IV. Concerning the infallible teaching of the Roman Pontiff: (part 2 of 8)

IV. Concerning the infallible teaching of the Roman Pontiff: (part 2 of 8)

"Poland, like Belgium and the Romagna, had felt the invigorating influence of the Revolution of July [in France]. The partition of Poland had been accomplished in a dark period of the preceding century. It was almost universally regarded in Western Europe as a mistake and a crime. It was a mistake to have removed the barrier which separated Russia from the West; it was a crime to have sacrificed a free and brave people to the ambition of a relentless autocrat. … The cause of freedom was identified with the cause of Poland, 'and freedom shrieked' when Poland's champion 'fell.' The statesmen, however, who parcelled out Europe amongst the victorious autocrats in 1815 were incapable of appreciating the feelings which had inspired the Scotch poet. Castlereagh, indeed, endeavoured to make terms for Poland. But he did not lay much stress on his demands. He contented himself with obtaining the forms of constitutional government for the Poles. Poland, constituted a kingdom, whose crown was to pass by hereditary succession to the Emperors of Russia, was to be governed by a resident Viceroy, assisted by a Polish Diet. Constantine, who had abdicated the crown of Russia in his brother's favour, was Viceroy of Poland. … He was residing at Warsaw when the news of the glorious days of July reached Poland. The Poles were naturally affected by the tidings of a revolution which had expelled autocracy from France. Kosciusko—the hero of 1794—was their favourite patriot. The cadets at the Military School in Warsaw, excited at the news, drank to his memory. Constantine thought that young men who dared to drink to Kosciusko deserved to be flogged. The cadets, learning his decision, determined on resisting it. Their determination precipitated a revolution which, perhaps, under any circumstances, would have occurred. Every circumstance which could justify revolt existed in Poland. The Constitution provided for the regular assembly of the Diet: the Diet had not been assembled for five years. The Constitution declared that taxes should not be imposed on the Poles without the consent of their representatives: for fifteen years no budget had been submitted to the Diet. The Constitution provided for the personal liberty of every Pole: the Grand Duke seized and imprisoned the wretched Poles at his pleasure. The Constitution had given Poland a representative government; and Constantine, in defiance of it, had played the part of an autocrat. The threat of punishment, which Constantine pronounced against the military cadets, merely lighted the torch which was already prepared. Eighteen young men, armed to the teeth, entered the Grand Duke's palace and forced their way into his apartments. Constantine had just time to escape by a back staircase. His flight saved his life. … The insurrection, commenced in the Archduke's palace, soon spread. Some of the Polish regiments passed over to the insurgents. Constantine, who displayed little courage or ability, withdrew from the city; and, on the morning of the 30th of November [1830], the Poles were in complete possession of Warsaw. They persuaded Chlopicki, a general who had served with distinction under Suchet in Spain, to place himself at their head. … Raised to the first position in the State, his warmest counsellors urged him to attack the few thousand men whom Constantine still commanded. Chlopicki preferred negotiating with the Russians. The negotiation, of course, failed. … Chlopicki—his own well-intentioned effort having failed—resigned his office; and his fellow countrymen invested Radziwil with the command of their army, and placed Adam Czartoryski at the head of the Government. In the meanwhile Nicholas was steadily preparing for the contest which was before him. Diebitsch, who had brought the campaign of 1820 to a victorious conclusion, was entrusted with the command of the Russian army. … Three great military roads converge from the east upon Warsaw. {2558} The most northerly of these enters Poland at Kovno, crosses the Narew, a tributary of the Bug, at Ostrolenka, and runs down the right bank of the first of these rivers; the central road crosses the Bug at Brzesc and proceeds almost due west upon Warsaw; the most southerly of the three enters Poland from the Austrian frontier, crosses the Vistula at Gora, and proceeds along its west bank to the capital. Diebitsch decided on advancing by all three routes on Warsaw. … Diebitsch, on the 20th of February, 1831, attacked the Poles; on the 25th he renewed the attack. The battle on the 20th raged round the village of Grochow; it raged on the 25th round the village of Praga. Fought with extreme obstinacy, neither side was able to claim any decided advantage. The Russians could boast that the Poles had withdrawn across the Vistula. The Poles could declare that their retreat had been conducted at leisure, and that the Russians were unable or unwilling to renew the attack. Diebitsch himself, seriously alarmed at the situation into which he had fallen, remained for a month in inaction at Grochow. Before the month was over Radziwil, who had proved unequal to the duties of his post, was superseded in the command of the Polish army by Skrzynecki. On the 30th of March, Skrzynecki crossed the Vistula at Praga, and attacked the division of the Russian army which occupied the forest of Waver, near Grochow. The attack was made in the middle of the night. The Russians were totally defeated; they experienced a loss of 5,000 in killed and wounded, and 6,000 prisoners. Crippled by this disaster, Diebitsch fell back before the Polish army. Encouraged by his success, Skrzynecki pressed forward in pursuit. The great central road by which Warsaw is approached crosses the Kostczyn, a tributary of the Bug, near the little village of Iganie, about half-way between Russia and Warsaw. Eleven days after the victory of the 30th of March the Russians were again attacked by the Poles at Iganie. The Poles won a second victory. The Russians, disheartened at a succession of reverses, scattered before the attack; and the cause of Poland seemed to have been already won by the gallantry of her children and the skill of their generals. Diebitsch, however, defeated at Grochow and Iganie, was not destroyed. … Foregoing his original intention of advancing by three roads on Warsaw, he determined to concentrate his right on the northern road at Ostrolenka, his left, on the direct road at Siedlice. It was open to Skrzynecki to renew the attack, where Diebitsch expected it, and throw himself on the defeated remnants of the Russian army at Siedlice. Instead of doing so he took advantage of his central situation to cross the Bug and throw himself upon the Russian right at Ostrolenka. … Skrzynecki had reason to hope that he might obtain a complete success before Diebitsch could by any possibility march to the rescue. He failed. Diebitsch succeeded in concentrating his entire force before the destruction of his right wing had been consummated. On the 26th of May, Skrzynecki found himself opposed to the whole Russian army. Throughout the whole of that day the Polish levies gallantly struggled for the victory. When evening came they remained masters of the field which had been the scene of the contest. A negative victory of this character, however, was not the object of the great movement upon the Russian right. The Polish general, his army weakened by heavy losses, resolved on retiring upon Warsaw. Offensive operations were over: the defensive campaign had begun. Victory with the Poles had, in fact, proved as fatal as defeat. The Russians, relying upon their almost illimitable resources, could afford to lose two men for every one whom Poland could spare. … It happened, too, that a more fatal enemy than even war fell upon Poland in the hour of her necessity. The cholera, which had been rapidly advancing through Russia during 1830, broke out in the Russian army in the spring of 1831. The prisoners taken at Iganie communicated the seeds of infection to the Polish troops. Both armies suffered severely from the disease; but the effects of it were much more serious to the cause of Poland than to the cause of Russia. … A fortnight after the battle of Ostrolenka, Diebitsch, who had advanced his head-quarters to Pultusk, succumbed to the malady. In the same week Constantine, the Viceroy of Poland, and his Polish wife, also died. … Diebitsch was at once succeeded in the command by Paskievitsch, an officer who had gained distinction in Asia Minor. … On the 7th of July, Paskievitsch crossed the Vistula at Plock, and threatened Warsaw from the rear. … Slowly and steadily he advanced against the capital. On the 6th of September he attacked the devoted city. Inch by inch the Russians made their way over the earthworks which had been constructed in its defence. On the evening of the 7th the town was at their mercy; on the 8th it capitulated. … The news of its fall reached Paris on the 15th of September. The news of Waterloo had not created so much consternation in the French capital. Business was suspended; the theatres were closed. The cause of Poland was in every mind, the name of Poland on every tongue. … On the 26th of February, 1832, Nicholas, promulgated a new organic statute for the government of Poland, which he had the insolence to claim for Russia by the right of conquest of 1815. A draft of the statute reached Western Europe in the spring of 1832. About the same time stories were received of the treatment which the Russians were systematically applying to the ill-fated country. Her schools were closed; her national libraries and public collections removed; the children of the Poles were carried into Russia; their fathers Were swept into the Russian army; whole families accused of participation in the rebellion were marched into the interior of the empire; columns of Poles, it was stated, could be seen on the Russian roads linked man to man by bars of iron; and little children, unable to bear the fatigues of a long journey, were included among them; the dead bodies of those who had perished on the way could be seen on the sides of the Russian roads. The wail of their wretched mothers—"Oh, that the Czar could be drowned in our tears!'—resounded throughout Europe."

S. Walpole, History of England, chapter 16 (volume 3).

ALSO IN: _J. Hordynski, History of the late Polish Revolution._

A. Rambaud, History of Russia, volume 2, chapter 14.

Sir A. Alison, History of Europe, 1815-52, chapter 26.

POLAND: A. D. 1846. Insurrection in Galicia suppressed. Extinction of the republic of Cracow. Its annexation to Austria.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1815-1846.

{2559}

POLAND: A. D. 1860-1864. The last insurrection.

"In 1860 broke out the last great Polish insurrection, in all respects a very ill–advised attempt. On the 29th of November of that year, on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the revolution of 1830, national manifestations, taking a religious form, took place in the Warsaw churches. … On the 25th of February, 1861, on the anniversary of the battle of Grochow, the Agricultural Society of that city, presided over by Count Zamojski, held a meeting for the purpose of presenting a petition to the Emperor to grant a constitution. Although the Tsar did not concede this demand, he decreed by an ukase of the 26th of March a council of state for the kingdom, elective councils in each government, and municipal councils in Warsaw and the chief cities. Moreover, the Polish language was to be adopted in all the schools of the kingdom. … On the 8th of April the people appeared in crowds in front of the castle of the Viceroy, and when they refused to disperse, were fired upon by the soldiers. About 200 persons were killed in this unfortunate affair, and many more wounded. The viceroyalty of Count Lambert was not successful in conciliating the people; he was succeeded by Count Lüders, who was reactionary in his policy. An attempt was made in June, 1862, on the life of the Count in the Saxon Garden (Saksonski Sad), and he was soon afterwards recalled; his place being taken by the Grand Duke Constantine, who was chiefly guided by the Marquis Wielopolski, an unpopular but able man. Two attempts were made upon the life of the Grand Duke, the latter of which was nearly successful; the life of Wielopolski was also several times in danger. … On the night of June 15, 1863, a secret conscription was held, and the persons considered to be most hostile to the Government were taken in their beds and forcibly enlisted. Out of a population of 180,000 the number thus seized at Warsaw was 2,000; soon after this the insurrection broke out. Its proceedings were directed by a secret committee, styled Rzad (Government), and were as mysterious as the movements of the celebrated Fehmgerichte. The Poles fought under enormous difficulties. Most of the bands consisted of undisciplined men, unfamiliar with military tactics, and they had to contend with well–organised troops. Few of them had muskets; the generality were armed only with pikes, scythes, and sticks. … The bands of the insurgents were chiefly composed of priests, the smaller landowners, lower officials, and peasants who had no land, but those peasants who possessed any land refused to join. Many showed but a languid patriotism on account of the oppressive laws relating to the poorer classes, formerly in vigour in Poland, of which the tradition was still strong. The war was only guerilla fighting, in which the dense forests surrounding the towns were of great assistance to the insurgents. The secret emissaries of the revolutionary Government were called stiletcziki, from the daggers which they carried. They succeeded in killing many persons who had made themselves obnoxious to the national party. … No quarter was given to the chiefs of the insurgents; when captured they were shot or hanged. … When the Grand Duke Constantine resigned the viceroyalty at Warsaw he was succeeded by Count Berg. … By May, 1864, the insurrection was suppressed, but it had cost Poland dear. All its old privileges were now taken away; henceforth all teaching, both in the universities and schools, must be in the Russian language. Russia was triumphant, and paid no attention to the demands of the three Great Powers, England, France, and Austria. Prussia had long been silently and successfully carrying on her plan for the Germanisation of Posen, and on the 8th of February, 1863, she had concluded a convention with Russia with a view of putting a stop to the insurrection. Her method throughout has been more drastic; she has slowly eliminated or weakened the Polish element, carefully avoiding any of those reprisals which would cause a European scandal."

W. R. Morfill, The Story of Poland, chapter 12.

POLAND: A. D. 1868. Complete incorporation with Russia.

By an imperial ukase, February 23, 1868, the government of Poland was absolutely incorporated with that of Russia.

----------POLAND: End--------

POLAR STAR, The Order of the.

A Swedish order of knighthood, the date of the founding of which is uncertain.

POLEMARCH.

See GREECE: FROM THE DORIAN MIGRATION TO B. C. 683.

POLETÆ. POLETERIUM.

"Every thing which the state (Athens) sold, or leased; revenues, real property, mines, confiscated estates, in which is to be included also the property of public debtors, who were in arrear after the last term of respite, and the bodies of the aliens under the protection of the state, who had not paid the sum required for protection, and of foreigners who had been guilty of assuming the rights of citizenship, or of the crime called apostasion; all these, I say, together with the making of contracts for the public works, at least in certain cases and periods, were under the charge of the ten poletæ, although not always without the coöperation of other boards of officers. Each of the tribes appointed one of the members of this branch of the government, and their sessions were held in the edifice called the Poleterium."

A. Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens (Lamb's translation), book 2, chapter 3.

POLITIQUES, The Party of the.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1573-1576.

POLK, James K.: Presidential election and administration.

See UNITED STATES OF AM.:A. D. 1844, to 1848.

POLKOS, The.

See MEXICO: A. D. 1846-1847.

POLLENTIA, Battle of.

See GOTHS: A. D. 400-403.

POLLICES.

See FOOT, THE ROMAN.

POLO, Marco, The travels of.

"This celebrated personage was not, in the strict sense of the word, a traveller. He was one of those professional politicians of the Middle Ages who are familiar to the student of Italian history. The son of a travelling Venetian merchant, who had already passed many years in Tartary, and been regarded with welcome and consideration by the Grand Khan himself, he was taken at an early age to the Grand Khan's court, and apprenticed, as it were, to the Grand Khan's service. The young adventurer possessed in a high degree that subtlety and versatility which opinion attributes to his nation. Profiting by his opportunities, he soon succeeded in transmuting himself into a Tartar. {2560} He adopted the Tartar dress, studied the Tartar manners, and mastered the four languages spoken in the Grand Khan's dominions. Kublai appears first to have employed him as a secretary, and then to have sent him on confidential missions: and during a service of seventeen years Marco was engaged in this way, in journeys by land and sea, in every part of the Grand Khan's empire and dependencies. More than this, he travelled on his own account, everywhere, it would appear, recording his notes and observations, partly for his own use, and partly for the information or entertainment of his master. These notes and observations were given to the world of Europe under the following circumstances. After a residence of seventeen years, Marco obtained permission to revisit Venice, accompanied by his father and uncle. Not long after his return, he was taken in a sea-fight with the Genoese, and committed to prison. To relieve the ennui of his confinement, he procured his rough notes from Venice, and dictated to a fellow–prisoner the narrative which passes under his name. This narrative soon became known to the world: and from its publication may be dated that intense and active interest in the East which has gone on steadily increasing ever since. The rank and dignified character of this famous adventurer, the romance of his career, the wealth which he amassed, the extent of his observations, the long series of years they had occupied, the strange and striking facts which he reported, and the completeness and perspicuity of his narrative, combined to produce a marked effect on the Italian world. Marco Polo was the true predecessor of Columbus. From an early time we find direct evidence of his influence on the process of exploration. … Wherever the Italian captains went, the fame of the great Venetian's explorations was noised abroad: and, as we shall presently see, the Italian captains were the chief directors of navigation and discovery in every seaport of Western Europe. The work dictated by Marco Polo to his fellow-captive, though based upon his travels both in form and matter, is no mere journal or narrative of adventure. A brief account of his career in the East is indeed prefixed, and the route over which he carries his reader is substantially that chronologically followed by himself; for he takes his reader successively overland to China, by way of the Black Sea, Armenia, and Tartary, backwards and forwards by land and sea, throughout the vast dominions of the Grand Khan, and finally homeward by the Indian Ocean, touching by the way at most of those famous countries which bordered thereon. Yet the book is no book of travels. It is rather a Handbook to the East for the use of other European travellers, and was clearly compiled as such and nothing more. Perhaps no compiler has ever laid down a clearer or more practical plan, adopted a more judicious selection of facts, or relieved it by a more attractive embroidery of historical anecdote. … It is not here to the purpose to dwell on his notices of Armenia, Turcomania, and Persia: his descriptions of the cities of Bagdad, Ormus, Tabriz, and many others, or to follow him to Kashmir, Kashghar, and Samarkhand, and across the steppes of Tartary. The main interest of Marco Polo lies in his description of the Grand Khan's Empire, and of those wide-spread shores, all washed by the Indian Ocean, which from Zanzibar to Japan went by the general name of India. … The Pope alone, among European potentates of the 15th century, could be ranked as approaching in state and dignity to the Tartar sovereign of China. For any fair parallel, recourse must be had to the Great Basileus of Persia: and in the eyes of his Venetian secretary the Grand Khan appeared much as Darius or Cyrus may have appeared to the Greek adventurers who crowded his court, and competed for the favour of a mighty barbarian whom they at once flattered and despised."

E. J. Payne, History of the New World, book 1.

ALSO IN: The Book of Ser Marco Polo; edited by Colonel H. Yule.

_T. W. Knox, Travels of Marco Polo for Boys and Girls._

_G. M. Towle, Marco Polo._

See, also, CHINA: A. D. 1259-1294.

POLONNA, Battle of (1792).

See POLAND: A. D. 1791-1792.

POLYNESIANS, The.

See MALAYAN RACE.

POLYPOTAMIA, The proposed State of.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1784.

POMERANIANS, The.

"Adam of Bremen first mentions these Pomeranians [east of the Oder], and he mentions them as Slavonians, the Oder being their boundary to the West. On the east they were conterminous with the Prussians. Their name is Slavonic, 'po'='on' and 'more'='sea,'='coastmen.' All their antiquities and traditions are equally so; in other words there is neither evidence, nor shadow of evidence, of their ever having dispossessed an older Germanic population. Nor are they wholly extinct at the present moment. On the promontories which project into the Gulf of Dantzig we find the Slavonic Kassub, Cassubitæ, or Kaszeb. Their language approaches the Polish."

R. G. Latham, The Germania of Tacitus, Prolegomena, section 7.

POMERIUM, The Roman.

"The pomerium was a hallowed space, along the whole circuit of the city, behind the wall, where the city auspices were taken, over which the augurs had full right, and which could never be moved without their first consulting the will of the gods. The pomerium which encircled the Palatine appears to have been the space between the wall and the foot of the hill."

H. M. Westropp, Early and Imperial Rome, page 40.

POMPADOUR, Madame de, Ascendancy of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1723-1774.

POMPÆ.

The solemn processions of the ancient Athenians, on which they expended great sums of money, were so called.

A. Boeckh, Public Economy of Athens, book 2, chapter 12.

POMPEII.

"Pompeii was a maritime city at the mouth of the river Sarnus, the most sheltered recess of the Neapolitan Crater. Its origin was lost in antiquity, and the tradition that it was founded by Hercules, together with the other spot [Herculaneum] which bore the name of the demigod, was derived perhaps from the warm springs with which the region abounded. The Greek plantations on the Campanian coast had been overrun by the Oscans and Samnites; nevertheless the graceful features of Grecian civilization were still everywhere conspicuous, and though Pompeii received a Latin name, and though Sulla, Augustus, and Nero had successively endowed it with Roman colonists, it retained the manners and to a great extent the language of the settlers from beyond the sea."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 60.

{2561}

Pompeii, and the neighboring city of Herculaneum, were overwhelmed by a volcanic eruption from Mount Vesuvius, on the 23rd of August, A. D. 79. They were buried, but did not perish; they were death-stricken, but not destroyed; and by excavations, which began at Pompeii A. D. 1748, they have been extensively uncovered, and made to exhibit to modern times the very privacies and secrets of life in a Roman city of the age of Titus.

Pliny the Younger, Letters, book 6, epistles 16 and 20.

ALSO IN: _T. H. Dyer, Pompeii._

POMPEII AND HERCULANEUM, Exhumed Libraries of.

See LIBRARIES, ANCIENT: HERCULANEUM.

POMPEIUS, the Great, and the first Triumvirate.

See ROME: B. C. 78-68, to B. C. 48; and ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 48-47.

PONCAS, PONKAS, PUNCAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY, and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.

----------PONDICHERRY: Start--------

PONDICHERRY: A. D. 1674-1697. Founded by the French. Taken by the Dutch. Restored to France.

See INDIA: A. D. 1665-1743.

PONDICHERRY: A. D. 1746. Siege by the English.

See INDIA: A. D. 1743-1752.

PONDICHERRY: A. D. 1761. Capture by the English.

See INDIA: A. D. 1758-1761.

----------PONDICHERRY: End--------

PONIATOWSKY, Stanislaus Augustus, King of Poland, A. D. 1764-1795.

PONKAS.

See PONCAS.

PONS ÆLII.

A Roman bridge and military station on the Tyne, where Newcastle is now situated.

H. M. Scarth, Roman Britain, chapter 8.

PONS SUBLICIUS, The.

See SUBLICIAN BRIDGE.

PONT ACHIN, Battle of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).

PONTCHARRA, Battle of (1591).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1591-1593.

PONTE NUOVO, Battle of (1769).

See CORSICA: A. D. 1729-1769.

PONTIAC'S WAR (A. D. 1763-1764).

"With the conquest of Canada and the expulsion of France as a military power from the continent, the English colonists were abounding in loyalty to the mother country, were exultant in the expectation of peace, and in the assurance of immunity from Indian wars in the future; for it did not seem possible that, with the loose system of organization and government common to the Indians, they could plan and execute a general campaign without the co–operation of the French as leaders. This feeling of security among the English settlements was of short duration. A general discontent pervaded all the Indian tribes from the frontier settlements to the Mississippi, and from the great lakes to the Gulf of Mexico. The extent of this disquietude was not suspected, and hence no attempt was made to gain the goodwill of the Indians. There were many real causes for this discontent. The French had been politic and sagacious in their intercourse with the Indian. They gained his friendship by treating him with respect and justice. They came to him with presents, and, as a rule, dealt with him fairly in trade. They came with missionaries, unarmed, heroic, self-denying men. … Many Frenchmen married Indian wives, dwelt with the native tribes, and adopted their customs. To the average Englishman, on the other hand, Indians were disgusting objects; he would show them no respect, nor treat them with justice except under compulsion. … The French had shown little disposition to make permanent settlements; but the English, when they appeared, came to stay, and they occupied large tracts of the best land for agricultural purposes. The French hunters and traders, who were widely dispersed among the native tribes, kept the Indians in a state of disquietude by misrepresenting the English, exaggerating their faults, and making the prediction that the French would soon recapture Canada and expel the English from the Western territories. Pontiac, the chief of the Ottawas [see CANADA: A. D. 1760], was the Indian who had the motive, the ambition, and capacity for organization which enabled him to concentrate and use all these elements of discontent for his own malignant and selfish purposes. After the defeat of the French, be professed for a time to be friendly with the English, expecting that, under the acknowledged supremacy of Great Britain, he would be recognized as a mighty Indian prince, and be assigned to rule over his own, and perhaps a confederacy of other tribes. Finding that the English government had no use for him, he was indignant, and he devoted all the energies of his vigorous mind to a secret conspiracy of uniting the tribes west of the Alleghanies to engage in a general war against the English settlements ['The tribes thus banded together against the English comprised, with a few unimportant exceptions, the whole Algonquin stock, to whom were united the Wyandots, the Senecas, and several tribes of the lower Mississippi. The Senecas were the only members of the Iroquois confederacy who joined in the league, the rest being kept quiet by the influence of Sir William Johnson.'

F. Parkman, Conspiracy of Pontiac, volume 1, page 187.

… His scheme was to make a simultaneous attack on all the Western posts in the month of May, 1763; and each attack was assigned to the neighboring tribes. His summer home was on a small island at the entrance of Lake St. Clair; and being near Detroit, he was to conduct in person the capture of that fort. On the 6th of May, 1763, Major Gladwin, in command at Detroit, had warning from an Indian girl that the next day an attempt would be made to capture the fort by treachery. When Pontiac, on the appointed morning, accompanied by 60 of his chiefs, with short guns concealed under their blankets, appeared at the fort, and, as usual, asked for admission, he was startled at seeing the whole garrison under arms, and that his scheme of treachery had miscarried. For two months the savages assailed the fort, and the sleepless garrison gallantly defended it, when they were relieved by the arrival of a schooner from Fort Niagara, with 60 men, provisions, and ammunition. Fort Pitt, on the present site of Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, was in command of Captain Ecuyer, another trained soldier, who had been warned of the Indian conspiracy by Major Gladwin in a letter written May 5th. Captain Ecuyer, having a garrison of 330 soldiers and backwoodsmen, immediately made every preparation for defence. On May 27th, a party of Indians appeared at the fort under the pretence of wishing to trade, and were treated as spies. {2562} Active operations against Fort Pitt were postponed until the smaller forts had been taken. Fort Sandusky was captured May 16th; Fort St. Joseph (on the St. Joseph River, Michigan), May 25th; Fort Ouatanon (now Lafayette, Indiana), May 31st; Fort Michillimaekinac (now Mackinaw, Michigan), June 2d; Fort Presqu' Isle (now Erie, Pennsylvania), June 17th; Fort Le Bœuf (Erie County, Pennsylvania), June 18th; Fort Venango (Venango County, Pennsylvania), June 18th; and the posts at Carlisle and Bedford, Pennsylvania, on the same day. No garrison except that at Presqu' Is]e had warning of danger. The same method of capture was adopted in each instance. A small party of Indians came to the fort with the pretence of friendship, and were admitted. Others soon joined them, when the visitors rose upon the small garrisons, butchered them, or took them captive. At Presqu' Isle the Indians laid siege to the fort for two days, when they set it on fire. At Venango no one of the garrison survived to give an account of the capture. On June 22d, a large body of Indians surrounded Fort Pitt and opened fire on all sides, but were easily repulsed. … The Indians departed next day and did not return until July 26th," when they laid siege to the fort for five days and nights, with more loss to themselves than to the garrison. They "then disappeared, in order to intercept the expedition of Colonel Bouquet, which was approaching from the east with a convoy of provisions for the relief of Fort Pitt. It was fortunate for the country that there was an officer stationed at Philadelphia who fully understood the meaning of the alarming reports which were coming in from the Western posts. Colonel Henry Bouquet was a gallant Swiss officer who had been trained in war from his youth, and whose personal accomplishments gave an additional charm to his bravery and heroic energy. He had served seven years in fighting American Indians, and was more cunning than they in the practice of their own artifices. General Amherst, the commander-in–chief, was slow in appreciating the importance and extent of the Western conspiracy; yet he did good service in directing Colonel Bouquet to organize an expedition for the relief of Fort Pitt. The promptness and energy with which this duty was performed, under the most embarrassing conditions, make the expedition one of the most brilliant episodes in American warfare. The only troops available for the service were about 500 regulars recently arrived from the siege of Havana, broken in health." At Bushy Run, 25 miles east of Fort Pitt, Bouquet fought a desperate battle with the savages, and defeated them by the stratagem of a pretended retreat, which drew them into an ambuscade. Fort Pitt was then reached in safety. "On the 29th of July Detroit was reinforced by 280 men under Captain Dalzell, who in June had left Fort Niagara in 22 barges, with several cannon and a supply of provisions and ammunition. The day after his arrival, Captain Dalzell proposed, with 250 men, to make a night attack on Pontiac's camp and capture him. Major Gladwin discouraged the attempt, but finally, against his judgment, consented. Some Canadians obtained the secret and carried it to Pontiac, who waylaid the party in an ambuscade [at a place called Bloody Bridge ever since]. Twenty of the English were killed and 39 wounded. Among the killed was Captain Dalzell himself. Pontiac could make no use of this success, as the fort was strongly garrisoned and well supplied. … Elsewhere there was nothing to encourage him." His confederation begun to break, and in November he was forced to raise the siege of Detroit. "There was quietness on the frontiers during the winter of 1763-64. In the spring of 1764 scattered war parties were again ravaging the borders. Colonel Bouquet was recruiting in Pennsylvania, and preparing an outfit for his march into the valley of the Ohio. In June, Colonel Bradstreet, with a force of 1,200 men, was sent up the great lakes," where he made an absurd and unauthorized treaty with some of the Ohio Indians. He arrived at Detroit on the 26th of August. "Pontiac had departed, and sent messages of defiance from the banks of the Maumee." Colonel Bouquet had experienced great difficulty in raising troops and supplies and it was not until September, 1764, that he again reached Fort Pitt. But before two months passed he had brought the Delawares and Shawanees to submission and had delivered some 200 white captives from their hands. Meantime, Sir William Johnson, in conjunction with Bradstreet, had held conferences with a great council of 2,000 warriors at Fort Niagara, representing Iroquois, Ottawas, Ojibways, Wyandots and others, and had concluded several treaties of peace. By one of these, with the Senecas, a strip of land four miles wide on each side of Niagara River, from Erie to Ontario, was ceded to the British government. "The Pontiac War, so far as battles and campaigns were concerned, was ended; but Pontiac was still at large and as untamed as ever. His last hope was the Illinois country, where the foot of an English soldier had never trod;" and there he schemed and plotted without avail until 1765. In 1769 he was assassinated, near St. Louis.

W. F. Poole, The West, 1763-1783 (Narrative and Critical History of America, volume 6, chapter 9).

ALSO IN: _F. Parkman, Conspiracy of Pontiac._

S. Farmer, History of Detroit and Michigan, chapter 38.

Historical Account of Bouquet's Expedition.

A. Henry, Travels and Adventures in Canada, part 1, chapters 9-23.

W. L. Stone, Life and Times of Sir William Johnson, volume 2, chapters 9-12.

J. R. Brodhead, Documents Relative to Colonial History New York, volume 7.

PONTIFEX MAXIMUS. PONTIFICES, Roman.

See AUGURS.

PONTIFF, The Roman.

The Pope is often alluded to as the Roman Pontiff, the term implying an analogy between his office and that of the Pontifex Maximus of the ancient Romans.

PONTIFICAL INDICTIONS.

See INDICTIONS.

PONTUS.

See MITHRIDATIC WARS.

PONTUS EUXINUS, EUXINUS PONTUS.

The Black Sea, as named by the Greeks.

PONZA, Naval Battle of (1435).

See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.

POOR LAWS, The English.

"It has been often said and often denied that the monasteries supplied the want which the poor law, two generations after the dissolution of these bodies, enforced. That the monasteries were renowned for their almsgiving is certain. The duty of aiding the needy was universal. Themselves the creatures of charity, they could not deny to others that on which they subsisted. … {2563} It is possible that these institutions created the mendicancy which they relieved, but it cannot be doubted that they assisted much which needed their help. The guilds which existed in the towns were also found in the country villages. … They were convenient instruments for charity before the establishment of a poor law, and they employed no inconsiderable part of their revenues, collected from subscriptions and from lands and tenements, in relieving the indigent and treating poor strangers hospitably. … Before the dissolution of the monasteries, but when this issue was fairly in view, in 1536, an attempt was made to secure some legal provision for destitution. The Act of this year provides that the authorities in the cities and boroughs should collect alms on Sundays and holy days, that the ministers should on all occasions, public and private, stir up the people to contribute to a common fund, that the custom of giving doles by private persons should be forbidden under penalty, and that the church-wardens should distribute the alms when collected. The Act, however, is strictly limited to free gifts, and the obligations of monasteries, almshouses, hospitals, and brotherhoods are expressly maintained. … There was a considerable party in England which was willing enough to see the monasteries destroyed, root and branch, and one of the most obvious means by which this result could be attained would be to allege that all which could be needed for the relief of destitution would be derived from the voluntary offerings of those who contributed so handsomely to the maintenance of indolent and dissolute friars. The public was reconciled to the Dissolution by the promise made that the monastic estates should not be converted to the king's private use, but be devoted towards the maintenance of a military force, and that therefore no more demands should be made on the nation for subsidies and aids. Similarly when the guild lands and chantry lands were confiscated at the beginning of Edward's reign, a promise was made that the estates of these foundations should be devoted to good and proper uses, for erecting grammar schools, for the further augmentation of the universities, and the better provision for the poor and needy. They were swept into the hands of Seymour and Somerset, of the Dudleys and Cecils, and the rest of the crew who surrounded the throne of Edward. It cannot, therefore, I think, be doubted that this violent change of ownership, apart from any considerations of previous practice in these several institutions, must have aggravated whatever evils already existed. … The guardians of Edward attempted, in a savage statute passed in the first year of his reign, to restrain pauperism and vagabondage by reducing the landless and destitute poor to slavery, by branding them, and making them work in chains. The Act, however, only endured for two years. In the last year of Edward's reign two collectors were to be appointed in every parish, who were to wait on every person of substance and inquire what sums he will give weekly to the relief of the poor. The promises are to be entered in a book, and the collectors were authorized to employ the poor in such work as they could perform, paying them from the fund. Those who refused to aid were to be first exhorted by the ministers and church wardens, and if they continued obstinate were to be denounced to the bishop, who is to remonstrate with such uncharitable folk. … In the beginning of Elizabeth's reign (5, cap. 3) the unwilling giver, after being exhorted by the bishop, is to be bound to appear before the justices, in quarter sessions, where, if he be still obdurate to exhortation, the justices are empowered to tax him in a weekly sum, and commit him to prison till he pays. … There was only a step from the process under which a reluctant subscriber to the poor law was assessed by the justices and imprisoned on refusal, to the assessment of all property under the celebrated Act of 43 Elizabeth [1601], cap. 3. The law had provided for the regular appointment of assessors for the levy of rates, for supplying work to the able-bodied, for giving relief to the infirm and old, and for binding apprentices. It now consolidates the experience of the whole reign, defines the kind of property on which the rate is to be levied, prescribes the manner in which the assessors shall be appointed, and inflicts penalties on parties who infringe its provisions. It is singular that the Act was only temporary. It was, by the last clause, only to continue to the end of the next session of parliament. It was, however, renewed, and finally made perpetual by 16 Car. I., cap. 4. The economical history of labour in England is henceforward intimately associated with this remarkable Act. … The Act was to be tentative, indeed, but in its general principles it lasted till 1835. … The effect of poor law relief on the wages of labour was to keep them hopelessly low, to hinder a rise even under the most urgent circumstances."

J. E. Thorold Rogers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages, chapter 15 (volume 2).

"In February 1834 was published perhaps the most remarkable and startling document to be found in the whole range of English, perhaps, indeed, of all, social history. It was the Report upon the administration and practical operation of the Poor Laws by the Commissioners who had been appointed to investigate the subject. … It was their rare good fortune not only to lay bare the existence of abuses and trace them to their roots, but also to propound and enforce the remedies by which they might be cured."

T. W. Fowle, The Poor Law, chapter 4.

"The poor-rate had become public spoil. The ignorant believed it an inexhaustible fund which belonged to them. To obtain their share, the brutal bullied the administrators, the profligate exhibited their bastards which must be fed, the idle folded their arms and waited till they got it; ignorant boys and girls married upon it; poachers, thieves, and prostitutes extorted it by intimidation; country justices lavished it for popularity, and guardians for convenience. This was the way the fund went. As for whence it arose—it came, more and more every year, out of the capital of the shopkeeper and the farmer, and the diminishing resources of the country gentleman. … Instead of the proper number of labourers to till his lands—labourers paid by himself—the farmer was compelled to take double the number, whose wages were paid partly out of the rates; and these men, being employed by compulsion on him, were beyond his control—worked or not as they chose —let down the quality of his land, and disabled him from employing the better men who would have toiled hard for independence. These better men sank down among the worse; the rate-paying cottager, after a vain struggle, went to the pay-table to seek relief; the modest girl might starve, while her bolder neighbour received 1s. 6d. per week for every illegitimate child. {2564} Industry, probity, purity, prudence– all heart and spirit—the whole soul of goodness —were melting down into depravity and social ruin, like snow under the foul internal fires which precede the earthquake. There were clergymen in the commission, as well as politicians and economists; and they took these things to heart, and laboured diligently to frame suggestions for a measure which should heal and recreate the moral spirit as well as the economical condition of society in England. To thoughtful observers it is clear that the … grave aristocratic error … of confounding in one all ranks below a certain level of wealth was at the bottom of much poor-law abuse, as it has been of the opposition to its amendment. … Except the distinction between sovereign and subject, there is no social difference in England so wide as that between the independent labourer and the pauper; and it is equally ignorant, immoral, and impolitic to confound the two. This truth was so apparent to the commissioners, and they conveyed it so fully to the framers of the new poor-law, that it forms the very foundation of the measure. … Enlightened by a prodigious accumulation of evidence, the commissioners offered their suggestions to government; and a bill to amend the poor-law was prepared and proposed to the consideration of parliament early in 1834. … If one main object of the reform was to encourage industry, it was clearly desirable to remove the impediments to the circulation of labour. Settlement by hiring and service was to exist no longer; labour could freely enter any parish where it was wanted, and leave it for another parish which might, in its turn, want hands. In observance of the great principle that the independent labourer was not to be sacrificed to the pauper, all administration of relief to the able-bodied at their own homes was to be discontinued as soon as possible; and the allowance system was put an end to entirely. … Henceforth, the indigent must come into the workhouse for relief, if he must have it. … The able-bodied should work—should do a certain amount of work for every meal. They might go out after the expiration of twenty-four hours; but while in the house they must work. The men, women, and children must be separated; and the able-bodied and infirm. … In order to a complete and economical classification in the workhouses, and for other obvious reasons, the new act provided for unions of parishes. … To afford the necessary control over such a system … a central board was indispensable, by whose orders, and through whose assistant-commissioners, everything was to be arranged, and to whom all appeals were to be directed. … Of the changes proposed by the new law, none was more important to morals than that which threw the charge of the maintenance of illegitimate children upon the mother. … The decrease of illegitimate births was what many called wonderful, but only what the framers of the law had anticipated from the removal of direct pecuniary inducement to profligacy, and from the awakening of proper care in parents of daughters, and of reflection in the women themselves. … On the 14th of August 1834, the royal assent was given to the Poor–law Amendment Act, amidst prognostications of utter failure from the timid, and some misgivings among those who were most confident of the absolute necessity of the measure. … Before two years were out, wages were rising and rates were falling in the whole series of country parishes; farmers were employing more labourers; surplus labour was absorbed; bullying paupers were transformed into steady working-men; the decrease of illegitimate births, chargeable to the parish, throughout England, was nearly 10,000, or nearly 13 per cent.; … and, finally, the rates, which had risen nearly a million in their annual amount during the five years before the poor-law commission was issued, sank down, in the course of the five years after it, from being upwards of seven millions to very little above four."

H. Martineau, A History of the Thirty Years Peace, book 4, chapter 7 (volume 2).

In 1838 the Act was extended to Ireland, and in 1845 to Scotland.

T. W. Fowle, The Poor Law, chapter 4.

"The new Poor Law was passed by Parliament in 1834; and the oversight of its administration was placed in the hands of a special board of commissioners, then known as the Central Poor Law Board. This board, which was not represented in Parliament, was continued until 1847. In that year it was reconstructed and placed under the presidency of a minister with a seat in the House of Commons—a reconstruction putting it on a political level with the Home Office and the other important Government Departments at Whitehall. The Department was henceforward known as the Poor Law Board, and continued to be so named until 1871, when there was another reconstruction. This time the Poor Law Board took over from the Home Office various duties in respect of municipal government and public health, and from the Privy Council the oversight of the administration of the vaccination laws and other powers, and its title was changed to that of the Local Government Board. Since then hardly a session of Parliament has passed in which its duties and responsibilities have not been added to, until at the present time the Local Government Board is more directly in touch with the people of England and Wales than any other Government Department. There is not a village in the land which its inspectors do not visit or to which the official communications of the Board are not addressed."

E. Porritt, The Englishman at Home, chapter 2.

ALSO IN: _Sir G. Nicholls, History of the English Poor-Law._

_F. Peek, Social Wreckage._

POOR MEN OF LYONS. POOR MEN OF LOMBARDY.

See WALDENSES.

POOR PRIESTS OF LOLLARDY, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1360-1414.

POPE, General John. Capture of New Madrid and Island Number Ten.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (MARCH-APRIL: ON THE .MISSISSIPPI).

Command of the Army of the Mississippi.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (APRIL-MAY: TENNESSEE-MISSISSIPPI).

Virginia campaign.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (JULY-AUGUST: VIRGINIA); (AUGUST: VIRGINIA); and (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER: VIRGINIA).

POPE, The.

See PAPACY.

POPHAM COLONY, The.

See MAINE: A. D. 1607-1608.

POPISH PLOT, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1678-1679.

POPOL VUH, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: QUICHES.

{2565}

POPOLOCAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CHONTALS.

POPULARES.

See OPTIMATES.

PORNOCRACY AT ROME.

See ROME: A. D. 903-964.

PORT GIBSON, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (APRIL-JULY: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

PORT HUDSON, Siege and capture of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (MAY-JULY: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

PORT JACKSON: A. D. 1770-1788. The discovery. The naming. The first settlement.

See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1601-1800.

PORT MAHON.

See MINORCA.

PORT PHILLIP DISTRICT.

See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1800-1840, and 1839-1855.

PORT REPUBLIC, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 MAY-JUNE: VIRGINIA).

----------PORT ROYAL: Start--------

PORT ROYAL, The Jansenists: A. D. 1602-1660. The monastery under Mère Angelique and the hermits of the Port Royal Valley. Their acceptance of the doctrines of Jansenius. Their conflict with the Jesuits.

"The monastery of Port Royal … was founded in the beginning of the 13th century, in the reign of Philip Augustus; and a later tradition claimed this magnificent monarch as the author of its foundation and of its name. … But this is the story of a time when, as it has been said, 'royal founders were in fashion.' More truly, the name is considered to be derived from the general designation of the fief or district in which the valley lies, Porrois—which, again, is supposed to be a corruption of Porra or Borra, meaning a marshy and woody hollow. The valley of Port Royal presents to this day the same natural features which attracted the eye of the devout solitary in the seventeenth century. … It lies about eighteen miles west of Paris, and seven or eight from Versailles, on the road to Chevreuse. … The monastery was founded, not by Philip Augustus, but by Matthieu, first Lord of Marli, a younger son of the noble house of Montmorency. Having formed the design of accompanying the crusade proclaimed by Innocent III. to the Holy Land, he left at the disposal of his wife, Mathilde de Garlande, and his kinsman, the Bishop of Paris, a sum of money to devote to some pious work in his absence. They agreed to apply it to the erection of a monastery for nuns in this secluded valley, that had already acquired a reputation for sanctity in connection with the old chapel dedicated to St. Lawrence, which attracted large numbers of worshippers. The foundations of the church and monastery were laid in 1204. They were designed by the same architect who built the Cathedral of Amiens, and ere long the graceful and beautiful structures were seen rising in the wilderness. The nuns belonged to the Cistercian order. Their dress was white woollen, with a black veil; but afterwards they adopted as their distinctive badge a large scarlet cross on their white scapulary, as the symbol of the 'Institute of the Holy Sacrament.' The abbey underwent the usual history of such institutions. Distinguished at first by the strictness of its discipline and the piety of its inmates, it became gradually corrupted with increasing wealth, till, in the end of the sixteenth century, it had grown notorious for gross and scandalous abuses. … But at length its revival arose out of one of the most obvious abuses connected with it. The patronage of the institution, like that of others, had been distributed without any regard to the fitness of the occupants, even to girls of immature age. In this manner the abbey of Port Royal accidentally fell to the lot of one who was destined by her ardent piety to breathe a new life into it, and by her indomitable and lofty genius to give it an undying reputation. Jacqueline Marie Arnauld—better known by her official name, La Mère Angélique—was appointed abbess of Port Royal when she was only eight years of age. She was descended from a distinguished family belonging originally to the old noblesse of Provence, but which had migrated to Auvergne and settled there. Of vigorous healthiness, both mental and physical, the Arnaulds had already acquired a merited position and name in the annals of France. In the beginning of the sixteenth century it found its way to Paris in the person of Antoine Arnauld, Seigneur de la Mothe, the grandfather of the heroine of Port Royal. … Antoine Arnauld married the youthful daughter of M. Marion, the Avocat-general. … The couple had twenty children, and felt, as may be imagined, the pressure of providing for so many. Out of this pressure came the remarkable lot of two of the daughters. The benefices of the Church were a fruitful field of provision, and the avocat-general, the maternal grandfather of the children, had large ecclesiastical influence. The result was the appointment not only of one daughter to the abbey of Port Royal, but also of a younger sister, Agnes, only six years of age, to the abbey of St Cyr, about six miles distant from Port Royal. … At the age of eleven, in the year 1602, Angélique was installed Abbess of Port Royal. Her sister took the veil at the age of seven. … The remarkable story of Angélique's conversion by the preaching of a Capucin friar in 1608, her strange contest with her parents which followed, the strengthening impulses in different directions which her religious life received, first from the famous St Francis de Sales, and finally, and especially, from the no less remarkable Abbé de St Cyran, all belong to the history of Port Royal."

J. Tulloch, Pascal, chapter 4.

"The numbers at the Port Royal had increased to eighty, and the situation was so unhealthy that there were many deaths. In 1626 they moved to Paris, and the abbey in the fields remained for many years deserted. M. Zamet, a pious but not a great man, for a while had the spiritual charge of the Port Royal, but in 1634 the abbé of St. Cyran became its director. To his influence is due the position it took in the coming conflict of Jansenism, and the effects of his teachings can be seen in the sisters, and in most of the illustrious recluses who attached themselves to the monastery. St. Cyran had been an early associate of Jansenius, whose writings became such a fire-brand in the Church. As young men they devoted the most of five years to an intense study of St. Augustine. It is said Jansenius read all of his works ten times, and thirty times his treatises against the Pelagians. The two students resolved to attempt a reformation in the belief of the Church, which they thought was falling away from many of the tenets of the father. {2566} Jansenius was presently made bishop of Ypres by the Spanish as a reward for a political tract, but he pursued his studies in his new bishopric. … In 1640, the Augustinus appeared, in which the bishop of Ypres sought, by a full reproduction of the doctrines of St. Augustine, to bring the Church back from the errors of the Pelagians to the pure and severe tenets of the great father. The doctrine of grace, the very corner–stone of the Christian faith, was that which Jansenius labored to revive. Saint Augustine had taught that, before the fall of our first parents, man, being in astute of innocence, could of his own free will do works acceptable to God; but after that his nature was so corrupted, that no good thing could proceed from it, save only as divine grace worked upon him. This grace God gave as He saw fit, working under his eternal decrees, and man, except as predestined and elected to its sovereign help, could accomplish no righteous act, and must incur God's just wrath. But the Pelagians and semi-Pelagians had departed from this doctrine, and attributed a capacity to please God, to man's free will and the deeds proceeding from it—a belief which could but foster his carnal pride and hasten his damnation. The Jesuits were always desirous to teach religion so that it could most easily be accepted, and they had inclined to semi-Pelagian doctrines, rather than to the difficult truths of St. Augustine. Yet no one questioned his authority. The dispute was as to the exact interpretation of his writings. Jansenius claimed to have nothing in his great book save the very word of Augustine, or its legitimate result. The Jesuits replied that his writings contained neither the doctrine of Augustine nor the truth of God. They appealed to the Pope for the condemnation of these heresies. Jansenius had died before the publication of his book, but his followers, who were soon named after him, endeavored to defend his works from censure. … It was not until 1653 that the influence of the Jesuits succeeded in obtaining the condemnation of the offending book. In that year, Innocent X. issued a bull, by which he condemned as heretical five propositions contained in the Augustinus. … The members of the Port Royal adopted the Jansenist cause. Saint Cyran had been a fellow worker with Jansenius, and he welcomed the Augustinus as a book to revive and purify the faith of the Church. … The rigid predestinarianism of Jansen had a natural attraction for the stern zeal of the Port Royal. The religion of the convent and of those connected with it bordered on asceticism. They lived in the constant awe of God, seeking little communion with the world, and offering to it little compromise. … An intense and rigorous religious life adopts an intense and rigorous belief. The Jansenists resembled the English and American Puritans. They shared their Calvinistic tenets and their strict morality. A Jansenist, said the Jesuits, is a Calvinist saying mass. No accusation was more resented by those of the Jansenist party. They sought no alliance with the Protestants. Saint Cyran and Arnauld wrote prolifically against the Calvinists. They were certainly separated from the latter by their strong devotion to two usages of the Catholic Church which were especially objectionable to Protestants—the mass and the confessional. … In 1647, Mother Angelique with some of the sisters returned to Port Royal in the Fields. The convent at Paris continued in close relations with it, but the abbey in the fields was to exhibit the most important phases of devotional life. Before the return of the sisters, this desolate spot had begun to be the refuge for many eminent men, whose careers became identified with the fate of the abbey. 'We saw arrive,' writes one of them, 'from diverse provinces, men of different professions, who, like mariners that had suffered shipwreck, came to seck the Port.' M. le Maitre, a nephew of Mother Angelique, a lawyer of much prominence, a counsellor of state, a favorite of the chancellor and renowned for his eloquent harangues, abandoned present prosperity and future eminence, and in 1638 built a little house, near the monastery, and became the first of those who might be called the hermits of the Port Royal. Not taking orders, nor becoming a member of any religious body, he sought a life of lonely devotion in this barren place. … Others gradually followed, until there grew up a community, small in numbers, but strong in influence, united in study, in penance, in constant praise and worship. Though held together by no formal vows, few of those who put hand to the plough turned back from the work. They left their beloved retreat only when expelled by force, and with infinite regret. The monastery itself had become dilapidated. It was surrounded by stagnant waters, and the woods near by were full of snakes. But the recluses found religious joy amid this desolation. … As their numbers increased they did much, however, to improve the desolate retreat they had chosen. … Some of the recluses cultivated the ground. Others even made shoes, and the Jesuits dubbed them the cobblers. They found occupation not only in such labors and in solitary meditation, but in the more useful work of giving the young an education that was sound in learning and grounded in piety. The schools of the Port Royal had a troubled existence of about fifteen years. Though they rarely had over fifty pupils, yet in this brief period they left their mark. Racine, Tillemont, and many others of fruitful scholarship and piety were among the pupils who were watched and trained by the grave anchorites with a tender and fostering care. … The judicious teachers of the Port Royal taught reading in French, and in many ways did much to improve the methods of French instruction and scholarship. The children were thoroughly trained also in Greek and Latin, in logic and mathematics. Their teachers published admirable manuals for practical study in many branches. 'They sought,' says one, 'to render study more agreeable than play or games.' The jealousy of the Jesuits, who were well aware of the advantages of controlling the education of the young, at last obtained the order for the final dispersion of these little schools, and in 1660 they were closed for ever. Besides these manuals for teaching, the literature of the Port Royal comprised many controversial works, chief among them the forty-two volumes of Arnauld. It furnished also a translation of the Bible by Saci, which, though far from possessing the merits of the English version of King James, is one of the best of the many French translations. But the works of Blaise Pascal were the great productions of the Port Royal, as he himself was its chief glory. The famous Provincial Letters originated from the controversy over Jansenism, though they soon turned from doctrinal questions to an attack on the morality of the Jesuits that permanently injured the influence of that body."

J. B. Perkins, France under Mazarin, chapter 20 (volume 2).

ALSO IN: _M. A. Schimmelpenninck, Select Memoirs of Port Royal._

{2567}

PORT ROYAL: A. D. 1702-1715. Renewed persecution. Suppression and destruction of the Monastery. The odious Bull Unigenitus, and its tyrannical enforcement.

"The Jesuits had been for some time at a low ebb, in the beginning of the 18th century, the Cardinal de Noailles, Archbishop of Paris, then ruling the King through Madame de Maintenon, and himself submitting to the direction of Bossuet. The imprudence of the Jansenists, their indefatigable spirit of dispute, restored to their enemies the opportunity to retrieve their position. In 1702, forty Sorbonne doctors resuscitated the celebrated question of fact concerning the five propositions of Jansenius, and maintained that, in the presence of the decisions of the Church on points of fact and not of dogma, a respectful silence sufficed without internal acquiescence. Some other propositions of a Jansenistic tendency accompanied this leading question. Bossuet hastened to interfere to stifle the matter, and to induce the doctors to retract. … Thirty-nine doctors retracted out of forty. The King forbade the publication thenceforth of anything concerning these matters, but, in his own name, and that of Philip V. [of Spain, his grandson], entreated Pope Clement XI. to renew the constitutions of his predecessors against Jansenism. … Clement XI. responded to the King's wishes by a Bull which fell in the midst of the assembly of the clergy in 1705. Cardinal de Noailles, who presided, made reservations against the infallibility of the Church in affairs of fact. The assembly, animated with a Gallican spirit, accepted the Bull, but established that the constitutions of the Popes bind the whole Church only when they have been accepted by the bodies of the pastors,' and that this acceptance on the part of the bishops is made 'by way of judgment.' The court of Rome was greatly offended that the bishops should claim to 'judge' after it, and this gave rise to long negotiations: the King induced the bishops to offer to the Pope extenuating explanations. The Jesuits, however, regained the ascendency at Versailles, and prepared against Cardinal de Noailles a formidable engine of war." The Cardinal had given his approval, some years before, to a work—"Moral Reflections on the New Testament"—published by Father Quesnel, who afterwards became a prominent Jansenist. The Jesuits now procured the condemnation of this work, by the congregation of the Index, and a decree from the Pope prohibiting it. "This was a rude assault on Cardinal de Noailles. The decree, however, was not received in France, through a question of form, or rather, perhaps, because the King was then dissatisfied with the Pope, on account of the concessions of Clement XI. to the House of Austria. The Jansenists gained nothing thereby. At this very moment, a terrible blow was about to fall on the dearest and most legitimate object of their veneration." The nuns of Port-Royal of the Fields having refused to subscribe to the papal constitution of 1705, the Pope had subjected them to the Abbess of Port-Royal of Paris, "who did not share their Augustinian faith (1708). They resisted. Meanwhile, Father La Chaise [the King's confessor] died, and Le Tellier succeeded him. The affair was carried to the most extreme violence. Cardinal de Noailles, a man of pure soul and feeble character, was persuaded, in order to prove that he was not a Jansenist, to cruelty, despite himself, towards the rebellious nuns. They were torn from their monastery and dispersed through different convents (November, 1709). The illustrious abbey of Port-Royal, hallowed, even in the eyes of unbelievers, by the name of so many great men, by the memory of so much virtue, was utterly demolished, by the order of the lieutenant of police, D'Argenson. Two years after, as if it were designed to exile even the shades that haunted the valley, the dead of Port-Royal were exhumed, and their remains transferred to a village cemetery (at Magny). Noailles, while he entered into this persecution, took the same course, nevertheless, as the nuns of Port-Royal, by refusing to retract the approbation which he had given to the 'Moral Reflections.' Le Tellier caused him to be denounced to the King. … The King prohibited Quesnel's book by a decree in council (November 11, 1711), and demanded of the Pope a new condemnation of this book, in a form that could be received in France. The reply of Clement XI. was delayed until September 8, 1713; this was the celebrated Unigenitus Bull, the work of Le Tellier far more than of the Pope, and which, instead of the general terms of the Bull of 1708, expressly condemned 101 propositions extracted from the 'Moral Reflections.' … The Bull dared condemn the very words of St. Augustine and of St. Paul himself; there were propositions, on other matters than grace, the condemnation of which was and should have been scandalous, and seemed veritably the triumph of Jesuitism over Christianity; for example, those concerning the necessity of the love of God. It had dared to condemn this: 'There is no God, there is no religion, where there is not charity.' This was giving the pontifical sanction to the Jesuitical theories most contrary to the general spirit of Christian theology. It was the same with the maxims relative to the Holy Scriptures. The Pope had anathematized the following propositions: 'The reading of the Holy Scriptures is for all. Christians should keep the Sabbath-day holy by reading the Scriptures; it is dangerous to deprive them of these.' And also this: 'The fear of unjust excommunication should not prevent us from doing our duty.' This was overturning all political Gallicanism." The acceptance of the Bull was strongly but vainly resisted. The King and the King's malignant confessor spared no exercise of their unbridled power to compel submission to it. "It was endeavored to stifle by terror public opinion contrary to the Bull: exiles, imprisonments, were multiplied from day to day." And still, when Louis XIV. died, on the 1st day of September, 1715, the struggle was not at an end.

