Part 2 — CHAPTER IV. Concerning the infallible teaching of the Roman Pontiff: (continued 39)

R. H. Thurston, History of the Growth of the Steam Engine, chapter 5.

ALSO IN: R. H. Thurston, Robert Fulton.

C. D. Colden, Life of Robert Fulton.

T. Westcott, Life of John Fitch.

STEAM NAVIGATION: On the Ocean.

"In 1819 the Atlantic was first crossed by a ship using steam. This was the Savannah, of 380 tons, launched at Corlear's Hook, New York, August 22, 1818. She was built to ply between New York and Savannah as a sailing packet. She was however, purchased by Savannah merchants [by a Mr. Scarborough] and fitted with steam machinery, the paddle-wheels being constructed to fold up and be laid upon the deck when not in use, her shaft also having a joint for that purpose. She left Savannah on the 26th of May, and reached Liverpool in 25 days, using steam 18 days. The log book, still preserved, notes several times taking the wheels in on deck in thirty minutes. In August she left Liverpool for Cronstadt. An effort was made to sell her to Russia, which failed. She sailed for Savannah, touching at Copenhagen and Arendal, and arrived in 53 days. Her machinery later was taken out, and she resumed her original character as a sailing packet, and ended her days by being wrecked on the south coast of Long Island. But steam-power had by 1830 grown large enough to strike out more boldly. The Savannah's effort was an attempt in which steam was only an auxiliary, and one, too, of a not very powerful kind. Our coastwise steamers, as well as those employed in Great Britain, as also the voyage of the Enterprise to Calcutta in 1825 (though she took 113 days in doing it), had settled the possibility of the use of steam at sea, and the question had now become whether a ship could be built to cross the Atlantic depending entirely on her steam power. It had become wholly a question of fuel consumption. The Savannah, it may be said, used pitch-pine on her outward voyage, and wood was for a very long time the chief fuel for steaming purposes in America. … In 1836, under the influence of Brunel's bold genius, the Great Western Steamship Company was founded as an off-shoot of the Great Western Railway, whose terminus was then Bristol." The Company's first ship was the Great Western. She was of unprecedented size—236 feet length and 35 feet 4 inches breadth—"determined on by Brunei as being necessary for the requisite power and coal carrying capacity. … The Great Western was launched on July 19, 1837, and was towed from Bristol to the Thames to receive her machinery, where she was the wonder of London. She left for Bristol on March 31, 1838; and arrived, after having had a serious fire on board, on April 2d. In the meantime others had been struck with the possibility of steaming to New York; and a company, of which the moving spirit was Mr. J. Laird, of Birkenhead, purchased the Sirius, of 700 tons, employed between London and Cork, and prepared her for a voyage to New York. The completion of the Great Western was consequently hastened; and she left Bristol on Sunday, April 8, 1838, at 10 A. M. with 7 passengers on board, and reached New York on Monday, the 23d, the afternoon of the same day with the Sirius, which had left Cork Harbor (where she had touched en route from London) four days before the Great Western had left Bristol. The latter still had nearly 200 tons of coal, of the total of 800, on board on arrival; the Sirius had consumed her whole supply, and was barely able to make harbor. It is needless to speak of the reception of these two ships at New York. It was an event which stirred the whole country, and with reason; it had practically, at one stroke, reduced the breadth of the Atlantic by half. … The Great Western started on her return voyage, May 7th, with 66 passengers. This was made in 14 days, though one was lost by a stoppage at sea." Within a few years following several steamers were placed in the transatlantic trade, among them the Royal William, the British Queen, the President, the Liverpool, and the Great Britain, the latter a screw steamer, built of iron and put afloat by the Great Western Company. In 1840 the long famous Cunard line was founded by Mr. Samuel Cunard, of Halifax, Nova Scotia, in company with Mr. George Burns of Glasgow and Mr. David McIver of Liverpool. The screw propeller (taking the place of the paddle-wheel), which made its first appearance in ocean navigation with the Great Britain, obtained its practical introduction through the labors of the great Swedish engineer, John Ericsson, though an idea of it had been in the minds of many inventors for a century and a half. Ericsson, induced by Francis B. Ogden and Captain Robert F. Stockton, United States Navy, came to the United States in 1839, and the introduction of the screw-propeller occurred rapidly after that date, the paddle-wheel disappearing from ocean steamships first, and more slowly from the steamers engaged in lake and river navigation.

F. E. Chadwick, The Development of the Steamship ("Ocean Steamships," chapter 1).

ALSO IN: A. J. Maginnis, The Atlantic Ferry, chapters 1-2.

R. H. Thurston, History of the Growth of the Steam Engine, chapter 5.

W. C. Church, Life of Ericsson, chapters 6-10 (volume 1).

{3034}

STEDMAN, FORT, The capture of.

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

STEEL BOYS.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1760-1798.

STEEL YARD, The Association of the.

See HANSA TOWNS.

STEENWYK: Siege and relief (1581).

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581.

STEIN, Prussian reform measures of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1806 (JANUARY-AUGUST); 1807-1808; and 1808.

STEINKIRK, OR STEENKERKE, Battle of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1692.

STELA, OR STELE.

"This is one of the words most frequently used in Egyptian archæology, because it designates a monument which is found in hundreds. The stela is a rectangular fiat stone generally rounded at the summit, and it was made use of by the Egyptians for all sorts of inscriptions. These stelæ were, generally speaking, used for epitaphs; they also served, however, to transcribe texts which were to be preserved or exhibited to the public, and in this latter case the stela became a sort of monumental placard."

A. Mariette, Monuments of Upper Egypt, page 29, foot-note.

STENAY: A. D. 1654. Siege and capture by the French.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1653-1656.

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

See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.

STEPHANUS, OR ESTIENNE, Robert and Henry, The Press of.

See PRINTING &c.: A. D. 1496-1598.

STEPHEN (of Blois), King of England, A. D. 1135-1154.

Stephen I., Pope, A. D. 752, March.

Stephen I. (called Saint), King of Hungary, 997-1038.

Stephen II., Pope, 752-757.

Stephen II., King of Hungary, 1114-1131.

Stephen III., Pope, 768-772.

Stephen III. and IV. (in rivalry), Kings of Hungary, 1161-1173.

Stephen IV., Pope, 816-817.

Stephen V., Pope, 885-891.

Stephen V., King of Hungary, 1270-1272.

Stephen VI., Pope, 896-897.

Stephen VII., Pope, 929-931.

Stephen VIII., Pope, 939-942.

Stephen IX., Pope, 1057-1058.

Stephen Batory, King of Poland, 1575-1586.

Stephen Dushan, The Empire of.

See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: A. D. 1341-1356.

STEPHENS, Alexander H. Opposition to Secession.

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

Election to the Vice-Presidency of the rebellious "Confederate States."

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

The Hampton Roads Peace Conference.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (FEBRUARY).

STEPHENSON, George, and the beginning of railroads.

See STEAM LOCOMOTION.

STETTIN: A. D. 1630. Occupied by Gustavus Adolphus and his Swedes.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1630-1631.

STETTIN: A. D. 1648. Cession to Sweden in the Peace of Westphalia.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1648.

STETTIN: A. D. 1677. Siege and capture by the Elector of Brandenburg.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1644-1697.

STETTIN: A. D. 1720. Cession by Sweden to Prussia.

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

STEUBEN, Baron, in the Virginia campaign of the American Revolution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781; 1781 (JANUARY-MAY).

STEVENS, Thaddeus, and the Reconstruction Committee.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865-1866 (DECEMBER-APRIL), to 1868-1870.

STEWART, Captain Charles, and the frigate Constitution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1814.

STEWART DYNASTY, The.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1370; and ENGLAND: A. D. 1603, to 1688.

STILICHO, Ministry of.

See ROME: A. D. 394-395, to 404-408.

STILLWATER, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1777 (JULY-OCTOBER).

STIRLING, Earl of, The American grant to.

See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1621-1631.

STIRLING, General Lord, and the American Revolution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1776 (AUGUST).

STIRLING, Wallace's victory at (1297).

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1290-1305.

STIRLING CASTLE, Sieges of.

Stirling Castle was taken in 1303 by Edward I. of England, after a three months' siege, which he conducted in person and which he looked upon as his proudest military achievement. Eleven years later, in 1314, it was besieged and recaptured by the Scots, under Edward Bruce, and it was in a desperate attempt of the English to relieve the castle at that time that the battle of Bannockburn was fought.

J. H. Burton, History of Scotland, chapters 22-23 (volume 2).

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1314.

STOA, The.

"We have repeatedly mentioned the stoa or colonnade in connection with other buildings; we now have to consider it as a separate artistic erection [in ancient Greek cities]. … The stoa, as an independent building, occurs both as an ornament of streets and squares, and as a convenient locality for walks and public meetings. Its simplest form is that of a colonnade bounded by a wall. This back wall offers a splendid surface for decorations, and is frequently adorned with pictures. A stoa in the market-place of Athens contained illustrations of the battle of Œnoë, of the fight of the Athenians against the Amazons, of the destruction of Troy and of the battle of Marathon. … The progress from this simple form to a further extension is on a principle somewhat analogous to what we have observed in the temple; that is, a row of columns was added on the other side of the wall. The result was a double colonnade, … as a specimen of which, Pausanias mentions the Korkyraic stoa near the market place of Elis. As important we notice Pausanias's remark that this stoa 'contained in the middle, not columns, but a wall'; which shows that most of the double colonnades contained columns in the centre as props of the roof."

E. Guhl and W. Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans, part 1, section 27.

{3035}

STOCKACH, Battle of (1799).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799 (AUGUST-APRIL).

STOCKBRIDGE INDIANS.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: STOCKBRIDGE INDIANS.

STOCKHOLM: A. D. 1471. Battle of the Brunkeberg.

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

STOCKHOLM: A. D. 1521-1523. Siege by Gustavus Vasa.

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

STOCKHOLM: A. D. 1612. Attacked by the Danes.

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

STOCKHOLM, Treaty of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1812-1813.

STOCKTON AND DARLINGTON RAIL WAY.

See STEAM LOCOMOTION ON LAND.

STOLA, The.

