Part 2 — Chapter III. (These four articles abrogated by the four articles following them, 118-122.) Article 118. The Federal Constitution may at any time be amended. (continued 4)

H. Wilson, History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America, volume 2, chapter 47.

{640}

ALSO IN: H. Von Holst, Constitutional and Political History of the United States, volume 4, chapter 2, and volume 5, chapter 1.

G. T. Curtis, Life of James Buchanan, volume 2, chapter 6.

M. M. Ballou, History of Cuba, chapter 3.

J. J. Roche, The Story of the Filibusters, chapter 3.

—————CUBA: End—————

CUBIT, The.

"The length of the Egyptian foot is … shown to be equal to 1.013 English foot, or 12.16 inches (0.3086 metre) and the cubit to 18.24 English inches, or 0.463 metre. This cubit was identical with the Phœnician or Olympic cubit, afterwards adopted in Greece. … The second of the two Egyptian cubits was the royal cubit, or cubit of Memphis, of seven palms or twenty-eight digits. … The mean length of the Egyptian royal cubit is … ascertained to be 20.67 English inches, or 525 mm. … There is much conflict of opinion as to the actual length of the several cubits in use by the Jews at different periods; but the fact that Moses always mentions the Egyptian measures … as well as the Egyptian weights … proves that the Hebrews originally brought their weights and measures from Egypt. … In his dissertation on cubits, Sir Isaac Newton states grounds for his opinion that the sacred cubit of the Jews was equal to 24.7 of our inches, and that the royal cubit of Memphis was equivalent to five-sixths of this sacred Jewish cubit, or 20.6 inches."

H. W. Chisholm, On the Science of Weighing and Measuring, chapter 2.

CUCUTA, The Convention of.

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

CUFA.

See BUSSORAH and KUFA.

CUICIDH, The.

See TUATH, THE.

CULDEES, The.

It used to be set forth by religious historians that the Culdees were an ardent religious fraternity in Scotland, probably founded by Columba, the saintly Irish missionary of the sixth century, and having its principal seat in Iona; that they "were the lights of Scotland in a dark and superstitious age"; that they struggled for several centuries against the errors and the oppressive pretensions of Rome, and that "the strength and vigor of the Reformation in Scotland, where the Papal power received its first and most decisive check, may be traced not indirectly to the faith, the doctrines, and the spirit of the ancient Culdees." It was claimed for the Presbyterian Church that its form of church government prevailed among the Culdees, while the supporters of Episcopacy found evidences to the contrary. But all these views, with all the controversies fomented by them, have been dissipated by modern historical investigation. The facts gathered by Dean Reeves and published in 1864, in his work on the "Culdees of the British Islands," supported by the more recent studies of Mr. W. F. Skene, are now generally accepted. Says Mr. Skene, (Celtic Scotland, book 2, chapter 6): "It is not till after the expulsion of the Columban monks from the kingdom of the Picts, in the beginning of the eighth century, that the name of Culdee appears. To Adamnan, to Eddi and to Bede it was totally unknown. They knew of no body of clergy who bore this name, and in the whole range of ecclesiastical history there is nothing more utterly destitute of authority than the application of this name to the Columban monks of the sixth and seventh centuries, or more utterly baseless than the fabric which has been raised upon that assumption." Mr. Skene's conclusion is that the Culdees sprang from an ascetic order called Deicolæ or God-worshippers; that in Irish the name became Ceile De, thence corrupted into Culdee; that they were hermits, who became in time associated in communities, and were finally brought under the canonical rule of the Roman church, along with the secular clergy.

CULEUS, The.

See AMPHORA.

CULHUACAN.

See MEXICO, ANCIENT: THE TOLTEC EMPIRE.

CULLODEN, Battle of (1746).

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1745-1746.

CULM, OR KULM, Battle of.

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

CULTURKAMPF, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1873-1887.

CUMÆ. CUMÆAN SIBYL.

"Earlier than 735 B. C., … though we do not know the precise era of its commencement, there existed one solitary Grecian establishment in the Tyrrhenian Sea,—the Campanian Cumæ, near Cape Misenum; which the more common opinion of chronologists supposed to have been founded in 1050 B. U. and which has even been carried back by some authors to 1139 B. C. … We may at least feel certain that it is the most ancient Grecian establishment in any part of Italy. … The Campanian Cumæ—known almost entirely by this its Latin designation—received its name and a portion of its inhabitants from the Æolic Kymê in Asia Minor. … Cumæ, situated on the neck of the peninsula which terminates in Cape Misenum, occupied a lofty and rocky hill overhanging the sea and difficult of access on the land side. … In the hollow rock under the very walls of the town was situated the cavern of the prophetic Sibyl,—a parallel and reproduction of the Gergithian Sibyl, near Kymê in Æolis: in the immediate neighborhood, too, stood the wild woods and dark lake of Avernus, consecrated to the subterranean gods, and offering an establishment of priests, with ceremonies evoking the dead, for purposes of prophecy or for solving doubts and mysteries. It was here that Grecian imagination localized the Cimmerians and the fable of Odysseus; and the Cumæans derived gains from the numerous visitors to this holy spot, perhaps hardly less than those of the inhabitants of Krissa from the vicinity of Delphi. Of the relations of these Cumæans with the Hellenic world generally, we unfortunately know nothing; but they seem to have been in intimate connection with Rome during the time of the kings, and especially during that of the last king Tarquin,—forming the intermediate link between the Greek and Latin world, whereby the feelings of the Teukrians and Gergitheans near the Æolic Kymê and the legendary stories of Trojan as well as Grecian heroes,—Æneas and Odysseus—passed into the antiquarian imagination of Rome and Latium. The writers of the Augustan age knew Cumæ only in its decline, and wondered at the vast extent of its ancient walls, yet remaining in their time. But during the two centuries prior to 500 B. C. these walls inclosed a full and thriving population, in the plenitude of prosperity."

G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 22.

See, also, SIBYLS

CUMANS, OR KOMANS, The.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1114-1301.

CUMBERLAND GAP, The capture of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER: TENNESSEE).

{641}

CUMBRIA: The British kingdom.

"The Britons of Cumbria occupy a tolerably large space on the map, but a very small one in history;—their annals have entirely perished;—and nothing authentic remains concerning them, except a very few passages, wholly consisting of incidental notices relating to their subjection and their misfortunes. Romance would furnish much more; for it was in Cumbria that Rhyderc, or Roderic the magnificent, is therein represented to have reigned, and Merlin to have prophesied. Arthur held his court in merry Carlisle; and Peredur, the Prince of Sunshine, whose name we find amongst the princes of Strathclyde, is one of the great heroes of the 'Mabinogion,' or tales of youth, long preserved by tradition amongst the Cymri. These fantastic personages, however, are of importance in one point of view, because they show, what we might otherwise forget—that from the Ribble in Lancashire, or thereabouts, up to the Clyde, there existed a dense population composed of Britons, who preserved their national language and customs, agreeing in all respects with the Welsh of the present day. So that even in the tenth century, the ancient Britons still inhabited the greater part of the western coast of the island, however much they had been compelled to yield to the political supremacy of the Saxon invaders. The 'Regnum Cumbrense' comprehended many districts, probably governed by petty princes or Reguli, in subordination to a chief monarch or Pendragon. Reged appears to have been somewhere in the vicinity of Annandale. Strathclyde is of course the district or vale of Clydesdale. In this district, or state, was situated Alcluyd, or Dunbritton, now Dumbarton, where the British kings usually resided; and the whole Cumbrian kingdom was not infrequently called Strathclyde, from the ruling or principal state; just as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland is often designated in common language as 'England,' because England is the portion where the monarch and legislature are found. Many dependencies of the Cumbrian kingdom extended into modern Yorkshire, and Leeds was the frontier town between the Britons and the Angles. … The kings of Cumbria became the vassals, or 'men,' of the Anglo-Saxon kings. Eugenius had thus submitted to Athelstane. Of the nature of the obligation I shall speak hereafter. The Anglo-Saxon kings appear to have been anxious to extend and confirm their supremacy; Edmund proceeded against Donald, or Dumhnail, the Scottish King of Cumbria (A. D. 945), with the most inveterate and implacable hostility. … Edmund, having thus obtained possession of Cumbria, granted the country to Malcolm, King of the Scots, upon condition, as the chronicles say, of being his co-operator, both by sea and by land. … From this period the right of the Scottish kings or princes to the kingdom of Cumbria, as vassals of the English crown, seems to have been fully admitted: and the rights of the Scottish kings to the 'Earldom of Cumberland'—for such it was afterwards termed—were founded upon Edmund's grant. The Britons of Strathclyde, and Reged, and Cumbria, gradually melted away into the surrounding population; and, losing their language, ceased to be discernible as a separate race. Yet it is most probable that this process was not wholly completed until a comparatively recent period."

F. Palgrave, History of the Anglo-Saxons, chapter 11.

Cumbria and Cambria (Wales), the two states long maintained by the Britons, against the Angles and Saxons, bore, in reality, the same name, Cumbria being the more correct form of it. The earliest development of the so-called Welsh poetry seems to have been in Cumbria rather than in Wales. Taliesen and Aneurin were Cumbrian bards, and Arthur, if any historical personage stands behind his kingly shadow, was probably a Cumbrian hero.

J. Rhys, Celtic Britain.

ALSO IN: W. F. Skene, The Four Ancient Books of Wales.

See, also, KYMRY, ALCLYDE, and SCOTLAND: 10TH-11TH CENTURIES.

CUNARD LINE, The founding of the.

See STEAM NAVIGATION: ON THE OCEAN.

CUNAXA, Battle of (B. C. 401).

See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.

CUNEIFORM WRITING.

The characters employed for the written languages of ancient Babylonia and Assyria, have been called cuneiform, from the Latin cunens, a wedge, because the marks composing them are wedge-shaped. All knowledge of those characters and of the languages expressed in them had been lost for many centuries, and its recent recovery is one of the most marvelous achievements of our age. "Travellers had discovered inscriptions engraved in cuneiform, or, as they were also termed, arrow-headed characters, on the ruined monuments of Persepolis and other ancient sites in Persia. Some of these monuments were known to have been erected by the Achæmenian princes—Darius, the son of Hystaspes, and his successors—and it was therefore inferred that the inscriptions also had been carved by order of the same kings. The inscriptions were in three different systems of cuneiform writing; and since the three kinds of inscription were always placed side by side, it was evident that they represented different versions of the same text. … It was clear that the three versions of the Achæmenian inscriptions were addressed to the three chief populations of the Persian Empire, and that the one which invariably came first was composed in ancient Persian, the language of the sovereign himself. Now this Persian version happened to offer the decipherer less difficulties than the two others which accompanied it. The number of distinct characters employed in writing it did not exceed forty, while the words were divided from one another by a slanting wedge. Some of the words contained so many characters that it was plain that these latter must denote letters and not syllables, and that consequently the Persian cuneiform system must have consisted of an alphabet, and not of a syllabary. It was further plain that the inscriptions had to be read from left to right, since the ends of all the lines were exactly underneath one another on the left side, whereas they terminated irregularly on the right. … The clue to the decipherment of the inscriptions was first discovered by the successful guess of a German scholar, Grotefend. Grotefend noticed that the inscriptions generally began with three or four words, one of which varied, while the others remained unchanged. The variable word had three forms, though the same form always appeared on the same monument. Grotefend, therefore, conjectured that this word represented the name of a king, the words which followed it being royal titles." Working on this conjecture, he identified the three names with Darius, Xerxes and Artaxerxes, and one of the supposed titles with a Zend word for "king," which gave him a considerable part of the cuneiform alphabet. He was followed in the work by Burnouf, Lassen and Sir Henry Rawlinson, until, finally, Assyrian inscriptions were read with "almost as much certainty as a page of the Old Testament."