H. Martin, History of France: Age of Louis XIV., volume 2, chapter 6.

{2568}

"It is now time that I should say something of the infamous bull Unigenitus, which by the unsurpassed audacity and scheming of Father Le Tellier and his friends was forced upon the Pope and the world. I need not enter into a very lengthy account of the celebrated Papal decree which has made so many martyrs, depopulated our schools, introduced ignorance, fanaticism, and misrule, rewarded vice, thrown the whole community into the greatest confusion, caused disorder everywhere, and established the most arbitrary and the most barbarous inquisition; evils which have doubled within the last thirty years. I will content myself with a word or two, and will not blacken further the pages of my Memoirs. … It is enough to say that the new bull condemned in set terms the doctrines of St. Paul, … and also those of St. Augustin, and of other fathers; doctrines which have always been adopted by the Popes, by the Councils, and by the Church itself. The bull, as soon as published, met with a violent opposition in Rome from the cardinals there, who went by sixes, by eights, and by tens, to complain of it to the Pope. … He protested … that the publication had been made without his knowledge, and put off the cardinals with compliments, excuses, and tears, which last he could always command. The constitution had the same fate in France as in Rome. The cry against it was universal."

Duke of Saint Simon, Memoirs (abridged translation by St. John), volume 3, chapter 6.

"Jansenism … laid hold upon all ecclesiastical bodies with very few exceptions, it predominated altogether in theological literature; all public schools that were not immediately under the Jesuits, or, as in Spain, under the Inquisition, held Jansenist opinions, at least so far as the majority of their theologians were concerned. In Rome itself this teaching was strongly represented amongst the cardinals." Fenelon declared "that nobody knew—now that the controversy and the condemnations had gone on for sixty years—in what the erroneous doctrine exactly consisted; for the Roman court stuck fast to the principle of giving no definition of what ought to be believed, so that the same doctrine which it apparently rejected in one form, was unhesitatingly accepted at Rome itself when expressed in other though synonymous terms. … The same thing which under one name was condemned, was under another, as the teaching of the Thomists or Augustinians, declared to be perfectly orthodox. … Just because nobody could tell in what sense such propositions as those taken from the works of Jansenius or Quesnel were to be rejected, did they become valuable; for the whole question was turned into one of blind obedience and submission, without previous investigation. The Jesuit D'Aubenton, who as Tellier's agent in Rome had undertaken to procure that the passages selected from Quesnel's book should be condemned, repeatedly informed his employer that at Rome everything turned upon the papal infallibility; to get this passed whilst the king was ready to impose, by force of arms, upon the bishops and clergy the unquestioning acceptance of the papal constitution, was the only object."

J. I. von Döllinger, Studies in European History, chapter 12.

ALSO IN: W. H. Jarvis, History of the Church of France, volume 2, chapters 5-7.

F. Rocquain, The Revolutionary Spirit preceding the French Revolution, chapter 1.

----------PORT ROYAL: End--------

----------PORT ROYAL, Nova Scotia: Start--------

PORT ROYAL, Nova Scotia: A. D. 1603-1613. Settled by the French, and destroyed by the English.

See CANADA: A. D. 1603-1605; 1606-1608; and 1610-1613.

PORT ROYAL, Nova Scotia: A. D. 1690. Taken by an expedition from Massachusetts.

See CANADA: A. D. 1689-1690.

PORT ROYAL, Nova Scotia: A. D. 1691. Recovered by the French.

See CANADA: A. D. 1692-1697.

PORT ROYAL, Nova Scotia: A. D. 1710. Final conquest by the English and change of name to Annapolis Royal.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1702-1710.

----------PORT ROYAL, Nova Scotia: End--------

PORT ROYAL EXPEDITION, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER: SOUTH CAROLINA-GEORGIA).

PORTCHESTER, Origin of.

See PORTUS MAGNUS.

PORTE, The Sublime.

See SUBLIME PORTE; also PHARAOH.

PORTEOUS RIOT, The.

See EDINBURGH: A. D. 1736.

PORTER, Admiral David D.: Capture of New Orleans.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (APRIL: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

Second attempt against Vicksburg.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (DECEMBER: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

PORTICO, The Athenian, Suppression of.

See ATHENS: A. D. 529.

PORTLAND MINISTRY, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1806-1812.

PORTO NOVO, Battle of (1781).

See INDIA: A. D. 1780-1783.

PORTO RICO: Discovery by Columbus (1493).

See AMERICA: A. D. 1493-1496.

PORTO VENERE, Naval Battle of (1494).

See ITALY: A. D. 1494-1496.

PORTOBELLO: A. D. 1668.

Capture by the Buccaneers.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1639-1700.

PORTOBELLO: A. D. 1740. Capture by Admiral Vernon.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1739-1741.

PORTOLONGO, or Sapienza, Battle of (1354).

See CONSTANTINOPLE: A. D. 1348-1355.

----------PORTUGAL: Start--------

PORTUGAL: Early history. Mistaken identification with ancient Lusitania. Roman, Gothic, Moorish and Spanish conquests. The county of Henry of Burgundy.

"The early history of the country, which took the name of Portugal from the county which formed the nucleus of the future kingdom, is identical with that of the rest of the Iberian peninsula, but deserves some slight notice because of an old misconception, immortalized in the title of the famous epic of Camoens, and not yet entirely eradicated even from modern ideas. Portugal, like the rest of the peninsula, was originally inhabited by men of the prehistoric ages. … There seems to be no doubt that the Celts, the first Aryan immigrants, were preceded by a non-Aryan race, which is called by different writers the Iberian or Euskaldunac nation, but this earlier race speedily amalgamated with the Celts, and out of the two together were formed the five tribes inhabiting the Iberian peninsula, which Strabo names as the Cantabrians, the Vasconians, the Asturians, the Gallicians and the Lusitanians. It is Strabo, also, who mentions the existence of Greek colonies at the mouth of the Tagus, Douro, and Minho, and it is curious to note that the old name of Lisbon, Olisipo, was from the earliest times identified with that of the hero of the Odyssey, and was interpreted to mean the city of Ulysses. … {2569} The Carthaginians, though they had colonies all over the peninsula, established their rule mainly over the south and east of it, having their capital at Carthagena or Nova Carthago, and seem to have neglected the more barbarous northern and western provinces. It was for this reason that the Romans found far more difficulty in subduing these latter provinces. … In 189 B. C. Lucius Æmilius Paullus defeated the Lusitanians, and in 185 B. C. Gaius Calpurnius forced his way across the Tagus. There is no need here to discuss the gradual conquest by the Romans of that part of the peninsula which includes the modern kingdom of Portugal, but it is necessary to speak of the gallant shepherd Viriathus, who sustained a stubborn war against the Romans from 149 B. C. until he was assassinated in 139 B. C., because he has been generally claimed as the first national hero of Portugal. This claim has been based upon the assumed identification of the modern Portugal with the ancient Lusitania [see LUSITANIA, an identification which has spread its roots deep in Portuguese literature, and has until recently been generally accepted. … The Celtic tribe of Lusitanians dwelt, according to Strabo, in the districts north of the Tagus, while the Lusitania of the Latin historians of the Republic undoubtedly lay to the south of that river, though it was not used as the name of a province until the time of Augustus, when the old division of the peninsula into Hispania Citerior and Hispania Ulterior was superseded by the division into Betica, Tarraconensis, and Lusitania. Neither in this division, nor in the division of the peninsula into the five provinces of Tarraconensis, Carthaginensis, Betica, Lusitania, and Gallicia, under Hadrian, was the province called Lusitania coterminous with the modern kingdom of Portugal. Under each division the name was given to a district south of the Tagus. … It is important to grasp the result of this misconception, for it emphasizes the fact that the history of Portugal for many centuries is merged in that of the rest of the Iberian peninsula, and explains why it is unnecessary to study the wars of the Lusitanians with the Roman Republic, as is often done in histories of Portugal. Like the rest of the peninsula Portugal was thoroughly Latinized in the days of the Roman Empire; Roman 'coloniæ', and 'municipia' were established in places suited for trade, such as Lisbon and Oporto. … Peaceful existence under the sway of Rome continued until the beginning of the 5th century, when the Goths first forced their way across the Pyrenees. …

See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 410-419.

The Visigothic Empire left but slight traces in Portugal." The Mohammedan conquest by the Arab-Moors, which began early in the 8th century, extended to Portugal, and for a general account of the struggle in the peninsula between Christians and Moslems during several succeeding centuries the reader is referred to SPAIN: A. D. 711-713, and after. "In 997 Bermudo II., king of Gallicia, won back the first portion of modern Portugal from the Moors by seizing Oporto and occupying the province now known as the Entre Minho e Douro. … In 1055 Ferdinand 'the Great,' king of Leon, Castile, and Gallicia, invaded the Beira; in 1057 he took Lamego and Viseu; and in 1064 Coimbra, where he died in the following year. He arranged for the government of his conquests in the only way possible under the feudal system, by forming them into a county, extending to the Mondego, with Coimbra as its capital. The first count of Coimbra was Sesnando, a recreant Arab vizir, who had advised Ferdinand to invade his district and had assisted in its easy conquest. … But though Sesnando's county of Coimbra was the great frontier county of Gallicia, and the most important conquest of Ferdinand 'the Great,' it was not thence that the kingdom which was to develop out of his dominions was to take its name. Among the counties of Gallicia was one called the 'comitatus Portucalensis,' because it contained within its boundaries the famous city at the mouth of the Douro, known in Roman and Greek times as the Portus Cale, and in modern days as Oporto, or 'The Port.' This county of Oporto or Portugal was the one destined to give its name to the future kingdom, and was held at the time of Ferdinand's death by Nuno Mendes, the founder of one of the most famous families in Portuguese history. Ferdinand 'the Great' was succeeded in his three kingdoms of Castile, Leon, and Gallicia, by his three sons, Sancho, Alfonso, and Garcia, the last of whom received the two counties of Coimbra and Oporto as fiefs of Gallicia, and maintained Nuno Mendes and Sesnando as his feudatories." Wars between the three sons ensued, as the result of which "the second of them, Alfonso of Leon, eventually united all his father's kingdoms in 1073, as Alfonso VI." This Alfonso was now called upon to encounter a new impulse of Mohammedan aggression, under a new dynasty, that of the Almoravides

See ALMORAVIDES.

"The new dynasty collected great Moslem armies, and in 1086 Yusuf Ibn Teshfin routed Alfonso utterly at the battle of Zalaca, and reconquered the peninsula up to the Ebro. … Alfonso tried to compensate for this defeat and his loss of territory in the east of his dominions by conquests in the west, and in 1093 he advanced to the Tagus and took Santarem and Lisbon, and made Sueiro Mendes, count of the new district. But these conquests he did not hold for long. … In 1093 Seyr, the general of the Almoravide caliph Yusuf, took Evora from the Emir of Badajoz; in 1094 he took Badajoz itself, and killed the emir; and retaking Lisbon and Santarem forced his way up to the Mondego. To resist this revival of the Mohammedan power, Alfonso summoned the chivalry of Christendom to his aid. Among the knights who joined his army eager to win their spurs, and win dominions for themselves, were Count Raymond of Toulouse and Count Henry of Burgundy. To the former, Alfonso gave his legitimate daughter, Urraca, and Gallicia; to the latter, his illegitimate daughter Theresa, and the counties of Oporto and Coimbra, with the title of Count of Portugal. The history of Portugal now becomes distinct from that of the rest of the peninsula, and it is from the year 1095 that the history of Portugal commences. The son of Henry of Burgundy was the great monarch Affonso Henriques, the hero of his country and the founder of a great dynasty."

H. M. Stephens, The Story of Portugal, chapter 1.

{2570}

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1095-1325. The county made independent and raised to the rank of a kingdom. Completion of conquests from the Moors. Limits of the kingdom established.

Count Henry of Burgundy waged war for seven years with his Moorish neighbors; then went crusading to Palestine for two years. On his return in 1105 he made common cause with his brother-in-law and brother-adventurer, Count Raymond of Gallicia, against the suspected intention of King Alfonso to declare his bastard, half-Moorish son, Sancho, the heir to his dominions. "This peaceful arrangement had no result, owing to the death of Count Raymond in 1107, followed by that of young Sancho at the battle of Uclés with the Moors, in 1108, and finally by the death of Alfonso VI. himself in 1109. The king's death brought about the catastrophe. He left all his dominions to his legitimate daughter, Urraca, with the result that there was five years of fierce fighting between Henry of Burgundy, Alfonso Raimundes, the son of Count Raymond, Alfonso I. of Aragon, and Queen Urraca. … While they fought with each other the Mohammedans advanced. … On May 1, 1114, Count Henry died, … leaving his wife Theresa as regent during the minority of his son Affonso Henriques, who was but three years old. Theresa, who made the ancient city of Guimaraens her capital, devoted all her energies to building up her son's dominions into an independent state; and under her rule, while the Christian states of Spain were torn by internecine war, the Portuguese began to recognize Portugal as their country, and to cease from calling themselves Gallicians. This distinction between Portugal and Gallicia was the first step towards the formation of a national spirit, which grew into a desire for national independence." The regency of Theresa, during which she was engaged in many contests, with her half-sister Urraca and others, ended in 1128. In the later years of it she provoked great discontent by her infatuation with a lover to whom she was passionately devoted. In the end, her son headed a revolt which expelled her from Portugal. The son, Affonso Henriques, assumed the reins of government at the age of seventeen years. In 1130 he began a series of wars with Alfonso VII. of Castile, the aim of which was to establish the independence of Portugal. These wars were ended in 1140 by an agreement, "in consonance with the ideas of the times, to refer the great question of Portuguese Independence to a chivalrous contest. In a great tournament, known as the Tourney of Valdevez, the Portuguese knights were entirely successful over those of Castile, and in consequence of their victory Affonso Henriques assumed the title of King of Portugal. This is the turning-point of Portuguese history, and it is a curious fact that the independence of Portugal from Gallicia was achieved by victory in a tournament and not in war. Up to 1136, Affonso Henriques had styled himself Infante, in imitation of the title borne by his mother; from 1136 to 1140 he styled himself Principe, and in 1140 he first took the title of King." A little before this time, on the 25th of July, 1139, Affonso had defeated the Moors in a famous and much magnified battle—namely that of Orik or Ourique—"which, until modern investigators examined the facts, has been considered to have laid the foundations of the independence of Portugal. Chroniclers, two centuries after the battle, solemnly asserted that five kings were defeated on this occasion, that 200,000 Mohammedans were slain, and that after the victory the Portuguese soldiers raised Affonso on their shields and hailed him as king. This story is absolutely without authority from contemporary chronicles, and is quite as much a fiction as the Cortes of Lamego, which has been invented as sitting in 1143 and passing the constitutional laws on which Vertot and other writers have expended so much eloquence. … It was not until the modern school of historians arose in Portugal, which examined documents and did not take the statements of their predecessors on trust, that it was clearly pointed out that Affonso Henriques won his crown by his long struggle with his Christian cousin, and not by his exploits against the Moors."

H. M. Stephens, The Story of Portugal, chapters 2-3.

"The long reign of Affonso I., an almost uninterrupted period of war, is the most brilliant epoch in the history of the Portuguese conquests. Lisbon, which had already under its Moorish masters become the chief city of the west, was taken in 1147, and became at once the capital of the new kingdom. The Tagus itself was soon passed. Large portions of the modern Estremadura and Alemtejo were permanently annexed. The distant provinces of Algarve and Andalucia were overrun; and even Seville trembled at the successes of the Portuguese. It was in vain that Moorish vessels sailed from Africa to chastise the presumption of their Christian foes; their ships were routed off Lisbon by the vessels of Affonso; their armies were crushed by a victory at Santarem [1184], the last, and perhaps the most glorious of the many triumphs of the King. … Every conquest saw the apportionment of lands to be held by military tenure among the conquerors; and the Church, which was here essentially a militant one, received not only an endowment for its religion but a reward for its sword. The Orders of St. Michael and of Avis [St. Benedict of Avis] which were founded had a religious as well as a military aspect. Their members were to be distinguished by their piety not less than by their courage, and were to emulate the older brotherhoods of Jerusalem and of Castile. … Sancho I. [who succeeded his father Affonso in 1185], though not adverse to military fame, endeavoured to repair his country's wounds; and his reign, the complement of that of Affonso, was one of development rather than of conquest. … The surname of El Povoador, the Founder, is the indication of his greatest work. New towns and villages arose, new wealth and strength were given to the rising country. Affonso II. [1211] continued what Sancho had begun; and the enactment of laws, humane and wise, are a testimony of progress, and an honourable distinction to his reign." But Affonso II. provoked the hostility of an arrogant and too powerful clergy, and drew upon himself a sentence of excommunication from Rome. "The divisions and the weakness which were caused by the contest between the royal and ecclesiastical authority brought misery upon the kingdom. The reign of Sancho II. [who succeeded to the throne in 1223] was more fatally influenced by them even than that of his father. … The now familiar terrors of excommunication and interdict were followed [1245] by a sentence of deposition from Innocent IV.; and Sancho, weak in character, and powerless before a hostile priesthood and a disaffected people, retired to end his days in a cloister of Castile. The successor to Sancho was Affonso III. {2571} He had intrigued for his brother's crown; he had received the support of the priesthood, and he had promised them their reward in the extension of their privileges"; but his administration of the government was wise and popular. He died in 1279. "The first period of the history of Portugal is now closed. Up to this time, each reign, disturbed and enfeebled though it may have been, had added something to the extent of the country. But now the last conquest from the Moors had been won. On the south, the impassable barrier of the ocean; on the east, the dominions of Castile, confined the kingdom. … The crusading days were over. … The reign of Denis, who ruled from 1279 to 1325, is at once the parallel to that of Affonso I. in its duration and importance, the contrast to it in being a period of internal progress instead of foreign conquest. … That Denis should have been able to accomplish as much as he did, was the wonder even of his own age. … Successive reigns still found the country progressing."

C. F. Johnstone, Historical Abstracts, chapter 4.

ALSO IN: E. McMurdo, History of Portugal, volume 1, books 1-4, and volume 2, book 1.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1383-1385. The founding of the new dynasty, of the House of Avis.

"The legitimate descent of the kings of Portugal from Count Henry, of the house of Burgundy, terminated with Ferdinand (the son of Peter I.) … in 1383. After wasting the resources of his people in the vain support of his claims to the crown of Castile, exposing Lisbon to a siege, and the whole country to devastation, this monarch gave his youthful daughter in marriage to the natural enemy of Portugal, John I., at that time the reigning king of Castile. … It was agreed between the contracting parties that the male issue of this connection should succeed to the Portuguese sceptre, and, that failing, that it should devolve into the hands of the Castilian monarch. Fortunately, however, the career of this Spanish tyrant was short, and no issue was left of Beatrix, for whom the crown of Portugal could be claimed; and therefore all the just pretensions of the Spaniard ceased. The marriage had scarcely been concluded, when Ferdinand died. It had been provided by the laws of the constitution, that in a case of emergency, such as now occurred, the election of a new sovereign should immediately take place. The legal heir to the crown, Don Juan [the late king's brother], the son of Pedro and Ignes de Castro, whose marriage had been solemnly recognised by an assembly of the states, was a prisoner at this time in the hands of his rival, the king of Castile. The necessity of having a head to the government appointed without delay, opened the road to the throne for John, surnamed the Bastard, the natural son of Don Pedro, by Donna Theresa Lorenzo, a Galician lady. Availing himself of the natural aversion by which the Portuguese were influenced against the Castilians, he seized the regency from the hands of the queen-dowager, … successfully defended Lisbon, and forced the Spaniards to retire into Spain after their memorable defeat on the plain of Aljubarota. … This battle … completely established the independence of the Portuguese monarchy. John was, in consequence, unanimously elected King by the Cortes, assembled at Coimbra in 1385. … In aid of his natural talents John I. had received an excellent education from his father, and during his reign exhibited proofs of being a profound politician, as well as a skilful general. … He became the founder of a new dynasty of kings, called the house of 'Avis,' from his having been grand master of that noble order. The enterprises, however, of the great Prince Henry, a son of John I., form a distinguishing feature of this reign."

W. M. Kinsey, Portugal Illustrated, pages 34-35.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1415-1460. The taking of Ceuta. The exploring expeditions of Prince Henry the Navigator down the African coast.

"King John [the First] had married an English wife, Philippa Plantagenet—a grand-daughter of our King Edward III., thoroughly English, too, on her mother's side, and not without a dash of Scottish blood, for her great-great-grandmother was a Comyn of Broghan. King John of Portugal was married to his English wife for twenty-eight years, they had five noble sons and a daughter (who was Duchess of Burgundy and mother of Charles the Bold); and English habits and usages were adopted at the Portuguese Court. We first meet with Prince Henry and his brothers, Edward and Peter, at the bed-side of their English mother. The king had determined to attack Ceuta, the most important seaport on the Moorish coast; and the three young princes were to receive knighthood if they bore themselves manfully, and if the place was taken. Edward, the eldest, was twenty-four, Peter twenty-three, and Henry just twenty-one. He was born on March 4th, 1394. There were two other brothers, John and Ferdinand, but they were still too young to bear arms. Their mother had caused three swords to be made with which they were to be girt as knights; and the great fleet was being assembled at Lisbon. But the Queen was taken ill, and soon there was no hope. Husband and sons gathered round her death-bed. When very near her end she asked: 'How is the wind?' she was told that it was northerly. 'Then,' she said, 'You will all sail for Ceuta on the feast of St. James.' A few minutes afterwards she died, and husband and sons sailed for Ceuta on St. James's day, the 25th of July, 1415, according to her word. … Ceuta was taken after a desperate fight. It was a memorable event, for the town never again passed into the hands of the Moors unto this day. … From the time of this Ceuta expedition Prince Henry set his mind steadfastly on the discovery of Guinea and on the promotion of commercial enterprise. During his stay at Ceuta he collected much information respecting the African coast. … His first objects were to know what was beyond the farthest cape hitherto reached on the coast of Africa, to open commercial relations with the people, and to extend the Christian faith. Prince Henry had the capacity for taking trouble. He undertook the task, and he never turned aside from it until he died. To be close to his work he came to live on the promontory of Sagres, near Cape St. Vincent, and not far from the seaport of Lagos. He was twenty-four years old when he came to live at this secluded spot, in December, 1418; and he died there in his sixty-seventh year. … He established a school at Sagres for the cultivation of map-drawing and the science of navigation. At great expense he procured the services of Mestre Jacome from Majorca, a man very learned in the art of navigation, as it was then understood, and he erected an observatory. … {2572} My readers will remember that during the time of the Crusades a great order of knighthood was established, called the Templars, which became very rich and powerful, and held vast estates in most of the countries of Europe. At last the kings became jealous of their prosperity and, in the days of our Edward II. and of the French Philip IV., their wealth was confiscated, and the order of Knights Templars was abolished in all countries except Portugal. But King Dionysius of Portugal refused either to rob the knights or to abolish the order. In the year 1319 he reformed the order, and changed the name, calling it the Order of Christ, and he encircled the white cross of the Templars with a red cross as the future badge of the knights. They retained their great estates. Prince Henry was appointed, by his father, Grand Master of the Order of Christ in the year 1419. He could imagine no nobler nor more worthy employment for the large revenues of the Order than the extension of geographical discovery. Thus were the funds for his costly expeditions supplied by the Order of Chivalry of which he was Grand Master. When Prince Henry first began to send forth expeditions along the coast of Africa, the farthest point to the southward that had been sighted was Cape Bojador. The discovery of the extreme southern point of Africa, and of a way thence to India, was looked upon then exactly as the discovery of the North Pole is now. Fools asked what was the use of it. Half-hearted men said it was impossible. Officials said it was impractical. Nevertheless, Prince Henry said that it could be done, and that, moreover it should be done. … In 1434 he considered that the time had come to round Cape Bojador. He selected for the command of the expedition an esquire of his household named Gil Eannes, who was accompanied by John Diaz, an experienced seaman of a seafaring family at Lagos, many of whose members became explorers. Prince Henry told them that the current which they feared so much was strongest at a distance of about three to five miles from the land. He ordered them, therefore, to stand out boldly to sea. 'It was a place before terrible to all men,' but the Prince told them that they must win fame and honour by following his instructions. They did so, rounded the Cape, and landed on the other side. There they set up a wooden cross as a sign of their discovery. … The Prince now equipped a larger vessel than had yet been sent out, called a varinel, propelled by oars as well as sails. Many were the eager volunteers among the courtiers at Sagres. Prince Henry's cup-bearer, named Alfonso Gonsalves Baldaya, was selected to command the expedition, and Gil Eannes—he who first doubled Cape Bojador—went with it in a smaller vessel. … They sailed in the year 1436, and, having rounded Cape Bojador without any hesitation, they proceeded southward along the coast for 120 miles, until they reached an estuary called by them Rio d'Ouro. … During the five following years Prince Henry was much engaged in State affairs. The disastrous expedition to Tangiers took place, and the imprisonment of his young brother Ferdinand by the Moors, whose noble resignation under cruel insults and sufferings until he died at Fez, won for him the title of the 'Constant Prince.' But in 1441 Prince Henry was able to resume the despatch of vessels of discovery. In that year he gave the command of a small ship to his master of the wardrobe, Antam Gonsalves. … He [Gonsalves] was followed in the same year by Nuno Tristram. … Tristram discovered a headland which, from its whiteness, he named Cape Blanco. … The next discovery was that of the island of Arguin, south of Cape Blanco, which was first visited in 1443 by Nuño Tristram in command of a caravel. … The next voyage of discovery was one of great importance, because it passed the country of the Moors, and, for the first time, entered the land of the Negroes. Dinis Diaz, who was selected for this enterprise by the Prince, sailed in 1446 with the resolution of beating all his predecessors. He passed the mouth of the river Senegal, and was surprised at finding that the people on the north bank were Moors, while to the south they were all blacks; of a tribe called Jaloffs. Diaz went as far as a point which he called Cabo Verde. In the following years several expeditions, under Lanzarote and others, went to Arguin and the Senegal; until, in 1455, an important voyage under Prince Henry's patronage was undertaken by a young Venetian named Alvise (Luigi) Cadamosto. … They sailed on March 22, 1455, and went first to Porto Santo and Madeira. From the Canary Islands they made sail for Cape Blanco, boldly stretching across the intervening sea and being for some time quite out of sight of land. Cadamosto had a good deal of intercourse with the Negroes to the south of the Senegal, and eventually reached the mouth of the Gambia whence he set out on his homeward voyage. The actual extent of the discoveries made during the life of Prince Henry was from Cape Bojador to beyond the mouth of the Gambia. But this was only a small part of the great service he performed, not only for his own country, but for the whole civilised world. He organised discovery, trained up a generation of able explorers, so that from his time progress was continuous and unceasing. … Prince Henry, who was to be known to all future generations as 'the Navigator,' died at the age of sixty-six at Sagres, on Thursday, the 13th of November, 1460."

C. R. Markham, The Sea Fathers, chapter 1.

ALSO IN: _R. H. Major, Life of Prince Henry of Portugal, the Navigator._

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1463-1498. The Pope's gift of title to African discoveries. Slow southward progress of exploration. The rounding of the Cape of Good Hope. Vasco da Gama's voyage.

"In order to secure his triumphs, Prince Henry procured a bull from Pope Eugenius IV., which guaranteed to the Portuguese all their discoveries between Cape Nun, in Morocco, and India. None of his commanders approached within six or eight degrees of the equator. … By the year 1472, St. Thomas, Annobon, and Prince's Islands were added to the Portuguese discoveries, and occupied by colonists; and at length the equator was crossed. Fernando Po having given his name to an island in the Bight of Biafra, acquired possession of 500 leagues of equatorial coast, whence the King of Portugal took the title of Lord of Guinea. The subsequent divisions of this territory into the Grain Coast, named from the cochineal thence obtained, and long thought to be the seed of a plant, Gold Coast, Ivory Coast, and Slave Coast, indicate by their names the nature of the products of those lands, and the kind of traffic. {2573} Under King John II., after an inactive period of eight or ten years, Diego Cam (1484) pushed forward fearlessly to latitude 22° south, erecting at intervals on the shore, pillars of stone, which asserted the rights of his sovereign to the newly-found land. For the first time, perhaps, in history, men had now sailed under a new firmament. They lost sight of a part of the old celestial constellations, and were awe-struck with the splendours of the Southern Cross, and hosts of new stars. Each successive commander aimed at outdoing the deeds of his predecessor. Imaginary perils, which had frightened former sailors, spurred the Portuguese to greater daring. Bartholomew Diaz, in 1486, was sent in command of an expedition of three ships, with directions to sail till he reached the southernmost headland of Africa. Creeping on from cape to cape, he passed the furthest point touched by Diego Cam, and reached about 29° south latitude. Here driven out of his course by rough weather, he was dismayed on again making land to find the coast trending northward. He had doubled the Cape without knowing it, and only found it out on returning, disheartened by the results of his voyage. Raising the banner of St. Philip on the shore of Table Bay, Diaz named the headland the Cape of Tempests, which the king, with the passage to India in mind, changed to that of the Cape of Good Hope. By a curious coincidence, in the same year Covillan [see ABYSSINIA: 15-19TH CENTURIES] … learnt the fact that the Cape of Good Hope, the Lion of the Sea, or the Head of Africa, could be reached across the Indian Ocean."

J. Yeats, Growth and Vicissitudes of Commerce, part 2, chapter 4.

"Pedro de Covilho had sent word to King John II., from Cairo, by two Jews, Rabbi Abraham and Rabbi Joseph, that there was a south cape of Africa which could be doubled. They brought with them an Arabic map of the African coast. … Covilho had learned from the Arabian mariners, who were perfectly familiar with the east coast, that they had frequently been at the south of Africa, and that there was no difficulty in passing round the continent that way. … Vasco de Gama set sail July 9, 1497, with three ships and 160 men, having with him the Arab map. King John had employed his Jewish physicians, Roderigo and Joseph, to devise what help they could from the stars. They applied the astrolabe to marine use, and constructed tables. These were the same doctors who had told him that Columbus would certainly succeed in reaching India, and advised him to send out a secret expedition in anticipation, which was actually done, though it failed through want of resolution in its captain. Encountering the usual difficulties, tempestuous weather and a mutinous crew, who conspired to put him to death, De Gama succeeded, November 20, in doubling the Cape. On March 1 he met seven small Arab vessels, and was surprised to find that they used the compass, quadrants, sea-charts, and 'had divers maritime mysteries not short of the Portugals.' With joy he soon after recovered sight of the northern stars, for so long unseen. He now bore away to the north-east, and on May 19, 1498, reached Calicut, on the Malabar coast. The consequences of this voyage were to the last degree important. The commercial arrangements of Europe were completely dislocated; Venice was deprived of her mercantile supremacy [see VENICE: 15-17TH CENTURIES]; the hatred of Genoa was gratified; prosperity left the Italian towns; Egypt, hitherto supposed to possess a pre-eminent advantage as offering the best avenue to India, suddenly lost her position; the commercial monopolies so long in the hands of the European Jews were broken down. The discovery of America and passage of the Cape were the first steps of that prodigious maritime development soon exhibited by Western Europe. And since commercial prosperity is forthwith followed by the production of men and concentration of wealth, and, moreover, implies an energetic intellectual condition, it appeared before long that the three centres of population, of wealth, of intellect, were shifting westwardly. The front of Europe was suddenly changed; the British Islands, hitherto in a sequestered and eccentric position, were all at once put in the van of the new movement."

J. W. Draper, History of the Intellectual Development of Europe, chapter 19.

ALSO IN: _G. Correa, The Three Voyages of Vasco da Gama (Hakluyt Society, 1869)._

J. Fiske, The Discovery of America, chapter 4 (volume l).

_G. M. Towle, Voyages and Adventures of Vasco da Gama._

See, also, SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1486-1806.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1474-1476. Interference in Castile. Defeat at Toro.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1368-1479.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1490. Alliance with Castile and Aragon in the conquest of Granada.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1476-1492.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1493. The Pope's division of discoveries in the New World.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1493.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1494. The Treaty of Tordesillas. Amended partition of the New World with Spain.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1494.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1495. Persecution and expulsion of Jews.

See JEWS: 8-15TH CENTURIES.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1498-1580. Trade and settlements in the East Indies.

See INDIA; A. D. 1498-1580.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1500-1504. Discovery, exploration and first settlement of Brazil.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1500-1514; and 1503-1504.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1501. Early enterprise in the Newfoundland fisheries.

See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1510-1549. Colonization of Brazil.

See BRAZIL: A. D. 1510-1661.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1524. Disputes with Spain in the division of the New World. The Congress at Badajos.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1519-1524.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1579-1580. Disastrous invasion of Morocco by Sebastian. His death in battle. Disputed succession to the throne. The claim of Philip II. of Spain established by force of arms.

"Under a long succession of Kings who placed their glory in promoting the commerce of their subjects and extending their discoveries through the remotest regions of the globe, Portugal had attained a degree of importance among the surrounding nations, from which the narrow limits of the kingdom, and the neighbourhood of the Spanish monarchy, seemed for ever to exclude her. … John III., the last of those great monarchs under whose auspices the boundaries of the known world had been enlarged, was succeeded in the throne of Portugal [1557] by his grandson Sebastian, a child of only three years old. {2574} As the royal infant advanced to manhood, his subjects might, without flattery, admire his sprightly wit, his manly form, his daring spirit, and his superior address, in all the accomplishments of a martial age. But the hopes which these splendid qualities inspired were clouded by an intemperate thirst of fame. … He had early cherished the frantic project of transporting a royal army to India, and of rivalling the exploits of Alexander; but from this design he was diverted, not by the difficulties that opposed it, nor by the remonstrances of his counsellors, but by the distractions of Africa, which promised to his ambition a nearer and fairer harvest of glory. On the death of Abdalla, King of Morocco, his son, Muley Mahomet, had seized upon the crown, in contempt to an established law of succession, that the kingdom should devolve to the brother of the deceased monarch. A civil war ensued, and Mahomet, defeated in several battles, was compelled to leave his uncle Muley Moluc, a prince of great abilities and virtues, in possession of the throne." Mahomet escaped to Lisbon, and Sebastian espoused his cause. He invaded Morocco [see MAROCCO: THE ARAB CONQUEST AND SINCE] with a force partly supplied by his uncle, Philip II.; of Spain, and partly by the Prince of Orange, engaged the Moors rashly in battle (the battle of Alcazar, or the Three Kings, 1579), and perished on the field, his army being mostly destroyed or made captive. "An aged and feeble priest was the immediate heir to the unfortunate Sebastian; and the Cardinal Henry, the great uncle to the late monarch, ascended the vacant throne." He enjoyed his royal dignity little more than a twelvemonth, dying in 1580, leaving the crown in dispute among a crowd of claimants.

History of Spain, chapter 22 (volume 2).

"The candidates were seven in number: the duchess of Braganza, the king of Spain, the duke of Savoy, Don Antonio, prior of Crato, the duke of Parma, Catherine of Medicis, and the sovereign pontiff. The four first were grand-children of Emanuel the Great, father of Henry. The duchess of Braganza was daughter of Prince Edward, Emanuel's second son; Philip was the son of the Empress Isabella, his eldest daughter; the duke of Savoy, of Beatrix, his younger daughter; and Don Antonio was a natural son of Lewis, who was a younger son of Emanuel, and brother to the present king [cardinal Henry]. The duke of Parma was great–grandson of Emanuel, by a daughter of the above-mentioned Prince Edward. The Queen-mother of France founded her claim on her supposed descent from Alphonso III., who died about 300 years before the present period; and the Pope pretended that Portugal was feudatory to the see of Rome, and belonged to him, since the male heirs in the direct line were extinct." The other candidates held small chances against the power and convenient neighborhood of Philip of Spain. "Philip's agents at the court of Lisbon allowed that if the duchess of Braganza's father had been alive, his title would have been indisputable; but they maintained that, since he had died without attaining possession of the throne, nothing but the degree of consanguinity to Emanuel ought to be regarded; and that, as the duchess and he were equal in that respect, the preference was due to a male before a female. And they farther insisted, that the law which excludes strangers from inheriting the crown was not applicable to him, since Portugal had formerly belonged to the kings of Castile." Promptly on the death of the cardinal-king Henry, the Spanish king sent an army of 35,000 men, under the famous duke of Alva, and a large fleet under the Marquis of Santa Croce, to take possession of what he claimed as his inheritance. Two battles sufficed for the subjugation of Portugal:—one fought on the Alcantara, August 25, 1580, and the other a little later on the Douro. The kingdom submitted, but with bitter feelings, which the conduct of Alva and his troops had intensified at every step of their advance. "The colonies in America, Africa, and the Indies, which belonged to the crown of Portugal, quickly followed the example of the mother country; nor did Philip find employment for his arms in any part of the Portuguese dominions but the Azores," which, supported by the French, were not subdued until the following year.

R. Watson, History of the Reign of Philip II., book 16.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1594-1602. Beginning of the rivalry of the Dutch in East India trade.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1594-1620.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1624-1661. War with the Dutch. Loss and recovery of parts of Brazil.

See BRAZIL: A. D. 1510-1661.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1637-1668. Crisis of discontent with the Spanish rule. A successful revolution. National independence recovered. The House of Braganza placed on the throne.

"A spirit of dissatisfaction had long been growing amongst the Portugueze. Their colonies were neglected; a great part of Brazil, and a yet larger portion of their Indian empire, had fallen into the hands of the Dutch; Ormus, and their other possessions in the Persian Gulph, had been conquered by the Persians; their intercourse with their remaining colonies was harassed and intercepted; their commerce with the independent Indian states, with China and with Japan, was here injured and there partially destroyed, by the enterprising merchants and mariners of Holland; whilst at home the privileges secured to them as the price of their submission, were hourly, if not flagrantly, violated by their Spanish masters. The illegal imposition of a new tax by the king's sole authority, in 1637, had provoked a partial revolt in the southern provinces, where the duke of Braganza, grandson of Catherine [whose right to the throne was forcibly put aside by Philip II. of Spain in 1580,—see, PORTUGAL: A. D. 1579-1580], was proclaimed king. He refused the proffered dignity, and assisted in quelling the rebellion. He was thanked by Philip and at once recompensed, and, as it was hoped, ensnared, by an appointment to be general–in-chief of Portugal. But the flame was smothered, not extinguished. … The vice-queen, Margaret, duchess-dowager of Mantua, a daughter of Philip II.'s youngest daughter, Catherine, saw the gathering tempest, and forewarned the court of Madrid of the impending danger. Her information was treated, like herself, with contempt by Olivarez. One measure, however, he took, probably in consequence; and that one finally decided the hesitating conspirators to delay no longer. He ordered a large body of troops to be raised in Portugal, the nobles to arm their vassals, and all, under the conduct of the duke of Braganza, to hasten into Spain, in order to attend the king, who was about to march in person against the rebellious Catalans. {2575} Olivarez hoped thus at once to overwhelm Catalonia and Roussillon, and to take from Portugal the power of revolting, by securing the intended leader, and draining the country of the warlike portion of its population. The nobles perceived the object of this command, and resolved to avoid compliance by precipitating their measures. Upon the 12th of October, 1640, they assembled to the number of 40 at the house of Don Antonio d' Almeida. At this meeting they determined to recover their independence, and dispatched Don Pedro de Mendoza as their deputy, to offer the crown and their allegiance to the duke of Braganza, who had remained quietly upon his principal estate at Villa Viçosa. The duke hesitated, alarmed, perhaps, at the importance of the irrevocable step he was called upon to take. But his high-spirited duchess, a daughter of the Spanish duke of Medina-Sidonia, observing to him, that a wretched and dishonourable death certainly awaited him at Madrid; at Lisbon, as certainly glory, whether in life or death, decided his acceptance. Partisans were gained on all sides, especially in the municipality of Lisbon; and the secret was faithfully kept, for several weeks, by at least 500 persons of both sexes, and all ranks. During this interval, the duke of Braganza remained at Villa Viçosa, lest his appearance at Lisbon should excite suspicion; and it seems that, however clearly the vice-queen had perceived the threatening aspect of affairs, neither she nor her ministers entertained any apprehension of the plot actually organized. The 1st of December was the day appointed for the insurrection. Early in the morning the conspirators approached the palace in four well-armed bands," and easily mastered the guard. From the windows of the palace they "proclaimed liberty and John IV." to a great concourse of people who had speedily assembled. Finding Vasconcellos, the obnoxious secretary to 'the vice–queen, hidden in a closet, they slew him and flung his body into the street. The vice-queen, seeing herself helpless, submitted to the popular will and signed mandates addressed to the Spanish governors and other officers commanding castles and fortifications in Portugal, requiring their surrender. "The archbishop of Lisbon was next appointed royal-lieutenant. He immediately dispatched intelligence of the event to the new king, and sent messengers to every part of Portugal with orders for the proclamation of John IV., and the seizure of all Spaniards. … Obedience was prompt and general. … John was crowned on the 15th of December, and immediately abolished the heavy taxes imposed by the king of Spain, declaring that, for his own private expenses, he required nothing beyond his patrimonial estates. He summoned the Cortes to assemble in January, when the three estates of the kingdom solemnly confirmed his proclamation as king, or 'acclamation,' as the Portugueze term it. … In the islands, in the African settlements, with the single exception of Ceuta, which adhered to Spain, and in what remained of Brazil and India, King John was proclaimed, the moment intelligence of the revolution arrived, the Spaniards scarcely any where attempting to resist. … In Europe, the new king was readily acknowledged by all the states at war with the house of Austria." The first attempts made by the Spanish court to regain its lost authority in Portugal took chiefly the form of base conspiracies for the assassination of the new king. War ensued, but the "languid and desultory hostilities produced little effect beyond harassing the frontiers. Portugal was weak, and thought only of self-defence; Spain was chiefly intent upon chastizing the Catalans." The war was prolonged, in fact, until 1668, when it was terminated by a treaty which recognized the independence of Portugal, but ceded Ceuta to Spain. The only considerable battles of the long war were those of Estremos, or Ameixal, in 1663, and Villa Viçosa, 1665, in which the Portuguese were victors, and which were practically decisive of the war.

M. M. Busk, History of Spain and Portugal, book 2, chapters 10-12.

ALSO IN: J. Dunlap, Memoirs of Spain, 1621-1700, volume 1, chapter 12.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1702. Joins the Grand Alliance against France and Spain.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1701-1702.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1703. The Methuen Treaty with England.

Portugal joined the Grand Alliance against France and Spain, in the War of the Spanish Succession, in 1703, and entered at that time into an important treaty with England. This is known as the Methuen Treaty—"called after the name of the ambassador who negotiated it—and that treaty, and its effect upon the commerce of England and the habits of her people lasted through five generations, even to the present time. The wines of Portugal were to be admitted upon the payment of a duty 33½ per cent. less than the duty paid upon French wines; and the woolen cloths of England, which had been prohibited in Portugal for twenty years, were to be admitted upon terms of proportionate advantage. Up to that time the Claret of France had been the beverage of the wine-drinkers of England. From 1703 Port established itself as what Defoe calls 'our general draught.' In all commercial negotiations with France the Methuen Treaty stood in the way; for the preferential duty was continued till 1831. France invariably pursued a system of retaliation. It was a point of patriotism for the Englishman to hold firm to his Port."

C. Knight, Popular History of England, volume 5, chapter 17.

See, also, SPAIN: A. D. 1703-1704.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1713. Possessions in South America confirmed.

See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1757-1759. Expulsion of the Jesuits and suppression of the order.

See JESUITS: A. D. 1757-1773.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1793. Joined in the coalition against Revolutionary France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (MARCH-SEPTEMBER).

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1807. Napoleon's designs against the kingdom. His delusive treaty for its partition with Spain. French invasion and flight of the royal family to Brazil.

"One of the first steps taken by Napoleon, after his return to Paris, … [after the Peace of Tilsit-see GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY)] was, in the month of August, to order the French and Spanish ambassadors conjointly, to declare to the prince–regent of Portugal, that he must concur in the continental system, viz. shut his ports against English commerce, confiscate all English property, and imprison all English subjects to be found within his dominions, or they were instructed immediately to leave Lisbon. {2576} The prince and his ministers dared not openly resist the French emperor's will, even whilst the wiser part of the cabinet were convinced that the very existence of the country depended upon British commerce. In this extremity, and relying upon the friendly forbearance of England, they strove to pursue a middle course. Don John professed his readiness to exclude British ships of all descriptions from his ports, but declared that his religious principles would not allow him to seize the subjects and property of a friendly state in the midst of peace, and that prudence forbade his offending England until a Portugueze squadron, then at sea, should have returned safely home. … Napoleon punished this imperfect obedience, by seizing all Portugueze vessels in ports under his control, and ordering the French and Spanish legations to leave Lisbon. The Portugueze ambassadors were, at the same time, dismissed from Paris and Madrid. A French army was, by this time, assembled near the foot of the Pyrenees, bearing the singular title of army of observation of the Gironde; and General Junot … was appointed to its command. … Spain was endeavouring to share in the spoil, not to protect the victim. A treaty, the shameless iniquity of which can be paralleled only by the treaties between Austria, Russia, and Prussia for the partition of Poland, had been signed at Fontainebleau, on the 27th of October. … By this treaty Charles surrendered to Napoleon his infant grandson's kingdom of Etruria (King Louis I. had been dead some years), over which he had no right whatever, and bargained to receive for him in its stead the small northern provinces of Portugal, Entre Minho e Douro and Tras os Montes, under the name of the kingdom of Northern Lusitania, which kingdom the young monarch was to hold in vassalage of the crown of Spain. The much larger southern provinces, Alemtejo and Algarve, were to constitute the principality of the Algarves, for Godoy, under a similar tenure. And the middle provinces were to be occupied by Napoleon until a general peace, when, in exchange for Gibraltar, Trinidad, and any other Spanish possession conquered by England, they might be restored to the family of Braganza, upon like terms of dependence. The Portugueze colonies were to be equally divided between France and Spain. In execution of this nefarious treaty, 10,000 Spanish troops were to seize upon the northern, and 6,000 upon the southern state. … On the 18th of October, Junot, in obedience to his master's orders, crossed the Pyrenees, and, being kindly received by the Spaniards, began his march towards the Portugueze frontiers, whilst the Spanish troops were equally put in motion towards their respective destinations. … The object of so much haste was, to secure the persons of the royal family, whose removal to Brazil had not only been talked of from the beginning of these hostile discussions, but was now in preparation, and matter of public notoriety. … The reckless haste enjoined by the emperor, and which cost almost as many lives as a pitched battle, was very near attaining its end. … The resolution to abandon the contest being adopted, the prince and his ministers took every measure requisite to prevent a useless effusion of blood. A regency, consisting of five persons, the marquess of Abrantes being president, was appointed to conduct the government, and negotiate with Junot. On the 26th a proclamation was put forth, explaining to the people that, as Napoleon's enmity was rather to the sovereign than the nation, the prince-regent, in order to avert the calamities of war from his faithful subjects, would transfer the seat of government to Brazil, till the existing troubles should subside, and strictly charging the Portugueze, more especially the Lisbonians, to receive the French as friends. On the 27th the whole royal family proceeded to Belem, to embark for flight, on the spot whence, about three centuries back, Vasco de Gama had sailed upon his glorious enterprise. … The ships set sail and crossed the bar, almost as the French advance guard was entering Lisbon. Sir Sidney Smith escorted the royal family, with four men-of-war, safely to Rio Janeiro, the capital of Brazil, leaving the remainder of his squadron to blockade the mouth of the Tagus."

M. M. Busk, History of Spain and Portugal, book 4, chapter 7.

ALSO IN: C. A. Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, volume 1, chapter 7.

Sir A. Alison, History of Europe, 1800-1815, chapter 52.

H. Martineau, History of England, 1800-1815, book 2, chapter 1.

R. Southey, History of the Peninsular War, chapter 2 (volume l).

See, also, BRAZIL: A. D. 1808-1822.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1808. Rising against the French. Arrival of British forces.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1808 (MAY-SEPTEMBER).

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1808. Wellington's first campaign in the Peninsula. The Convention of Cintra. French evacuation of Portugal.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1808-1809 (AUGUST-JANUARY).

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1809 (February-December). Wellington's retreat and fresh advance. The French checked. Passage of the Douro. Battle of Talavera.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1809 (FEBRUARY-JULY); and (AUGUST-DECEMBER).

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1809-1812. Wellington's Lines of Torres Vedras. French invasion and retreat. English advance into Spain.

See SPAIN: A.D. 1809-1810 (OCTOBER-SEPTEMBER); and 1810-1812.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1814. End of the Peninsular War.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1812-1814.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1820-1824. Revolution and Absolutist reaction. Separation and independence of Brazil.

"Ever since 1807 Portugal had not known a court. On the first threat of French invasion the Regent had emigrated to the Brazils, and he had since lived and ruled entirely in the great Transatlantic colony. The ordinary conditions of other countries had been reversed. Portugal had virtually become a dependency of her own colony. The absence of the court was a sore trial to the pride of the Portuguese. An absent court had few supporters. It happened, too, that its ablest defender had lately left the country. … In April 1820 [Marshal] Beresford sailed for the Brazils. He did not return till the following October; and the revolution had been completed before his return. On the 24th of August the troops at Oporto determined on establishing a constitutional government, and appointed a provisional Junta with this object. The Regency which conducted the affairs of the country at Lisbon denounced the movement as a nefarious conspiracy. But, however nefarious the conspiracy might be, the defection of the army was so general that resistance became impossible. On the 1st of September the Regency issued a proclamation promising to convene the Cortes. {2577} The promise, however, did not stop the progress of the insurrection. The Junta which had been constituted at Oporto marched at the head of the troops upon Lisbon. The troops at Lisbon and in the south of Portugal threw off their allegiance, and established a Junta of their own. The Junta at Lisbon were, for the moment, in favour of milder measures than the Junta of Oporto. But the advocates of the more extreme course won their ends. The Oporto troops, surrounding the two Juntas, which had been blended together, compelled them to adopt the Spanish constitution; in other words, to sanction the election of one deputy to the Cortes for every 30,000 persons inhabiting the country. … When the revolution of 1820 had occurred John VI., King of Portugal, was quietly ruling in his transatlantic dominions of Brazil. Portugal had been governed for thirteen years from Rio de Janeiro; and the absence of the Court from Lisbon had offended the Portuguese and prepared them for change. After the mischief had been done John VI. was persuaded to return to his native country, leaving his eldest son, Dom Pedro, Regent of Brazil in his absence. Before setting out on his journey he gave the prince public instructions for his guidance, which practically made Brazil independent of Portugal; and he added private directions to the prince, in case any emergency should arise which should make it impracticable to preserve Brazil for Portugal, to place the crown on his own head, and thus save the great Transatlantic territory for the House of Braganza. Leaving these parting injunctions with his son, John VI. returned to the old kingdom which he had deserted nearly fourteen years before. He reached Lisbon, and found the Constitutionalists in undisputed possession of power. He found also that the action of the Constitutionalists in Portugal was calculated to induce Brazil to throw off the authority of the mother country. The Cortes in Portugal insisted on the suppression of the supreme tribunals in Brazil, on the establishment of Provincial Juntas, and on the return of the Regent to Portugal. The Brazilians declined to adopt measures which they considered ruinous to their dignity, and persuaded the Regent to disobey the orders of the Cortes. A small body of Portuguese troops quartered in Brazil endeavoured to overawe the prince, but proved powerless to do so. In May 1822 the prince was persuaded to declare himself Perpetual Defender of the Brazils. In the following September the Brazilians induced him to raise their country to the dignity of an empire, and to declare himself its constitutional emperor. The news that the Brazilians had declared themselves an independent empire reached Europe at a critical period. Monarchs and diplomatists were busily deliberating at Verona on the affairs of Spain and of the Spanish colonies. No one, however, could avoid comparing the position of Portugal and Brazil with that of Spain and her dependencies. … The evident determination of France to interfere in Spain created anxiety in Portugal. The Portuguese Cortes apprehended that the logical consequence of French interference in the one country was French interference in the other. … The position of a French army on the Spanish frontier roused the dormant spirits of the Portuguese Absolutists. In February 1823 a vast insurrection against the Constitution broke out in Northern Portugal. The insurgents, who in the first instance obtained considerable success, were with difficulty defeated. But the revolt had been hardly quelled before the Absolutists recovered their flagging spirits. Every step taken by the Duc d' Angoulême in his progress from the Bidassoa to Madrid [see SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827] raised their hopes of ultimate success. The king's second son, the notorious Dom Miguel, fled from his father's palace and threw in his lot with the insurgents. For a moment the king stood firm and denounced his son's proceedings. But the reaction which had set in was too strong to be resisted. The Cortes was closed, a new Ministry appointed, and autocracy re-established in Portugal. The re-establishment of autocracy in Portugal marked the commencement of a series of intrigues in which this country [England] was deeply interested. One party in the new Government, with M. de Palmella at its head, was disposed to incline to moderate measures and to listen to the advice which it received from the British Ministry and from the British Ambassador, Sir Edward Thornton. Another party, of which M. de Subsérra was the representative, was in favour of an intimate union with France, and ready to listen to the contrary counsels of M. de Neuville, the French Minister at Lisbon. M. de Palmella, despairing of founding a settled form of government amidst the disorders which surrounded him on every side, applied to the British Ministry for troops to give stability to the Administration. The demand arrived in London in July 1823. … The demand for troops was refused, but a British squadron was sent to the Tagus, with a view of affording the King of Portugal the moral support of the British nation and a secure asylum in the event of any danger to his person. Many months elapsed before the King of Portugal had occasion to avail himself of the possible asylum which was thus afforded to him. … The evident leanings of M. de Palmella towards moderate measures, however, alarmed the Portuguese Absolutists. Ever since the revolution of 1823 Dom Miguel had held the command of the army; and, on the night of the 29th of April, 1824, the prince suddenly ordered the arrest of the leading personages of the Government, and, under the pretext of suppressing an alleged conspiracy of Freemasons, called on the army to liberate their king, and to complete the triumph of the previous year. For nine days the king was a mere puppet in the hands of his son, and Dom Miguel was virtually master of Lisbon. On the 9th of May the king was persuaded by the foreign ministers in his capital to resume his authority; to retire on board the 'Windsor Castle,' a British man-of-war; to dismiss Dom Miguel from his command, and to order his attendance upon him. The prince, 'stricken with a sudden futuity,' obeyed his father's commands, and was prevailed upon to go into voluntary exile. The revolution of 1824 terminated with his departure, and Portugal again enjoyed comparative tranquillity."

S. Walpole, History of England from 1815, chapter 9 (volume 2).

ALSO IN: H. M. Stephens, The Story of Portugal, chapter 18.

See, also, BRAZIL: A.D. 1808-1822.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1822. The independence of Brazil proclaimed and established.

See BRAZIL: A. D. 1808-1822.

{2578}

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1824-1889. Return of John VI. to Brazil. Abdication of the Portuguese throne by Dom Pedro, after granting a constitution. Usurpation of Dom Miguel. Civil war and factious conflicts. Establishment of Parliamentary government, and Peace.