"The Roman ladies wore, by way of under garment, a long tunic descending to the feet, and more particularly denominated 'stola.' This vestment assumed all the variety of modification displayed in the corresponding attire of the Grecian females. Over the stola, they also adopted the Grecian peplum, under the name of palla."

T. Hope, Costume of the Ancients, volume 1, page 38.

STOLHOFEN, The breaking of the lines of (1707).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1706-1711.

STONE AGE. BRONZE AGE. IRON AGE.

"Human relics of great antiquity occur, more or less abundantly, in many parts of Europe. … The antiquities referred to are of many kinds—dwelling-places, sepulchral and other monuments, forts and camps, and a great harvest of implements and ornaments of stone and metal. In seeking to classify these relics and remains according to their relative antiquity, archæologists have selected the implements and ornaments as affording the most satisfactory basis for such an arrangement, and they divide prehistoric time into three periods, which are termed respectively the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age. Of these periods the earliest was the Stone Age, when implements and ornaments were formed exclusively of stone, wood, horn, and bone. The use of metal for such purposes was then quite unknown. To the Stone Age succeeded the Age of Bronze, at which time cutting instruments, such as swords and knives and axes, began to be made of copper, and an alloy of that metal and tin. When in the course of time iron replaced bronze for cutting-instruments, the Bronze Age came to an end and the Iron Age supervened. … The archæological periods are simply so many phases of civilisation, and it is conceivable that Stone, Bronze, and Iron Ages might have been contemporaneous in different parts of one and the same continent. … It has been found necessary within recent years to subdivide the Stone Age into two periods, called respectively the Old Stone and New Stone Ages; or, to employ the terms suggested by Sir John Lubbock, and now generally adopted, the Palæolithic and Neolithic Periods. The stone implements belonging to the older of these periods show but little variety of form, and are very rudely fashioned, being merely roughly chipped into shape, and never ground or polished."

J. Geikie, Prehistoric Europe, pages 5-11.

STONE OF DESTINY, The.

See LIA-FAIL.

STONE RIVER, OR MURFREESBOROUGH, Battle of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862-1863 (DECEMBER-JANUARY: TENNESSEE).

STONE STREET.

An old Roman road which runs from London to Chichester.

STONEHENGE.

See ABURY.

STONEMAN'S RAID.

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

STONEY CREEK, The Surprise at.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1813 (APRIL-JULY).

STONINGTON, Bombardment of.

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

STONY POINT, The storming of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1778-1779.

STORTHING, The.

See THING; also SCANDINAVIAN STATES (NORWAY): A. D. 1814-1815; and CONSTITUTION OF NORWAY.

STORY, Judge, and his judicial services.

See LAW, EQUITY: A. D. 1812.

STRAFFORD (Wentworth, Earl of) and Charles I.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1634-1637, 1640, and 1640-1641; also, IRELAND: A. D. 1633-1639.

STRALSUND: The founding of the city.

See HANSA TOWNS.

STRALSUND: A. D. 1628. Unsuccessful siege by Wallenstein.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1627-1629.

STRALSUND: A. D. 1678. Siege and capture by the Elector of Brandenburg.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES (SWEDEN): A. D. 1644-1697.

STRALSUND: A. D. 1715. Siege and capture by the Danes and Prussians.

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

STRALSUND: A. D. 1720. Restoration by Denmark to Sweden.

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

STRALSUND: A. D. 1809. Occupied by the Patriot Schill. Stormed and captured by the French.

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

—————STRASBURG: Start————

STRASBURG: A. D. 357. Julian's victory.

The most serious battle in Julian's campaigns against the Alemanni was fought in August, A. D. 357, at Strasburg (then a Roman post called Argentoratum) where Chnodomar had crossed the Rhine with 35,000 warriors. The result was a great victory for the Romans.

E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 19.

See GAUL: A. D. 355-361.

STRASBURG: A. D. 842. The Oaths.

During the civil wars which occurred between the grandsons of Charlemagne, in 842, the year following the great battle at Fontainelles, the two younger of the rivals, Karl and Ludwig, formed an alliance against Lothaire. Karl found his support in Aquitaine and Neustria; Ludwig depended on the East Franks and their German kindred. The armies of the two were assembled in February at Strasburg (Argentaria) and a solemn oath of friendship and fidelity was taken by the kings in the presence of their people and repeated by the latter. The oath was repeated in the German language, and in the Romance language—then just acquiring form in southern Gaul,—and it has been preserved in both. "In the Romance form of this oath, we have the earliest monument of the tongue out of which the modern French was formed."

P. Godwin, History of France: Ancient Gaul, chapter 18.

ALSO IN: J. C. L. de Sismondi, The French Under the Carlovingians, translated by Bellingham, chapter 8.

{3036}

STRASBURG: A. D. 1525. Formal establishment of the Reformed Religion.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1522-1525.

STRASBURG: A. D. 1529. Joined in the Protest which gave rise to the name Protestants.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1525-1529.

STRASBURG: A. D. 1674-1675. The passage of the Rhine given to the Germans.

See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1674-1678.

STRASBURG: A. D. 1681. Seizure and annexation to France.

Overthrow of the independence of the town as an Imperial city.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1679-1681.

STRASBURG: A. D. 1697. Ceded to France by the Treaty of Ryswick.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1697.

STRASBURG: A. D. 1870. Siege and capture by the Germans.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1870 (JULY-AUGUST), and (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER).

STRASBURG: A. D. 1871. Acquisition (with Alsace) by Germany.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1871 (JANUARY-MAY).

—————STRASBURG: End————

STRATEGI.

In ancient Sparta, the Strategi were military commanders appointed for those armies which were not led by one of the kings. At Athens, the whole direction of the military system belonged to a board of ten Strategi.

G. Schumann, Antiquities of Greece: The State, part 3, chapters 1 and 3.

STRATHCLYDE.

See CUMBRIA; also, SCOTLAND: 7TH CENTURY.

STRELITZ, STRELTZE.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1698-1704.

STRONGBOW'S CONQUEST OF IRELAND.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1169-1175.

STUART, General J. E. B., The Raid of.

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

STUARTS, The.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1370; and ENGLAND: A. D. 1603.

STUM, Battle of (1629).

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

STUNDISTS, The.

In the neighborhood of Kherson, in southern Russia, the Stundist religious movement arose, about 1858. As its name implies, it "had a German origin. As far back as 1778 the great Empress Catherine had colonized Kherson with peasants from the Suabian land, who brought with them their religion, their pastors, and their industrious, sober ways. For many years national prejudices and the barriers of language kept Russians and Germans apart from each other. But sooner or later true life begins to tell. … Some of the Russian peasants who had been helped in their poverty or ministered to in their sickness by their German neighbours began to attend their services —to keep the 'stunden,' or 'hours,' of praise and prayer; they learned to read, were furnished with the New Testament in their own language, and eventually some of them found the deeper blessing of eternal life. In this simple scriptural fashion this memorable movement began. Men told their neighbours what God had done for their souls, and so the heavenly contagion spread from cottage to cottage, from village to village, and from province to province, till at length the Russian Stundists were found in all the provinces from the boundaries of the Austrian Empire in the West to the land of the Don Cossack in the East, and were supposed to number something like a quarter of a million souls. … M. Dalton, a Lutheran clergyman, long resident in St. Petersburg, and whose knowledge of religious movements in Russia is very considerable, goes so far as to say that they are two millions strong. But it is not alone to the actual number of professing Stundists that we are to look in estimating the force and extent of the movement which they have inaugurated in Russia. … Compared with the enormous population of the Russian Empire, the number of Stundists, whether two millions or only a quarter of a million, is insignificant; but the spirit of Stundism has spread, and is still spreading into regions as ultra-Orthodox as the heart of the most bigoted Greek Churchman could desire, and is slowly but surely leavening the whole mass."

J. Brown, editor, The Stundists, preface and chapter. 14.

STUYVESANT, Peter, The administration of.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1647-1664, to 1664.

STYRIA: Origin, and annexation to Austria.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 805-1246.

STYRIA:A. D. 1576. Annexation of Croatia.

See HUNGARY: A. D. 1567-1604.

STYRIA:17th Century. Suppression of the Reformation.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1608-1618.

SUABIA, The Imperial House of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1138-1268; and ITALY: A. D. 1154-1162, to 1183-1250.

SUABIA AND SUABIANS, Ancient.

See SUEVI; and ALEMANNI.

SUABIAN BUND, OR LEAGUE, The.

See LANDFRIEDE, &c.; also CITIES, IMPERIAL AND FREE, OF GERMANY; and FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

SUABIAN CIRCLE, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1493-1519; also, ALEMANNI: A. D. 496-504.

SUABIAN WAR (1496-1499).

See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1396-1499.

SUARDONES, The.

See AVIONES.

SUBLICIAN BRIDGE.

The Pons Sublicius was the single bridge in ancient Rome with which the Tiber was originally spanned. It was built of wood, and constructed for easy removal when an enemy threatened. No trace of it exists.

B. G. Niebuhr, Lectures on Ancient Ethnography and Geography, volume 2. page 103.

SUBLIME PORTE, The.

"The figurative language of the institutes of Mahomet II. [Sultan, A. D. 1451-1481], still employed by his Successors, describes the state under the martial metaphor of a tent. The Lofty Gate of the Royal Tent (where Oriental rulers of old sate to administer justice) denotes the chief seat of government. The Italian translation of the phrase, 'La Porta Sublima,' has been adopted by Western nations, with slight modifications to suit their respective languages; and by 'The Sublime Porte' we commonly mean the Imperial Otto·man Government. The Turkish legists and historians depict the details of their government by imagery drawn from the same metaphor of a royal tent. The dome of the state is supported by four pillars. These are formed by, 1st, the Viziers; 2nd, the Kudiaskers (judges); 3rd, the Defterdars (treasurers); and 4th, the Nischandyis (the secretaries of state). Besides these, there are the Outer Agas, that is to say, the military rulers; and the Inner Agas, that is to say, the rulers employed in the court. {3037} There is also the order of the Ulema, or men learned in the law. The Viziers were regarded as constituting the most important pillar that upheld the fabric of the state. In Mahomet II.'s time the Viziers were four in number. Their chief, the Grand Vizier, is the highest of all officers. … The … high legal dignitaries (who were at that time next in rank to the Kadiaskers) were, 1st, the Kho-dya, who was the tutor of the Sultan and the Princes Royal; 2nd, the Mufti, the authoritative expounder of the law; and, 3rdly, the Judge of Constantinople. … The great council of state was named the Divan; and, in the absence of the Sultan, the Grand Vizier was its president. … The Divan was also attended by the Reis-Effendi, a general secretary, whose power afterwards became more important than that of the Nis-chandyis; by the Grand Chamberlain, and the Grand Marshal, and a train of other officers of the court."

