A GENERAL HISTORY FOR COLLEGES AND HIGH SCHOOLS. 

BYP. V. N. MYERS, A. M. 

[Illustration: VIEW OF THE ATTIC PLAINS, WITH A GLIMPSE OF THE ACROPOLISOF ATHENS. --Frontispiece. ]

PREFACE. 

This volume is based upon my _Ancient History_ and _Mediæval and ModernHistory_. In some instances I have changed the perspective and theproportions of the narrative; but in the main, the book is constructedupon the same lines as those drawn for the earlier works. In dealing withso wide a range of facts, and tracing so many historic movements, I cannothope that I have always avoided falling into error. I have, however, takenthe greatest care to verify statements of fact, and to give the latestresults of discovery and criticism. 

Considering the very general character of the present work, an enumerationof the books that have contributed facts to my narration, or have helpedto mould my views on this or that subject, would hardly be looked for; yetI wish here to acknowledge my special indebtedness, in the earlier partsof the history, to the works of George Rawlinson, Sayce, Wilkinson, Brugsch, Grote, Curtius, Mommsen, Merivale, and Leighton; and in the laterparts, and on special periods, to the writings of Hodgkin, Emerton, Ranke, Freeman, Michaud, Bryce, Symonds, Green (J. R. ), Motley, Hallam, Thiers, Lecky, Baird, and Müller. 

Several of the colored maps, with which the book will be found liberallyprovided, were engraved especially for my _Ancient History_; but thelarger number are authorized reproductions of charts accompanyingProfessor Freeman's _Historical Geography of Europe_. The Roman maps wereprepared for Professor William F. Allen's _History of Rome_, which is tobe issued soon, and it is to his courtesy that I am indebted for theiruse. 

The illustrations have been carefully selected with reference to theirauthenticity and historical truthfulness. Many of those in the Orientaland Greek part of the work are taken from Oscar Jäger's _Weltgeschichte_;while most of those in the Roman portion are from Professor Allen'sforthcoming work on Rome, to which I have just referred, the author havingmost generously granted me the privilege of using them in my work, notwithstanding it is to appear in advance of his. 

Further acknowledgments of indebtedness are also due from me to manyfriends who have aided me with their scholarly suggestions and criticism. My warmest thanks are particularly due to Professor W. F. Allen, of theUniversity of Wisconsin; to Dr. E. W. Coy, Principal of Hughes High School, Cincinnati; to Professor William A. Merrill, of Miami University; and toMr. D. H. Montgomery, author of _The Leading Facts of History_ series. 

P. V. N. M. COLLEGE HILL, OHIO, July, 1889. 

TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

PREFACELIST OF MAPSGENERAL INTRODUCTION: THE RACES AND THEIR EARLY MIGRATIONS

PART I. 

ANCIENT HISTORY. 

SECTION I. --THE EASTERN NATIONS. 

CHAPTER I. India and China. 1. India. 2. China. II. Egypt. 1. Political History. 2. Religion, Arts, and General Culture. III. Chaldæa. 1. Political History. 2. Arts and General Culture. IV. Assyria. 1. Political History. 2. Religion, Arts, and General Culture. V. Babylonia. VI. The Hebrews. VII. The Phoenicians. VIII. The Persian Empire. 1. Political History. 2. Government, Religion, and Arts. 

SECTION II. --GRECIAN HISTORY. 

 IX. The Land and the People. X. The Legendary or Heroic Age. XI. Religion of the Greeks. XII. Age of the Tyrants and of Colonization: the Early Growth of Sparta and of Athens. 1. Age of the Tyrants and of Colonization. 2. The Growth of Sparta. 3. The Growth of Athens. XIII. The Græco-Persian Wars. XIV. Period of Athenian Supremacy. XV. The Peloponnesian War: the Spartan and the Theban Supremacy. 1. The Peloponnesian War. 2. The Spartan and the Theban Supremacy. XVI. Period of Macedonian Supremacy: Empire of Alexander. XVII. States formed from the Empire of Alexander. XVIII. Greek Architecture, Sculpture, and Painting. 1. Architecture. 2. Sculpture and Painting. XIX. Greek Literature. 1. Epic and Lyric Poetry. 2. The Drama and Dramatists. 3. History and Historians. 4. Oratory. XX. Greek Philosophy and Science. XXI. Social Life of the Greeks. 

SECTION III. --ROMAN HISTORY. 

 XXII. The Roman Kingdom. XXIII. The Early Roman Republic: Conquest of Italy. XXIV. The First Punic War. XXV. The Second Punic War. XXVI. The Third Punic War. XXVII. The Last Century of the Roman Republic. XXVIII. The Last Century of the Roman Republic (_concluded_). XXIX. The Roman Empire (from 31 B. C. To A. D. 180). XXX. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire in the West (A. D. 180-476). XXXI. Roman Civilization. 1. Architecture. 2. Literature, Philosophy, and Law. 3. Social Life. 

PART II. 

MEDIÆVAL AND MODERN HISTORY. 

INTRODUCTION. 

SECTION I. --MEDIÆVAL HISTORY. 

FIRST PERIOD. --THE DARK AGES. (From the Fall of Rome, A. D. 476, to the Eleventh Century. )

 XXXII. Migrations and Settlements of the Teutonic Tribes. XXXIII. The Conversion of the Barbarians. XXXIV. Fusion of the Latin and Teutonic Peoples. XXXV. The Roman Empire in the East. XXXVI. Mohammed and the Saracens. XXXVII. Charlemagne and the Restoration of the Empire in the West. XXXVIII. The Northmen. XXXIX. Rise of the Papal Power. 

SECOND PERIOD. --THE AGE OF REVIVAL. (From the opening of the Eleventh Century to the Discovery of America byColumbus, in 1492. )

 XL. Feudalism and Chivalry. 1. Feudalism. 2. Chivalry. XLI. The Norman Conquest of England. XLII. The Crusades. 1. Introductory: Causes of the Crusades. 2. The First Crusade. 3. The Second Crusade. 4. The Third Crusade. 5. The Fourth Crusade. 6. Close of the Crusades: Their Results. XLIII. Supremacy of the Papacy: Decline of its Temporal Power. XLIV. Conquests of the Turanian Tribes. XLV. Growth of the Towns: The Italian City-Republics. XLVI. The Revival of Learning. XLVII. Growth of the Nations: Formation of National Governments and Literatures. 1. England. 2. France. 3. Spain. 4. Germany. 5. Russia. 6. Italy. 7. The Northern Countries. 

SECTION II. MODERN HISTORY. 

INTRODUCTION

THIRD PERIOD. --THE ERA OF THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION. (From the Discovery of America to the Peace of Westphalia, in 1648. )

 XLVIII. The Beginnings of the Reformation under Luther. XLIX. The Ascendency of Spain. 1. Reign of the Emperor Charles V. 2. Spain under Philip II. L. The Tudors and the English Reformation. 1. Introductory. 2. The Reign of Henry VII. 3. England severed from the Papacy by Henry VIII. 4. Changes in the Creed and Ritual under Edward VI. 5. Reaction under Mary. 6. Final Establishment of Protestantism under Elizabeth. LI. The Revolt of the Netherlands: Rise of the Dutch Republic. LII. The Huguenot Wars in France. LIII. The Thirty Years' War. 

FOURTH PERIOD. --THE ERA OF THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION. (From the Peace of Westphalia, in 1648, to the present time. )

 LIV. The Ascendency of France under the Absolute Government of Louis XIV. LV. England under the Stuarts: The English Revolution. 1. The First Two Stuarts. 2. The Commonwealth. 3. The Restored Stuarts. 4. The Orange-Stuarts. 5. England under the Earlier Hanoverians. LVI. The Rise of Russia: Peter the Great. LVII. The Rise of Prussia: Frederick the Great. LVIII. The French Revolution. 1. Causes of the Revolution: The States-General of 1789. 2. The National, or Constituent Assembly. 3. The Legislative Assembly. 4. The National Convention. 5. The Directory. LIX. The Consulate and the First Empire: France since the Second Restoration. 1. The Consulate and the Empire. 2. France since the Second Restoration. LX. Russia since the Congress of Vienna. LXI. German Freedom and Unity. LXII. Liberation and Unification of Italy. LXIII. England since the Congress of Vienna. 1. Progress towards Democracy. 2. Expansion of the Principle of Religious Equality. 3. Growth of the British Empire in the East. 

CONCLUSION: THE NEW AGE. INDEX, PRONOUNCING VOCABULARY, AND GLOSSARY

LIST OF COLORED MAPS. 

1. Ancient Egypt2. The Tigris and the Euphrates3. Lydia, Media, and Babylonia, c. B. C. 5504. Greece and the Greek Colonies5. Greece in the 5th Century B. C. 6. Dominions and Dependencies of Alexander, c. B. C. 3237. Kingdoms of the Successors of Alexander, c. B. C. 3008. Italy before the Growth of the Roman Power9. Mediterranean Lands at the Beginning of Second Punic War10. Roman Dominions at the End of the Mithridatic War, B. C. 6411. The Roman Empire under Trajan, A. D. 11712. Roman Empire divided into Prefectures13. Europe in the Reign of Theodoric, c. A. D. 50014. Europe in the Time of Charles the Great, 81415. The Western Empire as divided at Verdun, 84316. Spanish Kingdoms, 136017. Central Europe, 136018. The Spanish Kingdoms and their European Dependencies under Charles V19. Europe in the 16th and 17th Centuries20. The Baltic Lands, c. 170121. Central Europe, 180122. Sketch Map of Europe showing Principal Battles of Napoleon [Footnote: For the use of this map I am indebted to the courtesy of Mr. D. H. Montgomery, author of "Leading Facts of French History. "]23. Central Europe, 181024. Central Europe, 181525. South-Eastern Europe according to the Treaty of Berlin, 187826. Europe in 1880

GENERAL HISTORY. 

GENERAL INTRODUCTION: THE RACES AND THEIR EARLY MIGRATIONS. 

DIVISIONS OF HISTORY. --History is usually divided into three periods, --Ancient, Mediæval, and Modern. Ancient History begins with the earliestnations of which we can gain any certain knowledge, and extends to thefall of the Roman Empire in the West, A. D. 476. Mediæval History embracesthe period, about one thousand years in length, lying between the fall ofRome and the discovery of the New World by Columbus, A. D. 1492. ModernHistory commences with the close of the mediæval period and extends to thepresent time. [Footnote: It is thought preferable by some scholars to letthe beginning of the great Teutonic migration (A. D. 375) mark the end ofthe period of ancient history. Some also prefer to date the beginning ofthe modern period from the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, A. D. 1453; while still others speak of it in a general way as commencing aboutthe close of the 15th century, at which time there were many inventionsand discoveries and a great stir in the intellectual world. ]

ANTIQUITY OF MAN. --We do not know when man first came into possession ofthe earth. We only know that, in ages vastly remote, when both the climateand the outline of Europe were very different from what they are atpresent, man lived on that continent with animals now extinct; and that asearly as 4000 or 3000 B. C. , --when the curtain first rises on the stage ofhistory, --in some favored regions, as in the Valley of the Nile, therewere nations and civilizations already venerable with age, and possessinglanguages, arts, and institutions that bear evidence of slow growththrough very long periods of time before written history begins. [Footnote: The investigation and study of this vast background of humanlife is left to such sciences as _Ethnology, Comparative Philology_, and _Prehistoric Archeology_. ]

THE RACES OF MANKIND. --Distinctions in form, color, and physiognomy dividethe human species into three chief types, or races, known as the Black(Ethiopian, or Negro), the Yellow (Turanian, or Mongolian), and the White(Caucasian). But we must not suppose each of these three types to besharply marked off from the others; they shade into one another byinsensible gradations. 

There has been no perceptible change in the great types during historictimes. The paintings upon the oldest Egyptian monuments show us that atthe dawn of history, about five or six thousand years ago, the principalraces were as distinctly marked as now, each bearing its racial badge ofcolor and physiognomy. As early as the times of Jeremiah, the permanencyof physical characteristics had passed into the proverb, "Can theEthiopian change his skin?"

Of all the races, the White, or Caucasian, exhibits by far the mostperfect type, physically, intellectually, and morally. 

[Illustration: NEGRO CAPTIVES, From the Monuments of Thebes. (Illustratingthe permanence of race characteristics. )]

THE BLACK RACE. --Africa is the home of the peoples of the Black Race, butwe find them on all the other continents, whither they have been carriedas slaves by the stronger races; for since time immemorial they have been"hewers of wood and drawers of water" for their more favored brethren. 

THE YELLOW, OR TURANIAN RACE. --The term Turanian is very loosely appliedby the historian to many and widely separated families and peoples. In itsbroadest application it is made to include the Chinese and other more orless closely allied peoples of Eastern Asia; the Ottoman Turks, theHungarians, the Finns, the Lapps, and the Basques, in Europe; and (bysome) the Esquimaux and American Indians. 

The peoples of this race were, it seems, the first inhabitants of Europeand of the New World; but in these quarters, they have, in the main, either been exterminated or absorbed by later comers of the White Race. InEurope, however, two small areas of this primitive population escaped thecommon fate--the Basques, sheltered among the Pyrenees, and the Finns andLapps, in the far north; [Footnote: The Hungarians and Turks are Turanianpeoples that have thrust themselves into Europe during historic times]while in the New World, the Esquimaux and the Indians still represent therace that once held undisputed possession of the land. 

The polished stone implements found in the caves and river-gravels ofWestern Europe, the shell-mounds, or kitchen-middens, upon the shores ofthe Baltic, the Swiss lake habitations, and the barrows, or grave-mounds, found in all parts of Europe, are supposed to be relics of a prehistoricTuranian people. 

Although some of the Turanian peoples, as for instance the Chinese, havemade considerable advance in civilization, still as a rule the peoples ofthis race have made but little progress in the arts or in general culture. Even their languages have remained undeveloped. These seem immature, orstunted in their growth. They have no declensions or conjugations, likethose of the languages of the Caucasian peoples. 

THE WHITE RACE AND ITS THREE FAMILIES. --The White Race embraces thehistoric nations. This type divides into three families, --the Hamitic, theSemitic, and the Aryan, or Indo-European (formerly called the Japhetic). 

The ancient Egyptians were the chief people of the Hamitic branch. In thegray dawn of history we discover them already settled in the Valley of theNile, and there erecting great monuments so faultless in construction asto render it certain that those who planned them had had a very longprevious training in the art of building. 

The Semitic family includes among its chief peoples the ancientBabylonians and Assyrians, the Hebrews, the Phoenicians, and the Arabians. We are not certain what region was the original abode of this family. Weonly know that by the dawn of history its various clans and tribes, whencesoever they may have come, had distributed themselves over thegreater part of Southwestern Asia. 

It is interesting to note that the three great historic religions of theworld, --the Hebrew, the Christian, and the Mohammedan, --the threereligions that alone (if we except that of Zoroaster) teach a belief inone God, arose among peoples belonging to the Semitic family. 

The Aryan, or Indo-European, though probably the youngest, is the mostwidely scattered family of the White Race. It includes among its membersthe ancient Hindus, Medes, and Persians, the classic Greeks and Romans, and the modern descendants of all these nations; also almost all thepeoples of Europe, and their colonists that have peopled the New World, and taken possession of other parts of the earth. 

MIGRATIONS OF THE ARYANS. --The original seat of the Aryan peoples was, itis conjectured [Footnote: Some scholars seek the primitive home inEurope], somewhere in Asia. At a period that cannot be placed later than3000 B. C. , the Aryan household began to break up and scatter, and thedifferent clans to set out in search of new dwelling-places. Some tribesof the family spread themselves over the table-lands of Iran and theplains of India, and became the progenitors of the Medes, the Persians, and the Hindus. Other clans entering Europe probably by the way of theHellespont, pushed themselves into the peninsulas of Greece and Italy, andfounded the Greek and Italian states. Still other tribes seem to havepoured in successive waves into Central Europe. The vanguard of thesepeoples are known as the Celts. After them came the Teutonic tribes, whocrowded the former out on the westernmost edge of Europe--into Gaul andSpain, and out upon the British Isles. These hard-pressed Celts arerepresented to-day by the Welsh, the Irish, and the Highland Scots. Behindthe Teutonic peoples were the Slavonic folk, who pushed the former hardagainst the Celts, and, when they could urge them no farther to the west, finally settled down and became the ancestors of the Russians and otherkindred nations. 

Although these migratory movements of the various clans and tribes of thiswonderful Aryan family began in the early morning of history, some fivethousand or more years ago, still we must not think of them as somethingpast and unrelated to the present. These movements, begun in those remotetimes, are still going on. The overflow of the population of Europe intothe different regions of the New World, is simply a continuation of theprehistoric migrations of the members of the primitive Aryan household. 

Everywhere the other races and families have given way before the advanceof the Aryan peoples, who have assumed the position of leaders andteachers among the families of mankind, and are rapidly spreading theirarts and sciences and culture over the earth. 

EARLY CULTURE OF THE ARYANS. --One of the most fascinating studies ofrecent growth is that which reveals to us the customs, beliefs, and modeof life of the early Aryans, while they were yet living together as asingle household. Upon comparing the myths, legends, and ballads of thedifferent Aryan peoples, we discover the curious fact that, under variousdisguises, they are the same. Thus our nursery tales are found to beidentical with those with which the Hindu children are amused. But thediscovery should not surprise us. We and the Hindus are kinsmen, childrenof the same home; so now, when after a long separation we meet, the taleswe tell are the same, for they are the stories that were told around thecommon hearth-fire of our Aryan forefathers. 

And when we compare certain words in different Aryan languages, we oftenfind them alike in form and meaning. Thus, take the word _father_. Thisword occurs with but little change of form in several of the Aryantongues. [Footnote: Sanscrit, _pitri_; Persian, _padar_; Greek, _pater_;Latin, _pater_; German, _vater_. ] From this we infer that the remoteancestors of the now widely separated Aryan peoples once lived togetherand had a common speech. 

Our knowledge of the prehistoric culture of the Aryans, gained through thesciences of comparative philology and mythology, may be summed up asfollows: They personified and worshipped the various forces and parts ofthe physical universe, such as the Sun, the Dawn, Fire, the Winds, theClouds. The all-embracing sky they worshipped as the Heaven-Father(_Dyaus-Pitar_, whence Jupiter). They were herdsmen and at leastoccasional farmers. They introduced the sheep, as well as the horse, intoEurope: the Turanian people whom they displaced had neither of thesedomestic animals. In social life they had advanced to that stage where thefamily is the unit of society. The father was the priest and absolute lordof his house. The families were united to form village-communities ruledby a chief, or patriarch, who was assisted by a council of elders. 

IMPORTANCE OF ARYAN STUDIES. --This picture of life in the early Aryanhome, the elements of which are gathered in so novel a way, is of the verygreatest historical value and interest. In these customs and beliefs ofthe early Aryans, we discover the germs of many of the institutions of theclassical Greeks and Romans, and of the nations of modern Europe. Thus, inthe council of elders around the village patriarch, political historianstrace the beginnings of the senates of Greece and Rome and the nationalparliaments of later times. 

Just as the teachings of the parental roof mould the life and character ofthe children that go out from under its discipline, so have the influencesof that early Aryan home shaped the habits, institutions, and character ofthose peoples and families that, as its children, went out to establishnew homes in their "appointed habitations. "

RACES OF MANKIND, WITH CHIEF FAMILIES AND PEOPLES. 

BLACK RACE (Ethiopian, or Negro). Tribes of Central and Southern Africa, the Papuans and the Australians. (This group includes two great divisions, the Negroid and Australoid. )

YELLOW RACE (Turanian, or Mongolian). (1) The Chinese, Burmese, Japanese, and other kindred peoples of Eastern Asia; (2) the Malays of Southeastern Asia, and the inhabitants of many of the Pacific islands; (3) the nomads (Tartars, Mongols, etc. ) of Northern and Central Asia and of Eastern Russia; (4) the Turks, the Magyars, or Hungarians, the Finns and Lapps, and the Basques, in Europe; (5) the Esquimaux and the American Indians. Languages of these peoples are monosyllabic or agglutinative. (Note that the Malays and American Indians were formerly classified as distinct races. )

WHITE RACE (Caucasian). Hamitic Family Egyptians, Libyans, Cushites. Semitic Family Chaldæans (partly Turanian) Assyrians, Babylonians, Canaanites (chiefly Semitic), Phoenicians, Hebrews, Arabs. Aryan, or Indo-European Family Indo-Iranic Branch Hindus, Medes, Persians. Græco-Italic Branch Greeks, Romans. Celtic Branch Gauls, Britons, Scots (Irish), Picts. Teutonic Branch High Germans, Low Germans, Scandinavians. Slavonic Branch Russians, Poles, etc. 

The peoples of modern Germany are the descendants of various Germanictribes. The Swedes, Norwegians, and Danes represent the Scandinavianbranch of the Teutonic family. The Irish, the Welsh, the ScotchHighlanders, and the Bretons of Brittany (anciently Armorica), in France, are the present representatives of the ancient Celts. The French, Spaniards, Portuguese, and Italians have sprung, in the main, from ablending of the Celts, the ancient Romans, and the Germanic tribes thatthrust themselves within the limits of the Roman Empire in the West. TheEnglish are the descendants of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes (Teutonictribes), slightly modified by interminglings with the Danes and Normans(also of Teutonic origin). (See _Mediæval and Modern History_, pp. 169-178. )

PART I. 

_ANCIENT HISTORY. _

SECTION I. --THE EASTERN NATIONS. 

CHAPTER I. 

INDIA AND CHINA. 

1. INDIA. 

THE ARYAN INVASION. --At the time of the great Aryan migration (see p. 4), some Aryan bands, journeying from the northwest, settled first the plainsof the Indus and then occupied the valley of the Ganges. They reached thebanks of the latter river as early probably as 1500 B. C. 

These fair-skinned invaders found the land occupied by a dark-skinned, non-Aryan race, whom they either subjugated and reduced to serfdom, ordrove out of the great river valleys into the mountains and the half-desert plains of the peninsula. 

THE ORIGIN OF CASTES. --The conflict of races in Northern India gave riseto what is known as the system of castes; that is, society became dividedinto a number of rigid hereditary classes. There arose gradually fourchief castes: (1) Brahmans, or priests; (2) warriors; (3) agriculturistsand traders; and (4) serfs, or Sudras. The Brahmans were those of pureAryan blood, while the Sudras were the despised and oppressed non-Aryanaborigines. The two middle classes, the warriors and the cultivators ofthe soil, were of mixed Aryan and non-Aryan blood. Below these severalcastes were the Pariahs, or outcasts, the most degraded of the degradednatives. [Footnote: At a later period, the Brahmans, in order toperpetuate their own ascendancy and to secure increased reverence fortheir order, incorporated among the sacred hymns an account of creationwhich gave a sort of divine sanction to the system of castes byrepresenting the different classes of society to have had differentorigins. The Brahmans, the sacred books are made to say, came forth fromthe mouth of Brahma, the soldier from his arms, the farmer from histhighs, and the Sudra from his feet. ]

The system of castes, modified however by various influences, particularlyby the later system of Buddhism (see p. 11), has characterized Hindusociety from the time the system originated down to the present, and isone of the most important facts of Indian history. 

THE VEDAS. --The most important of the sacred books of the Hindus arecalled the Vedas. They are written in the Sanscrit language, which isbelieved to be the oldest form of Aryan speech. The Rig-Veda, the mostancient of the books, is made up of hymns which were composed chieflyduring the long period, perhaps a thousand years or more, while the Aryanswere slowly working their way from the mountains on the northwest of Indiaacross the peninsula to the Ganges. These hymns are filled with memoriesof the long conflict of the fair-faced Aryans with the dark-facedaborigines. The Himalayas, through whose gloomy passes the early emigrantsjourneyed, must have deeply impressed the wanderers, for the poets oftenrefer to the great dark mountains. 

BRAHMANISM. --The religion of the Indian Aryans is known as Brahmanism. This system gradually developed from the same germs as those out of whichgrew the Greek and Roman religions. It was at first a pure nature-worship, that is, the worship of the most striking phenomena of the physical worldas intelligent and moral beings. The chief god was Dyaus-Pitar, theHeaven-Father. As this system characterized the early period when theoldest Vedic hymns were composed, it is known as the Vedic religion. 

In course of time this nature-worship of the Vedic period developed into asort of pantheism, that is, a system which identifies God with theuniverse. This form of the Indian religion is known as Brahmanism. Brahma, an impersonal essence, is conceived as the primal existence. Forth fromBrahma emanated, as heat and light emanate from the sun, all things andall life. Banish a personal God from the universe, as some modernscientists would do, leaving nothing but nature with her original nebula, her endless cycles, her unconscious evolutions, and we have something verylike Brahmanism. 

A second, fundamental conception of Brahmanism is that all life, apartfrom Brahma, is evil, is travail and sorrow. We can make this ideaintelligible to ourselves by remembering what are our own ideas of thisearthly life. We call it a feverish dream, a journey through a vale ofsorrow. Now the Hindu regards _all_ conscious existence in the samelight. He has no hope in a better future; so long as the soul isconscious, so long must it endure sorrow and pain. 

This conception of all conscious existence as necessarily and always evil, leads naturally to the doctrine that it is the part of wisdom and of dutyfor man to get rid of consciousness, to annihilate himself, in a word, tocommit soul-suicide. Brahmanism teaches that the only way to extinguishself and thus get rid of the burden of existence, is by re-absorption intoBrahma. But this return to Brahma is dependent upon the soul'spurification, for no impure soul can be re-absorbed into the primalessence. The necessary freedom from passion and the required purity ofsoul can best be attained by self-torture, by a severe mortification ofthe flesh; hence the asceticism of the Hindu devotee. 

As only a few in each generation reach the goal, it follows that the greatmajority of men must be born again, and yet again, until all evil has beenpurged away from the soul and eternal repose found in Brahma. He who livesa virtuous life is at death born into some higher caste, and thus headvances towards the longed-for end. The evil man, however, is born into alower caste, or perhaps his soul enters some unclean animal. This doctrineof re-birth is known as the transmigration of souls (metempsychosis). 

Only the first three classes are admitted to the benefits of religion. TheSudras and the outcasts are forbidden to read the sacred books, and forany one of the upper classes to teach a serf how to expiate sin is acrime. 

BUDDHISM. --In the fifth century before our era, a great teacher andreformer, known as Buddha, or Gautama (died about 470 B. C. ), arose inIndia. He was a prince, whom legend represents as being so touched by theuniversal misery of mankind, that he voluntarily abandoned the luxury ofhis home, and spent his life in seeking out and making known to men a newand better way of salvation. He condemned the severe penances and theself-torture of the Brahmans, yet commended poverty and retirement fromactive life as the best means of getting rid of desire and of attaining_Nirvana_, that is, the repose of unconsciousness. 

[Illustration: STATUE OF BUDDHA. ]

Buddha admitted all classes to the benefits of religion, the poor outcastas well as the high-born Brahman, and thus Buddhism was a revolt againstthe earlier harsh and exclusive system of Brahmanism. It holds somewhatthe same relation to Brahmanism that Christianity bears to Judaism. 

Buddhism gradually gained the ascendancy over Brahmanism; but after somecenturies the Brahmans regained their power, and by the eighth centuryafter Christ, the faith of Buddha was driven out of almost every part ofIndia. But Buddhism has a profound missionary spirit, like that ofChristianity, Buddha having commanded his disciples to make known to allmen the way to Nirvana and consequently during the very period when Indiawas being lost, the missionaries of the reformed creed were spreading theteachings of their master among the peoples of all the countries ofEastern Asia, so that to-day Buddhism is the religion of almost one thirdof the human race. Buddha has probably nearly as many followers as bothChrist and Mohammed together. 

During its long conflict with Buddhism, Brahmanism was greatly modified, and caught much of the gentler spirit of the new faith, so that modernBrahmanism is a very different religion from that of the ancient system;hence it is usually given a new name, being known as Hinduism. [Footnote:Among the customs introduced into Brahmanism during this period was therite of Suttee, or the voluntary burning of the widow on the funeral pyreof her husband. ]

ALEXANDER'S INVASION OF INDIA (327 B. C. ). --Although we find obscurenotices of India in the records of the early historic peoples of WesternAsia, yet it is not until the invasion of the peninsula by Alexander theGreat in 327 B. C. That the history of the Indian Aryans comes insignificant contact with that of the progressive nations of the West. Fromthat day to our own its systems of philosophy, its wealth, and itscommerce have been more or less important factors in universal history. Greece carried on an intellectual commerce with this country; Rome, andthe Italian republics of the Middle Ages, a more material but not lessimportant trade. Columbus was seeking a short all-sea route to thiscountry when he found the New World. And in the upbuilding of the imperialgreatness of the England of to-day, the wealth and trade of India haveplayed no inconsiderable part. 

2. CHINA. 

GENERAL REMARKS: THE BEGINNING. --China is the seat of a very oldcivilization, older perhaps than that of any other land save Egypt; yetChinese affairs have not until recently exerted any appreciable influenceupon the general current of history. All through ancient and mediævaltimes the country lay, vague and mysterious, in the haze of the world'shorizon. During the Middle Ages the land was known to Europe under thename of Cathay. 

The beginning of the Chinese nation was a band of Turanian wanderers whocame into the basin of the Yellow River, from the West, probably prior to3000 B. C. These immigrants gradually pushed out the aborigines whom theyfound in the land, and laid the basis of institutions that have endured tothe present day. 

DYNASTIC HISTORY. --The government of China since the remotest times hasbeen a parental monarchy. The Emperor is the father of his people. Butthough an absolute prince, still he dare not rule tyrannically: he mustrule justly, and in accordance with the ancient customs and laws. 

The Chinese have books that purport to give the history of the differentdynasties that have ruled in the land from a vast antiquity; but theserecords are largely mythical and legendary. Everything is confused anduncertain until we reach the eighth or seventh century before our era; andeven then we meet with little of interest in the dynastic history of thecountry until we come to the reign of Che Hwang-te (246-210 B. C. ). Thisenergetic ruler strengthened and consolidated the imperial power, andexecuted great works of internal improvement, such as roads and canals. As a barrier against the incursions of the Huns, he began the erection ofthe celebrated Chinese Wall, a great rampart extending for about 1500miles along the northern frontier of the country. [Footnote: The GreatWall is one of the most remarkable works of man. "It is, " says Dr. Williams, "the only artificial structure which would arrest attention in ahasty survey of the globe. " It has been estimated that there is more thanseventy times as much material in the wall as there is in the GreatPyramid of Cheops, and that it represents more labor than 100, 000 miles ofordinary railroad. It was begun in 214(?) and finished in 204(?) B. C. Itis twenty-five feet wide at base, and from fifteen to thirty feet high. Towers forty feet high rise at irregular intervals. In some places it is amere earthen rampart; in others it is faced with brick; and then again itis composed of stone throughout. ]

From the strong reign of Che Hwang-te to the end of the period covered byancient history, Chinese dynastic records present no matters of universalinterest that need here occupy our attention. 

CHINESE WRITING. --It is nearly certain that the art of writing was knownamong the Chinese as early as 2000 B. C. The system employed is curiouslycumbrous. In the absence of an alphabet, each word of the language isrepresented upon the written page by means of a symbol, or combination ofsymbols; this, of course, requires that there be as many symbols, orcharacters, as there are words in the language. The number sanctioned bygood use is about 25, 000; but counting obsolete characters, the numberamounts to over 50, 000. A knowledge of 5000 or 6000 characters, however, enables one to read and write without difficulty. The task of learningeven this number might well be hopeless, were it not that many of thecharacters bear a remote resemblance to the objects for which they stand, and when once explained, readily suggest the thing or idea represented. The nature of the characters shows conclusively that the Chinese system ofwriting, like that of all others with which we are acquainted, was atfirst purely hieroglyphical, that is, the characters were originallysimply rude outline pictures of material objects. Time and use have wornthem to their present form. 

This Chinese system of representing thought, cumbrous and inconvenient asit is, is employed at the present time by one third of the human race. 

Printing from blocks was practised in China as early as the sixth centuryof our era, and printing from movable types as early as the tenth oreleventh century, that is to say, about four hundred years before the sameart was invented in Europe. 

CHINESE LITERATURE: CONFUCIUS AND MENCIUS. --The most highly prized portionof Chinese literature is embraced in what is known as the Five Classicsand the Four Books, called collectively the Nine Classics. The FiveClassics are among the oldest books in the world. For some of the books anantiquity of 3000 years is claimed. The books embrace chronicles, political and ethical maxims, and numerous odes. One of the most importantof the Classics is the so-called Book of Rites, said to date from 1200B. C. 

The Four Books are of later origin than the Five Classics, having beenwritten about the fifth and fourth centuries before the Christian era; yetthey hardly yield to them in sacredness in the eyes of the Chinese. Thefirst three of the series are by the pupils of the great sage and moralistConfucius (551-478 B. C. ), and the fourth is by Mencius (371-288 B. C. ), adisciple of Confucius, and a scarcely less revered philosopher and ethicalteacher. The teachings of the Four Books may be summed up in the simpleprecept, "Walk in the Trodden Paths. " Confucius was not a prophet, orrevealer; he laid no claims to a supernatural knowledge of God or of thehereafter; he said nothing of an Infinite Spirit, and but little of afuture life. His cardinal precepts were obedience to superiors, reverencefor the ancients, and imitation of their virtues. He himself walked in theold paths, and thus added the force of example to that of precept. He gavethe Chinese the Golden Rule, stated negatively: "What you do not want doneto yourself, do not do to others. "

During the reign of Che Hwang-te (see p. 13), Chinese literature suffereda great disaster. That despot, for the reason that the teachers in theiropposition to him were constantly quoting the ancient writings against hisinnovations, ordered the chief historical books to be destroyed, andsentenced to death any one who should presume to talk about the proscribedwritings, or even allude to the virtues of the ancients in such a way asto reflect upon his reforms. The contumacious he sent to work upon theGreat Wall. But the people concealed the books in the walls of theirhouses, or better still hid them away in their memories; and in this waythe priceless inheritance of antiquity was preserved until the storm hadpassed. 

INFLUENCE OF THIS LITERATURE AND OF THE SAGE CONFUCIUS. --It would beimpossible to exaggerate the influence which the Nine Classics have hadupon the Chinese nation. For more than 2000 years these writings have beenthe Chinese Bible. And as all of the Four Books, though they were notwritten by Confucius, yet bear the impress of his mind and thought, justas the Gospels teach the mind of Christ, a large part of this influencemust be attributed to the life and teachings of that great Sage. Hisinfluence has been greater than that of any other teacher, exceptingChrist and perhaps Buddha. His precepts, implicitly followed by hiscountrymen, have shaped their lives from his day to the present. 

The moral system of Confucius, making, as it does, filial obedience and aconformity to ancient customs primary virtues, has exalted the family lifeamong the Chinese and given a wonderful stability to Chinese society. Chinese children are the most obedient and reverential to parents of anychildren in the world, and the Chinese Empire is the only one in allhistory that has prolonged its existence from ancient times to thepresent. 

But along with much good, one great evil has resulted from this blind, servile following of the past. The Chinese in strictly obeying theinjunction to walk in the old ways, to conform to the customs of theancients, have failed to mark out any new footpaths for themselves. Hencetheir lack of originality, their habit of imitation: hence the unchanging, unprogressive character of Chinese civilization. 

EDUCATION AND CIVIL SERVICE COMPETITIVE EXAMINATIONS. --China has a veryancient educational system. The land was filled with schools, academies, and colleges more than a thousand years before our era, and education isto-day more general among the Chinese than among any other pagan people. Aknowledge of the sacred books is the sole passport to civil office andpublic employment. All candidates for places in the government must pass acompetitive examination in the Nine Classics. This system is practicallythe same in principle as that which we, with great difficulty, are tryingto establish in connection with our own civil service. 

THE THREE RELIGIONS, --CONFUCIANISM, TAOISM, AND BUDDHISM. --There are threeleading religions in China, --Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism. The greatSage Confucius is reverenced and worshipped throughout the Empire. Heholds somewhat the same relation to the system that bears his name thatChrist holds to that of Christianity. Taoism takes its name from Tao, which is made, like Brahma in Brahmanism, the beginning of all things. Itis a very curious system of mystical ideas and superstitious practices. Buddhism was introduced into China about the opening of the Christian era, and soon became widely spread. 

There is one element common to all these religions, and that is theworship of ancestors. Every Chinese, whether he be a Confucianist, aTaoist, or a Buddhist, reverences his ancestors, and prays and makesofferings to their spirits. 

POLICY OF NON-INTERCOURSE. --The Chinese have always been a very self-satisfied and exclusive people. They have jealously excluded foreignersand outside influence from their country. The Great Wall with which theyhave hedged in their country on the north, is the symbol of their policyof isolation. Doubtless this characteristic of the Chinese has beenfostered by their geographical isolation; for great mountain barriers andwide deserts cut the country off from communication with the rest of theAsiatic continent. And then their reverence for antiquity has renderedthem intolerant of innovation and change. Hence, in part, theunwillingness of the Chinese to admit into their country railroads, telegraphs, and other modern improvements. For them to adopt these new-fangled inventions, would be like our adopting a new religion. Such adeparture from the ways and customs of the past has in it, to their way ofthinking, something akin to disrespect and irreverence for ancestors. 

CHAPTER II. 

EGYPT. 

1. POLITICAL HISTORY. 

EGYPT AND THE NILE. --Egypt comprises the delta of the Nile and the flood-plains of its lower course. The whole land is formed of the deposits ofthe river; hence Herodotus, in happy phrase, called the country "the giftof the Nile. " The delta country was known to the ancients as Lower Egypt;while the valley proper, reaching from the head of the delta to the FirstCataract, a distance of six hundred miles, was called Upper Egypt. [Footnote: About seven hundred miles from the Mediterranean a low ledge ofrocks, stretching across the Nile, forms the first obstruction tonavigation in passing up the river. The rapids found at this point aretermed the First Cataract. Six other cataracts occur in the next sevenhundred miles of the river's course. ]

Through the same means by which Egypt was originally created, is the landeach year still renewed and fertilized. The Nile, swollen by the heavytropical rains about its sources, begins to rise in its lower parts latein June, and by October, when the inundation has attained its greatestheight, the country presents the appearance of an inland sea. 

By the end of November the river has returned to its bed, and the fields, over which has been spread a film of rich earth, [Footnote: The rate ofthe fluviatile deposit is from three to five inches in a century. Thesurface of the valley at Thebes, as shown by the accumulations about themonuments, has been raised seven feet during the last seventeen hundredyears. ] present the appearance of black mud-flats. Usually the plow is runlightly over the soft surface, but in some cases the grain is sown uponthe undisturbed deposit, and simply trampled in by flocks of sheep andgoats driven over it. In a few weeks the entire land, so recently aflooded plain, is overspread with a sea of verdure, which forms a strikingcontrast to the desert sands and barren hills that rim the valley. 

[Illustration: ANCIENT EGYPT]

CLIMATE. --In Lower Egypt, near the sea, the rainfall in the winter isabundant; but the climate of Upper Egypt is all but rainless, only a fewslight showers falling throughout the year. This dryness of the Egyptianair is what has preserved through so many thousand years, in suchwonderful freshness of color and with such sharpness of outline, thenumerous paintings and sculptures of the monuments of the Pharaohs. 

The southern line of Egypt only just touches the tropics; still theclimate, influenced by the wide and hot deserts that hem the valley, issemi-tropical in character. The fruits of the tropics and the cereals ofthe temperate zone grow luxuriantly. Thus favored in climate as well as inthe matter of irrigation, Egypt became in early times the granary of theEast. To it less favored countries, when stricken by famine, --a calamityso common in the East in regions dependent upon the rainfall, --looked forfood, as did the families of Israel during drought and failure of crops inPalestine. 

DYNASTIES AND CHRONOLOGY. --The kings, or Pharaohs, that reigned in Egyptfrom the earliest times till the conquest of the country by Alexander theGreat (332 B. C. ), are grouped into thirty-one dynasties. Thirty of thesewe find in the lists of Manetho, an Egyptian priest who lived in the thirdcentury B. C. , and who compiled a chronicle of the kings of the countryfrom the manuscripts kept in the Egyptian temples. 

We cannot assign a positive date to the beginning of the First Dynasty, chiefly because Egyptologists are at a loss to know whether to considerall the dynasties of Manetho's list as successive or in partcontemporaneous. Thus, it is held by some scholars that several of thesefamilies were reigning at the same time in the different cities of Upperand Lower Egypt; while others think that they all reigned at differentepochs, and that the sum of the lengths of the several dynasties gives usthe true date of the beginning of the political history of the country. Accordingly, some place the beginning of the First Dynasty at about 5000B. C. , while others put it at about 3000 B. C. The constantly growingevidence of the monuments is in favor of the higher figures. 

MENES, THE FIRST OF THE PHARAOHS. --Menes is the first kingly personage, shadowy and indistinct in form, that we discover in the early dawn ofEgyptian history. Tradition makes him the founder of Memphis, near thehead of the Delta, the site of which capital he secured against theinundations of the Nile by vast dikes and various engineering works. Tohim is ascribed the achievement of first consolidating the numerous pettyprincipalities of Lower Egypt into a single state. 

THE FOURTH DYNASTY: THE PYRAMID KINGS (about 2700 B. C. ). --The kings of theFourth Dynasty, who reigned at Memphis, are called the Pyramid builders. Kufu I. , the Cheops of the Greeks, was the first great builder. To him wecan now positively ascribe the building of the Great Pyramid, the largestof the Gizeh group, near Cairo; for his name has been found upon some ofthe stones, --painted on them by his workmen before the blocks were takenfrom the quarries. 

The mountains of stone heaped together by the Pyramid kings are proof thatthey were cruel oppressors of their people, and burdened them with uselesslabor upon these monuments of their ambition. Tradition tells how the verymemory of these monarchs was hated by the people. Herodotus says that theEgyptians did not like even to speak the names of the builders of the twolargest pyramids. 

THE TWELFTH DYNASTY (about 2300 B. C. ). --After the Sixth Dynasty, Egypt, for several centuries, is almost lost from view. When finally the valleyemerges from the obscurity of this period, the old capital Memphis hasreceded into the background, and the city of Thebes has taken its place asthe seat of the royal power. 

The period of the Twelfth Dynasty, a line of Theban kings, is one of thebrightest in Egyptian hhistory. Many monuments scattered throughout thecountry perpetuate the fame of the sovereigns of this illustrious house. Egyptian civilization is regarded by many as having during this periodreached the highest perfection to which it ever attained. 

THE HYSKOS, OR SHEPHERD KINGS (from about 2100 to 1650 B. C. ). --Soon afterthe bright period of the Twelfth Dynasty, Egypt again suffered a greateclipse. Nomadic tribes from Syria crossed the eastern frontier of Egypt, took possession of the inviting pasture-lands of the Delta, andestablished there the empire of the Shepherd Kings. 

These Asiatic intruders were violent and barbarous, and destroyed ormutilated the monuments of the country. But gradually they weretransformed by the civilization with which they were in contact, and intime they adopted the manners and culture of the Egyptians. It wasprobably during the supremacy of the Hyksos that the families of Israelfound a refuge in Lower Egypt. They received a kind reception from theShepherd Kings, not only because they had the same pastoral habits, butalso, probably, because of near kinship in race. 

At last these intruders, after they had ruled in the valley four or fivehundred years, were expelled by the Theban kings, and driven back intoAsia. This occurred about 1650 B. C. The episode of the Shepherd Kings inEgypt derives great importance from the fact that these Asiatic conquerorswere one of the mediums through which Egyptian civilization wastransmitted to the Phoenicians, who, through their wide commercialrelations, spread the same among all the early nations of theMediterranean area. 

And further, the Hyksos conquest was an advantage to Egypt itself. Theconquerors possessed political capacity, and gave the country a strongcentralized government. They made Egypt in fact a great monarchy, and laidthe basis of the power and glory of the mighty Pharaohs of the Eighteenthand Nineteenth Dynasties. 

THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY (about 1650-1400 B. C. ). --The revolt which drove theHyksos from the country was led by Amosis, or Ahmes, a descendant of theTheban kings. He was the first king of what is known as the EighteenthDynasty, probably the greatest race of kings, it has been said, that everreigned upon the earth. 

The most eventful period of Egyptian history, covered by what is calledthe New Empire, now opens. Architecture and learning seem to haverecovered at a bound from their long depression under the domination ofthe Shepherd Kings. To free his empire from the danger of another invasionfrom Asia, Amosis determined to subdue the Syrian and Mesopotamian tribes. This foreign policy, followed out by his successors, shaped many of theevents of their reigns. 

Thothmes III. , one of the greatest kings of this Eighteenth Dynasty, hasbeen called "the Alexander of Egyptian history. " During his reign thefrontiers of the empire reached their greatest expansion. His authorityextended from the oases of the Libyan desert to the Tigris and theEuphrates. 

[Illustration: PHALANX OF THE KHITA: In the background, town protected bywalls and moats. ]

Thothmes was also a magnificent builder. His architectural works in thevalley of the Nile were almost numberless. He built a great part of thetemple of Karnak, at Thebes, the remains of which form the most majesticruin in the world. His obelisks stand to-day in Constantinople, in Rome, in London, and in New York. 

The name of Amunoph III. Stands next after that of Thothmes III. As one ofthe great rulers and builders of the Eighteenth Dynasty. 

THE NINETEENTH DYNASTY (about 1400-1280 B. C. ). --The Pharaohs of theNineteenth Dynasty rival those of the Eighteenth in their fame asconquerors and builders. It is their deeds and works, in connection withthose of the preceding dynasty, that have given Egypt such a name andplace in history. The two great names of the house are Seti I. And RamesesII. 

One of the most important of Seti's wars was that against the Hittites(_Khita_, in the inscriptions) and their allies. The Hittites were apowerful non-Semitic people, whose capital was Carchemish, on theEuphrates, and whose strength and influence were now so great as to be athreat to Egypt. 

But Seti's deeds as a warrior are eclipsed by his achievements as abuilder. He constructed the main part of what is perhaps the mostimpressive edifice ever raised by man, --the world-renowned "Hall ofColumns, " in the Temple of Karnak, at Thebes (see illustration, p. 32). Healso cut for himself in the Valley of the Tombs of the Kings, at the sameplace, the most beautiful and elaborate of all the rock-sepulchres of thePharaohs (see p. 31). In addition to these and numerous other works, hebegan a canal to unite the Red Sea and the Nile, --an undertaking which wascompleted by his son and successor, Rameses II. 

[Illustration: SETI I. (From a photograph of the mummy. )]

Rameses II. , surnamed the Great, was the Sesostris of the Greeks. His isthe most prominent name of the Nineteenth Dynasty. Ancient writers, infact, accorded him the first place among all the Egyptian sovereigns, andmade him the hero of innumerable stories. His long reign, embracing sixty-seven years, was, in truth, well occupied with military expeditions andthe superintendence of great architectural works. 

His chief wars were those against the Hittites. Time and again is Ramesesfound with his host of war-chariots in their country, but he evidentlyfails to break their power; for we find him at last concluding with them acelebrated treaty, in which the chief of the Hittites is called "The GreatKing of the Khita" (Hittites), and is formally recognized as in everyrespect the equal of the king of Egypt. Later, Rameses marries a daughterof the Hittite king. All this means that the Pharaohs had met their peersin the princes of the Hittites, and that they could no longer hope tobecome masters of Western Asia. 

It was probably the fear of an invasion by the tribes of Syria that ledRameses to reduce to a position of grinding servitude the Semitic peoplesthat under former dynasties had been permitted to settle in Lower Egypt;for this Nineteenth Dynasty, to which Rameses II. Belongs, was the newking (dynasty) that arose "which knew not Joseph" (Ex. I. 8), andoppressed the children of Israel. It was during the reign of his sonMenephtha that the Exodus took place (about 1300 B. C. ). 

[Illustration: RAMESES II. RETURNING IN TRIUMPH FROM SYRIA, with hischariot garnished with the heads of his enemies. (From the monuments ofKarnak. )]

THE TWENTY-SIXTH DYNASTY (666-527 B. C. ). --We pass without comment a longperiod of several centuries, marked, indeed, by great vicissitudes in thefortunes of the Egyptian monarchs, yet characterized throughout by a sureand rapid decline in the power and splendor of their empire. 

During the latter part of this period Egypt was tributary to Assyria. Butabout 666 B. C. , a native prince, Psammetichus I. (666-612 B. C. ), with theaid of Greek mercenaries from Asia Minor, succeeded in expelling theAssyrian garrisons. Psammetichus thus became the founder of the Twenty-sixth Dynasty. 

The reign of this monarch marks a new era in Egyptian history. HithertoEgypt had secluded herself from the world, behind barriers of jealousy, race, and pride. But Psammetichus being himself, it seems, of non-Egyptianorigin, and owing his throne chiefly to the swords of Greek soldiers, wasled to reverse the policy of the past, and to throw the valley open to thecommerce and influences of the world. His capital, Sais, on the Canopicbranch of the Nile, forty miles from the Mediterranean, was filled withGreek citizens; and Greek mercenaries were employed in his armies. 

This change of policy, occurring at just the period when the rising statesof Greece and Rome were shaping their institutions, was a most significantevent. Egypt became the University of the Mediterranean nations. From thistime forward Greek philosophers, as in the case of Pythagoras and ofPlato, are represented as becoming pupils of the Egyptian priests; andwithout question the learning and philosophy of the ancient Egyptiansexerted a profound influence upon the quick, susceptible mind of theHellenic race, that was, in its turn, to become the teacher of the world. 

The liberal policy of Psammetichus, while resulting in a great advantageto foreign nations, brought a heavy misfortune upon his own. Displeasedwith the position assigned Greek mercenaries in the army, the nativeEgyptian soldiers revolted, and two hundred thousand of the troopsseceding in a body, emigrated to Ethiopia, whence no inducement thatPsammetichus offered could persuade them to return. 

The son of Psammetichus, Necho II. (612-596 B. C. ), the Pharaoh-Necho ofthe Bible, followed the liberal policy marked out by his father. Tofacilitate commerce, he attempted to reopen the old canal dug by Seti I. And his son, which had become unnavigable. After the loss of one hundredand twenty thousand workmen in the prosecution of the undertaking, Nechowas constrained to abandon it; Herodotus says, on account of anunfavorable oracle. 

Necho then fitted out an exploring expedition for the circumnavigation ofAfrica, in hope of finding a possible passage for his fleets from the RedSea to the Nile by a water channel already opened by nature, and to whichthe priests and oracles could interpose no objections. The expedition, wehave reason to believe, actually accomplished the feat of sailing aroundthe continent; for Herodotus, in his account of the enterprise, says thatthe voyagers upon their return reported that, when they were rounding thecape, the sun was on their right hand (to the north). This feature of thereport, which led Herodotus to disbelieve it, is to us the very strongestevidence possible that the voyage was really performed. 

THE LAST OF THE PHARAOHS. --Before the close of his reign, Necho had comeinto collision with the king of Babylon, and was forced to acknowledge hissupremacy. A little later, Babylon having yielded to the rising power ofPersia, Egypt also passed under Persian authority (see p. 77). TheEgyptians, however, were restive under this foreign yoke, and, after alittle more than a century, succeeded in throwing it off; but the countrywas again subjugated by the Persian king Artaxerxes III. (about 340 B. C. ), and from that time until our own day no native prince has ever sat uponthe throne of the Pharaohs. Long before the Persian conquest, the ProphetEzekiel, foretelling the debasement of Egypt, had declared, "There shallbe no more a prince of the land of Egypt. " [Footnote: Ezek. Xxx. 13. ]

Upon the extension of the power of the Macedonians over the East (333B. C. ), Egypt willingly exchanged masters; and for three centuries thevalley was the seat of the renowned Græco-Egyptian Empire of thePtolemies, which lasted until the Romans annexed the region to their all-absorbing empire (30 B. C. ). 

"The mission of Egypt among the nations was fulfilled; it had lit thetorch of civilization in ages inconceivably remote, and had passed it onto other peoples of the West. "

2. RELIGION, ARTS, AND GENERAL CULTURE. 

CLASSES OF SOCIETY. --Egyptian society was divided into three greatclasses, or orders, --priests, soldiers, and common people; the lastembracing shepherds, husbandmen, and artisans. 

The sacerdotal order consisted of high-priests, prophets, scribes, keepersof the sacred robes and animals, sacred sculptors, masons, and embalmers. They enjoyed freedom from taxation, and met the expenses of the templeservices with the income of the sacred lands, which embraced one third ofthe soil of the country. 

The priests were extremely scrupulous in the care of their persons. Theybathed twice by day and twice by night, and shaved the entire body everythird day. Their inner clothing was linen, woollen garments being thoughtunclean; their diet was plain and even abstemious, in order that, asPlutarch says, "their bodies might sit light as possible about theirsouls. "

Next to the priesthood in rank and honor stood the military order. Likethe priests, the soldiers formed a landed class. They held one third ofthe soil of Egypt. To each soldier was given a tract of about eight acres, exempt from all taxes. They were carefully trained in their profession, and there was no more effective soldiery in ancient times than that whichmarched beneath the standard of the Pharaohs. 

THE CHIEF DEITIES. --Attached to the chief temples of the Egyptians werecolleges for the training of the sacerdotal order. These institutions werethe repositories of the wisdom of the Egyptians. This learning was openonly to the initiated few. 

The unity of God was the central doctrine in this private system. Theygave to this Supreme Being the very same name by which he was known to theHebrews--_Nuk Pu Nuk_, "I am that I am. " [Footnote: "It is evidentwhat a new light this discovery throws on the sublime passage in Exodusiii. 14; where Moses, whom we may suppose to have been initiated into thisformula, is sent both to his people and to Pharaoh to proclaim the trueGod by this very title, and to declare that the God of the highestEgyptian theology was also the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. Thecase is parallel to that of Paul at Athens. "--Smith's _Ancient Historyof the East_, p. 196, note. ] The sacred manuscripts say, "He is the oneliving and true God, . . . Who has made all things, and was not himselfmade. "

The Egyptian divinities of the popular mythology were frequently groupedin triads. First in importance among these groups was that formed byOsiris, Isis (his wife and sister), and Horus, their son. The members ofthis triad were worshipped throughout Egypt. 

The god Set (called Typhon by the Greek writers), the principle of evil, was the Satan of Egyptian mythology. While the good and beneficent Osiriswas symbolized by the life-giving Nile, the malignant Typhon wasemblemized by the terrors and barrenness of the desert. 

[Illustration: MUMMY OF A SACRED BULL. (From a photograph. )]

ANIMAL-WORSHIP. --The Egyptians regarded certain animals as emblems of thegods, and hence worshipped them. To kill one of these sacred animals wasadjudged the greatest impiety. Persons so unfortunate as to harm onethrough accident were sometimes murdered by the infuriated people. Thedestruction of a cat in a burning building was lamented more than the lossof the property. Upon the death of a dog, every member of the familyshaved his head. The scarabæus, or beetle, was especially sacred, beingconsidered an emblem of the sun, or of life. 

Not only were various animals held sacred, as being the emblems of certaindeities, but some were thought to be real gods. Thus the soul of Osiris, it was imagined, animated the body of some bull, which might be known fromcertain spots and markings. 

Upon the death of the sacred bull, or Apis, as he was called, a greatsearch, accompanied with loud lamentation, was made throughout the landfor his successor: for, the moment the soul of Osiris departed from thedying bull, it entered a calf that moment born. The calf was always foundwith the proper markings; but, as Wilkinson says, the young animal hadprobably been put to "much inconvenience and pain to make the marks andhair conform to his description. "

The body of the deceased Apis was carefully embalmed, and, amid funeralceremonies of great expense and magnificence, deposited in the tomb of hispredecessors. In 1851, Mariette discovered this sepulchral chamber of thesacred bulls. It is a narrow gallery, two thousand feet in length, cut inthe limestone cliffs just opposite the site of ancient Memphis. A largenumber of the immense granite coffins, fifteen feet long and eight wideand high, have been brought to light. 

Many explanations have been given to account for the existence of such adebased form of worship among so cultured a people as were the ancientEgyptians. Probably the sacred animals in the later worship represent anearlier stage of the Egyptian religion, just as many superstitious beliefsand observances among ourselves are simply survivals from earlier andruder times. 

JUDGMENT OF THE DEAD. --Death was a great equalizer among the Egyptians. King and peasant alike must stand before the judgment-seat of Osiris andhis forty-two assessors. 

This judgment of the soul in the other world was prefigured by a peculiarordeal to which the body was subjected here. Between each chief city andthe burial-place on the western edge of the valley was a sacred lake, across which the body was borne in a barge. But, before admittance to theboat, it must pass the ordeal called "the judgment of the dead. " This wasa trial before a tribunal of forty-two judges, assembled upon the shore ofthe lake. Any person could bring accusations against the deceased, falsecharges being guarded against by the most dreadful penalties. If itappeared that the life of the deceased had been evil, passage to the boatwas denied; and the body was either carried home in dishonor, or, in caseof the poor who could not afford to care for the mummy, was interred onthe shores of the lake. Many mummies of those refused admission to thetombs of their fathers have been dug up along these "Stygian banks. "

[Illustration: JUDGMENT OF THE DEAD: above, an ape-assessor scourges anevil soul, that has been changed into an unclean animal. ]

But this ordeal of the body was only a faint symbol of the dread tribunalof Osiris before which the soul must appear in the lower world. In onescale of a balance was placed the heart of the deceased; in the otherscale, an image of Justice, or Truth. The soul stands by watching theresult, and, as the beam inclines, is either welcomed to the companionshipof the good Osiris, or consigned to oblivion in the jaws of a frightfulhippopotamus-headed monster, "the devourer of evil souls. " Thisannihilation, however, is only the fate of those inveterately wicked. Those respecting whom hopes of reformation may be entertained arecondemned to return to earth and do penance in long cycles of lives in thebodies of various animals. This is what is known as the transmigration ofsouls. The kind of animals the soul should animate, and the length of itstransmigrations, were determined by the nature of its sins. 

TOMBS. --The Egyptians bestowed little care upon the temporary residencesof the living, but the "eternal homes" of the dead were fitted up with themost lavish expenditure of labor. These were chambers, sometimes built ofbrick or stone, but more usually cut in the limestone cliffs that form thewestern rim of the Nile valley; for that, as the land of the sunset, wasconceived to be the realm of darkness and of death. The cliffs oppositethe ancient Egyptian capitals are honeycombed with sepulchral cells. 

[Illustration: BRICK-MAKING IN ANCIENT EGYPT, (From Thebes. )]

In the hills back of Thebes is the so-called Valley of the Tombs of theKings, the "Westminster Abbey of Egypt. " Here are twenty-five magnificentsepulchres. These consist of extensive rock-cut passages and chambersrichly sculptured and painted. 

The subjects of the decorations of many of the tombs, particularly of theoldest, are drawn from the life and manners of the times. Thus the artisthas converted for us the Egyptian necropolis into a city of the living, where the Egypt of four thousand years ago seems to pass before our eyes. 

THE PYRAMIDS. --The Egyptian pyramids, the tombs of the earlier Pharaohs, are the most venerable monuments that have been preserved to us from theearly world. They were almost all erected before the Twelfth Dynasty. Although thus standing away back in the earliest twilight of the historicmorning, nevertheless they mark, not the beginning, but the perfection ofEgyptian art. They speak of long periods of growth in art and sciencelying beyond the era they represent. It is this vast and mysteriousbackground that astonishes us even more than these giant forms cast upagainst it. 

[Illustration: THE GREAT HALL OF COLUMNS AT KARNAK. ]

Being sepulchral monuments, the pyramids are confined to the western sideof the Nile valley (see p. 31). There are over thirty still standing, withtraces of about forty more. 

The Pyramid of Cheops, the largest of the Gizeh group, near Cairo, risesfrom a base covering thirteen acres, to a height of four hundred and fiftyfeet. According to Herodotus, Cheops employed one hundred thousand men fortwenty years in its erection. 

PALACES AND TEMPLES. ---The earlier Memphian kings built great unadornedpyramids, but the later Theban monarchs constructed splendid palaces andtemples. Two of the most prominent masses of buildings on the site ofThebes are called, the one the Temple of Karnak, and the other the Templeof Luxor, from the names of two native villages built near or within theruined enclosures. The former was more than five hundred years inbuilding. As an adjunct of the temple at Karnak was a Hall of Columns, which consisted of a phalanx of one hundred and sixty-four giganticpillars. Some of these columns measure over seventy feet in height, withcapitals sixty-five feet in circumference. 

[Illustration: STATUES OF MEMNON AT THEBES. ]

In Nubia, beyond the First Cataract, is the renowned rock-hewn temple ofIpsambul, the front of which is adorned with four gigantic portrait-statues of Rameses II. , seventy feet in height. This temple has beenpronounced the greatest and grandest achievement of Egyptian art. 

SCULPTURE: SPHINXES AND COLOSSI. --A strange immobility, due to theinfluence of religion, attached itself, at an early period, to Egyptianart. The artist, in the portrayal of the figures of the gods, was notallowed to change a single line in the conventional form. Hence theimpossibility of improvement in sacred sculpture. Wilkinson says thatMenes would have recognized the statue of Osiris in the Temple of Amasis. Plato complained that the pictures and statues in the temples in his daywere no better than those made "ten thousand years" before. 

The heroic, or colossal size of many of the Egyptian statues excites ouradmiration. The two colossi at Thebes, known as the "Statues of Memnon, "are forty-seven feet high, and are hewn each from a single block ofgranite. The appearance of these time-worn, gigantic figures, upon thesolitary plain, is singularly impressive. "There they sit together, yetapart, in the midst of the plain, serene and vigilant, still keeping theiruntired watch over the lapse of ages and the eclipse of Egypt. "

One of these statues acquired a wide reputation among the Greeks andRomans, under the name of the "Vocal Memnon. " When the rays of the risingsun fell upon the colossus, it emitted low musical tones, which theEgyptians believed to be the greeting of the statue to the mother-sun. [Footnote: It is probable that the musical notes were produced by theaction of the sun upon the surface of the rock while wet with dew. Thephenomenon was observed only while the upper part of the colossus, whichwas broken off by an earthquake, remained upon the ground. When the statuewas restored, the music ceased. ]

The Egyptian sphinxes were figures having a human head and the body of alion, symbolizing intelligence and power. The most famous of the sphinxesof Egypt is the colossal figure at the base of the Great Pyramid, atGizeh, sculptured, some think, by Menes, and others, by one of the kingsof the Fourth Dynasty. The immense statue, cut out of the native rock, save the fore-legs, which are built of masonry, is ninety feet long andseventy feet high. "This huge, mutilated figure has an astonishing effect;it seems like an eternal spectre. The stone phantom seems attentive; onewould say that it hears and sees. Its great ear appears to collect thesounds of the past; its eyes, directed to the east, gaze, as it were, intothe future; its aspect has a depth, a truth of expression, irresistiblyfascinating to the spectator. In this figure--half statue, half mountain--we see a wonderful majesty, a grand serenity, and even a sort of sweetnessof expression. "

GLASS MANUFACTURE. --The manufacture of glass, a discovery usuallyattributed to the Phoenicians, [Footnote: The Phoenicians, being thecarriers of antiquity, often received credit among the peoples with whomthey traded, for various inventions and discoveries of which they weresimply the disseminators. ] was carried on in Egypt more than four thousandyears ago. The paintings of the monuments represent glass-blowers mouldingall manner of articles. Glass bottles, and various other objects of thesame material, are found in great numbers in the tombs. Some of theseobjects show that the ancient Egyptians were acquainted with processes ofcoloring glass that secured results which we have not yet been able toequal. The Egyptian artists imitated, with marvellous success, thevariegated hues of insects and stones. The manufacture of precious gems, so like the natural stone as to defy detection, was a lucrativeprofession. 

THE PAPYRUS PAPER. --The chief writing material used by the ancientEgyptians was the noted papyrus paper, manufactured from a reed which grewin the marshes and along the water-channels of the Nile. From the Greeknames of this Egyptian plant, _byblos_ and _papyrus_, come our words"Bible" and "paper. " The plant has now entirely disappeared from Egypt, and is found only on the Anapus, in the island of Sicily, and on asmall stream near Jaffa, in Palestine. Long before the plant becameextinct in Egypt an ancient prophecy had declared, "The paper reeds by thebrooks . . . Shall wither, be driven away, and be no more. " (Isa. Xix. 7. )The costly nature of the papyrus paper led to the use of many substitutesfor writing purposes--as leather, broken pottery, tiles, stones, andwooden tablets. 

FORMS OF WRITING. --The Egyptians employed three forms of writing: the_hieroglyphical_, consisting of rude pictures of material objects, usually employed in monumental inscriptions; the _hieratic_, anabbreviated or rather simplified form of the hieroglyphical, adapted towriting, and forming the greater part of the papyrus manuscripts; and the_demotic_, or _encorial_, a still simpler form than the hieratic. The lastdid not come into use till about the seventh century B. C. , and was thenused for all ordinary documents, both of a civil and commercial nature. Itcould be written eight or ten times as fast as the hieroglyphical form. 

KEY TO EGYPTIAN WRITING. --The key to the Egyptian writing was discoveredby means of the Rosetta Stone. This valuable relic, a heavy block of blackbasalt, is now in the British Museum. It holds an inscription, written inhieroglyphic, in demotic, and in Greek characters. Champollion, a Frenchscholar, by comparing the characters composing the words Ptolemy, Alexander, and other names in the parallel inscriptions, discovered thevalue of several of the symbols; and thus were opened the vast librariesof Egyptian learning. 

We have now the Ritual, or Book, of the Dead, a sort of guide to the soulin its journey through the underworld; romances, and fairy tales, amongwhich is "Cinderella and the Glass Slipper"; autobiographies, letters, fables, and epics; treatises on medicine, astronomy, and various otherscientific subjects; and books on history--in prose and verse--which fullyjustify the declaration of the Egyptian priests to Solon: "You Greeks aremere children, talkative and vain; you know nothing at all of the past. "

ASTRONOMY, GEOGRAPHY AND ARITHMETIC. --The cloudless and brilliant skies ofEgypt invited the inhabitants of the Nile valley to the study of theheavenly bodies. And another circumstance closely related to their veryexistence, the inundation of the Nile, following the changing cycles ofthe stars, could not but have incited them to the watching and predictingof astronomical movements. Their observations led them to discover thelength, very nearly, of the sidereal year, which they made to consist of365 days, every fourth year adding one day, making the number for thatyear 366. They also divided the year into twelve months of thirty dayseach, adding five days to complete the year. This was the calendar thatJulius Cæsar introduced into the Roman Empire, and which, slightlyreformed by Pope Gregory XIII. In 1582, has been the system employed byalmost all the civilized world up to the present day. 

The Greeks accounted for the early rise of the science of geometry amongthe Egyptians by reference to the necessity they were under each year ofre-establishing the boundaries of their fields--the inundationobliterating old landmarks and divisions. The science thus forced upontheir attention was cultivated with zeal and success. A single papyrus hasbeen discovered that holds twelve geometrical theorems. 

Arithmetic was necessarily brought into requisition in solvingastronomical and geometrical problems. We ourselves are debtors to theancient Egyptians for much of our mathematical knowledge, which has cometo us from the banks of the Nile, through the Greeks and the Saracens. 

MEDICINE AND THE ART OF EMBALMING. --The custom of embalming the dead, affording opportunities for the examination of the body, without doubt hada great influence upon the development of the sciences of anatomy andmedicine among the Egyptians. That the embalmers were physicians, we knowfrom various testimonies. Thus we are told in the Bible that Joseph"commanded the _physicians_ to embalm his father. " The Egyptian doctorshad a very great reputation among the ancients. 

Every doctor was a specialist, and was not allowed to take charge of casesoutside of his own branch. As the artist was forbidden to change the linesof the sacred statues, so the physician was not permitted to treat casessave in the manner prescribed by the customs of the past; and if he wereso presumptuous as to depart from the established mode of treatment, andthe patient died, he was adjudged guilty of murder. Many drugs andmedicines were used; the ciphers, or characters, employed by modernapothecaries to designate grains and drams are of Egyptian invention. 

The Egyptians believed that after a long lapse of time, several thousandyears, the departed soul would return to earth and reanimate its formerbody; hence their custom of preserving the body by means of embalmment. Inthe processes of embalming, the physicians made use of oils, resin, bitumen, and various aromatic gums. The body was swathed in bandages oflinen, while the face was sometimes gilded, or covered with a gold mask. As this, which was the "most approved method" of embalming, was verycostly, the expense being equivalent probably to $1000 of our money, thebodies of the poorer classes were simply "salted and dried, " wrapped incoarse mats, and laid in tiers in great trenches in the desert sands. 

[Illustration: PROFILE OF RAMESES II. (From a photograph of the mummy. )]

Only a few years ago (in 1881) the mummies of Thothmes III. , Seti I. , andRameses II. , together with those of nearly all of the other Pharaohs ofthe Eighteenth, Nineteenth, Twentieth, and Twenty-first Dynasties, werefound in a secret cave near Thebes. It seems that, some time in the 12thcentury B. C. , a sudden alarm caused these bodies to be taken hastily fromthe royal tombs of which we have spoken (see p. 31), and secreted in thishidden chamber. When the danger had passed, the place of concealment hadevidently been forgotten; so the bodies were never restored to theirancient tombs, but remained in this secret cavern to be discovered in ourown day. 

The mummies were taken to the Boulak Museum, at Cairo, where they wereidentified by means of the inscriptions upon the cases and wrappings. Among others the body of Seti I. And that of Rameses II. Were unbandaged(1886), so that now we may look upon the faces of the greatest and mostrenowned of the Pharaohs. The faces of both Seti and Rameses are soremarkably preserved, that "were their subjects to return to earth to-daythey could not fail to recognize their old sovereigns. " Both are strongfaces, of Semitic cast, that of Rameses bearing a striking resemblance tothat of his father Seti, and both closely resembling their portraitstatues and profiles. Professor Maspero, the director-general of theexcavations and antiquities of Egypt, in his official report of theuncovering of the mummies, writes as follows of the appearance of the faceof Rameses: "The face of the mummy gives a fair idea of the face of theliving king. The expression is unintellectual, perhaps slightly animal;but even under the somewhat grotesque disguise of mummification, there isplainly to be seen an air of sovereign majesty, of resolve, and of pride. "[Footnote: On the finding and identification of the Pharaohs, consult twoexcellent articles in _The Century Magazine_ for May, 1887. ]

CHAPTER III. 

CHALDÆA. 

1. POLITICAL HISTORY. 

BASIN OF THE TIGRIS AND EUPHRATES. -The northern part of the Tigris andEuphrates valley, the portion that comprised ancient Assyria, consists ofundulating plains, broken in places by considerable mountain ridges. 

But all the southern portion of the basin, the part known as Chaldæa, orBabylonia, having been formed by the gradual encroachment of the depositsof the Tigris and Euphrates upon the waters of the Persian Gulf, is aslevel as the sea. During a large part of the year, rains are infrequent;hence agriculture is dependent mainly upon artificial irrigation. Thedistribution of the waters of the Tigris and the Euphrates was secured, inancient times, by a stupendous system of canals and irrigants, which, atthe present day, in a sand-choked and ruined condition, spread like aperfect network over the face of the country (see cut, p. 41). 

The productions of Babylonia are very like those of the Nile valley. Theluxuriant growth of grain upon these alluvial flats excited the wonder ofall the Greek travellers who visited the East. Herodotus will not tell thewhole truth, for fear his veracity may be doubted. The soil is as fertilenow as in the time of the historian; but owing to the neglect of theancient canals, the greater part of this once populous district has beenconverted into alternating areas of marsh and desert. 

THE THREE GREAT MONARCHIES. --Within the Tigris-Euphrates basin, threegreat empires--the Chaldæan, the Assyrian, and the Babylonian--successively rose to prominence and dominion. Each, in turn, not onlyextended its authority over the valley, but also made the power of itsarms felt throughout the adjoining regions. We shall now trace the riseand the varied fortunes of these empires, and the slow growth of the artsand sciences from rude beginnings among the early Chaldæans to theirfuller and richer development under the Assyrian and Babylonianmonarchies. 

THE CHALDÆANS A MIXED PEOPLE. --In the earliest times Lower Chaldæa wasknown as Shumir, the Shinar of the Bible, while Upper Chaldæa bore thename of Accad. The original inhabitants were conjecturally of Turanianrace, and are called Accadians. 

[Illustration: ANCIENT BABYLONIAN CANALS. ]

These people laid the basis of civilization in the Euphrates valley, sothat with them the history of Asian culture begins. They brought with theminto the valley the art of hieroglyphical writing, which later developedinto the well-known cuneiform system. They also had quite an extensiveliterature, and had made considerable advance in the art of building. 

The civilization of the Accadians was given a great impulse by the arrivalof a Semitic people. These foreigners were nomadic in habits, andaltogether much less cultured than the Accadians. Gradually, however, theyadopted the arts and literature of the people among whom they had settled;yet they retained their own language, which in the course of timesuperseded the less perfect Turanian speech of the original inhabitants;consequently the mixed people, known later as Chaldæans, that arose fromthe blending of the two races, spoke a language essentially the same asthat used by their northern neighbors, the Semitic Assyrians. 

SARGON (SHARRUKIN) I. (3800? B. C. ). --We know scarcely anything about thepolitical affairs of the Accadians until after the arrival of the Semites. Then, powerful kings, sometimes of Semitic and then again of Turanian, orAccadian origin, appear ruling in the cities of Accad and Shumir, and thepolitical history of Chaldæa begins. 

The first prominent monarch is called Sargon I. (Sharrukin), a Semiticking of Agade, one of the great early cities. An inscription recentlydeciphered makes this king to have reigned as early as 3800 B. C. Heappears to have been the first great organizer of the peoples of theChaldæan plains. 

Yet not as a warrior, but as a patron and protector of letters, isSargon's name destined to a sure place in history. He classified andtranslated into the Semitic, or Assyrian tongue the religious, mythological, and astronomical literature of the Accadians, and depositedthe books in great libraries, which he established or enlarged, --theoldest and most valuable libraries of the ancient world. The scholar Saycecalls him the Chaldæan Solomon. 

CONQUEST OF CHALDÆA BY THE ELAMITES (2286 B. C. ). --While the Chaldæan kingswere ruling in the great cities of Lower Babylonia, the princes of theElamites, a people of Turanian race, were setting up a rival kingdom tothe northeast, just at the foot of the hills of Persia. 

In the year 2286 B. C. , a king of Elam, Kudur-Nakhunta by name, overranChaldæa, took all the cities founded by Sargon and his successors, andfrom the temples bore off in triumph to his capital, Susa, the statues ofthe Chaldæan gods, and set up in these lowland regions what is known asthe Elamite Dynasty. 

[Illustration: MAP OF THE TIGRIS AND EUPHRATES REGION. ]

More than sixteen hundred years after this despoiling of the Chaldæansanctuaries, a king of Nineveh captured the city of Susa, and findingthere these stolen statues, caused them to be restored to their originaltemples. 

The Chedorlaomer of Genesis, whose contact with the history of the Jewishpatriarch Abraham has caused his name to be handed down to our own timesin the records of the Hebrew people, is believed to have been the son andsuccessor of Kudur-Nakhunta. 

CHALDÆA ECLIPSED BY ASSYRIA. --After the Elamite princes had maintained amore or less perfect dominion over the cities of Chaldæa for two or threecenturies, their power seems to have declined; and then for severalcenturies longer, down to about 1300 B. C. , dynasties and kings of which weknow very little as yet, ruled the country. 

During this period, Babylon, gradually rising into prominence, overshadowed the more ancient Accadian cities, and became the leading cityof the land. From it the whole country was destined, later, to draw thename by which it is best known--Babylonia. 

Meanwhile a Semitic power had been slowly developing in the north. Thiswas the Assyrian empire, the later heart and centre of which was the greatcity of Nineveh. For a long time Assyria was simply a province ordependency of the lower kingdom; but about 1300 B. C. , the Assyrian monarchTiglathi-nin conquered Babylonia, and Assyria assumed the place that hadbeen so long held by Chaldæa. From this time on to the fall of Nineveh in606 B. C. , the monarchs of this country virtually controlled the affairs ofWestern Asia. 

2. ARTS AND GENERAL CULTURE. 

TOWER-TEMPLES. --In the art of building, the Chaldæans, though theiredifices fall far short of attaining the perfection exhibited by theearliest Egyptian structures, displayed no inconsiderable architecturalknowledge and skill. 

The most important of their constructions were their tower-temples. Thesewere simple in plan, consisting of two or three terraces, or stages, placed one upon another so as to form a sort of rude pyramid. The materialused in their construction was chiefly sun-dried brick. The edifice wassometimes protected by outer courses of burnt brick. The temple propersurmounted the upper platform. 

All these tower-temples have crumbled into vast mounds, with only here andthere a projecting mass of masonry to distinguish them from natural hills, for which they were at first mistaken. 

CUNEIFORM WRITING. --We have already mentioned the fact that the Accadians, when they entered the Euphrates valley, were in possession of a system ofwriting. This was a simple pictorial, or hieroglyphical system, which theygradually developed into the cuneiform. 

In the cuneiform system, the characters, instead of being formed ofunbroken lines, are composed of wedge-like marks; hence the name (from_cuneus_, a wedge). This form, according to the scholar Sayce, arosewhen the Accadians, having entered the low country, substituted tablets ofclay for the papyrus or other similar material which they had formerlyused. The characters were impressed upon the soft tablet by means of atriangular writing-instrument, which gave them their peculiar wedge-shapedform. 

The cuneiform mode of writing, improved and simplified by the Assyriansand the Persians, was in use about two thousand years, being employed bythe nations in and near the Euphrates basin, down to the time of theconquest of the East by the Macedonians. 

BOOKS AND LIBRARIES. --The books of the Chaldæans were in general claytablets, varying in length from one inch to twelve inches, and being aboutone inch thick. Those holding records of special importance, after havingbeen once written over and baked, were covered with a thin coating ofclay, and then the matter was written in duplicate and the tablets againbaked. If the outer writing were defaced by accident or altered by design, the removal of the outer coating would at once show the true text. 

The tablets were carefully preserved in great public libraries. Evenduring the Turanian period, before the Semites had entered the land, oneor more of these collections existed in each of the chief cities of Accadand Shumir. "Accad, " says Sayce, "was the China of Asia. Almost every onecould read and write. " Erech was especially renowned for its greatlibrary, and was known as "the City of Books. "

[Illustration: CHALDÆAN TABLET. ]

THE RELIGION. --The Accadian religion, as revealed by the tablets, wasessentially the same as that held today by the nomadic Turanian tribes ofNorthern Asia--what is known as Shamanism. It consisted in a belief ingood and evil spirits, of which the latter held by far the most prominentplace. To avert the malign influence of these wicked spirits, theAccadians had resort to charms and magic rites. The religion of theSemites was a form of Sabæanism, --that is, a worship of the heavenlybodies, --in which the sun was naturally the central object of adoration. 

When the Accadians and the Semites intermingled, their religious systemsblended to form one of the most influential religions of the world--onewhich spread far and wide under the form of Baal worship. There were inthe perfected system twelve primary gods, at whose head stood Il, or Ra. Besides these great divinities, there were numerous lesser and localdeities. 

There were features of this old Chaldæan religion which were destined toexert a wide-spread and potent influence upon the minds of men. Out of theSabæan Semitic element grew astrology, the pretended art of forecastingevents by the aspect of the stars, which was most elaborately andingeniously developed, until the fame of the Chaldæan astrologers wasspread throughout the ancient world, while the spell of that art held inthraldom the mind of mediæval Europe. 

Out of the Shamanistic element contributed by the Turanian Accadians, grewa system of magic and divination which had a most profound influence notonly upon all the Eastern nations, including the Jews, but also upon thelater peoples of the West. Mediæval magic and witchcraft were, in largepart, an unchanged inheritance from Chaldæa. 

THE CHALDÆAN GENESIS. --The cosmological myths of the Chaldæans, that is, their stories of the origin of things, are remarkably like the firstchapters of Genesis. 

[Illustration: ASSYRIAN TABLET WITH PARTS OF THE DELUGE LEGEND. ]

The discoveries and patient labors of various scholars have reproduced, ina more or less perfect form, from the legendary tablets, the Chaldæanaccount of the Creation of the World, of an ancestral Paradise and theTree of Life with its angel guardians, of the Deluge, and of the Tower ofBabel. [Footnote: Consult especially George Smith's _The ChaldæanAccount of Genesis_; see also _Records of the Past_, Vol. VII. Pp. 127, 131. ]

THE CHALDÆAN EPIC OF IZDUBAR. --Beside their cosmological myths, theChaldæans had a vast number of so-called heroic and nature myths. The mostnoted of these form what is known as the Epic of Izdubar (Nimrod?), whichis doubtless the oldest epic of the race. This is in twelve parts, and isreally a solar myth, which recounts the twelve labors of the sun in hisyearly passage through the twelve signs of the Chaldæan zodiac. 

This epic was carried to the West, by the way of Phoenicia and Asia Minor, and played a great part in the mythology of the Greeks and Romans. "Thetwelve labors of Heracles may be traced back to the adventures ofGisdhubar [Izdubar] as recorded in the twelve books of the great epic ofChaldæa. " (Sayce. )

SCIENCE. --In astronomy and arithmetic the Chaldæans made substantialprogress. The clear sky and unbroken horizon of the Chaldæan plains, lending an unusually brilliant aspect to the heavens, naturally led theChaldæans to the study of the stars. They early divided the zodiac intotwelve signs, and named the zodiacal constellations, a memorial of theirastronomical attainments which will remain forever inscribed upon thegreat circle of the heavens; they foretold eclipses, constructed sun-dialsof various patterns, divided the year into twelve months, and the day andnight into twelve hours each, and invented or devised the week of sevendays, the number of days in the week being determined by the course of themoon. "The 7th, 14th, 19th, 21st, and 28th days of the lunar month werekept like the Jewish Sabbath, and were actually so named in Assyria. "

In arithmetic, also, the Chaldæans made considerable advance. A tablet hasbeen found which contains the squares and cubes of the numbers from one tosixty. 

CONCLUSION. -This hasty glance at the beginnings of civilization among theprimitive peoples of the Euphrates valley, will serve to give us at leastsome little idea of how much modern culture owes to the old Chaldæans. Wemay say that Chaldæa was one of the main sources--Egypt was the other--ofthe stream of universal history. 

CHAPTER IV. 

ASSYRIA. 

1. POLITICAL HISTORY. 

TIGLATH-PILESER I. (1130-1110 B. C. ). --It is not until about two centuriesafter the conquest of Chaldæa by the Assyrian prince Tiglathi-Nin (see p. 43), that we find a sovereign of renown at the head of Assyrian affairs. This was Tiglath-Pileser I. , who came to the throne about 1130 B. C. Theroyal records detail at great length his numerous war expeditions, anddescribe minutely the great temples which he constructed. 

For the two centuries following the reign of Tiglath-Pileser, Assyria isquite lost to history; then it is again raised into prominence by two orthree strong kings; after which it once more almost "drops below thehistorical horizon. "

TIGLATH-PILESER II. (745-727 B. C. ). --With this king, who was a usurper, begins what is known as the Second Empire. He was a man of great energyand of undoubted military talent, --for by him the Assyrian power was oncemore extended over the greater part of Southwestern Asia. 

But what renders the reign of this king a landmark in Assyrian history, isthe fact that he was not a mere conqueror like his predecessors, but apolitical organizer of great capacity. He laid the basis of the power andglory of the great kings who followed him upon the Assyrian throne. 

SARGON (722-705 B. C. ). --Sargon was one of the greatest conquerors andbuilders of the Second Empire. In 722 B. C. , he took Samaria and carriedaway the Ten Tribes into captivity beyond the Tigris. The larger part ofthe captives were scattered among the Median towns, where they became somingled with the native population as to be inquired after even to thisday as the "lost tribes. "

During this reign the Egyptians and their allies, in the first encounter(the battle of Raphia, 720 B. C. ) between the empires of the Euphrates andthe Nile valley, suffered a severe defeat, and the ancient kingdom of thePharaohs became tributary to Assyria. 

Sargon was a famous builder. Near the foot of the Persian hills he foundeda large city, which he named for himself; and there he erected a royalresidence, described in the inscriptions as "a palace of incomparablemagnificence, " the site of which is now preserved by the vast mounds ofKhorsabad. 

SENNACHERIB (705-681 B. C. ). --Sennacherib, the son of Sargon, came to thethrone 705 B. C. We must accord to him the first place of renown among allthe great names of the Assyrian Empire. His name, connected as it is withthe story of the Jews, and with many of the most wonderful discoveriesamong the ruined palaces of Nineveh, has become as familiar to the ear asthat of Nebuchadnezzar in the story of Babylon. 

The fulness of the royal inscriptions of this reign enables us to permitSennacherib to tell us in his own words of his great works and militaryexpeditions. Respecting the decoration of Nineveh, he says: "I raisedagain all the edifices of Nineveh, my royal city; I reconstructed all itsold streets, and widened those that were too narrow. I have made the wholetown a city shining like the sun. "

Concerning an expedition against Hezekiah, king of Judah, he says: "I tookforty-six of his strong fenced cities; and of the smaller towns which werescattered about I took and plundered a countless number. And from theseplaces I captured and carried off as spoil 200, 150 people, old and young, male and female, together with horses and mares, asses and camels, oxenand sheep, a countless multitude. And Hezekiah himself I shut up inJerusalem, his capital city, like a bird in a cage, building towers roundthe city to hem him in, and raising banks of earth against the gates, soas to prevent escape. " [Footnote: Rawlinson's _Ancient Monarchies_, Vol. II. P. 161. ]

While Sennacherib was besieging Jerusalem, the king of Egypt appeared inthe field in the south with aid for Hezekiah. This caused Sennacherib todraw off his forces from the siege to meet the new enemy; but near thefrontiers of Egypt the Assyrian host, according to the Hebrew account, wassmitten by "the angel of the Lord, " [Footnote: This expression is aHebraism, meaning often any physical cause of destruction, as a plague orstorm. In the present case, the destroying agency was probably apestilence. ] and the king returned with a shattered army and withoutglory to his capital, Nineveh. 

Sennacherib employed the closing years of his reign in the digging ofcanals, and in the erection of a splendid palace at Nineveh. He wasfinally murdered by his own sons. 

[Illustration: SIEGE OF A CITY, SHOWING USE OF BATTERING-RAM. (FromNimrud. )]

ASSHUR-BANI-PAL (668-626? B. C. ). --This king, the Sardanapalus of theGreeks, is distinguished for his magnificent patronage of art andliterature. During his reign Assyria enjoyed her Augustan age. 

But Asshur-bani-pal was also possessed of a warlike spirit. He broke topieces, with terrible energy, in swift campaigns, the enemies of hisempire. All the scenes of his sieges and battles he caused to besculptured on the walls of his palace at Nineveh. These pictured panelsare now in the British Museum. They are a perfect Iliad in stone. 

SARACUS OR ESARHADDON II. (?-606 B. C. ). --Saracus was the last of the longline of Assyrian kings. His reign was filled with misfortunes for himselfand his kingdom. For nearly or quite seven centuries the Ninevite kingshad lorded it over the East. There was scarcely a state in all WesternAsia that had not, during this time, felt the weight of their conqueringarms; scarcely a people that had not suffered their cruel punishments, ortasted the bitterness of their servitude. 

But now swift misfortunes were bearing down upon the oppressor from everyquarter. The Scythian hordes, breaking through the mountain gates on thenorth, spread a new terror throughout the upper Assyrian provinces; fromthe mountain defiles on the east issued the armies of the recent-grownempire of the Aryan Medes, led by the renowned Cyaxares; from the southernlowlands, anxious to aid in the overthrow of the hated oppressor, theBabylonians, led by the youthful Nebuchadnezzar, the son of the traitorviceroy Nabopolassar, joined, it appears, the Medes as allies, andtogether they laid close siege to the Assyrian capital. 

The operations of the besiegers seem to have been aided by an unusualinundation of the Tigris, which undermined a section of the city walls. Atall events the place was taken, and dominion passed away forever from theproud capital [Footnote: Saracus, in his despair, is said to have erecteda funeral pyre within one of the courts of his palace, and, mounting thepile with the members of his family, to have perished with them in theflames; but this is doubtless a poetical embellishment of the story. ] (606B. C. ). Two hundred years later, when Xenophon with his Ten ThousandGreeks, in his memorable retreat (see p. 156), passed the spot, the oncegreat city was a crumbling mass of ruins, of which he could not even learnthe name. 

2. RELIGION, ARTS, AND GENERAL CULTURE. 

RELIGION. --The Assyrians were Semites, and as such they possessed the deepreligious spirit that has always distinguished the peoples of this family. In this respect they were very much like the Hebrews. The wars which theAssyrian monarchs waged were not alone wars of conquest, but were, in acertain sense, crusades made for the purpose of extending the worship andauthority of the gods of Assyria. They have been likened to the wars ofthe Hebrew kings, and again to the conquests of the Saracens. 

As with the wars, so was it with the architectural works of thesesovereigns. Greater attention, indeed, was paid to the palace in Assyriathan in Babylonia; yet the inscriptions, as well as the ruins, of theupper country attest that the erection and adornment of the temples of thegods were matters of anxious and constant care on the part of the Assyrianmonarchs. Their accounts of the construction and dedication of temples fortheir gods afford striking parallels to the Bible account of the buildingof the temple at Jerusalem by King Solomon. 

[Illustration: EMBLEM OF ASSHUR. ]

Not less prominently manifested is the religious spirit of these kings inwhat we may call their sacred literature, which is filled with prayerssingularly like those of the Old Testament. 

As to the Assyrian deities and their worship, these were in all theiressential characteristics so similar to those of the later Chaldæansystem, already described (see p. 45), that any detailed account of themhere is unnecessary. One difference, however, in the two systems should benoted. The place occupied by Il, or Ra, as the head of the Chaldæandeities, is in Assyria given to the national god Asshur, whose emblem wasa winged circle with the figure of a man within, the whole perhapssymbolizing, according to Rawlinson, eternity, omnipresence, and wisdom. 

CRUELTY OF THE ASSYRIANS. --The Assyrians have been called the "Romans ofAsia. " They were a proud, martial, cruel, and unrelenting race. Althoughpossessing, as we have just noticed, a deep and genuine religious feeling, still the Assyrian monarchs often displayed in their treatment ofprisoners the disposition of savages. In common with most Asiatics, theyhad no respect for the body, but subjected captives to the most terriblemutilations. The sculptured marbles taken from the palaces exhibit thecruel tortures inflicted upon prisoners; kings are being led before theirconqueror by means of hooks thrust through one or both lips; [Footnote:See 2 Chron. Xxxiii. 10-13 (Revised Version). ] other prisoners are beingflayed alive; the eyes of some are being bored out with the point of aspear; and still others are having their tongues torn out. 

[Illustration: ASSYRIANS FLAYING THEIR PRISONERS ALIVE. ]

An inscription by Asshur-nazir-pal, found in one of the palaces at Nimrud, runs as follows: "Their men, young and old, I took prisoners. Of some Icut off the feet and hands; of others I cut off the noses, ears, and lips;of the young men's ears I made a heap; of the old men's heads I built atower. I exposed their heads as a trophy in front of their city. The malechildren and the female children I burned in the flames. "

ROYAL SPORTS. --The Assyrian king gloried in being, like the great Nimrod, "a mighty hunter before the Lord. " The monuments are covered withsculptures that represent the king engaged in the favorite royal sport. Asshur-nazir-pal had at Nineveh a menagerie, or hunting-park, filled withvarious animals, many of which were sent him as tribute by vassal princes. 

[Illustration: LION HUNT. (From Nineveh. )]

REMAINS OF ASSYRIAN CITIES. --Enormous grass-grown mounds, enclosed bycrumbled ramparts, alone mark the sites of the great cities of theAssyrian kings. The character of the remains arises from the nature of thebuilding material. City walls, palaces, and temples were constructedchiefly of sun-dried bricks, so that the generation that raised them hadscarcely passed away before they began to sink down into heaps of rubbish. The rains of many centuries have beaten down and deeply furrowed thesemounds, while the grass has crept over them and made green alike thepalaces of the kings and the temples of the gods. [Footnote: Lying uponthe left bank of the Upper Tigris are two enormous mounds surrounded byheavy earthen ramparts, about eight miles in circuit. This is the site ofancient Nineveh, the immense enclosing ridges being the ruined city walls. These ramparts are still, in their crumbled condition, about fifty feethigh, and average about one hundred and fifty in width. The lower part ofthe wall was constructed of solid stone masonry; the upper portion ofdried brick. This upper and frailer part, crumbling into earth, hascompletely buried the stone basement. The Turks of to-day quarry the stonefrom these old walls for their buildings. ]

PALACE-MOUNDS AND PALACES. --In order to give a certain dignity to theroyal residence, to secure the fresh breezes, and to render them moreeasily defended, the Assyrians, as well as the Babylonians and thePersians, built their palaces upon lofty artificial terraces, orplatforms. These eminences, which appear like natural, flat-topped hills, were constructed with an almost incredible expenditure of human labor. Thegreat palace-mound at Nineveh, called by the natives Koyunjik, covers anarea of one hundred acres, and is from seventy to ninety feet high. Out ofthe material composing it could be built four pyramids as large as that ofCheops. Upon this mound stood several of the most splendid palaces of theNinevite kings. 

[Illustration: RESTORATION OF A COURT IN SARGON'S PALACE AT KHORSABAD. (After Fergusson. )]

The group of buildings constituting the royal residence was often ofenormous extent; the various courts, halls, corridors, and chambers of thePalace of Sennacherib, which surmounted the great platform at Nineveh, covered an area of over ten acres. The palaces were usually one-storied. The walls, constructed chiefly of dried brick, were immensely thick andheavy. The rooms and galleries were plastered with stucco, or panelledwith precious woods, or lined with enamelled bricks. The main halls, however, and the great open courts were faced with slabs of alabaster, covered with sculptures and inscriptions, the illustrated narrative of thewars and labors of the monarch. There were two miles of such sculpturedpanelling at Koyunjik. At the portals of the palace, to guard theapproach, were stationed the colossal human-headed bulls. 

[Illustration: SCULPTURES FROM A GATEWAY AT KHORSABAD. ]

An important adjunct of the palace was the temple, a copy of the tower-temples of the Chaldæans. Its position is marked at present by a loftyconical mound rising amidst and overlooking the palace ruins. 

Upon the decay of the Assyrian palaces, the material forming the upperpart of the thick walls completely buried and protected all the lowerportion of the structure. In this way their sculptures and inscriptionshave been preserved through so many centuries, till brought to light bythe recent excavations of French and English antiquarians. 

THE ROYAL LIBRARY AT NINEVEH. --Within the palace of Asshur-bani-pal atNineveh, Layard discovered what is known as the Royal Library. There weretwo chambers, the floors of which were heaped with books, like theChaldæan tablets already described, The number of books in the collectionhas been estimated at ten thousand. The writing upon some of the tabletsis so minute that it cannot be read without the aid of a magnifying glass. We learn from the inscriptions that a librarian had charge of thecollection. Catalogues of the books have been found, made out on claytablets. The library was open to the public, for an inscription says, "I[Asshur-bani-pal] wrote upon the tablets; I placed them in my palace forthe instruction of my people. "

Asshur-bani-pal, as we have already learned, was the Augustus of Assyria. It was under his patronage and direction that most of the books wereprepared and placed in the Ninevite collection. The greater part of thesewere copies of older Chaldæan tablets; for the literature of theAssyrians, as well as their arts and sciences, was borrowed almost in abody from the Chaldæans. All the old libraries of the low country wereransacked, and copies of their tablets made for the Royal Library atNineveh. Rare treasures were secured from the libraries founded orenlarged by Sargon of Agade (see p. 42). In this way was preserved themost valuable portion of the early Chaldæan literature, which wouldotherwise have been lost to the world. 

The tablets embrace a great variety of subjects; the larger part, however, are lexicons and treatises on grammar, and various other works intended astext-books for scholars. Perhaps the most curious of the tablets yet foundare notes issued by the government, and made redeemable in gold and silveron presentation at the king's treasury. 

From one part of the library, which seems to have been the archivesproper, were taken copies of treaties, reports of officers of thegovernment, deeds, wills, mortgages, and contracts. One tablet, known as"the Will of Sennacherib, " conveys to certain priests some personalproperty to be held in trust for one of his sons. This is the oldest willin existence. 

CHAPTER V. 

BABYLONIA. 

BABYLONIAN AFFAIRS FROM 1300 TO 625 B. C. --During the six centuries andmore that intervened between the conquest of the old Chaldæan monarchy bythe Assyrian king Tiglathi-Nin and the successful revolt of the lowcountries under Nabopolassar (see pp. 43, 51), the Babylonian peoples borethe Assyrian yoke very impatiently. Again and again they made violentefforts to throw it off; and in several instances they succeeded, and fora time enjoyed home rulers. But for the most part the whole country as faras the "Sea, " as the Persian Gulf is called in the inscriptions, was adependency of the great overshadowing empire of the north. 

NABOPOLASSAR (625-604 B. C. ). --Nabopolassar was the first king of what iscalled the New Babylonian Monarchy. When troubles and misfortunes began tothicken about the last Assyrian king, Saracus, he intrusted to the care ofNabopolassar, as his viceroy, the towns and provinces of the South. Thechance now presented of obtaining a crown proved too great a temptationfor the satrap's fidelity to his master. He revolted and becameindependent (625 B. C. ). Later, he entered into an alliance with the Medianking, Cyaxares, against his former sovereign (see p. 51). Through theoverthrow of Nineveh and the break-up of the Assyrian Empire, the newBabylonian kingdom received large accessions of territory. 

NEBUCHADNEZZAR (604-561 B. C. ). --Nabopolassar was followed by his renownedson Nebuchadnezzar, whose oppressive wars and gigantic architectural worksrendered Babylon at once the scourge and the wonder of the ancient world. 

Jerusalem, having repeatedly revolted, was finally taken and sacked. Thetemple was stripped of its sacred vessels of silver and gold, which werecarried away to Babylon, and the temple itself with the adjoining palacewas given to the flames; the people, save a miserable remnant, were alsoborne away into the "Great Captivity" (586 B. C. ). 

With Jerusalem subdued, Nebuchadnezzar pushed with all his forces thesiege of the Phoenician city of Tyre, whose investment had been commencedseveral years before. In striking language the prophet Ezekiel (ch. Xxix. 18) describes the length and hardness of the siege: "Every head was madebald, and every shoulder was peeled. " After a siege of thirteen years, thecity seems to have fallen into the hands of the Babylonian king, and hisauthority was now undisputed from the Zagros Mountains to theMediterranean. 

The numerous captives of his many wars, embracing peoples of almost everynation in Western Asia, enabled Nebuchadnezzar to rival even the Pharaohsin the execution of enormous works requiring an immense expenditure ofhuman labor: Among his works were the Great Palace in the royal quarter ofthe city; the celebrated Hanging Gardens; and gigantic reservoirs, canals, and various engineering works, embracing a vast system of irrigation thatreached every part of Babylonia. 

In addition to all these works, the indefatigable monarch seems to haveeither rebuilt or repaired almost every city and temple throughout theentire country. There are said to be at least a hundred sites in the tractimmediately about Babylon which give evidence, by inscribed bricks bearinghis legend, of the marvellous activity and energy of this monarch. 

In the midst of all these gigantic undertakings, surrounded by a brilliantcourt of councillors and flatterers, the reason of the king was suddenlyand mysteriously clouded. [Footnote: "Nebuchadnezzar fell a victim to thatmental aberration which has often proved the penalty of despotism, but inthe strange and degrading form to which physicians have given the name oflycanthropy; in which the patient, fancying himself a beast, rejectsclothing and ordinary food, and even (as in this case) the shelter of aroof, ceases to use articulate speech, and sometimes persists in going onall-fours. "--Smith's _Ancient History of the East_, p. 357. ] After aperiod the cloud passed away, "the glory of his kingdom, his honor, andbrightness returned unto him. " But it was the splendor of the evening; forthe old monarch soon after died at the age of eighty, worn out by thetoils and cares of a reign of forty-three years, the longest, mostmemorable, and instructive in the annals of the Babylonian or Assyriankings. 

THE FALL OF BABYLON. --In 555 B. C. , Nabonadius, the last king of Babylon, began his reign. He seems to have associated with himself in thegovernment his son Belshazzar, who shared with his father the duties andhonors of royalty, apparently on terms of equal co-sovereignty. 

To the east of the valley of the Tigris and the Euphrates, beyond theranges of the Zagros, there had been growing up an Aryan kingdom, theMedo-Persian, which, at the time now reached by us, had excited by itsaggressive spirit the alarm of all the nations of Western Asia. Forpurposes of mutual defence, the king of Babylon, and Croesus, the well-known monarch of Lydia, a state of Asia Minor, formed an alliance againstCyrus, the strong and ambitious sovereign of the Medes and Persians. Thisleague awakened the resentment of Cyrus, and, after punishing Croesus anddepriving him of his kingdom (see p. 75), he collected his forces tochastise the Babylonian king. 

Anticipating the attack, Nabonadius had strengthened the defences ofBabylon, and stationed around it supporting armies. But he was able toavert the fatal blow for only a few years. Risking a battle in the openfield, his army was defeated, and the gates of the capital were thrownopen to the Persians (538 B. C. ). [Footnote: The device of turning theEuphrates, which Herodotus makes an incident of the siege, was notresorted to by Cyrus; but it seems that a little later (in 521-519 B. C. ), the city, having revolted, was actually taken in this way by the Persianking Darius. Herodotus confused the two events. ]

With the fall of Babylon, the sceptre of dominion, borne for so many yearsby Semitic princes, was given into the hands of the Aryan peoples, whowere destined, from this time forward, to shape the course of events, andcontrol the affairs of civilization. 

THE GREAT EDIFICES OF BABYLON. --The deep impression which Babylon producedupon the early Greek travellers was made chiefly by her vast architecturalworks, --her temples, palaces, elevated gardens, and great walls. TheHanging Gardens of Nebuchadnezzar and the walls of the city were reckonedamong the wonders of the world. 

[Illustration: BIRS-NIMRUD. (Ruins of the great Temple of the SevenSpheres, near Babylon. )]

The Babylonians, like their predecessors the Chaldæans, accorded to thesacred edifice the place of pre-eminence among their architectural works. Sacred architecture in the time of Nebuchadnezzar had changed but littlefrom the early Chaldæan models (see p. 44); save that the temples were nowlarger and more splendid, being made, in the language of the inscriptions, "to shine like the sun. " The celebrated Temple of the Seven Spheres, atBorsippa, a suburb of Babylon, may serve as a representative of the laterBabylonian temples. This structure was a vast pyramid, rising in sevenconsecutive stages, or platforms, to a height of over one hundred andfifty feet. Each of the stages was dedicated to one of the seven planets, or spheres. (The sun and moon were reckoned as planets. ) The stages sacredto the sun and moon were covered respectively with plates of gold andsilver. The chapel, or shrine proper, surmounted the uppermost stage. Aninscribed cylinder discovered under the corner of one of the stages (theBabylonians always buried records beneath the corners of their publicedifices), informs us that this temple was a restoration by Nebuchadnezzarof a very ancient one, which in his day had become, from "extreme oldage, " a heap of rubbish. This edifice in its decay has left one of thegrandest and most impressive ruins in all the East. 

The Babylonian palaces and palace-mounds, in all essential features, werelike those of the Assyrians, already described. 

The so-called Hanging Gardens excited the greatest admiration of theancient Greek visitors to Babylon. They were constructed byNebuchadnezzar, to please his wife Amytis, who, tired of the monotony ofthe Babylonian plains, longed for the mountain scenery of her nativeMedia. The gardens were probably built somewhat in the form of the tower-temples, the successive stages being covered with earth, and beautifiedwith rare plants and trees, so as to simulate the appearance of a mountainrising in cultivated terraces towards the sky. 

Under the later kings, Babylon was surrounded with stupendous walls. Herodotus affirms that these defences enclosed an area just fourteen milessquare. A recently discovered inscription corroborates the statement ofthe historian. The object in enclosing such an enormous district seems tohave been to bring sufficient arable ground within the defences to supportthe inhabitants in case of a protracted siege. No certain traces of thesegreat ramparts can now be found. 

CHAPTER VI. 

THE HEBREWS. 

THE PATRIARCHAL AGE. --Hebrew history begins with the departure of Abrahamout of Ur of the Chaldees, about 2000 B. C. The story of Abraham and hisnephew Lot, of Isaac and his sons Jacob and Esau, of the sojourn of thedescendants of Jacob in Egypt, of the Exodus, of the conquest of Canaanand the apportionment of the land among the twelve tribes of Israel, --allthis marvellous story is told in the Hebrew Scriptures with a charm andsimplicity that have made it the familiar possession of childhood. 

THE JUDGES (from about 1300 to 1095 B. C. ). --Along period of anarchy anddissension followed the conquest and settlement of Canaan by the Hebrews. "There was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in hisown eyes. " During this time there arose a line of national heroes, such asGideon, Jephthah, and Samson, whose deeds of valor and daring, and thetimely deliverance they wrought for the tribes of Israel from their foes, caused their names to be handed down with grateful remembrance tofollowing ages. 

These popular leaders were called Judges because they usually exercisedjudicial functions, acting as arbiters between the different tribes, aswell as between man and man. Their exploits are narrated in the Book ofJudges, which is a collection of the fragmentary, yet always interesting, traditions of this early and heroic period of the nation's life. The lastof the Judges was Samuel, whose life embraces the close of the anarchicalage and the beginning of the monarchy. 

FOUNDING OF THE HEBREW MONARCHY (about 1095 B. C. ). --During the period ofthe Judges, the tribes of Israel were united by no central government. Their union was nothing more than a league, or confederation, which hasbeen compared to the Saxon Heptarchy in England. But the common dangers towhich they were exposed from the attacks of the half-subdued Canaanitishtribes about them, and the example of the great kingdoms of Egypt andAssyria, led the people to begin to think of the advantages of a closerunion and a stronger government. Consequently the republic, orconfederation, was changed into a kingdom, and Saul, of the tribe ofBenjamin, a man chosen in part because of his commanding stature and royalaspect, was made king of the new monarchy (about 1095 B. C. ). 

The king was successful in subduing the enemies of the Hebrews, andconsolidated the tribes and settled the affairs of the new state. Buttowards the close of his reign, his reason became disturbed: fits of gloomand despondency passed into actual insanity, which clouded the closingyears of his life. At last he and his three sons fell in battle with thePhilistines upon Mount Gilboa (about 1055 B. C. ). 

THE REIGN OF DAVID (about 1055-1015 B. C. ). --Upon the death of Saul, David, son of Jesse, of the tribe of Judah, who had been previously anointed andencouraged to expect the crown by the prophet Samuel, assumed the sceptre. This warlike king transformed the pastoral and half-civilized tribes intoa conquering people, and, in imitation of the monarchs of the Nile and theEuphrates, extended the limits of his empire in every direction, and wagedwars of extermination against the troublesome tribes of Moab and Edom. 

Poet as well as warrior, David enriched the literature of his own nationand of the world with lyric songs that breathe such a spirit of devotionand trust that they have been ever since his day the source of comfort andinspiration to thousands. [Footnote: The authorship of the differentpsalms is a matter of debate, yet critics are very nearly agreed inascribing the composition of at least a considerable number of them toDavid. ] He had in mind to build at Jerusalem, his capital city, amagnificent temple, and spent the latter years of his life in collectingmaterial for this purpose. In dying, he left the crown to Solomon, hisyoungest son, his eldest, Absalom, having been slain in a revolt againsthis father, and the second, Adonijah, having been excluded from thesuccession for a similar crime. 

THE REIGN OF SOLOMON (about 1015-975 B. C. ). --Solomon did not possess hisfather's talent for military affairs, but was a liberal patron ofarchitecture, commerce, and learning. He erected, with the utmostmagnificence of adornment, the temple at Jerusalem, planned by his fatherDavid. King Hiram of Tyre, who was a close friend of the Hebrew monarch, aided him in this undertaking by supplying him with the celebrated cedarof Lebanon, and with Tyrian architects, the most skilled workmen at thattime in the world. The dedication ceremonies upon the completion of thebuilding were most imposing and impressive. Thenceforth this temple wasthe centre of the Jewish worship and of the national life. 

[Illustration: THE TEMPLE OF SOLOMON. (A Restoration. )]

For the purpose of extending his commerce, Solomon built fleets upon theMediterranean and the Red Sea. The most remote regions of Asia and Africawere visited by his ships, and their rich and wonderful products made tocontribute to the wealth and glory of his kingdom. 

Solomon maintained one of the most magnificent courts ever held by anoriental sovereign. When the Queen of Sheba, attracted by the reports ofhis glory, came from Southern Arabia to visit the monarch, she exclaimed, "The half was not told me. " He was the wisest king of the East. Hisproverbs are famous specimens of sententious wisdom. He was versed, too, in botany, being acquainted with plants and trees "from the hyssop uponthe wall to the cedar of Lebanon. "

But wise as was Solomon in his words, his life was far from being eitheradmirable or prudent. In conformity with Asiatic custom, he had manywives--seven hundred, we are told--of different nationalities andreligions. Through their persuasion the old monarch himself fell intoidolatry, which turned from him the affections of his best subjects, andprepared the way for the dissensions and wars that followed his death. 

THE DIVISION OF THE KINGDOM (about 975 B. C. ). --The reign of Solomon wasbrilliant, yet disastrous in the end to the Hebrew monarchy. In order tocarry on his vast undertakings, he had laid most oppressive taxes upon hispeople. When Rehoboam, his son, succeeded to his father's place, thepeople entreated him to lighten the taxes that were making their verylives a burden. Influenced by young and unwise counsellors, he replied tothe petition with haste and insolence: "My father, " said he, "chastisedyou with whips, but I will chastise you with scorpions. " Immediately allthe tribes, save Judah and Benjamin, rose in revolt, and succeeded insetting up, to the north of Jerusalem, a rival kingdom, with Jeroboam asits first king. This northern state, with Samaria as its capital, becameknown as the Kingdom of Israel; the southern, of which Jerusalem remainedthe capital, was called the Kingdom of Judah. 

Thus was torn in twain the empire of David and Solomon. United, the tribesmight have maintained an empire capable of offering successful resistanceto the encroachments of the powerful and ambitious monarchs about them. But now the land becomes an easy prey to the spoiler. It is henceforth thepathway of the conquering armies of the Nile and the Euphrates. Betweenthe powerful monarchies of these regions, as between an upper and nethermillstone, the little kingdoms are destined, one after the other, to beground to pieces. 

THE KINGDOM OF ISRAEL (975?-722 B. C. ). --The kingdom of the Ten Tribesmaintained an existence for about two hundred and fifty years. Its storyis instructive and sad. Many passages of its history are recitals of thestruggles between the pure worship of Jehovah and the idolatrous serviceof the deities introduced from the surrounding nations. The cause of thereligion of Jehovah, as the tribes of Israel had received it from thepatriarch Abraham and the lawgiver Moses, was boldly espoused and upheldby a line of the most remarkable teachers and prophets produced by theHebrew race, among whom Elijah and Elisha stand preeminent. 

The little kingdom was at last overwhelmed by the Assyrian power. Thishappened 722 B. C. , when Samaria, as we have already narrated in thehistory of Assyria, was captured by Sargon, king of Nineveh, and the TenTribes were carried away into captivity beyond the Euphrates (see p. 48). From this time they are quite lost to history. 

The country, left nearly vacant by this wholesale deportation of itsinhabitants, was filled with other subjects or captives of the Assyrianking. The descendants of these, mingled with the few Jews of the poorerclass that were still left in the country, formed the Samaritans of thetime of Christ. 

THE KINGDOM OF JUDAH (975?-586 B. C. ). --This little kingdom, torn byinternal religious dissensions, as was its rival kingdom of the north, andoften on the very verge of ruin from Egyptian or Assyrian armies, maintained an independent existence for about four centuries. During thisperiod, a line of eighteen kings, of most diverse character, sat upon thethrone. Upon the extension of the power of Babylon to the west, Jerusalemwas forced to acknowledge the suzerainty of the Babylonian kings. 

The kingdom at last shared the fate of its northern rival. Nebuchadnezzar, in revenge for an uprising of the Jews, besieged and captured Jerusalem, and carried away a large part of the people, and their king Zedekiah, intocaptivity at Babylon (see p. 58). This event virtually ended the separateand political life of the Hebrew race (586 B. C. ). Henceforth Judahconstituted simply a province of the empires--Babylonian, Persian, Macedonian, and Roman--which successively held sway over the regions ofWestern Asia, with, however, just one flicker of national life under theMaccabees, during a part of the two centuries preceding the birth ofChrist. 

It only remains to mention those succeeding events which belong rather tothe story of the Jews as a people than as a nation. Upon the capture ofBabylon by the Persian king Cyrus (see p. 60), that monarch, who waskindly disposed towards the Jews that he there found captives, permittedthem to return to Jerusalem and restore the temple. Jerusalem thus becameagain the centre of the old Hebrew worship, and, although shorn ofnational glory, continued to be the sacred centre of the ancient faithtill the second generation after Christ. Then, in chastisement forrepeated revolts, the city was laid in ruins by the Romans; while vastnumbers of the inhabitants--some authorities say over one million--wereslain, or perished by famine, and the remnant were driven into exile todifferent lands. 

Thus, by a series of unparalleled calamities and persecutions, thedescendants of Abraham were "sifted among all nations"; but to this daythey cling with a strange devotion and loyalty to the simple faith oftheir fathers. 

HEBREW RELIGION AND LITERATURE. 

The ancient Hebrews made little or no contribution to science. Theyproduced no new order of architecture. In sculpture they did nothing:their religion forbade their making "graven images. " Their mission was toteach religion. Here they have been the instructors of the world. Theirliterature is a religious one; for literature with them was simply amedium for the conveyance of religious instruction and the awakening ofdevotional feeling. 

The Hebrew religion, a pure monotheism, the teachings of a long line ofholy men--patriarchs, lawgivers, prophets, and priests--stretching fromAbraham down to the fifth century B. C. , is contained in the sacred booksof the Old Testament Scriptures. In these ancient writings, patriarchaltraditions, histories, dramas, poems, prophecies, and personal narrativesblend in a wonderful mosaic, which pictures with vivid and grand effectthe various migrations, the deliverances, the calamities--all the eventsand religious experiences in the checkered life of the Chosen People. 

Out of this old exclusive, formal Hebrew religion, transformed andspiritualized by the Great Teacher, grew the Christian faith. Out of theOld Testament arose the New, which we should think of as a part of Hebrewliterature: for although written in the Greek language, and long after theclose of the political life of the Jewish nation, still it is essentiallyHebrew in thought and doctrine, and the supplement and crown of the HebrewScriptures. 

Besides the Sacred Scriptures, called collectively, by way of pre-eminence, the Bible (The Book), it remains to mention especially theApocrypha, embracing a number of books that were composed after thedecline of the prophetic spirit, and which show traces, as indeed doseveral of the later books of the Bible, of the influence of Persian andGreek thought. These books are generally regarded by the Jews andProtestants as uncanonical, but in the main are considered by the RomanCatholics as possessing equal authority with the other books of the Bible. 

Neither should we fail to mention the Talmud, a collection of Hebrewcustoms and traditions, with the comments thereupon of the rabbis, a workheld by most Jews next in sacredness to the Holy Book; the writings ofPhilo, an illustrious rabbi who lived at Alexandria just before the birthof Christ; and the _Antiquities of the Jews_ and the _Jewish Wars_ by thehistorian Josephus, who lived and wrote about the time of the taking ofJerusalem by Titus; that is, during the latter part of the first centuryafter Christ. 

CHAPTER VII. 

THE PHOENICIANS. 

THE LAND AND THE PEOPLE. --Ancient Phoenicia embraced a little strip ofbroken sea-coast lying between the Mediterranean and the ranges of MountLebanon. One of the most noted productions of the country was the finefir-timber cut from the forests that crowned the lofty ranges of theLebanon Mountains. The "cedar of Lebanon" holds a prominent place both inthe history and the poetry of the East. 

Another celebrated product of the country was the Tyrian purple, which wasobtained from several varieties of the murex, a species of shell-fish, secured at first along the Phoenician coast, but later sought in distantwaters, especially in the Grecian seas. 

The Phoenicians were of Semitic race, and of close kin to most of the so-called Canaanitish tribes. They were a maritime and trading people. 

TYRE AND SIDON. --The various Phoenician cities never coalesced to form atrue nation. They simply constituted a sort of league, or confederacy, thepetty states of which generally acknowledged the leadership of Tyre or ofSidon, the two chief cities. The place of supremacy in the confederationwas at first held by Sidon, but later by Tyre. 

From the 11th to the 4th century B. C. , Tyre controlled, almost withoutdispute on the part of Sidon, the affairs of Phoenicia. During this timethe maritime enterprise and energy of her merchants spread the fame of thelittle island-capital throughout the world. She was queen and mistress ofthe Mediterranean. 

During all the last centuries of her existence, Phoenicia was, for themost part, tributary to one or another of the great monarchies about her. She acknowledged in turn the suzerainty of the Assyrian, the Egyptian, theBabylonian, the Persian, and the Macedonian kings. Alexander the Great, after a most memorable siege, captured the city of Tyre--which alone ofall the Phoenician cities closed her gates against the conqueror--andreduced it to ruins (332 B. C. ). The city never recovered from this blow. The larger part of the site of the once brilliant maritime capital is now"bare as the top of a rock, "--a place where the fishermen that stillfrequent the spot spread their nets to dry. 

PHOENICIAN COMMERCE. --When we catch our first glimpse of theMediterranean, about 1500 B. C. , it is dotted with the sails of Phoeniciannavigators. It was natural that the people of the Phoenician coast shouldhave been led to a seafaring life. The lofty mountains that back thelittle strip of shore seemed to shut them out from a career of conquestand to prohibit an extension of their land domains. At the same time, theMediterranean in front invited them to maritime enterprise; while theforests of Lebanon in the rear offered timber in abundance for theirships. The Phoenicians, indeed, were the first navigators who pushed outboldly from the shore and made real sea voyages. 

The longest voyages were made to procure tin, which was in great demandfor the manufacture of articles in bronze. The nearest region where thismetal was found was the Caucasus, on the eastern shore of the Euxine. ThePhoenician sailors boldly threaded the Aegean Archipelago, passed throughthe Hellespont, braved the unknown terrors of the Black Sea, and from theland of Colchis brought back to the manufacturers of Asia the covetedarticle. 

Towards the close of the 11th century B. C. , the jealousy of the Pelasgicstates of Greece and of the Archipelago, that were now growing intomaritime power, closed the Aegean Sea against the Phoenician navigators. They then pushed out into the Western Mediterranean, and opened the tin-mines of the Iberian (Spanish) peninsula. When these began to fail, thesebold sailors passed the Pillars of Hercules, faced the dangers of theAtlantic, and brought back from those distant seas the tin gathered in themines of Britain. 

PHOENICIAN COLONIES. --Along the different routes pursued by their ships, and upon the coasts visited by them, the Phoenicians established navalstations and trading-posts. Settlements were made in Cyprus, in Rhodes, and on other islands of the Aegean Sea, as well as in Greece itself. Theshores of Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica were fringed with colonies; whilethe coast of North Africa was dotted with such great cities as Utica, Hippo, and Carthage. Colonies were even planted beyond the Pillars ofHercules, upon the Atlantic seaboard. The Phoenician settlement of Gades, upon the western coast of Spain, is still preserved in the modern Cadiz. 

ARTS DISSEMINATED BY THE PHOENICIANS. --We can scarcely overrate theinfluence of Phoenician maritime enterprise upon the distribution of thearts and the spread of culture among the early peoples of theMediterranean area. "Egypt and Assyria, " says Lenormant, "were thebirthplace of material civilization; the Canaanites [Phoenicians] were itsmissionaries. " Most prominent of the arts which they introduced among allthe nations with whom they traded was that of alphabetical writing. 

Before or during the rule of the Hyksos in Egypt, the Phoenician settlersin the Delta borrowed from the Egyptians twenty-two hieratic characters, which they passed on to their Asiatic kinsmen. These characters receivednew names, and became the Phoenician alphabet. Now, wherever thePhoenicians went, they carried this alphabet as "one of their exports. " Itwas through them, probably, that the Greeks received it; the Greeks passedit on to the Romans, and the Romans gave it to the German peoples. In thisway did our alphabet come to us from Old Egypt. 

The introduction of letters among the different nations, vast as was thebenefit which the gift conferred upon peoples just beginning to makeadvances in civilization, was only one of the many advantages whichresulted to the early civilization of Europe from the commercialenterprise of the Phoenicians. It is probable that they first introducedamong the semi-civilized tribes of that continent the use of bronze, whichmarks an epoch in their growing culture. Articles of Phoenicianworkmanship are found in the earliest tombs of the Greeks, the Etruscans, and the Romans; and in very many of the manufactures of these peoples maybe traced the influence of Phoenician art. 

GREAT ENTERPRISES AIDED BY THE PHOENICIANS. --While scattering the germs ofcivilization and culture broadcast over the entire Mediterranean area, theenterprising Phoenicians were also lending aid to almost every greatundertaking of antiquity. 

King Hiram of Tyre furnished Solomon with artisans and skilled workmen, and with great rafts of timber from Lebanon, for building the splendidtemple at Jerusalem. The Phoenicians also provided timber from their fineforests for the construction of the great palaces and temples of theAssyrians, the Babylonians, and the Egyptians. They built for the Persianking Xerxes the Hellespontine bridges over which he marched his immensearmy into Greece (see p. 81). They furnished contingents of ships to thekings of Nineveh and Babylon for naval operations both upon theMediterranean and the Persian and Arabian gulfs. Their fleets served astransports and convoys to the expeditions of the Persian monarchs aimingat conquest in Asia Minor or in Europe. They formed, too, the naval branchof the armaments of the Pharaohs; for the Egyptians hated the sea, andnever had a native fleet. And it was Phoenician sailors that, under theorders of Pharaoh-Necho, circumnavigated Africa (see p. 26)--anundertaking which, although attended perhaps with less advantage to theworld, still is reckoned quite as remarkable, considering the remote agein which it was accomplished, as the circumnavigation of the globe by thePortuguese navigator Magellan, more than two thousand years later. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

THE PERSIAN EMPIRE

1. POLITICAL HISTORY. 

KINSHIP OF THE MEDES AND PERSIANS. --It was in very remote times, that someAryan tribes, separating themselves from the other members of the Aryanfamily, sought new abodes on the plateau of Iran. The tribes that settledin the south became known as the Persians; while those that tookpossession of the mountain regions of the northwest were called Medes. TheMedes, through mingling with native non-Aryan tribes, became quitedifferent from the Persians; but notwithstanding this, the names of thetwo peoples were always very closely associated, as in the familiarlegend, "The law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not. "

THE MEDES AT FIRST THE LEADING RACE. --Although the Persians were destinedto become the dominant tribe of all the Iranian Aryans, still the Medeswere at first the leading people. Cyaxares (625-585 B. C. ) was their firstprominent leader and king. We have already seen how, aided by theBabylonians, he overthrew the last king of Nineveh, and burned thatcapital (see p. 51). 

Cyaxares was followed by his son Astyages (585-558 B. C. ), during whosereign the Persians, whom Cyaxares had brought into at least partialsubjection to the Median crown, revolted, overthrew the Median power, andthenceforth held the place of leadership and authority. 

REIGN OF CYRUS THE GREAT (558-529 B. C. ). --The leader of the revolt againstthe Medes was Cyrus, the tributary king of the Persians. Through hisenergy and soldierly genius, he soon built up an empire more extended thanany over which the sceptre had yet been swayed by an Oriental monarch, orindeed, so far as we know, by any ruler before his time. It stretched fromthe Indus to the farthest limits of Asia Minor, and from the Caspian Seato the Persian Gulf, thus embracing not only the territories of the Mediankingdom, but also those of the allied kingdoms of Lydia and Babylonia. Thesubjugation of Babylonia to the Persian authority has already beennarrated (see p. 60). We will now tell how Cyrus gained the kingdom ofLydia. 

[Illustration: KINGDOMS OF LYDIA, MEDIA, AND BABYLONIA. C. B. C. 550]

Lydia was a country in the western part of Asia Minor. It was a landhighly favored by nature. It embraced two rich river valleys, --the plainsof the Hermus and the Cayster, --which, from the mountains inland, slopegently to the island-dotted Aegean. The Pactolus, and other tributaries ofthe streams we have named, rolled down "golden sands, " while the mountainswere rich in the precious metals. The coast region did not at first belongto Lydia; it was held by the Greeks, who had fringed it with cities. Thecapital of the country was Sardis, whose citadel was set on a lofty andprecipitous rock. 

The Lydians were a mixed people, formed, it is thought, by the mingling, in prehistoric times, of Aryan tribes that crossed the Aegean from Europe, with the original non-Aryan population of the country. 

The last and most renowned of the Lydian kings was Croesus. Under him theLydian empire attained its greatest extension, embracing all the states ofAsia Minor west of the Halys, save Lycia. The tribute Croesus collectedfrom the Greek cities, which he subjugated, and the revenues he derivedfrom his gold mines, rendered him the richest monarch of his times, sothat his name has passed into the proverb "Rich as Croesus. "

Now Astyages, whom Cyrus had just overthrown, was the brother-in-law ofthis Croesus. When Croesus heard of his relative's misfortune, he resolvedto avenge his wrongs. The Delphian oracle (see p. 104), to which he sentto learn the issue of a war upon Cyrus, told him that he "would destroy agreat kingdom. " Interpreting this favorably, he sent again to inquirewhether the empire he should establish would prove permanent, and receivedthis oracle: "Flee and tarry not when a mule [Footnote: The allusion is tothe (traditional) mixed Persian and Median descent of Cyrus. ] shall beking of the Medes. " Deeming the accession of a mule to the Persian thronealtogether impossible, he inferred the oracle to mean that his empireshould last forever. 

Thus encouraged in his purpose, Croesus prepared to make war upon Persia. But he had miscalculated the strength and activity of his enemy. Cyrusmarched across the Halys, defeated the Lydian army in the field, and aftera short siege captured Sardis; and Lydia became a province of the newPersian empire. 

[Illustration: TOMB OF CYRUS THE GREAT. (Present Condition. )]

There is a story which tells how Cyrus had caused a pyre to be erected onwhich to burn Croesus, but at the last moment was struck by hearing theunfortunate monarch repeatedly call the name of Solon. Seeking the meaningof this, he was told that Croesus in his prosperous years was visited bythe Greek sage Solon, who, in answer to the inquiry of Croesus as towhether he did not deem him a happy man, replied, "Count no man happyuntil he is dead. " Cyrus was so impressed with the story, so the legendtells, that he released the captive king, and treated him with thegreatest kindness. 

This war between Croesus and Cyrus derives a special importance from thefact that it brought the Persian empire into contact with the Greek citiesof Asia, and thus led on directly to that memorable struggle betweenGreece and Persia known as the Græco-Persian War. 

Tradition says that Cyrus lost his life while leading an expeditionagainst some Scythian tribes in the north. He was buried at Pasargadæ, theold Persian capital, and there his tomb stands to-day, surrounded by theruins of the magnificent buildings with which he adorned that city. Thefollowing cuneiform inscription may still be read upon a pillar near thesepulchre: "I am Cyrus, the king, the Akhæmenian. "

Cyrus, notwithstanding his seeming love for war and conquest, possessed akindly and generous disposition. Almost universal testimony has ascribedto him the purest and most beneficent character of any Eastern monarch. 

REIGN OF CAMBYSES (529-522 B. C. ). --Cyrus the Great left two sons, Cambysesand Smerdis: the former, as the oldest, inherited the sceptre, and thetitle of king. He began a despotic and unfortunate reign by causing hisbrother, whose influence he feared, to be secretly put to death. 

With far less ability than his father for their execution, Cambysesconceived even vaster projects of conquest and dominion. Asia had hithertousually afforded a sufficient field for the ambition of Oriental despots. Cambyses determined to add the country of Africa to the vast inheritancereceived from his father. Upon some slight pretext, he invaded Egypt, captured Memphis, and ascended the Nile to Thebes. From here he sent anarmy of fifty thousand men to subdue the oasis of Ammon, in the Libyandesert. Of the vast host not a man returned from the expedition. It isthought that the army was overwhelmed and buried by one of those fatalstorms, called simooms, that so frequently sweep over those dreary wastesof sand. 

After a short, unsatisfactory stay in Egypt, Cambyses set out on hisreturn to Persia. While on his way home, news was brought to him that hisbrother Smerdis had usurped the throne. A Magian [Footnote: There were atthis time two opposing religions in Persia: Zoroastrianism, which taughtthe simple worship of God under the name of Ormazd; and Magianism, a lesspure faith, whose professors were fire-worshippers. The former was thereligion of the Aryans; the latter, that of the non-Aryan portion of thepopulation. The usurpation which placed Smerdis on the throne was plannedby the Magi, Smerdis himself being a fire-priest. ] impostor, Gomates byname, who resembled the murdered Smerdis, had personated him, and actuallygrasped the sceptre. Entirely disheartened by this startlingintelligence, Cambyses in despair took his own life. 

REIGN OF DARIUS I. (521-486 B. C. ). --The Persian nobles soon rescued thesceptre from the grasp of the false Smerdis, and their leader, Darius, took the throne. The first act of Darius was to punish, by a generalmassacre, the Magian priests for the part they had taken in the usurpationof Smerdis. 

[Illustration: CAPTIVE INSURGENTS BROUGHT BEFORE DARIUS. Beneath his footis the Magus Gomates, the false Smerdis. (From the great Behistun Rock. )]

With quiet and submission secured throughout the empire, Darius gavehimself, for a time, to the arts of peace. He built a palace at Susa, anderected magnificent structures at Persepolis; reformed the administrationof the government (see p. 82), making such wise and lasting changes thathe has been called "the second founder of the Persian empire"; establishedpost-roads, instituted a coinage for the realm, and upon the great rock ofBehistun, a lofty smooth-faced cliff on the western frontier of Persia, caused to be inscribed a record of all his achievements. [Footnote: Thisimportant inscription is written in the cuneiform characters, and in threelanguages, Aryan, Turanian, and Semitic. It is the Rosetta Stone of thecuneiform writings, the key to their treasures having been obtained fromits parallel columns. ]

And now the Great King, Lord of Western Asia and of Egypt, conceived andentered upon the execution of vast designs of conquest, the far-reachingeffects of which were destined to live long after he had passed away. Inhospitable steppes on the north, and burning deserts on the south, whoseshifting sands within a period yet fresh in memory had been the grave of aPersian army, seemed to be the barriers which Nature herself had set forthe limits of empire in these directions. But on the eastern flank of thekingdom the rich and crowded plains of India invited the conqueror withpromises of endless spoils and revenues; while on the west a newcontinent, full of unknown mysteries, presented virgin fields never yettraversed by the army of an Eastern despot. Darius determined to extendthe frontiers of his empire in both these directions. 

At one blow the region of northwestern India known as the Punjab, wasbrought under Persian authority; and thus with a single effort were theeastern limits of the empire pushed out so as to include one of therichest countries of Asia--one which henceforth returned to the Great Kingan annual revenue vastly larger than that of any other province hithertoacquired, not even excepting the rich district of Babylonia. 

With an army numbering, it is said, more than 700, 000 men, Darius nowcrossed the Bosphorus by means of a sort of pontoon bridge, constructed byGrecian architects, and passing the Danube by means of a similar bridge, penetrated far into what is now Russia, which was then occupied byScythian hordes. The results of the expedition were the addition of Thraceto the Persian empire, and the making of Macedonia a tributary kingdom. Thus the Persian kings secured their first foothold upon the Europeancontinent. 

The most significant campaign in Europe was yet to follow. In 500 B. C. , the Ionian cities in Asia Minor subject to the Persian authority revolted. The Greeks of Europe lent aid to their sister states. Sardis was sackedand burned by the insurgents. With the revolt crushed and punished withgreat severity, Darius determined to chastise the European Greeks, andparticularly the Athenians, for their insolence in giving aid to hisrebellious subjects. Herodotus tells us that he appointed a person whosesole duty it was daily to stir up the purpose of the king with the words, "Master, remember the Athenians. "

A large land and naval armament was fitted out and placed under thecommand of Mardonius, a son-in-law of Darius. The land forces sufferedsevere losses at the hands of the barbarians of Thrace, and the fleet waswrecked by a violent storm off Mount Athos, three hundred ships being lost(492 B. C. ). 

Two years after this disaster, another expedition, consisting of 120, 000men, was borne by ships across the AEgean to the plains of Marathon. Thedetails of the significant encounter that there took place between thePersians and the Athenians will be given when we come to narrate thehistory of Greece. We need now simply note the result, --the completeoverthrow of the Persian forces by the Greeks under Miltiades (490 B. C. ). 

Darius, angered beyond measure by the failure of the expedition, stirredup all the provinces of his vast empire, and called for new levies fromfar and near, resolved upon leading in person such an army into Greecethat the insolent Athenians should be crushed at a single blow, and thetarnished glory of the Persian arms restored. In the midst of thesepreparations, with the Egyptians in revolt, the king suddenly died, in theyear 486 B. C. 

REIGN OF XERXES I. (486-465 B. C. ). --The successor of Darius, his sonXerxes, though more inclined to indulge in the ease and luxury of thepalace than to subject himself to the hardship and discipline of the camp, was urged by those about him to an active prosecution of the plans of hisfather. 

After crushing the Egyptian revolt and another insurrection in Babylonia, the Great King was free to devote his attention to the distant Greeks. Mustering the contingents of the different provinces of his empire, Xerxesled his vast army over the bridges he had caused to be thrown across theHellespont, crushed the Spartan guards at the Pass of Thermopylæ, pushedon into Attica, and laid Athens in ruins. But there fortune forsook him. At the naval battle of Salamis, his fleet was cut to pieces by the Grecianships; and the king, making a precipitate retreat into Asia, hastened tohis capital, Susa. Here, in the pleasures of the harem, he sought solacefor his wounded pride and broken hopes. He at last fell a victim to palaceintrigue, being slain in his own chamber (465 B. C. ). 

END OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE. --The power and supremacy of the Persianmonarchy passed away with the reign of Xerxes. The last one hundred andforty years of the existence of the empire was a time of weakness andanarchy. This period was spanned by the reigns of eight kings. It was inthe reign of Artaxerxes II. , called Mnemon for his remarkable memory, thattook place the well-known expedition of the Ten Thousand Greeks underCyrus, the brother of Artaxerxes, an account of which will be given inconnection with Grecian history (see chap. XV. ). 

The march of the Ten Thousand through the very heart of the dominions ofthe Great King demonstrated the amazing internal weakness of the empire. Marathon and Salamis had shown the immense superiority of the freesoldiery of Greece over the splendid but servile armies of Persia, thatwere often driven to battle with the lash. These disclosures invited theMacedonians to the invasion and conquest of the empire. 

In the year 334 B. C. , Alexander the Great, king of Macedonia, led a smallarmy of thirty-five thousand Greeks and Macedonians across the Hellespont. Three great battles--that of the Granicus, that of Issus, and that ofArbela--decided the fate of the Persian Empire. Darius III. , the last ofthe Persian kings, fled from the field of Arbela, on the plains ofAssyria, only to be treacherously assassinated by one of his own generals. 

The succeeding movements of Alexander, and the establishment by him of theshort-lived Macedonian monarchy upon the ruins of the Persian state, arematters that properly belong to Grecian history, and will be related in afollowing chapter. 

2. GOVERNMENT, RELIGION, AND ARTS. 

THE GOVERNMENT. --Before the reign of Darius I. , the government of thePersian Empire was like that of all the great monarchies that had precededit; that is, it consisted of a great number of subject states, which wereallowed to retain their own kings and manage their own affairs, onlypaying tribute and homage, and furnishing contingents in time of war, tothe Great King. 

We have seen how weak was this rude and primitive type of government. Darius I. , who possessed rare ability as an organizer, remodelled thesystem of his predecessors, and actually realized for the Persian monarchywhat Tiglath-Pileser II. Had long before attempted, but only with partialand temporary success, to accomplish for the Assyrian. 

The system of government which Darius I. Thus first made a real fact inthe world, is known as the _satrapal_, a form represented to-day bythe government of the Turkish Sultan. The entire kingdom was divided intotwenty or more provinces, over each of which was placed a governor, calleda satrap, appointed by the king. These officials held their position atthe pleasure of the sovereign, and were thus rendered his subservientcreatures. Each province contributed to the income of the king a statedrevenue. 

There were provisions in the system by which the king might be apprised ofthe disloyalty of his satraps. Thus the whole dominion was firmly cementedtogether, and the facility with which almost sovereign states--which wasthe real character of the different parts of the empire under the oldsystem--could plan and execute revolt, was removed. 

LITERATURE AND RELIGION: ZOROASTRIANISM. --The literature of the ancientPersians was mostly religious. Their sacred book is called the Zendavesta. The oldest part is named the Vendidad. This consists of laws, incantations, and mythical tales. 

[Illustration: THE KING IN COMBAT WITH A MONSTER. (From Persepolis. )]

The religious system of the Persians, as taught in the Zendavesta, isknown as Zoroastrianism, from Zoroaster, its founder. This great reformerand teacher is now generally supposed to have lived and taught about 1000B. C. 

Zoroastrianism was a system of belief known as dualism. Opposed to the"good spirit, " Ormazd (Ahura Mazda), there was a "dark spirit, " Ahriman(Angro-Mainyus), who was constantly striving to destroy the good creationsof Ormazd by creating all evil things--storm, drought, pestilence, noxiousanimals, weeds and thorns in the world without, and evil in the heart ofman within. From all eternity these two powers had been contending for themastery; in the present neither had the decided advantage; but in the nearfuture Ormazd would triumph over Ahriman, and evil be forever destroyed. 

The duty of man was to aid Ormazd by working with him against the evil-loving Ahriman. He must labor to eradicate every evil and vice in his ownbosom; to reclaim the earth from barrenness; and to kill all bad animals--frogs, toads, snakes, lizards--which Ahriman had created. Herodotus sawwith amazement the Magian priests armed with weapons and engaged inslaying these animals as a "pious pastime. " Agriculture was a sacredcalling, for the husbandman was reclaiming the ground from the curse ofthe Dark Spirit. Thus men might become co-workers with Ormazd in themighty work of overthrowing and destroying the kingdom of the wickedAhriman. 

The evil man was he who allowed vice and degrading passions to find aplace in his own soul, and neglected to exterminate noxious animals andweeds, and to help redeem the earth from the barrenness and sterilitycreated by the enemy of Ormazd. [Footnote: The belief of the Zoroastriansin the sacredness of the elements, --earth, water, fire, and air, --createda difficulty in regard to the disposal of dead bodies. They could neitherbe burned, buried, thrown into the water, nor left to decay in asepulchral chamber or in the open air, without polluting one or another ofthe sacred elements. So they were given to the birds and wild beasts, being exposed on lofty towers or in desert places. Those whose feelingswould not allow them thus to dispose of their dead, were permitted to burythem, provided they first encased the body in wax, to preserve the groundfrom contamination. The modern Parsees, or Fire-Worshippers, give theirdead to the birds. ]

After death the souls of the good and the bad alike must pass over anarrow bridge: the good soul crosses in safety, and is admitted to thepresence of Ahura Mazda; while the evil soul is sure to fall from thepath, sharp as the edge of a scimitar, into a pit of woe, the dwelling-place of Ahriman. 

ARCHITECTURE. --The simple religious faith of the Persians discouraged, though it did not prohibit, the erection of temples: their sacredarchitecture scarcely included more than an altar and pedestal. The palaceof the monarch was the structure that absorbed the best efforts of thePersian artist. 

In imitation of the inhabitants of the valley of the Euphrates, thePersian kings raised their palaces upon lofty terraces, or platforms. Butupon the table-lands they used stone instead of adobe or brick, and atPersepolis, raised, for the substruction of their palaces, an immenseplatform of massive masonry, which is one of the most wonderful monumentsof the world's ancient builders. This terrace, which is uninjured by the2300 years that have passed since its erection, is about 1500 feet long, 1000 feet wide, and 40 feet high. The summit is reached by broad stairwaysof stone, pronounced by competent judges the finest work of the kind thatthe ancient or even the modern world can boast. 

[Illustration: THE RUINS OF PERSEPOLIS. ]

Surmounting this platform are the ruins of the palaces of several of thePersian monarchs, from Cyrus the Great to Artaxerxes Ochus. These ruinsconsist chiefly of walls, columns, and great monolithic door- and window-frames. Colossal winged bulls, copied from the Assyrians, stand as wardensat the gateway of the ruined palaces. 

Numerous sculptures in bas-relief decorate the faces of the walls, andthese throw much light upon the manners and customs of the ancient Persiankings. The successive palaces increase, not only in size, but insumptuousness of adornment, thus registering those changes which we havebeen tracing in the national history. The residence of Cyrus was small andmodest, while that of Artaxerxes Ochus equalled in size the great palaceof the Assyrian Sargon. 

TABLE OF KINGS OF MEDIA AND PERSIA. 

Kings of Media Phraortes. . . . . . . . . . . . ? -625 Cyaxares . . . . . . . . . . . . 625-585 Astyages . . . . . . . . . . . . 585-558

Kings of Persia Cyrus . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558-529 Cambyses . . . . . . . . . . . . 529-522 Pseudo-Smerdis . . . . . . . . . 522-521 Darius I. . . . . . . . . . . . 521-486 Xerxes I. . . . . . . . . . . . 486-465 Artaxerxes I. (Longimanus) . . . 465-425 Xerxes II. . . . . . . . . . . . 425 Sogdianus . . . . . . . . . . . 425-424 Darius II. (Nothus) . . . . . . 424-405 Artaxerxes II. (Mnemon) . . . . 405-359 Artaxerxes III. (Ochus) . . . . 359-338 Arses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338-336 Darius III. (Codomannus) . . . . 336-330

SECTION II. --GRECIAN HISTORY

CHAPTER IX. 

THE LAND AND THE PEOPLE. 

DIVISIONS OF GREECE. --Long arms of the sea divide the Grecian peninsulainto three parts, called Northern, Central, and Southern Greece. 

Northern Greece included the ancient districts of Thessaly and Epirus. Thessaly consists mainly of a large and beautiful valley, walled in on allsides by rugged mountains. It was celebrated far and wide for the varietyand beauty of its scenery. On its northern edge, lay a beautiful glen, called the Vale of Tempe, the only pass by which the plain of Thessalycould be entered from the north. The district of Epirus stretched alongthe Ionian Sea on the west. In the gloomy recesses of its forests of oakwas situated the renowned Dodonean oracle of Zeus. 

Central Greece was divided into eleven districts, among which were Phocis, Boeotia, and Attica. In Phocis was the city of Delphi, famous for itsoracle and temple; in Boeotia, the city of Thebes; and in Attica, thebrilliant Athens. 

Southern Greece, or the Peloponnesus, was also divided into elevenprovinces, of which the more important were Arcadia, embracing the centralpart of the peninsula; Achaia, the northern part; Argolis, the eastern;and Messenia and Laconia, the southern. The last district was ruled by thecity of Sparta, the great rival of Athens. 

MOUNTAINS. --The Cambunian Mountains form a lofty wall along a considerablereach of the northern frontier of Greece, shutting out at once the coldwinds and hostile races from the north. Branching off at right angles tothese mountains is the Pindus range, which runs south into Central Greece. 

In Northern Thessaly is Mount Olympus, the most celebrated mountain of thepeninsula. The ancient Greeks thought it the highest mountain in the world(it is 9700 feet in height), and believed that its cloudy summit was theabode of the celestials. 

South of Olympus, close by the sea, are Ossa and Pelion, celebrated infable as the mountains which the giants, in their war against the gods, piled one upon another, in order to scale Olympus. 

Parnassus and Helicon, in Central Greece, --beautiful mountains clad withtrees and vines and filled with fountains, --were believed to be thefavorite haunts of the Muses. Near Athens are Hymettus, praised for itshoney, and Pentelicus, renowned for its marbles. 

The Peloponnesus is rugged with mountains that radiate in all directionsfrom the central country of Arcadia, --"the Switzerland of Greece. "

ISLANDS ABOUT GREECE. --Very much of the history of Greece is intertwinedwith the islands that lie about the mainland. On the east, in the AegeanSea, are the Cyclades, so called because they form an irregular circleabout the sacred isle of Delos, where was a very celebrated shrine ofApollo. Between the Cyclades and Asia Minor lie the Sporades, whichislands, as the name implies, are sown irregularly over that portion ofthe Aegean. 

Just off the coast of Attica is a large island called by the ancientsEuboea, but known to us as Negropont. Close to the Asian shores are thelarge islands of Lesbos, Chios, Samos, and Rhodes. 