"At the close of 1824 the king returned to Brazil to spend his last days in peace. On reaching Rio de Janeiro, he recognized Dom Pedro as Emperor of Brazil, and on the 6th of March, 1826, John VI. died in the country of his choice. By his will, John VI. left the regency of Portugal to his daughter Isabel Maria, to the disgust of Dom Miguel, who had fully expected in spite of his conduct that Portugal would be in some manner bequeathed to him, and that Dom Pedro would be satisfied with the government of Brazil. The next twenty-five years are the saddest in the whole history of Portugal. The establishment of the system of parliamentary government, which now exists, was a long and difficult task. … The keynote of the whole series of disturbances is to be found in the pernicious influence of the army. … The army was disproportionately large for the size and revenue of the country; there was no foreign or colonial war to occupy its energies, and the soldiers would not return to the plough nor the officers retire into private life. The English Cabinet at this juncture determined to maintain peace and order, and in 1826, a division of 5,000 men was sent under the command of Lieutenant-General Sir William Clinton to garrison the chief towns. The accession of Pedro IV. to the throne was hailed with joy in Portugal, though looked on with suspicion in Brazil. He justified his reputation by drawing up a charter, containing the bases for a moderate parliamentary government of the English type, which he sent over to Portugal, by the English diplomatist, Lord Stuart de Rothesay. Then to please his Brazilian subjects, he abdicated the throne of Portugal in favour of his daughter, Donna Maria da Gloria, a child of seven years old, on condition that on attaining a suitable age she should marry her uncle, Dom Miguel, who was to swear to observe the new constitution. The Charter of 1826 was thankfully received by the moderate parliamentary party; Clinton's division was withdrawn; Palmella remained prime minister; and in the following year, 1827, Dom Pedro destroyed the effect of his wise measures by appointing Dom Miguel to be regent of Portugal in the name of the little queen. Dom Miguel was an ambitious prince, who believed that he ought to be king of Portugal; he was extremely popular with the old nobility, the clergy, and the army, with all who disliked liberal ideas, and with the beggars and the poor who were under the influence of the mendicant orders. He was declared Regent in July, 1827, and in May, 1828, he summoned a Cortes of the ancient type, such as had not met since 1697, which under the presidency of the Bishop of Viseu offered him the throne of Portugal. He accepted, and immediately exiled all the leaders of the parliamentary, or, as it is usually called, the Chartist, party, headed by Palmella, Saldanha, Villa Flor, and Sampaio. They naturally fled to England, where the young queen was stopping on her way to be educated at the court of Vienna, and found popular opinion strongly in their favour. But the Duke of Wellington and his Tory Cabinet refused to countenance or assist them. … Meanwhile the reign of Dom Miguel had become a Reign of Terror; arrests and executions were frequent; thousands were deported to Africa, and in 1830 it was estimated that 40,000 persons were in prison for political offences. He ruled in absolute contempt of all law, and at different times English, French, and American fleets entered the Tagus to demand reparation for damage done to commerce, or for the illegal arrest of foreigners. The result of this conduct was that the country was hopelessly ruined, and the chartist and radical parties, who respectively advocated the Charter of 1826 and the Constitution of 1822, agreed to sink their differences, and to oppose the bigoted tyrant. … Dom Pedro, who had devoted his life to the cause of parliamentary government, resigned his crown in 1831 [see BRAZIL: A. D. 1825-1865] to his infant son, and left Brazil to head the movement for his daughter's cause. … In July, 1832, the ex-emperor with an army of 7,500 men arrived at Oporto, where he was enthusiastically welcomed, and Dom Miguel then laid siege to the city. European opinion was divided between the two parties; partisans of freedom and of constitutional government called the Miguelites 'slaves of a tyrant,' while lovers of absolutism, alluding to the loans raised by the ex-emperor, used to speak of the 'stock-jobbing Pedroites.' The siege was long and protracted." The Miguelites finally sustained several heavy defeats, both on land and at sea, and Lisbon was triumphantly entered by the Chartists in July, 1833. "The year 1834 was one of unbroken success for the Chartists. England and France recognized Maria da Gloria as Queen of Portugal, and the ministry of Queen Isabella of Spain, knowing Dom Miguel to be a Carlist, sent two Spanish armies under Generals Rodil and Serrano to the help of Dom Pedro. … Finally the combined Spanish and Portuguese armies surrounded the remnant of the Miguelites at Evora Monte, and on the 26th of May, 1834, Dom Miguel surrendered. By the Convention of Evora Monte, Dom Miguel abandoned his claim to the throne of Portugal, and in consideration of a pension of £15,000 a year promised never again to set foot in the kingdom. … Dom Pedro, who had throughout the struggle been the heart and soul of his daughter's party, had thus the pleasure of seeing the country at peace, and a regular parliamentary system in operation, but he did not long survive, for on the 24th of September, 1834, he died at Queluz near Lisbon, of an illness brought on by his great labours and fatigues, leaving a name, which deserves all honour from Portuguese and Brazilians alike. Queen Maria da Gloria was only fifteen, when she thus lost the advantage of her father's wise counsel and steady help, yet it might have been expected that her reign would be calm and prosperous. But neither the queen, the nobility, nor the people, understood the principles of parliamentary government. … The whole reign was one of violent party struggles, for they hardly deserve to be called civil wars, so little did they involve, which present a striking contrast to the peaceable constitutional government that at present prevails. … In 1852 the Charter was revised to suit all parties; direct voting, one of the chief claims of the radicals, was allowed, and the era of civil war came to an end. {2579} Maria da Gloria did not long survive this peaceful settlement, for she died on the 15th of November, 1853, and her husband the King-Consort, Ferdinand II, assumed the regency until his eldest son Pedro V. should come of age. The era of peaceful parliamentary government, which succeeded the stormy reign of Maria II., has been one of material prosperity for Portugal. … The whole country, and especially the city of Lisbon, was during this reign, on account of the neglect of all sanitary precautions, ravaged by cholera and yellow fever, and it was in the midst of one of these outbreaks, on the 11th of November, 1861, that Pedro V., who had refused to leave his pestilence-stricken capital, died of cholera, and was followed to the grave by two of his younger brothers, Dom Ferdinand and Dom John. At the time of Pedro's death, his next brother and heir, Dom Luis, was travelling on the continent, and his father, Ferdinand II., who long survived Queen Maria da Gloria … assumed the regency until his return; soon after which King Luis married Maria Pia, younger daughter of Victor Emmanuel, king of Italy. … The reign of King Luis was prosperous and peaceful, and the news of his death on October 9, 1889, was received with general regret. … Luis I. was succeeded on the throne by his elder son, Dom Carlos, or Charles I., a young man of twenty-six, who married in 1886, the Princess Marie Amélie de Bourbon, the eldest daughter of the Comte de Paris. His accession was immediately followed by the revolution of the 15th of November, 1889, in Brazil, by which his great uncle, Pedro II., Emperor of Brazil, was dethroned and a republican government established in that country."

H. M. Stephens, The Story of Portugal, chapter 18.

See BRAZIL: A. D. 1889-1891.

ALSO IN: W. Bollaert, Wars of Succession in Portugal and Spain, volume 1.

PORTUGAL: A. D. 1884-1889. Territorial claims in Africa. The Berlin Conference.

See AFRICA: A. D. 1884-1891.

----------PORTUGAL: End--------

PORTUS AUGUSTI AND PORTUS TRAJANI.

See OSTIA.

PORTUS CALE.

The ancient name of Oporto, whence came, also, the name of Portugal.

See PORTUGAL: EARLY HISTORY.

PORTUS ITIUS.

The port on the French coast from which Cæsar sailed on both his expeditions to Britain. Boulogne, Ambleteuse, Witsand and Calais have all contended for the honor of representing it in modern geography; but the serious question seems to be between Boulogne and Witsand, or Wissant.

_T. Lewin, Invasion of Britain._

ALSO IN: G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 4, appendix 1.

Napoleon III., History of Cæsar, book 3, chapter 7.

PORTUS LEMANIS.

An important Roman port in Britain, at the place which still preserves its name—Lymne.

T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.

PORTUS MAGNUS.

An important Roman port in Britain, the massive walls of which are still seen at Porchester (or Portchester).

T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.

POST. POSTAGE. POST–OFFICE.

"The little that is known of the post-system of the [Roman] empire is summed up in a few words in Becker's 'Handbuch,' iii. i. 304: 'The institution of Augustus, which became the basis of the later System known to us from the writings of the Jurists, consisted of a military service which forwarded official despatches from station to station by couriers, called in the earlier imperial period speculatories. (Liv. xxxi. 24.; Suet. Calig. 44.; Tac. Hist. ii. 73.) Personal conveyance was confined (as in the time of the republic) to officials: for this purpose the mutationes (posts) and mansiones (night quarters) were assigned, and even palatia erected at the latter for the use of governors and the emperor himself. Private individuals could take advantage of these state posts within the provinces by a special license (diploma) of the governor, and at a later period of the emperor only.' Under the republic senators and high personages could obtain the posts for their private use, as a matter of privilege."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans under the Empire, chapter 34 (volume 4), foot-note.

"According to Professor Friedländer in his interesting work, 'Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschiehte Roms,' great progress was made by the Romans, in the fourth and fifth centuries, in their method of postal communication. Their excellent roads enabled them to establish rapid mule and horse posts as well as carts, and it is even stated that special 'postal ships' (Post schiffe) were kept in readiness at the principal sea-ports. These advanced postal arrangements, like many other traces of Roman civilization, survived longest in Gaul; but even there the barbarism of the people, and the constant wars in which they were engaged, gradually extinguished, first the necessity, and then, as a natural consequence, the means of postal communication, until we find, at a much later period, all European countries alike, for lack of any organized system, making use of pilgrims, friars, pedlars, and others, to convey their correspondence from one place to another. The first attempt of any importance, to rescue postal communication from the well-nigh hopeless condition into which it had for centuries fallen, was made in Germany in 1380, by the order of Teutonic Knights, who established properly equipped post-messengers for home and international service. An improvement and extension of this plan was carried out by Francis von Thaxis in the year 1516, when a postal line from Brussels to Vienna, via Kreuznach, was established. It is true that, shortly before this, there is some record of Louis XI. of France having started, for State postal purposes, what were termed cavaliers du roy; but these were only allowed to be used for private purposes by privileged individuals, part of whose privilege, by the way, consisted in paying to Louis an enormous fee. It is to Francis von Thaxis that must be accorded the title of the first postal reformer. So eager was his interest in the work he had undertaken, that, in order to gain the right of territorial transit through several of the small states of Germany where his plans were strongly opposed, he actually agreed for a time to carry the people's letters free of charge, an instance of generosity, for a parallel of which we look in vain in the history of the Post Office. The mantle of this reformer seems, strangely enough, to have fallen in turn upon many of his descendants, who not only in Germany, but also in Spain, Austria, Holland, and other countries, obtained concessions for carrying on the useful work started by Francis von Thaxis. {2580} One of the Thaxis family, at a later date, was created a prince of Germany, and took the name of Thurm und Taxis; and from him is descended the princely line bearing that name which flourishes at the present day. Another member of the family was created a grandee of Spain, and has the honor of being immortalized by Schiller in his 'Don Carlos.' The first establishment of an organized system of postal communication in England is wrapt in some obscurity. During the reign of John post-messengers were, for the first time, employed by the king; these messengers were called nuncii; and in the time of Henry I. these nuncii were also found in the service of some of the barons. In Henry III.'s reign they had so far become a recognized institution of the State that they were clothed in the royal livery. Mr. Lewins, in his interesting work, 'Her Majesty's Mails,' states that several private letters are still in existence, dating back as far as the reign of Edward II., which bear the appearance of having been carried by the nuncii of that period, with 'Haste, post haste!' written across them. … Edward IV., towards the end of the fifteenth century, during the time that he was engaged in war with Scotland, had the stations for postal relays placed within a few miles of each other all the way from London to the royal camp, and by this means managed to get his despatches carried nearly a hundred miles a day. … No improvement is recorded in the postal service in this country from the period last referred to until the reign of Henry VIII. This king, we are told, appointed a 'master of the posts,' in the person of Sir Brian Tuke, who really seems to have made great efforts to exercise a proper control over the horse-posts, and to bring some sort of organization to bear on his department. Poor Tuke, however, was not rewarded with much success. … James I. established a regular post for inland letters, and Charles I., recognizing, no doubt, the financial importance of the Post Office, declared it in 1637, by royal proclamation, to be State property. It was, however, during the Protectorate, twenty years later, that the first act of Parliament relating to the formation of a State Post Office was passed. This statute was entitled, 'An Act for the settling of the postage of England, Scotland, and Ireland.' … The first trace which can be found of a regular tariff of postal charges is in the reign of Charles I., and even regarded by the light of to-day these charges cannot be held to be exorbitant; for example, a single letter from London, for any distance under eighty miles, was charged twopence; fourpence up to one hundred and forty miles; sixpence for any greater distance in England, and eightpence to all parts of Scotland."

_Postal Communication, Past and Present (National Review; copied in Littell's Living Age, July 30, 1887)._

"A penny post was established in London, in 1683, two years before the death of Charles II., for the conveyance of letters and parcels within the City, by Robert Murray, an upholsterer by trade, who, like a great many others, was dissatisfied with the Government, which, in its anxiety to provide for the postal requirements of the country, had entirely neglected the City and suburbs. The post, established by Murray at a vast expense, was ultimately handed over to a William Docwray, whose name is now well known in the annals of Post Office history. The arrangements of the new penny post were simple, and certainly liberal enough. All letters or parcels not exceeding a pound weight, or any sum of money not exceeding £10 in value, or parcel not worth more than £10, could be conveyed at a cost of one penny; or within a radius of ten miles from a given centre, for the charge of twopence. Several district offices were opened in various parts of London, and receiving houses were freely established in all the leading thoroughfares. … The deliveries in the City were from six to eight daily, while from three to four were found sufficient to supply the wants of the suburbs. The public appreciated and supported the new venture, and it soon became a great commercial success, useful to the citizens, and profitable to the proprietor. No sooner, however, did a knowledge of this fact reach the ears of those in authority over the General Post Office, than the Duke of York, acting under instructions, and by virtue of the settlement made to him, objected to its being continued, on the ground that it was an invasion of his legal rights. … The authorities … applied to the court of King's Bench, wherein it was decided that the new or so-called penny post was an infraction of the privileges of the authorities of the General Post Office, and the royal interest, and that consequently it, with all its organization, profits, and advantages, should be handed over to, and remain the property of, the royal establishment. … Post-paid envelopes were in use in France in the time of Louis XIV. Pelisson states that they originated in 1653 with M. de Velayer, who established, under royal authority, a private penny-post in Paris. He placed boxes at the corners of the principal streets to receive the letters, which were obliged to be enclosed in these envelopes. They were suggested to the Government by Mr. Charles Whiting in 1830, and the eminent publisher, the late Mr. Charles Knight, also proposed stamped covers for papers. Dr. T. E. Gray, of the British Museum, claimed the credit of suggesting that letters should be prepaid by the use of stamps as early as 1834."

W. Tegg, Posts and Telegraphs, pages 21-23 and 100-101.

"On the morning of the 10th of January, 1840, the people of the United Kingdom rose in the possession of a new power—the power of sending by the post a letter not weighing more than half an ounce upon the prepayment of one penny, and this without any regard to the distance which the letter had to travel. … To the sagacity and the perseverance of one man, the author of this system, the high praise is due, not so much that he triumphed over the petty jealousies and selfish fears of the post-office authorities, but that he established his own convictions against the doubts of some of the ablest and most conscientious leaders of public opinion. … Mr. Rowland Hill in 1837 published his plan of a cheap and uniform postage. A Committee of the House of Commons was appointed in 1837, which, continued its inquiries throughout the session of 1838, and arrived at the conviction that 'the mode recommended of charging and collecting postage, in a pamphlet published by Mr. Rowland Hill,' was feasible, and deserving of a trial under legislative sanction. … Lord Ashburton, although an advocate of Post-office Reform, held that the reduction to a penny would wholly destroy the revenue. Lord Lowther, the Postmaster-General, thought twopence the smallest rate that would cover the expenses. {2581} Colonel Maberly, the secretary to the post office, considered Mr. Hill's plan a most preposterous one, and maintained that if the rates were to be reduced to a penny, the revenue would not recover itself for forty or fifty years. … Public opinion, however, had been brought so strongly to bear in favour of a penny rate, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Spring Rice, on the 5th of July, 1839, proposed a resolution, 'that it is expedient to reduce the postage on letters to one uniform rate of a penny postage, according to a certain amount of weight to be determined—that the parliamentary privilege of franking should be abolished, and that official franking be strictly limited—the House pledging itself to make good any deficiency that may occur in the revenue from such reduction of the postage.' A Bill was accordingly passed to this effect in the House of Commons, its operation being limited in its duration to one year, and the Treasury retaining the power of fixing the rates at first, although the ultimate reduction was to be to one penny. This experimental measure reduced all rates above fourpence to that sum, leaving those below fourpence unaltered. With this complication of charge the experiment could not have a fair trial, and accordingly on the 10th of January, 1840, the uniform half-ounce rate became by order of the Treasury one penny. … In 1840 the number of letters sent through the post had more than doubled, and the legislature had little hesitation in making the Act of 1839 permanent, instead of its duration being limited to the year which would expire in October. A stamped envelope, printed upon a peculiar paper, and bearing an elaborate design, was originally chosen as the mode of rendering prepayment convenient to the sender of a letter. A simpler plan soon superseded this attempt to enlist the Fine Arts in a plain business operation. The plan of prepaying letters by affixing a stamp bearing the head of the ruler of the country, came into use here in May, 1840 [see, also, ENGLAND: A. D. 1840]. The habit of prepayment by postage stamps has now become so universal throughout the world, that in 1861 the system was established in eighty different countries or colonies."

C. Knight, Popular History of England, volume 8, chapter 24.

The first postal system in the American colonies was privately established in New England in 1676, by John Heyward, under authority from the General Court of the colony of Massachusetts. "In 1683 the government of Penn established a postal system for the Colony of Pennsylvania. In 1700 Colonel J. Hamilton organized 'his postal establishment for British America' including all the English colonies, but soon after disposed of his right to the English crown. In 1710 the English Parliament established by law the first governmental postal system with the general office at New York, which continued until in 1776 the Continental Congress adopted and set in action the postal system proposed by Franklin, who was appointed the first Postmaster General. The first law of the Federal Congress continued this system in operation as sufficient for the public wants, but the postal service was not finally settled until the act of 1792. This law (1792) fixed a tariff which with unimportant changes remained in force until the adoption of the system of Uniform Postage in the United States. Single, double and triple letters were charged 8, 16 and 24 cents respectively when sent to other countries, and four cents plus the internal postage when arriving from foreign countries. The internal postage between offices in the United States was 6, 8, 10, 15, 17, 20, 22 and 25 cents for distances of 30, 60, 100, 150, 200, 250, 350, or 400 miles respectively for single letters, and double, triple, etc., this for double, triple, etc. letters. A single letter was defined by the law to be a single sheet or piece of paper, a double letter, two sheets or pieces of paper, etc. … The earliest letters which we have seen, consist of single sheets of paper folded and addressed upon the sheet. An envelope would have subjected them to double postage."

J. K. Tiffany, History of the Postage Stamps, introduction.

By an act of March 3, 1845, the postage rates in the United States were reduced to two—namely, 5 cents for 300 miles or under, and 10 cents for longer distances. Six years later (March 3, 1851) the minimum rate for half an ounce became 3 cents (if prepaid) with the distance covered by it extended to 3,000 miles; if not prepaid, 5 cents. For distances beyond 3,000 miles, these rates were doubled. In 1856 prepayment was made compulsory; and by an act signed March 3, 1863, the 3 cent rate for half–ounce letters was extended to all distances in the United States.

J. Rees, Footprints of a Letter-Carrier, page 264.

In 1883 the rate in the United States was reduced to 2 cents for all distances, on letters not exceeding half an ounce. In 1885 the weight of a letter transmissible for 2 cents was increased to one ounce. The use of postage stamps was first introduced in the United States under an act of Congress passed in March, 1847. Stamped envelopes were first provided in 1853. The first issue of postal cards was on the 1st of May, 1873, under an act approved June 8, 1872. The registry system was adopted July 1, 1855. Free delivery of letters in the larger cities was first undertaken on the 1st of July 1863.

_D. M. Dickinson, Progress and the Post (North American Review, October, 1889)._

ALSO IN: Annual Report of the Postmaster-General of the United States, 1893, pages 543-558 (Description of all Postage Stamps and Postal Cards issued).

POSTAL MONEY-ORDER SYSTEM, The.

The postal money-order system, though said to be older in practical existence, was regularly instituted and organized in England, in its present form, in 1859. It was adopted in the United States five years later, going into operation in November, 1864.

_D. M. Dickinson, Progress and the Post (North American Review, October, 1889)._

ALSO IN: Appleton's Annual Cyclopœdia, 1887, page 687.

POSTAL SAVINGS BANKS.

Postal savings banks were first brought into operation in England in 1861. "One shilling is the smallest sum that can be deposited. The Government has, however, … issued blank forms with spaces for twelve penny postage-stamps, and will receive one of these forms with twelve stamps affixed as a deposit. This plan was suggested by the desire to encourage habits of saving among children, and by the success of penny banks in connection with schools and mechanics' institutes. No one can deposit more than £30 in one year, or have to his credit more than £150 exclusive of interest. When the principal and interest together amount to £200, interest ceases until the amount has been reduced below £200. {2582} Interest at two and a half per cent is paid, beginning the first of the month following the deposit and stopping the last of the month preceding the withdrawal, but no interest is paid on any sum less than a pound or not a multiple of a pound. The interest is added to the principal on the 31st of December of each year. … The English colonies … have established postal savings-banks of a similar character. … The Canadian system … went into operation in 1868. … Influenced by the success of the English system of postal savings-banks, the governments on the Continent of Europe have now nearly all made similar provisions for the investment of the surplus earnings of the people. The Italian system … went into operation February 20, 1876. … In France the proposal to establish postal savings-banks was frequently discussed, but not adopted until March 1881, although the ordinary savings-banks had for several years been allowed to use the post-offices as places for the receipt and repayment of deposits. … The Austrian postal savings-banks were first opened January 12, 1883. … The Belgian system has been [1885] in successful operation for more than fifteen years; that of the Netherlands was established some three years ago; while Sweden has just followed her neighbors, Denmark and Norway, in establishing similar institutions. In 1871 Postmaster-General Creswel recommended the establishment of postal savings depositories in connection with the United States post-offices, and two years later he discussed the subject very fully in his annual report. Several of his successors have renewed his recommendation;" but no action has been taken by Congress.

_D. B. King, Postal Savings-Banks (Popular Science Monthly, December, 1885)._

POSTAL TELEGRAPH, The.

"The States of the continent of Europe were the first to appreciate the advantages of governmental control of the telegraph. … From the beginning they assumed the erection and management of the telegraph lines. It may be said that in taking control of the telegraphs the monarchical governments of the Old World were actuated as much by the desire to use them for the maintenance of authority as by the advantages which they offered for the service of the people. To a certain extent this is doubtless true, but it is none the less true that the people have reaped the most solid benefits, and that the tendency has been rather to liberalize government than to maintain arbitrary power. … The greatest progress and the best management have alike been shown in those countries where the forms of government are most liberal, as in Switzerland and Belgium. … In Great Britain the telegraph was at first controlled by private parties. … In July, 1868, an act was passed 'to enable Her Majesty's Postmaster-General to acquire, work, and maintain electric telegraphs.' … The rate for messages was fixed throughout the kingdom at one shilling for twenty words, excluding the address and signature. This rate covered delivery within one mile of the office of address, or within its postal delivery." The lines of the existing telegraph companies were purchased on terms which were commonly held to be exorbitant, and Parliament, changing its original intention, conferred on the post-office department a monopoly of the telegraphs. Thus "the British postal telegraph was from the first handicapped by an enormous interest charge, and to some extent by the odium which always attaches to a legal monopoly. But notwithstanding the exorbitant price paid for the telegraph, the investment has not proved an unprofitable one."

_N. P. Hill, Speech in the Senate of the United States, January 14, 1884, on a Bill to Establish Postal Telegraphs, ("Speeches and Papers," pages 200-215)._

POSTAL UNION, The.

The Postal Union, which now embraces most of the civilized and semi-civilized countries of the world, was formed originally by a congress of delegates, representing the principal governments of Europe, and the United States of America, which assembled at Berne, Switzerland, in September, 1874. A treaty was concluded at that time, which established uniform rates of postage (25 centimes, or 5 cents, on half-ounce letters), between the countries becoming parties to it, and opening the opportunity for other states to join in the same arrangement. From year to year since, the Postal Union has been widened by the accession of new signatories to the treaty, until very few regions of the globe where any postal system exists lie now outside of it. The late accessions to the Postal Union have been North Borneo, the German East African Protectorate, and the British Australasian Colonies, in 1801; Natal and Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1802; the South African Republic (Transvaal) in 1803. By the action of an international postal congress, held at Vienna, in 1801, a kind of international clearing-house for the Postal Union was established at Berne, Switzerland, and the settlement of accounts between its members has been greatly facilitated thereby.

POSTUMIAN ROAD.

One of the great roads of the ancient Romans. It led from Genoa to Aquileia, by way of Placentia, Cremona and Verona.

T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 4, chapter 11.

POTESTAS.

The civil power with which a Roman magistrate was invested was technically termed potestas.

W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity., chapter 5.

POTESTAS TRIBUNITIA, The.

The powers and prerogatives of the ancient tribunitian office, without the office itself, being conferred upon Augustus and his successors, became the most important element, perhaps, of the finally compacted sovereignty of the Roman emperors.

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 30.

POTIDÆA, Siege of.

The city of Potidæa, a Corinthian colony founded on the long peninsula of Pallene which projects from the Macedonian coast, but which had become subject to Athens, revolted from the latter B. C. 432, and was assisted by the Corinthians. This was among the quarrels which led up to the Peloponnesian War. The Athenians reduced the city and expelled the inhabitants after a siege of three years.

Thucydides, History, books 1-2.

See, also, GREECE: B. C. 432; and ATHENS: B. C. 430-429.

POTOMAC, Army of the: Its creation and its campaigns.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (JULY-NOVEMBER); 1862 (MARCH-JULY), and after.

POTOSI, The Spanish province of. Modern Bolivia.

See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.

{2583}

POTTAWATOMIES.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY, AND OJIBWAS.

POUNDAGE.

See TUNNAGE AND POUNDAGE.

POWHATANS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: POWHATAN CONFEDERACY.

POYNING'S ACTS.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1494.

PRÆFECTS. PREFECTS. PRÉFÊTS.

See ROME: B. C. 31-A. D. 14; and PRÆTORIAN PRÆFECTS.

PRÆMUNIRE, Statute of.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1306-1393.

PRÆNESTE, Sulla's capture of.

Præneste, the ancient city of the Latins, held against Sulla, in the first civil war, by young Marius, was surrendered after the battle at the Colline Gate of Rome. Sulla ordered the male inhabitants to be put to the sword and gave up the town to his soldiers for pillage.

W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 7, chapter 19.

PRÆNOMEN. NOMEN. COGNOMEN.

See GENS.

PRÆTOR.

See ROME: B. C. 366.

----------PRÆTORIANS: Start--------

PRÆTORIAN GUARDS. PRÆTORIANS.

"The commander–in-chief of a Roman army was attended by a select detachment, which, under the name of 'Cohors Praetoria,' remained closely attached to his person in the field, ready to execute his orders, and to guard him from any sudden attack. … Augustus, following his usual line of policy, retained the ancient name of 'Praetoriae Cohortes,' while he entirely changed their character. He levied in Etruria, Umbria, ancient Latium, and the old Colonies, nine or ten Cohorts, consisting of a thousand men each, on whom he bestowed double pay and superior privileges. These formed a permanent corps, who acted as the Imperial Life Guards, ready to overawe the Senate, and to suppress any sudden popular commotion."

W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapter 12.

The Prætorian Guard had been quartered, during the reign of Augustus, and during the early years of the reign of Tiberius, in small barracks at various points throughout the city, or in the neighboring towns. Sejanus, the intriguing favorite of Tiberius, being commander of the formidable corps, established it in one great permanent camp, "beyond the north-eastern angle of the city, and between the roads which sprang from the Viminal and Colline gates." This was done A. D. 23.

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 45.

See, also, ROME: A. D. 14-37.

PRÆTORIANS: A. D. 41. Their elevation of Claudius to the throne.

See ROME: A. D. 41.

PRÆTORIANS: A. D. 193. Murder of Pertinax and sale of the empire.

See ROME: A. D. 192-284.

PRÆTORIANS: A. D. 193. Reconstitution by Severus.

Severus, whose first act on reaching Rome had been to disarm and disband the insolent Guard which murdered Pertinax and sold the empire to Julianus, had no thought of dispensing with the institution. There was soon in existence a new organization of Prætorians, increased to four times the ancient number and picked from all the legions of the frontiers.

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 5.

PRÆTORIANS: A. D. 238. Murder of Balbinus and Pupienus.

See ROME: A. D. 192-284.

PRÆTORIANS: A. D. 312. Abolition by Constantine.

"By the prudent measures of Diocletian, the numbers of the Prætorians were insensibly reduced, their privileges abolished, and their place supplied by two faithful legions of Illyricum, who, under the new titles of Jovians and Herculians, were appointed to perform the service of the imperial guards. … They were old corps stationed at Illyricum; and, according to the ancient establishment, they each consisted of 6,000 men. They had acquired much reputation by the use of the plumbatæ, or darts loaded with lead."

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 13, with foot-note.

Restored and augmented by Maxentius, during his brief reign, the Prætorians were finally abolished and their fortified camp destroyed, by Constantine, after his victory in the civil war of A. D. 312.

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 13.

----------PRÆTORIANS: End--------

PRÆTORIAN PRÆFECTS.

"As the government degenerated into military despotism, the Prætorian præfect, who in his origin had been a simple captain of the guards, was placed not only at the head of the army, but of the finances, and even of the law. In every department of administration he represented the person, and exercised the authority, of the emperor. The first præfect who enjoyed and abused this immense power was Plautianus, the favourite minister of Severus. … They [the Prætorian præfects) were deprived by Constantine of all military command as soon as they had ceased to lead into the field, under their immediate orders, the flower of the Roman troops; and at length, by a singular revolution, the captains of the guards were transformed into the civil magistrates of the provinces. According to the plan of government instituted by Diocletian, the four princes had each their Prætorian præfect; and, after the monarchy was once more united in the person of Constantine, he still continued to create the same number of four præfects, and intrusted to their care the same provinces which they already administered.

1. The Præfect of the East stretched his ample jurisdiction" from the Nile to the Phasis and from Thrace to Persia.

"2. The important provinces of Pannonia, Dacia, Macedonia, and Greece, acknowledged the authority of the Præfect of Illyricum.

3. The power of the Præfect of Italy" extended to the Danube, and over the islands of the Mediterranean and part of Africa.

"4. The Præfect of the Gauls comprehended under that plural denomination the kindred provinces of Britain and Spain, and … to the foot of Mount Atlas.

… Rome and Constantinople were alone excepted from the jurisdiction of the Prætorian præfects. … A perfect equality was established between the dignity of the two municipal, and that of the four Prætorian præfects."

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapters 5 and 17.

See, also, ROME: B. C. 31-A. D. 14.

PRÆTORIUM, The.

"In the very early days of Rome, before even Consuls had a being, the two chief magistrates of the republic bore the title of Praetors. Some remembrance of this fact lingering in the speech of the people gave always to the term Prætorium (the Praetor's house) a peculiar majesty, and caused it to be used as the equivalent of palace. So in the well-known passages of the New Testament, the palace of Pilate the Governor at Jerusalem, of Herod the King at Caesarea, of Nero the Emperor at Rome, are all called the Praetorium. From the palace the troops who surrounded the person of the Emperor took their well-known name, 'the Praetorian Guard.'"

T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3 (volume 1).

{2584}

PRAGA, Battle of (1831).

See POLAND: A. D. 1830-1832.

----------PRAGMATIC SANCTION: Start--------

PRAGMATIC SANCTION.

"No two words convey less distinct meaning to English ears than those which form this title: nor are we at all prepared to furnish an equivalent. Perhaps 'a well considered Ordinance' may in some degree represent them: i. e. an Ordinance which has been fully discussed by men practised in State Affairs. But we are very far from either recommending or being satisfied with such a substitute. The title was used in the Lower [the Byzantine] Empire, and Ducange ad v. describes 'Pragmaticum Rescriptum seu Pragmatica Sanctio' to be that which 'ad hibitâ diligente causæ cognitione, ex omnium Procerum consensu in modum sententiæ lecto, a Principe conceditur.'"

E. Smedley, History of France, part 1, chapter 15, footnote.

"Pragmatic Sanction being, in the Imperial Chancery and some others, the received title for Ordinances of a very irrevocable nature, which a sovereign makes, in affairs that belong wholly to himself, or what he reckons his own rights."

T. Carlyle, History of Frederick II., book 5, chapter 2.

"This word [pragmatic] is derived from the Greek 'pragma,' which means 'a rule.'"

E. de Bonnechose, History of France, volume 1, epoch 2, book 1, chapter 5, foot-note.

The following are the more noted ordinances which have borne this name.

PRAGMATIC SANCTION: A. D. 1220 and 1232. Of the Emperor Frederick II.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1250-1272.

PRAGMATIC SANCTION:A. D. 1268 (?). Of St. Louis.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1268.

PRAGMATIC SANCTION: A. D. 1438. Of Charles VII. of France, and its abrogation.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1438; and 1515-1518.

PRAGMATIC SANCTION:A. D. 1547. Of the Emperor Charles V. for the Netherlands.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1547.

PRAGMATIC SANCTION: A. D. 1718. Of the Emperor Charles VI.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1718-1738; and 1740 (OCTOBER).

----------PRAGMATIC SANCTION: End--------

----------PRAGUE: Start--------

PRAGUE: A. D. 1348-1409. The University and the German secession.

See EDUCATION, MEDIÆVAL: GERMANY; and BOHEMIA: A. D. 1405-1415.

PRAGUE: A. D. 1620. Battle of the White Mountain. Abandonment of crown and capital by Frederick.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1620.

PRAGUE: A. D. 1631. Occupied and plundered by the Saxons.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1631-1632.

PRAGUE: A. D. 1648. Surprise and capture of the Kleinsite by the Swedes. Siege of the older part of the city. The end of the Thirty Years War.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1646-1648.

PRAGUE: A. D. 1741. Taken by the French, Saxons and Bavarians.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1741 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).

PRAGUE: A. D. 1742. The French blockaded in the city. Retreat of Belleisle.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1742 (JUNE-DECEMBER).

PRAGUE: A. D. 1744. Won and lost by Frederick the Great.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1743-1744; and 1744-1745.

PRAGUE: A. D. 1757. Battle. Prussian victory Siege. Relief by Count Daun.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1757 (APRIL-JUNE).

PRAGUE: A. D. 1848. Bombardment by the Austrians.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1848-1849.

----------PRAGUE: End--------

PRAGUE, Congress of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (MAY-AUGUST).

PRAGUE, Treaty of (1634).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1634-1639.

Treaty of (1866).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1866.

PRAGUERIE.

The commotions produced by John Huss, at Prague, in the beginning of the 15th century, gave the name Praguerie, at that period, to all sorts of popular disturbances.

PRAIRIAL, The month.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (OCTOBER) THE NEW REPUBLICAN CALENDAR.

PRAIRIAL FIRST, The insurrection of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (APRIL).

PRAIRIAL TWENTY-SECOND, Law of the.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (JUNE-JULY).

PRAIRIE GROVE, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER: MISSOURI-ARKANSAS).

PRAKRITA.

See SANSKRIT

PRATO, The horrible sack of (1512).

See FLORENCE: A. D. 1502-1569.

PRECIANI, The.

See AQUITAINE: THE ANCIENT TRIBES.

PRECIEUSES.

See RAMBOUILLET, HÔTEL DE.

PRECIOUS METALS, Production of.

See MONEY AND BANKING: 16-17TH CENTURIES, and 1848-1893.

PREFECTS. PRÉFÊTS. PRÆFECTS.

See ROME: B. C. 31-A. D. 14; and PRÆTORIAN PRÆFECTS.

PREMIER. PRIME MINISTER.

See CABINET, THE ENGLISH.

PREMISLAUS, King of Poland, A. D. 1289-1296.

PREMONSTRATENSIAN ORDER.

This was the most important branch of the Regular Canons of St. Augustine, founded by St. Norbert, a German nobleman, who died in 1134. It took its name from Pre-montre, in Picardy, where the first house was established.

E. L. Cutts, Scenes and Characters of the Middle Ages, chapter 3.

ALSO IN: J. Alzog, Manual of Universal Church History, section 243 (volume 2).

See AUSTIN CANONS.

PRESBURG, OR PRESSBURG, Peace of (1805).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806.

----------PRESBYTERIANS: Start--------

PRESBYTERIANS, English, in the Civil War.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1643 (JULY), and (JULY-SEPTEMBER); 1646 (MARCH); 1647 (APRIL-AUGUST); (AUGUST-DECEMBER); 1648.

PRESBYTERIANS: At the Restoration.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1658-1660; 1661; and 1662-1665.

PRESBYTERIANS: In Colonial Massachusetts.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1646-1651.

PRESBYTERIANS: Scotch-Irish.

See SCOTCH-IRISH.

PRESBYTERIANS: Scottish.

See CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

----------PRESBYTERIANS: End--------

PRESCOTT, Colonel William, and the battle of Bunker Hill.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (JUNE).

{2585}

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

"The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice-President, chosen for the same term, be elected as follows: Each State shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress [and these electors, meeting in their respective States, shall vote for President and Vice-President, transmitting certified lists of their votes to the President of the Senate of the United States, who shall count them in the presence of the two Houses of Congress; and if no person is elected President by a majority of all the votes cast, then the House of Representatives shall elect a President from the three persons who received the highest numbers of the votes cast by the electors, the representation from each State having one vote in such election]. … No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States. … The President shall be Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several States, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law; but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers as they think proper in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments. The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States. The President, Vice-President, and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Constitution of the United States, article 2, and article 12 of amendments.

The provisions of the Constitution regarding the Presidential succession, in case of the death or resignation of both President and Vice-President, are: 'In case of the removal of the President from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the Vice-President, and the Congress may by law provide for the case of removal, death, resignation, or inability both of the President and Vice-President, declaring what officer shall then act as President, and such officer shall act accordingly until the disability be removed or a President shall be elected.'

(Article II, Section 6.)

In pursuance of the power thus granted to it in the last half of this section, Congress in 1792 passed an act declaring that in case of the death, resignation, etc., of both the President and Vice-President, the succession should be first to the President of the Senate and then to the Speaker of the House. This order was changed by the act of 1886, which provided that the succession to the presidency should be as follows:

1. President. 2. Vice-President. 3. Secretary of State. 4. Secretary of the Treasury. 5. Secretary of War. 6. Attorney General. 7. Postmaster General. 8. Secretary of the Navy. 9. Secretary of the Interior.

In all cases the remainder of the four-years' term shall be served out. This act also regulated the counting of the votes of the electors by Congress, and the determination of who were legally chosen electors.

Statutes of the United States passed at 1st Session of 49th Congress, page 1.

ALSO IN: E. Stanwood, History of Presidential Elections, chapter 27.

J. Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, book 3, chapters 36-37 (volume 3).

The Federalist, numbers 66-76.

J. Bryce, The American Commonwealth, chapters 5-8 (volume 1).

PRESIDIO.

See TEXAS: A. D. 1819-1835

PRESS, The.

See PRINTING.

PRESSBURG, or PRESBURG, Treaty of (1805).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1800.

PRESS-GANG.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812.

PRESTER JOHN, The Kingdom of.

"About the middle of the eleventh century stories began to be circulated in Europe as to a Christian nation of north-eastern Asia, whose sovereign was at the same time king and priest, and was known by the name of Prester John. Amid the mass of fables with which the subject is encumbered, it would seem to be certain that, in the very beginning of the century, the Khan of the Keraït, a tribe whose chief seat was at Karakorum, between Lake Baikal and the northern frontier of China, was converted to Nestorian Christianity—it is said, through the appearance of a saint to him when he had lost his way in hunting. By means of conversation with Christian merchants, he acquired some elementary knowledge of the faith, and, on the application of Ebed-Jesu, metropolitan of Maru, to the Nestorian patriarch Gregory, clergy were sent, who baptized the king and his subjects, to the number of 200,000. Ebed-Jesu consulted the patriarch how the fasts were to be kept, since the country did not afford any corn, or anything but flesh and milk; and the answer was, that, if no other Lenten provisions were to be had, milk should be the only diet for seasons of abstinence. The earliest western notice of this nation is given by Otho of Freising, from the relation of an Armenian bishop who visited the court of pope Eugenius III. This report is largely tinctured with fable, and deduces the Tartar chief's descent from the Magi who visited the Saviour in His cradle. {2586} It would seem that the Nestorians of Syria, for the sake of vying with the boasts of the Latins, delighted in inventing tales as to the wealth, the splendour, and the happiness of their convert's kingdom; and to them is probably to be ascribed an extravagantly absurd letter, in which Prester John is made to dilate on the greatness and the riches of his dominions, the magnificence of his state and the beauty of his wives, and to offer the Byzantine emperor, Manuel, if he be of the true faith, the office of lord chamberlain in the court of Karakorum. In 1177 Alexander III. was induced by reports which a physician named Philip had brought back from Tartary, as to Prester John's desire to be received into communion with the pope, to address a letter to the king, recommending Philip as a religions instructor. But nothing is known as to the result of this; and in 1202 the Keraït kingdom was overthrown by the Tartar conqueror Genghis Khan. In explanation of the story as to the union of priesthood with royalty in Prester John, many theories have been proposed, of which two may be mentioned here: that it arose out of the fact of a Nestorian priest's having got possession of the kingdom on the death of a khan; or that, the Tartar prince's title being compounded of the Chinese 'wang' (king) and the Mongol 'khan,' the first of these words was confounded by the Nestorians of Syria with the name John, and the second with 'cohen' (a priest). … The identification of Prester John's kingdom with Abyssinia was a mistake of Portuguese explorers some centuries later."

J. C. Robertson, History of the Christian Church, book 6, chapter 11, with foot-note (volume 5).

ALSO IN: Colonel H. Yule, Note to 'The Book of Marco Polo,' volume 1, pages 204-209.

PRESTON, Battle of (1648).

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1648 (APRIL-AUGUST).

Battle of (1715).

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1715.

PRESTON PANS, Battle of (1745).

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1745-1746.

PRESTONBURG, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY: KENTUCKY-TENNESSEE).

PRETAXATION.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1125-1152.

PRETENDERS, The Stuart.

See JACOBITES.

PRICE'S RAID.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (MARCH-OCTOBER: ARKANSAS-MISSOURI).

PRIDE'S PURGE.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1648 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER).

PRIEST'S LANE, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1631-1632.

PRIM, General, Assassination of.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1866-1873.

PRIMATES. METROPOLITANS. PATRIARCHS.

In the early organization of the Christian Church, the bishops of every province found it necessary "to make one of themselves superior to all the rest, and invest him with certain powers and privileges for the good of the whole, whom they therefore named their primate, or metropolitan, that is, the principal bishop of the province. … Next in order to the metropolitans or primates were the patriarchs; or, as they were at first called, archbishops and exarchs of the diocese. For though now an archbishop and a metropolitan be generally taken for the same, to wit, the primate of a single province; yet anciently the name archbishop was a more extensive title, and scarce given to any but those whose jurisdiction extended over a whole imperial diocese, as the bishop of Rome, Alexandria, Antioch, &c."

T. Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, book 2, chapters 16-17 (volume 1).

See, also, CHRISTIANITY; A. D. 312-337.

PRIME MINISTER, The English.

See CABINET, THE ENGLISH.

PRINCE, Origin of the title.

See PRINCEPS SENATUS.

PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND.

"Prince Edward's Island, the smallest province of the Dominion [of Canada], originally called St. John's Island, until 1770 formed part of Nova Scotia. The first Governor was Walter Patterson. … The first assembly met in 1773." In 1873 Prince Edward Island consented to be received into the Confederation of the Dominion of Canada—the latest of the provinces to accede to the Union, except Newfoundland, which still (1894) remains outside.

J. E. C. Munro, The Constitution of Canada, chapter 2.

See, also, CANADA: A. D. 1867; and 1869-1873.

PRINCE OF THE CAPTIVITY.

See JEWS: A. D. 200-400.

PRINCE OF WALES.

See WALES, PRINCE OF.

PRINCEPS SENATUS.

"As the title of imperator conferred the highest military rank upon Augustus and his successors, so did that of princeps senatus, or princeps (as it came to be expressed by an easy but material abridgment), convey the idea of the highest civil preeminence consistent with the forms of the old constitution. In ancient times this title had been appropriated to the first in succession of living censorii, men who had served the office of censor; and such were necessarily patricians and senators. The sole privilege it conferred was that of speaking first in the debates of the senate; a privilege however to which considerable importance might attach from the exceeding deference habitually paid to authority and example by the Roman assemblies. … The title of princeps was modest and constitutional; it was associated with the recollection of the best ages of the free state and the purest models of public virtue; it could not be considered beyond the deserts of one who was undoubtedly the foremost man of the nation. … The popularity which the assumption of this republican title conferred upon the early emperors may be inferred from the care with which it is noted, and its constitutional functions referred to by the writers of the Augustan age and that which succeeded it. But it was an easy and natural step in the progress of political ideas to drop the application of the title, and contract it from prince of the senate, to prince merely. The original character of the appellation was soon forgotten, and the proper limits of its privileges confounded in the more vague and general prerogative which the bare designation of first or premier seemed to imply."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 31.

ALSO IN: E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 3, note by Dr. W. Smith.

PRINCETON, Battle of (1777).

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776-1777 WASHINGTON'S RETREAT.

PRINCIPES.

See LEGION, THE ROMAN.

{2587}

----------PRINTING AND THE PRESS: Start--------

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1430-1456. The invention of movable type. Rival claims for Coster and Gutenberg. The first Printed Book.

"Before arriving at the movable type placed side by side, and forming phrases, which appears to us to-day so simple and so ordinary, many years passed. It is certain that long before Gutenberg a means was found of cutting wood and metal in relief and reproducing by application the image traced. … Remembering that the numerous guilds of 'tailleurs d' images,' or sculptors in relief, had in the Middle Ages the specialty of carving ivories and of placing effigies on tombs, it can be admitted without much difficulty that these people one day found a means of multiplying the sketches of a figure often asked for, by modelling its contour in relief on ivory or wood, and afterwards taking a reproduction on paper or parchment by means of pressure. When and where was this discovery produced? We cannot possibly say; but it is certain that playing cards were produced by this means, and that from the year 1423 popular figures were cut in wood, as we know from the St. Christopher of that date belonging to Lord Spencer. … It is a recognised fact that the single sheet with a printed figure preceded the xylographic book, in which text and illustration were cut in the same block. This process did not appear much before the second quarter of the 15th century, and it was employed principally for popular works which were then the universal taste. The engraving also was nothing more than a kind of imposition palmed off as a manuscript; the vignettes were often covered with brilliant colours and gold, and the whole sold as of the best quality. … An attempt had been made to put some text at the foot of the St. Christopher of 1423, and the idea of giving more importance to the text was to the advantage of the booksellers. … At the epoch of the St. Christopher, in 1423, several works were in vogue in the universities, the schools, and with the public. … To find a means of multiplying these treatises at little cost was a fortune to the inventor. It is to be supposed that many artisans of the time attempted it; and without doubt it was the booksellers themselves, mostly mere dealers, who were tempted to the adventure by the sculptors and wood-cutters. But none had yet been so bold as to cut in relief a series of blocks with engravings and text to compose a complete work. That point was reached very quickly when some legend was engraved at the foot of a vignette, and it may be thought that the 'Donatus' [i. e. the Latin Syntax of Ælius Donatus] was the most ancient of books so obtained among the 'Incunabuli,' as we now call them, a word that signifies origin or cradle. The first books then were formed of sheets of paper or parchment, laboriously printed from xylographic blocks, that is to say wooden blocks on which a 'tailleur d' images' had left in relief the designs and the letters of the text. He had thus to trace his characters in reverse, so that they could be reproduced as written; he had to avoid faults, because a phrase once done, well or ill, lasted. It was doubtless this difficulty of correction that gave the idea of movable types. … This at least explains the legend of Laurent Coster, of Haarlem, who, according to Hadrian Junius, his compatriot, discovered by accident the secret of separate types while playing with his children. And if the legend of which we speak contains the least truth, it must be found in the sense above indicated, that is in the correction of faults, rather than in the innocent game of a merchant of Haarlem. … Movable type, the capital point of printing, the pivot of the art of the Book, developed itself little by little, according to needs, when there was occasion to correct an erroneous inscription; but, in any case, its origin is unknown. Doubtless to vary the text, means were found to replace entire phrases by other phrases, preserving the original figures; and thus the light dawned upon these craftsmen, occupied in the manufacture and sale of their books. According to Hadrian Junius, Laurent Janszoon Coster (the latter name signifying 'the discoverer') published one of the celebrated series of works under the general title of 'Speculum' which was then so popular, … the 'Speculum Humanæ Salvationis.' … Junius, as we see, attributes to Laurent Coster the first impression of the 'Speculum,' no longer the purely xylographic impression of the 'Donatus' from an engraved block, but that of the more advanced manner in movable types [probably between 1430 and 1440]. In point of fact, this book had at least four editions, similar in engravings and body of letters, but of different text. It must then be admitted that the fount was dispersed, and typography discovered. … All the xylographic works of the 15th century may be classed in two categories: the xylographs, rightly so called, or the block books, such as the 'Donatus,' and the books with movable types, like the 'Speculum,' of which we speak. … The movable types used, cut separately in wood, were not constituted to give an ideal impression. We can understand the cost that the execution of these characters must have occasioned, made as they were one by one, without the possibility of ever making them perfectly uniform. Progress was to substitute for this irregular process types that were similar, identical, easily produced, and used for a long time without breaking. Following on the essays of Laurent Coster, continuous researches bore on this point. … Here history is somewhat confused. Hadrian Junius positively accuses one of Laurent Coster's workmen of having stolen the secrets of his master and taken flight to Mayence, where he afterwards founded a printing office. According to Junius, the metal type was the discovery of the Dutchman, and the name of the thief was John. Who was this John? Was it John Gænsefleisch, called Gutenberg, or possibly John Fust? But it is not at all apparent that Gutenberg, a gentleman of Mayence, exiled from his country, was ever in the service of the Dutch inventor. As to Fust, we believe his only intervention in the association of printers of Mayence was as a money-lender, from which may be comprehended the unlikelihood of his having been with Coster, the more so as we find Gutenberg retired to Strasbourg, where he pursued his researches. There he was, as it were, out of his sphere, a ruined noble whose great knowledge was bent entirely on invention. Doubtless, like many others, he may have had in his hands one of the printed works of Laurent Coster, and conceived the idea of appropriating the infant process. {2588} In 1439 he was associated with two artisans of the city of Strasbourg, ostensibly in the fabrication of mirrors, which may be otherwise understood as printing of 'Speculums,' the Latin word signifying the same thing. … Three problems presented themselves to him. He wanted types less fragile than wooden types and less costly than engraving. He wanted a press by the aid of which he could obtain a clear impression on parchment or paper. He desired also that the leaves of his books should not be anopistograph, or printed only on one side. … Until then, and even long after, the xylographs were printed 'au frotton,' or with a brush, rubbing the paper upon the forme coated with ink, thicker than ordinary ink. He dreamed of something better. In the course of his work John Gutenberg returned to Mayence. The idea of publishing a Bible, the Book of books, had taken possession of his heart. … The cutting of his types had ruined him. … In this unhappy situation, Gutenberg made the acquaintance of a financier of Mayence, named Fust, … who put a sum of 1,100 florins at his disposal to continue his experiments. Unfortunately this money disappeared, it melted away, and the results obtained were absolutely ludicrous. … About this time a third actor enters on the scene. Peter Schoeffer, of Gernsheim, a writer, introduced into the workshop of Gutenberg to design letters, benefited by the abortive experiments, and taking up the invention at its dead-lock, conducted it to success. John of Tritenheim, called Trithemius, the learned abbot of Spanheim, is the person who relates these facts; but as he got his information from Schoeffer himself, too much credence must not be given to his statements. Besides, Schoeffer was not at all an ordinary artisan. If we credit a Strasbourg manuscript written by his hand in 1449, he was a student of the 'most glorious university of Paris.'" How much Schoeffer contributed to the working out of the invention is a matter of conjecture; but in 1454 it was advanced to a state in which the first known application of it in practical use was made. This was in the printing of copies of the famous letters of indulgence which Pope Nicholas V. was then selling throughout Europe. Having the so far perfected invention in hand, Fust and Schoeffer (the latter now having married the former's granddaughter) wished to rid themselves of Gutenberg. "Fust had a most easy pretext, which was to demand purely and simply from his associate the sums advanced by him, and which had produced so little. Gutenberg had probably commenced his Bible, but, in face of the claims of Fust, he had to abandon it altogether, types, formes, and press. In November, 1455, he had retired to a little house outside the city, where he tried his best, by the aid of foreign help, to establish a workshop, and to preserve the most perfect secrecy. Relieved of his company, Fust and Schoeffer were able to take up the impression of the Bible and to complete it without him. … One thing is certain: that the Bible of Schoeffer, commenced by Gutenberg or not, put on sale by Fust and Schoeffer alone about the end of 1455 or beginning of 1456, proves to be the first completed book. … It is now called the Mazarine Bible, from the fact that the copy in the Mazarin Library was the first to give evidence concerning it. The book was put on sale at the end of 1455 or beginning of 1456, for a manuscript note of a vicar of St. Stephen at Mayence records that he finished the binding and illuminating of the first volume on St. Bartholomew's Day [June 13], 1456, and the second on the 15th of August. … All these remarks show that the printers did not proclaim themselves, and were making pseudo-manuscripts. … Many of the copies are illuminated with as much care and beauty as if they were the finest manuscripts. … Copies are by no means uncommon, most of the great libraries having one, and many are in private collections."

H. Bouchot, The Printed Book, chapter 1.

"The general consent of all nations in ascribing the honour of the invention of printing to Gutenberg seems at first sight a very strong argument in his favour; but if Gutenberg were not the first to invent and use movable types, but the clever man who brought to perfection what already existed in a crude state, we can quite imagine his fame to have spread everywhere as the real inventor. As a master in the art of printing, Gutenberg's name was known in Paris so early as 1472. … Mr. Hessels … believes that the Coster mentioned in the archives as living in Haarlem, 1436-83, was the inventor of types, and that, taken as a whole, the story as told by Junius is substantially correct. Personally I should like to wait for more evidence. There is no doubt that the back-bone of the Dutch claim lies in the pieces and fragments of old books discovered for the most part in the last few decades, and which give support to, at the same time that they receive support from, the Cologne Chronicler. … These now amount to forty-seven different works. Their number is being added to continually now that the attention of librarians has been strongly called to the importance of noting and preserving them. They have been catalogued with profound insight by Mr. Hessels, and for the first time classified by internal evidence into their various types and classes. But, it may well be asked, what evidence is there that all these books were not printed long after Gutenberg's press was at work? … The earliest book of Dutch printing bears date 1473, and not a single edition out of all the so-called Costeriana has any printer's name or place or date. To this the reply is, that these small pieces were school-books or absies and such-like works, in the production of which there was nothing to boast of, as there would be in a Bible. Such things were at all times 'sine ulla nota,' and certain to be destroyed when done with, so that the wonder would be to find them so dated, and the very fact of their bearing a date would go far to prove them not genuine. These fragments have been nearly all discovered in 15th-century books, printed mostly' in various towns of Holland. … Mr. Hessels quotes forty-seven different books as 'Costeriana,' which include four editions of the Speculum, nineteen of Donatus, and seven of Doctrinale. The Donatuses are in five different types, probably from five different Dutch presses. Compared with the earliest dated books of 1473 and onwards, printed in Holland, they have nothing in common, while their brotherhood to the Dutch MSS. and block-books of about thirty years earlier is apparent. Just as astronomers have been unable to explain certain aberrations of the planets without surmising a missing link in the chain of their knowledge, so is it with early typography. That such finished works as the first editions of the Bible and Psalter could be the legitimate predecessors of the Costeriana, the Bruges, the Westminster press, and others, I cannot reconcile with the internal evidence of their workmanship. But admit the existence of an earlier and much ruder school of typography, and all is plain and harmonious."