Sir E. S. Creasy, History of the Ottoman Turks, pages 96-97.

See, also, PHARAOHS.

SUB-TREASURY, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1837.

SUBURA, at Rome, The.

"Between the converging points of the Quirinal and Esquiline hills lay the Subura, a district of ill-fame, much abused by the poets and historians of imperial times. It was one of the most ancient district communities ('pagi') of Rome, and gave name to one of the four most ancient regions. Nor was it entirely occupied by the lowest class of people, as might be inferred from the notices of it in Martial and Horace. Julius Cæsar is said to have lived in a small house here. … The Subura was a noisy, bustling part of Rome, full of small shops, and disreputable places of various kinds."

H. Burn, Rome and the Campagna, chapter 6, part 1.

SUCCESSION, The Austrian: The Question and War of.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1718-1738, 1740, and to 1744-1745; NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1745, and 1746-1747; ITALY: A. D. 1741-1743, to 1746-1747; AIX-LA-CHAPELLE: THE CONGRESS.

SUCCESSION, The Spanish: The question and war of.

See SPAIN: A. D. 1698-1700, to 1713-1725; and UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.

SUCCOTH.

See JEWS: THE ROUTE OF THE EXODUS.

—————SUDAN: Start————

SUDAN, OR SOUDAN, The.

"Forming a natural frontier to the Great Desert is that section of Africa known by the somewhat vague name of Sudan. By this term is understood the region south of the Sahara, limited on the west and south by the Atlantic Ocean as far as it reaches. From the Gulf of Guinea inland, there is no definite southern border line. It may, however, be assumed at the fifth degree of north latitude. … [The] Nile region is generally taken as the eastern frontier of Sudan, although it properly reaches to the foot of the Abyssinian highlands. Hence modern maps have introduced the appropriate expression 'Egyptian Sudan' for those eastern districts comprising Senaar, Kordofan, Darfur, and some others. Sudan is therefore, strictly speaking, a broad tract of country reaching right across the whole continent from the Atlantic seaboard almost to the shores of the Red Sea, and is the true home of the Negro races. When our knowledge of the interior has become sufficiently extended to enable us accurately to fix the geographical limits of the Negroes, it may become desirable to make the term Sudan convertible with the whole region inhabited by them."

Hellwald-Johnston, Africa (Stanford's Compendium), chapter 9.

SUDAN: A. D. 1870-1885. Egyptian conquest. General Gordon's government. The Mahdi's rebellion. The British campaign. Death of Gordon.

See EGYPT: A. D. 1870-1883; and 1884-1885.

—————SUDAN: End————

SUDOR ANGLICUS.

See SWEATING SICKNESS; and PLAGUE: A. D. 1486-1593.

SUDRAS.

See CASTE SYSTEM OF INDIA.

SUESSIONES, The.

See BELGÆ.

SUETONIUS PAULINUS: Campaigns in Britain.

See BRITAIN: A. D. 61.

—————SUEVI: Start————

SUEVI, SUEBI, The.

"I must now speak of the Suevi, who are not one nation as are the Chatti and Tencteri, for they occupy the greater part of Germany, and have hitherto been divided into separate tribes with names of their own, though they are called by the general designation of 'Suevi.' A national peculiarity with them is to twist their hair back and fasten it in a knot. This distinguishes the Suevi from the other Germans, as it also does their own freeborn from their slaves."—"Suevia would seem to have been a comprehensive name for the country between the Elbe and the Vistula as far north as the Baltic. Tacitus and Cæsar differ about the Suevi. Suabia is the same word as Suevia."

Tacitus, Germany, translated by Church and Brodribb, chapter. 38, with geographical note.

"The Suebi, that is the wandering people or nomads. … Cæsar's Suebi were probably the Chatti; but that designation certainly belonged in Cæsar's time, and even much later, to every other German stock which could be described as a regularly wandering one."

T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 5, chapter 7, with note.

"The name of the country called Suabia is a true ethnological term, even as Franconia is one. The one means the country occupied by the Suevi, the other the country occupied by the Franks. … At what time the name first became an unequivocal geographical designation of what now, in the way of politics, coincides with the Grand Duchy of Baden and part of Wurtemburg, and, in respect to its physical geography, is part of the Black Forest, is uncertain. It was not, however, later than the reign of Alexander Severus (ending A. D. 235). … Therein, Alamannia and Suevia appear together —as terms for that part of Germany which had previously gone under the name of 'Decumates agri,' and the parts about the 'Limes Romanus.' With this, then, begins the history of the Suevi of Suabia, or, rather, of the Suabians. Their alliances were chiefly with the Alamanni and Burgundians; their theatre the German side of France, Switzerland, Italy, and (in conjunction with the Visigoths) Spain. Their epoch is from the reign of Alexander to that of Augustulus, in round numbers, from about A. D. 225 to A. D. 475."

R. G. Latham, The Germania of Tacitus, epilegomena, section 20.

See, also, ALEMANNI, and BAVARIA: THE ETHNOLOGY.

{3038}

SUEVI: B. C. 58. Expulsion from Gaul by Cæsar.

A large body of the Suevi, a formidable German tribe, the name of which has survived in modern Suabia, crossed the Rhine and entered Gaul about B. C. 61. They came at the invitation of the Arverni and Sequani of Gaul, who were forming a league against the Ædui, their rivals, and who sought the aid of the German warriors. The latter responded eagerly to the call, and, having lodged themselves in the country of the Sequani, summoned fresh hordes of their countrymen to join them. The Gauls soon found that they had brought troublesome neighbors into their midst, and they all joined in praying Cæsar and his Roman legions to expel the insolent intruders. Cæsar had then just entered on the government of the Roman Gallic provinces and had signalized his first appearance in the field by stopping the attempted migration of the Helvetii, destroying two thirds of them, and forcing the remnant back to their mountains. He welcomed an opportunity to interfere further in Gallic affairs and promptly addressed certain proposals to the Suevic chieftain, Ariovistus, which the latter rejected with disdain. Some negotiations followed, but both parties meant war, and the question, which should make a conquest of Gaul, was decided speedily at a great battle fought at some place about 80 miles from Vesontio (modern Besançon) in the year 58 B. C. The Germans were routed, driven into the Rhine and almost totally destroyed. Ariovistus, with a very few followers, escaped across the river, and died soon afterwards.

C. Merivale, History of the Romans, chapter 6.

ALSO IN: Cæsar, Gallic Wars, book 1, chapters 31-53.

Napoleon III., History of Cæsar, book 3, chapter 4.

SUEVI: A. D. 406-409. Final invasion of Gaul.

See GAUL: A. D. 406-409.

SUEVI: A. D. 409-414. Settlement in Spain.

See SPAIN: A. D. 409-414.

SUEVI: A. D. 409-573. Their history in Spain.

"The Suevi kept their ground for more than half a century in Spain, before they embraced the Christian religion and became Arians. Being surrounded on all sides by the Visigoths, their history contains merely an account of the wars which they had to maintain against their neighbours: they were long and bloody; 164 years were passed in fighting before they could be brought to yield. In 573, Leovigild, king of the Visigoths, united them to the monarchy of Spain."

J. C. L. de Sismondi, Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 7 (volume l).

See, also, VANDALS: A. D. 428, and GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 507-712.

SUEVI: A. D. 460-500. In Germany.

Those tribes of the Suevic confederacy which remained on the German side of the Rhine, while their brethren pressed southwards, along with the Vandals and Burgundians, in the great invasive movement of 406, "dwelt in the south-west corner of Germany, in the region which is now known as the Black Forest, and away eastwards along the Upper Danube, perhaps as far as the river Lech. They were already mingled with the Alamanni of the mountains, a process which was no doubt carried yet further when, some thirty years after the time now reached by us [about 460] Clovis overthrew the monarchy of the Alamanni [A. D. 496], whom he drove remorselessly forth from all the lands north of the Neckar. The result of these migrations and alliances was the formation of the two great Duchies with which we are so familiar in the mediaeval history of Germany—Suabia and Franconia. Suabia, which is a convertible term with Alamannia, represents the land left to the mingled Suevi and Alamanni; Franconia that occupied east of the Rhine by the intrusive Franks."

T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders, book 4, chapter 1 (volume 3).

See, also, ALEMANNI: A. D. 496-504.

—————SUEVI: End————

SUEVIC SEA.

The ancient name of the Baltic.

SUEZ CANAL, Opening of the (1869).

See EGYPT: A. D. 1840-1869.

SUFFERERS' LANDS, The.

See OHIO: A. D. 1786-1796.

SUFFETES.

"The original monarchical constitution [of Carthage]—doubtless inherited from Tyre—was represented (practically in Aristotle's time, and theoretically to the latest period) by two supreme magistrates called by the Romans Suffetes. Their name is the same as the Hebrew Shofetim, mistranslated in our Bible, Judges. The Hamilcars and Hannos of Carthage were, like their prototypes, the Gideons and the Samsons of the Book of Judges, not so much the judges as the protectors and rulers of their respective states."

R. B. Smith, Carthage and the Carthaginians, chapter 1.

See, also, JEWS: ISRAEL UNDER THE JUDGES.

SUFFOLK RESOLVES, The.

See BOSTON: A. D. 1774.

SUFFRAGE, Woman.

See WOMAN SUFFRAGE.

SUFFRAGE QUALIFICATION IN ENGLAND.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1884-1885.

SUFIS.

A sect of Mahometan mystics. "The final object of the Sufi devotee is to attain to the light of Heaven, towards which he must press forward till perfect knowledge is reached in his union with God, to be consummated, after death, in absorption into the Divine Being."

