Chapter II (part 3 of 23)

Chapter II (part 3 of 23)

In the division of the empire of Alexander the Great between his generals, when he died, Ptolemy Lagus—reputed to be a natural son of Alexander's father Philip—chose Egypt (see MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316), with a modesty which proved to be wise. In all the provinces of the Macedonian conquest, it was the country most easily to be held as an independent state, by reason of the sea and desert which separated it from the rest of the world. It resulted from the prudence of Ptolemy that he founded a kingdom which lasted longer and enjoyed more security and prosperity than any other among the monarchies of the Diadochi. He was king of Egypt, in fact, for seventeen years before, in 307, B. C., he ventured to assume the name (see MACEDONIA: B. C. 310-301). Meantime, he had added to his dominion the little Greek state of Cyrene, on the African coast with Phœnicia, Judæa, Cœle-Syria, and the island of Cyprus. These latter became disputed territory, fought over for two centuries, between the Ptolemies and the Seleucids, sometimes dominated by the one and sometimes by the other (see SELEUCIDÆ: B. C. 281-224, and 224-187). At its greatest extent, the dominion of the Ptolemies, under Ptolemy Philadelphus, son of Ptolemy Lagus, included large parts of Asia Minor and many of the Greek islands. Egypt and Cyrene they held, with little disturbance, until Rome absorbed them. Notwithstanding the vices which the family of Ptolemy developed, and which were as rank of their kind as history can show, Egypt under their rule appears to have been one of the most prosperous countries of the time. In Alexandria, they more than realized the dream of its Macedonian projector. They made it not only the wealthiest city of their day, but the greatest seat of learning,—the successor of Athens as the capital of Greek civilization in the ancient world.

S. Sharpe, History of Egypt, chapters 7-12.

The first Ptolemy abdicated in favor of his son, Ptolemy Philadelphus, in 284 B. C., and died in the second year following.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 297-280.

"Although the political constitution of Egypt was not greatly altered when the land fell into Greek hands, yet in other respects great changes took place. The mere fact that Egypt took its place among a family of Hellenistic nations, instead of claiming as of old a proud isolation, must have had a great effect on the trade, the manufactures, and the customs of the country. To begin with trade. Under the native kings Egypt had scarcely any external trade, and trade could scarcely spring up during the wars with Persia. But under the Ptolemies, intercourse between Egypt and Sicily, Syria or Greece, would naturally and necessarily advance rapidly. Egypt produced manufactured goods which were everywhere in demand; fine linen, ivory, porcelain, notably that papyrus which Egypt alone produced, and which was necessary to the growing trade in manuscripts. Artificial barriers being once removed, enterprising traders of Corinth and Tarentum, Ephesus and Rhodes, would naturally seek these goods in Egypt, bringing in return whatever of most attractive their own countries had to offer. It seems probable that the subjects of the Ptolemies seldom or never had the courage to sail direct down the Red Sea to India. In Roman times this voyage became not unusual, but at an earlier time the Indian trade was principally in the hands of the Arabs of Yemen and of the Persian Gulf. Nevertheless the commerce of Egypt under the Ptolemies spread eastwards as well as westwards. The important towns of Arsinoë and Berenice arose on the Red Sea as emporia of the Arabian trade. And as always happens when Egypt is in vigorous hands, the limits of Egyptian rule and commerce were pushed further and further up the Nile. The influx into Alexandria and Memphis of a crowd of Greek architects, artists, and artizans, could not fail to produce movement in that stream of art which had in Egypt long remained all but stagnant. … If we may trust the somewhat over-coloured and flighty panegyrics which have come down to us, the material progress of Egypt under Ptolemy Philadelphus was most wonderful. We read, though we cannot for a moment trust the figures of Appian, that in his reign Egypt possessed an army of 200,000 foot soldiers and 40,000 horsemen, 300 elephants and 2,000 chariots of war. The fleet at the same period is said to have included 1,500 large vessels, some of them with twenty or thirty banks of oars. Allowing for exaggeration, we must suppose that Egypt was then more powerful than it had been since the days of Rameses."

P. Gardner, New Chapters in Greek History, chapter 7.

See, also, ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 282-246; and EDUCATION, ANCIENT: ALEXANDRIA.

{759}

EGYPT: B. C. 80-48. Strife among the Ptolemies. Roman pretensions.

The throne of Egypt being disputed, B. C. 80, between Cleopatra Berenice, who had seized it, and her step-son, Ptolemy Alexander, then in Rome, the latter bribed the Romans to support his claims by making a will in which he named the Roman Republic as his heir. The Senate, thereat, sent him to Alexandria with orders that Berenice should marry him and that they should reign jointly, as king and queen. The order was obeyed. The foully mated pair were wedded, and, nineteen days afterwards, the young king procured the death of his queen. The crime provoked an insurrection in which Ptolemy Alexander was slain by his own guard. This ended the legitimate line of the Ptolemies; but an illegitimate prince, usually called Auletes, or "the piper," was put on the throne, and he succeeded in holding it for twenty-four years. The claim of the Romans, under the will of Ptolemy Alexander, seems to have been kept in abeyance by the bribes which Auletes employed with liberality among the senatorial leaders. In 58 B. C. a rising at Alexandria drove Auletes from the throne; in 54 B. C. he bought the support of Gabinius, Roman pro-consul in Syria, who reinstated him. He died in 51 B. C. leaving by will his kingdom to his elder daughter, Cleopatra, and his elder son, Ptolemy, who, according to the abominable custom of the Ptolemies, were to marry one another and reign together. The Roman people, by the terms of the will were made its executors. When, therefore, Cæsar, coming to Alexandria, three years afterwards, found the will of Auletes set at nought, Ptolemy occupying the throne, alone, and Cleopatra struggling against him, he had some ground for a pretension of right to interfere.

S. Sharpe, History of Egypt, chapter 11.

EGYPT: B. C. 48-47. Civil war between Cleopatra and Ptolemy. Intervention of Cæsar. The rising against him. The Romans besieged in Alexandria. Their ruthless victory.

See ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 48-47.

EGYPT: B. C. 30. Organized as a Roman province.

After the battle of Actium and the death of Cleopatra, Egypt was reduced by Octavius to the rank of a Roman province and the dynasty of the Ptolemies extinguished. But Octavius "had no intention of giving to the senate the rich domain which he tore from its native rulers. He would not sow in a foreign soil the seeds of independence which he was intent upon crushing nearer home. … In due time he persuaded the senate and people to establish it as a principle, that Egypt should never be placed under the administration of any man of superior rank to the equestrian, and that no senator should be allowed even to visit it, without express permission from the supreme authority."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 29.

EGYPT: A. D. 100-500. Roman and Christian.

See ALEXANDRIA: B. C. 48-47 to A. D. 413-415; and CHRISTIANITY: A. D. 33-100, and 100-312.

EGYPT: A. D. 296. Revolt crushed by Diocletian.

See ALEXANDRIA: A. D. 296.

EGYPT: A. D. 616-628. Conquest by Chosroes, the Persian.

The career of conquest pursued by Chosroes, the last Persian conqueror, extended even to Egypt, and beyond it. "Egypt itself, the only province which had been exempt since the time of Diocletian from foreign and domestic war, was again subdued by the successors of Cyrus. Pelusium, the key of that impervious country, was surprised by the cavalry of the Persians: they passed with impunity the innumerable channels of the Delta, and explored the long valley of the Nile from the pyramids of Memphis to the confines of Æthiopia. Alexandria might have been relieved by a naval force, but the archbishop and the præfect embarked for Cyprus; and Chosroes entered the second city of the empire, which still preserved a wealthy remnant of industry and commerce. His western trophy was erected, not on the walls of Carthage, but in the neighbourhood of Tripoli: the Greek colonies of Cyrene were finally extirpated." By the peace concluded in 628, after the death of Chosroes, all of his conquests were restored to the empire and the cities of Syria and Egypt evacuated by their Persian garrisons.

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 46. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717

See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.

EGYPT: A. D. 640-646. Moslem conquest.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 640-646.

EGYPT: A. D. 967-1171. Under the Fatimite Caliphs.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 908-1171.

EGYPT: A. D. 1168-1250. Under the Atabeg and Ayoubite sultans.

See SALADIN, THE EMPIRE OF.

EGYPT: A. D. 1218-1220. Invasion by the Fifth Crusade.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1216-1229.

EGYPT: A. D. 1249-1250. The crusading invasion by Saint Louis of France.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1248-1254.

EGYPT: A. D. 1250-1517. The Mameluke Sultans.

The Mamelukes were a military body created by Saladin. "The word means slave (literally, the possessed'), and … they were brought in youth from northern countries to serve in the South. Saladin himself was a Kurd, and long before his accession to power, Turkish and Kurdish mercenaries were employed by the Caliphs of Bagdad and Cairo, as the Pope employs Swiss. … Subsequently, however, Circassia became the country which most largely furnished this class of troops. Their apprenticeship was a long and laborious one: they were taught, first of all, to read the Koran and to write; then followed lance-exercise, during which time nobody was allowed to speak to them. At first they either resided in the castle, or were exercised living under tents; but after the time of Sultan Barkouk they were allowed to live in the town [Cairo], and the quarter now occupied by the Jews was at that time devoted to the Circassian Mamelukes. After this period they neglected their religious and warlike exercises, and became degenerate and corrupt. … The dynasty of Saladin … was of no duration, and ended in 648 A. H., or 1250 of the Christian era. {760} Then began the so-called Bahrite Sultans, in consequence of the Mamelukes of the sultan Negm-ed-din having lodged in Rodah, the Island in the Nile (Bahr-en-Nil). The intriguer of the period was Sheger-ed-dur, the widow of the monarch, who married one of the Mamelukes, Moez-eddin-aibek-el-Turcomany, who became the first of these Bahrite Sultans, and was himself murdered in the Castle of Cairo through this woman. … Their subsequent history, until the conquest of Egypt by Sultan Selim in 1517, presents nothing but a series of acts of lust, murder and rapine. So rapidly did they expel each other from power, that the average reign of each did not exceed five or six years. … The 'fleeting purple' of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire is the spectacle which these Mameluke Dynasties constantly present."

A. A. Paton, History of the Egyptian Revolution, volume 1, chapters 3-5.

EGYPT: A. D. 1516-1517. Overthrow of the Mameluke Sultans. Ottoman conquest by Sultan Selim.

See TURKS: A. D. 1481-1520.

EGYPT: A. D. 1798-1799. The French conquest and occupation by Bonaparte.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1798 (MAY-AUGUST), and 1798-1799 (AUGUST-AUGUST).

EGYPT: A. D. 1798-1799. Bonaparte's organization of government. His victory at Aboukir. His return to France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799 (AUGUST-AUGUST), and 1799 (NOVEMBER).

EGYPT: A. D. 1800. Discontent and discouragement of the French. The repudiated Treaty of El Arish. Turkish defeat at Heliopolis. Revolt crushed at Cairo. Assassination of Kleber.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1800 (JANUARY-JUNE).

EGYPT: A. D. 1801-1802. Expulsion of the French by the English. Restoration of the province to Turkey.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1802.

EGYPT: A. D. 1803-1811. The rise of Mohammad 'Aly (or Mehemet Ali) to power. His treacherous destruction of the Mamelukes.

"It was during the French occupation that Mohammad 'Aly [or Mehemet Ali] came on the scene. He was born in 1768 at the Albanian port of Kaballa, and by the patronage of the governor was sent to Egypt in 1801 with the contingent of troops furnished by Kaballa to the Ottoman army then operating with the English against the French. He rapidly rose to the command of the Arnaut or Albanian section of the Turkish army, and soon found himself an important factor in the confused political position which followed the departure of the British army. The Memluk Beys had not been restored to their former posts as provincial governors, and were consequently ripe for revolt against the Porte; but their party was weakened by the rivalry of its two leaders, El-Elfy and El-Bardisy, who divided their followers into two hostile camps. On the other hand, the Turkish Pasha appointed by the Porte had not yet gained a firm grip of the country, and was perpetually apprehensive of a recall to Constantinople. Mohammad 'Aly at the head of his Albanians was an important ally for either side to secure, and he fully appreciated his position. He played off one party against the other, the Pasha against the Beys, so successfully, that he not only weakened both sides, but made the people of Cairo, who were disgusted with the anarchy of Memluk and Turk alike, his firm friends; and at last suffered himself, with becoming hesitation, to be persuaded by the entreaty of the populace to become [1805] their ruler, and thus stepped to the supreme power in the curious guise of the people's friend. A fearful time followed Mohammad 'Aly's election—for such it was—to the governorship of Egypt. The Turkish Pasha, Khurshid, held the citadel, and Mohammad 'Aly, energetically aided by the people of Cairo, laid siege to it. From the minaret of the mosque of Sultan Hasan, and from the heights of Mukattam, the besiegers poured their fire into the citadel, and Khurshid replied with an indiscriminate cannonade upon the city. The firing went on for weeks (pausing on Fridays), till a messenger arrived from Constantinople bringing the confirmation of the popular vote, in the form of a firman, appointing Mohammad 'Aly governor of Egypt. Khurshid shortly afterwards retired, and the soldiery amused themselves in the approved Turkish and (even worse) Albanian fashion by making havoc of the houses of the citizens. Mohammad 'Aly now possessed the title of Governor of Egypt, but beyond the walls of Cairo his authority was everywhere disputed by the Beys. … An attempt was made to ensnare certain of the Beys, who were encamped north of the metropolis. On the 17th of August, 1805, the dam of the canal of Cairo was to be cut, and some chiefs of Mohammad 'Aly's party wrote informing them that he would go forth early on that morning with most of his troops to witness the ceremony, inviting them to enter and seize the city, and, to deceive them, stipulating for a certain sum of money as a reward. The dam, however, was cut early in the preceding night, without any ceremony. On the following morning these Beys, with their Memluks, a very numerous body, broke open the gate of the suburb El-Hosey-niyeh, and gained admittance into the city. … They marched along the principal street for some distance, with kettle-drums behind each company, and were received with apparent joy by the citizens. At the mosque called the Ashrafiyeh they separated, one party proceeding to the Azhar and the houses of certain sheykhs, and the other party continuing along the main street, and through the gate called Bab-Zuweyleh, where they turned up towards the citadel. Here they were fired on by some soldiers from the houses; and with this signal a terrible massacre commenced. Falling back towards their companions, they found the by-streets closed; and in that part of the main thoroughfare called Beyn-el-Kasreyn, they were suddenly placed between two fires. Thus shut up in a narrow street, some sought refuge in the collegiate mosque of the Barkukiyeh, while the remainder fought their way through their enemies, and escaped over the city wall with the loss of their horses. Two Memluks had in the meantime succeeded, by great exertions, in giving the alarm to their comrades in the quarter of the Azhar, who escaped by the eastern gate called Bab-el-Ghureyyib. A horrible fate awaited those who had shut themselves up in the Barkukiyeh. Having begged for quarter and surrendered, they were immediately stripped nearly naked, and about fifty were slaughtered on the spot; and about the same number were dragged away. … The wretched captives were then chained and left in the court of the Pasha's house; and on the following morning the heads of their comrades, who had perished the day before, were skinned and stuffed with straw before their eyes. {761} One Bey and two other men paid their ransom, and were released; the rest, without exception, were tortured, and put to death in the course of the ensuing night. … The Beys were disheartened by this revolting butchery, and most of them retired to the upper country. Urged by England, or more probably by the promise of a bribe from El-Elfy, the Porte began a leisurely interference in favour of the Memluks; but the failure of El-Elfy's treasury, and a handsome bribe from Mohammad 'Aly, soon changed the Sultan's views, and the Turkish fleet sailed away. … An attempt of the English Government to restore the Memluks by the action of a force of 5,000 men under General Fraser ended in disaster and humiliation, and the citizens of Cairo had the satisfaction of seeing the heads of Englishmen exposed on stakes in the Ezbekiyeh. Mohammad 'Aly now adopted a more conciliatory policy towards the Memluks, granted them land, and encouraged them to return to Cairo. The clemency was only assumed in order to prepare the way for the act of consummate treachery which finally uprooted the Memluk power. … Early in the year 1811, the preparations for an expedition against the Wahhabis in Arabia being complete, all the Memluk Beys then in Cairo were invited to the ceremony of investing Mohammad 'Aly's favourite son, Tusun, with a pelisse and the command of the army. As on the former occasion, the unfortunate Memluks fell into the snare. On the 1st of March, Shahin Bey and the other chiefs (one only excepted) repaired with their retinues to the citadel, and were courteously received by the Pasha. Having taken coffee, they formed in procession, and, preceded and followed by the Pasha's troops, slowly descended the steep and narrow road leading to the great gate of the citadel; but as soon as the Memluks arrived at the gate it was suddenly closed before them. The last of those who made their exit before the gate was shut were Albanians under Salih Kush. To those troops their chief now made known the Pasha's orders to massacre all the Memluks within the citadel; therefore having returned by another way, they gained the summit of the walls and houses, that hem in the road in which the Memluks were, and some stationed themselves upon the eminences of the rock through which that road is partly cut. Thus securely placed, they commenced a heavy fire on their defenceless victims, and immediately the troops who closed the procession, and who had the advantage of higher ground, followed their example. … 470 Memluks entered the citadel, and of these very few, if any, escaped. One of these is said to have been a Bey. According to some, he leaped his horse from the ramparts, and alighted uninjured, though the horse was killed by the fall. Others say that he was prevented from joining his comrades, and discovered the treachery while waiting without the gate. He fled and made his way to Syria. This massacre was the signal for an indiscriminate slaughter of the Memluks throughout Egypt, orders to this effect being transmitted to every governor; and in Cairo itself, the houses of the Beys were given over to the soldiery, who slaughtered all their adherents, treated their women in the most shameless manner, and sacked their dwellings. … The last of his rivals being now destroyed, Mohammad 'Aly was free to organize the administration of the country, and to engage in expeditions abroad."

S. Lane-Poole, Egypt, chapter 8.

ALSO IN: A. A. Paton, History of the Egyptian Revolution, volume 2.

EGYPT: A. D. 1807. Occupation of Alexandria by the English. Disastrous failure of their expedition.

See TURKS: A. D. 1806-1807.

EGYPT: A. D. 1831-1840. Rebellion of Mehemet Ali. Successes against the Turks. Intervention of the Western Powers. Egypt made an hereditary Pashalik.

See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.

EGYPT: A. D. 1840-1869. Mehemet Ali and his successors. The khedives. The opening of the Suez Canal.

"By the treaty of 1840 between the Porte and the European Powers, … his title to Egypt having been … affirmed … Mehemet Ali devoted himself during the next seven years to the social and material improvement of the country, with an aggregate of results which has fixed his place in history as the 'Peter the Great' of Egypt. Indeed, except some additions and further reforms made during the reign of his reputed grandson, Ismail Pasha, the whole administrative system, up till less than ten years ago, was, in the main, his work; and notwithstanding many admitted defects, it was at his death incomparably the most civilised and efficient of then existing Mussulman Governments. In 1848, this great satrap, then verging on his eightieth year, was attacked by a mental malady, induced, as it was said, by a potion administered in mistaken kindness by one of his own daughters, and the government was taken over by his adopted son, Ibrahim Pasha, the hero of Koniah and Nezib. He lingered till August 1849, but Ibrahim had already pre-deceased him; and Abbas, a son of the latter, succeeded to the viceregal throne. Though born and bred in Egypt, Abbas was a Turk of the worst type—ignorant, cowardly, sensual, fanatic, and opposed to reforms of every sort. Thus his feeble reign of less than six years was, in almost everything, a period of retrogression. On a night in July, 1854, he was strangled in his sleep by a couple of his own slaves,—acting, it was variously said, on a secret order from Constantinople, or at the behest of one of his wives. To Abbas succeeded Said, the third son of Mehemet Ali, an amiable and liberal-minded prince who retrieved much of the mischief done by his predecessor, but lacked the vigorous intelligence and force of character required to carry on the great work begun by his father. His reign will be chiefly memorable for the concession and commencement of the Suez Canal, the colossal work which, while benefiting the trade of the world, has cost so much to Egypt. Said died in January 1863, and was succeeded by his nephew Ismail Pasha, the second son of Ibrahim. As most of the leading incidents of this Prince's reign, as also the chief features of his character, are still fresh in the public memory, I need merely recall a few of the more salient of both. Amongst the former, history will give the first place to his creation of the huge public debt which forms the main element of a problem that still confronts Europe. {762} But, for this the same impartial judge will at least equally blame the financial panderers who ministered to his extravagance, with exorbitant profit to themselves, but at ruinous cost to Egypt. On the other hand, it is but historical justice to say that Ismail did much for the material progress of the country. He added more than 1,000 to the 200 miles of railway in existence at the death of Said. He greatly improved the irrigation, and so increased the cultivable area of the country; multiplied the primary schools, and encouraged native industries. For so much, at least, history will give him credit. As memorable, though less meritorious, were the magnificent fetes with which, in 1869, he opened the Suez Canal, the great work which England had so long opposed, but through which—as if by the irony of history—the first ship that passed flew the English flag, and to the present traffic of which we contribute more than eighty per cent. In personal character, Ismail was of exceptional intelligence, but cruel, crafty, and untrustworthy both in politics and in his private relations. … It may be mentioned that Ismail Pasha was the first of these Ottoman Viceroys who bore the title of 'Khedive,' which is a Perso-Arabic designation signifying rank a shade less than regal. This he obtained in 1867 by heavy bribes to the Sultan and his chief ministers, as he had the year before by similar means ousted his brother and uncle from the succession, and secured it for his own eldest son,—in virtue of which the latter now [1890] nominally reigns."

_J. C. M'Coan, Egypt (National Life and Thought, lecture 18)._

J. C. M'Coan, Egypt under Ismail, chapters 1-4.

EGYPT: A. D. 1870-1883. Conquest of the Soudan. Measures for the suppression of the slave-trade. The government of General Gordon. Advent of the Mahdi and beginning of his revolt.

In 1870, Ismail Pasha "made an appeal for European assistance to strengthen him in completing the conquest of Central Africa. [Sir Samuel] Baker was accordingly placed in command of 1,200 men, supplied with cannon and steam-boats, and received the title of Governour-General of the provinces which he was commissioned to subdue. Having elected to make Gondokoro the seat of his government, he changed its name to Ismailia. He was not long in bringing the Bari to submission, and then, advancing southwards, he came to the districts of Dufilé and Fatiko, a healthy region endowed by nature with fertile valleys and irrigated by limpid streams, but for years past converted into a sort of hell upon earth by the slave-hunters who had made it their headquarters. From these pests Baker delivered the locality, and having by his tact and energy overcome the distrust of the native rulers, he established over their territory a certain number of small military settlements. … Baker returned to Europe flattering himself with the delusion that he had put an end to the scourge of slave dealing. It was true that various slave-dealers' dens on the Upper Nile had been destroyed, a number of outlaws had been shot, and a few thousand miserable slaves had been set at liberty; but beyond that nothing had been accomplished; no sooner had the liberator turned his back than the odious traffic recommenced with more vigour than before through the region south of Gondokoro. This, however, was only one of the slave-hunting districts, and by no means the worst. … Under European compulsion … the Khedive Ismail undertook to promote measures to put a stop to the scandal. He entered into various conventions with England on the subject; and in order to convince the Powers of the sincerity of his intentions, he consented to put the equatorial provinces under the administration of an European officer, who should be commissioned to carry on the work of repression, conquest and organisation that had been commenced by Baker. His choice fell upon a man of exceptional ability, a brilliant officer trained at Woolwich, who had already gained high renown in China, not only for military talent, but for his adroitness and skill in negotiation and diplomacy. This was Colonel Gordon, familiarly known as 'Chinese Gordon,' who was now to add fresh lustre to his name in Egypt as Gordon Pasha. Gordon was appointed Governour-General of the Soudan in 1874. With him were associated Chaillé-Long, an American officer, who was chief of his staff; the German, Dr. Emin Effendi, medical officer to the expedition; Lieutenants Chippendall and Watson; Gessi and Kemp, engineers. … Thenceforward the territories, of which so little had hitherto been known, became the continual scene of military movements and scientific excursions. … The Soudan was so far conquered as to be held by about a dozen military outposts stationed along the Nile from Lake No to Lakes Albert and Ibrahim. … In 1876 Gordon went back to Cairo. Nevertheless, although he was wearied with the continual struggle of the past two years, worn down by the incessant labours of internal organisation and geographical investigations, disheartened, too, by the jealousies, rivalries, and intrigues of all around him, and by the ill feeling of the very people whom the Khedive's Government had sent to support him, he consented to return again to his post; this time with the title of Governour-General of the Soudan, Darfur, and the Equatorial Provinces. At the beginning of 1877 he took possession of the Government palace at Khartoum. … Egyptian authority, allied with European civilisation, appeared now at length to be taking some hold on the various districts, and the Cairo Government might begin to look forward to a time when it could reckon on some reward for its labours and sacrifices. The area of the new Egyptian Soudan had now become immense. Geographically, its centre included the entire valley of the Nile proper, from Berber to the great lakes; on the east were such portions of the valleys of the Blue Nile and Atbara as lay outside Abyssinia; and on the west were the districts watered by the Bahr-el-Ghazal, and the Bahr-el-Arab, right away to the confines of Wadai. … Unfortunately in 1879 Ismail Pasha was deposed, and, to the grievous loss of the Soudan, Gordon was recalled. As the immediate consequence, the country fell back into the hands of Turkish pashas; apathy, disorder, carelessness, and ill feeling reappeared at Khartoum, and the Arab slave-dealers, who had for a period been kept under by Baker, Gessi, and Gordon, came once more to the front. … It was Raouf Pasha who, in 1879, succeeded Gordon as Governour-General. He had three Europeans as his subordinates—Emin Bey, who before Gordon left, had been placed in charge of the province of the equator; Lupton Bey, an Englishman, who had followed Gessi as Governour on the Bahr-el-Ghazal; and Slatin Bey, an Austrian, in command of Darfur. Raouf had barely been two years at Khartoum when the Mahdi appeared on the scene. {763} Prompted either by personal ambition or by religious hatred, the idea of playing the part of 'Mahdi' had been acted upon by many an Arab fanatic [see MAHDI]. Such an idea, at an early age, had taken possession of a certain Soudanese of low birth, a native of Dongola, by name Mohammed Ahmed. Before openly aspiring to the role of the regenerator of Islam he had filled several subordinate engagements, notably one under Dr. Peney, the French surgeon-general in the Soudan, who died in 1861. Shortly afterwards he received admittance into the powerful order of the Ghelani dervishes, and then commenced his schemes for stirring up a revolution in defence of his creed. His proceedings did not fail to attract the attention of Gessi Pasha, who had him arrested at Shekka and imprisoned for five months. Under the government of Raouf he took up his abode upon the small island of Abba, on the Nile above Khartoum, where he gained a considerable notoriety by the austerity of his life and by the fervour of his devotions, thus gradually gaining a high reputation for sanctity. Not only offerings but followers streamed in from every quarter. He became rich as well as powerful. … Waiting till May 1881, he then assumed that a propitious time had arrived for the realisation of his plans, and accordingly had himself publicly proclaimed as 'Mahdi,' inviting every fakir and every religious leader of Islam to come and join him at Abba. … Convinced that it was impolitic to tolerate any longer the revolutionary intrigues of such an adventurer at the very gates of Khartoum, Raouf Pasha resolved to rid the country of Mohammed and to send him to Cairo for trial. An expedition was accordingly despatched to the island of Abba, but unfortunately the means employed were inadequate to the task. Only a small body of black soldiers were sent to arrest the agitator in his quarters, and they, inspired no doubt by a vague and superstitious dread of a man who represented himself as the messenger of Allah, wavered and acted with indecision. Before their officers could rally them to energy, the Mahdi, with a fierce train of followers, knife in hand, rushed upon them, and killing many, put the rest to flight; then, seeing that a renewed assault was likely to be made, he withdrew the insurgent band into a retreat of safety amongst the mountains of Southern Kordofan. Henceforth revolt was openly declared. Such was the condition of things in August 1881. Chase was given, but every effort to secure the person of the pretended prophet was baffled. A further attempt was made to arrest him by the Mudir of Fashoda with 1,500 men, only to be attended with a still more melancholy result. After a desperate struggle the Mudir lay stretched upon the ground, his soldiers murdered all around him. One single officer, with a few straggling cavalry, escaped the massacre, and returned to report the fatal news. The reverse caused an absolute panic in Khartoum, an intense excitement spreading throughout the Soudan…. Meantime the Mahdi's prestige was ever on the increase, and he soon felt sufficiently strong to assume the offensive. His troops overran Kordofan and Sennar, advancing on the one hand to the town of Sennar, which they set on fire, and on the other to El-Obeid, which they placed in a state of siege. In the following July a fresh and more powerful expedition, this time numbering 6,000 men, under the command of Yussuf Pasha, left Fashoda and made towards the Mahdi's headquarters. It met with no better fate than the expeditions that had gone before. … And then it was that the English Government, discerning danger for Egypt in this insurrection of Islam, set to work to act for the Khedive. It told off 11,000 men, and placed them under the command of Hicks Pasha, an officer in the Egyptian service who had made the Abyssinian campaign. At the end of December 1882 this expedition embarked at Suez for Suakin, crossed the desert, reached the Nile at Berber, and after much endurance on the way, arrived at Khartoum. Before this, El-Obeid had fallen into the Mahdi's power, and there he had taken up his headquarters. Some trifling advantages were gained by Hicks, but having entered Kordofan with the design of retaking El-Obeid, he was, on the 5th of November 1883, hemmed in amongst the Kasgil passes, and after three days' heroic fighting, his army of about 10,000 men was overpowered by a force five or six times their superior in numbers, and completely exterminated. Hicks Pasha himself, his European staff, and many Egyptian officers of high rank, were among the dead, and forty-two guns fell into the hands of the enemy. Again, not a man was left to carry the fatal tidings to Khartoum. Rebellion continued to spread. After being agitated for months, the population of the Eastern Soudan also made a rising. Osman Digna, the foremost of the Mahdi's lieutenants, occupied the road between Suakin and Berber, and surrounded Sinkat and Tokar; then, having destroyed, one after another, two Egyptian columns that had been despatched for the relief of these towns, he finally cut off the communication between Khartoum and the Red Sea. The tide of insurrection by this time had risen so high that it threatened not only to overthrow the Khedive's authority in the Soudan, but to become the source of serious peril to Egypt itself."

A. J. Wauters, Stanley's Emin Pasha Expedition, chapters 1-2.

ALSO IN: Major R. F. Wingate, Mahdiism and the Egyptian Sudan, books 1-4.

Colonel Sir W. F. Butler, Charles George Gordon, chapters 5-6.

A. E. Hake, The Story of Chinese Gordon, chapters 10-15.

EGYPT: A. D. 1875-1882. Bankruptcy of the state. English and French control of finances. Native hostility to the foreigners. Rebellion, led by Arabi. English bombardment of Alexandria.

"The facilities given by foreign money-lenders encouraged extravagance and ostentation on the part of the sovereign and the ruling classes, while mismanagement and corrupt practices were common among officials, so that the public debt rose in 1875 to ninety-one millions, and in January, 1881, to ninety-eight millions. … The European capitalists obtained for their money nominally six to nine per cent., but really not less than eight to ten per cent., as the bonds were issued at low rates. … The interest on these borrowed millions was punctually paid up to the end of 1875, when the Khedive found that he could not satisfy his creditors, and the British government interfered in his favour. Mr. Cave was sent to examine into Egyptian finances, and he reported that loans at twelve and thirteen per cent. were being agreed to and renewed at twenty-five per cent., and that some measure of consolidation was necessary. The two western Powers now took the matter in hand, but they thereby recognized the whole of these usurious demands. {764} The debt, although under their control, and therefore secured, was not reduced by the amount already paid in premiums for risk. Nor was the rate of interest diminished to something more nearly approaching the rate payable on English consols, which was three per cent. A tribunal under the jurisdiction of united European and native judges was also established in Egypt to decide complaints of foreigners against natives, and vice versa. In May, 1876, this tribunal gave judgment that the income of the Khedive Ismail, from his private landed property, could be appropriated to pay the creditors of the state, and an execution was put into the Viceregal palace, Er Ramleh, near Alexandria. The Khedive pronounced the judgment invalid, and the tribunal ceased to act. Two commissioners were now again sent to report on Egyptian finances—M. Joubert, the director of the Paris Bank, for France, and Mr. Goschen, a former minister, for England. These gentlemen proposed to hand over the control of the finances to two Europeans, depriving the state of all independence and governing power. The Khedive, in order to resist these demands, convoked a sort of Parliament in order to make an appeal to the people. From this Parliament was afterwards developed the Assembly of Notables, and the National party, now so often spoken of. In 1877 a European commission of control over Egyptian finance was named. … Nubar Pasha was made Prime minister in 1878; the control of the finances was entrusted to Mr. Wilson, an Englishman; and later, the French controller, M. de Blignières, entered the Cabinet. Better order was thus restored to the finances. Rothschild's new loan of eight and a half millions was issued at seventy-three, and therefore brought in from six to eight per cent. nett. … But to be able to pay the creditors their full interest, economy had to be introduced into the national expenditure. To do this, clumsy arrangements were made, and the injustice shown in carrying them out embittered many classes of the population, and laid the foundations of a fanatical hatred of race against race. … In consequence of all this, the majority of the notables, many ulemas, officers, and higher officials among the Egyptians, formed themselves into a National party, with the object of resisting the oppressive government of the foreigner. They were joined by the great mass of the discharged soldiers and subordinate officials, not to mention many others. At the end of February, 1870, a revolt broke out in Cairo. Nubar, hated by the National party, was dismissed by the Khedive Ismail, who installed his son Tewfik as Prime minister. In consequence of this, the coupons due in April were not paid till the beginning of May, and the western Powers demanded the reinstatement of Nubar. That Tewfik on this occasion retired and sided with the foreigners is the chief cause of his present [1882] unpopularity in Egypt. Ismail, however, now dismissed Wilson and De Blignières, and a Cabinet was formed, consisting chiefly of native Egyptians, with Sherif Pasha as Prime minister. Sherif now raised for the first time the cry of which we have since heard so much, and which was inscribed by Arabi on his banners, 'Egypt for the Egyptians.' The western Powers retorted by a menacing naval demonstration, and demanded of the Sultan the deposition of the Khedive. In June, 1870, this demand was agreed to. Ismail went into exile, and his place was filled br Mahomed Tewfik. … The new Khedive, with apathetic weakness, yielded the reconstruction of his ministry and the organization of his finances to the western Powers. Mr. Baring and M. de Blignières, as commissioners of the control, aided by officials named by Rothschild to watch over his private interests, now ruled the land. They devoted forty-five millions (about sixteen shillings per head on the entire population) to the payment of interest. The people were embittered by the distrust shown towards them, and the further reduction of the army from fifty to fifteen thousand men threw a large number out of employment. … Many acts of military insubordination occurred, and at last, on the 8th of November, 1881, the great military revolt broke out in Cairo. … Ahmed Arabi, colonel of the 4th regiment, now first came into public notice. Several regiments, headed by their officers, openly rebelled against the orders of the Khedive, who was compelled to recall the nationalist, Sherif Pasha, and to refer the further demands of the rebels for the increase of the army, and for a constitution, to the Sultan. Sherif Pasha, however, did not long enjoy the confidence of the National Egyptian party, at whose head Arabi now stood, winning every day more reputation and influence. The army, in which he permitted great laxity of discipline, was entirely devoted to him. … A pretended plot of Circassian officers against his life he dexterously used to increase his popularity. … Twenty-six officers were condemned to death by court-martial, but the Khedive, at the instance of the western Powers, commuted the sentence, and they were banished to Constantinople. This leniency was stigmatized by the National party as treachery to the country, and the Chamber of Notables retorted by naming Arabi commander-in-chief of the army and Prime minister without asking the consent of the Khedive. The Chamber soon afterwards came into conflict with the foreign comptrollers. … This ended in De Blignières resigning his post, and in the May of the present year (1882) the consuls of the European Powers declared that a fleet of English and French ironclads would appear before Alexandria, to demand the disbanding of the army and the punishment of its leaders. The threat was realized, and, in spite of protests from the Sultan, a fleet of English and French ironclads entered the harbour of Alexandria. The Khedive, at the advice of his ministers and the chiefs of the National party, appealed to the Sultan. … The popular hatred of foreigners now became more and more apparent, and began to assume threatening dimensions. … On the 30th of May, Arabi announced that a despatch from the Sultan had reached him, promising the deposition of Tewfik in favour of his uncle Halim Pasha. … On the 3rd of June, Dervish Pasha, a man of energy notwithstanding his years, had sailed from Constantinople. … His object was to pacify Egypt and to reconcile Tewfik and Arabi Pasha. … Since the publication of the despatch purporting to proclaim Halim Pasha as Khedive, Arabi had done nothing towards dethroning the actual ruler. But on the 2nd of June he began to strengthen the fortifications of Alexandria with earthworks. … {765} The British admiral protested, and the Sultan, on the remonstrances of British diplomacy, forbad the continuation of the works. … Serious disturbances took place in Alexandria on the 11th. The native rabble invaded the European quarter, plundered the shops, and slew many foreigners. … Though the disturbances were not renewed, a general emigration of foreigners was the result. … On the 22nd a commission, consisting of nine natives and nine Europeans … began to try the ringleaders of the riot. … But events were hurrying on towards war. The works at Alexandria were recommenced, and the fortifications armed with heavy guns. The English admiral received information that the entrance to the harbour would be blocked by sunken storeships, and this, he declared, would be an act of open war. A complete scheme for the destruction of the Suez canal was also discovered. … The English, on their side, now began to make hostile demonstrations; and Arabi, while repudiating warlike intentions, declared himself ready for resistance. … On the 27th the English vice-consul advised his fellow-countrymen to leave Alexandria, and on the 3rd of July, according to the 'Times,' the arrangements for war were complete. … Finally, as a reconnaissance on the 9th showed that the forts were still being strengthened, he [the English admiral] informed the governor of Alexandria, Zulficar Pasha, that unless the forts had been previously evacuated and surrendered to the English, he intended to commence the bombardment at four the next morning. … As the French government were unable to take part in any active measures (a grant for that purpose having been refused by the National Assembly), the greater part of their fleet, under Admiral Conrad, left Alexandria for Port Said. The ironclads of other nations, more than fifty in number, anchored outside the harbour of Alexandria. … On the evening of the 10th of July … and at daybreak on the 11th, the … ironclads took up the positions assigned to them. There was a gentle breeze from the east, and the weather was clear. At 6.30 a. m. all the ships were cleared for action. At seven the admiral signalled to the Alexandra to fire a shell into Fort Ada. … The first shot fired from the Alexandra was immediately replied to by the Egyptians; whereupon the ships of the whole fleet and the Egyptian forts and batteries opened fire, and the engagement became general. … At 8.30 Fort Marsa-el-Kanat was blown up by shells from the Invincible and Monarch, and by nine o'clock the Téméraire, Monarch, and Penelope had silenced most of the guns in Fort Meks, although four defied every effort from their protected situation. By 11.45 Forts Marabout and Adjemi had ceased firing, and a landing party of seamen and marines was despatched, under cover of the Bittern's guns, to spike and blow up the guns in the forts. At 1.30 a shell from the Superb burst in the chief powder magazine of Fort Ada and blew it up. By four o'clock all the guns of Fort Pharos, and half an hour later those of Fort Meks, were disabled, and at 5.30 the admiral ordered the firing to cease. The ships were repeatedly struck and sustained some damage. … The English casualties were five killed and twenty-eight wounded, a comparatively small loss. The Egyptian loss is not known. … At 1 p. m. on the 12th of July, the white flag was hoisted by the Egyptians. Admiral Seymour demanded, as a preliminary measure, the surrender of the forts commanding the entrance to the harbour, and the negotiations on this point were fruitlessly protracted for some hours. As night approached the city was seen to be on fire in many places, and the flames were spreading in all directions. The English now became aware that the white flag had merely been used as means to gain time for a hasty evacuation of Alexandria by Arabi and his army. Sailors and marines were now landed, and ships of other nations sent detachments on shore to protect their countrymen. But it was too late; Bedouins, convicts, and ill-disciplined soldiers had plundered and burnt the European quarter, killed many foreigners, and a Reuter's telegram of the 14th said, 'Alexandria is completely destroyed.'"

H. Vogt, The Egyptian War of 1882, pages 2-32.

ALSO IN: J. C. McCoan, Egypt under Ismail, chapters 8-10.

C. Royle, The Egyptian Campaigns, volume 1, chapters 1-20.

Khedives and Pashas.

C. F. Goodrich, Report on British Military and Naval Operations in Egypt, 1882, part 1.

EGYPT: A. D. 1882-1883. The massacre and destruction in Alexandria. Declared rebellion of Arabi. Its suppression by the English. Banishment of Arabi. English occupation.

The city of Alexandria had become "such a scene of pillage, massacre, and wanton destruction as to make the world shudder. It was the old tale of horrors. Houses were plundered and burned; the European quarter, including the stately buildings surrounding the Great Square of Mehemet Ali, was sacked and left a heap of smoldering ruins; and more than two thousand Europeans, for the most part Levantines, were massacred with all the cruelty of oriental fanaticism. This was on the afternoon of the 12th. It was the second massacre that had occurred under the very eyes of the British fleet. The admiral's failure to prevent it has been called unfortunate by some and criminal by others. It seems to have been wholly without excuse. … The blue-jackets were landed on the 13th, and cleared the way before them with a Gatling gun. The next day, more ships having arrived, a sufficient force was landed to take possession of the entire city. The khedive was escorted back to Ras-el-Tin from Ramleh, and given a strong guard. Summary justice was dealt out to all hostile Arabs who had been captured in the city. In short, English intervention was followed by English occupation. The bombardment of Alexandria had defined clearly the respective positions of Arabi and the khedive toward Egypt and the Egyptian people. … The khedive was not only weak in the eyes of his people, but he was regarded as the tool of England. … From the moment the first shot was fired upon Alexandria, Arabi was the real ruler of the people. … The conference at Constantinople was stirred by the news of the bombardment of Alexandria. It presented a note to the Porte, July 15, requesting the dispatch of Turkish troops to restore the status quo in Egypt. But the sultan had no idea of taking the part of the Christian in what all Islam regarded as a contest between the Moslem and the unbeliever. … In Egypt, the khedive had been prevailed upon, after some demur, to proclaim Arabi a rebel and discharge him from his cabinet. Arabi had issued a counter-proclamation, on the same day, declaring Tewfik a traitor to his people and his religion. {766} Having received the news of the khedive's proclamation, Lord Dufferin, the British ambassador at Constantinople, announced to the conference that England was about to send an expedition to Egypt to suppress the rebellion and to restore the authority of the khedive. Thereupon the sultan declared that he had decided to send a Turkish expedition. Lord Dufferin feigned to accept the sultan's cooperation, but demanded that the Porte, as a preliminary step, should declare Arabi a rebel. Again the sultan was confronted with the danger of incurring the wrath of the Moslem world. He could not declare Arabi a rebel. … In his desperation, he sent a force of 3,000 men to Suda bay with orders to hold themselves in readiness to enter Egypt at a moment's notice. … In the meantime, however, the English expedition had arrived in Egypt and was proceeding to crush the rebellion, regardless of the diplomatic delays and bickerings at Constantinople. … It was not until the 15th of August that Sir Garnet Wolseley arrived with his force in Egypt. The English at that time held only two points, Alexandria and Suez, while the entire Egyptian interior, as well as Port Said and Ismailia, were held by Arabi, whose force, it was estimated, now amounted to about 70,000 men, of whom at least 50,000 were regulars. The objective point of General Wolseley's expedition to crush Arabi was, of course, the city of Cairo. There were two ways of approaching that city, one from Alexandria, through the Delta, and the other from the Suez canal. There were many objections to the former route. … The Suez canal was supposed to be neutral water. … But England felt no obligation to recognize any neutrality, … acting upon the principle, which is doubtless sound, that 'the neutrality of any canal joining the waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans will be maintained, if at all, by the nation which can place and keep the strongest ships at each extremity.' In other words, General Wolseley decided to enter Cairo by way of the Suez canal and Ismailia. But he kept his plan a profound secret. Admiral Seymour alone knew his purpose. … On the 19th, the transports moved eastward from Alexandria, as if to attack Abukir; but under the cover of darkness that night, they were escorted on to Port Said, where they learned that the entire canal, owing to the preconcerted action of Admiral Seymour, was in the hands of the British. On the 21st, the troops met Sir Henry McPherson's Indian contingent at Ismailia. Two days were now consumed in rest and preparation. The Egyptians cut off the water supply, which came from the Delta by the Sweet Water Canal, by damming the canal. A sortie to secure possession of the dam was therefore deemed necessary, and was successfully made on the 24th. Further advances were made, and on the 26th, Kassassin, a station of some importance on the canal and railway, was occupied. Here the British force was obliged to delay for two weeks, while organizing a hospital and a transport service. This gave Arabi opportunity to concentrate his forces at Zagazig and Tel-el-Kebir. But he knew it was for his interest to strike at once before the British transports could come up with the advance. He therefore made two attempts, one on August 28, and the other on September 9, to regain the position lost at Kassassin. But he failed in both, though inflicting some loss upon his opponents. On the 12th of September preparations were made by General Wolseley for a decisive battle. He had become convinced from daily reconnoissance and from the view obtained in the engagement of September 9, that the fortifications at Tel-el-Kebir were both extensive and formidable. … It was therefore decided to make the approach under cover of darkness. … At 1.30 on the morning of the 13th General Wolseley gave the order for the advance, his force consisting of about 11,000 infantry, 2,000 cavalrymen, and sixty field-guns. They had only the stars to guide them, but so accurately was the movement conducted that the leading brigades of each division reached the enemy's outposts within two minutes of each other. 'The enemy (says General Wolseley) were completely surprised, and it was not until one or two of their advanced sentries fired their rifles that they realized our close proximity to their works.' … The intrenchments were not carried without a severe struggle. The Egyptians fought with a desperate courage and hundreds of them were bayoneted at their posts. … But what could the rank and file accomplish when 'each officer knew that he would run, but hoped his neighbor would stay.' At the first shot Arabi and his second in command took horse and galloped to Belbeis, where they caught a train for Cairo. Most of the other officers, as the reports of killed and wounded show, did the same. The Egyptians fired their first shot at 4.55 A. M., and at 6.45 the English had possession of Arabi's headquarters and the canal bridge. The British loss was 57 killed, 380 wounded, and 22 missing. The Egyptian army left about 2,000 dead in the fortifications. … A proof of the completeness of the success was the entire dissipation of Arabi's army. Groups of soldiers, it is true, were scattered to different parts of Egypt; but the army organization was completely broken up with the battle of Tel-el-Kebir. … 'Major-General Lowe was ordered to push on with all possible speed to Cairo. … General Lowe [reached] the great barracks of Abbassieh, just outside of Cairo, at 4.45 P. M., on the 14th instant. The cavalry marched sixty-five miles in these two days. … A message was sent to Arabi Pasha through the prefect of the city, calling upon him to surrender forthwith, which he did unconditionally.' … Before leaving England, Wolseley had predicted that he would enter Cairo on the 16th of September; but with still a day to spare the feat was accomplished, and Arabi's rebellion was completely crushed. England now stood alone. Victory had been won without the aid of France or the intervention of Turkey. In Constantinople negotiations regarding Turkish expeditions were still pending when Lord Dufferin received the news of Wolseley's success, and announced to the Porte that there was now no need of a Turkish force in Egypt, as the war was ended. France at once prepared to resume her share in the control; but England, having borne the sole burden of the war, did not propose now to share the influence her success had given her. And it was for the interest of Egypt that she should not. … England's first duty, after quiet was assured, was to send away all the British troops except a force of about 11,000 men, which it was deemed advisable to retain in Egypt until the khedive's authority was placed on a safe footing throughout the land. … {767} What should be done with Arabi was the question of paramount interest, when once the khedive's authority was re-established and recognized. Tewfik and his ministers, if left to themselves, would unquestionably have taken his life. … But England was determined that Arabi should have a fair trial. … It was decided that the rebel leaders should appear before a military tribunal, and they were given English counsel to plead their cause. … The trial was a farce. Everything was 'cut and dried' beforehand. It was arranged that Arabi was to plead guilty to rebellion, that he was forthwith to be condemned to death by the court, and that the khedive was immediately to commute the sentence to perpetual exile. In fact, the necessary papers were drawn up and signed before the court met for Arabi's trial on December 3. … On the 26th of December Arabi and his six companions … upon whom the same sentence had been passed, left Cairo for the Island of Ceylon, there to spend their life of perpetual exile. … Lord Dufferin … had been sent from Constantinople to Cairo, early in November, with the special mission of bringing order out of governmental chaos. In two months he had prepared a scheme of legislative reorganization. This was, however, somewhat altered; so that it was not until May, 1883, that the plan in its improved form was accepted by the decree of the khedive. The new constitution provided for three classes of assemblies: the 'Legislative' Council,' the 'General Assembly,' and the 'Provincial Councils,' of which there were to be fourteen, one for each province. … Every Egyptian man, over twenty years of age, was to vote (by ballot) for an 'elector-delegate' from the village in the neighborhood of which he lived, and the 'electors-delegate' from all the villages in a province were to form the constituency that should elect the provincial council. … The scheme for reorganization was carried forward to the extent of electing the 'electors-delegate' in September; but by that time Egypt was again in a state of such disquietude that the British advisers of the khedive considered it unwise to put the new institutions into operation. In place of legislative council and general assembly, the khedive appointed a council of state, consisting of eleven Egyptians, two Armenians, and ten Europeans. The reforms were set aside for the time being in view of impending troubles and dangers in the Sudan."

J. E. Bowen, The Conflict of East and West in Egypt, chapter 5-6.

ALSO IN: _Colonel J. F. Maurice, Military History of the Campaign of 1882 in Egypt._

C. Royle, The Egyptian Campaigns, volume 1, chapters 22-44.

EGYPT: A. D. 1884-1885. General Gordon's Mission to Khartoum. The town beleaguered by the Mahdists. English rescue expedition. The energy that was too late.

"The abandonment of the Soudan being decided upon, the British Government confided to General Gordon the task of extricating the Egyptian garrisons scattered throughout the country. … Gordon's original instructions were dated the 18th January, 1884. He was to proceed at once to Egypt, to report on the military situation in the Soudan, and on the measures which it might be advisable to take for the security of the Egyptian garrisons and for the safety of the European population in Khartoum. … He was to be accompanied by Colonel Stewart. … Gordon's final instructions were given him by the Egyptian Government in a firman appointing him Governor-General. … Gordon arrived at Khartoum on the 18th February. … While Gordon was sending almost daily expressions of his view as to the only way of carrying out the policy of eventual evacuation, it was also becoming clear to him that he would very soon be cut off from the rest of Egypt. His first remark on this subject was to express 'the conviction that I shall be caught in Khartoum'; and he wrote,—'Even if I was mean enough to escape I have no power to do so.' The accuracy of this forecast was speedily demonstrated. Within a few days communications with Khartoum were interrupted, and although subsequently restored for a time, the rising of the riparian tribes rendered the receipt and despatch of messages exceedingly uncertain. … Long before the summer of 1884, it was evident that the position of Gordon at Khartoum had become so critical, that if he were to be rescued at all, it could only be by the despatch of a British force. … Early in May, war preparations were commenced in England, and on the 10th of the month the military authorities in Cairo received instructions to prepare for the despatch in October of an expedition for the relief of the Soudanese capital. 12,000 camels were ordered to be purchased and held in readiness for a forward march in the autumn. On the 16th May a half-battalion of English troops was moved up the Nile to Wady Halfa. A few weeks later some other positions on the Nile were occupied by portions of the Army of Occupation. Naval officers were also sent up the river to examine and report upon the cataracts and other impediments to navigation. Still it was not till the 5th August that Mr. Gladstone rose in the House of Commons to move a vote of credit of £300,000 to enable the Government to undertake operations for the relief of Gordon. … It was agreed that there were but two routes by which Khartoum could be approached by an expedition. One by way of the Nile, and the other via Souakim and Berber. … The Nile route having been decided on, preparations on a large scale were begun. … It was at first arranged that not more than 5,000 men should form the Expedition, but later on the number was raised to 7,000. … The instructions given to Lord Wolseley stated that the primary object of the Expedition was to bring away Gordon and Stewart from Khartoum; and when that purpose should be effected, no further offensive operations of any kind were to be undertaken."

C. Royle, The Egyptian Campaigns, 1882-1885, volume 2, chapters 12-18.

"First, it was said that our troops would be before the gates of Khartoum on January 14th; next it was the middle of February; and then the time stretched out to the middle of March. … Lord Wolseley offered a hundred pounds to the regiment covering the distance from Sarras to Debbeh most expeditiously and with least damage to boats. … He also dispatched Sir Herbert Stewart on the immortal march to Gakdul. Stewart's force, composed principally of the Mounted Infantry and Camel Corps, and led by a troop of the 19th Hussars, acting as scouts—numbering about 1,100 in all—set out from Korti on December 30th. Its destination was about 100 miles from headquarters, and about 80 from the Nile at Shendy. {768} The enterprise, difficult and desperate as it was, was achieved with perfect success. … On the 17th January Sir Herbert Stewart engaged the enemy on the road to Metemneh, and after defeating some 10,000 Arabs—collected from Berber, Metemneh, and Omdurman—pushed forward to the Abu Klea Wells. His tactics were much the same as those of General Graham at Elteb, and those of the Mahdi's men—of attacking when thirst and fatigue had well-nigh prostrated the force—were at all points similar to those adopted against Hicks. Our losses were 65 non-commissioned officers and men killed and 85 wounded, with 9 officers killed—among them Colonel Burnaby—and 9 wounded. Stewart at once pushed on for Metemneh and the Nile. He left the Wells on the 18th January to occupy Metemneh, if possible, but, failing that, to make for the Nile and entrench himself. After a night's march, some five miles south of Metemneh, the column found itself in presence of an enemy said to have been about 18,000 strong. Stewart halted and formed a zareba under a deadly fire. He himself was mortally hurt in the groin, and Mr. Cameron, of the Standard, and Mr. Herbert, of the Morning Post, were killed. The zareba completed, the column advanced in square, and the Arabs, profiting by Abu Klea, moved forward in echelon, apparently with the purpose of charging. At thirty yards or so they were brought to bay, so terrific was the fire from the square, and so splendidly served was Norton's artillery. For two hours the battle raged; and then the Arabs, 'mown down in heaps,' gave way. Meantime Sir Charles Wilson had made a dash for the Nile, where he found steamers and reinforcements from Gordon, and the laconic message, 'An right at Khartoum. Can hold out for years.' … In the joy at the good news, none had stopped to consider the true meaning of the message, 'All right. Can hold out for years,' for none was aware that nearly two months before Gordon had said he had just provisions enough for 40 days, and that what he really meant was that he had come to his last biscuit. The message—which was written for the enemy—was dated December 20, and Sir Charles Wilson would reach Khartoum on January 28, just a month after its despatch. … The public, carefully kept in ignorance … and hopeful beyond their wont, were simply stupefied to hear, on February 5, that Khartoum was in the hands of the Mahdi and Gordon captured or dead."

A. E. Hake, The Story of Chinese Gordon, volume 2, chapter 10.

ALSO IN: H. M. Stanley, In Darkest Africa, chapter 1.

_Colonel H. E. Colvile, History of the Soudan Campaign._

_Colonel C. W. Wilson, From Korti to Khartoum._

_Colonel Sir W. F. Butler, The Campaign of the Cataracts._

_W. M. Pimblett, The Story of the Soudan War._

_General C. G. Gordon, Journals at Khartoum._

H. W. Gordon, Events in the Life of Charles George Gordon, chapters 14-20.

EGYPT: A. D. 1893. The reigning khedive.

Mohamed Tewfik died in January, 1802 and was succeeded by his son Abbas, born in 1874.

Statesman's Year-book, 1893.

----------EGYPT: End----------

EGYPTIAN EDUCATION.

See EDUCATION, ANCIENT.

EGYPTIAN TALENT.

See TALENT.

EIDGENOSSEN.

The German word Eidgenossen, signifying "confederates," is often used in a special sense, historically, as applied to the members of the Swiss Confederation/

See SWITZERLAND: THE THREE FOREST CANTONS.