To the west of Greece lie the Ionian Islands, the largest of which wascalled Corcyra, now Corfu. The rugged island of Ithaca was the birthplaceof Odysseus, or Ulysses, the hero of the _Odyssey_. Cythera, just south ofthe Peloponnesus, was sacred to Aphrodite (Venus), as it was here fablesaid she rose from the sea-foam. Beyond Cythera, in the Mediterranean, midway between Greece and Egypt, is the large island of Crete, noted inlegend for its labyrinth and its legislator Minos. 

INFLUENCE OF COUNTRY. --The physical features of a country have much to dowith the moulding of the character and the shaping of the history of itspeople. Mountains, isolating neighboring communities and shutting outconquering races, foster the spirit of local patriotism and preservefreedom; the sea, inviting abroad, and rendering intercourse with distantcountries easy, awakens the spirit of adventure and develops commercialenterprise. 

Now, Greece is at once a mountainous and a maritime country. Abruptmountain-walls fence it off into a great number of isolated districts, each of which in ancient times became the seat of a distinct community, orstate. Hence the fragmentary character of its political history. TheHellenic states never coalesced to form a single nation. 

The peninsula is, moreover, by deep arms and bays of the sea, convertedinto what is in effect an archipelago. (No spot in Greece is forty milesfrom the sea. ) Hence its people were early tempted to a sea-faring life. The shores of the Mediterranean and the Euxine were dotted with Helleniccolonies. Intercourse with the old civilizations of Egypt and Phoeniciastirred the naturally quick and versatile Greek intellect to early andvigorous thought. The islands strewn with seeming carelessness through theAEgean Sea were "stepping-stones, " which invited the earliest settlers ofGreece to the delightful coast countries of Asia Minor, and thus blendedthe life and history of the opposite shores. 

Again, the beauty of Grecian scenery inspired many of the most strikingpassages of her poets; and it is thought that the exhilarating atmosphereand brilliant skies of Attica were not unrelated to the lofty achievementsof the Athenian intellect. 

THE PELASGIANS. --The historic inhabitants of the land we have describedwere called by the Romans Greeks, but they called themselves Hellenes, from their fabled ancestor Hellen. 

But the Hellenes, according to their own account, were not the originalinhabitants of the country. They were preceded by a people whom theycalled Pelasgians. Who these folk were is a matter of debate. Some thinkthat the Pelasgians and Hellenes were kindred tribes, but that theHellenes, possessing superior qualities, gradually acquired ascendencyover the Pelasgians and finally absorbed them. 

[Illustration: PREHISTORIC WALLS AT MYCENÆ. (The Lions' Gate. )]

The Pelasgians were somewhat advanced beyond the savage state. Theycultivated the ground, and protected their cities with walls. Remnants oftheir rude but massive masonry still encumber in places the soil ofGreece. 

THE HELLENES. --The Hellenes were divided into four tribes; namely, theIonians, the Dorians, the Achæans, and the Æolians. The Ionians were amany-sided, imaginative people. They developed every part of their nature, and attained unsurpassed excellence in art, literature, and philosophy. The most noted Ionian city was Athens, whose story is a large part of thehistory of Hellas. 

The Dorians were a practical, unimaginative race. Their speech and theirart were both alike without ornament. They developed the body rather thanthe mind. Their education was almost wholly gymnastic and military. Theywere unexcelled as warriors. The most important city founded by them wasSparta, the rival of Athens. 

These two great Hellenic families divided Hellas [Footnote: Under the nameHellas the ancient Greeks included not only Greece proper and the islandsof the adjoining seas, but also the Hellenic cities in Asia Minor, Southern Italy, Sicily, and elsewhere. "Wherever were Hellenes, there wasHellas. "] into two rival parties, which through their mutual jealousiesand contentions finally brought all the bright hopes and promises of theHellenic race to utter ruin. 

The Achæans are represented by the Greek legends as being the predominantrace in the Peloponnesus during the Heroic Age. The Æolians formed arather ill-defined division. In historic times the name is often made toinclude all Hellenes not enumerated as Ionians or Dorians. 

These several tribes, united by bonds of language and religion, alwaysregarded themselves as members of a single family. They were proud oftheir ancestry, and as exclusive almost as the Hebrews. All non-Hellenicpeople they called _Barbarians_ [Footnote: At first, this term meantscarcely more than "unintelligible folk"; but later, it came to expressaversion and contempt. ]. 

When the mists of antiquity are first lifted from Greece, about thebeginning of the eighth century B. C. , we discover the several families ofthe Hellenic race in possession of Greece proper, of the islands of theÆgean, and of the western coasts of Asia Minor. Respecting theirprehistoric migrations and settlements, we have little or no certainknowledge. 

ORIENTAL IMMIGRANTS. --According to their own traditions the early growthof civilization among the European Hellenes was promoted by the settlementamong them of Oriental immigrants, who brought with them the arts andculture of the different countries of the East. 

From Egypt, legend affirms, came Cecrops, bringing with him the arts, learning, and priestly wisdom of the Nile valley. He is represented as thebuilder of the citadel (the _Cecropia_) of what was afterwards theillustrious city of Athens. From Phoenicia Cadmus brought the letters ofthe alphabet, and founded the city of Thebes. The Phrygian Pelops, theprogenitor of the renowned heroes Agamemnon and Menelaus, settled in thesouthern peninsula, which was called after him the Peloponnesus (theIsland of Pelops). 

The nucleus of fact in all these legends is probably this, --that theEuropean Greeks received the primary elements of their culture from theEast through their Asiatic kinsmen. 

LOCAL PATRIOTISM OF THE GREEKS: THE CITY THE POLITICAL UNIT. --The narrowpolitical sympathies of the ancient Greeks prevented their ever uniting toform a single nation. The city was with them the political unit. It wasregarded as a distinct, self-governing state, just like a modern nation. Acitizen of one city was an alien in any other: he could not marry a womanof a city not his own, nor hold property in houses or lands within itsterritory. 

A Greek city-state usually embraced, besides the walled town, a more orless extensive border of gardens and farms, a strip of sea-coast, orperhaps a considerable mountain-hemmed valley or plain. The _model_city (or _state_, as we should say) must not be over large. In this, as in everything else, the ancient Greeks applied the Delphian rule--"Measure in all things. " "A small city, " says one of their poets, "setupon a rock and well governed, is better than all foolish Nineveh. "Aristotle thought that the ideal city should not have more than tenthousand citizens. 

CHAPTER X. 

THE LEGENDARY, OR HEROIC AGE. (From the earliest times to 776 B. C. )

CHARACTER OF THE LEGENDARY AGE. --The real history of the Greeks does notbegin before the eighth century B. C. All that lies back of that date is aninseparable mixture of myth, legend, and fact. Yet this shadowy periodforms the background of Grecian history, and we cannot understand theideas and acts of the Greeks of historic times without at least someknowledge of what they believed their ancestors did and experienced inthose prehistoric ages. 

So, as a sort of prelude to the story we have to tell, we shall repeatsome of the legends of the Greeks respecting their national heroes andtheir great labors and undertakings. But it must be carefully borne inmind that these legends are not history, though some of them may beconfused remembrances of actual events. 

THE HEROES: HERACLES, THESEUS, AND MINOS. --The Greeks believed that theirancestors were a race of heroes of divine or semi-divine lineage. Everytribe, district, city, and village even, preserved traditions of itsheroes, whose wonderful exploits were commemorated in song and story. Manyof these personages acquired national renown, and became the reveredheroes of the whole Greek race. 

Heracles was the greatest of the national heroes of the Greeks. He isrepresented as performing, besides various other exploits, twelvesuperhuman labors, and as being at last translated from a blazing pyre toa place among the immortal gods. The myth of Heracles, who was at first asolar divinity, is made up mainly of the very same fables that were toldof the Chaldæan solar hero Izdubar (see p. 46). Through the Phoenicians, these stories found their way to the Greeks, who ascribed to their ownHeracles the deeds of the Chaldæan sun-god. 

Theseus, a descendant of Cecrops, was the favorite hero of the Athenians, being one of their legendary kings. Among his great exploits was theslaying of the Minotaur, --a monster which Minos, king of Crete, kept in alabyrinth, and fed upon youths and maidens sent from Athens as a forcedtribute. 

Minos, king of Crete, was one of the greatest tribal heroes of theDorians. Legend makes him a legislator of divine wisdom, the suppressor ofpiracy in the Grecian seas, and the founder of the first great maritimestate of Hellas. 

THE ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION. --Besides the labors and exploits of singleheroes, the legends of the Greeks tell of several memorable enterprisesconducted by bands of heroes. Among these were the Argonautic Expeditionand the Siege of Troy. 

The tale of the Argonautic Expedition is told with many variations in thelegends of the Greeks. Jason, a prince of Thessaly, with fifty companionheroes, among whom were Heracles, Theseus, and Orpheus, the latter amusician of superhuman skill, the music of whose lyre moved brutes andstones, set sail in "a fifty-oared galley, " called the _Argo_ (hencethe name _Argonauts_, given to the heroes), in search of a "goldenfleece" which was fabled to be nailed to a tree and watched by a dragon, in the Grove of Ares, on the eastern shores of the Euxine, an inhospitableregion of unknown terrors. The expedition is successful, and, after manywonderful adventures, the heroes return in triumph with the sacred relic. 

Different meanings have been given to this tale. In its primitive form itwas doubtless a pure myth of the rain-clouds; but in its later forms wemay believe it to symbolize the maritime explorations in the eastern seas, of some of the tribes of Pelasgian Greece. 

THE TROJAN WAR (legendary date 1194-1184 B. C. ). --The Trojan War was anevent about which gathered a great circle of tales and poems, all full ofan undying interest and fascination. 

Ilios, or Troy, was the capital of a strong empire, represented as Grecianin race and language, which had grown up in Asia Minor, along the shoresof the Hellespont. The traditions tell how Paris, son of Priam, king ofTroy, visited the Spartan king Menelaus, and ungenerously requited hishospitality by secretly bearing away to Troy his wife Helen, famous forher rare beauty. 

All the heroes of Greece flew to arms to avenge the wrong. A host of onehundred thousand warriors was speedily gathered. Agamemnon, brother ofMenelaus and "king of men, " was chosen leader of the expedition. Under himwere the "lion-hearted Achilles, " of Thessaly, the "crafty Ulysses"(Odysseus), king of Ithaca, Ajax, "the swift son of Oileus, " theTelamonian Ajax, the aged Nestor, and many more--the most valiant heroesof all Hellas. Twelve hundred galleys bore the gathered clans from Aulisin Greece, across the Ægean to the Trojan shores. 

For ten years the Greeks and their allies hold in close siege the city ofPriam. On the plains beneath the walls of the capital, the warriors of thetwo armies fight in general battle, or contend in single encounter. Atfirst, Achilles is foremost in every fight; but a fair-faced maiden, whofell to him as a prize, having been taken from him by his chief, Agamemnon, he is filled with wrath, and sulks in his tent. Though theGreeks are often sorely pressed, still the angered hero refuses them hisaid. At last, however, his friend Patroclus is killed by Hector, eldestson of Priam, and then Achilles goes forth to avenge his death. In afierce combat he slays Hector, fastens his body to his chariot wheels, anddrags it thrice around the walls of Troy. 

The city is at last taken through a device of the "crafty Ulysses. " Uponthe plain in sight of the walls is built a wooden statue of a horse, inthe body of which are hidden several Grecian warriors. Then the Greeksretire to their ships, as though about to abandon the siege. The Trojansissue from the gates and gather in wondering crowds about the image. Theybelieve it to be an offering sacred to Athena, and so dare not destroy it;but, on the other hand, misled by certain omens and by a lying Greek namedSinon, they level a place in the walls of their city, and drag the statuewithin. At night the concealed warriors issue from the horse, open thegates of the city to the Grecians, and Troy is sacked, and burned to theground. The aged Priam is slain, after having seen his sons and many ofhis warriors perish before his face. Æneas, with his aged father, Anchises, and a few devoted followers, escapes, and, after longwanderings, becomes the fabled founder of the Roman race in Italy. 

It is a matter of difficulty to point out the nucleus of fact in this themost elaborate and interesting of the Grecian legends. Some believe it tobe the dim recollection of a prehistoric conflict between the Greeks andthe natives of Asia Minor, arising from the attempt of the former tosecure a foothold upon the coast. That there really existed in prehistorictimes such a city as Troy, has been placed beyond doubt by the excavationsand discoveries of Dr. Schliemann. 

RETURN OF THE GRECIAN CHIEFTAINS. --After the fall of Troy, the Grecianchieftains and princes returned home. The poets represent the gods aswithdrawing their protection from the hitherto favored heroes, becausethey had not respected the altars of the Trojans. So, many of them weredriven in endless wanderings over sea and land. Homer's _Odyssey_ portraysthe sufferings of the "much-enduring" Odysseus (Ulysses), impelled bydivine wrath to long journeyings through strange seas. 

In some cases, according to the tradition, advantage had been taken of theabsence of the princes, and their thrones had been usurped. Thus at Argos, Ægisthus had won the unholy love of Clytemnestra, wife and queen ofAgamemnon, who on his return was murdered by the guilty couple. Inpleasing contrast with this we have exhibited to us the constancy ofPenelope, although sought by many suitors during the absence of herhusband Ulysses. 

THE DORIAN INVASION, OR THE RETURN OF THE HERACLIDÆ (legendary date 1104B. C. ). --We set the tradition of the return of the Heraclidæ apart from thelegends of the enterprises just detailed, for the reason that itundoubtedly contains quite a large historical element. The legend tellshow Heracles, an Achæan, in the times before the Trojan War, ruled overthe Peloponnesian Achæans. Just before that event his children were drivenfrom the land. Eighty years after the war, the hundred years of exileappointed by the Fates having expired, the descendants of the hero, at thehead of the Dorians from Northern Greece, returned, and with their aideffected the conquest of the greater part of the Peloponnesus, andestablished themselves as conquerors and masters in the land that hadformerly been ruled by their semi-divine ancestor. 

This legend seems to be a dim remembrance of a prehistoric invasion of thePeloponnesus by the Dorians from the north of Greece, and the expulsion orsubjugation of the native inhabitants of the peninsula. 

Some of the dispossessed Achæans, crowding towards the north of thePeloponnesus, drove out the Ionians who occupied the southern shore of theCorinthian Gulf, and settling there, gave the name _Achaia_ to all thatregion. 

Arcadia, in the centre of the Peloponnesus, was another district which didnot fall into the hands of the Dorians. The people here, even down to thelatest times, retained their primitive customs and country mode of life;hence _Arcadian_ came to mean rustic and artless. 

MIGRATIONS TO ASIA MINOR. --The Greek legends represent that the Dorianinvasion of the Peloponnesus resulted in three distinct migrations fromthe mother-land to the shores of Asia Minor and the adjoining islands. 

The northwestern shore of Asia Minor was settled, mainly, by Aeolianemigrants from Boeotia. The neighboring island of Lesbos became the homeand centre of Æolian culture in poetry and music. 

The coast to the south of the Æolians was occupied by Ionian emigrants, who, uniting with their Ionian kinsmen already settled upon that shore, built up twelve splendid cities (Ephesus, Miletus, etc. ), which finallyunited to form the celebrated Ionian confederacy. 

South of the Ionians, all along the southwestern shore of Asia Minor, theDorians established their colonies. They also settled the importantislands of Cos and Rhodes, and conquered and colonized Crete. 

The traditions of these various settlements represent them as having beeneffected in a very short period; but it is probable that the movementembraced several centuries, --possibly a longer time than has been occupiedby the English race in colonizing the different lands of the WesternWorld. 

With these migrations to the Asiatic shores, the Legendary Age of Greececomes to an end. From this time forward we tread upon fairly firm historicground. 

SOCIETY IN THE HEROIC AGE. --In Homeric times the Greeks were ruled byhereditary kings, who were believed to be of divine or superhuman lineage. The king was at once the lawgiver, the judge, and the military leader ofhis people. He was expected to prove his divine right to rule, by hiscourage, strength, wisdom, and eloquence. When he ceased to display thesequalities, "the sceptre departed from him. "

The king was surrounded by an advisory council of chiefs or nobles. Theking listened to what the nobles had to say upon any measure he mightpropose, and then acted according to his own will or judgment, restrainedonly by the time-honored customs of the community. 

Next to the council of chiefs, there was a general assembly, called the_Agora_, made up of all the common freemen. The members of this bodycould not take part in any debate, nor could they vote upon any question. This body, so devoid seemingly of all authority in the Homeric age, wasdestined to become the all-powerful popular assembly in the democraticcities of historic Greece. 

Of the condition of the common freemen we know but little; the legendarytales were concerned chiefly with the kings and nobles. Slavery existed, but the slaves did not constitute as numerous a class as they became inhistoric times. 

In the family, the wife held a much more honored position than sheoccupied in later times. The charming story of the constant Penelope, which we find in the _Odyssey_, assures us that the Homeric age cherisheda chivalric feeling for woman. 

In all ranks of society, life was marked by a sort of patriarchalsimplicity. Manual labor was not yet thought to be degrading. Ulyssesconstructs his own house and raft, and boasts of his skill in swinging thescythe and guiding the plow. Spinning and weaving were the chiefoccupations of the women of all classes. 

One pleasing and prominent virtue of the age was hospitality. There wereno public inns in those times, hence a sort of gentle necessity compelledthe entertainment of wayfarers. The hospitality accorded was the same freeand impulsive welcome that the Arab sheik of to-day extends to thetraveller whom chance brings to his tent. But while hospitable, the noblesof the heroic age were often cruel, violent, and treacherous. Homerrepresents his heroes as committing without a blush all sorts of fraud andvillanies. Piracy was considered an honorable occupation. 

[Illustration: FORTY-OARED GREEK BOAT. (After a Vase Painting. )]

Art and architecture were in a rudimentary state. Yet some advance hadbeen made. The cities were walled, and the palaces of the kings possesseda certain barbaric splendor. Coined money was unknown; wealth was reckonedchiefly in flocks and herds, and in uncoined metals. The art of writingwas probably unknown, at least there is no certain mention of it; andsculpture could not have been in an advanced state, as the Homeric poemsmake no mention of statues. The state of literature is shown by the poemsof the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_: before the close of the age, epic poetry hadreached a perfection beyond which it has never been carried. 

Commerce was yet in its infancy. Although the Greeks were to become agreat maritime people, still in the Homeric age they had evidentlyexplored the sea but little. The Phoenicians then ruled the waves. TheGreeks in those early times knew scarcely anything of the world beyondGreece proper and the neighboring islands and shores. Scarcely an echo ofthe din of life from the then ancient and mighty cities of Egypt andChaldæa seems to have reached their ears. 

CHAPTER XI. 

RELIGION OF THE GREEKS. 

INTRODUCTORY. --Without at least some little knowledge of the religiousideas and institutions of the ancient Greeks, we should find very manypassages of their history wholly unintelligible. Hence a few remarks uponthese matters will be in place here. 

COSMOGRAPHY OF THE GREEKS. --The Greeks supposed the earth to be, as itappears, a plane, circular in form like a shield. Around it flowed the"mighty strength of the ocean river, " a stream broad and deep, beyondwhich on all sides lay realms of Cimmerian darkness and terror. Theheavens were a solid vault, or dome, whose edge shut down close upon theearth. Beneath the earth, reached by subterranean passages, was Hades, avast region, the realm of departed souls. Still beneath this was theprison Tartarus, a pit deep and dark, made fast by strong gates of brassand iron. Sometimes the poets represent the gloomy regions beyond theocean stream as the cheerless abode of the dead. 

The sun was an archer-god, borne in a fiery chariot up and down the steeppathway of the skies. Naturally it was imagined that the regions in theextreme east and west, which were bathed in the near splendors of thesunrise and sunset, were lands of delight and plenty. The eastern was thefavored country of the Ethiopians [Footnote: There was also a westerndivision of these people. ], a land which even Zeus himself so loved tovisit that often he was found absent from Olympus when sought bysuppliants. The western region, adjoining the ocean stream, formed theElysian Fields, the abodes of the souls of heroes and of poets. [Footnote:These conceptions, it will be understood, belong to the early period ofGreek mythology. As the geographical knowledge of the Greeks became moreextended, they modified considerably the topography not only of the upper-world, but also of the nether-world. ]

THE OLYMPIC COUNCIL. --There were twelve members of the celestial council, six gods and as many goddesses. The male deities were Zeus, the father ofgods and men; Poseidon, ruler of the sea; Apollo, or Phoebus, the god oflight, of music, and of prophecy; Ares, the god of war; Hephæstus, thedeformed god of fire, and the forger of the thunderbolts of Zeus; Hermes, the wing-footed herald of the celestials, the god of invention andcommerce, himself a thief and the patron of thieves. 

[Illustration: THE WORLD ACCORDING TO HOMER. ]

The female divinities were Hera, the proud and jealous queen of Zeus;Athena, or Pallas, --who sprang full-grown from the forehead of Zeus, --thegoddess of wisdom, and the patroness of the domestic arts; Artemis, thegoddess of the chase; Aphrodite, the goddess of love and beauty, born ofthe sea-foam; Hestia, the goddess of the hearth; Demeter, the earth-mother, the goddess of grains and harvests. [Footnote: The Latin names ofthese divinities are as follows: Zeus = Jupiter; Poseidon = Neptune;Apollo = Apollo; Ares = Mars; Hephæstus = Vulcan; Hermes = Mercury; Hera =Juno; Athena = Minerva; Artemis = Diana; Aphrodite = Venus; Hestia =Vesta; Demeter = Ceres. 

These Latin names, however, are not the equivalents of the Greek names, and should not be used as such. The mythologies of the Hellenes and Romanswere as distinct as their languages. Consult Rawlinson's _Religions ofthe Ancient World_. ]

These great deities were simply magnified human beings, possessing alltheir virtues, and often their weaknesses. They give way to fits of angerand jealousy. "Zeus deceives, and Hera is constantly practising herwiles. " All the celestial council, at the sight of Hephæstus limpingacross the palace floor, burst into "inextinguishable laughter"; andAphrodite, weeping, moves all to tears. They surpass mortals rather inpower, than in size of body. They can render themselves visible orinvisible to human eyes. Their food is ambrosia and nectar; theirmovements are swift as light. They may suffer pain; but death can nevercome to them, for they are immortal. Their abode is Mount Olympus and theairy regions above the earth. 

LESSER DEITIES AND MONSTERS. --Besides the great gods and goddesses thatconstituted the Olympian council there was an almost infinite number ofother deities, celestial personages, and monsters neither human nordivine. 

Hades (Pluto) ruled over the lower realms; Dionysus (Bacchus) was the godof wine; the goddess Nemesis was the punisher of crime, and particularlythe queller of the proud and arrogant; Æolus was the ruler of the winds, which he confined in a cave secured by mighty gates. 

There were nine Muses, inspirers of art and song. The Nymphs werebeautiful maidens, who peopled the woods, the fields, the rivers, thelakes, and the ocean. Three Fates allotted life and death, and threeFuries (Eumenides or Erinnyes) avenged crime, especially murder andunnatural crimes. The Gorgons were three sisters, with hair entwined withserpents. A single gaze upon them chilled the beholder to stone. Besidesthese there were Scylla and Charybdis, sea-monsters that made perilous thepassage of the Sicilian Straits, the Centaurs, the Cyclops, Cerberus, thewatch-dog of Hades, and a thousand others. 

Many at least of these monsters were simply personifications of the humanpassions or of the malign and destructive forces of nature. Thus, theFuries were the embodiment of an aroused and accusing conscience; theGorgons were tempests, which lash the sea into a fury that paralyzes theaffrighted sailor; Scylla and Charybdis were dangerous whirlpools off thecoast of Sicily. To the common people at least, however, they were realcreatures, with all the parts and habits given them by the poets. 

MODES OF DIVINE COMMUNICATION. --In the early ages the gods were wont, itwas believed, to visit the earth and mingle with men. But even in Homer'stime this familiar intercourse was a thing of the past--a tradition of agolden age that had passed away. Their forms were no longer seen, theirvoices no longer heard. In these later and more degenerate times therecognized modes of divine communication with men were by oracles, and bycasual and unusual sights and sounds, as thunder and lightning, a suddentempest, an eclipse, a flight of birds, --particularly of birds that mountto a great height, as these were supposed to know the secrets of theheavens, --the appearance or action of the sacrificial victims, or anystrange coincidence. The art of interpreting these signs or omens wascalled the art of divination. 

ORACLES. --But though the gods might reveal their will and intentionsthrough signs and portents, still they granted a more specialcommunication of counsel through what were known as _oracles_. Thesecommunications, it was believed, were made by Zeus, and especially byApollo, who was the god of prophecy, the Revealer. 

Not everywhere, but only in chosen places, did these gods manifest theirpresence and communicate the divine will. These favored spots were calledoracles, as were also the responses there received. There were twenty-twooracles of Apollo in different parts of the Grecian world, but a muchsmaller number of those of Zeus. These were usually situated in wild anddesolate spots--in dark forests or among gloomy mountains. 

The most renowned of the oracles was that of the Pelasgian Zeus at Dodona, in Epirus, and that of Apollo at Delphi, in Phocis. At Dodona the priestslistened in the dark forests for the voice of Zeus in the rustling leavesof the sacred oak. At Delphi there was a deep fissure in the ground, whichemitted stupefying vapors, that were thought to be the inspiring breath ofApollo. Over the spot was erected a splendid temple, in honor of theoracle. The revelation was generally received by the Pythia, or priestess, seated upon a tripod placed over the orifice. As she became overpowered bythe influence of the prophetic exhalations, she uttered the message of thegod. These mutterings of the Pythia were taken down by attendant priests, interpreted, and written in hexameter verse. Sometimes the will of Zeuswas communicated to the pious seeker by dreams and visions granted to himwhile sleeping in the temple of the oracle. 

The oracle of Delphi gained a celebrity wide as the world: it was oftenconsulted by the monarchs of Asia and the people of Rome in times ofextreme danger and perplexity. Among the Greeks scarcely any undertakingwas entered upon without the will and sanction of the oracle being firstsought. 

Especially true was this in the founding of colonies. Apollo was believed"to take delight in the foundation of new cities. " No colony could prosperthat had not been established under the superintendence of the Delphiangod. 

Some of the responses of the oracle contained plain and wholesome advice;but very many of them, particularly those that implied a knowledge of thefuture, were obscure and ingeniously ambiguous, so that they mightcorrespond with the event however affairs should turn. Thus, Croesus istold that, if he undertake an expedition against Persia, he will destroy agreat empire. He did, indeed;--but the empire was his own. 

The Delphian oracle was at the height of its fame before the Persian War;in that crisis it did not take a bold or patriotic stand, and itsreputation was sensibly impaired. 

IDEAS OF THE FUTURE. --To the Greeks life was so bright and joyous a thingthat they looked upon death as a great calamity. They therefore picturedlife after death, except in the case of a favored few, as being hopelessand aimless. [Footnote: Homer makes the shade of the great Achilles inHades to say:-- "I would be A laborer on earth, and serve for hire Some man of mean estate, who makes scant cheer, Rather than reign o'er all who have gone down To death. "--_Od. _ XI. 489-90 [Bryant's Trans. ]. ] The Elysian Fields, away in the land of sunset, were, indeed, filled with every delight; butthese were the abode only of the great heroes and benefactors of the race. So long as the body remained unburied, the soul wandered restless inHades; hence the sacredness of the rites of sepulture. 

THE SACRED GAMES. --The celebrated games of the Greeks had their origin inthe belief of their Aryan ancestors that the souls of the dead weregratified by such spectacles as delighted them during their earthly life. During the Heroic Age these festivals were simply sacrifices or gamesperformed at the tomb, or about the pyre of the dead. Gradually these grewinto religious festivals observed by an entire city or community, and werecelebrated near the oracle or shrine of the god in whose honor they wereinstituted; the idea now being that the gods were present at the festival, and took delight in the various contests and exercises. 

Among these festivals, four acquired a world-wide celebrity. These werethe Olympian, celebrated in honor of Zeus, at Olympia, in thePeloponnesus; the Pythian, in honor of Apollo, near his shrine and oracleat Delphi; the Nemean, in honor of Zeus, at Nemea; and the Isthmian, heldin honor of Poseidon, on the isthmus of Corinth. 

THE OLYMPIAN GAMES. --Of these four festivals the Olympian secured thegreatest renown. In 776 B. C. Coroebus was victor in the foot-race atOlympia, and as from that time the names of the victors were carefullyregistered, that year came to be used by the Greeks as the starting-pointin their chronology. The games were held every fourth year, and theinterval between two successive festivals was known as an Olympiad. 

The contests consisted of foot-races, boxing, wrestling, and otherathletic games. Later, chariot-racing was introduced, and became the mostpopular of all the contests. The competitors must be of the Hellenic race;and must, moreover, be unblemished by any crime against the state or sinagainst the gods. Spectators from all parts of the world crowded to thefestival. 

The victor was crowned with a garland of wild olive; heralds proclaimedhis name abroad; his native city received him as a conqueror, sometimesthrough a breach made in the city walls; his statues, executed by eminentartists, were erected at Olympia and in his own city; sometimes evendivine honor and worship were accorded to him; and poets and orators viedwith the artist in perpetuating the name and deeds of him who hadreflected undying honor upon his native state. 

INFLUENCE OF THE GRECIAN GAMES. --For more than a thousand years thesenational festivals exerted an immense influence upon the literary, social, and religious life of Hellas. They enkindled among the widely scatteredHellenic states and colonies a common literary taste and enthusiasm; forinto all the four great festivals, excepting the Olympian, wereintroduced, sooner or later, contests in poetry, oratory, and history. During the festivals, poets and historians read their choicestproductions, and artists exhibited their masterpieces. The extraordinaryhonors accorded to the victors stimulated the contestants to the utmost, and strung to the highest tension every power of body and mind. To thisfact we owe some of the grandest productions of the Greek race. 

They moreover promoted intercourse and trade; for the festivals becamegreat centres of traffic and exchange during the continuance of the games. They softened, too, the manners of the people, turning their thoughts frommartial exploits and giving the states respite from war; for during themonth in which the religious games were held it was sacrilegious to engagein military expeditions. In all these ways, though they never drew thestates into a common political union, still they did impress a commoncharacter upon their social, intellectual, and religious life. 

THE AMPHICTYONIC COUNCIL. --Closely connected with the religious festivalswere the so-called Amphictyonies, or "leagues of neighbors. " These wereassociations of a number of cities or tribes for the celebration ofreligious rites at some shrine, or for the protection of some particulartemple. 

Pre-eminent among all such unions was that known as the DelphicAmphictyony, or simply The Amphictyony. This was a league of twelve of thesub-tribes of Hellas, whose main object was the protection of the Templeof Apollo at Delphi. Another of its purposes was, by humane regulations, to mitigate the cruelties of war. 

The so-called First Sacred War (600-590 B. C. ) was a crusade of ten yearscarried on by the Amphictyons against the cities of Crissa and Cirrha fortheir robbery of the treasures of the Delphian temple. The cities werefinally taken, levelled to the ground, and the wrath of the gods invokedupon any one who should dare to rebuild them. The spoils of the war weredevoted to the establishment of musical contests in honor of the DelphianApollo. Thus originated the renowned Pythian festivals, to which allusionhas just been made. 

CHAPTER XII. 

AGE OF THE TYRANTS AND OF COLONIZATION:THE EARLY GROWTH OF SPARTA AND OF ATHENS. (776-500 B. C. )

1. AGE OF THE TYRANTS AND OF COLONIZATION. 

THE TYRANTS. --In the Heroic Age the preferred form of government was apatriarchal monarchy. The _Iliad_ says, "The rule of many is not agood thing: let us have one ruler only, --one king, --him to whom Zeus hasgiven the sceptre. " But by the dawn of the historic period, thepatriarchal monarchies of the Achæan age had given place, in almost allthe Grecian cities, to oligarchies or aristocracies. 

THE OLIGARCHIES GIVE WAY TO TYRANNIES. --The nobles into whose hands theancient royal authority thus passed were often divided among themselves, and invariably opposed by the common freemen, who, as they grew inintelligence and wealth, naturally aspired to a place in the government. The issue of long contentions was the overthrow almost everywhere ofoligarchical government and the establishment of the rule of a singleperson. 

Usually this person was one of the nobility, who held himself out as thechampion of the people, and who with their help usurped the government. One who had thus seized the government was called a tyrant. By this termthe Greeks did not mean one who rules harshly, but simply one who holdsthe supreme authority in the state illegally. Some of the Greek Tyrantswere mild and beneficent rulers, though too often they were all that thename implies among us. 

But the Greeks always had an inextinguishable hatred of arbitrary rule;consequently the Tyrannies were, as a rule, short-lived, rarely lastinglonger than three generations. They were usually violently overthrown, andthe old oligarchies re-established, or democracies set up in their place. As a rule, the Dorian cities preferred oligarchical, and the Ionian citiesdemocratical, government. The so-called Age of the Tyrants lasted from 650to 500 B. C. 

Among the most noted of the Tyrants were the Pisistratidæ, at Athens, ofwhom we shall speak hereafter; Periander at Corinth (625-585 B. C. ), whowas a most cruel ruler, yet so generous a patron of artists and literarymen that he was thought worthy of a place among the Seven Sages; andPolycrates, Tyrant of Samos (535-522 B. C. ), who, with that island as astronghold, and with a fleet of a hundred war-galleys, built up a sort ofmaritime kingdom in the AEgean, and for the space of more than a decadeenjoyed such astonishing and uninterrupted prosperity, that it wasbelieved his sudden downfall and death--he was allured to the Asian shoreby a Persian satrap, and crucified--were brought about by the envy of thegods, [Footnote: Herodotus tells how Amasis of Egypt, the friend and allyof the Tyrant, becoming alarmed at his extraordinary course of goodfortune, wrote him, begging him to interrupt it and disarm the envy of thegods, by sacrificing his most valued possession. Polycrates, acting uponthe advice, threw into the sea a precious ring, which he highly prized;but soon afterwards the jewel was found by his servants in a fish that afisherman had brought to the palace as a present for Polycrates. WhenAmasis heard of this, he at once broke off his alliance with the Tyrant, feeling sure that he was fated to suffer some terrible reverse of fortune. The event justified his worst fears. ] who the Greeks thought were apt tobe jealous of over-prosperous mortals. 

THE FOUNDING OF COLONIES. --The Age of the Tyrants coincides very nearlywith the era of greatest activity in the founding of new colonies. Thousands, driven from their homes, like the Puritans in the time of theStuart tyranny in England, fled over the seas, and, under the direction ofthe Delphian Apollo, laid upon remote and widely separated shores thebasis of "Dispersed Hellas. " The overcrowding of population and the Greeklove of adventure also contributed to swell the number of emigrants. During this colonizing era Southern Italy became so thickly set with Greekcities as to become known as _Magna Græcia_, "Great Greece. " Here werefounded during the latter part of the eighth century B. C. The importantDorian city of Tarentum; the wealthy and luxurious Achæan city of Sybaris(whence the term _Sybarite_, meaning a voluptuary); the Great Crotona, distinguished for its schools of philosophy and its victors in theOlympian games. 

Upon the island of Sicily was planted, by the Dorian Corinth, the city ofSyracuse (734 B. C. ), which, before Rome had become great, waged war onequal terms with Carthage. 

In the Gulf of Lyons was established about 600 B. C. The important Ioniancity of Massalia (Marseilles), the radiating point of long routes oftravel and trade. 

On the African coast was founded the great Dorian city of Cyrene (630B. C. ), and probably about the same time was established in the Nile deltathe city of Naucratis, through which the civilization of Egypt flowed intoGreece. 

The tide of emigration flowed not only to the west and south, but to thenorth as well. The northern shores of the Ægean and those of theHellespont and the Propontis were fringed with colonies. The Argonauticterrors of the Black Sea were forgotten or unheeded, and even those remoteshores received their emigrants. Many of the settlements in that quarterwere established by the Ionian city of Miletus, which, swarming like ahive, became the mother of more than eighty colonies. 

Through this wonderful colonizing movement, Greece came to hold somewhatthe same place in the ancient Mediterranean world that England as acolonizer occupies in the world of today. Many of these colonies not onlyreflected honor upon the mother land through the just renown of theircitizens, but through their singularly free, active, and progressive life, they exerted upon her a most healthful and stimulating influence. 

2. THE GROWTH OF SPARTA. 

SITUATION OF SPARTA. --Sparta was one of the cities of the Peloponnesuswhich owed their origin or importance to the Dorian Invasion (see p. 96). It was situated in the deep valley of the Eurotas, in Laconia, and tookits name Sparta (sown land) from the circumstance that it was built upontillable ground, whereas the heart and centre of most Greek citiesconsisted of a lofty rock (the citadel, or acropolis). It was also calledLacedæmon, after an early legendary king. 

CLASSES IN THE SPARTAN STATE. --In order to understand the social andpolitical institutions of the Spartans, we must first notice the threeclasses--Spartans (Spartiatæ), Perioeci, and Helots--into which thepopulation of Laconia was divided. 

The Spartans proper were the descendants of the Dorian conquerors of thecountry. They composed but a small fraction of the entire population. Their relations to the conquered people were those of an army ofoccupation. Sparta, their capital, was simply a vast camp, unprotected byany walls until later and degenerate times. The martial valor of itscitizens was thought its only proper defence. 

The Perioeci (dwellers-around), who constituted the second class, were thesubjugated Achæans. They were allowed to retain possession of their lands, but were forced to pay tribute, and, in times of war, to fight for theglory and interest of their Spartan masters. 

The third and lowest class was composed of slaves, or serfs, calledHelots. The larger number of these were laborers upon the estates of theSpartans. They were the property of the state, and not of the individualSpartan lords, among whom they were distributed by lot. Practically theyhad no rights which their Spartan masters felt bound to respect. It isaffirmed that when they grew too numerous for the safety of the state, their numbers were thinned by a deliberate massacre of the surpluspopulation. 

THE LEGEND OF LYCURGUS. --The laws and customs of the Spartans have excitedmore interest, perhaps, than any similar institutions of the ancientworld. A mystery and halo were thrown about them by their being attributedto the creative genius of a single lawgiver, Lycurgus. 

Lycurgus, according to tradition, lived about the ninth century B. C. He isrepresented as acquainting himself with the laws and institutions ofdifferent lands, by converse with their priests and sages. He is said tohave studied with great zeal the laws of Minos, the legendary lawgiver ofthe Cretans. Like the great legislator Moses, he became learned in all thewisdom of the Egyptians. 

After much opposition, a system of laws and regulations drawn up byLycurgus was adopted by the Spartan people. Then, binding his countrymenby a solemn oath that they would carefully observe his laws during hisabsence, he set out on a pilgrimage to Delphi. In response to his inquiry, the oracle assured him that Sparta would endure and prosper as long as thepeople obeyed the laws he had given them. Lycurgus caused this answer tobe carried to his countrymen; and then, that they might remain bound bythe oath they had taken, he resolved never to return. He went into anunknown exile. 

THE KINGS, THE SENATE, AND THE POPULAR ASSEMBLY. --The so-calledConstitution of Lycurgus provided for two joint kings, a Senate of Elders, and a Popular Assembly. 

The two kings corresponded in some respects to the two consuls in thelater Roman republic. One served as a check upon the other. This doublesovereignty worked admirably; for five centuries there were no attempts onthe part of the Spartan kings to subvert the constitution. The power ofthe joint kings, it should be added, was rather nominal than real (save intime of war); so that while the Spartan government was monarchical inform, it was in reality an aristocracy, the Spartans corresponding veryclosely to the feudal lords of mediæval Europe. 

The Senate consisted of thirty elders. The powers of this body were atfirst almost unlimited. After a time, however, officers called ephors wereelected by the Popular Assembly, and these gradually absorbed the powersand functions of the Senate, as well as the authority of the two associatekings. 

The Popular Assembly was composed of all the citizens of Sparta overthirty years of age. By this body laws were made, and questions of peaceand war decided. In striking contrast to what was the custom at Athens, all matters were decided without debate. The Spartans were fighters, nottalkers; they hated discussion. 

REGULATIONS AS TO LANDS AND MONEY. --At the time of Lycurgus the lands ofLaconia had become absorbed by the rich, leaving the masses in poverty anddistress. It is certain that the lawgiver did much to remedy this ruinousstate of affairs. Tradition says that all the lands were redistributed, anequal portion being assigned to each of the nine thousand Spartancitizens, and a smaller and less desirable portion to each of the thirtythousand Perioeci, --but it is not probable that there was any such exactequalization of property. 

The Spartans were forbidden to engage in trade; all their time must bepassed in the chase, or in gymnastic and martial exercise. Iron was madethe sole money of the state. This, according to Plutarch, "was of greatsize and weight, and of small value, so that the equivalent for ten minæ(about $140) required a great room for its stowage, and a yoke of oxen todraw it. " The object of this, he tell us, was to prevent its being usedfor the purchase of "foreign trumpery. "

THE PUBLIC TABLES. --The most peculiar, perhaps, of the Lycurgeaninstitutions were the public meals. In order to correct the extravagancewith which the tables of the rich were often spread, Lycurgus ordered thatall the Spartan citizens should eat at public and common tables. Exceptingthe ephors, none, not even the kings, were excused from sitting at thecommon mess. One of the kings, returning from a long expedition, presumedto dine privately with his wife, but received therefor a severe reproof. 

A luxury-loving Athenian, once visiting Sparta and seeing the coarse fareof the citizens, is reported to have declared that now he understood theSpartan disregard of life in battle. "Any one, " said he, "must naturallyprefer death to life on such fare as this. "

EDUCATION OF THE YOUTH. --Children were considered as belonging to thestate. Every infant was brought before the Council of Elders; and if itdid not seem likely to become a robust and useful citizen, it was exposedin a mountain glen. At seven the education and training of the youth werecommitted to the charge of public officers, called boy-trainers. The aimof the entire course, as to the boys, was to make a nation of soldiers whoshould despise toil and danger and prefer death to military dishonor. Reading and writing were untaught, and the art of rhetoric was despised. Spartan brevity was a proverb, whence our word _laconic_ (from Laconia), implying a concise and pithy mode of expression. Boys were taught torespond in the fewest words possible. At the public tables they were notpermitted to speak until questioned: they sat "silent as statues. " AsPlutarch puts it, "Lycurgus was for having the money bulky, heavy, and oflittle value; and the language, on the contrary, very pithy and short, anda great deal of sense compressed in a few words. "

But before all things else the Spartan youth was taught to bear painunflinchingly. Often he was scourged just for the purpose of accustominghis body to pain. Frequently, it is said, boys died under the lash, without betraying their suffering by look or moan. 

Another custom tended to the same end as the foregoing usage. The boyswere at times compelled to forage for their food. If detected, they wereseverely punished for having been so unskilful as not to get safely awaywith their booty. This custom, as well as the fortitude of the Spartanyouth, is familiar to all through the story of the boy who, having stolena young fox and concealed it beneath his tunic, allowed the animal to tearout his vitals, without betraying himself by the movement of a muscle. 

The Cryptia, which has been represented as an organization of youngSpartans who were allowed, as a means of rendering themselves ready andexpert in war, to hunt and kill the Helots, seems in reality to have beena sort of police institution, designed to guard against uprisings of theserfs. 

ESTIMATE OF THE SPARTAN INSTITUTIONS. --That the laws and regulations ofthe Spartan constitution were admirably adapted to the end in view, --therearing of a nation of skilful and resolute warriors, --the long militarysupremacy of Sparta among the states of Greece abundantly attests. Butwhen we consider the aim and object of the Spartan institutions, we mustpronounce them low and unworthy. The true order of things was justreversed among the Lacedæmonians. Government exists for the individual: atSparta the individual lived for the state. The body is intended to be theinstrument of the mind: the Spartans reversed this, and attended to theeducation of the mind only so far as its development enhanced theeffectiveness of the body as a weapon in warfare. 

Spartan history teaches how easy it is for a nation, like an individual, to misdirect its energies--to subordinate the higher to the lower. Itillustrates, too, the fact that only those nations that labor to developthat which is best and highest in man make helpful contributions to theprogress of the world. Sparta, in significant contrast to Athens, bequeathed nothing to posterity. 

THE MESSENIAN WARS. --The most important event in Spartan history betweenthe age of Lycurgus and the commencement of the Persian War was the longcontest with Messenia, known as the First and Second Messenian Wars (about750-650 B. C. ). Messenia was one of the districts of the Peloponnesuswhich, like Laconia, had been taken possession of by the Dorians at thetime of the great invasion. 

It is told that the Spartans, in the second war, falling into despair, sent to Delphi for advice. The oracle directed them to ask Athens for acommander. The Athenians did not wish to aid the Lacedæmonians, yet darednot oppose the oracle. So they sent Tyrtæus, a poet-schoolmaster, who theyhoped and thought would prove of but little service to Sparta. Whatevertruth there may be in this part of the story, it seems indisputable thatduring the Second Messenian War, Tyrtæus, an Attic poet, reanimated thedrooping spirits of the Spartans by the energy of his martial strains. Perhaps it would not be too much to say that Sparta owed her final victoryto the inspiring songs of this martial poet. 

The conquered Messenians were reduced to serfdom, and their condition madeas degrading and bitter as that of the Helots of Laconia. Many, choosingexile, pushed out into the western seas in search of new homes. Some ofthe fugitives founded Rhegium, in Italy; others, settling in Sicily, gavename and importance to the still existing city of Messina. 

GROWTH OF THE POWER OF SPARTA. --After having secured possession ofMessenia, Sparta conquered the southern part of Argolis. All the southernportion of the Peloponnesus was now subject to her commands. 

On the north, Sparta extended her power over many of the villages, ortownships, of Arcadia; but her advance in this direction having beenchecked by Tegea, one of the few important Arcadian cities, Sparta enteredinto an alliance with that city, which ever after remained her faithfulfriend and helper. This alliance was one of the main sources of Spartanpreponderance in Greece during the next hundred years and more. 

Sparta was now the most powerful state in the Peloponnesus. Her fame wasspread even beyond the limits of Hellas. Croesus, king of Lydia, sought analliance with her in his unfortunate war with Persia, which just now wasthe rising power in Asia. 

3. THE GROWTH OF ATHENS. 

THE ATTIC PEOPLE. --The population of Attica in historic times wasessentially Ionian in race, but there were in it strains of other Hellenicstocks, besides some non-Hellenic elements as well. This mixed origin ofthe population is believed to be one secret of the versatile yet well-balanced character which distinguished the Attic people above all otherbranches of the Hellenic family. It is not the absolutely pure, but themixed races, like the English people, that have made the largestcontributions to civilization. 

THE SITE OF ATHENS. --Four or five miles from the sea, a flat-topped rock, about one thousand feet in length and half as many in width, rises withabrupt cliffs, one hundred and fifty feet above the level of the plains ofAttica. The security afforded by this eminence doubtless led to itsselection as a stronghold by the early Attic settlers. Here a fewbuildings, perched upon the summit of the rock and surrounded by apalisade, constituted the beginning of the capital whose fame has spreadover all the world. 

THE KINGS OF ATHENS. --During the Heroic Age Athens was ruled by kings, like all the other Grecian cities. The names of Theseus and Codrus are themost noted of the regal line. 

[Illustration: THE ACROPOLIS AT ATHENS. (From a Photograph. )]

To Theseus tradition ascribed the work of uniting the different Atticvillages, or cantons, twelve in number, into a single city, on the seat ofthe ancient Cecropia (see p. 92). This prehistoric union, however or bywhomsoever effected, laid the basis of the greatness of Athens. 

Respecting Codrus, the following legend is told: At one time the Doriansfrom the Peloponnesus invaded Attica. Codrus having learned that an oraclehad assured them of success if they spared the life of the Athenian king, disguised himself, and, with a single companion, made an attack upon someSpartan soldiers, who instantly slew him. Discovering that the king ofAthens had fallen by a Lacedæmonian sword, the Spartans despaired oftaking the city, and withdrew from the country. 

THE ARCHONS (1050?-612 B. C. ). --Codrus was the last king of Athens. Hissuccessor, elected by the nobles, was given simply the name of Archon, orRuler, for the reason, it is said, that no one was thought worthy to bearthe title of the divine Codrus. The real truth is, that the nobles weretransforming the Homeric monarchy into an oligarchy, and to effect thechange were taking away from the king his royal powers. At the outsetthere was but one Archon, elected for life; later, there were nine, chosenannually. 

Throughout these early times the government was in the hands of thenobles; the people, that is, the free farmers and artisans, having no partin the management of public affairs. The people at length demanded a voicein the government, or at least legal protection from the exactions andcruelties of the wealthy. 

THE LAWS OF DRACO (about 620 B. C. ). --To meet these demands, the noblesappointed one of their own number, Draco, to prepare a code of laws. Hereduced existing customs and regulations to a definite and writtenconstitution, assigning to the smallest offence the penalty of death. Thiscruel severity of the Draconian laws caused an Athenian orator to say ofthem that "they were written, not in ink, but in blood. " But for theirharshness Draco was not responsible: he did not make them; their severitywas simply a reflection of the harshness of those early times. 

THE REBELLION OF CYLON (612 B. C. ). --Soon after the enactment of Draco'slaws, which naturally served only to increase the discontent of thepeople, Cylon, a rich and ambitious noble, taking advantage of the stateof affairs, attempted to overthrow the government and make himselfsupreme. He seized the citadel of the Acropolis, where he was closelybesieged by the Archons. Finally the Archon Megacles offered theinsurgents their lives on condition of surrender. They accepted the offer, but fearing to trust themselves among their enemies without someprotection, fastened a string to a statue of Athena, and holding fast tothis, descended from the citadel, into the streets of Athens. As they camein front of the altars of the Furies, the line broke; and Megacles, professing to believe that this mischance indicated that the goddessrefused to shield them, caused them to be set upon and massacred. 

The people were alarmed lest the fierce anger of the avenging Furies hadbeen incurred by the slaughter of prisoners in violation of a sacred oathand before their very altars. Calamities that now befell the statedeepened their apprehension. Thus the people were inflamed still moreagainst the aristocracy. They demanded and finally secured the banishmentof the Alcmæonidæ, the family to which Megacles belonged. Even the bonesof the dead of the family were dug up, and cast beyond the frontiers. Thepeople further insisted upon a fresh revision of the laws and a share inthe government. 

THE LAWS OF SOLON (594 B. C. ). --Solon, a man held in great esteem by allclasses, was chosen to draw up a new code of laws. He repealed many of thecruel laws of Draco; permitted the return of persons driven into exile;gave relief to the debtor class, especially to the poor farmers, whoselittle plots were covered with mortgages, by reducing the value of themoney in which they would have to make payment; ordered those held inslavery for debt to be set free; and cancelled all fines payable to thestate. These measures caused contentment and prosperity to take the place, everywhere throughout Attica, of previous discontent and wretchedness. 

CHANGES IN THE ATHENIAN CONSTITUTION. --The changes wrought by Solon in thepolitical constitution of Athens were equally wise and beneficent. Hedivided all the citizens of Athens into four classes, according to theirincome. Only members of the first class could hold the office of Archon;and only those of the first three classes were eligible to the Council ofElders; but every member of all the classes had the right to vote in thepopular assembly. 

Thus property instead of birth was made the basis of political rights. This completely changed the character of the government; it was no longeran exclusive oligarchy. 

A council known as the Council of the Four Hundred was created by Solon. Its chief duties were to decide what matters might be discussed by thepublic assembly, and to execute the resolutions of that body. 

THE TRIBUNAL OF THE AREOPAGUS. --Solon also enlarged the jurisdiction ofthe celebrated Tribunal of the Areopagus, a venerable council that fromtime out of memory had been held on the Areopagus, or Mars' Hill, near theAcropolis. The judges sat beneath the open sky, that they might not becontaminated, it is said, by the breath of the criminals brought beforethem. To this court was committed the care of morals and religion. It wasin the presence of this venerable tribunal, six hundred years afterSolon's time, that Paul stood when he made his eloquent defence ofChristianity. 

THE PUBLIC ASSEMBLY. --The public assembly, under the constitution ofSolon, was made the most important of all the institutions of the state. It was the fountain of all power. Contrary to the rule in Sparta, anycitizen had the right not only of voting, but of speaking on any questionwhich the assembly had a right to discuss. Six thousand citizens wererequired to constitute a quorum to transact business in cases of specialimportance. This popular assembly grew into vast importance in latertimes. By it were discussed and decided questions affecting the entireHellenic world. 

These laws and institutions of Solon laid the basis of the Atheniandemocracy. 

THE TYRANT PISISTRATUS (560-527 B. C. ). --Solon had the misfortune of livingto see his institutions used to set up a tyranny, by an ambitious kinsman, his nephew Pisistratus. This man courted popular favor, and called himselfthe "friend of the people. " One day, having inflicted many wounds uponhimself, he drove his chariot hastily into the public square, andpretended that he had been thus set upon by the nobles, because of hisdevotion to the people's cause. The people, moved with sympathy andindignation, voted him a guard of fifty men. Under cover of raising thiscompany, Pisistratus gathered a much larger force, seized the Acropolis, and made himself master of Athens. Though twice expelled from the city, heas often returned, and finally succeeded in getting a permanent hold ofthe government. 

The rule of the usurper was mild, and under him Athens enjoyed a period ofgreat prosperity. He adorned the city with temples and other splendidbuildings, and constructed great aqueducts. Just beyond the city walls, helaid out the Lyceum, a sort of public park, which became in after yearsthe favorite resort of the philosophers and poets of Athens. He was aliberal patron of literature; and caused the Homeric poems to be collectedand edited. He died 527 B. C. , thirty-three years after his first seizureof the citadel. Solon himself said of him that he had no vice saveambition. 

EXPULSION OF THE TYRANTS FROM ATHENS (510 B. C. ). --The two sons ofPisistratus, Hippias and Hipparchus, succeeded to his power. At first theyemulated the example of their father, and Athens flourished under theirparental rule. But at length an unfortunate event gave an entirelydifferent tone to the government. Hipparchus, having insulted a youngnoble, was assassinated. Hippias escaped harm, but the event caused him tobecome suspicious and severe. His rule now became a tyranny indeed, andwas brought to an end in the following way. 

After his last return to Athens, Pisistratus had sent the "accursed"Alcmæonidæ into a second exile. During this period of banishment anopportunity arose for them to efface the stain of sacrilege which wasstill supposed to cling to them on account of the old crime of Megacles. The temple at Delphi having been destroyed by fire, they contracted withthe Amphictyons to rebuild it. They not only completed the work in themost honorable manner throughout, but even went so far beyond the terms oftheir contract as to use beautiful Parian marble for the front of thetemple, when only common stone was required by the specifications. 

By this act the exiled family won to such a degree the favor of thepriests of the sacred college, that they were able to influence theutterances of the oracle. The invariable answer now of the Pythia toSpartan inquirers at the shrine was, "Athens must be set free. "

Moved at last by the repeated injunctions of the oracle, the Spartansresolved to drive Hippias from Athens. Their first attempt wasunsuccessful; but in a second they were so fortunate as to capture the twochildren of the tyrant, who, to secure their release, agreed to leave thecity (510 B. C. ). He retired to Asia Minor, and spent the rest of his life, as we shall learn hereafter, seeking aid in different quarters to re-establish his tyranny in Athens. The Athenians passed a decree ofperpetual exile against him and all his family. 

THE REFORMS OF CLISTHENES (509 B. C. ). --Straightway upon the expulsion ofthe Tyrant Hippias, there arose a great strife between the people, who ofcourse wished to organize the government in accord with the constitutionof Solon, and the nobles, who desired to re-establish the oldaristocratical rule. Clisthenes, an aristocrat, espoused the cause of thepopular party. Through his influence several important changes in theconstitution, which rendered it still more democratical than under Solon, were now effected. 

Athenian citizenship was conferred upon _all the free inhabitants ofAttica_. This made such a radical change in the constitution in theinterest of the masses, that Clisthenes rather than Solon is regarded bymany as the real founder of the Athenian democracy. 

OSTRACISM. --But of all the innovations or institutions of Clisthenes, thatknown as _ostracism_ was the most characteristic. By means of thisprocess any person who had excited the suspicions or displeasure of thepeople could, without trial, be banished from Athens for a period of tenyears. Six thousand votes cast against any person in a meeting of thepopular assembly was a decree of banishment. The name of the person whosebanishment was sought was written on a piece of pottery or a shell (inGreek _ostrakon_), hence the term _ostracism_. 

The original design of this institution was to prevent the recurrence ofsuch a usurpation as that of the Pisistratidæ. The privilege and power itgave the people were often abused, and many of the ablest and beststatesmen of Athens were sent into exile through the influence of somedemagogue who for the moment had caught the popular ear. 

No stigma or disgrace attached to the person ostracized. The vote came tobe employed, as a rule, simply to settle disputes between rival leaders ofpolitical parties. Thus the vote merely expressed political preference, the ostracized person being simply the defeated candidate for popularfavor. 

The institution was short-lived. It was resorted to for the last timeduring the Peloponnesian War (417 B. C. ). The people then, in a freak, ostracized a man whom all admitted to be the meanest man in Athens. Thiswas regarded as such a degradation of the institution, as well as such anhonor to the mean man, that never thereafter did the Athenians degrade agood man, or honor a bad one, by a resort to the measure. 

SPARTA OPPOSES THE ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY. --The aristocratic party at Athenswas naturally bitterly opposed to all these democratic innovations. TheSpartans, also, viewed with disquiet and jealousy this rapid growth of theAthenian democracy, and tried to overthrow the new government and restoreHippias to power. But they did not succeed in their purpose, and Hippiaswent away to Persia to seek aid of King Darius. His solicitations, inconnection with an affront which the Athenians just now offered the kinghimself by aiding his revolted subjects in Ionia, led directly up to thememorable struggle known as the Græco-Persian wars. 

[Illustration: GREEK WARRIORS PREPARING FOR BATTLE. ]

CHAPTER XIII. 

THE GRÆCO-PERSIAN WARS. (500-479 B. C. )

EXPEDITIONS OF DARIUS AGAINST GREECE. --In narrating the history of thePersians, we told how Darius, after having subdued the revolt of hisIonian subjects in Asia Minor, turned his armaments against the EuropeanGreeks, to punish them for the part they had taken in the capture andburning of Sardis. It will be recalled how ill-fated was his firstexpedition, which was led by his son-in-law Mardonius (see p. 80). 

Undismayed by this disaster, Darius issued orders for the raising andequipping of another and stronger armament. Meanwhile he sent heralds tothe various Grecian states to demand earth and water, which elements amongthe Persians were symbols of submission. The weaker states gave the tokensrequired; but the Athenians and Spartans threw the envoys of the king intopits and wells, and bade them help themselves to earth and water. By thebeginning of the year 490 B. C. , another Persian army of 120, 000 men hadbeen mustered for the second attempt upon Greece. This armament wasintrusted to the command of the experienced generals Datis andArtaphernes; but was under the guidance of the traitor Hippias. A fleet ofsix hundred ships bore the army from the coasts of Asia Minor over theAegean towards the Grecian shores. 

After receiving the submission of the most important of the Cyclades, andcapturing and sacking the city of Eretria upon the island of Euboea, thePersians landed at Marathon, barely one day's journey from Athens. Here isa sheltered bay, which is edged by a crescent-shaped plain, backed by therugged ranges of Parnes and Pentelicus. Upon this level ground the Persiangenerals drew up their army, flushed and confident with their recentsuccesses. 

THE BATTLE OF MARATHON (490 B. C. ). --The Athenians were nerved by the verymagnitude of the danger to almost superhuman energy. Slaves weretransformed into soldiers by the promise of liberty. A fleet runner, Phidippides by name, was despatched to Sparta for aid. In just thirty-sixhours he was in Sparta, which is one hundred and fifty miles from Athens. But it so happened that it lacked a few days of the full moon, duringwhich interval the Spartans, owing to an old superstition, were averse tosetting out upon a military expedition. They promised aid, but moved onlyin time to reach Athens when all was over. The Platæans, firm and gratefulfriends of the Athenians, on account of some former service, no soonerreceived the latter's appeal for help than they responded to a man. 

The Athenians and their faithful allies, numbering about ten thousand inall, under the command of Miltiades, were drawn up in battle array justwhere the hills of Pentelicus sink down into the plain of Marathon. Thevast host of the Persians filled the level ground in their front. The fateof Greece and the future of Europe were in the keeping of Miltiades andhis trusty warriors. Without waiting for the attack of the Persians, theGreeks charged and swept like a tempest from the mountain over the plain, pushed the Persians back towards the shore, and with great slaughter drovethem to their ships. 

Miltiades at once despatched a courier to Athens with intelligence of hisvictory. The messenger reached the city in a few hours, but so breathlessfrom his swift run that, as the people thronged eagerly around him to hearthe news he bore, he could merely gasp, "Victory is ours, " and fell dead. 

But the danger was not yet past. The Persian fleet, instead of returningto the coast of Asia, bore down upon Athens. Informed by watchers on thehills of the movements of the enemy, Miltiades immediately set out withhis little army for the capital, which he reached just at evening, thebattle at Marathon having been won in the forenoon of that same day. Thenext morning, when the Persian generals would have made an attack upon thecity, they found themselves confronted by the same men who but yesterdayhad beaten them back from the plains of Marathon. Shrinking from anotherencounter with these citizen-soldiers of Athens, the Persians spread theirsails, and bore away towards the Ionian shore. 

Thus the cloud that had lowered so threateningly over Hellas was for atime dissipated. The most imposing honors were accorded to the heroes whohad achieved the glorious victory, and their names and deeds weretransmitted to posterity, in song and marble. And as the gods werebelieved to have interposed in behalf of Greece, suitable recognition oftheir favor was made in gifts and memorials. A considerable part of thebrazen arms and shields gathered from the battle-field was melted into acolossal statue of Athena, which was placed upon the Acropolis, as theguardian of Athens. 

RESULTS OF THE BATTLE OF MARATHON. --The battle of Marathon is reckoned asone of the "decisive battles of the world. " It marks an epoch, not only inthe life of Greece, but in that of Europe. Hellenic civilization wasspared to mature its fruit, not for itself alone, but for the world. Thebattle decided that no longer the despotism of the East, with itsrepression of all individual action, but the freedom of the West, with allits incentives to personal effort, should control the affairs and mouldthe ideas and institutions of the future. It broke the spell of thePersian name, and destroyed forever the prestige of the Persian arms. Itgave the Hellenic peoples that position of authority and pre-eminence thathad been so long enjoyed by the successive races of the East. Itespecially revealed the Athenians to themselves. The consciousness ofresources and power became the inspiration of their future acts. Theyperformed great deeds thereafter because they believed themselves able toperform them. 

MILTIADES FALLS INTO DISGRACE. --The distinguished services Miltiades hadrendered his country, made him the hero of the hour at Athens. Takingadvantage of the public feeling in his favor, he persuaded the Atheniansto put in his hands a fleet for an enterprise respecting the nature ofwhich no one save himself was to know anything whatever. Of course it wasgenerally supposed that he meditated an attack upon the Persians or theirallies, and with full faith in the judgment as well as in the integrity oftheir favorite, the Athenians gave him the command he asked. 

But Miltiades abused the confidence imposed in him. He led the expeditionagainst the island of Paros, simply to avenge some private wrong. Theundertaking was unsuccessful, and Miltiades, severely wounded, returned toAthens, where he was brought to trial for his conduct. His never-to-be-forgotten services at Marathon pleaded eloquently for him, and he escapedbeing sentenced to death, but was subjected to a heavy fine. This he wasunable to pay, and in a short time he died of his wound. The unfortunateaffair left an ineffaceable blot upon a fame otherwise the mostresplendent in Grecian story. 

ATHENS PREPARES FOR PERSIAN VENGEANCE. --Many among the Athenians wereinclined to believe that the battle of Marathon had freed Athens foreverfrom the danger of a Persian invasion. But there was at least one amongthem who was clear-sighted enough to see that that battle was only thebeginning of a great struggle. This was Themistocles, a sagacious, versatile, and ambitious statesman, who labored to persuade the Atheniansto strengthen their navy, in order to be ready to meet the danger heforesaw. 

Themistocles was opposed in this policy by Aristides, called the Just, aman of the most scrupulous integrity, who feared that Athens would make aserious mistake if she converted her land force into a naval armament. Thecontention grew so sharp between them that the ostracism was called intouse to decide the matter. Six thousand votes were cast against Aristides, and he was sent into exile. 

It is related that while the vote that ostracized him was being taken inthe popular assembly, an illiterate peasant, who was a stranger toAristides, asked him to write the name of Aristides upon his tablet. As heplaced the name desired upon the shell, the statesman asked the man whatwrong Aristides had ever done him. "None, " responded the voter; "I don'teven know him; but I am tired of hearing him called 'the Just. '"

After the banishment of Aristides, Themistocles was free to carry out hisnaval policy without any serious opposition, and soon Athens had thelargest fleet of any Greek city, with a harbor at Piræus. 

XERXES' PREPARATIONS TO INVADE GREECE. --No sooner had the news of thedisaster at Marathon been carried to Darius than he began to make giganticpreparations to avenge this second defeat and insult. It was in the midstof these plans for revenge that, as we have already learned, death cutshort his reign, and his son Xerxes came to the throne (see p. 80). 

Urged on by his nobles, as well as by exiled Greeks at his court, whosought to gratify ambition or enjoy revenge in the humiliation and ruin oftheir native land, Xerxes, though at first disinclined to enter into acontest with the Greeks, at length ordered the preparations begun by hisfather to be pushed forward with the utmost energy. For eight years allAsia resounded with the din of preparation. Levies were made upon all theprovinces that acknowledged the authority of the Great King, from India tothe Hellespont. Vast contingents of vessels were furnished by the coastcountries of the Mediterranean. Immense stores of provisions, the harvestsof many years, were gathered into great storehouses along the intendedline of march. 

While all these preparations were going on in Asia itself, Phoenician andEgyptian architects were employed in spanning the Hellespont with a doublebridge of boats, which was to unite the two continents as with a royalhighway. At the same time, the isthmus at Mount Athos, in rounding whichpromontory the admirals of Mardonius had lost their fleet, was cut by acanal, traces of which may be seen at this day. Three years were consumedin these gigantic works. With them completed, or far advanced, Xerxes setout from his capital to join the countless hosts that from all quarters ofthe compass were gathering at Sardis, in Asia Minor. 

DISUNION OF THE GREEKS: CONGRESS AT CORINTH (481 B. C. ). --Startling rumorsof the gigantic preparations that the Persian king was making to crushthem were constantly borne across the Aegean to the ears of the Greeks inEurope. Finally came intelligence that Xerxes was about to begin hismarch. Something must now be done to meet the impending danger. Mainlythrough the exertions of Themistocles, a council of the Greek cities wasconvened at Corinth in the fall of 481 B. C. 

But on account of feuds, jealousies, and party spirit, only a small numberof the states of Hellas could be brought to act in concert. Argos wouldnot join the proposed confederation through hatred of Sparta; Thebes, through jealousy of Athens. The Cretans, to whom an embassy had been sentsoliciting aid, refused all assistance. Gelon, the Tyrant of Syracuse, offered to send over a large armament, provided that he were given thechief command of the allied forces. His aid on such terms was refused. 

Thus, through different causes, many of the Greek cities held aloof fromthe confederation, so that only about fifteen or sixteen states werebrought to unite their resources against the Barbarians; and even thestrength of many of those cities that did enter into the alliance wasdivided by party spirit. The friends of aristocratical government werealmost invariably friends of Persia, because a Persian victory in Greeceproper meant what it had already meant in Ionia, --a suppression of thedemocracies as incompatible with the Persian form of government. Thus forthe sake of a party victory, the aristocrats were ready to betray theircountry into the hands of the Barbarians. Furthermore, the Delphianoracle, aristocratical in its sympathies, was luke-warm and wavering, ifnot actually disloyal, and by its timid responses, disheartened thepatriot party. 

But under the inspiration of Themistocles the patriots in convention atCorinth determined upon desperate resistance to the Barbarians. It was atfirst decided to concentrate a strong force in the Vale of Tempe, and atthat point to dispute the advance of the enemy; but this being foundimpracticable, it was resolved that the first stand against the invadersshould be made at the pass of Thermopylæ. 

The Spartans were given the chief command of both the land and the navalforces. The Athenians might fairly have insisted upon their right to thecommand of the allied fleet, but they patriotically waived their claim, for the sake of harmony. 

THE HELLESPONTINE BRIDGES BROKEN. --As the vast army of Xerxes was about tomove from Sardis, intelligence came that the bridges across the Hellesponthad been wrecked by a violent tempest. It is said that Xerxes, in greatwrath, ordered the architects to be put to death, and the sea to be boundwith fetters and scourged. The scourgers faithfully performed their duty, at the same time gratuitously cursing the traitorous and rebelliousHellespont with what Herodotus calls "non-Hellenic and blasphemous terms. "

Other architects spanned the channel with two stronger and firmer bridges. Each roadway rested upon a row of from three to four hundred vessels, allsecurely anchored like modern pontoons. The bridges were each about onemile in length, and furnished with high parapets, that the horses andcattle might not be rendered uneasy at sight of the water. 

PASSAGE OF THE HELLESPONT. --With the first indications of the openingspring of 480 B. C. , just ten years after the defeat at Marathon, the vastPersian army was astir and concentrating from all points upon theHellespont. The passage of this strait, as pictured to us in theinimitable narration of Herodotus, is one of the most dramatic of all thespectacles afforded by history. 

Before the passage commenced, the bridges were strewn with the sacredmyrtle and perfumed with incense from golden censers, while the sea wasplacated with libations poured by the king himself. As the east reddenedwith the approach of day, prayers were offered, and the moment the rays ofthe sun touched the bridges the passage began. To avoid accidents anddelays, the trains of baggage wagons and the beasts of burden crossed byone causeway, leaving the other free for the march of the army. The firstof the host to cross was the sacred guard of the Great King, the TenThousand Immortals, all crowned with garlands as in festival procession. Preceding the king, the gorgeous Chariot of the Sun moved slowly, drawn byeight milk-white steeds. Herodotus affirms that for seven days and sevennights the bridges groaned beneath the living tide that Asia was pouringinto Europe. [Footnote: According to Herodotus, the land and naval forcesof Xerxes amounted to 2, 317, 000 men, besides about 2, 000, 000 slaves andattendants. It is believed that these figures are a great exaggeration, and that the actual number of the Persian army could not have exceeded900, 000 men. ]

BATTLE OF THERMOPYLÆ (480 B. C. ). --Leading from Thessaly into CentralGreece is a narrow pass, pressed on one side by the sea and on the otherby rugged mountain ridges. At the foot of the cliffs break forth severalhot springs, whence the name of the pass, Thermopylæ, or "Hot Gates. "

At this point, in accordance with the decision of the Corinthian Congress, was offered the first resistance to the progress of the Persian army. Leonidas, king of Sparta, with three hundred Spartan soldiers and aboutsix thousand allies from different states of Greece, held the pass. As theGreeks were about to celebrate the Olympian games, which their religiousscruples would not allow them to postpone, they left this handful of menunsupported to hold in check the army of Xerxes until the festival daysshould be past. 

The Spartans could be driven from their advantageous position only by anattack in front, as the Grecian fleet prevented Xerxes from landing aforce in their rear. Before assaulting them, Xerxes summoned them to giveup their arms. The answer of Leonidas was, "Come and take them. " For twodays the Persians tried to storm the pass. The Asiatics were driven to theattack by their officers armed with whips. But every attempt to force theway was repulsed; even the Ten Thousand Immortals were hurled back fromthe Spartan front like waves from a cliff. 

But an act of treachery on the part of a native Greek rendered unavailingall the bravery of the keepers of the pass. A by-way leading over themountains to the rear of the Spartans was revealed to Xerxes. Thestartling intelligence was brought to Leonidas that the Persians weredescending the mountain-path in his rear. He saw instantly that all waslost. The allies were permitted to seek safety in flight while opportunityremained. But to him and his Spartan companions there could be no thoughtof retreat. Death in the pass, the defence of which had been intrusted tothem, was all that Spartan honor and Spartan law now left them. The nextday, surrounded by the Persian host, they fought with desperate valor;but, overwhelmed by mere numbers, they were slain to the last man. Withthem also perished seven hundred Thespians who had chosen death with theircompanions. Over the bodies of the Spartan soldiers a monument wasafterwards erected with this inscription: "Stranger, tell theLacedæmonians that we lie here in obedience to their orders. "

THE BURNING OF ATHENS. -Athens now lay open to the invaders. ThePeloponnesians, thinking of their own safety simply, commenced throwing updefences across the isthmus of Corinth, working day and night under theimpulse of an almost insane fear. Athens was thus left outside to care forherself. 

Counsels were divided. The Delphian oracle had obscurely declared, "Wheneverything else in the land of Cecrops shall be taken, Zeus grants toAthena that the _wooden walls_ alone shall remain unconquered, to defendyou and your children. " The oracle was believed to be, as was declared, "firm as adamant. "

But there were various opinions as to what was meant by the "woodenwalls. " Some thought the Pythian priestess directed the Athenians to seekrefuge in the forests on the mountains; but Themistocles (who it isthought may have himself prompted the oracle) contended that the shipswere plainly indicated. 

The last interpretation was acted upon. All the soldiers of Attica werecrowded upon the vessels of the fleet at Salamis. The aged men, with thewomen and children, were carried out of the country to different places ofsafety. All the towns of Attica, with the capital, were thus abandoned tothe conquerors. 

A few days afterwards the Persians entered upon the deserted plain, whichthey rendered more desolate by ravaging the fields and burning the emptytowns. Athens shared the common fate, and her splendid temples sank inflames. Sardis was avenged. The joy in distant Susa was unbounded. 

THE NAVAL BATTLE OF SALAMIS (480 B. C. ). --Just off the coast of Attica, separated from the mainland by a narrow passage of water, lies the islandof Salamis. Here lay the Greek fleet, awaiting the Persian attack. Tohasten on the attack before dissensions should divide the Greek forces, Themistocles resorted to the following stratagem. He sent a messenger toXerxes representing that he himself was ready to espouse the Persiancause, and advised an immediate attack upon the Athenian fleet, which herepresented as being in no condition to make any formidable resistance. Xerxes was deceived. He ordered an immediate attack. From a lofty throneupon the shore he himself overlooked the scene and watched the result. ThePersian fleet was broken to pieces and two hundred of the ships destroyed. [Footnote: The entire Persian fleet numbered about seven hundred and fiftyvessels; the Grecian, about three hundred and eighty-five ships, mostlytriremes. ]

The blow was decisive. Xerxes, fearing that treachery might burn or breakthe Hellespontine bridges, instantly despatched a hundred ships to protectthem; and then, leaving Mardonius with three hundred thousand men toretrieve the disaster of Salamis, and effect, as he promised to do, theconquest of the rest of Greece, the monarch set out on his ignominiousretreat to Asia. [Footnote: On the very day of the battle of Salamis, Gelon of Syracuse gained a great victory over the Carthaginians at thebattle of Himera, in the north of Sicily. So it was a memorable day forHellas in the West as well as in the East. ]

THE BATTLES OF PLATÆA AND MYCALE (479 B. C. ). --The next year the Persianfleet and army thus left behind in Europe were entirely destroyed, both onthe same day--the army at Platæa, near Thebes, by the combined Greekforces under the Spartan Pausanias; and the fleet, including the Asiaticland forces, at Mycale, on the Ionian coast. 

The battles of Salamis, Platæa, and Mycale were the successive blows thatshattered into fragments the most splendid armaments ever commanded byAsiatic despot. 

MEMORIALS AND TROPHIES OF THE WAR. --The glorious issue of the war caused ageneral burst of joy and exultation throughout all Greece. Poets, artists, and orators, all vied with one another in commemorating the deeds of theheroes whose valor had warded off the impending danger. 

Nor did the pious Grecians think that the marvellous deliverance had beeneffected without the intervention of the gods in their behalf. To thetemple at Delphi was gratefully consecrated a tenth of the immense spoilsin gold and silver from the field of Platæa; and within the sanctuary ofAthena, upon the Acropolis at Athens, were placed the broken cables of theHellespontine bridges, at once a proud trophy of victory, and a signalillustration of the divine punishment that had befallen the audacious andimpious attempt to lay a yoke upon the sacred waters of the Hellespont. 

CHAPTER XIV. 

PERIOD OF ATHENIAN SUPREMACY. (479-431 B. C. )

REBUILDING THE WALLS OF ATHENS. --After the Persians had been expelled fromGreece, the first care of the Athenians was the rebuilding of their homes. Their next task was the restoration of the city walls. The exalted hopesfor the future which had been raised by the almost incredible achievementsof the past few months, led the Athenians to draw a vast circuit of sevenmiles about the Acropolis as the line of the new ramparts. 

The rival states of the Peloponnesus watched the proceedings of theAthenians with the most jealous interest. While they could not but admireAthens, they feared her. Sparta sent an embassy to dissuade the citizensfrom rebuilding the walls, hypocritically assigning as the cause of herinterest in the matter her solicitude lest, in case of another Persianinvasion, the city, if captured, might become a shelter and defence to theenemy. But the Athenians persisted in their purpose, and in a marvellouslyshort time had raised the wall to such a height that they could defyinterference. 

THEMISTOCLES' NAVAL POLICY. --Themistocles saw clearly that the supremacyof Athens among the Grecian states must be secured and maintained by hermastery of the sea. He had unbounded visions of the maritime power andglory that might come to her through her fleet, those "wooden walls" towhich at this moment she owed her very existence; and he succeeded ininspiring his countrymen with his own enthusiasm and sanguine hopes. 

In the prosecution of his views, Themistocles persuaded the Athenians toenlarge the harbor of Piræus, the most spacious of the ports of Athens, and to surround the place with immense walls, far exceeding, both incompass and strength, those of the capital. He also led his countrymen tothe resolution of adding each year twenty well-equipped triremes to theirnavy. 

This policy, initiated by Themistocles, was, as we shall see, zealouslypursued by the statesmen that after him successively assumed the lead inAthenian affairs. 

HIS OSTRACISM. --Themistocles well deserved the honor of being called, ashe was, the founder of the New Athens. But, although an able statesman, hewas an unscrupulous man. He accepted bribes and sold his influence, thereby acquiring an enormous property. Finally he was ostracized (471B. C. ). After long wanderings, he became a resident at the court of thePersian king. 

Tradition affirms that Artaxerxes, in accordance with Persian usage, provided for the courtier exile by assigning to three cities in Asia Minorthe care of providing for his table: one furnished bread, a second meat, and a third wines. It is told that one day, as he sat down to his richlyloaded board, he exclaimed, "How much we should have lost, my children, ifwe had not been ruined!"

THE CONFEDERACY OF DELOS (477 B. C. ). --In order that they might be able tocarry on the war more effectively against the Persians, the Ionian statesof Asia Minor, the islands of the Ægean, and some of the states in Greeceproper, shortly after the battle of Platæa, formed themselves into what isknown as the Confederacy of Delos. Sparta, on account of her militaryreputation, had hitherto been accorded the place of pre-eminence andauthority in all such alliances of the Hellenic cities. She had come, indeed, to regard herself as the natural guardian and leader of Greece. But at this time the unbearable arrogance of the Spartan generalPausanias, who presumed upon the great reputation he had gained at thebattle of Platæa, led the states which had entered into the alliance tolook to Athens to assume the position of leadership in the newconfederacy. 

The lofty character of Aristides, who was now the most prominent Athenianleader, and his great reputation for fairness and incorruptible integrity, also contributed to the same result. He was chosen the first president ofthe league (477 B. C. ), and the sacred island of Delos was made therepository of the common funds. What proportion of the ships and moneyneeded for carrying out the purposes of the union should be contributed bythe different states, was left entirely to the decision of Aristides, suchwas the confidence all had in his equity; and so long as he had control ofthe matter, none of the members of the alliance ever had cause ofcomplaint. 

Thus did Sparta lose, and Athens gain, the place of precedence among theIonian states. The Dorian states of the Peloponnesus, in the main, stilllooked to Sparta as their leader and adviser. All Greece was thus dividedinto two great leagues, under the rival leadership of Sparta and Athens. 

THE ATHENIANS CONVERT THE DELIAN LEAGUE INTO AN EMPIRE. --The Confederacyof Delos laid the basis of the imperial power of Athens. The Atheniansmisused their authority as leaders of the league, and gradually, duringthe interval between the formation of the union and the beginning of thePeloponnesian War, reduced their allies, or confederates, to the conditionof tributaries and subjects. 

Athens transformed the league into an empire in the following manner. Thecontributions assessed by Aristides upon the different members of theconfederation consisted of ships and their crews for the larger states, and of money payments for the smaller ones. From the first, Athensattended to this assessment matter, and saw to it that each member of theleague made its proper contribution. After a while, some of the citiespreferring to make a money payment in lieu of ships, Athens accepted thecommutation, and then building the ships herself, added them to her ownnavy. Thus the confederates disarmed themselves and armed their master. 

Very soon the restraints which Athens imposed upon her allies becameirksome, and they began to refuse, one after another, to pay theassessment in any form. Naxos, one of the Cyclades, was the first islandto secede, as it were, from the league (466 B. C. ). But Athens had no ideaof admitting any such doctrine of state rights, and with her powerful navyforced the Naxians to remain within the union, and to pay an increasedtribute. 

What happened in the case of Naxos happened in the case of almost all theother members of the confederation. By the year 449 B. C. Only three of theisland members of the league still retained their independence. 

Even before this date (probably about 457 B. C. ) the Athenians hadtransferred the common treasury from Delos to Athens, and diverting thetribute from its original purpose, were beginning to spend it, not in theprosecution of war against the Barbarians, but in the execution of homeenterprises, as though the treasure were their own revenue. 

Thus what had been simply a voluntary confederation of sovereign andindependent cities, was converted into what was practically an absolutemonarchy, with the Attic democracy as the imperial master. 

What made this servitude of the former allies of Athens all the moregalling was the fact that they themselves had been compelled to forge thevery chains which fettered them; for it was their money that had built andwas maintaining the fleet by which they were kept in subjection and forcedto do whatever might be the will of the Athenians. 

THE LEADERSHIP OF CIMON; HIS OSTRACISM. --One of the ablest and mostpopular of the generals who commanded the forces of the Athenians duringthis same period when they were enslaving their confederates, was Cimon, the son of Miltiades. He was one of those whose spirits had been fired bythe exciting events attendant upon the Persian invasion. He had acquired acertain reputation, at the time of the abandonment of Athens, by being thefirst to hang up his bridle in the sanctuary of the Acropolis, thusexpressing his resolution to place all his confidence in the fleet, asThemistocles advised. 

The popularity of Cimon at last declined, and he suffered ostracism, ashad Aristides and Themistocles before him. His loss of public favor cameabout in this manner. In the year 464 B. C. , a terrible earthquakedestroyed a large portion of Sparta. In the panic of the appallingdisaster the Spartans were led to believe that the evil had befallen themas a punishment for their recent violation of the Temple of Poseidon, fromwhich some Helots who had fled to the sanctuary for refuge had been torn. The Helots, on their part, were quick to interpret the event as anintervention of the gods in their behalf, and as an unmistakable signalfor their uprising. Everywhere they flew to arms, and, being joined bysome of the Perioeci, furiously attacked their masters. The Spartans, after maintaining the bitter struggle for several years, findingthemselves unable to reduce their former slaves to submission, were forcedto ask aid of the other Grecian states. 

The great Athenian statesman Pericles implored his countrymen not to lendthemselves to the building up of the power of their rival. But thearistocratic Cimon, who had always entertained the most friendly feelingsfor the Spartans, exhorted the Athenians to put aside all sentiments ofenmity or jealousy, and to extend succor to their kinsmen. "Let notGreece, " said he, "be lamed, and thus Athens herself be deprived of heryokefellow. " The assembly voted as he advised, and so the Athenian forcesfought for some time side by side with the Lacedæmonians. 

But the Spartans were distrustful of their Athenian allies, and fearingthey might pass over to the side of the Helots, they dismissed them. Thediscourtesy of the act aroused the most bitter resentment at Athens. Theparty of Pericles took advantage of the exasperated feelings of the peopleto effect some important changes in the constitution in favor of thepeople, which made it almost purely democratical in character, and tosecure the exercise of the ostracism against Cimon as the leader of thearistocratical party and the friend of Sparta (459 B. C. ). 

THE AGE OF PERICLES (459-431 B. C. ). 

GENERAL FEATURES OF THE AGE. --Under the inspiration of Pericles, theAthenian state now entered upon the most brilliant period of its history. The epoch embraces less than the lifetime of a single generation, yet itsinfluence upon the civilization of the world can hardly be overrated. During this short period Athens gave birth to more great men--poets, artists, statesmen, and philosophers--than all the world besides hasproduced in any period of equal length. 

[Illustration: PERICLES. ]

Among all the great men of this age, Pericles stood pre-eminent. Such wasthe impression he left upon the period in which he lived, that it iscalled after him the Periclean Age. Yet Pericles' authority was simplythat which talent and character justly confer. He ruled, as Plutarch says, by the art of persuasion. 

During the Periclean period the Athenian democracy was supreme. Everymatter that concerned the empire was discussed and decided by the popularassembly. Never before had any people enjoyed such perfect politicalliberty as did the citizens of Athens at this time, and never before wereany people, through so intimate a knowledge of public affairs, so wellable to direct the policies of state. Every citizen, it is affirmed, wasqualified to hold civil office. 

PERICLES FOSTERS THE NAVAL POWER OF ATHENS. --Cimon's policy had been tokeep the Grecian cities united in order that they might offer effectualresistance to the Persian power. The aim of his rival Pericles was tomaintain Athens as the leading state in Hellas, and to oppose thepretensions of Sparta. Accordingly he encouraged the Athenians tostrengthen their naval armament and to perfect themselves in navaldiscipline, for with Themistocles he was convinced that the supremacy ofAthens must depend chiefly upon her fleet. 

As a part of his maritime policy, Pericles persuaded the Athenians tobuild what were known as the Long Walls, --great ramparts between four andfive miles in length, --which united Athens to the ports of Piræus andPhalerum. Later, as a double security, a third wall was built parallel tothe one running to the former harbor. By means of these walls Athens andher ports, with the intervening land, were converted into a vast fortifieddistrict, capable in time of war of holding the entire population ofAttica. With her communication with the sea thus secured, and with apowerful navy at her command, Athens could bid defiance to her foes on seaand land. 

[Illustration: ATHENS AND THE LONG WALLS. ]

EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE THIRTY YEARS' TRUCE. --At the same time thatPericles was making the maritime supremacy of Athens more secure, he wasendeavoring to build up for her a land empire in Central Greece. As herinfluence in this quarter increased, Sparta became more and more jealous, and strove to counteract it, chiefly by enhancing the power of Thebes. 

The contest between the two rivals was long and bitter. It was ended bythe well-known Peace of Pericles, or the Thirty Years' Truce (445 B. C. ). By the terms of this treaty each of the rival cities was left at the headof the confederation it had formed, but neither was to interfere with thesubjects or allies of the other, while those cities of Hellas which werenot yet members of either league were to be left free to join eitheraccording to choice. 

The real meaning of the Truce was that Athens gave up her ambition toestablish a land empire, and was henceforth to be content with supremacyon the seas. It meant further that Greece was to remain a house dividedagainst itself; that democratic Athens must share with aristocratic Spartathe hegemony, or leadership, of the Hellenic cities. 

PERICLES ADORNS ATHENS WITH PUBLIC BUILDINGS. --Notwithstanding Pericleshad failed to build up for Athens a land dominion, he had neverthelesssucceeded in securing for her a place of proud pre-eminence in maritimeHellas. Athens having achieved such a position as she now held, it was theidea of Pericles that the Athenians should so adorn their city that itshould be a fitting symbol of the power and glory of their empire. Nor wasit difficult for him to persuade his art-loving countrymen to embellishtheir city with those masterpieces of genius that in their ruins stillexcite the admiration of the world. 

Upon the commanding site of the Acropolis was erected the unrivalledParthenon. Various other edifices, rich with sculptures, were also erectedthere and in different parts of Athens, until the whole city took on asurprisingly brilliant and magnificent appearance. The whole world lookedup to the Attic city with the same surprised wonder with which a centurybefore it had regarded the city of Babylon as adorned by the power andwealth of the great Nebuchadnezzar. 

The Athenians secured the vast sums of money needed for the prosecution oftheir great architectural works, out of the treasury of the Delianconfederacy. The allies naturally declaimed bitterly against thisproceeding, complaining that Athens, with their money, was "gilding itselfas a proud and vain woman decks herself out with jewels. " But the answerof Pericles to them was, that the money was contributed to the end thatthe cities of the league should be protected from the Persians, and thatso long as the Athenians kept the enemy at a distance they had a right touse the money as they pleased. 

The Citizens are taken into the Pay of the State. --It was a fixed idea ofPericles that in a democracy there should be not only an equaldistribution of political rights among all classes, but also anequalization of the means and opportunities of exercising these rights, aswell as an equal participation by all in social and intellectualenjoyments. 

In promoting his views Pericles carried to great length the system ofpayment for the most common public services. Thus, he introduced thecustom of military pay; hitherto the Athenian soldier had served hiscountry in the field as a matter of honor and duty. He also secured thepayment of the citizen for serving as a juryman, as well as for hisattendance upon the meetings of the popular assembly. Through hisinfluence, also, salaries were attached to the various civil offices, themost of which had hitherto been unpaid positions. 

These various measures enabled the poorer citizens to enjoy, without aninconvenient sacrifice, their franchise in the popular assembly, and tooffer themselves for the different magistracies, which up to this time hadbeen practically open only to men of means and leisure. 

Furthermore, Pericles introduced or extended the practice of supplying allthe citizens with free tickets to the theatre and other places ofamusement, and of banqueting the people on festival days at the publicexpense. 

STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS OF THE ATHENIAN EMPIRE. --Under Pericles Athens hadbecome the most powerful naval state in the world. In one of his lastspeeches, made at the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, in which herecounts the resources of the Athenian empire, Pericles says to hisfellow-citizens: "There is not now a king, there is not any nation in theuniversal world, able to withstand that navy which at this juncture youcan launch out to sea. "

But the most significant feature of this new imperial power was thecombination of these vast material resources with the most imposingdisplay of intellectual resources that the world had ever witnessed. Neverbefore had there been such a union of the material and intellectualelements of civilization at the seat of empire. Literature and art hadbeen carried to the utmost perfection possible to human genius. Art wasrepresented by the inimitable creations of Phidias and Polygnotus. Thedrama was illustrated by the incomparable tragedies of Æschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides, and by the comedies of Aristophanes, while thewriting of the world's annals had become an art in the graceful narrationsof Herodotus. 

But there were elements of weakness in the splendid imperial structure. The subject cities of the empire were the slaves of Athens. To her theypaid tribute. To her courts they were dragged for trial. Naturally theyregarded Athens as the destroyer of Hellenic liberties, and watchedimpatiently for the first favorable moment to revolt, and throw off thehateful yoke that she had imposed upon them. Hence the Athenian empirerested upon a foundation of sand. 

Had Athens, instead of enslaving her confederates of the Delian league, only been able to find out some way of retaining them as allies in anequal union, --a great and perhaps impossible task in that age of theworld, --as head of the federated Greek race, she might have secured forHellas the sovereignty of the Mediterranean, and the history of Rome mighthave ended with the first century of the Republic. 

Furthermore, in his system of payment for the most common public services, and of wholesale public gratuities, Pericles had introduced or encouragedpractices that had the same demoralizing effects upon the Athenians thatthe free distribution of grain at Rome had upon the Roman populace. Thesepernicious customs cast discredit upon labor, destroyed frugality, andfostered idleness, thus sapping the virtues and strength of the Atheniandemocracy. 

Illustrations of these weaknesses, as well as of the strength of theAthenian empire, will be afforded by the great struggle between Athens andSparta known as the Peloponnesian War, the causes and chief incidents ofwhich we shall next rehearse. 

CHAPTER XV. 

THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR: THE SPARTAN AND THE THEBAN SUPREMACY. 

1. THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR (431-404 B. C. ). 

CAUSES OF THE WAR. --During the closing years of the life of Pericles, thegrowing jealousy between Athens and Sparta broke out in the long struggleknown as the Peloponnesian War. Pericles had foreseen the coming storm: "Idescry war, " said he, "lowering from the Peloponnesus. " His whole laterpolicy looked toward the preparation of Athens for the "irrepressibleconflict. "

The immediate causes of the war were, first, the interference of Athens, on the side of the Corcyræans, in a quarrel between them and their mothercity Corinth; and secondly, the blockade by the Athenians of Potidæa, onthe Macedonian coast. This was a Corinthian colony, but it was a member ofthe Delian league, and was now being chastised by Athens for attemptedsecession. Corinth, as the ever-jealous naval rival of Athens, hadendeavored to lend aid to her daughter, but had been worsted in anengagement with the Athenians. 

With affairs in this shape, Corinth, seconded by other states that hadcauses of complaint against Athens, appealed to Sparta, as the head of theDorian alliance, for aid and justice. The Spartans, after listening to thedeputies of both sides, decided that the Athenians had been guilty ofinjustice, and declared for war. The resolution of the Spartans wasendorsed by the Peloponnesian confederation, and apparently approved bythe Delphian oracle, which, in response to an inquiry of the Spartans asto what would be the issue of the proposed undertaking, assured them that"they would gain the victory, if they fought with all their might. "

COMPARISON OF THE RESOURCES OF SPARTA AND OF ATHENS. --The resources ofHellas were, at the outbreak of the war, very evenly divided between thetwo parties. With Sparta were all the states of the Peloponnesus, saveArgos and Achaia, while beyond the Isthmus the Boeotian League, headed byThebes, and other states were her allies. Together, these states couldraise a land force of sixty thousand men, besides a considerable navalarmament, Corinth being especially strong in ships. 

Athens commanded all the resources of the subject cities--about threehundred in number, with twice as many smaller towns--of her great maritimeempire. Her independent allies were Chios, Lesbos, Corcyra, and otherstates. Of course the chief strength of Athens lay in her splendid navy. 

THE BEGINNING: ATTACK UPON PLATÆA BY THE THEBANS. --The first act in thelong and terrible drama was enacted at night, within the walls of Platæa. This city, though in Boeotia, was under the protection of Athens, andwould have nothing to do with the Boeotian League. 

Anxious to get possession of this place before the actual outbreak of thewar which they saw to be inevitable, the Thebans planned its surprise andcapture. Three hundred Thebans gained access to the unguarded city in thedead of night, and marching to the public square, summoned the Platæans toexchange the Athenian for a Boeotian alliance. 

The Platæans were upon the point of acceding to all the demands made uponthem, when, discovering the small number of the enemy, they attacked andoverpowered them in the darkness, and took a hundred and eighty of themprisoners. These captives they afterwards murdered, in violation, as theThebans always maintained, of a sacred promise that their lives should bespared. This wretched affair at Platæa precipitated the war (431 B. C. ). 

INVASION OF ATTICA: PESTILENCE AT ATHENS. --A Spartan army was soonoverrunning Attica, while an Athenian fleet was ravaging the coasts of thePeloponnesus. Pericles persuaded the country people of Attica to abandontheir villas and hamlets and gather within the defences of the city. Hedid not deem it prudent to risk a battle in the open fields. From thewalls of Athens the people could see the flames of their burning villagesand farmhouses, as the enemy ravaged the plains of Attica up to the verygates of the city. It required all the persuasion of Pericles to restrainthem from issuing in a body from behind the ramparts and rushing to thedefence of their homes. 

The second year the Lacedæmonians again ravaged the fields about Athens, and drove the Athenians almost to frenzy with the sight of the flame andsmoke of such property as had escaped the destruction of the previousyear. To increase their misery, a pestilence broke out within the crowdedcity, and added its horrors to the already unbearable calamities of war. No pen could picture the despair and gloom that settled over the city. Athens lost, probably, one-fourth of her fighting men. Pericles, who hadbeen the very soul and life of Athens through these dark days, fell avictim to the plague (429 B. C. ). In dying, he said he considered hisgreatest praise to be that "he had never caused an Athenian to put onmourning. "

After the death of Pericles the leadership of affairs at Athens fell intothe hands of unprincipled demagogues, of whom Cleon was chief. The mobelement got control of the popular assembly, so that hereafter we shallfind many of its actions characterized neither by virtue nor wisdom. 

DESPERATE AND CRUEL CHARACTER OF THE WAR. --On both sides the war was wagedwith the utmost vindictiveness and cruelty. As a rule, all the mencaptured by either side were killed. 

In the year 428 B. C. The city of Mytilene, on the island of Lesbos, revolted from the Athenians. With the rebellion suppressed, the fate ofthe Mytileneans was in the hands of the Athenian assembly. Cleon proposedthat all the men of the place, six thousand in number, should be slain, and the women and children sold as slaves. This infamous decree waspassed, and a galley despatched bearing the sentence for execution to theAthenian general at Mytilene. 

By the next morning, however, the Athenians had repented of their hastyand cruel resolution. A second meeting of the assembly was hurriedlycalled; the barbarous vote was repealed; and a swift trireme, bearing thereprieve, set out in anxious haste to overtake the former galley, whichhad twenty-four hours the start. The trireme reached the island just intime to prevent the execution of the barbarous edict. 

The second resolution of the Athenians, though more discriminating thanthe first decree, was quite severe enough. Over one thousand of the noblesof Mytilene were killed, the city was destroyed, and the larger part ofthe lands of the island given to citizens of Athens. 

Still more unrelenting and cruel were the Spartans. In the summer of thesame year that the Athenians wreaked such vengeance upon the Mytileneans, the Spartans and their allies captured the city of Platæa, put to deathall the men, sold the women as slaves, and turned the site of the cityinto pasture-land. 

EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE PEACE OF NICIAS (421 B. C. ). --Soon after theaffair at Mytilene and the destruction of Platæa, an enterprising generalof the Athenians, named Demosthenes, seized and fortified a point of land(Pylos) on the coast of Messenia. The Spartans made every effort todislodge the enemy. In the course of the siege, four hundred Spartansunder Brasidas, having landed upon a little island (Sphacteria), were sounfortunate as to be cut off from the mainland by the sudden arrival of anAthenian fleet. About three hundred of them were at last captured andtaken as prisoners to Athens. 

But affairs now took a different turn; the Athenians were worsted (at thebattle of Delium, 424 B. C. ), and then much indecisive fighting followed. At last negotiations for peace were opened, which, after many embassies toand fro, resulted in what is known as the Peace of Nicias, from theprominent Athenian general who is supposed to have had most to do inbringing it about. The treaty arranged for a truce of fifty years. Eachparty was to give up to the other all prisoners and captured places. 

ALCIBIADES AND THE SICILIAN EXPEDITION (415-413 B. C. ). --The Peace ofNicias was only a nominal one. Some of the allies of the two principalparties to the truce were dissatisfied with it, and consequently its termswere not carried out in good faith or temper on either side. So the warwent on. For about seven years, however, Athens and Sparta refrained frominvading each other's territory; but even during this period each wasaiding its allies in making war upon the dependents or confederates of theother. Finally, hostilities flamed out in open and avowed war, and allHellas was again lit up with the fires of the fratricidal strife. 

[Illustration: ALCIBIADES]

The most prominent person on the Athenian side during this latter periodof the struggle was Alcibiades, a versatile and brilliant man, but areckless and unsafe counsellor. He was a pupil of Socrates, but he failedto follow the counsels of his teacher. His astonishing escapades onlyseemed to attach the people more closely to him, for he possessed allthose personal traits which make men popular idols. His influence over thedemocracy was unlimited. He was able to carry through the popular assemblyalmost any measure that it pleased him to advocate. The more prudent ofthe Athenians were filled with apprehension for the future of the stateunder such guidance. The noted misanthrope Timon gave expression to thisfeeling when, after Alcibiades had secured the assent of the popularassembly to one of his impolitic measures, he said to him: "Go on, mybrave boy, and prosper; for your prosperity will bring on the ruin of allthis crowd. " And it did, as we shall see. 

The most prosperous enterprise of Alcibiades, in the Timonian sense, wasthe inciting the Athenians to undertake an expedition against the Doriancity of Syracuse, in Sicily. The scheme that Alcibiades was revolving inhis mind was a most magnificent one. He proposed that the Athenians, aftereffecting the conquest of Sicily, should make that island the base ofoperations against both Africa and Italy. With the Italians andCarthaginians subdued, the armaments of the entire Hellenic world outsideof the Peloponnesus, were to be turned against the Spartans, who with oneblow should be forever crushed, and Athens be left the arbiter of thedestinies of Hellas. 

Alcibiades succeeded in persuading the Athenians to undertake at least thefirst part of the colossal enterprise. An immense fleet was carefullyequipped and manned. [Footnote: It consisted of one hundred and thirty-four costly triremes, bearing thirty-six thousand soldiers and sailors. The commanders were Alcibiades, Nicias, and Lamachus. Later, Demostheneswas sent out with a reinforcement consisting of seventy-three triremes andfive thousand soldiers. ] Anxiously did those remaining behind watch thesquadron as it bore away from the port of Athens. Could the watchers haveforeseen the fate of the splendid armament, their anxiety would havepassed into despair. "Athens itself was sailing out of the Piræus, neveragain to return. "

Scarcely had the expedition arrived at Sicily, before Alcibiades, who wasone of the leading generals in command of the armament, was summoned backto Athens to answer a charge of impiety. [Footnote: Just upon the eve ofthe departure of the expedition, the numerous statues of Hermes scatteredthroughout the city were grossly mutilated. Alcibiades was accused ofhaving had a hand in the affair, and furthermore of having mimicked thesacred rites of the Eleusinian mysteries. ] Fearing to trust himself in thehands of his enemies at Athens, he fled to Sparta, and there, bytraitorous counsel, did all in his power to ruin the very expedition hehad planned. He advised the Spartans to send at once their best general tothe Syracusans. They sent Gylippus, an able commander, whose generalshipcontributed largely to the total and irretrievable defeat that theAthenians finally suffered. Their fleet and army were both virtuallyannihilated. Seven thousand prisoners were crowded into the open stonequarries, where hundreds speedily died of exposure and starvation. Most ofthe wretched survivors were sold as slaves. The disaster was appalling andcomplete. The resources of Athens were wrecked. 

THE DECELEAN WAR: THE FALL OF ATHENS--While the Athenians were beforeSyracuse, the Spartans, acting upon the advice of Alcibiades, had takenpossession of and fortified a strong and commanding position known asDecelea, in Attica, only twelve miles from Athens. This was a thorn in theside of Athens. Secure in this stronghold, the Spartans could annoy andkeep in terror almost all the Attic plain. The occupation by the Spartansof this strategic point had such a determining influence upon theremainder of the Peloponnesian War, that this latter portion of it isknown as the Decelean War (413-404 B. C. ). 

Taking advantage of the terrible misfortunes of Athens, her subject-alliesnow revolted and fell away from her on every side. The Persians, everready to aid the Greeks in destroying one another, lent a willing ear tothe solicitations of the traitor Alcibiades, and gave help to theSpartans. 

The Athenians put forth almost superhuman efforts to retrieve theirfortunes. Had they been united among themselves, perhaps their effortsmight not have been in vain. But the oligarchical party, for the sake ofruining the democracy were willing to ruin the empire. While the army wasabsent from Athens, they overturned the government, and established a sortof aristocratical rule (411 B. C. ), under which affairs were in the handsof a council of Four Hundred. 

The Athenian troops, however, who were at Samos, would not recognize thenew government. They voted themselves to be the true Athens, andforgetting and forgiving the past, recalled Alcibiades, and gave himcommand of the army, thereby well illustrating what the poet Aristophanessaid respecting the disposition of the Athenians towards the spoiledfavorite, --"They love, they hate, but cannot live without him. "

Alcibiades detached the Persians from the side of the Spartans, and gainedsome splendid victories for Athens. But he could not undo the evil he haddone. He had ruined Athens beyond redemption by any human power. Constantly the struggle grew more and more hopeless. Alcibiades wasdefeated, and fearing to face the Athenians, who had deposed him from hiscommand, sought safety in flight. 

Finally, at Ægospotami, on the Hellespont, the Athenian fleet wassurprised and captured by the Spartans under Lysander (405 B. C. ). Theprisoners, three thousand in number, were massacred, and the usual ritesof burial denied their bodies. 

The battle of Ægospotami sealed the fate of Athens. "That night, " writesthe historian Xenophon, referring to the night upon which the news of thewoful disaster reached Athens, "That night no man slept. "

The towns on the Thracian and Macedonian coasts, and the islands of theÆgean belonging to the Athenian Empire, now fell into the hands of thePeloponnesians. Athens was besieged by sea and land, and soon forced tosurrender. Some of the allies insisted upon the total destruction of thecity, and the conversion of its site into pasture-land. The Spartans, however, with apparent magnanimity, declared that they would never consentthus "to put out one of the eyes of Greece. "

The real motive, doubtless, of the Spartans in sparing the city was theirfear lest, with Athens blotted out, Thebes or Corinth should become toopowerful. So the city itself was spared, but the fortifications of Piræusand the Long Walls were levelled to the ground, the work of demolitionbeing begun to the accompaniment of festive music (404 B. C. ). 

Sparta's power was now supreme. She had neither peer nor rival among allthe Grecian states. Throughout the war she had maintained that her onlypurpose in warring against Athens was to regain liberty for the Greciancities. We shall very soon see what sort of liberty it was that theyenjoyed under her guardianship. 

RESULTS OF THE WAR. --"Never, " says Thucydides, commenting upon thelamentable results of the Peloponnesian War, "Never had so many citiesbeen made desolate by victories;. . . Never were there so many instances ofbanishment; never so many scenes of slaughter either in battle orsedition. "

Athens was but the wreck of her former self. She had lost two hundredships and sixty thousand men, including the killed among her allies. Things were just the reverse now of what they were at the time of thePersian invasion. When, with all Athens in ruins, Themistocles at Salamiswas taunted by the Spartans with being a man without a city, he repliedgrandly, "Athens is here in her ships. " But now the real Athens was gone;only the empty shell remained. 

And all the rest of Hellas showed the marks of the cruel war. Spots whereonce had stood large towns were now pasture-land. But more lamentable thanall else besides, was the effect of the war upon the intellectual andmoral life of the Greek race. The Grecian world had sunk many degrees inmorality; while the vigor and productiveness of the intellectual andartistic life of Hellas, the centre and home of which had been Athens, were impaired beyond recovery. The achievements of the Greek intellect, especially in the fields of philosophic thought, in the century followingthe war were, it is true, wonderful; but these triumphs merely show, wemay believe, what the Hellenic mind would have done for art and generalculture, had it been permitted, unchecked, and under the favoring andinspiring conditions of liberty and self-government, to disclose all thatwas latent in it. 

2. THE SPARTAN AND THE THEBAN SUPREMACY. 

SPARTAN SUPREMACY. --For just one generation following the PeloponnesianWar (404-371 B. C. ), Sparta held the leadership of the Grecian states. Aristocratical governments, with institutions similar to the Spartan, wereestablished in the different cities of the old Athenian Empire. At Athens, the democratical constitution of Solon, under which the Athenians hadattained their greatness, was abolished, and an oppressive oligarchyestablished in its stead. The Thirty Tyrants, however, who administeredthis government, were, after eight months' infamous rule, driven from thecity, and the old democratic constitution, somewhat modified, was re-established (403 B. C. ). 

It was during this period that Socrates, the greatest moralist and teacherof antiquity that Europe had produced, was condemned to death, because histeachings were thought contrary to the religion of the Athenians. To thisera also belongs the well-known expedition of the Ten Thousand Greeks. 

EXPEDITION OF THE TEN THOUSAND (401-400 B. C. ). --Cyrus, satrap of thePersian province of Asia Minor, thinking that his brother Artaxerxes heldthe throne unjustly, planned to wrest it from him. For carrying out thispurpose, he raised an army composed of a hundred thousand Barbarians andabout eleven thousand Greek mercenaries. 

With this force Cyrus set out from Sardis, in the spring of 401 B. C. Hemarched without opposition across Asia Minor and Mesopotamia to Babylonia, into the very heart of the Persian empire. Here, at Cunaxa, he wasconfronted by Artaxerxes with a force of more than half a million of men. The Barbarian allies of Cyrus were scattered at the first onset of theenemy; but the Greeks stood like a rampart of rock. Cyrus, however, wasslain; and the other Greek generals, having been persuaded to enter into acouncil, were treacherously murdered by the Persians. 

The Greeks, in a hurried night meeting, chose new generals to lead themback to their homes. One of these was Xenophon, the popular historian ofthe expedition. Now commenced one of the most memorable retreats in allhistory. After a most harassing march over the hot plains of the Tigrisand the icy passes of Armenia, the survivors reached the Black Sea, theabode of sister Greek colonies. 

THEBAN SUPREMACY (371-362 B. C. ). --Throughout all the period of hersupremacy, Sparta dealt selfishly and tyrannically with the other Grecianstates. But at last the fiery resentment kindled by her oppressivemeasures inspired such a determined revolt against her as brought to anend her assumed supremacy over her sister cities. It was a city in Boeotiathat led the uprising against Sparta. This was Thebes. The oligarchicalgovernment which the Lacedæmonians had set up in that capital wasoverthrown by Pelopidas at the head of the so-called Sacred Band, acompany of three hundred select men who were bound by oath to stand byeach other to the last. Pelopidas was seconded in all his efforts byEpaminondas, one of the ablest generals the Grecian race ever produced. Under the masterly guidance and inspiration of these patriot leaders, Thebes very soon secured a predominating influence in the affairs ofGreece. 

It was Epaminondas who, when his enemies sought to disgrace and annoy himby electing him "public scavenger, " made, in accepting the office, thememorable utterance, "If the office will not reflect honor upon me, I willreflect honor upon it. "

At Leuctra (371 B. C. ) the Thebans earned the renown of being the mostinvincible soldiers in the world by completely overthrowing, with a forceof six thousand men, the Spartan army of twice that number. This is saidto have been the first time that the Spartans were ever fairly defeated inopen battle. Their forces had been annihilated, as at Thermopylæ, --butannihilation is not defeat. 

From the victory of Leuctra dates the short but brilliant period of Thebansupremacy. The year after that battle Epaminondas led an army into thePeloponnesus to aid the Arcadians, who had risen against Sparta. Laconiawas ravaged, and for the first time Spartan women saw the smoke of fireskindled by an enemy. 

To strengthen Arcadia's power of resistance to Sparta, Epaminondasperfected a league among the hitherto isolated towns and cantons of thedistrict. As the mutual jealousies of the leading cities prevented himfrom making any one of them the capital of the confederation, he foundedMegalopolis, or the Great City, and made it the head of the union. In thepursuit of the same policy, Epaminondas also restored the independence ofMessenia. 

But, moved by jealousy of the rapidly growing power of Thebes, Athens nowformed an alliance with her old rival Sparta against her. Three times moredid Epaminondas lead an army into the Peloponnesus. During his fourth andlast expedition he fought with the Spartans and Athenians the great battleof Mantinea, in Arcadia. On this memorable field, Epaminondas led theThebans once more to victory; but he himself was slain, and with him fellthe hopes and power of Thebes (362 B. C. ). 

All the states of Greece now lay exhausted, worn out by their endlessdomestic contentions and wars. There was scarcely sufficient strength leftto strike one worthy blow against enslavement by the master destined soonto come from the North. 

CHAPTER XVI. 

PERIOD OF MACEDONIAN SUPREMACY: EMPIRE OF ALEXANDER. (338-323 B. C. )

GENERAL STATEMENT. --Macedonia lay to the north of Greece proper. Theruling class of the country was probably of Hellenic race; at all eventsthe Macedonian kings were allowed to take part in the Olympian games--aprivilege accorded to none but pure Hellenes. Their efforts to spreadGreek art and culture among their subjects, a race of rough but brave andmartial men, unaccustomed to city life, had been so far successful thatthe country had, to a certain degree, become Hellenized. 

So this period of Macedonian supremacy upon which we are entering belongsto the history of the political life of the Greek race, as well as theeras marked by Athenian, Spartan, or Theban leadership. It was Hellenicinstitutions, customs, and manners, Hellenic language and civilization, that the Macedonians, in the extended conquests which we are about tonarrate, spread over the world. [Footnote: Of course it was rather theouter forms than the real inner life and spirit of the old Greekcivilization which were adopted by the non-Hellenic peoples of Egypt andWestern Asia. Hence the resulting culture is given a special name, _Hellenism_, which, in Professor Jebbs' language, means, --"not '_being_Hellenes, ' or Greeks, but--'doing _like_ Hellenes'; and as the adjectiveanswering to _Hellas_ is _Hellenic_, so the adjective answering to_Hellenism_ is _Hellenistic_. "] It is this which makes the short-livedMacedonian empire so important in universal history. 

PHILIP OF MACEDON. --Macedonia first rose to importance during the reign ofPhilip II. (359-336 B. C. ), better known as Philip of Macedon. He was a manof pre-eminent ability, of wonderful address in diplomacy, and possessedrare genius as an organizer and military chieftain. The art of war he hadlearned in youth as a hostage-pupil of Epaminondas of Thebes. He was theoriginator of the "Macedonian phalanx" a body as renowned in the militaryhistory of Macedonia as is the "legion" in that of Rome. 

With his kingdom settled and consolidated at home, Philip's ambition ledhim to seek the leadership of the Grecian states. He sought to gain hispurpose rather by artful diplomacy and intrigue than by open force. In theuse of these weapons he might have been the teacher of the AthenianThemistocles. 

THE SECOND SACRED WAR (355-346 B. C. ). --Philip quickly extended his powerover a large part of Thrace and the Greek cities of Chalcidice. Meanwhilehe was, in the following way, acquiring a commanding position in theaffairs of the states of Greece proper. 

The Phocians had put to secular use some of the lands which, at the end ofthe First Sacred War (see p. 108), had been consecrated to the DelphianApollo. Taken to task and heavily fined for this act by the other membersof the Delphian Amphictyony, the Phocians deliberately robbed the temple, and used the treasure in the maintenance of a large force of mercenarysoldiers. The Amphictyons not being able to punish the Phocians for theirimpiety, were forced to ask help of Philip, who gladly rendered theassistance sought. 

The Phocians were now quickly subdued, their cities were destroyed, andthe inhabitants scattered in villages and forced to pay tribute to theDelphian Apollo. The place that the Phocians had held in the DelphianAmphictyony was given to Philip, upon whom was also bestowed the privilegeof presiding at the Pythian games. The position he had now secured wasjust what Philip had coveted, in order that he might use it to makehimself master of all Greece. 

BATTLE OF CHÆRONEA (338 B. C. ). --Demosthenes at Athens was one of the fewwho seemed to understand the real designs of Philip. His penetration, likethat of Pericles, descried a cloud lowering over Greece--this time fromthe North. With all the energy of his wonderful eloquence, he strove tostir up the Athenians to resist the encroachments of the king of Macedon. He hurled against him his famous "Philippics, " speeches so filled withfierce denunciation that they have given name to all writingscharacterized by bitter criticism or violent invective. 

At length the Athenians and Thebans, aroused by the oratory of Demosthenesand by some fresh encroachments of the Macedonians, united their forces, and met Philip upon the memorable field of Chæronea in Boeotia. TheMacedonian phalanx swept everything before it. The Theban band wasannihilated. The power and authority of Philip were now extended andacknowledged throughout Greece (338 B. C. ). 

PLAN TO INVADE ASIA. --While the Greek states were divided amongthemselves, they were united in an undying hatred of the Persians. Theywere at this time meditating an enterprise fraught with the greatestimportance to the history of the world. This was a joint expeditionagainst Persia. The march of the Ten Thousand Greeks through the veryheart of the dominions of the Great King had encouraged this nationalundertaking, and illustrated the feasibility of the conquest of Asia. At agreat council of the Grecian cities held at Corinth, Philip was chosenleader of this expedition. All Greece was astir with preparation. In themidst of all, Philip was assassinated during the festivities attending themarriage of his daughter, and his son Alexander succeeded to his place andpower (336 B. C. ). 

ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT. --Alexander was only twenty years of agewhen he came to his father's throne. The spirit of the man is shown in thecomplaint of the boy when news of his father's victories came to him:"Friends, " said he to his playmates, "my father will possess himself ofeverything and leave nothing for us to do. "

For about two years Alexander was busy suppressing revolts against hispower among the different cities of Hellas, and chastising hostile tribeson the northern frontiers of Macedonia. Thebes having risen against him, he razed the city to the ground, --sparing, however, the house of the poetPindar, --and sold thirty thousand of the inhabitants into slavery. Thuswas one of the most renowned of the cities of Greece blotted out ofexistence. 

ALEXANDER CROSSES THE HELLESPONT (334 B. C. ). --Alexander was now free tocarry out his father's scheme in regard to the Asiatic expedition. In thespring of 334 B. C. , he set out, at the head of an army numbering aboutthirty-five thousand men, for the conquest of the Persian empire. Nowcommenced one of the most remarkable and swiftly executed campaignsrecorded in history. 

[Illustration: THE BATTLE OF ISSUS. (From a Mosaic found at Pompeii. )]

Crossing the Hellespont, Alexander routed the Persians at the importantbattle of the Granicus, by which victory all Asia Minor was laid open tothe invader. 

THE BATTLE OF ISSUS (333 B. C. ). --At the northeast corner of theMediterranean lies the plain of Issus. Here Alexander again defeated thePersian army, numbering six hundred thousand men. The family of Darius, including his mother, wife, and children, fell into the hands ofAlexander; but the king himself escaped from the field, and hastened tohis capital, Susa, to raise another army to oppose the march of theconqueror. 

SIEGE OF TYRE (332 B. C. ). --Before penetrating to the heart of the empire, Alexander turned to the south, in order to effect the subjugation ofPhoenicia, that he might command the Phoenician fleets and prevent theirbeing used to sever his communication with Greece. The island-city ofTyre, after a memorable siege, was taken by means of a mole, or causeway, built with incredible labor through the sea to the city. Eight thousand ofthe inhabitants were slain, and thirty thousand sold into slavery--aterrible warning to those cities that should dare to close their gatesagainst the Macedonian. 

ALEXANDER IN EGYPT. --With the cities of Phoenicia and the fleets of theMediterranean subject to his control, Alexander easily effected theconquest of Egypt. The Egyptians, indeed, made no resistance to theMacedonians, but willingly exchanged masters. 

While in the country, Alexander founded, at one of the mouths of the Nile, a city called, after himself, Alexandria. The city became the meeting-place of the East and West; and its importance through many centuriesattests the far-sighted wisdom of its founder. 

A less worthy enterprise of the conqueror was his expedition to the oasisof Siwah, located in the Libyan desert, where were a celebrated temple andoracle of Zeus Ammon. To gratify his own vanity, as well as to impress thesuperstitious barbarians, Alexander desired to be declared of celestialdescent. The priests of the temple, in accordance with the wish of theking, gave out that the oracle pronounced Alexander to be the son of ZeusAmmon, and the destined ruler of the world. 

THE BATTLE OF ARBELA (331 B. C. ). --From Egypt Alexander recommenced hismarch towards the Persian capital. He had received offers of peace fromDarius, but to these he is said to have replied, "There cannot be two sunsin the heavens. " Pushing on, he crossed the Euphrates and the Tigriswithout opposition; but upon the plain of Arbela, not far from ancientNineveh, he found his further advance disputed by Darius with an immensearmy. Again the Macedonian phalanx "cut through the ranks of the Persiansas a boat cuts through the waves. " The fate of Darius has been alreadynarrated in our story of the last of the Persian kings (see p. 82). 

The battle of Arbela was one of the decisive combats of history. It markedthe end of the long struggle between the East and the West, between Persiaand Greece, and prepared the way for the spread of Hellenic civilizationover all Western Asia. 

ALEXANDER AT BABYLON, SUSA, AND PERSEPOLIS. --From the field of ArbelaAlexander marched south to Babylon, which opened its gates to him withoutopposition. Susa was next entered by the conqueror. Here he seizedincredible quantities of gold and silver ($57, 000, 000, it is said), thetreasure of the Great King. 

From Susa Alexander's march was next directed to Persepolis, where hesecured a treasure more than twice as great ($138, 000, 000) as that foundat Susa. Upon Persepolis Alexander wreaked vengeance, for all Greece hadsuffered at the hands of the Persians. Many of the inhabitants weremassacred, and others sold into slavery; while the palaces of the Persiankings were given to the flames. 

Alexander, having thus overthrown the power of Darius, now began to regardhimself, not only as his conqueror, but as his successor, and was thuslooked upon by the Persians, He assumed the pomp and state of an Orientalmonarch, and required the most obsequious homage from all who approachedhim. His Greek and Macedonian companions, unused to paying such servileadulation to their king, were much displeased at Alexander's conduct, andfrom this time on to his death, intrigues and conspiracies were beingconstantly formed among them against his power and life. 

CONQUEST OF BACTRIA. --Urged on by an uncontrollable desire to possesshimself of the most remote countries of which any accounts had everreached him, Alexander now led his army to the north, and, after subduingmany tribes that dwelt about the Caspian Sea, boldly conducted hissoldiers over the snowy passes of the Hindu Kush, and descended into thefair provinces of Bactria. 

During the years 329-328 B. C. Alexander conquered not only Bactria butSogdiana, a country lying north of the Oxus. Among his captives here was abeautiful Bactrian princess, Roxana by name, who became his bride. 

Alexander's stay in Sogdiana was saddened by his murder of his dearestfriend Clitus, who had saved his life at the Granicus. Both were flushedwith wine when the quarrel arose; after the deed, Alexander wasoverwhelmed with remorse. 

CONQUESTS IN INDIA. --With the countries north of the Hindu Kush subduedand settled, Alexander recrossed the mountains, and led his army down uponthe rich and crowded plains of India (327 B. C. ). Here again he showedhimself invincible, and received the submission of many of the nativeprinces. 

The most formidable resistance encountered by the Macedonians was offeredby a strong and wealthy king named Porus. Captured at last and broughtinto the presence of Alexander, his proud answer to the conqueror'squestion as to how he thought he ought to be treated was, "Like a king. "The impulsive Alexander gave him back his kingdom, to be held, however, subject to the Macedonian crown. 

Alexander's desire was to extend his conquests to the Ganges, but hissoldiers began to murmur because of the length and hardness of theircampaigns, and he reluctantly gave up the undertaking. To secure theconquests already made, he founded, at different points in the valley ofthe Indus, Greek towns and colonies. One of these he named Alexandria, after himself; another Bucephala, in memory of his favorite steed; andstill another Nicæa, for his victories. The modern museum at Lahorecontains many relics of Greek art, dug up on the site of these Macedoniancities and camps. 

Alexander's return route lay through the ancient Gedrosia, nowBeluchistan, a region frightful with burning deserts, amidst which hissoldiers endured almost incredible privations and sufferings. After atrying and calamitous march of over two months, Alexander, with thesurvivors of his army, reached Carmania. Here, to his unbounded joy, hewas joined by Nearchus, the trusted admiral of his fleet, whom he hadordered to explore the sea between the Indus and the Euphrates. 

To appropriately celebrate his conquests and discoveries, Alexanderinstituted a series of religious festivals, amidst which his soldiersforgot the dangers of their numberless battles and the hardships of theirunparalleled marches, which had put to the test every power of humanendurance. And well might these veterans glory in their achievements. In afew years they had conquered half the world, and changed the whole courseof history. 

PLANS AND DEATH OF ALEXANDER. --As the capital of his vast empire, whichnow stretched from the Ionian Sea to the Indus, Alexander chose theancient Babylon, upon the Euphrates. His designs were to push hisconquests as far to the west as he had extended them to the east. Arabia, Carthage, Italy, and Spain were to be added to his already vast domains. Indeed, the plans of Alexander embraced nothing less than the union andHellenizing of the world. Not only were the peoples of Asia and Europe tobe blended by means of colonies, but even the floras of the two continentswere to be intermingled by the transplanting of fruits and trees from onecontinent to the other. Common laws and customs, a common language and acommon religion, were to unite the world into one great family. Intermarriages were to blend the races. Alexander himself married adaughter of Darius III. , and also one of Artaxerxes Ochus; and to tenthousand of his soldiers, whom he encouraged to take Asiatic wives, hegave magnificent gifts. 

In the midst of his vast projects, Alexander was seized by a fever, brought on by his insane excesses, and died at Babylon, 323 B. C. , in thethirty-second year of his age. His soldiers could not let him die withoutseeing him. The watchers of the palace were obliged to open the doors tothem, and the veterans of a hundred battle-fields filed sorrowfully pastthe couch of their dying commander. His body was carried to Alexandria, inEgypt, and there enclosed in a golden coffin, and a splendid mausoleum wasraised over it. His ambition for celestial honors was gratified in hisdeath; for in Egypt and elsewhere temples were dedicated to him, anddivine worship was paid to his statues. 

We cannot deny to Alexander, in addition to a remarkable genius formilitary affairs, a profound and comprehensive intellect. He had finetastes, and liberally encouraged art, science, and literature. The artistsof his times had in him a munificent patron; and to his preceptorAristotle he sent large collections of natural-history objects, gatheredin his extended expeditions. He had a kind and generous nature: he avengedthe murder of his enemy Darius; and he repented in bitter tears over thebody of his faithful Clitus. He exposed himself like the commonestsoldier, sharing with his men the hardships of the march and the dangersof the battle-field. 

But he was self-seeking, foolishly vain, and madly ambitious of militaryglory. He plunged into shameful excesses, and gave way to bursts ofpassion that transformed a usually mild and generous disposition into thefury of a madman. The contradictions of his life cannot, perhaps, bebetter expressed than in the words once applied to the giftedThemistocles: "He was greater in genius than in character. "

RESULTS OF ALEXANDER'S CONQUESTS. --The remarkable conquests of Alexanderhad far-reaching consequences. They ended the long struggle between Persiaand Greece, and spread Hellenic civilization over Egypt and Western Asia. The distinction between Greek and Barbarian was obliterated, and thesympathies of men, hitherto so narrow and local, were widened, and thus animportant preparation was made for the reception of the cosmopolitan creedof Christianity. The world was also given a universal language of culture, which was a further preparation for the spread of Christian teachings. 

But the evil effects of the conquest were also positive and far-reaching. The sudden acquisition by the Greeks of the enormous wealth of the Persianempire, and contact with the vices and the effeminate luxury of theOriental nations, had a most demoralizing effect upon Hellenic life. Greece became corrupt, and she in turn corrupted Rome. Thus thecivilization of antiquity was undermined. 

CHRONOLOGICAL SUMMARY OF GRECIAN HISTORY TO THE DEATH OFALEXANDER THE GREAT. 

Legendary Age The Trojan War, legendary date 1194-1184 The Dorians enter the Peloponnesus, about 1104

Early History of Sparta Lycurgus gives laws to Sparta, about 850 The Messenian Wars, about 750-650

Early History of Athens Rule of the Archons 1050-612 Rebellion of Cylon 612 Legislation of Solon 594 Pisistratus rules 560-527 Expulsion of the Pisistratidæ 510

Period of Græco-Persian War First Expedition of Darius (led by Mardonius) 492 Battle of Marathon 490 Battle of Thermopylæ 480 Battle of Salamis 480 Battles of Platæa and Mycale 479

Period of Athenian Supremacy Athens rebuilt 478 Aristides chosen first president of the Confederacy of Delos 477 Themistocles sent into exile 471 Ostracism of Cimon 459 Pericles at the head of affairs-- Periclean Age 459-431

Events of the Peloponnesian War Beginning of the Peloponnesian War 431 Pestilence at Athens 430 Expedition against Syracuse 415 Battle of Ægospotami 405 Close of the War 404

Period of Spartan Supremacy Rule of the Thirty Tyrants at Athens 404-403 Expedition of the Ten Thousand 401-400 Peace of Antalcidas 387 Oligarchy established at Thebes 382 Spartan power broken on the field of Leuctra 371

Period of Theban Supremacy Battle of Leuctra, which secures the supremacy of Thebes 371 Battle of Mantinea and death of Epaminondas 362

Period of Macedonian Supremacy Battle of Chæronea 338 Death of Philip of Macedon 336 Alexander crosses the Hellespont 334 Battle of Issus 333 Battle of Arbela 331 Death of Alexander at Babylon 323

CHAPTER XVII. 

STATES FORMED FROM THE EMPIRE OF ALEXANDER. 

DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE OF ALEXANDER. --There was no one who could wield thesword that fell from the hand of Alexander. It is told that, when dying, being asked to whom the kingdom should belong, he replied, "To thestrongest, " and handed his signet ring to his general Perdiccas. ButPerdiccas was not strong enough to master the difficulties of thesituation. [Footnote: Perdiccas ruled as regent for Philip Arridæus (anillegitimate brother of Alexander), who was proclaimed titular king. ]Indeed, who is strong enough to rule the world?

Consequently the vast empire created by Alexander's unparalleled conquestswas distracted by quarrels and wars, and before the close of the fourthcentury B. C. , had become broken into many fragments. Besides minor states, [Footnote: Two of these lesser states, Rhodes and Pontus, deserve specialnotice:

RHODES. --Rhodes became the head of a maritime confederation of the citiesand islands along the coasts of Asia Minor, and thus laid the basis of aremarkable commercial prosperity and naval power. 

PONTUS. --Pontus (Greek for _sea_), a state of Asia Minor, was so calledfrom its position upon the Euxine. It was never thoroughly conquered bythe Macedonians. It has a place in history mainly because of the lustreshed upon it by the transcendent ability of one of its kings, Mithridatesthe Great (120-63 B. C. ), who for a long time made successful resistance tothe Roman arms. ] four well-defined and important monarchies arose out ofthe ruins. After the rearrangement of boundaries that followed thedecisive battle of Ipsus (fought in Phrygia 301 B. C. ), these principalstates had the outlines shown by the accompanying map. Their rulers wereLysimachus, Seleucus Nicator, Ptolemy, and Cassander, who had each assumedthe title of king. The great horn being broken, in its place came up fournotable ones toward the four winds of heaven. [Footnote: Dan. Viii. 8. ]

Lysimachus held Thrace and the western part of Asia Minor; SeleucusNicator, Syria and the countries eastward to the Indus; Ptolemy ruledEgypt; and Cassander governed Macedonia, and claimed authority overGreece. [Footnote: Cassander never secured complete control of Greece, hence this country is not included in his domains as these appear upon themap. ]

After barely mentioning the fate of the kingdom of Lysimachus, we willtrace very briefly the fortunes of the other three monarchies until theywere overthrown, one after the other, by the now rapidly rising power ofRome. 

THRACE, OR THE KINGDOM OF LYSIMACHUS. --The kingdom of Lysimachus soondisappeared. He was defeated by Seleucus in the year 281 B. C. , and hisdominions were divided. The lands in Asia Minor were joined to the Syriankingdom, while Thrace was absorbed by Macedonia. 

SYRIA, OR THE KINGDOM OF THE SELEUCIDÆ (312-63 B. C. ). --This kingdom, during the two centuries and more of its existence, played an importantpart in the political history of the world. Under its first king itcomprised nominally almost all the countries of Asia conquered byAlexander, thus stretching from the Hellespont to the Indus. Its rulerswere called Seleucidæ, from the founder of the kingdom, Seleucus Nicator. 

Seleucus Nicator (312-280 B. C. ), besides being a ruler of unusual ability, was a most liberal patron of learning and art. He is declared to have been"the greatest founder of cities that ever lived. " Throughout his dominionshe founded a vast number, some of which endured for many centuries. Antioch, on the Orontes, in Northern Syria, became, after Seleucia on theTigris, the capital of the kingdom, and obtained an influence and renownas a centre of population and trade which have given its name a sure placein history. 

The successors of Seleucus Nicator led the kingdom through checkeredfortunes. On different sides provinces fell away and became independentstates. [Footnote: The most important of these were the following:--1. PERGAMUS. --This was a state in western Asia Minor, which becameindependent upon the death of Seleucus Nicator (280 B. C. ). Favored by theRomans, it gradually grew into a powerful kingdom, which at one timeembraced a considerable part of Asia Minor. Its capital, also calledPergamus, became a most noted centre of Greek learning and civilization. 2. PARTHIA. --Parthia was a powerful Turanian state that grew up east ofthe Euphrates River (from about 255 B. C. To 226 A. D. ). Its kings were atfirst formidable enemies of the rulers of Syria, and later of the Romans, whom they never allowed to make any considerable conquest beyond theEuphrates. ] Antiochus III. (223-187 B. C. ), called "the Great, " raised thekingdom for a short time into great prominence; but attempting to makeconquests in Europe, and further, giving asylum to the Carthaginiangeneral Hannibal, he incurred the fatal hostility of Rome. Quickly drivenby the Roman legions across the Hellespont, he was hopelessly defeated atthe battle of Magnesia (190 B. C. ). After this, the Syrian kingdom was ofvery little importance in the world's affairs. At last, brought again intocollision with Rome, the country was overrun by Pompey the Great, andbecame a part of the Roman Republic, 63 B. C. 

[Illustration: COIN OF ANTIOCHUS III. (THE GREAT). ]

[Illustration: PTOLEMY SOTER. ]

KINGDOM OF THE PTOLEMIES IN EGYPT (323-30 B. C. ). --The Græco-Egyptianempire of the Ptolemies was by far the most important, in its influenceupon the civilization of the world, of all the kingdoms that owed theirorigin to the conquests of Alexander. The founder of the house and dynastywas Ptolemy I. , surnamed Soter (323-283 B. C. ), one of Alexander's ablestgenerals. His descendants ruled in Egypt for nearly three centuries, amost important period in the intellectual life of the world. Under PtolemyI. , Alexandria became the great depot of exchange for the productions ofthe world. At the entrance of the harbor stood the Pharos, or light-house, --the first structure of its kind, --which Ptolemy built to guide thefleets of the world to his capital. This edifice was reckoned one of theSeven Wonders. 

But it was not alone the exchange of material products that wascomprehended in Ptolemy's scheme. His aim was to make his capital theintellectual centre of the world--the place where the arts, sciences, literatures, and even the religions, of the world should meet and mingle. He founded the famous Museum, a sort of college, which became the"University of the East, " and established the renowned AlexandrianLibrary. Poets, artists, philosophers, and teachers in all departments oflearning were encouraged to settle in Alexandria by the conferring ofimmunities and privileges, and by gifts and munificent patronage. Hiscourt embraced the learning and genius of the age. 

Ptolemy II. , Philadelphus (283-247 B. C. ), followed closely in thefootsteps of his father, carrying out, as far as possible, the plans andpolicies of the preceding reign. Under his successor, Ptolemy III. , Euergetes (247-242 B. C. ), the dominions of the Ptolemies touched theirwidest limits; while the capital Alexandria reached the culminating pointin her fame as the centre of Hellenistic civilization. 

Altogether the Ptolemies reigned in Egypt almost exactly three centuries(323-30 B. C. ). Those rulers who held the throne for the last two hundredyears were, with few exceptions, a succession of monsters, such as evenRome in her worst days could scarcely equal. The usage of intermarriageamong the members of the royal family, --a usage in which the Ptolemiesfollowed what was a custom of the ancient Pharaohs, --led to endless familyquarrels, which resulted in fratricide, matricide, and all the dark deedsincluded in the calendar of royal crime. The story of the renownedCleopatra, the last of the house of the Ptolemies, will be told inconnection with Roman history, to which it properly belongs. 

MACEDONIA AND GREECE. --From the time of the subjection of Greece by Philipand Alexander to the absorption of Macedonia into the growing dominions ofRome, the Greek cities of the peninsula were very much under the controlor influence of the Macedonian kings. But the Greeks were never made forroyal subjects, and consequently they were in a state of chronic revoltagainst this foreign authority. 

Thus, no sooner had they heard of the death of Alexander than several ofthe Grecian states rose against the Macedonian general Antipater, andcarried on with him what is known as the Lamian War (323-321 B. C. ). Thestruggle ended disastrously for the Greeks, and Demosthenes, who had beenthe soul of the movement, was forced to flee from Athens. He took refugeupon an island just off the coast of the Peloponnesus; but being stillhunted by Antipater, he put an end to his own life by means of poison. 

[Illustration: THE DYING GAUL. ]

The next matter of moment in the history of Macedonia, was an invasion ofthe Gauls (279 B. C. ), kinsmen of the Celtic tribes that about a centurybefore this time had sacked the city of Rome. These savage maraudersinflicted terrible suffering upon both Macedonia and Greece. But they wereat last expelled from Europe, and settling in Asia Minor, they there gavename to the province of Galatia. The celebrated Greek sculpture, The DyingGaul, popularly but erroneously called The Dying Gladiator, is a mostinteresting memorial of this episode in Greek history. 

Macedonia finally came in contact with a new enemy--the great militaryrepublic of the West. For lending aid to Carthage in the Second Punic War, she incurred the anger of Rome, and the result was that, after muchintrigue and hard fighting, the country was brought into subjection to theItalian power. In the year 146 B. C. It was erected into a Roman province. 

The political affairs of Greece proper during the period we areconsidering were chiefly comprehended in the fortunes of twoconfederacies, or leagues, one of which was called the Achæan, and theother the Ætolian League. United, these two confederacies might havemaintained the political independence of Greece; but that spirit ofdissension which we have seen to be the bane of the Hellenic peoplescaused them to become, in the hands of intriguing Rome, weapons first forcrushing Macedonia, and then for grinding each other to pieces. Finally, in the year 146 B. C. , the splendid city of Corinth was taken by the Romanarmy and laid in ashes. This was the last act in the long and varied dramaof the political life of ancient Greece. Henceforth it constituted simplya portion of the Roman Empire. 

CONCLUSION. --We have now traced the political fortunes of the Hellenicrace through about seven centuries of authentic history. In succeedingchapters it will be our pleasanter task to trace the more brilliant andworthy fortunes of the artistic and intellectual life of Hellas, --toportray, though necessarily in scanty outline, the achievements of thatwonderful genius which enabled her, "captured, to lead captive hercaptor. "

CHAPTER XVIII. 

GREEK ARCHITECTURE, SCULPTURE, AND PAINTING. 

THE GREEK SENSE OF BEAUTY. --The Greeks were artists by nature. "Uglinessgave them pain like a blow. " Everything they made was beautiful. Beautythey placed next to holiness; indeed, they almost or quite made beauty andright the same thing. They are said to have thought it strange thatSocrates was good, seeing he was so unprepossessing in appearance. 

[Illustration: PELASGIAN MASONRY. ]

1. ARCHITECTURE. 

PELASGIAN ARCHITECTURE. --The term Pelasgian is applied to variousstructures of massive masonry found in different parts of Greece, Italy, and Asia Minor. The origin of these works was a mystery to the earliestHellenes, who ascribed them to a race of giants called Cyclops; hence thename Cyclopean that also attaches to them. 

These works exhibit three well-defined stages of development. In theearliest and rudest structures the stones are gigantic in size anduntouched by the chisel; in the next oldest the stones are worked intoirregular polygonal blocks; while in the latest the blocks are cut intorectangular shapes and laid in regular courses. The walls of the oldcitadels or castles of several Grecian cities exhibit specimens of thisprimitive architecture (see p. 90). 

ORDERS OF ARCHITECTURE. --There are three styles, or orders, of Grecianarchitecture--the Doric, the Ionic, and the Corinthian. They aredistinguished from one another chiefly by differences in the proportionsand ornamentation of the column. 

[Illustration: DORIC CAPITAL. ]

[Illustration: IONIC CAPITAL. ]

The Doric column is without a base, and has a simple and massive capital. At first the Doric temples of the Greeks were almost as massive as theEgyptian temples, but later they became more refined. 

The Ionic column is characterized by the spiral volutes of the capital. This form was borrowed from the Assyrians, and was principally employed bythe Greeks of Ionia, whence its name. 

The Corinthian order is distinguished by its rich capital, formed ofacanthus leaves. This type is made up of Egyptian, Assyrian, and Grecianelements. The addition of the acanthus leaves is said to have beensuggested to the artist Callimachus by the pretty effect of a basketsurrounded by the leaves of an acanthus plant, upon which it hadaccidentally fallen. 

The entire structure was made to harmonize with its supporting columns. The general characteristics of the several orders are well portrayed bythe terms we use when we speak of the "stern" Doric, the "graceful" Ionic, and the "ornate" Corinthian. 

[Illustration: CORINTHIAN CAPITAL. ]

TEMPLE OF DIANA AT EPHESUS. --The temple of Diana at Ephesus was regardedas one of the wonders of the world. The original structure was commencedabout the beginning of the sixth century B. C. , and, according to Pliny, was one hundred and twenty years in process of building. Croesus gaveliberally of his wealth to ornament the shrine. 

In the year 356 B. C. , on the same night, it is said, that Alexander wasborn, an ambitious youth, named Herostratus, fired the building, simply toimmortalize his name. Alexander offered to rebuild the temple, providedthat he be allowed to inscribe his name upon it. The Ephesians gracefullydeclined the proposal by replying that it was not right for one deity toerect a temple to another. Alexander was obliged to content himself withplacing within the shrine his own portrait by Apelles--a piece of workwhich cost $30, 000. The value of the gifts to the temple was beyond allcalculation: kings and states vied with one another in splendid donations. Painters and sculptors were eager to have their masterpieces assigned aplace within its walls, so that it became a great national gallery ofpaintings and statuary. 

So inviolable was the sanctity of the temple that at all times, andespecially in times of tumult and danger, property and treasures werecarried to it as a safe repository. [Footnote: The Grecian temples were, in a certain sense, banks of deposit. They contained special chambers orvaults for the safe-keeping of valuables. The heaps of gold and silverrelics discovered by Di Cesnola at Sunium, in the island of Cyprus, werefound in the secret subterranean vaults of a great temple. The priestsoften loaned out on interest the money deposited with them, the revenuefrom this source being added to that from the leased lands of the templeand from the tithes of war booty, to meet the expenses of the services ofthe shrine. Usually the temple property in Greece was managed solely bythe priests; but the treasure of the Parthenon at Athens formed anexception to this rule. The treasure here belonged to the state, and wascontrolled and disposed of by the vote of the people. Even the personalproperty of the goddess, the gold drapery of the statue (see p. 185), which was worth about $600, 000, could be used in case of great need, butit must be replaced in due time, with a fair interest. ] But the riches ofthe sanctuary proved too great a temptation to the Roman emperor Nero. Herisked incurring the anger of the great Diana, and robbed the temple ofmany statues and a vast amount of gold. Later (in 262 A. D. ), the barbarianGoths enriched themselves with the spoils of the shrine, and left it aruin. 

THE DELPHIAN TEMPLE. --The first temple erected at Delphi over the spotwhence issued the mysterious vapors (see p. 105) was a rude woodenstructure. In the year 548 B. C. , the temple then standing was destroyed byfire. All the cities and states of Hellas contributed to its rebuilding. Even the king of Egypt, Amasis, sent a munificent gift. More than half amillion of dollars was collected; for the temple was to exceed inmagnificence anything the world had yet seen. It will be recalled that theAthenian Alcmæonidæ were the contractors who undertook the rebuilding ofthe shrine (see p. 122). 

The temple was crowded with the spoils of many battle-fields, with therich gifts of kings, and with rare works of art. Like the temple atEphesus, the Delphian shrine, after remaining for many years secure, through the awe and reverence which its oracle inspired, suffered frequentspoliation. The greed of conquerors overcame all religious scruples. ThePhocians robbed the temple of a treasure equivalent, it is estimated, tomore than $10, 000, 000 with us (see p. 160); and Nero plundered it of fivehundred bronze images. But Constantine (emperor of Rome 306-337 A. D. , andfounder of Constantinople) was the Nebuchadnezzar who bore off the sacredvessels and many statues as trophies to his new capital then rising on theHellespont. 

THE ATHENIAN ACROPOLIS AND THE PARTHENON. --In the history of art there isno other spot in the world possessed of such interest as the flat-toppedrock, already described, which constituted the Athenian Acropolis. Wehave seen that in early times the eminence was used as a stronghold. Butby the fifth century B. C. The city had slipped down upon the plain, andthe summit of the rock was consecrated to the temples and the worship ofthe deities, and came to be called "the city of the gods. " During theperiod of Athenian supremacy, especially in the Periclean Age, Hellenicgenius and piety adorned this spot with temples and statues that all theworld has pronounced to be faultless specimens of beauty and taste. 