A. H. Sayce, Fresh Light from the ancient monuments, chapter 1.

{642}

CUNIBERTUS, King of the Lombards, A. D. 691-700.

CUNIMARÉ, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR Coco GROUP.

CURDS, OR KURDS, The.

See CARDUCHI.

CURFEW-BELL, The.

"Except from its influence upon the imagination, it would be hardly worth while to notice the legend of the curfew-bell, so commonly supposed to have been imposed by William [the Conqueror] upon the English, as a token of degradation and slavery; but the 'squilla di lontano, che paja il giorno pianger che si muore,' was a universal custom of police throughout the whole of mediaeval Europe, not unconnected with devotional feeling."

Sir F. Palgrave, History of Normandy and England, volume 3, page 627.

"In the year [1061] after King Henry's death [Henry I. of France], in a Synod held at Caen by the Duke's authority [Duke William of Normandy, who became in 1066 the Conqueror, and King of England], and attended by Bishops, Abbots, and Barons, it was ordered that a bell should be rung every evening, at hearing of which prayer should be offered, and all people should get within their houses and shut their doors. This odd mixture of piety and police seems to be the origin of the famous and misrepresented Curfew. Whatever was its object, it was at least not ordained as any special hardship on William's English subjects."

E. A. Freeman, History of the Norman Conquest of England, chapter 12, section 3 (volume 3).

CURIA, Ancient Roman.

See COMITIA-CURIATA.

CURIA, Municipal, of the later Roman empire. Decuriones.

"It is only necessary in this work to describe the general type of the municipal organization which existed in the provinces of the Roman Empire after the time of Constantine. … The proprietors of land in the Roman provinces generally dwelt in towns and cities, as a protection against brigands and man-stealers. Every town had an agricultural district which formed its territory, and the landed proprietors constituted the municipality. The whole local authority was vested in an oligarchical senate called the Curia, consisting probably of one hundred of the wealthiest landed proprietors in the city or township. This body elected the municipal authorities and officers, and filled up vacancies in its own body. It was therefore independent of the proprietors from among whom it was taken, and whose interests it ought to have represented. The Curia—not the body of landed proprietors—formed therefore the Roman municipality. The Curia was used by the imperial government as an instrument of fiscal extortion."

G. Finlay, Greece under the Romans, chapter 2, section 1.

"When the progress of fiscal tyranny had almost sapped the vigor of society, the decuriones [members of the municipal curiæ, called, also, curiales] … being held jointly responsible for the taxation, became the veriest slaves of the empire. Responsible jointly for the taxes, they were, by the same token, responsible for their colleagues and their successors; their estates were made the securities of the imperial dues; and if any estate was abandoned by its proprietor, they were compelled to occupy it and meet the imposts exigible from it. Yet they could not relinquish their offices; they could not leave the city except by stealth; they could not enter the army, or the priesthood, or any office which might relieve them from municipal functions. … Even the children of the Curial were adscribed to his functions, and could engage in no course of life inconsistent with the onerous and intolerable duty. In short, this dignity was so much abhorred that the lowest plebeian shunned admission to it, the members of it made themselves bondmen, married slave-women, or joined the barbaric hordes in order to escape it; and malefactors, Jews and heretics were sometimes condemned to it, as an appropriate penalty for their offenses."

P. Godwin, History of France: Ancient Gaul, book 2, chapter 8.

ALSO IN: T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, book 3, chapter 9.

F. Guizot, History of Civilization, volume 2 (volume 1, France), lecture 2.

See, also ROME: A. D. 363-379.

CURIA, Papal. College of Cardinals. Consistory.

"The Court of Rome, commonly called the Roman Curia, consisted of a number of dignified ecclesiastics who assisted the Pope in the executive administration. The Pontiff's more intimate advisers, or, as we should say, his privy council, were the College of Cardinals [see PAPACY: A. D. 1059], consisting of a certain number of cardinal bishops, cardinal priests, and cardinal deacons. The cardinal deacons, at first seven and afterwards fourteen in number, were originally ecclesiastics appointed as overseers and guardians of the sick and poor in the different districts of Rome. Equal to them in rank were the fifty cardinal priests, as the chief priests of the principal Roman churches were called; who, with the cardinal deacons, formed, in very early times, the presbytery, or senate of the Bishop of Rome. … According to some authorities, cardinal bishops were instituted in the 9th century; according to others not till the 11th, when seven bishops of the dioceses nearest to Rome—Ostia, Porto, Velitrae, Tusculum, Præneste, Tibur, and the Sabines—were adopted by the Pope partly as his assistants in the service of the Lateran, and partly in the general administration of the Church. In process of time, the appointment of such cardinal bishops was extended not only to the rest of Italy but also to foreign countries. Though the youngest of the cardinals in point of time, cardinal bishops were the highest in rank, and enjoyed the pre-eminence in the College. Their titles were derived from their dioceses. … But they were also called by their own names. The number of the cardinals was indefinite and varying. The Council of Basle endeavoured to restrict it to 24. But this was not carried out, and Pope Sixtus V. at length fixed the number at 70. The Council called the Consistory, which advised with the Pope both in temporal and ecclesiastical matters, was ordinarily private, and confined to the cardinals alone; though on extraordinary occasions, and for solemn purposes of state, as in the audiences of foreign ambassadors, &c., other prelates, and even distinguished laymen, might appear in it."

T. H. Dyer, History of Modern Europe, volume 1, page 38.

{643}

CURIA REGIS OF THE NORMAN KINGS.

"The Curia Regis [under the Norman Kings of England], the supreme tribunal of judicature, of which the Exchequer was the financial department or session, was … the court of the king sitting to administer justice with the advice of his counsellors; those counsellors being, in the widest acceptation, the whole body of tenants-in-chief, but in the more limited usage, the great officers of the household and specially appointed judges. The great gatherings of the national council may be regarded as full sessions of the Curia Regis, or the Curia Regis as a perpetual committee of the national council."

William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 11, section 127.

"Not long after the granting of Magna Charta, the Curia Regis was permanently divided into three committees or courts, each taking a certain portion of the business: (1) Fiscal matters were confined to the Exchequer; (2) civil disputes, where neither the king's interest nor any matter savouring of a criminal nature were involved, were decided in the Common Pleas; and (3) the court of King's Bench retained all the remaining business and soon acquired the exclusive denomination of the ancient Curia Regis."

"But the same staff of judges was still retained for all three courts, with the chief justiciar at their head. Towards the end of Henry III.'s reign, the three courts received each a distinct staff, and on the abolition by Edward I. of the office of chief justiciar, the only remaining bond of union being severed, they became completely separated. Some trace of their ancient unity of organization always survived, however, in the court of Exchequer Chamber; until at length after six centuries of independent existence they were again united by the Judicature Act, 1873. Together with the Court of Chancery and the Probate, Divorce and Admiralty courts, they now form divisions of a consolidated High Court of Justice, itself a branch of the Supreme Court of Judicature."

T. P. Taswell-Langmead, English Constitutional History, page 154.

"The Aula Regia, or Curia Regis … has been described in various and at first sight contradictory terms. Thus it has been called the highest Law Court, the Ministry of the King, a Legislative Assembly, &c. The apparent inconsistency of these descriptions vanishes on closer inspection, and throws great light on mediæval history. For the Curia Regis possessed every attribute which has been ascribed to it."

A. V. Dicey, The Privy Council, part 1.

ALSO IN: R. Gneist, History of the English Constitution, chapter 19.

CURIALES.

See CURIA, MUNICIPAL.

CURIOSOLITÆ, The.

See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.

CURTIS, George W., and Civil-Service Reform.

See CIVIL SERVICE REFORM IN THE UNITED STATES.

CURULE ÆDILES.

See ROME: B. C. 494-492.

CURULE CHAIR.

In ancient Rome, "certain high offices of state conferred upon the holder the right of using, upon public occasions, an ivory chair of peculiar form. This chair was termed Sella Curulis. … This was somewhat in the form of a modern camp-stool."

W. Ramsay, Manual of Roman Antiquity, chapters 2 and 4.

CURZOLA, Battle of (1298).

See GENOA: A. D. 1261-1299.

CUSCO: The Capital of the Incas of Peru.

See PERU: A. D. 1533-154.8.

CUSH. CUSHITES.

"Genesis, like the Hebrews of later date, includes under the name of Cush the nations dwelling to the South, the Nubians, Ethiopians and tribes of South Arabia."

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

See, also, HAMITES, and ARABIA.

CUSHING, Lieutenant William B. Destruction of the ram Albemarle.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D.1864 (OCTOBER: NORTH CAROLINA).

CUSTER'S LAST BATTLE.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1876.

CUSTOMS DUTIES.

See TARIFF.

CUSTOMS UNION, The German (Zollverein).

See TARIFF: A. D. 1833.

CUSTOZZA, Battles of (1848 and 1866).

See ITALY: A. D. 1848-1849; and 1862-1866.

CUTLER, Manasseh, and the Ordinance of 1787.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES: A. D. 1787.

CUYRIRI, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.

CYCLADES, The. SPORADES, The.

"Among the Ionic portion of Hellas are to be reckoned (besides Athens) Eubœa, and the numerous group of islands included between the southernmost Eubœan promontory, the eastern coast of Peloponnesus, and the northwestern coast of Krête. Of these islands some are to be considered as outlying prolongations, in a southeasterly direction, of the mountain-system of Attica; others of that of Eubœa; while a certain number of them lie apart from either system, and seem referable to a volcanic origin. To the first class belong Keôs, Kythnus, Seriphus, Pholegandrus, Sikinus, Gyarus, Syra, Paros, and Antiparos; to the second class Andros, Tênos, Mykonos, Dêlos, Naxos, Amorgos; to the third class Kimôlus, Mêlos, Thêra. These islands passed amongst the ancients by the general name of the Cyclades and the Sporades; the former denomination being commonly understood to comprise those which immediately surrounded the sacred island of Dêlos,—the latter being given to those which lay more scattered and apart. But the names are not applied with uniformity or steadiness even in ancient times: at present, the whole group are usually known by the title of Cyclades."