The name of the Huguenots is believed by some writers to be a corruption of the same term.

EIGHT SAINTS OF WAR, The.

See FLORENCE: A. D. 1375-1378.

EIKON BASILIKE, The.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1649 (FEBRUARY).

EION, Siege and capture of (B. C. 470).

See ATHENS: B. C. 470-466.

EIRE.

See IRELAND: THE NAME.

EKKLESIA.

See ECCLESIA.

EKOWE, Defence of (1879).

See SOUTH AFRICA: A. D. 1877-1870.

ELAGABALUS, Roman Emperor, A. D. 218-222.

ELAM.

"Genesis calls a tribe dwelling on the Lower Tigris, between the river and the mountains of Iran, the Elamites, the oldest son of Shem. Among the Greeks the land of the Elamites was known as Kissia [Cissia], and afterwards as Susiana, from the name of the capital. It was also called Elymais."

M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, book 2, chapter 1.

About 2300 B. C. Chaldea, or Babylonia, was overwhelmed by an Elamite invasion—an invasion recorded by king Asshurbanipal, and which is stated to have laid waste the land of Accad and desecrated its temples. "Nor was this a passing inroad or raid of booty-seeking mountaineers. It was a real conquest. Khudur-Nankhundi and his successors remained in Southern Chaldea. … This is the first time we meet authentic monumental records of a country which was destined through the next sixteen centuries to be in continual contact, mostly hostile, with both Babylonia and her northern rival, Assyria, until its final annihilation by the latter [B. C. 649, under Asshurbanipal, the Sardanapulus of the Greeks, who reduced the whole country to a wilderness]. Its capital was Shushan (afterwards pronounced by foreigners Susa), and its own original name Shushinak. Its people were of Turanian stock, its language was nearly akin to that of Shumir and Accad. … Elam, the name under which the country is best known, both from the Bible and later monuments, is a Turanian word, which means, like 'Accad,' 'Highlands.' … One of Khudur-Nankhundi's next successors, Khudur-Lagamar, was not content with the addition of Chaldea to his kingdom of Elam. He had the ambition of a born conqueror, and the generalship of one. The Chapter xiv, of Genesis—which calls him Chedorlaomer—is the only document we have descriptive of this king's warlike career, and a very striking picture it gives of it, … Khudur-Lagamar … lived, according to the most probable calculations, about 2200 B. C."

Z. A. Ragozin, Story of Chaldea, chapter 4.

It is among the discoveries of recent times, derived from the records in clay unearthed in Babylonia, that Cyrus the Great was originally king of Elam, and acquired Persia, as he acquired his later dominions, by conquest.

See PERSIA, B. C. 549-521.

See, also, BABYLONIA.

EL ARISH, Treaty of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1800 (JANUARY-JUNE).

ELBA: A. D. 1735. Ceded to Spain by Austria.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1733-1735.

ELBA: A. D. 1802. Annexation to France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1802 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).

ELBA: A. D. 1814. Napoleon in exile.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (MARCH-APRIL), and (APRIL-JUNE).

{i}

APPENDIX A.

NOTES TO ETHNOGRAPHICAL MAP, PLACED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS VOLUME.

To the eye of modern scholarship "language" forms the basis of every ethnic distinction. Physical and exterior features like the stature, the color of the skin, the diversity of habits and customs, the distinctions which once formed in great part the basis of ethnic research have all in our own day been relegated to a subordinate place.

The "language" test is of course subject to very serious limitations. The intermingling of different peoples, more general to be sure in our own day than in past ages, has nevertheless been sufficiently great in every age to make the tracing of linguistic forms a task of great difficulty. In special cases where both the civilization and language of one people have become lost in that of another the test must of course fail utterly.

With all these restrictions however the adoption of the linguistic method by modern criticism has been practically universal. Its defence, if it requires any, is apparent. It is the only method of ethnic study the deductions of which, where successful at all, approach anything like certainty. The points wherein linguistic criticism has failed have been freely admitted; on the other hand the facts which it has established are unassailable by any other school of criticism.

Taking language then as the only tangible working basis the subject resolves itself from the start into a two-fold division: the debatable and the certain. It is the purpose to indicate in the course of these notes, what is merely conjecture and what may be safely accepted as fact.

The ethnology of Europe, studied on this basis, has for its central feature the Indo-Germanic (Indo-European) or Aryan race. The distinction between the races clearly Aryan and those doubtful or non-Aryan forms the primary division of the subject. As the map is intended to deal only with the Europe of the present, a historical distinction must be made at the outset between the doubtful or non-Aryan peoples who preceded the Aryans and the non-Aryan peoples who have appeared in Europe in comparatively recent times. The simple formula, pre-Aryan, Aryan, non-Aryan, affords the key to the historical development of European ethnology.

PRE-ARYAN PEOPLES.

Of the presumably pre-Aryan peoples of western Europe the Iberians occupy easily the first place. The seat of this people at the dawn of history was in Spain and southern France; their ethnology belongs entirely to the realm of conjecture. They are of much darker complexion than the Aryans and their racial characteristic is conservatism even to stubbornness, which places them in marked contrast to their immediate Aryan neighbors, the volatile Celts. Among the speculations concerning the origin of the Iberians a plausible one is that of Dr. Bodichon, who assigns to them an African origin making them, indeed, cognate with the modern Berbers (see R. H. Patterson's "Ethnology of Europe" in "Lectures on History and Art"). This generalization is made to include also the Bretons of the north west. It is clear however that the population of modern Brittany is purely Celtic: made up largely from the immigrations from the British Isles during the fifth century.

To the stubbornness with which the Iberians resisted every foreign aggression and refused intermingling with surrounding races is due the survival to the present day of their descendants, the Basques.

The mountain ranges of northern Spain, the Cantabrians and Eastern Pyrenees have formed the very donjon-keep of this people in every age. Here the Cantabri successfully resisted the Roman arms for more than a century after the subjugation of the remainder of Spain, the final conquest not occurring until the last years of Augustus. While the Iberian race as a whole has become lost in the greater mass of Celtic and Latin intruders, it has remained almost pure in this quarter. The present seat of the Basques is in the Spanish provinces of Viscaya, Alava, Guipuzcoa, and Navarre and in the French department of Basses Pyrénées. The Ivernians of Ireland, now lost in the Celtic population, and the Ligurians along the shores of the Genoese gulf, later absorbed by the Romans, both belong likewise to this pre-Aryan class. (Modern research concerning these pre-Aryan peoples has in large part taken its inspiration from the "Untersuchungen" of Humboldt, whose view concerning the connection between the Basques and Iberians is substantially the one stated.)

Another early non-Aryan race now extinct were the Etruscans of Italy. Their origin was manifestly different from that of the pre-Aryan peoples just mentioned. By many they have been regarded as a branch of the great Ural-Altaic family. This again is conjecture.

ARYAN PEOPLES.

In beginning the survey of the Aryan peoples it is necessary to mention the principal divisions of the race. As generally enumerated there are seven of these, viz., the Sanskrit (Hindoo), Zend (Persian), Greek, Latin, Celtic, Germanic and Slavic. To these may be added two others not definitely classified, the Albanian and the Lithuanian. These bear the closest affinity respectively to the Latin and the Slavic.

Speculation concerning the origin of the Aryans need not concern us. It belongs as yet entirely to the arena of controversy. The vital question which divides the opposing schools is concerning their European or Asiatic origin. Of the numerous writers on this subject the two who perhaps afford the reader of English the best view of the opposing opinions are, on the Asiatic side, Dr. Max Müller (Lectures on the Science of Language); on the other, Professor A. H. Sayce (Introduction to the Science of Language).

{ii}

Of the divisions of the Aryan race above enumerated the first two do not appear in European ethnology. Of the other branches, the Latin, Germanic and Slavic form by great odds the bulk of the European population.

THE LATIN BRANCH.

The Latin countries are France, Spain, Portugal, Italy and the territory north of the Danube, between the Dniester and the Theiss. In the strictest ethnic sense however the term Latin can be applied only to Italy and then only to the central part. As Italy first appears in history it is inhabited by a number of different races: the Iapygians and Oenotrians of the south who were thrown in direct contact with the Greek settlers; the Umbrians, Sabines, Latins, Volscians and Oscans in the centre; the Etruscans on the west shore north of the Tiber; while in the north we find the Gauls in the valley of the Po, with the Ligurians and Venetians respectively on the west and east coasts. Of this motley collection the central group bore a close affinity to the Latin, yet all alike received the Latin stamp with the growing power of Rome.

The ethnic complexion of Italy thus formed was hardly modified by the great Germanic invasions which followed with the fall of the West-Roman Empire.

This observation applies with more or less truth to all the Latin countries, the Germanic conquerors becoming everywhere merged and finally lost in the greater mass of the conquered. Only in Lombardy where a more enduring Germanic kingdom existed for over two centuries (568-774), has the Germanic made any impression, and this indeed a slight one, on the distinctly Latin character of the Italian peninsula.

In Spain an interval between the Iberian period and the Roman conquest appears to have existed, during which the population is best described as Celt-Iberian. Upon this population the Latin stamp was placed by the long and toilsome, but for that reason more thorough, Roman conquest. The ethnic character of Spain thus formed has passed without material change through the ordeal both of Germanic and Saracenic conquest. The Gothic kingdom of Spain (418-714) and the Suevic kingdom of northern Portugal (406-584) have left behind them scarcely a trace. The effects of the great Mohammedan invasion cannot be dismissed so lightly.

Conquered entirely by the Arabs and Moors in 714, the entire country was not freed from the invader for nearly eight centuries. In the south (Granada) where the Moors clung longest their influence has been greatest. Here their impress on the pure Aryan stock has never been effaced.

The opening phrase of Cæsar's Gallic war, "all Gaul is divided into three parts," states a fact as truly ethnic as it is geographical or historical. In the south (Aquitania) we find the Celtic blending with the Iberian; in the northeast the Cimbrian Belgae, the last comers of the Celtic family, are strongly marked by the characteristics of the Germans; while in the vast central territory the people "calling themselves Galli" are of pure Celtic race. This brief statement of Caesar, allowing for the subsequent influx of the German, is no mean description of the ethnic divisions of France as they exist at the present day, and is an evidence of the remarkable continuity of ethnological as opposed to mere political conditions.

The four and a half centuries of Roman rule placed the Latin stamp on the Gallic nation, a preparation for the most determined siege of Germanic race influence which any Latin nation was fated to undergo.

In Italy and Spain the exotic kingdoms were quickly overthrown; the Frankish kingdom in northern Gaul was in strictness never overthrown at all.

In addition we soon have in the extreme north a second Germanic element in the Scandinavian Norman. Over all these outside elements, however, the Latin influence eventually triumphed. While the Franks have imposed their name upon the natives, the latter have imposed their language and civilization on the invaders.

The result of this clashing of influences is seen, however, in the present linguistic division of the old Gallic lands. The line running east and west through the centre of France marks the division between the French and the Provençal dialects, the langued'oil and the langued'oc. It is south of this line in the country of the langued'oc that the Latin or Romance influence reigns most absolute in the native speech.

In the northeast, on the other hand, in the Walloon provinces of Belgium, we have, as with the Belgae of classic times, the near approach of the Gallic to the Germanic stems.

Our survey of the Latin peoples must close with a short notice of its outlying members in the Balkan and Danubian lands. The Albanians (Skipetars) and the Roumans (Vlachs or Wallachs) represent as nearly as ethnology can determine the ancient populations respectively of Illyricum and Thrace. The ethnology of the Albanians is entirely uncertain. Their present location, considerably to the south of their supposed pristine seat in Illyricum, indicates some southern migration of the race. This migration occurred at an entirely unknown time, though it is generally believed to have been contemporary with the great southward movement of the Slavic races in the seventh century.

The Albanian migrations of the time penetrated Attica, Aetolia and the entire Peloponnesus; with the Slavs and Vlachs they formed indeed a great part of the population of Greece during the Middle Ages. While the Slavic stems have since been merged in the native Greek population, and the Vlachs have almost entirely disappeared from these southern lands, the Albanians in Greece have shown a greater tenacity. Their part in later Greek history has been a prominent one and they form to-day a great part of the population of Attica and Argolis.

The Roumans or Vlachs, the supposed native population of Thrace, are more closely identified than the Albanians with the other Latin peoples. They occupy at present the vast country north of the Danube, their boundary extending on the east to the Dniester, on the west almost to the Theiss.

Historically these people form a perplexing yet interesting study. The theory once general that they represented a continuous Latin civilization north of the Danube, connecting the classic Dacia by an unbroken chain to the present, has now been generally abandoned. (See Roesler's "Romänische Studien" or Freeman's "Historical Geography of Europe," page 435.)

{iii}

The present geographical location of the Vlach peoples is probably the result of a migration from the Thracian lands south of the Danube, which occurred for unexplained causes in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The kernel of the race at the present day is the separate state of Roumania; in the East and West they come under the respective rules of Russia and Hungary.

In mediaeval times the part played by them south of the Balkans was an important one, and to this day they still linger in considerable numbers on either side of the range of Pindus. (For a short dissertation on the Vlach peoples, see Finlay, "History of Greece," volume 3, pages 224-230.)

THE GERMANIC BRANCH.

The Germanic nations of modern Europe are _England, Germany, Holland, Denmark, Norway_ and Sweden. The Germanic races also form the major part of the population of Switzerland, the Cis-Leithan division of the Austrian Empire, and appear in isolated settlements throughout Hungary and Russia.

Of the earlier Germanic nations who overthrew the Roman Empire of the West scarcely a trace remains.

The population of the British Isles at the dawn of history furnishes a close parallel to that of Gaul. The pre-Aryan Ivernians (the possible Iberians of the British Isles) had been forced back into the recesses of Scotland and Ireland; next to them came the Celts, like those of Gaul, in two divisions, the Goidels or Gaels and the Britons.

In Britain, contrary to the usual rule, the Roman domination did not give the perpetual Latin stamp to the island; it is in fact the only country save the Pannonian and Rhaetian lands south of the upper Danube, once a Roman possession, where the Germanic element has since gained a complete mastery. The invasion of the Germanic races, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, from the sixth to the eighth centuries, were practically wars of extermination. The Celtic race is to-day represented on the British Isles only in Wales and the western portions of Scotland and Ireland. The invasions of the Danes, and later the Norman conquest, bringing with them only slight infusions of kindred Germanic nations, have produced in England no marked modification of the Saxon stock.

The German Empire, with the smaller adjoining realms, Holland and Switzerland and the Austrian provinces of Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Salzburg and Tyrol, contain the great mass of the Germanic peoples of the continent.

During the confusion following the overthrow of the West-Roman Empire the Germanic peoples were grouped much further westward than they are at present; the eastward reaction involving the dispossession of the Slavic peoples on the Elbe and Oder, has been going on ever since the days of Charlemagne. Germany like France possesses a linguistic division, Low German (Nieder-Deutsche) being generally spoken in the lands north of the cross line, High German (Hoch-Deutsche) from which the written language is derived, to the south of it, Holland uses the Flemish, a form of the Nieder-Deutsche; Belgium is about equally divided between the Flemish and the Walloon. Switzerland, though predominantly German, is encroached upon by the French in the western cantons, while in the southeast is used the Italian and a form allied to the same, the Romance speech of the Rhaetian (Tyrolese) Alps. This form also prevails in Friuli and some mountainous parts of northern Italy.

The present population of the German Empire is almost exclusively Germanic, the exceptions being the Slavic Poles of Posen, Pomerellen, southeastern Prussia and eastern Silesia, the remnant of the Wends of Lusatia and the French element in the recently acquired Imperial lands of Alsace and Lorraine. Beyond the Empire we find a German population in the Austrian territories already noted, in the border lands of Bohemia, and in isolated settlements further east. The great settlement in the Siebenbürgen was made by German emigrants in the eleventh century and similar settlements dot the map both of Hungary and Russia. On the Volga indeed exists the greatest of them all.

Denmark, Norway and Sweden are peopled by the Scandinavian branch of the Germanic race. Only in the extreme north do we find another and non-Aryan race, the Lapps. On the other hand a remnant of the Swedes still retain a precarious hold on the coast line of their former possession, the Russian Finland.

THE SLAVIC BRANCH.

The Slavs, though the last of the Aryan nations to appear in history, form numerically by far the greatest branch of the Indo-European family. Their present number in Europe is computed at nearly one hundred million souls.

At the time of the great migrations they extended over nearly all modern Germany; their slow dispossession by the Germanic peoples, beginning in the eighth century, has already been noticed. In the course of this dispossession the most westerly Slavic group, the Polabic, between the Elbe and the Oder, were merged in the German, and, barring the remnant of Wends in Lusatia (the Sorabi or Northern Serbs), have disappeared entirely from ethnic geography.

The great Slavic nation of the present day is Russia, but the great number of Slavic peoples who are not Russian and the considerable Russian population which is not Slavic renders impossible the study of this race on strictly national lines.

The Slavic peoples are separated, partly by geographical conditions, into three great divisions: the Eastern, the Western and the Southern. The greatest of these divisions, the Eastern, lies entirely within the boundaries of the Russian Empire. The sub-divisions of the Eastern group are as follows: The Great Russians occupying the vast inland territory and numbering alone between forty and fifty millions, the Little Russians inhabiting the entire south of Russia from Poland to the Caspian, and the White Russians, the least numerous of this division, in Smolensk, Wilna, and Minsk, the west provinces bordering on the Lithuanians and Poles.

The West Slavic group, omitting names of peoples now extinct, are the Poles, Slovaks, Czechs and the remnants of the Lusatian Wends. The Poles, excepting those already mentioned as within the German empire, and the Austrian Poles of Cracow, are all under the domination of Russia. Under the sovereignty of Austria are the Slovaks, Moravians and Czechs of Bohemia, the latter the most westerly as well as historically the oldest of the surviving Slavic peoples, having appeared in their present seats in the last years of the fifth century.

{iv}

In connection with this West Slavic group we should also refer to the Lithuanians whose history, despite the racial difference, is so closely allied with that of Poland. Their present location in the Russian provinces of Kowno, Kurland and Livland has been practically the same since the dawn of history.

The South Slavic peoples were isolated from their northern kinsmen by the great Finno-Tatar invasions.

The invasion of Europe by the Avars in the sixth century clove like a wedge the two great divisions of the Slavic race, the southernmost being forced upon the confines of the East-Roman Empire. Though less imposing as conquests than the Germanic invasions of the Western Empire, the racial importance of these Slavic movements is far greater since they constitute, in connection with the Finno-Tatar invasions which caused them, the most important and clearly defined series of ethnic changes which Europe has experienced during the Christian Era. During the sixth and seventh centuries these Slavic emigrants spread over almost the entire Balkan peninsula, including Epirus and the Peloponnesus. In Greece they afterwards disappeared as a separate people, but in the region between the Danube, the Save and the Balkans they immediately developed separate states (Servia in 641, Bulgaria in 678). As they exist at present they may be classed in three divisions. The Bulgarians, so called from the Finno-Tatar people whom they absorbed while accepting their name, occupy the district included in the separate state of Bulgaria and Eastern Roumelia, with a considerable territory to the south of it in Macedonia and Thrace. It was this last named territory or one very nearly corresponding to it that was actually ceded to Bulgaria by the peace of San Stefano, though she unfortunately lost it by the subsequent compromise effected at the Congress of Berlin. The second division includes the Servians, Montenegrans, Bosnians and Croatians, the last two under Austrian control; the third and smallest are the Slovenes of Carniola, likewise under Austrian sovereignty. (Schafarik's "Slawische Alterthümer" is the greatest single authority on the early history and also comparative ethnology of the Slavs.)

The territory occupied by the Greek speaking people is clearly shown on the accompanying map. As in all history, it is the coast lands where they seem to have formed the strongest hold. In free Greece itself and in the Turkish territories immediately adjoining, the Greek population overwhelmingly preponderates.

Nevertheless there is still a considerable Albanian element in Attica and Argolis, a Vlach element in Epirus while the Turk himself still lingers in certain quarters of Thessaly. All these are remnants left over from the successive migrations of the Middle Ages. The Slavs, who also figured most prominently in these migrations, have disappeared in Greece as a distinct race. The question as to the degree of Slavic admixture among the modern Greeks is however another fruitful source of ethnic controversy. The general features of the question are most compactly stated in Finlay, volume 4, pages 1-37.

NON-ARYAN PEOPLES.

The Non-Aryan peoples on the soil of modern Europe, excepting the Jews and also probably excepting those already placed in the unsolved class of pre-Aryan, all belong to the Finno-Tatar or Ural-Altaic family, and all, possibly excepting the Finns, date their arrival in Europe from comparatively recent and historic times. The four principal divisions of this race, the Ugric, Finnic, Turkic and Mongolic, all have their European representatives.

Of the first the only representatives are the Hungarians (Magyars). The rift between the North and South Slavic peoples opened by the Huns in the fifth century, reopened and enlarged by the Avars in the sixth, was finally occupied by their kinsmen the Magyars in the ninth. The receding of this wave of Asiatic invasion left the Magyars in utter isolation among their Aryan neighbors. It follows as a natural consequence that they have been the only one of the Ural-Altaic peoples to accept the religion and civilization of the West. Since the conversion of their king St. Stephen in the year 1000, their geographical position has not altered. Roughly speaking, it comprises the western half of Hungary, with an outlying branch in the Carpathians.

More closely allied to the Magyars than to their more immediate neighbors of the same race are the Finnic stems of the extreme north. Stretching originally over nearly the whole northern half of Scandinavia and Russia they have been gradually displaced, in the one case by their Germanic, in the other by their Slavic neighbors. Their present representatives are the Ehsts and Tschudes of Ehstland, the Finns and Karelians of Finland, the Tscheremissians of the upper Volga, the Siryenians in the basin of the Petchora and the Lapps in northern Scandinavia and along the shores of the Arctic ocean.

East of the Lapps, also bordering the Arctic ocean, lie the Samojedes, a people forming a distinct branch of the Ural-Altaic family though most closely allied to the Finnic peoples. The great division of the Ural-Altaic family known indifferently as Tatar (Tartar) or Turk, has, like the Aryan Slavs, through the accidents of historical geography rather than race divergence been separated into two great divisions: the northern or Russian division commonly comprised under the specific name of Tartar; and the southern, the Turk.

These are the latest additions to the European family of races. The Mongol-Tatar invasion of Russia occurred as late as the thirteenth century, while the Turks did not gain their first foothold in Europe through the gates of Gallipoli until 1353. The bulk of the Turks of the present day are congregated in Asia-Minor.

Barring the Armenians, the Georgians of the northeast, the Greeks of the seacoast and the scattered Circassians, the whole peninsula is substantially Turkish.

In Europe proper the Turks as a distinct people never cut a great figure. Even in the grandest days of Osmanli conquest they were always outnumbered by the conquered nations whose land they occupied, and with the decline of their power this numerical inferiority has become more and more marked. At the present day there are very few portions of the Balkan peninsula where the Turkish population actually predominates; their general distribution is clearly shown on the map.

{v}

The Tartars or Russian Turks represent the siftings of the Asiatic invasions of the thirteenth century.

Their number has been steadily dwindling until they now count scarcely three millions, a mere handful in the mass of their former Slavic subjects.

The survivors are scattered in irregular and isolated groups over the south and east. Prominent among them are the Crim Tartars, the kindred Nogais of the west shores of the Caspian, the Kirghis of the north shore and Ural valley, and the Bashkirs between the upper Ural and the Volga, with an isolated branch of Tartars in the valley of the Araxes south of the Caucasus.

The great Asiatic irruption of the thirteenth century has been commonly known as the Mongol invasion. Such it was in leadership, though the residuum which it has left behind in European Russia proves that the rank and file were mostly Tartars. One Mongol people however, the Kalmucks, did make their way into Europe and still exist in the steppes between the lower Don and the lower Volga.

The ethnology of the Caucasian peoples is the most difficult part of the entire subject. On the steppes of the Black and Caspian seas up to the very limit of the Caucasus we have two races between whom the ethnic distinction is clearly defined, the Mongol-Tartar and the Slav. Entering the Caucasus however we find a vast number of races differing alike from these and from each other.

To enumerate all the different divisions of these races, whose ethnology is so very uncertain, would be useless. Grouped in three general divisions however they are as follows: the so-called Circassians who formerly occupied the whole western Caucasus with the adjoining Black sea coast but who, since the Russian conquest of 1864, have for the most part emigrated to different quarters of the Turkish Empire; the Lesghians, under which general name are included the motley crowd of peoples inhabiting the eastern Caucasus; and the Georgians, the supposed descendants of the ancient Iberians of the Caucasus, who inhabit the southern slope, including all the Tiflis province and the Trapezuntine lands on the southeast coast of the Black sea.

The Tartars are hardly found in the Caucasus though they reappear immediately south of it in the lower basin of the Kura and the Araxes. Here also appear the various Iranian stems of the Asiatic Aryans, the Armenians, the Persians and the Kurds.

R. H. Latham's works on "European Ethnology" are the best general authority in English. Of more recent German guides, map and otherwise, the following are noteworthy: Bastain's "Ethnologisches Bilderbuch," "Das Beständige in den Menschenrassen," "Allgemeine Grundzüge der Ethnologie," Kiepert's "Ethnographische Uebersichtskarte des Europäischen Orients," Menke's "Europa nach seinen Ethnologischen Verhältnissen in der Mitte des 19. Jahrhundert," Rittich's "Ethnographie des europäischen Russland," Sax's "Ethnographische Karte der europäischen Turkei," Berghaus's "Ethnographische Karte vom österreichischen Kaiserstaat," Wendt's "Bilder Atlas der Länder und Völkerkunde," Andree's "Allgemeiner Hand-atlas (Ethnographischen Karten)," Gerland's "Atlas der Ethnographie."

A. C. Reiley.

{vi}

APPENDIX B.

NOTES TO FOUR MAPS OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA. (TWELFTH TO THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY.)

There exists to-day upon the map of Europe no section whose historical geography has a greater present interest than the Danubian, Balkan and Levantine states. It is these and the Austro-Hungarian lands immediately adjoining which have formed one of the great fulcrums for those national movements which constitute the prime feature of the historical geography of the present age.

Upon the present map of Europe in this quarter we discover a number of separate and diminutive national entities, the Roumanian, Bulgarian, Servian and Montenegrin, the Greek and Albanian, all struggling desperately to establish themselves on the debris of the crumbling Turkish Empire.

What the issue will be of these numerous and mutually conflicting struggles for separate national existence it is out of our province to forecast.

It is only intended in this map series to throw all possible light on their true character from the lessons and analogies of the past. At first sight the period treated in the four Levantine maps (from the last of the twelfth to the middle of the fifteenth century) must appear the most intricate and the most obscure in the entire history of this region. The most intricate it certainly is, and possibly the most obscure, though the obscurity arises largely from neglect. Its importance, however, arises from the fact that it is the only past period of Levantine history which presents a clear analogy to the present, not alone in its purely transitionary character, but also from the several national movements which during this time were diligently at work.

During the Roman and the earlier Byzantine periods, which from their continuity may be taken as one, any special tendency was of course stifled under the preponderant rule of a single great empire.

The same was equally true at a later time, when all of these regions passed under the rule of the Turk. These four maps treat of that most interesting period intervening between the crumbling of the Byzantine power and the Turkish conquest. That in our own day the crumbling in turn of the Turkish power has repeated, in its general features, the same historical situation, is the point upon which the interest must inevitably centre.

What the outcome will be in modern times forms the most interesting of political studies. Whether the native races of the Danube, the Balkans and the southern peninsula are to work out their full national development, either federately or independently, or whether they are destined to pass again, as is threatened, under the domination of another and greater empire, is one of the most important of the questions which agitates the mind of the modern European statesman. That the latter outcome is now the less likely is due to the great unfolding of separate national spirit which marks so strongly the age in which we live. The reason why the previous age treated in this map series ended in nothing better than foreign and Mohammedan conquest may perhaps be sought in the imperfect development of this same national spirit.

THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE.

The first map (Asia Minor and the Balkans near the close of the twelfth century) is intended to show the geographical situation as it existed immediately prior to the dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine Empire of this period is in itself an important study. It must be regarded more as the offspring than the direct continuation of the great East-Roman Empire of Arcadius and Justinian; for with the centuries which had intervened the great changes in polity, internal geography, external neighbors and lastly the continual geographical contraction, present us with an entirely new series of relations. It is this geographical contraction which concerns us most vitally, for with it the frontiers of the empire conform more and more closely to the ethnic limits of the Greek nation. The later Byzantine Empire was, therefore, essentially a Greek Empire, and as such it appeals most vividly to the national consciousness of the Greek of our own time. The restoration of this empire, with the little kingdom of free Greece as the nucleus, is the vision which inspires the more aggressive and venturesome school of modern Greek politicians. In the twelfth century the bulk of Asia Minor had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire by the Turks, but it was the Crusaders, not the Turks, who overthrew the first empire. In one view this fact is fortunate, otherwise there would have been no transition period whose study would be productive of such fruitful results.

Owing to the artful policy of the Comnenian emperors, the Byzantine Empire actually profited by the early crusades and was enabled through them to recover a considerable part of Asia Minor from the Turks. This apparent success, however, was only the prelude to final disaster.

Isolated from western Christendom by the schism, the Greeks were an object of suspicion and hatred to the Latin Crusaders and it only required a slight abatement of the original crusading spirit for their warlike ardor to be diverted from Jerusalem to Constantinople. Cyprus was torn away from the Greek Empire and created a separate kingdom under Latin rule, in 1191. Finally, the so-called Fourth Crusade, controlled by Venetian intrigue, ended in the complete dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire (1204).

{vii}

This nefarious enterprise forms a dark spot in history: it also ushers in the greatest period of geographical intricacy in Levantine annals, the geography which immediately resulted from it is not directly shown in this Levantine map series, but can be seen on the general map of Europe at the opening of the thirteenth century. Briefly stated, it represented the establishment of a fragmentary and disjointed Latin Empire in the place of the former Greek Empire of Constantinople. Known as the Latin Empire of Romania, this new creation included the Empire of Constantinople proper and its feudal dependencies, the kingdom of Thessalonica, the duchy of Athens, and the principality of Achaia.

Three orphan Greek states survived the fall of the parent power: in Europe, the despotat of Epirus, and in Asia, the empires of Nicæa and Trebizond.

The Latin states of the East are scarcely worthy the historian's notice. They have no place whatever in the natural development, either political or geographical, of the Levantine states. They were not only forced by foreign lances upon an unwilling population, but were clumsy feudalisms, established among a people to whom the feudal idea was unintelligible and barbarous. Like their prototypes, the Crusading states of Syria, they resembled artificial encroachments upon the sea, standing for a time, but with the ordinary course of nature the ocean reclaims its own.

Even the weak little Greek states were strong in comparison and immediately began to recover ground at their expense. The kingdom of Thessalonica was overthrown by the despot of Epirus in 1222; the Latin Empire of Constantinople itself fell before the Greek Emperor of Nicæa in 1261; while the last of the barons of the principality of Achaia submitted to the Byzantine despots of the Morea in 1430.

The duchy of Athens alone of all these Latin states survived long enough to fall at last before the Turkish conquest. The Levantine possessions won by Venice at this and later times were destined, partly from their insular or maritime location, and partly from the greater vitality of trade relations, to enjoy a somewhat longer life.

To the Nicæan emperors of the house of Paleologus belongs the achievement of having restored the Byzantine Empire in the event of 1261. The expression Restored Byzantine Empire has been employed, since it has the sanction of usage, though a complete restoration never occurred. The geography of the Restored Empire as shown on the second map (1265 A. D.) fails to include the greater part of what we may term the cradle of the Greek race. The only subsequent extension was over the balance of the Morea. In every other quarter the frontiers of the Restored Empire soon began to recede until it included only the city of Constantinople and an ever decreasing portion of Thrace. With the commencement of the fourteenth century the Turks, having thrown off the Mongol-Tartar dominion, began under the house of Osmanlis their final career of conquest. This, of course, was the beginning of the end. Their first foothold in Europe was gained in 1353, but over a century was destined to elapse before the completion of their sovereignty in all the lands south of the Danube. There remains, therefore, a considerable period during which whatever separate national tendencies existed had full opportunity to work.

THE FIRST AND SECOND BULGARIAN KINGDOMS.

It was this age which saw not only the highest point in the national greatness of Bulgaria and Servia, but also witnessed the evolution of the Wallachian principalities in the lands north of the Danube.

The separate states of Bulgaria and Servia, born in the seventh century of the great southward migration of the Slavic peoples, had in after times risen or fallen according to the strength or weakness of the Byzantine Empire. Bulgaria had hitherto shown the greatest power. At several different periods, notably under Simeon (883-927), and again under Samuel (976-1014), it developed a strength which fairly overawed the Empire itself. These Slavic states had, however, been subjected by the Byzantine Empire in the first half of the eleventh century, and, though Servia enjoyed another period of independence (1040-1148), it was not until the final crumbling of the Byzantine Empire, the premonition of the event of 1204, that their expansion recommences. The Wallachian, or Second Bulgarian kingdom, which came into existence in 1187 in the lands between the Balkans and the Danube, has been the subject of an ethnic discussion which need not detain us. That it was not purely Slavic is well established, for the great and singular revival of the Vlach or Rouman peoples and their movement from the lands south of Haemus to their present seats north of the Danube, which is one of the great features of this age, had already begun. (The country between the Danube and the Balkans, the seat of the Second Bulgarian kingdom, appears as Aspro or White-Wallachia in some Byzantine writings. So also north of the Danube the later Moldavia and Great Wallachia are known respectively as Mavro [Black] and Hungarowallachia. Still the fact of a continuous Roumnn civilization north of the Danube is not established. The theory of a great northward movement of the Vlach peoples is the one now generally accepted and is ably advocated in Roesler's "Romänische Studien.")

At the present day this movement has been so long completed that scarcely the trace of Vlach population remains in the lands south of the Danube. These emigrants appear, as it were, in passing, to have shared with the native Bulgarians in the creation of this Second Bulgarian kingdom. This realm achieved a momentary greatness under its rulers of the house of Asau. The dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire in 1204 enabled them to make great encroachments to the south, and it seemed for a time that to the Bulgarian, not the Greek, would fall the task of overthrowing the Latin Empire of Roumania (see general map of Europe at the opening of the thirteenth century). With the reëstablishment, however, of the Greek Empire of Constantinople, in 1261, the Bulgarian kingdom began to lose much of its importance, and its power was finally broken in 1285 by the Mongols.

SERVIA.

In the following century it was the turn of Servia to enjoy a period of preeminent greatness. The latter kingdom had recovered its independence under the house of Nemanja in 1183.

{viii}

Under the great giant conqueror Stephen Dushan (1321-1355) it enjoyed a period of greater power than has ever before or since fallen to the lot of a single Balkan state. The Restored Byzantine Empire had sustained no permanent loss from the period of Bulgarian greatness: it was by the sudden Servian conquest that it was deprived forever of nearly all its European possessions (see Balkan map III). A Byzantine reaction might have come under other conditions, but already another and greater enemy was at her gates. Dushan died in 1355; and already, in 1353, two years before, the Turk at Gallipoli had made his entrance into Europe. From this time every Christian state of the East grew steadily weaker until Bulgaria, Servia, the Greek Empire, and finally even Hungary, had passed under the Turkish dominion.

THE VLACHS.

Passing on from these Slavic peoples, another national manifestation of the greatest importance belonging to this period, one which, unlike the Greek and Slavic, may be said in one sense to have originated in the period, was that of the Vlachs. This Latin population, which ethnologists have attempted to identify with the ancient Thracians, was, previous to the twelfth century, scattered in irregular groups throughout the entire Balkan peninsula. During the twelfth century their great northward migration began. A single result of this movement has already been noticed in the rise of the Second Bulgarian kingdom. South of the Danube, however, their influence was transitory. It was north of the river that the evolution of the two principalities, Great Wallachia (Roumania) and Moldavia, and the growth of a Vlach population in the Transylvanian lands of Eastern Hungary, has yielded the ethnic and in great part the political geography of the present day.

The process of this evolution may be understood from a comparative study of the four Balkan maps. Upon the first map the Cumanians, a Finno-Tatar people, who in the twelfth century had displaced a kindred race, the Patzinaks or Petschenegs, occupy the whole country between the Danube and the Transylvanian Alps. These were in turn swept forever from the map of Europe by the Mongols (1224). With the receding of this exterminating wave of Asiatic conquest the great wilderness was thrown open to new settlers. The settlements of the Vlachs north of the Danube and east of the Aluta became the principality of Great Wallachia, the nucleus of the modern Roumania. West of the Aluta the district of Little Wallachia was incorporated for a long period, as the banat of Severin, in the Hungarian kingdom.

Finally, the principality of Moldavia came into existence in 1341, in land previously won by the Hungarians from the Mongols, between the Dniester and the Carpathians. Both the principalities of Great Wallachia and Moldavia were in the fourteenth century dependencies of Hungary. The grasp of Hungary was loosened, however, towards the close of the century and after a period of shifting dependence, now on Hungary, now on Turkey, and for a time, in the case of Moldavia, on Poland, we come to the period of permanent Turkish supremacy.

With the presence and influence of the Vlachs south of the Balkans, during this period, we are less interested, since their subsequent disappearance has removed the subject from any direct connection with modern politics. The only quarter where they still linger and where this influence led to the founding of an independent state, was in the country east of the range of Pindus, the Great Wallachia of the Byzantines. Here the principality of Wallachian Thessaly appeared as an offshoot of the Greek despotat of Epirus in 1259 (see map II).

This state retained its independent existence until 1308, when it was divided between the Catalan dukes of Athens and the Byzantine Empire.

ALBANIANS.

The Skipetars (Albanians) during this period appear to have been the slowest to grasp out for a separate national existence. The southern section of Albania formed, after the fall of Constantinople, a part of the despotat of Epirus, and whatever independence existed in the northern section was lost in the revival, first of the Byzantine, then, in the ensuing century, of the Servian power. It was not until 1444 that a certain George Castriot, known to the Turks as Iskander-i-beg, or Scanderbeg, created a Christian principality in the mountain fastnesses of Albania. This little realm stretched along the Adriatic from Butrinto almost to Antivari, embracing, further inland, Kroja and the basin of the Drin (see map IV).

It was not until after Scanderbeg's death that Ottoman control was confirmed over this spirited Albanian population.

THE TURKISH CONQUEST.

The reign of Mohammed II. (1451-1481) witnessed the final conquest of the entire country south of the Danube and the Save. The extent of the Turkish Empire at his accession is shown on map IV. The acquisitions of territory during his reign included in Asia Minor the old Greek Empire of Trebizond (1461) and the Turkish dynasty of Karaman; in Europe, Constantinople, whose fall brought the Byzantine Empire to a close in 1453, the duchy of Athens (1456), the despotats of Patras and Misithra (1460), Servia (1458), Bosnia (1463), Albania (1468), Epirus and Acarnania, the continental dominion of the Counts of Cephalonia (1479), and Herzegovina (1481). In the mountainous district immediately south of Herzegovina, the principality of Montenegro, situated in lands which had formed the southern part of the first Servian kingdom, alone preserved its independence, even at the height of the Turkish domination.

The chronicle of Turkish history thereafter records only conquest after conquest. The islands of the Ægean were many of them won during Mohammed's own reign, the acquisition of the remainder ensued shortly after. Venice was hunted step by step out of all her Levantine possessions save the Ionian Islands; the superiority over the Crim Tartars, Wallachia, Moldavia and Jedisan followed, finally, the defeat at Mohacs (1526), and the subsequent internal anarchy left nearly all Hungary at the mercy of the Ottoman conqueror.

The geographical homogeneity thus restored by the Turkish conquest was not again disturbed until the present century. The repetition of almost the same conditions in our own time, though with the process reversed, has been referred to in the sketch of Balkan geography of the present day. The extreme importance of the period just described, for the purposes of minute historical analogy, will be apparent at once wherever comparison is attempted.

{ix}

The thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries were of course periods of far greater geographical intricacy, but the purpose has been rather to indicate the nature of this intricacy than to describe it in detail. The principal feature, namely, the national movements, wherever they have manifested themselves, have been more carefully dwelt upon. The object has been simply to show that the four separate national movements, the Greek, the Slavic, the Rouman, and the Albanian, which may be said to have created the present Levantine problem, were all present, and in the case of the two last may even be said to have had their inception, in the period just traversed.

In the present century the unfolding of national spirit has been so much greater and far-reaching that a different outcome may be looked for. It is sufficient for the present that the incipient existence of these same movements has been shown to have existed in a previous age. The best general text authority in English for the geography of this period is George Finlay's "History of Greece," volumes. III. and IV.; a more exhaustive guide in German is Hopf's "Geschichte Griechenlands." For the purely geographical works see the general bibliography of historical geography.

A. C. Reiley.

{x}

APPENDIX C.

NOTES TO THE MAP OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA. (PRESENT CENTURY.)

The present century has been a remarkable one for the settlement of great political and geographical questions. These questions resolve themselves into two great classes, which indicate the political forces of the present age,—the first, represented in the growth of democratic thought, and the second arising from the awakening of national spirit. The first of these concerns historical geography only incidentally, but the second has already done much to reconstruct the political geography of our time.

RECENT NATIONAL MOVEMENTS.

Within a little over thirty years it has changed the map of central Europe from a medley of small states into a united Italy and a united Germany; it has also led to a reconstruction of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, In Italy, Germany and Austria-Hungary, the national questions may, however, be regarded as settled; and if, in the case of Austria-Hungary, owing to exactly reverse conditions, the settlement has been a tentative one, it has at least removed the question from the more immediate concern of the present. In a different quarter of Europe, however, the rise of the national movements has led to a question, infinitely more complicated than the others, and which, so far from being settled, is becoming ever more pressing year by year. This reference is to the great Balkan problem. That this question has been delayed in its solution for over four centuries, is due, no doubt, to the conquests of the Turk, and it is still complicated by his presence. In the notes to the four previous Balkan maps (1191-1451), attention was especially directed to the national movements, so far as they had opportunity to develop themselves during this period. These movements, feeble in their character, were all smothered by the Turkish conquest. With the decline of this power in the present century these forces once more have opportunity for reappearance. In this regard the history of the Balkans during the nineteenth century is simply the history of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries read backwards.

The Turkish Empire had suffered terrible reverses during the eighteenth century. Hungary (1699), the Crim Tartars (1774), Bukovina (1777), Jedisan (1792), Bessarabia and Eastern Moldavia (1812) were all successively wrested from the Ottomans, while Egypt on one side and Moldavia and Wallachia on another recovered practical autonomy, the one under the restored rule of the Mamelukes (1766), the other under native hospodars.

THE SERVIAN AND GREEK REVOLTS.

All of these losses, though greatly weakening the Ottoman power, did not destroy its geographical integrity. It was with the Servian revolt of 1804 that the series of events pointing to the actual disruption of the Turkish Empire may be said to have begun. The first period of dissolution was measured by the reign of Mahmoud II. (1808-1839), at once the greatest and the most unfortunate of all the later Turkish sultans. Servia, first under Kara Georg, then under Milosch Obrenovitch, the founder of the present dynasty, maintained a struggle which led to the recognition of Servian local autonomy in 1817. The second step in the process of dissolution was the tragic Greek revolution (1821-1828). The Sultan, after a terrible war of extermination, had practically reduced Greece to subjection, when all his work was undone by the intervention of the great powers.

The Turkish fleet was destroyed by the combined squadrons of England, France and Russia at Navarin, October 20, 1827, and in the campaign of the ensuing year the Moscovite arms for the first time in history penetrated south of the Balkans. The treaty of Adrianople, between Russia and Turkey (September 14, 1829), gave to the Czar the protectorate over Moldavia and Wallachia. By the treaty of London earlier in this year Greece was made autonomous under the suzerainty of the Sultan, and the protocol of March 22, 1829, drew her northern frontier in a line between the gulfs of Arta and Volo. The titular sovereignty of the Sultan over Greece was annulled later in the year at the peace of Adrianople, though the northern boundary of the Hellenic kingdom was then curtailed to a line drawn from the mouth of the Achelous to the gulf of Lamia. With the accession of the Bavarian king Otho, in 1833, after the failure of the republic, the northern boundary was again adjusted, returning to about the limits laid down in the March protocol of 1829. Greece then remained for over fifty years bounded on the north by Mount Othrys, the Pindus range and the gulf of Arta. In 1863, on the accession of the Danish king George I., the Ionian Isles, which had been under English administration since the Napoleonic wars, were ceded to the Greek kingdom, and in May, 1881, almost the last change in European geography to the present day was accomplished in the cession, by the Sultan, of Thessaly and a small part of Epirus. The agitation in 1886 for a further extension of Greek territory was unsuccessful.

THE TREATY OF UNKIAR SKELESSI.

A series of still greater reverses brought the reign of the Sultan Mahmoud to a close. The chief of these were the defeats sustained at the hands of his rebellious vassal Mehemet Ali, pacha of Egypt, a man who takes rank even before the Sultan himself as the greatest figure in the Mohammedan world during the present century. The immediate issue of this struggle was the practical independence of Egypt, where the descendants of Mehemet still rule, their title having been changed in 1867 from viceroy to that of khedive. An event incidental to the strife between Mehemet Ali and the Sultan is of far greater importance in the history of European Turkey. {xi} Mahmoud in his distress looked for aid to the great powers, and the final issue of the rival interests struggling at Constantinople was the memorable treaty of Unkiar Skelessi (July, 1833) by which the Sultan resigned himself completely to the interests of his former implacable foe, the Czar of Russia. In outward appearance this treaty was an offensive and defensive alliance; in practical results it gave the Moscovite, in exchange for armed assistance, when needed, the practical control of the Dardanelles. It is no extravagance of statement to say that this treaty forms absolutely the high watermark of Russian predominance in the affairs of the Levant. During the subsequent sixty years, this influence, taken as a whole, strange paradox as it may seem, has rather receded than advanced. The utter prostration of the Turkish Empire on the death of Mahmoud (1839) compelled Russia to recede from the conditions of Unkiar Skelessi while a concert of the European powers undertook the task of rehabilitating the prostrate power; the Crimean war (1854-1855) struck a more damaging blow at the Russian power, and the events of 1878, though they again shattered the Turkish Empire, did not, as will be shown, lead to corresponding return of the Czar's ascendency.

THE CRIMEAN WAR AND TREATY OF PARIS.

The Crimean War was brought on by the attempt of the Czar to dictate concerning the internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire—a policy which culminated in the occupation of Moldavia and Wallachia (1853). All Europe became arrayed against Russia on this question,—Prussia and Austria in tacit opposition, while England, France, and afterwards Piedmont, drifted into war with the northern power.

By the treaty of Paris (1856), which terminated the sanguinary struggle, the Danube, closed since the peace of Adrianople (1829), was reopened; the southern part of Bessarabia was taken from Russia and added to the principality of Moldavia; the treaty powers renounced all right to interfere in the internal affairs of the Porte; and, lastly, the Black Sea, which twenty years before, by the treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, had become a private Russian pond, was swept of the Russian fleets and converted into a neutral sea. The latter condition however was abrogated by the powers (March 13, 1871).

Despite the defeat of Russia, the settlement effected at the congress of Paris was but tentative. The most that the allied powers could possibly have hoped for, was so far to cripple Russia as to render her no longer a menace to the Ottoman Empire. They succeeded only in so far as to defer the recurrence of a Turkish crisis for another twenty years.

The chief event of importance during this interval was the birth of the united Roumania. In 1857 the representative councils of both Moldavia and Wallachia voted for their union under this name. This personal union was accomplished by the choice of a common ruler, John Cuza (1859), whose election was confirmed by a new conference at Paris in 1861. A single ministry and single assembly were formed at Bucharest in 1862. Prince Karl of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen was elected hospodar in 1866, and finally crowned as king in 1881.

THE REVIVED EASTERN QUESTION OF 1875-78.

The Eastern question was reopened with all its perplexities in the Herzegovinian and Bosnian revolt of August, 1875. These provinces, almost cut off from the Turkish Empire by Montenegro and Servia, occupied a position which rendered their subjugation almost a hopeless task. Preparations were already under way for a settlement by joint action of the powers, when a wave of fanatical fury sweeping over the Ottoman Empire rendered all these efforts abortive. Another Christian insurrection in Bulgaria was suppressed in a series of wholesale and atrocious massacres. Servia and Montenegro in a ferment declared war on Turkey (July 2, 1876). The Turkish arms, however, were easily victorious, and Russia only saved the Servian capital by compelling an armistice (October 30). A conference of the representatives of the powers was then held at Constantinople in a final effort to arrange for a reorganization of the Empire, which should include the granting of autonomy to Bosnia, Herzegovina and Bulgaria. These conditions, though subsequently embodied in a general ultimatum, the London protocol of March 31, 1877, were rejected by the Porte, and Russia, who had determined to proceed alone in the event of this rejection, immediately declared war (April 24). Into this war, owing to the horror excited in England by the Bulgarian massacres, and the altered policy of France, the Turk was compelled to go without allies, and thus unassisted his defeat was assured. Then followed the sanguinary campaigns in Bulgaria, the memories of which are still recent and unobscured. Plevna, the central point of the Turkish resistance, fell on December 10th; Adrianople was occupied by the Russians on January 20th, 1878; and on January 31st., an armistice was granted.

Great Britain now seemed roused to a sense of the danger to herself in the Russian approach to Constantinople, and public opinion at last permitted Lord Beaconsfield to send a fleet to the Bosporus.

By the Russo-Turkish peace of San Stephano (March 3, 1878) Turkey recognized the complete independence of Servia, Roumania and Montenegro, while Bulgaria became what Servia and Roumania had just ceased to be, an autonomous principality under nominal Turkish sovereignty. Russia received the Dobrutcha in Europe, which was to be given by the Czar to Roumania in exchange for the portion of Bessarabia lost in 1856. Servia and Montenegro received accessions of territory, the latter securing Antivari on the coast, but the greatest geographical change was the frontier assigned to the new Bulgaria, which was to include all the territory bounded by an irregular line beginning at Midia on the Black Sea and running north of Adrianople, and, in addition, a vast realm in Macedonia, bounded on the west only by Albania, approaching Salonica, and touching the Ægean on either side of the Chalcidice.

It was evident that the terms of this treaty involved the interests of other powers, especially of Great Britain. An ultimate settlement which involved as parties only the conqueror and conquered was therefore impossible. A general congress of the Powers was seen to be the only solvent of the difficulty; but before such a congress was possible it was necessary for Great Britain and Russia to find at least a tangible basis of negotiation for the adjustment of their differences.

{xii}

By the secret agreement of May 30th, Russia agreed to abandon the disputed points—chief among these the creation of a Bulgarian seaboard on the Ægean—and the congress of Berlin then assembled (June 13-July 13, 1878).

ARRANGEMENTS OF THE TREATY OF BERLIN.

Great Britain was represented at the congress by the Marquis of Salisbury and the premier, the Earl of Beaconsfield. The treaty of Berlin modified the conditions of San Stephano by reducing the Russian acquisitions in Asia Minor and also by curtailing the cessions of territory to Servia and Montenegro. A recommendation was also made to the Porte to cede Thessaly and a part of Epirus to Greece, a transfer which was accomplished in 1881. A more important provision was the transfer of the administrative control of the provinces of Bosnia and Herzegovina to Austria. This cession was the outcome of the secret agreement between Russia and Austria at Reichstadt, in July of the previous year, by which the former had secured from her rival a free hand in the Turkish war. These districts were at once occupied by Austria, despite the resistance of the Mohammedan population, and the sanjak of Novibazar, the military occupation of which was agreed to by the Porte, was also entered by Austrian troops in September of the following year. England secured as her share of the spoil the control of the island of Cyprus.

The greatest work accomplished at Berlin, however, was the complete readjustment of the boundaries of the new Bulgarian principality. This result was achieved through the agency of Great Britain. The great Bulgarian domain, which by the treaty of San Stephano would have conformed almost to the limits of the Bulgarian Empire of the tenth century, was, with the exception of a small western strip including the capital, Sofia, pushed entirely north of the Balkans. This new principality was to enjoy local autonomy; and immediately south of the Balkans was formed a new province, Eastern Roumelia, also with local autonomy, although under the military authority of the Sultan.

The result of the Berlin Congress was the apparent triumph of the Beaconsfield policy. It is doubtful, however, if the idea of this triumph has been fully sustained by the course of subsequent events. The idea of Beaconsfield appears to have been that the new Bulgaria could not become other than a virtual dependency of Russia, and that in curtailing its boundaries he was checking by so much the growth of Russian influence. If he could have foreseen, however, the unexpected spirit with which the Bulgarians have defended their autonomy, not from Turkish but from Russian aggression, it is doubtful if he would have lent himself with such vigor to that portion of his policy which had for its result the weakening of this "buffer" state. The determination to resist Russian aggression in the Balkans continues to form the purpose of English politicians of nearly all schools; but the idea that this policy is best served by maintaining the integrity of the Ottoman Empire in Europe has been steadily losing adherents since Beaconsfield's day. The one event of importance in Balkan history since 1878 has served well to illustrate this fact.

LATER CHANGES.

In September, 1885, the revolt of Eastern Roumelia partially undid the work of the Berlin treaty. After the usual negotiations between the Powers, the question at issue was settled by a conference of ambassadors at Constantinople in November, by which Eastern Roumelia was placed under the rule of the Bulgarian prince as vassal of the Sultan. This result was achieved through the agency of England, and against the opposition of Russia and other continental powers. England and Russia had in fact exchanged policies since 1878, now that the real temper of the Bulgarian people was more generally understood.

The governments of Greece and Servia, alarmed at the predominance thus given to Bulgaria among the liberated states, sought similar compensation, but were both foiled.

Servia, which sought this direct from Bulgaria, was worsted in a short war (Nov.-December 1885), and Greece was checked in her aspiration for further territorial aggrandizement at the expense of Turkey by the combined blockade of the Powers in the spring of 1886.

Since then, no geographical change has taken place in the old lands of European Turkey. Prince Alexander of Bulgaria was forced to abdicate by Russian intrigue in September 1886; but under his successor, Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg (crowned in 1887), und his able minister Stambouloff, Bulgaria has successfully preserved its autonomy.

THE PRESENT-DAY PROBLEM.

A general statement of the Balkan problem as it exists to-day may be briefly given. The non-Turkish populations of European Turkey, for the most part Christian, are divided ethnically into four groups: the Roumans or Vlachs, the Greeks, the Albanians and the Slavs. The process of liberation, as it has proceeded during the present century, has given among these people the following separate states. The Vlachs are represented in the present kingdom of Roumania ruled by a Hohenzollern prince; the Greeks are represented in the little kingdom of Greece ruled by a prince of the house of Denmark; while the Slavs are represented by three autonomous realms: Bulgaria under Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, Servia under the native dynasty of Obrenovitch, and the little principality of Montenegro, the only one of all which had never yielded to Turkish supremacy, under the Petrovic house, which is likewise native.

The Albanians alone of the four races, owing in part, perhaps, to their more or less general acceptance of Mohammedanism, have not as yet made a determined effort for separate national existence.

To these peoples, under any normal process of development, belongs the inheritance of the Turkish Empire in Europe. The time has long passed when any such process can be effectually hindered on the Turkish side. It will be hindered, if at all, either by the aggressive and rival ambitions of their two great neighbors, Austria and Russia, or by the mutual jealousies and opposing claims of the peoples themselves. The unfortunate part which these jealousies are likely to play in the history of the future was dimly foreshadowed in the events of 1885.

{xiii}

It is indeed these rival aspirations, rather than the collapse of the Turkish power, which are most likely to afford Russia and even Austria the opportunity for territorial extension over the Balkan lands. A confederation, or even a tacit understanding between the Balkan states, would do much to provide against this danger; but the idea of a confederation, though often suggested and even planned, belongs at present only to the realm of possibilities. On the one hand Servia, menaced by the proximity of Austria, leans upon Russian support; on the other, Bulgaria, under exactly reverse conditions, yields to the influence of Austria. It will be seen at once that these are unfavorable conditions on which to build up any federative action. If at the next crisis, however, the liberated states are fated to act independently, it will be seen at once that Greece and Bulgaria possess the better chance. Not only are they the most remote from any of the great powers, but they alone possess a geography which is entirely open on the Turkish side. Moreover, what is of still greater consequence, it is they who, from an ethnic standpoint, have the most legitimate interest in the still unliberated population of European Turkey. The unliberated Greek population predominates in southern Macedonia, the Chalcidian peninsula and along almost the entire seaboard, both of Thrace and Asia Minor; on the other hand the ethnographical limits of the Bulgarian people conform almost exactly to the boundaries of Bulgaria as provided for at San Stephano. The creation of a political Bulgaria to correspond to the ethnic Bulgaria was indeed the purpose of the Russian government in 1878, though with the repetition of the same conditions it would hardly be its purpose again. Barring, therefore, the Albanians of the west, who as yet have asserted no clearly defined national claim, the Greeks and the Bulgarians are the logical heirs to what remains of European Turkey.