[Illustration: ATHENIAN YOUTH IN PROCESSION. (From the Frieze of theParthenon. )]

The most celebrated of the buildings upon the Acropolis was the Parthenon, the "Residence of the virgin-goddess Athena. " This is considered thefinest specimen of Greek architecture. It was designed by the architectIctinus, but the sculptures that adorned it were the work of thecelebrated Phidias. [Footnote: The subject of the wonderful frieze runninground the temple was the procession which formed the most importantfeature of the Athenian festival known as the Great Panathenæa, which wascelebrated every four years in honor of the patron-goddess of Athens. Thelarger part of the frieze is now in the British Museum, the Parthenonhaving been despoiled of its coronal of sculptures by Lord Elgin. ReadLord Byron's _The Curse of Minerva_. To the poet, Lord Elgin's actappeared worse than vandalism. ] It was built in the Doric order, of marblefrom the neighboring Pentelicus. After standing for more than two thousandyears, and having served successively as a Pagan temple, a Christianchurch, and a Mohammedan mosque, it finally was made to serve as a Turkishpowder-magazine, in a war with the Venetians, in 1687. During the progressof this contest a bomb fired the magazine, and more than half of thismasterpiece of ancient art was shivered into fragments. The front isnearly perfect, and is the most prominent feature of the Acropolis at thepresent time. 

[Illustration: RESTORATION OF THE ACROPOLIS OF ATHENS. ]

THE MAUSOLEUM AT HALICARNASSUS. --This structure was another of the SevenWonders of the World. It was a monumental tomb designed to preserve thememory of Mausolus, king of Caria, who died 353 B. C. Its erection wasprompted by the love and grief of his wife Artemisia. The combined geniusof the most noted artists of the age executed the wish of the queen. It isthe traditions of this beautiful structure that have given the world aname for all magnificent monuments raised to perpetuate the memory of thedead. 

THEATRES. --The most noted of Greek theatres was the Theatre of Dionysus atAthens, which was the model of all the others. It was semi-circular inform, and was partly cut in the rock on the southeastern slope of theAcropolis, the Greeks in the construction of their theatres generallytaking advantage of a hillside. There were about one hundred rows ofseats, the lowest one, bordering the orchestra, consisting of sixty-sevenmarble arm-chairs. The structure would hold thirty thousand spectators. 

[Illustration: THE THEATRE OF DIONYSUS AT ATHENS. (Restored by G. Rehlender. )]

2. SCULPTURE AND PAINTING. 

PROGRESS IN SCULPTURE: INFLUENCE OF THE GYMNASTIC ART. --Wood was thematerial first employed by the Greek artists. About the eighth centuryB. C. Bronze and marble were generally substituted for the less durablematerial. With this change sculpture began to make rapid progress. 

[Illustration: PITCHING THE DISCUS, OR QUOIT (Discobolus. )]

But what exerted the most positive influence upon Greek sculpture was thegymnastic art. The exercises of the gymnasium and the contests of thesacred games afforded the artist unrivalled opportunities for the study ofthe human form. "The whole race, " as Symonds says, "lived out itssculpture and its painting, rehearsed, as it were, the great works ofPhidias and Polygnotus, in physical exercises, before it learned toexpress itself in marble or in color. "

As the sacred buildings increased in number and costliness, the servicesof the artist were called into requisition for their adornment. At firstthe temple held only the statue of the god; but after a time it became, aswe have already seen, a sort of national museum. The entablature, thepediments, and every niche of the interior of the shrine, as well as thesurrounding grounds and groves, were peopled with statues and groups offigures, executed by the most renowned artists, and representing thenational deities, the legendary heroes, victors at the public games, orincidents in the life of the state in which piety saw the specialinterposition of the god in whose honor the shrine had been reared. 

PHIDIAS. --Among all the great sculptors of antiquity, Phidias stands pre-eminent. He was an Athenian, and was born about 488 B. C. He delighted inthe beautiful myths and legends of the Heroic Age, and from these he drewsubjects for his art. It was his genius that created the wonderful figuresof the pediments and the frieze of the Parthenon. 

[Illustration: ATHENA PARTHENOS. After a statue found at Athens in 1880, which is supposed to be a copy of the colossal statue of Athena byPhidias, described in the text. ]

The most celebrated of his colossal sculptures were the statue of Athenawithin the Parthenon, and that of Olympian Zeus in the temple at Olympia. The statue of Athena was of gigantic size, being about forty feet inheight, and was constructed of ivory and gold, the hair, weapons, anddrapery being of the latter material. 

The statue of Olympian Zeus was also of ivory and gold. It was sixty feethigh, and represented the god seated on his throne. The hair, beard, anddrapery were of gold. The eyes were brilliant stones. Gems of great valuedecked the throne, and figures of exquisite design were sculptured on thegolden robe. The colossal proportions of this wonderful work, as well asthe lofty yet benign aspect of the countenance, harmonized well with thepopular conception of the majesty and grace of the "father of gods andmen. " It was thought a great misfortune to die without having seen theOlympian Zeus. [Footnote: Phidias avowed that he took his idea from therepresentation which Homer gives in the first book of the _Iliad_ inthe passage thus translated by Pope:-- "He spake, and awful bends his sable brow, Shakes his ambrosial curls, and gives the nod, The stamp of fate, and sanction of the god. High heaven with reverence the dread signal took, And all Olympus to the centre shook. " BULFINCH'S _Age of Fable_. ]

The statue was in existence for eight hundred years, being finallydestroyed by fire in the fifth century A. D. 

[Illustration: HEAD OF THE OLYMPIAN ZEUS BY PHIDIAS. ]

Phidias also executed other works in both bronze and marble. He met anunworthy fate. Upon the famous shield at the feet of the statue of Athenain the Parthenon, among the figures in the representation of a battlebetween the Athenians and the Amazons, Phidias introduced a portrait ofhimself and also one of his patron Pericles. The enemies of the artistcaused him to be prosecuted for this, which was considered an act ofsacrilege. He died in prison (432 B. C. ). 

POLYCLETUS. --At the same time that Phidias was executing his idealrepresentations of the gods, Polycletus the elder, whose home was atArgos, was producing his renowned bronze statues of athletes. Among hispieces was one representing a spear-bearer, which was so perfect as to beknown as "the Rule. "

PRAXITELES. --This artist, after Polycletus, stands next to Phidias as oneof the most eminent of Greek sculptors. His works were executed during thefourth century B. C. Among his chief pieces may be mentioned the "CnidianAphrodite. " This stood in the Temple of Aphrodite at Cnidus, and wasregarded by the ancients as the most perfect embodiment of the goddess ofbeauty. Pilgrimages were made from distant countries to Cnidus for thesake of looking upon the matchless statue. 

LYSIPPUS. --This artist is renowned for his works in bronze. He flourishedabout the middle of the fourth century B. C. His statues were in greatdemand. Many of these were of colossal size. Alexander gave the artistmany orders for statues of himself, and also of the heroes that fell inhis campaigns. 

[Illustration: THE LAOCOON GROUP. ]

THE RHODIAN COLOSSUS AND SCHOOLS OF ART. --The most noted pupil of Lysippuswas Chares, who gave to the world the celebrated Colossus at Rhodes (about280 B. C. ). This was another of the wonders of the world. Its height wasabout one hundred and seven feet, and a man could barely encircle with hisarms the thumb of the statue. [Footnote: The statue was not as large asthe Statue of Liberty in New York harbor. The height of the latter is 151feet. ] After standing little more than half a century, it was overthrownby an earthquake. For nine hundred years the Colossus then lay, like aHomeric god, prone upon the ground. Finally, the Arabs, having overrunthis part of the Orient (A. D. 672), appropriated the statue, and thriftilysold it to a Jewish merchant. It is said that it required a train of ninehundred camels to bear away the bronze. 

This gigantic piece of statuary was not a solitary one at Rhodes; for thatcity, next after Athens, was the great art centre of the Grecian world. Its streets and gardens and public edifices were literally crowded withstatues. The island became the favorite resort of artists, and the variousschools there founded acquired a wide renown. Many of the most prizedworks of Grecian art in our modern museums were executed by members ofthese Rhodian schools. The "Laocoön Group, " found at Rome in 1506, and nowin the Museum of the Vatican, is generally thought to be the work of threeRhodian sculptors. 

GREEK PAINTING. --Although the Greek artists attained a high degree ofexcellence in painting, still they probably never brought the art to theperfection which they reached in sculpture. One reason for this was thatpaintings were never, like statues, objects of adoration; hence lessattention was directed to them. 

With the exception of antique vases and a few patches of mural decoration, all specimens of Greek painting have perished. Consequently our knowledgeof Greek painting is derived chiefly from the descriptions of renownedworks, by the ancient writers, and their anecdotes of great painters. 

POLYGNOTUS. --Polygnotus (flourished 475-455 B. C. ) has been called thePrometheus of painting, because he was the first to give fire andanimation to the expression of the countenance. "In his hand, " it isaffirmed, "the human features became for the first time the mirror of thesoul. " Of a Polyxena [Footnote: Polyxena was a daughter of the TrojanPriam, famous for her beauty and her sufferings. ] painted by this greatmaster, it was said that "she carried in her eyelids the whole history ofthe Trojan War. "

ZEUXIS AND PARRHASIUS. --These great artists lived and painted about 400B. C. A favorite and familiar story preserves their names as companions, and commemorates their rival genius. Zeuxis, such is the story, painted acluster of grapes which so closely imitated the real fruit that the birdspecked at them. His rival, for his piece, painted a curtain. Zeuxis askedParrhasius to draw aside the veil and exhibit his picture. "I confess I amsurpassed, " generously admitted Zeuxis to his rival; "I deceived birds, but you have deceived the eyes of an experienced artist. "

APELLES. --Apelles, who has been called the "Raphael of antiquity, " was thecourt painter of Alexander the Great. He was such a consummate master ofthe art of painting, and carried it to such a state of perfection, thatthe ancient writers spoke of it as the "art of Apelles. "

That Apelles, like Zeuxis and Parrhasius, painted life-like pictures isshown by the following story. In a contest between him and some rivalartists, horses were the objects represented. Perceiving that the judgeswere unfriendly to him, and partial, Apelles insisted that less prejudicedjudges should pronounce upon the merit of the respective pieces, demanding, at the same time, that the paintings should be shown to somehorses that were near. When brought before the pictures of his rival, thehorses exhibited no concern; but upon being shown the painting of Apelles, they manifested by neighing and other intelligent signs their instantrecognition of the companions the great master had created. 

NOTE. --Recent excavations (1878-1886) on the site of ancient Pergamus, inAsia Minor, have brought to light a great Altar, dating seemingly from thesecond century B. C. , whose sides were decorated with gigantic sculpturesrepresenting the Battle of the Giants against the Gods. The sculptures, which by some are placed next to those of the Parthenon, are now in theBerlin Museum. 

CHAPTER XIX. 

GREEK LITERATURE. 

1. EPIC AND LYRIC POETRY. 

THE GREEKS AS LITERARY ARTISTS. --It was that same exquisite sense offitness and proportion and beauty which made the Greeks artists in marblethat also made them artists in language. "Of all the beautiful thingswhich they created, " says Professor Jebb, "their own language was the mostbeautiful. " This language they wrought into epics, lyrics, dramas, histories, and orations as incomparable in form and beauty as theirtemples and statues. 

THE HOMERIC POEMS, --The earliest specimens of Greek poetry are the so-called "Homeric poems, " consisting of the _Iliad_ and the _Odyssey_. Thesubject of the _Iliad_ (from Ilios, Troy) is the "Wrath of Achilles. " The_Odyssey_ tells of the long wanderings of the hero Odysseus (Ulysses) upand down over many seas while seeking his native Ithaca, after thedownfall of Ilios. These poems exerted an incalculable influence upon theliterary and religious life of the Hellenic race. 

The _Iliad_ must be pronounced the world's greatest epic. It has beentranslated into all languages, and has been read with an ever freshinterest by generation after generation for nearly 3000 years. Alexander, it is told, slept with a copy beneath his pillow, --a copy preparedespecially for him by his preceptor Aristotle, and called the "casketedition, " from the jewelled box in which Alexander is said to have keptit. We preserve it quite as sacredly in all our courses of classicalstudy. The poem has made warriors as well as poets. It incited themilitary ambition of Alexander, of Hannibal, and of Cæsar; it inspiredVirgil, Dante, and Milton. All epic writers have taken it as their model. 

[Illustration: HOMER. ]

DATE AND AUTHORSHIP OF THE HOMERIC POEMS. --Until the rise of modern Germancriticism, the _Iliad_ and the _Odyssey_ were almost universallyascribed to a single bard named Homer, who was believed to have livedabout the middle of the ninth or tenth century B. C. , one or two centuriesafter the events commemorated in his poems. Though tradition representsmany cities as contending for the honor of having been his birthplace, still he was generally regarded as a native of Smyrna, in Asia Minor. Hetravelled widely (so it was believed), lost his sight, and then, as awandering minstrel, sang his immortal verses to admiring listeners in thedifferent cities of Hellas. 

But it is now the opinion of many scholars that the _Iliad_ and the_Odyssey_, as they stand today, are not, either of them, the creationof a single poet. They are believed to be mosaics; that is, to be built upout of the fragments of an extensive ballad literature that grew up in anage preceding the Homeric. The "Wrath of Achilles, " which forms thenucleus of the _Iliad_ as we have it, may, with very great probability, beascribed to Homer, whom we may believe to have been the most prominent ofa brotherhood of bards who flourished about 850 or 750 B. C. 

THE HESIODIC POEMS. --Hesiod, who lived a century or more after the agethat gave birth to the Homeric poems, was the poet of nature and of reallife, especially of peasant life, in the dim transition age of Hellas. TheHomeric bards sing of the deeds of heroes, and of a far-away time whengods mingled with men. Hesiod sings of common men, and of every-day, present duties. His greatest poem, a didactic epic, is entitled _Worksand Days_. This is, in the main, a sort of farmers' calendar, in whichthe poet points out to the husbandman the lucky and unlucky days for doingcertain kinds of work, eulogizes industry, and intersperses among all hispractical lines homely maxims of morality and beautiful descriptivepassages of the changing seasons. 

LYRIC POETRY: PINDAR. --The Æolian island of Lesbos was the hearth and homeof the earlier lyric poets. Among the earliest of the Lesbian singers wasthe poetess Sappho, whom the Greeks exalted to a place next to Homer. Plato calls her the Tenth Muse. Although her fame endures, her poetry, except some mere fragments, has perished. 

Anacreon was a courtier at the time of the Greek tyrannies. He was anative of Ionia, but passed much of his time at the court of Polycrates ofSamos. He seems to have enjoyed to the full the gay and easy life of acourtier, and sung so voluptuously of love and wine and festivity that theterm "Anacreontic" has come to be used to characterize all poetry over-redolent of these themes. 

But the greatest of the Greek lyric poets, and perhaps the greatest of alllyric poets of every age and race, was Pindar (about 522-443 B. C. ). He wasborn at Thebes, but spent most of his time in the cities of Magna Græcia. Such was the reverence in which his memory was held that when Alexander, one hundred years after Pindar's time, levelled the city of Thebes to theground on account of a revolt, the house of the poet was spared, and leftstanding amid the general ruin (see p. 161). The greater number ofPindar's poems were inspired by the scenes of the national festivals. Theydescribe in lofty strains the splendors of the Olympian chariot-races, orthe glory of the victors at the Isthmian, the Nemean, or the Pythiangames. 

Pindar insists strenuously upon virtue and self-culture. With deep meaninghe says, "Become that which thou art;" that is, be that which you are madeto be. 

2. THE DRAMA AND DRAMATISTS. 

ORIGIN OF THE GREEK DRAMA. --The Greek drama, in both its branches oftragedy and comedy, grew out of the songs and dances instituted in honorof the god of wine--Dionysus (the same as the Roman Bacchus). 

Tragedy (goat-song, possibly from the accompanying sacrifice of a goat)sprang from the graver songs, and comedy (village-song) from the lighterand more farcical ones. Gradually, recital and dialogue were added, therebeing at first but a single speaker, then two, and finally three, whichlast was the classical number. Thespis (about 536 B. C. ) is said to haveintroduced this idea of the dialogue; hence the term "Thespian" applied tothe tragic drama. 

[Illustration: BACCHIC PROCESSION. ]

Owing to its origin, the Greek drama always retained a religiouscharacter, and further, presented two distinct features, the chorus (thesongs and dances) and the dialogue. At first, the chorus was the all-important part; but later, the dialogue became the more prominent portion, the chorus, however, always remaining an essential feature of theperformance. Finally, in the golden age of the Attic stage, the chorusdancers and singers were carefully trained, at great expense, and thedialogue became the masterpiece of some great poet, --and then the Greekdrama, the most splendid creation of human genius, was complete. 

THE THREE GREAT TRAGIC POETS. --There are three great names in Greektragedy, --Æschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides. These dramatists all wroteduring the splendid period which followed the victories of the Persianwar, when the intellectual life of all Hellas, and especially that ofAthens, was strung to the highest tension. This lent nervous power andintensity to almost all they wrote, particularly to the tragedies ofAEschylus and Sophocles. Of the two hundred and more dramas produced bythese poets, only thirty-two have escaped the accidents of time. 

Æschylus (525-456 B. C. ) knew how to touch the hearts of the generationthat had won the victories of the Persian war; for he had fought withhonor both at Marathon and at Salamis. But it was on a very differentarena that he was destined to win his most enduring fame. Eleven times didhe carry off the prize in tragic composition. The Athenians called him the"Father of Tragedy. "

[Illustration: ÆSCHYLUS. ]

The central idea of his dramas is that "no mortal may dare raise his hearttoo high, "--that "Zeus tames excessive lifting up of heart. " _PrometheusBound_ is one of his chief works. Another of his great tragedies is_Agamemnon_, thought by some to be his masterpiece. The subject isthe crime of Clytemnestra (see p. 96). It is a tragedy crowded withspirit-shaking terrors, and filled with more than human crimes and woes. Nowhere is portrayed with greater power the awful vengeance with which theimplacable Nemesis is armed. 

Sophocles (495-405 B. C. ) while yet a youth gained the prize in a poeticcontest with Æschylus. Plutarch says that Æschylus was so chagrined by hisdefeat that he left Athens and retired to Sicily. Sophocles now became theleader of tragedy at Athens. In almost every contest he carried away thefirst prize. He lived through nearly a century, a century, too, thatcomprised the most brilliant period of the life of Hellas. His dramas wereperfect works of art. The leading idea of his pieces is the same as thatwhich characterizes those of Æschylus; namely, that self-will and insolentpride arouse the righteous indignation of the gods, and that no mortal cancontend successfully against the will of Zeus. 

[Illustration: SOPHOCLES. ]

Euripides (485-406 B. C. ) was a more popular dramatist than either Æschylusor Sophocles. His fame passed far beyond the limits of Greece. Herodotusasserts that the verses of the poet were recited by the natives of theremote country of Gedrosia; and Plutarch says that the Sicilians were sofond of his lines that many of the Athenian prisoners, taken beforeSyracuse, bought their liberty by teaching their masters his verses. 

COMEDY: ARISTOPHANES. --Foremost among all writers of comedy must be placedAristophanes (about 444-380 B. C. ). He introduces us to the every-day lifeof the least admirable classes of Athenian society. Four of his most notedworks are the _Clouds_, the _Knights_, the _Birds_, and the _Wasps_. 

In the comedy of the _Clouds_, Aristophanes especially ridicules theSophists, a school of philosophers and teachers just then rising intoprominence at Athens, of whom the satirist unfairly makes Socrates therepresentative. 

The aim of the _Knights_ was the punishment and ruin of Cleon, whomwe already know as one of the most conceited and insolent of thedemagogues of Athens. 

[Illustration: EURIPIDES. ]

The play of the _Birds_ is "the everlasting allegory of foolish shamand flimsy ambition. " It was aimed particularly at the ambitious Sicilianschemes of Alcibiades; for at the time the play appeared, the Athenianarmy was before Syracuse, and elated by good news daily arriving, theAthenians were building the most gorgeous air-castles, and indulging inthe most extravagant day-dreams of universal dominion. 

In the _Wasps_, the poet satirizes the proceedings in the Athenianlaw-courts, by showing how the great citizen-juries, numbering sometimesfive or six hundred, were befooled by the demagogues. But Aristophanes wassomething more than a master of mere mirth-provoking satire and ridicule:many of the choruses of his pieces are inexpressibly tender and beautiful. 

[Illustration: HERODOTUS. ]

3. HISTORY AND HISTORIANS. 

Poetry is the first form of literary expression among all peoples. So wemust not be surprised to find that it was not until several centuriesafter the composition of the Homeric poems--that is, about the sixthcentury B. C. --that prose-writing appeared among the Greeks. Historicalcomposition was then first cultivated. We can speak briefly of only threehistorians, --Herodotus, Thucydides and Xenophon, --whose names werecherished among the ancients, and whose writings are highly valued andcarefully studied by ourselves. 

HERODOTUS. --Herodotus (about 484-402 B. C. ), born at Halicarnassus, in AsiaMinor, is called the "Father of History. " He travelled over much of thethen known world, visiting Italy, Egypt, and Babylonia, and as an eye-witness describes with a never-failing vivacity and freshness the wondersof the different lands he had seen. Herodotus lived in a story-tellingage, and he is himself an inimitable story-teller. To him we are indebtedfor a large part of the tales of antiquity--stories of men and eventswhich we never tire of repeating. He was over-credulous, and was oftenimposed upon by his guides in Egypt and at Babylon; but he describes withgreat care and accuracy what he himself saw. It is sometimes verydifficult, however, to determine just what he actually did see with hisown eyes and experience in his own person; for it seems certain that, following the custom of the story-tellers of his time, he often related ashis own personal adventures the experiences of others, yet with no thoughtof deceiving. In this he might be likened to our modern writers ofhistorical romances. 

The central theme of his great History is the Persian wars, the strugglebetween Asia and Greece. Around this he groups the several stories of thenations of antiquity. In the pictures which the artist-historian draws, wesee vividly contrasted, as in no other writings, the East and the West, Persia and Hellas. 

THUCYDIDES. --Thucydides (about 471-400 B. C. ), though not so popular anhistorian as Herodotus, was a much more philosophical one. He was bornnear Athens. A pretty story is told of his youth, which must be repeated, though critics have pronounced it fabulous. The tale is that Thucydides, when only fifteen, was taken by his father to hear Herodotus recite hishistory at the Olympian games, and that the reading and the accompanyingapplause caused the boy to shed tears, and to resolve to become anhistorian. 

[Illustration: THUCYDIDES. ]

Thucydides was engaged in military service during the first years of thePeloponnesian War; but, on account of his being unfortunate, possiblythrough his own neglect, the Athenians deprived him of his command, and hewent into an exile of twenty years. It is to this circumstance that we areindebted for his invaluable _History of the War between the Peloponnesiansand the Athenians_. 

Through the closest observation and study, he qualified himself to becomethe historian of what he from the first foresaw would prove a memorablewar. "I lived, " he says, "through its whole extent, in the very flower ofmy understanding and strength, and with a close application of mythoughts, to gain an exact insight into all its occurrences. " He diedbefore his task was completed. The work is considered a model ofhistorical writing. Demosthenes read and re-read his writings to improvehis own style; and the greatest orators and historians of modern timeshave been equally diligent students of the work of the great Athenian. 

XENOPHON. --Xenophon (about 445-355 B. C. ) was an Athenian, and is knownboth as a general and a writer. The works that render his name so familiarare his _Anabasis_, a simple yet thrilling narrative of the Expedition ofthe Ten Thousand Greeks; and his _Memorabilia_, or Recollections ofSocrates. This work by his devoted pupil is the most faithful portraiturethat we possess of that philosopher. 

4. ORATORY. 

INFLUENCE OF THE PUBLIC ASSEMBLY. --The art of oratory among the Greeks wasfostered and developed by the democratic character of their institutions. The public assemblies of the democratic cities were great debating clubs, open to all. The gift of eloquence secured for its possessor a sure pre-eminence. The law-courts, too, especially the great jury-courts of Athens, were schools of oratory; for every citizen was obliged to be his ownadvocate and to defend his own case. Hence the attention bestowed uponpublic speaking, and the high degree of perfection attained by the Greeksin the difficult art of persuasion. Almost all the prominent Athenianstatesmen were masters of oratory. 

THEMISTOCLES AND PERICLES. --We have already become acquainted withThemistocles and Pericles as statesmen and leaders of Athenian affairsduring the most stirring period of the history of Athens. They both werealso great orators, and to that fact were largely indebted for their powerand influence. Thucydides has preserved the oration delivered by Periclesin commemoration of those who fell in the first year of the PeloponnesianWar. It is an incomparable picture of the beauty and glory of Athens atthe zenith of her power, and has been pronounced one of the finestproductions of antiquity. The language of the address, as we have it, isthe historian's, but the sentiments are doubtless those of the greatstatesman. It was the habit of Thucydides to put speeches into the mouthsof his characters. 

DEMOSTHENES AND ÆSCHINES. --It has been the fortune of Demosthenes (385-322B. C. ) to have his name become throughout the world the synonym ofeloquence. The labors and struggles by which, according to tradition, heachieved excellence in his art are held up anew to each generation ofyouth as guides of the path to success. His first address before thepublic assembly was a complete failure, owing to defects of voice andmanner. With indomitable will he set himself to the task of correctingthese. He shut himself up in a cave, and gave himself to the diligentstudy of Thucydides. That he might not be tempted to spend his time insociety, he rendered his appearance ridiculous by shaving one side of hishead. To correct a stammering utterance, he spoke with pebbles in hismouth, and broke himself of an ungainly habit of shrugging his shouldersby speaking beneath a suspended sword. To accustom himself to the tumultand interruptions of a public assembly, he declaimed upon the noisiestseashore. 

[Illustration: DEMOSTHENES. ]

These are some of the many stories told of the world's greatest orator. There is doubtless this much truth in them at least--that Demosthenesattained success, in spite of great discouragements, by persevering andlaborious effort. It is certain that he was a most diligent student ofThucydides, whose great history he is said to have known by heart. Morethan sixty of his orations have been preserved. "Of all human productionsthey present to us the models which approach the nearest to perfection. "

The latter part of the life of Demosthenes is intertwined with that ofanother and rival Athenian orator, Æschines. For his services to thestate, the Athenians proposed to award to Demosthenes a golden crown. Æschines opposed this. All Athens and strangers from far and near gatheredto hear the rival orators; for every matter at Athens was decided by agreat debate. Demosthenes made the grandest effort of his life. Hisaddress, known as the "Oration on the Crown, " has been declared to be "themost polished and powerful effort of human oratory. " Æschines wascompletely crushed, and was sent into exile, and became a teacher oforatory at Rhodes. 

He is said to have once gathered his disciples about him and to have readto them the oration of Demosthenes that had proved so fatal to himself. Carried away by the torrent of its eloquence, his pupils, unable torestrain their enthusiasm, burst into applause. "Ah!" said Æschines, whoseemed to find solace in the fact that his defeat had been at the hands ofso worthy an antagonist, "you should have heard the wild beast himself!"

Respecting the orations of Demosthenes against Philip of Macedon, and thedeath of the eloquent patriot, we have already spoken (see pp. 160, 174). 

5. THE ALEXANDRIAN AGE. 

The Alexandrian period of Greek literature embraces the time between thebreak-up of Alexander's empire and the conquest of Greece by Rome (300-146B. C. ). During this period Alexandria in Egypt was the centre of literaryactivity, hence the term _Alexandrian_, applied to the literature ofthe age. The great Museum and Library of the Ptolemies afforded in thatcapital such facilities for students and authors as existed in no othercity in the world. 

[Illustration: IDEAL SCENE IN THE ALEXANDRIAN LIBRARY]

But the creative age of Greek literature was over. With the loss ofpolitical liberty, literature was cut off from its sources of inspiration. Consequently the Alexandrian literature lacked freshness and originality. The writers of the period were grammarians, commentators, andtranslators, --in a word, book-worms. 

One of the most important literary undertakings of the age was thetranslation of the Old Testament into Greek. From the traditional numberof translators (seventy) the version is known as the _Septuagint_ (Latinfor seventy. ) The work was probably begun by Ptolemy Philadelphus, and wascompleted under his successors. 

Among the poets of the period one name, and only one, stands out clear andpre-eminent. This is that of Theocritus, a Sicilian idyllist, who wrote atAlexandria under Ptolemy Philadelphus. His idyls are beautiful pictures ofSicilian pastoral life. 

CONCLUSION: GRÆCO-ROMAN WRITERS. --After the Roman conquest of Greece, thecentre of Greek literary activity shifted from Alexandria to Rome. HenceGreek literature now passes into what is known as its Græco-Roman period(146 B. C. -527 A. D. ). 

The most noted historical writer of the first part of this period wasPolybius (about 203-121 B. C. ), who wrote a history of the Roman conquestsfrom 264 to 146 B. C. His work, though the larger part of it has reached usin a very mutilated state, is of great worth; for Polybius wrote ofmatters that had become history in his own day. He had lived to see thelarger part of the world he knew absorbed by the ever-growing power of theImperial City. 

Plutarch (b. About 40 A. D. ), "the prince of ancient biographers, " willalways live in literature as the author of the _Parallel Lives_, inwhich, with great wealth of illustrative anecdotes, he compares orcontrasts Greek and Roman statesmen and soldiers. 

CHAPTER XX. 

GREEK PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE. 

THE SEVEN SAGES; THE FORERUNNERS. --About the sixth century B. C. Therelived and taught in different parts of Hellas many philosophers of real orreputed originality and wisdom. Among these were seven men, called the"Seven Sages, " who held the place of pre-eminence. [Footnote: As in thecase of the Seven Wonders of the World, ancient writers were not alwaysagreed as to what names should be accorded the honor of enrolment in thesacred number. Thales, Solon, Periander, Cleobulus, Chilo, Bias, andPittacus are, however, usually reckoned as the Seven Wise Men. ] To thembelongs the distinction of having first aroused the Greek intellect tophilosophical thought. The wise sayings--such as "Know thyself" and"Nothing in excess"--attributed to them, are beyond number. 

The ethical maxims and practical proverbs ascribed to the sages, while, like the so-called proverbs of Solomon, they contain a vast amount ofpractical wisdom, still do not constitute philosophy proper, which is asystematic search for the reason and causes of things. They form simplythe introduction or prelude to Greek philosophy. 

THE IONIC PHILOSOPHERS. --The first Greek school of philosophy grew up inthe cities of Ionia, in Asia Minor, where almost all forms of Hellenicculture seem to have had their beginning. The founder of the system wasThales of Miletus (about 640-550 B. C. ), who was followed by Anaximander, Anaximenes, and Heraclitus. 

One tenet held in common by all these philosophers was that matter andmind are inseparable; or, in other words, that all matter is animate. Theynever thought of the soul as something distinct and separable from matteras we do. Even the soul in Hades was conceived as having a body in everyrespect like that the soul possessed in the earthly life, only it wascomposed of a subtler substance. This conception of matter as being alivewill help us to understand Greek mythology, which, it will be remembered, endowed trees, rivers, springs, clouds, the planets, all physical objectsindeed, with intelligence and will. 

PYTHAGORAS. --Pythagoras (about 580-500 B. C. ) was born on the island ofSamos, whence his title of "Samian Sage. " Probable tradition says that hespent many years of his early life in Egypt, where he became versed in allthe mysteries of the Egyptians. He returned to Greece with a greatreputation, and finally settled at Crotona, in Italy. 

Like many another ancient philosopher, Pythagoras sought to increase thereverence of his disciples for himself by peculiarities of dress andmanner. His uncut hair and beard flowed down upon his shoulders and overhis breast. He never smiled. His dress was a white robe, with a goldencrown. For the first years of their novitiate, his pupils were not allowedto look upon their master. They listened to his lectures from behind acurtain. _Ipse dixit_, "he himself said so, " was the only argumentthey must employ in debate. It is to Pythagoras, according to legend, thatwe are indebted for the word _philosopher_. Being asked of what hewas master, he replied that he was simply a "philosopher, " that is, a"lover of wisdom. "

Pythagoras held views of the solar system that anticipated by two thousandyears those of Copernicus and his school. He taught, only to his mostselect pupils however, that the earth is a sphere; and that, like theother planets, it revolves about a central globe of fire. From him comesthe pretty conceit of the "music of the spheres. " He imagined that theheavenly spheres, by their swift, rolling motions, produced musical notes, which united in a celestial melody, too refined, however, for human ears. 

He taught the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, an idea he haddoubtless brought from Egypt. Because of this belief the Pythagoreans werestrict vegetarians, abstaining religiously from the use of all animalfood. 

ANAXAGORAS. --Anaxagoras (499-427 B. C. ) was the first Greek philosopher whomade _mind_, instead of necessity or chance, the arranging and harmonizingforce of the universe. "Reason rules the world" was his first maxim. 

Anaxagoras was the teacher in philosophy of Pericles, and it is certainthat that statesman was greatly influenced by the liberal views of thephilosopher; for in his general conceptions of the universe, Anaxagoraswas far in advance of his age. He ventured to believe that the moon wassomewhat like the earth, and inhabited; and taught that the sun was not agod, but a glowing rock, as large, probably, as the Peloponnesus. 

But for his audacity, the philosopher suffered the fate of Galileo in alater age; he was charged with impiety and exiled. Yet this did notdisturb the serenity of his mind. In banishment he said, "It is not I whohave lost the Athenians, but the Athenians who have lost me. "

EMPEDOCLES AND DEMOCRITUS. --In the teachings of Empedocles (about 492-432B. C. ) and Democritus (about 460-370 B. C. ) we meet with many speculationsrespecting the constitution of matter and the origin of things which arestartlingly similar to some of the doctrines held by modern scientists. Empedocles, with the evolutionists of to-day, taught that the higher formsof life arise out of the lower; Democritus conceived all things to becomposed of invisible atoms, all alike in quality, but differing in formand combination. 

THE SOPHISTS. --The Sophists, of whom the most noted were Protagoras, Gorgias, and Prodicus, were a class of philosophers or teachers who gaveinstruction in rhetoric and the art of disputation. They travelled aboutfrom city to city, and contrary to the usual custom of the Greekphilosophers, took fees from their pupils. They were shallow but brilliantmen, caring more for the dress in which the thought was arrayed than forthe thought itself, more for victory than for truth; and some of theminculcated a selfish morality. The better philosophers of the timedespised them, and applied to them many harsh epithets, taunting them withselling wisdom, and accusing them of boasting that they could "make theworse appear the better reason. "

SOCRATES. --Volumes would not contain what would be both instructive andinteresting respecting the lives and works of the three great philosophersSocrates, Plato, and Aristotle. We can, however, accord to each only a fewwords. Of these three eminent thinkers, Socrates (469-399 B. C. ), thoughsurpassed in grasp and power of intellect by both Plato and Aristotle, hasthe firmest hold upon the affections of the world. 

Nature, while generous to the philosopher in the gifts of soul, was unkindto him in the matter of his person. His face was ugly as a satyr's, and hehad an awkward, shambling walk, so that he invited the shafts of the comicpoets of his time. He loved to gather a little circle about him in theAgora or in the streets, and then to draw out his listeners by a series ofingenious questions. His method was so peculiar to himself that it hasreceived the designation of the "Socratic dialogue. " He has very happilybeen called an _educator_, as opposed to an _instructor_. In the young menof his time Socrates found many devoted pupils. The youthful Alcibiadesdeclared that "he was forced to stop his ears and flee away, that he mightnot sit down by the side of Socrates and grow old in listening. "

[Illustration: SOCRATES. ]

Socrates was unfortunate in his domestic relations. Xanthippe, his wife, seems to have been of a practical turn of mind, and unable to sympathizewith the abstracted ways of her husband. 

This great philosopher believed that the proper study of mankind is man, his favorite maxim being "Know Thyself"; hence he is said to have broughtphilosophy from the heavens and introduced it to the homes of men. 

Socrates held the Sophists in aversion, and in opposition to their selfishexpediency taught the purest system of morals that the world had yetknown, and which has been surpassed only by the precepts of the GreatTeacher. He thought himself to be restrained from entering upon what wasinexpedient or wrong by a tutelary spirit. He believed in the immortalityof the soul and in a Supreme Ruler of the universe, but sometimes spokeslightingly of the temples and the popular deities. This led to hisprosecution on the double charge of blasphemy and of corrupting theAthenian youth. The fact that Alcibiades had been his pupil was used toprove the demoralizing tendency of his teachings. He was condemned todrink the fatal hemlock. The night before his death he spent with hisdisciples, discoursing on the immortality of the soul. 

PLATO. --Plato (429-348 B. C. ), "the broad-browed, " was a philosopher ofnoble birth, before whom in youth a brilliant career in the world of Greekaffairs opened; but, coming under the influence of Socrates, he resolvedto give up all his prospects in politics and devote himself to philosophy. Upon the condemnation and death of his master he went into voluntaryexile. In many lands he gathered knowledge and met with variedexperiences. He visited Sicily, where he was so unfortunate as to callupon himself the resentment of Dionysius, tyrant of Syracuse, throughhaving worsted him in an argument, and also by an uncourtly plainness ofspeech. The king caused him to be sold into slavery as a prisoner of war. Being ransomed by a friend, he found his way to his native Athens, andestablished a school of philosophy in the Academy, a public garden closeto Athens. Here amid the disciples that thronged to his lectures, hepassed the greater part of his long life, --he died 348 B. C. , at the age ofeighty-one years, --laboring incessantly upon the great works that bear hisname. 

[Illustration: PLATO. ]

Plato imitated in his writings the method of Socrates in conversation. Thediscourse is carried on by questions and answers, hence the term_Dialogues_ that attaches to his works. He attributes to his master, Socrates, much of the philosophy that he teaches: yet his _Dialogues_are all deeply tinged with his own genius and thought. In the _Republic_Plato portrays his conception of an ideal state. He was opposed to therepublic of Athens, and his system, in some of its main features, wassingularly like the Feudal System of Mediæval Europe. 

The _Phædo_ is a record of the last conversation of Socrates with hisdisciples--an immortal argument for the immortality of the soul. 

Plato believed not only in a future life (post-existence), but also inpre-existence; teaching that the ideas of reason, or our intuitions, arereminiscences of a past experience. [Footnote: In the following lines fromWordsworth we catch a glimpse of Plato's doctrine of pre-existence:-- "Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting; The soul that rises with us, our life's star, Hath had elsewhere its setting, And cometh from afar: Not in entire forgetfulness, Nor yet in utter nakedness, But trailing clouds of glory, do we come From God, who is our home. "--_Ode on Immortality_. ] Plato'sdoctrines have exerted a profound influence upon all schools of thoughtand philosophies since his day. In some of his precepts he made a closeapproach to the teachings of Christianity. "We ought to become like God, "he said, "as far as this is possible; and to become like Him is to becomeholy and just and wise. "

ARISTOTLE. --As Socrates was surpassed by his pupil Plato, so in turn wasPlato excelled in certain respects by his disciple Aristotle, "the masterof those who know. " In him the philosophical genius of the Hellenicintellect reached its culmination. He was born in the Macedonian city ofStagira (384 B. C. ), and hence is frequently called the "Stagirite. " As inthe case of Socrates, his personal appearance gave no promise of thephilosopher. His teacher, Plato, however, recognized the genius of hispupil, and called him the "Mind of the school. "

After studying for twenty years in the school of Plato, Aristotle becamethe preceptor of Alexander the Great. When Philip invited him to becomethe tutor of his son, he gracefully complimented the philosopher by sayingin his letter that he was grateful to the gods that the prince was born inthe same age with him. Alexander became the liberal patron of his tutor, and aided him in his scientific studies by sending him large collectionsof plants and animals, gathered on his distant expeditions. 

At Athens the great philosopher delivered his lectures while walking aboutbeneath the trees and porticoes of the Lyceum; hence the term_peripatetic_ (from the Greek _peripatein_, "to walk about") applied tohis philosophy. 

[Illustration: ARISTOTLE. ]

Among the productions of his fertile intellect are works on rhetoric, logic, poetry, morals and politics, physics and metaphysics. For centurieshis works were studied and copied and commented upon by both European andAsiatic scholars, in the schools of Athens and Rome, of Alexandria andConstantinople. Until the time of Bacon in England, for nearly twothousand years, Aristotle ruled over the realm of mind with a despoticsway. All teachers and philosophers acknowledged him as their guide andmaster. 

ZENO AND THE STOICS. --We are now approaching the period when the politicallife of Hellas was failing, and was being fast overshadowed by thegreatness of Rome. But the intellectual life of the Greek race was by nomeans eclipsed by the calamity that ended its political existence. Forcenturies after that event the poets, scholars, and philosophers of thisintellectual people led a brilliant career in the schools and universitiesof the Roman world. 

From among all the philosophers of this long period, we can select forbrief mention only a few. And first we shall speak of Zeno and Epicurus, who are noted as founders of schools of philosophy that exerted a vastinfluence upon both the thought and the conduct of many centuries. 

Zeno, founder of the celebrated school of the Stoics, lived in the thirdcentury before our era (about 362-264). He taught at Athens in a publicporch (in Greek, _stoa_), from which circumstance comes the name appliedto his disciples. 

The Stoical philosophy was the outgrowth, in part at least, of that of theCynics, a sect of most rigid and austere morals. The typicalrepresentative of this sect is found in Diogenes, who lived, so the storygoes, in a tub, and went about Athens by daylight with a lantern, insearch, as he said, of a _man_. The Cynics were simply a race of paganhermits. 

The Stoics inculcated virtue for the sake of itself. They believed--and itwould be very difficult to frame a better creed--that "man's chiefbusiness here is to do his duty. " They schooled themselves to bear withperfect composure any lot that destiny might appoint. Any sign of emotionon account of calamity was considered unmanly and unphilosophical. Thus, when told of the sudden death of his son, the Stoic replied, "Well, Inever imagined that I had given life to an immortal. "

Stoicism became a favorite system of thought with certain classes of theRomans, and under its teachings and doctrines were nourished some of thepurest and loftiest characters produced by the pagan world. It numberedamong its representatives, in later times, the illustrious Roman emperorMarcus Aurelius, and the scarcely less renowned and equally virtuous slaveEpictetus. In many of its teachings it anticipated Christian doctrines, and was, in the philosophical world, a very important preparation forChristianity. 

[Illustration: EPICURUS. ]

EPICURUS AND THE EPICUREANS. --Epicurus (342-270 B. C. ), who was acontemporary of Zeno, taught, in opposition to the Stoics, that_pleasure_ is the highest good. He recommended virtue, indeed, butonly as a means for the attainment of pleasure; whereas the Stoics madevirtue an end in itself. In other words, Epicurus said, "Be virtuous, because virtue will bring you the greatest amount of happiness"; Zenosaid, "Be virtuous, because you ought to be. "

Epicurus had many followers in Greece, and his doctrines were eagerlyembraced by many among the Romans during the corrupt period of the Romanempire. Many of these disciples carried the doctrines of their master toan excess that he himself would have been the first to condemn. Allowingfull indulgence to every appetite and passion, their whole philosophy wasexpressed in the proverb, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. " Nopure or exalted life could be nourished in the unwholesome atmosphere ofsuch a philosophy. Epicureanism never produced a single great character. 

THE SKEPTICS; PYRRHO. --About the beginning of the third century B. C. Skepticism became widespread in Greece. It seemed as though men werelosing faith in everything. Many circumstances had worked together inbringing about this state of universal unbelief. A wider knowledge of theworld had caused many to lose their faith in the myths and legends of theold mythologies. The existence of so many opposing systems of philosophycaused men to doubt the truth of any of them. Many thoughtful minds werehopelessly asking, "What is truth?"

Pyrrho (about 360-270 B. C. ) was the doubting Thomas of the Greeks. Hequestioned everything, and declared that the great problems of theuniverse could not be solved. He asserted that it was the duty of man, andthe part of wisdom, to entertain no positive judgment on any matter, andthus to ensure serenity and peace of mind. 

The disciples of Pyrrho went to absurd lengths in their skepticism, someof them even saying that they asserted nothing, not even that theyasserted nothing. They doubted whether they doubted. 

THE NEO-PLATONISTS. --Neo-Platonism was a blending of Greek philosophy andOriental mysticism. It has been well called the "despair of reason, "because it abandoned all hope of man's ever being able to attain the_highest_ knowledge through reason alone, and looked for a Revelation. Thecentre of this last movement in Greek philosophical thought was Alexandriain Egypt, the meeting-place, in the closing centuries of the ancientworld, of the East and the West. 

Philo the Jew (b. About 30 B. C. ), who labored to harmonize Hebrewdoctrines with the teachings of Plato, was the forerunner of the Neo-Platonists. But the greatest of the school was Plotinus (A. D. 204-269), who spent the last years of his life at Rome, where he was a greatfavorite. 

CONFLICT BETWEEN NEO-PLATONISM AND CHRISTIANITY. --While the Neo-Platonistswere laboring to restore, in modified form, the ancient Greek philosophyand worship, the teachers of Christianity were fast winning the world overto a new faith. The two systems came into deadly antagonism. Christianitytriumphed. The gifted and beautiful Hypatia, almost the lastrepresentative of the old system of speculation and belief, was torn topieces in the streets of Alexandria by a mob of fanatic Christian monks(A. D. 415). Finally the Roman emperor Justinian forbade the paganphilosophers to teach their doctrines (A. D. 529). This imperial edictclosed forever the Greek schools, in which for more than a thousand yearsthe world had received instruction upon the loftiest themes that canengage the human mind. The Greek philosophers, as living, personalteachers, had finished their work; but their systems of thought will nevercease to attract and influence the best minds of the race. 

SCIENCE AMONG THE GREEKS. 

The contributions of the Greek observers to the physical sciences havelaid us under no small obligation to them. Some of those whom we haveclassed as philosophers, were careful students of nature, and might becalled scientists. The great philosopher Aristotle wrote some valuableworks on anatomy and natural history. From his time onward the scienceswere pursued with much zeal and success. Especially did the later Greeksdo much good and lasting work in the mathematical sciences. 

MATHEMATICS: EUCLID AND ARCHIMEDES. --Alexandria, in Egypt, became the seatof the most celebrated school of mathematics of antiquity. Here, underPtolemy Lagus, flourished Euclid, the great geometer, whose work forms thebasis of the science of geometry as taught in our schools at the presenttime. Ptolemy himself was his pupil. The royal student, however, seems tohave disliked the severe application required to master the problems ofEuclid, and asked his teacher if there was not some easier way. Euclidreplied, "There is no royal road to geometry. "

In the third century B. C. , Syracuse, in Sicily, was the home ofArchimedes, the greatest mathematician that the Grecian world produced. 

ASTRONOMY. --Among ancient Greek astronomers, Aristarchus, Hipparchus, andClaudius Ptolemy are distinguished. 

Aristarchus of Samos, who lived in the third century B. C. , held that theearth revolves about the sun as a fixed centre, and rotates on its ownaxis. He was the Greek Copernicus. But his theory was rejected by hiscontemporaries and successors. 

Hipparchus, who flourished about the middle of the second century B. C. , was, through his careful observations, the real founder of scientificastronomy. He calculated eclipses, catalogued the stars, and wrote severalastronomical works of a really scientific character. 

Claudius Ptolemy lived in Egypt about the middle of the second centuryafter Christ. His great reputation is due not so much to his superiorgenius as to the fortunate circumstance that a vast work compiled by him, preserved and transmitted to later times almost all the knowledge of theancients on astronomical and geographical subjects. In this way it hashappened that his name has become attached to various doctrines and viewsrespecting the universe, though these probably were not originated by him. The phrase _Ptolemaic system_, however, links his name inseparablywith that conception of the solar system set forth in his works, whichcontinued to be the received theory from his time until Copernicus--fourteen centuries later. 

Ptolemy combated the theory of Aristarchus in regard to the rotation andrevolution of the earth; yet he believed the earth to be a globe, andsupported this view by exactly the same arguments that we to-day use toprove the doctrine. 

CHAPTER XXI. 

SOCIAL LIFE OF THE GREEKS. 

EDUCATION. --Education at Sparta, where it was chiefly gymnastic, as wehave seen (p. 115), was a state affair; but at Athens and throughoutGreece generally, the youth were trained in private schools. These schoolswere of all grades, ranging from those kept by the most obscure teachers, who gathered their pupils in some recess of the street, to thoseestablished in the Athenian Academy and Lyceum by such philosophers asPlato and Aristotle. 

[Illustration: A GREEK SCHOOL. (After a vase-painting. )]

It was only the boys who received education. These Grecian boys, ProfessorMahaffy imagines, were "the most attractive the world has ever seen. " Atall events, we may believe that they were trained more carefully anddelicately than the youth among any other people before or since the daysof Hellenic culture. 

In the nursery, the boy was taught the beautiful myths and stories of thenational mythology. At about seven he entered school, being led to andfrom the place of training by an old slave, who bore the name of_pedagogue_, which in Greek means a guide or leader of boys--not ateacher. His studies were grammar, music, and gymnastics, the aim of thecourse being to secure a symmetrical development of mind and body alike. 

Grammar included reading, writing, and arithmetic; music, which embraced awide range of mental accomplishments, trained the boy to appreciate themasterpieces of the great poets, to contribute his part to the musicaldiversions of private entertainments, and to join in the sacred chorusesand in the pæan of the battlefield. The exercises of the palestræ and thegymnasia trained him for the Olympic contests, or for those sterner hand-to-hand battle-struggles, in which so much depended upon personal strengthand dexterity. 

Upon reaching maturity, the youth was enrolled in the list of citizens. But his graduation from school was his "commencement" in a much more realsense than with the average modern graduate. Never was there a peoplebesides the Greeks whose daily life was so emphatically a discipline inliberal culture. The schools of the philosophers, the debates of thepopular assembly, the practice of the law-courts, the religiousprocessions, the representations of an unrivalled stage, the Panhellenicgames--all these were splendid and efficient educational agencies, whichproduced and maintained a standard of average intelligence and cultureamong the citizens of the Greek cities that probably has never beenattained among any other people on the earth. Freeman, quoted approvinglyby Mahaffy, says that "the average intelligence of the assembled Atheniancitizens was higher than that of our [the English] House of Commons. "

SOCIAL POSITION OF WOMAN. --Woman's social position in ancient Greece maybe defined in general as being about half-way between Oriental seclusionand Western freedom. Her main duties were to cook and spin, and to overseethe domestic slaves, of whom she herself was practically one. In thefashionable society of Ionian cities, she was seldom allowed to appear inpublic, or to meet, even in her own house, the male friends of herhusband. In Sparta, however, and in Dorian states generally, she wasaccorded much greater freedom, and was a really important factor insociety. 

The low position generally assigned the wife in the home had a mostdisastrous effect upon Greek morals. She could exert no such elevating orrefining influence as she casts over the modern home. The men were led toseek social and intellectual sympathy and companionship outside the familycircle, among a class of women known as Hetairæ, who were esteemed chieflyfor their brilliancy of intellect. As the most noted representative ofthis class stands Aspasia, the friend of Pericles. The influence of theHetairæ was most harmful to social morality. 

THEATRICAL ENTERTAINMENTS. --Among the ancient Greeks the theatre was astate establishment, "a part of the constitution. " This arose from thereligious origin and character of the drama (see p. 193), all matterspertaining to the popular worship being the care and concern of the state. Theatrical performances, being religious acts, were presented only duringreligious festivals, and were attended by all classes, rich and poor, men, women, and children. The women, however, except the Hetairæ, were, itwould seem, permitted to witness tragedies only; the comic stage was toogross to allow of their presence. The spectators sat under the open sky;and the pieces followed one after the other in close succession from earlymorning till nightfall. 

[Illustration: GREEK TRAGIC FIGURE. ]

There were companies of players who strolled about the country, just asthe English actors of Shakespeare's time were wont to do. While the betterclass of actors were highly honored, ordinary players were held in verylow esteem. The tragic actor increased his height and size by wearingthick-soled buskins, an enormous mask, and padded garments. The actor incomedy wore thin-soled slippers, or socks. The _sock_ being thus acharacteristic part of the make-up of the ancient comic actor, and the_buskin_ that of the tragic actor, these foot coverings have come tobe used as the symbols respectively of comedy and tragedy, as in thefamiliar lines of Dryden:--

 "Great Fletcher never treads in buskins here, Nor greater Jonson dares in socks appear. "

The theatre exerted a great influence upon Greek life. It performed forancient Greek society somewhat the same service as that rendered to modernsociety by the pulpit and the press. During the best days of Hellas thefrequent rehearsal upon the stage of the chief incidents in the lives ofthe gods and the heroes served to deepen and strengthen the religiousfaith of the people; and later, in the Macedonian period, the theatre wasone of the chief agents in the diffusion of Greek literary culture overthe world. 

BANQUETS AND SYMPOSIA. --Banquets and drinking-parties among the Greekspossessed some features which set them apart from similar entertainmentsamong other peoples. 

The banquet proper was partaken, in later times, by the guest in areclining position, upon couches or divans, arranged about the table inthe Oriental manner. After the usual courses, a libation was poured outand a hymn sung in honor of the gods, and then followed thatcharacteristic part of the entertainment known as the _symposium_. 

The symposium was "the intellectual side of the feast. " It consisted ofgeneral conversation, riddles, and convivial songs rendered to theaccompaniment of the lyre passed from hand to hand. Generally, professional singers and musicians, dancing-girls, jugglers, and jesterswere called in to contribute to the merrymaking. All the while the wine-bowl circulated freely, the rule being that a man might drink "as much ashe could carry home without a guide, --unless he were far gone in years. "Here also the Greeks applied their maxim, "Never too much. "

The banqueters usually consumed the night in merry-making, sometimes beingbroken in upon from the street by other bands of revellers, who madethemselves self-invited guests. 

OCCUPATION. --The enormous body of slaves in ancient Greece relieved thefree population from most of those forms of labor classed as drudgery. Theæsthetic Greek regarded as degrading any kind of manual labor that marredthe symmetry or beauty of the body. 

At Sparta, and in other states where oligarchical institutions prevailed, the citizens formed a sort of military class, strikingly similar to themilitary aristocracy of Feudal Europe. Their chief occupation was martialand gymnastic exercises and the administration of public affairs. TheSpartans, it will be recalled, were forbidden by law to engage in trade. In other aristocratic states, as at Thebes, a man by engaging in tradedisqualified himself for full citizenship. 

In the democratic states, however, speaking generally, labor and tradewere regarded with less contempt. A considerable portion of the citizenswere traders, artisans, and farmers. 

Life at Athens presented some peculiar features. All Attica being includedin what we should term the corporate limits of the city, the roll ofAthenian citizens included a large body of well-to-do farmers, whoseresidence was outside the city walls. The Attic plains, and the slopes ofthe half-encircling hills, were dotted with beautiful villas and invitingfarmhouses. 

And then Athens being the head of a great empire of subject cities, alarge number of Athenian citizens were necessarily employed as salariedofficials in the minor positions of the public service, and thus politicsbecame a profession. In any event, the meetings of the popular assemblyand the discussion of matters of state engrossed more or less of the timeand attention of every citizen. 

Again, the great Athenian jury-courts, which were busied with cases fromall parts of the empire, gave constant employment to nearly one fourth ofthe citizens, the fee that the juryman received enabling him to livewithout other business. It is said that, in the early morning, when thejurymen were passing through the streets to the different courts, Athensappeared like a city wholly given up to the single business of law. Furthermore, the great public works, such as temples and commemorativemonuments, which were in constant process of erection, afforded employmentfor a vast number of artists and skilled workmen of every class. 

In the Agora, again, at any time of the day, a numerous class might havebeen found whose sole occupation, as in the case of Socrates, was to talk. The writer of the "Acts of the Apostles" was so impressed with thisfeature of life at Athens that he summarized the habits of the people bysaying, "All the Athenians, and strangers which were there, spent theirtime in nothing else, but either to tell or to hear some new thing. "(Chap. Xvii. 21. )

SLAVERY. --There was a dark side to Greek life. Hellenic art, culture, refinement--"these good things were planted, like exquisite exoticflowers, upon the black, rank soil of slavery. "

The proportion of slaves to the free population in many of the states wasastonishingly large. In Corinth and Ægina there were ten slaves to everyfreeman. In Attica the proportion was four to one; that is to say, out ofa population of about 500, 000, 400, 000 were slaves. [Footnote: Thepopulation of Attica in 317 B. C. Is reckoned at about 527, 000. That ofAthens in its best days was probably not far from 150, 000. ] Almost everyfreeman was a slave owner. It was accounted a real hardship to have to getalong with less than half a dozen slaves. 

This large class of slaves was formed in various ways. In the prehistoricperiod, the fortunes of war had brought the entire population of wholeprovinces into a servile condition, as in certain parts of thePeloponnesus. During later times, the ordinary captives of war stillfurther augmented the ranks of these unfortunates. Their number was alsolargely added to by the slave traffic carried on with the barbarianpeoples of Asia Minor. Criminals and debtors, too, were often condemned toservitude; while foundlings were usually brought up as slaves. 

The relation of master and slave was regarded by the Greek as being, notonly a legal, but a natural one. A free community, in his view, could notexist without slavery. It formed the natural basis of both the family andthe state, --the relation of master and slave being regarded as "strictlyanalogous to the relation of soul and body. " Even Aristotle and otherGreek philosophers approved the maxim that "slaves are simply domesticanimals possessed of intelligence. " They were regarded as just asnecessary in the economy of the family as cooking utensils. 

In general, Greek slaves were not treated harshly--judging their treatmentby the standard of humanity that prevailed in antiquity. Some held placesof honor in the family, and enjoyed the confidence and even the friendshipof their master. Yet at Sparta, where slavery assumed the form of serfdom, the lot of the slave was peculiarly hard and unendurable. 

If slavery was ever justified by its fruits, it was in Greece. Thebrilliant civilization of the Greeks was its product, and could never haveexisted without it. As one truthfully says, "Without the slaves the Atticdemocracy would have been an impossibility, for they alone enabled thepoor, as well as the rich, to take a part in public affairs. " Relievingthe citizen of all drudgery, the system created a class characterized byelegant leisure, refinement, and culture. 

We find an almost exact historical parallel to all this in the feudalaristocracy of mediæval Europe. Such a society has been well likened to agreat pyramid, whose top may be gilded with light, while the base lies indark shadows. The civilization of ancient Hellas was splendid andattractive, but it rested with a crushing weight upon all the lower ordersof Greek society. 

SECTION III. ROMAN HISTORY. 

CHAPTER XXII. 

THE ROMAN KINGDOM. (Legendary Date, 753-509 B. C. )

DIVISIONS OF ITALY. --The peninsula of Italy, like that of Greece, dividesitself into three parts--Northern, Central, and Southern Italy. The firstcomprises the great basin of the Po, lying between the Alps and theApennines. In ancient times this part of Italy included three districts--Liguria, Gallia Cisalpina, which means "Gaul on this (the Italian) side ofthe Alps, " and Venetia. 

The countries of Central Italy were Etruria, Latium, and Campania, facingthe Western, or Tuscan Sea; Umbria and Picenum, looking out over theEastern, or Adriatic Sea; and Samnium and the country of the Sabines, occupying the rough mountain districts of the Apennines. 

Southern Italy comprised the countries of Apulia, Lucania, Calabria, andBruttium. Calabria occupied the "heel, " and Bruttium formed the "toe, " ofthe peninsula. This part of Italy, as we have already learned, was calledMagna Græcia, or "Great Greece, " on account of the number and importanceof the Greek cities that during the period of Hellenic supremacy wereestablished in these regions. 

The large island of Sicily, lying just off the mainland on the south, maybe regarded simply as a detached fragment of Italy, so intimately has itshistory been interwoven with that of the peninsula. In ancient times itwas the meeting-place and battleground of the Carthaginians, Greeks, andRomans. 

EARLY INHABITANTS OF ITALY. --There were, in early times, three chief racesin Italy--the Italians, the Etruscans, and the Greeks. The Italians, abranch of the Aryan family, embraced many tribes (Latins, Umbrians, Sabines, Samnites, etc. ), that occupied nearly all Central Italy. TheEtruscans, a wealthy, cultured, and maritime people of uncertain race, dwelt in Etruria, now Tuscany. Before the rise of the Romans they were theleading race in the peninsula. Of the establishment of the Greek cities inSouthern Italy, we have already learned in connection with Grecian History(p. 111). 

Some five hundred years B. C. , the Gauls, a Celtic race, came over theAlps, and settling in Northern Italy, became formidable enemies of theinfant republic of Rome. 

THE LATINS. --Most important of all the Italian peoples were the Latins, who dwelt in Latium, between the Tiber and the Liris. These people, likeall the Italians, were near kindred of the Greeks, and brought with theminto Italy those same customs, manners, beliefs, and institutions which wehave seen to have been the common possession of the various branches ofthe Aryan household (see p. 5). There are said to have been in all Latiumthirty towns, and these formed an alliance known as the Latin League. Thecity which first assumed importance and leadership among the towns of thisconfederation was Alba Longa, the "Long White City, " so called because itsbuildings stretched for a great distance along the summit of a whitishridge. 

THE BEGINNINGS OF ROME. --The place of preeminence among the Latin townswas soon lost by Alba Longa, and gained by another city. This was Rome, the stronghold of the Ramnes, or Romans, located upon a low hill on thesouth bank of the Tiber, about fifteen miles from the sea. 

The traditions of the Romans place the founding of their city in the year753 B. C. The town was established, it would seem, as an outpost to guardthe northern frontier of Latium against the Etruscans. 

Recent excavations have revealed the foundations of the old walls and twoof the ancient gates. We thus learn that the city at first covered onlythe top of the Palatine Hill, one of a cluster of low eminences close tothe Tiber, which, finally embraced within the limits of the growing city, became the famed "Seven Hills of Rome. " From the shape of its enclosingwalls, the original city was called _Roma Quadrata_, "Square Rome. "

THE EARLY ROMAN STATE: KING, SENATE, AND POPULAR ASSEMBLY. --The earlyRoman state seems to have been formed by the union of three communities. These constituted three tribes, known as Ramnes (the Romans proper, whogave name to the mixed people), Tities, and Luceres. Each of these tribeswas divided into ten wards, or districts (_curiæ_); each ward wasmade up of _gentes_, or clans, and each clan was composed of a numberof families. The heads of these families were called _patres_, or"fathers, " and all the members patricians, that is, "children of thefathers. "

At the head of the nation stood the King, who was the father of the state. He was at once ruler of the people, commander of the army, judge and highpriest of the nation, with absolute power as to life and death. 

Next to the king stood the Senate, or "council of the old men, " composedof the "fathers, " or heads of the families. This council had no power toenact laws: the duty of its members was simply to advise with the king, who was free to follow or to disregard their suggestions. 

The Popular Assembly (_comitia curiata_) comprised all the citizensof Rome, that is, all the members of the patrician families, old enough tobear arms. It was this body that enacted the laws of the state, determinedupon peace or war, and also elected the king. 

CLASSES OF SOCIETY. --The two important classes of the population of Romeunder the kingdom and the early republic, were the patricians and theplebeians. The former were the members of the three original tribes thatmade up the Roman people, and at first alone possessed political rights. They were proud, exclusive, and tenacious of their inherited privileges. The latter were made up chiefly of the inhabitants of subjected cities, and of refugees from various quarters that had sought an asylum at Rome. They were free to acquire property, and enjoyed personal freedom, but atfirst had no political rights whatever. The greater number were pettyland-owners, who held and cultivated the soil about the city. A large partof the early history of Rome is simply the narration of the struggles ofthis class to secure social and political equality with the patricians. 

Besides these two principal orders, there were two other classes--clientsand slaves. The former were attached to the families of patricians, whobecame their patrons, or protectors. The condition of the client wassomewhat like that of the serf in the feudal system of the Middle Ages. Alarge clientage was considered the crown and glory of a patrician house. 

The slaves were, in the main, captives in war. Their number, small atfirst, gradually increased as the Romans extended their conquests, tillthey outnumbered all the other classes taken together, and more than onceturned upon their masters in formidable revolts that threatened the veryexistence of the Roman state. 

THE LEGENDARY KINGS. --For nearly two and a half centuries after thefounding of Rome (from 753 to 509 B. C. , according to tradition), thegovernment was a monarchy. To span this period, the legends of the Romanstell of the reigns of seven kings--Romulus, the founder of Rome; Numa, thelawgiver; Tullus Hostilius and Ancus Marcius, conquerors both; TarquiniusPriscus, the great builder; Servius Tullius, the reorganizer of thegovernment and second founder of the state; and Tarquinius Superbus, thehaughty tyrant, whose oppressions led to the abolition by the people ofthe office of king. 

The traditions of the doings of these monarchs and of what happened tothem, blend hopelessly fact and fable. We cannot be quite sure even as tothe names. Respecting Roman affairs, however, under the last three rulers(the Tarquins), who were of Etruscan origin, some important things arerelated, the substantial truth of which we may rely upon with a fairdegree of certainty; and these matters we shall notice in the followingparagraphs. 

GROWTH OF ROME UNDER THE TARQUINS. --The Tarquins extended their authorityover the whole of Latium. The position of supremacy thus given Rome wasnaturally attended by the rapid growth in population and importance of thelittle Palatine city. The original walls soon became too strait for theincreasing multitudes; new ramparts were built--tradition says under thedirection of the king Servius Tullius--which, with a great circuit ofseven miles, swept around the entire cluster of the Seven Hills. A largetract of marshy ground between the Palatine and Capitoline hills wasdrained by means of the Cloaca Maxima, the "Great Sewer, " which was soadmirably constructed that it has been preserved to the present day. Itstill discharges its waters through a great arch into the Tiber. The landthus reclaimed became the Forum, the assembling-place of the people. Uponthe summit of the Capitoline Hill, overlooking the Forum, was built thefamous sanctuary called the Capitol, or the Capitoline temple, wherebeneath the same roof were the shrines of Jupiter, Juno, and Minerva, thethree great national deities. Upon the level ground between the Aventineand the Palatine was laid out the Circus Maximus, the "Great Circus, "where were celebrated the Roman games. 

[Illustration: VIEW OF THE CAPITOLINE, WITH THE CLOACA MAXIMA. (AReconstruction. )]

NEW CONSTITUTION OF SERVIUS TULLIUS. --The second king of the Etruscanhouse, Servius Tullius by name, effected a most important change in theconstitution of the Roman state. He did here at Rome just what Solon atabout this time did at Athens (see p. 120). He made property instead ofbirth the basis of the constitution. The entire population was dividedinto five classes, the first of which included all citizens, whetherpatricians or plebeians, who owned twenty _jugera_ (about twelve acres) ofland; the fifth and lowest embraced all that could show title to even twojugera. The army was made up of the members of the five classes; as it wasthought right and proper that the public defence should be the care ofthose who, on account of their possessions, were most interested in themaintenance of order and in the protection of the boundaries of the state. 

The assembling-place of the military classes thus organized was on a largeplain just outside the city walls, called the Campus Martius, or "Field ofMars. " The meeting of these military orders was called the _comitiacenturiata_, or the "assembly of hundreds. " [Footnote: This assemblywas not organized by Servius Tullius, but it grew out of the militaryorganization he created. ] This body, which of course was made up ofpatricians and plebeians, gradually absorbed the powers of the earlierpatrician assembly (_comitia curiata_). 

THE EXPULSION OF THE KINGS. --The legends make Tarquinius Superbus, orTarquin the Proud, the last king of Rome. He is represented as a monstroustyrant, whose arbitrary acts caused both patricians and plebeians to uniteand drive him and all his house into exile. This event, according totradition, occurred in the year 509 B. C. , only one year later than theexpulsion of the tyrants from Athens (see p. 122). 

So bitterly did the people hate the tyranny they had abolished that it issaid they all, the nobles as well as the commons, bound themselves by mostsolemn oaths never again to tolerate a king. We shall hereafter see howwell this vow was kept for nearly five hundred years. 

THE ROMAN RELIGION. 

THE CHIEF ROMAN DEITIES. --The basis of the Roman religious system was thesame as that of the Grecian: the germs of its institutions were broughtfrom the same early Aryan home. At the head of the Pantheon stood Jupiter, identical in all essential attributes with the Hellenic Zeus. He was thespecial protector of the Roman people. To him, together with Juno andMinerva, was consecrated, as we have already noticed, a magnificent templeupon the summit of the Capitoline Hill, overlooking the Forum and thecity. Mars, the god of war, standing next in rank, was the favorite deityand the fabled father of the Roman race, who were fond of callingthemselves the "children of Mars. " They proved themselves worthy offspringof the war-god. Martial games and festivals were celebrated in his honorduring the first month of the Roman year, which bore, and still bears, inhis honor, the name of March. Janus was a double-faced deity, "the god ofthe beginning and the end of everything. " The month of January was sacredto him, as were also all gates and doors. The gates of his temple werealways kept open in time of war and shut in time of peace. 

The fire upon the household hearth was regarded as the symbol of thegoddess Vesta. Her worship was a favorite one with the Romans. The nation, too, as a single great family, had a common national hearth in the Templeof Vesta, where the sacred fires were kept burning from generation togeneration by six virgins, daughters of the Roman state. The Lares andPenates were household gods. Their images were set in the entrance of thedwelling. The Lares were the spirits of ancestors, which were thought tolinger about the home as its guardians. 

ORACLES AND DIVINATION. --The Romans, like the Greeks, thought that thewill of the gods was communicated to men by means of oracles, and bystrange sights, unusual events, or singular coincidences. There were notrue oracles at Rome. The Romans, therefore, often had recourse to thosein Magna Græcia, even sending for advice, in great emergencies, to theDelphian shrine. From Etruria was introduced the art of the haruspices, orsoothsayers, which consisted in discovering the divine mind by theappearance of victims slain for the sacrifices. 

THE SACRED COLLEGES. --The four chief sacred colleges, or societies, werethe Keepers of the Sibylline Books, the College of Augurs, the College ofPontiffs, and the College of the Heralds. 

[Illustration: VESTAL VIRGIN. ]

A curious legend is told of the Sibylline Books. An old woman came toTarquinius Superbus and offered to sell him, for an extravagant price, nine volumes. As the king declined to pay the sum demanded, the womandeparted, destroyed three of the books, and then, returning, offered theremainder at the very same sum that she had wanted for the completenumber. The king still refused to purchase; so the sibyl went away anddestroyed three more of the volumes, and bringing back the remainingthree, asked the same price as before. Tarquin was by this time so curiousrespecting the contents of the mysterious books that he purchased theremaining volumes. It was found upon examination that they were filledwith prophecies respecting the future of the Roman people. The books wereplaced in a stone chest, which was kept in a vault beneath the Capitolinetemple; and special custodians were appointed to take charge of them andinterpret them. The number of keepers, throughout the most importantperiod of Roman history, was fifteen. The books were consulted only intimes of extreme danger. 

The duty of the members of the College of Augurs was to interpret theomens, or auspices, which were casual sights or appearances, by whichmeans it was believed that Jupiter made known his will. Great skill wasrequired in the "taking of the auspices, " as it was called. No business ofimportance, public or private, was entered upon without first consultingthe auspices, to ascertain whether they were favorable. The publicassembly, for illustration, must not convene, to elect officers or toenact laws, unless the auspices had been taken and found propitious. Should a peal of thunder occur while the people were holding a meeting, that was considered an unfavorable omen, and the assembly must instantlydisperse. 

The College of Pontiffs was so called because one of the duties of itsmembers was to keep in repair the bridges (_pontes_) over which thereligious processions were accustomed to pass. This was the most importantof all the religious institutions of the Romans; for to the pontiffsbelonged the superintendence of all religious matters. In their keeping, too, was the calendar, and they could lengthen or shorten the year, whichpower they sometimes used to extend the office of a favorite or to cutshort that of one who had incurred their displeasure. The head of thecollege was called Pontifex Maximus, or the Chief Bridge-builder, whichtitle was assumed by the Roman emperors, and after them by the Christianbishops of Rome; and thus the name has come down to our own times. TheCollege of Heralds had the care of all public matters pertaining toforeign nations. If the Roman people had suffered any wrong from anotherstate, it was the duty of the heralds to demand satisfaction. If this wasdenied, and war determined upon, then a herald proceeded to the frontierof the enemy's country and hurled over the boundary a spear dipped inblood. This was a declaration of war. The Romans were very careful in theobservance of this ceremony. 

SACRED GAMES. --The Romans had many religious games and festivals. Prominent among these were the so-called Circensian Games, or Games of theCircus, which were very similar to the sacred games of the Greeks (see p. 106). They consisted, in the main, of chariot-racing, wrestling, foot-racing, and various other athletic contests. 

These festivals, as in the case of those of the Greeks, had their originin the belief that the gods delighted in the exhibition of feats of skill, strength, or endurance; that their anger might be appeased by suchspectacles; or that they might be persuaded by the promise of games tolend aid to mortals in great emergencies. At the opening of the year itwas customary for the Roman magistrate, in behalf of the people, topromise to the gods games and festivals, provided good crops, protectionfrom pestilence, and victory were granted the Romans during the year. So, too, a general in great straits in the field might, in the name of thestate, vow plays to the gods, and the people were sacredly bound by hisact to fulfil the promise. Plays given in fulfilment of vows thus madewere called votive games. 

Towards the close of the republic these games lost much of their religiouscharacter, and at last became degraded into mere brutal shows given byambitious leaders for the purpose of winning popularity. 

CHAPTER XXIII. 

THE EARLY ROMAN REPUBLIC: CONQUEST OF ITALY, (509-264 B. C. )

THE FIRST CONSULS. --With the monarchy overthrown and the last king and hishouse banished from Rome, the people set to work to reorganize thegovernment. In place of the king, there were elected (by the _comitiacenturiata_, in which assembly the plebeians had a place) two patricianmagistrates, called consuls, [Footnote: That is, _colleagues_. Eachconsul had the power of obstructing the acts or vetoing the commands ofthe other. In times of great public danger the consuls were superseded bya special officer called a _dictator_, whose term of office was limited tosix months, but whose power during this time was as unlimited as that ofthe kings had been. ] who were chosen for one year, and were invested withall the powers, save some priestly functions, that had been held by themonarch during the regal period. 

In public each consul was attended by twelve servants, called lictors, each of whom bore an axe bound in a bundle of rods (_fasces_), thesymbols of the authority of the consul to flog and to put to death. Withinthe limits of the city, however, the axe must be removed from the_fasces_, by which was indicated that no Roman citizen could be putto death by the consuls without the consent of the public assembly. 

Lucius Junius Brutus and Tarquinius Collatinus were the first consulsunder the new constitution. But it is said that the very name ofTarquinius was so intolerable to the people that he was forced to resignthe consulship, and that he and all his house were driven out of Rome. [Footnote: The truth is, he was related to the exiled royal family, andthe people were distrustful of his loyalty to the republic. ] Anotherconsul, Publius Valerius, was chosen in his stead. 

SECESSION OF THE PLEBEIANS. 

FIRST SECESSION OF THE PLEBEIANS (494 B. C. ). --Taking advantage of thedisorders that followed the political revolution, the Latin towns whichhad been forced to acknowledge the supremacy of Rome rose in revolt, andthe result was that almost all the conquests that had been made under thekings were lost. For a long time the little republic had to struggle hardfor bare existence. 

[Illustration: LICTORS. ]

Troubles without brought troubles within. The poor plebeians, during thisperiod of disorder and war, fell in debt to the wealthy class, --for theRoman soldier went to war at his own charge, equipping and feedinghimself, --and payment was exacted with heartless severity. A debtor becamethe absolute property of his creditor, who might sell him as a slave topay the debt, and in some cases even put him to death. All this wasintolerable. The plebeians determined to secede from Rome and build a newcity for themselves on a neighboring eminence, called afterwards theSacred Hill. They marched away in a body from Rome to the chosen spot, andbegan making preparations for erecting new homes (494 B. C. ). 

THE COVENANT AND THE TRIBUNES. --The patricians saw clearly that such adivision must prove ruinous to the state, and that the plebeians must bepersuaded to give up their enterprise and come back to Rome. The consulValerius was sent to treat with the insurgents. The plebeians were atfirst obstinate, but at last were persuaded to yield to the entreaties ofthe embassy to return, being won to this mind, so it is said, by one ofthe wise senators, Menenius, who made use of the well-known fable of theBody and the Members. 

The following covenant was entered into, and bound by the most solemnoaths and vows before the gods: The debts of the poor plebeians were to becancelled and those held in slavery set free; and two magistrates (thenumber was soon increased to ten), called tribunes, whose duty it shouldbe to watch over the plebeians, and protect them against the injustice, harshness, and partiality of the patrician magistrates, were to be chosenfrom the commons. The persons of these officers were made sacred. Any oneinterrupting a tribune in the discharge of his duties, or doing him anyviolence, was declared an outlaw, whom any one might kill. That thetribunes might be always easily found, they were not allowed to go morethan one mile beyond the city walls. Their houses were to be open night aswell as day, that any plebeian unjustly dealt with might flee thither forprotection and refuge. 

We cannot overestimate the importance of the change effected in the Romanconstitution by the creation of this office of the tribunate. Under theprotection and leadership of the tribunes, who were themselves protectedby oaths of inviolable sanctity, the plebeians carried on a struggle for ashare in the offices and dignities of the state which never ceased untilthe Roman government, as yet only republican in name, became in fact areal democracy, in which patrician and plebeian shared equally in allemoluments and privileges. 

CORIOLANUS. --The tradition of Coriolanus illustrates in what manner thetribunes cared for the rights of the common people and protected them fromthe oppression of the nobles. During a severe famine at Rome, Gelon, theKing of Syracuse, sent large quantities of grain to the capital fordistribution among the suffering poor. A certain patrician, Coriolanus byname, made a proposal that none of the grain should be given to theplebeians save on condition that they give up their tribunes. Theseofficials straightway summoned him before the plebeian assembly, [Footnote: This was the _Concilium Tributum Plebis_, an assemblywhich came into existence about this time. It was made up wholly ofplebeians, and was presided over by the tribunes. Later, there came intoexistence another tribal assembly, which was composed of patricians andplebeians, and presided over by consuls or prætors. Some authorities areinclined to regard these two assemblies as one and the same body; butothers, among whom is Mommsen, with probably better reason, look uponthem as two distinct organizations. ] on the charge of having broken thesolemn covenant of the Sacred Mount, and so bitter was the feeling againsthim that he was obliged to flee from Rome. 

He now allied himself with the Volscians, enemies of Rome, and even ledtheir armies against his native city. An embassy from the Senate was sentto him, to sue for peace. But the spirit of Coriolanus was bitter andrevengeful, and he would listen to none of their proposals. Nothingavailed to move him until his mother, at the head of a train of Romanmatrons, came to his tent, and with tears pleaded with him to spare thecity. Her entreaties and the "soft prayers" of his own wife and childrenprevailed, and with the words "Mother, thou hast saved Rome, but lost thyson, " he led away the Volscian army. 

CINCINNATUS MADE DICTATOR. --The enemies of Rome, taking advantage of thedissensions of the nobles and commons, pressed upon the frontiers of therepublic on all sides. In 458 B. C. , the Æquians, while one of the consulswas away fighting the Sabines, defeated the forces of the other, and shutthem up in a narrow valley, whence escape seemed impossible. There wasgreat terror in Rome when news of the situation of the army was brought tothe city. 

The Senate immediately appointed Cincinnatus, a noble patrician, dictator. The ambassadors that carried to him the message from the Senate found himupon his little farm near the Tiber, at work behind the plough. Acceptingthe office at once, he hastily gathered an army, marched to the relief ofthe consul, captured the entire army of the Æquians, and sent them beneaththe yoke. [Footnote: This was formed of two spears thrust firmly into theground and crossed a few feet from the earth by a third. Prisoners of warwere forced to pass beneath this yoke as a symbol of submission. ]Cincinnatus then led his army back to Rome in triumph, laid down hisoffice, and sought again the retirement of his farm. 

THE DECEMVIRS AND THE TABLES OF LAWS. --Written laws are always a greatsafeguard against oppression. Until what shall constitute a crime and whatshall be its penalty are clearly written down and well known andunderstood by all, judges may render unfair decisions, or inflict unjustpunishment, and yet run little risk--unless they go altogether too far--ofbeing called to an account; for no one but themselves knows what the lawor the penalty really is. Hence in all struggles of the people against thetyranny of the ruling class, the demand for written laws is one of thefirst measures taken by the people for the protection of their persons andproperty. Thus we have seen the people of Athens, early in their strugglewith the nobles, demanding and obtaining a code of written laws (see p. 119). The same thing now took place at Rome. The plebeians demanded that acode of laws be drawn up, in accordance with which the consuls, whoexercised judicial powers, should render their decisions. The patriciansoffered a stubborn resistance to their wishes, but finally were forced toyield to the popular clamor. 

A commission was sent to the Greek cities of Southern Italy and to Athensto study the Grecian laws and customs. Upon the return of this embassy, acommission of ten magistrates, who were known as decemvirs, was appointedto frame a code of laws (451 B. C. ). These officers, while engaged in thiswork, were also to administer the entire government, and so were investedwith the supreme power of the state. The patricians gave up their consulsand the plebeians their tribunes. At the end of the first year, the taskof the board was quite far from being finished, so a new decemvirate waselected to complete the work. Appius Claudius was the only member of theold board that was returned to the new. 

The code was soon finished, and the laws were written on twelve tablets ofbrass, which were fastened to the rostrum, or orator's platform in theForum, where they might be seen and read by all. These "Laws of the TwelveTables" were to Roman jurisprudence what the good laws of Solon (see p. 120) were to the Athenian constitution. They formed the basis of all newlegislation for many centuries, and constituted a part of the education ofthe Roman youth--every school-boy being required to learn them by heart. 

MISRULE AND OVERTHROW OF THE DECEMVIRS. --The first decemvirs used thegreat power lodged in their hands with justice and prudence; but thesecond board, under the leadership of Appius Claudius, instituted a mostinfamous and tyrannical rule. The result was a second secession of theplebeians to the Sacred Hill. This procedure, which once before had provedso effectual in securing justice to the oppressed, had a similar issuenow. The situation was so critical that the decemvirs were forced toresign. The consulate and the tribunate were restored. Eight of thedecemvirs were forced to go into exile; Appius Claudius and one other, having been imprisoned, committed suicide. 

CONSULAR, OR MILITARY TRIBUNES. --The overthrow of the decemvirate wasfollowed by a long struggle between the nobles and the commons, which wasan effort on the part of the latter to gain admission to the consulship;for up to this time only a patrician could hold that office. Thecontention resulted in a compromise. It was agreed that, in place of thetwo consuls, the people _might_ elect from either order magistrates, who should be known as "military tribunes with consular powers. " Theseofficers, whose numbers varied, differed from consuls more in name than infunctions or authority. In fact, the plebeians had gained the office, butnot the name (444 B. C. ). 

THE CENSORS. --No sooner had the plebeians virtually secured admission tothe consulship, than the jealous and exclusive patricians commencedscheming to rob them of the fruit of the victory they had gained. Theyeffected this by taking from the consulate some of its most distinctiveduties and powers, and conferring them upon two new patrician officerscalled censors. The functions of these magistrates were many andimportant. They took the census, and thus assigned to every man hisposition in the different classes of the citizens; and they could, forimmorality or any improper conduct, not only degrade a man from his rank, but deprive him of his vote. It was their duty to watch the public moralsand in case of necessity to administer wholesome advice. Thus we are toldof their reproving the young Romans for wearing tunics with long sleeves--an Oriental and effeminate custom--and for neglecting to marry uponarriving at a proper age. From the name of these Roman officers comes ourword _censorious_, meaning fault-finding. 

The first censors were elected probably in the year 444 B. C. ; about onehundred years afterwards, in 351 B. C. , the plebeians secured the right ofholding this office also. 

SIEGE AND CAPTURE OF VEII. --We must now turn to notice the fortunes ofRome in war. Almost from the founding of the city, we find its warlikecitizens carrying on a fierce contest with their powerful Etruscanneighbors on the north. Veii was one of the largest and richest of thecities of Etruria. Around this the war gathered. The Romans, like theGrecians at Troy, attacked its walls for ten years. The length of thesiege, and the necessity of maintaining a force permanently in the field, led to the establishment of a paid standing army; for hitherto the soldierhad not only equipped himself, but had served without pay. Thus was laidthe basis of that military power which was destined to effect the conquestof the world, and then, in the hands of ambitious and favorite generals, to overthrow the republic itself. 

[Illustration: ROMAN SOLDIER. ]

The capture of Veii by the dictator Camillus (396 B. C. ) was followed bythat of many other Etruscan towns. Rome was enriched by their spoils, andbecame the centre of a large and lucrative trade. The frontiers of therepublic were pushed out even beyond the utmost limits of the kingdombefore its overthrow. All that was lost by the revolution had been nowregained, and much besides had been won. At this moment there broke uponthe city a storm from the north, which all but cut short the story we arenarrating. 

SACK OF ROME BY THE GAULS (390 B. C. ). --We have already mentioned how, invery remote times, the tribes of Gaul crossed the Alps and establishedthemselves in Northern Italy (see p. 223). While the Romans wereconquering the towns of Etruria, these barbarian hordes were movingsouthward, and overrunning and devastating the countries of Central Italy. 

[Illustration: GAULS IN SIGHT OF ROME. ]

News was brought to Rome that they were advancing upon that city. A Romanarmy met them on the banks of the river Allia, eleven miles from thecapital. The Romans were driven in great panic from the field. It would beimpossible to picture the consternation and despair that reigned at Romewhen the fugitives brought to the city intelligence of the terribledisaster. It was never forgotten, and the day of the battle of Allia wasever after a black day in the Roman calendar. The sacred vessels of thetemples were buried; the eternal fires of Vesta were hurriedly borne bytheir virgin keepers to a place of safety in Etruria; and a large part ofthe population fled in dismay across the Tiber. No attempt was made todefend any portion of the city save the citadel. This stronghold was keptby a little garrison, under the command of the hero Marius Manlius. Atradition tells how, when the barbarians, under cover of the darkness ofnight, had climbed the steep rock and had almost effected an entrance tothe citadel, the defenders were awakened by the cackling of some geese, which the piety of the famishing soldiers had spared, because these birdswere sacred to Juno. 

News was now brought the Gauls that the Venetians were overrunning theirpossessions in Northern Italy. This led them to open negotiations with theRomans. For one thousand pounds of gold, according to the historian Livy, the Gauls agreed to retire from the city. As the story runs, while thegold was being weighed out in the Forum, the Romans complained that theweights were false, when Brennus, the Gallic leader, threw his sword alsointo the scales, exclaiming, "_Væ, victis!_" "Woe to the vanquished. "Just at this moment, so the tale continues, Camillus, a brave patriciangeneral, appeared upon the scene with a Roman army that had been gatheredfrom the fugitives; and, as he scattered the barbarians with heavy blows, he exclaimed, "Rome is ransomed with steel and not with gold. " Accordingto one account Brennus himself was taken prisoner; but another traditionsays that he escaped, carrying with him not only the ransom, but a vastbooty besides. 

THE REBUILDING OF ROME. --When the fugitives returned to Rome after thewithdrawal of the Gauls, they found the city a heap of ruins. Some of thepoorer classes, shrinking from the labor of rebuilding their old homes, proposed to abandon the site and make Veii their new capital. But love forthe old spot at last prevailed over all the persuasions of indolence, andthe people, with admirable courage, set themselves to the task ofrebuilding their homes. It was a repetition of the scene at Athens afterthe retreat of the Persians (see p. 136). The city was speedily restored, and was soon enjoying her old position of supremacy among the surroundingstates. There were some things, however, which even Roman resolution andperseverance could not restore. These were the ancient records anddocuments, through whose irreparable loss the early history of Rome isinvolved in great obscurity and uncertainty. 

TREASON AND DEATH OF MANLIUS. --The ravages of the Gauls left the poorplebeians in a most pitiable condition. In order to rebuild theirdwellings and restock their farms, they were obliged to borrow money ofthe rich patricians, and consequently soon began again to experience theinsult and oppression that were ever incident to the condition of thedebtor class at Rome. 

The patrician Manlius, the hero of the brave defence of the Capitol, nowcame forward as the champion of the plebeians. He sold the larger part ofhis estates, and devoted the proceeds to the relief of the debtor class. It seems evident that in thus undertaking the cause of the commons he hadpersonal aims and ambitions. The patricians determined to crush him. Hewas finally brought to trial before the popular assembly, on the charge ofconspiring to restore the office of king. From the Forum, where the peoplewere gathered, the Capitol, which Manlius had so bravely defended againstthe barbarians, was in full sight. Pointing to the temples he had saved, he appealed to the gods and to the gratitude of the Roman people. Thepeople responded to the appeal in a way altogether natural. They refusedto condemn him. But brought to trial a second time, and now in a grovewhence the citadel could not be seen, he was sentenced to death, and wasthrown from the Tarpeian Rock. [Footnote: The Tarpeian Rock was the namegiven to the cliff which the Capitoline Hill formed on the side towardsthe Tiber (or towards the Palatine, according to some). It received itsname from Tarpeia, daughter of one of the legendary keepers of thecitadel. State criminals were frequently executed by being thrown fromthis rock. ] This event occurred 384 B. C. 

PLEBEIANS ADMITTED TO THE CONSULSHIP. --For nearly half a century after thedeath of Manlius the most important events in the history of Rome centreabout the struggle of the plebeians, for admission to those offices of thegovernment whence the jealousy of the patricians still excluded them. TheLicinian laws, so called from one of their proposers, the tribune C. Licinius, besides relieving the poor of usurious interest, and effecting amore just division of the public lands, also provided that consuls shouldbe chosen yearly, as at first (see p. 238), and that one of the consulsshould be a plebeian. This last provision opened to any one of theplebeian class the highest office in the state. The nobles, when they sawthat it would be impossible to resist the popular demand, had recourse tothe old device. They effected a compromise, whereby the judicial powers ofthe consuls were taken from them and conferred upon a new magistrate, whobore the name of prætor. Only patricians, of course, were to be eligibleto this new office. They then permitted the Licinian laws to pass (367B. C. ). 

During the latter half of the fourth century B. C. (between the years 356-300) the plebeians gained admittance to the dictatorship, the censorship, the prætorship, and to the College of Augurs and the College of Pontiffs. They had been admitted to the College of Priests having charge of theSibylline books, at the time of the passing of the Licinian laws. Withplebeians in all these positions, the rights of the lower order werefairly secured against oppressive and partisan decisions on the part ofthe magistrates, and against party fraud in the taking of the auspices andin the regulation of the calendar. There was now political equalitybetween the nobility and the commonalty. 

WARS FOR THE MASTERY OF ITALY. 

THE FIRST SAMNITE WAR (343-341 B. C. ). --The union of the two orders in thestate allowed the Romans now to employ their undivided strength insubjugating the different states of the peninsula. The most formidablecompetitors of the Romans for supremacy in Italy were the Samnites, roughand warlike mountaineers who held the Apennines to the east of Latium. They were worthy rivals of the "children of Mars. " The successivestruggles between these martial races are known as the First, Second, andThird Samnite wars. They extended over a period of half a century, and intheir course involved almost all the states of Italy. 

Of the first of this series of wars we know very little, although Livywrote a long, but unfortunately very unreliable, narration of it. In themidst of the struggle, Rome was confronted by a dangerous revolt of herLatin allies, and, leaving the war unfinished, turned her forces upon theinsurgents. 

REVOLT OF THE LATIN CITIES (340-338 B. C. ). --The strife between the Romansand their Latin allies was simply the old contest within the walls of thecapital between the patricians and the plebeians transferred to a largerarena. As the nobles had oppressed the commons, so now both these ordersunited in the oppression of the Latins--the plebeians in their betteredcircumstances forgetting the lessons of adversity. The Latin alliesdemanded a share in the government, and that the lands acquired byconquest should be distributed among them as well as among Roman citizens. The Romans refused. All Latium rose in revolt against the injustice andtyranny of the oppressor. 

After about three years' hard fighting, the rebellion was subdued. TheLatin League was now broken up. Some of the towns retained theirindependence (Tibur, Præneste, and Cora); some received full Romancitizenship (Aricia, Lanuvium, and Nomentum); while others received onlythe private rights of Roman citizens, the right of suffrage beingwithheld. 

SECOND AND THIRD SAMNITE WARS (326-290 B. C. ). --In a few years after theclose of the Latin contest, the Romans were at war again with their oldrivals, the Samnites. Notwithstanding the latter were thoroughly defeatedin this second contest, still it was not long before they were again inarms and engaged in their third struggle with Rome. This time they hadformed a powerful coalition which embraced the Etruscans, the Umbrians, the Gauls, and other nations. 

Roman courage rose with the danger. The united armies of the league metwith a most disastrous defeat (at Sentinum, 295 B. C. ), and the power ofthe coalition was broken. One after another the states that had joined thealliance were chastised, and the Samnites were forced to acknowledge thesupremacy of Rome. A few years later, almost all of the Greek cities ofSouthern Italy, save Tarentum, also came under the growing power of theimperial city. 

WAR WITH PYRRHUS (282-272 B. C. ). --Tarentum was one of the most noted ofthe Hellenic cities of Magna Græcia. It was a seaport on the Calabriancoast, and had grown opulent through the extended trade of its merchants. The capture of some Roman vessels, and an insult offered to an envoy ofthe republic by the Tarentines, led to a declaration of war against themby the Roman Senate. The Tarentines turned to Greece for aid. Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, a cousin of Alexander the Great, who had an ambition tobuild up such an empire in the West as his renowned kinsman hadestablished in the East, responded to their entreaties, and crossed overinto Italy with a small army of Greek mercenaries and twenty war-elephants. He organized and drilled the effeminate Tarentines, and soonfelt prepared to face the Romans. 

The hostile armies met at Heraclea (280 B. C. ). It is said that whenPyrrhus, who had underestimated his foe, observed the skill which theRomans evinced in forming their line of battle, he exclaimed, inadmiration, "In war, at least, these men are not barbarians. " The battlewas won for Pyrrhus by his war-elephants, the sight of which, being new tothe Romans, caused them to flee from the field in dismay. But Pyrrhus hadlost thousands of his bravest troops. Victories gained by such losses in acountry where he could not recruit his army, he saw clearly, meant finaldefeat. As he looked over the battle-field, he is said to have turned tohis companions and remarked, "Another such victory, and I must return toEpirus alone. " He noticed also, and not without appreciating itssignificance, that the wounds of the Roman soldiers killed in the actionwere all in front. "Had I such soldiers, " said he, "I should soon bemaster of the world. "

The prudence of the victorious Pyrrhus led him to send to the Romans anembassy with proposals of peace. When the Senate hesitated, its resolutionwas fixed by the eloquence of the aged Appius: "Rome, " exclaimed he, "shall never treat with a victorious foe. " The ambassadors were obliged toreturn to Pyrrhus unsuccessful in their mission. 

Pyrrhus, according to the Roman story-tellers, who most lavishlyembellished this chapter of their history, was not more successful inattempts at bribery than in the arts of negotiation. Upon his attemptingby large offers of gold to win Fabricius, who had been intrusted by theSenate with an important embassy, the sturdy old Roman replied, "Poverty, with an honest name, is more to be desired than wealth. "

After a second victory, as disastrous as his first, Pyrrhus crossed overinto Sicily, to aid the Grecians there in their struggle with theCarthaginians. At first he was everywhere successful; but finally fortuneturned against him, and he was glad to escape from the island. Recrossingthe straits into Italy, he once more engaged the Romans, but at the battleof Beneventum suffered a disastrous and final defeat at the hands of theconsul Curius Dentatus (274 B. C. ). Leaving a sufficient force to garrisonTarentum, the baffled and disappointed king set sail for Epirus. He hadscarcely embarked before Tarentum surrendered to the Romans (272 B. C. ). This ended the struggles for the mastery of Italy. Rome was now mistressof all the peninsula south of the Arnus and the Rubicon. It was now hercare to consolidate these possessions, and to fasten her hold upon them, by means of a perfect network of colonies and military roads. [Footnote:"Colonies were not all of the same character. They must be distinguishedinto two classes--the colonies of Roman citizens and the Latin colonies. The colonies of Roman citizens consisted usually of three hundred men ofapproved military experience, who went forth with their families to occupyconquered cities of no great magnitude, but which were important asmilitary positions, being usually on the sea-coast. These three hundredfamilies formed a sort of patrician caste, while the old inhabitants sankinto the condition formerly occupied by the plebeians at Rome. The headsof these families retained all their rights as Roman citizens, and mightrepair to Rome to vote in the popular assemblies. "--Liddell's _Historyof Rome_. 

The Latin colonies numbered about thirty at the time of the Second PunicWar. A few of these were colonies that had been founded by the old LatinConfederacy; but the most were towns that had been established by Romesubsequent to the dissolution of the League (see p. 244). The term Latinwas applied to these later colonies of purely Roman origin, for the reasonthat they enjoyed the same rights as the Latin towns that had retainedtheir independence. Thus the inhabitants of a Latin colony possessed someof the most valuable of the private rights of Roman citizens, but they hadno political rights at the capital. ]

CHAPTER XXIV. 

THE FIRST PUNIC WAR. (264-241 B. C. )

CARTHAGE AND THE CARTHAGINIAN EMPIRE. --Foremost among the cities foundedby the Phoenicians upon the different shores of the Mediterranean wasCarthage, upon the northern coast of Africa. The city is thought to havehad its beginnings in a small trading-post, established late in the ninthcentury B. C. , about one hundred years before the founding of Rome. Carthage was simply another Tyre. She was mistress and queen of theWestern Mediterranean. At the period we have now reached, she held sway, through peaceful colonization or by force of arms, over all the northerncoast of Africa from the Greater Syrtis to the Pillars of Hercules, andpossessed the larger part of Sicily, as well as Sardinia, Corsica, theBalearic Isles, Southern Spain, and scores of little islands scatteredhere and there in the neighboring seas. With all its shores dotted withher colonies and fortresses, and swept in every direction by theCarthaginian war-galleys, the Western Mediterranean had become a"Phoenician lake, " in which, as the Carthaginians boasted, no one daredwash his hands without their permission. 

CARTHAGINIAN GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION. --The government of Carthage, likethat of Rome, was republican in form. Corresponding to the Roman consuls, two magistrates, called Suffetes, stood at the head of the state. TheSenate was composed of the heads of the leading families; its duties andpowers were very like those of the Roman Senate. So well-balanced was theconstitution, and so prudent was its administration, that six hundredyears of Carthaginian history exhibited not a single revolution. 

The religion of the Carthaginians was the old Canaanitish worship of Baal, or the Sun. To Moloch, --another name for the fire-god, --"who rejoiced inhuman victims and in parents' tears, " they offered human sacrifices. 

ROME AND CARTHAGE COMPARED. --These two great republics, which for morethan five centuries had been slowly extending their limits and maturingtheir powers upon the opposite shores of the Mediterranean, were now aboutto begin one of the most memorable struggles of all antiquity--a duel thatwas to last, with every vicissitude of fortune, for over one hundredyears. 

As was the case in the contest between Athens and Sparta, so now the tworival cities, with their allies and dependencies, were very nearly matchedin strength and resources. The Romans, it is true, were almost destituteof a navy; while the Carthaginians had the largest and most splendidlyequipped fleet that ever patrolled the waters of the Mediterranean. Butalthough the Carthaginians were superior to the Romans in naval warfare, they were greatly their inferiors in land encounters. The Carthaginianterritory, moreover, was widely scattered, embracing extended coasts andisolated islands; while the Roman possessions were compact, and confinedto a single and easily defended peninsula. Again, the Carthaginian armieswere formed chiefly of mercenaries, while those of Rome were recruitedvery largely from the ranks of the Roman people. And then the subjectstates of Carthage were mostly of another race, language, and religionfrom their Phoenician conquerors, and were ready, upon the first disasterto the ruling city, to drop away from their allegiance; while the Latinallies and Italian dependencies of Rome were close kindred to her in raceand religion, and so, through natural impulse, for the most part remainedloyal to her during even the darkest periods of her struggle with herrival. 

THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR. --Lying between Italy and the coast of Africa isthe large island of Sicily. It is in easy sight of the former, and itssouthernmost point is only ninety miles from the latter. At thecommencement of the First Punic War, the Carthaginians held possession ofall the island save a strip of the eastern coast, which was under the swayof the Greek city of Syracuse. The Greeks and Carthaginians had carried onan almost uninterrupted struggle through two centuries for the control ofthe island. The Romans had not yet set foot upon it. But it was destinedto become the scene of the most terrible encounters between the armamentsof the two rivals. Pyrrhus had foreseen it all. As he withdrew from theisland, he said, "What a fine battlefield we are leaving for the Romansand Carthaginians. "

In the year 264 B. C. , on a flimsy pretext of giving protection to somefriends, the Romans crossed over to the island. That act committed them toa career of foreign conquest destined to continue till their arms had madethe circuit of the Mediterranean. 

The Syracusans and Carthaginians, old enemies and rivals though they hadbeen, joined their forces against the insolent newcomers. The allies werecompletely defeated in the first battle, and the Roman army obtained asure foothold upon the island. 

In the following year both consuls were placed at the head of formidablearmies for the conquest of Sicily. A large portion of the island wasquickly overrun, arid many of the cities threw off their allegiance toSyracuse and Carthage, and became allies of Rome. Hiero, king of Syracuse, seeing that he was upon the losing side, deserted the cause of theCarthaginians, and formed an alliance with the Romans, and ever afterremained their firm friend. 

THE ROMANS GAIN THEIR FIRST NAVAL VICTORY (260 B. C. ). --Their experienceduring the past campaigns had shown the Romans that if they were to copesuccessfully with the Carthaginians, they must be able to meet them uponthe sea as well as upon the land. So they determined to build a fleet. ACarthaginian galley that had been wrecked upon the shores of Italy, servedas a pattern. It is affirmed that, within the almost incredibly shortspace of sixty days, a growing forest was converted into a fleet of onehundred and twenty war galleys. 

The consul C. Duillius was entrusted with the command of the fleet. He metthe Carthaginian squadron near the city and promontory of Mylæ, on thenorthern coast of Sicily. Now, distrusting their ability to match theskill of their enemy in naval tactics, the Romans had provided each oftheir vessels with a drawbridge. As soon as a Carthaginian ship came nearenough to a Roman vessel, this gangway was allowed to fall upon theapproaching galley; and the Roman soldiers, rushing along the bridge, weresoon engaged in a hand-to-hand conflict with their enemies, in whichspecies of encounter the former were unequalled. The result was a completevictory for the Romans. 

The joy at Rome was unbounded. It inspired in the more sanguine splendidvisions of maritime command and glory. The Mediterranean should speedilybecome a Roman lake, in which no vessel might float without the consent ofRome. 

THE ROMANS CARRY THE WAR INTO AFRICA. --The results of the naval engagementat Mylæ encouraged the Romans to push the war with redoubled energy. Theyresolved to carry it into Africa. An immense Carthaginian fleet thatdisputed the passage of the Roman squadron was almost annihilated, and theRomans disembarked near Carthage. Regulus, one of the consuls who led thearmy of invasion, sent word to Rome that he had sealed up the gates ofCarthage with terror. Finally, however, Regulus suffered a crushingdefeat, and was made prisoner. A fleet which was sent to bear away theremnants of the shattered army was wrecked in a terrific storm off thecoast of Sicily, and the shores of the island were strewn with thewreckage of between two and three hundred ships and with the bodies of onehundred thousand men. 

Undismayed at the terrible disaster that had overtaken the transportfleet, the Romans set to work to build another, and made a second descentupon the African coast. The expedition, however, accomplished nothing ofimportance; and the fleet on its return voyage was almost destroyed, justoff the coast of Italy, by a tremendous storm. 

REGULUS AND THE CARTHAGINIAN EMBASSY. --For a few years the Romansrefrained from tempting again the hostile powers of the sea, and Sicilybecame once more the battle-ground of the contending rivals. At last, having lost a great battle (battle of Panormus, 251 B. C. ), theCarthaginians became dispirited, and sent an embassy to Rome, to negotiatefor peace, or, if that could not be reached, to effect an exchange ofprisoners. Among the commissioners was Regulus, who since his capture, five years before, had been held a prisoner in Africa. Before setting outfrom Carthage he had promised to return if the embassy were unsuccessful. For the sake of his own release, the Carthaginians supposed he wouldcounsel peace, or at least urge an exchange of prisoners. But it isrelated, that upon arrival at Rome, he counselled war instead of peace, atthe same time revealing to the Senate the enfeebled condition of Carthage. As to the exchange of prisoners, he said, "Let those who have surrenderedwhen they ought to have died, die in the land which has witnessed theirdisgrace. "

The Roman Senate, following his counsel, rejected all the proposals of theembassy; and Regulus, in spite of the tears and entreaties of his wife andfriends, turned away from Rome, and set out for Carthage to bear such fateas he well knew the Carthaginians, in their disappointment and anger, would be sure to visit upon him. 

The tradition goes on to tell how, upon his arrival at Carthage, he wasconfined in a cask driven full of spikes, and then left to die ofstarvation and pain. This part of the tale has been discredited, and thefinest touches of the other portions are supposed to have been added bythe story-tellers. 

LOSS OF TWO MORE ROMAN FLEETS. --After the failure of the Carthaginianembassy, the war went on for several years by land and sea with varyingvicissitudes. At last, on the coast of Sicily, one of the consuls, Claudius, met with an overwhelming defeat. Almost a hundred vessels of hisfleet were lost. The disaster caused the greatest alarm at Rome. Superstition increased the fears of the people. It was reported that justbefore the battle, when the auspices were being taken, and the sacredchickens would not eat, Claudius had given orders to have them thrown intothe sea, irreverently remarking, "At any rate, they shall drink. "Imagination was free to depict what further evils the offended gods mightinflict upon the Roman state. 

The gloomiest forebodings might have found justification in subsequentevents. The other consul just now met with a great disaster. He wasproceeding along the southern coast of Sicily with a squadron of eighthundred merchantmen and over one hundred war galleys, the former loadedwith grain for the Roman army on the island. A severe storm arising, thesquadron was beaten to pieces upon the rocks. Not a single ship escaped. The coast for miles was strewn with broken planks, and with bodies, andheaped with vast windrows of grain cast up by the waves. 

CLOSE OF THE FIRST PUNIC WAR. --The war had now lasted for fifteen years. Four Roman fleets had been destroyed, three of which had been sunk orbroken to pieces by storms. Of the fourteen hundred vessels which had beenlost, seven hundred were war galleys, --all large and costly quinqueremes, that is, vessels with five banks of oars. Only one hundred of these hadfallen into the hands of the enemy; the remainder were a sacrifice to themalign and hostile power of the waves. Such successive blows from aninvisible hand were enough to blanch the faces even of the sturdy Romans. Neptune manifestly denied to the "Children of Mars" the realm of the sea. 

It was impossible for the six years following the last disaster to infuseany spirit into the struggle. In 247 B. C. , Hamilcar Barcas, the father ofthe great Hannibal, assumed the command of the Carthaginian forces, andfor several years conducted the war with great ability on the island ofSicily, even making Rome tremble for the safety of her Italianpossessions. 

Once more the Romans determined to commit their cause to the element thathad been so unfriendly to them. A fleet of two hundred vessels was builtand equipped, but entirely by private subscription; for the Senate fearedthat public sentiment would not sustain them in levying a tax for fittingup another costly armament as an offering to the insatiable Neptune. Thispeople's squadron, as we may call it, was intrusted to the command of theconsul Catulus. He met the Carthaginian fleet under the command of theAdmiral Hanno, near the Ægatian islands, and inflicted upon it a crushingdefeat. 

The Carthaginians now sued for peace. A treaty was at length arranged, theterms of which required that Carthage should give up all claims to theisland of Sicily, surrender all her prisoners, and pay an indemnity of3200 talents (about $4, 000, 000), one-third of which was to be paid down, and the balance in ten yearly payments. Thus ended (241 B. C. ), after acontinuance of twenty-four years, the first great struggle betweenCarthage and Rome. 

CHAPTER XXV. 

THE SECOND PUNIC WAR. (2l8-201 B. C. )

ROME BETWEEN THE FIRST AND THE SECOND PUNIC WAR. 

THE FIRST ROMAN PROVINCE. --For the twenty-three years that followed theclose of the first struggle between Rome and Carthage, the two rivalsstrained every power and taxed every resource in preparation for a renewalof the contest. 

The Romans settled the affairs of Sicily, organizing all of it, save thelands belonging to Syracuse, as a province of the republic. This was thefirst territory beyond the limits of Italy that Rome had conquered, andthe Sicilian the first of Roman provinces. But as the imperial cityextended her conquests, her provincial possessions increased in number andsize until they formed at last a perfect cordon about the Mediterranean. Each province was governed by a magistrate sent out from the capital, andpaid an annual tribute, or tax, to Rome. 

ROME ACQUIRES SARDINIA AND CORSICA. --The first acquisition by the Romansof lands beyond the peninsula seems to have created in them an insatiableambition for foreign conquests. They soon found a pretext for seizing theisland of Sardinia, the most ancient and, after Sicily, the most prized ofthe possessions of the Carthaginians. The island, in connection withCorsica, which was also seized, was formed into a Roman province. With herhands upon these islands, the authority of Rome in the Western, or TuscanSea, was supreme. 

THE ILLYRIAN CORSAIRS ARE PUNISHED. --At about the same time, the Romansalso extended their influence over the seas that wash the eastern shoresof Italy. For a long time the Adriatic and Ionian waters had been infestedwith Illyrian pirates, who issued from the roadsteads of the northeasterncoasts of the former sea. The Roman fleet chased these corsairs from theAdriatic, and captured several of their strongholds. Rome now assumed asort of protectorate over the Greek cities of the Adriatic coasts. Thiswas her first step towards final supremacy in Macedonia and Greece. 

WAR WITH THE GAULS. --In the north, during this same period, Romanauthority was extended from the Apennines and the Rubicon to the foot ofthe Alps. Alarmed at the advance of the Romans, who were pushing northwardtheir great military road, called the Flaminian Way, and also settlingwith discharged soldiers and needy citizens the tracts of frontier landwrested some time before from the Gauls, the Boii, a tribe of that race, stirred up all the Gallic peoples already in Italy, besides their kinsmenwho were yet beyond the mountains, for an assault upon Rome. Intelligenceof this movement among the northern tribes threw all Italy into a fever ofexcitement. At Rome the terror was great; for not yet had died out ofmemory what the city had once suffered at the hands of the ancestors ofthese same barbarians that were now again gathering their hordes for sackand pillage. An ancient prediction, found in the Sibylline books, declaredthat a portion of Roman territory must needs be occupied by Gauls. Hopingsufficiently to fulfil the prophecy and satisfy Fate, the Roman Senatecaused two Gauls to be buried alive in one of the public squares of thecapital. 

Meanwhile the barbarians had advanced into Etruria, ravaging the countryas they moved southward. After gathering a large amount of booty, theywere carrying this back to a place of safety, when they were surrounded bythe Roman armies at Telamon, and almost annihilated (225 B. C. ). TheRomans, taking advantage of this victory, pushed on into the plains of thePo, captured the city which is now known as Milan, and extended theirauthority to the foot-hills of the Alps. 

CARTHAGE BETWEEN THE FIRST AND THE SECOND PUNIC WAR. 

THE TRUCELESS WAR. --Scarcely had peace been concluded with Rome at the endof the First Punic War, before Carthage was plunged into a still deadlierstruggle, which for a time threatened her very existence. The mercenarytroops, upon their return from Sicily, revolted, on account of notreceiving their pay. Their appeal to the native tribes of Africa wasanswered by a general uprising throughout the dependencies of Carthage. The extent of the revolt shows how hateful and hated was the rule of thegreat capital over her subject states. 

The war was unspeakably bitter and cruel. It is known in history as "TheTruceless War. " At one time Carthage was the only city remaining in thehands of the government. But the genius of the great Carthaginian generalHamilcar Barcas at last triumphed, and the authority of Carthage waseverywhere restored. 

THE CARTHAGINIANS IN SPAIN. --After the disastrous termination of the FirstPunic War, the Carthaginians determined to repair their losses by newconquests in Spain. Hamilcar Barcas was sent over into that country, andfor nine years he devoted his commanding genius to organizing thedifferent Iberian tribes into a compact state, and to developing the richgold and silver mines of the southern part of the peninsula. He fell inbattle 228 B. C. 

Hamilcar Barcas was the greatest general that up to this time theCarthaginian race had produced. As a rule, genius is not heritable; but inthe Barcine family the rule was broken, and the rare genius of Hamilcarreappeared in his sons, whom he himself, it is said, was fond of callingthe "lion's brood. " Hannibal, the oldest, was only nineteen at the time ofhis father's death, and being thus too young to assume command, Hasdrubal, [Footnote: Not to be confounded with Hannibal's own brother Hasdrubal. ]the son-in-law of Hamilcar, was chosen to succeed him. He carried out theunfinished plans of Hamilcar, extended and consolidated the Carthaginianpower in Spain, and upon the eastern coast founded New Carthage as thecentre and capital of the newly acquired territory. The native tribes wereconciliated rather than conquered. The Barcine family knew how to rule aswell as how to fight. 

HANNIBAL'S VOW. --Upon the death of Hasdrubal, which occurred 221 B. C. , Hannibal, now twenty-six years of age, was by the unanimous voice of thearmy called to be their leader. When a child of nine years he had been ledby his father to the altar; and there, with his hands upon the sacrifice, the little boy had sworn eternal hatred to the Roman race. He was drivenon to his gigantic undertakings and to his hard fate, not only by therestless fires of his warlike genius, but, as he himself declared, by thesacred obligations of a vow that could not be broken. 

HANNIBAL ATTACKS SAGUNTUM. --In two years Hannibal extended theCarthaginian power to the Ebro. Saguntum, a Greek city upon the east coastof Spain, alone remained unsubdued. The Romans, who were jealouslywatching affairs in the peninsula, had entered into an alliance with thiscity, and taken it, with other Greek cities in that quarter of theMediterranean, under their protection. Hannibal, although he well knewthat an attack upon this place would precipitate hostilities with Rome, laid siege to it in the spring of 219 B. C. He was eager for the renewal ofthe old contest. The Roman Senate sent messengers to him forbidding hismaking war upon a city which was a friend and ally of the Roman people;but Hannibal, disregarding their remonstrances, continued the siege, and, after an investment of eight months, gained possession of the town. 

The Romans now sent commissioners to Carthage to demand of the Senate thatthey should give up Hannibal to them, and by so doing repudiate the act oftheir general. The Carthaginians hesitated. Then Quintus Fabius, chief ofthe embassy, gathering up his toga, said: "I carry here peace and war;choose, men of Carthage, which ye will have. " "Give us whichever ye will, "was the reply. "War, then, " said Fabius, dropping his toga. The "die wasnow cast; and the arena was cleared for the foremost man of his race andhis time, perhaps the mightiest military genius of any race and of anytime. "

THE SECOND PUNIC WAR. 

HANNIBAL'S PASSAGE OF THE ALPS. --The Carthaginian empire was now stirredwith preparations for the impending struggle. Hannibal was the life andsoul of every movement. His bold plan was to cross the Pyrenees and theAlps and descend upon Rome from the north. 

[Illustration: HANNIBAL]

With his preparations completed, Hannibal left New Carthage early in thespring of 218 B. C. , with an army numbering about one hundred thousand men, and including thirty-seven war elephants. Crossing the Pyrenees and theRhone, he reached the foot-hills of the Alps. Nature and man joined tooppose the passage. The season was already far advanced--it was October--and snow was falling upon the higher portions of the trail. Day after daythe army toiled painfully up the dangerous path. In places the narrow wayhad to be cut wider for the monstrous bodies of the elephants. Oftenavalanches of stone were hurled upon the trains by the hostile bands thatheld possession of the heights above. At last the summit was gained, andthe shivering army looked down into the warm haze of the Italian plains. The sight alone was enough to rouse the drooping spirits of the soldiers;but Hannibal stirred them to enthusiasm by addressing them with thesewords: "Ye are standing upon the Acropolis of Italy; yonder lies Rome. "The army began its descent, and at length, after toils and losses equalledonly by those of the ascent, its thinned battalions issued from thedefiles of the mountains upon the plains of the Po. Of the fifty thousandmen and more with which Hannibal had begun the passage, barely half thatnumber had survived the march, and these "looked more like phantoms thanmen. "

BATTLES OF THE TICINUS, THE TREBIA, AND LAKE TRASIMENUS. --The Romans hadnot the remotest idea of Hannibal's plans. With war determined upon, theSenate had sent one of the consuls, L. Sempronius Longus, with an armyinto Africa by the way of Sicily; while the other, Publius CorneliusScipio, they had directed to lead another army into Spain. 

While the Senate were watching the movements of these expeditions, theywere startled with the intelligence that Hannibal, instead of being inSpain, had crossed the Pyrenees and was among the Gauls upon the Rhone. Sempronius was hastily recalled from his attempt upon Africa, to thedefence of Italy. Scipio, on his way to Spain, had touched at Massilia, and there learned of the movements of Hannibal. He turned back, hurriedinto Northern Italy, and took command of the levies there. The cavalry ofthe two armies met upon the banks of the Ticinus, a tributary of the Po. The Romans were driven from the field by the fierce onset of the Numidianhorsemen. Scipio now awaited the arrival of the other consular army, whichwas hurrying up through Italy by forced marches. 

In the battle of the Trebia the united armies of the two consuls werealmost annihilated. The Gauls, who had been waiting to see to which sidefortune would incline, now flocked to the standard of Hannibal, and hailedhim as their deliverer. 

The spring following the victory at the Trebia, Hannibal led his army, nowrecruited by many Gauls, across the Apennines, and moved southward. AtLake Trasimenus he entrapped the Romans under Flaminius in a mountaindefile, where, bewildered by a fog that filled the valley, the greaterpart of the army was slaughtered, and the consul himself was slain. 

The way to Rome was now open. Believing that Hannibal would march directlyupon the capital, the Senate caused the bridges that spanned the Tiber tobe destroyed, and appointed Fabius Maximus dictator. 

In one respect only had events disappointed Hannibal's expectations. Hehad thought that all the states of Italy were, like the Gauls, ready torevolt from Rome at the first opportunity that might offer itself. But nota single city had thus far proved unfaithful to her. 

FABIUS "THE DELAYER. "--The fate of Rome was now in the hands of Fabius. Should he risk a battle and lose it, the destiny of the capital would besealed. He determined to adopt a more prudent policy--to follow and annoythe Carthaginian army, but to refuse all proffers of battle. Thus timemight be gained for raising a new army and perfecting measures for thepublic defence. In every possible way Hannibal endeavored to draw hisenemy into an engagement. He ravaged the fields far and wide and fired thehomesteads of the Italians, in order to force Fabius to fight in theirdefence. The soldiers of the dictator began to murmur. They called him_Cunctator_, or "the Delayer. " They even accused him of treachery tothe cause of Rome. But nothing moved him from the steady pursuit of thepolicy which he clearly saw was the only prudent one to follow. 

THE BATTLE OF CANNÆ. --The time gained by Fabius enabled the Romans toraise and discipline an army that might hope successfully to combat theCarthaginian forces. Early in the summer of the year 216 B. C. These newlevies, numbering 80, 000 men, confronted the army of Hannibal, amountingto not more than half that number, at Cannæ, in Apulia. It was the largestarmy the Romans had ever gathered on any battle-field. But it had beencollected only to meet the most overwhelming defeat that ever befell theforces of the republic. Through the skilful manoeuvres of Hannibal, theRomans were completely surrounded, and huddled together in a helpless massupon the field, and then for eight hours were cut down by the Numidiancavalry. From fifty to seventy thousand were slain; a few thousand weretaken prisoners; only the merest handful escaped, including one of theconsuls. The slaughter was so great that, according to Livy, when Mago, abrother of Hannibal, carried the news of the victory to Carthage, he, inconfirmation of the intelligence, poured down in the porch of the Senate-house, nearly a peck of gold rings taken from the fingers of Romanknights. 

EVENTS AFTER THE BATTLE OF CANNÆ. --The awful news flew to Rome. Consternation and despair seized the people. The city would have beenemptied of its population had not the Senate ordered the gates to beclosed. Never did that body display greater calmness, wisdom, prudence, and resolution. By word and act they bade the people never to despair ofthe republic. Little by little the panic was allayed. Measures wereconcerted for the defence of the capital, as it was expected that Hannibalwould immediately march upon Rome. Swift horsemen were sent out along theAppian Way to gather information of the conqueror's movements, and tolearn, as Livy expresses it, "if the immortal gods, out of pity to theempire, had left any remnant of the Roman name. "

The leader of the Numidian cavalry, Maharbal, urged Hannibal to follow uphis victory closely, "Let me advance with the cavalry, " said he, "and infive days thou shalt dine in the capital. " But Hannibal refused to adoptthe counsel of his impetuous general. Maharbal turned away, and, withmingled reproach and impatience, exclaimed, "Alas! thou knowest how togain a victory, but not how to use one. " The great commander, while heknew he was invincible in the open field, did not think it prudent tofight the Romans behind their walls. 

Hannibal now sent an embassy to Rome to offer terms of peace. The Senate, true to the Appian policy never to treat with a victorious enemy (see p. 245), would not even permit the ambassadors to enter the gates. Not lessdisappointed was Hannibal in the temper of the Roman allies. For the mostpart they adhered to the cause of Rome with unshaken loyalty through allthese trying times. Some tribes in the South of Italy, however, amongwhich were the Lucanians, the Apulians, and the Bruttians, went over tothe Carthaginians. Hannibal marched into Campania and quartered his armyfor the winter in the luxurious city of Capua, which had opened its gatesto him. Here he rested and sent urgent messages to Carthage for re-inforcements, while Rome exhausted every resource in raising and equippingnew levies, to take the place of the legions lost at Cannæ. For severalyears there was an ominous lull in the war, while both parties weregathering strength for a renewal of the struggle. 

THE FALL OF SYRACUSE AND OF CAPUA. --In the year 216 B. C. , Hiero, King ofSyracuse, who loved to call himself the friend and ally of the Romanpeople, died, and the government fell into the hands of a party unfriendlyto the republic. An alliance was formed with Carthage, and a large part ofSicily was carried over to the side of the enemies of Rome. Thedistinguished Roman general, Marcus Claudius Marcellus, called "the Swordof Rome, " was intrusted with the task of reconquering the island. Afterreducing many towns, he at last laid siege to Syracuse. 

This noted capital was then one of the largest and richest cities of theGrecian world. For three years it held out against the Roman forces. It issaid that Archimedes (see p. 213), the great mathematician, renderedvaluable aid to the besieged with curious and powerful engines contrivedby his genius. But the city fell at last, and was given over to sack andpillage. Rome was adorned with the rare works of Grecian art--paintingsand sculptures--which for centuries had been accumulating in this theoldest and most renowned of the colonies of ancient Hellas. Syracuse neverrecovered from the blow inflicted upon her at this time by the relentlessRomans. 

[Illustration: MARCELLUS, "The sword of Rome. "]

Capua must next be punished for opening her gates and extending herhospitalities to the enemies of Rome. A line of circumvallation was drawnabout the devoted city, and two Roman armies held it in close siege. Hannibal, ever faithful to his allies and friends, hastened to the reliefof the Capuans. Unable to break the enemy's lines, he marched directlyupon Rome, as if to make an attack upon that city, hoping thus to draw offthe legions about Capua to the defence of the capital. The "dreadHannibal" himself rode alongside the walls of the hated city, and, tradition says, even hurled a defiant spear over the defences. The Romanscertainly were trembling with fear; yet Livy tells how they manifestedtheir confidence in their affairs by selling at public auction the landupon which Hannibal was encamped. He in turn, in the same manner, disposedof the shops fronting the Forum. The story is that there were eagerpurchasers in both cases. 

Failing to draw the legions from Capua as he had hoped, Hannibal nowretired from before Rome, and, retreating into the southern part of Italy, abandoned Capua to its fate. It soon fell, and paid the penalty that Romenever failed to inflict upon an unfaithful ally. The chief men in the citywere put to death, and a large part of the inhabitants sold as slaves. Capua had aspired to the first place among the cities of Italy: scarcelymore than the name of the ambitious capital now remained. 

Hasdrubal attempts to carry Aid to his Brother. --During all the yearsHannibal was waging war in Italy, his brother Hasdrubal was carrying on adesperate struggle with the Roman armies in Spain. At length he determinedto leave the conduct of the war in that country to others, and go to therelief of his brother, who was sadly in need of aid. Like Pyrrhus, Hannibal had been brought to realize that even constant victories won atthe cost of soldiers that could not be replaced, meant final defeat. 

Hasdrubal followed the same route that had been taken by his brotherHannibal, and in the year 207 B. C. Descended from the Alps upon the plainsof Northern Italy. Thence he advanced southward, while Hannibal movednorthward from Bruttium to meet him. Rome made a last great effort toprevent the junction of the armies of the two brothers. At the riverMetaurus, Hasdrubal's march was withstood by a large Roman army. Here hisforces were cut to pieces, and he himself was slain (207 B. C. ). His headwas severed from his body and sent to Hannibal. Upon recognizing thefeatures of his brother, Hannibal exclaimed sadly, "Carthage, I see thyfate. "

WAR IN AFRICA: BATTLE OF ZAMA. --The defeat and death of Hasdrubal gave adifferent aspect to the war. Hannibal now drew back into the rockypeninsula of Bruttium, the southernmost point of Italy. There he faced theRomans like a lion at bay. No one dared attack him. It was resolved tocarry the war into Africa, in hopes that the Carthaginians would be forcedto call their great commander out of Italy to the defence of Carthage. Publius Cornelius Scipio, who after the departure of Hasdrubal from Spainhad quickly brought the peninsula under the power of Rome, led the army ofinvasion. He had not been long in Africa before the Carthaginian Senatesent for Hannibal to conduct the war. At Zama, not far from Carthage, thehostile armies came face to face. Fortune had deserted Hannibal; he wasfighting [Footnote: Son of the consul mentioned on page 259. ] againstfate. He here met his first and final defeat. His army, in which were manyof the veterans that had served through all the Italian campaigns, wasalmost annihilated (202 B. C. ). Scipio was accorded a splendid triumph atRome, and given the surname Africanus in honor of his achievements. [Footnote: Some time after the close of the Second Punic War, the Romans, persuading themselves that Hannibal was preparing Carthage for anotherwar, demanded his surrender of the Carthaginians. He fled to Syria, andthence to Asia Minor, where, to avoid falling into the hands of hisimplacable foes, he committed suicide by means of poison (183 B. C. ). ]

[Illustration: PUBLIUS CORNELIUS SCIPIO (Africanus). ]

THE CLOSE OF THE WAR. --Carthage was now completely exhausted, and sued forpeace. Even Hannibal himself could no longer counsel war. The terms of thetreaty were much severer than those imposed upon the city at the end ofthe First Punic War. She was required to give up all claims to Spain andthe islands of the Mediterranean; to surrender her war elephants, and allher ships of war save ten galleys; to pay an indemnity of five thousandtalents at once, and two hundred and fifty talents annually for fiftyyears; and not to engage in any war without the consent of Rome. Fivehundred of the costly Phoenician war galleys were towed out of the harborof Carthage and burned in the sight of the citizens. 

Such was the end of the Second Punic, or Hannibalic War, as called by theRomans, the most desperate struggle ever maintained by rival powers forempire. 

CHAPTER XXVI. 

THE THIRD PUNIC WAR. (149-146 B. C. )

EVENTS BETWEEN THE SECOND AND THE THIRD PUNIC WAR. 

The terms imposed upon Carthage at the end of the Second Punic War leftRome mistress of the Western Mediterranean. During the fifty eventfulyears that elapsed between the close of that struggle and the breaking-outof the last Punic war, her authority became supreme also in the Easternseas. In a preceding chapter (see p. 170), while narrating the fortunes ofthe most important states into which the great empire of Alexander wasbroken at his death, we followed them until one after another they fellbeneath the arms of Rome, and were successively absorbed into her growingkingdom. We shall therefore speak of them here only in the briefestmanner, simply indicating the connection of their several histories withthe series of events which mark the advance of Rome to universal empire. 

THE BATTLE OF CYNOSCEPHALÆ (197 B. C. ). --During the Hannibalic War, PhilipV. (III. ) of Macedonia had aided the Carthaginians, or at least hadentered into an alliance with them. He was now troubling the Greek citieswhich were under the protection of Rome. For these things the Roman Senatedetermined to punish him. An army under Flamininus was sent into Greece, and on the plains of Cynoscephalæ, in Thessaly, the Roman legiondemonstrated its superiority over the unwieldy Macedonian phalanx bysubjecting Philip to a most disastrous defeat (197 B. C. ). The king wasforced to give up all his conquests, and Rome extended her protectorateover Greece. 

THE BATTLE OF MAGNESIA (190 B. C. ). --Antiochus the Great of Syria had atthis time not only overrun all Asia Minor, but had crossed the Hellespontinto Europe, and was intent upon the conquest of Thrace and Greece. Rome, that could not entertain the idea of a rival empire upon the southernshores of the Mediterranean, could much less tolerate the establishment inthe East of such a colossal kingdom as the ambition of Antiochus proposedto itself. Just as soon as intelligence was carried to Italy that theSyrian king was leading his army into Greece, the legions of the republicwere set in motion. Some reverses caused Antiochus to retreat in hasteacross the Hellespont into Asia, whither he was followed by the Romans, led by Scipio, a brother of Africanus. 

At Magnesia, Antiochus was overthrown, and a large part of Asia Minor fellinto the hands of the Romans. Not yet prepared to maintain provinces sodistant from the Tiber, the Senate conferred the new territory, with theexception of Lycia and Caria, which were given to the Rhodians, upon theirfriend and ally Eumenes, King of Pergamus (see p. 171). This "Kingdom ofAsia, " as it was called, was really nothing more than a dependency ofRome, and its nominal ruler only a puppet-king in the hands of the RomanSenate. 

Scipio enjoyed a magnificent triumph at Rome, and, in accordance with acustom that had now become popular with successful generals, erected amemorial of his deeds in his name by assuming the title of Asiaticus. 

[Illustration: PERSEUS, of Macedonia. ]

THE BATTLE OF PYDNA (168 B. C. ). --In a few years Macedonia, under theleadership of Perseus, son of Philip V. , was again in arms and offeringdefiance to Rome; but in the year 168 B. C. The Roman consul Æmilius Pauluscrushed the Macedonian power forever upon the memorable field of Pydna. This was one of the decisive battles fought by the Romans in theirstruggle for the dominion of the world. The last great power in the Eastwas here broken. The Roman Senate was henceforth recognized by the wholecivilized world as the source and fountain of supreme political wisdom andpower. We shall have yet to record many campaigns of the Roman legions;but these were efforts to suppress revolt among dependent or semi-vassalstates, or were struggles with barbarian tribes that skirted the Romandominions. 

THE DESTRUCTION OF CORINTH (146 B. C. ). --Barely twenty years had passedafter the destruction of the Macedonian monarchy before the cities andstates that formed the Achæan League (see p. 175) were goaded to revolt bythe injustice of their Roman protectors. In the year 146 B. C. The consulMummius signalized the suppression of the rebellion by the completedestruction of the brilliant city of Corinth, the "eye of Hellas, " as theancient poets were fond of calling it. This fair capital, the mostbeautiful and renowned of all the cities of Greece after the fall ofAthens, was sacked, and razed to the ground. Much of the booty was sold onthe spot at public auction. Numerous works of art, --rare paintings andsculptures, --with which the city was crowded, were carried off to Italy. "Never before or after, " says Long, "was such a display of the wonders ofGrecian art carried in triumphal procession through the streets of Rome. "

THE THIRD PUNIC WAR. 

"CARTHAGE MUST BE DESTROYED. "--The same year that Rome destroyed Corinth(146 B. C. ), she also blotted her great rival Carthage from the face of theearth. It will be recalled that one of the conditions imposed upon thelast-named city at the close of the Second Punic War was that she should, under no circumstances, engage in any war without the permission of theRoman Senate. Taking advantage of the helpless condition of Carthage, Masinissa, King of Numidia, began to make depredations upon herterritories. She appealed to Rome for protection. The envoys sent toAfrica by the Senate to settle the dispute, unfairly adjudged every casein favor of the robber Masinissa. In this way Carthage was deprived of herlands and towns. 

Chief of one of the embassies sent out was Marcus Cato the Censor. When hesaw the prosperity of Carthage, --her immense trade, which crowded herharbor with ships, and the country for miles back of the city a beautifullandscape of gardens and villas, --he was amazed at the growing power andwealth of the city, and returned home convinced that the safety of Romedemanded the destruction of her rival. Never afterwards did he address theRomans, no matter upon what subject, but he always ended with the words, "Carthage must be destroyed" (_delenda est Carthago_). 

ROMAN PERFIDY. --A pretext for the accomplishment of the hateful work wasnot long wanting. In 150 B. C. The Carthaginians, when Masinissa madeanother attack upon their territory, instead of calling upon Rome, fromwhich source the past had convinced them they could hope for neither aidnor justice, gathered an army, and resolved to defend themselves. Theirforces, however, were defeated by the Numidians, and sent beneath theyoke. 

In entering upon this war without the consent of Rome, Carthage had brokenthe conditions of the last treaty. The Carthaginian Senate, in greatanxiety, now sent an embassy to Italy to offer any reparation the Romansmight demand. They were told that if they would give three hundredhostages, members of the noblest Carthaginian families, the independenceof their city should be respected. They eagerly complied with this demand. But no sooner were these in the hands of the Romans than the consulararmies, numbering eighty thousand men, secured against attack by thehostages so perfidiously drawn from the Carthaginians, crossed from Sicilyinto Africa, and disembarked at Utica, only ten miles from Carthage. 

The Carthaginians were now commanded to give up all their arms; stillhoping to win their enemy to clemency, they complied with this demandalso. Then the consuls made known the final decree of the Roman Senate--"That Carthage must be destroyed, but that the inhabitants might build anew city, provided it were located ten miles from the coast. "

When this resolution of the Senate was announced to the Carthaginians, andthey realized the baseness and perfidy of their enemy, a cry ofindignation and despair burst from the betrayed city. 

THE CARTHAGINIANS PREPARE TO DEFEND THEIR CITY. --It was resolved to resistto the bitter end the execution of the cruel decree. The gates of the citywere closed. Men, women, and children set to work and labored day andnight manufacturing arms. The entire city was converted into one greatworkshop. The utensils of the home and the sacred vessels of the temples, statues, and vases were melted down for weapons. Material was torn fromthe buildings of the city for the construction of military engines. Thewomen cut off their hair and braided it into strings for the catapults. Bysuch labor, and through such means, the city was soon put in a state towithstand a siege. 

When the Romans advanced to take possession of the place, they wereastonished to find the people they had just treacherously disarmed, withweapons in their hands, manning the walls of their capital, and ready tobid them defiance. 

THE DESTRUCTION OF CARTHAGE. --It is impossible for us here to give thecircumstances of the siege of Carthage. For four years the city held outagainst the Roman army. At length the consul Scipio Æmilianus succeeded intaking it by storm. When resistance ceased, only 50, 000 men, women, andchildren, out of a population of 700, 000, remained to be made prisoners. The city was fired, and for seventeen days the space within the walls wasa sea of flames. Every trace of building which the fire could not destroywas levelled, a plough was driven over the site, and a dreadful curseinvoked upon any one who should dare attempt to rebuild the city. 

Such was the hard fate of Carthage. It is said that Scipio, as he gazedupon the smouldering ruins, seemed to read in them the fate of Rome, and, bursting into tears, sadly repeated the lines of Homer:

 "The day shall come in which our sacred Troy, And Priam, and the people over whom Spear-bearing Priam rules, shall perish all. "

The Carthaginian territory in Africa was made into a Roman province, withUtica as the leading city; and Roman civilization was spread rapidly, bymeans of traders and settlers, throughout the regions that lie between theranges of the Atlas and the sea. 

WAR IN SPAIN. 

SIEGE OF NUMANTIA. --It is fitting that the same chapter which narrates thedestruction of Corinth in Greece, and the blotting-out of Carthage inAfrica, should tell the story of the destruction of Numantia in Spain. 

The expulsion of the Carthaginians from the Spanish peninsula really gaveRome the control of only a small part of that country. The war-like nativetribes--the Celtiberians and Lusitanians--of the North and the West wereready stubbornly to dispute with the new-comers the possession of thesoil. 

The war gathered about Numantia, the siege of which was brought to a closeby Scipio Æmilianus, the conqueror of Carthage. Before the surrender ofthe place, almost all the inhabitants had met death, either in defence ofthe walls, or by deliberate suicide. The miserable remnant which theravages of battle, famine, pestilence, and despair had left alive weresold into slavery, and the city was levelled to the ground (133 B. C. ). 

The capture of Numantia was considered quite as great an achievement asthe taking of Carthage. Scipio celebrated another triumph at Rome, and tohis surname Africanus, which he had received for his achievements inAfrica, added that of Numantinus. Spain became a favorite resort of Romanmerchants, and many colonies were established in different parts of thecountry. As a result of this great influx of Italians, the laws, manners, customs, language, and religion of the conquerors were introducedeverywhere, and the peninsula became rapidly Romanized. 

CHAPTER XXVII. 

THE LAST CENTURY OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. (133-31 B. C. )

We have now traced the growth of the power of republican Rome, as throughtwo centuries and more of conquest she has extended her authority, firstthroughout Italy, and then over almost all the countries that border uponthe Mediterranean. It must be our less pleasant task now to follow thedeclining fortunes of the republic through the last century of itsexistence. We shall here learn that wars waged for spoils and dominion arein the end more ruinous, if possible, to the conqueror than to theconquered. 

THE SERVILE WAR IN SICILY (134-132 B. C. ). --With the opening of this periodwe find a terrible struggle going on in Sicily between masters and slaves--or what is known as "The First Servile War. " The condition of affairs inthat island was the legitimate result of the Roman system of slavery. Thecaptives taken in war were usually sold into servitude. The great numberof prisoners furnished by the numerous conquests of the Romans causedslaves to become a drug in the slave-markets of the Roman world. They wereso cheap that masters found it more profitable to wear their slaves out bya few years of unmercifully hard labor, and then to buy others, than topreserve their lives for a longer period by more humane treatment. In caseof sickness, they were left to die without attention, as the expense ofnursing exceeded the cost of new purchases. Some Sicilian estates wereworked by as many as 20, 000 slaves. That each owner might know his own, the poor creatures were branded like cattle. What makes all this the morerevolting is the fact that many of these slaves were in every way thepeers of their owners, and often were their superiors. The fortunes of waralone had made one servant and the other master. 

The wretched condition of these slaves and the cruelty of their masters atlast drove them to revolt. The insurrection spread throughout the island, until 200, 000 slaves were in arms, and in possession of many of thestrongholds of the country. They defeated four Roman armies sent againstthem, and for three years defied the power of Rome. Finally, however, inthe year 132 B. C. , the revolt was crushed, and peace was restored to thedistracted island. [Footnote: In the year 102 B. C. Another insurrection ofthe slaves broke out in the island, which it required three years toquell. This last revolt is known as "The Second Servile War. "]

THE PUBLIC LANDS. --In Italy itself affairs were in a scarcely lesswretched condition than in Sicily. When the different states of thepeninsula were subjugated, large portions of the conquered territory hadbecome public land (_ager publicus_); for upon the subjugation of astate Rome never left to the conquered people more than two-thirds oftheir lands, and often not so much as this. The land appropriated wasdisposed of at public sale, leased at low rentals, allotted to dischargedsoldiers, or allowed to lie unused. [Footnote: These land matters may bemade plain by a reference to the public lands of the United States. Thetroubles in Ireland between the land-owners and their tenants will alsoserve to illustrate the agrarian disturbances in ancient Rome. ]

Now, it had happened that, in various ways, the greater part of the publiclands had fallen into the hands of the wealthy. They alone had the capitalnecessary to stock and work them to advantage; hence the possessions ofthe small proprietors were gradually absorbed by the large landholders. These great proprietors, also, disregarding a law which forbade any personto hold more than five hundred jugera of land, held many times thatamount. Almost all the lands of Italy, about the beginning of the firstcentury B. C. , are said to have been held by not more than two thousandpersons; for the large proprietors, besides the lands they had secured bypurchase from the government, or had wrested from the smaller farmers, claimed enormous tracts to which they had only a squatter's title. So longhad they been left in undisturbed possession of these government landsthat they had come to look upon them as absolutely their own. In manycases, feeling secure through great lapse of time, --the lands having beenhanded down through many generations, --the owners had expended large sumsin their improvement, and now resisted as very unjust every effort todispossess them of their hereditary estates. Money-lenders, too, had, inmany instances, made loans upon these lands, and they naturally sided withthe owners in their opposition to all efforts to disturb the titles. 

These wealthy "possessors" employed slave rather than free labor, as theyfound it more profitable; and so the poorer Romans, left withoutemployment, crowded into the cities, especially congregating at Rome, where they lived in vicious indolence. The proprietors also found it totheir interest to raise stock rather than to cultivate the soil. All Italybecame a great sheep-pasture. 

Thus, largely through the workings of the public land system, the Romanpeople had become divided into two great classes, which are variouslydesignated as the Rich and the Poor, the Possessors and the Non-Possessors, the Optimates (the "Best"), and the Populares (the "People"). We hear nothing more of patricians and plebeians. As one expresses it, "Rome had become a commonwealth of millionaires and beggars. "

For many years before and after the period at which we have now arrived, abitter struggle was carried on between these two classes; just such acontest as we have seen waged between the nobility and the commonalty inthe earlier history of Rome. The most instructive portion of the story ofthe Roman republic is found in the records of this later struggle. Themisery of the great masses naturally led to constant agitation at thecapital. Popular leaders introduced bill after bill into the Senate, andbrought measure after measure before the assemblies of the people, allaiming at the redistribution of the public lands and the correction ofexisting abuses. 

THE REFORMS OF THE GRACCHI. --The most noted champions of the cause of thepoorer classes against the rich and powerful were Tiberius and CaiusGracchus. These reformers are reckoned among the most popular orators thatRome ever produced. They eloquently voiced the wrongs of the people. SaidTiberius, "You are called 'lords of the earth' without possessing a singleclod to call your own. " The people made him tribune; and in that positionhe secured the passage of a law for the redistribution of the publiclands, which gave some relief. It took away from Possessors without sonsall the land they held over five hundred jugera; Possessors with one sonmight hold seven hundred and fifty jugera, and those with two sons onethousand. 

At the end of his term of office, Tiberius stood a second time for thetribunate. The nobles combined to defeat him. Foreseeing that he would notbe re-elected, Tiberius resolved to use force upon the day of voting. Hispartisans were overpowered, and he and three hundred of his followers werekilled in the Forum, and their bodies thrown into the Tiber (133 B. C. ). This was the first time that the Roman Forum had witnessed such a scene ofviolence and crime. 

Caius Gracchus, the younger brother of Tiberius, now assumed the positionmade vacant by the death of Tiberius. It is related that Caius had a dreamin which the spirit of his brother seemed to address him thus: "Caius, whydo you linger? There is no escape: one life for both of us, and one deathin defence of the people, is our fate. " The dream came true. Caius waschosen tribune in 123 B. C. He secured the passage of grain-laws whichprovided that grain should be sold to the poor from public granaries, athalf its value or less. This was a very unwise and pernicious measure. Itwas not long before grain was distributed free to all applicants; and aconsiderable portion of the population of the capital were living invicious indolence and feeding at the public crib. 

Caius proposed other measures in the interest of the people, which werebitterly opposed by the Optimates; and the two orders at last came intocollision. Caius sought death by a friendly sword (121 B. C. ), and threethousand of his adherents were massacred. The consul offered for the headof Caius its weight in gold. "This is the first instance in Roman historyof head-money being offered and paid, but it was not the last" (Long). 

The people ever regarded the Gracchi as martyrs to their cause, and theirmemory was preserved by statues in the public square. To Cornelia, theirmother, a monument was erected, simply bearing the inscription, "TheMother of the Gracchi. "

THE WAR WITH JUGURTHA (111-106 B. C. ). --After the death of the Gracchithere seemed no one left to resist the heartless oppressions and todenounce the scandalous extravagances of the aristocratic party. Many ofthe laws of the Gracchi respecting the public lands were annulled. Italyfell again into the hands of a few over-rich land-owners. The provinceswere plundered by the Roman governors, who squandered their ill-gottenwealth at the capital. The votes of senators and the decisions of judges, the offices at Rome and the places in the provinces--everything pertainingto the government had its price, and was bought and sold like merchandise. Affairs in Africa at this time illustrate how Roman virtue and integrityhad declined since Fabricius indignantly refused the gold of Pyrrhus. 

Jugurtha, king of Numidia, had seized all that country, having put todeath the rightful rulers of different provinces of the region, who hadbeen confirmed in their possessions by the Romans at the close of thePunic wars. Commissioners sent from Rome to look into the matter werebribed by Jugurtha. Even the consul Bestia, who had been sent into Africawith an army to punish the insolent usurper, sold himself to the robber. An investigation was ordered; but many prominent officials at Rome wereimplicated in the offences, and the matter was hushed up with money. Thevenality of the Romans disgusted even Jugurtha, who exclaimed, "O venalcity, thou wouldst sell thyself if thou couldst find a purchaser!"