G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 12.

CYDONIA, Battles and siege of (B. C. 71-68).

See CRETE: B. C. 68-66.

CYLON, Conspiracy of.

See ATHENS: B. C. 612-595.

CYMBELINE, Kingdom of.

See COLCHESTER, ORIGIN OF.

CYMRY, The.

See KYMRY, THE.

CYNOSARGES AT ATHENS, The.

See GYMNASIA, GREEK.

CYNOSCEPHALÆ, Battle of (B. C. 364).

The battle in which Pelopidas, the Theban patriot, friend and colleague of Epaminondas, was slain. It was fought B. C. 364, in Thessaly, near Pharsalus, on the heights called Cynoscephalæ, or the Dog's Heads, and delivered the Thessalian cities from the encroachments of the tyrant of Pheræ.

C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 40.

CYNOSCEPHALÆ: (B. C. 197).

See GREECE: B. C. 214-146.

{644}

CYNOSSEMA, Naval battle of.

Two successive naval battles fought, one in July and the second in October, B. C. 411, between the Athenians and the Peloponnesian allies, in the Hellespont, are jointly called the Battle of Cynossema. The name was taken from the headland called Cynossema, or the "Dog's Tomb," "ennobled by the legend and the chapel of the Trojan queen Hecuba." The Athenians had the advantage in both encounters, especially in the latter one, when they were joined by Alcibiades, with reenforcements, just in time to decide the doubtful fortunes of the day.

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

ALSO IN: G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 63.

See GREECE: B. C. 411-407.

CYNURIANS, The.

See KYNURIANS.

CYPRUS: Origin of the name.

"The Greek name of the island was derived from the abundance in which it produced the beautiful plant ('Copher') which furnishes the 'al-henna,' coveted throughout the East for the yellow dye which it communicates to the nails. It was rich in mines of copper, which has obtained for it the name by which it is known in the modern languages of the West."

J. Kenrick, Phœnicia, chapter 4.

CYPRUS: Early History.

"The first authentic record with regard to Cyprus is an inscription on an Egyptian tombstone of the 17th century B. C., from which it appears that the island was conquered by Thothmes III. of Egypt, in whose reign the exodus of the Children of Israel is supposed to have taken place. This was no doubt anterior to the establishment of any Greek colonies, and probably, also, before the Phœnicians had settled in the island. … As appears from various inscriptions and other records, Cyprus became subject successively to Egypt, as just mentioned, to Assyria, to Egypt again in 568 B. C., when it was conquered by Amasis, and in 525 B. C. to Persia. Meanwhile the power of the Greeks had been increasing. … The civilization of the West was about to assert itself at Marathon and Salamis; and Cyprus, being midway between East and West, could not fail to be involved in the coming conflict. On the occasion of the Ionic revolt [see PERSIA: B. C. 521-493] the Greek element in Cyprus showed its strength: and in 502 B. C. the whole island, with the single exception of the Phœnician town of Amathus, took part with the Ionians in renouncing the authority of the Persian king." But in the war which followed, the Persians, aided by the Phœnicians of the mainland, reconquered Cyprus, and the Cyprian Greeks were long disheartened. They recovered their courage, however, about 410 B. C. when Evagoras, a Greek of the royal house of Teucer, made himself master of Salamis, and finally established a general sovereignty over the island—even extending his power to the mainland and subjugating Tyre. "The reign of Evagoras is perhaps the most brilliant period in the history of Cyprus. Before his death, which took place in 374 B. C., he had raised the island from the position of a mere dependency of one or other of the great Eastern monarchies, had gained for it a place among the lending states of Greece, and had solved the question as to which division of the ancient world the Cyprian people should be assigned. Consequently when, some forty years later, the power of Persia was shattered by Alexander the Great at the battle of Issus, the kings of the island hastened to offer him their submission as the leader of the Greek race, and sent 120 ships to assist him in the siege of Tyre." After Alexander's death, Cyprus was disputed between Antigonus and Ptolemy.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 310-301.

The king of Egypt secured the prize, and the island remained under the Greek-Egyptian crown, until it passed, with the rest of the heritage of the Ptolemys to the Romans. "When the [Roman] empire was divided, on the death of Constantine the Great, Cyprus, like Malta, passed into the hands of the Byzantine Emperors. Like Malta, also, it was exposed to frequent attacks from the Arabs; but, although they several times occupied the island and once held it for no less than 160 years, they were always expelled again by the Byzantine Emperors, and never established themselves there as firmly as they did in Malta. The crusades first brought Cyprus into contact with the western nations of modern Europe."

C. P. Lucas, Historical Geography of British Colonies, section 1, chapter 2.

ALSO IN: R. H. Lang, CYPRUS, chapters 1-8.

F. Von Loher, CYPRUS, chapters 12 and 30.

L. P. Di Cesnola, Cyprus; its ancient cities, &c.

CYPRUS: B. C. 58. Annexed to the Roman Dominions.

"The annexation of Cyprus was decreed in 696 [B. C. 58] by the people [of Rome], that is, by the leaders of the democracy, the support given to piracy by the Cypriots being alleged as the official reason why that course should now be adopted. Marcus Cato, intrusted by his opponents with the execution of this measure, came to the island without an army; but he had no need of one. The king [a brother of the king of Egypt] took poison; the inhabitants submitted without offering resistance to their inevitable fate, and were placed under the governor of Cilicia."

T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 4.

CYPRUS: A. D. 117. Jewish insurrection.

"This rich and pleasant territory [the island of Cyprus] had afforded a refuge to the Jews of the continent through three generations of disturbance and alarm, and the Hebrew race was now [A. D. 117] probably not inferior there in number to the native Syrians or Greeks. On the first outburst of a Jewish revolt [against the Roman domination, in the last year of the reign of Trajan] the whole island fell into the hands of the insurgents, and became an arsenal and rallying point for the insurrection, which soon spread over Egypt, Cyrene and Mesopotamia. The leader of the revolt in Cyprus bore the name of Artemion, but we know no particulars of the war in this quarter, except that 240,000 of the native population is said to have fallen victims to the exterminating fury of the insurgents. When the rebellion was at last extinguished in blood, the Jews were forbidden thenceforth to set foot on the island; and even if driven thither by stress of weather, the penalty of death was mercilessly enforced. … The Jewish population of Cyrenaica outnumbered the natives. … The hostility of the Jews in these parts was less directed against the central government and the Roman residents than the native race. … Of these 220,000 are said to have perished."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 65.

{645}

CYPRUS: A. D. 1191. Conquest by Richard Cœur de Lion. Founding of the Latin Kingdom.

During the civil strife and confusion of the last years of the Comnenian dynasty of emperors at Constantinople, one of the members of the family, Isaac Comnenos, secured the sovereignty of Cyprus and assumed the title of emperor. With the alliance of the king of Sicily, he defeated the Byzantine forces sent against him, and was planted securely, to all appearance, on his newly built throne at the time of the Third Crusade. Circumstances at that time (A. D. 1191) gave him a fatal opportunity to provoke the English crusaders. First, he seized the property and imprisoned the crews of three English ships that were wrecked on the Cyprian coast. Not satisfied with that violence, he refused shelter from the storm to a vessel which bore Berengaria of Navarre, the intended wife of King Richard. "The king of England immediately sailed to Cyprus; and when Isaac refused to deliver up the ship-wrecked crusaders, and to restore their property, Richard landed his army and commenced a series of operations, which ended in his conquering the whole island, in which he abolished the administrative institutions of the Eastern Empire, enslaving the Greek race, introducing the feudal system, by which he riveted the chains of a foreign domination, and then gave it as a present to Guy of Lusignan, the titular king of Jerusalem, who became the founder of a dynasty of Frank kings in Cyprus."

G. Finlay, History of the Byzantine and Greek Empires, from 716 to 1453, book 3, chapter 3, section 1.

Before giving Cyprus to Guy of Lusignan, Richard had sold the island to the Templars, and Guy had to pay the knights heavily for the extinguishment of their rights. Richard, therefore, was rather a negotiator than a giver in the transaction.

William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Mediæval and Modern History, lecture 8.

CYPRUS: A. D. 1192-1489. The kingdom under the house of Lusignan.

"The house of Lusignan maintained itself in Cyprus for nearly three centuries, during which, although fallen somewhat from the blessedness which had been broken up by Isaac Comnenus, the island seems to have retained so much fertility and prosperity as to make its later history very dark by contrast. … Guy, we are told, received Cyprus for life only, and did homage for the island to Richard. As he already bore the title of king, the question whether he should hold Cyprus as a kingdom does not seem to have arisen. … On his death, in April, 1194, Richard putting in no claim for the reversion, his brother, Amalric of Lusignan, constable of Palestine, entered on the possession as his heir. … Amalric succeeded to the crown of Jerusalem; the crown of Jerusalem, which, after the year 1269, became permanently united with that of Cyprus, was an independent crown, and the king of Jerusalem an anointed king: the union of the crowns therefore seems to have precluded any question as to the tenure by which the kingdom of Cyprus should be held. … The homage then due to Richard, or to the crown of England, ceased at the death of Guy."

William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Mediæval and Modern History, lecture 8.

See, also, JERUSALEM: A. D. 1291.

CYPRUS: A. D. 1291-1310. The Knights Hospitallers of St. John.

See HOSPITALLERS OF ST. JOHN: A. D. 1118-1310.

CYPRUS: A. D. 1489-1570. A Venetian dependency.

The last reigning king of Cyprus was James II., a bastard brother of Queen Charlotte, whom he drove from the Cypriot throne in 1464. This king married a Venetian lady, Caterina Cornaro, in 1471 and was declared to be "the son-in·law of the Republic." The unscrupulous republic is said to have poisoned its son·in-law in order to secure the succession. He died in 1473, and a son, born after his death, lived but two years. Cyprus was then ruled by the Venetians for fifteen years in the name of Caterina, who finally renounced her rights wholly in favor of the republic. After 1489, until its conquest by the Turks, Cyprus was a Venetian dependency, in form as well as in fact, but tributary to the Sultan of Egypt.

William Stubbs, Seventeen Lectures on the Study of Mediæval and Modern History, lecture 8.

CYPRUS: A. D. 1570-1571. Conquest by the Turks.

See TURKS: A. D. 1566-1571.

CYPRUS: A. D. 1821. Turkish massacre of Christians.

See GREECE: A. D. 1821-1829.

CYPRUS: A. D. 1878. Control surrendered by Turkey to England.

See TURKS: A. D. 1878, THE TREATIES OF SAN STEFANO AND BERLIN.

—————CYPRUS: End—————

CYREANS, The.

See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.

CYRENAICA. CYRENE. KYRENE.