J. W. H. Stobart, Islam and its Founder, chapter 10.

SUGAMBRI, SICAMBRI.

See USIPETES; also FRANKS: ORIGIN, and A. D. 253.

SUGAR ACT, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1763-1764.

SUGAR-HOUSE PRISONS, The.

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

SUIONES, The.

"Next [on the Baltic] occur the communities of the Suiones, seated in the very Ocean, who, besides their strength in men and arms, also possess a naval force. … These people honour wealth." "The Suiones inhabited Sweden and the Danish isles of Funen, Langland, Zeeland, Laland, etc. From them and the Cimbri were derived the Normans."

Tacitus, Germany, Oxford Translation, chapter 44 and note.

SULIOTES, The.

"The heroic struggle of the little commonwealth over a number of years, [1787-1804] against all the resources and ingenuity of Ali Pacha [vizir of Jannina] is very stirring and full of episode. … The origin of the Suliotes is lost in obscurity. … The chief families traced their origin to different villages and districts; and, though their language was Greek, they appear to have consisted, for the most part, of Christian Albanians, with a small admixture of Greeks, who, flying from the oppression of the invaders, had taken refuge in the well-nigh inaccessible mountains of Chamouri (Chimari) [in Epirus], and had there established a curious patriarchal community. … At the time when they became conspicuous in history the Suliotes were possessed of four villages in the great ravine of Suli, namely, Kiapha, Avariko, Samoniva, and Kako-Suli, composing a group known as the Tetrachorion; and seven villages in the plains, whose inhabitants, being considered genuine Suliotes, were allowed to retire into the mountain in time of war. … {3039} They also controlled between 50 and 60 tributary villages, with a mixed population of Greeks and Albanians; but these were abandoned to their fate in war. In the early part of the last century the Suliotes are said not to have had more than 200 fighting-men, although they were almost always engaged in petty warfare and marauding expeditions; and at the period of their extraordinary successes the numbers of the Suliotes proper never exceeded 5,000 souls, with a fighting strength d 1,500 men, who were, however, reinforced at need by the women. Their government was purely patriarchal; they had neither written laws nor law courts, and the family formed the political unit of the State. The families were grouped together in tribal alliances called Pharas, of which there were 29 in the Tetrachorion and 18 in the Heptachorion. All disputes were settled by arbitration by the heads of the Pharas; and these 47 elders formed a sort of general Council, the matter for discussion being almost exclusively war. As they were gradually driven from the plains which had supported them to the mountains, which produced nothing but pasture for their flocks, they were of necessity compelled to support themselves by marauding expeditions, which involved them in perpetual difficulties with the surrounding Ottoman governors. The historian of Suli enumerates no less than eight wars in which the community was involved before their great struggle with Ali."

R. Rodd, The Customs and Lore of Modern Greece, chapter 10.

SULLA, Proscriptions by and Dictatorship of.

See ROME: B. C. 88-78.

SULLIVAN, General John, and the War of the American Revolution.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1775 (MAY-AUGUST); 1776 (AUGUST); 1779 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).

SULTAN, The Title.

Gibbon (chapter 57) represents that the title of Sultan was first invented for Mahmud the Gaznevide, by the ambassador of the Caliph of Bagdad, "who employed an Arabian or Chaldaic word that signifies 'lord' and 'master.'" But Dr. William Smith in a note to this passage in Gibbon, citing Weil, says: "It is uncertain when the title of Sultan was first used, but it seems at all events to have been older than the time of Mahmud. It is mentioned by Halebi, under the reign of Motawaccel; but according to Ibn Chaldun it was first assumed by the Bowides."

See TURKS: A. D. 999-1183.

SUMIR, SHUMIR.

See BABYLONIA, PRIMITIVE.

SUMTER, The Confederate cruiser.

See ALABAMA CLAIMS: A. D. 1861-1862.

—————SUMTER, Fort: Start————

SUMTER, Fort: A. D. 1860. Occupied and held by Major Anderson, for the United States Government.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1860 (DECEMBER).

SUMTER, Fort: A. D. 1861 (April). Bombardment and reduction by the Rebel batteries.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 MARCH-APRIL).

SUMTER, Fort: A. D. 1863. Attack and repulse of the Monitors.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (APRIL: SOUTH CAROLINA).

SUMTER, Fort: A. D. 1863. Bombardment and unsuccessful assault.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (AUGUST-DECEMBER: SOUTH CAROLINA).

SUMTER, Fort: A. D. 1865 (February-April). Recovery by the nation. The restoring of the flag.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (FEBRUARY: SOUTH CAROLINA).

—————SUMTER, Fort: End————

SUNNAH, The.

See ISLAM.

SUNNI SECT, The.

See ISLAM.

SUOVETAURILIA.

Expiatory sacrifices of pigs, sheep and oxen, offered by the ancient Romans at the end of a lustrum and after a triumph.

E. Guhl and W. Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans, section 103.

SUPERIOR, Lake, The discovery of.

See CANADA: A. D. 1634-1673.

SUPREMACY, The Acts of.

The first Act of Supremacy, which established the independence of the Church of England and broke its relations with Rome, was passed by the English Parliament during the reign of Henry VIII., in 1534. It enacted "that the King should be taken and reputed 'the only Supreme Head on earth of the Church of England called Ecclesia Anglicana, and shall have and enjoy, annexed and united to the imperial Crown of this realm, as well the title and style thereof, as all honours, dignities, pre-eminencies, jurisdictions, privileges, authorities, immunities, profits, and commodities, to the said dignity of Supreme Head of the same church belonging and appertaining'; with full power to visit, reform, and correct all heresies, errors, abuses, offences, contempts and enormities which, by any manner of spiritual authority or jurisdiction, ought to be reformed or corrected."

T. P. Taswell-Langmead, English Constitutional History, chapter 11.

The Act of Supremacy was repealed in the reign of Mary and re-enacted with changes in that of Elizabeth, 1559.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1527-1534; and 1559.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, The.

"On the 24th day of September, 1789, the act organizing the Supreme Court; was passed. The Court was constituted with a Chief Justice and five associates. John Jay was appointed the first Chief Justice by Washington. Webster said of him that when the ermine fell upon his shoulders, it touched a being as spotless as itself. The Court first convened in February, 1790, in New York. It does not appear from the reports that any case then came before it. Jay remained Chief Justice until 1795, when he resigned to become governor of the State of New York. A Chief Justice in our day would hardly do this. His judicial duties were so few that he found time, in 1794, to accept the mission to England to negotiate the treaty so famous in history as 'Jay's Treaty.' John Rutledge of South Carolina was appointed to succeed Jay, but he was so pronounced in his opposition to the treaty, and so bitter in his denunciation of Jay himself, that the federal Senate refused to confirm him. William Cushing of Massachusetts, one of the associate justices, was then nominated by Washington, and was promptly confirmed; but he preferred to remain associate justice, and Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut was made Chief Justice. He held the office until 1801, when John Marshall of Virginia was appointed by President Adams. Marshall held the office thirty-four years. He was known at the time of his appointment as an ardent Federalist. {3040} In our time he is known as 'the great Chief Justice.' Roger B. Taney was the next incumbent. He was appointed by President Jackson. His political enemies styled him a renegade Federalist, and said that his appointment was his reward for his obsequious obedience, while Secretary of the Treasury, to President Jackson. But Taney, despite the Dred Scott decision, was an honest man and a great judge. His opinions are models of lucid and orderly discussion, and are of admirable literary form. He held the office for twenty-eight years, and upon his death in 1864, President Lincoln appointed Salmon P. Chase, of Ohio. Chief Justice Chase died in 1874. President Grant then appointed Morrison R. Waite of Ohio. He died in 1888. Melville W. Fuller, of Illinois, is the present [1889] incumbent, his appointment having been made by President Cleveland. … In 1807 an associate judge was added by Congress; two more were added in 1837, and one in 1863. They were added to enable the Court to perform the work of the circuits, which increased with the growth of the country."

J. S. Landon, The Constitutional History and Government of the United States, lecture 10.

"The Supreme court is directly created by Article iii., section 1 of the Constitution, but with no provision as to the number of its judges. Originally there were six; at present there are nine, a chief justice, with a salary of $10,500 (£2,100), and eight associate judges (salary $10,000). The justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. They hold office during good behaviour, i. e. they are removable only by impeachment. They have thus a tenure even more secure than that of English judges, for the latter may be removed by the Crown on an address from both Houses of Parliament. … The Fathers of the Constitution were extremely anxious to secure the independence of their judiciary, regarding it as a bulwark both for the people and for the States against aggressions of either Congress or the President. They affirmed the life tenure by an unanimous vote in the Convention of 1787, because they deemed the risk of the continuance in office of an incompetent judge a less evil than the subserviency of all judges to the legislature, which might flow from a tenure dependent on legislative will. The result has justified their expectations. The judges have shown themselves independent of Congress and of party, yet the security of their position has rarely tempted them to breaches of judicial duty. Impeachment has been four times resorted to, once only against a justice of the Supreme court, and then unsuccessfully. Attempts have been made, beginning from Jefferson, who argued that judges should hold office for terms of four or six years only, to alter the tenure of the Federal judges, as that of the State judges has been altered in most States; but Congress has always rejected the proposed constitutional amendment. The Supreme court sits at Washington from October till July in every year."

J. Bryce, The American Commonwealth, part 1, chapter 22 (volume 1).

"It is, I believe, the only national tribunal in the world which can sit in judgment on a national law, and can declare an act of all the three powers of the Union to be null and void. No such power does or can exist in England. Anyone of the three powers of the state, King, Lords, or Commons, acting alone, may act illegally; the three acting together cannot act illegally. An act of parliament is final; it may be repealed by the power which enacted it; it cannot be questioned by any other power. For in England there is no written constitution; the powers of Parliament, of King, Lords, and Commons, acting together, are literally boundless. But in your Union, it is not only possible that President, Senate, or House of Representatives, acting alone, may act illegally; the three acting together may act illegally. For their powers are not boundless, they have no powers but such as the terms of the constitution, that is, the original treaty between the States, have given them. Congress may pass, the President may assent to, a measure which contradicts the terms of the constitution. If they so act, they act illegally, and the Supreme Court can declare such an act to be null and void. This difference flows directly from the difference between a written and an unwritten constitution. It does not follow that every state which has a written constitution need vest in its highest court such powers as are vested in yours, though it certainly seems to me that, in a federal constitution, such a power is highly expedient. My point is simply that such a power can exist where there is a written constitution; where there is no written constitution, it cannot."