In the year 106 B. C. The war against Jugurtha was brought to a close byCaius Marius, a man who had risen to the consulship from the lowest ranksof the people. Under him fought a young nobleman named Sulla, of whom weshall hear much hereafter. Marius celebrated a grand triumph at Rome. Jugurtha, after having graced the triumphal procession, was thrown intothe Mamertine dungeon, beneath the Capitoline, where he died ofstarvation. 

INVASION OF THE CIMBRI AND TEUTONES. --The war was not yet ended in Africabefore terrible tidings came to Rome from the north. Two mighty nations of"horrible barbarians, " three hundred thousand strong in fighting-men, coming whence no one could tell, had invaded, and were now desolating, theRoman provinces of Gaul, and might any moment cross the Alps and pour downinto Italy. 

The mysterious invaders proved to be two Germanic tribes, the Teutones andCimbri, the vanguard of that great German migration which was destined tochange the face and history of Europe. These intruders were seeking newhomes. They carried with them, in rude wagons, all their property, theirwives, and their children. The Celtic tribes of Gaul were no match for thenewcomers, and fled before them as they advanced. Several Roman armiesbeyond the Alps were cut to pieces. The terror at Rome was only equalledby that occasioned by the invasion of the Gauls two centuries before. TheGauls were terrible enough; but now the conquerors of the Gauls werecoming. 

Marius, the conqueror of Jugurtha, was looked to by all as the only manwho could save the state in this crisis. Accompanied by Sulla as one ofhis most skilful lieutenants, Marius hastened into Northern Italy. Thebarbarians had divided into two bands. The Cimbri were to cross theEastern Alps, and join in the valley of the Po the Teutones, who were toforce the defiles of the Western, or Maritime Alps. Marius determined toprevent the union of the barbarians, and to crush each band separately. 

Anticipating the march of the Teutones, he hurried over the Alps intoGaul, and falling upon them at a favorable moment (at Aquæ Sextæ, not farfrom Marseilles, 102 B. C. ), almost annihilated the entire host. Twohundred thousand barbarians are said to have been slain. Marius nowrecrossed the Alps, and, after visiting Rome, hastened to meet the Cimbri, who were entering the northeastern corner of Italy. He was not a day toosoon. Already the barbarians had defeated the Roman army under thenobleman Catulus, and were ravaging the rich plains of the Po. The Cimbri, unconscious of the fate of the Teutones, sent an embassy to Marius, todemand that they and their kinsmen should be given lands in Italy. Mariussent back in reply, "The Teutones have got all the land they need on theother side of the Alps. " The devoted Cimbri were soon to have all theyneeded on this side. 

A terrible battle almost immediately followed at Vercellæ (101 B. C. ). Thebarbarians were drawn up in an enormous hollow square, the men forming theouter ranks being fastened together with chains, to prevent the linesbeing broken. This proved their ruin. More than 100, 000 were killed and60, 000 taken prisoners to be sold as slaves in the Roman markets. Mariuswas hailed as the "Saviour of his Country. "

"The forlorn-hope of the German migration had performed its duty; thehomeless people of the Cimbri and their comrades were no more" (Mommsen). Their kinsmen yet behind the Danube and the Rhine were destined to exact aterrible revenge for their slaughter. 

THE SOCIAL, OR MARSIC WAR (91-89 B. C. ). --Scarcely was the danger of thebarbarian invasion past, before Rome was threatened by another and greaterevil arising within her own borders. At this time all the free inhabitantsof Italy were embraced in three classes, --_Roman citizens_, _Latins, _and _Italian allies_. The Roman citizens included the inhabitants ofthe capital and of the various Roman colonies planted in different partsof the peninsula (see p. 246, note), besides the people of a number oftowns called _municipia;_ the Latins were the inhabitants of the Latincolonies (see p. 246, note); the Italian allies (_socii_) included thevarious subjugated races of Italy. 

The Social, or Marsic War (as it is often called on account of theprominent part taken in the insurrection by the warlike Marsians) was astruggle that arose from the demands of the Italian allies for theprivileges of Roman citizenship, from which they were wholly excluded. Their demands were stubbornly resisted by both the aristocratic and thepopular party at Rome. Some, however, recognized the justice of theseclaims of the Italians. The tribune Livius Drusus championed their cause, but he was killed by an assassin. The Italians now flew to arms. Theydetermined upon the establishment of a rival state. A town calledCorfinium, among the Apennines, was chosen as the capital of the newrepublic, and its name changed to Italica. Thus, in a single day, almostall Italy south of the Rubicon was lost to Rome. The Etrurians, theUmbrians, the Campanians, the Latins, and some of the Greek cities werethe only states that remained faithful. 

[Illustration: COIN OF THE ITALIAN CONFEDERACY. (The Sabellian Bull goringthe Roman Wolf. )]

The greatness of the danger aroused all the old Roman courage andpatriotism. Aristocrats and democrats hushed their quarrels, and foughtbravely side by side for the endangered life of the republic. The warlasted three years. Finally Rome prudently extended the right of suffrageto the Latins, Etruscans, and Umbrians, who had so far remained true toher, but now began to show signs of wavering in their loyalty. Shortlyafterwards she offered the same to all Italians who should lay down theirarms within sixty days. This tardy concession to the just demands of theItalians virtually ended the war. It had been extremely disastrous to therepublic. Hundreds of thousands of lives had been lost, many towns hadbeen depopulated, and vast tracts of the country made desolate by thoseravages that never fail to characterize civil contentions. 

In after-years, under the empire, the rights of Roman citizenship, whichthe most of the Italians had now so hardly won, were extended to all thefree inhabitants of the various provinces, beyond the confines of Italy(see p. 327). 

THE CIVIL WAR OF MARIUS AND SULLA. --The Social War was not yet ended whena formidable enemy appeared in the East. Mithridates the Great, king ofPontus (see p. 170, note), taking advantage of the distracted condition ofthe republic, had encroached upon the Roman provinces in Asia Minor, andhad caused a general massacre of the Italian traders and residents in thatcountry. The number of victims of this wholesale slaughter has beenvariously estimated at from 80, 000 to 150, 000. The Roman Senate instantlydeclared war. 

A contest straightway arose between Marius and Sulla for the command ofthe forces. The sword settled the dispute. Sulla, at the head of thelegions he commanded, marched upon Rome, entered the gates, and "for thefirst time in the annals of the city a Roman army encamped within thewalls. " The party of Marius was defeated, and he and ten of his companionswere proscribed. Marius escaped and fled to Africa; Sulla embarked withthe legions to meet Mithridates in the East (87 B. C. ). 

[Illustration: MARIUS. ]

THE WANDERINGS OF MARIUS: HIS RETURN TO ITALY. --Leaving Sulla to carry onthe Mithridatic War, we must first follow the fortunes of the outlawedMarius. The ship in which he embarked for Africa was driven back upon theItalian coast at Circeii, and he was captured. A Cimbrian slave was sentto despatch him in prison. The cell where Marius lay was dark, and theeyes of the old soldier "seemed to flash fire. " As the slave advanced, Marius shouted, "Man, do you dare to kill Caius Marius?" The frightenedslave dropped his sword, and fled from the chamber, half dead with fear. 

A better feeling now took possession of the captors of Marius, and theyresolved that the blood of the "Saviour of Italy" should not be upon theirhands. They put him aboard a vessel, which bore him and his friends to anisland just off the coast of Africa. When he attempted to set foot uponthe mainland near Carthage, Sextius, the Roman governor of the province, sent a messenger to forbid him to land. The legend says that the oldgeneral, almost choking with indignation, only answered, "Go, tell yourmaster, that you have seen Marius a fugitive sitting amidst the ruins ofCarthage. "

A successful move of his friends at Rome brought Marius back to thecapital. He now took a terrible revenge upon his enemies. The consulOctavius was assassinated, and his head set up in front of the Rostrum. Never before had such a thing been seen at Rome--a consul's head exposedto the public gaze. The senators, equestrians, and leaders of the Optimateparty fled from the capital. For five days and nights a mercilessslaughter was kept up. The life of every man in the capital was in thehands of the revengeful Marius. If he refused to return the greeting ofany citizen, that sealed his fate: he was instantly despatched by thesoldiers who awaited the dictator's nod. The bodies of the victims layunburied in the streets. Sulla's house was torn down, and he himselfdeclared a public enemy. 

Rumors were now spread that Sulla, having overthrown Mithridates, wasabout to set out on his return with his victorious legions. He wouldsurely exact speedy and terrible vengeance. Marius, old and enfeebled bythe hardships of many campaigns, seemed to shrink from again facing hishated rival. He plunged into dissipation to drown his remorse and gloomyforebodings, and died in his seventy-first year (86 B. C. ). 

SULLA AND THE MITHRIDATIC WAR. --When Sulla left Italy with his legions forthe East, he knew very well that his enemies would have their own way inItaly during his absence; but he also knew that, if successful in hiscampaign against Mithridates, he could easily regain Italy, and wrest thegovernment from the hands of the Marian party. 

We can here take space to give simply the results of Sulla's campaigns inthe East. After driving the army of Mithridates out of Greece, Sullacrossed the Hellespont, and forced the king to sue for peace. He gave uphis conquered territory, surrendered his war ships, and paid a largeindemnity to cover the expenses of the war. 

[Illustration: SULLA. ]

With the Mithridatic War ended, Sulla wrote to the Senate, saying that hewas now coming to take vengeance upon the Marian party, --his own and therepublic's foes. 

The terror and consternation produced at Rome by this letter wereincreased by the accidental burning of the Capitol. The Sibylline books, which held the secrets of the fate of Rome, were consumed. Such an event, it was believed, could only foreshadow the most direful calamities to thestate. 

THE PROSCRIPTIONS OF SULLA. --The returning army from the East landed inItaly. With his veteran legions at his back, Sulla marched into Rome withall the powers of a dictator. The leaders of the Marian party wereproscribed, rewards were offered for their heads, and their property wasconfiscated. Sulla was implored to make out a list of those he designed toput to death, that those he intended to spare might be relieved of theterrible suspense in which all were now held. He made out a list ofeighty, which was attached to the Rostrum. The people murmured at thelength of the roll. In a few days it was extended to over three hundred, and grew rapidly, until it included the names of thousands of the bestcitizens of Italy. Hundreds were murdered, not for any offence, butbecause some favorites of Sulla coveted their estates. A wealthy noblecoming into the Forum, and reading his own name in the list of theproscribed, exclaimed, "Alas! my villa has proved my ruin. " The infamousCatiline, by having the name of a brother placed upon the fatal roll, secured his property. Julius Cæsar, at this time a mere boy of eighteen, was proscribed on account of his relationship to Marius; but, upon theintercession of friends, Sulla spared him: as he did so, however, he saidwarningly, and, as the event proved, prophetically, "There is in that boymany a Marius. "

Senators, knights, and wealthy land-owners fell by hundreds and bythousands; but the poor Italians who had sided with the Marian party weresimply slaughtered by tens of thousands. Nor did the provinces escape. InSicily, Spain, and Africa the enemies of the dictator were hunted andexterminated like noxious animals. It is estimated that the civil war ofMarius and Sulla cost the republic over one hundred and fifty thousandlives. 

When Sulla had sated his revenge, he celebrated a splendid triumph atRome, and the Senate enacted a law declaring all that he had done legaland right, caused to be erected in the Forum a gilded equestrian statue ofthe dictator, which bore the legend, "To Lucius Cornelius Sulla, theCommander Beloved by Fortune, " and made him dictator for life. Sulla usedhis position and influence in recasting the constitution in the interestof the aristocratic party. After enjoying the unlimited power of anAsiatic despot for three years, he suddenly resigned the dictatorship, andretired to his villa at Puteoli, where he gave himself up to the grossestdissipations. He died the year following his abdication (78 B. C. ). 

CHAPTER XXVIII. 

THE LAST CENTURY OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC (_concluded_). (133-31 B. C. )

POMPEY THE GREAT IN SPAIN. --The fires of the Civil War, though quenched inItaly, were still smouldering in Spain. Sertorius, an adherent of Marius, had there stirred up the martial tribes of Lusitania, and incited ageneral revolt against the power of the aristocratic government at Rome. Cnæus Pompey, a rising young leader of the oligarchy, upon whom the titleof Great had already been conferred as a reward for crushing the Marianparty in Sicily and Africa, was sent into Spain to perform a similarservice there. 

For several years the war was carried on with varying fortunes. At timesthe power of Rome in the peninsula seemed on the verge of utterextinction. Finally, the brave Sertorius was assassinated, and then thewhole of Spain was quickly regained. Pompey boasted of having forced thegates of more than eight hundred cities in Spain and Southern Gaul. Throughout all the conquered regions he established military colonies, andreorganized the local governments, putting in power those who would be, not only friends and allies of the Roman state, but also his own personaladherents. How he used these men as instruments of his ambition, we shalllearn a little later. 

SPARTACUS: WAR OF THE GLADIATORS. --While Pompey was subduing the Marianfaction in Spain, a new danger broke out in the midst of Italy. Gladiatorial combats had become, at this time, the favorite sport of theamphitheatre. At Capua was a sort of training-school, from which skilledfighters were hired out for public or private entertainments. In thisseminary was a Thracian slave, known by the name of Spartacus, who incitedhis companions to revolt. The insurgents fled to the crater of Vesuvius, and made that their stronghold. There they were joined by gladiators fromother schools, and by slaves and discontented men from every quarter. Someslight successes enabled them to arm themselves with the weapons of theirenemies. Their number at length increased to one hundred thousand men. Forthree years they defied the power of Rome, and even gained control of thelarger part of Southern Italy. Four Roman armies sent against them werecut to pieces. But at length Spartacus himself was slain, and theinsurgents were crushed. 

The rebellion was punished with Roman severity. The slaves that had takenpart in the revolt were hunted through the mountains and forests, andexterminated like dangerous beasts. The Appian Way was lined with sixthousand crosses, bearing aloft as many bodies--a terrible warning of thefate awaiting slaves that should dare to strike for freedom. 

THE ABUSES OF VERRES. --Terrible as was the state of society in Italy, still worse was the condition of affairs outside the peninsula. At firstthe rule of the Roman governors in the provinces, though severe, washonest and prudent. But during the period of profligacy and corruptionupon which we have now entered, the administration of these foreignpossessions was shamefully dishonest and incredibly cruel and rapacious. The prosecution of Verres, the proprætor of Sicily, exposed the scandalousrule of the oligarchy, into whose hands the government had fallen. Forthree years Verres plundered and ravaged that island with impunity. Hesold all the offices, and all his decisions as judge. He demanded of thefarmers the greater part of their crops, which he sold, to swell hisalready enormous fortune. Agriculture was thus ruined, and the farms wereabandoned. Verres had a taste for art, and when on his tours through theisland confiscated gems, vases, statues, paintings, and other things thatstruck his fancy, whether in temples or private dwellings. He even causeda Roman trader, for a slight offence, to be crucified, "the cross beingset on the beach within sight of Italy, that he might address to hisnative shores the ineffectual cry 'I am a Roman citizen. '"

Verres could not be called to account while in office; and it was doubtfulwhether, after the end of his term, he could be convicted, so corrupt andvenal had become the members of the Senate, before whom all such offendersmust be tried. Indeed, Verres himself openly boasted that he intended twothirds of his gains for his judges and lawyers, while the remaining onethird would satisfy himself. 

At length, after Sicily had come to look as though it had been ravaged bybarbarian conquerors, the infamous robber was impeached. The prosecutorwas Marcus Tullius Cicero, the brilliant orator, who was at this time justrising into prominence at Rome. The storm of indignation raised by thedevelopments of the trial caused Verres to flee into exile to Massilia, whither he took with him much of his ill-gotten wealth. 

WAR WITH THE MEDITERRANEAN PIRATES (66 B. C. ). --The Roman republic was nowthreatened by a new danger from the sea. The Mediterranean was swarmingwith pirates. Roman conquests in Africa, Spain, and especially in Greeceand Asia Minor, had caused thousands of adventurous spirits from thosemaritime countries to flee to their ships, and seek a livelihood bypreying upon the commerce of the seas. The cruelty and extortions of theRoman governors had also driven large numbers to the same course of life. These corsairs had banded themselves into a sort of government, and heldpossession of numerous strongholds--four hundred, it is said--in Cilicia, Crete, and other countries. With a full thousand swift ships they scouredthe waters of the Mediterranean, so that no merchantman could spread hersails in safety. They formed a floating empire, which Michelet calls "awandering Carthage, which no one knew where to seize, and which floatedfrom Spain to Asia. "

These buccaneers, the Vikings of the South, made descents upon the coasteverywhere, plundered villas and temples, attacked and captured cities, and sold the inhabitants as slaves in the various slave-markets of theRoman world. They carried off merchants and magistrates from the AppianWay itself, and held them for ransom. At last the grain-ships of Sicilyand Africa were intercepted, and Rome was threatened with the alternativeof starvation or the paying of an enormous ransom. 

The Romans now bestirred themselves. Pompey was invested with dictatorialpower for three years over the Mediterranean and all its coasts for fiftymiles inland. An armament of five hundred ships and one hundred thousandmen was intrusted to his command. The great general acted with hischaracteristic energy. Within forty days he had swept the pirates from theWestern Mediterranean, and in forty-nine more hunted them from all thewaters east of Italy, captured their strongholds in Cilicia, and settledthe twenty thousand prisoners that fell into his hands in various coloniesin Asia Minor and Greece. Pompey's vigorous and successful conduct of thiscampaign against the pirates gained him great honor and reputation. 

POMPEY AND THE MITHRIDATIC WAR. --In the very year that Pompey suppressedthe pirates (66 B. C. ), he was called to undertake a more difficult task. Mithridates the Great, led on by his ambition and encouraged by thediscontent created throughout the Eastern provinces by Roman rapacity andmisrule, was again in arms against Rome. He had stirred almost all AsiaMinor to revolt. The management of the war was eventually intrusted toPompey, whose success in the war of the pirates had aroused unboundedenthusiasm for him. 

In a great battle in Lesser Armenia, Pompey almost annihilated the army ofMithridates. The king fled from the field, and, after seeking in vain fora refuge in Asia Minor, sought an asylum beyond the Caucasus Mountains, whose bleak barriers interposed their friendly shield between him and hispursuers. Desisting from the pursuit, Pompey turned south and conqueredSyria, Phoenicia, and Coele-Syria, which countries he erected into a Romanprovince. Still pushing southward, the conqueror entered Palestine, andafter a short siege captured Jerusalem (63 B. C. ). 

[Illustration: MITHRIDATES VI. (The Great) ]

While Pompey was thus engaged, Mithridates was straining every energy toraise an army among the Scythian tribes with which to carry out a mostdaring project. He proposed to cross Europe and fall upon Italy from thenorth. A revolt on the part of his son Pharnaces ruined all his plans andhopes; and the disappointed monarch, to avoid falling into the hands ofthe Romans, took his own life (63 B. C. ). His death removed one of the mostformidable enemies that Rome had ever encountered. Hamilcar, Hannibal, andMithridates were the three great names that the Romans always pronouncedwith respect and dread. 

POMPEY'S TRIUMPH. --After regulating the affairs of the different statesand provinces in the East, Pompey set out on his return to Rome, where heenjoyed such a triumph as never before had been seen since Rome had becomea city. The spoils of all the East were borne in the procession; 322princes walked as captives before the triumphal chariot of the conqueror;legends upon the banners proclaimed that he had conquered 21 kings, captured 1000 strongholds, 900 towns, and 800 ships, and subjugated morethan 12, 000, 000 people; and that he had put into the treasury more than$25, 000, 000, besides doubling the regular revenues of the state. Heboasted that three times he had triumphed, and each time for the conquestof a continent--first for Africa, then for Europe, and now for Asia, whichcompleted the conquest of the world. 

THE CONSPIRACY OF CATILINE. --While the legions were absent from Italy withPompey in the East, a most daring conspiracy against the government wasformed at Rome. Catiline, a ruined spendthrift, had gathered a largecompany of profligate young nobles, weighed down with debt and desperatelike himself, and had deliberately planned to murder the consuls and thechief men of the state, and to plunder and burn the capital. The officesof the new government were to be divided among the conspirators. Theydepended upon receiving aid from Africa and Spain, and proposed to inviteto their standard the gladiators in the various schools of Italy, as wellas slaves and criminals. The proscriptions of Sulla were to be renewed, and all debts were to be cancelled. 

Fortunately, all the plans of the conspirators were revealed to the consulCicero, the great orator. The Senate immediately clothed the consuls withdictatorial power with the usual formula, that they should take care thatthe republic received no harm. The gladiators were secured; the city wallswere manned; and at every point the capital and state were armed againstthe "invisible foe. " Then in the Senate-chamber, with Catiline himselfpresent, Cicero exposed the whole conspiracy in a famous philippic, knownas "The First Oration against Catiline. " The senators shrank from theconspirator, and left the seats about him empty. After a feeble effort toreply to Cicero, overwhelmed by a sense of his guilt, and the cries of"traitor" and "parricide" from the senators, Catiline fled from thechamber, and hurried out of the city to the camp of his followers, inEtruria. In a desperate battle fought near Pistoria (62 B. C. ), he wasslain with many of his followers. His head was borne as a trophy to Rome. Cicero was hailed as the "Saviour of his Country. "

CÆSAR, CRASSUS, AND POMPEY. --Although the conspiracy of Catiline hadfailed, it was very easy to foresee that the downfall of the Romanrepublic was near at hand. Indeed, from this time on only the nameremains. The basis of the institutions of the republic--the old Romanvirtue, integrity, patriotism, and faith in the gods--was gone, havingbeen swept away by the tide of luxury, selfishness, and immoralityproduced by the long series of foreign conquests and robberies in whichthe Roman people had been engaged. The days of liberty at Rome were over. From this time forward the government was really in the hands of ambitiousand popular leaders, or of corrupt combinations and "rings. " Events gatherabout a few great names, and the annals of the republic becomebiographical rather than historical. 

There were now in the state three men--Cæsar, Crassus, and Pompey--whowere destined to shape affairs. Caius Julius Cæsar was born in the year100 B. C. Although descended from an old patrician family, still hissympathies, and an early marriage to the daughter of Cinna, one of theadherents of Marius, led him early to identify himself with the Marian, ordemocratic party. In every way Cæsar courted public favor. He lavishedenormous sums upon public games and tables. His debts are said to haveamounted to 25, 000, 000 sesterces ($1, 250, 000). His popularity wasunbounded. A successful campaign in Spain had already made known tohimself, as well as to others, his genius as a commander. 

Crassus belonged to the senatorial, or aristocratic party. He owed hisinfluence to his enormous wealth, being one of the richest men in theRoman world. His property was estimated at 7100 talents (about$7, 500, 000). 

With Pompey and his achievements we are already familiar. His influencethroughout the Roman world was great; for, in settling and reorganizingthe many countries he subdued, he had always taken care to reconstructthem in his own interest, as well as in that of the republic. The offices, as we have seen, were filled with his friends and adherents (see p. 285). This patronage had secured for him incalculable authority in theprovinces. His veteran legionaries, too, were naturally devoted to thegeneral who had led them so often to victory. 

THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE. --What is known as the First Triumvirate rested onthe genius of Cæsar, the wealth of Crassus, and the achievements ofPompey. It was a coalition or private arrangement entered into by thesethree men for the purpose of securing to themselves the control of publicaffairs. Each pledged himself to work for the interests of the others. Cæsar was the manager of the "ring, " and through the aid of his colleaguessecured the consulship (59 B. C. ). 

CÆSAR'S CONQUESTS IN GAUL AND BRITAIN. --At the end of his consulship, theadministration of the provinces of Cisalpine and Transalpine Gaul wasassigned to Cæsar. Already he was revolving in his mind plans for seizingsupreme power. Beyond the Alps the Gallic and Germanic tribes were inrestless movement. He saw there a grand field for military exploits, whichshould gain for him such glory and prestige as, in other fields, had beenwon and were now enjoyed by Pompey. With this achieved, and with a veteranarmy devoted to his interests, he might hope easily to attain thatposition at the head of affairs towards which his ambition was urging him. 

In the spring of 58 B. C. Alarming intelligence from beyond the Alps causedCæsar to hasten from Rome into Transalpine Gaul. Now began a series ofeight brilliant campaigns directed against the various tribes of Gaul, Germany, and Britain. In his _Commentaries_ Cæsar himself has left usa faithful and graphic account of all the memorable marches, battles, andsieges that filled the years between 58 and 50 B. C. The year 55 B. C. Marked two great achievements. Early in the spring of this year Cæsarconstructed a bridge across the Rhine, and led his legions against theGermans in their native woods and swamps. In the autumn of the same yearhe crossed, by means of hastily constructed ships, the channel thatseparates the mainland from Britain, and after maintaining a foothold uponthat island for two weeks withdrew his legions into Gaul for the winter. The following season he made another invasion of Britain; but, after someencounters with the fierce barbarians, recrossed to the mainland withouthaving established any permanent garrisons in the island. Almost onehundred years passed away before the natives of Britain were againmolested by the Romans (see p. 311). 

In the year 52 B. C. , while Cæsar was absent in Italy, a general revoltoccurred among the Gallic tribes. It was a last desperate struggle for therecovery of their lost independence. Vercingetorix, chief of the Arverni, was the leader of the insurrection. For a time it seemed as though theRomans would be driven from the country. But Cæsar's despatch and militarygenius saved the province to the republic. 

In his campaigns in Gaul, Cæsar had subjugated three hundred tribes, captured eight hundred cities, and slain a million of barbarians--onethird of the entire population of the country. Another third he had takenprisoners. Great enthusiasm was aroused at Rome by these victories. "Letthe Alps now sink, " exclaimed Cicero: "the gods raised them to shelterItaly from the barbarians: they are now no longer needed. "

RESULTS OF THE GALLIC WARS. --The most important result of the Gallic warsof Cæsar was the Romanizing of Gaul. The country was opened to Romantraders and settlers, who carried with them the language, customs, andarts of Italy. 

Another result of the conquest was the checking of the migratory movementsof the German tribes, which gave Græco-Roman civilization time to becomethoroughly rooted, not only in Gaul, but also in Spain and other lands. 

RIVALRY BETWEEN CÆSAR AND POMPEY: CÆSAR CROSSES THE RUBICON. --While Cæsarwas in the midst of his Transalpine wars, Crassus was leading an armyagainst the Parthians, hoping to rival there the brilliant conquests ofCæsar in Gaul. But his army was almost annihilated by the Parthiancavalry, and he himself was slain (54 B. C. ). His captors, so it is said, poured molten gold down his throat, that he might be sated with the metalwhich he had so coveted during life. In the death of Crassus, Cæsar losthis stanchest friend, one who had never failed him, and whose wealth hadbeen freely used for his advancement. 

The world now belonged to Cæsar and Pompey. That the insatiable ambitionof these two rivals should sooner or later bring them into collision wasinevitable. Their alliance in the triumvirate was simply one of selfishconvenience, not of friendship. While Cæsar was carrying on his campaignsin Gaul, Pompey was at Rome watching jealously the growing reputation ofhis great rival. He strove, by a princely liberality, to win theaffections of the common people. On the Field of Mars he erected animmense theatre with seats for forty thousand spectators. He gavemagnificent games, and set public tables; and when the interest of thepeople in the sports of the Circus flagged, he entertained them withgladiatorial combats. In a similar manner Cæsar strengthened himself withthe people for the struggle which he plainly foresaw. He sought in everyway to ingratiate himself with the Gauls; increased the pay of hissoldiers; conferred the privileges of Roman citizenship upon theinhabitants of different cities in his province; and sent to Rome enormoussums of gold to be expended in the erection of temples, theatres, andother public structures, and in the celebration of games and shows thatshould rival in magnificence those given by Pompey. 

The terrible condition of affairs at the capital favored the ambition ofPompey. So selfish and corrupt were the members of the Senate, so dead toall virtue and to every sentiment of patriotism were the people, that evensuch patriots as Cato and Cicero saw no hope for the maintenance of therepublic. The former favored the appointment of Pompey as sole consul forone year, which was about the same thing as making him dictator. "It isbetter, " said Cato, "to choose a master than to wait for the tyrant whomanarchy will impose upon us. " The "tyrant" in his and everybody's mind wasCæsar. 

Pompey now broke with Cæsar, and attached himself again to the oldaristocratic party, which he had deserted for the alliance and promises ofthe triumvirate. The death at this time of his wife Julia, the daughter ofCæsar, severed the bonds of relationship at the same moment that those ofostensible friendship were broken. 

The Senate, hostile to Cæsar, now issued a decree that he should resignhis office, and disband his Gallic legions by a stated day. The crisis hadnow come. Cæsar ordered his legions to hasten from Gaul into Italy. Without waiting for their arrival, at the head of a small body of veteransthat he had with him at Ravenna, he crossed the Rubicon, a little streamthat marked the boundary of his province. This was a declaration of war. As he plunged into the river, he exclaimed, "The die is cast. "

THE CIVIL WAR OF CÆSAR AND POMPEY (49-48 B. C. ). --The bold movement ofCæsar produced great consternation at Rome. Realizing the danger of delay, Cæsar, without waiting for the Gallic legions to join him, marchedsouthward. One city after another threw open its gates to him; legionafter legion went over to his standard. Pompey and the Senate hastenedfrom Rome to Brundisium, and thence, with about twenty-five thousand men, fled across the Adriatic into Greece. Within sixty days Cæsar made himselfundisputed master of all Italy. 

Pompey and Cæsar now controlled the Roman world. It was large, but notlarge enough for both these ambitious men. As to which was likely tobecome sole master, it were difficult for one watching events at that timeto foresee. Cæsar held Italy, Illyricum, and Gaul, with the resources ofhis own genius and the idolatrous attachment of his soldiers; Pompeycontrolled Spain, Africa, Sicily, Sardinia, Greece, and the provinces ofAsia, with the prestige of his great name and the indefinite resources ofthe East. 

Cæsar's first care was to pacify Italy. His moderation and prudence wonall classes to his side. Many had looked to see the terrible scenes of thedays of Marius and Sulla re-enacted. Cæsar, however, soon gave assurancethat life and property should be held sacred. He needed money; but, toavoid laying a tax upon the people, he asked for the treasure kept beneaththe Capitol. Legend declared that this gold was the actual ransom-moneywhich Brennus had demanded of the Romans, and which Camillus had saved byhis timely appearance (see p. 241). It was esteemed sacred, and was neverto be used save in case of another Gallic invasion. When Cæsar attemptedto get possession of the treasure, the tribune Metellus prevented him; butCæsar impatiently brushed him aside, saying, "The fear of a Gallicinvasion is over: I have subdued the Gauls. "

With order restored in Italy, Cæsar's next movement was to gain control ofthe wheat-fields of Sicily, Sardinia, and Africa. A single legion broughtover Sardinia without resistance to the side of Cæsar. Cato, thelieutenant of Pompey, fled from before Curio out of Sicily. In Africa, however, the lieutenant of Cæsar sustained a severe defeat, and thePompeians held their ground there until the close of the war. Cæsar, meanwhile, had subjugated Spain. In forty days the entire peninsula wasbrought under his authority. Massilia had ventured to close her gatesagainst the conqueror; but a brief siege forced the city to capitulate. Cæsar was now free to turn his forces against Pompey in the East. 

THE BATTLE OF PHARSALUS (48 B. C. ). --From Brundisium Cæsar embarked hislegions for Epirus. The armies of the rivals met upon the plains ofPharsalia, in Thessaly. The adherents of Pompey were so confident of aneasy victory that they were already disputing about the offices at Rome, and were renting the most eligible houses fronting the public squares ofthe capital. The battle was at length joined. It proved Pompey's Waterloo. His army was cut to pieces. He himself fled from the field, and escaped toEgypt. Just as he was landing there, he was assassinated. 

The head of the great general was severed from his body; and when Cæsar, who was pressing after Pompey in hot pursuit, landed in Egypt, the bloodytrophy was brought to him. He turned from the sight with generous tears. It was no longer the head of his rival, but of his old associate and son-in-law. He ordered the assassins to be executed, and directed that fittingobsequies should be performed over the body. 

CLOSE OF THE CIVIL WAR. --Cæsar was detained at Alexandria nine months insettling a dispute respecting the throne of Egypt. After a severe contesthe overthrew the reigning Ptolemy, and secured the kingdom to thecelebrated Cleopatra and a younger brother. Intelligence was now broughtfrom Asia Minor that Pharnaces, son of Mithridates the Great, was incitinga revolt among the peoples of that region. Cæsar met the Pontic king atZela, defeated him, and in five days put an end to the war. His laconicmessage to the Senate, announcing his victory, is famous. It ran thus:_Veni, vidi, vici_, --"I came, I saw, I conquered. "

Cæsar now hurried back to Italy, and thence proceeded to Africa, which thefriends of the old republic had made their last chief rallying-place. Atthe great battle of Thapsus (46 B. C. ) they were crushed. Fifty thousandlay dead upon the field. Cato, who had been the very life and soul of thearmy, refusing to outlive the republic, took his own life. 

CÆSAR'S TRIUMPH. --Cæsar was now virtually lord of the Roman world. Although he refrained from assuming the title of king, no Eastern monarchwas ever possessed of more absolute power, or surrounded by more abjectflatterers and sycophants. He was invested with all the offices anddignities of the state. The Senate made him perpetual dictator, andconferred upon him the powers of censor, consul, and tribune, with thetitles of Pontifex Maximus and Imperator (whence Emperor). "He was to sitin a golden chair in the Senate-house, his image was to be borne in theprocession of the gods, and the seventh month of the year was changed inhis honor from Quintilis to Julius [whence our July]. "

His triumph celebrating his many victories far eclipsed in magnificenceanything that Rome had before witnessed. In the procession were ledcaptive princes from all parts of the world. Beneath his standards marchedsoldiers gathered out of almost every country beneath the heavens. Seventy-five million dollars of treasure were displayed. Splendid gamesand tables attested the liberality of the conqueror. Sixty thousandcouches were set for the multitudes. The shows of the theatre and thecombats of the arena followed one another in an endless round. "Above thecombats of the amphitheatre floated for the first time the awning of silk, the immense velarium of a thousand colors, woven from the rarest andrichest products of the East, to protect the people from the sun"(Gibbon). 

CÆSAR AS A STATESMAN. --Cæsar was great as a general, yet greater, ifpossible, as a statesman. The measures which he instituted evince profoundpolitical sagacity and surprising breadth of view. He sought to reversethe jealous and narrow policy of Rome in the past, and to this end rebuiltboth Carthage and Corinth, and founded numerous colonies in all thedifferent provinces, in which he settled about one hundred thousand of thepoorer citizens of the capital. Upon some of the provincials he conferredfull Roman citizenship, and upon others Latin rights (see p. 246, note), and thus strove to blend the varied peoples and races within theboundaries of the empire in a real nationality, with community ofinterests and sympathies. He reformed the calendar so as to bring thefestivals once more in their proper seasons, and provided against furtherconfusion by making the year consist of 365 days, with an added day forevery fourth or leap year. 

Besides these achievements, Cæsar projected many vast undertakings, whichthe abrupt termination of his life prevented his carrying into execution. Among these was his projected conquest of the Parthians and the Germans. He proposed, in revenge for the defeat and death of his friend Crassus, tobreak to pieces the Parthian empire; then, sweeping with an army aroundabove the Euxine, to destroy the dreaded hordes of Scythia; and then, falling upon the German tribes in the rear, to crush their power forever, and thus relieve the Roman empire of their constant threat. He was aboutto set out on the expedition against the Parthians, when he was struckdown by assassins. 

THE DEATH OF CÆSAR. --Cæsar had his bitter personal enemies, who neverceased to plot his downfall. There were, too, sincere lovers of the oldrepublic, who longed to see restored the liberty which the conqueror hadoverthrown. The impression began to prevail that Cæsar was aiming to makehimself king. A crown was several times offered him in public by MarkAntony; but, seeing the manifest displeasure of the people, he each timepushed it aside. Yet there is no doubt that secretly he desired it. It wasreported that he proposed to rebuild the walls of Troy, whence the Romanrace had sprung, and make that ancient capital the seat of the new Romanempire. Others professed to believe that the arts and charms of theEgyptian Cleopatra, who had borne him a son at Rome, would entice him tomake Alexandria the centre of the proposed kingdom. So many, out of lovefor Rome and the old republic, were led to enter into a conspiracy againstthe life of Cæsar with those who sought to rid themselves of the dictatorfor other and personal reasons. 

The Ides (the 15th day) of March, 44 B. C. , upon which day the Senateconvened, witnessed the assassination. Seventy or eighty conspirators, headed by Cassius and Brutus, both of whom had received special favorsfrom the hands of Cæsar, were concerned in the plot. The soothsayers musthave had some knowledge of the plans of the conspirators, for they hadwarned Cæsar to "beware of the Ides of March. " On his way to the Senate-meeting that day, a paper warning him of his danger was thrust into hishand; but, not suspecting its urgent nature, he did not open it. As heentered the assembly chamber he observed the astrologer Spurinna, andremarked carelessly to him, referring to his prediction, "The Ides ofMarch have come. " "Yes, " replied Spurinna, "but not gone. "

No sooner had Cæsar taken his seat than the conspirators crowded about himas if to present a petition. Upon a signal from one of their number theirdaggers were drawn. For a moment Cæsar defended himself; but seeingBrutus, upon whom he had lavished gifts and favors, among theconspirators, he exclaimed reproachfully, _Et tu, Brute!_--"Thou, too, Brutus!" drew his mantle over his face, and received unresistingly theirfurther thrusts. Pierced with twenty-three wounds, he sank dead at thefoot of Pompey's statue. 

FUNERAL ORATION by MARK ANTONY. --The conspirators, or "liberators, " asthey called themselves, had thought that the Senate would confirm, and thepeople applaud, their act. But both people and senators, struck withconsternation, were silent. Men's faces grew pale as they recalled theproscriptions of Sulla, and saw in the assassination of Cæsar the firstact in a similar reign of terror. As the conspirators issued from theassembly hall, and entered the Forum, holding aloft their bloody daggers, instead of the expected acclamations they were met by an ominous silence. The liberators hastened for safety to the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, going thither ostensibly for the purpose of giving thanks for the death ofthe tyrant. 

Upon the day set for the funeral ceremonies, Mark Antony, the trustedfriend and secretary of Cæsar, mounted the rostrum in the Forum to deliverthe usual funeral oration. He recounted the great deeds of Cæsar, theglory he had conferred upon the Roman name, dwelt upon his liberality andhis munificent bequests to the people--even to some who were now hismurderers; and, when he had wrought the feelings of the multitude to thehighest tension, he raised the robe of Cæsar, and showed the rents made bythe daggers of the assassins. Cæsar had always been beloved by the peopleand idolized by his soldiers. They were now driven almost to frenzy withgrief and indignation. Seizing weapons and torches, they rushed throughthe streets, vowing vengeance upon the conspirators. The liberators, however, escaped from the fury of the mob, and fled from Rome, Brutus andCassius seeking refuge in Greece. 

[Illustration: MARK ANTONY. ]

THE SECOND TRIUMVIRATE. --Antony had gained possession of the will andpapers of Cæsar, and now, under color of carrying out the testament of thedictator, according to a decree of the Senate, entered upon a course ofhigh-handed usurpation. He was aided in his designs by Lepidus, one ofCæsar's old lieutenants. Very soon he was exercising all the powers of areal dictator. "The tyrant is dead, " said Cicero, "but the tyranny stilllives. " This was a bitter commentary upon the words of Brutus, who, as hedrew his dagger from the body of Cæsar, turned to Cicero, and exclaimed, "Rejoice, O Father of your Country, for Rome is free. " Rome could not befree, the republic could not be reestablished because the old love forvirtue and liberty had died out from among the people--had beenoverwhelmed by the rising tide of vice, corruption, sensuality, andirreligion that had set in upon the capital. 

[Illustration: JULIUS CÆSAR. (From a Bust in the Museum of the Louvre. )]

To what length Antony would have gone in his career of usurpation it isdifficult to say, had he not been opposed at this point by Caius Octavius, the grand-nephew of Julius Cæsar, and the one whom he had named in hiswill as his heir and successor. Upon the Senate declaring in favor ofOctavius, civil war immediately broke out between him and Antony andLepidus. After several indecisive battles between the forces of the rivalcompetitors, Octavius proposed to Antony and Lepidus a reconciliation. Thethree met on a small island in the Rhenus, a little stream in NorthernItaly, and there formed a league known as the Second Triumvirate (43B. C. ). 

The plans of the triumvirs were infamous. They first divided the worldamong themselves: Octavius was to have the government of the West; Antony, that of the East; while to Lepidus fell the control of Africa. A generalproscription, such as had marked the coming to power of Sulla (see p. 283), was then resolved upon. It was agreed that each should give up tothe assassin such friends of his as had incurred the ill will of either ofthe other triumvirs. Under this arrangement Octavius gave up his friendCicero, --who had incurred the hatred of Antony by opposing his schemes, --and allowed his name to be put at the head of the list of the proscribed. 

The friends of the orator urged him to flee the country. "Let me die, "said he, "in my fatherland, which I have so often saved!" His attendantswere hurrying him, half unwilling, towards the coast, when his pursuerscame up and despatched him in the litter in which he was being carried. His head was taken to Rome, and set up in front of the rostrum, "fromwhich he had so often addressed the people with his eloquent appeals forliberty. " It is told that Fulvia, the wife of Antony, ran her gold bodkinthrough the tongue, in revenge for the bitter philippics it had utteredagainst her husband. The right hand of the victim--the hand that hadpenned the eloquent orations--was nailed to the rostrum. 

Cicero was but one victim among many hundreds. All the dreadful scenes ofthe days of Sulla were re-enacted. Three hundred senators and two thousandknights were murdered. The estates of the wealthy were confiscated, andconferred by the triumvirs upon their friends and favorites. 

LAST STRUGGLE OF THE REPUBLIC AT PHILIPPI (42 B. C. ). --The friends of theold republic, and the enemies of the triumvirs, were meanwhile rallying inthe East. Brutus and Cassius were the animating spirits. The Asiaticprovinces were plundered to raise money for the soldiers of theliberators. Octavius and Antony, as soon as they had disposed of theirenemies in Italy, crossed the Adriatic into Greece, to disperse the forcesof the republicans there. The liberators, advancing to meet them, passedover the Hellespont into Thrace. 

Tradition tells how one night a spectre appeared to Brutus and seemed tosay, "I am thy evil genius; we will meet again at Philippi. " At Philippi, in Thrace, the hostile armies met (42 B. C. ). In two successive engagementsthe new levies of the liberators were cut to pieces, and both Brutus andCassius, believing the cause of the republic forever lost, committedsuicide. It was, indeed, the last effort of the republic. The history ofthe events that lie between the action at Philippi and the establishmentof the empire is simply a record of the struggles among the triumvirs forthe possession of the prize of supreme power. After variousredistributions of provinces, Lepidus was at length expelled from thetriumvirate, and then again the Roman world, as in the times of Cæsar andPompey, was in the hands of two masters--Antony in the East, and Octaviusin the West. 

ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA. --After the battle of Philippi, Antony went into Asiafor the purpose of settling the affairs of the provinces and vassal statesthere. He summoned Cleopatra, the fair queen of Egypt, to meet him atTarsus, in Cilicia, there to give account to him for the aid she hadrendered the liberators. She obeyed the summons, relying upon the power ofher charms to appease the anger of the triumvir. She ascended the Cydnusin a gilded barge, with oars of silver, and sails of purple silk. Beneathawnings wrought of the richest manufactures of the East, the beautifulqueen, attired to personate Venus, reclined amidst lovely attendantsdressed to represent cupids and nereids. Antony was completely fascinated, as had been the great Cæsar before him, by the dazzling beauty of the"Serpent of the Nile. " Enslaved by her enchantments, and charmed by herbrilliant wit, in the pleasure of her company he forgot all else--ambitionand honor and country. 

Once, indeed, Antony did rouse himself and break away from his enslavementto lead the Roman legions across the Euphrates against the Parthians. Butthe storms of approaching winter, and the incessant attacks of theParthian cavalry, at length forced him to make a hurried and disastrousretreat. He hastened back to Egypt, and sought to forget his shame anddisappointment amidst the revels of the Egyptian court. 

THE BATTLE OF ACTIUM (31 B. C. ). --Affairs could not long continue in theirpresent course. Antony had put away his faithful wife Octavia for thebeautiful Cleopatra. It was whispered at Rome, and not without truth, thathe proposed to make Alexandria the capital of the Roman world, andannounce Cæsarion, son of Julius Cæsar and Cleopatra, as heir of theempire. All Rome was stirred. It was evident that a conflict was at handin which the question for decision would be whether the West should rulethe East, or the East rule the West. All eyes were instinctively turned toOctavius as the defender of Italy, and the supporter of the sovereignty ofthe Eternal City. Both parties made the most gigantic preparations. Octavius met the combined fleets of Antony and Cleopatra just off thepromontory of Actium, on the Grecian coast. While the issue of the battlethat there took place was yet undecided, Cleopatra turned her galley inflight. The Egyptian ships, to the number of fifty, followed her example. Antony, as soon as he perceived the withdrawal of Cleopatra, forgot allelse, and followed in her track with a swift galley. Overtaking thefleeing queen, the infatuated man was received aboard her vessel, andbecame her partner in the disgraceful flight. 

The abandoned fleet and army surrendered to Octavius. The conqueror wasnow sole master of the civilized world. From this decisive battle (31B. C. ) are usually dated the end of the republic and the beginning of theempire. Some, however, make the establishment of the empire date from theyear 27 B. C. , as it was not until then that Octavius was formally investedwith imperial powers. 

DEATHS OF ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA. --Octavius pursued Antony to Egypt, wherethe latter, deserted by his army, and informed by a messenger from thefalse queen that she was dead, committed suicide. Cleopatra then sought toenslave Octavius with her charms; but, failing in this, and becomingconvinced that he proposed to take her to Rome that she might there gracehis triumph, she took her own life, being in the thirty-eighth year of herage. Tradition says that she effected her purpose by applying an asp toher arm. But it is really unknown in what way she killed herself. 

CHAPTER XXIX. 

THE ROMAN EMPIRE. (From 31 B. C. To A. D. 180. )

REIGN OF AUGUSTUS CÆSAR (31 B. C. To A. D. 14). --The hundred years of strifewhich ended with the battle of Actium left the Roman republic, exhaustedand helpless, in the hands of one wise enough and strong enough to remouldits crumbling fragments in such a manner that the state, which seemedready to fall to pieces, might prolong its existence for another fivehundred years. It was a great work thus to create anew, as it were, out ofanarchy and chaos, a political fabric that should exhibit such elements ofperpetuity and strength. "The establishment of the Roman empire, " saysMerivale, "was, after all, the greatest political work that any humanbeing ever wrought. The achievements of Alexander, of Cæsar, ofCharlemagne, of Napoleon, are not to be compared with it for a moment. "

The government which Octavius established was a monarchy in fact, but arepublic in form. Mindful of the fate of Julius Cæsar, who fell because hegave the lovers of the republic reason to think that he coveted the titleof king, Octavius carefully veiled his really absolute sovereignty underthe forms of the old republican state. The Senate still existed; but socompletely subjected were its members to the influence of the conquerorthat the only function it really exercised was the conferring of honorsand titles and abject flatteries upon its master. All the republicanofficials remained; but Octavius absorbed and exercised their chief powersand functions. He had the powers of consul, tribune, censor, and PontifexMaximus. All the republican magistrates--the consuls, the tribunes, theprætors--were elected as usual; but they were simply the nominees andcreatures of the emperor. They were the effigies and figure-heads todelude the people into believing that the republic still existed. Neverdid a people seem more content with the shadow after the loss of thesubstance. 

[Illustration: AUGUSTUS. ]

The Senate, acting under the inspiration of Octavius, withheld from himthe title of king, which ever since the expulsion of the Tarquins, fivecenturies before this time, had been intolerable to the people; but theyconferred upon him the titles of Imperator and Augustus, the latter havingbeen hitherto sacred to the gods. The sixth month of the Roman year wascalled Augustus (whence our August) in his honor, an act in imitation ofthat by which the preceding month had been given the name of Julius inhonor of Julius Cæsar. 

The domains over which Augustus held sway were imperial in magnitude. Theystretched from the Atlantic to the Euphrates, and upon the north werehemmed by the forests of Germany and the bleak steppes of Scythia, andwere bordered on the south by the sands of the African desert and thedreary wastes of Arabia, which seemed the boundaries set by nature todominion in those directions. Within these limits were crowded more than100, 000, 000 people, embracing every conceivable condition and variety inrace and culture, from the rough barbarians of Gaul to the refinedvoluptuary of the East. 

Octavius was the first to moderate the ambition of the Romans, and tocouncil them not to attempt to conquer any more of the world, but ratherto devote their energies to the work of consolidating the domains alreadyacquired. He saw the dangers that would attend any further extension ofthe boundaries of the state. 

The reign of Augustus lasted forty-four years, from 31 B. C. To A. D. 14. Itembraced the most splendid period of the annals of Rome. Under thepatronage of the emperor, and that of his favorite minister Mæcenas, poetsand writers flourished and made this the "golden age" of Latin literature. During this reign Virgil composed his immortal epic of the _Æneid_, and Horace his famous odes; while Livy wrote his inimitable history, andOvid his _Metamorphoses_. Many who lamented the fall of the republicsought solace in the pursuit of letters; and in this they were encouragedby Augustus, as it gave occupation to many restless spirits that wouldotherwise have been engaged in political intrigues against his government. 

Augustus was also a munificent patron of architecture and art. He adornedthe capital with many splendid structures. Said he proudly, "I found Romea city of brick; I left it a city of marble. " The population of the cityat this time was probably about one million. 

Although the government of Augustus was disturbed by some troubles uponthe frontiers, still never before, perhaps, did the world enjoy so long aperiod of general rest from the preparation and turmoil of war. Threetimes during this auspicious reign the gates of the Temple of Janus atRome, which were open in time of war and closed in time of peace, wereshut. Only twice before during the entire history of the city had theybeen closed, so constantly had the Roman people been engaged in war. Itwas in the midst of this happy reign, when profound peace prevailedthroughout the civilized world, that Christ was born in Bethlehem ofJudea. The event was unheralded at Rome; yet it was filled with profoundsignificance, not only for the Roman empire, but for the world. 

The latter years of the life of Augustus were clouded both by domesticbereavement and national disaster. His beloved nephew Marcellus, and histwo grandsons Caius and Lucius, whom he purposed making his heirs, wereall removed by death; and then, far away in the German forest, his generalVarus, who had attempted to rule the freedom-loving Teutons as he hadgoverned the abject Asiatics of the Eastern provinces, was surprised bythe barbarians, led by their brave chief Hermanu, --Arminius, as called bythe Romans, --and his army destroyed almost to a man (A. D. 9). Twentythousand of the legionaries lay dead and unburied in the tangled woods andmorasses of Germany. 

The victory of Arminius over the Roman legions was an event of thegreatest significance in the history of European civilization. Germany wasalmost overrun by the Roman army. The Teutonic tribes were on the point ofbeing completely subjugated and Romanized, as had been the Celts of Gaulbefore them. Had this occurred, the entire history of Europe would havebeen changed; for the Germanic element is the one that has given shape andcolor to the important events of the last fifteen hundred years. Thosebarbarians, too, were our ancestors. Had Rome succeeded in exterminatingor enslaving them, Britain, as Creasy says, would never have received thename of England, and the great English nation would never have had anexistence. 

In the year A. D. 14, Augustus died, having reached the seventy-sixth yearof his age. It was believed that his soul ascended visibly amidst theflames of the funeral pyre. By decree of the Senate divine worship wasaccorded to him, and temples were erected in his honor. 

One of the most important of the acts of Augustus, in its influence uponfollowing events, was the formation of the Prætorian Guard, which wasdesigned for a sort of body-guard to the emperor. In the succeeding reignthis body of soldiers, about ten thousand in number, was given a permanentcamp alongside the city walls. It soon became a formidable power in thestate, and made and unmade emperors at will. 

REIGN OF TIBERIUS (A. D. 14-37). --Tiberius succeeded to an unlimitedsovereignty. The Senate conferred upon him all the titles that had beenworn by Augustus. One of the first acts of Tiberius gave the last blow tothe ancient republican institutions. He took away from the popularassembly the privilege of electing the consuls and prætors, and bestowedthe same upon the Senate, which, however, must elect from candidatespresented by the emperor. As the Senate was the creation of the emperor, who as censor made up the list of its members, he was now of course thesource and fountain of all patronage. During the first years of his reign, Tiberius used his practically unrestrained authority with moderation andjustice, but soon yielding to the promptings of a naturally cruel, suspicious, and jealous nature, he entered upon a course of the most high-handed tyranny. He enforced oppressively an old law, known as the _lawof majestas_, which made it a capital offence for any one to speak acareless word, or even to entertain an unfriendly thought, respecting theemperor. "It was dangerous to speak, and equally dangerous to keepsilent, " says Leighton, "for silence even might be construed intodiscontent. " Rewards were offered to informers, and hence sprang up aclass of persons called "delators, " who acted as spies upon society. Oftenfalse charges were made, to gratify personal enmity; and many, especiallyof the wealthy class, were accused and put to death that their propertymight be confiscated. 

Tiberius appointed, as his chief minister and as commander of theprætorians, one Sejanus, a man of the lowest and most corrupt life. Thisofficer actually persuaded Tiberius to retire to the little island ofCapreæ, in the Bay of Naples, and leave to him the management of affairsat Rome. The emperor built several villas in different parts of thebeautiful islet, and, having gathered a band of congenial companions, passed in this pleasant retreat the later years of his reign. Both Tacitusthe historian and Suetonius the biographer tell many stories of thescandalous profligacy of the emperor's life on the island; but thesetales, it should be added, are discredited by some. 

Meanwhile, Sejanus was ruling at Rome very much according to his own will. No man's life was safe. He even grew so bold as to plan the assassinationof the emperor himself. His designs, however, became known to Tiberius;and the infamous and disloyal minister was arrested and put to death. 

After the execution of his minister, Tiberius ruled more despotically thanever before. Multitudes sought refuge from his tyranny in suicide. Deathat last relieved the world of the monster. His end was probably hastenedby his attendants, who are believed to have smothered him in his bed, ashe lay dying. 

It was in the midst of the reign of Tiberius that, in a remote province ofthe Roman empire, the Saviour was crucified. Animated by an unparalleledmissionary spirit, His followers traversed the length and breadth of theempire, preaching everywhere the "glad tidings. " Men's loss of faith inthe gods of the old mythologies, the softening and liberalizing influenceof Greek culture, the unification of the whole civilized world under asingle government, the widespread suffering and the inexpressibleweariness of the oppressed and servile classes, --all these things hadprepared the soil for the seed of the new doctrines. In less than threecenturies the Pagan empire had become Christian not only in name, but alsovery largely in fact. This conversion of Rome is one of the most importantevents in all history. A new element is here introduced into civilization, an element which we shall find giving color and character to very much ofthe story of the eighteen centuries that we have yet to study. 

REIGN OF CALIGULA (A. D. 37-41). --Caius Cæsar, better known as Caligula, was only twenty-five years of age when the death of Tiberius called him tothe throne. His career was very similar to that of Tiberius. After a fewmonths spent in arduous application to the affairs of the empire, duringwhich time his many acts of kindness and piety won for him the affectionsof all classes, the mind of the young emperor became unsettled, and hebegan to indulge in all sorts of insanities. The cruel sports of theamphitheatre possessed for him a strange fascination. When animals failed, he ordered spectators to be seized indiscriminately, and thrown to thebeasts. He entered the lists himself, and fought as a gladiator upon thearena. In a sanguinary mood, he wished that "the people of Rome had butone neck. " As an insult to his nobles, he gave out that he proposed tomake his favorite horse, Incitatus, consul. He declared himself divine, and removing the heads of Jupiter's statues, put on his own. 

After four years the insane career of Caligula was brought to a close bysome of the officers of the prætorian guard, whom he had wantonlyinsulted. 

REIGN OF CLAUDIUS (A. D. 4l-54). --The reign of Claudius, Caligula'ssuccessor, was signalized by the conquest of Britain. Nearly a century hadnow passed since the invasion of the island by Julius Cæsar, who, as hasbeen seen (see p. 292), simply made a reconnoissance of the island andthen withdrew. Claudius conquered all the southern portion of the island, and founded many colonies, which in time became important centres of Romantrade and culture. The leader of the Britons was Caractacus. He was takencaptive and carried to Rome. Gazing in astonishment upon the magnificenceof the imperial city, he exclaimed, "How can a people possessed of suchsplendor at home envy Caractacus his humble cottage in Britain?"

Claudius distinguished his reign by the execution of many important works. At the mouth of the Tiber he constructed a magnificent harbor, called thePortus Romanus. The Claudian Aqueduct, which he completed, was astupendous work, bringing water to the city from a distance of forty-fivemiles. 

The delight of the people in gladiatorial shows had at this time becomealmost an insane frenzy. Claudius determined to give an entertainment thatshould render insignificant all similar efforts. Upon a large lake, whosesloping bank afforded seats for the vast multitudes of spectators, heexhibited a naval battle, in which two opposing fleets, bearing nineteenthousand gladiators, fought as though in real battle, till the water wasfilled with thousands of bodies, and covered with the fragments of thebroken ships. 

Throughout his life Claudius was ruled by intriguing favorites andunworthy wives. For his fourth wife Claudius married the "wickedAgrippina, " who secured his death by means of a dish of poisonedmushrooms, in order to make place for the succession of her son Nero. 

REIGN OF NERO (A. D. 54-68). --Nero was fortunate in having for hispreceptor the great philosopher and moralist Seneca; but never was teachermore unfortunate in his pupil. For five years Nero ruled with moderationand equity. He then broke away from the guidance of his tutor Seneca, andentered upon a career filled with crimes of almost incredible enormity. The dagger and poison--the latter a means of murder the use of which atRome had become a "fine art, " and was in the hands of those who made it aregular profession--were employed almost unceasingly, to remove personsthat had incurred his hatred, or who possessed wealth that he coveted. 

It was in the tenth year of his reign that the so-called Great Fire laidmore than half of Rome in ashes. It was rumored that Nero had ordered theconflagration to be lighted, and that from the roof of his palace he hadenjoyed the spectacle, and amused himself by singing a poem which he hadwritten, entitled the "Sack of Troy. "

Nero did everything in his power to discredit the rumor. To turn attentionfrom himself, he accused the Christians of having conspired to destroy thecity, in order to help out their prophecies. The doctrine which was taughtby some of the new sect respecting the second coming of Christ, and thedestruction of the world by fire, lent color to the charge. Thepersecution that followed was one of the most cruel recorded in thehistory of the Church. Many victims were covered with pitch and burned atnight, to serve as torches in the imperial gardens. Tradition preservesthe names of the Apostles Peter and Paul as victims of this Neronianpersecution. 

As to Rome, the conflagration was a blessing in disguise. The city rosefrom its ashes as quickly as Athens from her ruins at the close of thePersian wars. The new buildings were made fireproof; and the narrow, crooked streets reappeared as broad and beautiful avenues. A considerableportion of the burnt region was appropriated by Nero for the buildings andgrounds of an immense palace, called the "Golden House. " It covered somuch space that the people "maliciously hinted" that Nero had fired theold city, in order to make room for it. 

The emperor secured money for his enormous expenditures by new extortions, murders, and confiscations. No one of wealth knew but that his turn mightcome next. A conspiracy was formed among the nobles to relieve the stateof the monster. The plot was discovered, and again "the city was filledwith funerals. " Lucan the poet, and Seneca, the old preceptor of Nero, both fell victims to the tyrant's rage. 

Nero now made a tour through the East, and there plunged deeper and deeperinto every shame, sensuality, and crime. The tyranny and the disgrace wereno longer endurable. Almost at the same moment the legions in several ofthe provinces revolted. The Senate decreed that Nero was a public enemy, and condemned him to a disgraceful death by scourging, to avoid which heinstructed a slave how to give him a fatal thrust. His last words were, "What a loss my death will be to art!"

Nero was the sixth and last of the Julian line. The family of the GreatCæsar was now extinct; but the name remained, and was adopted by all thesucceeding emperors. 

GALBA, OTHO, AND VITELLIUS (A. D. 68-69). --These three names are usuallygrouped together, as their reigns were all short and uneventful. Thesuccession, upon the death of Nero and the extinction in him of the Julianline, was in dispute, and the legions in different quarters supported theclaims of their favorite leaders. One after another the three aspirantsnamed were killed in bloody struggles for the imperial purple. The last, Vitellius, was hurled from the throne by the soldiers of FlaviusVespasian, the old and beloved commander of the legions in Palestine, which were at this time engaged in a war with the Jews. 

REIGN OF VESPASIAN (A. D. 69-79). --The accession of Flavius Vespasian marksthe beginning of a period, embracing three reigns, known as the _FlavianAge_ (A. D. 69-96). Vespasian's reign was signalized both by importantmilitary achievements abroad and by stupendous public works undertaken atRome. 

[Illustration: COIN OF VESPASIAN. ]

After one of the most harassing sieges recorded in history, Jerusalem wastaken by Titus, son of Vespasian. The Temple was destroyed, and more thana million of Jews that were crowded in the city are believed to haveperished. Great multitudes suffered death by crucifixion. The miserableremnants of the nation were scattered everywhere over the world. Josephus, the great historian, accompanied the conqueror to Rome. In imitation ofNebuchadnezzar, Titus robbed the Temple of its sacred utensils, and borethem away as trophies. Upon the triumphal arch at Rome that bears his namemay be seen at the present day the sculptured representation of the goldencandlestick, which was one of the memorials of the war. 

In the opposite corner of the empire a dangerous revolt of the Gauls wassuppressed, and in the island of Britain the Roman commander Agricolasubdued or crowded back the native tribes until he had extended thefrontiers of the empire into what is now Scotland. Then, as a protectionagainst the incursions of the Caledonians, the ancestors of the ScottishHighlanders, he constructed a line of fortresses from the Frith of Forthto the Frith of Clyde. 

Vespasian rebuilt the Capitoline temple, which had been burned during thestruggle between his soldiers and the adherents of Vitellius; heconstructed a new forum which bore his own name; and also began theerection of the celebrated Flavian amphitheatre, which was completed byhis successor. After a most prosperous reign of ten years, Vespasian diedA. D. 79, the first emperor after Augustus that did not meet with a violentdeath. 

[Illustration: TRIUMPHAL PROCESSION FROM THE ARCH OF TITUS: Showing theSeven-branched Candlestick and other Trophies from the Temple atJerusalem. ]

At the last moment he requested his attendants to raise him upon his feetthat he might "die standing, " as befitted a Roman emperor. 

REIGN OF TITUS (A. D. 79-81). --In a short reign of two years Titus won thetitle, the "Delight of Mankind. " He was unwearied in acts of benevolenceand in bestowal of favors. Having let a day slip by without some act ofkindness performed, he is said to have exclaimed reproachfully, "I havelost a day. "

Titus completed and dedicated the great Flavian amphitheatre begun by hisfather, Vespasian. This vast structure, which accommodated more thaneighty thousand spectators, is better known as the Colosseum--a name givenit either because of its gigantic proportions, or on account of a colossalstatue of Nero which happened to stand near it. 

[Illustration: STREET IN POMPEII. (A Reconstruction. )]

The reign of Titus, though so short, was signalized by two greatdisasters. The first was a conflagration at Rome, which was almost ascalamitous as the Great Fire in the reign of Nero. The second was thedestruction, by an eruption of Vesuvius, of the Campanian cities ofPompeii and Herculaneum. The cities were buried beneath showers ofcinders, ashes, and streams of volcanic mud. Pliny the elder, the greatnaturalist, venturing too near the mountain to investigate the phenomenon, lost his life. [Footnote: In the year 1713, sixteen centuries after thedestruction of the cities, the ruins were discovered by some personsengaged in digging a well, and since then extensive excavations have beenmade, which have uncovered a large part of Pompeii, and revealed to us thestreets, homes, theatres, baths, shops, temples, and various monuments ofthe ancient city--all of which presents to us a very vivid picture ofRoman life during the imperial period, eighteen hundred years ago. ]

DOMITIAN--LAST OF THE TWELVE CÆSARS (A. D. 81-96). --Domitian, the brotherof Titus, was the last of the line of emperors known as "the TwelveCæsars. " The title, however, was assumed by, and is applied to, allsucceeding emperors; the sole reason that the first twelve princes aregrouped together is because the Roman biographer Suetonius completed thelives of that number only. 

Domitian's reign was an exact contrast to that of his brother Titus. Itwas one succession of extravagances, tyrannies, confiscations, andmurders. Under this emperor took place what is known in Church history as"the second persecution of the Christians. " This class, as well as theJews, were the special objects of Domitian's hatred, because they refusedto worship the statues of himself which he had set up (see p. 322). 

The last of the Twelve Cæsars perished in his own palace, and by the handsof members of his own household. The Senate ordered his infamous name tobe erased from the public monuments, and to be blotted from the records ofthe Roman state. 

THE FIVE GOOD EMPERORS: REIGN OF NERVA (A. D. 96-98). --The five emperors--Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the two Antonines--that succeeded Domitianwere elected by the Senate, which during this period assumed something ofits former weight and influence in the affairs of the empire. The wise andbeneficent administration of the government by these rulers secured forthem the enviable distinction of being called "the five good emperors. "Nerva died after a short reign of sixteen months, and the sceptre passedinto the stronger hands of the able commander Trajan, whom Nerva hadpreviously made his associate in the government. 

[Illustration: TRAJAN. ]

REIGN OF TRAJAN (A. D. 98-117). --Trajan was a native of Spain, and asoldier by profession and talent. His ambition to achieve military renownled him to undertake distant and important conquests. It was the policy ofAugustus--a policy adopted by most of his successors--to make the Danubein Europe and the Euphrates in Asia the limits of the Roman empire inthose respective quarters. But Trajan determined to push the frontiers ofhis dominions beyond both these rivers, scorning to permit Nature by thesebarriers to mark out the confines of Roman sovereignty. 

He crossed the Danube by means of a bridge, the foundations of which maystill be seen, and subjugated the bold and warlike Dacian tribes lyingbehind that stream--tribes that had often threatened the peace of theempire. After celebrating his victories in a magnificent triumph at Rome, Trajan turned to the East, led his legions across the Euphrates, reducedArmenia, and wrested from the Parthians most of the territory whichanciently formed the heart of the Assyrian monarchy. To Trajan belongs thedistinction of extending the boundaries of the empire to the most distantpoints to which Roman ambition and prowess were ever able to push them. 

But Trajan was something besides a soldier. He had a taste for literature:Juvenal, Plutarch, and the younger Pliny wrote under his patronage; and, moreover, as is true of almost all great conquerors, he had a perfectpassion for building. Among the great works with which he embellished thecapital was the Trajan Forum. Here he erected the celebrated marble shaftknown as Trajan's column. It is one hundred and forty-seven feet high, andis wound from base to summit by a spiral band of sculptures, containingmore than twenty-five thousand human figures. The column is nearly asperfect to-day as when reared eighteen centuries ago. It was intended tocommemorate the Dacian conquests of Trajan; and its pictured sides are thebest, and almost the only, record we now possess of those wars. 

[Illustration: BESIEGING A DACIAN CITY. (From Trajan's Column. )]

Respecting the rapid spread of Christianity at this time, the character ofthe early professors of the new faith, and the light in which they wereviewed by the rulers of the Roman world, we have very important evidencein a certain letter written by Pliny the Younger to the emperor in regardto the Christians of Pontus, in Asia Minor, of which remote province Plinywas governor. Pliny speaks of the new creed as a "contagious superstition, that had seized not cities only, but the lesser towns also, and the opencountry. " Yet he could find no fault in the converts to the new doctrines. Notwithstanding this, however, because the Christians steadily refused tosacrifice to the Roman gods, he ordered many to be put to death for their"inflexible obstinacy. "

Trajan died A. D. 117, after a reign of nineteen years, one of the mostprosperous and fortunate that had yet befallen the lot of the Romanpeople. 

REIGN OF HADRIAN (A. D. 117-138). --Hadrian, a kinsman of Trajan, succeededhim in the imperial office. He possessed great ability, and displayedadmirable moderation and prudence in the administration of the government. He gave up the territory conquered by Trajan in the East, and made theEuphrates once more the boundary of the empire in that quarter. He alsobroke down the bridge that Trajan had built over the Danube, and made thatstream the real frontier line, notwithstanding the Roman garrisons werestill maintained in Dacia. Hadrian saw plainly that Rome could not safelyextend any more widely the frontiers of the empire. Indeed, so active andthreatening were the enemies of the empire in the East, and so daring andnumerous had now become its barbarian assailants of the North, that therewas reason for the greatest anxiety lest they should break through eventhe old and strong lines of the Danube and the Euphrates, and pour theirdevastating hordes over the provinces. 

More than fifteen years of his reign were spent by Hadrian in making toursof inspection through all the different provinces of the empire. Hevisited Britain, and secured the Roman possessions there against the Pictsand Scots by erecting a continuous wall across the island. Next hejourneyed through Gaul and Spain, and then visited in different tours allthe remaining countries bordering upon the Mediterranean. He ascended theNile, and, traveller-like, carved his name upon the vocal Memnon. Thecities which he visited he decorated with temples, theatres, and othermonuments. 

In the year 131, the Jews in Palestine, who had in a measure recoveredfrom the blow Titus had given their nation, broke out in desperate revolt, because of the planting of a Roman colony upon the almost desolate site ofJerusalem, and the placing of the statue of Jupiter in the Holy Temple. More than half a million of Jews perished in the useless struggle, and thesurvivors were driven into exile--the last dispersion of the race. 

The latter years of his reign Hadrian passed at Rome. It was here thatthis princely builder erected his most splendid structures. Among thesewas the Mole, or Mausoleum, of Hadrian, an immense structure surmounted bya gilded dome, erected on the banks of the Tiber, and designed as a tombfor himself. 

THE ANTONINES (A. D. 138-180). --Aurelius Antoninus, surnamed Pius, theadopted son of Hadrian, and his successor, gave the Roman empire anadministration singularly pure and parental. Of him it has been said that"he was the first, and, saving his colleague and successor Aurelius, theonly one of the emperors who devoted himself to the task of governmentwith a single view to the happiness of his people. " Throughout his longreign of twenty-three years, the empire was in a state of profound peace. The attention of the historian is attracted by no striking events, which, as many have not failed to observe, illustrates admirably the oft-repeatedmaxim, "Happy is that people whose annals are brief. "

Antoninus, early in his reign, united with himself in the government hisadopted son Marcus Aurelius, and upon the death of the former (A. D. 161)the latter succeeded quietly to his place and work. His studious habitswon for him the title of "Philosopher. " He belonged to the school of theStoics, and was a most thoughtful writer. His _Meditations_ breathe thetenderest sentiments of devotion and benevolence, and make the nearestapproach to the spirit of Christianity of all the writings of Paganantiquity. He established an Institution, or Home, for orphan girls; and, finding the poorer classes throughout Italy burdened by their taxes andgreatly in arrears in paying them, he caused all the tax-claims to beheaped in the Forum and burned. 

The tastes and sympathies of Aurelius would have led him to choose a lifepassed in retirement and study at the capital; but hostile movements ofthe Parthians, and especially invasions of the barbarians along theRhenish and Danubian frontiers, called him from his books, and forced himto spend most of the latter years of his reign in the camp. The Parthians, who had violated their treaty with Rome, were chastised by the lieutenantsof the emperor, and Mesopotamia again fell under Roman authority. 

This war drew after it a series of terrible calamities. The returningsoldiers brought with them the Asiatic plague, which swept off vastnumbers, especially in Italy, where entire cities and districts weredepopulated. In the general distress and panic, the superstitious peoplewere led to believe that it was the new sect of Christians that had calleddown upon the nation the anger of the gods. Aurelius permitted a fearfulpersecution to be instituted against them, during which the famousChristian fathers and bishops, Justin Martyr and Polycarp, suffered death. 

It should be noted that the persecution of the Christians under the Paganemperors, sprung from political rather than religious motives, and thatthis is why we find the names of the best emperors, as well as those ofthe worst, in the list of persecutors. It was believed that the welfare ofthe state was bound up with the careful performance of the rites of thenational worship; and hence, while the Roman rulers were usually verytolerant, allowing all forms of worship among their subjects, still theyrequired that men of every faith should at least recognize the Roman gods, and burn incense before their statues. This the Christians steadilyrefused to do. Their neglect of the service of the temple, it wasbelieved, angered the gods, and endangered the safety of the state, bringing upon it drought, pestilence, and every disaster. This was themain reason of their persecution by the Pagan emperors. 

But pestilence and persecution were both forgotten amidst the imperativecalls for immediate help that now came from the North. The barbarians werepushing in the Roman outposts, and pouring impetuously over the frontiers. To the panic of the plague was added this new terror. Aurelius placedhimself at the head of his legions, and hurried beyond the Alps. For manyyears, amidst the snows of winter and the heats of summer, he strove tobeat back the assailants of the empire. 

The efforts of the devoted Aurelius checked the inroads of the barbarians;but he could not subdue them, so weakened was the empire by the ravages ofthe pestilence, and so exhausted was the treasury from the heavy andconstant drains upon it. At last his weak body gave way beneath thehardships of his numerous campaigns, and he died in his camp at Vindobona(now Vienna), in the nineteenth year of his reign (A. D. 180). 

The united voice of the Senate and people pronounced him a god, and divineworship was accorded to his statue. Never was Monarchy so justified of herchildren as in the lives and works of the Antonines. As Merivale, indwelling upon their virtues, very justly remarks, "the blameless career ofthese illustrious princes has furnished the best excuse for Cæsarism inall after-ages. "

ROMAN EMPERORS FROM AUGUSTUS TO MARCUS AURELIUS. (From 31 B. C. To A. D. 180. )

Augustus reigns . 31 B. C. To A. D. 14Tiberius . . . . . . A. D. 14-37Caligula . . . . . . . . 37-41Claudius . . . . . . . . 41-54Nero . . . . . . . . . 54-68Galba . . . . . . . . 68-69Otho . . . . . . . . . 69Vitellius . . . . . . . 69Vespasian . . . . . . . 69-79Titus . . . . . . . . 79-81Domitian . . . . . . . 81-96Nerva . . . . . . . . 96-98Trajan . . . . . . . . 98-117Hadrian . . . . . . . 117-138Antoninus Pius . . . . . 138-161Marcus Aurelius . . . . 161-180Verus associated with Aurelius 161-169

The first eleven, in connection with Julius Cæsar, are called the TwelveCæsars. The last five (excluding Verus) are known as the Five GoodEmperors. 

CHAPTER XXX. 

DECLINE AND FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE IN THE WEST;BEGINNING OF THE GREAT GERMAN MIGRATION. (A. D. 180-476. )

REIGN OF COMMODUS (A. D. 180-192). --Under the wise and able administrationof "the five good emperors"--Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the twoAntonines--the Roman empire reached its culmination in power andprosperity; and now, under the enfeebling influences of vice andcorruption within, and the heavy blows of the barbarians without, itbegins to decline rapidly to its fall. 

[Illustration: COMMODUS (as Hercules). ]

Commodus, son of Marcus Aurelius, and the last of the Antonines, was amost unworthy successor of his illustrious father. For three years, however, surrounded by the able generals and wise counsellors that theprudent administration of the preceding emperors had drawn to the head ofaffairs, Commodus ruled with fairness and lenity, when an unsuccessfulconspiracy against his life seemed suddenly to kindle all the slumberingpassions of a Nero. He secured the favor of the rabble with the shows ofthe amphitheatre, and purchased the support of the prætorians with bribesand flatteries. Thus he was enabled for ten years to retain the throne, while perpetrating all manner of cruelties, and staining the imperialpurple with the most detestable debaucheries and crimes. 

Commodus had a passion for gladiatorial combats, and attired in a lion'sskin, and armed with the club of Hercules, he valiantly set upon and slewantagonists arrayed to represent mythological monsters, and armed withgreat sponges for rocks. The Senate, so obsequiously servile had that bodybecome, conferred upon him the title of the Roman Hercules, and also votedhim the additional surnames of Pius and Felix, and even proposed to changethe name of Rome and call it Colonia Commodiana. 

The empire was finally relieved of the insane tyrant by some members ofthe royal household, who anticipated his designs against themselves byputting him to death. 

"THE BARRACK EMPERORS. "--For nearly a century after the death of Commodus(from A. D. 192 to 284), the emperors were elected by the army, and hencethe rulers for this period have been called "the Barrack Emperors. " Thecharacter of the period is revealed by the fact that of the twenty-fiveemperors who mounted the throne during this time all except four came totheir deaths by violence. "Civil war, pestilence, bankruptcy, were allbrooding over the empire. The soldiers had forgotten how to fight, therulers how to govern. " On every side the barbarians were breaking into theempire to rob, to murder, and to burn. 

THE PUBLIC SALE OF THE EMPIRE (A. D. 193). --The beginning of thesetroublous times was marked by a shameful proceeding on the part of theprætorians. Upon the death of Commodus, Pertinax, a distinguished senator, was placed on the throne; but his efforts to enforce discipline among theprætorians aroused their anger, and he was slain by them after a shortreign of only three months. These soldiers then gave out notice that theywould sell the empire to the highest bidder. It was, accordingly, set upfor sale at the prætorian camp, and struck off to Didius Julianus, awealthy senator, who gave $1000 to each of the 12, 000 soldiers at thistime composing the guard. So the price of the empire was about$12, 000, 000. 

But these turbulent and insolent soldiers at the capital of the empirewere not to have things entirely their own way. As soon as the news of thedisgraceful transaction reached the legions on the frontiers, they rose asa single man in indignant revolt. Each of the three armies that held theEuphrates, the Rhine, and the Danube, proclaimed its favorite commanderemperor. The leader of the Danubian troops was Septimius Severus, a man ofgreat energy and force of character. He knew that there were othercompetitors for the throne, and that the prize would be his who firstseized it. Instantly he set his veterans in motion and was soon at Rome. The prætorians were no match for the trained legionaries of the frontiers, and did not even attempt to defend their emperor, who was taken prisonerand put to death after a reign of sixty-five days. REIGN OF SEPTIMIUSSEVERUS (A. D. 193-211). --One of the first acts of Severus was to organizea new body-guard of 50, 000 legionaries, to take the place of the unworthyprætorians, whom, as a punishment for the insult they had offered to theRoman state, he disbanded, and banished from the capital, and forbade toapproach within a hundred miles of its walls. He next crushed his tworival competitors, and was then undisputed master of the empire. He put todeath forty senators for having favored his late rivals, and completelydestroyed the power of their body. Committing to the prefect of the newprætorian guard the management of affairs at the capital, Severus passedthe greater part of his long and prosperous reign upon the frontiers. Atone time he was chastising the Parthians beyond the Euphrates, and atanother, pushing back the Caledonian tribes from the Hadrian wall in theopposite corner of his dominions. Finally, in Britain, in his camp atYork, death overtook him. 

REIGN OF CARACALLA (A. D. 211-217). --Severus conferred the empire upon histwo sons, Caracalla and Geta. Caracalla murdered his brother, and thenordered Papinian, the celebrated jurist, to make a public argument invindication of the fratricide. When that great lawyer refused, saying that"it was easier to commit such a crime than to justify it, " he put him todeath. Thousands fell victims to his senseless rage. Driven by remorse andfear, he fled from the capital, and wandered about the most distantprovinces. At Alexandria, on account of some uncomplimentary remarks bythe citizens upon his appearance, he ordered a general massacre. Finally, after a reign of six years, the monster was slain in a remote corner ofSyria. 

[Illustration: CARACALLA. ]

Caracalla's sole political act of real importance was the bestowal ofcitizenship upon all the free inhabitants of the empire; and this he did, not to give them a just privilege, but that he might collect from themcertain special taxes which only Roman citizens had to pay. Before thereign of Caracalla it was only particular classes of subjects, or theinhabitants of some particular city or province, that, as a mark ofspecial favor, had, from time to time, been admitted to the rights ofcitizenship (see p. 280). By this wholesale act of Caracalla, the entirepopulation of the empire was made Roman, at least in name and nominalprivilege. "The city had become the world, or, viewed from the other side, the world had become the city" (Merivale). 

REIGN OF ALEXANDER SEVERUS (A. D. 222-235). --Severus restored the virtuesof the Age of the Antonines. His administration was pure and energetic;but he strove in vain to resist the corrupt and downward tendencies of thetimes. He was assassinated, after a reign of fourteen years, by hisseditious soldiers, who were angered by his efforts to reduce them todiscipline. They invested with the imperial purple an obscure officernamed Maximin, a Thracian peasant, whose sole recommendation for thisdignity was his gigantic stature and his great strength of limbs. Rome hadnow sunk to the lowest possible degradation. We may pass rapidly over thenext fifty years of the empire. 

[Illustration: TRIUMPH OF SAPOR OVER VALERIAN. ]

THE THIRTY TYRANTS (A. D. 251-268). --Maximin was followed swiftly byGordian, Philip, and Decius, and then came what is called the "Age of theThirty Tyrants. " The imperial sceptre being held by weak emperors, theresprang up in every part of the empire, competitors for the throne--severalrivals frequently appearing in the field at the same time. The barbarianspressed upon all the frontiers, and thrust themselves into all theprovinces. The empire seemed on the point of falling to pieces. [Footnote:It was during this period that the Emperor Valerian (A. D. 253-260), in abattle with the Persians before Edessa, in Mesopotamia, was defeated andtaken prisoner by Sapor, the Persian king. A large rock tablet (see cutabove), still to be seen near the Persian town of Shiraz, is believed tocommemorate the triumph of Sapor over the unfortunate emperor. ] But afortunate succession of five good emperors--Claudius, Aurelian, Tacitus, Probus, and Carus (A. D. 268-284)--restored for a time the ancientboundaries, and again forced together into some sort of union thefragments of the shattered state. 

THE FALL OF PALMYRA. --The most noted of the usurpers of authority in theprovinces during the period of anarchy of which we have spoken, wasOdenatus, Prince of Palmyra, a city occupying an oasis in the midst of theSyrian Desert, midway between the Mediterranean and the Euphrates. Ingratitude for the aid he had rendered the Romans against the Parthians, the Senate had bestowed upon him titles and honors. When the empire beganto show signs of weakness and approaching dissolution, Odenatus conceivedthe ambitious project of erecting upon its ruins in the East a greatPalmyrian kingdom. Upon his death, his wife, Zenobia, succeeded to hisauthority and to his ambitions. This famous princess claimed descent fromCleopatra, and it is certain that in the charms of personal beauty she wasthe rival of the Egyptian queen. Boldly assuming the title of "Queen ofthe East, " she bade defiance to the emperor of Rome. Aurelian marchedagainst her, defeated her armies, and carried her a captive to Italy (273A. D. ). After having been led in golden chains in the triumphal processionof Aurelian, the queen was given a beautiful villa in the vicinity ofTibur, where, surrounded by her children, she passed the remainder of hercheckered life. 

The ruins of Palmyra are among the most interesting remains of Græco-Romancivilization in the East. 

REIGN OF DIOCLETIAN (A. D. 284-305). --The reign of Diocletian marks animportant era in Roman history. Up to this time the imperial governmenthad been more or less carefully concealed under the forms and names of theold republic. The government now became an unveiled and absolute monarchy. Diocletian's reforms, though radical, were salutary, and infused suchfresh vitality into the frame of the dying state as to give it a new leaseof life for another term of nearly two hundred years. 

He determined to divide the numerous and increasing cares of thedistracted empire, so that it might be ruled from two centres--one in theEast and the other in the West. In pursuance of this plan, he chose as acolleague a companion soldier, Maximian, upon whom he conferred the titleof Augustus. After a few years, finding the cares of the co-sovereigntystill too heavy, each sovereign associated with himself an assistant, whotook the title of Cæsar, and was considered the son and heir of theemperor. There were thus two Augusti and two Cæsars. Milan, in Italy, became the capital and residence of Maximian; while Nicomedia, in AsiaMinor, became the seat of the court of Diocletian. The Augusti took chargeof the countries near their respective capitals, while the younger andmore active Cæsars were assigned the government of the more distant andturbulent provinces. The vigorous administration of the government inevery quarter of the empire was thus secured. The authority of each of therulers was supreme within the territory allotted him; but all acknowledgedDiocletian as "the father and head of the state. "

[Illustration: DIOCLETIAN. ]

The most serious drawback to the system of government thus instituted wasthe heavy expense incident to the maintenance of four courts with theirtrains of officers and dependants. The taxes became unendurable, husbandryceased, and large masses of the population were reduced almost tostarvation. 

While the changes made in the government have rendered the name ofDiocletian famous in the political history of the Roman state, the cruelpersecutions which he ordered against the Christians have made his name inan equal degree infamous in ecclesiastical annals; for it was during thisreign that the tenth--the last and severest--of the persecutions of theChurch took place. By an imperial decree the churches of the Christianswere ordered to be torn down, and they themselves were outlawed. For tenyears the fugitives were hunted in forest and cave. The victims wereburned, were cast to the wild beasts in the amphitheatre--were put todeath by every torture and in every mode that ingenious cruelty coulddevise. But nothing could shake the constancy of their faith. They courtedthe death that secured them, as they firmly believed, immediate entranceupon an existence of unending happiness. The exhibition of devotion andconstancy shown by the martyrs won multitudes to the persecuted faith. 

It was during this and the various other persecutions that vexed theChurch in the second and third centuries that the Christians sought refugein the Catacombs, those vast subterranean galleries and chambers under thecity of Rome. Here the Christians lived and buried their dead, and on thewalls of the chambers sketched rude symbols of their hope and faith. Itwas in the darkness of these subterranean abodes that Christian art hadits beginnings. 

[Illustration: CHRIST AS THE GOOD SHEPHERD. (From the Catacombs. )]

After a prosperous reign of twenty years, becoming weary of the cares ofstate, Diocletian abdicated the throne, and forced or induced hiscolleague Maximian also to lay down his authority on the same day. Galerius and Constantius were, by this act, advanced to the purple andmade Augusti; and two new associates were appointed as Cæsars. Diocletian, having enjoyed the extreme satisfaction of seeing the imperial authorityquietly and successfully transmitted by his system, without the dictationof the insolent prætorians or the interference of the turbulentlegionaries, now retired to his country-seat at Salona, on the easternshore of the Adriatic, and there devoted himself to rural pursuits. It isrelated that, when Maximian wrote him urging him to endeavor, with him, toregain the power they had laid aside, he replied: "Were you but to come toSalona and see the vegetables which I raise in my garden with my ownhands, you would no longer talk to me of empire. "

REIGN OF CONSTANTINE THE GREAT (A. D. 306-337); THE EMPIRE BECOMESCHRISTIAN. --Galerius and Constantius had reigned together only one year, when the latter died at York, in Britain; and his soldiers, disregardingthe rule of succession as determined by the system of Diocletian, proclaimed his son Constantine emperor. Six competitors for the thronearose in different quarters. For eighteen years Constantine fought to gainsupremacy. At the end of that time every rival was crushed, and he was thesole ruler of the Roman world. 

Constantine was the first Christian emperor. He was converted to the newreligion--such is the story--by seeing in the heavens, during one of hiscampaigns against his rivals, a luminous cross with this inscription:"With this sign you will conquer. " He made the cross the royal standard;and the Roman legions now for the first time marched beneath the emblem ofChristianity. 

By a decree issued from Milan A. D. 313, Christianity was made in effectthe state religion; but all other forms of worship were tolerated. Withthe view of harmonizing the different sects that had sprung up among theChristians, and to settle the controversy between the Arians and theAthanasians respecting the nature of Christ, --the former denied hisequality with God the Father, --Constantine called the first OEcumenical, or General Council of the Church, at Nicæa, a town of Asia Minor, A. D. 325. Arianism was denounced, and a formula of Christian faith adopted, which is known as the Nicene Creed. 

After the recognition of Christianity, the most important act ofConstantine was the selection of Byzantium, on the Bosporus, as the newcapital of the empire. One reason which led the emperor to choose thissite in preference to Rome was the ungracious conduct towards him of theinhabitants of the latter city, because he had abandoned the worship ofthe old national deities. But there were political reasons for such achange. Through the Eastern conquests of Rome, the centre of thepopulation, wealth, and culture of the empire had shifted eastward. TheWest--Gaul, Britain, Spain--was rude and barbarous; the East--Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor--was the abode of ancient civilizations from which Romewas proud to trace her origin. Constantine was not the first to entertainthe idea of seeking in the East a new centre for the Roman world. TheItalians were inflamed against the first Cæsar by the report that heintended to restore Ilium, the cradle of the Roman race, and make that thecapital of the empire. 

Constantine organized at Byzantium a new Senate, while that at Rome sankto the obscure position of the council of a provincial municipality. Multitudes eagerly thronged to the new capital, and almost in a night thelittle colony grew into an imperial city. In honor of the emperor its namewas changed to Constantinople, the "City of Constantine. " Hereafter theeyes of the world were directed towards the Bosporus instead of the Tiber. 

To aid in the administration of the government, Constantine laid out theempire into four great divisions, called prefectures (see map), which weresubdivided into thirteen dioceses, and these again into one hundred andsixteen provinces. 

The character of Constantine has been greatly eulogized by Christianwriters, while pagan historians very naturally painted it in dark colors. It is probable that he embraced Christianity, not entirely fromconviction, but partly from political motives. As the historian Hodgkinputs it, "He was half convinced of the truth of Christianity, and whollyconvinced of the policy of embracing it. " In any event, Constantine'sreligion was a strange mixture of the old and the new faith: on his medalsthe Christian cross is held by the pagan deity, Victory. In his domesticrelations he was tyrannical and cruel. He died in the thirty-first year ofhis reign, leaving his kingdom to his three sons, Constans, Constantius, and Constantine. 

REIGN OF JULIAN THE APOSTATE (A. D. 361-363). --The parcelling out of theempire by Constantine among his sons led to strife and wars, which, at theend of sixteen years, left Constantius master of the whole. He reigned assole emperor for about eight years, engaged in ceaseless warfare withGerman tribes in the West and with the Persians [Footnote: The greatParthian empire, which had been such a formidable antagonist of Rome, was, after an existence of five centuries, overthrown (A. D. 226) by a revolt ofthe Persians, and the New Persian, or Sassanian monarchy established. Thisempire lasted till the country was overrun by the Saracens in the seventhcentury A. D. ] in the East. Constantius was followed by his cousin Julian, who was killed while in pursuit of the troops of Sapor, king of thePersians (A. D. 363). 

Julian is called the Apostate because he abandoned Christianity andlabored to restore the pagan faith. In his persecution of the Christians, however, he could not resort to the old means--"the sword, the fire, thelions;" for, under the softening influences of the very faith he sought toextirpate, the Roman world had already learned a gentleness and humanitythat rendered impossible the renewal of the Neronian and Diocletianpersecutions. Julian's weapons were sophistry and ridicule, in the use ofwhich he was a master. To degrade the Christians, and place them at adisadvantage in controversy, he excluded them from the schools of logicand rhetoric. 

Furthermore, to cast discredit upon the predictions of the Scriptures, Julian determined to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, which the Christianscontended could not be restored because of the prophecies against it. Heactually began excavations, but his workmen were driven in great panicfrom the spot by terrific explosions and bursts of flame. The Christiansregarded the occurrence as miraculous; and Julian himself, it is certain, was so dismayed by it that he desisted from the undertaking. [Footnote:The explosions which so terrified the workmen of Julian are supposed tohave been caused by accumulations of gases--similar to those that sofrequently occasion accidents in mines--in the subterranean chambers ofthe Temple foundations. ]

It was in vain that the apostate emperor labored to uproot the new faith;for the purity of its teachings, the universal and eternal character ofits moral precepts, had given it a name to live. Equally in vain were hisefforts to restore the worship of the old Grecian and Roman divinities. Polytheism was a transitional form of religious belief which the world hadnow outgrown: Great Pan was dead. 

The disabilities under which Julian had placed the Christians were removedby his successor Jovian (A. D. 363-4), and the Christian worship was re-established. 

[Illustration: GERMANS CROSSING THE RHINE. (Drawing by Alphonse deNeuville. )]

VALENTINIAN AND VALENS. --Upon the death of Jovian, Valentinian, thecommander of the imperial guard, was elected emperor by a council of thegenerals of the army and the ministers of the court. He appointed hisbrother Valens as his associate in office, and assigned to him the Easternprovinces, while reserving for himself the Western. He set up his owncourt at Milan, while his brother established his residence atConstantinople. 

THE MOVEMENTS OF THE BARBARIANS. --The reigns of Valentinian and Valenswere signalized by threatening movements of the barbarian tribes, thatnow, almost at the same moment, began to press with redoubled energyagainst all the barriers of the empire. The Alemanni (Germans) crossed theRhine--sometimes swarming over the river on the winter's ice--and, beforepursuit could be made, escaped with their booty into the depths of theGerman forests. The Saxons, pirates of the northern seas, who issued fromthe mouth of the Elbe, ravaged the coasts of Gaul and Britain, evenpushing their light skiffs far up the rivers and creeks of thosecountries, and carrying spoils from the inland cities. In Britain, thePicts broke through the Wall of Antoninus, and wrested almost the entireisland from the hands of the Romans. In Africa, the Moorish and othertribes, issuing from the ravines of the Atlas Mountains and swarming fromthe deserts of the south, threatened to obliterate the last trace of Romancivilization occupying the narrow belt of fertile territory skirting thesea. 

The barbarian tide of invasion seemed thus on the point of overwhelmingthe empire in the West; but for twelve years Valentinian defended withsignal ability and energy, not only his own territories, but aided witharms and counsel his weaker brother Valens in the defence of his. Upon thedeath of Valentinian, his son Gratian succeeded to his authority (A. D. 375). 

THE GOTHS CROSS THE DANUBE. --The year following the death of Valentinian, an event of the greatest importance occurred in the East. The Visigoths(Western Goths) dwelling north of the Lower Danube, who had often inhostile bands crossed that river to war against the Roman emperors, nowappeared as suppliants in vast multitudes upon its banks. They said that aterrible race, whom they were powerless to withstand, had invaded theirterritories, and spared neither their homes nor their lives. They beggedpermission of the Romans to cross the river and settle in Thrace, andpromised, should this request be granted, ever to remain the grateful andfirm allies of the Roman state. 

Valens consented to grant their petition on condition that they shouldsurrender their arms, give up their children as hostages, and all bebaptized in the Christian faith. Their terror and despair led them toassent to these conditions. So the entire nation, numbering one millionsouls, --counting men, women, and children, --were allowed to cross theriver. Several days and nights were consumed in the transport of the vastmultitudes. The writers of the times liken the passage to that of theHellespont by the hosts of Xerxes. 

The enemy that had so terrified the Goths were the Huns, a monstrous raceof fierce nomadic horsemen, that two centuries and more before theChristian era were roving the deserts north of the Great Wall of China(see p. 13). Migrating from that region, they moved slowly to the west, across the great plains of Central Asia, and, after wandering severalcenturies, appeared in Europe. They belonged to a different race (theTuranian) from all the other European tribes with which we have been sofar concerned. Their features were hideous, their noses being flattened, and their cheeks gashed, to render their appearance more frightful, aswell as to prevent the growth of a beard. Even the barbarous Goths calledthem "barbarians. "

Scarcely had the fugitive Visigoths been received within the limits of theempire before a large company of their kinsmen, the Ostrogoths (EasternGoths), also driven from their homes by the same terrible Huns, crowded tothe banks of the Danube, and pleaded that they might be allowed, as theircountrymen had been, to place the river between themselves and theirdreaded enemies. But Valens, becoming alarmed at the presence of so manybarbarians within his dominions, refused their request; whereupon they, dreading the fierce and implacable foe behind more than the wrath of theRoman emperor in front, crossed the river with arms in their hands. Atthis moment the Visigoths, rising in revolt, joined their kinsmen thatwere just now forcing the passage of the Danube, and began to ravage theDanubian provinces. Valens despatched swift messengers to Gratian in theWest, asking for assistance against the foe he had so imprudently admittedwithin the limits of the empire. 

THEODOSIUS THE GREAT (A. D. 379-395). --Gratian was hurrying to the help ofhis colleague Valens, when news of his defeat and death at the hands ofthe barbarians was brought to him, and he at once appointed as hisassociate Theodosius, known afterwards as the Great, and entrusted himwith the government of the Eastern provinces. Theodosius, by wise andvigorous measures, quickly reduced the Goths to submission. Vastmultitudes of the Visigoths were settled upon the waste lands of Thrace, while the Ostrogoths were scattered in various colonies in differentregions of Asia Minor. The Goths became allies of the Emperor of the East, and more than 40, 000 of these warlike barbarians, who were destined to bethe subverters of the empire, were enlisted in the imperial legions. 

While Theodosius was thus composing the East, the West, through thejealous rivalries of different competitors for the control of thegovernment, had fallen into great disorder. Theodosius twice interposed toright affairs, and then took the government into his own hands. For fourmonths he ruled as sole monarch of the empire. 

FINAL DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE (A. D. 395). --The Roman world was now unitedfor the last time under a single master. Just before his death, Theodosiusdivided the empire between his two sons, Arcadius and Honorius, assigningthe former, who was only eighteen years of age, the government of theEast, and giving the latter, a mere child of eleven, the sovereignty ofthe West. This was the final partition of the Roman empire--the issue ofthat growing tendency, which we have observed in its immoderately extendeddominions, to break apart. The separate histories of the East and the Westnow begin. 

THE EASTERN EMPIRE. --The story of the fortunes of the Empire in the Eastneed not detain us long at this point of our history. This monarchy lastedover a thousand years--from the accession to power of Arcadius, A. D. 395, to the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, A. D. 1453. It will thus beseen that the greater part of its history belongs to the mediæval period. Up to the time of the overthrow of the Empire in the West, the sovereignsof the East were engaged almost incessantly in suppressing uprisings oftheir Gothic allies or mercenaries, or in repelling invasions of the Hunsand the Vandals. Frequently during this period, in order to save their ownterritories, the Eastern emperors, by dishonorable inducements, persuadedthe barbarians to direct their ravaging expeditions against the provincesof the West. 

LAST DAYS OF THE EMPIRE IN THE WEST. 

FIRST INVASION OF ITALY BY ALARIC. --Only a few years had elapsed after thedeath of the great Theodosius, before the barbarians were trooping in vasthordes through all the regions of the West. First, from Thrace and Moesiacame the Visigoths, led by the great Alaric. They poured through the Passof Thermopylæ, and devastated almost the entire peninsula of Greece; but, being driven from that country by Stilicho, the renowned Vandal general ofHonorius, they crossed the Julian Alps, and spread terror throughout allItaly. Stilicho followed the barbarians cautiously, and, attacking them ata favorable moment, inflicted a terrible and double defeat upon them atPollentia and Verona (A. D. 402-403). The captured camp was found filledwith the spoils of Thebes, Corinth, and Sparta. Gathering the remnants ofhis shattered army, Alaric forced his way with difficulty through thedefiles of the Alps, and escaped. 

LAST TRIUMPH AT ROME (A. D. 404). --A terrible danger had been averted. AllItaly burst forth in expressions of gratitude and joy. The days of theCimbri and Teutones were recalled, and the name of Stilicho was pronouncedwith that of Marius. A magnificent triumph at Rome celebrated the victoryand the deliverance. It was the last triumph that Rome ever saw. Threehundred times--such is asserted to be the number--the Imperial City hadwitnessed the triumphal procession of her victorious generals, celebratingconquests in all quarters of the world. 

LAST GLADIATORIAL COMBAT OF THE AMPHITHEATRE. --The same year that marksthe last military triumph at Rome also signalizes the last gladiatorialcombat in the Roman amphitheatre. It is to Christianity that the credit ofthe suppression of the inhuman exhibitions of the amphitheatre isentirely, or almost entirely, due. The pagan philosophers usually regardedthem with indifference, often with favor. Thus Pliny commends a friend forgiving a gladiatorial entertainment at the funeral of his wife. And whenthe pagan moralists did condemn the spectacles, it was rather for otherreasons than that they regarded them as inhuman and absolutely contrary tothe rules of ethics. They were defended on the ground that they fostered amartial spirit among the people and inured the soldier to the sights ofthe battlefield. Hence gladiatorial games were actually exhibited to thelegions before they set out on their campaigns. Indeed, all classes appearto have viewed the matter in much the same light, and with exactly thesame absence of moral disapprobation, that we ourselves regard theslaughter of animals for food. 

But the Christian fathers denounced the combats as absolutely immoral, andlabored in every possible way to create a public opinion against them. Themembers of their own body who attended the spectacles were excommunicated. At length, in A. D. 325, the first imperial edict against them was issuedby Constantine. This decree appears to have been very little regarded;nevertheless, from this time forward the exhibitions were under somethingof a ban, until their final abolition was brought about by an incident ofthe games that closed the triumph of Honorius. In the midst of theexhibition a Christian monk, named Telemachus, descending into the arena, rushed between the combatants, but was instantly killed by a shower ofmissiles thrown by the people, who were angered by this interruption oftheir sports. But the people soon repented of their act; and Honoriushimself, who was present, was moved by the scene. Christianity hadawakened the conscience and touched the heart of Rome. The martyrdom ofthe monk led to an imperial edict "which abolished forever the humansacrifices of the amphitheatre. "

INVASION OF ITALY BY VARIOUS GERMAN TRIBES. --While Italy was celebratingher triumph over the Goths, another and more formidable invasion waspreparing in the North. The tribes beyond the Rhine--the Vandals, theSuevi, the Burgundians, and other peoples--driven onward by some unknowncause, poured in impetuous streams from the forests and morasses ofGermany, and bursting the barriers of the Alps, overspread the devotedplains of Italy. The alarm caused by them among the Italians was evengreater than that inspired by the Gothic invasion; for Alaric was aChristian, while Radagaisus, the leader of the new hordes, was asuperstitious savage, who paid worship to gods that required the bloodysacrifice of captive enemies. 

By such efforts as Rome put forth in the younger and more vigorous days ofthe republic, when Hannibal was at her gates, an army was now equipped andplaced under the command of Stilicho. Meanwhile the barbarians hadadvanced as far as Florence, and were now besieging that place. Stilichohere surrounded the vast host--variously estimated from 200, 000 to 400, 000men--and starved them into a surrender. Their chief, Radagaisus, was putto death, and great multitudes of the barbarians that the sword and faminehad spared were sold as slaves (A. D. 406). 

THE RANSOM OF ROME (A. D. 409). --Shortly after the victory of Stilicho overthe German barbarians, he came under the suspicion of the weak and jealousHonorius, and was executed. Thus fell the great general whose sword andcounsel had twice saved Rome from the barbarians, and who might again haveaverted similar dangers that were now at hand. Listening to the rashcounsels of his unworthy advisers, Honorius provoked to revolt the 30, 000Gothic mercenaries in the Roman legions by a massacre of their wives andchildren, who were held as hostages in the different cities of Italy. TheGoths beyond the Alps joined with their kinsmen to avenge the perfidiousact. Alaric again crossed the mountains, and pillaging the cities in hisway, led his hosts to the very gates of Rome. Not since the time of thedread Hannibal (see p. 263)--more than six hundred years before--had Romebeen insulted by the presence of a foreign foe beneath her walls. 

The barbarians laying siege to the city, famine soon forced the Romans tosue for terms of surrender. The ambassadors of the Senate, when they camebefore Alaric, began, in lofty language, to warn him not to render theRomans desperate by hard or dishonorable terms: their fury when driven todespair, they represented, was terrible, and their number enormous. "Thethicker the grass, the easier to mow it, " was Alaric's derisive reply. Thebarbarian chieftain at length named the ransom that he would accept, andspare the city. Small as it comparatively was, the Romans were able toraise it only by the most extraordinary measures. The images of the godswere stripped of their ornaments of gold and precious stones, and even thestatues themselves were melted down. 

SACK OF ROME BY ALARIC (A. D. 410). --Upon retiring from Rome, Alaricestablished his camp in Etruria. Here he was joined by great numbers offugitive slaves, and by fresh accessions of barbarians from beyond theAlps. The Gallic king now demanded for his followers lands of Honorius, but the emperor treated all the proposals of the barbarian with foolishinsolence. Rome paid the penalty. Alaric turned upon the devoted city, determined upon its sack and plunder. The barbarians broke into thecapital by night, "and the inhabitants were awakened by the tremendoussound of the Gothic trumpet. " Precisely eight hundred years had passedsince its sack by the Gauls. During that time the Imperial City hadcarried its victorious standards over three continents, and had gatheredwithin the temples of its gods and the palaces of its nobles the plunderof the world. Now it was given over for a spoil to the fierce tribes frombeyond the Danube. 

Alaric commanded his soldiers to respect the lives of the people, and toleave untouched the treasures of the Christian temples; but the wealth ofthe citizens he encouraged them to make their own. For six days and nightsthe rough barbarians trooped through the streets of the city on theirmission of pillage. Their wagons were heaped with the costly furniture, the rich plate, and the silken garments stripped from the palaces of thewealthy patricians and the temples of the gods. Amidst the license of thesack, the barbarian instincts of the robbers broke loose from allrestraint, and the city was everywhere wet with blood, while the nightswere lighted with burning buildings. 

EFFECTS OF THE DISASTER UPON PAGANISM. --The overwhelming disaster that hadbefallen the Imperial City produced a profound impression upon both Pagansand Christians throughout the Roman world. The former asserted that theseunutterable calamities had fallen upon the Roman state because of theabandonment by the people of the worship of the gods of their forefathers, under whose protection and favor Rome had become the mistress of theworld. The Christians, on the other hand, saw in the fall of the EternalCity the fulfilment of the prophecies against the Babylon of theApocalypse. The latter interpretation of the appalling calamity gainedcredit amidst the panic and despair of the times. The temples of the oncepopular deities were deserted by their worshippers, who had lost faith ingods that could neither save themselves nor protect their shrines fromspoliation. "Henceforth, " says Merivale, "the power of paganism wasentirely broken, and the indications which occasionally meet us of itscontinued existence are rare and trifling. Christianity stepped into itsdeserted inheritance. The Christians occupied the temples, transformingthem into churches. "

THE DEATH OF ALARIC. --After withdrawing his warriors from Rome, Alaric ledthem southward. As they moved slowly on, they piled still higher thewagons of their long trains with the rich spoils of the cities and villasof Campania and other districts of Southern Italy. In the villas of theRoman nobles the rough barbarians spread rare banquets from the stores oftheir well-filled cellars, and drank from jewelled cups the famedFalernian wine. 

Alaric led his soldiers to the extreme southern point of Italy, intendingto cross the Straits of Messina into Sicily, and, after subduing thatisland, to carry his conquests into the provinces of Africa. His designswere frustrated by his death, which occurred A. D. 412. With religious carehis followers secured the body of their hero against violation by hisenemies. The little river Busentinus, in Northern Bruttium, was turnedfrom its course with great labor, and in the bed of the stream wasconstructed a tomb, in which was placed the body of the king, with hisjewels and trophies. The river was then restored to its old channel, and, that the exact spot might never be known, the prisoners who had beenforced to do the work were all put to death. 

THE BARBARIANS SEIZE THE WESTERN PROVINCES. --We must now turn our eyesfrom Rome and Italy to observe the movement of events in the provinces. Inhis efforts to defend Italy, Stilicho had withdrawn the last legion fromBritain, and had drained the camps and fortresses of Gaul. The Wall ofAntoninus was left unmanned; the passages of the Rhine were leftunguarded; and the agitated multitudes of barbarians beyond these defenceswere free to pour their innumerable hosts into all the fair provinces ofthe empire. Hordes of Suevi, Alani, Vandals, and Burgundians overspreadall the plains and valleys of Gaul. The Vandals pushed on into the southof Spain, and there occupied a large tract of country, which, in itspresent name of Andalusia, preserves the memory of its barbarian settlers. From these regions they crossed the Straits of Gibraltar, overran theRoman provinces of Northern Africa, captured Carthage (A. D. 439), and madethat city the seat of the dread empire of the Vandals. The Goths, withItaly pillaged, recrossed the Alps, and establishing their camps in thesouth of Gaul and the north of Spain, set up in those regions what isknown as the Kingdom of the Visigoths. 

In Britain, upon the withdrawal of the Roman legions, the Picts breakingover the Wall of Antoninus, descended upon and pillaged the cities of theSouth. The half-Romanized and effeminate provincials--no match for theirhardy kinsmen who had never bowed their necks to the yoke of Rome--weredriven to despair by the ravages of their relentless enemies, and, intheir helplessness, invited to their aid the Angles and Saxons from theshores of the North Sea. These people came in their rude boats, drove backthe invaders, and, being pleased with the soil and climate of the island, took possession of the country for themselves, and became the ancestors ofthe English people. 

INVASION OF THE HUNS: BATTLE OF CHALONS. --The barbarians that were thusoverrunning and parcelling out the inheritance of the dying empire werenow, in turn, pressed upon and terrified by a foe more hideous anddreadful in their eyes than were they in the sight of the peoples amongwhom they had thrust themselves. These were the non-Aryan Huns, of whom wehave already caught a glimpse as they drove the panic-stricken Gothsacross the Danube. At this time their leader was Attila, whom theaffrighted inhabitants of Europe called the "Scourge of God. " It wasdeclared that the grass never grew again where once the hoof of Attila'shorse had trod. 

Attila defeated the armies of the Eastern emperor, and exacted tributefrom the court of Constantinople. Finally he turned westward, and, at thehead of a host numbering, it is asserted, 700, 000 warriors, crossed theRhine into Gaul, purposing first to ravage that province, and then totraverse Italy with fire and sword, in order to destroy the last vestigeof the Roman power. 

The Romans and their Gothic conquerors laid aside their animosities, andmade common cause against the common enemy. The Visigoths were rallied bytheir king, Theodoric; the Italians, the Franks, the Burgundians, flockedto the standard of the Roman general Ætius. Attila drew up his mightyhosts upon the plain of Chalons, in the north of Gaul, and there awaitedthe onset of the Romans and their allies. The conflict was long andterrible. Theodoric was slain; but at last fortune turned against thebarbarians. The loss of the Huns is variously estimated at from 100, 000 to300, 000 warriors. Attila succeeded in escaping from the field, andretreated with his shattered hosts across the Rhine (A. D. 451). 

This great victory is placed among the significant events of history; forit decided that the Christian Germanic races, and not the pagan ScythicHuns, should inherit the dominions of the expiring Roman Empire, andcontrol the destinies of Europe. 

THE DEATH OF ATTILA. --The year after his defeat at Chalons, Attila againcrossed the Alps, and burned or plundered all the important cities ofNorthern Italy. The Veneti fled for safety to the morasses at the head ofthe Adriatic (A. D. 452). Upon the islets where they built their rudedwellings, there grew up in time the city of Venice, the "eldest daughterof the Roman Empire, " the "Carthage of the Middle Ages. "

The conqueror threatened Rome; but Leo the Great, bishop of the capital, went with an embassy to the camp of Attila, and pleaded for the city. Herecalled to the mind of Attila the fact that death had overtaken theimpious Alaric soon after he had given the Imperial City to be sacked, andwarned him not to call down upon himself the like judgment of heaven. Tothese admonitions of the Christian bishop was added the persuasion of agolden bribe from the Emperor Valentinian; and Attila was induced to spareSouthern Italy, and to lead his warriors back beyond the Alps. Shortlyafter he had crossed the Danube, he died suddenly in his camp. Hisfollowers gradually withdrew from Europe into the wilds of their nativeScythia, or were absorbed by the peoples they had conquered. 

SACK OF ROME BY THE VANDALS (A. D. 455). --Rome had been saved a visitationfrom the spoiler of the North, but a new destruction was about to burstupon it by way of the sea from the South. Africa sent out another enemywhose greed for plunder proved more fatal to Rome than the eternal hate ofHannibal. The kings of the Vandal Empire in Northern Africa had acquiredas perfect a supremacy in the Western Mediterranean as Carthage everenjoyed in the days of her commercial pride. Vandal corsairs swept theseas and harassed the coasts of Sicily and Italy, and even plundered themaritime towns of the Eastern provinces. In the year 455 a Vandal fleet, led by the dread Genseric, sailed up the Tiber. 

Panic seized the people; for the name of Vandal was pronounced with terrorthroughout the world. Again the great Leo, who had once before saved hisflock from the fury of an Attila, went forth to intercede in the name ofChrist for the Imperial City. Genseric granted to the pious bishop thelives of the citizens, but said that the plunder of the capital belongedto his warriors. For fourteen days and nights the city was given over tothe ruthless barbarians. The ships of the Vandals, which almost hid withtheir number the waters of the Tiber, were piled, as had been the wagonsof the Goths before them, with the rich and weighty spoils of the capital. Palaces were stripped of their ornaments and furniture, and the walls ofthe temples denuded of their statues and of the trophies of a hundredRoman victories. From the Capitoline sanctuary were borne off the goldencandlestick and other sacred articles that Titus had stolen from theTemple at Jerusalem. 

The greed of the barbarians was sated at last, and they were ready towithdraw. The Vandal fleet sailed for Carthage, bearing, besides theplunder of the city, more than 30, 000 of the inhabitants as slaves. [Footnote: The fleet was overtaken by a storm and suffered some damage, but the most precious of the relics it bore escaped harm. "The goldencandlestick reached the African capital, was recovered a century later, and lodged in Constantinople by Justinian, and by him replaced, fromsuperstitious motives, in Jerusalem. From that time its history is lost. "--Merivale. ] Carthage, through her own barbarian conquerors, was at lastavenged upon her hated rival. The mournful presentiment of Scipio hadfallen true (see p. 271). The cruel fate of Carthage might have been readagain in the pillaged city that the Vandals left behind them. 

FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE IN THE WEST (A. D. 476). --Only the shadow of theEmpire in the West now remained. All the provinces--Illyricum, Gaul, Britain, Spain, and Africa--were in the hands of the Goths, the Vandals, the Franks, the Burgundians, the Angles and Saxons, and various otherintruding tribes. Italy, as well as Rome herself, had become again andagain the spoil of the insatiable barbarians. The story of the twentyyears following the sack of the capital by Genseric affords only arepetition of the events we have been narrating. During these yearsseveral puppet emperors were set up by the different leaders of theinvading tribes. A final seditious movement placed upon the shadow-thronea child of six years, named Romulus Augustus. Chiefly because of theimperial farce he was forced to play, this child-emperor became known asAugustulus, "the little Augustus. " He had reigned only a year, whenOdoacer, the leader of a tribe of German mercenaries, dethroned him, andabolishing the title of emperor, took upon himself the government ofItaly. 

The Roman Senate now sent an embassy to Constantinople, with the royalvestments and the insignia of the imperial office, to represent to theEmperor Zeno that the West was willing to give up its claims to an emperorof its own, and to request that the German chief, with the title of"Patrician, " might rule Italy as his viceroy. This was granted; and Italynow became in effect a province of the Empire in the East (A. D. 476). TheRoman Empire in the West had come to an end, after an existence from thefounding of Rome of 1229 years. 

[Illustration: THE APPIAN WAY. (From a photograph). ]

ROMAN EMPERORS FROM COMMODUS TO ROMULUS AUGUSTUS. (A. D. 180-476. ) A. D. Commodus . . . . . . . . . . 180-192Pertinax . . . . . . . . . . 193Didius Julianus . . . . . . . 193Septimius Severus . . . . . . 193-211/ Caracalla . . . . . . . . . 211-217\ Geta . . . . . . . . . . . 211-213Macrinus . . . . . . . . . . 2l7-218Elagabalus . . . . . . . . . 218-222Alexander Severus . . . . . . 222-235Maximin . . . . . . . . . . . 235-238Gordian III . . . . . . . . . 238-244Philip . . . . . . . . . . . 244-249Decius . . . . . . . . . . . 249-251Period of the Thirty Tyrants. 251-268Claudius . . . . . . . . . . 268-270Aurelian . . . . . . . . . . 270-275Tacitus . . . . . . . . . . . 275-276Probus . . . . . . . . . . . 276-282Carus . . . . . . . . . . . . 282-283/ Carinus . . . . . . . . . . 283-284\ Numerian . . . . . . . . . 283-284/ Diocletian . . . . . . . . 284-305\ Maximian . . . . . . . . . 286-305/ Constantius I . . . . . . . 305-306\ Galerius . . . . . . . . . 305-311Constantine the Great . . . . 306-337 Reigns as sole ruler . . . . 323-337Constantine II . . . . . . . . 337-340Constans I . . . . . . . . . . 337-350Constantius II . . . . . . . . 337-361 Reigns as sole ruler . . . . 350-361Julian the Apostate . . . . . 361-363Jovian . . . . . . . . . . . 363-364/ Valentinian I . . . . . . . 364-375\ Valens (in the East). . . . 364-378Gratian . . . . . . . . . . . 375-383Maximus . . . . . . . . . . . 383-388Valentinian II . . . . . . . . 375-392Eugenius . . . . . . . . . . . 392-394Theodosius the Great . . . . . 379-395 Reigns as sole emperor. . . 394-395

FINAL PARTITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. (A. D. 395. )

EMPERORS IN THE EAST. (From A. D. 395 to Fall of Rome. ) A. D. Arcadius . . . . . . . . . . 395-408Theodosius II. . . . . . . . 408-450Marcian . . . . . . . . . . 450-457Leo I . . . . . . . . . . . 457-474Zeno . . . . . . . . . . . . 474-491

EMPERORS IN THE WEST. A. D. Honorius . . . . . . . . . . 395-423Valentinian III. . . . . . . 425-455Maximus . . . . . . . . . . 455Avitus . . . . . . . . . . . 455-456Count Ricimer creates and deposes emperors . . . . . 456-472Romulus Augustus . . . . . . 475-476

CHAPTER XXXI. 

ARCHITECTURE, LITERATURE, LAW, AND SOCIAL LIFE AMONG THE ROMANS. 

1. ARCHITECTURE. 

GREEK ORIGIN OF ROMAN ARCHITECTURE: THE ARCH. --The architecture of theRomans was, in the main, an imitation of Greek models. But the Romans werenot mere servile imitators. They not only modified the architectural formsthey borrowed, but they gave their structures a distinct character by theprominent use of the arch, which the Greek and Oriental builders seldomemployed, though they were acquainted with its properties. By means of itthe Roman builders vaulted the roofs of the largest buildings, carriedstupendous aqueducts across the deepest valleys, and spanned the broadeststreams with bridges that have resisted all the assaults of time and floodto the present day. 

SACRED EDIFICES. --The temples of the Romans were in general so like thoseof the Greeks that we need not here take time and space to enter into aparticular description of them. Mention, however, should be made of theircircular vaulted temples, as this was a style of building almostexclusively Italian. The best representative of this style of sacrededifices is the Pantheon at Rome, which has come down to our own times ina state of wonderful preservation. This structure is about 140 feet indiameter. The great concrete dome which vaults the building, is one of theboldest pieces of masonry executed by the master-builders of the world. 

CIRCUSES, THEATRES, AND AMPHITHEATRES. --The circuses of the Romans werewhat we should call race-courses. There were several at Rome, the mostcelebrated being the Circus Maximus, which was first laid out in the timeof the Tarquins, and afterwards enlarged as the population of the capitalincreased, until it was capable of holding two or three hundred thousandspectators. 

[Illustration: THE ROMAN FORUM IN 1885]

The Romans borrowed the plan of their theatres from the Greeks; theiramphitheatres, however, were original with them. The Flavian Amphitheatre, known as the Colosseum, has already come under our notice (see p. 316). The edifice was 574 feet in its greatest diameter, and was capable ofseating eighty-seven thousand spectators. The ruins of this immensestructure stand to-day as "the embodiment of the power and splendor of theRoman Empire. "

AQUEDUCTS. --The aqueducts of ancient Rome were among the most important ofthe utilitarian works of the Romans. The water-system of the capital wascommenced by Appius Claudius (about 313 B. C. ), who secured the building ofan aqueduct which led water into the city from the Sabine hills. Duringthe republic four aqueducts in all were completed; under the emperors thenumber was increased to fourteen. [Footnote: Several of these are still inuse. ] The longest of these was about fifty-five miles in length. Theaqueducts usually ran beneath the surface, but when a depression was to becrossed, they were lifted on arches, which sometimes were over one hundredfeet high. These lofty arches running in long broken lines over the plainsbeyond the walls of Rome, are the most striking feature of the Campagna atthe present time. 

THERMÆ, OR BATHS. --The greatest demand upon the streams of water pouredinto Rome by the aqueducts was made by the Thermæ, or baths. Among theancients Romans, bathing, regarded at first simply as a troublesomenecessity, became in time a luxurious art. Under the republic, bathing-houses were erected in considerable numbers. But it was during theimperial period that those magnificent structures to which the name ofThermæ properly attaches, were erected. These edifices were among the mostelaborate and expensive of the imperial works. They contained chambers forcold, hot, tepid, sudatory, and swimming baths; dressing-rooms andgymnasia; museums and libraries; covered colonnades for lounging andconversation, extensive grounds filled with statues and traversed bypleasant walks; and every other adjunct that could add to the sense ofluxury and relaxation. Being intended to exhibit the liberality of theirbuilders, they were thrown open to the public free of charge. 

MEMORIAL ARCHITECTURE. --Among the memorial structures of the Romans, theirtriumphal arches are especially characteristic. These were modelled afterthe city gates, being constructed with single and with triple archways. Two of the most noted monuments of this character, and the mostinteresting because of their historic connections, are the Arch of Titus(see p. 315) and the Arch of Constantine, both of which are stillstanding. The Arch of Constantine was intended to commemorate the victoryof that emperor over his rival Maxentius, which event establishedChristianity as the imperial and favored religion of the empire. 

[Illustration: ARCH OF CONSTANTINE. ]

2. LITERATURE, PHILOSOPHY, AND LAW. 

RELATION OF ROMAN TO GREEK LITERATURE: THE POETS OF THE REPUBLICAN ERA. --Latin literature was almost wholly imitative or borrowed, being areproduction of Greek models; still it performed a most important servicefor civilization: it was the medium for the dissemination throughout theworld of the rich literary treasures of Greece. 

It was the dramatic productions of the Greeks which were first studied andcopied at Rome. Livius Andronicus, Nævius, Ennius, Plautus, and Terence, all of whom wrote under the republic, are the most noted of the Romandramatists. Most of their plays were simply adaptations or translations ofGreek masterpieces. 

Lucilius (born 148 B. C. ) was one of the greatest of Roman satirists. Thelater satirists of the corrupt imperial era were his imitators. BesidesLucilius, there appeared during the later republican era only two otherpoets of distinguished merit, Lucretius and Catullus. Lucretius (95-51B. C. ) was an evolutionist, and in his great poem, _On the Nature ofThings_, we find anticipated many of the conclusions of modern scientists. 

POETS OF THE AUGUSTAN AGE. --We have in another place (see p. 307) spokenof the effects of the fall of the republic upon the development of Latinliterature. Many, who if the republican institutions had continued wouldhave been absorbed in the affairs of state, were led, by the change ofgovernment, to seek solace for their disappointed hopes, and employmentfor their enforced leisure, in the graceful labors of elegant composition. Four names have cast an unfading lustre over the period covered by thereign of Augustus, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, and Livy. So distinguished havethese writers rendered the age in which they lived, that any period in apeople's literature marked by unusual literary taste and refinement iscalled, in allusion to the Roman era, an _Augustan Age_. Of the threepoets, Virgil, Horace, and Ovid, a word has already been said; of Livy weshall find place to say something a little later, under the head of theRoman historians. 

SATIRE AND SATIRISTS. --Satire thrives best in the reeking soil and taintedatmosphere of an age of selfishness, immorality, and vice. Such an age wasthat which followed the Augustan era at Rome. The throne was held by suchimperial monsters as Caligula, Nero, and Domitian. The profligacy offashionable life at the capital and the various watering-places of theempire, and the degradation of the court gave venom and point to theshafts of those who were goaded by the spectacle into attacking theimmoralities and vices which were silently yet rapidly sapping thefoundations of both society and state. Hence arose a succession of writerswhose mastery of sharp and stinging satire has caused their productions tobecome the models of all subsequent attempts in the same species ofliterature. Two names stand out in special prominence--Persius andJuvenal, who lived and wrote during the last half of the first and thebeginning of the second century of our era. 

ORATORY AMONG THE ROMANS. --"Public oratory, " as has been truly said, "isthe child of political freedom, and cannot exist without it. " We have seenthis illustrated in the history of republican Athens. Equally well is thesame truth exemplified by the records of the Roman state. All the greatorators of Rome arose under the republic. 

Roman oratory was senatorial, popular, or judicial. These different stylesof eloquence were represented by the grave and dignified debates of theSenate, the impassioned and often noisy and inelegant harangues of theForum, and the learned pleadings or ingenious appeals of the courts. Amongthe orators of ancient Rome, Hortensius, (114-50 B. C. ), an eloquentadvocate, and Cicero (106-43 B. C. ) are easily first. 

HISTORIANS. --Ancient Rome produced four writers of history whose workshave won for them a permanent fame--Cæsar, Sallust, Livy, and Tacitus. OfCæsar and his _Commentaries on the Gallic War_, we have learned in aprevious chapter. His _Commentaries_ will always be mentioned with the_Anabasis_ of Xenophon, as a model of the narrative style of writing. Sallust (86-34 B. C. ) was the contemporary and friend of Cæsar. The twoworks upon which his fame rests are the _Conspiracy of Catiline_ and the_Jugurthine War_. 

Livy (59 B. C. -A. D. 17) was one of the brightest ornaments of the Augustanage. Herodotus among the ancient, and Macaulay among the modern, writersof historical narrative, are the names with which his is most frequentlycompared. His greatest work is his _Annals_, a history of Rome fromthe earliest times to the year 9 B. C. Unfortunately, all save thirty-fiveof the books [Footnote: It should be borne in mind that a book in theancient sense was simply a roll of manuscript or parchment, and containednothing like the amount of matter held by an ordinary modern volume. ThusCæsar's _Gallic Wars_, which makes a single volume of moderate sizewith us, made eight Roman books. ]--the work filled one hundred and forty-two volumes--perished during the disturbed period that followed theoverthrow of the empire. Many have been the laments over "the lost booksof Livy. " As a chronicle of actual events, Livy's history, particularly inits earlier parts, is very unreliable; however, it is invaluable as anaccount of what the Romans themselves believed respecting the origin oftheir race, the founding of their city, and the deeds and virtues of theirforefathers. 

The most highly prized work of Tacitus is his _Germania_, a treatiseon the manners and customs of the Germans. Tacitus dwells with delightupon the simple life of the uncivilized Germans, and sets their virtues instrong contrast with the immoralities of the refined and cultured Romans. 

ETHICS, SCIENCE, AND PHILOSOPHY. --Under this head may be grouped the namesof Seneca, Pliny the Elder, Marcus Aurelius, and Epictetus. Seneca (aboutA. D. 1-65), moralist and philosopher, has already come to our notice asthe tutor of Nero (see p. 312). He was a disbeliever in the popularreligion of his countrymen, and entertained conceptions of God and hismoral government not very different from the doctrines of Socrates. Plinythe Elder (A. D. 23-79) is almost the only Roman who won renown as anaturalist. The only work of his that has been spared to us is his_Natural History_, a sort of "Roman Encyclopædia, " embracing thirty-seven books. 

[Illustration: SENECA. ]

Marcus Aurelius the emperor and Epictetus the slave hold prominent placesamong the ethical teachers of Rome. Of the emperor as a philosopher wehave already spoken (see p. 321). 

Epictetus (b. About 60 A. D. ) was for many years a slave at the capital;but, securing in some way his freedom, he became a teacher of philosophy. Epictetus and Aurelius were the last eminent representatives andexpositors of the philosophy of Zeno. Christianity, giving a larger placeto the affections than did Stoicism, was already fast winning the heartsof men. 

WRITERS OF THE EARLY LATIN CHURCH. --The Christian authors of the firstthree centuries, like the writers of the New Testament, employed theGreek, that being the language of learning and culture. As the Latintongue, however, came into more general use throughout the extendedprovinces of the Roman empire, the Christian authors naturally began touse the same in the composition of their works. Hence, almost all thewritings of the Fathers of the Church, produced during the last twocenturies of the empire, were composed in Latin. Among the many names thatadorn the Church literature of this period may be mentioned Saint Jeromeand Saint Augustine, --the former celebrated for his translation of theScriptures into Latin, [Footnote: The _Vulgate_, which is the versionstill used in the Roman Catholic Church. ] and the latter for his "City ofGod. " This was truly a wonderful work. It was written just when Rome wasbecoming the spoil of the barbarians, and was designed to answer thecharge of the pagans that Christianity, turning the hearts of the peopleaway from the worship of the ancient gods, was the cause of the calamitiesthat were befalling the Roman state. 

ROMAN LAW AND LAW LITERATURE. --Although the Latin writers in all thedepartments of literary effort which we have so far reviewed did muchvaluable work, yet the Roman intellect in all these directions was underGreek guidance. Its work was largely imitative. But in another departmentit was different. We mean, of course, the field of legal and politicalscience. Here the Romans ceased to be pupils, and became teachers. Nations, like men, have their mission. Rome's mission was to give laws tothe world. 

In the year 527 A. D. Justinian became emperor of the Roman empire in theEast. He almost immediately appointed a commission, headed by the greatlawyer Tribonian, to collect and arrange in a systematic manner theimmense mass of Roman laws, and the writings of the jurists. Theundertaking was like that of the Decemvirs in connection with the TwelveTables (see p. 236), only far greater. The result of the work of thecommission was what is known as the _Corpus Juris Civilis_, or "Bodyof the Civil Law. " This consisted of three parts: the _Code_, the_Pandects_ and the _Institutes_, [Footnote: A later work called the_Novels_ comprised the laws of Justinian subsequent to the completion ofthe _Code_. ] The Code was a revised and compressed collection of all thelaws, instructions to judicial officers, and opinions on legal subjects, promulgated by the different emperors since the time of Hadrian; thePandects (all-containing) were a digest or abridgment of the writings, opinions, and decisions of the most eminent of the old Roman jurists andlawyers. The Institutes were a condensed edition of the Pandects, and wereintended to form an elementary text-book for the use of students in thegreat law-schools of the empire. 

The Body of the Roman Law thus preserved and transmitted was the greatcontribution of the Latin intellect to civilization. It has exerted aprofound influence upon all the law-systems of Europe. Thus does the oncelittle Palatine city of the Tiber still rule the world. The religion ofJudea, the arts of Greece, and the laws of Rome are three very real andpotent elements in modern civilization. 

3. SOCIAL LIFE. 

EDUCATION. --Roman children were subject in an extraordinary manner totheir father (_paterfamilias_). They were regarded as his property, and their life and liberty were in general at his absolute disposal. Thispower he exercised by usually drowning at birth the deformed or sicklychild. Even the married son remained legally subject to his father, whocould banish him, sell him as a slave, or even put him to death. It shouldbe said, however, that the right of putting to death was seldom exercised, and that in the time of the empire the law put some limitations upon it. 

The education of the Roman boy differed from that of the Greek youth inbeing more practical. The Laws of the Twelve Tables were committed tomemory; and rhetoric and oratory were given special attention, as amastery of the art of public speaking was an almost indispensableacquirement for the Roman citizen who aspired to take a prominent part inthe affairs of state. 

After the conquest of Magna Græcia and of Greece, the Romans were broughtinto closer relations than had hitherto existed with Greek culture. TheRoman youth were taught the language of Athens, often to the neglect, itappears, of their native tongue. Young men belonging to families of means, not unusually went to Greece, just as the graduates of our schools go toEurope, to finish their education. Many of the most prominent statesmen ofRome, as for instance Cicero and Julius Cæsar, received the advantages ofthis higher training in the schools of Greece. 

Somewhere between the age of fourteen and eighteen the boy exchanged hispurple-hemmed toga, or gown, for one of white wool, which was in allplaces and at all times the significant badge of Roman citizenship. 

SOCIAL POSITION OF WOMEN. --Until after her marriage, the daughter of thefamily was kept in almost Oriental seclusion. Marriage gave her a certainfreedom. She might now be present at the races of the circus and thevarious shows of the theatre and the arena, a privilege rarely accorded toher before marriage. In the early virtuous period of the Roman state, divorce was unusual, but in later and more degenerate times, it becamevery common. The husband had the right to divorce his wife for theslightest cause, or for no cause at all. In this disregard of the sanctityof the family relation, may doubtless be found one cause of the degeneracyand failure of the Roman stock. 

PUBLIC AMUSEMENTS. --The entertainments of the theatre, the games of thecircus, and the combats of the amphitheatre were the three principalpublic amusements of the Romans. These entertainments in general increasedin popularity as liberty declined, the great festive gatherings at thevarious places of amusement taking the place of the political assembliesof the republic. The public exhibitions under the empire were, in acertain sense, the compensation which the emperors offered the people fortheir surrender of the right of participation in public affairs, --and thepeople were content to accept the exchange. 

Tragedy was never held in high esteem at Rome: the people saw too muchreal tragedy in the exhibitions of the amphitheatre to care much for themake-believe tragedies of the stage. The entertainments of the theatresusually took the form of comedies, farces, and pantomimes. The last wereparticularly popular, both because the vast size of the theatres made itquite impossible for the actor to make his voice heard throughout thestructure, and for the reason that the language of signs was the onlylanguage that could be readily understood by an audience made up of somany different nationalities as composed a Roman assemblage. 

More important and more popular than the entertainments of the theatrewere the various games, especially the chariot races, of the circus. Butsurpassing in their terrible fascination all other public amusements werethe animal-baitings and the gladiatorial combats of the arena. 

The beasts required for the baitings were secured in different parts ofthe world, and transported to Rome and the other cities of the empire atan enormous expense. The wildernesses of Northern Europe furnished bearsand wolves; Africa contributed lions, crocodiles, and leopards; Asiaelephants and tigers. These creatures were pitted against one another inevery conceivable way. Often a promiscuous multitude would be turned loosein the arena at once. But even the terrific scene that then ensued, becameat last too tame to stir the blood of the Roman populace. Hence a newspecies of show was introduced, and grew rapidly into favor with thespectators of the amphitheatre. This was the gladiatorial combat. 

THE GLADIATORIAL COMBATS. --Gladiatorial games seem to have had theirorigin in Etruria, whence they were brought to Rome. It was a custom amongthe early Etruscans to slay prisoners upon the warrior's grave, it beingthought that the spirit of the dead delighted in the blood of suchvictims. In time the condemned prisoners were allowed to fight and killone another, this being deemed more humane than their cold-bloodedslaughter. Thus it happened that sentiments of humanity gave rise to aninstitution which, afterwards perverted, became the most inhuman of anythat ever existed among a civilized people. 

The first gladiatorial spectacle at Rome was presented by two sons at thefuneral of their father, in the year 264 B. C. This exhibition was arrangedin one of the forums, as there were at that time no amphitheatres inexistence. From this time the public taste for this species ofentertainment grew rapidly, and by the beginning of the imperial periodhad mounted into a perfect passion. It was now no longer the manes of thedead, but the spirits of the living, that they were intended to appease. At first the combatants were slaves, captives, or condemned criminals; butat last knights, senators, and even women descended into the arena. Training-schools were established at Rome, Capua, Ravenna, and othercities. Free citizens often sold themselves to the keepers of theseseminaries; and to them flocked desperate men of all classes, and ruinedspendthrifts of the noblest patrician houses. Slaves and criminals wereencouraged to become proficient in this art by the promise of freedom ifthey survived the combats beyond a certain number of years. 

[Illustration: GLADIATORS. (After an old Mosaic. )]

Sometimes the gladiators fought in pairs; again great companies engaged atonce in the deadly fray. They fought in chariots, on horseback, on foot--in all the ways that soldiers were accustomed to fight in actual battle. The contestants were armed with lances, swords, daggers, tridents, andevery manner of weapon. Some were provided with nets and lassos, withwhich they entangled their adversaries, and then slew them. 

The life of a wounded gladiator was in the hands of the audience. If inresponse to his appeal for mercy, which was made by outstretching theforefinger, the spectators reached out their hands with thumbs turneddown, that indicated that his prayer had been heard and that the sword wasto be sheathed; but if they extended their hands with thumbs turned up, that was the signal for the victor to complete his work upon his woundedfoe. Sometimes the dying were aroused and forced on to the fight byburning with a hot iron. The dead bodies were dragged from the arena withhooks, like the carcasses of animals, and the pools of blood soaked upwith dry sand. 

These shows increased to such an extent that they entirely overshadowedthe entertainments of the circus and the theatre. Ambitious officials andcommanders arranged such spectacles in order to curry favor with themasses; magistrates were expected to give them in connection with thepublic festivals; the heads of aspiring families exhibited them "in orderto acquire social position"; wealthy citizens prepared them as anindispensable feature of a fashionable banquet; the children caught thespirit of their elders and imitated them in their plays. The demand forgladiators was met by the training-schools; the managers of these hiredout bands of trained men, that travelled through the country like operatroupes among us, and gave exhibitions in private houses or in theprovincial amphitheatres. 

The rivalries between ambitious leaders during the later years of therepublic tended greatly to increase the number of gladiatorial shows, asliberality in arranging these spectacles was a sure passport to popularfavor. It was reserved for the emperors, however, to exhibit them on atruly imperial scale. Titus, upon the dedication of the FlavianAmphitheatre, provided games, mostly gladiatorial combats, that lasted onehundred days. Trajan celebrated his victories with shows that continuedstill longer, in the progress of which 10, 000 gladiators fought upon thearena, and more than that number of wild beasts were slain. (For thesuppression of the gladiatorial games, see p. 339. )

STATE DISTRIBUTION OF CORN. --The free distribution of corn at Rome hasbeen characterized as the "leading fact of Roman life. " It will berecalled that this pernicious practice had its beginnings in thelegislation of Caius Gracchus (see p. 276). Just before the establishmentof the empire, over 300, 000 Roman citizens were recipients of this statebounty. In the time of the Antonines the number is asserted to have beeneven larger. The corn for this enormous distribution was derived in largepart from a grain tribute exacted of the African and other corn-producingprovinces. The evils that resulted from this misdirected state charity canhardly be overstated. Idleness and all its accompanying vices werefostered to such a degree that we probably shall not be wrong inenumerating the practice as one of the most prominent causes of thedemoralization of society at Rome under the emperors. 

SLAVERY. --A still more demoralizing element in Roman life than that of thestate largesses of corn, was the institution of slavery. The number ofslaves in the Roman state under the later republic and the earlier empirewas probably as great or even greater than the number of freemen. The loveof ostentation led to the multiplication of offices in the households ofthe wealthy, and the employment of a special slave for every differentkind of work. Thus there was the slave called the _sandalio_, whosesole duty it was to care for his master's sandals; and another, called the_nomenclator_, whose exclusive business it was to accompany his masterwhen he went upon the street, and give him the names of such persons as heought to recognize. The price of slaves varied from a few dollars to tenor twenty thousand dollars, --these last figures being of courseexceptional. Greek slaves were the most valuable, as their livelyintelligence rendered them serviceable in positions calling for specialtalent. 

The slave class was chiefly recruited, as in Greece, by war, and by thepractice of kidnapping. Some of the outlying provinces in Asia and Africawere almost depopulated by the slave hunters. Delinquent tax payers wereoften sold as slaves, and frequently poor persons sold themselves intoservitude. 

Slaves were treated better under the empire than under the later republic(see p. 273), a change to be attributed doubtless to the softeninginfluence of the Stoical philosophy and of Christianity. The feelingentertained towards this unfortunate class in the later republican periodis illustrated by Varro's classification of slaves as "vocal agriculturalimplements, " and again by Cato the Elder's recommendation that old andworn-out slaves be sold, as a matter of economy. Sick and hopelesslyinfirm slaves were taken to an island in the Tiber and left there to dieof starvation and exposure. In many cases, as a measure of precaution, theslaves were forced to work in chains, and to sleep in subterraneanprisons. Their bitter hatred towards their masters, engendered by harshtreatment, is witnessed by the well-known proverb, "As many enemies asslaves, " and by the servile revolts and wars of the republican period. Butfrom the first century of the empire there is observable a growingsentiment of humanity towards the bondsman. Imperial edicts take away fromthe master the right to kill his slave, or to sell him to the trader ingladiators, or even to treat him with any undue severity. This marks thebeginning of a slow reform which in the course of ten or twelve centuriesresulted in the complete abolition of slavery in Christian Europe. 

[Illustration: SARCOPHAGUS OF CORNELIUS SCIPIO BARBATUS (Consul 298B. C. ). ]

PART II. 

MEDIÆVAL AND MODERN HISTORY. 

INTRODUCTION. 

DIVISIONS OF THE SUBJECT. --As we have already noted, the fourteencenturies since the fall of the Roman empire in the West (A. D. 476) areusually divided into two periods, --the _Middle Ages_, or the period lyingbetween the fall of Rome and the discovery of America by Columbus in 1492, and the _Modern Age_, which extends from the latter event to the presenttime. The Middle Ages, again, naturally subdivide into two periods, --the_Dark Ages_, and the _Age of Revival_; while the Modern Age also fallsinto two divisions, --the _Era of the Protestant Reformation_, and the _Eraof the Political Revolution_. 

CHIEF CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FOUR PERIODS. --The so-called _Dark Ages_embrace the years intervening between the fall of Rome and the opening ofthe eleventh century. The period was one of _origins_, --of the beginningsof peoples and languages and institutions. During this time arose thePapacy and Feudalism, the two great institutions of the Mediæval Ages. 

The _Age of Revival_ begins with the opening of the eleventh century, and ends with the discovery of America by Columbus in 1492. During allthis time civilization was making slow but sure advances. The last centuryof the period, especially, was marked by a great revival of classicallearning (known as the _Renaissance_, or New Birth), by improvements, inventions, and discoveries, which greatly stirred men's minds, andawakened them as from a sleep. The Crusades, or Holy Wars, were the mostremarkable undertakings of the age. 

The _Era of the Reformation_ embraces the sixteenth century and thefirst half of the seventeenth. The period is characterized by the greatreligious movement known as the Reformation, and the tremendous strugglebetween Catholicism and Protestantism. Almost all the wars of the periodwere religious wars. The last great combat was the Thirty Years' War inGermany, which was closed by the celebrated Peace of Westphalia, in 1648. After this date the disputes and wars between parties and nations werepolitical rather than religious in character. 

The _Era of the Political Revolution_ extends from the Peace of Westphaliato the present time. This age is especially marked by the great conflictbetween despotic and liberal principles of government, resulting in thetriumph of democratic ideas. The central event of the period is the FrenchRevolution. 

Having now made a general survey of the ground we are to traverse, we mustreturn to our starting-point, --the fall of Rome. 

RELATION OF THE FALL OF ROME TO WORLD-HISTORY. --The calamity which in thefifth century befell the Roman empire in the West is sometimes representedas having destroyed the treasures of the Old World. It was not so. Allthat was really valuable in the accumulations of antiquity escaped harm, and became sooner or later the possession of the succeeding ages. Thecatastrophe simply prepared the way for the shifting of the scene ofcivilization from the south to the north of Europe, simply transferred atonce political power, and gradually social and intellectual preeminence, from one branch of the Aryan family to another, --from the Græco-Italic tothe Teutonic. 

The event was not an unrelieved calamity, because, fortunately, the floodsthat seemed to be sweeping so much away were not the mountain torrent, which covers fruitful fields with worthless drift, but the overflowingNile with its rich deposits. Over all the regions covered by the barbarianinundation a new stratum of population was deposited, a new soil formedthat was capable of nourishing a better civilization than any the worldhad yet seen. 

THE THREE ELEMENTS OF CIVILIZATION. --We must now notice what survived thecatastrophe of the fifth century, what it was that Rome transmitted to thenew rulers of the world, the Teutonic race. This renders necessary ananalysis of the elements of civilization. 

Modern civilization is the result of the blending of three historicelements, --the _Classical_, the _Hebrew_, and the _Teutonic_. 

By the classical element in civilization is meant that whole body of arts, sciences, literatures, laws, manners, ideas, and social arrangements, --everything, in a word, save Christianity, that Greece and Rome gave tomediæval and modern Europe. Taken together, these things constituted avaluable gift to the new northern race that was henceforth to representcivilization. 

By the Hebrew element in history is meant Christianity. This has been themost potent factor in modern civilization. It has so colored the wholelife, and so moulded all the institutions of the European people thattheir history is very largely a story of the fortunes and influences ofthis religion, which, first going forth from Judea, was given to theyounger world by the missionaries of Rome. 

By the Teutonic element in history is meant of course the Germanic race. The Teutons were poor in those things in which the Romans were rich. Theyhad neither arts, nor sciences, nor philosophies, nor literatures. Butthey had something better than all these; they had personal worth. Threeprominent traits of theirs we must especially notice; namely, theircapacity for civilization, their love of personal freedom, and theirreverence for womanhood. 

