 11th May at Bahia, where, on the 13th,
she was joined by the Confederate steamer Georgia. Cruising
near the line, thence southward towards the Cape of Good Hope,
numerous captures were made. On the 29th July she anchored in
Saldanha Bay, South Africa, and near there on the 5th August,
was joined by the Confederate bark Tuscaloosa, Commander Low.
In September, 1863, she was at St. Simon's Bay, and in October
was in the Straits of Sunda, and up to January 20, 1864,
cruised in the Bay of Bengal and vicinity, visiting
Singapore, and making a number of very valuable captures,
including the Highlander, Sonora, etc.
{25}
From this point she cruised on her homeward track via Cape of
Good Hope, capturing the bark Tycoon and ship Rockingham, and
arrived at Cherbourg, France, in June, 1864, where she
repaired. A Federal steamer, the Kearsarge, was lying off the
harbour. Capt. Semmes might easily have evaded this enemy; the
business of his vessel was that of a privateer; and her value
to the Confederacy was out of all comparison with a single
vessel of the enemy. ... But Capt. Semmes had been twitted
with the name of 'pirate;' and he was easily persuaded to
attempt an éclat for the Southern Confederacy by a naval fight
within sight of the French coast, which contest, it was
calculated, would prove the Alabama a legitimate war vessel,
and give such an exhibition of Confederate belligerency as
possibly to revive the question of 'recognition' in Paris and
London. These were the secret motives of the gratuitous fight
with which Capt. Semmes obliged the enemy off the port of
Cherbourg. The Alabama carried one 7-inch Blakely rifled gun,
one 8-inch smooth-bore pivot gun, and six 32-pounders,
smooth-bore, in broadside; the Kearsarge carried four
broadside 32-pounders, two 11-inch and one 28-pound rifle. The
two vessels were thus about equal in match and armament; and
their tonnage was about the same."
E. A. Pollard, The Lost Cause, pages 549.
Captain Winslow, commanding the United States Steamer
Kearsarge, in a report to the Secretary of the Navy written on
the afternoon of the day of his battle with the Alabama, June
19, 1864, said: "I have the honor to inform the department
that the day subsequent to the arrival of the Kearsarge off
this port, on the 24th [14th] instant, I received a note from
Captain Semmes, begging that the Kearsarge would not depart,
as he intended to fight her, and would delay her but a day or
two. According to this notice, the Alabama left the port of
Cherbourg this morning at about half past nine o'clock. At
twenty minutes past ten A. M., we discovered her steering
towards us. Fearing the question of jurisdiction might arise,
we steamed to sea until a distance of six or seven miles was
attained from the Cherbourg break-water, when we rounded to
and commenced steaming for the Alabama. As we approached her,
within about 1,200 yards, she opened fire, we receiving two or
three broadsides before a shot was returned. The action
continued, the respective steamers making a circle round and
round at a distance of about 900 yards from each other. At the
expiration of an hour the Alabama struck, going down in about
twenty minutes afterward, carrying many persons with her." In
a report two days later, Captain Winslow gave the following
particulars: "Toward the close of the action between the
Alabama and this vessel, all available sail was made on the
former for the purpose of again reaching Cherbourg. When the
object was apparent, the Kearsarge was steered across the bow
of the Alabama for a raking fire; but before reaching this
point the Alabama struck. Uncertain whether Captain Semmes was
not using some ruse, the Kearsarge was stopped. It was seen,
shortly afterward, that the Alabama was lowering her boats,
and an officer came alongside in one of them to say that they
had surrendered, and were fast sinking, and begging that boats
would be despatched immediately for saving life. The two boats
not disabled were at once lowered, and as it was apparent the
Alabama was settling, this officer was permitted to leave in
his boat to afford assistance. An English yacht, the
Deerhound, had approached near the Kearsarge at this time,
when I hailed and begged the commander to run down to the
Alabama, as she was fast sinking, and we had but two boats,
and assist in picking up the men. He answered affirmatively,
and steamed toward the Alabama, but the latter sank almost
immediately. The Deerhound, however, sent her boats and was
actively engaged, aided by several others which had come from
shore.' These boats were busy in bringing the wounded and
others to the Kearsarge; whom we were trying to make as
comfortable as possible, when it was reported to me that the
Deerhound was moving off. I could not believe that the
commander of that vessel could be guilty of so disgraceful an
act as taking our prisoners off, and therefore took no means
to prevent it, but continued to keep our boats at work
rescuing the men in the water. I am sorry to say that I was
mistaken. The Deerhound made off with Captain Semmes and
others, and also the very officer who had come on board to
surrender."--In a still later report Captain Winslow gave the
following facts: "The fire of the Alabama, although it is stated
she discharged 370 or more shell and shot, was not of serious
damage to the Kearsarge. Some 13 or 14 of these had taken
effect in and about the hull, and 16 or 17 about the masts and
rigging. The casualties were small, only three persons having
been wounded. ... The fire of the Kearsarge, although only 173
projectiles had been discharged, according to the prisoners'
accounts, was terrific. One shot alone had killed and wounded
18 men, and disabled a gun. Another had entered the
coal-bunkers, exploding, and completely blocking up the engine
room; and Captain Semmes states that shot and shell had taken
effect in the sides of his vessel, tearing large holes by
explosion, and his men were everywhere knocked down."
Rebellion Record, volume 9, pages 221-225.
ALSO IN
J. R. Soley, The Blockade and the Cruisers (The Navy in
the Civil War, volume 1), chapter 7.
J. R. Soley, J. McI. Kell and J. M. Browne, The
Confederate Cruisers (Battles and Leaders, volume 3).
R. Semmes, Memoirs of Service Afloat, chapter 29-55.
J. D. Bullock, Secret Service of the Confederate States
in Europe, volume 1, chapter 5.
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1862-1865.
Other Confederate cruisers.
"A score of other Confederate cruisers roamed the seas, to
prey upon United States commerce, but none of them became
quite so famous as the Sumter and the Alabama. They included
the Shenandoah, which made 38 captures, the Florida, which
made 36, the Tallahassee, which made 27, the Tacony, which
made 15, and the Georgia, which made 10. The Florida was
captured in the harbor of Bahia, Brazil, in October, 1864, by
a United States man-of·war [the Wachusett: commander Collins],
in violation of the neutrality of the port. For this the
United States Government apologized to Brazil and ordered the
restoration of the Florida to the harbor where she was
captured. But in Hampton Roads she met with an accident and
sank. It was generally believed that the apparent accident was
contrived with the connivance, if not by direct order, of the
Government. Most of these cruisers were built in British
shipyards."
R. Johnson, Short History of the War of Secession,
chapter 24.
{26}
The last of the destroyers of American commerce, the
Shenandoah, was a British merchant ship--the Sea King--built
for the Bombay trade, but purchased by the Confederate agent,
Captain Bullock, armed with six guns, and commissioned
(October, 1865) under her new name. In June, 1865, the
Shenandoah, after a voyage to Australia, in the course of
which she destroyed a dozen merchant ships, made her
appearance in the Northern Sea, near Behring Strait, where she
fell in with the New Bedford whaling fleet. "In the course of
one week, from the 21st to the 28th, twenty-five whalers were
captured, of which four were ransomed, and the remaining 21
were burned. The loss on these 21 whalers was estimated at
upwards of $3,000,000, and considering that it occurred ...
two months after the Confederacy had virtually passed out of
existence, it may be characterized as the most useless act of
hostility that occurred during the whole war." The captain of
the Shenandoah had news on the 23d of the fall of Richmond;
yet after that time he destroyed 15 vessels. On his way
southward he received information, August 2d, of the final
collapse of the Confederacy. He then sailed for Liverpool, and
surrendered his vessel to the British Government, which delivered
her to the United States.
J. R. Soley, The Confederate Cruisers (Battles and
Leaders, volume 4).
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1862-1869.
Definition of the indemnity claims of the United States
against Great Britain.
First stages of the Negotiation.
The rejected Johnson-Clarendon Treaty.
"A review of the history of the negotiations between the two
Governments prior to the correspondence between Sir Edward
Thornton and Mr. Fish, will show ... what was intended by
these words, 'generically known as the Alabama Claims,' used
on each side in that correspondence. The correspondence
between the two Governments was opened by Mr. Adams on the
20th of November, 1862 (less than four months after the escape
of the Alabama), in a note to Earl Russell, written under
instructions from the Government of the United States. In this
note Mr. Adams submitted evidence of the acts of the Alabama,
and stated: 'I have the honor to inform Your Lordship of the
directions which I have received from my Government to solicit
redress for the national and private injuries thus sustained.'
... Lord Russell met this notice on the 19th of December,
1862, by a denial of any liability for any injuries growing
out of the acts of the Alabama. ... As new losses from time to
time were suffered by individuals during the war, they were
brought to the notice of Her Majesty's Government, and were
lodged with the national and individual claims already
preferred; but argumentative discussion on the issues involved
was by common consent deferred. ... The fact that the first
claim preferred grew out of the acts of the Alabama explains
how it was that all the claims growing out of the acts of all
the vessels came to be 'generically known as the Alabama
claims.' On the 7th of April, 1865, the war being virtually
over, Mr. Adams renewed the discussion. He transmitted to Earl
Russell an official report showing the number and tonnage of
American vessels transferred to the British flag during the
war. He said: 'The United States commerce is rapidly vanishing
from the face of the ocean, and that of Great Britain is
multiplying in nearly the same ratio.' 'This process is going
on by reason of the action of British subjects in cooperation
with emissaries of the insurgents, who have supplied from the
ports of Her Majesty's Kingdom all the materials, such as
vessels, armament, supplies, and men, indispensable to the
effective prosecution of this result on the ocean.' ... He
stated that he 'was under the painful necessity of announcing
that his Government cannot avoid entailing upon the Government
of Great Britain the responsibility for this damage.' Lord
Russell ... said in reply, 'I can never admit that the duties
of Great Britain toward the United States are to be measured
by the losses which the trade and commerce of the United
States have sustained. ... Referring to the offer of
arbitration, made on the 26th day of October, 1863, Lord
Russell, in the same note, said: 'Her Majesty's Government
must decline either to make reparation and compensation for
the captures made by the Alabama, or to refer the question to
any foreign State.' This terminated the first stage of the
negotiations between the two Governments. ... In the summer of
1866 a change of Ministry took place in England, and Lord
Stanley became Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in the
place of Lord Clarendon. He took an early opportunity to give
an intimation in the House of Commons that, should the
rejected claims be revived, the new Cabinet was not prepared
to say what answer might be given them; in other words, that,
should an opportunity be offered, Lord Russell's refusal might
possibly be reconsidered. Mr. Seward met these overtures by
instructing Mr. Adams, on the 27th of August, 1866, 'to call
Lord Stanley's attention in a respectful but earnest manner,'
to 'a summary of claims of citizens of the United States, for
damages which were suffered by them during the period of the
civil war,' and to say that the Government of the United
States, while it thus insists upon these particular claims, is
neither desirous nor willing to assume an attitude unkind and
unconciliatory toward Great Britain. ... Lord Stanley met this
overture by a communication to Sir Frederick Bruce, in which
he denied the liability of Great Britain, and assented to a
reference, 'provided that a fitting Arbitrator can be found,
and that an agreement can be come to as to the points to which
the arbitration shall apply.' ... As the first result of these
negotiations, a convention known as the Stanley-Johnson
convention was signed at London on the 10th of November, 1868.
It proved to be unacceptable to the Government of the United
States. Negotiations were at once resumed, and resulted on the
14th of January, 1869, in the Treaty known as the
Johnson-Clarendon convention [having been negotiated by Mr.
Reverdy Johnson, who had succeeded Mr. Adams as United States
Minister to Great Britain]. This latter convention provided
for the organization of a mixed commission with jurisdiction
over 'all claims on the part of citizens of the United States
upon the Government of Her Britannic Majesty, including the
so-called Alabama claims, and all claims on the part of
subjects of Her Britannic Majesty upon the Government of the
United States which may have been presented to either
government for its interposition with the other since the 26th
July, 1853, and which yet remain unsettled.'" The
Johnson-Clarendon treaty, when submitted to the Senate, was
rejected by that body, in April, "because, although it made
provision for the part of the Alabama claims which consisted
of claims for individual losses, the provision for the more
extensive national losses was not satisfactory to the Senate."
The Argument of the United States delivered to the
Tribunal of Arbitration at Geneva, June 15, 1872, Division
13, section 2.
{27}
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1869-1871.
Renewed Negotiations.
Appointment and meeting of the Joint High Commission.
The action of the Senate in rejecting the Johnson-Clarendon
treaty was taken in April, 1869, a few weeks after President
Grant entered upon his office. At this time "the condition of
Europe was such as to induce the British Ministers to take
into consideration the foreign relations of Great Britain;
and, as Lord Granville, the British Minister of Foreign
Affairs, has himself stated in the House of Lords, they saw
cause to look with solicitude on the uneasy relations of the
British Government with the United States, and the
inconvenience thereof in case of possible complications in
Europe. Thus impelled, the Government dispatched to Washington
a gentleman who enjoyed the confidence of both Cabinets, Sir John
Rose, to ascertain whether overtures for reopening
negotiations would be received by the President in spirit and
terms acceptable to Great Britain. ... Sir John Rose found the
United States disposed to meet with perfect correspondence of
good-will the advances of the British Government. Accordingly,
on the 26th of January, 1871, the British Government, through
Sir Edward Thornton, finally proposed to the American
Government the appointment of a joint High Commission to hold
its sessions at Washington, and there devise means to settle
the various pending questions between the two Governments
affecting the British possessions in North America. To this
overture Mr. Fish replied that the President would with
pleasure appoint, as invited, Commissioners on the part of the
United States, provided the deliberations of the Commissioners
should be extended to other differences,--that is to say, to
include the differences growing out of incidents of the late
Civil War. ... The British Government promptly accepted this
proposal for enlarging the sphere of the negotiation." The
joint High Commission was speedily constituted, as proposed,
by appointment of the two governments, and the promptitude of
proceeding was such that the British commissioners landed at
New York in twenty-seven days after Sir Edward Thornton's
suggestion of January 26th was made. They sailed without
waiting for their commissions, which were forwarded to them by
special messenger. The High Commission was made up as follows:
"On the part of the United States were five persons,--Hamilton
Fish, Robert C. Schenck, Samuel Nelson, Ebenezer Rockwood
Hoar, and George H. Williams,--eminently fit representatives
of the diplomacy, the bench, the bar, and the legislature of
the United States: on the part of Great Britain, Earl De Grey
and Ripon, President of the Queen's Council; Sir Stafford
Northcote, Ex-Minister and actual Member of the House of
Commons; Sir Edward Thornton, the universally respected
British Minister at Washington; Sir John [A.] Macdonald, the
able and eloquent Premier of the Canadian Dominion; and, in
revival of the good old time, when learning was equal to any
other title of public honor, the Universities in the person of
Professor Montague Bernard. ... In the face of many
difficulties, the Commissioners, on the 8th of May, 1871,
completed a treaty [known as the Treaty of Washington], which
received the prompt approval of their respective Governments."
C. Cushing, The Treaty of Washington,
pages 18-20, and 11-13.
ALSO IN
A. Lang, Life, Letters, and Diaries of Sir Stafford
Northcote, First Earl of Iddesleigh, chapter 12 (volume 2).
A. Badeau, Grant in Peace, chapter 25.
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1871.
The Treaty of Washington.
The treaty signed at Washington on the 8th day of May, 1871,
and the ratifications of which were exchanged at London on the
17th day of the following June, set forth its principal
agreement in the first two articles as follows: "Whereas
differences have arisen between the Government of the United
States and the Government of Her Brittanic Majesty, and still
exist, growing out of the acts committed by the several
vessels which have given rise to the claims generically known
as the 'Alabama Claims;' and whereas Her Britannic Majesty has
authorized Her High Commissioners and Plenipotentiaries to
express in a friendly spirit, the regret felt by Her Majesty's
Government for the escape, under whatever circumstances, of
the Alabama and other vessels from British ports, and for the
depredations committed by those vessels: Now, in order to
remove and adjust all complaints and claims on the part of the
United States and to provide for the speedy settlement of such
claims which are not admitted by Her Britannic Majesty's
Government, the high contracting parties agree that all the
said claims, growing out of acts committed by the aforesaid
vessels, and generically known as the 'Alabama Claims,' shall
be referred to a tribunal of arbitration to be composed of
five Arbitrators, to be appointed in the following manner,
that is to say: One shall be named by the President of the
United States; one shall be named by Her Britannic Majesty;
His Majesty the King of Italy shall be requested to name one;
the President of the Swiss Confederation shall be requested to
name one; and His Majesty the Emperor of Brazil shall be
requested to name one. ... The Arbitrators shall meet at
Geneva, in Switzerland, at the earliest convenient day after
they shall have been named, and shall proceed impartially and
carefully to examine and decide all questions that shall be
laid before them on the part of the Governments of the United
States and Her Britannic Majesty respectively. All questions
considered by the tribunal, including the final award, shall
be decided by a majority of all the Arbitrators. Each of the
high contracting parties shall also name one person to attend
the tribunal as its Agent to represent it generally in all
matters connected with the arbitration." Articles 3, 4 and 5
of the treaty specify the mode in which each party shall
submit its case. Article 6 declares that, "In deciding the
matters submitted to the Arbitrators, they shall be governed
by the following three rules, which are agreed upon by the
high contracting parties as rules to be taken as applicable to
the case, and by such principles of international law not
inconsistent therewith as the Arbitrators shall determine to
have been applicable to the case:
{28}
A neutral Government is bound--First, to use due diligence to
prevent the fitting out, arming, or equipping, within its
jurisdiction, of any vessel which it has reasonable ground to
believe is intended to cruise or to carry on war against a
Power with which it is at peace; and also to use like
diligence to prevent the departure from its jurisdiction of
any vessel intended to cruise or carry on war as above, such
vessel having been specially adapted, in whole or in part,
within such jurisdiction, to warlike use. Secondly, not to
permit or suffer either belligerent to make use of its ports
or waters as the base of naval operations against the other,
or for the purpose of the renewal or augmentation of military
supplies or arms, or the recruitment of men. Thirdly to
exercise due diligence in its own ports and waters, and, as to
all persons within its jurisdiction, to prevent any violation
of the foregoing obligations and duties. Her Britannic Majesty
has commanded her High Commissioners and Plenipotentiaries to
declare that Her Majesty's Government cannot assent to the
foregoing rules as a statement of principles of international
law which were in force at the time when the claims mentioned
in Article 1 arose, but that Her Majesty's Government, in
order to evince its desire of strengthening the friendly
relations between the two countries and of making satisfactory
provision for the future, agrees that in deciding the
questions between the two countries arising out of those
claims, the Arbitrators should assume that Her Majesty's
Government had undertaken to act upon the principles set forth
in these rules. And the high contracting parties agree to
observe these rules as between themselves in future, and to
bring them to the knowledge of other maritime powers, and to
invite them to accede to them." Articles 7 to 17, inclusive,
relate to the procedure of the tribunal of arbitration, and
provide for the determination of claims, by assessors and
commissioners, in case the Arbitrators should find any
liability on the part of Great Britain and should not award a
sum in gross to be paid in settlement thereof. Articles 18 to
25 relate to the Fisheries. By Article 18 it is agreed that in
addition to the liberty secured to American fishermen by the
convention of 1818, "of taking, curing and drying fish on
certain coasts of the British North American colonies therein
defined, the inhabitants of the United States shall have, in
common with the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, the liberty
for [a period of ten years, and two years further after notice
given by either party of its wish to terminate the
arrangement] ... to take fish of every kind, except shell
fish, on the sea-coasts and shores, and in the bays, harbours
and creeks, of the provinces of Quebec, Nova Scotia and New
Brunswick, and the colony of Prince Edward's Island, and of
the several islands thereunto adjacent, without being
restricted to any distance from the shore, with permission to
land upon the said coasts and shores and islands, and also
upon the Magdalen Islands, for the purpose of drying their
nets and curing their fish; provided that, in so doing, they
do not interfere with the rights of private property, or with
British fishermen, in the peaceable use of any part of the
said coasts in their occupancy for the same purpose. It is
understood that the above-mentioned liberty applies solely to
the sea-fishery, and that the salmon and shad fisheries, and
all other fisheries in rivers and the mouths of rivers, are
hereby reserved exclusively for British fishermen." Article 19
secures to British subjects the corresponding rights of
fishing, &c., on the eastern sea-coasts and shores of the
United States north of the 39th parallel of north latitude.
Article 20 reserves from these stipulations the places that
were reserved from the common right of fishing under the first
article of the treaty of June 5, 1854. Article 21 provides for
the reciprocal admission of fish and fish oil into each
country from the other, free of duty (excepting fish of the
inland lakes and fish preserved in oil). Article 22 provides
that, "Inasmuch as it is asserted by the Government of Her
Britannic Majesty that the privileges accorded to the citizens
of the United States under Article XVIII of this treaty are of
greater value than those accorded by Articles XIX and XXI of
this treaty to the subjects of Her Britannic Majesty, and this
assertion is not admitted by the Government of the United
States, it is further agreed that Commissioners shall be
appointed to determine ... the amount of any compensation
which in their opinion, ought to be paid by the Government of
the United States to the Government of Her Britannic Majesty."
Article 23 provides for the appointment of such Commissioners,
one by the President of the United States, one by Her
Britannic Majesty, and the third by the President and Her
Majesty conjointly; or, failing of agreement within three
months, the third Commissioner to be named by the Austrian
Minister at London. The Commissioners to meet at Halifax, and
their procedure to be as prescribed and regulated by Articles
24 and 25. Articles 26 to 31 define certain reciprocal
privileges accorded by each government to the subjects of the
other, including the navigation of the St. Lawrence, Yukon,
Porcupine and Stikine Rivers, Lake Michigan, and the WeIland,
St. Lawrence and St. Clair Flats canals; and the
transportation of goods in bond through the territory of one
country into the other without payment of duties. Article 32
extends the provisions of Articles 18 to 25 of the treaty to
Newfoundland if all parties concerned enact the necessary
laws, but not otherwise. Article 33 limits the duration of
Articles 18 to 25 and Article 30, to ten years from the date
of their going into effect, and "further until the expiration
of two years after either of the two high contracting parties
shall have given notice to the other of its wish to terminate
the same." The remaining articles of the treaty provide for
submitting to the arbitration of the Emperor of Germany the
Northwestern water-boundary question (in the channel between
Vancouver's Island and the continent)--to complete the
settlement of Northwestern boundary disputes.
Treaties and Conventions between the U. S. and other
Powers (ed. of 1889), pages 478-493.
ALSO IN
C. Cushing, The Treaty of Washington, appendix
{29}
ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: A. D. 1871-1872.
The Tribunal of Arbitration at Geneva, and its Award.
"The appointment of Arbitrators took place in due course, and
with the ready good-will of the three neutral governments. The
United States appointed Mr. Charles Francis Adams; Great
Britain appointed Sir Alexander Cockburn; the King of Italy
named Count Frederic Sclopis; the President of the Swiss
Confederation, Mr. Jacob Stæmpfii; and the Emperor of Brazil,
the Baron d'Itajubá. Mr. J. C. Bancroft Davis was appointed
Agent of the United States, and Lord Tenterden of Great
Britain. The Tribunal was organized for the reception of the
case of each party, and held its first conference [at Geneva,
Switzerland] on the 15th of December, 1871," Count Sclopis
being chosen to preside. "The printed Case of the United
States, with accompanying documents, was filed by Mr. Bancroft
Davis, and the printed Case of Great Britain, with documents,
by Lord Tenterden. The Tribunal made regulation for the filing
of the respective Counter-Cases on or before the 15th day of
April next ensuing, as required by the Treaty; and for the
convening of a special meeting of the Tribunal, if occasion
should require; and then, at a second meeting, on the next
day, they adjourned until the 15th of June next ensuing,
subject to a prior call by the Secretary, if there should be
occasion." The sessions of the Tribunal were resumed on the
15th of June, 1872, according to the adjournment, and were
continued until the 14th of September following, when the
decision and award were announced, and were signed by all the
Arbitrators except the British representative, Sir Alexander
Cockburn, who dissented. It was found by the Tribunal that the
British Government had "failed to use due diligence in the
performance of its neutral obligations" with respect to the
cruisers Alabama and Florida, and the several tenders of those
vessels; and also with respect to the Shenandoah after her
departure from Melbourne, February 18, 1865, but not before that
date. With respect to the Georgia, the Sumter, the Nashville,
the Tallahassee and the Chickamauga, it was the finding of the
Tribunal that Great Britain had not failed to perform the
duties of a neutral power. So far as relates to the vessels
called the Sallie, the Jefferson Davis, the Music, the Boston,
and the V. H. Joy, it was the decision of the Tribunal that
they ought to be excluded from consideration for want of
evidence. "So far as relates to the particulars of the
indemnity claimed by the United States, the costs of pursuit
of Confederate cruisers" are declared to be "not, in the
judgment of the Tribunal, properly distinguishable from the
general expenses of the war carried on by the United States,"
and "there is no ground for awarding to the United States any
sum by way of indemnity under this head." A similar decision
put aside the whole consideration of claims for "prospective
earnings." Finally, the award was rendered in the following
language: "Whereas, in order to arrive at an equitable
compensation for the damages which have been sustained, it is
necessary to set aside all double claims for the same losses,
and all claims for 'gross freights' so far as they exceed 'net
freights;' and whereas it is just and reasonable to allow
interest at a reasonable rate; and whereas, in accordance with
the spirit and letter of the Treaty of Washington, it is
preferable to adopt the form of adjudication of a sum in
gross, rather than to refer the subject of compensation for
further discussion and deliberation to a Board of Assessors,
as provided by Article X of the said Treaty: The Tribunal,
making use of the authority conferred upon it by Article VII
of the said Treaty, by a majority of four voices to one,
awards to the United States the sum of fifteen millions five
hundred thousand Dollars in gold as the indemnity to be paid
by Great Britain to the United States for the satisfaction of
all the claims referred to the consideration of the Tribunal,
conformably to the provisions contained in Article VII of the
aforesaid Treaty." It should be stated that the so-called
"indirect claims" of the United States, for consequential
losses and damages, growing out of the encouragement of the
Southern Rebellion, the prolongation of the war, &c., were
dropped from consideration at the outset of the session of the
Tribunal, in June, the Arbitrators agreeing then in a
statement of opinion to the effect that "these claims do not
constitute, upon the principles of international law
applicable to such cases, good foundation for an award of
compensation or computation of damages between nations." This
declaration was accepted by the United States as decisive of
the question, and the hearing proceeded accordingly.
C. Cushing, The Treaty of Washington.
ALSO IN
F. Wharton, Digest of the International Law of
the U. S., chapter 21 (volume 3).
----------ALABAMA CLAIMS, The: End----------
ALACAB, OR TOLOSO, Battle of (1212).
See ALMOHADES, and SPAIN: A. D. 1146-1232.
ALADSHA, Battles of (1877).
See TURKS: A. D. 1877-1878.
ALAMANCE, Battle Of(1771).
See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1766-1771.
ALAMANNI.
See ALEMANNI.
ALAMO, The massacre of the (1836).
See TEXAS: A. D. 1824-1836.
ALAMOOT, OR ALAMOUT, The castle of.
The stronghold of the "Old Man of the Mountain," or Sheikh of
the terrible order of the Assassins, in northern Persia. Its
name signifies "the Eagle's nest," or "the Vulture's nest."
See ASSASSINS.
ALANS, OR ALANI, The.
"The Alani are first mentioned by Dionysius the geographer (B.
C. 30-10) who joins them with the Daci and the Tauri, and
again places them between the latter and the Agathyrsi. A
similar position (in the south of Russia in Europe, the modern
Ukraine) is assigned to them by Pliny and Josephus. Seneca
places them further west upon the Ister. Ptolemy has two
bodies of Alani, one in the position above described, the
other in Scythia within the Imaus, north and partly east of
the Caspian. It must have been from these last, the
successors, and, according to some, the descendants of the
ancient Massagetæ, that the Alani came who attacked Pacorus
and Tiridates [in Media and Armenia, A. D. 75]. ... The result
seems to have been that the invaders, after ravaging and
harrying Media and Armenia at their pleasure, carried off a
vast number of prisoners and an enormous booty into their own
country."
G. Rawlinson, Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter 17.
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 6, note H.
"The first of this [the Tartar] race known to the
Romans were the Alani. In the fourth century they pitched
their tents in the country between the Volga and the Tanais,
at an equal distance from the Black Sea and the Caspian."
J. C. L. Sismondi, Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 3.
{30}
ALANS: A. D. 376.
Conquest by the Huns.
See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 376.
ALANS: A. D. 406-409.
Final Invasion of Gaul.
See GAUL: A. D. 406-409.
ALANS: A. D. 409-414.
Settlement in Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 409-414.
ALANS: A. D. 429.
With the Vandals in Africa.
See VANDALS: A. D. 429-439.
ALANS: A. D. 451.
At the Battle of Chalons.
See HUNS: A. D. 451.
----------ALANS: End----------
ALARCOS, Battle of (A. D. 1195).
See ALMOHADES.
ALARIC'S RAVAGES IN GREECE AND CONQUEST OF ROME.
See GOTHS: A. D. 395; 400-403,
and ROME: A. D. 408-410.
ALARODIANS.--IBERIANS.--COLCHIANS.
"The Alarodians of Herodotus, joined with the Sapeires ... are
almost certainly the inhabitants of Armenia, whose Semitic
name was Urarda, or Ararat. 'Alarud,' indeed, is a mere
variant form of 'Ararud,' the l and r being undistinguishable
in the old Persian, and 'Ararud' serves determinately to
connect the Ararat of Scripture with the Urarda, or Urartha of
the Inscriptions. ... The name of Ararat is constantly used in
Scripture, but always to denote a country rather than a
particular mountain. ... The connexion ... of Urarda with the
Babylonian tribe of Akkad is proved by the application in the
inscriptions of the ethnic title of Burbur (?) to the Armenian
king ... ; but there is nothing to prove whether the Burbur or
Akkad of Babylonia descended in a very remote age from the
mountains to colonize the plains, or whether the Urardians
were refugees of a later period driven northward by the
growing power of the Semites. The former supposition, however,
is most in conformity with Scripture, and incidentally with the
tenor of the inscriptions."
H. C. Rawlinson, History of Herodotus,
book 7, appendix 3.
"The broad and rich valley of the Kur, which corresponds
closely with the modern Russian province of Georgia, was
[anciently] in the possession of a people called by Herodotus
Saspeires or Sapeires, whom we may identify with the Iberians
of later writers. Adjoining upon them towards the south,
probably in the country about Erivan, and so in the
neighbourhood of Ararat, were the Alarodians, whose name must
be connected with that of the great mountain. On the other
side of the Sapeirian country, in the tracts now known as
Mingrelia and Imeritia, regions of a wonderful beauty and
fertility, were the Colchians,--dependents, but not exactly
subjects, of Persia."
G. Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies: Persia, chapter 1.
ALASKA: A. D. 1867.
Purchase by the United States.
As early as 1859 there were unofficial communications between
the Russian and American governments, on the subject of the
sale of Alaska by the former to the latter. Russia was more
than willing to part with a piece of territory which she found
difficulty in defending, in war; and the interests connected
with the fisheries and the fur-trade in the north-west were
disposed to promote the transfer. In March, 1867, definite
negotiations on the subject were opened by the Russian
minister at Washington, and on the 23d of that month he
received from Secretary Seward an offer, subject to the
President's approval, of $7,200,000, on condition that the
cession be "free and unencumbered by any reservations,
privileges, franchises, grants, or possessions by any
associated companies, whether corporate or incorporate,
Russian, or any other." "Two days later an answer was
returned, stating that the minister believed himself
authorized to accept these terms. On the 29th final
instructions were received by cable from St. Petersburg. On
the same day a note was addressed by the minister to the
secretary of state, informing him that the tsar consented to
the cession of Russian America for the stipulated sum of
$7,200,000 in gold. At four o'clock the next morning the
treaty was signed by the two parties without further phrase or
negotiation. In May the treaty was ratified, and on June 20,
1867, the usual proclamation was issued by the president of
the United States." On the 18th of October, 1867, the formal
transfer of the territory was made, at Sitka, General Rousseau
taking possession in the name of the Government of the United
States.
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 28,
chapter 28.
ALSO IN
W. H. Dall, Alaska and its Resources, part 2, chapter 2.
For some account of the aboriginal inhabitants,
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ESKIMAUAN FAMILY and ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
ALATOONA, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864
(SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER: GEORGIA).
ALBA.
Alban Mount.
"Cantons ... having their rendezvous in some stronghold, and
including a certain number of clanships, form the primitive
political unities with which Italian history begins. At what
period, and to what extent, such cantons were formed in
Latium, cannot be determined with precision; nor is it a
matter of special historical interest. The isolated Alban
range, that natural stronghold of Latium, which offered to
settlers the most wholesome air, the freshest springs, and the
most secure position, would doubtless be first occupied by the
new comers. Here accordingly, along the narrow plateau above
Palazzuola, between the Alban lake (Lago di Castello) and the
Alban mount (Monte Cavo) extended the town of Alba, which was
universally regarded as the primitive seat of the Latin stock,
and the mother-city of Rome, as well as of all the other Old
Latin communities. Here, too, on the slopes lay the very
ancient Latin canton-centres of Lanuvium, Aricia, and
Tusculum. ... All these cantons were in primitive times
politically sovereign, and each of them was governed by its
prince with the co-operation of the council of elders and the
assembly of warriors. Nevertheless the feeling of fellowship
based on community of descent and of language not only
pervaded the whole of them, but manifested itself in an
important religious and political institution--the perpetual
league of the collective Latin cantons. The presidency
belonged originally, according to the universal Italian as
well as Hellenic usage, to that canton within whose bounds lay
the meeting-place of the league; in this case it was the canton
of Alba. ... The communities entitled to participate in the
league were in the beginning thirty. ... The rendezvous of
this union was, like the Pambœotia and the Panionia among the
similar confederacies of the Greeks, the 'Latin festival'
(feriæ Latinæ) at which, on the Mount of Alba, upon a day
annually appointed by the chief magistrate for the purpose, an
ox was offered in sacrifice by the assembled Latin stock to
the 'Latin god' (Jupiter Latiaris)."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 1, chapter 3.
ALSO IN
Sir W. Gell, Topography of Rome, volume 1.
{31}
ALBA DE TORMES, Battle of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).
ALBAIS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
ALBAN, Kingdom of.
See ALBION;
also, SCOTLAND: 8TH-9TH CENTURIES.
ALBANI, The.
See BRITAIN, TRIBES OF CELTIC.
ALBANIANS: Ancient.
See EPIRUS and ILLYRIANS.
ALBANIANS: Mediæval.
"From the settlement of the Servian Sclavonians within the
bounds of the empire [during the reign of Heraclius, first
half of the seventh century], we may ... venture to date the
earliest encroachments of the Illyrian or Albanian race on the
Hellenic population. The Albanians or Arnauts, who are now
called by themselves Skiptars, are supposed to be remains of
the great Thracian race which, under various names, and more
particularly as Paionians, Epirots and Macedonians, take an
important part in early Grecian history. No distinct trace of
the period at which they began to be co-proprietors of Greece
with the Hellenic race can be found in history. ... It seems
very difficult to trace back the history of the Greek nation
without suspecting that the germs of their modern condition,
like those of their neighbours, are to be sought in the
singular events which occurred in the reign of Heraclius."
G. Finlay, Greece Under the Romans, chapter 4, section 6.
ALBANIANS: A. D. 1443-1467.
Scanderbeg's War with the Turks.
"John Castriot, Lord of Emalthia (the modern district of
Moghlene) [in Epirus or Albania] had submitted, like the other
petty despots of those regions, to Amurath early in his reign,
and had placed his four sons in the Sultan's hands as hostages
for his fidelity. Three of them died young. The fourth, whose
name was George, pleased the Sultan by his beauty, strength
and intelligence. Amurath caused him to be brought up in the
Mahometan creed; and, when he was only eighteen, conferred on
him the government of one of the Sanjaks of the empire. The
young Albanian proved his courage and skill in many exploits
under Amurath's eye, and received from him the name of
Iskanderbeg, the lord Alexander. When John Castriot died,
Amurath took possession of his principalities and kept the son
constantly employed in distant wars. Scanderbeg brooded over
this injury; and when the Turkish armies were routed by
Hunyades in the campaign of 1443, Scanderbeg determined to
escape from their side and assume forcible possession of his
patrimony. He suddenly entered the tent of the Sultan's chief
secretary, and forced that functionary, with the poniard at
his throat, to write and seal a formal order to the Turkish
commander of the strong city of Croia, in Albania, to deliver
that place and the adjacent territory to Scanderbeg, as the
Sultan's viceroy. He then stabbed the secretary and hastened
to Croia, where his strategem gained him instant admittance
and submission. He now publicly abjured the Mahometan faith,
and declared his intention of defending the creed of his
forefathers, and restoring the independence of his native
land. The Christian population flocked readily to his banner
and the Turks were massacred without mercy. For nearly
twenty-five years Scanderbeg contended against all the power
of the Ottomans, though directed by the skill of Amurath and
his successor Mahomet, the conqueror of Constantinople."
Sir E. S. Creasy, History of the Ottoman Turks, chapter 4.
"Scanderbeg died a fugitive at Lissus on the Venetian
territory [A. D. 1467]. His sepulchre was soon violated by the
Turkish conquerors; but the janizaries, who wore his bones
enchased in a bracelet, declared by this superstitious amulet
their involuntary reverence for his valour. ... His infant son
was saved from the national shipwreck; the Castriots were
invested with a Neapolitan dukedom, and their blood continues
to flow in the noblest families of the realm."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 67.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALSO IN
A. Lamartine, History of Turkey, book 11, sections 11-25.
ALBANIANS: A. D. 1694-1696.
Conquests by the Venetians.
See TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.
----------ALBANIANS: End----------
ALBANY, NEW YORK: A. D. 1623.
The first Settlement.
In 1614, the year after the first Dutch traders had
established their operations on Manhattan Island, they built a
trading house, which they called Fort Nassau, on Castle
Island, in the Hudson River, a little below the site of the
present city of Albany. Three years later this small fort was
carried away by a flood and the island abandoned. In 1623 a
more important fortification, named Fort Orange, was erected
on the site afterwards covered by the business part of Albany.
That year, "about eighteen families settled themselves at Fort
Orange, under Adriaen Joris, who 'staid with them all winter,'
after sending his ship home to Holland in charge of his son.
As soon as the colonists had built themselves 'some huts of
bark' around the fort, the Mahikanders or River Indians
[Mohegans], the Mohawks, the Oneidas, the Onondagas, the
Cayugas, and the Senecas, with the Mahawawa or Ottawawa
Indians, 'came and made covenants of friendship ... and
desired that they might come and have a constant free trade
with them, which was concluded upon.'"
J. R. Brodhead, History of the State of N. Y., volume 1,
pages 55 and 151.
ALBANY, NEW YORK: A. D. 1630.-
Embraced in the land-purchase of Patroon Van Rensselaer.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1621-1646.
ALBANY, NEW YORK: A. D. 1664.
Occupied and named by the English.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1664.
ALBANY, NEW YORK: A. D. 1673.
Again occupied by the Dutch.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1673.
ALBANY, NEW YORK: A. D. 1754.
The Colonial Congress and its plans of Union.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1754.
----------ALBANY, NEW YORK: End----------
ALBANY AND SCHENECTADY RAILROAD OPENING.
See STEAM LOCOMOTION ON LAND.
ALBANY REGENCY, The.
See NEW YORK; A. D. 1823.
ALBEMARLE, The Ram, and her destruction.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (APRIL-MAY: NORTH
CAROLINA), and (OCTOBER: N. CAROLINA).
ALBERONI, Cardinal, The Spanish Ministry of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1713-1725;
and ITALY: A. D. 1715-1735.
{32}
ALBERT,
King of Sweden, A. D. 1365-1388.
Albert, Elector of Brandenburg, A. D. 1470-1486.
Albert I., Duke of Austria and
King of Germany, A. D. 1298-1308.
Albert II., Duke of Austria, King of Hungary and
Bohemia, A. D. 1437-1440;
King of Germany, A. D. 1438-1440.
ALBERTA, The District of.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORIES OF CANADA.
ALBERTINE LINE OF SAXONY.
See SAXONY: A. D. 1180-1553.
ALBICI, The.
A Gallic tribe which occupied the hills above Massilia
(Marseilles) and who are described as a savage people even in
the time of Cæsar, when they helped the Massiliots to defend
their city against him.
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 5, chapter 4.
ALBIGENSES, OR ALBIGEOIS, The.
"Nothing is more curious in Christian history than the
vitality of the Manichean opinions. That wild, half poetic,
half rationalistic theory of Christianity, ... appears almost
suddenly in the 12th century, in living, almost irresistible
power, first in its intermediate settlement in Bulgaria, and
on the borders of the Greek Empire, then in Italy, in France,
in Germany, in the remoter West, at the foot of the Pyrenees.
... The chief seat of these opinions was the south of France.
Innocent III., on his accession, found not only these daring
insurgents scattered in the cities of Italy, even, as it were,
at his own gates (among his first acts was to subdue the
Paterines of Viterbo), he found a whole province, a realm, in
some respects the richest and noblest of his spiritual domain,
absolutely dissevered from his Empire, in almost universal
revolt from Latin Christianity. ... In no [other] European
country had the clergy so entirely, or it should seem so
deservedly, forfeited its authority. In none had the Church
more absolutely ceased to perform its proper functions."
H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity,
book 9, chapter 8.
"By mere chance, the sects scattered in South France received
the common name of Albigenses, from one of the districts where
the agents of the church who came to combat them found them
mostly to abound,--the district around the town of Alba, or
Alby; and by this common name they were well known from the
commencement of the thirteenth century. Under this general
denomination parties of different tenets were comprehended
together, but the Catharists seem to have constituted a
predominant element among the people thus designated."
A. Neander, General History of the Christian Religion
and Church, 5th per., division 2, section 4, part 3.
"Of the sectaries who shared the errors of Gnosticism and
Manichæism and opposed the Catholic Church and her hierarchy,
the Albigenses were the most thorough and radical. Their
errors were, indeed, partly Gnostic and partly Manichæan, but
the latter was the more prominent and fully developed. They
received their name from a district of Languedoc, inhabited by
the Albigeois and surrounding the town of Albi. They are
called Cathari and Patarini in the acts of the Council of
Tours (A. D. 1163), and in those of the third Lateran,
Publiciani (i. e., Pauliciani). Like the Cathari, they also
held that the evil spirit created all visible things."
Johannes Baptist Alzog,
Manual of Universal Church History,
period 2, epoch 2, part 1, chapter 3, section 236.
https://archive.org/details/manualofuniversa02alzo
"The imputations of irreligion, heresy, and shameless
debauchery, which have been cast with so much bitterness on
the Albigenses by their persecutors, and which have been so
zealously denied by their apologists, are probably not ill
founded, if the word Albigenses be employed as synonymous with
the words Provençaux or Languedocians; for they were
apparently a race among whom the hallowed charities of
domestic life, and the reverence due to divine ordinances and
the homage due to divine truth, were often impaired, and not
seldom extinguished, by ribald jests, by infidel scoffings,
and by heart-hardening impurities. Like other voluptuaries,
the Provençaux (as their remaining literature attests) were
accustomed to find matter for merriment in vices which would
have moved wise men to tears. But if by the word Albigenses be
meant the Vaudois, or those followers (or associates) of Peter
Waldo who revived the doctrines against which the Church of
Rome directed her censures, then the accusation of
dissoluteness of manners may be safely rejected as altogether
calumnious, and the charge of heresy may be considered, if not
as entirely unfounded, yet as a cruel and injurious
exaggeration."
Sir J. Stephen, Lectures on the History of France,
lecture 7.
ALSO IN L. Mariotti, Frà Dolcino and his Times.
See, also, Paulicians, and Catharists.
ALBIGENSES: A. D. 1209.
The First Crusade.
"Pope Innocent III., in organizing the persecution of the
Catharins [or Catharists], the Patarins, and the Pauvres de
Lyons, exercised a spirit, and displayed a genius similar to
those which had already elevated him to almost universal
dominion; which had enabled him to dictate at once to Italy
and to Germany; to control the kings of France, of Spain, and
of England; to overthrow the Greek Empire, and to substitute
in its stead a Latin dynasty at Constantinople. In the zeal of
the Cistercian Order, and of their Abbot, Arnaud Amalric; in
the fiery and unwearied preaching of the first Inquisitor, the
Spanish Missionary, Dominic; in the remorseless activity of
Foulquet, Bishop of Toulouse; and above all, in the strong and
unpitying arm of Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester,
Innocent found ready instruments for his purpose. Thus aided;
he excommunicated Raymond of Toulouse [A. D. 1207], as Chief
of the Heretics, and he promised remission of sins, and all
the privileges which had hitherto been exclusively conferred
on adventurers in Palestine, to the champions who should
enroll themselves as Crusaders in the far more easy enterprise
of a Holy War against the Albigenses. In the first invasion of
his territories [A. D. 1209], Raymond VI. gave way before the
terrors excited by the 300,000 fanatics who precipitated
themselves on Languedoc; and loudly declaring his personal
freedom from heresy, he surrendered his chief castles,
underwent a humiliating penance, and took the cross against
his own subjects. The brave resistance of his nephew Raymond
Roger, Viscount of Bezières, deserved but did not obtain
success. When the crusaders surrounded his capital, which was
occupied by a mixed population of the two Religions, a
question was raised how, in the approaching sack, the
Catholics should be distinguished from the Heretics. 'Kill
them all,' was the ferocious reply of Amalric; 'the Lord will
easily know His own.' In compliance with this advice, not one
human being within the walls was permitted to survive;
{33}
and the tale of slaughter has been variously estimated, by
those who have perhaps exaggerated the numbers, at 60,000, but
even in the extenuating despatch, which the Abbot himself
addressed to the Pope, at not fewer than 15,000. Raymond Roger
was not included in this fearful massacre, and he repulsed two
attacks upon Carcassonne, before a treacherous breach of faith
placed him at the disposal of de Montfort, by whom he was
poisoned after a short imprisonment. The removal of that young
and gallant Prince was indeed most important to the ulterior
project of his captor, who aimed at permanent establishment in
the South. The family of de Montfort had ranked among the
nobles of France for more than two centuries; and it is traced
by some writers through an illegitimate channel even to the
throne: but the possessions of Simon himself were scanty;
necessity had compelled him to sell the County of Evreux to
Philippe Auguste; and the English Earldom of Leicester which he
inherited maternally, and the Lordship of a Castle about ten
leagues distant from Paris, formed the whole of his revenues."
E. Smedley, History of France, chapter 4.
ALSO IN
J. C. L. de Sismondi, History of the Crusades against
the Albigenses, chapter 1.
H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity,
book 9, chapter 8.
J. Alzog, Manual of Universal Church History, period 2,
epoch 2, part 1, chapter 3
https://archive.org/details/manualofuniversa02alzo.
See, also, INQUISITION: A. D. 1203-1525.
ALBIGENSES: A. D. 1210-1213.
The Second Crusade.
"The conquest of the Viscounty of Beziers had rather inflamed
than satiated the cupidity of De Montfort and the fanaticism
of Amalric [legate of the Pope] and of the monks of Citeaux.
Raymond, Count of Toulouse, still possessed the fairest part
of Languedoc, and was still suspected or accused of affording
shelter, if not countenance, to his heretical subjects. ...
The unhappy Raymond was ... again excommunicated from the
Christian Church, and his dominions offered as a reward to the
champions who should execute her sentence against him. To earn
that reward De Montfort, at the head of a new host of
Crusaders, attracted by the promise of earthly spoils and of
heavenly blessedness, once more marched through the devoted
land [A. D. 1210], and with him advanced Amalric. At each
successive conquest, slaughter, rapine, and woes such as may
not be described tracked and polluted their steps. Heretics,
or those suspected of heresy, wherever they were found, were
compelled by the legate to ascend vast piles of burning
faggots. ... At length the Crusaders reached and laid siege to
the city of Toulouse. ... Throwing himself into the place,
Raymond ... succeeded in repulsing De Montfort and Amalric. It
was, however, but a temporary respite, and the prelude to a
fearful destruction. From beyond the Pyrenees, at the head of
1,000 knights, Pedro of Arragon had marched to the rescue of
Raymond, his kinsman, and of the counts of Foix and of
Comminges, and of the Viscount of Béarn, his vassals; and
their united forces came into communication with each other at
Muret, a little town which is about three leagues distant from
Toulouse. There, also, on the 12th of September [A. D. 1213],
at the head of the champions of the Cross, and attended by
seven bishops, appeared Simon de Montfort in full military
array. The battle which followed was fierce, short and
decisive. ... Don Pedro was numbered with the slain. His army,
deprived of his command, broke and dispersed, and the whole of
the infantry of Raymond and his allies were either put to the
sword, or swept a way by the current of the Garonne. Toulouse
immediately surrendered, and the whole of the dominions of
Raymond submitted to the conquerors. At a council subsequently
held at Montpellier, composed of five archbishops and
twenty-eight bishops, De Montfort was unanimously acknowledged
as prince of the fief and city of Toulouse, and of the other
counties conquered by the Crusaders under his command."
Sir J. Stephen, Lectures on the History of France, lecture 7.
ALSO IN
J. C. L. de Sismondi, History of Crusades against the
Albigenses, chapter 2.
ALBIGENSES: A. D. 1217-1229.
The Renewed Crusades.
Dissolution of the County of Toulouse.
Pacification of Languedoc.
"The cruel spirit of De Montfort would not allow him to rest
quiet in his new Empire. Violence and persecution marked his
rule; he sought to destroy the Provençal population by the
sword or the stake, nor could he bring himself to tolerate the
liberties of the citizens of Toulouse. In 1217 the Toulousans
again revolted, and war once more broke out betwixt Count
Raymond and Simon de Montfort. The latter formed the siege of
the capital, and was engaged in repelling a sally, when a
stone from one of the walls struck him and put an end to his
existence. ... Amaury de Montfort, son of Simon, offered to
cede to the king all his rights in Languedoc, which he was
unable to defend against the old house of Toulouse. Philip
[Augustus] hesitated to accept the important cession, and left
the rival houses to the continuance of a struggle carried
feebly on by either side." King Philip died in 1223 and was
succeeded by a son, Louis VIII., who had none of his father's
reluctance to join in the grasping persecution of the
unfortunate people of the south. Amaury de Montfort had been
fairly driven out of old Simon de Montfort's conquests, and he
now sold them to King Louis for the office of constable of
France. "A new crusade was preached against the Albigenses;
and Louis marched towards Languedoc at the head of a
formidable army in the spring of the year 1226. The town of
Avignon had proferred to the crusaders the facilities of
crossing the Rhone under her walls, but refused entry within
them to such a host. Louis having arrived at Avignon, insisted
on passing through the town: the Avignonais shut their gates,
and defied the monarch, who instantly formed the siege. One of
the rich municipalities of the south was almost a match for
the king of France. He was kept three months under its walls;
his army a prey to famine, to disease and to the assaults of a
brave garrison. The crusaders lost 20,000 men. The people of
Avignon at length submitted, but on no dishonourable terms.
This was the only resistance that Louis experienced in
Languedoc. ... All submitted. Louis retired from his facile
conquest; he himself, and the chiefs of his army stricken by
an epidemy which had prevailed in the conquered regions. The
monarch's feeble frame could not resist it; he expired at
Montpensier, in Auvergne, in November, 1226." Louis VIII. was
succeeded by his young son, Louis IX. (Saint Louis), then a
boy, under the regency of his energetic and capable mother,
Blanche of Castile.
{34}
"The termination of the war with the Albigenses, and
the pacification, or it might be called the acquisition, of
Languedoc, was the chief act of Queen Blanche's regency. Louis
VIII. had overrun the country without resistance in his last
campaign; still, at his departure, Raymond VI. again appeared,
collected soldiers and continued to struggle against the royal
lieutenant. For upward of two years he maintained himself; the
attention of Blanche being occupied by the league of the
barons against her. The successes of Raymond VII., accompanied
by cruelties, awakened the vindictive zeal of the pope.
Languedoc was threatened with another crusade; Raymond was
willing to treat, and make considerable cessions, in order to
avoid such extremities. In April, 1229, a treaty was signed:
in it the rights of De Montfort were passed over. About
two-thirds of the domains of the count of Toulouse were ceded
to the king of France; the remainder was to fall, after
Raymond's death, to his daughter Jeanne, who by the same
treaty was to marry one of the royal princes: heirs failing
them, it was to revert to the crown [which it did in 1271]. On
these terms, with the humiliating addition of a public
penance, Raymond VII. once more was allowed peaceable
possession of Toulouse, and of the part of his domains
reserved to him. Alphonse, brother of Louis IX., married
Jeanne of Toulouse soon after, and took the title of count of
Poitiers; that province being ceded to him in apanage. Robert,
another brother, was made count of Artois at the same time.
Louis himself married Margaret, the eldest daughter of Raymond
Berenger, count of Provence."
E. E. Crowe, History of France, volume 1, chapter 2-3.
"The struggle ended in a vast increase of the power of the
French crown, at the expense alike of the house of Toulouse
and of the house of Aragon. The dominions of the count of
Toulouse were divided. A number of fiefs, Beziers, Narbonne,
Nimes, Albi, and some other districts were at once annexed to
the crown. The capital itself and its county passed to the
crown fifty years later. ... The name of Toulouse, except as
the name of the city itself, now passed away, and the new
acquisitions of France came in the end to be known by the name
of the tongue which was common to them with Aquitaine and
Imperial Burgundy [Provence]. Under the name of Languedoc they
became one of the greatest and most valuable provinces of the
French kingdom."
E. A. Freeman, History Geography of Europe, chapter 9.
The brutality and destructiveness of the Crusades.
"The Church of the Albigenses had been drowned in blood. These
supposed heretics had been swept away from the soil of France.
The rest of the Languedocian people had been overwhelmed with
calamity, slaughter, and devastation. The estimates
transmitted to us of the numbers of the invaders and of the
slain are such as almost surpass belief. We can neither verify
nor correct them; but we certainly know that, during a long
succession of years, Languedoc had been invaded by armies more
numerous than had ever before been brought together in
European warfare since the fall of the Roman empire. We know
that these hosts were composed of men inflamed by bigotry and
unrestrained by discipline; that they had neither military pay
nor magazines; that they provided for all their wants by the
sword, living at the expense of the country, and seizing at
their pleasure both the harvests of the peasants and the
merchandise of the citizens. More than three-fourths of the
landed proprietors had been despoiled of their fiefs and
castles. In hundreds of villages, every inhabitant had been
massacred. ... Since the sack of Rome by the Vandals, the
European world had never mourned over a national disaster so
wide in its extent or so fearful in its character."
Sir J. Stephen, Lectures on the History of France,
lecture 7.
----------ALBIGENSES: End----------
ALBION.
"The most ancient name known to have been given to this island
[Britain] is that of Albion. ... There is, however, another
allusion to Britain which seems to carry us much further back,
though it has usually been ill understood. It occurs in the
story of the labours of Hercules, who, after securing the cows
of Geryon, comes from Spain to Liguria, where he is attacked
by two giants, whom he kills before making his way to Italy.
Now, according to Pomponius Mela, the names of the giants were
Albiona and Bergyon, which one may, without much hesitation,
restore to the forms of Albion and Iberion, representing,
undoubtedly, Britain and Ireland, the position of which in the
sea is most appropriately symbolized by the story making them
sons of Neptune or the sea-god. ... Even in the time of Pliny,
Albion, as the name of the island, had fallen out of use with
Latin authors; but not so with the Greeks, or with the Celts
themselves, at any rate those of the Goidelic branch; for they
are probably right who suppose that we have but the same word
in the Irish and Scotch Gælic Alba, genitive Alban, the
kingdom of Alban or Scotland beyond the Forth. Albion would be
a form of the name according to the Brythonic pronunciation of
it. ... It would thus appear that the name Albion is one that
has retreated to a corner of the island, to the whole of which
it once applied."
J. Rhys, Celtic Britain, chapter 6.
ALSO IN E. Guest, Origines Celticae, chapter 1.
See SCOTLAND: 8TH-9TH CENTURIES.
ALBIS, The.
The ancient name of the river Elbe.
ALBOIN, King of the Lombards, A. D. 569-573.
ALCALDE.--ALGUAZIL.--CORREGIDOR.
"The word alcalde is from the Arabic 'al cadi,' the judge or
governor. ... Alcalde mayor signifies a judge, learned in the
law, who exercises [in Spain] ordinary jurisdiction, civil and
criminal, in a town or district." In the Spanish colonies the
Alcalde mayor was the chief judge. "Irving (Columbus, ii.
331) writes erroneously alguazil mayor, evidently confounding
the two offices. ... An alguacil mayor, was a chief constable
or high sheriff." "Corregidor, a magistrate having civil and
criminal jurisdiction in the first instance ('nisi prius')
and gubernatorial inspection in the political and economical
government in all the towns of the district assigned to him."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, pages 297 and 250, foot-notes.
ALCANIZ, Battle of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JUNE).
ALCANTARA, Battle of the (1580).
See PORTUGAL; A. D. 1579-1580.
{35}
ALCANTARA, Knights of.
"Towards the close of Alfonso's reign [Alfonso VIII. of
Castile and Leon, who called himself 'the Emperor,'
A. D. 1126-1157], may be assigned the origin of the
military order of Alcantara. Two cavaliers of Salamanca, don
Suero and don Gomez, left that city with the design of
choosing and fortifying some strong natural frontier, whence
they could not only arrest the continual incursions of the
Moors, but make hostile irruptions themselves into the
territories of the misbelievers. Proceeding along the banks of
the Coales, they fell in with a hermit, Amando by name, who
encouraged them in their patriotic design and recommended the
neighbouring hermitage of St. Julian as an excellent site for
a fortress. Having examined and approved the situation, they
applied to the bishop of Salamanca for permission to occupy
the place: that permission was readily granted: with his
assistance, and that of the hermit Amando, the two cavaliers
erected a castle around the hermitage. They were now joined by
other nobles and by more adventurers, all eager to acquire
fame and wealth in this life, glory in the next. Hence the
foundation of an order which, under the name, first, of St.
Julian, and subsequently of Alcantara, rendered good service
alike to king and church."
S. A. Dunham, History of Spain and Portugal, book 3,
section 2, chapter 1, division. 2.
ALCAZAR, OR "THE THREE KINGS," Battle of (1578 or 1579).
See MAROCCO: THE ARAB CONQUEST AND SINCE.
ALCIBIADES, The career of.
See GREECE: B. C. 421-418, and 411-407;
and ATHENS: B. C. 415, and 413-411.
ALCLYDE.
Rhydderch, a Cumbrian prince of the sixth century who was the
victor in a civil conflict, "fixed his headquarters on a rock
in the Clyde, called in the Welsh Alclud [previously a Roman
town known as Theodosia], whence it was known to the English
for a time as Alclyde; but the Goidels called it Dunbrettan,
or the fortress of the Brythons, which has prevailed in the
slightly modified form of Dumbarton. ... Alclyde was more than
once destroyed by the Northmen."
J. Rhys; Celtic Britain, chapter 4.
See, also, CUMBRIA.
ALCMÆONIDS, The curse and banishment of the.
See ATHENS: B. C. 612-595.
ALCOLEA, Battle of (1868).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1866-1873.
ALDIE, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863
(JUNE-JULY: PENNSYLVANIA).
ALDINE PRESS, The.
See PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1469-1515.
ALEMANNIA: The Mediæval Duchy.
See GERMANY: A. D. 843-962.
ALEMANNI, OR ALAMANNI: A. D. 213.
Origin and first appearance.
"Under Antoninus, the Son of Severus, a new and more severe
war once more (A. D. 213) broke out in Raetia. This also was
waged against the Chatti; but by their side a second people is
named, which we here meet for the first time--the Alamanni.
Whence they came, we known not. According to a Roman writing a
little later, they were a conflux of mixed elements; the
appellation also seems to point to a league of communities, as
well as the fact that, afterwards, the different tribes
comprehended under this name stand forth--more than is the
case among the other great Germanic peoples--in their separate
character, and the Juthungi, the Lentienses, and other
Alamannic peoples not seldom act independently. But that it is
not the Germans of this region who here emerge, allied under the
new name and strengthened by the alliance, is shown as well by
the naming of the Alamanni along side of the Chatti, as by the
mention of the unwonted skilfulness of the Alamanni in
equestrian combat. On the contrary, it was certainly, in the
main, hordes coming on from the East that lent new strength to
the almost extinguished German resistance on the Rhine; it is
not improbable that the powerful Semnones, in earlier times
dwelling on the middle Elbe, of whom there is no further
mention after the end of the second century, furnished a
strong contingent to the Alamanni."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 8, chapter 4.
"The standard quotation respecting the derivation of the name
from 'al'='all' and m-n= man', so that the word (somewhat
exceptionably) denotes 'men of all sorts,' is from Agathias,
who quotes Asinius Quadratus. ... Notwithstanding this, I
think it is an open question, whether the name may not have
been applied by the truer and more unequivocal Germans of
Suabia and Franconia, to certain less definitely Germanic
allies from Wurtemberg and Baden,--parts of the Decumates
Agri--parts which may have supplied a Gallic, a Gallo-Roman,
or even a Slavonic element to the confederacy; in which case,
a name so German as to have given the present French and
Italian name for Germany, may, originally, have applied to a
population other than Germanic. I know the apparently
paradoxical elements in this view; but I also know that, in
the way of etymology, it is quite as safe to translate 'all'
by 'alii' as by 'omnes': and I cannot help thinking that the
'al-' in Ale-manni is the 'al-' in 'alir-arto' (a foreigner
or man of another sort), 'eli-benzo' (an alien), and
'ali-land' (captivity in foreign land).--Grimm, ii.
628.--Rechsalterth, page 359. And still more satisfied am I that
the 'al-' in Al-emanni is the 'al-' in
Alsatia='el-sass'='ali-satz'='foreign settlement.' In other
words, the prefix in question is more probably the 'al-' in
'el-se', than the 'al-' in 'all.' Little, however, of
importance turns on this. The locality of the Alemanni was the
parts about the Limes Romanus, a boundary which, in the time
of Alexander Severus, Niebuhr thinks they first broke through.
Hence they were the Marchmen of the frontier, whoever those
Marchmen were. Other such Marchmen were the Suevi; unless,
indeed, we consider the two names as synonymous. Zeuss admits
that, between the Suevi of Suabia, and the Alemanni, no
tangible difference can be found."
R. G. Lathan, The Germania of Tacitus; Epilegomena,
section 11.
ALSO IN T. Smith, Arminius, part 2, chapter 1.
See also, SUEVI, and BAVARIANS.
ALEMANNI: A. D. 259.
Invasion of Gaul and Italy.
The Alemanni, "hovering on the frontiers of the Empire ...
increased the general disorder that ensued after the death of
Decius. They inflicted severe wounds on the rich provinces of
Gaul; they were the first who removed the veil that covered
the feeble majesty of Italy. A numerous body of the Alemanni
penetrated across the Danube and through the Rhætian Alps into
the plains of Lombardy, advanced as far as Ravenna and
displayed the victorious banners of barbarians almost in sight
of Rome [A. D. 259]. The insult and the danger
rekindled in the senate some sparks of their ancient virtue.
Both the Emperors were engaged in far distant wars--Valerian
in the East and Galienus on the Rhine." The senators, however,
succeeded in confronting the audacious invaders with a force
which checked their advance, and they "retired into Germany
laden with spoil."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 10.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
{36}
ALEMANNI: A. D. 270.
Invasion of Italy.
Italy was invaded by the Alemanni, for the second time, in the
reign of Anrelian, A. D. 270. They ravaged the provinces from
the Danube to the Po, and were retreating, laden with spoils,
when the vigorous Emperor intercepted them, on the banks of
the former river. Half the host was permitted to cross the
Danube; the other half was surprised and surrounded. But these
last, unable to regain their own country, broke through the
Roman lines at their rear and sped into Italy again, spreading
havoc as they went. It was only after three great
battles,--one near Placentia, in which the Romans were almost
beaten, another on the Metaurus (where Hasdrubal was
defeated), and a third near Pavia,--that the Germanic
invaders were destroyed.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 11.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALEMANNI: A. D. 355-361.
Repulse by Julian.
See GAUL: A. D. 355-361.
ALEMANNI: A. D. 365-367.
Invasion of Gaul.
The Alemanni invaded Gaul in 365, committing widespread
ravages and carrying away into the forests of Germany great
spoil and many captives. The next winter they crossed the
Rhine, again, in still greater numbers, defeated the Roman
forces and captured the standards of the Herulian and Batavian
auxiliaries. But Valentinian was now Emperor, and he adopted
energetic measures. His lieutenant Jovinus overcame the
invaders in a great battle fought near Chalons and drove them
back to their own side of the river boundary. Two years later,
the Emperor, himself, passed the Rhine and inflicted a
memorable chastisement on the Alemanni. At the same time he
strengthened the frontier defences, and, by diplomatic arts,
fomented quarrels between the Alemanni and their neighbors,
the Burgundians, which weakened both.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 25.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALEMANNI: A. D. 378.
Defeat by Gratian.
On learning that the young Emperor Gratian was preparing to
lead the military force of Gaul and the West to the help of
his uncle and colleague, Valens, against the Goths, the
Alemanni swarmed across the Rhine into Gaul. Gratian instantly
recalled the legions that were marching to Pannonia and
encountered the German invaders in a great battle fought near
Argentaria (modern Colmar) in the month of May, A. D. 378. The
Alemanni were routed with such slaughter that no more than
5,000 out of 40,000 to 70,000, are said to have escaped.
Gratian afterwards crossed the Rhine and humbled his
troublesome neighbors in their own country.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 26.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALEMANNI: A. D. 496-504.
Overthrow by the Franks.
"In the year 496 A. D. the Salians [Salian Franks] began that
career of conquest which they followed up with scarcely any
intermission until the death of their warrior king. The
Alemanni, extending themselves from their original seats on
the right bank of the Rhine, between the Main and the Danube,
had pushed forward into Germanica Prima, where they came into
collision with the Frankish subjects of King Sigebert of
Cologne. Clovis flew to the assistance of his kinsman and
defeated the Alemanni in a great battle in the neighbourhood
of Zülpich [called, commonly, the battle of Tolbiac]. He then
established a considerable number of his Franks in the
territory of the Alemanni, the traces of whose residence are
found in the names of Franconia and Frankfort."
V. C. Perry, The Franks, chapter 2.
"Clovis had been intending to cross the Rhine, but the hosts
of the Alamanni came upon him, as it seems, unexpectedly and
forced a battle on the left bank of the river. He seemed to be
overmatched, and the horror of an impending defeat
overshadowed the Frankish king. Then, in his despair, he
bethought himself of the God of Clotilda [his queen, a
Burgundian Christian princess, of the orthodox or Catholic
faith]. Raising his eyes to heaven, he said: 'Oh Jesus Christ,
whom Clotilda declares to be the Son of the living God, who
art said to give help to those who are in trouble and who
trust in Thee, I humbly beseech Thy succour! I have called on
my gods and they are far from my help. If Thou wilt deliver me
from mine enemies, I will believe in Thee, and be baptised in
Thy name.' At this moment, a sudden change was seen in the
fortunes of the Franks. The Alamanni began to waver, they
turned, they fled. Their king, according to one account was
slain; and the nation seems to have accepted Clovis as its
over-lord." The following Christmas day Clovis was baptised at
Reims and 3,000 of his warriors followed the royal example.
"In the early years of the new century, probably about 503 or
504, Clovis was again at war with his old enemies, the
Alamanni. ... Clovis moved his army into their territories and
won a victory much more decisive, though less famous than that
of 496. This time the angry king would make no such easy terms
as he had done before. From their pleasant dwellings by the
Main and the Neckar, from all the valley of the Middle Rhine,
the terrified Alamanni were forced to flee. Their place was
taken by Frankish settlers, from whom all this district
received in the Middle Ages the name of the Duchy of Francia,
or, at a rather later date, that of the Circle of Franconia.
The Alamanni, with their wives and children, a broken and
dispirited host, moved southward to the shores of the Lake of
Constance and entered the old Roman province of Rhætia. Here
they were on what was held to be, in a sense, Italian ground;
and the arm of Theodoric, as ruler of Italy, as successor to
the Emperors of the West, was stretched forth to protect them.
... Eastern Switzerland, Western Tyrol, Southern Baden and
Würtemberg and Southwestern Bavaria probably formed this new
Alamannis, which will figure in later history as the 'Ducatus
Alamanniæ,' or the Circle of Swabia."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 4, chapter 9.
ALSO IN
P. Godwin, History of France: Ancient Gaul,
book 3, chapter 11.
See, also, SUEVI: A. D. 460-500;
and FRANKS: A. D. 481-511.
ALEMANNI: A. D. 528-729.
Struggles against the Frank Dominion.
See GERMANY: A. D. 481-768.
ALEMANNI: A. D. 547.
Final subjection to the Franks.
See BAVARIA: A. D. 547.
{37}
ALEPPO: A. D. 638-969.
Taken by the Arab followers of Mahomet in 638, this city was
recovered by the Byzantines in 969.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 963-1025.
ALEPPO: A. D. 1260.
Destruction by the Mongols.
The Mongols, under Khulagu, or Houlagou, brother of Mangu
Khan, having overrun Mesopotamia and extinguished the
Caliphate at Bagdad, crossed the Euphrates in the spring of
1260 and advanced to Aleppo. The city was taken after a siege
of seven days and given up for five days to pillage and
slaughter. "When the carnage ceased, the streets were cumbered
with corpses. ... It is said that 100,000 women and children
were sold as slaves. The walls of Aleppo were razed, its
mosques destroyed, and its gardens ravaged." Damascus
submitted and was spared. Khulagu was meditating, it is said,
the conquest of Jerusalem, when news of the death of the Great
Khan called him to the East.
H. H. Howorth, History of the Mongols, pages 209-211.
ALEPPO: A. D. 1401.
Sack and Massacre by Timour.
See TIMOUR.
ALESIA, Siege of, by Cæsar.
See GAUL: B. C. 58-51.
ALESSANDRIA: The creation of the city (1168).
See ITALY: A. D. 1174--1183.
ALEUTS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ESKIMO.
ALEXANDER
ALEXANDER the Great, B. C. 334-323.
Conquests and Empire.
See MACEDONIA, &c., B. C. 334-330, and after.
Alexander, King of Poland, A. D. 1501-1507.
Alexander, Prince of Bulgaria.--Abduction and Abdication.
See BULGARIA: A. D. 1878-1886..
Alexander I., Czar of Russia, A. D. 1801-1825..
Alexander I., King of Scotland, A. D. 1107-1124.
Alexander II., Pope, A. D. 1061-1073.
Alexander II., Czar of Russia, A. D. 1855-1881.
Alexander II., King of Scotland, A. D. 1214--1249..
Alexander III., Pope, A. D. 1159-1181.
Alexander III., Czar of Russia, A. D. 1881-.
Alexander III., King of Scotland, A. D. 1249-1286.
Alexander IV., Pope, A. D. 1254--1261.
Alexander V., Pope, A. D. 1409-1410
(elected by the Council of Pisa).
Alexander VI., Pope, A. D. 1492-1503.
Alexander VII., Pope, A. D. 1655-1667.
Alexander VIII., Pope, A. D. 1689-1691.
Alexander Severus, Roman Emperor, A. D. 222-235.
ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 332.
The Founding of the City.
"When Alexander reached the Egyptian military station at the
little town or village of Rhakotis, he saw with the quick eye
of a great commander how to turn this petty settlement into a
great city, and to make its roadstead, out of which ships
could be blown by a change of wind, into a double harbour
roomy enough to shelter the navies of the world. All that was
needed was to join the island by a mole to the continent. The
site was admirably secure and convenient, a narrow strip of
land between the Mediterranean and the great inland Lake
Mareotis. The whole northern side faced the two harbours,
which were bounded east and west by the mole, and beyond by
the long, narrow rocky island of Pharos, stretching parallel
with the coast. On the south was the inland port of Lake
Mareotis. The length of the city was more than three miles,
the breadth more than three-quarters of a mile; the mole was
above three-quarters of a mile long and six hundred feet
broad; its breadth is now doubled, owing to the silting up of
the sand. Modern Alexandria until lately only occupied the
mole, and was a great town in a corner of the space which
Alexander, with large provision for the future, measured out.
The form of the new city was ruled by that of the site, but
the fancy of Alexander designed it in the shape of a
Macedonian cloak or chlamys, such as a national hero wears on
the coins of the kings of Macedon, his ancestors. The
situation is excellent for commerce. Alexandria, with the best
Egyptian harbour on the Mediterranean, and the inland port
connected with the Nile streams and canals, was the natural
emporium of the Indian trade. Port Said is superior now,
because of its grand artificial port and the advantage for
steamships of an unbroken sea route."
R. S. Poole, Cities of Egypt, chapter 12.--
See, also, MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 334-330;
and EGYPT: B. C. 332.
ALEXANDRIA: Reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus, B. C. 282-246.
Greatness and splendor of the City.
Its Commerce.
Its Libraries.
Its Museum.
Its Schools.
Ptolemy Philadelphus, son of Ptolemy Soter, succeeded to the
throne of Egypt in 282 B. C. when his father retired from it
in his favor, and reigned until 246 B. C. "Alexandria, founded
by the great conqueror, increased and beautified by Ptolemy
Soter, was now far the greatest city of Alexander's Empire. It
was the first of those new foundations which are a marked
feature in Hellenism; there were many others of great size and
importance--above all, Antioch, then Seleucia on the Tigris,
then Nicomedia, Nicæa, Apamea, which lasted; besides such as
Lysimacheia, Antigoneia, and others, which early disappeared.
... Alexandria was the model for all the rest. The
intersection of two great principal thoroughfares, adorned
with colonnades for the footways, formed the centre point, the
omphalos of the city. The other streets were at right angles
with these thoroughfares, so that the whole place was quite
regular. Counting its old part, Rhakotis, which was still the
habitation of native Egyptians, Alexandria had five quarters,
one at least devoted to Jews who had originally settled there
in great numbers. The mixed population there of Macedonians,
Greeks, Jews, and Egyptians gave a peculiarly complex and
variable character to the population. Let us not forget the
vast number of strangers from all parts of the world whom
trade and politics brought there. It was the great mart where
the wealth of Europe and of Asia changed hands. Alexander had
opened the sea-way by exploring the coasts of Media and
Persia. Caravans from the head of the Persian Gulf, and ships
on the Red Sea, brought all the wonders of Ceylon and China,
as well as of Further India, to Alexandria. There, too, the
wealth of Spain and Gaul, the produce of Italy and Macedonia,
the amber of the Baltic and the salt fish of Pontus, the
silver of Spain and the copper of Cyprus, the timber of
Macedonia and Crete, the pottery and oil of Greece--a thousand
imports from all the Mediterranean--came to be exchanged for
the spices of Arabia, the splendid birds and embroideries of
India and Ceylon, the gold and ivory of Africa, the antelopes,
the apes, the leopards, the elephants of tropical climes.
Hence the enormous wealth of the Lagidæ, for in addition to
the marvellous fertility and great population--it is said to
have been seven millions--of Egypt, they made all the profits
of this enormous carrying trade.
{38}
We gain a good idea of what the splendours of the capital were
by the very full account preserved to us by Athenæus of the
great feast which inaugurated the reign of Philadelphus. ...
All this seems idle pomp, and the doing of an idle sybarite.
Philadelphus was anything but that. ... It was he who opened
up the Egyptian trade with Italy, and made Puteoli the great
port for ships from Alexandria, which it remained for
centuries. It was he who explored Ethiopia and the southern
parts of Africa, and brought back not only the curious fauna
to his zoological gardens, but the first knowledge of the
Troglodytes for men of science. The cultivation of science and
of letters too was so remarkably one of his pursuits that the
progress of the Alexandria of his day forms an epoch in the
world's history, and we must separate his University and its
professors from this summary, and devote to them a separate
section. ... The history of the organization of the University
and its staff is covered with almost impenetrable mist. For
the Museum and Library were in the strictest sense what we
should now call an University, and one, too, of the Oxford
type, where learned men were invited to take Fellowships, and
spend their learned leisure close to observatories in science,
and a great library of books. Like the mediæval universities,
this endowment of research naturally turned into an engine for
teaching, as all who desired knowledge flocked to such a
centre, and persuaded the Fellow to become a Tutor. The model
came from Athens. There the schools, beginning with the
Academy of Plato, had a fixed property--a home with its
surrounding garden, and in order to make this foundation sure,
it was made a shrine where the Muses were worshipped, and
where the head of the school, or a priest appointed, performed
stated sacrifices. This, then, being held in trust by the
successors of the donor, who bequeathed it; to them, was a
property which it would have been sacrilegious to invade, and
so the title Museum arose for a school of learning. Demetrius
the Phalerean, the friend and protector of Theophrastus,
brought this idea with him to Alexandria, when his namesake
drove him into exile [see GREECE: B. C. 307-197] and it was no
doubt his advice to the first Ptolemy which originated the
great foundation, though Philadelphus, who again exiled
Demetrius, gets the credit of it. The pupil of Aristotle
moreover impressed on the king the necessity of storing up in
one central repository all that the world knew or could
produce, in order to ascertain the laws of things from a
proper analysis of detail. Hence was founded not only the
great library, which in those days had a thousand times the
value a great library has now, but also observatories,
zoological gardens, collections of exotic plants, and of other
new and strange things brought by exploring expeditions from
the furthest regions of Arabia and Africa. This library and
museum proved indeed a home for the Muses, and about it a most
brilliant group of students in literature and science was
formed. The successive librarians were Zenodotus, the
grammarian or critic; Callimachus, to whose poems we shall
presently return; Eratosthenes, the astronomer, who originated
the process by which the size of the earth is determined
to-day; Appollonius the Rhodian, disciple and enemy of
Callimachus; Aristophanes of Byzantium, founder of a school of
philological criticism; and Aristarchus of Samos, reputed to
have been the greatest critic of ancient times. The study of
the text of Homer was the chief labour of Zenodotus,
Aristophanes, and Aristarchus, and it was Aristarchus who
mainly fixed the form in which the Iliad and Odyssey remain to
this day. ... The vast collections of the library and museum
actually determined the whole character of the literature of
Alexandria. One word sums it all up--erudition, whether in
philosophy, in criticism, in science, even in poetry. Strange
to say, they neglected not only oratory, for which there was
no scope, but history, and this we may attribute to the fact
that history before Alexander had no charms for Hellenism.
Mythical lore, on the other hand, strange uses and curious
words, were departments of research dear to them. In science
they did great things, so did they in geography. ... But were
they original in nothing? Did they add nothing of their own to
the splendid record of Greek literature? In the next
generation came the art of criticism, which Aristarchus
developed into a real science, and of that we may speak in its
place; but even in this generation we may claim for them the
credit of three original, or nearly original, developments in
literature--the pastoral idyll, as we have it in Theocritus;
the elegy, as we have it in the Roman imitators of Philetas
and Callimachus; and the romance, or love story, the parent of
our modern novels. All these had early prototypes in the folk
songs of Sicily, in the love songs of Mimnermus and of
Antimachus, in the tales of Miletus, but still the revival was
fairly to be called original. Of these the pastoral idyll was
far the most remarkable, and laid hold upon the world for
ever."
J. P. Mahaffy, The Story of Alexander's Empire, chapter 13-14.
"There were two Libraries of Alexandria under the Ptolemies,
the larger one in the quarter called the Bruchium, and the
smaller one, named 'the daughter,' in the Serapeum, which was
situated in the quarter called Rhacotis. The former was
totally destroyed in the conflagration of the Bruchium during
Cæsar's Alexandrian War [see below: B. C. 48-47]; but the
latter, which was of great value, remained uninjured (see
Matter, Histoire de l'École d'Alexandrie, volume 1, page 133
seg., 237 seq.) It is not stated by any ancient writer
where the collection of Pergamus [see PERGAMUM] was placed,
which Antony gave to Cleopatra (Plutarch, Anton., c. 58); but
it is most probable that it was deposited in the Bruchium, as
that quarter of the city was now without a library, and the
queen was anxious to repair the ravages occasioned by the
civil war. If this supposition is correct, two Alexandrian
libraries continued to exist after the time of Cæsar, and this
is rendered still more probable by the fact that during the
first three centuries of the Christian era the Bruchium was
still the literary quarter of Alexandria. But a great change
took place in the time of Aurelian. This Emperor, in
suppressing the revolt of Firmus in Egypt, A. D. 273 [see
below: A. D. 273] is said to have destroyed the Bruchium; and
though this statement is hardly to be taken literally, the
Bruchium ceased from this time to be included within the walls
of Alexandria, and was regarded only as a suburb of the city.
{39}
Whether the great library in the Bruchium with the museum and
its other literary establishments, perished at this time, we
do not know; but the Serapeum for the next century takes its
place as the literary quarter of Alexandria, and becomes the
chief library in the city. Hence later writers erroneously
speak of the Serapeum as if it had been from the beginning the
great Alexandrian library. ... Gibbon seems to think that the
whole of the Serapeum was destroyed [A. D. 389, by order of
the Emperor Theodosius--see below]; but this was not the case.
It would appear that it was only the sanctuary of the god that
was levelled with the ground, and that the library, the halls
and other buildings in the consecrated ground remained
standing long afterwards."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 28. Notes by Dr. William Smith.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
Concerning the reputed final destruction of the Library by the
Moslems,
See below: A. D. 641-646.
ALSO IN
O. Delepierre, Historical Difficulties, chapter 3.
S. Sharpe, History of Egypt, chapters 7, 8 and 12.
See, also, NEOPLATONICS.
ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 48-47.
Cæsar and Cleopatra.
The Rising against the Romans.
The Siege.
Destruction of the great Library.
Roman victory.
From the battle field of Pharsalia (see ROME: B. C. 48)
Pompeius fled to Alexandria in Egypt; and was treacherously
murdered as he stepped on shore. Cæsar arrived a few days
afterwards, in close pursuit, and shed tears, it is said, on
being shown his rival's mangled head. He had brought scarcely
more than 3,000 of his soldiers with him, and he found Egypt
in a turbulent state of civil war. The throne was in dispute
between children of the late king, Ptolemæus Auletes.
Cleopatra, the elder daughter, and Ptolemæus, a son, were at
war with one another, and Arsinoë, a younger daughter, was
ready to put forward claims (see EGYPT: B. C. 80-48).
Notwithstanding the insignificance of his force, Cæsar did not
hesitate to assume to occupy Alexandria and to adjudicate the
dispute. But the fascinations of Cleopatra (then twenty years
of age) soon made him her partisan, and her scarcely disguised
lover. This aggravated the irritation which was caused in
Alexandria by the presence of Cæsar's troops, and a furious
rising of the city was provoked. He fortified himself in the
great palace, which he had taken possession of, and which
commanded the causeway to the island, Pharos, thereby
commanding the port. Destroying a large part of the city in
that neighborhood, he made his position exceedingly strong. At
the same time he seized and burned the royal fleet, and thus
caused a conflagration in which the greater of the two
priceless libraries of Alexandria--the library of the
Museum--was, much of it, consumed. [See above: B. C. 282-246.]
By such measures Cæsar withstood, for several months, a siege
conducted on the part of the Alexandrians with great
determination and animosity. It was not until March, B. C. 47,
that he was relieved from his dangerous situation, by the
arrival of a faithful ally, in the person of Mithridates, king
of Pergamus, who led an army into Egypt, reduced Pelusium, and
crossed the Nile at the head of the Delta. Ptolemæus advanced
with his troops to meet this new invader and was followed and
overtaken by Cæsar. In the battle which then occurred the
Egyptian army was utterly routed and Ptolemæus perished in the
Nile. Cleopatra was then married, after the Egyptian fashion,
to a younger brother, and established on the throne, while
Arsinoë was sent a prisoner to Rome.
A. Hirtius, The Alexandrian War.
ALSO IN
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 5, chapter 20.
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 18.
S. Sharpe, History of Egypt, chapter 12.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 116.
Destruction of the Jews.
See JEWS: A. D. 116.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 215.