A city, growing into a kingdom, which was founded at an early day by the Greeks, on that projecting part of the coast of Libya, or northern Africa, which lies opposite to Greece. The first settlers were said to have been from the little island of Thera, whose people were bold and enterprising. The site they chose "was of an unusual nature, especially for islanders, and lay several miles away from the sea, the shores of which were devoid of natural bays for anchorage. But, with this exception, every advantage was at hand: instead of the narrow stony soil of their native land, they found the most fertile corn-fields, a broad table-land with a healthy atmosphere and watered by fresh springs; a well-wooded coast-land, unusually well adapted for all the natural products which the Hellenes deemed essential; while in the background spread mysteriously the desert, a world passing the comprehension of the Hellenes, out of which the Libyan tribes came to the shore with horses and camels, with black slaves, with apes, parrots and other wonderful animals, with dates and rare fruits. … An abundant spring of water above the shore was the natural point at which the brown men of the deserts and the mariners assembled. Here regular meetings became customary. The bazaar became a permanent market, and the market a city which arose on a grand scale, broad and lofty, on two rocky heights, which jut out towards the sea from the plateau of the desert. This city was called Cyrene. … Large numbers of population immigrated from Crete, the islands and Peloponnesus. A large amount of new land was parcelled out, the Libyans were driven back, the landing-place became the port of Apollonia, and the territory occupied by the city itself was largely extended. Cyrene became, like Massalia, the starting point of a group of settlements, the centre of a small Greece: Barca and Hesperides [afterwards called Berenice] were her daughters. Gradually a nation grew up, which extended itself and its agriculture, and contrived to cover a large division of African land with Hellenic culture. This was the new era which commenced for Cyrene with the reign of the third king, the Battus who, on account of the marvellously rapid rise of his kingdom, was celebrated as 'the fortunate' in all Hellas. The Battiadæ [the family or dynasty of Battus] were soon regarded as a great power."

E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 2, chapter 3.

{646}

Cyrenaica became subject to Egypt under the Ptolemys, and was then usually called Pentapolis, from the five cities of Cyrene, Apollonia, Arsinoë (formerly Teuchira), Berenice (formerly Hesperis, or Hesperides) and Ptolemais (the port of Barca). Later it became a province of the Roman Empire, and finally, passing under Mahometan rule, sank to its present state, as a district, called Barca, of the kingdom of Tripoli.—Cyrene was especially famous for the production of a plant called silphium—supposed to be assafœtida—on which the ancients seem to have set an extraordinary value. This was one of the principal sources of the wealth of Cyrene.

E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography, chapter 8, section 1, and chapter 12, section 2.

CYRENAICA: B. C. 525. Tributary to Persia.

See EGYPT: B. C. 525-332.

CYRENAICA: B. C. 322. Absorbed in the Kingdom of Egypt by Ptolemy Lagus.

See EGYPT: B. C. 323-30.

CYRENAICA: B. C. 97. Transferred to the Romans by will.

"In the middle of this reign [of Ptolemy, called Lathyrus, king of Egypt] died Ptolemy Apion, king of Cyrene. He was the half-brother of Lathyrus and Alexander, and having been made king of Cyrene by his father Euergetes II., he had there reigned quietly for twenty years. Being between Egypt and Carthage, then called the Roman province of Africa, and having no army which he could lead against the Roman legions, he had placed himself under the guardianship of Rome; he had bought a truce during his lifetime, by making the Roman people his heirs in his will, so that on his death they were to have his kingdom. Cyrene had been part of Egypt for above two hundred years, and was usually governed by a younger son or brother of the king. But on the death of Ptolemy Apion, the Roman senate, who had latterly been grasping at everything within their reach, claimed his kingdom as their inheritance, and in the flattering language of their decree by which the country was enslaved, they declared Cyrene free."

S. Sharpe, History of Egypt, chapter 11.

CYRENAICA: A. D. 117. Jewish insurrection.

See CYPRUS: A. D. 117.

CYRENAICA: A. D. 616. Destroyed by Chosroes.

See EGYPT: A. D. 616-628.

CYRENAICA: 7th Century. Mahometan conquest.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 647-709.

—————CYRENAICA: End—————

CYRUS, The empire of.

See PERSIA: B. C. 549-521.

CYRUS THE YOUNGER, The expedition of.

See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.

CYZICUS: B. C. 411-410, Battles at.

See GREECE: B. C. 411-407.

CYZICUS: B. C. 74. Siege by Mithridates.

Cyzicus, which had then become one of the largest and wealthiest cities of Asia Minor, was besieged for an entire year (B. C. 74-73) by Mithridates in the Third Mithridatic war. The Roman Consul Lucullus came to the relief of the city and succeeded in gaining a position which blockaded the besiegers and cut off their supplies. In the end, Mithridates retreated with a small remnant only, of his great armament, and never recovered from the disaster.

G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 3, chapter 1.

CYZICUS: A. D. 267. Capture by the Goths.

See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.

—————CYZICUS: End—————

CZAR, OR TZAR.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1547.

CZARTORISKYS, The, and the fall of Poland.

See POLAND: A. D. 1763-1773.

CZASLAU, OR CHOTUSITZ, Battle of (A. D. 1742).

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1742 (JANUARY-MAY).

CZEKHS, The.

See BOHEMIA: ITS PEOPLE.

—————CZEKHS, End—————

D.

DACHTELFIELD, The.

See SAXONS: A. D. 772-804.

DACIA, The Dacians.

Ancient Dacia embraced the district north of the Danube between the Theiss and the Dneister. "The Dacians [at the time of Augustus, in the last half century B. C.] occupied the whole of what now forms the southern part of Hungary, the Banat and Transylvania. … The more prominent part which they henceforth assumed in Roman history was probably owing principally to the immediate proximity in which they now found themselves to the Roman frontier. The question of the relation in which the Dacians stood to the Getæ, whom we find in possession of these same countries at an earlier period, was one on which there existed considerable difference of opinion among ancient writers: but the prevailing conclusion was that they were only different names applied to the same people. Even Strabo, who describes them as distinct, though cognate tribes, states that they spoke the same language. According to his distinction the Getæ occupied the more easterly regions, adjoining the Euxine, and the Dacians the western, bordering on the Germans."

E. H. Bunbury, History of Ancient Geography, chapter 20, section 1.

DACIA: A. D. 102-106. Trajan's conquest.

At the beginning of the second century, when Trajan conquered the Dacians and added their country to the Roman Empire, "they may be considered as occupying the broad block of land bounded by the Theiss, the Carpathians, the lower Danube or Ister, and the Pruth." In his first campaign, A. D. 102, Trajan penetrated the country to the heart of modern Transylvania, and forced the Dacians to give him battle at a place called Tapæ, the site of which is not known. He routed them with much slaughter, as they had been routed at the same place, Tapæ, sixteen years before, in one of the ineffectual campaigns directed by Domitian. They submitted, and Trajan established strong Roman posts in the country; but he had scarcely reached Rome and celebrated his triumph there, before the Dacians were again in arms. In the spring of the year 104, Trajan repaired to the lower Danube in person, once more, and entered the Dacian country with an overwhelming force. This time the subjugation was complete, and the Romans established their occupation of the country by the founding of colonies and the building of roads. {647} Dacia was now made a Roman province, and "the language of the Empire became, and to this day substantially remains, the national tongue of the inhabitants. … Of the Dacian province, the last acquired and the first to be surrendered of the Roman possessions, if we except some transient occupations, soon to be commemorated, in the East, not many traces now exist; but even these may suffice to mark the moulding power of Roman civilization. … The accents of the Roman tongue still echo in the valleys of Hungary and Wallachia; the descendants of the Dacians at the present day repudiate the appellation of Wallachs, or strangers, and still claim the name of Romúni."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 63.

DACIA: A. D. 270. Given up to the Goths.

See GOTHS: A. D. 268-270.

DACIA: 4th Century. Conquest by the Huns.

See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 376, and HUNS: A. D. 433-453.

DACIA: 6th Century. Occupied by the Avars.

See AVARS.

DACIA: Modern history.

See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.

—————DACIA: End—————

DACOITS.

See DAKOITS.

DACOTAS.

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

DÆGSASTAN, Battle of.

Fought, A. D. 603, between the Northumbrians and the Scots of Dalriada, the army of the latter being almost wholly destroyed.

DAGOBERT I., King of the Franks (Neustria), A. D. 628-638; (Austrasia), 622-633: (Burgundy), 628-638.

Dagobert II., King of the Franks (Austrasia), A. D. 673-678.

Dagobert III., King of the Franks (Neustria and Burgundy), A. D. 711-715.

DAHIS, The.

See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES, 14TH-19TH CENTURIES (SERVIA).

DAHLGREN, Admiral John A. Siege of Charleston.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JULY, and AUGUST-DECEMBER: S. CAROLINA).

DAHLGREN, Ulric. Raid to Richmond.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (FEBRUARY-MARCH: VIRGINIA).

DAKOITS. DAKOITEE.

The Dakoits of India, who were suppressed soon after the Thugs, were "robbers by profession, and even by birth." Dakoitee "was established upon a broad basis of hereditary caste, and was for the most part an organic state of society. 'I have always followed the trade of my ancestors, Dakoitee.' said Lukha, a noted Dakoit, who subsequently became approver. 'My ancestors held this profession before me,' said another, 'and we train boys in the same manner. In my caste if there were any honest persons, i. e., not robbers, they would be turned out.'" The hunting down of the Dakoits was begun in 1838, under the direction of Colonel Sleeman, who had already hunted down the Thugs.

J. W. Kaye, The Administration of the East India Co., part 3, chapter 3.

DAKOTA, North and South: A. D. 1803.- Embraced in the Louisiana Purchase.

See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.

DAKOTA: A. D. 1834-1838. Partly joined, in succession, to Michigan, Wisconsin, and Iowa Territories.

See WISCONSIN: A. D. 1805-1848.

DAKOTA: A. D. 1889. Admission to the Union.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.

DAKOTAS.

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

DALAI LAMA.

See LAMAS.

DALCASSIANS.

The people of North Munster figure prominently under that name in early Irish history.

T. Moore, History of Ireland, volume 2.

DALHOUSIE, Lord, The India administration of.

See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849; 1848-1856; and 1852.

DALMATIA.

"The narrow strip of land on the eastern side of the Hadriatic on which the name of Dalmatia has settled down has a history which is strikingly analogous to its scenery. … As the cultivation and civilization of the land lies in patches, as harbours and cities alternate with barren hills, so Dalmatia has played a part in history only by fits and starts. This fitful kind of history goes on from the days of Greek colonies and Illyrian piracy to the last war between Italy and Austria. But of continuous history, steadily influencing the course of the world's progress, Dalmatia has none to show."

E. A. Freeman, Subject and Neighbour Lands of Venice, pages 85-87.

ALSO IN: T. G. Jackson, Dalmatia, the Quarnero and Istria, chapters 1-2.