The Teutons fortunately belonged to a progressive family of peoples. AsKingsley puts it, they came of a royal race. They were Aryans. It wastheir boundless capacity for growth, for culture, for civilization, whichsaved the countries of the West from the sterility and barbarism reservedfor those of the East that were destined to be taken possession of by theTuranian Turks. 

The Teutons loved personal freedom. They never called any man master, butfollowed their chosen leader as companions and equals. They could not evenbear to have the houses of their villages set close together. And again wesee the same independent spirit expressed in their assemblies of freemen, in which meetings, all matters of public interest were debated anddecided. In this trait of the Teutonic disposition lay the germ ofrepresentative government and of Protestant, or Teutonic Christianity. 

A feeling of respect for woman characterized all the northern, or Teutonicpeoples. Tacitus says of the Germans that they deemed something sacred toreside in woman's nature. This sentiment guarded the purity and sanctityof the home. In their high estimation of the sacredness of the familyrelation, the barbarians stood in marked contrast with the later Romans. Our own sacred word _home_, as well as all that it represents, comesfrom our Teutonic ancestors. 

CELTS, SLAVONIANS, AND OTHER PEOPLES. --Having noticed the Romans andTeutons, the two most prominent peoples that present themselves to us atthe time of the downfall of Rome, if we now name the Celts, theSlavonians, the Persians, the Arabians, and the Turanian tribes of Asia, we shall have under view the chief actors in the drama of mediæval andmodern history. 

At the commencement of the mediæval era the Celts were in front of theTeutons, clinging to the western edge of the European continent, andengaged in a bitter contest with these latter peoples, which, in theantagonism of England and Ireland, was destined to extend itself to ourown day. 

The Slavonians were in the rear of the Teutonic tribes, pressing them oneven as the Celts in front were struggling to resist their advance. Thesepeoples, progressing but little beyond the pastoral state before theModern Age, will play only an obscure part in the events of the mediævalera, but in the course of the modern period will assume a most commandingposition among the European nations. 

The Persians were in their old seat beyond the Euphrates, maintainingthere what is called the New Persian Empire, the kings of which, until therise of the Saracens in the seventh century, were the most formidablerivals of the emperors of Constantinople. 

The Arabians were hidden in their deserts; but in the seventh century weshall see them, animated by a wonderful religious fanaticism, issue fromtheir peninsula and begin a contest with the Christian nations of the Eastand the West which, in its varying phases, was destined to fill a largepart of the mediæval period. 

The Tartar tribes were buried in Central Asia. They will appear late inthe eleventh century, proselytes for the most part of Mohammedanism; and, as the religious ardor of the Semitic Arabians grows cool, we shall seethe Crescent upheld by these zealous converts of another race, andfinally, in the fifteenth century, placed by the Turks upon the dome ofSt. Sophia in Constantinople. 

As the Middle Ages draw to a close, the remote nations of Eastern Asiawill gradually come within our circle of vision; and, as the Modern Agedawns, we shall catch a glimpse of new continents and strange races of menbeyond the Atlantic. 

SECTION I. --MEDIÆVAL HISTORY. 

FIRST PERIOD. --THE DARK AGES. (FROM THE FALL OF ROME, A. D. 476, TO THE ELEVENTH CENTURY. )

CHAPTER XXXII. 

THE TEUTONIC KINGDOMS. 

INTRODUCTORY. --In connection with the history of the break-up of the Romanempire in the West, we have already given some account of the migrationsand settlements of the German tribes. In the present chapter we shallrelate briefly the political fortunes, for the two centuries following thefall of Rome, of the principal kingdoms set up by the German chieftains inthe different provinces of the old empire. 

KINGDOM OF THE OSTROGOTHS (A. D. 493-554). --Odoacer will be recalled as thebarbarian chief who dethroned the last of the Western Roman emperors (seep. 348). His feeble government in Italy lasted only seventeen years, whenit was brought to a close by the invasion of the Ostrogoths (EasternGoths) under Theodoric, the greatest of their chiefs, who set up in Italya new dominion, known as the Kingdom of the Ostrogoths. 

The reign of Theodoric covered thirty-three years--years of such quiet andprosperity as Italy had not known since the happy era of the Antonines. The king made good his promise that his reign should be such that "theonly regret of the people should be that the Goths had not come at anearlier period. "

The kingdom established by the rare abilities of Theodoric lasted onlytwenty-seven years after his death, which occurred A. D. 527. Justinian, emperor of the East, taking advantage of that event, sent his generals, first Belisarius and afterwards Narses, to deliver Italy from the rule ofthe barbarians. The last of the Ostrogothic kings fell in battle, andItaly, with her fields ravaged and her cities in ruins, was reunited tothe empire (A. D. 554). 

KINGDOM OF THE VISIGOTHS (A. D. 415-711). --The Visigoths (Western Goths)were already in possession of Spain and Southern Gaul at the time of thefall of Rome. Being driven south of the Pyrenees by Clovis, king of theFranks, they held possession of Spain until the beginning of the eighthcentury, when the Saracens crossed the Straits of Gibraltar, destroyed thekingdom of Roderick, the last of the Gothic kings, and establishedthroughout the country the authority of the Koran (A. D. 711). TheVisigothic empire when thus overturned had lasted nearly three hundredyears. During this time the conquerors had mingled with the old Romanizedinhabitants of Spain, so that in the veins of the Spaniard of to-day isblended the blood of Iberian, Celt, Roman, and Teuton, together with thatof the last comers, the Moors. 

KINGDOM OF THE BURGUNDIANS (A. D. 443-534). --The Burgundians, who were nearkinsmen of the Goths, built up a kingdom in Southeastern Gaul. A portionof this ancient domain still retains, from these German settlers, the nameof "Burgundy. " The Burgundians soon came in collision with the Franks onthe north, and were reduced by the Frankish kings to a state ofdependence. 

KINGDOM OF THE VANDALS (A. D. 429-533). --We have already spoken of theestablishment in North Africa of the kingdom of the Vandals, and told how, under the lead of their king Genseric, they bore in triumph down the Tiberthe heavy spoils of Rome. (see p. 346). 

Being Arian Christians, the Vandals persecuted with furious zeal theorthodox party, the followers of Athanasius. Moved by the entreaties ofthe African Catholics, the Emperor Justinian sent his general Belisariusto drive the barbarians from Africa, and to restore that province to thebosom of the true Catholic Church. The expedition was successful, andCarthage and the fruitful fields of Africa were restored to the empire, after having suffered the insolence of the barbarian conquerors for thespace of one hundred years. The Vandals remaining in the country weregradually absorbed by the old Roman population, and after a fewgenerations no certain trace of the barbarian invaders could be detectedin the physical appearance, the language, or the customs of theinhabitants of the African coast. The Vandal nation had disappeared; thename alone remained. 

[Illustration: CLOVIS AND THE VASE OF SOISSONS (After a drawing byAlphonse de Neuville. ) [Footnote: The story of the Vase of Soissonsillustrates at once the customs of the Franks and the power and personalcharacter of their leader Clovis. Upon the division at Soissons of somespoils, Clovis asked his followers to set aside a rule whereby theydivided the booty by lot, and to let him have a certain beautiful vase. One of his followers objected, and broke the vase to pieces with hisbattle-axe. Clovis concealed his anger at the time, but some timeafterwards, when reviewing his troops, he approached the man who hadoffended him, and chiding him for not keeping his arms bright, cleft hishead with a battle-axe, at the same time exclaiming, "Thus didst thou tothe vase of Soissons. "]]

THE FRANKS UNDER THE MEROVINGIANS (A. D. 482-752). --The Franks, who weredestined to give a new name to Gaul and form the nucleus of the Frenchnation, made their first settlement west of the Rhine about two hundredyears before the fall of Rome. The name was the common designation of anumber of Teutonic tribes that had formed a confederation while dwellingbeyond the Rhine. The Salian Franks were the leading tribe of the league, and it was from the members of their most powerful family, who tracedtheir descent from Merovæus, a legendary sea-king of the Franks, thatleaders were chosen by the free vote of all the warriors. 

After the downfall of Rome, Clovis, then chief of the Franks, conceivedthe ambition of erecting a kingdom upon the ruins of the Roman power. Heattacked Syagrius, the Roman governor of Gaul, and at Soissons gained adecisive victory over his forces (A. D. 486). Thus was destroyed forever inGaul that Roman authority established among its barbarous tribes more thanfive centuries before by the conquests of Julius Cæsar. 

During his reign, Clovis extended his authority over the greater part ofGaul, reducing to the condition of tributaries the various Teutonic tribesthat had taken possession of different portions of the country. About acentury and a half of discord followed his energetic rule, by the end ofwhich time the princes of the house of Merovæus had become so feeble andinefficient that they were contemptuously called "do-nothings, " and anambitious officer of the crown, who bore the title of Mayor of the Palace, pushed aside his imbecile master, and gave to the Frankish monarchy a newroyal line, --the Carolingian (see p. 404). 

KINGDOM OF THE LOMBARDS (A. D. 568-774). --The circumstances attending theestablishment of the Lombards in Italy were very like those marking thesettlement of the Ostrogoths. The Lombards (Langobardi), so called eitherfrom their long beards, or their long battle-axes, came from the region ofthe Upper Danube. In just such a march as the Ostrogoths had made nearly acentury before, the Lombard nation crossed the Alps and descended upon theplains of Italy. After many years of desperate fighting, they wrested fromthe empire [Footnote: Italy, it will be borne in mind, had but recentlybeen delivered from the hands of the Ostrogoths by the lieutenants of theEastern emperor (see p. 372). ] all the peninsula save some of the greatcities, and set up in the country a monarchy which lasted almost exactlytwo centuries. 

The rule of the Lombard princes was brought to an end by Charlemagne, thegreatest of the Frankish rulers (see p. 405); but the blood of theinvaders had by this time become intermingled with that of the formersubjects of the Roman empire, so that throughout all that part of thepeninsula which is still called Lombardy after them, the people at thepresent day reveal, in the light hair and fair features which distinguishthem from the inhabitants of Southern Italy, their partly German origin. 

THE ANGLO-SAXONS IN BRITAIN. --We have already seen how in the time ofRome's distress the Angles and Saxons secured a foothold in Britain (seep. 344). The advance of the invaders here was stubbornly resisted by thehalf-Romanized Celts of the island. At the end of a century and a half offighting, the German tribes had gained possession of only the eastern halfof what is now England. On the conquered soil they set up eight or nine, or perhaps more, petty kingdoms. For the space of two hundred years therewas an almost perpetual strife among these states for supremacy. FinallyEgbert, king of the West Saxons, brought all the other states into asubject or tributary condition, and became the first king of the English, and the founder of the long line of Saxon monarchs (A. D. 827). 

TEUTONIC TRIBES OUTSIDE THE EMPIRE. --We have now spoken of the mostimportant of the Teutonic tribes that forced themselves within the limitsof the Roman empire in the West, and that there, upon the ruins of thecivilization they had overthrown, laid or helped to lay the foundations ofthe modern nations of Italy, Spain, France, and England. Beyond theboundaries of the old empire were still other tribes and clans of thissame mighty family of nations, --tribes and clans that were destined toplay great parts in European history. 

On the east, beyond the Rhine, were the ancestors of the modern Germans. Notwithstanding the immense hosts that the forests and morasses of Germanyhad poured into the Roman provinces, the Father-land, in the sixth centuryof our era, seemed still as crowded as before the great migration began. These tribes were yet savages in manners and for the most part pagans inreligion. 

In the northwest of Europe were the Scandinavians, the ancestors of themodern Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians. They were as yet untouched either bythe civilization or the religion of Rome. We shall scarcely get a glimpseof them before the ninth century, when they will appear as the Northmen, the dreaded corsairs of the northern seas. 

CHAPTER XXXIII. 

THE CONVERSION OF THE BARBARIANS. 

INTRODUCTORY. --The most important event in the history of the tribes thattook possession of the Roman empire in the West was their conversion toChristianity. Many of the barbarians were converted before or soon aftertheir entrance into the empire; to this circumstance the Roman provincesowed their immunity from the excessive cruelties which pagan barbariansseldom fail to inflict upon a subjected enemy. Alaric left untouched thetreasures of the churches of the Roman Christians, because his own faithwas also Christian (see p. 342). For like reason the Vandal king Gensericyielded to the prayers of Pope Leo the Great, and promised to leave to theinhabitants of the Imperial City their lives (see p. 346). The moretolerable fate of Italy, Spain, and Gaul, as compared with the hard fateof Britain, is owing, in part at least, to the fact that the tribes whichoverran those countries had become, in the main, converts to Christianitybefore they crossed the boundaries of the empire, while the Saxons, whenthey entered Britain, were still untamed pagans. 

CONVERSION OF THE GOTHS, VANDALS, AND OTHER TRIBES. --The first converts toChristianity among the barbarians beyond the limits of the empire were wonfrom among the Goths. Foremost of the apostles that arose among them wasUlfilas, who translated the Scriptures into the Gothic language, omittingfrom his version, however, "the Book of Kings, " as he feared that thestirring recital of wars and battles in that portion of the Word mightkindle into too fierce a flame the martial ardor of his new converts. 

When the Visigoths, distressed by the Huns, besought the Eastern EmperorValens for permission to cross the Danube, one of the conditions imposedupon them was that they should all be baptized in the Christian faith (seep. 336). This seems to have crowned the work that had been going on amongthem for some time, and thereafter they were called Christians. 

What happened to the Goths happened also to most of the barbarian tribesthat participated in the overthrow of the Roman empire in the West. By thetime of the fall of Rome, the Goths, the Vandals, the Suevi, theBurgundians, had all become proselytes to Christianity. The greater partof them, however, professed the Arian creed, which had been condemned bythe great council of the church held at Nicæa during the reign ofConstantine the Great (see p. 332). Hence they were regarded as hereticsby the Roman Church, and all had to be reconverted to the orthodox creed, which was gradually effected. 

The remaining Teutonic tribes of whose conversion we shall speak, --theFranks, the Anglo Saxons, the Scandinavians, and the chief tribes ofGermany, --embraced at the outset the Catholic faith. 

CONVERSION OF THE FRANKS. --The Franks, when they entered the empire, likethe Angles and Saxons when they landed in Britain, were still pagans. Christianity gained way very slowly among them until a supposedinterposition by the Christian God in their behalf led the king and nationto adopt the new religion in place of their old faith. The circumstanceswere these. In the year 496 of our era, the Alemanni crossed the Rhine andfell upon the Franks. A desperate battle ensued. In the midst of it, Clovis, falling upon his knees, called upon the God of the Christians, andsolemnly vowed that if He would give victory to his arms, he would becomehis faithful follower. The battle turned in favor of the Franks, andClovis, faithful to his vow, was baptized, and with him several thousandof his warriors. This incident illustrates how the very superstitions ofthe barbarians, their belief in omens and divine interpositions, contributed to their conversion. 

AUGUSTINE'S MISSION TO THE ANGLES AND SAXONS IN BRITAIN. --In the year 596Pope Gregory I. Sent the monk Augustine with a band of forty companions toteach the Christian faith in Britain. Gregory had become interested in theinhabitants of that remote region in the following way. One day, someyears before his elevation to the papal chair, he was passing through theslave-market at Rome, and noticed there some English captives, whose fairfeatures awakened his curiosity respecting them. Inquiring of what nationthey were, he was told that they were called Angles. "Right, " said he, "for they have an angelic face, and it becomes such to become co-heirswith the angels in heaven. " A little while afterwards he was elected Pope, and still mindful of the incident of the slave-market, he sent to theAngles the embassy to which we have alluded. 

The monks were favorably received by the English, who listened attentivelyto the story the strangers had come to tell them, and being persuaded thatthe tidings were true, they burned the temples of Woden and Thor, and werein large numbers baptized in the Christian faith. 

THE CELTIC CHURCH. --It here becomes necessary for us to say a wordrespecting the Celtic Church. Christianity, it must be borne in mind, heldits place among the Celts whom the Saxons crowded slowly westward. Now, during the very period that England was being wrested from the Celticwarriors, the Celtic missionaries were effecting the spiritual conquest ofIreland. Among these messengers of the Cross, was a zealous priest namedPatricius, better known as Saint Patrick, the patron saint of the Irish. 

Never did any race receive the Gospel with more ardent enthusiasm. TheIrish Church sent out its devoted missionaries into the Pictish Highlands, into the forests of Germany, and among the wilds of Alps and Apennines. "For a time it seemed, " says the historian Green, "that the course of theworld's history was to be changed; as if the older Celtic race that Romanand German had driven before them had turned to the moral conquest oftheir conquerors; as if Celtic, and not Latin, Christianity was to mouldthe destinies of the churches of the West. "

Among the numerous religious houses founded by the Celtic missionaries wasthe famous monastery established about A. D. 564 by the Irish monk SaintColumba, on the little isle of Iona, just off the Pictish coast. Ionabecame a most renowned centre of Christian learning and missionary zeal, and for almost two centuries was the point from which radiated lightthrough the darkness of the surrounding heathenism. Fitly has it beencalled the Nursery of Saints and the Oracle of the West. 

RIVALRY BETWEEN THE ROMAN AND THE CELTIC CHURCH. --Now, from the verymoment that Augustine touched the shores of Britain and summoned the Welshclergy to acknowledge the discipline of the Roman Church, there had been agrowing jealousy between the Latin and the Celtic Church, which by thistime had risen into the bitterest rivalry and strife. So long had theCeltic Church been cut off from all relations with Rome, that it had cometo differ somewhat from it in the matter of certain ceremonies andobservances, such as the time of keeping Easter and the form of thetonsure. Furthermore, it was inclined to look upon St. John rather thanupon St. Peter as the apostle of pre-eminence. 

THE COUNCIL OF WHITBY (A. D. 664). --With a view to settling the quarrelOswy, king of Northumbria, called a synod composed of representatives ofboth parties, at the monastery of Whitby. The chief question of debate, which was argued before the king by the ablest advocates of both Churches, was the proper time for the observance of Easter. Finally Wilfred, thespeaker for the Roman party, happening to quote the words of Christ toPeter, "To thee will I give the keys of the kingdom of heaven, " the kingasked the Celtic monks if these words were really spoken by Christ to thatapostle, and upon their admitting that they were, Oswy said, "He being thedoor-keeper, . . . I will in all things obey his decrees, lest when I come tothe gates of the kingdom of heaven, there should be none to open them. "[Footnote: Bede's _Eccl. Hist. _ III. 25. ]

The decision of the prudent Oswy gave the British Isles to Rome; for notonly was all England quickly won to the Roman side, but the Celticchurches and monasteries of Wales and Ireland and Scotland soon came toconform to the Roman standard and custom. "By the assistance of our Lord, "says the pious Latin chronicler, "the monks were brought to the canonicalobservation of Easter, and the right mode of the tonsure. "

THE ROMAN VICTORY FORTUNATE FOR ENGLAND. --There is no doubt but that itwas very fortunate for England that the controversy turned as it did. Forone of the most important of the consequences of the conversion of Britainwas the re-establishment of that connection of the island with Romancivilization which had been severed by the calamities of the fifthcentury. As Green says, --he is speaking of the embassy of St. Augustine, --"The march of the monks as they chanted their solemn litany was in onesense a return of the Roman legions who withdrew at the trumpet call ofAlaric. . . . Practically Augustine's landing renewed that union with thewestern world which the landing of Hengest had destroyed. The new Englandwas admitted into the older Commonwealth of nations. The civilization, art, letters, which had fled before the sword of the English conquerorsreturned with the Christian faith. "

Now all this advantage would have been lost had Iona instead of Rome wonat Whitby. England would have been isolated from the world, and would havehad no part or lot in that rich common life which was destined to theEuropean peoples as co-heirs of the heritage bequeathed to them by thedying empire. 

A second valuable result of the Roman victory was the hastening of thepolitical unity of England through its ecclesiastical unity. The CelticChurch, in marked contrast with the Latin, was utterly devoid of capacityfor organization. It could have done nothing in the way of developingamong the several Anglo-Saxon states the sentiment of nationality. On theother hand, the Roman Church, through the exercise of a central authority, through national synods and general legislation, overcame the isolation ofthe different kingdoms, and helped powerfully to draw them together into acommon political life. 

THE CONVERSION OF GERMANY. --The conversion of the tribes of Germany waseffected by Celtic, Anglo-Saxon, and Frankish missionaries, --and the swordof Charlemagne (see p. 406). The great apostle of Germany was the SaxonWinfred, or Winifred, better known as St. Boniface. During a long andintensely active life he founded schools and monasteries, organizedchurches, preached and baptized; and at last died a martyr's death (A. D. 753). 

The christianizing of the tribes of Germany relieved the Teutonic statesof Western Europe from the constant peril of massacre by their heathenkinsmen, and erected a strong barrier in Central Europe against theadvance of the waves of Turanian paganism and Mohammedanism which forcenturies beat so threateningly against the eastern frontiers of Germany. [Footnote: The conversion of Russia dates from about the close of thetenth century. Its evangelization was effected by the missionaries ofConstantinople, that is, of the Greek, or Eastern Church. Of the Turaniantribes, only the Hungarians, or Magyars, embraced Christianity. All theother Turanian peoples that appeared on the eastern edge of Europe duringthe Middle Ages, came as pagan or Moslem enemies. ]

CHRISTIANITY IN THE NORTH. --The progress of Christianity in the North wasslow: but gradually, during the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries, themissionaries of the Church won over all the Scandinavian peoples. Oneimportant effect of their conversion was the checking of their piraticalexpeditions, which previously had vexed almost every shore to the south. 

By the opening of the fourteenth century all Europe was claimed byChristianity, save a limited district in Southern Spain held by the Moors, and another in the Baltic regions possessed by the still pagan Finns andLapps. 

MONASTICISM. --It was during this very conflict with the barbarians thatthe Church developed the remarkable institution known as Monasticism, which denotes a life of seclusion from the world, with the object ofpromoting the interests of the soul. The central idea of the system is, that the body is a weight upon the spirit, and that to "mortify the flesh"is a prime duty. 

The monastic system embraced two prominent classes of ascetics: 1. Hermits, or anchorites, persons who, retiring from the world, livedsolitary lives in desolate places; 2. Cenobites, or monks, who formedcommunities and lived under a common roof. 

St. Antony, an Egyptian ascetic, who by his example and influence gave atremendous impulse to the strange enthusiasm, is called the "father of thehermits. " The persecutions that arose under the Roman emperors, drivingthousands into the deserts, contributed vastly to the movement. The citiesof Egypt became almost emptied of their Christian population. 

About the close of the fourth century the cenobite system was introducedinto Europe, and in an astonishingly short space of time spread throughoutall the western countries where Christianity had gained a foothold. Monasteries arose on every side, in the wilds of the desert and in themidst of the crowded city. The number that fled to these retreats wasvastly augmented by the disorder and terror attending the invasion of thebarbarians and the overthrow of the empire in the West. 

With the view of introducing some sort of system and uniformity among thenumerous communities, fraternities or associations were early organizedand spread rapidly. The three essential vows required of their memberswere poverty, chastity, and obedience. The most celebrated of thesefraternities was the Order of the Benedictines, so called from its founderSt. Benedict (A. D. 480-543). This order became immensely popular. At onetime it embraced about 40, 000 abbeys. 

ADVANTAGES OF THE MONASTIC SYSTEM. --The early establishment of themonastic system in the Church resulted in great advantages to the newworld that was shaping itself out of the ruins of the old. 

The monks became missionaries, and it was largely to their zeal anddevotion that the Church owed her speedy and signal victory over thebarbarians; they also became teachers, and under the shelter of themonasteries established schools which were the nurseries of learningduring the Middle Ages; they became copyists, and with great care andindustry gathered and multiplied ancient manuscripts, and thus preservedand transmitted to the modern world much classical learning and literaturethat would otherwise have been lost; they became agriculturists, especially the Benedictines, and by skilful labor converted the wildernessabout their retreats into fair gardens, thus redeeming from barrennesssome of the most desolate districts of Europe; they became further thealmoners of the pious and the wealthy, and distributed alms to the poorand needy. Everywhere the monasteries opened their hospitable doors to theweary, the sick, and the discouraged. In a word, these retreats were theinns, the asylums, and the hospitals, mediæval Europe. Nor should we failto mention how the asceticism of the monks checked those flagrant socialevils that had sapped the strength of the Roman race, and whichuncounteracted would have contaminated and weakened the purer peoples ofthe North; nor how, through its requirements of self-control and self-sacrifice, it gave prominence to the inner life of the spirit. 

CONCLUSION. --With a single word or two respecting the general consequencesof the conversion to Christianity of the Teutonic tribes, we will closethe present chapter. 

The adoption of a common faith by the European peoples drew them togetherinto a sort of religious brotherhood, and rendered it possible for thecontinent to employ its undivided strength, during the succeedingcenturies, in staying the threatening progress toward the West of thecolossal Mohammedan power of the East. The Christian Church set in themidst of the seething, martial nations and races of Europe an influencethat fostered the gentler virtues, and a power that was always to be foundon the side of order, and usually of mercy. It taught the brotherhood ofman, the essential equality in the sight of God of the high and the low, and thus pleaded powerfully and at last effectually for the freedom of theslave and the serf. It prepared the way for the introduction among thebarbarians of the arts, the literature, and the culture of Rome, andcontributed powerfully to hasten the fusion into a single people of theLatins and Teutons, of which important matter we shall treat in thefollowing chapter. 

CHAPTER XXXIV. 

FUSION OF THE LATIN AND TEUTONIC PEOPLES. 

INTRODUCTORY. --Having seen how the Hebrew element, that is, the ideas, beliefs, and sentiments of Christianity, became the common possession ofthe Latins and Teutons, it yet remains to notice how these two races, uponthe soil of the old empire, intermingled their blood, their language, their laws, their usages and customs, to form new peoples, new tongues, and new institutions. 

THE ROMANCE NATIONS. --In some districts the barbarian invaders and theRoman provincials were kept apart for a long time by the bitter antagonismof race, and a sense of injury on the one hand and a feeling of disdainfulsuperiority on the other. But for the most part the Teutonic intruders andthe Latin-speaking inhabitants of Italy, Spain, and Gaul very soon beganfreely to mingle their blood by family alliances. It is quite impossibleto say what proportion the Teutons bore to the Romans. Of course theproportion varied in the different countries. In none of the countriesnamed, however, was it large enough to absorb the Latinized population; onthe contrary, the barbarians were themselves absorbed, yet not withoutchanging very essentially the body into which they were incorporated. Bythe close of the ninth century the two elements had become quiteintimately blended, and a century or two later Roman and Teuton have alikedisappeared, and we are introduced to Italians, Spaniards, and Frenchmen. These we call Romance nations, because at base they are Roman. [Footnote:Britain did not become a Romance nation on account of the nature of thebarbarian conquest of that island. The Romanized provincials, as has beenseen, were there almost destroyed by the fierce Teutonic invaders. ]

THE FORMATION OF THE ROMANCE LANGUAGES. --During the five centuries oftheir subjection to Rome, the natives of Spain and Gaul forgot theirbarbarous dialects and came to speak a corrupt Latin. Now in exactly thesame way that the dialects of the Celtic tribes of Gaul and of theCeltiberians of Spain had given way to the more refined speech of theRomans, did the rude languages of the Teutons yield to the more culturedspeech of the Roman provincials. In the course of two or three centuriesafter their entrance into the empire, Goths, Lombards, Burgundians, andFranks had, in a large measure, dropped their own tongue, and werespeaking that of the people they had subjected. But of course thisprovincial Latin underwent a great change upon the lips of the mixeddescendants of the Romans and Teutons. Owing to the absence of a commonpopular literature, the changes that took place in one country did notexactly correspond to those going on in another. Hence, in the course oftime, we find different dialects springing up, and by about the ninthcentury the Latin has virtually disappeared as a spoken language, and itsplace been usurped by what will be known as the Italian, Spanish, andFrench languages, all more or less resembling the ancient Latin, and allcalled Romance tongues, because children of the old Roman speech. 

PERSONAL CHARACTER OF THE TEUTONIC LEGISLATION. --The legislation of thebarbarians was generally personal instead of territorial, as with us; thatis, instead of all the inhabitants of a given country being subject to thesame laws, there were different ones for the different classes of society. The Latins, for instance, were subject in private law only to the oldRoman code, while the Teutons lived under the rules and regulations whichthey had brought with them from beyond the Rhine. 

Even among themselves the Teutons knew nothing of the modern legal maximthat all should stand equal before the law. The penalty inflicted upon theevil-doer depended, not upon the nature of his crime, but upon his rank, or that of the party injured. Thus slaves and serfs could be beaten andput to death for minor offences, while a freeman might atone for anycrime, even for murder, by the payment of a fine, the amount of thepenalty being determined by the rank of the victim. Among the Saxons thelife of a king's thane was worth 1200 shillings, while that of a commonfree man was valued only one-sixth as high. 

ORDEALS. --The modes by which guilt or innocence was ascertained show inhow rude a state was the administration of justice among the barbarians. One very common method of proof was by what were called ordeals, in whichthe question was submitted to the judgment of God. Of these the chief werethe _ordeal by fire_, the _ordeal by water_, and the _ordeal by battle_. 

The _ordeal by fire_ consisted in taking in the hand a red-hot iron, or in walking blindfolded with bare feet over a row of hot ploughshareslaid lengthwise at irregular distances. If the person escaped withoutserious harm, he was held to be innocent. Another way of performing thefire ordeal was by running through the flame of two fires built closetogether, or by walking over live brands; hence the phrase "to haul overthe coals. "

The _ordeal by water_ was of two kinds, by hot water and cold. In thehot-water ordeal the accused person thrust his arm into boiling water, andif no hurt was visible upon the arm three days after the operation, theperson was considered guiltless. When we speak of one's being "in hotwater, " we use an expression which had its origin in this ordeal. 

In the cold-water trial the suspected person was thrown into a stream orpond: if he floated, he was held guilty; if he sank, innocent. The water, it was believed, would reject the guilty, but receive the innocent intoits bosom. The practice common in Europe until a very recent date oftrying supposed witches by weighing them, or by throwing them into a pondof water to see whether they would sink or float, grew out of thissuperstition. 

The _trial by combat_, or _wager of battle_, was a solemn judicial duel. It was resorted to in the belief that God would give victory to the right. Naturally it was a favorite mode of trial among a people who found theirchief delight in fighting. Even religious disputes were sometimes settledin this way. The modern duel may probably be regarded as a relic of thisform of trial. 

The ordeal was frequently performed by deputy, that is, one person forhire or for the sake of friendship would undertake it for another; hencethe expression "to go through fire and water to serve one. " Especially wassuch substitution common in the judicial duel, as women and ecclesiasticswere generally forbidden to appear personally in the lists. The champions, as the deputies were called, became in time a regular class in society, like the gladiators in ancient Rome. Religious houses and chartered townshired champions at a regular salary to defend all the cases to which theymight become a party. 

THE REVIVAL OF THE ROMAN LAW. --Now the barbarian law-system, if such itcan be called, the character of which we have simply suggested by thepreceding illustrations, gradually displaced the Roman law in all thosecountries where the two systems at first existed alongside each other, save in Italy and Southern France, where the provincials greatlyoutnumbered the invaders. But the admirable jurisprudence of Rome wasbound to assert its superiority. About the close of the eleventh century, there was a great revival in the study of the Roman law as embodied in the_Corpus Juris Civilis_ of Justinian (see p. 358), and in the course of acentury or two this became either the groundwork or a strong modifyingelement in the jurisprudence of almost all the peoples of Europe. 

What took place may be illustrated by reference to the fate of theTeutonic languages in Gaul, Italy, and Spain. As the barbarian tongues, after maintaining a place in those countries for two or three centuries, at length gave place to the superior Latin, which became the basis of thenew Romance languages, so now in the domain of law the barbarian maximsand customs, though holding their place more persistently, likewisefinally give way, almost everywhere and in a greater or less degree, tothe more excellent law-system of the empire. Rome must fulfil her destinyand give laws to the nations. 

CHAPTER XXXV. 

THE ROMAN EMPIRE IN THE EAST. 

THE REIGN OF JUSTINIAN (A. D. 527-565). --During the fifty years immediatelyfollowing the fall of Rome, the Eastern emperors struggled hard anddoubtfully to withstand the waves of the barbarian inundation whichconstantly threatened to overwhelm Constantinople with the same awfulcalamities that had befallen the imperial city of the West. Had the newRome--the destined refuge for a thousand years of Græco-Roman learning andculture--also gone down at this time before the storm, the loss to thecause of civilization would have been incalculable. 

Fortunately, in the year 527, there ascended the Eastern throne a princeof unusual ability, to whom fortune gave a general of such rare geniusthat his name has been allotted a place in the short list of the greatcommanders of the world. Justinian was the name of the prince, andBelisarius that of the soldier. The sovereign has given name to theperiod, which is called after him the "Era of Justinian. "

It will be recalled that it was during this reign that Africa wasrecovered from the Vandals and Italy from the Goths (see p. 372). Theseconquests brought once more within the boundaries of the empire some ofthe fairest lands of the West. 

But that which has given Justinian's reign a greater distinction than anyconferred upon it by brilliant military achievements, is the collectionand publication, under the imperial direction, of the _Corpus JurisCivilis_, or "Body of the Roman Law. " This work is the most preciouslegacy of Rome to the modern world. In causing its publication, Justinianearned the title of "The Lawgiver of Civilization" (see p. 358). 

In the midst of this brilliant reign an awful pestilence, bred probably inEgypt, fell upon the empire, and did not cease its ravages until aboutfifty years afterwards. This plague was the most terrible scourge of whichhistory has any knowledge, save perhaps the so called Black Death, whichafflicted Europe in the fourteenth century. The number of victims of theplague has been estimated at 100, 000, 000. 

THE REIGN OF HERACLIUS (A. D. 610-641). --For half a century after the deathof Justinian, the annals of the Byzantine empire are unimportant. Then wereach the reign of Heraclius, a prince about whose worthy name gathermatters of significance in world-history. 

About this time Chosroes II. , king of Persia, wrested from the empire thefortified cities that guarded the Euphratean frontier, and overran allSyria, Egypt, and Asia Minor. What was known as the True Cross was tornfrom the church at Jerusalem and carried off in triumph to Persia. Inorder to compel Chosroes to recall his armies, which were distressing theprovinces of the empire, Heraclius, pursuing the same plan as that bywhich the Romans in the Second Punic War forced the Carthaginians to callHannibal out of Italy (see p. 264), with a small company of picked menmarched boldly into the heart of Persia, and in revenge for the insultsheaped by the infidels upon the Christian churches, overturned the altarsof the fire-worshippers and quenched their sacred flames. 

The struggle between the two rival empires was at last decided by aterrible combat known as the Battle of Nineveh (A. D. 627), which wasfought around the ruins of the old Assyrian capital. The Persian army wasalmost annihilated. In a few days grief or violence ended the life ofChosroes. With him passed away the glory of the Second Persian Empire. Thenew Persian king negotiated a treaty of peace with Heraclius. The articlesof this treaty left the boundaries of the two empires unchanged. 

THE EMPIRE BECOMES GREEK. --The two combatants in the fierce struggle whichwe have been watching, were too much absorbed in their contentions tonotice the approach of a storm from the deserts of Arabia, --a stormdestined to overwhelm both alike in its destructive course. Within a fewyears from the date of the Battle of Nineveh, the Saracens entered upontheir surprising career of conquest, which in a short time completelychanged the face of the entire East, and set the Crescent, the emblem of anew faith, alike above the fire-altars of Persia and the churches of theEmpire. Heraclius himself lived to see--so cruel are the vicissitudes offortune--the very provinces which he had wrested from the hands of thefire-worshippers, in the hands of the more insolent followers of the FalseProphet, and the Crescent planted within sight of the walls ofConstantinople. 

The conquests of the Saracens cut off from the empire those provinces thathad the smallest Greek element and thus rendered the population subject tothe emperor more homogeneous, more thoroughly Greek. The Roman elementdisappeared, and the court of Constantinople became Greek in tone, spirit, and manners. Hence, instead of longer applying to the empire thedesignation _Roman_, we shall from this on call it the _Greek_, orByzantine empire. 

We shall trace no further as a separate story the fortunes of the Easternemperors. In the eighth century the so-called Iconoclastic controversy[Footnote: See p. 417. ] will draw our attention to them; and then again inthe twelfth and thirteenth centuries the Crusades will once more bringtheir affairs into prominence, and we shall see a line of Latin princesseated for a time (from 1204 to 1261) upon the throne of Constantine. [Footnote: See p. 446. ] Finally, in the year 1453, we shall witness thecapture of Constantinople by the Turks, [Footnote: See p. 462. ] whichdisaster closes the long and checkered history of the Græco-Roman empirein the East. 

CHAPTER XXXVI. 

MOHAMMED AND THE SARACENS. 

[Illustration: AN ARAB RIDER. ]

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT. --The Arabs, or Saracens, who are now about to playtheir surprising part in history, are, after the Hebrews, the mostimportant people of the Semitic race. Secure in their inaccessibledeserts, the Arabs have never as a people bowed their necks to a foreignconqueror, although portions of the Arabian peninsula have been repeatedlysubjugated by different races. 

RELIGIOUS CONDITION OF ARABIA BEFORE MOHAMMED. --Before the reforms ofMohammed, the Arabs were idolaters. Their holy city was Mecca. Here wasthe ancient and most revered shrine of the Caaba, where was preserved asacred black stone believed to have been given by an angel to Abraham. 

But though the native tribes of the peninsula were idolaters, still therewere many followers of other faiths; for Arabia at this time was a land ofreligious freedom. The altar of the fire-worshipper rose alongside theJewish synagogue and the Christian church. The Jews especially were to befound everywhere in great numbers, having been driven from Palestine bythe Roman persecutions. It was from the Jews and Christians, doubtless, that Mohammed learned many of the doctrines that he taught. 

MOHAMMED. --Mohammed, the great prophet of the Arabs, was born in the holycity of Mecca, about the year 570 of our era. He sprang from thedistinguished tribe of the Koreishites, the custodians of the sacredshrine of the Caaba. Like Moses, he spent many years of his life as ashepherd. 

[Illustration: MOSQUE AND CAABA AT MECCA. (From a photograph. )]

Mohammed possessed a deeply religious nature, and it was his wont often toretire to a cave a few miles from Mecca, and there spend long vigils inprayer. He declared that here he had visions, in which the angel Gabrielappeared to him, and made to him revelations which he was commanded tomake known to his fellow-men. The sum of the new faith which he was toteach was this: "There is but one God, and Mohammed is his Prophet. "

Mohammed communicated the nature of his visions to his wife, and shebecame his first convert. At the end of three years his disciples numberedforty persons. 

THE HEGIRA (622). --The teachings of Mohammed at last aroused the anger ofa powerful party among the Koreishites, who feared that they, as theguardians of the national idols of the Caaba, would be compromised in theeyes of the other tribes by allowing such heresy to be openly taught byone of their number, and accordingly plots were formed against his life. Barely escaping assassination, he fled to the city of Medina. 

This Hegira, or Flight, as the word signifies, occurred in the year 622, and was considered by the Moslems as such an important event in thehistory of their religion that they adopted it as the beginning of a newera, and from it still continue to reckon their dates. 

THE FAITH EXTENDED BY THE SWORD. --His cause being warmly espoused by theinhabitants of Medina, Mohammed threw aside the character of an exhorter, and assumed that of a warrior. He declared it to be the will of God thatthe new faith should be spread by the sword. Accordingly, the yearfollowing the Hegira, he began to attack and plunder caravans. The flamesof a sacred war were soon kindled. The reckless enthusiasm of his wildconverts was intensified by the assurance of the Apostle that death met infighting those who resisted the true faith ensured the martyr immediateentrance upon the joys of Paradise. Within ten years from the time of theassumption of the sword by Mohammed, Mecca had been conquered, and the newcreed established among all the tribes of Arabia. 

Mohammed died in the year 632. No character in all history has been thesubject of more conflicting speculations than the Arabian Prophet. By somehe has been called a self-deluded enthusiast, while others have denouncedhim as the boldest of impostors. We shall, perhaps, reconcile thesediscordant views, if we bear in mind that the same person may, indifferent periods of a long career, be both. 

THE KORAN AND THE DOCTRINES OF ISLAM. --Before going on to trace theconquests of the successors of Mohammed, we must form some acquaintancewith the religion of the great Prophet. 

The doctrines of Mohammedanism, or Islam, which means "submission, " arecontained in the Koran, the sacred book of the Moslems. They declare thatGod has revealed himself through four holy men: to Moses he gave thePentateuch; to David, the Psalms; to Jesus, the Gospels; and to Mohammed, the last and greatest of all the prophets, he gave the Koran. 

"There is no God save Allah, " is the fundamental doctrine of Islamism, andto this is added the equally binding declaration that "Mohammed is theProphet of Allah. " The faithful Moslem must also believe in the sacrednessand infallibility of the Koran. He is also required to believe in theresurrection and the day of judgment, and an after-state of happiness andof misery. Also he must believe in the absoluteness of the decrees ofGod, --that he foreordains whatsoever comes to pass, and that nothing mancan do can change his appointments. 

The Koran, while requiring assent to the foregoing creed, inculcates thepractice of four virtues. The first is prayer; five times each day mustthe believer turn his face towards Mecca and engage in devotion. Thesecond requirement is almsgiving. The third is keeping the Fast ofRamadan, which lasts a whole month. The fourth duty is making a pilgrimageto Mecca. 

ABUBEKR, FIRST SUCCESSOR OF MOHAMMED (632-634). --Upon the death ofMohammed a dispute at once arose as to his successor; for the Prophet leftno children, nor had he designated upon whom his mantle should fall. Abubekr, the Apostle's father-in-law, was at last chosen to the position, with the title of Caliph, or Vicar, of the Prophet, although many thoughtthat the place belonged to Ali, the Prophet's cousin and son-in-law, andone of his first and most faithful companions. This question of successionwas destined at a later period to divide the Mohammedan world into twosects, animated by the most bitter and lasting hostility towards eachother. [Footnote: The Mohammedans of Persia, who are known as Shiites, arethe leaders of the party of Ali; while the Turks, known as Sunnites, arethe chief adherents of the opposite party. ]

During the first part of his caliphate, Abubekr was engaged in suppressingrevolts in different parts of the peninsula. These commotions quieted, hewas free to carry out the last injunction of the Prophet to his followers, which enjoined them to spread his doctrines by the sword, till all men hadconfessed the creed of Islam, or consented to pay tribute to the Faithful. 

THE CONQUEST OF SYRIA. --The country which Abubekr resolved first to reducewas Syria. A call addressed to all the Faithful throughout Arabia wasresponded to with the greatest alacrity and enthusiasm. From every quarterthe warriors flocked to Medina, until the desert about the city wasliterally covered with their black tents, and crowded with men and horsesand camels. After invoking the blessing of God upon the hosts, Abubekrsent them forward upon their holy mission. 

Heraclius made a brave effort to defend the holy places against thefanatical warriors of the desert, but all in vain. His armies were cut topieces. Seeing there was no hope of saving Jerusalem, he removed from thatcity to Constantinople the True Cross, which he had rescued from thePersians (see p. 390). "Farewell, Syria, " were his words, as he turnedfrom the consecrated land which he saw must be given up to the followersof the False Prophet. 

THE CONQUEST OF PERSIA (632-641). --While one Saracen army was overrunningSyria, another was busy with the subjugation of Persia. Enervated as thiscountry was through luxury, and weakened by her long wars with the Easternemperors, she could offer but feeble resistance to the terrible energy ofthe Saracens. 

Soon after the conquest of Persia, the Arabs crossed the mountains thatwall Persia on the north, and spread their faith among the Turanian tribesof Central Asia. Among the most formidable of the clans that adopted thenew religion were the Turks. Their conversion was an event of the greatestsignificance, for it was their swords that were destined to uphold and tospread the creed of Mohammed when the fiery zeal of his own countrymenshould abate, and their arms lose the dreaded power which religiousfanaticism had for a moment imparted to them. 

THE CONQUEST OF EGYPT (638). --The reduction of Persia was not yet fullyaccomplished, when the Caliph Omar, the successor of Abubekr, commissionedAmrou, the chief whose valor had won many of the cities of Palestine, tocarry the standard of the Prophet into the Valley of the Nile. Alexandria, after holding out against the arms of the Saracens for more than a year, was at length abandoned to the enemy. Amrou, in communicating theintelligence of the important event to Omar, wrote him also about thegreat Alexandrian Library, and asked him what he should do with the books. Omar is said to have replied: "If these books agree with the Koran, theyare useless; if they disagree, they are pernicious: in either case theyought to be destroyed. " Accordingly the books were distributed among thefour thousand baths of the capital, and served to feed their fires for sixmonths. 

THE CONQUEST OF NORTHERN AFRICA (643-689). --The lieutenants of the Caliphswere obliged to do much and fierce fighting before they obtainedpossession of the oft-disputed shores of North Africa. They had to contendnot only with the Græco-Roman Christians of the coast, but to battle alsowith the idolatrous Moors of the interior. Furthermore, all Europe hadbegun to feel alarm at the threatening advance of the Saracens; so nowRoman soldiers from Constantinople, and Gothic warriors from Italy andSpain hastened across the Mediterranean to aid in the protection ofCarthage, and to help arrest the alarming progress of these wild fanaticsof the desert. 

But all was of no avail. Destiny had allotted to the followers of theApostle the land of Hannibal and Augustine. Carthage was taken and razedto the ground, and the entire coast from the Nile to the Atlantic, wasforced to acknowledge the authority of the Caliphs. By this conquest allthe countries of Northern Africa, whose history for a thousand years hadbeen intertwined with that of the opposite shores of Europe, and which atone time seemed destined to share in the career of freedom and progressopening to the peoples of that continent, were drawn back into thefatalism, the despotism, and the stagnation of the East. From being anextension of Europe, they became once more an extension of Asia. 

ATTACKS UPON CONSTANTINOPLE. --Only fifty years had now passed since thedeath of Mohammed, but during this short time his standard had beencarried by the lieutenants of his successors through Asia to theHellespont on the one side, and across Africa to the Straits of Gibraltaron the other. From each of these two points, so remote from each other, the fanatic warriors of the desert were casting longing glances acrossthose narrow passages of water which alone separated them from the singlecontinent that their swift coursers had not yet traversed, or whence thespoil of the unbelievers had not yet been borne to the feet of the Vicarof the Prophet of God. We may expect to see the Saracens at one or both ofthese points attempt the invasion of Europe. 

The first attempt was made in the East (in 668), where the Arabsendeavored to gain control of the Bosporus, by wresting Constantinoplefrom the hands of the Eastern emperors. But the capital was saved throughthe use, by the besieged, of a certain bituminous compound, called GreekFire. In 716, the city was again besieged by a powerful Moslem army; butits heroic defence by the Emperor Leo III. Saved the capital for severalcenturies longer to the Christian world. 

THE CONQUEST OF SPAIN (711). --While the Moslems were thus being repulsedfrom Europe at its eastern extremity, the gates of the continent wereopened to them by treachery at the western, and they gained a foothold inSpain. At the great battle of Xeres (711), Roderic, the last of theVisigothic kings, was hopelessly defeated, and all the peninsula, savesome mountainous regions in the northwest, quickly submitted to theinvaders. Thus some of the fairest provinces of Europe were lost toChristendom for a period of nearly eight hundred years. 

No sooner had the subjugation of the country been effected than multitudesof colonists from Arabia, Syria, and North Africa crowded into thepeninsula, until in a short time the provinces of Seville, Cordova, Toledo, and Granada became Arabic in dress, manners, language, andreligion. 

INVASION OF FRANCE: BATTLE OF TOURS (732). --Four or five years after theconquest of Spain, the Saracens crossed the Pyrenees, and establishedthemselves upon the plains of Gaul. This advance of the Moslem hostsbeyond the northern wall of Spain was viewed with the greatest alarm byall Christendom. It looked as though the followers of Mohammed would soonpossess all the continent. As Draper pictures it, the Crescent, lying in avast semi-circle upon the northern shore of Africa and the curving coastof Asia, with one horn touching the Bosporus and the other the Straits ofGibraltar, seemed about to round to the full and overspread all Europe. 

In the year 732, exactly one hundred years after the death of the greatProphet, the Franks, under their renowned chieftain, Charles, and theirallies met the Moslems upon the plains of Tours in the centre of Gaul, andcommitted to the issue of a single battle the fate of Christendom and thefuture course of history. The desperate valor displayed by the warriors ofboth armies was worthy of the prize at stake. Abderrahman, the Mohammedanleader, fell in the thick of the fight, and night saw the completediscomfiture of the Moslem hordes. The loss that the sturdy blows of theGermans had inflicted upon them was enormous, the accounts of that ageswelling the number killed to the impossible figures of 375, 000. Thedisaster at all events was too overwhelming to permit the Saracens ever torecover from the blow, and they soon retreated behind the Pyrenees. 

The young civilization of Europe was thus delivered from an appallingdanger, such as had not threatened it since the fearful days of Attila andthe Huns. The heroic Duke Charles who had led the warriors of Christendomto the glorious victory was given the surname _Martel_, the "Hammer, "in commemoration of the mighty blows of his huge battle-axe. 

CHANGES IN THE CALIPHATE. --During the century of conquests we have traced, there were many changes in the caliphate. Abubekr was followed by Omar(634-644), Othman (644-655), and Ali (655-661), all of whom fell by thehands of assassins, for from the very first dissensions were rife amongthe followers of the Prophet. Ali was the last of the four so-called"Orthodox Caliphs, " all of whom were relatives or companions of theProphet. 

Moawiyah, a usurper, was now recognized as Caliph (661). He succeeded inmaking the office hereditary, instead of elective, as it hitherto hadbeen, and thus established what is known as the dynasty of the Ommiades[Footnote: So called from Ommaya, an ancestor of Moawiyah. ], the rulers ofwhich family for nearly a century issued their commands from the city ofDamascus. 

The house of the Ommiades was overthrown by the adherents of the house ofAli, who established a new dynasty (750), known as that of the Abbassides, so called from Abbas, an uncle of Mohammed. The new family, soon aftercoming to power, established the seat of the royal residence on the lowerTigris, and upon the banks of that river founded the renowned city ofBagdad, which was destined to remain the abode of the Abbasside Caliphsfor a period of five hundred years, --until the subversion of the house bythe Tartars of the North. 

The golden age of the caliphate of Bagdad covers the latter part of theeighth and the ninth century of our era, and was illustrated by the reignof the renowned Haroun-al-Raschid (786-809), the hero of the ArabianNights. During this period science, philosophy, and literature were mostassiduously cultivated by the Arabian scholars, and the court of theCaliphs presented in culture and luxury a striking contrast to the rudeand barbarous courts of the kings and princes of Western Christendom. 

THE DISMEMBERMENT OF THE CALIPHATE. --"At the close of the first century ofthe Hegira, " writes Gibbon, "the Caliphs were the most potent and absolutemonarchs of the globe. The word that went forth from the palace atDamascus was obeyed on the Indus, on the Jaxartes, and on the Tagus. "Scarcely less potent was the word that at first went forth from Bagdad. But in a short time the extended empire of the Abbassides, through thequarrels of sectaries and the ambitions of rival aspirants for the honorsof the caliphate, was broken in fragments, and from three capitals--Bagdadupon the Tigris, Cairo upon the Nile, and Cordova upon the Guadalquivir--were issued the commands of three rival Caliphs, each of whom was regardedby his adherents as the sole rightful spiritual and civil successor of theApostle. All, however, held the great Arabian Prophet in the samereverence, all maintained with equal zeal the sacred character of theKoran, and all prayed with their faces turned toward the holy city ofMecca. 

SPREAD OF THE RELIGION AND LANGUAGE OF THE ARABS. --Just as the RomansRomanized the peoples they conquered, so did the Saracens Saracenize thepopulations of the countries subjected to their authority. Over a largepart of Spain, over North Africa, Egypt, Syria, Babylonia, Persia, Northern India, and portions of Central Asia, were spread--to the more orless perfect exclusion of native customs, speech, and worship--themanners, the language, and the religion of the Arabian conquerors. [Footnote: Beyond the eastern edge of Mesopotamia, the Arabs failed toimpress their language upon the subjected peoples, or in any way, save inthe matter of creed, to leave upon them any important permanent trace oftheir conquests. ]

In Arabia no religion was tolerated save the faith of the Koran. But inall the countries beyond the limits of the peninsula, freedom of worshipwas allowed (save to _idolaters_, who were to be "rooted out");unbelievers, however, must purchase this liberty by the payment of amoderate tribute. Yet notwithstanding this toleration, the Christian andZoroastrian religions gradually died out almost everywhere throughout thedomains of the Caliphs. [Footnote: The number of Guebers, or fire-worshippers, in Persia at the present time is estimated at from 50, 000 to100, 000. About the same number may be counted in India, the descendants ofthe Guebers who fled from Persia at the time of the Arabian invasion. Theyare there called Parsees, from the land whence they came. ]

THE DEFECTS OF ISLAM. --Civilization certainly owes a large debt to theSaracens. They preserved and transmitted much that was valuable in thescience of the Greeks and the Persians (see p. 472). They improvedtrigonometry and algebra, and from India they borrowed the decimal systemof notation and introduced it into the West. 

Many of the doctrines of Islam, however, are most unfavorable to humanliberty, progress, and improvement. It teaches fatalism, and thusdiscourages effort and enterprise. It allows polygamy and pelts norestraint upon divorce, and thus destroys the sanctity of the family life. It permits slavery and fosters despotism. It inspires a blind and bigotedhatred of race and creed, and thus puts far out of sight the salutarytruth of the brotherhood of man. Because of these and other scarcely lessprominent defects in its teachings, Islam has proved a blight and curse toalmost every race embracing its sterile doctrines. 

Mohammedism is vastly superior, however, either to fetichism or idolatry, and consequently, upon peoples very low in the scale of civilization, ithas an elevating influence. Thus, upon the negro tribes of Central Africa, where it is to-day spreading rapidly, it is acknowledged to have acivilizing effect. 

CHAPTER XXXVII. 

CHARLEMAGNE AND THE RESTORATION OF THE EMPIRE IN THE WEST. 

GENERAL REMARKS. --In the foregoing chapter we traced the rise and declineof the power of the Saracens. We saw the Semitic East roused for a momentto a life of tremendous energy by the miracle of religious enthusiasm, andthen beheld it sinking rapidly again into inaction and weakness, disappointing all its early promises. Manifestly the "Law" is not to goforth from Mecca. The Semitic race is not to lead the civilization of theworld. 

But returning again to the West, we discover among the Teutonic barbariansindications of such youthful energy and life, that we are at oncepersuaded that to them has been given the future. The Franks, who, withthe aid of their confederates, withstood the advance of the Saracens uponthe field of Tours, and saved Europe from subjection to the Koran, are thepeople that first attract our attention. It is among them that a manappears who makes the first grand attempt to restore the laws, the order, the institutions of the ancient Romans. Charlemagne, their king, is theimposing figure that moves amidst all the events of the times; indeed, isthe one who makes the events, and renders the period in which he lived anepoch in universal history. The story of this era affords the key to verymuch of the subsequent history of Europe. 

HOW DUKE PEPIN BECAME KING OF THE FRANKS--Charles Martel, whose tremendousblows at Tours earned for him his significant surname (see p. 399), although the real head of the Frankish nation, was nominally only anofficer of the Merovingian court. He died without ever having borne thetitle of king, notwithstanding he had exercised all the authority of thatoffice. 

But Charles's son Pepin, called _le Bref_ (the Short), on account ofhis diminutive stature, aspired to the regal title and honors. He resolvedto depose his titular master, and to make himself king. Not deeming itwise, however, to do this without the sanction of the Pope, he sent anembassy to represent to him the state of affairs, and to solicit hisadvice. Mindful of recent favors that he had received at the hands ofPepin, the Pope gave his approval to the proposed scheme by replying thatit seemed altogether reasonable that the one who was king in power shouldbe king also in name. This was sufficient. Chilperic--such was the name ofthe Merovingian king--was straightway deposed, and placed in a monastery;while Pepin, whose own deeds together with those of his illustrious fatherhad done so much for the Frankish nation and for Christendom, was anointedand crowned king of the Franks (752), and thus became the first of theCarolingian line, the name of his illustrious son Charlemagne giving nameto the house. 

BEGINNING OF THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPES. --In the year 754 PopeStephen II. , who was troubled by the Lombards (see p. 374), besoughtPepin's aid. Quick to return the favor which the head of the Church hadrendered him in the establishment of his power as king, Pepin straightwaycrossed the Alps with a large army, expelled the Lombards from theirrecent conquests, and made a donation to the Pope of these captured citiesand provinces (755). 

This famous gift may be regarded as having laid the basis of the temporalpower of the Popes; for though Pepin probably did not intend to convey tothe Papal See the absolute sovereignty of the transferred lands, after atime the Popes claimed this, and finally came to exercise within thelimits of the donated territory all the rights and powers of independenttemporal rulers. So here we have the beginning of the celebrated _PapalStates_, and of the story of the Popes as temporal princes. 

ACCESSION OF CHARLEMAGNE. --Pepin died in the year 768, and his kingdompassed into the hands of his two sons, Carloman and Charles; but withinthree years the death of Carloman and the free votes of the Franksconferred the entire kingdom upon Charles, better known as Charlemagne, or"Charles the Great. "

HIS CAMPAIGNS. --Charlemagne's long reign of nearly half a century--heruled forty-six years--was filled with military expeditions and conquests, by which he so extended the boundaries of his dominions, that at his deaththey embraced the larger part of Western Europe. He made fifty-twomilitary campaigns, the chief of which were against the Lombards, theSaracens, and the Saxons. Of these we will speak briefly. 

Among Charlemagne's first undertakings was a campaign against theLombards, whose king, Desiderius, was troubling the Pope. Charlemagnewrested from Desiderius all his possessions, shut up the unfortunate kingin a monastery, and placed on his own head the iron crown of the Lombards. While in Italy he visited Rome, and, in return for the favor of the Pope, confirmed the donation of his father, Pepin (774). 

[Illustration: CHARLEMAGNE. (Head of a bronze equestrian statuette. )]

In the ninth year of his reign Charlemagne gathered his warriors for acrusade against the Saracens in Spain. He crossed the Pyrenees, andsucceeded in wresting from the Moslems all the northeastern corner of thepeninsula. As he was leading his victorious bands back across thePyrenees, the rear of his army under the lead of the renowned paladinRoland, while hemmed in by the walls of the Pass of Roncesvalles, was setupon by the wild mountaineers (the Gascons and Basques), and cut to piecesbefore Charlemagne could give relief. Of the details of this event noauthentic account has been preserved; but long afterwards it formed thefavorite theme of the tales and songs of the Troubadours of SouthernFrance. 

But by far the greater number of the campaigns of Charlemagne weredirected against the pagan Saxons, who almost alone of the German tribesstill retained their ancient idolatry. Thirty years and more of his reignwere occupied in these wars across the Rhine. Reduced to submission againand again, as often did the Saxons rise in desperate revolt. The heroicWitikind was the "second Arminius" (see p. 308) who encouraged hiscountrymen to resist to the last the intruders upon their soil. Finally, Charlemagne, angered beyond measure by the obstinacy of the barbarians, caused 4500 prisoners in his hands to be massacred in revenge for thecontumacy of the nation. The Saxons at length yielded, and acceptedCharlemagne as their sovereign, and Christianity as their religion. 

RESTORATION OF THE EMPIRE IN THE WEST (800). --An event of seemingly littlereal moment, yet, in its influence upon succeeding affairs, of the verygreatest importance, now claims our attention. Pope Leo III. Having calledupon Charlemagne for aid against a hostile faction at Rome, the king soonappeared in person at the capital, and punished summarily the disturbersof the peace of the Church. The gratitude of Leo led him at this time tomake a most signal return for the many services of the Frankish king. Tounderstand his act a word of explanation is needed. 

For a considerable time a variety of circumstances had been fostering agrowing feeling of enmity between the Italians and the emperors atConstantinople. Disputes had arisen between the churches of the East andthose of the West, and the Byzantine rulers had endeavored to compel theItalian churches to introduce certain changes and reforms in theirworship, which had aroused the most determined opposition of the Romanbishops, who denounced the Eastern emperors as schismatics and heretics. Furthermore, while persecuting the orthodox churches of the West, theseunworthy emperors had allowed the Christian lands of the East to fall aprey to the Arabian infidels. 

Just at this time, moreover, by the crime of the Empress Irene, who haddeposed her son Constantine VI. , and put out his eyes, that she might havehis place, the Byzantine throne was vacant, in the estimation of theItalians, who contended that the crown of the Cæsars could not be worn bya woman. Confessedly it was time that the Pope should exercise the powerreposing in him as Head of the Church, and take away from the hereticaland effeminate Greeks the Imperial crown, and bestow it upon some strong, orthodox, and worthy prince in the West. 

Now, among all the Teutonic chiefs of Western Christendom, there was nonewho could dispute the claims to the honor with the king of the Franks, therepresentative of a most illustrious house, and the strongest champion ofthe young Christianity of the West against her pagan foes. Accordingly, asCharlemagne was participating in the festivities of Christmas Day in theCathedral of St. Peter at Rome, the Pope approached the kneeling king, --who declared afterwards that he was wholly ignorant of the designs of hisfriend, --and placing a crown of gold upon his head, proclaimed him emperorof the Romans, and the rightful and consecrated successor of CæsarAugustus and Constantine (800). 

The intention of Pope Leo was, by a sort of reversal of the act ofConstantine, to bring back from the East the seat of the Imperial court;but what he really accomplished was a restoration of the line of emperorsin the West, which 324 years before had been ended by Odoacer, when hedethroned Romulus Augustus and sent the royal vestments to Constantinople(see p. 348). We say this was what he actually effected; for the Greeks ofthe East, disregarding wholly what the Roman people and the Pope had done, maintained their line of emperors just as though nothing had occurred inItaly. So now from this time on for centuries there were two emperors, onein the East, and another in the West, each claiming to be the rightfulsuccessor of Cæsar Augustus. [Footnote: From this time on it will beproper for us to use the terms _Western_ Empire and _Eastern_ Empire. These names should not, however, be employed before this time, for the twoparts of the old Roman Empire were simply administrative divisions of asingle empire; we may though, properly enough, speak of the Roman empire_in_ the West, and the Roman empire _in_ the East, or of the Western andEastern emperors. See Bryce's _Holy Roman Empire_. The Eastern Empire wasdestroyed by the Turks in 1453; the line of Western Teutonic emperors wasmaintained until the present century, when it was ended by the act ofNapoleon in the dismemberment of Germany (1806). ]

CHARLEMAGNE'S DEATH; HIS WORK. --Charlemagne enjoyed the Imperial dignityonly fourteen years, dying in 814. Within the cathedral at Aachen, in atomb which he himself had built, the dead monarch was placed upon athrone, with his royal robes around him, his good sword by his side, andthe Bible open on his lap. It seemed as though men could not believe thathis reign was over; and it was not. 

By the almost universal verdict of students of the mediæval period, Charles the Great has been pronounced the most imposing personage thatappears between the fall of Rome and the fifteenth century. His greatnesshas erected an enduring monument for itself in his name, the one by whichhe is best known--Charlemagne. 

Charlemagne must not be regarded as a warrior merely. His most noteworthywork was that which he effected as a reformer and statesman. He foundedschools, reformed the laws, collected libraries, and extended to theChurch a patronage worthy of a Constantine. In a word, he laid "thefoundation of all that is noble and beautiful and useful in the history ofthe Middle Ages. "

DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE; TREATY OF VERDUN (843). --Like the kingdom ofAlexander, the mighty empire of Charlemagne fell to pieces soon after hisdeath. "His sceptre was the bow of Ulysses which could not be drawn by anyweaker hand. " After a troublous period of dissension arid war, the empirewas divided, by the important Treaty of Verdun, among Charlemagne's threegrandchildren, --Charles, Lewis, and Lothair. To Charles was given France;to Lewis, Germany; and to Lothair, Italy and the valley of the Rhone, together with a narrow strip of land extending from Switzerland to themouth of the Rhine. With these possessions of Lothair went also theImperial title. 

[Illustration: THE WESTERN EMPIRE As Divided at Verdun (843)]

This treaty is celebrated, not only because it was the first great treatyamong the European states, but also on account of its marking thedivergence from one another, and in some sense the origin, of three of thegreat nations of modern Europe, --of France, Germany, and Italy. 

CONCLUSION. --After this dismemberment of the dominions of Charlemagne, theannals of the different branches of the Carolingian family becomeintricate, wearisome, and uninstructive. A fate as dark and woeful as thatwhich, according to Grecian story, overhung the royal house of Thebes, seemed to brood over the house of Charlemagne. In all its different linesa strange and adverse destiny awaited the lineage of the great king. Thetenth century witnessed the extinction of the family. 

CHAPTER XXXVIII. 

THE NORTHMEN. 

THE PEOPLE. --Northmen, Norsemen, Scandinavians, are different namesapplied in a general way to the early inhabitants of Denmark, Norway, andSweden. These people formed the northern branch of the Teutonic family. Wecannot be certain when they took possession of the northern peninsulas, but it is probable that they had entered those countries long before Cæsarinvaded Gaul. 

THE NORTHMEN AS PIRATES AND COLONIZERS. --For the first eight centuries ofour era the Norsemen are hidden from our view in their remote northernhome; but with the opening of the ninth century their black piraticalcrafts are to be seen creeping along all the coasts of Germany, Gaul, andthe British Isles, and even venturing far up their inlets and creeks. Every summer these dreaded sea-rovers made swift descents upon the exposedshores of these countries, plundering, burning, murdering; then upon theapproach of the stormy season, they returned to winter in the shelteredfiords of the Scandinavian peninsula. After a time the bold corsairs beganto winter in the lands they had harried during the summer; and soon allthe shores of the countries visited were dotted with their stations orsettlements. 

These marauding expeditions and colonizing enterprises of the Northmen didnot cease until the eleventh century was far advanced. The consequences ofthis wonderful outpouring of the Scandinavian peoples were so importantand lasting that the movement has well been compared to the greatmigration of their German kinsmen in the fifth and sixth centuries. Europeis a second time inundated by the Teutonic barbarians. 

The most noteworthy characteristic of these Northmen was the readinesswith which they laid aside their own manners, habits, ideas, andinstitutions, and adopted those of the country in which they establishedthemselves. "In Russia they became Russians; in France, Frenchmen; inEngland, Englishmen. "

COLONIZATION OF ICELAND AND GREENLAND. --Iceland was settled by theNorthmen in the ninth century, [Footnote: Iceland became the literarycentre of the Scandinavian world. There grew up here a class of scalds, orbards, who, before the introduction of writing, preserved and transmittedorally the sagas, or legends, of the Northern races. About the twelfthcentury these poems and legends were gathered into collections known asthe Elder, or poetic, Edda, and the Younger, or prose, Edda. These areamong the most interesting and important of the literary memorials that wepossess of the early Teutonic peoples. They reflect faithfully thebeliefs, manners, and customs of the Norsemen, and the wild, adventurousspirit of their Sea-Kings. ] and about a century later Greenland wasdiscovered and colonized. In 1874 the Icelanders celebrated the thousandthanniversary of the settlement of their island, an event very like ourCentennial of 1876. 

America was reached by the Northmen as early as the beginning of theeleventh century: the Vineland of their traditions was possibly some partof the New England coast. It is believed that these first visitors to thecontinent made settlements in this new land; but no certain remains ofthese exist. 

THE NORSEMEN IN RUSSIA. --While the Norwegians were sailing boldly out intothe Atlantic and taking possession of the isles and coasts of the westernseas, the Swedes were pushing their crafts across the Baltic and troublingthe Slavonian tribes that dwelt upon the eastern shore of that sea. Eitherby right of conquest or through the invitation of the contentiousSlavonian clans, the renowned Scandinavian chieftain Ruric acquired, inthe year 862, kingly dignity, and became the founder of the first royalline of Russia, the successive kings of which family graduallyconsolidated the monarchy which was destined to become one of the foremostpowers of Europe. 

THE DANISH CONQUEST OF ENGLAND. --The Danes began to make descents upon theEnglish coast about the beginning of the ninth century. These sea-roversspread the greatest terror through the island; for they were not contentwith plunder, but being pagans, they took special delight in burning thechurches and monasteries of the now Christian Anglo-Saxons, or English, aswe shall hereafter call them. After a time the Danes began to makepermanent settlements in the land. The wretched English were subjected toexactly the same treatment that they had inflicted upon the Celts. Muchneed had they to pray the petition of the Litany of those days, "From thefury of the Northmen, Good Lord, deliver us. " Just when it began to lookas though they would be entirely annihilated or driven from the island bythe barbarous intruders, the illustrious Alfred (871-901) came to thethrone of Wessex. 

For six years the youthful king fought heroically at the head of his bravethanes; but each succeeding year the possessions of the English grewsmaller, and finally Alfred and his few remaining followers were driven totake refuge in the woods and morasses. 

After a time, however, the affairs of the English began to brighten. TheDanes were overpowered, and though allowed to hold the northeastern halfof the land, still they were forced nominally to acknowledge the authorityof the English king. 

For a full century following the death of Alfred, his successors wereengaged in a constant struggle to hold in subjection the Danes alreadysettled in the land, or to protect their domains from the plunderinginroads of fresh bands of pirates from the northern peninsulas. In theend, the Danes got the mastery, and Canute, king of Denmark, became kingof England (1016). For eighteen years he reigned in a wise and parentalway. 

Altogether the Danes ruled in England about a quarter of a century (from1016 to 1042), and then the old English line was restored in the person ofEdward the Confessor. 

The great benefit which resulted to England from the Danish conquest, wasthe infusion of fresh blood into the veins of the English people, whothrough contact with the half-Romanized Celts, and especially through theenervating influence of a monastic church, had lost much of that bold, masculine vigor which characterized their hardy ancestors. 

SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTHMEN IN GAUL. --The Northmen began to make piraticaldescents upon the coasts of Gaul before the end of the reign ofCharlemagne. Tradition tells how the great king, catching sight one day ofsome ships of the Northmen, burst into tears as he reflected on thesufferings that he foresaw the new foe would entail upon his country. 

The record of the raids of the Northmen in Gaul, and of their finalsettlement in the north of the country, is simply a repetition of the taleof the Danish forays and settlement in England. At last, in the year 918, Charles the Simple did exactly what Alfred the Great had done across theChannel only a very short time before. He granted the adventurous Rollo, the leader of the Northmen that had settled at Rouen, a considerablesection of country in the north-west of Gaul, upon condition of homage andconversion. 

In a short time the barbarians had adopted the language, the manners, andthe religion of the French, and had caught much of their vivacity andimpulsiveness of spirit, without, however, any loss of their own nativevirtues. This transformation in their manners and life we may conceive asbeing recorded in their transformed name--_Northmen_ becoming softenedinto _Norman_. As has been said, they were simply changed from heathenVikings, delighting in the wild life of sea-rover and pirate, intoChristian knights, eager for pilgrimages and crusades. 

CHAPTER XXXIX. 

RISE OF THE PAPAL POWER. 

INTRODUCTION. --In an early chapter of our book we told how Christianity asa system of beliefs and precepts took possession of the different nationsand tribes of Europe. We purpose in the present chapter to tell how theChristian Church grew into a great spiritual monarchy, with the bishop ofRome as its head. 

It must be borne in mind that the bishops of Rome put forth a doubleclaim, namely, that they were the supreme head of the Church, and also therightful, divinely appointed suzerain of all temporal princes, the"earthly king of kings. " Their claim to supremacy in all spiritual matterswas very generally acknowledged throughout at least the West as early asthe sixth century, and continued to be respected by almost every one untilthe great Reformation of the sixteenth century, when the nations ofNorthern Europe revolted, denied the spiritual authority of the Pope, andseparated themselves from the ancient ecclesiastical empire. 

The papal claim to supremacy in temporal affairs was never fully andwillingly allowed by the secular rulers of Europe; yet during aconsiderable part of the Middle Ages, particularly throughout thethirteenth century, the Pope was very generally acknowledged by kings andprinces as their superior and suzerain in temporal as well as in spiritualmatters. 

EARLY ORGANIZATION OF THE CHURCH. --The Christian Church very early in itshistory became an organized body, with a regular gradation of officers, such as presbyters, bishops, metropolitans or archbishops, and patriarchs. There were at first four regular patriarchates, that is, districtssuperintended by patriarchs. These centred in the great cities of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, and Antioch. Jerusalem was also made anhonorary patriarchate. 

PRIMACY OF THE BISHOP OF ROME. --It is maintained by some that thepatriarchs at first had equal and coordinate powers; that is, that no oneof the patriarchs had preeminence or authority over the others. But othersassert that the bishop of Rome from the very first was regarded as abovethe others in dignity and authority, and as the divinely appointed head ofthe visible Church on earth. 

However this may be, the pontiffs of Rome began very early to _claim_supremacy over all other bishops and patriarchs. This claim of the Romanpontiffs was based on several alleged grounds, the chief of which was thatthe Church at Rome had been founded by St. Peter himself, the first bishopof that capital, to whom Christ had given the keys of the kingdom ofheaven, and had further invested with superlative authority as a teacherand interpreter of the Word by the commission, "Feed my Sheep;. . . Feed myLambs, " thus giving into his charge the entire flock of the Church. Thisauthority and preeminence conferred by the great Head of the Church uponPeter was held to be transmitted to his successor in the holy office. 

ADVANTAGE TO THE ROMAN BISHOPS OF THE MISFORTUNES OF THE EMPIRE. --Theclaims of the Roman bishops were greatly favored from the very first bythe spell in which the world was held by the name and prestige of imperialRome. Thence it had been accustomed to receive its commands in alltemporal matters; how very natural, then, that thither it should turn forcommand and guidance in spiritual affairs. The Roman bishops in thusoccupying the geographical and political centre of the world enjoyed agreat advantage over all other bishops and patriarchs. 

Nor was this advantage lost when misfortune befell the imperial city. Thusthe removal by Constantine the Great of the seat of government to theBosporus (see p. 332), instead of diminishing the power and dignity of theRoman bishops, tended powerfully to promote their claims and authority. Inthe phrase of Dante, it "gave the Shepherd room. " It left the pontiff theforemost personage of Rome. 

Again, when the barbarians came, there came another occasion for the Romanbishops to increase their influence, and to raise themselves to a positionof absolute supremacy throughout the West. Rome's extremity was theiropportunity. Thus it will be recalled how, mainly through the intercessionof Leo the Great, the fierce Attila was persuaded to turn back and leaveRome unpillaged; and how, through the intercession of the same piousbishop, the savage Genseric was prevailed upon to spare the lives of theinhabitants of the city at the time of its sack by the Vandals (see pp. 346, 347). So when the emperors, the natural defenders of the capital, were unable to protect it, the unarmed pastor was able, through the aweand reverence inspired by his holy office, to render services that couldnot but result in bringing increased honor and dignity to the Roman See. 

But if the misfortunes of Rome tended to the enhancement of the reputationand influence of the Roman bishops, much more did the final downfall ofthe capital tend to the same end. Upon the surrender of the sovereignty ofthe West into the hands of the emperor of the East, the bishops of Romebecame the most important persons in Western Europe, and being so farremoved from the court at Constantinople, gradually assumed almostimperial powers. They became the arbiters between the barbarian chiefs andthe Italians, and to them were referred for decision the disputes arisingbetween cities, states, and kings. It is easy to understand how directlyand powerfully these things tended to strengthen the authority andincrease the influence of the Roman See. 

THE MISSIONS OF ROME. --Again, the early missionary zeal of the church atRome made her the mother of many churches, all of whom looked up to herwith affectionate and grateful loyalty. Thus the Angles and Saxons, won tothe faith by the missionaries of Rome, conceived a deep veneration for theHoly See and became her most devoted children. To Rome it was that theymade their most frequent pilgrimages, and thither they sent their offeringof "St. Peter's penny. " And when the Saxons became missionaries to theirpagan kinsmen of the continent, they transplanted into the heart ofGermany these same feelings of filial attachment and love. Thus was Romeexalted in the eyes of the children of the churches of the West, untilGregory II. (715-731), writing the Eastern emperor, could say that tothese peoples the very statue of the founder of the Roman church seemed "agod on earth. "

THE ICONOCLASTS. --The dispute about the worship of images, known in churchhistory as the Iconoclastic controversy, which broke out in the eighthcentury between the Greek churches of the East and the Latin churches ofthe West, drew after it far-reaching consequences as respects the growingpower of the Roman pontiffs. 

Even long before the seventh century, the churches both in the East and inthe West had become crowded with images or pictures of the apostles, saints, and martyrs, which to the ignorant classes at least were objectsof adoration and worship. A strong party opposed to the use of images[Footnote: The so-called images of the Greek Church were not statues, butmosaics, or paintings. The Eastern Church has at no period sanctioned theuse of sculptures in worship. ] at last arose in the East. These reformerswere given the name of Iconoclasts (image-breakers). 

Leo the Isaurian, who came to the throne of Constantinople in 717, was amost zealous Iconoclast. The Greek churches of the East having beencleared of images, the emperor resolved to clear also the Latin churchesof the West of these symbols. To this end he issued a decree that theyshould not be used. 

The bishop of Rome not only opposed the execution of the edict, but by theban of excommunication cut off the emperor and all the iconoclasticchurches of the East from communion with the true Catholic Church. Thoughimages were permanently restored in the Eastern churches in 842, still bythis time other causes of alienation had arisen, and the breach betweenthe two sections of Christendom could not now be closed. The final outcomewas the permanent separation, about the middle of the eleventh century, ofthe churches of the East from those of the West. The former became knownas the Greek, Byzantine, or Eastern Church; the latter as the Latin, Roman, or Catholic Church. 

The East was thus lost to the Roman See. But the loss was more than madegood by fresh accessions of power in the West. In this quarrel with theEastern emperors the Roman bishops cast about for an alliance with somepowerful Western prince. We have already told the story of the friendshipof the Carolingian kings and the Roman pontiffs, and of the favors theyexchanged (see ch. Xxxvii). Never did friends render themselves moreserviceable to each other. The Popes made the descendants of CharlesMartel kings and emperors; the grateful Frankish princes defended thePopes against all their enemies, imperial and barbarian, and dowering themwith cities and provinces, laid the basis of their temporal sovereignty, which continued for more than a thousand years (until 1870). 

ECCLESIASTICAL JURISDICTION: APPEALS TO ROME. --Charlemagne had recognizedthe principle, held from early times by the Church, that ecclesiasticsshould be amenable only to the ecclesiastical tribunals, by freeing thewhole body of the clergy from the jurisdiction of the temporal courts, incriminal as well as civil cases. Gradually the bishops acquired the rightto try all cases relating to marriage, trusts, perjury, simony, orconcerning widows, orphans, or crusaders, on the ground that such caseshad to do with religion. Even the right to try all criminal cases wasclaimed on the ground that all crime is sin, and hence can properly bedealt with only by the Church. Persons convicted by the ecclesiasticaltribunals were subjected to penance, imprisoned in the monasteries, orhanded over to the civil authorities for punishment. 

Thus by the end of the twelfth century the Church had absorbed, not onlythe whole criminal administration of the clergy, but in part that of thelaity also. [Footnote: Hallam, _Middle Ages_, ch. Vii. ] Now the particularfeature of this enormous extension of the jurisdiction of the Churchtribunals which at present it especially concerns us to notice, is theestablishment of the principle that all cases might be appealed or citedfrom the courts of the bishops and archbishops of the different Europeancountries to the Papal See, which thus became the court of last resort inall cases affecting ecclesiastics or concerning religion. The Pope thuscame to be regarded as the fountain of justice, and, in theory at least, the supreme judge of Christendom, while emperors and kings and all civilmagistrates bore the sword simply as his ministers to carry into effecthis sentences and decrees. 

THE PAPACY AND THE EMPIRE. --We must now speak of the relation of the Popesto the Emperors. About the middle of the tenth century Otto the Great ofGermany, like a second Charlemagne, restored once more the fallen Imperialpower, which now became known as the Holy Roman Empire, the heads of whichfrom this on were the German kings (see p. 502). Here now were two world-powers, the Empire and the Papacy, whose claims and ambitions werepractically antagonistic and irreconcilable. 

There were three different theories of the divinely constituted relationof the "World-King" and the "World-Priest. " The first was that Pope andEmperor were each independently commissioned by God, the first to rule thespirits of men, the second to rule their bodies. Each reigning thus byoriginal divine right, neither is set above the other, but both are tocooperate and to help each other. The special duty of the temporal poweris to maintain order in the world and to be the protector of the Church. 

The second theory, the one held by the Imperial party, was that theEmperor was superior to the Pope. Arguments from Scripture and from thetransactions of history were not wanting to support this view of therelation of the two world-powers. Thus Christ's payment of tribute moneywas cited as proof that he regarded the temporal power as superior to thespiritual; and again, his submission to the jurisdiction of the Romantribunal was held to be a recognition on his part of the supremacy of thecivil authority. Further, the gifts of Pepin and Charlemagne to the RomanSee made the Popes, it was maintained, the vassals of the Emperors. 

The third theory, the one held by the Papal party, maintained that theordained relation of the two powers was the subordination of the temporalto the spiritual authority. This view was maintained by such texts ofScripture as these: "But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet hehimself is judged of no man;" [Footnote: 1 Cor. Ii. 15. ] "See, I have thisday set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out and topull down, and to destroy and to throw down, to build and to plant. "[Footnote: Jer. I. 10. ] The conception was further illustrated by suchcomparisons as the following. As God has set in the heavens two lights, the sun and the moon, so has he established on earth two powers, thespiritual and the temporal; but as the moon is inferior to the sun andreceives its light from it, so is the Emperor inferior to the Pope andreceives all power from him. Again, the two authorities were likened tothe soul and body; as the former rules over the latter, so is it orderedthat the spiritual power shall rule over and subject the temporal. 

The first theory was the impracticable dream of lofty souls who forgotthat men are human. Christendom was virtually divided into two hostilecamps, the members of which were respectively supporters of the Imperialand the Papal theory. The most interesting and instructive chapters ofmediæval history after the tenth century are those that record thestruggles between Pope and Emperor, springing from their efforts to reduceto practice these irreconcilable theories. [Footnote: For a most admirablepresentation of this whole subject, consult Bryce's _The Holy RomanEmpire. _]

SECOND PERIOD. --THE AGE OF REVIVAL. (FROM THE OPENING OF THE ELEVENTH CENTURY TO THE DISCOVERY OF AMERICA BYCOLUMBUS IN 1492. )

CHAPTER XL. 

FEUDALISM AND CHIVALRY. 

1. FEUDALISM. 

FEUDALISM DEFINED. --Feudalism is the name given to a special form ofsociety and government, based upon a peculiar military tenure of landwhich prevailed in Europe during the latter half of the Middle Ages, attaining, however, its most perfect development in the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries. 

A feudal estate, which might embrace a few acres or an entire province, was called a _fief_, or _feud_, whence the term Feudalism. The persongranting a fief was called the _suzerain_, _liege_, or _lord;_ the onereceiving it, his _vassal_, _liegeman_, or _retainer_. 

THE IDEAL SYSTEM. --The few definitions given above will renderintelligible the following explanation of the theory of the Feudal System. 

In theory, all the soil of the country was held by the king as a fief fromGod (in practice, the king's title was his good sword), granted onconditions of fealty to right and justice. Should the king be unjust orwicked, he forfeited the kingdom, and it might be taken from him and givento another. According to Papal theorists it was the Pope who, as God'svicar on earth, had the right to pronounce judgment against a king, deposehim, and put another in his place. 

In the same way that the king received his fief from God, so he mightgrant it out in parcels to his chief men, they, in return for it, promising, in general, to be faithful to him as their lord, and to serveand aid him. Should these men, now vassals, be in any way untrue to theirengagement, they forfeited their fiefs, and these might be resumed bytheir suzerain and bestowed upon others. 

In like manner these immediate vassals of the king or suzerain mightparcel out their domains in smaller tracts to others, on the sameconditions as those upon which they had themselves received theirs; and soon down through any number of stages. 

We have thus far dealt only with the soil of a country. We must nextnotice what disposition was made of the people under this system. 

The king in receiving his fief was intrusted with sovereignty over allpersons living upon it: he became their commander, their lawmaker, andtheir judge--in a word, their absolute and irresponsible ruler. Then, whenhe parcelled out his fief among his great men, he invested them, withinthe limits of the fiefs granted, with all his own sovereign rights. Eachvassal became a virtual sovereign in his own domain. And when these greatvassals divided their fiefs and granted them to others, they in turninvested their vassals with those powers of sovereignty with which theythemselves had been clothed. Thus every holder of a fief became "monarchof all he surveyed. "

To illustrate the workings of the system, we will suppose the king orsuzerain to be in need of an army. He calls upon his own immediate vassalsfor aid; these in turn call upon their vassals; and so the order runs downthrough the various ranks of retainers. The retainers in the lowest rankrally around their respective lords, who, with their bands, gather abouttheir lords, and so on up through the rising tiers of the system, untilthe immediate vassals of the suzerain, or chief lord, present themselvesbefore him with their graduated trains of followers. The array constitutesa feudal army, --a splendidly organized body in theory, but in fact anextremely poor instrument for warfare. 

Such was the ideal feudal state. It is needless to say that the ideal wasnever perfectly realized. The system simply made more or less distantapproaches to it in the several European countries. 

ROMAN AND TEUTONIC ELEMENTS IN THE SYSTEM. --Like many another institutionthat grew up on the conquered soil of the empire. Feudalism was of acomposite character; that is, it contained both Roman and Teutonicelements. The spirit of the institution was barbarian, but the form wasclassical. We might illustrate the idea we are trying to convey, byreferring to the mediæval papal church. It, while Hebrew in spirit, wasRoman in form. It had shaped itself upon the model of the empire, and wasthoroughly imperial in its organization. Thus was it with Feudalism. Beneath the Roman garb it assumed, beat a German life. 

THE CEREMONY OF HOMAGE. --A fief was conferred by a very solemn andpeculiar ceremony called homage. The person about to become a vassal, kneeling with uncovered head, placed his hands in those of his futurelord, and solemnly vowed to be henceforth his man (Latin _homo_, whence"homage"), and to serve him faithfully even with his life. This part ofthe ceremony, sealed with a kiss, was what properly constituted theceremony of homage. It was accompanied by an oath of fealty, and thewhole was concluded by the act of investiture, whereby the lord put hisvassal in actual possession of the land, or by placing in his hand a clodof earth or a twig, symbolized the delivery to him of the estate for whichhe had just now done homage and sworn fealty. 

THE RELATIONS OF LORD AND VASSAL. --In general terms the duty of the vassalwas service; that of the lord, protection. The most honorable servicerequired of the vassal, and the one most willingly rendered in a martialage, was military aid. The liegeman must always be ready to follow hislord upon his military expeditions; he must defend his lord in battle; ifhe should be unhorsed, must give him his own animal; and, if he should bemade a prisoner, must offer himself as a hostage for his release. 

Among other incidents attaching to a fief were _escheat_, _forfeiture_, and _aids_. By Escheat was meant the falling back of the fief into thehands of the lord through failure of heirs. If the fief lapsed throughdisloyalty or other misdemeanor on the part of the vassal, this was knownas Forfeiture. Aids were sums of money which the lord had a right todemand, in order to defray the expense of knighting his eldest son, ofmarrying his eldest daughter, or for ransoming his own person in case ofcaptivity. 

The chief return that the lord was bound to make to the vassal as acompensation for these various services, was counsel and protection--by nomeans a small return in an age of turmoil and insecurity. 

DEVELOPMENT OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. --After the death of Charlemagne and thepartition of his great empire among his feeble successors, it seemed asthough the world was again falling back into chaos. The bonds of societyseemed entirely broken. The strong oppressed the weak; the nobles becamehighway-robbers and marauders. 

It was this distracted state of things that, during the ninth and tenthcenturies, caused the rapid development of the Feudal System. It was theonly form of social organization, the only form of government that it waspracticable to maintain in that rude, transitional age. All classes ofsociety, therefore, hastened to enter the system, in order to secure theprotection which it alone could afford. Kings, princes, and wealthypersons who had large landed possessions which they had never parcelledout as fiefs, were now led to do so, that their estates might be held bytenants bound to protect them by all the sacred obligations of homage andfealty. Again, the smaller proprietors who held their estates by allodialtenure voluntarily surrendered them into the hands of some neighboringlord, and then received them again from him as fiefs, that they mightclaim protection as vassals. They deemed this better than being robbed oftheir property altogether. Thus it came that almost all the allodial landsof France, Germany, Italy, and Northern Spain were, during the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries, converted into feudal estates, or fiefs. 

Moreover, for like reasons and in like manner, churches, monasteries, andcities became members of the Feudal System. They granted out their vastpossessions as fiefs, and thus became suzerains and lords. Bishops andabbots became the heads of great bands of retainers, and led militaryexpeditions, like temporal chiefs. On the other hand, these samemonasteries and towns, as a means of security and protection, did homageto some powerful lord, and thus came in vassalage to him. 

In this way were Church and State, all classes of society from thewealthiest suzerain to the humblest tenant, bound together by feudal ties. Everything was impressed with the stamp of Feudalism. 

CLASSES OF FEUDAL SOCIETY. --Besides the nobility, or the landed class, there were under the Feudal System three other classes, namely, _freemen_, _serfs_ or _villeins_, and _slaves. _ These lower classes madeup the great bulk of the population of a feudal state. The freemen werethe inhabitants of chartered towns, and in some countries the yeomanry, orsmall farmers, who did not hold their lands by a regular feudal tenure. The serfs, or villeins, were the laborers who cultivated the ground. Thepeculiarity of their condition was that they were not allowed to move fromthe estate where they lived, and when the land was sold they passed withit just like any fixture. The slaves constituted a still lower class madeup of captives in war or of persons condemned to bondage as a penalty forcrime. These chattel slaves, however, almost disappeared before thethirteenth century, being converted into the lowest order of serfs, whichwas a step toward freedom. 

CASTLES OF THE NOBLES. --The lawless and violent character of the timesduring which Feudalism prevailed is well shown by the nature of theresidences of the nobles. These were strong stone fortresses, usuallyperched upon some rocky eminence, and defended by moats and towers. France, Germany, Italy, Northern Spain, England, and Scotland, in whichcountries the Feudal System became most thoroughly developed, fairlybristled with these fortified residences of the nobility. One of the moststriking and picturesque features of the scenery of many districts ofEurope at the present time is the ivy-mantled towers and walls of thesefeudal castles, now falling into ruins. 

CAUSES OF THE DECAY OF FEUDALISM. --Chief among the various causes whichundermined and at length overthrew Feudalism, were the hostility to thesystem of the kings and the common people, the Crusades, the revolt of thecities, and the introduction of fire-arms in the art of war. 

[Illustration: FEUDAL CASTLE AT ROUEN. ]

The Feudal System was hated and opposed by both the royal power and thepeople. Kings opposed it and sought to break it down, because it left themonly the semblance of power. The people always hated it for the reasonthat under it they were regarded as of less value than the game in thelord's hunting-park. 

The Crusades, or Holy Wars, that agitated all Europe during the twelfthand thirteenth centuries did much to weaken the power of the nobles; forin order to raise money for their expeditions, they frequently sold ormortgaged their estates, and in this way power and influence passed intothe hands of the kings or of the wealthy merchants of the cities. Many ofthe great nobles also perished in battle with the Infidels, and theirlands escheated to their suzerain, whose domains were thus augmented. Thegrowth of the towns also tended to the same end. As they increased inwealth and influence, they became able to resist the exactions and tyrannyof the lord in whose fief they happened to be, and eventually were able tosecede, as it were, from his authority, and to make of themselves littlerepublics (see p. 464). 

Again, the use of gunpowder in war hastened the downfall of Feudalism, byrendering the yeoman foot-soldier equal to the armor-clad knight. "It madeall men of the same height. " as Carlyle puts it. 

But it is to be noted that, though Feudalism as a system of governmentvirtually disappeared during the latter part of the mediæval age, it stillcontinued to exist as a social organization. The nobles lost their powerand authority as rulers and magistrates, as petty sovereigns, but retainedgenerally their titles, privileges, and social distinctions. 

DEFECTS OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. --Feudalism was perhaps the best form ofsocial organization that it was possible to maintain in Europe during themediæval period; yet it had many and serious defects, which rendered itvery far from being a perfect social or political system. Among its chieffaults may be pointed out the two following. First, it rendered impossiblethe formation of strong national governments. Every country was dividedand subdivided into a vast number of practically independentprincipalities. Thus, in the tenth century France was partitioned amongnearly two hundred overlords, all exercising equal and coordinate powersof sovereignty. The enormous estates of these great lords were againdivided into about 70, 000 smaller fiefs. 

In theory, as we have seen, the holders of these petty estates were boundto serve and obey their overlords, and these great nobles were in turn thesworn vassals of the French king. But many of these lords were richer andstronger than the king himself, and if they chose to cast off theirallegiance to him, he found it impossible to reduce them to obedience. 

A second evil of the institution was its exclusiveness. It was, in theory, only the person of noble birth that could become the holder of a fief. Thefeudal lords constituted a proud and oppressive aristocracy. It was onlyas the lower classes in the different countries gradually wrested from thefeudal nobility their special and unfair privileges, that a better form ofsociety arose, and civilization began to make more rapid progress. 

GOOD RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM. --The most noteworthy of the good resultsspringing from the Feudal System was the development among its privilegedmembers of that individualism, that love of personal independence, whichwe have seen to be a marked trait of the Teutonic character (see p. 369). Turbulent, violent, and refractory as was the feudal aristocracy ofEurope, it performed the grand service of keeping alive during the latermediæval period the spirit of liberty. It prevented Royalty from becomingas despotic as it would otherwise have become. Thus in England, forinstance, the feudal lords held such tyrannical rulers as King John incheck, until such time as the yeomen and the burghers were bold enough andstrong enough alone to resist their despotically inclined sovereigns. InFrance, where, unfortunately, the power of the feudal nobles was brokentoo soon, --before the common people, the Third Estate, were prepared totake up the struggle for liberty, --the result was the growth of thatautocratic, despotic Royalty which led the French people to the Revolutionand the Reign of Terror. 

Another of the good effects of Feudalism was the impulse it gave tocertain forms of polite literature. Just as learning and philosophy werefostered by the seclusion of the cloister, so were poetry and romancefostered by the open and joyous hospitalities of the baronial hall. Thecastle door was always open to the wandering singer and story-teller, andit was amidst the scenes of festivity within that the ballads and romancesof mediæval minstrelsy and literature had their birth. 

Still another service which Feudalism rendered to civilization was thedevelopment within the baronial castle of those ideas and sentiments--among others, a nice sense of honor and an exalted consideration for thefemale sex--which found their noblest expression in Chivalry, of whichinstitution and its good effects upon the social life of Europe we shallnow proceed to speak. 

2. CHIVALRY. 

CHIVALRY DEFINED: ORIGIN OF THE INSTITUTION. --Chivalry has been, aptlydefined as the "Flower of Feudalism. " It was a military institution, ororder, the members of which, called _knights_, were pledged to theprotection of the church, and to the defence of the weak and theoppressed. Although the germs of the system may be found in society beforethe age of Charlemagne, still Chivalry did not assume its distinctivecharacter until the eleventh century, and died out during the fifteenth. 

[Illustration: A KNIGHT IN FULL ARMOR. (Drawing by Alphonse de Neuville. )]

Chivalry seems to have had France for its cradle. That country at leastwas its true home. There it was that it exhibited its most complete andromantic development. Yet its influence was felt everywhere and ineverything. It colored all the events and enterprises of the latter halfof the Middle Ages. The literature of the period is instinct with itsspirit. The Crusades, or Holy Wars, the greatest undertakings of themediæval ages, were predominantly enterprises of the Christian chivalry ofEurope. 

TRAINING OF THE KNIGHT. --When Chivalry had once become established, allthe sons of the nobility, save such as were to enter the holy orders ofthe Church, were set apart and disciplined for its service. The sons ofthe poorer nobles were usually placed in the family of some superior lordof renown and wealth, whose castle became a sort of school, where theywere trained in the duties and exercises of knighthood. 

This education began at the early age of seven, the youth bearing the nameof page or varlet until he attained the age of fourteen, when he acquiredthe title of squire or esquire. At the age of twenty-one the squire becamea knight, being then introduced to the order of knighthood by a peculiarand impressive service. After a long fast and vigil, the candidatelistened to a lengthy sermon on his duties as a knight. Then kneeling, asin the feudal ceremony of homage, before the lord conducting the services, he vowed to defend religion and the ladies, to succor the distressed, andever to be faithful to his companion knights. His arms were now given tohim, and his sword was girded on, when the lord, striking him with theflat of his sword on the shoulders or the neck, said, "In the name of God, of St. Michael, and of St. George, I dub thee knight: be brave, bold, andloyal. "

[Illustration: CONFERRING KNIGHTHOOD ON THE FIELD OF BATTLE. ]

Sometimes knighthood was conferred with less ceremony upon the battle-field, as the reward of signal bravery or address. 

THE TOURNAMENT. --The tournament was the favorite amusement of the age ofChivalry. It was a mimic battle between two companies of noble knights, armed usually with pointless swords or blunted lances. In the universalesteem in which the participants were held, it reminds us of the SacredGames of the Greeks; while in the fierce and sanguinary character itsometimes assumed, especially before it was brought fully under the spiritof Chivalry, it recalls the gladiatorial combats of the Romanamphitheatre. 

[Illustration: A TOURNAMENT. ]

DECLINE OF CHIVALRY. --The fifteenth century was the evening of Chivalry. The decline of the system resulted from the operation of the same causesthat effected the overthrow of Feudalism. The changes in the mode ofwarfare which helped to do away with the feudal baron and his mail-cladretainers, likewise tended to destroy knight errantry. And then ascivilization advanced, new feelings and sentiments began to claim theattention, and to work upon the imagination of men. Governments, too, became more regular, and the increased order and security of societyrendered less needful the services of the gallant knight in behalf ofdistressed maidens. 

INFLUENCE OF CHIVALRY. --The system of Chivalry had many vices, chief amongwhich were its exclusive, aristocratic tendencies. An indignant writerdeclares that "it is not probable that the knights supposed they could beguilty of injustice to the lower classes. " These were regarded withindifference or contempt, and considered as destitute of any claims uponthose of noble birth as were beasts of burden or the game of the chase. Itis always the young and beautiful lady of gentle birth whose wrongs thevaliant knight is risking his life to avenge, always the smiles of the"queen of love and beauty" for which he is splintering his lance in thefierce tournament. The fostering of this aristocratic spirit was one ofthe most serious faults of Chivalry. 

But to speak of the beneficial, refining influences of Chivalry, we shouldsay that it undoubtedly contributed powerfully to lift that sentiment ofrespect for the gentler sex that characterized all the Northern nations, into that reverence for womanhood which forms one of the distinguishingcharacteristics of the present age. 

Again, Chivalry did much towards producing that type of manhood among uswhich we rightly think to surpass any ever formed under the influences ofantiquity. Just as Christianity gave to the world an ideal manhood whichit was to strive to realize, so did Chivalry hold up an ideal to which menwere to conform their lives. Men, indeed, have never perfectly realizedeither the ideal of Christianity or that of Chivalry; but the influencewhich these two ideals have had in shaping and giving character to thelives of men cannot be overestimated. Together, through the enthusiasm andeffort awakened for their realization, they produced a new type ofmanhood, which we indicate by the phrase "a knightly and Christiancharacter. "

[Illustration: LANDING IN ENGLAND OF WILLIAM OF NORMANDY. (From the BayeuxTapestry. ) ]

CHAPTER XLI. 

THE NORMAN CONQUEST OF ENGLAND. 

INTRODUCTORY. --The history of the Normans--the name, it will be recalled, of the transformed Scandinavians who settled in Northern Gaul (see p. 4l3)--is simply a continuation of the story of the Northmen. The mostimportant of the enterprises of the Normans, and one followed byconsequences of the greatest magnitude not only to the conquered people, but indirectly to the world, was their conquest of England. [Footnote: Notlong before the Normans conquered England, they succeeded in gaining afoothold in the south of Italy, where they established a sort of republic, which ultimately included the island of Sicily. The fourth president ofthe commonwealth was the celebrated Robert Guiscard (d. 1085), who spreadthe renown of the Norman name throughout the Mediterranean lands. ThisNorman state, converted finally into a kingdom, lasted until late in thetwelfth century (1194). ]

EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE CONQUEST. --In the year 1066 Edward the Confessordied, in whose person, it will be recalled, the old English line wasrestored after the Danish usurpation (see p. 412). Immediately the Witan, that is, the assembly of the chief men of the nation, in accordance withthe dying wish of the king, chose Harold, Earl of the West Saxons, son ofthe famous Godwin, and the best and strongest man in all England, to behis successor. 

When the news of the action of the Witan and of Harold's acceptance of theEnglish crown was carried across the channel to William, Duke of Normandy, he was really or feignedly transported with rage. He declared that Edward, who was his cousin, had during his lifetime promised the throne to him, and that Harold had assented to this, and by solemn oath engaged tosustain him. He now demanded of Harold that he surrender to him theusurped throne, threatening the immediate invasion of the island in casehe refused. King Harold answered the demand by expelling from the countrythe Normans who had followed Edward into the kingdom, and by collectingfleets and armies for the defence of his dominions. 

While Harold was watching the southern coasts against the Normans, aDanish host appeared in the north, led by Tostig, the traitor brother ofthe English king, and Harold Hardrada, king of Norway. The English army inthat quarter, attempting to withstand the invaders, was cut to pieces; andthe important city of York fell into the hands of the Northmen. As soon asnews of this disaster was borne to King Harold in the south, he instantlymarched northward with his army, and at Stamford Bridge met the invaders, and there gained a decisive victory over them. 

THE BATTLE OF HASTINGS (1066). --The festivities that followed the victoryof Stamford Bridge were not yet ended, when a messenger from the southbrought to Harold intelligence of the landing of the Normans. Hurryingsouthward with his army, Harold came face to face with the forces ofWilliam at Senlac, a short distance from the port of Hastings. 

The battle soon opened--the battle that was to determine the fate ofEngland. It was begun by a horseman riding out from the Norman lines andadvancing alone toward the English army, tossing up his sword andskilfully catching it as it fell, and singing all the while the stirringbattle-song of Charlemagne and Roland (see p. 405). The English watchedwith astonishment this exhibition of "careless dexterity, " and if they didnot contrast the vivacity and nimbleness of the Norman foe with their ownheavy and clumsy manners, others at least have not failed to do so forthem. 

The battle once joined, the conflict was long and terrific. The dayfinally went against the English. Harold fell, pierced through the eye byan arrow; and William was master of the field (1066). 

The conqueror now marched upon London, and at Westminster Abbey, onChristmas Day, 1066, was crowned and anointed king of England. 

[ILLUSTRATION: BATTLE OF HASTINGS. (From the Bayeux Tapestry. )]

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE LAND. --Almost the first act of William after hehad established his power in England was to fulfil his promise to thenobles who had aided him in his enterprise, by distributing among them theunredeemed [Footnote: "When the lands of all those who had fought forHarold were confiscated, those who were willing to acknowledge Williamwere allowed to redeem theirs, either paying money at once, or givinghostages for the payment. "--Stubbs, Const. Hist. I. 258. ] estates of theEnglish who had fought at Hastings in defence of their king and country. Large as was the number of these confiscated estates, there would havebeen a lack of land to satisfy all, had not subsequent uprisings againstthe authority of William afforded him an opportunity to confiscate almostall the soil of England as forfeited by treason. 

Profiting by the lesson taught by the wretched condition of France, whichcountry was kept in a state of constant turmoil by a host of feudal chiefsand lords many of whom were almost or quite as powerful as the kinghimself, William took care that in the distribution no feudatory shouldreceive an entire shire, save in two or three exceptional cases. To thegreat lord to whom he must needs give a large fief, he granted, not acontinuous tract of land, but several estates, or manors, scattered indifferent parts of the country, in order that there might be no dangerousconcentration of property or power in the hands of the vassal. He alsorequired of all the sub-vassals of the realm, in addition to their oath ofallegiance to their own lord, an oath of fealty to the crown. This was amost important modification of feudal custom. On the Continent, the sub-tenant swore allegiance to his own lord simply, and was in duty bound toaid him in all his wars, even in one against the sovereign. But the oathof allegiance to himself exacted by William of all holders of fiefs, justreversed this, and made it the first duty of the sub-vassal, even in thecase of a war between his lord and the king, to follow and obey the king. Furthermore, William denied to his feudatories the right of coining moneyor making laws; and by other wise restrictions upon their power, he savedEngland from those endless contentions and petty wars that weredistracting almost every other country of Europe. 

THE NORMAN SUCCESSORS OF THE CONQUEROR. --For nearly three-quarters of acentury after the death of William the Conqueror, England was ruled byNorman kings. [Footnote: William II. , known as Rufus "the Red" (1087-1100); Henry I. , surnamed Beauclerc, "the good scholar" (1100-1135); andStephen of Blois (1135-1154). William and Henry were sons, and Stephen agrandson, of the conqueror. ] The latter part of this period was atroublous time. The succession to the crown coming into dispute, civil warbroke out. The result of the contention was a decline in the royal power, and the ascendency of the Norman barons, who for a time made England thescene of the same feudal anarchy that prevailed at this time upon theContinent. Finally, in 1154, the Norman dynasty gave place to that of thePlantagenets. Under Henry II. , the first king of the new house, and anenergetic and strong ruler, the barons were again brought into propersubjection to the crown, and many castles which had been built withoutroyal permission during the preceding anarchical period, and some of whichat least were little better than robbers' dens, were destroyed. 

ADVANTAGES TO ENGLAND OF THE NORMAN CONQUEST. --The most important andnoteworthy result of the Norman Conquest of England, was the establishmentin the island of a strong centralized government. England now for thefirst time became a real kingdom. 

A second result of the Conquest was the founding of a new feudalaristocracy. Even to this day there is a great preponderance of Normanover English blood in the veins of the nobility of England. 

A third result was the bringing of England into more intimate relationswith the nations of continental Europe, by which means her advance in art, science, and general culture was greatly promoted. 

[Illustration: CRUSADERS ON THE MARCH. ]

CHAPTER XLII. 

THE CRUSADES. (1096-1272. )

1. INTRODUCTORY: CAUSES OF THE CRUSADES. 

GENERAL STATEMENT. --The Crusades were great military expeditionsundertaken by the Christian nations of Europe for the purpose of rescuingfrom the hands of the Mohammedans the holy places of Palestine. They wereeight in number, the first four being sometimes called the PrincipalCrusades, and the remaining four the Minor Crusades. Besides these therewere a Children's Crusade, and several other expeditions, which, beinginsignificant in numbers or results, are not usually enumerated. 

CAUSES OF THE CRUSADES. --Among the early Christians it was thought a piousand meritorious act to undertake a journey to some sacred place. Especially was it thought that a pilgrimage to the land that had been trodby the feet of the Saviour of the world, to the Holy City that hadwitnessed his martyrdom, was a peculiarly pious undertaking, and one whichsecured for the pilgrim the special favor and blessing of Heaven. 

The Saracen caliphs, for the four centuries and more that they heldpossession of Palestine, pursued usually an enlightened policy towards thepilgrims, even encouraging pilgrimages as a source of revenue. But in theeleventh century the Seljukian Turks, a prominent Tartar tribe, zealousproselytes of Islam, wrested from the caliphs almost all their Asiaticpossessions. The Christians were not long in realizing that power hadfallen into new hands. Pilgrims were insulted and persecuted in every way. The churches in Jerusalem were destroyed or turned into stables. 

Now, if it were a meritorious thing to make a pilgrimage to the HolySepulchre, much more would it be a pious act to rescue the sacred spotfrom the profanation of infidels. This was the conviction that changed thepilgrim into a warrior, --this the sentiment that for two centuries andmore stirred the Christian world to its profoundest depths, and cast thepopulation of Europe in wave after wave upon Asia. 

Although this religious feeling was the principal cause of the Crusades, still there was another concurring cause which must not be overlooked. This was the restless, adventurous spirit of the Teutonic peoples ofEurope, who had not as yet outgrown their barbarian instincts. The feudalknights and lords, just now animated by the rising spirit of chivalry, were very ready to enlist in an undertaking so consonant with theirmartial feelings and their new vows of knighthood. 

PREACHING OF PETER THE HERMIT. --The _immediate_ cause of the FirstCrusade was the preaching of Peter the Hermit, a native of Picardy, inFrance. Having been commissioned by Pope Urban II. To preach a crusade, the Hermit traversed all Italy and France, addressing everywhere, in thechurch, in the street, and in the open field, the crowds that flockedabout him, moving all hearts with sympathy or firing them withindignation, as he recited the sufferings of their brethren at the handsof the infidels, or pictured the profanation of the holy places, pollutedby the presence and insults of the unbelievers. 

THE COUNCILS OF PLACENTIA AND CLERMONT. --While Peter the Hermit had beenarousing the warriors of the West, the Turks had been making constantadvances in the East, and were now threatening Constantinople itself. TheGreek emperor (Alexius Comnenus) sent urgent letters to the Pope, askingfor aid against the infidels, representing that, unless assistance wasextended immediately, the capital with all its holy relics must soon fallinto the hands of the barbarians. 

Urban called a great council of the Church at Placentia, in Italy, toconsider the appeal (1095), but nothing was effected. Later in the sameyear a new council was convened at Clermont, in France, Urban purposelyfixing the place of meeting among the warm tempered and martial Franks. The Pope himself was one of the chief speakers. He was naturally eloquent, so that the man, the cause, and the occasion all conspired to achieve oneof the greatest triumphs of human oratory. He pictured the humiliation andmisery of the provinces of Asia; the profanation of the places made sacredby the presence and footsteps of the Son of God; and then he detailed theconquests of the Turks, until now, with all Asia Minor in theirpossession, they were threatening Europe from the shores of theHellespont. "When Jesus Christ summons you to his defence, " exclaimed theeloquent pontiff, "let no base affection detain you in your homes; whoeverwill abandon his house, or his father, or his mother, or his wife, or hischildren, or his inheritance, for the sake of my name, shall berecompensed a hundred-fold, and possess life eternal. "

Here the enthusiasm of the vast assembly burst through every restraint. With one voice they cried, _Dieu le volt! Dieu le volt!_ "It is thewill of God! It is the will of God!" Thousands immediately affixed thecross to their garments, [Footnote: Hence the name Crusade given to theHoly Wars, from old French _crois_ cross. ] as a pledge of their sacredengagement to go forth to the rescue of the Holy Sepulchre. The fifteenthday of August of the following year was set for the departure of theexpedition. 

2. THE FIRST CRUSADE (1096-1099). 

MUSTERING OF THE CRUSADERS. --All Western Europe now rang with the cry, "Hewho will not take up his cross and follow me, is not worthy of me. " Thecontagion of enthusiasm seized all classes; for while the religiousfeelings of the age had been specially appealed to, all the varioussentiments of ambition, chivalry, love of license, had also been skilfullyenlisted on the side of the undertaking. The council of Clermont haddeclared Europe to be in a state of peace, and pronounced anathemasagainst any one who should invade the possessions of a prince engaged inthe holy war. By further edicts of the assembly, the debtor was releasedfrom meeting his obligations while a soldier of the Cross, and during thisperiod the interest on his debt was to cease; and the criminal, as soon ashe assumed the badge of the crusader, was by that act instantly absolvedfrom all his sins of whatever nature. 

Under such inducements princes and nobles, bishops and priests, monks andanchorites, saints and sinners, rich and poor, hastened to enrollthemselves beneath the consecrated banner. "Europe, " says Michaud, "appeared to be a land of exile, which every one was eager to quit. "

THE VANGUARD. --Before the regular armies of the crusaders were ready tomove, those who had gathered about Peter the Hermit, becoming impatient ofdelay, urged him to place himself at their head and lead them at once tothe Holy Land. Dividing command of the mixed multitudes with a poorknight, called Walter the Penniless, and followed by a throng of about80, 000 persons, among whom were many women and children, the Hermit setout for Constantinople by the overland route through Germany and Hungary. Thousands of the crusaders fell in battle with the natives of thecountries through which they marched, and thousands more perishedmiserably of hunger and exposure. Those that crossed the Bosporus weresurprised by the Turks, and almost all were slaughtered. Thus perished theforlorn hope of the First Crusade. 

MARCH OF THE MAIN BODY. --Meanwhile there were gathering in the Westdisciplined armies composed of men worthy to be champions of the holycause they had espoused. Godfrey of Bouillon, Duke of Lorraine, andTancred, "the mirror of knighthood, " were among the most noted of theleaders of the different divisions of the army. The expedition numberedabout 700, 000 men, of whom fully 100, 000 were mailed knights. 

The crusaders traversed Europe by different routes and reassembled atConstantinople. Crossing the Bosporus, they first captured Nicæa, theTurkish capital, in Bithynia, and then set out across Asia Minor forSyria. The line of their dreary march between Nicæa and Antioch waswhitened with the bones of nearly one-half their number. Arriving atAntioch, the survivors captured that place, and then, after some delays, pushed on towards Jerusalem. When at length the Holy City burst upontheir view, a perfect delirium of joy seized the crusaders. They embracedone another with tears of joy, and even embraced and kissed the ground onwhich they stood. As they passed on, they took off their shoes, andmarched with uncovered head and bare feet, singing the words of theprophet: "Jerusalem, lift up thine eyes, and behold the liberator whocomes to break thy chains. "

The first assault made by the Christians upon the walls of the city wasrepulsed; but the second was successful, and the city was in the hands ofthe crusaders (1099). A terrible slaughter of the infidels now took place. For seven days the carnage went on, at the end of which time scarcely anyof the Moslem faith were left alive. The Christians took possession of thehouses and property of the infidels, each soldier having a right to thatwhich he had first seized and placed his mark upon. 

FOUNDING OF THE LATIN KINGDOM OF JERUSALEM. --No sooner was Jerusalem inthe hands of the crusaders than they set themselves to the task oforganizing a government for the city and country they had conquered. Thegovernment which they established was a sort of feudal league, known asthe Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem. At its head was placed Godfrey ofBouillon, the most valiant and devoted of the crusader knights. The princerefused the title and vestments of royalty, declaring that he would neverwear a crown of gold in the city where his Lord and Master had worn acrown of thorns. The only title he would accept was that of "Defender ofthe Holy Sepulchre. "

Many of the crusaders, considering their vows fulfilled, now set out ontheir return to their homes, some making their way back by sea and some byland. Godfrey, Tancred, and a few hundred other knights, were all thatstayed behind to maintain the conquests that had been made, and to act asguardians of the holy places. 

3. THE SECOND CRUSADE (1147-1149). 

ORIGIN OF THE RELIGIOUS ORDERS OF KNIGHTHOOD. --In the interval between theSecond and the Third Crusade, the two famed religious military orders, known as the Hospitallers and the Templars, [Footnote: The Hospitallers, or Knights of St. John, took their name from the fact that theorganization was first formed among the monks of the Hospital of St. John, at Jerusalem; while the Templars, or Knights of the Temple, were so calledon account of one of the buildings of the brotherhood occupying the siteof Solomon's Temple. ] were formed. A little later, during the ThirdCrusade, still another fraternity, known as the Teutonic Knights wasestablished. The objects of all the orders were the care of the sick andwounded crusaders, the entertainment of Christian pilgrims, the guardingof the holy places, and ceaseless battling for the Cross. Thesefraternities soon acquired a military fame that was spread throughout theChristian world. They were joined by many of the most illustrious knightsof the West, and through the gifts of the pious acquired great wealth, andbecame possessed of numerous estates and castles in Europe as well as inAsia. 

PREACHING OF ST. BERNARD; FAILURE OF THE CRUSADE. --In the year 1146, thecity of Edessa, the bulwark of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem on the sidetowards Mesopotamia, was taken by the Turks, and the entire population wasslaughtered, or sold into slavery. This disaster threw the entire Westinto a state of the greatest alarm, lest the little Christian state, established at such cost of tears and suffering, should be completelyoverwhelmed, and all the holy places should again fall into the hands ofthe infidels. 

The scenes that marked the opening of the First Crusade were now repeatedin all the countries of the West. St. Bernard, an eloquent monk, was thesecond Peter the Hermit, who went everywhere, arousing the warriors of theCross to the defence of the birthplace of their religion. The contagion ofthe holy enthusiasm seized not only barons, knights, and the commonpeople, which classes alone participated in the First Crusade, but kingsand emperors were now infected with the sacred frenzy. Conrad III. , emperor of Germany, was persuaded to leave the affairs of his distractedempire in the hands of God, and consecrate himself to the defence of thesepulchre of Christ. Louis VII. , king of France, was led to undertake thecrusade through remorse for an act of great cruelty that he hadperpetrated upon some of his revolted subjects. [Footnote: The act whichtroubled the king's conscience was the burning of thirteen hundred peoplein a church, whither they had fled for refuge. ]

The strength of both the French and the German division of the expeditionwas wasted in Asia Minor, and the crusade accomplished nothing. 

4. THE THIRD CRUSADE (1189-1192). 

THE THREE LEADERS. --The Third Crusade was caused by the capture ofJerusalem (1187) by Saladin, the sultan of Egypt. Three of the greatsovereigns of Europe, Frederick Barbarossa of Germany, Philip Augustus ofFrance, and Richard I. Of England, assumed the Cross, and set out, each atthe head of a large army, for the recovery of the Holy City. 

The English king, Richard, afterwards given the title of _Coeur deLion_, the "Lion-hearted, " in memory of his heroic exploits in Palestine, was the central figure among the Christian knights of this crusade. Heraised money for the enterprise by the persecution and robbery of theJews; by the imposition of an unusual tax upon all classes; and by thesale of offices, dignities, and the royal lands. When some oneexpostulated with him on the means employed to raise money, he declaredthat "he would sell the city of London, if he could find a purchaser. "

DEATH OF FREDERICK BARBAROSSA: SIEGE OF ACRE. --The German army, attemptingthe overland route, was consumed in Asia Minor by the hardships of themarch and the swords of the Turks. The Emperor Frederick, according to themost probable accounts, was drowned while crossing a swollen stream, andthe most of the survivors of his army, disheartened by the loss of theirleader, returned to Germany. 

The English and French kings finally mustered their forces beneath thewalls of Acre, which city the Christians were then besieging. It isestimated that 600, 000 men were engaged in the investment of the place. After one of the longest and most costly sieges they ever carried on inAsia, the crusaders at last forced the place to capitulate, in spite ofall the efforts of Saladin to render the garrison relief. 

RICHARD AND SALADIN. --The knightly adventures and chivalrous exploitswhich mark the career of Richard in the Holy Land read like a romance. Norwas the chief of the Mohammedans, the renowned Saladin, lacking in any ofthose knightly virtues with which the writers of the time invested thecharacter of the English hero. At one time, when Richard was sick with afever, Saladin, knowing that he was poorly supplied with delicacies, senthim a gift of the choicest fruits of the land. And on another occasion, Richard's horse having been killed in battle, the sultan caused a fineArabian steed to be led to the Christian camp as a present for his rival. 

For two years did Richard the Lion-hearted vainly contend in almost dailycombat with his generous antagonist for the possession of the tomb ofChrist. He finally concluded a truce of three years and eight months withSaladin, which provided that the Christians during that period should havefree access to the holy places, and remain in undisturbed possession ofthe coast from Jaffa to Tyre. 

5. THE FOURTH CRUSADE (1202-1204). 

CAPTURE OF CONSTANTINOPLE BY THE LATINS. --None of the Crusades after theThird effected much in the Holy Land; either their force was spent beforereaching it, or they were diverted from their purpose by different objectsand ambitions. 

The crusaders of the Fourth expedition captured Constantinople instead ofJerusalem. The circumstances were these: A usurper had seized upon theByzantine throne. The rightful claimant, Alexius, besought the aid of theFrankish warriors to regain the sceptre. The Christian knights listenedfavorably to his appeals. The Venetians, in consideration of a share ofthe conquests that might be made, also joined their forces to those of thecrusaders. Constantinople was taken by storm, and Alexius was investedwith the Imperial authority. 

Scarcely was Alexius seated upon the throne, before the turbulent Greeksengaged in a revolt which resulted in his death. The crusaders nowresolved to take possession of the capital, and set a Latin prince on thethrone of Constantine. The determination was carried out. Constantinoplewas taken a second time by storm, and sacked, and Baldwin, Count ofFlanders, was crowned Emperor of the East. 

The Latin empire thus established lasted only a little over half a century(1204-1261). The Greeks, at the end of this period, succeeded in regainingthe throne, which they then held until the capture of Constantinople bythe Turks in 1453. 

6. CLOSE OF THE CRUSADES: THEIR RESULTS. 

THE CHILDREN'S CRUSADE (1212). --During the interval between the Fourth andthe Fifth Crusade, the epidemical fanaticism that had so long agitatedEurope seized upon the children, resulting in what is known as theChildren's Crusade. 

The preacher of this crusade was a child about twelve years of age, aFrench peasant lad, named Stephen, who became persuaded that Jesus Christhad commanded him to lead a crusade of children to the rescue of the HolySepulchre. The children became wild with excitement, and flocked in vastcrowds to the places appointed for rendezvous. Nothing could restrain themor thwart their purpose. "Even bolts and bars, " says an old chronicler, "could not hold them. "

The movement excited the most diverse views. Some declared that it wasinspired by the Holy Spirit, and quoted such Scriptural texts as these tojustify the enthusiasm: "A child shall lead them;" "Out of the mouth ofbabes and sucklings thou hast ordained praise. " Others, however, werequite as confident that the whole thing was the work of the Devil. 

The great majority of those who collected at the rallying places were boysunder twelve years of age, but there were also many girls. The Germanchildren, 50, 000 in number, crossed the Alps, and marched down the Italianshores, looking for a miraculous pathway through the Mediterranean. FromBrundusium 2000 or 3000 of the little crusaders sailed away into oblivion. Not a word ever came back from them. 

The French children--about 30, 000 in number--set out from the place ofrendezvous for Marseilles. Those that sailed from that port were betrayed, and sold as slaves in Alexandria and other Mohammedan slave markets. 

This remarkable spectacle of the children's crusade affords the moststriking exhibition possible of the ignorance, superstition, andfanaticism that characterized the period. Yet we cannot but reverence theholy enthusiasm of an age that could make such sacrifices of innocence andhelplessness in obedience to what was believed to be the will of God. 

The children's expedition marked at once the culmination and the declineof the crusading movement. The fanatic zeal that inspired the firstcrusaders was already dying out. "These children, " said the Pope, referring to the young crusaders, "reproach us with having fallen asleep, whilst they were flying to the assistance of the Holy Land. "

THE MINOR CRUSADES: END OF THE KINGDOM OF JERUSALEM. --The last fourexpeditions--the Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth--undertaken by theChristians of Europe against the infidels of the East, may be convenientlygrouped as the Minor Crusades. They were marked by a less fervid and holyenthusiasm than that which characterized the first movements, and exhibitamong those taking part in them the greatest variety of objects andambitions. [Footnote: The _Fifth Crusade_ (1216-1220) was led by thekings of Hungary and Cyprus. Its strength was wasted in Egypt, and itresulted in nothing The _Sixth Crusade_ (1227-1229), headed by FrederickII. Of Germany, succeeded in securing from the Saracens the restoration ofJerusalem, together with several other cities of Palestine. The _SeventhCrusade_ (1249-1254) was under the lead of Louis IX. Of France, surnamedthe Saint. The _Eighth Crusade_ (1270-1272) was incited by the freshmisfortunes that, towards the close of the thirteenth century, befell theChristian kingdom in Palestine. The two principal leaders of theexpedition were Louis IX. Of France, and Prince Edward of England, afterwards Edward I. Louis directed his forces against the Moors aboutTunis, in North Africa. Here the king died of the plague. Nothing waseffected by this division of the expedition. The division led by theEnglish prince, was, however, more fortunate. Edward succeeded incapturing Nazareth, and in compelling the sultan of Egypt to agree to atreaty favorable to the Christians (1272). ] The flame of the Crusades hadburned itself out, and the fate of the little Christian kingdom in Asia, isolated from Europe, and surrounded on all sides by bitter enemies, became each day more and more apparent. Finally the last of the places(Acre) held by the Christians fell before the attacks of the Mamelukes ofEgypt, and with this event the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem came to an end(1291). The second great combat between Mohammedanism and Christianity wasover, and "silence reigned along the shore that had so long resounded withthe world's debate. "

RESULTS OF THE CRUSADES. --The Crusades kept all Europe in a tumult for twocenturies, and directly and indirectly cost Christendom several millionsof lives (from 2, 000, 000 to 6, 000, 000 according to different estimates), besides incalculable expenditures in treasure and suffering. They were, moreover, attended by all the disorder, license, and crime with which waris always accompanied. 

On the other hand, the Holy Wars were productive indirectly of so much andlasting good that they form a most important factor in the history of theprogress of civilization. To show this to be so, we will speak briefly oftheir influence upon the Church, and upon the political, the social, theintellectual, and the material progress and development of the Europeannations. 

The Crusades contributed to increase the wealth of the Church and thepower of the Papacy. Thus the prominent part which the Popes took in theenterprises naturally fostered their authority and influence, by placingin their hands, as it were, the armies and resources of Christendom, andaccustoming the people to look to them as guides and leaders. As to thewealth of the churches and monasteries, this was augmented enormously bythe sale to them, often for a mere fraction of their actual value, of theestates of those preparing for the expeditions, or by the out and out giftof the lands of such in return for prayers and pious benedictions. Again, thousands of the crusaders, returning broken in spirits and in health, sought an asylum in cloistral retreats, and endowed the establishmentsthat they entered with all their worldly goods. Besides all this, thestream of the ordinary gifts of piety was swollen by the extraordinaryfervor of religious enthusiasm which characterized the period intoenormous proportions. In all these ways, the power of the Papacy and thewealth of the Church were vastly augmented. [Footnote: It should be saidin regard to this increase in the riches of the Church and the authorityof the Popes, that while Catholics count this as one of the good resultsof the Holy Wars, Protestants consider it as one of the evils of themovements, urging that it led to papal tyranny and to the corruption ofmonastic morals. ]

As to the political effects of the Crusades, they helped to break down thepower of the feudal aristocracy, and to give prominence to the kings andthe people. Many of the nobles who set out on the expeditions neverreturned, and their estates, through failure of heirs, escheated to theCrown; while many more wasted their fortunes in meeting the expenses oftheir undertaking. At the same time, the cities also gained many politicaladvantages at the expense of the crusading barons and princes. Ready moneyin the twelfth and thirteenth centuries was largely in the hands of theburgher class, and in return for the contributions and loans they made totheir overlords, or suzerains, they received charters conferring specialand valuable privileges. And under this head of the political effects ofthe Crusades, it should be noticed that, in checking the advance of theTurks, they postponed the fall of Constantinople for three centuries ormore. This gave the young Christian civilization of Germany time toacquire sufficient strength to roll back the returning tide of Mohammedaninvasion when it broke upon Europe in the fifteenth century. 

The effects of the Crusades upon the social life of the Western nationswere marked and important. Giving opportunity for romantic adventure, theywere one of the principal fostering influences of Chivalry; while bybringing the rude peoples of the West in contact with the culture of theEast, they exerted upon them a general refining influence. 

The influence of the Crusades upon the intellectual development of Europecan hardly be overestimated. Above all, they liberalized the minds of thecrusaders. Furthermore, the knowledge of the science and learning of theEast gained by the crusaders through their expeditions, greatly stimulatedthe Latin intellect, and helped to awaken in Western Europe that mentalactivity which resulted finally in the great intellectual outburst knownas the Revival of Learning (see p. 471). 

Among the effects of the Holy Wars upon the material development of Europemust be mentioned the spur they gave to commercial enterprise, especiallyto the trade and commerce of the Italian cities. During this period, Venice, Pisa, and Genoa acquired great wealth and reputation through thefostering of their trade by the needs of the crusaders, and the opening upof the East. The Mediterranean was whitened with the sails of theirtransport ships, which were constantly plying between the various ports ofEurope and the towns of the Syrian coast. Moreover, various arts, manufactures, and inventions before unknown in Europe, were introducedfrom Asia. This enrichment of the civilization of the West with the"spoils of the East" we may allow to be emblemized by the famous bronzehorses that the crusaders carried off from Constantinople, and set upbefore St. Mark's Cathedral in Venice. 

Lastly, the incentive given to geographical discovery led varioustravellers, such as the celebrated Italian, Marco Polo, and the scarcelyless noted Englishman, Sir John Mandeville, to explore the most remotecountries of Asia. Even that spirit of maritime enterprise and adventurewhich rendered illustrious the fifteenth century, inspiring the voyages ofColumbus, Vasco de Gama, and Magellan, may be traced back to that livelyinterest in geographical matters awakened by the expeditions of thecrusaders. 

CHAPTER XLIII. 

SUPREMACY OF THE PAPACY: DECLINE OF ITS TEMPORAL POWER. 

INTRODUCTORY. --In a previous chapter we traced the gradual rise of thespiritual and temporal power of the Papacy, and stated the severaltheories respecting its relation to secular rulers. In the presentchapter, we purpose to follow its increasing power to the culmination ofits authority in the thirteenth century, and then to speak of some of thecircumstances that caused, or that marked, the decline of its temporalpower. 

POPE GREGORY VII. (HILDEBRAND) AND HIS REFORMS. --One of the greatestpromoters of the papal fortunes was Pope Gregory VII. , perhaps betterknown as Hildebrand, the most noteworthy character after Charlemagne thatthe Middle Ages produced. In the year 1049 he was called from thecloisters of a French monastery to Rome, there to become the maker andadviser of Popes, and finally to be himself elevated to the pontificalthrone, which he held from 1073 to 1080. Being a man of great force ofcharacter and magnificent breadth of view, he did much towardsestablishing the universal spiritual and temporal sovereignty of the HolySee. 

In carrying out his purpose of exalting the Papal See above all prelatesand princes, Gregory, as soon as he became Pope, set about two importantreforms, --the enforcement of celibacy among the secular clergy, and thesuppression of simony. By the first measure he aimed to effect not only amuch-needed moral reform, but, by separating the clergy from all theattachments of home and neighborhood and country, to render them moredevoted to the interests of the Church. 

The second reform, the correction of simony, had for its ultimate objectthe freeing of the lands and offices of the Church from the control oftemporal lords and princes, and the bringing of them more completely intothe hands of the Roman bishop. 

The evil of simony [Footnote: By simony is meant the purchase of an officein the Church, the name of the offence coming from Simon Magus, whooffered Paul money for the gift of working miracles. ] had grown up in theChurch in the following way: As the feudal system took possession ofEuropean society, the Church, like individuals and cities, assumed feudalrelations. Thus, as we have already seen, abbots and bishops, as the headsof monasteries and churches, for the sake of protection, became thevassals of powerful barons or princes. When once a prelate had renderedhomage for his estates, or temporalities, as they were called, thesebecame thenceforth a permanent fief of the overlord, and upon the death ofthe holder could be re-bestowed by the lord upon whomsoever he chose. These Church estates and positions that thus came within the gift of thetemporal princes were often given to unworthy court favorites, or sold tothe highest bidder. So long as a considerable portion of the clergysustained this vassal relation to the feudal lords, the Papal See couldnot hope to exercise any great authority over them. 

To remedy the evil, Gregory issued a decree that no ecclesiastic should dohomage to a temporal lord, but that he should receive the ring and staff, the symbols of investiture, from the hands of the Pope alone. Any one whoshould dare disobey the decree was threatened with the anathemas of theChurch. 

Such was the bold measure by which Gregory proposed to wrest out of thehands of the feudal lords and princes the vast patronage and immenserevenues resulting from the relation they had gradually come to sustain toa large portion of the lands and riches of the Church. To realize themagnitude of the proposed revolution, we must bear in mind that the Churchat this time was in possession of probably one-half of the lands ofEurope. 

EXCOMMUNICATIONS AND INTERDICTS. --The principal instruments relied upon byGregory for the carrying out of his reforms were Excommunication andInterdict. 

The first was directed against individuals. The person excommunicated wascut off from all relations with his fellow-men. If a king, his subjectswere released from their oath of allegiance. Any one providing theaccursed with food or shelter incurred the wrath of the Church. TheInterdict was directed against a city, province, or kingdom. Throughoutthe region under this ban, the churches were closed; no bell could berung, no marriage celebrated, no burial ceremony performed. The rites ofbaptism and extreme unction alone could be administered. These spiritualpunishments rarely failed during the eleventh and twelfth centuries inbringing the most contumacious offender to a speedy and abject confession. This will appear in the following paragraph. 

GREGORY VII. AND HENRY IV. OF GERMANY. --The decree of Gregory respectingthe relation of the clergy to the feudal lords created a perfect storm ofopposition, not only among the temporal princes and sovereigns of Europe, but also among the clergy themselves. The dispute thus begun distractedEurope for centuries. 

Gregory experienced the most formidable opposition to his reforms inGermany. The Emperor Henry IV. Refused to recognize his decree, and evencalled a council of the clergy of Germany and deposed him. Gregory in turngathered a council at Rome, and deposed and excommunicated the emperor. This encouraged a revolt on the part of some of Henry's discontentedsubjects. He was shunned as a man accursed by heaven. His authority seemedto have slipped entirely out of his hands, and his kingdom was on thepoint of going to pieces. In this wretched state of his affairs there wasbut one thing for him to do, --to go to Gregory, and humbly sue for pardonand re-instatement in the favor of the Church. 

Henry sought the Pontiff at Canossa among the Apennines. But Gregoryrefused to admit the penitent to his presence. It was winter, and forthree successive days the king, clothed in sackcloth, stood with bare feetin the snow of the court-yard of the palace, waiting for permission tokneel at the feet of the Pontiff and to receive forgiveness. On the fourthday the penitent king was admitted to the presence of Gregory, who re-instated him in favor--to the extent of removing the sentence ofexcommunication (1077). 

Henry afterwards avenged his humiliation. He raised an army, invadedItaly, and drove Gregory into exile at Salerno, where he died. His lastwords were, "I have loved justice and hated iniquity, and therefore I diein exile" (1085), But the quarrel did not end here. It was taken up by the successors ofGregory, and Henry was again excommunicated. After maintaining a longstruggle with the power of the Church, and with his own sons, who wereincited to rebel against him, he at last died of a broken heart (1106). 

THE POPES AND THE HOHENSTAUFEN EMPERORS. --In the twelfth century began thelong and fierce contention--lasting more than a hundred years--between thePapal See and the emperors of the proud House of Hohenstaufen (see p. 504). It was simply the continuation and culmination of the struggle begunlong before to decide which should be supreme, the "world-priest" or the"world-king. " The outcome was the final triumph of the Roman bishops andthe utter ruin of the Hohenstaufen. 

THE PAPACY AT ITS HEIGHT. --The authority of the Popes was at its heightduring the thirteenth century. The beginning of this period of papalsplendor is marked by the accession to the pontifical throne of InnocentIII. (1198-1216), the greatest of the Popes after Gregory VII. Under himwas very nearly made good the papal claim that all earthly sovereigns weremerely vassals of the Roman Pontiff. Almost all the kings and princes ofEurope swore fealty to him as their overlord. "Rome was once more themistress of the world. "

POPE INNOCENT III. AND PHILIP AUGUSTUS OF FRANCE. --One of Innocent's mostsignal triumphs in his contest with the kings of Europe was gained overPhilip Augustus (1180-1223) of France. That king having put away his wife, Innocent commanded him to take her back, and forced him to submission bymeans of an interdict. "This submission of such a prince, " says Hallam, "not feebly superstitious like his predecessor Robert, nor vexed withseditions, like the Emperor Henry IV. , but brave, firm, and victorious, isperhaps the proudest trophy in the scutcheon of Rome. "

POPE INNOCENT III. AND KING JOHN OF ENGLAND. --Innocent's quarrel with KingJohn (1199-1216) of England will afford another illustration of the powerof the Popes. The See of Canterbury falling vacant, John ordered the monkswho had the right of election to give the place to a favorite of his. Theyobeyed; but the Pope immediately declared the election void, and causedthe vacancy to be filled with one of his own friends, Stephen Langton. John declared that the Pope's archbishop should never enter England asprimate, and proceeded to confiscate the estates of the See. Innocent III. Now laid all England under an interdict, excommunicated John, and incitedthe French king, Philip Augustus, to undertake a crusade against thecontumacious rebel. 

The outcome of the matter was that John, like the German Emperor beforehim, was compelled to yield to the power of the Church. He gave back thelands he had confiscated, acknowledged Langton to be the rightful primateof England, and even went so far as to give England to the Pope as aperpetual fief. In token of his vassalage he agreed to pay to the PapalSee the annual sum of 1000 marks. This tribute money was actually paid, though with very great irregularity, until the seventeenth year of thereign of Edward I. (1289). 

THE MENDICANTS, OR BEGGING FRIARS. --The authority of the immediatesuccessors of Innocent III. Was powerfully supported by the monasticorders of the Dominicans and Franciscans, established early in thethirteenth century. They were named after their respective founders, St. Dominic (1170-1221) and St. Francis (1182-1226). The principles on whichthese fraternities were established were very different from those whichhad shaped all previous monastic institutions. Until now the monk hadsought cloistral solitude in order to escape from the world, and throughpenance and prayer and contemplation to work out his own salvation. In thenew orders, the monk was to give himself wholly to the work of securingthe salvation of others. 

Again, the orders were also as _orders_ to renounce all earthlypossessions, and, "espousing Poverty as a bride, " to rely entirely forsupport upon the alms of the pious. Hitherto, while the individual membersof a monastic order must affect extreme poverty, the house or fraternitymight possess any amount of communal wealth. 

The new fraternities grew and spread with marvellous rapidity, and in lessthan a generation they quite overshadowed all of the old monastic ordersof the Church. The Popes conferred many and special privileges upon them, and they in turn became the staunchest friends and supporters of the RomanSee. They were to the Papacy of the thirteenth century what the laterorder of the Jesuits was to the Roman Church of the seventeenth (see p. 528). 

REMOVAL OF THE PAPAL SEAT TO AVIGNON (1309). --Having now noticed some ofthe most prominent circumstances and incidents that marked the gradualadvance of the bishops of Rome to almost universal political andecclesiastical sovereignty, we shall next direct attention to some of thechief events that marked the decline of their temporal power, and preparedthe way for the rejection, at a later date, by a large part ofChristendom, of their spiritual authority. 

One of the severest blows given both the temporal and the spiritualauthority of the Popes was the removal, in 1309, through the influence ofthe French king, Philip the Fair, of the papal chair from Rome to Avignon, in Provence, near the frontier of France. Here it remained for a space ofabout seventy years, an era known in Church history as the BabylonianCaptivity. While it was established here, all the Popes were French, andof course all their policies were shaped and controlled by the Frenchkings. "In that city, " says Stille, "the Papacy ceased, in the eyes of avery large part of Christendom, to possess that sacred cosmopolitancharacter which no doubt had had much to do with the veneration andrespect with which the Catholic authority had been regarded. "

THE GREAT SCHISM (1378). --The discontent awakened among the Italians bythe situation of the papal court at length led to an open rupture betweenthem and the French party. In 1378 the opposing factions each elected aPope, and thus there were two heads of the Church, one at Avignon and theother at Rome. 

The spectacle of two rival Popes, each claiming to be the rightfulsuccessor of St. Peter and the sole infallible head of the Church, verynaturally led men to question the claims and infallibility of both. Itgave the reverence which the world had so generally held for the Roman Seea rude shock, and one from which it never recovered. 

THE CHURCH COUNCILS OF PISA AND CONSTANCE. --Finally, in 1409, a generalcouncil of the Church assembled at Pisa, for the purpose of composing theshameful quarrel. This council deposed both Popes, and elected AlexanderV. As the supreme head of the Church. But matters instead of being mendedhereby were only made worse; for neither of the deposed pontiffs would laydown his authority in obedience to the demands of the council, andconsequently there were now three Popes instead of two. 

In 1414 another council was called, at Constance, for the settlement ofthe growing dispute. Two of the claimants were deposed, and one resigned. A new Pope was then elected, --Pope Martin V. In his person the Catholicworld was again united under a single spiritual head. The schism wasoutwardly healed, but the wound had been too deep not to leave permanentmarks upon the Church. 

THE REVOLT OF THE TEMPORAL PRINCES. --Taking advantage of the decliningauthority of the Papal See, the temporal rulers in France, Germany, andEngland successively revolted, and freed themselves from the authority ofthe Papacy as touching political or governmental affairs. But it must beborne in mind that the princes or governments that at this time repudiatedthe temporal authority of the Papal See, did not think of challenging theclaims of the Popes to recognition as the supreme head of the_Church_, and the rightful arbiters in all _spiritual_ matters. At thevery time that they were striving to emancipate themselves from papalcontrol in temporal matters, they were lending the Church all theirstrength to punish heresy and schism. Thus the Albigenses [Footnote: Seep. 493. ] in Southern France, the Lollards [Footnote: See p. 491. ] inEngland, and the Hussites [Footnote: See p. 506. ] in Bohemia, wereextirpated or punished by the civil authorities, acting either inaccordance with the then universal idea of how heresy should be dealtwith, or in obedience to the commands of the Roman See. 

CHAPTER XLIV. 

CONQUESTS OF THE TURANIAN TRIBES. 

THE HUNS AND THE HUNGARIANS. --The Huns, of whom we have already told, werethe first Turanians that during historic times pushed their way in amongthe peoples of Europe (see p. 345). 

The next Turanian invaders of Europe that we need here notice were theMagyars, or Hungarians, another branch of the Hunnic race, who in theninth century of our era succeeded in thrusting themselves far into thecontinent, and establishing there the important Kingdom of Hungary. Thesepeople, in marked contrast to almost every other tribe of Turanian origin, adopted the manners, customs, and religion of the peoples about them--became, in a word, thoroughly Europeanized, and for a long time were themain defence of Christian Europe against the Turkish tribes of the samerace that followed closely in their footsteps. 

THE SELJUKIAN TURKS. --The Seljukian Turks, so called from the name of oneof their chiefs, are the next Tartar people that thrust themselvesprominently upon our notice. It was the capture of the holy places inPalestine by this intolerant race, and their threatening advance towardsthe Bosporus, that alarmed the Christian nations of Europe, and led to theFirst Crusade. 

The blows dealt the empire of the Seljuks by the crusaders, and disputesrespecting the succession, caused the once formidable sovereignty tocrumble to pieces, only, however, to be replaced by others of equallyrapid growth, destined to as quick a decay. 

THE MONGOLS OR MOGULS. --While the power of the Seljukian Turks wasdeclining in Western Asia, the Mongols, or Moguls, a fierce and utterlyuntamed Tartar tribe that first issued from the easternmost part ofChinese Tartary, were building up a new dynasty among the various tribesof the central portion of the continent. In the year 1156 was born theirgreatest chieftain, Temujin, afterwards named Genghis Khan, or "UniversalSovereign, " the most terrible scourge that ever afflicted the human race. At the head of vast armies, made up of numerous Turanian hordes, hetraversed with sword and torch a great part of Asia. It is estimated thathis enormous empire was built up at the cost of fifty thousand cities andtowns and five millions of lives, --a greater waste, probably, thanresulted from all the Crusades. 

The successors of Genghis Khan still farther enlarged and strengthened themonarchy, so that it came to embrace, besides the best part of Asia, aconsiderable portion of Europe as well. At length the immoderatelyextended empire fell into disorder, and became broken into many pettystates. It was restored by Tamerlane, or Timour the Lame (born about1336), a descendant of Genghis Khan. With his wild Mongolian hordes hetraversed anew almost all the countries that had been desolated by thesanguinary marches of his predecessors. The route of the barbarians waseverywhere marked by ruined fields and burned villages. 

Asia has never recovered from the terrible devastation of the Mongolconquerors. Many districts, swarming with life, were entirely swept oftheir population by these destroyers of the race, and have remained tothis day desolate as the tomb. 

The immense empire of Tamerlane crumbled to pieces after his death. One ofits fragments had a remarkable history. This was the dynasty establishedin India, which became known as the Kingdom of the Great Moguls. ThisMongol state lasted upwards of 300 years, --until destroyed by the Englishin the present century. The magnificence of the court of the Great Mogulsat Delhi and Agra is one of the most splendid traditions of the East. 

THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE. 

FOUNDING OF THE EMPIRE. --The latest, most permanent, and most important ofthe Tartar sovereignties was established by the Ottoman Turks, who were anoffshoot of the Seljukians. Gradually this martial race seized provinceafter province of the Asiatic possessions of the Byzantine emperors. Through the quarrels that were constantly distracting Constantinople, theyat last gained a foothold in Europe (1353). During the reign of Amurath I. (1360-1389), a large part of the country known as Turkey in Europe fellinto their hands. 