These observations are not intended as a fore-cast; they merely indicate what would be an inevitable outcome, were the question permitted a natural settlement.

Concerning the Turks themselves a popular fallacy has ever been to consider their destiny as a whole. But here again an important division of the subject intrudes itself.

In Asia Minor, where the Turkish population overwhelmingly preponderates, the question of their destiny, barring the ever threatened Russian interference, ought not to arouse great concern in the present. But in European Turkey the utter lack of this predominance seems to deprive the Ottoman of his only legitimate title. The Turkish population in Thrace and the Balkans never did in fact constitute a majority; and with its continual decline, measured indeed by the decline of the Ottoman Empire itself, the greatest of all obstacles to an equitable and final settlement has been removed. (See the ethnic map of Europe at the present day.)

The historical geography of the Balkans during the present century is not so intricate that it may not be understood even from the current literature of the subject. The best purely geographical authority is E. Hertslet's "Map of Europe by Treaty." Of text works A. C. Fyffe's. "History of Modern Europe," and J. H. Rose's "A Century of Continental History" afford excellent general views. The facts concerning the settlement of the first northern boundary of free Greece are given in Finlay's "History of Greece," Volume VII. Of excellent works dealing more or less directly with present Balkan politics there is hardly an end. It is necessary to mention but a few: E. de Laveleye's "The Balkan Peninsula," E. A. Freeman's "The Ottoman Power in Europe," the Duke of Argyll's "The Eastern Question," and James Baker's "Turkey." See also the general bibliography of historical geography.

A. C. Reiley.

{xiv}

APPENDIX D.

NOTES TO THE DEVELOPMENT MAP OF CHRISTIANITY.

The subject matter contained in this map is of a character so distinct from that of the other maps of this series that the reader must expect a corresponding modification in the method of treatment.

The use of historical maps is confined, for the most part, to the statement of purely political conditions.

This is in fact almost the only field which admits of exact portrayal, within the limits of historical knowledge, by this method. Any other phase of human life, whether religious or social, which concerns the belief or the thought of the people rather than the exact extent of their race or their government, must remain, so far as the limitations of cartography is concerned, comparatively intangible.

Again, it should be noted that, even in the map treatment of a subject as comparatively exact as political geography, it is one condition of exactness that this treatment should be specific in its relation to a date, or at least to a limited period.

The map which treats a subject in its historical development has the undoubted merit of greater comprehensiveness; but this advantage cannot be gained without a certain loss of relation and proportion. Between the "development" map and the "date" map there is this difference: In the one, the whole subject passes before the eye in a sort of moving panorama, the salient points evident, but with their relation to external facts often obscured: in the other, the subject stands still at one particular point and permits itself to be photographed. A progressive series of such photographs, each forming a perfect picture by itself, yet each showing the clear relation with what precedes and follows, affords the method which all must regard as the most logical and the most exact. But from the very intangible nature of the subject treated in this map, the date method, with its demand for exactness, becomes impracticable. These observations are necessary in explaining the limitations of cartography in dealing with a subject of this nature. The notes that follow are intended as a simple elucidation of the plan of treatment.

The central feature in the early development of Christianity is soon stated. The new faith spread by churches from city to city until it became the religion of the Roman Empire; afterwards this spread was continued from people to people until it became the religion of Europe. The statement of the general fact in this crude and untempered form might in an ordinary case provoke criticism, and its invariable historic truth with reference to the second period be open to some question; but within the limits of map presentation it is substantially accurate. It forms, indeed, the key upon which the entire map is constructed.

THE ANTE-NICENE CHURCHES.

During the first three centuries of the Christian era, up to the Constantinian or Nicene period, there is no country, state or province which can be safely described as Christian; yet as early as the second century there is hardly a portion of the Empire which does not number some Christians in its population. The subject of the historical geography of the Christian church during the ante-Nicene period is confined, therefore, to the locating of these Christian bodies wherever they are to be found. On this portion of the subject the map makes its own statement. It is possible merely to elucidate this statement, with the suggestion, in addition, of a few points which the map does not and cannot contain.

Concerning the ante-Nicene churches there is only one division attempted. This division, into the "Apostolic" and "post-Apostolic," concerns merely the period of their foundation. Concerning the churches founded in the Apostolic period (33-100), our knowledge is practically limited to the facts culled from the Acts, the Epistles and the Apocalypse. The churches of the post-Apostolic period afford a much wider field for research, although the materials for study bearing upon them are almost as inadequate. According to the estimate of the late Professor R. D. Hitchcock, there were in the Roman Empire at the close of the persecutions about 1,800 churches, 1,000 in the East and 800 in the West. Of this total, the cities in which churches have been definitely located number only 525. They are distributed as follows: Europe 188, Asia 214, Africa 123 (see volume I, page 443). Through the labors of Professor Henry W. Hulbert, the locations of these 525 cities, so far as established, have been cast in available cartographic form.

It is much to be regretted that, despite the sanction of the author, it has been found impossible, owing to the limitations of space, to locate all of these cities in the present map. The attempt has been limited therefore to the placing of only the more prominent cities, or those whose location is subject to the least dispute.

The Apostolic and post-Apostolic churches, as they appear upon the map, are distinguished by underlines in separate colors. A special feature has been the insertion of double underlines to mark the greater centres of diffusion, so far as their special activity in this respect can be safely assumed. In this class we have as centres in Apostolic times Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Philippi, Thessalonica and Corinth; in post-Apostolic times, when the widening of the field necessitates special and limited notices, we may name Alexandria, Edessa, Rome and Carthage.

The city of Rome contains a Christian community in Apostolic times, but its activity as a great diffusion centre, prior to early post-Apostolic times, is a point of considerable historical controversy. In this respect it occupies a peculiar position, which is suggested by the special underlines in the map.

{xv}

CONVERSION OF THE EMPIRE.

The above method of treatment carries us in safety up to the accession in the West of the first Christian Emperor (311). The attempt, however, to pursue the same method beyond that period would involve us at once in insurmountable difficulties.

The exact time of the advent of the Christian-Roman world it is indeed impossible to define with precision. The Empire after the time of Constantine was predominantly Christian, yet paganism still lingered in formidable though declining strength. A map of religions designed to explain this period, even with unlimited historical material, could hardly be executed by any system, for the result could be little better than a chaos, the fragments of the old religion everywhere disappearing or blending with the new. The further treatment of the growth of Christianity by cities or churches is now impossible; for the rapid increase of the latter has carried the subject into details and intricacies where it cannot be followed: on the other hand, to describe the Roman world in the fourth century as a Christian world would be taking an unwarranted liberty with the plain facts of history.

The last feeble remnants of paganism were in fact burned away in the fierce heat of the barbaric invasions of the fifth century. After that time we can safely designate the former limits of the Roman Empire as the Christian world. From this point we can resume the subject of church expansion by the "second method" indicated at the head of this article. But concerning the transition period of the fourth and fifth centuries, from the time Christianity is predominant in the Roman world until it becomes the sole religion of the Roman world, both methods fail us and the map can tell us practically nothing.

BARBARIANS OF THE INVASION.

Another source of intricacy occurring at this point should not escape notice. It was in the fourth century that Christianity began its spread among the barbarian Teutonic nations north of the Danube. The Goths, located on the Danube, between the Theiss and the Euxine, were converted to Christianity, in the form known as Arianism, by the missionary bishop Ulphilas, and the faith extended in the succeeding century to many other confederations of the Germanic race. This fact represented, for a time, the Christianization, whole or partial, of some peoples beyond the borders of the Empire. With the migrations of the fifth and sixth centuries, however, these converts, without exception, carried their new faith with them into the Empire, and their deserted homes, left open to new and pagan settlers, simply became the field for the renewed missionary effort of a later age. It is a historical fact, from a cartographic standpoint a fortunate one, that, with all the geographic oscillations of this period between Christianity and paganism, the Christian world finally emerged with its boundaries conforming, with only a few exceptions, to the former frontiers of the Roman Empire.

Whether or not this is a historical accident it nevertheless gives technical accuracy from the geographic standpoint to the statement that Christianity first made the conquest of the Roman world; from thence it went out to complete the conquest of Europe.

CONVERSION OF EUROPE.

With the view, as afforded on the map, of the extent of Christianity at the commencement of the seventh century, we have entered definitely upon the "second method." Indeed, in Ireland, Wales and Scotland, where the Celtic church has already put forth its missionary effort, the method has, in point of date, been anticipated; but this fact need cause no confusion in treatment. Henceforth the spread of Christianity is noted as it made its way from "people to people." At this point, however, occurs the greatest intangibility of the subject. The dates given under each country represent, as stated in the key to the map, "the approximate periods of conversion." It is not to be inferred, however, that Christianity was completely unknown in any of these countries prior to the periods given, or that the work of conversion was in each case entirely completed within the time specified. But it is an absolute necessity to give some definiteness to these "periods of conversion"; to assign with all distinctness possible the time when each land passed from the list of pagan to the list of Christian nations. The dates marking the limits to these periods are perhaps chosen by an arbitrary method. The basis of their selection, however, has been almost invariably some salient point, first in the introduction and finally in the general acceptance of the Christian faith. In order that the reader may possess the easy means of independent opinion or critical judgment, the explanation is appended of the dates thus used, concerning which a question might legitimately arise.

Goths. Converted to Arian Christianity by Ulphilas, 341-381.

These dates cover the period of the ministry of Ulphilas, whose efforts resulted in the conversion of the great body of the Danubian Goths. He received his ordination and entered upon his work in 341, and died at Constantinople in 381. (See C. A. A. Scott's "Ulfilas.")

Suevi, Burgundians and Lombards.

These people, like the Goths, passed from paganism through the medium of Arian Christianity to final Orthodoxy. Concerning the first process, it is possible to establish nothing, save that these Teutonic peoples appeared in the Empire in the fifth century as professors of the Arian faith. The exact time of the acceptance of this faith is of less consequence. The second transition from Arianism to Orthodoxy occurred at a different time in each case. The Suevi embraced the Catholic faith in 550; the Visigoths, through their Catholic king Reccared, were brought within the church at the third council of Toledo (589). Further north the Burgundians embraced Catholicism through their king Sigismond in 517, and, finally, the Lombards, the last of the Arians, accepted Orthodoxy in the beginning of the seventh century. The Vandals, another Arian German nation of this period, figured in Africa in the fourth century.

They were destroyed, however, by the arms of Belisarius in 534, and their early disappearance renders unnecessary their representation on the present map.

Franks. Christianity introduced in 496.

This is the date of the historic conversion of Clovis and his warriors on the battlefield of Tolbiac. The Franks were the first of the Germanic peoples to pass, as a nation, to orthodoxy direct from paganism, and their conversion, as we have seen, was soon followed by the progress from Arianism to Orthodoxy of the other Germanic nations within the borders of the Empire.

{xvi}

Ireland. Christianity introduced by Patrick, 440-493.

St. Patrick entered upon his missionary work in Ireland in 440; he died on the scene of his labors in 493. This period witnessed the conversion of the bulk of the Irish nation.

Picts. Christianity introduced from Ireland by Columba, 563-597.

These dates cover the period of St. Columba's ministry. The work of St. Ninian, the "apostle of the Lowlands" in the previous century, left very few enduring results. The period from 563, the date of the founding of the famous Celtic monastery of Iona, to the death of Columba in 597, witnessed, however, the conversion of the great mass of the Pictish nation.

Strathclyde. Christianity introduced by Kentigern, 550-603.

These dates, like the two preceding, cover the period of the ministry of a single man, Kentigern, the "apostle of Strathclyde." The date marking the commencement of Kentigern's labors is approximate. He died in 603.

England.

The Celtic church had been uprooted in England by the Anglo-Saxon invasions of the fifth and sixth centuries. While its missionary efforts were now being expended on Scotland, Strathclyde, and Cornwall, its pristine seat had thus fallen away to complete paganism. The Christianization of England was the work of the seventh century, and in this work the Celtic church, though expending great effort, was anticipated and ultimately outstripped by the church of Rome.

Kent. Christianity introduced by Augustine, 597-604.

These dates cover the ministry of St. Augustine, the apostle of Kent. This was the first foothold gained by the Roman church on the soil of Britain.

Northumbria.—627-651.

Edwin (Eadwine), king of Northumbria, received baptism from the Kentish missionary Paulinus on Easter Eve, 627.

The process of conversion was continued by the Celtic missionary, Aidin, who died in 651. The Christianity of Northumbria had begun before the latter date, however, to influence the surrounding states.

East Anglia.—630-647.

East Anglia had one Christian king prior to this period; but it was only with the accession of Sigebert (630) that great progress was made in the conversion of the people. The reign of king Anna witnesses the practical completion of this work. In 647 the efforts of this sovereign led to the baptism of Cenwalch, king of the West Saxons.

Wessex.—634-648.

The conversion of the West Saxons was begun by the missionary Birinus in 634. The year 648 witnessed the restoration of the Christian king Cenwalch.

Mercia.—654-670.

Mercia was one of the last of the great English kingdoms to accept the faith. Their king, Penda, was indeed the most formidable foe the church encountered in the British Isles. The conversion of Penda's son Peada admitted the gospel to the Middle Angles, who accepted Christianity in 653. The East Saxons embraced the faith at about the same time. Finally in 654 the defeat and death of Penda at the hand of Oswy, the Christian king of Northumbria, opened the doors of Mercia as well. The conversion of the realm was practically accomplished during the next few years.

Sussex.—681.

The leaders of the South Saxons received baptism at the hands of the apostle Wilfred in 681. Sussex was the last retreat of paganism on the English mainland, and five years later the conversion of the inhabitants of the Isle of Wight completed the spread of Christianity over every portion of the British Isles.

Frisians. Christianity introduced by Willibrord, 690-739.

The work of St. Willibrord among the Frisians was one of many manifestations of the missionary activity of the Celtic church. Willibrord introduced Christianity among these people during the years of his ministry, but to judge by the subsequent martyrdom of Boniface in Friesland (755) the work of conversion was not fully completed in all quarters until a later time.

Mission Field of Boniface.—722-755.

The object of the map is not merely to locate the mission field of the great "apostle of Germany," but also to give the location and date of the various bishoprics which owed their foundation to his missionary efforts.

Saxons.—787-805.

Of all the nations converted to Christianity up to this time the Saxons were the first conquest of the sword. The two most powerful Saxon chiefs were baptized in 787; but it was not until their complete defeat and subjugation by Charlemagne in 805 that the work of conversion showed a degree of completeness. With the Christianization of the Saxons the cordon of the church was completed around the Germanic nations.

Moravia. Christianity introduced by Cyrillus and Methodius, 863-900.

St. Cyrillus, the "apostle of the Slavs," entered upon his mission in Moravia in 863. The political Moravia of the ninth century, under Rastislav and Sviatopluk, exceeded greatly the limits of the modern province; but the missionary labor of the brothers Cyrillus and Methodius seems to have produced its principal results in the modern Moravian territory, as indicated on the map. Methodius, the survivor of the brothers, died about 900. In the tenth century Moravia figures as Christian.

Czechs.—880-1039.

The door to Bohemia was first opened from Moravia in the time of Sviatopluk. The reactions in favor of paganism were, however, unusually prolonged and violent. Severus, Archbishop of Prague, finally succeeded in enforcing the various rules of the Christian cultus (1039).

Poles.—966-1034.

The Polish duke Mieczyslav was baptized in 966. Mieczyslav II. died in 1034. These dates cover the active missionary time when, indeed, the efforts of the clergy were backed by the strong arm of the sovereign. Poland did not, however, become completely Christian until a somewhat later period.

Bulgarians.—863-900.

The Bulgarian prince Bogoris was baptized in 863. Again, as in so many other cases, the faith was compelled to pass to the people through the medium of the sovereign. The second date is arbitrary, although Bulgaria appears definitely as a Christian country at the commencement of the tenth century.

Magyars.—950-1050.

Missionaries were admitted into the territory of the Magyars in 950.

{xvii}

The coronation of St. Stephen, the "apostolic king," (1000) marked the real triumph of Christianity in Hungary. A number of pagan reactions occurred, however, in the eleventh century, so that it is impossible to place the conversion of the Magyars at an earlier date than the last one assigned.

Russians.—988-1015.

The Russian grand-duke Vladimir was baptized on the occasion of his marriage to the princess Anne, sister of the Byzantine Emperor, in 988. Before his death in 1015 Christianity had through his efforts become the accepted religion of his people.

Danes.—Converted by Ansgar and his successors, 827-1035.

The Danes had been visited by missionaries prior to the ninth century, but their work had left no permanent result. The arrival of Ansgar, the "apostle of the North" (827), marks the real beginning of the period of conversion. This period in Denmark was an unusually long one. It was not fully complete until the reign of Canute the Great (1019-1035).

Swedes (Gothia). Christianity introduced by Ansgar and his successors, 829-1000.

Ansgar made his first visit to Sweden in 829, two years after his arrival in Denmark. The period of conversion, as in Denmark, was a long one; but by the year 1000 the southern section, Gothia or Gothland, had become Christian. The conversion of the northern Swedes was not completed for another century.

Norwegians.—935-1030.

The period of conversion in Norway began with the reign of the Christian king Hakon the Good. The faith made slow progress, however, until the reign of Olaf Trygveson, who ascended the throne near the end of the tenth century. The work of conversion was completed in the reign of Olaf the Saint (1014-1030).

Pomeranians. Christianity introduced by Otho of Bamberg, 1124-1128.

The attempt of the Poles to convert the Pomeranians by the sword prior to these dates had proven unavailing, and missionaries had been driven from the country. Within the short space of four years, however, Otho of Bamberg succeeded in bringing the great mass of the people within the pale of the church.

Abotrites.—1125-1162.

The conversion of these people was clearly the work of the sword. It was accomplished within the time specified by Albert the Bear, first margrave of Brandenburg, and Henry the Lion, duke of Saxony. The last heathen king became the first Christian duke of Mecklenburg in 1162. Further south the kindred Wend nations between the Elbe and the Oder had been the object of German effort, both missionary and military, for over two centuries, but had generally come within the church before this time.

Lives and Prussians. Christianity introduced by the Sword Brothers, 1202-1236, and by the Teutonic Knights, 1230-1289.

These conversions, the work of the transplanted military orders of Palestine, were direct conquests of the sword, and as such possess a definiteness which is so unfortunately lacking in so many other cases.

So much for the character and the purpose of the dates which appear on this map. In the employment of the colors, the periods covered are longer, and as a consequence the general results are somewhat more definite. The use of a color system directly over a date system is intended to afford an immediate though general view, From this to the special aspects presented by the date features is a simple step in the development of the subject.

Another feature of the map which may not escape notice is the different systems used, respectively, in the Roman and Mediæval period for the spelling of urban names. A development map covering a long period of history cannot be entirely free from anachronisms of this nature; but a method has nevertheless been followed in the spelling of these place names:—to give in each case the spelling current at the period of conversion. The fact that the labors of the Christian missionaries were confined mostly to the Roman world in the Roman period, and did not extend to non-Roman lands until the Middle Ages, enables us to limit our spelling of civic names to a double system. The cities of the Roman and of the Mediæval period are shown on the map and in the key in two different styles of type. Only in the cases of cities like Rome, Constantinople and Antioch, where the current form has the absolute sanction of usage even for classic times, has there been any deviation from the strict line of this method.

In conclusion, the general features of the subject present themselves as follows: Had the advance of Christianity, like Mohammedanism, been by conquest, had the bounds of the Christian faith been thus rendered ever conterminous with the limits of a people or an empire, then, indeed, the subject of church expansion would possess a tangibility and coherency concerning which exact statement would be possible. The historical geography of the Christian church would then partake of some of the precision of political division. But the non-political element in the Christian cultus deprives us, in the study of the subject, of this invaluable aid. At a later time, when the conquests of the soul were backed by the strong arm of power, and when the new faith, as often happened, passed to the people from the sovereign, a measure of this exactness is perhaps possible.

We have witnessed an indication of these tendencies in many cases, as we approached the termination of the period covered by this map. But the fact remains that the fundamental character of the Christian faith precludes, in the main, the possibility of its growth being measured by the rules which govern ordinary political expansion.

This being then a subject on which definiteness is well nigh impossible, it has been treated by a method correspondingly elastic. A working basis for the study of the subject is, however, afforded by this system. This basis secured, the student may then systematically pursue his theme.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

The historical geography of the Christian church, if studied only within narrow limits, can be culled from the pages of general church history. All of these accounts, however, are brief—those in the smaller histories extremely so. If studied thus, the reader will derive the most help from:

Neander's "History of the Christian Religion and Church," volume I, pages 68-86. volume II, pages 1-84, 93-129;

Schaff's "History of the Christian Church," volume I, pages 224-406, volume II, pages 13-84, volume III, pages 10-71, volume IV, pages 17-142,

Moeller's "History of the Christian Church."

{xviii}

These works may be supplemented by a vast number of books treating of special phases of church history, though the number in English dealing specifically with geographical expansion is very small.

The most recent, dealing with the ante-Nicene period, is Ramsey's "Church in the Roman Empire before A. D. 170," to which the same author's "Historical Geography of Asia Minor" forms a most indispensible prelude.

Entering the mediæval period, the best general guides are the little books of G. F. Maclear, entitled respectively the conversion of the Celts, English, Continental Teutons, Northmen and Slavs. These works may be supplemented by Thomas Smith's "Mediæval Missions," and for special subjects by G. T. Stokes' "Ireland and the Celtic Church," W. F. Skene's "Celtic Scotland" (volume II), and S. Baring Gould's "The Church in Germany."

The texts of the Councils as contained in Harduin, Labbe, and Mansi are indispensible original aids in the study of church geography.

Of German Works, J. E. T. Wiltsch's "Atlas Sacer," and the same author's "Church Geography and Statistics," translated by John Leitch, have long remained the standard guides for a study of the historical geography of the church. The Atlas Sacer, containing five large plates, is the only pure atlas guide to the subject. The "Church Geography and Statistics," being an ecclesiastical work, dwells with great fulness on the internal facts of church geography, but the outward expansion, barring the early growth of the church, is not so concisely treated. For the history of mediæval missions the reader will be better served elsewhere. To the reader using German, C. G. Blumhardt's "Die Missionsgeschichte der Kirche Christi" (3 volumes, 1828-1837), and a later work, "Handbuch der Missionsgeschichte und Missionsgeographie" (2 volumes, 1863), may be noted.

For modern missions there is a very full literature. Comprehensive works on this subject are Grundemann's "Allgemeine Missions Atlas," Burkhardt and Grundemann's "Les Missions Evangéliques" (4 vols.), and in English the "Encyclopædia of Missions." Several articles in the "Encyclopædia of Missions" should not escape notice. Among them are "Mediæval Missions," and the "Historical Geography of Missions," the latter by Dr. Henry W. Hulbert. The writer is glad at this point to return his thanks to Dr. Hulbert for the valued aid extended in the location of the Church of the ante-Nicene period.

A. C. Reiley

{xix}

APPENDIX E.

THE FOLLOWING NOTES AND CORRECTIONS TO MATTER RELATING TO AMERICAN ABORIGINES.

(PP. 76-108) HAVE BEEN KINDLY MADE BY MAJOR J. W. POWELL AND MR. J. OWEN DORSEY, OF THE BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY.

Adai.

This tribe, formerly classed as a distinct family—the Adaizan—is now regarded by the Bureau of Ethnology as but a part of the Caddoan or Pawnee.

Apache Group.

Indians of different families are here mentioned together: (A) the Comanches, etc., of the Shoshonean Family; (B) the Apaches (including the Chiricaguis, or Chiri cahua, Coyoteros, etc., but excluding the Tejuas who are Tañoan) of the Athapascan Family, the Navajos of the same family; and (C) the Yuman Family, including the Cosninos, who are not Apache (Athapascan stock).

Athapascan Family.

Not an exact synonym of "Chippewyans, Tinneh and Sarcees." The whole family is sometimes known as Tinneh, though that appellation is more frequently limited to part of the Northern group, the Chippewyans. The Surcees are an offshoot of the Beaver tribe, which latter form part of one of the subdivisions of the Northern group of the Athapascan Family. The Sarcees are now with the Blackfeet.

Atsinas (Caddoes).

The Atsinas are not a Caddoan people, but they are Algonquian, as are the Blackfeet (Sik-sik-a). The Atsinas are the "Fall Indians," "Minnetarees of the Plains," or "Gros Ventres of the Plains," as distinguished from the Hidatsa, who are sometimes called the "Minnetarees of the Missouri," "Gros Ventres of the Missouri."

Blackfeet or Siksikas.

The Sarcee are a Tinneh or Athapascan tribe, but they are not the Tinneh (see above). The "Atsina" are not a Caddo tribe (see above).

Cherokees.

These people are now included in the Iroquoian Family. See Powell, in Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, page 79.

Flatheads (Salishan Family).

The "Cherakis," though included among the Flatheads by Force, are of the Iroquoian Family. The "Chicachas" or Chickasaws, are not Salishan, but Muskhogean. See Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, page 95. The Totiris of Force, are the Tutelos, a tribe of the Siouan Family. See Powell, Seventh, Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, page 116. The Cathlamahs, Killmucks (i. e., Tillamooks), Clatsops, Chinooks and Chilts are of the Chinookan Family. See Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, pages 65, 66.

Gros Ventres (Minnetaree; Hidatsa).

There are two distinct tribes which are often confounded, both being known as the Gros Ventres or Minnetarees. 1. The Atsina or Fall Indians, an Algonquian tribe, the "Gros Ventres of the Plains," or the "Minnetarees of the Plains." 2. The Hidatsa, a Siouan tribe, the "Gros Ventres of the Missouri," or the "Minnetarees of the Missouri." The former, the Atsina, have been wrongly styled "Caddoes" on page 81.

Hidatsa, or Minnetaree, or Gros Ventres.

Often confounded with the Atsina, who belong to the Algonquian Family, the Hidatsa being a tribe of the Siouan Family. The Hidatsa have been called Gros Ventres, "Big Paunches," but this nickname could have no reference to any personal peculiarities of the Hidatsa. It seems to have originated in a quarrel between some Indians over the big paunch of a buffalo, resulting in the separation of the people into the present tribes of Hidatsas and Absarokas or Crows, the latter of whom now call the Hidatsa, "Ki-kha-tsa," from ki-kha, a paunch.

Hupas.

They belong to the Athapascan Family: the reference to the Modocs is misleading.

Iroquois Tribes of the South. "The Meherrins or Tuteloes."

These were not identical, the Tutelos being a Siouan tribe, the Meherrins being now identified with the Susquehannocks.

Kenai or Blood Indians.

The Kenai are an Athapascan people inhabiting the shores of Cook's Inlet and the Kenai Peninsula, Southern Alaska; while the Blood Indians are a division of the Blackfeet (Siksika), an Algonquian tribe, in Montana.

Kusan Family.

The villages of this family were on Coos River and Bay, and on both sides of Coquille River, near the mouth. See Powell, Seventh, Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, page 80.

ALSO IN: J. Owen Dorsey, The Gentile System of the Siletz Tribes, in Journal American Folk-Lore, July-Sept., 1890, page 231.

Minnetarees.

See above, ATSINA and HIDATSA.

Modocs (Klamaths) and their California and Oregon neighbors.

The Klamaths and Modocs are of the Lutuamian Family; the Shastas of the Sastean; the Pit River Indians of the Palaihnihan; the Eurocs of the Weitspekan; the Cahrocs of the Quoratean; the Hoopahs, Tolewas, and the lower Rogue River Indians of the Athapascan; the upper Rogue River Indians of the Takilman.

Muskhogean Family.

The Biloxi tribe is not Muskhogean but Siouan. See Dorsey (James Owen), "The Biloxi Indians of Louisiana," reprinted from volume 42, Proc. American Association Advancement of Science., Madison meeting, 1893.

Natchitoches.

A tribe of the Caddoan Family.

_Dorsey (J. Owen), MS. in the Bureau of Ethnology, 1882._

ALSO IN: Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, page 61.

Pueblos.

"That Zuni was Cibola it is needless to attempt to prove any further."

A. F. Bandelier, Journal of American Eth. and Arch., volume 3, page 19, 1892.

{xx}

Rogue River Indians.

This includes tribes of various families: the upper Rogue River Indians being the Takelma, who are assigned to a special family, the Takilman; and the lower Rogue River Indians, who are Athapascan tribes.

See Dorsey (J. Owen), "The Gentile System of the Siletz Tribes," in Journal of American Folk-Lore, July-September, 1890, pages 228, 232-236.

Santees.

Two divisions of the Siouan Family are known by this name: 1. The I san-ya-ti or Dwellers on Knife Lake, Minnesota, identical with the Mdewakantonwan Dakota. These figured in the Minnesota outbreak of 1862. The survivors are in Knox County, Nebraska, on what was once the Santee reservation, and near Flandreau, South Dakota. 2. The Santees of South Carolina were part of the Catawba confederacy. The Santee river is named after them.

Sarcee.

These are not all of the Tinneh, nor are they really Blackfeet, though living with them. The Sarcees are an offshoot of the Beaver Indians, a tribe of one of the divisions of the Northern group of the Athapascan Family.

Siouan Family.

All the tribes of this family do not speak the Sioux language, as is wrongly stated on page 103. Those who speak the "Sioux" language are the Dakota proper, nicknamed Sioux, and the Assiniboin. There are, or have been, nine other groups of Indians in this family: to the Cegiha or Dhegiha group belong the Omahas, Ponkas, Osages, Kansas or Kaws, and Kwapas or Quapaws; to the Tchiwere group belong the Iowas, Otos, and Missouris; the Winnebago or Hochangara constitute another group; the fifth group consists of the survivors of the Mandan nation; to the sixth group belong the Hidatsa and the Absarokas or Crows; the Tutelos, Keyauwees, Aconeechis, etc., constituted the seventh group; the tribes of the Catawba confederacy, the eighth; the Biloxis, the ninth; and certain Virginia tribes the tenth group. The Winnebagos call themselves Hochangara, or First Speech (not "Trout Nation"), they are not called Horoje ("fish-eaters") by the Omahas, but Hu-tan-ga, Big Voices, a mistranslation of Hochangara. The Dakotas proper sometimes speak of themselves as the "O-che-ti sha-ko-win," or the Seven Council-fires. Their Algonquian foes called them Nadowe-ssi-wak, the Snake-like ones, from nadowe, a snake; this was corrupted by the Canadian French to Nadouessioux, of which the last syllable is Sioux. The seven primary divisions of the Dakota are as follow: Mdewakantonwan, Wakhpekute, Sisitonwan or Sisseton, Wakhpetonwan or Warpeton, Ihanktonwan or Yankton, Ihanktonwanna or Yanktonnai, and Titonwan or Teton.

The Sheyennes or Cheyennes, mentioned in connection with the Sioux by Gallatin and Carver, are an Algonquian people. Gallatin styles the "Mandanes" a Minnetaree tribe; but as has just been stated, the survivors of the Mandan nation, a people that formerly inhabited many villages (according to Dr. Washington Matthews and others) belong to a distinct group of the Siouan Family, and the Hidatsa (including the Amakhami or "Annahawas" of Gallatin) and the Absaroka, Upsaroka or Crows constitute the sixth group of that family. The "Quappas or Arkansas" of Gallatin are the Kwapas or Quapaws of recent times. The Osages call themselves, not "Wausashe," but Wa-sha-she.

Takilman Family.

"The Takilma formerly dwelt in villages along upper Rogue River, Oregon, all the latter, with one exception, being on the south side, from Illinois River on the southwest, to Deep Rock, which was nearer the head of the stream. They are now included among the 'Rogue River Indians,' and they reside on the Siletz Reservation, Tillamook County, Oregon, where Dorsey found them in 1884."

Powell, Seventh Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology, page 121.

They call themselves, Ta-kel-ma

Dorsey.

Dorsey had their chief make a map showing the locations of all their villages.

{xxi}

[Transcriber's note: The internet links listed were active at the time of this production in 2021. The link may be to a different edition than listed. Most are to archive.org or gutenberg.org, both excellent repositories of free books. An internet search (duckduckgo, google, bing, …) will provide links to many other sources. These were produced by entering the author and title, as shown in the list, eg.,

BANCROFT, GEORGE. History of the United States of America, site:archive.org

Without the site restriction (site:archive.org) the search results are flooded with links to commercial sites, hiding the actual targets.

Results can be extended by noting the sequence number in a link such as: (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds04banciala (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds05banciala Try modifying the number for adjacent volumes of the same title.]

APPENDIX F. BIBLIOGRAPHY.

THE BETTER LITERATURE OF HISTORY IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ON SUBJECTS NAMED BELOW.

In the following Classified List, the date of the first appearance of each one among the older works is given in parentheses, if ascertained. The period covered by the several memoirs, and other works limited in time, is stated in brackets.

AMERICA. DISCOVERY. EXPLORATION. SETTLEMENT. ARCHÆOLOGY. ETHNOLOGY.

GENERAL.

BANCROFT, GEORGE. History of the United States of America, part 1. (Author's last revision.) New York: D. Appleton & Company 1883-5. 6 volumes. https://archive.org/details/historyoftheunit037605mbp (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofusa01bancrich (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofunited32banc (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofusa03bancrich (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds04banciala (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds05banciala (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds06banciala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyoftheunit037606mbp (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds0004banc/page/n7/mode/2up

BANCROFT, HUBERT HOWE. History of the Pacific States of North America: Central America, volumes 1-2; Mexico, volumes 1-2. San Francisco: A. L. Bancroft & Company 1882-3. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics11bategoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics15bategoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics16bategoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics26bategoog (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics24bategoog (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics13bategoog (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics30bategoog (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics02bategoog (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics23bategoog (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics04bategoog (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics29bategoog (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics03bategoog (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics06bategoog (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics07bategoog (Volume 12) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics05bategoog (Volume 13) https://archive.org/details/historyofpacific13bancrich (Volume 14) https://archive.org/details/historyofpacific14bancrich (Volume 14) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics09bategoog (Volume 15) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics01bategoog (Volume 16) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics10bategoog (Volume 17) https://archive.org/details/historyofpacific17bancrich (Volume 17) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics22bategoog (Volume 18) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics08bategoog (Volume 19) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics20bategoog (Volume 19) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics27bategoog (Volume 20) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics31bategoog (Volume 21) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics17bategoog (Volume 22) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics18bategoog (Volume 23) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics28bategoog (Volume 24) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics19bategoog (Volume 25) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics26bategoog (Volume 26) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics12bategoog (Volume 27) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics21bategoog (Volume 31) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics25bategoog (Volume 32) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics15bategoog (Volume 33) https://archive.org/details/historypacifics14bategoog

BANVARD, REVEREND JOSEPH. Novelties of the new world. Boston: Gould & Lincoln. 1851. https://archive.org/details/noveltiesofnew00banv

BELKNAP, JEREMY. American biography, volume 1. (1794-8.) New York: Harper & Brothers. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/americanbiograph185101belk (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_48978 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37965

BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY. Notes of Americana. (Bulletins, volume 3. pages 205-209.)

BROWNELL, HENRY. North and South America Illustrated, from its first discovery. Hartford: Hurlbut, Kellogg & Company 1800. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/northsouthameric11brow (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/northsouthamill01browrich (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/northandsoutham00browgoog

BRYANT, WILLIAM CULLEN, and SIDNEY H. GAY. Popular history of the United States, volume 1. New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co. 1870-81. 4 volumes. https://archive.org/details/3704730.1-4

BUMP, C. W. Bibliographies of America. Baltimore. 1892. (Johns Hopkins University studies in historical and political science. 10th series, nos. 10-11. appendix)

CARVER, ELVIRA, and MARA L. PRATT. Our fatherland. [Juvenile.] Boston: Educational Publication Company. 1890. volume 1-. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/ourfatherland00carv (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/ourfatherlandvol01carvuoft

FISKE, JOHN. The discovery of America: with some account of ancient America and the Spanish conquest. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1892. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/discoveryamerica01fisk (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/discoveryofameri02fisk

GORDON, THOMAS F. History of America, volumes. 1-2; containing the history of the Spanish discoveries prior to 1520. Philadelphia. 1832. 2 volumes. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyamericab00gordgoog

HAKLUYT, RICHARD. collection Divers voyages touching the discovery of America and the Islands adjacent (1582); with notes by John W. Jones. London: Hakluyt Society. 1850. https://archive.org/details/diversvoyagesto00thorgoog

HARRISSE, HENRY. The discovery of North America: a critical, documentary, and historic investigation. London: H. Stevens & Son. 1892.

HIGGINSON, THOMAS WENTWORTH. A book of American explorers. Boston: Lee & Shepard. 1877.

Larger history of the United States of America, chapters 1-5. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1880.

HOLMES, ABIEL. The annals of America, 1492-1826 (1805); 2d edition. Cambridge: Hilliard & Brown. 1829. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/annalsamer00holmrich (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/annalsamerica02holmgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cihm_47269 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/americanannals00unkngoog

HUMBOLDT, ALEXANDER VON. Cosmos (1845-58), translated by E. C. Otté, part 2, section 6 (volume 2). London: H. Bohn. 1847-58. 5 volumes (Audio) https://archive.org/details/cosmos_1603_librivox (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cosmosasketchap00dallgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cosmossketchofph0002humb/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/cosmosofph03humbrich (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/sketchofphcosmos04humbrich

New York: Harper & Brothers 1850-. 5 volumes. https://archive.org/details/cosmos01humbgoog

KERR, ROBERT, ed. General history and collection of voyages and travels (1811-1824). volumes 1-6. Edinburgh: W. Blackwood. 18 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory06kerrgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/generalhistoryco02kerrrich (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory02kerrgoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_zb46AAAAIAAJ (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory07kerrgoog (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory08kerrgoog (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/generalhistoryco05kerrrich (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory15kerrgoog (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory10kerrgoog (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory12kerrgoog (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory09kerrgoog (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory11kerrgoog (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory04kerrgoog (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.18187 (Volume 12) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory14kerrgoog (Volume 13) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory05kerrgoog (Volume 15) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory13kerrgoog (Volume 18) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory10unkngoog/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 18) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory03kerrgoog

KINGSLEY, CHARLES. The first discovery of America. (Lectures delivered in America in 1874. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1875. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates. 1875.) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1360 https://archive.org/details/lecturesdelivere00king

LODGE, H. C. Gravier's Découverte de l'Amérique. (North American Review 119: 166. 1874.)

MACGREGOR, JOHN. Progress in America. London: Whittaker & Company. 1847. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/progressofameric01macguoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/progressamerica02macggoog

MACKENZIE, ROBERT. America; a history. London: Nelson & Sons. 1882. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.87679

MAVOR, WILLIAM. Historical account of the most celebrated voyages. volumes 1 and 17. London: 1790-7. 20 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou01conggoog/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou02conggoog/page/n6/mode/2up (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou13conggoog (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37601 (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37604 (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/anhistoricalacc03mavogoog (Volume 13) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou11conggoog (Volume 16) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou09conggoog (Volume 17) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou17mavogoog (Volume 19) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou09mavogoog (Volume 20) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37614 (Volume 21) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37615 (Volume 22) https://archive.org/details/anhistoricalacc10mavogoog (Volume 23) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37617 (Volume 24) https://archive.org/details/historicalaccou08mavogoog/page/n8/mode/2up (Volume 24) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37618

PALFREY, JOHN G. History of New England, volume 1, chapter 2. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1858-90. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historynewengla23palfgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofnewengl02palf (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofnewengl0002palf/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofnewengl00palf

PAYNE, EDWARD JOHN. History of the new world called America. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1892-. volume 1-. New York: Macmillan & Company. 1892-. volume 1-. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/histnewworld01paynrich (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/histnewworld02paynrich

PINKERTON, JOHN, ed. General collection of the best and most interesting voyages and travels, volume 14. London: Longman. 1808-14. 17 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_18698 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio01pink (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio02pink (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio04pink (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio04pinkuoft (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/ageneralcollect05pinkgoog/page/n15/mode/2up (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/cihm_18703 (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio07pink (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/ageneralcollect03unkngoog/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio09pink (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio10pink (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio11pink (Volume 13) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio12pink (Volume 14) https://archive.org/details/generalcollectio14pink (Volume 16) https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.5489 (Volume 17) https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.1668

ROBERTSON, WILLIAM. History of America (1777-96). (Works, volumes 6-8. Oxford: Talboys & Wheeler. 1825.) (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyamerica12robegoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/americarobertson00willrich/page/n3/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyamericab00robegoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofamerica03robe (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyamerica01unkngoog

SCAIFE, WALTER B. America, its geographical history, 1492-1892. (Johns Hopkins University studies in historical and political science, extra volume 13.) Baltimore. 1892. https://archive.org/details/americaitsgeogra00scairich

SNOWDEN, RICHARD. History of North and South America, from its discovery to the death of General Washington. (1806.) Philadelphia: B. Warner. 2 volumes. (Volume 1, 2) /phttps://archive.org/details/historynorthand00snowgoog

STEVENS, HENRY. Historical and geographical notes on the earliest discoveries in America, 1453-1530. London: Henry Stevens. 1869. New Haven: American Journal of Science. 1869. https://archive.org/details/historicalandge00stevgoog

WILLSON, MARCIUS. American history. New York: Mark H. Newman & Company. 1847. https://archive.org/details/americanhistory00will

WINSOR, JUSTIN. Harrisse's Discovery of North America Nation, 55: 244. 264. https://archive.org/details/jstor-196715/page/n11/mode/2up

Editor, Narrative and critical history of America Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company 1886. 8 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica01wins/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 1, 1)https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica51wins (Volume 1, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica12wins (Volume 2 )https://archive.org/details/narrcrithistamerica02winsrich (Volume 2, 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica21wins (Volume 2, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica22wins (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica0003wins/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 3, 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica31wins (Volume 3, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica32wins (Volume 4 ) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica04wins (Volume 4, 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica41wins (Volume 4, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica42wins (Volume 5 ) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica0005wins/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 5, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica52wins (Volume 6, 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica61wins (Volume 6, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica62wins/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica0007wins/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 7, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica72wins (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica0008wins/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 8, 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica82wins

YATES, JOHN V. N., and MOULTON, JOS. W. History of the state of New York, volume 1, part 1. New York: A. T. Goodrich. 1924-6. 2 volumes. (Volume1, 1)https://archive.org/details/historyofstateof12moul_0 (Part 2)https://archive.org/details/historyofstateof02moul/page/n3/mode/2up

PRE-COLUMBIAN DISCOVERIES.

ANDERSON, RASMUS B. America not discovered by Columbus. Chicago: S. C. Griggs & Company. 1874. https://archive.org/details/americanotdiscov00andeiala

BEAMISH, NORTH LUDLOW. The discovery of America by the Northmen in the 10th century. London: T. & W. Boone 1841. https://archive.org/details/discoveryameric00beamgoog

BOWEN, Reverend BENJ. F. America discovered by the Welsh in 1170. A. D. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 1876. https://archive.org/details/americadiscovere00boweuoft

DALL, W. H. Alleged early Chinese voyages to America. (Science, 8: 402. 1886.)

DAVIS, ASAHEL. Discovery of America by the Northmen. Rochester: D. Hoyt. 1839. https://archive.org/details/lectureondiscove00davi

DE COSTA, Reverend BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, editor. The pre-Columbian discovery of America by the Northmen, illustrated by translations from the Icelandic sagas. Albany: Joel Munsell. 1868. https://archive.org/details/precolumbiandisc00deco http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/41221

{xxii}

DIMAN, J. L. De Costa's Pre-Columbian discovery of America, (North American Review, 109: 205. 1869.) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/41221

DISCOVERY OF AMERICA BY THE NORTHMEN. (Atlantic Monthly, 54: 282. 1884.)

DU BOIS, B. H. Did the Norse discover America? (Magazines of American History, 27: 369. 1892.)

ELLIOTT, CHARLES W. The New England history, chapter 1. New York: Charles Scribner. 1857. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/newenglandhisto04elligoog

EVERETT, EDWARD. Discovery of America by the Northmen. (North American Review, 46: 161. 1838.)

FISKE, JOHN. How America came to be discovered. (Harper's Magazine, 64: 111. 1881.)

HIGGINSON, THOMAS W. The visit of the Vikings, (Harper's Magazine, 65: 515. 1882.)

HORSFORD, EBEN NORTON. The problem of the Northmen. Cambridge: J. Wilson & Son. 1889. https://archive.org/details/problemofnorthme00hors

LEGENDS OF OLD America. (Cornhill Magazine 26: 452. 1872.)

LELAND, CHARLES GODFREY. The ante-Norse discoverers of America (Continental Monthly, 1: 389,530. 1862)

Fusang: or the discovery of America by Chinese Buddhist priests in the 5th century. London: Trübner. 1875. New York: J. W. Bouton, 1875. http://link.archive.org/portal/Fusang-or-The-discovery-of-America-by-Chinese/ZD2URRe5Nbs/

MacLEAN, J. P. Pre-Columbian discovery of America (American Antiquarian, 14, 1892)

MAJOR, RICHARD HENRY. The life of prince Henry of Portugal, surnamed the navigator, and its results. London: A. Asher & Company, 1868. https://archive.org/details/lifeofprincehenr00majo

On the voyages of the Venetian brothers Zeno. (Massachusetts History Society Proceedings, 1873-75.)

Translator and editor. Voyages of the Venetian brothers, Nicolò and Antonio Zeno, to the northern seas, in the 14th century. London: Hakluyt Society. 1873. https://archive.org/details/voyagesofvenetia00zenorich

ONDERDONK, J. L. Pre-Columbian discoveries of America, (National Quarterly Review, 33: 1. 1876.) https://archive.org/details/precolumbiandis00ondegoog/page/n4/mode/2up

PILON, M. R. Visits of Europeans to America in the 10th and 11th centuries. (Potter's American Monthly, 5: 903. 1875.)

RANKING, JOHN, Historical researches on the conquest of Peru, Mexico, etc., in the 13th century, by the Mongols. London: Longman. 1827. https://archive.org/details/historicalresear00rank

REEVES, ARTHUR MIDDLETON. The finding of Wineland the good. London: Henry Frowde. 1890. https://archive.org/details/winelandthegood00reevrich

ROPES, A. R. Early explorations of America, real and imaginary. (English Historical Review, 2: 78. 1887.)

SHORT, JOHN T. Claims to the discovery of America (Galaxy, 20: 509. 1875.)

SLAFTER, Rev. EDMUND F. The discovery of America by the Northmen 985-1015: a discourse delivered before the New Hampshire Historical Society, April 24, 1888. https://archive.org/details/winelandthegood00reevrich

Editor. Voyages of the Northmen to America; including extracts from the Icelandic sagas in an English translation by N. L. Beamish, opinion of Professor Rafn, etc. Boston: Prince Society. 1877. https://archive.org/details/voyagesofnorthme00slafiala

SMITH, JOSHUA TOULMIN. The discovery of America by the Northmen In the 10th century; comprising translations of all the most important original narratives (1839). 2d edition. London: William S. Orr & Company 1842. https://archive.org/details/discoveryofameri00smit

SOUTHEY, ROBERT. Madoc (1805). London: Longmans. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/madoc03soutgoog/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/madoc00soutgoog/page/n6/mode/2up

STEPHENS, THOMAS. Madoc; an essay on the discovery of America by Madoc ap Owen Gwynedd in the 12th century. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1893. https://archive.org/details/madocessayondisc00stepuoft

STORM, GUSTAV. Studies on the Vineland voyages. Copenhagen: Thiele. 1889.

VINING, EDWARD P. An inglorious Columbus; or, evidence that Hwui Shán and a party of Buddhist monks from Afghanistan discovered America in the 5th century. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1885. https://archive.org/details/ingloriouscolumb00vini

VOYAGES TO VINLAND, THE; from the saga of Eric the red. Boston: D. C. Heath & Company. (Old South leaflets, general series, No.31.) https://archive.org/details/cihm_07112/page/n5/mode/2up

WATSON, PAUL B. Bibliography of the pre-Columbian discoveries of America. (Library Journal, 6: 227. 1881.)

WINSOR, JUSTIN. America prefigured: an address at Harvard, October 21, 1892. Cambridge. 1893. https://archive.org/details/prefiguredamerica00winsrich/page/4/mode/2up

COLUMBUS

ADAMS, CHARLES KENDALL. Christopher Columbus, his life and work. ("Makers of America.") New York: Dodd, Mead & Company. 1892. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/54929 https://archive.org/details/christophercolum00adamrich

Some recent discoveries concerning Columbus. (Magazine of American History, 27: 161, 1892.)

ADAMS, HERBERT B., and HENRY WOOD. Columbus and his discovery of America. (Johns Hopkins University studies in historical and political science, 10th series, Numbers 10-11,) Baltimore, October-November, 1892. https://archive.org/details/columbusandhisd00woodgoog

BLIND, K. The forerunners of Columbus. (New Review, 7: 346, Living Age, 195: 387. 1892.)

CASTELAR, EMILIO. Christopher Columbus. (Century, 22: 123-921. 1892.) https://archive.org/details/centuryillustrat44newyuoft

COLUMBUS, CHRISTOPHER. Journal, 1492-3; and documents relating to the voyages of John [and Sebastian] Cabot and Gaspar Corte Real; translated by C. R. Markham. London: Hakluyt Society. 1893. https://archive.org/details/cihm_05312

The letter on the discovery of America; a facsimile of the pictorial edition, with a new and literal translation. Printed by the Lenox Library. New York. 1882. https://archive.org/details/letterofcolumbus00colum

Letter to Gabriel Sanchez, 1493. Boston: D. C. Heath & Company. (Old South leaflets, general series, No. 33.) https://archive.org/details/spanishletterco00kerngoog

Select letters, with other original documents; translated and edited by R. H. Major. London: Hakluyt Society. 1847.

Writings descriptive of the discovery and occupation of the new world; edited by Paul Leicester Ford. New York: C. L. Webster & Company. 1892.

COLUMBUS, FERDINAND. The discovery of America; from the life of Columbus. Boston: D. C. Heath & Company. (Old South leaflets, general series, No. 29.)

ELTON, CHARLES. The career of Columbus. New York: Cassell Publishing Company. 1892. https://archive.org/details/careercolumbus00eltogoog

GOODRICH, AARON. History of the character and achievements of the so-called Christopher Columbus. New York: D. Appleton & Company, 1874. https://archive.org/details/historyofcharact00good

HELPS, Sir ARTHUR, and H. P. Thomas. Life of Columbus. London: Bell & Daldy. 1869. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/15336

IRVING, WASHINGTON. Life and voyages of Christopher Columbus (1828); to which are added those of his companions (1831). New York: G. P. Putnam. 3 volumes. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/8519 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyoflifeand01irviiala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyoflifeand02irviiala (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyoflifeand03irviiala (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/lifeandvoyagesc05irvigoog

LORGUES, ROSELLY DE. Life of Christopher Columbus, from Spanish and Italian documents; comp. from the French by J. J. Barry. Boston: P. Donahoe. 1870. https://archive.org/details/lifeofchristophe00rose

MACKIE, CHARLES PAUL. The last voyages of the Admiral of the Ocean Sea, as related by himself and his companions. Chicago: A. C. McClurg & Company. 1892. https://archive.org/details/lastvoyagesadmi00paulgoog

MACKINTOSH, J. The discovery of America by Columbus and the origin of the North American Indians. Toronto. 1836. https://archive.org/details/discoveryameric00mcingoog

MARKHAM, CLEMENTS R. Life of Christopher Columbus. London: George Philip & Son. 1892. https://archive.org/details/cu31924020393413

MAURY, M. An examination of the claims of Columbus. (Harper's Magazines, 42: 425, 527. 1871.)

OBER, FREDERICK A. In the wake of Columbus; adventures of the special commissioner sent by the World's Columbian Exposition to the West Indies. Boston: D. Lothrop Company. 1893. https://archive.org/details/inwakecolumbusa00obergoog

SEELYE, ELIZABETH EGGLESTON. The story of Columbus; with introduction by Edward Eggleston. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1892. https://archive.org/details/storyofcolumbus00seel

SPALDING, J. L., Columbus, (Catholic World, 56: 1. 1892.)

TARDUCCI, FRANCESCO. The life of Christopher Columbus; translated from the Italian by H. F. Brownson. Detroit: H. F. Brownson. 1890. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/lifechriscolum01tardrich (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/lifechristopher00browgoog

WINSOR, JUSTIN. Christopher Columbus, and how he received and imparted the spirit of discovery. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1891. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.158654

Columbiana. (Nation, 52: 297. 1891.)

POST-COLUMBIAN DISCOVERIES.

ARBER, EDWARD. editor. The first three English books on America (?1511)-1555 A. D.; being chiefly translations, compilations, &c., by Richard Eden, from the writings of Pietro Martire, Sebastian Münster, Sebastian Cabot. Birmingham. 1885. https://archive.org/details/firstthreeenglis00arberich

ASHER, G. M., editor Henry Hudson the navigator: original documents in which his career is recorded. London: Hakluyt Society. 1860. https://archive.org/details/henryhudsonnavig27ashe

BIDDLE, RICHARD. Memoir of Sebastian Cabot. Philadelphia: Carey & Lea. 1831. https://archive.org/details/sebastiancabot00biddrich

BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY. America in the 16th century (bibliographical note in Bulletins, volume 3, pages 130-141).

Early English explorations in America (bibliographical note in Bulletins, volume 3, pages 241-244).

Early explorations in America (bibliographical note in Bulletins, volume 3, pages 103-100).

{xxiii}

BREVOORT, J. C. Verrazano the navigator [from report of the American Geographical Society of New York for 1873]. New York. 1874. https://archive.org/details/verrazanonavigator00brevrich

CHAMPLAIN, SAMUEL DE. Voyages (1603-1610): translated Charles P. Otis, [editor] with memoir by E. F. Slafter. Boston: Prince Society. 1878-82. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_26911 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/voyagessamuelde00massgoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/voyagessamuelde00unkngoog

DE VRIES. D. P. Extracts from the voyages; translated from a Dutch ms. in the Philadelphia Library, by Dr. G. Troost. (Collections of the New York Historical Society., 2d series, volume 1. New York. 1841.)

Voyages from Holland to America, 1632-1644; translated by H. C. Murphy. (Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d series, volume 3. New York. 1857.) https://archive.org/details/cu31924028729402/page/n25/mode/2up

FISKE, JOHN. The romance of the Spanish and French explorers. (Harper's Magazines, 64: 438. 1882.)

FORCE, M. F. Some observations on the letters of Amerigo Vespucci (1879). Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company 1885. https://archive.org/details/someobservation01forcgoog

HAKLUYT, RICHARD, editor. The principal navigations, voyages, traffiques and discoveries of the English nation (1589); edited by E. Goldsmid. volume 12-15. Edinburgh: E. & G. Goldsmid. 1889-90. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.178849 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/principalnavigat02hakluoft (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/principalnaviga00haklgoog (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/principalnaviga06hakl (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/principalnaviga00unkngoog (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/cihm_33125 (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/principalnavigat10hakl (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/principalnavigat11hakl (Volume 12) https://archive.org/details/principalnavigat12hakl (Volume 13) https://archive.org/details/theprincipalnavi25645gut (Volume 13) https://www.gutenberg.org/files/25645/ (Volume 16) https://archive.org/details/cihm_33132

HIGGINSON, THOMAS W. The old English seamen. (Harper's Mag., 66: 217. 1883)

The Spanish discoverers. (Harper's Magazine. 65: 729. 1882.)