E. A. Freeman, The English People in its Three Homes: Lectures to American Audiences, pages 191-192.

SURA, Battle of (A. D. 530).

See PERSIA: A. D. 226-627.

SURENA.

The title of the commander-in-chief or field-marshal of the Parthian armies, whose rank was second only to that of the king. This title was sometimes mistaken by Greek writers for an individual name, as in the case of the Parthian general who defeated Crassus.

G. Rawlinson, Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy, page 23.

SURGERY.

See MEDICAL SCIENCE.

SURINAM.

See GUIANA: A. D. 1580-1814.

SURPLUS, The distribution of the.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1835-1837.

SURRATT, Mrs.: The Lincoln Assassination Conspiracy.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1865 (APRIL 14TH).

SUSA. SUSIANA. SHUSHAN.

Originally the capital of the ancient kingdom of Elam, Shushan, or Susiana, or Susa, as it has been variously called, was in later times made the principal capital of the Persian empire, and became the scene of the Biblical story of Esther. A French expedition, directed by M. Dieulafoy and wife, undertook an exploration of the ruins of Susa in 1885 and has brought to light some remarkably interesting and important remains of ancient art. The name Susiana was applied by the Greeks to the country of Elam, as well as to the capital city, and it is sometimes still used in that sense.

Z. A. Ragozin, Story of Media, Babylon and Persia, appendix to chapter 10.

See, also, ELAM; and BABYLONIA: PRIMITIVE.

SUSIAN GATES.

A pass in the mountains which surrounded the plain of Persepolis, the center of ancient Persia proper. Alexander had difficulty in forcing the Gates.

G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 93.

SUSIANA.

See SUSA.

SUSMARSHAUSEN, Battle of(1648).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1646-1648.

SUSQUEHANNA COMPANY, The.

See PENNSYLVANIA: A. D. 1753-1799.

SUSQUEHANNAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SUSQUEHANNAS.

{3041}

SUSSEX.

Originally the kingdom formed by that body of the Saxon conquerors of Britain in the 5th and 6th centuries which acquired the name of the South Saxons. It is nearly represented in territory by the present counties of Sussex and Surrey.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 477-527.

SUTRIUM, Battle of.

A victory of the Romans over the Etruscans, among the exploits ascribed to the veteran Q. Fabius Maximus.

W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 3, chapter 10.

SUTTEE, Suppression of, in India.

See INDIA: A. D. 1823-1833.

SUVARROF, SUWARROW, Campaigns of.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1762-1796; also FRANCE: A. D. 1798-1799 (AUGUST-APRIL); 1799 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER), and (AUGUST-DECEMBER).

SVASTIKA, The.

See TRI-SKELION.

SWAANENDAEL.

See DELAWARE: A. D. 1629-1631.

SWABIA.

See SUABIA.

SWAMP ANGEL, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (AUGUST-DECEMBER: SOUTH CAROLINA).

SWAN, The Order of the.

A Prussian order of knighthood, instituted in the 15th century, which disappeared in the century following, and was revived in 1843.

SWANS, The Road of the.

See NORMANS.

SWEATING SICKNESS, The.

The "Sudor Anglicus," or Sweating Sickness was a strange and fearful epidemic which appeared in England in 1485 or 1486, and again in 1507, 1518, 1529, and 1551. In the last three instances it passed to the continent. Its first appearance was always in England, from which fact it took one of its names. Its peculiar characteristic was the profuse sweating which accompanied the disease. The mortality from it was very great.

J. H. Baas, Outlines of the History of Medicine, pages 318-319.

See, also, PLAGUE, ETC.: A. D. 1485-1593.

SWEDEN: Early inhabitants.

See SUIONES.

SWEDEN: History.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES.

SWEDEN: Constitution.

See CONSTITUTION OF SWEDEN.

SWEENEY, Peter B., and the Tweed Ring.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1863-1871.

SWERKER I., King of Sweden, A. D. 1155.

SWERKER II., King of Sweden, 1199-1210.

SWERKERSON.

See CHARLES SWERKERSON; and JOHN SWERKERSON.

SWERRO, King of Norway, A. D. 1186-1202.

SWEYN I., King of Denmark, A. D. 991-1014.

Sweyn II., King of Denmark, 1047-1076.

Sweyn III., King of Denmark, 1156-1157.

Sweyn Canutson, King of Norway, 1030-1035.

SWISS CONFEDERATION AND CONSTITUTION.

See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1848-1890; and CONSTITUTION OF SWITZERLAND.

—————SWITZERLAND: Start————

SWITZERLAND: Early inhabitants.

See HELVETII; ALEMANNI: A. D. 496-504; BURGUNDIANS: A. D. 443-451; also, below: THE THREE FOREST CANTONS.

SWITZERLAND: The Three Forest Cantons, their original Confederation (Eidgenossenschaft), and their relations with the House of Austria. History divested of Legend.