See, also, ILLYRICUM OF THE ROMANS; SALONA; and BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.

DALMATIA: 6th-7th Centuries: Slavonic occupation.

See SLAVONIC PEOPLES: 6TH AND 7TH CENTURIES; also, BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: 7TH CENTURY.

DALMATIA: A. D. 944. Beginning of Venetian Conquest.

See VENICE: A. D. 810-961.

DALMATIA: A. D. 1102. Conquest by the king of Hungary.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 972-1114.

DALMATIA: 14th Century. Conquest from the Venetians by Louis the Great of Hungary.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1301-1442.

DALMATIA: 16th Century. The Uscocks.

See USCOCKS.

DALMATIA: A. D. 1694-1696. Conquests by the Venetians.

See TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.

DALMATIA: A. D. 1699. Cession in great part to Venice by the Turks.

See HUNGARY: 1683-1699.

DALMATIA: A. D. 1797. Acquisition by Austria.

See, FRANCE: A. D. 1797 (MAY-OCTOBER).

DALMATIA: A. D. 1805. Ceded by Austria to the kingdom of Italy.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806.

DALMATIA: A. D. 1809. Incorporated in the Illyrian Provinces of Napoleon.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1809 (JULY-SEPTEMBER).

DALMATIA: A. D. 1814. Restored to Austria.

Austria recovered possession of Dalmatia under the arrangements of the Congress of Vienna.

—————DALMATIA: End—————

DALRIADA.

"A district forming the northeast corner of Ireland and comprising the north half of the county of Antrim, was called Dalriada. It appears to have been one of the earliest settlements of the Scots among the Picts of Ulster and to have derived its name from its supposed founder Cairbre, surnamed Righfhada or Riada. It lay exactly opposite the peninsula of Kintyre [Scotland] from whence it was separated by a part of the Irish channel of no greater breadth than about fourteen miles; and from this Irish district the colony of Scots, which was already Christian [fifth century] passed over and settled in Kintyre and in the island of Isla"—establishing a Scotch Dalriada.

W. F. Skene, Celtic Scotland, book 1, chapter 3.

For some account of the Scotch Dalriada,

See SCOTLAND: 7TH CENTURY.

{648}

DAMASCUS, Kingdom of.

The kingdom of Damascus, or "Aram of Damascus" as it was entitled, was formed soon after that Syrian region threw off the yoke of dependence which David and Solomon had imposed upon it. "Rezon, the outlaw, was its founder. Hader, or Hadad, and Rimmon, were the chief divinities of the race, and from them the line of its kings derived their names,—Hadad, Ben-hadad, Hadad-ezer, Tabrimmon."

Dean Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Jewish Church, lecture 33.

"Though frequently captured and plundered in succeeding centuries by Egypt and Assyria, neither of those nations was able to hold it long in subjection because of the other. It was probably a temporary repulse of the Assyrians, under Shalmaneser II., by the Damascene general Naaman to which reference is made in 2 Kings volume 1: 'by him the Lord had given deliverance unto Syria.' … After the great conquerors of Egypt and Asia, each in his day, had captured and plundered Damascus, it was taken without resistance by Parmenio for Alexander the Great [B. C. 333]. In it Pompey spent the proudest year of his life, 64 B. C., distributing at his pleasure the thrones of the East to the vassals of Rome. Cleopatra had received the city as a love-gift from Mark Antony, and Tiberius had bestowed it upon Herod the Great, before Aretas of Petra, the father of the princess whom Herod Antipas divorced for Herodias' sake, and the ruler whose officers watched the city to prevent the escape of Paul, made it, we know not how, a part of his dominions."

W. B. Wright, Ancient Cities, chapter 7.

DAMASCUS: A. D. 634. Conquest by the Arabs.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 632-639.

DAMASCUS: A. D. 661. Becomes the seat of the Caliphate.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 661.

DAMASCUS: A. D. 763. The Caliphate transferred to Bagdad.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 763.

DAMASCUS: A. D. 1148-1217. Capital of the Atabeg and the Ayoubite sultans.

See SALADIN, THE EMPIRE OF.

DAMASCUS: A. D. 1401. Sack and massacre by Timour.

See Timour.

DAMASCUS: A. D. 1832. Capture by Mehemed Ali.

See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.

—————DAMASCUS: End—————

DAMASUS II., Pope, A. D. 1048, July to August.

DAMIETTA: A. D. 1219-1220. Siege, capture and surrender by the Crusaders.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1216-1229.

DAMIETTA: A. D. 1249-1250. Capture and loss by Saint Louis.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1248-1254.

DAMIETTA: A. D. 1252. Destruction by the Mamelukes.

"Two years after the deliverance of the king [Saint Louis], and whilst he was still in Palestine, the Mamelukes, fearing a fresh invasion of the Franks, in order to prevent their enemies from taking Damietta and fortifying themselves in that city, entirely destroyed it. Some years after, as their fears were not yet removed, and the second crusade of Louis IX. spread fresh alarms throughout the East, the Egyptians caused immense heaps of stone to be cast into the mouth of the Nile, in order that the Christian fleets might not be able to sail up the river. Since that period a new Damietta has been built at a small distance from the site of the former city."

J. F. Michaud, History of the Crusades, book 14.

DAMNONIA.

See BRITAIN: 6TH CENTURY.

DAMNONII, OR DAMNII, The.

See DUMNONII.

DAMOISEL. DAMOISELLE. DONZELLO.

"In mediæval Latin 'domicella' is used for the unmarried daughter of a prince or noble, and 'domicellus,' contracted from 'domnicellus,' the diminutive of 'dominus,' for the son. These words are the forerunners of the old French 'dâmoisel' in the masculine, and 'damoiselle' in the feminine gender. Froissart calls Richard, prince of Wales, son of Edward: 'le jeune damoisil Richart.' In Romance the word is indifferently 'damoisel' and' 'danzel,' in Italian 'donzello.' All of these are evidently titles under the same notion as that of child and 'enfant,' of which the idea belongs to the knights of an earlier period."

R. T. Hampson, Origines Patriciæ, page 328.

DANAIDÆ, The.

See ARGOS. ARGOLIS.

DANCING PLAGUE.

See PLAGUE, A. D. 1374.

DANDRIDGE, Engagement at.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863-1864 (DECEMBER-APRIL: TENNESSEE-MISSISSIPPI).

DANEGELD, The.

"A tax of two shillings on the hide of land, originally levied as tribute to the Danes under Ethelred, but continued [even under the Plantagenets], like the income tax, as a convenient ordinary resource."

William Stubbs, The Early Plantagenets, page 53.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 979-1016.

DANELAGH, OR DANELAGA, OR DANELAU.

The district in England held by the Danes after their treaty with Alfred the Great, extending south to the Thames, the Lea and the Ouse; north to the Tyne; west of the mountain district of Yorkshire, Westmoreland and Cumberland. "Over all this region the traces of their colonization abound in the villages whose names end in by, the Scandinavian equivalent of the English tun or ham."

William Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 7, section 77.

See, also, ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880.

DANES AS VIKINGS.

See, also, NORMANS.—NORTHMEN.

DANES: In England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 855-880, 979-1016, and 1016-1042; also NORMANS: A. D. 787-880.

DANES: In Ireland.

See IRELAND: 9TH-10TH CENTURIES.

—————DANES: End—————

DANITES, The.

See MORMONISM: A. D. 1830-1846.

DANTE AND THE FACTIONS OF FLORENCE.

See FLORENCE: A. D. 1295-1300; and 1301-1313.

DANTON AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (OCTOBER), to 1793-1794 (NOVEMBER-JUNE).

DANTZIC: In the Hanseatic League.

See HANSA TOWNS.

DANTZIC: A. D. 1577. Submission to the king of Poland.

See POLAND: A. D. 1574-1590.

DANTZIC: A. D. 1793. Acquisition by Prussia.

See POLAND: A. D. 1793-1796.

DANTZIC: A. D. 1806-1807. Siege and capture by the French.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (FEBRUARY-JUNE).

DANTZIC: A. D. 1807. Declared a Free state.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (JUNE-JULY).

DANTZIC: A. D. 1813. Siege and capture by the Allies.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

{649}

DARA.

One of the capitals of the Parthian kings, the site of which has not been identified.

DARA, Battle of (A. D. 529).

See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.

DARDANIANS OF THE TROAD.

See TROJA; and ASIA MINOR: THE GREEK COLONIES; also, AMORITES.

DARIEN, The Isthmus of.

See PANAMA.

DARIEN: The Scottish colony.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1695-1699.

DARINI, The.

See IRELAND, TRIBES OF EARLY CELTIC INHABITANTS.

DARIUS, King of Persia, B. C. 521-486. Darius II., B. C. 425-405. Darius III. (Codomannus), B. C. 336-331.

DARK AGES, The.

The historical period, so-called, is nearly identical with that more commonly named the Middle Ages; but its duration may be properly considered as less by a century or two. From the 5th to the 13th century is a definition of the period which most historians would probably accept.

See MIDDLE AGES.

DARORIGUM. Modern Vannes.

See VENETI OF WESTERN GAUL.

DAR-UL-ISLAM AND DAR-UL-HARB.

"The Koran divides the world into two portions, the House of Islam, Dar-ul-Islam, and the House of War, Dar-ul-harb. It has generally been represented by Western writers on the institutes of Mahometanism and on the habits of Mahometan nations, that the Dar-ul-harb, the House of War, comprises all lands of the misbelievers. … There is even a widely-spread idea among superficial talkers and writers that the holy hostility, the Jehad [or Dhihad] of Mussulmans against non-Mussulmans is not limited to warfare between nation and nation; but that 'it is a part of the religion of every Mahometan to kill as many Christians as possible, and that by counting up a certain number killed, they think themselves secure of heaven.' But careful historical investigators, and statesmen long practically conversant with Mahometan populations have exposed the fallacy of such charges against those who hold the creed of Islam. … A country which is under Christian rulers, but in which Mahometans are allowed free profession of their faith, and peaceable exercise of their ritual, is not a portion of the House of War, of the Dar-ul-harb; and there is no religious duty of warfare, no Jehad, on the part of true Mussulmans against such a state. This has been of late years formally determined by the chief authorities in Mahometan law with respect to British India."

Sir E. S. Creasy, History of the Ottoman Turks, chapter 6.

DASTAGERD.

The favorite residence of the last great Persian king and conqueror, Chosroes (A. D. 590-628), was fixed at Dastagerd, or Artemita, sixty miles north of Ctesiphon, and east of the Tigris. His palaces and pleasure grounds were of extraordinary magnificence.

DASYUS.

See INDIA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

DAUPHINS OF FRANCE. DAUPHINE.

In 1349, Philip VI., or Philip de Valois, of France, acquired by purchase from Humbert II., count of Vienne, the sovereignty of the province of Dauphine. This principality became from that time the appanage of the eldest sons of the kings of France and gave them their peculiar name or title of the Dauphins. The title in question had been borne by the counts of Vienne (in Dauphiné), "on account of the dolphin which they carried upon their helmets and on their armorial bearings."