CONQUESTS OF BAJAZET (1389-1403). --Amurath was followed by his son Bajazetwho, by the rapid advance of his arms, spread the greatest alarmthroughout Western Europe. The warriors of Hungary, Germany, and Franceunited their armies to arrest his progress; but their combined forces, numbering 100, 000 men, were cut to pieces by the sabres of the Turks onthe fatal field of Nicopolis, in Bulgaria (1396). Bajazet now vowed thathe would stable his horse in the Cathedral of St. Peter at Rome, and thereseemed no power in Christendom to prevent the sacrilege. 

Before proceeding to fulfil his threat, however, Bajazet turned back tocapture Constantinople, which he believed in the present despondent stateof its inhabitants would make little or no resistance. Now it happenedthat just at this time Tamerlane was leading the Mongols on their careerof conquest. He directed them against the Turks in Asia Minor, and Bajazetwas forced to raise the siege of Constantinople, and hasten across theBosporus, to check the advance in his dominions of these new enemies. TheTurks and Mongols met upon the plains of Angora, where the former suffereda disastrous defeat (1402). The battle of Angora checked for a time theconquests of the Ottomans, and saved Constantinople to the Christian worldfor another period of fifty years. 

THE CAPTURE OF CONSTANTINOPLE (1453). --The Ottomans gradually recoveredfrom the blow they had received at Angora. In the year 1421 they madeanother attempt upon Constantinople, but were unsuccessful. Finally, inthe year 1453, Mohammed II. , the Great, sultan of the Ottomans, laid siegeto the capital, with an army of over 200, 000 men. After a shortinvestment, the place was taken by storm. The Cross, which since the timeof Constantine the Great had surmounted the dome of St. Sophia, wasreplaced by the Crescent, which remains to this day. 

CHECK TO THE OTTOMAN ARMS. --The consternation which the fall of Byzantiumcreated throughout Christendom was like the dismay which filled the worldupon the downfall of Rome in the fifth century. All Europe now lay open tothe Moslem barbarians, and there seemed nothing to prevent their marchingto the Atlantic. But the warriors of Hungary made a valiant stand againstthe invaders, and succeeded in checking their advance upon the continent, while the Knights of St. John (see p. 443), now established in the islandof Rhodes, held them in restraint in the Mediterranean. Mohammed II. Didsucceed in planting the Crescent upon the shores of Italy--capturing andholding for a year the city of Otranto, in Calabria; but by the time ofthe death of that energetic prince, the conquering energy of the Ottomansseems to have nearly spent itself, and the limits of their empire were notafterwards materially enlarged. 

The Turks have ever remained quite insensible to the influences ofEuropean civilization, and their government has been a perfect blight andcurse to the countries subjected to their rule. They have always beenlooked upon as intruders in Europe, and their presence there has led toseveral of the most sanguinary wars of modern times. Gradually they arebeing pushed out from their European possessions, and the time is probablynot very far distant when they will be driven back across the Bosporus, astheir Moorish brethren were expelled long ago from the opposite corner ofthe continent by the Christian chivalry of Spain. 

CHAPTER XLV. 

GROWTH OF THE TOWNS: THE ITALIAN CITY-REPUBLICS. 

RELATION OF THE CITIES TO THE FEUDAL LORDS. --When Feudalism tookpossession of Europe, the cities became a part of the system. Each townformed a part of the fief in which it happened to be situated, and wassubject to all the incidents of feudal ownership. It owed allegiance toits lord, must pay to him feudal tribute, and aid him in his warenterprises. As the cities, through their manufactures and trade, were themost wealthy members of the Feudal System, the lords naturally looked tothem for money when in need. Their exactions at last became unendurable, and a long struggle broke out between them and the burghers, whichresulted in what is known as the enfranchisement of the towns. 

It was in the eleventh century that this revolt of the cities against thefeudal lords become general. During the course of this and the succeedingcentury, the greater number of the towns of the countries of WesternEurope either bought, or wrested by force of arms, charters from theirlords or suzerains. The cities thus chartered did not become independentof the feudal lords, but they acquired the right of managing, with more orless supervision, their own affairs, and were secured against arbitraryand oppressive taxation. This was a great gain; and as, under theprotection of their charters, they increased in wealth and population, very many of them grew at last strong enough to cast off all actualdependence upon lord or suzerain, and became in effect independent states--little commonwealths. Especially was this true in the case of theItalian cities, and in a less marked degree in that of the German towns. 

RISE OF THE ITALIAN CITY-REPUBLICS. --The Italian cities were the first torise to power and importance. Several things conspired to secure theirearly and rapid development, but the main cause of their prosperity wastheir trade with the East, and the enormous impulse given to this commerceby the Crusades. 

[Illustration: A MEDIÆVAL SIEGE, SHOWING BALLISTAE, ETC. (By Alphonse deNeuville. )]

With wealth came power, and all the chief Italian cities became distinct, self-governing states, with just a nominal dependence upon the pope or theemperor. Towards the close of the thirteenth century, Northern and CentralItaly was divided among about two hundred contentious little city-republics. Italy had become another Greece. 

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TYRANNIES. --Just what happened among the contendingrepublics of Greece took place in the case of the quarrelling city-commonwealths of Italy. Their republican constitutions were overthrown, and the supreme power fell into the hands of an ambitious aristocracy, orwas seized by some bold usurper, who often succeeded in making thegovernment hereditary in his family. Before the close of the fourteenthcentury almost all the republics of the peninsula had become convertedinto exclusive oligarchies or hereditary principalities. 

We shall now relate some circumstances, for the most part of a commercialcharacter, which concern some of the most renowned of the Italian city-states. 

VENICE. --Venice, the most celebrated of the Italian republics, had itsbeginnings in the fifth century, in the rude huts of some refugees whofled out into the marshes of the Adriatic to escape the fury of the Hunsof Attila (see p. 346). Conquests and negotiations gradually extended thepossessions of the island-city until she came to control the coasts andwaters of the Eastern Mediterranean in much the same way that Carthage hadmastery of the Western Mediterranean at the time of the First Punic War. Even before the Crusades her trade with the East was very extensive, andby those expeditions was expanded into enormous proportions. 

[Illustration: PALACE OF THE DOGES. (From a photograph. )]

Venice was at the height of her power during the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries. Her supremacy on the sea was celebrated each yearby the brilliant ceremony of "Wedding the Adriatic, " by the dropping of aring into the sea. 

The decline of Venice dates from the fifteenth century. The conquests ofthe Turks during that century deprived her of much of the territory sheheld east of the Adriatic, and finally the voyage of Vasco da Gama roundthe Cape of Good Hope (1497-8), showing a new path to India, gave a death-blow to her commerce. From this time forward, the trade of Europe with theEast was to be conducted from the Atlantic ports of the continent insteadof from those in the Mediterranean. 

GENOA. --Genoa, on the western coast of Italy, was the most formidablecommercial rival of Venice. The period of her greatest prosperity datesfrom the recapture of Constantinople from the Latins by the Greeks in1261; for the Genoese had assisted the Greek princes in the recovery oftheir throne, and as a reward were shown commercial favors by the Greekemperors. 

The jealousy with which the Venetians regarded the prosperity of theGenoese led to oft-renewed war between the two rival republics. For nearlytwo centuries their hostile fleets contended, as did the navies of Romeand Carthage during the First Punic War, for the supremacy of the sea. 

The merchants of Genoa, like those of Venice, reaped a rich harvest duringthe Crusades. Their prosperity was brought to an end by the irruption ofthe Mongols and Turks, and the capture of Constantinople by the latter in1453. The Genoese traders were now driven from the Black Sea, and theirtraffic with Eastern Asia was completely broken up; for the Venetians hadcontrol of the ports of Egypt and Syria and the southern routes to Indiaand the countries beyond--that is, the routes by way of the Euphrates andthe Red Sea. 

FLORENCE. --Florence, although shut out, by her inland location upon theArno, from engaging in those naval enterprises that conferred wealth andimportance upon the coast cities of Venice and Genoa, became, notwithstanding, through the skill, industry, enterprise, and genius ofher citizens, the great manufacturing, financial, literary, and art centreof the Middle Ages. The list of her illustrious citizens, of her poets, statesmen, historians, architects, sculptors, and painters, is moreextended than that of any other city of mediæval times; and indeed, asrespects the number of her great men, Florence is perhaps unrivalled byany city, excepting Athens, of the ancient or the modern world. [Footnote:In her long roll of fame we find the names of Dante, Petrarch, Boccaccio, Macchiavelli, Michael Angelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Galileo, AmerigoVespucci, and the Medici. ]

THE HANSEATIC LEAGUE. --From speaking of the Italian city-republics, wemust now turn to say a word respecting the free cities of Germany, inwhich country, next after Italy, the mediæval municipalities had theirmost perfect development, and acquired their greatest power and influence. 

[Illustration: ROBBER KNIGHTS. ]

When, in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the towns of Northern Europebegan to extend their commercial connections, the greatest drawback totheir trade was the general insecurity and disorder that everywhereprevailed. The trader who entrusted his goods designed for the Italianmarket to the overland routes was in danger of losing them at the hands ofthe robber nobles, who watched all the lines of travel, and either robbedthe merchant outright, or levied an iniquitous toll upon his goods. Theplebeian tradesmen, in the eyes of these patrician barons, had no rightswhich they felt bound to respect. Nor was the way to Italy by the Balticand the North Sea beset with less peril. Piratical crafts scoured thosewaters, and made booty of any luckless merchantman they might overpower, or lure to wreck upon the dangerous shores. This state of things led someof the German cities, about the middle of the fourteenth century, to form, for the protection of their merchants, an alliance called the HanseaticLeague. The confederation eventually embraced eighty-five of the principaltowns of North Germany. In order to facilitate the trading operations ofits members, the League established in different parts of the worldtrading-posts and warehouses. The four most noted centres of the trade ofthe confederation were the cities of Bruges, London, Bergen, and Novgorod. The League thus became a vast monopoly, which endeavored to control, inthe interests of its own members, the entire commerce of Northern Europe. 

Among other causes of the dismemberment of the association may bementioned the maritime discoveries of the fifteenth century, whichdisarranged all the old routes of trade in the north of Europe as well asin the south; the increased security which the formation of stronggovernments gave to the merchant class upon sea and land; and the heavyexpense incident to membership in the association, resulting from itsambitious projects. All these things combined resulted in the decline ofthe power and usefulness of the League, and finally led to its formaldissolution about the middle of the seventeenth century. 

INFLUENCE OF THE MEDIÆVAL CITIES. --The chartered towns and free cities ofthe mediæval era exerted a vast influence upon the commercial, social, artistic, and political development of Europe. 

They were the centres of the industrial and commercial life of the MiddleAges, and laid the foundations of that vast system of internationalexchange and traffic which forms a characteristic feature of modernEuropean civilization. 

Their influence upon the social and artistic life of Europe cannot beoverestimated. It was within the walls of the cities that the civilizationuprooted by the Teutonic invaders first revived. With their growing wealthcame not only power, but those other usual accompaniments of wealth, --culture and refinement. The Italian cities were the cradle and home ofmediæval art, science, and literature. 

Again, these cities were the birthplace of political liberty, ofrepresentative government. It was the burghers, the inhabitants of thecities, that in England, in France, and in Germany finally grew into theThird Estate, or Commons, the controlling political class in all thesecountries. In a word, municipal freedom was the germ of national liberty. 

CHAPTER XLVI. 

THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING. 

By the Revival of Learning, in the most general sense, is meant theintellectual awakening of Europe after the languor and depression of thefirst mediæval centuries. In a narrower sense, however, the phrase is usedto designate that wonderful renewal of interest in the old Greek and Latinauthors which sprung up in Italy about the beginning of the fourteenthcentury. We shall use the expression in its most comprehensive sense, thusmaking the restoration of classical letters simply a part of the greatRevival of Learning. 

SCHOLASTICISM AND THE SCHOOLMEN. --One of Charlemagne's most fruitfullabors was the establishment of schools, in connection with the cathedralsand monasteries, throughout his dominions. Within these schools there grewup in the course of time a form of philosophy called, from the place ofits origin, Scholasticism, while its expounders were known as Schoolmen. This philosophy was a fusion of Christianity and Aristotelian logic. Itmight be defined as being, in its later stages, an effort to reconcilerevelation and reason, faith and philosophy. Viewed in this light, it wasnot altogether unlike that theological philosophy of the present day whoseaim is to harmonize the Bible with the facts of modern science. 

The greatest of the Schoolmen appeared in the thirteenth century. Amongthem were Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus. The most eminent of these was Thomas Aquinas (died 1274), who was calledthe "Angel of the Schools. " He was the strongest champion of mediævalorthodoxy. His remarkable work, entitled the _Summa Theologica_, outlinesand defends the whole scheme of Roman Catholic theology. 

The Schoolmen often busied themselves with the most unprofitable questionsin metaphysics and theology, yet their discussions were not without goodresults. These debates sharpened the wits of men, created activity ofthought and deftness in argument. The schools of the times became realmental gymnasia, in which the young awakening mind of Europe received itsfirst training and gained its earliest strength. 

THE UNIVERSITIES. --Closely related to the subject of Scholasticism is thehistory of the universities, which, springing up in the thirteenthcentury, became a powerful agency in the Revival of Learning. They werefor the most part expansions of the old cathedral and abbey schools, theirtransformation being effected largely through the reputation of theSchoolmen, who drew such multitudes to their lectures that it becamenecessary to reorganize the schools on a broader basis. Popes and kingsgranted them charters which conferred special privileges upon theirfaculties and students, as, for instance, exemption from taxation and fromthe jurisdiction of the ordinary courts. The celebrated University ofParis was the first founded, and that of Bologna was probably next inorder. 

The usual course of study in the universities was divided into what wasknown as the _trivium_ and the _quadrivium_. The trivium embraced Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric; the quadrivium, Arithmetic, Geometry, Astronomy, andMusic. These constituted the seven liberal arts. Greek, Hebrew, and thephysical sciences received but little attention. Medicine had not yetfreed itself from the influence of magic and astrology, and alchemy hadnot yet given birth to chemistry. The Ptolemaic theory of the universestill held sway. However, in all these matters the European mind wasmaking progress, was blindly groping its way towards the light. 

INFLUENCE OF THE SARACENS. --The progress of the Christian scholars ofEurope in the physical sciences was greatly accelerated by the Saracens, who, during the Dark Ages, were almost the sole repositories of thescientific knowledge of the world. A part of this they gathered forthemselves, for the Arabian scholars were original investigators, but alarger share of it they borrowed from the Greeks. While the Westernnations were too ignorant to know the value of the treasures of antiquity, the Saracens preserved them by translating into Arabic the scientificworks of Aristotle and other Greek authors; and then, when Europe wasprepared to appreciate these accumulations of the past, gave them back toher. This learning came into Europe in part through the channel of theCrusades, but more largely, and at an earlier date, through the Arabianschools in Spain. Two of the greatest scholars of the thirteenth century, or perhaps of all the mediæval ages, Roger Bacon and Albertus Magnus, owedvery much of their scientific knowledge to the Arabians. 

EFFECTS OF THE CRUSADES. --Having in a previous chapter dwelt on theeffects of the Crusades upon the intellectual development of the Europeanpeoples (see p. 449) there is no need that we here do more than refer tothe matter, in order that we may fix in mind the place of the Holy Warsamong the agencies that conspired to bring about the Revival of Learning. The stimulating, quickening, liberalizing tendency of these chivalricenterprises was one of the most potent forces concerned in the mentalmovement we are tracing. 

RISE OF MODERN LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES. --Between the tenth and thefourteenth century the native tongues of Europe. Began to form literaturesof their own. We have already spoken of the formation and gradual growthof these languages (see p. 386). As soon as their forms became somewhatsettled, then literature was possible, and all these speeches bud andblossom into song and romance. This formation of modern European languagesand birth of native literatures, was one of the greatest gains in theinterest of general intelligence; for the Schoolmen used the Latinlanguage, and their discussions and writings consequently influenced onlya limited class; while the native literatures addressed themselves to themasses, and thus stirred the universal mind and heart of Europe. 

THE REVIVAL OF CLASSICAL LEARNING. --About the beginning of the fourteenthcentury there sprung up in Italy a great enthusiasm for Greek and Latinliterature and art. This is what is generally known as the ItalianRenaissance, or the New Birth. 

The Renaissance divides itself as follows: 1. The revival of classicallearning; 2. The revival of classical art. It is with the first only, theintellectual and literary phase of the movement, that we are nowconcerned. This feature of the movement is called _Humanism_, and thepromoters of it are known as _Humanists_. [Footnote: That is, students ofthe _humanities_, or polite literature. ] The real originator of thehumanistic movement was Petrarch [Footnote: The great Florentine poet, Dante (1265-1321), was the forerunner of Humanism, but was not, properlyspeaking, a Humanist. His Divine Comedy is the "Epic of Mediævalism. "](1304-1374). His love for the old Greek and Latin writers was a passionamounting to a worship. He often wrote love-letters to his favoriteauthors. In one to Homer he laments the lack of taste among hiscountrymen, and declares that there are not more than ten persons in allItaly who could appreciate the Iliad. Next to Petrarch stands Boccaccio(1313-1375), as the second of the Humanists. 

[Illustration: DANTE. [Footnote: The great Florentine poet, Dante (1265-1321), was the forerunner of Humanism, but was not, properly speaking, aHumanist. His Divine Comedy is the "Epic of Mediævalism. "] (From Raphael'sDisputation. )]

Just as the antiquarians of to-day search the mounds of Assyria for relicsof the ancient civilizations of the East, so did the Humanists ransack thelibraries of the monasteries and cathedrals, and all the out-of-the-wayplaces of Europe, for old manuscripts of the classic writers. The preciousdocuments were found covered with mould in damp cellars, or loaded withdust in the attics of monasteries. This late search for these remains ofclassical authors saved to the world hundreds of valuable manuscriptswhich, a little longer neglected, would have been forever lost. Librarieswere founded in which the new treasures might be stored, and copies of themanuscripts were made and distributed among all who could appreciate them. It was at this time that the celebrated Vatican Library was established byPope Nicholas V. (1447-1455), one of the most generous promoters of thehumanistic movement. 

This reviving interest in the literature of ancient Greece was vastlyaugmented by the disasters just now befalling the Greek empire (see p. 462). From every part of the crumbling state scholars fled before theapproach of the barbarians, and sought shelter in the West, especially inItaly, bringing with them many valuable manuscripts of the old Greekmasters, who were almost unknown in Western Europe, and always anenthusiasm for Greek learning. There was now a repetition of what tookplace at Rome upon the conquest of Greece in the days of the Republic. Italy was conquered a second time by the genius of Greece. 

Before the close of the fifteenth century, the enthusiasm for classicalauthors had infected the countries beyond the Alps. The New Learning, asit was called, found a place in the colleges and universities of Germany, France, and England. Greek was added to Latin as one of the requirementsin a liberal education, and from that day to this has maintained aprominent place in all our higher institutions of learning. In NorthernEurope, however, the humanistic movement became blended with othertendencies. In Italy it had been an exclusive passion, a single devotionto classical literature; but here in the North there was added to thisenthusiasm for Græco-Roman letters an equal and indeed supremer interestin what we have called the Hebrew element in civilization (see p. 368). Petrarch hung over the pages of Homer; Luther pores over the pages of theBible. The Renaissance, in a word, becomes the Reformation; the Humanistbecomes the Reformer. 

EVIL AND GOOD RESULTS OF THE CLASSICAL REVIVAL. --There were some seriousevils inherent in the classical revival. In Italy, especially, where thehumanistic spirit took most complete possession of society, it was"disastrous to both faith and morals. " The study of the old pagan writersproduced the result predicted by the monks, --caused a revival of paganism. To be learned in Greek was to excite suspicion of heresy. With the NewLearning came also those vices and immoralities that characterized thedecline of classical civilization. Italy was corrupted by the newinfluences that flowed in upon her, just as Rome was corrupted by Grecianluxury and vice in the days of the failing republic. 

On the other hand, the benefits of the movement to European civilizationwere varied and positive. The classical revival gave to Europe, not onlyfaultless literary models, but large stores of valuable knowledge. AsWoolsey says, "The old civilization contained treasures of permanent valuewhich the world could not spare, which the world will never be able orwilling to spare. These were taken up into the stream of life, and provedtrue aids to the progress of a culture which is gathering in one thebeauty and truth of all the ages. " And to the same effect are the words ofSymonds, who closes his appreciative review of the Italian Revival ofLetters as follows: "Such is the Lampadephoria, or torch-race, of thenations. Greece stretches out her hand to Italy; Italy consigns the sacredfire to Northern Europe; the people of the North pass on the flame toAmerica, to India, and the Australasian Isles. "

[Illustration: JOHN GUTENBERG. ]

PRINTING. --One of the most helpful agencies concerned in the Revival ofLearning, was the invention of printing from movable blocks, or type, --themost important discovery, in the estimation of Hallam, recorded in theannals of mankind. For this improvement the world is probably indebted toJohn Gutenberg of Mentz (1438). [Footnote: Dutch writers maintain that thehonor of the invention belongs to Costar of Haarlem. ]

The new art would have been much restricted in its usefulness had it notbeen for the bringing to perfection about this time of the art of makingpaper from linen rags. This article took the place of the costlyparchment, and rendered it possible to place books within the reach of allclasses. 

The first book printed from movable types was a Latin copy of the Bible, issued at Mentz, in Germany, between the years 1450 and 1455. The artspread rapidly, and before the close of the fifteenth century presses werebusy in every country of Europe, multiplying books with a rapidityundreamed of by the patient copyists of the cloister. 

It is needless to dwell upon the tremendous impulse which the new artgave, not only to the humanistic movement, but to the general intellectualprogress of the European nations. Without it, the Revival of Learning musthave languished, and the Reformation could hardly have become a fact inhistory. Its instrument, the _press_, is fitly chosen as the symbolof the new era of intelligence and freedom which it ushered in. 

CHAPTER XLVII. 

GROWTH OF THE NATIONS. --FORMATION OF NATIONAL GOVERNMENTS AND LITERATURES. 

INTRODUCTORY. --The most important movement that marked the latter part ofthe Middle Ages was the grouping, in several of the countries of Europe, of the petty feudal states and half-independent cities and towns intogreat nations with strong centralized governments. This movement wasaccompanied by, or rather consisted in, the decline of Feudalism as agovernmental system, the loss by the cities of their freedom, and thegrowth of the power of the kings. 

Many things contributed to this consolidation of peoples and governments, different circumstances favoring the movement in the several countries. Insome countries, however, events were opposed to the centralizing tendency, and in these the Modern Age was reached without nationality having beenfound. But in England, in France, and in Spain circumstances all seemed totend towards unity, and by the close of the fifteenth century there wereestablished in these countries strong despotic monarchies. Yet even amongthose peoples where national governments did not appear, some progress wasmade towards unity through the formation of national languages andliteratures, and the development of common feelings, sentiments, andaspirations, so that these peoples were manifestly only awaiting theopportunities of a happier period for the maturing of their national life. 

This rise of Monarchy and decline of Feudalism, this substitution ofstrong centralized governments in place of the feeble, irregular, andconflicting authorities of the feudal nobles, was a very great gain to thecause of law and good order. It paved the way for modern progress andcivilization. 

1. ENGLAND. 

GENERAL STATEMENT. --In preceding chapters we have told of the origin ofthe English people, and traced their growth under Saxon, Danish, andNorman rulers (see pp. 375, 411, 433). We shall, in the present section, tell very briefly the story of their progress under the Plantagenet kings, thus carrying on our narrative to the accession of the Tudors in 1485, from which event dates the beginning of the modern history of England. 

The era of the Plantagenets, which covers three hundred and thirty-oneyears, was a most eventful one in English history. The chief politicalmatters that we shall notice were the wresting of Magna Charta from KingJohn, the formation of the House of Commons, the Conquest of Wales, theWars with Scotland, the Hundred Years' War with France, and the Wars ofthe Roses. [Footnote: The name Plantagenet came from the peculiar badge, asprig of broom-plant (_plante de genet_), adopted by one of the earlymembers of the House. Following is a table of the sovereigns of thefamily:-- Henry II. . . . . . . . 1154-1189 Richard I. . . . . . . 1189-1199 John . . . . . . . . . 1199-1216 Henry III. . . . . . . 1216-1272 Edward I . . . . . . . 1272-1307 Edward II. . . . . . . 1307-1327 Edward III . . . . . . 1327-1377 Richard II . . . . . . 1377-1399

HOUSE OF LANCASTER. Henry IV . . . . . . . 1399-1413 Henry V. . . . . . . . 1413-1422 Henry VI . . . . . . . 1422-1461

HOUSE OF YORK. Edward IV. . . . . . . 1461-1483 Edward V . . . . . . . 1483 Richard III. . . . . . 1483-1485]

MAGNA CHARTA (1215). --Magna Charta, the "Great Charter, " held sacred asthe basis of English liberties, was an instrument which the English baronsand clergy forced King John to grant, in which the ancient rights andprivileges of the people were clearly defined and guaranteed. 

King John (1199-1216), the third of the Plantagenet line, was astyrannical as he was unscrupulous and wicked. His course led to an openrevolt of the barons, who were resolved upon the recovery of their ancientliberties. The tyrant was forced to bow to the storm he had raised. He methis barons at Runnymede, a meadow on the Thames, and there affixed hisseal to the instrument that had been prepared to receive it. 

Among the important articles of the paper were the following: No freemanshould be deprived of life, liberty, or property, "save by legal judgmentof his peers. " No taxes (save several feudal aids specified) should beimposed "save by the Common Council of the realm. " [Footnote: This articlerespecting taxation was suffered to fall into abeyance in the reign ofJohn's successor, Henry III. , and it was not until about one hundred yearsafter the granting of _Magna Charta_ that the great principle that thepeople should be taxed only through their representatives in Parliament, became fully established. ]

Besides these articles, which form the foundation of the EnglishConstitution, there were others abolishing numerous abuses and confirmingvarious time-honored rights and privileges of the towns and of differentclasses of freemen. 

The Great Charter was often disregarded and broken by despotic sovereigns;but the people always clung to it as the warrant and basis of theirliberties, and again and again forced tyrannical kings to renew andconfirm its provisions, and swear solemnly to observe all its articles. 

Considering the far-reaching consequences that resulted from the grantingof _Magna Charta_, --the securing of constitutional liberty as aninheritance for the English-speaking race in all parts of the world, --itmust always be considered the most important concession that a freedom-loving people ever wrung from a tyrannical sovereign. 

BEGINNING OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS (1265). --The reign of Henry III. (1216-1272), John's son and successor, witnessed the second important step takenin English constitutional freedom. This was the formation of the House ofCommons, Parliament having up to this time consisted of a single House, made up of nobles and bishops. It was again the royal misbehavior that ledto this great change in the form of the English national assembly. Henryhad violated his oath to rule according to the Great Charter, and hadbecome even more tyrannical than his father. The indignant barons rose inrevolt, and Henry and his son being worsted in a great engagement, knownas the battle of Lewes (1264), were made prisoners. 

Simon de Montfort, a Frenchman, whom Henry had given a prominent positionin the government, now assumed control of affairs. He issued, in theking's name, writs of summons to the nobles and bishops to meet inParliament; and at the same time sent similar writs to the sheriffs of thedifferent shires, directing them "to return two knights for the body oftheir county, with two citizens or burghers for every city and boroughcontained in it. " This was the first time that plain untitled citizens orburghers had been called to take their place with the knights, lords, andbishops in the great council of the nation, to join in deliberations onthe affairs of the realm. [Footnote: At first the Commons could only takepart in questions relating to taxation, but gradually they acquired theright to share in all matters that might come before Parliament. ] TheCommons were naturally at first a weak and timorous body, quite overawedby the great lords, but were destined eventually to grow into thecontrolling branch of the British Parliament. 

CONQUEST OF WALES. --For more than a thousand years the Celtic tribes ofWales maintained among their mountain fastnesses an ever-renewed strugglewith the successive invaders and conquerors of England--with Roman, Saxon, and Norman. They never submitted their necks to the Roman yoke, but theywere forced to acknowledge the overlordship of some of the Saxon andNorman kings. They were restless vassals, however, and were constantlywithholding tribute and refusing homage. 

When Edward I. Came to the English throne in 1272, Llewellyn, the overlordof the Welsh chiefs, with the title of Prince of Wales, refused to renderhomage to the new king. War followed. Llewellyn was slain, and theindependence of his race forever extinguished (1282). The title of theWelsh chieftain has ever since been borne by the eldest son of the Englishsovereign. 

WARS WITH SCOTLAND (1296-1328). --In 1285 the ancient Celtic line ofScottish chiefs became extinct. Thirteen claimants for the vacant throneimmediately arose. Chief among these were Robert Bruce and John Balliol, distinguished noblemen of Norman descent, attached to the Scottish court. King Edward I. Of England, who claimed suzerain rights over the Scottishrealm, was asked to act as arbitrator, and decide to whom the crown shouldbe given. He decided the question of the succession in favor of Balliol, who now took the crown of Scotland as the acknowledged vassal of theEnglish sovereign. 

Edward's unjust demands on the Scottish king led him to cast off hisfeudal allegiance. In the war that followed, the Scots were defeated, andScotland now fell back as a fief forfeited by treason, into the hands ofEdward (1296). As a sign that the Scottish kingdom had come to an end, Edward carried off to London the royal regalia, and with this a largestone, known as the Stone of Scone, upon which the Scottish kings, fromtime out of memory, had been accustomed to be crowned. Legend declaredthat the relic was the very stone on which Jacob had slept at Bethel. Theblock was taken to Westminster Abbey, and there made to support the seatof a stately throne-chair, which to this day is used in the coronationceremonies of the English sovereigns. It is said that the stone once borethis legend:--

 "Should fate not fail, where'er this stone be found, The Scot shall monarch of that realm be crowned, "

which prophecy was fulfilled when James VI. Of Scotland became James I. OfEngland. [Footnote: "Whether the prophecy was actually inscribed on thestone may be doubted, though this seems to be implied, and on the lowerside is still visible a groove which may have contained it; but the factthat it was circulated and believed as early as the fourteenth century, iscertain. "--Dean Stanley's _Memorials of Westminster Abbey_. ]

The two countries were not long united. The Scotch people loved too welltheir ancient liberties to submit quietly to this extinguishment of theirnational independence. Under the inspiration and lead of the famous SirWilliam Wallace, an outlaw knight, all the Lowlands were soon indetermined revolt. It was chiefly from the peasantry that the patriot herodrew his followers. Wallace gained some successes, but at length wasbetrayed into Edward's hands. He was condemned to death as a traitor, andhis head, garlanded with a crown of laurel, was exposed on London Bridge(1305). The romantic life of Wallace, his patriotic service, his heroicexploits, and his tragic death, at once lifted him to the place that hehas ever since held, as the national hero of Scotland. 

The struggle in which Wallace had fallen, was soon renewed by the almostequally renowned hero Robert Bruce (grandson of the Robert Bruce mentionedon p. 482), who was the representative of the nobles, as Wallace had beenof the common people. With Edward II. Bruce fought the great _Battle ofBannockburn_, near Stirling. Edward's army was almost annihilated (1314). It was the most appalling disaster that had befallen the arms of theEnglish people since the memorable defeat of Harold at Hastings. 

The independence of Scotland really dates from the great victory ofBannockburn, but the English were too proud to acknowledge it untilfourteen years more of war. Finally, in the year 1328, the young kingEdward III. Gave up all claim to the Scottish crown, and Scotland with thehero Bruce as its king, took its place as an independent power among thenations of Europe. 

The independence gained by the Scotch at Bannockburn was maintained fornearly three centuries, --until 1603, --when the crowns of England andScotland were peacefully united in the person of James Stuart VI. OfScotland. During the greater part of these three hundred years the twocountries were very quarrelsome neighbors. 

_The Hundred Years' War_ (1336-1453). 

CAUSES OF THE WAR. --The long and wasteful war between England and France, known in history as the Hundred Years' War, was a most eventful one, andits effects upon both England and France so important and lasting as toentitle it to a prominent place in the records of the closing events ofthe Middle Ages. Freeman likens the contest to the Peloponnesian War inancient Greece. 

The war with Scotland was one of the things that led up to this war. Allthrough that struggle, France, as the jealous rival of England, was evergiving aid and encouragement to the Scotch rebels. Then the English landsin France, for which the English king did homage to the French king asoverlord, were a source of constant dispute between the two countries. Furthermore, upon the death of Charles IV. , the last of the Capetian line, Edward III. Laid claim, through his mother, to the French crown, in muchthe same way that William of Normandy centuries before had laid claim tothe crown of England. 

THE BATTLE OF CRÉCY (1346). --The first great combat of the long war wasthe memorable battle of Crécy. Edward had invaded France with an army of30, 000 men, made up largely of English bowmen, and had penetrated far intothe country, ravaging as he went, when he finally halted, and faced thepursuing French army near the village of Crécy, where he inflicted upon ita most terrible defeat; 1200 knights, the flower of French chivalry, and30, 000 foot-soldiers lay dead upon the field. 

The great battle of Crécy is memorable for several reasons, but chieflybecause Feudalism and Chivalry there received their death-blow. Theyeomanry of England there showed themselves superior to the chivalry ofFrance. "The churl had struck down the noble; the bondsman proved morethan a match, in sheer hard fighting, for the knight. From the day ofCrécy, Feudalism tottered slowly but surely to its grave. " The battles ofthe world were hereafter, with few exceptions, to be fought and won, notby mail-clad knights with battle-axe and lance, but by common foot-soldiers with bow and gun. 

THE CAPTURE OF CALAIS. --From the field of Crécy Edward led his army to thesiege of Calais. At the end of a year's investment, the city fell into thehands of the English. The capture of this sea-port was a very importantevent for the English, as it gave them control of the commerce of theChannel, and afforded them a convenient landing-place for theirexpeditions of invasion into France. 

THE BATTLE OF POITIERS (1356). -The terrible scourge of the "Black Death, "[Footnotes: The Black Death was so called on account of the black spotswhich covered the body of the person attacked. It was a contagious fever, which, like the pestilence in the reign of Justinian, entered Europe fromthe East, and made terrible ravages during the years 1347-49. In Germanyover 1, 000, 000 persons fell victims to the plague, while in England, according to some authorities, one-half of the population was swept away. The pestilence was also especially severe in Florence, in Italy. Under theterror and excitement of the dreadful visitation, religious penitents, thinking to turn away the wrath of heaven by unusual penances, went aboutin procession, lacerating themselves with whips (hence they were called_flagellants_). This religious frenzy had its most remarkablemanifestation in Germany. ] which desolated all Europe about the middle ofthe fourteenth century, caused the contending nations for a time to forgettheir quarrel. But no sooner had a purer atmosphere breathed upon thecontinent than the old struggle was renewed with fresh eagerness. 

Edward III. Planned a double invasion of France. He himself led an armythrough the already wasted provinces of the North, while the Black Princewith another army ravaged the fields of the South. As the Prince's army, numbering about 8000 men, loaded with booty, was making its way back tothe coast, it found its path, near Poitiers, obstructed by a French armyof 50, 000. A battle ensued which proved for the French a second Crécy. Thearrows of the English bowmen drove them in fatal panic from the field, which was strewn with 11, 000 of their dead. 

[Illustration: CHARGE OF FRENCH KNIGHTS AND FLIGHT OF ENGLISH ARROWS. ]

BATTLE OF AGINCOURT (1415). --For half a century after the Peace [Footnote:The Treaty of Brétigny (1360). ] that followed the battle of Poitiers therewas a lull in the war. But while Henry V. (1413-1422) was reigning inEngland, France was unfortunate in having an insane king, Charles VI. ; andHenry, taking advantage of the disorder into which the French kingdomnaturally fell under these circumstances, invaded the country with apowerful army, defeated the French in the great battle of Agincourt(1415), and five years later concluded the Treaty of Troyes, in which, sodiscouraged had the French become, a large party agreed that the crown ofFrance should be given to him upon the death of Charles. 

JOAN OF ARC. --But patriotism was not yet wholly extinct among the Frenchpeople. There were many who regarded the concessions of the Treaty ofTroyes as not only weak and shameful, but as unjust to the DauphinCharles, who was thereby disinherited, and they accordingly refused to bebound by its provisions. Consequently, when the poor insane king died, theterms of the treaty were not carried out, and the war dragged on. Theparty that stood by their native prince, afterwards crowned as CharlesVII. , were at last reduced to most desperate straits. A great part of thenorthern section of the country was in the hands of the English, who wereholding in close siege the important city of Orleans. 

But the darkness was the deep gloom that precedes the dawn. A strangedeliverer now appears, --the famous Joan of Arc, Maid of Orleans. Thisyoung peasant girl, with imagination all aflame from brooding over hercountry's wrongs and sufferings, seemed to see visions and hear voices, which bade her undertake the work of delivering France. She was obedientunto the heavenly vision. 

The warm, impulsive French nation, ever quick in responding to appeals tothe imagination, was aroused exactly as it was stirred by the voice of thepreachers of the Crusades. Religious enthusiasm now accomplished whatpatriotism alone could not do. 

Received by her countrymen as a messenger from heaven, the maiden kindledthroughout the land a flame of enthusiasm that nothing could resist. Inspiring the dispirited French soldiers with new courage, she forced theEnglish to raise the siege of Orleans (from which exploit she became knownas the Maid of Orleans), and speedily brought about the coronation ofPrince Charles at Reims (1429). Shortly afterward she fell into the handsof the English, and was condemned and burned as a heretic and witch. 

But the spirit of the Maid had already taken possession of the Frenchnation. From this on, the war, though long continued, went steadilyagainst the English. Little by little they were pushed back and off fromthe soil they had conquered, until, by the middle of the fifteenthcentury, they were driven quite out of the country, retaining no footholdin the land save Calais (see p. 553). 

Thus ended the Hundred Years' War, in 1453, the very year which sawConstantinople fall before the Turks. 

EFFECTS UPON ENGLAND OF THE WAR. --The most lasting and important effectsupon England of the war were the enhancement of the power of the LowerHouse of Parliament, and the awakening of a national spirit and feeling. The maintaining of the long and costly quarrel called for such heavyexpenditures of men and money that the English kings were made moredependent than hitherto upon the representatives of the people, who werecareful to make their grants of supplies conditional upon the correctionof abuses or the confirming of their privileges. Thus the war served tomake the Commons a power in the English government. Again, as the war wasparticipated in by all classes alike, the great victories of Crécy, Poitiers, and Agincourt roused a national pride, which led to a closerunion between the different elements of society. Normans and English werefused by the ardor of a common patriotic enthusiasm into a single people. The real _national_ life of England dates from this time. (For theeffects of the war on France, see p. 494. )

_The Wars of the Roses_ (1455-1485). 

GENERAL STATEMENT. --The Wars of the Roses is the name given to a long, shameful, and selfish contest between the adherents of the Houses of Yorkand Lancaster, rival branches of the royal family of England. The strife, which was for place and power, was so named because the Yorkists adoptedas their badge a white rose and the Lancastrians a red one. 

The battle of Bosworth Field (1485) marks the close of the war. In thisfight King Richard III. , the last of the House of York, was overthrown andslain by Henry Tudor, the Earl of Richmond, who was crowned on the fieldwith the diadem which had fallen from the head of Richard, and saluted asKing Henry VII. , the first of the Tudors. 

THE EFFECTS OF THE WAR. --The most important result of the Wars of theRoses was the ruin of the baronage of England. One-half of the nobilitywas slain. Those that survived were ruined, their estates having beenwasted or confiscated during the progress of the struggle. Not a singlegreat house retained its old-time wealth and influence. 

The second result of the struggle sprung from the first. This was thegreat peril into which English liberty was cast by the ruin of thenobility. It will be recalled that it was the barons who forced the GreatCharter from King John (see p. 479), and who kept him and his successorsfrom reigning like absolute monarchs. Now that once proud and powerfulbaronage were ruined, and their confiscated estates had gone to increasethe influence and patronage of the king. He being no longer in wholesomefear of Parliament, for the Commons were as yet weak and timid, did prettymuch as he pleased, and became insufferably oppressive and tyrannical;raising taxes, for instance, without the consent of Parliament, andimprisoning and executing persons without due process of law. For thehundred years following the Wars of the Roses the government of Englandwas rather an absolute than a limited monarchy. Not until the finalRevolution of the seventeenth century (see Chap. LV. ) did the people, byoverturning the throne of the Stuarts, fully recover their lost liberties. 

_Growth of the English Language and Literature. _

THE LANGUAGE. --From the Norman Conquest to the middle of the fourteenthcentury there were in use in England three languages: Norman French wasthe speech of the conquerors and the medium of polite literature; OldEnglish was the tongue of the common people; while Latin was the languageof the laws and records, of the church services, and of the works of thelearned. 

Modern English is the Old English worn and improved by use, and enrichedby a large infusion of Norman-French words, with less important additionsfrom the Latin and other languages. It took the place of the Norman-Frenchin the courts of law about the middle of the fourteenth century. At thistime the language was broken up into many dialects, and the expression"King's English" is supposed to have referred to the standard formemployed in state documents and in use at court. 

EFFECT OF THE NORMAN CONQUEST ON ENGLISH LITERATURE. --The blow that struckdown King Harold and his brave thanes on the field of Hastings silencedfor the space of about a century the voice of English literature. Thetongue of the conquerors became the speech of the court, the nobility, andthe clergy; while the language of the despised English was, likethemselves, crowded out of every place of honor. But when, after a fewgenerations, the down-trodden race began to re-assert itself, Englishliterature emerged from its obscurity, and with an utterance somewhatchanged--yet it is unmistakably the same voice--resumes its interruptedlesson and its broken song. 

CHAUCER (1328?-1400). --Holding a position high above all other writers ofearly English is Geoffrey Chaucer. He is the first in time, and, afterShakespeare, perhaps the first in genius, among the great poets of theEnglish-speaking race. He is reverently called the "Father of EnglishPoetry. "

Chaucer stands between two ages, the mediæval and the modern. He felt notonly the influences of the age of Feudalism which was passing away, butalso those of the new age of learning and freedom which was dawning. It isbecause he reflects his surroundings so faithfully in his writings, thatthese are so valuable as interpreters of the period in which he lived. Chaucer's greatest work is his _Canterbury Tales_, wherein the poetrepresents himself as one of a company of story-telling pilgrims who haveset out from London on a journey to the tomb of Thomas Becket, atCanterbury. 

[Illustration: STATUE OF WYCLIFFE. (From the Luther Monument at Worms. )]

WYCLIFFE AND THE REFORMATION (1324-1384). --Foremost among the reformersand religious writers of the period under review was Wycliffe, "TheMorning Star of the Reformation. " He gave the English people the firsttranslation of the entire Bible in their native tongue. There was no pressat that time to multiply editions of the book, but by means of manuscriptcopies it was widely circulated and read. Its influence was very great, and from its appearance may be dated the beginning of the Reformation inEngland. 

The followers of Wycliffe became known as "Lollards" (babblers), a termapplied to them in derision. They grew to be very numerous, and threatenedby their excesses and imprudent zeal the peace of the state. They werefinally suppressed by force. 

2. FRANCE. 

BEGINNING OF THE FRENCH KINGDOM. --The kingdom of France begins properlywith the accession of the first of the Capetian rulers, late in the tenthcentury. The Merovingian and Carolingian kings were simply German princesreigning in Gaul. The Capetians held the throne for more than threecenturies, when they were followed by the Valois kings. The last of themain line of the Valois family gave way to the first of the Valois-Orleanssovereigns in 1498, which date may be allowed to mark the beginning ofmodern French history. 

We shall now direct attention to the most important transactions of theperiod covered by the Capetian and Valois dynasties. Our aim will be togive prominence to those matters which concern the gradual consolidationof the French monarchy. 

_France under the Capetians_ (987-1328). [Footnote: Table of the Capetian Kings:-- Hugh Capet (the Great). . . 987--996 Robert II. (the Sage) . . . 996-1031 Henry I. . . . . . . . . . . 1031-1060 Philip I. . . . . . . . . . 1060-1108 Louis VI. (the Fat) . . . . 1108-1137 Louis VII. (the Young). . . 1137-1180 Philip II. (Augustus) . . . 1180-1223 Louis VIII. (Lion-hearted). 1223-1226 Louis IX. (the Saint) . . . 1226-1270 Philip III. (the Hardy) . . 1270-1285 Philip IV. (the Fair) . . . 1285-1314 Louis X. (the Stubborn) . . 1314-1316 Philip V. (the Tall). . . . 1316-1322 Charles IV. (the Handsome) . 1322-1328]

The first Capetian king differed from his vassal counts and dukes simplyin having a more dignified title; his power was scarcely greater than thatof many of the lords who paid him homage as their suzerain. The fourthking of the line (Philip I. ) confessed that he had grown gray while tryingto capture a castle which stood within sight of Paris; and evidently hehad abandoned all hope of getting possession of it, for he charged hisson, to whom he one day pointed it out, to watch it well. How variousevents and circumstances--conquests, treaties, politic marriage alliances, and unjust encroachments--conspired to build up the power of the kingswill appear as we go on. 

The most noteworthy events of the Capetian period were the acquisition bythe French crown of the English possessions in France, the Holy Wars forthe recovery of Jerusalem, the crusade against the Albigenses, and thecreation of the States-General. Of these several matters we will now speakin order. 

THE ENGLISH POSSESSIONS IN FRANCE. --The issue of the battle of Hastings, in 1066, made William of Normandy king of England. He ruled that countryby right of conquest. But we must bear in mind that he still held hispossessions in France as a fief from the French king, whose vassal he was. This was the beginning of the possessions on the continent of the Englishkings. Then, when Henry, Count of Anjou, came to the English throne as thefirst of the Plantagenets, these territories were greatly increased by theFrench possessions of that prince. The larger part of Henry's dominions, indeed, was in France, almost the whole of the western coast of thecountry being in his hands; but for all of this he, of course, paid homageto the French king. 

As was inevitable, a feeling of intense jealousy sprang up between the twosovereigns. The French king was ever watching for some pretext upon whichhe might deprive his rival of his possessions in France. The opportunitycame when King John, in 1199, succeeded Richard the Lion-hearted upon theEnglish throne. That odious tyrant was accused, and doubtless justly, ofhaving murdered his nephew Arthur. Philip Augustus, who then held theFrench throne, as John's feudal superior, ordered him to clear himself ofthe charge before his French peers. John refusing to do so, Philipdeclared forfeited all the lands he held as fiefs of the French Crown[Footnote: This was the second condemnation of John. A year before thistime (in 1202), John having refused to answer a charge of tyrannypreferred by the nobles of Poitou, Philip had declared his fief to beforfeited. It was in the turmoil which followed this sentence, that Arthurwas taken prisoner by John and afterwards murdered. ], and thereuponproceeded to seize Normandy and other possessions of John in the North ofFrance, leaving him scarcely anything save the Duchy of Aquitaine in theSouth. The annexation of these large possessions to the crown of Francebrought a vast accession of power and patronage to the king, who was noweasily the superior of any of his great vassals. 

THE FRENCH AND THE CRUSADES. --The age of the Capetians was the age of theCrusades. These romantic expeditions, while stirring all Christendom, appealed especially to the ardent, imaginative genius of the Gallic race. Three Capetian kings, Louis VII. , Philip Augustus, and Louis IX. , themselves headed several of the wild expeditions. 

It is the influence of the Crusades on the French monarchy that we aloneneed to notice in this place. They tended very materially to weaken thepower and influence of the feudal nobility, and in a corresponding degreeto strengthen the authority of the crown and add to its dignity. The wayin which they brought about this transfer of power from the aristocracy tothe king has been explained in the chapter on the Crusades (see p. 450). 

CRUSADE AGAINST THE ALBIGENSES (1207-1229). --During this age of religiousenthusiasm holy wars were directed as well against heretics as infidels. In the South of France was a sect of Christians called Albigenses[Footnote: From _Albi_, the name of a city and district in which theirtenets prevailed. ], who had departed so far from the faith of the Church, and had embraced such dangerous social heresies, that Pope Innocent III. Felt constrained to call upon the French king and his nobles to lead acrusade against them. The outcome was the almost total extirpation of theheretical sect, and the acquisition by the French crown of large and richterritories that were formerly the possessions of the Counts of Toulouse, the patrons of the heretics. 

CREATION OF THE STATES-GENERAL (1302). --The event of the greatestsignificance in the Capetian age was the admission, in the reign of Philipthe Fair, of the commons to the feudal assembly, or council, of the king. This transaction is in French history what the first summoning of theHouse of Commons is in English (see p. 480). 

A dispute having arisen between Philip and the Pope respecting the controlof the offices and revenues of the French Church, in order to rally to hissupport all classes throughout his kingdom, Philip called an assembly, towhich he invited representatives of the burghers, or inhabitants of thecities (1302). The royal council had hitherto been made up of two estatesonly, --the nobles and the clergy; now is added what comes to be known asthe _Tiers État_, or Third Estate, and henceforth the assembly is known asthe _States-General_. Eventually, before the power of this Third Estate, we shall see the Church, the nobility, and the monarchy all go down, through revolution; just as in England we shall see clergy, nobles, andking gradually yield to the rising power of the English Commons. 

_France under the House of Valois_ (1328-1498). [Footnote: Names of the sovereigns of the main line of the House ofValois:-- Philip VI. . . . . . . . . . . . 1328-1350 John (the Good). . . . . . . . . 1350-1364 Charles V. (the Wise). . . . . . 1364-1380 Charles VI. (the Well-Beloved) . 1380-1422 Charles VII. (the Victorious). . 1422-1461 Louis XI. . . . . . . . . . . . 1461-1483 Charles VIII. (the Affable) . . 1483-1498]

EFFECTS UPON FRANCE OF THE HUNDRED YEARS' WAR. --The chief interest of thatperiod of French history upon which we here enter attaches to that longstruggle between England and France known as the Hundred Years' War. Having already, in connection with English affairs (see p. 484), touchedupon the causes and incidents of this war, we shall here simply speak ofthe effects of the struggle on the French people and kingdom. Among theseresults must be noticed the almost complete prostration, by the successiveshocks of Crécy, Poitiers, and Agincourt, of the French feudalaristocracy, which was already tottering to its fall through theundermining influences of the Crusades; the growth of the power of theking, a consequence, largely, of the ruin of the nobility; and, lastly, the awakening of a feeling of nationality, and the drawing together of thehitherto isolated sections of the country by the attraction of a commonand patriotic enthusiasm. 

Speaking in a very general manner, we may say that by the close of the warFeudalism in France was over, and that France had become, partly in spiteof the war but more largely by reason of it, not only a great monarchy, but a great nation. 

LOUIS XI. AND CHARLES THE BOLD OF BURGUNDY. --The foundations of the Frenchmonarchy were greatly enlarged and strengthened by the unscrupulousmeasures of Louis XI. (1461-1483), who was a perfect Ulysses in cunningand deceit. His maxim was, "He who knows how to deceive, knows how toreign. " The great feudal lords that still retained power and influence, hebrought to destruction one after another, and united their fiefs to theroyal domains. Of all the vassal nobles ruined by the craft and cunning ofLouis, the most famous and powerful was Charles the Bold, Duke ofBurgundy, with whom the French king was almost constantly warring, andagainst whom he was forever intriguing. Upon the death of the duke, Louis, without clear right, seized a great part of his dominions, which werealmost large and rich enough to sustain the dignity of a king. Byinheritance and treaty, Louis also gained large accessions of territory inthe South of France, which gave his kingdom a wide frontage upon theMediterranean, and made the Pyrenees its southern defence. 

INVASION OF ITALY BY CHARLES VIII. --Charles VIII. , the son of Louis XI. , was the last of the direct line of the Valois. Through the favor of a longseries of circumstances, the persistent policy of his predecessors, andhis own politic marriage, [Footnote: He married Anne of Brittany, and thusbrought that large province, which had hitherto constituted an almostindependent state, under the authority of the French crown. ] he foundhimself at the head of a state that had been gradually transformed from afeudal league into a true monarchy. The strength of this kingdom hedetermined to employ in some enterprise beyond the limits of France. Witha standing army, created by Charles VII during the latter years of the warwith England, [Footnote: The paid force of infantry and cavalry created byCharles VII in 1448, was the first standing army in Europe, and thebeginning of that vast military system which now burdens the great nationsof that continent with the support of several millions of soldiersconstantly under arms. ] at his command, he invaded Italy, intent on theconquest of Naples, --to which he laid claim on the strength of some oldbequest, --proposing, with that state subdued, to lead a crusade to theEast against the Turks. He reached Naples in triumph, but was soon forced, with heavy losses, to retreat into France. 

This enterprise of Charles is noteworthy not only because it marks thecommencement of a long series of brilliant yet disastrous campaignscarried on by the French in Italy, but also on account of Charles' armyhaving been made up largely of paid troops instead of feudal retainers, which fact assures us that the Feudal System in France, as a governmentalorganization, had come to an end. 

_Beginnings of French Literature. _

THE TROUBADOURS. --The contact of the old Latin speech in Gaul with that ofthe Teutonic invaders gave rise there to two very distinct dialects. Thesewere the _Langue d'Oc_, or Provencal, the tongue of the South of Franceand of the adjoining regions of Spain and Italy; and the _Langue d'Oil_, or French proper, the language of the North. [Footnote: The terms _Langued'Oc_ and _Langue d'Oil_ arose from the use of different words for _yes_, which in the tongue of the South was _oc_, and in that of the North_oil_. ]

About the beginning of the twelfth century, by which time the Provencaltongue had become settled and somewhat polished, literature in Francefirst began to find a voice in the songs of the Troubadours, the poets ofthe South. It is instructive to note that it was the home of theAlbigensian heresy, the land that had felt the influence of everyMediterranean civilization, that was also the home of the Troubadourliterature. The Counts of Toulouse, the protectors of the heretics, werealso the patrons of the poets. The same fierce persecution that uprootedthe heretical faith of the Albigenses, also stilled the song of theTroubadours (see p. 493). 

The verses of the Troubadours were sung in every land, and to thestimulating influence of their musical harmonies the early poetry ofalmost every people of Europe is largely indebted. 

THE TROUVEURS. --These were the poets of Northern France, who composed inthe _Langue d' Oil_, or Old French tongue. They flourished during thetwelfth and thirteenth centuries. While the compositions of theTroubadours were almost exclusively lyrical songs, those of the Trouveurswere epic, or narrative poems, called _romances_. They gather aboutthree great names, --King Arthur, Alexander the Great, and Charlemagne. Itwill be noted that the poet story-tellers thus drew their material fromthe heroic legends of all the different races that blended to form theFrench nation, namely, the Celtic, the Græco-Roman, and the Teutonic. 

The influence of these French romances upon the springing literatures ofEurope was most inspiring and helpful. Nor has their influence yet ceased. Thus in English literature, not only did Chaucer and Spenser and all theearly island-poets draw inspiration from these fountains of continentalsong, but the later Tennyson, in his _Idylls of the King_, has illustratedthe power over the imagination yet possessed by the Arthurian poems of theold Trouveurs. 

FROISSART'S CHRONICLES. --The first really noted prose writer in Frenchliterature was Froissart (1337-1410), whose entertaining credulity andartlessness, and skill as a story-teller, have won for him the title ofthe French Herodotus. Born, as he was, only a little after the opening ofthe Hundred Years' War, and knowing personally many of the actors in thatstruggle, it was fitting that he should become, as he did, the annalist ofthose stirring times. 

3. SPAIN. 

The Beginnings of Spain. --When, in the eighth century, the Saracens sweptlike a wave over Spain, the mountains of Asturia, in the northwest cornerof the peninsula, afforded a refuge for the most resolute of the Christianchiefs who refused to submit their necks to the Moslem yoke. These braveand hardy warriors not only successfully defended the hilly districts thatformed their retreat, but gradually pushed back the invaders, and regainedcontrol of a portion of the fields and cities that had been lost. Thiswork of reconquest was greatly furthered by Charlemagne, who, it will berecalled, drove the Saracens out of all the northeastern portion of thecountry as far south as the Ebro, and made the subjugated district aprovince of his great empire, under the name of the Spanish March. 

By the opening of the eleventh century several little Christian states, among which we must notice the names of Castile and Aragon, because of theprominent part they were to play in later history, had been establishedupon the ground thus recovered or always maintained. Castile was at firstsimply "a line of castles" against the Moors, whence its name. 

UNION OF CASTILE AND ARAGON (1479). --For several centuries the princes ofthe little states to which we have referred kept up an incessant warfarewith their Mohammedan neighbors; owing however to dissensions amongthemselves, they were unable to combine in any effective way for thereconquest of their ancient possessions. But the marriage, in 1469, ofFerdinand, prince of Aragon, to Isabella, princess of Castile, paved theway for the union a little later of these two leading states. Thus thequarrels of these rival principalities were composed, and they were nowfree to employ their united strength in effecting what the Christianprinces amidst all their contentions had never lost sight of, --theexpulsion of the Moors from the peninsula. 

[Illustration: THE SPANISH KINGDOMS 1800. ]

THE CONQUEST OF GRANADA (1492). --At the time when the basis of the Spanishmonarchy was laid by the union of Castile and Aragon, the Mohammedanpossessions had been reduced, by the constant pressure of the Christianchiefs through eight centuries, to a very limited dominion in the south ofSpain. Here the Moors had established a strong, well-compacted state, known as the Kingdom of Granada. 

As soon as Ferdinand and Isabella had settled the affairs of theirdominions, they began to make preparation for the conquest of Granada, eager to signalize their reign by the reduction of this last stronghold ofthe Moorish power in the peninsula. The Moors made a desperate defence oftheir little state. The struggle lasted for ten years. City after cityfell into the hands of the Christian knights, and finally the capital, Granada, pressed by an army of seventy thousand, was forced to surrender, and the Cross replaced the Crescent on its walls and towers (1492). TheMoors, or Moriscoes, as they were called, were allowed to remain in thecountry and to retain their Mohammedan worship, though under many annoyingrestrictions. What is known as their _expulsion_ occurred at a laterdate (see p. 538). 

[Illustration: THE ALHAMBRA. PALACE OF THE MOORISH KINGS AT GRANADA. (Froma photograph. )]

The fall of Granada holds an important place among the many significantevents that mark the latter half of the fifteenth century. It ended, afteran existence of eight hundred years, the Mohammedan kingdom in the Spanishpeninsula, and thus formed an offset to the progress of the Moslem powerin Eastern Europe and the loss to the Christian world of Constantinople. It advanced Spain to the first rank among the nations of Europe, and gaveher arms a prestige that secured for her position, influence, anddeference long after the decline of her power had commenced. 

THE INQUISITION. --Ferdinand greatly enhanced his power by the active andtyrannical use of the Inquisition, a court that had been established bythe Church for the purpose of detecting and punishing heresy. The chiefvictims of the tribunal were the Moors and Jews, but it was also directedagainst the enemies of the sovereign among the nobility and the clergy. The Holy Office, as the tribunal was styled, thus became the instrument ofthe most incredible cruelty. Thousands were burned at the stake, and tensof thousands more condemned to endure penalties scarcely less terrible. Queen Isabella, in giving her consent to the establishment of the tribunalin her dominions, was doubtless actuated by the purest religious zeal, andsincerely believed that in suppressing heresy she was discharging a simpleduty, and rendering God good service. "In the love of Christ and his Maid-Mother, " she says, "I have caused great misery. I have depopulated townsand districts, provinces and kingdoms. "

DEATH OF FERDINAND AND OF ISABELLA. --Queen Isabella died in 1504, andFerdinand followed her in the year 1516, upon which latter event the crownof Spain descended upon the head of his grandson, Charles, of whom weshall hear much as Emperor Charles V. With his reign the modern history ofSpain begins. 

_Beginnings of the Spanish Language and Literature. _

THE LANGUAGE. --After the union of Castile and Aragon it was the languageof the former that became the speech of the Spanish court. During thereign of Ferdinand and Isabella it gradually gained the ascendancy overthe numerous dialects of the country, and became the national speech, justas in France the Langue d'Oil finally crowded out all other dialects. Bythe conquests and colonizations of the sixteenth century this Castilianspeech was destined to become only less widely spread than the Englishtongue. 

THE POEM OF THE CID. --Castilian, or Spanish literature begins in thetwelfth century with the romance-poem of the _Cid_ (that is, _Chief_, thetitle of the hero of the poem), one of the great literary productions ofthe mediæval period. This grand national poem was the outgrowth of thesentiments inspired by the long struggle between the Spanish Christiansand the Mohammedan Moors. 

[Illustration: SARCOPHAGUS OF FERDINAND AND ISABELLA, AT GRANADA. (From aphotograph. )]

4. GERMANY. 

BEGINNINGS OF THE KINGDOM OF GERMANY. --The history of Germany as aseparate kingdom begins with the break-up of the empire of Charlemagne(see p. 408). Germany at that time comprised several groups of tribes, --the Saxons, the Suabians, the Thuringians, the Bavarians, and the Franks. Closely allied in race, speech, manners, and social arrangements, allthese peoples seemed ready to be welded into a close and firm nation; but, unfortunately, the circumstances tending to keep the several states orcommunities apart were stronger than those operating to draw themtogether, so that for a thousand years after Charlemagne we find themconstituting hardly anything more than a very loose confederation, themembers of which were constantly struggling among themselves forsupremacy, or were engaged in private wars with the neighboring nations. [Footnote: During the mediæval period, Germany was under the followinglines of kings and emperors:-- Carolingians. . . . . . . . . . . . . 843-911 Conrad of Franconia. . . . . . . . . . 911-918 Saxon Emperors. . . . . . . . . . . . 919-1024 Franconian Emperors . . . . . . . . . 1024-1125 Lothair of Saxony . . . . . . . . . . 1125-1137 Hohenstaufen Emperors . . . . . . . . 1138-1254 The Interregnum . . . . . . . . . . . 1254-1273 Emperors of different Houses. . . . . 1273-1438 Emperors of the House of Austria. . . 1438-]

That which more than all else operated to prevent Germany from becoming apowerful, closely-knit nation, was the adoption by the German rulers of anunfortunate policy respecting a world-empire. This matter will beexplained in the following paragraphs. 

RENEWAL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE BY OTTO THE GREAT (962). --When the dominionsof Charlemagne were divided among his three grandsons (see p. 408), theImperial title was given to Lothair, to whom fell Italy and the Rhine-land. The title, however, meant scarcely anything, carrying with it littleor no real authority. Thus matters ran on for more than a century, theempty honor of the title sometimes being enjoyed by the kings of Italy, and again by those of Germany. 

But with the accession of the second of the Saxon line, Otto I. , who wascrowned king at Aachen in 936, there appeared among the princes of Europea second Charlemagne. He was easily first among them all. Besides beingking of Germany, he became, through, interference on request in theaffairs of Italy, king of that country also. Furthermore, he wrested largetracts of land from the Slavonians, and forced the Danes, Poles, andHungarians to acknowledge his suzerainty. Thus favored by fortune, henaturally conceived the idea of restoring once more the Roman empire, evenas it had been revived by Charles the Great (see p. 406). 

So in 962, just a little more than a century and a half after thecoronation at Rome of Charlemagne as emperor, Otto, at the same place andby the same papal authority, was crowned Emperor of the Romans. For ageneration no one had borne the title. From this time on it was the rulethat the German king who was crowned at Aachen had a right to be crownedking of Italy at Milan, and emperor at Rome (Freeman). Thus three crowns, and in time still more, came to be heaped upon a single head. 

CONSEQUENCES TO GERMANY OF THE REVIVAL OF THE EMPIRE. --The scheme of Ottorespecting a world-empire was a grand one, but, as had been demonstratedby the failure of the attempt of Charlemagne, was an utterly impracticableidea. It was simply a dream, and never became anything more than a ghostlyshadow. Yet the pursuit of this phantom by the German kings resulted inthe most woeful consequences to Germany. Trying to grasp too much, theserulers seized nothing at all. Attempting to be emperors of the world, theyfailed to become even kings of Germany. While engaged in their schemes offoreign conquest, their home affairs were neglected, and their vassalssucceeded in increasing their power and making it hereditary. Thus whilethe kings of England, France, and Spain were gradually consolidating theirdominions, and building up strong centralized monarchies on the ruins ofFeudalism, the sovereigns of Germany, neglecting the affairs of their ownkingdom, were allowing it to become split up into a vast number ofvirtually independent states, the ambitions and jealousies of whose rulerswere to postpone the unification of Germany for four or five hundredyears--until our own day. 

Had the emperors inflicted loss and disaster upon Germany alone throughtheir pursuit of this phantom, the case would not be so lamentable; butItaly was made the camping field of the Imperial armies, and the wholepeninsula kept distracted with the bitter quarrels of Guelphs andGhibellines (see p. 504), and thus the nationalization of the Italianpeople was also delayed for centuries. 

Germany received just one positive compensation for all this loss accruingfrom the ambition of her kings. This was the gift of Italian civilization, which came into the country through the connections of the emperors withthe peninsula. 

GERMANY UNDER THE HOHENSTAUFEN EMPERORS (1138-1254). --The Hohenstaufen, orSuabian dynasty was a most notable line of emperors. The matter of chiefimportance in German history under the Hohenstaufen is the long and bitterconflict, begun generations before, that was waged between them and thePopes (see p. 455). Germany and Italy were divided into two great parties, known as Welfs and Waiblings, or, as designated in Italy, Guelphs andGhibellines, the former adhering to the Pope, the latter to the Emperor. The issue of a century's contention was the complete ruin of the House ofHohenstaufen. 

The most noted ruler of the line was Frederick I. (1152-1190), betterknown as _Frederick Barbarossa_, from his red beard. He gave Germanya good and strong government, and gained a sure place in the affections ofthe German people, who came to regard him as the representative of thesentiment of German nationality. When news of his death was brought backfrom the East, --it will be recalled that he took part in the ThirdCrusade, and lost his life in Asia Minor (see p. 445), --they refused tobelieve that he was dead, and, as time passed, a tradition arose whichtold how he slept in a cavern beneath one of his castles on a mountain-top, and how, when the ravens should cease to circle about the hill, hewould appear, to make the German people a nation united and strong. 

Frederick Barbarossa was followed by his son Henry VI. (1190-1197), who, by marriage, had acquired a claim to the kingdom of Sicily. [Footnote: TheHohenstaufen held the kingdom until 1265, when the Pope gave it as a fiefto Charles I. Of Anjou (brother of Louis IX. Of France), who beheaded therightful heir, the ill-starred boy Conradin, the last of the Hohenstaufenrace (1268). Charles' oppressive rule led to a revolt of his islandsubjects, and to the great massacre known as the Sicilian Vespers (1282). All of the hated race of Frenchmen were either killed or driven out of theisland. ] Almost all his time and resources were spent in reducing thatremote realm to a state of proper subjection to his authority. By thusleading the emperors to neglect their German subjects and interests, thissouthern kingdom proved a fatal dower to the Suabian house. 

By the close of the Hohenstaufen period, Germany was divided into twohundred and seventy-six virtually independent states, the princes andnobles having taken advantage of the prolonged absences of the emperors, or their troubles with the Popes, to free themselves almost completelyfrom the control of the crown. There was really no longer either a Germankingdom or a Roman empire. 

CATHEDRAL-BUILDING. --The age of the Hohenstaufen was the age of theCrusades, which is to say that it was the age of religious faith. The moststriking expression of the spirit of the period, if we except the HolyWars, is to be found in the sacred architecture of the time. The style ofarchitecture first employed was the Romanesque, characterized by therounded arch and the dome; but towards the close of the twelfth centurythis was superseded by the Gothic, distinguished by the pointed arch, thetower or the slender spire, and rich ornamentation. 

The enthusiasm for church-building was universal throughout Europe; yetnowhere did it find nobler or more sustained expression than in Germany. Among the most noted of the German cathedrals are the one at Strasburg, begun in the eleventh century, and that at Cologne, commenced in 1248, butnot wholly finished until our own day (in 1880). 

RISE OF THE SWISS REPUBLIC. --The most noteworthy matters in German historyduring the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, are the struggles betweenthe Swiss and the dukes of Austria; the religious movement of theHussites; and the growing power of the House of Austria. 

From early in the eleventh century, the country now known as Switzerlandwas a part of the Holy Roman Empire; but its liberty-loving people neveracknowledged any man as their master, save the German emperor, to whomthey yielded a merely nominal obedience. The dukes of Austria, princes ofthe empire, laid claim to a certain authority over them, and tried to makethemselves masters in Switzerland. This led to a memorable strugglebetween the dukes and the brave mountaineers. To the early part of thecontest belongs the legend of William Tell, which historical criticism nowpronounces a myth, with nothing but the revolt as the nucleus of fact. 

In 1315, at the noted battle of Morgarten Pass, the Austrians suffered asevere defeat at the hands of the Swiss patriots. Later in the samecentury, the Austrians sustained another defeat on the memorable field ofSempach (1386). It was here, tradition says, that Arnold of Winkelriedbroke the ranks of the Austrians, by collecting in his arms as many oftheir lances as he could, and, as they pierced his breast, bearing themwith him to the ground, exclaiming, "Comrades, I will open a road foryou. "

Shortly after the battle of Sempach, the Eidgenossen, or Confederates, asthe Swiss were at this time called, gained another victory over theAustrians at Wafels (1388), which placed on a firm basis the growing powerof the League. 

THE HUSSITES. --About the beginning of the fifteenth century, the doctrinesof the English reformer, Wycliffe (see p. 490) began to spread inBohemia. The chief of the new sect was John Huss, a professor of theUniversity of Prague. The doctrines of the reformer were condemned by thegreat Council of Constance, and Huss himself, having been delivered overinto the hands of the civil authorities for punishment, was burned at thestake (1415). The following year Jerome of Prague, another reformer, waslikewise burned. 

Shortly after the burning of Huss a crusade was proclaimed against hisfollowers, who had risen in arms. Then began a cruel, desolating war offifteen years, the outcome of which was the almost total extermination ofthe radical party among the Hussites. With the more moderate of thereformers, however, a treaty was made which secured them freedom ofworship. 

[Illustration: CENTRAL EUROPE 1880. ]

THE IMPERIAL CROWN BECOMES HEREDITARY IN THE HOUSE OF AUSTRIA (1438). --Inthe year 1438, Albert, Duke of Austria, was raised by the Electors[Footnote: When, in the beginning of the tenth century, the GermanCarolingian line became extinct, the great nobles of the kingdom assumedthe right of choosing the successor of the last of the house, and Germanythus became an elective feudal monarchy. In the course of time a few ofthe leading nobles usurped the right of choosing the king, and theseprinces became known as Electors. There were, at the end of theHohenstaufen period, seven princes who enjoyed this important privilege, four of whom were secular princes and three spiritual. ] to the Imperialthrone. His accession marks an epoch in German history, for from this timeuntil. The dissolution of the empire by Napoleon in 1806, the Imperialcrown was regarded as hereditary in the Hapsburg [Footnote: The House ofAustria is often so called from the Castle of Hapsburg in Switzerland, thecradle of the family. ] family, the Electors, although never failing to gothrough the formality of an election, almost always choosing one of themembers of that house as king. 

From the beginning of the practically uninterrupted succession upon theImperial throne of the princes of the House of Austria, up to the close ofthe Middle Ages, the power and importance of the family steadilyincreased, until it seemed that Austria would overshadow all the otherGerman states, and subject them to her sway; would, in a word, becomeGermany, just as Francia in Gaul had become France. But this, as we shalllearn, never came about. 

[Illustration: GERMAN FOOT-SOLDIER (15th Century. )]

The greatest of the Hapsburg line during the mediæval period wasMaximilian I. (1493-1519). His reign is in every way a noteworthy one inGerman history, marking, as it does, a strong tendency to centralization, and the material enhancement of the Imperial authority. 

_Beginning of German Literature. _

SONG OF THE NIBELUNGEN. --It was under the patronage of the Hohenstaufenthat Germany produced the first pieces of a national literature. The "Songof the Nibelungen" is the great German mediæval epic. It was reduced towriting about 1200, being a recast, by some Homeric genius, perhaps, ofancient German and Scandinavian legends and lays dating from the sixth andseventh centuries. The hero of the story is Siegfried, the Achilles ofTeutonic legend and song. 

THE MINNESINGERS. --Under the same emperors, during the twelfth andthirteenth centuries, the Minnesingers, or lyric poets, flourished. Theywere the "Troubadours of Germany. " For the most part, refined and tenderand chivalrous and pure, the songs of these poets tended to soften themanners and lift the hearts of the German people. 

5. RUSSIA. 

BEGINNINGS OF RUSSIA. --We have seen how, about the middle of the ninthcentury, the Swedish adventurer Ruric laid, among the Slavonian tribesdwelling eastward from the Baltic, the foundation of what was destined tobecome one of the leading powers of Europe (see p. 411). The state came tobe known as Russia, probably from the word _Ruotsi_ (corsairs?), thename given by the Finns to the foreigners. 

THE TARTAR CONQUEST. --In the thirteenth century an overwhelming calamitybefell Russia. This was the overrunning and conquest of the country by theTartar hordes (see p. 461). The barbarian conquerors inflicted the mosthorrible atrocities upon the unfortunate land, and for more than twohundred years held the Russian princes in a degrading bondage, forcingthem to pay homage and tribute. This misfortune delayed for centuries thenationalization of the Slavonian peoples. 

RUSSIA FREED FROM THE MONGOLS. --It was not until the reign of Ivan theGreat (1462-1505) that Russia, --now frequently called Muscovy from thefact that it had been reorganized with Moscow as a centre, --after aterrible struggle, succeeded in freeing itself from the hateful Tartardomination, and began to assume the character of a well-consolidatedmonarchy. 

Thus, by the end of the Middle Ages, Russia had become a really greatpower; but she was as yet too much hemmed in by hostile states to be ableto make her influence felt in the affairs of Europe. Between her and theCaspian and Euxine were the Tartars; shutting her out from the Baltic werethe Swedes and other peoples; and between her and Germany were theLithuanians and Poles. 

6. ITALY. 

NO NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. --In marked contrast to all those countries ofwhich we have thus far spoken, unless we except Germany, Italy came to theclose of the Middle Ages without a national or regular government. This isto be attributed in large part to that unfortunate rivalry between Popeand Emperor which resulted in dividing Italy into the two hostile camps ofGuelph and Ghibelline. And yet the mediæval period did not pass withoutattempts on the part of patriot spirits to effect some sort of politicalunion among the different cities and states of the peninsula. The mostnoteworthy of these movements, and one which gave assurance that the sparkof patriotism which was in time to flame into an inextinguishable passionfor national unity was kindling in the Italian heart, was that headed bythe hero Rienzi, in the fourteenth century. 

RIENZI, TRIBUNE OF ROME (1347). --During the greater part of the fourteenthcentury the seat of the Papal See was at Avignon, beyond the Alps (see p. 457). Throughout this period of the "Babylonish captivity, " Rome, deprivedof her natural guardians, was in a state of the greatest confusion. Thenobles terrorized the country about the capital, and kept the streets ofthe city itself in constant turmoil with their bitter feuds. 

In the midst of these disorders there appeared from among the lowest ranksof the people a deliverer in the person of one Nicola di Rienzi. Possessedof considerable talent and great eloquence, Rienzi easily incited thepeople to a revolt against the rule, or rather misrule, of the nobles, andsucceeded in having himself, with the title of Tribune, placed at the headof a new government for Rome. 

Encouraged by the success that had thus far attended his schemes, Rienzinow began to concert measures for the union of all the principalities andcommonwealths of Italy in a great republic, with Rome as its capital. Hesent ambassadors throughout Italy to plead, at the courts of the princesand in the council chamber of the municipalities, the cause of Italianunity and freedom. The splendid dream of Rienzi was shared by otherItalian patriots besides himself, among whom was the poet Petrarch, whowas the friend and encourager of the "plebeian hero. "

But the moment for Italy's unification had not yet come. Not only werethere hindrances to the national movement in the ambitions and passions ofrival parties and classes, but there were still greater impediments in thecharacter of the plebeian patriot himself. Rienzi proved to be an unworthyleader. His sudden elevation and surprising success completely turned hishead, and he soon began to exhibit the most incredible vanity andweakness. The people withdrew from him their support, and he was finallyassassinated. 

Thus vanished the dream of Rienzi and Petrarch, of the hero and the poet. Centuries of division, of shameful subjection to foreign princes, --French, Spanish, and Austrian, --of wars and suffering, were yet before the Italianpeople ere Rome should become the centre of a free, orderly, and unitedItaly. 

THE RENAISSANCE. --Though the Middle Ages closed in Italy without the risethere of a national government, still before the end of the period muchhad been done to awaken those common ideas and sentiments upon whichpolitical unity can alone safely repose. Literature and art here performedthe part that war did in other countries in arousing a national spirit. The Renaissance (see p. 474) did much toward creating among the Italians acommon pride in race and country; and thus this great literary andartistic enthusiasm was the first step in a course of national developmentwhich was to lead the Italian people to a common political life. 

Upon the literary phase of the Italian Renaissance we have said somethingin the chapter on the Revival of Learning (see p. 474); we shall here sayjust a word respecting the artistic side of the movement. 

The most splendid period of the art revival covered the latter part of thefifteenth century and the first half of the sixteenth. The characteristicart of the Renaissance in Italy was painting, although the æsthetic geniusof the Italians also expressed itself both in architecture and sculpture. [Footnote: The four supreme masters of the Italian Renaissance wereLeonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), Michael Angelo (1475-1564), Raphael (1483-1520), and Titian (1477-1576). All were great painters. Perhaps the one ofgreatest, at least of most varied, genius, was Michael Angelo, who was atonce architect, painter, and sculptor. His grandest architectural triumphwas the majestic dome of St. Peter's, --which work, however, he did notlive to see completed. ] The mediæval artists devoted themselves topainting instead of sculpture, for the reason that it best expresses theideas and sentiments of Christianity. The art that would be the handmaidof the Church needed to be able to represent faith and hope, ecstasy andsuffering, --none of which things can well be expressed by sculpture, whichis essentially the art of repose. 

SAVONAROLA (1452-1498). --A word must here be said respecting theFlorentine monk and reformer Girolamo Savonarola, who stands as the mostnoteworthy personage in Italy during the closing years of the mediævalperiod. 

Savonarola was at once Roman censor and Hebrew prophet. Such a preacher ofrighteousness the world had not seen since the days of Elijah. Hispowerful preaching alarmed the conscience of the Florentines. At hissuggestion the women brought their finery and ornaments, and others theirbeautiful works of art, and piling them in great heaps in the streets ofFlorence, burned them as "vanities. " Savonarola even persuaded the peopleof Florence to set up a sort of theocratic government, of which Christ wasthe acknowledged head. But at length the activity of his enemies broughtabout the reformer's downfall, and he was condemned to death, executed, and his body burned. Savonarola may be regarded as the last great mediævalforerunner of the reformers of the sixteenth century. 

7. THE NORTHERN COUNTRIES. 

THE UNION OF CALMAR. --The great Scandinavian Exodus of the ninth and tenthcenturies drained the Northern lands of some of the best elements of theirpopulation. For this reason these countries did not play as prominent apart in mediæval history as they would otherwise have done. The constantquarrels between their sovereigns and the nobility were also another causeof internal weakness. 

In the year 1397, by what is known as the Union of Calmar, the threekingdoms of Norway, Denmark, and Sweden were united under Margaret ofDenmark, "the Semiramis of the North. " The treaty provided that eachcountry should make its own laws. But the treaty was violated, and thoughthe friends of the measure had hoped much from it, it brought onlyjealousies, feuds, and wars. 

The Swedes arose again and again in revolt, and finally, under the lead ofa nobleman named Gustavus Vasa, made good their independence (1523). During the seventeenth century, under the descendants and successors ofthe Liberator, Sweden was destined to play an important part in theaffairs of the continent. 

Norway became virtually a province of Denmark, and the Norwegian nobleswere driven into exile or killed. The country remained attached to theDanish Crown until the present century. 

SECTION II. --MODERN HISTORY. 

INTRODUCTION. 

As an introduction to the history of the Modern Age, we shall give a briefaccount of the voyages and geographical discoveries of Columbus, Vasco daGama, and Magellan, and of the beginning of European conquests andsettlements in the New World, inasmuch as these great events lie at theopening of the era and form the prelude of its story. 

DISCOVERY OF THE NEW WORLD BY COLUMBUS (1492). --Christopher Columbus wasone of those Genoese navigators who, when Genoa's Asiatic lines of tradewere broken by the irruption of the Turks (see p. 467), conceived the ideaof reaching India by an ocean route. While others were endeavoring toreach that country by sailing around the southern point of Africa, heproposed the bolder plan of reaching this eastern land by sailing directlywestward. The sphericity of the earth was a doctrine held by many at thatday; but the theory was not in harmony with the religious ideas of thetime, and so it was not prudent for one to publish too openly one's beliefin the notion. 

[Illustration: COLUMBUS. (After the Yanez Portrait in the MadridLibrary. )]

In his endeavors to secure a patron for his enterprise, Columbus met atfirst with repeated repulse and disappointment. At last, however, hegained the ear of Queen Isabella of Spain; a little fleet was fitted outfor the explorer, --and the New World was found. 

Columbus never received a fitting reward for the great service he hadrendered mankind. Even the continent to which he had shown the way, instead of being called after him as a perpetual memorial, was named froma Florentine navigator, Amerigo Vespucci, whose chief claim to thisdistinction was his having published the first account of the new lands. 

[Illustration: THE OCEAN AND ISLANDS BETWEEN WESTERN EUROPE AND EASTERNASIA. From the Globe of Martin Behaim, 1492. (Cathaja--China; Cipango =Japan. )]

THE VOYAGE OF VASCO DA GAMA (1497-1498). --The favorable position ofPortugal upon the Atlantic seaboard naturally led her sovereigns toconceive the idea of competing with the Italian cities for the trade ofthe East Indies, by opening up an ocean route to those lands. During allthe latter part of the fifteenth century Portuguese sailors were yearafter year penetrating a little farther into the mysterious tropical seas, and exploring new reaches of the western coast of Africa. 

In 1487 the most southern point of the continent was reached, and wasnamed the Cape of Good Hope, as the possibility of reaching India by seanow seemed assured. A decade later Vasco da Gama, a Portuguese admiral, doubled the Cape, crossed the Indian Sea, and landed on the coast ofMalabar (1498). 

The discovery of a water-path to India effected, as we have alreadynoticed (see p. 467), most important changes in the traffic of the world. It made the ports of Portugal and of other countries on the Atlanticseaboard the depots of the Eastern trade. "The front of Europe wassuddenly changed. " The Italian merchants were ruined. The great warehousesof Egypt and Syria were left empty. The traffic of the Mediterraneandwindled to insignificant proportions. Portugal established trading-postsand colonies in the East, and built up there a great empire, --like thatwhich England is maintaining in the same region at the present day. 

THE VOYAGE AROUND THE GLOBE (1519-1522). --Upon the return of Columbus fromhis successful expedition, Pope Alexander VI. , with a view to adjustingthe conflicting claims of Spain and Portugal, divided the world by ameridian line drawn about midway through the Atlantic, and gave to theSpanish sovereigns all unclaimed pagan lands that their subjects mightfind west of this line, and to the Portuguese kings all new pagan landsdiscovered by Portuguese navigators east of the designated meridian. 

The determination on the part of the king of Spain to acquire title underthe papal grant to the valuable Spice Islands of the Pacific by reachingthem through sailing westward, led him to organize an expedition ofdiscovery in the western seas. The little fleet was entrusted to thecommand of Magellan, a Portuguese admiral. 

Magellan directed his fleet in a southwesterly course across the Atlantic, hoping to find towards the south a break in the land discovered byColumbus. Near the most southern point of Patagonia he found the narrowstrait that now bears his name, through which he pushed his vessel intothe sea beyond. From the calm, unruffled face of the new ocean, sodifferent from the stormy Atlantic, he gave to it the name _Pacific_. 

After a most adventurous voyage upon the hitherto untraversed waters ofthe new sea, the expedition reached the Spice Islands, and eventuallyarrived home, after an absence of over three years. For the first time menhad gone around the globe that they had so long lived upon. Theachievement of course settled forever the question as to the shape of theearth. It pushed aside all the old narrow geographical ideas, andbroadened immensely the physical horizon of the world. 

CONQUEST OF MEXICO (1519-1521). --Soon after the discovery of the NewWorld, Spanish settlements were established upon the islands in front ofthe Gulf of Mexico. Among the colonists here were constantly spreadreports of a great and rich Indian monarchy upon the mainland to the west. These stories inflamed the imagination of the more adventurous among thesettlers, and an expedition was organized and placed under the command ofHernando Cortez, for the conquest and "conversion" of the heathen nation. The expedition was successful, and soon the Spaniards were masters of thegreater part of Mexico. 

The state that the conquerors destroyed was hardly an "empire, " as termedby the Spanish writers, but rather a confederacy, somewhat like theIroquois confederacy in the North. It embraced three tribes, of which theAztecs were leaders. At the head of the league was a war-chief, who borethe name of Montezuma. 

The Mexican Indians had taken some steps in civilization. They employed asystem of picture-writing, and had cities and temples. But they werecannibals, and offered human sacrifices to their gods. They had noknowledge of the horse or of the ox, and were of course ignorant of theuse of fire-arms. 

THE CONQUEST OF PERU (1532-1536). --Shortly after the conquest of theIndians of Mexico, the subjugation of the Indians of Peru was alsoeffected. The civilization of the Peruvians was superior to that of theMexicans. Not only were the great cities of the Peruvian empire filledwith splendid temples and palaces, but throughout the country weremagnificent works of public utility, such as roads, bridges, andaqueducts. The government of the Incas, the royal, or ruling race, was amild, parental autocracy. 

Glowing reports of the enormous wealth of the Incas, --the commonestarticles in whose palaces, it was asserted, were of solid gold, reachedthe Spaniards by way of the Isthmus of Darien, and it was not long beforean expedition was organized for the conquest of the country. The leader ofthe band was Francisco Pizarro, an iron-hearted, perfidious, andilliterate adventurer. 

Through treachery, Pizarro made a prisoner of the Inca Atahualpa. Thecaptive offered, as a ransom for his release, to fill the room in which hewas confined "as high as he could reach" with vessels of gold. Pizarroaccepted the offer, and the palaces and temples throughout the empire werestripped of their golden vessels, and the apartment was filled with theprecious relics. The value of the treasure is estimated at over$17, 000, 000. When this vast wealth was once under the control of theSpaniards, they seized it all, and then treacherously put the Inca todeath (1533). With the death of Atahualpa the power of the Inca dynastypassed away forever. 

SPANISH COLONIZATION IN THE NEW WORLD. --Not until more than one hundredyears after the discovery of the Western Hemisphere by Columbus, was thereestablished a single permanent English settlement within the limits ofwhat is now the United States, the portion of the New World destined to betaken possession of by the peoples of Northern Europe, and to become thehome of civil and religious freedom. 

But into those parts of the new lands opened up by Spanish exploration andconquest there began to pour at once a tremendous stream of Spanishadventurers and colonists, in search of fortune and fame. It was a sort ofSpanish migration. The movement might be compared to the rush ofpopulation from the Eastern States to California, after the announcementof the discovery there of gold, in 1848-9. Upon the West India Islands, inMexico, in Central America, all along the Pacific slope of the Andes, andeverywhere upon the lofty and pleasant table-lands that had formed theheart of the empire of the Incas, there sprang up rapidly great cities asthe centres of mining and agricultural industries, of commerce and oftrade. Thus did a Greater Spain grow up in the New World. It was, in alarge measure, the treasures derived from these new possessions thatenabled the sovereigns of Spain to play the imposing part they did in theaffairs of Europe during the century following the discovery of America. [Footnote: After having robbed the Indians of their wealth in gold andsilver, the slow accumulations of centuries, the Spaniards furtherenriched themselves by the enforced labor of the unfortunate natives. Unused to such toil as was exacted of them under the lash of worse thanEgyptian task-masters, the Indians wasted away by millions in the mines ofMexico and Peru, and upon the sugar plantations of the West Indies. Morethan half of the native population of Peru is thought to have beenconsumed in the Peruvian mines. To save the Indians, negroes wereintroduced as a substitute for native laborers. This was the beginning ofthe African slave-trade in the New World. The traffic was especiallyencouraged by a benevolent priest named Las Casas (1474-1566), known asthe "Apostle of the Indians. " Thus the gigantic evil of African slavery inthe Western Hemisphere, like the gladiatorial shows of the Romans, wasbrought into existence, or, rather, in its beginning was fostered, by aphilanthropic desire and effort to mitigate human suffering. ]

FIRST PERIOD. --THE ERA OF THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION. (FROM THE DISCOVERY OF AMERICA TO THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA, IN 1648. )

CHAPTER XLVIII. 

THE BEGINNING OF THE REFORMATION UNDER LUTHER. 

GENERAL STATEMENT. --We have already indicated (see pp. 366-7), the twoperiods of modern history; namely, the _Era of the Protestant Reformation_and the _Era of the Political Revolution_. We need here simply to remindthe reader that the first period, extending from the opening of thesixteenth century to the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, is characterized bythe revolt of the nations of Northern Europe against the spiritualjurisdiction of Rome, and the great combat between Protestantism andCatholicism; and that the second period, running from the Peace ofWestphalia to our own day, is distinguished by the contest between thepeople and their rulers, or, in other words, by the conflict betweenliberal and despotic principles of government. 

We shall now proceed to speak of the causes and general features of theReformation, and in succeeding chapters shall follow its fortunes in thevarious countries of Europe. 

EXTENT OF ROME'S SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY AT THE OPENING OF THE SIXTEENTHCENTURY. --In a preceding chapter on the Papacy it was shown how perfect atone time was the obedience of the West, not only to the spiritual, but tothe temporal, authority of the Pope. It was also shown how the papal claimof the right to dictate in temporal or governmental affairs waspractically rejected by the princes and sovereigns of Europe as early asthe fourteenth century (see p. 458). But previous to the opening of thesixteenth century there had been comparatively few--though there had beensome, like the Albigenses in the South of France, the Wickliffites inEngland, and the Hussites in Bohemia--who denied the supreme andinfallible authority of the bishops of Rome in all matters touchingreligion. Speaking in a very general manner, it would be correct to saythat at the close of the fifteenth century all the nations of WesternEurope professed the faith of the Latin, or Roman Catholic Church, andyielded spiritual obedience to the Papal See. 

CAUSES OF REFORMATION. --We must now seek the causes which led one-half ofthe nations of Europe to secede, as it were, from the Roman CatholicChurch. The causes were many. Among others may be mentioned the greatmental awakening which marked the close of the mediæval and the opening ofthe modern age; for the intellectual revival, though often spoken of, inso far as it concerned the Northern nations, as an effect of the religiousrevival, was in reality at once cause and effect. It hastened theReformation, and was itself hastened by it. And in connection with theRevival of Learning must be mentioned the invention of printing as apowerful agency in the promotion of the religious movement. The pressscattered broadcast over Europe, not only the Bible, but the writings ofthe men who had begun to doubt the scriptural authority for many of thedoctrines and ceremonies of the Church, --such as devotion to the VirginMary, the invoking of saints, the use of images, confession to a priest, and the nature of the elements in the Eucharist. These writings of coursestirred up debate, and led to questioning and criticism. 

A second cause was the existence of most serious scandals and abuses inthe Church. During the fifteenth century, the morality of the Church wasprobably lower than at any other period in its history. The absolutenecessity of its thorough reform in both "head and members" was recognizedby all earnest and spiritual-minded men. The only difference of opinionamong such was as to the manner in which the work of purification shouldbe effected. 

A third cause may be found in the claims of the Popes to the right tointerfere in the internal, governmental affairs of a nation; for, althoughthese claims had been rejected by the sovereigns of Europe, they werenevertheless still maintained by the Roman bishops, and this caused thetemporal princes to regard with great jealousy the papal power. 

But foremost among the proximate causes, and the actual _occasion_ ofthe revolution, was the controversy which arose about indulgences. These, in the Catholic Church, are remissions, to penitents, of punishment duefor sin, upon the performance of some work of mercy or piety, or thepayment of a sum of money. It is, and always has been, the theory of theCatholic Church, that the indulgence remits merely temporal penalties, --that is, penalties imposed by ecclesiastical authority, and the pains ofPurgatory, --and that it can take effect only upon certain conditions, among which is that of sincere repentance. Indulgences were frequentlygranted by various pontiffs, as a means of raising funds for piousenterprises. A considerable portion of the money for building theCathedral of St. Peter at Rome was raised in this manner. 

TETZEL AND THE PREACHING OF INDULGENCES. --Leo X. , upon his election to thepapal dignity, in 1513, found the coffers of the Church almost empty; and, being in pressing need of money to carry on his various undertakings, among which was work upon St. Peter's, he had recourse to the then commonexpedient of a grant of indulgences. He delegated the power of dispensingthese in Germany to the archbishop of Magdeburg, who employed a Dominicanfriar by the name of Tetzel as his deputy in Saxony. 

The archbishop was unfortunate in the selection of his agent. Tetzelcarried out his commission in such a way as to give rise to great scandal. The language that he, or at least his subordinates, used, in exhorting thepeople to comply with the conditions of gaining the indulgences, one ofwhich was a donation of money, was unseemly and exaggerated. The resultwas that erroneous views as to the effect of indulgences began to spreadamong the ignorant and credulous, some being so far misled as to thinkthat if they only contributed this money to the building of St. Peter's atRome they would be exempt from all penalty for sins, paying little heed tothe other conditions, such as sorrow for sin, and purpose of amendment. Hence, many were led to declaim against the procedure of the zealousfriar. These protests were the near mutterings of a storm that had longbeen gathering, and that was soon to shake all Europe from the Baltic tothe Mediterranean. 

[Illustration: MARTIN LUTHER]

MARTIN LUTHER. --Foremost among those who opposed and denounced Tetzel wasMartin Luther (1483-1546), an Augustine monk, and a teacher of theology inthe university of Wittenberg. He was of humble parentage, his father beinga poor miner. The boy possessed a good voice, and frequently, while astudent, earned his bread by singing from door to door. The natural bentof his mind, and, if we may believe a somewhat doubtful legend, the deathof a friend struck down at his side by lightning, led him to resolve toenter a monastery and devote himself to the service of the Church. BeforeTetzel appeared in Germany, Luther had already earned a wide reputationfor learning and piety. 

THE NINETY-FIVE THESES. --The form which Church penances had taken in thehands of Tetzel and his associates, together with other circumstances, awakened in Luther's mind doubts and questionings as to many of thedoctrines of the Church. Especially was there gradually maturing withinhim a conviction that the entire system of ecclesiastical penances andindulgences was unscriptural and wrong. His last lingering doubtrespecting this matter appears to have been removed while, during anofficial visit to Rome in 1510, he was penitentially ascending on hisknees the sacred stairs (_scala santa_) of the Lateran, when heseemed to hear an inner voice declaring, "The just shall live by faith. "

At length Luther drew up ninety-five theses, or articles, wherein hefearlessly stated his views respecting indulgences. These theses, writtenin Latin, he nailed to the door of the church at Wittenberg, and invitedall scholars to examine and criticise them, and to point out if in anyrespect they were opposed to the teachings of the Word of God, or of theearly Fathers of the Church (1517). By means of the press the theses werescattered with incredible rapidity throughout every country in Europe. 

BURNING OF THE PAPAL BULL (1520). --All the continent was now plunged intoa perfect tumult of controversy. Luther, growing bolder, was soonattacking the entire system and body of teachings of the Roman CatholicChurch. At first the Pope, Leo X. , was inclined to regard the whole matteras "a mere squabble of monks, " but at length he felt constrained to issuea bull against the audacious reformer (1520). His writings were condemnedas heretical, and all persons were forbidden to read them; and he himself, if he did not recant his errors within sixty days, was to be seized andsent to Rome to be dealt with as an heretic. Luther in reply publiclyburned the papal bull at one of the gates of Wittenberg. 

THE DIET OF WORMS (1521). --Leo now invoked the aid of the recently electedEmperor Charles the Fifth in extirpating the spreading heresy. The emperorcomplied by summoning Luther before the Diet of Worms, an assembly of theprinces, nobles, and clergy of Germany, convened at Worms to deliberateupon the affairs of Germany, and especially upon matters touching thegreat religious controversy. 

Called upon in the Imperial assembly to recant his errors, Luther steadilyrefused to do so, unless his teachings could be shown to be inconsistentwith the Bible. Although some wished to deliver the reformer to theflames, the safe-conduct of the emperor under which he had come to theDiet protected him. So Luther was allowed to depart in safety, but wasfollowed by a decree of the assembly which pronounced him a heretic and anoutlaw. 

But Luther had powerful friends among the princes of Germany, one of whomwas his own prince, Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony. Solicitors forthe safety of the reformer, the prince caused him to be seized on his wayfrom the Diet by a company of masked horsemen, who carried him to thecastle of the Wartburg, where he was kept about a year, his retreat beingknown only to a few friends. During this period of forced retirement fromthe world, Luther was hard at work upon his celebrated translation of theBible. 

THE PEASANTS' WAR (1524-1525). --Before quite a year had passed, Luther wascalled from the Wartburg by the troubles caused by a new sect that hadappeared, known as the Anabaptists, whose excesses were casting greatdiscredit upon the whole reform movement. Luther's sudden appearance atWittenberg gave a temporary check to the agitation. 

But in the course of two or three years the trouble broke out afresh, andin a more complex and aggravated form. The peasants of Suabia andFranconia, stung to madness by the oppressions of their feudal lords, stirred by the religious excitement that filled the air, and influenced bythe incendiary preaching of their prophets Carlstadt and Muenzer, rose inrevolt against the nobles and priests. Castles and monasteries were sackedand burned, and horrible outrages were committed. The rebellion was atlength crushed, but not until one hundred thousand lives had beensacrificed, a large part of South Germany ravaged, and great reproach castupon the reformers, whose teachings were held by their enemies to be thewhole cause of the ferment. 

The Reformers are called Protestants. Notwithstanding all the efforts thatwere made to suppress the doctrines of Luther, they gained ground rapidly, and in the year 1529 another assembly, known as the Second Diet of Spires, was called to consider the matter. This body issued an edict forbiddingall persons doing anything to promote the spread of the new doctrines, until a general council of the Church should have investigated them andpronounced authoritatively upon them. Seven of the German princes, and alarge number of the cities of the empire, issued a formal _protest_against the action of the Diet. Because of this protest, the reformersfrom this time began to be known as _Protestants_. 

CAUSES THAT CHECKED THE PROGRESS OF THE REFORMATION. --Even before thedeath of Luther, [Footnote: After the death of Luther, the leadership ofthe Reformation in Germany fell to Philip Melanchthon (1497-1560), one ofLuther's friends and fellow-workers. Melanchthon's disposition was exactlythe opposite of Luther's. He often reproved Luther for his indiscretionand vehemence, and was constantly laboring to effect, through mutualconcessions, a reconciliation between the Roman Catholics and theProtestants. ] which occurred in the year 1546, the Reformation had gaineda strong foothold in most of the countries of Western Christendom, save inSpain and Italy, and even in these parts the new doctrines had made someprogress. It seemed as if the revolt from Rome was destined to becomeuniversal, and the old ecclesiastical empire to be completely broken up. 

But several causes now conspired to check the hitherto triumphant advanceof Protestantism, and to confine the movement to the Northern nations. Chief among these were the _divisions among the Protestants_, the_Catholic counter-reform_, the _increased activity of the Inquisition_, and the _rise of the Order of the Jesuits_. 

DIVISIONS AMONG THE PROTESTANTS. --Early in their contest with Rome, theProtestants became divided into numerous hostile sects. In Switzerlandarose the Zwinglians (followers of Ulrich Zwingle, 1484-1531), whodiffered from the Lutherans in their views regarding the Eucharist, and onsome other points of doctrine. The Calvinists were followers of JohnCalvin (1509-1564), a Frenchman by birth, who, forced to flee from Franceon account of persecution, found a refuge at Geneva, of which city hebecame a sort of Protestant pope. [Footnote: Calvin was, next afterLuther, the greatest of the reformers. The doctrines of Calvin came toprevail very widely, and have exerted a most remarkable influence upon thegeneral course of history. "The Huguenots of France, the Covenanters ofScotland, the Puritans of England, the Pilgrim Fathers of New England, were all the offspring of Calvinism. "]

The great Protestant communions quickly broke up into a large number ofdenominations, or churches, each holding to some minor point of doctrine, or adhering to some form of worship disregarded by the others, yet allagreeing in the central doctrine of the Reformation, "Justification byfaith. "

[Illustration: JOHN CALVIN]

Now the contentions between these different sects were sharp and bitter. The liberal-minded reformer had occasion to lament the same state ofthings as that which troubled the apostle Paul in the early days ofChristianity. One said, I am of Luther; another said, I am of Calvin; andanother said, I am of Zwingle. Even Luther himself denounced Zwingle as aheretic; and the Calvinists would have no dealings with the Lutherans. 

The influence of these sectarian divisions upon the progress of theReformation was most disastrous. They afforded the Catholics a strong andeffective argument against the entire movement as tending to uncertaintyand discord. 

THE CATHOLIC COUNTER-REFORM. --While the Protestants were thus breaking upinto numerous rival sects, the Catholics were removing the causes ofdissension within the old Church by a thorough reform in its head andmembers, and by a clear and authoritative restatement of the doctrines ofthe Catholic faith. This was accomplished very largely by the labors ofthe celebrated Council of Trent (1545-1563). The correction of the abusesthat had so much to do in causing the great schism, smoothed the way forthe return to the ancient Church of thousands who had become alarmed atthe dangers into which society seemed to drift when once it cast loosefrom anchorage in the safe harbor of tradition and authority. 

THE INQUISITION. --The Roman Catholic Church having purified itself anddefined clearly its articles of faith, demanded of all a more implicitobedience than hitherto. The Inquisition, or Holy Office (see p. 500), nowassumed new vigor and activity, and heresy was sternly dealt with. Thetribunal was assisted in the execution of its sentences by the secularauthorities in all the Romance countries, but outside of these it was notgenerally recognized by the temporal princes, though it did succeed inestablishing itself for a time in the Netherlands and in some parts ofGermany. Death, usually by burning, and loss of property were the penaltyof obstinate heresy. Without doubt the Holy Office did much to check theadvance of the Reformation in Southern Europe, aiding especially inholding Italy and Spain compactly obedient to the ancient Church. 

At this point, in connection with the persecutions of the Inquisition, weshould not fail to recall that in the sixteenth century a refusal toconform to the established worship was regarded by all, by Protestants aswell as by Catholics, as a species of treason against society, and wasdealt with accordingly. Thus we find Calvin at Geneva consenting to theburning of Servetus (1553), because he published views that the Calviniststhought heretical; and in England we see the Anglican Protestants wagingthe most cruel, bitter, and persistent persecutions, not only against theCatholics, but also against all Protestants that refused to conform to theEstablished Church. 

THE JESUITS. --The Order of Jesuits, or Society of Jesus, was another mostpowerful agent concerned in the re-establishment of the threatenedauthority of the Papal See. The founder of the institution was St. Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), a native of Spain. Loyola's object was toform a society, the devotion and energy of whose numbers should counteractthe zeal and activity of the reformers. 

[Illustration: LOYOLA. (From a medal. )]

As the well-disciplined, watchful, and uncompromising foes of theProtestant reformers, now divided into many and often hostile sects, theJesuits did very much to bring about a reaction, to retrieve the failingfortunes of the papal power in Europe, and to extend the authority anddoctrines of the Roman Catholic Church in all other parts of the world. Most distinguished of the missionaries of the order to pagan lands wasFrancis Xavier (1506-1552), known as the Apostle of the Indies. His laborsin India, Japan, and other lands of the East were attended withastonishing results. 

OUTCOME OF THE REVOLT. --As in following chapters we are to trace thefortunes of the Reformation in the leading European countries, we shallhere say only a word as to the issue of the great contest. 

The outcome of the revolt, very broadly stated, was the separation fromthe Roman Catholic Church of the Northern, or Teutonic nations; that is tosay, of Northern Germany, of portions of Switzerland and of theNetherlands, of Denmark, Norway, Sweden, England, and Scotland. TheRomance nations, namely, Italy, France and Spain, together with CelticIreland, adhered to the old Church. 

What this separation from Rome meant in the political realm is well statedby Seebohm: "It was the claiming by the civil power in each nation ofthose rights which the Pope had hitherto claimed within it as head of thegreat ecclesiastical empire. The clergy and monks had hitherto beenregarded more or less as foreigners--that is, as subjects of the Pope'secclesiastical empire. Where there was a revolt from Rome the allegianceof these persons to the Pope was annulled, and the civil power claimed asfull a sovereignty over them as it had over its lay subjects. Mattersrelating to marriage and wills still for the most part remained underecclesiastical jurisdiction, but then, as the ecclesiastical courtsthemselves became national courts and ceased to be Roman or papal, allthese matters came under the control of the civil power. "

In a spiritual or religious point of view, this severance by the Northernnations of the bonds that formerly united them to the ecclesiasticalempire of Rome, meant a transfer of their allegiance from the_Church_ to the _Bible_. The decrees of Popes and the decisions ofCouncils were no longer to be regarded as having divine and binding force;the Scriptures alone were to be held as possessing divine and infallibleauthority, and, theoretically, this rule and standard of faith andpractice each one was to interpret for himself. 

Thus one-half of Western Christendom was lost to the Roman Church. Yetnotwithstanding this loss, notwithstanding the earlier loss of the Easternpart of Christendom (see p. 417), and notwithstanding the fact that itstemporal power has been entirely taken from it, the Papacy still remains, as Macaulay says, "not a mere antique, but full of life and youthfulvigor. " The Pope is to-day the supreme Head of a Church that, in the wordsof the brilliant writer just quoted, "was great and respected before Saxonhad set foot on Britain, before the Frank had passed the Rhine, whenGrecian eloquence still flourished in Antioch, when idols were stillworshipped in the temple of Mecca. And she may still exist in undiminishedvigor when some traveller from New Zealand shall, in the midst of a vastsolitude, take his stand on a broken arch of London Bridge to sketch theruins of St. Paul's. "

CHAPTER XLIX. 

THE ASCENDENCY OF SPAIN. 

1. REIGN OF THE EMPEROR CHARLES V. (1519-1556). 

CHARLES' DOMINIONS. --Charles I. Of Spain, better known to fame as EmperorCharles V. , was the son of Philip the Handsome, Archduke of Austria, andJoanna, daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. He was "theconverging point and heir of four great royal lines, which had becomeunited by a series of happy matrimonial alliances. " These were the housesof Austria, Burgundy, Castile, and Aragon. Before Charles had completedhis nineteenth year, there were heaped upon his head, through the removalof his ancestors by death, the crowns of the four dynasties. 

But vast as were the hereditary possessions of the young prince, there wasstraightway added to these (in 1519), by the vote of the Electors ofGermany, the sovereignty of the Holy Roman Empire. After this election hewas known as _Emperor Charles V. , _ whereas hitherto he had borne thetitle of _Don Carlos I. _ of Spain. 

CHARLES AND THE REFORMATION. --It is Charles' relations to the Lutheranmovement which constitute the significant feature of his life and work. Here his policies and acts concerned universal history. It would hardly beasserting too much to say that Charles, at the moment he ascended theImperial throne, held in his hands the fortunes of the Reformation, so faras regards the countries of Southern Europe. Whether these were to besaved to Rome or not, seemed at this time to depend largely upon theattitude which Charles should assume towards the reform movement. Fortunately for the Catholic Church, the young emperor placed himself atthe head of the Catholic party, and during his reign employed the strengthand resources of his empire in repressing the heresy of the reformers. 

[Illustration: THE SPANISH KINGDOMS And Their European Dependencies underCharles the Fifth]

HIS TWO CHIEF ENEMIES. --Had Charles been free from the outset to devoteall his energies to the work of suppressing the Lutheran heresy, it isdifficult to see what could have saved the reform doctrines within hisdominions from total extirpation. But fortunately for the cause of thereformers, Charles' attention, during all the first part of his reign, wasdrawn away from the serious consideration of Church questions, by theattacks upon his dominions of two of the most powerful monarchs of thetimes, --Francis I. (1515-1547) of France, and Solyman the Magnificent(1520-1566), Sultan of Turkey. Whenever Charles was inclined to proceed tosevere measures against the Protestant princes of Germany, the threateningmovements of one or both of these enemies, at times acting in concert andalliance, forced him to postpone his proposed crusade against heretics fora campaign against foreign foes. 

RIVALRY AND WARS BETWEEN CHARLES AND FRANCIS [Footnote: Table of Wars:-- First War (ended by Peace of Madrid). . 1521-1526 Second War (ended by Ladies' Peace) . . 1527-1529 Third War (ended by Truce of Nice). . . 1536-1538 Fourth War (ended by Peace of Crespy). . 1542-1544] (1521-1544). --FrancisI. Was the rival of Charles in the contest for Imperial honors. When theElectors conferred the title of emperor upon the Spanish monarch, Franciswas sorely disappointed, and during all the remainder of his reign kept upa jealous and almost incessant warfare with Charles, whose enormouspossessions now nearly surrounded the French kingdom. Italy was the fieldof much of the fighting, as the securing of dominion in that peninsula wasthe chief aim of each of the rivals. 

The so-called _First War_ between Francis and the emperor was full ofmisfortunes for Francis. His army was driven out of Northern Italy by theImperial forces; his most skilful and trusted commander, the Constable ofBourbon, turned traitor and went over to Charles, and another of his mostvaliant nobles, the celebrated Chevalier Bayard, the knight _sans peur, sans reproche_, "without fear and without reproach, " was killed; while, to crown all, Francis himself, after suffering a crushing defeat at Pavia, in Italy, was wounded and taken prisoner. In his letter to his motherinforming her of the disaster, he is said to have laconically written, "All is lost save honor. " He was liberated by the Peace of Madrid (1526). 

The most memorable incident of the _Second War_ between the king andthe emperor, was the sack of Rome by an Imperial army, made up chiefly ofLutherans. Rome had not witnessed such scenes since the terrible days ofthe Goth and Vandal. 

In the _Third War_ Francis shocked all Christendom by forming analliance with the Turkish Sultan, who ravaged with his fleets the Italiancoasts, and sold his plunder and captives in the port of Marseilles. Thuswas a Christian city shamefully opened to the Moslems as a refuge and aslave-market. 

The _Fourth War_, which was the last between the rivals, left theirrespective possessions substantially the same as at the beginning of thestrife, in 1521. 

DISASTROUS EFFECTS OF THE WAR. --The results of these royal contentions hadbeen extremely calamitous. For a quarter of a century they had kept nearlyall Europe in a perfect turmoil, and by preventing alliances of theChristian states, had been the occasion of the severe losses whichChristendom during this period suffered at the hands of the Turks. Hungaryhad been ravaged with fire and sword; Rhodes had been captured from theKnights of St. John; and all the Mediterranean shores pillaged, andthousands of Christian captives chained to the oars of Turkish galleys. [Footnote: The worst feature of this advance of the Sultan's authority inthe Mediterranean was the growth, under his protection, of the power ofthe Algerian pirates. One of the chief strongholds of the pirates on theAfrican coast was Tunis, which was held by the famous Barbarossa. In theinterval between his second and third wars with Francis, Charles, with alarge army and fleet, made an assault upon this place, defeated thecorsair, and set free 20, 000 Christian captives. For this brilliant andknightly achievement, the emperor received great applause throughoutEurope. Just after his third war with Francis, the emperor made anunsuccessful and most disastrous assault upon Algiers, another strongholdof the corsairs. ]

PERSECUTION OF THE FRENCH PROTESTANTS BY FRANCIS. --The cessation of thewars between Francis and Charles left each free to give his attention tohis heretical subjects. And both had work enough on hand; for while theking and the emperor had been fighting each other, the doctrines of thereformers had been spreading rapidly in all directions and among allclasses. 

The severest blow dealt by Francis against the heretics of his kingdomfell upon the Vaudois, or Waldenses, [Footnote: So called from the founderof the sect, Peter Waldo, or Pierre de Vaux, who lived about the beginningof the thirteenth century. ] the inhabitants of a number of hamlets inPiedmont and Provence. Thousands were put to death by the sword, thousandsmore were burned at the stake, and the land was reduced to a wilderness. Only a miserable remnant, who found an asylum among the mountains, wereleft to hand down their faith to later times. 

CHARLES' WARS WITH THE PROTESTANT GERMAN PRINCES. --Charles, on his part, turned his attention to the reformers in Germany. Inspired by religiousmotives and convictions, and apprehensive, further, of the effect upon hisauthority in Germany of the growth there of a confederacy of theProtestant princes, known as the League of Schmalkald, Charles resolved tosuppress the reform movement by force. He was at first successful, but inthe end, the war proved the most disastrous and humiliating to him of anyin which he had engaged. Successive defeats of his armies forced him togive up his undertaking to make all his German subjects think alike inmatters of religion. 

THE RELIGIOUS PEACE OF AUGSBURG (1555). --In the celebrated Diet ofAugsburg, convened in 1555 to compose the distracted affairs of the Germanstates, it was arranged and agreed that every prince should be allowed tochoose between the Catholic religion and the Augsburg Confession, [Footnote: The "Augsburg Confession" was the formula of belief of theadherents of Luther. It was drawn up by the scholar Melanchthon, and laidbefore the Imperial Diet assembled at Augsburg by Charles V. In 1530. ] andshould have the right to make his religion the worship of his people. This, it will be noted, was simply toleration as concerns princes orgovernments. The people individually had no freedom of choice; everysubject must follow his prince, and think and believe as he thought andbelieved. Of course, this was no real toleration. 

Even to the article of toleration as stated above, the Diet made oneimportant exception. The Catholics insisted that _ecclesiastical_ princes, _i. E. _, bishops and abbots who were heads of states, on becomingProtestants, should lose their offices and revenues; and this provision, under the name of the _Ecclesiastical Reservation_, was finally made apart of the treaty. This was a most fortunate article for the Catholics. 

ABDICATION AND DEATH OF CHARLES. --While the Diet of Augsburg was arrangingthe Religious Peace, the Emperor Charles was enacting the part of a secondDiocletian (see p. 331). There had long been forming in his mind thepurpose of spending his last days in monastic seclusion. The disappointingissue of his contest with the Protestant princes of Germany, the weight ofadvancing years, together with menacing troubles which began "to thickenlike dark clouds about the evening of his reign, " now led the emperor tocarry this resolution into effect. Accordingly he abdicated in favor ofhis son Philip the crown of the Netherlands (1555), and that of Spain andits colonies (1556), and then retired to the monastery of San Yuste, situated in a secluded region in the western part of Spain (1556). 

[Illustration: EMPEROR CHARLES THE FIFTH. (After a painting by AngelLizcano. )]

In his retreat at Yuste, Charles passed the remaining short term of hislife in participating with the monks in the exercises of religion, and inwatching the current of events without; for Charles never lost interest inthe affairs of the empire over which he had ruled, and Philip constantlyhad the benefit of his father's wisdom and experience. 

There is a tradition which tells how. Charles, after vainly endeavoring tomake some clocks that he had about him at Yuste run together, made thefollowing reflection: "How foolish I have been to think I could make allmen believe alike about religion, when here I cannot make even two clockskeep the same time. "

This story is probably mythical. Charles seems never to have doubtedeither the practicability or the policy of securing uniformity of beliefby force. While in retirement at Yuste, he expressed the deepest regretthat he did not burn Luther at Worms. He was constantly urging Philip touse greater severity in dealing with his heretical subjects, and couldscarcely restrain himself from leaving his retreat, in order to engagepersonally in the work of extirpating the pestilent doctrines, which heheard were spreading in Spain. 

2. SPAIN UNDER PHILIP II. (1556-1598). 

PHILIP'S DOMAINS. --With the abdication of Charles V. The Imperial crownpassed out of the Spanish line of the House of Hapsburg. [Footnote: TheImperial crown went to Charles' brother, Ferdinand, of Austria. ] Yet thedominions of Philip were scarcely less extensive than those over which hisfather had ruled. All the hereditary possessions of the Spanish crown wereof course his. Then just before his father's abdication gave him thesedomains, he had become king-consort of England by marriage with MaryTudor. And about the middle of his reign he conquered Portugal and addedto his empire that kingdom and its rich dependencies in Africa and theEast Indies, --an acquisition which more than made good to the Spanishcrown the loss of the Imperial dignity. After this accession of territory, Philip's sovereignty was acknowledged by more than 100, 000, 000 persons-probably as large a number as was embraced within the limits of the Romanempire at the time of its greatest extension. 

But notwithstanding that Philip's dominions were so extensive, hisresources enormous, and many of the outward circumstances of his reignstriking and brilliant, there were throughout the period causes at workwhich were rapidly undermining the greatness of Spain and preparing herfall. By wasteful wars and extravagant buildings Philip managed todissipate the royal treasures; and by his tyrannical course in respect ofhis Moorish, Jewish, and Protestant subjects, he ruined the industries ofthe most flourishing of the provinces of Spain, and drove the Netherlandsinto a desperate revolt, which ended in the separation of the mostvaluable of those provinces from the Spanish crown. 

As the most important matters of Philip's reign--namely, his war againstthe revolted Netherlands, and his attempt upon England with his"Invincible Armada"--belong more properly to the respective histories ofEngland and the Netherlands, and will be treated of in connection with theaffairs of those countries (see pp. 558, 564), we shall give here only avery little space to the history of the period. 

PHILIP'S WAR WITH FRANCE. --Philip took up his father's quarrel withFrance. He was aided by the English, who were persuaded to this step bytheir queen, Mary Tudor, now the wife of the Spanish sovereign. Fortunefavored Philip. The French were defeated in two great battles, and wereforced to agree to the terms of a treaty (Peace of Cateau-Cambrésis, 1559)so advantageous to Spain as to give Philip great distinction in the eyesof all Europe. 

PHILIP'S CRUSADE AGAINST THE MOORS. --It will be recalled that after theconquest of Granada the Moors were still allowed the exercise of theirreligion (see p. 499). Philip conceived it to be his duty to impose uponthem conditions that should thoroughly obliterate all traces of theirancient faith and manners. So he issued a decree that the Moors should nolonger use their native tongue; and that they should give their childrenChristian names, and send them to Christian schools. A determined revoltfollowed. Philip repressed the uprising with terrible severity (1571). Thefairest provinces of Spain were almost depopulated, and large districtsrelapsed into primeval wilderness. 

DEFEAT OF THE TURKISH FLEET AT LEPANTO (1571). --Philip rendered an eminentservice to civilization in helping to stay the progress of the Turks inthe Mediterranean. They had captured the important island of Cyprus, andhad assaulted the Hospitallers at Malta, [Footnote: After the knights hadbeen driven from the island of Rhodes by the Turks (see p. 532), Charlesgave the survivors of the Order the island of Malta (1530). ] which islandhad been saved from falling into the hands of the infidels only by thesplendid conduct of the knights. All Christendom was becoming alarmed. Pope Pius V. Called upon the princes of Europe to rally to the defence ofthe Church. An alliance was formed, embracing the Pope, the Venetians, andPhilip II. An immense fleet was equipped, and put under the command of DonJohn of Austria, Philip's half-brother, a young general whose consummateability had been recently displayed in the crusade against the Moors. 

The Christian fleet met the Turkish squadron in the Gulf of Lepanto, onthe western coast of Greece. The battle was unequalled by anything theMediterranean had seen since the naval encounters of the Romans andCarthaginians in the First Punic War. More than 600 ships and 200, 000 menmingled in the struggle. The Ottoman fleet was almost totally destroyed. Thousands of Christian captives, who were found chained to the oars of theTurkish galleys, were liberated. All Christendom rejoiced as whenJerusalem was captured by the first crusaders. 

The battle of Lepanto holds an important place in history, because itmarks the turning-point of the long struggle between the Mohammedans andthe Christians, which had now been going on for nearly one thousand years. The Ottoman Turks, though they afterwards made progress in some quarters, never recovered the prestige they lost in that disaster, and theirauthority and power thenceforward steadily declined. [Footnote: After thebattle of Lepanto the next most critical moment in the history of theTurkish conquests was in 1683. In that year the Turks besieged Vienna, andhad all but secured the prize, when the city was relieved by thedistinguished Polish general Sobieski. ]

THE DEATH OF PHILIP: LATER EVENTS. --In the year 1588 Philip made hismemorable attempt with the so-called "Invincible Armada" upon England, atthis time the stronghold of Protestantism. As we shall see a little later, he failed utterly in the undertaking (see p. 558). Ten years after this hedied in the palace of the Escurial. With his death closed that splendidera of Spanish history which began with the discovery of the New World byColumbus. From this time forward the nation steadily declined in power, reputation, and influence. 

Thus, under Philip III. (1598-1621), a severe loss, and one from whichthey never recovered, was inflicted upon the manufactures and variousother industries of Spain, by the expulsion of the Moors, or Moriscoes. More than half a million of the most intelligent, skilful, and industriousinhabitants of the Peninsula were driven into exile. And then in 1609, theProtestant Netherlands, whose revolt against the tyranny of Philip II. Hasbeen mentioned, virtually achieved their independence (see p. 570). In thesecession of these provinces the Spanish crown lost her most valuablepossessions, and she now sank rapidly to the position of a third or fourthrate power. [Footnote: The loss of the Netherlands was followed in 1639 bythe loss of Portugal. During the latter part of the seventeenth centurySpain was involved in disastrous wars with France, and suffered a declineof 8, 000, 000 in her population. After the revolt of her American colonies, in the early part of the present century, and her cession to the UnitedStates of Florida (in 1819), Spain was almost shorn--she still held Cubaand a few other patches of territory scattered about the world--of thoserich and magnificent colonial possessions which had been her pride in thetime of her ascendency. ]

[Illustration: EUROPE IN THE 16TH AND 17TH CENTURIES. ]

CHAPTER L. 

THE TUDORS AND THE ENGLISH REFORMATION. (1485-1603. )

1. INTRODUCTORY. 

THE TUDOR PERIOD. --The Tudor period [Footnote: The Tudor sovereigns wereHenry VII. (1485-1509); Henry VIII. (1509-1547); Edward VI. (1547-1553);Mary (1553-1558); and Elizabeth (1558-1603). ] in English history coversthe sixteenth century, and overlaps a little the preceding and thefollowing century. It was an eventful and stirring time for the Englishpeople. It witnessed among them great progress in art, science, and trade, and a literary outburst such as the world had not seen since the best daysof Athens. But the great event of the period was the Reformation. It wasunder the Tudors that England was severed from the spiritual empire ofRome, and Protestantism firmly established in the island. To tell howthese great results were effected will be our chief aim in the presentchapter. 

THE ENGLISH REFORMATION FIRST A REVOLT AND THEN A REFORM. --The Reformationin England was, more distinctly than elsewhere, a double movement. First, England was separated violently from the ecclesiastical empire of Rome. All papal and priestly authority was cast off, but without any essentialchange being made in creed or mode of worship. This was accomplished underHenry VIII. 

Secondly, the English Church, thus rendered independent of Rome, graduallychanged its creed and ritual. This was effected chiefly under Edward VI. So the movement was first a _revolt_ and then a _reform_. 

THE REVIVAL OF LEARNING IN ENGLAND. --The soil in England was, in aconsiderable measure, prepared for the seed of the Reformation by thelabors of the Humanists (see p. 474). Three men stand preeminent as loversand promoters of the New Learning. Their names are Colet, Erasmus, andMore. 

Colet was leader and master of the little band. His generous enthusiasmwas kindled at Florence, in Italy. It was an important event in thehistory of the Reformation when Colet crossed the Alps to learn Greek atthe feet of the Greek exiles; for on his return to England he brought backwith him not only an increased love for classical learning, but a ferventzeal for religious reform, inspired, it would seem, by the stirringeloquence of Savonarola (see p. 511). 

[Illustration: ERASMUS]

Erasmus was probably superior in classical scholarship to any student ofhis times. "He bought Greek books first, and clothes afterwards. " HisGreek testament, published in 1516, was one of the most powerful agentsconcerned in bringing about the Reformation. Indeed, his relation to thereform movement is well indicated by the charge made against him by theenemies of the Reformation, who declared that "Erasmus laid the egg, andLuther hatched it. "

Thomas More was drawn, or rather forced, into political life, and of himand his writings we shall have occasion to speak hereafter, in connectionwith the reign of Henry VIII. (see p. 549). 

THE LOLLARDS. --Another special preparation for the entrance into Englandof the Reformation was the presence among the lower classes there of aconsiderable body of Lollards (see p. 491). Persecution had driven thesect into obscurity, but had not been able to extirpate the heresy. Inholding the Scriptures as the sole rule of faith, and in the maintenanceof other doctrines denounced by the Roman Catholic Church, the Lollardsoccupied a position similar to that held by the German reformers, andconsequently, when the teachings of Luther were disseminated in England, they received them gladly. 

2. THE REIGN OF HENRY VII. (1485-1509). 

THE UNION OF THE ROSES. --Henry VII. And his queen united the long-disputedtitles of the two Roses [Footnote: Henry represented the claims of theHouse of Lancaster, and soon after his coronation he married the PrincessElizabeth, a daughter of Edward IV. , and the representative of the claimsof the House of York. ] (see p. 488); but the bitter feelings engendered bythe contentions of the rival families still existed. Particularly wasthere much smothered discontent among the Yorkists, which manifesteditself in two attempts to place impostors upon the throne, both of which, however, were unsuccessful. 

BENEVOLENCES. --Avarice and a love of despotic rule were Henry's chieffaults. Much of his attention was given to heaping up a vast fortune. Onedevice adopted by the 'king for wringing money from his wealthy subjectswas what was euphoniously termed _Benevolences_. Magna Charta forbadethe king to impose taxes without the consent of Parliament. But Henry didnot like to convene Parliament, as he wished to rule like the kings of theContinent, guided simply by his own free will. Furthermore, his title notbeing above question, it was his policy to relieve the poorer classes ofthe burden of tax-paying, in order to secure their good-will and support. So Benevolences were made to take the place of regular taxes. These werenothing more nor less than gifts extorted from the well-to-do, generallyby moral pressure. One of Henry's favorite ministers, named Morton, wasparticularly successful in his appeals for gifts of this kind. To thosewho lived splendidly he would say that it was very evident they were quiteable to make a generous donation to their sovereign; while to others wholived in a narrow and pinched way he would represent that their economicalmode of life must have made them wealthy. This famous dilemma received thename of "Morton's Fork. "

MARITIME DISCOVERIES. --It was during this reign that great geographicaldiscoveries enlarged the boundaries of the world. In 1492 Columbusannounced to Europe the existence of land to the west. In 1497 Vasco daGama sailed around the cape of Good Hope and found a water-road to theEast Indies. 

The same year of this last enterprise, Henry fitted out a fleet under thecommand of John Cabot, a Venetian sailor doing business in England, andhis son Sebastian, for exploration in the western seas. The Cabots firsttouched at Newfoundland (or Cape Breton Island), and then the followingyear Sebastian explored the coast they had run against, from that point towhat is now Virginia or the Carolinas. They were the first Europeans, ifwe except the Northmen, to look upon the American continent, for Columbusat this time had seen only the islands in front of the Gulf of Mexico. These explorations of the Cabots were of great importance for the reasonthat they gave England a title to the best portion of the North Americancoast. 

FOREIGN MATRIMONIAL ALLIANCES. --The marriages of Henry's children must benoted by us here, because of the great influence these alliances had uponthe after-course of English history. A common fear of France causedFerdinand and Isabella of Spain and Henry to form a protective alliance. To secure the permanency of the union it was deemed necessary to cement itby a marriage bond. The Spanish Infanta was accordingly betrothed toArthur, Prince of Wales. Unfortunately, the prince died soon after thecelebration of the nuptials. The Spanish sovereigns, still anxious toretain the advantages of an English alliance, now urged that the youngwidow be espoused to Arthur's brother Henry, and the English king, desirous on his side to preserve the friendship of Spain, assented to thebetrothal. A rule of the Church, however, which forbade a man to marry hisbrother's widow, stood in the way of this arrangement; but the queen-mother Isabella managed to secure a decree from the Pope grantingpermission in this case, and so the young widow was betrothed to PrinceHenry, afterward Henry VIII. This alliance of the royal families ofEngland and Spain led to many important consequences, as we shall learn. 

To relieve England of danger on her northern frontier, Henry steadilypursued the policy of a marriage alliance with Scotland. His wishes wererealized when his eldest daughter Margaret became the wife of James IV. , king of that realm. This was a most fortunate marriage, and finally led tothe happy union of the two countries under a single crown (see p. 601). 

Henry VII. Died in 1509, leaving his throne to his son Henry, an energeticand headstrong youth of eighteen years. 

3. ENGLAND SEVERED FROM THE PAPACY BY HENRY VIII. (1509-1547). 

CARDINAL WOLSEY. --We must here, at the opening of Henry VIII. 's reign, [Footnote: In 1512, joining what was known as the Holy League, --a unionagainst the French king, of which the Pope was the head, --Henry made hisfirst campaign in France. While Henry was across the Channel, James IV. OfScotland thought to give aid to the French king by invading England. TheScottish army was met by the English force at Flodden, beneath the CheviotHills, and completely overwhelmed (1513). King James was killed, and theflower of the Scottish nobility were left dead upon the field. It was themost terrible disaster that had ever befallen the Scottish nation. Scott'spoem entitled _Marmion, a Tale of Flodden Field_, commemorates thebattle. ] introduce his greatest minister, Thomas Wolsey (1471-1530). Thisman was one of the most remarkable characters of his generation. HenryVIII. Elevated him to the office of Archbishop of York, and made him lordchancellor of the realm. The Pope, courting the minister's influence, madehim a cardinal, and afterwards papal legate in England. He was now at thehead of affairs in both State and Church. His revenues from his manyoffices were enormous, and enabled him to assume a style of livingastonishingly magnificent. His household numbered five hundred persons;and a truly royal train, made up of bishops and nobles, attended him withgreat pomp and parade wherever he went. 

HENRY AS DEFENDER OF THE FAITH. --It was early in the reign of Henry VIII. That Martin Luther tacked upon the door of the Wittenberg church hisepoch-making theses. England was stirred with the rest of WesternChristendom. Henry wrote a Latin treatise replying to the articles of theaudacious monk. The Pope, Leo X. , rewarded Henry's Catholic zeal byconferring upon him the title of "Defender of the Faith" (1521). Thistitle was retained by Henry after the secession of the Church of Englandfrom the Papal See, and is borne by his successors at this day, thoughthey are "defenders" of quite a different faith from that in the defenceof which Henry first earned the title. 

[Illustration: HENRY VIII. OF ENGLAND. (After a painting by Carl Piloty. )]

HENRY SEEKS TO BE DIVORCED FROM CATHERINE. --We have now to relate somecircumstances which changed Henry from a zealous supporter of the Papacyinto its bitterest enemy. 

Henry's marriage with Catherine of Aragon had been prompted by policy andnot by love. Of the five children born of the union, all had died save asickly daughter named Mary. In these successive afflictions which left himwithout a son to succeed him, Henry saw, or feigned to see, a certain signof Heaven's displeasure because he had taken to wife the widow of hisbrother. 

And now a new circumstance arose, --if it had not existed for some timeprevious to this. Henry conceived a violent passion for Anne Boleyn, abeautiful and vivacious maid of honor in the queen's household. This newaffection so quickened the king's conscience, that he soon became fullyconvinced that it was his duty to put Catherine aside. [Footnote:Political considerations, without doubt, had much if not most to do inbringing Henry to this state of mind. He was ready to divorce Catherineand openly break with Spain, because the Emperor Charles V. , to whom hehad offered the hand of the Princess Mary, had married the Infanta ofPortugal, and thus cast aside the English alliance. On this point consultSeebohm, _The Era of the Protestant Revolution_, pp. 178-180. ]

Accordingly, Henry asked the Pope, Clement VII. , to grant him a divorce. The request placed Clement in a very embarrassing position; for if herefused to grant it, he would offend Henry; and if he granted it, he wouldoffend Charles V. , who was Catherine's relative. So Clement in hisbewilderment was led to temporize, to make promises to Henry and thenevade them. At last, after a year's delay, he appointed Cardinal Wolseyand an Italian cardinal named Campeggio as commissioners to hold a sort ofcourt in England to determine the validity of Henry's marriage toCatherine. A year or more dragged along without anything beingaccomplished, and then Clement, influenced by the Emperor Charles, orderedHenry and Catherine both to appear before him at Rome. (Respecting appealsto Rome, see p. 418). 

THE FALL OF WOLSEY. --Henry's patience was now completely exhausted. Becoming persuaded that Wolsey was not exerting himself as he might tosecure the divorce, he banished him from the court. The hatred of AnneBoleyn and of others pursued the fallen minister. He was deposed from allhis offices save the archbishopric, and eventually was arrested on thecharge of high treason. While on his way to London the unhappy minister, broken in spirits and health, was prostrated by a fatal fever. As he laydying, he uttered these words, which have lived so long after him: "Had Iserved my God as diligently as I have served my king, He would not havegiven me over in my gray hairs" (1530). 

THOMAS CROMWELL. --A man of great power and mark now rises to our notice. Upon the disgrace of Wolsey, a faithful attendant of his named ThomasCromwell straightway assumed in Henry's regard the place from which theCardinal had fallen. He was just the opposite of Wolsey in caring nothingfor pomp and parade. For the space of ten years this wonderful man shapedthe policy of Henry's government. What he proposed to himself was theestablishment of a royal despotism upon the ruin of every other power inthe State. The executioner's axe was constantly wet with the blood ofthose who stood in his way, or who in any manner incurred his displeasure. 

It was to the bold suggestions of this man that Henry now listened, whenall other means of gratifying his passion had been tried in vain. Cromwell's advice to the king was to waste no more time in negotiatingwith the Pope, but at once to renounce the jurisdiction of the Romanpontiff, proclaim himself Supreme Head of the Church in England, and thenget a decree of divorce from his own courts. 

THE BREACH WITH ROME. --The advice of Cromwell was acted upon, and by aseries of steps England was swiftly and forever carried out from under theauthority of the Roman See. Henry first virtually cut the Gordian knot bya secret marriage with Anne Boleyn, notwithstanding a papal decreethreatening him with excommunication should he dare to do so. Parliament, which was entirely subservient to Henry's wishes, now passed a law knownas the Statute of Appeals, which made it a crime for any Englishman tocarry a case out of the kingdom to the courts at Rome. Cranmer, aCambridge doctor who had served Henry by writing a book in favor of thedivorce, was, in accordance with the new programme, made archbishop ofCanterbury. He at once formed a court, tried the case, and of coursedeclared the king's marriage with Catherine null and void from the veryfirst, and his union with Anne legal and right. 

THE ACT OF SUPREMACY (1534). --The decisive step had now been taken: theRubicon had been crossed. The Pope issued a decree excommunicating Henryand relieving his subjects from their allegiance. Henry on his part calledParliament, and a celebrated bill known as the Act of Supremacy was passed(1534). This statute made Henry the Supreme Head of the Church in England, vesting in him absolute control over all its offices, and turning into hishands the revenues which had hitherto flowed into the coffers of the RomanSee. A denial of the title given the king by the statute was made hightreason. This statute laid the foundations of the Anglican Church. 

HENRY AS SUPREME HEAD OF THE CHURCH. --Henry now set up in England a littlePopedom of his own. He drew up a sort of creed which everybody mustbelieve, or at least pretend to believe. The doctrines of purgatory, ofindulgences, of masses for the dead, of pilgrimages, of the adoration ofimages and relics, were condemned; but the doctrines of transubstantiationand of confession to a priest were retained. Every head of a family andevery teacher was commanded to teach his children or pupils the Lord'sPrayer, the Ten Commandments, and the new Creed. 

Thus was the English Church cared for by its self-appointed shepherd. Whatit should be called under Henry it would be hard to say. It was notProtestant; and it was just as far from being Catholic. 

THE SUPPRESSION OF THE MONASTERIES. --The suppression of the monasterieswas one of Henry's most high-handed measures. Several things led him toresolve on the extinction of these religious houses. For one thing, hecoveted their wealth, which at this time included probably one-fifth ofthe lands of the realm. Then the monastic orders were openly or secretlyopposed to Henry's claims of supremacy in religious matters; and thisnaturally caused him to regard them with jealousy and disfavor. Hencetheir ruin was planned. 

In order to make the act appear as reasonable as possible, it was plannedto make the charge of immorality the ostensible ground of theirsuppression. Accordingly two royal commissioners were appointed to inspectthe monasteries, and make a report upon what they might see and learn. Ifwe may believe the report, the smaller houses were conducted in a mostshameful manner. The larger houses, however, were fairly free from faults. Many of them served as schools, hospitals, and inns, and all distributedalms to the poor who knocked at their gates. But the undoubted usefulnessand irreproachable character of the larger foundations did not avail toavert the indiscriminate ruin of all. A bill was passed which at oncedissolved between three and four hundred of the smaller monasteries, andgave all their property to the king (1536). 

The unscrupulous act stirred up a rebellion in the north of England, knownas the "Pilgrimage of Grace. " This was suppressed with great severity, andsoon afterwards the larger monasteries were also dissolved, theirpossessors generally surrendering the property voluntarily into the handsof the king, lest a worse thing than the loss of their houses and landsshould come upon them. [Footnote: Altogether there were 90 colleges, 110hospitals, 2374 chantries and chapels, and 645 monasteries broken up. SuchRoman Catholic church property as was spared at this time, was confiscatedduring the reign of Edward VI. , and a portion of it used to establishschools and hospitals. ] Pensions were granted to the dispossessed monks, which relieved in part the suffering caused by the proceeding. 

A portion of the confiscated wealth of the houses was used in foundingschools and colleges, and a part for the establishment of bishoprics; butby far the greater portion was distributed among the adherents andfavorites of the king. The leading houses of the English aristocracy ofto-day, may, according to Hallam, trace the title of their estates back tothese confiscated lands of the religious houses. Thus a new nobility wasraised up whose interests led them to oppose any return to Rome; for insuch an event their estates were liable of course to be restored to themonasteries. 

PERSECUTION OF CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. --Our disapproval of Henry'sunscrupulous conduct in compassing the ruin of the religious houses flamesinto hot indignation when we come to speak of his atrocious crimes againstthe lives and consciences of his subjects. The royal reformer persecutedalike Catholics and Protestants. Thus, on one occasion, three Catholicswho denied that the king was the rightful Head of the Church, and threeProtestants who disputed the doctrine of the real presence in thesacrament (a dogma which Henry had retained in his creed), were dragged onthe same sled to the place of execution. 

The most illustrious of the king's victims were the learned Sir ThomasMore and the aged Bishop Fisher, both of whom were brought to the blockbecause their consciences would not allow them to acknowledge that theking was rightfully the Supreme Head of the Church of England. 

HENRY'S WIVES. --Henry's troubles with his wives form a curious andshameful page in the history of England's kings. Anne Boleyn retained theaffections of her royal husband only a short time. She was charged withunfaithfulness and beheaded, leaving a daughter who became the famousQueen Elizabeth. The day after the execution of Anne the king married JaneSeymour, who died the following year. She left a son by the name ofEdward, The fourth marriage of the king was to Anne of Cleves, who enjoyedher queenly honors only a few months. The king becoming enamoured of ayoung lady named Catherine Howard, Anne was divorced on the charge of aprevious betrothal, and a new alliance formed. But Catherine was provedguilty of misconduct and her head fell upon the block. The sixth and lastwife of this amatory monarch was Catherine Parr. She was a discreet woman, and managed to outlive her husband. 

HIS DEATH AND THE SUCCESSION. --Henry died in 1547. His many marriages anddivorces had so complicated the question of the succession, thatParliament, to avoid disputes after Henry's death, had given him power, with some restrictions, to settle the matter by will. This he did, directing that the crown should descend to his son Edward and his heirs;in case Edward died childless, it was to go to Mary and her heirs, andthen to Elizabeth and her heirs. 

LITERATURE UNDER HENRY VIII. : MORE'S UTOPIA. --The most prominent literaryfigure of this period is Sir Thomas More. The work upon which his fame asa writer mainly rests is his _Utopia_, or "Nowhere, " a political romancelike Plato's _Republic_ or Sir Philip Sidney's _Arcadia_. It pictures animaginary kingdom away on an island beneath the equinoctial in the NewWorld, then just discovered, where the laws, manners, and customs of thepeople were represented as being ideally perfect. In this wise way Moresuggested improvements in social, political, and religious matters: for itwas the wretchedness, the ignorance, the social tyranny, the religiousintolerance, the despotic government of the times which inspired the_Utopia_. More did not expect, however, that Henry would follow all hissuggestions, for he closes his account of the Utopians with thisadmission: "I confess that many things in the commonwealth of Utopia Irather _wish_ than _hope_ to see adopted in our own. " And, indeed, Morehimself, before his death, materially changed his views regardingreligious persecution. Although in his book he had expressed his decideddisapproval of persecution for conscience' sake, yet he afterwards, driveninto reaction by the terrible excesses of the Peasants' War in Germany, and by other popular tumults which seemed to be the outgrowth of theProtestant movement, favored persecution, and advised that unity of faithbe preserved by the use of force. 

4. CHANGES IN THE CREED AND RITUAL UNDER EDWARD VI. (1547-1553). 

CHANGES IN THE CREED. --In accordance with the provisions of Henry's will, his only son Edward, by Jane Seymour, succeeded him. As Edward was but achild of nine years, the government was entrusted to a board of regentsmade up of both Protestants and Catholics. But the Protestants usurpedauthority in the body, and conducted the government in the interests oftheir party. The young king was carefully taught the doctrines of thereformers, and changes were made in the creed and service of the EnglishChurch which carried it still farther away from the Roman Catholic Church. By a royal decree all pictures, images, and crosses were cleared from thechurches; the use of tapers, holy water, and incense were forbidden; theworship of the Virgin and the invocation of saints was prohibited; beliefin purgatory was denounced as a superstition, and prayers for the deadwere interdicted; the real or bodily presence of Christ in the bread andwine of the sacrament was denied; the prohibition against the marriage ofthe clergy was annulled (a measure which pleased the clergy and reconciledthem to the other sweeping innovations); and the services of the Church, which had hitherto been conducted in Latin, were ordered to be said in thelanguage of the people. 

In order that the provision last mentioned might be effectually carriedout, the English Book of Common Prayer was prepared by Archbishop Cranmer, and the first copy issued in 1549. This book, which was in the main simplya translation of the old Latin service-books, with the subsequent changeof a word here and a passage there to keep it in accord with the growingnew doctrines, is the same that is used in the Anglican Church at thepresent time. 

In 1552 were published the well-known Forty-two Articles of Religion, which formed a compendious creed of the reformed faith. These Articles, reduced finally to thirty-nine, form the present standard of faith anddoctrine in the Church of England. 

PERSECUTIONS TO SECURE UNIFORMITY. --These sweeping changes in the oldcreed and in the services of the Church would have worked little hardshipor wrong had only everybody, as in More's happy republic, been left freeto follow what religion he would. But unfortunately it was only away in"Nowhere" that men were allowed perfect freedom of conscience and worship. By royal edict all preachers and teachers were forced to sign the Forty-two Articles; and severe enactments, known as "Acts for the Uniformity ofService, " punished with severe penalties any departure from the forms ofthe new prayer-book. The Princess Mary, who remained a firm andconscientious adherent of the old faith, was not allowed to have the RomanCatholic service in her own private chapel. Even the powerful intercessionof the Emperor Charles V. Availed nothing. What was considered idolatry inhigh places could not be tolerated. 

Many persons during the reign were imprisoned for refusing to conform tothe new worship; while two at least were given to the flames as "hereticsand contemners of the Book of Common Prayer. " Probably a large majority ofthe English people were still at this time good Catholics at heart. 

5. REACTION UNDER MARY (1553-1558). 

RECONCILIATION WITH ROME. --Upon the death of Edward, an attempt was made, in the interest of the Protestant party, to place upon the throne LadyJane Grey, [Footnote: The leaders of this movement were executed, and LadyJane Grey was also eventually brought to the block. ] a grand-niece ofHenry VIII. ; but the people, knowing that Mary was the rightful heir tothe throne, rallied about her, and she was proclaimed queen amidst greatdemonstrations of loyalty. Soon after her accession, she was married toPhilip II. Of Spain. 

[Illustration: MARY TUDOR. ]

Mary was an earnest Catholic, and her zeal effected the fullreestablishment of the Catholic worship throughout the realm. Parliamentvoted that the nation should return to its obedience to the Papal See; andthen the members of both houses fell upon their knees to receive at thehands of the legate of the Pope absolution from the sin of heresy andschism. The sincerity of their repentance was attested by their repeal ofall the acts of Henry and of Edward by which the new worship had been setup in the land. The joy at Rome was unbounded. 