Massacre by Caracalla.
"Caracalla was the common enemy of mankind. He left the
capital (and he never returned to it) about a year after the
murder of Geta [A. D. 213]. The rest of his reign [four years]
was spent in the several provinces of the Empire, particularly
those of the East, and every province was, by turns, the scene
of his rapine and cruelty. ... In the midst of peace, and upon
the slightest provocation, he issued his commands at
Alexandria, Egypt [A. D. 215], for a general massacre. From a
secure post in the temple of Serapis, he viewed and directed
the slaughter of many thousand citizens, as well as strangers,
without distinguishing either the number or the crime of the
sufferers."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 6.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 260-272.
Tumults of the Third Century.
"The people of Alexandria, a various mixture of nations,
united the vanity and inconstancy of the Greeks with the
superstition and obstinacy of the Egyptians. The most trifling
occasion, a transient scarcity of flesh or lentils, the
neglect of an accustomed salutation, a mistake of precedency
in the public baths, or even a religious dispute, were at any
time sufficient to kindle a sedition among that vast
multitude, whose resentments were furious and implacable.
After the captivity of Valerian [the Roman Emperor, made
prisoner by Sapor, king of Persia, A. D. 260] and the
insolence of his son had relaxed the authority of the laws,
the Alexandrians abandoned themselves to the ungoverned rage
of their passions, and their unhappy country was the theatre
of a civil war, which continued (with a few short and
suspicious truces) above twelve years. All intercourse was cut
off between the several quarters of the afflicted city, every
street was polluted with blood, every building of strength
converted into a citadel; nor did the tumult subside till a
considerable part of Alexandria was irretrievably ruined. The
spacious and magnificent district of Bruchion, with its
palaces and museum, the residence of the kings and
philosophers of Egypt, is described, above a century
afterwards, as already reduced to its present state of dreary
solitude."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 10.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 273.
Destruction of the Bruchium by Aurelian.
After subduing Palmyra and its Queen Zenobia, A. D. 272, the
Emperor Aurelian was called into Egypt to put down a rebellion
there, headed by one Firmus, a friend and ally of the
Palmyrene queen. Firmus had great wealth, derived from trade,
and from the paper-manufacture of Egypt, which was mostly in
his hands. He was defeated and put to death. "To Aurelian's
war against Firmus, or to that of Probus a little before in
Egypt, may be referred the destruction of Bruchium, a great
quarter of Alexandria, which according to Ammianus
Marcellinus, was ruined under Aurelian and remained deserted
everafter."
J. B. L. Crevier, History of the Roman Emperors,
book 27.
{40}
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 296.
Siege by Diocletian.
A general revolt of the African provinces of the Roman Empire
occurred A. D. 296. The barbarous tribes of Ethiopia and the
desert were brought into alliance with the provincials of
Egypt, Cyrenaica, Carthage and Mauritania, and the flame of
war was universal. Both the emperors of the time, Diocletian
and Maximian, were called to the African field. "Diocletian,
on his side, opened the campaign in Egypt by the siege of
Alexandria, cut off the aqueducts which conveyed the waters of
the Nile into every quarter of that immense city, and,
rendering his camp impregnable to the sallies of the besieged
multitude, he pushed his reiterated attacks with caution and
vigor. After a siege of eight months, Alexandria, wasted by
the sword and by fire, implored the clemency of the conqueror,
but it experienced the full extent of his severity. Many
thousands of the citizens perished in a promiscuous slaughter,
and there were few obnoxious persons in Egypt who escaped a
sentence either of death or at least of exile. The fate of
Busiris and of Coptos was still more melancholy than that of
Alexandria; those proud cities ... were utterly destroyed."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 13.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 365.
Great Earthquake.
See EARTHQUAKE IN THE ROMAN WORLD: A. D.365.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 389.
Destruction of the Serapeum.
"After the edicts of Theodosius had severely prohibited the
sacrifices of the pagans, they were still tolerated in the
city and temple of Serapis. ... The archepiscopal throne of
Alexandria was filled by Theophilus, the perpetual enemy of
peace and virtue; a bold, bad man, whose hands were
alternately polluted with gold and with blood. His pious
indignation was excited by the honours of Serapis. ... The
votaries of Serapis, whose strength and numbers were much
inferior to those of their antagonists, rose in arms [A. D.
389] at the instigation of the philosopher Olympius, who
exhorted them to die in the defence of the altars of the gods.
These pagan fanatics fortified themselves in the temple, or
rather fortress, of Serapis; repelled the besiegers by daring
sallies and a resolute defence; and, by the inhuman cruelties
which they exercised on their Christian prisoners, obtained
the last consolation of despair. The efforts of the prudent
magistrate were usefully exerted for the establishment of a
truce till the answer of Theodosius should determine the fate
of Serapis." The judgment of the emperor condemned the great
temple to destruction and it was reduced to a heap of ruins.
"The valuable library of Alexandria was pillaged or destroyed;
and, near twenty years afterwards, the appearance of the empty
shelves excited the regret and indignation of every spectator
whose mind was not totally darkened by religious
prejudice."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 28.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
Gibbon's statement as to the destruction of the great library
in the Serapeum is called in question by his learned
annotator, Dr. Smith.
See above: B. C. 282-246.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 413-415.
The Patriarch Cyril and his Mobs.
"His voice [that of Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria, A. D.
412-444] inflamed or appeased the passions of the multitude:
his commands were blindly obeyed by his numerous and fanatic
parabolani, familiarized in their daily office with scenes of
death; and the præfects of Egypt were awed or provoked by the
temporal power of these Christian pontiffs. Ardent in the
prosecution of heresy, Cyril auspiciously opened his reign by
oppressing the Novatians, the most innocent and harmless of
the sectaries. ... The toleration, and even the privileges of
the Jews, who had multiplied to the number of 40,000, were
secured by the laws of the Cæsars and Ptolemies, and a long
prescription of 700 years since the foundation of Alexandria.
Without any legal sentence, without any royal mandate, the
patriarch, at the dawn of day, led a seditious multitude to
the attack of the synagogues. Unarmed and unprepared, the Jews
were incapable of resistance; their houses of prayer were
levelled with the ground, and the episcopal warrior, after
rewarding his troops with the plunder of their goods, expelled
from the city the remnant of the misbelieving nation. Perhaps
he might plead the insolence of their prosperity, and their
deadly hatred of the Christians, whose blood they had recently
shed in a malicious or accidental tumult. Such crimes would
have deserved the animadversions of the magistrate; but in
this promiscuous outrage the innocent were confounded with the
guilty."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 47.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
"Before long the adherents of the archbishop were guilty of a
more atrocious and unprovoked crime, of the guilt of which a
deep suspicion attached to Cyril. All Alexandria respected,
honoured, took pride in the celebrated Hypatia. She was a
woman of extraordinary learning; in her was centred the
lingering knowledge of that Alexandrian Platonism cultivated
by Plotinus and his school. Her beauty was equal to her
learning; her modesty commended both. ... Hypatia lived in
great intimacy with the præfect Orestes; the only charge
whispered against her was that she encouraged him in his
hostility to the patriarch. ... Some of Cyril's ferocious
partisans seized this woman, dragged her from her chariot, and
with the most revolting indecency tore her clothes off and then
rent her limb from limb."
H. H. Milman, History of Latin Christianity,
book 2, chapter 3.
ALSO IN
C. Kingsley, Hypatia.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 616.
Taken by Chosroes.
See EGYPT: A. D. 616-628.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 641-646.
The Moslem Conquest.
The precise date of events in the Moslem conquest of Egypt, by
Amru, lieutenant of the Caliph Omar, is uncertain. Sir William
Muir fixes the first surrender of Alexandria to Amru in A. D.
641. After that it was reoccupied by the Byzantines either
once or twice, on occasions of neglect by the Arabs, as they
pursued their conquests elsewhere. The probability seems to be
that this occurred only once, in 646. It seems also probable,
as remarked by Sir W. Muir, that the two sieges on the taking
and retaking of the city--641 and 646--have been much confused
in the scanty accounts which have come down to us. On the
first occasion Alexandria would appear to have been generously
treated; while, on the second, it suffered pillage and its
fortifications were destroyed. How far there is truth in the
commonly accepted story of the deliberate burning of the great
Alexandrian Library--or so much of it as had escaped
destruction at the hands of Roman generals and Christian
patriarchs--is a question still in dispute. Gibbon discredited
the story, and Sir William Muir, the latest of students in
Mahometan history, declines even the mention of it in his
narrative of the conquest of Egypt. But other historians of
repute maintain the probable accuracy of the tale told by
Abulpharagus--that Caliph Omar ordered the destruction of the
Library, on the ground that, if the books in it agreed with
the Koran they were useless, if they disagreed with it they
were pernicious.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 640-646.
{41}
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 815-823.
Occupied by piratical Saracens from Spain.
See CRETE: A. D. 823.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 1798.
Captured by the French under Bonaparte.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1798 (MAY-AUGUST).
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 1801-1802.
Battle of French and English.
Restoration to the Turks.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 1807.
Surrendered to the English.
The brief occupation and humiliating capitulation.
See TURKS: A. D. 1806-1807.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 1840.
Bombardment by the English.
See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.
ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 1882.
Bombardment by the English fleet.
Massacre of Europeans.
Destruction.
See EGYPT: A. D. 1875-1882, and 1882-1883.
----------ALEXANDRIA: End----------
ALEXANDRIA, LA., The Burning of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864
(MARCH-MAY: LOUISIANA).
ALEXANDRIA, VA., A. D. 1861 (May).
Occupation by Union troops.
Murder of Colonel Ellsworth.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (MAY: VIRGINIA).
ALEXANDRIAN TALENT.
See TALENT.
ALEXIS, Czar of Russia, A. D. 1645-1676.
ALEXIUS I. (Comnenus),
Emperor in the East (Byzantine, or Greek), A. D. 1081-1118.
Alexius II. (Comnenus), Emperor in the East (Byzantine, or
Greek), A. D. 1181-1183.
Alexius III. (Angelus), Emperor in the East (Byzantine, or
Greek), A. D. 1195-1203
Alexius IV. (Angelus), Emperor in the East (Byzantine, or
Greek), A. D. 1203-1204
Alexius V. (Ducas), Emperor in the East (Byzantine, or Greek),
A. D. 1204.
ALFONSO
ALFONSO I., King of Aragon and Navarre, A. D. 1104-1134
Alfonso I., King of Castile, A. D. 1072-1109;
and VI. of Leon, A. D. 1065-1109.
Alfonso I., King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo,
A. D. 739-757.
Alfonso I., King of Portugal, A. D. 1112-1185.
Alfonso II., King of Aragon, A D. 1163-1196.
Alfonso II., King of Castile, A. D. 1126-1157.
Alfonso II., King of Leon and the Asturias,
or Oviedo, A. D. 791-842.
Alfonso II., King of Naples, A. D. 1494-1495.
Alfonso II., King of Portugal, A. D. 1211-1223.
Alfonso III., King of Aragon, A. D. 1285-1291.
Alfonso III., King of Castile, A. D. 1158-1214.
Alfonso III., King of Leon and the Asturias,
or Oviedo, A. D. 866-910.
Alfonso III., King of Portugal, A. D. 1244-1279.
Alfonso IV., King of Aragon, A. D. 1327-1336.
Alfonso IV., King of Leon and the Asturias,
or Oviedo, A. D. 925-930.
Alfonso IV., King of Portugal, A. D. 1323-1357.
Alfonso V., King of Aragon and I. of Sicily, A. D. 1416-1458;
I. of Naples, A. D. 1443-1458.
Alfonso V., King of Leon and the Asturias,
or Oviedo, A. D. 9919-1027.
Alfonso V., King of Portugal, A. D. 1438-1481.
Alfonso VI., King of Portugal, A. D., 1656-1667.
Alfonso VII., King of Leon, A. D. 1109-1126.
Alfonso VIII., King of Leon, A. D. 1126-1157.
Alfonso IX., King of Leon, A. D. 1188-1230.
Alfonso X., King of Leon and Castile, A. D. 1252-1284.
Alfonso XI., King of Leon and Castile, A. D. 1312-1350.
Alfonso XII., King of Spain, A. D. 1874-1885.
ALFORD, Battle of (A. D. 1645).
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1644-1645.
ALFRED, called the Great, King of Wessex, A. D. 871-901.
ALGIERS AND ALGERIA.
"The term Algiers literally signifies 'the island,' and was
derived from the original construction of its harbour, one
side of which was separated from the land."
M. Russell, History of the Barbary States, page 314.
For history, see BARBARY STATES.
ALGIHED, The.
The term by which a war is proclaimed among the Mahometans to
be a Holy War.
ALGONKINS, OR ALGONQUINS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONKIN FAMILY.
ALGUAZIL.
See ALCALDE.
ALHAMA, The taking of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1476-1492.
ALHAMBRA, The building of the.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1238-1273.
ALI, Caliph, A. D. 655-661.
ALIA, Battle of the (B. C. 390).
See ROME: B. C. 390-347.
ALIBAMUS, OR ALIBAMONS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MUSKHOGEE FAMILY.
ALIEN AND SEDITION LAWS, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1798.
ALIGARH, Battle of (1803).
See INDIA: A. D. 1798-1805.
ALIWAL, Battle of (1846).
See INDIA: A D. 1845-1849.
ALJUBAROTA, Battle of (1385).
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1383-1385,
and SPAIN: A. D. 1368-1479.
ALKMAAR, Siege by the Spaniards and successful defense (1573).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1573-1574.
ALKMAR, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).
"ALL THE TALENTS," The Ministry of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1801-1806, and 1806-1812.
ALLEGHANS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALLEGHANS.
ALLEMAGNE.
The French name for Germany, derived from the confederation of
the Alemanni.
See ALEMANNI: A. D. 213.
ALLEN, Ethan, and the Green Mountain Boys.
See VERMONT, A. D. 1749-1774.
And the Capture of Fort Ticonderoga.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (MAY).
ALLERHEIM, Battle of (or Second battle of Nördlingen,--1645.)
See GERMANY: A.. D. 1640-1645.
ALLERTON Isaac, and the Plymouth Colony.
See MASSACHUSETTS (PLYMOUTH): A. D. 1623-1629. and after.
ALLIANCE, The Farmers'.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1877-1891.
{42}
ALLOBROGES, Conquest of the.
The Allobroges (see ÆDUI; also GAULS) having sheltered the
chiefs of the Salyes, when the latter succumbed to the Romans,
and having refused to deliver them up, the proconsul Cn.
Domitius marched his army toward their country, B. C. 121. The
Allobroges advanced to meet him and were defeated at
Vindalium, near the junction of the Sorgues with the Rhone,
and not far from Avignon, having 20,000 men slain and 3,000
taken prisoners. The Arverni, who were the allies of the
Allobroges, then took the field, crossing the Cevennes
mountains and the river Rhone with a vast host, to attack the
small Roman army of 30,000 men, which had passed under the
command of Q. Fabius Maximus Æmilianus. On the 8th of August,
B. C. 121, the Gaulish horde encountered the legions of Rome,
at a point near the junction of the Isere and the Rhone, and
were routed with such enormous slaughter that 150,000 are said
to have been slain or drowned. This battle settled the fate of
the Allobroges, who surrendered to Rome without further
struggle; but the Arverni were not pursued. The final conquest
of that people was reserved for Cæsar.
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 1, chapter 21.
ALMA, Battle of the.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1854 (SEPTEMBER).
ALMAGROS AND PIZARROS, The quarrel of the.
See PERU: A. D. 1533-1548.
ALMANZA, Battle of (A. D. 1707).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1707.
ALMENARA, Battle of (A. D. 1710).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1707-1710.
ALMOHADES, The.
The empire of the Almoravides, in Morocco and Spain, which
originated in a Moslem missionary movement, was overturned in
the middle of the twelfth century by a movement of somewhat
similar nature. The agitating cause of the revolution was a
religious teacher named Mahomet ben Abdallah, who rose in the
reign of Ali (successor to the great Almoravide prince,
Joseph), who gained the odor of sanctity at Morocco and who
took the title of Al Mehdi, or El Mahdi, the Leader, "giving
himself out for the person whom many Mahometans expect under
that title. As before, the sect grew into an army, and the
army grew into an empire. The new dynasty were called
Almohades from Al Mehdi, and by his appointment a certain
Abdelmumen was elected Caliph and Commander of the Faithful.
Under his vigorous guidance the new kingdom rapidly grew, till
the Almohades obtained quite the upper hand in Africa, and in
1146 they too passed into Spain. Under Abdelmumen and his
successors, Joseph and Jacob Almansor, the Almohades entirely
supplanted the Almoravides, and became more formidable foes
than they had been to the rising Christian powers. Jacob
Almansor won in 1195 the terrible battle of Alarcos against
Alfonso of Castile, and carried his conquests deep into that
kingdom. His fame spread through the whole Moslem world. ...
With Jacob Almansor perished the glory of the Almohade. His
successor, Mahomet, lost in 1211 [June 16] the great battle of
Alacab or Tolosa against Alfonso, and that day may be said to
have decided the fate of Mahometanism in Spain. The Almohade
dynasty gradually declined. ... The Almohades, like the
Ommiads and the Almoravides, vanish from history amidst a
scene of confusion the details of which it were hopeless to
attempt to remember."
E. A. Freeman, History and Conquests of the Saracens,
lecture 5.
ALSO IN
H. Coppée, Conquest of Spain by the Arab-Moors,
book 8, chapter 4
See, also, SPAIN. A. D. 1146-1232.
ALMONACID, Battle of.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).
ALMORAVIDES, The.
During the confusions of the 11th century in the Moslem world,
a missionary from Kairwan--one Abdallah--preaching the faith
of Islam to a wild tribe in Western North Africa, created a
religious movement which "naturally led to a political one."
"The tribe now called themselves Almoravides, or more properly
Morabethah, which appears to mean followers of the Marabout or
religious teacher. Abdallah does not appear to have himself
claimed more than a religious authority, but their princes
Zachariah and Abu Bekr were completely guided by his counsels.
After his death Abu Bekr founded in 1070 the city of Morocco.
There he left as his lieutenant his cousin Joseph, who grew so
powerful that Abu Bekr, by a wonderful exercise of moderation,
abdicated in his favour, to avoid a probable civil war. This
Joseph, when he had become lord of most part of Western
Africa, was requested, or caused himself to be requested, to
assume the title of Emir al Momenin, Commander of the
Faithful. As a loyal subject of the Caliph of Bagdad, he
shrank from such sacrilegious usurpation, but he did not
scruple to style himself Emir Al Muslemin, Commander of the
Moslems. ... The Almoravide Joseph passed over into Spain,
like another Tarik; he vanquished Alfonso [the Christian
prince of the rising kingdom of Castile] at Zalacca [Oct. 23,
A. D. 1086] and then converted the greater portion of
Mahometan Spain into an appendage to his own kingdom of
Morocco. The chief portion to escape was the kingdom of
Zaragossa, the great out-post of the Saracens in northeastern
Spain. ... The great cities of Andalusia were all brought
under a degrading submission to the Almoravides. Their dynasty
however was not of long duration, and it fell in turn [A. D.
1147] before one whose origin was strikingly similar to their
own" [the Almohades].
E. A. Freeman, History and Conquests of the Saracens,
lecture 5.
ALSO IN
H. Coppée, Conquest of Spain by the Arab-Moors, book 8,
chapter 2 and 4.
See, also, PORTUGAL: EARLY HISTORY.
ALOD.--ALODIAL
"It may be questioned whether any etymological connexion
exists between the words odal and alod, but their
signification applied to land is the same: the alod is the
hereditary estate derived from primitive occupation; for which
the owner owes no service except the personal obligation to
appear in the host and in the council. ... The land held in
full ownership might be either an ethel, an inherited or
otherwise acquired portion of original allotment; or an estate
created by legal process out of public land. Both these are
included in the more common term alod; but the former looks
for its evidence in the pedigree of its owner or in the
witness of the community, while the latter can produce the
charter or· book by which it is created, and is called
bocland. As the primitive allotments gradually lost their
historical character, as the primitive modes of transfer
became obsolete, and the use of written records took their
place, the ethel is lost sight of in the bookland. All the
land that is not so accounted for is folcland, or public
land."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, c
hapter 3, section 24, and chapter 5, section 36.
{43}
"Alodial lands are commonly opposed to beneficiary or feudal;
the former being strictly proprietary, while the latter
depended upon a superior. In this sense the word is of
continual recurrence in ancient histories, laws and
instruments. It sometimes, however, bears the sense of
inheritance. . . . Hence, in the charters of the eleventh
century, hereditary fiefs are frequently termed alodia."
H. Hallam, Middle Ages, chapter 2, part 1, note.
ALSO IN
J. M. Kemble, The Saxon in England, book 1, chapter 11.
See, also, FOLCLAND.
ALP ARSLAN, Seljouk Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1063-1073.
ALPHONSO.
See ALFONSO.
ALSACE.--ALSATIA:
The Name.
See ALEMANNI: A. D. 213.
ALSACE: A. D. 843-870.
Included in the Kingdom of Lorraine.
See LORRAINE: A. D. 843-870.
ALSACE: 10th Century.
Joined to the Empire.
See LORRAINE: A. D. 911-980.
ALSACE: 10th Century.
Origin of the House of Hapsburg.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1246--1282.
ALSACE: A. D. 1525.
Revolt of the Peasants.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1524-1525.
ALSACE: A. D. 1621-1622.
Invasions by Mansfeld and his predatory army.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1621-1623.
ALSACE: A. D. 1636-1639.
Invasion and conquest by Duke Bernhard of Weimar.
Richelieu's appropriation of the conquest for France.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1634-1639.
ALSACE: A. D. 1648.
Cession to France in the Peace of Westphalia.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1648.
ALSACE: A. D. 1659.
Renunciation of the claims of the King of Spain.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.
ALSACE: A. D. 1674-1678.
Ravaged in the Campaigns of Turenne and Condé.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1674-1678.
ALSACE: A. D. 1679-1681.
Complete Absorption in France.
Assumption of entire Sovereignty by Louis XIV.
Encroachments of the Chamber of Reannexation.
Seizure of Strasburg.
Overthrow of its independence as an Imperial City.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1679-1681.
ALSACE: A. D. 1744.
Invasion by the Austrians.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1743-1744.
ALSACE: A. D. 1871.
Ceded to the German Empire by France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1871 (JANUARY-MAY).
ALSACE: 1871-1879.
Organization of government as a German Impanel Province.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1871-1879.
----------ALSACE: End----------
ALTA CALIFORNIA.--Upper California.
See CALIFORNIA: A. D. 1543-1781.
ALTENHElM, Battle of (A. D. 1675).
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1674-1678.
ALTENHOVEN, Battle of (1793).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (FEBRUARY-APRIL).
ALTHING, The.
See THING;
Also, NORMANS.--NORTHMEN: A. D. 860-1100;
And SCANDINAVIAN STATES (DENMARK-ICELAND): A. D. 1849-1874.
ALTIS, The.
See OLYMPIC FESTIVAL.
ALTMARCK.
See BRANDENBURG: A. D. 1142-1152.
ALTONA: A. D. 1713.
Burned by the Swedes.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1707-1718.
ALTOPASCIO, Battle of (1325).
See ITALY: A. D. 1313-1330.
ALVA IN THE NETHERLANDS.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1566-1568 to 1573-1574.
AMADEO, King of Spain, A. D. 1871-1873.
AMAHUACA, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.
AMALASONTHA, Queen of the Ostrogoths.
See ROME: A. D. 535-553.
AMALEKITES, The.
"The Amalekites were usually regarded as a branch of the
Edomites or 'Red-skins'. Amalek, like Kenaz, the father of the
Kenizzites or 'Hunters,' was the grandson of Esau (Gen. 36:
12, 16). He thus belonged to the group of nations,--Edomites,
Ammonites, and Moabites,--who stood in a relation of close
kinship to Israel. But they had preceded the Israelites in
dispossessing the older inhabitants of the land, and
establishing themselves in their place. The Edomites had
partly destroyed, partly amalgamated the Horites of Mount Seir
(Deuteronomy 2: 12); the Moabites had done the same to the Emim,
'a people great and many, and tall as the Anakim' (Deuteronomy
2: 10), while the Ammonites had extirpated and succeeded to
the Rephaim or 'Giants,' who in that part of the country were
termed Zamzummim (Deuteronomy 2: 20; Gen. 14: 5). Edom however
stood in a closer relation to Israel than its two more
northerly neighbours. ... Separate from the Edomites or
Amalekites were the Kenites or wandering 'smiths.' They formed
an important Guild in an age when the art of metallurgy was
confined to a few. In the time of Saul we hear of them as
camping among the Amalekites (1. Samuel 15: 6.) ... The
Kenites ... did not constitute a race, or even a tribe. They
were, at most, a caste. But they had originally come, like the
Israelites or the Edomites, from those barren regions of
Northern Arabia which were peopled by the Menti of the
Egyptian inscriptions. Racially, therefore, we may regard them
as allied to the descendants of Abraham. While the Kenites and
Amalekites were thus Semitic in their origin, the Hivites or
'Villagers' are specially associated with Amorites."
A. H. Sayce, Races of the Old Testament, chapter 6.
ALSO IN
H. Ewald, History of Israel, book 1, section 4.
See, also, ARABIA.
AMALFI.
"It was the singular fate of this city to have filled up the
interval between two periods of civilization, in neither of
which she was destined to be distinguished. Scarcely known
before the end of the sixth century, Amalfi ran a brilliant
career, as a free and trading republic [see ROME: A. D.
554-800], which was checked by the arms of a conqueror in the
middle of the twelfth. ... There must be, I suspect, some
exaggeration about the commerce and opulence of Amalfi, in the
only age when she possessed any at all."
H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, chapter 9, part 1, with note.
{44}
"Amalfi and Atrani lie close together in two ... ravines, the
mountains almost arching over them, and the sea washing their
very house-walls. ... It is not easy to imagine the time when
Amalfi and Atrani were one town, with docks and arsenals and
harbourage for their associated fleets, and when these little
communities were second in importance to no naval power of
Christian Europe. The Byzantine Empire lost its hold on Italy
during the eighth century; and after this time the history of
Calabria is mainly concerned with the republics of Naples and
Amalfi, their conflict with the Lombard dukes of Benevento,
their opposition to the Saracens, and their final subjugation
by the Norman conquerors of Sicily. Between the year 839 A.
D., when Amalfi freed itself from the control of Naples and
the yoke of Benevento, and the year 1131, when Roger of
Hauteville incorporated the republic in his kingdom of the Two
Sicilies, this city was the foremost naval and commercial port
of Italy. The burghers of Amalfi elected their own doge;
founded the Hospital of Jerusalem, whence sprang the knightly
order of S. John; gave their name to the richest quarter in
Palermo; and owned trading establishments or factories in all
the chief cities of the Levant. Their gold coinage of 'tari'
formed the standard of currency before the Florentines had
stamped the lily and S. John upon the Tuscan florin. Their
shipping regulations supplied Europe with a code of maritime
laws. Their scholars, in the darkest depths of the dark ages,
prized and conned a famous copy of the Pandects of Justinian,
and their seamen deserved the fame of having first used, if
they did not actually invent, the compass. ... The republic
had grown and flourished on the decay of the Greek Empire.
When the hard-handed race of Hauteville absorbed the heritage
of Greeks and Lombards and Saracens in Southern Italy [see
ITALY (Southern): A. D. 1000-1090], these adventurers
succeeded in annexing Amalfi. But it was not their interest to
extinguish the state. On the contrary, they relied for
assistance upon the navies and the armies of the little
commonwealth. New powers had meanwhile arisen in the North of
Italy, who were jealous of rivalry upon the open seas; and
when the Neapolitans resisted King Roger in 1135, they called
Pisa to their aid, and sent her fleet to destroy Amalfi. The
ships of Amalfi were on guard with Roger's navy in the Bay of
Naples. The armed citizens were, under Roger's orders, at
Aversa. Meanwhile the home of the republic lay defenceless on
its mountain-girdled seaboard. The Pisans sailed into the
harbour, sacked the city and carried off the famous Pandects
of Justinian as a trophy. Two years later they returned, to
complete the work of devastation. Amalfi never recovered from
the injuries and the humiliation of these two attacks. It was
ever thus that the Italians, like the children of the dragon's
teeth which Cadmus sowed, consumed each other."
J. A. Symonds, Sketches and Studies in Italy,
pages 2-4.
AMALINGS, OR AMALS.
The royal race of the ancient Ostragoths, as the Balthi or
Balthings were of the Visigoths, both claiming a descent from
the gods.
AMAZIGH, The.
See LIBYANS.
AMAZONS.
"The Amazons, daughters of Arês and Harmonia, are both early
creations, and frequent reproductions, of the ancient epic.
... A nation of courageous, hardy and indefatigable women,
dwelling apart from men, permitting only a short temporary
intercourse for the purpose of renovating their numbers, and
burning out their right breast with a view of enabling
themselves to draw the bow freely,--this was at once a general
type stimulating to the fancy of the poet, and a theme
eminently popular with his hearers. Nor was it at all
repugnant to the faith of the latter--who had no recorded
facts to guide them, and no other standard of credibility as
to the past except such poetical narratives themselves--to
conceive communities of Amazons as having actually existed in
anterior time. Accordingly we find these warlike females
constantly reappearing in the ancient poems, and universally
accepted as past realities. In the Iliad, when Priam wishes to
illustrate emphatically the most numerous host in which he
ever found himself included, he tells us that it was assembled
in Phrygia, on the banks of the Sangarius, for the purpose of
resisting the formidable Amazons. When Bellerophon is to be
employed on a deadly and perilous undertaking, by those who
indirectly wish to procure his death, he is despatched against
the Amazons. ... The Argonautic heroes find the Amazons on the
river Thermôdon in their expedition along the southern coast
of the Euxine. To the same spot Hêrakles goes to attack them,
in the performance of the ninth labour imposed upon him by
Eurystheus, for the purpose of procuring the girdle of the
Amazonian queen, Hippolyte; and we are told that they had not
yet recovered from the losses sustained in this severe
aggression when Theseus also assaulted and defeated them,
carrying off their queen Antiopê. This injury they avenged by
invading Attica ... and penetrated even into Athens itself:
where the final battle, hard-fought and at one time doubtful,
by which Thêseus crushed them, was fought--in the very heart
of the city. Attic antiquaries confidently pointed out the
exact position of the two contending armies. ... No portion of
the ante-historical epic appears to have been more deeply
worked into the national mind of Greece than this invasion and
defeat of the Amazons. ... Their proper territory was asserted
to be the town and plain of Themiskyra, near the Grecian
colony of Amisus, on the river Thermôdon [northern Asia
Minor], a region called after their name by Roman historians
and geographers. ... Some authors placed them in Libya or
Ethiopia."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 1, chapter 11.
AMAZONS RIVER, Discovery and Naming of the.
The mouth of the great river of South America was discovered
in 1500 by Pinzon, or Pinçon (see AMERICA: A. D. 1499-1500),
who called it 'Santa Maria de la Mar Dulce' (Saint Mary of the
Fresh-Water Sea). "This was the first name given to the river,
except that older and better one of the Indians, 'Parana,' the
Sea; afterwards it was Marañon and Rio das Amazonas, from the
female warriors that were supposed to live near its banks. ...
After Pinçon's time, there were others who saw the fresh-water
sea, but no one was hardy enough to venture into it. The honor
of its real discovery was reserved for Francisco de Orellana;
and he explored it, not from the east, but from the west, in
one of the most daring voyages that was ever recorded. It was
accident rather than design that led him to it. After ...
Pizarro had conquered Peru, he sent his brother Gonzalo, with
340 Spanish soldiers, and 4,000 Indians, to explore the great
forest east of Quito, 'where there were cinnamon trees.' The
expedition started late in 1539, and it was two years before
the starved and ragged survivors returned to Quito. In the
course of their wanderings they had struck the river Coco;
building here a brigantine, they followed down the current, a
part of them in the vessel, a part on shore.
{45}
After a while they met some Indians, who told them of a rich
country ten days' journey beyond--a country of gold, and with
plenty of provisions. Gonzalo placed Orellana in command of
the brigantine, and ordered him, with 50 soldiers, to go on to
this gold-land, and return with a load of provisions. Orellana
arrived at the mouth of the Coco in three days, but found no
provisions; 'and he considered that if he should return with
this news to Pizarro, he would not reach him in a year, on
account of the strong current, and that if he remained where
he was, he would be of no use to the one or to the other. Not
knowing how long Gonzalo Pizarro would take to reach the
place, without consulting anyone he set sail and prosecuted
his voyage onward, intending to ignore Gonzalo, to reach
Spain, and obtain that government for himself.' Down the Napo
and the Amazons, for seven months, these Spaniards floated to
the Atlantic. At times they suffered terribly from hunger:
'There was nothing to eat but the skins which formed their
girdles, and the leather of their shoes, boiled with a few
herbs.' When they did get food they were often obliged to
fight hard for it; and again they were attacked by thousands
of naked Indians, who came in canoes against the Spanish
vessel. At some Indian villages, however, they were kindly
received and well fed, so they could rest while building a new
and stronger vessel. ... On the 26th of August, 1541, Orellana
and his men sailed out to the blue water 'without either
pilot, compass, or anything useful for navigation; nor did
they know what direction they should take.' Following the
coast, they passed inside of the island of Trinidad, and so at
length reached Cubagua in September. From the king of Spain
Orellana received a grant of the land he had discovered; but
he died while returning to it, and his company was dispersed.
It was not a very reliable account of the river that was given
by Orellana and his chronicler, Padre Carbajal. So Herrera
tells their story of the warrior females, and very properly
adds: 'Every reader may believe as much as he likes.'"
H. H. Smith, Brazil, the Amazons, and the Coast, chapter 1.
In chapter 18 of this same work "The Amazon Myth" is discussed at
length, with the reports and opinions of numerous travellers,
both early and recent, concerning it.--Mr. Southey had so much
respect for the memory of Orellana that he made an effort to
restore that bold but unprincipled discoverer's name to the
great river. "He discarded Maranon, as having too much
resemblance to Maranham, and Amazon, as being founded upon
fiction and at the same time inconvenient. Accordingly, in his
map, and in all his references to the great river he
denominates it Orellana. This decision of the poet-laureate of
Great Britain has not proved authoritative in Brazil. O
Amazonas is the universal appellation of the great river among
those who float upon its waters and who live upon its banks.
... Pará, the aboriginal name of this river, was more
appropriate than any other. It signifies 'the father of
waters.' ... The origin of the name and mystery concerning the
female warriors, I think, has been solved within the last few
years by the intrepid Mr. Wallace. ... Mr. Wallace, I think,
shows conclusively that Friar Gaspar [Carbajal] and his
companions saw Indian male warriors who were attired in
habiliments such as Europeans would attribute to women. ... I
am strongly of the opinion that the story of the Amazons has
arisen from these feminine-looking warriors encountered by the
early voyagers."
J. C. Fletcher and D. P. Kidder, Brazil and the
Brazilians, chapter 27.
ALSO IN
A. R. Wallace, Travels on the Amazon and Rio Negro,
chapter 17.
R. Southey, History of Brazil, chapter 4 (volume 1).
AMAZULUS, OR ZULUS.-The Zulu War.
See SOUTH AFRICA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS;
and the same: A. D. 1877-1879.
AMBACTI.
"The Celtic aristocracy [of Gaul] ... developed the system of
retainers, that is, the privilege of the nobility to surround
themselves with a number of hired mounted servants--the
ambacti as they were called--and thereby to form a state
within a state; and, resting on the support of these troops of
their own, they defied the legal authorities and the common
levy and practically broke up the commonwealth. ... This
remarkable word [ambacti] must have been in use as early as
the sixth century of Rome among the Celts in the valley of the
Po. ... It is not merely Celtic, however, but also German, the
root of our 'Amt,' as indeed the retainer-system itself is
common to the Celts and the Germans. It would be of great
historical importance to ascertain whether the word--and
therefore the thing--came to the Celts from the Germans or to
the Germans from the Celts. If, as is usually supposed, the
word is originally German and primarily signified the servant
standing in battle 'against the back' ('and '=against,
'bak'=back) of his master, this is not wholly irreconcilable
with the singularly early occurrence of the word among the
Celts. ... It is ... probable that the Celts, in Italy as in
Gaul, employed Germans chiefly as those hired
servants-at-arms. The 'Swiss guard' would therefore in that
case be some thousands of years older than people suppose."
T. Mommsen, History of Rome,
book 5, chapter 7, and foot-note.
AMBARRI, The.
A small tribe in Gaul which occupied anciently a district
between the Saone, the Rhone and the Ain.
Napoleon III., History of Cæsar, book 3, chapter 2, note.
AMBIANI, The.
See BELGÆ.
AMBITUS.
Bribery at elections was termed ambitus among the Romans, and
many unavailing laws were enacted to check it.
W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapter 9.
AMBIVARETI, The.
A tribe in ancient Gaul which occupied the left bank of the
Meuse, to the south of the marsh of Peel.
Napoleon III., History of Cæsar,
book 3, chapter 2, note.
AMBLEVE, Battle of (716.)
See FRANKS (MEROVINGIAN EMPIRE): A. D. 511-752.
AMBOISE, Conspiracy or Tumult of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1559-1561.
AMBOISE, Edict of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1560-1563.
AMBOYNA, Massacre of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1600-1702.
AMBRACIA (Ambrakia).
See KORKYRA.
AMBRONES, The.
See CIMBRI AND TEUTONES: B. C. 113-102.
AMBROSIAN CHURCH.--AMBROSIAN CHANT.
See MILAN: A. D. 374-397.
AMEIXAL, OR ESTREMOS, Battle of (1663).
See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1637-1668.
{46}
AMERICA, The Name.
See below: A. D. 1500-1514.
AMERICA, Prehistoric.
"Widely scattered throughout the United States, from sea to
sea, artificial mounds are discovered, which may be enumerated
by the thousands or hundreds of thousands. They vary greatly
in size; some are so small that a half-dozen laborers with
shovels might construct one of them in a day, while others
cover acres and are scores of feet in height. These mounds
were observed by the earliest explorers and pioneers of the
country. They did not attract great attention, however, until
the science of archæology demanded their investigation. Then
they were assumed to furnish evidence of a race of people
older than the Indian tribes. Pseud-archæologists descanted on
the Mound-builders that once inhabited the land, and they told
of swarming populations who had reached a high condition of
culture, erecting temples, practicing arts in the metals, and
using hieroglyphs. So the Mound-builders formed the theme of
many an essay on the wonders of ancient civilization. The
research of the past ten or fifteen years has put this subject
in a proper light. First, the annals of the Columbian epoch
have been carefully studied, and it is found that some of the
mounds have been constructed in historical time, while early
explorers and settlers found many actually used by tribes of
North American Indians; so we know that many of them were
builders of mounds. Again, hundreds and thousands of these
mounds have been carefully examined, and the works of art
found therein have been collected and assembled in museums. At
the same time, the works of art of the Indian tribes, as they
were produced before modification by European culture, have
been assembled in the same museums, and the two classes of
collections have been carefully compared. All this has been
done with the greatest painstaking, and the Mound-builder's
arts and the Indian's arts are found to be substantially
identical. No fragment of evidence remains to support the
figment of theory that there was an ancient race of
Mound-builders superior in culture to the North American
Indians. ... That some of these mounds were built and used in
modern times is proved in another way. They often contain
articles manifestly made by white men, such as glass beads and
copper ornaments. ... So it chances that to-day unskilled
archæologists are collecting many beautiful things in copper,
stone, and shell which were made by white men and traded to
the Indians. Now, some of these things are found in the
mounds; and bird pipes, elephant pipes, banner stones, copper
spear heads and knives, and machine-made wampum are collected
in quantities and sold at high prices to wealthy amateurs. ...
The study of these mounds, historically and archæologically,
proves that they were used for a variety of purposes. Some
were for sepulture, and such are the most common and widely
scattered. Others were used as artificial hills on which to
build communal houses. ... Some of the very large mounds were
sites of large communal houses in which entire tribes dwelt.
There is still a third class ... constructed as places for
public assembly. ... But to explain the mounds and their uses
would expand this article into a book. It is enough to say
that the Mound-builders were the Indian tribes discovered by
white men. It may well be that some of the mounds were erected
by tribes extinct when Columbus first saw these shores, but
they were kindred in culture to the peoples that still
existed. In the southwestern portion of the United States,
conditions of aridity prevail. Forests are few and are found
only at great heights. ... The tribes lived in the plains and
valleys below, while the highlands were their hunting grounds.
The arid lands below were often naked of vegetation; and the
ledges and cliffs that stand athwart the lands, and the canyon
walls that inclose the streams, were everywhere quarries of
loose rock, lying in blocks ready to the builder's hand. Hence
these people learned to build their dwellings of stone; and
they had large communal houses, even larger than the
structures of wood made by the tribes of the east and north.
Many of these stone pueblos are still occupied, but the ruins
are scattered wide over a region of country embracing a little
of California and Nevada, much of Utah, most of Colorado, the
whole of New Mexico and Arizona, and far southward toward the
Isthmus. ... No ruin has been discovered where evidences of a
higher culture are found than exists in modern times at Zuni,
Oraibi, or Laguna. The earliest may have been built thousands
of years ago, but they were built by the ancestors of existing
tribes and their congeners. A careful study of these ruins,
made during the last twenty years, abundantly demonstrates
that the pueblo culture began with rude structures of stone
and brush, and gradually developed, until at the time of the
exploration of the country by the Spaniards, beginning about
1540, it had reached its highest phase. Zuni [in New Mexico]
has been built since, and it is among the largest and best
villages ever established within the territory of the United
States without the aid of ideas derived from civilized men."
With regard to the ruins of dwellings found sheltered in the
craters of extinct volcanoes, or on the shelves of cliffs, or
otherwise contrived, the conclusion to which all recent
archæological study tends is the same. "All the stone pueblo
ruins, all the clay ruins, all the cliff dwellings, all the
crater villages, all the cavate chambers, and all the
tufa-block houses are fully accounted for without resort to
hypothetical peoples inhabiting the country anterior to the
Indian tribes. ... Pre-Columbian culture was indigenous; it
began at the lowest stage of savagery and developed to the
highest, and was in many places passing into barbarism when
the good queen sold her jewels."
Major J. W. Powell, Prehistoric Man in America;
in "The Forum," January, 1890.
"The writer believes ... that the majority of American
archæologists now sees no sufficient reason for supposing that
any mysterious superior race has ever lived in any portion of
our continent. They find no archæological evidence proving
that at the time of its discovery any tribe had reached a
stage of culture that can properly be called civilization.
Even if we accept the exaggerated statements of the Spanish
conquerors, the most intelligent and advanced peoples found
here were only semi-barbarians, in the stage of transition
from the stone to the bronze age, possessing no written
language, or what can properly be styled an alphabet, and not
yet having even learned the use of beasts of burden."
H. W. Haynes, Prehistoric Archæology of North America
(volume 1, chapter 6, of "Narrative and Critical History of
America").
{47}
"It may be premised ... that the Spanish adventurers who
thronged to the New World after its discovery found the same
race of Red Indians in the West India Islands, in Central and
South America, in Florida and in Mexico. In their mode of life
and means of subsistence, in their weapons, arts, usages and
customs, in their institutions, and in their mental and
physical characteristics, they were the same people in
different stages of advancement. ... There was neither a
political society, nor a state, nor any civilization in
America when it was discovered; and excluding the Eskimos, but
one race of Indians, the Red Race."
L. H. Morgan, Houses and House-life of the American
Aborigines: (Contributions to North American Ethnology,
v, 5.), chapter 10.
"We have in this country the conclusive evidence of the
existence of man before the time of the glaciers, and from the
primitive conditions of that time, he has lived here and
developed, through stages which correspond in many particulars
to the Homeric age of Greece."
F. W. Putnam, Report, Peabody Museum of Archæology,
1886.
ALSO IN
L. Carr, The Mounds of the Mississippi Valley.
C. Thomas, Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the
United States: Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology,
1883-84.
Marquis de Nadaillac, Prehistoric America.
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 1.
See, also, MEXICO; PERU;
and AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALLEGHANS, CHEROKEES, and MAYAS.
AMERICA: 10th-11th Centuries.
Supposed Discoveries by the Northmen.
The fact that the Northmen knew of the existence of the
Western Continent prior to the age of Columbus, was
prominently brought before the people of this country in the
year 1837, when the Royal Society of Northern Antiquaries at
Copenhagen published their work on the Antiquities of North
America, under the editorial supervision of the great
Icelandic scholar, Professor Rafn. But we are not to suppose
that the first general account of these voyages was then
given, for it has always been known that the history of
certain early voyages to America by the Northmen were
preserved in the libraries of Denmark and Iceland. ... Yet,
owing to the fact that the Icelandic language, though simple
in construction and easy of acquisition, was a tongue not
understood by scholars, the subject has until recent years
been suffered to lie in the background, and permitted, through
a want of interest, to share in a measure the treatment meted
out to vague and uncertain reports. ... It now remains to give
the reader some general account of the contents of the
narratives which relate more or less to the discovery of the
western continent. ... The first extracts given are very
brief. They are taken from the 'Landanama Book,' and relate to
the report in general circulation, which indicated one
Gunniborn as the discoverer of Greenland, an event which has
been fixed at the year 876. ... The next narrative relates to
the rediscovery of Greenland by the outlaw, Eric the Red, in
983, who there passed three years in exile, and afterwards
returned to Iceland. About the year 986, he brought out to
Greenland a considerable colony of settlers, who fixed their
abode at Brattahlid, in Ericsfiord. Then follow two versions
of the voyage of Biarne Heriulfson, who, in the same year,
986, when sailing for Greenland, was driven away during a
storm, and saw a new land at the southward, which he did not
visit. Next is given three accounts of the voyage of Leif, son
of Eric the Red, who in the year 1000 sailed from Brattahlid
to find the land which Biarne saw. Two of these accounts are
hardly more than notices of the voyage, but the third is of
considerable length, and details the successes of Leif, who
found and explored this new land, where he spent the winter,
returning to Greenland the following spring [having named
different regions which he visited Helluland, Markland and
Vinland, the latter name indicative of the finding of grapes].
After this follows the voyage of Thorvald Ericson, brother of
Leif, who sailed to Vinland from Greenland, which was the
point of departure in all these voyages. This expedition was
begun in 1002, and it cost him his life, as an arrow from one
of the natives pierced his side, causing death. Thorstein, his
brother, went to seek Vinland, with the intention of bringing
home his body, but failed in the attempt. The most
distinguished explorer was Thorfinn Karlsefne, the Hopeful, an
Icelander whose genealogy runs back in the old Northern
annals, through Danish, Swedish, and even Scotch and Irish
ancestors, some of whom were of royal blood. In the year 1006
he went to Greenland, where he met Gudrid, widow of Thorstein,
whom he married. Accompanied by his wife, who urged him to the
undertaking, he sailed to Vinland in the spring of 1007, with
three vessels and 160 men, where he remained three years. Here
his son Snorre was born. He afterwards became the founder of a
great family in Iceland, which gave the island several of its
first bishops. Thorfinn finally left Vinland because he found
it difficult to sustain himself against the attacks of the
natives. The next to undertake a voyage was a wicked woman
named Freydis, a sister to Leif Ericson, who went to Vinland
in 1011, where she lived for a time with her two ships, in the
same places occupied by Leif and Thorfinn. Before she
returned, she caused the crew of one ship to be cruelly
murdered, assisting in the butchery with her own hands. After
this we have what are called the Minor Narratives, which are
not essential.
B. F. De Costa, Pre-Columban Discovery of America,
General Introduction.
By those who accept fully the claims made for the Northmen, as
discoverers of the American continent in the voyages believed
to be authentically narrated in these sagas, the Helluland of
Leif is commonly identified with Newfoundland, Markland with
Nova Scotia, and Vinland with various parts of New England.
Massachusetts Bay, Cape Cod, Nantucket Island, Martha's
Vineyard, Buzzard's Bay, Narragansett Bay, Mount Hope Bay,
Long Island Sound, and New York Bay are among the localities
supposed to be recognized in the Norse narratives, or marked
by some traces of the presence of the Viking explorers. Professor
Gustav Storm, the most recent of the Scandinavian
investigators of this subject, finds the Helluland of the
sagas in Labrador or Northern Newfoundland, Markland in
Newfoundland, and Vinland in Nova Scotia and Cape Breton
Island.
G. Storm, Studies of the Vineland Voyages.
{48}
"The only discredit which has been thrown upon the story of
the Vinland voyages, in the eyes either of scholars or of the
general public, has arisen from the eager credulity with which
ingenious antiquarians have now and then tried to prove more
than facts will warrant. ... Archælogical remains of the
Northmen abound in Greenland, all the way from Immartinek to
near Cape Farewell; the existence of one such relic on the
North American continent has never yet been proved. Not a
single vestige of the Northmen's presence here, at all worthy
of credence, has ever been found. ... The most convincing
proof that the Northmen never founded a colony in America,
south of Davis Strait, is furnished by the total absence of
horses, cattle and other domestic animals from the soil of
North America until they were brought hither by the Spanish,
French and English settlers."
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 2.
"What Leif and Karlsefne knew they experienced," writes Professor
Justin Winsor, "and what the sagas tell us they underwent,
must have just the difference between a crisp narrative of
personal adventure and the oft-repeated and embellished story
of a fireside narrator, since the traditions of the Norse
voyages were not put in the shape of records till about two
centuries had elapsed, and we have no earlier manuscript of
such a record than one made nearly two hundred years later
still. ... A blending of history and myth prompts Horn to say
that 'some of the sagas were doubtless originally based on
facts, but the telling and retelling have changed them into
pure myths.' The unsympathetic stranger sees this in stories
that the patriotic Scandinavians are over-anxious to make
appear as genuine chronicles. ... The weight of probability is
in favor of a Northman descent upon the coast of the American
mainland at some point, or at several, somewhere to the south
of Greenland; but the evidence is hardly that which attaches
to well established historical records. ... There is not a
single item of all the evidence thus advanced from time to
time which can be said to connect by archæological traces the
presence of the Northmen on the soil of North America south of
Davis' Straits." Of other imagined pre-Columban discoveries of
America, by the Welsh, by the Arabs, by the Basques, &c., the
possibilities and probabilities are critically discussed by
Professor Winsor in the same connection.
J. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 1, chapter 2, and Critical Notes to the same.
ALSO IN
Bryant and Gay, Popular History of the United States,
chapter 3.
E. F. Slafter, Editor,
Voyages of the Northmen to America (Prince Society, 1877).
E. F. Slafter, Editor,
Discovery of America by the Northmen (N. H. History
Society, 1888).
N. L. Beamish, Discovery of America by the
Northmen.
A. J. Weise, Discoveries of America, chapter 1.
AMERICA: A. D. 1484-1492.
The great project of Columbus, and the sources of its inspiration.
His seven years' suit at the Spanish Court.
His departure from Palos.
"All attempts to diminish the glory of Columbus' achievement
by proving a previous discovery whose results were known to
him have signally failed. ... Columbus originated no new
theory respecting the earth's form or size, though a popular
idea has always prevailed, notwithstanding the statements of
the best writers to the contrary, that he is entitled to the
glory of the theory as well as to that of the execution of the
project. He was not in advance of his age, entertained no new
theories, believed no more than did Prince Henry, his
predecessor, or Toscanelli, his contemporary; nor was he the
first to conceive the possibility of reaching the east by
sailing west. He was however the first to act in accordance
with existing beliefs. The Northmen in their voyages had
entertained no ideas of a New World, or of an Asia to the
West. To knowledge of theoretical geography, Columbus added
the skill of a practical navigator, and the iron will to
overcome obstacles. He sailed west, reached Asia as he
believed, and proved old theories correct. There seem to be
two undecided points in that matter, neither of which can ever
be settled. First, did his experience in the Portuguese
voyages, the perusal of some old author, or a hint from one of
the few men acquainted with old traditions, first suggest to
Columbus his project? ... Second, to what extent did his
voyage to the north [made in 1477, probably with an English
merchantman from Bristol, in which voyage he is believed to
have visited Iceland] influence his plan? There is no
evidence, but a strong probability, that he heard in that
voyage of the existence of land in the west. ... Still, his
visit to the north was in 1477, several years after the first
formation of his plan, and any information gained at the time
could only have been confirmatory rather than suggestive."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 1,
summary appendix to chapter 1.
"Of the works of learned men, that which, according to
Ferdinand Columbus, had most weight with his father, was the
'Cosmographia' of Cardinal Aliaco. Columbus was also confirmed
in his views of the existence of a western passage to the
Indies by Paulo Toscanelli, the Florentine philosopher, to
whom much credit is due for the encouragement he afforded to
the enterprise. That the notices, however, of western lands
were not such as to have much weight with other men, is
sufficiently proved by the difficulty which Columbus had in
contending with adverse geographers and men of science in
general, of whom he says he never was able to convince any
one. After a new world had been discovered, many scattered
indications were then found to have foreshown it. One thing
which cannot be denied to Columbus is that he worked out his
own idea himself. ... He first applied himself to his
countrymen, the Genoese, who would have nothing to say to his
scheme. He then tried the Portuguese, who listened to what he
had to say, but with bad faith sought to anticipate him by
sending out a caravel with instructions founded upon his plan.
... Columbus, disgusted at the treatment he had received from
the Portuguese Court, quitted Lisbon, and, after visiting
Genoa, as it appears, went to see what favour he could meet
with in Spain, arriving at Palos in the year 1485." The story
of the long suit of Columbus at the Court of Ferdinand and
Isabella; of his discouragement and departure, with intent to
go to France; of his recall by command of Queen Isabella; of
the tedious hearings and negotiations that now took place; of
the lofty demands adhered to by the confident Genoese, who
required "to be made an admiral at once, to be appointed
viceroy of the countries he should discover, and to have an
eighth of the profits of the expedition;" of his second
rebuff, his second departure for France, and second recall by
Isabella, who finally put her heart into the enterprise and
persuaded her more skeptical consort to assent to it--the
story of those seven years of the struggle of Columbus to
obtain means for his voyage is familiar to all readers.
{49}
"The agreement between Columbus and their Catholic highnesses
was signed at Santa Fe on the 17th of April, 1492; and
Columbus went to Palos to make preparation for his voyage,
bearing with him an order that the two vessels which that city
furnished annually to the crown for three months should be
placed at his disposal. ... The Pinzons, rich men and skilful
mariners of Palos, joined in the undertaking, subscribing an
eighth of the expenses; and thus, by these united exertions,
three vessels were manned with 90 mariners, and provisioned
for a year. At length all the preparations were complete, and
on a Friday (not inauspicious in this case), the 3d of August,
1492, after they had all confessed and received the sacrament,
they set sail from the bar of Saltes, making for the Canary
Islands."
Sir A. Helps, The Spanish Conquest in America, book 2,
chapter 1.
ALSO IN
J. Winsor, Christopher Columbus, chapter 5-9, and 20.
AMERICA: A. D. 1492.
The First Voyage of Columbus.
Discovery of the Bahamas, Cuba and Hayti.
The three vessels of Columbus were called the Santa Maria, the
Pinta and the Nina. "All had forecastles and high poops, but
the 'Santa Maria' was the only one that was decked amidships,
and she was called a 'nao' or ship. The other two were
caravelas, a class of small vessels built for speed. The
'Santa Maria,' as I gather from scattered notices in the
letters of Columbus, was of 120 to 130 tons, like a modern
coasting schooner, and she carried 70 men, much crowded. Her
sails were a foresail and a foretop-sail, a sprit-sail, a
main-sail with two bonnets, and maintop sail, a mizzen, and a
boat's sail were occasionally hoisted on the poop. The 'Pinta'
and 'Nina' only had square sails on the foremast and lateen
sails on the main and mizzen. The former was 50 tons, the
latter 40 tons, with crews of 20 men each. On Friday, the 3d
of August, the three little vessels left the haven of Palos,
and this memorable voyage was commenced. ... The expedition
proceeded to the Canary Islands, where the rig of the 'Pinta'
was altered. Her lateen sails were not adapted for running
before the wind, and she was therefore fitted with square
sails, like the 'Santa Maria.' Repairs were completed, the
vessels were filled up with wood and water at Gomera, and the
expedition took its final departure from the island of Gomera,
one of the Canaries, on September 6th, 1492. ... Columbus had
chosen his route most happily, and with that fortunate
prevision which often waits upon genius. From Gomera, by a
course a little south of west, he would run down the trades to
the Bahama Islands. From the parallel of about 30° N. nearly
to the equator there is a zone of perpetual winds--namely, the
north-east trade winds--always moving in the same direction,
as steadily as the current of a river, except where they are
turned aside by local causes, so that the ships of Columbus
were steadily carried to their destination by a law of nature
which, in due time, revealed itself to that close observer of
her secrets. The constancy of the wind was one cause of alarm
among the crews, for they began to murmur that the provisions
would all be exhausted if they had to beat against these
unceasing winds on the return voyage. The next event which
excited alarm among the pilots was the discovery that the
compasses had more than a point of easterly variation. ...
This was observed on the 17th of September, and about 300
miles westward of the meridian of the Azores, when the ships
had been eleven days at sea. Soon afterwards the voyagers
found themselves surrounded by masses of seaweed, in what is
called the Sargasso Sea, and this again aroused their fears.
They thought that the ships would get entangled in the beds of
weed and become immovable, and that the beds marked the limit
of navigation. The cause of this accumulation is well known
now. If bits of cork are put into a basin of water, and a
circular motion given to it, all the corks will be found
crowding together towards the centre of the pool where there
is the least motion. The Atlantic Ocean is just such a basin,
the Gulf Stream is the whirl, and the Sargasso Sea is in the
centre. There Columbus found it, and there it has remained to
this day, moving up and down and changing its position
according to seasons, storms and winds, but never altering its
mean position. ... As day after day passed, and there was no
sign of land, the crews became turbulent and mutinous.
Columbus encouraged them with hopes of reward, while he told
them plainly that he had come to discover India, and that,
with the help of God, he would persevere until he found it. At
length, on the 11th of October, towards ten at night, Columbus
was on the poop and saw a light. ... At two next morning, land
was distinctly seen. ... The island, called by the natives
Guanahani, and by Columbus San Salvador, has now been
ascertained to be Watling Island, one of the Bahamas, 14 miles
long by 6 broad, with a brackish lake in the centre, in 24°
10' 30'' north latitude. ... The difference of latitude
between Gomera and Watling Island is 235 miles. Course, West 5°
South; distance 3,114 miles; average distance made good daily,
85'; voyage 35 days. ... After discovering several smaller
islands the fleet came in sight of Cuba on the 27th October,
and explored part of the northern coast. Columbus believed it
to be Cipango, the island placed on the chart of Toscanelli,
between Europe and Asia. ... Crossing the channel between Cuba
and St. Domingo [or Hayti], they anchored in the harbour of
St. Nicholas Mole on December 4th. The natives came with
presents and the country was enchanting. Columbus ... named
the island 'Española' [or Hispaniola]. But with all this
peaceful beauty around him he was on the eve of disaster." The
Santa Maria was drifted by a strong current upon a sand bank
and hopelessly wrecked. "It was now necessary to leave a small
colony on the island. ... A fort was built and named 'La
Navidad,' 39 men remaining behind supplied with stores and
provisions," and on Friday, January 4, 1493, Columbus began his
homeward voyage. Weathering a dangerous gale, which lasted
several days, his little vessels reached the Azores February 17,
and arrived at Palos March 15, bearing their marvellous news.
C. R. Markham, The Sea Fathers, chapter 2.
C. R. Markham, Life of Columbus, chapter 5.
{50}
The statement above that the island of the Bahamas on which
Columbus first landed, and which he called San Salvador, "has
now been ascertained to be Watling Island" seems hardly
justified. The question between Watling Island, San Salvador
or Cat Island, Samana, or Attwood's Cay, Mariguana, the Grand
Turk, and others is still in dispute. Professor Justin Winsor
says "the weight of modern testimony seems to favor Watling's
Island;" but at the same time he thinks it "probable that men
will never quite agree which of the Bahamas it was upon which
these startled and exultant Europeans first stepped."
J. Winsor, Christopher Columbus, chapter 9.
J. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 2, chapter 1, note B.
Professor John Fiske, says: "All that can be positively
asserted of Guanahani is that it was one of the Bahamas; there
has been endless discussion as to which one, and the question
is not easy to settle. Perhaps the theory of Captain Gustavus
Fox, of the United States Navy, is on the whole best
supported. Captain Fox maintains that the true Guanahani was
the little Island now known as Samana or Attwood's Cay."
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 5 (volume 1).
ALSO IN
U. S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Report, 1880,
appendix 18.
AMERICA: A. D. 1493.
Papal grant of the New World to Spain.
"Spain was at this time connected with the Pope about a most
momentous matter. The Genoese, Cristoforo Colombo, arrived at
the Spanish court in March, 1493, with the astounding news of
the discovery of a new continent. ... Ferdinand and Isabella
thought it wise to secure a title to all that might ensue from
their new discovery. The Pope, as Vicar of Christ, was held to
have authority to dispose of lands inhabited by the heathen;
and by papal Bulls the discoveries of Portugal along the
African coast had been secured. The Portuguese showed signs of
urging claims to the New World, as being already conveyed to
them by the papal grants previously issued in their favour. To
remove all cause of dispute, the Spanish monarchs at once had
recourse to Alexander VI., who issued two Bulls on May 4 and 5
[1493] to determine the respective rights of Spain and
Portugal. In the first, the Pope granted to the Spanish
monarchs and their heirs all lands discovered or hereafter to
be discovered in the western ocean. In the second, he defined
his grant to mean all lands that might be discovered west and
south of an imaginary line, drawn from the North to the South
Pole, at the distance of a hundred leagues westward of the
Azores and Cape de Verd Islands. In the light of our present
knowledge we are amazed at this simple means of disposing of a
vast extent of the earth's surface." Under the Pope's
stupendous patent, Spain was able to claim every part of the
American Continent except the Brazilian coast.
M. Creighton, History of the Papacy during the
Reformation, book 5, chapter 6 (volume 3).
ALSO IN
E. G. Bourne, The Demarcation Line of Pope Alexander VI.
(Yale Review., May, 1892).
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 6 (volume 1).
J. Gordon, The Bulls distributing America
(American Society of Ch. Dist., volume 4).
See, also, below: A. D. 1494.
AMERICA: A. D. 1493-1496.
The Second Voyage of Columbus.
Discovery of Jamaica and the Caribbees.
Subjugation of Hispaniola.
"The departure of Columbus on his second voyage of discovery
presented a brilliant contrast to his gloomy embarkation at
Palos. On the 25th of September [1493], at the dawn of day the
bay of Cadiz was whitened by his fleet: There were three large
ships of heavy burden and fourteen caravels. ... Before
sunrise the whole fleet was under way." Arrived at the
Canaries on the 1st of October, Columbus purchased there
calves, goats, sheep, hogs, and fowls, with which to stock the
island of Hispaniola; also "seeds of oranges, lemons,
bergamots, melons, and various orchard fruits, which were thus
first introduced into the islands of the west from the
Hesperides or Fortunate Islands of the Old World." It was not
until the 13th of October that the fleet left the Canaries,
and it arrived among the islands since called the Lesser
Antilles or Caribbees, on the evening of November 2. Sailing
through this archipelago, discovering the larger island of
Porto Rico on the way, Columbus reached the eastern extremity
of Hispaniola or Hayti on the 22d of November, and arrived on
the 27th at La Navidad, where he had left a garrison ten
months before. He found nothing but ruin, silence and the
marks of death, and learned, after much inquiry, that his
unfortunate men, losing all discipline after his departure,
had provoked the natives by rapacity and licentiousness until
the latter rose against them and destroyed them. Abandoning
the scene of this disaster, Columbus found an excellent harbor
ten leagues east of Monte Christi and there he began the
founding of a city which he named Isabella. "Isabella at the
present day is quite overgrown with forests, in the midst of
which are still to be seen, partly standing, the pillars of
the church, some remains of the king's storehouses, and part
of the residence of Columbus, all built of hewn stone." While
the foundations of the new city were being laid, Columbus sent
back part of his ships to Spain, and undertook an exploration
of the interior of the island--the mountains of Cibao--where
abundance of gold was promised. Some gold washings were
found--far too scanty to satisfy the expectations of the
Spaniards; and, as want and sickness soon made their
appearance at Isabella, discontent was rife and mutiny afoot
before the year had ended. In April, 1494, Columbus set sail
with three caravels to revisit the coast of Cuba, for a more
extended exploration than he had attempted on the first
discovery. "He supposed it to be a continent, and the extreme
end of Asia, and if so, by following its shores in the
proposed direction he must eventually arrive at Cathay and
those other rich and commercial, though semi-barbarous
countries, described by Mandeville and Marco Polo." Reports of
gold led him southward from Cuba until he discovered the
island which he called Santiago, but which has kept its native
name, Jamaica, signifying the Island of Springs. Disappointed
in the search for gold, he soon returned from Jamaica to Cuba
and sailed along its southern coast to very near the western
extremity, confirming himself and his followers in the belief
that they skirted the shores of Asia and might follow them to
the Red Sea, if their ships and stores were equal to so long a
voyage. "Two or three days' further sail would have carried
Columbus round the extremity of Cuba; would have dispelled his
illusion, and might have given an entirely different course to
his subsequent discoveries. In his present conviction he lived
and died; believing to his last hour that Cuba was the
extremity of the Asiatic continent."
{51}
Returning eastward, he visited Jamaica again and purposed some
further exploration of the Caribbee Islands, when his toils
and anxieties overcame him. "He fell into a deep lethargy,
resembling death itself. His crew, alarmed at this profound
torpor, feared that death was really at hand. They abandoned,
therefore, all further prosecution of the voyage; and
spreading their sails to the east wind so prevalent in those
seas, bore Columbus back, in a state of complete
insensibility, to the harbor of Isabella,"--Sept. 4.
Recovering consciousness, the admiral was rejoiced to find his
brother Bartholomew, from whom he had been separated for
years, and who had been sent out to him from Spain, in command
of three ships. Otherwise there was little to give pleasure to
Columbus when he returned to Isabella. His followers were
again disorganized, again at war with the natives, whom they
plundered and licentiously abused, and a mischief-making
priest had gone back to Spain, along with certain intriguing
officers, to make complaints and set enmities astir at the
court. Involved in war, Columbus prosecuted it relentlessly,
reduced the island to submission and the natives to servitude
and misery by heavy exactions. In March 1496 he returned to
Spain, to defend himself against the machinations of his
enemies, transferring the government of Hispaniola to his
brother Bartholomew.
W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus, books 6-8
(volumes 1-2).
ALSO IN
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 2.
J. Winsor, Christopher Columbus, chapter 12-14.
AMERICA: A. D. 1494.
The Treaty of Tordesillas.
Amended Partition of the New World between Spain and Portugal.
"When speaking or writing of the conquest of America, it is
generally believed that the only title upon which were based
the conquests of Spain and Portugal was the famous Papal Bull
of partition of the Ocean, of 1493. Few modern authors take
into consideration that this Bull was amended, upon the
petition of the King of Portugal, by the [Treaty of
Tordesillas], signed by both powers in 1494, augmenting the
portion assigned to the Portuguese in the partition made
between them of the Continent of America. The arc of meridian
fixed by this treaty as a dividing line, which gave rise,
owing to the ignorance of the age, to so many diplomatic
congresses and interminable controversies, may now be traced
by any student of elementary mathematics. This line ... runs
along the meridian of 47° 32' 56" west of Greenwich. ... The
name Brazil, or 'tierra del Brazil,' at that time [the middle
of the 16th century] referred only to the part of the
continent producing the dye wood so-called. Nearly two
centuries later the Portuguese advanced toward the South, and
the name Brazil then covered the new possessions they were
acquiring."
L. L. Dominguez, Introduction to "The Conquest of the
River Plate" (Hakluyt Society Publications. No. 81).
AMERICA: A. D. 1497.
Discovery of the North American Continent by John Cabot.
"The achievement of Columbus, revealing the wonderful truth of
which the germ may have existed in the imagination of every
thoughtful mariner, won [in England] the admiration which
belonged to genius that seemed more divine than human; and
'there was great talk of it in all the court of Henry VII.' A
feeling of disappointment remained, that a series of disasters
had defeated the wish of the illustrious Genoese to make his
voyage of essay under the flag of England. It was, therefore,
not difficult for John Cabot, a denizen of Venice, residing at
Bristol, to interest that politic king in plans for discovery.
On the 5th of March, 1496, he obtained under the great seal a
commission empowering himself and his three sons, or either of
them, their heirs, or their deputies, to sail into the
eastern, western, or northern sea with a fleet of five ships,
at their own expense, in search of islands, provinces, or
regions hitherto unseen by Christian people; to affix the
banners of England on city, island, or continent; and, as
vassals of the English crown, to possess and occupy the
territories that might be found. It was further stipulated in
this 'most ancient American State paper of England,' that the
patentees should be strictly bound, on every return, to land
at the port of Bristol, and to pay to the king one-fifth part
of their gains; while the exclusive right of frequenting all
the countries that might be found was reserved to them and to
their assigns' without limit of time. Under this patent,
which, at the first direction of English enterprise toward
America, embodied the worst features of monopoly and
commercial restriction, John Cabot, taking with him his son
Sebastian, embarked in quest of new islands and a passage to
Asia by the north-west. After sailing prosperously, as he
reported, for 700 leagues, on the 24th day of June, early in
the morning, almost fourteen months before Columbus on his
third voyage came in sight of the main, and more than two
years before Amerigo Vespucci sailed west of the Canaries, he
discovered the western continent, probably in the latitude of
about 56° degrees, among the dismal cliffs of Labrador. He ran
along the coast for many leagues, it is said even for 300, and
landed on what he considered to be the territory of the Grand
Cham. But he encountered no human being, although there were
marks that the region was inhabited. He planted on the land a
large cross with the flag of England, and, from affection for
the republic of Venice, he added the banner of St. Mark, which
had never been borne so far before. On his homeward voyage he
saw on his right hand two islands, which for want of
provisions he could not stop to explore. After an absence of
three months the great discoverer re-entered Bristol harbor,
where due honors awaited him. The king gave him money, and
encouraged him to continue his career, The people called him
the great admiral; he dressed in silk; and the English, and
even Venetians who chanced to be at Bristol, ran after him
with such zeal that he could enlist for a new voyage as many
as he pleased. ... On the third day of the month of February
next after his return, 'John Kaboto, Venecian,' accordingly
obtained a power to take up ships for another voyage, at the
rates fixed for those employed in the service of the king, and
once more to set sail with as many companions as would go with
him of their own will. With this license every trace of John
Cabot disappears. He may have died before the summer; but no
one knows certainly the time or the place of his end, and it
has not even been ascertained in what country this finder of a
continent first saw the light."
G. Bancroft, History of the U. S. of Am.
(Author's last Revision), part 1, chapter 1.
{52}
In the Critical Essay appended to a chapter on the voyages of the
Cabots, in the Narrative and Critical History of America,
there is published, for the first time, an English translation
of a dispatch from Raimondo de Soncino, envoy of the Duke of
Milan to Henry VII., written Aug. 24, 1497, and giving an
account of the voyage from which 'Master John Caboto,' 'a
Venetian fellow,' had just returned. This paper was brought to
light in 1865, from the State Archives of Milan. Referring to
the dispatch, and to a letter, also quoted, from the 'Venetian
Calendars,' written Aug. 23, 1497, by Lorenzo Pasqualigo, a
merchant in London, to his brothers in Venice, Mr. Charles
Deane says: "These letters are sufficient to show that North
America was discovered by John Cabot, the name of Sebastian
being nowhere mentioned in them, and that the discovery was
made in 1497. The place which he first sighted is given on the
map of 1544 [a map of Sebastian Cabot, discovered in Germany
in 1843] as the north part of Cape Breton Island, on which is
inscribed 'prima tierra vista,' which was reached, according
to the Legend, on the 24th of June. Pasqualigo, the only one
who mentions it, says he coasted 300 leagues. Mr. Brevoort,
who accepts the statement, thinks he made the periplus of the
Gulf of St. Lawrence, passing out at the Straits of Belle
Isle, and thence home. ... The extensive sailing up and down
the coast described by chroniclers from conversations with
Sebastian Cabot many years afterwards, though apparently told
as occurring on the voyage of discovery--as only one voyage is
ever mentioned--must have taken place on a later voyage."
C. Deane, Narrative and Critical History of America, volume
3, chapter 1, Crit. Essay.
ALSO IN
R. Biddle, Memoir of Sebastian Cabot, chapter 1-8.
AMERICA: A. D. 1497-1498.
The first Voyage of Americus Vespucius.
Misunderstandings and disputes concerning it.
Vindication of the Florentine navigator.
His exploration of 4,000 miles of continental coast.
"Our information concerning Americus Vespucius, from the early
part of the year 1496 until after his return from the
Portuguese to the Spanish service in the latter part of 1504,
rests primarily upon his two famous letters; the one addressed
to his old patron Lorenzo di Pier Francesco de' Medici (a
cousin of Lorenzo the Magnificent) and written in March or
April, 1503, giving an account of his third voyage; the other
addressed to his old school-fellow Piero Soderini [then
Gonfaloniere of Florence] and dated from Lisbon, September 4,
1504, giving a brief account of four voyages which he had made
under various commanders in the capacity of astronomer or
pilot. These letters ... became speedily popular, and many
editions were published, more especially in France, Germany,
and Italy. ... The letter to Soderini gives an account of four
voyages in which the writer took part, the first two in the
service of Spain, the other two in the service of Portugal.
The first expedition sailed from Cadiz May 10, 1497, and
returned October 15, 1498, after having explored a coast so
long as to seem unquestionably that of a continent. This
voyage, as we shall see, was concerned with parts of America
not visited again until 1513 and 1517. It discovered nothing
that was calculated to invest it with much importance in
Spain, though it by no means passed without notice there, as
has often been wrongly asserted. Outside of Spain it came to
attract more attention, but in an unfortunate way, for a
slight but very serious error in proof-reading or editing, in
the most important of the Latin versions, caused it after a
while to be practically identified with the second voyage,
made two years later. This confusion eventually led to most
outrageous imputations upon the good name of Americus, which
it has been left for the present century to remove. The second
voyage of Vespucius was that in which he accompanied Alonso de
Ojeda and Juan de la Costa, from May 20, 1499, to June, 1500.
They explored the northern coast of South America from some
point on what we would now call the north coast of Brazil, as
far as the Pearl Coast visited by Columbus in the preceding
year; and they went beyond, as far as the Gulf of Maracaibo.
Here the squadron seems to have become divided, Ojeda going
over to Hispaniola in September, while Vespucius remained
cruising till February. ... It is certainly much to be
regretted that in the narrative of his first expedition,
Vespucius did not happen to mention the name of the chief
commander. ... However ... he was writing not for us, but for
his friend, and he told Soderini only what he thought would
interest him. ... Of the letter to Soderini the version which
has played the most important part in history is the Latin one
first published at the press of the little college at
Saint-Dié in Lorraine, April 25 (vij Kl' Maij), 1507. ... It
was translated, not from an original text, but from an
intermediate French version, which is lost. Of late years,
however, we have detected, in an excessively rare Italian
text, the original from which the famous Lorraine version was
ultimately derived. ... If now we compare this primitive text
with the Latin of the Lorraine version of 1507, we observe
that, in the latter, one proper name--the Indian name of a
place visited by Americus on his first voyage--has been
altered. In the original it is 'Lariab;' in the Latin it has
become 'Parias.' This looks like an instance of injudicious
editing on the part of the Latin translator, although, of
course, it may be a case of careless proof-reading. Lariab is
a queer-looking word. It is no wonder that a scholar in his
study among the mountains of Lorraine could make nothing of
it. If he had happened to be acquainted with the language of
the Huastecas, who dwelt at that time about the river
Panuco--fierce and dreaded enemies of their southern
neighbours the Aztecs--he would have known that names of
places in that region were apt to end in ab. ... But as such
facts were quite beyond our worthy translator's ken, we cannot
much blame him if he felt that such a word as Lariab needed
doctoring. Parias (Paria) was known to be the native name of a
region on the western shores of the Atlantic, and so Lariab
became Parias. As the distance from the one place to the other
is more than two thousand miles, this little emendation
shifted the scene of the first voyage beyond all recognition,
and cast the whole subject into an outer darkness where there
has been much groaning and gnashing of teeth. Another curious
circumstance came in to confirm this error. On his first
voyage, shortly before arriving at Lariab, Vespucius saw an
Indian town built over the water, 'like Venice.' He counted 44
large wooden houses, 'like barracks,' supported on huge tree-
trunks and communicating with each other by bridges that could
be drawn up in case of danger.
{53}
This may well have been a village of communal houses of the
Chontals on the coast of Tabasco; but such villages were
afterwards seen on the Gulf of Maracaibo, and one of them was
called Venezuela, or 'Little Venice,' a name since spread over
a territory nearly twice as large as France. So the amphibious
town described by Vespucius was incontinently moved to
Maracaibo, as if there could be only one such place, as if
that style of defensive building had not been common enough in
many ages and in many parts of the earth, from ancient
Switzerland to modern Siam. ... Thus in spite of the latitudes
and longitudes distinctly stated by Vespucius in his letter,
did Lariab and the little wooden Venice get shifted from the
Gulf of Mexico to the northern coast of South America. Now
there is no question that Vespucius in his second voyage, with
Ojeda for captain, did sail along that coast, visiting the
gulfs of Paria and Maracaibo. This was in the summer of 1499,
one year after a part of the same coast had been visited by
Columbus. Hence in a later period, long after the actors in
these scenes had been gathered unto their fathers, and when
people had begun to wonder how the New World could ever have
come to be called America instead of Columbia, it was
suggested that the first voyage described by Vespucius must be
merely a clumsy and fictitious duplicate of the second, and
that he invented it and thrust it back from 1499 to 1497, in
order that he might be accredited with 'the discovery of the
continent' one year in advance of his friend Columbus. It was
assumed that he must have written his letter to Soderini with
the base intention of supplanting his friend, and that the
shabby device was successful. This explanation seemed so
simple and intelligible that it became quite generally
adopted, and it held its ground until the subject began to be
critically studied, and Alexander von Humboldt showed, about
sixty years ago, that the first naming of America occurred in
no such way as had been supposed. As soon as we refrain from
projecting our modern knowledge of geography into the past, as
soon as we pause to consider how these great events appeared
to the actors themselves, the absurdity of this accusation
against Americus becomes evident. We arc told that he falsely
pretended to have visited Paria and Maracaibo in 1497, in
order to claim priority over Columbus in the discovery of 'the
continent.' What continent? When Vespucius wrote that letter
to Soderini, neither he nor anybody else suspected that what
we now call America had been discovered. The only continent of
which there could be any question, so far as supplanting
Columbus was concerned, was Asia. But in 1504 Columbus was
generally supposed to have discovered the continent of Asia,
by his new route, in 1492. ... It was M. Varnhagen who first
turned inquiry on this subject in the right direction. ...
Having taken a correct start by simply following the words of
Vespucius himself, from a primitive text, without reference to
any preconceived theories or traditions, M. Varnhagen finds"
that Americus in his first voyage made land on the northern
coast of Honduras; "that he sailed around Yucatan, and found
his aquatic village of communal houses, his little wooden
Venice, on the shore of Tabasco. Thence, after a fight with
the natives in which a few tawny prisoners were captured and
carried on board the caravels, Vespucius seems to have taken a
straight course to the Huasteca country by Tampico, without
touching at points in the region subject or tributary to the
Aztec confederacy. This Tampico country was what Vespucius
understood to be called Lariab. He again gives the latitude
definitely and correctly as 23° N., and he mentions a few
interesting circumstances. He saw the natives roasting a
dreadfully ugly animal," of which he gives what seems to be
"an excellent description of the iguana, the flesh of which is
to this day an important article of food in tropical America.
... After leaving this country of Lariab the ships kept still
to the northwest for a short distance, and then followed the
windings of the coast for 870 leagues. ... After traversing
the 870 leagues of crooked coast, the ships found themselves
'in the finest harbour in the world' [which M. Varnhagen
supposed, at first, to have been in Chesapeake Bay, but
afterwards reached conclusions pointing to the neighbourhood
of Cape Cañaveral, on the Florida coast]. It was in June,
1498, thirteen months since they had started from Spain. ...
They spent seven-and-thirty days in this unrivalled harbour,
preparing for the home voyage, and found the natives very
hospitable. These red men courted the aid of the white
strangers," in an attack which they wished to make upon a
fierce race of cannibals, who inhabited certain islands some
distance out to sea. The Spaniards agreed to the expedition,
and sailed late in August, taking seven of the friendly
Indians for guides. "After a week's voyage they fell in with
the islands, some peopled, others uninhabited, evidently the
Bermudas, 600 miles from Cape Hatteras as the crow flies. The
Spaniards landed on an island called Iti, and had a brisk
fight," resulting in the capture of more than 200 prisoners.
Seven of these were given to the Indian guides, who paddled
home with them. "'We also [wrote Vespucius] set sail for
Spain, with 222 prisoners, slaves; and arrived in the port of
Cadiz on the 15th day of October, 1498, where we were well
received and sold our slaves.' ... The obscurity in which this
voyage has so long been enveloped is due chiefly to the fact
that it was not followed up till many years had elapsed, and
the reason for this neglect impresses upon us forcibly the
impossibility of understanding the history of the Discovery of
America unless we bear in mind all the attendant
circumstances. One might at first suppose that a voyage which
revealed some 4,000 miles of the coast of North America would
have attracted much attention in Spain and have become
altogether too famous to be soon forgotten. Such an argument,
however, loses sight of the fact that these early voyagers
were not trying to 'discover America.' There was nothing to
astonish them in the existence of 4,000 miles of coast line on
this side of the Atlantic. To their minds it was simply the
coast of Asia, about which they knew nothing except from Marco
Polo, and the natural effect of such a voyage as this would be
simply to throw discredit upon that traveller."
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 7 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
C. E. Lester and A. Foster, Life and Voyages of Americus
Vespucius, part 1, chapter 7.
J. Winsor, Christopher Columbus, chapter 15.
{54}
AMERICA: A. D. 1498.
Voyage and Discoveries of Sebastian Cabot.
The ground of English claims in the New World.
"The son of John Cabot, Sebastian, is not mentioned in this
patent [issued by Henry VII., February 3, 1498], as he had been in
that of 1496. Yet he alone profited by it. For the father is
not again mentioned in connection with the voyage. ...
Sebastian was now, if Humboldt's supposition is true that he
was born in 1477, a young man of about 20 or 21 years of age.
And as he had become proficient in astronomy and mathematics,
and had gained naval experience in the voyage he had made in
company with his father; and as he knew better than anyone
else his father's views, and also the position of the newly
discovered regions, he may now have well appeared to Henry as
a fit person for the command of another expedition to the
northwest. Two ships, manned with 300 mariners and volunteers,
were ready for him early in the spring of 1498; and he sailed
with them from Bristol, probably in the beginning of the month
of May. We have no certain information regarding his route.
But he appears to have directed his course again to the
country which he had seen the year before on the voyage with
his father, our present Labrador. He sailed along the coast of
this country so far north that, even in the month of July, he
encountered much ice. Observing at the same time, to his great
displeasure, that the coast was trending to the east, he resolved
to give up a further advance to the north, and returned in a
southern direction. At Newfoundland, he probably came to
anchor in some port, and refreshed his men, and refitted his
vessels after their Arctic hardships. ... He probably was the
first fisherman on the banks or shores of Newfoundland, which
through him became famous in Europe. Sailing from Newfoundland
southwest, he kept the coast in view as much as possible, on
his right side, 'always with the intent to find a passage and
open water to India.' ... After having rounded Cape Cod, he
must have felt fresh hope. He saw a coast running to the west,
and open water before him in that direction. It is therefore
nearly certain that he entered somewhat that broad gulf, in
the interior corner of which lies the harbor of New York. ...