HUDSON, HENRY. Divers voyages and northern discoveries. (Purchas his pilgrimes, volume 3. Collections of the New York Historical Society, volume 1. New York. 1811.)

JUET, ROBERT. Extract from the journal of the voyage of the Half-Moon, Henry Hudson, master, 1609. (Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d series, volume 1. New York. 1841.) http://halfmoon.mus.ny.us/Juets-journal.pdf

KOHL, J. G. History of the discovery of Maine; with an appendix on the voyages of the Cabots. (Collections of the Maine Historical Society., 2d series, volume 1. Portland: 1869.) (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofdiscove00kohl

LESTER, C. EDWARDS, and A. FOSTER. Life and voyages of Americus Vespucius. New York: Baker & Scribner. 1846. https://archive.org/details/lifeandvoyages00lestrich/page/n3/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/lifevoyagesofame00lestiala https://archive.org/details/cu31924020421867

NICHOLLS, J. F. Remarkable life, adventures and discoveries of Sebastian Cabot. London: Sampson Low, Son & Marston. 1869. https://archive.org/details/remarkablelifead00nich

PARKMAN, FRANCIS. Pioneers of France in the New World. Boston: Little. Brown & Company. 1865. https://archive.org/details/pioneers_of_france_in_new_world_0908_librivox1

PAYNE, EDWARD JAMES. Voyages of the Elizabethan seamen to America; 13 original narratives from the collection of Hakluyt. London: Thomas de la Rue & Company. 1880. https://archive.org/details/voyagesofelizabe02hakluoft

READ, JOHN MEREDITH, Jr. Historical inquiry concerning Henry Hudson. Albany: J. Munsell. 1866. https://archive.org/details/historicalinquir00readuoft

SANTAREM, Viscount. Researches respecting Americus Vespucius and his voyages (1842); translated by E. V. Childe. Boston: C. C. Little & Jas. Brown. 1850. https://archive.org/details/researchesrespe02conggoog

STANLEY OF ALDERLEY. Lord. The first voyage round the world, by Magellan; translated from the accounts of Pigafetta and other contemporary writers; with documents, notes, etc. London: Hakluyt Society. 1874. https://archive.org/details/firstvoyageround00piga

TARDUCCI, FRANCESCO. John and Sebastian Cabot, biographical notice, with documents; translated from the Italian by Henry F. Brownson. Detroit: H. F. Brownson. 1893. https://archive.org/details/johnsebast00tardrich

TOWLE, GEORGE M. Magellan. Boston: Lee & Shepard. 1880. https://archive.org/details/magellan00towl/page/n5/mode/2up

VERRAZANO, JOHN DE. The relation of. (Collections of the New York Historical Society., volume 1. New York. 1811.)

The same: a new translation, by J. G. Cogswell. (Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d series, volume 1. New York. 1841.)

Voyage, 1524. (Old South leaflets, general series, No. 17.) Boston: D. C. Heath & Company.

VESPUCCI, AMERIGO. Account of his first voyage; letter to Pier Soderini. (Old South leaflets, general series, No. 34.) Boston: D. C. Heath & Company.

The first four voyages; reprinted in facsimile and translated from the rare original edition. (1505-6). London: Bernard Quaritch. 1893.

https://archive.org/details/lettersofamerigo00vesp https://archive.org/details/lettersofamerigo00vesprich

VOYAGES OF THE CABOTS, THE. From Hakluyt's "Principal navigations." Boston: D. C. Heath & Company. (Old South leaflets, general series, No. 37.)

SPANISH AND PORTUGUESE CONQUEST AND OCCUPATION.

ANDAGOYA, PASCUAL DE. Narrative of the proceedings of Pedrarias Davila [1514-1541]; translated and edited by C. R. Markham. London: Hakluyt Society. 1865. https://archive.org/details/narrativeofproce00anda

BANDELIER, ADOLF F. A. Discovery of New Mexico [Cibola] by Fray Marcos of Nizza. (Magazine of Western History, 4: 659. 1886.)

BENZONI, GIROLAMO. History of the new world, shewing his travels in America, 1541-1556; translated and edited by W. H. Smyth. London: Hakluyt Society. 1857. https://archive.org/details/historynewworld00smytgoog/page/n10/mode/2up

BLACKMAR, FRANK W. Spanish Institutions of the southwest. Baltimore. 1801. (Johns Hopkins University studies in history and political science. Extra volume 10.) https://archive.org/details/spanishinstituti00blac

CHARLEVOIX, Father F. P. X. DE. History of Paraguay (1756); [translated from the French]. London: L. Davis. 1769. 2 volumes. (French) https://archive.org/details/histoireduparag04chargoog (English) https://books.google.com/books?id=40sIAAAAQAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

CHEVALIER, MICHEL. Mexico, ancient and modern; translated by T. Alpass. London: J. Maxwell & Company. 1864. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/gri_33125000251625/page/n3/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/mexicoancientan01alpagoog

CIEZA DE LEON, PEDRO DE. Travels, A. D. 1532-50, contained in the first and second parts of his Chronicle of Peru (1553-): translated an edited by C. R. Markham. London: Hakluyt Society 1864-83. https://archive.org/details/travelsofpedrode33ciez/page/n31/mode/2up

CLAVIGERO, Abbé D. FRANCESCO SAVERIO. History of Mexico, collected from Spanish and Mexican historians, from MSS. and ancient paintings of the Indians; translated from the Italian by Charles Cullen. Philadelphia: Thomas Dobson. 1804. 3 volumes. https://archive.org/details/historyofmexicoc03clav

CORTEZ, HERNANDO. Despatches addressed to the emperor Charles V. during the conquest: translated from the Spanish, with introduction and notes by George Folsom. New York: Wiley & Putnam. 1843. https://archive.org/details/despatchesofhern0cort

DIAZ DEL CASTILLO, BERNAL. Memoirs, containing a true and full account of the discovery and conquest of Mexico and New Spain (1612): translated from the Spanish by John I. Lockhart. London: J. Hatchard & Son. 1844. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/memoirsofconquis01dauoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/memoirsconquist01lockgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.40349/page/n3/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/memoirsofconquis02di

DISCOVERY and conquest of Terra Florida, by Don Fernando de Solo; written by a gentleman of Elvas (1557), and translated out of Portuguese by Richard Hakluyt: edited by W. B. Rye. London: Hakluyt Society 1851. https://archive.org/details/discoveryandcon00haklgoog

FANCOURT, CHARLES. ST. J. History of Yucatan. London: J. Murray. 1854. https://archive.org/details/historyofyucatan00fanc

HELPS, Sir ARTHUR. Life of Hernando Cortes. London: Bell & Son. 1871. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/lifehernandocor00goog/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.85399/page/ii/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/lifeofhernandoco01helpuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/lifeofhernandoco02helpuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.86033

Life of Las Casas. London: Bell & Son. 1868. https://archive.org/details/lifeoflascasasth00help/page/n7/mode/2up

Life of Pizarro. London: Bell & Son. 1869. https://archive.org/details/lifeofpizarrowit00help

The Spanish conquest In America. London: Parker & Son. (1855-61.) New York: Harper & Brothers. 1867. 4 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/spanishconquesti01helpuoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/spanishconquest00conggoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/spanishconquest06oppegoog (Volume 3) https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moa/agf7071.0003.001 (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/spanish_conquest_in_america_vol4/page/n3/mode/2up

IRVING, THEODORE. History of De Soto's conquest of Florida (1835). New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/conquestflorida01irvirich/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/conquestflorida01irvigoog

MARKHAM, CLEMENTS R. History of Peru, chapters 1-4. Chicago: C. H. Sergel & Co. 1892. https://archive.org/details/ahistoryperu01markgoog

Edited and translated. Reports on the discovery of Peru. London: Hakluyt Society 1872. https://archive.org/details/reportsondiscove04mark

MAYER, BRANTZ. Mexico, Aztec, Spanish and republican, book. 1. Hartford: S. Drake & Company. 1851. 2 volumes. https://books.google.com/books/about/Mexico_Aztec_Spanish_and_republican.html?id=4QNQAQAAIAAJ (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/mexicoaztecspan01mayegoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/mexicoaztecspani02maye

RESCOTT, WILLIAM H. History of the conquest of Mexico (1843); edited by J. F. Kirk. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/conquestofmexico01presrich (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/conquestmexico02presuoft (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyconmex03pres (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofconques04pres

History of the conquest of Peru (1847); edited by J. F. Kirk. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofconques01presiala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofconques02presiala (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofconques03presiala

RAYNAL, Abbé. A philosophical and political history of the settlements and trade of the Europeans in the east and west Indies (1770); translated from the French by J. O. Justamond. London. 1788. 8 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol01rayn (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol02rayn (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol03rayn (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol04rayn (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol06rayn (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol05rayn (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol07rayn (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/philosophicalpol08rayn/

RIVERO, M. E., and TSCHUDI, J. J. VON. Peruvian antiquities: translated from the Spanish by F. L. Hawks. New York: G. P. Putnam & Company. 1853. https://archive.org/details/peruvianantiqui01tschgoog/page/n10/mode/2up

SIMPSON, J. H. Coronado's march in search of the "Seven cities of Cibola." Washington. 1871. https://archive.org/details/coronadosmarchin00simprich/page/n11/mode/2up

SOLIS, Don ANTONIO DE History of the conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards (1684); translated from the Spanish by T. Townsend, revised and corrected by N. Hook. London: T. Woodward. 1738. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://books.google.com/books/about/The_History_of_the_Conquest_of_Mexico.html?id=ejQVAAAAQAAJ

SOUTHEY, ROBERT. History of Brazil, volume 1. London: Longman. 1810-19. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofbrazil01sout (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofbrazil02sout (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofbrazil03sout

SOUTHEY, THOMAS. Chronological history of the West Indies, volume 1. London: Longman. 1827. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/chronologicalhis01sout (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/chronologicalhis02sout (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/chronologicalhis03sout

TOWLE, GEORGE M. Pizarro. Boston: Lee & Shepard. 1879. https://archive.org/details/pizarrohisadvent00towlrich/page/n5/mode/2up

TYLOR, EDWARD B. Anahuac; or Mexico and the Mexicans, ancient and modern. London: Longman, Green & Company. 1861. https://archive.org/details/b24883360

WASHBURN, CHARLES A. History of Paraguay, chapters 1-4. Boston: Lee & Shepard. 1871. 2 volumes. (volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofparagua01washuoft/page/n3/mode/2up (volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofparagua02wash

WATSON, ROBERT G. The Spanish and Portuguese in South America during the colonial period, volume 1. London: Trübner & Company. 1884. 2 volumes. (volume 1) https://archive.org/details/spanishportugues01watsuoft (volume 1) https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50990 (volume 2) https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/52252

WILSON, ROBERT A. A new history of the conquest of Mexico, in which Las Casas' denunciations of the popular historians of that war are vindicated. Philadelphia: Jas. Challen & Son. 1859. https://archive.org/details/anewhistoryconq00goog

{xxiv}

ENGLISH AND FRENCH COLONIZATION.

ACRELIUS, ISRAEL. History of New Sweden. (Memoirs of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, volume 11. Philadelphia. 1876.) https://archive.org/details/historyofnewswed11acre https://archive.org/details/historyofnewswed00acre https://archive.org/details/cihm_12822/page/n5/mode/2up

ADAMS, CHARLES FRANCIS. Three episodes of Massachusetts history. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1892 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/threeepisodesofm01adamuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/threeepisodesofm02adam

BAYLIES, FRANCIS. Historical memoir of the colony of New Plymouth (1830). Boston: Wiggin & Lunt. 1866. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historicalmemoir11bayl (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historicalmemoir02bayl

BEVERLEY, ROBERT. History of Virginia (1705). Richmond: J. W. Randolph. 1855. https://archive.org/details/historyvirginia00campgoog

BOZMAN, JOHN LEEDS History of Maryland, 1633-1660. Baltimore: Lucas & Deaver. 1837 (introduction 1811.) Baltimore: John Murphy & Co. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofmarylan00bozm (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historymaryland02bozmgoog

BRADFORD, WILLIAM. History of Plymouth Plantation. (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, 4th series, volume 3. Boston. 1856.) (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofplymout1162brad (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historymaryland02bozmgoog

BRIDGES, GEORGE W. Annals of Jamaica, volume 1. London: J. Murray. 1827. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/annalsofjamaica01briduoft (Volume 2 )https://archive.org/details/annalsjamaica05bridgoog

BRODHEAD, JOHN R., editor Documents relating to the colonial history of the state of New York. Albany. 1856-87. 14 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ01brod (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ02brod/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ03brod/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ04brod/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ05brod/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ06brod/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ07brod/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ08brod/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ09brod/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ10brod/page/n7/mode/2up

History of the state of New York, volume 1. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1853. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ01brod (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ02brod (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ03brod (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ04b/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ05brod/ (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ06brod/ (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ07brod/ (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ08brod/ (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ09brod/ (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ10brod/ (Index) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ11brod/page/n7/mode/2up

BROWN, ALEXANDER editor The genesis of the United States [a collection of historical mss. and tracts, with notes, etc.]. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1890. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/genesisofuniteds01brow (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/genesisofuniteds02brow

BROWN, WILLIAM HAND, editor. Archives of Maryland. Baltimore. 1883-. https://msa.maryland.gov/megafile/msa/speccol/sc2900/sc2908/000001/000021/html/am21p--1.html Has links to other volumes.

BURKE, EDMUND. An account of the European settlements in America. London: R. & J. Dodsley. 1757. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/accountofeuropea01burk (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/accountofeuropea02burk

BURY, Viscount. Exodus of the western nations. London: Richard Bentley. 1865. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/exodusofwesternn01albeuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/exodusofwesternn02albeuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.82499

CAMPBELL, CHARLES. Introduction to the history of the colony and ancient dominion of Virginia. Richmond: D. B. Minor. 1847. https://archive.org/details/introductiontohi00campb

History of the colony and ancient dominion of Virginia. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. https://archive.org/details/historyofcolonya00camp

CAMPBELL, DOUGLAS. The Puritan in Holland, England and America. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1892. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/puritaninholland01camp (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/puritaninholland02camp

CARROLL, B. R., editor. Historical collections of South Carolina. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1836. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historicalcolle00carrgoog/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historicalcolle02carrgoog/page/n6/mode/2up

CHARLEVOIX, Father PIERRE F. X. DE. History and general description of New France (1744): translated, with notes, by John G. Shea. New York: J. G. Shea. 1866-7.2. 6 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_32251 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cihm_32765 (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historygeneralde03char (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historygeneralde04char (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historygenerald05achar (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historygeneralde06char

CHEEVER, GEORGE B., editor Journal of the Pilgrims at Plymouth in 1620. New York: J. Wiley. 1848. https://archive.org/details/journalofpilgrim00mouruoft

DALTON, HENRY G. History of British Guiana, chapter 2. London: Longmans. 1855. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historybritishg01daltgoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historybritishg02daltgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historybritishg03daltgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historybritishg00daltgoog/page/n10/mode/2up

DOUGLASS, WILLIAM. Summary, historical and political, of the British settlements in North America. London: R. Baldwin. 1755. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/summaryhistorica01doug/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/McGillLibrary-rbsc_lc_summary-historical-political_Lande00193_v2-15869

DOYLE, JOHN A. The American colonies (Arnold prize essay). London: Rivingtons. 1869.

The English In America: Virginia. Maryland and the Carolinas (1882). The Puritan colonies (1887), 2 volumes. London: Longmans, Green & Company. New York: Henry Holt & Co.

https://archive.org/details/englishcoloniesi01doyl (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/englishcoloniesi03doyl (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/englishcoloniesi04doyl/page/n7/mode/2up/page/n7/mode/2up

DRAKE, SAMUEL ADAMS. The making of New England, 1580-1643. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1886. https://archive.org/details/makingofnewengla00drakrich

The making of Virginia and the middle colonies. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1893. https://archive.org/details/makingofvirginia00drak

DRAKE, SAMUEL G. History and antiquities of Boston, 1630-1770. Boston: L. Stevens. 1856. https://archive.org/details/historyantiquiti00dra

EDWARDS, BRYAN. History, civil and commercial, of the British colonies in the West Indies. [Caribs, etc.] London: J. Stockdale. 1793-1801. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_44458 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historycivilcomm04edwa https://archive.org/details/historycivilcomm06edwa/page/n5/mode/2up

FERRIS, BENJAMIN. History of the original settlements on the Delaware. Wilmington: Wilson & Heald. 1846. https://archive.org/details/historyoforigina00ferr

FISHER. GEORGE P. The colonial era (American History series). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1892. (1906) https://archive.org/details/colonialera00fishuoft (1910) https://archive.org/details/colonialerabygeo00fish

FISKE, JOHN. The beginnings of New England. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1889. (1897) https://archive.org/details/beginningsofne00fisk

FORCE, PETER. editor. Tracts and other papers relating principally to the origin, settlement and progress of the colonies in North America. Washington. 1886-47. 4 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/tractsotherpaper01forc (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/tractsotherpaper02forc (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/tractsotherpaper1844forc (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/tractsotherpaper04forc

GAYARRÉ, CHARLES. History of Louisiana; the French domination (1851-4). New York: William J. Widdleton. 1861. (1867) https://archive.org/details/historyoflouisia03gaya

GOODWIN, JOHN A. The pilgrim republic. Boston: Ticknor & Company. 1888. https://archive.org/details/pilgrimrepublich00good/page/n11/mode/2up

GRAHAME, JAMES. History of the rise and progress of the United States of North America. till 1688, volume 1. London: Longman. 1827. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofrisepro01grah/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofrisepro02grah/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 4, 1836) https://archive.org/details/historyriseandp01grahgoog/page/n8/mode/2up

The same, enlarged [to 1776] and amended [edited by Josiah Quincy, and published under the title of "History of the United States"]. Philadelphia: Lea & Blanchard. 1846.

HAWKS, FRANCIS L. History of North Carolina [to 1729] (1857-60). Fayetteville: Hale & Son. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924028788374 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historynorthcar00lillgoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historynorthcar00pittgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historynorthcar00unkngoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_MzgTAAAAYAAJ/page/n3/mode/2up

HIGGINSON, THOMAS W. The French Voyageurs. (Harper's Mag., 66: 505. 1883.)

HUBBARD, Rev. WILLIAM. General history of New England, to 1680 (1815). (Collections of the Massachusetts History Society, 2d series, volumes 5-11. Boston. 1848.) https://archive.org/details/generalhistoryof00hubb

HUTCHINSON, THOMAS. History of the colony [and province] of Massachusetts-Bay [to 1749]. Boston: T. & J. Fleet. 1764-7. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/historyofcolonyo00hutc

LAMBRECHTSEN, N. C. Short description of the discovery and subsequent history of the New Netherlands (1818): [translated from the Dutch]. (Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d series, volume 1. New York. 1841.)

LODGE, HENRY CABOT. Short history of the English colonies in America. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1881. https://archive.org/details/histenglishcolonies00lodgrich

MARSHALL, JOHN. History of the colonies planted by the English on the continent of North America. Philadelphia: A. Small. 1824. https://archive.org/details/plantedcolonies00marsrich

MOORE, N. Pilgrims and Puritans: the story of the planting of Plymouth and Boston. Boston: Ginn & Co. 1888. https://archive.org/details/pilgrimspuritans00tiff

MOURT, GEORGE. Relation, or journal of the plantation at Plymouth (1622); with introduction and notes by H. M. Dexter. Boston: J. K. Wiggin. 1865. https://archive.org/details/mourtsrelationo00dextgoog

NEILL, EDWARD D. English colonization of America during the 17th century. London: Strahan & Company. 1871. https://archive.org/details/cu31924032746145

History of the Virginia Company of London. Albany: J. Munsell. 1869. https://archive.org/details/cu31924028784738

Virginia vetusta [Supplement to above]. Albany: J. Munsell's Sons. 1885. https://archive.org/details/virginiavetusta00neilgoog

O'CALLAGHAN, E. B. Register of New Netherland, 1626-1674. Albany: J. Munsell. 1865. https://archive.org/details/registerofnewnet00ocal

PALFREY, JOHN G. History of New England during the Stuart dynasty. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1858-1864. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofnewengl01bost (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historynewengla19palfgoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historynewengla18palfgoog/page/n6/mode/2up

PRINCE, THOMAS. Chronological history of New England [to 1633] (1736-55). Boston: Cummings, Hilliard & Company. 1826. https://archive.org/details/achronologicalh00halegoog/page/n6/mode/2up

SAINSBURY, W. N. editor. Calendar of state papers: colonial series [America and the West Indies]. London: Longman. 1860-89. 3 volumes. 1860-84. 6 volumes. (1675-1676) https://archive.org/details/calendarstatepa19offigoog (1677-1680) https://archive.org/details/calendarstatepa08offigoog/page/n11/mode/2up (1685-1688) https://archive.org/details/calendarstatepa18offigoog/page/n9/mode/2up (1689-1692) https://archive.org/details/calendarstatepa14offigoog (1696-1697) https://archive.org/details/cu31924087794685 (1719-1720) https://archive.org/details/colonialrecordsc31greauoft/page/n3/mode/2up (1699) https://archive.org/details/calendarstatepa15offigoog

SHURTLEFF, N. B., editor. Records of the governor and Company of the Massachusetts Bay, 1628-86. Printed by order of the Legislature. Boston. 1853-4; 5 volumes in 6. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/recordsofgoverno01mass (Volume 4, Part 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924091024590 (Volume 4, Part 2) https://archive.org/details/recordsofgoverno42mass

SHURTLEFF, N. B., and D. PULSIFER. editors. Records of the colony of New Plymouth. Printed by order of the Legislature. Boston. 1855-61. 12 volumes. in 10. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/recordsofcolonyo0102newp/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/recordsofcolonyo05newp https://www.plymouthcolony.net/resources/pcr.html#pcrarchive

STITH, WILLIAM. History of the first discovery and settlement of Virginia (1747). New York: Reprinted for Jos. Sabin. 1865. https://archive.org/details/101292821.nlm.nih.gov/page/n3/mode/2up

TARBOX, Rev. INCREASE N. Sir Walter Raleigh and his colony in America. Boston: Prince Society. 1884. https://archive.org/details/sirwalterralegh00lanegoog

TRUMBULL, BENJAMIN. General history of the United States of America to 1792. Boston: Farrand, Mallory & Company. 1810. volume 1. https://archive.org/details/generalhistoryof03trum (Volume 1 of 3) https://archive.org/details/ageneralhistory01trumgoog/page/n8/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/generalhistoryof03trum/page/n13/mode/2up

TYTLER, PATRICK F. Historical view of the progress of discovery on the more northern coasts of America; with natural history, by Jas. Wilson. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd. 1832. New York: Harper Brothers. https://archive.org/details/historicalviewp00goog

WHITEFIELD, WILLIAM A., editor. Documents relating to the colonial history of the state of New Jersey. Newark. 1880-. 11 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelati01socigoog/page/n10/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelati04socigoog/page/n12/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelati05socigoog/page/n6/mode/2up

(William Nelson) (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelati03socigoog/page/n10/mode/2up (Volume 19) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelati02socigoog/page/n4/mode/2up (Volume 22) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelati00socigoog/page/n10/mode/2up

WILSON, JAMES GRANT, editor Memorial history of the city of New York, volume 1. New York: History Co. 1892. 4 volumes. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cu31924024757290 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/memorialhistoryo01wilsuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/memorialhistoryo02wilsuoft/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/memorialhistoryo03wilsuoft/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/memorialhistoryo04wilsuoft/page/n13/mode/2up

WINTHROP, JOHN. History of New England, 1630-1649 (1825-6). New edition. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1853. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/winthropsjournal00wint/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/winthropsjournal02wint

YOUNG, ALEXANDER. Chronicles of the first planters of the colony of Massachusetts Bay, 1623-1636. Boston: Little & Brown. 1846. https://archive.org/details/chroniclesoffirs00younuoft https://archive.org/details/chroniclesoffirs00youn https://archive.org/details/chroniclesoffirs00youn_0

Chronicles of the pilgrim fathers, 1602-1625. Boston: Little & Brown. 1841. https://archive.org/details/chroniclesofpilg00youn

{xxv}

AMERICAN ARCHÆOLOGY.

ABBOTT, CHARLES. C. Primitive Industry; or illustrations of the handiwork, in stone, bone and clay, of the native races of the northern Atlantic seaboard of America. Salem: G. A. Bates. 1881. https://archive.org/details/primitiveindustry00abborich

Traces of an American autocthon. (American Naturalist, 10: 329. 1876.)

AMERICAN ANTIQUARIAN AND ORIENTAL JOURNAL. Chicago. 1878-.

AMERICAN ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY. Proceedings. Boston.

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ARCHÆOLOGY. Baltimore. 1885-7. Boston: Ginn & Company. 1888-.

ANTHROPOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF WASHINGTON. Proceedings (1879-). (Smithsonian miscellaneous collections, volume 25-. Washington. 1882-.)

ATWATER, CALEB. Description of the antiquities discovered in Ohio and other western states. (Archæologia Americana, volume 1. Worcester: American Antiquities Society. 1820.) https://archive.org/details/descriptionofant0000atwa/page/n3/mode/2up

BACON, A. T. Ruins of the Colorado valley. (Lippincott's Magazine, 20: 521. 1880.)

BAILEY, Rev. JACOB. Observations and conjectures on the antiquities of America. (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society., volume 4. Boston. 1795.)

BALDWIN, JOHN D. Ancient America. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1872. https://archive.org/details/ancientamericain00bald/page/n7/mode/2up

Pre-historic nations. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1869. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.115963

BANDELIER, ADOLF A historical introduction to studies among the sedentary Indians of New Mexico. Report on the ruins of the Pueblo of Pecos. Boston: A. Williams & Company. 1881. (Papers Archæological Institute of America.) https://archive.org/details/historicalintrod00bandrich/page/n7/mode/2up

Report of an archæological tour in Mexico, in 1881. Boston: Cupples, Upham & Company. 1884. https://archive.org/details/archaeologmexico02bandrich/page/n5/mode/2up

BARBER, EDWIN A. Ancient pueblos, Rio San Juan. (American Naturalist, 12: 526, 606. 1878.) https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/272184

Pueblo pottery. (American Naturalist, 15: 453. 1881.)

Rock inscriptions of the "ancient pueblos." (American Naturalist, 10: 716. 1876.)

BAXTER, SYLVESTER. The father of the pueblos [Zuni]. (Harper's Magazine, 65: 72. 1882.)

BEAUCHAMP, W. M. Indian occupation of New York. (Science, 19: 76. 1892.) https://archive.org/details/aboriginaloccupa00beau https://archive.org/details/aboriginaloccupa00beau_0

BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY. America before Columbus. (Bibliographical note in Bulletins, volume 3, pages 65-71.)

BOSTON SOCIETY OF NATURAL HISTORY. Palæolithic implements of the valley of the Delaware; by C. C. Abbott and others (from Proceedings, volume 21). Cambridge. 1881.

BRINTON, DANIEL G. The books of Chilan Balam, the prophetic and historic records of the Mayas of Yucatan. Philadelphia: Edw. Stern & Company. 1882. https://archive.org/details/bookschilanbala00bringoog/page/n6/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/cu31924020440115

Essays of an Americanist. Philadelphia: Porter & Coates. 1890. https://archive.org/details/essaysofamerican00brin/page/n5/mode/2up

Prehistoric chronology of America. (Science, 10: 76. 1887.)

BRYANT, W. C. Interesting archæological studies in and about Buffalo. [Buffalo. 1890.]

BRYCE, GEORGE. The mound builders. Winnipeg Historical Society. 1884-5. https://archive.org/details/moundbuilders00bryc

CARR, LUCIEN. The mounds of the Mississippi valley, historically considered. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1883. https://archive.org/details/cu31924104076934

CHARNAY, DÉSIRÉ. Ancient cities of the new world, being voyages and explorations in Mexico and Central America, 1857-82; translated from the French by J. Gonino and H. S. Conant. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1887. https://archive.org/details/ancientcitiesofn00char_1

CONANT, A. J. Footprints of vanished races in the Mississippi valley. St. Louis: C. R. Barns. 1879. https://archive.org/details/footprintsvanrace00conarich

CUSHING, FRANK H. The nation of the willows [Zunis]. (Atlantic Monthly, 50: 362,541. 1882.)

Zuni social, mythic and religious systems. (Popular Science Monthly, 21: 186. 1882.)

DALL, W. H. On the remains of later pre-historic man obtained from caves in the Catherina Archipelago, Alaska (1876). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 22. Washington. 1880.) https://archive.org/details/cu31924104074822/page/n3/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/ontheremains00dallrich/page/n5/mode/2up

EVERETT, J. T. The earliest American people. (Magazine of American History, 22: 114. 1889.) https://archive.org/details/magazineamerica05stevgoog https://archive.org/stream/magazineamerica05stevgoog/magazineamerica05stevgoog_djvu.txt

FISKE, JOHN. The discovery of America. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company 1892. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/discoveryamerica01fisk (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/discoveryofameri02fisk

FORCE, M. F. Some early notices of the Indians of Ohio; to what race did the mound builders belong. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1879. https://archive.org/details/someearlynotice00ohiogoog

FOSTER, J. W. Prehistoric races of the United States of America: Chicago: S. C. Griggs & Company. 1873. https://archive.org/details/prehistoricraces00fostiala/page/n5/mode/2up

GANNETT, HENRY. Prehistoric ruins in southern Colorado. (Popular Science Monthly, 16: 666. 1880.)

HABEL, S. The sculptures of Santa Lucia Cosumalwhuapa in Guatemala (1878). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 22. Washington. 1880.) (French) https://archive.org/details/sculpturesdesant00habe

HALE, HORATIO. Indian migrations, as evidenced by language; comprising the Huron-Cherokee stock, Dakota, Algonkins, Chahta-Muskoki, mound-builders, Iberians. Chicago. 1883. (American Association for the Advancement of Science., 1882, American Antiquarian, January, April, 1883.) https://archive.org/details/indianmigrations00halerich

HARVARD UNIVERSITY. Peabody Museum of American archæology and ethnology. Reports. Cambridge. 1868-.

HAVEN, SAMUEL F. Archæology of the United States. (1855). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 8. Washington. 1856.) https://archive.org/details/archologyunited00havegoog/page/n5/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/archaeologyus00haverich

HIGGINSON, T. W. The first Americans. (Harper's Magazine, 65: 342. 1882.)

HUMBOLDT, ALEXANDER von. Researches concerning the Institutions and monuments of the ancient inhabitants of America; translated by Helen M. Williams. London: Longman 1814. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/researchesconcer01humb

JACKSON, W. H. Ancient ruins in southwestern Colorado. (American Naturalist, 10: 31. 1876.)

JONES, CHARLES C. Jr. Antiquities of the southern Indians, particularly of the Georgia tribes. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1873. https://archive.org/details/antiquitiesofsou00jone_0/antiquitiesofsou00jone_0?view=theater

Monumental remains of Georgia, part 1. Savannah: J. M. Cooper & Company. 1861. https://archive.org/details/monumentalremain01jone

JONES, JOSEPH Explorations of the aboriginal remains of Tennessee (1876). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 22. Washington. 1880.)

JOURNAL OF AMERICAN ETHNOLOGY AND ARCHÆOLOGY. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co. 1891-.

KINGSBOROUGH, Lord. Antiquities of Mexico: comprising fac-similes of ancient Mexican paintings and hieroglyphics, etc., illustrated by many valuable inedited mss. London. R. Havell. 1830-48. 9 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexi1King (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexiv2King (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexiv3King (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexi4King (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexi5King (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexi6King (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexi7King (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexiv8King (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/AntiquitiesMexiv9King

LAPHAM, I. A. The antiquities of Wisconsin (1853), (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 7. Washington 1855.) https://archive.org/details/antiquitiesofwis00laph

LARKIN, FREDERICK. Ancient man in America. 1880.

MacLEAN, J. P. The mound builders. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1879. https://archive.org/details/moundbuilders00maclgoog/page/n10/mode/2up

MINDELEFF, V. Origin of pueblo architecture. (Science, 9: 593. 1887.) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19856/19856-h/19856-h.htm

MITCHILL, Dr. SAMUEL. Communications [on American antiquities, ethnology, etc.]. (Archæologia Americana, volume 1. Worcester: American Antiquarian Society, 1820.)

MOOREHEAD, WARREN K. Fort Ancient, the great prehistoric earthwork of Warren County, Ohio; compiled from a careful survey. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1890. https://archive.org/details/fortancientgrea00moorgoog

NADAILLAC, Marquis de. Prehistoric America (1882); translated by N. d'Anvers. edited by W. H. Dall. New York: G. W. Putnam's Sons. 1884. https://archive.org/details/cihm_52727/page/n7/mode/2up

NEWBERRY, JOHN S. Ancient civilizations of America. (Popular Science Monthly, 41: 187. 1892.)

OHIO STATE ARCHÆOLOGICAL SOCIETY. Report on the antiquities of Ohio. (Final report of the Ohio State board of Centennial managers. Columbus. 1877.)

PEET, Reverend STEPHEN D. Prehistoric America. Chicago: American Antiquarian Office. 1890-. 5 volumes. volume 1. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cu31924088416932

The mound builders, volume 2. Emblematic mounds and animal effigies. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/prehistoricameri01peetuoft/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/prehistoricameri02peet https://archive.org/details/prehistoricameri04peet/page/n7/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/prehistoricameri03peet https://archive.org/details/prehistoricameri05peet https://archive.org/details/cu31924088416932 https://archive.org/details/cu31924088416924/page/n7/mode/2up

PHILADELPHIA. Numismatic and Antiquarian Society. Proceedings.

POWELL, J. W. Annual reports of the Bureau of Ethnology. Washington. (1) https://archive.org/details/rosettaproject_dak_vertxt-1/page/n3/mode/2up (7) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/26568/26568-h/26568-h.htm

(1st) https://archive.org/details/rosettaproject_dak_vertxt-1/page/n3/mode/2up (10th) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbu108889smit (11th)https://archive.org/details/eleventhannualre1889powe (12th) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbu1218901891smit (Pubs) https://ia902705.us.archive.org/26/items/listofpubethno00smitrich/listofpubethno00smitrich.pdf

Prehistoric man in America. (Forum, 8: 489. 1890.)

PRIEST, JOSIAH. American antiquities and discoveries in the west, 2d edition, revised. Albany: Hoffman 1835 https://archive.org/details/americanantiqui05priegoog

PUTNAM, F. W. Archæological notes, and other pamphlets.

Prehistoric remains in the Ohio valley. (Century, 17: 698. 1890.)

QUATREFAGES, A. DE. The peopling of America. (Popular Science Monthly, 38: 305. 1891.)

RAU, CHARLES. The archæological collection of the United States National Museum (1876). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 22. Washington. 1880.) https://archive.org/details/archaeologicalc00raugoog

The Palenque tablet in the United States National Museum (1879). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 22. Washington. 1880.) https://archive.org/details/palenquetabletin00rauc

{xxvi}

READ, Matthew Canield Archæology of Ohio. Cleveland: Western Reserve History Society. [1888.] https://archive.org/details/archaeologyohio00readrich

REISS, W., and A. STÜBEL. The necropolis of Ancon in Peru. Berlin: A. Asher & Company. 1880-7. 8 volumes. https://archive.org/details/gri_33125012875635

RIO, Don ANTONIO DEL. Description of the ruins of an ancient city, discovered near Palengue, Guatemala (1787); translated: [also] Teatro Critico Americano, by Dr. Paul Felix Cabrera. London: Henry Berthoud. 1822. https://archive.org/details/descriptionofrui00roan_0

RIVERO, MARIANO EDW., and JOHN JAMES VON TSCHUDI. Peruvian antiquities: translated from the Spanish by Francis L. Hawks. New York: G. P. Putnam. 1853. https://archive.org/details/peruvianantiqui01tschgoog

ST. LOUIS ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. Contributions to the archæology of Missouri, part 1: Pottery. Salem: George A. Bates. 1880.

SHORT, JOHN T. The North Americans of antiquity; their origin, migrations and type of civilization considered. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1880. https://archive.org/details/northamericansof00shorrich

STEPHENS, JOHN L. Incidents of travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1843. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/incidentsoftrave11841step (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/incidentstravel07stepgoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/b2935030x_0001 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/b2935030x_0002

Incidents of travel In Yucatan. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1843. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/travelinyucatan01step (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/incidentsoftrave01step_1 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/travelyucatan02step (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/incidentsoftrave21843step

SQUIER E. G. Aboriginal monuments of New York. (1849). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 2. Washington. 1851.) https://archive.org/details/aboriginalmonume0000squi/page/n5/mode/2up

Antiquities of the state of New York; with a supplement on the antiquities of the west. Buffalo: G. H. Derby & Company. 1851. https://archive.org/details/antiquitiesofsta00squirich

Nicaragua: its people, scenery, monuments. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1852. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/gri_nicaraguaits01squi (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/nicaraguaitspeo05squigoog/page/n8/mode/2up

SQUIER E. G., and E. H. DAVIS. Ancient monuments of the Mississippi valley (1847). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 1. Washington. 1848.) https://archive.org/details/ancientmonuments00squi

THOMAS, CYRUS. Catalogue of prehistoric works east of the Rocky Mountains. Washington. 1891. (Smithsonian Institute Bureau of Ethnology.) https://archive.org/details/catalogueprehis01thomgoog

The Cherokees In pre-Columbian times. New York: N. D. C. Hodges. 1800. https://archive.org/details/cherokeesinpreco00thom

The circular, square, and octagonal earthworks of Ohio. Washington. 1889. (Smithsonian Institute Bureau of Ethnology.) https://archive.org/details/b30477633

The problem of the Ohio mounds. Washington. 1889. (Smithsonian Institute Bureau of Ethnology.) https://archive.org/details/problemofohiomou01thom

A study of the Manuscript Troano. (United States geography and geological survey. Contributions to North American ethnology, volume 5. Washington. 1882.) https://archive.org/details/studyofmanuscrip00thom_0/page/n5/mode/2up

THRUSTON, GATES P. The antiquities of Tennessee and the adjacent states, and the state of aboriginal society in the scale of civilization represented by them. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1890. https://archive.org/details/antiquitiestenn00thurrich

UNITED STATES. Bureau of Ethnology, John W. Powell, director. Annual reports. Washington. See POWELL, J. W.

WALLACE, A. R. American museums, of American pre-historic archæology. (Fortnightly Review, 48: 665. 1887.)

WHITTLESEY, CHARLES. Description of ancient works in Ohio (1850). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 3. Washington. 1852.) https://archive.org/details/descriptionsofan00whit

WINSOR, JUSTIN, editor. Narrative and critical history of America, volume 1. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1886. 8 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica01wins (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica02wins (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica03wins (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica04wins (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica05wins (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica06wins (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica07wins (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/narrativecritica08wins

AMERICAN ABORIGINES.

ADAIR, JAMES. The history of the American Indians, particularly those nations adjoining to the Mississippi, East and West Florida, Georgia, South and North Carolina, and Virginia. London: E. & C. Dilly. 1775. https://archive.org/details/historyofamerica00adairich

ALLEN, PAUL. History of the expedition under the command of Lewis and Clarke, to the Pacific Ocean, 1804-6. Philadelphia. Dublin: J. Christie. 1817. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyexpediti01allegoog/page/n12/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyexpediti04allegoog/page/n6/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyexpediti02allegoog/page/n6/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyexpediti03allegoog/page/n15/mode/2up

AMERICAN STATE PAPERS: Indian affairs, 1789-1827. Washington: 1852-4. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/americanstatepap_c11unit

ATWATER, CALEB. Remarks made on a tour to Prairie du Chien in 1829. Columbus, Ohio: I. N. Whiting. 1831. https://archive.org/details/remarksmadeontou00atwa

BANCROFT, GEORGE. History of the United States of America; the authors's last revision, volume 2. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1883-5. 6 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyoftheunit037605mbp (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofunited32banc/page/n3/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.506697 (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofusa03bancrich (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds0004banc/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyofuniteds05banciala

BANCROFT, HUBERT HOWE. The native races of the Pacific States of North America. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1874-6. 5 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/nativeraces01bancrich (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/nativeracespaci03bancgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/nativeracespaci02bancgoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/nativeracespaci01bancgoog (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/nativeracespaci00bancgoog https://archive.org/details/nativeracespaci04bancgoog/page/n18/mode/2up

BARROWS, William. The Indian's side of the Indian question. Boston: D. Lothrop & Company. 1887. https://archive.org/details/cihm_03383

BEACH, W. W., editor. The Indian miscellany. Albany: J. Munsell. 1877. https://archive.org/details/rsindianmiscella00beacuoft

BOSTON PUBLIC LIBRARY. The Indian question (list in Bulletins, volume 4, pages 68-70).

BRINTON, DANIEL G. The American race; a linguistic classification and ethnographic description of the native tribes of North and South America. New York: N. D. C. Hodges. 1891. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/55096

Races and peoples: lectures on the science of ethnography. New York: N. D. C. Hodges. 1890. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/57315 https://archive.org/details/racesandpeoplesl57315gut

BROOKS, ELBRIDGE S. The story of the American Indian, his origin, development, decline and destiny. Boston: D. Lothrop & Co. 1887. https://archive.org/details/storyofamericani00broo/page/n5/mode/2up

BROWN, ROBERT. The races of mankind, volume 1. London: Cassell, Petter & Galpin. 1873-6: 4 volumes. https://archive.org/details/racesofmankindbe01browuoft

BROWNELL, CHARLES DE WOLF. The Indian races of North and South America. New York: American Subscription House. 1857. https://archive.org/details/indianracesofnor00brow

CANADA. Department of Indian affairs. Annual reports. Ottawa.

CATLIN, GEORGE. Illustrations of the manners, customs and condition of the North American Indians (1841). London: Henry G. Bohn. 1861. 2 volumes. Chatto & Windus. 1876. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/illustrationsofm01catl (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/illustrationsofm02catl

North American portfolio of hunting scenes, etc. London: H. Bohn. 1844. https://archive.org/details/Ayer_250_45_C2_1844_Catlin/page/n27/mode/2up

CHARLEVOIX, Father. Letters to the Dutchess of Lesdiguieres [containing account of the North American tribes, 1720-22; translated] London. 1763. https://archive.org/details/letterstodutche00char

COLDEN, CADWALLADER. History of the five Indian nations of Canada, which are dependent on the province of New York in America. New York. 1727. [Enlarged edition]. London. 1747. https://archive.org/details/McGillLibrary-131832-5200

COLTON, C. Tour of the American lakes in 1830. London: F. Westley & A. H. Davis. 1833. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/tourofamericanla0000colt/page/n1/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/touramericanlak00coltgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/touramericanlak01coltgoog

CRAIG, NEVILLE B., editor. The olden time. Pittsburg. 1846-8. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1876. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/GR_3089-1/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/oldentimeamonth00craigoog

DODGE, Colonel RICHARD I. Our wild Indians: thirty-three years' personal experience among the red men of the great west; with an introduction by General Sherman. Hartford: A. D. Worthington & Company. 1882. https://archive.org/details/ourwildindiansth00dodgrich

DOMENECH, Abbé EM. Seven years' residence in the great deserts of North America. London: Longman, Green & Company. 1860. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/sevenyearsreside01domeuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/sevenyearsresid00domegoog

DONALDSON, THOMAS The George Catlin Indian gallery, United States National Museum, Washington. (Report of the Smithsonian Institute, 1885, part 2.)

DRAKE, FRANCIS S. Indian history for young folks. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1885. https://archive.org/details/indianhistoryfo00dowdgoog/page/n12/mode/2up

DRAKE, SAMUEL G. The aboriginal races of North America, 15th edition. Philadelphia: C. Desilver & Sons. 1859. https://archive.org/details/aboriginalraceso01drak

Biography and history of the Indians of North America. (1841), 11th edition. Boston: B. B. Mussey & Company. 1851. (Edition 8) https://archive.org/details/cihm_34854 (Edition 9) https://archive.org/details/cihm_37353

The old Indian chronicle; being a collection of exceeding rare tracts written and published in the time of king Philip's war. Boston: Antiquarian Institute. 1836. https://archive.org/details/oldindianchroni00lithgoog

ELLIS, GEORGE E. The red man and the white man in North America. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1882. https://archive.org/details/cu31924028719007 https://archive.org/details/redmanwhitemanin00ellirich

FIELD, THOMAS. W. An essay towards an Indian bibliography. New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Company. 1873. https://archive.org/details/essaytowardsindi00fielrich

FLETCHER, ALICE C. Indian education and civilization; a report. Washington. 1888. https://archive.org/details/indianeducationa00unitrich

GALLATIN, ALBERT. A synopsis of the Indian tribes of North America. (Archæologia Americana, volume 2. Cambridge: American Antiquarian Society. 1836.) Writings; edited by H. Adams. Lippincott. 1879. 3 volumes. https://archive.org/details/synopsisofindian01gall/page/n3/mode/2up

HOLMES, Reverend ABIEL. Annals of America, 1492-1826 (1895). Cambridge: Hilliard & Brown. 1829. 2 volumes. (Volume 1, 1826) https://archive.org/details/cihm_47268/page/n3/mode/2up (Volume 1, 1826) https://archive.org/details/annalsamer00holmrich (Volume 2, 1826) https://archive.org/details/cihm_47269

HUMBOLDT ALEXANDER VON. Personal narrative of travels to the equinoctial regions of the new continent, 1799-1804, by Alexander de Humboldt and Aimé Bonpland; translated by Helen Maria Williams, volume 5, pages 315-334. London: Longman. 1826. 7 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/personalnarrati00humbgoog/page/n6/mode/2up (Volume 1, 2) https://archive.org/details/personalnarrati01humbgoog/page/n10/mode/2up

INDIAN RIGHTS ASSOCIATION. Annual reports of the executive committee. Philadelphia. ( 6th, 1888) https://archive.org/details/annualreportexe00assogoog/page/n10/mode/2up (30th, 1912) https://archive.org/details/annualreportexe02commgoog (31st, 1913) https://archive.org/details/annualreportexe00assogoog/page/n10/mode/2up

JACKSON. Mrs. HELEN HUNT. A century of dishonor (1881). New edition, with appendix. Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1885. https://archive.org/details/centuryofdishono005246mbp/page/n23/mode/2up

KINGSLEY, JOHN STERLING, editor. The standard natural history, volume 6. Boston: S. E. Cassino & Company. 1885. 6 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/standardnaturalh01king (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/standardnaturalh02king (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/cu31924003839358/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/standardnaturalh03king (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/standardnaturalh04king/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/standardnaturalh05king/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/standardnaturalh06king/page/n11/mode/2up

KIP, Reverend WILLIAM INGRAHAM. The early Jesuit, missions in North America; composed and translated from the letters of the French Jesuits. New York: Wiley & Putnam. 1846. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/earlyjesuitmissi00kip/page/n7/mode/2up (Part 1) https://archive.org/details/earlyjesuitmissi00kipw_0 (Part 1) https://archive.org/details/earlyjesuitmissi02kipw

LAHONTAN, Baron. New voyages to North America, containing an account of the several nations of that vast continent, 1683-1694 (1703): [translated from the French.] 2d edition. London. 1735. 2 volumes. (Volume 1, 1905) https://archive.org/details/newvoyagestonort01laho (Volume 2, 1905) https://archive.org/details/newvoyagestonort02laho/page/n7/mode/2up

{xxvii}

LAKE MOHONK annual conference of friends of the Indian. Proceedings. Philadelphia. https://www.maquah.net/Historical/Mohonk.html (17th, 1890)https://archive.org/details/proceedingsannu00unkngoog (1896) https://archive.org/details/proceedingsannu01unkngoog/page/n6/mode/2up (17th, 1899) https://archive.org/details/proceedingsannu39unkngoog

McKENNEY, THOMAS L., and JAMES HALL. History of the Indian tribes of North America, with 120 portraits from the Indian gallery at Washington (1838-44). Philadelphia: D. Rice & A. N. Hart. 1854. 3 volumes. (Volume 1, 1872) https://archive.org/details/historyofindiant01mckerich/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 2, 1872) https://archive.org/details/historyofindiant02mckerich/page/n7/mode/2up

MANYPENNY, GEORGE W. Our Indian wards. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1880. https://archive.org/details/Ayer_155_M25_1880

MASON, Professor OTIS T., editor. Miscellaneous papers relating to anthropology, from the Smithsonian report for 1881. Washington. 1883.

MASSACHUSETTS. The Indian question; report of the committee appointed by Governor Long. Boston. 1880.

MORGAN, LEWIS H. Houses and house-life of the American aborigines. Washington. 1881. (U. S. geographic and geological survey, Contributions to North American ethnology, volume 4.) https://archive.org/details/houseshouselifeo00morg_0

Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family (1868). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 17. Washington. 1871.) https://archive.org/details/systemsofconsang00morgrich/page/n21/mode/2up

MORSE, Reverend JEDIDIAH. A report to the secretary of war of the United States, on Indian affairs, comprising a narrative of a tour in 1820. New Haven: S. Converse. 1822. https://archive.org/details/reporttosecretar00mors

MORTON, SAMUEL G. Crania Americana; or a comparative view of the skulls of various aboriginal nations of North and South America. Philadelphia: J. Penington. 1839. https://archive.org/details/Craniaamericana00Mort

NOTT, J. C., GEORGE. R. GLIDDON, and others. Indigenous races of the earth. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co. 1857. https://archive.org/details/indigenousraceso01nott

OTIS, ELWELL S. The Indian question. New York: Sheldon & Company. 1878. https://archive.org/details/indianquestion00otisrich

PARKMAN, FRANCIS. History of the conspiracy of Pontiac (1851). Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1888. 2 volumes. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39253

The Jesuits in North America. Boston: Little, Brown & Company. 1867. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6933

PESCHEL, OSCAR. The races of man and their geographical distribution; from the German. (1874). New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1876. (1876) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501969 (1888) https://archive.org/details/racesofmantheirg00pescuoft

PRICHARD, JAMES C. Researches into the physical history of mankind (1813). 2d ed. London: J. & A. Arch. 1826. 2 volumes. (Volume 1, 1841) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop08pricgoog (Volume 1, 1851) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop03pricgoog (Volume 1, 1836) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop06pricgoog/page/n8/mode/2up (Volume 2, 1837) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop02pricgoog (Volume 2, 1851) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop04pricgoog (Volume 3, 1811) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop09pricgoog (Volume 3, 1841) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop10pricgoog (Volume 3, 1841) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop05pricgoog/page/n8/mode/2up (Volume 4, 1844) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop01pricgoog (Volume 5, 1847) https://archive.org/details/researchesintop07pricgoog

RADISSON, PETER ESPRIT. Voyages, being an account of his travels and experiences among the North American Indians, 1652-1684; with historical illustrations and an introduction by Gideon D. Scull. Boston: Prince Society. 1885. https://archive.org/details/voyagespeteresp00sculgoog/page/n14/mode/2up

RAWLE, WILLIAM. A vindication of Heckewelder's "History of the Indian nations." (Memoirs of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, volume 1. Philadelphia. 1826. J. B. Lippincott & Co. 1864.) https://archive.org/details/5f1b0c76-4bcd-4e48-b937-081944dc88aa/mode/2up

ROGERS, Major ROBERT. A concise account of North America. London. 1765. https://archive.org/details/aconciseaccount00rogeuoft/page/n5/mode/2up

SCHOOLCRAFT, HENRY R. Historical and statistical information respecting the history, condition and prospects of the Indian tribes; prepared under the direction of the Bureau of Indian affairs. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo & Company. 1851-5. 5 volumes. (Part 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924032190161 (Part 2) https://archive.org/details/historicalstatis02scho (Part 3) https://archive.org/details/cu31924091889976 (Part 4) https://archive.org/details/historicalstatipt4scho (Part 5) https://archive.org/details/historicalstatis05scho (Part 5) https://archive.org/details/historicalstati00schoa (Part 6) https://archive.org/details/historicalstatis06scho/page/n7/mode/2up

SHALER, NATHANIEL S. Nature and man in America. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1891. (1891) https://archive.org/details/natureandmanina00shalgoog (1924) https://archive.org/details/naturemaninameri00

STANFORD'S COMPENDIUM OF GEOGRAPHY AND TRAVEL: North America; edited and enlarged by Professor F. V. Hayden and Professor A. R. C. Selwyn. London: E. Stanford. 1883. https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.86162

STANLEY'S PORTRAITS OF NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS IN SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION. Catalogue (1852). (Smithsonian miscellaneous collections, volume 2. Washington. 1862.) https://archive.org/details/portraitsnaindians00stanrich

THATCHER, B. B. Indian biography. New York: J. & J. Harper. 1832. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) http://www.gutenberg.org/files/54898 (Volume 2) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/54072

UNITED STATES. Board of Indian Commissioners. Annual reports. Washington. (2nd, 1870) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo02unitrich/page/n5/mode/2up (3rd, 1871) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo03unitrich/page/n5/mode/2up (4th, 1872) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo04unitrich/page/n3/mode/2up (5th, 1873) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo05unitrich/page/n5/mode/2up (6th, 1874) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo06unitrich/page/n5/mode/2up (7th, 1875) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo07unitrich/page/n5/mode/2up (8th, 1876) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo08unitrich/page/n3/mode/2up (17th, 1885) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo17unitrich (20th, 1888) https://archive.org/details/20annualreport00unitrich (1928) https://archive.org/details/annualreportofbo00unitrich/page/n3/mode/2up

Commissioner of Indian affairs. Annual reports. Washington.

WALKER, FRANCIS A. The Indian question. Boston: J. R. Osgood & Company. 1874. https://archive.org/details/indianquestion00walk

WOMEN'S NATIONAL INDIAN ASSOCIATION. Annual reports. Philadelphia.

AMERICAN ABORIGINES.

SPECIAL TRIBES, GROUPS AND REGIONS.

AB-SA-RA-KA, HOME OF THE CROWS. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 1868. https://archive.org/details/absarakahomeofcr00carr/page/n5/mode/2up

BANDELIER, ADOLF F. The delight makers. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company. 1890. https://archive.org/details/delightmakers00bandrich

The gilded man (El Dorado). New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1893. https://archive.org/details/gildedmaneldorad00bandrich/page/n7/mode/2up

BARTRAM, WILLIAM. Travels through North and South Carolina, Georgia, etc. [1773-8]. [Creeks, Cherokees and Choctaws.] Philadelphia. 1791. https://archive.org/details/travelsthroughno00bart

BEAUCHAMP, William Martin The Iroquois trail; in which are included David Cusick's sketches of ancient history of the six nations. Fayetteville, New York: H. C. Beauchamp. 1892. https://archive.org/details/cihm_04555

BECKWOURTH, JAMES P., Chief of the Crows. Life and adventures (1856). New York: Harper & Brothers. 1858. https://archive.org/details/lifeadventuresof00beckrich

BENSON, HENRY C. Life among the Choctaw Indians. Cincinnati: L. Swormstedt & A. Poe. 1860. https://archive.org/details/lifeamongchoctaw00bens

BIART, LUCIEN. The Aztecs, their history, manners and customs (1885); translated from the French, by J. L. Garner. Chicago: A. C. McClurg & Co. 1887. (1919) https://archive.org/details/aztecstheirhist01garngoog

BLACKBIRD, ANDREW J. (MACK-AW-DE-BE-NESSY). History of the Ottawa and Chippewa Indians of Michigan, a grammar of their language, etc. Ypsilanti, Michigan. 1887. https://archive.org/details/completebothearl01blac

BLAKE, Lady. The Beothuks of Newfoundland. (Nineteenth Century, 24: 899. 1888.)

BRETT, Reverend W. H. The Indian tribes of Guiana. London: Bell & Daldy. 1868. https://archive.org/details/indiantribesofgu00bret

BRINTON, DANIEL G., editor. The annals of the Cakchiquels; the original text, with a translation, notes and introduction. Philadelphia. 1885. https://archive.org/details/bp_684862

The Lenâpé and their legends, with the complete text and symbols of the Walam Olum. Philadelphia. 1885. https://archive.org/details/lenptheirleg00brin

Editor. The Maya chronicles. Philadelphia: D. G. Brinton. 1882. https://archive.org/details/mayachronicles00briniala

Notes on the Floridian peninsula. Philadelphia: Jos. Sabin. 1859. https://archive.org/details/notesonfloridia01bringoog

The Shawnees and their migrations. (Historical magazine, volume. 10, January, 1866.)