But not quite everything done by the reformers was undone. Parliamentrefused to restore the confiscated Church lands, which was very natural, as much of this property was now in the hands of the lords and commoners(see p. 548). Mary, however, in her zeal for the ancient faith, restored agreat part of the property still in the possession of the crown, andrefounded many of the ruined monasteries and abbeys. 

PERSECUTION OF THE PROTESTANTS. --With the reestablishment of the Romanworship, the Protestants in their turn became the victims of persecution. The three most eminent martyrs of what is known as the Marian persecutionswere Latimer, Ridley, and Cranmer. Altogether, between two and threehundred persons suffered death, during this reign, on account of theirreligion. 

For the part she took in the persecutions that marked her reign, Maryshould be judged not by the standard of our time, but by that of her own. Punishment of heresy was then regarded, by both Catholics and Protestantsalike, as a duty which could be neglected by those in authority only atthe peril of Heaven's displeasure. Believing this, those of that age couldconsistently do nothing less than labor to exterminate heresy with axe, sword, and fagot. 

THE LOSS OF CALAIS. --The marriage of Philip and Mary had been earnestlywished for by the Emperor Charles V. , in order that Philip, in those warswith France which he well knew must be a part of the bequest which heshould make to his son, might have the powerful aid of England. This wasPhilip's chief reason in seeking the alliance; and in due time he calledupon Mary for assistance against the French king. The result of England'sparticipation in the war was her mortifying loss of Calais (see p. 487), which the French, by an unexpected attack, snatched out of the hands ofits garrison (1558). The unfortunate queen did not live out the year thatmarked this calamity, which she most deeply deplored. 

6. FINAL ESTABLISHMENT OF PROTESTANTISM UNDER ELIZABETH (1558-1603). 

THE QUEEN. --Elizabeth was the daughter of Henry VIII. And Anne Boleyn. Sheseems to have inherited the characteristics of both parents; hence theinconsistencies of her disposition. 

[Illustration: ENTRANCE OF QUEEN ELIZABETH INTO LONDON. (Showing thecostumes of the time. )]

When the death of Mary called Elizabeth to the throne, she was twenty-fiveyears of age. Like her father, she favored the reformed faith rather frompolicy than conviction. It was to the Protestants alone that she couldlook for support; her title to the crown was denied by every true Catholicin the realm, for she was the child of that marriage which the Pope hadforbidden under pain of the anathemas of the Church. 

Elizabeth possessed a strong will, indomitable courage, admirablejudgment, and great political tact. It was these qualities which renderedher reign the strongest and most illustrious in the record of England'ssovereigns, and raised the nation from a position of insignificance to aforemost place among the states of Europe. 

Along with her good and queenly qualities and accomplishments, Elizabethhad many unamiable traits and unwomanly ways. She was capricious, treacherous, unscrupulous, ungrateful, and cruel. She seemed almost whollydevoid of a moral or religious sense. Deception and falsehood were herusual weapons in diplomacy. "In the profusion and recklessness of herlies, " declares Green, "Elizabeth stood without a peer in Christendom. "

HER MINISTERS. --One secret of the strength and popularity of Elizabeth'sgovernment was the admirable judgment she exercised in her choice ofadvisers. Around her Council-board she gathered the wisest and strongestmen to be found in the realm. The most eminent of the queen's ministerswas Sir William Cecil (Lord Burleigh), a man of great sagacity andceaseless industry, to whose able counsel and prudent management islargely due the success of Elizabeth's reign. He stood at the head of theQueen's Council for forty years. His son Robert, Sir Nicholas Bacon, andSir Francis Walsingham were also prominent among the queen's advisers. 

REESTABLISHMENT OF THE REFORMED CHURCH. --As Mary undid the work inreligion of Henry and Edward, so now her work is undone by Elizabeth. Thereligious houses that had been reestablished by Mary were again dissolved, and Parliament, by two new Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity, relaid thefoundations of the Anglican Church. 

The Act of Supremacy required all the clergy, and every person holdingoffice under the crown, to take an oath declaring the queen to be thesupreme governor of the realm in all spiritual as well as temporal things, and renouncing the authority or jurisdiction of any foreign prince orprelate. For refusing to take this oath, many Catholics during Elizabeth'sreign suffered death, and many more endured within the Tower the worsehorrors of the rack. 

The Act of Uniformity forbade any clergyman to use any but the Anglicanliturgy, and required every person to attend the Established Church onSunday and other holy days. For every absence a fine of one shilling wasimposed. The persecutions which arose under this law caused many Catholicsto seek freedom of worship in other countries. 

THE PROTESTANT NON-CONFORMISTS. --The Catholics were not the only personsamong Elizabeth's subjects who were opposed to the Anglican worship. Therewere Protestant non-conformists--the Puritans and the Separatists--whotroubled her almost as much as the Romanists. 

The Puritans were so named because they desired a _purer_ form ofworship than the Anglican. To these earnest reformers the Church Elizabethhad established seemed but half-reformed. Many rites and ceremonies, suchas wearing the surplice and making the cross in baptism, had beenretained; and these things, in their eyes, appeared mere Popishsuperstitions. What they wanted was a more sweeping change, a form ofworship more like that of the Calvinistic churches of Geneva, in whichcity very many of them had lived as exiles during the Marian persecution. They, however, did not at once withdraw from the Established Church, butremaining within its pale, labored to reform it, and to shape itsdoctrines and discipline to their notions. 

The Separatists were still more zealous reformers than the Puritans: intheir hatred of everything that bore any resemblance to the Roman worship, they flung away the surplice and the Prayer-book, severed all connectionwith the Established Church, and refused to have anything to do with it. Under the Act of Conformity they were persecuted with great severity, sothat multitudes were led to seek an asylum upon the continent. It was fromamong these exiles gathered in Holland that a little later came thepassengers of the Mayflower, --the Pilgrim Fathers, who laid thefoundations of civil liberty in the New World. 

MARY STUART, QUEEN OF SCOTS. --A large part of the history of Elizabeth'sreign is intertwined with the story of her cousin, Mary Stuart, Queen ofScots. Mary Stuart was the daughter of James V. Of Scotland, and to her_in right of birth_--according to all Catholics who denied the validity ofHenry's marriage with Anne Boleyn--belonged the English crown next, afterMary Tudor. Upon the death, in 1560, of her husband Francis II. Of France, Mary gave up life at the French court, and returned to her native land. She was now in her nineteenth year. The subtle charm of her beauty seemsto have bewitched all who came into her presence--save the more zealous ofthe Protestants, who could never forget that their young sovereign was aCatholic. The stern old reformer, John Knox, made her life miserable. Hewas a veritable Elijah, in whose eyes Mary appeared a modern Jezebel. Hecalled her a "Moabite, " and the "Harlot of Babylon, " till she wept fromsheer vexation. She dared not punish the impudent preacher, for she knewtoo well the strength of the Protestant feeling among her subjects. 

Other things now conspired with Mary's hated religion to alienate entirelythe love of her people. Her second husband, Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, was murdered. The queen was suspected of having some guilty knowledge ofthe affair. She was imprisoned and forced to abdicate in favor of herinfant son James. 

Escaping from prison, Mary fled into England (1568). Here she threwherself upon the generosity of her cousin Elizabeth, and entreated aid inrecovering her throne. But the part which she was generally believed tohave had in the murder of her husband, her disturbing claims to theEnglish throne, and the fact that she was a Catholic, all conspired todetermine her fate. She was placed in confinement, and for nineteen yearsshe remained a prisoner. During all this time Mary was the centre ofinnumerable plots and conspiracies on the part of the Catholics, whichaimed at setting her upon the English throne. The Pope aided theseconspirators by a bull excommunicating Elizabeth, denying her right to thecrown she wore, and releasing her subjects from their allegiance. 

Events just now occurring on the continent tended to inflame theProtestants of England with a deadly hatred against Mary and her Catholicfriends and abettors. In 1572 the Huguenots of France were slaughtered onSt. Bartholomew's Day. In 1584 the Prince of Orange fell at the hands of ahired assassin. That there were daggers waiting to take the life ofElizabeth was well known. It was evident that so long as Mary lived thequeen's life was in constant danger. In the feverish state of the publicmind, it was natural that the air should be filled with rumors of plots ofevery kind. Finally, a carefully laid conspiracy to assassinate Elizabethand place Mary on the throne, was unearthed. Mary was tried for complicityin the plot, was declared guilty, and, after some hesitation, feigned orotherwise, on the part of Elizabeth, was ordered to the block (1587). 

THE INVINCIBLE ARMADA. --The execution of Mary Stuart led immediately tothe memorable attempt against England by the Spanish Armada. Before herdeath the Queen of Scots had bequeathed to Philip II. Of Spain her claimsto the English crown. To enforce these rights, to avenge the death ofMary, to punish Elizabeth for rendering aid to his rebellious subjects inthe Netherlands, and to deal a fatal blow to the Reformation in Europe bycrushing the Protestants of England, Philip resolved upon making atremendous effort for the conquest of the heretical and troublesomeisland. Vast preparations were made for carrying out the project. Greatfleets were gathered in the harbors of Spain, and a large army wasassembled in the Netherlands to cooperate with the naval armament. ThePope, Sixtus V. , blessed the enterprise, which was thus rendered a sort ofcrusade. 

These threatening preparations produced a perfect fever of excitement inEngland; for we must bear in mind that the Spanish king was at this timethe most powerful potentate in Europe, commanding the resources of a largepart of two worlds. Never did Roman citizens rise more splendidly to avertsome terrible peril threatening the republic than the English people nowarose as a single man to defend their island-realm against the revengefuland ambitious project of Spain. The imminent danger served to unite allclasses, the gentry and the yeomanry, Protestants and Catholics. Thelatter might intrigue to set a Mary Stuart on the English throne, but theywere not ready to betray their land into the hands of the hated Spaniards. 

[Illustration: SPANISH AND ENGLISH WAR-VESSELS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. ]

July 19, 1588, the Invincible Armada, as it was boastfully called, wasfirst descried by the watchmen on the English cliffs. It swept up thechannel in the form of a great crescent, seven miles in width from tip totip of horn. The English fleet, commanded by Drake, Howard, and Lord HenrySeymour, disputed its advance. The light build and quick movements of theEnglish ships gave them a great advantage over the clumsy, unwieldySpanish galleons. The result was the complete defeat of the immenseArmada, and the destruction of many of the ships. The remaining galleonssought to escape by sailing northward around the British Isles; but--aterrible tempest arising, many of the fleeing ships were dashed to pieceson the Scottish or the Irish shores. Barely one-third of the ships of theArmada ever reentered the harbors whence they sailed. When intelligence ofthe woeful disaster was carried to Philip, he simply said, "God's will bedone; I sent my fleet to fight with the English, not with the elements. "

The destruction of the Invincible Armada was not only a terrible blow toSpanish pride, but an equally heavy blow to Spanish supremacy among thestates of Europe. From this time on, Spain's prestige and power rapidlydeclined. 

As to England, she had been delivered from a great peril; and as to thecause of Protestantism, it was now safe. 

MARITIME AND COLONIAL ENTERPRISES. --The crippling of the naval power ofSpain left England mistress of the seas. The little island-realm nowentered upon the most splendid period of her history. The old Norse bloodof her people, stirred by recent events, seemed to burn with a feverishimpatience for maritime adventure and glory. Many a story of the daringexploits of English sea-rovers during the reign of Elizabeth seems like arepetition of some tale of the old Vikings. [Footnote: Among all thesesea-rovers, half explorer, half pirate, Sir Francis Drake (1545-1595) waspreeminent. Before the Armada days he had sailed around the globe (1577-1579), and for the achievement had been knighted by Queen Elizabeth. Thewhole life of this sixteenth century Viking was spent in fighting thefleets of his sovereign's enemy, Philip II. , in capturing Spanishtreasure-vessels on the high sea, and in pillaging the warehouses andsettlements on every Spanish shore in the Old and the New World. ]

Especially deserving of mention among the enterprises of these stirringand romantic times are the undertakings of Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618). Several expeditions were sent out by him for the purpose of makingexplorations and forming settlements in the New World. One of these, whichexplored the central coasts of North America, returned with such glowingaccounts of the beauty and richness of the land visited, that, in honor ofthe Virgin Queen, it was named "Virginia. "

Sir Walter Raleigh sent two colonies to the new land, but they both failedto form permanent settlements. It is said that the returning colonistsfirst acquainted the English with the Indian custom of smoking tobacco, and that Sir Walter Raleigh made the practice popular. This may be true;yet prior to this, Europeans had acquired a knowledge of the plant andsome of its uses through Spanish explorers and settlers. At this same timealso, the potato, likewise a native product of the New World, wasintroduced into the British Isles. 

THE QUEEN'S DEATH. --The closing days of Elizabeth's reign were, to herpersonally, dark and gloomy. She seemed to be burdened with a secretgrief, [Footnote: In 1601 she sent to the block her chief favorite, theEarl of Essex, who had been found guilty of treason. She wished to sparehim, and probably would have done so, had a token which he sent her fromhis prison reached her. Read the story as told in all the histories ofEngland. ] as well as by the growing infirmities of age. She died March 24, 1603, in the seventieth year of her age, and the forty-fifth of her reign. With her ended the Tudor line of English sovereigns. 

_Literature of the Elizabethan Era. _

INFLUENCES FAVORABLE TO LITERATURE. --The years covered by the reign ofElizabeth constitute the most momentous period in history. It was the agewhen Europe was most deeply stirred by the Reformation. It was, too, aperiod of marvellous physical and intellectual expansion and growth. Thediscoveries of Columbus and Copernicus had created, as Froude affirms, "not in any metaphor, but in plain and literal speech, a new heaven and anew earth. " The New Learning had, at the same time, discovered the oldworld--had revealed an unsuspected treasure in the philosophies andliteratures of the past. 

No people of Europe felt more deeply the stir and movement of the times, nor helped more to create this same stir and movement, than the Englishnation. There seemed to be nothing too great or arduous for them toundertake. They made good their resistance to the Roman See; they humbledthe pride of the strongest monarch in Christendom; they sailed round theglobe, and penetrated all its seas. 

An age of such activity and achievement almost of necessity gives birth toa strong and vigorous literature. And thus is explained, in part at least, how the English people during this period should have developed aliterature of such originality and richness and strength as to make it theprized inheritance of all the world. 

THE WRITERS. --To make special mention of all the great writers who adornedthe Elizabethan era would carry us quite beyond the limits of our book. Having said something of the influences under which they wrote, we willsimply add that this age was the age of Shakespeare and Spenser and Bacon. [Footnote: William Shakespeare (1564-1616); Edmund Spenser (1552?-1599);Francis Bacon (1561-1626). Shakespeare and Bacon, it will be noticed, outlived Elizabeth. Two other names hold a less prominent place, --that ofSir Philip Sidney (1554-1586), the courtly knight, who wrote the_Arcadia_, a sort of pastoral romance, and _A Defence of Poesy_, a workintended to counteract the Puritanical spirit then rising; and that ofRichard Hooker (1553-1600), who in his _Ecclesiastical Polity_ defends theAnglican Church. ]

[Illustration: REDUCED FAC-SIMILE OF THE SIGNATURE OF QUEEN ELIZABETH]

CHAPTER LI. 

THE REVOLT OF THE NETHERLANDS: RISE OF THE DUTCH REPUBLIC. (1572-1609. )

THE COUNTRY. --The term Netherlands (low-lands) was formerly applied to allthat low, marshy district in the northwest of Europe, sunk much of itbelow the level of the sea, now occupied by the kingdoms of Holland andBelgium. The entire strip of land is simply the delta accumulations of theRhine and other rivers emptying into the North Sea. Originally it wasoften overflowed by its streams and inundated by the ocean. But thisunpromising morass, protected at last by heavy dykes against the invasionsof the ocean and the overflow of its streams, was destined to become thesite of cities which at one period were the richest and most potent ofEurope, and the seat of one of the foremost commonwealths of modern times. 

No country in Europe made greater progress in civilization during themediæval era than the Netherlands. At the opening of the sixteenth centurythey contained a crowded and busy population of 3, 000, 000 souls. Theancient marshes had been transformed into carefully kept gardens andorchards. The walled cities alone numbered between two and three hundred. 

THE LOW COUNTRIES UNDER CHARLES V. (1515-1555). --The Netherlands were partof those possessions over which Charles V. Ruled by hereditary right. Though Charles could not prevent the growth of Protestantism in Germany, he resolved to root out the heresy from his hereditary possessions of theNetherlands. By an Imperial edict he condemned to death all personspresuming to read the Scriptures, or even to discuss religious topics. TheInquisition was introduced, and thousands perished at the stake and uponthe scaffold, or were strangled, or buried alive. But when Charles retiredto the monastery at Yuste (see p. 534), the reformed doctrines were, notwithstanding all his efforts, far more widely spread and deeply rootedin the Netherlands than when he entered upon their extirpation by fire andsword. 

ACCESSION OF PHILIP II. --In 1555, in the presence of an august andprincely assembly at Brussels, and amidst the most imposing and dramaticceremonies, Charles V. Abdicated the crown whose weight he could no longerbear, and placed the same upon the head of his son Philip (see p. 534), who was a most zealous Catholic. Philip remained in the Netherlands afterhis coronation four years, employing much of his time in devising means toroot out the heresy of Protestantism. In 1559 he set sail for Spain, neverto return. 

LONG LIVE THE BEGGARS. --Upon his departure from the Netherlands Philipentrusted their government to his half-sister, Margaret, Duchess of Parma, as Regent. Under the administration of Margaret (1559-1567) thepersecution of the Protestants went on with renewed bitterness. Philipdeclared that "he would rather lose a hundred thousand lives, were theyall his own, than allow the smallest deviation from the standards of theRoman Catholic Church. " Thousands fled the country, many of the fugitivesfinding a home in England. At last the nobles leagued together for thepurpose of resisting the Inquisition. They demanded of the Regent aredress of grievances. When the petition was presented to the Duchess, shedisplayed great agitation, whereupon one of her councillors exclaimed, "Madam, are you afraid of a pack of beggars?"

The expression was carried to the nobles, who were assembled at a banquet. Immediately one of their number suspended a beggar's wallet from his neck, and filling a wooden bowl with wine, proposed the toast, "Long live theBeggars. " The name was tumultuously adopted, and became the partydesignation of the patriot Netherlanders during their long struggle withthe Spanish power. 

THE ICONOCLASTS (1566). --Affairs now rapidly verged towards violence andopen revolt. The only reply of the government to the petition of thenobles was a decree termed the _Moderation_, which substituted hanging forburning in the case of condemned heretics. The pent-up indignation of thepeople at length burst forth in an uncontrollable fury. They gathered ingreat mobs, and arming themselves with whatever implements they couldfirst seize, proceeded to demolish every image they could find in thechurches throughout the country. The rage of the insurgents was turned inthis direction, because in their eyes these churches represented the hatedInquisition under which they were suffering. Scarcely a church in all theNetherlands escaped. The monasteries, too, were sacked, their librariesburned, and the inmates driven from their cloisters. In the province ofFlanders alone there were four hundred sacred buildings visited by themob, and sacked. The tempest destroyed innumerable art treasures, whichhave been as sincerely mourned by the lovers of the beautiful as theburned rolls of the Alexandrian Library have been lamented by the loversof learning. 

These image-breaking riots threw Philip into a perfect transport of rage. He tore his beard, and exclaimed, "It shall cost them dear! I swear it bythe soul of my father!"

THE DUKE OF ALVA AND WILLIAM OF ORANGE. --The year following the outbreakof the Iconoclasts, Philip sent to the Netherlands a veteran Spanish army, headed by the Duke of Alva. The duke was one of the ablest generals of theage; and the intelligence of his coming threw the provinces into a stateof the greatest agitation and alarm. Those who could do so hastened to getout of the country. William the Silent, Prince of Orange, fled to Germany, where he began to gather an army of volunteers for the struggle which henow saw to be inevitable. Egmont and Horn, noblemen of high rank and greatdistinction, were seized, cast into prison, and afterwards beheaded(1568). 

The eyes of all Netherlanders were now turned to the Prince of Orange astheir only deliverer. Towards the close of the year 1568, he marched fromGermany against Alva, at the head of an army of 30, 000 men, which he hadraised and equipped principally at his own expense. The war was now fullyjoined. The struggle lasted for more than a generation, --for thirty-sevenyears. 

[Illustration: WILLIAM OF ORANGE (the Silent). (After a copper-plate byWilliam Jacobz Delff, 1580-1638. )]

The Spanish armies were commanded successively by the most experienced anddistinguished generals of Europe, --the Duke of Alva, Don John of Austria(the conqueror of the Moors and the hero of the great naval fight ofLepanto), and the Duke of Parma; but the Prince of Orange coped ably withthem all, and in the masterly service which he rendered his country, thusterribly assaulted, earned the title of "the Founder of Dutch Liberties. "

ISOLATION OF THE PROVINCES. --The Netherlanders sustained the unequalcontest almost single-handed; for, though they found much sympathy amongthe Protestants of Germany, France, and England, they never receivedmaterial assistance from any of these countries, excepting England, and itwas not until late in the struggle that aid came from this source. Elizabeth did, indeed, at first furnish the patriots with secret aid, andopened the ports of England to the "Beggars of the Sea"; but after a timethe fear of involving herself in a war with Philip led her to withhold fora long period all contributions and favors. As regards the German states, they were too much divided among themselves to render efficient aid; andjust at the moment when the growing Protestant sentiment in Franceencouraged the Netherlanders to look for help from the Huguenot partythere, the massacre of St. Bartholomew extinguished forever all hope ofsuccor from that quarter (see p. 576). So the little revolted provinceswere left to carry on unaided, as best they might, a contest with the mostpowerful monarch of Christendom. 

The details of this memorable struggle we must, of course, leaveunnoticed, and hurry on to the issue of the matter. In so doing we shallpass unnoticed many memorable sieges and battles. [Footnote: Read inMotley's _Rise of the Dutch Republic_ the siege and sack of Harlemand the relief of Leyden. ]

PACIFICATION OF GHENT (1576). --The year 1576 was marked by a revolt of theSpanish soldiers, on account of their not receiving their pay, the costlywar having drained Philip's treasury. The mutinous army marched throughthe land, pillaging city after city, and paying themselves with thespoils. The beautiful city of Antwerp was ruined. The horrible massacre ofits inhabitants, and the fiendish atrocities committed by the frenziedsoldiers, caused the awful outbreak to be called the "Spanish Fury. "

The terrible state of affairs led to an alliance between Holland andZealand and the other fifteen provinces of the Netherlands, known inhistory as the Pacification of Ghent (1576). The resistance to the Spanishcrown had thus far been carried on without concerted action among theseveral states, the Prince of Orange having hitherto found it impossibleto bring the different provinces to agree to any plan of general defence. But the awful experiences of the Spanish Fury taught the necessity ofunion, and led all the seventeen provinces solemnly to agree to unite indriving the Spaniards from the Netherlands, and in securing full libertyfor all in matters of faith and worship. William of Orange, with the titleof Stadtholder, was placed at the head of the union. It was mainly thestrong Catholic sentiment in the Southern provinces that had preventedsuch a union and pacification long before. 

THE UNION OF UTRECHT (1579). --With the Spanish forces under the lead firstof Don John of Austria, the hero-victor of Lepanto, and afterwards ofPrince Alexander of Parma, a commander of most distinguished ability, thewar now went on with increased vigor, fortune, with many vacillations, inclining to the side of the Spaniards. Disaffection arose among theNetherlanders, the outcome of which was the separation, of the provinces. The Prince of Orange, seeing the impossibility of uniting all the states, devoted his efforts to effecting a confederation of the Northern ones. Hisendeavors were fortunately crowned with success, and the seven Protestantstates of the North, [Footnote: The ten Catholic provinces of the South, although they continued their contest with Philip a little longer, ultimately submitted to Spanish tyranny. A portion of these provinces wereabsorbed by France, while the remainder, after varied fortunes amidst therevolutions and dynastic changes of the European states, finally becamethe present kingdom of Belgium] the chief of which were Holland andZealand, by the treaty of Utrecht (1579), were united in a permanentconfederation, known as the Seven United Provinces of the Netherlands. Inthis league was laid the foundation of the Dutch Republic. 

Fortunate would it have been for the Netherlands, could all of the statesat this time have been brought to act in concert. Under the leadership ofthe Prince of Orange, the seventeen provinces might have been consolidatedinto a powerful nation, that might now be reckoned among the great powersof Europe. 

THE "BAN" AND THE "APOLOGY. "--William of Orange was, of course, theanimating spirit of the confederacy formed by the treaty of Utrecht. Inthe eyes of Philip and his viceroys he appeared the sole obstacle in theway of the pacification of the provinces and their return to civil andecclesiastical obedience. In vain had Philip sent against him the ablestand most distinguished commanders of the age; in vain had he endeavored todetach him from the cause of his country by magnificent bribes of titles, offices, and fortune. 

Philip now resolved to employ assassination for the removal of theinvincible general and the incorruptible patriot. He published a banagainst the prince, declaring him an outlaw, and offering to any one whoshould kill him the pardon of all his sins, a title of nobility, and25, 000 gold crowns. 

The prince responded to the infamous edict in a remarkable paper, entitled"The Apology of the Prince of Orange, "--the most terrible arraignment oftyranny that was ever penned. The "Apology" was scattered throughoutEurope, and everywhere produced a profound impression. The friends of theprince, while admiring his boldness, were filled with alarm for hissafety. Their apprehensions, as the issue shows, were not unfounded. 

ASSASSINATION OF THE PRINCE OF ORANGE. --"The ban soon bore fruit. " Uponthe 10th day of July, 1584, five previous unsuccessful attempts havingbeen made upon his life, the Prince of Orange was fatally shot by anassassin. The heirs of the murderer received substantially the rewardwhich had been offered in the ban, being enriched with the estates of theprince, and honored by elevation to the ranks of the Spanish nobility. 

The character of William the Silent is one of the most admirable portrayedin all history. [Footnote: He was not, however, without faults. The mostserious of these was his habit of dissimulation. Some charge to this theseparation of the Northern and Southern provinces after the Pacificationof Ghent. The Southern provinces would not trust the "double-dealer. " Forreferences to various writers on this point, consult Young's _History ofthe Netherlands_, p, 320. ] His steadfast and unselfish devotion to thecause of his country deservedly won for him the love of all classes. Hispeople fondly called him "Father William. "

PRINCE MAURICE: SIR PHILIP SIDNEY. --Severe as was the blow sustained bythe Dutch patriots in the death of the Prince of Orange, they did not loseheart, but continued the struggle with the most admirable courage andsteadfastness. Prince Maurice, a youth of seventeen years, the second sonof William, was chosen Stadtholder in his place, and proved himself aworthy son of the great chief and patriot. The war now proceeded withunabated fury. The Southern provinces were, for the most part, in thehands of the Spaniards, while the revolutionists held control, in themain, of the Northern states. 

Substantial aid from the English now came to the struggling Hollanders. Queen Elizabeth, alarmed by the murder of the Prince of Orange, --for shewell knew that hired agents of the king of Spain watched likewise for herlife, --openly espoused the cause of the Dutch. Among the English knightswho led the British forces sent into the Netherlands was the gallant SirPhilip Sidney, the "Flower of Chivalry. " At the siege of Zutphen (1586), he received a mortal wound. A little incident that occurred as he rodefrom the field, suffering from his terrible hurt, is always told as amemorial of the gentle knight. A cup of water having been brought him, hewas about to lift it to his lips, when his hand was arrested by thelonging glance of a wounded soldier who chanced at that moment to becarried past. "Give it to him, " said the fainting knight; "his necessityis greater than mine. "

PROGRESS OF THE WAR: TREATY OF 1609. --The circle of war grew more and moreextended. France as well as England became involved, both fighting againstPhilip, who was now laying claims to the crowns of both these countries. The struggle was maintained on land and on sea, in the Old World and inthe New. The English fleet, under the noted Sir Francis Drake (see p. 560, n. ), ravaged the Spanish settlements in Florida and the West Indies, andintercepted the treasure-ships of Philip returning from the mines ofMexico and Peru; the Dutch fleet wrested from Spain many of herpossessions in the East Indies and among the islands of the South Pacific. 

Europe at last grew weary of the seemingly interminable struggle, and theSpanish commanders becoming convinced that it was impossible to reduce theDutch rebels to obedience by force of arms, negotiations were enteredinto, and by the celebrated treaty of 1609, comparative peace was securedto Christendom. 

The treaty of 1609 was in reality an acknowledgment by Spain of theindependence of the United Provinces of the Netherlands, although theSpanish king was so unwilling to admit the fact of his being unable toreduce the rebel states to submission, that the treaty was termed simply"a truce for twelve years. " Spain did not formally acknowledge theirindependence until forty years afterwards, in the Peace of Westphalia, atthe end of the Thirty Years' War (1648) (see p. 586). 

DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROVINCES DURING THE WAR. --One of the most remarkablefeatures of the war for Dutch independence was the vast expansion of thetrade and commerce of the revolted provinces, and their astonishing growthin population, wealth, and resources, while carrying on the bitter andprotracted struggle. When the contest ended, notwithstanding the waste ofwar, the number of inhabitants crowded on that little patch of sea-bottomand morass constituting the Dutch Republic, was equal to the entirepopulation of England; that is to say, to three or four millions. But thehome-land was only a small part of the dominions of the commonwealth. Through the enterprise and audacity of its bold sailors, it had madeextensive acquisitions in the East Indies and other parts of the world, largely at the expense of the Spanish and the Portuguese colonialpossessions. The commerce of the little republic had so expanded that morethan one hundred thousand of its citizens found a home upon the sea. Noidlers or beggars were allowed a place in the industrious commonwealth. And hand in hand with industry went intelligence. Throughout the UnitedProvinces it was rare to meet with a person who could not both read andwrite. 

CHAPTER LII. 

THE HUGUENOT WARS IN FRANCE. (1562-1629. )

BEGINNING OF THE REFORMATION IN FRANCE. --Before Luther posted his ninety-five theses at Wittenberg, there appeared in the University of Paris andelsewhere in France men who, from their study of the Scriptures, had cometo entertain opinions very like those of the German reformer. The landwhich had been the home of the Albigenses was again filled with heretics. The movement thus begun received a fresh impulse from the uprising inGermany under Luther. 

The Reformation in France, as elsewhere, brought dissension, persecution, and war. We have already seen how Francis I. , the second of the Valois-Orleans dynasty, [Footnote: The Valois-Orleans sovereigns, whose reignscover the greater part of the period treated in the present chapter, wereLouis XII. (1498-1515), Francis I. (1515-1547), Henry II. (1547-1559), Francis II. (1559-1560), Charles IX. (1560-1574), Henry III. (1574-1589). The successor of Henry III. --Henry IV. --was the first of the Bourbons. ]waged an exterminating crusade against his heretical Waldensian subjects(see p. 533). His son and successor, Henry II. , also conceived it to behis duty to uproot heresy; and it was his persecution of his Protestantsubjects that sowed the seeds of those long and woful civil and religiouswars which he left as a terrible legacy to his three feeble sons, Francis, Charles, and Henry, who followed him in succession upon the throne. At thetime these wars began, which was about the middle of the sixteenthcentury, the confessors of the reformed creed, who later were known asHuguenots, [Footnote: This word is probably a corruption of the German_Eidgenossen_, meaning "oath-comrades" or "confederates. "] numberedprobably 400, 000. The new doctrines found adherents especially among thenobility and the higher classes, and had taken particularly deep root inthe South, --the region of the old Albigensian heresy. 

THE CATHOLIC AND THE HUGUENOT LEADERS. --The leaders of the Catholic partywere the notorious Catherine de Medici, and the powerful chiefs of thefamily of the Guises. Catherine, the queen-mother of the last threeValois-Orleans sovereigns, was an intriguing, treacherous Italian. Nominally she was a Catholic; but only nominally, for it seems certainthat she was almost destitute of religious convictions of any kind. Whatshe sought was power, and this she was ready to secure by any means. Whenit suited her purpose, she favored the Huguenots; and when it suited herpurpose better, she incited the Catholics to make war upon them. Perhapsno other woman ever made so much trouble in the world. She made Francewretched through the three successive reigns of her sons, and brought herhouse to a shameful and miserable end. 

At the head of the family of the Guises stood Francis, Duke of Guise, afamous commander, who had gained great credit and popularity among hiscountrymen by many military exploits, especially by his capture of Calaisfrom the English in the recent Spanish wars (see p. 553). By his sidestood a younger brother Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine. Both of these menwere ardent Catholics. Mary Stuart, the queen of the young king FrancisII. , was their niece, and through her they ruled the boy-king. The Popeand the king of Spain were friends and allies of the Guises. 

The chiefs of the Huguenots were the Bourbon princes, Anthony, king ofNavarre, and Louis, Prince of Condé, who, next after the brothers ofFrancis II. , were heirs to the French throne; and Gaspard de Coligny, Admiral of France. Anthony was not a man of deep convictions. He at firstsided with the Protestants, probably because it was only through formingan alliance with them that he could carry on his opposition to the Guises. He afterwards went over to the side of the Catholics. A man of verydifferent character was Admiral Coligny. Early in life he had embraced thedoctrines of the reformers, and he remained to the last the trusted andconsistent, though ill-starred, champion of the Protestants. 

THE CONSPIRACY OF AMBOISE (1560). --The foregoing notice of parties andtheir chiefs will render intelligible the events which we now have tonarrate. The harsh measures adopted against the reformers by Francis II. , who of course was entirely under the influence of the Guises, led thechiefs of the persecuted party to lay a plan for wresting the governmentfrom the hands of these "new Mayors of the Palace. " The Guises were to bearrested and imprisoned, and the charge of the young king given to thePrince of Condé. The plot was revealed to the Guises, and was avenged bythe execution of more than a thousand of the Huguenots. 

THE MASSACRE OF VASSY (1562). --After the short reign of Francis II. (1559-1560), his brother Charles came to the throne as Charles IX. He was onlyten years of age, so the queen-mother assumed the government in his name. Pursuing her favorite maxim to rule by setting one party as a counterpoiseto the other, she gave the Bourbon princes a place in the government, andalso by a royal edict gave the Huguenots a limited toleration, and forbadetheir further persecution. 

These concessions in favor of the Huguenots angered the Catholic chiefs, particularly the Guises; and it was the violation by the adherents of theDuke of Guise of the edict of toleration that finally caused the growinganimosities of the two parties to break out in civil war. While passingthrough the country with a body of armed attendants, at a small placecalled Vassy, the Duke came upon a company of Huguenots assembled in abarn for worship. His retainers first insulted and then attacked them, killing about forty of the company and wounding many more. 

Under the lead of Admiral Coligny and the Prince of Condé, the Huguenotsnow rose throughout France. Philip II. Of Spain sent an army to aid theCatholics, while Elizabeth of England extended help to the Huguenots. 

THE TREATY OF ST. GERMAIN (1570). --Throughout the series of lamentablecivil wars upon which France now entered, both parties displayed aferocity of disposition more befitting pagans than Christians. But itshould be borne in mind that many on both sides were actuated by politicalambition, rather than by religious conviction, knowing little and caringless about the distinctions in the creeds for which they were ostensiblyfighting. [Footnote: What are usually designated as the _First_, _Second_, and _Third Wars_ were really one. The table belowexhibits the wars of the entire period of which we are treating. Some makethe Religious Wars proper end with the Edict of Nantes (1598); others withthe fall of La Rochelle (1628). First War (ended by Peace of Amboise) . . . . . . . 1562-1563. Second War (ended by Peace of Longjumeau) . . . . . 1567-1568. Third War (ended by Peace of St. Germain) . . . . . 1568-1570. Massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day, Aug. 24. . . . . . . . 1572. Fourth War (ended by Peace of La Rochelle). . . . . 1572-1573. Fifth War (ended by Peace of Chastenoy) . . . . . . 1574-1576. Sixth War (ended by Peace of Bergerac). . . . . . . . . . 1577. Seventh War (ended by Treaty of Fleix). . . . . . . 1579-1580. Eighth War (War of the Three Henries) . . . . . . . 1585-1589. Henry of Bourbon, King of Navarre, secures the throne . . 1589. Edict of Nantes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1598. Siege and fall of La Rochelle . . . . . . . . . . . 1627-1628. By the fall of La Rochelle the political power of the Huguenots wascompletely prostrated. ]

Sieges, battles, and truces followed one another in rapid and confusingsuccession. Conspiracies, treacheries, and assassinations help to fill upthe dreary record of the period. The Treaty of St. Germain (in 1570)brought a short but, as it proved, delusive peace. The terms of the treatywere very favorable to the Huguenots. They received four towns, --amongwhich was La Rochelle, the stronghold of the Huguenot faith, --which theymight garrison and hold as places of safety and pledges of good faith. 

To cement the treaty, Catherine de Medici now proposed that the PrincessMarguerite, the sister of Charles IX. , should be given in marriage toHenry of Bourbon, the new young king of Navarre. The announcement of theproposed alliance caused great rejoicing among Catholics and Protestantsalike, and the chiefs of both parties crowded to Paris to attend thewedding, which took place on the 18th of August, 1572. 

THE MASSACRE OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW'S DAY (Aug. 24, 1572). --Before thefestivities which followed the nuptial ceremonies were over, the world wasshocked by one of the most awful crimes of which history has to tell, --themassacre of the Huguenots in Paris on St. Bartholomew's Day. 

The circumstances which led to this fearful tragedy were as follows: Amongthe Protestant nobles who came up to Paris to attend the wedding was theAdmiral Coligny. Upon coming in contact with Charles IX. , the Admiralsecured almost immediately an entire ascendency over his mind. Thisinfluence Coligny used to draw the king away from the queen-mother and theGuises. Fearing the loss of her influence over her son, Catherine resolvedupon the death of the Admiral. The attempt miscarried, Coligny receivingonly a slight wound from the assassin's ball. 

The Huguenots at once rallied about their wounded chief with loud threatsof revenge. Catherine, driven on by insane fear and hatred, now determinedupon the death of all the Huguenots in Paris as the only measure ofsafety. By the 23d of August, the plans for the massacre were allarranged. On the evening of that day, Catherine went to her son, andrepresented to him that the Huguenots had formed a plot for theassassination of the royal family and the leaders of the Catholic party, and that the utter ruin of their house and cause could be averted only bythe immediate destruction of the Protestants within the city walls. Theorder for the massacre was then laid before him for his signature. Theking at first refused to sign the decree, but, overcome at last by therepresentations of his mother, he exclaimed, "I agree to the scheme, provided not one Huguenot be left alive in France to reproach me with thedeed. "

A little past the hour of midnight on St. Bartholomew's Day (Aug. 24, 1572), at a preconcerted signal, --the tolling of a bell, --the massacrebegan. Coligny was one of the first victims. After his assassins had donetheir work, they tossed the body out of the window of the chamber in whichit lay, into the street, in order that the Duke of Guise, who stood below, might satisfy himself that his enemy was really dead. For three days andnights the massacre went on within the city. King Charles himself is saidto have joined in the work, and from one of the windows of the palace ofthe Louvre to have fired upon the Huguenots as they fled past. The numberof victims in Paris is variously estimated at from 3, 000 to 10, 000. 

With the capital cleared of Huguenots, orders were issued to the principalcities of France to purge themselves in like manner of heretics. In manyplaces the instincts of humanity prevailed over fear of the royalresentment, and the decree was disobeyed. But in other places the orderswere carried out, and frightful massacres took place. The entire number ofvictims throughout the country was probably between 20, 000 and 30, 000. 

The massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day raised a cry of execration in almostevery part of the civilized world, among Catholics and Protestants alike. Philip II. , however, is said to have received the news with unfeigned joy;while Pope Gregory XIII. Caused a _Te Deum_, in commemoration of theevent, to be sung in the church of St. Mark, in Rome. Respecting this itshould in justice be said that Catholic writers maintain that the Popeacted under a misconception of the facts, it having been represented tohim that the massacre resulted from a thwarted plot of the Huguenotsagainst the royal family of France and the Catholic Church. 

REIGN OF HENRY III. (1574-1589). --The massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day, instead of exterminating heresy in France, only served to rouse theHuguenots to a more determined defence of their faith. Throughout the lasttwo years of the reign of Charles IX. , and the fifteen succeeding years ofthe reign of his brother Henry III. , the country was in a state of turmoiland war. At length the king, who, jealous of the growing power andpopularity of the Duke of Guise, had caused him to be assassinated, washimself struck down by the avenging dagger of a Dominican monk. With himended the House of Valois-Orleans. 

Henry of Bourbon, king of Navarre, who for many years had been the mostprominent leader of the Huguenots, now came to the throne as the first ofthe Bourbon kings. 

ACCESSION OF HENRY IV. (1589). --Notwithstanding that the doctrines of thereformers had made rapid progress in France under the sons of Henry II. , still the majority of the nation at the time of the death of Henry III. Were Roman Catholics in faith and worship. Under these circumstances, weshall hardly expect to find the entire nation quietly acquiescing in theaccession to the French throne of a Protestant prince, and he the leaderand champion of the hated Huguenots. Nor did Henry secure without astruggle the crown that was his by right. The Catholics declared forCardinal Bourbon, an uncle of the king of Navarre, and France was thuskept in the whirl of civil war. Elizabeth of England aided theProtestants, and Philip II. Of Spain assisted the Catholics. 

HENRY TURNS CATHOLIC (1593). --After the war had gone on for about fouryears, --during which time was fought the noted battle of Ivry, in whichHenry led his soldiers to victory by telling them to follow the whiteplume on his hat, --the quarrel was closed, for the time being, by Henry'sabjuration of the Huguenot faith, and his adoption of that of the RomanCatholic Church (1593). 

Mingled motives led Henry to do this. He was personally liked even by theCatholic chiefs, and he was well aware that it was only his Huguenot faiththat prevented their being his hearty supporters. Hence duty and policyseemed to him to concur in urging him to remove the sole obstacle in theway of their ready loyalty, and thus bring peace and quiet to distractedFrance. 

THE EDICT OF NANTES (1598). --As soon as Henry had become the crowned andacknowledged king of France, he gave himself to the work of composing theaffairs of his kingdom. The most noteworthy of the measures he adopted tothis end was the publication of the celebrated Edict of Nantes (April 15, 1598). This decree granted the Huguenots practical freedom of worship, opened to them all offices and employments, and gave them as places ofrefuge and defence a large number of fortified towns, among which was theimportant city of La Rochelle. 

The temporary hushing of the long-continued quarrels of the Catholics andProtestants by the adoption of the principle of religious toleration, paved the way for a revival of the trade and industries of the country, which had been almost destroyed by the anarchy and waste of the civilwars. France now entered upon such a period of prosperity as she had notknown for many years. 

LOUIS XIII, AND HIS MINISTER, CARDINAL RICHELIEU. --Henry IV. Wasassassinated by a fanatic named Ravaillac, who regarded him as an enemy ofthe Roman Catholic Church. As his son Louis, who succeeded him as LouisXIII. (1610-1643), was a child of nine years, during his minority thegovernment was administered by his mother, Mary de Medici. Upon attaininghis majority, Louis took the government into his own hands. He chose, ashis chief minister, Cardinal Richelieu, one of the most remarkablecharacters of the seventeenth century. From the time that Louis admittedthe young prelate to his cabinet (in 1622), the ecclesiastic became thevirtual sovereign of France, and for the space of twenty years swayed thedestinies not only of that country, but, it might almost be said, those ofEurope as well. 

[Illustration: CARDINAL RICHELIEU. (After a painting in the Louvre. )]

Richelieu's policy was twofold: first, to render the authority of theFrench king absolute in France; secondly, to make the power of Francesupreme in Europe. 

To attain the first end, Richelieu sought to crush the political power ofthe Huguenots, and to trample out the last vestige of independence amongthe old feudal aristocracy; to secure the second, he labored to break downthe power of both branches of the House of Hapsburg, --that is, of Austriaand Spain. 

For nearly the life-time of a generation Richelieu, by intrigue, diplomacy, and war, pursued with unrelenting purpose these objects of hisambition. His own words best indicate how he proposed to use his doubleauthority as cardinal and prime minister to effect his purpose: "I shalltrample all opposition under foot, " said he, "and then cover all errorswith my scarlet robe. "

In the following paragraph we shall speak very briefly of the cardinal'sdealings with the Huguenots, which feature alone of his policy especiallyconcerns us at present. 

POLITICAL POWER OF THE HUGUENOTS CRUSHED. --In the prosecution of hisplans, Cardinal Richelieu's first step was to break down the politicalpower of the Huguenot chiefs, who, dissatisfied with their position in thegovernment, and irritated by religious grievances, were revolving in mindthe founding in France of a Protestant commonwealth like that which thePrince of Orange and his adherents had setup in the Netherlands. Thecapital of the new Republic was to be La Rochelle, on the southwesterncoast of France. In 1627, an alliance having been formed between Englandand the French Protestant nobles, an English fleet and army were sentacross the Channel to aid the Huguenot enterprise. 

Richelieu now resolved to ruin forever the power of these Protestantnobles who were constantly challenging the royal authority and threateningthe dismemberment of France. Accordingly he led in person an army to thesiege of La Rochelle, which, after a gallant resistance of more than ayear, was compelled to open its gates to the cardinal (1628). That theplace might never again be made the centre of resistance to the royalpower, Louis ordered that "the fortifications be razed to the ground, insuch wise that the plough may plough through the soil as through tilledland. "

The Huguenots maintained the struggle a few months longer in the south ofFrance, but were finally everywhere reduced to submission. The result ofthe war was the complete destruction of the political power of the FrenchProtestants. A treaty of peace, called the Edict of Grace, negotiated theyear after the fall of La Rochelle, left them, however, freedom ofworship, according to the provisions of the Edict of Nantes (see p. 578). 

The Edict of Grace properly marks the close of the religious wars whichhad desolated France for two generations (from 1562 to 1629). It isestimated that this series of wars and massacres cost France a millionlives, and that between three and four hundred hamlets and towns weredestroyed by the contending parties. 

RICHELIEU AND THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR. --When Cardinal Richelieu came to thehead of affairs in France, there was going on in Germany the Thirty Years'War (1618-1648), of which we shall tell in the following chapter. This wasvery much such a struggle between the Catholic and Protestant Germanprinces as we have seen waged between the two religious parties in France. 

Although Richelieu had just crushed French Protestantism, he now gives aidto the Protestant princes of Germany, because their success meant thedivision of Germany and the humiliation of Austria. Richelieu did not liveto see the end either of the Thirty Years' War or of that which he hadbegun with Spain; but this foreign policy of the great minister, carriedout by others, finally resulted, as we shall learn hereafter, in thehumiliation of both branches of the House of Hapsburg, and the lifting ofFrance to the first place among the powers of Europe. 

CHAPTER LIII. 

THE THIRTY YEARS' WAR. (1618-1648. )

NATURE AND CAUSES OF THE WAR. --The long and calamitous Thirty Years' Warwas the last great combat between Protestantism and Catholicism in Europe. It started as a struggle between the Protestant and Catholic princes ofGermany, but gradually involved almost all the states of the continent, degenerating at last into a shameful and heartless struggle for power andterritory. 

The real cause of the war was the enmity existing between the GermanProtestants and Catholics. Each party by its encroachments gave the otheroccasion for complaint. The Protestants at length formed for their mutualprotection a league called the Evangelical Union (1608). In opposition tothe Union, the Catholics formed a confederation known as the Holy League(1609). All Germany was thus prepared to burst into the flames of areligious war. 

THE BOHEMIAN PERIOD OF THE WAR (1618-1623). --The flames that were todesolate Germany for a generation were first kindled in Bohemia, wherewere still smouldering embers of the Hussite wars, which two centuriesbefore had desolated that land (see p. 506). A church which theProtestants maintained they had a right to build was torn down by theCatholics, and another was closed. The Protestants rose in revolt againsttheir Catholic king, Ferdinand, elected a new Protestant king, [Footnote:Frederick V. Of the Palatinate, son-in-law of James I. Of England. ] anddrove out the Jesuits. The Thirty Years' War had begun (1618). Almost anexact century had passed since Luther posted his theses on the door of thecourt church at Wittenberg. It is estimated that at this time more thannine-tenths of the population of the empire were Protestants. 

The war had scarcely opened when, the Imperial office falling vacant, theBohemian king, Ferdinand, was elected emperor. With the power andinfluence he now wielded, it was not a difficult matter for him to quellthe Protestant insurrection in his royal dominions. The leaders of therevolt were executed, and the reformed faith in Bohemia was almostuprooted. 

THE DANISH PERIOD (1625-1629). --The situation of affairs at this moment inGermany filled all the Protestant rulers of the North with the greatestalarm. Christian IV. , king of Denmark, supported by England and Holland, threw himself into the struggle as the champion of German Protestantism. He now becomes the central figure on the side of the reformers. On theside of the Catholics are two noted commanders, --Tilly, the leader of theforces of the Holy League, and Wallenstein, the commander of the Imperialarmy. What is known as the Danish period of the war now begins (1625). 

The war, in the main, proved disastrous to the Protestant allies, andChristian IV. Was constrained to conclude a treaty of peace with theemperor (Peace of Lübeck, 1629), and retire from the struggle. 

By what is known as the Edict of Restitution (1629), the Emperor Ferdinandnow restored to the Catholics all the ecclesiastical lands and offices inNorth Germany of which possession had been taken by the Protestants inviolation of the terms of the Peace of Augsburg. This decree gave back tothe Catholic Church two archbishoprics, twelve bishoprics, besides manymonasteries and other ecclesiastical property. 

THE SWEDISH PERIOD (1630-1635): GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS, WALLENSTEIN, ANDTILLY. --At this moment of seeming triumph, Ferdinand was constrained byrising discontent and jealousies to dismiss from his service his mostefficient general, Wallenstein, who had made almost all classes, save hissoldiers, his bitter enemies. In his retirement, Wallenstein maintained acourt of fabulous magnificence. Wherever he went he was followed by animperial train of attendants and equipages. He was reserved and silent, but his eye was upon everything going on in Germany, and indeed in Europe. He was watching for a favorable moment for revenge, and the retrieving ofhis fortunes. 

The opportunity which Wallenstein, inspired by faith in his star, was soconfidently awaiting was not long delayed. Only a few months before hisdismissal from the Imperial service, Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, with a veteran and enthusiastic army of 16, 000 Swedes, had appeared inNorthern Germany as the champion of the dispirited and leaderlessProtestants. The Protestant princes, however, through fear of the emperor, as well as from lack of confidence in the disinterestedness of the motivesof Gustavus, were shamefully backward in rallying to the support of theirdeliverer. But through an alliance formed just now with France, theSwedish king received a large annual subsidy from that country, which, with the help he was receiving from England, made him a formidableantagonist. 

The wavering, jealous, and unworthy conduct of the Protestant princes nowled to a most terrible disaster. At this moment Tilly was besieging thecity of Magdeburg, which had dared to resist the Edict of Restitution (seep. 583). Gustavus was prevented from giving relief to the place by thehindrances thrown in his way by the Electors of Brandenburg and Saxony, both of whom should have given him every assistance. In a short time thecity was obliged to surrender, and was given up to sack and pillage. Everything was burned, save two churches and a few hovels. 30, 000 of theinhabitants perished miserably. 

The cruel fate of Magdeburg excited the alarm of the Protestant princes. The Elector of Saxony now at once united his forces with those of theSwedish king. Tilly was defeated with great loss in the celebrated battleof Leipsic (1631), and Gustavus, emboldened by his success, pushedsouthward into the very heart of Germany. Attempting to dispute his march, Tilly's army was again defeated, and he himself received a fatal wound. Inthe death of Tilly, Ferdinand lost his most trustworthy general (1632). 

The Imperial cause appeared desperate. There was but one man in Germanywho could turn the tide of victory that was running so strongly in favorof the Swedish monarch. That man was Wallenstein; and to him the emperornow turned. This strange man had been watching with secret satisfactionthe success of the Swedish arms, and had even offered to Gustavus his aid, promising "to chase the emperor and the House of Austria over the Alps. "

[Illustration: DEATH OF GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS AT THE BATTLE OF LUTZEN. ]

To this proud subject of his, fresh from his dalliances with his enemies, the emperor now appealed for help. Wallenstein agreed to raise an army, provided his control of it should be absolute. Ferdinand was constrainedto grant all that his old general demanded. Wallenstein now raised hisstandard, to which rallied the adventurers not only of Germany, but of allEurope as well. The array was a vast and heterogeneous host, boundtogether by no bonds of patriotism, loyalty, or convictions, but by thespell and prestige of the name of Wallenstein. 

With an army of 40, 000 men obedient to his commands, Wallenstein, afternumerous marches and counter-marches, attacked the Swedes in a terriblebattle on the memorable field of Lutzen, in Saxony. The Swedes won theday, but lost their leader and sovereign (1632). 

Notwithstanding the death of their great king and commander, the Swedesdid not withdraw from the war. Hence the struggle went on, the advantagebeing for the most part with the Protestant allies. Ferdinand, at justthis time, was embarrassed by the suspicious movements of his generalWallenstein. Becoming convinced that he was meditating the betrayal of theImperial cause, the emperor caused him to be assassinated (1634). Thisevent marks very nearly the end of the Swedish period of the war. 

THE SWEDISH-FRENCH PERIOD (1635-1648). --Had it not been for the selfishand ambitious interference of France, the woeful war which had nowdesolated Germany for half a century might here have come to an end, forboth sides were weary of it and ready for negotiations of peace. ButRichelieu was not willing that the war should end until the House ofAustria was thoroughly crippled. Accordingly he encouraged Oxenstiern, theSwedish chancellor, to persevere in carrying on the war, promising him theaid of the French armies. 

The war thus lost in large part its original character of a contestbetween the Catholic and the Protestant princes of Germany, and became apolitical struggle between the House of Austria and the House of Bourbon, in which the former was fighting for existence, the latter for nationalaggrandizement. 

THE TREATY OF WESTPHALIA (1648). --And so the miserable war dragged on. Theearlier actors in the drama at length passed from the scene, but theirparts were carried on by others. The year 1643, which marks the death ofRichelieu, heard the first whisperings of peace. Everybody wasinexpressibly weary of the war, and longed for the cessation of itshorrors, yet each one wanted peace on terms advantageous to himself. Thearrangement of the articles of peace was a matter of immense difficulty;for the affairs and boundaries of the states of Central Europe were inalmost hopeless confusion. After five years of memorable discussion andnegotiation, the articles of the celebrated Treaty of Westphalia, as itwas called, were signed by the different European powers. 

The chief articles of this important treaty may be made to fall under twoheads: (1) those relating to territorial boundaries, and (2) thoserespecting religion. 

As to the first, these cut short in three directions the actual or nominallimits of the Holy Roman Empire. Switzerland and the United Netherlandswere severed from it; for though both of these countries had been for along time practically independent of the empire, this independence hadnever been acknowledged in any formal way. The claim of France to thethree cities of Metz, Toul, and Verdun in Lorraine, which places she hadheld for about a century, was confirmed, and a great part of Alsace wasgiven to her. Thus on the west, on the southwest, and on the northwest, the empire suffered loss. 

Sweden was given cities and territories in Northern Germany which gave hercontrol of a long strip of the Baltic shore, a most valuable possession. But these lands were not given to the Swedish king in full sovereignty;they still remained a part of the Germanic body, and the king of Sweden asto them became a prince of the empire. 

The changes within the empire were many, and some of them important. Brandenburg especially received considerable additions of territory. 

The articles respecting religion were even more important than those whichestablished the metes and bounds of the different states. Catholics, Lutherans, and Calvinists were all put upon the same footing. TheProtestants were to retain all the benefices and Church property of whichthey had possession in 1624. Every prince was to have the right to makehis religion the religion of his people, and to banish all who refused toadopt the established creed: but such non-conformists were to have threeyears in which to emigrate. 

The different states of the empire were left almost independent of theemperor. They were given the right to form alliances with one another andwith foreign princes; but not, of course, against the empire or emperor. This provision made Germany nothing more than a lax confederation, andpostponed to a distant future the nationalization of the German states. 

EFFECTS OF THE WAR UPON GERMANY. --It is simply impossible to picture thewretched condition in which the Thirty Years' War left Germany. When thestruggle began, the population of the country was 30, 000, 000; when itended, 12, 000, 000. Many of the once large and flourishing cities werereduced to "mere shells. " Two or three hundred ill-clad personsconstituted the population of Berlin. The duchy of Würtemburg, which hadhalf a million of inhabitants at the commencement of the war, at its closehad barely 50, 000. On every hand were the charred remains of the hovels ofthe peasants and the palaces of the nobility. The lines of commerce werebroken, and some trades and industries were swept quite out of existence. 

The effects upon the fine arts, upon science, learning, and morals wereeven more lamentable. Painting, sculpture, and architecture were drivenout of the land. The cities which had been the home of all these arts layin ruins. Education was entirely neglected. For the lifetime of ageneration, men had been engaged in the business of war, and had allowedtheir children to grow up in absolute ignorance. Moral law was forgotten. Vice, nourished by the licentious atmosphere of the camp, reigned supreme. "In character, in intelligence, and in morality, the German people wereset back two hundred years. "

To all these evils were added those of political disunion and weakness. The title of emperor still continued to be borne by a member of the Houseof Austria, but it was only an empty name. By the Peace of Westphalia, theGermanic body lost even that little cohesion which had begun to manifestitself between its different parts, and became simply a loose assemblageof virtually independent states, of which there were now over two hundred. Thus weakened, Germany lost her independence as a nation, while thesubjects of the numerous petty states became the slaves of their ambitiousand tyrannical rulers. Worse than all, the overwhelming calamities thatfor the lifetime of a generation had been poured out upon the unfortunateland, had extinguished the last spark of German patriotism. Everysentiment of pride and hope in race and country seemed to have becomeextinct. 

CONCLUSION. --The treaty of Westphalia is a prominent landmark in universalhistory. It stands at the dividing line of two great epochs. It marks theend of the Reformation Era and the beginning of that of the PoliticalRevolution. Henceforth men will fight for constitutions, not creeds. Weshall not often see one nation attacking another, or one party in a nationassaulting another party, on account of a difference in religious opinion. [Footnote: The Puritan Revolution in England may look like a religiouswar, but we shall learn that it was primarily a political contest, --astruggle against despotism in the state. ]

But in setting the Peace of Westphalia to mark the end of the religiouswars occasioned by the Reformation, we do not mean to convey the idea thatmen had come to embrace the beneficent doctrine of religious toleration. As a matter of fact, no real toleration had yet been reached--nothing savethe semblance of toleration. The long conflict of a century and more, andthe vicissitudes of fortune, which to-day gave one party the power of thepersecutor and to-morrow made the same sect the victims of persecution, had simply forced all to the practical conclusion that they must tolerateone another, --that one sect must not attempt to put another down by force. But it required the broadening and liberalizing lessons of another fullcentury to bring men to see that the thing they _must_ do is the verything they _ought_ to do, --to make men tolerant not only in outwardconduct, but in spirit. 

With this single word of caution, we now pass to the study of the Era ofthe Political Revolution, the period marked by the struggle betweendespotic and liberal principles of government. And first, we shall give asketch of absolute monarchy as it exhibited itself in France under theautocrat Louis XIV. 

SECOND PERIOD. --THE ERA OF THE POLITICAL REVOLUTION. (FROM THE PEACE OF WESTPHALIA IN 1648 TO THE PRESENT TIME. )

CHAPTER LIV. 

THE ASCENDENCY OF FRANCE UNDER THE ABSOLUTE GOVERNMENT OF LOUIS XIV. (1643-1715. )

THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS. --Louis XIV. Stands as the representative ofabsolute monarchy. This indeed was no new thing in the world, but Louiswas such an ideal autocrat that somehow he made autocratic governmentstrangely attractive. Other kings imitated him, and it became theprevailing theory of government that kings have a "divine right" to rule, and that the people should have no part at all in government. 

According to this theory, the nation is a great family with the king asits divinely appointed head. The duty of the king is to govern like afather; the duty of the people is to obey their king even as children obeytheir parents. If the king does wrong, is harsh, cruel, unjust, this issimply the misfortune of his people: under no circumstances is it rightfor them to rebel against his authority, any more than for children torise against their father. The king is responsible to God alone, and toGod the people, quietly submissive, must leave the avenging of all theirwrongs. 

Before the close of the period upon which we here enter, we shall see howthis theory of the divine right of kings worked out in practice, --how dearit cost both kings and people, and how the people by the strong logic ofrevolution demonstrated that they are not children but mature men, andhave a divine and inalienable right to govern themselves. 

THE BASIS OF LOUIS XIV. 's POWER. --The basis of the absolute power of LouisXIV. Was laid by Cardinal Richelieu during the reign of Louis XIII. (seep. 580). Besides crushing the political power of the Huguenots, andthereby vastly augmenting the security and strength of the royalauthority, the Cardinal succeeded, by various means, --by annulling theirprivileges, by banishment, confiscations, and executions, --in almostextinguishing the expiring independence of the old feudal aristocracy, andin forcing the once haughty and refractory nobles to yield humbleobedience to the crown. 

In 1643, barely six months after the death of his great minister, LouisXIII. Died, leaving the vast power which the Cardinal had done so much toconsolidate, as an inheritance to his little son, a child of five years. 

THE ADMINISTRATION OF MAZARIN. --During the minority of Louis thegovernment was in the hands of his mother, Anne of Austria, as regent. Shechose as her prime minister an Italian ecclesiastic, Cardinal Mazarin, who, in his administration of affairs, followed in the footsteps of hispredecessor, Richelieu, carrying out with great ability the comprehensivepolicy of that minister. France was encouraged to maintain her part--and avery glorious part it was, as war goes--in the Thirty Years' War, untilAustria was completely exhausted, and all Germany indeed almost ruined. Even after the Peace of Westphalia, which simply concluded the war inGermany, France carried on the war with Spain for ten years longer, until1659, when the Treaty of the Pyrenees, which gave the French the twoprovinces of Artois and Roussillon, asserted the triumph of France overSpain. Richelieu's plan had at last, though at terrible cost to France[Footnote: The heavy taxes laid to meet the expenses of the wars createdgreat discontent, which during the struggle with Spain led to a series ofconspiracies or revolts against the government, known as the _Wars ofthe Fronde_ (1648-1652). "Notwithstanding its peculiar character oflevity and burlesque, the Fronde must be regarded as a memorable struggleof the aristocracy, supported by the judicial and municipal bodies, tocontrol the despotism of the crown. . . . It failed;. . . Nor was any farthereffort made to resuscitate the dormant liberties of the nation until thedawning of the great Revolution. "] and all Europe, been crowned withsuccess. The House of Austria in both its branches had been humiliated andcrippled, and the House of Bourbon was ready to assume the lead inEuropean affairs. 

LOUIS XIV. ASSUMES THE GOVERNMENT. --Cardinal Mazarin died in 1661. Uponthis event, Louis, who was now twenty-three years of age, became his ownprime minister, and for more than half a century thereafter ruled Franceas an absolute and irresponsible monarch. He regarded France as hisprivate estate, and seemed to be fully convinced that he had a divinecommission to govern the French people. It is said that he declared, _L'État, c'est moi_, "I am the State, " meaning that he alone was therightful legislator, judge, and executive of the French nation. TheStates-General was not once convened during his long reign. Richelieu madeLouis XIII. "the first man in Europe, but the second in his own kingdom. "Louis XIV. Was the first man at home as well as abroad. He had able menabout him; but they served instead of ruling him. 

COLBERT. --Mazarin when dying said to Louis, "Sire, I owe everything toyou; but I pay my debt to your majesty by giving you Colbert. " During thefirst ten or twelve years of Louis's personal reign, this extraordinaryman inspired and directed everything; but he carefully avoided theappearance of doing so. His maxim seemed to be, Mine the labor, thine thepraise. He did for the domestic affairs of France what Richelieu had donefor the foreign. So long as Louis followed the policy of Colbert, he gaveFrance a truly glorious reign; but unfortunately he soon turned aside fromthe great minister's policy of peace, to seek glory for himself andgreatness for France through new and unjust encroachments upon neighboringnations. 

THE WARS OF LOUIS XIV. --During the period of his personal administrationof the government, Louis XIV. Was engaged in four great wars: (1) A warrespecting the Spanish Netherlands (1667-1668); (2) a war with Holland(1672-1678); (3) the War of the Palatinate (1689-1697); and (4) the War ofthe Spanish Succession (1701-1714). 

All these wars were, on the part of the French monarch, wars of conquestand aggression, or were wars provoked by his ambitious and encroachingpolicy. The most inveterate enemy of Louis during all this period wasHolland, the representative and champion of liberal, constitutionalgovernment. 

THE WAR CONCERNING THE SPANISH NETHERLANDS (1667-1668). --Upon the death ofPhilip IV. Of Spain (1665), Louis immediately claimed, in the name of hiswife, portions of the Spanish Netherlands (see p. 568, n. ). The Hollanderswere naturally alarmed, fearing that Louis would also want to annex theircountry to his dominions. Accordingly they effected what was called theTriple Alliance with England and Sweden, checked the French king in hiscareer of conquest, and, by the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, forced him togive up much of the territory he had seized. 

THE WAR WITH HOLLAND (1672-1678). --The second war of the French king wasagainst Holland, whose interference with his plans in the SpanishNetherlands, as well as some uncomplimentary remarks of the Dutchhumorists on his personal appearance, had stirred his resentment. Beforeentering upon the undertaking which had proved too great for Philip II. With the resources of two worlds at his command, Louis, by means of bribesand the employment of that skilful diplomacy of which he was so perfect amaster, prudently drew from the side of Holland both her allies (Swedenand England), even inducing the English king, Charles II. , to lend himactive assistance. Money also secured the aid of several princes ofGermany. Thus the little commonwealth was left alone to contend againstfearful odds. 

The brave Hollanders made a stout defence of their land. It was evenseriously proposed in the States-General, that, rather than submit to thetyranny of this second Philip, they should open the dykes, bury thecountry and its invaders beneath the ocean, and taking their families andhousehold goods in their ships, seek new homes in lands beyond the sea. The desperate resolve was in part executed; for with the Frenchthreatening Amsterdam, the dykes were cut, and all the surrounding fieldswere laid under water, and the invaders thus forced to retreat. 

The heroic resistance to the intruders made by the Hollanders in theirhalf-drowned land, the havoc wrought by the stout Dutch sailors among thefleets of the allies, and the diplomacy of the Dutch statesmen, who, through skilful negotiations, detached almost all of the allies of theFrench from that side, and brought them into alliance with the republic, --all these things soon put a very different face upon affairs, and Louisfound himself confronted by the armies of half of Europe. 

For several years the war now went on by land and sea, --in theNetherlands, all along the Rhine, upon the English Channel, in theMediterranean, and on the coasts of the New World. At length an end wasput to the struggle by the Treaty of Nimeguen (1678). Louis gave up hisconquests in Holland, but kept a large number of towns and fortresses inthe Spanish Netherlands, besides the province of Franche-Comté and severalImperial cities on his German frontier. 

Thus Louis came out of this tremendous struggle, in which half of Europewas leagued against him, with enhanced reputation and fresh acquisitionsof territory. People now began to call him the _Grand Monarch_. 

THE REVOCATION OF THE EDICTS OF NANTES (1685). --Louis now committed an actthe injustice of which was only equalled by its folly, --an act from whichmay be dated the decline of his power. This was the Revocation of theEdict of Nantes, the well-known decree by which Henry IV. Securedreligious freedom to the French Protestants (see p. 578). By this cruelmeasure all the Protestant churches were closed, and every Huguenot whorefused to embrace the Roman Catholic faith was outlawed. The persecutionwhich the Huguenots had been enduring and which was now greatly increasedin violence, is known as the _Dragonnades_, from the circumstance that_dragoons_ were quartered upon the Protestant families, with fullpermission to annoy and persecute them in every way "short of violationand death, " to the end that the victims of these outrages might beconstrained to recant, which multitudes did. 

Under the fierce persecutions of the _Dragonnades_, probably as manyas three hundred thousand of the most skilful and industrious of thesubjects of Louis were driven out of the kingdom. Several of the mostimportant and flourishing of the French industries were ruined, while themanufacturing interests of other countries, particularly those of Hollandand England, were correspondingly benefited by the energy, skill, andcapital which the exiles carried to them. Many of the fugitive Huguenotsfound ultimately a refuge in America; and no other class of emigrants, save the Puritans of England, cast

 "Such healthful leaven 'mid the elements That peopled the new world. "[Footnote: See Baird, _History of the Huguenot Emigration to America. _]

THE WAR OF THE PALATINATE (1689-1697). --The indirect results of theRevocation of the Edict of Nantes were quite as calamitous to France aswere the direct results. The indignation that the barbarous measureawakened among the Protestant nations of Europe enabled William of Orangeto organize a formidable confederacy against Louis, known as the League ofAugsburg (1686). 

Louis resolved to attack the confederates. Seeking a pretext for beginninghostilities, he laid claim, in the name of his sister-in-law, to portionsof the Palatinate, and hurried a large army into the country, which wasquickly overrun. But being unable to hold the conquests he had made, Louisordered that the country be turned into a desert. The Huns of an Attilacould not have carried out more relentlessly the command than did thesoldiers of Louis. Churches and abbeys, palaces and cottages, villas andcities, were all given to the flames. 

This barbarous act of Louis almost frenzied Germany. Another and moreformidable coalition, known as the "Grand Alliance, " was now formed(1689). It embraced England, Holland, Sweden, Spain, the German emperor, the Elector Palatine, and the Electors of Bavaria and Saxony. For tenyears almost all Europe was a great battle-field. Both sides at lengthbecoming weary of the contest and almost exhausted in resources, thestruggle was closed by the Treaty of Ryswick (1697). There was a mutualsurrender of conquests made during the course of the war, and Louis hadalso to give up some of the places he had unjustly seized before thebeginning of the conflict. 

[Illustration: DUKE OF MARLBOROUGH. (After a painting by F. Kneller. )]

WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION (1701-1714). --Barely three years passedafter the Treaty of Ryswick before the great powers of Europe wereinvolved in another war, known as the War of the Spanish Succession. 

The circumstances out of which the war grew were these: In 1700 the kingof Spain, Charles II. , died, leaving his crown to Philip of Anjou, agrandson of Louis XIV. "There are no longer any Pyrenees, " was Louis'sexultant epigram, meaning of course that France and Spain were nowpractically one. England and Holland particularly were alarmed at thisvirtual consolidation of these two powerful kingdoms. Consequently asecond Grand Alliance was soon formed against France, the object of whichwas to dethrone Philip of Anjou and place upon the Spanish throne Charles, Archduke of Austria. The two greatest generals of the allies were thefamous Duke of Marlborough (John Churchill), the ablest commander, exceptWellington perhaps, that England has ever produced, and the hardly lessnoted Prince Eugene of Savoy. 

For thirteen years all Europe was shaken with war. During the progress ofthe struggle were fought some of the most memorable battles in Europeanhistory, --Blenheim, Ramillies, Oudenarde, and Malplaquet, --in all of whichthe genius of Marlborough and the consummate skill of Prince Eugene wonsplendid victories for the allies. 

Finally, changes wrought by death in the House of Austria brought theArchduke Charles to the imperial throne. This changed the whole aspect ofthe Spanish question, for now to place Charles upon the Spanish thronealso would be to give him a dangerous preponderance of power, would be, infact, to reestablish the great monarchy of Charles V. Consequently theGrand Alliance fell to pieces, and the war was ended by the treaties ofUtrecht (1713) and Rastadt (1714). 

By the provisions of these treaties the Bourbon prince of Anjou was leftupon the Spanish throne, but his kingdom was pared away on every side. Gibraltar and the island of Minorca were ceded to England; while Milan, Naples, Sardinia, and the Netherlands (Spanish) were given to Austria. France was forced to surrender to England considerable portions of herpossessions in the New World, --Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and the HudsonBay territory. 

DEATH OF THE KING. --Amidst troubles, perplexities, and afflictions, LouisXIV. 's long and eventful reign was now drawing to a close. The heavy andconstant taxes necessary to meet the expenses of his numerous wars, and tomaintain an extravagant court, had bankrupted the country, and the criesof his wretched subjects clamoring for bread could not be shut out of theroyal chamber. Death, too, had invaded the palace, striking down thedauphin, the dauphiness, and two grandsons of Louis, leaving as thenearest heir to the throne his great-grandson, a mere child. On themorning of September 1st, 1715, the Grand Monarch breathed his last, bequeathing to this boy of five years a kingdom overwhelmed with debt, andfilled with misery, with threatening vices and dangerous discontent. 

THE COURT OF LOUIS XIV. --The Court sustained by the Grand Monarch was themost extravagantly magnificent that Europe has ever seen. Never since Neroerected his Golden House upon the burnt district of Rome, and ensconcinghimself amid its luxurious appointments, exclaimed, "Now I am housed as aman ought to be, " had prince or king so ostentatiously lavished uponhimself the wealth of an empire. Louis had half a dozen palaces, the mostcostly of which was that at Versailles. Upon this and its surroundings hespent fabulous sums. The palace itself cost what would probably be equalto more than $100, 000, 000 with us. Here were gathered the beauty, wit, andlearning of France. The royal household numbered fifteen thousand persons, all living in costly and luxurious idleness at the expense of the people. 

[Illustration: LOUIS XIV. IN HIS OLD AGE. ]

One element of this enormous family was the great lords of the old feudalaristocracy. Dispossessed of their ancient power and wealth, they werecontent now to fill a place in the royal household, to be the king'spensioners and the elegant embellishment of his court. 

As we might well imagine, the life of the French court at this period wasshamefully corrupt. Vice, however, was gilded. The scandalous immoralitiesof king and courtiers were made attractive by the glitter of superficialaccomplishment and by exquisite suavity and polish of manner. 

But notwithstanding its immorality, the brilliancy of the Court of Louisdazzled all Europe. The neighboring courts imitated its manners andemulated its extravagances. In all matters of taste and fashion Francegave laws to the continent, and the French language became the courtlanguage of the civilized world. 

LITERATURE UNDER LOUIS XIV. --Louis gave a most liberal encouragement tomen of letters, thereby making his reign the Augustan Age of Frenchliterature. In this patronage Louis was not unselfish. He honored andbefriended poets and writers of every class, because he thus extended thereputation of his court. These writers, pensioners of his bounty, filledall Europe with their praises of the Great King, and thus made the mostample and grateful return to Louis for his favor and liberality. 

Almost every species of literature was cultivated by the French writers ofthis era, yet it was in the province of the Drama that the greatest numberof eminent authors appeared. The three great names here are those ofCorneille (1606-1684), Racine (1639-1699), and Molière (1622-1673). 

DECLINE OF THE FRENCH MONARCHY UNDER LOUIS XV. --The ascendency of theHouse of Bourbon passed away forever with Louis XIV. In passing from thereign of the Grand Monarch to that of his successor, Louis XV. (1715-1774), we pass from the strongest and most brilliant reign in Frenchhistory to the weakest and most humiliating. 

France took part, but usually with injury to her military reputation, inall the wars of this period. The most important of these were the War ofthe Austrian Succession (see p. 644), and the Seven Years' War (see p. 631), known in America as the French and Indian War, which resulted in theloss to France of Canada in the New World and of her Indian possessions inthe Old. 

Though thus shorn of her colonial possessions in all quarters of theglobe, France managed to hold in Europe the provinces won for her by thewars and the diplomacy of Louis XIV. , and even made some freshacquisitions of territory along the Rhenish frontier. 

But taken all together, the period was one of great national humiliation:the French fleet was almost driven from the sea; the martial spirit of thenation visibly declined; and France, from the foremost place among thestates of Europe, fell to the position of a third or fourth rate power. 

CHAPTER LV. 

ENGLAND UNDER THE STUARTS: THE ENGLISH REVOLUTION. (1603-1714. )

I. THE FIRST TWO STUARTS. 

1. _Reign of James the First_ (1603-1625). 

THE "DIVINE RIGHT" OF KINGS AND THE "ROYAL TOUCH. "--With the end of theTudor line (see p. 561), James VI. Of Scotland, son of Mary Stuart, cameto the English throne, as James I. Of England. The accession of the Houseof Stuart brought England and Scotland under the same sovereign, thougheach country still retained its own Parliament. 

The Stuarts were firm believers in the doctrine of the "Divine Right" ofkings. They held that hereditary princes are the Lord's anointed, and thattheir authority can in no way be questioned or limited by people, priest, or Parliament. James I. 's own words were, "As it is atheism and blasphemyto dispute what God can do, so it is high contempt in a subject to disputewhat a king can do, or to say that the king cannot do this or that. "

This doctrine found much support in the popular superstition of the "RoyalTouch. " The king was believed to possess the power--a gift transmittedthrough the royal line of England from Edward the Confessor--of healingscrofulous persons by the laying on of hands. [Footnote: Consult Lecky, _A History of England in the Eighteenth Century_, Vol. I. P. 73. TheFrench kings were also supposed to possess the same miraculous power, inherited, as most believed, from Louis the Saint. ] It is simply thebearing of this strange superstition upon the doctrine of the divine rightof kings that concerns us now. "The political importance of thissuperstition, " observes Lecky, "is very manifest. Educated laymen mightderide it, but in the eyes of the English poor it was a visible, palpableattestation of the indefeasible sanctity of the royal line. It placed thesovereignty entirely apart from the categories of mere humaninstitutions. "

By bearing this superstition in mind, it will be easier for us tounderstand how so large a proportion of the people of England couldsupport the Stuarts in their extravagant claims, and could sincerelymaintain the doctrine of the sinfulness of resistance to the king. 

THE GUNPOWDER PLOT (1605). --In the third year of James's reign wasunearthed a plot to blow up with gunpowder the Parliament Building, uponthe opening day of the Session, when king, lords, and commons would all bepresent, and thus to destroy at a single blow every branch of the EnglishGovernment. This conspiracy, known as the Gunpowder Plot, was entered intoby a few Roman Catholics, because they were disappointed in the coursewhich the king had taken as regards their religion. [Footnote: Though sonof the Catholic Mary Stuart, James had been educated as a Protestant. ] Theleader of the conspiracy, Guy Fawkes, was arrested, and after being put tothe rack, was executed. His chief accomplices were also seized andpunished. The alarm created by the terrible plot led Parliament to enactsome very severe laws against all the Roman Catholics of the realm. 

COLONIES AND TRADE SETTLEMENTS. --The reign of James I. Is signalized bythe commencement of that system of colonization which has resulted in theestablishment of the English race in almost every quarter of the globe. 

In the year 1607 Jamestown, so named in honor of the king, was founded inVirginia. This was the first permanent English settlement within thelimits of the United States. In 1620 some Separatists, or Pilgrims, whohad found in Holland a temporary refuge from persecution, pushed acrossthe Atlantic, and amidst heroic sufferings and hardships established thefirst settlement in New England, and laid the foundations of civil libertyin the New World. 

Besides planting these settlements in the New World, the English duringthis same reign established themselves in the ancient country of India. In1612 the East India Company, which had been chartered by Elizabeth in1600, established their first trading-post at Surat. This was the humblebeginning of the gigantic English empire in the East. 

CONTEST BETWEEN JAMES AND THE COMMONS. --We have made mention of James'sidea of the divine right of kingship. Such a view of royal authority andprivileges was sure to bring him into conflict with Parliament, especiallywith the House of Commons. He was constantly dissolving Parliament andsending the members home, because they insisted upon considering subjectswhich he had told them they should let alone. 

The chief matters of dispute between the king and the Commons were thelimits of the authority of the former in matters touching legislation andtaxation, and the nature and extent of the privileges and jurisdictions ofthe latter. 

As to the limits of the royal power, James talked and acted as though hisprerogatives were practically unbounded. He issued proclamations which intheir scope were really laws, and then enforced these royal edicts byfines and imprisonment, as though they were regular statutes ofParliament. Moreover, taking advantage of some uncertainty in the law asregards the power of the king to collect customs at the ports of therealm, he laid new and unusual duties upon imports and exports. James'sjudges were servile enough to sustain him in this course, some of themgoing so far as to say that "the sea-ports are the king's gates, which hemay open and shut to whom he pleases. "

As to the privileges of the Commons, that body insisted, among otherthings, upon their right to determine all cases of contested election oftheir members, and to debate freely all questions concerning the commonweal, without being liable to prosecution or imprisonment for words spokenin the House. James denied that these privileges were matters of rightpertaining to the Commons, and repeatedly intimated to them that it wasonly through his own gracious permission and the favor of his ancestorsthat they were allowed to exercise these liberties at all, and that iftheir conduct was not more circumspect and reverential, he should takeaway their privileges entirely. 

On one occasion, the Commons having ventured to debate certain matters ofstate which the king had forbidden them to meddle with, he, in reprovingthem, made a more express denial than ever of their rights and privileges, which caused them, in a burst of noble indignation, to enter upon theirjournal a brave protest, known as "The Great Protestation, " which declaredthat "the liberties, franchises, privileges, and jurisdictions ofParliament are the ancient and undoubted birthright and inheritance of thesubjects of England, and that the arduous and urgent affairs concerningthe king, state, and defence of the realm . . . Are proper subjects andmatter of council and debate in Parliament" (1621). 

When intelligence of this action was carried to the king, he instantlysent for the journal of the House, and with his own hands tore out theleaf containing the obnoxious resolution. Then he angrily proroguedParliament, and even went so far as to imprison several of the members ofthe Commons. In these high handed measures we get a glimpse of the Stuarttheory of government, and see the way paved for the final break betweenking and people in the following reign. 

King James died in the year 1625, after a reign as sovereign of Englandand Scotland of twenty-two years. 

LITERATURE. --One of the most noteworthy literary labors of the reign underreview was a new translation of the Bible, known as _King James'sVersion_. This royal version is the one in general use at the presentday. 

The most noted writers of James's reign were a bequest to it from thebrilliant era of Elizabeth (see p. 560). Sir Walter Raleigh, the pettedcourtier of Elizabeth, fell on evil days after her death. On the charge oftaking part in a conspiracy against the crown, he was sent to the Tower, where he was kept a prisoner for thirteen years. From the tedium of hislong confinement, he found relief in the composition of a _History ofthe World_. He was at last beheaded. 

[Illustration: THE TOWER OF LONDON. ]

The close of the life of the great philosopher Francis Bacon, was scarcelyless sad than that of Sir Walter Raleigh. He held the office of LordChancellor, and yielding to the temptations of the corrupt times uponwhich he had fallen, accepted bribes from the suitors who brought casesbefore him. He was impeached and brought to the bar of the House of Lords, where he confessed his guilt, pathetically appealing to his judges "to bemerciful to a broken reed. " He lived only five years after his fall anddisgrace, dying in 1626. 

Bacon must be given the first place among the philosophers of the English-speaking race. His system is known as the _Inductive Method ofPhilosophy_. It insists upon experiment and a careful observation offacts as the only true means of arriving at a knowledge of the laws ofnature. 

2. _Reign of Charles the First_ (1625-1649). 

THE PETITION OF RIGHT (1628). --Charles I. Came to the throne with all hisfather's lofty notions about the divine right of kings. Consequently theold contest between king and Parliament was straightway renewed. The firsttwo Parliaments of his reign Charles dissolved speedily, because insteadof voting supplies they persisted in investigating public grievances. After the dissolution of his second Parliament Charles endeavored to raisethe money he needed to carry on the government, by means of "benevolences"and forced loans. But all his expedients failed to meet his needs, and hewas compelled to fall back upon Parliament. The Houses met, and promisedto grant him generous subsidies, provided he would sign a certain_Petition of Right_ which they had drawn up. Next after Magna Charta, this document up to this date is the most noted in the constitutionalhistory of England. It simply reaffirmed the ancient rights and privilegesof the English people as defined in the Great Charter and by the good lawsof Edward I. And Edward III. Four abuses were provided against: (i) theraising of money by loans, "benevolences, " taxes, etc. , without theconsent of Parliament; (2) arbitrary imprisonment; (3) the quartering ofsoldiers in private houses--a very vexatious thing; and (4) trial withoutjury. 

[Illustration: CHARLES I. (After a painting by A. Vandyke. )]

Charles was as reluctant to assent to the Petition as King John was toaffix his seal to the Magna Charta; but he was at length forced to givesanction to it by the use of the usual formula, "Let it be law as desired"(1628). 

CHARLES RULES WITHOUT PARLIAMENT (1629-1640). --It soon became evident thatCharles was utterly insincere when he put his name to the Petition ofRight. He immediately violated its provisions in attempting to raise moneyby forbidden taxes and loans. For eleven years he ruled withoutParliament, thus changing the government of England from a government byking, lords, and commons, to what was in effect an absolute andirresponsible monarchy, like that of France or Spain. 

As is always the case under such circumstances, there were enough personsready to aid the king in his schemes of usurpation. Prominent among hisunscrupulous agents were his ministers Thomas Wentworth (Earl of Stafford)and William Laud. Wentworth devoted himself to establishing the royaldespotism in civil matters; while Laud, who was made Archbishop ofCanterbury, busied himself chiefly with exalting above all humaninterference the king's prerogatives in religious affairs as the supremehead of the English Church. 

All these high-handed and tyrannical proceedings of Charles and his agentswere enforced by certain courts that had been wrested from their originalpurpose and moulded into instruments of despotism. These were known as the_Council of the North_, the _Star Chamber_, and the _High CommissionCourt_. [Footnote: The first was a tribunal established by Henry VIII. , and was now employed by Wentworth as an instrument for enforcing theking's despotic authority in the turbulent northern counties of England. The Star Chamber was a court of somewhat obscure origin, which at thistime dealt chiefly with criminal cases affecting the government, such asriot, libel, and conspiracy. The High Commission Court was a tribunal offorty-four commissioners, created in Elizabeth's reign to enforce the actsof Supremacy and Uniformity. ] All of these courts sat without jury, andbeing composed of the creatures of the king, were of course hissubservient instruments. Their decisions were unjust and arbitrary; theirpunishments, harsh and cruel. 

JOHN HAMPDEN AND SHIP-MONEY. --Among the illegal taxes levied during thisperiod of tyranny was a species known as ship-money, so called from thefact that in early times the kings, when the realm was in danger, calledupon the sea-ports and maritime counties to contribute ships and ship-material for the public service. Charles and his agents, in looking thismatter over, conceived the idea of extending this tax over the inland aswell as the sea-board counties. 

Among those who refused to pay the tax was a country gentleman, named JohnHampden. The case was tried in the Exchequer Chamber, before all thetwelve judges. All England watched the progress of the suit with theutmost solicitude. The question was argued by able counsel both on theside of Hampden and of the crown. Judgment was finally rendered in favorof the king, although five of the twelve judges stood for Hampden. Thecase was lost; but the people, who had been following the arguments, werefully persuaded that it went against Hampden simply for the reason thatthe judges stood in fear of the royal displeasure, and that they did notdare to decide the case adversely to the crown. 

The arbitrary and despotic character which the government had now assumedin both civil and religious matters, and the hopelessness of relief orprotection from the courts, caused thousands to seek in the New World thatfreedom and security which was denied them in their own land. 

THE COVENANTERS. --England was almost ready to rise in open revolt againstthe unbearable tyranny. Events in Scotland hastened the crisis. The kingwas attempting to impose the English liturgy (slightly modified) upon theScotch Presbyterians. At Edinburgh this led to a riot, one of the womenworshippers throwing a stool at the bishop who attempted to read theservice. The spirit of resistance spread. All classes, nobles and peasantsalike, bound themselves by a solemn covenant to resist to the very lastevery attempt to make innovations in their religion. From this act theybecame known as Covenanters (1638). 

The king resolved to crush the movement by force, but he soon found thatwar could not be carried on without money, and was constrained to summonParliament in hopes of obtaining a vote of supplies. But instead of makingthe king a grant of money, the Commons first gave their attention to thematter of grievances, whereupon Charles dissolved the Parliament. TheScottish forces crossed the border, and the king, helpless, with an emptytreasury and a seditious army, was forced again to summon the two Houses. 

THE LONG PARLIAMENT. --Under this call met on November 3, 1640, thatParliament which, from the circumstance of its lasting over twelve years, became known as the Long Parliament. The members of the Commons of thisParliament were stern and determined men, who were resolved to put a checkto the despotic course of the king. 

Almost the first act of the Commons was the impeachment and trial ofStrafford and Laud, as the most prominent instruments of the king'styranny and usurpation. Both were finally brought to the block. The threeiniquitous and illegal courts of which we have spoken (see p. 607) wereabolished. And the Commons, to secure themselves against dissolutionbefore their work was done, enacted a law which provided that they shouldnot be adjourned or dissolved without their own consent. 

CHARLES'S ATTEMPT TO SEIZE THE FIVE MEMBERS. --An act of violence on thepart of Charles now precipitated the nation into the gulf of civil war, towards which events had been so rapidly drifting. With the design ofoverawing the Commons, the king made a charge of treason against five ofthe leading members, among whom were Hampden and Pym, and sent officers toeffect their arrest; but the accused were not to be found. The next dayCharles himself, accompanied to the door of the chamber by armedattendants, went to the House, for the purpose of seizing the fivemembers; but, having been forewarned of the king's intention, they hadwithdrawn from the hall. The king was not long in realizing the state ofaffairs, and with the observation, "I see the birds have flown, " withdrewfrom the chamber. 

Charles had taken a fatal step. The nation could not forgive the insultoffered to its representatives. All London rose in arms. The king, frightened by the storm which he had raised, fled from the city to York. From this flight of Charles from London, may be dated the beginning of theCivil War (Jan. 10, 1642). 

Having now traced the events which led up to this open strife between theking and his people, we shall pass very lightly over the incidents of thestruggle itself, and hasten to speak of the Commonwealth, to theestablishment of which the struggle led. 

3. _The Civil War_ (1642-1649). 

THE BEGINNING. --After the flight of the king, negotiations were enteredinto between him and Parliament with a view to a reconciliation. Thedemands of Parliament were that the militia, the services of the Church, the education and marriage of the king's children, and many other mattersshould be subject to the control of the two Houses. In making all thesedemands Parliament had manifestly gone to unreasonable andunconstitutional lengths; but their distrust of Charles was so profound, that they were unwilling to leave in his hands any power or prerogativethat might be perverted or abused. Charles refused, as might have been andwas expected, to accede to the propositions of Parliament, and unfurlingthe royal standard at Nottingham, called upon all loyal subjects to rallyto the support of their king (Aug. 22, 1642). 

THE TWO PARTIES. --The country was now divided into two great parties. Those that enlisted under the king's standard--on whose side rallied, forthe most part, the nobility, the gentry, and the clergy--were known asRoyalists, or Cavaliers; while those that gathered about the Parliamentarybanner were called Parliamentarians, or Roundheads, the latter term beingapplied to them because many of their number cropped their hair close tothe head, simply for the reason that the Cavaliers affected long andflowing locks. The Cavaliers, in the main, favored the Established Church, while the Roundheads were, in general, Puritans. During the progress ofthe struggle the Puritans split into two parties, or sects, known asPresbyterians and Independents. 

For six years England now suffered even greater evils than those thatmarked that earlier civil strife known as the Wars of the Roses. 

OLIVER CROMWELL AND HIS "IRONSIDES. "--The war had continued about threeyears when there came into prominence among the officers of theParliamentary forces a man of destiny, one of the great characters ofhistory, --Oliver Cromwell. During the early campaigns of the war, ascolonel of a regiment of cavalry, he had exhibited his rare genius as anorganizer and disciplinarian. His regiment became famous under the name of"Cromwell's Ironsides. " It was composed entirely of "men of religion. "Swearing, drinking, and the usual vices of the camp were unknown amongthem. They advanced to the charge singing psalms. During all the war theregiment was never once beaten. 

THE SELF-DENYING ORDINANCE (1645). --In the course of the war the Puritans, as has been said, became divided into two parties, the Presbyterians andthe Independents. The former desired to reestablish a limited monarchy;the latter wished to sweep aside the old constitution and form a republic. 

In the third year of the war there arose a struggle as to which partyshould have control of the army. By means of what was called the "Self-denying Ordinance, " which declared that no member of either House shouldhold a position in the army, the Independents effected the removal fromtheir command of several conservative noblemen. Cromwell, as he was amember of the House of Commons, should also have given up his command; butthe ordinance was suspended in his case, so that he might retain his placeas lieutenant-general. Sir Thomas Fairfax was made commander-in-chief. Though Cromwell was nominally second in command, he was now really at thehead of the army. 

THE "NEW MODEL. "--Cromwell at once set about to effect the entireremodelling of the army on the plan of his favorite Ironsides. His ideawas that "the chivalry of the Cavalier must be met by the religiousenthusiasm of the Puritan. " The army was reduced to 20, 000 men--allhonest, fervent, God-fearing, psalm-singing Puritans. When not fighting, they studied the Bible, prayed and sung hymns. Since Godfrey led hiscrusaders to the rescue of the Holy Sepulchre, the world had not beheldanother such army of religious enthusiasts. From Cromwell down to thelowest soldier of the "New Model, " every man felt called of the Lord tostrike down all forms of tyranny in Church and State. 

THE BATTLE OF NASEBY (1645). --The temper of the "New Model" was soon triedin the battle of Naseby, the decisive engagement of the war. The Royalistswere scattered to the winds, and their cause was irretrievably lost. Charles escaped from the field, and ultimately fled into Scotland, thinking that he might rely upon the loyalty of the Scots to the House ofStuart; but on his refusing to sign the Covenant and certain otherarticles, they gave him up to the English Parliament. 

"PRIDE'S PURGE" (1648). --Now, there were many in the Parliament who werein favor of restoring the king unconditionally to his throne, that is, without requiring from him any guaranties that he would in the future rulein accordance with the constitution and the laws of the land. TheIndependents, which means Cromwell and the army, saw in this possibilitythe threatened ruin of all their hopes, and the loss of all the fruits ofvictory. A high-handed measure was resolved upon, --the exclusion from theHouse of Commons of all those members who favored the restoration ofCharles. 

Accordingly, an officer by the name of Pride was stationed at the door ofthe hall, to arrest the members obnoxious to the army. One hundred andforty members were thus kept from their seats, and the Commons therebyreduced to about fifty representatives, all of whom of course wereIndependents. This performance was appropriately called "Pride's Purge. "It was simply an act of military usurpation. 

TRIAL AND EXECUTION OF THE KING. --The Commons thus "purged" of the king'sfriends now passed a resolution for the immediate trial of Charles fortreason. A High Court of Justice, comprising 150 members, was organized, before which Charles was summoned. Before the close of a week he wascondemned to be executed "as a tyrant, traitor, murderer, and enemy of hiscountry. "

II. THE COMMONWEALTH (1649-1660). 

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMONWEALTH. --A few weeks after the execution ofCharles, the Commons voted to abolish the Monarchy and the House of Lords, and to establish a republic, under the name of "The Commonwealth. " Theexecutive power was lodged in a Council of State, composed of forty-onepersons. Of this body Bradshaw, an eminent lawyer, was the nominal, butCromwell the real, head. 

TROUBLES OF THE COMMONWEALTH. --The republic thus born of mingled religiousand political enthusiasm was beset with dangers from the very first. Theexecution of Charles had alarmed every sovereign in Europe. Russia, France, and Holland, all refused to have any communication with theambassadors of the Commonwealth. The Scots, who too late repented ofhaving surrendered their native sovereign into the hands of his enemies, now hastened to wipe out the stain of their disloyalty by proclaiming hisson their king, with the title of Charles the Second. The impulsive Irishalso declared for the Prince; while the Dutch began active preparations toassist him in regaining the throne of his unfortunate father. In Englanditself the Royalists were active and threatening. 

WAR WITH IRELAND. --The Commonwealth, like the ancient republic of Rome, seemed to gather strength and energy from the very multitude ofsurrounding dangers. Cromwell was made Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, andsent into that country to crush a rising of the Royalists there. With hisIronsides he made quick and terrible work of the conquest of the island. Having taken by storm the town of Drogheda (1649), he massacred the entiregarrison, consisting of three thousand men. About a thousand who hadsought asylum in a church were butchered there without mercy. The captureof other towns was accompanied by massacres little less terrible. Theconqueror's march through the island was the devastating march of anAttila or a Zinghis Khan. The following is his own account of the mannerin which he dealt with the captured garrisons: "When they submitted, theirofficers were knocked on the head, and every tenth man of the soldierskilled, and the rest shipped for Barbadoes [to be sold into slavery]. "

WAR WITH SCOTLAND. --Cromwell was called out of Ireland by the Council tolead an army into Scotland. The terror of his name went before him, andthe people fled as he approached. At Dunbar he met the Scotch army. Beforethe terrible onset of the fanatic Roundheads the Scots were scattered likechaff before the wind (1650). 

The following year, on the anniversary of the Battle of Dunbar, Cromwellgained another great victory over the Scottish army at Worcester, and allScotland was soon after forced to submit to the authority of theCommonwealth. Prince Charles, after many adventurous experiences, escapedacross the Channel into Normandy. 

CROMWELL EJECTS THE LONG PARLIAMENT (1653). --The war in Scotland wasfollowed by one with the Dutch. While this war was in progress Parliamentcame to an open quarrel with the army. Cromwell demanded of Parliamenttheir dissolution, and the calling of a new body. This they refused;whereupon, taking with him a body of soldiers, Cromwell went to the House, and after listening impatiently for a while to the debate, suddenly sprangto his feet, and, with bitter reproaches, exclaimed: "I will put an end toyour prating. Get you gone; give place to better men. You are noParliament. The Lord has done with you. " The soldiers rushing in at apreconcerted signal, the hall was cleared, and the doors locked (1653). 

In such summary manner the Long Parliament, or the "Rump Parliament, " asit was called in derision after Pride's Purge, was dissolved, after havingsat for twelve years. So completely had the body lost the confidence andrespect of all parties, that scarcely a murmur was heard against theillegal and arbitrary mode of its dissolution. 

THE LITTLE PARLIAMENT. --Cromwell now called a new Parliament, or moreproperly a convention, summoning, so far as he might, only religious, God-fearing men. The "Little Parliament, " as generally called, consisted of156 members, mainly religious persons, who spent much of their time inScripture exegesis, prayer, and exhortation. Among them was a Londonleather-merchant, named Praise-God Barebone, who was especially given tothese exercises. The name amused the people, and they nicknamed theConvention the "Praise-God Barebone Parliament. "

The Little Parliament sat only a few months, during which time, however, it really did some excellent work, particularly in the way of suggestingimportant reforms. It at length resigned all its powers into the hands ofCromwell; and shortly afterwards his council of army officers, fearing thecountry would fall into anarchy, persuaded him--though manifestingreluctance, he probably was quite willing to be persuaded--to accept thetitle of "Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. "

[Illustration: OLIVER CROMWELL]

THE PROTECTORATE (1653-1659). --Cromwell's power was now almost unlimited. He was virtually a dictator. His administration was harsh and despotic. Hesummoned, prorogued, and dissolved parliaments. The nation was reallyunder martial law. Royalists and active Roman Catholics were treated withthe utmost rigor. A censorship of the Press was established. Scotland wasoverawed by strong garrisons. The Irish Royalists, rising against the"usurper, " were crushed with remorseless severity. Thousands weremassacred, and thousands more were transported to the West Indies to besold as slaves. 

While the resolute and despotic character of Cromwell's government securedobedience at home, its strength and vigor awakened the fear as well as theadmiration of foreign nations. He gave England the strongest, and in manyrespects the best, government she had had since the days of Henry VIII andElizabeth. 

CROMWELL'S DEATH. --Notwithstanding Cromwell was a man of immovableresolution and iron spirit, he felt sorely the burdens of his government, and was deeply troubled by the perplexities of his position. With hisconstitution undermined by overwork and anxiety, fever attacked him, andwith gloomy apprehensions as to the terrible dangers into which Englandmight drift after his hand had fallen from the helm of affairs, he laydown to die, passing away on the day which he had always called his"fortunate day"--the anniversary of his birth, and also the anniversary ofhis great victories of Dunbar and Worcester (Sept. 3, 1658). 

RICHARD CROMWELL (1658-1659). --Cromwell with his dying breath haddesignated his son Richard as his successor in the office of theProtectorate. Richard was exactly the opposite of his father, --timid, irresolute, and irreligious. The control of affairs that had taxed to theutmost the genius and resources of the father was altogether too great anundertaking for the incapacity and inexperience of the son. No one wasquicker to realize this than Richard himself, and after a rule of a fewmonths, yielding to the pressure of the army, whose displeasure he hadincurred, he resigned the Protectorate. Had he possessed one-half theenergy and practical genius that characterized his father, the crown wouldprobably have become hereditary in the family of the Cromwells, and theirhouse might have been numbered among the royal houses of England. 

THE RESTORATION (1660). --For some months after the fall of theProtectorate the country trembled on the verge of anarchy. The gloomyoutlook into the future, and the unsatisfactory experiment of theCommonwealth, caused the great mass of the English people earnestly todesire the restoration of the Monarchy. Prince Charles, towards whom thetide of returning royalty was running, was now in Holland. A race wasactually run between Monk, the leader of the army, and Parliament, to seewhich should first present him with the invitation to return to hispeople, and take his place upon the throne of his ancestors. Amid thewildest demonstrations of joy, Charles stepped ashore on the island fromwhich he had been for nine years an exile. As he observed the preparationsmade for his reception, and received from all parties the warmestcongratulations, he remarked with pleasant satire, "It is my own faultthat I did not come back sooner, for I find nobody who does not tell me hehas always longed for my return. "

1. _Puritan Literature_. 

IT LIGHTS UP THE RELIGIOUS SIDE OF THE ENGLISH REVOLUTION. --No epoch inhistory receives a fresher illustration from the study of its literaturethan that of the Puritan Commonwealth. To neglect this, and yet hope togain a true conception of that wonderful episode in the life of theEnglish people by an examination of its outer events and incidents alone, would, as Green declares, be like trying to form an idea of the life andwork of ancient Israel from the _Kings_ and the _Chronicles_, without the_Psalms_ and the _Prophets_. The true character of the English Revolution, especially upon its religious side, must be sought in the magnificent Epicof Milton and the unequalled Allegory of Bunyan. 

Both of these great works, it is true, were written after the Restoration, but they were both inspired by the same spirit that had struck downDespotism and set up the Commonwealth. The Epic was the work of a lonely, disappointed Republican; the Allegory, of a captive Puritan. 

Milton (1608-1674) stands as the grandest representative of Puritanism. Hewas the greatest statesman of the Revolution, the stoutest champion ofEnglish liberties against the tyranny of the House of Stuart. After thebeheading of Charles I. He wrote a famous work in Latin, entitled _TheDefence of the English People_, in which he justified the execution ofthe king. 

The Restoration forced Milton into retirement, and the last fourteen yearsof his life were passed apart from the world. It was during these yearsthat, in loneliness and blindness, he composed the immortal poems_Paradise Lost_ and _Paradise Regained_. The former is the "Epic ofPuritanism. " All that was truest and grandest in the Puritan characterfound expression in the moral elevation and religious fervor of this thegreatest of Christian poems. 

John Bunyan (1628-1688) was a Puritan non-conformist. After theRestoration, he was imprisoned for twelve years in Bedford jail, onaccount of non-conformity to the established worship. It was during thisdreary confinement that he wrote his _Pilgrim's Progress_, the mostadmirable allegory in English literature. The habit of the Puritan, fromconstant study of the Bible, to employ in all forms of discourse itslanguage and imagery, is best illustrated in the pages of this remarkablework. 

III. THE RESTORED STUARTS. 

1. _Reign of Charles the Second_ (1660-1685). 

PUNISHMENT OF THE REGICIDES. --The monarchy having been restored in theperson of Charles II, Parliament extended a general pardon to all who hadtaken part in the late rebellion, save most of the judges who hadcondemned Charles I. To the block. Thirteen of these were executed withthe revolting cruelty with which treason was then punished, their heartsand bowels being cut out of their living bodies. Others of the regicideswere condemned to imprisonment for life. Death had already removed thegreat leaders of the rebellion, Cromwell, Ireton, and Bradshaw, beyond thereach of Royalist hate; so vengeance was taken upon their bodies. Thesewere dragged from their tombs in Westminster Abbey, hauled to Tyburn inLondon, and there, on the anniversary of Charles's execution, were hanged, and afterwards beheaded (1661). 

THE "NEW MODEL" IS DISBANDED. --This same Parliament, mindful of how thearmy had ruled preceding ones, took care to disband, as soon as possible, the "New Model. " "With them, " in the words of the historian Green, "Puritanism laid down the sword. It ceased from the long attempt to buildup a kingdom of God by force and violence, and fell back on its truer workof building up a kingdom of righteousness in the hearts and consciences ofmen. "

On the pretext, however, that the disturbed state of the realm demandedspecial precautions on the part of the government, Charles retained in hisservice three carefully chosen regiments, to which he gave the name ofGuards. These, very soon augmented in number, formed the nucleus of thepresent standing army of England. 

THE CONVENTICLE AND FIVE-MILE ACTS. --Early in the reign the services ofthe Anglican Church were restored by Parliament, and harsh laws wereenacted against all non-conformists. Thus the Conventicle Act made it acrime punishable by imprisonment or transportation for more than fivepersons besides the household to gather in any house or in any place forworship, unless the service was conducted according to the forms of theEstablished Church. 

The Five-Mile Act forbade any non-conformist minister who refused to swearthat it is unlawful to take arms against the king _under anycircumstance_, and that he never would attempt to make any change inChurch or State government, to approach within five miles of any city, corporate town, or borough sending members to Parliament. This harsh actforced hundreds to give up their homes in the towns, and, with greatinconvenience and loss, to seek new ones in out-of-the-way country places. 

PERSECUTION OF THE COVENANTERS. --In Scotland the attempt to suppressconventicles and introduce Episcopacy was stubbornly resisted by theCovenanters, who insisted on their right to worship God in their own way. They were therefore subjected to most cruel and unrelenting persecution. They were hunted by English troopers over their native moors and among thewild recesses of their mountains, whither they secretly retired for prayerand worship. The tales of the suffering of the Scotch Covenanters at thehands of the English Protestants form a most harrowing chapter of therecords of the ages of religious persecution. 

THE FIRE, THE PLAGUE, AND THE DUTCH WAR. --The years from 1664 to 1667 werecrowded with calamities, --with war, plague, and fire. The poet Dryden notinaptly calls the year 1666, in which the Great Fire at London added itshorrors to those of pestilence and war, the _Annus Mirabilis_, or"Year of Wonders. "

The war alluded to was a struggle between the English and the Dutch, whichgrew out of commercial rivalries (1664-1667). Just before the war began, the English treacherously seized the Dutch settlement of New Amsterdam inAmerica, and changed its name to New York in honor of the king's brother, the Duke of York. 

Early in the summer of 1665 the city of London was swept by a woefulplague, the most terrible visitation the city had known since the BlackDeath in the Middle Ages (see p. 485). Within six months 100, 000 of thepopulation perished. 

The plague was followed, the next year, by the great fire, which destroyed13, 000 houses, and a vast number of churches and public buildings. Thefire was afterwards acknowledged to be, like the Great Fire at Rome inNero's reign, a blessing in disguise. The burnt districts were rebuilt ina more substantial way, with broader streets and more airy residences, sothat London became a more beautiful and healthful city than would havebeen possible without the fire. 

CHARLES'S INTRIGUES WITH LOUIS XIV. --Charles inclined to the Catholicworship, and wished to reestablish the Roman Catholic Church, because hethought it more favorable than the Anglican to such a scheme of governmentas he aimed to set up in England. In the year 1670 he made a secret treatywith the French king, the terms and objects of which were most scandalous. In return for aid which he was to render Louis in an attack upon Holland, he was to receive from him a large sum of money; and in case his proposeddeclaration in favor of the restoration of the Catholic Church producedany trouble in the island, the aid of French troops. The scheme was neverconsummated; but these clandestine negotiations, however, becoming an opensecret, made the people very uneasy and suspicious. This state of thepublic mind led to a serious delusion and panic. 

THE "POPISH PLOT" (1678). --A rumor was started that the Catholics hadplanned for England a St. Bartholomew massacre. The king, the members ofParliament, and all Protestants were to be massacred, the Catholic Churchwas to be reestablished, and the king's brother James, the Duke of York, azealous Catholic, was to be placed on the throne. Each day the reports ofthe conspiracy grew more exaggerated and wild. Informers sprang up onevery hand, each with a more terrifying story than the preceding. One ofthese witnesses, Titus Oates by name, a most infamous person, gained anextraordinary notoriety in exposing the imaginary plot. Many Catholics, convicted solely on the testimony of perjured witnesses, became victims ofthe delusion and fraud. 

The excitement produced by the supposed plot led Parliament to pass whatwas called the Test Act, which excluded Catholics from the House of Lords. (They had already been shut out from the House of Commons by the oath ofSupremacy, which was required of commoners, though not of peers. ) Thedisability created by this statute was not removed from them until thepresent century, --in the reign of George the Fourth. 

ORIGIN OF THE WHIG AND TORY PARTIES. --Besides shutting Catholic peers outof Parliament, there were many in both houses who were determined toexclude the Duke of York from the throne. Those in favor of the measure ofexclusion were called Whigs, those who opposed it Tories. [Footnote: Forthe meaning of the names Whig and Tory, see _Glossary_. ] We cannot, perhaps, form a better general idea of the maxims and principles of thesetwo parties than by calling the Whigs the political descendants of theRoundheads, and the Tories of the Cavaliers. Later, they became knownrespectively as Liberals and Conservatives. 

THE KING'S DEATH. --After a reign of just a quarter of a century, Charlesdied in 1685, and was followed by his brother James, whose rule wasdestined to be short and troubled. 

2. _Reign of James the Second_ (1685-1688). 

JAMES'S DESPOTIC COURSE. [Footnote: James was barely seated upon thethrone before the Duke of Monmouth, an illegitimate son of Charles II. , who had been in exile in the Netherlands, asserted his right to the crown, and at the head of a hundred men invaded England. Thousands flocked to hisstandard, but in the battle of Sedgemoor (1685) he was utterly defeatedby the royal troops. Terrible vengeance was wreaked upon all in any wayconnected with the rebellion. The notorious Chief Justice Jeffries, inwhat were called the "Bloody Assizes, " condemned to death 320 persons, andsentenced 841 to transportation. Jeffries conducted the so-called trialswith incredible brutality. ]--James, like all the other Stuarts, heldexalted notions of the divine right of kings to rule as they please, andat once set about carrying out these ideas in a most imprudent andreckless manner. Notwithstanding he had given most solemn assurances thathe would uphold the Anglican Church, he straightway set about thereestablishment of the Roman Catholic worship. He arbitrarily proroguedand dissolved Parliament. The standing army, which Charles had raised to10, 000 men, he increased to 20, 000, and placed Catholics in many of itsmost important offices. He formed a league against his own subjects withLouis XIV. The High Commission Court of Elizabeth, which had beenabolished by Parliament, he practically restored in a new ecclesiasticaltribunal presided over by the infamous Jeffries (see note, below). 

The despotic course of the king raised up enemies on all sides. No partyor sect, save the most zealous Catholics, stood by him. The Tory gentrywere in favor of royalty, indeed, but not of tyranny. Thinking to makefriends of the Protestant dissenters, James issued a decree known as theDeclaration of Indulgence, whereby he suspended all the laws against non-conformists. This edict all the clergy were ordered to read from theirpulpits. Almost to a man they refused to do so. Seven bishops even daredto send the king a petition and remonstrance against his unconstitutionalproceedings. 

The petitioners were thrust into the Tower, and soon brought to trial onthe charge of "seditious libel. " The nation was now thoroughly aroused, and the greatest excitement prevailed while the trial was progressing. Judges and jury were overawed by the popular demonstration, and thebishops were acquitted. The news of the result of the trial was receivednot only by the people, but by the army as well, with shouts of joy, whichdid not fail to reach even the dull ears of the king. 

THE REVOLUTION OF 1688. --The crisis which it was easy to see was impendingwas hastened by the birth of a prince, as this cut off the hope of thenation that the crown upon James's death would descend to his daughterMary, now wife of the Prince of Orange, Stadtholder of Holland. Theprospect of the accession in the near future of a Protestant and freedomloving Prince and Princess had reconciled the people to the misgovernmentof their present despotic and Catholic sovereign. The appearance upon thestage of an infant prince gave a wholly different look to affairs, and, aswe have said, destroyed all hope of matters being righted by the ordinarycourse of events. 

This led the most active of the king's opponents to resolve to bring aboutat once what they had been inclined to wait to have accomplished by hisdeath. They sent an invitation to the Prince of Orange to come over withsuch force as he could muster and take possession of the government, pledging him the united and hearty support of the English nation. Williamaccepted the invitation, and straightway began to gather his fleet andarmy for the enterprise. 

Meanwhile King James, in his blind and obstinate way, was rushing onheadlong upon his own destruction. He seemed absolutely blind to thesteady and rapid drift of the nation towards the point of open resistanceand revolution. At last, when the sails of the Dutch fleet were spread fora descent upon the English shores, then the infatuated despot suddenlyrealized that absolute ruin was impending over his throne. He now adoptedevery expedient to avert the threatened evil. He restored to cities thecharters he had wrongfully taken from them, reinstated magistrates in thepositions from which they had been unjustly deposed, attempted to makefriends with the bishops, and promised to sustain the Anglican Church andrule in accordance with the constitution of the realm. 

All concessions and promises, however, were in vain. They came too late. The king was absolutely deserted; army and people went over in a body tothe Prince of Orange, whose fleet had now touched the shores of theisland. Flight alone was left him. The queen with her infant childsecretly embarked for France, where the king soon after joined her. Thelast act of the king before leaving England was to disband the army, andfling the Great Seal into the Thames, in order that no parliament might belegally convened. 

The first act of the Prince of Orange was to issue a call for a Conventionto provide for the permanent settlement of the crown. This body metJanuary 22, 1689, and after a violent debate declared the throne to bevacant through James's misconduct and flight. They then resolved to conferthe royal dignity upon William and his wife Mary as joint sovereigns ofthe realm. 

But this Convention did not repeat the error of the Parliament thatrestored Charles II. , and give the crown to the Prince and Princesswithout proper safeguards and guaranties for the conduct of the governmentaccording to the ancient laws of the kingdom. They drew up the celebratedDeclaration of Rights, which plainly rehearsed all the old rights andliberties of Englishmen; denied the right of the king to lay taxes ormaintain an army without the consent of Parliament; and asserted thatfreedom of debate was the inviolable privilege of both the Lords and theCommons. William and Mary were required to accept this declaration, and toagree to rule in accordance with its provisions, whereupon they weredeclared King and Queen of England. In such manner was effected what isknown in history as the Revolution of 1688. 

3. _Literature of the Restoration_. 

IT REFLECTS THE IMMORALITY OF THE AGE. --The reigns of the restored Stuartsmark the most corrupt period in the history of English society. The lowstandard of morals, and the general prodigacy in manners, especially amongthe higher classes, are in part attributable to the demoralizing exampleof a shockingly licentious and shameless court; but in a larger measure, perhaps, should be viewed as the natural reaction from the over-stern, repellent Puritanism of the preceding period. The Puritans undoubtedlyerred in their indiscriminate and wholesale denunciation of all forms ofharmless amusement and innocent pleasure. They not only rebuked gaming, drinking, and profanity, and stopped bear-baiting, but they closed all thetheatres, forbade the Maypole dances of the people, condemned as paganishthe observance of Christmas, frowned upon sculpture as idolatrous andindecent, and considered any bright color in dress as utterly incompatiblewith a proper sense of the seriousness of life. 

Now all this was laying too heavy a burden upon human nature. The revoltand reaction came, as come they must. Upon the Restoration, society swungto the opposite extreme. In place of the solemn-visaged, psalm-singingRoundhead, we have the gay, roistering Cavalier. Faith gives place toinfidelity, sobriety to drunkenness, purity to profligacy, economy toextravagance, Bible-study, psalm-singing and exhorting to theatre-going, profanity, and carousing. 

The literature of the age is a perfect record of this revolt against the"sour severity" of Puritanism, and a faithful reflection of the unblushingimmorality of the times. 

The book most read and praised by Charles II, and his court, and the onethat best represents the spirit of the victorious party, is the satiricalpoem of _Hudibras_ by Samuel Butler. The object of the work is to satirizethe cant and excesses of Puritanism, just as the _Don Quixote_ ofCervantes burlesques the extravagances and follies of Chivalry. 

So immoral and indecent are the works of the writers for the stage of thisperiod that they have acquired the designation of "the corruptdramatists. " Among the authors of this species of literature was the poetDryden. 

IV. THE ORANGE-STUARTS. 

1. _Reign of William and Mary_ (1689-1702). 

THE BILL OF RIGHTS. --The Revolution of 1688, and the new settlement of thecrown upon William and Mary, marks an epoch in the constitutional historyof England. It settled forever the long dispute between king andParliament--and settled it in favor of the latter. The Bill of Rights, --the articles of the Declaration of Rights (see p. 624) framed into a law, --which was one of the earliest acts of the first Parliament under Williamand Mary, in effect "transferred sovereignty from the king to the House ofCommons. " It asserted plainly that the kings of England derive their rightand title to rule, not from the accident of birth, but from the will ofthe people, and declared that Parliament might depose any king, excludehis heirs from the throne, and settle the crown anew in another family. This uprooted thoroughly the pernicious doctrine that princes have adivine and inalienable right to the throne of their ancestors, and whenonce seated on that throne rule simply as the vicegerents of God, aboveall human censure and control. We shall hear but little more in England ofthis monstrous theory, which for so long a time overshadowed andthreatened the freedom of the English people. 

Mindful of Charles's attempt to reestablish the Roman Catholic worship, the framers of this same famous Bill of Rights further declared that allpersons holding communion with the Church of Rome or uniting in marriagewith a Roman Catholic, should be "forever incapable to possess, inherit, or enjoy the crown and government of the realm. " Since the Revolution of1688 no one of that faith has worn the English crown. 

The other provisions of the bill, following closely the language of theDeclaration, forbade the king to levy taxes or keep an army in time ofpeace without the consent of Parliament; demanded that Parliament shouldbe frequently assembled; reaffirmed, as one of the ancient privileges ofboth Houses, perfect freedom of debate; and positively denied thedispensing power of the crown, that is, the authority claimed by theStuarts of exempting certain persons from the penalty of the law by aroyal edict. 

All of these provisions now became inwrought into the EnglishConstitution, and from this time forward were recognized as part of thefundamental law of the realm. 

SETTLEMENT OF THE REVENUE. --The articles of the Bill of Rights were madeeffectual by appropriate legislation. One thing which had enabled theTudors and Stuarts to be so independent of Parliament was the custom whichprevailed of granting to each king, at the beginning of his reign, theordinary revenue of the kingdom during his life. This income, with whatcould be raised by gifts, benevolences, monopolies, and similarexpedients, had enabled despotic sovereigns to administer the government, wage war, and engage in any wild enterprise just as his own individualcaprice or passion might dictate. All this was now changed. Parliament, instead of granting William the revenue for life, restricted the grant toa single year, and made it a penal offence for the officers of thetreasury to pay out money otherwise than ordered by Parliament. 

We cannot overestimate the importance of this change in the EnglishConstitution. It is this control of the purse of the nation which has madethe Commons--for all money bills must originate in the Lower House--theactual seat of government, constituting them the arbiters of peace andwar. By simply refusing to vote supplies, they can paralyze instantly thearm of the king. [Footnote: For the _Mutiny Bill_, enacted at thistime, see _Glossary_. ]

JAMES ATTEMPTS TO RECOVER THE THRONE: BATTLE OF THE BOYNE (1690). --Thefirst years of William's reign were disturbed by the efforts of James toregain the throne which he had abandoned. In these attempts he was aidedby Louis XIV. , and by the Jacobites (from _Jacobus_, Latin for James), thename given to the adherents of the exiled king. The Irish gave William themost trouble, but in the decisive battle of the Boyne he gained a greatvictory over them, and soon all Ireland acknowledged his authority. 

PLANS AND DEATH OF WILLIAM. --The motive which had most strongly urgedWilliam to respond to the invitation of the English revolutionists toassume the crown of England, was his desire to turn the arms and resourcesof that country against the great champion of despotism, and the dangerousneighbor of his own native country, Louis XIV. Of France. 

The conduct of Louis in lending aid to James in his attempts to regain hiscrown had so inflamed the English that they were quite ready to supportWilliam in his wars against him, and so the English and Dutch sailorsfought side by side against the common enemy in the War of the Palatinate(see p. 595). 

A short time after the Peace of Ryswick, broke out the War of the SpanishSuccession (see p. 596). William, as the uncompromising foe of theambitious French king, urged the English to enter the war against France. An insolent and perfidious act on the part of Louis caused the Englishpeople to support their king in this plan with great unanimity andheartiness. The matter to which we refer was this. James II. Having diedat just this juncture of affairs, Louis, disregarding his solemn promises, at once acknowledged his son, known in history as the "Pretender, " as"King of Great Britain and Ireland. "

Preparations were now made for the war thus provoked by the double senseof danger and insult. In the midst of these preparations William wasfatally hurt by being thrown from his horse (1702). Mary had died in 1694, and as they left no children, the crown descended to the Princess Anne, Mary's sister, who had married Prince George of Denmark. 

2. _Reign of Queen Anne_ (1702-1714). 

WAR OF THE SPANISH SUCCESSION (1701-1714). --The War of the SpanishSuccession covered the whole of the reign of Queen Anne. Of the causes andresults of this war, and of England's part in it, we have spoken inconnection with the reign of Louis XIV. (see p. 596); and so, referringthe reader to the account of the contest there given, we shall pass tospeak of another event of a domestic character which signalized the reignof Queen Anne. 

UNION OF THE PARLIAMENTS OF ENGLAND AND SCOTLAND (1707). --We refer to theunion of England and Scotland into a single kingdom, under the name ofGreat Britain (1707). It was only the two _crowns_ that were united whenJames I. Came to the English throne: now the two _Parliaments_ wereunited. From this time forward the two countries were represented byone Parliament, and in time the name "British" becomes the commondesignation of the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Scotland. The unionwas advantageous to both countries; for it was a union not simply ofhands, but of hearts. 

DEATH OF QUEEN ANNE: THE SUCCESSION. --Queen Anne died in the year 1714, leaving no heirs. In the reign of William a statute known as the Act ofSettlement had provided that the crown, in default of heirs of William andAnne, should descend to the Electress Sophia of Hanover (grandchild ofJames I. ), or her heirs, "being Protestants. " The Electress died only ashort time before the death of Queen Anne; so, upon that event, the crowndescended upon the head of the Electress's eldest son George, who thusbecame the founder of a new line of English sovereigns, the House ofHanover, or Brunswick, the family in whose hands the royal sceptre stillremains. 

LITERATURE UNDER QUEEN ANNE. --The reign of Queen Anne is an illustriousone in English literature. Under her began to write a group of brilliantauthors, whose activity continued on into the reign of her successor, George I. Their productions are, many of them, of special interest to thehistorian, because during this period there was an unusually closeconnection between literature and politics. Literature was forced into theservice of party. A large portion of the writings of the era is in theform of political pamphlets, wherein all the resources of wit, satire, andliterary skill are exhausted in defending or ridiculing the opposingprinciples and policies of Whig and Tory. 

The four most prominent and representative authors of the times wereAlexander Pope (1688-1744), Jonathan Swift (1667-1745), Joseph Addison(1672-1719), and Daniel Defoe (1661-1731). 

In the scientific annals of the period the name of Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) is most prominent. As the discoverer of the law of gravitation andthe author of the _Principia_, his name will ever retain a high placeamong the few who belong through their genius or achievements to no singlenation or age, but to the world. 

V. ENGLAND UNDER THE EARLIER HANOVERIANS. [Footnote: The sovereigns of the House of Hanover are George I. (1714-1727); George II. (1727-1760); George III. (1760-1820); George IV. (1820-1830); William IV. (1830-1837); Victoria. (1837-). ]

THE SOVEREIGN'S LOSS OF POLITICAL INFLUENCE. --The new Hanoverian king, George I. (1714-1727), was utterly ignorant of the language and theaffairs of the people over whom he had been called to rule. He was notloved by the English, but he was tolerated by them for the reason that herepresented Protestantism and those principles of political liberty forwhich they had so long battled with their Stuart kings. On account of hisignorance of English affairs the king was obliged to intrust to hisministers the practical administration of the government. The same wastrue in the case of George II. (1727-1760). George III. (1760-1820), having been born and educated in England, regained some of the oldinfluence of former kings. But he was the last English sovereign who hadany large personal influence in shaping governmental policies. Since histime the English government has been carried on in the name of the king bya prime minister, dependent upon the will of the House of Commons. Thismarks an important step in the process by which sovereignty has beentransferred from the Crown to the People. (For later steps, see Chap. LXIII. )

ENGLAND AND CONTINENTAL AFFAIRS. --It must be borne in mind that theGeorges, while kings of England, were also Electors of Hanover in Germany. These German dominions of theirs caused England to become involved incontinental quarrels which really did not concern her. Thus she was drawninto the War of the Austrian Succession (see p. 644) in which she had nonational interest, and which resulted in no advantage to the Englishpeople. Hence these matters may be passed over by us without furthernotice here. 

THE PRETENDERS. --Several times during the eighteenth century the exiledStuarts attempted to get back the throne they had lost. The last of theseattempts was made in 1745, when the "Young Pretender" (grandson of JamesII. ) landed in Scotland, effected a rising of the Scotch Highlanders, worsted the English at Preston Pans, and marched upon London. Forced toretreat into Scotland, he was pursued by the English, and utterly defeatedat the battle of Culloden Moor, --and the Stuart cause was ruined forever. 

OLD FRENCH AND INDIAN WAR (1756-1763). --Just after the middle of theeighteenth century there broke out between the French and the Englishcolonists in America the so-called Old French and Indian War. The strugglebecame blended with what in Europe is known as the Seven Years' War (seep. 645). At first the war went disastrously against the English, --Braddock's attempt against Fort Du Quesne, upon the march to which hesuffered his memorable defeat in the wilderness, being but one of severalill-starred English undertakings. But in the year 1757, the elder WilliamPitt (afterwards Earl of Chatham), known as "the Great Commoner, " came tothe head of affairs in England. Straightway every department of thegovernment was infused with new vigor. His own indomitable will andpersistent energy seemed to pass into every subordinate to whom heintrusted the execution of his plans. The war in America was brought to aspeedy and triumphant close, the contest being virtually ended by thegreat victory gained by the English under the youthful Major-General Wolfeover the French under Montcalm upon the Heights of Quebec (1759). By theTreaty of Paris (1763) France ceded to England Canada and all herpossessions in North America east of the Mississippi River, save NewOrleans and a little adjoining land (which, along with the Frenchterritory west of the Mississippi, had already been given to Spain), andtwo little islands in the neighborhood of Newfoundland, which she wasallowed to retain to dry fish on. 

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION (1775-1783). --By a violation of one of theprinciples which the English people had so stoutly maintained against theStuarts, the ruling powers in England now drove the American colonies torevolt. A majority in Parliament insisted upon taxing the colonists; thecolonists maintained that taxation without representation is tyranny, --that they could be justly taxed only through their own legislativeassemblies. The Government refusing to acknowledge this principle, thecolonists took up arms in defence of those liberties which their fathershad won with so hard a struggle from English kings on English soil. Theresult of the war was the separation from the mother-land of the thirteencolonies that had grown up along the Atlantic seaboard, --and a GreaterEngland began its independent career in the New World. 

LEGISLATIVE INDEPENDENCE OF IRELAND (1782). --While the American War ofIndependence was going on, the Irish, taking advantage of theembarrassment of the English government, demanded legislativeindependence. Ireland had had a Parliament of her own since the time ofthe conquest of the island by the English, but this Irish Parliament wasdependent upon the English Parliament, which claimed the power to bindIreland by its laws. This the Irish patriots strenuously denied, and now, under the lead of the eloquent Henry Grattan, drew up a Declaration ofRights, wherein they demanded the legislative independence of Ireland. Theprinciple here involved was the same as that for which the Englishcolonists in America were at this time contending with arms in theirhands. Fear of a revolt led England to grant the demands of the Irish, andto acknowledge the independence of the Irish Parliament. 

Thus both in America and in Ireland the principles of the PoliticalRevolution triumphed. In Ireland, however, the legislative independencegained was soon lost (see Chap. LXIII. ). 

CHAPTER LVI. 

THE RISE OF RUSSIA: PETER THE GREAT. (1682-1725. )

GENERAL REMARKS. --The second great struggle between the principles ofLiberalism and of Despotism, as represented by the opposing parties in theEnglish Revolution, took place in France. But before proceeding to speakof the French Revolution, we shall first trace the rise of Russia and ofPrussia, as these two great monarchies were destined to play prominentparts in that tremendous conflict. We left Russia at the close of theMiddle Ages a semi-savage, semi-Asiatic power, so hemmed in by barbarianlands and hostile races as to be almost entirely cut off from intercoursewith the civilized world (see p. 508). In the present chapter we wish totell how she pushed her lines out to the seas on every side, --to theCaspian, the Euxine, and the Baltic. The main interest of our storygathers about Peter the Great, whose almost superhuman strength and energylifted the great barbarian nation to a prominent place among the powers ofEurope. 

ACCESSION OF PETER THE GREAT (1682). --The royal line established in Russiaby the old Norseman Ruric (see p. 508), ended in 1589. Then followed aperiod of confusion and of foreign invasion, known as the Troublous Times, after which a prince of the celebrated house of Romanoff came to thethrone. For more than half a century after the accession of the Romanoffs, there is little either in the genius or the deeds of any of the linecalculated to draw our special attention. But towards the close of theseventeenth century there ascended the Russian throne a man whose capacityand energy and achievements instantly drew the gaze of his contemporaries, and who has elicited the admiration and wonder of all succeedinggenerations. This was Peter I. , universally known as Peter the Great, oneof the remarkable characters of history. He was but seventeen years of agewhen he assumed the full responsibilities of government. 

THE CONQUEST OF AZOF (1696). --At this time Russia possessed only one sea-port, Archangel, on the White Sea, which harbor for a large part of theyear was sealed against vessels by the extreme cold of that high latitude. Russia, consequently, had no marine commerce; there was no word for_fleet_ in the Russian language. Peter saw clearly that the most urgentneed of his empire was outlets upon the sea. Hence, his first aim was towrest the Baltic shore from the grasp of Sweden, and the Euxine from thehands of the Turks. 

In 1695 Peter sailed down the Don and made an attack upon Azof; the key tothe Black Sea, but was unsuccessful. The next year, however, repeating theattempt, he succeeded, and thus gained his first harbor on the south. 

[Illustration: PETER THE GREAT. (After a painting at Hampton Court, by G. Kneller, 1698. )]

PETER'S FIRST VISIT TO THE WEST (1697-1698). --With a view to advancing hisnaval projects, Peter about this time sent a large number of young Russiannobles to Italy, Holland, and England to acquire in those countries aknowledge of naval affairs, forbidding them to return before they hadbecome good sailors. 

Not satisfied with thus sending to foreign parts his young nobility, Peterformed the somewhat startling resolution of going abroad himself, andlearning the art of ship-building by personal experience in the dockyardsof Holland. Accordingly, in the year 1697, leaving the government in thehands of three nobles, he set out _incognito_ for the Netherlands. Uponarriving there he proceeded to Zaandam, a place a short distance fromAmsterdam, and there hired out as a common laborer to a Dutch shipbuilder. 

Notwithstanding his disguise it was well enough known who the strangerwas. Indeed there was but little chance of Peter's being mistaken for aDutchman. The way in which he flew about, and the terrible energy withwhich he did everything, set him quite apart from the easy-going, phlegmatic Hollanders. 

To escape the annoyance of the crowds at Zaandam, Peter left the place, and went to the docks of the East India Company in Amsterdam, who setabout building a frigate that he might see the whole process ofconstructing a vessel from the beginning. Here he worked for four months, being known among his fellow-workmen as Baas or Master Peter. 

It was not alone the art of naval architecture in which Peter interestedhimself; he attended lectures on anatomy, studied surgery, gaining someskill in pulling teeth and bleeding, inspected paper-mills, flour-mills, printing-presses, and factories, and visited cabinets, hospitals, andmuseums, thus acquainting himself with every industry and art that hethought might be advantageously introduced into his own country. 

From Holland Master Peter went to England to study her superior navalestablishment. Here he was fittingly received by King William III. , whohad presented Peter while in Holland with a splendid yacht fully armed, and who now made his guest extremely happy by getting up for him a shamsea-fight. 

Returning from England to Holland, Peter went thence to Vienna, intendingto visit Italy; but hearing of an insurrection at home, he set out inhaste for Moscow. 

PETER'S REFORMS. --The revolt which had hastened Peter's return from theWest was an uprising among the Strelitzes, a body of soldiers numbering20, 000 or 30, 000, organized by Ivan the Terrible as a sort of imperialbody-guard. In their ungovernable turbulence, they remind us of thePrætorians of Rome. The mutiny settled Peter in his determination to ridhimself altogether of the insolent and refractory body. Its place wastaken by a well-disciplined force trained according to the tactics of theWestern nations. 

The disbanding of the seditious guards was only one of the many reformseffected by Peter. So intent was he upon thoroughly Europeanizing hiscountry, that he resolved that his subjects should literally clothethemselves in the "garments of Western Civilization. " Accordingly heabolished the long-sleeved, long-skirted Oriental robes that were at thistime worn, and decreed that everybody save the clergy should shave, or paya tax on his beard. We are told that Peter stationed tailors and barbersat the gates of Moscow to cut off the skirts and to train the beards ofthose who had not conformed to the royal regulations, and that he himselfsheared off with his own hands the offending sleeves and beards of hisreluctant courtiers. The law was gradually relaxed, but the reform becameso general that in the best society in Russia at the present day one seesonly smooth faces and the Western style of dress. 

As additional outgrowths of what he had seen, or heard, or had suggestedto him on his foreign tour, Peter issued a new coinage, introducedschools, built factories, constructed roads and canals, established apostal system, opened mines, framed laws modelled after those of the West, and reformed the government of the towns in such a way as to give thecitizens some voice in the management of their local affairs, as he hadobserved was done in the Netherlands and in England. 

CHARLES XII. OF SWEDEN. --Peter's history now becomes intertwined with thatof a man quite as remarkable as himself, Charles XII. Of Sweden, the"Madman of the North. " Charles was but fifteen years of age when, in 1697, the death of his father called him to the Swedish throne. The dominionswhich came under his sway embraced not only Sweden, but Finland, and largepossessions along the Southern Baltic, --territory that had been won by thearms of his ancestors. 

[Illustration: Map of the BALTIC ISLANDS]

Taking advantage of Charles's extreme youth, three sovereigns, FrederickIV. Of Denmark, Augustus the Strong, Elector of Saxony and King of Poland, and Peter the Great of Prussia, leagued against him (1700), for thepurpose of appropriating such portions of his dominions as they severallydesired to annex to their own. 

THE BATTLE OF NARVA (1700). --But the conspirators had formed a wrongestimate of the young Swedish monarch. Notwithstanding the insane folliesin which he was accustomed to indulge, he possessed talent; he hadespecially a remarkable aptitude for military affairs. With a well-trainedforce--a veteran army that had not yet forgotten the discipline of thehero Gustavus Adolphus--Charles now threw himself first upon the Danes, and in two weeks forced the Danish king to sue for peace; then he turnedhis little army of 8, 000 men upon the Russian forces of 20, 000, which werebesieging the city of Narva, on the Gulf of Finland, and inflicted uponthem a most ignominious defeat. The only comment of the imperturbablePeter upon the disaster was, "The Swedes will have the advantage of us atfirst, but they will teach us how to beat them. "

THE FOUNDING OF ST. PETERSBURG (1703). --After chastising the Czar[Footnote: Czar is probably a contraction of _Cæsar_. The title wasadopted by the rulers of Russia because they regarded themselves as thesuccessors and heirs of the Cæsars of Rome and Constantinople. ] at Narva, the Swedish king turned south and marched into Poland to punish Augustusfor the part he had taken in the conspiracy against him. While Charles wasbusied in this quarter, Peter was gradually making himself master of theSwedish lands on the Baltic, and upon a marshy island at the mouth of theNeva was laying the foundations of the great city of St. Petersburg, whichhe proposed to make the western gateway of his empire. 

The spot selected by Peter as the site of his new capital was low andsubject to inundation, so that the labor requisite to make it fit forbuilding purposes was simply enormous. But difficulties never dismayedPeter. In spite of difficulties the work was done, and the splendid citystands to-day one of the most impressive monuments of the indomitable anddespotic energy of Peter. 

INVASION OF RUSSIA BY CHARLES XII. --Meanwhile Charles was doing very muchas he pleased with the king of Poland. He defeated his forces, overran hisdominions, and forced him to surrender the Polish crown in favor ofStanislaus Lesczinski (1706). With sufficient punishment meted out toFrederick Augustus, Charles was ready to turn his attention once more tothe Czar. So marvellous had been the success attendant upon his arms forthe past few years, nothing now seemed impossible to him. Deluded by thisbelief, he resolved to march into Russia and dethrone the Czar, even as hehad dethroned the king of Poland. 

In 1708, with an army of barely 40, 000 men, Charles marched boldly acrossthe Russian frontier. At Pultowa the two armies met in decisive combat(1709). It was Charles's Waterloo. The Swedish army was virtuallyannihilated. Escaping with a few soldiers from the field, Charles fledsouthward, and found an asylum in Turkey. [Footnote: After spending fiveyears in Turkey, Charles returned to Sweden, and shortly afterwards waskilled at the siege of Frederickshall, in Norway (1718). At the moment ofhis death he was only thirty-six years of age. He was the strangestcharacter of the eighteenth century. Perhaps we can understand him best byregarding him, as his biographer Voltaire says we must regard him, as anold Norse sea-king, born ten centuries after his time. ]

CLOSE OF PETER'S REIGN. --In 1721 the Swedish wars which had so longdisturbed Europe were brought to an end by the Peace of Nystadt, whichconfirmed Russia's title to all the Southern Baltic lands that Peter hadwrested from the Swedes. The undisputed possession of so large a strip ofthe Baltic seaboard vastly increased the importance and influence ofRussia, which now assumed a place among the leading European powers. 

In 1723 troubles in Persia that resulted in the massacre of some Russiansafforded Peter a pretext for sailing down the Volga and seizing thesouthern shore of the Caspian Sea, which now became virtually a Russianlake. This ended Peter's conquests. The Russian colossus now "stoodastride, with one foot on the Baltic and the other upon the Caspian. "

Two years later, being then in his fifty-fourth year, Peter died of afever brought on by exposure while aiding in the rescue of some sailors indistress, in the Gulf of Finland (1725). 

PETER'S CHARACTER AND WORK. --Peter's character stands revealed in thelight of his splendid achievements. Like Charlemagne he was a despoticreformer. His theory of government was a rough, brutal one, yet theexclamation which broke from him as he stood by the tomb of Richelieu[Footnote: In 1716 Peter made a second journey to the West, visitingFrance, Denmark, and Holland. ] discloses his profound desire to rule well:"Thou great man, " he exclaimed, "I would have given thee half of mydominion to have learned of thee how to govern the other half. " He plantedthroughout his vast empire the seeds of Western civilization, and by hisgiant strength lifted the great nation which destiny had placed in hishands out of Asiatic barbarism into the society of the European peoples. 

The influence of Peter's life and work upon the government of Russia wasvery different from what he intended. It is true that his aggressive, arbitrary rule strengthened temporarily autocratic government in Russia. He destroyed all checks, ecclesiastical and military, upon the absolutepower of the crown. But in bringing into his dominions Westerncivilization, he introduced influences which were destined in time toneutralize all he had done in the way of strengthening the basis ofdespotism. He introduced a civilization which fosters popular liberties, and undermines personal, despotic government. 

REIGN OF CATHERINE THE GREAT (1762-1796). --From the death of Peter on tothe close of the eighteenth century the Russian throne was held, the mostof the time, by women, the most noted of whom was Catherine II. , theGreat, "the greatest woman probably, " according to the admission of anEnglish historian (McCarthy), "who ever sat on a throne, Elizabeth ofEngland not even excepted. " But while a woman of great genius, she hadmost serious faults of character, being incredibly profligate andunscrupulous. 

Carrying out ably the policy of Peter the Great, Catherine extended vastlythe limits of Russian dominion, and opened the country even morethoroughly than he had done to the entrance of Western influences. Themost noteworthy matters of her reign were the conquest of the Crimea andthe dismemberment of Poland. 

[Illustration: CATHERINE II. OF RUSSIA, IN HUSSAR UNIFORM. (After apainting by Schebanow. ) ]

It was in the year 1783 that Catherine effected the subjugation of theCrimea. The possession of this peninsula gave Russia dominion on the BlackSea, which once virtually secured by Peter the Great had been again lostthrough his misfortunes. Catherine greatly extended the limits of herdominion on the west at the expense of Poland, the partition of whichstate she planned in connection with Frederick the Great of Prussia andMaria Theresa of Austria. On the first division, which was made in 1772, the imperial robbers each took a portion of the spoils. In 1793 a secondpartition was made, this time between Russia and Prussia; and then, in1795, after the suppression of a determined revolt of the Poles under thelead of the patriot Kosciusko, a third and final division among the threepowers completed the dismemberment of the unhappy state, and erased itsname from the roll of the nations. The territory gained by Russia in thesetransactions brought her western frontier close alongside the civilizationof Central Europe. In Catherine's phrase, Poland had become her "doormat, " upon which she stepped when visiting the West. 

Besides thus widening her empire, Catherine labored to reform itsinstitutions and to civilize her subjects. Her labors in bettering thelaws and improving the administration of the government, have caused herto be likened to Solon and to Lycurgus; while her enthusiasm for learningand her patronage of letters led Voltaire to say, "Light now comes fromthe North. "

By the close of Catherine's reign Russia was beyond question one of theforemost powers of Europe, the weight of her influence being quite equalto that of any other nation of the continent. 

CHAPTER LVII. 

THE RISE OF PRUSSIA: FREDERICK THE GREAT. (1740-1786. )

THE BEGINNINGS OF PRUSSIA. --The foundation of the Prussian Kingdom waslaid in the beginning of the seventeenth century (1611) by the union oftwo small states in the North of Germany. These were the Mark, orElectorate, of Brandenburg and the Duchy of Prussia. Brandenburg had beengradually growing into prominence since the tenth century. Its ruler atthis time was a prince of the now noted House of Hohenzollern, and was oneof the seven princes to whom belonged the right of electing the emperor. 

THE GREAT ELECTOR, FREDERICK WILLIAM (1640-1688). --Although this newPrussian power was destined to become the champion of GermanProtestantism, it acted a very unworthy and vacillating part in the ThirtyYears' War. But just before the close of that struggle a strong man cameto the throne, Frederick William, better known as the Great Elector. Heinfused vigor and strength into every department of the State, andacquired such a position for his government that at the Peace ofWestphalia he was able to secure new territory, which greatly enhanced hispower and prominence among the German princes. 

[Illustration: THE GREAT ELECTOR. (From a battle-piece. )]

The Great Elector ruled for nearly half a century. He laid the basis ofthe military power of Prussia by the formation of a standing army, andtransmitted to his son and successor a strongly centralized and despoticauthority. 

HOW THE ELECTOR OF BRANDENBURG ACQUIRED THE TITLE OF KING. --Frederick III. (1688-1713), son of the Great Elector, was ambitious for the title ofking, a dignity that the weight and influence won for the Prussian stateby his father fairly justified him in seeking. He saw about him otherprinces less powerful than himself enjoying this dignity, and he too"would be a king and wear a crown. " The recent elevation of William ofOrange, Stadtholder of Holland, to royal honors in England (see p. 624), stimulated the Elector's ambition. 

It was necessary of course for Frederick to secure the consent of theemperor, a matter of some difficulty, for the Catholic advisers of theAustrian court were bitterly opposed to having an heretical prince thushonored and advanced, while the emperor himself was not at all pleasedwith the idea. But the War of the Spanish Succession was just about toopen, and the emperor was extremely anxious to secure Frederick'sassistance in the coming struggle. Therefore, on condition of hisfurnishing him aid in the war, the emperor consented to Frederick'sassuming the new title and dignity _in the Duchy of Prussia_, which, unlike Brandenburg, did not form part of the empire. 

Accordingly, early in the year 1701, Frederick, amidst imposingceremonies, was crowned and hailed as king at Königsberg. Hitherto he hadbeen Elector of Brandenburg and Duke of Prussia; now he is Elector ofBrandenburg and King of Prussia. 

Thus was a new king born among the kings of Europe. Thus did the house ofAustria invest with royal dignity the rival house of Hohenzollern. Theevent is a landmark in German, and even in European history. The cue ofGerman history from this on is the growth of the power of the Prussiankings, and their steady advance to imperial honors, and to the control ofthe affairs of the German race. 