From a statement contained in the work of Peter Martyr it
appears ... certain that Cabot landed on some places of the
coast along which he sailed. This author, relating a
conversation which he had with his friend Cabot, on the
subject of his voyage of 1498, says that Cabot told him 'he
had found on most of the places copper or brass among the
aborigines.' ... From another authority we learn that he
captured some of these aborigines and brought them to England,
where they lived and were seen a few years after his return by
the English chronicler, Robert Fabyan. It is not stated at
what place he captured those Indians; but it was not customary
with the navigators of that time to take on board the Indians
until near the time of their leaving the country. Cabot's
Indians, therefore, were probably captured on some shore south
of New York harbor. ... The southern terminus of his voyage is
pretty well ascertained. He himself informed his friend Peter
Martyr, that he went as far south as about the latitude of the
Strait of Gibraltar, that is to say, about 36° North latitude,
which is near that of Cape Hatteras. ... On their return from
their first voyage of 1497, the Cabots believed that they had
discovered portions of Asia and so proclaimed it. But the more
extensive discoveries of the second voyage corrected the views
of Sebastian, and revealed to him nothing but a wild and
barbarous coast, stretching through 30 degrees of latitude,
from 67½° to 36°. The discovery of this impassable barrier
across his passage to Cathay, as he often complained, was a
sore displeasure to him. Instead of the rich possessions of
China, which he hoped to reach, he was arrested by a New found
land, savage and uncultivated. A spirited German author, Dr.
G. M. Asher, in his life of Henry Hudson, published in London
in 1860, observes: 'The displeasure of Cabot involves the
scientific discovery of a new world. He was the first to
recognize that a new and unknown continent was lying, as one
vast barrier, between Western Europe and Eastern Asia.' ...
When Cabot made proposals in the following year, 1499, for
another expedition to the same regions, he was supported
neither by the king nor the merchants. For several years the
scheme for the discovery of a north-western route to Cathay
was not much favored in England. Nevertheless, the voyage of
this gifted and enterprising youth along the entire coast of
the present United States, nay along the whole extent of that
great continent, in which now the English race and language
prevail and flourish, has always been considered as the true
beginning, the foundation and cornerstone, of all the English
claims and possessions in the northern half of America."
J. G. Kohl, History of the Discovery of Maine, chapter 4.
ALSO IN:
R. Biddle, Memoir of Sebastian Cabot, chapter 1-10.
J. F. Nicholls, Life of Sebastian Cabot, chapter 5.
AMERICA: A. D. 1498-1505.
The Third and Fourth Voyages of Columbus.
Discovery of Trinidad, the northern coast of S. America, the
shores of Central America and Panama.
When Columbus reached Spain in June, 1496, "Ferdinand and
Isabella received him kindly, gave him new honors and promised
him other outfits. Enthusiasm, however, had died out and
delays took place. The reports of the returning ships did not
correspond with the pictures of Marco Polo, and the new-found
world was thought to be a very poor India after all. Most
people were of this mind; though Columbus was not
disheartened, and the public treasury was readily opened for a
third voyage. Coronel sailed early in 1498 with two ships, and
Columbus followed with six, embarking at San Lucas on the 30th
of May. He now discovered Trinidad (July 31), which he named
either from its three peaks, or from the Holy Trinity; struck
the northern coast of South America, and skirted what was
later known as the Pearl coast, going as far as the Island of
Margarita. He wondered at the roaring fresh waters which the
Oronoco pours into the Gulf of Pearls, as he called it, and he
half believed that its exuberant tide came from the
terrestrial paradise. He touched the southern coast of Hayti
on the 30th of August. Here already his colonists had
established a fortified post, and founded the town of Santo
Domingo. His brother Bartholomew had ruled energetically
during the Admiral's absence, but he had not prevented a
revolt, which was headed by Roldan. Columbus on his arrival
found the insurgents still defiant, but he was able after a
while to reconcile them, and he even succeeded in attaching
Roldan warmly to his interests.
{55}
Columbus' absence from Spain, however, left his good name
without sponsors; and to satisfy detractors, a new
commissioner was sent over with enlarged powers, even with
authority to supersede Columbus in general command, if
necessary. This emissary was Francisco de Bobadilla, who
arrived at Santo Domingo with two caravels on the 23d of
August, 1500, finding Diego in command, his brother, the
Admiral, being absent. An issue was at once made. Diego
refused to accede to the commissioner's orders till Columbus
returned to judge the case himself; so Bobadilla assumed
charge of the crown property violently, took possession of the
Admiral's house, and when Columbus returned, he with his
brother was arrested and put in irons. In this condition the
prisoners were placed on shipboard, and sailed for Spain. The
captain of the ship offered to remove the manacles: but
Columbus would not permit it, being determined to land in
Spain bound as he was; and so he did. The effect of his
degradation was to his advantage; sovereigns and people were
shocked at the sight; and Ferdinand and Isabella hastened to
make amends by receiving him with renewed favor. It was soon
apparent that everything reasonable would be granted him by
the monarchs, and that he could have all he might wish short
of receiving a new lease of power in the islands, which the
sovereigns were determined to see pacified at least before
Columbus should again assume government of them. The Admiral
had not forgotten his vow to wrest the Holy Sepulchre from the
Infidel; but the monarchs did not accede to his wish to
undertake it. Disappointed in this, he proposed a new voyage;
and getting the royal countenance for this scheme, he was
supplied with four vessels of from fifty to seventy tons each.
... He sailed from Cadiz, May 9, 1502, accompanied by his
brother Bartholomew and his son Fernando. The vessels reached
San Domingo June 29. Bobadilla, whose rule of a year and a
half had been an unhappy one, had given place to Nicholas de
Ovando; and the fleet which brought the new governor--with
Maldonado, Las Casas and others--now lay in the harbor waiting
to receive Bobadilla for the return voyage. Columbus had been
instructed to avoid Hispaniola; but now that one of his
vessels leaked, and he needed to make repairs, he sent a boat
ashore, asking permission to enter the harbor. He was refused,
though a storm was impending. He sheltered his vessels as best
he could, and rode out the gale. The fleet which had on board
Bobadilla and Roldan, with their ill-gotten gains, was
wrecked, and these enemies of Columbus were drowned. The
Admiral found a small harbor where he could make his repairs;
and then, July 14, sailed westward to find, as he supposed,
the richer portions of India. ... A landing was made on the
coast of Honduras, August 14. Three days later the explorers
landed again fifteen leagues farther east, and took possession
of the country for Spain. Still east they went; and, in
gratitude for safety after a long storm, they named a cape
which they rounded, Gracias à Dios--a name still preserved at
the point where the coast of Honduras begins to trend
southward. Columbus was now lying ill on his bed, placed on
deck, and was half the time in revery. Still the vessels
coasted south," along and beyond the shores of Costa Rica;
then turned with the bend of the coast to the northeast, until
they reached Porto Bello, as we call it, where they found
houses and orchards, and passed on "to the farthest spot of
Bastidas' exploring, who had, in 1501, sailed westward along
the northern coast of South America." There turning back,
Columbus attempted to found a colony at Veragua, on the Costa
Rica coast, where signs of gold were tempting. But the gold
proved scanty, the natives hostile, and, the Admiral,
withdrawing his colony, sailed away. "He abandoned one
worm-eaten caravel at Porto Bello, and, reaching Jamaica,
beached two others. A year of disappointment, grief, and want
followed. Columbus clung to his wrecked vessels. His crew
alternately mutinied at his side, and roved about the island.
Ovando, at Hispaniola, heard of his straits, but only tardily
and scantily relieved him. The discontented were finally
humbled; and some ships, despatched by the Admiral's agent in
Santo Domingo, at last reached him and brought him and his
companions to that place, where Ovando received him with
ostentatious kindness, lodging him in his house till Columbus
departed for Spain, Sept. 12, 1504." Arriving in Spain in
November, disheartened, broken with disease, neglected, it was
not until the following May that he had strength enough to go
to the court at Segovia, and then only to be coldly received
by King Ferdinand--Isabella being dead. "While still hope was
deferred, the infirmities of age and a life of hardships
brought Columbus to his end; and on Ascension Day, the 20th of
May, 1506, he died, with his son Diego and a few devoted
friends by his bedside."
J. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 2, chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 2 and 4.
W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus,
book 10-18 (volume 2).
AMERICA: A. D. 1499-1500.
The Voyages and Discoveries of Ojeda and Pinzon.
The Second Voyage of Amerigo Vespucci.
One of the most daring and resolute of the adventurers who
accompanied Columbus on his second voyage (in 1493) was Alonzo
de Ojeda. Ojeda quarrelled with the Admiral and returned to
Spain in 1498. Soon afterwards, "he was provided by the Bishop
Fonseca, Columbus' enemy, with a fragment of the map which the
Admiral had sent to Ferdinand and Isabella, showing the
discoveries which he had made in his last voyage. With this
assistance Ojeda set sail for South America, accompanied by
the pilot, Juan de la Cosá, who had accompanied Columbus in
his first great voyage in 1492, and of whom Columbus
complained that, 'being a clever man, he went about saying
that he knew more than he did,' and also by Amerigo Vespucci.
They set sail on the 20th of May, 1499, with four vessels, and
after a passage of 27 days came in sight of the continent, 200
leagues east of the Oronoco. At the end of June, they landed
on the shores of Surinam, in six degrees of north latitude,
and proceeding west saw the mouths of the Essequibo and
Oronoco. Passing the Boca del Drago of Trinidad, they coasted
westward till they reached the Capo de la Vela in Granada. It
was in this voyage that was discovered the Gulf to which Ojeda
gave the name of Venezuela, or Little Venice, on account of
the cabins built on piles over the water, a mode of life which
brought to his mind the water-city of the Adriatic.
{56}
From the American coast Ojeda went to the Caribbee Islands,
and on the 5th of September reached Yaguimo, in Hispaniola,
where he raised a revolt against the authority of Columbus.
His plans, however, were frustrated by Roldan and Escobar, the
delegates of Columbus, and he was compelled to withdraw from
the island. On the 5th of February, 1500, he returned,
carrying with him to Cadiz an extraordinary number of slaves,
from which he realized an enormous sum of money. At the
beginning of December, 1499, the same year in which Ojeda set
sail on his last voyage, another companion of Columbus, in his
first voyage, Vicente Yañez Pinzon, sailed from Palos, was the
first to cross the line on the American side of the Atlantic.
and on the 20th of January, 1500, discovered Cape St.
Augustine, to which he gave the name of Cabo Santa Maria de la
Consolacion, whence returning northward he followed the
westerly trending coast, and so discovered the mouth of the
Amazon, which he named Paricura. Within a month after his
departure from Palos, he was followed from the same port and
on the same route by Diego de Lepe, who was the first to
discover, at the mouth of the Oronoco, by means of a closed
vessel, which only opened when it reached the bottom of the
water, that, at a depth of eight fathoms and a half, the two
lowest fathoms were salt water, but all above was fresh. Lepe
also made the observation that beyond Cape St. Augustine,
which he doubled, as well as Pinzon, the coast of Brazil
trended south-west."
R. H. Major, Life of Prince Henry of Portugal, chapter 19.
ALSO IN:
W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus, volume 3, chapter 1-3.
AMERICA: A. D. 1500.
Voyages of the Cortereals to the far North, and of Bastidas to
the Isthmus of Darien.
"The Portuguese did not overlook the north while making their
important discoveries to the south. Two vessels, probably in
the spring of 1500, were sent out under Gaspar Cortereal. No
journal or chart of the voyage is now in existence, hence
little is known of its object or results. Still more dim is a
previous voyage ascribed by Cordeiro to João Vaz Cortereal,
father of Gaspar. ... Touching at the Azores, Gaspar
Cortereal, possibly following Cabot's charts, struck the coast
of Newfoundland north of Cape Race, and sailing north
discovered a land which he called Terra Verde, perhaps
Greenland, but was stopped by ice at a river which he named
Rio Nevado, whose location is unknown. Cortereal returned to
Lisbon before the end of 1500. ... In October of this same
year Rodrigo de Bastidas sailed from Cadiz with two vessels.
Touching the shores of South America near Isla Verde, which
lies between Guadalupe and the main land, he followed the
coast westward to El Retrete, or perhaps Nombre de Dios, on
the Isthmus of Darien, in about 9° 30' North latitude.
Returning he was wrecked on Española toward the end of 1501,
and reached Cadiz in September, 1502. This being the first
authentic voyage by Europeans to the territory herein defined
as the Pacific States, such incidents as are known will be
given hereafter."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 1,
page 113.
"We have Las Casas's authority for saying that Bastidas was a
humane man toward the Indians. Indeed, he afterwards lost his
life by this humanity; for, when governor of Santa Martha, not
consenting to harass the Indians, he so alienated his men that
a conspiracy was formed against him, and he was murdered in
his bed. The renowned Vasco Nuñez [de Balboa] was in this
expedition, and the knowledge he gained there had the greatest
influence on the fortunes of his varied and eventful life."
Sir A. Helps, Spanish Conquest in America,
book 5, chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
J. G. Kohl, History of the Discovery of Maine, chapter 5.
R. Biddle, Memoir of Sebastian Cabot, book 2, chapters 3-5.
See, also, NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.
AMERICA: A. D. 1500-1514.
Voyage of Cabral.
The Third Voyage of Americus Vespucius.
Exploration of the Brazilian coast for the King of Portugal.
Curious evolution of the continental name "America."
"Affairs now became curiously complicated. King Emanuel of
Portugal intrusted to Pedro Alvarez de Cabral the command of a
fleet for Hindustan, to follow up the work of Gama and
establish a Portuguese centre of trade on the Malabar coast.
This fleet of 13 vessels, carrying about 1,200 men, sailed
from Lisbon March 9, 1500. After passing the Cape Verde
Islands, March 22, for some reason not clearly known, whether
driven by stormy weather or seeking to avoid the calms that
were apt to be troublesome on the Guinea coast, Cabral took a
somewhat more westerly course than he realized, and on April
22, after a weary progress averaging less than 60 miles per
day, he found himself on the coast of Brazil not far beyond
the limit reached by Lepe. ... Approaching it in such a way
Cabral felt sure that this coast must fall to the east of the
papal meridian. Accordingly on May day, at Porto Seguro in
latitude 16° 30' South, he took formal possession of the country
for Portugal, and sent Gaspar de Lemos in one of his ships
back to Lisbon with the news. On May 22 Cabral weighed anchor
and stood for the Cape of Good Hope. ... Cabral called the
land he had found Vera Cruz, a name which presently became
Santa Cruz; but when Lemos arrived in Lisbon with the news he
had with him some gorgeous paroquets, and among the earliest
names on old maps of the Brazilian coast we find 'Land of
Paroquets' and 'Land of the Holy Cross.' The land lay
obviously so far to the east that Spain could not deny that at
last there was something for Portugal out in the 'ocean sea.'
Much interest was felt at Lisbon. King Emanuel began to
prepare an expedition for exploring this new coast, and wished
to secure the services of some eminent pilot and cosmographer
familiar with the western waters. Overtures were made to
Americus, a fact which proves that he had already won a high
reputation. The overtures were accepted, for what reason we do
not know, and soon after his return from the voyage with
Ojeda, probably in the autumn of 1500, Americus passed from
the service of Spain into that of Portugal. ... On May 14,
1501, Vespucius, who was evidently principal pilot and guiding
spirit in this voyage under unknown skies, set sail from
Lisbon with three caravels. It is not quite clear who was
chief captain, but M. Varnhagen has found reasons for
believing that it was a certain Don Nuno Manuel. The first
halt was made on the African coast at Cape Verde, the first
week in June. ... After 67 days of 'the vilest weather ever
seen by man' they reached the coast of Brazil in latitude
about 5° South, on the evening of the 16th of August, the
festival-day of San Roque, whose name was accordingly given to
the cape before which they dropped anchor.
{57}
From this point they slowly followed the coast to the
southward, stopping now and then to examine the country. ...
It was not until All Saints day, the first of November, that
they reached the bay in latitude 13° South, which is still known
by the name which they gave it, Bahia de Todos Santos. On New
Year's day, 1502, they arrived at the noble bay where 54 years
later the chief city of Brazil was founded. They would seem to
have mistaken it for the mouth of another huge river, like
some that had already been seen in this strange world; for
they called it Rio de Janeiro (River of January). Thence by
February 15 they had passed Cape Santa Maria, when they left
the coast and took a southeasterly course out into the ocean.
Americus gives no satisfactory reason for this change of
direction. ... Perhaps he may have looked into the mouth of
the river La Plata, which is a bay more than a hundred miles
wide; and the sudden westward trend of the shore may have led
him to suppose that he had reached the end of the continent.
At any rate, he was now in longitude more than twenty degrees
west of the meridian of Cape San Roque, and therefore
unquestionably out of Portuguese waters. Clearly there was no
use in going on and discovering lands which could belong only
to Spain. This may account, I think, for the change of
direction." The voyage southeastwardly was pursued until the
little fleet had reached the icy and rocky coast of the island
of South Georgia, in latitude 54° South. It was then decided to
turn homeward. "Vespucius ... headed straight North North East
through the huge ocean, for Sierra Leone, and the distance of
more than 4,000 miles was made--with wonderful accuracy,
though Vespucius says nothing about that--in 33 days. ...
Thence, after some further delay, to Lisbon, where they
arrived on the 7th of September, 1502. ... Among all the
voyages made during that eventful period there was none that
as a feat of navigation surpassed this third of Vespucius, and
there was none, except the first of Columbus, that outranked
it in historical importance. For it was not only a voyage into
the remotest stretches of the Sea of Darkness, but it was
preeminently an incursion into the antipodal world of the
Southern hemisphere. ... A coast of continental extent,
beginning so near the meridian of the Cape Verde islands and
running southwesterly to latitude 35° South and perhaps beyond,
did not fit into anybody's scheme of things. ... It was land
unknown to the ancients, and Vespucius was right in saying
that he had beheld there things by the thousand which Pliny
had never mentioned. It was not strange that he should call it
a 'New World,' and in meeting with this phrase, on this first
occasion in which it appears in any document with reference to
any part of what we now call America, the reader must be
careful not to clothe it with the meaning which it wears in
our modern eyes. In using the expression 'New World' Vespucius
was not thinking of the Florida coast which he had visited on
a former voyage, nor of the 'islands of India' discovered by
Columbus, nor even of the Pearl Coast which he had followed
after the Admiral in exploring. The expression occurs in his
letter to Lorenzo de' Medici, written from Lisbon in March or
April, 1503, relating solely to this third voyage. The letter
begins as follows: 'I have formerly written to you at
sufficient length about my return from those new countries
which in the ships and at the expense and command of the most
gracious King of Portugal we have sought and found. It is
proper to call them a new world.' Observe that it is only the
new countries visited on this third voyage, the countries from
Cape San Roque southward, that Vespucius thinks it proper to
call a new world, and here is his reason for so calling them:
'Since among our ancestors there was no knowledge of them, and
to all who hear of the affair it is most novel. For it
transcends the ideas of the ancients, since most of them say
that beyond the equator to the south there is no continent,
but only the sea which they called the Atlantic, and if any of
them asserted the existence of a continent there, they found
many reasons for refusing to consider it a habitable country.
But this last voyage of mine has proved that this opinion of
theirs was erroneous and in every way contrary to the facts."
... This expression 'Novus Mundus,' thus occurring in a
private letter, had a remarkable career. Early in June, 1503,
about the time when Americus was starting on his fourth
voyage, Lorenzo died. By the beginning of 1504, a Latin
version of the letter [translated by Giovanni Giocondo] was
printed and published, with the title 'Mundus Novus.' ... The
little four-leaved tract, 'Mundus Novus,' turned out to be the
great literary success of the day. M. Harisse has described at
least eleven Latin editions probably published in the course
of 1504, and by 1506 not less than eight editions of German
versions had been issued. Intense curiosity was aroused by
this announcement of the existence of a populous land beyond
the equator and unknown (could such a thing be possible) to
the ancients,--who did know something, at least, about the
eastern parts of the Asiatic continent which Columbus was
supposed to have reached. The "Novus Mundus," so named, began
soon to be represented on maps and globes, generally as a
great island or quasi-continent lying on and below the
equator. "Europe, Asia and Africa were the three parts of the
earth [previously known], and so this opposite region,
hitherto unknown, but mentioned by Mela and indicated by
Ptolemy, was the Fourth Part. We can now begin to understand
the intense and wildly absorbing interest with which people
read the brief story of the third voyage of Vespucius, and we
can see that in the nature of that interest there was nothing
calculated to bring it into comparison with the work of
Columbus. The two navigators were not regarded as rivals in
doing the same thing, but as men who had done two very
different things; and to give credit to one was by no means
equivalent to withholding credit from the other." In 1507,
Martin Waldseemüller, professor of geography at Saint-Dié,
published a small treatise entitled "Cosmographic
Introductio," with that second of the two known letters of
Vespucius--the one addressed to Soderini, of which an account
is given above (A. D. 1497-1498)--appended to it. "In this
rare book occurs the first suggestion of the name America.
{58}
After having treated of the division of the earth's inhabited
surface into three parts--Europe, Asia, and
Africa--Waldseemüller speaks of the discovery of a Fourth
Part," and says: "'Wherefore I do not see what is rightly to
hinder us from calling it Amerige or America, i. e., the land
of Americus, after its discoverer Americus, a man of sagacious
mind, since both Europe and Asia have got their names from
women.' ... Such were the winged words but for which, as M.
Harisse reminds us, the western hemisphere might have come to
be known as Atlantis, or Hesperides, or Santa Cruz, or New
India, or perhaps Columbia. ... In about a quarter of a
century the first stage in the development of the naming of
America had been completed. That stage consisted of five
distinct steps: 1. Americus called the regions visited by him
beyond the equator 'a new world' because they were unknown to
the ancients; 2. Giocondo made this striking phrase 'Mundus
Novus' into a title for his translation of the letter. ... 3.
the name Mundus Novus got placed upon several maps as an
equivalent for Terra Sanctæ Crucis, or what we call Brazil; 4.
the suggestion was made that Mundus Novus was the Fourth Part
of the earth, and might properly be named America after its
discoverer; 5. the name America thus got placed upon several
maps [the first, so far as known, being a map ascribed to
Leonardo da Vinci and published about 1514, and the second a
globe made in 1515 by Johann Schöner, at Nuremberg] as an
equivalent for what we call Brazil, and sometimes came to
stand alone as an equivalent for what we call South America,
but still signified only a part of the dry land beyond the
Atlantic to which Columbus had led the way. ... This wider
meaning [of South America] became all the more firmly
established as its narrower meaning was usurped by the name
Brazil. Three centuries before the time of Columbus the red
dye-wood called brazil-wood was an article of commerce, under
that same name, in Italy and Spain. It was one of the valuable
things brought from the East, and when the Portuguese found
the same dye-wood abundant in those tropical forests that had
seemed so beautiful to Vespucius, the name Brazil soon became
fastened upon the country and helped to set free the name
America from its local associations." When, in time, and by
slow degrees, the great fact was learned, that all the lands
found beyond the Atlantic by Columbus and his successors,
formed part of one continental system, and were all to be
embraced in the conception of a New World, the name which had
become synonymous with New World was then naturally extended
to the whole. The evolutionary process of the naming of the
western hemisphere as a whole was thus made complete in 1541,
by Mercator, who spread the name America in large letters upon
a globe which he constructed that year, so that part of it
appeared upon the northern and part upon the southern
continent.
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 7 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
W. B. Scaife, America: Its Geographical History,
section 4.
R. H. Major, Life of Prince Henry of Portugal,
chapter 19.
J. Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 2, ch, 2, notes.
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 1, pages
99-112, and 123-125.
AMERICA: A. D. 1501-1504.
Portuguese, Norman and Breton fishermen on the Newfoundland
Banks.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.
AMERICA: A. D. 1502..
The Second Voyage of Ojeda.
The first voyage of Alonzo de Ojeda, from which he returned to
Spain in June 1500, was profitable to nothing but his
reputation as a bold and enterprising explorer. By way of
reward, he was given "a grant of land in Hispaniola, and
likewise the government of Coquibacoa, which place he had
discovered [and which he had called Venezuela]. He was
authorized to fit out a number of ships at his own expense and
to prosecute discoveries on the coast of Terra Firma. ... With
four vessels, Ojeda set sail for the Canaries, in 1502, and
thence proceeded to the Gulf of Paria, from which locality he
found his way to Coquibacoa. Not liking this poor country, he
sailed on to the Bay of Honda, where he determined to found
his settlement, which was, however, destined to be of short
duration. Provisions very soon became scarce; and one of his
partners, who had been sent to procure supplies from Jamaica,
failed to return until Ojeda's followers were almost in a
state of mutiny. The result was that the whole colony set sail
for Hispaniola, taking the governor with them in chains. All
that Ojeda gained by his expedition was that he at length came
off winner in a lawsuit, the costs of which, however, left him
a ruined man."
R G. Watson, Spanish and Portuguese South America,
book 1, chapter 1.
AMERICA: A. D. 1503-1504.
The Fourth Voyage of Americus Vespucius.
First Settlement in Brazil.
In June, 1503, "Amerigo sailed again from Lisbon, with six
ships. The object of this voyage was to discover a certain
island called Melcha, which was supposed to lie west of
Calicut, and to be as famous a mart in the commerce of the
Indian world as Cadiz was in Europe. They made the Cape de
Verds, and then, contrary to the judgment of Vespucci and of
all the fleet, the Commander persisted in standing for Serra
Leoa." The Commander's ship was lost, and Vespucci, with one
vessel, only, reached the coast of the New World, finding a
port which is thought to have been Bahia. Here "they waited
above two months in vain expectation of being joined by the
rest of the squadron. Having lost all hope of this they
coasted on for 260 leagues to the Southward, and there took
port again in 18° S. 35° West of the meridian of Lisbon. Here
they remained five months, upon good terms with the natives,
with whom some of the party penetrated forty leagues into the
interior; and here they erected a fort, in which they left 24
men who had been saved from the Commander's ship. They gave
them 12 guns, besides other arms, and provisions for six
months; then loaded with brazil [wood], sailed homeward and
returned in safety. ... The honour, therefore, of having
formed the first settlement in this country is due to Amerigo
Vespucci. It does not appear that any further attention was as
this time paid to it. ... But the cargo of brazil which
Vespucci had brought home tempted private adventurers, who
were content with peaceful gains, to trade thither for that
valuable wood; and this trade became so well known, that in
consequence the coast and the whole country obtained the name
of Brazil, notwithstanding the holier appellation [Santa Cruz]
which Cabral had given it."
R. Southey, History of Brazil, volume 1, chapter 1.
{59}
AMERICA: A. D. 1509-1511.
The Expeditions of Ojeda and Nicuesa to the Isthmus.
The Settlement at Darien.
"For several years after his ruinous, though successful
lawsuit, we lose all traces of Alonzo de Ojeda, excepting that
we are told he made another voyage to Coquibacoa [Venezuela],
in 1505. No record remains of this expedition, which seems to
have been equally unprofitable with the preceding, for we find
him, in 1508, in the island of Hispaniola as poor in purse,
though as proud in spirit, as ever. ... About this time the
cupidity of King Ferdinand was greatly excited by the accounts
by Columbus of the gold mines of Veragua, in which the admiral
fancied he had discovered the Aurea Chersonesus of the
ancients, whence King Solomon procured the gold used in
building the temple of Jerusalem. Subsequent voyagers had
corroborated the opinion of Columbus as to the general riches
of the coast of Terra Firma; King Ferdinand resolved,
therefore, to found regular colonies along that coast, and to
place the whole under some capable commander." Ojeda was
recommended for this post, but found a competitor in one of
the gentlemen of the Spanish court, Diego de Nicuesa. "King
Ferdinand avoided the dilemma by favoring both; not indeed by
furnishing them with ships and money, but by granting patents
and dignities, which cost nothing, and might bring rich
returns. He divided that part of the continent which lies
along the Isthmus of Darien into two provinces, the boundary
line running through the Gulf of Uraba. The eastern part,
extending to Cape de la Vela, was called New Andalusia, and
the government of it given to Ojeda. The other to the west
[called Castilla del Oro], including Veragua, and reaching, to
Cape Gracias à Dios, was assigned to Nicuesa. The island of
Jamaica was given to the two governors in common, as a place
whence to draw supplies of provisions." Slender means for the
equipment of Ojeda's expedition were supplied by the veteran
pilot, Juan de la Cosa, who accompanied him as his lieutenant.
Nicuesa was more amply provided. The rival armaments arrived
at San Domingo about the same time (in 1509), and much
quarreling between the two commanders ensued. Ojeda found a
notary in San Domingo, Martin Fernandez de Enciso, who had
money which he consented to invest in the enterprise, and who
promised to follow him with an additional ship-load of
recruits and supplies. Under this arrangement Ojeda made ready
to sail in advance of his competitor, embarking November 10, 1509.
Among those who sailed with him was Francisco Pizarro, the
future conqueror of Peru. Ojeda, by his energy, gained time
enough to nearly ruin his expedition before Nicuesa reached
the scene; for, having landed at Carthagena, he made war upon
the natives, pursued them recklessly into the interior of the
country, with 70 men, and was overwhelmed by the desperate
savages, escaping with only one companion from their poisoned
arrows. His faithful friend, the pilot, Juan de la Cosa, was
among the slain, and Ojeda himself, hiding in the forest, was
nearly dead of hunger and exposure when found and rescued by a
searching party from his ships. At this juncture the fleet of
Nicuesa made its appearance. Jealousies were forgotten in a
common rage against the natives and the two expeditions were
joined in an attack on the Indian villages which spared
nothing. Nicuesa then proceeded to Veragua, while Ojeda
founded a town, which he called San Sebastian, at the east end
of the Gulf of Uraba. Incessantly harassed by the natives,
terrified by the effects of the poison which these used in
their warfare, and threatened with starvation by the rapid
exhaustion of its supplies, the settlement lost courage and
hope. Enciso and his promised ship were waited for in vain. At
length there came a vessel which certain piratical adventurers
at Hispaniola had stolen, and which brought some welcome
provisions, eagerly bought at an exorbitant price. Ojeda, half
recovered from a poisoned wound, which he had treated
heroically with red-hot plates of iron, engaged the pirates to
convey him to Hispaniola, for the procuring of supplies. The
voyage was a disastrous one, resulting in shipwreck on the
coast of Cuba and a month of desperate wandering in the
morasses of the island. Ojeda survived all these perils and
sufferings, made his way to Jamaica, and from Jamaica to San
Domingo, found that his partner Enciso had sailed for the
colony long before, with abundant supplies, but could learn
nothing more. Nor could he obtain for himself any means of
returning to San Sebastian, or of dispatching relief to the
place. Sick, penniless and disheartened, he went into a
convent and died. Meantime the despairing colonists at San
Sebastian waited until death had made them few enough to be
all taken on board of the two little brigantines which were
left to them; then they sailed away, Pizarro in command. One
of the brigantines soon went down in a squall; the other made
its way to the harbor of Carthagena, where it found the tardy
Enciso, searching for his colony. Enciso, under his
commission, now took command, and insisted upon going to San
Sebastian. There the old experiences were soon renewed, and
even Enciso was ready to abandon the deadly place. The latter
had brought with him a needy cavalier, Vasco Nuñez de
Balboa--so needy that he smuggled himself on board Enciso's
ship in a cask to escape his creditors. Vasco Nuñez, who had
coasted this region with Bastidas, in 1500, now advised a
removal of the colony to Darien, on the opposite coast of the
Gulf of Uraba. His advice, which was followed, proved good,
and the hopes of the settlers were raised; but Enciso's modes
of government proved irksome to them. Then Balboa called
attention to the fact that, when they crossed the Gulf of
Uraba, they passed out of the territory covered by the patent
to Ojeda, under which Enciso was commissioned, and into that
granted to Nicuesa. On this suggestion Enciso was promptly
deposed and two alcaldes were elected, Balboa being one. While
events in one corner of Nicuesa's domain were thus
establishing a colony for that ambitious governor, he himself,
at the other extremity of it, was faring badly. He had
suffered hardships, separation from most of his command and
long abandonment on a dc solate coast; had rejoined his
followers after great suffering, only to suffer yet more in
their company, until less than one hundred remained of the 700
who sailed with him a few months before. The settlement at
Veragua had been deserted, and another, named Nombre de Dios
undertaken, with no improvement of circumstances. In this
situation he was rejoiced, at last, by the arrival of one of
his lieutenants, Rodrigo de Colmenares, who came with
supplies. Colmenares brought tidings, moreover, of the
prosperous colony at Darien, which he had discovered on his
way, with an invitation to Nicuesa to come and assume the
government of it. He accepted the invitation with delight;
but, alas! the community at Darien had repented of it before
he reached them, and they refused to receive him when he
arrived. Permitted finally to land, he was seized by a
treacherous party among the colonists--to whom Balboa is said
to have opposed all the resistance in his power--was put on
board of an old and crazy brigantine, with seventeen of his
friends, and compelled to take an oath that he would sail
straight to Spain. "The frail bark set sail on the first of
March, 1511, and steered across the Caribbean Sea for the
island of Hispaniola, but was never seen or heard of more."
W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus and his
Companions, volume 3.
ALSO IN
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 6.
{60}
AMERICA: A. D. 1511.
The Spanish conquest and occupation of Cuba.
See CUBA: A. D. 1511.
AMERICA: A. D. 1512.
The Voyage of Ponce de Leon in quest of the Fountain of Youth,
and his Discovery of Florida.
"Whatever may have been the Southernmost point reached by
Cabot in coasting America on his return, it is certain that he
did not land in Florida, and that the honour of first
exploring that country is due to Juan Ponce de Leon. This
cavalier, who was governor of Puerto Rico, induced by the
vague traditions circulated by the natives of the West Indies,
that there was a country in the north possessing a fountain
whose waters restored the aged to youth, made it an object of
his ambition to be the first to discover this marvellous
region. With this view, he resigned the governorship, and set
sail with three caravels on the 3d of March 1512. Steering N.
¼ N., he came upon a country covered with flowers and verdure;
and as the day of his discovery happened to be Palm Sunday,
called by the Spaniards' Pasqua Florida,' he gave it the name
of Florida from this circumstance. He landed on the 2d of
April, and took possession of the country in the name of the
king of Castile. The warlike people of the coast of Cautio (a
name given by the Indians to all the country lying between
Cape Cañaveral and the southern point of Florida) soon,
however, compelled him to retreat, and he pursued his
exploration of the coast as far as 30° 8' North latitude, and
on the 8th of May doubled Cape Cañaveral. Then retracing his
course to Puerto Rico, in the hope of finding the island of
Bimini, which he believed to be the Land of Youth, and
described by the Indians as opposite to Florida, he discovered
the Bahamas, and some other islands, previously unknown. Bad
weather compelling him to put into the isle of Guanima to
repair damages, he despatched one of his caravels, under the
orders of Jaun Perez de Ortubia and of the pilot Anton de
Alaminos, to gain information respecting the desired land,
which he had as yet been totally unable to discover. He
returned to Puerto Rico on the 21st of September; a few days
afterwards, Ortubia arrived also with news of Bimini. He
reported that he had explored the island,--which he described
as large, well wooded, and watered by numerous streams,--but
he had failed in discovering the fountain. Oviedo places
Bimini at 40 leagues west of the island of Bahama. Thus all
the advantages which Ponce de Leon promised himself from this
voyage turned to the profit of geography: the title of
'Adelantado of Bimini and Florida,' which was conferred upon
him, was purely honorary; but the route taken by him in order
to return to Puerto Rico, showed the advantage of making the
homeward voyage to Spain by the Bahama Channel."
W. B. Rye, Introduction to "Discovery and Conquest of
Terra Florida, by a gentleman of Elvas" (Hakluyt Society,
1851).
ALSO IN G. R. Fairbanks, History of Florida, chapter 1
AMERICA: A. D. 1513-1517.
The discovery of the Pacific by Vasco Nuñez de Balboa.
Pedrarias Davila on the Isthmus.
With Enciso deposed from authority and Nicuesa sent adrift,
Vasco Nuñez de Balboa seems to have easily held the lead in
affairs at Darien, though not without much opposition; for
faction and turbulence were rife. Enciso was permitted to
carry his grievances and complaints to Spain, but Balboa's
colleague, Zamudio, went with him, and another comrade
proceeded to Hispaniola, both of them well-furnished with
gold. For the quest of gold had succeeded at last. The Darien
adventurers had found considerable quantities in the
possession of the surrounding natives, and were gathering it
with greedy hands. Balboa had the prudence to establish
friendly relations with one of the most important of the
neighboring caciques, whose comely daughter he
wedded--according to the easy customs of the country--and
whose ally he became in wars with the other caciques. By gift
and tribute, therefore as well as by plunder, he harvested
more gold than any before him had found since the ransacking
of the New World began. But what they obtained seemed little
compared with the treasures reported to them as existing
beyond the near mountains and toward the south. One Indian
youth, son of a friendly cacique, particularly excited their
imaginations by the tale which he told of another great sea,
not far to the west, on the southward-stretching shores of
which were countries that teemed with every kind of wealth. He
told them, however, that they would need a thousand men to
fight their way to this Sea. Balboa gave such credence to the
story that he sent envoys to Spain to solicit forces from the
king for an adequate expedition across the mountains. They
sailed in October, 1512, but did not arrive in Spain until the
following May. They found Balboa in much disfavor at the
court. Enciso and the friends of the unfortunate Nicuesa had
unitedly ruined him by their complaints, and the king had
caused criminal proceedings against him to be commenced.
Meantime, some inkling of these hostilities had reached
Balboa, himself, conveyed by a vessel which bore to him, at
the same time, a commission as captain-general from the
authorities in Hispaniola. He now resolved to become the
discoverer of the ocean which his Indian friends described,
and of the rich lands bordering it, before his enemies could
interfere with him. "Accordingly, early in September, 1513, he
set out on his renowned expedition for finding 'the other
sea,' accompanied by 190 men well armed, and by dogs, which
were of more avail than men, and by Indian slaves to carry the
burdens. He went by sea to the territory of his father-in-law,
King Careta, by whom he was well received, and accompanied by
whose Indians he moved on into Poncha's territory." Quieting
the fears of this cacique, he passed his country without
fighting. The next chief encountered, named Quarequa,
attempted resistance, but was routed, with a great slaughter
of his people, and Balboa pushed on. "On the 25th of
September, 1513, he came near to the top of a mountain from
whence the South Sea was visible.
{61}
The distance from Poncha's chief town to this point was forty
leagues, reckoned then six days' journey; but Vasco Nuñez and
his men took twenty-five days to accomplish it, as they
suffered much from the roughness of the ways and from the want
of provisions. A little before Vasco Nuñez reached the height,
Quarequa's Indians informed him of his near approach to the
sea. It was a sight in beholding which, for the first time,
any man would wish to be alone. Vasco Nuñez bade his men sit
down while he ascended, and then, in solitude, looked down
upon the vast Pacific--the first man of the Old World, so far
as we know, who had done so. Falling on his knees, he gave
thanks to God for the favour shown to him in his being
permitted to discover the Sea of the South. Then with his hand
be beckoned to his men to come up. When they had come, both he
and they knelt down and poured forth their thanks to God. He
then addressed them. ... Having ... addressed his men, Vasco
Nuñez proceeded to take formal possession, on behalf of the
kings of Castile, of the sea and of all that was in it; and in
order to make memorials of the event, he cut down trees,
formed crosses, and heaped up stones. He also inscribed the
names of the monarchs of Castile upon great trees in the
vicinity." Afterwards, when he had descended the western slope
and found the shore, "he entered the sea up to his thighs,
having his sword on, and with his shield in his hand; then he
called the by-standers to witness how he touched with his
person and took possession of this sea for the kings of
Castile, and declared that he would defend the possession of
it against all comers. After this, Vasco Nuñez made friends in
the usual manner, first conquering and then negotiating with"
the several chiefs or caciques whose territories came in his
way. He explored the Gulf of San Miguel, finding much wealth
of pearls in the region, and returned to Darien by a route
which crossed the isthmus considerably farther to the north,
reaching his colony on the 29th of January, 1514, having been
absent nearly five months. "His men at Darien received him
with exultation, and he lost no time in sending his news,
'such signal and new news,' ... to the King of Spain,
accompanying it with rich presents. His letter, which gave a
detailed account of his journey, and which, for its length,
was compared by Peter Martyr to the celebrated letter that
came to the senate from Tiberius, contained in every page
thanks to God that he had escaped from such great dangers and
labours. Both the letter and the presents were intrusted to a
man named Arbolanche, who departed from Darien about the
beginning of March, 1514. ... Vasco Nuñez's messenger,
Arbolanche, reached the court of Spain too late for his
master's interests." The latter had already been superseded in
the Governorship, and his successor was on the way to take his
authority from him. The new governor was one Pedrarias De
Avila, or Davila, as the name is sometimes written;--an
envious and malignant old man, under whose rule on the isthmus
the destructive energy of Spanish conquest rose to its meanest
and most heartless and brainless development. Conspicuously
exposed as he was to the jealousy and hatred of Pedrarias,
Vasco Nuñez was probably doomed to ruin, in some form, from
the first. At one time, in 1516, there seemed to be a promise
for him of alliance with his all-powerful enemy, by a marriage
with one of the governor's daughters, and he received the
command of an expedition which again crossed the isthmus,
carrying ships, and began the exploration of the Pacific. But
circumstances soon arose which gave Pedrarias all opportunity
to accuse the explorer of treasonable designs and to
accomplish his arrest--Francisco Pizarro being the officer
fitly charged with the execution of the governor's warrant.
Brought in chains to Acla, Vasco Nuñez was summarily tried,
found guilty and led forth to swift death, laying his head
upon the block (A. D. 1517). "Thus perished Vasco Nuñez de
Balboa, in the forty-second year of his age, the man who,
since the time of Columbus, had shown the most statesmanlike
and warriorlike powers in that part of the world, but whose
career only too much resembles that of Ojeda, Nicuesa, and the
other unfortunate commanders who devastated those beautiful
regions of the earth."
Sir A. Helps, Spanish Conquest in America,
book 6 (volume 1).
"If I have applied strong terms of denunciation to Pedrarias
Dávila, it is because he unquestionably deserves it. He is by
far the worst man who came officially to the New World during
its early government. In this all authorities agree. And all
agree that Vasco Nuñez was not deserving of death."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 8-12 (foot-note, page 458).
ALSO IN
W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus and His
Companions, volume 3.
AMERICA: A. D. 1515.
Discovery of La Plata by Juan de Solis.
See PARAGUAY: A. D. 1515-1557.
AMERICA: A. D. 1517-1518.
The Spaniards find Mexico.
"An hidalgo of Cuba, named Hernandez de Cordova, sailed with
three vessels on an expedition to one of the neighbouring
Bahama Islands, in quest of Indian slaves (February 8, 1517). He
encountered a succession of heavy gales which drove him far
out of his course, and at the end of three weeks he found
himself on a strange and unknown coast. On landing and asking
the name of the country, he was answered by the natives
'Tectelan,' meaning 'I do not understand you,' but which the
Spaniards, misinterpreting into the name of the place, easily
corrupted into Yucatan. Some writers give a different
etymology. ... Bernal Diaz says the word came from the
vegetable 'yuca' and 'tale,' the name for a hillock in which
it is planted. ... M. Waldeck finds a much more plausible
derivation in the Indian word 'Ouyouckatan,' 'listen to what
they say.' ... Cordova had landed on the north-eastern end of
the peninsula, at Cape Catoche. He was astonished at the size
and solid materials of the buildings constructed of stone and
lime, so different from the frail tenements of reeds and
rushes which formed the habitations of the islanders. He was
struck, also, with the higher cultivation of the soil, and
with the delicate texture of the cotton garments and gold
ornaments of the natives. Everything indicated a civilization
far superior to anything he had before witnessed in the New
World. He saw the evidence of a different race, moreover, in
the warlike spirit of the people. ... Wherever they landed
they were met with the most deadly hostility.
{62}
Cordova himself, in one of his skirmishes with the Indians,
received more than a dozen wounds, and one only of his party
escaped unhurt. At length, when he had coasted the peninsula
as far as Campeachy, he returned to Cuba, which he reached
after an absence of several months. ... The reports he had
brought back of the country, and, still more, the specimens of
curiously wrought gold, convinced Velasquez [governor of Cuba]
of the importance of this discovery, and he prepared with all
despatch to avail himself of it. He accordingly fitted out a
little squadron of four vessels for the newly discovered
lands, and placed it under the command of his nephew, Juan de
Grijalva, a man on whose probity, prudence, and attachment to
himself he knew he could rely. The fleet left the port of St.
Jago de Cuba, May 1, 1518. ... Grijalva soon passed over to
the continent and coasted the peninsula, touching at the same
places as his predecessor. Everywhere he was struck, like him,
with the evidences of a higher civilization, especially in the
architecture; as he well might be, since this was the region
of those extraordinary remains which have become recently the
subject of so much speculation. He was astonished, also, at
the sight of large stone crosses, evidently objects of
worship, which he met with in various places. Reminded by
these circumstances of his own country, he gave the peninsula
the name New Spain, a name since appropriated to a much wider
extent of territory. Wherever Grijalva landed, he experienced
the same unfriendly reception as Cordova, though he suffered
less, being better prepared to meet it." He succeeded,
however, at last, in opening a friendly conference and traffic
with one of the chiefs, on the Rio de Tabasco, and "had the
satisfaction of receiving, for a few worthless toys and
trinkets, a rich treasure of jewels, gold ornaments and
vessels, of the most fantastic forms and workmanship. Grijalva
now thought that in this successful traffic--successful beyond
his most sanguine expectations--he had accomplished the chief
object of his mission." He therefore dispatched Alvarado, one
of his captains, to Velasquez, with the treasure acquired, and
continued his voyage along the coast, as far as the province
of Panuco, returning to Cuba at the end of about six months
from his departure. "On reaching the Island, he was surprised
to learn that another and more formidable armament had been
fitted out to follow up his own discoveries, and to find
orders at the same time from the governor, couched in no very
courteous language, to repair at once to St. Jago. He was
received by that personage, not merely with coldness, but with
reproaches, for having neglected so fair an opportunity of
establishing a colony in the country he had visited."
W. H. Prescott, Conquest of Mexico, book 2, chapter 1.
ALSO IN: C.
St. J. Fancourt, History of Yucatan, chapter 1-2.
Bernal Diaz del Castillo, Memoirs, V. 1, chapter 2-19.
AMERICA: A. D. 1519-1524.
The Spanish Conquest of Mexico.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1519-1524.
AMERICA: A. D. 1519-1524.
The Voyage of Magellan and Sebastian del Cano.
The New World passed and the Earth circumnavigated.
The Congress at Badajos.
Fernando Magellan, or Magalhaes, was "a disaffected Portuguese
gentleman who had served his country for five years in the Indies
under Albuquerque, and understood well the secrets of the
Eastern trade. In 1517, conjointly with his geographical and
astronomical friend, Ruy Falerio, another unrequited
Portuguese, he offered his services to the Spanish court. At
the same time these two friends proposed, not only to prove
that the Moluccas were within the Spanish lines of
demarkation, but to discover a passage thither different from
that used by the Portuguese. Their schemes were listened to,
adopted and carried out. The Straits of Magellan were
discovered, the broad South Sea was crossed, the Ladrones and
the Phillipines were inspected, the Moluccas were passed
through, the Cape of Good Hope was doubled on the homeward
voyage, and the globe was circumnavigated, all in less than
three years, from 1519 to 1522. Magellan lost his life, and
only one of his five ships returned [under Sebastian del Cano]
to tell the marvelous story. The magnitude of the enterprise
was equalled only by the magnitude of the results. The globe
for the first time began to assume its true character and size
in the minds of men, and the minds of men began soon to grasp
and utilize the results of this circumnavigation for the
enlargement of trade and commerce, and for the benefit of
geography, astronomy, mathematics, and the other sciences.
This wonderful story, is it not told in a thousand books? ...
The Portuguese in India and the Spiceries, as well as at home,
now seeing the inevitable conflict approaching, were
thoroughly aroused to the importance of maintaining their
rights. They openly asserted them, and pronounced this trade
with the Moluccas by the Spanish an encroachment on their
prior discoveries and possession, as well as a violation of
the Papal Compact of 1494, and prepared themselves
energetically for defense and offense. On the other hand, the
Spaniards as openly declared that Magellan's fleet carried the
first Christians to the Moluccas and by friendly intercourse
with the kings of those islands, reduced them to Christian
subjection and brought back letters and tribute to Cæsar.
Hence these kings and their people came under the protection
of Charles V. Besides this, the Spaniards claimed that the
Moluccas were within the Spanish half, and were therefore
doubly theirs. ... Matters thus waxing hot, King John of
Portugal begged Charles V. to delay dispatching his new fleet
until the disputed points could be discussed and settled.
Charles, who boasted that he had rather be right than rich,
consented, and the ships were staid. These two Christian
princes, who owned all the newly discovered and to be
discovered parts of the whole world between them by deed of
gift of the Pope, agreed to meet in Congress at Badajos by
their representatives, to discuss and settle all matters in
dispute about the division of their patrimony, and to define
and stake out their lands and waters, both parties agreeing to
abide by the decision of the Congress. Accordingly, in the
early spring of 1524, up went to this little border town
four-and-twenty wise men, or thereabouts, chosen by each
prince. They comprised the first judges, lawyers,
mathematicians, astronomers, cosmographers, navigators and
pilots of the land, among whose names were many honored now as
then--such as Fernando Columbus, Sebastian Cabot, Estevan
Gomez, Diego Ribero, etc. ... The debates and proceedings of
this Congress, as reported by Peter Martyr, Oviedo, and
Gomara, are very amusing, but no regular joint decision could
be reached, the Portuguese declining to subscribe to the
verdict of the Spaniards, inasmuch as it deprived them of the
Moluccas. So each party published and proclaimed its own
decision after the Congress broke up in confusion on the last
day of May, 1524. It was, however, tacitly understood that the
Moluccas fell to Spain, while Brazil, to the extent of two
hundred leagues from Cape St. Augustine, fell to the
Portuguese. ... However, much good resulted from this first
geographical Congress. The extent and breadth of the Pacific
were appreciated, and the influence of the Congress was soon
after seen in the greatly improved maps, globes, and charts."
H. Stevens, History and Geographical Notes,
1453-1530.
{63}
"For three months and twenty days he [Magellan] sailed on the
Pacific and never saw inhabited land. He was compelled by
famine to strip off the pieces of skin and leather wherewith
his rigging was here and there bound, to soak them in the sea
and then soften them with warm water, so as to make a wretched
food; to eat the sweepings of the ship and other loathsome
matter'; to drink water gone putrid by keeping; and yet he
resolutely held on his course, though his men were dying
daily. ... In the whole history of human undertakings there is
nothing that exceeds, if indeed there is anything that equals,
this voyage of Magellan's. That of Columbus dwindles away in
comparison. It is a display of superhuman courage, superhuman
perseverance."
J. W. Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of
Europe, chapter 19.
"The voyage [of Magellan] ... was doubtless the greatest feat
of navigation that has ever been performed, and nothing can be
imagined that would surpass it except a journey to some other
planet. It has not the unique historic position of the first
voyage of Columbus, which brought together two streams of
human life that had been disjoined since the Glacial Period.
But as an achievement in ocean navigation that voyage of
Columbus sinks into insignificance by the side of it, and when
the earth was a second time encompassed by the greatest
English sailor of his age, the advance in knowledge, as well
as the different route chosen, had much reduced the difficulty
of the performance. When we consider the frailness of the
ships, the immeasurable extent of the unknown, the mutinies
that were prevented or quelled, and the hardships that were
endured, we can have no hesitation in speaking of Magellan as
the prince of navigators."
J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 7 (volume 2).
ALSO IN
Lord Stanley of Alderley, The First Voyage Round the
World (Hakluyt Society, 1874).
R. Kerr, Collection of Voyages, volume 10.
AMERICA: A. D. 1519-1525.
The Voyages of Garay and Ayllon.
Discovery of the mouth of the Mississippi.
Exploration of the Carolina Coast.
In 1519, Francisco de Garay, governor of Jamaica, who had been
one of the companions of Columbus on his second voyage, having
heard of the richness and beauty of Yucatan, "at his own
charge sent out four ships well equipped, and with good
pilots, under the command of Alvarez Alonso de Pineda. His
professed object was to search for some strait, west of
Florida, which was not yet certainly known to form a part of
the continent. The strait having been sought for in vain, his
ships turned toward the west, attentively examining the ports,
rivers, inhabitants, and everything else that seemed worthy of
remark; and especially noticing the vast volume of water
brought down by one very large stream. At last they came upon
the track of Cortes near Vera Cruz. ... The carefully drawn
map of the pilots showed distinctly the Mississippi, which, in
this earliest authentic trace of its outlet, bears the name of
the Espiritu Santo. ... But Garay thought not of the
Mississippi and its valley: he coveted access to the wealth of
Mexico; and, in 1523, lost fortune and life ingloriously in a
dispute with Cortes for the government of the country on the
river Panuco. A voyage for slaves brought the Spaniards in
1520 still farther to the north. A company of seven, of whom
the most distinguished was Lucas Vasquez de Ayllon, fitted out
two slave ships from St. Domingo, in quest of laborers for
their plantations and mines. From the Bahama Islands they
passed to the coast of South Carolina, which was called
Chicora. The Combahee river received the name of Jordan; the
name of St. Helena, whose day is the 18th of August, was given
to a cape, but now belongs to the sound." Luring a large
number of the confiding natives on board their ships the
adventurers treacherously set sail with them; but one of the
vessels foundered at sea, and most of the captives on the
other sickened and died. Vasquez de Ayllon was rewarded for
his treacherous exploit by being authorized and appointed to
make the conquest of Chicora. "For this bolder enterprise the
undertaker wasted his fortune in preparations; in 1525 his
largest ship was stranded in the river Jordan; many of his men
were killed by the natives; and he himself escaped only to
suffer from the consciousness of having done nothing worthy of
honor. Yet it may be that ships, sailing under his authority,
made the discovery of the Chesapeake and named it the bay of
St. Mary; and perhaps even entered the bay of Delaware, which,
in Spanish geography, was called St. Christopher's."
G. Bancroft, History of the U. 8., part 1, chapter 2.
ALSO IN
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 4, chapter 11, and volume 5, chapters 6-7.
W. G. Simms, History of S. Carolina, book 1, chapter 1.
AMERICA: A. D. 1523-1524.
The Voyages of Verrazano.
First undertakings of France in the New World.
"It is constantly admitted in our history that our kings paid
no attention to America before the year 1523. Then Francis I.,
wishing to excite the emulation of his subjects in regard to
navigation and commerce, as he had already so successfully in
regard to the sciences and fine arts, ordered John Verazani,
who was in his service, to go and explore the New Lands, which
began to be much talked of in France. ... Verazani was
accordingly sent, in 1523, with four ships to discover North
America; but our historians have not spoken of his first
expedition, and we should be in ignorance of it now, had not
Ramusio preserved in his great collection a letter of Verazani
himself, addressed to Francis I. and dated Dieppe, July 8,
1524. In it he supposes the king already informed of the
success and details of the voyage, so that he contents himself
with stating that he sailed from Dieppe in four vessels, which
he had safely brought back to that port. In January, 1524, he
sailed with two ships, the Dauphine and the Normande, to
cruise against the Spaniards. Towards the close of the same
year, or early in the next, he again fitted out the Dauphine,
on which, embarking with 50 men and provisions for eight
months, he first sailed to the island of Madeira."
Father Charlevoix, History of New France
(translated by J. G. Shea), book 1.
{64}
"On the 17th of January, 1524, he [Verrazano] parted from the
'Islas desiertas,' a well-known little group of islands near
Madeira, and sailed at first westward, running in 25 days 500
leagues, with a light and pleasant easterly breeze, along the
northern border of the trade winds, in about 30° North. His track
was consequently nearly like that of Columbus on his first
voyage. On the 14th of February he met 'with as violent a
hurricane as any ship ever encountered.' But he weathered it,
and pursued his voyage to the west, 'with a little deviation
to the north;' when, after having sailed 24 days and 400
leagues, he descried a new country which, as he supposed, had
never before been seen either by modern or ancient navigators.
The country was very low. From the above description it is
evident that Verrazano came in sight of the east coast of the
United States about the 10th of March, 1524. He places his
land-fall in 34° North, which is the latitude of Cape Fear." He
first sailed southward, for about 50 leagues, he states,
looking for a harbor and finding none. He then turned
northward. "I infer that Verrazano saw little of the coast of
South Carolina and nothing of that of Georgia, and that in
these regions he can, at most, be called the discoverer only
of the coast of North Carolina. ... He rounded Cape Hatteras,
and at a distance of about 50 leagues came to another shore,
where he anchored and spent several days. ... This was the
second principal landing-place of Verrazano. If we reckon 50
leagues from Cape Hatteras, it would fall somewhere upon the
east coast of Delaware, in latitude 38° North, where, by some
authors, it is thought to have been. But if, as appears most
likely, Verrazano reckoned his distance here, as he did in
other cases, from his last anchoring, and not from Cape
Hatteras, we must look for his second landing somewhere south
of the entrance to Chesapeake Bay, and near the entrance to
Albemarle Sound. And this better agrees with the 'sail of 100
leagues' which Verrazano says he made from his second to his
third landing-place, in New York Bay. ... He found at this
third landing station an excellent berth, where he came to
anchor, well-protected from the winds, ... and from which he
ascended the river in his boat into the interior. He found the
shores very thickly settled, and as he passed up half a league
further, he discovered a most beautiful lake ... of three
leagues in circumference. Here, more than 30 canoes came to
him with a multitude of people, who seemed very friendly. ...
This description contains several accounts which make it still
more clear that the Bay of New York was the scene of these
occurrences."--Verrazano's anchorage having been at Gravesend
Bay, the river which he entered being the Narrows, and the
lake he found being the Inner Harbor. From New York Bay
Verrazano sailed eastward, along the southern shore of Long
Island, and following the New England coast, touching at or
describing points which are identified with Narragansett Bay
and Newport, Block Island or Martha's Vineyard, and
Portsmouth. His coasting voyage was pursued as far as 50° North,
from which point he sailed homeward. "He entered the port of
Dieppe early in July, 1524. His whole exploring expedition,
from Madeira and back, had accordingly lasted but five and a
half months."
J. G. Kohl, History of the Discovery of Maine
(Maine Historical Society Collection, 2d Series, volume 1),
chapter 8.
ALSO IN
G. Dexter, Cortereal, Verrazano, &c. (Narrative and
Critical History of America, volume 4, chapter 1).
Relation of Verrazano (New York Historical Society
Collection, volume 1, and N. S., volume 1).
J. C. Brevoort, Verrazano the Navigator.
AMERICA: A. D. 1524-1528.
The Explorations of Pizarro and Discovery of Peru.
"The South Sea having been discovered, and the inhabitants of
Tierra Firme having been conquered and pacified, the Governor
Pedrarias de Avila founded and settled the cities of Panama
and of Nata, and the town of Nombre de Dios. At this time the
Captain Francisco Pizarro, son of the Captain Gonzalo Pizarro,
a knight of the city of Truxillo, was living in the city of
Panama; possessing his house, his farm and his Indians, as one
of the principal people of the land, which indeed he always
was, having distinguished himself in the conquest and
settling, and in the service of his Majesty. Being at rest and
in repose, but full of zeal to continue his labours and to
perform other more distinguished services for the royal crown,
he sought permission from Pedrarias to discover that coast of
the South Sea to the eastward. He spent a large part of his
fortune on a good ship which he built, and on necessary
supplies for the voyage, and he set out from the city of
Panama on the 14th day of the month of November, in the year
1524. He had 112 Spaniards in his company, besides some Indian
servants. He commenced a voyage in which they suffered many
hardships, the season being winter and unpropitious." From
this unsuccessful voyage, during which many of his men died of
hunger and disease, and in the course of which he found no
country that tempted his cupidity or his ambition, Pizarro
returned after some months to "the land of Panama, landing at
an Indian village near the island of Pearls, called Chuchama.
Thence he sent the ship to Panama, for she had become
unseaworthy by reason of the teredo; and all that had befallen
was reported to Pedrarias, while the Captain remained behind
to refresh himself and his companions. When the ship arrived
at Panama it was found that, a few days before, the Captain
Diego de Almagro had sailed in search of the Captain Pizarro,
his companion, with another ship and 70 men." Almagro and his
party followed the coast until they came to a great river,
which they called San Juan [a few miles north of the port of
Buenaventura, in New Granada]. ... They there found signs of
gold, but there being no traces of the Captain Pizarro, the
Captain Almagro returned to Chuchama, where he found his
comrade. They agreed that the Captain Almagro should go to
Panama, repair the ships, collect more men to continue the
enterprise, and defray the expenses, which amounted to more
than 10,000 castellanos. At Panama much obstruction was caused
by Pedrarias and others, who said that the voyage should not
be persisted in, and that his Majesty would not be served by
it. The Captain Almagro, with the authority given him by his
comrade, was very constant in prosecuting the work he had
commenced, and ... Pedrarias was forced to allow him to engage men.
{65}
He set out from Panama with 110 men; and went to
the place where Pizarro waited with another 50 of the first
110 who sailed with him, and of the 70 who accompanied Almagro
when he went in search. The other 130 were dead. The two
captains, in their two ships, sailed with 160 men, and coasted
along the land. When they thought they saw signs of
habitations, they went on shore in three canoes they had with
them, rowed by 60 men, and so they sought for provisions. They
continued to sail in this way for three years, suffering great
hardships from hunger and cold. The greater part of the crews
died of hunger, insomuch that there were not 50 surviving, and
during all those three years they discovered no good land. All
was swamp and inundated country, without inhabitants. The good
country they discovered was as far as the river San Juan,
where the Captain Pizarro remained with the few survivors,
sending a captain with the smaller ship to discover some good
land further along the coast. He sent the other ship, with the
Captain Diego de Almagro to Panama to get more men. At the
end of 70 days, the exploring ship came back with good
reports, and with specimens of gold, silver and cloths, found
in a country further south. "As soon as the Captain Almagro
arrived from Panama with a ship laden with men and horses, the
two ships, with their commanders and all their people, set out
from the river San Juan, to go to that newly-discovered land.
But the navigation was difficult; they were detained so long
that the provisions were exhausted, and the people were
obliged to go on shore in search of supplies. The ships
reached the bay of San Mateo, and some villages to which the
Spaniards gave the name of Santiago. Next they came to the
villages of Tacamez [Atacames, on the coast of modern
Ecuador], on the sea coast further on. These villages were
seen by the Christians to be large and well peopled: and when
90 Spaniards had advanced a league beyond the villages of
Tacamez, more than 10,000 Indian warriors encountered them;
but seeing that the Christians intended no evil, and did not
wish to take their goods, but rather to treat them peacefully,
with much love, the Indians desisted from war. In this land there
were abundant supplies, and the people led well-ordered lives,
the villages having their streets and squares. One village had
more than 3,000 houses, and others were smaller. It seemed to
the captains and to the other Spaniards that nothing could be
done in that land by reason of the smallness of their numbers,
which rendered them unable to cope with the Indians. So they
agreed to load the ships with the supplies to be found in the
villages, and to return to an island called Gallo, where they
would be safe until the ships arrived at Panama with the news
of what had been discovered, and to apply to the Governor for
more men, in order that the Captains might be able to continue
their undertaking, and conquer the land. Captain Almagro went
in the ships. Many persons had written to the Governor
entreating him to order the crews to return to Panama, saying
that it was impossible to endure more hardships than they had
suffered during the last three years. The Governor ordered
that all those who wished to go to Panama might do so, while
those who desired to continue the discoveries were at liberty
to remain. Sixteen men stayed with Pizarro, and all the rest
went back in the ships to Panama. The Captain Pizarro was on
that island for five months, when one of the ships returned,
in which he continued the discoveries for a hundred leagues
further down the coast. They found many villages and great
riches; and they brought away more specimens of gold, silver,
and cloths than had been found before, which were presented by
the natives. The Captain returned because the time granted by
the governor had expired, and the last day of the period had
been reached when he entered the port of Panama. The two
Captains were so ruined that they could no longer prosecute
their undertaking. ... The Captain Francisco Pizarro was only
able to borrow a little more than 1,000 castellanos among his
friends, with which sum he went to Castile, and gave an
account to his Majesty of the great and signal services he had
performed."
F. de Xeres (Sec. of Pizarro), Account of the Province
of Cuzco; translated and edited by C. R. Markham
(Hakluyt Society, 1872).
ALSO IN:
W. H. Prescott, History of the Conquest of Peru,
book 2, chapters 2-4 (volume 1).
AMERICA: A. D. 1525.
The Voyage of Gomez.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): THE NAMES.
AMERICA: A. D. 1526-1531.
Voyage of Sebastian Cabot and attempted colonization of La Plata.
See PARAGUAY: A. D. 1515-1557.
AMERICA: A. D. 1528-1542.
The Florida Expeditions of Narvaez and Hernando de Soto.
Discovery of the Mississippi.
See FLORIDA: A. D. 1528-1542.
AMERICA: A. D. 1531-1533.
Pizarro's Conquest of Peru.
See PERU: A. D. 1528-1531, and 1531-1533.
AMERICA: A. D. 1533.
Spanish Conquest of the Kingdom of Quito.
See ECUADOR:
AMERICA: A. D. 1534-1535.
Exploration of the St. Lawrence to Montreal by Jacques Cartier.
"At last, ten years after [the voyages of Verrazano], Philip
Chabot, Admiral of France, induced the king [Francis I.] to
resume the project of founding a French colony in the New
World whence the Spaniards daily drew such great wealth; and
he presented to him a Captain of St. Malo, by name Jacques
Cartier, whose merit he knew, and whom that prince accepted.
Cartier having received his instructions, left St. Malo the 2d
of April, 1534, with two ships of 60 tons and 122 men. He
steered west, inclining slightly north, and had such fair
winds that, on the 10th of May, he made Cape Bonavista, in
Newfoundland, at 46° north. Cartier found the land there still
covered with snow, and the shore fringed with ice, so that he
could not or dared not stop; He ran down six degrees
south-southeast, and entered a port to which he gave the name
of St. Catharine. Thence he turned back north. ... After
making almost the circuit of Newfoundland, though without
being able to satisfy himself that it was an island, he took a
southerly course, crossed the gulf, approached the continent,
and entered a very deep bay, where he suffered greatly from
heat, whence he called it Chaleurs Bay. He was charmed with
the beauty of the country, and well pleased with the Indians
that he met and with whom he exchanged some goods for furs.
... On leaving this bay, Cartier visited a good part of the
coasts around the gulf, and took possession of the country in
the name of the most Christian king, as Verazani had done in
all the places where he landed.
{66}
He set sail again on the 15th of August to return to France,
and reached St. Malo safely on the 5th of September. ... On
the report which he made of his voyage, the court concluded
that it would be useful to France to have a settlement in that
part of America; but no one took this affair more to heart
than the Vice-Admiral Charles de Mony, Sieur de la Mailleraye.
This noble obtained a new commission for Cartier, more ample
than the first, and gave him three ships well equipped. This
fleet was ready about the middle of May, and Cartier ...
embarked on Wednesday the 19th." His three vessels were
separated by violent storms, but found one another, near the
close of July, in the gulf which was their appointed place of
rendezvous. "On the 1st of August bad weather drove him to
take refuge in the port of St. Nicholas, at the mouth of the
river on the north. Here Cartier planted a cross, with the
arms of France, and remained until the 7th. This port is
almost the only spot in Canada that has kept the name given by
Cartier. ... On the 10th the three vessels re-entered the
gulf, and in honor of the saint whose feast is celebrated on
that day, Cartier gave the gulf the name of St. Lawrence; or
rather he gave it to a bay lying between Anticosti Island and
the north shore, whence it extended to the whole gulf of which
this bay is part; and because the river, before that called
River of Canada, empties into the same gulf, it insensibly
acquired the name of St. Lawrence, which it still bears. ...
The three vessels ... ascended the river, and on the 1st of
September they entered the river Saguenay. Cartier merely
reconnoitered the mouth of this river, and ... hastened to
seek a port where his vessels might winter in safety. Eight
leagues above Isle aux Coudres he found another much larger
and handsomer island, all covered with trees and vines. He
called it Bacchus Island, but the name has been changed to
Isle d'Orleans. The author of the relation to this voyage,
printed under the name of Cartier, pretends that only here the
country begins to be called Canada. But he is surely mistaken;
for it is certain that from the earliest times the Indians
gave this name to the whole country along the river on both
sides, from its mouth to the Saguenay. From Bacchus Island,
Cartier proceeded to a little river which is ten leagues off,
and comes from the north; he called it Rivière de Ste Croix,
because he entered it on the 14th of September (Feast of the
Exaltation of the Holy Cross); but it is now commonly called
Rivière de Jacques Cartier. The day after his arrival he
received a visit from an Indian chief named Donnacona, whom
the author of the relation of that voyage styles Lord of
Canada. Cartier treated with this chief by means of two
Indians whom he had taken to France the year before, and who
knew a little French. They informed Donnacona that the
strangers wished to go to Hochelaga, which seemed to trouble
him. Hochelaga was a pretty large town, situated on an island
now known under the name of Island of Montreal. Cartier had
heard much of it, and was loth to return to France without
seeing it. The reason why this voyage troubled Donnacona was
that the people of Hochelaga were of a different nation from
his, and that he wished to profit exclusively by the
advantages which he hoped to derive from the stay of the
French in his country." Proceeding with one vessel to Lake St.
Pierre, and thence in two boats, Cartier reached Hochelaga
Oct. 2. "The shape of the town was round, and three rows of
palisades inclosed in it about 50 tunnel shaped cabins, each
over 50 paces long and 14 or 15 wide. It was entered by a
single gate, above which, as well as along the first palisade,
ran a kind of gallery, reached by ladders, and well provided
with pieces of rock and pebbles for the defence of the place.
The inhabitants of the town spoke the Huron language. They
received the French very well. ... Cartier visited the
mountain at the foot of which the town lay, and gave it the
name of Mont Royal, which has become that of the whole Island
[Montreal]. From it he discovered a great extent of country,
the sight of which charmed him. ... He left Hochelaga on the
5th of October, and on the 11th arrived at Sainte Croix."
Wintering at this place, where his crews suffered terribly
from the cold and from scurvy, he returned to France the
following spring. "Some authors ... pretend that Cartier,
disgusted with Canada, dissuaded the king, his master, from
further thoughts of it; and Champlain seems to have been of
that opinion. But this does not agree with what Cartier
himself says in his memoirs. ... Cartier in vain extolled the
country which he had discovered. His small returns, and the
wretched condition to which his men had been reduced by cold
and scurvy, persuaded most that it would never be of any use
to France. Great stress was laid on the fact that he nowhere
saw any appearance of mines; and then, even more than now, a
strange land which produced neither gold nor silver was
reckoned as nothing."
Father Charlevoix, History of New France
(translated by J. G. Shea), book 1.
ALSO IN:
R. Kerr, General Collection of Voyages,
part 2, book 2, chapter 12 (volume 6).
F. X. Garneau, History of Canada, volume 1, chapter 2.
AMERICA: A. D. 1535-1540.
Introduction of Printing in Mexico.
See PRINTING, &c.: A. D. 1535-1709.
AMERICA: A. D. 1535-1550.
Spanish Conquests in Chile.
See CHILE: A. D. 1450-1724.
AMERICA: A. D. 1536-1538.
Spanish Conquests of New Granada.
See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1536-1731.
AMERICA: A. D. 1541-1603.
Jacques Cartier's last Voyage.
Abortive attempts at French Colonization in Canada.
"Jean François de la Roque, lord of Roberval, a gentleman of
Picardy, was the most earnest and energetic of those who
desired to colonize the lands discovered by Jacques Cartier.
... The title and authority of lieutenant-general was
conferred upon him; his rule to extend over Canada. Hochelaga,
Saguenay, Newfoundland, Belle Isle, Carpon, Labrador, La Grand
Baye, and Baccalaos, with the delegated rights and powers of
the Crown. This patent was dated the 15th of January, 1540.
Jacques Cartier was named second in command. ... Jacques
Cartier sailed on the 23d of May, 1541, having provisioned his
fleet for two years." He remained on the St. Lawrence until
the following June, seeking vainly for the fabled wealth of
the land of Saguenay, finding the Indians strongly inclined to
a treacherous hostility, and suffering severe hardships during
the winter. Entirely discouraged and disgusted, he abandoned
his undertaking early in the summer of 1542, and sailed for home.
{67}
In the road of St. John's, Newfoundland, Cartier met his tardy
chief, Roberval, just coming to join him; but no persuasion
could induce the disappointed explorer to turn back. "To avoid
the chance of an open rupture with Roberval, the lieutenant
silently weighed anchor during the night, and made all sail
for France. This inglorious withdrawal from the enterprise
paralyzed Roberval's power, and deferred the permanent
settlement of Canada for generations then unborn. Jacques
Cartier died soon after his return to Europe." Roberval
proceeded to Canada, built a fort at Ste Croix, four leagues
west of Orleans, sent back two of his three ships to France,
and remained through the winter with his colony, having a
troubled time. There is no certain account of the ending of
the enterprise, but it ended in failure. For half a century
afterwards there was little attempt made by the French to
colonize any part of New France, though the French fisheries
on the Newfoundland Bank and in the Gulf of St. Lawrence were
steadily growing in activity and importance. "When, after
fifty years of civil strife, the strong and wise sway of Henry
IV. restored rest to troubled France, the spirit of discovery
again arose. The Marquis de In Roche, a Breton gentleman,
obtained from the king, in 1598, a patent granting the same
powers that Roberval had possessed." But La Roche's
undertaking proved more disastrous than Roberval's had been.
Yet, there had been enough of successful fur-trading opened to
stimulate enterprise, despite these misfortunes. "Private
adventurers, unprotected by any special privilege, began to
barter for the rich peltries of the Canadian hunters. A
wealthy merchant of St. Malo, named Pontgravé, was the boldest
and most successful of these traders; he made several voyages
to Tadoussac, at the mouth of the Saguenay, bringing back each
time a rich cargo of rare and valuable furs." In 1600,
Pontgravé effected a partnership with one Chauvin, a naval
captain, who obtained a patent from the king giving him a
monopoly of the trade; but Chauvin died in 1602 without having
succeeded in establishing even a trading post at Tadoussac. De
Chatte, or De Chastes, governor of Dieppe, succeeded to the
privileges of Chauvin, and founded a company of merchants at
Rouen [1603] to undertake the development of the resources of
Canada. It was under the auspices of this company that Samuel
Champlain, the founder of New France, came upon the scene.
E. Warburton, The Conquest of Canada, volume 1, chapter 2-3.
ALSO IN:
F. Parkman, Pioneers of France in the New World:
Champlain, chapter 1-2.
AMERICA: A. D. 1562-1567.
The slave trading Voyages of John Hawkins.
Beginnings of English Enterprise in the New World.
"The history of English America begins with the three
slave-trading voyages of John Hawkins, made in the years 1562,
1564, and 1567. Nothing that Englishmen had done in connection
with America, previously to those voyages, had any result
worth recording. England had known the New World nearly
seventy years, for John Cabot reached it shortly after its
discovery by Columbus; and, as the tidings of the discovery
spread, many English adventurers had crossed the Atlantic to
the American coast. But as years passed, and the excitement of
novelty subsided, the English voyages to America had become
fewer and fewer, and at length ceased altogether. It is easy
to account for this. There was no opening for conquest or
plunder, for the Tudors were at peace with the Spanish
sovereigns: and there could be no territorial occupation, for
the Papal title of Spain and Portugal to the whole of the new
continent could not be disputed by Catholic England. No trade
worth having existed with the natives: and Spain and Portugal
kept the trade with their own settlers in their own hands. ...
As the plantations in America grew and multiplied, the demand
for negroes rapidly increased. The Spaniards had no African
settlements, but the Portuguese had many, and, with the aid of
French and English adventurers, they procured from these
settlements slaves enough to supply both themselves and the
Spaniards. But the Brazilian plantations grew so fast, about
the middle of the century, that they absorbed the entire
supply, and the Spanish colonists knew not where to look for
negroes. This penury of slaves in the Spanish Indies became
known to the English and French captains who frequented the
Guinea coast; and John Hawkins, who had been engaged from
boyhood in the trade with Spain and the Canaries, resolved in
1562 to take a cargo of negro slaves to Hispaniola. The little
squadron with which he executed this project was the first
English squadron which navigated the West Indian seas. This
voyage opened those seas to the English. England had not yet
broken with Spain, and the law excluding English vessels from
trading with the Spanish colonists was not strictly enforced.
The trade was profitable, and Hawkins found no difficulty in
disposing of his cargo to great advantage. A meagre note ...
from the pen of Hakluyt contains all that is known of the
first American voyage of Hawkins. In its details it must have
closely resembled the second voyage. In the first voyage,
however, Hawkins had no occasion to carry his wares further
than three ports on the northern side of Hispaniola. These
ports, far away from San Domingo, the capital, were already
well known to the French smugglers. He did not venture into
the Caribbean Sea; and having loaded his ships with their
return cargo, he made the best of his way back. In his second
voyage ... he entered the Caribbean Sea, still keeping,
however, at a safe distance from San Domingo, and sold his
slaves on the mainland. This voyage was on a much larger
scale. ... Having sold his slaves in the continental ports
[South American], and loaded his vessels with hides and other
goods bought with the produce, Hawkins determined to strike
out a new path and sail home with the Gulf-stream, which would
carry him northwards past the shores of Florida. Sparke's
narrative ... proves that at every point in these expeditions
the Englishman was following in the track of the French. He
had French pilots and seamen on board, and there is little
doubt that one at least of these had already been with
Laudonnière in Florida. The French seamen guided him to
Laudonnière's settlement, where his arrival was most opportune.
They then pointed him the way by the coast of North America,
then universally know in the mass as New France, to
Newfoundland, and thence, with the prevailing westerly winds,
to Europe.
{68}
This was the pioneer voyage made by Englishmen along coasts
afterwards famous in history through English colonization. ...
The extremely interesting narrative ... given ... from the pen
of John Sparke, one of Hawkins' gentlemen companions ...
contains the first information concerning America and its
natives which was published in England by an English
eye-witness." Hawkins planned a third voyage in 1566, but the
remonstrances of the Spanish king caused him to be stopped by
the English court. He sent out his ships, however, and they
came home in due time richly freighted,--from what source is
not known. "In another year's time the aspect of things had
changed." England was venturing into war with Spain, "and
Hawkins was now able to execute his plans without restraint,
He founded a permanent fortified factory on the Guinea coast,
where negroes might be collected all the year round. Thence he
sailed for the West Indies a third time. Young Francis Drake
sailed with him in command of the 'Judith,' a small vessel of
fifty tons." The voyage had a prosperous beginning and a
disastrous ending. After disposing of most of their slaves,
they were driven by storms to take refuge in the Mexican port
of Vera Cruz, and there they were attacked by a Spanish fleet.
Drake in the "Judith" and Hawkins in another small vessel
escaped. But the latter was overcrowded with men and obliged
to put half of them ashore on the Mexican coast. The majority
of those left on board, as well as a majority of Drake's crew,
died on the voyage home, and it was a miserable remnant that
landed in England, in January, 1569.
E. J. Payne, Voyages of the Elizabethan Seamen to
America, chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
The Hawkins Voyages; edited by C. R. Markham
(Hakluyt Society, No. 57).
R. Southey, Lives of the British Admirals, volume 3.
AMERICA: A. D. 1572-1580.
The Piratical Adventures of Drake and his Encompassing of the
World.
"Francis Drake, the first of the English Buccaneers, was one
of the twelve children of Edward Drake of Tavistock, in
Devonshire, a staunch Protestant, who had fled his native
place to avoid persecution, and had then become a ship's
chaplain. Drake, like Columbus, had been a seaman by
profession from boyhood; and ... had served as a young man, in
command of the Judith, under Hawkins, ... Hawkins had confined
himself to smuggling: Drake advanced from this to piracy. This
practice was authorized by law in the middle ages for the
purpose of recovering debts or damages from the subjects of
another nation. The English, especially those of the west
country, were the most formidable pirates in the world; and
the whole nation was by this time roused against Spain, in
consequence of the ruthless war waged against Protestantism in
the Netherlands by Philip II. Drake had accounts of his own to
settle with the Spaniards. Though Elizabeth had not declared
for the revolted States, and pursued a shifting policy, her
interests and theirs were identical; and it was with a view of
cutting off those supplies of gold and silver from America
which enabled Philip to bribe politicians and pay soldiers, in
pursuit of his policy of aggression, that the famous voyage
was authorized by English statesmen. Drake had recently made
more than one successful voyage of plunder to the American
coast." In July, 1572, he surprised the Spanish town of Nombre
de Dios, which was the shipping port on the northern side of
the Isthmus for the treasures of Peru. His men made their way
into the royal treasure-house, where they laid hands on a heap
of bar-silver, 70 feet long, 10 wide, and 10 high; but Drake
himself had received a wound which compelled the pirates to
retreat with no very large part of the splendid booty. In the
winter of 1573, with the help of the runaway slaves on the
Isthmus, known as Cimarrones, he crossed the Isthmus, looked
on the Pacific ocean, approached within sight of the city of
Panama, and waylaid a transportation party conveying gold to
Nombre de Dios; but was disappointed of his prey by the
excited conduct of some of his men. When he saw, on this
occasion, the great ocean beyond the Isthmus, "Drake then and
there resolved to be the pioneer of England in the Pacific;
and on this resolution he solemnly besought the blessing of
God. Nearly four years elapsed before it was executed; for it
was not until November, 1577, that Drake embarked on his
famous voyage, in the course of which he proposed to plunder
Peru itself. The Peruvian ports were unfortified. The
Spaniards knew them to be by nature absolutely secured from
attack on the north; and they never dreamed that the English
pirates would be daring enough to pass the terrible straits of
Magellan and attack them from the south. Such was the plan of
Drake; and it was executed with complete success." He sailed
from Plymouth, Dec. 13, 1577, with a fleet of four vessels,
and a pinnace, but lost one of the ships after he had entered
the Pacific, in a storm which drove him southward, and which
made him the discoverer of Cape Horn. Another of his ships,
separated from the squadron, returned home, and a third, while
attempting to do the same, was lost in the river Plate. Drake,
in his own vessel, the Golden Hind, proceeded to the Peruvian
coasts, where he cruised until be had taken and plundered a
score of Spanish ships. "Laden with a rich booty of Peruvian
treasure he deemed it unsafe to return by the way that he
came. He therefore resolved to strike across the Pacific, and
for this purpose made the latitude in which this voyage was
usually performed by the Spanish government vessels which
sailed annually from Acapulco to the Philippines. Drake thus
reached the coast of California, where the Indians, delighted
beyond measure by presents of clothing and trinkets, invited
him to remain and rule over them. Drake took possession of the
country in the name of the Queen, and refitted his vessel in
preparation for the unknown perils of the Pacific. The place
where He landed must have been either the great bay of San
Francisco [per contra., see CALIFORNIA: A. D. 1846-1847] or
the small bay of Bodega, which lies a few leagues further
north. The great seaman had already coasted five degrees more
to the northward before finding a suitable harbour. He
believed himself to be the first European who had coasted
these shores; but it is now well known that Spanish explorers
had preceded him. Drake's circumnavigation of the globe was
thus no deliberate feat of seamanship, but the necessary
result of circumstances. The voyage made in more than one way
a great epoch in English nautical history." Drake reached
Plymouth on his return Sept. 26, 1580.
E. J. Payne, Voyages of the Elizabethan Seamen, pages
141-143.
ALSO IN
F. Fletcher, The World Encompassed by Sir F. Drake
(Hakluyt Society, 1854).
J. Barrow, Life of Drake.
R. Southey, Lives of British Admirals, volume 3.
{69}
AMERICA: A. D. 1580.
The final founding of the City of Buenos Ayres.
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC; A. D: 1580-1777.
AMERICA: A. D. 1583.
The Expedition of Sir Humphrey Gilbert.
Formal possession taken of Newfoundland.