W. Blades, Books in Chains, and other Bibliographical Papers, pages 149-158.

ALSO IN: _J. H. Hessels, Gutenberg: was he the Inventor of Printing?_

C. H. Timperley, Encyclopœdia of Literature and Typographical Anecdote, pages 101-120.

H. N. Humphreys, History of the Art of Printing, chapters 3-4.

{2589}

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1457-1489. Progress and diffusion of the art.

After the Mazarine Bible, "then follows the Kalendar for the year 1457, most probably printed at the end of 1456. Then again the printed dates, August 14, 1457 and 1459, with place (Mentz) in the colophons of the Psalter issued by Fust and Schoeffer; the printed year 1460 (with Mentz added) in the Catholicon [a Latin Grammar and Dictionary]. &c. &c. So that, with the exception of 1458, there is no interruption in Mentz printing from the moment that we see it begin there. As regards the printed psalter, its printers are mentioned distinctly in the book itself; but the other books just mentioned are assumed to have been issued by the same two Mentz printing-offices which are supposed to be already at work there in 1454, though the 1460 Catholicon and some of the other works are ascribed by some to other printers. By the side of these dates, we find already a Bible completed in 1460 by Mentelin at Strassburg, according to a MS. note in the copy preserved at Freiburg. … Assuming then, for a moment, that Mentz is the starting-point, we see printing spread to Strassburg in 1460; to Bamberg in 1461; to Subiaco in 1465; in 1466 (perhaps already in 1463) it is established at Cologne; in 1467 at Eltville, Rome; in 1468 at Augsburg, Basle, Marienthal; in 1469 at Venice; 1470 at Nuremberg, Verona, Foligno, Trevi, Savigliano, Paris; 1471 at Spire, Bologna, Ferrara, Florence, Milan, Naples, Pavia, Treviso; 1472 at Esslingen, Cremona, Mantua, Padua, Parma, Monreale, Fivizano, Verona; 1473 at Laugingen, Ulm (perhaps here earlier), Merseburg, Alost, Utrecht, Lyons, Brescia, Messina; 1474 at Louvain, Genoa, Como, Savona, Turin, Vicenza; 1475 at Lubeck, Breslau, Blaubeuren, Burgdorf, Modena, Reggio, Cagli, Caselle or Casale, Saragossa; 1476 at Rostock, Bruges (here earlier?), Brussels; 1477 at Reichenstein, Deventer, Gouda, Delft, Westminster; 1478 at Oxford, St. Maartensdyk, Colle, Schussenried, Eichstadt; 1479 at Erfurt, Würzburg, Nymegen, Zwolle, Poitiers; 1480 at London [?], Oudenaarde, Hasselt, Reggio; 1481 at Passau, Leipzig, Magdeburg, Treves, Urach; 1482 at Reutlingen, Memmingen, Metz, Antwerp; 1483 at Leiden, Kuilenburg, Ghent, Haarlem; 1484 at Bois-le–Duc, Siena; 1485 at Heidelberg, Regensburg; 1486 at Munster, Stuttgart; 1487 at Ingolstadt; 1488 at Stendal; 1489 at Hagenau, &c."

J. H. Hessels, Haarlem the Birth-place of Printing, not Mentz, chapter 4.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1469-1515. The early Venetian printers. The Aldine Press.

"One of the famous first race of German printers, John of Spires, arrived at Venice in the year 1469, and immediately brought his art into full play; producing within the first three months his fine edition of the 'Letters of Cicero.' a masterpiece of early printing. … The success of John of Spires as a printer was at once recognized by the Venetian Republic; and Pasquale Malipiero, the reigning Doge, granted a patent conferring upon him the sole right of printing books within the territory of Venice. … But the enterprising printer did not live to enjoy the privilege," and it was not continued to any of his family, "On the withdrawal of the monopoly several new printers set up their Presses in the city, among whom was the celebrated Jenson, the ingenious Frenchman who was sent by Charles VII. to acquire the art at Mayence. … John Emeric, of Udenheim, was another of the German printers who immediately succeeded John and Vindelin of Spires; and still more successful, though somewhat later, in the field, was Erard Ratdolt. … He [Ratdolt] is said to have been the first to adopt a regular form of Title at all approaching our modern conception of a Book-Title; and he also took the lead in the production of those beautifully-engraved initials for which the books printed in Italy towards the close of the 15th century are famous. His most splendid work is undoubtedly the 'Elements of Euclid, with the Commentaries of Campanus.' … Nicholas Jenson was the most renowned of those who followed the earliest German printers in Venice, until his works were partially eclipsed by those of the Aldi. … In 1470 he [Jenson] had … completed his preparations, and the first four works which issued from his Venetian press appeared in that year. … These works were printed with Roman characters of his own engraving, more perfect in form than those of any previous printer. His types are in fact the direct parents of the letters now in general use, which only differ from them in certain small details dependent solely on fashion. … This celebrated printer died in September of the year 1481. … Andrea Torresani and others continued Jenson's Association, making use of the same types. Torresani was eventually succeeded in the same establishment by the celebrated Aldo Manuccio, who, having married his daughter, adopted the important vocation of printer, and became the first of those famous 'Aldi,' as they are commonly termed, whose fame has not only absorbed that of all the earlier Venetian printers, but that of the early printers of every other Italian seat of the art. … It was Manuccio who, among many other advances in this art, first invented the semi-cursive style of character now known as 'Italic'; and it is said that it was founded upon a close imitation of the careful handwriting of Petrarch, which, in fact, it closely resembles. This new type was used for a small octavo edition of 'Virgil,' issued in 1501, on the appearance of which he obtained from Pope Leo X. a letter of privilege, entitling him to the sole use of the new type which he had invented." The list of the productions of the elder Aldus and his son Paul "comprises nearly all the great works of antiquity, and of the best Italian authors of their own time. From their learning and general accomplishments, the Aldi might have occupied a brilliant position as scholars and authors, but preferred the useful labour of giving correctly to the world the valuable works of others. The Greek editions of the elder Aldus form the basis of his true glory, especially the 'Aristotle,' printed in 1405, a work of almost inconceivable labour and perseverance."

H. N. Humphreys, History of the Art of Printing, chapter 8.

{2590}

"Aldus and his studio and all his precious manuscripts disappeared during the troubled years of the great Continental war in which all the world was against Venice [see VENICE: A. D. 1508-1500]. In 1510, 1511, and 1512, scarcely any book proceeded from his press. … After the war Aldus returned to his work with renewed fervour. 'It is difficult,' says Renouard, 'to form an idea of the passion with which he devoted himself to the reproduction of the great works of ancient literature. If he heard of the existence anywhere of a manuscript unpublished, or which could throw a light upon an existing text, he never rested till he had it in his possession. He did not shrink from long journeys, great expenditure, applications of all kinds.' … It is not in this way however that the publisher, that much questioned and severely criticised middleman, makes a fortune. And Aldus died poor. His privileges did not stand him in much stead, copyright, especially when not in books but in new forms of type, being non-existent in his day. In France and Germany, and still nearer home, his beautiful Italic was robbed from him, copied on all sides, notwithstanding the protection granted by the Pope and other princes as well as by the Venetian Signoria. His fine editions were printed from, and made the foundation of foreign issues which replaced his own. How far his princely patrons stood by him to repair his losses there seems no information. His father-in-law, Andrea of Asola, a printer who was not so fine a scholar, but perhaps more able to cope with the world, did come to his aid, and his son Paolo Manutio, and his grandson Aldo il Giovane, as he is called, succeeded him in turn."

Mrs. Oliphant, The Makers of Venice, part 4, chapter 3.

Aldus died in 1515. His son Paul left Venice for Rome in 1562.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1476-1491. Introduction in England. The Caxton Press.

"It was probably at the press of Colard Mansion, in a little room over the porch of St. Donat's at Bruges, that William Caxton learned the art which he was the first to introduce into England. A Kentish boy by birth, but apprenticed to a London mercer, Caxton had already spent thirty years of his manhood in Flanders as Governor of the English gild of Merchant Adventurers there, when we find him engaged as copyist in the service of Edward's sister, Duchess Margaret of Burgundy. But the tedious process of copying was soon thrown aside for the new art which Colard Mansion had introduced into Bruges. … The printing-press was the precious freight he brought back to England in 1476 after an absence of five-and-thirty years. Through the next fifteen, at an age when other men look for ease and retirement, we see him plunging with characteristic energy into his new occupation. His 'red pale' or heraldic shield marked with a red bar down the middle invited buyers to the press he established in the Almonry at Westminster, a little enclosure containing a chapel and almshouses near the west front of the church, where the alms of the abbey were distributed to the poor. … Caxton was a practical man of business, … no rival of the Venetian Aldi or of the classical printers of Rome, but resolved to get a living from his trade, supplying priests with service books and preachers with sermons, furnishing the clerk with his 'Golden Legend' and knight and baron with 'joyous and pleasant histories of chivalry.' But while careful to win his daily bread, he found time to do much for what of higher literature lay fairly to hand. He printed all the English poetry of any moment which was then in existence. His reverence for that 'worshipful man, Geoffrey Chaucer,' who 'ought to be eternally remembered,' is shown not merely by his edition of the 'Canterbury Tales,' but by his reprint of them when a purer text of the poem offered itself. The poems of Lydgate and Gower were added to those of Chaucer. The Chronicle of Brut and Higden's 'Polychronicon' were the only available works of an historical character then existing in the English tongue, and Caxton not only printed them but himself continued the latter up to his own time. A translation of Boethius, a version of the Eneid from the French, and a tract or two of Cicero, were the stray first-fruits of the classical press in England. Busy as was Caxton's printing-press, he was even busier as a translator than as a printer. More than four thousand of his printed pages are from works of his own rendering. The need of these translations shows the popular drift of literature at the time; but keen as the demand seems to have been, there is nothing mechanical in the temper with which Caxton prepared to meet it. A natural, simple-hearted taste and enthusiasm, especially for the style and forms of language, breaks out in his curious prefaces. … But the work of translation involved a choice of English which made Caxton's work important in the history of our language. He stood between two schools of translation, that of French affectation and English pedantry. It was a moment when the character of our literary tongue was being settled, and it is curious to see in his own words the struggle over it which was going on in Caxton's time. 'Some honest and great clerks have been with me and desired me to write the most curious terms that I could find;' on the other hand, 'some gentlemen of late blamed me, saying that in my translations I had over many curious terms which could not be understood of common people, and desired me to use old and homely terms in my translations.' 'Fain would I please every man,' comments the good-humoured printer, but his sturdy sense saved him alike from the temptations of the court and the schools. His own taste pointed to English, but 'to the common terms that be daily used' rather than to the English of his antiquarian advisers. 'I took an old book and read therein, and certainly the English was so rude and broad I could not well understand it,' while the Old-English charters which the Abbot of Westminster lent as models from the archives of his house seemed 'more like to Dutch than to English.' To adopt current phraseology however was by no means easy at a time when even the speech of common talk was in a state of rapid flux. … Coupling this with his long absence in Flanders we can hardly wonder at the confession he makes over his first translation, that 'when all these things came to fore me, after that I had made and written a five or six quires, I fell in despair of this work, and purposed never to have continued therein, and the quires laid apart, and in two years after laboured no more in this work.' He was still however busy translating when he died [in 1491]. {2591} All difficulties in fact were lightened by the general interest which his labours aroused. When the length of the 'Golden Legend' makes him 'half desperate to have accomplished it' and ready to 'lay it apart,' the Earl of Arundel solicits him in no wise to leave it and promises a yearly fee of a buck in summer and a doc in winter, once it were done. 'Many noble and divers gentle men of this realm came and demanded many and often times wherefore I have not made and imprinted the noble history of the San Graal.' … Caxton profited in fact by the wide literary interest which was a mark of the time."

J. R. Green, History of the English People, book 5, chapter 1 (volume 2).

"Contemporary with Caxton were the printers Lettou and Machlinia, … who carried on business in the city of London, where they established a press in 1480. Machlinia had previously worked under Caxton. … Wynkyn de Worde … in all probability … was one of Caxton's assistants or workmen, when the latter was living at Bruges, but without doubt he was employed in his office at Westminster until 1491, when he commenced business on his own account, having in his possession a considerable quantity of Caxton's type. Wynkyn de Worde, who was one of the founders of the Stationers' Company, died in 1534, after having printed no less than 410 books known to bibliographers, the earliest of which bearing a date is the 'Liber Festivalis,' 4to, 1493."

J. H. Slater, Book Collecting, chapter 9.

ALSO IN: _C. Knight, William Caxton._

C. H. Timperley, Encyclopœdia of Literary and Typographical Anecdote, pages 138-194.

_T. C. Hansard, History and Process of Printing ("The Five Black Arts," chapter 1)._

_Gentleman's Magazine Library: Bibliographical Notes, and Literary Curiosities._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1496-1598. The Estienne or Stephanus Press in Paris.

"With the names of Aldus and Elzevir we are all acquainted; the name of Estienne, or Stephanus, has a less familiar sound to English ears, though the family of Parisian printers was as famous in its day as the great houses of Venice and Leyden. The most brilliant member of it was the second Henry, whose story forms a melancholy episode in French literary history of the 16th century. … The Estiennes are said to have come of a noble Provençal family, but nothing is exactly known of their descent. The art of printing was not much more than fifty years old when Henry Estienne, having learnt his trade in Germany, came to Paris, and set up his press [about 1496] in the Rue Saint Jean de Beauvais, opposite the school of Canon Law. There for some twenty years he laboured diligently, bringing out in that time no less than 120 volumes, chiefly folios. The greater number of these are theological and scholastic works; among the few modern authors on the list is the name of Erasmus. Henry Estienne died in 1520 leaving three sons. Robert, the second of them, was born probably in 1503. The boys all being minors, the business passed into the hands of their mother, who in the following year married Simon de Colines, her late husband's foreman, and perhaps partner. … Robert worked with De Colines for five or six years before he went into business on his own account in the same street." It was he who first gave celebrity to the name and the press. "The spell of the Renaissance had early fallen upon the young printer, and it held him captive almost till the end of his life." He married "the daughter of the learned Flemish printer Jodocus Badius, notable for her culture and her beauty. Latin was the ordinary language of the household. The children learned it in infancy from hearing it constantly spoken. … At one time ten foreign scholars lived in Estienne's house to assist him in selecting and revising his manuscripts and in correcting his proofs. … Both Francis [King Francis I.] and his sister Marguerite of Navarre had a great regard for Robert, and often visited the workshop; to that royal patronage the printer was more than once indebted for his liberty and his life." His danger came from the bigoted Sorbonne, with whom he brought himself into collision by printing the Bible with as careful a correction of the text as he had performed in the case of the Latin classics. After the death of Francis I., the peril of the printer's situation became more serious, and in 1550 he fled to Geneva, renouncing the Roman Catholic faith. He died there in 1559.

_H. C. Macdowall, An old French Printer (Macmillan's Magazine, November 1892)._

The second Henry Estienne, son of Robert, either did not accompany his father to Geneva, or soon returned to Paris, and founded anew the Press of his family, bringing to it even more learning than his father, with equal laboriousness and zeal. He died at Lyons in 1598.

_E. Greswell, A View of the Early Parisian Greek Press._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1535-1709. Introduction in America. The first Spanish printing in Mexico. The early Massachusetts Press. Restrictions upon its freedom.

"The art of printing was first introduced into Spanish America, as early as the middle of the 16th century. The historians whose works I have consulted are all silent as to the time when it was first practiced on the American continent; … but it is certain that printing was executed, both in Mexico and Peru, long before it made its appearance in the British North American colonies. [The precise date of the introduction of printing into Mexico was for a long time in doubt. … When Mr. Thomas wrote his 'History of Printing in America,' early works on America were rare, and it is probable that there was not one in the country printed in either America or Europe in the 16th century, except the copy of Molina's dictionary; now many of the period may be found in our great private libraries. The dictionary of Molina, in Mexican and Spanish, printed in Mexico, in 1571, in folio, was, by many, asserted and believed to be the earliest book printed in America. … No one here had seen an earlier book until the 'Doctrina Christiana,' printed in the house of Juan Cromberger, in the city of Mexico, in the year 1544, was discovered. Copies of this rare work were found in two well known private libraries in New York and Providence. For a long time the honor was awarded to this as the earliest book printed in America. But there is now strong evidence that printing was really introduced in Mexico nine years before that time, and positive evidence, by existing books, that a press was established in 1540. Readers familiar with early books relating to Mexico have seen mention of a book printed there as early as 1535, … the 'Spiritual Ladder' of St John Climacus. … It seems that no copy of the 'Spiritual Ladder' has ever been seen in recent times, and the quoted testimonials are the only ones yet found which refer to it.

Note by Hon. John R. Bartlett, appendix A., giving a 'List of Books printed in Mexico between the years 1540 and 1560 inclusive.'

{2592}

… In January, 1639, printing was first performed in that part of North America which extends from the Gulf of Mexico to the Frozen ocean. For this press our country is chiefly indebted to the Rev. Mr. Glover, a nonconformist minister, who possessed a considerable estate. … Another press, with types, and another printer, were, in 1660, sent over from England by the corporation for propagating the gospel among the Indians in New England. This press, &c., was designed solely for the purpose of printing the Bible, and other books, in the Indian language. On their arrival they were carried to Cambridge, and employed in the printing house already established in that place. … The fathers of Massachusetts kept a watchful eye on the press; and in neither a religious nor civil point of view were they disposed to give it much liberty. … In 1662, the government of Massachusetts appointed licensers of the press; and afterward, in 1664, passed a law that 'no printing should be allowed in any town within the jurisdiction, except in Cambridge'; nor should any thing be printed there but what the government permitted through the agency of those persons who were empowered for the purpose. … In a short time, this law was so far repealed as to permit the use of a press at Boston. … It does not appear that the press, in Massachusetts, was free from legal restraints till about the year 1755 [see PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1704-1729]. … Except in Massachusetts, no presses were set up in the colonies till near the close of the 17th century. Printing then [1686] was performed in Pennsylvania [by William Bradford], 'near Philadelphia' [at Shackamaxon, now Kensington], and afterward in that city, by the same press which, in a few years subsequent, was removed to New York.

See PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1685-1693; also PENNSYLVANIA: A. D. 1692-1696.

The use of types commenced in Virginia about 1681; in 1682 the press was prohibited. In 1709 a press was established at New London, in Connecticut."

I. Thomas, History of Printing in America, 2nd edition. (Translated and Collection of the American Antiquity Society, volume 5), volume 1, pages 1-17.

ALSO IN: J. L. Bishop, History of American Manufactures, volume 1, chapter 7.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1612-1650. Origin of printed newspapers. The newspaper defined. Its earliest appearances in Germany and Italy.

"Lally-Tollendal, in his 'Life of Queen Elizabeth,' in the 'Biographie Universelle' (vol. xiii, published in 1815, p. 56) … remarks that 'as far as the publication of an official journal is concerned, France can claim the priority by more than half a century; for in the Royal Library at Paris there is a bulletin of the campaign of Louis XII. in Italy in 1509.' He then gives the title of this 'bulletin,' from which it clearly appears that it is not a political journal, but an isolated piece of news—a kind of publication of which there are hundreds in existence of a date anterior to 1588 [formerly supposed to be the date of the first English newspaper—see PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1622-1702], and of which there is no doubt that thousands were issued. There is, for instance, in the British Museum a French pamphlet of six printed leaves, containing an account of the surrender of Granada to Ferdinand and Isabella on the 'first of January last past' (le premier jour de janvier dernierement passe), in the year 1492; and there are also the three editions of the celebrated letter of Columbus, giving the first account of the discovery of America, all printed at Rome in 1493. Nay, one of the very earliest productions of the German press was an official manifesto of Diether, Archbishop of Cologne, against Count Adolph of Nassau, very satisfactorily proved to have been printed at Mentz in 1462. There is among the German bibliographers a technical name for this class of printed documents, which are called 'Relations.' In fact, in order to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion with regard to the origin of newspapers, it is requisite, in the first place, to settle with some approach to precision what a newspaper is. Four classes of publications succeeded to each other from the 15th to the 19th century, to which the term has by different writers been applied:

1st. Accounts of individual public transactions of recent occurrence.

2nd. Accounts in one publication of several public transactions of recent occurrence, only connected together by having taken place about the same period, so as at one time to form the 'news of the day.'

3rd. Accounts similar to those of the second class, but issued in a numbered series.

4th. Accounts similar to those of the second class, but issued not only in a numbered series, but at stated intervals.

The notices of the surrender of Granada and the discovery of America belong to the first class, and so also do the last dying speeches, which are in our own time cried about the streets. These surely are not newspapers. The Times and Daily News [London] belong to the fourth class, and these, of course, are newspapers. … Are not, in fact, all the essentials of a newspaper comprised in the definition of the second class, which it may be as well to repeat: 'Accounts in one publication of several public transactions of recent occurrence, only connected together by having taken place about the same period, so as at one time to form the news of the day'? Let us take an instance. There is preserved in the British Museum a collection of several volumes of interesting publications issued in Italy between 1640 and 1650, and containing the news of the times. They are of a small folio size, and consist in general of four pages, but sometimes of six, sometimes only of two. There is a series for the month of December, 1644, consisting entirely of the news from Rome. The first line of the first page runs thus:—'Di Roma,' with the date, first of the 3rd, then of the 10th, then the 17th, then the 24th, and lastly the 31st of December, showing that a number was published every week, most probably on the arrival of the post from Rome. The place of publication was Florence, and the same publishers who issued this collection of the news from Rome, sent forth in the same month of December, 1644, two other similar gazettes, at similar intervals, one of the news from Genoa, the other of the news from Germany and abroad. That this interesting series of publications, which is well worthy of a minute examination and a detailed description, is in reality a series of newspapers, will, I believe, be questioned by very few; but each individual number presents no mark by which, if separately met with, it could be known to form part of a set. … {2593} The most minute researches on the history of newspapers in Germany are, as already mentioned, those of Prutz, who has collected notices of a large number of the 'relations,' though much remains to be gleaned. There are, for instance, in Van Heusde's Catalogue of the Library at Utrecht (Utrecht, 1835, folio), the titles of nearly a hundred of them, all as early as the sixteenth century; and the British Museum possesses a considerable quantity, all of recent acquisition. Prutz has no notice of the two that have been mentioned, and, like all preceding writers, he draws no distinction between the publications of the first class and the second. The view that he takes is, that no publication which does not answer to the definition of what I have termed the fourth class is entitled to the name of a newspaper. There was in the possession of Professor Grellman a publication called an 'Aviso,' numbered as '14,' and published in 1612, which has been considered by many German writers as their earliest newspaper, but Prutz denies that honour to it, on the ground of there being no proof that it was published at stated intervals. In the year 1615 Egenolph Emmel, of Frankfort-on-the-Main, issued a weekly intelligencer, numbered in a series, and this, according to Prutz, is the proper claimant. Its history has been traced with some minuteness in a separate dissertation by Schwarzkopf, who has also the credit of having published in 1795 the first general essay on newspapers of any value, and to have followed up the subject in a series of articles in the Allgemeine Litterarische Anzeiger. … The claims of Italy have yet to be considered. Prutz dismisses them very summarily, because, as he says, the Venetian gazettes of the sixteenth century, said to be preserved at Florence, are in manuscript, and it is essential to the definition of a newspaper that it should be printed. These Venetian gazettes have never, so far as I am aware, been described at all; they may be mere 'news-letters,' or they may be something closely approaching to the modern newspaper. But I am strongly inclined to believe that something of the second class of Italian origin will turn up in the great libraries of Europe when further research is devoted to the subject. … The existence of these 'gazettes' in so many languages furnishes strong ground for supposing that the popularity of newspapers originated in Italy."

_T. Watts, The fabricated "Earliest English Newspaper" (Gentleman's Magazine, 1850, reprinted in the Gentleman's Magazine Library; Bibliographical Notes, pages 146-150)._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1617-1680. The Elzevirs.

"Just as the house of Aldus waned and expired, that of the great Dutch printers, the Elzevirs, began obscurely enough at Leyden in 1583. The Elzevir's were not, like Aldus, ripe scholars and men of devotion to learning. Aldus laboured for the love of noble studies; the Elzevirs were acute, and too often 'smart' men of business. The founder of the family was Louis (born at Louvain, 1540, died 1617). But it was in the second and third generations that Bonaventura and Abraham Elzevir began to publish at Leyden their editions in small duodecimo. Like Aldus, these Elzevirs aimed at producing books at once handy, cheap, correct, and beautiful in execution. Their adventure was a complete success. The Elzevirs did not, like Aldus, surround themselves with the most learned scholars of their time. Their famous literary adviser, Heinsius, was full of literary jealousies, and kept students of his own calibre at a distance. The classical editions of the Elzevirs, beautiful, but too small in type for modern eyes, are anything but exquisitely correct. … The ordinary marks of the Elzevirs were the sphere, the old hermit, the Athena, the eagle, and the burning faggot. But all little old books marked with spheres are not Elzevirs, as many booksellers suppose. Other printers also stole the designs for the tops of chapters, the Aegipan, the Siren, the head of Medusa, the crossed sceptres, and the rest. In some cases the Elzevirs published their books, especially when they were piracies, anonymously. When they published for the Jansenists, they allowed their clients to put fantastic pseudonyms on the title pages. But, except in four cases, they had only two pseudonyms used on the titles of books published by and for themselves. These disguises are 'Jean Sambix' for Jean and Daniel Elzevir, at Leyden, and 'for the Elzevirs of Amsterdam, 'Jacques le Jeune.' The last of the great representatives of the house, Daniel, died at Amsterdam, 1680. Abraham, an unworthy scion, struggled on at Leyden till 1712. The family still prospers, but no longer prints, in Holland."

A. Lang, The Library, chapter 3.

"Though Elzevirs have been more fashionable than at present, they are still regarded by novelists as the great prize of the book collector. You read in novels about 'priceless little Elzevirs,' about books 'as rare as an old Elzevir.' I have met, in the works of a lady novelist (but not elsewhere) with an Elzevir 'Theocritus.' The late Mr. Hepworth Dixon introduced into one of his romances a romantic Elzevir Greek Testament, 'worth its weight in gold.' Casual remarks of this kind encourage a popular delusion that all Elzevirs are pearls of considerable price."

A. Lang, Books and Bookmen, chapter 6.

ALSO IN: J. H. Slater, Book Collecting, chapter 8.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1622-1702. The first printed Newspaper and the first daily Newspaper in England.

"Up to 1839 (when Mr. Watts, of the British Museum, exposed the forgery) the world was led to believe that the first English newspaper appeared in 1588." Mr. Watts "ascertained that 'The English Mercurie,' which Mr. George Chalmers first discovered on the shelves of the British Museum, and which was said to have been 'imprinted in London by her highness's printer, 1588,' was a forgery, for which the second Earl of Hardwicke appears to be answerable." As to the actual date of the appearance of the first printed newspaper in England, "Mr. Knight Hunt, in his 'Fourth Estate,' speaks confidently. … 'There is now no reason to doubt,' he says, 'that the puny ancestor of the myriads of broad sheets of our time was published in the metropolis in 1622; and that the most prominent of the ingenious speculators who offered the novelty to the world, was one Nathaniel Butter.' As the printing press had then been at work in England for a century and a half, Caxton having established himself in Westminster Abbey in 1471, and as manuscript news-letters had been current for many years previous to 1622, one cannot help wondering that the inventive wits of that age should have been so slow in finding out this excellent mode of turning Faust's invention to profitable account. {2594} Butter's journal was called—'The Weekly Newes,' a name which still survives, although the original possessor of that title has long since gone the way of all newspapers. The first number in the British Museum collection bears date the 23rd of May, 1622, and contains 'news from Italy, Germanie,' &c. The last number made its appearance on the 9th of January, 1640; a memorable year, in which the Short Parliament, dismissed by King Charles 'in a huff,' after a session of three weeks, was succeeded by the Long Parliament, which unlucky Charles could not manage quite so easily. … It was nearly a century after 'The Weekly Newes' made its first appearance, before a daily newspaper was attempted. When weekly papers had become firmly established, some of the more enterprising printers began to publish their sheets twice, and ultimately three times a week. Thus at the beginning of last century we find several papers informing the public that they are 'published every Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday morning.' One of the most respectable looking was entitled 'The New State of Europe,' or a 'True Account of Public Transactions and Learning.' It consisted of two pages of thin, coarse paper … and contained altogether about as much matter as there is in a single column of the 'Times' of 1855. The custom at that period was to publish the newspaper on a folio or quarto sheet, two pages of which were left blank to be used for correspondence. This is expressly stated in a standing advertisement in the 'New State of Europe,' in which the names of certain booksellers are given 'where any person may have this paper with a blank half sheet to write their own private affairs.' … The first number of the 'Daily Courant' [the first daily newspaper in England] was published on the 11th of March, 1702, just three days after the accession of Queen Anne. … As regards the form and size of the new journal, the 'author' condescends to give the following information, with a growling remark at the impertinence of the 'Postboys,' 'Postmen,' 'Mercuries,' and 'Intelligencers' of that day:—'This "Courant" (as the title shows) will be published Daily, being designed to give all the Material News as soon as every Post arrives, and is confined to half the compass to save the Publick at least half the Impertinences of ordinary Newspapers.' In addition to the Prospectus we have quoted, the first number of the 'Daily Courant' contains only nine paragraphs, five of which were translated from the 'Harlem Courant,' three from the 'Paris Gazette,' and one from the 'Amsterdam Courant.' They all relate to the war of the Spanish Succession then waging, or to the attempts making by diplomats to settle the affairs of the Continent at some kind of Vienna or Utrecht Conference. After adhering for several weeks to the strict rule of giving only one page of news, and those entirely foreign, the 'Courant' begins to show certain symptoms of improvement. The number for April 22, contains two pages of news and advertisements. … The alteration in the getting-up of the 'Courant' was owing to a change of proprietorship. The paper had now come into the hands of 'Sam Buckley, at the Dolphin, Little Britain.' … Mr. Samuel Buckley, who continued to publish and conduct the 'Daily Courant' for many years, was a notable man among London publishers, as we find from various references to him in the fugitive literature of that age."

_The London Daily Press (Westminster Review, October, 1855)._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1631. The first printed Newspaper in France. Dr. Renandot and his "Gazette."

"The first Frenchman to found a printed newspaper was Dr. Théophraste Renaudot, who obtained the King's privilege for the 'Gazette de France' in 1631. … He was a shrewd man, born at London in 1567, brought up in Paris, but graduate of the Faculty of Montpellier. In 1612, being then twenty-six, he returned to the capital, and somehow got appointed at once doctor to the King. But there was no salary attached to this post, which was in his case purely honorary, and so Renaudot opened a school, though the fact that he, a mere provincial doctor, had obtained a medical appointment at court, was very sore to the Paris Faculty of Medicine, who began to annoy him from that moment. Renaudot, however, was a man far ahead of his contemporaries in sagacity, patience, learning and humanity. Petty spite did not disturb him, or at least it did not deter him from executing any of the numerous plans he had in mind for the welfare of his contemporaries. … This extraordinary man not only inaugurated in France an Estate, Professional and Servants' Agency, as well as an office for private sales and exchanges, but further laid the basis of the Poste Restante, Parcels Delivery, Post-Office Directory, Tourist's Guide and Money Order Office; besides affording an outlet to troubled spirits like those who correspond through the agony column of 'The Times.' It is not surprising that his office in the Rue de la Calandre should soon have been all too small for its multifarious duties and that his original staff of six clerks should, in less than three months, have swelled to fifty. Richelieu, in sheer admiration at the man, sent for him and thanked him for the services he was rendering the King's subjects. He also offered him money to extend his offices, and this Renaudot accepted, but only as a loan. It was his custom to levy a commission of six deniers per livre (franc) on the sales he effected, and by means of these and other receipts he soon repaid the Cardinal every penny that had been advanced to him. But he did more than this. Finding that his registers were not always convenient modes of reference, by reason of the excessive crowds which pressed round them, he brought out a printed advertiser, which is almost the exact prototype of a journal at present well known in London. It was called 'Feuille du Bureau d'Adresses,' and appeared every Saturday, at the price of 1 sou. Opinions differ as to whether this paper preceded the 'Gazette de France,' or was issued simultaneously with it. Probably it was first published in manuscript form, but came out in print at least six months before the 'Gazette,' for a number bearing the date of June 14th, 1631, shows a periodical in full organisation and containing indirect references to advertisements which must have appeared several weeks before. At all events this 'Feuille' was purely an advertisement sheet—a forerunner of the 'Petites Affiches' which were reinvented in 1746—it was in no sense a newspaper. … It is clear that from the moment he started his 'Feuille du Bureau d'Adresses,' Renaudot must have conceived the possibility of founding a news-sheet. … The manuscript News Letters had attained, by the year 1630, to such a pitch of perfection, and found such a ready sale, that the notion of further popularising them by printing must have suggested itself to more than one man before it was actually put into practice. {2595} But the great bar was this, that nothing could be printed without the King's privilege, and this privilege was not lightly granted. … Renaudot, who had no wish to publish tattle, had no reason to fear censorship. He addressed himself to Richelieu, and craved leave to start a printed newspaper under royal patronage. The politic Cardinal was quite shrewd enough to see how useful might be to him an organ which would set information before the public in the manner he desired, and in that manner alone; so he granted all Renaudot wished, in the form of 'letters patent,' securing him an entire monopoly of printing newspapers, and moreover he conferred on his protégé the pompous title of Historiographer of France. The first number of the 'Gazette de France' appeared on Friday, May 30, 1631. Its size was four quarto pages, and its price one sol parisis, i. e. ½d., worth about l½d. modern money. … The first number contained no preface or address, nothing in the way of a leading article, but plunged at once in medias res, and gave news from nineteen foreign towns or countries, but oddly enough, not a line of French intelligence. … The bulk of the matter inserted was furnished direct by Richelieu from the Foreign Office, and several of the paragraphs were written in his own hand. … The publication of the 'Gazette' was continued uninterruptedly from week to week but the press of matter was so great that Renaudot took to issuing a Supplement with the last number of every month. In this he condensed the reports of the preceding numbers, corrected errors, added fresh news, and answered his detractors. … At the end of the year 1631 he suppressed his monthly Supplement, increased the 'Gazette' to eight pages, and announced that for the future he would issue supplements as they were needed. It seems they were needed pretty often, for towards the beginning of the year 1633 Renaudot published Supplements, under the title of 'Ordinaries and Extraordinaries,' as often as twice, and even three times in one week. In fact whenever a budget of news arrived which would nowadays justify a special edition, the indefatigable editor set his criers afoot with a fresh printed sheet, shouting, 'Buy the "Extraordinary," containing the account of the superb burial of the King of Denmark!' or, 'Buy and read of the capture of the beautiful island of Curaçoa in the Indies by the Dutch from the Spaniards!' Renaudot understood the noble art of puffing. He dressed his criers in red, and gave them a trumpet apiece to go and bray the praises of the 'Gazette' on the off days, when the paper did not appear. … On the death of Renaudot, he was succeeded by his sons Eusèbe and Isaac, who in their turn bequeathed the Gazette' to Eusèbe junior, son of the elder brother, who took orders and consequently left no progeny. After this the 'Gazette' became Government property. … In 1762 the 'Gazette' was annexed to the Foreign Office Department. … The 'Gazette de France' continued to appear under royal patronage until May 1st, 1792, when its official ties were snapped and it came out as a private and republican journal with the date 'Fourth Year of Freedom.' The 'Gazette' has flourished with more or less brilliancy ever since, and has been for the last fifty years a legitimist organ, read chiefly in the provinces."

_The French Press (Cornhill Magazine, June, 1873)._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1637. Archbishop Laud's Star-Chamber restriction of printing.

On the 11th of July, 1637, "Archbishop Laud procured a decree to be passed in the star chamber, by which it was ordered, that the master printers should be reduced to twenty in number; and that if any other should secretly, or openly, pursue the trade of printing, he should be set in the pillory, or whipped through the streets, and suffer such other punishment as the court should inflict upon him; that none of the master printers should print any book or books of divinity, law, physic, philosophy, or poetry, till the said books, together with the titles, epistles, prefaces, tables, or commendatory verses, should be lawfully licensed, on pain of losing the exercise of his art, and being proceeded against in the star chamber, &c.; that no person should reprint any book without a new license; that every merchant, bookseller, &c., who should import any book or books, should present a catalogue of them to the archbishop or bishop, &c., before they were delivered, or exposed to sale, who should view them, with power to seize those that were schismatical; and, that no merchant, &c., should print or cause to be printed abroad, any book, or books, which either entirely or for the most part, were written in the English tongue, nor knowingly import any such books, upon pain of being proceeded against in the star chamber, or high commission court. … That there should be four founders of letters for printing, and no more. That the archbishop of Canterbury, or the bishop of London, with six other high commissioners, shall supply the places of those four as they shall become void. That no master founder shall keep above two apprentices at one time. That all journeymen founders be employed by the masters of the trade; and that all the idle journeymen be compelled to work upon pain of imprisonment, and such other punishment as the court shall think fit. That no master founder of letters shall employ any other person in any work belonging to casting and founding of letters than freemen and apprentices to the trade, save only in putting off the knots of metal hanging at the end of the letters when they are first cast; in which work, every master founder may employ one boy only, not bound to the trade."

C. H. Timperley, Encyclopœdia of Literary and Typographical Anecdote, page 490.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1647. Renewed ordinance, in England, against the printers.

"An ordinance of parliament passed the house of lords on this day [September 30, 1647], that no person shall make, write, print, sell, publish or utter, or cause to be made, &c., any book, pamphlet, treatise, ballad, libel, sheet, or sheets of news whatsoever (except the same be licensed by both or either house of parliament,) under the penalty of 40s. and an imprisonment not exceeding forty days, if he can not pay it: if a printer, he is to pay a fine of only 20s., or suffer twenty days' imprisonment, and likewise to have his press and implements of printing broken in pieces. The book-seller, or stationer, to pay 10s., or suffer ten days' imprisonment,—and, lastly, the hawker, pedlar, or ballad-singer, to forfeit all his printed papers exposed to sale, and to be whipped as a common rogue in the parish where he shall be apprehended. {2596} Early in the following year, the committee of estates in Scotland passed an act prohibiting the printing under the pain of death, any book, declaration, or writing, until these were first submitted to their revisal. … One of the consequences of these persecutions was the raising up of a new class of publishers, those who became noted for what was called 'unlawful and unlicensed books.' Sparkes, the publisher of Prynne's Histriomastix, was of this class. The presbyterian party in parliament, who thus found the press closed on them, vehemently cried out for its freedom; and it was imagined, that when they ascended into power, the odious office of a licenser of the press would have been abolished; but these pretended friends of freedom, on the contrary, discovered themselves as tenderly alive to the office as the old government, and maintained it with the extremest vigour. Both in England and Scotland, during the civil wars, the party in power endeavoured to crush by every means the freedom of the press."

C. H. Timperley, Encyclopœdia of Literary and Typographical Anecdote, page 506.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1654-1694. Freedom of the press under Cromwell. Censorship under the restored Stuarts. Roger L'Estrange and the first news reporters.

"During the Protectorate of Cromwell the newspaper press knew … what it was to enjoy the luxury of freedom. The natural result was that a very great increase took place in the number of new political journals. Most of them, however, had only a very brief existence. Many of their number could not boast of a longer life than six or seven months—nay, many of them not so much as even that term of life. But, as might have been expected, from what was known of the antecedents of Charles II., the freedom of the press, which previously existed, came to an immediate end on his ascending the throne. Hardly had he done so, than an edict was issued, prohibiting the publication of any journal except the London Gazette, which was originally printed at Oxford, and called the Oxford Gazette,—the Court being then resident there on account of the plague raging in London at the time, 1665, when it was commenced, and for some time afterwards. This was an act of pure despotism. But Government at this time reserved to itself the right —a right which there was none to dispute—to publish a broad sheet in connexion with the London Gazette, whenever they might deem it expedient, which should contain either foreign or domestic matters of interest,—of the knowledge of which some of the King's subjects might wish to be put in early possession. … The newspapers of the seventeenth century were permitted, until the time of Charles II., to be published without being licensed by the Government of the day; but in the reign of that despotic sovereign, a law was passed [1662] prohibiting the publication of any newspaper without being duly licensed. … Sir John Birkenhead, … one of the three men whom Disraeli the elder called the fathers of the English press, was appointed to the office of Licenser of the Press. But he was soon succeeded by Sir Roger l'Estrange."

J. Grant, The Newspaper Press, volume 1, chapter. 2.

Roger L'Estrange "is remarkable for having been the writer of the best newspapers which appeared before the age of Queen Anne, and, at the same time, a most bitter enemy to the freedom of the press. He was appointed licenser or censor in 1663, and in the same year was given authority to publish all newspapers, periodicals, and pamphlets, not exceeding two sheets in size. He appears to have looked upon his newspaper as a noxious thing, suffered to exist only that an income might be created for him in return for the labour of purging the press. Yet he spared no pains to make his Public Intelligencer readable, and if we may trust his letters now preserved at the State Paper Office, expended in the first year more than £500 on 'spyes for collecting intelligence.' Three years afterwards he estimated the profits at £400 a year. … He sent paid correspondents, or 'spyes' as they were called, to all parts of the country, and even induced some respectable persons, under promise of concealing their names, to contribute occasional paragraphs; these persons were for the most part repaid by sending to them their newspapers and letters free of postage. Another set of 'spyes' was employed in picking up the news of the town on Paul's Walk or in the taverns and coffee–houses. L'Estrange printed about sixteen reams of his Intelligencer weekly, which were for the most part sold by the mercury-women who cried them about the streets. One Mrs. Andrews is said to have taken more than one-third of the whole quantity printed. … Advantage was taken of a slip in the weekly intelligence to deprive L'Estrange of his monopoly in favour of the new Oxford Gazette, published in the winter of 1665 and transferred to London in the ensuing spring. The Gazette was placed under the control of Williamson, then a rising under-Secretary of State, under whose austere influence nothing was suffered to appear which could excite or even amuse the public. … L'Estrange has not been a favourite with historians, and we confess that his harsh measures towards the press are apt to raise a feeling of repugnance. … But he was certainly an enthusiastic and industrious writer, who raised the tone of the press, even while taking pains to fetter its liberty. When he lost his monopoly, that era of desolation began which Macaulay has so forcibly described. The newspapers became completely sterile, omitting events even of such importance as the trial of the seven bishops, and were supplanted in popular favour by the manuscript news-letters, which were, in fact, the only journals of importance. On the day after the abdication of James II. three fresh newspapers appeared, and many more burst out after the appearance of the official journal under the style of the Orange Gazette. But it was not until 1694 that the king was induced to abolish the censorship and to permit free trade in news; 'he doubted much,' says Hume, 'of the salutary effects of such unlimited freedom.' The newspapers increased and multiplied exceedingly for the eighteen years between the abolition of the office of licenser and the passing of the Stamp Act, in 1712, by which a halfpenny tax was laid on every half-sheet of intelligence."

_Early English Newspapers (Cornhill Magazine, July, 1868)._

{2597}

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1685-1693. William Bradford and his Press in Philadelphia and New York.

William Bradford, a young printer, of the Society of Friends, came to Philadelphia in the autumn of 1685, and established himself in business. "His first publication was 'Kalendarium Pennsilvaniense, or America's Messenger; Being an Almanack for the Year of Grace 1686.' This brought him a summons before the Governor and Council, for referring to the Proprietary, in the table of chronology, ns 'Lord Penn;' and, on his appearance, he was ordered to blot out the objectionable title, and forbidden to print anything without license from the Provincial Council. In 1687 he was cautioned by the Philadelphia meeting not to print anything touching the Quakers without its approval. Two years later he was again called before the Governor, and Council—this time for printing the charter of the province. The spirited report, in his own handwriting, of his examination on this occasion, is now preserved in the collection of the New York Historical Society. Disappointed at the non-fulfilment of Penn's promise of the government printing and the failure of his scheme for printing an English Bible, which, although indorsed by the meeting, found few subscribers, and harassed by both the civil and religious authorities, Bradford determined to leave the province," which he did, with his family, sailing to England in 1689. He was induced, however, by promises of increased business and a yearly salary of £40, to return. In 1692, having become one of the supporters of George Keith, and having printed Keith's "Appeal", he was arrested and imprisoned.

See PENNSYLVANIA: A. D. 1692-1696.

This occurred in August, and his trial followed in December. The jury disagreed, and he was held for appearance at the next court. "In the meantime the dissensions in the province aroused by the Keithian schism had led to the abrogation of Penn's charter by the crown, and the appointment of Benjamin Fletcher to be Royal Governor of Pennsylvania as well as New York." This change led to the dropping of proceedings against Bradford, and to his removal from Philadelphia to New York, whither he seems to have been invited. His removal was undoubtedly prompted by a resolution which the Provincial Council of New York adopted on the 23d of March, 1693: "That if a Printer will come and settle in the city of New York for the printing of our Acts of Assembly and Publick Papers, he shall be allowed the sum of £40 current money of New York per annum for his salary and have the benefit of his printing besides what serves the publick." "Bradford's first warrant for his salary as 'Printer to King William and Queen Mary, at the City of New York,' was dated October 12, 1693, and was for six months, due on the 10th preceding," showing that he had established himself in the colony more hospitable to his art as early as the 10th of April, 1693. "What was the first product of his press is a matter of doubt. It may have been, as Dr. Moore suggests, the 'Journal of the Late Actions of the French at Canada,' or 'New England's Spirit of Persecution Transmitted to Pennsilvania'"—which was a report of his own trial at Philadelphia—or it may have been an Act of the New York Assembly—one of three which his press produced early that year, but the priority among which is uncertain.

C. R Hildeburn, Printing in New York in the 17th Century (Memorial History of the City of New York, volume 1, chapter 15.)

ALSO IN: _I. Thomas, History of Printing in America, 2d edition, volume 1._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1695. Expiration of the Censorship law in England. Quick multiplication of Newspapers.

"While the Licensing Act was in force there was no newspaper in England except the 'London Gazette,' which was edited by a clerk in the office of the Secretary of State, and which contained nothing but what the Secretary of State wished the nation to know. There were indeed many periodical papers: but none of those papers could be called a newspaper. Welwood, a zealous Whig, published a journal called the Observator: but his Observator, like the Observator which Lestrange had formerly edited, contained, not the news, but merely dissertations on politics. A crazy bookseller, named John Dunton, published the Athenian Mercury: but the Athenian Mercury merely discussed questions of natural philosophy, of casuistry and of gallantry. A fellow of the Royal Society, named John Houghton, published what he called a Collection for the Improvement of Industry and Trade: but his Collection contained little more than the prices of stocks, explanations of the modes of doing business in the City, puffs of new projects, and advertisements of books, quack medicines, chocolate, Spa water, civet cats, surgeons wanting ships, valets wanting masters, and ladies wanting husbands. If ever he printed any political news, he transcribed it from the Gazette. The Gazette was so partial and so meagre a chronicle of events that, though it had no competitors, it had but a small circulation. … But the deficiencies of the Gazette were to a certain extent supplied in London by the coffeehouses, and in the country by the news-letters. On the third of May 1695 the law which had subjected the press to a censorship expired. Within a fortnight, a stanch old Whig, named Harris, who had, in the days of the Exclusion Bill, attempted to set up a newspaper entitled Intelligence Domestic and Foreign, and who had been speedily forced to relinquish that design, announced that the Intelligence Domestic and Foreign, suppressed fourteen years before by tyranny, would again appear. Ten days later was printed the first number of the English Courant. Then came the Packet Boat from Holland and Flanders, the Pegasus, the London Newsletter, the London Post, the Flying Post, the Old Postmaster, the Postboy, and the Postman. The history of the newspapers of England from that time to the present day is a most interesting and instructive part of the history of the country. At first they were small and mean-looking. … Only two numbers came out in a week; and a number contained little more matter than may be found in a single column of a daily paper of our time."

Lord Macaulay, History of England, chapter 21.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1704-1729. The first Newspapers in America.

"There was not a newspaper published in the English colonies, throughout the extensive continent of North America, until the 24th of April, 1704. John Campbell, a Scotchman, who was a bookseller and postmaster in Boston, was the first who began and established a publication of this kind. It was entitled 'The Boston News-Letter.' … It is printed on half a sheet of pot paper, with a small pica type, folio. {2598} The first page is filled with an extract from 'The London Flying Post,' respecting the pretender. … The queen's speech to both houses of parliament on that occasion, a few articles under the Boston head, four short paragraphs of marine intelligence from New York, Philadelphia, and New London, and one advertisement, form its whole contents. The advertisement is from Campbell, the proprietor of the paper." In 1719, a rival paper was started in Boston, called the "Gazette," and in 1721, a third, founded by James Franklin, took the name of "The New England Courant." Meantime there had appeared at Philadelphia, on the 22nd of December, 1719,—only one day later than the second of the Boston newspapers—"The American Weekly Mercury," printed by Andrew Bradford, son of William Bradford. The same printer, Andrew Bradford, removing to New York, brought out "The New York Gazette," the first newspaper printed in that city, in October, 1725.

I. Thomas, History of Printing in America, volume 2, page 12, and after.

"In 1740, the number of newspapers in the English colonies on the continent had increased to eleven, of which one appeared in South Carolina, one in Virginia, three in Pennsylvania—one of them being in German—one in New York, and the remaining five in Boston. … The New England 'Courant,' the fourth American periodical, was, in August 1721, established by James Franklin as an organ of independent opinion. Its temporary success was advanced by Benjamin, his brother and apprentice, a boy of fifteen, who wrote for its columns, worked in composing the types as well as printing off the sheets, and, as carrier, distributed the papers to the customers. The sheet satirized hypocrisy, and spoke of religious knaves as of all knaves the worst. This was described as tending 'to abuse the ministers of religion in a manner which was intolerable.' … In July 1722, a resolve passed the council, appointing a censor for the press of James Franklin; but the house refused its concurrence. The ministers persevered; and, in January 1723, a committee of inquiry was raised by the legislature. Benjamin, being examined, escaped with an admonition; James, the publisher, refusing to discover the author of the offence, was kept in jail for a month; his paper was censured as reflecting injuriously on the reverend ministers of the gospel; and, by vote of the house and council, he was forbidden to print it, 'except it be first supervised.' Vexed at the arbitrary proceedings, Benjamin Franklin, then but seventeen years old, in October 1723, sailed clandestinely for New York. Finding there no employment, he crossed to Amboy; went on foot to the Delaware; for want of a wind, rowed in a boat from Burlington to Philadelphia; and bearing marks of his labor at the oar, weary, hungry, having for his whole stock of cash a single dollar, the runaway apprentice—the pupil of the free schools of Boston, rich in the boundless hope of youth and the unconscious power of modest genius—stepped on shore to seek food and occupation. On the deep foundations of sobriety, frugality and industry, the young journeyman built his fortunes and fame; and he soon came to have a printing-office of his own. … The assembly of Pennsylvania chose him its printer. He planned a newspaper [the 'Pennsylvania Gazette']; and, when (1729] he became its proprietor and editor, he defended freedom of thought and speech, and the inalienable power of the people."

G. Bancroft, History of the United States of America, part 3, chapter 15 (volume 2).

ALSO IN: J. Parton, Life of Franklin, parts 1-2 (volume l).

B. Franklin, Life by Himself, edited by J. Bigelow, part 1.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1709-1752. The Periodicals of the Essayists. The "Tatler," "Spectator," and their successors.

"In the spring of 1709, Steele [Sir Richard] formed a literary project, of which he was far indeed from foreseeing the consequences. Periodical papers had during many years been published in London. Most of these were political; but in some of them questions of morality, taste, and love-casuistry had been discussed. The literary merit of these works was small indeed; and even their names are now known only to the curious. Steele had been appointed gazetteer by Sunderland, at the request, it is said, of Addison; and thus had access to foreign intelligence earlier and more authentic than was in those times within the reach of an ordinary news-writer. This circumstance seems to have suggested to him the scheme of publishing a periodical paper on a new plan. It was to appear on the days on which the post left London for the country, which were, in that generation, the Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays. It was to contain the foreign news, accounts of theatrical representations, and the literary gossip of Will's and of the Grecian. It was also to contain remarks on the fashionable topics of the day, compliments to beauties, pasquinades on noted sharpers, and criticisms on popular preachers. The aim of Steele does not appear to have been at first higher than this. … Issac Bickerstaff, Esquire, Astrologer, was an imaginary person, almost as well known in that age as Mr. Paul Pry or Mr. Pickwick in ours. Swift had assumed the name of Bickerstaff in a satirical pamphlet against Partridge, the almanac-maker. Partridge had been fool enough to publish a furious reply. Bickerstaff had rejoined in a second pamphlet still more diverting than the first. All the wits had combined to keep up the joke, and the town was long in convulsions of laughter. Steele determined to employ the name which this controversy had made popular; and, in April, 1709, it was announced that Isaac Bickerstaff, Esquire, Astrologer, was about to publish a paper called the 'Tatler.' Addison had not been consulted about this scheme; but as soon as he heard of it, he determined to give it his assistance. The effect of that assistance cannot be better described than in Steele's own words. 'I fared,' he said, 'like a distressed prince who calls in a powerful neighbour to his aid. I was undone by my auxiliary. When I had once called him in, I could not subsist without dependence on him.' 'The paper,' he says elsewhere, 'was advanced indeed. It was raised to a greater thing than I intended it.'"

_Lord Macaulay. Life and Writings of Addison (Essays)._

"Steele, on the 12th of April 1709, issued the first number of the 'Tatler.' … This famous newspaper, printed in one folio sheet of 'tobacco paper' with 'scurvy letter,' ran to 271 numbers, and abruptly ceased to appear in January 1711. It enjoyed an unprecedented success, for, indeed, nothing that approached it had ever before been issued from the periodical press in England. The division of its contents was thus arranged by the editor: 'All accounts of gallantry, pleasure, and entertainment shall be under the article of White's Chocolate House; poetry under that of Will's Coffee-House; learning under the title of Grecian; foreign and domestic news you will have from St. James's Coffee-House; and what else I shall on any other subject offer shall be dated from my own apartment.' {2599} The political news gradually ceased to appear. … Of the 271 'Tatlers,' 188 were written by Steele, 42 by Addison, and 36 by both conjointly. Three were from the pen of John Hughes. … These, at least, are the numbers usually given, but the evidence on which they are based is slight. It rests mainly upon the indications given by Steele to Tickell when the latter was preparing his edition of Addison's Works. The conjecture may be hazarded that there were not a few Tatlers written by Addison which he was not anxious to claim as his particular property. … Addison, … remained Steele's firm friend, and less than two months after the cessation of the 'Tatler' there appeared the first number of a still more famous common enterprise, the 'Spectator,' on the 1st of March 1711. It was announced to appear daily, and was to be composed of the reflections and actions of the members of an imaginary club, formed around 'Mr. Spectator.' In this club the most familiar figure is the Worcestershire Knight, Sir Roger de Coverley, the peculiar property of Addison. … The 'Spectator' continued to appear daily until December 1712. It consisted of 555 numbers, of which Addison wrote 274, Steele 236, Hughes 19, and Pope 1 (The Messiah, 'Spectator' 378). Another contributor was Eustace Budgell (1685-1736), Addison's cousin. … The 'Spectator' enjoyed so very unequivocal a success that it has puzzled historians to account for its discontinuance. In No. 517 Addison killed Sir Roger de Coverley 'that nobody else might murder him.' This shows a voluntary intention to stop the publication, which the Stamp Act itself had not been able to do by force."