E. De Bonnechose, History of France, book 2, chapter 2, footnote.

ALSO IN: E. Smedley, History of France, part 1, chapter 9.

See, also, BURGUNDY: A. D. 1127-1378.

DAVENPORT, John, and the founding of New Haven Colony.

See CONNECTICUT: A. D. 1638, and 1639.

DAVID, King of Israel and Judah.

See JEWS: THE KINGDOMS OF ISRAEL AND JUDAH, and JERUSALEM: CONQUEST, &c.

DAVID I., King of Scotland, A. D. 1124-1153. David II., 1329-1370.

DAVIS, Jefferson. Election to the Presidency of the rebellious "Confederate States."

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (FEBRUARY).

Flight and capture.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (APRIL-MAY).

DAVOUT, Marshal, Campaigns of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1806 (OCTOBER); 1806-1807; 1807 (FEBRUARY-JUNE); also RUSSIA: A. D. 1812; and GERMANY: A. D. 1812-1813; 1813 (AUGUST), (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

DAY OF BARRICADES, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1584-1589.

DAY OF DUPES, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1630-1632.

DAY OF THE SECTIONS, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1795 (OCTOBER-DECEMBER).

DAYAKS, OR DYAKS, The.

See MALAYAN RACE.

DEAK, Francis, and the recovery of Hungarian nationality.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1866-1867.

DEAN FOREST.

The "Royal Forest of Dean," situated in the southwestern angle of the county of Gloucester, England, between the Severn and the Wye, is still so extensive that it covers some 23,000 acres, though much reduced from its original dimensions. Its oaks and its iron mines have played important parts in British history. The latter were worked by the Romans and still give employment to a large number of miners. The former were thought to be so essential to the naval power of England that the destruction of the Forest is said to have been one of the special duties prescribed to the Spanish Armada.

J. C. Brown, Forests of England.

DEANE, Silas, and the American transactions with Beaumarchais in France.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776-1778.

DEARBORN, General Henry, and the War of 1812.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-OCTOBER), (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER); A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).

DEBRECZIN, Battle of (1849).

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1848-1849.

DEBT, Laws concerning: Ancient Greek.

At Athens, in the time of Solon (6th century, B. C.) the Thetes—"the cultivating tenants, metayers and small proprietors of the country … are exhibited as weighed down by debts and dependence, and driven in large numbers out of a state of freedom into slavery—the whole mass of them (we are told) being in debt to the rich, who were proprietors of the greater part of the soil. They had either borrowed money for their own necessities, or they tilled the lands of the rich as dependent tenants, paying a stipulated portion of the produce, and in this capacity they were largely in arrear. {650} All the calamitous effects were here seen of the old harsh law of debtor and creditor—once prevalent in Greece, Italy, Asia, and a large portion of the world—combined with the recognition of slavery as a legitimate status, and of the right of one man to sell himself as well as that of another man to buy him. Every debtor unable to fulfil his contract was liable to be adjudged as the slave of his creditor, until he could find means either of paying it or working it out; and not only he himself, but his minor sons and unmarried daughters and sisters also, whom the law gave him the power of selling. The poor man thus borrowed upon the security of his body (to translate literally the Greek phrase) and upon that of the persons in his family. So severely had these oppressive contracts been enforced, that many debtors had been reduced from freedom to slavery in Attica itself,—many others had been sold for exportation,—and some had only hitherto preserved their own freedom by selling their children. … To their relief Solon's first measure, the memorable Seisachtheia, shaking off of burthens, was directed. The relief which it afforded was complete and immediate. It cancelled at once all those contracts in which the debtor had borrowed on the security either of his person or of his land: it forbade all future loans or contracts in which the person of the debtor was pledged as security: it deprived the creditor in future of all power to imprison, or enslave, or extort work from, his debtor, and confined him to an effective judgment at law authorizing the seizure of the property of the latter. It swept off all the numerous mortgage pillars from the landed properties in Attica, leaving the land free from all past claims. It liberated and restored to their full rights all debtors actually in slavery under previous legal adjudication; and it even provided the means (we do not know how) of re-purchasing in foreign lands, and bringing back to a renewed life of liberty in Attica, many insolvents who had been sold for exportation. And while Solon forbad every Athenian to pledge or sell his own person into slavery, he took a step farther in the same direction by forbidding him to pledge or sell his son, his daughter, or an unmarried sister under his tutelage—excepting only the case in which either of the latter might be detected in unchastity. … One thing is never to be forgotten in regard to this measure, combined with the concurrent amendments introduced by Solon in the law—it settled finally the question to which it referred. Never again do we hear of the law of debtor and creditor as disturbing Athenian tranquility. The general sentiment which grew up at Athens, under the Solonian money-law and under the democratical government, was one of high respect for the sanctity of contracts. … There can be little doubt that under the Solonian law, which enabled the creditor to seize the property of his debtor, but gave him no power over the person, the system of money-lending assumed a more beneficial character."

G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 11 (volume 3).

DEBT: Ancient Roman.

"The hold of the creditor was on the person of the debtor. The obligation of a debt was a tying up or binding, or bondage, of the person: the payment was a solution, a loosing or release of the person from that bondage. The property of the debtor was not a pledge for the debt. It could be made so by special agreement, though in the earliest law only by transferring it at once to the ownership of the creditor. Without such special agreement, the creditor whose debtor failed to pay could not touch his property. Even when the debtor had been prosecuted and condemned to pay, if he still failed, the creditor could not touch his property. He could seize his person—I speak now of the early law, in the first centuries of the republic—and after holding him in rigorous confinement for sixty days, with opportunities, however, either to pay himself or get somebody to pay for him, if payment still failed, he could sell him as a slave, or put him to death; if there were several creditors, they could cut his body into pieces and divide it among them. This extreme severity was afterward softened; but the principle remained long unchanged, that the hold of the creditor was on the person of the debtor. If the debtor obstinately and to the last refused to surrender his property, the creditor could not touch it."

J. Hadley, Introduction to Roman Law, lecture 10.

"During the first half of the Samnite war [B. C. 326-304], but in what year is uncertain, there was passed that famous law which prohibited personal slavery for debt. No creditor might for the future attach the person of his debtor, but he might only seize his property; and all those whose personal freedom was pledged for their debts (nexi), were released from their liability, if they could swear that they had property enough to meet their creditor's demands. It does not appear that this great alteration in the law was the work of any tribune, or that it arose out of any general or deliberate desire to soften the severity of the ancient practice. It was occasioned, we are told, by one scandalous instance of abuse of power on the part of a creditor. … But although personal slavery for debt was thus done away with, yet the consequences of insolvency were much more serious at Rome than they are in modern Europe. He whose property had once been made over to his creditors by the prætor's sentence, became, ipso facto, infamous; he lost his tribe, and with it all his political rights; and the forfeiture was irrevocable, even though he might afterwards pay his debts to the full; nor was it even in the power of the censors to replace him on the roll of citizens. So sacred a thing did credit appear in the eyes of the Romans."

T. Arnold, History of Rome, chapter 32 (volume 2).

DEBT: In England.

"Debt has been regarded as a crime by primitive society in every part of the world. In Palestine, as in Rome, the creditor had power over the person of the debtor, and misfortune was commonly treated with a severity which was not always awarded to crime."

[Leviticus 12 xxv., 39-41, and 2 Kings iv., 1]

{651}

"In this country [England] the same system was gradually introduced in Plantagenet times. The creditor, who had been previously entitled to seize the goods, or even the land of the debtor, was at last authorised to seize his person. In one sense, indeed, the English law was, in this respect, more irrational than the cruel code of the Jews, or the awful punishment [death and dismemberment or slavery—Gibbon, chapter 44] which the law of the Twelve Tables reserved for debtors. In Palestine the creditor was, at least, entitled to the service of the debtor or of his children, and the slave had the prospect of an Insolvent Debtor's Relief Act in the Sabbatical year. Even the law of the Twelve Tables allowed the creditors to sell the debtor into slavery, instead of resorting to the horrible alternative of partitioning his body. But in England the creditors had no such choice. They had nothing to do but to throw the debtor into prison; and by his imprisonment deprive themselves of the only chance of his earning money to pay their debts. A law of this kind was intolerable to a commercial people. The debtor languished in gaol, the creditor failed to obtain payment of his debt. When trade increased in Tudor times, the wits of legislators were exercised in devising some expedient for satisfying the creditor without imprisoning the debtor. The Chancellor was authorised to appoint commissioners empowered to divide the debtor's property among the creditors. By an Act of Anne the debtor who complied with the law was released from further liability, and was practically enabled to commence life anew. In 1826, a debtor was allowed to procure his own bankruptcy; while in 1831, commissioners were appointed to carry out the arrangements which had been previously conducted under the Court of Chancery. The law of bankruptcy which was thus gradually developed by the legislation of three centuries only applied to persons in trade. No one who was not a trader could become a bankrupt; the ordinary debtor became as a matter of course an insolvent, and passed under the insolvent laws. The statutes, moreover, omitted to give any very plain definition of a trader. The distinction between trader and non-trader which had been gradually drawn by the Courts was not based on any very clear principle. A person who made bricks on his own estate of his own clay was not a trader; but a person who bought the clay and then made the bricks was a trader. Farmers, again, were exempt from the bankruptcy law; but farmers who purchased cattle for sale at a profit were liable to it. The possibility, moreover, of a trader being made a bankrupt depended on the size of his business. A petitioning creditor in bankruptcy was required to be a person to whom at least £100 was due; if two persons petitioned, their debts were required to amount to £150; if more than two persons petitioned, to £200. A small shopkeeper, therefore, who could not hope to obtain credit for £200, £150, or £100, could not become a bankrupt; he was forced to become an insolvent. The treatment of the insolvent was wholly different from that of the bankrupt. The bankruptcy law was founded on the principle that the goods and not the person of the debtor should be liable for the debt; the insolvency law enabled the person of the debtor to be seized, but provided no machinery for obtaining his goods. … Up to 1838 the first step in insolvency was the arrest of the debtor. Any person who made a deposition on oath that some other person was in debt to him, could obtain his arrest on what was known as 'mesne process.' The oath might possibly be untrue; the debt might not be due; the warrant issued on the sworn deposition as a matter of course. But, in addition to the imprisonment on mesne process, the insolvent could be imprisoned for a further period on what was known as 'final process.' Imprisonment on mesne process was the course which the creditor took to prevent the flight of the debtor; imprisonment on final process was the punishment which the Court awarded to the crime of debt. Such a system would have been bad enough if the debtors' prisons had been well managed. The actual condition of these prisons almost exceeds belief. Dickens, indeed, has made the story of a debtor's imprisonment in the Marshalsea familiar to a world of readers. … The Act of 1813 had done something to mitigate the misery which the law occasioned. The Court which was constituted by it released 50,000 debtors in 13 years. But large numbers of persons were still detained in prison for debt. In 1827 nearly 6,000 persons were committed in London alone for debt. The Common Law Commissioners, reporting in 1830, declared that the loud and general complaints of the law of insolvency were well founded; and Cottenham, in 1838, introduced a bill to abolish imprisonment for debt in all cases. The Lords were not prepared for so complete a remedy; they declined to abolish imprisonment on final process, or to exempt from imprisonment on mesne process, persons who owed more than £20, and who were about to leave the country. Cottenham, disappointed at these amendments, decided on strengthening his own hands by instituting a fresh inquiry. He appointed a commission in 1839, which reported in 1840, and which recommended the abolition of imprisonment on final process, and the union of bankruptcy and insolvency. In 1841, in 1842, in 1843, and in 1844 Cottenham introduced bills to carry out this report. The bills of 1841, 1842, and 1843 were lost. The bill of 1844 was not much more successful. Brougham declared that debtors who refused to disclose their property, who refused to answer questions about it, who refused to give it up, or who fraudulently made away with it, as well as debtors who had been guilty of gross extravagance, deserved imprisonment. He introduced an alternative bill giving the Cou rt discretionary power to imprison them. The Lords, bewildered by the contrary counsels of two such great lawyers as Cottenham and Brougham, decided on referring both bills to one Select Committee. The Committee preferred Brougham's bill, amended it, and returned it to the House. This bill became ultimately law. It enabled both private debtors and traders whose debts amounted to less than the sums named in the Bankruptcy Acts to become bankrupts; and it abolished Imprisonment in all cases where the debt did not exceed £20."