In 1578, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, an English gentleman, of
Devonshire, whose younger half-brother was the more famous Sir
Walter Raleigh, obtained from Queen Elizabeth a charter
empowering him, for the next six years, to discover "such
remote heathen and barbarous lands, not actually possessed by
any Christian prince or people," as he might be shrewd or
fortunate enough to find, and to occupy the same as their
proprietor. Gilbert's first expedition was attempted the next
year, with Sir Walter Raleigh associated in it; but
misfortunes drove back the adventurers to port, and Spanish
intrigue prevented their sailing again. "In June, 1583,
Gilbert sailed from Cawsund Bay with five vessels, with the
general intention of discovering and colonizing the northern
parts of America. It was the first colonizing expedition which
left the shores of Great Britain; and the narrative of the
expedition by Hayes, who commanded one of Gilbert's vessels,
forms the first page in the history of English colonization.
Gilbert did no more than go through the empty form of taking
possession of the island of Newfoundland, to which the English
name formerly applied to the continent in general ... was now
restricted. ... Gilbert dallied here too long. When he set
sail to cross the Gulf of St. Lawrence and take possession of
Cape Breton and Nova Scotia the season was too far advanced;
one of his largest ships went down with all on board,
including the Hungarian scholar Parmenius, who had come out as
the historian of the expedition; the stores were exhausted and
the crews dispirited; and Gilbert resolved on sailing home,
intending to return and prosecute his discoveries the next
spring. On the home voyage the little vessel in which he was
sailing foundered; and the pioneer of English colonization
found a watery grave. ... Gilbert was a man of courage, piety,
and learning. He was, however, an indifferent seaman, and
quite incompetent for the task of colonization to which he had
set his hand. The misfortunes of his expedition induced Amadas
and Barlow, who followed in his steps, to abandon the
northward voyage and sail to the shores intended to be
occupied by the easier but more circuitous route of the
Canaries and the West Indies."
E. J. Payne, Voyages of the Elizabethan Seamen,
pages 173-174.
"On Monday, the 9th of September, in the afternoon, the
frigate [the' Squirrel'] was near cast away, oppressed by
waves, yet at that time recovered; and giving forth signs of
joy, the general, sitting abaft with a book in his hand, cried
out to us in the 'Hind' (so oft as we did approach within
hearing), 'We are as near to heaven by sea as by land,'
reiterating the same speech, well beseeming a soldier resolute
in Jesus Christ, as I can testify he was. On the same Monday
night, about twelve o'clock, or not long after, the frigate
being ahead of us in the 'Golden Hind,' suddenly her lights
were out, whereof as it were in a moment we lost the sight,
and withal our watch cried the General was cast away, which
was too true; for in that moment the frigate was devoured and
swallowed up by the sea. Yet still we looked out all that
night and ever after, until we arrived upon the coast of
England. ... In great torment of weather and peril of drowning
it pleased God to send safe home the 'Golden Hind,' which
arrived in Falmouth on the 22d of September, being Sunday."
E. Hayes, A Report of the Voyage by Sir Humphrey Gilbert
(reprinted in Payne's Voyages).
ALSO IN
E. Edwards, Life of Raleigh, volume 1, chapter 5.
R. Hakluyt, Principal Navigations; edited by E. Goldsmid,
volume 12.
AMERICA: A. D. 1584-1586.
Raleigh's First Colonizing attempts and failures.
"The task in which Gilbert had failed was to be undertaken by
one better qualified to carry it out. If any Englishman in
that age seemed to be marked out as the founder of a colonial
empire, it was Raleigh. Like Gilbert, he had studied books;
like Drake he could rule men. ... The associations of his
youth, and the training of his early manhood, fitted him to
sympathize with the aims of his half-brother Gilbert, and
there is little reason to doubt that Raleigh had a share in
his undertaking and his failure. In 1584 he obtained a patent
precisely similar to Gilbert's. His first step showed the
thoughtful and well-planned system on which he began his task.
Two ships were sent out, not with any idea of settlement, but
to examine and report upon the country. Their commanders were
Arthur Barlow and Philip Amidas. To the former we owe the
extant record of the voyage: the name of the latter would
suggest that he was a foreigner. Whether by chance or design,
they took a more southerly course than any of their
predecessors. On the 2d of July the presence of shallow water,
and a smell of sweet flowers, warned them that land was near.
The promise thus given was amply fulfilled upon their
approach. The sight before them was far different from that
which had met the eyes of Hore and Gilbert. Instead of the
bleak coast of Newfoundland, Barlow and Amidas looked upon a
scene which might recall the softness of the Mediterranean.
... Coasting along for about 120 miles, the voyagers reached
an inlet and with some difficulty entered. They then solemnly
took possession of the land in the Queen's name, and then
delivered it over to Raleigh according to his patent. They
soon discovered that the land upon which they had touched was
an island about 20 miles long, and not above six broad, named,
as they afterwards learnt, Roanoke. Beyond, separating them
from the mainland, lay an enclosed sea, studded with more than
a hundred fertile and well-wooded islets." The Indians proved
friendly, and were described by Barlow as being "most gentle,
loving and faithful, void of all guile and treason, and such
as live after the manner of the golden age." "The report which
the voyagers took home spoke as favourably of the land itself
as of its inhabitants. ... With them they brought two of the
savages, named Wanchese and Manteo. A probable tradition tells
us that the queen herself named the country Virginia, and that
Raleigh's knighthood was the reward and acknowledgment of his
success.
{70}
On the strength of this report Raleigh at once made
preparations for a settlement. A fleet of seven ships was
provided for the conveyance of 108 settlers. The fleet was
under the command of Sir Richard Grenvillle, who was to
establish the settlement and leave it under the charge of
Ralph Lane. ... On the 9th of April [1585] the emigrants set
sail." For some reason not well explained, the fleet made a
circuit to the West Indies, and loitered for five weeks at the
island of St. John's and at Hispaniola, reaching Virginia in
the last days of June. Quarrels between the two commanders,
Grenville and Lane, had already begun, and both seemed equally
ready to provoke the enmity of the natives. In August, after
exploring some sixty miles of the coast, Grenville returned to
England, promising to come back the next spring with new
colonists and stores. The settlement, thus left to the care of
Lane, was established "at the north-east corner of the island
of Roanoke, whence the settlers could command the strait.
There, even now, choked by vines and underwood, and here and
there broken by the crumbling remains of an earthen bastion,
may be traced the outlines of the ditch which enclosed the
camp, some forty yards square, the home of the first English
settlers in the New World. Of the doings of the settlers
during the winter nothing is recorded, but by the next spring
their prospects looked gloomy. The Indians were no longer
friends. ... The settlers, unable to make fishing weirs, and
without seed corn, were entirely dependent on the Indians for
their daily food. Under these circumstances, one would have
supposed that Lane would have best employed himself in
guarding the settlement and improving its condition. He,
however, thought otherwise, and applied himself to the task of
exploring the neighbouring territory." But a wide combination
of hostile Indian tribes had been formed against the English,
and their situation became from day to day more imperilled. At
the beginning of June, 1586, Lane fought a bold battle with
the savages and routed them; but no sign of Grenville appeared
and the prospect looked hopeless. Just at this juncture, a
great English fleet, sailing homewards from a piratical
expedition to the Spanish Main, under the famous Captain
Drake, came to anchor at Roanoke and offered succor to the
disheartened colonists. With one voice they petitioned to be
taken to England, and Drake received the whole party on board
his ships. "The help of which the colonists had despaired was
in reality close at hand. Scarcely had Drake's fleet left the
coast when a ship well furnished by Raleigh with needful
supplies, reached Virginia, and after searching for the
departed settlers returned to England. About a fortnight later
Grenville himself arrived with three ships. He spent some time in
the country exploring, searching for the settlers, and at last,
unwilling to lose possession of the country, landed fifteen
men at Roanoke well supplied for two years, and then set sail
for England, plundering the Azores, and doing much damage to
the Spaniards."
J. A. Doyle, The English in America: Virginia, &c.,
chapter 4.
"It seems to be generally admitted that, when Lane and his
company went back to England, they carried with them tobacco
as one of the products of the country, which they presented to
Raleigh, as the planter of the colony, and by him it was
brought into use in England, and gradually in other European
countries. The authorities are not entirely agreed upon this
point. Josselyn says: 'Tobacco first brought into England by
Sir John Hawkins, but first brought into use by Sir Walter
Rawleigh many years after.' Again he says: 'Now (say some)
Tobacco was first brought into England by Mr. Ralph Lane, out
of Virginia. Others will have Tobacco to be first brought into
England from Peru, by Sir Francis Drake's Mariners.' Camden
fixes its introduction into England by Ralph Lane and the men
brought back with him in the ships of Drake. He says: 'And
these men which were brought back were the first that I know
of, which brought into England that Indian plant which they
call Tobacco and Nicotia, and use it against crudities, being
taught it by the Indians.' Certainly from that time it began
to be in great request, and to be sold at a high rate. ...
Among the 108 men left in the colony with Ralph Lane in 1585
was Mr. Thomas Hariot, a man of a strongly mathematical and
scientific turn, whose services in this connection were
greatly valued. He remained there an entire year, and went
back to England in 1586. He wrote out a full account of his
observations in the New World."
L. N. Tarbox, Sir Walter Raleigh and his Colony (Prince
Society 1884).
ALSO IN
T. Hariot, Brief and true Report (Reprinted in
above-named Prince Society Publication).
F. L. Hawks, History of North Carolina, volume 1 (containing
reprints of Lane's Account, Hariot's Report, &c.)
Original Documents edited by E. E. Hale
(Archæologia Americana, volume 4).
AMERICA: A. D. 1587-1590.
The Lost Colony of Roanoke.
End of the Virginia Undertakings of Sir Walter Raleigh.
"Raleigh, undismayed by losses, determined to plant an
agricultural state; to send emigrants with their wives and
families, who should make their homes in the New World; and,
that life and property might be secured, in January, 1587, he
granted a charter for the settlement, and a municipal
government for the city of 'Raleigh.' John White was appointed
its governor; and to him, with eleven assistants, the
administration of the colony was intrusted. Transport ships
were prepared at the expense of the proprietary; 'Queen
Elizabeth, the godmother of Virginia,' declined contributing
'to its education.' Embarking in April, in July they arrived
on the coast of North Carolina; they were saved from the
dangers of Cape Fear; and, passing Cape Hatteras, they
hastened to the isle of Roanoke, to search for the handful of
men whom Grenville had left there as a garrison. They found
the tenements deserted and overgrown with weeds; human bones
lay scattered on the field where wild deer were reposing. The
fort was in ruins. No vestige of surviving life appeared. The
instructions of Raleigh had designated the place for the new
settlement on the bay of Chesapeake. But Fernando, the naval
officer, eager to renew a profitable traffic in the West
Indies, refused his assistance in exploring the coast, and
White was compelled to remain on Roanoke. ... It was there
that in July the foundations of the city of Raleigh were laid.
But the colony was doomed to disaster from the beginning,
being quickly involved in warfare with the surrounding
natives. "With the returning ship White embarked for England,
under the excuse of interceding for re-enforcements and
supplies.
{71}
Yet, on the 18th of August, nine days previous to
his departure, his daughter Eleanor Dare, the wife of one of
the assistants, gave birth to a female child, the first
offspring of English parents on the soil of the United States.
The infant was named from the place of its birth. The colony,
now composed of 89 men, 17 women, and two children, whose
names are all preserved, might reasonably hope for the speedy
return of the governor, as he left with them his daughter and
his grandchild, Virginia Dare. The farther history of this
plantation is involved in gloomy uncertainty. The inhabitants
of 'the city of Raleigh,' the emigrants from England and the
first-born of America, awaited death in the land of their
adoption. For, when White reached England, he found its
attention absorbed by the threats of an invasion from Spain.
... Yet Raleigh, whose patriotism did not diminish his
generosity, found means, in April 1588, to despatch White with
supplies in two vessels. But the company, desiring a gainful
voyage rather than a safe one, ran in chase of prizes, till
one of them fell in with men of war from Rochelle, and, after
a bloody fight, was boarded and rifled. Both ships were
compelled to return to England. The delay was fatal: the
English kingdom and the Protestant reformation were in danger;
nor could the poor colonists of Roanoke be again remembered
till after the discomfiture of the Invincible Armada. Even
then Sir Walter Raleigh, who had already incurred a fruitless
expense of £40,000, found his impaired fortune insufficient
for further attempts at colonizing Virginia. He therefore used
the privilege of his patent to endow a company of merchants
and adventurers with large concessions. Among the men who thus
obtained an assignment of the proprietary's rights in Virginia
is found the name of Richard Hakluyt; it connects the first
efforts of England in North Carolina with the final
colonization of Virginia. The colonists at Roanoke had
emigrated with a charter; the instrument of March, 1589, was
not an assignment of Raleigh's patent, but the extension of a
grant, already held under its sanction by increasing the
number to whom the rights of that charter belonged. More than
another year elapsed before White could return to search for
his colony and his daughter; and then the island of Roanoke
was a desert. An inscription on the bark of a tree pointed to
Croatan; but the season of the year and the dangers from
storms were pleaded as an excuse for an immediate return. The
conjecture has been hazarded that the deserted colony,
neglected by their own countrymen, were hospitably adopted
into the tribe [the Croatans] of Hatteras Indians. Raleigh
long cherished the hope of discovering some vestiges of their
existence, and sent at his own charge, and, it is said, at
five several times, to search for his liege men. But
imagination received no help in its attempts to trace the fate
of the colony of Roanoke."
G. Bancroft, History of the United States,
part 1, ch.5 (volume 1).
"The Croatans of to-day claim descent from the lost colony.
Their habits, disposition and mental characteristics show
traces both of savage and civilized ancestors. Their language
is the English of 300 years ago, and their names are in many
cases the same as those borne by the original colonists. No
other theory of their origin has been advanced."
S. B. Weeks, The Lost Colony of Roanoke (American
History Association Papers, volume 5, part 4).
"This last expedition [of White, searching for his lost
colony] was not despatched by Raleigh, but by his successors
in the American patent. And our history is now to take leave
of that illustrious man, with whose schemes and enterprises it
ceases to have any further connexion. The ardour of his mind
was not exhausted, but diverted by a multiplicity of new and
not less arduous undertakings. ... Desirous, at the same time,
that a project which he had carried so far should not be
entirely abandoned, and hoping that the spirit of commerce
would preserve an intercourse with Virginia that might
terminate in a colonial establishment, he consented to assign
his patent to Sir Thomas Smith, and a company of merchants in
London, who undertook to establish and maintain a traffic
between England and Virginia. ... It appeared very soon that
Raleigh had transferred his patent to bands very different
from his own. ... Satisfied with a paltry traffic carried on
by a few small vessels, they made no attempt to take
possession of the country: and at the period of Elizabeth's
death, not a single Englishman was settled in America."
J. Grahame, History of the Rise and Progress of the
United States of North America till 1688, chapter 1.
ALSO IN
W. Stith, History of Va., book 1.
F. L. Hawks, History of N. C., volume 1, Nos. 7-8.
AMERICA: A. D. 1602-1605.
The Voyages of Gosnold, Pring, and Weymouth.
The First Englishmen In New England.
Bartholomew Gosnold was a West-of-England mariner who had
served in the expeditions of Sir Walter Raleigh to the
Virginia coast. Under his command, in the spring of 1602,
"with the consent of Sir Walter Raleigh, and at the cost,
among others, of Henry Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton, the
accomplished patron of Shakespeare, a small vessel, called the
Concord, was equipped for exploration in 'the north part of
Virginia,' with a view to the establishment of a colony. At
this time, in the last year of the Tudor dynasty, and nineteen
years after the fatal termination of Gilbert's enterprise,
there was no European Inhabitant of North America, except
those of Spanish birth in Florida, and some twenty or thirty
French, the miserable relics of two frustrated attempts to
settle what they called New France. Gosnold sailed from
Falmouth with a company of thirty-two persons, of whom eight
were seamen, and twenty were to become planters. Taking a
straight course across the Atlantic, instead of the indirect
course by the Canaries and the West Indies which had been
hitherto pursued in voyages to Virginia, at the end of seven
weeks he saw land in Massachusetts Bay, probably near what is
now Salem Harbor. Here a boat came off, of Basque build,
manned by eight natives, of whom two or three were dressed in
European clothes, indicating the presence of earlier foreign
voyagers in these waters. Next he stood to the southward, and
his crew took great quantities of codfish by a head land,
called by him for that reason Cape Cod, the name which it
retains. Gosnold, Brereton, and three others, went on shore,
the first Englishmen who are known to have set foot upon the
soil of Massachusetts. ... Sounding his way cautiously along,
first in a southerly, and then in a westerly direction, and
probably passing to the south of Nantucket, Gosnold next
landed on a small island, now called No Man's Land.
{72}
To this he gave the name of Martha's Vineyard, since
transferred to the larger island further north. ... South of
Buzzard's Bay, and separated on the south by the Vineyard
Sound from Martha's Vineyard, is scattered the group denoted
on modern maps as the Elizabeth Islands. The southwesternmost
of these, now known by the Indian name of Cuttyhunk, was
denominated by Gosnold Elizabeth Island. ... Here Gosnold
found a pond two miles in circumference, separated from the
sea on one side by a beach thirty yards wide, and enclosing 'a
rocky islet, containing near an acre of ground, full of wood and
rubbish.' This islet was fixed upon for a settlement. In three
weeks, while a part of the company were absent on a trading
expedition to the mainland, the rest dug and stoned a cellar,
prepared timber and built a house, which they fortified with
palisades, and thatched with sedge. Proceeding to make an
inventory of their provisions, they found that, after
supplying the vessel, which was to take twelve men on the
return voyage, there would be a sufficiency for only six weeks
for the twenty men who would remain. A dispute arose upon the
question whether the party to be left behind would receive a
share in the proceeds of the cargo of cedar, sassafras, furs,
and other commodities which had been collected. A small party,
going out in quest of shell-fish, was attacked by some
Indians. With men having already, it is likely, little stomach
for such cheerless work, these circumstances easily led to the
decision to abandon for the present the scheme of a
settlement, and in the following month the adventurers sailed
for England, and, after a voyage of five weeks, arrived at
Exmouth. ... The expedition of Gosnold was pregnant with
consequences, though their development was slow. The accounts
of the hitherto unknown country, which were circulated by his
company on their return, excited an earnest interest." The
next year (April, 1603), Martin Pring or Prynne was sent out,
by several merchants of Bristol, with two small vessels.
seeking cargoes of sassafras, which had acquired a high value
on account of supposed medicinal virtues. Pring coasted from
Maine to Martha's Vineyard, secured his desired cargoes, and
gave a good account of the country. Two years later (March,
1605), Lord Soathampton and Lord Wardour sent a vessel
commanded by George Weymouth to reconnoitre the same coast
with an eye to settlements. Weymouth ascended either the
Kennebec or the Penobscot river some 50 or 60 miles and
kidnapped five natives. "Except for this, and for some
addition to the knowledge of the local geography, the voyage
was fruitless."
J. G. Palfrey, History of New England,
volume 1, chapter 2.
ALSO IN
Massachusetts History Society Collection,
3d Series, volume 8 (1843).
J. McKeen, On the Voyage of George Weymouth
(Maine History Society Collection, volume 5).
AMERICA: A. D. 1603-1608.
The First French Settlements in Acadia.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1603-1605, and 1606-1608.
AMERICA: A. D. 1607.
The founding of the English Colony of Virginia, and the
failure in Maine.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1606-1607, and after;
and MAINE: A. D. 1607-1608.
AMERICA: A. D. 1607-1608.
The First Voyages of Henry Hudson.
"The first recorded voyage made by Henry Hudson was undertaken
... for the Muscovy or Russia Company [of England]. Departing
from Gravesend the first of May, 1607, with the intention of
sailing straight across the north pole, by the north of what
is now called Greenland, Hudson found that this land stretched
further to the eastward than he had anticipated, and that a
wall of ice, along which he coasted, extended from Greenland
to Spitzbergen. Forced to relinquish the hope of finding a
passage in the latter vicinity, he once more attempted the
entrance of Davis' Straits by the north of Greenland. This
design was also frustrated and he apparently renewed the
attempt in a lower latitude and nearer Greenland on his
homeward voyage. In this cruise Hudson attained a higher
degree of latitude than any previous navigator. ... He reached
England on his return on the 15th September of that year
[1607]. ... On the 22d of April, 1608, Henry Hudson commenced
his second recorded voyage for the Muscovy or Russia Company,
with the design of 'finding a passage to the East Indies· by
the north-east. ... On the 3d of June, 1608, Hudson had
reached the most northern point of Norway, and on the 11th was
in latitude 75° 24', between Spitzbergen and Nova Zembla."
Failing to pass to the north-east beyond Nova Zembla, he
returned to England in August.
J. M. Read, Jr., Historical Inquiry Concerning Henry
Hudson, pages 133-138.
ALSO IN
G. M. Asher, Henry Hudson, the Navigator
(Hakluyt Society, 1860).
AMERICA: A. D. 1608-1616.
Champlain's Explorations in the Valley of the St. Lawrence and
the Great Lakes.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1608-1611, and 1611-1616.
AMERICA: A. D. 1609.
Hudson's Voyage of Discovery for the Dutch.
"The failure of two expeditions daunted the enterprise of
Hudson's employers [the Muscovy Company, in England]; they
could not daunt the courage of the great navigator, who was
destined to become the rival of Smith and of Champlain. He
longed to tempt once more the dangers of the northern sea;
and, repairing to Holland, he offered, in the service of the
Dutch East India Company, to explore the icy wastes in search
of the coveted passage. The voyage of Smith to Virginia
stimulated desire; the Zealanders, fearing the loss of
treasure, objected; but, by the influence of Balthazar
Moucheron, the directors for Amsterdam resolved on equipping a
small vessel of discovery; and, on the 4th day of April, 1609,
the 'Crescent' [or 'Half-Moon' as the name of the little ship
is more commonly translated], commanded by Hudson, and manned
by a mixed crew of Englishmen and Hollanders, his son being of
the number, set sail for the north-western passage. Masses of
ice impeded the navigation towards Nova Zembla; Hudson, who
had examined the maps of John Smith of Virginia, turned to the
west; and passing beyond Greenland and Newfoundland, and
running down the coast of Acadia, he anchored, probably, in
the mouth of the Penobscot. Then, following the track of
Gosnold, he came upon the promontory of Cape Cod, and,
believing himself its first discoverer, gave it the name of
New Holland. Long afterwards, it was claimed as the
north-eastern boundary of New Netherlands. From the sands of
Cape Cod, he steered a southerly course till he was opposite
the entrance into the bay of Virginia, where Hudson remembered
that his countrymen were planted.
{73}
Then, turning again to the north, he discovered the Delaware
Bay, examined its currents and its soundings, and, without
going on shore, took note of the aspect of the country. On the
3d day of September, almost at the time when Champlain was
invading New York from the north, less than five months after
the truce with Spain, which gave the Netherlands a diplomatic
existence as a state, the 'Crescent' anchored within Sandy
Hook, and from the neighboring shores, that were crowned with
'goodly oakes,' attracted frequent visits from the natives.
After a week's delay, Hudson sailed through the Narrows, and
at the mouth of the river anchored in a harbor which was
pronounced to be very good for all winds. ... Ten days were
employed in exploring the river; the first of Europeans,
Hudson went sounding his way above the Highlands, till at last
the 'Crescent' had sailed some miles beyond the city of
Hudson, and a boat had advanced a little beyond Albany.
Frequent intercourse was held with the astonished natives [and
two battles fought with them]. ... Having completed his
discovery, Hudson descended the stream to which time has given
his name, and on the 4th day of October, about the season of
the return of John Smith to England, he set sail for Europe.
... A happy return voyage brought the 'Crescent' into
Dartmouth. Hudson forwarded to his Dutch employers a brilliant
account of his discoveries; but he never revisited the lands
which he eulogized: and the Dutch East-India Company refused
to search further for the north-western passage."
G. Bancroft, History of the U. S., chapter 15 (or part
2, chapter 12 of "Author's Last Revision").
ALSO IN
H. R. CLEVELAND, Life of Henry Hudson (Library of American
Biographies, volume 10), chapters 3-4.
R. Juet, Journal of Hudson's Voyage (New York History
Society Collection., Second Series, volume 1).
J. V. N. Yates and J. W. Moulton, History of the State of
New York, part 1.
AMERICA: A. D. 1610-1614.
The Dutch occupation of New Netherland, and Block's coasting
exploration.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1610-1614.
AMERICA: A. D. 1614-1615.
The Voyages of Capt. John Smith to North Virginia.
The Naming of the country New England.
"From the time of Capt. Smith's departure from Virginia [see
VIRGINIA: A. D. 1607-1610], till the year 1614, there is a
chasm in his biography. . . . In 1614, probably by his advice
and at his suggestion, an expedition was fitted out by some
London merchants, in the expense of which he also shared, for
the purposes of trade and discovery in New England, or, as it
was then called, North Virginia. ... In March, 1614, he set
sail from London with two ships, one commanded by himself, and
the other by Captain Thomas Hunt. They arrived, April 30th, at
the island of Manhegin, on the coast of Maine, where they
built seven boats. The purposes for which they were sent were
to capture whales and to search for mines of gold or copper,
which were said to be there, and, if these failed, to make up
a cargo of fish and furs. Of mines, they found no indications,
and they found whale-fishing a 'costly conclusion;' for,
although they saw many, and chased them too, they succeeded in
taking none. They thus lost the best part of the fishing
season; but, after giving up their gigantic game, they
diligently employed the months of July and August in taking
and curing codfish, an humble, but more certain prey. While
the crew were thus employed, Captain Smith, with eight men in
a small boat, surveyed and examined the whole coast, from
Penobscot to Cape Cod, trafficking with the Indians for furs,
and twice fighting with them, and taking such observations of
the prominent points as enabled him to construct a map of the
country. He then sailed for England, where he arrived in
August, within six months after his departure. He left Captain
Hunt behind him, with orders to dispose of his cargo of fish
in Spain. Unfortunately, Hunt was a sordid and unprincipled
miscreant, who resolved to make his countrymen odious to the
Indians, and thus prevent the establishment of a permanent
colony, which would diminish the large gains he and a few
others derived by monopolizing a lucrative traffic. For this
purpose, having decoyed 24 of the natives on board his ship,
he carried them off and sold them as slaves in the port of
Malaga. . . . Captain Smith, upon his return, presented his
map of the country between Penobscot and Cape Cod to Prince
Charles (afterwards Charles I.), with a request that he would
substitute others, instead of the 'barbarous names' which had
been given to particular places. Smith himself gave to the
country the name of New England, as he expressly states, and
not Prince Charles, as is commonly supposed. ... The first
port into which Captain Smith put on his return to England was
Plymouth. There he related his adventures to some of his
friends, 'who,' he says, 'as I supposed, were interested in
the dead patent of this unregarded country.' The Plymouth
Company of adventurers to North Virginia, by flattering hopes
and large promises, induced him to engage his services to
them." Accordingly in March, 1615, he sailed from Plymouth,
with two vessels under his command, bearing 16 settlers,
besides their crew. A storm dismasted Smith's ship and drove
her back to Plymouth. "His consort, commanded by Thomas
Dermer, meanwhile proceeded on her voyage, and returned with a
profitable cargo in August; but the object, which was to
effect a permanent settlement, was frustrated. Captain Smith's
vessel was probably found to be so much shattered as to render
it inexpedient to repair her; for we find that he set sail a
second time from Plymouth, on the 24th of June, in a small
bark of 60 tons, manned by 30 men, and carrying with him the
same 16 settlers he had taken before. But an evil destiny
seemed to hang over this enterprise, and to make the voyage a
succession of disasters and disappointments." It ended in
Smith's capture by a piratical French fleet and his detention
for some months, until he made a daring escape in a small
boat. "While he had been detained on board the French pirate,
in order, as he says, 'to keep my perplexed thoughts from too
much meditation of my miserable estate,' he employed himself
in writing a narrative of his two voyages to New England, and
an account of the country. This was published in a quarto form
in June, 1616. ... Captain Smith's work on New England was the
first to recommend that country as a place of settlement."
G. S. Hillard, Life of Captain John Smith (ch. 14-15).
ALSO IN
Captain John Smith, Description of New England.
{74}
AMERICA: A. D. 1619.
Introduction of negro slavery into Virginia.
See VIRGINIA: A. D. 1619.
AMERICA: A. D. 1620.
The Planting of the Pilgrim Colony at Plymouth, and the
Chartering of the Council for New England.
See MASSACHUSETTS (PLYMOUTH COLONY): A. D. 1620;
and NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1620-1623.
AMERICA: A. D. 1620.
Formation of the Government of Rio de La Plata.
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.
AMERICA: A. D. 1621.
Conflicting claims of England and France on the North-eastern coast.
Naming and granting of Nova Scotia.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1621-1631.
AMERICA: A. D. 1629.
The Carolina grant to Sir Robert Heath.
"Sir Robert Heath, attorney-general to Charles I., obtained a
grant of the lands between the 38th [36th?] degree of north
latitude to the river St. Matheo. His charter bears date of
October 5, 1629. ... The tenure is declared to be as ample as
any bishop of Durham [Palatine], in the kingdom of England,
ever held and enjoyed, or ought or could of right have held
and enjoyed. Sir Robert, his heirs and assigns, are
constituted the true and absolute lords and proprietors, and
the country is erected into a province by the name of Carolina
[or Carolana] and the islands are to be called the Carolina
islands. Sir Robert conveyed his right some time after to the
earl of Arundel. This nobleman, it is said, planted several
parts of his acquisition, but his attempt to colonize was
checked by the war with Scotland, and afterwards the civil
war. Lord Maltravers, who soon after, on his father's death,
became earl of Arundel and Sussex ... made no attempt to avail
himself of the grant. ... Sir Robert Heath's grant of land, to
the southward of Virginia, perhaps the most extensive
possession ever owned by an individual, remained for a long
time almost absolutely waste and uncultivated. This vast
extent of territory occupied all the country between the 30th
and 36th degrees of northern latitude, which embraces the
present states of North and South Carolina, Georgia,
[Alabama], Tennessee, Mississippi, and, with very little
exceptions, the whole state of Louisiana, and the territory of
East and West Florida, a considerable part of the state of
Missouri, the Mexican provinces of Texas, Chiuhaha, &c. The
grantee had taken possession of the country, soon after he had
obtained his title, which he afterwards had conveyed to the
earl of Arundel. Henry lord Maltravers appears to have
obtained some aid from the province of Virginia in 1639, at
the desire of Charles I., for the settlement of Carolana, and
the country had since become the property of a Dr. Cox; yet,
at this time, there were two points only in which incipient
English settlements could be discerned; the one on the
northern shore of Albemarle Sound and the streams that flow
into it. The population of it was very thin, and the greatest
portion of it was on the north-east bank of Chowan river. The
settlers had come from that part of Virginia now known as the
County of Nansemond. ... They had been joined by a number of
Quakers and other sectaries, whom the spirit of intolerance
had driven from New England, and some emigrants from Bermudas.
... The other settlement of the English was at the mouth of
Cape Fear river; ... those who composed it had come thither
from New England in 1659. Their attention was confined to
rearing cattle. It cannot now be ascertained whether the
assignees of Carolana ever surrendered the charter under which
it was held, nor whether it was considered as having become
vacated or obsolete by non-user, or by any other means."
F. X. Martin, History of North Carolina,
volume 1, chapter 5 and 7.
AMERICA: A. D. 1629.
The Royal Charter to the Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1623-1629, THE DORCHESTER COMPANY.
AMERICA: A. D. 1629-1631.
The Dutch occupation of the Delaware.
See DELAWARE: A. D. 1629-1631.
AMERICA: A. D. 1629-1632.
English Conquest and brief occupation of New France.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1628-1632.
AMERICA: A. D. 1632.
The Charter to Lord Baltimore and the founding of Maryland.
See MARYLAND: A. D. 1632, and A. D. 1633-1637.
AMERICA: A. D. 1638.
The planting of a Swedish Colony on the Delaware.
See DELAWARE: A. D. 1638-1640.
AMERICA: A. D. 1639-1700.
The Buccaneers and their piratical warfare with Spain.
"The 17th century gave birth to a class of rovers wholly
distinct from any of their predecessors in the annals of the
world, differing as widely in their plans, organization and
exploits as in the principles that governed their actions. ...
After the native inhabitants of Haiti had been exterminated,
and the Spaniards had sailed farther west, a few adventurous
men from Normandy settled on the shores of the island, for the
purpose of hunting the wild bulls and hogs which roamed at
will through the forests. The small island of Tortugas was
their market; thither they repaired with their salted and
smoked meat, their hides, &c., and disposed of them in
exchange for powder, lead, and other necessaries. The places
where these semi-wild hunters prepared the slaughtered
carcases were called 'boucans,' and they themselves became
known as Buccaneers. Probably the world has never before or
since witnessed such an extraordinary association as theirs.
Unburdened by women-folk or children, these men lived in
couples, reciprocally rendering each other services, and
having entire community of property--a condition termed by
them matelotage, from the word 'matelot,' by which they
addressed one another. ... A man on joining the fraternity
completely merged his identity. Each member received a
nickname, and no attempt was ever made to inquire into his
antecedents. When one of their number married, he ceased to be
a buccaneer, having forfeited his membership by so civilized a
proceeding. He might continue to dwell on the coast, and to
hunt cattle, but he was no longer a 'matelot'--as a Benedick
he had degenerated to a 'colonist.' ... Uncouth and lawless
though the buccaneers were, the sinister signification now
attaching to their name would never have been merited had it
not been for the unreasoning jealousy of the Spaniards. The
hunters were actually a source of profit to that nation, yet
from an insane antipathy to strangers the dominant race
resolved on exterminating the settlers. Attacked whilst
dispersed in pursuance of their avocations, the latter fell
easy victims; many of them were wantonly massacred, others
dragged into slavery. ... Breathing hatred and vengeance, 'the
brethren of the coast' united their scattered forces, and a
war of horrible reprisals commenced.
{75}
Fresh troops arrived from Spain, whilst the ranks of the
buccaneers were filled by adventurers of all nations, allured
by love of plunder, and fired with indignation at the
cruelties of the aggressors. ... The Spaniards, utterly
failing to oust their opponents, hit upon a new expedient, so
short-sighted that it reflects but little credit on their
statesmanship. This was the extermination of the horned
cattle, by which the buccaneers derived their means of
subsistence; a general slaughter took place, and the breed was
almost extirpated. ... The puffed up arrogance of the Spaniard
was curbed by no prudential consideration; calling upon every
saint in his calendar, and raining curses on the heretical
buccaneers, he deprived them of their legitimate occupation,
and created wilfully a set of desperate enemies, who harassed
the colonial trade of an empire already betraying signs of
feebleness with the pertinacity of wolves, and who only
desisted when her commerce had been reduced to insignificance.
... Devoured by an undying hatred of their assailants, the
buccaneers developed into a new association--the freebooters."
C. H. Eden, The West Indies, chapter 3.
"The monarchs both of England and France, but especially the
former, connived at and even encouraged the freebooters [a
name which the pronunciation of French sailors transformed
into 'flibustiers,' while that corruption became Anglicized in
its turn and produced the word filibusters], whose services
could be obtained in time of war, and whose actions could be
disavowed in time of peace. Thus buccaneer, filibuster, and
sea-rover, were for the most part at leisure to hunt wild
cattle, and to pillage and massacre the Spaniards wherever
they found an opportunity. When not on some marauding
expedition, they followed the chase." The piratical buccaneers
were first organized under a leader in 1639, the islet of
Tortuga being their favorite rendezvous. "So rapid was the
growth of their settlements that in 1641 we find governors
appointed, and at San Christobal a governor-general named De
Poincy, in charge of the French filibusters in the Indies.
During that year Tortuga was garrisoned by French troops, and
the English were driven out, both from that islet and from
Santo Domingo, securing harborage elsewhere in the islands.
Nevertheless corsairs of both nations often made common cause.
... In [1654] Tortuga was again recaptured by the Spaniards,
but in 1660 fell once more into the hands of the French; and
in their conquest of Jamaica in 1655 the British troops were
reenforced by a large party of buccaneers." The first of the
more famous buccaneers, and apparently the most ferocious
among them all, was a Frenchman called François L'Olonnois,
who harried the coast of Central America between 1660-1665
with six ships and 700 men. At the same time another buccaneer
named Mansvelt, was rising in fame, and with him, as second in
command, a Welshman, Henry Morgan, who became the most
notorious of all. In 1668, Morgan attacked and captured the
strong town of Portobello, on the Isthmus, committing
indescribable atrocities. In 1671 he crossed the Isthmus,
defeated the Spaniards in battle and gained possession of the
great and wealthy city of Panama--the largest and richest in
the New World, containing at the time 30,000 inhabitants. The
city was pillaged, fired and totally destroyed. The exploits
of this ruffian and the stolen riches which he carried home to
England soon afterward, gained the honors of knighthood for
him, from the worthy hands of Charles II. In 1680, the
buccaneers under one Coxon again crossed the Isthmus, seized
Panama, which had been considerably rebuilt, and captured
there a Spanish fleet of four ships, in which they launched
themselves upon the Pacific. From that time their plundering
operations were chiefly directed against the Pacific coast.
Towards the close of the 17th century, the war between England
and France, and the Bourbon alliance of Spain with France,
brought about the discouragement, the decline and finally the
extinction of the buccaneer organization.
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States: Central
America, volume 2, chapter 26-30.
ALSO IN
W. Thornbury, The Buccaneers.
A. O. Exquemelin, History of the Buccaneers.
J. Burney, History of the Buccaneers of Am.
See, also, JAMAICA: A. D. 1655-1796.
AMERICA: A. D. 1655.
Submission of the Swedes on the Delaware to the Dutch.
See DELAWARE: A. D. 1640-1656.
AMERICA: A. D. 1663.
The grant of the Carolinas to Monk, Clarendon, Shaftesbury,
and others.
See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.
AMERICA: A. D. 1664.
English conquest of New Netherland.
See NEW YORK: A. D.1664.
AMERICA: A. D. 1673.
The Dutch reconquest of New Netherland.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1673.
AMERICA: A. D. 1673-1682.
Discovery and exploration of the Mississippi, by Marquette and
La Salle.
Louisiana named and possessed by the French.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1634-1673, and 1669-1687.
AMERICA: A. D. 1674.
Final surrender of New Netherland to the English.
See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1674.
AMERICA: A. D. 1681.
The proprietary grant to William Penn.
See PENNSYLVANIA: A. D,1681.
AMERICA: A. D. 1689-1697.
The first lnter-Colonial War: King Williams's War (The war of
the League of Augsburg).
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1689-1690; 1692-1697;
also, NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1694-1697.
AMERICA: A. D. 1690.
The first Colonial Congress.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1690;
also, CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1689-1690.
AMERICA: A. D. 1698-1712.
The French colonization of Louisiana.
Broad claims of France to the whole Valley of the Mississippi.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1698-1712.
AMERICA: A. D. 1700-1735.
The Spread of French occupation in the Mississippi Valley and
on the Lakes.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1700-1735.
AMERICA: A. D. 1702.
Union of the two Jerseys as a royal province.
See NEW JERSEY: A. D. 1688-1738.
AMERICA: A. D. 1702-1713.
The Second Inter-Colonial War: Queen Anne's War (The War of
the Spanish Succession).
Final acquisition of Nova Scotia by the English.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1702-1710;
CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1711-1713.
AMERICA: A. D. 1713.
Division of territory between England and France by the Treaty
of Utrecht.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE) A. D. 1711-1713.
{76}
AMERICA: A. D. 1729.
End of the proprietary government in North Carolina.
See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1688-1729.
AMERICA: A. D. 1732.
The colonization of Georgia by General Oglethrope.
See GEORGIA: A. D. 1732-1739.
AMERICA: A. D. 1744-1748.
The Third Inter-Colonial War: King George's War (The War of
the Austrian Succession).
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1744; 1745; and 1745-1748.
AMERICA: A. D. 1748-1760.
Unsettled boundary disputes of England and France.
The fourth and last inter-colonial war, called the French and
Indian War (The Seven Years War of Europe).
English Conquest of Canada.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1750-1753; 1760;
NOVA SCOTIA: A. D.1749-1755; 1755;
OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1748-1754; 1754; 1755;
CAPE BRETON ISLAND: A. D. 1758-1760.
AMERICA: A. D. 1749.
Introduction of negro slavery into Georgia.
See GEORGIA: A. D. 1735-1749.
AMERICA: A. D. 1750-1753:
Dissensions among the English Colonies on the eve of the great
French War.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1750-1753.
AMERICA: A. D. 1754.
The Colonial Congress at Albany.
Franklin's Plan of Union.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1754.
AMERICA: A. D. 1763.
The Peace of Paris.
Canada, Cape Breton, Newfoundland, and Louisiana east of the
Mississippi (except New Orleans) ceded by France to Great
Britain.
West of the Mississippi and New Orleans to Spain.--Florida by
Spain to Great Britain.
See SEVEN YEARS WAR.
AMERICA: A. D. 1763-1764.
Pontiac's War.
See PONTIAC'S WAR.
AMERICA: A. D. 1763-1766.
Growing discontent of the English Colonies.
The question of taxation.
The Stamp Act and its repeal.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1760-1775, to 1766.
AMERICA: A. D. 1766-1769.
Spanish occupation of New Orleans and Western Louisiana, and
the revolt against it.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1766-1768, and 1769.
AMERICA: A. D. 1775-1783.
Independence of the English colonies achieved.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1775 (APRIL) to 1783 (SEPTEMBER).
AMERICA: A. D. 1776.
Erection of the Spanish Vice-royalty of Buenos Ayres.
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.
AMERICA: A. D. 1810-1816.
Revolt, independence and Confederation of the Argentine
Provinces.
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1806-1820.
AMERICA: A. D. 1818.
Chilean independence achieved.
See CHILE: A. D. 1810-1818.
AMERICA: A. D. 1820-1821.
Independence Acquired by Mexico and the Central American
States.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1820-1826,
and CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1821-1871.
AMERICA: A. D. 1824.
Peruvian independence won at Ayacucho.
See PERU: A. D. 1820-1826.
----------AMERICA: End----------
AMERICAN ABORIGINES.
Linguistic Classification.
In the Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology (for
1885-86, published in 1891), Major J. W. Powell, the Director
of the Bureau, has given a classification of the languages of
the North American aborigines based upon the most recent
investigations. The following is a list of families of speech,
or linguistic stocks, which are defined and named:
"Adaizan [identified since the publication of this list as
being but part of the Caddoan stock].
Algonquian.
Athapascan.
Attacapan.
Beothukan.
Caddoan.
Chimakuan.
Chimarikan.
Chimmesyan.
Chinookan.
Chitimachan.
Chumashan.
Coahuiltecan.
Copehan.
Costanoan.
Eskimauan.
Esselenian.
Iroquoian.
Kalapooian.
Karankawan.
Keresan.
Kiowan.
Kituanahan.
Koluschan.
Kulanapan.
Kusan.
Lutuamian.
Mariposan.
Moquelumnan.
Muskhogean.
Natchesan.
Palaihnihan.
Piman.
Pujunan.
Quoratean.
Salinan.
Salishan.
Sastean.
Shahaptian.
Shoshonean.
Siouan.
Skittagetan.
Takilman.
Tañoan.
Timuquanan.
Tonikan.
Tonkawan.
Uchean.
Waiilatpuan.
Wakashan.
Washoan.
Weitspekan.
Wishoskan.
Yokonan.
Yanan.
Yukian.
Yuman.
Zufiian."
These families are severally defined in the summary of
information given below, and the relations to them of all
tribes having any historical importance are shown by
cross-references and otherwise; but many other groupings and
associations, and many tribal names not scientifically
recognized, are likewise exhibited here, for the reason that
they have a significance in history and are the subjects of
frequent allusion in literature.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Abipones.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Abnakis, or Abenaques, or Taranteens.
"The Abnakis were called Taranteens by the English, and
Owenagungas by the New Yorkers. ... We must admit that a large
portion of the North American Indians were called Abnakis, if
not by themselves, at least by others. This word Abnaki is
found spelt Abenaques, Abenaki, Wapanachki, and Wabenakies by
different writers of various nations, each adopting the manner
of spelling according to the rules of pronunciation of their
respective native languages. ... The word generally received
is spelled thus, Abnaki, but it should be 'Wanbanaghi,' from
the Indian word 'wanbanban,' designating the people of the
Aurora Borealis, or in general, of the place where the sky
commences to appear white at the breaking of the day. ... It
has been difficult for different writers to determine the
number of nations or tribes comprehended under this word
Abnaki. It being a general word, by itself designates the
people of the east or northeast. ... We find that the word
Abnaki was applied in general, more or less, to all the
Indians of the East, by persons who were not much acquainted
with the aborigines of the country. On the contrary, the early
writers and others well acquainted with the natives of New
France and Acadia, and the Indians themselves, by Abnakis
always pointed out a particular nation existing north-west and
south of the Kennebec river, and they never designated any
other people of the Atlantic shore, from Cape Hatteras to
Newfoundland. ... The Abnakis had five great villages, two
amongst the French colonies, which must be the village of St.
Joseph or Sillery, and that of St. Francis de Sales, both in
Canada, three on the head waters, or along three rivers,
between Acadia and New England. These three rivers are the
Kennebec, the Androscoggin, and the Saco. ... The nation of
the Abnakis bear evident marks of having been an original
people in their name, manners, and language. They show a kind
of civilization which must be the effect of antiquity, and of
a past flourishing age."
E. Vetromile, The Abnaki Indians
(Maine Historical Society Collection, volume 6).
See, also, below:
ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
{77}
For some account of the wars of the Abnakis, with the New
England colonies,
See
CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1689-1690, and 1692-1697;
NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1675 (JULY-SEPT.); 1702-1710, 1711-1713;
and NOVA SCOTIA: A. D. 1713-1730.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Absarokas, Upsarokas, or Crows.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Acawoios.
See below: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Acolhuas.
See MEXICO, A. D. 1325-1502.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Adais.
[Footnote: See Note, Appendix E.]
These Indians were a "tribe who, according to Dr. Sibley,
lived about the year 1800 near the old Spanish fort or mission
of Adaize, 'about 40 miles from Natchitoches, below the
Yattassees, on a lake called Lac Macdon, which communicates
with the division of Red River that passes by Bayou Pierre'
[Lewis and Clarke]. A vocabulary of about 250 words is all
that remains to us of their language, which according to the
collector, Dr. Sibley, 'differs from all others, and is so
difficult to speak or understand that no nation can speak ten
words of it. ... A recent comparison of this vocabulary by Mr.
Gatschet, with several Caddoan dialects, has led to the
discovery that a considerable percentage of the Adái words
have a more or less remote affinity with Caddoan, and he
regards it as a Caddoan dialect."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 45-46.
See preceding page.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Adirondacks.
"This is a term bestowed by the Iroquois, in derision, on the
tribes who appear, at an early day, to have descended the
Utawas river, and occupied the left banks of the St. Lawrence,
above the present site of Quebec, about the close of the 15th
century. It is said to signify men who eat trees, in allusion
to their using the bark of certain trees for food, when
reduced to straits, in their war excursions. The French, who
entered the St. Lawrence from the gulf, called the same people
Algonquins--a generic appellation, which has been long
employed and come into universal use, among historians and
philologists. According to early accounts, the Adirondacks had
preceded the Iroquois in arts and attainments."
H. R. Schoolcraft, Notes on the Iroquois, chapter 5.
See, also, below: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY: THEIR CONQUESTS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Æsopus Indians.
See below: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Agniers.
Among several names which the Mohawks (see below: IROQUOIS)
bore in early colonial history was that of the Agniers.
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, volume 1, page 9,
foot-note.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Albaias.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Aleuts.
See below: ESKIMAUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Algonquian (Algonkin) Family.
"About the period 1500-1600, those related tribes whom we now
know by the name of Algonkins were at the height of their
prosperity. They occupied the Atlantic coast from the Savannah
river on the south to the strait of Belle Isle on the north.
... The dialects of all these were related, and evidently at
some distant day had been derived from the same primitive
tongue. Which of them had preserved the ancient forms most
closely, it may be premature to decide positively, but the
tendency of modern studies has been to assign that place to
the Cree--the northernmost of all. We cannot erect a
genealogical tree of these dialects. ... We may, however,
group them in such a manner as roughly to indicate their
relationship. This I do"--in the following list:
"Cree.
Old Algonkin.
Montagnais.
Chipeway, Ottawa, Pottawattomie, Miami, Peoria, Pea,
Piankishaw, Kaskaskia, Menominee, Sac, Fox, Kikapoo.
Sheshatapoosh, Secoffee, Micmac, Melisceet, Etchemin, Abnaki.
Mohegan, Massachusetts, Shawnee, Minsi, Unami, Unalachtigo
[the last three named forming, together, the nation of the
Lenape or Delawares], Nanticoke, Powhatan, Pampticoke.
Blackfoot, Gros Ventre, Sheyenne.
... All the Algonkin nations who dwelt north of the Potomac,
on the east shore of Chesapeake Bay, and in the basins of the
Delaware and Hudson rivers, claimed near kinship and an
identical origin, and were at times united into a loose,
defensive confederacy. By the western and southern tribes they
were collectively known as Wapanachkik--' those of the eastern
region'--which in the form Abnaki is now confined to the
remnant of a tribe in Maine. ... The members of the
confederacy were the Mohegans (Mahicanni) of the Hudson, who
occupied the valley of that river to the falls above the site
of Albany, the various New Jersey tribes, the Delawares proper
on the Delaware river and its branches, including the Minsi or
Monseys, among the mountains, the Nanticokes, between
Chesapeake Bay and the Atlantic, and the small tribe called
Canai, Kanawhas or Ganawese, whose towns were on tributaries
of the Potomac and Patuxent. ... Linguistically, the Mohegans
were more closely allied to the tribes of New England than to
those of the Delaware Valley. Evidently, most of the tribes of
Massachusetts and Connecticut were comparatively recent
offshoots of the parent stem on the Hudson, supposing the
course of migration had been eastward. ... The Nanticokes
occupied the territory between Chesapeake Bay and the ocean,
except its southern extremity, which appears to have been
under the control of the Powhatan tribe of Virginia."
D. G. Brinton, The Lenape and their Legends.
chapters 1-2.
"Mohegans, Munsees, Manhattans, Metöacs, and other affiliated
tribes and bands of Algonquin lineage, inhabited the banks of
the Hudson and the islands, bay and seaboard of New York,
including Long Island, during the early periods of the rise of
the Iroquois Confederacy. ... The Mohegans finally retired
over the Highlands east of them into the valley of the
Housatonic. The Munsees and Nanticokes retired to the Delaware
river and reunited with their kindred, the Lenapees, or modern
Delawares. The Manhattans, and numerous other bands and
sub-tribes melted away under the influence of liquor and died
in their tracks."
H. R. Schoolcraft, Notes on the Iroquois, chapter 5.
{78}
"On the basis of a difference in dialect, that portion of the
Algonquin Indians which dwelt in New England has been classed
in two divisions, one consisting of those who inhabited what
is now the State of Maine, nearly up to its western border,
the other consisting of the rest of the native population. The
Maine Indians may have been some 15,000 in number, or somewhat
less than a third of the native population of New England.
That portion of them who dwelt furthest towards the east were
known by the name of Etetchemins. The Abenaquis, including the
Tarratines, hunted on both sides of the Penobscot, and
westward as far as the Saco, if not quite to the Piscataqua.
The tribes found in the rest of New England were designated by
a greater variety of names. The home of the Penacook or
Pawtucket Indians was in the southeast corner of what is now
New Hampshire and the contiguous region of Massachusetts. Next
dwelt the Massachusetts tribe, along the bay of that name.
Then were found successively the Pokanokets, or Wampanoags, in
the southeasterly region of Massachusetts, and by Buzzard's
and Narragansett Bays; the Narragansetts, with a tributary
race called Nyantics in what is now the western part of the
State of Rhode Island; the Pequots, between the Narragansetts
and the river formerly called the Pequot River, now the
Thames; and the Mohegans, spreading themselves beyond the
River Connecticut. In the central region of Massachusetts were
the Nipmucks, or Nipnets; and along Cape Cod were the Nausets,
who appeared to have owed some fealty to the Pokanokets. The
New England Indians exhibited an inferior type of humanity.
... Though fleet and agile when excited to some occasional
effort, they were found to be incapable of continuous labor.
Heavy and phlegmatic, they scarcely wept or smiled."
J. G. Palfrey, Compendious History of New England,
book 1, chapter 3 (volume 1).
"The valley of the 'Cahohatatea,' or Mauritius River [i. e.,
the Hudson River, as now named] at the time Hudson first
ascended its waters, was inhabited, chiefly, by two aboriginal
races of Algonquin lineage, afterwards known among the English
colonists by the generic names of Mohegans and Mincees. The
Dutch generally called the Mohegans, Mahicans; and the
Mincees, Sanhikans. These two tribes were subdivided into
numerous minor bands, each of which had a distinctive name.
The tribes on the east side of the river were generally
Mohegans; those on the west side, Mincees. They were
hereditary enemies. ... Long Island, or 'Sewan-hacky,' was
occupied by the savage tribe of Metowacks, which was
subdivided into various clans. ... Staten Island, on the
opposite side of the bay, was inhabited by the Monatons. ...
Inland, to the west, lived the Raritans and the Hackinsacks;
while the regions in the vicinity of the well-known
'Highlands,' south of Sandy Hook, were inhabited by a band or
sub-tribe called the Nevesincks or Navisinks. ... To the south
and west, covering the centre of New Jersey, were the
Aquamachukes and the Stankekans; while the valley of the
Delaware, northward from the Schuylkill, was inhabited by
various tribes of the Lenape race. ... The island of the
Manhattans" was occupied by the tribe which received that name
(see MANHATTAN). On the shores of the river, above, dwelt the
Tappans, the Weckquaesgeeks, the Sint Sings, "whose chief
village was named Ossin-Sing, or 'the Place of Stones,'" the
Pachami, the Waorinacks, the Wappingers, and the
Waronawankongs. "Further north, and occupying the present
counties of Ulster and Greene, were the Minqua clans of
Minnesincks, Nanticokes, Mincees, and Delawares. These clans
had pressed onward from the upper valley of the Delaware. ...
They were generally known among the Dutch as the Æsopus
Indians."
J. R Brodhead, History of the State of New York, volume 1,
chapter 3
"The area formerly occupied by the Algonquian family was more
extensive than that of any other linguistic stock in North
America, their territory reaching from Labrador to the Rocky
Mountains, and from Churchill River of Hudson Bay as far south
at least as Pamlico Sound of North Carolina. In the eastern
part of this territory was an area occupied by Iroquoian
tribes, surrounded on almost all sides by their Algonquian
neighbors. On the south the Algonquian tribes were bordered by
those of Iroquoian and Siouan (Catawba) stock, on the
southwest and west by the Muskhogean and Siouan tribes, and on
the northwest by the Kitunahan and the great Athapascan
families, while along the coast of Labrador and the eastern
shore of Hudson Bay they came in contact with the Eskimo, who
were gradually retreating before them to the north. In
Newfoundland they encountered the Beothukan family, consisting
of but a single tribe. A portion of the Shawnee at some early
period had separated from the main body of the tribe in
central Tennessee and pushed their way down to the Savannah
River in South Carolina, where, known as Savannahs, they
carried on destructive wars with the surrounding tribes until
about the beginning of the 18th century they were finally
driven out and joined the Delaware in the north. Soon
afterwards the rest of the tribe was expelled by the Cherokee
and Chicasa, who thenceforward claimed all the country
stretching north to the Ohio River. The Cheyenne and Arapaho,
two allied tribes of this stock, had become separated from
their kindred on the north and had forced their way through
hostile tribes across the Missouri to the Black Hills country
of South Dakota, and more recently into Wyoming and Colorado,
thus forming the advance guard of the Algonquian stock in that
direction, having the Siouan tribes behind them and those of
the Shoshonean family in front. [The following are the]
principal tribes: Abnaki, Algonquin, Arapaho, Cheyenne, Conoy,
Cree, Delaware, Fox, Illinois, Kickapoo, Mahican, Massachuset,
Menominee, Miami, Micmac, Mohegan, Montagnais, Montauk,
Munsee, Nanticoke, Narraganset, Nauset, Nipmuc, Ojibwa,
Ottawa, Pamlico, Pennacook, Pequot, Piankishaw, Pottawotomi,
Powhatan, Sac, Shawnee, Siksika, Wampanoag, Wappinger. The
present number of the Algonquian stock is about 95,600, of
whom about 60,000 are in Canada and the remainder in the
United States."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 47-48.
ALSO IN
J. W. De Forest, History of the Indians of Connecticut.
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of the Indian Tribes (Archæologia
Americana, volume 2), intro., section 2.
S. G. Drake, Aboriginal Races of N. Am., book 2-3.
See, also, below:
DELAWARES; HORIKANS; SHAWANESE; SUSQUEHANNAS; OJIBWAS;
ILLINOIS.
For the Indian wars of New England,
See NEW ENGLAND:
A. D. 1637 (THE PEQUOT WAR);
A. D. 1674-1675 to 1676-1678 (KING PHILIP'S WAR).
See, also, PONTIAC'S WAR.
{79}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Alibamus, or Alabamas.
See below: MUSKHOOEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Alleghans, or Allegewi, or Talligewi.
"The oldest tribe of the United States, of which there is a
distinct tradition, were the Alleghans. The term is
perpetuated in the principal chain of mountains traversing the
country. This tribe, at an antique period, had the seat of
their power in the Ohio Valley and its confluent streams,
which were the sites of their numerous towns and villages.
They appear originally to have borne the name of Alli, or
Alleg, and hence the names of Talligewi and Allegewi. (Trans.
Am. Phi. Society, volume 1.) By adding to the radical of this
word the particle 'hany' or 'ghany,' meaning river, they
described the principal scene of their residence--namely, the
Alleghany, or River of the Alleghans, now called Ohio. The
word Ohio is of Iroquois origin, and of a far later period;
having been bestowed by them after their conquest of the
country, in alliance with the Lenapees, or ancient Delawares.
(Phi. Trans.) The term was applied to the entire river, from
its confluence with the Mississippi, to its origin in the
broad spurs of the Alleghanies, in New York and Pennsylvania.
... There are evidences of antique labors in the alluvial
plains and valleys of the Scioto, Miami, and Muskingum, the
Wabash, Kaskaskia, Cahokia, and Illinois, denoting that the
ancient Alleghans, and their allies and confederates,
cultivated the soil, and were semi-agriculturists. These
evidences have been traced, at late periods, to the fertile
table-lands of Indiana and Michigan. The tribes lived in fixed
towns, cultivating extensive fields of the zea-maize; and
also, as denoted by recent discoveries, ... of some species of
beans, vines, and esculents. They were, in truth, the mound
builders."
H. R. Schoolcraft, Information respecting the Indian
Tribes, part 5, page 133.
This conclusion, to which Mr. Schoolcraft had arrived, that
the ancient Alleghans or Tallegwi were the mound builders of
the Ohio Valley is being sustained by later investigators, and
seems to have become an accepted opinion among those of
highest authority. The Alleghans, moreover, are being
identified with the Cherokees of later times, in whom their
race, once supposed to be extinct, has apparently survived;
while the fact, long suspected, that the Cherokee language is
of the Iroquois family is being proved by the latest studies.
According to Indian tradition, the Alleghans were driven from
their ancient seats, long ago, by a combination against them
of the Lenape (Delawares) and the Mengwe (Iroquois). The route
of their migrations is being traced by the character of the
mounds which they built, and of the remains gathered from the
mounds. "The general movement [of retreat before the Iroquois
and Lenape] ... must have been southward, ... and the exit of
the Ohio mound-builders was, in all probability, up the
Kanawah Valley on the same line that the Cherokees appear to
have followed in reaching their historical locality. ... If
the hypothesis here advanced be correct, it is apparent that
the Cherokees entered the immediate valley of the Mississippi
from the northwest, striking it in the region of Iowa."
C. Thomas, The Problem of the Ohio Mounds (Bureau of
Ethnology, 1889).
ALSO IN The same,
Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the U. S.
(Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1883-84).
J. Heckewelder, Account of the Indian Nations, chapter 1.
See, below:
CHEROKEES, and IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY;
also AMERICA, PREHISTORIC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Amahuacas.
See below: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Andastés.
See below: SUSQUEHANNAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Andesians.
"The term Andesians or Antesians, is used with geographical
rather than ethnological limits, and embraces a number of
tribes. First of these are the Cofan in Equador, east of
Chimborazo. They fought valiantly against the Spaniards, and
in times past killed many of the missionaries sent among them.
Now they are greatly reduced and have become more gentle. The
Huamaboya are their near neighbors. The Jivara, west of the
river Pastaca, are a warlike tribe, who, possibly through a
mixture of Spanish blood, have a European cast of countenance
and a beard. The half Christian Napo or Quijo and their
peaceful neighbors, the Zaporo, live on the Rio Napo. The
Yamco, living on the lower Chambiva and crossing the Marañon,
wandering as far as Saryacu, have a clearer complexion. The
Pacamora and the Yuguarzongo live on the Maranon, where it
leaves its northerly course and bends toward the east. The
Cochiquima live on the lower Yavari; the Mayoruna, or Barbudo,
on the middle Ucayali beside the Campo and Cochibo, the most
terrible of South American Indians; they dwell in the woods
between the Tapiche and the Marañon, and like the Jivaro have
a beard. The Pano, who formerly dwelt in the territory of
Lalaguna, but who now live in villages on the upper Ucayali,
are Christians. ... Their language is the principal one on the
river, and it is shared by seven other tribes called
collectively by the missionaries Manioto or Mayno. ... Within
the woods on the right bank live the Amahuaca and Shacaya. On
the north they join the Remo, a powerful tribe who are
distinguished from all the others by the custom of tattooing.
Outside this Pano linguistic group stand the Campa, Campo, or
Antis on the east slope of the Peruvian Cordillera at the
source of the Rio Beni and its tributaries. The Chontaquiros,
or Piru, now occupy almost entirely the bank of the Ucayali
below the Pachilia. The Mojos or Moxos live in the Bolivian
province of Moxos with the small tribes of the Baure, Itonama,
Pacaguara. A number of smaller tribes belonging to the
Antesian group need not be enumerated. The late Professor
James Orton described the Indian tribes of the territory
between Quito and the river Amazon. The Napo approach the type
of the Quichua. ... Among all the Indians of the Provincia del
Oriente, the tribe of Jivaro is one of the largest. These
people are divided into a great number of sub-tribes. All of
these speak the clear musical Jivaro language. They are
muscular, active men. ... The Morona are cannibals in the full
sense of the word. ... The Campo, still very little known, is
perhaps the largest Indian tribe in Eastern Peru, and,
according to some, is related to the Inca race, or at least
with their successors. They are said to be cannibals, though
James Orton does not think this possible. ... The nearest
neighbors of the Campo are the Chontakiro, or Chontaquiro, or
Chonquiro, called also Piru, who, according to Paul Marcoy,
are said to be of the same origin with the Campo; but the
language is wholly different. ... Among the Pano people are
the wild Conibo; they are the most interesting, but are
passing into extinction."
The Standard Natural History (J. S. Kingsley, editor),
volume 6, pages 227-231.
{80}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Apache Group [Footnote: See Note, Appendix E.]
Under the general name of the Apaches "I include all the
savage tribes roaming through New Mexico, the north-western
portion of Texas, a small part of northern Mexico, and
Arizona. ... Owing to their roving proclivities and incessant
raids they are led first in one direction and then in another.
In general terms they may be said to range about as follows:
The Comanches, Jetans, or Nauni, consisting of three tribes,
the Comanches proper, the Yamparacks, and Tenawas, inhabiting
northern Texas, eastern Chihuahua, Nuevo Leon, Coahuila,
Durango, and portions of south-western New Mexico, by language
allied to the Shoshone family; the Apaches, who call
themselves Shis Inday, or 'men of the woods,' and whose tribal
divisions are the Chiricaguis, Coyoteros, Faraones, Gileños,
Lipanes, Llaneros, Mescaleros, Mimbreños, Natages, Pelones,
Pinaleños, Tejuas, Tontos, and Vaqueros, roaming over New
Mexico, Arizona, North-western Texas, Chihuahua and Sonora,
and who are allied by language to the great Tinneh family; the
Navajos, or Tenuai, 'men,' as they designate themselves,
having linguistic affinities with the Apache nation, with
which they are sometimes classed, living in and around the
Sierra de los Mimbres; the Mojaves, occupying both banks of
the Colorado in Mojave Valley; the Hualapais, near the
head-waters of Bill Williams Fork; the Yumas, on the east bank
of the Colorado, near its junction with the Rio Gila; the
Cosninos, who, like the Hualapais, are sometimes included in
the Apache nation, ranging through the Mogollon Mountains; and
the Yampais, between Bill Williams Fork and the Rio
Hassayampa. ... The Apache country is probably the most desert
of all. ... In both mountain and desert the fierce, rapacious
Apache, inured from childhood to hunger and thirst, and heat
and cold, finds safe retreat. ... The Pueblos ... are nothing
but partially reclaimed Apaches or Comanches."
H. H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 5.
Dr. Brinton prefers the name Yuma for the whole of
the Apache Group, confining the name Apache (that being the
Yuma word for "fighting men") to the one tribe so called. "It
has also been called the Katchan or Cuchan stock."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 109.
See, also, below: ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Apalaches.
"Among the aboriginal tribes of the United States perhaps none
is more enigmatical than the Apalaches. They are mentioned as
an important nation by many of the early French and Spanish
travellers and historians, their name is preserved by a bay
and river on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico, and by the
great eastern coast range of mountains, and has been applied
by ethnologists to a family of cognate nations that found
their hunting grounds from the Mississippi to the Atlantic and
from the Ohio river to the Florida Keys; yet, strange to say,
their own race and place have been but guessed at." The
derivation of the name of the Apalaches "has been a 'questio
vexata' among Indianologists." We must "consider it an
indication of ancient connections with the southern continent,
and in itself a pure Carib word. 'Apáliché' in the Tamanaca
dialect of the Guaranay stem on the Orinoco signifies 'man,'
and the earliest application of the name in the northern
continent was as the title of the chief of a country, 'l'homme
par excellence,' and hence, like very many other Indian tribes
(Apaches, Lenni Lenape, Illinois), his subjects assumed by
eminence the proud appellation of 'The Men.' ... We have ...
found that though no general migration took place from the
continent southward, nor from the islands northward, yet there
was a considerable intercourse in both directions; that not
only the natives of the greater and lesser Antilles and
Yucatan, but also numbers of the Guaranay stem of the southern
continent, the Caribs proper, crossed the Straits of Florida
and founded colonies on the shores of the Gulf of Mexico; that
their customs and language became to a certain extent grafted
upon those of the early possessors of the soil; and to this
foreign language the name Apalache belongs. As previously
stated, it was used as a generic title, applied to a
confederation of many nations at one time under the domination
of one chief, whose power probably extended from the Alleghany
mountains on the north to the shore of the Gulf; that it
included tribes speaking a tongue closely akin to the Choktah
is evident from the fragments we have remaining. ... The
location of the tribe in after years is very uncertain. Dumont
placed them in the northern part of what is now Alabama and
Georgia, near the mountains that bear their name. That a
portion of them did live in this vicinity is corroborated by
the historians of South Carolina, who say that Colonel Moore,
in 1703, found them 'between the head-waters of the Savannah
and Altamaha.' ... According to all the Spanish authorities,
on the other hand, they dwelt in the region of country between
the Suwannee and Appalachicola rivers--yet must not be
confounded with the Apalachicolos. ... They certainly had a
large and prosperous town in this vicinity, said to contain
1,000 warriors. ... I am inclined to believe that these were
different branches of the same confederacy. ... In the
beginning of the 18th century they suffered much from the
devastations of the English, French and Creeks. ... About the
time Spain regained possession of the soil, they migrated to
the West and settled on the Bayou Rapide of Red River. Here
they had a village numbering about 50 souls."
D. G. Brinton, Notes on the Floridian Peninsula,
chapter 2.
See, also, below: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Apelousas.
See TEXAS: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Araicu.
See below: GUCK ON COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Arapahoes.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Araucanians.
See CHILE.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Arawaks, or Arauacas.
See below: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Arecunas.
See below: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Arikaras.
See below: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Arkansas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Assiniboins.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Athapascan Family.
Chippewyans.
Tinneh.
Sarcees [Footnote: See Note, Appendix E.]
"This name [Athapascans or Athabascans] has been applied to a
class of tribes who are situated north of the great Churchill
river, and north of the source of the fork of the
Saskatchawine, extending westward till within about 150 miles
of the Pacific Ocean. ... The name is derived, arbitrarily,
from Lake Athabasca, which is now more generally called the
Lake of the Hills. Surrounding this lake extends the tribe of
the Chippewyans, a people so-called by the Kenistenos and
Chippewas, because they were found to be clothed, in some
primary encounter, in the scanty garb of the fisher's skin.
... We are informed by Mackenzie that the territory occupied
by the Chippewyans extends between the parallels of 60° and
65° North and longitudes from 100° to 110° West."
H. R. Schoolcraft, Information Respecting the Indian
Tribes, part 5, page 172.
{81}
"The Tinneh may be divided into four great families of
nations; namely, the Chippewyans, or Athabascas, living
between Hudson Bay and the Rocky Mountains; the Tacullies, or
Carriers, of New Caledonia or North-western British America;
the Kutchins, occupying both banks of the Upper Yukon and its
tributaries, from near its mouth to the Mackenzie River, and
the Kenai, inhabiting the interior from the lower Yukon to
Copper River."
H. H. Bancroft, The Native Races of the Pacific States,
chapter 2.
"The Indian tribes of Alaska and the adjacent region may be
divided into two groups. ...
1. Tinneh--Chippewyans of
authors. ... Father Petitot discusses the terms Athabaskans,
Chippewayans, Montagnais, and Tinneh as applied to this group
of Indians. ... This great family includes a large number of
American tribes extending from near the mouth of the Mackenzie
south to the borders of Mexico. The Apaches and Navajos belong
to it, and the family seems to intersect the continent of
North America in a northerly and southerly direction,
principally along the flanks of the Rocky Mountains. ... The
designation [Tinneh] proposed by Messrs. Ross and Gibbs has
been accepted by most modern ethnologists. ...
2. T'linkets, which family includes the Yakutats and other
groups.
W. H. Dall, Tribes of the Extreme Northwest
(Contributions to North American Ethnology, volume 1).
"Wherever found, the members of this group present a certain
family resemblance. In appearance they are tall and strong,
the forehead low with prominent superciliary ridges, the eyes
slightly oblique, the nose prominent but wide toward the base,
the mouth large, the hands and feet small. Their strength and
endurance are often phenomenal, but in the North, at least,
their longevity is slight, few living beyond fifty.
Intellectually they rank below most of their neighbors, and
nowhere do they appear as fosterers of the germs of
civilization. Where, as among the Navajos, we find them having
some repute for the mechanical arts, it turns out that this is
owing to having captured and adopted the members of more
gifted tribes. ... Agriculture was not practised either in the
north or south, the only exception being the Navajos, and with
them the inspiration came from other stocks. ... The most
cultured of their bands were the Navajos, whose name is said
to signify 'large cornfields,' from their extensive
agriculture. When the Spaniards first met them in 1541 they
were tillers of the soil, erected large granaries for their
crops, irrigated their fields by artificial water courses or
acequias, and lived in substantial dwellings, partly
underground; but they had not then learned the art of weaving
the celebrated 'Navajo blankets,' that being a later
acquisition of their artisans."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, pages 69-72.
See, above, APACHE GROUP, and BLACKFEET.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Atsinas (Caddoes).
See Note, Appendix E.
See below: BLACKFEET.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Attacapan Family.
"Derivation: From a Choctaw word meaning 'man-eater.' Little
is known of the tribe, the language of which forms the basis
of the present family. The sole knowledge possessed by
Gallatin was derived from a vocabulary and some scanty
information furnished by Dr. John Sibley, who collected his
material in the year 1805. Gallatin states that the tribe was
reduced to 50 men. ... Mr. Gatschet collected some 2,000 words
and a considerable body of text. His vocabulary differs
considerably from the one furnished by Dr. Sibley and
published by Gallatin. ... The above material seems to show
that the Attacapa language is distinct from all others, except
possibly the Chitimachan."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 57.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Aymaras.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Aztecs.
See below: MAYAS;
also MEXICO: A. D. 1325-1502;
and AZTEC AND MAYA PICTURE WRITING.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Bakairi.
See below: CARIBS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Balchitas.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Bannacks.
See below: SNOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Barbudo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Baré.
See below: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Baure.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Beothukan Family.
The Beothuk were a tribe, now extinct, which is believed to
have occupied the whole of Newfoundland at the time of its
discovery. What is known of the language of the Beothuk
indicates no relationship to any other American tongue.
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology, page 57.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Biloxis.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Blackfeet, or Siksikas.
See Note, Appendix E.
"The tribe that wandered the furthest from the primitive home
of the stock [the Algonquian] were the Blackfeet, or Sisika,
which word has this signification. It is derived from their
earlier habitat in the valley of the Red river of the north,
where the soil was dark and blackened their moccasins. Their
bands include the Blood or Kenai and the Piegan Indians. Half
a century ago they were at the head of a confederacy which
embraced these and also the Sarcee (Tinné) and the Atsina
(Caddo) nations, and numbered about 30,000 souls. They have an
interesting mythology and an unusual knowledge of the
constellations."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 79.
SEE above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
And, below: FLATHEADS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Blood, or Kenai Indians.
See above: BLACKFEET.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Botocudos.
See below: TUPI.--GUARANI.--TUPUYAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Brulé:
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Caddoan Family.
See below: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY;
See, also, TEXAS: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cakchiquels.
See below: QUICHES, and MAYAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Calusa.
See below: TUMUQUANAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cambas, or Campo, or Campa.
See above: ANDESIANS;
also, BOLIVIA: ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cañares.
See ECUADOR.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Canas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Canichanas.
See BOLIVIA: ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
{82}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Caniengas.
See below: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cariay.
See below: GUCK OR COCO Group.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Caribs and their Kindred.
"The warlike and unyielding character of these people, so
different from that of the pusillanimous nations around them,
and the wide scope of their enterprises and wanderings, like
those of the nomad tribes of the Old World, entitle them to
distinguished attention. ... The traditional accounts of their
origin, though of course extremely vague, are yet capable of
being verified to a great degree by geographical facts, and
open one of the rich veins of curious inquiry and speculation
which abound in the New World. They are said to have migrated
from the remote valleys embosomed in the Apalachian mountains.
The earliest accounts we have of them represent them with
weapons in their hands, continually engaged in wars, winning
their way and shifting their abode, until, in the course of
time, they found themselves at the extremity of Florida. Here,
abandoning the northern continent, they passed over to the
Lucayos [Bahamas], and thence gradually, in the process of
years, from island to island of that vast verdant chain, which
links, as it were, the end of Florida to the coast of Paria,
on the southern continent. The archipelago extending from
Porto Rico to Tobago was their stronghold, and the island of
Guadaloupe in a manner their citadel. Hence they made their
expeditions, and spread the terror of their name through all
the surrounding countries. Swarms of them landed upon the
southern continent, and overran some parts of terra firma.
Traces of them have been discovered far in the interior of
that vast country through which flows the Oroonoko. The Dutch
found colonies of them on the banks of the Ikouteka, which
empties into the Surinam; along the Esquibi, the Maroni, and
other rivers of Guayana; and in the country watered by the
windings of the Cayenne."
W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus, book 6, chapter 3
(volume 1).
"To this account [substantially as given above] of the origin
of the Insular Charaibes, the generality of historians have
given their assent; but there are doubts attending it that are
not easily solved. If they migrated from Florida, the
imperfect state and natural course of their navigation induce
a belief that traces of them would have been found on those
islands which are near to the Florida shore; let the natives
of the Bahamas, when discovered by Columbus, were evidently a
similar people to those of Hispaniola. Besides, it is
sufficiently known that there existed anciently many numerous
and powerful tribes of Charaibes on the southern peninsula,
extending from the river Oronoko to Essequebe, and throughout
the whole province of Surinam, even to Brazil, some of which
still maintain their independency. ... I incline therefore to
the opinion of Martyr, and conclude that the islanders were
rather a colony from the Charaibes of South America, than from
any nation of the North. Rochefort admits that their own
traditions referred constantly to Guiana."
B. Edwards, History of British Colonies in the West
Indies, book 1, chapter 2.
"The Carabisce, Carabeesi, Charaibes, Caribs, or Galibis,
originally occupied [in Guiana] the principal rivers, but as
the Dutch encroached upon their possessions they retired
inland, and are now daily dwindling away. According to Mr.
Hillhouse, they could formerly muster nearly 1,000 fighting
men, but are now [1855] scarcely able to raise a tenth part of
that number. ... The smaller islands of the Caribbean Sea were
formerly thickly populated by this tribe, but now not a trace of
them remains."
H. G. Dalton, History of British Guiana, volume 1, chapter 1.
E. F. im Thurn, Among the Indians of Guiana, chapter 6.
"Recent researches have shown that the original home of the
stock was south of the Amazon, and probably in the highlands
at the head of the Tapajoz river. A tribe, the Bakairi, is
still resident there, whose language is a pure and archaic
form of the Carib tongue."
D. G. Brinton, Races and Peoples, page 268.
"Related to the Caribs stand a long list of small tribes ...
all inhabitants of the great primeval forest in and near
Guiana. They may have characteristic differences, but none
worthy of mention are known. In bodily appearance, according
to all accounts, these relatives of the Caribs are beautiful.
In Georgetown the Arauacas [or Arawaks] are celebrated for
their beauty. They are slender and graceful, and their
features handsome and regular, the face having a Grecian
profile, and the skin being of a reddish cast. A little
farther inland we find the Macushi [or Macusis], with a
lighter complexion and a Roman nose. These two types are
repeated in other tribes, except in the Tarumi, who are
decidedly ugly. In mental characteristics great similarity
prevails."
The Standard Natural History
(J. S. Kingsley, ed.), page 237.
"The Arawaks occupied on the continent the area of the modern
Guiana, between the Corentyn and the Pomeroon rivers, and at
one time all the West Indian Islands. From some of them they
were early driven by the Caribs, and within 40 years of the
date of Columbus' first voyage the Spanish had exterminated
nearly all on the islands. Their course of migration had been
from the interior of Brazil northward; their distant relations
are still to be found between the headwaters of the Paraguay
and Schingu rivers."
D. G. Brinton, Races and Peoples, page 268-269.
"The Kapohn (Acawoios, Waikas, &c.) claim kindred with the
Caribs. ... The Acawoios, though resolute and determined, are
less hasty and impetuous than the Caribs. ... According to
their tradition, one of their hordes removed [to the Upper
Demerera] ... from the Masaruni. The Parawianas, who
originally dwelt on the Demerera, having been exterminated by
the continual incursions of the Caribs, the Waika-Acawoios
occupied their vacant territory. ... The Macusis ... are
supposed by some to have formerly inhabited the banks of the
Orinoco. ... As they are industrious and unwarlike, they have
been the prey of every savage tribe around them. The
Wapisianas are supposed to have driven them northward and
taken possession of their country. The Brazilians, as well as
the Caribs, Acawoios, &c., have long been in the habit of
enslaving them. ... The Arecunas have been accustomed to
descend from the higher lands and attack the Macusis. ... This
tribe is said to have formerly dwelt on the banks of the
Uaupes or Ucayari, a tributary of the Rio Negro. ... The
Waraus appear to have been the most ancient inhabitants of the
land. Very little, however, can be gleaned from them
respecting their early history. ... The Tivitivas, mentioned
by Raleigh, were probably a branch of the Waraus, whom he
calls Quarawetes."
W. H. Brett, Indian Tribes of Guiana,
part 2, chapter 13.
{83}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Caripuna.
See below: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cat Nation, or Eries.
See below: HURONS, &c.,
and IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY: THEIR CONQUESTS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Catawbas, or Kataba.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY;
also, TIMUQUANAN.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cayugas.
See below: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chancas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chapas, or Chapanecs.
See below: ZAPOTECS, ETC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cherokees.
"The Cherokee tribe has long been a puzzling factor to
students of ethnology and North American languages. Whether to
be considered an abnormal offshoot from one of the well-known
Indian stocks or families of North America, or the remnant of
some undetermined or almost extinct family which has merged
into another, appear to be questions yet unsettled."
C. Thomas, Burial Mounds of the Northern Sections of the
United States (Fifth Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology, 1883-4).
Facts which tend to identify the Cherokees with the ancient
"mound-builders" of the Ohio Valley--the Alleghans or
Talligewi of Indian tradition--are set forth by Professor Thomas
in a later paper, on the Problem of the Ohio Mounds, published
by the Bureau of Ethnology in 1889 [see above: ALLEGHANS] and
in a little book published in 1890, entitled "The Cherokees in
Pre-Columbian Times." "The Cherokee nation has probably
occupied a more prominent place in the affairs and history of
what is now the United States of America, since the date of
the early European settlements, than any other tribe, nation,
or confederacy of Indians, unless it be possible to except the
powerful and warlike league of the Iroquois or Six Nations of
New York. It is almost certain that they were visited at a
very early period [1540] following the discovery of the
American continent by that daring and enthusiastic Spaniard,
Fernando de Soto. ... At the time of the English settlement of
the Carolinas the Cherokees occupied a diversified and
well-watered region of country of large extent upon the waters
of the Catawba, Broad, Saluda, Keowee, Tugaloo, Savannah, and
Coosa rivers on the east and south, and several tributaries of
the Tennessee on the north and west. ... In subsequent years,
through frequent and long continued conflicts with the ever
advancing white settlements, and the successive treaties
whereby the Cherokees gradually yielded portions of their
domain, the location and names of their towns were continually
changing until the final removal of the nation [1836-1839]
west of the Mississippi. ... This removal turned the Cherokees
back in the calendar of progress and civilization at least a
quarter of a century. The hardships and exposures of the
journey, coupled with the fevers and malaria of a radically
different climate, cost the lives of perhaps 10 per cent. of
their total population. The animosities and turbulence born of
the treaty of 1835 not only occasioned the loss of many lives,
but rendered property insecure, and in consequence diminished
the zeal and industry of the entire community in its
accumulation. A brief period of comparative quiet, however,
was again characterized by an advance toward a higher
civilization. Five years after their removal we find from the
report of their agent that they are again on the increase in
population. ... With the exception of occasional
drawbacks--the result of civil feuds--the progress of the
nation in education, industry and civilization continued until
the outbreak of the rebellion. At this period, from the best
attainable information, the Cherokees numbered 21,000 souls.
The events of the war brought to them more of desolation and
ruin than perhaps to any other community. Raided and sacked
alternately, not only by the Confederates and Union forces,
but by the vindictive ferocity and hate of their own factional
divisions, their country became a blackened and desolate
waste. ... The war over, and the work of reconstruction
commenced, found them numbering 14,000 impoverished,
heart-broken, and revengeful people. ... To-day their country
is more prosperous than ever. They number 22,000, a greater
population than they have had at any previous period, except
perhaps just prior to the date of the treaty of 1835, when
those east added to those west of the Mississippi are stated
to have aggregated nearly 25,000 people. To-day they have
2,300 scholars attending 75 schools, established and supported
by themselves at an annual expense to the nation of nearly
$100,000. To-day, 13,000 of their people can read and 18,000
can speak the English language. To-day, 5,000 brick, frame and
log-houses are occupied by them, and they have 64 churches
with a membership of several thousand. They cultivate 100,000
acres of land and have an additional 150,000 fenced. ... They
have a constitutional form of government predicated upon that
of the United States. As a rule their laws are wise and
beneficent and are enforced with strictness and justice. ...
The present Cherokee population is of a composite character.
Remnants of other nations or tribes [Delawares, Shawnees,
Creeks, Natchez] have from time to time been absorbed and
admitted to full participation in the benefits of Cherokee
citizenship."
C. C. Royce, The Cherokee Nation of Indians (Fifth
Annual Reportt of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1883-84).
This elaborate paper by Mr. Royce is a narrative in detail of
the official relations of the Cherokees with the colonial and
federal governments, from their first treaty with South
Carolina, in 1721, down to the treaty of April 27, 1868.--"As
early as 1798 Barton compared the Cheroki language with that
of the Iroquois and stated his belief that there was a
connection between them. ... Mr. Hale was the first to give
formal expression to his belief in the affinity of the Cheroki
to Iroquois. Recently extensive Cheroki vocabularies have come
into possession of the Bureau of Ethnology, and a careful
comparison of them with ample Iroquois material has been made
by Mr Hewitt. The result is convincing proof of the
relationship of the two languages."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology, page 77.