E. Gosse, A History of Eighteenth Century Literature, chapter 6.

"After this, in 1713, came the 'Guardian'; and in 1714 an eighth volume of the 'Spectator' was issued by Addison alone. He was also the sole author of the 'Freeholder,' 1715, which contains the admirable sketch of the 'Tory Foxhunter.' Steele, on his side, followed up the 'Guardian' by the 'Lover,' the 'Reader,' and half-a–dozen abortive efforts; but his real successes, as well as those of Addison, were in the three great collections for which they worked together. … Between the 'Guardian' of 1713 and the 'Rambler' of 1750-2 there were a number of periodical essayists of varying merit. It is scarcely necessary to recall the names of these now forgotten 'Intelligencers,' 'Moderators,' 'Remembrancers,' and the like, the bulk of which were political. Fielding places one of them, the 'Freethinker' of Philips, nearly on a level with 'those great originals the "Tatlers" and the "Spectators;"' but the initial chapters to the different books of 'Tom Jones' attract us more forcibly to the author's own 'Champion,' written in conjunction with the Ralph who 'makes night hideous' in the 'Dunciad.' … Another of Fielding's enterprises in the 'Spectator' vein was the 'Covent Garden Journal,' 1752. … Concurrently with the 'Covent Garden Journal' appeared the final volume of Johnson's 'Rambler,' a work upon the cardinal defect of which its author laid his finger, when in later life, he declared it to be 'too wordy.' Lady Mary said in her smart way that the 'Rambler' followed the 'Spectator' as a pack horse would do a hunter. … In the twenty-nine papers which Johnson wrote for Hawkesworth's 'Adventurer,' the 'Rambler' style is maintained. In the 'Idler,' however, which belongs to a later date, when its author's mind was unclouded, and he was comparatively free from the daily pressure" of necessity, he adopts a simpler and less polysyllabic style."

A. Dobson, Eighteenth Century Essays, introduction.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1712. The first Stamp Tax on Newspapers in England.

The first stamp tax on newspapers in England went into effect on the 12th day of August, 1712. "An act had passed the legislature, that 'for every pamphlet or paper contained in half a sheet, or lesser piece of paper so printed, the sum of one halfpenny sterling: and for every such pamphlet or paper being larger than half a sheet, and not exceeding one whole sheet, so printed, a duty after the rate of one penny sterling for every sheet printed thereof.' This act, which was to curb the licentiousness of the press, was to be in force for the space of thirty-two years, to be reckoned from the 10th day of June, 1712. Addison, in the 'Spectator' of this day, says, 'this is the day on which many eminent authors will probably publish their last works. I am afraid that few of our weekly historians, who are men that above all others delight in war, will be able to subsist under the weight of a stamp duty in an approaching peace. In short, the necessity of carrying a stamp, and the impracticability of notifying a bloody battle, will, I am afraid, both concur to the sinking of these thin folios which have every other day related to us the history of Europe for several years last past. A facetious friend of mine, who loves a pun, calls this present mortality among authors, "the fall of the leaf.'" On this tax Dean Swift thus humorously alludes in his Journal to Stella, as follows (August 7):—'Do you know that all Grub-street is dead and gone last week? No more Ghosts or murders now for love or money. I plied it close the last fortnight, and published at least seven papers of my own, besides some of other people's; but now every single half-sheet pays a halfpenny to the queen. The 'Observator' is fallen; the 'Medleys' are jumbled together with the 'Flying Post'; the 'Examiner' is deadly sick; the 'Spectator' keeps up and doubles its price; I know not how long it will hold. Have you seen the red stamp the papers are marked with? Methinks the stamping is worth a half-penny.' The stamp mark upon the newspapers was a rose and thistle joined by the stalks, and enclosing between the Irish shamrock, the whole three were surmounted by a crown. … It is curious to observe what an effect this trifling impost had upon the circulation of the most favourite papers. Many were entirely discontinued, and several of those which survived were generally united into one publication. The bill operated in a directly contrary manner to what the ministers had anticipated; for the opposition, who had more leisure, and perhaps more acrimony of feeling, were unanimous in the support of their cause. The adherents of ministers, who were by no means behind the opposition in their proficiency in the topic of defamation, were, it seems, not so strenuously supported; and the measure thus chiefly destroyed those whom it was Bolinbroke's interest to protect. {2600} For some reason, which we have not been able to trace, the stamp-duties were removed shortly after their imposition, and were not again enforced until 1725. In order to understand how so small a duty as one halfpenny should operate so strongly upon these periodical publications, we must look at the price at which they were vended at that period. The majority of them were published at a penny, many at a halfpenny, and some were even published so low as a farthing."

C. H. Timperley, Encyclopædia of Literary and Typographical Anecdote, pages 601-602.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1723. End of Newspaper monopoly in France.

"Until Louis XVI. was dethroned, Paris was officially supposed to possess but three periodicals: the 'Gazette de France' for politics, 'Le Journal des Savants' for literature and science, and the 'Mercure de France' for politics, literature, and social matters mingled. For a time these monopolies were respected, but only for a very short time. … During the Regency of the Duke of Orleans (1715-23), the 'Gazette de France,' 'Mercure,' and 'Journal des Savants' combined to bring an action for infringement against all the papers then existing, but they were non-suited on a technical objection; and this was their last attempt at asserting their prerogative."

_The French Press (Cornhill Magazine, October, 1873)._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1734. Zenger's trial in New York. Determination of the freedom of the Press.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1720-1734.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1771. Freedom of Parliamentary reporting won in England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1771.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1777. The first Daily Newspaper in France.

"In 1777 there appeared the 'Journal de Paris,' which only deserves notice from its being the first daily paper issued in France."

_Westminster Review, July 1860, page 219._

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1784-1813. The earliest daily Newspapers in the United States.

"The first daily newspaper published in the United States was the 'American Daily Advertiser.' It was issued in Philadelphia in 1784, by Benjamin Franklin Bache, afterwards of the Aurora. When the seat of national government was in Philadelphia, it shared the confidence and support of Jefferson with the 'National Gazette.' It was strong in its opposition to the Federal section of the administration of Washington, and to all the measures originating with Hamilton. Zachariah Poulson became its proprietor and publisher in 1802, and it was known as 'Poulson's Advertiser,' and we believe he continued its publisher till October 28, 1839, when the establishment was sold to Brace and Newbold, the publishers of a new paper called the 'North American.' The name after that was the 'North American and Daily Advertiser.' … The 'New York Daily Advertiser,' the second real journal in the United States, was published in 1785. It was commenced on the 1st of March by Francis Childs & Co. … On the 29th of July, 1786, the 'Pittsburg (Pennsylvania) Gazette,' the first newspaper printed west of the Alleghany Mountains, appeared, and in 1796 the 'Post' was issued. … 'The United States Gazette' was started in New York in 1789 by John Fenno, of Boston. Its original name was 'Gazette of the United States.' It was first issued in New York, because the seat of the national government was then in that city. When Congress removed to Philadelphia in 1790, the 'Gazette' went with that body. In 1792 it was the special organ of Alexander Hamilton. … Noah Webster, the lexicographer of America, was a lawyer in 1793, and had an office in Hartford, Connecticut. 'Washington's administration was then violently assailed by the 'Aurora,' 'National Gazette,' and other organs of the Republican Party, and by the partisans of France. Jefferson was organizing the opposition elements, and Hamilton was endeavoring to strengthen the Federal party. Newspapers were established on each side as the chief means of accomplishing the objects each party had in view. Noah Webster was considered, in this state of affairs, the man to aid the Federalists journalistically in New York. He was, therefore, induced to remove to that city and take charge of a Federal organ. On the 9th of December, 1793, he issued the first number of a daily paper, which was named the 'Minerva.' According to its imprint, it appeared 'every day, Sundays excepted, at four o'clock, or earlier if the arrival of the mail will permit.' … With the 'Minerva' was connected a semi-weekly paper called the 'Herald.' … The names of 'Minerva' and 'Herald' were shortly changed to those of 'Commercial Advertiser' and 'New York Spectator,' and these names have continued. … The 'Commercial Advertiser' is the oldest daily newspaper in the metropolis. Of the hundreds of daily papers started in New York, from the time of Bradford's Gazette in 1725 to the 'Journal of Commerce' in 1827, there are now [1872] only two survivors—the 'Evening Post' and the 'Commercial Advertiser.' … The first prominent daily paper issued in New England was the Boston Daily Advertiser, the publication of which was commenced on the 3d of March, 1813. There was a daily paper begun in that city on the 6th of October, 1796, by Alexander Martin, and edited by John O'Ley Burk, one of the 'United Irishmen.' It lived about six months. It was called the Polar Star and Boston Daily Advertiser. Another was attempted on the 1st of January, 1798, by Caleb P. Wayne, who was afterwards editor of the United States Gazette of Philadelphia. This second daily paper of Boston was named the Federal Gazette and Daily Advertiser. It lived three months. The third attempt at a daily paper in the capital of Massachusetts was a success. It was published by William W. Clapp, afterwards of the Saturday Evening Gazette, and edited by Horatio Biglow."

F. Hudson, Journalism in the United States, pages 175-194, and 378.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1785-1812. The founding of "The Times," in London. The beginning of "leading articles."

The newspaper afterwards famous as "The Times" was started, in 1785, under the name of the "Daily Universal Register," and did not adopt the title of "The Times" until the 1st of January, 1788.

J. Grant, The Newspaper Press, volume 1, chapter 16.

"All the newspapers that can be said to have been distinguished in any way till the appearance of the 'Times' were distinguished by some freak of cleverness. … The 'Times' took up a line of its own from the first day of its existence. The proprietors staked their fortunes upon the general character of their paper, upon the promptitude and accuracy of its intelligence, upon its policy, upon the frank and independent spirit of its comments on public men. … The chief proprietor of the 'Times' was John Walter—a man who knew nothing or next to nothing of newspaper work, but who knew precisely what the public wanted in a newspaper, and possessed, with this instinct and intelligence, the determination and enterprise which constitute the character of a successful man of business. {2601} He saw how a newspaper ought to be conducted, and he thought he saw how, by the development of a new idea in printing, he could produce the 'Times' a good deal cheaper than any of its contemporaries. The whole English language, according to Mr. Walter, consisted of about 90,000 words; but by separating the particles and omitting the obsolete words, technical terms, and common terminations, Mr. Walter believed it to be possible to reduce the stock in common use to about 50,000, and a large proportion of these words, with all the common terminations, he proposed to have cast separately, so that the compositor, with a slip of MS. before him to set in type, might pick up words or even phrases instead of picking up one by one every letter of every word in his copy, and thus, of course, save a good deal of time. The idea was impracticable, utterly impracticable, because the number of words required to carry out the system must in itself be so great that no case of type that a printer could stand before would hold them all, even if the printer 'learn his boxes' with a case of some 4,000 or 5,000 compartments before him; but it took a good many years, a good many experiments, and the expenditure of some thousands of pounds to convince Mr. Walter that the failure was not due to the perversity of his printers but to the practical difficulties which surrounded his conception. John Walter was far more successful in the general conduct of the 'Times' as a newspaper than he was in the management of the 'Times' printing office. He set all the printers in London by the ears with his whim about logographic printing. But he had a very clear conception of what a national newspaper ought to be, and with the assistance of a miscellaneous group of men, who, as they are sketched for us by Henry Crabb Robinson, were apparently far more picturesque than practical, John Walter made the 'Times' what the 'Times' has been for nearly a century, pre-eminently and distinctly a national newspaper. The 'Times,' in its original shape, consisted merely of the day's news, a few advertisements, some market quotations, perhaps a notice of a new book, a few scraps of gossip, and in the session, a Parliamentary report. The 'Morning Chronicle' had the credit … of inventing the leading article, as it had the credit of inventing Parliamentary reporting. The 'Morning Chronicle,' on the 12th of May, 1791, published a paragraph, announcing that 'the great and firm body of the Whigs of England, true to their principles, had decided on the dispute between Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke, in favor of Mr. Fox, as the representative of the pure doctrines of Whiggery,' and that in consequence of this resolution Mr. Burke would retire from Parliament. It was very short, but this paragraph is the nearest approximation that is to be found in the newspapers of that time to a leading article, and appearing as it did in the part of the 'Morning Chronicle' where a year or two afterwards the leading articles were printed, Mr. Wingrove Cooke cites it as the germ of the leaders which, when they became general, gave a distinctive colour and authority to newspapers as independent organs of opinion and criticism. The idea soon became popular; and in the 'Morning Post' and the 'Courier' the leading article, developed as it was by Coleridge and Macintosh into a work of art, often rivalling in argument, wit, and eloquence the best speeches in Parliament, became the object of quite as much interest as the Parliamentary reports themselves. The 'Times,' knowing how to appropriate one by one all the specialties of its contemporaries, and to improve upon what it appropriated, was one of the first newspapers to adopt the idea of leading articles, and in adopting that idea, to improve upon it by stamping its articles with a spirit of frankness and independence which was all its own. … The reign of John Walter, practically the founder of the 'Times,' ended in the year 1812, and upon his death his son, the second John Walter, took possession of Printing House Square, and, acting in the spirit of his father, with ampler means, soon made the 'Times' the power in the State that it has been from that day to this."

C. Pebody, English Journalism, pages 92-99.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1817. The trials of William Hone.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1816-1820.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1830-1833. The first Penny Papers in the United States.

"The Penny Press of America dates from 1833. There were small and cheap papers published in Boston and Philadelphia before and about that time. The Bostonian was one. The Cent, in Philadelphia, was another. The latter was issued by Christopher C. Cornwall in 1830. These and all similar adventures were not permanent. Most of them were issued by printers when they had nothing else to do. Still they belonged to the class of cheap papers. The idea came from the illustrated Penny Magazine, issued in London in 1830. … The Morning Post was the first penny paper of any pretensions in the United States. It was started on New-Year's Day, 1833, as a two-cent paper, by Dr. Horatio David Shepard, with Horace Greeley and Francis V. Story as partners, printers, and publishers. … After one week's trial, with the exhaustion of the capital, the original idea of Dr. Shepard, his dream of the previous year 1832 was attempted, and the price reduced to one cent; but it was too late. … This experiment, however, was the seed of the Cheap Press. It had taken root. On Tuesday, the 3d of September, in the same year 1833, the first number of the Sun was issued by Benjamin H. Day."

F. Hudson, Journalism in the United States, pages 416-417.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1853-1870. Extinction of taxes on Newspapers in England. The beginning of Penny Papers. Rise of the provincial daily press.

"In 1853 the advertisement duty was repealed; in 1855 the obligatory newspaper stamp was abolished, and in 1861, with the repeal of the paper duty, the last check upon the unrestrained journalism was taken away. As a matter of course, the resulting increase in the number of newspapers has been very great as well as the resulting diminution in their price. … When it was seen that the trammels of journalism were about to be loosed the penny paper came into existence. The 'Daily Telegraph,' the first newspaper published at that price, was established in June, 1855, and is now one of the most successful of English journals."

_T. G. Bowles, Newspapers (Fortnightly Review, July 1, 1884)._

{2602}

"With the entire freedom from taxation began the modern era of the daily press. At this time [1861] London had nine or ten daily newspapers, with the 'Times' in the lead. Of these, six or seven still survive, and are holding their own with competitors of more recent origin. Up to the time of the abolition of the stamp duties, London was the only city which had a daily press; but between 1855 and 1870 a large number of newspapers published in the provincial cities, which had hitherto been issued in weekly or bi-weekly form, made their appearance as daily journals. With only one or two exceptions, all the prosperous provincial morning papers of to-day were originally weeklies, and as such had long occupied the ground they now hold as dailies."

E. Porritt, The Englishman at Home, chapter 13.

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: A. D. 1874-1894. Surviving Press Censorship in Germany.

"It would be wrong to speak of the Newspaper Press of Germany as the fourth estate. In the land which gave Gutenberg and the art of printing to the world, the Press has not yet established a claim to a title so imposing. To the growth and power of a Free Press are needed liberal laws and institutions, with freedom of political opinion and civil action for the subject. Hitherto these fundamental conditions have been absent. During the last fifty years little has been done to liberate the newspaper, to give it free play, to unmuzzle it. It is the misfortune of the German Press that the special laws for the regulation of newspapers and serial publications have been evolved from a system of legislation which was devised in times of great political unrest and agitation. … Liberty of the Press has been one of the leading political watchwords of the reform party during the last three-quarters of a century. Yet though the Press does not stand where it stood at the beginning of the century, when even visiting cards could not be printed without the solemn assent of the public censor, and when objectionable prints were summarily suppressed at the mere beck of a Minister or his subordinate, little ground has been won since the severer features of the measures passed in 1854 for the repression of democratic excesses were abandoned. The constitution of Prussia says that 'Every Prussian has the right to express his opinion freely by word, writing, print, or pictorial representation' (Article 27). But this right is superseded by the provision of the imperial constitution (Article 41, Section 16) which reserves to the Empire the regulation of the Press, and by a measure of May 7th, 1874, which gives to this provision concrete form. This is the Press Law of Germany to-day. The law does, indeed, concede, in principle at least, the freedom of the Press (Pressfreiheit), and it abolishes the formal censorship. But a severe form of control is still exercised by the police, whose authority over the Press is greater in reality than it seems to be from the letter of the statute. It is no longer necessary, as it once was, and still is in Russia, to obtain sanction for the issue of each number before it is sent into the world, but it is the legal duty of a publisher to lay a copy of his journal before the police authority directly it reaches the press. This an informal censor revises, and in the event of any article being obnoxious he may order the immediate confiscation of the whole issue, or a court of law, which in such matters works very speedily, may do so for him. As the police and judicial authorities have wide discretion in the determination of editorial culpability, this power of confiscation is felt to be a harsh one. While the Socialist Law existed the powers of the police were far more extensive than now, and that they were also real is proved by the wholesale extermination of newspapers of Socialistic tendencies which took place between the years 1878 and 1890. Since that law disappeared, however, Socialist journals have sprung up again in abundance, though the experience gained by their conductors in the unhappy past does not enable them to steer clear of friction with the authorities. The police, too, regulates the public sale of newspapers and decides whether they shall be cried in the street or not. In Berlin special editions cannot be published without the prior sanction of this authority. … So frequent are prosecutions of editors that many newspapers are compelled to maintain on their staffs batches of Sitzredakteure, or 'sitting editors,' whose special function is to serve in prison (colloquially sitzen=sit) the terms of detention that may be awarded for the too liberal exercise of the critical faculty. … Some measure of the public depreciation of newspapers is due to the fact that they are largely in Hebrew hands. In the large towns the Press is, indeed, essentially a Jewish institution."

W. H. Dawson, Germany and the Germans, part 2, chapter 1 (volume 1).

PRINTING AND THE PRESS: American Periodicals founded before 1870 and existing in 1894.

The following is a carefully prepared chronological list of important newspapers and other periodicals, still published (1894) in the United States and Canada, which have existed for a quarter of a century or more, having been founded before 1870. The * before a title indicates that the information given has been obtained directly from the publisher. For some of the periodicals not so marked, the dates of beginning have been taken from their own files. In other cases, where publishers have neglected to answer a request for information, the facts have been borrowed from Rowell's American Newspaper Directory:

1764. * Connecticut Courant (Hartford), w.; added Courant, d., 1836.

* Quebec Gazette (French and English), weekly; ran many years as tri-weekly, in English; discontinued for about 16 years; now resumed as Quebec Gazette in connection with Quebec Morning Chronicle (founded 1847).

1766 or 1767. * Connecticut Herald and Post Boy (New Haven); various names; now Connecticut Herald and Weekly Journal.

1768. * Essex Gazette; changes of name and place; suspended; revived at Salem, Massachusetts, as Salem Mercury, 1786; became semi-weekly, 1796; became Salem Daily Gazette, 1892.

1770. Worcester Spy, weekly; added daily, 1845.

1771. * Pennsylvania Packet and General Advertiser (Philadelphia), weekly; became Pennsylvania Packet and American Daily Advertiser, daily, 1784; consolidated with North American (founded 1839), 1839; consolidated with United States Gazette (established 1789, see 1789, Gazette of the U. S.), as North American and United States Gazette, 1847; became North American, 1876.

{2603}

1773. * Maryland Journal and Baltimore Advertiser; merged in Baltimore American, 1799.

1778. * Gazette (Montreal), weekly; now daily and weekly; since 1870 absorbed Telegraph and Daily News.

1785. *Falmouth (Maine) Gazette and Weekly Advertiser; Cumberland Gazette, 1786; Gazette of Maine, 1790; Eastern Herald, 1792; Eastern Herald and Gazette of Maine, 1796; Jenks' Portland Gazette, 1798; Portland Gazette and Maine Advertiser, 1805; Portland Advertiser, semi-weekly, 1823; daily, 1831. * Journal (Poughkeepsie, New York); established to take the place of New York Journal, published at Poughkeepsie, 1778-1783; consolidated with Eagle (founded 1828—see 1828, Dutchess Intelligencer), as Journal and Eagle; became Eagle after a few years.

1786. Hampshire Gazette (Northampton, Massachusetts). Pittsburgh Commercial Gazette.

1789. * Gazette of the United States (New York); removed to Philadelphia, 1790; daily, 1793; became The Union, or United States Gazette and True American; merged in North American, 1847. Berkshire County Eagle (Pittsfield, Massachusetts), weekly.

1793. Gazette (Cincinnati), weekly; added daily, Commercial Gazette, 1841. Minerva (New York), daily, and Herald, semi-weekly; became Commercial Advertiser, and New York Spectator. Newburyport (Massachusetts) Herald. Utica Gazette; consolidated with Herald (founded 1847), as Morning Herald and Gazette.

1794. Rutland (Vermont) Herald.

1796. * Sentinel of Freedom (Newark), weekly; added Newark Daily Advertiser, daily, 1832.

1800. * Salem Register, weekly; then semi-weekly; now weekly.

1801. New York Evening Post. Ægis and Gazette (Worcester), weekly; added Evening Gazette, 1843.

1803. Charleston News and Courier. Portland (Maine) Eastern Argus.

1804. Pittsburgh Post.

1805. Missionary Herald (Boston), monthly. * Quebec Mercury, tri-weekly; became daily about 1860.

1806. * Precurser (Montpelier), weekly; became Vermont Watchman, 1807, weekly.

1807. * New Bedford (Massachusetts) Mercury, weekly; added daily, 1831.

1808. * Cooperstown(New York) Federalist; became Freeman's Journal, weekly, 1820. Le Canadien (Montreal). St. Louis Republic, weekly; added daily, 1835.

1809. * New Hampshire Patriot (Concord, New Hampshire); consolidated with People (founded 1868) as People and Patriot, 1878, daily and weekly. Montreal Herald.

1810. Kingston (Ontario) News, weekly.; added daily, 1851.

1811. * Buffalo Gazette, weekly; became Niagara Patriot, weekly, 1818; became Buffalo Patriot, weekly, July 10, 1821; added Buffalo Commercial Advertiser, daily, 1835. * Western Intelligencer; Western Intelligencer and Columbus Gazette, 1814; became Ohio State Journal, 1825; daily, 1839.

1812. * Columbian Weekly Register (New Haven); added Evening Register, daily, 1848.

1813. Albany Argus. Boston Advertiser. Acadian Recorder (Halifax).

1815. North American Review (New York), monthly.

1816. * Boston Recorder; merged in Congregationalist, weekly, 1867. Knoxville Tribune, weekly; added daily, 1865. Rochester Union and Advertiser, weekly; added daily, 1826.

1817. * Hartford Times, weekly; added daily., 1841.

1819. * Cleveland Herald; consolidated with Evening News (founded 1868), 1885. See 1848. Cleveland Leader. Arkansas Gazette (Little Rock). * Oswego Palladium, weekly; added daily about 1860.

1820. Nova Scotian (Halifax), weekly; added Chronicle, 3 times a week, 1845; added Morning Chronicle, 1865. * Manufacturers' and Farmers' Journal (Providence), semi-weekly; added Daily Journal, 1829.

1821. * Christian Register (Boston), weekly. Indianapolis Sentinel. Mobile Register.

1822. Broome Republican (Binghamton, New York), weekly; added Republican, daily, 1849. * Old Colony Memorial (Plymouth, Massachusetts), weekly; has absorbed Plymouth Rock, and Old Colony Sentinel.

1823. Auburn (New York) News and Democrat, weekly; added Bulletin, daily, 1870. Zion's Herald (Boston), weekly. * New Hampshire Statesman (Concord), weekly; consolidated with Independent Democrat (founded 1845), as Independent Statesman, 1871; added daily, Concord Evening Monitor, 1864. * Western Censor and Emigrant's Guide (Indianapolis); became Indianapolis Journal, weekly, and semi-weekly during session of the Legislature; became weekly and daily, 1850. * Observer (New York), weekly. * Register (New York), weekly; became Examiner, 1855. Poughkeepsie News-Telegraph, weekly; added News-Press, daily, 1852.

1824. * Springfield (Massachusetts) Republican, weekly; added daily, 1844.

1825. Kennebec Journal, weekly; added daily, 1870. * Rome (New York) Republican, weekly; became Telegram; became Sentinel, 1837; added daily, 1852-1860; added daily, 1881.

1826. Detroit Free Press, weekly; added daily, 1835. * Lowell Courier, weekly; added daily, 1845; weekly now called Lowell Weekly Journal. * La Minerve (Montreal), daily and weekly. Christian Advocate (New York), weekly. Journal of the Franklin Institute (Philadelphia), monthly. * St. Lawrence Republican (Potsdam, New York) weekly; removed to Canton, N. Y., 1827; removed to Ogdensburg, 1830, and consolidated with St. Lawrence Gazette (founded 1815); purchased by Ogdensburg Journal (founded 1855), daily, 1858; both papers continue. Rochester Democrat; consolidated with Chronicle (founded 1868) as Democrat and Chronicle.

{2604}

1827. * Youth's Companion (Boston), weekly. * Independent News Letter (Cleveland); became Advertiser, 1832; became Plain Dealer, 1842. Columbus (Ohio) Press. New York Journal of Commerce.

1828. * Orleans Republican (Albion, New York), weekly. Burlington (Vermont) Free Press, weekly, added daily, 1844. Montgomery (Alabama) Advertiser. * Dutchess Intelligencer (Poughkeepsie, New York); consolidated with Dutchess Republican, as Poughkeepsie Eagle, weekly, 1833; consolidated with Poughkeepsie Journal (see 1785, Journal), as Journal and Eagle, 1844; now Eagle; added daily, 1860.

1829. * Auburn (New York) Journal, weekly; added Daily Advertiser, 1844. * Northwestern Journal (Detroit), weekly; semi-weekly, then 3 times a week, 1835; became Daily Advertiser, 1836; consolidated with Tribune (founded 1849), as Advertiser and Tribune, 1862; consolidated with Daily Post (founded 1866), as Post and Tribune, 1877; became Tribune, 1885. * Elmira Gazette, weekly, added daily, 1860. Philadelphia Inquirer. * Providence Daily Journal. * Syracuse Standard; successor to Onondaga Standard.

1830. * Albany Evening Journal. * Boston Transcript. Louisville Journal; consolidated with Courier (founded 1843) and Democrat (founded 1844), under name of Louisville Courier-Journal, 1868. * Evangelist (New York), weekly. * Sunday School Journal (Philadelphia), weekly; merged in Sunday School Times, 1859.

1831. Orleans American (Albion, New York), weekly. * Boston Daily Post. Presbyterian (Philadelphia), weekly. Illinois State Journal (Springfield), weekly; added daily, 1848.

1832. * Patriot (Montpelier, Vermont); consolidated with Argus (founded 1851, Bellows Falls), as Argus and Patriot, weekly, 1862. * Herald (New Haven), daily; various names; became Journal and Courier, 1849. Morning Journal and Courier (New Haven).

1833. * Catholic Intelligencer (Boston), weekly; successor to Jesuit; became Pilot, 1836. * Boston Mercantile Journal; now Boston Journal. * The Sun (New York).

1834. Bangor Whig and Courier. * Western Christian Advocate (Cincinnati), weekly. * British Whig (Kingston, Ontario), daily, 1849. * New Yorker Staats-Zeitung, weekly; added daily, 1845 Anzeiger des Westens (St. Louis).

1835. * New York Herald. Schenectady Reflector, weekly; added Evening Star, 1855. Troy Morning Telegram.

1836. * Miner's Express, weekly; merged in Dubuque Herald (founded 1853), now daily and weekly. * Public Ledger and Daily Transcript (Philadelphia). * Illinois State Register (Vandalia), weekly; absorbed People's Advocate, 1836; removed to Springfield, 1839; absorbed Illinois Republican, 1839; added daily, 1848. * Toledo Blade, weekly; added daily, 1848.

1837. * Sun (Baltimore), daily and weekly. Buffalo Demokrat und Weltbürger. Burlington (Iowa) Gazette. * Cincinnati Times, daily and weekly; daily consolidated with Star (founded 1872), daily and weekly, as Cincinnati Times-Star, 1880. Southern Christian Advocate (Columbia, South Carolina), weekly. Jackson (Mississippi) Clarion, weekly. * Milwaukee Sentinel, weekly; absorbed Gazette and became Sentinel-Gazette, 1846; dropped "Gazette," 1851; daily 1844. * New Orleans Picayune.

1838. Bangor Commercial. * Philadelphia Demokrat. * St. Louis Evening Gazette; became Evening Mirror, 1847; became New Era, 1848; became Intelligencer, 1849; became Evening News, 1857; consolidated with Dispatch, 1867; consolidated with Evening Post, as Post Dispatch, 1878.

1839. * Iowa Patriot (Burlington), weekly; became Hawkeye and Iowa Patriot; has been, at various times, semi-weekly, and daily; now Burlington Hawkeye, daily and weekly. * Christliche Apologete (Cincinnati), weekly. * Madison Express, weekly; became Wisconsin Express, 1848; daily, 1851; consolidated with a new paper, Statesman, as Palladium, daily and weekly, 1852; became Wisconsin State Journal, 1852. Freeman's Journal and Catholic Register (New York), weekly. * North American (Philadelphia); absorbed Pennsylvania Packet (see 1771, Pennsylvania Packet), 1839. Western State Journal (Syracuse), weekly; became Syracuse Journal, 1844; added daily, 1846; absorbed Evening Chronicle, 1856; added semi-weekly, 1893.

1840. Chicago Tribune. * Appeal Memphis); consolidated with Avalanche (founded 1857), as Appeal-Avalanche, 1890 (?); consolidated with Commercial (founded 1889), as Commercial Appeal, 1894. * Union and Evangelist (Uniontown, Pennsylvania); became Evangelist and Observer at Pittsburgh; succeeded by Cumberland Presbyterian, about 1846, at Uniontown; removed to Brownsville; then to Waynesburg; to Alton, Illinois, in 1868; and to Nashville, Tennessee, in 1874; here consolidated with Banner of Peace (founded, Princeton, Kentucky, 1840; removed to Lebanon, Tennessee, 1843; then to Nashville). * Roman Citizen, weekly; became Rome Semi-Weekly Citizen, 1888.

1841. * Brooklyn Eagle. * Prairie Farmer (Chicago), weekly. * New York Tribune. * Pittsburgh Chronicle; consolidated with Pittsburgh Telegraph (founded 1873), as Pittsburgh Chronicle Telegraph, 1884. Reading Eagle, weekly; added daily, 1868.

{2605}

1842. * Daily Mercantile Courier and Democratic Economist (Buffalo); became Daily Courier and Economist, 1843; became Buffalo Courier, daily, 1845. * Cincinnati Enquirer, daily and semi-weekly. * Galveston News. Rural New Yorker (New York), weekly. * Preacher (Pittsburgh), weekly; became United Presbyterian, 1854.

1843. * Albany Daily Knickerbocker; consolidated with Press (founded 1877), as Daily Press and Knickerbocker, 1877. * Steuben Courier (Bath, New York).

1844. Chicago Evening Journal. * Woechentlicher Seebote (Milwaukee); became Der Seebote, daily and Woechentlicher Seebote. * American Baptist (New York); became Baptist Weekly; has absorbed Gospel Age; became Christian Inquirer, weekly, 1888. * Churchman (New York), weekly. *New Yorker Demokrat; New Yorker Journal, 1862; consolidated as New Yorker Zeitung, 1878. Eclectic Magazine of Foreign Literature (New York), monthly. Ledger (New York), weekly. Oswego Times. * Globe (Toronto).

1845. * Binghamton Democrat, weekly; added daily, 1864. * Buffalo Morning Express. * Independent Democrat (Concord, New Hampshire). See 1823, New Hampshire Statesman. Montreal Witness, weekly; added daily, 1860. Scientific American (New York), weekly. * St. Joseph (Missouri) Gazette, daily and weekly.

1846. * Boston Herald, daily and weekly. * Evening News (Hamilton, Ontario), daily and weekly; successor to Journal and Express, semi-weekly; became Banner and Railway Chronicle, 1852 or 1853; became Evening Times, 1858. * Hamilton (Ontario) Spectator, semi-weekly; added daily, 1852. Keokuk (Iowa) Gate City. * Bankers' Magazine (New York), monthly. * Newport (Rhode Island) Daily News. Pittsburgh Dispatch.

1847. * Albany Morning Express. New England Historical and Genealogical Register (Boston), quarterly. Boston Traveller. Illinois Staats-Zeitung (Chicago). * Lewiston (Maine) Weekly Journal; added Evening Journal, 1861. London (Ontario) Free Press, weekly; added daily, 1859. * Evening Wisconsin Milwaukee). Iron Age (New York), weekly. Toledo Commercial. Utica Morning Herald; consolidated with Gazette (founded 1793), as Morning Herald and Gazette.

1848. * Massachusetts Teacher; afterwards, with College Courant (founded 1866, New Haven), Rhode Island Schoolmaster (founded 1855), and Connecticut School Journal, formed Journal of Education (founded 1875, Boston). * Williamsburg Times; became Brooklyn Daily Times, 1854. * Cleveland Leader, daily; added, by purchase, Evening News (founded 1868), 1869; purchased Cleveland Herald (founded 1819), and consolidated it with Evening News, as News and Herald, 1885. Des Moines Leader. * Independent (New York), weekly.

1849. * Congregationalist (Boston), weekly; absorbed Boston Recorder (founded 1816), 1867. * Detroit Tribune; consolidated with Post, 1877. See 1829, Northwestern Journal. * Irish American (New York), weekly. * Water Cure Journal (New York); became Herald of Health, 1863; became Journal of Hygiene and Herald of Health, m., 1893. * St. Paul Pioneer, weekly; daily, 1854; consolidated with St. Paul Press (founded 1860), daily, as Pioneer Press, 1875. Wilkesbarre Leader, weekly; added daily, 1879.

1850. * Buffalo Christian Advocate, weekly. Kansas City (Missouri) Times. Mirror and American (Manchester, New Hampshire). Harper's New Monthly Magazine (New York). * Oregonian (Portland), weekly; added daily, 1861. Richmond Dispatch. * Deseret News (Salt Lake City), weekly; added semi-weekly, 1865; added daily, 1867. * Morning News (Savannah, Georgia), daily and weekly; absorbed Savannah Republican (founded 1802), and Savannah Daily Advertiser (founded 1866), 1874. * Watertown (New York) Weekly Reformer; added Daily Times, 1860.

1851. La Crosse Morning Chronicle. * Union Democrat (Manchester, New Hampshire), weekly; added Manchester Union, daily, 1863. * Argus (Bellows Falls); consolidated with Patriot, at Montpelier, under name of Argus and Patriot, weekly, 1862. * New York Times, daily and weekly. * Rochester Beobachter, weekly; 3 times a week, 1855; daily, 1863; consolidated with Abendpost (founded 1880), as Rochester Abendpost und Beobachter, daily and weekly, 1881. St. Joseph (Mo.) Herald. * Troy (New York) Times, daily.

1852. Wächter am Erie (Cleveland). St. Louis Globe–Democrat. Wheeling Intelligencer (Wheeling, West Virginia).

1853. Elmira Advertiser. Frank Leslie's Illustrated Weekly (New York). Richmond Anzeiger. San Francisco Evening Post. Toledo Express. Washington Evening Star. * Record of the Times (Wilkesbarre), weekly; added Wilkesbarre Record, daily, 1873.

1854. * Deutsche Zeitung (Charleston, South Carolina), semi-weekly and weekly; suspended during four years of Civil War. Chicago Times, daily and weekly. * American Israelite (Cincinnati), weekly. * Kansas City (Missouri) Journal, weekly; added daily, 1864. La Crosse Republican and Leader. Herold (Milwaukee). * Nebraska City News. * Anzeiger des Nordens (Rochester); became Rochester Volksblatt, weekly, 1859, added daily, 1863.

{2606}

1855. * Ogdensburg Journal, daily; purchased St. Lawrence Republican (founded 1826), weekly, 1858.

1856. * Albany Times; absorbed Evening Courier, 1861; consolidated with Evening Union (founded 1882), as Albany Times-Union, daily and weekly, 1891. * Buffalo Allgemeine Zeitung, weekly; succeeded by Buffalo Freie Presse, daily 3 months, then semi-weekly; daily, 1872. * Iowa State Register (Des Moines), weekly; added daily, 1861. Dubuque Times. * Western Railroad Gazette (Chicago), weekly; became Railroad Gazette; removed to New York, 1871. San Francisco Call. * Scranton Republican, weekly; added daily, 1867.

1857. Baltimore News. Atlantic Monthly (Boston). * Banner of Light (Boston), weekly. Leavenworth Times. New Haven Union. Harper's Weekly (New York). * Jewish Messenger (New York), weekly. * Scottish American (New York), weekly. Philadelphia Press. Courrier du Canada (Quebec). Westliche Post (St. Louis). Syracuse Courier.

1858. Hartford Evening Post; Connecticut Post, weekly. Nebraska Press (Nebraska City), daily and weekly. Rochester Post-Express.

1859. * Boston Commercial Bulletin, weekly. * Rocky Mountain News (Denver), weekly; added daily, 1860. Kansas City (Missouri) Post (German). * Sunday School Times (Philadelphia), weekly; succeeded Sunday School Journal (founded 1830); absorbed Sunday School Workman (founded 1870), 1871; absorbed National Sunday School Teacher (founded 1866), 1882. St. John (New Brunswick) Globe.

1860. World (New York).

1861. Commonwealth (Boston), weekly.

1862. * New Yorker Journal. See 1844, New Yorker Demokrat. * Maine State Press (Portland), weekly; Portland Press, daily. Raleigh News and Observer. St. John (New Brunswick) Telegraph, weekly;added daily, 1869.

1863. * Brooklyn Daily Union; consolidated with Brooklyn Daily Standard (founded 1884), as Brooklyn Standard Union, 1887. London (Ontario) Advertiser. * New Orleans Times; consolidated with Democrat (founded 1876), as New Orleans Times–Democrat, 1881, all daily and weekly. Army and Navy Journal (New York), weekly. Portland (Oregon) Evening Telegram. Providence Evening Bulletin. * Sioux City Journal, weekly; added daily, 1870. * Wheeling Register.

1864. * Concord (New Hampshire) Evening Monitor, daily; issued in connection with Independent Statesman (see 1823, New Hampshire Statesman). Reading Post (German), weekly; added daily, 1867. * Springfield (Massachusetts) Union.

1865. Albany Evening Post. * Skandinaven (Chicago), weekly; daily, 1871. Halifax Morning Chronicle. Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville). Memphis Public Ledger.

* Catholic World (New York City), monthly. [https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39367 (first of many)]

* Commercial and Financial Chronicle (New York), weekly; absorbed Hunt's Merchants' Magazine, 1870. Nation (New York), weekly Norfolk Virginian. * Daily Herald (Omaha, Nebraska); consolidated with Evening World (founded 1885), as World-Herald, 1889. * Index (Petersburg, Virginia); consolidated with Appeal (successor to Express, founded in 1848), as Index-Appeal, 1873. Philadelphia Abend Post. San Antonio Express. * San Francisco Chronicle. * Union (Schenectady), daily, and weekly.

1866. * Denver Tribune; consolidated with Denver Republican (founded 1878), under name of Tribune-Republican, 1884; became Denver Republican, daily and weekly. * Christian at Work (New York), weekly; became Christian Work, 1894; has absorbed The Continent, The Manhattan Magazine, Every Thursday, and others. Engineering and Mining Journal (New York), weekly. Sanitarian (New York), monthly.

1867. * Advance (Chicago), weekly. * Evening Journal (Jersey City). * Nebraska Commonwealth (Lincoln), weekly; became Nebraska State Journal, weekly, 1869; added daily, 1870. * Democrat (Madison, Wisconsin), daily and weekly. Minneapolis Tribune. * Le Monde (Montreal). Engineering News (New York), weekly. Harper's Bazaar (New York), weekly. American Naturalist (Philadelphia), monthly. * L'Evenement (Quebec). * Seattle Intelligencer, weekly; daily, 1876; consolidated with Post (founded 1878), daily, under name of Post-Intelligencer, 1881. Vicksburg Commercial Herald, weekly; added daily, 1869. Wilmington (North Carolina) Messenger. * Morning Star (Wilmington, North Carolina).

1868. Atlanta Constitution. * Buffalo Volksfreund, daily and weekly. * People (Concord, New Hampshire). See 1809, New Hampshire Patriot. Lippincott's Magazine (Philadelphia), monthly. St. Paul Dispatch. * San Diego Union, weekly; added daily, 1871. Troy Press.

1869. * Evening Star (Montreal); became Montreal Evening Star, then Montreal Daily Star; added Family Herald and Weekly Star, weekly. * Christian Union (New York), weekly; became The Outlook, 1893. Manufacturer and Builder (New York), monthly. * Ottawa Free Press, daily and weekly. Scranton Times, daily and weekly.

{2607}

PRIOR. PRIORY.

See MONASTERY.

PRIORIES, Alien.

"These were cells of foreign abbeys, founded upon estates which English proprietors had given to the foreign houses."

E. L. Cutts, Scenes and Characters of the Middle Ages, chapter 4.

PRIORS OF THE FLORENTINE GUILDS.

See FLORENCE: A. D. 1250-1203.

PRISAGE.

See TUNNAGE AND POUNDAGE.

PRISON-SHIPS, British, at New York.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776-1777 PRISONERS AND EXCHANGES.

PRISONS AND PRISON-PENS, Confederate. Libby. Belle Isle. Andersonville.

"The Libby, which is best known, though also used as a place of confinement for private soldiers, is generally understood to be the officers' prison. It is a row of brick buildings, three stories high, situated on the canal [in Richmond, Virginia], and overlooking the James river, and was formerly a tobacco warehouse. … The rooms are 100 feet long by 40 feet broad. In six of these rooms, 1,200 United States officers, of all grades, from the Brigadier-General to the Second-Lieutenant, were confined for many months, and this was all the space that was allowed them in which to cook, eat, wash, sleep, and take exercise. … Ten feet by two were all that could be claimed by each man—hardly enough to measure his length upon; and even this was further abridged by the room necessarily taken for cooking, washing and clothes-drying. At one time they were not allowed the use of benches, chairs, or stools, nor even to fold their blankets and sit upon them, but those who would rest were obliged to huddle on their haunches, as one of them expresses it, 'like so many slaves on the middle passage.' After awhile this severe restriction was removed, and they were allowed to make chairs and stools for themselves, out of the barrels and boxes which they had received from the North. They were overrun with vermin in spite of every precaution and constant ablutions. Their blankets, which averaged one to a man, and sometimes less, had not been issued by the rebels, but had been procured in different ways; sometimes by purchase, sometimes through the Sanitary Commission. The prisoners had to help themselves from the refuse accumulation of these articles. … The prison did not seem to be under any general and uniform army regulations, but the captives were subject to the caprices of Major Turner, the officer in charge, and Richard Turner, inspector of the prison. It was among the rules that no one should go within three feet of the windows, a rule which seems to be general in all Southern prisons of this character. … Often by accident, or unconsciously, an officer would go near a window, and be instantly shot at without warning. The reports of the sentry's musket were heard almost every day, and frequently a prisoner fell either killed or wounded. It was even worse with a large prison near by, called the Pemberton Buildings, which was crowded with enlisted men. … The daily ration in the officers' quarter of Libby Prison was a small loaf of bread about the size of a man's fist, made of Indian meal. Sometimes it was made from wheat flour, but of variable quality. It weighed a little over half a pound. With it was given a piece of beef weighing two ounces. … But there is a still lower depth of suffering to be exposed. The rank of the officers, however disregarded in most respects, induced some consideration, but for the private soldiers there seemed to be no regard whatever, and no sentiment which could restrain. It is to this most melancholy part of their task that the Commissioners now proceed. Belle Isle is a small island in the James river, opposite the Tredegar Iron–works, and in full sight from the Libby windows. … The portion on which the prisoners are confined is low, sandy, and barren, without a tree to cast a shadow, and poured upon by the burning rays of a Southern sun. Here is an enclosure, variously estimated to be from three to six acres in extent, surrounded by an earthwork about three feet high, with a ditch on either side. … The interior has something of the look of an encampment, a number of Sibley tents being set in rows, with 'streets' between. These tents, rotten, torn, full of holes,—poor shelter at any rate,—accommodated only a small proportion of the number who were confined within these low earth walls. The number varied at different periods, but from 10,000 to 12,000 men have been imprisoned in this small space at one time, turned into the enclosure like so many cattle, to find what resting place they could. … Thousands had no tents, and no shelter of any kind. Nothing was provided for their accommodation. Lumber was plenty in a country of forests, but not a cabin or shed was built. … Every day, during the winter season, numbers were conveyed away stiff and stark, having fallen asleep in everlasting cold. … They were fed as the swine are fed. A chunk of corn-bread, 12 or 14 ounces in weight, half-baked, full of cracks as if baked in the sun, musty in taste, containing whole grains of corn, fragments of cob, and pieces of husks; meat often tainted, suspiciously like mule–meat, and a mere mouthful at that; two or three spoonfuls of rotten beans; soup thin and briny, often with worms floating on the surface. None of these were given together, and the whole ration was never one-half the quantity necessary for the support of a healthy man."

V. Mott, and others, Report of United States Sanitary Commission Com. of Inquiry on the Sufferings of Prisoners of War in the hands of the Rebel Authorities, chapters 2-3.

The little hamlet of Anderson, so named, in 1853, after John W. Anderson, of Savannah, but called Andersonville by the Post Office Department, is situated in the heart of the richest portion of the cotton and corn-growing region of Georgia, on the Southwestern Railroad, 62 miles south from Macon and 9 miles north of Americus. "Here, on the 27th day of November, 1863, W. S. Winder, a captain in the rebel army, and who was selected for the purpose, came and located the grounds, for a 'Confederate States Military Prison.' … When the site was definitely established, it was found to be covered with a thick growth of pines and oaks. … It was … suggested to W. S. Winder by a disinterested spectator of his preliminary proceedings … that the shade afforded by the trees would prove grateful protections to the prisoners. The reply was characteristic of the man and prophetic of their future fate. 'That is just what I am not going to do! I will make a pen here for the d—d Yankees, where they will rot faster than they can be sent!' … The trees were leveled to the ground, and the space was cleared. … No buildings, barracks, houses, or huts of any kind were built. {2608} The canopy of the sky was the only covering." In March, 1864, John H. Winder, father of the W. S. Winder mentioned above, became commandant of the post, and with him came Henry Wirz, as superintendent of the prison. These two names are linked in infamy with the horrors of the Andersonville Prison-Pen. "The stockade at Andersonville was originally built, as we learn from many sources, with a capacity for 10,000, its area being about 18 acres. It continued without enlargement until the month of June, 1864, when it was increased about one third, its area then, as shown by actual survey, being 23½ acres. … From Colonel Chandler's Inspection Report [the report of a Confederate official], dated August 5th, 1864, I quote the following: 'A railing around the inside of the stockade, and about 20 feet from it, constitutes the 'dead line,' beyond which prisoners are not allowed to pass. A small stream passes from west to east through the inclosure, about 150 yards from its southern limit, and furnishes the only water for washing accessible to the prisoners. Bordering this stream, about three quarters of an acre in the centre of the inclosure are so marshy as to be at present unfit for occupation, reducing the available present area to about 23½ acres, which gives somewhat less than six square feet to each prisoner'; and, he remarks, 'even this is being constantly reduced by the additions to their number.' … Dr. Joseph Jones, Professor of Chemistry in the Medical College of Georgia, … went to Andersonville under the direction of the surgeon general of the Confederacy, pursuant to an order dated Richmond, Virginia, August 6th, 1864. … Dr. Jones proceeds to give a table illustrating the mean strength of prisoners confined in the stockade. … His table … shows the following as the mean result: March, 7,500; April, 10,000; May, 15,000; June, 22,291; July, 29,030; August, 32,899. He says: 'Within the circumscribed area of the stockade the Federal prisoners were compelled to perform all the offices of life, cooking, washing, urinating, defecation, exercise, and sleeping.' … 'The low grounds bordering the stream were covered with human excrement and filth of all kinds, which in many cases appeared to be alive with working maggots. An indescribable sickening stench arose from the fermenting mass of human dung and filth.' And again: 'There were nearly 5,000 seriously-ill Federals in the stockade and Confederate States Military Prison Hospital, and the deaths exceeded 100 per day. … I visited 2,000 sick within the stockade, lying under some long sheds which they had built at the northern portion for themselves. At this time only one medical officer was in attendance.'" At the close of the war, Wirz, the inhuman jailor of Andersonville was tried for his many crimes before a military commission, over which General Lewis Wallace presided, was condemned and was hanged, at Andersonville, November 10, 1865. His superior officer, Winder, escaped the earthly tribunal by dying of a gangrenous disorder, which had been caused, without doubt, by the poisoned air of the place.

A. Spencer, Narrative of Andersonville, chapters 1, 4, 5, 13, 15.

"There can be no accurate count of the mortality in rebel prisons. The report made by the War Department to the 40th Congress shows that about 188,000 Union soldiers were captured by the Confederates; that half of them were paroled, and half confined in prison; of this number 36,000 died in captivity. The Union armies, on the other hand, captured 476,000 Confederates: of these 227,000 were retained as prisoners, and 30,000 died. While the percentage of mortality in Northern prisons was 13 in the hundred, that in rebel prisons was 38."

J. G. Nicolay and J. Hay, Abraham Lincoln, volume 7, chapter 16.

Report of Special Commission on Treatment of Prisoners (H.R. Report No. 45, 40th Cong., 3d Session).

Trial of Henry Wirz.

Southern Historical Society Papers, volume 1.

ALSO IN: _J. McElroy, Andersonville. [https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/4257 (volume 1)]_

_F. F. Cavada, Libby Life_.

_A. B. Isham, H. M. Davidson and H. B. Furness, Prisoners of War and Military Prisons._

PRIVATE WARFARE, The Right of.

See LANDFRIEDE.

PRIVATEERING, American, in the War of 1812.

"The war [of 1812-14] lasted about three years, and the result was, as near as I have been able to ascertain, a loss to Great Britain of about 2,000 ships and vessels of every description, including men-of-war and merchantmen. Eighteen hundred sail are recorded as having been taken, burnt, sunk, or destroyed. To this number may be added 200 more, which were either destroyed or considered too insignificant to be reported; making an aggregate of 2,000 sail of British shipping captured by our little navy, with the aid of privateers and letters-of-marque. … I have not had sufficient time in giving this summary to ascertain, precisely, what proportion of these 2,000 vessels were captured by the United States government ships; but, at a rough estimate, should judge one-third part of the whole number, leaving two-thirds, or, say, 1330 sail, to have been taken by American privateers and private-armed vessels. I have found it difficult to ascertain the exact number of our own vessels taken and destroyed by the English; but, from the best information I can obtain, I should judge they would not amount to more than 500 sail. It must be recollected that the most of our losses occurred during the first six months of the war. After that period, we had very few vessels afloat, except privateers and letters-of–marque."

G. Coggeshall, History of American Privateers, 1812-14, pages 394-395.

PRIVATEERS. LETTERS OF MARQUE.

"Until lately all maritime states have … been in the habit of using privateers, which are vessels belonging to private owners, and sailing under a commission of war [such commissions being denominated letters of marque and reprisal] empowering the person to whom it is granted to carry on all forms of hostility which are permissible at sea by the usages of war. … Universally as privateers were formerly employed, the right to use them has now almost disappeared from the world. It formed part of the Declaration adopted at the Congress of Paris in 1856 with reference to Maritime Law that 'privateering is and remains abolished'; and all civilised states have since become signataries of the Declaration, except the United States, Spain, and Mexico. For the future privateers can only be employed by signataries of the Declaration of Paris during war with one of the last-mentioned states."

W. E. Hall, Treatise on International Law, part 3, chapter 7, section 180.

{2609}

"There is a distinction between a privateer and a letter of marque in this, that the former are always equipped for the sole purpose of war, while the latter may be a merchantman, uniting the purposes of commerce to those of capture. In popular language, however, all private vessels commissioned for hostile purposes, upon the enemy's property, are called letters of marque."

F. H. Upton, The Law of Nations affecting Commerce during War, page 186.

See, also, DECLARATION OF PARIS.

PRIVILEGE OF UNION AND GENERAL PRIVILEGE OF ARAGON.

See CORTES, THE EARLY SPANISH.

PRIVILEGIUM MAJUS, THE.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1330-1364.

PRIVY COUNCIL, THE.

"It was in the reign of Henry VI. that the King's Council first assumed the name of the 'Privy Council,' and it was also during the minority of this King that a select Council was gradually emerging from out of the larger body of the Privy Council, which ultimately resulted in the institution of our modern Cabinet.

See CABINET, THE ENGLISH.

From the accession of Henry VII. to the reign of Charles I. the Privy Council was wholly subservient to the royal will, and the instrument of unconstitutional and arbitrary proceedings. The first act of the Long Parliament was to deprive the Council of most of its judicial power, leaving, however, its constitution and political functions unchanged. Since the Revolution of 1688 the Privy Council has dwindled into comparative insignificance, when contrasted with its original authoritative position. Its judicial functions are now restrained within very narrow limits. The only relic of its ancient authority in criminal matters is its power of taking examinations, and issuing commitments for treason. It still, however, continues to exercise an original jurisdiction in advising the Crown concerning the grant of charters, and it has exclusively assumed the appellate jurisdiction over the colonies and dependencies of the Crown, which formerly appertained to the Council in Parliament. Theoretically, the Privy Council still retains its ancient supremacy, and in a constitutional point of view is presumed to be the only legal and responsible Council of the Crown. … As her Majesty can only act through her privy councillors, or upon their advice, all the higher and more formal acts of administration must proceed from the authority of the Sovereign in Council, and their performance be directed by orders issued by the Sovereign at a meeting of the Privy Council specially convened for that purpose. No rule can be laid down defining those political acts of the Crown which may be performed upon the advice of particular ministers, or those which must be exercised only 'in Council'—the distinction depends partly on usage and partly on the wording of Acts of Parliament. … The ancient functions of the Privy Council are now performed by committees, excepting those formal measures which proceed from the authority of her Majesty in Council. The acts of these committees are designated as those of the Lords of the Council. These Lords of Council (who are usually selected by the Lord President of the Council, of whom more hereafter) constitute a high court of record for the Investigation of all offences against the Government, and of such other extraordinary matters as may be brought before them. … If the matter be one properly cognisable by a legal tribunal, it is referred to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. This committee, which is composed of the Lord President, the Lord Chancellor, and such members of the Privy Council as from time to time hold certain high judicial offices, has jurisdiction in appeals from all colonial courts: it is also the supreme court of maritime jurisdiction, and the tribunal wherein the Crown exercises its judicial supremacy in ecclesiastical cases. The Privy Council has also to direct local authorities throughout the kingdom in matters affecting the preservation of the public health. A committee of the Privy Council is also appointed to provide 'for the general management and superintendence of Education,' and subject to this committee is the Science and Art Department for the United Kingdom. … Formerly meetings of the Council were frequently held, but they now seldom occur oftener than once in three or four weeks, and are always convened to assemble at the royal residence for the time being. The attendance of seven Privy Councillors used to be regarded as the quorum necessary to constitute a Council for ordinary purposes of state, but this number has been diminished frequently to only three. No Privy Councillor presumes to attend upon any meeting of the Privy Council unless specially summoned. The last time the whole Council was convoked was in 1839. Privy Councillors are appointed absolutely, without patent or grant, at the discretion of the Sovereign. Their number is unlimited. … Since the separate existence of the Cabinet Council, meetings of the Privy Council for purposes of deliberation have ceased to be held. The Privy Council consists ordinarily of the members of the Royal Family, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York, the Bishop of London, all the Cabinet Ministers, the Lord Chancellor, the chief officers of the Royal Household, the Judges of the Courts of Equity, the Chief Justices of the Courts of Common Law, and some of the Puisne Judges, the Ecclesiastical and Admiralty Judges and the Judge-Advocate, the Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, the Speaker of the House of Commons, the Ambassadors and the Chief Ministers Plenipotentiary, the Governors of the chief colonies, the Commander-in-Chief, the Vice-President of the Committee of Council for Education, certain other officials I need not particularise, and occasionally a Junior Lord of the Admiralty, though it is not usual for Under Secretaries of State or Junior Lords of the Treasury or Admiralty to have this rank conferred upon them. A seat in the Privy Council is sometimes given to persons retiring from the public service, who have filled responsible situations under the Crown, as an honorary distinction. A Privy Councillor is styled Right Honourable, and he takes precedence of all baronets, knights, and younger sons of viscounts and barons."