S. Walpole, History of England from 1815, chapter 17 (volume 4).

DEBT: In the United States.

"In New York, by the act of April 26, 1831, c. 300, and which went into operation on March 1st, 1832, arrest and imprisonment on civil process at law, and on execution in equity founded upon contract, were abolished. The provision under the act was not to apply to any person who should have been a non-resident of the state for a month preceding (and even this exception was abolished by the act of April 25th, 1840); nor to proceedings as for a contempt to enforce civil remedies; nor to actions for fines and penalties; nor to suits founded in torts … nor on promises to marry; or for moneys collected by any public officer; or for misconduct or neglect in office, or in any professional employment. {652} The plaintiff, however, in any suit, or upon any judgment or decree, may apply to a judge for a warrant to arrest the defendant, upon affidavit stating a debt or demand due, to more than $50; and that the defendant is about to remove property out of the jurisdiction of the court, with intent to defraud his creditors; or that he has property or rights in action which he fraudulently conceals; or public or corporate stock, money, or evidences of debt, which he unjustly refuses to apply to the payment of the judgment or decree in favor of the plaintiff; or that he has assigned, or is about to assign or dispose of his property, with intent to defraud his creditors; or has fraudulently contracted the debt, or incurred the obligation respecting which the suit is brought. If the judge shall be satisfied, on due examination, of the truth of the charge, he is to commit the debtor to jail, unless he complies with certain prescribed conditions or some one of them, and which are calculated for the security of the plaintiff's claim. Nor is any execution against the body to be issued on justices' judgments, except in cases essentially the same with those above stated. … By the New York act of 1846, c. 150, the defendant is liable for imprisonment as in actions for wrong, if he be sued and judgment pass against him in actions on contracts for moneys received by him (and it applies to all male persons) in a fiduciary character. The legislature of Massachusetts, in 1834 and 1842, essentially abolished arrest and imprisonment for debt, unless on proof that the debtor was about to abscond. As early as 1790, the constitution of Pennsylvania established, as a fundamental principle, that debtors should not be continued in prison after surrender of their estates in the mode to be prescribed by law, unless in cases of a strong presumption of fraud. In February, 1819, the legislature of that state exempted women from arrest and imprisonment for debt; and this provision as to women was afterwards applied in New York to all civil actions founded upon contract. … Females were first exempted from imprisonment for debt in Louisiana and Mississippi; and imprisonment for debt, in all cases free from fraud, is now abolished in each of those states. The commissioners in Pennsylvania, in their report on the Civil Code, in January, 1835, recommended that there be no arrest of the body of the debtor on mesne process, without an affidavit of the debt, and that the defendant was a non-resident, or about to depart without leaving sufficient property, except in cases of force, fraud, or deceit, verified by affidavit. This suggestion was carried into effect by the act of the legislature of Pennsylvania of July 12th, 1842, entitled 'An Act to abolish imprisonment for debt, and to punish fraudulent debtors.' In New Hampshire, imprisonment on mesne process and execution for debt existed under certain qualifications, until December 23, 1840, when it was abolished by statute, in cases of contract and debts accruing after the first of March, 1841. In Vermont, imprisonment for debt, on contracts made after first January, 1839, is abolished, as to resident citizens, unless there be evidence that they are about to abscond with their property; so, also, the exception in Mississippi applies to cases of torts, frauds, and meditated concealment, or fraudulent disposition of property."

J. Kent, Commentaries on American Law; edited by O. W. Holmes, Jr., volume 2 (foot-note).

"In many states the Constitution provides (A) that there shall be no imprisonment for debt: Indiana. C. 1, 22; Minnesota. C. I, 12; Kansas. C. B. Rts. 16; Maryland. C. 3, 38; North Carolina. C. 1, 16; Missouri. C. 2. 16; Texas. C. 1, 18; Oregon. C. 1, 19; Nevada. C. 1, 14; South Carolina. C. 1, 20; Georgia. C. 1, 1, 21; Alabama. C. 1, 21; Mississippi. C. 1, 11; Florida. C. Decl'n Rts. 15.

(B) That there shall be no imprisonment for debt (1) in any civil action on mesne or final process, in seven states: Ohio. C. 1, 15; Iowa. C. 1, 19; Nebraska. C. 1, 20; Tennessee. C. 1, 18; Arkansas. C. 2, 16; California. C. 1, 15; Oregon. C. 1, 15; Arizona. B. Uts. 18.

(2) In any action or judgment founded upon contract, in three states: New Jersey. C. 1, 17; Michigan. C. 6, 33; Wisconsin. C. 1, 16.

(C) In six, that there shall be no person imprisoned for debt in any civil action when he has delivered up his property for the benefit of his creditors in the manner prescribed by law; Vermont. C. 2, 33; Rhode Island. C. 1, 11; Pennsylvania. C. 1, 16; Illinois. C. 2, 12; Kentucky. C. 13, 19; Colorado. C. 2, 12.

… But the above principles are subject to the following exceptions in the several states respectively:

(1) a debtor may be imprisoned in criminal actions: Tennessee.

So (2) for the non-payment of fines or penalties imposed by law: Missouri.

So (3) generally, in civil or criminal actions, for fraud: Vermont, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, North Carolina, Kentucky, Arkansas, California, Oregon, Nevada, Colorado, South Carolina, Florida, Arizona.

And so, in two, the legislature has power to provide for the punishment of fraud and for reaching property of the debtor concealed from his creditors: Georgia. C. 1, 2, 6; Louisiana. C. 223.

So (4) absconding debtors may be imprisoned: Oregon. Or debtors (5) in cases of libel or slander: Nevada. (6) In civil cases of tort generally: California, Colorado. (7) In cases of malicious mischief: California. (8) Or of breach of trust: Michigan, Arizona. (9) Or of moneys collected by public officers, or in any professional employment: Michigan, Arizona."

F. J. Stimson, American Statute Law: Digest of Constitutions and Civil Public Statutes of all the States and Territories relating to Persons and Property, in force January 1, 1886, art. 8.

—————DEBT: End—————

DÉCADI OF THE FRENCH REPUBLICAN CALENDAR.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (OCTOBER). The new republican calendar.

DECAMISADOS, The.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1814-1827.

DECATUR, Commodore Stephen. Burning of the "Philadelphia."

See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1803-1805.

In the War of 1812.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812-1813; 1814.

DECCAN, The.

See INDIA: THE NAME; and IMMIGRATION AND CONQUESTS OF THE ARYAS.

DECELIAN WAR, The.

See GREECE: B. C. 413.

DECEMVIRS, The.

See ROME: B. C. 451-449.

DECIUS: Roman Emperor. A. D. 249-251.

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE (American).

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776 (JANUARY-JUNE), and (JULY); also, INDEPENDENCE HALL.

{653}

DECLARATION OF PARIS, The.

"At the Congress of Paris in 1856, subsequently to the conclusion of the treaty, which ended the Crimean war [see RUSSIA: A. D. 1854-1856], a declaration of principles was signed on April 16th, by the plenipotentiaries of all the powers represented there, which contained four articles: 'First. Privateering is and remains abolished. Second, The neutral flag covers enemies' goods, with the exception of contraband of war. Third, Neutral goods, except of contraband of war, are not liable to capture under an enemy's flag. Fourth, Blockades, to be binding, must be effective—that is to say, maintained by a force really sufficient to prevent access to the coast of the enemy.' The adherence of other powers was requested to these principles," and all joined in signing it except the United States, Spain, and Mexico. The objection on the part of the United States was stated in a circular letter by Mr. Marcy, then Secretary of State, who "maintained that the right to resort to privateers is as incontestable as any other right appertaining to belligerents; and reasoned that the effect of the declaration would be to increase the maritime preponderance of Great Britain and France, without even benefiting the general cause of civilization; while, if public ships retained the right of capturing private property, the United States, which had at that time a large mercantile marine and a comparatively small navy, would be deprived of all means of retaliation. … The President proposes, therefore [wrote Mr. Marcy] to add to the first proposition contained in the declaration of the Congress of Paris the following words: 'and that the private property of the subjects and citizens of a belligerent on the high seas shall be exempted from seizure by public armed vessels of the other belligerent, except it be contraband.' … Among the minor states of Europe there was complete unanimity and a general readiness to accept our amendment to the rules"; but England opposed, and the offered amendment was subsequently withdrawn. "Events … have shown that … our refusal to accept the Declaration of Paris has brought the world nearer to the principles which we proposed, which became known as the 'Marcy amendment for the abolition of war against private property on the seas.'"

E. Schuyler, American Diplomacy, chapter 7.

ALSO IN: F. Wharton, Digest of the International law of the United States, chapter 17, section 342 (volume 3).

H. Adams, Historical Essays, chapter 6.

See, also, PRIVATEERS.

DECLARATION OF RIGHTS.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1689 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY).

DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN, French Revolutionary.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1789 (AUGUST-OCTOBER).

DECLARATORY ACT, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1766.

DECRETA, Roman imperial.

See CORPUS JURIS CIVILIS.

DECRETALS, The False.

See PAPACY: A. D. 829-847.

DECUMÆ.

See VECTIGAL.

DECUMATES LAND.

See AGRI DECUMATES, also ALEMANNI; and SUEVI.