BRODHEAD, JOHN Romeyn History of the state of New York., volume 1. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1853-71. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofstateof01brod_0 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ01brod (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ02brod (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ03brod (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ04brod (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ05brod (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ06brod (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ07brod (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ08brod (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/documentsrelativ09brod

CASWELL, Mrs. HARRIET S. Our life among the Iroquois Indians. Boston: Congregational Sunday School and Publishing Society. 1892. https://archive.org/details/ourlifeamongiroq00caswiala

CATON, JOHN D. The last of the Illinois, and a sketch of the Pottawatomies (1870). (Fergus historical series.) Chicago: Fergus Printing Company. 1876. https://archive.org/details/cihm_04014

CLAIBORNE, J. F. H. Mississippi, as a province, territory and state. Jackson, Mississippi: Power & Barksdale. 1880. volume 1. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924028795405

CLARKE, PETER D. Origin and traditional history of the Wyandotts, etc. Toronto: Hunter, Rose & Company. 1870. https://archive.org/details/origintraditiona00clar

COPWAY, GEORGE (KAH-GE-GA-GAH-BOWH), Chief. Traditional history and characteristic sketches of the Ojibway nation. London: C. Gilpin. 1850. https://archive.org/details/traditionalhist00bookgoog

COX, ROSS. Adventures on the Columbia River. London. 2 volumes. New York: J. & J. Harper. 1832. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/adventuresoncolu00coxr (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.7215 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cihm_33605

COZZENS, SAMUEL W. The marvellous country; or, three years in Arizona and New Mexico, the Apaches' home (1873). Boston: Lee & Shepard. https://archive.org/details/marvellouscountry00cozzrich/page/n9/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/marvellouscountr00cozz_0 https://archive.org/details/marvellouscountr00cozzrich

CRANTZ, DAVID. History of Greenland, book 4 (volume 1). London: 1767. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofgree01cran (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofgreen02cran

CRUISE OF THE REVENUE-STEAMER CORWIN IN ALASKA AND THE North West ARCTIC OCEAN IN 1881. Washington. 1883. (H. of Rep's, 47th congress, 2d session. Ex. doc. 105.) https://archive.org/details/cruiseofrevenues00muir

CUSHING, FRANK HAMILTON. My adventures in Zuni. (Century, volumes 3-4, December, 1882, February, May, 1883.) https://archive.org/details/zunifolktales00cushrich https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/48342 (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/zuibreadstuff00cush/page/n3/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/zuifetiches00cush/page/n3/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/cu31924104094010

CUSTER, General. G. A. My life on the plains. New York: Sheldon & Co. 1874. https://archive.org/details/mylifeonplainsor00cust

DALL, WILLIAM. H. Tribes of the extreme northwest. (United States geography and geology survey. Contributions to North American ethnology, volume 1. Washington. 1877.) https://archive.org/details/tribesextremeno01dallgoog/page/n8/mode/2up

DALTON, HENRY G. History of British Guiana, volume 1. London: Longman. 1855. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historybritishg02daltgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historybritishg03daltgoog https://archive.org/details/historybritishg01daltgoog/mode/2up

DEFOREST, JOHN W. History of the Indians of Connecticut (1853). Albany: J. Munsell. 1871. (1851) https://archive.org/details/historyindiansc00darlgoog (1851) https://archive.org/details/historyindiansc01darlgoog

DENTON, DANIEL. A brief description of New York; likewise a brief relation of the customs of the Indians there (1670). New York: William Gowans. 1845. https://archive.org/details/briefdescription11dent/page/n13/mode/2up

DOBRIZHOFFER, MARTIN An account of the Abipones, an equestrian people of Paraguay (1784); from the Latin. London: John Murray. 1822. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/accountofabipone04dobr (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/accountofabipone05dobr (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/accountofabiponex03dobr (Volume 1) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50629 (Volume 2) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50621 (Volume 3) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50623

DODGE. J. R. Red men of the Ohio valley, 1650-1795. Springfield, Ohio: Ruralist Publishing Company. 1860. https://archive.org/details/redmenofohiovall00dodg

{xxviii}

DORSEY, JAMES OWEN. The Biloxi Indians of Louisiana. Salem. 1893. https://archive.org/details/dictionaryofbilo0047dors/page/n5/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/jstor-534279/page/n1/mode/2up

The gentile system of the Siletz tribes. https://archive.org/details/jstor-532806/page/n1/mode/2up

Migrations of Siouan tribes. (American Naturalist, volume 20, March, 1886.) https://archive.org/details/jstor-2449921/page/n1/mode/2up

DUNBAR, J. B. The Pawnee Indians. (Magazine of American History, volume 4, April, 1880.)

EASTMAN, Mrs. MARY. Dahcotah; or life and legends of the Sioux around Fort Snelling. New York: John Wiley. 1849. https://archive.org/details/cihm_35037

EELLS, MYRON. Indians of Puget Sound. (American Antiquarian, 9: 1,271. 10: 26, 174. 1887-8.)

EGGLESTON, EDWARD, and LILLIE E. SEELYE. Pocahontas. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company. [1879.] https://archive.org/details/pocahontas00seel

GATSCHET, ALBERT S. The Klamath Indians of southwestern Oregon. Washington. 1890. 2 volumes. (United States geographical and geological survey. Contributions to North American ethnology, volume 2.) https://archive.org/details/klamathindiansof02gatsuoft https://archive.org/details/cihm_52744/page/n7/mode/2up

A migration legend of the Creek Indians, with a linguistic, historic and ethnographic introduction. Philadelphia: D. G. Brinton. 1884. volume 1. (Volume 1) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/49031 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924096785484 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/migrationcreek00gatsrich

GIBBS, GEORGE. Tribes of western Washington and northwestern Oregon. (United States geographical and geological survey. Contributions to North American ethnology, volume 1. Washington. 1877.) https://archive.org/details/cihm_14847/page/n9/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/tribesextremeno00dallgoog/page/n8/mode/2up

GOOKIN, DANIEL. Historical account of the doings and sufferings of the Christian Indians of New England. (Archæologia Americana, volume 2. Cambridge: American Antiquarian Society. 1886.) https://books.google.com/books/about/Historical_Account_of_the_Doings_and_Suf.html?id=Qmhumu27RG0C

Historical collections of the Indians in New England. (Collections of the Mass. Historical Society, volume 1. Boston. 1792.)

GRANT, Mrs. ANNE (of Laggan). Memoirs of an American lady [Mrs. Philip Schuyler] (1808). (Mohawks.) New York. https://archive.org/details/memoirsanameric03grangoog

GRINNELL, GEORGE BIRD. Pawnee hero stories and folk-tales, with notes on the origin, customs and character of the Pawnee people. New York: Forest and Stream Pub. Company, 1889. (1893) https://archive.org/details/pawneeherostorie00grinrich/page/n3/mode/2up

GWYTHER, G. Pueblo Indians. (Overland Monthly, 6: 260. 1871.)

HALE, HORATIO, editor. The Iroquois book of rites. Philadelphia: D. G. Brinton. 1883. https://archive.org/details/cu31924099385514

HARDACRE, EMMA C. The cliff-dwellers. (Scribner's Monthly, 17: 266. 1878.)

HAUGHTON, JAMES Additional memoir of the Moheagans. (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society, volume 9. Boston. 1804.) https://archive.org/details/memoirjameshaug00hauggoog

HEALY, Capt. M. A. Report of the cruise of the revenue marine steamer Corwin in the Arctic Ocean in 1885. Washington. 1887. (House of Representatives, 49th congress, 1st session. Ex. doc. 153.) https://archive.org/details/cihm_04426

HEARNE, SAMUEL. A journey from Hudson's Bay to the Northern Ocean, 1769-72. London: A. Strahan & T. Cadell. 1795. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/38404 https://archive.org/details/journeyfromprin00hear

HECKEWELDER, Reverend JOHN. History of the manners and customs of the Indian nations who once inhabited Pennsylvania, etc. (1818; new edition, with introduction by Reverend William C. Reichel. Memoirs of the Pennsylvania Historical Society, volume 12. Philadelphia. 1876). https://archive.org/details/histmannerscust00heckrich

Narrative of the mission of the United Brethren among the Delaware and Mohegan Indians, 1740-1808. Philadelphia: M'Carthy & Davis. 1820. https://archive.org/details/narrativeofmissi00heck

HENRY, ALEXANDER Travels and adventures in Canada and the Indian territories, 1760-76. New York: I. Riley. 1809. (1809) https://archive.org/details/travelsandadven00henrgoog/page/n8/mode/2up (1901) https://archive.org/details/travelsadventur00henr (1901) https://archive.org/details/travelsadventure00henr/page/n7/mode/2up

HILLARD, G. S. Life of captain John Smith. (Library of American biography: conducted by Jared Sparks. 1884. New York: Harper & Brothers. 10 volumes.) https://archive.org/details/lifeofcaptainjoh00simms https://archive.org/details/lifecaptainsmith00simmrich

HIND, HENRY YOULE. Explorations in the interior of the Labrador peninsula; the country of the Montagnais and Nasquapee Indians. London: Longman, Green & Company. 1863. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_42676 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/explorationsinin021863hind (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cihm_42677

Narrative of the Canadian Red River exploring expedition of 1857, and of the Assinniboine and Saskatchewan expedition of 1858. London: Longman, Green & Company. 1860. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cihm_35699 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/narrativeofcanad02hind

HOWARD, OLIVER OTIS. Nez Percé Joseph; an account of his ancestors, his lands, etc. Boston: Lee & Shepard. 1881. https://archive.org/details/nezpercejoseph01howa https://archive.org/details/nezpercejosepha01howagoog

HUBBARD, J. NILES. An account of Sa·go-ye-wat·ha, or Red Jacket and his people, 1750-1830. Albany: Joel Munsell's Sons. 1886. https://archive.org/details/accountofsagoyew00hubbuoft http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/7339

HUNTER, JOHN D. Manners and customs of several Indian tribes located west of the Mississippi. Philadelphia. 1823. https://archive.org/details/mannerscustoms00huntrich

Memoirs of a captivity among the Indians. London: Longman. 1824. https://archive.org/details/memoirsacaptivi01huntgoog https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.82979

HURT, Dr. GARLAND. Indians of Utah. (Simpson's Report of explorations, 1850. Washington. 1876.)

HUTCHINSON, THOMAS. J. The Parana. London: Edward Stanford. 1868. https://archive.org/details/paranwithincide00hutcgoog

IM THURN, EVERARD FERDINAND. Among the Indians of Guiana. London: Kegan Paul, Trench & Company. 1883. https://archive.org/details/amongindiansgui00thurgoog

IRVING, JOHN TREAT. Indian sketches taken during a United States expedition to make treaties with the Pawnee and other tribes of Indians in 1833 (1833). New York. G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1888. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/indiansketchest01irvigoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/GR_2157-2 https://archive.org/details/indiansketchesta00irvirich/page/ii/mode/2up

JAMES, EDWIN, comp. Account of an expedition from Pittsburgh to the Rocky Mountains., 1819-20, under command of Major Long. Philadelphia: Carey & Lea. 1823. 2 volumes, with atlas. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/accountofexpedit01jame (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/account02ofexpeditjame

JEWITT, JOHN R. Narrative of adventures and sufferings among the Indians of Nootka Sound. Ithaca, New York: Andrus, Gauntlett & Company. 1851. https://archive.org/details/narrativeofadven00jewi

JOGUES PAPERS, THE (1642-6); translated, with a memoir, by J. G. Shea. (Collections of the New York Historical Society, 2d series, volume 3. New York, 1857.)

JOHNSON, ELIAS, Tuscarora chief. Legends, traditions and laws of the Iroquois or six nations, and history of the Tuscarora Indians. Lockport. 1881. https://archive.org/details/cihm_24792 https://archive.org/details/bp_583763/page/3/mode/2up

JONES, Reverend PETER (KAHKEWAQUONABY). History of the Ojebway Indians. London: A. W. Bennett. 1861. https://archive.org/details/historyofojebway00jone

KEATING, WILLIAM H., comp. Narrative of an expedition to the source of St. Peter's River, Lake Winnepeek, &c., in 1823, under command of Major Long. Philadelphia: Carey & Lea. 1824. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/narrativeofexped01keat https://archive.org/details/narrativeofanexp010860mbp/page/n7/mode/2up

KETCHUM, WILLIAM. Authentic and comprehensive history of Buffalo, with some account of its early inhabitants; comprising historic notices of the six nations [Senecas, chiefly]. Buffalo: Rockwell, Baker & Hill. 1864. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/anauthenticandc01ketcgoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/anauthenticandc00ketcgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/authenticcompreh02ketc

KIDDER, FREDERIC. The Abenaki Indians. (Collections of the Main Historical Society., volume 6. Portland: 1859.) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25416 https://archive.org/details/abenakiindiansw00kiddgoog https://archive.org/details/cihm_36479

KIP, Reverend. WILLIAM INGRAHAM, compo. and translator. The early Jesuit missions in North America; from the letters of the Fr. Jesuits, with notes. New York: Wiley & Putnam. 1846. 2 volumes. Albany: J. Munsell. 1873. https://archive.org/details/earlyjesuitmissi00kip https://archive.org/details/earlyjesuitmissi00kipwrich

KOHL, J. G. Kitchi-gami; wanderings round Lake Superior [translated from the German]. [Ojibbewas.] London: Chapman & Hall. 1860. https://archive.org/details/kitchigamiwander00kohl/page/n7/mode/2up

LA ROCHEFOUCAULT LIANCOURT, Duc de. Travels through the United States, the country of the Iroquois and upper Canada, 1795-7. London. 1799. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/travelsthroughun01larorich

LE CLERCQ, Father CHRISTIAN. First establishment of the faith in New France (1691); now first translation, with notes, by John G. Shea. New York: J. G. Shea. 1881. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/firstestablishme01lecl (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/firstestablishme02lecl

LEWIS AND CLARKE. Journal to the Rocky Mountains., 1804-6, as related by Patrick Gass (1807). Dayton: Ells, Claflin & Company. 1847. https://archive.org/details/lewisclarksjourn00gassrich

LORD, JOHN K. The naturalist in Vancouver's Island and British Columbia, volume 2. London: Richard Bentley. 1866. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/naturalistinvanc01lord (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/naturalistinvanc00lord

LOSKIEL, GEORGE HENRY. History of the mission of the United Brethren among the Indians of North America; translated from the German by C. I. La Trobe. London 1794. https://archive.org/details/historyofmiss00losk https://archive.org/details/historyofmission01losk

LUMMIS, CHARLES. F. The land of poco tiempo [New Mexico]. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1893. https://archive.org/details/cu31924028915036

McKENNA, J. A. J. Indians of Canada. (Catholic World, 53: 350. 1891.)

McKENNEY, THOMAS. L. Sketches of a tour to the lakes [1826], the Chippeway Indians, etc. Baltimore: F. Lucas, Jr. 1827. https://archive.org/details/sketchesatourto01mckegoog

MARCY, Colonel R. B. Thirty years of army life on the border. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1866. https://archive.org/details/thirtyyearsofarm01marc

MARCY, Colonel. R. B., and GEORGE. D. McCLELLAN. Exploration of the Red River of Louisiana In 1852. [Comanches and Kiowas.] Washington. 1854. (House of Representatives, 33d congress, 1st session Ex. doc) https://archive.org/details/explorationredr00mcclgoog

MARSHALL, ORSAMUS H. Historical writings relating to the early history of the west; with introduction by William L. Stone. Albany: Joel Munsell's Sons. 1887. https://archive.org/details/historicalwritin01mars https://archive.org/details/historicalwriti00marsgoog/page/n21/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/cihm_09926

The Niagara frontier; read before the Buffalo Historical Club. February 27, 1865. [Buffalo: The author.] https://archive.org/details/niagarafrontiere00mars/page/n5/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/cihm_40160

MATTHEWS, WASHINGTON. Ethnography and philology of the Hidatsa Indians. Washington. 1877. (United States geographical and geological survey. F. V. Hayden in charge: miscellaneous publications. No.7.) https://archive.org/details/ethnographyandp00mattgoog https://archive.org/details/ethnographyandp01mattgoog https://archive.org/details/ethnographyphilo00mattrich https://archive.org/details/rosettaproject_hid_morsyn-2

MEGAPOLENSIS, J., Jr. Short sketch of the Mohawk Indians in New Netherland (1644); translated, revised, with an introduction, by J. H. Brodhead. (Collections of the New York Historical Society. 2d series, volume 3. New York. 1857.)

MEMOIR OF THE PEQUOTS, etc. (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society., volume 10. Boston. 1800.)

MILLER, JOAQUIN. Unwritten history; life amongst the Modocs. Hartford: American Pub. Company. 1874. https://archive.org/details/amongstthemodocs00millrichs://archive.org/details/unwrittenhist00millrich https://archive.org/details/unwrittenhist00millrich

MILLER. WILLIAM. J. Notes concerning the Wampanoag tribe of Indians. Providence: S. S. Rider. 1880. https://archive.org/details/notesconcerningw00mill/page/n5/mode/2up

{xxix}

MINER, LEWIS H. The valley of Wyoming. New York: Robert H. Johnston & Company. 1866. https://archive.org/details/valleywyomingro00minegoog https://archive.org/details/valleyofwyomingr00mine

MÖLLHAUSEN, BALDWIN. Diary of a journey from the Mississippi to the coasts of the Pacific, with a United States government expedition [1853-4]; translated by Mrs. Percy Sinnett. London: Longman. 1858. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/diaryajourneyfr00sinngoog/page/n10/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/Diaryjourneyfro11Moll

MORELET, ARTHUR. Travels in Central America; translated from the French by Mrs. M. F. Squier; introduction by M. G. Squier. London: Trübner & Company. 1871. New York: Henry Holt & Company. 1871. https://archive.org/details/travelsincentra00moregoog

MORGAN, LEWIS H. League of the Ho-dé-no-sau-nee, or Iroquois. Rochester: Sage & Brother. 1851. https://archive.org/details/leagueofhodnos00inmorg (2 volumes, 1922) https://archive.org/details/hodenosaunee00morgrich https://archive.org/details/leagueofhodnos00inmorg

Report on the fabrics, inventions, implements and utensils of the Iroquois, made to the regents of the university [of New York.], 1851.

NEW YORK STATE. Commissioners of Indian affairs, for the extinguishment of Indian titles. Proceedings, with introduction and notes by F. B. Hough. Albany: Joel Munsell. 1861. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/proceedingsofcom01newy (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/proceedingsofcom01newy_0 https://archive.org/details/bp_616923/page/n3/mode/2up

Regents of the university. Annual reports on the condition of the state cabinet of natural history and the historical and antiquarian collection. Albany.

Special committee to Investigate the Indian problem. Report. Albany. 1889.

NORMAN, B. M. Rambles in Yucatan; including a visit to the remarkable ruins of Chi-Chen, Kabah, Zayi, and Uxmal. New York: J. & H. G. Langley. 1842. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/57074 https://archive.org/details/ramblesinyucatan00norm

NUTTALL, THOMAS. Journal of travels into the Arkansa territory, 1819. Philadelphia. T. H. Palmer. 1821. https://archive.org/details/journaloftravels00nutt https://archive.org/details/journaloftravels00nutt_0

OBER, F. A. Acoma, a picturesque pueblo. (American architect, 29: 65. 1890.)

PALFREY, JOHN GORHAM. Compendious history of New England. 1494-1775 (1884). volume 1. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 4 volumes. https://archive.org/details/historynewengla23palfgoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/compendioushisto01palfuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/compendioushisto02palfuoft (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/compendioushisto03palfuoft (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/compendioushisto04palfuoft

PIDGEON, WILLIAM. Traditions of De-coo-dah, comprising extensive explorations, surveys and excavations of the remains of the mound builders in America. (1853). New York: Horace Thayer. 1858. https://archive.org/details/traditionsofdeco00inpidg

POWERS, STEPHEN. Tribes of California. Washington. 1877. (United States geographical and geological survey, Contributions to North American ethnology, volume 3.) https://archive.org/details/tribescaliforni00powegoog/page/n9/mode/2up

RAE, J. Indians of Hudson's Bay territories. (Journal of the Society of Arts, 30: 483. 1882.)

REPORT OF THE INTERNATIONAL POLAR EXPEDITION TO POINT BARROW, ALASKA [1881-2]. Washington. 1885. (House of Representatives, 48th congress, 2d session Ex. doc. 44.) https://archive.org/details/reportofpolar00inteuoft

RIGGS, Reverend Dr. STEPHEN R. Mary and I; forty years with the Sioux. Chicago: W. G. Holmes. 1880. https://archive.org/details/maryandifortyyea00riggrich

RINK, Dr. HENRY. The Eskimo tribes; their distribution and characteristics, with a comparative vocabulary (volume 11 of the "Middelelser om Gronland"). Copenhagen: C. A. Reitzel. London: Williams & Norgate. 1887. https://archive.org/details/eskimotribesthei00rinkrich

Tales and traditions of the Eskimo, with a sketch of their habits, religions, language, etc. (1866-71); translated from the Danish by the author, edited by Dr. R. Brown. Edinburgh: William Blackwood & Sons. 1875. https://archive.org/details/talestraditionso01rink

RONAN, PETER. Historical sketch of the Flathead Indian nation, 1813-1890. Helena: Journal Publishing Company. 1800. https://archive.org/details/historicalsketch00ronarich

RONDTHALER, Reverend EDWARD. Life of John Heckewelder; edited by B. H. Coates. Philadelphia: T. Ward. 1847. https://archive.org/details/lifeofjohnheckew00rondt

RUTTENBER. E. M. History of the Indian tribes of Hudson's River: their origin, manners, etc. Albany: J. Munsell. 1872. https://archive.org/details/ruttenberindians00ruttrich

SCHERMERHORN, J. F. Report, on the western Indians. (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society., 2d series, volume 2. Boston. 1814.) https://archive.org/details/correctviewoftha00sche

SCHOOLCRAFT, HENRY R. Notes on the Iroquois. Albany: E. H. Pease & Company. 1847. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50053

Personal memoirs of a residence of thirty years with the Indian tribes on the American frontiers, 1-12-1842 (1831). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. http://www.fullbooks.com/Personal-Memoirs-Of-A-Residence-Of-Thirty.html

SCHWEINITZ, EDMUND DE. Life and times of David Zeisberger, apostle of the Indians. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 1870. https://archive.org/details/cihm_26078

SEAVER, JAS. E. Life of Mary Jemison: Deh-he-wä-mis (1842). New York: Miller, Orton & Mulligan. 1856. (1918) https://archive.org/details/narrativeoflifeo00seavuoft

SHEA, J. G. Inquiries respecting the lost neutral nation. (Schoolcraft's Information respecting the Indian tribes, part. 4.) See SCHOOLCRAFT, HENRY R.

SHELDON, WILLIAM. Account of the Caraibs. (Archæologia Americana, volume 1. Worcester: American Antiquarian Society. 1820.)

SIMPSON, JAMES H. Journal of a military reconnoissance from Santa Fe to the Navajo country, 1840. [Navajos and Pueblos.] Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo & Company. 1852. https://archive.org/details/journalamilitar00simpgoog

The shortest route to California, with some account of the Indian tribes [of Utah]. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 1860. https://archive.org/details/shortestroutetoc00simp

SITGREAVES, Capt. L. Report of an expedition down the Zuni and Colorado rivers. Washington, 1854. (Senate ex. doc's, 33d congress, 1st session.) https://archive.org/details/reportanexpidit00sitggoog https://archive.org/details/reportanexpedit00engigoog

SKENANDOAH. Letters on the Iroquois; addressed to Albert Gallatin. (Reprinted in volume 2 of Craig's "The olden time." Pittsburgh: Wright & Charlton. 1848. 2 volumes.)

SMET, Father P. J. DE. Letters and sketches, with a narrative of a year's residence among the Indian tribes of the Rocky Mountains. Philadelphia: M. Fithian. 1843. https://archive.org/details/letterssketchesw00smet

Oregon missions and travels over the Rocky Mountains. 1845-6. New York: Edward Dunigan. 1847. https://archive.org/details/cihm_40687

Western missions and missionaries. New York: T. W. Strong. 1859. https://archive.org/details/westernmissionsm01smet/page/n7/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/westernmissionsm0000smet/page/n3/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/westernmissionsa00smetrich

SMITH, Capt. JOHN. Description of Virginia. General historie of Virginia. (Works, 1608-1631); edited by E. Arber, Birmingham. 1884.

SPRAGUE, JOHN T. The origin, progress, and conclusion of the Florida war. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1843. https://archive.org/details/originprogressa03spragoog

Historical and mythological traditions of the Algonquins, with a translation of the "Walumolum." (New York Historical Society.)

STONE, WILLIAM L. Life and times of Sa-go-ye-wat-ha, or Red Jacket (1841). Albany: J. Munsell. 1866. https://archive.org/details/lifeandtimessag01stongoog

Life of Joseph Brant--Thayendanegea (1838). Albany: J. Munsell. 1865. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/lifeofjosephbran01ston (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/lifejosephbrant03stongoog

STRACHEY, WILLIAM. Historie of travaile into Virginia Britannia. (1618?). London: Hakluyt Society. 1849. https://archive.org/details/historietravail00majogoog

SWAN, JAMES G. The Haidah Indians of Queen Charlotte's Islands (1874). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 21. Washington. 1876.) https://archive.org/details/haidahindians00swanrich https://archive.org/details/cihm_23957

The Indians of Cape Flattery, Washington Territory. (1868). (Smithsonian contributions to knowledge, volume 16. Washington. 1870.) https://archive.org/details/indianscapeflatt00swanrich https://archive.org/details/b21914084

The northwest coast; or three years [1852-5] in Washington Territory. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1857. https://archive.org/details/northwestcoastor00swan

SULLIVAN, Honorable JAMES. History of the Penobscott Indians. (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society., volume 9. Boston. 1804.)

VETROMILE, EUGENE. The Abnaki Indians. (Collections of the Maine Historical Society., volume 6. Portland. 1859.) https://archive.org/details/abnakisandtheir00vetrgoog

The Abnakis and their history. New York: J. B. Kirker. 1866. https://archive.org/details/abnakistheirhist00vetr

WILLIAMSON, WILLIAM. D. Indian tribes in New England (1839) (Collections of the Massachusetts Historical Society., 3d series, volume 9. 1846.)

WILLIS, WILLIAM. The language of the Abnaquies or eastern Indians: appendix by C. E. Potter. (Collections of the Maine Historical Society, volume 4. Portland. 1856.)

WILSON, DANIEL. The Huron-Iroquois of Canada. (Translation Royal Society, Canada. 1884.) https://archive.org/details/cihm_29131/page/n5/mode/2up

ZEISBERGER, DAVID, Moravian Missionary, Ohio. Diary [1781-1798]; translated from the German and edited by E. F. Bliss. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke & Company. 1885. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/diaryofdavid01zeisrich (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/diaryofdavid02zeisrich

ZYLYFF. The Ponca chiefs, an Indian's attempt to appeal from the tomahawk to the courts; with introduction by Inshtatheamba (Bright Eyes), and dedication by Wendell Phillips. Boston: Lockwood, Brooks & Company. 1880. https://archive.org/details/poncachiefsanin01tibbgoog

AUSTRIA.

GENERAL.

BRYCE, JAMES. The holy Roman empire (1864). London: Macmillan & Company. (1871) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/44101 (1915) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.213191

COXE, WILLIAM. History of the house of Austria, 1218-1792 (1807). London: H. G. Bohn. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofhouseof01coxeuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofhouseof02coxeiala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofhouseof02coxeuoft (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofhouseof03coxeuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.458810

DUNHAM, S. A. History of the Germanic empire. London: Longman. 1834. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofgermani01dunhiala/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofgermani02dunhiala/page/n9/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofgermani03dunhiala/page/n7/mode/2up

DYER, THOMAS HENRY. History of modern Europe, 1453-1857. London: John Murray, 4 volumes; George Bell & Sons. 4 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofmodern01dyer (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.40858

FREEMAN, EDWARD A. The historical geography of Europe. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1881. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/b31349638 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historicalgeog01free (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historicalgeogra01freeuoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historicalgeogra01free (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historicalgeogra02freeuoft

{xxxi}

GOULD, S. BARING. GOULD, S. BARING-GOULD. The story of Germany (Story of the nations). London: T. F. Unwin. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1886. https://archive.org/details/storyofgermany00bari/page/n11/mode/2up

HEEREN, A. H. L. A manual of the history of the political system of Europe and its colonies (1809); translated from the German. London: H. G. Bohn. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501449/page/n1/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/manualofhistoryo00heerrich https://archive.org/details/manual00ofhistoryoheerrich

KOCH, CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM. The revolutions of Europe (1771); from the French. London: Whittaker & Company. 1839. https://archive.org/details/revolutionseurop00koch

KOHLRAUSCH, FRIEDRICH. History of Germany (1816); [translated by J. D. Haas]. London: Chapman & Hall. 1844. https://archive.org/details/ahistorygermany00haasgoog New York: Appleton. 1845. https://archive.org/details/ahistorygermany00haasgoog

LATHAM, ROBERT. G. Ethnology of Europe. London: J. Van Voorst. 1852. https://archive.org/details/ethnologyofeurop00lathuoft/page/n5/mode/2up

The nationalities of Europe. volume 2. London: W. H. Allen & Company. 1863. 2 volumes. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.31028

LAVISSE, ERNEST. General view of the political history of Europe; translated by Charles Gross. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1891. https://archive.org/details/generalviewofpol00laviiala https://archive.org/details/generalviewofpol00lavi https://archive.org/details/generalviewpoli01grosgoog

LEGER, LOUIS. History of Austro-Hungary (1666; 2d edition., 1878-88); translated by Mrs. Birkbeck Hill. London: Rivingtons. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. https://archive.org/details/historyofaustroh00lege https://archive.org/details/ahistoryaustroh00hillgoog

LEWIS, CHARLTON T. History of Germany. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1874. https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany00lewi https://archive.org/details/ahistorygermany00unkngoog

LODGE, RICHARD. History of modern Europe, 1453-1878. London: J. Murray. 1885. New York: Harper Brothers. https://archive.org/details/historyofmoderne00lodguoft https://archive.org/details/historyofmoderne017244mbp https://archive.org/details/cu31924027987092

MALLESON, G. B. Lost opportunities of the house of Austria (Royal Historical Society Papers, volume 12, page 225).

MENZEL, WOLFGANG. History of Germany (1824-5); translated from 4th German edition by Mrs. G. Horrocks. London: H. G. Bohn. 1848. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany01menzuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany02menzuoft (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany03menzuoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historygermanyf00menzgoog

MICHELET, JULES. A summary of modern history (1827); translated and continued by M. C. M. Simpson. London: Macmillan & Co. 1875. https://archive.org/details/asummarymodernh00michgoog https://archive.org/details/summaryofmodernh00michuoft

RUSSELL, WILLIAM. History of modern Europe (1779). London: George Routledge & Sons. 4 volumes. Whittaker & Company. 4 volume New York: Harper Brothers. 3 volumes. (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historymoderneu01jonegoog

(Epitomized) https://archive.org/details/russellshistory00russgoog/page/n6/mode/2up

SIME, JAMES. History of Germany. London: Macmillan & Company. 1874. New York: Henry Holt & Co. 1874. https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany00simerich https://archive.org/details/historygermany00simegoog https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany0000unse_n7z0/page/n7/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany00sime https://archive.org/details/historyofgermany00simeuoft

SMYTH, WILLIAM. Lectures on modern history (1840). London: H. G. Bohn. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.3073 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/dli.bengal.10689.2173

TURNER, SAMUEL EPES. Sketch of the Germanic constitution from early times to the dissolution of the empire. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1888. https://archive.org/details/asketchgermanic01turngoog

VOLTAIRE, F. M. AROUET DE. Annals of the empire, from the time of Charlemagne (Works, translated by Smollett and others, 1761, volumes 20-22). (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/annalsoftheempir01voltuoft

MEDIÆVAL.

BUSK, Mrs. WILLIAM. Mediæval popes, emperors, kings and crusaders. London: Hookham & Sons. 1854-6. 4 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/medivalpopesem01buskuoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/medivalpopesemp01buskgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/medivalpopesem02buskuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/MediaevalPopesEmperorsKingsCrusadersV2 (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/medivalpopesemp00buskgoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/medivalpopesem03buskuoft (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/medivalpopesem04buskuoft (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/MediaevalPopesEmperorsKingsCrusadersV4

COMYN, Sir ROBERT. History of the western empire, from Charlemagne to Charles V. [800-1520], London: W. H. Allen & Company. 1841. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historywesterne01unkngoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historywesterne02unkngoog/page/n7/mode/2up

DURUY, VICTOR. The history of the middle ages (1839); translated by E. H. and M. D. Whitney, with notes and revisions by G. B. Adams. New York: Henry Holt & Company. 1891. https://archive.org/details/historyofmiddlea00dur https://archive.org/details/historyofmiddlea00duru https://archive.org/details/historyofmiddlea00duruuoft https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.169467

HALLAM, HENRY. View of the state of Europe during the middle ages. London: J. Murray. 3 volumes. New York: W. J. Widdleton. 3 volumes. (Volume 3) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/33540 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/viewofstateofe01hall (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/viewofstateofeur01hall (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/viewofstateofeur02hall (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/viewofstateofeur03hall https://archive.org/details/cu31924027794654/page/n3/mode/2up

HENDERSON, ERNEST F., Select historical documents of the middle ages. London: George Bell & Sons. 1892. New York: Macmillan & Company. https://archive.org/details/selecthistorical00hendiala https://archive.org/details/ErnestF.HendersonSelectHistoricalDocumentsOfTheMiddleAges https://archive.org/details/cu31924014186161 https://archive.org/details/selectdocuments00hend https://archive.org/details/cu31924014186526

STUBBS, WILLIAM. Seventeen lectures on the study of medieval and modern history. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 1886. New York: MacMillan & Company. 1887. https://archive.org/details/seventeenlecture00stub https://archive.org/details/cu31924027811011

The Constitutional History of England in Its Origin and Development https://archive.org/details/constitutionalh04stubgoog

The Early Plantagenets https://archive.org/details/earlyplantagenet01stub

16TH-17TH CENTURIES. REFORMATION. THIRTY YEARS WAR.

CUST, Sir EDWARD, Lives of the warriors of the thirty years' war. London: John Murray. 1865. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/livesofwarriorspt1custuoft/page/n3/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/livesofwarriorspt2custuoft

GARDINER, SAMUEL R. The thirty years' war, 1618-1648 (Epochs of history). London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1874. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/40082 https://archive.org/details/gardinersamuel00rawsrich https://archive.org/details/thirtyyearswar00gardgoog https://archive.org/details/thirtyyearswar1600gard https://archive.org/details/thirtyyearswar1600

GINDELY, ANTON. History of the thirty years' war (1869-80): translated by A. Ten Brook. London: Richard Bentley & Son. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1884. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historythirtyye01broogoog

MALDEN, HENRY E. Vienna, 1683. London: Kegan Paul & Company. 1883. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/56023

MARTIN, HENRI. History of France: age of Louis XIV.(1860); translated by Mrs. Booth. Boston: Walker, Wise & Company. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_nW0PAAAAYAAJ (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_T30PAAAAYAAJ

MAXWELL, Sir WILLIAM STIRLING. Don John of Austria, 1547-78. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1883. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/donjohnofaustria01stiriala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/donjohnofaustria02stiruoft

MITCHELL, Lieut.-Colonel J. Life of Wallenstein. London: Jas. Fraser. 1837. https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.94161

PRAET, JULES VAN. Essays on the political history of the 15th, 16th and 17th centuries; [translated] edited by Sir Edmund Head. London: Richard Bentley. 1868. https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.77834

RANKE, LEOPOLD VON. Ferdinand I. and Maximilian II. of Austria (1832); translated by Lady Duff Gordon. London: Longman. (1853) https://archive.org/details/FerdinandIAndMaximilianIIOfAustria/page/n5/mode/2up

History of the Latin and Teutonic nations, 1494-1514 (1824); translated from the German by Philip A. Ashworth. London: George Bell & Sons. 1887. (1887) https://archive.org/details/historyoflatinte01rank (1909) https://archive.org/details/historyoflatinte00rankiala (1915) https://archive.org/details/historyoflatinte00rankrich

History of the reformation in Germany (1839-43); translated by Sarah Austin. London: Longman. 1845-7. 3 volumes. (1905) https://archive.org/details/historyreformat02rankgoog/page/n6/mode/2up

ROBERTSON, WILLIAM. History of the reign of the emperor Charles V. (1769); with life of the emperor after his abdication, by W. H. Prescott (1857). London: George Routledge & Sons. 2 volumes. (Volume 1)https://archive.org/details/historyreignemp42robegoog (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofreign01robe (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/reignofemperorch02robe https://archive.org/details/historyreignemp27robegoog/page/n10/mode/2up

Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofreignof1864robe (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofreignof02robe (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofreignof03robe

New York: Hopkins & Seymore (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofreignof01robguat/page/n11/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofreignof03roguat/page/n11/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/historyreignemp32robegoog/page/n6/mode/2up (Complete) https://archive.org/details/historyofreignof00roberich

TRENCH, RICHARD C. Gustavus Adolphus in Germany. London: Macmillan & Company, 2d edition. 1872. (Volume 1)https://archive.org/details/historyreignemp27robegoog/page/n10/mode/2up

18TH CENTURY.

BRACKENBURY. Colonel. C. B. Frederick the great. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1884. https://archive.org/details/frederickgreat00bracrich

BROGLIE, Duc de. Frederick the great and Maria Theresa (1882); translated by Mrs. Hoey and J. Lillie. London: Low, Marston & Company. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/frederickgreatma01brogiala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/frederickgreatma02brogiala

CARLYLE, THOMAS. History of Friedrich II. of Prussia, called Frederick the great (1858).

London: Chapman & Hall. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric37carlgoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric27carlgoog (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric47carlgoog (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric57carlgoog

New York: Harper & Brothers. (Books 1-19) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/2102 (Books 1-21) http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25808 (Books 1-5) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri01carl (Books 8-10) https://archive.org/details/friedrichiiofpru03carl (Books 15-17) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric47carlgoog

New York: Dana Estes and Charles E. Lauriat (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri01carl/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri02carl (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri03carl (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri04carl (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri05carl (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historyoffriedri06carl

New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric54carlgoog/page/n12/mode/2up (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric51carlgoog/page/n8/mode/2up

Leipzig: Bernard Tauchnitz (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/historyfriedric10carlgoog

CUST, Sir Edward. Annals of the wars of the eighteenth century. London: John Murray. 1862. 5 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/annalswarseight05custgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/annalswarseight00custgoog/page/n4/mode/2up (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/annalswarseight03custgoog (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/annalswarseight04custgoog (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.106238/page/n1/mode/2up

DOVER, Lord. Life of Frederick II., King of Prussia. London: Longman. 1831. New York: Harper & Brothers. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/lifeoffredericse01doveuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/lifefredericsec08dovegoog/page/n8/mode/2up

FREDERICK II. (called the great). History of my own times [1740-1745]. (Posthumous works; translated by Thomas Holcroft. Volume 1. London. 1789. 13 volumes.) (Part 1) https://archive.org/details/vol2historyofmyo00fred (Part 2) https://archive.org/details/vol3historyofmyo00fred

See CARLYLE, THOMAS for mant other volumes.

GERARD, JAMES W. The peace of Utrecht, 1713-14. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1885. https://archive.org/details/cu31924027872021 https://archive.org/details/peaceutrechtahi00geragoog

KUGLER, FRANCIS. Pictorial history of Germany during the reign of Frederick the great (1842); [translated from the German.]. London: H. G. Bohn. https://archive.org/details/pictorialhistor00menzgoog

LECKY, WILLIAM EDWARD HARTPOLE History of England in the 18th century. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1878-90. 8 volumes. New York: D. Appleton & Company. 1878-90. 8 volumes. https://archive.org/details/historyofengland06leck/page/n7/mode/2up

LONGMAN, F. W. Frederick the great and the seven years' war. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1881. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.41356 https://archive.org/details/frederickgreatse01long

MACAULAY, Lord. Essays: Frederick the great (1842). London: Longmans, Green & Company. Boston: Estes & Lauriat. 3 volumes. New York: Maynard, Merrill, &: Co. https://archive.org/details/essayonfredericg00maca/page/n5/mode/2up

MALLESON, Colonel. G. B. Loudon [Austrian fieldmarshal, 1743-1790]. London: Chapman & Hall. 1884.

MALLET, CHARLES EDWARD. The French revolution. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1893. (1897) https://archive.org/details/frenchrevolution00malluoft (1893) https://archive.org/details/frenchrevolution00mallrich (1893) https://archive.org/details/cu31924031498128/page/n9/mode/2up

MIGNET, FRANÇOIS A. M. History of the French revolution, 1789-1814 (1824); translated from the French. London: George Bell & Sons. https://archive.org/details/historyoffrenchr00migniala https://archive.org/details/historyfrenchre03conggoog

RAUMER, FREDERICK VON. Contributions to modern history: Frederick II. and his times. London: Charles Knight & Company. 1837. https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.91064

SCHLOSSER, F. C. History of the eighteenth century, etc.; translated by D. Davison. London: Chapman & Hall. 1843-52. 8 volumes. (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyeighteen03schlgoog (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyeighteen08schlgoog (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyeighteen01schlgoog/page/n6/mode/2up (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historyeighteen02schlgoog/page/n5/mode/2up

STANHOPE, Earl (Lord Mahon). History of England 1713-1783 (1836-53). London: John Murray. 7 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofengland01stan (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofengland02stan (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofengland03stan/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofengland04stan (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyofengland05stan/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/historyofengland07stan/page/n5/mode/2up

Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz 1853 (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_4CFTAAAAcAAJ

STEPHENS, H. MORSE. History of the French revolution. Volumes 1-2. London: Rivingtons. 1880. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1886-91. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyoffrenchr01stepiala (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924024309480

THIERS, LOUIS ADOLPHE. History of the French revolution (1827); translated by F. Shoberl (1854). New York: D. Appleton & Co. 4 volumes. London: Richard Bentley & Son. 5 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyoffrench01thieuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyoffrench02thieuoft (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/v3a4historyoffren03thieuoft (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyoffrench04thieuoft (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyoffrench05thieuoft

{xxxi}

19TH CENTURY: EARLY AND GENERAL.

ADAMS, Major CHARLES. Great campaigns in Europe from 1796 to 1870; edited by C. C. King. Edinburgh: William Blackwood & Sons. 1877. https://archive.org/details/greatcampaignssu00adam

ALISON, Sir ARCHIBALD. History of Europe, 1789-1815 (1842). 10 volumes. (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyeuropefr04alisgoog/page/n8/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/historyeuropefr37alisgoog

History of Europe, 1815-1852 (1857). 6 volumes.

Edinburgh: William Blackwood & Sons. New York: Harper & Brothers.

(Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofeurope701alisuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef02alis (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofeurope703alisuoft (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropefc04alis (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyofeurope705alisuoft (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/historyofeurope706alisuoft (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/historyofeurope707alisuoft (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef08alisuoft (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef09alisuoft (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef09alis (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef11alisiala (Volume 12) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef12alisuoft (Volume 13) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef13alisuoft (Volume 14) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef14alisuoft (Volume 15) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef15alisuoft (Volume 16) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef16alisuoft (Volume 17) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef17alisuoft (Volume 20) https://archive.org/details/historyofeuropef00alisuoft

AUSTRIA. (North British Review, 44: 27. 1866.)

AUSTRIAN NATIONALITIES AND AUSTRIAN POLICY: by J. W. W. (Fraser's Magazine., 52: 163. 1855).

DUFF, MOUNTSTUART E. GRANT-. Studies in European politics. Edinburgh: Edmonston &: Douglas. 1866. https://archive.org/details/studiesineurope01duffgoog https://archive.org/details/studiesineurope00duffgoog https://archive.org/details/cu31924027804248 https://archive.org/details/studiesineuropea00granrich

FYFFE, C. A. History of modern Europe. [1792-1878]. London: Cassell. 1880-1889. 3 volumes. New York: Henry Holt & Company. 1881-90. 3 volumes. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/6589 (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.172930/page/n1/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/historyofmoderne00fyffuoft

JOURNAL OF A NOBLEMAN: his residence at Vienna during the congress. London. Philadelphia. 1833.

KELLY, WALTER K. History of the house of Austria [1792-1848]. And Genesis or the late Austrian revolution: by an officer of state [Count Hartig]: translated from the German. London: H. G. Bohn. 1853. https://archive.org/details/historyofhouseof00kell

KOHL, J. G. Austria. London: Chapman & Hall. 1844. https://archive.org/details/austriaviennapr00kohlgoog

KRAUSE, GUSTAV. The growth of German unity. London: David Nutt. 1892.

LANFREY, P. History of Napoleon I. [translated from the French.]. London: Macmillan & Company. 1871-1879. 4 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofnapoleo01lanfuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyofnapole02lanf (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cu31924024344834 (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/historyofnapoleo03lanfuoft (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/cu31924024344842 (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/historyofnapoleo04lanfuoft

MALLESON, Colonel George Bruce Life of Prince Metternich (Statesmen series). London: W. H. Allen & Company. 1888. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott &: Co. https://archive.org/details/lifeofprincemett00mall https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.181131/page/n3/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/lifeofprincemet00mall https://archive.org/details/lifeofprincemett00malluoft (Audio) https://archive.org/details/life_of_prince_metternich_1611_librivox/lifeofprincemetternich_01_malleson_128kb.mp3

METTERNICH, Prince. Memoirs [1773-1835]: translated by Mrs. Alexander Napier. London: Bentley & Son. 1880. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. https://archive.org/details/memoirsofprincem02mettuoft/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.85236/page/ii/mode/2up

MICHIELS, ALFRED, compiler. Secret history of the Austrian government. London: Chapman & Hall. 1859. https://archive.org/details/secrethistoryau00michgoog

MÜLLER, W. Political history of recent times, 1816-1875: translated [and continued to 1881] by John P. Peters. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1882. https://archive.org/details/politicalhistory00mulliala https://archive.org/details/politicalhistory00mluoft https://archive.org/details/politicalhistory00ml https://archive.org/details/politicalhistor00mlgoog https://archive.org/details/politicalhistor00petegoog

ROSE, J. H. A century of continental history, 1780-1880. London: Edward Stanford. 1889. https://archive.org/details/cu31924031187804

STEPHENS, H. MORSE. Europe, 1789-1815. London: Macmillan &: Company. 1893. https://archive.org/details/europestephens00step

THIERS, ADOLPH. History of the consulate and the empire of France under Napoleon (1845-62); translated by D. F. Campbell and H. W. Herbert. London: George Bell & Sons (Bohn). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 5 volumes.

Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Company. 1894. 12 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire01thieiala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyconsulate02thieiala (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire03thieiala (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire04thieiala (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/historyofconsula05thieiala (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire06thieiala (Volume 7) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire07thieiala (Volume 8) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire08thieiala (Volume 9) https://archive.org/details/historyofconsula09thieiala (Volume 10) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire10thieiala (Volume 11) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire11thieiala (Volume 12) https://archive.org/details/consulateempire12thieiala

TURNBULL, PETER EVAN Austria, volume 2. London: J. Murray. 1840. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/austria01turngoog/page/n10/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/austria02turngoog/page/n8/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/austria03turngoog/page/n6/mode/2up

VEHSE, E. Memoirs of the court, aristocracy and diplomacy of Austria; translated by Franz Demmler. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1856. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/memoirsofcourtof01vehs (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/memoirsofcourtar02vehs (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/memoirscourtari00vehsgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cu31924088019769

WEIR, ARCHIBALD. The historical basis of modern Europe, 1760-1815. London: Swan Sonnenschein & Company. 1886. https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501799 https://archive.org/details/cu31924027892375/page/n7/mode/2up

WHITMAN, SIDNEY. The realm of the Habsburgs. London: William Heinemann. 1893. https://archive.org/details/realmofhabsburgs00whituoft https://archive.org/details/realmofhabsburgs00whit/page/n9/mode/2up

AUSTRIA, HUNGARY, AND THE LESSER PROVINCES.

AUSTRIA AND HUNGARY. (Edinburgh Review, 90: 230. 1849.)

AUSTRIA IN 1848-9. (Edinburgh Review, 174: 440. 1891.)

BONER, CHARLES. Transylvania. London: Longmans. 1865. https://archive.org/details/transylvaniaits00bonegoog

BRACE, CHARLES LORING. Hungary in 1851. New York: Charles Scribner. 1852. https://archive.org/details/hungaryin1851wit01brac https://archive.org/details/hungaryinwithan00bracgoog

FELBERMANN, LOUIS. Hungary and its people. London: Griffith, Farran & Company. 1892. https://archive.org/details/hungaryitspeople00felb

FITZMAURICE, EDMOND. Home rule in Austria. (Nineteenth Century, 19: 443. 1886.)

FORSTER, FLORENCE A. Francis Deak, Hungarian statesman: a memoir, with a preface by M. E. Grant Duff. London: Macmillan & Company. 1880. https://archive.org/details/francisdekhung00arnoiala https://archive.org/details/francisdekhunga00forgoog

GERARD, E. The land beyond the forest [Transylvania]. Edinburgh: William Blackwood & Sons. 1888. 2 volumes. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/57168 https://archive.org/details/cu31924011921420

GODKIN, EDWIN LAWRENCE History of Hungary and the Magyars. London: Cassell & Company. 1858. https://archive.org/details/historyofhungary00godkiala/page/n5/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/historyhungarya00godkgoog

GÖRGEI, ARTHUR. My life and acts in Hungary, 1848-9 (1851); translated. London: D. Bogue. New York: Harper & Brothers. https://archive.org/details/mylifeactsinhung00grrich

HOFER, ANDREW, Memoirs of the life of: containing an account of the transactions in the Tyrol, 1809: [translated] from the German, by C. H. Hall. London: John Murray. 1820. https://archive.org/details/memoirslifeandr00unkngoog

KAY, DAVID. Home rule in Austria-Hungary. (Nineteenth Century, 19: 41. 1886.) https://archive.org/details/austriahungary00kayd

KLAPKA, General GEORGE. Memoirs of the war of independence in Hungary: translated by O. Wenckstern. London: C. Gilpin. 1850. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/memoirswarindep00wencgoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/memoirswarindep01klapgoog

MAURICE, C. EDMUND. Revolutionary movement of 1848-9 in Italy, Austria-Hungary, and Germany. London: George Bell & Sons. 1887. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/39540 https://archive.org/details/revolutionarymo00maurgoog/page/n16/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/revolutionarymo00unkngoog https://archive.org/details/therevolutionary39540gut https://archive.org/details/revolutionarymov00maur

PAGET, JOHN. Travels in Hungary and Transylvania (1839). London: John Murray. Philadelphia: Lea &: Blanchard. 1850. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.36331/page/n5/mode/2up (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/agw0321.0001.001.umich.edu/page/II/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/hungarytransylva02pageuoft/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/agw0321.0002.001.umich.edu/page/n9/mode/2up

PARDOE, Miss JULIA. The city of the Magyar, or Hungary and her institutions in 1839-40. London: G. Virtue. 1840. 3 volumes. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_City_of_the_Magyar.html?id=S-gDAAAAQAAJ

PATON, A. A. Highlands and islands of the Adriatic. London: Chapman & Hall. 1849. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/highlandsislands00pato/page/n7/mode/2up (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_dzbNcsnbcOYC

PATTERSON, ARTHUR J. The Magyars: their country and institutions. London: Smith, Elder & Company. 1869. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/magyarstheircou06johngoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/magyarstheircou01pattgoog/page/n6/mode/2up

PLANTA, JOSEPH. History of the Helvetic confederacy. London. 1800. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyofhelveti01planuoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/historyhelvetic02plangoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/historyhelvetic00plangoog

PRICE, BONAMY. Austria and Hungary. (Fraser's Magazine, 65: 384. 1862.)

STILES, WILLIAM. H. Austria in 1848-49. New York: Harper & Brothers. 1852-3. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924088020130 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/cu31924088020148

SZABAD, EMERIC. Hungary, past and present. Edinburgh: A. & C. Black. 1854. https://archive.org/details/hungarypastandp00szabgoog/page/n4/mode/2up

VÁMBÉRY, ARMINIUS, and LOUIS HEILPRIN. The story of Hungary (Story of the nations). New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1886. London: T. F. Unwin. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/50038 https://archive.org/details/storyhungary00vmgoog

AUSTRIA AND ITALY.

ARRIVABENE, Count CHARLES. Italy under Victor Emmanuel. London: Hurst & Blackett. 1862. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/italyundervicto02arrigoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/italyundervicto01arrigoog

AUSTRIA, FRANCE AND ITALY. (Edinburgh Review., 109: 286. 1859.)

AUSTRIANS AND ITALY, The. (Eclectic Magazine, 47: 538. 1859.)

GARIBALDI, GIUSEPPE. Autobiography: translated by A. Werner, with a supplement by Jessie White Mario. London: Walter Smith & Innes. 1889. 3 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/autobiography01gariuoft (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/autobiographygi00garigoog (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/autobiographygi02garigoog

ITALY AND THE WAR OF 1866. (Westminster Review., 87: 275. 1867.)

MAZADE, CHARLES DE. Life of Count Cavour. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons. 1877. https://archive.org/details/lifeofcountcavou00mazarich

O'CLERY, PATRICK KEYES (The Chevalier O'Clery). The history of the Italian revolution: 1st period, 1796-1849. London: R. Washbourne. 1875. https://archive.org/details/historyitalianr00oclgoog/page/n8/mode/2up

The making of Italy. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench &: Company. 1892. https://archive.org/details/makingofitaly18500oclerich https://archive.org/details/makingitaly00oclgoog https://archive.org/details/makingofitaly0000ocle/page/n5/mode/2up https://archive.org/details/makingitaly01oclgoog

PROBYN, JOHN W. Italy, 1815-1890. London: Cassell & Company. 1891. https://archive.org/details/italyfromfallofn00probuoft https://archive.org/details/italyfromfallna00probgoog https://archive.org/details/italyfromfallna01probgoog/italyfromfallna01probgoog

STUART, R. The Austro-Italian alliance. (Contemporary Review., 40: 921. 1881.)

THAYER, WILLIAM ROSCOE. The dawn of Italian Independence, 1814-1849. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Company. 1893. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/dawnofitalianind01thayiala (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/dawnofitalianind02thayuoft (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/cu31924082152400

WRIGHTSON, RICHARD HEBER A history of modern Italy [1800-50]. London: Richard Bentley. 1855. https://archive.org/details/dli.ministry.14113 https://archive.org/details/ahistorymoderni00wriggoog

AUSTRIA AND GERMANY.

CHESNEY, C. C. The campaign [of 1866] in western Germany. (Blackwood's Magazine, 101: 68. 1867.)

DICEY, EDWARD. The battlefields of 1866. London: Tinsley Brothers. 1866. https://archive.org/details/battlefields00dicegoog

The campaign [of 1866] in Germany. (Macmillan's Magazine, 14: 386. 1866.)

DICEY, EDWARD T. The campaign [of 1866] in Italy. (Macmillan's Magazine, 14: 241. 1866.)

GERMANIC CONFEDERATION and the Austrian empire, The. (Quarterly Review, 84: 425. 1849.)

HOZIER, H. M. The seven weeks' war [1866]. London: Macmillan & Company. 1867. 2 volumes. (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.238477 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.45879

{xxxii}

LOWE, CHARLES. Prince Bismarck; an historical biography. London: Cassell & Company. 1885. 2 volumes. https://archive.org/details/princebismarkhis00lowe (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/princebismarckhi01loweiala (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/princebismarcka01lowegoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/princebismarcka02lowegoog

MALET, Sir ALEXANDER. The overthrow of the Germanic confederation. 1866. London: Longmans, Green & Company. 1870. https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.77288/page/iii/mode/2up

MALLESON, Colonel. G. B. Battle-fields of Germany. London: W. H. Allen & Company. 1884. https://archive.org/details/battlefieldsofge00malluoft

The refounding of the German empire. 1848-71. London: Seeley & Company. 1893. https://archive.org/details/refoundingofgerm00mall

PRUSSIAN CAMPAIGN OF 1806. (Edinburgh Review, 125: 187. 1867.)