A. C. Ewald, The Crown and its Advisers, lecture 2.

ALSO IN: _A. V. Dicey, The Privy Council._

{2610}

PROBULI, The.

A board of ten provisional councillors, instituted at Athens during the later period of the Peloponnesian War, after the great calamity at Syracuse. It was intended to introduce a conservative agency into the too democratic constitution of the state; to be "a board composed of men of mature age, who should examine all proposals and motions, after which only such among the latter as this board had sanctioned and approved should come before the citizens. This new board was, at the same time, in urgent cases itself to propose the necessary measures."

E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 4, chapter 5.

See ATHENS; B. C. 413-411.

PROBUS, Roman Emperor, A. D. 276-282.

PROBUS, Wall of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 277.

PROCESSION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, Controversy on.

See FILIOQUE CONTROVERSY.

PROCONSUL AND PROPRÆTOR, ROMAN.

"If a Consul was pursuing his operations ever so successfully, he was liable to be superseded at the year's close by his successor in the Consulship: and this successor brought with him new soldiers and new officers; everything, it would seem, had to be done over again. This was always felt in times of difficulty, and the constitutional usages were practically suspended. … In the year 328 B. C. the Senate first assumed the power of decreeing that a Consul or Prætor might be continued in his command for several successive years, with the title of Proconsul, or Proprætor, the power of these officers being, within their own district, equal to the power of the Consul or Prætor himself. The Proconsul also was allowed to keep part of his old army, and would of course continue his Tribunes and Centurions in office. … Almost all the great successes of Marcellus and Scipio were gained in Proconsular commands."

H. G. Liddell, History of Rome, book 4, chapter 35.

PROCURATOR. PROCTOR.

See ROME: B. C. 31-A. D. 14.

PROHIBITIONISTS.

A party in American politics which contends for the enactment of laws to prohibit the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors.

PROMANTY, The Right of.

See GREECE: B. C. 449-445.

PROPAGANDA, The College of the.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1622.

PROPHESYINGS.

In the early part of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, among those English reformers who were subsequently known as Puritans, "the clergy in several dioceses set up, with encouragement from their superiors, a certain religious exercise, called prophesyings. They met at appointed times to expound and discuss together particular texts of Scripture, under the presidency of a moderator appointed by the bishop, who finished by repeating the substance of their debate, with his own determination upon it. These discussions were in public, and it was contended that this sifting of the grounds of their faith, and habitual argumentation, would both tend to edify the people, very little acquainted as yet with their religion, and supply in some degree the deficiencies of learning among the pastors themselves." The prophesyings, however, were suppressed by the queen and Archbishop Parker.

H. Hallam, Constitutional History of England, chapter 4 (volume 1).

ALSO IN: J. B. Marsden, History of the Early Puritans, chapter 4. sections 7-25.

PROPHETS, The Hebrew.

"The Hebrew word 'Nabi' is derived from the verb 'naba.' … The root of the verb is said to be a word signifying 'to boil or bubble over,' and is thus taken from the metaphor of a fountain bursting forth from the heart of man, into which God has poured it. Its actual meaning is 'to pour forth excited utterances,' as appears from its occasional use in the sense of 'raving.' Even to this day, in the East, the ideas of prophet and madman are closely connected. The religious sense, in which, with these exceptions, the word is always employed, is that of 'speaking' or 'singing under a divine afflatus or impulse,' to which the peculiar form of the word, as just observed, lends itself. … It is this word that the Seventy translated by a Greek term not of frequent usage in classical authors, but which, through their adoption of it, has passed into all modern European languages; namely, the word … Prophet. … The English words 'prophet,' 'prophecy,' 'prophesying,' originally kept tolerably close to the Biblical use of the word. The celebrated dispute about 'prophesyings,' in the sense of 'preachings,' in the reign of Elizabeth, and the treatise of Jeremy Taylor on 'The Liberty of Prophesying,' i. e. the liberty of preaching, show that even down to the seventeenth century the word was still used, as in the Bible, for 'preaching,' or 'speaking according to the will of God.' In the seventeenth century, however, the limitation of the word to the sense of 'prediction' had gradually begun to appear. … The Prophet then was 'the messenger or interpreter of the Divine will.'"

Dean Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church, lecture 19 (volume 1).

PROPHETS, Schools of the.

See EDUCATION, ANCIENT; JUDÆA.

PROPONTIS, The.

The small sea which intervenes between the Pontus Euxinus (Black Sea) and the Ægean. So-called by the Greeks; now called the Sea of Marmora.

PROPRÆTOR, Roman.

See PROCONSUL.

PROPYLÆA OF THE ACROPOLIS, The.

See ACROPOLIS OF ATHENS.

PROTECTIVE TARIFFS.

See TARIFF LEGISLATION.

PROTECTORATE, Cromwell's.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1653 (DECEMBER); 1654-1658.

PROTESTANT, Origin of the name.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1525-1529.

PROTESTANT FLAIL, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1678-1679.

----------PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Start--------

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Bohemia.

See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1405-1415. and after.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1527-1534, to 1558-1588.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: France.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1521-1535; and FRANCE; A. D. 1532-1547, and after.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Germany.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1516-1517, 1517, 1517-1521, 1521-1522, 1522-1525, 1525-1529, 1530-1531, 1537-1563; also, GERMANY: A. D. 1517-1523, and 1530-1532, to 1552-1561;

also PALATINATE OF THE RHINE: A. D. 1518-1572.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Hungary.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1526-1567.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Ireland: its failure.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1535-1553.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Netherlands.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1521-1555, and after.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Piedmont.

See SAVOY: A. D. 1559-1580.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Scotland.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1547-1557; 1557; 1558-1560; and 1561-1568.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Sweden and Denmark.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES; A. D. 1397-1527.

PROTESTANT REFORMATION: Switzerland.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1519-1524; SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1528-1531; and GENEVA: A. D. 1536-1564.

----------PROTESTANT REFORMATION: End--------

PROTOSEVASTOS.

See SEVASTOS.

{2611}

PROVENCE: Roman origin.

"The colonization of Narbo [Narbonne, B. C. 118] may be considered as the epoch when the Romans finally settled the province of southern Gallia, which they generally named Gallia Provincia, and sometimes simply Provincia. From the time of Augustus it was named Narbonensis Provincia, and sometimes Gallia Braccata. It comprehended on the east all the country between the Rhone and the Alps. The most northeastern town in the Provincia was Geneva in the territory of the Allobroges. Massilia, the ally of Rome, remained a free city. On the west side of the Rhone, from the latitude of Lugdunum (Lyon), the Cevenna, or range of the Cévennes, was the boundary of the Provincia. … The limits of the Provincia were subsequently extended to Carcaso (Carcassone) and Tolosa (Toulouse); and it will appear afterwards that some additions were made to it even on the other side of the Cévennes. This country is a part of France which is separated by natural boundaries from the rest of that great empire, and in climate and products it is Italian rather than French. In the Provincia the Romans have left some of the noblest and most enduring of their great works."

G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 1, chapter 22.

The Provincia of the Romans became the Provence of mediæval times.

PROVENCE: Cession to the Visigoths.

"The fair region which we now call Provence, nearly the earliest formed and quite the latest lost 'Provincia' of Rome, that region in which the Latin spirit dwelt so strongly that the Roman nobles thought of migrating thither in 401, when Alaric first invaded Italy, refused to submit to the rule of the upstart barbarian [Odovacar, or Odoacer, who subverted the Western Empire in 476]. The Provençals sent an embassy to Constantinople to claim the protection of Zeno for the still loyal subjects of the Empire." But Zeno "inclined to the cause of Odovacar. The latter, however, who perhaps thought that he had enough upon his hands without forcing his yoke on the Provençals, made over his claim to Euric king of the Visigoths, whose influence was at this time predominant in Gaul."

T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 4, chapter 4 (volume 3).

See, also, ARLES: A. D. 508-510.

PROVENCE: A. D. 493-526. Embraced in the Ostrogothic kingdom of Theodoric.

See ROME: A. D. 488-526.

PROVENCE: A. D. 536. Cession to the Franks.

Out of the wreck of the Visigothic kingdom in Gaul, when it was overthrown by the Frank king, Clovis, the Ostrogothic king of Italy, Theodoric, seems to have secured Provence. Eleven years after the death of Theodoric, and on the eve of the subversion of his own proudly planted kingdom, in 536, his successor Witigis, or Vitigis, bought the neutrality of the Franks by the cession to them of all the Ostrogothic possessions in Gaul, which were Provence and part of Dauphiné.

T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, book 4, chapter 3 (volume 3), and book 5, chapter 3 (volume 4).

PROVENCE: A. D. 877-933. The Kingdom.

See BURGUNDY: A. D. 843-933.

PROVENCE: A. D. 943-1092. The Kings become Counts. The Spanish connection.

"Southern France, … after having been the inheritance of several of the successors of Charlemagne, was elevated in 870 to the rank of an independent kingdom, by Bozon, who was crowned at Mantes under the title of King of Arles, and who reduced under his dominion Provence, Dauphiny, Savoy, the Lyonnese, and some provinces of Burgundy. The sovereignty of this territory exchanged, in 943, the title of King for that of Count, under Bozon II.; but the kingdom of Provence was preserved entire, and continued in the house of Burgundy, of which Bozon I. was the founder. This noble house became extinct in 1092, in the person of Gilibert, who left only two daughters, between whom his possessions were divided. One of these, Faydide, married Alphonso, Count of Toulouse; and the other, Douce, became the wife of Raymond Berenger, Count of Barcelona. … The accession of Raymond Berenger, Count of Barcelona and husband of Douce, to the throne of Provence, gave a new direction to the national spirit, by the mixture of the Catalans with the Provençals. … Raymond Berenger and his successors introduced into Provence the spirit both of liberty and chivalry, and a taste for elegance and the arts, with all the sciences of the Arabians. The union of these noble sentiments gave birth to that poetical spirit which shone out, at once, over Provence and all the south of Europe, like an electric flash in the midst of the most palpable darkness, illuminating all things by the brightness of its flame."

J. C. L. S. de Sismondi, Literature of the South of Europe, chapter 3 (volume l).

See, also, BURGUNDY: A. D. 1032.

PROVENCE: A. D. 1179-1207. Before the Albigensian Crusade.

"At the accession of Philippe Auguste [crowned as joint-king of France, 1179, succeeded his father, 1180], the greater part of the south of France was holden, not of him, but of Pedro of Arragon, as the supreme suzerain.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1035-1258.

To the Arragonese king belonged especially the counties of Provence, Forcalquier, Narbonne, Beziers, and Carcassonne. His supremacy was acknowledged by the Counts of Bearn, of Armagnac, of Bigorre, of Comminges, of Foix, of Roussillon, and of Montpellier; while the powerful Count of Toulouse, surrounded by his estates and vassals, maintained with difficulty his independence against him. To these extensive territories were given the names sometimes of Provence, in the larger and less exact use of that word, and sometimes of Languedoc, in allusion to the rich, harmonious, picturesque, and flexible language which was then vernacular there.

See LANGUE D'OC.

They who used it called themselves Provençaux or Aquitanians, to indicate that they were not Frenchmen, but members of a different and indeed of a hostile nation. Tracing their descent to the ancient Roman colonists and to the Gothic invaders of Southern Gaul, the Provençaux regarded with a mixture of contempt, of fear, and ill will, the inhabitants of the country north of the Loire, who had made far less progress than themselves, either in civil liberty, or in the arts and refinements of social life. … Toulouse, Marseilles, Arles, Beziers, and many other of their greater cities, emulous of the Italian republics, with whom they traded and formed alliances, were themselves living under a government which was virtually republican. Each of these free cities being, however, the capital of one of the greater lords among whom the whole of Aquitaine was parceled out, became the seat of a princely and luxurious court. {2612} A genial climate, a fertile soil, and an active commerce, rendered the means of subsistence abundant even to the poor, and gave to the rich ample resources for indulging in all the gratifications which wealth can purchase. … They lived as if life had been one protracted holiday. Theirs was the land of feasting, of gallantry, and of mirth. … They refined and enhanced the pleasures of appetite by the pleasures of the imagination. They played with the stern features of war in knightly tournaments. They parodied the severe toils of justice in their courts of love. They transferred the poet's sacred office and high vocation to the Troubadours, whose amatory and artificial effusions posterity has willingly let die, notwithstanding the recent labours of MM. Raynouard and Fauriel to revive them."

Sir J. Stephen, Lectures on the History of France, lecture 7.

"In the south of France, more particularly, peace, riches, and a court life, had introduced, amongst the nobility, an extreme laxity of manners. Gallantry seems to have been the sole object of their existence. The ladies, who only appeared in society after marriage, were proud of the celebrity which their lovers conferred on their charms. They were delighted with becoming the objects of the songs of their Troubadour; nor were they offended at the poems composed in their praise, in which gallantry was often mingled with licentiousness. They even themselves professed the Gay Science, 'el Gai Saber,' for thus poetry was called; and, in their turn, they expressed their feelings in tender and impassioned verses. They instituted Courts of Love, where questions of gallantry were gravely debated and decided by their suffrages. They gave, in short, to the whole south of France the character of a carnival, affording a singular contrast to the ideas of reserve, virtue, and modesty, which we usually attribute to those good old times."

J. C. L. S. de Sismondi, Literature of the South of Europe, chapter 3 (volume 1).

ALSO IN: _C. C. Fauriel, History of Provençal Poetry._

See, also, TROUBADOURS.

PROVENCE: A. D. 1209-1242. The Albigensian Crusades.

See ALBIGENSES.

PROVENCE: A. D. 1246. The count becomes founder of the Third House of Anjou.

See ANJOU: A. D. 1206-1442.

PROVENCE: A. D. 1348. Sale and transfer of Avignon to the Pope.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1294-1348.

PROVENCE: A. D. 1536-1546. Invasion by Charles V. Defensive wasting of the country. Massacre of Waldenses.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.

PROVENCE: 16th Century. Strength of Protestantism.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1559-1561.

----------PROVENCE: End--------

PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND: The Plantation and the City.

See RHODE ISLAND.

PROVISIONS OF OXFORD AND WESTMINSTER.

See OXFORD, PROVISIONS OF.

PROVISORS, Statute of.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1306-1393.

PROXENI.

In ancient Sparta, "the so-called Proxeni, whose number was fluctuating, served as the subordinates of the kings in their diplomatic communication with foreign States."

G. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece: The State, part 3, chapter 1, section 9.

PRUSA: A. D. 1326. The first capital of the Ottomans.

See TURKS (OTTOMANS): A. D. 1240-1326.

----------PRUSSIA: Start--------

PRUSSIA: The original country and its name.

"Five–hundred miles, and more, to the east of Brandenburg, lies a Country then [10th century] as now called Preussen (Prussia Proper), inhabited by Heathens, where also endeavours at conversion are going on, though without success hitherto. … Part of the great plain or flat which stretches, sloping insensibly, continuously, in vast expanse, from the Silesian Mountains to the amber–regions of the Baltic; Preussen is the seaward, more alluvial part of this,—extending west and east, on both sides of the Weichsel (Vistula), from the regions of the Oder river to the main stream of the Memel. 'Bordering-on-Russia' its name signifies: Bor-Russia, B'russia, Prussia; or—some say it was only on a certain inconsiderable river in those parts, river Reussen, that it 'bordered,' and not on the great Country, or any part of it, which now in our days is conspicuously its next neighbour. Who knows?—In Henry the Fowler's time, and long afterwards, Preussen was a vehemently Heathen country; the natives a Miscellany of rough Serbic Wends, Letts, Swedish Goths, or Dryasdust knows not what;—very probably a sprinkling of Swedish Goths, from old time, chiefly along the coasts. Dryasdust knows only that these Preussen were a strong-boned, iracund herdsman-and-fisher people; highly averse to be interfered with, in their religion especially. Famous otherwise, through all the centuries, for the amber they had been used to fish, and sell in foreign parts. … Their knowledge of Christianity was trifling; their aversion to knowing anything of it was great."

T. Carlyle, Frederick the Great, book 2, chapter 2.

PRUSSIA: 13th Century. Conquered and Christianized by the Teutonic Knights.

The first Christian missionary who ventured among the savage heathen of Prussia Proper was Adalbert, bishop of Prague, who fell a martyr to his zeal in 997. For two centuries after that tragedy they were little disturbed in their paganism; but early in the 13th century a Pomeranian monk named Christian succeeded in establishing among them many promising churches. The heathen party in the country, however, was enraged by the progress of the Christians and rose furiously against them, putting numerous converts to the sword. "Other agencies were now invoked by Bishop Christian, and the 'Order of Knights Brethren of Dobrin,' formed on the model of that which we have already encountered in Livonia, was bidden to coerce the people into the reception of Christianity. But they failed to achieve the task assigned them, and then it was that the famous 'Order of Teutonic Knights,' united with the 'Brethren of the Sword' in Livonia, concentrated their energies on this European crusade. Originally instituted for the purpose of succouring German pilgrims in the Holy Land, the 'Order of Teutonic Knights,' now that the old crusades had become unpopular, enrolled numbers of eager adventurers determined to expel the last remains of heathenism from the face of Europe. After the union of the two Orders had been duly solemnized at Rome, in the presence of the Pope, in the year A. D. 1238, they entered the Prussian territory, and for a space of nearly fifty years continued a series of remorseless wars against the wretched inhabitants. {2613} Slowly but surely they made their way into the very heart of the country, and secured their conquests by erecting castles, under the shadow of which rose the towns of Culm, Thorn, Marienwerder, and Elbing, which they peopled with German colonists. The authority of the Order knew scarcely any bounds. Themselves the faithful vassals of the Pope, they exacted the same implicit obedience, alike from the German immigrant, or colonist, and the converted Prussians. … In A. D. 1243 the conquered lands were divided by the Pope into three bishoprics, Culm, Pomerania, and Ermeland, each of which was again divided into three parts, one being subject to the bishop, and the other two to the brethren of the Order."

G. F. Maclear, Apostles of Mediæval Europe, chapter 16.

"None of the Orders rose so high as the Teutonic in favour with mankind. It had by degrees landed possessions far and wide over Germany and beyond, … and was thought to deserve favour from above. Valiant servants, these; to whom Heaven had vouchsafed great labours and unspeakable blessings. In some fifty or fifty-three years they had got Prussian Heathenism brought to the ground; and they endeavoured to tie it well down there by bargain and arrangement. But it would not yet lie quiet, nor for a century to come; being still secretly Heathen; revolting, conspiring ever again, ever on weaker terms, till the Satanic element had burnt itself out, and conversion and composure could ensue."

T. Carlyle, History of Frederick the Great, book 2, chapter 6 (volume l).

See, also, LIVONIA: 12-13TH CENTURIES.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1466-1618. Conquest and annexation to the Polish crown. Surrender by the Teutonic Knights. Erection into a duchy. Union with the electorate of Brandenburg.

See POLAND: A. D. 1333-1572; and BRANDENBURG: A. D. 1417-1640.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1626-1629. Conquests of Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden in his war with Poland.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1611-1629.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1656-1688. Complete sovereignty of the duchy acquired by the Great Elector of Brandenburg. His curbing of the nobles.

See BRANDENBURG: A. D. 1640-1688.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1700. The Dukedom erected into a Kingdom.

In the last year of the 17th century, Europe was on the verge of the great War of the Spanish Succession. The Emperor was making ready to contest the will by which Charles II. of Spain had bequeathed his crown to Philip, Duke of Anjou, grandson of Louis XIV. of France.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1698-1700.

"He did not doubt that he would speedily involve England, Holland, and the Germanic diet in his quarrel. Already several German princes were pledged to him; he had gained the Duke of Hanover by an elector's hat, and a more powerful prince, the Elector of Brandenburg, by a royal crown. By a treaty of November 16, 1700, the Emperor had consented to the erection of ducal Prussia into a kingdom, on condition that the new King should furnish him an aid of 10,000 soldiers. The Elector Frederick III. apprised his courtiers of this important news at the close of a repast, by drinking 'to the health of Frederick I. King of Prussia'; then caused himself to be proclaimed King at Konigsberg, January 15, 1701."

H. Martin, History of France: Age of Louis XIV. (translated by M. L. Booth), volume 2, chapter 5.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1713. Neufchatel and Spanish Guelderland acquired. Orange relinquished.

See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1717-1809. Abolition of serfdom.

See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL: GERMANY.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1720. Acquisition of territory from Sweden, including Stettin.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1719-1721.

PRUSSIA: A. D. 1720-1794. Reign of Frederick William I., and after.

The later history of Prussia, under Frederick William, Frederick the Great, and their successors, will be found included in that of GERMANY.

----------PRUSSIA: End--------

PRUSSIAN LANGUAGE, The Old.

"The Old Prussian, a member of the Lithuanic family of languages, was spoken here as late as the 16th century, remains of which, in the shape of a catechism, are extant. This is the language of the ancient Æstyi, or 'Men of the East,' which Tacitus says was akin to the British, an error arising from the similarity of name, since a Slavonian … would call the two languages by names so like as 'Prytskaia' and 'Brytskaia,' and a German … by names so like as 'Pryttisc' and 'Bryttisc.' The Guttones, too, of Pliny, whose locality is fixed from the fact of their having been collectors of the amber of East Prussia and Courland, were of the same stock."

R. G. Latham, The Ethnology of Europe, chapter 8.

PRUTH, The Treaty of the (1711).

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1707-1718.

PRYDYN.

See SCOTLAND: THE PICTS AND SCOTS.

PRYTANES. PRYTANEUM.

The Council of Four Hundred, said to have been instituted at Athens by Solon, "was divided into sections, which, under the venerable name of prytanes, succeeded each other throughout the year as the representatives of the whole body. Each section during its term assembled daily in their session house, the prytaneum, to consult on the state of affairs, to receive intelligence, information, and suggestions, and instantly to take such measures as the public interest rendered it necessary to adopt without delay. … According to the theory of Solon's constitution, the assembly of the people was little more than the organ of the council, as it could only act upon the propositions laid before it by the latter."

C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 11.

"Clisthenes … enlarged the number of the senate, 50 being now elected by lot from each tribe, so as to make in all 500. Each of these companies of 50 acted as presidents of both the senate and the assemblies, for a tenth part of the year, under the name of Prytanes: and each of these tenth parts, of 35 or 36 days, so as to complete a lunar year, was called a Prytany."

G. F. Schömann, Dissertation on the Assemblies of the Athenians, page 14.

See, also, ATHENS: B. C. 594.

PRYTANIS.

A title frequently recurring among the Greeks was that of Prytanis, which signified prince, or supreme ruler. "Even Hiero, the king or tyrant of Syracuse, is addressed by Pindar as Prytanis. At Corinth, after the abolition of the monarchy, a Prytanis, taken from the ancient house of the Bacchiadæ, was annually appointed as supreme magistrate

See CORINTH: B. C. 745-725.

… The same title was borne by the supreme magistrate in the Corinthian colony of Corcyra. … In Rhodes we find in the time of Polybius a Prytany lasting for six months."

G. Schömann, Antiquity of Greece: The State, part 2, chapter 5.

{2614}

PSALTER OF CASHEL. PSALTER OF TARA.

See TARA, HILL AND FEIS OF.

PSEPHISM.

A decree, or enactment, in ancient Athens.

PSEUDO-ISIDORIAN DECRETALS, The.

See PAPACY: A. D. 829-847.

PTOLEMAIS, Syria.

See ACRE.

PTOLEMIES, The.

See EGYPT: B. C. 323-30.

PTOLEMY KERAUNOS, The intrigues and death of.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 297-280; and GAULS: B. C. 280-279.

PTOLEMY SOTER, and the Wars of the Diadochi.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316, to 297-280; and EGYPT: B. C. 323-30.

PTOLEMY'S CANON.

An important chronological list of Chaldean, Persian, Macedonian and Egyptian kings, compiled or continued by Claudius Ptolemæus, an Alexandrian mathematician and astronomer in the reign of the Second Antoninus.

W. Hales, New Analysis of Chronology, volume I, book 1.

PUANS, OR WINNEBAGOES, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.

PUBLIC MEALS.

See SYSSITIA.

PUBLIC PEACE, The.

See LANDFRIEDE.

PUBLIC WEAL, League of the.

See FRANCE; A. D. 1461-1468; and 1453-1461.

PUBLICANI.

The farmers of the taxes, among the Romans.

See VECTIGAL.

PUBLICIANI, The.

See ALBIGENSES; and PAULICIANS.

PUEBLA: Capture by the French (1862).

See MEXICO: A. D. 1861-1867.

PUBLILIAN LAW OF VOLERO, The.

See ROME: B. C. 472-471.

PUBLILIAN LAWS, The.

See ROME: B. C. 340.

PUEBLOS.

The Spanish word pueblo, meaning town, village, or the inhabitants thereof, has acquired a special signification as applied, first, to the sedentary or village Indians of New Mexico and Arizona, and then to the singular villages of communal houses which they inhabit.

D. G. Brinton, The American Race, page 113.

"The purely civic colonies of California were called pueblos to distinguish them from missions or presidios. The term pueblo, in its most extended meaning, may embrace towns of every description, from a hamlet to a city. … However, in its special significance, a pueblo means a corporate town."

F. W. Blackmar, Spanish Institutions of the Southwest, chapter 8.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PUEBLOS.

PUELTS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.

PUERTO CAVELLO, Spanish capitulation at (1823).

See COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1819-1830.

PUJUNAN FAMILY, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PUJUNAN FAMILY.

PULASKI, Fort: A. D. 1861. Threatened by the Union forces.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER: SOUTH CAROLINA—GEORGIA).

PULASKI, Fort: A. D. 1862 (February-April). Siege and capture.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (FEBRUARY-APRIL: GEORGIA-FLORIDA).

PULLANI, The.

The descendants of the first Crusaders who remained in the East and married Asiatic women are represented as having been a very despicable half-breed race. They were called the Pullani. Prof. Palmer suggests a derivation of the name from "fulani," anybodies. Mr. Keightley, on the contrary, states that before the crusading colonists overcame their prejudice against Oriental wives, women were brought to them from Apulia, in Italy. Whence the name Pullani, applied indiscriminately to an the progeny of the Latin settlers.

_W. Besant and E. H. Palmer, Jerusalem, chapter 7._

ALSO IN: T. Keightley, The Crusaders, chapter 2.

PULTNEY ESTATE, The.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1786-1799.

PULTOWA, Battle of (1709).

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1707-1718.

PULTUSK, Battle of (1703).

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1701-1707.

Battle of (1806).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1806-1807.

PUMBADITHA, The. School of.

See JEWS: 7TH CENTURY.

PUNCAS, OR PONCAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY, and PAWNEE (CADDOAN) FAMILY.

PUNIC.

The adjective Punicus, derived from the name of the Phœnicians, was used by the Romans in a sense which commonly signified "Carthaginian,"—the Carthaginians being of Phœnician origin. Hence "Punic Wars," "Punic faith," etc., the phrase "Punic faith" being an imputation of faithlessness and treachery.

----------PUNIC WARS: Start--------

PUNIC WARS, The First.

When Pyrrhus quitted Italy he is said to have exclaimed, "How fair a battle–field are we leaving to the Romans and Carthaginians." He may easily have had sagacity to foresee the deadly struggle which Rome and Carthage would soon be engaged in, and he might as easily have predicted, too, that the beginning of it would be in Sicily. Rome had just settled her supremacy in the whole Italian peninsula; she was sure to covet next the rich island that lies so near to it. In fact, there was bred quickly in the Roman mind such an eagerness to cross the narrow strait that it waited only for the slenderest excuse. A poor pretext was found in the year 264 B. C. and it was so despicably poor that the proud Roman senators turned over to the popular assembly of the Comitia the responsibility of accepting it. There came to Rome from Messene, in Sicily—or Messana, as the Romans called the city—an appeal. It did not come from the citizens of Messene, but from a band of freebooters who had got possession of the town. These were mercenaries from Campania (lately made Roman territory by the Samnite conquest) who had been in the pay of Agathocles of Syracuse. Disbanded on that tyrant's death, they had treacherously seized Messene, slain most of the male inhabitants, taken to themselves the women, and settled down to a career of piracy and robbery, assuming the name of Mamertinl,—children of Mamers, or Mars. Of course, all Sicily, both Greek and Carthaginian, was roused against them by the outrages they committed. Being hard pressed, the Mamertines invoked, as Italians, the protection of Rome; although one party among them appears to have preferred an arrangement of terms with the Carthaginians. {2615} The Roman Senate, being ashamed to extend a friendly hand to the Mamertine cutthroats, but not having virtue enough to decline an opportunity for fresh conquests, referred the question to the people at large. The popular vote sent an army into Sicily, and Messene, then besieged by Hiero of Syracuse on one side and by a Carthaginian army on the other, was relieved of both. The Romans thereon proceeded, in two aggressive campaigns, against Syracusans and Carthaginians alike, until Hiero bought peace with them, at a heavy cost, and became their half-subject ally for the remainder of his life. The war with the Carthaginians was but just commenced. Its first stunning blow was struck at Agrigentum, the splendid city of Phalaris, which the Carthaginians had destroyed, B. C. 405, which Timoleon had rebuilt, and which one of the Hannibals ("son of Gisco") now seized upon for his stronghold. In a great battle fought under the walls of Agrigentum (B. C. 262) Hannibal lost the city and all but a small remnant of his army. But the successes of the Romans on land were worth little to them while the Carthaginians commanded the sea. Hence they resolved to create a fleet, and are said to have built a hundred ships of the quinquereme order and twenty triremes within sixty days, while rowers for them were trained by all imitative exercise on land. The first squadron of this improvised navy was trapped at Lipara and lost; the remainder was successful in its first encounter with the enemy. But where naval warfare depended on good seamanship the Romans were no match for the Carthaginians. They contrived therefore a machine for their ships, called the Corvus, or raven, by which, running straight on the opposing vessel, they were able to grasp it by the throat, so to speak, and force fighting at close quarters. That accomplished, they were tolerably sure of victory. With their corvus they half annihilated the Carthaginian fleet in a great sea-fight at Mylæ, B. C. 260, and got so much mastery of the sea that they were able to attack their Punic foes even in the island of Sardinia, but without much result. In 257 B. C. another naval battle of doubtful issue was fought at Tyndaris, and the following year, in the great battle of Ecnomus, the naval power of the Carthaginians, for the time being, was utterly crushed. Then followed the invasion of Carthaginian territory by Regulus, his complete successes at first, his insolent proposal of hard terms, and the tremendous defeat which overwhelmed him at Adis a little later, when he, himself, was taken prisoner. The miserable remnant of the Roman army which held its ground at Clypea on the African coast was rescued the next year (B. C. 255) by a new fleet, but only to be destroyed on the voyage homeward, with 260 ships, in a great storm on the south coast of Sicily. Then Carthaginians reappeared in Sicily and the war in that unhappy island was resumed. In 254 B. C. the Romans took the strong fortified city of Panormus. In 253, having built and equipped another fleet, they were robbed of it again by a storm at sea, and the Carthaginians gained ground and strength in Sicily. In 251 the Roman consul, Cæcilius Metellus, drove them back from the walls of Panormus and inflicted on them so discouraging a defeat, that they sent Regulus, their prisoner, on parole, with an embassy, to solicit peace at Rome. How Regulus advised his countrymen against peace, and how he returned to Carthage to meet a cruel death—the traditional story is familiar to all readers, but modern criticism throws doubt upon it. In 250 B. C. the Romans undertook the siege of Lilybæum, which, with the neighboring port of Drepana, were the only strongholds left to the Carthaginians. The siege then commenced was one of the most protracted in history, for when the First Punic War ended, nine years later, Lilybæum was still resisting, and the Romans only acquired it with all the rest of Sicily, under the terms of the treaty of peace. Meantime the Carthaginians won a bloody naval victory at Drepana (B. C. 249) over the Roman fleet, and the latter, in the same year, had a third fleet destroyed on the coast by relentless storms. In the year 247 B. C. the Carthaginian command in Sicily was given to the great Hamilcar, surnamed Barca, who was the father of a yet greater man, the Hannibal who afterwards brought Rome very near to destruction. Hamilcar Barca, having only a few mutinous mercenary soldiers at his command, and almost unsupported by the authorities at Carthage, established himself, first, on the rocky height of Mount Ercte, or Hercte, near Panormus, and afterwards on Mount Eryx, and harassed the Romans for six years. The end came at last as the consequence of a decisive naval victory near the Ægatian Isles, which the Romans achieved, with a newly built fleet, in March B. C. 241. The Carthaginians, discouraged, proposed peace, and purchased it by evacuating Sicily and paying a heavy war indemnity. Thus Rome acquired Sicily, but the wealth and civilization of the great island had been ruined beyond recovery.

R. B. Smith, Carthage and the Carthaginians, chapters 4-7.

ALSO IN: W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 4, chapter 3.

Polybius, Histories, book l.

A. J. Church, The Story of Carthage, part 4, chapters 1-3.

See, also, ROME: B. C. 264-241.

PUNIC WARS: The Second.

Between the First Punic War and the Second there was an interval of twenty-three years. Carthage, meantime, had been brought very near to destruction by the Revolt of the Mercenaries and had been saved by the capable energy of Hamilcar Barca.

See CARTHAGE: B. C. 241-238.

Then the selfish faction which hated Hamilcar had regained power in the Punic capital, and the Barcine patriot could do no more than obtain command of an army which he led, on his own responsibility, into Spain, B. C. 237. The Carthaginians had inherited from the Phœnicians a considerable commerce with Spain, but do not seem to have organized a control of the country until Hamilcar took the task in hand. Partly by pacific influences and partly by force, he established a rule, rather personal than Carthaginian, which extended over nearly all southern Spain. With the wealth that he drew from its gold and silver mines he maintained his army and bought or bribed at Carthage the independence he needed for the carrying out of his plans. He had aimed from the first, no doubt, at organizing resources with which to make war on Rome. Hamilcar was killed in battle, B. C. 228, and his son-in-law, Hasdrubal, who succeeded him, lived only seven years more. Then Hannibal, the son of Hamilcar, in his twenty–sixth year, was chosen to the command in Spain. {2616} He waited two years, for the settling of his authority and for making all preparations complete, and then he threw down a challenge to the Romans for the war which he had sworn to his father that he would make the one purpose of his life. The provocation of war was the taking of the city of Saguntum, a Greek colony on the Spanish coast, which the Romans had formed an alliance with. It was taken by Hannibal after a siege of eight months and after most of the inhabitants had destroyed themselves, with their wealth. When Rome declared war it was with the expectation, no doubt, that Spain and Africa would be the battle grounds. But Hannibal did not wait for her attack. He led his Spanish army straight to Italy, in the early summer of B. C. 218, skirting the Pyrenees and crossing the Alps. The story of his passage of the Alps is familiar to every reader. The difficulties he encountered were so terrible and the losses sustained so great that Hannibal descended into Italy with only 20,000 foot and 6,000 horse, out of 50,000 of the one and 9,000 of the other which he had led through Gaul. He received some reinforcement and co-operation from the Cisalpine Gauls, but their strength had been broken by recent wars with Rome and they were not efficient allies. In the first encounter of the Romans with the dread invader, on the Ticinus, they were beaten, but not seriously. In the next, on the Trebia, where Scipio, the consul, made a determined stand, they sustained an overwhelming defeat. This ended the campaign of B. C. 218. Hannibal wintered in Cisalpine Gaul and passed the Apennines the following spring into Etruria, stealing a march on the Roman army, under the popular consul Flaminius, which was watching to intercept him. The latter pursued and was caught in ambush at Lake Trasimene, where Flaminius and 15,000 of his men were slain, while most of the survivors of the fatal field were taken prisoners and made slaves. Rome then seemed open to the Carthaginian, but he knew, without doubt, that his force was not strong enough for the besieging of the city, and he made no attempt. What he aimed at was the isolating of Rome and the arraying of Italy against her, in a great and powerfully handled combination of the jealousies and animosities which he knew to exist. He led his troops northward again, after the victory of Lake Trasimene, across the mountains to the Adriatic coast, and rested them during the summer. When cooler weather came he moved southward along the coast into Apulia. The Romans meantime had chosen a Dictator, Q. Fabius Maximus, a cautious man, whose plan of campaign was to watch and harass and wear out the enemy, without risking a battle. It was a policy which earned for him the name of "The Cunctator," or Lingerer. The Roman people were discontented with it, and next year (B. C. 216) they elected for one of the consuls a certain Varro who had been one of the mouth-pieces of their discontent. In opposition to his colleague, Æmilius Paullus, Varro soon forced a battle with Hannibal at Cannæ, in Apulia, and brought upon his countrymen the most awful disaster in war that they ever knew. Nearly 50,000 Roman citizens were left dead on the field, including eighty senators, and half the young nobility of the state. From the spoils of the field Hannibal was said to have sent three bushels of golden rings to Carthage, stripped from the fingers of Roman knights. Rome reeled under the blow, and yet haughtily refused to ransom the 20,000 prisoners in Hannibal's hands, while she met the discomfited Varro with proud thanks, because "he had not despaired of the Republic." Capua now opened its gates to Hannibal and became the headquarters of his operations. The people of Southern Italy declared generally in his favor; but he had reached and passed, nevertheless, the crowning point of his success. He received no effective help from Carthage; nor from his brother in Spain, who was defeated by the elder Scipios, that same year (B. C. 216) at Ibera, just as he had prepared to lead a fresh army into Italy. On the other hand, the energies of the Romans had risen with every disaster. Their Latin subjects continued faithful to them; but they lost at this time an important ally in Sicily, by the death of the aged Hiero of Syracuse, and the Carthaginians succeeded in raising most of the island against them. The war in Sicily now became for a time more important than that in Italy, and the consul Marcellus, the most vigorous of the Roman generals, was sent to conduct it. His chief object was the taking of Syracuse and the great city sustained another of the many dreadful sieges which it was her fate to endure. The siege was prolonged for two years, and chiefly by the science and the military inventions of the famous mathematician, Archimides. When the Romans entered Syracuse at last (B. C. 212) it was to pillage and slay without restraint, and Archimides was one of the thousands cut down by their swords. Meantime, in Italy, Tarentum had been betrayed to Hannibal, but the Romans still held the citadel of the town. They had gained so much strength in the field that they were now able to lay siege to Capua and Hannibal was powerless to relieve it. He attempted a diversion by marching on Rome, but the threat proved idle and Capua was left to its fate. The city surrendered soon after (B. C. 211) and the merciless conquerors only spared it for a new population. For three or four years after this the war in Italy was one of minor successes and reverses on both sides, but Hannibal lost steadily in prestige and strength. In Spain, Hannibal's brother, Hasdrubal, had opportunely beaten and slain (B. C. 212) both the elder Scipios; but another and greater Scipio, P. Cornelius, son of Publius, had taken the field and was sweeping the Carthaginians from the peninsula. Yet, despite Scipio's capture of New Carthage and his victories, at Bæcula, and elsewhere, Hasdrubal contrived, in some unexplained way, in the year 208, B. C., to cross the Pyrenees into Gaul and to recruit reinforcements there for a movement on Italy. The next spring he passed the Alps and brought his army safely into Cisalpine Gaul; but his dispatches to Hannibal fell into the hands of the Romans and revealed his plans. The swift energy of one of the consuls, C. Claudius Nero, brought about a marvellous concentration of Roman forces to meet him, and he and his army perished together in an awful battle fought on the banks of the Metaurus, in Umbria. The last hopes of Hannibal perished with them; but he held his ground in the extreme south of Italy and no Roman general dared try to dislodge him. When Scipio returned next year (B. C. 206) and reported the complete conquest of Spain, he was chosen consul with the understanding that he would carry the war into Africa, though the senate stood half opposed. {2617} He did so in the early months of the year 204 B. C. crossing from Sicily with a comparatively small armament and laying siege to Utica. That year he accomplished nothing, but during the next winter he struck a terrible blow, surprising and burning the camps of the Carthaginians and their Numidian allies and slaughtering 40,000 of their number. This success was soon followed by another, on the Great Plains, which lie 70 or 80 miles to the southwest of Carthage. The Numidian king, Syphax, was now driven from his throne and the kingdom delivered over to an outlawed prince, Massinissa, who became, thenceforth, the most useful and unscrupulous of allies to the Romans. Now pushed to despair, the Carthaginians summoned Hannibal to their rescue. He abandoned Italy at the call and returned to see his own land for the first time since as a boy he left it with his father. But even his genius could not save Carthage with the means at his command. The long war was ended in October of the year 202 B. C. by the battle which is called the battle of Zama, though it was fought at some distance westward of that place. The Carthaginian army was routed utterly, and Hannibal himself persuaded his countrymen to accept a peace which stripped them of their ships and their trade, their possessions in Spain and all the islands, and their power over the Numidian states, besides wringing from them a war indemnity of many millions. On those hard terms, Carthage was suffered to exist a few years longer.

_R. B. Smith, Carthage and the Carthaginians._

ALSO IN: T. Arnold, History of Rome, chapters 43-47.

H. G. Liddell, History of Rome, chapters 31-34.

T. A. Dodge, Hannibal, chapters 11-39.

See, also, ROME: B. C. 218-211, to 211-202.

PUNIC WARS: The Third.

See CARTHAGE: B. C. 146; and ROME: B. C. 151-146.

----------PUNIC WARS: End--------

PUNJAB, PUNJAUB, PANJAB, The.

"Everything has a meaning in India, and the Panjab is only another name for the Five Rivers which make the historic Indus. They rise far back among the western Himalayas, bring down their waters from glaciers twenty-five miles in length, and peaks 26,000 feet high, and hurl their mighty torrent into one great current, which is thrown at last into the Arabian Sea. It is a fertile region, not less so than the Valley of the Ganges. This Panjab is the open door, the only one by which the European of earlier days was able to descend upon the plains of India for conquest and a new home. … In the Panjab every foot of the land is a romance. No one knows how many armies have shivered in the winds of the hills of Afghanistan, and then pounced down through the Khaibar Pass into India, and overspread the country, until the people could rise and destroy the stranger within the gates. Whenever a European invader of Asia has reached well into the continent, his dream has always been India. That country has ever been, and still is, the pearl of all the Orient. Its perfect sky in winter, its plenteous rains in summer, its immense rivers, its boundless stores of wealth, an its enduring industries, which know no change, have made it the dream of every great conqueror."

J. F. Hurst, Indika, chapter 75.

"In form, the country is a great triangle, its base resting on the Himalayan chain and Cashmere, and its apex directed due south–west. … The five streams which confer its name, counting them from north to south, are the Upper Indus, the Jhelum, the Chenab, the Ravee and the Sutlej, the Indus and Sutlej constituting respectively the western and eastern boundary. … The four divisions enclosed by the five convergent streams are called doabs—lands of two waters. … Besides the territory thus delineated, the Punjab of the Sikhs included Cashmere, the Jummoo territory to Spiti and Tibet, the trans-Indus frontier and the Hazara highlands in the west; and to the east the Jullundhur Doab with Kangra and Noorpoor. These last, with the frontier, are better known as the cis- and trans-Sutlaj states."

E. Arnold, The Marquis of Dalhousie's Administration of British India, chapter 2 (volume 1).

The Sikhs established their supremacy in the Punjab in the 18th century, and became a formidable power, under the famous Runjet Singh, in the early part of the 19th century. (The English conquest of the Sikhs and annexation of the Punjab to British India took place in 1849.

See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849, and SIKHS

PUNT, Land of.

"Under the name of Punt, the old inhabitants of Kemi [ancient Egypt] meant a distant land, washed by the great ocean, full of valleys and hills, abounding in ebony and other rich woods, in incense, balsam, precious metals, and costly stones; rich also in beasts, as cameleopards, hunting leopards, panthers, dog-headed apes, and long-tailed monkeys. … Such was the Ophir of the Egyptians, without doubt the present coast of the Somauli land in sight of Arabia, but separated from it by the sea. According to an old obscure tradition, the land of Punt was the original seat of the gods. From Punt the holy ones had travelled to the Nile valley, at their head Amon, Horus, Hathor."

H. Brugsch, History of Egypt under the Pharaohs, chapter 8.

PURCHASE IN THE ARMY, Abolition of.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1871.

----------PURITANS: Start--------

PURITANS: The movement taking form.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1559-1566.

PURITANS: First application of the Name.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1564-1565 (?).

PURITANS: In distinction from the Independents or Separatists.

"When, in 1603, James I. became king of England, he found his Protestant subjects divided into three classes,—Conformists, or High Ritualists; Nonconformists, or Broad-Church Puritans; and Separatists, popularly called Brownists [and subsequently called Independents]. The Conformists and the Puritans both adhered to the Church of England, and were struggling for its control. … The Puritans objected to some of the ceremonies of the Church, such as the ring in marriage, the sign of the cross in baptism, the promises of god-parents, the showy vestments, bowing in the creed, receiving evil-livers to the communion, repetitions, and to kneeling at communion as if still adoring the Host, instead of assuming an ordinary attitude as did the apostles at the Last Supper. The majority of the lower clergy and of the middle classes are said to have favored Puritanism. … Dr. Neal says that the Puritan body took form in 1564, and dissolved in 1644. {2618} During that term of eighty years the Puritans were ever 'in and of the Church of England'; as Dr. Prince says in his Annals (1736), those who left the Episcopal Church 'lost the name of Puritans and received that of the Separatists.' … The Separatists, unlike the Puritans, had no connection with the National Church, and the more rigid of them even denied that Church to be scriptural, or its ministrations to be valid. … The Pilgrim Fathers, the founders of our Plymouth, the pioneer colony of New England, were not Puritans. They never were called by that name, either by themselves or their contemporaries. They were Separatists, slightingly called Brownists, and in time became known as Independents or Congregationalists. As Separatists they were oppressed and maligned by the Puritans. They did not restrict voting or office-holding to their church-members. They heartily welcomed to their little State all men of other sects, or of no sects, who adhered to the essentials of Christianity and were ready to conform to the local laws and customs. … Though their faith was positive and strong, they laid down no formal creed."

J. A. Goodwin, The Pilgrim Republic, chapters 2 and 1.

"The reader of this history must have remarked that 'Puritan' and 'Separatist' were by no means convertible terms; that, in point of fact, they very often indicated hostile parties, pitted against each other in bitter controversies. And the inquiry may have arisen—How is this? Were not the Separatists all Puritans? … The term 'Puritan' was originally applied to all in the church of England who desired further reformation—a greater conformity of church government and worship to primitive and apostolic usages. But after awhile the term became restricted in its application to those who retained their respect for the church of England, and their connection with it, notwithstanding its acknowledged corruptions; in distinction from those who had been brought to abandon both their respect for that church and their connection with it, under the conviction that it was hopelessly corrupt, and could never be reformed. The Separatists, then, were indeed all Puritans, and of the most thorough and uncompromising kind. They were the very essence—the oil of Puritanism. But the Puritans were by no means all Separatists; though they agreed with them in doctrinal faith, being all thoroughly Calvinistic in their faith."

G. Punchard, History of Congregationalism, volume 3, appendix, note F.

ALSO IN: G. E. Ellis, The Puritan Age and Rule in the Colony of Massachusetts Bay, chapter 3.

See INDEPENDENTS OR SEPARATISTS.

D. Campbell, The Puritan in Holland, England, and America, chapter 16 (volume 2).

PURITANS: A. D. 1604. Hampton Court Conference with James I.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1604.

PURITANS: A. D. 1629. Incorporation of the Governor and Company of Massachusetts Bay.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1623-1629 THE DORCHESTER COMPANY.

PURITANS: A. D. 1629-1630. The exodus to Massachusetts Bay.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1623-1629; 1629-1630; and 1630.

PURITANS: A. D. 1631-1636. The Theocracy of Massachusetts Bay.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1631-1636; and 1636.

PURITANS: A. D. 1638-1640. At the beginning of the English Civil War.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1638-1640.

----------PURITANS: End--------

PURUARAN, Battle of (1814).

See MEXICO: A. D. 1810-1819.

PURUMANCIANS, The.

See CHILE: A. D. 1450-1724.

PUT-IN-BAY, Naval Battle at.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812-1813 HARRISON'S NORTHWESTERN CAMPAIGN.

PUTEOLI.

The maritime city of Puteoli, which occupied the site of the modern town of Pozzuoli, about 7 miles from Naples, became under the empire the chief emporium of Roman commerce in Italy. The vicinity of Puteoli and its neighbor Baiæ was one of the favorite resorts of the Roman nobility for villa residence. It was at Puteoli that St. Paul landed on his journey to Rome.

T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 4, chapter 11.

PUTNAM, Israel, and the American Revolution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (APRIL-MAY), (MAY-AUGUST); 1776 (AUGUST), (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER).

PYDNA, Battle of (B. C. 168).

See GREECE: B. C. 214-146.

PYLÆ CASPIÆ.

See CASPIAN GATES.

PYLÆ CILICIÆ. See

CILICIAN GATES.

PYLUS, Athenian seizure of.

See GREECE: B. C. 425.

PYRAMID.

"The name 'pyramid'—first invented by the ancients to denote the tombs of the Egyptian kings, and still used in geometry to this day—is of Greek origin. The Egyptians themselves denoted the pyramid—both in the sense of a sepulchre and of a figure in Solid Geometry—by the word 'abumir;' while, on the other hand, the word' Pir-am-us' is equivalent to the 'edge of the pyramid,' namely, the four edges extending from the apex of the pyramid to each corner of the quadrangular base."

H. Brugsch History of Egypt, chapter 7.

PYRAMIDS, Battle of the.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1798 (MAY-AUGUST).

PYRENEES, Battles of the (1813).

See SPAIN: A. D. 1812-1814.

PYRENEES, Treaty of the.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.

PYRRHIC DANCE.

A spirited military dance, performed in armor, which gave much delight to the Spartans, and is said to have been taught to children only five years old. It was thought to have been invented by the Cretans.

G. Schömann, Antiquities of Greece: The State, part 3, chapters 1-2.

PYRRHUS, and his campaigns in Italy and Sicily.

See ROME: B. C. 282-275.

PYTHIAN GAMES.

See DELPHI.

PYTHO, The Sanctuary of.

According to the Greek legend, a monstrous serpent, or dragon, Pytho, or Python, produced from the mud left by the deluge of Deucalion, lived in a great cavern of Mount Parnassus until slain by the god Apollo. The scene of the exploit became the principal seat of the worship of Apollo, the site of his most famous temple, the home of the oracle which he inspired. The temple and its seat were originally called Pytho; the cavern, from which arose mephitic and intoxicating vapors was called the Pythium; the priestess who inhaled those vapors and uttered the oracles which they were supposed to inspire, was the Pythia; Apollo, himself, was often called Pythius. Subsequently, town, temple and oracle were more commonly known by the name of Delphi.

See DELPHI.

{2619}

----------QUADI, The: Start--------

QUADI, The: Early place and history.

See MARCOMANNI.

QUADI, The: Campaigns of Marcus Aurelius against.

See SARMATIAN AND MARCOMANNIAN WARS OF MARCUS AURELIUS.

QUADI, The: A. D. 357-359. War of Constantius.

See LIMIGANTES.

QUADI, The: A. D. 374-375. War of Valentinian.

A treacherous outrage of peculiar blackness, committed by a worthless Roman officer on the frontier, in 374, provoked the Quadi to invade the province of Pannonia. They overran it with little opposition, and their success encouraged inroads by the neighboring Sarmatian tribes. In the following year, the Emperor Valentinian led a retaliatory expedition into the country of the Quadi and revenged himself upon it with unmerciful severity. At the approach of winter he returned across the Danube, but only to wait another spring, when his purpose was to complete the annihilation of the offending Quadi. The latter, thereupon, sent ambassadors to humbly pray for peace. The choleric emperor received them, but their presence excited him to such rage that a blood vessel was ruptured in his body and he died on the spot.

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 25.

QUADI, The: Probable Modern Representatives of.

See BOHEMIA: ITS PEOPLE.

----------QUADI, The: End--------

QUADRILATERAL, The.

A famous military position in northern Italy, formed by the strong fortresses at Peschiera, Verona, Mantua, and Legnano, bears this name. "The Quadrilateral … fulfils all the requirements of a good defensive position, which are to cover rearward territory, to offer absolute shelter to a defending army whenever required, and to permit of ready offensive: first, by the parallel course of the Mincio and Adige; secondly, by the fortresses on these rivers; thirdly, by passages offered at fortified points which insure the command of the rivers."

Major C. Adams, Great Campaigns in Europe from 1790 to 1870, page 232.

QUADRUPLE ALLIANCE (A. D. 1718).

See SPAIN: A. D. 1713-1725; also, ITALY: A. D. 1715-1735.

QUÆSTIO PERPETUA.

See CALPURNIAN LAW.

QUÆSTOR, The Imperial.

In the later Roman empire, "the Quaestor had the care of preparing the Imperial speeches, and was responsible for the language of the laws. … His office is not unlike that of the Chancellor of a mediaeval monarch."

T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 3 (volume 1).

QUÆSTORS, Roman.

"Probably created as assistants to the consuls in the first year of the republic. At first two; in 421 B. C., four; in 241, eight; in 81, twenty; in 45, forty. Thrown open to plebeians in 421 B. C. Elected in the Comitia Tributa. The quæstor's office lasted as long as the consul's to whom he was attached."

H. F. Horton, History of the Romans, appendix A.

"We have seen how the care of the city's treasures had been intrusted to two city quæstors, soon after the abolition of the monarchy. In like manner, soon after the fall of the decemvirate, the expenditures connected with military affairs, which had hitherto been in the hands of the consuls, were put under the control of new patrician officers, the military quæstors, who were to accompany the army on its march."

A. Tighe, Development of the Roman Constitution, chapter 6.

ALSO IN: W. Ihne, Researches into the History of the Roman Constitution, pages 70-84.

QUÆSTORS OF THE FLEET.

See ROME: B. C. 275.

----------QUAKERS: Start--------

QUAKERS: Origin of the Society of Friends. George Fox and his early Disciples.