DECURIONES.

See CURIA, MUNICIPAL, OF THE LATER ROMAN EMPIRE.

DEDITITIUS. COLONUS. SERVUS.

"The poor Provincial [of the provinces of the Roman empire at the time of the breaking up in the fifth century] who could not fly to the Goths because his whole property was in land, hunted to despair by the tax-gatherer, would transfer that land to some wealthy neighbour, apparently on condition of receiving a small life annuity out of it. He was then called the Dedititius (or Surrenderer) of the new owner, towards whom he stood in a position of a certain degree of dependence. Not yet, however, were his sorrows or those of his family at an end, for the tax-gatherer still regarded him as responsible for his land. … On his death his sons, who had utterly lost their paternal inheritance, and still found themselves confronted with the claim for taxes, were obviously without resource. The next stage of the process accordingly was that they abdicated the position of free citizens and implored the great man to accept them as Coloni, a class of labourers, half-free, half-enslaved, who may perhaps with sufficient accuracy be compared to the serfs 'adscripti glebæ' of the middle ages. … Before long they became mere slaves (Servi) without a shadow of right or claim against their new lords."

T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, book 1, chapter 10.

With the "increase of great estates and simultaneous increase in the number of slaves (so many Goths were made slaves by Claudius [A. D. 268-270], to give one instance, that there was not a district without them), the small proprietors could no longer maintain the fruitless struggle, and, as a class, wholly disappeared. Some, no doubt, became soldiers; others crowded into the already overflowing towns; while others voluntarily resigned their freedom, attached themselves to the land of some rich proprietor, and became his villeins, or coloni. But this was not the chief means by which this class was formed and increased. … After a successful war these serfs were given … to landed proprietors without payment; and in this way not only was the class of free peasants diminished or altogether destroyed—a happier result—the slave system was directly attacked. The coloni themselves were not slaves. The codes directly distinguish them from slaves, and in several imperial constitutions they are caned 'ingenui.' They could contract a legal marriage and could hold property. … On the other hand, the coloni were like slaves in that they were liable to personal punishment. … A colonus was indissolubly attached to the land, and could not get quit of the tie, even by enlisting as a soldier. The proprietor could sell him with the estate, but had no power whatever of selling him without it; and if he sold the estate, he was compelled to sell the coloni along with it. … The position of these villeins was a very miserable one. … These coloni in Gaul, combined together, were joined by the free peasants still left [A. D. 287], whose lot was not less wretched than their own, and forming into numerous bands, spread themselves over the country to pillage and destroy. They were called Bagaudæ, from a Celtic word meaning a mob or riotous assembly; and under this name recur often in the course of the next century both in Gaul and Spain."

W. T. Arnold, The Roman System of Provincial Administration, chapter 4.

DEEMSTERS.

See MANX KINGDOM, THE.

DEFENDERS.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1784.

DEFENESTRATION AT PRAGUE, The.

See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1611-1618.

DEFTERDARS.

See SUBLIME PORTE.

DEICOLÆ, The.

See CULDEES.

DEIRA, The kingdom of.

One of the kingdoms of the Angles, covering what is now called the East Riding of Yorkshire, with some territory beyond it. Sometimes it was united with the kingdom of Bernicia, north of it, to form the greater kingdom of Northumbria.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 547-633.

{654}

DEKARCHIES.

See SPARTA: B. C. 404-403.

DEKELEIA. DEKELEIAN WAR.

See GREECE: B. C. 413.

DELATION. DELATORS.

Under the empire, there was soon bred at Rome an infamous class of men who bore a certain resemblance—with significant contrasts likewise—to the sycophants of Athens. They were known as delators, and their occupation was delation. "The delator was properly one who gave notice to the fiscal officers of moneys that had become due to the treasury of the state, or more strictly to the emperor's fiscus." But the title was extended to informers generally, who dragged their fellow-citizens before the tribunals for alleged violations of law. Augustus made delation a profession by attaching rewards to the information given against transgressors of his marriage laws. Under the successor of Augustus, the sullen and suspicious Tiberius, delation received its greatest encouragement and development. "According to the spirit of Roman criminal procedure, the informer and the pleader were one and the same person. There was no public accuser, … but the spy who discovered the delinquency was himself the man to demand of the senate, the prætor or the judge, an opportunity of proving it by his own eloquence and ingenuity. The odium of prosecution was thus removed from the government to the private delator."

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 44.

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

DELAWARE BAY: A. D. 1609. Discovered by Henry Hudson.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1609.

DELAWARE BAY: The error perpetuated in its name.

"Almost every writer on American history that I have met with appears to have taken pains to perpetuate the stereotyped error that 'Lord Delawarr touched at this bay in his passage to Virginia in 1610.' … Lord Delawarr himself, in his letter of the 7th of July, 1610, giving an account of his voyage to Virginia, not only makes no mention of that bay, or of his approaching it, but expressly speaks of his first reaching the American coast on the '6th of June, at what time we made land to the southward of our harbor, the Chesiopiock Bay.' The first European who is really known to have entered the bay, after Hudson, was Capt. Samuel Argall [July 1610]. … The name of Lord Delawarr, however, seems to have been given to the bay soon afterwards by the Virginians."

J. R. Brodhead, History of the State of New York, volume 1, appendix, note D.

—————DELAWARE BAY: End—————

DELAWARE: A. D. 1629-1631. The Dutch occupancy and first settlement.

The first attempt at settlement on the Delaware was made by the Dutch, who claimed the country in right of Hudson's discovery and Mey's exploration of the Bay, notwithstanding the broad English claim, which covered the whole of it as part of an indefinite Virginia. In 1629, pursuant to the patroon ordinance of the Dutch West India Company, which opened New Netherland territory to private purchasers, "Samuel Godyn and Samuel Blommaert, both directors of the Amsterdam Chamber, bargained with the natives for the soil from Cape Henlopen to the mouth of Delaware river; in July, 1630, this purchase of an estate more than thirty miles long was ratified at Fort Amsterdam by Minuit [then Governor of New Netherland] and his council. It is the oldest deed for land in Delaware, and comprises the water-line of the two southern counties of that state. … A company was soon formed to colonize the tract acquired by Godyn and Blommaert. The first settlement in Delaware, older than any in Pennsylvania, was undertaken by a company, of which Godyn, Van Rensselaer, Blommaert, the historian De Laet, and a new partner, David Petersen de Vries, were members. By joint enterprise, in December, 1630, a ship of 18 guns, commanded by Pieter Heyes, and laden with emigrants, store of seeds, cattle and agricultural implements, embarked from the Texel, partly to cover the southern shore of Delaware Bay with fields of wheat and tobacco, and partly for a whale fishery on the coast. … Early in the spring of 1631, the … vessel reached its destination, and just within Cape Henlopen, on Lewes Creek, planted a colony of more than thirty souls. The superintendence of the settlement was intrusted to Gillis Hosset. A little fort was built and well beset with palisades: the arms of Holland were affixed to a pillar; the country received the name Swaanendael; the water that of Godyn's Bay. The voyage of Heyes was the cradling of a state. That Delaware exists as a separate commonwealth is due to this colony. According to English rule, occupancy was necessary to complete a title to the wilderness; and the Dutch now occupied Delaware. On the 5th of May, Heyes and Hosset, in behalf of Godyn and Blommaert, made a further purchase from Indian chiefs of the opposite coast of Cape May, for twelve miles on the bay, on the sea, and in the interior; and, in June, this sale of a tract twelve miles square was formally attested at Manhattan. Animated by the courage of Godyn, the patroons of Swaanendael fitted out a second expedition under the command of De Vries. But, before he set sail, news was received of the destruction of the fort, and the murder of its people. Hasset, the commandant, had caused the death of an Indian chief; and the revenge of the savages was not appeased till not one of the emigrants remained alive. De Vries, on his arrival, found only the ruins of the house and its palisades, half consumed by fire, and here and there the bones of the colonists."

G. Bancroft, History of the United States, part 2, chapter 13 (volume 1).

ALSO IN: J. R. Brodhead, History of the State of New York, volume 1, chapter 7.

DELAWARE: A. D. 1632. Embraced in the Maryland grant to Lord Baltimore.

See MARYLAND: A. D. 1632.

DELAWARE: A. D. 1634. Embraced in the Palatine grant of New Albion.

See NEW ALBION.

DELAWARE: A. D. 1638-1640. The planting of the Swedish colony.

"William Usselinx, a distinguished merchant in Stockholm, was the first to propose to the Swedish government a scheme for planting a colony in America. He was a native of Antwerp, and had resided in Spain, Portugal and the Azores, at a time when the spirit of foreign adventure pervaded every class of society. … In the year 1624 he proposed to the Swedish monarch, Gustavus Adolphus, a plan for the organization of a trading company, to extend its operations to Asia, Africa, America and Terra Magellanica. … {655} Whether Usselinx had ever been in America is uncertain, but he had, soon after the organization of the Dutch West India Company, some connection with it, and by this and other means was able to give ample information in relation to the country bordering on the Delaware, its soil, climate, and productions. … His plan and contract were translated into the Swedish language by Schrader, the royal interpreter, and published to the nation, with an address strongly appealing both to their piety and their love of gain. The king recommended it to the States, and an edict dated at Stockholm, July 2d, 1626, was issued by royal authority, in which people of all ranks were invited to encourage the project and support the Company. Books were opened for subscription to the stock … and Gustavus pledged the royal treasure for its support to the amount of 400,000 dollars. … The work was ripe for execution, when the German war [the Thirty Years War], and afterwards the king's death, prevented it, and rendered the fair prospect fruitless. … The next attempt on the part of the Swedes to plant a colony in America was more successful. But there has been much difference among historians in relation to the period when that settlement was made. … It is owing to the preservation, among the Dutch records at Albany, of an official protest issued by Kieft, the Governor at New Amsterdam, that we do certainly know the Swedes were here in the spring of 1638. Peter Minuit, who conducted to our shore the first Swedish colony, had been Commercial Agent, and Director General of the Dutch West India Company, and Governor of the New Netherlands. … At this time Christina, the infant daughter of Gustavus Adolphus, had ascended the throne of Sweden. … Under the direction of Oxenstiern, the celebrated chancellor of Sweden, whose wisdom and virtue have shed a glory on the age in which he lived, the patent which had been granted in the reign of Gustavus to the company formed under the influence of Usselinx was renewed, and its privileges extended to the citizens of Germany. Minuit, being now out of employment, and probably deeming himself injured by the conduct of the Dutch Company [which had displaced him from the governorship of the New Netherlands, through the influence of the patroons, and appointed Wouter Van Twiller, a clerk, to succeed him], had determined to offer his services to the crown of Sweden. … Minuit laid before the chancellor a plan of procedure, urged a settlement on the Delaware, and offered to conduct the enterprise. Oxenstiern represented the case to the queen … and Minuit was commissioned to command and direct the expedition."