See Note, Appendix: E.
ALSO IN
S. G. Drake, The Aboriginal Races of North America, book
4, chapter 13-16.
See, above: ALLEGHANS.
See, also, for an account of the Cherokee War of 1759-1761,
SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1759-1761; and for "Lord Dunmore's
War," OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1774.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cheyennes, or Sheyennes.
See above; ALGONQUIAN FAMILY
{84}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chibchas.
The most northerly group of the tribes of the Andes "are the
Cundinamarca of the table lands of Bogota. At the time of the
conquest the watershed of the Magdalena was occupied by the
Chibcha, or, as they were called by the Spaniards, Muyscas. At
that time the Chibcha were the most powerful of all the
autochthonous tribes, had a long history behind them, were
well advanced toward civilization, to which numerous
antiquities bear witness. The Chibcha of to-day no longer
speak the well-developed and musical language of their
forefathers. It became extinct about 1730, and it can now only
be inferred from existing dialects of it; these are the
languages of the Turiero, a tribe dwelling north of Bogota,
and of the Itoco Indians who live in the neighborhood of the
celebrated Emerald mines of Muzo."
The Standard Natural History (J. S. Kingsley, editor)
volume 6, page 215.
"As potters and goldsmiths they [the Chibcha] ranked among the
finest on the continent."
D. G. Brinton, Races and Peoples, page 272.
See, also, COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1536-1731.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chicasas.
See below: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY;
also, LOUISIANA: A. D. 1719-1750.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chichimecs.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1325-1502.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chimakuan Family.
"The Chimakum are said to have been formerly one of the
largest and most powerful tribes of Puget Sound. Their
warlike habits early tended to diminish their numbers, and
when visited by Gibbs in 1854 they counted only about 70
individuals. This small remnant occupied some 15 small lodges
on Port Townsend Bay."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 62.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chimarikan Family.
"According to Powers, this family was represented, so far as
known, by two tribes in California, one the Chi-mál-a-kwe,
living on New River, a branch of the Trinity, the other the
Chimariko, residing upon the Trinity itself from Burnt Ranch
up to the mouth of North Fork, California. The two tribes are
said to have been as numerous formerly as the Hupa, by whom
they were overcome and nearly exterminated. Upon the arrival
of the Americans only 25 of the Chimalakwe were left."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 63.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chinantecs.
See below: ZAPOTECS, ETC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chinookan Family.
"The banks of the Columbia, from the Grand Dalles to its
mouth, belong to the two branches of the Tsinuk [or Chinook]
nation, which meet in the neighborhood of the Kowlitz River,
and of which an almost nominal remnant is left. ... The
position of the Tsinuk previous to their depopulation was, as
at once appears, most important, occupying both sides of the
great artery of Oregon for a distance of 200 miles, they
possessed the principal thoroughfare between the interior and
the ocean, boundless resources of provisions of various kinds,
and facilities for trade almost unequalled on the Pacific."
G. Gibbs, Tribes of West Washington and N. W. Oregon
(Contributions to North American Ethnology, volume 1),
page 164.
See, also, below: FLATHEADS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chippewas.
See below: OJIBWAS;
and above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chippewyans.
See below: ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Choctaws.
See below: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chontals and Popolocas.
"According to the census of 1880 there were 31,000 Indians in
Mexico belonging to the Familia Chontal. No such family
exists. The word 'chontalli' in the Nahuatl language means
simply 'stranger,' and was applied by the Nahuas to any people
other than their own. According to the Mexican statistics, the
Chontals are found in the states of Mexico, Puebla, Oaxaca,
Guerrero, Tabasco, Guatemala and Nicaragua. A similar term is
'popoloca,' which in Nahuatl means a coarse fellow, one
speaking badly, that is, broken Nahuatl. The Popolocas have
also been erected into an ethnic entity by some ethnographers,
with as little justice as the Chontallis. They are stated to
have lived in the provinces of Puebla, Oaxaca, Vera Cruz,
Mechoacan and Guatemala."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, pages 146-153.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chontaquiros.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Chumashan Family.
"Derivation: From Chumash, the name of the Santa Rosa
Islanders. The several dialects of this family have long been
known under the group or family name, 'Santa Barbara,' which
seems first to have been used in a comprehensive sense by
Latham in 1856, who included under it three languages, viz.:
Santa Barbara, Santa Inez, and San Luis Obispo. The term has
no special pertinence as a family designation, except from the
fact that the Santa Barbara Mission, around which one of the
dialects of the family was spoken, is perhaps more widely
known than any of the others."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 67.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cliff-dwellers.
See AMERICA: PREHISTORIC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Coahuiltecan Family.
"Derivation: From the name of the Mexican State Coahuila. This
family appears to have included numerous tribes in
southwestern Texas and in Mexico. ... A few Indians still
survive who speak one of the dialects of this family, and in
1886 Mr. Gatschet collected vocabularies of two tribes, the
Comecrudo and Cotoname, who live on the Rio Grande, at Las
Prietas, State of Tamaulipas."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 68.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Coajiro, or Guajira.
"An exceptional position is taken, in many respects, by the
Coajiro, or Guajira, who live on the peninsula of the same
name on the northwestern boundary of Venezuela. Bounded on all
sides by so-called civilized peoples, this Indian tribe is
known to have maintained its independence, and acquired the
well-deserved reputation for cruelty, a tribe which, in many
respects, can be classed with the Apaches and Comanches of New
Mexico, the Araucanians of Chili, and the Guaycara and Guarani
on the Parana. The Coajiro are mostly large, with
chestnut-brown complexion and black, sleek hair. While all the
other coast tribes have adopted the Spanish language, the
Coajiro have preserved their own speech. They are the especial
foes of the other peoples. No one is given entrance into their
land, and they live with their neighbors, the Venezuelans, in
constant hostilities. They have fine horses, which they know
how to ride excellently. ... They have numerous herds of
cattle. ... They follow agriculture a little."
The Standard Natural History (J. S. Kingsley, editor),
volume 6, page 243.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cochibo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cochiquima.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Coco Group.
See below: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Coconoons.
See below: MARIPOSAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cofan.
See above: ANDESIANS.
{85}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Collas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Comanches.
See below: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY,
and KIOWAN FAMILY;
and above: APACHE GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Conestogas.
See below: SUSQUEHANNAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Conibo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Conoys.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Copehan Family.
"The territory of the Copehan family is bounded on the north
by Mount Shasta and the territory of the Sastean and Lutuamian
families, on the east by the territory of the Palaihnihan,
Yanan, and Punjunan families, and on the south by the bays of
San Pablo and Suisun and the lower waters of the Sacramento."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
page 69.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Costanoan Family.
"Derivation: From the Spanish costano, 'coast-men.' Under this
group name Latham included five tribes ... which were under
the supervision of the Mission Dolores. ... The territory of
the Costanoan family extends from the Golden Gate to a point
near the southern end of Monterey Bay. ... The surviving
Indians of the once populous tribes of this family are now
scattered over several counties and probably do not number,
all told, over 30 individuals, as was ascertained by Mr.
Henshaw in 1888. Most of these are to be found near the
towns of Santa Cruz and Monterey."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
p, 71.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Creek Confederacy, Creek Wars.
See below: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY;
also UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1813-1814 (AUGUST-APRIL);
and FLORIDA: A. D. 1816-1818.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Crees.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Croatans,
See AMERICA: A. D. 1587-1590.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Crows (Upsarokas, or Absarokas).
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cuatos.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cunimaré.
See below: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Cuyriri or Kiriri.
See below: GUCK on Coco GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Dakotas, or Dacotahs, or Dahcotas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Delawares, or Lenape.
"The proper name of the Delaware Indians was and is Lenapé (a
as in father, é as a in mate). ... The Lenape were divided
into three sub-tribes:
1. The Minsi, Monseys, Montheys, Munsees, or Minisinks.
2. The Unami or Wonameys.
3. The Unalachtigo.
No explanation of these designations will be
found in Heckewelder or the older writers. From
investigations among living Delawares, carried out at my
request by Mr. Horatio Hale, it is evident that they are
wholly geographical, and refer to the location of these
sub-tribes on the Delaware river. ... The Minsi lived in the
mountainous region at the head waters of the Delaware, above
the Forks or junction of the Lehigh river. ... The Unamis'
territory on the right bank of the Delaware river extended
from the Lehigh Valley southward. It was with them and their
southern neighbors, the Unalachtigos, that Penn dealt for the
land ceded to him in the Indian deed of 1682. The Minsis did
not take part in the transaction, and it was not until 1737
that the Colonial authorities treated directly with the latter
for the cession of their territory. The Unalachtigo or Turkey
totem had its principal seat on the affluents of the Delawares
near where Wilmington now stands."
D. G. Brinton, The Lenape and Their Legends,
chapter 3.
"At the ... time when
William Penn landed in Pennsylvania, the Delawares had been
subjugated and made women by the Five Nations. It is well
known that, according to that Indian mode of expression, the
Delawares were henceforth prohibited from making war, and
placed under the sovereignty of the conquerors, who did not
even allow sales of land, in the actual possession of the
Delawares, to be valid without their approbation. William
Penn, his descendants, and the State of Pennsylvania,
accordingly, always purchased the right of possession from the
Delawares, and that of Sovereignty from the Five Nations. ...
The use of arms, though from very different causes, was
equally prohibited to the Delawares and to the Quakers. Thus
the colonization of Pennsylvania and of West New Jersey by the
British, commenced under the most favorable auspices. Peace
and the utmost harmony prevailed for more than sixty years
between the whites and the Indians; for these were for the
first time treated, not only justly, but kindly, by the
colonists. But, however gradually and peaceably their lands
might have been purchased, the Delawares found themselves at
last in the same situation as all the other Indians, without
lands of their own, and therefore without means of
subsistence. They were compelled to seek refuge on the waters
of the Susquehanna, as tenants at will, on lands belonging to
their hated conquerors, the Five Nations. Even there and on
the Juniata they were encroached upon. ... Under those
circumstances, many of the Delawares determined to remove west
of the Alleghany Mountains, and, about the year 1740-50,
obtained from their ancient allies and uncles, the Wyandots,
the grant of a derelict tract of land lying principally on the
Muskingum. The great body of the nation was still attached to
Pennsylvania. But the grounds of complaint increased. The
Delawares were encouraged by the western tribes, and by the
French, to shake off the yoke of the Six Nations, and to join
in the war against their allies, the British. The frontier
settlements of Pennsylvania were accordingly attacked both by
the Delawares and the Shawnoes. And, although peace was made
with them at Easton in in 1758, and the conquest of Canada put
an end to the general war, both the Shawnoes and Delawares
removed altogether in 1768 beyond the Alleghany Mountains. ...
The years 1765-1795 are the true period of the power and
importance of the Delawares. United with the Shawnoes, who
were settled on the Scioto, they sustained during the Seven
Years' War the declining power of France, and arrested for
some years the progress of the British and American arms.
Although a portion of the nation adhered to the Americans
during the War of Independence, the main body, together with
all the western nations made common cause with the British.
And, after the short truce which followed the treaty of 1783,
they were again at the head of the western confederacy in
their last struggle for independence. Placed by their
geographical situation in the front of battle, they were,
during those three wars, the aggressors, and, to the last
moment, the most active and formidable enemies of America. The
decisive victory of General Wayne (1794), dissolved the
confederacy; and the Delawares were the greatest sufferers by
the treaty of Greenville of 1795."
{86}
After this, the greater part of the Delawares were settled on
White River, Indiana, "till the year 1819, when they finally
ceded their claim to the United States. Those residing there
were then reduced to about 800 souls. A number ... had
previously removed to Canada; and it is difficult to ascertain
the situation or numbers of the residue at this time [1836].
Those who have lately removed west of the Mississippi are, in
an estimate of the War Department, computed at 400 souls.
Former emigrations to that quarter had however taken place,
and several small dispersed bands are, it is believed, united
with the Senecas and some other tribes."
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of the Indian Tribes (Archæologia
Americana, volume 2), introduction, section 2.
See, above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY:
below: SHAWANESE, and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
Also, PONTIAC'S WAR; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768;
and MORAVIAN BRETHREN;
and, for an account of "Lord Dunmore's War,"
see Ohio (VALLEY): A. D. 1774.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Eries.
See below: HURONS, &c.,
and IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY: THEIR CONQUESTS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Eskimauan Family.
"Save a slight inter-mixture of European settlers, the Eskimo
are the only inhabitants of the shores of Arctic America, and
of both sides of Davis Strait and Baffin Bay, including
Greenland, as well as a tract of about 400 miles on the
Behring Strait coast of Asia. Southward they extend as far as
about 50° North latitude on the eastern side, 60° on the
western side of America, and from 55° to 60° on the shores of
Hudson Bay. Only on the west the Eskimo near their frontier
are interrupted on two small spots of the coast by the Indians,
named Kennayans and Ugalenzes, who have there advanced to the
sea-shore for the sake of fishing. These coasts of Arctic
America, of course, also comprise all the surrounding islands.
Of these, the Aleutian Islands form an exceptional group; the
inhabitants of these on the one hand distinctly differing from
the coast people here mentioned, while on the other they show
a closer relationship to the Eskimo than any other nation. The
Aleutians, therefore, may be considered as only an abnormal
branch of the Eskimo nation. ... As regards their northern
limits, the Eskimo people, or at least remains of their
habitations, have been found nearly as far north as any Arctic
explorers have hitherto advanced: and very possibly bands of
them may live still farther to the north, as yet quite unknown
to us. ... On comparing the Eskimo with the neighbouring
nations, their physical complexion certainly seems to point at
an Asiatic origin; but, as far as we know, the latest
investigations have also shown a transitional link to exist
between the Eskimo and the other American nations, which would
sufficiently indicate the possibility of a common origin from
the same continent. As to their mode of life, the Eskimo
decidedly resemble their American neighbours. ... With regard
to their language, the Eskimo also appear akin to the American
nations in regard to its decidedly polysynthetic structure.
Here, however, on the other hand, we meet with some very
remarkable similarities between the Eskimo idiom and the
language of Siberia, belonging to the Altaic or Finnish group.
... According to the Sagas of the Icelanders, they were
already met with on the east coast of Greenland about the year
1000, and almost at the same time on the east coast of the
American continent. ... Between the years 1000 and 1300 they
do not seem to have occupied the land south of 65° North L. on
the west coast of Greenland, where the Scandinavian colonies
were then situated. But the colonists seem to have been aware
of their existence in higher latitudes, and to have lived in
fear of an attack by them, since, in the year 1266, an
expedition was sent out for the purpose of exploring the
abodes of the Skrælings, as they were called by the colonists.
... About the year 1450, the last accounts were received from
the colonies, and the way to Greenland was entirely forgotten
in the mother country. ... The features of the natives in the
Southern part of Greenland indicate a mixed descent from the
Scandinavians and Eskimo, the former, however, not having left
the slightest sign of any influence on the nationality or
culture of the present natives. In the year 1585, Greenland
was discovered anew by John Davis, and found inhabited
exclusively by Eskimo."
H. Rink, Tales and Traditions of the Eskimo,
introduction and chapter 6.
H. Rink, The Eskimo tribes.
"In 1869, I proposed for the Aleuts and people of Innuit stock
collectively the term Orarians, as indicative of their
coastwise distribution, and as supplying the need of a general
term to designate a very well-defined race. ...The Orarians
are divided into two well-marked groups, namely the Innuits,
comprising all the so-called Eskimo and Tuskis, and the
Aleuts."
W. H. Dall, Tribes of the Extreme Northwest (Contributed
to North American Ethnology, volume 1), part 1.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Esselenian Family.
"The present family was included by Latham in the
heterogeneous group called by him Salinas. ... The term
Salinan [is now] restricted to the San Antonio and San Miguel
languages, leaving the present family ... [to be] called
Esselenian, from the name of the single tribe Esselen, of
which it is composed. ... The tribe or tribes composing this
family occupied a narrow strip of the California coast from
Monterey Bay south to the vicinity of the Santa Lucia
Mountain, a distance of about 50 miles."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 75-76.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Etchemins.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Eurocs, or Yuroks.
See below: MODOCS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Five Nations.
See below: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Flatheads (Salishan Family).
See Note, Appendix E.
"The name Flathead was commonly given to the Choctaws, though,
says Du Pratz, he saw no reason why they should be so
distinguished, when the practice of flattening the head was so
general. And in the enumeration just cited [Documentary Hist.
of New York, volume 1, page 24] the next paragraph. ... is: 'The
Flatheads, Cherakis, Chicachas, and Totiris are included under
the name of Flatheads by the Iroquois."
M. F. Force, Some Early Notices of the Indians of Ohio,
page 32.
"The Salish ... are distinctively known as Flatheads, though
the custom of deforming the cranium is not confined to them."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 107.
"In ... early times the hunters and trappers could not
discover why the Blackfeet and Flatheads [of Montana] received
their respective designations, for the feet of the former are
no more inclined to sable than any other part of the body,
while the heads of the latter possess their fair proportion of
rotundity. Indeed it is only below the falls and rapids that
real Flatheads appear, and at the mouth of the Columbia that
they flourish most supernaturally. The tribes who practice the
custom of flattening the head, and who lived at the mouth of
the Columbia, differed little from each other in laws, manners
or customs, and were composed of the Cathlamahs, Killmucks,
Clatsops, Chinooks and Chilts. The abominable custom of
flattening their heads prevails among them all."
P. Ronan, Historical Sketch of the Flathead Indian
Nation, page 17.
In Major Powell's linguistic classification, the "Salishan
Family" (Flathead) is given a distinct place.
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology, page 102.
{87}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Fox Indians.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
and below, SACS, &c.
For an account of the massacre of Fox Indians at Detroit in
1712,
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1711-1713.
For an account of the Black Hawk War,
See Illinois: A. D. 1832.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Fuegians.
See below: PATAGONIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Gausarapos or Guuchies.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Ges Tribes.
See below: TUPI.--GUARANI.--TUPUYAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Gros Ventres (Minnetaree; Hidatsa).
See Note, Appendix E.
See below: HIDATSA;
also, above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guaicarus.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guajira.
See above: COAJIRO.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guanas.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guarani.
See below: TUPI.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guayanas.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guck or Coco Group.
An extensive linguistic group of tribes in Brazil, on and
north of the Amazon, extending as far as the Orinoco, has been
called the Guck, or Coco group. "There is no common name for
the group, that here used meaning a father's brother, a very
important personage in these tribes. The Guck group embraces a
large number of tribes. ... We need enumerate but few. The
Cuyriri or Kiriri (also known as Sabaja, Pimenteiras, etc.),
number about 3,000. Some of them are half civilized, some are
wild, and, without restraint, wander about, especially in the
mountains in the Province of Pernambuco. The Araicu live on
the lower Amazon and the Tocantins. Next come the Manaos, who
have a prospect of maintaining themselves longer than most
tribes. With them is connected the legend of the golden lord
who washed the gold dust from his limbs in a lake [see EL
DORADO]. ... The Uirina, Baré, and Cariay live on the Rio
Negro, the Cunimaré on the Jurua, the Maranha on the Jutay.
Whether the Chamicoco on the right bank of the Paraguay,
belong to the Guck is uncertain. Among the tribes which,
though very much mixed, are still to be enumerated with the
Guck, are the Tecuna and the Passé. In language the Tecunas
show many similarities to the Ges; they live on the western
borders of Brazil, and extend in Equador to the Pastaça. Among
them occur peculiar masques which strongly recall those found
on the northwest coast of North America. ... In the same
district belong the Uaupe, who are noticeable from the fact
that they live in barracks, indeed the only tribe in South
America in which this custom appears. The communistic houses
of the Uaupe are called 'malloca;' they are buildings of about
120 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 30 high, in which live a band
of about 100 persons in 12 families, each of the latter,
however, in its own room. ... Finally, complex tribes of the
most different nationality are comprehended under names which
indicate only a common way of life, but are also incorrectly
used as ethnographic names. These are Caripuna, Mura, and
Miranha, all of whom live in the neighborhood of the Madeira
River. Of the Caripuna or Jaûn-Avô (both terms signify
'watermen'), who are mixed with Quichua blood, it is related
that they not only ate human flesh, but even cured it for
preservation. ... Formerly the Mura ... were greatly feared;
this once powerful and populous tribe, however, was almost
entirely destroyed at the end of the last century by the
Mundruco; the remnant is scattered. ... The Mura are the
gypsies among the Indians on the Amazon; and by all the other
tribes they are regarded with a certain degree of contempt as
pariahs. ... Much to be feared, even among the Indians, are
also the Miranha (i. e., rovers, vagabonds), a still populous
tribe on the right bank of the Japura, who seem to know
nothing but war, robbery, murder, and man-hunting."
The Standard Natural History
(J. S. Kingsley, ed.), volume 6, pages 245-248.
ALSO IN F. Keller, The Amazon and Madeira Rivers,
chapter 2 and 6.
H. W. Bates, A Naturalist on the River Amazons,
chapter 7-13.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Guuchies.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Hackinsacks.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Haidas.
See below: SKITTAGETAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Hidatsa, or Minnetaree, or Grosventres
See Note, Appendix E.
"The Hidatsa, Minnetaree, or Grosventre Indians, are one of
the three tribes which at present inhabit the permanent
village at Fort Berthold, Dakota Territory, and hunt on the
waters of the Upper Missouri and Yellowstone Rivers, in
Northwestern Dakota and Eastern Montana. The history of this
tribe is ... intimately connected with that of the politically
allied tribes of the Aricarees and Mandans." The name,
Grosventres, was given to the people of this tribe "by the
early French and Canadian adventurers. The same name was
applied also to a tribe, totally distinct from these in
language and origin, which lives some hundreds of miles west
of Fort Berthold; and the two nations are now distinguished
from one another as Grosventres of the Missouri and
Grosventres of the Prairie. ... Edward Umfreville, who traded
on the Saskatchewan River from 1784 to 1787, ... remarks: ...
'They [the Canadian French] call them Grosventres, or
Big-Bellies; and without any reason, as they are as comely and
as well made as any tribe whatever.' ... In the works of many
travellers they are called Minnetarees, a name which is
spelled in various ways. ... This, although a Hidatsa word, is
the name applied to them, not by themselves, but by the
Mandans; it signifies 'to cross the water,' or 'they crossed
the water.' ... Hidatsa was the name of the village on Knife
River farthest from the Missouri, the village of those whom
Lewis and Clarke considered the Minnetarees proper." It is the
name "now generally used by this people to designate
themselves."
W. Matthews, Ethnography and Philology of the Hidatsa
Indians, parts 1-2 (United States Geological and
Geographical Survey. F. V. Hayden, Mis. Pub., No. 7).
See also, below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
{88}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES: Hitchitis.
See below: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Horikans.
North of the Mohegans, who occupied the east bank of the
Hudson River opposite Albany, and covering the present
counties of Columbia and Rensselaer, dwelt the Algonkin tribe
of Horikans, "whose hunting grounds appear to have extended
from the waters of the Connecticut, across the Green
Mountains, to the borders of that beautiful lake [named Lake
George by the too loyal Sir William Johnson] which might now
well bear their sonorous name."
J. R. Brodhead, History of the State of New York,
page 77.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Huamaboya.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Huancas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Huastecs.
See below: MAYAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Huecos, or Wacos.
See below: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Humas, or Oumas.
See below: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Hupas.
See Note, Appendix E.
See below: MODOCS, &c.
Hurons, or Wyandots.
Neutral Nation.
Eries.
"The peninsula between the Lakes Huron, Erie, and Ontario was
occupied by two distinct peoples, speaking dialects of the
Iroquois tongue. The Hurons or Wyandots, including the tribe
called by the French the Dionondadies, or Tobacco Nation,
dwelt among the forests which bordered the eastern shores of
the fresh water sea to which they have left their name; while
the Neutral Nation, so called from their neutrality in the war
between the Hurons and the Five Nations, inhabited the
northern shores of Lake Erie, and even extended their eastern
flank across the strait of Niagara. The population of the
Hurons has been variously stated at from 10,000 to 30,000
souls, but probably did not exceed the former estimate. The
Franciscans and the Jesuits were early among them, and from
their descriptions it is apparent that, in legends, and
superstitions, manners and habits, religious observances and
social customs, they were closely assimilated to their
brethren of the Five Nations. ... Like the Five Nations, the
Wyandots were in some measure an agricultural people; they
bartered the surplus products of their maize fields to
surrounding tribes, usually receiving fish in exchange; and
this traffic was so considerable that the Jesuits styled their
country the Granary of the Algonquins. Their prosperity was
rudely broken by the hostilities of the Five Nations; for
though the conflicting parties were not ill matched in point
of numbers, yet the united counsels and ferocious energies of
the confederacy swept all before them. In the year 1649, in
the depth of winter, their warriors invaded the country of the
Wyandots, stormed their largest villages, and involved all
within in indiscriminate slaughter. The survivors fled in
panic terror, and the whole nation was broken and dispersed.
Some found refuge among the French of Canada, where, at the
village of Lorette, near Quebec, their descendants still
remain; others were incorporated with their conquerors, while
others again fled northward, beyond Lake Superior, and sought
an asylum among the wastes which bordered on the north-eastern
lands of the Dahcotah. Driven back by those fierce bison-hunters,
they next established themselves about the outlet of Lake
Superior, and the shores and islands in the northern parts of
Lake Huron. Thence, about the year 1680, they descended to
Detroit, where they formed a permanent settlement, and where,
by their superior valor, capacity and address, they soon
acquired an ascendancy over the surrounding Algonquins. The
ruin of the Neutral Nation followed close on that of the
Wyandots, to whom, according to Jesuit authority, they bore an
exact resemblance in character and manners. The Senecas soon
found means to pick a quarrel with them; they were assailed by
all the strength of the insatiable confederacy, and within a
few years their destruction as a nation was complete."
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 1.
F. Parkman, The Jesuits in North America, chapter 1.
"The first in this locality [namely, the western extremity of
the State of New York, on and around the site of the city of
Buffalo], of whom history makes mention, were the
Attiouandaronk, or Neutral Nation, called Kah-kwas by the
Senecas. They had their council-fires along the Niagara, but
principally on its western side. Their hunting grounds
extended from the Genesee nearly to the eastern shores of Lake
Huron, embracing a wide and important territory. ... They are
first mentioned by Champlain during his winter visit to the
Hurons in 1615 ... but he was unable to visit their territory.
... The peace which this peculiar people had so long
maintained with the Iroquois was destined to be broken. Some
jealousies and collisions occurred in 1647, which culminated
in open war in 1650. One of the villages of the Neutral
Nation, nearest the Senecas and not far from the site of our
city [Buffalo], was captured in the autumn of the latter year,
and another the ensuing spring. So well-directed and energetic
were the blows of the Iroquois, that the total destruction of
the Neutral Nation was speedily accomplished. ... The
survivors were adopted by their conquerors. .... A long period
intervened between the destruction of the Neutral Nation and
the permanent occupation of their country by the
Senecas,"--which latter event occurred after the expulsion of
the Senecas from the Genesee Valley, by the expedition under
General Sullivan, in 1779, during the Revolutionary War. "They
never, as a nation, resumed their ancient seats along the
Genesee, but sought and found a new home on the secluded banks
and among the basswood forests of the Dó-syo-wa, or Buffalo
Creek, whence they had driven the Neutral Nation 130 years
before. ... It has been assumed by many writers that the
Kah-kwas and Eries were identical. This is not so. The latter,
according to the most reliable authorities, lived south of the
western extremity of Lake Erie until they were destroyed by
the Iroquois in 1655. The Kah-kwas were exterminated by them
as early as 1651. On Coronelli's map, published in 1688, one
of the villages of the latter, called 'Kahouagoga, a destroyed
nation,' is located at or near the site of Buffalo."
O. H. Marshall, The Niagara Frontier, pages 5-8, and
foot-note.
"Westward of the Neutrals, along the Southeastern shores of
Lake Erie, and stretching as far east as the Genesee river,
lay the country of the Eries, or, as they were denominated by
the Jesuits, 'La Nation Chat,' or Cat Nation, who were also a
member of the Huron-Iroquois family. The name of the beautiful
lake on whose margin our city [Buffalo] was cradled is their
most enduring monument, as Lake Huron is that of the generic
stock. They were called the Cat Nation either because that
interesting but mischievous animal, the raccoon, which the
holy fathers erroneously classed in the feline gens, was the
totem of their leading clan, or sept, or in consequence of the
abundance of that mammal within their territory."
W. C. Bryant, Interesting Archaeological Studies in and
about Buffalo, page 12.
{89}
Mr. Schoolcraft either identifies or confuses the Eries and
the Neutral Nation.
H. R. Schoolcraft, Sketch of the History of the Ancient
Eries (Information Respecting the Indian Tribes, part 4. p.
197).
ALSO IN
J. G. Shea, Inquiries Respecting the lost Neutral Nation
(same, part 4, page 204).-
D. Wilson, The Huron-Iroquois of Canada (Trans. Royal
Society of Canada, 1884).
P. D. Clarke, Origin and Traditional History of the
Wyandottes.
W. Ketchum, History of Buffalo, volume 1, chapter 1-2.
N. B. Craig. The Olden Time, volume 1, page 225.
See below: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY;
Also, CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1608-1611; 1611-1616;
1634-1652; 1640-1700.
See, also, PONTIAC'S WAR.
For an account of "Lord Dunmore's War,"
See OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1774.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Illinois and Miamis.
"Passing the country of the Lenape and the Shawanoes, and
descending the Ohio, the traveller would have found its valley
chiefly occupied by two nations, the Miamis or Twightwees, on
the Wabash and its branches, and the Illinois, who dwelt in
the neighborhood of the river to which they have given their
name, while portions of them extended beyond the Mississippi.
Though never subjugated, as were the Lenape, both the Miamis
and the Illinois were reduced to the last extremity by the
repeated attacks of the Five Nations; and the Illinois, in
particular, suffered so much by these and other wars, that the
population of ten or twelve thousand, ascribed to them by the
early French writers, had dwindled, during the first quarter
of the eighteenth century,
to a few small villages."
F. Parkman, Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 1.
See, also, above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
and below: SACS, &c.;
also CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1669-1687.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Incas, or Yncas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Innuits.
See above: ESKIMAUAN.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iowas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY, and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Confederacy.
Iroquoian Family.
"At the outset of the 16th Century, when the five tribes or
nations of the Iroquois confederacy first became known to
European explorers, they were found occupying the valleys and
uplands of northern New York, in that picturesque and fruitful
region which stretches westward from the head-waters of the
Hudson to the Genesee. The Mohawks, or Caniengas--as they
should properly be called--possessed the Mohawk River, and
covered Lake George and Lake Champlain with their flotillas of
large canoes, managed with the boldness and skill which,
hereditary in their descendants, make them still the best
boatmen of the North American rivers. West of the Caniengas
the Oneidas held the small river and lake which bear their
name. ... West of the Oneidas, the imperious Onondagas, the
central and, in some respects, the ruling nation of the
League, possessed the two lakes of Onondaga and Skaneateles.
together with the common outlet of this inland lake system,
the Oswego River to its issue into Lake Ontario. Still
proceeding westward, the lines of trail and river led to the
long and winding stretch of Lake Cayuga, about which were
clustered the towns of the people who gave their name to the
lake; and beyond them, over the wide expanse of hills and
dales surrounding Lakes Seneca and Canandaigua, were scattered
the populous villages of the Senecas, more correctly called
Sonontowanas, or Mountaineers. Such were the names and abodes
of the allied nations, members of the far-famed Kanonsionni,
or League of United Households, who were destined to become
for a time the most notable and powerful community among the
native tribes of North America. The region which has been
described was not, however, the original seat of those nations.
They belonged to that linguistic family which is known to
ethnologists as the Huron-Iroquois stock. This stock comprised
the Hurons or Wyandots, the Attiwandaronks or Neutral Nation,
the Iroquois, the Eries, the Andastes or Conestogas, the
Tuscaroras and some smaller bands. The tribes of this family
occupied a long irregular area of inland territory, stretching
from Canada to North Carolina. The northern nations were all
clustered about the great lakes; the southern bands held the
fertile valleys bordering the head-waters of the rivers which
flowed from the Allegheny mountains. The languages of all
these tribes showed a close affinity. ... The evidence of
language, so far as it has yet been examined, seems to show
that the Huron clans were the older members of the group; and
the clear and positive traditions of all the surviving tribes,
Hurons, Iroquois, and Tuscarora, point to the lower St.
Lawrence as the earliest known abode of their stock. Here the
first explorer, Cartier, found Indians of this stock at
Hochelaga and Stadaconé, now the sites of Montreal and Quebec.
... As their numbers increased, dissensions arose. The hive
swarmed, and band after band moved off to the west and south.
As they spread they encountered people of other stocks, with
whom they had frequent wars. Their most constant and most
dreaded enemies were the tribes of the Algonkin family, a
fierce and restless people, of northern origin, who everywhere
surrounded them. At one period, however, if the concurrent
traditions of both Iroquois and Algonkins can be believed,
these contending races for a time stayed their strife, and
united their forces in an alliance against a common and
formidable foe. This foe was the nation, or perhaps the
confederacy, of the Alligewi or Talligewi, the semi-civilized
'Mound-builders' of the Ohio Valley, who have left their name
to the Allegheny river and mountains, and whose vast
earthworks are still, after half-a-century of study, the
perplexity of archæologists. A desperate warfare ensued, which
lasted about a hundred years, and ended in the complete overthrow
and destruction, or expulsion, of the Alligewi. The survivors
of the conquered people fled southward. ... The time which has
elapsed since the overthrow of the Alligewi is variously
estimated. The most probable conjecture places it at a period
about a thousand years before the present day. It was
apparently soon after their expulsion that the tribes of the
Huron-Iroquois and the Algonkin stocks scattered themselves
over the wide region south of the Great Lakes, thus left open
to their occupancy."
H. Hale, Introduction to Iroquois Book of Rites.
{90}
After the coming of the Europeans into the New World, the
French were the first to be involved in hostilities with the
Iroquois, and their early wars with them produced a hatred
which could never be extinguished. Hence the English were able
to win the alliance of the Five Nations, when they struggled
with France for the mastery of the North American continent,
and they owed their victory to that alliance, probably, more
than to any other single cause. England still retained the
faithful friendship and alliance of the Iroquois when she came
to a struggle with her own colonies, and all the tribes except
the Oneidas were in arms against the Americans in the
Revolutionary War. "With the restoration of peace, the
political transaction of the League were substantially closed.
This was, in effect, the termination of their political
existence. The jurisdiction of the United States was extended
over their ancient territories, and from that time forth they
became dependent nations. During the progress of the
Revolution, the Mohawks abandoned their country and removed to
Canada, finally establishing themselves partly upon Grand
River, in the Niagara peninsula, and partly near Kingston,
where they now reside upon two reservations secured to them by
the British government. ... The policy of the State of New York
[toward the Iroquois nations] was ever just and humane.
Although their country, with the exception of that of the
Oneidas, might have been considered as forfeited by the event
of the Revolution, yet the government never enforced the
rights of conquest, but extinguished the Indian title to the
country by purchase, and treaty stipulations. A portion of the
Oneida nation [who had sold their lands to the State, from
time to time, excepting one small reservation] emigrated to a
reservation on the river Thames in Canada, where about 400 of
them now [1851] reside. Another and a larger band removed to
Green Bay, in Wisconsin, where they still make their homes to
the number of 700. But a small part of the nation have
remained around the seat of their ancient council-fire ...
near Oneida Castle, in the county of Oneida." The Onondagas
"still retain their beautiful and secluded valley of Onondaga,
with sufficient territory for their comfortable maintenance.
About 150 Onondagas now reside with the Senecas; another party
are established on Grand River, in Canada, and a few have
removed to the west. ... In the brief space of twelve years
after the first house of the white man was erected in Cayuga
county (1789) the whole nation [of the Cayugas] was uprooted
and gone. In 1795, they ceded, by treaty, all their lands to
the State, with the exception of one reservation, which they
finally abandoned about the year 1800. A portion of them
removed to Green Bay, another to Grand River, and still
another, and a much larger band, settled at Sandusky, in Ohio,
from whence they were removed by government, a few years
since, into the Indian territory, west of the Mississippi.
About 120 still reside among the Senecas, in western New York.
... The Tuscaroras, after removing from the Oneida territory,
finally located near the Niagara river, in the vicinity of
Lewiston, on a tract given to them by the Senecas. ... The
residue of the Senecas are now shut up within three small
reservations, the Tonawanda, the Cattaraugus and the Allegany,
which, united, would not cover the area of one of the lesser
counties of the State."
L. H. Morgan, The League of the Iroquois,
book 1, chapter 1.
"The Indians of the State of New York number about 5,000, and
occupy lands to the estimated extent of 87,()77 acres. With
few exceptions, these people are the direct descendants of the
native Indians, who once possessed and controlled the soil of
the entire State."
Report of Special Committee to Investigate the Indian
Problem of the State of New York 1889.
H. R. Schoolcraft, Notes on the Iroquois.
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 1.
C. Colden, History of the Five Indian Nations.
J. Fiske, Discovery of America, chapter 1.
In 1715 the Five Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy became
Six Nations, by the admission of the Tuscaroras, from N.
Carolina.
See below: IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH.
On the relationship between the Iroquois and the Cherokees,
See above: CHEROKEES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Confederacy.
Their Name.
"The origin and proper meaning of the word Iroquois are
doubtful. All that can be said with certainty is that the
explanation given by Charlevoix cannot possibly be correct.
The name of Iroquois, he says, is purely French, and has been
formed from the term 'hiro,' 'I have spoken,' a word by which
these Indians close all their speeches, and 'kouê,' which,
when long drawn out, is a cry of sorrow, and when briefly
uttered is an exclamation of joy. ... But ... Champlain had
learned the name from his Indian allies before he or any other
Frenchman, so far as is known, had ever seen an Iroquois. It
is probable that the origin of the word is to be sought in the
Huron language; yet, as this is similar to the Iroquois
tongue, an attempt may be made to find a solution in the
latter. According to Bruyas, the word 'garokwa' meant a pipe,
and also a piece of tobacco,--and, in its verbal form, to
smoke. This word is found, somewhat disguised by aspirates, in
the Book of Rites,--denighroghkwayen,--'let us two smoke
together.' ... In the indeterminate form the verb becomes
'ierokwa,' which is certainly very near to Iroquois. It might
be rendered 'they who smoke,' or 'they who use tobacco,' or,
briefly, 'the Tobacco People.' This name, the Tobacco Nation
('Nation du Petun') was given by the French, and probably also
by the Algonkins, to one of the Huron tribes, the Tionontates,
noted for the excellent tobacco which they raised and sold.
The Iroquois were equally well known for their cultivation of
this plant, of which they had a choice variety."
H. Hale, Iroquois Book of Rites, appendix, note A.
Iroquois Confederacy.
Their conquests and wide dominion.
"The project of a League [among the 'Five Nations' of the
Iroquois] originated with the Onondagas, among whom it was
first suggested, as a means to enable them more effectually to
resist the pressure of contiguous nations. The epoch of its
establishment cannot now be decisively ascertained; although
the circumstances attending its formation are still preserved
by tradition with great minuteness. These traditions all refer
to the northern shore of the Onondaga lake, as the place where
the Iroquois chiefs assembled in general congress, to agree
upon the terms and principles of the compact. ... After the
formation of the League, the Iroquois rose rapidly in power
and influence. ... With the first consciousness of rising
power, they turned their long-cherished resentment upon the
Adirondacks, who had oppressed them in their infancy as a
nation, and had expelled them from their country, in the first
struggle for the ascendancy.
{91}
... At the era of French discovery (1535), the latter nation
[the Adirondacks] appear to have been dispossessed of their
original country, and driven down the St. Lawrence as far as
Quebec. ... A new era commenced with the Iroquois upon the
establishment of the Dutch trading-post at Orange, now Albany,
in 1615. ... Friendly relations were established between the
Iroquois and the Dutch, which continued without interruption
until the latter surrendered their possessions upon the Hudson
to the English in 1664. During this period a trade sprang up
between them in furs, which the Iroquois exchanged for
European fabrics, but more especially for fire-arms, in the
use of which they were afterwards destined to become so
expert. The English, in turn, cultivated the same relations of
friendship. ... With the possession of fire-arms commenced not
only the rapid elevation, but absolute supremacy of the
Iroquois over other Indian nations. In 1643, they expelled the
Neuter Nation from the Niagara peninsula and established a
permanent settlement at the mouth of that river. They nearly
exterminated, in 1653, the Eries, who occupied the south side
of Lake Erie, and from thence east to the Genesee, and thus
possessed themselves of the whole area of western New York,
and the northern part of Ohio. About the year 1670, after they
had finally completed the dispersion and subjugation of the
Adirondacks and Hurons, they acquired possession of the whole
country between lakes Huron, Erie and Ontario, and of the
north bank of the St. Lawrence, to the mouth of the Ottawa
river, near Montreal. ... They also made constant inroads upon
the New England Indians. ... In 1680, the Senecas with 600
warriors invaded the country of the Illinois, upon the borders
of the Mississippi, while La Salle was among the latter. ...
At various times, both before and after this period, the
Iroquois turned their warfare against the Cherokees upon the
Tennessee, and the Catawbas in South Carolina. ... For about a
century, from the year 1600 to the year 1700, the Iroquois
were involved in an almost uninterrupted warfare. At the close
of this period, they had subdued and held in nominal
subjection all the principal Indian nations occupying the
territories which are now embraced in the states of New York,
Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, the northern and
western parts of Virginia, Ohio, Kentucky, Northern Tennessee,
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, a portion of the New England
States, and the principal part of Upper Canada. Over these
nations, the haughty and imperious Iroquois exercised a
constant supervision. If any of them became involved in
domestic difficulties, a delegation of chiefs went among them
and restored tranquillity, prescribing at the same time their
future conduct."
L. H. Morgan, League of the Iroquois, book 1, chapter 1.
"Their [the Iroquois's] war-parties roamed over half America,
and their name was a terror from the Atlantic to the
Mississippi; but when we ask the numerical strength of the
dreaded confederacy, when we discover that, in the days of
their greatest triumphs, their united cantons could not have
mustered 4,000 warriors, we stand amazed at the folly and
dissension which left so vast a region the prey of a handful
of bold marauders. Of the cities and villages now so thickly
scattered over the lost domain of the Iroquois, a single one
might boast a more numerous population than all the five
united tribes."
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 1.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Confederacy: A. D. 1608-1700.
Their wars with the French.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1608-1611; 1611-1616;
1634-1652; 1640-1700; 1696.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Confederacy: A. D. 1648-1649.
Their destruction of the Hurons and the Jesuit Missions.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1634-1652;
also, above, HURONS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Confederacy: A. D. 1684-1744.
Surrenders and conveyances to the English.
See
NEW YORK: A. D. 1684, and 1726;
VIRGINIA: A. D. 1744;
OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1748-1754;
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Confederacy: A. D. 1778-1779.
Their part in the War of the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1778 (JUNE-NOVEMBER)
and (JULY); and 1779 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Iroquois Tribes of the South.
See Note, Appendix E.
"The southern Iroquois tribes occupied Chowan River and its
tributary streams. They were bounded on the east by the most
southerly Lenape tribes, who were in possession of the low
country along the sea shores, and those of Albemarle and
Pamlico Sounds. Towards the south and the west they extended
beyond the river Neuse. They appear to have been known in
Virginia, in early times, under the name of Monacans, as far
north as James River. ... Lawson, in his account of the North
Carolina Indians, enumerates the Chowans, the Meherrins, and
the Nottoways, as having together 95 warriors in the year
1708. But the Meherrins or Tuteloes and the Nottoways
inhabited respectively the two rivers of that name, and were
principally seated in Virginia. We have but indistinct notices
of the Tuteloes. ... It appears by Beverly that the Nottoways
had preserved their independence and their numbers later than
the Powhatans, and that, at the end of the 17th century, they
had still 130 warriors. They do not appear to have migrated
from their original seats in a body. In the year 1820, they
are said to have been reduced to 27 souls, and were still in
possession of 7,000 acres in Southampton county, Virginia,
which had been at an early date reserved for them. ... The
Tuscaroras were by far the most powerful nation in North
Carolina, and occupied all the residue of the territory in
that colony, which has been described as inhabited by Iroquois
tribes. Their principal seats in 1708 were on the Neuse and
the Taw or Tar rivers, and according to Lawson they had 1,200
warriors in fifteen towns." In 1711 the Tuscaroras attacked
the English colonists, massacring 130 in a single day, and a
fierce war ensued. "In the autumn of 1712. all the inhabitants
south and southwest of Chowan River were obliged to live in
forts; and the Tuscaroras expected assistance from the Five
Nations. This could not have been given without involving the
confederacy in a war with Great Britain; and the Tuscaroras
were left to their own resources. A force, consisting chiefly
of southern Indians under the command of Colonel Moore, was
again sent by the government of South Carolina to assist the
northern Colonies. He besieged and took a fort of the
Tuscaroras. ... Of 800 prisoners 600 were given up to the
Southern Indians, who carried them to South Carolina to sell
them as slaves.
{92}
The Eastern Tuscaroras, whose principal town was on
the Taw, twenty miles above Washington, immediately made
peace, and a portion was settled a few years after north of
the Roanoke, near Windsor, where they continued till the year
1803. But the great body of the nation removed in 1714-15 to
the Five Nations, was received as the Sixth, and has since
shared their fate."
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of the Indian Tribes (Archæologia
Americana, volume 2), introduction, section 2.
ALSO IN
J. W. Moore, History of North Carolina, volume 1, chapter 3.
See, also, above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Itocos.
See above: CHIBCHAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Itonamos, or Itonomos.
See above: ANDESIANS;
also BOLIVIA: ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Jivara, or Jivaro.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kah-kwas.
See above: HURONS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kalapooian Family.
"Under this family name Scouler places two tribes, the
Kalapooian, inhabiting 'the fertile Willamat plains' and the
Yamkallie, who live 'more in the interior, towards the sources
of the Willamat River.'... The tribes of the Kalapooian family
inhabited the valley of Willamette River, Oregon, above the
falls."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 81.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kanawhas, or Ganawese.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kansas, or Kaws.
See below: SIOUAN.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kapohn.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Karankawan Family.
"The Karankawa formerly dwelt upon the Texan coast, according
to Sibley, upon an island or peninsula in the Bay of St.
Bernard (Matagorda Bay). ... In 1884 Mr. Gatschet found a
Tonkawe at Fort Griffin, Texas, who claimed to have formerly
lived among the Karankawa. From him a vocabulary of
twenty-five terms was obtained, which was all of the language
he remembered. The vocabulary ... such as it is, represents
all of the language that is extant. Judged by this vocabulary
the language seems to be distinct not only from the Attakapa
but from all others."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 82.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Karoks, or Cahrocs.
See below: MODOCS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kaskaskias.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kaus, or Kwokwoos.
See below: KUSAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kaws, or Kansas.
See below: SIOUAN.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kenai, or Blood Indians.
See above: BLACKFEET.
See Note, Appendix E.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Keresan Family.
"The ... pueblos of Keresan stock ... are situated in New
Mexico on the upper Rio Grande, on several of its small
western affluents, and on the Jemez and San Jose, which also
are tributaries of the Rio Grande."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
page 83.
See PUEBLO.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kikapoos.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
and below: SACS, &c., and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kiowan Family.
"Derivation: From the Kiowa word Kó-i, plural Kó-igu, meaning
'Káyowe man.' The Comanche term Káyowe means 'rat.' The author
who first formally separated this family appears to have been
Turner. ... Turner, upon the strength of a vocabulary
furnished by Lieutenant Whipple, dissents from the opinion
expressed by Pike and others to the effect that the language
is of the same stock as the Comanche, and, while admitting
that its relationship to Comanche is greater than to any other
family, thinks that the likeness is merely the result of long
intercommunication. His opinion that it is entirely distinct
from any other language has been indorsed by Buschmann and
other authorities. The family is represented by the Kiowa
tribe. So intimately associated with the Comanches have the
Kiowa been since known to history that it is not easy to
determine their pristine home. ... Pope definitely locates the
Kiowa in the valley of the Upper Arkansas, and of its
tributary, the Purgatory (Las Animas) River. This is in
substantial accord with the statements of other writers of
about the same period. Schermerhorn (1812) places the Kiowa on
the heads of the Arkansas and Platte. Earlier still they
appear upon the headwaters of the Platte."-
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 84.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kiriri, Cuyriri.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kitunahan Family.
"This family was based upon a tribe variously termed Kitunaha,
Kutenay, Cootenai, or Flatbow, living on the Kootenay River,
a branch of the Columbia in Oregon."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
page 85.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Klamaths.
See below: MODOCS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Koluschan Family.
"Derivation: From the Aleut word kolosh, or more properly,
kaluga, meaning 'dish,' the allusion being to the dishshaped
lip ornaments. This family was based by Gallatin upon the
Koluschen tribe (the Tshinkitani of Marchand), 'who inhabit
the islands and the [Pacific] coast from the 60th to the 55th
degree of north latitude.'"
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 86.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kulanapan Family.
"The main territory of the Kulanapan family is bounded on the
west by the Pacific Ocean, on the east by the Yukian and
Copohan territories, on the north by the watershed of the
Russian River, and on the south by a line drawn from Bodega
Head to the southwest corner of the Yukian territory, near
Santa Rosa, Sonoma County, California."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 88.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kusan Family:
"The 'Kaus or Kwokwoos' tribe is merely mentioned by Hale as
living on a river of the same name between the Umqua and the
Clamet."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 89.
See Note, Appendix E.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Kwokwoos.
See above: KUSAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Lenape.
See above: DELAWARES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Machicuis.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Macushi.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Manaos.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mandans, or Mandanes.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Manhattans.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
and, also, MANHATTAN ISLAND.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Manioto, or Mayno.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mapochins.
See CHILE: A. D. 1450-1724.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Maranha.
See above: GUCK OR Coco GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Maricopas.
See below: PUEBLOS.
{93}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mariposan Family.
"Derivation: A Spanish word meaning 'butterfly,' applied to a
county in California and subsequently taken for the family
name. Latham mentions the remnants of three distinct bands of
the Coconoon, each with its own language, in the north of
Mariposa County. These are classed together under the above
name. More recently the tribes speaking languages allied to
the Coconun have been treated of under the family name Yokut.
As, however, the stock was established by Latham on a sound
basis, his name is here restored."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
page 90.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mascoutins, or Mascontens,
See below: SACS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Massachusetts,
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mataguayas.
See BOLIVIA: ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS,
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mayas.
"In his second voyage, Columbus heard vague rumors of a
mainland westward from Jamaica and Cuba, at a distance of ten
days' journey in a canoe. ... During his fourth voyage
(1503-4), when he was exploring the Gulf southwest from Cuba,
he picked up a canoe laden with cotton clothing variously
dyed. The natives in it gave him to understand that they were
merchants, and came from a land called Maia. This is the first
mention in history of the territory now called Yucatan, and of
the race of the Mayas; for although a province of similar name
was found in the western extremity of the island of Cuba, the
similarity was accidental, as the evidence is conclusive that
no colony of the Mayas was found on the Antilles. ... Maya was
the patrial name of the natives of Yucatan. It was the proper
name of the northern portion of the peninsula. No single
province bore it at the date of the Conquest, and probably it
had been handed down as a generic term from the period, about
a century before, when this whole district was united under
one government. ... Whatever the primitive meaning and first
application of the name Maya, it is now used to signify
specifically the aborigines of Yucatan. In a more extended
sense, in the expression 'the Maya family,' it is understood
to embrace all tribes, wherever found, who speak related
dialects presumably derived from the same ancient stock as the
Maya proper. ... The total number of Indians of pure blood
speaking the Maya proper may be estimated as nearly or quite
200,000, most of them in the political limits of the
department of Yucatan; to these should be added nearly 100,000
of mixed blood, or of European descent, who use the tongue in
daily life. For it forms one of the rare examples of American
languages possessing vitality enough not only to maintain its
ground, but actually to force itself on European settlers and
supplant their native speech. ... The Mayas did not claim to
be autochthones. Their legends referred to their arrival by
the sea from the East, in remote times, under the leadership
of Itzamna, their hero-god, and also to a less numerous
immigration from the West, which was connected with the
history of another hero-god, Kukul Càn. The first of these
appears to be wholly mythical. ... The second tradition
deserves more attention from the historian. ... It cannot be
denied that the Mayas, the Kiches [or Quiches] and the
Cakchiquels, in their most venerable traditions, claimed to
have migrated from the north or west from some part of the
present country of Mexico. These traditions receive additional
importance from the presence on the shores of the Mexican
Gulf, on the waters of the river Panuco, north of Vera Cruz,
of a prominent branch of the Maya family, the Huastecs. The
idea suggests itself that these were the rear-guard of a great
migration of the Maya family from the north toward the south.
Support is given to this by their dialect, which is most
closely akin to that of the Tzendals of Tabasco, the nearest
Maya race to the south of them, and also by very ancient
traditions of the Aztecs. It is noteworthy that these two
partially civilized races, the Mayas and the Aztecs, though
differing radically in language, had legends which claimed a
community of origin in some indefinitely remote past. We find
these on the Maya side narrated in the sacred book of the
Kiches, the Popol Vuh, in the Cakchiquel 'Records of Tecpan
Atillan,' and in various pure Maya sources. ... The annals of
the Aztecs contain frequent allusions to the Huastecs."
D. G. Brinton, The Maya Chronicles, introduction.
"Closely enveloped in the dense forests of Chiapas, Gautemala,
Yucatan, and Honduras, the ruins of several ancient cities
have been discovered, which are far superior in extent and
magnificence to any seen in Aztec territory, and of which a
detailed description may be found in the fourth volume of this
work. Most of these cities were abandoned and more or less
unknown at the time of the [Spanish] Conquest. They bear
hieroglyphic inscriptions apparently identical in character;
in other respects they resemble each other more than they
resemble the Aztec ruins--or even other and apparently later
works in Guatemala and Honduras. All these remains bear
evident marks of great antiquity. ... I deem the grounds
sufficient ... for accepting this Central American
civilization of the past as a fact, referring it not to an
extinct ancient race, but to the direct ancestors of the
peoples still occupying the country with the Spaniards, and
applying to it the name Maya as that of the language which has
claims as strong as any to be considered the mother tongue of
the linguistic family mentioned. ... There are no data by
which to fix the period of the original Maya empire, or its
downfall or breaking up into rival factions by civil and
foreign wars. The cities of Yucatan, as is clearly shown by
Mr. Stephens, were, many of them, occupied by the descendants
of the builders down to the conquest, and contain some
remnants of wood-work still in good preservation, although
some of the structures appear to be built on the ruins of
others of a somewhat different type. Palenque and Copan, on
the contrary, have no traces of wood or other perishable
material, and were uninhabited and probably unknown in the
16th century. The loss of the key to what must have been an
advanced system of hieroglyphics, while the spoken language
survived, is also an indication of great antiquity, confirmed
by the fact that the Quiché structures of Guatemala differed
materially from those of the more ancient epoch. It is not
likely that the Maya empire in its integrity continued later
than the 3d or 4th century, although its cities may have been
inhabited much later, and I should fix the epoch of its
highest power at a date preceding rather than following the
Christian era."
H. H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States,
volume 2, chapter 2; volume 4, ch, 3-6;
volume 5, chapter 11-13.
{94}
ALSO IN
Marquis de Nadaillac, Prehistoric America, chapter 6-7.
J. L. Stephens, Incidents of Travel in Yucatan; and
Travel in Central America, &c.
B. M. Norman, Rambles in Yucatan.
D. Charnay, Ancient Cities of the New World.
See, also, MEXICO: ANCIENT, and AZTEC AND AND MAYA
PICTURE-WRITING.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mayoruna, or Barbudo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Menominees.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, and SACS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Metöacs.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Miamis, or Twightwees.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, ILLINOIS, and SACS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Micmacs.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mingoes.
"The name of Mingo, or Mengwe, by which the Iroquois were
known to the Delawares and the other southern Algonkins, is
said to be a contraction of the Lenape word 'Mahongwi,'
meaning the 'People of the Springs.' The Iroquois possessed
the head-waters of the rivers which flowed through the country
of the Delawares."
H. Hale, The Iroquois Book of Rites,
appendix, note. A.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Minneconjou.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Minnetarees.
See above: HIDATSA;
and below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
See Note, Appendix E. 9.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Minquas.
See below: SUSQUEHANNAS;
and above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Minsis, Munsees, or Minisinks.
See above: DELAWARES, and ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Miranha.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Missouris.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mixes.
See below: ZAPOTECS, ETC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mixtecs.
See below: ZAPOTECS, ETC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mocovis.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Modocs (Klamaths) and their California and Oregon neighbors.
See Note, Appendix E.
"The principal tribes occupying this region [of Northern
California from Rogue River on the north to the Eel River,
south] are the Klamaths, who live on the head waters of the
river and on the shores of the lake of that name; the Modocs,
on Lower Klamath Lake and along Lost River; the Shastas, to
the south-west of the Lakes; the Pitt River Indians; the
Euroes, on the Klamath River between Weitspek and the coast;
the Cahrocs, on the Klamath River from a short distance above
the junction of the Trinity to the Klamath Mountains; the
Hoopahs [or Hupas, a tribe of the Athapascan Family] in Hoopah
Valley on the Trinity near its junction with the Klamath;
numerous tribes on the coast from Eel River and Humboldt Bay
north, such as the Weeyots, Wallies, Tolewahs, etc., and the
Rogue River Indians, on and about the river of that name. The
Northern Californians are in every way superior to the central
and southern tribes."
H. Bancroft, The Native Races of the Pacific States, volume
1, ch, 4.
"On the Klamath there live three distinct tribes, called the
Yú-rok, Ká-rok, and Mó-dok, which names are said to mean,
respectively, 'down the river,' 'up the river,' and 'head of
the river.' ... The Karok are probably the finest tribe in
California. ... Hoopa Valley, on the Lower Trinity, is the
home of [the Hú-pá]. Next after the Ká-rok they are the finest
race in all that region, and they even excel them in their
statecraft, and in the singular influence, or perhaps brute
force, which they exercise over the vicinal tribes. They are
the Romans of Northern California in their valor and their
wide-reaching dominions; they are the French in the extended
diffusion of their language." The Modoks, "on the whole ...
are rather a cloddish, indolent, ordinarily good-natured race,
but treacherous at bottom, sullen when angered, notorious for
keeping Punic faith. But their bravery nobody can impeach or
deny; their heroic and long defense of their stronghold
against the appliances of modern civilized warfare, including
that arm so awful to savages--the artillery--was almost the
only feature that lent respectability to their wretched
tragedy of the Lava Beds [1873]."
S. Powers, Tribes of California (Contributions to N. A.
Ethnology, volume 3), chapter 1, 7, and 27.
"The home of the Klamath tribe of southwestern Oregon lies
upon the eastern slope of the southern extremity of the
Cascade Range, and very nearly coincides with what we may call
the head waters of the Klamath River, the main course of which
lies in Northern California. ... The main seat of the Modoc
people was the valley of Lost River, the shores of Tule and of
Little Klamath Lake. ... The two main bodies forming the Klamath
people are (1) the Klamath Lake Indians; (2) the Modoc
Indians. The Klamath Lake Indians number more than twice as
many as the Modoc Indians. They speak the northern dialect and
form the northern chieftaincy. ... The Klamath people possess
no historic traditions going further back in time than a
century, for the simple reason that there was a strict law
prohibiting the mention of the person or acts of a deceased
individual by using his name. ... Our present knowledge does
not allow us to connect the Klamath language genealogically
with any of the other languages compared, but ... it stands as
a linguistic family for itself."
A. S. Gatschet, The Klamath Indians (Contributions to N.
A. Ethnology, volume 2, part 1).
In Major Powell's linguistic classification, the Klamath and
Modoc dialects are embraced in a family called the Lutuamian
Family, derived from a Pit River word signifying "lake;" the
Yuroks in a family called the Weitspekan; and the Pit River
Indian dialects are provisionally set apart in a distinct
family named the Palaihnihan Family.
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 89 and 97.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mohaves (Mojaves).
See above: APACHE GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mohawks.
See above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mohegans, or Mahicans.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
and below: STOCKBRIDGE INDIANS;
also, NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1637.
Montagnais.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
and ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Montauks.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Moquelumnan Family.
"Derivation: From the river and hill of the same name in
Calaveras County, California. ... It was not until 1856 that
the distinctness of the linguistic family was fully set forth
by Latham. Under the head of Moquelumne, this author gathers
several vocabularies representing different languages and
dialects of the same stock. These are the Talatui of Hale, the
Tuolumne from Schoolcraft, the Sonoma dialects as represented
by the Tshokoyem vocabulary, the Chocuyem and Youkiousme
paternosters, and the Olamentke of Kostromitonov in Bäer's
Beiträge. ... The Moquelumnan family occupies the territory
bounded on the north by the Cosumne River, on the south by the
Fresno River, on the east by the Sierra Nevada, and on the
west by the San Joaquin River, with the exception of a strip
on the east bank occupied by the Cholovone. A part of this
family occupies also a territory bounded on the south by San
Francisco Bay."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 92-93.
{95}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Moquis.
See below: PUEBLOS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Morona.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Moxos, or Mojos.
See above: ANDESIANS;
also, BOLIVIA: ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mundrucu.
See below: TUPI.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Munsees.
See above: DELAWARES, and ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
also MANHATTAN ISLAND.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Mura.
See above: GUCK Ort Coco GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Muskhogean, or Maskoki Family.
"Among the various nationalities of the Gulf territories the
Maskoki family of tribes occupied a central and commanding
position. Not only the large extent of territory held by them,
but also their numbers, their prowess in war, and a certain
degree of mental culture and self-esteem made of the Maskoki
one of the most important groups in Indian history. From their
ethnologic condition of later times, we infer that these
tribes have extended for many centuries back in time from the
Atlantic to the Mississippi and beyond that river, and from
the Apalachian ridge to the Gulf of Mexico. With short
intermissions they kept up warfare with all the circumjacent
Indian communities, and also among each other. ... The
irresolute and egotistic policy of these tribes often caused
serious difficulties to the government of the English and
French colonies, and some of them constantly wavered in their
adhesion between the French and the English cause. The
American government overcame their opposition easily whenever
a conflict presented itself (the Seminole War forms an
exception), because, like all the Indians, they never knew how
to unite against a common foe. The two main branches of the
stock, the Creek and the Cha'hta [or Choctaw] Indians, were
constantly at war, and the remembrance of their deadly
conflicts has now passed to their descendants in the form of
folk lore. ... The only characteristic by which a subdivision
of the family can be attempted, is that of language. Following
their ancient topographic location from east to west, we
obtain the following synopsis: First branch, or Maskoki
proper: The Creek, Maskokálgi or Maskoki proper, settled on
Coosa, Tallapoosa, Upper and Middle Chatahuchi rivers. From
these branched off by segmentation the Creek portion of the
Seminoles, of the Yámassi and of the little Yamacraw
community. Second, or Apalachian branch: This southeastern
division, which may be called also 'a parte potiori' the
Hitchiti connection, anciently comprised the tribes on the
Lower Chatahuchi river, and, east from there, the extinct
Apalachi, the Mikasuki, and the Hitchiti portion of the
Seminoles, Yámassi and Yamacraws. Third, or Alibamu branch,
comprised the Alibamu villages on the river of that name; to
them belonged the Koassáti and Witumka on Coosa river, its
northern affluent. Fourth, Western or Cha'hta [Choctaw]
branch: From the main people, the Cha'hta, settled in the
middle portions of the State of Mississippi, the Chicasa,
Pascagoula, Biloxi, Huma, and other tribes once became
separated through segmentation. The strongest evidence for a
community of origin of the Maskoki tribes is furnished by the
fact that their dialects belong to one linguistic family. ...
Maskóki, Maskógi, isti Maskóki, designates a single person of
the Creek tribe, and forms, as a collective plural,
Maskokálgi, the Creek community, the Creek people, the Creek
Indians. English authors write this name Muscogee, Muskhogee,
and its plural Muscogulgee. The first syllable, as pronounced
by the Creek Indians, contains a clear short a. ... The accent
is usually laid on the middle syllable: Maskóki, Maskógi. None
of the tribes are able to explain the name from their own
language. ... Why did the English colonists call them Creek
Indians? Because, when the English traders entered the Maskoki
country from Charleston or Savannah, they had to cross a
number of streams or creeks, especially between the Chatahuchi
and Savannah rivers. Gallatin thought it probable that the
inhabitants of the country adjacent to Savannah river were
called Creeks from an early time. ... In the southern part of
the Cha'hta territory several tribes, represented to be of
Cha'hta lineage, appear as distinct from the main body, and
are always mentioned separately. The French colonists, in
whose annals they figure extensively, call them Mobilians,
Tohomes, Pascogoulas, Biloxis, Mougoulachas, Bayogoulas and
Humas (Oumas). They have all disappeared in our epoch, with
the exception of the Biloxi [Major Powell, in the Seventh
Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, places the Biloxi in
the Siouan Family], [See Note, Appendix E.] of whom scattered
remnants live in the forests of Louisiana, south of the Red
River."
A. S. Gatschet, A Migration Legend of the Creek Indians,
volume 1, part 1.
"The Uchees and the Natches, who are both incorporated in the
[Muskhogee or Creek] confederacy, speak two distinct languages
altogether different from the Muskhogee. The Natches, a
residue of the well-known nation of that name, came from the
banks of the Mississippi, and joined the Creeks less than one
hundred years ago. The original seats of the Uchees were east
of the Coosa and probably of the Chatahoochee; and they
consider themselves as the most ancient inhabitants of the
country. They may have been the same nation which is called
Apalaches in the accounts of De Soto's expedition. ... The
four great Southern nations, according to the estimates of the
War Department ... consist now [1836] of 67,000 souls, viz.:
The Cherokees, 15,000; the Choctaws (18,500), the Chicasas
(5,500), 24,000; the Muskhogees, Seminoles, and Hitchittees,
26,000; the Uchees, Alibamons, Coosadas, and Natches, 2,000.
The territory west of the Mississippi, given or offered to
them by the United States in exchange for their lands east of
that river, contains 40,000,000 acres, exclusively of
what may be allotted to the Chicasas."
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of the Indian Tribes (Archæologia
Americana, volume 2), section 3.
See below: SEMINOLES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Musquito, or Mosquito Indians.
"That portion of Honduras known as the Musquito Coast derived
its name, not from the abundance of those troublesome insects,
but from a native tribe who at the discovery occupied the
shore near Blewfield Lagoon. They are an intelligent people,
short in stature, unusually dark in color, with finely cut
features, and small straight noses--not at all negroid,
except where there has been an admixture of blood. They number
about 6,000, many of whom have been partly civilized by the
efforts of missionaries, who have reduced the language to
writing and published in it a number of works. The Tunglas are
one of the sub-tribes of the Musquitos."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 162.
See, also, NICARAGUA: A. D., 1850.
{96}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nahuas.
See MEXICO, ANCIENT: THE MAYA AND NAHUA PEOPLES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nanticokes.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Napo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Narragansetts.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
also RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1636;
and NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1637; 1674-1675; 1675; and 1676-1678.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Natchesan Family.
When the French first entered the lower Mississippi valley,
they found the Natchez [Na'htchi] occupying a region of
country that now surrounds the city which bears their name.
"By the persevering curiosity of Gallatin, it is established
that the Natchez were distinguished from the tribes around
them less by their customs and the degree of their
civilization than by their language, which, as far as
comparisons have been instituted, has no etymological affinity
with any other whatever. Here again the imagination too
readily invents theories; and the tradition has been widely
received that the dominion of the Natchez once extended even
to the Wabash. History knows them only as a feeble and
inconsiderable nation, who in the 18th century attached
themselves to the confederacy of the Creeks."
G. Bancroft, History of the United States
(Author's last revision), volume 2, page 97.
"Chateaubriand, in his charming romances, and some of the
early French writers, who often drew upon their fancy for
their facts, have thrown an interest around the Natchez, as a
semi-civilized and noble race, that has passed into history.
We find no traces of civilization in their architecture, or in
their social life and customs. Their religion was brutal and
bloody, indicating an Aztec origin. They were perfidious and
cruel, and if they were at all superior to the neighboring
tribes it was probably due to the district they occupied--the
most beautiful, healthy and productive in the valley of the
Mississippi--and the influence of its attractions in
substituting permanent for temporary occupation. The residence
of the grand chief was merely a spacious cabin, of one
apartment, with a mat of basket work for his bed and a log for
his pillow. ... Their government was an absolute despotism.
The supreme chief was master of their labor, their property,
and their lives. ... The Natchez consisted exclusively of two
classes--the Blood Royal and its connexions, and the common
people, the Mich-i-mioki-quipe, or Stinkards. The two classes
understood each other, but spoke a different dialect. Their
customs of war, their treatment of prisoners, their ceremonies
of marriage, their feasts and fasts, their sorceries and
witchcraft, differed very little from other savages. Father
Charlevoix, who visited Natchez in 1721, saw no evidences of
civilization. Their villages consisted of a few cabins, or
rather ovens, without windows and roofed with matting. The
house of the Sun was larger, plastered with mud, and a narrow
bench for a seat and bed. No other furniture in the mansion of
this grand dignitary, who has been described by imaginative
writers as the peer of Montezuma!"
J. F. H. Claiborne, Mississippi, volume 1, chapter 4.
In 1729, the Natchez, maddened by insolent oppressions,
planned and executed a general massacre of the French within
their territory. As a consequence, the tribe was virtually
exterminated within the following two years.
C. Gayarre, Louisiana, its Colonial History and Romance,
2d series, lecture 3 and 5.
"The Na'htchi, according to Gallatin, a residue of the
well-known nation of that name, came from the banks of the
Mississippi, and joined the Creek less than one hundred years
ago. The seashore from Mobile to the Mississippi was then
inhabited by several small tribes, of which the Na'htchi was
the principal. Before 1730 the tribe lived in the vicinity of
Natchez, Miss., along St. Catherine Creek. After their
dispersion by the French in 1730 most of the remainder joined
the Chicasa and afterwards the Upper Creek. They are now in
Creek and Cherokee Nations, Indian Territory. The linguistic
relations of the language spoken by the Taensa tribe have long
been in doubt, and it is possible they will ever remain so."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 96.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1719-1750.
See, also, above: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Natchitoches;
See Note, Appendix E.
See TEXAS: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nausets.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Navajos.
See above: ATHAPASCAN FAMILY, and APACHE GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Neutral Nation.
See above: HURONS, &c.;
and IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY: THEIR CONQUESTS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nez Percés, or Sahaptins.
"The Sahaptins or Nez Percés [the Shahaptian Family in Major
Powell's classification], with their affiliated tribes,
occupied the middle and upper valley of the Columbia and its
affluents, and also the passes of the mountains. They were in
contiguity with the Shoshones and the Algonkin Blackfeet, thus
holding an important position, intermediate between the eastern
and the Pacific tribes. Having the commercial instinct of the
latter, they made good use of it."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 107.
ALSO IN
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report of the
Bureau of Ethnology, page 106.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Niniquiquilas.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nipmucs, or Nipnets.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
also, NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1674-1675; 1675; and 1676-1678
(KING PHILIP'S WAR).
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nootkas.
See below: WAKASHAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nottoways.
See above: IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Nyantics.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Ogalalas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Ojibwas, or Chippewas.
"The Ojibways, with their kindred, the Pottawattamies, and
their friends the Ottawas,--the latter of whom were fugitives
from the eastward, whence they had fled from the wrath of the
Iroquois,--were banded into a sort of confederacy. They were
closely allied in blood, language, manners and character. The
Ojibways, by far the most numerous of the three, occupied the
basin of Lake Superior, and extensive adjacent regions. In
their boundaries, the career of Iroquois conquest found at
length a check. The fugitive Wyandots sought refuge in the
Ojibway hunting grounds; and tradition relates that, at the
outlet of Lake Superior, an Iroquois war-party once
encountered a disastrous repulse. In their mode of life, they
were far more rude than the Iroquois, or even the southern
Algonquin tribes."
F. Parkman, Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 1.
{97}
"The name of the tribe appears to be recent. It is not met
with in the older writers. The French, who were the earliest
to meet them, in their tribal seat at the falls or Sault de
Ste Marie, named them Saulteur, from this circumstance.
M'Kenzie uses the term 'Jibway,' as the equivalent of this
term, in his voyages. They are referred to, with little
difference in the orthography, in General Washington's report,
in 1754, of his trip to Le Bœuf, on Lake Erie; but are first
recognized, among our treaty-tribes, in the general treaty of
Greenville, of 1794, in which, with the Ottawas they ceded the
island of Michilimackinac, and certain dependencies, conceded
by them at former periods to the French. ... The Chippewas are
conceded, by writers on American philology ... to speak one of
the purest forms of the Algonquin."
H. R. Schoolcraft, Information respecting the History,
Condition and Prospects of the Indian Tribes, part 5, p.
142.
ALSO IN
G. Copway, The Ojibway Nation.
J. G. Kohl, Kitchi-gami.
See, also, PONTIAC'S WAR:
and above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Omahas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY, and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Oneidas.
See above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
Onondagas.
See above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Orejones.
See below: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Osages.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY,
and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Otoes, or Ottoes.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY,
and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Otomis.
"According to Aztec tradition, the Otomis were the earliest
owners of the soil of Central Mexico. Their language was at
the conquest one of the most widely distributed of any in this
portion of the continent. Its central regions were the States
of Queretaro and Guanajuato. ... The Otomis are below the
average stature, of dark color, the skull markedly
dolichocephalic, the nose short and flattened, the eyes
slightly oblique."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 135.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Ottawas.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, and OJIBWAS.
See, also, PONTIAC'S WAR.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES
Pacaguara.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pacamora.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pamlicoes.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pampas Tribes.
"The chief tribe of the Pampas Indians was entitled Querandis
by the Spaniards, although they called themselves Pehuelches
[or Puelts--that is, the Eastern]. Various segments of these,
under different names, occupied the immense tract of ground,
between the river Parana and the republic of Chili. The
Querandis ... were the great opponents to settlement of the
Spaniards in Buenos Ayres. ... The Ancas or Aracaunos Indians
[see CHILE] resided on the west of the Pampas near Chili, and
from time to time assisted the Querandis in transporting
stolen cattle across the Cordilleras. The southern part of the
Pampas was occupied by the Balchitas, Uhilches, Telmelches,
and others, all of whom were branches of the original Quelches
horde. The Guarani Indians were the most famous of the South
American races. ... Of the Guayanas horde there were several
tribes--independent of each other, and speaking different
idioms, although having the same title of race. Their
territory extended from the river Guarai, one of the affluents
into the Uruguay, for many leagues northwards, and stretched
over to the Parana opposite the city of Corpus Christi. They
were some of the most vigorous opponents of the Spanish
invaders. ... The Nalicurgas Indians, who lived up to near 21°
South latitude were reputed to dwell in caves, to be very limited in
number, and to go entirely naked. The Gausarapos, or Guuchies
dwelt in the marshy districts near where the river Gausarapo,
or Guuchie, has its source. This stream enters from the east
into the Paraguay at 19° 16' 30" South latitude. ... The Cuatos lived
inside of a lake to the west of the river Paraguay, and
constituted a very small tribe. ... The Orejones dwelt on the
eastern brows of the mountains of Santa Lucia or San
Fernando--close to the western side of Paraguay river. ...
Another tribe, the Niniquiquilas, had likewise the names of
Potreros, Simanos, Barcenos, and Lathanos. They occupied a forest
which began at about 19° South latitude, some leagues backward
from the river Paraguay, and separated the Gran Chaco from the
province of Los Chiquitos in Peru. ... The Guanas Indians were
divided into eight separate segments, for each of which there
was a particular and different name. They lived between 20°
and 22° of South latitude in the Gran Chaco to the west of Paraguay,
and they were not known to the Spaniards till the latter
crossed the last-named river in 1673. ... The Albaias and
Payaguas Indians ... in former times, were the chief tribes of
the Paraguay territory. ... The Albaias were styled Machicuis
and Enimgas by other authors. At the time of the Spaniards'
arrival here, the Albaias occupied the Gran Chaco side of the
river Paraguay from 20° to 22° South latitude. Here they entered into
a treaty offensive and defensive with the Payaguas. ... The
joined forces of Albaias and Payaguas had managed to extend
their territory in 1673 down to 24° 7' South on the eastern side
of Paraguay river. ... The Albaias were a very tall and
muscular race of people. ... The Payagua Indians, before and
up to, as well as after, the period of the conquest, were
sailors, and domineered over the river Paraguay. ... The
Guaicarus lived on the Chaco side of Paraguay river and
subsisted entirely by hunting. From the barbarous custom which
their women had of inducing abortion to avoid the pain or
trouble of child-bearing, they became exterminated soon after
the conquest. ... The Tobas, who have also the titles of
Natecœt and Yncanabaite, were among the best fighters of the
Indians. They occupy the Gran Chaco, chiefly on the banks of
the river Vermejo, and between that and the Pilcomayo. Of
these there are some remains in the present day. ... The
Mocovis are likewise still to be found in the Chaco. ... The
Abipones, who were also styled Ecusgina and Quiabanabaite,
lived in the Chaco, so low down as 28° South. This was the
tribe with whom the Jesuits incorporated, when they erected
the city of San Geronimo, in the Gran Chaco, and nearly
opposite Goya, in 1748."
T. J. Hutchinson, The Parana, chapter 6-7.
{98}
"The Abipones inhabit [in the 18th century] the province
Chaco, the centre of all Paraguay; they have no
fixed abodes, nor any boundaries, except what fear of their
neighbours has established. They roam extensively in every
direction, whenever the opportunity of attacking their
enemies, or the necessity of avoiding them renders a journey
advisable. The northern shore of the Rio Grande or Bermejo,
which the Indians call Iñatè, was their native land in the
last century [the 17th]. Thence they removed, to avoid the war
carried on against Chaco by the Spaniards ... and, migrating
towards the south, took possession of a valley formerly held
by the Calchaquis. ... From what region their ancestors came
there is no room for conjecture."
M. Dobrizhoffer, Account of the Abipones, volume 2, chapter 1.
"The Abipones are in general above the middle stature, and of
a robust constitution. In summer they go quite naked; but in
winter cover themselves with skins. ... They paint themselves
all over with different colours."
Father Charlevoix, History of Paraguay,
book 7 (volume 1).
ALSO IN
The Standard Natural History (J. S. Kingsley, editor),
volume 6, pages 256-262.
See, also, below: TUPI.--GUARANI.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pampticokes.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pano.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Papagos.
See below: PIMAN FAMILY, and PUEBLOS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Parawianas.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pascogoulas.
See above: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Passé.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Patagonians and Fuegians.
"The Patagonians call themselves Chonek or Tzoueca, or Inaken
(men, people), and by their Pampean neighbors are referred to
as Tehuel-Che, southerners. They do not, however, belong to
the Aucanian stock, nor do they resemble the Pampeans
physically. They are celebrated for their stature, many of
them reaching from six to six feet four inches in height, and
built in proportion. In color they are a reddish brown, and
have aquiline noses and good foreheads. They care little for a
sedentary life, and roam the coast as far north as the Rio Negro.
... On the inhospitable shores of Tierra del Fuego there dwell
three nations of diverse stock, but on about the same plane of
culture. One of these is the Yahgans, or Yapoos, on the Beagle
Canal; the second is the Onas or Aonik, to the north and east
of these; and the third the Aliculufs, to the north and west.
... The opinion has been advanced by Dr. Deniker of Paris,
that the Fuegians represent the oldest type or variety of the
American race. He believes that at one time this type occupied
the whole of South America south of the Amazon, and that the
Tapuyas of Brazil and the Fuegians are its surviving members.
This interesting theory demands still further evidence before
it can be accepted."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, pages 327-332.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pawnee Family (named "Caddoan" by Major Powell).
"The Pawnee Family, though some of its branches have long been
known, is perhaps in history and language one of the least
understood of the important tribes of the West. In both
respects it seems to constitute a distinct group. During
recent years its extreme northern and southern branches have
evinced a tendency to blend with surrounding stocks; but the
central branch, constituting the Pawnee proper, maintains
still in its advanced decadence a bold line of demarcation
between itself and all adjacent tribes. The members of the
family are: The Pawnees, the Arikaras, the Caddos, the Huecos
or Wacos, the Keechies, the Tawaconies, and the Pawnee Picts
or Wichitas. The last five may be designated as the Southern
or Red River branches. At the date of the Louisiana purchase
the Caddos were living about 40 miles northwest of where
Shreveport now stands. Five years earlier their residence was
upon Clear Lake, in what is now Caddo Parish. This spot they
claimed was the place of their nativity, and their residence
from time immemorial. ... They have a tradition that they are
the parent stock, from which all the southern branches have
sprung, and to some extent this claim has been recognized. ...
The five [southern] bands are now all gathered upon a reserve
secured for them in the Indian Territory by the Government.
... In many respects, their method of building lodges, their
equestrianism, and certain social and tribal usages, they
quite closely resemble the Pawnees. Their connection, however,
with the Pawnee family, not till recently if ever mentioned,
is mainly a matter of vague conjecture. ... The name Pawnee is
most probably derived from 'párĭk-ĭ,' a horn; and seems to
have been once used by the Pawnees themselves to designate
their peculiar scalp-lock. From the fact that this was the
most noticeable feature in their costume, the name came
naturally to be the denominative term of the tribe. The word
in this use once probably embraced the Wichitas (i. e., Pawnee
Picts) and the Arikaras. ... The true Pawnee territory till as
late as 1833 may be described as extending from the Niobrara
south to the Arkansas. They frequently hunted considerably
beyond the Arkansas; tradition says as far as the Canadian.
... On the east they claimed to the Missouri, though in
eastern Nebraska, by a sort of tacit permit, the Otoes,
Poncas, and Omahas along that stream occupied lands extending
as far west as the Elkhorn. In Kansas, also, east of the Big
Blue, they had ceased to exercise any direct control, as
several remnants of tribes, the Wyandots, Delawares,
Kickapoos, and Iowas, had been settled there and were living
under the guardianship of the United States. ... On the west
their grounds were marked by no natural boundary, but may
perhaps be described by a line drawn from the mouth of Snake
River on the Niobrara southwest to the North Platte, thence
south to the Arkansas. ... It is not to be supposed, however,
that they held altogether undisturbed possession of this
territory. On the north they were incessantly harassed by
various bands of the Dakotas, while upon the south the Osages,
Comanches, Cheyennes, Arapahoes and Kiowas (the last three
originally northern tribes) were equally relentless in their
hostility. ... In 1833 the Pawnees surrendered to the United
States their claim upon all the above described territory
lying south of the Platte. In 1858 all their remaining
territory was ceded, except a reserve 30 miles long and 15
wide upon the Loup Fork of the Platte, its eastern limit
beginning at Beaver Creek. In 1874 they sold this tract and
removed to a reserve secured for them by the Government in the
Indian Territory, between the Arkansas and Cimarron at their
junction."
J. B. Dunbar, The Pawnee Indians (Magazine of American
History, April, 1880, v.4).
ALSO IN
G. B. Grinnell, Pawnee Hero Stories.
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, pages 95-97.
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology, page 59.
See, also, above: ADAIS and BLACKFEET.
{99}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Payaguas.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pehuelches, or Puelts.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Penacooks, or Pawtucket Indians.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Peorias.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pequots.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
and below: SHAWANESE;
also, NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1637.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Piankishaws.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, and SACS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Piegans.
See above: BLACKFEET.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Piman Family.
"Only a small portion of the territory occupied by this family
is included within the United States, the greater portion
being in Mexico, where it extends to the Gulf of California.
The family is represented in the United States by three
tribes, Pima alta, Sobaipuri, and Papago. The former have
lived for at least two centuries with the Maricopa on the Gila
River about 160 miles from the mouth. The Sobaipuri occupied
the Santa Cruz and San Pedro Rivers, tributaries of the Gila,
but are no longer known. The Papago territory is much more
extensive and extends to the south across the border."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 98-99.
See below: PUEBLOS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pimenteiras.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Piru.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pit River Indians.