"The religious movement which began with the wandering preacher George Fox … grew into the Society of Friends, or, as they came to be commonly called, 'The Quakers.' George Fox was born in 1624, the year before Charles I. came to the throne: and he was growing up to manhood all through the troubled time of that king's reign, while the storms were gathering which at last burst forth in the civil wars. It was not much that he knew of all this, however. He was growing up in a little out-of-the-way village of Leicestershire—Fenny Drayton—where his father was 'by profession a weaver.'" While he was still a child, the companions of George Fox "laughed at his grave, sober ways, yet they respected him, too; and when, by-and-by, he was apprenticed to a shoemaker, his master found him so utterly trustworthy, and so true and unbending in his word, that the saying began to go about, 'If George says "verily" there is no altering him.' … He was more and more grieved at what seemed to him the lightness and carelessness of men's lives. He felt as if he were living in the midst of hollowness and hypocrisy. … His soul was full of great thoughts of something better and nobler than the common religion, which seemed so poor and worldly. … He wandered about from place to place—Northampton, London, various parts of Warwickshire —seeking out people here and there whom he could hear of as very religious, and likely to help him through his difficulties. … After two years of lonely, wandering life, he began to see a little light. It came to his soul that all these outward forms, and ceremonies, and professions that people were setting up and making so much ado about as 'religion,' were nothing in themselves; that priestly education and ordination was nothing—did not really make a man any nearer to God; that God simply wanted the hearts and souls of all men to be turned to Him, and the worship of their own thought and feeling. And with the sense of this there arose within him a great loathing of all the formalism, and priestcraft, and outward observances of the Churches. … But he did not find peace yet. … He writes: 'My troubles continued, and I was often under great temptations; I fasted much and walked abroad in solitary places many days.' … It was a time like Christ's temptations in the wilderness, or Paul's three years in Arabia, before they went forth to their great life-mission. But to him, as to them, came, at last, light and peace and an open way. … A voice seemed to come to him which said, 'There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition.' 'And when I heard it,' he says, 'my heart did leap for joy.' Fixing his mind upon Christ, all things began to be clearer to him; he saw the grand simple truth of a religion of spirit and life. {2620} … It was at Dukinfield, near Manchester, in 1647, that he began to speak openly to men of what was in his heart. … In those days, when he was wandering away from men, and shrinking with a sort of horror from the fashions of the world, he had made himself a strong rough suit of leather, and this for many years was his dress. Very white and clean indeed was the linen under that rough leather suit, for he hated all uncleanness either of soul or body; and very calm and clear were his eyes, that seemed to search into men's souls, and quailed before no danger, and sometimes lighted up with wonderful tenderness. A tall, burly man he was, too, of great strength. … Everywhere he saw vanity and worldliness, pretence and injustice. It seemed laid upon him that he must testify against it all. He went to courts of justice, and stood up and warned the magistrates to do justly; he went to fairs and markets, and lifted up his voice against wakes, and feasts and plays, and also against people's cozening and cheating. … He testified against great things and small, bade men not swear, but keep to 'yea' and 'nay,' and this in courts of justice as everywhere else; he spoke against lip-honour—that men should give up using titles of compliment, and keep to plain 'thee' and 'thou'; 'for surely,' he said, 'the way men address God should be enough from one to another.' But all this was merely the side-work of his life, flowing from his great central thought of true, pure life in the light of the Spirit of God. That was his great thought, and that he preached most of all; he wanted men to give up all their forms, and come face to face with the Spirit of God, and so worship Him and live to Him. Therefore he spoke most bitterly of all against all priestcraft. … Gradually followers gathered to him; little groups of people here and there accepted his teachings—began to look to him as their leader. He did not want to found a sect; and as for a church—the Church was the whole body of Christ's faithful people everywhere; so those who joined him would not take any name as a sect or church. They simply called themselves 'friends'; they used no form of worship, but met together, to wait upon the Lord with one another; believing that His Spirit was always with them, and that, if anything was to be said, He would put it into their hearts to say it." From the first, Fox suffered persecution at the hands of the Puritans. They "kept imprisoning him for refusing to swear allegiance to the Commonwealth; again and again he suffered in this way: in Nottingham Castle, in 1648; then, two years later, at Derby, for six months, at the end of which time they tried to force him to enter the army; but he refused, and so they thrust him into prison again, this time into a place called the Dungeon, among 30 felons, where they kept him another half-year. Then, two years later, in 1653, he was imprisoned at Carlisle, in a foul, horrible hole. … He was again imprisoned in Launceston gaol, for eight long months. After this came a quieter time for him; for he was taken before Cromwell, and Cromwell had a long conversation with him. … During Cromwell's life he was persecuted no more, but with the restoration of Charles II. his dangers and sufferings began again. … His followers caught his spirit, and no persecutions could intimidate them. … They made no secret of where their meetings were to be, and at the time there they assembled. Constables and informers might be all about the place, it made no difference; they went in, sat down to their quiet worship; if anyone had a word to say he said it. The magistrates tried closing the places, locked the doors, put a band of soldiers to guard them. The Friends simply gathered in the street in front, held their meetings there; went on exactly as if nothing had happened. They might all be taken off to prison, still it made no difference. … Is it wonderful that such principles, preached with such noble devotion to truth and duty, rapidly made way? By the year 1665, when Fox had been preaching for 18 years, the Society of Friends numbered 80,000, and in another ten years it had spread more widely still, and its founder had visited America, and travelled through Holland and Germany, preaching his doctrine of the inward light, and everywhere founding Meetings. Fox himself did not pass away until [1690] he had seen his people past all the days of persecution."

B. Herford, The Story of Religion in England, chapter 27.

"At a time when personal revelation was generally believed, it was a pardonable self-delusion that he [Fox] should imagine himself to be commissioned by the Divinity to preach a system which could only be objected to as too pure to be practised by man: This belief, and an ardent temperament, led him and some of his followers into unseasonable attempts to convert their neighbours, and unseemly intrusions into places of worship for that purpose, which excited general hostility against them, and exposed them to frequent and severe punishments. … Although they, like most other religious sects, had arisen in the humble classes of society, … they had early been joined by a few persons of superior rank and education. … The most distinguished of their converts was William Penn, whose father, Admiral Sir William Penn, had been a personal friend of the King [James II.], and one of his instructors in naval affairs."

Sir J. Mackintosh, History of the Revolution in England in 1688, chapter 6.

"At one of the interviews between G. Fox and Gervas Bennet—one of the magistrates who had committed him at Derby—the former bade the latter 'Tremble at the word of the Lord'; whereupon Bennet called him a Quaker. This epithet of scorn well suited the tastes and prejudices of the people, and it soon became the common appellation bestowed on Friends."

C. Evans, Friends in the 17th Century, chapter 2.

ALSO IN: _J. Gough, History of the People called Quakers._

_W. R. Wagstaff, History of the Society of Friends._

_T. Clarkson, Portraiture of Quakerism._

American Church History, volume 12.

QUAKERS: A. D. 1656-1661. The persecution in Massachusetts.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1656-1661.

QUAKERS: A. D. 1681. Penn's acquisition of Pennsylvania.

See PENNSYLVANIA: A. D. 1681.

QUAKERS: A. D. 1682. Proprietary purchase of New Jersey.

See NEW JERSEY: A. D. 1673-1682.

QUAKERS: A. D. 1688-1776. Early growth of anti-slavery sentiment in the Society.

See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1688-1780.

----------QUAKERS: End--------

QUALIFICATION OF SUFFRAGE: In England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1884-1885.

QUALIFICATION OF SUFFRAGE: In Rhode Island.

See RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1888.

{2621}

QUANTRELL'S GUERRILLAS.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (AUGUST: MISSOURI-KANSAS).

QUAPAWS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.

QUATRE BRAS, Battle of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1815 (JUNE).

----------QUEBEC, CITY: Start--------

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1535. Its Indian occupants. Its name.

"When Jacques Cartier sailed up the St. Lawrence, in 1535, he found an Indian village called Stadacona occupying the site of the present city of Quebec. "The Indian name Stadacona had perished before the time of Champlain, owing, probably, to the migration of the principal tribe and the succession of others." The name Quebec, afterwards given to the French settlement on the same ground, is said by some to be likewise of Indian origin, having reference to the narrowing of the river at that point. "Others give a Norman derivation for the word: it is said that Quebec was so–called after Caudebec, on the Seine." La Potherie says that the Normans who were with Cartier, when they saw the high cape, cried "Quel bec!" from which came the name Quebec. "Mr. Hawkins terms this 'a derivation entirely illusory and improbable,' and asserts that the word is of Norman origin. He gives an engraving of a seal belonging to William de la Pole, earl of Suffolk, dated in the 7th of Henry V., or A. D. 1420. The legend or motto is 'Sigillum Willielmi de la Pole, Comitis Suffolckiæ, Domine de Hamburg et de Quebec.'"

E. Warburton, The Conquest of Canada, volume 1, chapter 2, and foot-note.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1608. The founding of the city by Champlain.

See CANADA: A. D. 1608-1611.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1629-1632. Capture by the English, brief occupation and restoration to France.

See CANADA: A. D. 1628-1635.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1639. The founding of the Ursuline Convent.

See CANADA: A. D. 1637–1657.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1690. Unsuccessful attack by Sir Williams Phips and the Massachusetts colonists.

See CANADA: A. D. 1689-1690.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1711. Threatened by the abortive expedition of Admiral Walker.

See CANADA: A. D. 1711-1713.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1759. Wolfe's conquest.

See CANADA: A. D. 1759 (JUNE-SEPTEMBER).

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1760. Attempted recovery by the French.

See CANADA: A. D. 1760.

QUEBEC, CITY: A. D. 1775-1776. Unsuccessful siege by the Americans. Death of Montgomery.

See 'CANADA: A. D. 1775-1776.

----------QUEBEC, CITY: End--------------

----------QUEBEC, PROVINCE: Start--------

QUEBEC, Province: A. D. 1763. Creation of the English province.

See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.

QUEBEC, Province: A. D. 1774. Vast extension of the province by the Quebec Act.

See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.

QUEBEC, Province: A. D. 1867.

On the formation of the confederated Dominion of Canada, in 1867, the eastern province formerly called Lower Canada received the name of Quebec.

See CANADA: A. D. 1867.

----------QUEBEC, PROVINCE: End--------

QUEBEC ACT, The.

See CANADA: A. D. 1763-1774.

QUEBEC RESOLUTIONS, The.

See CANADA: A. D. 1867.

QUEBRADA-SECA, Battle of (1862).

See VENEZUELA: A. D. 1829-1886.

QUEEN, Origin of the word.

See King.

QUEEN ANNE'S BOUNTY.

"Her Majesty's [Queen Anne's] birthday, which was the 6th of February, falling this year [1704] on a Sunday, its celebration had been postponed till the next day. On that day, then, as well beseeming her pious and princely gift, Sir Charles Hedges as Secretary of State brought down to the House of Commons a message from the Queen, importing that Her Majesty desired to make a grant of her whole revenue arising out of the First Fruits and Tenths for the benefit of the poorer clergy. These First Fruits and Tenths had been imposed by the Popes some centuries ago for the support of the Holy Wars, but had been maintained long after those wars had ceased.

See ANNATES.

The broad besom of Henry VIII. had swept them from the Papal to the Royal treasury, and there they continued to flow. In the days of Charles II. they had been regarded as an excellent fund out of which to provide for the female favourites of His Majesty and their numerous children. … Upon the Queen's message the Commons returned a suitable address, and proceeded to pass a bill enabling Her Majesty to alienate this branch of the revenue, and to create a corporation by charter to apply it for the object she desired. … This fund has ever since and with good reason borne the name of 'Queen Anne's Bounty.' Its application has been extended to the building of parsonage-houses as well as to the increase of poor livings."

Earl Stanhope, History of England: Reign of Queen Anne, chapter 4.

QUEEN ANNE'S WAR.

The wide-ranging conflict which is known in European history as the War of the Spanish Succession, appears in American history more commonly under the name of Queen Anne's War.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1702-1710.

QUEENSBERRY PLOT, The.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1703-1704.

QUEENSLAND.

See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1859.

QUEENSTOWN HEIGHTS, The battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812 (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER).

QUELCHES, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.

QUERANDIS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.

QUESNOY: A. D. 1659. Ceded to France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.

QUESNOY: A. D. 1794. Siege and capture by the French.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794 (MARCH-JULY).

QUIBÉRON BAY, Naval battle of.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1759 (AUGUST-NOVEMBER).

Defeat of French Royalists (1795).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794-1796.

QUICHES, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: QUICHES.

QUICHUAS, The.

See PERU: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

{2622}

QUIDS, The.

John Randolph of Virginia. "had been one of the Republican leaders while the party was in opposition [during the second administration of Washington and the administration of John Adams, as Presidents of the United States], but his irritable spirit disqualified him for heading an Administration party. He could attack, but could not defend. He had taken offense at the President's [Jefferson's] refusal to make him Minister to England, and immediately took sides with the Federalists [1805] followed by a number of his friends, though not sufficient to give the Federalists a majority. … The Randolph faction, popularly called 'Quids,' gave fresh life to the Federalists in Congress, and made them an active and useful opposition party."

A. Johnston, History of American Politics, chapter 6, section 3.

QUIETISM.

See MYSTICISM.

QUIJO, OR NAPO, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.

QUINARIUS, The.

See AS.

QUINCY RAILWAY, The.

See STEAM LOCOMOTION ON LAND.

QUINDECEMVIRS, The.

The quindecemvirs, at Rome, had the custody of the Sibylline books.

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 31.

QUINNIPIACK.

See CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1638.

QUIPU. WAMPUM.

"The Peruvians adopted a … unique system of records, that by means of the quipu. This was a base cord, the thickness of the finger, of any required length, to which were attached numerous small strings of different colors, lengths, and textures, variously knotted and twisted one with another. Each of these peculiarities represented a certain number, a quality, quantity, or other idea, but what, not the most fluent quipu reader could tell unless he was acquainted with the general topic treated of. Therefore, whenever news was sent in this manner a person accompanied the bearer to serve as verbal commentator, and to prevent confusion the quipus relating to the various departments of knowledge were placed in separate storehouses, one for war, another for taxes, a third for history, and so forth. On what principle of mnemotechnics the ideas were connected with the knots and colors we are totally in the dark; it has even been doubted whether they had any application beyond the art of numeration. Each combination had, however, a fixed ideographic value in a certain branch of knowledge, and thus the quipu differed essentially from the Catholic rosary, the Jewish phylactery, or the knotted strings of the natives of North America and Siberia, to all of which it has at times been compared. The wampum used by the tribes of the North Atlantic coast was, in many respects, analogous to the quipu. In early times it was composed chiefly of bits of wood of equal size, but different colors. These were hung on strings which were woven into belts and bands, the hues, shapes, sizes, and combinations of the strings hinting their general significance. Thus the lighter shades were invariable harbingers of peaceful or pleasant tidings, while the darker portended war and danger. The substitution of beads or shells in place of wood, and the custom of embroidering figures in the belts were, probably, introduced by European influence."

D. G. Brinton, The Myths of the New World, chapter 1.

See, also, WAMPUM.

QUIRINAL, The.

"The Palatine city was not the only one that in ancient times existed within the circle afterwards enclosed by the Servian walls; opposite to it, in its immediate vicinity, there lay a second city on the Quirinal. … Even the name has not been lost by which the men of the Quirinal distinguished themselves from their Palatine neighbours. As the Palatine city took the name of 'the Seven Mounts,' its citizens called themselves the 'mount-men' ('montani'), and the term 'mount,' while applied to the other heights belonging to the city, was above all associated with the Palatine; so the Quirinal height—although not lower, but on the contrary somewhat higher, than the former—as well as the adjacent Viminal, never in the strict use of the language received any other name than 'hill' ('collis'). … Thus the site of the Roman commonwealth was still at this period occupied by the Mount-Romans of the Palatine and the Hill-Romans of the Quirinal as two separate communities confronting each other and doubtless in many respects at feud. … That the community of the Seven Mounts early attained a great preponderance over that of the Quirinal may with certainty be inferred."

T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 1, chapter 4.

See, also, PALATINE HILL, and SEVEN HILLS OF ROME.

QUIRITES.

In early Rome the warrior-citizens, the full burgesses, were so-called. "The king, when he addressed them, called them 'lance-men' (quirites). … We need not … regard the name Quirites as having been originally reserved for the burgesses on the Quirinal. … It is indisputably certain that the name· Quirites denoted from the first, as well as subsequently, simply the full burgess."

T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 1, chapters 4 and 5.

The term quirites, in fact, signified the citizens of Rome as a body. Whether it originally meant "men of the spear," as derived from a Sabine word, is a question in some dispute.

H. G. Liddell, History of Rome, book 1, chapter 5.

QUITO: The ancient kingdom and the modern city.

See ECUADOR.

QUIVIRA.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PUEBLOS.

QUORATEAN FAMILY, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: QUORATEAN FAMILY.

R

RAAB, Battle of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).

RABBLING.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1688-1690.

RABELAIS, on Education.

See EDUCATION, RENAISSANCE.

RAB-SHAKEH.

The title of the chief minister of the Assyrian kings. The Rab-Shakah of Sennacherib demanded the surrender of Jerusalem.

RACHISIUS, King of the Lombards, A. D. 744-750.

RADAGAISUS, RADAGAIS, RODOGAST; Invasion of Italy by.

"In the year 406, Italy was suddenly overrun by a vast multitude composed of Vandals, Sueves, Burgunds, Alans, and Goths, under the command of a king named Radagais. To what nation this king belonged is not certain, but it seems likely that he was an Ostrogoth from the region of the Black Sea, who had headed a tribe of his countrymen in a revolt against the Huns. {2623} The invading host is said to have consisted of 200,000 warriors, who were accompanied by their wives and families. These barbarians were heathens, and their manners were so fierce and cruel that the invasion excited far more terror than did that of Alaric. … Stilicho [the able minister and general of the contemptible Emperor of the West, Honorius] found it hard work to collect an army capable of opposing this savage horde, and Radagais had got as far as Florence before any resistance was offered to him. But while he was besieging that city, the Roman general came upon him, and, by surrounding his army with earthworks, compelled him to surrender. The barbarian king was beheaded, and those of the captives whose lives were spared were sold into slavery."

H. Bradley, Story of the Goths, chapter 10.

ALSO IN: T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 1, chapter 5.

See, also, ROME: A. D. 404-408.

RÆTIA.

See RHÆTIA.

RAGA, RAGHA, RHAGES.

"The Median city next in importance to the two Ecbatanas was Raga or Rhages, near the Caspian Gates, almost at the extreme eastern limits of the territory possessed by the Medes. The great antiquity of this place is marked by its occurrence in the Zendavesta among the primitive settlements of the Arians. Its celebrity during the time of the Empire is indicated by the position which it occupies in the romances of Tobit and Judith. … Rhages gave name to a district; and this district may be certainly identified with the long narrow tract of fertile territory intervening between the Elburz mountain-range and the desert, from about Kasvin to Khaar, or from longitude 50° to 52° 30'. The exact site of the city of Rhages within this territory is somewhat doubtful. All accounts place it near the eastern extremity; and, as there are in this direction ruins of a town called Rhei or Rhey, it has been usual to assume that they positively fix the locality. But … there are grounds for placing Rhages very much nearer to the Caspian Gates."

G. Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies: Media, chapter 1.

See, also, CASPIAN GATES.

RAGÆ.

See RATÆ.

RAGMAN'S ROLL.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1328.

RAID OF RUTHVEN, The.

See SCOTLAND. A. D. 1582.

RAILROADS, The beginning of.

See STEAM LOCOMOTION ON LAND.

RAISIN RIVER, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812-1813 HARRISON'S NORTHWESTERN CAMPAIGN.

RAJA, RAJAH. MAHARAJA.

Hindu titles, equivalent to king and great king.

RAJPOOTS, RAJPUTS. RAJPOOTANA.

"The Rajpoots, or sons of Rajas, are the noblest and proudest race in India, … They claim to be representatives of the Kshatriyas; the descendants of those Aryan warriors who conquered the Punjab and Hindustan in times primeval. To this day they display many of the characteristics of the heroes of the Maha Bharata and Ramayana. They form a military aristocracy of the feudal type. … The Rajpoots are the links between ancient and modern India. In days of old they strove with the kings of Magadha for the suzerainty of Hindustan from the Indus to the lower Gangetic valley. They maintained imperial thrones at Lahore and Delhi, at Kanouj and Ayodhya. In later revolutions their seats of empire have been shifted further west and south, but the Rajpoot kingdoms still remain as the relics of the old Aryan aristocracy. … The dynasties of Lahore and Delhi faded away from history, and perchance have reappeared in more remote quarters of India. The Rajpoots still retain their dominion in the west, whilst their power and influence have been felt in every part of India; and to this day a large Rajpoot element characterizes the populations, not only of the Punjab and Hindustan, but of the Dekhan and Peninsula. The Rajpoot empire of a remote antiquity is represented in the present day by the three kingdoms of Meywar, Marwar, and Jeypore. Meywar, better known as Chittore or Udaipore, is the smallest but most important of the three. It forms the garden of Rajpootana to the eastward of the Aravulli range. Westward of the range is the dreary desert of Marwar. Northward of Meywar lies the territory of Jeypore, the intermediate kingdom between Meywar and the Mussulmans. … In former times the sovereigns of Meywar were known as the Ranas of Chittore; they are now known as the Ranas of Udaipore. They belong to the blue blood of Rajpoot aristocracy."

J. T. Wheeler, History of India, volume 3, chapter 7.

"Everywhere [in the central region of India] Rajput septs or petty chiefships may still be found existing in various degrees of independence. And there are, of course, Rajput Chiefs outside Rajputana altogether, though none of political importance. But Rajputana proper, the country still under the independent rule of the most ancient families of the purest clans, may now be understood generally to mean the great tract that would be crossed by two lines, of which one should be drawn on the map of India from the frontier of Sind Eastward to the gates of Agra; and the other from the Southern border of the Punjab Government near the Sutlej Southward and South-Eastward until it meets the broad belt of Maratha States under the Guicowar, Holkar, and Scindia, which runs across India from Baroda to Gwalior. This territory is divided into nineteen States, of which sixteen are possessed by Rajput clans, and the Chief of the clan or sept is the State's ruler. To the Sesodia clan, the oldest and purest blood in India, belong the States of Oodeypoor, Banswarra, Pertabgarh, and Shahpura; to the Rathore clan, the States of Jodhpoor and Bikanir; Jeypoor and Ulwar to the Kuchwaha, and so on."

Sir A. C. Lyall, Asiatic Studies, chapter 8.

RALEIGH, Sir Walter: Colonizing undertakings in Virginia.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1584-1586, and 1587-1590.

Guiana and El Dorado expeditions.

See EL DORADO.

RAMBOUILLET, The Hôtel de.

The marquise de Rambouillet, who drew around herself, at Paris, the famous coterie which took its name from her hospitable house, was the daughter of a French nobleman, Jean de Vivonne, sieur de Saint-Gohard, afterwards first marquis de Pisani, who married a Roman lady of the noble family of the Strozzi. Catherine de Vivonne was born of this union in 1588, and in 1600, when less than twelve years old, became the wife of Charles d'Angennes, vidame du Mans afterwards marquis de Rambouillet. Her married life was more than half a century in duration; she was the mother of seven children, and she survived her husband thirteen years. {2624} During the minority of the husband the ancient residence of his family had been sold, and from 1610 to 1617 the marquis and marquise were engaged in building a new Hôtel de Rambouillet, which the latter is credited with having, in great part, designed. Her house being finished, she opened it "to her friends and acquaintances, and her receptions, which continued until the Fronde (1648), brought together every evening the choicest society of the capital, and produced a profound influence upon the manners and literature of the day. The marquise ceased attending court some years before the death of Henry IV., her refinement and pure character finding there an uncongenial atmosphere. The marquise was not alone a woman of society, but was carefully educated and fond of literature. Consequently the reunions at the Hôtel de Rambouillet were distinguished by a happy combination of rank and letters. Still more important was the new position assumed by the hostess and the ladies who frequented her house. Until the XVIIth century the crudest views prevailed as to the education and social position of woman. It was at the Hôtel de Rambouillet that her position as the intellectual companion of man was first recognized, find this position of equality, and the deferential respect which followed it, had a powerful influence in refining the rude manners of men of rank whose lives had been passed in camps, and of men of letters who had previously enjoyed few opportunities for social polish. The two classes met for the first time on a footing of equality, and it resulted in elevating the occupation of letters, and imbuing men of rank with a fondness for intellectual pursuits. The reunions at the Hôtel de Rambouillet began, as has been said, about 1617, and extend until the Fronde (1648) or a few years later. This period Larroumet ('Précieuses Ridicules,' page 14) divides into three parts: from 1617 to about 1629; from 1630 to 1640; and from 1640 to the death of the marquise in 1665. During the first period the habitués of the Hôtel de Rambouillet were": the marquis du Vigean, the maréchal de Souvré, the duke de la Tremoïlle, Richelieu (then bishop of Luçon), the cardinal de la Valette, the poets Malherbe, Racan, Gombauld, Chapelain, Marino, the preacher Cospeau, Godeau, the grammarian Vaugelas, Voiture, Balzac, Segrais, Mlle. Paulet, the princess de Montmorency, Mlle. du Vigean, and the daughters of the marquise de Rambouillet, "of whom the eldest, Julie d'Angennes, until her marriage in 1645 to the marquis de Montausier, was the soul of the reunions of the Hôtel de Rambouillet. The second period was that of its greatest brilliancy. To the illustrious names just mentioned must be added": the great Condé, the marquis de Montausier, Saint-Évremond, La Rochefoucald, Sarrasin, Costar, Patru, Conrart, Georges de Scudéry, Mairet, Colletet, Ménage, Benscrade, Cotin, Desmarets, Rotrou, Scarron, P. Corneille, Bossuet, Mlle. de Bourbon, later duchesse de Longueville, Mlle. de Coligny, Mme. Aubry, and Mlle. de Scudéry, "yet unknown as a writer. After 1640 the Hôtel de Rambouillet began to decline; but two names of importance belong to this period: Mme. de la Fayette, and Mme. de Sévigné. … Voiture died in 1648, the year which witnessed the outbreak of the Fronde, after which the reunions at the Hôtel de Rambouillet virtually ceased. … Until the time of Roederer ['Mémoire pour servir à l'histoire de la société polie en France'] it was generally supposed that the word 'Précieuse' was synonymous with Hôtel de Rambouillet, and that it was the marquise and her friends whom Molière intended to satirize. Roederer endeavored to show that it was not the marquise but her bourgeois imitators, the circle of Mlle. de Scudéry …; Victor Cousin attempts to prove that it was neither the marquise nor Mlle. de Scudéry, but the imitators of the latter. … The editor of Molière in the 'Grands Écrivains de la France,' M. Despois (volume 2, page 4) believes that the Hôtel de Rambouillet, including Mlle. de Scudéry, was the object of Moliere's satire, although he had no intention of attacking any particular person among the 'Précieuses,' but confined himself to ridiculing the eccentricities common to them all. It is with this last view that the editor of the present work unhesitatingly agrees, for reasons which he hopes some day to give in detail in an edition of the two plays of Molière mentioned above ['Precieuses Ridicules,' and 'Les Femmes Savantes']. From Paris the influence of the 'Précieuses' spread into the provinces, doubtless with all the exaggerations of an unskilful imitation."

_T. F. Crane, Introduction to "La Société Française au Dix-Septième Siècle."_

ALSO IN: A. G. Mason, The Women of the French Salons, chapters 2-7.

RAMBOUILLET DECREE, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1810-1812.

RAMESES, RAAMSES, RAMSES, Treasure-city of.

See JEWS: THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS.

RAMESSIDS, The.

The nineteenth dynasty of Egyptian kings, sprung from Rameses I. [in the] fourteenth to twelfth centuries B. C.

See EGYPT: ABOUT B. C. 1400-1200.

RAMILLIES, Battle of (1706).

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1706-1707.

RAMIRO I.' King of Aragon, A. D. 1035-1063.

Ramiro I., King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo, 842-850.

Ramiro II., King of Aragon, 1134-1137.

Ramiro II., King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo, 930-950.

Ramiro III., King of Leon and the Asturias, or Oviedo, 967-982.

RAMNES. RAMNIANS, The.

See ROME: BEGINNINGS AND NAME.

RAMOTH-GILEAD.

The strong fortress of Ramoth-Gilead, on the frontier of Samaria and Syria, was the object and the scene of frequent warfare between the Israelites and the Arameans of Damascus. It was there that king Ahab of Samaria, in alliance with Judah, was killed in battle, fighting against Ben-hadad of Damascus.

1 Kings, xxii.

ALSO IN: Dean Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church, lecture 33.

RANAS OF UDAIPORE OR CHITTORE.

See RAJPOOTS.

RANDOLPH, Edmund, and the framing and adoption of the Federal Constitution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1787; 1787-1789.

In the Cabinet of President Washington.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1789-1792.

RANJIT SINGH, RUNJIT SINGH, The conquests of.

See SIKHS.

{2625}

RANTERS. MUGGLETONIANS.

"'These [the Ranters] made it their business,' says Baxter, 'to set up the Light of Nature under the name of Christ in Man, and to dishonour and cry down the Church, the Scripture, and the present Ministry, and our worship and ordinances; and called men to hearken to Christ within them. But withal they conjoined a cursed doctrine of Libertinism, which brought them to all abominable filthiness of life. They taught, as the Familists, that God regardeth not the actions of the outward man, but of the heart, and that to the pure all things are pure.' … Of no sect do we hear more in the pamphlets and newspapers between 1650 and 1655, though there are traces of them of earlier date. … Sometimes confounded with the Ranters, but really distinguishable, were some crazed men, whose crazes had taken a religious turn, and whose extravagances became contagious.—Such was a John Robins, first heard of about 1650, when he went about, sometimes as God Almighty, sometimes as Adam raised from the dead. … One heard next, in 1652, of two associates, called John Reeve and Ludovick Muggleton, who professed to be 'the two last Spiritual Witnesses (Revelation xi.) and alone true Prophets of the Lord Jesus Christ, God alone blessed to all eternity,' They believed in a real man-shaped God, existing from all eternity, who had come upon earth as Jesus Christ, leaving Moses and Elijah to represent him in Heaven." Muggleton died in 1698, "at the age of 90, leaving a sect called The Muggletonians, who are perhaps not extinct yet."

D. Masson, Life of John Milton, volume 5, pages 17-20.

RAPALLO, Battle of (1425).

See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.

Massacre at (1494).

See ITALY: A. D. 1494-1496.

RAPE OF THE SABINE WOMEN, The.

See ROME: B. C. 753-510.

RAPES OF SUSSEX.

"The singular division of Sussex [England] into six 'rapes' [each of which is subdivided into hundreds] seems to have been made for military purposes. The old Norse 'hreppr' denoted a nearly similar territorial division."

T. P. Taswell-Langmead, English Constitutional History, chapter 1, foot-note.

"The 'reebning,' or mensuration by the rope or line, supplied the technical term of 'hrepp' to the glossary of Scandinavian legislation: archæologists have therefore pronounced an opinion that the 'Rapes' of Sussex, the divisions ranging from the Channel shore to the Suthrige border, were, according to Norwegian fashion, thus plotted out by the Conqueror."

Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England, book 1, chapter 5.

RAPHIA, Battle of (B. C. 217).

See SELEUCIDÆ: B. C. 224-187.

RAPID INDIANS.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: RAPID INDIANS.

RAPIDAN, Campaign of Meade and Lee on the.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JULY-NOVEMBER: VIRGINIA).

RAPPAHANNOCK STATION, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JULY-NOVEMBER: VIRGINIA).

RAPPAREES. TORIES.

"Ejected proprietors [in Ireland, 17th and 18th centuries] whose names might be traced in the annals of the Four Masters, or around the sculptured crosses of Clonmacnoise, might be found in abject poverty hanging around the land which had lately been their own, shrinking from servile labour as from an intolerable pollution, and still receiving a secret homage from their old tenants. In a country where the clan spirit was intensely strong, and where the new landlords were separated from their tenants by race, by religion, and by custom, these fallen and impoverished chiefs naturally found themselves at the head of the discontented classes; and for many years after the Commonwealth, and again after the Revolution, they and their followers, under the names of tories and rapparees, waged a kind of guerrilla war of depredations upon their successors. After the first years of the 18th century, however, this form of crime appears to have almost ceased; and although we find the names of tories and rapparees on every page of the judicial records, the old meaning was no longer attached to them, and they had become the designations of ordinary felons, at large in the country."

W. E. H. Lecky, History of England, 18th Century, chapter 7 (volume 2).

"The distinction between the Irish foot soldier and the Irish Rapparee had never been very strongly marked. It now disappeared [during the war in Ireland between James II. and William of Orange—A. D. 1691]. Great part of the army was turned loose to live by marauding."

Lord Macaulay, History of England, chapter 17 (volume 4).

"The Rapparee was the lowest of the low people. … The Rapparee knew little difference between friend and foe; receiving no mercy, they gave none."

Sir J. Dalrymple, Memoirs or Great Britain and Ireland, part 2, book 5 (volume 3).

"Political disaffection in Ireland has been the work, on the one hand, of the representatives of the old disinherited families—the Kernes, and Gallowglasses of one age, the Rapparees of the next, the houghers and ravishers of a third; on the other, of the restless aspirations of the Catholic clergy."

J. A. Froude, The English in Ireland, book 9, chapter 1 (volume 3).

RARITANS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.

RAS. RASENNA.

See ETRUSCANS.

RASCIA.

See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES, 7TH CENTURY (SERVIA, CROATIA, ETC.).

RASCOL. RASKOL. RASKOLNIKS.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1655-1659.

RASTA, The.

See LEUGA.

RASTADT, Congress of. Murder of French envoys.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER).

RASTADT, The Treaty of (1714).

See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.

RATÆ, RAGÆ.

A Roman town in Britain—"one of the largest and most important of the midland cities, adorned with rich mansions and temples, and other public buildings. Its site is now occupied by the town of Leicester."

T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.

RATHMINES, Battle of (1649).

See IRELAND: A. D. 1646-1649.

RATHS.

"Of those ancient Raths, or Hill-fortresses, which formed the dwellings of the old Irish chiefs, and belonged evidently to a period when cities were not yet in existence, there are to be found numerous remains throughout the country. This species of earthen work is distinguished from the artificial mounds, or tumuli, by its being formed upon natural elevations, and always surrounded by a rampart,"

T. Moore, History of Ireland, chapter 9.

RATHSMANN, RATHSMEISTER, etc.

See CITIES, IMPERIAL AND FREE, OF GERMANY.

{2626}

RATISBON: Taken by the Swedish-German forces (1633).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1632-1634.

RATISBON, Battle of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JANUARY-JUNE).

RATISBON, Catholic League of.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1522-1525.

RAUCOUX, Battle of (1746).

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1746-1747.

RAUDINE PLAIN, Battle of the.

See CIMBRI AND TEUTONES: B. C. 113-102.

RAURACI, The.

An ancient tribe "whose origin is perhaps German, established on both banks of the Rhine, towards the elbow which that river forms at Bâle."

Napoleon III., History of Cæsar, book 3, chapter 2, foot–note.

RAVENIKA, The Parliament of.

Henry, the second emperor of the Latin empire of Romania, or empire of Constantinople, convened a general parliament or high-court of all his vassals, at Ravenika, in 1209, for the determining of the feudal relations of all the subjects of the empire. Ravenika is in ancient Chalkidike, some fifty miles from Thessalonica.

G. Finlay, History of Greece from its Conquest by the Crusaders, chapter 4, section 4.

----------RAVENNA: Start--------

RAVENNA: B. C. 50. Cæsar's advance on Rome.

See ROME: B. C. 52-50.

RAVENNA: A. D. 404. Made the capital of the Western Empire.

"The houses of Ravenna, whose appearance may be compared to that of Venice, were raised on the foundation of wooden piles. The adjacent country, to the distance of many miles, was a deep and impassable morass; and the artificial causeway which connected Ravenna with the continent might be easily guarded, or destroyed, on the approach of a hostile army. These morasses were interspersed, however, with vineyards; and though the soil was exhausted by four or five crops, the town enjoyed a more plentiful supply of wine than of fresh water. The air, instead of receiving the sickly and almost pestilential exhalations of low and marshy grounds, was distinguished, like the neighbourhood of Alexandria, as uncommonly pure and salubrious; and this singular advantage was ascribed to the regular tides of the Adriatic. … This advantageous situation was fortified by art and labour; and, in the twentieth year of his age, the Emperor of the West [Honorius, A. D. 395-423] anxious only for his personal safety, retired to the perpetual confinement of the walls and morasses of Ravenna. The example of Honorius was imitated by his feeble successors, the Gothic kings, and afterwards the exarchs, who occupied the throne and palace of the emperors; and till the middle of the eighth century Ravenna was considered as the seat of government and the capital of Italy."

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 30.

ALSO IN: T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, chapter 9.

See, also, ROME: A. D. 404-408.

RAVENNA: A. D. 490-493. Siege and capture by Theodoric. Murder of Odoacer. Capital of the Ostrogothic kingdom.

See ROME: A. D. 488-526.

RAVENNA: A. D. 493-525. The capital of Theodoric the Ostrogoth.

"The usual residence of Theodoric was Ravenna, with which city his name is linked as inseparably as those of Honorius or Placidia. The letters of Cassiodorus show his zeal for the architectural enrichment of this capital. Square blocks of stone were to be brought from Faenza, marble pillars to be transported from the palace on the Pincian Hill: the most skilful artists in mosaic were invited from Rome, to execute some of those very works which we still wonder at in the basilicas and baptisteries of the city by the Ronco. The chief memorials of his reign which Theodoric has left at Ravenna are a church, a palace, and a tomb."

T. Hodgkin, Italy and Her Invaders, book 4, chapter 8 (volume 3).

RAVENNA: A. D. 540. Surrender to Belisarius.

See ROME: A. D. 535-553.

RAVENNA: A. D. 554-800. The Exarchate.

See ROME: A. D. 554-800.

RAVENNA: A. D. 728-751. Decline and fall of the Exarchate.

See PAPACY: A. D. 728-774.

RAVENNA: A. D. 1275. The Papal sovereignty confirmed by Rodolph of Hapsburg.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1273-1308.

RAVENNA: A. D. 1512. Taken by the French. Battle before the city. Defeat of the Spaniards.

See ITALY: A. D. 1510-1513.

----------RAVENNA: End--------

RAVENSPUR.

The landing place of Henry of Lancaster, July 4, 1399, when he came back from banishment to demand the crown of England from Richard II. It is on the coast of Yorkshire.

RAYMOND, of Toulouse, The Crusade of.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1096-1099; also, JERUSALEM: A. D. 1099; and 1099-1144.

RAYMOND, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (APRIL-JULY: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

REAL, Spanish.

See SPANISH COINS.

REAMS'S STATION, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (AUGUST: VIRGINIA).

REASON, The Worship of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (NOVEMBER).

REBECCAITES. DAUGHTERS OF REBECCA.

Between 1839 and 1844, a general outbreak occurred in Wales against what were thought to be the excessive tolls collected on the turnpike roads. Finding that peaceful agitation was of no avail the people determined to destroy the turnpike gates, and did so very extensively, the movement spreading from county to county. They applied to themselves the Bible promise given to the descendants of Isaac's wife, that they should possess the "gate" of their enemies, and were known as the Daughters, or Children of Rebecca, or Rebeccaites. Their proceedings assumed at last a generally riotous and lawless character, and were repressed by severe measures. At the same time Parliament removed the toll-gate grievance by an amended law.

W. N. Molesworth, History of England, 1830-1874, volume 2, page 131.

RECESS.

Certain decrees of the Germanic diet were so called.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1530-1531.

RECHABITES, The.

An ascetic religious association, or order, formed among the Israelites, under the influence of the prophet Elijah, or after his death. Like the monks of a later time, they mostly withdrew into the desert. "The vow of their order was so strict that they were not allowed to possess either vineyards or corn-fields or houses, and they were consequently rigidly confined for means of subsistence to the products of the wilderness."

H. Ewald, History of Israel, book 4, section 1 (volume 4).

{2627}

RECIPROCITY TREATY, Canadian.

See TARIFF LEGISLATION, &C. (UNITED STATES AND CANADA): A. D. 1854-1866.

RECOLLECTS, RÉCOLLETS.

This name is borne by a branch of the Franciscan order of friars, to indicate that the aim of their lives is the recollection of God and the forgetfulness of worldly things.

RECONSTRUCTION: President Lincoln's Louisiana plan.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863-1864 (DECEMBER-JULY).

President Johnson's plan.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (MAY-JULY).

The question in Congress.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865-1866 (DECEMBER-JUNE), 1866-1867 (OCTOBER-MARCH), 1867 (MARCH).

See, also: SOUTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1865-1876; TENNESSEE: A. D. 1865-1866; LOUISIANA: A. D. 1865-1867.

RECULVER, Roman origin of.

See REGULBIUM.

RED CAP OF LIBERTY, The.

See LIBERTY CAP.

RED CROSS, The.

"A confederation of relief societies in different countries, acting under the Geneva Convention, carries on its work under the sign of the Red Cross. The aim of these societies is to ameliorate the condition of wounded soldiers in the armies in campaign on land or sea. The societies had their rise in the conviction of certain philanthropic men, that the official sanitary service in wars is usually insufficient, and that the charity of the people, which at such times exhibits itself munificently, should be organized for the best possible utilization. An international public conference was called at Geneva, Switzerland, in 1863, which, though it had not an official character, brought together representatives from a number of Governments. At this conference a treaty was drawn up, afterwards remodeled and improved, which twenty-five Governments have signed. The treaty provides for the neutrality of all sanitary supplies, ambulances, surgeons, nurses, attendants, and sick or wounded men, and their safe conduct, when they bear the sign of the organization, viz: the Red Cross. Although the Convention which originated the organization was necessarily international, the relief societies themselves are entirely national and independent; each one governing itself and making its own laws according to the genius of its nationality and needs. It was necessary for recognizance and safety, and for carrying out the general provisions of the treaty, that a uniform badge should be agreed upon. The Red Cross was chosen out of compliment to the Swiss Republic, where the first convention was held, and in which the Central Commission has its headquarters. The Swiss colors being a white cross on a red ground, the badge chosen was these colors reversed. There are no 'members of the Red Cross,' but only members of societies whose sign it is. There is no 'Order of the Red Cross.' The relief societies use, each according to its convenience, whatever methods seem best suited to prepare in times of peace for the necessities of sanitary service in times of war. They gather and store gifts of money and supplies; arrange hospitals, ambulances, methods of transportation of wounded men, bureaus of information, correspondence, &c. All that the most ingenious philanthropy could devise and execute has been attempted in this direction. In the Franco–Prussian war this was abundantly tested. … This society had its inception in the mind of Monsieur Henri Dunant, a Swiss gentleman, who was ably seconded in his views by Monsieur Gustave Moynier and Dr. Louis Appia, of Geneva."

_History of the Red Cross (Washington, 1883)._

RED FORTRESS, The. The Alhambra.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1238-1273.

RED LAND, The.

See VEHMGERICHTS.

RED LEGS.

See JAYHAWKERS.

RED RIVER COMPANY AND SETTLEMENT. RIEL'S REBELLION.

See CANADA: A. D. 1869-1873.

RED RIVER EXPEDITION.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (MARCH-MAY: LOUISIANA).

RED ROBE, Counsellors of the.

See VENICE: A. D. 1032-1319.

RED TERROR, The.

The later period of the French Reign of Terror, when the guillotine was busiest, is sometimes so called.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1794-1795 (JULY-APRIL,).

REDAN, Assaults on the (1855).

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1854-1856.

REDEMPTIONERS.

"Redemptioners, or term slaves, as they were sometimes called, constituted in the early part of the 18th century a peculiar feature of colonial society. They were recruited from among all manner of people in the old world, and through this channel Europe emptied upon America, not only the virtuous poor and oppressed of her population, but the vagrants, felons, and the dregs of her communities. … There were two kinds of redemptioners: 'indented servants,' who had bound themselves to their masters for a term of years previous to their leaving the old country; and 'free–willers,' who, being without money and desirous of emigrating, agreed with the captains of ships to allow themselves and their families to be sold on arrival, for the captain's advantage, and thus repay costs of passage and other expenses."

A. D. Mellick, Jr., The Story of an Old Farm, chapter 11.

REDEMPTORISTS, The.

The members of the congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, founded by St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori, in 1732, are commonly known as Redemptorists. The congregation is especially devoted to apostolic work among neglected classes of people. It has monasteries in several parts of Europe.

REDONES, The.

See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.

REDSTICKS, The.

This name was given to the hostile Creek Indians of Florida.

See FLORIDA: A. D. 1816-1818.

REDUCTIONS IN PARAGUAY, The Jesuit.

See PARAGUAY: A. D. 1608-1873.

REEVE.

See GEREFA; and MARGRAVE.

REFERENDARIUS.

See CHANCELLOR.

REFERENDUM AND INITIATIVE, The Swiss.

"A popular vote under the name Referendum was known in the valleys of Graubunden and Wallis as early as the 16th century. Here existed small federations of communities who regulated certain matters of general concern by means of assemblies of delegates from each village. These conventions were not allowed to decide upon any important measure finally, but must refer the matter to the various constituencies. If a majority of these approved, the act might be passed at the next assembly. {2628} This primitive system lasted till the French invasion of 1798, and was again established in Graubünden in 1815. The word Referendum was also used by the old federal diets, in which there were likewise no comprehensive powers of legislation. If not already instructed the delegates must vote 'ad referendum' and carry all questions to the home government. The institution as now known is a product of this century. It originated in the canton of St. Gallen in 1830, where at the time the constitution was undergoing revision. As a compromise between the party which strove for pure democracy and that desiring representative government, it was provided that all laws should be submitted to popular vote if a respectable number of voters so demanded. Known at first by the name Veto, this system slowly found its way into several of the German-speaking cantons, so that soon after the adoption of the federal constitution five were employing the optional Referendum. Other forms of popular legislation were destined to find wider acceptance, but at present [1891] in eight states, including three of the Romance tongue, laws must be submitted on request. … The usual limit of time during which the petition must be signed is 30 days. These requests are directed to the Executive Council of the state, and that body is obliged, within a similar period after receiving the same, to appoint a day for the vote. The number of signers required varies from 500 in the little canton Zug to 6,000 in St. Gallen, or from one-tenth to one–fifth of all the voters. Some states provide that in connection with the vote on the bill as a whole, an expression may be taken on separate points. Custom varies as to the number of votes required to veto a law. Some fix the minimum at a majority of those taking part in the election, and others at a majority of all citizens, whether voting or not. In case the vote is against the bill, the matter is referred by the Executive Council to the legislature. This body, after examining into the correctness of the returns, passes a resolution declaring its own act to be void. By means of the Initiative or Imperative Petition, the order of legislation just described is reversed, since the impulse to make law is received from below instead of above. The method of procedure is about as follows: Those who are interested in the passage of a new law prepare either a full draft of such a bill or a petition containing the points desired to be covered, with the reasons for its enactment, and then bring the matter before the public for the purpose of obtaining signatures. Endorsement may be given either by actually signing the petition or by verbal assent to it. The latter form of consent is indicated either in the town meetings of the communes or by appearing before the official in charge of the petition and openly asking that his vote be given for it. If, in the various town meetings of the canton taken together, a stated number of affirmative votes are given for the petition, the effect is the same as if the names of voters had been signed. … The number of names required is about the same in proportion to the whole body of voters as for the Optional Referendum. The requisite number of signatures having been procured, the petition is carried to the legislature of the canton. This body must take the matter into consideration within a specified time (Solothurn, two months), and prepare a completed draft in accordance with the request. It may also at the same time present an alternate proposition which expresses its own ideas of the matter, so that voters may take their choice. In any case the legislature gives an opinion on the project, as to its desirability or propriety, and the public has thus a report of its own select committee for guidance. The bill is then submitted to the voters, and on receiving the assent of a majority, and having been promulgated by the executive authority, becomes a law of the land."

J. M. Vincent, State and Federal Government in Switzerland, chapter 13.

"Between 1874 and 1886, the federal legislature passed 113 laws and resolutions which were capable of being submitted to the referendum. Of these only 19 were subjected to the popular vote, and of these last 13 were rejected and 6 adopted. The strong opposing views, which are held in Switzerland regarding the expediency of the referendum, indicate that this is one of the features of the government which is open to future discussion."

B. Moses, The Federal Government of Switzerland, page 119.

See, also, SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1848-1890.

"A plébiscite is a mass vote of the French people by which a Revolutionary or Imperial Executive obtains for its policy, or its crimes, the apparent sanction or condonation of France. Frenchmen are asked at the moment, and in the form most convenient to the statesmen or conspirators who rule in Paris, to say 'Aye' or 'No' whether they will, or will not, accept a given Constitution or a given policy. The crowd of voters are expected to reply in accordance to the wishes or the orders of the Executive, and the expectation always has met, and an observer may confidently predict always will meet, with fulfilment. The plébiscite is a revolutionary, or at least abnormal, proceeding. It is not preceded by debate. The form and nature of the question to be submitted to the nation is chosen and settled by the men in power. Rarely, indeed, when a plébiscite has been taken, has the voting itself been either free or fair. Taine has a strange tale to tell of the methods by which a Terrorist faction, when all but crushed by general odium, extorted from the country by means of the plébiscite a sham assent to the prolongation of revolutionary despotism. The credulity of partisanship can nowadays hardly induce even Imperialists to imagine that the plébiscites which sanctioned the establishment of the Empire, which declared Louis Napoleon President for life, which first re-established Imperialism, and then approved more or less Liberal reforms, fatal at bottom to the Imperial system, were the free, deliberate, carefully considered votes of the French nation given after the people had heard all that could be said for and against the proposed innovation. … The essential characteristics, however, the lack of which deprives a French plébiscite of all moral significance, are the undoubted properties of the Swiss Referendum. When a law revising the Constitution is placed before the people of Switzerland, every citizen throughout the land has enjoyed the opportunity of learning the merits and demerits of the proposed alteration. The subject has been 'threshed out,' as the expression goes, in Parliament; the scheme, whatever its worth, has received the deliberately given approval of the elected Legislature; it comes before the people with as much authority in its favour as a Bill which in England has passed through both Houses."

_A. V. Dicey, The Referendum, (Contemporary Review, April, 1890)._

{2629}

"A judgment of the referendum must be based on the working of the electoral machinery, on the interest shown by the voters, and on the popular discrimination between good and bad measures. The process of invoking and voting on a referendum is simple and easily worked, if not used too often. Although the Assembly has, in urgent cases, the constitutional right to set a resolution in force at once, it always allows from three to eight months' delay so as to permit the opponents of a measure to lodge their protests against it. Voluntary committees take charge of the movement, and, if a law is unpopular, little difficulty is found in getting together the necessary thirty thousand or fifty thousand signatures. Only thrice has the effort failed when made. When, as in 1882, the signatures run up to 180,000, the labor is severe, for every signature is examined by the national executive to see whether it is attested as the sign manual of a voter; sometimes, in an interested canton, as many as 70 per cent. of the voters have signed the demand. The system undoubtedly leads to public discussion: newspapers criticise; addresses and counter addresses are issued; cantonal councils publicly advise voters; and of late the federal Assembly sends out manifestoes against pending initiatives. The federal Executive Council distributes to the cantons enough copies of the proposed measure, so that one may be given to each voter. The count of the votes is made by the Executive Council as a returning-board. Inasmuch as the Swiss are unfamiliar with election frauds, and there has been but one very close vote in the national referenda, the count is not difficult, but there are always irregularities, especially where more than one question is presented to the voters at the same time. What is the effect of the popular votes, thus carried out? The following table, based on official documents, shows the results for the twenty years, 1875-1894;

Passed Rejected Total

(a.) Constitutional amendments proposed by the Assembly (referendum obligatory) 1 6 7

(b.) Constitutional amendments proposed by popular initiative 2 1 *4 (50,000 signatures)

(c.) Laws passed by the Assembly 14 6 20 (referendum demanded by 30,000).

Total 17 13 31

* One measure still pending.

Making allowances for cases where more than one question has been submitted at the same time, there have been twenty-four popular votes in twenty years. In addition, most of the cantons have their own local referenda; in Zurich, for example, in these twenty years, more than one hundred other questions have been placed before the sovereign people. These numbers are large in themselves, but surprising in proportion to the total legislation. Out of 158 general acts passed by the federal Assembly from 1874 to 1892, 27 were subjected to the referendum; that is, about one-sixth are reviewed and about one-tenth are reversed. Constitutional amendments usually get through sooner or Inter, but more than two-thirds of the statutes attacked are annulled. To apply the system on such a scale in any State of our Union is plainly impossible; thirty-nine–fortieths of the statute-book must still rest, as now, on the character of the legislators. Nevertheless it may be worth while to excise the other fortieth, if experience shows that the people are more interested and wiser than their representatives, when a question is put plainly and simply before them. I must own to disappointment over the use made by the Swiss of their envied opportunity. On the twenty referenda between 1879 and 1891 the average vote in proportion to the voters was but 58.5 per cent.; in only one case did it reach 67 per cent.; and in one case—the patent law of 1887—it fell to about 40 per cent. in the Confederation, and to 9 per cent. in Canton Schwyz. On the serious and dangerous question of recognizing the right to employment, this present year, only about 56 per cent. participated. In Zurich there is a compulsory voting law, of which the curious result is that on both national and cantonal referenda many thousands of blank ballots are cast. The result of the small vote is that laws, duly considered by the national legislature and passed by considerable majorities, are often reversed by a minority of the voters. The most probable reason for this apathy is that there are too many elections—in some cantons as many as fifteen a year. Whatever the cause, Swiss voters are less interested in referenda than Swiss legislators in framing bills. … 'I am a friend of the referendum,' says an eminent member of the Executive Council, 'but I do not like the initiative.' The experience of Switzerland seems to show four things: that the Swiss voters are not deeply interested in the referendum; that the referendum is as likely to kill good as bad measures; that the initiative is more likely to suggest bad measures than good; that the referendum leads straight to the initiative. The referendum in the United States would therefore probably be an attempt to govern great communities by permanent town meeting."

_Prof. A. B. Hart, Vox Populi in Switzerland (Nation, September 13, 1894)._

ALSO IN: _A. L. Lowell, The Referendum in Switzerland and America (Atlantic Monthly, April, 1894)._

_E. P. Oberholtzer, The Referendum in America._

REFORM, Parliamentary.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1830; 1830-1832; 1865-1868, and 1884-1885.

----------REFORMATION: Start--------

REFORMATION: Bohemia.

See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1405-1415; and 1419-1434, and after.

REFORMATION: England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1527-1534, to 1558-1588.

REFORMATION: France.

See PAPACY; A. D. 1521-1535; and FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547, and after.

REFORMATION: Germany.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1516-1517, 1517, 1517-1521, 1521-1522, 1522-1525, 1525-1529, 1530-1531, 1537-1563; also GERMANY: A. D. 1517-1523, 1530-1532, 1533-1546, 1546-1552, 1552-1561; also PALATINATE OF THE RHINE; A. D. 1518-1572.

REFORMATION: Hungary.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1526-1567

REFORMATION: Ireland; its failure.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1535-1553.

REFORMATION: Netherlands.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1521-1555, and after.

REFORMATION: Piedmont.

See SAVOY AND PIEDMONT: A. D. 1559-1580.

{2630}

REFORMATION: Scotland.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1547-1557; 1557; 1558-1560; and 1561-1568.

REFORMATION: Sweden and Denmark.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1397-1527.

REFORMATION: Switzerland.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1519-1524; SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1528-1531; and GENEVA: A. D. 1504-1535; and 1536-1564.

----------REFORMATION: End--------

REFORMATION, The Counter.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1534-1540; 1537-1563; 1555-1603.

REGED.

See CUMBRIA.

REGENSBURG.

See RATISBON-under which name the town is more commonly known to English readers.

REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY, New York.

See EDUCATION, MODERN: AMERICA: A. D. 1746-1787.

REGICIDES AT NEW HAVEN, The.

See CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1660-1664.

REGILLUS, Lake, Battle at.

In the legendary history of the Roman kings it is told that the last of the Tarquins strove long to regain his throne, with the help of the Etruscans first, afterwards of the Latins, and that the question was finally settled in a great battle fought with the latter, near the Lake Regillus, in which the Romans were helped by Castor and Pollux, in person.

_Livy, History, II. 19._

REGNI, The.

See BRITAIN, CELTIC TRIBES.

REGULATORS OF NORTH CAROLINA.

See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1766-1771.

REGULBIUM.

One of the fortified Roman towns in Britain on the Kentish coast,—modern Reculver.

T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 449-473.

REGULUS, and the Carthaginians.

See PUNIC WAR, THE FIRST.

REICHSTAG.

See DIET, THE GERMANIC.

REIGN OF TERROR, The.

See TERROR.

REIS EFFENDI.

See SUBLIME PORTE.

REMI, The.

See BELGÆ.

REMO, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.

REMONSTRANTS AND COUNTER-REMONSTRANTS.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1603-1619.

REMOVAL OF THE DEPOSITS.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1833-1836.

RENAISSANCE, The.