RECONSTRUCTION OF GERMANY, The. (North British Review, 51: 133. 1869.)

SIMON, EDOUARD. The emperor William and his reign: from the French. London: Remington & Company. 1886. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/emperorwilliama00simogoog (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/emperorwilliama01simogoog

SYBEL, HEINRICH VON. The founding of the German empire by William I.; based chiefly upon Prussian state documents: translated by M. L. Perrin and G. Bradford, Jr. New York: T. Y. Crowell & Company. 1890-1. 5 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/foundingofgerman01sybe (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/foundingofgerman02sybe (Volume 3) https://archive.org/details/foundingofgerman03sybe (Volume 4) https://archive.org/details/foundingofgerman04sybe (Volume 5) https://archive.org/details/foundingofgerman05sybe (Volume 6) https://archive.org/details/foundingofgerman06sybe

AUSTRIA AND THE SOUTHEASTERN STATES.

AUSTRIA, GERMANY AND THE EASTERN QUESTION. (Fraser's Magazine, 96: 407. 1877.)

AUSTRIA'S POLICY IN THE EAST. (Macmillan's Magazine, 53: 17. 1885.)

BOURCHIER, John David The sentinel of the Balkans. (Fortnightly Review., 52: 806. 1889.)

CAILLARD, VINCENT. The Bulgarian imbroglio. (Fortnightly Review, 44: 740. 1885.)

FREEMAN; EDWARD A. The house of Habsburg in south-eastern Europe. (Fortnightly Review., 51: 839. 1889.)

The position of the Austrian power in south-eastern Europe. (Contemporary Review., 41: 727. 1882.)

THE RECONSTRUCTED EMPIRE: ITS REFORMS AND POLICY.

AUSTRIA AND HER REFORMS. (Westminster Review. 75: 503. 1801.)

AUSTRIA SINCE SADOWA. (Quarterly Review., 131: 90. 1871.)

AUSTRIA: qu'est que c'est l'Austrie? (Edinburgh Review, 40: 298. 1824.)

AUSTRIAN CONSTITUTIONALISM. (Westminster Review, 79: 333. 1863.)

BEUST, FRIEDRICH F. Count VON. Memoirs [1830-1885]. London: Remington & Company. 2 volumes. (Volume 1) https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.92139 (Volume 2) https://archive.org/details/memoirsfriedric00beusgoog

BOURCHIER, J. D. The heritage of the Hapsburgs. (Fortnightly Review, 51: 377. 1889.)

DILKE, Sir CHARLES W. Position of European politics, 1887. London: Chapman & Hall. 1887. https://archive.org/details/dli.granth.91722

DUALISM IN AUSTRIA. (Westminster Review, 88: 431. 1867.)

FOREIGN POLICY AND INTERNAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE AUSTRIAN EMPIRE. (Foreign Quarterly Review, 18: 257. 1837.)

NATIONAL LIFE AND THOUGHT. London: T. F. Unwin. 1891.

----------Volume 1: End--------

----------Volume 2: Start--------

LIST OF MAPS.

Map of Europe at the close of the Tenth Century, To follow page 1020.

Map of Europe in 1768, To follow page 1086.

Four maps of France, A. D. 1154, 1180, 1814 and 1860, To follow page 1168.

Two maps of Central Europe, A. D. 848 and 888, On page 1404.

Map of Germany at the Peace of Westphalia, To follow page 1486.

Maps of Germany, A. D. 1815 and 1866; of the Netherlands, 1880-1889; and of the Zollverein, To follow page 1540

LOGICAL OUTLINES, IN COLORS.

English history, To follow page 730.

French history, To follow page 1158. German history, To follow page 1428.

CHRONOLOGICAL TABLES.

The Fifth Century, On page 1433. The Sixth Century, On page 1434.

{769}

EL DORADO, The quest of.

"When the Spaniards had conquered and pillaged the civilized empires on the table lands of Mexico, Bogota, and Peru, they began to look round for new scenes of conquest, new sources of wealth; the wildest rumours were received as facts, and the forests and savannas, extending for thousands of square miles to the eastward of the cordilleras of the Andes, were covered, in imagination, with populous kingdoms, and cities filled with gold. The story of El Dorado, of a priest or king smeared with oil and then coated with gold dust, probably originated in a custom which prevailed among the civilized Indians of the plateau of Bogota; but El Dorado was placed, by the credulous adventurers, in a golden city amidst the impenetrable forests of the centre of South America, and, as search after search failed, his position was moved further and further to the eastward, in the direction of Guiana. El Dorado, the phantom god of gold and silver, appeared in many forms. … The settlers at Quito and in Northern Peru talked of the golden empire of the Omaguas, while those in Cuzco and Charcas dreamt of the wealthy cities of Paytiti and Enim, on the banks of a lake far away, to the eastward of the Andes. These romantic fables, so firmly believed in those old days led to the exploration of vast tracts of country, by the fearless adventurers of the sixteenth century, portions of which have never been traversed since, even to this day. The most famous searches after El Dorado were undertaken from the coast of Venezuela, and the most daring leaders of these wild adventures were German knights."

_C. R. Markham, Introduction to Simon's Account of the Expedition of Ursua and Aguirre (Hakluyt Society 1861)._

"There were, along the whole coast of the Spanish Main, rumours of an inland country which abounded with gold. These rumours undoubtedly related to the kingdoms of Bogota and Tunja, now the Nuevo Reyno de Granada. Belalcazar, who was in quest of this country from Quito, Federman, who came from Venezuela, and Gonzalo Ximenez de Quesada, who sought it by way of the River Madalena, and who effected its conquest, met here. But in these countries also there were rumours of a rich land at a distance; similar accounts prevailed in Peru; in Peru they related to the Nuevo Reyno, there they related to Peru; and thus adventurers from both sides were allured to continue the pursuit after the game was taken. An imaginary kingdom was soon shaped out as the object of their quest, and stories concerning it were not more easily invented than believed. It was said that a younger brother of Atabalipa fled, after the destruction of the Incas, took with him the main part of their treasures, and founded a greater empire than that of which his family had been deprived. Sometimes the imaginary Emperor was called the Great Paytite, sometimes the Great Moxo, sometimes the Enim or Great Paru. An impostor at Lima affirmed that he had been in his capital, the city of Manoa, where not fewer than 3,000 workmen were employed in the silversmiths' street; he even produced a map of the country, in which he had marked a hill of gold, another of silver, and a third of salt. … This imaginary kingdom obtained the name of El Dorado from the fashion of its Lord, which has the merit of being in savage costume. His body was anointed every morning with a certain fragrant gum of great price, and gold dust was then blown upon him, through a tube, till he was covered with it: the whole was washed off at night. This the barbarian thought a more magnificent and costly attire than could be afforded by any other potentate in the world, and hence the Spaniards called him El Dorado, or the Gilded One. A history of all the expeditions which were undertaken for the conquest of his kingdom would form a volume not less interesting than extraordinary."

R. Southey, History of Brazil, volume 1, chapter 12.

The most tragical and thrilling of the stories of the seekers after El Dorado is that which Mr. Markham introduces in the quotation above, and which Southey has told with full details in The Expedition of Orsua; and the Crimes of Aguirre. The most famous of the expeditions were those in which Sir Walter Raleigh engaged, and two of which he personally led—in 1595, and in 1617-18. Released from his long imprisonment in the Tower to undertake the latter, he returned from it, broken and shamed, to be sent to the scaffold as a victim sacrificed to the malignant resentment of Spain. How far Raleigh shared in the delusion of his age respecting El Dorado, and how far he made use of it merely to promote a great scheme for the "expansion of England," are questions that will probably remain forever in dispute.

_Sir Walter Raleigh, Discoverie of the Large, Rich and Beautiful Empire of Guiana (Hakluyt Society 1848)._

ALSO IN: _J. A. Van Heuvel, El Dorado._

E. Edwards, Life of Raleigh, volume 1, chapters 10 and 25.

P. F. Tytler, Life of Raleigh, chapters 3 and 6.

E. Gosse, Raleigh, chapters 4 and 9.

_A. F. Bandelier, The gilded man._

ELECTORAL COLLEGE, The Germanic: Its rise and constitution. Its secularization and extinction.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1125-1152, and 1347-1493; also, 1801-1803, and 1805-1806.

ELECTORAL COMMISSION, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876-1877.

ELECTORS, Presidential, of the United States of America.

See PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

ELECTRICAL DISCOVERY AND INVENTION.

"Electricity, through its etymology at least, traces its lineage back to Homeric times. In the Odyssey reference is made to the 'necklace hung with bits of amber' presented by the Phœnician traders to the Queen of Syra. Amber was highly prized by the ancients, having been extensively used as an ornamental gem, and many curious theories were suggested as to its origin. Some of these, although mythical, were singularly near the truth, and it is an interesting coincidence that in the well-known myth concerning the ill-fated and rash youth who so narrowly escaped wrecking the solar chariot and the terrestrial sphere, amber, the first known source of electricity, and the thunder-bolts of Jupiter are linked together. It is not unlikely that this substance was indebted, for some of the romance that clung to it through ages, to the fact that when rubbed it attracts light bodies. This property it was known to possess in the earliest times: it is the one single experiment in electricity which has come down to us from the remotest antiquity. … The power of certain fishes, notably what is known as the 'torpedo,' to produce electricity, was known at an early period, and was commented on by Pliny and Aristotle. {770} … Up to the sixteenth [century] there seems to have been no attempt to study electrical phenomena in a really scientific manner. Isolated facts which almost thrust themselves upon observers, were noted, and, in common with a host of other natural phenomena, were permitted to stand alone, with no attempt at classification, generalization, or examination through experiment. … Dr. Gilbert can justly be called the creator of the science of electricity and magnetism. His experiments were prodigious in number, and many of his conclusions were correct and lasting. To him we are indebted for the name 'electricity,' which he bestowed upon the power or property which amber exhibited in attracting light bodies, borrowing the name from the substance itself, in order to define one of its attributes. … This application of experiment to the study of electricity, begun by Gilbert three hundred years ago, was industriously pursued by those who came after him, and the next two centuries witnessed a rapid development of science. Among the earlier students of this period were the English philosopher, Robert Boyle, and the celebrated burgomaster of Magdeburg, Otto von Guericke. The latter first noted the sound and light accompanying electrical excitation. These were afterwards independently discovered by Dr. Wall, an Englishman, who made the somewhat prophetic observation, 'This light and crackling seems in some degree to represent thunder and lightning.' Sir Isaac Newton made a few experiments in electricity, which he exhibited to the Royal Society. … Francis Hawksbee was an active and useful contributor to experimental investigation, and he also called attention to the resemblance between the electric spark and lightning. The most ardent student of electricity in the early years of the eighteenth century was Stephen Gray. He performed a multitude of experiments, nearly all of which added something to the rapidly accumulating stock of knowledge, but doubtless his most important contribution was his discovery of the distinction between conductors and non-conductors. … Some of Gray's papers fell into the hands of Dufay, an officer of the French army, who, after several years' service, had resigned his post to devote himself to scientific pursuits. … His most important discovery was the existence of two distinct species of electricity, which he named 'vitreous' and 'resinous.' … A very important advance was made in 1745 in the invention of the Leyden jar or phial. As has so many times happened in the history of scientific discovery, it seems tolerably certain that this interesting device was hit upon by at least three persons, working independently of each other. One Cuneus, a monk named Kleist, and Professor Muschenbroeck, of Leyden, are all accredited with the discovery. … Sir William Watson perfected it by adding the outside metallic coating, and was by its aid enabled to fire gunpowder and other inflammables."

T. C. Mendenhall, A Century of Electricity, chapter 1.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1745-1747. Franklin's identification of Electricity with Lightning.

"In 1745 Mr. Peter Collinson of the Royal Society sent a [Leyden] jar to the Library Society of Philadelphia, with instructions how to use it. This fell into the hands of Benjamin Franklin, who at once began a series of electrical experiments. On March 28, 1747, Franklin began his famous letters to Collinson. … In these letters he propounded the single-fluid theory of electricity, and referred all electric phenomena to its accumulation in bodies in quantities more than their natural share, or to its being withdrawn from them so as to leave them minus their proper portion." Meantime, numerous experiments with the Leyden jar had convinced Franklin of the identity of lightning and electricity, and he set about the demonstration of the fact. "The account given by Dr. Stuber of Philadelphia, an intimate personal friend of Franklin, and published in one of the earliest editions of the works of the great philosopher, is as follows:—'The plan which he had originally proposed was to erect on some high tower, or other elevated place, a sentry-box, from which should rise a pointed iron rod, insulated by being fixed in a cake of resin. Electrified clouds passing over this would, he conceived, impart to it a portion of their electricity, which would be rendered evident to the senses by sparks being emitted when a key, a knuckle, or other conductor was presented to it. Philadelphia at this time offered no opportunity of trying an experiment of this kind. Whilst Franklin was waiting for the erection of a spire, it occurred to him that he might have more ready access to the region of clouds by means of a common kite. He prepared one by attaching two cross-sticks to a silk handkerchief, which would not suffer so much from the rain as paper. To his upright stick was fixed an iron point. The string was, as usual, of hemp, except the lower end, which was silk. Where the hempen string terminated, a key was fastened. With this apparatus, on the appearance of a thunder-gust approaching, he went into the common, accompanied by his son, to whom alone he communicated his intentions, well knowing the ridicule which, too generally for the interest of science, awaits unsuccessful experiments in philosophy. He placed himself under a shed to avoid the rain. His kite was raised. A thunder-cloud passed over it. No signs of electricity appeared. He almost despaired of success, when suddenly he observed the loose fibres of his string move toward an erect position. He now pressed his knuckle to the key, and received a strong spark. How exquisite must his sensations have been at this moment! On his experiment depended the fate of his theory. Doubt and despair had begun to prevail, when the fact was ascertained in so clear a manner, that even the most incredulous could no longer withhold their assent. Repeated sparks were drawn from the key, a phial was charged, a shock given, and all the experiments made which are usually performed with electricity.' And thus the identity of lightning and electricity was proved. … Franklin's proposition to erect lightning rods which would convey the lightning to the ground, and so protect the buildings to which they were attached, found abundant opponents. … Nevertheless, public opinion became settled … that they did protect buildings. … Then the philosophers raised a new controversy as to whether the conductors should be blunt or pointed; Franklin, Cavendish, and Watson advocating points, and Wilson blunt ends. … The logic of experiment, however, showed the advantage of pointed conductors; and people persisted then in preferring them, as they have done ever since."

{771}

P. Benjamin, The Age of Electricity, chapter 3.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1753-1820. The beginnings of the Electric Telegraph.

"The first actual suggestion of an electric telegraph was made in an anonymous letter published in the Scots Magazine at Edinburgh, February 17th, 1753. The letter is initialed 'C. M.,' and many attempts have been made to discover the author's identity. … The suggestions made in this letter were that a set of twenty-six wires should be stretched upon insulated supports between the two places which it was desired to put in connection, and at each end of every wire a metallic ball was to be suspended, having under it a letter of the alphabet inscribed upon a piece of paper. … The message was to be read off at the receiving station by observing the letters which were successively attracted by their corresponding balls, as soon as the wires attached to the latter received a charge from the distant conductor. In 1787 Monsieur Lomond, of Paris, made the very important step of reducing the twenty-six wires to one, and indicating the different letters by various combinations of simple movements of an indicator, consisting of a pith-ball suspended by means of a thread from a conductor in contact with the wire. … In the year 1790 Chappe, the inventor of the semaphore, or optico-mechanical telegraph, which was in practical use previous to the introduction of the electric telegraph, devised a means of communication, consisting of two clocks regulated so that the second hands moved in unison, and pointed at the same instant to the same figures. … In the early form of the apparatus, the exact moment at which the observer at the receiving station should read off the figure to which the hand pointed was indicated by means of a sound signal produced by the primitive method of striking a copper stew pan, but the inventor soon adopted the plan of giving electrical signals instead of sound signals. … In 1795 Don Francisco Salva … suggested … that instead of twenty-six wires being used, one for each letter, six or eight wires only should be employed, each charged by a Leyden jar, and that different letters should be formed by means of various combinations of signals from these. … Mr. (afterwards Sir Francis) Ronalds … took up the subject of telegraphy in the year 1816, and published an account of his experiments in 1823," based on the same idea as that of Chappe. … "Ronalds drew up a sort of telegraphic code by which words, and sometimes even complete sentences, could be transmitted by only three discharges. … Ronalds completely proved the practicability of his plan, not only on [a] short underground line, …. but also upon an overhead line some eight miles in length, constructed by carrying a telegraph wire backwards and forwards over a wooden frame-work erected in his garden at Hammersmith. … The first attempt to employ voltaic electricity in telegraphy was made by Don Francisco Salva, whose frictional telegraph has already been referred to. On the 14th of May, 1800, Salva read a paper on 'Galvanism and its application to Telegraphy' before the Academy of Sciences at Barcelona, in which he described a number of experiments which he had made in telegraphing over a line some 310 metres in length. … A few years later he applied the then recent discovery of the Voltaic pile to the same purpose, the liberation of bubbles of gas by the decomposition of water at the receiving station being the method adopted for indicating the passage of the signals. A telegraph of a very similar character was devised by Sömmering, and described in a paper communicated by the inventor to the Munich Academy of Sciences in 1809. Sömmering used a set of thirty-five wires corresponding to the twenty-five letters of the German alphabet and the ten numerals. … Oersted's discovery of the action of the electric current upon a suspended magnetic needle provided a new and much more hopeful method of applying the electric current to telegraphy. The great French astronomer Laplace appears to have been the first to suggest this application of Oersted's discovery, and he was followed shortly afterwards by Ampere, who in the year 1820 read a paper before the Paris Academy of Sciences."

G. W. De Tunzelmann, Electricity in Modern Life, chapter 9.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1786-1800. Discoveries of Galvani and Volta.

"The fundamental experiment which led to the discovery of dynamical electricity [1786] is due to Galvani, professor of anatomy in Bologna. Occupied with investigations on the influence of electricity on the nervous excitability of animals, and especially of the frog, he observed that when the lumbar nerves of a dead frog were connected with the crural muscles by a metallic circuit, the latter became briskly contracted. … Galvani had some time before observed that the electricity of machines produced in dead frogs analogous contractions, and he attributed the phenomena first described to an electricity inherent in the animal. He assumed that this electricity, which he called vital fluid, passed from the nerves to the muscles by the metallic arc, and was thus the cause of contraction. This theory met with great support, especially among physiologists, but it was not without opponents. The most considerable of these was Alexander Volta, professor of physics in Pavia. Galvani's attention had been exclusively devoted to the nerves and muscles of the frog; Volta's was directed upon the connecting metal. Resting on the observation, which Galvani had also made, that the contraction is more energetic when the connecting arc is composed of two metals than where there is only one, Volta attributed to the metals the active part in the phenomenon of contraction. He assumed that the disengagement of electricity was due to their contact, and that the animal parts only officiated as conductors, and at the same time as a very sensitive electroscope. By means of the then recently invented electroscope, Volta devised several modes of showing the disengagement of electricity on the contact of metals. … A memorable controversy arose between Galvani and Volta. The latter was led to give greater extension to his contact theory, and propounded the principle that when two heterogeneous substances are placed in contact, one of them always assumes the positive and the other the negative electrical condition. In this form Volta's theory obtained the assent of the principal philosophers of his time."

A. Ganot, Elementary Treatise on Physics; translated by Atkinson, book 10, chapter 1.

Volta's theory, however, though somewhat misleading, did not prevent his making what was probably the greatest step in the science up to this time, in the invention (about 1800) of the Voltaic pile, the first generator of electrical energy by chemical means, and the forerunner of the vast number of types of the modern "battery."

{772}

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1810-1890. The Arc light.

"The earliest instance of applying Electricity to the production of light was in 1810, by Sir Humphrey Davy, who found that when the points of two carbon rods whose other ends were connected by wires with a powerful primary battery were brought into contact, and then drawn a little way apart, the Electric current still continued to jump across the gap, forming what is now termed an Electric Arc. … Various contrivances have been devised for automatically regulating the position of the two carbons. As early as 1847, a lamp was patented by Staite, in which the carbon rods were fed together by clockwork. … Similar devices were produced by Foucault and others, but the first really successful arc lamp was Serrin's, patented in 1857, which has not only itself survived until the present day, but has had its main features reproduced in many other lamps. … The Jablochkoff Candle (1876), in which the arc was formed between the ends of a pair of carbon rods placed side by side, and separated by a layer of insulating material, which slowly consumed as the carbons burnt down, did good service in accustoming the public to the new illuminant. Since then the inventions by Brush, Thomson-Houston, and others have done much to bring about its adoption for lighting large rooms, streets, and spaces out of doors."

J. B. Verity, Electricity up to Date for Light, Power, and Traction, chapter 3.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1820-1825. Oersted, Ampere, and the discovery of the Electro-Magnet.

"There is little chance … that the discoverer of the magnet, or the discoverer and inventor of the magnetic needle, will ever be known by name, or that even the locality and date of the discovery will ever be determined [see COMPASS]. … The magnet and magnetism received their first scientific treatment at the hands of Dr. Gilbert. During the two centuries succeeding the publication of his work, the science of magnetism was much cultivated. … The development of the science went along parallel with that of the science of electricity … although the latter was more fruitful in novel discoveries and unexpected applications than the former. It is not to be imagined that the many close resemblances of the two classes of phenomena were allowed to pass unnoticed. … There was enough resemblance to suggest an intimate relation; and the connecting link was sought for by many eminent philosophers during the last years of the eighteenth and the earlier years of the present century."

T. C. Mendenhall, A Century of Electricity, chapter 3.

"The effect which an electric current, flowing in a wire, can exercise upon a neighbouring compass needle was discovered by Oersted in 1820. This first announcement of the possession of magnetic properties by an electric current was followed speedily by the researches of Ampere, Arago, Davy, and by the devices of several other experimenters, including De la Rive's floating battery and coil, Schweigger's multiplier, Cumming's galvanometer, Faraday's apparatus for rotation of a permanent magnet, Marsh's vibrating pendulum and Barlow's rotating star-wheel. But it was not until 1825 that the electromagnet was invented. Arago announced, on 25th September 1820, that a copper wire uniting the poles of a voltaic cell, and consequently traversed by an electric current, could attract iron filings to itself laterally. In the same communication he described how he had succeeded in communicating permanent magnetism to steel needles laid at right angles to the copper wire, and how, on showing this experiment to Ampere, the latter had suggested that the magnetizing action would be more intense if for the straight copper wire there were substituted one wrapped in a helix, in the centre of which the steel needle might be placed. This suggestion was at once carried out by the two philosophers. 'A copper wire wound in a helix was terminated by two rectilinear portions which could be adapted, at will, to the opposite poles of a powerful horizontal voltaic pile; a steel needle wrapped up in paper was introduced into the helix.' 'Now, after some minutes' sojourn in the helix, the steel needle had received a sufficiently strong dose of magnetism.' Arago then wound upon a little glass tube some short helices, each about 2¼ inches long, coiled alternately right-handedly and left-handedly, and found that on introducing into the glass tube a steel wire, he was able to produce 'consequent poles' at the places where the winding was reversed. Ampère, on October 23rd, 1820, read a memoir, claiming that these facts confirmed his theory of magnetic actions. Davy had, also, in 1820, surrounded with temporary coils of wire the steel needles upon which he was experimenting, and had shown that the flow of electricity around the coil could confer magnetic power upon the steel needles. … The electromagnet, in the form which can first claim recognition … was devised by William Sturgeon, and is described by him in the paper which he contributed to the Society of Arts in 1825."

S. P. Thompson, The Electromagnet, chapter 1.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1825-1874. The Perfected Telegraph.

"The European philosophers kept on groping. At the end of five years [after Oersted's discovery], one of them reached an obstacle which he made up his mind was so entirely insurmountable, that it rendered the electric telegraph an impossibility for all future time. This was [1825] Mr. Peter Barlow, fellow of the Royal Society, who had encountered the question whether the lengthening of the conducting wire would produce any effect in diminishing the energy of the current transmitted, and had undertaken to resolve the problem. … 'I found [he said] such a considerable diminution with only 200 feet of wire as at once to convince me of the impracticability of the scheme.' … The year following the announcement of Barlow's conclusions, a young graduate of the Albany (N. Y.) Academy—by name Joseph Henry—was appointed to the professorship of mathematics in that institution. Henry there began the series of scientific investigations which is now historic. … Up to that time, electro-magnets had been made with a single coil of naked wire wound spirally around the core, with large intervals between the strands. The core was insulated as a whole: the wire was not insulated at all. Professor Schweigger, who had previously invented the multiplying galvanometer, had covered his wires with silk. Henry followed this idea, and, instead of a single coil of wire, used several. … Barlow had said that the gentle current of the galvanic battery became so weakened, after traversing 200 feet of wire, that it was idle to consider the possibility of making it pass over even a mile of conductor and then affect a magnet. {773} Henry's reply was to point out that the trouble lay in the way Barlow's magnet was made. … Make the magnet so that the diminished current will exercise its full effect. Instead of using one short coil, through which the current can easily slip, and do nothing, make a coil of many turns; that increases the magnetic field: make it of fine wire, and of higher resistance. And then, to prove the truth of his discovery, Henry put up the first electro-magnetic telegraph ever constructed. In the academy at Albany, in 1831, he suspended 1,060 feet of bell-wire, with a battery at one end and one of his magnets at the other; and he made the magnet attract and release its armature. The armature struck a bell, and so made the signals. Annihilating distance in this way was only one part of Henry's discovery. He had also found, that, to obtain the greatest dynamic effect close at hand, the battery should be composed of a very few cells of large surface, combined with a coil or coils of short coarse wire around the magnet,—conditions just the reverse of those necessary when the magnet was to be worked at a distance. Now, he argued, suppose the magnet with the coarse short coil, and the large-surface battery, be put at the receiving station; and the current coming over the line be used simply to make and break the circuit of that local battery. … This is the principle of the telegraphic 'relay.' In 1835 Henry worked a telegraph-line in that way at Princeton. And thus the electro-magnetic telegraph was completely invented and demonstrated. There was nothing left to do, but to put up the posts, string the lines, and attach the instruments."

P. Benjamin, The Age of Electricity, chapter 11.

"At last we leave the territory of theory and experiment and come to that of practice. 'The merit of inventing the modern telegraph, and applying it on a large scale for public use, is, beyond all question, due to Professor Morse of the United States.' So writes Sir David Brewster, and the best authorities on the question substantially agree with him. … Leaving for future consideration Morse's telegraph, which was not introduced until five years after the time when he was impressed with the notion of its feasibility, we may mention the telegraph of Gauss and Weber of Göttingen. In 1833, they erected a telegraphic wire between the Astronomical and Magnetical Observatory of Göttingen, and the Physical Cabinet of the University, for the purpose of carrying intelligence from the one locality to the other. To these great philosophers, however, rather the theory than the practice of Electric Telegraphy was indebted. Their apparatus was so improved as to be almost a new invention by Steinheil of Munich, who, in 1837 … succeeded in sending a current from one end to the other of a wire 36,000 feet in length, the action of which caused two needles to vibrate from side to side, and strike a bell at each movement. To Steinheil the honour is due of having discovered the important and extraordinary fact that the earth might be used as a part of the circuit of an electric current. The introduction of the Electric Telegraph into England dates from the same year as that in which Steinheil's experiments took place. William Fothergill Cooke, a gentleman who held a commission in the Indian army, returned from India on leave of absence, and afterwards, because of his bad health, resigned his commission, and went to Heidelberg to study anatomy. In 1836, Professor Mönke, of Heidelberg, exhibited an electro-telegraphic experiment, 'in which electric currents, passing along a conducting wire, conveyed signals to a distant station by the deflexion of a magnetic needle enclosed in Schweigger's galvanometer or multiplier.' … Cooke was so struck with this experiment, that he immediately resolved to apply it to purposes of higher utility than the illustration of a lecture. … In a short time he produced two telegraphs of different construction. When his plans were completed, he came to England, and in February, 1837, having consulted Faraday and Dr. Roget on the construction of the electric-magnet employed in a part of his apparatus, the latter gentleman advised him to apply to Professor Wheatstone. … The result of the meeting of Cooke and Wheatstone was that they resolved to unite their several discoveries; and in the month of May 1837, they took out their first patent 'for improvements in giving signals and sounding alarms in distant places by means of electric currents transmitted through metallic circuits.' … By-and-by, as might probably have been anticipated, difficulties arose between Cooke and Wheatstone, as to whom the main credit of introducing the Electric Telegraph into England was due. Mr. Cooke accused Wheatstone (with a certain amount of justice, it should seem) of entirely ignoring his claims; and in doing so Mr. Cooke appears to have rather exaggerated his own services. Most will readily agree to the wise words of Mr. Sabine: "It was once a popular fallacy in England that Messrs. Cooke and Wheatstone were the original inventors of the Electric Telegraph. The Electric Telegraph had, properly speaking, no inventor; it grew up as we have seen little by little."

H. J. Nicoll, Great Movements, pages 424-429.

"In the latter part of the year 1832, Samuel F. B. Morse, an American artist, while on a voyage from France to the United States, conceived the idea of an electromagnetic telegraph which should consist of the following parts, viz: A single circuit of conductors from some suitable generator of electricity; a system of signs, consisting of dots or points and spaces to represent numerals; a method of causing the electricity to mark or imprint these signs upon a strip or ribbon of paper by the mechanical action of an electro-magnet operating upon the paper by means of a lever, armed at one end with a pen or pencil; and a method of moving the paper ribbon at a uniform rate by means of clock-work to receive the characters. … In the autumn of the year 1835 he constructed the first rude working model of his invention. … The first public exhibition … was on the 2d of September, 1837, on which occasion the marking was successfully effected through one third of a mile of wire. Immediately afterwards a recording instrument was constructed … which was subsequently employed upon the first experimental line between Washington and Baltimore. This line was constructed in 1843-44 under an appropriation by Congress, and was completed by May of the latter year. On the 27th of that month the first despatch was transmitted from Washington to Baltimore. … The experimental line was originally constructed with two wires, as Morse was not at that time acquainted with the discovery of Steinheil, that the earth might be used to complete the circuit. {774} Accident, however, soon demonstrated this fact. … The following year (1845) telegraph lines began to be built over other routes. … In October, 1851, a convention of deputies from the German States of Austria, Prussia, Bavaria, Würtemberg and Saxony, met at Vienna, for the purpose of establishing a common and uniform telegraphic system, under the name of the German-Austrian Telegraph Union. The various systems of telegraphy then in use were subjected to the most thorough examination and discussion. The convention decided with great unanimity that the Morse system was practically far superior to all others, and it was accordingly adopted. Prof. Steinheil, although himself … the inventor of a telegraphic system, with a magnanimity that does him high honor, strongly urged upon the convention the adoption of the American system." … The first of the printing telegraphs was patented in the United States by Royal E. House, in 1846. The Hughes printing telegraph, a remarkable piece of mechanism, was patented by David E. Hughes, of Kentucky, in 1855. A system known as the automatic method, in which the signals representing letters are transmitted over the line through the instrumentality of mechanism, was originated by Alexander Bain of Edinburgh, whose first patents were taken out in 1846. An autographic telegraph, transmitting despatches in the reproduced hand-writing of the sender, was brought out in 1850, by F. C. Bakewell, of London. The same result was afterwards accomplished with variations of method by Charles Cros, of Paris, Abbé Caseli, of Florence, and others; but none of these inventions has been extensively used. "The possibility of making use of a single wire for the simultaneous transmission of two or more communications seems to have first suggested itself to Moses G. Farmer, of Boston, about the year 1852." The problem was first solved with partial success by Dr. Gintl, on the line between Prague and Vienna, in 1853, but more perfectly by Carl Frischen, of Hanover, in the following year. Other inventors followed in the same field, among them Thomas A. Edison, of New Jersey, who was led by his experiments finally, in 1874 to devise a system "which was destined to furnish the basis of the first practical solution of the curious and interesting problem of quadruplex telegraphy."

G. B. Prescott, Electricity and the Electric Telegraph, chapter 29-40.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1831-1872. Dynamo Electrical Machines, and Electric Motors.

"The discovery of induction by Faraday, in 1831, gave rise to the construction of magneto-electro machines. The first of such machines that was ever made was probably a machine that never came into practical use, the description of which was given in a letter, signed 'P. M.,' and directed to Faraday, published in the Philosophical Magazine of 2nd August, 1832. We learn from this description that the essential parts of this machine were six horse-shoe magnets attached to a disc, which rotated in front of six coils of wire wound on bobbins." Sept. 3rd, 1832, Pixii constructed a machine in which a single horse-shoe magnet was made to rotate before two soft iron cores, wound with wire. In this machine he introduced the commutator, an essential element in all modern continuous current machines. "Almost at the same time, Ritchie, Saxton, and Clarke constructed similar machines. Clarke's is the best known, and is still popular in the small and portable 'medical' machines so commonly sold. … A larger machine [was] constructed by Stöhrer (1843), on the same plan as Clarke's, but with six coils instead of two, and three compound magnets instead of one. … The machines, constructed by Nollet (1849) and Shepard (1856) had still more magnets and coils. Shepard's machine was modified by Van Malderen, and was called the Alliance machine. … Dr. Werner Siemens, while considering how the inducing effect of the magnet can be most thoroughly utilised, and how to arrange the coils in the most efficient manner for this purpose, was led in 1857 to devise the cylindrical armature. … Sinsteden in 1851 pointed out that the current of the generator may itself be utilised to excite the magnetism of the field magnets. … Wilde [in 1863] carried out this suggestion by using a small steel permanent magnet and larger electro magnets. … The next great improvement of these machines arose from the discovery of what may be called the dynamo-electric principle. This principle may be stated as follows:—For the generation of currents by magneto-electric induction it is not necessary that the machine should be furnished with permanent magnets; the residual or temporary magnetism of soft iron quickly rotating is sufficient for the purpose. … In 1867 the principle was clearly enunciated and used simultaneously, but independently, by Siemens and by Wheatstone. … It was in February, 1867, that Dr. C. W. Siemens' classical paper on the conversion of dynamical into electrical energy without the aid of permanent magnetism was read before the Royal Society. Strangely enough, the discovery of the same principle was enunciated at the same meeting of the Society by Sir Charles Wheatstone. … The starting-point of a great improvement in dynamo-electric machines, was the discovery by Pacinotti of the ring armature … in 1860. … Gramme, in 1871, modified the ring armature, and constructed the first machine, in which he made use of the Gramme ring and the dynamic principle. In 1872, Hefner-Alteneck, of the firm of Siemens and Halske, constructed a machine in which the Gramme ring is replaced by a drum armature, that is to say, by a cylinder round which wire is wound. … Either the Pacinotti-Gramme ring armature, or the Hefner-Alteneck drum armature, is now adopted by nearly all constructors of dynamo-electric machines, the parts varying of course in minor details." The history of the dynamo since has been one of a gradual perfection of parts, resulting in the production of a great number of types, which can not here even be mentioned.

A. R. von Urbanitzky, Electricity in the Service of Man, pages 227-242.

_S. P. Thompson, Dynamo Electrical Machines._

ELECTRICITY: Electric Motors.

It has been known for forty years that every form of electric motor which operated on the principle of mutual mechanical force between a magnet and a conducting wire or coil could also be made to act as a generator of induced currents by the reverse operation of producing the motion mechanically. And when, starting from the researches of Siemens, Wilde, Nollet, Holmes and Gramme, the modern forms of magneto-electric and dynamo-electric machines began to come into commercial use, it was discovered that any one of the modern machines designed as a generator of currents constituted a far more efficient electric motor than any of the previous forms which had been designed specially as motors. {775} It required no new discovery of the law of reversibility to enable the electrician to understand this; but to convince the world required actual experiment."

A. Guillemin, Electricity and Magnetism, part 2, chapter 10, section 3.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1835-1889. The Electric Railway.

"Thomas Davenport, a poor blacksmith of Brandon, Vt., constructed what might be termed the first electric railway. The invention was crude and of little practical value, but the idea was there. In 1835 he exhibited in Springfield, Massachusetts, a small model electric engine running upon a circular track, the circuit being furnished by primary batteries carried in the car. Three years later, Robert Davidson, of Aberdeen, Scotland, began his experiments in this direction. … He constructed quite a powerful motor, which was mounted upon a truck. Forty battery cells, carried on the car, furnished power to propel the motor. The battery elements were composed of amalgamated zinc and iron plates, the exciting liquid being dilute sulphuric acid. This locomotive was run successfully on several steam railroads in Scotland, the speed attained was four miles an hour, but this machine was afterwards destroyed by some malicious person or persons while it was being taken home to Aberdeen. In 1849 Moses Farmer exhibited an electric engine which drew a small car containing two persons. In 1851, Dr. Charles Grafton Page, of Salem, Massachusetts, perfected an electric engine of considerable power. On April 29 of that year the engine was attached to a car and a trip was made from Washington to Bladensburg, over the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad track. The highest speed attained was nineteen miles an hour. The electric power was furnished by one hundred Grove cells carried on the engine. … The same year, Thomas Hall, of Boston, Mass., built a small electric locomotive called the Volta. The current was furnished by two Grove battery cells which were conducted to the rails, thence through the wheels of the locomotive to the motor. This was the first instance of the current being supplied to the motor on a locomotive from a stationary source. It was exhibited at the Charitable Mechanics fair by him in 1860. … In 1879, Messrs. Siemen and Halske, of Berlin, constructed and operated an electric railway at the Industrial Exposition. A third rail placed in the centre of the two outer rails, supplied the current, which was taken up into the motor through a sliding contact under the locomotive. … In 1880 Thomas A. Edison constructed an experimental road near his laboratory in Menlo Park, N. J. The power from the locomotive was transferred to the car by belts running to and from the shafts of each. The current was taken from and returned through the rails. Early in the year of 1881 the Lichterfelde, Germany, electric railway was put into operation. It is a third rail system and is still running at the present time. This may be said to be the first commercial electric railway constructed. In 1883 the Daft Electric Company equipped and operated quite successfully an electric system on the Saratoga & Mt. McGregor Railroad, at Saratoga, N. Y." During the next five or six years numerous electric railroads, more or less experimental, were built." October 31, 1888, the Council Bluffs & Omaha Railway and Bridge Company was first operated by electricity, they using the Thomson-Houston system. The same year the Thomson-Houston Co. equipped the Highland Division of the Lynn & Boston Horse Railway at Lynn, Massachusetts. Horse railways now began to be equipped with electricity all over the world, and especially in the United States. In February, 1889, the Thomson-Houston Electric Co. had equipped the line from Bowdoin Square, Boston, to Harvard Square, Cambridge, of the West End Railway with electricity and operated twenty cars, since which time it has increased its electrical apparatus, until now it is the largest electric railway line in the world."

E. Trevert, Electric Railway Engineering, appendix A.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1841-1880. The Incandescent Electric Light.

"While the arc lamp is well adapted for lighting large areas requiring a powerful, diffused light, similar to sunlight, and hence is suitable for outdoor illumination, and for workshops, stores, public buildings, and factories, especially those where colored fabrics are produced, its use in ordinary dwellings, or for a desk light in offices, is impractical, a softer, steadier, and more economical light being required. Various attempts to modify the arc-light by combining it with the incandescent were made in the earlier stages of electric lighting. … The first strictly incandescent lamp was invented in 1841 by Frederick de Molyens of Cheltenham, England, and was constructed on the simple principle of the incandescence produced by the high resistance of a platinum wire to the passage of the electric current. In 1849 Petrie employed iridium for the same purpose, also alloys of iridium and platinum, and iridium and carbon. In 1845 J. W. Starr of Cincinnati first proposed the use of carbon, and, associated with King, his English agent, produced, through the financial aid of the philanthropist Peabody, an incandescent lamp. … In all these early experiments, the battery was the source of electric supply; and the comparatively small current required for the incandescent light as compared with that required for the arc light, was an argument in favor of the former. … Still, no substantial progress was made with either system till the invention of the dynamo resulted in the practical development of both systems, that of the incandescent following that of the arc. Among the first to make incandescent lighting a practical success were Sawyer and Man of New York, and Edison. For a long time, Edison experimented with platinum, using fine platinum wire coiled into a spiral, so as to concentrate the heat, and produce incandescence; the same current producing only a red heat when the wire, whether of platinum or other metal, is stretched out. … Failing to obtain satisfactory results from platinum, Edison turned his attention to carbon, the superiority of which as an incandescent illuminant had already been demonstrated; but its rapid consumption, as shown by the Reynier and similar lamps, being unfavorable to its use as compared with the durability of platinum and iridium, the problem was, to secure the superior illumination of the carbon, and reduce or prevent its consumption. As this consumption was due chiefly to oxidation, it was questionable whether the superior illumination were not due to the same cause, and whether, if the carbon were inclosed in a glass globe, from which oxygen was eliminated, the same illumination could be obtained. {776} Another difficulty of equal magnitude was to obtain a sufficiently perfect vacuum, and maintain it in a hermetically sealed globe inclosing the carbon, and at the same time maintain electric connection with the generator through the glass by a metal conductor, subject to expansion and contraction different from that of the glass, by the change of temperature due to the passage of the electric current. Sawyer and Man attempted to solve this problem by filling the globe with nitrogen, thus preventing combustion by eliminating the oxygen. … The results obtained by this method, which at one time attracted a great deal of attention, were not sufficiently satisfactory to become practical; and Edison and others gave their preference to the vacuum method, and sought to overcome the difficulties connected with it. The invention of the mercurial air pump, with its subsequent improvements, made it possible to obtain a sufficiently perfect vacuum, and the difficulty of introducing the current into the interior of the globe was overcome by imbedding a fine platinum wire in the glass, connecting the inclosed carbon with the external circuit; the expansion and contraction of the platinum not differing sufficiently from that of the glass, in so fine a wire, as to impair the vacuum. … The carbons made by Edison under his first patent in 1879, were obtained from brown paper or cardboard. … They were very fragile and short-lived, and consequently were soon abandoned. In 1880 he patented the process which, with some modifications, he still adheres to. In this process he uses filaments of bamboo, which are taken from the interior, fibrous portion of the plant."

P. Atkinson, Elements of Electric Lighting, chapter 8.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1854-1866. The Atlantic Cable.

"Cyrus Field … established a company in America (in 1854), which … obtained the right of landing cables in Newfoundland for fifty years. Soundings were made in 1856 between Ireland and Newfoundland, showing a maximum depth of 4,400 metres. Having succeeded after several attempts in laying a cable between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland, Field founded the Atlantic Telegraph Company in England. … The length of the … cable [used] was 4,000 kilometres, and was carried by the two ships Agamemnon and Niagara. The distance between the two stations on the coasts was 2,640 kilometres. The laying of the cable commenced on the 7th of August, 1857, at Valentia (Ireland); on the third day the cable broke at a depth of 3,660 metres, and the expedition had to return. A second expedition was sent in 1858; the two ships met each other half-way, the ends of the cable were joined, and the lowering of it commenced in both directions; 149 kilometres were thus lowered, when a fault in the cable was discovered. It had, therefore, to be brought on board again, and was broken during the process. After it had been repaired, and when 476 kilometres had been already laid, another fault was discovered, which caused another breakage; this time it was impossible to repair it, and the expedition was again unsuccessful, and had to return. In spite of the repeated failures, two ships were again sent out in the same year, and this time one end of the cable was landed in Ireland, and the other at Newfoundland. The length of the sunk cable was 3,745 kilometres. Field's first telegram was sent on the 7th of August, from America to Ireland. The insulation of the cable, however, became more defective every day, and failed altogether on the 1st of September. From the experience obtained, it was concluded that it was possible to lay a trans-Atlantic cable, and the company, after consulting a number of professional men, again set to work. … The Great Eastern was employed in laying this cable. This ship, which is 211 metres long, 25 metres broad, and 16 metres in height, carried a crew of 500 men, of which 120 were electricians and engineers, 179 mechanics and stokers, and 115 sailors. The management of all affairs relating to the laying of the cable was entrusted to Canning. The coast cable was laid on the 21st of July, and the end of it was connected with the Atlantic cable on the 23rd. After 1,326 kilometres had been laid, a fault was discovered, an iron wire was found stuck right across the cable, and Canning considered the mischief to have been done with a malevolent purpose. On the 2nd of August, 2,196 kilometres of cable were sunk, when another fault was discovered. While the cable was being repaired it broke, and attempts to recover it at the time were all unsuccessful; in consequence of this the Great Eastern had to return without having completed the task. A new company, the Anglo-American Telegraph Company, was formed in 1866, and at once entrusted Messrs. Glass, Elliott and Company with the construction of a new cable of 3,000 kilometres. Different arrangements were made for the outer envelope of the cable, and the Great Eastern was once more equipped to give effect to the experiments which had just been made. The new expedition was not only to lay a new cable, but also to take up the end of the old one, and join it to a new piece, and thus obtain a second telegraph line. The sinking again commenced in Ireland on the 13th of July, 1866, and it was finished on the 27th. On the 4th of August, 1866, the Trans-Atlantic Telegraph Line was declared open."

A. R. von Urbanitzky, Electricity in the Service of Man, pages 767-768.

ELECTRICITY: A. D. 1876-1892. The Telephone.

"The first and simplest of all magnetic telephones is the Bell Telephone." In "the first form of this instrument, constructed by Professor Graham Bell, in 1876 … a harp of steel rods was attached to the poles of a permanent magnet. … When we sing into a piano, certain of the strings of the instrument are set in vibration sympathetically by the action of the voice with different degrees of amplitude, and a sound, which is an approximation to the vowel uttered, is produced from the piano. Theory shows that, had the piano a much larger number of strings to the octave, the vowel sounds would be perfectly reproduced. It was upon this principle that Bell constructed his first telephone. The expense of constructing such an apparatus, however, deterred Bell from making the attempt, and he sought to simplify the apparatus before proceeding further in this direction. After many experiments with more, or less unsatisfactory results, he constructed the instrument … which he exhibited at Philadelphia in 1876. In this apparatus, the transmitter was formed by an electro-magnet, through which a current flowed, and a membrane, made of gold-beater's skin, on which was placed as a sort of armature, a piece of soft iron, which thus vibrated in front of the electro-magnet when the membrane was thrown into sonorous vibration. {777} … It is quite clear that when we speak into a Bell transmitter only a small fraction of the energy of the sonorous vibrations of the voice can be converted into electric currents, and that these currents must be extremely weak. Edison applied himself to discover some means by which he could increase the strength of these currents. Elisha Gray had proposed to use the variation of resistance of a fine platinum wire attached to a diaphragm dipping into water, and hoped that the variation of extent of surface in contact would so vary the strength of current as to reproduce sonorous vibrations; but there is no record of this experiment having been tried. Edison proposed to utilise the fact that the resistance of carbon varied under pressure. He had independently discovered this peculiarity of carbon, but it had been previously described by Du Moncel. … The first carbon transmitter was constructed in 1878 by Edison."

W. H. Preece, and J. Maier, The Telephone, chapters 3-4.

In a pamphlet distributed at the Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893, entitled "Exhibit of the American Bell Telephone Co.," the following statements are made: "At the Centennial Exposition, in Philadelphia, in 1876, was given the first general public exhibition of the telephone by its inventor, Alexander Graham Bell. To-day, seventeen years later, more than half a million instruments are in daily use in the United States alone, six hundred million talks by telephone are held every year, and the human voice is carried over a distance of twelve hundred miles without loss of sound or syllable. The first use of the telephone for business purposes was over a single wire connecting only two telephones. At once the need of general inter-communication made itself felt. In the cities and larger towns exchanges were established and all the subscribers to any one exchange were enabled to talk to one another through a central office. Means were then devised to connect two or more exchanges by trunk lines, thus affording means of communication between all the subscribers of all the exchanges so connected. This work has been pushed forward until now have been gathered into what may be termed one great exchange all the important cities from Augusta on the east to Milwaukee on the west, and from Burlington and Buffalo on the north to Washington on the south, bringing more than one half the people of this country and a much larger proportion of the business interests, within talking distance of one another. … The lines which connect Chicago with Boston, via New York, are of copper wire of extra size. It is about one sixth of an inch in diameter, and weighs 435 pounds to the mile. Hence each circuit contains 1,044,000 pounds of copper. … In the United States there are over a quarter of a million exchange subscribers, and … these make use of the telephone to carry on 600,000,000 conversations annually. There is hardly a city or town of 5,000 inhabitants that has not its Telephone Exchange, and these are so knit together by connecting lines that intercommunication is constant." The number of telephones in use in the United States, on the 20th of December in each year since the first introduction, is given as follows; 1877, 5,187; 1878, 17,567; 1879, 52,517; 1880, 123,380; 1881, 180,592; 1882, 237,728; 1883, 298,580; 1884, 325,574; 1885, 330,040; 1886, 353,518; 1887, 380,277; 1888, 411,511; 1889, 444,861; 1890, 483,790; 1891, 512,407; 1892, 552,720.

----------End: Electricity----------

ELEPHANT, Order of the.

A Danish order of knighthood instituted in 1693 by King Christian V.

ELEPHANTINE.

See EGYPT: THE OLD EMPIRE AND THE MIDDLE EMPIRE.

ELEUSINIAN MYSTERIES, The.

Among the ancient Greeks, "the mysteries were a source of faith and hope to the initiated, as are the churches of modern times. Secret doctrines, regarded as holy, and to be kept with inviolable fidelity, were handed down in these brotherhoods, and no doubt were fondly believed to contain a saving grace by those who were admitted, amidst solemn and imposing rites, under the veil of midnight, to hear the tenets of the ancient faith, and the promises of blessings to come to those who, with sincerity of heart and pious trust, took the obligations upon them. The Eleusinian mysteries were the most imposing and venerable. Their origin extended back into a mythical antiquity, and they were among the few forms of Greek worship which were under the superintendence of hereditary priesthoods. Thirlwall thinks that 'they were the remains of a worship which preceded the rise of the Hellenic mythology and its attendant rites, grounded on a view of Nature less fanciful, more earnest, and better fitted to awaken both philosophical thought and religious feeling.' This conclusion is still further confirmed by the moral and religious tone of the poets,—such as Æschylus,—whose ideas on justice, sin and retribution are as solemn and elevated as those of a Hebrew prophet. The secrets, whatever they were, were never revealed in express terms; but Isocrates uses some remarkable expressions, when speaking of their importance to the condition of man. 'Those who are initiated,' says he 'entertain sweeter hopes of eternal life'; and how could this be the case, unless there were imparted at Eleusis the doctrine of eternal life, and some idea of its state and circumstances more compatible with an elevated conception of the Deity and of the human soul than the vague and shadowy images which haunted the popular mind. The Eleusinian communion embraced the most eminent men from every part of Greece,—statesmen, poets, philosophers, and generals; and when Greece became a part of the Roman Empire, the greatest minds of Rome drew instruction and consolation from its doctrines. The ceremonies of initiation—which took place every year in the early autumn, a beautiful season in Attica—were a splendid ritual, attracting visitors from every part of the world. The processions moving from Athens to Eleusis over the Sacred Way, sometimes numbered twenty or thirty thousand people, and the exciting scenes were well calculated to leave a durable impression on susceptible minds. … The formula of the dismissal, after the initiation was over, consisted in the mysterious words 'konx,' 'ompax'; and this is the only Eleusinian secret that has illuminated the world from the recesses of the temple of Demeter and Persephone. But it is a striking illustration of the value attached to these rites and doctrines, that, in moments of extremest peril—as of impending shipwreck, or massacre by a victorious enemy,—men asked one another, 'Are you initiated?' as if this were the anchor of their hopes for another life."

{778}

C. C. Felton, Greece, Ancient and Modern, chapter 2, lecture 10.

"The Eleusinian mysteries continued to be celebrated during the whole of the second half of the fourth century, till they were put an end to by the destruction of the temple at Eleusis, and by the devastation of Greece in the invasion of the Goths under Alaric in 395."

See GOTHS: A. D. 395.

W. Smith, Note to Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 25.

ALSO IN: R. Brown, The Great Dionysiak Myth, chapter 6, section. 2.

J. J. I. von Dollinger, The Gentile and the Jew, book 3 (volume 1).

See, also, ELEUSIS.

ELEUSIS.

Eleusis was originally one of the twelve confederate townships into which Attica was said to have been divided before the time of Theseus. It "was advantageously situated [about fourteen miles Northwest of Athens] on a height, at a small distance from the shore of an extensive bay, to which there is access only through narrow channels, at the two extremities of the island of Salamis: its position was important, as commanding the shortest and most level route by land from Athens to the Isthmus by the pass which leads at the foot of Mount Cerata along the shore to Megara. … Eleusis was built at the eastern end of a low rocky hill, which lies parallel to the sea-shore. … The eastern extremity of the hill was levelled artificially for the reception of the Hierum of Ceres and the other sacred buildings. Above these are the traces of an Acropolis. A triangular space of about 500 yards each side, lying between the hill and the shore, was occupied by the town of Eleusis. … To those who approached Eleusis from Athens, the sacred buildings standing on the eastern extremity of the height concealed the greater part of the town, and on a nearer approach presented a succession of magnificent objects, well calculated to heighten the solemn grandeur of the ceremonies and the awe and reverence of the Mystæ in their initiation. … In the plurality of enclosures, in the magnificence of the pylæ or gateways, in the absence of any general symmetry of plan, in the small auxiliary temples, we recognize a great resemblance between the sacred buildings of Eleusis and the Egyptian Hiera of Thebes and Philæ. And this resemblance is the more remarkable, as the Demeter of Attica was the Isis of Egypt. We cannot suppose, however, that the plan of all these buildings was even thought of when the worship of Ceres was established at Eleusis. They were the progressive creation of successive ages. … Under the Roman Empire … it was fashionable among the higher order of Romans to pass some time at Athens in the study of philosophy and to be initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries. Hence Eleusis became at that time one of the most frequented places in Greece; and perhaps it was never so populous as under the emperors of the first two centuries of our æra. During the two following centuries, its mysteries were the chief support of declining polytheism, and almost the only remaining bond of national union among the Greeks; but at length the destructive visit of the Goths in the year 396, the extinction of paganism and the ruin of maritime commerce, left Eleusis deprived of every source of prosperity, except those which are inseparable from its fertile plain, its noble bay, and its position on the road from Attica to the Isthmus. … The village still preserves the ancient name, no further altered than is customary in Romaic conversions."

W. M. Leake, Topography of Athens; volume 2: The Demi, section 5.

ELGIN, Lord. The Indian administration of.

See INDIA: A. D. 1862-1876.

ELIS.

Elis was an ancient Greek state, occupying the country on the western coast of Peloponnesus, adjoining Arcadia, and between Messenia at the south and Achaia on the north. It was noted for the fertility of its soil and the rich yield of its fisheries. But Elis owed greater importance to the inclusion within its territory of the sacred ground of Olympia, where the celebration of the most famous festival of Zeus came to be established at an early time. The Elians had acquired Olympia by conquest of the city and territory of Pisa, to which it originally belonged, and the presidency of the Olympic games was always disputed with them by the latter. Elis was the close ally of Sparta down to the year B. C. 421, when a bitter quarrel arose between them, and Elis suffered heavily in the wars which ensued. It was afterwards at war with the Arcadians, and joined the Ætolian League against the Achaian League. The city of Elis was one of the most splendid in Greece; but little now remains, even of ruins, to indicate its departed glories.

See, also, OLYMPIC GAMES.

ELISII, The.

See LYGIANS.

ELIZABETH, Czarina of Russia, A. D. 1741-1761.

Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, and the Thirty Years War.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1618-1620; 1620; 1621-1623; 1631-1632, and 1648.

Elizabeth, Queen of England, A. D. 1558-1603.

Elizabeth Farnese, Queen of Spain.

See ITALY: A. D. 1715-1735; and SPAIN: A. D. 1713-1725, and 1726-1731.

ELIZABETH, N. J. The first settlement of.

See NEW JERSEY: A. D. 1664-1667.

ELK HORN, OR PEA RIDGE, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-MARCH: MISSOURI-ARKANSAS).

ELKWATER, OR CHEAT SUMMIT, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (AUGUST-DECEMBER: WEST VIRGINIA).

ELLANDUM, Battle of.