See above: MODOCS (KLAMATHS), &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Piutes.
See below: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pokanokets, or Wampanoags.
See above:
ALGONQUIAN FAMILY;
also, NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1674-1675; 1675; 1676-1678 (KING
PHILIP'S WAR).
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Ponkas, or Puncas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY;
and above: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Popolocas.
See above: CHONTALS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pottawatomies.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, OJIBWAS, and SACS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Powhatan Confederacy.
"At the time of the first settlement by the Europeans, it has
been estimated that there were not more than 20,000 Indians
within the limits of the State of Virginia. Within a circuit
of 60 miles from Jamestown, Captain Smith says there were
about 5,000 souls, and of these scarce 1,500 were warriors.
The whole territory between the mountains and the sea was
occupied by more than 40 tribes, 30 of whom were united in a
confederacy under Powhatan, whose dominions, hereditary and
acquired by conquest, comprised the whole country between the
rivers James and Potomac, and extended into the interior as
far as the falls of the principal rivers. Campbell, in his
History of Virginia, states the number of Powhatan's subjects
to have been 8,000. Powhatan was a remarkable man; a sort of
savage Napoleon, who, by the force of his character and the
superiority of his talents, had raised himself from the rank
of a petty chieftain to something of imperial dignity and
power. He had two places of abode, one called Powhatan, where
Richmond now stands, and the other at Werowocomoco, on the
north side of York River, within the present county of
Gloucester. ... Besides the large confederacy of which
Powhatan was the chief, there were two others, with which that
was often at war. One of these, called the Mannahoacs,
consisted of eight tribes, and occupied the country between
the Rappahannoc and York rivers; the other, consisting of five
tribes, was called the Monacans, and was settled between York and
James rivers above the Falls. There were also, in addition to
these, many scattering and independent tribes."
G. S. Hillard, Life of Captain John Smith
(Library of Am. Biog.), chapter 4.
"The English invested savage life with all the
dignity of European courts. Powhatan was styled 'King,' or
'Emperor,' his principal warriors were lords of the kingdom,
his wives were queens, his daughter was a 'princess,' and his
cabins were his various seats of residence. ... In his younger
days Powhatan had been a great warrior. Hereditarily, he was
the chief or werowance of eight tribes; through conquest his
dominions had been extended. ... The name of his nation and
the Indian appellation of the James River was Powhatan. He
himself possessed several names."
E. Eggleston and L. E. Seelye, Pocahontas, chapter 3.
ALSO IN
Captain John Smith, Description of Virginia, and General
Historie of Virginia. (Arber's reprint of Works, pages 65 and
360).
See, also, above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Puans.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pueblos.
"The non-nomadic semi-civilized town and agricultural peoples
of New Mexico and Arizona ... I call the Pueblos, or
Townspeople, from pueblo, town, population, people, a name
given by the Spaniards to such inhabitants of this region as
were found, when first discovered, permanently located in
comparatively well-built towns. Strictly speaking, the term
Pueblos applies only to the villagers settled along the banks
of the Rio Grande del Norte and its tributaries between
latitudes 34° 45' and 36° 30', and although the name is
employed as a general appellation for this division, it will
be used, for the most part, only in its narrower and popular
sense. In this division, besides the before mentioned Pueblos
proper, are embraced the Moquis, or villagers of eastern
Arizona, and the non-nomadic agricultural nations of the lower
Gila river,--the Pimas, Maricopas, Papagos, and cognate
tribes. The country of the Townspeople, if we may credit
Lieutenant Simpson, is one of 'almost universal barrenness,'
yet interspersed with fertile spots; that of the agricultural
nations, though dry, is more generally productive. The fame of
this so-called civilization reached Mexico at an early day ...
in exaggerated rumors of great cities to the north, which
prompted the expeditions of Marco de Niza in 1539, of Coronado
in 1540, and of Espejo in 1586 [1583]. These adventurers
visited the north in quest of the fabulous kingdoms of
Quivira, Tontonteac, Marata and others, in which great riches
were said to exist. The name of Quivira was afterwards applied
by them to one or more of the pueblo cities. The name Cibola,
from 'Cibolo,' Mexican bull, 'bos bison,' or wild ox of New
Mexico, where the Spaniards first encountered buffalo, was
given to seven of the towns which were afterwards known as the
Seven Cities of Cibola. But most of the villages known at the
present day were mentioned in the reports of the early
expeditions by their present names.
{100}
... The towns of the Pueblos are essentially unique, and are
the dominant feature of these aboriginals. Some of them are
situated in valleys, others on mesas; sometimes they are
planted on elevations almost inaccessible, reached only by
artificial grades, or by steps cut in the solid rock. Some of
the towns are of an elliptical shape, while others are square,
a town being frequently but a block of buildings. Thus a
Pueblo consists of one or more squares, each enclosed by three
or four buildings of from 300 to 400 feet in length, and about
150 feet in width at the base, and from two to seven stories
of from eight to nine feet each in height. ... The stories are
built in a series of gradations or retreating surfaces,
decreasing in size as they rise, thus forming a succession of
terraces. In some of the towns these terraces are on both
sides of the building; in others they face only towards the
outside; while again in others they are on the inside. These
terraces are about six feet wide, and extend around the three
or four sides of the square, forming a walk for the occupants
of the story resting upon it, and a roof for the story
beneath; so with the stories above. As there is no inner
communication with one another, the only means of mounting to
them is by ladders which stand at convenient distances along
the several rows of terraces, and they may be drawn up at
pleasure, thus cutting off all unwelcome intrusion. The
outside walls of one or more of the lower stories are entirely
solid, having no openings of any kind, with the exception of,
in some towns, a few loopholes. ... To enter the rooms on the
ground floor from the outside, one must mount the ladder to
the first balcony or terrace, then descend through a trap door
in the floor by another ladder on the inside. ... The several
stories of these huge structures are divided into
multitudinous compartments of greater or less size, which are
apportioned to the several families of the tribe."
H. H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 5.
"There can be no doubt that Cibola is to be looked for in New
Mexico. ... We cannot ... refuse to adopt the views of General
Simpson and of Mr. W. W. H. Davis, and to look at the pueblo
of Zuni as occupying, if not the actual site, at least one of
the sites within the tribal area of the Seven Cities of
Cibola. Nor can we refuse to identify Tusayan with the Moqui
district, and Acuco with Acoma."
A. F. Bandelier, Historical Introduction to Studies
among the Sedentary Indians of N. Mexico (Papers of the
Archœology Institute of America: American Series,
volume 1).
ALSO IN
J. H. Simpson, The March of Coronado.
L. H. Morgan, Houses and House-life of the Am.
Aborigines (Contributions to N. Am. Ethnology, volume 4),
chapter 6.
F. H. Cushing, My Adventures in Zuñi
(Century, volume 3-4).
F. H. Cushing, Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology (1882-83), pages 473-480.
F. W. Blackmar, Spanish Institutions of the Southwest,
chapter 10.
See, also, AMERICA, PREHISTORIC,
and above: PIMAN FAMILY and KERESAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Pujunan Family.
"The following tribes were placed in this group by Latham:
Pujuni, Secumne, Tsamak of Hale, and the Cushna of
Schoolcraft. The name adopted for the family is the name of a
tribe given by Hale. This was one of the two races into which,
upon the information of Captain Sutter as derived by Mr. Dana,
all the Sacramento tribes were believed to be divided. 'These
races resembled one another in every respect but language.'
... The tribes of this family have been carefully studied by
Powers, to whom we are indebted for most all we know of their
distribution. They occupied the eastern bank of the Sacramento
in California, beginning some 80 or 100 miles from its mouth,
and extended northward to within a short distance of Pit
River."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 99-100.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Puncas, or Ponkas.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY:
and above: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Purumancians.
See CHILE: A. D. 1450-1724.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Quapaws.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Quelches.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Querandis, or Pehuelches, or Puelts.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Quiches.--Cakchiquels.
"Of the ancient races of America, those which approached the
nearest to a civilized condition spoke related dialects of a
tongue, which from its principal members has been called the
Maya Quiche linguistic stock. Even to-day, it is estimated
that half a million persons use these dialects. They are
scattered over Yucatan, Guatemala, and the adjacent territory,
and one branch formerly occupied the hot lowlands on the Gulf
of Mexico, north of Vera Cruz. The so-called 'metropolitan'
dialects are those spoken relatively near the city of
Guatemala, and include the Cakchiquel, the Quiche, the
Pokonchi and the Tzutuhill. They are quite closely allied, and
are mutually intelligible, resembling each other about as much
as did in ancient Greece the Attic, Ionic and Doric dialects.
... The civilization of these people was such that they used
various mnemonic signs, approaching our alphabet, to record
and recall their mythology and history. Fragments, more or
less complete, of these traditions have been preserved. The
most notable of them is the national legend of the Quiches of
Guatemala, the so-called Popol Vuh. It was written at an
unknown date in the Quiche dialect, by a native who was
familiar with the ancient records."
D. G. Brinton, Essays of an Americanist, page 104.
ALSO IN,
D. G. Brinton, Annals of the Cakchiquels.
H. H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States,
chapter 11.
See, also, above: MAYAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Quichuas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Quijo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Quoratean Family.
"The tribes occupy both banks of the lower Klamath from a
range of hills a little above Happy Camp to the junction of
the Trinity, and the Salmon River from its mouth to its
sources. On the north, Quoratean tribes extended to the
Athapascan territory near the Oregon line."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 101.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Rapid Indians.
A name applied by various writers to the Arapahoes, and other
tribes.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Raritans.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Remo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Rogue River Indians.
See above: MODOCS, ETC.
See Note, Appendix E.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Rucanas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sabaja.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
{101}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sacs (Sauks), Foxes, etc.
"The Sauks or Saukies (White Clay), and Foxes or Outagamies,
so called by the Europeans and Algonkins, but whose true name
is Musquakkiuk (Red Clay), are in fact but one nation. The
French missionaries on coming first in contact with them, in
the year 1665, at once found that they spoke the same
language, and that it differed from the Algonkin, though
belonging to the same stock; and also that this language was
common to the Kickapoos, and to those Indians they called
Maskontens. This last nation, if it ever had an existence as a
distinct tribe, has entirely disappeared. But we are informed
by Charlevoix, and Mr. Schoolcraft corroborates the fact, that
the word 'Mascontenck' means a country without woods, a
prairie. The name Mascontens was therefore used to designate
'prairie Indians.' And it appears that they consisted
principally of Sauks and Kickapoos, with an occasional mixture
of Potowotamies and Miamis, who probably came there to hunt
the Buffalo. The country assigned to those Mascontens lay
south of the Fox River of Lake Michigan and west of Illinois
River. ... When first discovered, the Sauks and Foxes had
their seats toward the southern extremity of Green Bay, on Fox
River, and generally farther east than the country which they
lately occupied. ... By the treaty of 1804, the Sauks and
Foxes ceded to the United States all their lands east of ...
the Mississippi. ... The Kickapoos by various treaties, 1809
to 1819, have also ceded all their lands to the United States.
They claimed all the country between the Illinois River and
the Wabash, north of the parallel of latitude passing by the
mouth of the Illinois and south of the Kankakee River. ... The
territory claimed by the Miamis and Piankishaws may be
generally stated as having been bounded eastwardly by the
Maumee River of Lake Erie, and to have included all the
country drained by the Wabash. The Piankishaws occupied the
country bordering on the Ohio."
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of the Indian Tribes (Archæologia
Americana, volume 2), introduction, section 2.
The Mascontens, or Mascoutins, "seldom appear alone, but
almost always in connection with their kindred, the Ottagamies
or Foxes and the Kickapoos, and like them bear a character for
treachery and deceit. The three tribes may have in earlier
days formed the Fire-Nation [of the early French writers],
but, as Gallatin observes in the Archæologia Americana, it is
very doubtful whether the Mascoutins were ever a distinct
tribe. If this be so, and there is no reason to reject it, the
disappearance of the name will not be strange."
J. G. Shea, Brief Researches Respecting the Mascoutins
(Schoolcraft's Information Respecting Indian Tribes,
part 4, page 245).
See above, ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
For an account of the Black Hawk War
See Illinois, A. D. 1832.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sahaptins.
See above: NEZ PERCÉS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Salinan Family.
This name is given by Major Powell to the San Antonio and San
Miguel dialects spoken by two tribes on the Salinas River,
Monterey County, California.
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 101.
See ESSELENIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Salishan Family.
See above: FLATHEADS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sanhikans, or Mincees.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sans Arcs.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES
Santees.
See below: SIOUAN FAMILY.
See Note. Appendix E.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sarcee (Tinneh).
See above: BLACKFEET.
See Note. Appendix E.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sastean Family.
"The single tribe upon the language of which Hale based his
name was located by him to the southwest of the Lutuami or
Klamath tribes. ... The former territory of the Sastean family
is the region drained by the Klamath River and its tributaries
from the western base of the Cascade range to the point where
the Klamath flows through the ridge of hills east of Happy
Camp, which forms the boundary between the Sastean and the
Quoratean families. In addition to this region of the Klamath,
the Shasta extended over the Siskiyou range northward as far as
Ashland, Oregon:"
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 106.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Savannahs.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Seminoles.
"The term 'semanóle,' or 'isti Simanóle,' signifies
'separatish' or 'runaway,' and as a tribal name points to the
Indians who left the Creek, especially the Lower Creek
settlements, for Florida, to live, hunt, and fish there in
independence. The term does not mean 'wild,' 'savage,' as
frequently stated; if applied now in this sense to animals, it
is because of its original meaning, 'what has become a
runaway.' ... The Seminoles of modern times are a people
compounded of the following elements: separatists from the
Lower Creek and Hitchiti towns; remnants of tribes partly
civilized by the Spaniards; Yamassi Indians, and some negroes.
... The Seminoles were always regarded as a sort of outcasts
by the Creek tribes from which they had seceded, and no doubt
there were reasons for this. ... These Indians showed, like
the Creeks, hostile intentions towards the thirteen states
during and after the Revolution, and conjointly with the Upper
Creeks on Tallapoosa river concluded a treaty of friendship
with the Spaniards at Pensacola in May, 1784. Although under
Spanish control, the Seminoles entered into hostilities with
the Americans in 1793 and 1812. In the latter year Payne míko
['King Payne'] was killed in a battle at Alachua, and his
brother, the influential Bowlegs, died soon after. These
unruly tribes surprised and massacred American settlers on the
Satilla river, Georgia, in 1817, and another conflict began,
which terminated in the destruction of the Mikasuki and
Suwanee river towns of the Seminoles by General Jackson, in
April, 1818. [See FLORIDA: A. D. 1816-1818.] After the cession
of Florida, and its incorporation into the American Union
(1819), the Seminoles gave up all their territory by the
treaty of Fort Moultrie, Sept. 18th, 1823, receiving in
exchange goods and annuities. When the government concluded to
move these Indians west of the Mississippi river, a treaty of
a conditional character was concluded with them at Payne's
landing, in 1832. The larger portion were removed, but the
more stubborn part dissented, and thus gave origin to one of
the gravest conflicts which ever occurred between Indians and
whites. The Seminole war began with the massacre of Major
Dade's command near Wahoo swamp, December 28th, 1835, and
continued with unabated fury for five years, entailing an
immense expenditure of money and lives. [See FLORIDA: A. D.
1835-1843.] A number of Creek warriors joined the hostile
Seminoles in 1836. A census of the Seminoles taken in 1822
gave a population of 3,899, with 800 negroes belonging to
them. The population of the Seminoles in the Indian Territory
amounted to 2,667 in 1881. ... There are some Seminoles now in
Mexico, who went there with their negro slaves."
A. S. Gatschet, A Migration Legend of the Creek Indians,
volume 1, part 1, section 2.
{102}
"Ever since the first settlement of these Indians in Florida
they have been engaged in a strife with the whites. ... In the
unanimous judgment of unprejudiced writers, the whites have
ever been in the wrong."
D. G. Brinton, Notes on the Floridian Peninsula,
page 148.
"There were in Florida, October 1, 1880, of the Indians
commonly known as Seminole, 208. They constituted 37 families,
living in 22 camps, which were gathered into five widely
separated groups or settlements. ... This people our
Government has never been able to conciliate or to conquer.
... The Seminole have always lived within our borders as
aliens. It is only of late years, and through natural
necessities, that any friendly intercourse of white man and
Indian has been secured. ... The Indians have appropriated for
their service some of the products of European civilization,
such as weapons, implements, domestic utensils, fabrics for
clothing, &c. Mentally, excepting a few religious ideas which
they received long ago from the teaching of Spanish
missionaries, and, in the southern settlements, excepting some
few Spanish words, the Seminole have accepted and appropriated
practically nothing from the white man."
C. MacCauley, The Seminole Indians of Florida (Fifth
Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1883-84),
introduction and chapter 4.
ALSO IN
J. T. Sprague, The Florida War.
S. G. Drake, The Aboriginal Races of North America.
book 4, chapter 6-21.
See, also, above: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Senecas; their name.
"How this name originated is a 'vexata quæstio' among
Indo-antiquarians and etymologists. The least plausible
supposition is, that the name has any reference to the
moralist Seneca. Some have supposed it to be a corruption of
the Dutch term for vermillion, cinebar, or cinnabar, under the
assumption that the Senecas, being the most warlike of the
Five Nations, used that pigment more than the others, and thus
gave origin to the name. This hypothesis is supported by no
authority. ... The name 'Sennecas' first appears on a Dutch
map of 1616, and again on Jean de Laet's map of 1633. ... It
is claimed by some that the word may be derived from
'Sinnekox,' the Algonquin name of a tribe of Indians spoken of
in Wassenaer's History of Europe, on the authority of Peter
Barentz, who traded with them about the year 1626. ... Without
assuming to solve the mystery, the writer contents himself
with giving some data which may possibly aid others in
arriving at a reliable conclusion. [Here follows a discussion
of the various forms of name by which the Senecas designated
themselves and were known to the Hurons, from whom the Jesuits
first heard of them.] By dropping the neuter prefix O, the
national title became 'Nan-do-wah-gaah,' or 'The great hill
people,' as now used by the Senecas. ... If the name Seneca
can legitimately be derived from the Seneca word
'Nan-do-wah-gaah' ... it can only be done by prefixing 'Son,'
as was the custom of the Jesuits, and dropping all unnecessary
letters. It would then form the word 'Son-non-do-wa-ga,' the
first two and last syllables of which, if the French sounds of
the letters are given, are almost identical in pronunciation
with Seneca. The chief difficulty, however, would be in the
disposal of the two superfluous syllables. They may have been
dropped in the process of contraction so common in the
composition of Indian words--a result which would be quite
likely to occur to a Seneca name, in its transmission through
two other languages, the Mohawk and the Dutch. The foregoing
queries and suggestions are thrown out for what they are
worth, in the absence of any more reliable theory."
O. H. Marshall, Historical Writings, page 231
See above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY, and HURONS, &c.
See, also, PONTIAC'S WAR,
For an account of Sullivan's expedition against the Senecas,
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1779 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Shacaya.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Shahaptian Family.
See above: NEZ PERCÉS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES
Shastas.
See above: SASTEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Shawanese, Shawnees, or Shawanoes.
"Adjacent to the Lenape [or Delawares--see above], and
associated with them in some of the most notable passages of
their history, dwelt the Shawanoes, the Chaouanons of the
French, a tribe of bold, roving, and adventurous spirit. Their
eccentric wanderings, their sudden appearances and
disappearances, perplex the antiquary, and defy research; but
from various scattered notices, we may gather that at an early
period they occupied the valley of the Ohio; that, becoming
embroiled with the Five Nations, they shared the defeat of the
Andastes, and about the year 1672 fled to escape destruction.
Some found an asylum in the country of the Lenape, where they
lived tenants at will of the Five Nations; others sought
refuge in the Carolinas and Florida, where, true to their
native instincts, they soon came to blows with the owners of
the soil. Again, turning northwards, they formed new
settlements in the valley of the Ohio, where they were now
suffered to dwell in peace, and where, at a later period, they
were joined by such of their brethren as had found refuge
among the Lenape."
F. Parkman, The Conspiracy of Pontiac, chapter 1.
"The Shawnees were not found originally in Ohio, but migrated
there after 1750. They were called Chaouanons by the French
and Shawanoes by the English. The English name Shawano changed
to Shawanee, and recently to Shawnee. Chaouanon and Shawano
are obviously attempts to represent the same sound by the
orthography of the two respective languages. ... Much industry
has been used by recent writers, especially by Dr. Brinton, to
trace this nomadic tribe to its original home; but I think
without success. ... We first find the Shawano in actual
history about the year 1660, and living along the Cumberland
river, or the Cumberland and Tennessee. Among the conjectures
as to their earlier history, the greatest probability lies for
the present with the earliest account--the account given by
Perrot, and apparently obtained by him from the Shawanoes
themselves, about the year 1680--that they formerly lived by
the lower lakes, and were driven thence by the Five Nations."
M. F. Force, Some Early Notices of the Indians of
Ohio.
"Their [the Shawnee's] dialect is more akin to the Mohegan
than to the Delaware, and when, in 1692, they first appeared
in the area of the Eastern Algonkin Confederacy, they came as
the friends and relatives of the former. They were divided
into four bands"--Piqua, properly Pikoweu, Mequachake,
Kiscapokoke, Chilicothe. "Of these, that which settled in
Pennsylvania was the Pikoweu, who occupied and gave their name
to the Pequa valley in Lancaster county. According to ancient
Mohegan tradition, the New England Pequods were members of
this band."
D. G. Brinton, The Lenape and their Legends, chapter 2.
D. G. Brinton, The Shawnees and their Migrations (History
Magazine, volume 10, 1866).
{103}
"The Shawanese, whose villages were on the western bank [of
the Susquehanna] came into the valley [of Wyoming] from their
former localities, at the 'forks of the Delaware' (the
junction of the Delaware and Lehigh, at Easton), to which
point they had been induced at some remote period to emigrate
from their earlier home, near the mouth of the river Wabash,
in the 'Ohio region,' upon the invitation of the Delawares.
This was Indian diplomacy, for the Delawares were desirous
(not being upon the most friendly terms with the Mingos, or
Six Nations) to accumulate a force against those powerful
neighbors. But, as might be expected, they did not long live
in peace with their new allies. ... The Shawanese [about 1755,
or soon after] were driven out of the valley by their more
powerful neighbors, the Delawares, and the conflict which
resulted in their leaving it grew out of, or was precipitated
by, a very trifling incident. While the warriors of the
Delawares were engaged upon the mountains in a hunting
expedition, a number of squaws or female Indians from
Maughwauwame were gathering wild fruits along the margin of
the river below the town, where they found a number of
Shawanese squaws and their children, who had crossed the river
in their canoes upon the same business. A child belonging to
the Shawanese having taken a large grasshopper, a quarrel
arose among the children for the possession of it, in which
their mothers soon took part. ... The quarrel became general.
... Upon the return of the warriors both tribes prepared for
battle. ... The Shawanese ... were not able to sustain the
conflict, and, after the loss of about half their tribe, the
remainder were forced to flee to their own side of the river,
shortly after which they abandoned their town and removed to
the Ohio." This war between the Delawares and Shawanese has
been called the Grasshopper War.
L. H. Miner, The Valley of Wyoming, page 32.
See, also, above, ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, and DELAWARES
See, also, PONTIAC'S WAR; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1765-1768;
For an account of "Lord Dunmore's War",
See OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1774.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sheepeaters (Tukuarika).
See below: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sheyennes.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Shoshonean Family.
"This important family occupied a large part of the great
interior basin of the United States. Upon the north Shoshonean
tribes extended far into Oregon, meeting Shahaptian territory
on about the 44th parallel or along the Blue Mountains. Upon
the northeast the eastern limits of the pristine habitat of
the Shoshonean tribes are unknown. The narrative of Lewis and
Clarke contains the explicit statement that the Shoshoni bands
encountered upon the Jefferson River, whose summer home was upon
the head waters of the Columbia, formerly lived within their
own recollection in the plains to the east of the Rocky
Mountains, whence they were driven to their mountain retreats
by the Minnetaree (Atsina), who had obtained firearms. ...
Later a division of the Bannock held the finest portion of
Southwestern Montana, whence apparently they were being pushed
westward across the mountains by Blackfeet. Upon the east the
Tukuarika or Sheepeaters held the Yellowstone Park country,
where they were bordered by the Siouan territory, while the
Washaki occupied southwestern Wyoming. Nearly the entire
mountainous part of Colorado was held by the several bands of
the Ute, the eastern and southeastern parts of the State being
held respectively by the Arapaho and Cheyenne (Algonquian),
and the Kaiowe (Kiowan). To the southeast the Ute country
included the northern drainage of the San Juan, extending
farther east a short distance into New Mexico. The Comanche
division of the family extended farther east than any other.
... Bourgemont found a Comanche tribe on the upper Kansas
River in 1724. According to Pike the Comanche territory
bordered the Kaiowe on the north, the former occupying the
head waters of the Upper Red River, Arkansas and Rio Grande.
How far to the southward Shoshonean tribes extended at this
early period is not known, though the evidence tends to show
that they raided far down into Texas, to the territory they
have occupied in more recent years, viz., the extensive plains
from the Rocky Mountains eastward into Indian Territory and
Texas to about 97°. Upon the south Shoshonean territory was
limited generally by the Colorado River ... while the Tusayan
(Moki) had established their seven pueblos ... to the east of
the Colorado Chiquito. In the southwest Shoshonean tribes had
pushed across California, occupying a wide band of country to
the Pacific."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report., Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 109-110.
"The Pah Utes occupy the greater part of Nevada, and extend
southward. ... The Pi Utes or Piutes inhabit Western Utah,
from Oregon to New Mexico. ... The Gosh Utes [Gosuites]
inhabit the country west of Great Salt Lake, and extend to the
Pah Utes."
H. H. Bancroft, Native Races of the Pacific States,
volume 1, chapter 4.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Siksikas, or Sisikas.
See above: BLACKFEET.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Siouan Family.--Sioux.
See Note, Appendix E.
"The nations which speak the Sioux language may be considered,
in reference both to their respective dialects and to their
geographical position, as consisting of four subdivisions,
viz., the Winnebagoes; the Sioux proper and the Assiniboins;
the Minetare group; and the Osages and other southern kindred
tribes. The Winnebagoes, so called by the Algonkins, but
called Puans and also Otchagras by the French, and Horoje
('fish-eaters') by the Omahaws and other southern tribes, call
themselves Hochungorah, or the 'Trout' nation. The Green Bay
of Lake Michigan derives its French name from theirs (Baye des
Puans). ... According to the War Department they amount [1836]
to 4,600 souls, and appear to cultivate the soil to a
considerable degree. Their principal seats are on the Fox
River of Lake Michigan, and towards the heads of the Rock
River of the Mississippi. ... The Sioux proper, or
Naudowessies, names given to them by the Algonkins and the
French, call themselves Dahcotas, and sometimes 'Ochente
Shakoans,' or the Seven Fires, and are divided into seven
bands or tribes, closely connected together, but apparently
independent of each other. They do not appear to have been
known to the French before the year 1660.
{104}
... The four most eastern tribes of the Dahcotas are known by
the name of the Mendewahkantoan, or 'Gens du Lac,' Wahkpatoan
and Wahkpakotoan, or 'People of the Leaves,' and Sisitoans.
... The three westerly tribes, the Yanktons, the Yanktonans,
and the Tetons, wander between the Mississippi and the
Missouri. ... The Assiniboins (Stone Indians), as they are
called by the Algonkins, are a Dahcota tribe separated from
the rest of the nation, and on that account called Hoha or
'Rebels,' by the other Sioux. They are said to have made part
originally of the Yanktons. ... Another tribe, called
Sheyennes or Cheyennes, were at no very remote period seated
on the left bank of the Red River of Lake Winnipek. ... Carver
reckons them as one of the Sioux tribes; and Mackenzie informs
us that they were driven away by the Sioux. They now [1836]
live on the headwaters of the river Sheyenne, a southwestern
tributary of the Missouri. ... I have been, however, assured
by a well-informed person who trades with them that they speak
a distinct language, for which there is no European
interpreter. ... The Minetares (Minetaree and Minetaries)
consist of three tribes, speaking three different languages,
which belong to a common stock. Its affinities with the
Dahcota are but remote, but have appeared sufficient to
entitle them to be considered as of the same family. Two of
those tribes, the Mandanes, whose number does not exceed
1,500, and the stationary Minetares, amounting to 3,000 souls,
including those called Annahawas, cultivate the soil, and live
in villages situated on or near the Missouri, between 47° and
48° north latitude. ... The third Minetare tribe, is that
known by the name of the Crow or Upsaroka [or Absaroka]
nation, probably the Keeheetsas of Lewis and Clarke. They are
an erratic tribe, who hunt south of the Missouri, between the
Little Missouri and the southeastern branches of the
Yellowstone River. ... The southern Sioux consist of eight
tribes, speaking four, or at most five, kindred dialects.
Their territory originally extended along the Mississippi,
from below the mouth of the Arkansas to the forty-first degree
of north latitude. ... Their hunting grounds extend as far
west as the Stony Mountains; but they all cultivate the soil,
and the most westerly village on the Missouri is in about 100°
west longitude. The three most westerly tribes are the Quappas
or Arkansas, at the mouth of the river of that name, and the
Osages and Kansas, who inhabited the country south of the
Missouri and of the river Kansas. ... The Osages, properly
Wausashe, were more numerous and powerful than any of the
neighbouring tribes, and perpetually at war with all the other
Indians, without excepting the Kansas, who speak the same
dialect with themselves. They were originally divided into
Great and Little Osages; but about forty years ago almost
one-half of the nation, known by the name of Chaneers, or
Clermont's Band, separated from the rest, and removed to the
river Arkansa. The villages of those several subdivisions are
now [1836] on the headwaters of the river Osage, and of the
Verdigris, a northern tributary stream of the Arkansa. They
amount to about 5,000 souls, and have ceded a portion of their
lands to the United States, reserving to themselves a
territory on the Arkansa, south of 38° North latitude,
extending from 95° to 100° West longitude, on a breadth of 45
to 50 miles. The territory allotted to the Cherokees, the
Creeks and the Choctaws lies south of that of the Osage. ...
The Kansas, who have always lived on the river of that name,
have been at peace with the Osage for the last thirty years,
and intermarry with them. They amount to 1,500 souls, and
occupy a tract of about 3,000,000 acres. ... The five other
tribes of this subdivision are the Ioways, or Pahoja (Grey
Snow), the Missouris or Neojehe, the Ottoes, or Wahtootahtah,
the Omahaws, or Mahas, and the Puncas. ... All the nations
speaking languages belonging to the Great Sioux Family may ...
be computed at more than 50,000 souls."
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of the Indian Tribes (Archœologia
Americana, volume 2), section 4.
"Owing to the fact that 'Sioux' is a word of reproach and
means snake or enemy, the term has been discarded by many
later writers as a family designation, and 'Dakota,' which
signifies friend or ally, has been employed in its stead. The
two words are, however, by no means properly synonymous. The
term 'Sioux' was used by Gallatin in a comprehensive or family
sense and was applied to all the tribes collectively known to
him to speak kindred dialects of a widespread language. It is
in this sense only, as applied to the linguistic family, that
the term is here employed. The term 'Dahcota' (Dakota) was
correctly applied by Gallatin to the Dakota tribes proper as
distinguished from the other members of the linguistic family
who are not Dakotas in a tribal sense. The use of the term
with this signification should be perpetuated. It is only
recently that a definite decision has been reached respecting
the relationship of the Catawba and Woccon, the latter an
extinct tribe known to have been linguistically related to the
Catawba. Gallatin thought that he was able to discern some
affinities of the Catawban language with 'Muskhogee and even
with Choctaw,' though these were not sufficient to induce him
to class them together. Mr. Gatschet was the first to call
attention to the presence in the Catawba language of a
considerable number of words having a Siouan affinity.
Recently Mr. Dorsey has made a critical examination of all the
Catawba linguistic material available, which has been
materially increased by the labors of Mr. Gatschet, and the
result seems to justify its inclusion as one of the dialects
of the widespread Siouan family." The principal tribes in the
Siouan Family named by Major Powell are the Dakota (including
Santee, Sisseton, Wahpeton, Yankton, Yanktonnais, Teton,--the
latter embracing Brulé, Sans Arcs, Blackfeet, Minneconjou, Two
Kettles, Ogalala, Uncpapa), Assinaboin, Omaha, Ponca, Kaw,
Osage, Quapaw, Iowa, Otoe, Missouri, Winnebago, Mandan, Gros
Ventres, Crow, Tutelo, Biloxi (see MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY), Catawba
and Woccon.
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology, page 112.
ALSO IN
J. O. Dorsey, Migrations of Siouan Tribes (American
Naturalist, volume 20, March).
J. O. Dorsey, Biloxi Indians of Louisiana (V. P.
address A. A. A. S., 1893).
See, above: HIDATSA.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Sissetons.
See above SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Six Nations.
See above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
{105}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Skittagetan Family.
"A family designation ... retained for the tribes of the Queen
Charlotte Archipelago which have usually been called Haida.
From a comparison of the vocabularies of the Haida language
with others of the neighboring Koluschan family, Dr. Franz
Boas is inclined to consider that the two are genetically
related. The two languages possess a considerable number of
words in common, but a more thorough investigation is
requisite for the settlement of the question."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 120.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Snakes.
See above: SNOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Stockbridge Indians.
"The Stockbridge Indians were originally a part of the
Housatannuck Tribe [Mohegans], to whom the Legislature of
Massachusetts granted or secured a township [afterward called
Stockbridge] in the year 1736. Their number was increased by
Wappingers and Mohikanders, and perhaps also by Indians
belonging to several other tribes, both of New England and New
York. Since their removal to New Stockbridge and Brotherton,
in the western parts of New York, they have been joined by
Mohegans and other Indians from East Connecticut, and even
from Rhode Island and Long Island."
A. Gallatin, Synopsis of Indian Tribes (Archæologia
Americana, volume 2), page 35.
ALSO IN
A. Holmes, Annals of America, 1736 (volume 2).
S. G. Drake, Aboriginal Races, page 15.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Susquehannas, or Andastes, or Conestogas.
"Dutch and Swedish writers speak of a tribe called Minquas;
... the French in Canada ... make frequent allusions to the
Gandastogués (more briefly Andastés), a tribe friendly to
their allies, the Hurons, and sturdy enemies of the Iroquois;
later still Pennsylvania writers speak of the Conestogas, the
tribe to which Logan belonged, and the tribe which perished at
the hands of the Paxton boys. Although Gallatin in his map,
followed by Bancroft, placed the Andastés near Lake Erie, my
researches led me to correct this, and identify the
Susquehannas, Minqua, Andastés or Gandastogués, and Conestogas
as being an the same tribe, the first name being apparently an
appellation given them by the Virginia tribes; the second that
given them by the Algonquins on the Delaware; while
Gandastogué as the French, or Conestoga as the English wrote
it, was their own tribal name, meaning cabin-pole men, Natio
Perticarum, from 'Andasta,' a cabin-pole. ... Prior to 1600
the Susquehannas and the Mohawks ... came into collision, and
the Susquehannas nearly exterminated the Mohawks in a war
which lasted ten years." In 1647 they offered their aid to the
Hurons against the Iroquois, having 1,300 warriors trained to
the use of fire-arms by three Swedish soldiers: but the
proposed alliance failed. During the third quarter of the 17th
century they seem to have been in almost continuous war with
the Five Nations, until, in 1675, they were completely
overthrown. A party of about 100 retreated into Maryland and
became involved there in a war with the colonists and were
destroyed. "The rest of the tribe, after making overtures to
Lord Baltimore, submitted to the Five Nations, and were
allowed to retain their ancient grounds. When Pennsylvania was
settled, they became known as Conestogas, and were always
friendly to the colonists of Penn, as they had been to the
Dutch and Swedes. In 1701 Canoodagtoh, their king, made a
treaty with Penn, and in the document they are styled Minquas,
Conestogas, or Susquehannas. They appear as a tribe in a
treaty in 1742, but were dwindling away. In 1763 the feeble
remnant of the tribe became involved in the general suspicion
entertained by the colonists against the red men, arising out
of massacres on the borders. To escape danger the poor
creatures took refuge in Lancaster jail, and here they were
all butchered by the Paxton boys, who burst into the place.
Parkman, in his Conspiracy of Pontiac, page 414, details the sad
story. The last interest of this unfortunate tribe centres in
Logan, the friend of the white man, whose speech is so
familiar to all, that we must regret that it has not sustained
the historical scrutiny of Brantz Mayer."
(Tahgahjute; or Logan and Capt. Michael Cresap, Maryland
Historical Society, May, 1851: and 8vo. Albany, 1867).
"Logan was a Conestoga, in other words a Susquehanna."
J. G. Shea, Note 46 to George Alsop's Character of the
Province of Maryland
(Gowan's Bibliotheca Americana, 5).
See, also, above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tachies.
See TEXAS: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS AND THE NAME.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tacullies.
See below: ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Taensas.
See NATCHESAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Takilman Family.
See Note, Appendix E.
"This name was proposed by Mr. Gatschet for a distinct
language spoken on the coast of Oregon about the lower Rogue
River."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 121.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Talligewi.
See above: ALLEGHANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tañoan Family.
"The tribes of this family in the United States resided
exclusively upon the Rio Grande and its tributary valleys from
about 33° to about 36°."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
page 122.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tappans.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Taranteens or Tarratines.
See above: ABNAKIS:
also, ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tarascans.
"The Tarascans, so called from Taras, the name of a tribal
god, had the reputation of being the tallest and handsomest
people of Mexico. They were the inhabitants of the present
State of Michoacan, west of the valley of Mexico. According to
their oldest traditions, or perhaps those of their neighbors,
they had migrated from the north in company with, or about the
same time as, the Aztecs. For some 300 years before the
conquest they had been a sedentary, semi-civilized people,
maintaining their independence, and progressing steadily in
culture. When first encountered by the Spaniards they were
quite equal and in some respects ahead of the Nahuas. ... In
their costume the Tarascos differed considerably from their
neighbors. The feather garments which they manufactured
surpassed all others in durability and beauty. Cotton was,
however, the usual material."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 136.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tarumi.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tecuna.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tehuel Che.
See above: PATAGONIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Telmelches.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tequestas.
See below: TIMUQUANAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tetons.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Teutecas, or Tenez.
See below: ZAPOTECS, ETC.
{106}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Timuquanan Family.
The Tequestas.
"Beginning at the southeast, we first meet the historic
Timucua family, the tribes of which are extinct at the present
time. ... In the 16th century the Timucua inhabited the
northern and middle portion of the peninsula of Florida, and
although their exact limits to the north are unknown, they
held a portion of Florida bordering on Georgia, and some of
the coast islands in the Atlantic ocean. ... The people
received its name from one of their villages called Timagoa.
... The name means 'lord,' 'ruler,' 'master' ('atimuca,'
waited upon, 'muca,' by servants, 'ati'), and the people's
name is written Atimuca early in the 18th century. ... The
languages spoken by the Calusa and by the people next in
order, the Tequesta, are unknown to us. ... The Calusa held
the southwestern extremity of Florida, and their tribal name
is left recorded in Calusahatchi, a river south of Tampa bay.
... Of the Tequesta people on the southeastern end of the
peninsula we know still less than of the Calusa Indians. There
was a tradition that they were the same people which held the
Bahama or Lucayo Islands."
A. S. Gatschet, A Migration Legend of the Creek Indians,
volume 1, part 1.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tinneh.
See above: ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tivitivas.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tlascalans.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1519 (JUNE-OCTOBER).
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
T'linkets.
See above: ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tobacco Nation.
See above: HURONS;
and IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY: THEIR NAME.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tobas.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Toltecs.
See MEXICO, ANCIENT.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tonikan Family.
"The Tonika are known to have occupied three localities:
First, on the Lower Yazoo River (1700); second, east shore of
Mississippi River (about 1704); third, in Avoyelles Parish,
Louisiana (1817). Near Marksville, the county seat of that
parish, about twenty-five are now living."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 125.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tonkawan Family.
"The Tónkawa were a migratory people and a colluvies gentium,
whose earliest habitat is unknown. Their first mention occurs
in 1719; at that time and ever since they roamed in the
western and southern parts of what is now Texas."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 126.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tontos.
See above: APACHE GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Toromonos.
See BOLIVIA: ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Totonacos.
"The first natives whom Cortes met on landing in Mexico were
the Totonacos. They occupied the territory of Totonicapan, now
included in the State of Vera Cruz. According to traditions of
their own, they had resided there 800 years, most of which
time they were independent, though a few generations before
the arrival of the Spaniards they had been subjected by the
arms of the Montezumas. ... Sahagun describes them as almost
white in color, their heads artificially deformed, but their
features regular and handsome. Robes of cotton beautifully
dyed served them for garments, and their feet were covered
with sandals. ... These people were highly civilized.
Cempoalla, their capital city, was situated about five miles
from the sea, at the junction of two streams. Its houses were
of brick and mortar, and each was surrounded by a small
garden, at the foot of which a stream of fresh water was
conducted. ... The affinities of the Totonacos are difficult
to make out. ... Their language has many words from Maya
roots, but it has also many more from the Nahuatl."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 139.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tukuarika.
See above: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tupi.--Guarani.--Tupuyas.
"The first Indians with whom the Portuguese came in contact,
on the discovery of Brazil, called themselves Tupinama, a term
derived by Barnhagen from Tupi and Mba, something like warrior
or nobleman; by Martius from Tupi and Anamba (relative) with
the signification 'belonging to the Tupi tribe.' These Tupi
dwell on the east coast of Brazil, and with their language the
Portuguese were soon familiar. It was found especially
serviceable as a means of communication with other tribes, and
this led the Jesuits later to develop it as much as possible,
and introduce it as a universal language of intercourse with
the Savages. Thus the 'lingua geral Brasilica' arose, which
must be regarded as a Tupi with a Portuguese pronunciation.
The result was a surprising one, for it really succeeded in
forming, for the tribes of Brazil, divided in language, a
universal means of communication. Without doubt the wide
extent of the Tupi was very favorable, especially since on
this side of the Andes, as far as the Caribbean Sea, the
continent of South America was overrun with Tupi hordes. ...
Von Martius has endeavored to trace their various migrations
and abodes, by which they have acquired a sort of ubiquity in
tropical South America. ... This history ... leads to the
supposition that, had the discovery been delayed a few
centuries, the Tupi might have become the lords of eastern
South America, and have spread a higher culture over that
region. The Tupi family may be divided, according to their
fixed abodes, into the southern, northern, eastern, western,
and central Tupi; all these are again divided into a number of
smaller tribes. The southern Tupi are usually called Guarani
(warriors), a name which the Jesuits first introduced. It
cannot be determined from which direction they came. The
greatest number are in Paraguay and the Argentine province of
Corrientes. The Jesuits brought them to a very high degree of
civilization. The eastern Tupi, the real Tupinamba, are
scattered along the Atlantic coast from St. Catherina Island
to the mouth of the Amazon. They are a very weak tribe. They
say they came from the south and west. The northern Tupi are a
weak and widely scattered remnant of a large tribe, and are
now in the province of Para, on the island of Marajo, and
along both banks of the Amazon. ... It is somewhat doubtful if
this peaceable tribe are really Tupi. ... The central Tupi
live in several free hordes between the Tocantins and Madeira.
... Cutting off the heads of enemies is in vogue among them.
... The Mundrucu are especially the head-hunting tribe. The
western Tupi all live in Bolivia. They are the only ones who
came in contact with the Inca empire, and their character and
manners show the influence of this. Some are a picture of
idyllic gayety and patriarchal mildness."
The Standard Natural History (J. S. Kingsley, editor)
volume 6, pages 248-249.
"In frequent contiguity with the Tupis was another stock, also
widely dispersed through Brazil, called the Tupuyas, of whom
the Botocudos in eastern Brazil are the most prominent tribe.
To them also belong the Ges nations, south of the lower
Amazon, and others. They are on a low grade of culture, going
quite naked, not cultivating the soil, ignorant of pottery,
and with poorly made canoes. They are dolichocephalic, and
must have inhabited the country a long time."
D. G. Brinton, Races and Peoples, pages 269-270.
{107}
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Turiero.
See above: CHIBCHAS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tuscaroras.
See above: IROQUOIS CONFEDERACY,
and IROQUOIS TRIBES OF THE SOUTH.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Tuteloes.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Twightwees, or Miamis.
See above: ILLINOIS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Two Kettles.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Uaupe.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Uchean Family.
"The pristine homes of the Yuchi are not now traceable with
any degree of certainty. The Yuchi are supposed to have been
visited by De Soto during his memorable march, and the town of
Cofitachiqui chronicled by him, is believed by many
investigators to have stood at Silver Bluff, on the left bank
of the Savannah, about 25 miles below Augusta. If, as is
supposed by some authorities, Cofitachiqui was a Yuchi town,
this would locate the Yuchi in a section which, when first
known to the whites, was occupied by the Shawnee. Later the
Yuchi appear to have lived somewhat farther down the
Savannah."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology,
page 126.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Uhilches.
See above: PAMPAS TRIBES.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Uirina.
See above: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Uncpapas.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Upsarokas, or Absarokas, or Crows.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Utahs.
See above: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wabenakies, or Abnakis.
See above: ABNAKIS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wacos, or Huecos.
See above: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wahpetons.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Waiilatpuan Family.
"Hale established this family and placed under it the Cailloux
or Cayuse or Willetpoos, and the Molele. Their headquarters as
indicated by Hale are the upper part of the Walla Walla River
and the country about Mounts Hood and Vancouver."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 127.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Waikas.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wakashan Family.
"The above family name was based upon a vocabulary of the
Wakash Indians, who, according to Gallatin, 'inhabit the
island on which Nootka Sound is situated.' ... The term
'Wakash' for this group of languages has since been generally
ignored, and in its place Nootka or Nootka-Columbian has been
adopted. ... Though by no means as appropriate a designation
as could be found, it seems clear that for the so-called
Wakash, Newittee, and other allied languages usually assembled
under the Nootka family, the term Wakash of 1836 has priority
and must be retained."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, pages 129-130.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wampanoags, or Pokanokets.
See above: POKANOKETS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wapisianas.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wappingers.
See above: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Waraus.
See above: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Washakis.
See above: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES
Washoan Family.
"This family is represented by a single well known tribe,
whose range extended from Reno, on the line of the Central
Pacific Railroad, to the lower end of Carson Valley."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 131.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wichitas, or Pawnee Picts.
See above: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Winnebagoes.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wishoskan Family.
"This is a small and obscure linguistic family and little is
known concerning the dialects composing it or of the tribes
which speak it. ... The area occupied by the tribes speaking
dialects of this language was the coast from a little below
the mouth of Eel River to a little north of Mad River,
including particularly the country about Humboldt Bay."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 133.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Witumkas.
See above: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Woccons.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Wyandots.
See above: HURONS.
Yamasis and Yamacraws.
See above: MUSKHOGEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yamco.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yanan Family.
"The eastern boundary of the Yanan territory is formed by a
range of mountains a little west of Lassen Butte and
terminating near Pit River; the northern boundary by a line
running from northeast to southwest, passing near the northern
side of Round Mountain, three miles from Pit River. The
western boundary from Redding southward is on an average 10
miles to the east of the Sacramento. North of Redding it
averages double that distance or about 20 miles."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 135.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yanktons and Yanktonnais.
See above: SIOUAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yncas, or Incas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yuchi.
See above: UCHEAN FAMILY.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yuguarzongo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yukian Family.
"Round Valley, California, subsequently made a reservation to
receive the Yuki and other tribes, was formerly the chief seat
of the tribes of the family, but they also extended across the
mountains to the coast."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 136.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yuman Family.
"The center of distribution of the tribes of this family is
generally considered to be the lower Colorado and Gila
Valleys."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 137.
See above: APACHE GROUP.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yuncas.
See PERU.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Yuroks or Eurocs.
See above: MODOCS, &c.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Zaporo.
See above: ANDESIANS.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Zapotecs, Mixtecs, Zoques, Mixes, etc.
"The greater part of Gaxaca [Mexico] and the neighboring
regions are still occupied by the Zapytees, who call
themselves Didja-za. There are now about 265,000 of them,
about 50,000 of whom speak nothing but their native tongue. In
ancient times they constituted a powerful independent state,
the citizens of which seem to have been quite as highly
civilized as any member of the Aztec family. They were
agricultural and sedentary, living in villages and
constructing buildings of stone and mortar.
{108}
The most remarkable, but by no means the only, specimens of
these still remaining are the ruins of Mitla. ... The Mixtecs
adjoined the Zapotecs to the west, extending along the coast
of the Pacific to about the present port of Acapulco. In
culture they were equal to the Zapotecs. ... The mountain
regions of the isthmus of Tehuantepec and the adjacent
portions of the states of Chiapas and Oaxaca are the habitats
of the Zoques, Mixes, and allied tribes. The early historians
draw a terrible picture of their valor, savagery and
cannibalism, which reads more like tales to deter the
Spaniards from approaching their domains than truthful
accounts. However this may be, they have been for hundreds of
years a peaceful, ignorant, timid part of the population,
homely, lazy and drunken. ... The faint traditions of these
peoples pointed to the South for their origin. ... The
Chinantecs inhabited Chinantla, which is a part of the state
of Oaxaca. ... The Chinantecs had been reduced by the Aztecs
and severely oppressed by them. Hence they welcomed the
Spaniards as deliverers. ... Other names by which they are
mentioned are Tenez and Teutecas. ... In speaking of the
province of Chiapas the historian Herrera informs us that it
derived its name from the pueblo so-called, 'whose inhabitants
were the most remarkable in New Spain for their traits and
inclinations.' They had early acquired the art of
horsemanship, they were skillful in all kinds of music,
excellent painters, carried on a variety of arts, and were
withal very courteous to each other. One tradition was that
they had reached Chiapas from Nicaragua. ... But the more
authentic legend of the Chapas or Chapanecs, as they were
properly called from their totemic bird the Chapa, the red
macaw, recited that the whole stock moved down from a northern
latitude, following down the Pacific coast until they came to
Soconusco, where they divided, one part entering the mountains
of Chiapas, the other proceeding on to Nicaragua."
D. G. Brinton, The American Race, pages 140-146.
ALSO IN
A. Bandelier, Report of Archæological Tour in Mexico.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Zoques.
See above: ZAPOTECS, ETC.
AMERICAN ABORIGINES:
Zuñian Family.
"Derivation: From the Cochiti term Suinyi, said to mean 'the
people of the long nails,' referring to the surgeons of Zuñi
who always wear some of their nails very long (Cushing)."
J. W. Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of
Ethnology, page 138.
See, above, PUEBLOS;
also, AMERICA: PREHISTORIC.
----------AMERICAN ABORIGINES: End----------
AMERICAN CIVIL WAR.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1860 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER),
and after.
Statistics of. See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1865 (MAY).
AMERICAN KNIGHTS, Order of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (OCTOBER).
AMERICAN PARTY, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1852.
AMERICAN SYSTEM, The.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (UNITED STATES): A. D. 1816-1824.
AMHERST, Lord, The Indian Administration of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1823-1833.
AMHERST'S CAMPAIGNS IN AMERICA.
See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1758 to 1760.
AMICITIÆ.
See GUILDS OF FLANDERS.
AMIDA, Sieges of.
The ancient city of Amida, now Diarbekr, on the right bank of
the Upper Tigris was thrice taken by the Persians from the
Romans, in the course of the long wars between the two
nations. In the first instance, A. D. 359, it fell after a
terrible siege of seventy-three days, conducted by the Persian
king Sapor in person, and was given up to pillage and
slaughter, the Roman commanders crucified and the few
surviving inhabitants dragged to Persia as slaves. The town
was then abandoned by the Persians, repeopled by the Romans
and recovered its prosperity and strength, only to pass
through a similar experience again in 502 A. D., when it was
besieged for eighty days by the Persian king Kobad, carried by
storm, and most of its inhabitants slaughtered or enslaved. A
century later, A. D. 605, Chosroes took Amida once more, but
with less violence.
G. Rawlinson, Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter 9, 19
and 24.
See, also, PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
AMIENS.--Origin of name.
See BELGÆ.
AMIENS: A. D. 1597.
Surprise by the Spaniards.
Recovery by Henry IV.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1593-1598.
AMIENS: A. D. 1870.
Taken by the Germans.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1870-1871.
----------AMIENS: End----------
AMIENS, The Mise of.
See OXFORD, PROVISIONS OF.
AMIENS, Treaty of (1527).
Negotiated by Cardinal Wolsey, between Henry VIII. of England
and Francis I. of France, establishing an alliance against the
Emperor, Charles V. The treaty was sealed and sworn to in the
cathedral church at Amiens, Aug. 18, 1527.
J. S. Brewer, Reign of Henry VIII.,
volume 2. chapter 26 and 28.
AMIENS, Treaty of (1801).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.
AMIN AL, Caliph, A. D. 809-813.
AMIR.
An Arabian title, signifying chief or ruler.
AMISIA, The.
The ancient name of the river Ems.
AMISUS, Siege of.
The siege of Amisus by Lucullus was one of the important
operations of the Third Mithridatic war. The city was on the
coast of the Black Sea, between the rivers Halys and Lycus; it
is represented in site by the modern town of Samsoon. Amisus,
which was besieged in 73 B. C. held out until the following
year. Tyrannio the grammarian was among the prisoners taken
and sent to Rome.
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 3, chapter 1 and
2.
AMMANN.
This is the title of the Mayor or President of the Swiss Communal
Council or Gemeinderath.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1848-1890.
AMMON, The Temple and Oracle of.
The Ammonium or Oasis of Ammon, in the Libyan desert, which
was visited by Alexander the Great, has been identified with
the oasis now known as the Oasis of Siwah. "The Oasis of Siwah
was first visited and described by Browne in 1792; and its
identity with that of Ammon fully established by Major Rennell
('Geography of Herodotus,' pages 577-591). ... The site of the
celebrated temple and oracle of Ammon was first discovered by
Mr. Hamilton in 1853." "Its famous oracle was frequently
visited by Greeks from Cyrene, as well as from other parts of
the Hellenic world, and it vied in reputation with those of
Delphi and Dodona."
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography, chapter 8,
section 1, and chapter 12, section 1, and note E.
An expedition of 50,000 men sent by Cambyses to Ammon, B. C.
525, is said to have perished in the desert, to the last man.
See EGYPT: B. C. 525-332.
{109}
AMMONITES, The.
According to the narrative in Genesis xix: 30-39, the
Ammonites were descended from Ben-Ammi, son of Lot's second
daughter, as the Moabites came from Moab, the eldest
daughter's son. The two people are much associated in Biblical
history. "It is hard to avoid the conclusion that, while Moab
was the settled and civilized half of the nation of Lot, the
Bene Ammon formed its predatory and Bedouin section."
G. Grove, Dictionary of the Bible.
See JEWS: THE EARLY HEBREW HISTORY;
also, MOABITES.
AMMONITI, OR AMMONIZIONI, The.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1358.
AMNESTY PROCLAMATION.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A.D. 1863 (DECEMBER).
AMORIAN DYNASTY, The.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE: A. D. 820-1057.
AMORIAN WAR, The.
The Byzantine Emperor, Theophilus, in war with the Saracens,
took and destroyed, with peculiar animosity, the town of
Zapetra or Sozopetra, in Syria, which happened to be the
birthplace of the reigning caliph, Motassem, son of Haroun
Alraschid. The caliph had condescended to intercede for the
place, and his enemy's conduct was personally insulting to
him, as well as atrociously inhumane. To avenge the outrage he
invaded Asia Minor, A. D. 838, at the head of an enormous
army, with the special purpose of destroying the birthplace of
Theophilus. The unfortunate town which suffered that
distinction was Amorinm in Phrygia,--whence the ensuing war
was called the Amorian War. Attempting to defend Amorinm in
the field, the Byzantines were hopelessly defeated, and the
doomed city was left to its fate. It made an heroic resistance
for fifty-five days, and the siege is said to have cost the
caliph 70,000 men. But he entered the place at last with a
merciless sword, and left a heap of ruins for the monument of
his revenge.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 52.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
AMORITES, The.
"The Hittites and Amorites were ... mingled together in the
mountains of Palestine like the two races which ethnologists
tell us go to form the modern Kelt. But the Egyptian monuments
teach us that they were of very different origin and
character. The Hittites were a people with yellow skins and
'Mongoloid' features, whose receding foreheads, oblique eyes,
and protruding upper jaws, are represented as faithfully on
their own monuments as they are on those of Egypt, so that we
cannot accuse the Egyptian artists of caricaturing their
enemies. If the Egyptians have made the Hittites ugly, it was
because they were so in reality. The Amorites, on the
contrary, were a tall and handsome people. They are depicted
with white skins, blue eyes, and reddish hair, all the
characteristics, in fact, of the white race. Mr. Petrie points
out their resemblance to the Dardanians of Asia Minor, who
form an intermediate link between the white-skinned tribes of
the Greek seas and the fair-complexioned Libyans of Northern
Africa. The latter are still found in large numbers in the
mountainous regions which stretch eastward from Morocco, and
are usually known among the French under the name of Kabyles.
The traveller who first meets with them in Algeria cannot fail
to be struck by their likeness to a certain part of the
population in the British Isles. Their clear-white freckled
skins, their blue eyes, their golden-red hair and tall
stature, remind him of the fair Kelts of an Irish village; and
when we find that their skulls, which are of the so-called
dolichocephalic or 'long-headed' type, are the same as the
skulls discovered in the prehistoric cromlechs of the country
they still inhabit, we may conclude that they represent the
modern descendants of the white-skinned Libyans of the
Egyptian monuments. In Palestine also we still come across
representatives of a fair-complexioned blue-eyed race in whom
we may see the descendants of the ancient Amorites, just as we
see in the Kabyles the descendants of the ancient Libyans. We
know that the Amorite type continued to exist in Judah long
after the Israelitish conquest of Canaan. The captives taken
from the southern cities of Judah br Shishak in the time of
Rehoboam, and depicted by him upon the walls of the great
temple of Karnak, are people of Amorite origin. Their 'regular
profile of sub-aquiline cast,' as Mr. Tomkins describes it,
their high cheek-bones and martial expression, are the
features of the Amorites, and not of the Jews. Tallness of
stature has always been a distinguishing characteristic of the
white race. Hence it was that the Anakim, the Amorite
inhabitants of Hebron, seemed to the Hebrew spies to be as
giants, while they themselves were but 'as grasshoppers' by,
the side of them (Numbers xiii: 33). After the Israelitish
invasion remnants of the Anakim were left in Gaza and Gath and
Ashkelon (Joshua xi: 22). and in the time of David, Goliath of
Gath and his gigantic family were objects of dread to their
neighbors (2 Samuel xxi: 15-22). It is clear, then, that the
Amorites of Canaan belonged to the same white race as the
Libyans of Northern Africa, and like them preferred the
mountains to the hot plains and valleys below. The Libyans
themselves belonged to a race which can be traced through the
peninsula of Spain and the western side of France into the
British Isles. Now it is curious that wherever this particular
branch of the white race has extended it has been accompanied
by a particular form of cromlech, or sepulchral chamber built
of large uncut stones. ... It has been necessary to enter at
this length into what has been discovered concerning the
Amorites by recent research, in order to show how carefully
they should be distinguished from the Hittites with whom they
afterwards intermingled. They must have been in possession of
Palestine long before the Hittites arrived there. They
extended over a much wider area."
A. H. Sayce, The Hittites, chapter 1.
AMPHIKTYONIC COUNCIL.
"An Amphiktyonic, or, more correctly, an Amphiktionic, body
was an assembly of the tribes who dwelt around any famous
temple, gathered together to manage the affairs of that
temple. There were other Amphiktyonic Assemblies in Greece
[besides that of Delphi], amongst which that of the isle of
Kalaureia, off the coast of Argolis, was a body of some
celebrity. The Amphiktyons of Delphi obtained greater
importance than any other Amphiktyons only because of the
greater importance of the Delphic sanctuary, and because it
incidentally happened that the greater part of the Greek
nation had some kind of representation among them.
{110}
But that body could not be looked upon as a perfect
representation of the Greek nation which, to postpone other
objections to its constitution, found no place for so large a
fraction of the Hellenic body as the Arkadians. Still the
Amphiktyons of Delphi undoubtedly came nearer than any other
existing body to the character of a general representation of
all Greece. It is therefore easy to understand how the
religious functions of such a body might incidentally assume a
political character. ... Once or twice then, in the course of
Grecian history, we do find the Amphiktyonic body acting with
real dignity in the name of united Greece. ... Though the list
of members of the Council is given with some slight variations
by different authors, all agree in making the constituent
members of the union tribes and not cities. The
representatives of the Ionic and Doric races sat and voted as
single members, side by side with the representatives of petty
peoples like the Magnêsians and Phthiôtic Achaians. When the
Council was first formed, Dorians and Ionians were doubtless
mere tribes of northern Greece, and the prodigious development
of the Doric and Ionic races in after times made no difference
in its constitution. ... The Amphiktyonic Council was not
exactly a diplomatic congress, but it was much more like a
diplomatic congress than it was like the governing assembly of
any commonwealth, kingdom, or federation. The Pylagoroi and
Hieromnêmones were not exactly Ambassadors, but they were much
more like Ambassadors than they were like members of a British
Parliament or even an American Congress. ... The nearest
approach to the Amphiktyonic Council in modern times would be
if the College of Cardinals were to consist of members chosen
by the several Roman Catholic nations of Europe and America."
E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government,
volume 1, chapter 3.
AMPHILOCHIANS, The.
See AKARNANIANS.
AMPHIPOLIS.
This town in Macedonia, occupying an important situation on
the eastern bank of the river Strymon, just below a small lake
into which it widens near its mouth, was originally called
"The Nine Ways," and was the scene of a horrible human
sacrifice made by Xerxes on his march into Greece.
Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 15.
It was subsequently taken by the Athenians, B. C. 437, and
made a capital city by them [see ATHENS: B. C. 440-437],
dominating the surrounding district, its name being changed to
Amphipolis. During the Peloponnesian War (B. C. 424), the able
Lacedæmonian general, Brasidas, led a small army into
Macedonia and succeeded in capturing Amphipolis, which caused
great dismay and discouragement at Athens. Thucydides, the
historian, was one of the generals held responsible for the
disaster and he was driven as a consequence into the fortunate
exile which produced the composition of his history. Two years
later the Athenian demagogue-leader, Cleon, took command of an
expedition sent to recover Amphipolis and other points in
Macedonia and Thrace. It was disastrously beaten and Cleon was
killed, but Brasidas fell likewise in the battle. Whether
Athens suffered more from her defeat than Sparta from her
victory is a question.
Thucydides, History, book 4, section 102-135:
book 5, section 1-11.
See, also,
ATHENS: B. C. 466-454,
and GREECE: B. C. 424-421.
Amphipolis was taken by Philip of Macedon, B. C. 358.
See GREECE: B. C. 359-358.
AMPHISSA, Siege and Capture by Philip of Macedon (B. C. 339-338).
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
AMPHITHEATRES, Roman.
"There was hardly a town in the [Roman] empire which had not
an amphitheatre large enough to contain vast multitudes of
spectators. The savage excitement of gladiatorial combats
seems to have been almost necessary to the Roman legionaries
in their short intervals of inaction, and was the first
recreation for which they provided in the places where they
were stationed. ... Gladiatorial combats were held from early
times in the Forum, and wild beasts hunted in the Circus; but
until Curio built his celebrated double theatre of wood, which
could be made into an amphitheatre by turning the two
semi-circular portions face to face, we have no record of any
special building in the peculiar form afterwards adopted. It
may have been, therefore, that Curio's mechanical contrivance
first suggested the elliptical shape. ... As specimens of
architecture, the amphitheatres are more remarkable for the
mechanical skill and admirable adaptation to their purpose
displayed in them, than for any beauty of shape or decoration.
The hugest of all, the Coliseum, was ill-proportioned and
unpleasing in its lines when entire."
R. Burn, Rome and the Campagna, introduction.
AMPHORA.--MODIUS.
"The [Roman] unit of capacity was the Amphora or Quadrantal,
which contained a cubic foot ... equal to 5.687 imperial
gallons, or 5 gallons, 2 quarts, 1 pint, 2 gills, nearly. The
Amphora was the unit for both liquid and dry measures, but the
latter was generally referred to the Modius, which contained
one-third of an Amphora. ... The Culeus was equal to 20
Amphoræ."
W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapter 13.
AMRITSAR.
See SIKHS.
AMSTERDAM:
The rise of the city.
"In 1205 a low and profitless marsh upon the coast of Holland,
not far from the confines of Utrecht, had been partially
drained by a dam raised upon the hitherto squandered stream of
the Amstel. Near this dam a few huts were tenanted by poor men
who earned a scanty livelihood by fishing in the Zuyder Sea;
but so uninviting seemed that barren and desolate spot, that a
century later Amstel-dam was still an obscure seafaring town,
or rather hamlet. Its subsequent progress was more rapid. The
spirit of the land was stirring within it, and every portion
of it thrilled with new energy and life. Some of the fugitive
artizans from Flanders saw in the thriving village safety and
peace, and added what wealth they had, and, what was better,
their manufacturing intelligence and skill, to the humble
hamlet's store. Amsteldam was early admitted to the fellowship
of the Hanse League; and, in 1342, having outgrown its primary
limits, required to be enlarged. For this an expensive
process, that of driving piles into the swampy plain, was
necessary; and to this circumstance, no doubt, it is owing
that the date of each successive enlargement has been so
accurately recorded."
W. T. McCullagh, Industrial History of Three Nations,
volume 2, chapter 9.
{111}
AMT.--AMTER.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (DENMARK-ICELAND): A. D. 1849-1874;
and SCANDINAVIAN STATES (NORWAY): A. D. 1814-1815.
AMURATH I., Turkish Sultan, A. D. 1359-1389.
Amurath II., A. D. 1421-1451.
Amurath III., A. D. 1574-1595.
Amurath IV., A. D. 1623-1640.
AMYCLÆ,
The Silence of.-
Amyclæ was the chief city of Laconia while that district of
Peloponnesus was occupied by the Achæans, before the Doric
invasion and before the rise of Sparta. It maintained its
independence against the Doric Spartans for a long period, but
succumbed at length under circumstances which gave rise to a
proverbial saying among the Greeks concerning "the silence of
Amyclæ." "The peace of Amyclæ, we are told, had been so often
disturbed by false alarms of the enemy's approach, that at
length a law was passed forbidding such reports, and the
silent city was taken by surprise."
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 7.
AMYTHAONIDÆ, The.
See ARGOS.--ARGOLIS.
AN, The City of.
See ON.
ANABAPTISTS OF MÜNSTER.
"Münster is a town in Westphalia, the seat of a bishop, walled
round, with a noble cathedral and many churches; but there is
one peculiarity about Münster that distinguishes it from all
other old German towns; it has not one old church spire in it.
Once it had a great many. How comes it that it now has none?
In Münster lived a draper, Knipperdolling by name, who was
much excited over the doctrines of Luther, and he gathered
many people in his house, and spoke to them bitter words
against the Pope, the bishops, and the clergy. The bishop at
this time was Francis of Waldeck, a man much inclined himself
to Lutheranism; indeed, later, he proposed to suppress
Catholicism in the diocese, as he wanted to seize on it and
appropriate it as a possession to his family. Moreover, in
1544, he joined the Protestant princes in a league against the
Catholics; but he did not want things to move too fast, lest
he should not be able to secure the wealthy See as personal
property. Knipperdolling got a young priest, named Rottmann,
to preach in one of the churches against the errors of
Catholicism, and he was a man of such fiery eloquence that he
stirred up a mob which rushed through the town, wrecking the
churches. The mob became daily more daring and threatening.
They drove the priests out of the town, and some of the
wealthy citizens fled, not knowing what would follow. The
bishop would have yielded to all the religious innovations if
the rioters had not threatened his temporal position and
revenue. In 1532 the pastor, Rottmann, began to preach against
the baptism of infants. Luther wrote to him remonstrating, but
in vain. The bishop was not in the town; he was at Minden, of
which See he was bishop as well. Finding that the town was in
the hands of Knipperdolling and Rottmann, who were
confiscating the goods of the churches, and excluding those
who would not agree with their opinions, the bishop advanced
to the place at the head of some soldiers. Münster closed its
gates against him. Negotiations were entered into; the
Landgrave of Hesse was called in as pacificator, and articles
of agreement were drawn up and signed. Some of the churches
were given to the Lutherans, but the Cathedral was reserved
for the Catholics, and the Lutherans were forbidden to molest
the latter, and disturb their religious services. The news of
the conversion of the city of Münster to the gospel spread,
and strangers came to it from all parts. Among these was a
tailor of Leyden, called John Bockelson. Rottmann now threw up
his Lutheranism and proclaimed himself opposed to many of the
doctrines which Luther still retained. Amongst other things he
rejected was infant baptism. This created a split among the
reformed in Münster, and the disorders broke out afresh. The
mob now fell on the cathedral and drove the Catholics from it,
and would not permit them to worship in it. They also invaded
the Lutheran churches, and filled them with uproar. On the
evening of January 28, 1534, the Anabaptists stretched chains
across the streets, assembled in armed bands, closed the gates
and placed sentinels in all directions. When day dawned there
appeared suddenly two men dressed like Prophets, with long
ragged beards and flowing mantles, staff in hand, who paced
through the streets solemnly in the midst of the crowd, who
bowed before them and saluted them as Enoch and Elias. These
men were John Bockelson, the tailor, and one John Mattheson,
head of the Anabaptists of Holland. Knipperdolling at once
associated himself with them, and shortly the place was a
scene of the wildest ecstacies. Men and women ran about the
streets screaming and leaping, and crying out that they saw
visions of angels with swords drawn urging them on to the
extermination of Lutherans and Catholics alike. ... A great
number of citizens were driven out, on a bitter day, when the
land was covered with snow. Those who lagged were beaten;
those who were sick were carried to the market-place and
re-baptized by Rottmann. ... This was too much to be borne.
The bishop raised an army and marched against the city. Thus
began a siege which was to last sixteen months, during which a
multitude of untrained fanatics, commanded by a Dutch tailor,
held out against a numerous and well-armed force. Thenceforth
the city was ruled by divine revelations, or rather, by the
crazes of the diseased brains of the prophets. One day they
declared that all the officers and magistrates were to be
turned out of their offices, and men nominated by themselves
were to take their places; another day Mattheson said it was
revealed to him that every book in the town except the Bible
was to be destroyed; accordingly all the archives and
libraries were collected in the market-place and burnt. Then
it was revealed to him that all the spires were to be pulled
down; so the church towers were reduced to stumps, from which
the enemy could be watched and whence cannon could play on
them. One day he declared he had been ordered by Heaven to go
forth, with promise of victory, against the besiegers. He
dashed forth at the head of a large band, but was surrounded
and he and his band slain. The death of Mattheson struck
dismay into the hearts of the Anabaptists, but John Bockelson
took advantage of the moment to establish himself as head. He
declared that it was revealed to him that Mattheson had been
killed because he had disobeyed the heavenly command, which
was to go forth with few. Instead of that he had gone with many.
{112}
Bockelson said he had been ordered in vision to marry
Mattheson's widow and assume his place. It was further
revealed to him that Münster was to be the heavenly Zion, the
capital of the earth, and he was to be king over it. ... Then
he had another revelation that every man was to have as many
wives as he liked, and he gave himself sixteen wives. This was
too outrageous for some to endure, and a plot was formed
against him by a blacksmith and about 200 of the more
respectable citizens, but it was frustrated and led to the
seizure of the conspirators and the execution of a number of
them. ... At last, on midsummer eve, 1536, after a siege of
sixteen months, the city was taken. Several of the citizens,
unable longer to endure the tyranny, cruelty and abominations
committed by the king, helped the soldiers of the
prince-bishop to climb the walls, open the gates, and surprise
the city. A desperate hand-to-hand fight ensued; the streets
ran with blood. John Bockelson, instead of leading his people,
hid himself, but was caught. So was Knipperdolling. When the
place was in his hands the prince-bishop entered. John of
Leyden and Knipperdolling were cruelly tortured, their flesh
plucked off with red-hot pincers, and then a dagger was thrust
into their hearts. Finally, their bodies were hung in iron
cages to the tower of a church in Münster. Thus ended this
hideous drama, which produced an indescribable effect
throughout Germany. Münster, after this, in spite of the
desire of the prince-bishop to establish Lutheranism, reverted
to Catholicism, and remains Catholic to this day."
S. Baring-Gould, The Story of Germany, chapter 36.
ALSO IN the same,
Historic Oddities and Strange Events, 2d Series.
L. von Ranke, History of the Reformation in Germany,
book 6, chapter 9 (volume 3).
C. Beard, The Reformation (Hibbert Lectures., 1883),
lecture 6.
ANAHUAC.
"The word Anahuac signifies 'near the water.' It was,
probably, first applied to the country around the lakes in the
Mexican Valley, and gradually extended to the remoter regions
occupied by the Aztecs, and the other semi-civilized races.
Or, possibly, the name may have been intended, as Veytia
suggests (Historical Antiquities, lib. 1, cap. 1), to denote
the land between the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific."
W. B. Prescott, Conquest of Mexico,
book 1, chapter 1, note 11.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1325-1502.
ANAKIM, The.
See HORITES, and AMORITES.
ANAKTORIUM.
See KORKYRA.
ANAPA: A. D. 1828.
Siege and Capture.
Cession to Russia.
See TURKS: A. D. 1826-1829.
ANARCHISTS.
"The anarchists are ... a small but determined band. ...
Although their programme may be found almost word for word in
Proudhon, they profess to follow more closely Bakounine, the
Russian nihilist, who separated himself from Marx and the
Internationals, and formed secret societies in Spain,
Switzerland, France, and elsewhere, and thus propagated
nihilistic views; for anarchy and nihilism are pretty much one
and the same thing when nihilism is understood in the older,
stricter sense, which does not include, as it does in a larger
and more modern sense, those who are simply political and
constitutional reformers. Like prince Krapotkine, Bakounine
came of an old and prominent Russian family; like him, he
revolted against the cruelties and injustices he saw about
him; like him, he despaired of peaceful reform, and concluded
that no great improvement could be expected until all our
present political, economic, and social institutions were so
thoroughly demolished that of the old structure not one stone
should be left on another. Out of the ruins a regenerated
world might arise. We must be purged as by fire. Like all
anarchists and true nihilists, he was a thorough pessimist, as
far as our present manner of life was concerned. Reaction
against conservatism carried him very far. He wished to
abolish private property, state, and inheritance. Equality is
to be carried so far that all must wear the same kind of
clothing, no difference being made even for sex. Religion is
an aberration of the brain, and should be abolished. Fire,
dynamite, and assassination are approved of by at least a
large number of the party. They are brave men, and fight for
their faith with the devotion of martyrs. Imprisonment and
death are counted but as rewards. ... Forty-seven anarchists
signed a declaration of principles, which was read by one of
their number at their trial at Lyons. ... 'We wish liberty
[they declared] and we believe its existence incompatible with
the existence of any power whatsoever, whatever its origin and
form--whether it be selected or imposed, monarchical or
republican--whether inspired by divine right or by popular
right, by anointment or universal suffrage. ... The best
governments are the worst. The substitution, in a word, in
human relations, of free contract perpetually revisable and
dissoluble, is our ideal.'"
H. T. Ely, French and German Socialism in Modern Times,
chapter 8.
"In anarchism we have the extreme antithesis of socialism and
communism. The socialist desires so to extend the sphere of
the state that it shall embrace all the more important
concerns of life. The communist, at least of the older school,
would make the sway of authority and the routine which follows
therefrom universal. The anarchist, on the other hand, would
banish all forms of authority and have only a system of the
most perfect liberty. The anarchist is an extreme
individualist. ... Anarchism, as a social theory, was first
elaborately formulated by Proudhon. In the first part of his
work, 'What is Property?' he briefly stated the doctrine and
gave it the name 'anarchy,' absence of a master or sovereign.
... About 12 years before Proudhon published his views, Josiah
Warren reached similar conclusions in America."
H. L. Osgood, Scientific Anarchism
(Political Science Quarterly, March, 1889), pages 1-2.
See, also, NIHILISM.
ANARCHISTS, The Chicago.
See Chicago: A. D. 1886-1887.
ANASTASIUS I., Roman Emperor (Eastern.) A. D. 491-518.
ANASTASIUS II., A. D. 713-716.
ANASTASIUS III., Pope, A. D. 911-913
ANASTASIUS IV., Pope., A. D. 1153-1154.
ANATOLIA.
See ASIA MINOR.
ANCALITES, The.
A tribe of ancient Britons whose home was near the Thames.
ANCASTER, Origin of.
See CAUSENNÆ.
{113}
ANCHORITES.--HERMITS.
"The fertile and peaceable lowlands of England ... offered few
spots sufficiently wild and lonely for the habitation of a
hermit; those, therefore, who wished to retire from the world
into a more strict and solitary life than that which the
monastery afforded were in the habit of immuring themselves,
as anchorites, or in old English 'Ankers,' in little cells of
stone, built usually against the wall of a church. There is
nothing new under the sun; and similar anchorites might have
been seen in Egypt, 500 years before the time of St. Antony,
immured in cells in the temples of Isis or Serapis. It is only
recently that antiquaries have discovered how common this
practice was in England, and how frequently the traces of
these cells are to be found about our parish churches."
C. Kingsley, The Hermits, page 329.
The term anchorites is applied, generally, to all religious
ascetics who lived in solitary cells.
J. Bingham, Antiquity of the Christian Church,
book 7, chapter 1, section 4.
"The essential difference between an anker or anchorite and a
hermit appears to have been that, whereas the former passed
his whole life shut up in a cell, the latter, although leading
indeed a solitary life, wandered about at liberty."
R. R. Sharpe, Introduction to "Calendar of Wills in the
Court of Husting, London," volume 2, page xxi.
ANCIENT REGIME.
The political and social system in France that was destroyed
by the Revolution of 1789 is commonly referred to as the
"ancien régime." Some writers translate this in the literal
English form--"the ancient regime;" others render it more
appropriately, perhaps, the "old regime." Its special
application is to the state of things described under FRANCE:
A. D. 1789.
ANCIENTS, The Council of the.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1795(JUNE-SEPTEMBER).
ANCRUM, Battle of.
A success obtained by the Scots over an English force making
an incursion into the border districts of their country A. D.
1544.
J. H. Burton, History of Scotland, chapter 35 (volume 3).
ANDALUSIA:
The name.
"The Vandals, ... though they passed altogether out of Spain,
have left their name to this day in its southern part, under
the form of Andalusia, a name which, under the Saracen
conquerors, spread itself over the whole peninsula."
E. A. Freeman, Historical Geography of Europe,
chapter 4, section 3.
See, also: VANDALS: A. D. 428.
Roughly speaking, Andalusia represents the country known to
the ancients, first, as Tartessus, and, later, as Turdetania.
ANDAMAN ISLANDERS, The.
See INDIA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
ANDASTÉS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SUSQUEHANNAS.
ANDECAVI.
The ancient name of the city of Angers, France, and of the
tribe which occupied that region.
See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.
ANDERIDA.--ANDERIDA SYLVA.--ANDREDSWALD.
A great forest which anciently stretched across Surrey, Sussex
and into Kent (southeastern England) was called Anderida Sylva
by the Romans and Andredswald by the Saxons. It coincided
nearly with the tract of country called in modern times the
Weald of Kent, to which it gave its name of the Wald or Weald.
On the southern coast-border of the Anderida Sylva the Romans
established the important fortress and port of Anderida, which
has been identified with modern Pevensey. Here the
Romano-Britons made an obstinate stand against the Saxons, in
the fifth century, and Anderida was only taken by Ælle after a
long siege. In the words of the Chronicle, the Saxons "slew
all that were therein, nor was there henceforth one Briton
left."
J. R. Green, The Making of England, chapter 1.
ALSO IN
T. Wright, Celt, Roman, and Saxon, chapter 5.
ANDERSON, Major Robert.
Defense of Fort Sumter.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1860 (DECEMBER); 1861
(MARCH-APRIL).
ANDERSONVILLE PRISON--PENS.
See PRISONS AND PRISON-PENS, CONFEDERATE.
ANDES, OR ANDI, OR ANDECAVI, The.
See VENETI of WESTERN GAUL.
ANDESIANS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES; ANDESIANS.
ANDRE, Major John, The Capture and execution of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).
ANDREW I., King of Hungary, A. D. 1046-1060.
ANDREW II., King of Hungary, A. D. 1204-1235.
ANDREW III., King of Hungary, A. D. 1290-1301.
ANDRONICUS I., Emperor in the East (Byzantine or Greek), A. D.
1183-1185.
Andronicus II. (Palæologus), Greek Emperor of Constantinople, A.
D. 1282-1328.
Andronicus III. (Palæologus), A. D. 1328-1341.
ANDROS, Governor, New England and New York under.
See
NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1686;
MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1671-1686;
and 1686-1689;
NEW YORK: A. D. 1688;
and CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1685-1687.
ANDROS, Battle of (B. C. 407).
See GREECE: B. C. 411-407.
ANGELIQUE, La Mère.
See PORT ROYAL AND THE JANSENISTS: A. D. 1602-1660.
ANGERS, Origin of.
See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.
ANGEVIN KINGS AND ANGEVIN EMPIRE.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1154-1189.
ANGHIARI, Battle of (1425).
See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.
ANGLES AND JUTES, The.
The mention of the Angles by Tacitus is in the following,
passage: "Next [to the Langobardi] come the Reudigni, the
Aviones, the Anglii, the Varini, the Eudoses, the Suardones,
and Nuithones, who are fenced in by rivers or forests. None of
these tribes have any noteworthy feature, except their common
worship of Ertha, or mother-Earth, and their belief that she
interposes in human affairs, and visits the nations in her
car. In an island of the ocean there is a sacred grove, and
within it a consecrated chariot, covered over with a garment.
Only one priest is permitted to touch it. He can perceive the
presence of the goddess in this sacred recess, and walks by
her side with the utmost reverence as she is drawn along by
heifers. It is a season of rejoicing, and festivity reigns
wherever she deigns to go and be received. They do not go to
battle or wear arms; every weapon is under lock; peace and
quiet are welcomed only at these times, till the goddess,
weary of human intercourse, is at length restored by the same
priest to her temple. Afterwards the car, the vestments, and,
if you like to believe it, the divinity herself, are purified
in a secret lake. Slaves perform the rite, who are instantly
swallowed up by its waters. Hence arises a mysterious terror
and a pious ignorance concerning the nature of that which is
seen only by men doomed to die.
{114}
This branch indeed of the Suevi stretches into the
remoter regions of Germany."
Tacitus, Germany; translated by Church and Brodribb,
chapter 40.
"In close neighbourhood with the Saxons in the middle of the
fourth century were the Angli, a tribe whose origin is more
uncertain and the application of whose name is still more a
matter of question. If the name belongs, in the pages of the
several geographers, to the same nation, it was situated in
the time of Tacitus east of the Elbe; in the time of Ptolemy
it was found on the middle Elbe, between the Thuringians to
the south and the Varini to the north; and at a later period
it was forced, perhaps by the growth of the Thuringian power,
into the neck of the Cimbric peninsula. It may, however, be
reasonably doubted whether this hypothesis is sound, and it is
by no means clear whether, if it be so, the Angli were not
connected more closely with the Thuringians than with the
Saxons. To the north of the Angli, after they had reached
their Schleswig home, were the Jutes, of whose early history
we know nothing, except their claims to be regarded as kinsmen
of the Goths and the close similarity between their
descendants and the neighbour Frisians."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
volume 1, chapter 3.
"Important as are the Angles, it is not too much to say that
they are only known through their relations to us of England,
their descendants; indeed, without this paramount fact, they
would be liable to be confused with the Frisians, with the Old
Saxons, and with even Slavonians. This is chiefly because
there is no satisfactory trace or fragment of the Angles of
Germany within Germany; whilst the notices of the other
writers of antiquity tell us as little as the one we find in
Tacitus. And this notice is not only brief but complicated.