"It is pretty clear that among those Helvetii with whom Cæsar had his cruel struggle [see HELVETII, TUE ARRESTED MIGRATION OF THE], and who subsequently became an integral portion of the empire, there were no people from the Forest Cantons of Schwytz, Uri, and Unterwalden. The men who defied the Roman eagles were inhabitants of the mountain slopes between the lakes of Geneva and Constance. On the North, the authority of the Romans penetrated no farther in the direction of the mountainous Oberland than to Zurich or Turicum. They, no doubt, ascended far up the valley of the Rhone, where they have left their mark in the speech of the people to this day; but they did not climb the mountain passes leading across the great chain of the Alps. It may be questioned if the higher valleys of Switzerland were then, or for centuries after the fall of the Western Empire, inhabited. … In the district of these Forest Cantons no remains of lake inhabitancy have yet been found. … Yet none of the places where they are met with could have been more naturally suited for lake-dwellings than these. The three Forest Cantons began the political history of Switzerland, having established among themselves that political centre round which the other Cantons clustered. In ethnological history, they were the latest members of the Swiss family, since their territory remained without occupants after the more accessible portions of the country had been peopled. In the same sense, the canton from which the confederation derived its name—that of Schwytz—is the youngest of all. When the Irish monk, afterwards canonised as St. Gall, settled near the Lake of Constance in the 7th century, he had gone as completely to the one extreme of the inhabited world, as his brother Columba had gone to the other when he sailed to Iona. If the districts of Thurgau, Appenzell, and St. Gall were at that period becoming gradually inhabited, it is supposed that Schwytz was not occupied by a permanent population until the latter half of the 9th century. … M. Rilliet [in 'Les Origines de la Confederation Suisse,' par Albert Rilliet) is one of the first writers who has applied himself to the study of … original documents [title-deeds of property, the chartularies of religious houses, records of litigation, etc.] as they are still preserved in Switzerland, for the purpose of tracing the character and progress of the Swiss people and of their free institutions. It was among the accidents propitious to the efforts of the Forest Cantons, that, among the high feudal or manorial rights existing within their territory, a large proportion was in the hands of monastic bodies. Throughout Europe the estates of the ecclesiastics were the best husbanded, and inhabited by the most prosperous vassals. These bodies ruled their vassals through the aid of a secular officer, a Vogt or advocate, who sometimes was the master, sometimes the servant, of the community. {3042} In either case there was to some extent a division of rule, and it was not the less so that in these Cantons the larger estates were held by nuns. The various struggles for supremacy in which emperors and competitors for empire, the successive popes, and the potentates struggling for dominion, severally figured, gave many opportunities to a brave and sagacious people, ever on the watch for the protection of their liberties; but the predominant feature in their policy—that, indeed, which secured their final triumph—was their steady adherence in such contests to the Empire, and their acknowledgment of its supremacy. This is the more worthy of notice since popular notions of Swiss history take the opposite direction, and introduce us to the Emperor and his ministers as the oppressors who drove an exasperated people to arms. In fact, there still lurk in popular history many fallacies and mistakes about the nature of the 'Holy Roman Empire' as an institution of the middle ages [see ROMAN EMPIRE, THE HOLY]. … It is not natural or easy indeed to associate that mighty central organisation with popular liberty and power; and yet in the feudal ages it was a strong and effective protector of freedom. … Small republics and free cities were scattered over central Europe and protected in the heart of feudalism. … M. Rilliet aptly remarks, that in the Swiss valleys, with their isolating mountains, and their narrow strips of valuable pasture, political and local conditions existed in some degree resembling those of a walled city." The election, in 1273, of Rudolph of Hapsburg, as King of the Romans, was an event of great importance in the history of the Swiss Cantons, owing to their previous connexion with the House of Hapsburg (see AUSTRIA: A. D. 1246-1282), "a connexion geographically so close that the paternal domains, whence that great family takes its ancient name, are part of the Swiss territory at the present day." Such agencies as belonged naturally to the most powerful family in the district fell to the House of Hapsburg. Its chiefs were the chosen advocates or champions of the religious communities neighbor to them; and "under such imperial offices as are known by the title Bailiff, Procurator, or Reichsvogt, they occasionally exercised what power the Empire retained over its free communities. Such offices conferred authority which easily ripened into feudal superiorities, or other forms of sovereignty. M. Rilliet attributes considerable, but not, it seems to us, too much importance to a rescript bearing date the 26th May, 1231. It is granted by Henry VII., King of the Romans, or more properly of the aggregated German communities, as acting for his father, the Emperor Frederic II. This instrument revokes certain powers over the people of the community of Uri, which had been granted at a previous time by Frederic himself to the Count of Hapsburg. It addresses the people of Uri by the term Universitas—high in class among the enfranchised communities of the Empire—and promises to them that they shall no more under any pretext be withdrawn from the direct jurisdiction of the Empire. … The great point reached through this piece of evidence, and corroborated by others, is, that at this remote period the district which is now the Canton of Uri was dealt with as a Roman Universitas—as one of the communities of the Empire, exempt from the immediate authority of any feudal chief. … M. Rilliet's researches show that Uri is the Canton in which the character of a free imperial community was first established, perhaps we should rather say it was the Canton in which the privilege was most completely preserved from the dangers that assailed it. The Hapsburgs and their rivals had a stronger hold on Schwytz. … In many of the documents relating to the rights of Rudolph over this district, bearing date after he became Cæsar, it is uncertain whether he acts as emperor or as immediate feudal lord. … Rudolph, however, found it, from whatever cause, his policy to attach the people of Schwytz to his interests as emperor rather than as feudal lord; and he gave them charters of franchise which seem ultimately to have made them, like their neighbours of Uri, a free community of the Empire, or to have certified their right to that character. In the fragmentary records of the three Cantons, Unterwalden does not hold rank as a free community of the Empire at so early a time even as Schwytz. It is only known that in 1291 Unterwalden acted with the other two as an independent community. In the disputes for supremacy between the Empire and the Church all three had been loyal to the Empire. There are some indications that Rudolph had discovered the signal capacity of these mountaineers for war, and that already there were bands of Swiss among the imperial troops. The reign of Rudolph lasted for 18 years. … During his 18 years of possession he changed the character of the Cæsarship, and the change was felt by the Swiss. In the early part of his reign he wooed them to the Empire—before its end he was strengthening the territorial power of his dynasty. … When Rudolph died in 1201, the imperial crown was no longer a disputable prize for a chance candidate. There was a conflict on the question whether his descendants should take it as a hereditary right, or the electors should show that they retained their power by another choice. The three Cantons felt that there was danger to their interests in the coming contest, and took a great step for their own protection. They formed a league or confederacy [Eidgenossenschaft] for mutual co-operation and protection. Not only has it been handed down to us in literature, but the very parchment has been preserved as a testimony to the early independence of the Forest Cantons, the Magna Charter of Switzerland. This document reveals the existence of unexplained antecedents by calling itself a renewal of the old league—the Antique Confederatio. … Thus we have a Confederation of the Three Cantons, dated in 1201, and referring to earlier alliances; while popular history sets down the subsequent Confederation of 1314 as the earliest, for the purpose of making the whole history of Swiss independence arise out of the tragic events attributed to that period. If this leads the way to the extinction of the story on which the Confederation is based, there is compensation in finding the Confederation in active existence a quarter of a century earlier. But the reader will observe that the mere fact of the existence of this anterior league overturns the whole received history of Switzerland, and changes the character of the alleged struggle with the House of Austria, prior to the battle of Morgarten. There is nothing in this document or in contemporary events breathing of disloyalty to the Empire. {3043} The two parties whom the Swiss held in fear were the Church, endeavouring to usurp the old prerogatives of the Empire in their fullness; and the feudal barons, who were encroaching on the imperial authority. Among the three the Swiss chose the chief who would be least of a master. … Two years before the end of the 13th century [by the election of Albert, son of Rudolph, the Hapsburg family] … again got possession of the Empire, and retained it for ten years. It passed from them by the well-known murder of the Emperor Albert. The Swiss and that prince were ill-disposed to each other at the time of the occurrence, and indeed the murder itself was perpetrated on Swiss ground; yet it had no connexion with the cause of the quarrel which was deepening between the House of Hapsburg and the Cantons. … There exist in contemporary records no instances of wanton outrage and insolence on the Hapsburg side. It was the object of that power to obtain political ascendancy, not to indulge its representatives in lust or wanton insult. … There are plentiful records of disputes in which the interests of the two powers were mixed up with those of particular persons. Some of these were trifling and local, relating to the patronage of benefices, the boundaries of parishes, the use of meadows, the amount of toll duties, and the like; others related to larger questions, as to the commerce of the lake of the Four Cantons, or the transit of goods across the Alps. But in these discussions the symptoms of violence, as is natural enough, appear rather on the side of the Swiss communities than on that of the aggrandising imperial house. The Canton of Schwytz, indeed, appears to have obtained by acts of violence and rapacity the notoriety which made its name supreme among the Cantons. … We are now at a critical point, the outbreak of the long War of Swiss Independence, and it would be pleasant if we had more distinct light than either history or record preserves of the immediate motives which brought Austria to the point of invading the Cantons. … The war was no doubt connected with the struggle for the Empire [between Frederic of Austria and Louis of Bavaria—see GERMANY: A. D. 1314-1347]; yet it is not clear how Frederic, even had he been victorious over the three Cantons, could have gained enough to repay him for so costly an expedition. … We are simply told by one party among historical writers that his army was sent against his rebellious subjects to reduce them to obedience, and by the other that it was sent to conquer for the House of Hapsburg the free Cantons. That a magnificent army did march against them, and that it was scattered and ruined by a small body of the Swiss at Morgarten, on the 15th November, 1315, is an historical event too clearly attested in all its grandeur to stand open to dispute. After the battle, the victorious Cantons renewed their Confederation of 1291, with some alterations appropriate to the change of conditions. The first bond or confederation comes to us in Latin, the second is in German. … Such was the base around which the Cantons of the later Swiss Confederation were gradually grouped. … To this conclusion we have followed M. Rilliet without encountering William Tell, or the triumvirate of the meadow of Rütli, and yet with no consciousness that the part of Hamlet has been left out of the play." According to the popular tradition, the people of the Three Cantons were maddened by wanton outrages and insolences on the part of the Austrian Dukes, until three bold leaders, Werner Stauffacher, Arnold of the Melkthal, and Walter Fürst, assembled them in nightly meetings on the little meadow of Grütli or Rütli, in 1307, and bound them by oaths in a league against Austria, which was the beginning of the Swiss Confederation. This story, and the famous legend of William Tell, connected with it, are fading out of authentic history under the light which modern investigation has brought to bear on it.

The Legend of Tell and Rütli (Edinburg Review, January, 1869).

ALSO IN: O. Delepierre, Historical Difficulties.

J. Heywood, The Establishment of Swiss Freedom, and the Scandinavian Origin of the Legend of William Tell (Royal Historical Society Transactions, volume 5).

SWITZERLAND: 4-11th Centuries.

See BURGUNDY.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1207-1401. Extension of the dominions of the House of Savoy beyond Lake Geneva. The city of Geneva surrounded.

See SAVOY: 11-15TH CENTURIES.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1332-1460. The extension of the old Confederation, or "Old League of High Germany." The Three Cantons increased to Eight.

"All the original cantons were German in speech and feeling, and the formal style of their union was 'the Old League of High Germany.' But in strict geographical accuracy there was … a small Burgundian element in the Confederation, if not from the beginning, at least from its aggrandizement in the 13th and 14th centuries. That is to say, part of the territory of the states which formed the old Confederation lay geographically within the kingdom of Burgundy, and a further part lay within the Lesser Burgundy of the Dukes of Zähringen. But, by the time when the history of the Confederation begins, the kingdom of Burgundy was pretty well forgotten, and the small German-speaking territory which it took in at its extreme northeast corner may be looked on as practically German ground. … It is specially needful to bear in mind, first, that, till the last years of the 13th century, not even the germ of modern Switzerland had appeared on the map of Europe; secondly, that the Confederation did not formally become an independent power till the 17th century; lastly, that, though the Swiss name had been in common use for ages, it did not become the formal style of the Confederation till the 19th century. Nothing in the whole study of historical geography is more necessary than to root out the notion that there has always been a country of Switzerland, as there has always been a country of Germany, Gaul, or Italy. And it is no less needful to root out the notion that the Swiss of the original cantons in any way represent the Helvetii of Cæsar. The points to be borne in mind are that the Swiss Confederation is simply one of many German Leagues, which was more lasting and became more closely united than other German Leagues—that it gradually split off from the German Kingdom—that in the course of this process, the League and its members obtained a large body of Italian and Burgundian allies and subjects —lastly, that these allies and subjects have in modern times been joined into one Federal body with the original German Confederates. {3044} The three Swabian lands [the Three Forest Cantons] which formed the kernel of the Old League lay at the point of union of the three Imperial kingdoms, parts of all of which were to become members of the Confederation in its later form. … The Confederation grew for a while by the admission of neighbouring lands and cities as members of a free German Confederation, owning no superior but the Emperor. First of all [1332], the city of Luzern joined the League. Then came the Imperial city of Zurich [1351], which had already begun to form a little dominion in the adjoining lands. Then [1352] came the land of Glarus and the town of Zug with its small territory. And lastly came the great city of Bern [1353], which had already won a dominion over a considerable body of detached and outlying allies and subjects. These confederate lands and towns formed the Eight Ancient Cantons. Their close alliance with each other helped the growth of each canton separately, as well as that of the League as a whole. Those cantons whose geographical position allowed them to do so, were thus able to extend their power, in the form of various shades of dominion and alliance, over the smaller lands and towns in their neighbourhood. … Zurich, and yet more Bern, each formed, after the manner of an ancient Greek city, what in ancient Greece would have passed for an empire. In the 15th century [1415-1460], large conquests were made at the expense of the House of Austria, of which the earlier ones were made by direct Imperial sanction. The Confederation, or some or other of its members, had now extended its territory to the Rhine and the Lake of Constanz. The lands thus won, Aargau, Thurgau, and some other districts, were held as subject territories in the hands of some or other of the Confederate States. … No new states were admitted to the rank of confederate cantons. Before the next group of cantons was admitted, the general state of the Confederation and its European position had greatly changed. It had ceased to be a purely German power. The first extension beyond the original German lands and those Burgundian lands which were practically German began in the direction of Italy. Uri had, by the annexation of Urseren, become the neighbour of the Duchy of Milan, and in the middle of the 15th century, this canton acquired some rights in the Val Levantina on the Italian side of the Alps. This was the beginning of the extension of the Confederation on Italian ground. But far more important than this was the advance of the Confederates over the Burgundian lands to the west."

E. A. Freeman, Historical Geography of Europe, chapter 8, section 6.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1386-1388. Austrian defeats at Sempach and Naefels.