Decisive victory of Ecgberht, the West Saxon king, over the Mercians, A. D. 823.

ELLEBRI, The.

See IRELAND, TRIBES OF EARLY CELTIC INHABITANTS.

ELLENBOROUGH, Lord, The Indian administration of.

See INDIA: A. D. 1836-1845.

ELLSWORTH, Colonel, The death of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (MAY: VIRGINIA).

ELMET.

A small kingdom of the Britons which was swallowed up in the English kingdom of Northumbria early in the seventh century. It answered, roughly speaking, to the present West-Riding of Yorkshire. … Leeds "preserves the name of Loidis, by which Elmet seems also to have been known."

J. R. Green, The Making of England, page 254.

ELMIRA, N. Y. (then Newtown). General Sullivan's Battle with the Senecas.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1779 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).

ELSASS.

See ALSACE.

ELTEKEH, Battle of.

A victory won by the Assyrian, Sennacherib, over the Egyptians, before the disaster befell his army which is related in 2 Kings xix. 35. Sennacherib's own account of the battle has been found among the Assyrian records.

{779}

A. H. Sayce, Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments, chapter 6.

ELUSATES, The.

See AQUITAINE, TRIBES OF ANCIENT.

ELVIRA, Battle of(1319).

See SPAIN: A. D. 1273-1460.

ELY, The Camp of Refuge at.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1069-1071.

ELYMAIS.

See ELAM.

ELYMEIA.

See MACEDONIA.

ELYMIANS, The.

See SICILY: EARLY INHABITANTS.

ELYSIAN FIELDS.

See CANARY ISLANDS.

ELZEVIRS.

See PRINTING: A. D. 1617-1680.

EMANCIPATION, Catholic.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1811-1829.

EMANCIPATION, Compensated; Proposal of President Lincoln.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (MARCH).

EMANCIPATION, Prussian Edict of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1807-1808.

EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATIONS, President Lincoln's.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862 (SEPTEMBER), and 1863 (JANUARY).

EMANUEL, King of Portugal, A. D. 1495-1521.

Emanuel Philibert, Duke of Savoy, A. D. 1553-1580.

EMBARGO OF 1807, The American.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1804-1809, and 1808.

EMERICH, King of Hungary, A. D. 1196-1204.

EMERITA AUGUSTA.

A colony of Roman veterans settled in Spain, B. C. 27, by the emperor Augustus. It is identified with modern Merida, in Estremadura.

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 34, note.

EMESSA. Capture by the Arabs (A. D. 636).

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 632-639.

ÉMIGRÉS OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1789-1791; 1791 (JULY-SEPTEMBER); and 1791-1792.

EMITES, The.

See JEWS: EARLY HEBREW HISTORY.

EMMAUS, Battle of.

Defeat of a Syrian army under Gorgias by Judas Maccabæus, B. C. 166.

Josephus, Antiquity of the Jews, book 12, chapter 7.

EMMENDINGEN, Battle of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1796 (APRIL-OCTOBER). .

EMMET INSURRECTION, The.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1801-1803.

EMPEROR.

A title derived from the Roman title Imperator.

See IMPERATOR.

EMPORIA, The.

See CARTHAGE, THE DOMINION OF.

ENCOMIENDAS.

See SLAVERY, MODERN: OF THE INDIANS; also, REPARTIMIENTOS.

ENCUMBERED ESTATES ACT, The.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1843-1848.

ENCYCLICAL AND SYLLABUS OF 1864, The.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1864.

ENCYCLOPÆDISTS, The.

"French literature had never been so brilliant as in the second half of the 18th century. Buffon, Diderot, D'Alembert, Rousseau, Duclos, Condillac, Helvetius, Holbach, Raynal, Condorcet, Mably, and many others adorned it, and the 'Encyclopædia,' which was begun in 1751 under the direction of Diderot, became the focus of an intellectual influence which has rarely been equalled. The name and idea were taken from a work published by Ephraim Chambers in Dublin, in 1728. A noble preliminary discourse was written by D'Alembert; and all the best pens in France were enlisted in the enterprise, which was constantly encouraged and largely assisted by Voltaire. Twice it was suppressed by authority, but the interdict was again raised. Popular favour now ran with an irresistible force in favour of the philosophers, and the work was brought to its conclusion in 1771."

W. E. H. Lecky, History of England in the 18th Century, chapter. 20 (volume 5).

ALSO IN: J. Morley, Diderot and the Encyclopædists, chapter 5 (volume 1).

E. J. Lowell, The Eve of the French Revolution, chapter 16.

ENDICOTT, John, and the Colony of Massachusetts Bay.

See MASSACHUSETTS: A. D. 1623-1629, and after.

ENDIDJAN, Battle of (1876).

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1859-1876.

ENGADINE, The.

See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1396-1499.

ENGEN, Battle of (1800).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1800-1801 (MAY-FEBRUARY).

ENGERN, Duchy of.

See SAXONY: THE OLD DUCHY.

ENGHIEN, Duc d', The abduction and execution of.

See FRANCE: 1804-1805.

ENGLAND: Before the coming of the English. The Celtic and Roman periods.

See BRITAIN.

ENGLAND: A. D.449-547. The three tribes of the English conquest. The naming of the country.

"It was by … three tribes [from Northwestern Germany], the Saxons, the Angles, and the Jutes, that southern Britain was conquered and colonized in the fifth and sixth centuries, according to the most ancient testimony. … Of the three, the Angli almost if not altogether pass away into the migration: the Jutes and the Saxons, although migrating in great numbers, had yet a great part to play in their own homes and in other regions besides Britain; the former at a later period in the train and under the name of the Danes; the latter in German history from the eighth century to the present day."

W. Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, volume 1, chapter 3.

"Among the Teutonic settlers in Britain some tribes stand out conspicuously; Angles, Saxons, and Jutes stand out conspicuously above all. The Jutes led the way; from the Angles the land and the united nation took their name; the Saxons gave us the name by which our Celtic neighbours have ever known us. But there is no reason to confine the area from which our forefathers came to the space which we should mark on the map as the land of the continental Angles, Saxons, and Jutes. So great a migration is always likely to be swollen by some who are quite alien to the leading tribe; it is always certain to be swollen by many who are of stocks akin to the leading tribe, but who do not actually belong to it. {780} As we in Britain are those who stayed behind at the time of the second great migration of our people [to America], so I venture to look on all our Low-Dutch kinsfolk on the continent of Europe as those who stayed behind at the time of the first great migration of our people. Our special hearth and cradle is doubtless to be found in the immediate marchland of Germany and Denmark, but the great common home of our people is to be looked on as stretching along the whole of that long coast where various dialects of the Low-Dutch tongue are spoken. If Angles and Saxons came, we know that Frisians came also, and with Frisians as an element among us, it is hardly too bold to claim the whole Netherlands as in the widest sense Old England, as the land of one part of the kinsfolk who stayed behind. Through that whole region, from the special Anglian corner far into what is now northern France, the true tongue of the people, sometimes overshadowed by other tongues, is some dialect or other of that branch of the great Teutonic family which is essentially the same as our own speech. From Flanders to Sleswick the natural tongue is one which differs from English only as the historical events of fourteen hundred years of separation have inevitably made the two tongues—two dialects, I should rather say, of the same tongue—to differ. From these lands we came as a people. That was our first historical migration. Our remote forefathers must have made endless earlier migrations as parts of the great Aryan body, as parts of the smaller Teutonic body. But our voyage from the Low-Dutch mainland to the isle of Britain was our first migration as a people. … Among the Teutonic tribes which settled in Britain, two, the Angles and the Saxons, stood out foremost. These two between them occupied by far the greater part of the land that was occupied at all. Each of these two gave its name to the united nation, but each gave it on different lips. The Saxons were the earlier invaders; they had more to do with the Celtic remnant which abode in the land. On the lips then of the Celtic inhabitants of Britain, the whole of the Teutonic inhabitants of Britain were known from the beginning, and are known still, as Saxons. But, as the various Teutonic settlements drew together, as they began to have common national feelings and to feel the need of a common national name, the name which they chose was not the same as that by which their Celtic neighbours called them. They did not call themselves Saxons and their land Saxony; they called themselves English and their land England. I used the word Saxony in all seriousness; it is a real name for the Teutonic part of Britain, and it is an older name than the name England. But it is a name used only from the outside by Celtic neighbours and enemies; it was not used from the inside by the Teutonic people themselves. In their mouths, as soon as they took to themselves a common name, that name was English; as soon as they gave their land a common name, that name was England. … And this is the more remarkable, because the age when English was fully established as the name of the people, and England as the name of the land, was an age of Saxon supremacy, an age when a Saxon state held the headship of England and of Britain, when Saxon kings grew step by step to be kings of the English and lords of the whole British island. In common use then, the men of the tenth and eleventh centuries knew themselves by no name but English."

E. A. Freeman, The English People in its Three Homes (Lectures to American Audiences, pages 30-31, and 45-47).

See ANGLES AND JUTES, and SAXONS.

ENGLAND: A. D. 449-473. The Beginning of English history. The conquest of Kent by the Jutes.

"In the year 449 or 450 a band of warriors was drawn to the shores of Britain by the usual pledges of land and pay. The warriors were Jutes, men of a tribe which has left its name to Jutland, at the extremity of the peninsula that projects from the shores of North-Germany, but who were probably akin to the race that was fringing the opposite coast of Scandinavia and settling in the Danish Isles. In three 'keels'—so ran the legend of their conquest—and with their Ealdormen, Hengest and Horsa, at their head, these Jutes landed at Ebbsfleet in the Isle of Thanet. With the landing of Hengest and his war-band English history begins. … In the first years that followed after their landing, Jute and Briton fought side by side; and the Picts are said to have been scattered to the winds in a great battle on the eastern coast of Britain. But danger from the Pict was hardly over when danger came from the Jutes themselves. Their numbers probably grew fast as the news of their settlement in Thanet spread among their fellow pirates who were haunting the channel; and with the increase of their number must have grown the difficulty of supplying them with rations and pay. The dispute which rose over these questions was at last closed by Hengest's men with a threat of war." The threat was soon executed; the forces of the Jutes were successfully transferred from their island camp to the main shore, and the town of Durovernum (occupying the site of modern Canterbury) was the first to experience their rage. "The town was left in blackened and solitary ruin as the invaders pushed along the road to London. No obstacle seems to have checked their march from the Stour to the Medway." At Aylesford (A. D. 455), the lowest ford crossing the Medway, "the British leaders must have taken post for the defence of West Kent; but the Chronicle of the conquering people tells … only that Horsa fell in the moment of victory; and the flint-heap of Horsted which has long preserved his name … was held in aftertime to mark his grave. … The victory of Aylesford was followed by a political change among the assailants, whose loose organization around ealdormen was exchanged for a stricter union. Aylesford, we are told, was no sooner won than 'Hengest took to the kingdom, and Ælle, his son.' … The two kings pushed forward in 457 from the Medway to the conquest of West Kent." Another battle at the passage of the Cray was another victory for the invaders, and, "as the Chronicle of their conquerors tells us, the Britons' forsook Kent-land and fled with much fear to London.' … If we trust British tradition, the battle at Crayford was followed by a political revolution in Britain itself. … It would seem … that the Romanized Britons rose in revolt under Aurelius Ambrosianus, a descendant of the last Roman general who claimed the purple as an Emperor in Britain. … The revolution revived for a while the energy of the province." The Jutes were driven back into the Isle of Thanet, and held there, apparently, for some years, with the help of the strong fortresses of Richborough and Reculver, guarding the two mouths of the inlet which then parted Thanet from the mainland. {781} "In 465 however the petty conflicts which had gone on along the shores of the Wantsum made way for a decisive struggle. … The overthrow of the Britons at Wipped'sfleet was so terrible that all hope of preserving the bulk of Kent seems from this moment to have been abandoned; and … no further struggle disturbed the Jutes in its conquest and settlement. It was only along its southern shore that the Britons now held their ground. … A final victory of the Jutes in 473 may mark the moment when they reached the rich pastures which the Roman engineers had reclaimed from Romney Marsh. … With this advance to the mouth of the Weald the work of Hengest's men came to an end; nor did the Jutes from this time play any important part in the attack on the island, for their after-gains were limited to the Isle of Wight and a few districts on the Southampton Water."

J. R. Green, The Making of England, chapter 1.

ALSO IN: J. M. Lappenberg, History of England under the Anglo-Saxon Kings, volume 1, pages 67-101.

-----------------------------------------------------------

A Logical Outline of English History

IN WHICH THE DOMINANT CONDITIONS AND INFLUENCES ARE DISTINGUISHED BY COLORS.

Physical or material (Orange). Ethnological (Dark Blue). Social and political (Green). Intellectual, moral and religious (Tan). Foreign (Black).

5th-7th centuries. Conquest: and settlement by Saxons, Angles and Jutes.

The Island of Britain, separated from the Continent of Europe by a narrow breadth of sea, which makes friendly commerce easy and hostile invasion difficult;—its soil in great part excellent; its northern climate tempered by the humid warmth of the Gulf Stream; its conditions good for breeding a robust population, strongly fed upon corn and meats; holding, moreover, in store, for later times, a rare deposit of iron and coal, of tin and potter's clay, and other minerals of like utility; was occupied and possessed by tribes from Northern Europe, of the strongest race in history; already schooled in courage and trained to enterprise by generations of sea-faring adventure; uncorrupted by any mercenary contact with the decaying civilization of Rome, but ready for the knowledge it could give.

7th-11th Centuries.

Fused, after much warring with one another and with their Danish kin, into a nation of Englishmen, they lived, for five centuries, an isolated life, until their insular and independent character had become deeply ingrained, and the primitive system of their social and political organization—their Townships, their Hundreds, their Shires, and the popular Moots, or courts, which determined and administered law in each—was rooted fast; though their king's power waxed and the nobles and the common people drew farther apart.

A. D. 1066.—Norman conquest.

Then they were mastered (in the last successful invasion that their Island ever knew) by another people, sprung from their own stock, but whose blood had been warmed and whose wit had been quickened by Latin and Gallic influences in the country of the Franks.

11th-18th Centuries.

A new social and political system now formed itself in England as the result:—Feudalism modified by the essential democracy inherent in Old English institutions—producing a stout commonality to daunt the lords, and a strong aristocracy to curb the king.

A. D. 1215. Magna charta.

English royalty soon weakened itself yet more by ambitious strivings to maintain and extend a wide dominion over-sea, in Normandy and Aquitaine; and was helpless to resist when barons and commons came together to demand the signing and sealing of the Great Charter of Englishmen's rights.

A. D. 1265-1295—Parliament.

Out of the conditions which gave birth to Magna Charta there followed, soon, the development of the English Parliament as a representative legislature, from the Curia Regis of the Normans and the Witenagemot of the older English time.

A. D. 1337-1453—The Hundred Years War.

From the woful wars of a hundred years with France, which another century brought upon it, the nation, as a whole, suffered detriment, no doubt, and it progress was hindered in many ways; but politically the people took some good from the troubled times, because their kings were more dependant on them for money and men.

A. D. 1453-1485—War of the Roses

So likewise, they were bettered in some ways by the dreadful civil Wars of the Roses, which distracted England for thirty years. The nobles well-nigh perished, as an order, in these wars, while the middle-class people at large suffered relatively little, in numbers or estate.

A. D. 1348—The Great Plague.

But, previously, the great Plague, by diminishing the ranks of the laboring class, had raised wages and the standard of living among them, and had helped, with other causes, to multiply the small landowners and tenant farmers of the country, increasing the independent common class.

A. D. 1327-1377—Immigration of Flemish weavers.

Moreover, from the time of Edward III., who encouraged Flemish weavers to settle in England and to teach their art to his people, manufactures began to thrive; trade extended; towns grew in population and wealth, and the great burgher middle-class rose rapidly to importance and weight in the land.

A. D. 1485-1603—Absolutism of the Tudors.

But the commons of England were not prepared to make use of the actual power which they held. The nobles had led them in the past; it needed time to raise leaders among themselves, and time to organize their ranks. Hence no new checks on royalty were ready to replace those constraints which had been broken by the ruin of great houses in the civil wars, and the crown made haste to improve its opportunity for grasping power. There followed, under the Tudors, a period of absolutism greater than England had known before.

15th-16th Centuries—Renaissance.

But this endured only for the time of the education of the commons, who conned the lessons of the age with eagerness and with understanding. The new learning from Greece and Rome; the new world knowledge that had been found in the West; the new ideas which the new art of the printer had furnished with wings,—all these had now gained their most fertile planting in the English mind. Their flower was the splendid literature of the Elizabethan age; they ripened fruits more substantial at a later day.

The intellectual development of the nation tended first toward a religious independence, which produced two successive revolts—from Roman Papacy and from the Anglican Episcopacy that succeeded it.

This religious new departure of the English people gave direction to a vast expansion of their energies in the outside world. It led them into war with Spain, and sent forth Drake and Hawkins and the Buccaneers, to train the sailors and pilot the merchant adventurers who would soon make England mistress of all the wide seas.

A. D. 1608-1688. The Stuarts. The Civil War. The Commonwealth. The Revolution.

Then, when these people, strong, prosperous and intelligent, had come to be ripely sufficient for self-government, there fell to them a foolish race of kings, who challenged them to a struggle which stripped royalty of all but its fictions, and established the sovereignty of England in its House of Commons for all time.

18th-19th Centuries. Science Invention. Material progress. Economic enlightenment.

Unassailable in its island,—taking part in the great wars of the 18th century by its fleets and its subsidies chiefly,—busy with its undisturbed labors at home,—vigorous in its conquests, its settlements and its trade, which it pushed into the farthest parts of the earth,—creating wealth and protecting it from spoliation and from waste,—the English nation now became the industrial and economic school of the age. It produced the mechanical inventions which first opened a new era in the life of mankind on the material side; it attained to the splendid enlightenment of freedom in trade; it made England the workshop and mart of the world, and it spread her Empire to every Continent, through all the seas.

--------- End: A Logical Outline of English History --------------------

ENGLAND: A. D. 477-527. The conquests of the Saxons. The founding of the kingdoms of Sussex, Wessex and Essex.

"Whilst the Jutes were conquering Kent, their kindred took part in the war. Ship after ship sailed from the North Sea, filled with eager warriors. The Saxons now arrived—Ella and his three sons landed in the ancient territory of the Regni (A. D. 477-491). The Britons were defeated with great slaughter, and driven into the forest of Andreade, whose extent is faintly indicated by the wastes and commons of the Weald. A general confederacy of the Kings and 'Tyrants' of the Britons was formed against the invaders, but fresh reinforcements arrived from Germany; the city of Andreades-Ceastre was taken by storm, all its inhabitants were slain and the buildings razed to the ground, so that its site is now entirely unknown. From this period the kingdom of the South Saxons was established in the person of Ella; and though ruling only over the narrow boundary of modern Sussex, he was accepted as the first of the Saxon Bretwaldas, or Emperors of the Isle of Britain. Encouraged, perhaps, by the good tidings received from Ella, another band of Saxons, commanded by Cerdic and his son Cynric, landed on the neighbouring shore, in the modern Hampshire (A. D. 494). At first they made but little progress. They were opposed by the Britons; but Geraint, whom the Saxon Chroniclers celebrate for his nobility, and the British Bards extol for his beauty and valour, was slain (A. D. 501). The death of the Prince of the 'Woodlands of Dyfnaint,' or Damnonia, may have been avenged, but the power of the Saxons overwhelmed all opposition; and Cerdic, associating his son Cynric in the dignity, became the King of the territory which he gained. Under Cynric and his son Ceaulin, the Saxons slowly, yet steadily, gained ground. The utmost extent of their dominions towards the North cannot be ascertained; but they had conquered the town of Bedford; and it was probably in consequence of their geographical position (A. D. 571) with respect to the countries of the Middle and East Saxons, that the name of the West Saxons was given to this colony. The tract north of the Thames was soon lost; but on the south of that river and of the Severn, the successors of Cerdic, Kings of Wessex, continued to extend their dominions. The Hampshire Avon, which retains its old Celtic name, signifying 'the Water,' seems at first to have been their boundary. Beyond this river, the British princes of Damnonia retained their power; and it was long before the country as far as the Exe became a Saxon March-land, or border. About the time that the Saxons under Cerdic and Cynric were successfully warring against the Britons, another colony was seen to establish itself in the territory or kingdom which, from its geographical position, obtained the name of East Saxony; but whereof the district of the Middle Saxons, now Middlesex, formed a part. London, as you well know, is locally included in Middle Saxony; and the Kings of Essex, and the other sovereigns who afterwards acquired the country, certainly possessed many extensive rights of sovereignty in the city. Yet, I doubt much whether London was ever incorporated in any Anglo-Saxon kingdom; and I think we must view it as a weak, tributary, vassal state, not very well able to resist the usurpations of the supreme Lord or Suzerain, Æscwin, or Ercenwine, who was the first King of the East Saxons (A. D. 527). His son Sleda was married to Ricola, daughter to Ethelbert of Kent, who afterwards appears as the superior, or sovereign of the country; and though Sleda was King, yet Ethelbert joined in all important acts of government. This was the fate of Essex—it is styled a kingdom, but it never enjoyed any political independence, being always subject to the adjoining kings."

F. Palgrave, History of the Anglo Saxons, chapter 2.

"The descents of [the West Saxons], Cerdic and Cynric, in 495 at the mouth of the Itchen, and a fresh descent on Portchester in 501, can have been little more than plunder raids; and though in 508 a far more serious conflict ended in the fall of 5,000 Britons and their chief, it was not till 514 that the tribe whose older name seems to have been that of the Gewissas, but who were to be more widely known as the West Saxons, actually landed with a view to definite conquest."

J. R. Green, The Making of England, chapter 3.

"The greatness of Sussex did not last beyond the days of its founder Ælle, the first Bretwalda. Whatever importance Essex, or its offshoot, Middlesex, could claim as containing the great city of London was of no long duration. We soon find London fluctuating between the condition of an independent commonwealth, and that of a dependency of the Mercian Kings. Very different was the destiny of the third Saxon Kingdom. Wessex has grown into England, England into Great Britain, Great Britain into the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom into the British Empire. Every prince who has ruled England before and since the eleventh century [the interval of the Danish kings, Harold, son of Godwine, and William the Conqueror, who were not of the West Saxon house] has had the blood of Cerdic the West Saxon in his veins. At the close of the sixth century Wessex had risen to high importance among the English Kingdoms, though the days of its permanent supremacy were still far distant."

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 2, section 1.

{782}

ENGLAND: A. D. 547-633. The conquests of the Angles. The founding of their kingdoms.

Northwards of the East Saxons was established the kingdom of the East Angles, in which a northern and a southern people (Northfolc and Suthfolc) were distinguished. It is probable that, even during the last period of the Roman sway, Germans were settled in this part of Britain; a supposition that gains probability from several old Saxon sagas, which have reference to East Anglia at a period anterior to the coming of Hengest and Horsa. The land of the Gyrwas, containing 1,200 hides … comprised the neighbouring marsh districts of Ely and Huntingdonshire, almost as far as Lincoln. Of the East Angles Wehwa, or Wewa, or more commonly his son Uffa, or Wuffa, from whom his race derived their patronymic of Uffings or Wuffings, is recorded as the first king. The neighbouring states of Mercia originated in the marsh districts of the Lindisware, or inhabitants of Lindsey (Lindesig), the northern part of Lincolnshire. With these were united the Middle Angles. This kingdom, divided by the Trent into a northern and a southern portion, gradually extended itself to the borders of Wales. Among the states which it comprised was the little Kingdom of the Hwiccas, conterminous with the later diocese of Worcester, or the counties of Gloucester, Worcester, and a part of Warwick. This state, together with that of the Hecanas, bore the common Germanic appellation of the land of the Magesætas. … The country to the north of the Humber had suffered the most severely from the inroads of the Picts and Scots. It became at an early period separated into two British states, the names of which were retained for some centuries, viz.: Deifyr (Deora rice), afterwards Latinized into Deira, extending from the Humber to the Tyne, and Berneich (Beorna rice), afterwards Bernicia, from the Tyne to the Clyde. Here also the settlements of the German races appear anterior to the date given in the common accounts of the first Anglian kings of those territories, in the middle of the sixth century."

J. M. Lappenberg, History of England under the Anglo-Saxon Kings (Thorpe), volume 1, pages 112-117.

The three Anglian kingdoms of Northumberland, Mercia and East Anglia, "are altogether much larger than the Saxon and Jutish Kingdoms, so you see very well why the land was called 'England' and not 'Saxony.' … 'Saxonia' does occur now and then, and it was really an older name than 'Anglia,' but it soon went quite out of use. … But some say that there were either Jutes or Saxons in the North of England as soon or sooner than there were in the south. If so, there is another reason why the Scotch Celts as well as the Welsh, call us Saxons. It is not unlikely that there may have been some small Saxon or Jutish settlements there very early, but the great Kingdom of Northumberland was certainly founded by Ida the Angle in 547. It is more likely that there were some Teutonic settlements there before him, because the Chronicle does not say of him, as it does of Hengest, Cissa and Cerdie, that he came into the land by the sea, but only that he began the Kingdom. … You must fully understand that in the old times Northumberland meant the whole land north of the Humber, reaching as far as the Firth of Forth. It thus takes in part of what is now Scotland, including the city of Edinburgh, that is Eadwinesburh, the town of the great Northumbrian King Eadwine, or Edwin [Edwin of Deira, A. D. 617-633]. … You must not forget that Lothian and all that part of Scotland was part of Northumberland, and that the people there are really English, and still speak a tongue which has changed less from the Old-English than the tongue of any other part of England. And the real Scots, the Gael in the Highlands, call the Lowland Scots 'Saxons,' just as much as they do the people of England itself. This Northumbrian Kingdom was one of the greatest Kingdoms in England, but it was often divided into two, Beornicia [or Bernicia] and Deira, the latter of which answered pretty nearly to Yorkshire. The chief city was the old Roman town of Eboracum, which in Old-English is Eoforwic, and which we cut short into York. York was for a long time the greatest town in the North of England. There are now many others much larger, but York is still the second city in England in rank, and it gives its chief magistrate the title of Lord-Mayor, as London· does, while in other cities and towns the chief magistrate is merely the Mayor, without any Lord. … The great Anglian Kingdom of the Mercians, that is the Marchmen, the people on the march or frontier, seems to have been the youngest of all, and to have grown up gradually by joining together several smaller states, including all the land which the West Saxons had held north of the Thames. Such little tribes or states were the Lindesfaras and the Gainas in Lincolnshire, the Magesætas in Herefordshire, the Hwiccas in Gloucester, Worcester, and part of Warwick, and several others. … When Mercia was fully joined under one King, it made one of the greatest states in England, and some of the Mercian Kings were very powerful princes. It was chiefly an Anglian Kingdom; and the Kings were of an Anglian stock, but among the Hwiccas and in some of the other shires in southern and western Mercia, most of the people must really have been Saxons."

E. A. Freeman, Old English History for Children, chapter 5.

ENGLAND: A. D. 560.

Ethelbert becomes king of Kent.

ENGLAND: A. D. 593.

Ethelfrith becomes king of Northumbria.

ENGLAND: A. D. 597-685. The conversion of the English.

"It happened that certain Saxon children were to be sold for slaves at the marketplace at Rome; when Divine Providence, the great clock-keeper of time, ordering not only hours, but even instants (Luke ii. 38), to his own honour, so disposed it, that Gregory, afterwards first bishop of Rome of that name, was present to behold them. It grieved the good man to see the disproportion betwixt the faces and fortunes, the complexions and conditions, of these children, condemned to a servile estate, though carrying liberal looks, so legible was ingenuity in their faces. It added more to his sorrow, when he conceived that those youths were twice vassals, bought by their masters, and 'sold under sin' (Romans vii. 14), servants in their bodies, and slaves in their souls to Satan; which occasioned the good man to enter into further inquiry with the merchants (which set them to sale) what they were and whence they came, according to this ensuing dialogue:

Gregory.—'Whence come these captives?' Merchants.—'From the isle of Britain.' Gregory.—'Are those islanders Christians?' Merchants.—'O no, they are Pagans.' Gregory.—'It is sad that the author of darkness should possess men with so bright faces. But what is the name of their particular nation?' Merchants.—'They are called Angli.' Gregory.—'And well may, for their "angel like faces"; it becometh such to be coheirs with the angels in heaven. In what province of England did they live?' Merchants.—'In Deira.' Gregory.—'They are to be freed de Dei irâ, "from the anger of God." How call ye the king of that country?' Merchants.—'Ella.' Gregory.—'Surely hallelujah ought to be sung in his kingdom to the praise of that God who created all things.'

{783}

Thus Gregory's gracious heart set the sound of every word to the time of spiritual goodness. Nor can his words be justly censured for levity, if we consider how, in that age, the elegance of poetry consisted in rhythm, and the eloquence of prose in allusions. And which was the main, where his pleasant conceits did end, there his pious endeavours began; which did not terminate in a verbal jest, but produce real effects, which ensued hereupon."

Thomas Fuller, The Church History of Britain, book 2, section 1.

In 590 the good Gregory became Bishop of Rome, or Pope, and six years later, still retaining the interest awakened in him by the captive English youth, he dispatched a band of missionary monks to Britain, with their prior, Augustine, at their head. Once they turned back, affrighted by what they heard of the ferocity of the new heathen possessors of the once-Christian island of Britain; but Gregory laid his commands upon them again, and in the spring of 597 they crossed the channel from Gaul, landing at Ebbsfleet, in the Isle of Thanet, where the Jutish invaders had made their first landing, a century and a half before. They found Ethelbert of Kent, the most powerful of the English kings at that time, already prepared to receive them with tolerance, if not with favor, through the influence of a Christian wife—queen Bertha, of the royal family of the Franks. The conversion and baptism of the Kentish king and court, and the acceptance of the new faith by great numbers of the people followed quickly. In November of the same year, 597, Augustine returned to Gaul to receive his consecration as "Archbishop of the English," establishing the See of Canterbury, with the primacy which has remained in it to the present day. The East Saxons were the next to bow to the cross and in 604 a bishop, Mellitus, was sent to London. This ended Augustine's work—and Gregory's— for both died that year. Then followed an interval of little progress in the work of the mission, and, afterwards, a reaction towards idolatry which threatened to destroy it altogether. But just at this time of discouragement in the south, a great triumph of Christianity was brought about in Northumberland, and due, there, as in Kent, to the influence of a Christian queen. Edwin, the king, with many of his nobles and his people, were baptised on Easter Eve, A. D. 627, and a new center of missionary work was established at York. There, too, an appalling reverse occurred, when Northumberland was overrun, in 633, by Penda, the heathen king of Mercia; but the kingdom rallied, and the Christian Church was reestablished, not wholly, as before, under the patronage and rule of Rome, but partly by a mission from the ancient Celtic Church, which did not acknowledge the supremacy of Rome. In the end, however, the Roman forms of Christianity prevailed, throughout Britain, as elsewhere in western Europe. Before the end of the 7th century the religion of the Cross was established firmly in all parts of the island, the South Saxons being the latest to receive it. In the 8th century English missionaries were laboring zealously for the conversion of their Saxon and Frisian brethren on the continent.

_G. F. Maclear, Conversion of the West; The English._

ALSO IN: _The Venerable Bede, Ecclesiastical History._

_H. Soames, The Anglo Saxon Church._

R. C. Jenkins, Canterbury, chapter 2.

ENGLAND: End of the 6th. Century. The extent, the limits and the character of the Teutonic conquest.

"Before the end of the 6th century the Teutonic dominion stretched from the German ocean to the Severn, and from the English Channel to the Firth of Forth. The northern part of the island was still held by Picts and Scots, Celtic tribes, whose exact ethnical relation to each other hardly concerns us. And the whole west side of the island, including not only modern Wales, but the great Kingdom of Strathclyde, stretching from Dumbarton to Chester, and the great peninsula containing Cornwall, Devon and part of Somerset, was still in the hands of independent Britons. The struggle had been a long and severe one, and the natives often retained possession of a defensible district long after the surrounding country had been occupied by the invaders. It is therefore probable that, at the end of the 6th century and even later, there may have been within the English frontier inaccessible points where detached bodies of Welshmen still retained a precarious independence. It is probable also that, within the same frontier, there still were Roman towns, tributary to the conquerors rather than occupied by them. But by the end of the 6th century even these exceptions must have been few. The work of the Conquest, as a whole, was accomplished. The Teutonic settlers had occupied by far the greater part of the territory which they ever were, in the strictest sense, to occupy. The complete supremacy of the island was yet to be won; but that was to be won, when it was won, by quite another process. The English Conquest of Britain differed in several important respects from every other settlement of a Teutonic people within the limits of the Roman Empire. … Though the literal extirpation of a nation is an impossibility, there is every reason to believe that the Celtic inhabitants of those parts of Britain which had become English at the 6th century had been as nearly extirpated as a nation can be. The women would doubtless be largely spared, but as far as the male sex is concerned, we may feel sure that death, emigration or personal slavery were the only alternatives which the vanquished found at the hands of our fathers. The nature of the small Celtic element in our language would of itself prove the fact. Nearly every Welsh word which has found its way into English expresses some small domestic matter, such as women and slaves would be concerned with."

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 2, section 1.

"A glance at the map shows that the mass of the local nomenclature of England begins with the Teutonic conquest, while the mass of the local nomenclature of France is older than the Teutonic conquest. And, if we turn from the names on the map to the living speech of men, there is the most obvious, but the most important, of all facts, the fact that Englishmen speak English and that Frenchmen speak French.

{784}

That is to say, in Gaul the speech of Rome lived through the Teutonic conquest, while in Britain it perished in the Teutonic conquest, if it had not passed away before. And behind this is the fact, very much less obvious, a good deal less important, but still very important, that in Gaul tongues older than Latin live on only in corners as mere survivals, while in Britain, while Latin has utterly vanished, a tongue older than Latin still lives on as the common speech of an appreciable part of the land. Here then is the final result open to our own eyes. And it is a final result which could not have come to pass unless the Teutonic conquest of Britain had been something of an utterly different character from the Teutonic conquest of Gaul—unless the amount of change, of destruction, of havoc of every kind, above all, of slaughter and driving out of the existing inhabitants, had been far greater in Britain than it was in Gaul. If the Angles and Saxons in Britain had been only as the Goths in Spain, or even as the Franks in Gaul, it is inconceivable that the final results should have been so utterly different in the two cases. There is the plain fact: Gaul remained a Latin-speaking land; England became a Teutonic-speaking land. The obvious inference is that, while in Gaul the Teutonic conquest led to no general displacement of the inhabitants, in England it did lead to such a general displacement. In Gaul the Franks simply settled among a subject people, among whom they themselves were gradually merged; in Britain the Angles and Saxons slew or drove out the people whom they found in the land, and settled it again as a new people."

E. A. Freeman, The English People in its Three Homes (Lectures to American Audiences), pages 114-115.

"Almost to the close of the 6th century the English conquest of Britain was a sheer dispossession of the conquered people; and, so far as the English sword in these earlier days reached, Britain became England, a land, that is, not of Britons, but of Englishmen. There is no need to believe that the clearing of the land meant the general slaughter of the men who held it, or to account for such a slaughter by supposed differences between the temper of the English and those of other conquerors. … The displacement of the conquered people was only made possible by their own stubborn resistance, and by the slow progress of the conquerors in the teeth of it. Slaughter no doubt there was on the battlefield or in towns like Anderida, whose long defence woke wrath in their besiegers. But for the most part the Britons cannot have been slaughtered; they were simply defeated and drew back."

J. R. Green, The Making of England, chapter 4.

The view strongly stated above, as to the completeness of the erasure of Romano-British society and influence from the whole of England except its southwestern and north· western counties, by the English conquest, is combated as strongly by another less prominent school of recent historians, represented, for example, by Mr. Henry C. Coote (The Romans of Britain) and by Mr. Charles H. Pearson, who says: "We know that fugitives from Britain settled largely during the 5th century in Armorica and in Ireland; and we may perhaps accept the legend of St. Ursula as proof that the flight, in some instances, was directed to the more civilized parts of the continent. But even the pious story of the 11,000 virgins is sober and credible by the side of that history which assumes that some million men and women were slaughtered or made homeless by a few ship-loads of conquerors."

C. H. Pearson, History of England during the Early and Middle Ages, volume 1, chapter 6.

The opinion maintained by Prof. Freeman and Mr. Green (and, no less, by Dr. Stubbs) is the now generally accepted one.

ENGLAND: 7th Century. The so-called "Heptarchy."

"The old notion of an Heptarchy, of a regular system of seven Kingdoms, united under the regular supremacy of a single over-lord, is a dream which has passed away before the light of historic criticism. The English Kingdoms in Britain were ever fluctuating, alike in their number and in their relations to one another. The number of perfectly independent states was sometimes greater and sometimes less than the mystical seven, and, till the beginning of the ninth century, the whole nation did not admit the regular supremacy of any fixed and permanent over-lord. Yet it is no less certain that, among the mass of smaller and more obscure principalities, seven Kingdoms do stand out in a marked way, seven Kingdoms of which it is possible to recover something like a continuous history, seven Kingdoms which alone supplied candidates for the dominion of the whole island." These seven kingdoms were Kent, Sussex, Essex, Wessex, East Anglia, Northumberland and Mercia.

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 2.

"After the territorial boundaries had become more settled, there appeared at the commencement of the seventh century seven or eight greater and smaller kingdoms. … Historians have described this condition of things as the Heptarchy, disregarding the early disappearance of Sussex, and the existence of still smaller kingdoms. But this grouping was neither based upon equality, nor destined to last for any length of time. It was the common interest of these smaller states to withstand the sudden and often dangerous invasions of their western and northern neighbours; and, accordingly, whichever king was capable of successfully combating the common foe, acquired for the time a certain superior rank, which some historians denote by the title of Bretwalda. By this name can only be understood an actual and recognized temporary superiority; first ascribed to Ælla of Sussex, and later passing to Northumbria, until Wessex finally attains a real and lasting supremacy. It was geographical position which determined these relations of superiority. The small kingdoms in the west were shielded by the greater ones of Northumberland, Mercia and Wessex, as though by crescent-shaped forelands—which in their struggles with the Welsh kingdoms, with Strathclyde and Cumbria, with Picts and Scots, were continually in a state of martial activity. And so the smaller western kingdoms followed the three warlike ones; and round these Anglo-Saxon history revolved for two whole centuries, until in Wessex we find a combination of most of the conditions which are necessary to the existence of a great State."

R. Gneist, History of the English Constitution, chapter 3.

ENGLAND: A. D. 617. Edwin becomes king of Northumbria.

ENGLAND: A. D. 634. Oswald becomes king of Northumbria.

ENGLAND: A. D. 655. Oswi becomes king of Northumbria.

{785}

ENGLAND: A. D. 670. Egfrith becomes king of Northumbria.

ENGLAND: A. D. 688. Ini becomes king of the West Saxons.

ENGLAND: A. D. 716. Ethelbald becomes king of Mercia.

ENGLAND: A. D. 758. Offa becomes king of Mercia.

ENGLAND: A. D. 794. Cenwulf becomes king of Mercia.

ENGLAND: A. D. 800. Accession of the West Saxon king Ecgberht.

ENGLAND: A. D. 800-836. The supremacy of Wessex. The first king of all the English.

"And now I have come to the reign of Ecgberht, the great Bretwalda. He was an Ætheling of the blood of Cerdic, and he is said to have been the son of Ealhmund, and Ealhmund is said to have been an Under-king of Kent. For the old line of the Kings of Kent had come to an end and Kent was now sometimes under Wessex and sometimes under Mercia. … When Beorhtric died in 800, he [Ecgberht] was chosen King of the West-Saxons. He reigned until 836, and in that time he brought all the English Kingdoms, and the greater part of Britain, more or less under his power. The southern part of the island, all Kent, Sussex, and Essex, he joined on to his own Kingdom, and set his sons or other Æthelings to reign over them as his Under-kings. But Northumberland, Mercia, and East-Anglia were not brought so completely under his power as this. Their Kings submitted to Ecgberht and acknowledged him as their over-lord, but they went on reigning in their own Kingdoms, and assembling their own Wise Men, just as they did before. They became what in after times was called his 'vassals,' what in English was called being his 'men.' … Besides the English Kings, Ecgberht brought the Welsh, both in Wales and in Cornwall, more completely under his power. … So King Ecgberht was Lord from the Irish Sea to the German Ocean, and from the English Channel to the Firth of Forth. So it is not wonderful if, in his charters, he not only called himself King of the West-Saxons or King of the West-Saxons and Kentishmen, but sometimes 'Rex Anglorum,' or 'King of the English.' But amidst all this glory there were signs of great evils at hand. The Danes came several times."

E. A. Freeman, Old English History for Children, chapter 7.

ENGLAND: A. D. 836. Accession of the West Saxon king Ethelwulf.

ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880. Conquests and settlements of the Danes. The heroic struggle of Alfred the Great. The "Peace of Wedmore" and the "Danelaw." King Alfred's character and reign.

"The Danish invasions of England … fall naturally into three periods, each of which finds its parallel in the course of the English Conquest of Britain. … We first find a period in which the object of the invaders seems to be simple plunder. They land, they harry the country, they fight, if need be, to secure their booty, but whether defeated or victorious, they equally return to their ships, and sail away with what they have gathered. This period includes the time from the first recorded invasion [A. D. 787] till the latter half of the ninth century. Next comes a time in which the object of the Northmen is clearly no longer mere plunder, but settlement. … In the reign of Æthelwulf the son of Ecgberht it is recorded that the heathen men wintered for the first time in the Isle of Sheppey [A. D. 855]. This marks the transition from the first to the second period of their invasions. … It was not however till about eleven years from this time that the settlement actually began. Meanwhile the sceptre of the West-Saxons passed from one hand to another. … Four sons of Æthelwulf reigned in succession, and the reigns of the first three among them [Ethelbald, A. D. 858, Ethelberht, 860, Ethelred, 866] make up together only thirteen years. In the reign of the third of these princes, Æthelred I., the second period of the invasions fairly begins. Five years were spent by the Northmen in ravaging and conquering the tributary Kingdoms. Northumberland, still disputed between rival Kings, fell an easy prey [867-869], and one or two puppet princes did not scruple to receive a tributary crown at the hands of the heathen invaders. They next entered Mercia [868], they seized Nottingham, and the West-Saxon King hastening to the relief of his vassals, was unable to dislodge them from that stronghold. East Anglia was completely conquered [866-870] and its King Eadmund died a martyr. At last the full storm of invasion burst upon Wessex itself [871]. King Æthelred, the first of a long line of West-Saxon hero-Kings, supported by his greater brother Ælfred [Alfred the Great] met the invaders in battle after battle with varied success. He died and Ælfred succeeded, in the thick of the struggle. In this year [871], the last of Æthelred and the first of Ælfred, nine pitched battles, besides smaller engagements, were fought with the heathens on West-Saxon ground. At last peace was made; the Northmen retreated to London, within the Mercian frontier; Wessex was for the moment delivered, but the supremacy won by Ecgberht was lost. For a few years Wessex was subjected to nothing more than temporary incursions, but Northumberland and part of Mercia were systematically occupied by the Northmen, and the land was divided among them. … At last the Northmen, now settled in a large part of the island, made a second attempt to add Wessex itself to their possessions [878]. For a moment the land seemed conquered; Ælfred himself lay hid in the marshes of Somersetshire; men might well deem that the Empire of Ecgberht and the Kingdom of Cerdic itself, had vanished for ever. But the strong heart of the most renowned of Englishmen, the saint, the scholar, the hero, and the lawgiver, carried his people safely through this most terrible of dangers. Within the same year the Dragon of Wessex was again victorious [at the battle of Ethandun, or Edington], and the Northmen were driven to conclude a peace which Englishmen, fifty years sooner, would have deemed the lowest depth of degradation, but which might now be fairly looked upon as honourable and even as triumphant. By the terms of the Peace of Wedmore the Northmen were to evacuate Wessex and the part of Mercia south-west of Watling-Street; they, or at least their chiefs, were to submit to baptism, and they were to receive the whole land beyond Watling-Street as vassals of the West-Saxon King. … The exact boundary started from the Thames, along the Lea to its source, then right to Bedford and along the Ouse till it meets Watling-Street, then along Watling-Street to the Welsh border. See Ælfred and Guthrum's Peace,' Thorpe's 'Laws and Institutes,' i. 152. This frontier gives London to the English; but it seems that Ælfred did not obtain full possession of London till 886." {786} The territory thus conceded to the Danes, which included all northeastern England from the Thames to the Tyne, was thenceforth known by the name of the Danelagh or Danelaw, signifying the country subject to the law of the Danes. The Peace of Wedmore ended the second period of the Danish invasions. The third period, which was not opened until a full century later, embraced the actual conquest of the whole of England by a Danish king and its temporary annexation to the dominions of the Danish crown.

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 2, with foot-note.

"Now that peace was restored, and the Danes driven out of his domains, it remained to be seen whether Alfred was as good a ruler as he was a soldier. … What did he see? The towns, even London itself, pillaged, ruined, or burnt down; the monasteries destroyed; the people wild and lawless; ignorance, roughness, insecurity everywhere. It is almost incredible with what a brave heart he set himself to repair all this; how his great and noble aims were still before him; how hard he strove, and how much he achieved. First of all he seems to have sought for helpers. Like most clever men, he was good at reading characters. He soon saw who would be true, brave, wise friends, and he collected these around him. Some of them he fetched from over the sea, from France and Germany; our friend Asser from Wales, or, as he calls his country, 'Western Britain,' while England, he calls 'Saxony.' He says he first saw Alfred 'in a royal vill, which is called Dene' in Sussex. 'He received me with kindness, and asked me eagerly to devote myself to his service, and become his friend; to leave everything which I possessed on the left or western bank of the Severn, and promised that he would give more than an equivalent for it in his own dominions. I replied that I could not rashly and incautiously promise such things; for it seemed to be unjust that I should leave those sacred places in which I had been bred, educated, crowned, and ordained for the sake of any earthly honour and power, unless upon compulsion. Upon this he said, "If you cannot accede to this, at least let me have your service in part; spend six months of the year with me here, and the other six months in Britain."' And to this after a time Asser consented. What were the principal things he turned his mind to after providing for the defence of his kingdom, and collecting his friends and counsellors about him? Law—justice—religion—education. He collected and studied the old laws of his nation; what he thought good he kept, what he disapproved he left out. He added others, especially the ten commandments and some other parts of the law of Moses. Then he laid them all before his Witan, or wise men, and with their approval published them. … The state of justice in England was dreadful at this time. … Alfred's way of curing this was by inquiring into all cases, as far as he possibly could, himself; and Asser says he did this 'especially for the sake of the poor, to whose interest, day and night, he ever was wonderfully attentive; for in the whole kingdom the poor, besides him, had few or no protectors.' … When he found that the judges had made mistakes through ignorance, he rebuked them, and told them they must either grow wiser or give up their posts; and soon the old earls and other judges, who had been unlearned from their cradles, began to study diligently. … For reviving and spreading religion among his people he used the best means that he knew of; that is, he founded new monasteries and restored old ones, and did his utmost to get good bishops and clergymen. For his own part, he strove to practise in all ways what he taught to others. … Education was in a still worse condition than everything else. … All the schools had been broken up. Alfred says that when he began to reign there were very few clergymen south of the Humber who could even understand the Prayer-book. (That was still in Latin, as the Roman missionaries had brought it.) And south of the Thames he could not remember one. His first care was to get better-educated clergy and bishops. And next to get the laymen taught also. … He founded monasteries and schools, and restored the old ones which had been ruined. He had a school in his court for his own children and the children of his nobles. But at the very outset a most serious difficulty confronted Alfred. Where was he to get books? At this time, as far as we can judge, there can only have been one, or at most two books in the English language—the long poem of Cædmon about the creation of the world, &c., and the poem of Beowulf about warriors and fiery dragons. There were many English ballads and songs, but whether these were written down I do not know. There was no book of history, not even English history; no book of geography, no religious books, no philosophy. Bede, who had written so many books, had written them all in Latin. … So when they had a time of 'stillness' the king and his learned friends set to work and translated books into English; and Alfred, who was as modest and candid as he was wise, put into the preface of one of his translations that he hoped, if anyone knew Latin better than he did, that he would not blame him, for he could but do according to his ability. … Beside all this, he had a great many other occupations. Asser, who often lived with him for months at a time, gives us an account of his busy life. Notwithstanding his infirmities and other hindrances, 'he continued to carry on the government, and to exercise hunting in all its branches; to teach his workers in gold and artificers of all kinds, his falconers, hawkers, and dog-keepers; to build houses, majestic and good, beyond all the precedents of his ancestors, by his new mechanical inventions; to recite the Saxon books (Asser, being a Welshman, always calls the English, Saxon), and especially to learn by heart the Saxon poems, and to make others learn them; he never desisted from studying most diligently to the best of his ability; he attended the mass and other daily services of religion; he was frequent in psalm-singing and prayer; … he bestowed alms and largesses on both natives and foreigners of all countries; he was affable and pleasant to all, and curiously eager to investigate things unknown.'"

M. J. Guest, Lectures on the History of England, lecture 9.

"It is no easy task for anyone who has been studying his [Alfred's] life and works to set reasonable bounds to their reverence, and enthusiasm, for the man. Lest the reader should think my estimate tainted with the proverbial weakness of biographers for their heroes; let them turn to the words in which the earliest, and the last of the English historians of that time, sum up the character of Alfred. {787} Florence of Worcester, writing in the century after his death, speaks of him as 'that famous, warlike, victorious king; the zealous protector of widows, scholars, orphans and the poor; skilled in the Saxon poets; affable and liberal to all; endowed with prudence, fortitude, justice, and temperance; most patient under the infirmity which he daily suffered; a most stern inquisitor in executing justice; vigilant and devoted in the service of God.' Mr. Freeman, in his 'History of the Norman Conquest,' has laid down the portrait in bold and lasting colours, in a passage as truthful as it is eloquent, which those who are familiar with it will be glad to meet again, while those who do not know it will be grateful to me for substituting for any poor words of my own. 'Alfred, the unwilling author of these great changes, is the most perfect character in history. He is a singular instance of a prince who has become a hero of romance, who, as such, has had countless imaginary exploits attributed to him, but to whose character romance has done no more than justice, and who appears in exactly the same light in history and in fable. No other man on record has ever so thoroughly united all the virtues both of the ruler and of the private man. In no other man on record were so many virtues disfigured by so little alloy. A saint without superstition, a scholar without ostentation, a warrior all whose wars were fought in the defence of his country, a conqueror whose laurels were never stained by cruelty, a prince never cast down by adversity, never lifted up to insolence in the day of triumph—there is no other name in history to compare with his. Saint Lewis comes nearest to him in the union of a more than monastic piety with the highest civil, military, and domestic virtues. Both of them stand forth in honourable contrast to the abject superstition of some other royal saints, who were so selfishly engaged in the care of their own souls that they refused either to raise up heirs for their throne, or to strike a blow on behalf of their people. But even in Saint Lewis we see a disposition to forsake an immediate sphere of duty for the sake of distant and unprofitable, however pious and glorious, undertakings. The true duties of the King of the French clearly lay in France, and not in Egypt or Tunis. No such charge lies at the door of the great King of the West Saxons. With an inquiring spirit which took in the whole world, for purposes alike of scientific inquiry and of Christian benevolence, Alfred never forgot that his first duty was to his own people. He forestalled our own age in sending expeditions to explore the Northern Ocean, and in sending alms to the distant Churches of India; but he neither forsook his crown, like some of his predecessors, nor neglected his duties, like some of his successors. The virtue of Alfred, like the virtue of Washington, consisted in no marvellous displays of super-human genius, but in the simple, straightforward discharge of the duty of the moment. But Washington, soldier, statesman, and patriot, like Alfred, has no claim to Alfred's further characters of saint and scholar. William the Silent, too, has nothing to set against Alfred's literary merits; and in his career, glorious as it is, there is an element of intrigue and chicanery utterly alien to the noble simplicity of both Alfred and Washington. The same union of zeal for religion and learning with the highest gifts of the warrior and the statesman is found, on a wider field of action, in Charles the Great. But even Charles cannot aspire to the pure glory of Alfred. Amidst all the splendour of conquest and legislation, we cannot be blind to an alloy of personal ambition, of personal vice, to occasional unjust aggressions and occasional acts of cruelty. Among our own later princes, the great Edward alone can bear for a moment the comparison with his glorious ancestor. And, when tried by such a standard, even the great Edward fails. Even in him we do not see the same wonderful union of gifts and virtues which so seldom meet together; we cannot acquit Edward of occasional acts of violence, of occasional recklessness as to means; we cannot attribute to him the pure, simple, almost childlike disinterestedness which marks the character of Alfred.' Let Wordsworth, on behalf of the poets of England, complete the picture:

'Behold a pupil of the monkish gown, The pious Alfred, king to justice dear! Lord of the harp and liberating spear; Mirror of princes! Indigent renown Might range the starry ether for a crown Equal to his deserts, who, like the year, Pours forth his bounty, like the day doth cheer, And awes like night, with mercy-tempered frown. Ease from this noble miser of his time No moment steals; pain narrows not his cares— Though small his kingdom as a spark or gem, Of Alfred boasts remote Jerusalem, And Christian India, through her widespread clime, In sacred converse gifts with Alfred shares.'"

Thomas Hughes, Alfred the Great, chapter 24.

ALSO IN: _R. Pauli, Life of Alfred the Great._

_Asser, Life of Alfred._

See, also, NORMANS, and EDUCATION, MEDIÆVAL.

ENGLAND: A. D. 901. Accession of the West Saxon king Edward, called The Elder.

ENGLAND: A. D. 925. Accession of the West Saxon king Ethelstan.

ENGLAND: A. D. 938. The battle of Brunnaburgh.

Alfred the Great, dying in 901, was succeeded by his son, Edward, and Edward, in turn, was followed, A. D. 925, by his son Athelstane, or Æthalsten. In the reign of Athelstane a great league was formed against him by the Northumbrian Danes with the Scots, with the Danes of Dublin and with the Britons of Strathclyde and Cumbria. Athelstane defeated the confederates in a mighty battle, celebrated in one of the finest of Old-English war-songs, and also in one of the Sagas of the Norse tongue, as the Battle of Brunnaburgh or Brunanburh, but the site of which is unknown. "Five Kings and seven northern Iarls or earls fell in the strife. … Constantine the Scot fled to the north, mourning his fair-haired son, who perished in the slaughter. Anlaf [or Olaf, the leader of the Danes or Ostmen of Dublin], with a sad and scattered remnant of his forces, escaped to Ireland. … The victory was so decisive that, during the remainder of the reign of Athelstane, no enemy dared to rise up against him; his supremacy was acknowledged without contest, and his glory extended to distant realms."

F. Palgrave, History of the Anglo-Saxons, chapter 10.

Mr. Skene is of opinion that the battle of Brunnaburgh was fought at Aldborough, near York.

W. F. Skene, Celtic Scotland, volume 1, page 357.

ENGLAND: A. D. 940. Accession of the West Saxon king Edmund.

ENGLAND: A. D. 946. Accession of the West Saxon king Edred.

ENGLAND: A. D. 955. Accession of the West Saxon king Edwig.

{788}

ENGLAND: A. D. 958. Accession of the West Saxon king Edgar.

ENGLAND: A. D. 958. Completed union of the realm. Increase of kingly authority. Approach towards feudalism. Rise of the Witenagemot. Decline of the Freemen.