"The word Renaissance has of late years received a more extended significance than that which is implied in our English equivalent—the Revival of Learning. We use it to denote the whole transition from the Middle Ages to the Modern World; and though it is possible to assign certain limits to the period during which this transition took place, we cannot fix on any dates so positively as to say—between this year and that the movement was accomplished. To do so would be like trying to name the days on which spring in any particular season began and ended. Yet we speak of spring as different from winter and from summer. … By the term Renaissance, or new birth, is indicated a natural movement, not to be explained by this or that characteristic, but to be accepted as an effort of humanity for which at length the time had come, and in the onward progress of which we still participate. The history of the Renaissance is not the history of arts, or of sciences, or of literature, or even of nations. It is the history of the attainment of self-conscious freedom by the human spirit manifested in the European races. It is no mere political mutation, no new fashion of art, no restoration of classical standards of taste. The arts and the inventions, the knowledge and the books which suddenly became vital at the time of the Renaissance, had long lain neglected on the shores of the Dead Sea which we call the Middle Ages. It was not their discovery which caused the Renaissance. But it was the intellectual energy, the spontaneous outburst of intelligence, which enabled mankind at that moment to make use of them. The force then generated still continues, vital and expansive, in the spirit of the modern world. … The reason why Italy took the lead in the Renaissance was, that Italy possessed a language, a favourable climate, political freedom, and commercial prosperity, at a time when other nations were still semi-barbarous. … It was … at the beginning of the 14th century, when Italy had lost indeed the heroic spirit which we admire in her Communes of the 13th, but had gained instead ease, wealth, magnificence, and that repose which springs from long prosperity, that the new age at last began. … The great achievements of the Renaissance were the discovery of the world and the discovery of man. Under these two formulæ may be classified all the phenomena which properly belong to this period. The discovery of the world divides itself into two branches—the exploration of the globe, and the systematic exploration of the universe which is in fact what we call Science. Columbus made known America in 1492; the Portuguese rounded the Cape in 1497; Copernicus explained the solar system in 1507. It is not necessary to add anything to this plain statement. … In the discovery of man … it is possible to trace a twofold process. Man in his temporal relations, illustrated by Pagan antiquity, and man in his spiritual relations, illustrated by Biblical antiquity: these are the two regions, at first apparently distinct, afterwards found to be interpenetrative, which the critical and inquisitive genius of the Renaissance opened for investigation. In the former of these regions we find two agencies at work, art and scholarship. … Through the instrumentality of art, and of all the ideas which art introduced into daily life, the Renaissance wrought for the modern world a real resurrection of the body. … It was scholarship which revealed to men the wealth of their own minds, the dignity of human thought, the value of human speculation, the importance of human life regarded as a thing apart from religious rules and dogmas. … The Renaissance opened to the whole reading public the treasure-houses of Greek and Latin literature. At the same time the Bible in its original tongues was rediscovered. Mines of Oriental learning were laid bare for the students of the Jewish and Arabic traditions. What we may call the Aryan and the Semitic revelations were for the first time subjected to something like a critical comparison. With unerring instinct the men of the Renaissance named the voluminous subject-matter of scholarship 'Litteræ Humaniores,' the more human literature, the literature that humanises [hence the term Humanism]. … Not only did scholarship restore the classics and encourage literary criticism; it also restored the text of the Bible, and encouraged theological criticism. In the wake of theological freedom followed a free philosophy, no longer subject to the dogmas of the Church. … On the one side Descartes, and Bacon, and Spinoza, and Locke are sons of the Renaissance, champions of new-found philosophical freedom; on the other side, Luther is a son of the Renaissance, the herald of new-found religious freedom."

J. A. Symonds, Renaissance in Italy: Age of the Despots, chapter 1.

{2631}

"The Renaissance, so far as painting is concerned, may be said to have culminated between the years 1470 and 1550. These dates, it must be frankly admitted, are arbitrary; nor is there anything more unprofitable than the attempt to define by strict chronology the moments of an intellectual growth so complex, so unequally progressive, and so varied as that of Italian art. All that the historian can hope to do, is to strike a mean between his reckoning of years and his more subtle calculations based on the emergence of decisive genius in special men. An instance of such compromise is afforded by Lionardo da Vinci, who belongs, as far as dates go, to the last half of the fifteenth century, but who must on any estimate of his achievement, be classed with Michael Angelo among the final and supreme masters of the full Renaissance. To violate the order of time, with a view to what may here be called the morphology of Italian art, is, in his case, a plain duty. Bearing this in mind, it is still possible to regard the eighty years above mentioned as a period no longer of promise and preparation but of fulfilment and accomplishment. Furthermore, the thirty years at the close of the fifteenth century may be taken as one epoch in this climax of the art, while the first half of the sixteenth forms a second. Within the former falls the best work of Mantegna, Perugino, Francia, the Bellini, Signorelli, Fra Bartolommeo. To the latter we may reckon Michael Angelo, Raphael, Giorgione, Correggio, Titian, and Andrea del Sarto. Lionardo da Vinci, though belonging chronologically to the former epoch, ranks first among the masters of the latter; and to this also may be given Tintoretto, though his life extended far beyond it to the last years of the century."

J. A. Symonds, Renaissance in Italy: The Fine Arts, chapters 4-6.

"It would be difficult to find any period in the history of modern Europe equal in importance with that distinguished in history under the name of the Renaissance. Standing midway between the decay of the Middle Ages and the growth of modern institutions, we may say that it was already dawning in the days of Dante Alighieri, in whose immortal works we find the synthesis of a dying age and the announcement of the birth of a new era. This new era—the Renaissance—began with Petrarch and his learned contemporaries, and ended with Martin Luther and the Reformation, which event not only produced signal changes in the history of those nations which remained Catholic, but transported beyond the Alps the centre of gravity of European culture."

P. Villari, Niccolo Machiavelli and his Times, volume 1, chapter 1.

_J. Burckhardt, The Civilization of the Period of the Renaissance in Italy._

On the communication of the movement of the Renaissance to France and Europe in general, as a notable consequence of the invasion of Italy by Charles VIII.

See ITALY: A. D. 1494-1496. See, also, ITALY: 14TH CENTURY, and 15-16TH CENTURIES; FLORENCE: A. D. 1469-1492; VENICE: 16TH CENTURY; FRANCE: A. D. 1492-1515, and 16TH CENTURY; EDUCATION: RENAISSANCE; ENGLAND: 10-16TH CENTURIES.

[Transcriber's note: For additional commentary on the Renaissance by James J. Walsh, see:

The Thirteenth, Greatest of Centuries, https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38680

Medieval Medicine https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43300

The Century of Columbus https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/35095

The Popes and Science https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34019

Catholic Churchmen in Science https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34067

Education: How Old The New https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/34938 ]

RÉNE (called The Good), Duke of Anjou and Lorraine and Count of Provence, A. D. 1434-1480.

King of Naples, A. D. 1435-1442.

See ANJOU: A. D. 1206-1442.

RENSSELAER, Van.

See VAN RENSSELAER.

RENSSELAERWICK, The Patroon colony and manor of.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1621-1646; also, LIVINGSTON MANOR.

REPARTIMIENTOS. ENCOMIENDAS.

Columbus, as governor of Hispaniola (Hayti), made an arrangement "by which the caciques in their vicinity, instead of paying tribute, should furnish parties of their subjects, free Indians, to assist the colonists in the cultivation of their lands: a kind of feudal service, which was the origin of the repartimientos, or distributions of free Indians among the colonists, afterwards generally adopted, and shamefully abused, throughout the Spanish colonies; a source of intolerable hardships and oppressions to the unhappy natives, and which greatly contributed to exterminate them from the island of Hispaniola. Columbus considered the island in the light of a conquered country, and arrogated to himself all the rights of a conqueror, in the name of the sovereigns for whom he fought."

W. Irving, Life and Voyages of Columbus, book 12, chapter 4 (volume 2).

"The words 'repartimiento' and 'encomienda' are often used indiscriminately by Spanish authors; but, speaking accurately, 'repartimiento' means the first apportionment of Indians,—'encomienda' the apportionment of any Spaniard's share which might become 'vacant' by his death or banishment."

Sir A. Helps, Spanish Conquest in America, book 6, chapter 2, foot-note, (volume 1).

"'Repartimiento,' a distribution; 'repartir,' to divide; 'encomienda,' a charge, a commandery; 'encomendar,' to give in charge; 'encomendero,' he who holds an encomienda. In Spain an encomienda, as here understood, was a dignity in the four military orders, endowed with a rental, and held by certain members of the order. It was acquired through the liberality of the crown as a reward for services in the wars against the Moors. The lands taken from the Infidels were divided among Christian commanders; the inhabitants of those lands were crown tenants, and life-rights to their services were given these commanders. In the legislation of the Indies, encomienda was the patronage conferred by royal favor over a portion of the natives, coupled with the obligation to teach them the doctrines of the Church, and to defend their persons and property. … The system begun in the New World by Columbus, Bobadilla, and Ovando was continued by Vasco Nuñez, Pedrarias, Cortés, and Pizarro, and finally became general."

H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 1, page 262, foot-note.

See, also, SLAVERY, MODERN: OF THE INDIANS.

REPEAL OF THE UNION OF IRELAND WITH GREAT BRITAIN, The Agitation for.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1811-1829, 1840-1841; and 1841-1848.

REPETUNDÆ.

See CALPURNIAN LAW.

REPHAIM, The.

See HORITES, THE.

REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT, 1884.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1884-1885.

{2632}

REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.

"This [representative government] is the great distinction between free states of the modern type, whether kingly or republican, and the city-commonwealths of old Greece. It is the great political invention of Teutonic Europe, the one form of political life to which neither Thucydides, Aristotle, nor Polybios ever saw more than the faintest approach. In Greece it was hardly needed, but in Italy a representative system would have delivered Rome from the fearful choice which she had to make between anarchy and despotism."

E. A. Freeman, History of Federal Government, chapter 2.

"Examples of nearly every form of government are to be found in the varied history of Greece: but nowhere do we find a distinct system of political representation. There is, indeed, a passage in Aristotle which implies a knowledge of the principles of representation. He speaks of 'a moderate oligarchy, in which men of a certain census elect a council entrusted with the deliberative power, but bound to exercise this power agreeably to established laws.' There can be no better definition of representation than this: but it appears to express his theoretical conception of a government, rather than to describe any example within his own experience. Such a system was incompatible with the democratic constitutions of the city republics: but in their international councils and leagues, we may perceive a certain resemblance to it. There was an approach to representation in the Amphictyonic Council, and in the Achaian League; and the several cities of the Lycian League had a number of votes in the assembly, proportioned to their size—the first example of the kind—being a still nearer approximation to the principles of representation. But it was reserved for later ages to devise the great scheme of representative government, under which large States may enjoy as much liberty as the walled cities of Greece, and individual citizens may exercise their political rights as fully as the Athenians, without the disorders and perils of pure democracy."

Sir T. E. May, Democracy in Europe, volume 1, chapter 3.

"The most interesting, and on the whole the most successful, experiments in popular government, are those which have frankly recognised the difficulty under which it labours. At the head of these we must place the virtually English discovery of government by Representation, which caused Parliamentary institutions to be preserved in these islands from the destruction which overtook them everywhere else, and to devolve as an inheritance upon the United States."

Sir H. S. Maine, Popular Government, page 92.

"To find the real origin of the modern representative system we must turn to the assemblies of the second grade in the early German states. In these the freemen of the smaller locality—the Hundred or Canton—came together in a public meeting which possessed no doubt legislative power over matters purely local, but whose most important function seems to have been judicial—a local court, presided over by a chief who suggested and announced the verdict, which, however, derived its validity from the decision of the assembly, or, in later times, of a number of their body appointed to act for the whole. Those local courts, probably, as has been suggested, because of the comparatively restricted character of the powers which they possessed, were destined to a long life. On the continent they lasted until the very end of the middle ages, when they were generally overthrown by the introduction of the Roman law, too highly scientific for their simple methods. In England they lasted until they furnished the model, and probably the suggestion, for a far more important institution—the House of Commons. How many grades of these local courts there were on the continent below the national assembly is a matter of dispute. In England there was clearly a series of three. The lowest was the township assembly, concerned only with matters of very slight importance and surviving still in the English vestry meeting and the New England town-meeting. Above this was the hundred's court formed upon a distinctly representative principle, the assembly being composed, together with certain other men, of four representatives sent from each township. Then, third, the tribal assembly of the original little settlement, or, the small kingdom of the early conquest, seems to have survived when this kingdom was swallowed up in a larger one, and to have originated a new grade in the hierarchy of assemblies, the county assembly or shire court. At any rate, whatever may have been its origin, and whatever may be the final decision of the vigorously disputed question, whether in the Frankish state there were any assemblies or courts for the counties distinct from the courts of the hundreds, it is certain that courts of this grade came into existence in England and were of the utmost importance there. In them, too, the representative principle was distinctly expressed, each township of the shire being represented, as in the hundred's court, by four chosen representatives. These courts, also, pass essentially unchanged through the English feudal and absolutist period, maintaining local self-government and preserving more of the primitive freedom than survived elsewhere. We shall see more in detail, at a later point, how the representative principle originating in them is transferred to the national legislature, creating our modern national representative system—the most important single contribution to the machinery of government made in historic times, with the possible exception of federal government."

G. B. Adams, Civilization during the Middle Ages, chapter 5.

For an account of the rise and development of the representative system in the English Parliament.

See PARLIAMENT, THE ENGLISH.

REPRESENTATIVES, House of.

See CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES.

REPUBLICAN PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES, The earlier.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1789-1792; 1798; and 1825-1828.

The later.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1854-1855.

Liberal and Radical wings.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1872.

REPUBLICANS, Independent.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1884.

RESACA, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (MAY: GEORGIA).

Hood's attack on.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER: GEORGIA).

RESACA DE LA PALMA, Battle of.

See MEXICO: A. D. 1846-1847.

{2633}

RESAINA, Battle of.

A battle, fought A. D. 241, in which Sapor I. the Persian king, was defeated by the Roman emperor Gordian, in Mesopotamia.

G. Rawlinson, Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy, chapter 4.

RESCH-GLUTHA, The. The "Prince of the Captivity."

See JEWS: A. D. 200-400.

RESCISSORY, Act.

See SCOTLAND: A.D. 1660-1666.

RESCRIPTS, Roman Imperial.

See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.

RESEN.

See ROTENNU, THE.

RESIDENCIA.

"Residencia was the examination or account taken of the official acts of an executive or judicial officer [Spanish] during the term of his residence within the province of his jurisdiction, and while in the exercise of the functions of his office. … While an official was undergoing his residencia it was equivalent to his being under arrest, as he could neither exercise office nor, except in certain cases specified, leave the place."

H. H. Bancroft, History of the Pacific States, volume 1, page 250, foot-note.

ALSO IN: F. W. Blackmar, Spanish Institutions of the Southwest, page 69.

RESIDENT AT EASTERN COURTS, The English.

See INDIA. A. D. 1877.

RESTITUTION, The Edict of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1627-1629.

RETENNU, The.

See ROTENNU, THE.

RETHEL, Battle of (1650).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1650-1651.

RETREAT OF THE TEN THOUSAND, The.

See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.

RETZ, Cardinal De, and the Fronde.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1649, to 1051-1653.

REUDIGNI, The.

See AVIONES.

REUIL, Peace of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1649.

REVERE, Paul, The ride of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (APRIL).

REVIVAL OF LEARNING.

See RENAISSANCE.

REVOLUTION, The American.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765, and after.

REVOLUTION, The English, of 1688.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1688.

REVOLUTION, The French, of 1789.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1787-1789, and after.

REVOLUTION, The French, of 1830.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1815-1830.

REVOLUTION, The French, of 1848.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1841-1848, and 1848.

REVOLUTION, The Year of.

See EUROPE (volume 2, pages 1098-1099): ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849: GERMANY: A. D. 1848 (MARCH), to 1848-1850; AUSTRIA: A. D. 1848, to 1848-1850; HUNGARY: A. D. 1847-1849; FRANCE: A. D. 1841-1848, and 1848.

REVOLUTIONARY TRIBUNAL, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (FEBRUARY-APRIL).

REYDANIYA, Battle of (1517).

See TURKS: A. D. 1481-1520.

REYNOSA, Battle of.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1808 (SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER).

----------RHÆTIA: Start--------

RHÆTIA. Rhætians, Vindelicians, etc.

"The Alps from the Simplon pass to the sources of the Drave were occupied by the Rhætians. Beyond the Inn and the Lake of Constance, the plain which slopes gently towards the Danube was known by the name of Vindelicia. Styria, the Kammergut of Salzburg, and the southern half of the Austrian Archduchy, belonged to the tribes of Noricum, while the passes between that country and Italy were held by the Carnians." The Roman conquest of this Alpine region was effected in the years 16 and 15 B. C. by the two stepsons of the Emperor Augustus, Tiberius and Drusus. In addition to the people mentioned above, the Camuni, the Vennones, the Brenni and the Genauni were crushed. "The free tribes of the eastern Alps appear then for the first time in history, only to disappear again for a thousand years."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 35.

See, also, TYROL.

RHÆTIA: Settlement of the Alemanni in.

See ALEMANNI: A. D. 496-504.

----------RHÆTIA: End--------

RHAGES.

See RAGA.

RHEGIUM, Siege of (B. C. 387).

Rhegium, an important Greek city, in the extreme south of Italy, on the strait which separates the peninsula from Sicily, incurred the hostility of the tyrant of Syracuse, the elder Dionysius, by scornfully refusing him a bride whom he solicited. The savage-tempered despot made several attempts without success to surprise the town, and finally laid siege to it with a powerful army and fleet. The inhabitants resisted desperately for eleven months, at the end of which time (B. C. 387) they were starved into surrender. "Dionysius, on entering Rhegium, found heaps of unburied corpses, besides 6,000 citizens in the last stage of emaciation. All these captives were sent to Syracuse, where those who could provide a mina (about £3. 17s.) were allowed to ransom themselves, while the rest were sold as slaves. After such a period of suffering, the number of those who retained the means of ransom was probably very small."

G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 83.

RHEIMS: Origin of the name.

See BELGÆ.

RHEIMS: A. D. 1429. The crowning of Charles VII.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1429-1431.

RHEIMS: A. D. 1814. Capture by the Allies and recovery by Napoleon.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).

RHEINFELDEN, Siege and Battle of (1638).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1634-1639.

RHETRÆ.

See SPARTA: THE CONSTITUTION, &c.

RHINE, The Circle of the.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1493-1519.

RHINE, The Confederation of the.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806; 1806 (JANUARY-AUGUST); 1813 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER); and FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).

RHINE, Roman passage of the.

See USIPETES AND TENCTHERI.

RHINE LEAGUE, The.

The Rhine League was one of several Bunds, or confederations formed among the German trading towns in the middle ages, for the common protection of their commerce. It comprised the towns of southwest Germany and the Lower Rhine provinces. Prominent among its members were Cologne, Wessel and Munster. Cologne, already a large and flourishing city, the chief market of the trade of the Rhine lands, was a member, likewise, of the Hanseatic League.

See HANSA TOWNS.

J. Yeats, Growth and Vicissitudes of Commerce, page 158.

See, also, CITIES, IMPERIAL, AND FREE, OF GERMANY; and FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

{2634}

----------RHODE ISLAND: Start--------

RHODE ISLAND: The aboriginal inhabitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1631-1636. Roger Williams in Massachusetts. His offenses against Boston Puritanism. His banishment.

On the 5th of February, 1631, "the ship Lyon arrived at Nantasket, with twenty passengers and a large store of provisions. Her arrival was most timely, for the [Massachusetts] colonists were reduced to the last exigencies of famine. Many had already died of want, and many more were rescued from imminent peril by this providential occurrence. A public fast had been appointed for the day succeeding that on which the ship reached Boston. It was changed to a general thanksgiving. There was another incident connected with the arrival of this ship, which made it an era, not only in the affairs of Massachusetts, but in the history of America. She brought to the shores of New England the founder of a new State, the exponent of a new philosophy, the intellect that was to harmonize religious differences, and soothe the asperities of the New World; a man whose clearness of mind enabled him to deduce, from the mass of crude speculations which abounded in the 17th century, a proposition so comprehensive, that it is difficult to say whether its application has produced the most beneficial result upon religion, or morals, or politics. This man was Roger Williams, then about thirty-two years of age. He was a scholar, well versed in the ancient and some of the modern tongues, an earnest inquirer after truth, and an ardent friend of popular liberty as well for the mind as for the body. As a 'godly minister,' he was welcomed to the society of the Puritans, and soon invited by the church in Salem to supply the place of the lamented Higginson, as an assistant to their pastor Samuel Skelton. The invitation was accepted, but the term of his ministry was destined to be brief. The authorities at Boston remonstrated with those at Salem against the reception of Williams. The Court at its next session addressed a letter to Mr. Endicott to this effect: 'That whereas Mr. Williams had refused to join with the congregation at Boston, because they would not make a public declaration of their repentance for having communion with the churches of England, while they lived there; and, besides, had declared his opinion that the magistrate might not punish the breach of the Sabbath, nor any other offence, as it was a breach of the first table; therefore they marvelled that they would choose him without advising with the council, and withal desiring him, that they would forbear to proceed till they had conferred about it.' This attempt of the magistrates of Boston to control the election of a church officer at Salem, met with the rebuke it so richly merited. The people were not ignorant of the hostility their invitation had excited; yet on the very day the remonstrance was written, they settled Williams as their minister. The ostensible reasons for this hostility are set forth in the letter above cited. That they were to a great extent the real ones cannot be questioned. The ecclesiastical polity of the Puritans sanctioned this interference. Their church platform approved it. Positive statute would seem to require it. Nevertheless, we cannot but think that, underlying all this, there was a secret stimulus of ambition on the part of the Boston Court to strengthen its authority over the prosperous and, in some respects, rival colony of Salem. … As a political measure this interference failed of its object. The people resented so great a stretch of authority, and the church disregarded the remonstrance. … What could not as yet be accomplished by direct intervention of the Court was effected in a surer manner. The fearlessness of Williams in denouncing the errors of the times, and especially the doctrine of the magistrate's power in religion, gave rise to a system of persecution which, before the close of the summer, obliged him to seek refuge beyond the jurisdiction of Massachusetts in the more liberal colony of the Pilgrims. At Plymouth 'he was well accepted as an assistant in the ministry to Mr. Ralph Smith, then pastor of the church there.' The principal men of the colony treated him with marked attention. … The opportunities there presented for cultivating an intimate acquaintance with the chief Sachems of the neighboring tribes were well improved, and exerted an important influence, not only in creating the State of which he was to be the founder, but also in protecting all New England amid the horrors of savage warfare. Ousamequin, or Massasoit, as he is usually called, was the Sachem of the Wampanoags, called also the Pokanoket tribe, inhabiting the Plymouth territory. His seat was at Mount Hope, in what is now the town of Bristol, R. I. With this chief, the early and steadfast friend of the English, Williams established a friendship which proved of the greatest service at the time of his exile."

S. G. Arnold, History of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, volume 1, chapter 1.

Williams "remained at Plymouth, teaching in the church, but supporting himself by manual labor, nearly two years. His ministry was popular in the main and his person universally liked. Finally, however, he advanced some opinions which did not suit the steady-going Plymouth elders, and therefore, departing 'something abruptly,' he returned to Salem. There he acted as assistant to Mr. Skelton, the aged pastor of the church, and when Mr. Skelton died, less than a year later, became his successor. At Salem he was again under the surveillance of the rulers and elders of the Bay, and they were swift to make him sensible of it. He had written in Plymouth, for the Plymouth Governor and Council a treatise on the Massachusetts Patent, in which he had maintained his doctrine that the King could not give the settlers a right to take away from the natives their land without paying them for it. He was not a lawyer but an ethical teacher, and it was doubtless as such that he maintained this opinion. In our day its ethical correctness is not disputed. It has always been good Rhode Island doctrine. He also criticised the patent because in it King James claimed to be the first Christian prince who discovered New England, and because he called Europe Christendom or the Christian World. Williams did not scruple to denounce these formal fictions in downright Saxon as lies. He does not appear to have been, at any period of his life, a paragon of conventional propriety. A rumor of the treatise got abroad, though it remained unpublished. The patent happened to be a sensitive point with the magistrates. {2635} It had been granted in England to an English trading company, and its transfer to Massachusetts was an act of questionable legality. Moreover it was exceedingly doubtful whether the rulers, in exercising the extensive civil jurisdiction which they claimed under it, did not exceed their authority. They were apprehensive of proceedings to forfeit it, and therefore were easily alarmed at any turning of attention to it. When they heard of the treatise they sent for it, and, having got it, summoned the author 'to be censured.' He appeared in an unexpectedly placable mood, and not only satisfied their minds in regard to some of its obscurer passages, but offered it, since it had served its purpose, to be burnt. The magistrates, propitiated by his complaisance, appeared to have accepted the offer as equivalent to a promise of silence, though it is impossible that he, the uncompromising champion of aboriginal rights, can ever have meant to give, or even appear to give, such a promise. Accordingly when they heard soon afterwards that he was discussing the patent they were deeply incensed, though it was doubtless the popular curiosity excited by their own indiscreet action which elicited the discussion. Their anger was aggravated by another doctrine then put forth by him, namely, that an oath ought not to be tendered to an unregenerate, or, as we should say, an unreligious man, because an oath is an act of worship, and cannot be taken by such a man without profanation. … He also taught that an oath being an act of worship, could not properly be exacted from anyone against his will, and that even Christians ought not to desecrate it by taking it for trivial causes. … The magistrates again instituted proceedings against him, at first subjecting him to the ordeal of clerical visitation, then formally summoning him to answer for himself before the General Court. At the same time the Salem church was arraigned for contempt in choosing him as pastor while he was under question. The court, however, did not proceed to judgment, but allowed them both further time for repentance. It so happened that the inhabitants of Salem had a petition before the court for 'some land at Marblehead Neck, which they did challenge as belonging to their town.' The court, when the petition came up, refused to grant it until the Salem church should give satisfaction for its contempt, thus virtually affirming that the petitioners had no claim to justice even, so long as they adhered to their recusant pastor. Williams was naturally indignant. He induced his church—'enchanted his church,' says Cotton Mather—to send letters to the sister churches, appealing to them to admonish the magistrates and deputies of their 'heinous sin.' He wrote the letters himself. His Massachusetts contemporaries say he was 'unlamblike.' Undoubtedly they heard no gentle bleating in those letters, but rather the reverberating roar of the lion chafing in his rage. The churches repelled the appeal; and then turning to the Salem church, besieged it only the more assiduously, laboring with it, nine with one, to alienate it from its pastor. What could the one church do,—with the magistracy against it, the clergy against it, the churches and the people against it, muttering their vague anathemas, and Salem town suffering unjustly on its account,—what could it do but yield? It yielded virtually if not yet in form; and Williams stood forth alone in his opposition to the united power of Church and State. … The fateful court day came at last. The court assembles, magistrates and deputies, with the clergy to advise them. Williams appears, not to be tried, but to be sentenced unless he will retract. He reaffirms his opinions. Mr. Hooker, a famous clerical dialectician, is chosen to dispute with him, and the solemn mockery of confutation begins. … Hour after hour, he argues unsubdued, till the sun sinks low and the weary court adjourns. On the morrow [Friday, October 9, 1635], still persisting in his glorious 'contumacy,' he is sentenced, the clergy all save one advising, to be banished, or, to adopt the apologetic but felicitous euphemism of his great adversary, John Cotton, 'enlarged' out of Massachusetts. He was allowed at first six weeks, afterwards until spring, to depart. But in January the magistrates having heard that he was drawing others to his opinion, and that his purpose was to erect a plantation about Narragansett Bay, 'from whence the infection would easily spread,' concluded to send him by ship, then ready, to England [see MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1636]. The story is familiar how Williams, advised of their intent, baffled it by plunging into the wilderness, where, after being 'sorely tost for one fourteen weeks, in a bitter winter season, not knowing what bread or bed did mean,' he settled with the opening spring, on the east bank of the Seekonk, and there built and planted."

_T. Durfee, Historical Discourse: Two hundred and fiftieth Anniversary of the Settlement of Providence, 1886._

"The course pursued towards Roger Williams was not exceptional. What was done to him had been done in repeated instances before. Within the first year of its settlement the colony had passed sentence of exclusion from its territory upon no less than fourteen persons. It was the ordinary method by which a corporate body would deal with those whose presence no longer seemed desirable. Conceiving themselves to be by patent the exclusive possessors of the soil,—soil which they had purchased for the accomplishment of their personal and private ends,—the colonists never doubted their competency to fix the terms on which others should be allowed to share in their undertaking. … While there is some discrepancy in the contemporary accounts of this transaction, there is entire agreement on one point, that the assertion by Roger Williams of the doctrine of 'soul-liberty' was not the head and front of his offending. Whatever was meant by the vague charge in the final sentence that he had 'broached and divulged new and dangerous opinions, against the authority of magistrates,' it did not mean that he had made emphatic the broad doctrine of the entire separation of church and state. We have his own testimony on this point. In several allusions to the subject in his later writings,—and it can hardly be supposed that in a matter which he felt so sorely his memory would have betrayed him,—he never assigns to his opinion respecting the power of the civil magistrate more than a secondary place. He repeatedly affirms that the chief causes of his banishment were his extreme views regarding separation, and his denouncing of the patent. Had he been himself conscious of having incurred the hostility of the Massachusetts colony for asserting the great principle with which he was afterwards identified, he would surely have laid stress upon it. … {2636} It is … clear that in the long controversy it had become covered up by other issues, and that his opponents, at least, did not regard it as his most dangerous heresy. So far as it was a mere speculative opinion it was not new. … To upbraid the Puritans as unrelenting persecutors, or extol Roger Williams as a martyr to the cause of Religious liberty, is equally wide of the real fact. On the one hand, the controversy had its origin in the passionate and precipitate zeal of a young man whose relish for disputation made him never unwilling to encounter opposition, and on the other, in the exigencies of a unique community, where the instincts of a private corporation had not yet expanded into the more liberal policy of a body politic. If we cannot impute to the colony any large statesmanship, so neither can we wholly acquit Roger Williams of the charge of mixing great principles with some whimsical conceits. The years which he passed in Massachusetts were years of discipline and growth, when he doubtless already cherished in his active brain the germs of the principles which he afterwards developed; but the fruit was destined to be ripened under another sky."

J. L. Diman, Orations and Essays, pages 114-117.

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1636. The wanderings of the exiled Roger Williams. His followers. The settlement at Providence.

The little that is known of the wanderings of Roger Williams after his banishment from Salem, until his settlement at Providence, is derived from a letter which he wrote more than thirty years afterwards (June 22, 1670) to Major Mason, the hero of the Pequot War. In that letter he says: "When I was unkindly and unchristianly, as I believe, driven from my house and land and wife and children, (in the midst of a New England winter, now about thirty-five years past,) at Salem, that ever honored Governor, Mr. Winthrop, privately wrote to me to steer my course to Narragansett Bay and Indians, for many high and heavenly and public ends, encouraging me, from the freeness of the place from any English claims or patents. I took his prudent motion as a hint and voice from God, and waving all other thoughts and motions, I steered my course from Salem (though in winter snow, which I feel yet) unto these parts, wherein I may say Peniel, that is, I have seen the face of God. … I first pitched, and began to build and plant at Seekonk, now Rehoboth, but I received a letter from my ancient friend, Mr. Winslow, then Governor of Plymouth, professing his own and others love and respect to me, yet lovingly advising me, since I was fallen into the edge of their bounds, and they were loath to displease the Bay, to remove but to the other side of the water, and then he said, I had the country free before me, and might be as free as themselves, and we should be loving neighbors together. These were the joint understandings of these two eminently wise and Christian Governors and others, in their day, together with their counsel and advice as to the freedom and vacancy of this place, which in this respect, and many other Providences of the Most Holy and Only Wise, I called Providence. … Some time after, the Plymouth great Sachem, (Oufamaquin,) upon occasion affirming that Providence was his land, and therefore Plymouth's land, and some resenting it, the then prudent and godly Governor, Mr. Bradford, and others of his godly council, answered, that if, after due examination, it should be found true what the barbarian said, yet having to my loss of a harvest that year, been now (though by their gentle advice) as good as banished from Plymouth as from the Massachusetts, and I had quietly and patiently departed from them, at their motion to the place where now I was, I should not be molested and tossed up and down again, while they had breath in their bodies; and surely, between those, my friends of the Bay and Plymouth, I was sorely tossed, for one fourteen weeks, in a bitter winter season, not knowing what bread or bed did mean, beside the yearly loss of no small matter in my trading with English and natives, being debarred from Boston, the chief mart and port of New England."

Letters of Roger Williams; edited by J. R. Bartlett, pages 335-336.

"According to the weight of authority, and the foregoing extract, when Williams left Salem he made his way from there by sea, coasting, probably, from place to place during the 'fourteen weeks' that 'he was sorely tossed,' and holding intercourse with the native tribes, whose language he had acquired, as we have before stated, during his residence at Plymouth. Dr. Dexter and Professer Diman interpret this and other references differently, and conclude that the journey must have been by land. See Dexter, page 62, note; Nar. Club Pub., Vol. II, page 87. Perhaps the true interpretation is that the journey was partly by sea and partly by land; that is, from the coast inward—to confer with the natives—was by land, and the rest by sea."

O. S. Straus, Roger Williams, chapter 5, and foot-note.

Mr. Hider, the well-known critical student of Rhode Island history, has commented on the above passage in Mr. Straus's work as follows: "The distance from Salem by sea to Seekonk was across Massachusetts Bay, Cape Cod Bay, the Atlantic Ocean, Vineyard Sound, Buzzard's Bay, the Atlantic Ocean again, and Narragansett Bay,—a distance scarcely less than 500 miles, in and out, by the line of the coast; all of which had to be covered either in a birch bark canoe or in a shallop; if in a canoe, then to be paddled, but if in a shallop, where did Williams get it, and what became of it? history does not answer. If Williams was in a boat sailing into Narragansett Bay, 'the pleasure of the Most High to direct my steps into the Bay' would become a positive absurdity unless the Most High meant that Williams should jump overboard! He certainly could have taken no steps in a boat. But if Williams was in a boat, what sense could there be in his saying 'I was sorely tossed for one fourteen weeks, in a bitter (hyperbole again) winter season, not knowing what bread or bed did mean.' Did they not have beds in boats, nor bread? As to the expression in the Cotton Letter, it was his soul and not his body, which was exposed to poverties, &c.; observe the quotation. … When Mr. Straus in his foot-note, speaks of Williams's journey, 'partly by sea and partly by land, that is from the coast inward, to confer with the natives,' he is dealing solely with the imagination. No such conference ever took place."

_S. S. Rider, Roger Williams (Book Notes, volume 11, page 148)._

{2637}

It was the opinion of Prof. Gammell that, when Roger Williams fled from Salem, "he made his way through the forest to the lodges of the Pokanokets, who occupied the country north from Mount Hope as far as Charles River. Ousemaguin, or Massasoit, the famous chief of this tribe, had known Mr. Williams when he lived in Plymouth, and had often received presents and tokens of kindness at his hands; and now, in the days of his friendless exile, the aged chief welcomed him to his cabin at Mount Hope, and extended to him the protection and aid he required. He granted to him a tract of land on the Seekonk River, to which, at the opening of spring, he repaired, and where 'he pitched and began to build and plant ' [near the beautiful bend in the river, now known as 'Manton's Cove,' a short distance above the upper bridge, directly eastward of Providence.—Foot-note]. At this place, also, at the same time, he was joined by a number of his friends from Salem. … But scarcely had the first dwelling been raised … when he was again disturbed, and obliged to move still further from Christian neighbors and the dwellings of civilized men," as related in his letter quoted above. "He accordingly soon abandoned the fields which he had planted, and the dwelling he had begun to build, and embarked in a canoe upon the Seekonk River, in quest of another spot where, unmolested, he might rear a home and plant a separate colony. There were five others, who, having joined him at Seekonk, bore him company." Coasting along the stream and "round the headlands now known as Fox Point and India Point, up the harbor, to the mouth of the Mooshausic River," he landed, and, "upon the beautiful slope of the hill that ascends from the river, he descried the spring around which he commenced the first 'plantations of Providence.' It was in the latter part of June, 1636, as well as can be ascertained, that Roger Williams and his companions began the settlement at the mouth of the Mooshausic River. A little north of what is now the centre of the city, the spring is still pointed out, which drew the attention of the humble voyagers from Seekonk. Here, after so many wanderings, was the weary exile to find a home, and to lay the foundations of a city, which should be a perpetual memorial of pious gratitude to the superintending Providence which had protected him and guided him to the spot. … The spot at which he had landed … was within the territory belonging to the Narragansetts. Canonicus, the aged chief of the tribe, and Miantonomo, his nephew, had visited the colonies of Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay, while Williams resided there, and had learned to regard him, in virtue of his being a minister, as one of the sachems of the English. He had also taken special pains to conciliate their good-will and gain their confidence. … Indeed, there is reason to believe that, at an early period after his arrival in New England, on finding himself so widely at variance with his Puritan brethren, he conceived the design of withdrawing from the colonies, and settling among the Indians, that he might labor as a missionary. … In all his dealings with the Indians, Mr. Williams was governed by a strict regard to the rights which, he had always contended, belonged to them as the sole proprietors of the soil. … It was by his influence, and at his expense, that the purchase was procured from Canonicus and Miantonomo, who partook largely of the shyness and jealousy of the English so common to their tribe. He says, 'It was not thousands nor tens of thousands of money that could have bought of them an English entrance into this bay.'"

W. Gammell, Life of Roger Williams (Library of American Biographies, series 2, volume 4), chapters 6-7.

ALSO IN: S. G. Arnold, History of Rhode Island, volume 1, chapters 1 and 4.

W. R Staples, Annals of Providence, chapter 1.

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1636-1661, Sale and gift of lands by the Indians to Roger Williams. His conveyance of the same to his associates.

"The first object of Mr. Williams would naturally be, to obtain from the sachems a grant of land for his new colony. He probably visited them, and received a verbal cession of the territory, which, two years afterwards, was formally conveyed to him by a deed, This instrument may properly be quoted here. 'At Narraganset, the 24th of the first month, commonly called March, the second year of the plantation or planting at Moshassuck, or Providence [1638]; Memorandum, that we, Canonicus and Miantinomo, the two chief sachems of Narraganset, having two years since sold unto Roger Williams the lands and meadows upon the two fresh rivers, called Moshassuck and Wanasquatucket, do now, by these presents, establish and confirm the bounds of these lands, from the river and fields of Pawtucket, the great hill of Notaquoncanot, on the northwest, and the town of Mashapaug, on the west. We also in consideration of the many kindnesses and services he hath continually done for us, both with our friends of Massachusetts, as also at Connecticut, and Apaum, or Plymouth, we do freely give unto him all that land from those rivers reaching to Pawtuxet river; as also the grass and meadows upon the said Pawtuxet river. In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands. [The mark (a bow) of Canonicus. The mark (an arrow) of Miantonomo]. In the presence of [The mark of Sohash. The mark of Alsomunsit].' … The lands thus ceded to Mr. Williams he conveyed to twelve men, who accompanied, or soon joined, him, reserving for himself an equal part only." Twenty-three years later, on the 20th of December, 1661, he executed a more formal deed of conveyance to his associates and their heirs of the lands which had unquestionably been partly sold and partly given to himself personally by the Indians. This latter instrument was in the following words. "'Be it known unto all men by these presents, that I, Roger Williams, of the town of Providence, in the Narraganset Bay, in New England, having, in the year one thousand six hundred thirty-four, and in the year one thousand six hundred thirty-five had several treaties with Canonicus and Miantinomo, the two chief sachems of the Narraganset, and in the end purchased of them the lands and meadows upon the two fresh rivers called Moshassuck and Wanasquatucket, the two sachems having, by a deed under their hands, two years after the sale thereof, established and confirmed the bounds of these lands from the rivers and fields of Pawtucket, the great hill of Notaquoncanot on the northwest, and the town of Mashapaug on the west, notwithstanding I had the frequent promise of Miantinomo, my kind friend, that it should not be land that I should want about these bounds mentioned, provided that I satisfied the Indians there inhabiting. I having made covenant of peaceable neighborhood with all the sachems and natives round about us, and having, of a sense of God's merciful Providence unto me in my distress, called the place Providence, I desired it might be for a shelter for persons distressed for conscience. {2638} I then considering the condition of divers of my distressed countrymen, I communicated my said purchase unto my loving friends, John Throckmorton, William Arnold, William Harris, Stukely Westcott, John Greene, Senior, Thomas Olney, Senior, Richard Waterman, and others, who then desired to take shelter here with me, and in succession unto so many others as we should receive into the fellowship and society of enjoying and disposing of the said purchase; and besides the first that were admitted, our town records declare, that afterwards we received Chad Brown, William Field, Thomas Harris, Senior, William Wickenden, Robert Williams, Gregory Dexter, and others, as our town book declares; and whereas, by God's merciful assistance, I was the procurer of the purchase, not by monies nor payment, the natives being so shy and jealous that monies could not do it, but by that language, acquaintance and favor with the natives, and other advantages, which it pleased God to give me, and also bore the charges and venture of all the gratuities, which I gave to the great sachems and other sachems and natives round about us, and lay engaged for a loving and peaceable neighborhood with them, to my great charge and travel; it was therefore thought fit by some loving friends, that I should receive some loving consideration and gratuity, and it was agreed between us, that every person, that should be admitted into the fellowship of enjoying land and disposing of the purchase, should pay thirty shillings unto the public stock; and first, about thirty pounds should be paid unto myself, by thirty shillings a person, as they were admitted; this sum I received, and in love to my friends, and with respect to a town and place of succor for the distressed as aforesaid, I do acknowledge the said sum and payment as full satisfaction; and whereas in the year one thousand six hundred and thirty-seven, so called, I delivered the deed subscribed by the two aforesaid chief sachems, so much thereof as concerneth the aforementioned lands, from myself and from my heirs, unto the whole number of the purchasers, with all my power, right and title therein, reserving only unto myself one single share equal unto any of the rest of that number; I now again, in a more formal way, under my hand and seal, confirm my former resignation of that deed of the lands aforesaid, and bind myself, my heirs, my executors, my administrators and assigns, never to molest any of the said persons already received, or hereafter to be received, into the society of purchasers, as aforesaid; but that they, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, shall at all times quietly and peaceably enjoy the premises and every part thereof, and I do further by these presents bind myself, my heirs, my executors, my administrators and assigns never to lay any claim, nor cause any claim to be laid, to any of the lands aforementioned, or unto any part or parcel thereof, more than unto my own single share, by virtue or pretence of any former bargain, sale or mortgage whatsoever, or jointures, thirds or entails made by me, the said Roger Williams, or of any other person, either for, by, through or under me. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, the twentieth day of December, in the present year one thousand six hundred sixty-one. Roger Williams.' … From this document, it appears, that the twelve persons to whom the lands, on the Moshassuck and Wanasquatucket rivers, were conveyed by Mr. Williams, did not pay him any part of the thirty pounds, which he received; but that the sum of thirty shillings was exacted of every person who was afterwards admitted, to form a common stock. From this stock, thirty pounds were paid to Mr. Williams, for the reasons mentioned in the instrument last quoted."

J. D. Knowles, Memoir of Roger Williams, chapter 8.

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1637. The Pequot War.

"Williams was banished in 1636 and settled at Providence. The Pequot war took place the next year following. The Pequots were a powerful tribe of Indians, dwelling … in the valley of the Thames at the easterly end of Connecticut, and holding the lands west to the river of that name. The parties to this war were, the Massachusetts, Plymouth, and Connecticut colonies, assisted by the Narragansett and Mohegan tribes of Indians on one side, against the Pequots, single-handed, on the other. The Pequots undertook to make an alliance with the Narragansetts and the Mohegans (Hubbard's Indian Wars, 1677, page 118), and but for Williams would have succeeded, (Narr. Club, volume 6, page 269). Williams had obtained a powerful influence over Canonicus and Miantinomi, the great Sachems of the Narragansetts, (Narr. Club, volume 6, page 17,) and Massachusetts having just banished him, sent at once to him to prevent if possible this alliance, (Narr. Club, volume 6, page 269). By his influence a treaty of alliance was made with Miantinomi, Williams being employed by both sides as a friend, the treaty was deposited with him and he was made interpreter by Massachusetts for the Indians upon their motion, (Winthrop's Hist. N. E., 1853, volume 1, page 237). The Narragansetts, the Mohegans, the Niantics, the Nipmucs, and the Cowesets, were by this treaty either neutrals or fought actively for the English in the war."

_S. S. Rider, Political results of the Banishment of Williams (Book Notes, volume 8, number 17)._

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1637.

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1638-1640. The purchase, the settlement, and the naming of the island. The founding of Newport.

Early in the spring of 1638, while Mrs. Anne Hutchinson was undergoing imprisonment at Boston (see MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1636-1638), "Mr's. Hutchinson's husband, Coddington, John Clarke, educated a physician, and other principal persons of the Hutchinsonian party, were given to understand that, unless they removed of their own accord, proceedings would be taken to compel them to do so. They sent, therefore, to seck a place of settlement, and found one in Plymouth patent; but, as the magistrates of that colony declined to allow them an independent organization, they presently purchased of the Narragansets, by the recommendation of Williams, the beautiful and fertile Is]and of Aquiday [or Aquetnet, or Aquidneck]. The price was 40 fathoms of white wampum; for the additional gratuity of ten coats and twenty hoes, the present inhabitants agreed to remove. The purchasers called it the Isle of Rhodes—a name presently changed by use to Rhode Island. Nineteen persons, having signed a covenant 'to incorporate themselves into a body politic,' and to submit to 'our Lord Jesus Christ,' and to his 'most perfect and absolute laws,' began a settlement at its northern end, with Coddington as their judge or chief magistrate, and three elders to assist him. They were soon joined by others from Boston; but those who were 'of the rigid separation, and savored Anabaptism,' removed to Providence, which now began to be well peopled."

R. Hildreth, History of the United States, volume 1, chapter 9.

{2639}

"This little colony increased rapidly, so that in the following spring some of their number moved to the south-west part of the island and began the settlement of Newport. The northern part of the island which was first occupied was called Portsmouth. Both towns, however, were considered, as they were in fact, as belonging to the same colony. To this settlement, also, came Anne Hutchinson with her husband and family after they had been banished from Massachusetts. There is no record that in this atmosphere of freedom she occasioned any trouble or disturbance. Here she led a quiet and peaceable life until the death of her husband in 1642, when she removed to the neighborhood of New York, where she and all the members of her family, sixteen in number, were murdered by the Indians, with the exception of one daughter, who was taken into captivity. In imitation of the form of government which existed under the judges of Israel, during the period of the Hebrew Commonwealth, the two settlements, Rhode Island and Portsmouth, chose Coddington to be their magistrate, with the title of Judge, and a few months afterward they elected three elders to assist him. This form of government continued until 1640."

O. S. Straus, Roger Williams, chapter 6.

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1638-1647. The Constitution of Providence Plantation. The charter and the Union. Religious liberty as understood by Roger Williams.

"The colonists of Plymouth had formed their social compact in the cabin of the Mayflower. The colonists of Providence formed theirs on the banks of the Mooshausick. 'We, whose names are hereunder,' it reads, 'desirous to inhabit in the town of Providence, do promise to subject ourselves in active or passive obedience to all such orders or agreements as shall be made for public good for the body, in an orderly way, by the major assent of the present inhabitants, masters of families, incorporated together into a town fellowship, and such others as they shall admit unto them only in civil things.' Never before, since the establishment of Christianity, has the separation of Church from State been definitely marked out by this limitation of the authority of the magistrate to civil things; and never, perhaps, in the whole course of history, was a fundamental principle so vigorously observed. Massachusetts looked upon the experiment with jealousy and distrust, and when ignorant or restless men confounded the right of individual opinion in religious matters with a right of independent action in civil matters, those who had condemned Roger Williams to banishment, eagerly proclaimed that no well ordered government could exist in connection with liberty of conscience. … Questions of jurisdiction also arose. Massachusetts could not bring herself to look upon her sister with a friendly eye, and Plymouth was soon to be merged in Massachusetts. It was easy to foresee that there would he bickerings and jealousies, if not open contention between them. Still the little Colony grew apace. The first church was founded in 1639. To meet the wants of an increased population the government was changed, and five disposers or selectmen charged with the principal functions of administration, subject, however, to the superior authority of monthly town meetings; so early and so naturally did municipal institutions take root in English colonies. A vital point was yet untouched. Williams, indeed, held that the Indians, as original occupants of the soil, were the only legal owners of it, and carrying his principle into all his dealings with the natives, bought of them the land on which he planted his Colony. The Plymouth and Massachusetts colonists, also, bought their land of the natives, but in their intercourse with the whites founded their claim upon royal charter. They even went so far as to apply for a charter covering all the territory of the new Colony. Meanwhile two other colonies had been planted on the shores of the Narragansett Bay: the Colony of Aquidnick, on the Island of Rhode Island, and the colony of Warwick. The sense of a common danger united them, and, in 1643, they appointed Roger Williams their agent to repair to England and apply for a royal charter. It has been treasured up as a bitter memory that he was compelled to seek a conveyance in New York, for Massachusetts would not allow him to pass through her territories. His negotiations were crowned with full success. … He found the King at open war with the Parliament, and the administration of the colonies entrusted to the Earl of Warwick and a joint committee of the two Houses. Of the details of the negotiation little is known, but on the 14th of March of the following year [1644], a 'free and absolute charter was granted as the Incorporation of Providence Plantations in Narragansett Bay in New England.' … Civil government and civil laws were the only government and laws which it recognized; and the absence of any allusion to religious freedom in it shows how firmly and wisely Williams avoided every form of expression which might seem to recognize the power to grant or to deny that inalienable right. … Yet more than three years were allowed to pass before it went into full force as a bond of union for the four towns. Then, in May, 1647, the corporators met at Portsmouth in General Court of Election, and, accepting the charter, proceeded to organize a government in harmony with its provisions. Warwick, although not named in the charter, was admitted to the same privileges with her larger and more flourishing sisters. This new government was in reality a government of the people, to whose final decision in their General Assembly all questions were submitted. 'And now,' says the preamble to the code, … 'it is agreed by this present Assembly thus incorporate and by this present act declared, that the form of government established in Providence Plantations is Democratical.'"

G. W. Greene, Short History of Rhode Island, chapters 3 and 5.

"The form of government being settled, they now prepared such laws as were necessary to enforce the due administration of it: but the popular approbation their laws must receive, before they were valid, made this a work of time; however, they were so industrious in it, that in the month of May, 1647, they completed a regular body of laws, taken chiefly from the laws of England, adding a very few of their own forming, which the circumstances and exigencies of their present condition required. {2640} These laws, for securing of right, for determining controversies, for preserving order, suppressing vice, and punishing offenders, were, at least, equal to the laws of any of the neighbouring colonies; and infinitely exceeded those of all other Christian countries at that time in this particular,—that they left the conscience free, and did not punish men for worshipping God in the way, they were persuaded, he required. … It was often objected to Mr. Williams, that such great liberty in religious matters, tended to licentiousness, and every kind of disorder: To such objections I will give the answer he himself made, in his own words [Letter to the Town of Providence, January, 1654-5]. 'Loving Friends and Neighbours, It pleaseth God yet to continue this great liberty of our town meetings, for which, we ought to be humbly thankful, and to improve these liberties to the praise of the Giver, and to the peace and welfare of the town and colony, without our own private ends. I thought it my duty, to present you with this my impartial testimony, and answer to a paper sent you the other day from my brother,—"That it is blood-guiltiness, and against the rule of the gospel, to execute judgment upon transgressors, against the private or public weal." That ever I should speak or write a tittle that tends to such an infinite liberty of conscience, is a mistake; and which I have ever disclaimed and abhorred. To prevent such mistakes, I at present shall only propose this case.—There goes many a ship to sea, with many a hundred souls in one ship, whose weal and wo is common; and is a true picture of a commonwealth, or an human combination, or society. It hath fallen out sometimes, that both Papists and Protestants, Jews and Turks, may be embarked into one ship. Upon which supposal, I do affirm, that all the liberty of conscience that ever I pleaded for, turns upon these two hinges, that none of the Papists, Protestants, Jews, or Turks, be forced to come to the ship's prayers or worship; nor, secondly, compelled from their own particular prayers or worship, if they practise any. I further add, that I never denied that, notwithstanding this liberty, the commander of the ship ought to command the ship's course; yea, and also to command that justice, peace, and sobriety, be kept and practised, both among the seamen and all the passengers. If any seamen refuse to perform their service, or passengers to pay their freight;—if any refuse to help in person or purse, towards the common charges, or defence;—if any refuse to obey the common laws and orders of the ship, concerning their common peace and preservation;—if any shall mutiny and rise up against their commanders, and officers;—if any shall preach or write, that there ought to be no commanders, nor officers, because all are equal in Christ, therefore no masters, nor officers, no laws, nor orders, no corrections nor punishments—I say I never denied, but in such cases, whatever is pretended, the commander or commanders may judge, resist, compel, and punish such transgressors, according to their deserts and merits. This, if seriously and honestly minded, may, if it so please the Father of lights, let in some light, to such as willingly shut not their eyes. I remain, studious of our common peace and liberty,—Roger Williams.' This religious liberty was not only asserted in words, but uniformly adhered to and practised; for in the year. 1656, soon after the Quakers made their first appearance in New England, and at which most of these colonies were greatly alarmed and offended;. Those at that time called the four united colonies, which were the Massachusetts, Plymouth, Connecticut, and New Haven, wrote to this colony, to join with them in taking effectual methods to suppress them, and prevent their pernicious doctrines being spread and propagated in the country.—To this request the Assembly of this colony gave the following worthy answer; 'We shall strictly adhere to the foundation principle on which this colony was first settled;. to wit, that every man who submits peaceably to the civil authority, may peaceably worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, without molestation.' And not to the people of the neighbouring governments only, was this principle owned; but it was asserted in their applications to the ruling powers in the mother country; for in the year 1659, in an address of this colony to Richard Cromwell, then lord protector of England, Scotland, and Ireland, there is this paragraph,—'May it please your highness to know, that this poor colony of Providence Plantations, mostly consists of a birth and breeding of the providence of the Most High.—We being an outcast people, formerly from our mother nation, in the bishops' days; and since from the rest of the New English over-zealous colonies: Our frame being much like the present frame and constitution of our dearest mother England; bearing with the several judgments, and consciences, each of other, in all the towns of our colony.—The which our neighbour colonies do not; which is the only cause of their great offence against us.' But as every human felicity has some attendant misfortune, so the people's enjoyment of very great liberty, hath ever been found to produce some disorders, factions, and parties amongst them. … It must be confessed, the historians and ministers of the neighbouring colonies, in all their writings for a long time, represented the inhabitants of this colony as a company of people who lived without any order, and quite regardless of all religion; and this, principally, because they allowed an unlimited liberty of conscience, which was then interpreted to be profane licentiousness, as though religion could not subsist without the support of human laws, and Christians must cease to be so, if they suffered any of different sentiments to live in the same country with them. Nor is it to be wondered at, if many among them that first came hither, being tinctured with the same bitter spirit, should create much disturbance; nor that others, when got clear of the fear of censure and punishment should relax too much, and behave as though they were become indifferent about religion itself. With people of both these characters, the fathers of this colony had to contend. …In this age it seemed to be doubted whether a civil government could be kept up and supported without some particular mode of religion was established by its laws, and guarded by penalties and tests: And for determining this doubt, by an actual trial, appears to have been the principal motive with King Charles the Second, for granting free liberty of conscience to the people of this colony, by his charter of 1663,—in which he makes use of these words: 'That they might hold forth a lively experiment, that a most flourishing civil state may stand, and best be maintained, and that amongst our English subjects, with a full liberty in religious concernments. And that true piety, rightly grounded on gospel principles, will give the best and greatest security to sovereignty, and will lay in the hearts of men the strongest obligations to true loyalty.'"

_Stephen Hopkins, Historical Account of the Planting and Growth of Providence (Massachusetts Historical Society Collections, 2d Series, volume 9)._

ALSO IN: S. G. Arnold, History of Rhode Island, volume 1, chapter 4.

Records of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, volume 1.

{2641}

RHODE ISLAND: A. D. 1639. The first Baptist Church.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us