"Seldom, if ever, has Switzerland seen a more eventful month than that of July, 1386, for in that month she fought and won the ever-memorable battle of Sempach. To set down all the petty details as to the causes which led to this engagement would be tedious indeed. It is sufficient to point out … that there is seldom much love lost between oppressor and oppressed, and Austria and the Swiss Confederation had for some time held that relation to each other. A ten years' peace had indeed been concluded between the two powers, but it was a sham peace, and the interval had been used by both to prepare for new conflicts. … Zurich laid siege to Rapperswyl with the intent to destroy the odious Austrian toll-house; Lucerne levelled with the ground the Austrian fort Rothenburg, and entered into alliances with Entlebuch and Sempach to overthrow the Austrian supremacy. This was equal to a declaration of war, and war was indeed imminent. Duke Leopold III., of Austria, was most anxious to bring the quarrel to an issue, and to chastise the insolent Swiss citizens and peasantry. … The nobles of Southern Germany rallied round the gallant swordsman, and made him their leader in the expeditions against the bourgeoisie and peasantry. And no sooner had the truce expired (June, 1386), than they directed their first attack on the bold Confederation. … Leopold's plan was to make Lucerne the centre of his military operations, but in order to draw away attention from his real object, he sent a division of 5,000 men to Zurich to simulate an attack on that town. Whilst the unsuspecting Confederates lay idle within the walls of Zurich, he gathered reinforcements from Burgundy, Swabia, and the Austro-Helvetian Cantons, the total force being variously estimated at from 12,000 to 24,000 men. He marched his army in the direction of Lucerne, but by a round-about way, and seized upon Willisan, which he set on fire, intending to punish Sempach 'en passant' for her desertion. But the Confederates getting knowledge of his stratagem left Zurich to defend herself, and struck straight across the country in pursuit of the enemy. Climbing the heights of Sempach, … they encamped at Meyersholz, a wood fringing the hilltop. The Austrians leaving Sursee, for want of some more practicable road towards Sempach, made their way slowly and painfully along the path which leads from Sursee to the heights, and then turns suddenly down upon Sempach. Great was their surprise and consternation when at the junction of the Sursee and Hiltisrieden roads they came suddenly upon the Swiss force. … The Swiss … drew up in battle order, their force taking a kind of wedge-shaped mass, the shorter edge foremost, and the bravest men occupying the front positions. … The onset was furious, and the Austrian Hotspurs, each eager to outstrip his fellows in the race for honour, rushed on the Swiss, drove them back a little, and then tried to encompass them and crush them in their midst. … All the fortune of the battle seemed against the Swiss, for their short weapons could not reach a foe guarded by long lances. But suddenly the scene changed. 'A good and pious man,' says the old chronicler, deeply mortified by the misfortune of his country, stepped forward from the ranks of the Swiss—Arnold von Winkelried. Shouting to his comrades in arms, 'I will cut a road for you; take care of my wife and children!' he dashed on the enemy, and, catching hold of as many spears as his arms could encompass, he bore them to the ground with the whole weight of his body. His comrades rushed over his corpse, burst through the gap made in the Austrian ranks, and began a fierce hand-to-hand encounter. … A fearful carnage followed, in which no mercy was shown, and there fell of the common soldiers 2,000 men, and no fewer than 700 of the nobility. The Swiss lost but 120 men. … This great victory … gave to the Confederation independence, and far greater military and political eminence. … The story of Winkelried's heroic action has given rise to much fruitless but interesting discussion. {3045} The truth of the tale, in fact, can neither be confirmed nor denied, in the absence of any sufficient proof. But Winkelried is no myth, whatever may be the case with the other great Swiss hero, Tell. There is proof that a family of the name of Winkelried lived at Unterwalden at the time of the battle. … The victory of Naefels [April, 1388] forms a worthy pendant to that of Sempach. … The Austrians, having recovered their spirits after the terrible disaster," invaded the Glarus valley in strong force, and met with another overthrow, losing 1,700 men. "In 1389 a seven years' peace was arranged. … This peace was first prolonged for 20 years, and afterwards, in 1412, for 50 years."

Mrs. L. Hug and R. Stead, The Story of Switzerland, chapter 15.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1396-1499. The Grey Leagues. Democratic Independence of Graubünden (Grisons) achieved. Their Alliance with the Swiss Cantons. The Swabian War. Practical separation of the Confederacy from the Empire.

"It was precisely at this epoch [the later years of the 14th century] that the common people of Graubünden [or the Grisons] felt the necessity of standing for themselves alone against the world. Threatened by the Habsburgs, suspicious of the See of Chur [see TYROL], ill-governed by their decadent dynastic nobles, encouraged by the example of the Forest Cantons, they began to form leagues and alliances for mutual protection and the preservation of peace within the province. Nearly a century was occupied in the origination and consolidation of those three Leagues which turned what we now call Graubünden into an independent democratic state. … The town of Chur, which had been steadily rising in power, together with the immediate vassals of the See, took the lead. They combined into an association, which assumed the name of the Gotteshausbund; and of which the Engadine [the upper valley of the Inn] formed an important factor. Next followed a league between the Abbot of Dissentis, the nobles of the Oberland, the Communes of that district, and its outlying dependencies. This was called the Grey League—according to popular tradition because the folk who swore it wore grey serge coats, but more probably because it was a League of Counts, Gräfen, Grawen. The third league was formed after the final dispersion of the great inheritance of Vaz, which passed through the Counts of Toggenburg into the hands of females and their representatives. This took the name of Zehn Gerichte, or Ten Jurisdictions, and embraced Davos, Belfort, Schanfigg, the Prättigau, and Maienfeld. The date of the formation of the Gotteshausbund is uncertain; but its origin may be assigned to the last years of the 14th century [some writers date it 1396]. That of the Grey League, or Graue Bund, or Obere Theil, as it is variously called, is traditionally 1424. (It is worth mentioning that this League took precedence of the other two, and that the three were known as the Grey Leagues.) That of the Zehn Gerichte is 1438. In 1471 these three Leagues formed a triple alliance, defensive and offensive, protective and aggressive, without prejudice to the Holy Roman Empire of which they still considered themselves to form a part, and without due reservation of the rights acquired by inheritance or purchase by the House of Austria within their borders. This important revolution, which defeudalized a considerable Alpine territory, and which made the individual members of its numerous Communes sovereigns by the right of equal voting, was peaceably effected. … The constitution of Graubünden after the formation of the Leagues, in theory and practise, … was a pure democracy, based on manhood suffrage. … The first difficulties with which this new Republic of peasants had to contend, arose from the neighbourhood of feudal and imperial Austria. The Princes of the House of Habsburg had acquired extensive properties and privileges in Graubünden. … These points of contact became the source of frequent rubs, and gave the Austrians opportunities for interfering in the affairs of the Grey Leagues. A little war which broke out in the Lower Engadine in 1475, a war of raids and reprisals, made bad blood between the people of Tirol and their Grisons neighbours. But the real struggle of Graubünden with Austria began in earnest, when the Leagues were drawn into the so-called Swabian War (1496-1499). The Emperor Maximilian promoted an association of south German towns and nobles, in order to restore his Imperial authority over the Swiss Cantons. They resisted his encroachments, and formed a close alliance with the Grey Leagues. That was the commencement of a tie which bound Graubünden, as a separate political entity, to the Confederation, and which subsisted for several centuries. Graubünden acted as an independent Republic, but was always ready to cooperate with the Swiss. … Fighting side by side [in the Swabian War] with the men of Uri, Glarus, Zürich, the Bündners learned the arts of warfare in the lower Rheinthal. Afterwards, in 1499, they gained the decisive battle of this prolonged struggle on their own ground and unassisted. In a narrow gorge called Calven, just where the Münsterthal opens out into the Vintschgau above Glurns, 5,000 men of the Grey Leagues defeated the whole chivalry and levies of Tirol. Many thousands of the foe (from 4,000 to 5,000 is the mean estimate) were left dead upon the field." Maximilian hastened to the scene with a fresh army, but found only deserted villages, and was forced by famine to retreat. "The victory of Calven raised the Grisons to the same rank as the Swiss, and secured their reputation in Europe as fighting men of the best quality. It also led to a formal treaty with Austria, in which the points at issue between the two parties were carefully defined."

J. A. Symonds, History of Graubünden (in Strickland's "The Engadine," pages 29-33).

During the Swabian War, in 1499, the Swiss concluded a treaty with France. "Willibald Pirkheimer, who was present with 400 red-habited citizens of Nuremberg, has graphically described every incident of this war. The imperial reinforcements arrived slowly and in separate bodies; the princes and nobles fighting in real earnest, the cities with little inclination. The Swiss were, consequently, able to defeat each single detachment before they could unite, and were in this manner victorious in ten engagements." The Emperor, "dividing his forces, despatched the majority of his troops against Basle, under the Count von Fürstenburg, whilst he advanced towards Geneva, and was occupied in crossing the lake when the news of Fürstenburg's defeat and death, near Dornach, arrived. The princes, little desirous of staking their honour against their low-born opponents, instantly returned home in great numbers, and the emperor was therefore compelled to make peace [1499]. {3046} The Swiss retained possession of the Thurgau and of Basle, and Schaffhausen joined the confederation, which was not subject to the imperial chamber, and for the future belonged merely in name to the empire, and gradually fell under the influence of France."

W. Menzel, History of Germany, chapter 191 (volume 2).

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1476-1477. Defeat of Charles the Bold.

See BURGUNDY (THE FRENCH DUKEDOM): A. D. 1476-1477.

SWITZERLAND:A. D. 1481-1501. Disagreements over the spoils of the war with Charles the Bold. Threatened rupture. The Convention of Stanz. Enlargement of the Confederacy. Its loose and precarious constitution.