... I still think that the Angli of Tacitus were--1: The
Angles of England; 2: Occupants of the northern parts of
Hanover; 3: At least in the time of Tacitus; 4: And that to
the exclusion of any territory in Holstein, which was Frisian
to the west, and Slavonic to the east. Still the question is
one of great magnitude and numerous complications."
R. G. Latham, The Germany of Tacitus; Epilegomena, section
49.
ALSO IN J. M. Lappenberg, History of England under the
Anglo-Saxon Kings, volume 1, pages 89-95.
See, also, AVIONES, and SAXONS.
The conquests and settlements of the Jutes and the Angles in
Britain are described under ENGLAND: A. D. 449-473. and
547-633.
ANGLESEA, Ancient.
See MONA, MONAPIA, and NORMANS: 8TH-9TH CENTURIES.
ANGLO-SAXON.
A term which may be considered as a compound of Angle and
Saxon, the names of the two principal Teutonic tribes which
took possession of Britain and formed the English nation by
their ultimate union. As thus regarded and used to designate
the race, the language and the institutions which resulted
from that union, it is only objectionable, perhaps, as being
superfluous, because English is the accepted name of the
people of England and all pertaining to them. But the term
Anglo-Saxon has also been more particularly employed to
designate the Early English people and their language, before
the Norman Conquest, as though they were Anglo-Saxon at that
period and became English afterwards. Modern historians are
protesting strongly against this use of the term. Mr. Freeman
(Norman Conquest, volume 1, note A), says: "The name by
which our forefathers really knew themselves and by which they
were known to other nations was English and no other. 'Angli,'
'Engle,' 'Angel-cyn,' 'Englisc,' are the true names by which
the Teutons of Britain knew themselves and their language. ...
As a chronological term, Anglo-Saxon is equally objectionable
with Saxon. The 'Anglo-Saxon period,' as far as there ever was
one, is going on still. I speak therefore of our forefathers,
not as 'Saxons,' or even as 'Anglo-Saxons,' but as they spoke
of themselves, as Englishmen--'Angli,' 'Engle,'-'Angel-cyn.'"
See, also, SAXONS, and ANGLES AND JUTES.
ANGLON, Battle of.
Fought in Armenia. A. D. 543, between the Romans and the
Persians, with disaster to the former.
G. Rawlinson, Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy,
chapter 20.
ANGORA, Battle of (1402).
See TIMOUR
also, TURKS: A. D. 1389-1403.
ANGOSTURA, OR BUENA VISTA, Battle of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1846-1847.
ANGRIVARII, The.
The Angrivarii were one of the tribes of ancient Germany. Their
settlements "were to the west of the Weser (Visurgis) in the
neighbourhood of Minden and Herford, and thus coincide to some
extent with Westphalia. Their territory was the scene of
Varus' defeat. It has been thought that the name of this tribe
is preserved in that of the town Engern."
A. J. Church and W. J. Brodribb, Tacitus's Germany,
notes.
See, also, BRUCTERI.
ANI.
Storming of the Turks (1064).
See TURKS: A. D. 1063-1073.
ANILLEROS, The.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827.
ANJOU:
Creation of the County.
Origin of the Plantagenets.
"It was the policy of this unfairly depreciated sovereign
[Charles the Bald, grandson of Charlemagne, who received in
the dismemberment of the Carlovingian Empire the Neustrian
part, out of which was developed the modern kingdom of France,
and who reigned from 840 to 877], to recruit the failing ranks
of the false and degenerate Frankish aristocracy, by calling
up to his peerage the wise, the able, the honest and the bold
of ignoble birth. ... He sought to surround himself with new
men, the men without ancestry; and the earliest historian of
the House of Anjou both describes this system and affords the
most splendid example of the theory adopted by the king.
Pre-eminent amongst these parvenus was Torquatus or Tortulfus,
an Armorican peasant, a very rustic, a backwoodsman, who lived
by hunting and such like occupations, almost in solitude,
cultivating his 'quillets,' his 'cueillettes,' of land, and
driving his own oxen, harnessed to his plough. Torquatus
entered or was invited into the service of Charles-le-Chauve,
and rose high in his sovereign's confidence: a prudent, a
bold, and a good man. Charles appointed him Forester of the
forest called 'the Blackbird's Nest,' the 'nid du merle,' a
pleasant name, not the less pleasant for its familiarity. This
happened during the conflicts with the Northmen. Torquatus
served Charles strenuously in the wars, and obtained great
authority. Tertullus, son of Torquatus, inherited his father's
energies, quick and acute, patient of fatigue, ambitious and
aspiring; he became the liegeman of Charles; and his marriage
with Petronilla the King's cousin, Count Hugh the Abbot's
daughter, introduced him into the very circle of the royal
family. Chateau Landon and other benefices in the Gastinois
were acquired by him, possibly as the lady's dowry. Seneschal
also was Tertullus of the same ample Gastinois territory.
Ingelger, son of Tertullus and Petronilla, appears as the
first hereditary Count of Anjou Outre-Maine,--Marquis, Consul
or Count of Anjou,--for all these titles are assigned to him.
Yet the ploughman Torquatus must be reckoned as the primary
Plantagenet: the rustic Torquatus founded that brilliant
family."
Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England, book 1,
chapter 3.
ALSO IN
K. Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings,
volume 1, chapter 2.
{115}
ANJOU: A. D. 987-1129.
The greatest of the old Counts.
"Fulc Nerra, Fulc the Black [A. D. 987-1040] is the greatest
of the Angevins, the first in whom we can trace that marked
type of character which their house was to preserve with a
fatal constancy through two hundred years. He was without
natural affection. In his youth he burned a wife at the stake,
and legend told how he led her to her doom decked out in his
gayest attire. In his old age he waged his bitterest war
against his son, and exacted from him when vanquished a
humiliation which men reserved for the deadliest of their
foes. 'You are conquered, you are conquered!' shouted the old
man in fierce exultation, as Geoffry, bridled and saddled like
a beast of burden, crawled for pardon to his father's feet.
... But neither the wrath of Heaven nor the curses of men
broke with a single mishap the fifty years of his success. At
his accession Anjou was the least important of the greater
provinces of France. At his death it stood, if not in extent,
at least in real power, first among them all. ... His
overthrow of Brittany on the field of Conquereux was followed
by the gradual absorption of Southern Touraine. ... His great
victory at Pontlevoi crushed the rival house of Blois; the
seizure of Saumur completed his conquests in the South, while
Northern Touraine was won bit by bit till only Tours resisted
the Angevin. The treacherous seizure of its Count, Herbert
Wake-dog, left Maine at his mercy ere the old man bequeathed
his unfinished work to his son. As a warrior, Geoffry Martel
was hardly inferior to his father. A decisive overthrow
wrested Tours from the Count of Blois; a second left Poitou at
his mercy; and the seizure of Le Mans brought him to the
Norman border. Here ... his advance was checked by the genius
of William the Conqueror, and with his death the greatness of
Anjou seemed for the time to have come to an end. Stripped of
Maine by the Normans, and weakened by internal dissensions,
the weak and profligate administration of Fulc Rechin left
Anjou powerless against its rivals along the Seine. It woke to
fresh energy with the accession of his son, Fulc of Jerusalem.
... Fulc was the one enemy whom Henry the First really feared.
It was to disarm his restless hostility that the King yielded
to his son, Geoffry the Handsome, the hand of his daughter
Matilda."
J. R. Green, A Short History of the English People, chapter
2, section 7.
ALSO IN
K. Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings, volume 1, chapter
2-4.
ANJOU: A. D. 1154.
The Counts become Kings of England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1154-1189.
ANJOU: A. D. 1204.
Wrested from the English King John.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1180-1224.
ANJOU: A. D. 1206-1442.
English attempts to recover the county.
The Third and Fourth Houses of Anjou.
Creation of the Dukedom.
King John, of England, did not voluntarily submit to the
sentence of the peers of France which pronounced his
forfeiture of the fiefs of Anjou and Maine, "since he invaded
and had possession of Angers again in 1206, when, Goth-like,
he demolished its ancient walls. He lost it in the following
year, and ... made no further attempt upon it until 1213. In
that year, having collected a powerful army, he landed at
Rochelle, and actually occupied Angers, without striking a
blow. But ... the year 1214 beheld him once more in retreat
from Anjou, never to reappear there, since he died on the 19th
of October, 1216. In the person of King John ended what is
called the 'Second House of Anjou.' In 1204, after the
confiscations of John's French possessions, Philip Augustus
established hereditary seneschals in that part of France, the
first of whom was the tutor of the unfortunate Young Arthur
[of Brittany], named William des Roches, who was in fact Count
in all except the name, over Anjou, Maine, and Tourraine,
owing allegiance only to the crown of France. The Seneschal,
William des Roches, died in 1222. His son-in-law, Amaury de
Craon, succeeded him," but was soon afterwards taken prisoner
during a war in Brittany and incarcerated. Henry III. of
England still claimed the title of Count of Anjou, and in 1230
he "disembarked a considerable army at St. Malo, in the view
of re-conquering Anjou, and the other forfeited possessions of
his crown. Louis IX., then only fifteen years old ... advanced
to the attack of the allies; but in the following year a peace
was concluded, the province of Guienne having been ceded to
the English crown. In 1241, Louis gave the counties of Poitou
and Auvergne to his brother Alphonso; and, in the year 1246,
he invested his brother Charles, Count of Provence, with the
counties of Anjou and Maine, thereby annulling the rank and
title of Seneschal, and instituting the Third House of Anjou.
Charles I., the founder of the proud fortunes of this Third
House, was ambitious in character, and events long favoured
his ambition. Count of Provence, through the inheritance of
his consort, had not long been invested with Anjou and Maine,
ere he was invited to the conquest of Sicily [see ITALY
(SOUTHERN): A. D. 1250-1268]." The Third House of Anjou ended
in the person of John, who became King of France in 1350. In
1356 he invested his son Louis with Anjou and Maine, and in
1360 the latter was created the first Duke of Anjou. The
Fourth House of Anjou, which began with this first Duke, came
to an end two generations later with René, or Regnier,--the
"good King René" of history and story, whose kingdom was for
the most part a name, and who is best known to English
readers, perhaps, as the father of Margaret of Anjou, the
stout-hearted queen of Henry VI. On the death of his father,
Louis, the second duke, René became by his father's will Count
of Guise, his elder brother, Louis, inheriting the dukedom. In
1434 the brother died without issue and René succeeded him in
Anjou, Maine and Provence. He had already become Duke of Bar,
as the adopted heir of his great-uncle, the cardinal-duke, and
Duke of Lorraine (1430), by designation of the late Duke,
whose daughter he had married. In 1435 he received from Queen
Joanna of Naples the doubtful legacy of that distracted
kingdom, which she had previously bequeathed first, to
Alphonso of Aragon, and afterwards-revoking that testament--to
René's brother, Louis of Anjou. King René enjoyed the title
during his life-time, and the actual kingdom for a brief
period; but in 1442 he was expelled from Naples by his
competitor Alphonso (see ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447).
M. A. Hookham, Life and Times of Margaret of Anjou,
introduction and chapter 1-2.
----------ANJOU: End----------
{116}
ANJOU, The English House of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1155-1189.
ANJOU, The Neapolitan House of: A. D. 1266.
Conquest of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies.
See ITALY: A. D. 1250-1268.
ANJOU: A. D. 1282.
Loss of Sicily.
Retention of Naples.
See ITALY: A. D. 1282-1300.
ANJOU: A. D. 1310-1382.
Possession of the Hungarian throne.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1301-1442.
ANJOU: A. D. 1370-1384.
Acquisition and loss of the crown of Poland.
See POLAND: A. D. 1333-1572.
ANJOU: A. D. 1381-1384.
Claims of Louis of Anjou.
His expedition to Italy and his death.
See ITALY: A. D. 1343-1389.
ANJOU: A. D. 1386-1399.-
Renewed contest for Naples.
Defeat of Louis II. by Ladislas.
See ITALY: A. D. 1386-1414.
ANJOU: A. D. 1423-1442.
Renewed contest for the crown of Naples.
Defeat by Alfonso of Aragon and Sicily.
See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.
----------ANJOU, The Neapolitan House of: End----------
ANKENDORFF, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (FEBRUARY-JUNE).
ANKERS.
See ANCHORITES.
ANNA, Czarina of Russia, A. D. 1730-1740.
ANNALES MAXIMI, The.
See FASTI.
ANNAM: A. D. 1882-1885.
War with France.
French protectorate accepted.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1875-1889.
ANNAPOLIS ROYAL, NOVA SCOTIA:
Change of name from Port Royal (1710).
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1702-1710.
ANNATES, OR FIRST-FRUITS.
"A practice had existed for some hundreds of years, in all the
churches of Europe, that bishops and archbishops, on
presentation to their sees, should transmit to the pope, on
receiving their bulls of investment, one year's income from
their new preferments. It was called the payment of Annates,
or first-fruits, and had originated in the time of the
crusades, as a means of providing a fund for the holy wars.
Once established it had settled into custom, and was one of
the chief resources of the papal revenue."
J. A. Froude, History of England, chapter 4.
"The claim [by the pope] to the first-fruits of bishoprics and
other promotions was apparently first made in England by
Alexander IV. in 1256, for five years; it was renewed by
Clement V. in 1306, to last for two years; and it was in a
measure successful. By John XXII. it was claimed throughout
Christendom for three years, and met with universal
resistance. ... Stoutly contested as it was in the Council of
Constance, and frequently made the subject of debate in
parliament and council the demand must have been regularly
complied with."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England,
chapter 19, section 718.
See, also, QUEEN ANNE'S BOUNTY.
ANNE, Queen of England, A. D. 1702-1714.
ANNE OF AUSTRIA, Queen-regent of France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1642-1643, to 1651-1653.
ANNE BOLEYN, Marriage, trial and execution of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1527-1534, and 1536-1543.
ANSAR, The.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 609-632.
ANSIBARII, The.
See FRANKS: ORIGIN, &c.
ANSPACH, Creation of the Margravate.
See GERMANY: 13TH CENTURY.
Separation from the Electorate of Brandenburg.
See BRANDENBUHG: A. D. 1417-1640.
ANTALCIDAS, Peace of (B. C. 387).
See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.
ANTES, The.
See SLAVONIC PEOPLES.
ANTESIGNANI, The.
"In each cohort [of the Roman legion, in Cæsar's time] a
certain number of the best men, probably about one-fourth of
the whole detachment, was assigned as a guard to the standard,
from whence they derived their name of Antesignani."
C. Menvale, History of the Romans, chapter 15.
ANTHEMIUS, Roman Emperor:(Western), A. D. 467-472.
ANTHESTERIA, The.
See DIONYSIA AT ATHENS.
ANTI-CORN-LAW LEAGUE.
See TARIFF LEGISLATION (ENGLAND): A. D. 1836-1839, and
1845-1846.
ANTI-FEDERALISTS.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1789-1792.
ANTI-MASONIC PARTY, American.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1826-1832.
ANTI-MASONIC PARTY, Mexican.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1822-1828.
ANTI-RENTERS.--ANTI-RENT WAR.
See LIVINGSTON MANOR.
ANTI-SLAVERY MOVEMENTS.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO.
ANTIETAM, OR SHARPSBURG, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862
(SEPTEMBER: MARYLAND).
ANTIGONEA.
See MANTINEA: B. C. 222.
ANTIGONID KINGS, The.
See GREECE: B. C. 307-197.
ANTIGONUS, and the wars of the Diadochi.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316; 315-310; 310-301.
ANTIGONUS GONATUS, The wars of.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 277-244.
ANTILLES.--ANTILIA.
"Familiar as is the name of the Antilles, few are aware of the
antiquity of the word; while its precise significance sets
etymology at defiance. Common consent identified the Antilia
of legend with the Isle of the Seven Cities. In the year 734,
says the story, the Arabs having conquered most of the Spanish
peninsula, a number of Christian emigrants, under the
direction of seven holy bishops, among them the archbishop of
Oporto, sailed westward with all that they had, and reached an
island where they founded seven towns. Arab geographers speak
of an Atlantic island called in Arabic El-tennyn, or Al-tin
(Isle of Serpents), a name which may possibly have become by
corruption Antilia. ... The seven bishops were believed in the
16th century to be still represented by their successors, and
to preside over a numerous and wealthy people. Most
geographers of the 15th century believed in the existence of
Antilia. It was represented as lying west of the Azores. ...
As soon as it became known in Europe that Columbus had
discovered a large island, Española was at once identified
with Antilia, ... and the name ... has ever since been applied
generally to the West Indian islands."
E. J. Payne, History of the New World called America, volume
1, page 98.
See, also, WEST INDIES.
{117}
ANTINOMIAN CONTROVERSY IN PURITAN MASSACHUSETTS.
See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1636-1638.
ANTIOCH:
Founding of the City.
See SELEUCIDÆ; and MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 310-301.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 36-400.
The Christian Church.
See CHRISTIANITY, EARLY.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 115.
Great Earthquake.
"Early in the year 115, according to the most exact
chronology, ... the splendid capital of Syria was visited by
an earthquake, one of the most disastrous apparently of all
the similar inflictions from which that luckless city has
periodically suffered. ... The calamity was enhanced by the
presence of unusual crowds from all the cities of the east,
assembled to pay homage to the Emperor [Trajan], or to take
part in his expedition [of conquest in the east]. Among the
victims were many Romans of distinction. ... Trajan, himself,
only escaped by creeping through a window."
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 65.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 260.
Surprise, massacre and pillage by Sapor, King of Persia.
See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 526.
Destruction by Earthquake.
During the reign of Justinian (A. D. 518-565) the cities of
the Roman Empire "were overwhelmed by earthquakes more
frequent than at any other period of history. Antioch, the
metropolis of Asia, was entirely destroyed, on the 20th of
May, 526, at the very time when the inhabitants of the
adjacent country were assembled to celebrate the festival of
the Ascension; and it is affirmed that 250,000 persons were
crushed by the fall of its sumptuous edifices."
J. C. L. de Sismondi, Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter
10.
ALSO IN:
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 43.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ANTIOCH: A. D. 540.
Stormed, pillaged and burned by Chosroes, the Persian King.
See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 638.
Surrender to the Arabs.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 632-639.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 969.
Recapture by the Byzantines.
After having remained 328 years in the possession of the
Saracens, Antioch was retaken in the winter of A. D. 969 by
the Byzantine Emperor, Nicephorus Phokas, and became again a
Christian city. Three years later the Moslems made a great
effort to recover the city, but were defeated. The Byzantine
arms were at this time highly successful in the never ending
Saracen war, and John Zimiskes, successor of Nicephorus
Phokas, marched triumphantly to the Tigris and threatened even
Bagdad. But most of the conquests thus made in Syria and
Mesopotamia were not lasting.
G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine Empire, A. D.
716-1007, book 2, chapter 2.
See BYZANTINE EMPIRE, A. D. 963-1025.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 1097-1098.
Siege and capture by the Crusaders.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 1099-1144.
Principality.
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099-1144.
ANTIOCH: A. D. 1268.
Extinction of the Latin Principality.
Total destruction of the city.
Antioch fell, before the arms of Bibars, the Sultan of Egypt
and Syria, and the Latin principality was bloodily
extinguished, in 1268. "The first seat of the Christian name
was dispeopled by the slaughter of seventeen, and the
captivity of one hundred, thousand of her inhabitants." This
fate befell Antioch only twenty-three years before the last
vestige of the conquests of the crusaders was obliterated at
Acre.
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 59.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
"The sultan halted for several weeks in the plain, and
permitted his soldiers to hold a large market, or fair, for
the sale of their booty. This market was attended by Jews and
pedlars from all parts of the East. ... 'It was,' says the
Cadi Mohieddin, 'a fearful and heart-rending sight. Even the
hard stones were softened with grief.' He tells us that the
captives were so numerous that a fine hearty boy might be
purchased for twelve pieces of silver, and a little girl for
five. When the work of pillage had been completed, when all
the ornaments and decorations had been carried away from the
churches, and the lead torn from the roofs, Antioch was fired
in different places, amid the loud thrilling shouts of 'Allah
Acbar,' 'God is Victorious.' The great churches of St. Paul
and St. Peter burnt with terrific fury for many days, and the
vast and venerable city was left without a habitation and
without an inhabitant."
C. G. Addison, The Knights Templars, chapter 6.
----------ANTIOCH: End----------
ANTIOCHUS SOTER, AND ANTIOCHUS THE GREAT.
See SELEUCIDÆ, THE: B. C. 281-224, and 224-187.
ANTIPATER, and the wars of the Diadochi.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.
ANTIUM.
"Antium, once a flourishing city of the Volsci, and afterwards
of the Romans, their conquerors, is at present reduced to a
small number of inhabitants. Originally it was without a port;
the harbour of the Antiates having been the neighbouring
indentation in the coast of Ceno, now Nettuno, distant more
than a mile to the eastward. ... The piracies of the ancient
Antiates all proceeded from Ceno, or Cerio, where they had 22
long ships. These Numicius took; ... some were taken to Rome
and their rostra suspended in triumph in the Forum. ... It
[Antium] was reckoned 260 stadia, or about 32 miles, from
Ostia."
Sir W. Gell, Topography of Rome, volume 1.
ANTIUM, Naval Battle of (1378).
See VENICE: A. D. 1378-1379.
ANTIVESTÆUM.
See BRITAIN, TRIBES OF CELTIC.
ANTOINE DE BOURBON, King of Navarre, A. D. 1555-1557.
ANTONINES, The.
See ROME: A. D. 138-180.
ANTONINUS, Marcus Aurelius, Roman Emperor, A. D. 161-180.
ANTONINUS PIUS, Roman Emperor, A. D. 138-161.
ANTONY, Mark, and the Second Triumvirate.
See ROME: B. C. 44 to 31.
ANTRUSTIONES.
In the Salic law, of the Franks, there is no trace of any
recognized order of nobility. "We meet, however, with
{118}
several titles denoting temporary rank, derived from offices
political and judicial, or from a position about the person of
the king. Among these the Antrustiones, who were in constant
attendance upon the king, played a conspicuous part. ...
Antrustiones and Convivæ Regis [Romans who held the same
position] are the predecessors of the Vassi Dominici of later
times, and like these were bound to the king by an especial
oath of personal and perpetual service. They formed part, as
it were, of the king's family, and were expected to reside in
the palace, where they superintended the various departments
of the royal household."
W. C. Perry, The Franks, chapter 10.
ANTWERP:
The name of the City.
Its commercial greatness in the 16th century.--"The city was
so ancient that its genealogists, with ridiculous gravity,
ascended to a period two centuries before the Trojan war, and
discovered a giant, rejoicing in the classic name of
Antigonus, established on the Scheld. This patriarch exacted
one half the merchandise of all navigators who passed his
castle, and was accustomed to amputate and cast into the river
the right hands of those who infringed this simple tariff.
Thus 'Hand-werpen,' hand-throwing, became Antwerp, and hence,
two hands, in the escutcheon of the city, were ever held 'up
in heraldic attestation of the truth. The giant was, in his
turn, thrown into the Scheld by a hero, named Brabo, from
whose exploits Brabant derived its name. ... But for these
antiquarian researches, a simpler derivation of the name would
seem 'an t' werf,' 'on the wharf.' It had now [in the first
half of the 16th century] become the principal entrepôt and
exchange of Europe. ... the commercial capital of the world.
... Venice, Nuremburg, Augsburg, Bruges, were sinking, but
Antwerp, with its deep and convenient river, stretched its arm
to the ocean and caught the golden prize, as it fell from its
sister cities' grasp. ... No city, except Paris, surpassed it
in population, none approached it in commercial splendor."
J. L. Motley, The Rise of the Dutch Republic, Hist.
Introduction, section 13.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1313.
Made the Staple for English trade.
See STAPLE.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1566.
Riot of the Image-breakers in the Churches.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1566-1568.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1576.--The Spanish Fury.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1575-1577.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1577.
Deliverance of the city from its Spanish garrison.
Demolition of the Citadel.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1583.
Treacherous attempt of the Duke of Anjou.
The French Fury.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1581-1584.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1584-1585.
Siege and reduction by Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma.
The downfall of prosperity.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1584-1585.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1648.
Sacrificed to Amsterdam in the Treaty of Münster.
Closing of the Scheldt.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1646-1648.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1706.
Surrendered to Marlborough and the Allies.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1706-1707.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1746-1748.
Taken by the French and restored to Austria.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1746-1747;
and AIX-LA-CHAPELLE: THE CONGRESS.
ANTWERP: A. D. 1832.
Siege of the Citadel by the French.
Expulsion of the Dutch garrison.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1830-1832.
----------ANTWERP: End----------
APACHES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: APACHE GROUP, and ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
APALACHES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: APALACHES.
APAMEA.
Apamea, a city founded by Seleucus Nicator on the Euphrates,
the site of which is occupied by the modern town of Bir, had
become, in Strabo's time (near the beginning of the Christian
Era) one of the principal centers of Asiatic trade, second
only to Ephesus. Thapsacus, the former customary
crossing-place of the Euphrates, had ceased to be so, and the
passage was made at Apamea. A place on the opposite bank of
the river was called Zeugma, or "the bridge." Bir "is still
the usual place at which travellers proceeding from Antioch or
Aleppo towards Bagdad cross the Euphrates."
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 22, section 1 (volume 2, pages 298 and 317).
APANAGE.
See APPANAGE.
APATURIA, The.
An annual family festival of the Athenians, celebrated for
three days in the early part of the month of October
(Pyanepsion). "This was the characteristic festival of the
Ionic race; handed down from a period anterior to the
constitution of Kleisthenes, and to the ten new tribes each
containing so many demes, and bringing together the citizens
in their primitive unions of family, gens, phratry, etc., the
aggregate of which had originally constituted the four Ionic
tribes, now superannuated. At the Apaturia, the family
ceremonies were gone through; marriages were enrolled, acts of
adoption were promulgated and certified, the names of youthful
citizens first entered on the gentile and phratric roll;
sacrifices were jointly celebrated by these family assemblages
to Zeus Phratrius, Athênê, and other deities, accompanied
with much festivity and enjoyment."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 64 (volume 7).
APELLA, The.
See SPARTA: THE CONSTITUTION. &c.
APELOUSAS, The.
See TEXAS: THE ABORIGINAL, INHABITANTS.
APHEK, Battle of.
A great victory won by Ahab, king of Israel over Benhadad,
king of Damascus.
H. Ewald, History of Israel, book 4, section 1.
APODECTÆ, The.
"When Aristotle speaks of the officers of government to whom
the public revenues were delivered, who kept them and
distributed them to the several administrative departments,
these are called, he adds, apodectæ and treasurers. In Athens
the apodectæ were ten in number, in accordance with the number
of the tribes. They were appointed by lot. ... They had in
their possession the lists of the debtors of the state,
received the money which was paid in, registered an account of
it and noted the amount in arrear, and in the council house in
the presence of the council, erased the names of the debtors
who had paid the demands against them from the list, and
deposited this again in the archives. Finally, they, together
with the council, apportioned the sums received."
A. Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens (translated by Lamb),
book 2, chapter 4.
APOLLONIA IN ILLYRIA, The Founding of.
See KORKYRA.
{119}
APOSTASION.
See POLETÆ.
APOSTOLIC MAJESTY: Origin of the Title.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 972-1114.
APPANAGE.
"The term appanage denotes the provision made for the younger
children of a king of France. This always consisted of lands
and feudal superiorities held of the crown by the tenure of
peerage. It is evident that this usage, as it produced a new
class of powerful feudataries, was hostile to the interests
and policy of the sovereign, and retarded the subjugation of
the ancient aristocracy. But an usage coeval with the monarchy
was not to be abrogated, and the scarcity of money rendered it
impossible to provide for the younger branches of the royal
family by any other means. It was restrained however as far as
circumstances would permit."
H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, chapter 1, part 2.
"From the words 'ad' and 'panis,' meaning that it was to
provide bread for the person who held it. A portion of
appanage was now given to each of the king's younger sons,
which descended to his direct heirs, but in default of them
reverted to the crown."
T. Wright, History of France, volume 1, page 308, note.
APPIAN WAY, The.
Appius Claudius, called the Blind, who was censor at Rome from
312 to 308 B. C. [see ROME: B. C. 312], constructed during
that time "the Appian road, the queen of roads, because the
Latin road, passing by Tusculum, and through the country of
the Hernicans, was so much endangered, and had not yet been
quite recovered by the Romans: the Appian road, passing by
Terracina, Fundi and Mola, to Capua, was intended to be a
shorter and safer one. ... The Appian road, even if Appius did
carry it as far as Capua, was not executed by him with that
splendour for which we still admire it in those parts which
have not been destroyed intentionally: the closely joined
polygons of basalt, which thousands of years have not been
able to displace, are of a somewhat later origin. Appius
commenced the road because there was actual need for it; in
the year A. U. 457 [B. C. 297] peperino, and some years later
basalt (silex) was first used for paving roads, and, at the
beginning, only on the small distance from the Porta Capena to
the temple of Mars, as we are distinctly told by Livy. Roads
constructed according to artistic principles had
previously existed."
B. G. Niebuhr, Lectures on the History of Rome.
lecture 45.
ALSO IN:
Sir W. Gell, Topography of Rome, volume 1.
H. G. Liddell, History of ROME, volume 1, page 251.
APPOMATTOX COURT HOUSE, Lee's Surrender at.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (APRIL, VIRGINIA).
APULEIAN LAW.
See MAJESTAS.
APULIA: A. D. 1042-1127.
Norman conquest and Dukedom.
Union with Sicily.
See ITALY (SOUTHERN): A. D. 1000-1090, and 1081-1194.
APULIANS, The.
See SABINES; also, SAMNITES.
AQUÆ SEXTIÆ.
See SALYES.
AQUÆ SEXTIÆ, Battle of.
See CIMBRI AND TEUTONES: B. C. 113-102.
AQUÆ SOLIS.
The Roman name of the long famous watering-place known in
modern England as the city of Bath. It was splendidly adorned
in Roman times with temples and other edifices.
T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.
AQUIDAY, OR AQUETNET.
The native name of Rhode Island.
See RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1638-1640.
AQUILA, Battle of (1424).
See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.
AQUILEIA.
Aquileia, at the time of the destruction of that city by the
Huns, A. D. 452, was, "both as a fortress and a commercial
emporium, second to none in Northern Italy. It was situated at
the northernmost point of the gulf of Hadria, about twenty
miles northwest of Trieste, and the place where it once stood
is now in the Austrian dominions, just over the border which
separates them from the kingdom of Italy. In the year 181 B.
C. a Roman colony had been sent to this far corner of Italy to
serve as an outpost against some intrusive tribes, called by
the vague name of Gauls. ... Possessing a good harbour, with
which it was connected by a navigable river, Aquileia
gradually became the chief entrepôt for the commerce between
Italy and what are now the Illyrian provinces of Austria."
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 2, chapter 4.
AQUILEIA: A. D. 238.--Siege by Maximin.
See ROME: A. D. 238.
AQUILEIA: A. D. 388.--Overthrow of Maximus by Theodosius.
See ROME: A. D. 379-395.
AQUILEIA: A. D. 452.--Destruction by the Huns.
See HUNS: A. D. 452;
also, VENICE: A. D. 452.
----------AQUILEIA: End----------
AQUITAINE:
The ancient tribes.
The Roman conquest of Aquitania was achieved, B. C. 56, by one
of Cæsar's lieutenants, the Younger Crassus, who first brought
the people called the Sotiates to submission and then defeated
their combined neighbors in a murderous battle, where
three-fourths of them are said to have been slain. The tribes
which then submitted "were the Tarbelli, Bigerriones,
Preciani, Vocates, Tarusates, Elusates, Garites, Ausci,
Garumni, Sibuzates and Cocosates. The Tarbelli were in the
lower basin of the Adour. Their chief place was on the site of
the hot springs of Dax. The Bigerriones appear in the name
Bigorre. The chief place of the Elusates was Elusa, Eause; and
the town of Auch on the river Gers preserves the name of the
Ausci. The names Garites, if the name is genuine, and Garumni
contain the same element, Gar, as the river Garumna [Garonne]
and the Gers. It is stated by Walckenaer that the inhabitants
of the southern part of Les Landes are still called Cousiots.
Cocosa, Caussèque, is twenty-four miles from Dax on the road
from Dax to Bordeaux."
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 4, chapter 6.
"Before the arrival of the brachycephalic Ligurian race, the
Iberians ranged over the greater part of France. ... If, as
seems probable, we may identify them with the Aquitani, one of
the three races which occupied Gaul in the time of Cæsar, they
must have retreated to the neighbourhood of the Pyrenees
before the beginning of the historic period."
I. Taylor, Origin of the Aryans, chapter 2, section 5.
AQUITAINE: In Cæsar's time.
See GAUL DESCRIBED BY CÆSAR.
AQUITAINE: Settlement of the Visigoths.
See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 410-419.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 567.--Divided between the Merovingian Kings.
See FRANKS: A. D. 511-752.
{120}
AQUITAINE: A. D. 681-768.
The independent Dukes and their subjugation.
"The old Roman Aquitania, in the first division of the spoils
of the Empire, had fallen to the Visigoths, who conquered it
without much trouble. In the struggle between them and the
Merovingians, it of course passed to the victorious party. But
the quarrels, so fiercely contested between the different
members of the Frank monarchy, prevented them from retaining a
distant possession within their grasp; and at this period
[681-718, when the Mayors of the Palace, Pepin and Carl, were
gathering the reins of government over the three
kingdoms--Austrasia, Neustria and Burgundy--into their hands].
Eudo, the duke of Aquitaine, was really an independent prince.
The population had never lost its Roman character; it was, in
fact, by far the most Romanized in the whole of Gaul. But it
had also received a new element in the Vascones or Gascons
[see BASQUES], a tribe of Pyrenean mountaineers, who
descending from their mountains, advanced towards the north
until their progress was checked by the broad waters of the
Garonne. At this time, however, they obeyed Eudo. "This duke
of Aquitaine, Eudo, allied himself with the Neustrians against
the ambitious Austrasian Mayor, Carl Martel, and shared with
them the crushing defeat at Soissons, A. D. 718, which
established the Hammerer's power. Eudo acknowledged allegiance
and was allowed to retain his dukedom. But, half-a-century
afterwards, Carl's son, Pepin, who had pushed the 'fainéant'
Merovingians from the Frank throne and seated himself upon it,
fought a nine years' war with the then duke of Aquitaine, to
establish his sovereignty. "The war, which lasted nine years
[760-768], was signalized by frightful ravages and destruction
of life upon both sides, until, at last, the Franks became
masters of Berri, Auvergne, and the Limousin, with their
principal cities. The able and gallant Guaifer [or Waifer] was
assassinated by his own subjects, and Pepin had the
satisfaction of finally uniting the grand-duchy of Aquitaine
to the monarchy of the Franks."
J. G. Sheppard, Fall of Rome, lecture 8.
ALSO IN:
P. Godwin. History of France: Ancient Gaul,
chapter 14-15.
W. H. Perry, The Franks, chapter 5-6.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 732.
Ravaged by the Moslems.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 715-732.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 781.
Erected into a separate kingdom by Charlemagne.
In the year 781 Charlemagne erected Italy and Aquitaine into
separate kingdoms, placing his two infant sons, Pepin and
Ludwig or Louis on their respective thrones. "The kingdom of
Aquitaine embraced Vasconia [Gascony], Septimania, Aquitaine
proper (that is, the country between the Garonne and the
Loire) and the county, subsequently the duchy, of Toulouse.
Nominally a kingdom, Aquitaine was in reality a province,
entirely dependent on the central or personal government of
Charles. ... The nominal designations of king and kingdom
might gratify the feelings of the Aquitanians, but it was a
scheme contrived for holding them in a state of absolute
dependence and subordination."
J. I. Mombert, History of Charles the Great,
book 2. chapter 11.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 843.
In the division of Charlemagne's Empire.
See FRANCE: A. D.843.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 884-1151.
The end of the nominal kingdom.
The disputed Ducal Title.
"Carloman [who died 884], son of Louis the Stammerer, was the
last of the Carlovingians who bore the title of king of
Aquitaine. This vast state ceased from this time to constitute
a kingdom. It had for a lengthened period been divided between
powerful families, the most illustrious of which are those of
the Counts of Toulouse, founded in the ninth century by
Fredelon, the Counts of Poitiers, the Counts of Auvergne, the
Marquises of Septimania or Gothia, and the Dukes of Gascony.
King Eudes had given William the Pius, Count of Auvergne, the
Investiture of the duchy of Aquitaine. On the extinction of
that family in 928, the Counts of Toulouse and those of Poitou
disputed the prerogatives and their quarrel stained the south
with blood for a long time. At length the Counts of Poitou
acquired the title of Dukes of Aquitaine or Guyenne [or
Guienne,--supposed to be a corruption of the name of
Aquitaine, which came into use during the Middle Ages], which
remained in their house up to the marriage of Eleanor of
Aquitaine with Henry Plantagenet I. [Henry II.], King of
England (1151)."
E. De Bonnechose, History of France, book 2, chapter 3,
foot-note.
"The duchy Aquitaine, or Guyenne, as held by Eleanor's
predecessors, consisted, roughly speaking, of the territory
between the Loire and the Garonne. More exactly, it was
bounded on the north by Anjou and Touraine, on the east by
Berry and Auvergne, on the south-east by the Quercy or County
of Cahors, and on the south-west by Gascony, which had been
united with it for the last hundred years. The old Karolingian
kingdom of Aquitania had been of far greater extent; it had,
in fact, included the whole country between the Loire, the
Pyrenees, the Rhone and the ocean. Over all this vast
territory the Counts of Poitou asserted a theoretical claim of
overlordship by virtue of their ducal title; they had,
however, a formidable rival in the house of the Counts of
Toulouse."
K. Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings,
volume 1, chapter 10.
See, also, TOULOUSE: 10TH AND 11TH CENTURIES.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 1137-1152.
Transferred by marriage from the crown of France to the crown
of England.
In 1137, "the last of the old line of the dukes of
Aquitaine--William IX., son of the gay crusader and troubadour
whom the Red King had hoped to succeed--died on a pilgrimage
at Compostella. His only son was already dead, and before
setting out for his pilgrimage he did what a greater personage
had done ten years before: with the consent of his barons, he
left the whole of his dominions to his daughter. Moreover, he
bequeathed the girl herself as wife to the young king Louis
[VII.] of France. This marriage more than doubled the strength
of the French crown. It gave to Louis absolute possession of
all western Aquitaine, or Guyenne as it was now beginning to
be called; that is the counties of Poitou and Gascony, with
the immediate overlordship of the whole district lying between
the Loire and the Pyrenees, the Rhone and the ocean:--a
territory five or six times as large as his own royal domain
and over which his predecessors had never been able to assert
more than the merest shadow of a nominal superiority." In 1152
Louis obtained a divorce from Eleanor, surrendering all the
great territory which she had added to his dominions, rather
than maintain an unhappy union. The same year the gay duchess
was wedded to Henry Plantagenet, then Duke of Normandy,
afterwards Henry II. King of England. By this marriage
Aquitaine became joined to the crown of England and remained
so for three hundred years.
K. Norgate, England under the Angevin Kings,
volume 1, chapter 8.
{121}
AQUITAINE: 12th Century.
The state of the southern parts.
See PROVENCE: A. D. 1179-1207.
AQUITAINE: A. D. 1360-1453.
Full sovereignty possessed by the English Kings.
The final conquest and union with France.
"By the Peace of Bretigny [see FRANCE: A. D. 1337-1360] Edward
III. resigned his claims on the crown of France; but he was
recognized in return as independent Prince of Aquitaine,
without any homage or superiority being reserved to the French
monarch. When Aquitaine therefore was conquered by France,
partly in the 14th, fully in the 15th century [see FRANCE: A.
D. 1431-1453], it was not the 'reunion' of a forfeited fief,
but the absorption of a distinct and sovereign state. The
feelings of Aquitaine itself seem to have been divided. The
nobles to a great extent, though far from universally,
preferred the French connexion. It better fell in with their
notions of chivalry, feudal dependency, and the like; the
privileges too which French law conferred on noble birth would
make their real interests lie that way. But the great cities
and, we have reason to believe, the mass of the people, also,
clave faithfully to their ancient Dukes; and they had good
reason to do so. The English Kings, both by habit and by
interest, naturally protected the municipal liberties of
Bourdeaux and Bayonne, and exposed no part of their subjects
to the horrors of French taxation and general oppression."
E. A. Freeman, The Franks and the Gauls (Historical
Essays, 1st Series, No.7).
----------AQUITAINE: End----------
AQUITANI, The.
See IBERIANS, THE WESTERN.
ARABIA.--ARABS:
The Name.
"There can be no doubt that the name of the Arabs was ...
given from their living at the westernmost part of Asia; and
their own word 'Gharb,' the 'West,' is another form of the
original Semitic name Arab."
G. Rawlinson, Notes to Herodotus, volume 2, page 71.
ARABIA:
The ancient succession and fusion of Races.
"The population of Arabia, after long centuries, more
especially after the propagation and triumph of Islamism,
became uniform throughout the peninsula. ... But it was not
always thus. It was very slowly and gradually that the
inhabitants of the various parts of Arabia were fused into one
race. ... Several distinct races successively immigrated into
the peninsula and remained separate for many ages. Their
distinctive characteristics, their manners and their
civilisation prove that these nations were not all of one
blood. Up to the time of Mahomet, several different languages
were spoken in Arabia, and it was the introduction of Islamism
alone that gave predominence to that one amongst them now
called Arabic. The few Arabian historians deserving of the
name, who have used any discernment in collecting the
traditions of their country, Ibn Khaldoun, for example,
distinguish three successive populations in the peninsula.
They divide these primitive, secondary, and tertiary Arabs
into three divisions, called Ariba, Motareba, and Mostareba.
... The Ariba were the first and most ancient inhabitants of
Arabia. They consisted principally of two great nations, the
Adites, sprung from Ham, and the Amalika of the race of Aram,
descendants of Shem, mixed with nations of secondary
importance, the Thamudites of the race of Ham, and the people
of the Tasm, and Jadis, of the family of Aram. The Motareba
were tribes sprung from Joktan, son of Eber, always in Arabian
tradition called Kahtan. The Mostareba of more modern origin
were Ismaelitish tribes. ... The Cushites, the first
inhabitants of Arabia, are known in the national traditions by
the name of Adites, from their progenitor, who is called Ad,
the grandson of Ham. All the accounts given of them by Arab
historians are but fanciful legends. ... In the midst of all
the fabulous traits with which these legends abound, we may
perceive the remembrance of a powerful empire founded by the
Cushites in very early ages, apparently including the whole of
Arabia Felix, and not only Yemen proper. We also find traces
of a wealthy nation, constructors of great buildings, with an
advanced civilisation analogous to that of Chaldæa, professing
a religion similar to the Babylonian; a nation, in short, with
whom material progress was allied to great moral depravity and
obscene rites. ... It was about eighteen centuries before our
era that the Joktanites entered Southern Arabia. ... According
to all appearances, the invasion, like all events of a similar
nature, was accomplished only by force. ... After this
invasion, the Cushite element of the population, being still
the most numerous, and possessing great superiority in
knowledge and civilisation over the Joktanites, who were still
almost in the nomadic state, soon recovered the moral and
material supremacy, and political dominion. A new empire was
formed in which the power still belonged to the Sabæans of the
race of Cush. ... Little by little the new nation of Ad was
formed. The centre of its power was the country of Sheba
proper, where, according to the tenth chapter of Genesis,
there was no primitive Joktanite tribe, although in all the
neighbouring provinces they were already settled. ... It was
during the first centuries of the second Adite empire that
Yemen was temporarily subjected by the Egyptians, who called
it the land of Pun. ... Conquered during the minority of
Thothmes III., and the regency of the Princess Hatasu, Yemen
appears to have been lost by the Egyptians in the troublous
times at the close of the eighteenth dynasty. Ramses II.
recovered it almost immediately after he ascended the throne,
and it was not till the time of the effeminate kings of the
twentieth dynasty, that this splendid ornament of Egyptian
power was finally lost. ... The conquest of the land of Pun
under Hatasu is related in the elegant bas-reliefs of the
temple of Deir-el-Bahari, at Thebes, published by M.
Duemichen. ... The bas-reliefs of the temple of Deir-el-Bahari
afford undoubted proofs of the existence of commerce between
India and Yemen at the time of the Egyptian expedition under
Hatasu. It was this commerce, much more than the fertility of
its own soil and its natural productions, that made Southern
Arabia one of the richest countries in the world. ... For a
long time it was carried on by land only, by means of caravans
crossing Arabia; for the navigation of the Red Sea, much more
difficult and dangerous than that of the Indian Ocean, was not
attempted till some centuries later. ...
{122}
The caravans of myrrh, incense, and balm crossing Arabia
towards the land of Canaan are mentioned in the Bible, in the
history of Joseph, which belongs to a period very near to the
first establishment of the Canaanites in Syria. As soon as
commercial towns arose in Phœnicia, we find, as the prophet
Ezekiel said, 'The merchants of Sheba and Raamah, they were
thy merchants: they occupied in thy fairs with chief of all
spices, and with all precious stones and gold.' ... A great
number of Phœnician merchants, attracted by this trade,
established themselves in Yemen, Hadramaut, Oman, and Bahrein.
Phœnician factories were also established at several places on
the Persian Gulf, amongst others in the islands of Tylos and
Arvad, formerly occupied by their ancestors. ... This
commerce, extremely flourishing during the nineteenth dynasty,
seems, together with the Egyptian dominion in Yemen, to have
ceased under the feeble and inactive successors of Ramses III.
... Nearly two centuries passed away, when Hiram and Solomon
despatched vessels down the Red Sea. ... The vessels of the
two monarchs were not content with doing merely what had once
before been done under the Egyptians of the nineteenth
dynasty, namely, fetching from the ports of Yemen the
merchandise collected there from India. They were much bolder,
and their enterprise was rewarded with success. Profiting by
the regularity of the monsoons, they fetched the products of
India at first hand, from the very place of their shipment in
the ports of the land of Ophir, or Abhira. These distant
voyages were repeated with success as long as Solomon reigned.
The vessels going to Ophir necessarily touched at the ports of
Yemen to take in provisions and await favourable winds. Thus
the renown of the two allied kings, particularly of the power
of Solomon, was spread in the land of the Adites. This was the
cause of the journey made by the queen of Sheba to Jerusalem
to see Solomon. ... The sea voyages to Ophir, and even to
Yemen, ceased at the death of Solomon. The separation of the
ten tribes, and the revolutions that simultaneously took place
at Tyre, rendered any such expeditions impracticable. ... The
empire of the second Adites lasted ten centuries, during which
the Joktanite tribes, multiplying in each generation, lived
amongst the Cushite Sabæans. ... The assimilation of the
Joktanites to the Cushites was so complete that the revolution
which gave political supremacy to the descendants of Joktan
over those of Cush produced no sensible change in the
civilisation of Yemen. But although using the same language,
the two elements of the population of Southern Arabia were
still quite distinct from each other, and antagonistic in
their interests. ... Both were called Sabæans, but the Bible
always carefully distinguishes them by a different
orthography. ... The majority of the Sabæan Cushites, however,
especially the superior castes, refused to submit to the
Joktanite yoke. A separation, therefore, took place, giving
rise to the Arab proverb, 'divided as the Sabæans,' and the
mass of the Adites emigrated to another country. According to
M. Caussin de Perceval, the passage of the Sabæans into
Abyssinia is to be attributed to the consequences of the
revolution that established Joktanite supremacy in Yemen. ...
The date of the passage of the Sabæans from Arabia into
Abyssinia is much more difficult to prove than the fact of
their having done so. ... Yarub, the conqueror of the Adites,
and founder of the new monarchy of Joktanite Arabs, was
succeeded on the throne by his son, Yashdjob, a weak and
feeble prince, of whom nothing is recorded, but that he
allowed the chiefs of the various provinces of his states to
make themselves independent. Abd Shems, surnamed Sheba, son of
Yashdjob, recovered the power his predecessors had lost. ...
Abd Shems had several children, the most celebrated being
Himyer and Kahlan, who left a numerous posterity. From these
two personages were descended the greater part of the Yemenite
tribes, who still existed at the time of the rise of Islamism.
The Himyarites seem to have settled in the towns, whilst the
Kahlanites inhabited the country and the deserts of Yemen. ...
This is the substance of all the information given by the Arab
historians."
F. Lenormant and E. Chevalier, Manual of Ancient History
of the East, book 7, chapter 1-2 (volume 2).
ARABIA:
Sabæans, The.
"For some time past it has been known that the Himyaritic
inscriptions fall into two groups, distinguished from one
another by phonological and grammatical differences. One of
the dialects is philologically older than the other,
containing fuller and more primitive grammatical forms. The
inscriptions in this dialect belong to a kingdom the capital
of which was at Ma'in, and which represents the country of the
Minæans of the ancients. The inscriptions in the other dialect
were engraved by the princes and people of Sabâ, the Sheba of
the Old Testament, the Sabæans of classical geography. The
Sabæan kingdom lasted to the time of Mohammed, when it was
destroyed by the advancing forces of Islam. Its rulers for
several generations had been converts to Judaism, and had been
engaged in almost constant warfare with the Ethiopic kingdom
of Axum, which was backed by the influence and subsidies of
Rome and Byzantium. Dr. Glaser seeks to show that the founders
of this Ethiopic kingdom were the Habâsa, or Abyssinians, who
migrated from Himyar to Africa in the second or first century
B. C.; when we first hear of them in the inscriptions they are
still the inhabitants of Northern Yemen and Mahrah. More than
once the Axumites made themselves masters of Southern Arabia.
About A. D. 300, they occupied its ports and islands, and from
350 to 378 even the Sabæan kingdom was tributary to them.
Their last successes were gained in 525, when, with Byzantine
help, they conquered the whole of Yemen. But the Sabæan
kingdom, in spite of its temporary subjection to Ethiopia, had
long been a formidable State. Jewish colonies settled in it,
and one of its princes became a convert to the Jewish faith.
His successors gradually extended their dominion as far as
Ormuz, and after the successful revolt from Axum in 378,
brought not only the whole of the southern coast under their
sway, but the western coast as well, as far north as Mekka.
Jewish influence made itself felt in the future birthplace of
Mohammed, and thus introduced those ideas and beliefs which
subsequently had so profound an effect upon the birth of
Islam. The Byzantines and Axumites endeavoured to counteract
the influence of Judaism by means of Christian colonies and
proselytism. The result was a conflict between Sabâ and its
assailants, which took the form of a conflict between the
members of the two religions.
{123}
A violent persecution was directed against the Christians of
Yemen, avenged by the Ethiopian conquest of the country and
the removal of its capital to San'a. The intervention of
Persia in the struggle was soon followed by the appearance of
Mohammedanism upon the scene, and Jew, Christian, and Parsi
were alike overwhelmed by the flowing tide of the new creed.
The epigraphic evidence makes it clear that the origin of the
kingdom of Sabâ went back to a distant date. Dr. Glaser traces
its history from the time when its princes were still but
Makârib, or 'Priests,' like Jethro, the Priest of Midian,
through the ages when they were 'kings of Sabâ,' and later
still 'kings of Sabâ and Raidân,' to the days when they
claimed imperial supremacy over all the principalities of
Southern Arabia. It was in this later period that they dated
their inscriptions by an era, which, as Halévy first
discovered, corresponds to 115 B. C. One of the kings of Sabâ
is mentioned in an inscription of the Assyrian king Sargon (B.
C. 715), and Dr. Glaser believes that he has found his name in
a 'Himyaritic' text. When the last priest, Samah'ali Darrahh,
became king of Sabâ, we do not yet know, but the age must be
sufficiently remote, if the kingdom of Sabâ already existed
when the Queen of Sheba came from Ophir to visit Solomon. The
visit need no longer cause astonishment, notwithstanding the
long journey by land which lay between Palestine and the south
of Arabia. ... As we have seen, the inscriptions of Ma'in set
before us a dialect of more primitive character than that of
Sabâ. Hitherto it had been supposed, however, that the two
dialects were spoken contemporaneously, and that the Minæan
and Sabæan kingdoms existed side by side. But geography
offered difficulties in the way of such a belief, since the
seats of Minæan power were embedded in the midst of the Sabæan
kingdom, much as the fragments of Cromarty are embedded in the
midst of other counties. Dr. Glaser has now made it clear that
the old supposition was incorrect, and that the Minæan kingdom
preceded the rise of Sabâ. We can now understand why it is
that neither in the Old Testament nor in the Assyrian
inscriptions do we hear of any princes of Ma'in, and that
though the classical writers are acquainted with the Minæan
people they know nothing of a Minæan kingdom. The Minæan
kingdom, in fact, with its culture and monuments, the relics
of which still survive, must have flourished in the grey dawn
of history, at an epoch at which, as we have hitherto
imagined, Arabia was the home only of nomad barbarism. And yet
in this remote age alphabetic writing was already known and
practised, the alphabet being a modification of the Phœnician
written vertically and not horizontally. To what an early date
are we referred for the origin of the Phœnician alphabet
itself! The Minæan Kingdom must have had a long existence. The
names of thirty-three of its kings are already known to us.
... A power which reached to the borders of Palestine must
necessarily have come into contact with the great monarchies
of the ancient world. The army of Ælius Gallus was doubtless
not the first which had sought to gain possession of the
cities and spice-gardens of the south. One such invasion is
alluded to in an inscription which was copied by M. Halévy.
... But the epigraphy of ancient Arabia is still in its
infancy. The inscriptions already known to us represent but a
small proportion of those that are yet to be discovered. ...
The dark past of the Arabian peninsula has been suddenly
lighted up, and we find that long before the days of Mohammed
it was a land of culture and literature, a seat of powerful
kingdoms and wealthy commerce, which cannot fail to have
exercised an influence upon the general history of the world."
A. H. Sayce, Ancient Arabia
(Contemporary Review., December, 1889).
ARABIA: 6th Century.
Partial conquest by the Abyssinians.
See ABYSSINIA: 6TH TO 16TH CENTURIES.
ARABIA: A. D. 609-632.
Mahomet's conquest.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 609-632.
ARABIA: A. D. 1517.
Brought under the Turkish sovereignty.
See TURKS: A. D. 1481-1520.
----------ARABIA: End----------
ARABS, Conquests of the.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST.
ARACAN, English acquisition of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1823-1833.
ARACHOTI, The.
A people who dwelt anciently in the Valley of the Arghandab,
or Urgundab, in eastern Afghanistan. Herodotus gave them the
tribal name of "Pactyes," and the modern Afghans, who call
themselves "Pashtun" and "Pakhtun," signifying "mountaineers,"
are probably derived from them.
M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, book 7, chapter 1.
ARAGON: A. D. 1035-1258.
Rise of the kingdom.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1035-1258.
ARAGON: A. D. 1133.
Beginning of popular representation in the Cortes.
The Monarchical constitution.
See CORTES, THE EARLY SPANISH.
ARAGON: A. D. 1218-1238.
The first oath of allegiance to the king.
Conquest of Balearic Islands.
Subjugation of Valencia.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1212-1238.
ARAGON: A. D. 1410-1475.
The Castilian dynasty.
Marriage of Ferdinand with Isabella of Castile.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1368-1479.
ARAGON: A. D. 1516.
The crown united with that of Castile by Joanna,
mother of Charles V.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1496-1517.
----------ARAGON: End----------
ARAICU, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
ARAM.--ARAM NAHARAIM.--ARAM--ZOBAH.--ARAMÆANS.
See SEMITES;
also, SEMITIC LANGUAGES.
ARAMBEC.
See NORUMBEGA.
ARAPAHOES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
ARAR, The.
The ancient name of the river Saone, in France.
ARARAT.--URARDA.
See ALARODIANS.
ARATOS, and the Achaian League.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
ARAUCANIANS, The.
See CHILE.
ARAUSIO.
A Roman colony was founded by Augustus at Arausio, which is
represented in name and site by the modern town of Orange, in
the department of Vaucluse, France, 18 miles north of Avignon.
P. Goodwin, History of France: Ancient Gaul,
book 2, chapter 5.
ARAUSIO, Battle of (B. C. 105).
See CIMBRI AND TEUTONES: B. C. 113-102.
{124}
ARAVISCI AND OSI, The.
"Whether ... the Aravisci migrated into Pannonia from the Osi,
a German race, or whether the Osi came from the Aravisci into
Germany, as both nations still retain the same language,
institutions and customs, is a doubtful matter."--"The
locality of the Aravisci was the extreme north-eastern part of
the province of Pannonia, and would thus stretch from Vienna
(Vindobona), eastwards to Raab (Arrabo), taking in a portion
of the south-west of Hungary. ... The Osi seem to have dwelt
near the sources of the Oder and the Vistula. They would thus
have occupied a part of Gallicia."
Tacitus, Germany, translated by Church and Brodribb, with
geographical notes.
ARAWAKS, OR ARAUACAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CARIBS.
ARAXES, The.
This name seems to have been applied to a number of Asiatic
streams in ancient times, but is connected most prominently
with an Armenian river, now called the Aras, which flows into
the Caspian.
ARBAS, Battle of.
One of the battles of the Romans with the Persians in which
the former suffered defeat. Fought A. D. 581.
G. Rawlinson, Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter
22.
ARBELA, or GAUGAMELA, Battle of (B. C. 331).
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 334-330.
ARCADIA.
The central district of Peloponnesus, the great southern
peninsula of Greece--a district surrounded by a singular
mountain circle. "From the circle of mountains which has been
pointed out, all the rivers of any note take their rise, and
from it all the mountainous ranges diverge, which form the
many headlands and points of Peloponnesus. The interior part
of the country, however, has only one opening towards the
western sea, through which all its waters flow united in the
Alpheus. The peculiar character of this inland tract is also
increased by the circumstance of its being intersected by some
lower secondary chains of hills, which compel the waters of
the valleys nearest to the great chains either to form lakes,
or to seek a vent by subterraneous passages. Hence it is that
in the mountainous district in the northeast of Peloponnesus
many streams disappear and again emerge from the earth. This
region is Arcadia; a country consisting of ridges of hills and
elevated plains, and of deep and narrow valleys, with streams
flowing through channels formed by precipitous rocks; a
country so manifestly separated by nature from the rest of
Peloponnesus that, although not politically united, it was
always considered in the light of a single community. Its
climate was extremely cold; the atmosphere dense, particularly
in the mountains to the north; the effect which this had on
the character and dispositions of the inhabitants has been
described in a masterly manner by Polybius, himself a native
of Arcadia."
C. O. Müller, History and Antiquity of the Doric Race,
book 1, chapter 4.
"The later Roman poets were wont to speak of Arcadia as a
smiling land, where grassy vales, watered by gentle and
pellucid streams, were inhabited by a race of primitive and
picturesque shepherds and shepherdesses, who divided their
time between tending their flocks and making love to one
another in the most tender and romantic fashion. This idyllic
conception of the country and the people is not to be traced
in the old Hellenic poets, who were better acquainted with the
actual facts of the case. The Arcadians were sufficiently
primitive, but there was very little that was graceful or
picturesque about their land or their lives."
C. H. Hanson, The Land of Greece, pages 381-382.
ARCADIA: B. C. 371-362.
The union of Arcadian towns.
Restoration of Mantineia.
Building of Megalopolis.
Alliance with Thebes.
Wars with Sparta and Elis.
Disunion.
Battle of Mantineia.
See GREECE: B. C. 371, and 371-362.
ARCADIA: B. C. 338.
Territories restored by Philip of Macedon.
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
ARCADIA: B. C. 243-146.
In the Achaian League.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
----------ARCADIA: End----------
ARCADIUS, Roman Emperor (Eastern), A. D. 395-408.
ARCHIPELAGO, The Dukes of the.
See NAXOS: THE MEDIÆVAL DUKEDOM.
ARCHON.
See ATHENS: FROM THE DORIAN MIGRATION TO B. C. 683.
ARCIS-SUR-AUBE, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).
ARCOLA, Battle of (1796).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1796-1797 (OCTOBER-APRIL).
ARCOT: A. D. 1751.
Capture and defence by Clive.
See INDIA: A. D. 1743-1752.
ARCOT: A. D. 1780.
Siege and capture by Hyder Ali.
See INDIA: A. D. 1780-1783.
----------ARCOT: End----------
ARDEN, Forest of.
The largest forest in early Britain, which covered the greater
part of modern Warwickshire and "of which Shakespeare's Arden
became the dwindled representative."
J. R. Green, The Making of England, chapter 7.
ARDENNES, Forest of.
"In Cæsar's time there were in [Gaul] very extensive forests,
the largest of which was the Arduenna (Ardennes), which
extended from the banks of the lower Rhine probably as far as
the shores of the North Sea."
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 3, chapter 22.
"Ardennes is the name of one of the northern French
departments which contains a part of the forest Ardennes.
Another part is in Luxemburg and Belgium. The old Celtic name
exists in England in the Arden of Warwickshire."
G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 4, chapter 14.
ARDRI, OR ARDRIGH, The.
See TUATH.
ARDSHIR, OR ARTAXERXES,
Founding of the Sassanian monarchy by.
See PERSIA: B. C. 150-A. D. 226.
ARECOMICI, The.
See VOLCÆ.
ARECUNAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CARIBS AND THEIR KINDRED.
AREIOS.
See ARIA.
ARELATE:
The ancient name of Arles.
The territory covered by the old kingdom of Arles is sometimes
called the Arelate.
See BURGUNDY: A. D. 1127-1378,
and SALYES.
ARENGO, The.
See SAN MARINO, THE REPUBLIC OF.
AREOPAGUS, The.
"Whoever [in ancient Athens] was suspected of having blood
upon his hands had to abstain from approaching the common
altars of the land. Accordingly, for the purpose of judgments
concerning the guilt of blood, choice had been made of the
barren, rocky height which lies opposite the ascent to the
citadel. It was dedicated to Ares, who was said to have been
the first who was ever judged here for the guilt of blood; and
to the Erinyes, the dark powers of the guilt-stained
conscience. Here, instead of a single judge, a college of
twelve men of proved integrity conducted the trial. If the
accused had an equal number of votes for and against him, he
was acquitted. The court on the hill of Ares is one of the
most ancient institutions of Athens, and none achieved for the
city an earlier or more widely-spread recognition."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 2, chapter 2.
{125}
"The Areopagus, or, as it was interpreted by an ancient
legend, Mars' Hill, was an eminence on the western side of the
Acropolis, which from time immemorial had been the seat of a
highly revered court of criminal justice. It took cognizance
of charges of wilful murder, maiming, poisoning and arson. Its
forms and modes of proceeding were peculiarly rigid and
solemn. It was held in the open air, perhaps that the judges
might not be polluted by sitting under the same roof with the
criminals. ... The venerable character of the court seems to
have determined Solon to apply it to another purpose; and,
without making any change in its original jurisdiction, to
erect it into a supreme council, invested with a
superintending and controlling authority, which extended over
every part of the social system. He constituted it the
guardian of the public morals and religion, to keep watch over
the education and conduct of the citizens, and to protect the
State from the disgrace or pollution of wantonness and
profaneness. He armed it with extraordinary powers of
interfering in pressing emergencies, to avert any sudden and
imminent danger which threatened the public safety. The nature
of its functions rendered it scarcely possible precisely to
define their limits; and Solon probably thought it best to let
them remain in that obscurity which magnifies whatever is
indistinct. ... It was filled with Archons who had discharged
their office with approved fidelity, and they held their seats
for life."
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, volume 1, chapter 11.
These enlarged functions of the Areopagus were withdrawn from
it in the time of Pericles, through the agency of Ephialtes,
but were restored about B. C. 400, after the overthrow of the
Thirty.--"Some of the writers of antiquity ascribed the first
establishment of the senate of Areopagus to Solon. ... But
there can be little doubt that this is a mistake, and that the
senate of Areopagus is a primordial institution of immemorial
antiquity, though its constitution as well as its functions
underwent many changes. It stood at first alone as a permanent
and collegiate authority, originally by the side of the kings
and afterwards by the side of the archons: it would then of
course be known by the title of The Boule,--the senate, or
council; its distinctive title 'senate of Areopagus,' borrowed
from the place where its sittings were held, would not be
bestowed until the formation by Solon of the second senate, or
council, from which there was need to discriminate it."
G. Grote, History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 10 (volume 3).
See, also, ATHENS: B. C. 477-462, and 466-454.
ARETHUSA, Fountain of.
See SYRACUSE.
AREVACÆ, The.
One of the tribes of the Celtiberians in ancient Spain. Their
chief town. Numantia, was the stronghold of Celtiberian
resistance to the Roman conquest.
See NUMANTIAN WAR.
ARGADEIS, The.
See PHYLÆ.
ARGAUM, Battle of (1803).
See INDIA: A. D. 1798-1805.
ARGENTARIA, Battle of (A. D.378).
See ALEMANNI: A. D. 378.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: Aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: TUPI.--GUARANI.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1515-1557.
Discovery, exploration and early settlement on La Plata.
First founding of Buenos Ayres.
See PARAGUAY: A. D. 1515-1557.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.
The final founding of the City of Buenos Ayres.
Conflicts of Spain and Portugal on the Plata.
Creation of the Viceroyalty of Buenos Ayres.
"In the year 1580 the foundations of a lasting city were laid
at Buenos Ayres by De Garay on the same situation as had twice
previously been chosen--namely, by Mendoza, and by Cabeza de
Vaca, respectively. The same leader had before this founded
the settlement of Sante Fe on the Paraná. The site selected
for the future capital of the Pampas is probably one of the
worst ever chosen for a city ... has probably the worst
harbour in the world for a large commercial town. ...
Notwithstanding the inconvenience of its harbour, Buenos Ayres
soon became the chief commercial entrepôt of the Valley of the
Plata. The settlement was not effected without some severe
fighting between De Garay's force and the Querandies. The
latter, however, were effectually quelled. ... The Spaniards
were now nominally masters of the Rio de La Plata, but they
had still to apprehend hostilities on the part of the natives
between their few and far-distant settlements [concerning
which see PARAGUAY: A. D. 1515-1557]. Of this liability De
Garay himself was to form a lamentable example. On his passage
back to Asuncion, having incautiously landed to sleep near the
ruins of the old fort of San Espiritu, he was surprised by a
party of natives and murdered, with all his companions. The
death of this brave Biscayan was mourned as a great loss by
the entire colony. The importance of the cities founded by him
was soon apparent; and in 1620 all the settlements south of
the confluence of the rivers Parana and Paraguay were formed
into a separate, independent government, under the name of Rio
de La Plata, of which Buenos Ayres was declared the capital.
This city likewise became the seat of a bishopric. ... The
merchants of Seville, who had obtained a monopoly of the
supply of Mexico and Peru, regarded with much jealousy the
prospect of a new opening for the South American trade by way
of La Plata," and procured restrictions upon it which were
relaxed in 1618 so far as to permit the sending of two vessels
of 100 tons each every year to Spain, but subject to a duty of
50 per cent. "Under this miserable commercial legislation
Buenos Ayres continued to languish for the first century of
its existence. In 1715, after the treaty of Utrecht, the
English ... obtained the 'asiento' or contract for supplying
Spanish colonies in America with African slaves, in virtue of
which they had permission to form an establishment at Buenos
Ayres, and to send thither annually four ships with 1,200
negroes, the value of which they might export in produce of
the country. They were strictly forbidden to introduce other
goods than those necessary for their own establishments; but
under the temptation of gain on the one side and of demand on
the other, the asiento ships naturally became the means of
transacting a considerable contraband trade. ...
{126}
The English were not the only smugglers in the river Plate. By
the treaty of Utrecht, the Portuguese had obtained the
important settlement of Colonia [the first settlement of the
Banda Oriental--or 'Eastern Border'--afterwards called
Uruguay] directly facing Buenos Ayres. ... The Portuguese, ...
not contented with the possession of Colonia ... commenced a
more important settlement near Monte Video. From this place
they were dislodged by Zavala [Governor of Buenos Ayres], who,
by order of his government, proceeded to establish settlements
at that place and at Maldonado. Under the above-detailed
circumstances of contention ... was founded the healthy and
agreeable city of Monte Video. ... The inevitable consequence
of this state of things was fresh antagonism between the two
countries, which it was sought to put an end to by a treaty
between the two nations concluded in 1750. One of the articles
stipulated that Portugal should cede to Spain all of her
establishments on the eastern bank of the Plata; in return for
which she was to receive the seven missionary towns [known as
the 'Seven Reductions'] on the Uruguay. But ... the
inhabitants of the Missions naturally rebelled against the
idea of being handed over to a people known to them only by
their slave-dealing atrocities. ... The result was that when
2,000 natives had been slaughtered [in the war known as the
War of the Seven Reductions] and their settlements reduced to
ruins, the Portuguese repudiated the compact, as they could no
longer receive their equivalent, and they still therefore
retained Colonia. When hostilities were renewed in 1762, the
governor of Buenos Ayres succeeded in possessing himself of
Colonia; but in the following year it was restored to the
Portuguese, who continued in possession until 1777, when it
was definitely ceded to Spain. The continual encroachments of
the Portuguese in the Rio de La Plata, and the impunity with
which the contraband trade was carried on, together with the
questions to which it constantly gave rise with foreign
governments, had long shown the necessity for a change in the
government of that colony; for it was still under the
superintendence of the Viceroy of Peru, residing at Lima,
3,000 miles distant. The Spanish authorities accordingly
resolved to give fresh force to their representatives in the
Rio de La Plata; and in 1776 they took the important
resolution to sever the connection between the provinces of La
Plata and the Viceroyalty of Peru. The former were now erected
into a new Viceroyalty, the capital of which was Buenos Ayres.
... To this Viceroyalty was appointed Don Pedro Cevallos, a
former governor of Buenos Ayres. ... The first act of Cevallos
was to take possession of the island of St. Katherine, the
most important Portuguese possession on the coast of Brazil.
Proceeding thence to the Plate, he razed the fortifications of
Colonia to the ground, and drove the Portuguese from the
neighbourhood. In October of the following year, 1777, a
treaty of peace was signed at St. Ildefonso, between Queen
Maria of Portugal and Charles III. of Spain, by virtue of
which St. Katherine's was restored to the latter country,
whilst Portugal withdrew from the Banda Oriental or Uruguay,
and relinquished all pretensions to the right of navigating
the Rio de La Plata and its affluents beyond its own frontier
line. ... The Viceroyalty of Buenos Ayres was sub-divided into
the provinces of--(1.) Buenos Ayres, the capital of which was
the city of that name, and which comprised the Spanish
possessions that now form the Republic of Uruguay, as well as
the Argentine provinces of Buenos Ayres, Santa Fé, Entre Rios,
and Corrientes; (2.) Paraguay, the capital of which was
Asuncion, and which comprised what is now the Republic of
Paraguay; (3.) Tucuman, the capital of which was St. Iago del
Estero, and which included what are to-day the Argentine
provinces of Cordova, Tucuman, St. Iago, Salta, Catamarca,
Rioja, and Jujuy; (4.) Las Charcas or Potosi, the capital of
which was La Plata, and which now forms the Republic of
Bolivia; and (5.) Chiquito or Cuyo, the capital of which was
Mendoza, and in which were comprehended the present Argentine
provinces of St. Luiz, Mendoza, and St. Juan."
R. G. Watson, Spanish and Portuguese South America,
volume 13-14.
ALSO IN:
E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, chapter 17.
S. H. Wilcocke, History of the Viceroyalty of Buenos
Ayres.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1806-1820.
The English invasion.
The Revolution.
Independence achieved.
Confederation of the Provinces of the Plate River and its
dissolution.
"The trade of the Plate River had enormously increased since
the substitution of register ships for the annual flotilla,
and the erection of Buenos Ayres into a viceroyalty in 1778;
but it was not until the war of 1797 that the English became
aware of its real extent. The British cruisers had enough to
do to maintain the blockade: and when the English learned that
millions of hides were rotting in the warehouses of Monte
Video and Buenos Ayres, they concluded that the people would
soon see that their interests would be best served by
submission to the great naval power. The peace put an end to
these ideas; but Pitt's favourite project for destroying
Spanish influence in South America by the English arms was
revived and put in execution soon after the opening of the
second European war in 1803. In 1806 ... he sent a squadron to
the Plate River, which offered the best point of attack to the
British fleet, and the road to the most promising of the
Spanish colonies. The English, under General Beresford, though
few in number, soon took Buenos Ayres, for the Spaniards,
terrified at the sight of British troops, surrendered without
knowing how insignificant the invading force really was. When
they found this out, they mustered courage to attack Beresford
in the citadel; and the English commander was obliged to
evacuate the place. The English soon afterwards took
possession of Monte Video, on the other side of the river.
Here they were joined by another squadron, who were under
orders, after reducing Buenos Ayres, to sail round the Horn,
to take Valparaiso, and establish posts across the continent
connecting that city with Buenos Ayres, thus executing the
long-cherished plan of Lord Anson. Buenos Ayres was therefore
invested a second time. But the English land forces were too
few for their task. The Spaniards spread all round the city
strong breastworks of ox hides, and collected all their forces
for its defence. Buenos Ayres was stormed by the English at
two points on the 5th of July, 1807; but they were unable to
hold their ground against the unceasing fire of the Spaniards,
who were greatly superior in numbers, and the next day they
capitulated, and agreed to evacuate the province within two
months.
{127}
The English had imagined that the colonists would readily
flock to their standard, and throw off the yoke of Spain. This
was a great mistake; and it needed the events of 1808 to lead
the Spanish colonists to their independence. ... In 1810, when
it came to be known that the French armies had crossed the
Sierra Morena, and that Spain was a conquered country, the
colonists would no longer submit to the shadowy authority of
the colonial officers, and elected a junta of their own to
carry on the Government. Most of the troops in the colony went
over to the cause of independence, and easily overcame the
feeble resistance that was made by those who remained faithful
to the regency in the engagement of Las Piedras. The leaders
of the revolution were the advocate Castelli and General
Belgrano; and under their guidance scarcely any obstacle
stopped its progress. They even sent their armies at once into
Upper Peru and the Banda Oriental, and their privateers
carried the Independent flag to the coasts of the Pacific; but
these successes were accompanied by a total anarchy in the
Argentine capital and provinces. The most intelligent and
capable men had gone off to fight for liberty elsewhere; and
even if they had remained it would have been no easy task to
establish a new government over the scattered and
half-civilized population of this vast country. ... The first
result of independence was the formation of a not very
intelligent party of country proprietors, who knew nothing of
the mysteries of politics, and were not ill-content with the
existing order of things. The business of the old viceroyal
government was delegated to a supreme Director; but this
functionary was little more than titular. How limited the
aspirations of the Argentines at first were may be gathered
from the instructions with which Belgrano and Rivadavia were
sent to Europe in 1814. They were to go to England, and ask
for an English protectorate; if possible under an English
prince. They were next to try the same plan in France,
Austria, and Russia, and lastly in Spain itself: and if Spain
still refused, were to offer to renew the subjection of the
colony, on condition of certain specified concessions being
made. This was indeed a strange contrast to the lofty
aspirations of the Colombians. On arriving at Rio, the
Argentine delegates were assured by the English minister, Lord
Strangford, that, as things were, no European power would do
anything for them: nor did they succeed better in Spain
itself. Meanwhile the government of the Buenos Ayres junta was
powerless outside the town, and the country was fast lapsing
into the utmost disorder and confusion. At length, when
Government could hardly be said to exist at all, a general
congress of the provinces of the Plate River assembled at
Tucuman in 1816. It was resolved that all the states should
unite in a confederation to be called the United Provinces of
the Plate River: and a constitution was elaborated, in
imitation of the famous one of the United States, providing
for two legislative chambers and a president. ... The
influence of the capital, of which all the other provinces
were keenly jealous, predominated in the congress; and
Puyrredon, an active Buenos Ayres politician, was made supreme
Director of the Confederation. The people of Buenos Ayres
thought their city destined to exercise over the rural
provinces a similar influence to that which Athens, under
similar circumstances, had exercised in Greece; and able
Buenos Ayreans like Puyrredon, San Martin, and Rivadavia, now
became the leaders of the unitary party. The powerful
provincials, represented by such men as Lopez and Quiroga,
soon found out that the Federal scheme meant the supremacy of
Buenos Ayres, and a political change which would deprive them
of most of their influence. The Federal system, therefore,
could not be expected to last very long; and it did in fact
collapse after four years. Artigas led the revolt in the Banda
Oriental [now Uruguay], and the Riverene Provinces soon
followed the example. For a long time the provinces were
practically under the authority of their local chiefs, the
only semblance of political life being confined to Buenos
Ayres itself."
E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, chapter 17.
ALSO IN:
M. G. Mulhall, The English in South America, chapter 10-13,
and 16-18.
J. Miller, Memoirs of General Miller, chapter 3 (volume 1).
T. J. Page, La Plata, the Argentine Confederation and
Paraguay, chapter 31.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1819-1874.
Anarchy, civil war, despotism.
The long struggle for order and Confederation.
"A new Congress met in 1819 and made a Constitution for the
country, which was never adopted by all the Provinces.
Pueyrredon resigned, and on June 10th, 1819, José Rondeau was
elected, who, however, was in no condition to pacify the civil
war which had broken out during the government of his
predecessors. At the commencement of 1830, the last 'Director
General' was overthrown; the municipality of the city of
Buenos-Aires seized the government; the Confederation was
declared dissolved, and each of its Provinces received liberty
to organize itself as it pleased. This was anarchy officially
proclaimed. After the fall in the same year of some military
chiefs who had seized the power, Gen. Martin Rodriguez was
named Governor of Buenos-Aires, and he succeeded in
establishing some little order in this chaos. He chose M. J.
Garcia and Bernardo Rivadavia--one of the most enlightened
Argentines of his times--as his Ministers. This
administration did a great deal of good by exchanging
conventions of friendship and commerce, and entering into
diplomatic relations with foreign nations. At the end of his
term General Las Heras--9th May, 1824--took charge of the
government, and called a Constituent Assembly of all the
Provinces, which met at Buenos-Aires, December 16th, and
elected Bernardo Rivadavia President of the newly Confederated
Republic on the 7th February, 1825. This excellent Argentine,
however, found no assistance in the Congress. No understanding
could be come to on the form or the test of the Constitution, nor
yet upon the place of residence for the national Government.
Whilst Rivadavia desired a centralized Constitution--called
here 'unintarian'--and that the city of Buenos-Aires should be
declared capital of the Republic, the majority of Congress
held a different opinion, and this divergence caused the
resignation of the President on the 5th July, 1827. After this
event, the attempt to establish a Confederation which would
include all the Provinces was considered as defeated, and each
Province went on its own way, whilst Buenos-Aires elected
Manuel Dorrego, the chief of the federal party, for its
Governor.
{128}
He was inaugurated on the 13th August, 1827, and at once
undertook to organize a new Confederation of the Provinces,
opening relations to this end with the Government of Cordoba,
the most important Province of the interior. He succeeded in
reëstablishing repose in the interior, and was instrumental in
preserving a general peace, even beyond the limits of his
young country. The Emperor of Brazil did not wish to
acknowledge the rights of the United Provinces over the
Cisplatine province, or Banda Oriental [now Uruguay]. He
wished to annex it to his empire, and declared war to the
Argentine Republic on the 10th of December, 1826. An army was
soon organized by the latter, under the command of General
Alvear, which on the 20th of February, 1827, gained a complete
victory over the Brazilian forces--twice their number--at the
plains of Ituzaingó, in the Brazilian province of Rio Grande
do Sul. The navy of the Argentines also triumphed on several
occasions, so that when England offered her intervention,
Brazil renounced all claim to the territory of Uruguay by the
convention of the 27th August, 1828, and the two parties
agreed to recognize and to maintain the neutrality and
independence of that country. Dorrego, however, had but few
sympathies in the army, and a short time after his return from
Brazil, the soldiers under Lavalle rebelled and forced him to
fly to the country on the 1st December of the same year. There
he found aid from the Commander General of the country
districts, Juan Manuel Rosas, and formed a small battalion
with the intention of marching on the city of Buenos-Aires.
But Lavalle triumphed, took him prisoner, and shot him without
trial on the 13th December. ... Not only did the whole
interior of the province of Buenos-Aires rise against Lavalle,
under the direction of Rosas, but also a large part of other
Provinces considered this event as a declaration of war, and
the National Congress, then assembled at Santa-Fé, declared
Lavalle's government illegal. The two parties fought with real
fury, but in 1829, after an interview between Rosas and
Lavalle, a temporary reconciliation was effected. ... The
legislature of Buenos-Aires, which had been convoked on
account of the reconciliation between Lavalle and Rosas,
elected the latter as Governor of the Province, on December
6th, 1829, and accorded to him extraordinary powers. ...
During this the first period of his government he did not
appear in his true nature, and at its conclusion he refused a
re-election and retired to the country. General Juan R.
Balcarce was then--17th December, 1832--named Governor, but
could only maintain himself some eleven months: Viamont
succeeded him, also for a short time only. Now the moment had
come for Rosas. He accepted the almost unlimited Dictatorship
which was offered to him on the 7th March, 1835, and reigned
in a horrible manner, like a madman, until his fall. Several
times the attempt was made to deliver Buenos-Aires from his
terrible yoke, and above all the devoted and valiant efforts
of General Lavalle deserve to be mentioned; but all was in
vain; Rosas remained unshaken. Finally, General Justo José De
Urquiza, Governor of the province of Entre-Rios, in alliance
with the province of Corrientes and the Empire of Brazil, rose
against the Dictator. He first delivered the Republic of
Uruguay, and the city of Monte Video--the asylum of the
adversaries of Rosas--from the army which besieged it, and
thereafter passing the great river Parana, with a relatively
large army, he completely defeated Rosas at Monte-Caseros,
near Buenos-Aires, on the 3rd February, 1852. During the same
day, Rosas sought and received the protection of an English
war-vessel which was in the road of Buenos-Aires, in which he
went to England, where he still [1876] resides. Meantime
Urquiza took charge of the Government of the United Provinces,
under the title of 'Provisional Director,' and called a
general meeting of the Governors at San Nicolás, a frontier
village on the north of the province of Buenos-Aires. This
assemblage confirmed him in his temporary power, and called a
National Congress which met at Santa-Fé and made a National
Constitution under date of 25th May, 1853. By virtue of this
Constitution the Congress met again the following year at
Parana, a city of Entre-Rios, which had been made the capital,
and on the 5th May, elected General Urquiza the first
President of the Argentine Confederation. ... The important
province of Buenos-Aires, however, had taken no part in the
deliberations of the Congress. Previously, on the 11th
September 1852, a revolution against Urquiza, or rather
against the Provincial Government in alliance with him, had
taken place and caused a temporary separation of the Province
from the Republic. Several efforts to pacify the disputes
utterly failed, and a battle took place at Cepeda in Santa-Fé,
wherein Urquiza, who commanded the provincial troops, was
victorious, although his success led to no definite result. A
short time after, the two armies met again at Pavon--near the
site of the former battle--and Buenos-Aires won the day. This
secured the unity of the Republic of which the victorious
General Bartolomé Mitre was elected President for six years
from October, 1862. At the same time the National Government
was transferred from Paraná to Buenos-Aires, and the latter
was declared the temporary capital of the Nation. The Republic
owes much to the Government of Mitre, and it is probable that
he would have done more good, if war had not broken out with
Paraguay, in 1865 [see PARAGUAY]. The Argentines took part in
it as one of the three allied States against the Dictator of
Paraguay, Francisco Solano Lopez. On the 12th October, 1868,
Domingo Faustino Sarmiento succeeded Gen. Mitre in the
Presidency. ... The 12th October, 1874, Dr. Nicolas Avellaneda
succeeded him in the Government."
R. Napp, The Argentine Republic, chapter 2.
ALSO IN:
D. F. Sarmiento, Life in the Argentine Republic in the
Days of the Tyrants.
J. A. King, Twenty-four years in the Argentine
Republic.
{129}
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1880-1891.
The Constitution and its working.
Governmental corruption.
The Revolution of 1890, and the financial collapse.
"The Argentine constitutional system in its outward form
corresponds closely to that of the United States. ... But the
inward grace of enlightened public opinion is lacking, and
political practice falls below the level of a self-governing
democracy. Congress enacts laws, but the President as
commander-in-chief of the army, and as the head of a civil
service dependent upon his will and caprice, possesses
absolute authority in administration. The country is governed
by executive decrees rather than by constitutional laws.