"Before Alfred's son Edward died, the whole of Mercia was incorporated with his immediate dominions. The way in which the thing was done was more remarkable than the thing itself. Like the Romans, he made the fortified towns the means of upholding his power. But unlike the Romans, he did not garrison them with colonists from amongst his own immediate dependents. He filled them, as Henry the Fowler did afterwards in Saxony, with free townsmen, whose hearts were at one with their fellow countrymen around. Before he died in 924, the Danish chiefs in the land beyond the Humber had acknowledged his overlordship, and even the Celts of Wales and Scotland had given in their submission in some form which they were not likely to interpret too strictly. His son and his two grandsons, Athelstan, Edmund, and Edred completed the work, and when after the short and troubled interval of Edwy's rule in Wessex, Edgar united the undivided realm under his sway in 958, he had no internal enemies to suppress. He allowed the Celtic Scottish King who had succeeded to the inheritance of the Pictish race to possess the old Northumbrian land north of the Tweed, where they and their descendants learned the habits and speech of Englishmen. But he treated him and the other Celtic kings distinctly as his inferiors, though it was perhaps well for him that he did not attempt to impose upon them any very tangible tokens of his supremacy. The story of his being rowed by eight kings on the Dee is doubtless only a legend by which the peaceful king was glorified in the troubled times which followed. Such a struggle, so successfully conducted, could not fail to be accompanied by a vast increase of that kingly authority which had been on the growth from the time of its first establishment. The hereditary ealdormen, the representatives of the old kingly houses, had passed away. The old tribes, or—where their limitations had been obliterated by the tide of Danish conquest, as was the case in central and northern England—the new artificial divisions which had taken their place, were now known as shires, and the very name testified that they were regarded only as parts of a greater whole. The shire mote still continued the tradition of the old popular assemblies. At its head as presidents of its deliberations were the ealdorman and the bishop, each of them owing their appointment to the king, and it was summoned by the shire-reeve or sheriff, himself even more directly an officer of the king, whose business it was to see that all the royal dues were paid within the shire. In the more general concerns of the kingdom, the king consulted with his Witan, whose meetings were called the Witenagemot, a body, which, at least for all ordinary purposes, was composed not of any representatives of the shire-motes, but of his own dependents, the ealdormen, the bishops, and a certain number of thegns whose name, meaning 'servants', implied at least at first, that they either were or had at one time been in some way in the employment of the king. … The necessities of war … combined with the sluggishness of the mass of the population to favour the growth of a military force, which would leave the tillers of the soil to their own peaceful occupations. As the conditions which make a standing army possible on a large scale did not yet exist, such a force must be afforded by a special class, and that class must be composed of those who either had too much land to till themselves, or, having no land at all, were released from the bonds which tied the cultivator to the soil, in other words, it must be composed of a landed aristocracy and its dependents. In working out this change, England was only aiming at the results which similar conditions were producing on the Continent. But just as the homogeneousness of the population drew even the foreign element of the church into harmony with the established institutions, so it was with the military aristocracy. It grouped itself round the king, and it supplemented, instead of overthrowing, the old popular assemblies. Two classes of men, the eorls and the gesiths, had been marked out from their fellows at the time of the conquest. The thegn of Edgar's day differed from both, but he had some of the distinguishing marks of either. He was not like the gesith, a mere personal follower of the king. He did not, like the eorl, owe his position to his birth. Yet his relation to the king was a close one, and he had a hold upon the land as firm as that of the older eorl. He may, perhaps, best be described as a gesith, who had acquired the position of an eorl without entirely throwing off his own characteristics. … There can be little doubt that the change began in the practice of granting special estates in the folkland, or common undivided land, to special persons. At first this land was doubtless held to be the property of the tribe. [This is now questioned by Vinogradoff and others. See FOLCLAND.] … When the king rose above the tribes, he granted it himself with the consent of his Witan. A large portion was granted to churches and monasteries. But a large portion went in privates estates, or book land, as it was called, from the book or charter which conveyed them to the king's own gesiths, or to members of his own family. The gesith thus ceased to be a mere member of the king's military household. He became a landowner as well, with special duties. to perform to the king. … He had special jurisdiction given him over his tenants and serfs, exempting him and them from the authority of the hundred mote, though they still remained, except in very exceptional cases, under the authority of the shire mote. … Even up to the Norman conquest this change was still going on. To the end, indeed, the old constitutional forms were not broken down. The hundred mote was not abandoned, where freemen enough remained to fill it. Even where all the land of a hundred had passed under the protection of a lord there was little outward change. … There was thus no actual breach of continuity in the nation. The thegnhood pushed its roots down, as it were, amongst the free classes. Nevertheless there was a danger of such a breach of continuity coming about. The freemen entered more and more largely into a condition of' dependence, and there was a great risk lest such a condition of dependence should become a condition of servitude. Here and there, by some extraordinary stroke of luck, a freeman might rise to be a thegn. But the condition of the class to which he belonged was deteriorating every day. {789} The downward progress to serfdom was too easy to take, and by large masses of the population it was already taken. Below the increasing numbers of the serfs was to be found the lower class of slaves, who were actually the property of their masters. The Witenagemot was in reality a select body of thegns, if the bishops, who held their lands in much the same way, be regarded as thegns. In was rather an inchoate House of Lords, than an inchoate Parliament, after our modern ideas. It was natural that a body of men which united a great part of the wealth with almost all the influence in the kingdom should be possessed of high constitutional powers. The Witenagemot elected the king, though as yet they always chose him out of the royal family, which was held to have sprung from the god Woden. There were even cases in which they deposed unworthy kings."

S. R. Gardiner and J. B. Mullinger, Introduction to the Study of English History, part 1, chapter 2, section 16-21.

ENGLAND: A. D. 975. Accession of the West Saxon king Edward, called The Martyr.

ENGLAND: A. D. 979. Accession of the West Saxon king Ethelred, called The Unready.

ENGLAND: A. D. 979-1016. The Danish conquest.

"Then [A. D. 979] commenced one of the longest and most disastrous reigns of the Saxon kings, with the accession of Ethelred II., justly styled Ethelred the Unready. The Northmen now renewed their plundering and conquering expeditions against England; while England had a worthless waverer for her ruler, and many of her chief men turned traitors to their king and country. Always a laggart in open war, Ethelred tried in 1001 the cowardly and foolish policy of buying off the enemies whom he dared not encounter. The tax called Dane-gelt was then levied to provide 'a tribute for the Danish men on account of the great terror which they caused.' To pay money thus was in effect to hire the enemy to renew the war. In 1002 Ethelred tried the still more weak and wicked measure of ridding himself of his enemies by treacherous massacre. Great numbers of Danes were now living in England, intermixed with the Anglo-Saxon population. Ethelred resolved to relieve himself from all real or supposed danger of these Scandinavian settlers taking part with their invading kinsmen, by sending secret orders throughout his dominions for the putting to death of every Dane, man, woman, and child, on St. Brice's Day, Nov. 13. This atrocious order was executed only in Southern England, that is, in the West-Saxon territories; but large numbers of the Danish race were murdered there while dwelling in full security among their Saxon neighbours. … Among the victims was a royal Danish lady, named Gunhilde, who was sister of Sweyn, king of Denmark, and who had married and settled in England. … The news of the massacre of St. Brice soon spread over the Continent, exciting the deepest indignation against the English and their king. Sweyn collected in Denmark a larger fleet and army than the north had ever before sent forth, and solemnly vowed to conquer England or perish in the attempt. He landed on the south coast of Devon, obtained possession of Exeter by the treachery of its governor, and then marched through western and southern England, marking every shire with fire, famine and slaughter; but he was unable to take London, which was defended against the repeated attacks of the Danes with strong courage and patriotism, such as seemed to have died out in the rest of Saxon England. In 1013, the wretched king Ethelred fled the realm and sought shelter in Normandy. Sweyn was acknowledged king in all the northern and western shires, but he died in 1014, while his vow of conquest was only partly accomplished. The English now sent for Ethelred back from Normandy, promising loyalty to him as their lawful king, 'provided he would rule over them more justly than he had done before.' Ethelred willingly promised amendment, and returned to reign amidst strife and misery for two years more. His implacable enemy, Sweyn, was indeed dead; but the Danish host which Sweyn had led thither was still in England, under the command of Sweyn's son, Canute [or Cnut], a prince equal in military prowess to his father, and far superior to him and to all other princes of the time in statesmanship and general ability. Ethelred died in 1016, while the war with Canute was yet raging. Ethelred's son, Edmund, surnamed Ironside, was chosen king by the great council then assembled in London, but great numbers of the Saxons made their submission to Canute. The remarkable personal valour of Edmund, strongly aided by the bravery of his faithful Londoners, maintained the war for nearly a year, when Canute agreed to a compromise, by which he and Edmund divided the land between them. But within a few months after this, the royal Ironside died by the hand of an assassin, and Canute obtained the whole realm of the English race. A Danish dynasty was now [A. D. 1016] established in England for three reigns."

Sir E. S. Creasy, History of England, volume 1, chapter 5.

ALSO IN: J. M. Lappenberg, England under the Anglo-Saxon Kings, volume 2, pages 151-233.

See, also, MALDEN, and ASSANDUN, BATTLES OF.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1016. Accession and death of King Edmund Ironside.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1016-1042. The Reign of the Danish kings.

"Cnut's rule was not as terrible as might have been feared. He was perfectly unscrupulous in striking down the treacherous and mischievous chieftains who had made a trade of Ethelred's weakness and the country's divisions. But he was wise and strong enough to rule, not by increasing but by allaying those divisions. Resting his power upon his Scandinavian kingdoms beyond the sea, upon his Danish countrymen in England, and his Danish huscarles, or specially trained soldiers in his service, he was able, without even the appearance of weakness, to do what in him lay to bind Dane and Englishman together as common instruments of his power. Fidelity counted more with him than birth. To bring England itself into unity was beyond his power. The device which he hit upon was operative only in hands as strong as his own. There were to be four great earls, deriving their name from the Danish word jarl, centralizing the forces of government in Wessex, in Mercia, in East Anglia, and in Northumberland. With Cnut the four were officials of the highest class. They were there because he placed them there. They would cease to be there if he so willed it. But it could hardly be that it would always be so. Some day or another, unless a great catastrophe swept away Cnut and his creation, the earldoms would pass into territorial sovereignties and the divisions of England would be made evident openly."

S. R. Gardiner and J. B. Mullinger, Introduction to the Study of English History, chapter 2, section 25.

{790}

"He [Canute] ruled nominally at least, a larger European dominion than any English sovereign has ever done; and perhaps also a more homogeneous one. No potentate of the time came near him except the king of Germany, the emperor, with whom he was allied as an equal. The king of the Norwegians, the Danes, and a great part of the Swedes, was in a position to found a Scandinavian empire with Britain annexed. Canute's division of his dominions on his death-bed, showed that he saw this to be impossible; Norway, for a century and a half after his strong hand was removed, was broken up amongst an anarchical crew of piratic and blood-thirsty princes, nor could Denmark be regarded as likely to continue united with England. The English nation was too much divided and demoralised to retain hold on Scandinavia, even if the condition of the latter had allowed it. Hence Canute determined that during his life, as after his death, the nations should be governed on their own principles. … The four nations of the English, Northumbrians, East Angles, Mercians and West Saxons, might, each under their own national leader, obey a sovereign who was strong enough to enforce peace amongst them. The great earldoms of Canute's reign were perhaps a nearer approach to a feudal division of England than anything which followed the Norman Conquest. … And the extent to which this creation of the four earldoms affected the history of the next half-century cannot be exaggerated. The certain tendency of such an arrangement to become hereditary, and the certain tendency of the hereditary occupation of great fiefs ultimately to overwhelm the royal power, are well exemplified. … The Norman Conquest restored national unity at a tremendous temporary sacrifice, just as the Danish Conquest in other ways, and by a reverse process, had helped to create it."

W. Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 7, section 77.

Canute died in 1035. He was succeeded by his two sons, Harold Harefoot (1035-1040) and Harthacnute or Hardicanute (1040-1042), after which the Saxon line of kings was momentarily restored.

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 6.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1035. Accession of Harold, son of Cnut.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1040. Accession of Harthacnut, or Hardicanute.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1042. Accession of Edward the Confessor.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1042-1066. The last of the Saxon kings.

"The love which Canute had inspired by his wise and conciliatory rule was dissipated by the bad government of his sons, Harold and Harthacnut, who ruled in turn. After seven years of misgovernment, or rather anarchy, England, freed from the hated rule of Harthacnut by his death, returned to its old line of kings, and 'all folk chose Edward [surnamed The Confessor, son of Ethelred the Unready] to king,' as was his right by birth. Not that he was, according to our ideas, the direct heir, since Edward, the son of Edmund Ironside, still lived, an exile in Hungary. But the Saxons, by choosing Edward the Confessor, reasserted for the last time their right to elect that one of the hereditary line who was most available. With the reign of Edward the Confessor the Norman Conquest really began. We have seen the connection between England and Normandy begun by the marriage of Ethelred the Unready to Emma the daughter of Richard the Fearless, and cemented by the refuge offered to the English exiles in the court of the Norman duke. Edward had long found a home there in Canute's time. … Brought up under Norman influence, Edward had contracted the ideas and sympathies of his adopted home. On his election to the English throne the French tongue became the language of the court, Norman favourites followed in his train, to be foisted into important offices of State and Church, and thus inaugurate that Normanizing policy which was to draw on the Norman Conquest. Had it not been for this, William would never have had any claim on England." The Normanizing policy of king Edward roused the opposition of a strong English party, headed by the great West-Saxon Earl Godwine, who had been lifted from an obscure origin to vast power in England by the favor of Canute, and whose son Harold held the earldom of East Anglia. "Edward, raised to the throne chiefly through the influence of Godwine, shortly married his daughter, and at first ruled England leaning on the assistance, and almost overshadowed by the power of the great earl." But Edward was Norman at heart and Godwine was thoroughly English; whence quarrels were not long in arising. They came to the crisis in 1051, by reason of a bloody tumult at Dover, provoked by insolent conduct on the part of a train of French visitors returning home from Edward's Court. Godwine was commanded to punish the townsmen of Dover and refused, whereupon the king obtained a sentence of outlawry, not only against the earl, but against his sons. "Godwine, obliged to bow before the united power of his enemies, was forced to fly the land. He went to Flanders with his son Swegen, while Harold and Leofwine went to Ireland, to be well received by Dermot king of Leinster. Many Englishmen seem to have followed him in his exile: for a year the foreign party was triumphant, and the first stage of the Norman Conquest complete. It was at this important crisis that William [Duke of Normandy], secure at home, visited his cousin Edward. … Friendly relations we may be sure had existed between, the two cousins, and if, as is not improbable, William had begun to hope that he might some day succeed to the English throne, what more favourable opportunity for a visit could have been found? Edward had lost all hopes of ever having any children. … William came, and it would seem, gained all that he desired. For this most probably was the date of some promise on Edward's part that William should succeed him on his death. The whole question is beset with difficulties. The Norman chroniclers alone mention it, and give no dates. Edward had no right to will away his crown, the disposition of which lay with King and Witenagemot (or assembly of Wise Men, the grandees of the country), and his last act was to reverse the promise, if ever given, in favour of Harold, Godwine's son. But were it not for some such promise, it is hard to see how William could have subsequently made the Normans and the world believe in the sacredness of his claim. … William returned to Normandy; but next year Edward was forced to change his policy." Godwine and his sons returned to England, with a fleet at their backs; London declared for them, and the king submitted himself to a reconciliation. {791} "The party of Godwine once more ruled supreme, and no mention was made of the gift of the crown to William. Godwine, indeed, did not long survive his restoration, but dying the year after, 1053, left his son Harold Earl of the West-Saxons and the most important man in England." King Edward the Confessor lived yet thirteen years after this time, during which period Earl Harold grew continually in influence and conspicuous headship of the English party. In 1062 it was Harold's misfortune to be shipwrecked on the coast of France, and he was made captive. Duke William of Normandy intervened in his behalf and obtained his release; and "then, as the price of his assistance, extorted an oath from Harold, soon to be used against him. Harold, it is said, became his man, promised to marry 'William's daughter Adela, to place Dover at once in William's hands, and support his claim to the English throne on Edward's death. By a stratagem of William's the oath was unwittingly taken on holy relics, hidden by the duke under the table on which Harold laid hands to swear, whereby, according to the notions of those days, the oath was rendered more binding." But two years later, when Edward the Confessor died, the English Witenagemot chose Harold to be king, disregarding Edward's promise and Harold's oath to the Duke of Normandy.

A. H. Johnson, The Normans in Europe, chapters 10 and 12.

ALSO IN: E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapters 7-10.

J. R. Green, The Conquest of England, chapter 10.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1066. Election and coronation of Harold.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1066 (spring and summer). Preparations of Duke William to enforce his claim to the English crown.

On receiving news of Edward's death and of Harold's acceptance of the crown, Duke William of Normandy lost no time in demanding from Harold the performance of the engagements to which he had pledged himself by his oath. Harold answered that the oath had no binding effect, by reason of the compulsion under which it was given; that the crown of England was not his to bestow, and that, being the chosen king, he could not marry without consent of the Witenagemot. When the Duke had this reply he proceeded with vigor to secure from his own knights and barons the support he would need for the enforcing of his rights, as he deemed them, to the sovereignty of the English realm. A great parliament of the Norman barons was held at Lillebonne, for the consideration of the matter. "In this memorable meeting there was much diversity of opinion. The Duke could not command his vassals to cross the sea; their tenures did not compel them to such service. William could only request their aid to fight his battles in England: many refused to engage in this dangerous expedition, and great debates arose. …William, who could not restore order, withdrew into another apartment: and, calling the barons to him one by one, he argued and reasoned with each of these sturdy vassals separately, and apart from the others. He exhausted all the arts of persuasion;—their present courtesy, he engaged, should not be tamed into a precedent, … and the fertile fields of England should be the recompense of their fidelity. Upon this prospect of remuneration, the barons assented. … William did not confine himself to his own subjects. All the adventurers and adventurous spirits of the neighbouring states were invited to join his standard. … To all, such promises were made as should best incite them to the enterprise—lands,—liveries,—money,—according to their rank and degree; and the port of St. Pierre-sur-Dive was appointed as the place where all the forces should assemble. William had discovered four most valid reasons for the prosecution of his offensive warfare against a neighbouring people:—the bequest made by his cousin;—the perjury of Harold;—the expulsion of the Normans, at the instigation, as he alleged, of Godwin;—and, lastly, the massacre of the Danes by Ethelred on St. Brice's Day. The alleged perjury of Harold enabled William to obtain the sanction of the Papal See. Alexander, the Roman Pontiff, allowed, nay, even urged him to punish the crime, provided England, when conquered, should be held as the fief of St. Peter. … Hildebrand, Archdeacon of the Church of Rome, afterwards the celebrated Pope Gregory VII., greatly assisted by the support which he gave to the decree. As a visible token of protection, the Pope transmitted to William the consecrated banner, the Gonfanon of St. Peter, and a precious ring, in which a relic of the chief of the Apostles was enclosed."

Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England, volume 3, pages 300-303.

"William convinced, or seemed to convince, all men out of England and Scandinavia that his claim to the English crown was just and holy, and that it was a good work to help him to assert it in arms. … William himself doubtless thought his own claim the better; he deluded himself as he deluded others. But we are more concerned with William as a statesman; and if it be statesmanship to adapt means to ends, whatever the ends may be, if it be statesmanship to make men believe the worse cause is the better, then no man ever showed higher statesmanship than William showed in his great pleading before all Western Christendom. … Others had claimed crowns; none had taken such pains to convince all mankind that the claim was a good one. Such an appeal to public opinion marks on one side a great advance."

E. A. Freeman, William the Conqueror, chapter 6.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1066 (September). The invasion of Tostig and Harold Hardrada and their overthrow at Stamford Bridge.

"Harold [the English king], as one of his misfortunes, had to face two powerful armies, in distant parts of the kingdom, almost at the same time. Rumours concerning the intentions and preparations of the Duke of Normandy soon reached England. During the greater part of the summer, Harold, at the head of a large naval and military force, had been on the watch along the English coast. But months passed away and no enemy became visible. William, it was said, had been apprised of the measures which had been taken to meet him. … Many supposed that, on various grounds, the enterprise had been abandoned. Provisions also, for so great an army, became scarce. The men began to disperse; and Harold, disbanding the remainder, returned to London. But the news now came that Harold Hardrada, king of Norway, had landed in the north, and was ravaging the country in conjunction with Tostig, Harold's elder brother. This event came from one of those domestic feuds which did so much at this juncture to weaken the power of the English. {792} Tostig had exercised his authority in Northumbria [as earl] in the most arbitrary manner, and had perpetrated atrocious crimes in furtherance of his objects. The result was an amount of disaffection which seems to have put it out of the power of his friends to sustain him. He had married a daughter of Baldwin, count of Flanders, and so became brother-in-law to the duke of Normandy. His brother Harold, as he affirmed, had not done a brother's part towards him, and he was more disposed, in consequence, to side with the Norman than with the Saxon in the approaching struggle. The army with which he now appeared consisted mostly of Norwegians and Flemings, and their avowed object was to divide not less than half the kingdom between them. … [The young Mercian earls Edwin and Morcar] summoned their forces … to repel the invasion under Tostig. Before Harold could reach the north, they hazarded an engagement at a place named Fulford, on the Ouse, not far from Bishopstoke. Their measures, however, were not wisely taken. They were defeated with great loss. The invaders seem to have regarded this victory as deciding the fate of that part of the kingdom. They obtained hostages at York, and then moved to Stamford Bridge, where they began the work of dividing the northern parts of England between them. But in the midst of these proceedings clouds of dust were seen in the distance. The first thought was, that the multitude which seemed to be approaching must be friends. But the illusion was soon at an end. The dust raised was by the march of an army of West Saxons under the command of Harold."

R. Vaughan, Revolutions of English History, book 3, chapter 1.

"Of the details of that awful day [Sept. 25, 1066] we have no authentic record. We have indeed a glorious description [in the Heimskringla of Snorro Sturleson], conceived in the highest spirit of the warlike poetry of the North; but it is a description which, when critically examined, proves to be hardly more worthy of belief than a battle-piece in the Iliad. … At least we know that the long struggle of that day was crowned by complete victory on the side of England. The leaders of the invading host lay each man ready for all that England had to give him, his seven feet of English ground. There Harold of Norway, the last of the ancient Sea-Kings, yielded up that fiery soul which had braved death in so many forms and in so many lands. … There Tostig, the son of Godwine, an exile and a traitor, ended, in crime and sorrow a life which had begun with promises not less bright than that of his royal brother. … The whole strength of the Northern army was broken; a few only escaped by flight, and found means to reach the ships at Riccall."

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 14, section. 4.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1066 (October). The Norman invasion and battle of Senlac or Hastings.

The battle of Stamford-bridge was fought on Monday, September 25, A. D. 1066. Three days later, on the Thursday, September 28, William of Normandy landed his more formidable army of invasion at Pevensey, on the extreme southeastern coast. The news of William's landing reached Harold, at York, on the following Sunday, it is thought, and his victorious but worn and wasted army was led instantly back, by forced marches, over the route it had traversed no longer than the week before. Waiting at London a few days for fresh musters to join him, the English king set out from that city October 12, and arrived on the following day at a point seven miles from the camp which his antagonist had entrenched at Hastings. Meantime the Normans had been cruelly ravaging the coast country, by way of provoking attack. Harold felt himself driven by the devastation they committed to face the issue of battle without waiting for a stronger rally. "Advancing near enough to the coast to check William's ravages, he intrenched himself on the hill of Senlac, a low spur of the Sussex Downs, near Hastings, in a position which covered London, and forced the Norman army to concentrate. With a host subsisting by pillage, to concentrate is to starve, and no alternative was left to William but a decisive victory or ruin. Along the higher ground that leads from Hastings the Duke led his men in the dim dawn of an October morning to the mound of Telham. It was from this point, that the Normans saw the host of the English gathered thickly behind a rough trench and a stockade on the height of Senlac. Marshy ground covered their right. … A general charge of the Norman foot opened the battle; in front rode the minstrel Taillefer, tossing his sword in the air and catching it again while he chanted the song of Roland. He was the first of the host who struck a blow, and he was the first to fall. The charge broke vainly on the stout stockade behind which the English warriors plied axe and javelin with fierce cries of 'Out, Out,' and the repulse of the Norman footmen was followed by the repulse of the Norman horse. Again and again the Duke rallied and led them to the fatal stockade. … His Breton troops, entangled in the marshy ground on his left, broke in disorder, and a cry arose, as the panic spread through the army, that the Duke was slain. 'I live,' shouted William as he tore off his helmet, 'and by God's help will conquer yet.' Maddened by repulse, the Duke spurred right at the standard; unhorsed, his terrible mace struck down Gyrth, the King's brother, and stretched Leofwine, a second of Godwine's sons, beside him; again dismounted, a blow from his hand hurled to the ground an unmannerly rider who would not lend him his steed. Amid the roar and tumult of the battle he turned the flight he had arrested into the means of victory. Broken as the stockade was by his desperate onset, the shield-wall of the warriors behind it still held the Normans at bay, when William by a feint of flight drew a part of the English force from their post of vantage. Turning on his disorderly pursuers, the Duke cut them to pieces, broke through the abandoned line, and was master of the central plateau, while French and Bretons made good their ascent on either flank. At three the hill seemed won, at six the fight still raged around the standard, where Harold's hus-carls stood stubbornly at bay on the spot marked afterward by the high altar of Battle Abbey. An order from the Duke at last brought his archers to the front, and their arrow-flight told heavily on the dense masses crowded around the King. As the sun went down, a shaft pierced Harold's right eye; he fell between the royal ensigns, and the battle closed with a desperate mélée over his corpse."

J. R. Green, A Short History of the English People, chapter 2, section 4.

ALSO IN: E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 15, section 4.

E. S. Creasy, Fifteen Decisive Battles of the World, chapter 8.

Wace, Roman de Rou, translated by Sir A. Malet.

{793}

England: A. D. 1066-1071. The Finishing of the Norman Conquest.

"It must be well understood that this great victory [of Senlac] did not make Duke William King nor put him in possession of the whole land. He still held only part of Sussex, and the people of the rest of the kingdom showed as yet no mind to submit to him. If England had had a leader left like Harold or Gyrth, William might have had to fight as many battles as Cnut had, and that with much less chance of winning in the end. For a large part of England fought willingly on Cnut's side, while William had no friends in England at all, except a few Norman settlers. William did not call himself King till he was regularly crowned more than two months later, and even then he had real possession only of about a third of the kingdom. It was more than three years before he had full possession of all. Still the great fight on Senlac none the less settled the fate of England. For after that fight William never met with any general resistance. … During the year 1067 William made no further conquests; all western and northern England remained unsubdued; but, except in Kent and Herefordshire, there was no fighting in any part of the land which had really submitted. The next two years were the time in which all England was really conquered. The former part of 1068 gave him the West. The latter part of that year gave him central and northern England as far as Yorkshire, the extreme north and northwest being still unsubdued. The attempt to win Durham in the beginning of 1069 led to two revolts at York. Later in the year all the north and west was again in arms, and the Danish fleet [of King Swegen, in league with the English patriots] came. But the revolts were put down one by one, and the great winter campaign of 1069-1070 conquered the still unsubdued parts, ending with the taking of Chester. Early in 1070 the whole land was for the first time in Williams's possession; there was no more fighting, and he was able to give his mind to the more peaceful part of his schemes, what we may call the conquest of the native Church by the appointment of foreign bishops. But in the summer of 1070 began the revolt of the Fenland, and the defence of Ely, which lasted till the autumn of 1071. After that William was full King everywhere without dispute. There was no more national resistance; there was no revolt of any large part of the country. … The conquest of the land, as far as fighting goes, was now finished."

E. A. Freeman, Short History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 8, section 9; chapter 10, section 16.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1067-1087. The spoils of the Conquest.

"The Norman army … remained concentrated around London [in the winter of 1067], and upon the southern and eastern coasts nearest Gaul. The partition of the wealth of the invaded territory now almost solely occupied them. Commissioners went over the whole extent of country in which the army had left garrisons; they took an exact inventory of property of every kind, public and private, carefully registering every particular. … A close inquiry was made into the names of all the English partisans of Harold, who had either died in battle, or survived the defeat, or by involuntary delays had been prevented from joining the royal standard. All the property of these three classes of men, lands, revenues, furniture, houses, were confiscated; the children of the first class were declared forever disinherited; the second class, were, in like manner, wholly dispossessed of their estates and property of every kind, and, says one of the Norman writers, were only too grateful for being allowed to retain their lives. Lastly, those who had not taken up arms were also despoiled of all they possessed, for having had the intention of taking up arms; but, by special grace, they were allowed to entertain the hope that after many long years of obedience and devotion to the foreign power, not they, indeed, but their sons, might perhaps obtain from their new masters some portion of their paternal heritage. Such was the law of the conquest, according to the unsuspected testimony of a man nearly contemporary with and of the race of the conquerors [Richard Lenoir or Noirot, bishop of Ely in the 12th century]. The immense product of this universal spoliation became the pay of those adventurers of every nation who had enrolled under the banner of the duke of Normandy. … Some received their pay in money, others had stipulated that they should have a Saxon wife, and William, says the Norman chronicle, gave them in marriage noble dames, great heiresses, whose husbands had fallen in the battle. One, only, among the knights who had accompanied the conqueror, claimed neither lands, gold, nor wife, and would accept none of the spoils of the conquered. His name was Guilbert Fitz-Richard: he said that he had accompanied his lord to England because such was his duty, but that stolen goods had no attraction for him."

A. Thierry, History of the Conquest of England by the Normans, book 4.

"Though many confiscations took place, in order to gratify the Norman army, yet the mass of property was left in the hands of its former possessors. Offices of high trust were bestowed upon Englishmen, even upon those whose family renown might have raised the most aspiring thoughts. But, partly through the insolence and injustice of William's Norman vassals, partly through the suspiciousness natural to a man conscious of having overturned the national government, his yoke soon became more heavy. The English were oppressed; they rebelled, were subdued, and oppressed again. … An extensive spoliation of property accompanied these revolutions. It appears by the great national survey of Domesday Book, completed near the close of the Conqueror's reign, that the tenants in capite of the crown were generally foreigners. … But inferior freeholders were much less disturbed in their estates than the higher. … The valuable labours of Sir Henry Ellis, in presenting us with a complete analysis of Domesday Book, afford an opportunity, by his list of mesne tenants at the time of the survey, to form some approximation to the relative numbers of English and foreigners holding manors under the immediate vassals of the crown. … Though I will not now affirm or deny that they were a majority, they [the English] form a large proportion of nearly 8,000 mesne tenants, who are summed up by the diligence of Sir Henry Ellis. … {794} This might induce us to suspect that, great as the spoliation must appear in modern times, and almost completely as the nation was excluded from civil power in the commonwealth, there is some exaggeration in the language of those writers who represent them as universal reduced to a state of penury and servitude. And this suspicion may be in some degree just. Yet those writers, and especial the most English in feeling of them all, M. Thierry, are warranted by the language of contemporary authorities."

H. Hallam, The Middle Ages. chapter 8, part 2.

"By right of conquest William claimed nothing. He had come to take his crown, and he had unluckily met with some opposition in taking it. The crown-lands of King Edward passed of course to his successor. As for the lands of other men, in William's theory all was forfeited to the crown. The lawful heir had been driven to seek his kingdom in arms; no Englishman had helped him; many Englishmen had fought against him. All then were directly or indirectly traitors. The King might lawfully deal with the lands of all as his own. … After the general redemption of lands, gradually carried out as William's power advanced, no general blow was dealt at Englishmen as such. … Though the land had never seen so great a confiscation, or one so largely for the behoof of foreigners, yet there was nothing new in the thing itself. … Confiscation of land was the every-day punishment for various public and private crimes. … Once granting the original wrong of his coming at all and bringing a host of strangers with him, there is singularly little to blame in the acts of the Conqueror."

E. A. Freeman, William the Conqueror, pages 102-104, 126.

"After each effort [of revolt] the royal hand was laid on more heavily: more and more land changed owners, and with the change of owners the title changed. The complicated and unintelligible irregularities of the Anglo-Saxon tenures were exchanged for the simple and uniform feudal theory. … It was not the change from alodial to feudal so much as from confusion to order. The actual amount of dispossession was no doubt greatest in the higher ranks."

W. Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 9, section. 95.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1069-1071. The Camp of Refuge in the Fens.

"In the northern part of Cambridgeshire there is a vast extent of low and marshy land, intersected in every direction by rivers. All the waters from the centre of England which do not flow into the Thames or the Trent, empty themselves into these marshes, which in the latter end of autumn overflow, cover the land, and are charged with fogs and vapours. A portion of this damp and swampy country was then, as now, called the Isle of Ely; another the Isle of Thorney, a third the Isle of Croyland. This district, almost a moving bog, impracticable for cavalry and for soldiers heavily armed, had more than once served as a refuge for the Saxons in the time of the Danish conquest; towards the close of the year 1069 it became the rendezvous of several bands of patriots from various quarters, assembling against the Normans. Former chieftains, now dispossessed of their lands, successively repaired hither with their clients, some by land, others by water, by the mouths of the rivers. They here constructed entrenchments of earth and wood, and established an extensive armed station, which took the name of the Camp of Refuge. The foreigners at first hesitated to attack them amidst their rushes and willows, and thus gave them time to transmit messages in every direction, at home and abroad, to the friends of old England. Become powerful, they undertook a partisan war by land and by sea, or, as the conquerors called it, robbery and piracy."

A. Thierry, History of the Conquest of England by the Normans, book 4.

"Against the new tyranny the free men of the Danelagh and of Northumbria rose. If Edward the descendant of Cerdic had been little to them, William the descendant of Rollo was still less. … So they rose, and fought; too late, it may be, and without unity or purpose; and they were worsted by an enemy who had both unity and purpose; whom superstition, greed, and feudal discipline kept together, at least in England, in one compact body of unscrupulous and terrible confederates. And theirs was a land worth fighting for—a good land and large: from Humber mouth inland to the Trent and merry Sherwood, across to Chester and the Dee, round by Leicester and the five burghs of the Danes; eastward again to Huntingdon and Cambridge (then a poor village on the site of an old Roman town); and then northward again into the wide fens, the land of the Girvii, where the great central plateau of England slides into the sea, to form, from the rain and river washings of eight shires, lowlands of a fertility inexhaustible, because ever-growing to this day. Into those fens, as into a natural fortress, the Anglo-Danish noblemen crowded down instinctively from the inland to make their last stand against the French. … Most gallant of them all, and their leader in the fatal struggle against William, was Hereward the Wake, Lord of Bourne and ancestor of that family of Wake, the arms of whom appear on the cover of this book."

_C. Kingsley, Hereward the Wake, Prelude._

The defence of the Camp of Refuge was maintained until October, 1071, when the stronghold is said to have been betrayed by the monks of Ely, who grew tired of the disturbance of their peace. But Hereward did not submit. He made his escape and various accounts are given of his subsequent career and his fate.

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 20, section 1.

ALSO IN: C. M. Yonge, Cameos from English History, first series, chapter 8.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1085-1086. The Domesday Survey and Domesday Book.

"The distinctive characteristic of the Norman kings [of England] was their exceeding greed, and the administrative system was so directed as to insure the exaction of the highest possible imposts. From this bent originated the great registration that William [the Conqueror] caused to be taken of all lands, whether holden in fee or at rent; as well as the census of the entire population. The respective registers were preserved in the Cathedral of Winchester, and by the Norman were designated 'Ie grand rôle,' 'Ie rôle royal,' 'Ie rôle de Winchester'; but by the Saxons were termed 'the Book of the Last Judgment,' 'Doomesdaege Boc,' 'Doomsday Book.'"

E. Fischel, The English Constitution, chapter 1.

For a different statement see the following: "The recently attempted invasion from Denmark seems to have impressed the king with the desirability of· an accurate knowledge of his resources, military and fiscal, both of which were based upon the land. The survey was completed in the remarkably short space of a single year [1085-1086]. In each shire the commissioners made their inquiries by the oaths of the sheriffs, the barons and their Norman retainers, the parish priests, the reeves and six ceorls of each township. {795} The result of their labours was a minute description of all the lands of the kingdom, with the exception of the four northern counties of Northumberland, Cumberland, Westmoreland and Durham, and part of what is now Lancashire. It enumerates the tenants-in-chief, under tenants, freeholders, villeins, and serfs, describes the nature and obligations of the tenures, the value in the time of King Eadward, at the conquest, and at the date of the survey, and, which gives the key to the whole inquiry, informs the king whether any advance in the valuation could be made. … The returns were transmitted to Winchester, digested, and recorded in two volumes which have descended to posterity under the name of Domesday Book. The name itself is probably derived from Domus Dei, the appellation of a chapel or vault of the cathedral at Winchester in which the survey was at first deposited."

T. P. Taswell-Langmead, English Constitutional History, chapter 2.

"Of the motives which induced the Conqueror and his council to undertake the Survey we have very little reliable information, and much that has been written on the subject savours more of a deduction from the result than of a knowledge of the immediate facts. We have the statement from the Chartulary of St. Mary's, Worcester, of the appointment of the Commissioners by the king himself to make the Survey. We have also the heading of the 'Inquisitio Eliensis' which purports to give, and probably does truly give, the items of the articles of inquiry, which sets forth as follows:

I. What is the manor called? II. Who held it in the time of King Edward? III. Who now holds it? IV. How many hides? V. What teams are there in demesne? VI. What teams of the men? VII. What villans? VIII. What cottagers? IX. What bondmen? X. What freemen and what sokemen? XI. What woods? XII. What meadow? XIII. What pastures? XIV. What mills? XV. What fisheries? XVI. What is added or taken away? XVII. What the whole was worth together, and what now? XVIII. How much each freeman or sokeman had or has?

All this to be estimated three times, viz. in the time of King Edward, and when King William gave it, and how it is now, and if more can be had for it than has been had. This document is, I think, the best evidence we have of the form of the inquiry, and it tallies strictly with the form of the various returns as we now have them. … An external evidence failing, we are driven back to the Record itself for evidence of the Conqueror's intention in framing it, and anyone who carefully studies it will be driven to the inevitable conclusion that it was framed and designed in the spirit of perfect equity. Long before the Conquest, in the period between the death of Alfred and that of Edward the Confessor, the kingdom had been rapidly declining into a state of disorganisation and decay. The defence of the kingdom and the administration of justice and keeping of the peace could not be maintained by the king's revenues. The tax of Danegeld, instituted by Ethelred at first to buy peace of the Danes, and afterwards to maintain the defence of the kingdom, had more and more come to be levied unequally and unfairly. The Church had obtained enormous remissions of its liability, and its possessions were constantly increasing. Powerful subjects had obtained further remission, and the tax had come to be irregularly collected and was burdensome upon the smaller holders and their poor tenants, while the nobility and the Church escaped with a small share in the burden. In short the tax had come to be collected upon an old and uncorrected assessment. It had probably dwindled in amount, and at last had been ultimately remitted by Edward the Confessor. Anarchy and confusion appears to have reigned throughout the realm. The Conqueror was threatened with foreign invasion, and pressed on all sides by complaints of unfair taxation on the part of his subjects. Estates had been divided and subdivided, and the incidence of the tax was unequal and unjust. He had to face the difficulties before him and to count the resources of his kingdom for its defence, and the means of doing so were not at hand. In this situation his masterly and order-loving Norman mind instituted this great inquiry, but ordered it to be taken (as I maintain the study of the Book will show) in the most public and open manner, and with the utmost impartiality, with the view of levying the taxes of the kingdom equally and fairly upon all. The articles of his inquiry show that he was prepared to study the resources of his kingdom and consider the liability of his subjects from every possible point of view."

_Stuart Moore, On the Study of Domesday Book (Domesday Studies, volume 1)._

"Domesday Book is a vast mine of materials for the social and economical history of our country, a mine almost inexhaustible, and to a great extent as yet unworked. Among national documents it is unique. There is nothing that approaches it in interest and value except the Landnámabók, which records the names of the original settlers in Iceland and the designations they bestowed upon the places where they settled, and tells us how the island was taken up and apportioned among them. Such a document for England, describing the way in which our forefathers divided the territory they conquered, and how 'they called the lands after their own names,' would indeed be priceless. But the Domesday Book does, indirectly, supply materials for the history of the English as well as of the Norman Conquest, for it records not only how the lands of England were divided among the Norman host which conquered at Senlac, but it gives us also the names of the Saxon and Danish holders who possessed the lands before the great battle which changed all the future history of England, and enables us to trace the extent of the transfer of the land from Englishmen to Normans; it shows how far the earlier owners were reduced to tenants, and by its enumeration of the classes of population—freemen, sokemen, villans, cottiers, and slaves—it indicates the nature and extent of the earlier conquests. Thus we learn that in the West of England slaves were numerous, while in the East they were almost unknown, and hence we gather that in the districts first subdued the British population was exterminated or driven off, while in the West it was reduced to servitude."

_I. Taylor, Domesday Survivals (Domesday Studies, volume 1)._

ALSO IN: E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest, chapters 21-22 and appendix A in volume 5.

_W. de Gray Birch, Domesday Book._

_F. W. Maitland, Domesday Book (Dict. Pol. Econ.)._

{796}

ENGLAND: A. D. 1087-1135. The sons of the Conqueror and their reigns.

William the Conqueror, when he died, left Normandy and Maine to his elder son Robert, the English crown to his stronger son, William, called Rufus, or the Red, and only a legacy of £5,000 to his third son, Henry, called Beauclerc, or The Scholar. The Conqueror's half-brother, Odo, soon began to persuade the Norman barons in England to displace William Rufus and plant Robert on the English throne. "The claim of Robert to succeed his father in England, was supported by the respected rights of primogeniture. But the Anglo-Saxon crown had always been elective. … Primogeniture … gave at that time no right to the crown of England, independent of the election of its parliamentary assembly. Having secured this title, the power of Rufus rested on the foundation most congenial with the feelings and institutions of the nation, and from their partiality received a popular support, which was soon experienced to be impregnable. The danger compelled the king to court his people by promises to diminish their grievances; which drew 30,000 knights spontaneously to his banners, happy to have got a sovereign distinct from hated Normandy. The invasion of Robert, thus resisted by the English people, effected nothing but some temporary devastations. … The state of Normandy, under Robert's administration, for some time furnished an ample field for his ambitious uncle's activity. It continued to exhibit a negligent government in its most vicious form. … Odo's politics only facilitated the Reannexation of Normandy to England. But this event was not completed in William's reign. When he retorted the attempt of Robert, by an invasion of Normandy, the great barons of both countries found themselves endangered by the conflict, and combined their interest to persuade their respective sovereigns to a fraternal pacification. The most important article of their reconciliation provided, that if either should die without issue, the survivor should inherit his dominions. Hostilities were then abandoned; mutual courtesies ensued; and Robert visited England as his brother's guest. The mind of William the Red King, was cast in no common mould. It had all the greatness and the defects of the chivalric character, in its strong but rudest state. Impetuous, daring, original, magnanimous, and munificent; it was also harsh, tyrannical, and selfish; conceited of its own powers, loose in its moral principles, and disdaining consequences. … While Lanfranc lived, William had a counsellor whom he respected, and whose good opinion he was careful to preserve. … The death of Lanfranc removed the only man whose wisdom and influence could have meliorated the king's ardent, but undisciplined temper. It was his misfortune, on this event, to choose for his favourite minister, an able, but an unprincipled man. … The minister advised the king, on the death of every prelate, to seize all his temporal possessions. … The great revenues obtained from this violent innovation, tempted both the king and his minister to increase its productiveness, by deferring the nomination of every new prelate for an indefinite period. Thus he kept many bishoprics, and among them the see of Canterbury, vacant for some years; till a severe illness alarming his conscience, he suddenly appointed Anselm to the dignity; … His disagreement with Anselm soon began. The prelate injudiciously began the battle by asking the king to restore, not only the possessions of his see, which were enjoyed by Lanfranc—a fair request—but also the lands which had before that time belonged to it; a demand that, after so many years alteration of property, could not be complied with without great disturbance of other persons. Anselm also exacted of the king that in all things which concerned the church, his counsels should be taken in preference to every other. … Though Anselm, as a literary man, was an honour and a benefit to his age, yet his monastic and studious habits prevented him from having that social wisdom, that knowledge of human nature, that discreet use of his own virtuous firmness, and that mild management of turbulent power, which might have enabled him to have exerted much of the influence of Lanfranc over the mind of his sovereign. … Anselm, seeing the churches and abbeys oppressed in their property, by the royal orders, resolved to visit Rome, and to concert with the pope the measures most adapted to overawe the king. … William threatened, that if he did go to Rome, he would seize all the possessions of the archbishopric. Anselm declared, that he would rather travel naked and on foot, than desist from his resolution; and he went to Dover with his pilgrim's staff and wallet. He was searched before his departure, that he might carry away no money, and was at last allowed to sail. But the king immediately executed his threat, and sequestered all his lands and property. This was about three years before the end of the reign. … Anselm continued in Italy till William's death. The possession of Normandy was a leading object of William's ambition, and he gradually attained a preponderance in it. His first invasion compelled Robert to make some cessions; these were increased on his next attack: and when Robert determined to join the Crusaders, he mortgaged the whole of Normandy to William for three years, for 10,000 marks. He obtained the usual success of a powerful invasion in Wales. The natives were overpowered on the plains, but annoyed the invaders in their mountains. He marched an army against Malcolm, king of Scotland, to punish his incursions. Robert advised the Scottish king to conciliate William; Malcolm yielded to his counsel and accompanied Robert to the English court, but on his return, was treacherously attacked by Mowbray, the earl of Northumbria, and killed. William regretted the perfidious cruelty of the action. … The government of William appears to have been beneficial, both to England and Normandy. To the church it was oppressive. … He had scarcely reigned twelve years, when he fell by a violent death." He was hunting with a few attendants in the New Forest. "It happened that, his friends dispersing in pursuit of game, he was left alone, as some authorities intimate, with Walter Tyrrel, a noble knight, whom he had brought out of France, and admitted to his table, and to whom he was much attached. As the sun was about to set, a stag passed before the king, who discharged an arrow at it. … At the same moment, another stag crossing, Walter Tyrrel discharged an arrow at it. At this precise juncture, a shaft struck the king, and buried itself in his breast. He fell, without a word, upon the arrow, and expired on the spot. … It seems to be a questionable point, whether Walter Tyrrel actually shot the king. That opinion was certainly the most prevalent at the time, both here and in France. … {797} None of the authorities intimate a belief of a purposed assassination; and, therefore, it would be unjust now to impute it to anyone. … Henry was hunting in a different part of the New Forest when Rufus fell. … He left the body to the casual charity of the passing rustic, and rode precipitately to Winchester, to seize the royal treasure. … He obtained the treasure, and proceeding hastily to London, was on the following Sunday, the third day after William's death, elected king, and crowned. … He began his reign by removing the unpopular agents of his unfortunate brother. He recalled Anselm, and conciliated the clergy. He gratified the nation, by abolishing the oppressive exactions of the previous reign. He assured many benefits to the barons, and by a charter, signed on the day of his coronation, restored to the people their Anglo-Saxon laws and privileges, as amended by his father; a measure which ended the pecuniary oppressions of his brother, and which favoured the growing liberties of the nation. The Conqueror had noticed Henry's expanding intellect very early; had given him the best education which the age could supply. … He became the most learned monarch of his day, and acquired and deserved the surname of Beauclerc, or fine scholar. No wars, no cares of state, could afterwards deprive him of his love of literature. The nation soon felt the impulse and the benefit of their sovereign's intellectual taste. He acceded at the age of 32, and gratified the nation by marrying and crowning Mathilda, daughter of the sister of Edgar Etheling by Malcolm the king of Scotland, who had been waylaid and killed."

S. Turner, History of England during the Middle Ages, volume 1, chapters 5-6.

The Norman lords, hating the "English ways" of Henry, were soon in rebellion, undertaking to put Robert of Normandy (who had returned from the Crusade) in his place. The quarrel went on till the battle of Tenchebray, 1106, in which Robert was defeated and taken prisoner. He was imprisoned for life. The duchy and the kingdom were again united. The war in Normandy led to a war with Louis king of France, who had espoused Robert's cause. It was ended by the battle of Brêmule, 1119, where the French suffered a bad defeat. In Henry's reign all south Wales was conquered; but the north Welsh princes held out. Another expedition against them was preparing, when, in 1135, Henry fell ill at the Castle of Lions in Normandy, and died.

_E. A. Freeman, The Reign of William Rufus and accession of Henry I._

ALSO IN: Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England, volume 4.

ENGLAND: A. D. 1135-1154. The miserable reign of Stephen. Civil war, anarchy and wretchedness in England. The transition to hereditary monarchy.

After the death of William the Conqueror, the English throne was occupied in succession by two of his sons, William II., or William Rufus (1087-1100), and Henry I., or Henry Beauclerk (1100-1135). The latter outlived his one legitimate son, and bequeathed the crown at his death to his daughter, Matilda, widow of the Emperor Henry V. of Germany and now wife of Geoffrey, Count of Anjou. This latter marriage had been very unpopular, both in England and Normandy, and a strong party refused to recognize the Empress Matilda, as she was commonly called. This party maintained the superior claims of the family of Adela, daughter of William the Conqueror, who had married the Earl of Blois. Naturally their choice would have fallen upon Theobald of Blois, the eldest of Adela's sons; but his more enterprising younger brother Stephen supplanted him. Hastening to England, and winning the favour of the citizens of London, Stephen secured the royal treasure and persuaded a council of peers to elect him king. A most grievous civil war ensued, which lasted for nineteen terrible years, during which long period there was anarchy and great wretchedness in England. "The land was filled with castles, and the castles with armed banditti, who seem to have carried on their extortions under colour of the military commands bestowed by Stephen on every petty castellan. Often the very belfries of churches were fortified. On the poor lay the burden of building these strongholds; the rich suffered in their donjeons. Many were starved to death, and these were the happiest. Others were flung into cellars filled with reptiles, or hung up by the thumbs till they told where their treasures were concealed, or crippled in frames which did not suffer them to move, or held just resting on the ground by sharp iron collars round the neck. The Earl of Essex used to send out spies who begged from door to door, and then reported in what houses wealth was still left; the alms-givers were presently seized and imprisoned. The towns that could no longer pay the blackmail demanded from them were burned. … Sometimes the peasants, maddened by misery, crowded to the roads that led from a field of battle, and smote down the fugitives without any distinction of sides. The bishops cursed vainly, when the very churches were burned and monks robbed. 'To till the ground was to plough the sea; the earth bare no corn, for the land was all laid waste by such deeds, and men said openly that Christ slept, and his saints. Such things, and more than we can say, suffered we nineteen winters for our sins' (A. S. Chronicle). … Many soldiers, sickened with the unnatural war, put on the white cross and sailed for a nobler battle-field in the East." As Matilda's son Henry—afterwards Henry II.—grew to manhood, the feeling in his favor gained strength and his party made head against the weak and incompetent Stephen. Finally, in 1153, peace was brought about under an agreement "that Stephen should wear the crown till his death, and Henry receive the homage of the lords and towns of the realm as heir apparent." Stephen died the next year and Henry came to the throne with little further dispute.

C. H. Pearson, History of England During the Early and Middle Ages, chapter 28.

"Stephen, as a king, was an admitted failure. I cannot, however, but view with suspicion the causes assigned to his failure by often unfriendly chroniclers. That their criticisms had some foundation it would not be possible to deny. But in the first place, had he enjoyed better fortune, we should have heard less of his incapacity, and in the second, these writers, not enjoying the same stand-point as ourselves, were, I think, somewhat inclined to mistake effects for causes. … His weakness throughout his reign … was due to two causes, each supplementing the other. {798} These were—(1) the essentially unsatisfactory character of his position, as resting, virtually, on a compact that he should be king so long only as he gave satisfaction to those who had placed him on the throne; (2) the existence of a rival claim, hanging over him from the first, like the sword of Damocles, and affording a lever by which the malcontents could compel him to adhere to the original understanding, or even to submit to further demands. … The position of his opponents throughout his reign would seem to have rested on two assumptions. The first, that a breach, on his part, of the 'contract' justified ipso facto revolt on theirs; the second, that their allegiance to the king was a purely feudal relation, and, as such, could be thrown off at any moment by performing the famous diffidatio. This essential feature of continental feudalism had been rigidly excluded by the Conqueror. He had taken advantage, as is well known, of his position as an English king, to extort an allegiance from his Norman followers more absolute than he could have claimed as their feudal lord. It was to Stephen's peculiar position that was due the introduction for a time of this pernicious principle into England. … Passing now to the other point, the existence of a rival claim, we approach a subject of great interest, the theory of the succession to the English Crown at what may be termed the crisis of transition from the principle of election (within the royal house) to that of hereditary right according to feudal rules. For the right view on this subject, we turn, as ever, to Dr. Stubbs, who, with his usual sound judgment, writes thus of the Norman period:—'The crown then continued to be elective. … But whilst the elective principle was maintained in its fulness where it was necessary or possible to maintain it, it is quite certain that the right of inheritance, and inheritance as primogeniture, was recognized as coordinate. … The measures taken by Henry I. for securing the crown to his own children, whilst they prove the acceptance of the hereditary principle, prove also the importance of strengthening it by the recognition of the elective theory.' Mr. Freeman, though writing with a strong bias in favour of the elective theory, is fully justified in his main argument, namely, that Stephen 'was no usurper in the sense in which the word is vulgarly used.' He urges, apparently with perfect truth, that Stephen's offence, in the eyes of his contemporaries, lay in his breaking his solemn oath, and not in his supplanting a rightful heir. And he aptly suggests that the wretchedness of his reign may have hastened the growth of that new belief in the divine right of the heir to the throne, which first appears under Henry II., and in the pages of William of Newburgh. So far as Stephen is concerned the case is clear enough. But we have also to consider the Empress. On what did she base her claim? I think that, as implied in Dr. Stubbs' words, she based it on a double, not a single, ground. She claimed the kingdom as King Henry's daughter ('regis Henrici filia '), but she claimed it further because the succession had been assured to her by oath ('sibi juratum') as such. It is important to observe that the oath in question can in no way be regarded in the light of an election. … The Empress and her partisans must have largely, to say the least, based their claim on her right to the throne as her father's heir, and … she and they appealed to the oath as the admission and recognition of that right, rather than as partaking in any way whatever of the character of a free election. … The sex of the Empress was the drawback to her claim. Had her brother lived, there can be little question that he would, as a matter of course, have succeeded his father at his death. Or again, had Henry II. been old enough to succeed his grandfather, he would, we may be sure, have done so. … Broadly speaking, to sum up the evidence here collected, it tends to the belief that the obsolescence of the right of election to the English crown presents considerable analogy to that of canonical election in the case of English bishoprics. In both cases a free election degenerated into a mere assent to a choice already made. We see the process of change already in full operation when Henry I. endeavours to extort beforehand from the magnates their assent to his daughter's succession, and when they subsequently complain of this attempt to dictate to them on the subject. We catch sight of it again when his daughter bases her claim to the crown, not on any free election, but on her rights as her father's heir, confirmed by the above assent. We see it, lastly, when Stephen, though owing his crown to election, claims to rule by Divine right ('Dei gratia'), and attempts to reduce that election to nothing more than a national 'assent' to his succession. Obviously, the whole question turned on whether the election was to be held first, or was to be a mere ratification of a choice already made. … In comparing Stephen with his successor the difference between their circumstances has been insufficiently allowed for. At Stephen's accession, thirty years of legal and financial oppression had rendered unpopular the power of the Crown, and had led to an impatience of official restraint which opened the path to a feudal reaction: at the accession of Henry, on the contrary, the evils of an enfeebled administration and of feudalism run mad had made all men eager for the advent of a strong king, and had prepared them to welcome the introduction of his centralizing administrative reforms. He anticipated the position of the house of Tudor at the close of the Wars of the Roses, and combined with it the advantages which Charles II. derived from the Puritan tyranny. Again, Stephen was hampered from the first by his weak position as a king on sufferance, whereas Henry came to his work unhampered by compact or concession. Lastly, Stephen was confronted throughout by a rival claimant, who formed a splendid rallying-point for all the discontent in his realm: but Henry reigned for as long as Stephen without a rival to trouble him; and when he found at length a rival in his own son, a claim far weaker than that which had threatened his predecessor seemed likely for a time to break his power as effectually as the followers of the Empress had broken that of Stephen. He may only, indeed, have owed his escape to that efficient administration which years of strength and safety had given him the time to construct. It in no way follows from these considerations that Henry was not superior to Stephen; but it does, surely, suggest itself that Stephen's disadvantages were great, and that had he enjoyed better fortune, we might have heard less of his defects."

J. H. Round, Geoffrey de Mandeville, chapter. 1.

ALSO IN: Mrs. J. R. Green, Henry the Second, chapter 1.

See, also, STANDARD, BATTLE OF THE (A. D. 1137).

{799}

ENGLAND: A. D. 1154-1189. Henry II., the first of the Angevin kings (Plantagenets) and his empire.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us