FREDERICK WILLIAM I. (1713-1740). -The son and successor of the firstPrussian king, known as Frederick William I. , was one of the mostextraordinary characters in history. He was a strong, violent, brutal man, full of the strangest freaks, yet in many respects just the man for thetimes. He would tolerate no idlers. He carried a heavy cane, which he laidupon the back of every unoccupied person he chanced to find, whether man, woman, or child. 

Frederick William had a mania for big soldiers. With infinite expense andtrouble he gathered a regiment of the biggest men he could find, which wasknown as the "Potsdam Giants, "--a regiment numbering 2400 men, some ofwhom were eight feet in height. Not only were the Goliaths of his owndominions impressed into the service, but big men in all parts of Europewere coaxed, bribed, or kidnapped by Frederick's recruiting officers. Nopresent was so acceptable to him as a giant, and by the gift of a six-footer more than one prince bought his everlasting favor. 

Rough, brutal tyrant though he was, Frederick William was an able andenergetic ruler. He did much to consolidate the power of Prussia, and athis death in 1740 left to his successor a considerably extended dominion, and a splendid army of 80, 000 men. 

FREDERICK THE GREAT (1740-1786). --Frederick William was followed by hisson Frederick II. , to whom the world has agreed to give the title of"Great. " Frederick had a genius for war, and his father had prepared tohis hand one of the most efficient instruments of the art since the timeof the Roman legions. The two great wars in which he was engaged, andwhich raised Prussia to the first rank among the military powers ofEurope, were the War of the Austrian Succession and the Seven Years' War. 

WAR OF THE AUSTRIAN SUCCESSION (1740-1748). --Through the death of CharlesVI. The Imperial office became vacant on the very year that Frederick II. Ascended the Prussian throne. Charles was the last of the direct male lineof the Hapsburgs, and disputes straightway arose respecting thepossessions of the House of Austria, which resulted in the long struggleknown as the War of the Austrian Succession. 

Now, not long before the death of Charles, he had bound all the leadingpowers of Europe in a sort of agreement called the Pragmatic Sanction, bythe terms of which, in case he should leave no son, all his hereditarydominions--that is, the kingdom of Hungary, the kingdom of Bohemia, thearchduchy of Austria, and the other possessions of the House of Austria--should be bestowed upon his daughter Maria Theresa. But no sooner wasCharles dead than a number of princes immediately laid claim to greater orlesser portions of these territories. Prominent among these claimants wasFrederick of Prussia, who claimed Silesia. [Footnote: Charles Albert, Elector of Bavaria, set up a claim to the Austrian States. France, everthe sworn enemy of the House of Austria, lent her armies to aid theElector in making good his pretensions] Before Maria Theresa could arm indefence of her dominions, Frederick pushed his army into Silesia and tookforcible possession of it. 

Queen Theresa, thus stripped of a large part of her dominions, fled intoHungary, and with all of a beautiful woman's art of persuasion appealed toher Hungarian subjects to avenge her wrongs. Her unmerited sufferings, herbeauty, her tears, the little princess in her arms, stirred the resentmentand kindled the ardent loyalty of the Hungarian nobles, and with onevoice, as they rang their swords in their scabbards, they swore to supportthe cause of their queen with their estates and their lives. England andSardinia also threw themselves into the contest on Maria Theresa's side. The war lasted until 1748, when it was closed by the Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, which left Silesia in the hands of Frederick. 

THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR (1756-1763). --The eight years of peace which followedthe war of the Austrian Succession were improved by Frederick indeveloping the resources of his kingdom and perfecting the organizationand discipline of his army, and by Maria Theresa in forming a league ofthe chief European powers against the unscrupulous despoiler of herdominions. France, Russia, Poland, Saxony, and Sweden, all entered into analliance with the queen. Frederick could at first find no ally saveEngland, --towards the close of the struggle Russia came to his side, --sothat he was left almost alone to fight the combined armies of theContinent. 

At first the fortunes of the war were all on Frederick's side. In thecelebrated battles of Rossbach, Leuthen, and Zorndorf, he defeatedsuccessively the French, the Austrians, and the Russians, and startled allEurope into an acknowledgment of the fact that the armies of Prussia hadat their head one of the greatest commanders of the world. His name becamea household word, and everybody coupled with it the admiring epithet of"Great. "

But fortune finally deserted him. In sustaining the unequal contest, hisdominions became drained of men. England withdrew her aid, and inevitableruin seemed to impend over his throne and kingdom. A change by death inthe government of Russia now put a new face upon Frederick's affairs. In1762 Elizabeth of that country died, and Peter III. , an ardent admirer ofFrederick, came to the throne, and immediately transferred the armies ofRussia from the side of the allies to that of Prussia. The alliance lastedonly a few months, Peter being deposed and murdered by his wife, who nowcame to the throne as Catherine II. She reversed once more the policy ofthe Government; but the temporary alliance had given Frederick a decisiveadvantage, and the year following Peter's act, England and France wereglad to give over the struggle and sign the Peace of Paris (1763). Shortlyafter this another peace (the Treaty of Hubertsburg) was arranged betweenAustria and Prussia, and one of the most terrible wars that had everdisturbed Europe was over. The most noteworthy result of the war was theexalting of the Prussian kingdom to a most commanding position among theEuropean powers. 

FREDERICK'S WORK: PRUSSIA MADE A NEW CENTRE OF GERMAN CRYSTALLIZATION. --The all-important result of Frederick the Great's strong reign was themaking of Prussia the equal of Austria, and thereby the laying of thebasis of German unity. Hitherto Germany had been trying unsuccessfully toconcentrate about Austria; now there is a new centre of crystallization, one that will draw to itself all the various elements of Germannationality. The history of Germany from this on is the story of therivalry of these two powers, with the final triumph of the kingdom of theNorth, and the unification of Germany under her leadership, Austria beingpushed out as entitled to no part in the affairs of the Fatherland. Thisstory we shall tell in a subsequent chapter (see Chap. LXL). 

CHAPTER LVIII. 

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION. (1789-1799. )

1. CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION: THE STATES-GENERAL OF 1789. 

INTRODUCTORY. --The French Revolution is in political what the GermanReformation is in ecclesiastical history. It was the revolt of the Frenchpeople against royal despotism and class privilege. "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, " was the motto of the Revolution. In the name of theseprinciples the most atrocious crimes were indeed committed; but theseexcesses of the Revolution are not to be confounded with its true spiritand aims. The French people in 1789 contended for those same principlesthat the English Puritans defended in 1640, and that our fathersmaintained in 1776. It is only as we view them in this light that we canfeel a sympathetic interest in the men and events of this tumultuousperiod of French history. 

CAUSES OF THE REVOLUTION. --Chief among the causes of the French Revolutionwere the abuses and extravagances of the Bourbon monarchy; the unjustprivileges enjoyed by the nobility and clergy; the wretched condition ofthe great mass of the people; and the revolutionary character and spiritof French philosophy and literature. To these must be added, as aproximate cause, the influence of the American Revolution. We shall speakbriefly of these several matters. 

THE BOURBON MONARCHY. --We simply repeat what we have already learned, whenwe say that the authority of the French crown under the Bourbons hadbecome unbearably despotic and oppressive. The life of every person in therealm was at the arbitrary disposal of the king. Persons were thrown intoprison without even knowing the offence for which they were arrested. Theroyal decrees were laws. The taxes imposed by the king were simplyrobberies and confiscations. The public money, thus gathered, wassquandered in maintaining a court the scandalous extravagances anddebaucheries of which would shame a Turkish Sultan. 

THE NOBILITY. --The French nobility, in the time of the Bourbons, numberedabout 80, 000 families. The order was simply the remains of the oncepowerful but now broken-down feudal aristocracy of the Middle Ages. Itsmembers were chiefly the pensioners of the king, the ornaments of hiscourt, living in riotous luxury at Paris or Versailles. Stripped of theirancient power, they still retained all the old pride and arrogance oftheir order, and clung tenaciously to all their feudal privileges. Although holding one-fifth of the lands of France, they paid scarcely anytaxes. 

THE CLERGY. --The clergy formed a decayed feudal hierarchy. They possessedenormous wealth, the gift of piety through many centuries. Over a third ofthe lands of the country was in their hands, and yet this immense propertywas almost wholly exempt from taxation. The bishops and abbots wereusually drawn from the families of the nobles, being too often attractedto the service of the Church rather by its princely revenues and thesocial distinction conferred by its offices, than by the inducements ofpiety. These "patrician prelates" were hated alike by the humbler clergyand the people. 

THE COMMONS. --Below the two privileged orders of the State stood thecommons, who constituted the chief bulk of the nation, and who numbered, at the commencement of the Revolution, probably about 25, 000, 000. It isquite impossible to give any adequate idea of the pitiable condition ofthe poorer classes of the commons throughout the century preceding theRevolution. The peasants particularly suffered the most intolerablewrongs. They were vexed by burdensome feudal regulations. Thus they wereforbidden to fence their fields for the protection of their crops, as thefences interfered with the lord's progress in the hunt; and they were evenprohibited from cultivating their fields at certain seasons, as thisdisturbed the partridges and other game. Being kept in a state of abjectpoverty, a failure of crops reduced them to absolute starvation. It wasnot an unusual thing to find women and children dead along the roadways. In a word, to use the language of one (Fénelon) who saw all this misery, France had become "simply a great hospital full of woe and empty of food. "

REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT OF FRENCH PHILOSOPHY. --French philosophy in theeighteenth century was sceptical and revolutionary. The names of the greatwriters Rousseau (1712-1778) and Voltaire (1694-1778) suggest at once itsprevalent tone and spirit. Rousseau declared that all the evils whichafflict humanity arise from vicious, artificial arrangements, such as theFamily, the Church, and the State. Accordingly he would do away with thesethings, and have men return to a state of nature--that is, to simplicity. Savages, he declared, were happier than civilized men. 

The tendency and effect of this sceptical philosophy was to create hatredand contempt for the institutions of both State and Church, to fosterdiscontent with the established order of things, to stir up anuncontrollable passion for innovation and change. 

INFLUENCE OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. --Not one of the least potent of theproximate causes of the French Revolution was the successful establishmentof the American republic. The French people sympathized deeply with theEnglish colonists in their struggle for independence. Many of thenobility, like Lafayette, offered to the patriots the service of theirswords; and the popular feeling at length compelled Louis XVI to extend tothem openly the aid of the armies of France. 

The final triumph of the cause of liberty awakened scarcely lessenthusiasm and rejoicing in France than in America. In this young republicof the Western world the French people saw realized the Arcadia of theirphilosophers. It was no longer a dream. They themselves had helped to makeit real. Here the Rights of Man had been recovered and vindicated. And nowthis liberty which the French people had helped the American colonists tosecure, they were impatient to see France herself enjoy. 

"AFTER US, THE DELUGE. "--The long-gathering tempest is now ready to breakover France. Louis XV. Died in 1774. In the early part of his reign hissubjects had affectionately called him the "Well-beloved, " but long beforehe laid down the sceptre, all their early love and admiration had beenturned into hatred and contempt. Besides being overbearing and despotic, the king was indolent, rapacious, and scandalously profligate. Duringtwenty years of his reign the king was wholly under the influence of thenotorious Madame de Pompadour. 

The inevitable issue of this orgy of crime and folly seems to have beenclearly enough perceived by the chief actors in it, as is shown by thatreckless phrase so often on the lips of the king and his favorite--"Afterus, the Deluge. " And after them, the Deluge indeed did come. The nearthunders of the approaching tempest could already be heard when Louis XV. Lay down to die. 

CALLING OF THE STATES-GENERAL (1789). --Louis XV. Left the tottering throneto his grandson, Louis XVI. , then only twenty years of age. He hadrecently been married to the fair and brilliant Marie Antoinette, archduchess of Austria. 

The king called to his side successively the most eminent financiers andstatesmen (Maurepas, Turgot, Necker, and Calonne) as his ministers andadvisers; but their policies and remedies availed little or nothing. Thedisease which had fastened itself upon the nation was too deep-seated. Thetraditions of the court, the rigidity of long-established customs, and theheartless selfishness of the privileged classes, rendered reform andefficient retrenchment impossible. 

In 1787 the king summoned the Notables, a body composed chiefly of greatlords and prelates, who had not been called to advise with the king sincethe reign of Henry IV. But miserable counsellors were they all. Refusingto give up any of their feudal privileges, or to tax the property of theirown orders that the enormous public burdens which were crushing thecommons might be lightened, their coming together resulted in nothing. 

As a last resort it was resolved to summon the united wisdom of thenation, --to call together the States-General, the almost-forgottenassembly, composed of representatives of the three estates, --the nobility, the clergy, and the commons, the latter being known as the Tiers État, orThird Estate. On the 5th of May, 1789, a memorable date, this assembly metat Versailles. It was the first time it had been summoned to deliberateupon the affairs of the nation in the space of 175 years. It was nowcomposed of 1, 200 representatives, more than one-half of whom weredeputies of the commons. The eyes of the nation were turned in hope andexpectancy towards Versailles. Surely if the redemption of France could beworked out by human wisdom, it would now be effected. 

2. THE NATIONAL, OR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY (June 17, 1789-Sept. 30, 1791). 

THE STATE-GENERAL CHANGED INTO THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY. --At the very outseta dispute arose in the States-General assembly between the privilegedorders and the commons, respecting the manner of voting. It had been theancient custom of the body to vote upon all questions by orders; andthinking that this custom would prevail in the present assembly, the kingand his counsellors had yielded to the popular demand and allowed theThird Estate to send to Versailles more representatives than both theother orders. The commons now demanded that the voting should be byindividuals; for, should the vote be taken by orders, the clergy andnobility by combining could always outvote them. For five weeks thequarrel kept everything at a standstill. 

Finally the commons, emboldened by the tone of public opinion without, took a decisive, revolutionary step. They declared themselves the NationalAssembly, and then invited the other two orders to join them in theirdeliberations, giving them to understand that if they did not choose to doso, they should proceed to the consideration of public affairs withoutthem. 

Shut out from the palace, the Third Estate met in one of the churches ofVersailles. Many of the clergy had already joined the body. Two days laterthe nobility came. The eloquent Bailly, President of the Assembly, inreceiving them, exclaimed, "This day will be illustrious in our annals; itrenders the family complete. " The States-General had now become in realitythe _National Assembly_. 

STORMING OF THE BASTILE (July 14, 1789). --During the opening weeks of theNational Assembly, Paris was in a state of great excitement. The Bastilewas the old state prison, the emblem, in the eyes of the people, ofdespotism. A report came that its guns were trained on the city; thatprovoked a popular outbreak. "Let us storm the Bastile, " rang through thestreets. The mob straightway proceeded to lay siege to the grim olddungeon. In a few hours the prison fortress was in their hands. The wallsof the hated state prison were razed to the ground, and the people dancedon the spot. The key of the fortress was sent as a "trophy of the spoilsof despotism" to Washington by Lafayette. 

The destruction by the Paris mob of the Bastile is in the FrenchRevolution what the burning of the papal bull by Luther was to theReformation. It was the death-knell not only of Bourbon despotism inFrance, but of royal tyranny everywhere. When the news reached England, the great statesman Fox, perceiving its significance for liberty, exclaimed, "How much is this the greatest event that ever happened in theworld, and how much the best!"

THE EMIGRATION OF THE NOBLES. --The fall of the Bastile left Paris in thehands of a triumphant mob. Those suspected of sympathizing with the royalparty were massacred without mercy. The peasantry in many districts, following the example set them by the capital, rose against the nobles, sacked and burned their castles, and either killed the occupants ordragged them off to prison. This terrorism caused the beginning of what isknown as the emigration of the nobles, their flight beyond the frontiersof France. 

"TO VERSAILLES. "--An imprudent act on the part of the king and his friendsat Versailles brought about the next episode in the progress of theRevolution. The arrival there of a body of troops was made the occasion ofa banquet to the officers of the regiment. While heated with wine, theyoung nobles had trampled under foot the national tri-colored cockades, and substituted for them white cockades, the emblem of the Bourbons. Thereport of these proceedings caused in Paris the wildest excitement. Otherrumors of the intended flight of the king to Metz, and of plots againstthe national cause, added fuel to the flames. Besides, bread had failed, and the poorer classes were savage from hunger. 

October 5th a mob of desperate women, terrible in aspect as furies, andarmed with clubs and knives, collected in the streets of Paris, determinedupon going to Versailles, and demanding relief from the king himself. Allefforts to dissuade them from their purpose were unavailing, and soon theParisian rabble was in motion. A horrible multitude, savage as the hordesthat followed Attila, streamed out of the city towards Versailles, abouttwelve miles distant. The National Guards, infected with the delirium ofthe moment, forced Lafayette to lead them in the same direction. Thus allday Paris emptied itself into the royal suburbs. 

The mob encamped in the streets of Versailles for the night. Early thefollowing morning they broke into the palace, killed two of the guards, and battering down doors with axes, forced their way to the chamber of thequeen, who barely escaped with her life to the king's apartments. Thetimely arrival of Lafayette alone saved the entire royal family from beingmassacred. 

THE ROYAL FAMILY TAKEN TO PARIS--The mob now demanded that the king shouldreturn with them to Paris. Their object in this was to have him undertheir eye, and prevent his conspiring with the privileged orders to thwartthe plans of the revolutionists. Louis was forced to yield to the demandsof the people. 

The procession arrived at Paris in the evening. The royal family wereplaced in the Palace of the Tuileries, and Lafayette was charged with theduty of guarding the king, who was to be held as a sort of hostage for thegood conduct of the nobles and foreign sovereigns while a constitution wasbeing prepared by the Assembly. 

Such was what was called the "Joyous Entry" of October 6th. The palace atVersailles, thus stripped of royalty and left bespattered with blood, wasnever again to be occupied as the residence of a king of France. 

THE FLIGHT OF THE KING (June 20, 1791). --For two years following theJoyous Entry there was a comparative lull in the storm of the Revolution, The king was kept a sort of prisoner in the Tuileries. The NationalAssembly were making sweeping reforms both in Church and State, andbusying themselves in framing a new constitution. The emigrant nobleswatched the course of events from beyond the frontiers, not daring to makea move for fear the excitable Parisian mob, upon any hostile step taken bythem, would massacre the entire royal family. Could the king only escapefrom the hands of his captors and make his way to the borders of France, then he could place himself at the head of the emigrant nobles, and, withforeign aid, overturn the National Assembly and crush the revolutionists. The flight was resolved upon and carefully planned. Under cover of nightthe entire royal family, in disguise, escaped from the Tuileries, and bypost conveyance fled towards the frontier. When just another hour wouldhave placed the fugitives in safety among friends, the Bourbon features ofthe king betrayed him, and the entire party was arrested and carried backto Paris. 

The attempted flight of the royal family was a fatal blow to the Monarchy. Many affected to regard it as equivalent to an act of abdication on thepart of the king. The people now began to talk of a republic. 

THE CLUBS: JACOBINS AND CORDELIERS. --In order to render intelligible thefurther course of the Revolution we must here speak of two clubs, ororganizations, which came into prominence about this time, and which weredestined to become more powerful than the Assembly itself, and to be thechief instruments in inaugurating the Reign of Terror. These were thesocieties of the Jacobins and Cordeliers, so called from certain oldconvents in which they were accustomed to meet. The purpose of these clubswas to watch for conspiracies of the royalists, and by constant agitationto keep alive the flame of the Revolution. 

THE NEW CONSTITUTION. --The work of the National Assembly was now drawingto a close. On the 14th of September, 1791, the new constitution framed bythat body, and which made the government of France a constitutionalmonarchy, was solemnly ratified by the king. The National Assembly, havingsat nearly three years, then adjourned (Sept, 30, 1791). The first scenein the drama of the French Revolution was ended. 

3. THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY (Oct. 1, 1791-Sept. 21, 1792). 

THE THREE PARTIES. --The new constitution provided for a nationallegislature to be called the Legislative Assembly. This body, comprising745 members, was divided into three parties: the Constitutionalists, theGirondists, and the Mountainists. The Constitutionalists of coursesupported the new constitution, being in favor of a limited monarchy. TheGirondists, so called from the name (_La Gironde_) of the departmentwhence came the most noted of its members, wished to establish in Francesuch a republic as the American colonists had just set up in the NewWorld. The Mountainists, who took their name from their lofty seats in theassembly, were radical republicans, or levellers. Many of them weremembers of the Jacobin club or that of the Cordeliers. The leaders of thisfaction were Marat, Danton, and Robespierre, --names of terror in thesubsequent records of the Revolution. 

WAR WITH THE OLD MONARCHIES. --The kings of Europe were watching with theutmost anxiety the course of events in France. They regarded the cause ofLouis XVI. As their own. If the French people should be allowed tooverturn the throne of their hereditary sovereign, who would then respectthe divine rights of kings? The old monarchies of Europe thereforeresolved that the revolutionary movement in France, a movement threateningall aristocratical and monarchical institutions, should be crushed, andthat these heretical French doctrines respecting the Sovereignty of thePeople and the Rights of Man should be proved false by the power of royalarmies. 

The warlike preparations of Frederick William III. Of Prussia and theEmperor Francis II. , awakened the apprehensions of the revolutionists, andled the Legislative Assembly to declare war against them (April 20, 1792). A little later, the allied armies of the Austrians and Prussians, numbering more than 100, 000 men, and made up in part of the Frenchemigrant nobles, passed the frontiers of France. Thus were taken the firststeps in a series of wars which were destined to last nearly a quarter ofa century, and in which France almost single-handed was to struggleagainst the leagued powers of Europe, and to illustrate the miraclespossible to enthusiasm and genius. 

THE MASSACRE OF THE SWISS GUARDS (Aug. 10, 1792). --The allies at firstgained easy victories over the ill-disciplined forces of the LegislativeAssembly, and the Duke of Brunswick, at the head of an immense army, advanced rapidly upon Paris. An insolent proclamation which this commandernow issued, wherein he ordered the French nation to submit to their king, and threatened the Parisians with the destruction of their city should anyharm be done the royal family, drove the French people frantic withindignation and rage. The Palace of the Tuileries, defended by a fewhundred Swiss soldiers, the remnant of the royal guard, was assaulted. Aterrible struggle followed in the corridors and upon the grand stairwaysof the palace. The Swiss stood "steadfast as the granite of their Alps. "But they were overwhelmed at last, and all were murdered, either in thebuilding itself or in the surrounding courts and streets. 

THE MASSACRE OF SEPTEMBER ("JAIL DELIVERY"). --The army of the allieshurried on towards Paris to avenge the slaughter of the royal guards andto rescue the king. The capital was all excitement. "We must stop theenemy, " cried Danton, "by striking terror into the royalists. " To this endthe most atrocious measures were now adopted by the Extremists. It wasresolved that all the royalists confined in the jails of the capitalshould be murdered. A hundred or more assassins were hired to butcher theprisoners. The murderers first entered the churches of the city, and theunfortunate priests who had refused to take oath to support the newconstitution, were butchered in heaps about the altars. The jails werenext visited, one after another, the persons confined within slaughtered, and their bodies thrown out to the brutal hordes that followed thebutchers to enjoy the carnival of blood. 

The victims of this terrible "September Massacre, " as it is called, areestimated at from six to fourteen thousand. Europe had never before knownsuch a "jail delivery. " It was the greatest crime of the FrenchRevolution. 

DEFEAT OF THE ALLIES. --Meanwhile, in the open field, the fortunes of warinclined to the side of the revolutionists. The French generals weresuccessful in checking the advance of the allies, and finally at Valmy(Sept. 20, 1792) succeeded in inflicting upon them a decisive defeat, which caused their hasty retreat beyond the frontiers of France. The dayafter this victory the Legislative Assembly came to an end, and thefollowing day the National Convention assembled. 

4. THE NATIONAL CONVENTION (Sept. 21, 1792-Oct. 26, 1795). 

PARTIES IN THE CONVENTION. --The Convention, consisting of seven hundredand forty-nine deputies, among whom was the celebrated freethinker, ThomasPaine, was divided into two parties, the Girondists and the Mountainists. There were no monarchists; all were republicans. No one dared to speak ofa monarchy. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE REPUBLIC (Sept. 21, 1792). --The veryfirst act of the Convention on its opening day was to abolish the Monarchyand proclaim France a Republic. The motion for the abolition of Royaltywas not even discussed. "What need is there for discussion, " exclaimed adelegate, "where all are agreed? Courts are the hot-bed of crime, thefocus of corruption; the history of kings is the martyrology of nations. "

All titles of nobility were also abolished. Every one was to be addressedsimply as _citizen_. In the debates of the Convention, the king wasalluded to as Citizen Capet, and on the street the shoeblack was calledCitizen Shoeblack. 

The day following the Proclamation of the republic (Sept. 22, 1792) wasmade the beginning of a new era, the first day of the YEAR 1. That was tobe regarded as the natal day of Liberty. A little later, excited by thesuccess of the French armies, --the Austrians and Prussians had beenbeaten, and Belgium had been overrun and occupied, --the Convention calledupon all nations to rise against despotism, and pledged the aid of Franceto any people wishing to secure freedom. 

TRIAL AND EXECUTION OF THE KING (Jan. 21, 1793). --The next work of theConvention was the trial and execution of the king. On the 11th ofDecember, 1792, he was brought before the bar of that body, charged withhaving conspired with the enemies of France, of having opposed the will ofthe people, and of having caused the massacre of the 10th of August. Thesentence of the Convention was immediate death. On Jan. 21, 1793, theunfortunate monarch was conducted to the scaffold. 

COALITION AGAINST FRANCE. --The regicide awakened the most bitter hostilityagainst the French revolutionists, among all the old monarchies of Europe. The act was interpreted as a threat against all kings. A grand coalition, embracing Prussia, Austria, England, Sweden, Holland, Spain, Portugal, Piedmont, Naples, the Holy See, and later, Russia, was formed to crush therepublican movement. Armies aggregating more than a quarter of a millionof men threatened France at once on every frontier. 

While thus beset with foes without, the republic was threatened with evenmore dangerous enemies within. The people of La Vendee, in Western France, who still retained their simple reverence for Royalty, Nobility, and theChurch, rose in revolt against the sweeping innovations of therevolutionists. 

To meet all these dangers which threatened the life of the new-bornrepublic, the Convention ordered a levy, which placed 300, 000 men in thefield. The stirring Marseillaise Hymn, sung by the marching bands, awakened everywhere a martial fervor. 

THE FALL OF THE GIRONDISTS (June 2, 1793). --Gloomy tidings came from everyquarter, --news of reverses to the armies of the republic in front of theallies, and of successes of the counter-revolutionists in La Vendée andother provinces. The Mountainists in the Convention, supported by therabble of Paris, urged the most extreme measures. They proposed that thecarriages of the wealthy should be seized and used for carrying soldiersto the seat of war, and that the expenses of the government should be metby forced contributions from the rich. 

The Girondists opposing these communistic measures, a mob, 80, 000 strong, it is asserted, surrounded the Convention, and demanded that theGirondists be given up as enemies of the Republic. They were surrenderedand placed under arrest, a preliminary step to the speedy execution ofmany of them during the opening days of the Reign of Terror, which had nowbegun. 

Thus did the Parisian mob purge the National Convention of France, as thearmy purged Parliament in the English Revolution (see p. 612). That mobwere now masters, not only of the capital, but of France as well. There isnothing before France now but anarchy, and the dictator to whom anarchyalways gives birth. 

_The Reign of Terror_ (June 2, 1793-July 27, 1794). 

OPENING OF THE REIGN OF TERROR. --As soon as the expulsion of the Moderateshad given the Extremists control of the Convention, they proceeded tocarry out their policy of terrorism. Supreme power was vested in the so-called Committee of Public Safety, which became a terrific engine oftyranny and cruelty. Marat was president of the Committee, and Danton andRobespierre were both members. 

The scenes which now followed are only feebly illustrated by theproscriptions of Sulla in ancient Rome (see p. 283). All aristocrats, allpersons suspected of lukewarmness in the cause of liberty, were ordered tothe guillotine. Hundreds were murdered simply because their wealth waswanted. Others fell, not because they were guilty of any politicaloffence, but on account of having in some way incurred the personaldispleasure of the dictators. 

CHARLOTTE CORDAY: ASSASSINATION OF MARAT (July 13, 1793). --At this momentappeared the Joan of Arc of the Revolution. A maiden of Normandy, Charlotte Corday by name, conceived the idea of delivering France from theterrors of proscription and civil war, by going to Paris and killingMarat, whom she regarded as the head of the tyranny. On pretence ofwishing to reveal to him something of importance, she gained admission tohis rooms and stabbed him to the heart. She atoned for the deed under theknife of the guillotine. 

EVENTS AFTER THE DEATH OF MARAT. --The enthusiasm of Charlotte Corday hadled her to believe that the death of Marat would be a fatal blow to thepower of the Mountainists. But it only served to drive them to stillgreater excesses, under the lead of Danton and Robespierre. She died tostanch the flow of her country's blood; but, as Lamartine says, "herponiard appeared to have opened the veins of France. " The flame ofinsurrection in the departments was quenched in deluges of blood. Some ofthe cities that had been prominent centres of the counter-revolution weremade a terrible example of the vengeance of the revolutionists. Lyons wasan object of special hatred to the tyrants. Respecting this place theConvention passed the following decree: "The city of Lyons shall bedestroyed: every house occupied by a rich man shall be demolished; onlythe dwellings of the poor shall remain, with edifices specially devoted toindustry, and monuments consecrated to humanity and public education. " Sothousands of men were set to work to pull down the city. The Conventionfurther decreed that a monument should be erected upon the ruins of Lyonswith this inscription: "Lyons opposed Liberty! Lyons is no more!"

EXECUTION OF THE QUEEN AND OF THE GIRONDISTS. --The rage of therevolutionists was at this moment turned anew against the remainingmembers of the royal family, by the European powers proclaiming theDauphin King of France. The queen, who had now borne nine months'imprisonment in a close dungeon, was brought before the terribleRevolutionary Tribunal, a sort of court organized to take cognizance ofconspiracies against the republic, condemned to the guillotine, andstraightway beheaded. 

Two weeks after the execution of the queen, twenty-one of the chiefs ofthe Girondists, who had been kept in confinement since their arrest in theConvention, were pushed beneath the knife. Hundreds of others followed. Day after day the carnival of death went on. Seats were arranged for thepeople, who crowded to the spectacle as to a theatre. The women busiedtheir hands with their knitting, while their eyes feasted upon the swiftlychanging scenes of the horrid drama. 

Most illustrious of all the victims after the queen was Madame Roland, whowas accused of being the friend of the Girondists. Woman has always acteda prominent part in the great events of French history, because the grandideas and sentiments which have worked so powerfully upon the imaginativeand impulsive temperament of the men of France, have appealed with a stillmore fatal attraction to her more romantic and generously enthusiasticnature. 

SWEEPING CHANGES AND REFORMS. --While clearing away the enemies of Franceand of liberty, the revolutionists were also busy making the most sweepingchanges in the ancient institutions and customs of the land. They hatedthese as having been established by kings and aristocrats to enhance theirown importance and power, and to enthrall the masses. They proposed tosweep these things all aside, and give the world a fresh start. 

A new system of weights and measures, known as the metrical, was planned, and a new mode of reckoning time was introduced. The names of the monthswere altered, titles being given them expressive of the character of each. Each month was divided into three periods of ten days each, calleddecades, and each day into ten parts. The tenth day of each decade tookthe place of Sunday. The five odd days not provided for in the arrangementwere made festival days. 

ABOLITION OF CHRISTIANITY. --With these reforms effected, therevolutionists next proceeded to the more difficult task of subverting theancient institutions of religion. Some of the chiefs of the Commune ofParis declared that the Revolution should not rest until it had "dethronedthe King of Heaven as well as the kings of earth. "

An attempt was made by the Extremists to have Christianity abolished by adecree of the National Convention; but that body, fearing such an actmight alienate many who were still attached to the Church, resolved thatall matters of creed should be left to the decision of the peoplethemselves. 

[Illustration: THE GUILLOTINE ]

The atheistic chiefs of the Commune of the capital now determined toeffect their purpose through the Church itself. They persuaded the Bishopof Paris to abdicate his office; and his example was followed by many ofthe clergy throughout the country. The churches of Paris and of othercities were now closed, and the treasures of their altars and shrinesconfiscated to the State, Even the bells were melted down into cannon. Theimages of the Virgin and of the Christ were torn down, and the busts ofMarat and other patriots set up in their stead. And as the emancipation ofthe world was now to be wrought, not by the Cross, but by the guillotine, that instrument took the place of the crucifix, and was called the HolyGuillotine. All the visible symbols of the ancient religion weredestroyed. All emblems of hope in the cemeteries were obliterated, andover their gates were inscribed the words, "Death is eternal sleep. "

The madness of the Parisian people culminated in the worship of what wascalled the Goddess of Reason. A celebrated beauty, personating theGoddess, was set upon the altar of Notre Dame as the object of homage andadoration. The example of Paris was followed in many places throughoutFrance. Churches were everywhere converted into temples of the newworship. The Sabbath having been abolished, the services of the templewere held only upon every tenth day. On that day the mayor or some popularleader mounted the altar and harangued the people, dwelling upon the newsof the moment, the triumphs of the armies of the republic, the gloriousachievements of the Revolution, and the privilege of living in an era whenone was oppressed neither by kings on earth or by a King in heaven. 

FALL OF HÉBERT AND DANTON (March and April, 1794). --Not quite one year ofthe Reign of Terror had passed before the revolutionists, having destroyedor driven into obscurity their common enemy, the Girondists, turned uponone another with the ferocity of beasts whose appetite has been whetted bythe taste of blood. 

During the progress of events the Jacobins had become divided into threefactions, headed respectively by Danton, Robespierre, and Hébert. Danton, though he had been a bold and audacious leader, was now adopting a moreconservative tone, and was condemning the extravagances and cruelties ofthe Committee of Public Safety, of which he had ceased to be a member. 

Hébert was one of the worst demagogues of the Commune, the chief andinstigator of the Parisian rabble. He and his followers, the sans-culottesof the capital, would overturn everything and refound society uponcommunism and atheism. 

[Illustration: ROBESPIERRE]

Robespierre occupied a position midway between these two, condemning alikethe moderatism of Danton and the atheistic communism of Hebert. To makehis own power supreme, he resolved to crush both. 

Hébert and his party were the first to fall, Danton and his adherentsworking with Robespierre to bring about their ruin, for the Moderates andAnarchists were naturally at bitter enmity. 

Danton and his friends were the next to follow. Little more than a weekhad passed since the execution of Hébert before Robespierre had effectedtheir destruction, on the charge of conspiring with and encouraging thecounter-revolutionists. 

With the Anarchists and Moderates both destroyed, Robespierre was nowsupreme. His ambition was attained. "He stood alone on the awful eminenceof the Holy Mountain. " But his turn was soon to come. 

WORSHIP OF THE SUPREME BEING. --One of the first acts of the dictator wasto give France a new religion in place, of the worship of Reason. Robespierre wished to sweep away Christianity as a superstition, but hewould stop at deism. He did not believe that a state could be founded onatheism. "Atheism, " said he, "is aristocratic. The idea of a great beingwho watches over oppressed innocence, and who punishes triumphant guilt, is and always will be popular. If God did not exist, it would behoove manto invent him. " Accordingly Robespierre offered in the Convention thefollowing resolution: "The French people acknowledge the existence of theSupreme Being and the immortality of the soul. " The decree was adopted, and the churches that had been converted into temples of the Goddess ofReason were now consecrated to the worship of the Supreme Being. 

THE TERROR AT PARIS. --At the very same time that Robespierre wasestablishing the new worship, he was desolating France with massacres ofincredible atrocity, and ruling by a terrorism unparalleled since the mostfrightful days of Rome. With all power gathered in his hands, he overawedall opposition and dissent by the wholesale slaughters of the guillotine. The prisons of Paris and of the departments were filled with suspectedpersons, until 200, 000 prisoners were crowded within these republicanBastiles. At Paris the dungeons were emptied of their victims and roommade for fresh ones, by the swift processes of the Revolutionary Tribunal, which in mockery of justice caused the prisoners to be brought before itsbar in companies of ten or fifty. Rank or talent was an inexpiable crime. "Were you not a noble?" asks the president of the court of one of theaccused. "Yes, " was the reply. "Enough; another, " was the judge's verdict. And so on through the long list each day brought before the tribunal. 

The scenes about the guillotine were simply infernal. Benches werearranged around the scaffold and rented to spectators, like seats in atheatre. A special sewer had to be constructed to carry off the blood ofthe victims. In the space of a little over a month (from June 10th to July17th) the number of persons guillotined at Paris was 1285, an average of34 a day. 

MASSACRES IN THE PROVINCES. --While such was the terrible state of thingsat the capital, matters were even worse in many of the other leadingcities of France. The scenes at Nantes, Bordeaux, Marseilles, and Toulonsuggested, in their varied elements of horror, the awful conceptions ofthe "Inferno" of Dante. At Nantes the victims were at first shot singly orguillotined; but these methods being found too slow, more expeditiousmodes of execution were devised. To these were playfully given the namesof "Republican Baptisms, " "Republican Marriages, " and "Battues. "

The "Republican Baptism" consisted in crowding a hundred or more personsinto a vessel, which was then towed out into the Loire and scuttled. Inthe "Republican Marriages" a man and woman were bound together, and thenthrown into the river. The "Battues" consisted in ranging the victims inlong ranks, and mowing them down with discharges of cannon and musket. 

By these various methods fifteen thousand victims were destroyed in thecourse of a single month. The entire number massacred at Nantes during theReign of Terror is estimated at thirty thousand. What renders thesemurders the more horrible is the fact that a considerable number of thevictims were women and children. Nantes was at this time crowded with theorphaned children of the Vendéan counter-revolutionists. Upon a singlenight three hundred of these innocents were taken from the city prisonsand drowned in the Loire. 

THE FALL OF ROBESPIERRE (July, 1794). --By such terrorism did Robespierreand his creatures rule France for a little more than three months. Theawful suspense and dread drove many into insanity and to suicide. Thestrain was too great for human nature to bear. A reaction came. Thesuccesses of the armies of the republic, and the establishment of theauthority of the Convention throughout the departments, caused the peopleto look upon the massacres that were daily taking place as unnecessary andcruel. They began to turn with horror and pity from the scenes of theguillotine. 

The first blow at the power of the dictator was struck in the Convention. A member dared to denounce him, upon the floor of the assembly, as atyrant. The spell was broken. He was arrested and sent to the guillotine, with a large number of his confederates. The people greeted the fall ofthe tyrant's head with demonstrations of unbounded joy. The delirium wasover. "France had awakened from the ghastly dream of the Reign of Terror(July 28, 1794). "

THE REACTION. --The reaction which had swept away Robespierre and hisassociates continued after their ruin. The clubs of the Jacobins wereclosed, and that infamous society which had rallied and directed thehideous rabbles of the great cities was broken up. The deputies that hadbeen driven from their seats in the Convention were invited to resumetheir places and the Christian worship was reestablished. 

NAPOLEON DEFENDS THE CONVENTION (Oct. 5, 1795). --These and other measuresof the Convention did not fail of arousing the bitter opposition of thescattered forces of the Terrorists, as they were called; and on the 5th ofOctober, 1795, a mob of 40, 000 men advanced to the attack of theTuileries, where the Convention was sitting. As the mob came on they weremet by a storm of grape shot, which sent them flying back in wilddisorder. The man who trained the guns was a young artillery officer, anative of the island of Corsica, --Napoleon Bonaparte. The Revolution hadat last brought forth a man of genius capable of controlling and directingits tremendous energies. 5. THE DIRECTORY (Oct. 27, 1795-Nov. 9, 1799). 

THE REPUBLIC BECOMES AGGRESSIVE. --A few weeks after the defence of theConvention by Napoleon, that body declaring its labors ended, closed itssessions, and immediately afterwards the Councils and the Board ofDirectors provided for by the new constitution [Footnote: There were to betwo legislative bodies, --the Council of Five Hundred and the Council ofthe Ancients, the latter embracing two hundred and fifty persons, of whomno one could be under fifty years of age. The executive power was vestedin a board of five persons, which was called the Directory. ] that had beenframed by the Convention, assumed control of affairs. 

Under the Directory the republic, which up to this time had been actingmainly on the defensive, entered upon an aggressive policy. TheRevolution, having accomplished its work in France, having there destroyedroyal despotism and abolished class privilege, now set itself aboutfulfilling its early promise of giving liberty to all peoples (see p. 658). In a word, the revolutionists became propagandists. France nowexhibits what her historians call her social, her communicative genius. "Easily seduced herself, " as Lamartine says, "she easily seduces others. "She would make all Europe like unto herself. Herself a republic, she wouldmake all nations republics. 

Had not the minds of the people in all the neighboring countries beenprepared to welcome the new order of things, the Revolution could neverhave spread itself as widely as it did. But everywhere irrepressiblelongings for social and political equality and freedom, born of longoppression, were stirring the souls of men. The French armies wereeverywhere welcomed as deliverers. Thus was France enabled to surroundherself with a girdle of commonwealths. She conquered Europe not by herarmies, but by her ideas. "An invasion of armies, " says Victor Hugo, "canbe resisted: an invasion of ideas cannot be resisted. "

The republics established were, indeed, short-lived; for the times werenot yet ripe for the complete triumph of democratic ideas. But a greatgain for freedom was made. The reestablished monarchies never dared tomake themselves as despotic as those which the Revolution had overturned. 

THE PLANS OF THE DIRECTORY. --Austria and England were the only formidablepowers that still persisted in their hostility to the republic. TheDirectors resolved to strike a decisive blow at the first of theseimplacable foes. To carry out their designs, two large armies, numberingabout 70, 000 each, were mustered upon the middle Rhine, and intrusted tothe command of the two young and energetic generals Moreau and Jourdan, who were to make a direct invasion of Germany. A third army, numberingabout 36, 000 men, was assembled in the neighborhood of Nice, in South-eastern France, and placed in the hands of Napoleon, to whom was assignedthe work of driving the Austrians out of Italy. 

NAPOLEON'S ITALIAN CAMPAIGN (1796-1797). --Straightway upon receiving hiscommand, Napoleon, now in his twenty-seventh year, animated by visions ofmilitary glory to be gathered on the fields of Italy, hastened to join hisarmy at Nice. He found the discontented soldiers almost without food orclothes. He at once aroused all their latent enthusiasm by one of thoseshort, stirring addresses for which he afterwards became so famous. Thenbefore the mountain roads were yet free from snow, he set his army inmotion, and forced the passage of the low Genoese, or Maritime Alps. TheCarthaginian had been surpassed. "Hannibal, " exclaimed Napoleon, "crossedthe Alps; as for us, we have turned them. " Now followed a most astonishingseries of French victories over the Austrians and their allies. As aresult of the campaign a considerable part of Northern Italy was formedinto a commonwealth under the name of the Cisalpine Republic. Genoa wasalso transformed into the Ligurian Republic. 

TREATY OF COMPO FORMIO (1797). --While Napoleon had been gaining hissurprising victories in Italy, Moreau and Jourdan had been meeting withsevere reverses in Germany, their invading columns having been forced backupon the Rhine by the Archduke Charles. Napoleon, having effected the workassigned to the army of Italy, now climbed the Eastern Alps, and led hissoldiers down upon the plains of Austria. The near approach of the Frenchto Vienna induced the emperor, Francis II. , to listen to proposals ofpeace. An armistice was agreed upon, and a few months afterwards theimportant treaty of Campo Formio was arranged. By the terms of this treatyAustria ceded her Belgian provinces to the French Republic, surrenderedimportant provinces on the west side of the Rhine, and acknowledged theCisalpine Republic. 

With the treaty arranged, Napoleon set out for Paris, where a triumph andovation such as Europe had not seen since the days of the old Romanconquerors, awaited him. 

NAPOLEON'S CAMPAIGN IN EGYPT (1798-1799). --The Directors had receivedNapoleon with apparent enthusiasm and affection; but at this very momentthey were disquieted by fears lest the conqueror's ambition might lead himto play the part of a second Cæsar. They resolved to engage the youngcommander in an enterprise which would take him out of France. Thisundertaking was an attack upon England, which they were then meditating. Bonaparte opposed the plan of a direct descent upon the island asimpracticable, declaring that England should be attacked through herEastern possessions. He presented a scheme very characteristic of hisbold, imaginative genius. This was nothing less than the conquest andcolonization of Egypt, by which means France would be able to control thetrade of the East, and cut England off from her East India possessions. The Directors assented to the plan, and with feelings of relief sawNapoleon embark from the port of Toulon to carry out the enterprise. 

Escaping the vigilance of the British fleet that was patrolling theMediterranean, Napoleon landed in Egypt July 1, 1798. Within sight of thePyramids, the French army was checked in its march upon Cairo by adetermined stand of the renowned Mameluke cavalry. Napoleon animated thespirits of his men for the inevitable fight by one of his happiestspeeches. One of the sentences is memorable: "Soldiers, " he exclaimed, pointing to the Pyramids, "forty centuries are looking down upon you. " Theterrific struggle that followed is known in history as the "Battle of thePyramids. " Napoleon gained a victory that opened the way for his advance. The French now entered Cairo in triumph, and all Lower Egypt fell intotheir hands. 

Napoleon had barely made his entrance into Cairo, before the startlingintelligence was borne to him that his fleet had been destroyed in the bayof Aboukir, at the mouth of the Nile, by the English admiral Nelson (Aug. 1, 1798). 

In the spring of 1799, Napoleon led his army into Syria, the Porte havingjoined a new coalition against France. He captured Gaza and Jaffa, andfinally invested Acre. The Turks were assisted in the defence of thisplace by the distinguished English admiral, Sir Sidney Smith. [Footnote:The besieged were further assisted by a Turkish army outside. With thesethe French fought the noted Battle of Mount Tabor, in which they gained acomplete victory. ] All of Napoleon's attempts to carry the place by stormwere defeated by the skill and bravery of the English commander. "That manSidney, " said Napoleon afterwards, "made me miss my destiny. " DoubtlessNapoleon's vision of conquests in the East embraced Persia and India. Withthe ports of Syria secured, he would have imitated Alexander, and led hissoldiers to the foot of the Himalayas. 

Bitterly disappointed, Napoleon abandoned the siege of Acre, and led hisarmy back into Egypt. There his worn and thinned ranks were attacked nearAboukir by a fresh Turkish army, but the genius of Napoleon turnedthreatened defeat into a brilliant victory. The enthusiastic Kleber, oneof Napoleon's lieutenants, clasping his general in his arms, exclaimed, "Sire, your greatness is like that of the universe. "

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE TIBERINE, HELVETIC, AND PARTHENOPÆAN REPUBLICS. --Wemust turn now to view affairs in Europe. The year 1798 was a favorable onefor the republican cause represented by the Revolution. During that yearand the opening month of the following one, the French set up three newrepublics. First, they incited an insurrection at Rome, made a prisoner ofthe Pope, and proclaimed the Roman, or Tiberine, Republic. Then theyinvaded the Swiss cantons and united them into a commonwealth under thename of the Helvetic Republic. A little later the French troops drove theking of Naples out of his kingdom, and transformed that state into theParthenopæan Republic. Thus were three new republics added to thecommonwealths which the Revolution had already created. 

THE REACTION: NAPOLEON OVERTHROWS THE DIRECTORY (18th and 19th Brumaire). --Most of this work was quickly undone. Encouraged by the victory ofNelson over the French fleet in the battle of the Nile, the leading statesof Europe had formed a new coalition against the French Republic. Early in1779 the war began, and was waged in almost every part of Europe at thesame time. The campaign was on the whole extremely disastrous to theFrench. They were driven out of Italy, and were barely able to keep theallies off the soil of France. The Tiberine and the Parthenopæan Republicswere abolished. 

The reverses suffered by the French armies caused the Directory to fallinto great disfavor. They were charged with having through jealousy exiledNapoleon, the only man who could save the Republic. Confusion and divisionprevailed everywhere. The royalists had become so strong and bold thatthere was danger lest they should gain control of the government. On theother hand, the threats of the Jacobins began to create apprehensions ofanother Reign of Terror. 

News of the desperate state of affairs at home reached Napoleon just afterhis victory in Egypt, following his return from Syria. He instantly formeda bold resolve. Confiding the command of the army in Egypt to Kleber, heset sail for France, disclosing his designs in the significant words, "Thereign of the lawyers is over. "

Napoleon was welcomed in France with the wildest enthusiasm. A greatmajority of the people felt instinctively that the emergency demanded adictator. Some of the Directors joined with Napoleon in a plot tooverthrow the government. Meeting with opposition in the Council of FiveHundred, Napoleon with a body of grenadiers drove the deputies from theirchamber (Nov. 9, 1799). 

The French Revolution had at last brought forth its Cromwell. Napoleon wasmaster of France. The first French Republic was at an end, and what isdistinctively called the French Revolution was over. Now commences thehistory of the Consulate and the First Empire, --the story of thatsurprising career, the sun of which rose so brightly at Austerlitz and setforever at Waterloo. 

CHAPTER LIX. 

THE CONSULATE AND THE FIRST EMPIRE: FRANCE SINCE THE SECOND RESTORATION. 

1. THE CONSULATE AND THE EMPIRE (1799-1815). 

THE VEILED MILITARY DESPOTISM. --After the overthrow of the Directorialgovernment, a new constitution--the fourth since the year 1789--wasprepared, and having been submitted to the approval of the people, washeartily indorsed. This new instrument vested the executive power in threeconsuls, elected for a term of ten years, the first of whom reallyexercised all the authority of the Board. Napoleon, of course, became theFirst Consul. 

The other functions of the government were carried on by a Council ofState, a Tribunate, a Legislature, and a Senate. But the members of allthese bodies were appointed either directly or indirectly by the consuls, so that the entire government was actually in their hands, or, rather, inthe hands of the First Consul. France was still called a republic, but itwas such a republic as Rome was under Julius Cæsar or Augustus. Therepublican names and forms merely veiled a government as absolute andpersonal as that of Louis XIV. , --in a word, a military despotism. 

WARS OF THE FIRST CONSUL. --Neither Austria nor England would acknowledgethe government of the First Consul as legitimate. In their view he wassimply an upstart, a fortunate usurper. The throne of France belonged, byvirtue of divine right, to the House of Bourbon. 

Napoleon mustered his soldiers. His plan was to deal Austria, his worstcontinental enemy, a double blow. A large army was collected on the Rhine, for an invasion of Germany. This was intrusted to Moreau. Another, intended to operate against the Austrians in Italy, was gathered at thefoot of the Alps. Napoleon himself assumed command of this latter force. 

In the spring of the year 1800 Napoleon made his memorable passage of theAlps, and astonished the Austrian generals by suddenly appearing, with anarmy of 40, 000 men, on the plains of Italy. Upon the renowned field ofMarengo the Austrian army, which outnumbered that of the French three toone, was completely overwhelmed, and Italy lay for a second time at thefeet of Napoleon (June 14, 1800). 

But at the moment Italy was regained, Egypt was lost. On the very day ofthe battle of Marengo, Kleber, whom Napoleon had left in charge of thearmy in Egypt, was assassinated by a Turkish fanatic, and shortlyafterwards the entire French force was obliged to surrender to theEnglish. 

The French reverses in Egypt, however, were soon made up by freshvictories in Europe. A few months after the battle of Marengo, Moreaugained a decisive victory over the Austrians at Hohenlinden, which openedthe way to Vienna. The Emperor Francis II. Was now constrained to sign atreaty of peace at Luneville, in which he allowed the Rhine to be made theeastern frontier of France (February, 1801). The emperor also recognizedthe Cisalpine, Ligurian, Helvetian, and Batavian republics. The followingyear England was also glad to sign a peace at Amiens (March, 1802). 

HIS WORKS OF PEACE: THE CODE NAPOLEON. --Having wrung from both England andAustria an acknowledgment of his government, Napoleon was now free todevote his amazing energies to the reform and improvement of the internalaffairs of France. So at this time were begun by him those great works ofvarious character which were continued through all the fifteen years ofhis supremacy. His great military road over the Alps by the Simplon Pass, surpasses in bold engineering the most difficult of the Roman roads, whilemany of his architectural works are the pride of France at the presentday. 

[Illustration: CENTRAL EUROPE 1801]

Taking up the work of the Revolution, he caused the laws of France to berevised and harmonized, producing the celebrated _Code Napoleon_, awork that is not unworthy of comparison with the _Corpus Juris Civilis_ ofthe Emperor Justinian. The influence of this Code upon the development ofLiberalism in Western Europe is simply incalculable. It secured the workof the Revolution. It swept away the unequal, iniquitous, oppressivecustoms, regulations, decrees, and laws that were an inheritance from thefeudal ages. It recognized the equality in the eye of the law of noble andpeasant. "It is to-day the frame-work of law in France, Holland, Belgium, Western Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. " Had Napoleon done nothing elsesave to give this Code to Europe, he would have conferred an inestimablebenefit upon mankind. 

NAPOLEON MADE CONSUL FOR LIFE (1802). --As a reward for his vast servicesto France, and also in order that his magnificent schemes of reform andimprovement might be pursued without fear of interruption, Napoleon wasnow, by a vote of the people, made Consul for Life, with the right to namehis successor (August, 1802). Thus he moved a step nearer the coveteddignity of the Imperial title. 

NAPOLEON PROCLAIMED EMPEROR (1804). --A conspiracy against the life of theFirst Consul, and the increased activity of his enemies, caused the Frenchpeople to resolve to increase his power, and secure his safety and thestability of his government, by placing him upon a throne. A decreeconferring upon him the title of Emperor having been submitted to thepeople for approval was ratified by an almost unanimous vote, less thanthree thousand persons opposing the measure. 

SURROUNDING REPUBLICS CHANGED INTO KINGDOMS. --Thus was the First FrenchRepublic metamorphosed into an unveiled empire. We may be sure that thecluster of republics which during the Revolution sprang up around thegreat original, will speedily undergo a like transformation; for Napoleonwas right when he said that a revolution in France is sure to be followedby a revolution throughout Europe. As France, a republic, would make allstates republics, so France, a monarchy, would make all nationsmonarchies. Within five years from the time that the government of Franceassumed an imperial form, all the surrounding republics raised up by therevolutionary ideas and armies of France, had been transformed intomonarchies dependent upon France, or had become a component part of theFrench Empire. [Footnote: The Cisalpine, or Italian Republic, was changedinto a kingdom, and Napoleon, crowning himself at Milan with the ironcrown of the Lombards, assumed the government of the state with the titleof King of Italy (May 26, 1805). The Ligurian Republic, embracing Genoaand a portion of Sardinia, was made a part of France, while the BatavianRepublic was changed into the Kingdom of Holland, and given by Napoleon tohis brother Louis (June, 1806). ] Thus was the political work of theRevolution undone. Political _liberty_ was taken away; the peoplewere not yet ready for self-government. Social _Equality_ was left. 

THE WARS OF NAPOLEON. --It will not be supposed that the powers of Europewere looking quietly on while France was thus metamorphosing herself andall the neighboring countries. The colossal power which the soldier offortune was building up, was a menace to all Europe. The empire was moredreaded than the republic, because it was a military despotism, and assuch, an instrument of irresistible power in the hands of a man of suchgenius and resources as Napoleon. Coalition after coalition, always headedby England, --who had sworn a Punic hatred to the Napoleonic empire, --wasformed by the monarchies of Europe against the "usurper, " with the objectof pressing France back within her original boundaries and setting upagain the subverted throne of the Bourbons. 

From the coronation of Napoleon in 1804 until his final downfall in 1815, the tremendous struggle went on almost without intermission. It was thewar of the giants. Europe was shaken from end to end by such armies as theworld had not seen since the days of Xerxes. Napoleon, whose hands wereupheld by a score of distinguished marshals, performed the miracles ofgenius. His brilliant achievements still dazzle, while they amaze, theworld. 

To relate in detail the campaigns of Napoleon from Austerlitz to Waterloowould require the space of volumes. We shall simply indicate in a fewbrief paragraphs the successive steps by which he mounted to the highestpitch of power and fame, and then trace rapidly the decline and fall ofhis astonishing fortunes. 

AUSTERLITZ (1805): END OF THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE (1806). --The yearfollowing his coronation, Napoleon made a gigantic effort to break thecoalition which England, Russia, Austria, and Sweden had formed againsthim. He massed an immense army at Boulogne, on the Channel, preparatory toan invasion of England; but the failure of his fleet to carry out its partof the plan, and intelligence of the approach of the Austrians andRussians towards the Rhenish frontier, caused him suddenly to transfer histroops to the opposite side of France. 

Without waiting for the attack of the allies, Napoleon flung his GrandArmy, as it was called, across the Rhine, defeated the Austrians in thebattle of Ulm, and marched in triumph through Vienna to the field ofAusterlitz beyond, where he gained one of his most memorable victoriesover the combined armies of Austria and Russia, numbering more than100, 000 men (Dec. 2, 1805). 

This battle completely changed the map of Europe. Austria was forced togive up Venetia and other provinces about the head of the Adriatic, thisterritory being now added to the kingdom of Italy. Sixteen of the Germanstates, declaring themselves independent of the empire, were formed into aleague, called the _Confederation of the Rhine_, with Napoleon asProtector. Furthermore, the Emperor Francis II. Was obliged to surrenderthe crown of the _Holy Roman Empire_, and thereafter to content himselfwith the title of _Emperor of Austria_. 

Thus did the Holy Roman Empire come to an end (1806), after havingmaintained an existence, since its revival by Otto the Great, of more thaneight hundred years. The _Kingdom of Germany_, which was created by thepartition of the empire of Charlemagne (see p. 408), now also passed outof existence, even in name. 

TRAFALGAR (Oct. 21, 1805). --Napoleon's brilliant victories in Germany wereclouded by an irretrievable disaster to his fleet, which occurred only twodays after the engagement at Ulm. Lord Nelson having met, near CapeTrafalgar on the coast of Spain, the combined French and Spanish fleets, --Spain had become the ally of Napoleon, --almost completely destroyed thecombined armaments. The gallant English admiral fell at the moment ofvictory. "Thank God, I have done my duty, " were his last words. 

This decisive battle give England the control of the sea, and relieved herfrom all danger of a French invasion. Even the "wet ditch, " as Napoleonwas wont contemptuously to call the English Channel, was henceforth animpassable gulf to his ambition. He might rule the continent, but thesovereignty of the ocean and its islands was denied him. 

JENA AND AUERSTADT (1806). --Prussia was the state next after Austria tofeel the weight of Napoleon's power. Goaded by insult, the Prussian king, Frederick William III. , very imprudently threw down the gauntlet to theFrench emperor. Moving with his usual swiftness, Napoleon overwhelmed thearmies of Frederick in the battles of Jena and Auerstadt, which were bothfought upon the same day (Oct. 14, 1806). Thus the great military powerconsolidated by the genius of Frederick the Great, was crushed and almostannihilated. What had proved too great an undertaking for the combinedpowers of Europe during the Seven Years' War, Napoleon had effected inless than a month. 

EYLAU AND FRIEDLAND (1807). --The year following his victories over thePrussians, Napoleon led his Grand Army against the forces of the Czar, Alexander I. , who had entered Prussia with aid for King Frederick. Afierce but indecisive battle at Eylau was followed, a little later in thesame season, by the battle of Friedland, in which the Russians werecompletely overwhelmed (June 14, 1807). The Czar was forced to sue forpeace. 

By the terms of the Treaty of Tilsit Prussia was stripped of more thanhalf of her former dominions, a part of which was made into a new state, called the Kingdom of Westphalia, with Napoleon's brother, Jerome, as itsking, and added to the Confederation of the Rhine; while Prussian Poland, reorganized and clumsily christened the "Grand Duchy of Warsaw, " was givento Saxony. What was left of Prussia became virtually a dependency of theFrench empire. 

THE CONTINENTAL SYSTEM: THE BERLIN AND MILAN DECREES. --While Napoleon wascarrying on his campaigns against Prussia and Russia, he was all the timemeditating vengeance upon England, his most uncompromising foe, and theleader or the instigator of the coalitions which were constantly beingformed for the overthrow of his power. We have seen how the destruction ofhis fleet at Trafalgar dashed all his hopes of ever making a descent uponthe British shores. Unable to reach his enemy directly with his arms, heresolved to strike her through her commerce. By two celebrated imperialedicts, called from the cities whence they were issued the Berlin and theMilan decree, he closed all the ports of the continent against Englishships, and forbade any of the European nations from holding anyintercourse with Great Britain, all of whose ports he declared in a stateof blockade. 

So completely was Europe under the domination of Napoleon, that England'strade was by these measures very seriously crippled, and great loss andsuffering were inflicted upon her industrial classes. We shall haveoccasion a little later to speak of the disastrous effects of the systemupon the French empire itself. 

BEGINNING OF THE PENINSULAR WARS (1808). --One of the first consequences ofNapoleon's "continental policy" was to bring him into conflict withPortugal. The prince regent of that country presuming to open its ports toEnglish ships, Napoleon at once deposed him, and sent one of his marshalsto take possession of the kingdom. The entire royal family, accompanied bymany of the nobility, fled to Brazil, and made that country the seat of anempire which has endured to the present day. 

Having thus gained a foothold in the Peninsula, Napoleon now resolved topossess himself of the whole of it. Insolently interfering in the affairsof Spain, he forced the weak-minded Bourbon king to resign to him, as his"dearly beloved friend and ally, " his crown, which he bestowed at onceupon his brother, Joseph Bonaparte (1808). The throne of Naples, whichJoseph had been occupying, [Footnote: Napoleon dethroned the Bourbons inNaples in 1805. ] was transferred to Murat, Napoleon's brother-in-law. Thusdid this audacious man make and unmake kings, and give away thrones andkingdoms. 

But the high-spirited Spaniards were not the people to submit tamely tosuch an indignity. The entire nation, from the Pyrenees to the Straits ofGibraltar, flew to arms. Portugal also arose, and England sent to her aida force under Sir Arthur Wellesley, afterwards Duke of Wellington, and thehero of Waterloo. The French were soon driven out of Portugal, and pushedbeyond the Ebro in Spain. Joseph fled in dismay from his throne, andNapoleon found it necessary to take the field himself, in order to restorethe prestige of the French arms. He entered the Peninsula at the head ofan army of 80, 000 men, and scattering the Spaniards wherever he met them, entered Madrid in triumph, and reseated his brother upon the Spanishthrone. 

Threatening tidings from another quarter of Europe now caused Napoleon tohasten back to Paris. 

SECOND CAMPAIGN AGAINST AUSTRIA (1809). --Taking advantage of Napoleon'stroubles in the Peninsula, Francis I. Of Austria, who had been watchingfor an opportunity to retrieve the disaster of Austerlitz, gathered anarmy of half a million of men, and declared war against the Frenchemperor. But Austria was fated to suffer even a deeper humiliation thanshe had already endured. Napoleon swept across the Danube, and at the endof a short campaign, the most noted battles of which were those of Eckmuhland Wagram, Austria was again at his feet, and a second time he enteredVienna in triumph. Austria was now still farther dismembered, large tractsof her possessions being ceded directly to Napoleon or given to thevarious neighboring states (1809). 

[Illustration: CENTRAL EUROPE, 1810]

THE PAPAL STATES AND HOLLAND JOINED TO THE FRENCH EMPIRE. --That Napoleoncared but little for the thunders of the Church is shown by his treatmentof the Pope. Pius VII. Opposing his continental system, the emperorincorporated the Papal States with the French empire (1809). The Popethereupon excommunicated Napoleon, who straightway arrested the Pontiff, dragged him over the Alps into France, and held him in captivity for fouryears. 

The year following the annexation of the Papal States to the Frenchempire, Louis Bonaparte, king of Holland, who disapproved of his brother'scontinental system, which was ruining the trade of the Dutch, abdicatedthe crown. Thereupon Napoleon incorporated Holland with France, on theground that it was simply "the sediment of the French rivers. "

NAPOLEON'S SECOND MARRIAGE (1810). --The year following his triumph overFrancis I. Of Austria, Napoleon divorced his wife Josephine, in order toform a new alliance, with Maria Louisa, Archduchess of Austria. The fondand faithful Josephine bowed meekly to the will of her lord, and went intosorrowful exile from his palace. Napoleon's object in this matter was tocover the reproach of his own plebeian birth, by an alliance with one ofthe ancient royal families of Europe, and to secure the perpetuity of hisgovernment by leaving an heir who might be the inheritor of his throne andfortunes. His hope seemed realized when, the year following his marriagewith the Archduchess, a son was born to them, who was given the title of"King of Rome. "

NAPOLEON AT THE SUMMIT OF HIS POWER (1811). --Napoleon was now at theheight of his marvellous fortunes. Marengo, Austerlitz, Jena, Friedland, and Wagram were the successive steps by which he had mounted to the mostdizzy heights of military power and glory. The empire which he had builtup stretched from the Baltic to Southern Italy, embracing France proper, Belgium, Holland, Northwestern Germany, Italy west of the Apennines as farsouth as Naples, besides large possessions about the head of the Adriatic. On all sides were allied, vassal, or dependent states. Several of theancient thrones of Europe were occupied by Napoleon's relatives orfavorite marshals. He himself was head of the kingdom of Italy, andProtector of the Confederation of the Rhine. Austria and Prussia werecompletely subject to his will. Russia and Denmark were his allies. 

[Illustration: NAPOLEON BONAPARTE]

ELEMENTS OF WEAKNESS IN THE EMPIRE. --But splendid and imposing as at thismoment appeared the external affairs of Napoleon, the sun of his fortunes, which had risen so brightly at Austerlitz, had already passed itsmeridian. There were many things just now contributing to the weakness ofthe French empire and foreboding its speedy dissolution. Founded andupheld by the genius of Napoleon, it depended solely upon the life andfortunes of this single man. The diverse elements it embraced were as yetso loosely joined that there could be no hope or possibility of itssurviving either the misfortune or the death of its founder. 

Again, Napoleon's continental system, through the suffering and loss itinflicted upon all the maritime countries of Europe, had caused murmurs ofdiscontent all around the circumference of the continent. This ruinouspolicy had also involved the French emperor in a terribly wasteful warwith Spain, which country was destined--more truly than Italy, of whichthe expression was first used--to become "the grave of the French. "Napoleon after his downfall himself admitted that his passage of thePyrenees was the fatal misstep in his career. 

Furthermore, the conscriptions of the emperor had drained France of men, and her armies were now recruited by mere boys, who were utterly unfit tobear the burden and fatigue of Napoleon's rapid campaigns. The heavytaxes, also, which were necessary to meet the expenses of Napoleon's wars, and to carry on the splendid public works upon which he was constantlyengaged, produced great suffering and discontent throughout the empire. And the crowd of deposed princes and dispossessed aristocrats in thosestates where Napoleon had promulgated his new code of equal rights (see p. 675), were naturally restless and resentful, and watchful for anopportunity to recover their ancient power and privileges. Even the largeclass in the surrounding countries that at first welcomed Napoleon as therepresentative of the French ideas of equality and liberty, and applaudedwhile he overturned ancient thrones and aristocracies, which, like themonarchy and the feudal nobility in France swept away by the Revolution, had become unbearably proud, corrupt, and oppressive, --even these earlyadherents had been turned into bitter enemies through Napoleon's adoptionof imperial manners, and especially by his setting aside his first wife, Josephine, in order that he might ally himself to one of the old royalhouses of Europe, which act was looked upon as a betrayal of the cause ofthe people. 

Nothing save the prestige of Napoleon's name and the dread of hisvengeance keeps his enemies at bay. Let the lion be wounded and a hundredenemies will spring upon him from every side. 

THE INVASION OF RUSSIA (1812-1813). --The signal for the uprising of Europewas the terrible misfortune which befell Napoleon in his invasion ofRussia. The Czar having cast aside the old ties of alliance andfriendship, and entered a coalition against France, Napoleon crossed thefrontiers of Russia, at the head of what was proudly called the GrandArmy, numbering more than half a million of men. 

The Russians threw themselves across the path of the invaders at Borodino, but their lines were swept back by the strong columns of the Grand Army, although the victory cost the French dear. Following closely theretreating enemy, the French pushed on towards the ancient Russiancapital, Moscow. This city Napoleon had thought would supply food for hisarmy, and shelter from the severity of the northern winter, which was nowapproaching. But to his astonishment he found the city deserted by itsinhabitants; and scarcely had he established himself in the empty palaceof the Czar (the Kremlin), before the city, probably fired by persons whomthe Russians had left behind for this purpose, burst into flames. After, waiting about the ruins until the middle of October, in hopes that theCzar would accept proposals of peace, Napoleon was forced to give thecommand for the return of the army to France. 

The retreat was attended with incredible sufferings and horrors. TheRussian winter setting in earlier than usual and with terrible severity, thousands of the French soldiers were frozen to death, and falling uponthe snow traced with a long black line the trail of the retreating army. The spot of each bivouac was marked by the circles of dead around thewatch-fires. Thousands more were slain by the wild Cossacks, whosurrounded the retreating columns and harassed them day and night. Thepassage of the river Beresina was attended with appalling losses. 

Soon after the passage of this stream, Napoleon, conscious that the fateof his empire depended upon his presence in Paris, left the remnant of thearmy in charge of his marshals, and hurried by post to his capital. Marshal Ney, "the bravest of the brave, " performed miracles in coveringthe retreat of the broken and dispirited columns. He was the last man, itis said, to cross the Niemen. His face was so haggard from care and sobegrimed with powder, that no one recognized him. Being asked who he was, he replied, "I am the rear guard of the Grand Army. "

The loss by death of the French and their allies in this disastrouscampaign is reckoned at about 300, 000 men, [Footnote: The Russians took100, 000 prisoners, and about 100, 000 recrossed the Niemen. ] while that ofthe Russians is estimated to have been almost as large. 

"THE BATTLE OF THE NATIONS" (Leipsic, 1813). --Napoleon's fortunes wereburied with his Grand Army in the snows of Russia. His woeful lossesemboldened the surrounding powers to think that now they could crush him. A sixth coalition was formed, embracing Russia, Prussia, England, andSweden. Napoleon made gigantic efforts to prepare France for the struggle. By the spring of 1813 he was at the head of a new army, numbering over300, 000 men. 

[Illustration: MAP OF CENTRAL EUROPE, 1815]

Falling upon the allied armies of the Russians and Prussians, first atLutzen and then at Bautzen, he gained a decisive victory upon both fields. Austria now appeared in the lists, and at Leipsic the French were met bythe leagued armies of Europe. So many were the powers represented upon therenowned field, that it is known in history as the "Battle of theNations. " The combat lasted three days. Napoleon was defeated, and forcedto retreat into France. 

THE ABDICATION OF NAPOLEON (1814). --The armies of the allies now pouredover all the French frontiers. Napoleon's tremendous efforts to roll backthe tide of invasion were all in vain. As the struggle became manifestlyhopeless, his most trusted officers deserted and betrayed him. Parissurrendered to the allies. Napoleon was forced to abdicate, and theancient House of the Bourbons was reestablished in the person of a brotherof Louis XVI. , who took the title of Louis XVIII. Napoleon was banished tothe little island of Elba in the Mediterranean, being permitted to retainhis title of Emperor, and to keep about him a few hundred of his oldguards. But Elba was a very diminutive empire for one to whom the half ofEurope seemed too small, and we shall not be surprised to learn thatNapoleon was not content with it. 

THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA (Sept. , 1814-June, 1815). --After the overthrow ofNapoleon, commissioners of the different European states met at Vienna toreadjust the map of Europe. It was a great task to harmonize theconflicting claims that came before the convention, and to effect asettlement of the continent that should satisfy all parties. But afternearly a year of negotiations and debate, an agreement respecting theboundaries and relations of the various states was reached. As we shallhereafter, in connection with the history of the separate countries, haveoccasion to say something respecting the relations of each to theCongress, we shall here say but a word regarding the temper of theassembly and the general character of its work. 

The Vienna commissioners seemed to have had but one thought and aim--toput everything back as near as possible in the shape that it was in beforethe Revolution. They had no care for the people; the princes were theironly concern. The crowd of thrones that Napoleon had overturned wererighted, and the old despots were invited to remount them. Italy andGermany were divided among a horde of petty tyrants. In Spain and Naplesthe old Bourbon families were re-instated, and the former despotismsrenewed. In short, the clock was set back to the hour when the Bastile wasattacked. Everything that had happened since was utterly ignored. 

But the Revolution had destroyed privilege as expressed in the effetefeudal aristocracies of Europe, and impaired beyond restoration themonstrous doctrine of the divine right of kings. An attempt to bring thesethings back again was an attempt to restore life to the dead, --to set upagain the fallen Dagon in his place. 

Notwithstanding, the commissioners at Vienna, blind to the spirit andtendencies of the times, did set up once more the broken idol, --only, however, to see it flung down again by the memorable social upheavals ofthe next half century. The kings had had their Congress: the people wereto have theirs, --in 1820 and '30 and '48. 

THE HUNDRED DAYS (March 20-June 29, 1815). --The allies who placed LouisXVIII. Upon the French throne set back the boundaries of France as nearlyas possible to the lines they occupied in 1792. In like manner the kinghimself, seemingly utterly oblivious to the spirit and tendencies of thetimes, as soon as he was in possession of the ancient inheritance of hisfamily, began to put back everything just as it was before the reforms ofthe Revolution. He always alluded to the year he began to rule as thenineteenth of his reign, thus affecting to ignore entirely the governmentof the republic and of the empire. 

The result of this reactionary policy was widespread dissatisfactionthroughout France. Many began to desire the return of Napoleon, and thewish was perhaps what gave rise to the report which was spread about thathe would come back with the spring violets. 

In the month of March, 1815, as the commissioners of the various powerswere sitting at Vienna rearranging the landmarks and boundariesobliterated by the French inundation, news was brought to them thatNapoleon had escaped from Elba and was in France. At first the members ofthe Congress were incredulous, regarding the thing as a jest, and werewith difficulty convinced of the truth of the report. 

Taking advantage of the general dissatisfaction with the rule of therestored Bourbons, Napoleon had resolved upon a bold push for the recoveryof his crown. Landing with a few followers at one of the southern ports ofFrance, he aroused all the country with one of his stirring addresses, andthen immediately pushed on towards Paris. Never was the changeable, impulsive character of the French people better illustrated than now; andnever was better exhibited the wonderful personal magnetism of Napoleon. His journey to the capital was one continuous ovation. One regiment afteranother, forgetting their recent oath of loyalty to the Bourbons, hastenedto join his train. His old generals and soldiers embraced him withtransports of joy. Louis XVIII. , deserted by his army, was left helpless, and, as Napoleon approached the gates of Paris, fled from his throne. 

Napoleon desired peace with the sovereigns of Europe; but they did notthink the peace of the continent could be maintained so long as he satupon the French throne. For the seventh and last time the allies leaguedtheir armies to crush the man of destiny. A million of men poured over thefrontiers of France. 

Hoping to overwhelm the armies of the allies by striking them one afteranother before they had time to unite, Napoleon moved swiftly into Belgiumwith an army of 130, 000, in order to crush there the English andPrussians. He first fell in with and defeated the Prussian army underBluecher, and then faced the English at Waterloo (June 18, 1815). 

The story of Waterloo need not be told, --how all day the French broketheir columns in vain on the English squares; how, at the critical momentat the close of the day, Bluecher with a fresh force of 30, 000 Prussiansturned the tide of battle; and how the famous Old Guard, that knew how todie but not how to surrender, made its last charge, and left its hithertoinvincible squares upon the lost field. 

A second time Napoleon was forced to abdicate, and a second time LouisXVIII. Was lifted by the allies upon his unstable throne. Bonapartedesired to be allowed to retire to America, but his enemies believed thathis presence there would not be consistent with the safety of Europe. Consequently he was banished to the island of St. Helena, in the SouthAtlantic, and there closely guarded by the British until his death, in1821. 

2. FRANCE SINCE THE SECOND RESTORATION (1815-). 

CHARACTER OF THE PERIOD. --The history of France since the secondrestoration of the Bourbons may be characterized briefly. It has beensimply a continuation of the Revolution, of the struggle betweendemocratic and monarchical tendencies. The aim of the Revolution was toabolish privileges and establish rights, --to give every man lot and partin shaping the government under which he lives. These republican ideas andprinciples have, on the whole, notwithstanding repeated reverses, gainedground; for revolutions never move backward. There may be eddies andcounter-currents in a river, but the steady and powerful sweep of thestream is ever onward towards the sea. Not otherwise is it with the greatpolitical and intellectual movements of history. 

THE REVOLUTION OF 1830. --Profiting by the lessons of The Hundred Days, Louis XVIII. Ruled after the second restoration with reasonable heed tothe results and changes effected by the Revolution. But upon the death ofLouis in 1824 and the accession of Charles X. , a reactionary policy wasadopted. The new king seemed utterly incapable of profiting by theteachings of the Revolution. His blind, stubborn course gave rise to thesaying, "A Bourbon learns nothing and forgets nothing. " The result mighthave been foreseen. The people rose in revolt, and by one of those suddenmovements for which Paris is so noted, the despot was driven into exile, and Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, was placed on the throne (1830). 

A new constitution was now given to France, and as Louis Philippe hadtravelled about the world considerably, and had experienced variousvicissitudes of fortune, --having at one time been obliged to supporthimself by teaching mathematics, --the people regarded him as one ofthemselves, and anticipated much from their "Citizen King" and theirreformed constitution. 

The French "July Revolution, " as it is called, lighted the signal fires ofliberty throughout Europe. In almost every country there were uprisings ofthe Liberals. Existing constitutions were so changed as to give the peoplea larger share in the government; and where there were no constitutions, original charters were granted. In some instances, indeed, the uprisingshad no other result than that of rendering the despotic governmentsagainst which they were directed more cruel and tyrannical than they werebefore; yet, on the whole, a decided impulse was given to the cause ofconstitutional, republican government. [Footnote: It was at this time thatBelgium became an independent state; for upon the downfall of NapoleonBonaparte in 1815, the Congress of Vienna had made the Low Countries intoa single kingdom, and given, the crown to a prince of the House of Orange. The Belgians now arose and declared themselves independent of Holland, adopted a liberal constitution, and elected Leopold I. , of Saxe-Coburg, astheir king (1831). ]

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC (1848). --The reign of Louis Philippeup to 1848 was very unquiet, yet was not marked by any disturbance ofgreat importance. But during all this time the ideas of the Revolutionwere working among the people, and the republican party was constantlygaining strength. Finally, in 1848, some unpopular measures of thegovernment caused an uprising similar to that of 1830. Louis Philippe, under the assumed name of Mr. Smith, fled into England. The SecondRepublic was now established. An election being ordered, Louis NapoleonBonaparte, nephew of the great Napoleon, was chosen president of the newrepublic (Dec. 20, 1848). 

The truth of the first Napoleon's declaration, which we have beforequoted, that a revolution in France is sure to be followed by a revolutionthroughout Europe, was now illustrated anew. Almost every throne upon thecontinent felt the shock of the French Revolution of 1848. Theconstitutions of many of the surrounding states again underwent greatchanges in the interest of the people and of liberty. "It is scarcely anexaggeration to say that during the month of March, 1848, not a single daypassed without a constitution being granted somewhere. " France had madeanother of her irresistible invasions of the states of Europe--"aninvasion of ideas. "

THE SECOND EMPIRE (1852-1870). --The life of the Second Republic spannedonly three years. By almost exactly the same steps as those by which hisuncle had mounted the French throne, Louis Napoleon now also ascended tothe imperial dignity, crushing the republic as he rose. 

Dissensions having arisen between the President and the LegislativeAssembly, he suddenly dissolved that body, placed its leaders underarrest, and then appealed to the country to indorse what he had done. By amost extraordinary vote of 7, 437, 216 to 640, 737 the nation approved of thePresident's _coup d'état_, and rewarded him for it by electing himPresident for ten years, which was virtually making him dictator. The nextyear he was made emperor, and took the title of Napoleon III. (1852). 

The important political events of the reign of Napoleon III. Were theCrimean War (1853-1856), the Austro-Sardinian War (1859), and the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871). The first and second of these wars need notdetain us at this time, as we shall speak of them hereafter in connectionwith Russian and Italian affairs. 

The third war was with Prussia. The real causes of this war were Frenchjealousy of the growing power of Prussia, and the Emperor's anxiety tostrengthen his government in the affections of the French people byreviving the military glory of the reign of his great-uncle. The pretextupon which the war was actually declared was that Prussia was scheming toaugment her influence by allowing a Prussian prince (Leopold ofHohenzollern) to become a candidate for the vacant throne of Spain (see p. 705). 

The French armies invaded Germany, but were pushed back by the Prussiansand their allies, who followed the retreating enemy across the frontier, defeated one large French army at Gravelotte (Aug. 18, 1870) andimprisoned it in Metz, captured the strong fortress of Sedan, --making aprisoner here of the emperor himself, [Footnote: After the war LouisNapoleon found an asylum in England (at Chiselhurst), where he diedJanuary 9, 1873. ]--and then advancing upon Paris, forced that city, afteran investment of a few months, to capitulate (Jan. 28, 1871). 

The terms of the treaty that followed were that France should surrender toGermany the greater portion of the Rhenish provinces of Alsace andLorraine, pay an indemnity of 5, 000, 000, 000 francs (about $1, 000, 000, 000), and consent to the occupation of certain portions of French territoryuntil the fine was paid. 

The Red Republicans, or Communists, of Paris, indignant at the terms ofthe treaty, shut the gates of the city, and called the population to arms, declaring that the capital would never submit to see France thusdismembered and humiliated. A second reign of terror was now set up. TheTuileries, the Hotel de Ville, and many other public buildings wereburned. The government at length succeeded in suppressing the Anarchists, and restoring order. 

THE THIRD REPUBLIC (1871). --The organization of the Third Republic was nowcompleted. M. Thiers, the historian, was made its first president[Footnote: The successors of M. Thiers have been Marshal MacMahon (1873-1879), M. Grévy (1879-1887), and M. Carnot (1887). ] (Aug. 31, 1871). Sincethe establishment of the republic, its enemies have been busy andvigilant, hoping to see democratic institutions discredited and themonarchy revived. But it is believed that each succeeding year ofrepublican government in France strengthens the faith of the French peoplein their ability to govern themselves, and that the history of France as amonarchy is ended. 

CHAPTER LX. 

RUSSIA SINCE THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA. 

ALEXANDER I. AND THE HOLY ALLIANCE. --Upon the downfall of Napoleon, Alexander I. (1801-1825) of Russia organized the celebrated union known asthe _Holy Alliance_. This was a league embracing as its chief membersRussia, Austria, and Prussia, the ostensible object of which was themaintenance of religion, peace, and order in Europe, and the reduction topractice in politics of the maxims of Christ. The several sovereignsentering into the union promised to be fathers to their people, to rule inlove and with reference solely to the promotion of the welfare of theirsubjects, and to help one another as brothers to maintain just governmentand prevent wrong. 

All this had a very millennial look. But the "Holy Alliance" very soonbecame practically a league for the maintenance of absolute principles ofgovernment, in opposition to the liberal tendencies of the age. Under thepretext of maintaining religion, justice, and order, the sovereigns of theunion acted in concert to suppress every aspiration among their subjectsfor political liberty. Yet, when Alexander founded the alliance, he meantall that he said. But conspiracies among his own subjects, and popularuprisings throughout Europe, all tended to create in him a revulsion offeeling. From an ardent apostle of liberal ideas, such as he was duringall the earlier part of his reign, he was transformed into a violentabsolutist, and spent all his later years in aiding the despotic rulers ofSpain, Italy, and Germany to crush every uprising among their subjects forpolitical freedom. 

This reactionary policy of Alexander caused bitter disappointment amongthe Liberals in Russia, the number of whom was large, for the Russianarmies that helped to crush Napoleon came back from the West with many newand liberal ideas awakened by what they had seen and heard andexperienced. 

THE RUSSO-TURKISH WAR OF 1828-1829. --In 1825 Alexander I. Was succeeded byhis brother Nicholas I. (1825-1855), "a terrible incarnation ofautocracy. " He carried out the later policy of his predecessor, and stroveto shut out from his empire all the liberalizing influences of WesternEurope. 

In 1828, taking advantage of the embarrassment of the Sultan through astubborn insurrection in Greece, [Footnote: This was the struggle known asthe "War of Grecian Independence. " It was characterized by the mostfrightful barbarities on the part of the Turks. Lord Byron enlisted on theside of the Greeks. The result of the war was the freeing of Greece fromTurkish rule. England, France, and Russia became the guardians of thelittle state, the crown of which was given to Prince Otto of Bavaria (OttoI. , 1832-1862). ] Nicholas declared war against the Ottoman Porte. TheBalkans were quickly passed, and the victorious armies of the Czar were infull march upon Constantinople, when their advance was checked by thejealous interference of England and Austria, through whose mediation thewar was brought to a close by the Peace of Adrianople (1829). Nicholasrestored all his conquests in Europe, but held some provinces in Asiawhich gave him control of the eastern shore of the Euxine. Greece wasliberated, and Servia became virtually independent of the Sultan. Thus theresult of the contest was greatly to diminish the strength and influenceof Turkey, and correspondingly to increase the power and prestige ofRussia. 

REVOLUTION IN POLAND (1830-1832). --The Congress of Vienna (1815) re-established Poland as a constitutional kingdom dependent upon Russia. Butthe rule of the Czar over the Poles was tyrannical, and they wereimpatient of an opportunity to throw off the Russian yoke. Therevolutionary movements of the year 1830 sent a wave of hope throughPoland; the people arose and drove out the Russian garrisons. But thearmies of the Czar quickly poured over the frontiers of the revoltedstate, and before the close of the year 1831 the Polish patriots were oncemore under the foot of their Russian master. 

It was a hard fate that awaited the unhappy nation. Their constitution wastaken away, and Poland was made a province of the Russian empire (1832). Multitudes were banished to Siberia, while thousands more expatriatedthemselves, seeking an asylum in England, America, and other countries. Ofall the peoples that rose for freedom in 1830 none suffered so cruel andcomplete an extinguishment of their hopes as did the patriotPoles. [Footnote: For Russia's part in the affairs of the revolutionaryyears 1848-49, see p. 702. ]

THE CRIMEAN WAR (1853-1856). --A celebrated phrase applied to the OttomanPorte by the Czar Nicholas casts a good deal of light upon thecircumstances that led to the Crimean War. "We have on our hands, " saidthe Czar, "a sick man--a very sick man; I tell you frankly it would be agreat misfortune if he should give us the slip some of these days, especially if it happened before all the necessary arrangements weremade. "

Nicholas had cultivated friendly relations with the English government, and he now proposed that England and Russia, as the parties most directlyinterested, should divide the estate of the "sick man. " England was to beallowed to take Egypt and Crete, while the Turkish provinces in Europewere to be taken under the protection of the Czar, which meant of coursethe complete absorption, in due time, of all Southeastern Europe into theRussian empire. 

A pretence for hastening the dissolution of the sick man was not longwanting. A quarrel between the Greek and Latin Christians at Jerusalemabout the holy places was made the ground by Nicholas for demanding of theSultan the admission and recognition of a Russian protectorate over allGreek Christians in the Ottoman dominions. The demand was rejected, andNicholas prepared for war. 

The Sultan appealed to the Western powers for help. England and Franceresponded to the appeal, and later Sardinia joined her forces to theirs. England, rejecting the Czar's proposal of a division of the dying man'sestate, fought to prevent Russia from getting through the Bosporus to theMediterranean, and thus endangering her route to her Eastern possessions. The French emperor fought to avenge Moscow, and to render his new imperialthrone attractive to his people by surrounding it with the glamour ofsuccessful war. Sardinia was led to join England and France through thepolicy of the far-sighted Cavour, who would thus have the Sardinians winthe gratitude of these powers, so that in the next conflict with Austriathe Italian patriots might have some strong friends to help them. 

The main interest of the struggle centred about Sebastopol, in the Crimea, Russia's great naval and military depot, and the key to the Euxine. Aroundthis strongly fortified place were finally gathered 175, 000 soldiers ofthe allies. The siege, which lasted eleven months, was one of the mostmemorable and destructive in history. The Russian engineer Todleben earneda great fame through his masterly defence of the works. The English "LightBrigade" earned immortality in their memorable charge at Balaklava. TheFrench troops, through their dashing bravery, brought great fame to theemperor who had sent them to gather glory for his throne. 

The Russians were at length forced to evacuate the place. They left it, however, a "second Moscow. " The war was now soon brought to an end by theTreaty of Paris (1856). Every provision of the treaty had in view themaintenance of the integrity of the empire of the Sultan, and therestraining of the ambition of the Czar. Russia was given back Sebastopol, but was required to give up some territory at the mouth of the Danube, whereby her frontier was pushed back from that river; to abandon allclaims to a protectorate over any of the subjects of the Porte; to agreenot to raise any more fortresses on the Euxine nor keep upon that sea anyarmed ships, save what might be needed for police service. The Christianpopulation of the Turkish dominions were placed under the guardianship ofthe great powers, who were to see that the Sublime Porte fulfilled itspromise of granting perfect civil and religious equality and protection toall its subjects. 

EMANCIPATION OF THE SERFS (1858-1863). --Alexander II. (1855-1881), whocame to the Russian throne in the midst of the Crimean War, abandoned thenarrow and intolerant system of his predecessor Nicholas, and reverting asit were to the policy of Peter the Great, labored for popular reform, andfor the introduction into his dominions of the ideas and civilization ofWestern Europe. The reform which will ever give his name a place in thelist of those rulers who have conferred singular benefits upon theirsubjects, was the emancipation, by a series of imperial edicts, of theRussian serfs, who made up more than 45, 000, 000 of the population of theempire. More than half of these serfs belonged to the Crown, and wereknown as Crown peasants. 

The Crown serfs were only _nominal_ bondsmen, their servitude consistingin scarcely more than the payment of a light rent. The serfs of individualproprietors, however, might be designated as semi-slaves. Thus, theirowners could flog them in case of disobedience, but could not sell themindividually as slaves are sold; yet when a proprietor sold his estate, the whole community of serfs living upon it passed with it to thepurchaser. 

Besides the emancipation measure, Alexander's name is associated withother reforms, the earlier part of his reign especially beingcharacterized by a very liberal spirit. This liberal policy was followeduntil the revolt of the Poles in 1863, when Alexander was led to adopt amore reactionary policy, a policy which persistently pursued has yieldedbitter fruit in Nihilism. 

THE RUSSO-TURKISH WAR OF 1877-1878. --Anxiously as the Treaty of Paris hadprovided for the permanent settlement of the Eastern Question, barelytwenty-two years had passed before it was again up before Europe, andRussia and Turkey were again in arms. The Sultan could not or would notgive to his Christian subjects that equal protection of the laws which hehad solemnly promised should be given. The Moslem hatred of the Christianswas constantly leading to disturbance and outrage. In 1860 there was agreat massacre of Syrian Christians by the Druses and Turks, and in 1876occurred in Bulgaria the so-called "Bulgarian atrocities, " massacres ofChristian men, women, and children, more revolting perhaps than any othersof which history tells. The greatest indignation was kindled throughoutEurope. The Russian armies were set in motion (1877). Kars in Asia Minorand Plevna in European Turkey fell into the hands of the Russians, and thearmies of the Czar were once more in full march upon Constantinople, withthe prospect of soon ending forever Turkish rule on European soil, whenEngland, as in 1829, interfered, and by the movements of her iron-clads inthe Bosporus again arrested the triumphant march of the Russians. 

[Illustration: SOUTH EASTERN EUROPE According to the Treaty of Berlin, 1878. ]

[Illustration: THE CONGRESS OF BERLIN. (By Anton von Werner, PrussianCourt Painter)]

The Treaty of Berlin (1878) adjusted once more the disorganized affairs ofthe Sublime Porte, and bolstered as well as was possible the "sick man. "But he lost a good part of his estate. Out of those provinces of hisdominions in Europe in which the Christian population was most numerous, there was created a group of wholly independent or half-independentstates. The absolute independence of Roumania, Servia, and Montenegro wasformally acknowledged; Bulgaria, north of the Balkans, was to enjoy self-government, but was to pay a tribute to the Porte; East Roumelia was tohave a Christian governor, but was to remain under the dominion of theSultan. The Balkans were thus made the northern boundary of the Turkishempire in Europe. Bosnia and Herzegovina were given to the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Russia acquired some places in Armenia, and alsoreceived Bessarabia on the Lower Danube. 

In a word, Russia regained everything she had lost in the Crimeanstruggle, while Turkey was shorn of half her European possessions. Therewere left in Europe under the direct authority of the Sultan barely5, 000, 000 subjects, of which number about one-half are Christians. Englandalone is responsible for the work of emancipation not having been madecomplete. 

NIHILISM AND THE EXILE SYSTEM. --Russian Nihilism is a smothered FrenchRevolution. It is the form which Liberalism has taken under therepressions of a despotic autocracy; for the government of Russia is aperfect absolutism, the Czar alone being legislator, judge, and executivefor the Russian nation of 85, 000, 000 souls. He makes laws, levies taxes, expends the revenue, and condemns his subjects to exile or death, according to his own will, without let or hindrance. The terriblecharacter of the repressive measures of the government is revealed by thefact that during the years 1879 and 1880 sixty thousand persons were, _without trial_, sent into exile in Siberia. [Footnote: On the ExileSystem of Russia read the excellent series of articles by George Kennan in_The Century Magazine_ for 1888-9. ]

It is a principle of the extreme Nihilists, that assassination is arighteous means of reform. Within the last few years many attempts havebeen made upon the life of the reigning Czar. On March 13, 1881, AlexanderII. Was killed by means of a bomb filled with dynamite. 

The son of the murdered Czar who now came to the throne as Alexander III. , immediately instituted a still more sternly repressive system than thatpursued by his father, whom he seemed to regard as the victim of the over-liberal policy of the earlier years of his reign. It appears to be hisdetermination to close his empire against the entrance of all liberal orprogressive ideas, political, religious, and scientific, of WesternEurope. A rigid censorship of the press is being maintained (1889), andthe writings of such authors as Huxley, Spencer, Agassiz, Lyell, and AdamSmith, are forbidden circulation. 

There can be but one outcome to this contest between the "Autocrat of allthe Russias" and his subjects. Either through wise concessions on the partof its rulers, or through the throes of a terrible revolution, like thatof 1789 in France, the Russian empire will sooner or later come to possessa constitutional representative government. The Czar of Russia is simplyfighting the hopeless battle that has been fought and lost by the despoticsovereigns of every other European country--a battle which has the sameinvariable issue, the triumph of liberal principles and the admission ofthe people to a participation in the government. 

CHAPTER LXI. 

GERMAN FREEDOM AND UNITY. 

FORMATION OF THE GERMAN CONFEDERATION (1815). --The German states, thirty-nine in number, were reorganized by the Congress of Vienna as aConfederation, with the emperor of Austria President of the league. A Dietformed of representatives, of the several states was to settle allquestions of dispute between the members of the Confederation, anddetermine matters of general concern, In all affairs concerning itselfalone, each state was to retain its independence. It might carry on warwith foreign states, or enter into alliance with them, but it must donothing to harm any member of the Confederation. The articles of union, ina spirit of concession to the growing sentiment of the times, providedthat all sects of Christians should enjoy equal toleration, and that everystate should establish a constitutional form of government. 

Under this scheme of union Germany was to rest half a century--until 1866. Though Austria was nominally head of the Confederation, Prussia wasactually the most powerful member of the league. 

THE UPRISINGS OF 1830: FIRST STEP TOWARDS FREEDOM. --For a long timeprevious to the French Revolution there had been gradually forming amongthe German people a double sentiment--a longing for freedom and for unity. It was the influence of the rising patriotic party that had secured theprovision in the act of confederation which required that all the princesof the union should give their states a representative form of government. But the faces of these rulers, like those of the restored Bourbons inFrance, were turned towards the past. They opposed all changes that shouldgive the people any part in the government, and clung to the old order ofthings. 

We have seen what was the consequence of the reactionary policy of theBourbons in France, --how in 1830 the people arose, drove out Charles X. , and set upon the throne the "Citizen King, " Louis Philippe. Events ranexactly the same course in Germany. The princes refused or neglected tocarry out in good faith that article of the act of confederation whichprovided for representative governments in all the German states. Thenatural result was widespread discontent among the people. Consequently, when the French Revolution of 1830 occurred, a sympathetic thrill shotthrough Germany, and in places the popular party made threateningdemonstrations against their tyrannical rulers. The princes of several ofthe smaller states were forced to give to their peoples the liberalconstitutions that were demanded. Thus a little was gained for freedom, though after the flutter of the revolutionary year the princes again tookup their retrograde policy, and did all in their power to check thepopular movement and keep governmental matters out of the hands of thepeople. 

THE CUSTOMS UNION: FIRST STEP TOWARDS UNITY. --Just about this time thefirst step was taken towards the real union of the German states throughthe formation of what is known as the _Customs Union_. This was a sort ofcommercial treaty binding those states that became parties to it, andeventually all the states save Austria acceded to the arrangement, toadopt among themselves the policy of free trade; that is, there were to beno duties levied on goods passing from one state of the Union to anotherbelonging to it. The greatest good resulting from the Union was, that ittaught the people to think of a more perfect national union. And asPrussia was a prominent promoter and the centre of the tradeconfederation, it accustomed the Germans to look to her as their head andchief. 

UPRISING OF 1848: A SECOND STEP TOWARDS FREEDOM. --The history of Germanyfrom the uprising of 1830 to that of 1848 may be summarized by saying thatduring all these years the people were steadily growing more and moreearnest in their demands for liberal forms of government, while theprinces, strangely blind to the spirit and tendency of the times, werestubbornly refusing all concessions that should take from themselves anyof their power as absolute rulers. In some instances the constitutionsalready granted were annulled, or their articles were disregarded. 

Finally, in 1848, news flew across the Rhine of the uprising in Franceagainst the reactionary government of Louis Philippe, and theestablishment by the French people of a new republic. The intelligencekindled a flame of excitement throughout Germany. The liberal partyeverywhere arose and demanded constitutional government. 

Almost all of the princes of the minor states yielded to the popularclamor, and straightway adopted the liberal measures and instituted thereforms demanded. In Austria and Prussia, however, the popular partycarried their point only after demonstrations that issued in bloodshed. Prince Metternich, the celebrated prime minister of the Emperor ofAustria, was forced to flee the country, because he had opposed soobstinately all the demands of the Liberals. 

The Revolution of 1848 thus effected much for the cause of liberalgovernment in Germany. The movements of that revolutionary year broughtinto the hands of the people much more power than they had ever beforeexercised. 

HUNGARY: KOSSUTH. --Meanwhile the Austrian emperor was having serioustrouble with his Hungarian subjects. Led by the distinguished orator LouisKossuth, they had revolted, and declared their independence. A memorablestruggle now followed (1848-1849), in which the patriotic Hungarians madea noble fight for freedom, but were at last overpowered and crushed by thecombined Austrian and Russian armies. Hungary was made a second Poland. 

RIVALRY BETWEEN AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA. --While the attention of Austria wasdirected to the suppression of the Hungarian rebels, Prussia proposed aplan for the unification of Germany, with herself as the head of the body, Austria being excluded from the confederation. Several of the statesjoined Prussia in this move, and an alliance called the "German Union" wasformed. Austria watched with the greatest concern this bold move of herrival for leadership in German affairs, a move whereby she was to bepushed aside entirely, and just as soon as the Hungarian trouble wascomposed, she made a counter-move to that of Prussia, by forming aconfederation of all those states which she could persuade to accept herleadership. 

The state of Germany at this moment, divided between the allies of Austriaand those of Prussia, may be likened to the condition of Greece at theoutbreak of the Peloponnesian War, when the Hellenic states had groupedthemselves, according to their sympathies, about Athens and Sparta. Itdoes not require a second Pericles to see war lowering in the horizon. 

THE SEVEN WEEKS' WAR BETWEEN AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA (1866). --The inevitablewar which was to decide whether Austria or Prussia should be leader inGerman affairs came on apace. In the year 1861, Frederick William IV. OfPrussia died, and his brother, already an old man of sixty, yet destinedto be for more than a score of years the central figure in the movementfor German unity, came to the Prussian throne as William I. (1861-1888). He soon called to his side the now distinguished Otto von Bismarck as hisprime minister, a man of wonderful energy and decision, whose policieshave shaped German affairs for a quarter of a century. He saw clearlyenough how the vexed question between Austria and Prussia was to besettled--"by blood and iron. " His appearance at the head of Prussianaffairs marks an epoch in history. He was in disposition a conservativeand despot, and the liberal party distrusted and hated him. 

Early in 1866 the war opened, the occasion of it being a dispute in regardto some petty Danish provinces (Schleswig and Holstein). Almost all of thelesser states grouped themselves about Austria. Prussia, however, found aready ally in Italy (see p. 713), which served to divert a part of theAustrian forces. Yet it seemed an unequal contest, the population ofPrussia at this time not being more than one-third (19, 000, 000) that ofthe states arrayed against her. But Bismarck had been preparing Prussiafor the struggle which he had long foreseen, and now the little kingdom, with the best disciplined army in the world, headed by the great commanderVon Moltke, was to astonish the world by a repetition of her achievementsunder the inspiration of Frederick the Great. 

The Prussian armies, numbering more than a quarter of a million of men, began to move about the middle of June. Battle followed battle in rapidsuccession. Almost every encounter proved a victory for the Prussians. Onthe third of July was fought the great battle of Sadowa, in Bohemia. Itwas Austria's Waterloo. The emperor was forced to sue for peace, and onthe twenty-third day of August the Peace of Prague was signed. 

The long debate between Austria and Prussia was over. By the terms of thetreaty Austria was shut out from participation in German affairs. Prussiawas now without a rival in Germany. 

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NORTH-GERMAN UNION (1867). --Now quickly followed thereorganization of the northern states of Germany into what was called theNorth-German Union, under the leadership of Prussia. Prussia was to havecommand of the entire military force of the several states composing theleague, the Prussian king being President of the Union. A constitution wasadopted which provided that the affairs of the confederation should bemanaged by a Diet, the members of which were to be chosen by the differentstates. 

Thus was a long step taken towards German unity. Bismarck's policy of"blood and iron, " though seemingly rough and brutal, now promised to provea cure indeed for all of Germany's troubles. Though so much had beeneffected, there was still remaining much to be desired. The states to thesouth of the Main--Baden, Bavaria, and Würtemberg--were yet wanting tocomplete the unification of the Fatherland. Many patriots both north andsouth of the dividing line earnestly desired the perfect union of Northand South. But the Catholics of the southern states were bitterly opposedto Prussia's being exalted to the chief place in Germany, because she wasProtestant, while many of the democratic party were loth to see Germanyreconstructed under the supremacy of Prussia on account of the repressiveand despotic character of her government. But the fervid enthusiasmawakened by another successful war serves to weld the states of both Northand South into a firm and close union, and complete the work of Germany'sunification. 

[Illustration: EUROPE 1880]

THE FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR (1870-1871). --It will be recalled with whatjealousy France viewed the rise to power of the House of Hohenzollern. Allof her old bitter hostility to the House of Austria seems to have beentransferred to her successful rival in the North. So when in 1870 thevacant throne of Spain was offered to Leopold, a member of theHohenzollern family, the Emperor Napoleon III. Affected to see in this ascheme on the part of the House of Hohenzollern to unite the interests ofPrussia and of Spain, just as Austria and Spain were united, with suchdisastrous consequences to the peace of Europe, under the princes of theHouse of Hapsburg. Even after Leopold, to avoid displeasing France, haddeclined the proffered crown, the Emperor Napoleon demanded of KingWilliam assurance that no member of the House of Hohenzollern should everbecome a candidate for the Spanish throne. The demand was rudely made, wasrefused, and the two nations rushed together in a struggle which wasdestined to prove terribly disastrous to France, and memorable to Germanyfor the glory and unity it won for her. 

The important thing for us to notice here is the enthusiasm that the warawakened not only throughout the states of the North-German Confederation, but among the states of the South as well, which placed their armies atthe disposal of King William. The cause was looked upon as a national one, and a patriotic fervor stirred the hearts of all Germans alike. 

ESTABLISHMENT OF THE NEW GERMAN EMPIRE (1871). --The astonishing successesof the German armies on French soil created among Germans everywhere suchpatriotic pride in the Fatherland, that all the obstacles which hadhitherto prevented anything more than a partial union of the members ofthe Germanic body were now swept out of the way by an irresistible tide ofnational sentiment. While the siege of Paris was progressing, commissioners were sent by the southern states to Versailles, theheadquarters of King William, to represent to him that they were ready andanxious to enter the North-German Union. Thus in rapid succession Baden, Bavaria, and Würtemberg were received into the Confederation, the name ofwhich was now changed to that of the German Confederation. 

[Illustration: PROCLAMATION OF KING WILLIAM AS EMPEROR OF GERMANY, ATVERSAILLES, JANUARY, 1871. (By Anton von Werner, Prussian Court Painter. )]

Scarcely was this accomplished, when, upon the suggestion of the king ofBavaria, King William, who now bore the title of _President_ of theConfederation, was given the title of _German Emperor_, which honorwas to be hereditary in his family. On the 18th of January, 1871, withinthe Palace of Versailles, --the siege of Paris being still in progress, --amidst indescribable enthusiasm, the Imperial dignity was formallyconferred upon King William, and Germany became a constitutional Empire. 

Thus amidst the throes of war the free German _nation_ was born. TheGerman people, after long centuries of division and servitude, had at lastfound Freedom and Unity. 

CHAPTER LXII. 

LIBERATION AND UNIFICATION OF ITALY. 

ITALY AT THE DOWNFALL OF NAPOLEON. --The Italian people, as being the mostdangerously infected with the ideas of the Revolution, were, by thereactionary Congress of Vienna, condemned to the most strict andignominious slavery. The former commonwealths were forbidden to restoretheir ancient institutions, while the petty principalities were handedover in almost every case to the tyrants or the heirs of the tyrants whohad ruled them before the Revolution. Austria appropriated Venetia andLombardy, and from Northern Italy assumed to direct the affairs of thewhole peninsula. Tuscany, Modena, Parma, and Piacenza were given toprinces of the House of Hapsburg. Naples was restored to its old Bourbonrulers. The Pope and Victor Emmanuel I. , king of Sardinia, were the onlynative rulers. 

"Italy was divided on the map, but she had made up her mind to be one. "The Revolution had sown the seeds of Liberty, and time only was needed fortheir maturing. The Cisalpine, the Ligurian, the Parthenopæan, theTiberine republics (see pp. 668, 670), short-lived though they were, hadawakened in the people an aspiration for self-government; while Napoleon'skingdom of Italy (see p. 676, n. ), though equally delusive, hadnevertheless inspired thousands of Italian patriots with the sentiment ofnational unity. Thus the French Revolution, disappointing as seemed itsissue, really imparted to Italy her first impulse in the direction offreedom and of national organization. 

Arbitrary Rule of the Restored Princes. --The setting up of the overturnedthrones meant, of course, the re-instating of the old tyrannies. Therestored despots came back with an implacable hatred of everything French. They swept away all French institutions that were supposed to tend in theleast to Liberalism. At Rome even vaccination and street-lamps, Frenchinnovations, were abolished. In Sardinia, nothing that bore the Frenchstamp, nothing that had been set up by French hands, was allowed toremain. Even the French furniture in the royal palace at Turin was thrownout of the windows, and the French plants in the royal gardens were pulledup root and branch. 

THE CARBONARI: UPRISING OF 1820-1821. --The natural results of thearbitrary rule and retrogressive policy of the restored princes was deepand widespread discontent. The French Revolution, as we have said, hadsown broadcast in Italy the seeds of liberty, and their growth could notbe checked by the repressions of tyranny. An old secret organization, themembers of which were known as, the Carbonari (charcoal-burners), formedthe nucleus about which gathered the elements of disaffection. 

In 1820, incited by a revolution in Spain, the Carbonari raised aninsurrection in Naples, and forced King Ferdinand, who was ruler of bothNaples and Sicily, now united under the name of the Kingdom of the TwoSicilies, to grant his Neapolitan subjects what was known as the SpanishConstitution of 1812. But Prince Metternich (see p. 702), who had beenwatching the doings of the Liberal party in Naples, interfered to martheir plans. He reasoned that Lombardy and Venetia could be kept free fromthe contagion of Liberalism only by the stamping out of the infectionwherever else in Italy it might show itself. Hence 60, 000 Austrian troopswere sent to crush the revolutionists. Ferdinand was re-instated in hisformer absolute authority, and everything was put back on the old footing. 

Meanwhile a similar revolution was running its course in Piedmont. KingVictor Emmanuel I. , rather than yield to the demands of his people for aconstitutional government, gave up his crown, and was succeeded by hisbrother Charles Felix, who, by threatening to call to his aid the Austrianarmy, compelled his subjects to cease their clamor about kings ruling, notby the grace of God, but by the will of the people. 

THE REVOLUTION OF 1830-1831. --For just ten years all Italy lay in sullenvassalage to Austria. Then the revolutionary years of 1830-31 witnessed arepetition of the scenes of 1820-21. The revolution in France which placedLouis Philippe upon the French throne (see p. 688) sent a tremor ofexcitement and hope through all Italy. The centre of the revolution wasthe Papal States. But the presence of Austrian troops, who, "true to theirold principle of hurrying with their extinguishers to any spot in Italywhere a crater opened, " had poured into Central Italy, resulted in thespeedy quenching of the flames of the insurrection. 

THE THREE PARTIES: PLANS FOR NATIONAL ORGANIZATION. --Twice now hadAustrian armies crushed the aspirations of the Italians after nationalunity and freedom. Italian hatred of these foreign intermeddlers who werecausing them to miss their destiny, grew ever more intense, and "death tothe Germans" became the watch-cry that united all the peoples of thepeninsula. 

But while united in their deadly hatred of the Austrians, the Italianswere divided in their views respecting the best plan for nationalorganization. One party, known as "Young Italy, " founded and inspired bythe patriot Joseph Mazzini, wanted a republic; another party wanted aconfederation of the various states, with the Pope as chief; while still athird wished to see Italy a constitutional monarchy, with the king ofSardinia at its head. 

THE REVOLUTION OF 1848-1849. --After the suppression of the uprising of1830, until the approach of the momentous year of 1848, Italy lay restlessunder the heel of her oppressor. The republican movements throughout thecontinent of Europe which characterized that year of revolutions, inspiredthe Italian patriots to make another attempt to achieve independence andnationality. Everywhere throughout the peninsula they rose against theirdespotic rulers, and forced them to grant constitutions and institutereforms. But through the intervention of the Austrians and the French[Footnote: This interference by the French in Italian affairs wasinstigated by their jealousy of Austria, and by the anxious desire ofLouis Napoleon to win the good-will of the Catholic clergy in France. ] thethird Italian revolution was thwarted. By the autumn of the year 1849 theLiberals were everywhere crushed, their leaders executed, imprisoned, ordriven into exile, and the dream of Italy's unity and freedom dispelled bythe hard present fact of renewed tyranny and foreign domination. 

Much, however, had been gained. The patriotic party had had revealed toitself its strength, and at the same time the necessity of united action, --of the adoption of a single policy. Henceforth the Republicans andFederalists were more inclined to give up as impracticable their plans ofnational organization, and with the Constitutionalists to look upon thekingdom of Sardinia as the only possible basis and nucleus of a free andunited Italy. 

VICTOR EMMANUEL II. , COUNT CAVOUR, AND GARIBALDI. --Sardinia was a statewhich had gradually grown into power in the northwest corner of thepeninsula. The throne was at this time held by Victor Emmanuel II. (1849-1878). To him it was that the hopes of the Italian patriots now turned. Nor were these hopes to be disappointed. Victor Emmanuel was the destinedliberator of Italy, or perhaps it would be more correct to say that hiswas the name in which the achievement was to be effected by the wisepolicy of his great minister Count Cavour, and the reckless daring of thehero Garibaldi. 

Count Cavour was a man of large hopes and large plans. His single aim andpurpose was the independence and unification of Italy. He was the geniusof Italian liberty. Garibaldi, "the hero of the red shirt, " was theknight-errant of Italian independence. Though yet barely past middle life, he had led a career singularly crowded with varied experiences andromantic adventures. Because of his violent republicanism, he had alreadybeen twice exiled from Italy. 

THE AUSTRO-SARDINIAN WAR (1859-1860). --The hour for striking another blowfor the freedom of Italy had now arrived. In 1859 Count Cavour, in thepursuance of his national policy for Italy, having first made a secretarrangement with the French emperor, gave Austria to understand thatunless she granted Lombardy and Venetia free government and ceased tointerfere in the affairs of the rest of Italy, Sardinia would declare waragainst her. Of course the Austrian government refused to accede to thedemand, and almost immediately war followed. The French emperor, actuatedprobably less by gratitude for the aid of the Sardinian contingent in theCrimean struggle (see p. 726) than by jealousy of Austria and the promiseof Savoy and Nice in case of a successful issue of the war, supported theSardinians with the armies of France. The two great victories of Magentaand Solferino seemed to promise to the allies a triumphant march to theAdriatic. But just now the threatening attitude of Prussia and otherGerman states, in connection with other considerations, led Napoleon toenter upon negotiations of peace with the Austrian emperor at Villafranca. 

The outcome was that Austria retained Venice, but gave up to Sardinia thelarger part of Lombardy. The Sardinians were bitterly disappointed thatthey did not get Venetia, and loudly accused the French emperor of havingbetrayed their cause, since at the outset he had promised them that hewould free Italy from the mountains to the sea. But Sardinia foundcompensation for Venice in the accession of Tuscany, Modena, Parma, andRomagna, the peoples of which states, having discarded their old rulers, besought Victor Emmanuel to permit them to unite themselves to hiskingdom. Thus, as the result of the war, the king of Sardinia had added tohis subjects a population of 9, 000, 000. One long step was taken in the wayof Italian unity and freedom. 

SICILY AND NAPLES ADDED TO VICTOR EMMANUEL'S KINGDOM (1860). --The romanticand adventurous daring of the hero Garibaldi now added Sicily and Naplesto the possessions of Victor Emmanuel, and changed the kingdom of Sardiniainto the kingdom of Italy. 

The king of Naples and Sicily, Francis II. , was a typical despot. In 1860his subjects rose in revolt. Victor Emmanuel and his minister Cavour werein sympathy with the movement, yet dared not send the insurgents aidthrough fear of arousing the jealousy of Austria and of France. ButGaribaldi, untrammelled by any such considerations, having gathered a bandof a thousand or more volunteers, set sail from Genoa for Sicily, whereupon landing he assumed the title of Dictator of Sicily for VictorEmmanuel, King of Italy, and quickly drove the troops of King Francis outof the island. Then crossing to the mainland, he marched triumphantly toNaples, whose inhabitants hailed him tumultuously as their Deliverer. 

The Neapolitans and Sicilians now voted almost unanimously for annexationto the Sardinian kingdom. The hero Garibaldi, having first met and hailedhis Sovereign "King of Italy, " surrendered his dictatorship, and retiredto the island of Capri, in the bay of Naples. He had earned the lastinggratitude of his country. 

Thus was another great step taken in the unification of Italy. Ninemillions more of Italians had become the subjects of Victor Emmanuel. There was now wanting to the complete union of Italy only Venetia and thePapal territories. 

VENETIA ADDED TO THE KINGDOM (1866). --The Seven Weeks' War which broke outbetween Prussia and Austria in 1866 afforded the Italian patriots theopportunity for which they were watching to make Venetia a part of thekingdom of Italy. Victor Emmanuel formed an alliance with the king ofPrussia, one of the conditions of which was that no peace should be madewith Austria until she had surrendered Venetia to Italy. The speedy issueof the war added the coveted territory to the dominions of VictorEmmanuel. Rome alone was now lacking to the complete unification of Italy. 

ROME BECOMES THE CAPITAL (1870). --After the liberation of Naples andSicily the city of Turin, the old capital of the Sardinian kingdom, wasmade the capital of the new kingdom of Italy. In 1865 the seat ofgovernment was transferred to Florence. But the Italians looked forward tothe time when Rome, the ancient mistress of the peninsula and of theworld, should be their capital. The power of the Pope, however, was upheldby the French, and this made it impossible for the Italians to have theirwill in this matter without a conflict with France. 

But events soon gave the coveted capital to the Italian government. In1870 came the sharp, quick war between France and Prussia, and the Frenchtroops at Rome were hastily summoned home. Upon the overthrow of theFrench Monarchy and the establishment of the Republic, Victor Emmanuel wasinformed that France would no longer sustain the Papal power. The Italiangovernment at once gave notice to the Pope that Rome would henceforth beconsidered a portion of the kingdom of Italy, and forthwith an Italianarmy entered the city, which by a vote of 133, 681 to 1, 507 joined itselfto the Italian nation. The family was now complete. Rome was the capitalof a free and united Italy. July 2, 1871, Victor Emmanuel [Footnote: Inthe early part of the year 1878 Victor Emmanuel died, and his son came tothe throne, with the title of Humbert 1. , the second king of Italy. ]himself entered the city and took up his residence there. 

END OF THE TEMPORAL POWER OF THE POPE. --Through the extension of theauthority of the Italian government over the Papal states, the Pope wasdespoiled of the last vestige of that temporal power wherewith Pepin andCharlemagne had invested the Bishops of Rome more than a thousand yearsbefore (see p. 404). The Papal troops were disbanded, but the Pope, PiusIX. , still retained all his spiritual authority, the Vatican with its11, 000 chambers being reserved to him as a place of residence. Just a fewmonths before the loss of his temporal sovereignty a great EcumenicalCouncil of the Roman Catholic Church had proclaimed the doctrine of PapalInfallibility, which declares decrees of the Pope "on questions of faithand morals" to be infallible. 

CONCLUSION. --Although there has been much antagonism between the Vaticanand the Quirinal, that is, between the Pope and the Italian government, still reform and progress have marked Italian affairs since the events of1870. A public system of education has been established; brigandage hasbeen suppressed; agriculture has been encouraged; while the naval andmilitary resources of the peninsula have been developed to such an extentthat Italy, so recently the prey of foreign sovereigns, of petty nativetyrants, and of adventurers, is now justly regarded as one of the greatpowers of Europe. 

[Illustration: QUEEN VICTORIA ON THE DAY OF HER CORONATION. ]

CHAPTER LXIII. 

ENGLAND SINCE THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA. 

THE THREE CHIEF MATTERS. --English history since the close of theNapoleonic wars embraces a multitude of events. A short chapter coveringthe entire period will possess no instructive value unless it reduces theheterogeneous mass of facts to some sort of unity by placing events inrelation with their causes, and thus showing how they are connected with afew broad national movements or tendencies. 

Studying the period in this way, we shall find that very many of itsleading events may be summed up under the three following heads: 1. Progress towards democracy; 2. Expansion of the principle of religiousequality; 3. Growth of the British Empire in the East. 

1. PROGRESS TOWARDS DEMOCRACY. 

EFFECTS OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION UPON LIBERALISM IN ENGLAND. --The FrenchRevolution at first gave a fresh impulse to liberal tendencies in England. The English Liberals watched the course of the French Republicans with thedeepest interest and sympathy. It will be recalled how the statesman Foxrejoiced at the fall of the Bastile, and what auguries of hope he saw inthe event (see p. 652). The young writers Coleridge, Wordsworth, andSouthey were all in sympathy with democratic sentiments, and inspired witha generous enthusiasm for political liberty and equality. But the wildexcesses of the French Levellers terrified the English Liberals. There wasa sudden revulsion of feeling. Liberal sentiments were denounced asdangerous and revolutionary. 

But in a few years after the downfall of Napoleon, the terrors of theFrench Revolution were forgotten. Liberal sentiments began to spread amongthe masses. The people very justly complained that, while the Englishgovernment claimed to be a government of the people, they had no part init. [Footnote: The English Revolution of 1688 transferred authority fromthe king to the Parliament. The elective branch of that body, however, rested upon a very narrow electoral basis. Out of 5, 000, 000 Englishmen whoshould have had a voice in the government, not more than 160, 000 werevoters, and these were chiefly of the rich upper classes. At the openingof the nineteenth century the number of electors in Scotland did notexceed 3000. ]

Now, it is instructive to note the different ways in which Liberalism wasdealt with by the English government and by the rulers on the continent. In the continental countries the rising spirit of democracy was met bycruel and despotic repressions. The people were denied by their rulers allparticipation in the affairs of government. We have seen the result. Liberalism triumphed indeed at last, but triumphed only throughRevolution. 

In England, the government did not resist the popular demands to the pointof Revolution. It made timely concessions to the growing spirit ofdemocracy. Hence here, instead of a series of revolutions, we have aseries of reform measures, which, gradually popularizing the House ofCommons, at last renders the English nation not alone in name, but inreality, a self-governing people. 

THE REFORM BILL OF 1832. --The first Parliamentary step in reform was takenin 1832. To understand this important act, a retrospective glance becomesnecessary. 

When, in 1265, the Commons were first admitted to Parliament (see p. 480), members were called only from those cities and boroughs whose wealth andpopulation fairly entitled them to representation. In the course of timesome of these places dwindled in population, and new towns sprang up: yetthe decayed boroughs retained their ancient privilege of sending membersto Parliament, while the new towns were left entirely withoutrepresentation. Thus Old Sarum, an ancient town now utterly decayed andwithout a single inhabitant, was represented in the Commons by twomembers. Furthermore, the sovereign, for the purpose of gaining influencein the Commons, had, from time to time, given unimportant places the rightof returning members to the Lower House. In 1793 less than 200 electors, or voters, sent to the Commons 197 members. Of course, elections in thesesmall or "pocket boroughs, " as they were called, were almost alwaysdetermined by the corrupt influence of the crown or of the resident lords. The Lower House of Parliament was thus filled with the nominees of theking, or of some great lord, or with persons who had bought the office, often with little effort at concealment. At the same time, such large, recently grown manufacturing towns as Birmingham and Manchester had norepresentation at all in the Commons. 

Agitation was begun for the reform of this corrupt and farcical system ofrepresentation. The contest between the Whigs and the Tories, or Liberalsand Conservatives, was long and bitter. The Conservatives of courseopposed all reform. Bill after bill was introduced into Parliament tocorrect the evil, but most of these, after having passed the Commons, werelost in the House of Lords. At last the public feeling became so strongand violent that the lords were forced to yield, and the Reform Bill of1832 became a law. [Footnote: The popularizing of the House of Commons ledto a series of acts of a popular character. Among them was an act (in1833) for the abolition of slavery throughout the British colonies. 780, 993 slaves in the British West Indies were freed at a cost to theEnglish nation of L20, 000, 000. ]

By this act the electoral system of the kingdom was radically changed. Fifty-six of the "rotten boroughs" were disfranchised, and the 143 seatsin the Lower House which they had filled were given to different countiesand large towns. The bill also greatly increased the number of electors byextending the right of voting to all persons owning or leasing property ofa certain value. We can scarcely exaggerate the importance of this ReformBill. 

CHARTISM: THE REVOLUTIONARY YEAR OF 1848. --But while the Reform bill of1832 was almost revolutionary in the principle it established, it wentonly a little way in the application of the principle. It admitted to thefranchise the middle classes only. The great laboring class were given nopart in the government. They now began an agitation, --characterized bymuch bitterness, --known as Chartism, from a document called the "People'sCharter, " which embodied the reforms they desired. These were "universalsuffrage, vote by ballot, annual parliaments, the division of the countryinto equal electoral districts, the abolition of the propertyqualifications of members, and payment for their services. "

The agitation for these changes in the constitution went on with more orless violence until 1848. That year the Chartists, encouraged by therevolutions then shaking almost every throne on the European continent, indulged in riotous demonstrations which frightened the law-abidingcitizens, and brought discredit upon themselves. Their organization nowfell to pieces. The reforms, however, which they had labored to secure, were, in the main, desirable and just, and the most important of them havesince been adopted and made a part of the English Constitution. 

THE REFORM BILL OF 1867. --The Reform Bill of 1867 was simply another steptaken by the English government in the direction of the Reform Bill of1832. Like that measure, it was passed only after long and violentagitation and discussion both without and within the walls of Parliament. Its main effect was the extension of the right of voting, --theenfranchisement of the great "fourth estate, or the masses. " By it also afew small boroughs in England--for the bill did not concern either Irelandor Scotland, separate bills of somewhat similar provisions being framedfor them--were disfranchised, and several new ones created. 

THE REFORM BILL OF 1884. --One of the conservative leaders, the Earl ofDerby, in the discussions upon the Reform Bill of 1867, said, "No doubt weare making a great experiment, and taking a leap in the dark. " Justseventeen years after the passage of that bill, the English people wereready to take another leap. But they were not now leaping in the dark. Thewisdom and safety of admitting the lower classes to a participation in thegovernment had been demonstrated. 

In 1884 Mr. Gladstone, then prime minister, introduced and pushed to asuccessful vote a new reform bill, more radical and sweeping in itsprovisions than any preceding one. It increased the number of voters fromabout 3, 000, 000 to about 5, 000, 000. The qualification of voters in thecounties was made the same as that required of voters in the boroughs. Hence its effect was to enfranchise the great agricultural classes. 

ONLY THE FORMS OF MONARCHY REMAIN. --The English government is now inreality as democratic as our own. Only the forms of monarchy remain. Itdoes not seem probable, that these can long withstand the encroachments ofdemocracy. Hereditary privilege, as represented by the House of Lords andthe Crown, is likely soon to be abolished. 

HOME RULE FOR IRELAND. --In connection with the above outline of thedemocratic movement in England, a word must be said about the so-calledHome Rule movement in Ireland. 

The legislative independence secured by Ireland in 1782 (see p. 632), wasmaintained only a short time. In 1798, England being then engaged in warwith the revolutionists of France, the Irish rose in revolt, with thepurpose of setting up an Irish republic. The uprising was quelled, andthen as a measure of security the Irish Parliament was abolished (1801)and Ireland given representation in the English Parliament, just as hadbeen done in the case of Scotland at the time of the legislative union ofEngland and Scotland (see p. 629). 

The Irish patriots bitterly resented this extinction of the legislativeindependence of Ireland, and denounced as traitors those members of thelast Irish Parliament who, corrupted by the English minister, William Pitt(the younger), had voted away Irish liberties. Consequently from the dayof the Union to the present, there has been more or less agitation for itsrepeal and the re-establishment of the old Irish Parliament. In 1841, under the inspiration of the eloquent Daniel O'Connell, Ireland wasbrought to the verge of insurrection, but the movement was suppressed. In1886 Mr. Gladstone, then prime minister, introduced a bill in Parliament, granting a separate legislation to Ireland. This led to bitter debate bothwithin and without the walls of Parliament, and at the present time(1889), the question of Home Rule for Ireland is the leading issue inEnglish politics. [Footnote: Closely connected with this political questionof Home Rule for Ireland, is the agrarian, or land trouble. At bottom, this is a matter that involves the right of private property in land, andtouches questions that belong to the Industrial Age (see p. 729) ratherthan to that of the Political Revolution. ]

2. EXPANSION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RELIGIOUS EQUALITY. 

RELIGIOUS FREEDOM AND RELIGIOUS EQUALITY. --Alongside the politicalmovement traced in the preceding section has run a similar one in thereligious realm. This is a growing recognition by the English people ofthe true principle of religious toleration. 

At the opening of the nineteenth century there was in England religiousfreedom, but no religious equality. That is to say, one might be aCatholic or a dissenter, if he chose to be, without fear of persecution. Dissent from the Established Church was not unlawful. But one's being adissenter disqualified him from holding certain public offices. Wherethere exists such discrimination against any religious sect, or where anyone sect is favored or sustained by the government, there of course is noreligious equality, although there may be religious freedom. Progress inthis direction, then, has consisted in the growth of a really tolerantspirit, which has led to the removal from Catholics, Protestantdissenters, and Jews all civil disabilities, and the placing of all sectson an absolute equality before the law. This is but a completion of thework of the Protestant Reformation. 

METHODISM AND ITS EFFECTS UPON TOLERATION. --One thing that helped to bringprominently forward the question of emancipating non-conformists from thecivil disabilities under which they were placed, was the great religiousmovement known as Methodism, which during the latter part of theeighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century revolutionized thereligious life of England. [Footnote: The leaders of the movement wereGeorge Whitefield (1714-1770) and John Wesley (1703-1791). Whitefieldbecame the leader of the _Calvinistic_ Methodists, and Wesley the founderof the sect known as _Wesleyans_. The Methodists at first had no thoughtof establishing a church distinct from the Anglican, but simply aimed toform within the Established Church a society of earnest, devout laymen, somewhat like that of the Young Men's Christian Association in our presentchurches. Petty persecution, however, eventually constrained them to goout from the established organization and form a Church of their own. Thisof course constituted them dissenters. ] By vastly increasing the body ofProtestant dissenters, Methodism gave new strength to the agitation forthe repeal of the laws which bore so heavily upon them. 

DISABILITIES REMOVED FROM PROTESTANT DISSENTERS (1828). --One of theearliest and most important of the acts of Parliament in this century inrecognition of the principle of religious equality, was the repeal of theCorporation and Test Acts, in so far as they bore upon Protestantdissenters. These were acts passed in the reign of Charles II. , whichrequired every officer of a corporation, and all persons holding civil andmilitary positions, to take certain oaths, and partake of the communionaccording to the rites of the Anglican Church. It is true that these lawswere not now strictly enforced; nevertheless, the laws were invidious andvexatious, and the Protestant dissenters demanded their repeal. The resultof the debate in Parliament was the repeal of such parts of the ancientacts as it was necessary to rescind in order to relieve Protestantdissenters, --that is, the provision requiring persons holding office to becommunicants of the Anglican Church. 

DISABILITIES REMOVED FROM THE CATHOLICS (1829). --The bill of 1828 gave norelief to Catholics. They were still excluded from Parliament and variouscivil offices by the declarations of belief and the oaths required ofoffice-holders, --declarations and oaths which no good Catholic couldconscientiously make. They now demanded that the same concessions be madethem that had been granted Protestant dissenters. The ablest champion ofCatholic emancipation was the eloquent Daniel O'Connell, an Irish patriot. 

A threatened revolt on the part of the Irish Catholics hurried theprogress of what was known as the _Catholic Emancipation Act_ throughParliament. This law opened all the offices of the kingdom, below thecrown, --save that of Lord Chancellor of England and Ireland, theViceroyalty of Ireland, and a few others, --to the Catholic subjects of therealm. 

DISABILITIES REMOVED FROM THE JEWS. --The Jews were still laboring underall the disabilities which had now been removed from Protestant dissentersand Catholics. In 1845 an act was passed by Parliament which so changedthe oath required for admission to corporate offices--the oath containedthe words "on the faith of a Christian"--as to open them to Jews. 

In 1858, after a long and unseemly struggle, the House of Commons wasopened to the long-proscribed race; and about a quarter of a centurylater, the House of Lords admitted to a seat Baron Rothschild, the firstpeer of Hebrew faith that had ever sat in that body. 

DISESTABLISHMENT OF THE IRISH CHURCH (1869). --Forty years after theCatholic Emancipation Act, the English government took another great stepin the direction of religious equality, by the disestablishment of theState Church in Ireland. 

The Irish have always and steadily refused to accept the religion whichtheir English conquerors have somehow felt constrained to force upon them. The vast majority of the people are to-day and ever have been Catholics;yet up to the time where we have now arrived these Irish Catholics hadbeen compelled to pay tithes and fees for the maintenance among them ofthe Anglican Church worship. Meanwhile their own churches, in which thegreat masses were instructed and cared for spiritually, had to be kept upby voluntary contributions. The proposition to do away with this grievanceby the disestablishment of the State Church in Ireland was bitterlyopposed by the Conservatives; but at length, after a memorable debate, theLiberals, under the lead of Bright and Gladstone, the latter then primeminister, carried the measure. This was in 1869, but the actualdisestablishment was not to take place until the year 1871, at which timethe Irish State Church, ceasing to exist as a state institution, became afree Episcopal Church. The historian May pronounces this "the mostimportant ecclesiastical matter since the Reformation. "

PROPOSED DISESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE CHURCH IN ENGLAND AND IN SCOTLAND. --The perfect application of the principle of religious equality demands, in the opinion of many English Liberals, the disestablishment of the StateChurch in England and in Scotland. [Footnote: The Established Church inScotland is the Presbyterian. ] They feel that for the government tomaintain any particular sect, is to give the State a monopoly in religion. They would have the churches of all denominations placed on an absoluteequality. Especially in Scotland is the sentiment in favor ofdisestablishment very strong. 

3. GROWTH OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE IN THE EAST. 

THE CLEW TO ENGLAND'S FOREIGN POLICY IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. --Seekingthe main fact of modern English history, Professor Seeley [Footnote: J. R. Seeley, in his work entitled _The Expansion of England_. ] finds it inthe expansion of England. He says, in substance, that the expansion ofEngland in the New World and in Asia is the formula which sums up forEngland the history of the last three centuries. As the outgrowth of thisextension into remote lands of English population or influence, Englandhas come successively into sharp rivalry with three of the leading powersof Europe, her competitors in the field of colonization or in the race forempire. The seventeenth century stands out as an age of intense rivalrybetween England and Spain; the eighteenth was a period of giganticcompetition between England and France; while the nineteenth has been anage of jealous rivalry between England and Russia. 

England triumphed over Spain and France; it remains to be seen whether shewill in like manner triumph over Russia. 

We have space simply to indicate how England's foreign policies and warsduring the present century have grown out of her Eastern connections, andher fear of the overshadowing influence of the Colossus of the North. RISE OF THE ENGLISH POWER IN INDIA. --And first, we must say a wordrespecting the establishment of English authority in India. By the closeof the seventeenth century the East India Company (see p. 603) had foundedestablishments at Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras, the three most importantcentres of English population and influence in India at the present time. The company's efforts to extend its authority in India were favored by thedecayed state into which the Great Mogul Empire--founded in Northern Indiaby the Tartar conquerors (see p. 461)--had fallen, and by the contentionsof the independent native princes among themselves. 

For a long time it was a matter of doubt whether the empire to be erectedupon the ruins of the Great Mogul Empire and of the contending nativestates should be French or English. About the middle of the eighteenthcentury the former had the stronger foothold in the peninsula, just asprevious to the French and Indian War in the New World they had thestronger hold upon the North American continent. 

A terrible crime committed by the Nabob Surajah Dowlah of Bengal, aprovince lying along the lower courses of the Ganges, determined the fatenot only of that native state, but of all India. Moved by jealousy of thegrowing power of the English, and encouraged by the French, the Nabobattacked and captured the English post at Calcutta. His one hundred andforty-six prisoners he crowded into a close dungeon, called the BlackHole. In the course of a sultry night the larger part of the unfortunateprisoners were suffocated. 

The crime was avenged by Robert Clive, the English commander at Madras. With only 100 English soldiers and 2000 sepoys (native soldiers inEuropean employ), he sailed for Calcutta, recaptured that place, and onthe memorable field of Plassey, scattered to the winds the Nabob's army of60, 000 (1757). 

The victory of Plassey established upon a firm basis the growing power ofthe Company. During the next one hundred years it extended its authoritythroughout almost every part of the peninsula. Many of the native princeswere, and still are, allowed to retain their thrones, only they must nowacknowledge the suzerainty or paramount authority of the Englishgovernment. 

We will now speak briefly of the most important wars and troubles in whichEngland has been involved through her interests in India. 

THE AFGHAN WAR OF 1838-1842. --One of the first serious wars into whichEngland was drawn through her jealousy of Russia was what was known as theAfghan War. It was England's policy to maintain the Afghan state as abarrier between her East India possessions and Russia. Persuaded that theruler of the Afghans, a usurper named Dost Mahommed, was inclined to aRussian alliance, the English determined to dethrone him, and put in hisplace the legitimate prince. This was done. The Afghans, however, resentedthis interference in their affairs. They arose in revolt, and forced theEnglish army to retreat from the country. In the wild mountain passesleading from Afghanistan into India, the fleeing army, 16, 000 in number, counting camp-followers, was cut off almost to a man. The English tooksignal vengeance. They again invaded the country, defeated the Afghans, punished some of their leaders, burned the chief bazaar of Cabul, and thenwithdrawing from the country, left the Afghans to themselves. 

OPIUM WAR WITH CHINA (1840-1842). --The next war incited by Britishinterest in India was the so-called Opium War with China. 

During the first half of the present century the opium traffic betweenIndia and China grew into gigantic proportions, and became an importantsource of wealth to the British merchants, and of revenue to the Indiangovernment. The Chinese government, however, awake to the enormous evilsof the growing use of the narcotic, forbade the importation of the drug;but the British merchants, notwithstanding the imperial prohibition, persisted in the trade, and succeeded in smuggling large quantities of thearticle into the Chinese market. Finally, the government seized anddestroyed all the opium stored in the warehouses of the British traders atCanton. This act, together with other "outrages, " led to a declaration ofwar on the part of England. British troops now took possession of Canton, and the Chinese government, whose troops were as helpless as childrenbefore European soldiers, was soon forced to agree to the treaty ofNanking, by which the island of Hong-Kong was ceded to the English, several important ports were opened to British traders, and theperpetuation of the nefarious traffic in opium was secured. 

THE CRIMEAN WAR (1854-1856). --Scarcely was the Opium War ended beforeEngland was involved in a gigantic struggle with Russia, --the Crimean War, already spoken of in connection with Russian history. From our presentstandpoint we can better understand why England threw herself into theconflict on the side of Turkey. She fought to maintain the integrity ofthe Ottoman Empire, in order that her own great rival, Russia, might beprevented from seizing Constantinople and the Bosporus, and from thatpoint controlling the affairs of Asia through the command of the EasternMediterranean. 

THE SEPOY MUTINY (1857-1858). --The echoes of the Crimean War had barelydied away before England was startled by the most alarming intelligencefrom the country for the secure possession of which English soldiers hadborne their part in the fierce struggle before Sebastopol. 

In 1857 there broke out in the armies of the East India Company what isknown as the Sepoy Mutiny. The causes of the uprising were various. Thecrowd of deposed princes was one element of discontent. A widespreadconviction among the natives awakened by different acts of the English, that their religion was in danger, was another of the causes that led tothe rebellion. There were also military grievances of which the nativesoldiers complained. 

The mutiny broke out at Bengal. At different points, by preconcertedsignals, the native regiments arose against their English officers and putthem to death. [Footnote: The East India Company at this time had an armyof nearly 300, 000, of which number not more than 45, 000 were Englishtroops. The chief positions in the native regiments were held by Englishofficers. ] Delhi and Cawnpore were seized, and the English residents andgarrisons butchered in cold blood. Fortunately many of the nativeregiments stood firm in their allegiance to the English, and with theiraid the revolt was speedily quelled. 

At the close of the war, the government of India, by act of Parliament, was taken out of the hands of the East India Company and vested in theEnglish crown. Since this transfer, the Indian government has beenconducted on the principle that "English rule in India should be forIndia. " [Footnote: Within the last two or three decades the country hasundergone in every respect a surprising transformation. Life and propertyare now as secure in India as in England, The railways begun by the EastIndia Company have been extended in every direction, and now bind togetherthe most distant provinces of the empire. All the chief cities are unitedby telegraph. Lines of steamers are established on the Indus and theGanges. Public schools have been opened, and colleges founded. Severalhundred newspapers, about half published in the native dialects, aresowing Western ideas broadcast among the people. The introduction ofEuropean science and civilization is rapidly undermining many of the oldsuperstitions, particularly the ancient system of caste. ]

LATER EVENTS: THE ENGLISH IN EGYPT. --It only remains for us to refer tosome later matters which are more or less intimately connected withEngland's Eastern policy. 

In 1874 Mr. Disraeli, who had then just succeeded Mr. Gladstone as primeminister, purchased, for $20, 000, 000, the 176, 000 shares which the Khediveof Egypt held in the Suez Canal. This was to give England more perfectcontrol of this all-important gateway to her East India possessions. 

In 1878, towards the close of the Russo-Turkish War, England, it will berecalled, interfered in behalf of the Turks, and, by the presence of heriron-clads in the Bosporus, prevented the Russians from occupyingConstantinople. In the treaty negotiations which followed, Englandreceived from Turkey the island of Cyprus. 

In the year 1882 political and financial reasons combined led the Englishgovernment, now conducted by Gladstone, to interfere in the affairs ofEgypt. A mutinous uprising against the authority of the Khedive havingtaken place in the Egyptian army, an expedition was sent out under thecommand of Lord Wolseley for the purpose of suppressing the revolt, and bythe restoration of the authority of the Khedive to render secure the SuezCanal, and protect the interest of English bondholders in Egyptiansecurities. 

Three years later, in 1885, a second expedition had to be sent out to thesame country. The Soudanese, subjects of the Khedive, encouraged by thedisorganized condition of the Egyptian government, had revolted, and werethreatening the Egyptian garrisons in the Soudan with destruction. LordWolseley was sent out a second time, to lead an expedition up the Nile tothe relief of Khartoum, where General Gordon, a representative of theEnglish government, was commanding the Egyptian troops, and trying--to usehis own phrase--to "smash the Mahdi, " the military prophet and leader ofthe Soudanese Arabs. 

The expedition arrived too late, Khartoum having fallen just before theadvance relief party reached the town. The English troops were nowrecalled, and the greater part of the Soudan abandoned to the rebel Arabs. Further complications seem likely to grow out of England's presence inEgypt. 

CONCLUSION: THE NEW AGE. 

The Age of Material Progress, or the Industrial Age. --History has beenwell likened to a grand dissolving view. While one age is passing awayanother is coming into prominence. 

During the last fifty years the distinctive features of society havewholly changed. The battles now being waged in the religious and thepolitical world are only faint echoes of the great battles of thesixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. A new movement of humansociety has begun. Civilization has entered upon what may be called theIndustrial Age, or the Age of Material Progress. 

The decade between 1830 and 1840 was, in the phrase of Herzog, "the cradleof the new epoch. " In that decade several of the greatest inventions thathave marked human progress were first brought to practical perfection. Prominent among these were ocean steam navigation, railroads, andtelegraphs. [Footnote: Ploetz in his _Epitome of History_, instructivelycompares these inventions to the three great inventions or discoveries--the magnetic needle, gunpowder, and printing--that ushered in the ModernAge. ] In the year 1830 Stephenson exhibited the first really successfullocomotive. In 1836 Morse perfected the telegraph. In 1838 ocean steamshipnavigation was first practically solved. 

The rapidity with which these inventions have been introduced into almostall parts of the world, partakes of the marvellous. 

Within the last fifty years the continents have been covered with aperfect network of railroads, constructed at an enormous cost of labor andcapital. The aggregate length of the world's steam railways in 1883 wasabout 275, 000 miles, sufficient, to use Mulhall's illustration, to girdlethe earth eleven times at the equator, or more than sufficient to reachfrom the earth to the moon. The continental lines of railways are madevirtually continuous round the world by connecting lines of oceansteamers. Telegraph wires traverse the continents in all directions, andcables run beneath all the oceans of the globe. 

By these inventions the most remote parts of the earth have been broughtnear together. A solidarity of commercial interests has been created. Thought has been made virtually cosmopolitan: a new and helpful idea ordiscovery becomes immediately the common possession of the world. Facilities for travel, by bringing men together, and familiarizing themwith new scenes and different forms of society and belief, have made themmore liberal and tolerant. Mind has been broadened and quickened. And bythe virtual annihilation of time and space, governmental problems havebeen solved. The chief difficulties in maintaining a confederation ofstates widely separated have been removed, and such extended territoriesas those of the United States made practically as compact as the mostclosely consolidated European state. England, with her scattered colonies, may now, Professor Seeley thinks, well enough become a World Venice, withthe oceans for streets. Furthermore, the steps of human progress have beenaccelerated a hundred-fold. The work of years, and of centuries even, iscrowded into a day. Thus Japan, on the outskirts of the world, has beenmodified more by our civilization within the last decade or two, thanBritain was modified by the civilization of Rome during the four hundredyears that the island was connected with the empire. 

But a still more important feature of the new epoch is the use of steamengines, electric motors, and machinery in the manufactures and thevarious other industries of mankind. At the beginning of the nineteenthcentury the great manufactures of the world were in their infancy. Underthe impulse of modern inventions they have been carried to seemingperfection at a bound. New motors and improved machinery have increasedincalculably the productive forces of society. This enormous augmentationof the power of production is one of the most significant features of theage. 

The history of this wonderful age, so different from any preceding age, cannot yet be written, for no one can tell whether the epoch is justopening or is already well advanced. It may well be that we have alreadyseen the greatest surprises of the age, and that the epoch is nearing itsculmination, [Footnote: "It is probable, " says Professor Ely, "that as we, after more than two thousand years, look back upon the time of Pericleswith wonder and astonishment, as an epoch great in art and literature, posterity two thousand years hence will regard our era as forming anadmirable and unparalleled epoch in the history of industrial invention. "--_French and German Socialism in Modern Times. _] and that other thanmaterial development--let us hope intellectual and moral development--willcharacterize future epochs.