Elections are carried by military pressure and manipulation of
the civil service. ... President Roca [who succeeded
Avellaneda in 1880] virtually nominated, and elected his
brother-in-law, Juarez Célman, as his successor. President
Juarez set his heart upon controlling the succession in the
interest of one of his relatives, a prominent official; but
was forced to retire before he could carry out his purpose.
... Nothing in the Argentine surprised me more than the
boldness and freedom with which the press attacked the
government of the day and exposed its corruption. ... The
government paid no heed to these attacks. Ministers did not
trouble themselves to repel charges affecting their integrity.
... This wholesome criticism from an independent press had one
important effect. It gave direction to public opinion in the
capital, and involved the organization of the Unión Cívica. If
the country had not been on the verge of a financial
revulsion, there might not have been the revolt against the
Juarez administration in July, 1890; but with ruin and
disaster confronting them, men turned against the President
whose incompetence and venality would have been condoned if
the times had been good. The Unión Cívica was founded when the
government was charged with maladministration in sanctioning
an illegal issue of $40,000,000 of paper money. ... The
government was suddenly confronted with an armed coalition of
the best battalions of the army, the entire navy, and the Unión
Cívica. The manifesto issued by the Revolutionary Junta was a
terrible arraignment of the political crimes of the Juarez
Government. ... The revolution opened with every prospect of
success. It failed from the incapacity of the leaders to
co-operate harmoniously. On July 19, 1890, the defection of
the army was discovered. On July 26 the revolt broke out. For
four days there was bloodshed without definite plan or
purpose. No determined attack was made upon the government
palace. The fleet opened a fantastic bombardment upon the
suburbs. There was inexplicable mismanagement of the insurgent
forces, and on July 29 an ignominious surrender to the
government with a proclamation of general amnesty. General
Roca remained behind the scenes, apparently master of the
situation, while President Juarez had fled to a place of
refuge on the Rosario railway, and two factions of the army
were playing at cross purposes, and the police and the
volunteers of the Unión Cívica were shooting women and
children in the streets. Another week of hopeless confusion
passed, and General Roca announced the resignation of
President Juarez and the succession of vice-President
Pellegrini. Then the city was illuminated, and for three days
there was a pandemonium of popular rejoicing over a victory
which nobody except General Roca understood. ... In June,
1891, the deplorable state of Argentine finance was revealed
in a luminous statement made by President Pellegrini. ... All
business interests were stagnant. Immigration had been
diverted to Brazil. ... All industries were prostrated except
politics, and the pernicious activity displayed by factions
was an evil augury for the return of prosperity. ... During
thirty years the country has trebled its population, its
increase being relatively much more rapid than that of the
United States during the same period. The estimate of the
present population [1892] is 4,000,000 in place of 1,160,000
in 1857. ... Disastrous as the results of political government
and financial disorder have been in the Argentine, its
ultimate recovery by slow stages is probable. It has a
magnificent railway system, an industrious working population
recruited from Europe, and nearly all the material appliances
for progress."
I. N. Ford. Tropical America, chapter 6.
See CONSTITUTION, ARGENTINE.
ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1892.
Presidential Election.
Dr. Luis Saenz-Pena, former Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, and reputed to be a man of great integrity and ability,
was chosen President, and inaugurated October 12, 1892.
----------ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: End----------
ARGINUSAE, Battle of.
See GREECE: B. C. 406.
ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION, The.
"The ship Argo was the theme of many songs during the oldest
periods of the Grecian Epic, even earlier than the Odyssey.
The king Æêtês, from whom she is departing, the hero Jason,
who commands her, and the goddess Hêrê, who watches over him,
enabling the Argo to traverse distances and to escape dangers
which no ship had ever before encountered, are all
circumstances briefly glanced at by Odysseus in his narrative
to Alkinous. ... Jason, commanded by Pelias to depart in quest
of the golden fleece belonging to the speaking ram which had
carried away Phryxus and Hellé, was encouraged by the oracle
to invite the noblest youth of Greece to his aid, and fifty of
the most distinguished amongst them obeyed the call. Hêraklês,
Thêseus, Telamôn and Pêleus, Kastor and Pollux, Idas and
Lynkeus--Zêtês and Kalaïs, the winged sons of
Boreas--Meleager, Amphiaraus, Kêpheus, Laertês, Autolykus,
Menœtius, Aktor, Erginus, Euphêmus, Ankæus, Pœas,
Periklymenus, Augeas, Eurytus, Admêtus, Akastus, Kæneus,
Euryalus, Pêneleôs and Lêitus, Askalaphus and Ialmenus, were
among them. ... Since so many able men have treated it as an
undisputed reality, and even made it the pivot of systematic
chronological calculations, I may here repeat the opinion long
ago expressed by Heyne, and even indicated by Burmann, that
the process of dissecting the story, in search of a basis of
fact, is one altogether fruitless."
G. Grote, History of Greece, volume 1, part 1, chapter 13.
"In the rich cluster of myths which surround the captain of
the Argo and his fellows are preserved to us the whole life
and doings of the Greek maritime tribes, which gradually
united all the coasts with one another, and attracted Hellenes
dwelling in the most different seats into the sphere of their
activity. ... The Argo was said to have weighed anchor from a
variety of ports--from Iplcus in Thessaly, from Anthedon and
Siphæ in Bœotia: the home of Jason himself was on Mount Pelion
by the sea, and again on Lemnos and in Corinth; a clear proof
of how homogeneous were the influences running on various
coasts. However, the myths of the Argo were developed in the
greatest completeness on the Pagasean gulf, in the seats of
the Minyi; and they are the first with whom a perceptible
movement of the Pelasgian tribes beyond the sea--in other
words, a Greek history in Europe--begins."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapter 2-3.
{130}
ARGOS.--ARGOLIS.--ARGIVES.
"No district of Greece contains so dense a succession of
powerful citadels in a narrow space as Argolis [the eastern
peninsular projection of the Peloponnesus]. Lofty Larissa,
apparently designed by nature as the centre of the district,
is succeeded by Mycenæ, deep in the recess of the land; at the
foot of the mountain lies Midea, at the brink of the sea-coast
Tiryns; and lastly, at a farther distance of half an hour's
march, Nauplia, with its harbour. This succession of ancient
fastnesses, whose indestructible structure of stone we admire
to this day [see Schliemann's 'Mycenæ' and 'Tiryns'] is clear
evidence of mighty conflicts which agitated the earliest days
of Argos; and proves that in this one plain of Inachus several
principalities must have arisen by the side of one another,
each putting its confidence in the walls of its citadel; some,
according to their position, maintaining an intercourse with
other lands by sea, others rather a connection with the inland
country. The evidence preserved by these monuments is borne
out by that of the myths, according to which the dominion of
Danaus is divided among his successors. Exiled Prœtus is
brought home to Argos by Lycian bands, with whose help he
builds the coast-fortress of Tiryns, where he holds sway as
the first and mightiest in the land. ... The other line of the
Danaidæ is also intimately connected with Lycia; for Perseus.
... [who] on his return from the East founds Mycenæ, as the
new regal seat of the united kingdom of Argos, is himself
essentially a Lycian hero of light, belonging to the religion
of Apollo. ... Finally, Heracles himself is connected with the
family of the Perseidæ, as a prince born on the Tirynthian
fastness. ... During these divisions in the house of Danaus,
and the misfortunes befalling that of Prœtus, foreign families
acquire influence and dominion in Argos: these are of the race
of Æolus, and originally belong to the harbour-country of the
western coast of Peloponnesus--the Amythaonidæ. ... While the
dominion of the Argive land was thus sub-divided, and the
native warrior nobility subsequently exhausted itself in
savage internal feuds, a new royal house succeeded in grasping
the supreme power and giving an entirely new importance to the
country. This house was that of the Tantalidæ [or PELOPIDS,
which see], united with the forces of Achæan population. ...
The residue of fact is, that the ancient dynasty, connected by
descent with Lycia, was overthrown by the house which derived
its origin from Lydia. ... The poetic myths, abhorring long
rows of names, mention three princes as ruling here in
succession, one leaving the sceptre of Pelops to the other,
viz., Atreus, Thyestes and Agamemnon. Mycenæ is the chief seat
of their rule, which is not restricted to the district of
Argos."
E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapter 3.
After the Doric invasion of the Peloponnesus (see GREECE: THE
MIGRATIONS; also, DORIANS AND IONIANS), Argos appears in Greek
history as a Doric state, originally the foremost one in power
and influence, but humiliated after long years of rivalry by
her Spartan neighbours. "Argos never forgot that she had once
been the chief power in the peninsula, and her feeling towards
Sparta was that of a jealous but impotent competitor. By what
steps the decline of her power had taken place, we are unable
to make out, nor can we trace the succession of her kings
subsequent to Pheidon [8th century B. C.]. ... The title [of
king] existed (though probably with very limited functions) at
the time of the Persian War [B. C. 490-479]. ... There is some
ground for presuming that the king of Argos was even at that
time a Herakleid--since the Spartans offered to him a third
part of the command of the Hellenic force, conjointly with
their own two kings. The conquest of Thyreates by the Spartans
[about 547 B. C.] deprived the Argeians of a valuable portion
of their Periœkis, or dependent territory. But Orneæ and the
remaining portion of Kynuria still continued to belong to
them: the plain round their city was very productive; and,
except Sparta, there was no other power in Peloponnesus
superior to them. Mykenæ and Tiryns, nevertheless, seem both
to have been independent states at the time of the Persian
War, since both sent contingents to the battle of Platæa, at a
time when Argos held aloof and rather favoured the Persians."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 8 (volume 2).
ARGOS: B. C. 496-421.
Calamitous War with Sparta.
Non-action in the Persian War.
Slow recovery of the crippled State.
"One of the heaviest blows which Argos ever sustained at the
hand of her traditional foe befell her about 496 B. C., six
years before the first Persian invasion of Greece. A war with
Sparta having broken out, Cleomenes, the Lacedæmonian king,
succeeded in landing a large army, in vessels he had extorted
from the Æginetans, at Nauplia, and ravaged the Argive
territory. The Argeians mustered all their forces to resist
him, and the two armies encamp cd opposite each other near
Tiryns. Cleomenes, however, contrived to attack the Argeians
at a moment when they were unprepared, making use, if
Herodotus is to be credited, of a stratagem which proves the
extreme incapacity of the opposing generals, and completely
routed them. The Argeians took refuge in a sacred grove, to
which the remorseless Spartans set fire, and so destroyed
almost the whole of them. No fewer than 6,000 of the citizens
of Argos perished on this disastrous day. Cleomenes might have
captured the city itself; but he was, or affected to be,
hindered by unfavourable omens, and drew off his troops. The
loss sustained by Argos was so severe as to reduce her for
some years to a condition of great weakness; but this was at
the time a fortunate circumstance for the Hellenic cause,
inasmuch as it enabled the Lacedæmonians to devote their whole
energies to the work of resistance to the Persian invasion
without fear of enemies at home. In this great work Argos took
no part, on the occasion of either the first or second attempt
of the Persian kings to bring Hellas under their dominion.
Indeed, the city was strongly suspected of 'medising'
tendencies. In the period following the final overthrow of the
Persians, while Athens was pursuing the splendid career of
aggrandisement and conquest that made her the foremost state
in Greece, and while the Lacedæmonians were paralyzed by the
revolt of the Messenians, Argos regained strength and
influence, which she at once employed and increased by the
harsh policy ... of depopulating Mycenæ and Tiryns, while she
compelled several other semi-independent places in the Argolid
to acknowledge her supremacy. During the first eleven years of
the Peloponnesian war, down to the peace of Nicias (421 B.
C.), Argos held aloof from all participation in the struggle,
adding to her wealth and perfecting her military organization.
As to her domestic conditions and political system, little is
known; but it is certain that the government, unlike that of
other Dorian states, was democratic in its character, though
there was in the city a strong oligarchic and philo-Laconian
party, which was destined to exercise a decisive influence at
an important crisis."
C. H. Hanson, The Land of Greece, chapter 10.
ALSO IN:
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 36 (volume 4).
{131}
ARGOS: B. C. 421-418.
League formed against Sparta.
Outbreak of War.
Defeat at Mantinea.
Revolution in the Oligarchical and Spartan interest.
See GREECE: B. C. 421-418.
ARGOS: B. C. 395-387.
Confederacy against Sparta.
The Corinthian War.
Peace of Antalcidas.
See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.
ARGOS: B. C. 371.
Mob outbreak and massacre of chief citizens.
See GREECE: B. C. 371-362.
ARGOS: B. C. 338.
Territories restored by Philip of Macedon.
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
ARGOS: B. C. 271.
Repulse and death of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 277-244.
ARGOS: B. C. 229.
Liberated from Macedonian control.
See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.
ARGOS: A. D. 267.--Ravaged by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.
ARGOS: A. D. 395.--Plundered by the Goths.
See GOTHS: A. D. 395.
ARGOS: A. D. 1463.
Taken by the Turks, retaken by the Venetians.
See GREECE: A. D. 1454-1479.
ARGOS: A. D. 1686.--Taken by the Venetians.
See TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.
----------ARGOS: End----------
ARGYRASPIDES, The.
"He [Alexander the Great] then marched into India, that he
might have his empire bounded by the ocean, and the extreme
parts of the East. That the equipments of his army might be
suitable to the glory of the Expedition, he mounted the
trappings of the horses and the arms of the soldiers with
silver, and called a body of his men, from having silver
shields, Argyraspides."
Justin, History (translated by J. S. Watson),
book 12, chapter 7.
ALSO IN:
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 58.
See, also, MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.
ARGYRE.
See CHRYSE.
ARIA.--AREIOS.--AREIANS.
The name by which the Herirud and its valley, the district of
modern Herat, was known to the ancient Greeks. Its inhabitants
were known as the Areians.
M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, book 7, chapter 1.
ARIANA.
"Strabo uses the name Ariana for the land of all the nations
of Iran, except that of the Medes and Persians, i. e., for the
whole eastern half of Iran."--Afghanistan and Beloochistan.
M. Duncker, History of Antiquity,
volume 5, book 7, chapter 1.
ARIANISM.--ARIANS.
From the second century of its existence, the Christian church
was divided by bitter controversies touching the mystery of
the Trinity. "The word Trinity is found neither in the Holy
Scriptures nor in the writings of the first Christians; but it
had been employed from the beginning of the second century,
when a more metaphysical turn had been given to the minds of
men, and theologians had begun to attempt to explain the
divine nature. ... The Founder of the new religion, the Being
who had brought upon earth a divine light, was he God, was he
man, was he of an intermediate nature, and, though superior to
all other created beings, yet himself created? This latter
opinion was held by Arius, an Alexandrian priest, who
maintained it in a series of learned controversial works
between the years 318 and 325. As soon as the discussion had
quitted the walls of the schools, and been taken up by the
people, mutual accusations of the gravest kind took the place
of metaphysical subtleties. The orthodox party reproached the
Arians with blaspheming the deity himself, by refusing to
acknowledge him in the person of Christ. The Arians accused
the orthodox of violating the fundamental law of religion; by
rendering to the creature the worship due only to the Creator.
... It was difficult to decide which numbered the largest body
of followers; but the ardent enthusiastic spirits, the
populace in all the great cities (and especially at
Alexandria) the women, and the newly-founded order of the
monks of the desert ... were almost without exception
partisans of the faith which has since been declared orthodox.
... Constantine thought this question of dogma might be
decided by an assembly of the whole church. In the year 325,
he convoked the council of Nice [see NICÆA, COUNCIL OF], at
which 300 bishops pronounced in favour of the equality of the
Son with the Father, or the doctrine generally regarded as
orthodox, and condemned the Arians to exile and their books to
the flames."
J. C. L. de Sismondi, Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 4.
"The victorious faction [at the Council of Nice] ... anxiously
sought for some irreconcilable mark of distinction, the
rejection of which might involve the Arians in the guilt and
consequences of heresy. A letter was publicly read and
ignominiously torn, in which their patron, Eusebius of
Nicomedia, ingeniously confessed that the admission of the
homoousion, or consubstantial, a word already familiar to the
Platonists, was incompatible with the principles of their
theological system. The fortunate opportunity was eagerly
embraced. ... The consubstantiality of the Father and the Son
was established by the Council of Nice, and has been
unanimously received as a fundamental article of the Christian
faith by the consent of the Greek, the Latin, the Oriental and
the Protestant churches." Notwithstanding the decision of the
Council of Nice against it, the heresy of Arius continued to
gain ground in the East. Even the Emperor Constantine became
friendly to it, and the sons of Constantine, with some of the
later emperors who followed them on the eastern throne, were
ardent Arians in belief. The Homoousians, or orthodox, were
subjected to persecution, which was directed with special
bitterness against their great leader, Athanasius, the famous
bishop of Alexandria. But Arianism was weakened by
hair-splitting distinctions, which resulted in many diverging
creeds. "The sect which asserted the doctrine of a 'similar
substance' was the most numerous, at least in the provinces of
Asia. ... The Greek word which was chosen to express this
mysterious resemblance bears so close an affinity to the
orthodox symbol, that the profane of every age have derided
the furious contests which the difference of a single
diphthong excited between the Homoousians and the
Homoiousians."
{132}
The Latin churches of the West, with Rome at their head,
remained generally firm in the orthodoxy of the Homoousian
creed. But the Goths, who had received their Christianity from
the East, tinctured with Arianism, carried that heresy
westward, and spread it among their barbarian neighbors--
Vandals, Burgundians and Sueves--through the influence of the
Gothic Bible of Ulfilas, which he and his missionary
successors bore to the Teutonic peoples. "The Vandals and
Ostrogoths persevered in the profession of Arianism till the
final ruin [A. D. 533 and 553] of the kingdoms which they had
founded in Africa and Italy. The barbarians of Gaul submitted
[A. D. 507] to the orthodox dominion of the Franks: and Spain
was restored to the Catholic Church by the voluntary
conversion of the Visigoths [A. D. 589]."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapters 21 and 37.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
Theodosius formally proclaimed his adhesion to Trinitarian
orthodoxy by his celebrated edict of A. D. 380, and commanded
its acceptance in the Eastern Empire.
See ROME: A. D. 379-395.
A. Neander, General History of Christian. Religion
and Church, translated by Torry, volume 2, section 4.
ALSO IN:
J. Alzog, Manual of Univ. Ch. History, section 110-114.
W. G. T. Shedd, History of Christian Doctrine, book 3.
J. H. Newman, Arians of the Fourth Century.
A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the History of the
Eastern Church, lectures 3-7.
J. A. Dorner, History of the Development of the Doctrine
of the Person of Christ, division 1 (volume 2).
See, also,
GOTHS: A. D. 341-381;
FRANKS: A. D. 481-511;
also, GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 507-509.
ARICA, Battle of (1880).
See CHILE: A. D. 1833-1884.
ARICIA, Battle of.
A victory won by the Romans over the Auruncians, B. C. 497,
which summarily ended a war that the latter had declared
against the former.
Livy, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 26.
ARICIAN GROVE, The.
The sacred grove at Aricia (one of the towns of old Latium,
near Alba Longa) was the center and meeting-place of an early
league among the Latin peoples, about which little is known.
W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 3.
Sir. W. Gell, Topography of Rome, volume 1.
"On the northern shore of the lake [of Nemi] right under the
precipitous cliffs on which the modern village of Nemi is
perched, stood the sacred grove and sanctuary of Diana
Nemorensis, or Diana of the Wood. ... The site was excavated
in 1885 by Sir John Saville Lumley, English ambassador at
Rome. For a general description of the site and excavations,
see the Athenæum, 10th October, 1885. For details of
the finds see 'Bulletino dell' Instituto di Corrispondenza
Archeologica,' 1885.--The lake and the grove were
sometimes known as the lake and grove of Aricia. But the town
of Aricia (the modern La Riccia) was situated about three
miles off, at the foot of the Alban Mount. ... According to
one story, the worship of Diana at Nemi was instituted by
Orestes, who, after killing Thoas, King of the Tauric
Chersonese (the Crimea), fled with his sister to Italy,
bringing with him the image of the Tauric Diana. ... Within
the sanctuary at Nemi grew a certain tree, of which no branch
might be broken. Only a runaway slave was allowed to break
off, if he could, one of its boughs. Success in the attempt
entitled him to fight the priest in single combat, and if he
slew him he reigned in his stead with the title of King of the
Wood (Rex Nemorensis). Tradition averred that the fateful
branch was that Golden Bough which, at the Sibyl's bidding,
Æneas plucked before he essayed the perilous journey to the
world of the dead. ... This rule of succession by the sword
was observed down to imperial times; for amongst his other
freaks Caligula, thinking that the priest of Nemi had held
office too long, hired a more stalwart ruffian to slay him."
J. G. Frazer, The Golden Bough, chapter 1, section 1.
ARICONIUM.
A town of Roman Britain which appears to have been the
principal mart of the iron manufacturing industry in the
Forest of Dean.
T. Wright, The Celt, the Roman and the Saxon,
page 161.
ARII, The.
See LYGIANS.
ARIKARAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.
ARIMINUM.
The Roman colony, planted in the third century B. C., which
grew into the modern city of Rimini. See ROME: B. C.
295-191.--When Cæsar entered Italy as an invader, crossing the
frontier of Cisalpine Gaul--the Rubicon--his first movement
was to occupy Ariminum. He halted there for two or three
weeks, making his preparations for the civil war which he had
now entered upon and waiting for the two legions that he had
ordered from Gaul.
C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 14.
ARIOVALDUS, King of the Lombards, A. D. 626-638.
ARISTEIDES, Ascendancy of.
See ATHENS: B. C. 477-462.
ARISTOCRACY.--OLIGARCHY.
"Aristocracy signifies the rule of the best men. If, however,
this epithet is referred to an absolute ideal standard of
excellence, it is manifest that an aristocratical government
is a mere abstract notion, which has nothing in history, or in
nature, to correspond to it. But if we content ourselves with
taking the same terms in a relative sense, ... aristocracy ...
will be that form of government in which the ruling few are
distinguished from the multitude by illustrious birth,
hereditary wealth, and personal merit. ... Whenever such a
change took place in the character or the relative position of
the ruling body, that it no longer commanded the respect of
its subjects, but found itself opposed to them, and compelled
to direct its measures chiefly to the preservation of its
power, it ceased to be, in the Greek sense an aristocracy; it
became a faction, an oligarchy."
C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 10.
ARISTOMNEAN WAR.
See MESSENIAN WARS, FIRST AND SECOND.
ARIZONA: The Name.
"Arizona, probably Arizonac in its original form, was the
native and probably Pima name of the place of a hill, valley,
stream, or some other local feature--just south of the modern
boundary, in the mountains still so called, on the head waters
of the stream flowing past Saric, where the famous Planchas de
Plata mine was discovered in the middle of the 18th century,
the name being first known to Spaniards in that connection and
being applied to the mining camp or real de minas. The
aboriginal meaning of the term is not known, though from the
common occurrence in this region of the prefix 'ari,' the root
'son,' and the termination 'ac,' the derivation ought not to
escape the research of a competent student. Such guesses as
are extant, founded on the native tongues, offer only the
barest possibility of a partial and accidental accuracy; while
similar derivations from the Spanish are extremely absurd. ...
The name should properly be written and pronounced Arisona, as
our English sound of the z does not occur in Spanish."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States,
volume 12, page 520.
{133}
ARIZONA:
Aboriginal Inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PUEBLOS, APACHE GROUP, SHOSHONEAN
FAMILY, AND UTAHS.
ARIZONA: A. D. 1848.
Partial acquisition from Mexico.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1848.
ARIZONA: A. D. 1853.
Purchase by the United States of the southern part from Mexico.
The Gadsden Treaty.
"On December 30, 1853, James Gadsden, United States minister
to Mexico, concluded a treaty by which the boundary line was
moved southward so as to give the United States, for a
monetary consideration of $10,000,000, all of modern Arizona
south of the Gila, an effort so to fix the line as to include
a port on the gulf being unsuccessful. ... On the face of the
matter this Gadsden treaty was a tolerably satisfactory
settlement of a boundary dispute, and a purchase by the United
States of a route for a southern railroad to California."
H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 12,
chapter 20.
----------ARIZONA: End----------
ARKANSAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1542
Entered by Hernando de Soto.
See FLORIDA: A. D. 1528-1542.
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1803.
Embraced in the Louisiana Purchase.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1819-1836.
Detached from Missouri.
Organized as a Territory.
Admitted as a State.
"Preparatory to the assumption of state government, the limits
of the Missouri Territory were restricted on the south by the
parallel of 36° 30' North. The restriction was made by an act
of Congress, approved March 3, 1819, entitled an 'Act
establishing a separate territorial government in the southern
portion of the Missouri Territory.' The portion thus separated
was subsequently organized into the second grade of territorial
government, and Colonel James Miller, a meritorious and
distinguished officer of the Northwestern army, was appointed
first governor. This territory was known as the Arkansas
Territory, and, at the period of its first organization,
contained an aggregate of nearly 14,000 inhabitants. Its
limits comprised all the territory on the west side of the
Mississippi between the parallels 33° and 36° 30', or between
the northern limit of Louisiana and the southern boundary of
the State of Missouri. On the west it extended indefinitely to
the Mexican territories, at least 550 miles. The Post of
Arkansas was made the seat of the new government. The
population of this extensive territory for several years was
comprised chiefly in the settlements upon the tributaries of
White River and the St. Francis; upon the Mississippi, between
New Madrid and Point Chicot; and upon both sides of the
Arkansas River, within 100 miles of its mouth, but especially
in the vicinity of the Post of Arkansas. ... So feeble was the
attraction in this remote region for the active, industrious,
and well-disposed portion of the western pioneers, that the
Arkansas Territory, in 1830, ten years after its organization,
had acquired an aggregate of only 30,388 souls, including
4,576 slaves. ... The western half of the territory had been
erected, in 1824, into a separate district, to be reserved for
the future residence of the Indian tribes, and to be known as
the Indian Territory. From this time the tide of emigration
began to set more actively into Arkansas, as well as into
other portions of the southwest. ... The territory increased
rapidly for several years, and the census of 1835 gave the
whole number of inhabitants at 58,134 souls, including 9,630
slaves. Thus the Arkansas Territory in the last five years had
doubled its population. ... The people, through the General
Assembly, made application to Congress for authority to
establish a regular form of state government. The assent of
Congress was not withheld, and a Convention was authorized to
meet at Little Rock on the first day of January, 1836, for the
purpose of forming and adopting a State Constitution. The same
was approved by Congress, and on the 13th of June following
the State of Arkansas was admitted into the Federal Union as
an independent state, and was, in point of time and order, the
twenty-fifth in the confederacy. ... Like the Missouri
Territory, Arkansas had been a slaveholding country from the
earliest French colonies. Of course, the institution of negro
slavery, with proper checks and limits, was sustained by the
new Constitution."
J. W. Monette, Discovery and Settlement of the Valley of
the Mississippi, book 5, chapter 17 (volume 2).
See, also, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1818-1821.
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1861 (March).
Secession voted down.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (MARCH-APRIL).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1861 (April).
Governor Rector's reply to President Lincoln's call for
troops.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (APRIL).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1862 (January-March).
Advance of National forces into the State.
Battle of Pea Ridge.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862
(JANUARY-MARCH: MISSOURI-ARKANSAS).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1862 (July-September).
Progress of the Civil War.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JULY-SEPTEMBER: MISSOURI-ARKANSAS).
ARKANSAS: A. D.1862(December).
The Battle of Prairie Grove.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D.
1862 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER: MISSOURI-ARKANSAS).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1863 (January).
The capture of Arkansas Post from the Confederates.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JANUARY: ARKANSAS).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1863 (July).
The defence of Helena.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863
(JULY: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1863 (August-October).
The breaking of Confederate authority.
Occupation of Little Rock by National forces.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863
(AUGUST-OCTOBER: ARKANSAS-Missouri).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1864 (March-October).
Last important operations of the War.
Price's Raid.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864
(MARCH-OCTOBER: ARKANSAS-MISSOURI).
{134}
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1864.
First steps toward Reconstruction.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863-1864 (DECEMBER-JULY).
ARKANSAS: A. D. 1865-1868.
Reconstruction completed.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D.1865 (MAY-JULY), to 1868-1870.
----------ARKANSAS: End----------
ARKITES, The.
A Canaanite tribe who occupied the plain north of Lebanon.
ARKWRIGHT'S SPINNING MACHINE, OR WATER-FRAME, The invention of.
See COTTON MANUFACTURE.
ARLES: Origin.
See SALVES.
ARLES: A. D. 411.--Double siege.
See BRITAIN: A. D. 407.
ARLES: A. D. 425.--Besieged by the Goths.
See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 419-451.
ARLES: A. D. 508-510.
Siege by the Franks.
After the overthrow of the Visigothic kingdom of Toulouse, A.
D. 507, by the victory of Clovis, king of the Franks, at
Voclad, near Poitiers, "the great city of Aries, once the
Roman capital of Gaul, maintained a gallant defence against
the united Franks and Burgundians, and saved for generations
the Visigothic rule in Provence and southern Languedoc. Of the
siege, which lasted apparently from 508 to 510, we have some
graphic details in the life of St. Cæsarius, Bishop of Aries,
written by his disciples." The city was relieved in 510 by an
Ostrogothic army, sent by king Theodoric of Italy, after a
great battle in which 30,000 Franks were reported to be slain.
"The result of the battle of Aries was to put Theodoric in
secure possession of all Provence and of so much of Languedoc
as was needful to ensure his access to Spain"--where the
Ostrogothic king, as guardian of his infant grandson,
Amalaric, was taking care of the Visigothic kingdom.
T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 4, chapter 9.
ARLES: A. D. 933.
Formation of the kingdom.
See BURGUNDY: A. D. 843-933.
ARLES: A. D. 1032-1378.
The breaking up of the kingdom and its gradual absorption in
France.
See BURGUNDY: A. D. 1032, and 1127-1378.
ARLES: 1092-1207.
The gay court of Provence.
See PROVENCE: A. D. 943-1092, and 1179-1207.
----------ARLES: End----------
ARMADA, The Spanish.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1588.
ARMAGEDDON.
See MEGIDDO.
ARMAGH, St. Patrick's School at.
See IRELAND: 5th to 8th CENTURIES.
ARMAGNAC, The counts of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1327.
ARMAGNACS.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1380-1415, and 1415-1419.
ARMENIA:
"Almost immediately to the west of the Caspian there rises a
high table-land diversified by mountains, which stretches
eastward for more than eighteen degrees, between the 37th and
41st parallels. This highland may properly be regarded as a
continuation of the great Iranean plateau, with which it is
connected at its southeastern corner. It comprises a portion
of the modern Persia, the whole of Armenia, and most of Asia
Minor. Its principal mountain ranges are latitudinal, or from
west to east, only the minor ones taking the opposite or
longitudinal direction. ... The heart of the mountain-region,
the tract extending from the district of Erivan on the east to
the upper course of the Kizil·Irmak river and the vicinity of
Sivas upon the west, was, as it still is, Armenia. Amidst
these natural fastnesses, in a country of lofty ridges, deep
and narrow valleys, numerous and copious streams, and
occasional broad plains--a country of rich pasture grounds,
productive orchards, and abundant harvests--this interesting
people has maintained itself almost unchanged from the time of
the early Persian kings to the present day. Armenia was one of
the most valuable portions of the Persian empire, furnishing,
as it did, besides stone and timber, and several most
important minerals, an annual supply of 20,000 excellent
horses to the stud of the Persian king."
G. Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies: Persia, chapter 1.
Before the Persians established their sovereignty over the
country, "it seems certain that from one quarter or another
Armenia had been Arianized; the old Turanian character had
passed away from it; immigrants had flocked in and a new
people had been formed--the real Armenians of later times,
and indeed of the present day." Submitting to Alexander, on
the overthrow of the Persian monarchy, Armenia fell afterwards
under the yoke of the Seleucidæ, but gained independence about
190 B. C., or earlier. Under the influence of Parthia, a
branch of the Parthian royal family, the Arsacids, was
subsequently placed on the throne and a dynasty established
which reigned for nearly six hundred years. The fourth of
these kings, Tigranes, who occupied the throne in the earlier
part of the last century B. C., placed Armenia in the front
rank of Asiatic kingdoms and in powerful rivalry with Parthia.
Its subsequent history is one of many wars and invasions and
much buffeting between Romans, Parthians, Persians, and their
successors in the conflicts of the eastern world. The part of
Armenia west of the Euphrates was called by the Romans Armenia
Minor. For a short period after the revolt from the Seleucid
monarchy, it formed a distinct kingdom called Sophene.
G. Rawlinson, Sixth and Seventh Great Oriental
Monarchies.
ARMENIA: B. C. 69-68.
War with the Romans.
Great defeat at Tigranocerta
Submission to Rome.
See ROME: B. C. 78-68, and 69-63.
ARMENIA: A. D. 115-117.
Annexed to the Roman Empire by Trajan and restored to
independence by Hadrian.
See ROME: A. D. 96-138.
ARMENIA: A. D. 422 (?).
Persian Conquest.
Becomes the satrapy of Persarmenia.
See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.
ARMENIA: A. D. 1016-1073.
Conquest and devastation by the Seljuk Turks.
See TURKS (SELJUKS): A. D. 1004-1063, and 1063-1073.
ARMENIA: 12th-14th Centuries.
The Mediæval Christian Kingdom.
"The last decade of the 12th century saw the establishment of
two small Christian kingdoms in the Levant, which long
outlived all other relics of the Crusades except the military
orders; and which, with very little help from the West,
sustained a hazardous existence in complete contrast with
almost everything around them. The kingdoms of Cyprus and
Armenia have a history very closely intertwined, but their
origin and most of their circumstances were very different. By
Armenia as a kingdom is meant little more than the ancient
Cilicia, the land between Taurus and the sea, from the
frontier of the principality of Antioch, eastward, to
Kelenderis or Palæopolis, a little beyond Seleucia; this
territory, which was computed to contain 16 days' journey in
length, measured from four miles of Antioch, by two in
breadth, was separated from the Greater Armenia, which before
the period on which we are now employed had fallen under the
sway of the Seljuks, by the ridges of Taurus.
{135}
The population was composed largely of the sweepings of Asia
Minor, Christian tribes which had taken refuge in the
mountains. Their religion was partly Greek, partly Armenian.
... Their rulers were princes descended from the house of the
Bagratidæ, who had governed the Greater Armenia as kings from
the year 885 to the reign of Constantine of Monomachus, and
had then merged their hazardous independence in the mass of
the Greek Empire. After the seizure of Asia Minor by the
Seljuks, the few of the Bagratidæ who had retained possession
of the mountain fastnesses of Cilicia or the strongholds of
Mesopotamia, acted as independent lords, showing little
respect for Byzantium save where there was something to be
gained. ... Rupin of the Mountain was prince [of Cilicia] at
the time of the capture of Jerusalem by Saladin; he died in
1189, and his successor, Leo, or Livon, after having
successfully courted the favour of pope and emperor, was
recognised as king of Armenia by the emperor Henry VI., and
was crowned by Conrad of Wittelsbach, Archbishop of Mainz, in
1198." The dynasty ended with Leo IV., whose "whole reign was
a continued struggle against the Moslems," and who was
assassinated about 1342. "The five remaining kings of Armenia
sprang from a branch of the Cypriot house of Lusignan [see
CYPRUS: A. D. 1192-1489] and were little more than Latin
exiles in the midst of several strange populations all alike
hostile."
William Stubbs, Lectures on the Study of Mediæval and Modern
History, lecture 8.
ARMENIA: A. D. 1623-1635.
Subjugated by Persia and regained by the Turks,
See TURKS: A. D. 1623-1640.
----------ARMENIA: End----------
ARMENIAN CHURCH, The.
The church of the Armenians is "the oldest of all national
churches. They were converted by St. Gregory, called 'The
Illuminator,' who was a relative of Dertad or Tiridates, their
prince, and had been forced to leave the country at the same
time with him, and settled at Cæsareia in Cappadocia, where he
was initiated into the Christian faith. When they returned,
both prince and people embraced the Gospel through the
preaching of Gregory, A. D. 276, and thus presented the first
instance of an entire nation becoming Christian. ... By an
accident they were unrepresented at [the Council of] Chalcedon
[A. D. 451], and, owing to the poverty of their language in
words serviceable for the purposes of theology, they had at
that time but one word for Nature and Person, in consequence
of which they misunderstood the decision of that council [that
Christ possessed two natures, divine and human, in one Person]
with sufficient clearness. ... It was not until eighty-four
years had elapsed that they finally adopted Eutychianism [the
doctrine that the divinity is the sole nature in Christ], and
an anathema was pronounced on the Chalcedonian decrees (536)."
H. F. Tozer, The Church and the Eastern Empire, chapter 5.
"The religion of Armenia could not derive much glory from the
learning or the power of its inhabitants. The royalty expired
with the origin of their schism; and their Christian kings,
who arose and fell in the 13th century on the confines of
Cilicia, were the clients of the Latins and the vassals of the
Turkish sultan of Iconium, The helpless nation has seldom been
permitted to enjoy the tranquility of servitude. From the
earliest period to the present hour, Armenia has been the
theatre of perpetual war; the lands between Tauris and Erivan
were dispeopled by the cruel policy of the Sophis; and myriads
of Christian families were transplanted, to perish or to
propagate in the distant provinces of Persia. Under the rod of
oppression, the zeal of the Armenians is fervent and intrepid;
they have often preferred the crown of martyrdom to the white
turban of Mahomet; they devoutly hate the error and idolatry
of the Greeks."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 47.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ARMINIANISM.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1603-1619.
ARMINIUS, The Deliverance of Germany by.
See GERMANY: B. C. 8--A. D. 11.
ARMORIAL BEARINGS, Origin of.
"As to armorial bearings, there is no doubt that emblems
somewhat similar have been immemorially used both in war and
peace. The shields of ancient warriors, and devices upon coins
or seals, bear no distant resemblance to modern blazonry. But
the general introduction of such bearings, as hereditary
distinctions, has been sometimes attributed to tournaments,
wherein the champions were distinguished by fanciful devices;
sometimes to the crusades, where a multitude of all nations
and languages stood in need of some visible token to denote
the banners of their respective chiefs. In fact, the peculiar
symbols of heraldry point to both these sources and have been
borrowed in part from each. Hereditary arms were perhaps
scarcely used by private families before the beginning of the
thirteenth century. From that time, however, they became very
general."
H. Hallam, The Middle Ages, chapter 2, part 2.
ARMORICA.
The peninsular projection of the coast of Gaul between the
mouths of the Seine and the Loire, embracing modern Brittany,
and a great part of Normandy, was known to the Romans as
Armorica. The most important of the Armorican tribes in
Cæsar's time was that of the Veneti. "In the fourth and fifth
centuries, the northern coast from the Loire to the frontier
of the Netherlands was called 'Tractus Aremoricus,' or
Aremorica, which in Celtic signifies 'maritime country.' The
commotions of the third century, which continued to increase
during the fourth and fifth, repeatedly drove the Romans from
that country. French antiquaries imagine that it was a
regularly constituted Gallic republic, of which Chlovis had
the protectorate, but this is wrong."
B. G. Niebuhr, Lectures on Ancient Ethnography and
Geography, volume 2, page 318.
ALSO IN:
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
volume 2, page 235.
See, also, VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL, and IBERIANS, THE WESTERN.
ARMSTRONG, General John, and the Newburgh Addresses.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1782-1783.
ARMSTRONG, General John: Secretary of War.
Plan of descent on Montreal.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
ARMY, The Legal Creation of the British.
See MUTINY ACTS.
ARMY PURCHASE, Abolition of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1871.
ARNÆANS, The.
See GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS.
{136}
ARNAULD, Jacqueline Marie, and the Monastery of Port Royal.
See PORT ROYAL and the JANSENISTS: A. D. 1602-1660.
ARNAUTS, The.
See ALBANIANS, MEDIÆVAL.
ARNAY-LE-DUC, Battle of (1570).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1563-1570.
ARNOLD, Benedict, and the American Revolution.
See CANADA: A. D. 1775-1776;
and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (MAY);
1777 (JULY-OCTOBER); 1780 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER);
1780-1781; 1781 (JANUARY-MAY); 1781 (MAY-OCTOBER).
ARNOLD OF BRESCIA, The Republic of.
See ROME: A. D. 1145-1155.
ARNOLD VON WINKELRIED, at the Battle of Sempach.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1386-1388.
ARNULF,
King of the East Franks (Germany), A. D. 888-899;
King of Italy and Emperor, A. D. 894-899.
AROGI, Battle of (1868).
See ABYSSINIA: A. D. 1854-1889.
ARPAD, Dynasty of.
See HUNGARIANS: RAVAGES IN EUROPE;
and HUNGARY: A. D. 972-1114; 1114-1301.
ARPAD, Siege of.
Conducted by the Assyrian Conqueror Tiglath-Pileser, beginning
B. C. 742 and lasting two years. The fall of the city brought
with it the submission of all northern Syria.
A. H. Sayce, Assyria, chapter 2.
ARQUES, Battles at (1589).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1589-1590.
ARRABIATI, The.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1490-1498.
ARRAPACHITIS.
See JEWS: THE EARLY HEBREW HISTORY.
ARRAPAHOES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
ARRAS: Origin.
See BELGÆ.
ARRAS: A.. D. 1583.
Submission to Spain.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1584-1585.
ARRAS: A. D. 1654.
Unsuccessful Siege by the Spaniards under Condé.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1653-1656.
----------ARRAS: End----------
ARRAS, Treaties of (1415 and 1435).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1380-1415, and 1431-1453.
ARRETIUM, Battle of (B. C. 285).
See ROME: B. C. 295-191.
ARROW HEADED WRITING.
See CUNEIFORM WRITING.
ARSACIDÆ, The.
The dynasty of Parthian kings were so called, from the founder
of the line, Arsaces, who led the revolt of Parthia from the
rule of the Syrian Seleucidæ and raised himself to the throne.
According to some ancient writers Arsaces was a Bactrian;
according to others a Scythian.
G. Rawlinson, Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter 3.
ARSEN.
In one of the earlier raids of the Seljukian Turks into
Armenia, in the eleventh century the city of Arsen was
destroyed. "It had long been the great city of Eastern Asia
Minor, the centre of Asiatic trade, the depot for merchandise
transmitted overland from Persia and India to the Eastern
Empire and Europe generally. It was full of warehouses
belonging to Armenians and Syrians and is said to have
contained 800 churches and 300,000 people. Having failed to
capture the city, Togrul's general succeeded in burning it.
The destruction of so much wealth struck a fatal blow at
Armenian commerce."
E. Pears, The Fall of Constantinople, chapter 2.
ARSENE, Lake.
An ancient name of the Lake of Van, which is also called
Thopitis by Strabo.
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 22. section 1.
ARTABA, The.
See EPHAH.
ARTAXATA.
The ancient capital of Armenia, said to have been built under
the superintendence of Hannibal, while a refugee in Armenia.
At a later time it was called Neronia, in honor of the Roman
Emperor Nero.
ARTAXERXES LONGIMANUS, King of Persia, B. C. 465-425.
ARTAXERXES MNEMON, King of Persia, B. C. 405-359.
ARTAXERXES OCHUS, King of Persia, B. C. 359-338.
ARTAXERXES, or ARDSHIR, Founder of the Sassanian monarchy.
See PERSIA: B. C. 150-A. D. 226.
ARTEMISIUM, Sea fights at.
See GREECE: B. C. 480.
ARTEMITA.
See DASTAGERD.
ARTEVELD, Jacques and Philip Van:
Their rise and fall in Ghent.
See FLANDERS: A. D. 1335-1337, to 1382.
ARTHUR, King, and the Knights of the Round Table.
"On the difficult question, whether there was a historical
Arthur or not, ... a word or two must now be devoted; ... and
here one has to notice in the first place that Welsh
literature never calls Arthur a gwledig or prince but emperor,
and it may be inferred that his historical position, in case
he had such a position, was that of one filling, after the
departure of the Romans, the office which under them was that
of the Comes Britanniæ or Count of Britain. The officer so
called had a roving commission to defend the Province wherever
his presence might be called for. The other military captains
here were the Dux Britanniarum, who had charge of the forces
in the north and especially on the Wall, and the Comes
Littoris Saxonici [Count of the Saxon Shore], who was
entrusted with the defence of the south-eastern coast of the
island. The successors of both these captains seem to have
been called in Welsh gwledigs or princes. So Arthur's
suggested position as Comes Britanniæ would be in a sense
superior to theirs, which harmonizes with his being called
emperor and not gwledig. The Welsh have borrowed the Latin
title of imperator, 'emperor,' and made it into 'amherawdyr,'
later 'amherawdwr,' so it is not impossible, that when the
Roman imperator ceased to have anything more to say to this
country, the title was given to the highest officer in the
island, namely the Comes Britanniæ, and that in the words 'Yr
Amherawdyr Arthur,' 'the Emperor Arthur,' we have a remnant of
our insular history. If this view be correct, it might be
regarded as something more than an accident that Arthur's
position relatively to that of the other Brythonic princes of
his time is exactly given by Nennius, or whoever it was that
wrote the Historia Brittonum ascribed to him: there
Arthur is represented fighting in company with the kings of
the Brythons in defence of their common country, he being
their leader in war. If, as has sometimes been argued, the
uncle of Maglocunus or Maelgwn, whom the latter is accused by
Gilda of having slain and superseded, was no other than
Arthur, it would supply one reason why that writer called
Maelgwn 'insularis draco,' 'the dragon or war-captain of the
island,' and why the latter and his successors after him were
called by the Welsh not gwledigs but kings, though their great
ancestor Cuneda was only a gwledig.
{137}
On the other hand the way in which Gildas alludes to the uncle
of Maelgwn without even giving his name, would seem to suggest
that in his estimation at least he was no more illustrious
than his predecessors in the position which he held, whatever
that may have been. How then did Arthur become famous above
them, and how came he to be the subject of so much story and
romance? The answer, in short, which one has to give to this
hard question must be to the effect, that besides a historic
Arthur there was a Brythonic divinity named Arthur, after whom
the man may have been called, or with whose name his, in case
it was of a different origin, may have become identical in
sound owing to an accident of speech; for both explanations
are possible, as we shall attempt to show later. Leaving aside
for a while the man Arthur, and assuming the existence of a
god of that name, let us see what could be made of him.
Mythologically speaking he would probably have to be regarded
as a Culture Hero; for, a model king and the institutor of the
Knighthood of the Round Table, he is represented as the leader
of expeditions to the isles of Hades, and as one who stood in
somewhat the same kind of relation to Gwalchmei as Gwydion did
to ILeu. It is needless here to dwell on the character usually
given to Arthur as a ruler: he with his knights around him may
be compared to Conehobar, in the midst of the Champions of
Emain Macha, or Woden among the Anses at Valhalla, while
Arthur's Knights are called those of the Round Table, around
which they are described sitting; and it would be interesting
to understand the signification of the term Round Table. On
the whole it is the table, probably, and not its roundness
that is the fact to which to call attention, as it possibly
means that Arthur's court was the first early court where
those present sat at a table at all in Britain. No such thing
as a common table figures at Conchobar's court or any other
described in the old legends of Ireland, and the same applies,
we believe, to those of the old Norsemen. The attribution to
Arthur of the first use of a common table would fit in well
with the character of a Culture Hero which we have ventured to
ascribe to him, and it derives countenance from the pretended
history of the Round Table; for the Arthurian legend traces it
back to Arthur's father, Uthr Bendragon, in whom we have under
one of his many names the king of Hades, the realm whence all
culture was fabled to have been derived. In a wider sense the
Round Table possibly signified plenty or abundance, and might
be compared with the table of the Ethiopians, at which Zeus
and the other gods of Greek mythology used to feast from time
to time."
J. Rhys, Studies in the Arthurian Legend, chapter 1.
See, also CUMBRIA.
ARTHUR, Chester A.
Election to Vice-Presidency.
Succession to the Presidency.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1880 and 1881.
ARTI OF FLORENCE.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1250-1293.
ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION (American).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1777-1781, and 1783-1787.
ARTICLES OF HENRY, The.
See POLAND: A. D. 1573.
ARTOIS, The House of.
See BOURBON, THE HOUSE OF.
ARTOIS: A. D. 1529.
Pretensions of the King of France to Suzerainty resigned.
See ITALY: A. D. 1527-1529.
ARTYNI.
See DEMIURGI.
ARVADITES, The.
The Canaanite inhabitants of the island of Aradus, or Arvad,
and who also held territory on the main land.
F. Lenormant, Manual of Ancient History,
book 6, chapter 1.
ARVERNI, The.
See ÆDUI;
also, GAULS, and ALLOBROGES.
ARX, The.
See CAPITOLINE HILL;
also GENS, ROMAN.
ARXAMUS, Battle of.
One of the defeats sustained by the Romans in their wars with
the Persians. Battle fought A. D. 603.
G. Rawlinson, Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter 24.
ARYANS.--ARYAS.
"This family (which is sometimes called Japhetic, or
descendants of Japhet) includes the Hindus and Persians among
Asiatic nations, and almost all the peoples of Europe. It may
seem strange that we English should be related not only to the
Germans and Dutch and Scandinavians, but to the Russians,
French, Spanish, Romans and Greeks as well; stranger still
that we can claim kinship with such distant peoples as the
Persians and Hindus. ... What seems actually to have been the
case is this: In distant ages, somewhere about the rivers Oxus
and Jaxartes, and on the north of that mountainous range
called the Hindoo-Koosh, dwelt the ancestors of all the
nations we have enumerated, forming at this time a single and
united people, simple and primitive in their way of life, but
yet having enough of a common national life to preserve a
common language. They called themselves Aryas or Aryans, a
word which, in its very earliest sense, seems to have meant
those who move upwards, or straight; and hence, probably, came
to stand for the noble race as compared with other races on
whom, of course, they would look down. ... As their numbers
increased, the space wherein they dwelt became too small for
them who had out of one formed many different peoples. Then
began a series of migrations, in which the collection of
tribes who spoke one language and formed one people started
off to seek their fortune in new lands. ... First among them,
in all probability, started the Kelts or Celts, who,
travelling perhaps to the South of the Caspian and the North
of the Black Sea, found their way to Europe and spread far on
to the extreme West. ... Another of the great families who
left the Aryan home was the Pelasgic or the Græco-Italic.
These, journeying along first Southwards and then to the West,
passed through Asia Minor, on to the countries of Greece and
Italy, and in time separated into those two great peoples, the
Greeks (or Hellenes, as they came to call themselves), and the
Romans. ... Next we come to two other great families of
nations who seem to have taken the same route at first, and
perhaps began their travels together as the Greeks and Romans
did. These are the Teutons and the Slaves. ... The word Slave
comes from Slowan, which in old Slavonian meant to speak, and
was given by the Slavonians to themselves as the people who
could speak in opposition to other nations whom, as they were
not able to understand them, they were pleased to consider as
dumb. The Greek word barbaroi (whence our barbarians) arose in
obedience to a like prejudice, only from an imitation of
babbling such as is made by saying 'bar-bar-bar.'"
C. F. Keary, Dawn of History, chapter 4.
{138}
The above passage sets forth the older theory of an Aryan
family of nations as well as of languages in its unqualified
form. Its later modifications are indicated in the following:
"The discovery of Sanscrit and the further discovery to which
it led, that the languages now variously known as Aryan,
Aryanic, Indo-European, Indo-Germanic, Indo-Celtic and
Japhetic are closely akin to one another, spread a spell over
the world of thought which cannot be said to have yet wholly
passed away. It was hastily argued from the kinship of their
languages to the kinship of the nations that spoke them. ...
The question then arises as to the home of the 'holethnos,' or
parent tribe, before its dispersion and during the proethnic
period, at a time when as yet there was neither Greek nor
Hindoo, neither Celt nor Teuton, but only an undifferentiated
Aryan. Of course, the answer at first was--where could it have
been but in the East. And at length the glottologist found it
necessary to shift the cradle of the Aryan race to the
neighbourhood of the Oxus and the Jaxartes, so as to place it
somewhere between the Caspian Sea and the Himalayas. Then
Doctor Latham boldly raised his voice against the Asiatic
theory altogether, and stated that he regarded the attempt to
deduce the Aryans from Asia as resembling an attempt to derive
the reptiles of this country from those of Ireland. Afterwards
Benfey argued, from the presence in the vocabulary common to
the Aryan languages of words for bear and wolf, for birch and
beech, and the absence of certain others, such as those for
lion, tiger and palm, that the original home of the Aryans
must have been within the temperate zone in Europe. ... As
might be expected in the case of such a difficult question,
those who are inclined to believe in the European origin of
the Aryans are by no means agreed among themselves as to the
spot to be fixed upon. Latham placed it east, or south-east of
Lithuania, in Podolia, or Volhynia; Benfey had in view a
district above the Black Sea and not far from the Caspian;
Peschel fixed on the slopes of the Caucasus; Cuno on the great
plain of Central Europe; Fligier on the southern part of
Russia; Pösche on the tract between the Niemen and the
Dnieper; L. Geiger on central and western Germany; and Penka
on Scandinavia."
J. Rhys, Race Theories
(in New Princeton Review, January, 1888).
"Aryan, in scientific language, is utterly inapplicable to
race. It means language, and nothing but language; and, if we
speak of Aryan race at all, we should know that it means no
more than X + Aryan speech. ... I have declared again and
again that if I say Aryas, I mean neither blood nor bones, nor
hair nor skull; I mean simply those who speak an Aryan
language. The same applies to Hindus, Greeks, Romans, Germans,
Celts and Slaves. ... In that sense, and in that sense only,
do I say that even the blackest Hindus represent an earlier
stage of Aryan speech and thought than the fairest
Scandinavians. ... If an answer must be given as to the place
where our Aryan ancestors dwelt before their separation,
whether in large swarms of millions, or in a few scattered
tents and huts, I should still say, as I said forty years ago,
'Somewhere in Asia,' and no more."
F. Max Müller, Biog. of Words and Home of the Aryas,
chapter 6.
The theories which dispute the Asiatic origin of the Aryans
are strongly presented by Canon Taylor in The Origin of the
Aryans, by G. H. Rendall, in The Cradle of the
Aryans, and by Dr. O. Schrader in Prehistoric
Antiquities of the Aryan Peoples.
See, also, INDIA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS,
and THE IMMIGRATION AND CONQUESTS OF THE ARYAS.
AS.--LIBRA.--DENARIUS.--SESTERTIUS.
"The term As [among the Romans] and the words which
denote its divisions, were not confined to weight alone, but
were applied to measures of length and capacity also, and in
general to any object which could be regarded as consisting of
twelve equal parts. Thus they were commonly used to denote
shares into which an inheritance was divided." As a unit of
weight the As, or Libra, "occupied the same position in
the Roman system as the pound does in our own. According to
the most accurate researches, the As was equal to about
11.8 oz. avoirdupois, or .7375 of an avoirdupois pound." It
"was divided into 12 equal parts called unciæ, and the unciæ
was divided into 24 equal parts called scrupula." "The
As, regarded as a coin [of copper] originally weighed,
as the name implies, one pound, and the smaller copper coins
those fractions of the pound denoted by their names. By
degrees; however, the weight of the As, regarded as a
coin, was greatly diminished. We are told that, about the
commencement of the first Punic war, it had fallen from 12
ounces to 2 ounces; in the early part of the second Punic war
(B. C. 217), it was reduced to one ounce; and not long
afterwards, by a Lex Papiria, it was fixed at half-an-ounce,
which remained the standard ever after." The silver coins of
Rome were the Denarius, equivalent (after 217 B. C.) to 16
Asses; the Quinarius and the Sestertius, which became,
respectively, one half and one fourth of the Denarius in
value. The Sestertius, at the close of the Republic, is.
estimated to have been equivalent in value to two pence
sterling of English money. The coinage was debased under the
Empire. The principal gold coin of the Empire was the Denarius
Aureus, which passed for 25 silver Denarii.
W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapter 13.
ASCALON, Battle of (A. D. 1099).
See JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099-1144.
ASCANIENS, The.
See BRANDENBURG: A. D. 928-1142.
ASCULUM, Battle of (B. C. 279).
See ROME: B. C. 282-275.
ASCULUM, Massacre at.
See ROME: B. C. 90-88.
ASHANTEE WAR, The (1874).
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1873-1880
ASHBURTON TREATY, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1842.
ASHDOD.
See PHILISTINES.
ASHRAF, Shah of Persia, A. D. 1725-1730.
ASHTI, Battle of (1818).
See INDIA: A. D. 1816-1819.
{139}
ASIA: The Name.
"There are grounds for believing Europe and Asia to have
originally signified 'the west' and 'the east' respectively.
Both are Semitic terms, and probably passed to the Greeks from
the Phœnicians. ... The Greeks first applied the title [Asia]
to that portion of the eastern continent which lay nearest to
them, and with which they became first acquainted--the coast
of Asia Minor opposite the Cyclades; whence they extended it
as their knowledge grew. Still it had always a special
application to the country about Ephesus."
G. Rawlinson, Notes to Herodotus, volume 3, page 33.
ASIA:
The Roman Province (so called).
"As originally constituted, it corresponded to the dominions
of the kings of Pergamus ... left by the will of Attalus III.
to the Roman people (B. C. 133). ... It included the whole of
Mysia and Lydia, with Æolis, Ionia and Caria, except a small
part which was subject to Rhodes, and the greater part, if not
the whole, of Phrygia. A portion of the last region, however,
was detached from it."
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography,
chapter 20, section 1.
ASIA: Central.
Mongol Conquest.
See MONGOLS.
ASIA:
Turkish Conquest.
See TURKS.
ASIA:
Russian Conquests.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1859-1876, and 1869-1881.
ASIA MINOR:
"The name of Asia Minor, so familiar to the student of ancient
geography, was not in use either among Greek or Roman writers
until a very late period. Orosius, who wrote in the fifth
century after the Christian era, is the first extant writer
who employs the term in its modern sense."
E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography.,
chapter 7, section 2.
The name Anatolia, which is of Greek origin, synonymous with
"The Levant," signifying "The Sunrise," came into use among
the Byzantines, about the 10th century, and was adopted by
their successors, the Turks.
ASIA MINOR:
Earlier Kingdoms and People.
See
PHRYGIANS and MYSIANS.
LYDIANS.
CARIANS.
LYCIANS.
BITHYNIANS.
PONTUS (CAPPADOCIA).
PAPHLAGONIANS.
TROJA.
ASIA MINOR:
The Greek Colonies.
"The tumult which had been caused by the irruption of the
Thesprotians into Thessaly and the displacement of the
population of Greece [see GREECE: THE MIGRATION, &c.] did not
subside within the limits of the peninsula. From the north and
the south those inhabitants who were unable to maintain their
ground against the incursions of the Thessalians, Arnaeans, or
Dorians, and preferred exile to submission, sought new homes
in the islands of the Aegean and on the western coast of Asia
Minor. The migrations continued for several generations. When
at length they came to an end, and the Anatolian coast from
Mount Ida to the Triopian headland, with the adjacent islands,
was in the possession of the Greeks, three great divisions or
tribes were distinguished in the new settlements: Dorians,
Ionians, and Aeolians. In spite of the presence of some alien
elements, the Dorians and Ionians of Asia Minor were the same
tribes as the Dorians and Ionians of Greece. The Aeolians, on
the other hand, were a composite tribe, as their name implies.
... Of these three divisions the Aeolians lay farthest to the
north. The precise limits of their territory were differently
fixed by different authorities. ... The Aeolic cities fell
into two groups: a northern, of which Lesbos was the centre,
and a southern, composed of the cities in the immediate
neighbourhood of the Hermus, and founded from Cyme.--The
northern group included the islands of Tenedos and Lesbos. In
the latter there were originally six cities: Methymna,
Mytilene, Pyrrha, Eresus, Arisba, and Antissa, but Arisba was
subsequently conquered and enslaved by Mytilene. ... The
second great stream of migration proceeded from Athens [after
the death of Codrus--see ATHENS: FROM THE DORIAN MIGRATION TO
B. C. 683--according to Greek tradition, the younger sons of
Codrus leading these Ionian colonists across the Aegean, first
to the Carian city of Miletus--see MILETUS,--which they
captured, and then to the conquest of Ephesus and the island
of Samos]. ... The colonies spread until a dodecapolis was
established, similar to the union which the Ionians had
founded in their old settlements on the northern shore of
Peloponnesus. In some cities the Ionian population formed a
minority. ... The colonisation of Ionia was undoubtedly, in
the main, an achievement of emigrants from Attica, but it was
not accomplished by a single family, or in the space of one
life-time. ... The two most famous of the Ionian cities were
Miletus and Ephesus. The first was a Carian city previously
known as Anactoria. ... Ephesus was originally in the hands of
the Leleges and the Lydians, who were driven out by the
Ionians under Androclus. The ancient sanctuary of the tutelary
goddess of the place was transformed by the Greeks into a
temple of Artemis, who was here worshipped as the goddess of
birth and productivity in accordance with Oriental rather than
Hellenic ideas." The remaining Ionic cities and islands were
Myus (named from the mosquitoes which infested it, and which
finally drove the colony to abandon it), Priene, Erythrae,
Clazomenæ, Teos, Phocaea, Colophon, Lebedus, Samos and Chios.
"Chios was first inhabited by Cretans ... and subsequently by
Carians. ... Of the manner in which Chios became connected
with the Ionians the Chians could give no clear account. ...
The southern part of the Anatolian coast, and the
southern-most islands in the Aegean were colonised by the
Dorians, who wrested them from the Phoenician or Carian
occupants. Of the islands, Crete is the most important. ...
Crete was one of the oldest centres of civilisation in the
Aegean [see CRETE]. ... The Dorian colony in Rhodes, like that
in Crete, was ascribed to the band which left Argos under the
command of Althaemenes. ... Other islands colonised by the
Dorians were Thera, ... Melos, ... Carpathus, Calydnae,
Nisyrus, and Cos. ... From the islands, the Dorians spread to
the mainland. The peninsula of Cnidus was perhaps the first
settlement. ... Halicarnassus was founded from Troezen, and
the Ionian element must have been considerable. ... Of the
Dorian cities, six united in the common worship of Apollo on
the headland of Triopium. These were Lindus, Ialysus, and
Camirus in Rhodes, Cos, and, on the mainland, Halicarnassus
and Cnidus. . . . The territory which the Aeolians acquired is
described by Herodotus as more fertile than that occupied by
the Ionians, but of a less excellent climate. It was inhabited
by a number of tribes, among which the Troes or Teucri were
the chief. ... In Homer the inhabitants of the city of the
Troad are Dardani or Troes, and the name Teucri does not
occur. In historical times the Gergithes, who dwelt in the
town of the same name ... near Lampsacus, and also formed the
subject population of Miletus, were the only remnants of this
once famous nation.
{140}
But their former greatness was attested by the Homeric poems,
and the occurrence of the name Gergithians at various places
in the Troad [see TROJA]. To this tribe belonged the Troy of
the Grecian epic, the site of which, so far as it represents
any historical city, is fixed at Hissarlik. In the Iliad the
Trojan empire extends from the Aesepus to the Caicus; it was
divided--or, at least, later historians speak of it as
divided--into principalities which recognised Priam as their
chief. But the Homeric descriptions of the city and its
eminence are not to be taken as historically true. Whatever
the power and civilisation of the ancient stronghold exhumed
by Dr. Schliemann may have been, it was necessary for the epic
poet to represent Priam and his nation as a dangerous rival in
wealth and arms to the great kings of Mycenae and Sparta. ...
The traditional dates fix these colonies [of the Greeks in
Asia Minor] in the generations which followed the Trojan war.
... We may suppose that the colonisation of the Aegean and of
Asia Minor by the Greeks was coincident with the expulsion of
the Phoenicians. The greatest extension of the Phoenician
power in the Aegean seems to fall in the 15th century B. C.
From the 13th it was gradually on the decline, and the Greeks
were enabled to secure the trade for themselves. ... By 1100
B. C. Asia Minor may have been in the hands of the Greeks,
though the Phoenicians still maintained themselves in Rhodes
and Cyprus. But all attempts at chronology are illusory."
E. Abbott, History of Greece, chapter 4 (volume 1).
ALSO IN:
E. Curtius, History of Greece,
book 2, chapter 3 (volume 1).
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapters 13-15.
J. A. Cramer, Geography and History Description of Asia
Minor, section 6 (volume 1).
See, also, MILETUS, PHOCÆANS.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 724-539.
Prosperity of the Greek Colonies.
Their Submission to Crœsus, King of Lydia, and their conquest
and annexation to the Persian Empire.
"The Grecian colonies on the coast of Asia early rose to
wealth by means of trade and manufactures. Though we have not
the means of tracing their commerce, we know that it was
considerable, with the mother country, with Italy, and at
length Spain, with Phœnicia and the interior of Asia, whence
the productions of India passed to Greece. The Milesians, who
had fine woolen manufactures, extended their commerce to the
Euxine, on all sides of which they founded factories, and
exchanged their manufactures and other goods with the
Scythians and the neighbouring peoples, for slaves, wool, raw
hides, bees-wax, flax, hemp, pitch, etc. There is even reason
to suppose that, by means of caravans, their traders bartered
their wares not far from the confines of China [see MILETUS].
... But while they were advancing in wealth and prosperity, a
powerful monarchy formed itself in Lydia, of which the capital
was Sardes, a city at the foot of Mount Tmolus." Gyges, the
first of the Mermnad dynasty of Lydian kings (see LYDIANS),
whose reign is supposed to have begun about B. C. 724, "turned
his arms against the Ionian cities on the coast. During a
century and a half the efforts of the Lydian monarchs to
reduce these states were unavailing. At length (Ol. 55) [B. C.
568] the celebrated Crœsus mounted the throne of Lydia, and he
made all Asia this side of the River Halys (Lycia and Cilicia
excepted) acknowledge his dominion. The Aeolian, Ionian and
Dorian cities of the coast all paid him tribute; but,
according to the usual rule of eastern conquerors, he meddled
not with their political institutions, and they might deem
themselves fortunate in being insured against war by the
payment of an annual sum of money. Crœsus, moreover,
cultivated the friendship of the European Greeks." But Crœsus
was overthrown, B. C. 554, by the conquering Cyrus and his
kingdom of Lydia was swallowed up in the great Persian empire
then taking form [see PERSIA: B. C. 549-521]. Cyrus, during
his war with Crœsus, had tried to entice the Ionians away from
the latter and win them to an alliance with himself. But they
incurred his resentment by refusing. "They and the Æolians now
sent ambassadors, praying to be received to submission on the
same terms as those on which they had obeyed the Lydian
monarch; but the Milesians alone found favour: the rest had to
prepare for war. They repaired the walls of their towns, and
sent to Sparta for aid. Aid, however, was refused; but Cyrus,
being called away by the war with Babylon, neglected them for
the present. Three years afterwards (Ol. 59, 2), Harpagus, who
had saved Cyrus in his infancy from his grandfather, Astyages,
came as governor of Lydia. He instantly prepared to reduce the
cities of the coast. Town after town submitted. The Teians
abandoned theirs, and retired to Abdera in Thrace; the
Phocæans, getting on shipboard, and vowing never to return,
sailed for Corsica, and being there harassed by the
Carthagenians and Tyrrhenians, they went to Rhegion in Italy,
and at length founded Massalia (Marseilles) on the coast of
Gaul. The Grecian colonies thus became a part of the Persian
empire."
T. Keightley, History of Greece, part 1, chapter 9.
ALSO IN:
Herodotus, History, translated and edited by G. Rawlinson,
book 1, and appendix
M. Duncker, History of Antiquity,
book 8, chapter 6-7 (volume 6).
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 501-493.
The Ionian revolt and its suppression.
See PERSIA: B. C. 521-493.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 479.
Athens assumes the protection of Ionia.
See ATHENS: B. C.479-478.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 477.
Formation of Confederacy of Delos.
See GREECE: B. C. 478-477.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 413.
Tribute again demanded from the Greeks by the Persian King.
Conspiracy against Athens.
See GREECE: B. C. 413.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 413-412.
Revolt of the Greek cities from Athens.
Intrigues of Alcibiades.
See GREECE: B. C. 413-412.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 412.
Re-submission to Persia.
See PERSIA: B. C. 486-405.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 401-400.
Expedition of Cyrus the Younger, and Retreat of the Ten
Thousand.
See PERSIA: B. C.401-400.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 399-387.
Spartan war with Persia in behalf of the Greek cities.
Their abandonment by the Peace of Antalcidas.
See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 334.
Conquest by Alexander the Great.
See MACEDONIA: B. C. 334-330.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 301.
Mostly annexed to the Thracian Kingdom of Lysimachus.
See MACEDONIA, &c.: B. C. 310-301.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 281-224.
Battle-ground of the warring monarchies of Syria and Egypt.
Changes of masters.
See SELEUCIDÆ.
{141}
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 191.
First Entrance of the Romans.
Their defeat of Antiochus the Great.
Their expansion of the kingdom of Pergamum and the Republic of
Rhodes.
See SELEUCIDÆ B. C. 224-187.
ASIA MINOR: B. C. 120-65.
Mithridates and his kingdom.
Massacre of Italians.
Futile revolt from Rome.
Complete Roman Conquest.
See MITHRIDATIC WARS;
also ROME: B. C.78-68. and 69-63.
ASIA MINOR: A. D. 292.
Diocletian's seat of Empire established at Nicomedia.
See ROME: A. D. 284-305.
ASIA MINOR: A. D. 602-628.
Persian invasions.
Deliverance by Heraclius.
See ROME: A. D. 565-628.
ASIA MINOR: A. D. 1063-1092.
Conquest and ruin by the Seljuk Turks.
See TURKS (SELJUKS): A. D. 1063-1073; and 1073-1092.
ASIA MINOR: A. D. 1097-1149.
Wars of the Crusaders.
See CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099; and 1147-1149.
ASIA MINOR: A. D. 1204-1261.
The Empire of Nicæa and the Empire of Trebizond.
See GREEK EMPIRE OF NICÆA.
----------ASIA MINOR: End----------
ASIENTO, OR ASSIENTO, The.
See
SLAVERY: A. D. 1698-1776;
UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714;
AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, THE CONGRESS OF; ENGLAND: A. D. 1739-1741;
and GEORGIA: A. D. 1738-1743.
ASKELON.
See PHILISTINES.
ASKLEPIADS.
"Throughout all the historical ages [of Greece] the
descendants of Asklêpius [or Esculapius] were numerous and
widely diffused. The many families or gentes called
Asklêpiads, who devoted themselves to the study and practice
of medicine, and who principally dwelt near the temples of
Asklêpius, whither sick and suffering men came to obtain
relief--all recognized the god, not merely as the object of
their common worship, but also as their actual progenitor."
G. Grote, History of Greece, part 1, chapter 9.
ASMONEANS, The.
See JEWS: B. C. 166-40.
ASOPIA.
See SICYON.
ASOV.
See AZOF.
ASPADAN.
The ancient name of which that of Ispahan is a corrupted form.
G. Rawlinson. Five Great Monarchies: Media, chapter 1.
ASPERN--ESSLINGEN (OR THE MARCHFELD), Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).
ASPIS, The.
See PHALANX.
ASPROMONTE, Defeat of Garibaldi at (1862).
See ITALY: A. D. 1862-1866.
ASSAM, English Acquisition of.
See INDIA: A. D. 1823-1833.
ASSANDUN, Battle of.
The sixth and last battle, A. D. 1016, between Edmund
Ironsides, the English King, and his Danish rival, Cnut, or
Canute, for the Crown of England. The English were terribly
defeated and the flower of their nobility perished on the
field. The result was a division of the kingdom; but Edmund
soon died, or was killed. Ashington, in Essex, was the
battle-ground.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 979-1016.
ASSASSINATIONS, Notable.
Abbas, Pasha of Egypt.
See EGYPT: A. D. 1840-1869.
Alexander II. of Russia.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1879-1881.
Beatoun, Cardinal.
See SCOTLAND: A, D. 1546.
Becket, Thomas.
See ENGLAND: A. D.1162-1170,
Buckingham.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1628.
Cæsar.
See ROME; B. C. 44.
Capo d'Istrea, Count, President of Greece.
See GREECE: A. D. 1830-1862.
Cavendish, Lord Frederick, and Burke, Mr.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1882.
Concini.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1610-1619.
Danilo, Prince of Montenegro (1860).
See MONTENEGRO.
Darnley.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1561-1568.
Francis of Guise.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1560-1563.
Garfield, President.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1881.
Gustavus III. of Sweden.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1720-1792.
Henry of Guise.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1584-1589.
Henry III. of France.
See FRANCE; A. D. 1584-1589.
Henry IV. of France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1599-1600.
Hipparchus.
See ATHENS: B. C, 560-510.
John, Duke of Burgundy.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1415-1419.
Kleber, General.
See FRANCE; A. D. 1800 (JANUARY-JUNE).
Kotzebue.
See GERMANY; A. D. 1817-1820.
Lincoln, President.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (APRIL 14TH).
Marat.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JULY).
Mayo, Lord.
See INDIA; A. D. 1862-1876.
Murray, The Regent.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1561-1568.
Omar, Caliph.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST, &c.: A. D. 661.
Paul, Czar of Russia.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1801.
Perceval, Spencer.
See ENGLAND; A. D. 1806-1812.
Peter III.
See RUSSIA: A. D. 1761-1762.
Philip of Macedon.
See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.
Prim, General (1870).
See SPAIN. A. D. 1866-1843.
Rizzio.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1561-1568.
Rossi, Count.
See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849.
Wallenstein (1634).
See GERMANY: A. D. 1632-1634.
William the Silent.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1581-1584.
Witt, John and Cornelius de.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1672-1674.
ASSASSINS, The.
"I must here speak with the brevity which my limits prescribe
of that wonderful brotherhood of the Assassins, which during
the 12th and 13th centuries spread such terror through all
Asia, Mussulman and Christian. Their deeds should be studied
in Von Hammer's history of their order, of which however
there is an excellent analysis in Taylor's History of
Mohammedanism. The word Assassin, it must be remembered,
in its ordinary signification, is derived from this order, and
not the reverse. The Assassins were not so called because they
were murderers, but murderers are called assassins because the
Assassins were murderers. The origin of the word Assassin has
been much disputed by oriental scholars; but its application
is sufficiently written upon the Asiatic history of the 12th
century. The Assassins were not, strictly speaking, a dynasty,
but rather an order, like the Templars; only the office of
Grand-Master, like the Caliphate, became hereditary. They were
originally a branch of the Egyptian Ishmaelites [see MAHOMETAN
CONQUEST: A. D. 908-1171] and at first professed the
principles of that sect. But there can be no doubt that their
inner doctrine became at last a mere negation of all religion
and all morality. 'To believe nothing and to dare everything'
was the summary of their teaching. Their exoteric principle,
addressed to the non-initiated members of the order, was
simple blind obedience to the will of their superiors. If the
Assassin was ordered to take off a Caliph or a Sultan by the
dagger or the bowl, the deed was done; if he was ordered to
throw himself from the ramparts, the deed was done likewise.
... Their founder was Hassan Sabah, who, in 1090, shortly
before the death of Malek Shah, seized the castle of
Alamout--the Vulture's nest--in northern Persia, whence they
extended their possessions over a whole chain of mountain
fortresses in that country and in Syria. The Grand-Master was
the Sheikh-al-Jebal, the famous Old Man of the Mountain, at
whose name Europe and Asia shuddered."
E. A. Freeman, History and Conquests of the, Saracens,
lecture 4.
{142}
"In the Fatimide Khalif of Egypt, they [the Assassins, or
Ismailiens of Syria and Persia] beheld an incarnate deity. To
kill his enemies, in whatever way they best could, was an
action, the merit of which could not be disputed, and the
reward for which was certain." Hasan Sabah, the founder of the
Order, died at Alamout A. D. 1124. "From the day he entered
Alamut until that of his death--a period of thirty-five
years--he never emerged, but upon two occasions, from the
seclusion of his house. Pitiless and inscrutable as Destiny,
he watched the troubled world of Oriental politics, himself
invisible, and whenever he perceived a formidable foe, caused
a dagger to be driven into his heart." It was not until more
than a century after the death of its founder that the fearful
organization of the Assassins was extinguished (A. D. 1257) by
the same flood of Mongol invasion which swept Bagdad and the
Caliphate out of existence.
R. D. Osborn, Islam under the Khalifs of Bagdad,
part 3, chapter 3.
W. C. Taylor, History of Mohammedanism and its Sects,
chapter 9.
The Assassins were rooted out from all their strongholds in
Kuhistan and the neighboring region, and were practically
exterminated, in 1257, by the Mongols under Khulagu, or
Houlagou, brother of Mongu Khan, the great sovereign of the
Mongol Empire, then reigning. Alamut, the Vulture's Nest, was
demolished.
H. H. Howorth, History of the Mongols, part 1, page 193;
and part 3, pages 91-108.
See BAGDAD; A. D. 1258.
ASSAYE, Battle of (1803).
See INDIA; A. D. 1798-1803.
ASSEMBLY OF THE NOTABLES IN FRANCE (1787).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1774-1788.
ASSENISIPIA, The proposed State of.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1784.
ASSIDEANS, The.
See CHASIDM, THE.
ASSIENTO, The.
See ASIENTO.
ASSIGNATS.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1789-1791; 1794-1795 (JULY-APRIL);
1795 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).
ASSINARUS, Athenian defeat and surrender at the.
See SYRACUSE: B. C. 415-413.
ASSINIBOIA.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORIES OF CANADA.
ASSINIBOINS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.
ASSIZE, The Bloody.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1685 (SEPTEMBER).
ASSIZE OF BREAD AND ALE.
The Assize of Bread and Ale was an English ordinance or
enactment, dating back to the time of Henry III. in the 13th
century, which fixed the price of those commodities by a scale
regulated according to the market prices of wheat, barley and
oats. "The Assize of bread was re-enacted so lately as the
beginning of the last century and was only abolished in London
and its neighbourhood about thirty years ago"--that is, early
in the present century.
G. L. Craik, History of British Commerce,
volume 1, page 137.
ASSIZE OF CLARENDON, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1162-1170.
ASSIZE OF JERUSALEM, The.
"No sooner had Godfrey of Bouillon [elected King of Jerusalem,
after the taking of the Holy City by the Crusaders, A. D.
1099] accepted the office of supreme magistrate than he
solicited the public and private advice of the Latin pilgrims
who were the best skilled in the statutes and customs of
Europe. From these materials, with the counsel and approbation
of the Patriarch and barons, of the clergy and laity, Godfrey
composed the Assise of Jerusalem, a precious monument of
feudal jurisprudence. The new code, attested by the seals of
the King, the Patriarch, and the Viscount of Jerusalem, was
deposited in the holy sepulchre, enriched with the
improvements of succeeding times, and respectfully consulted
as often as any doubtful question arose in the tribunals of
Palestine. With the kingdom and city all was lost; the
fragments of the written law were preserved by jealous
tradition and variable practice till the middle of the
thirteenth century. The code was restored by the pen of John
d'Ibelin, Count of Jaffa, one of the principal feudatories;
and the final revision was accomplished in the year thirteen
hundred and sixty-nine, for the use of the Latin kingdom of
Cyprus."
E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 58.
https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717
ASSIZES.
"The formal edicts known under the name of Assizes, the
Assizes of Clarendon and Northampton, the Assize of Arms, the
Assize of the Forest, and the Assizes of Measures, are the
only relics of the legislative work of the period [reign of
Henry II. in England]. These edicts are chiefly composed of
new regulations for the enforcement of royal justice, ... In
this respect they strongly resemble the capitularies of the
Frank Kings, or, to go farther back, the edicts of the Roman
prætors. ... The term Assize, which comes into use in this
meaning about the middle of the twelfth century, both on the
continent and in England, appears to be the proper Norman name
for such edicts. ... In the 'Assize of Jerusalem' it simply
means a law; and the same in Henry's legislation. Secondarily,
it means a form of trial established by the particular law, as
the Great Assize, the Assize of Mort d' Ancester; and thirdly
the court held to hold such trials, in which sense it is
commonly used at the present day."
William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 13.
ASSUR.
See ASSYRIA.
ASSYRIA.
For matter relating to Assyrian history, the reader is
referred to the caption SEMITES, under which it will be given.
The subject is deferred to that part of this work which will
go later into print, for the reason that every month is adding
to the knowledge of the students of ancient oriental history
and clearing away disputed questions. It is quite possible
that the time between the publication of our first volume and
our fourth or fifth may make important additions to the scanty
literature of the subject in English. Modern excavation on the
sites of the ancient cities in the East, bringing to light
large library collections of inscribed clay tablets,--sacred
and historical writings, official records, business contracts
and many varieties of inscriptions,--have almost
revolutionized the study of ancient history and the views of
antiquity derived from it.
{143}
"M. Botta, who was appointed French consul at Mosul in 1842,
was the first to commence excavations on the sites of the
buried cities of Assyria, and to him is due the honour of the
first discovery of her long lost palaces. M. Botta commenced
his labours at Kouyunjik, the large mound opposite Mosul, but
he found here very little to compensate for his labours. New
at the time to excavations, he does not appear to have worked
in the best manner; M. Botta at Kouyunjik contented himself
with sinking pits in the mound, and on these proving
unproductive abandoning them. While M. Botta was excavating at
Kouyunjik, his attention was called to the mounds of Khorsabad
by a native of the village on that site; and he sent a party
of workmen to the spot to commence excavation. In a few days
his perseverance was rewarded by the discovery of some
sculptures, after which, abandoning the work at Kouyunjik, he
transferred his establishment to Khorsabad and thoroughly
explored that site. ... The palace which M. Botta had
discovered ... is one of the most perfect Assyrian buildings
yet explored, and forms an excellent example of Assyrian
architecture. Beside the palace on the mound of Khorsabad, M.
Botta also opened the remains of a temple, and a grand porch
decorated by six winged bulls. ... The operations of M. Botta
were brought to a close in 1845, and a splendid collection of
sculptures and other antiquities, the fruits of his labours,
arrived in Paris in 1846 and was deposited in the Louvre.
Afterwards the French Government appointed M. Place consul at
Mosul, and he continued some of the excavations of his
predecessor. ... Mr. Layard, whose attention was early turned
in this direction, visited the country in 1840, and afterwards
took a great interest in the excavations of M. Botta. At
length, in 1845, Layard was enabled through the assistance of
Sir Stratford Canning to commence excavations in Assyria
himself. On the 8th of November he started from Mosul, and
descended the Tigris to Nimroud. ... Mr. Layard has described
in his works with great minuteness his successive excavations,
and the remarkable and interesting discoveries he made. ...
After making these discoveries in Assyria, Mr. Layard visited
Babylonia, and opened trenches in several of the mounds there.
On the return of Mr. Layard to England, excavations were
continued in the Euphrates valley under the superintendence of
Colonel (now Sir Henry) Rawlinson. Under his directions, Mr.
Hormuzd Rassam, Mr. Loftus, and Mr. Taylor excavated various
sites and made numerous discoveries, the British Museum
receiving the best of the monuments. The materials collected
in the national museums of France and England, and the
numerous inscriptions published, attracted the attention of
the learned, and very soon considerable light was thrown on
the history, language, manners, and customs of ancient Assyria
and Babylonia."
G. Smith, Assyrian Discoveries, chapter 1.
"One of the most important results of Sir A. H. Layard's
explorations at Nineveh was the discovery of the ruined
library of the ancient city, now buried under the mounds of
Kouyunjik. The broken clay tablets belonging to this library
not only furnished the student with an immense mass of
literary matter, but also with direct aids towards a knowledge
of the Assyrian syllabary and language. Among the literature
represented in the library of Kouyunjik were lists of
characters, with their various phonetic and ideographic
meanings, tables of synonymes, and catalogues of the names of
plants and animals. This, however, was not all. The inventors
of the cuneiform system of writing had been a people who
preceded the Semites in the occupation of Babylonia, and who
spoke an agglutinative language utterly different from that of
their Semitic successors. These Accadians, as they are usually
termed, left behind them a considerable amount of literature,
which was highly prized by the Semitic Babylonians and
Assyrians. A large portion of the Ninevite tablets,
accordingly, consists of interlinear or parallel translations
from Accadian into Assyrian, as well as of reading books