"In the war with Charles the Bold, Bern had gained greatly in extent on the west, while the immense booty taken in battle and the tributes laid on conquered cities seemed to the country cantons to be unfairly divided, for all were supposed to receive an equal share. The cities protested that it was no fair division of booty to give each one of the country states, who had altogether furnished 14,000 men for the war, an even share with Bern which had sent out 40,000. Another bone of contention was the enlargement of the union. The cities had for a long time desired to bring the cantons of Freiburg and Solothurn into the League. … But these were municipal governments, and the Forest States, unwilling to add more to the voting strength of the cities and thereby place themselves in the minority, refused again and again to admit these cantons. The situation daily grew more critical. Schwyz, Uri, and Unterwalden made an agreement with Glarus to stand by each other in case of attack. Luzern, Bern, and Zurich made a compact of mutual citizenship, a form of agreement by which they sought to circumvent the oath they had taken in the League of Eight to enter into no new alliances. Just at this point there was alleged to have been discovered a plot to destroy the city of Luzern by countrymen of Obwalden and Entlibuch. The cities were thrown into a frenzy and peace was strained to the utmost. Threats and recriminations passed from side to side, but finally, as an almost hopeless effort toward reconciliation, a Diet was called to meet at Stanz on the 8th of December, 1481. The details of this conference read like romance, so great was the transformation which took place in the feelings of the confederates. … Just as the Diet was about to break up in confusion a compromise was effected, and an agreement was drawn up which is known as the Convention of Stanz (Stanzerverkomniss). … As to the matter latest in contention, it was agreed that movable booty should be divided according to the number of men sent into war, but new acquisitions of territory should be shared equally among the states participating. Thus the principle of state-rights was preserved and the idea of popular representation received its first, and for 300 years almost its only recognition. In another agreement, made the same day, Freiburg and Solothurn were admitted to the League on equal terms with the others. In 1501 the confederation was enlarged by the admission of Basel, which, on account of its situation and importance, was a most desirable acquisition, and in the same year the addition of Schaffhausen, like Basel, a free imperial city with outlying territories, still further strengthened the Union. The next, and for 285 years the last, addition to the inner membership of the alliance was Appenzell. … Connected with the confederacy there were, for varying periods and in different relationships, other territories and cities more or less under its control. One class consisted of the so-called Allied Districts ('Zugewandte find Verbündete Orte'), who were attached to the central body not as equal members, but as friends for mutual assistance. This form of alliance began almost with the formation of the league, and gradually extended till it included St. Gallen, Biel, Neuchatel, the Bishopric of Basel (which territory lay outside the city), the separate confederacies of Graubünden and Valais, Geneva and several free imperial cities of Germany, at one time so distant as Strassburg. More closely attached to the confederation were the 'Gemeine Vogteien.' or subject territories [Aargau, Thurgau, etc.], whose government was administered by various members of the league in partnership. These lands had been obtained partly by purchase or forfeiture of loans and partly by conquest. … Before the middle of the 16th century nearly all the territory now included in Switzerland was in some way connected with the confederation. Upon this territorial basis of states, subject lands and allies, the fabric of government stood till the close of the 18th century. It was a loose confederation, whose sole organ of common action was a Diet in which each state was entitled to one vote. … Almost the only thread that held the Swiss Confederation together was the possession of subject lands. In these they were interested as partners in a business corporation. … These common properties were all that prevented complete rupture on several critical occasions."

J. M. Vincent, State and Federal Government in Switzerland, chapter 1.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1515. Defeat by the French at Marignano. Treaties of perpetual alliance with Francis I.

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

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1519. Geneva in civic relations with Berne and Freiburg.

See GENEVA: A. D. 1504-1535.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1519-1524. Beginning of the Reformation at Zurich, under Zwingli.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1519-1524.

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1528-1531. The spreading of the Reformation. Adhesion of the Forest Cantons to Romanism. Differences between the Swiss Reformers and the German Protestants. The Conference at Marburg. Civil war among the Cantons. Death of Zwingli.

From Zurich, "the reformed faith penetrated, but only gradually, into the northern and eastern cantons. Bern was reached in 1528, after a brilliant disputation held in that city. Basel and Schaffhausen followed in 1529, and then St. Gall, Appenzell, Graubünden, and Solothurn, though some of them had serious struggles within themselves and fell in only partly with the reforms. But in the Central or Forest Cantons it was that the fiercest opposition was encountered. … From the very simplicity of their lives the people ignored the degeneracy of the priesthood, and amongst these pastoral peoples the priests were of simpler manners and more moral life than those in the cities; they disliked learning and enlightenment. {3047} Then there was the old feeling of antipathy to the cities, coupled with a strong dislike for the reforms which had abolished 'Reislaufen' [military service under foreign pay], that standing source of income to the cantons. Lucerne, bought with French gold, struggled with Zurich for the lead. So far was the opposition carried that the Catholic districts by a majority of votes insisted (at the Diet) on a measure for suppressing heresy in Zurich, whilst some were for expelling that canton from the league. The Forest Cantons issued orders that Zwingli should be seized should he be found within their territories; consequently he kept away from the great convocation at Baden, 1526. … Wider and wider grew the chasm between the two religious parties, and Zwingli at length formed a 'Christian League' between the Swiss Protestants and some of the German cities and the Elector of Hesse. On the other hand, the Catholics entered into an alliance with Ferdinand of Austria, a determined enemy to the reformed religion. At last the Protestant party was exasperated beyond bearing, and Zurich declared war on the Forest Cantons, Zwingli himself joining in the vicissitudes of the campaign. His camp presented the 'picture of a well-organized, God-fearing army of a truly Puritan stamp.' The encounter at Kappel, in June, 1529, however, took a peaceful turn, thanks to the mediation of Landammann Aebli, of Glarus, greatly to the disgust of Zwingli, who prophetically exclaimed that some day the Catholics would be the stronger party, and then they would not show so much moderation. All ill-feeling, indeed, subsided when the two armies came within sight of each other. The curious and touching episode known as the 'Kappeler Milchsuppe' took place here. A band of jolly Catholics had got hold of a large bowl of milk, but lacking bread they placed it on the boundary line between Zug and Zurich. At once a group of Zurich men turned up with some loaves, and presently the whole party fell to eating the 'Milchsuppe' right merrily. A peace was concluded on the 29th of June, 1529, by which the Austrian League was dissolved, and freedom of worship granted to all. … By his treatise, 'De verâ et falsâ religione' (1525), Zwingli had, though unwillingly, thrown the gauntlet into the Wittenberg camp. The work was intended to be a scientific refutation of the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, and a war of words arose. The contest was by each disputant carried on 'suo more;' by Luther with his usual authoritative and tempestuous vehemence, by Zwingli in his own cool reasoning, dignified, and courteous style and republican frankness. Presently there came a strong desire for a union between the German Protestants, and the Swiss Reformers [called Sacramentarians by the Lutherans], … the impulse to it being given by Charles V.'s 'Protest' against the Protestants. Landgrave Philip of Hesse, the political leader of the German reformers, invited Luther and Zwingli to meet at his castle of Marburg [1529], with the view of reconciling the two sections. The religious colloquium was attended by many savants, princes, nobles, and all the chief leaders of the Reformation, and might have done great things, but came to grief through the obstinacy of Luther, as is well known, or rather through his determination to approve of no man's views except they should agree exactly with his own. Luther insisted on a literal interpretation of the words 'This is my body,' whilst Zwingli saw in them only a metaphorical or symbolical signification. … To return for a moment to home politics. The peace of 1529 was a short-lived one. Zwingli, anxious only to spread the reformed faith over the whole republic, did not realize clearly the hatred of the Forest district against the new creed. … War was imminent, and was indeed eagerly desired on both sides. Bern, finding that war was likely to be injurious to her private ends, insisted on a stoppage of mercantile traffic between the opposing districts, but Zwingli scorned to use such a means to hunger the enemy and so bring them to submit. However Zurich was outvoted in the Christian League (May 16th), and the Forest was excluded from the markets of that city and Bern. The rest may be easily guessed. On Zurich was turned all the fury of the famished Forest men, and they sent a challenge in October, 1531. A second time the hostile armies met at Kappel, but the positions were reversed. Zurich was unprepared to meet a foe four times as numerous as her own, and Bern hesitated to come to her aid. However Göldlin, the captain of the little force, recklessly engaged with the opposing army, whether from treachery or incapacity is not known, but he was certainly opposed to the reformed faith. Zwingli had taken leave of his friend Bullinger, as though foreseeing his own death in the coming struggle, and had joined the Zurich force. He was with the chief banner, and, with some 500 of his overmatched comrades, fell in the thickest of the battle. … But the reformation was far too deeply rooted to be thus destroyed. Bullinger, the friend of Zwingli, and, later on, of Calvin, worthily succeeded to the headship of the Zurich reformers."

Mrs. L. Hug and R. Stead, Switzerland, chapter 22.

ALSO IN: J. H. Merle d' Aubigne, History of the Reformation in the 16th century, books 11 and 15-16 (volume 3-4).

L. von Ranke, History of the Reformation in Germany, book 6, chapters 2-4 (volume 3).

SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1531-1648. Religious divisions and conflicts. Annexations of territory. Peace with the Duke of Savoy. The coming of Protestant refugees. Industrial progress. Peace.

"A peace at Dennikon in 1531 marks the acknowledgement of the principle of each Canton's independence. … The Confederacy was now fatally divided. There is, perhaps, no other instance of a State so deeply and so permanently sundered by the Reformation. Other governments adopted or rejected the reformed religion for their dominions as a whole; the Confederacy, by its constitution, was constrained to allow each Canton to determine its religion for itself; and the presence of Catholic and Reformed States side by side, each clinging with obstinacy to the religion of their choice, became the origin of jealousies and wars which have threatened more than once to rend asunder the ties of union. Next to the endless but uninteresting theme of religious differences comes the history of the annexations" by which the Confederacy extended its limits. "In the direction of the Jura was a country divided between many governments, which the princes of Savoy, the Hapsburgs of the West, had once effectually ruled, but which had become morselled among many claimants during a century and a half of weakness, and which Duke Charles III. of Savoy was now seeking to reconcile to his authority. {3048} Geneva was the chief city of these parts. … Factions in favour of or against [the rule of the Duke of Savoy] … divided the city [see GENEVA: A. D. 1504-1535]. The alliance of Bern and Freyburg was at length sought for; and the conclusion of a treaty of co-citizenship in 1526 opened at once the prospect of a collision between the House of Savoy and the Confederacy. That collision was not long delayed. In 1536, after repeated acts of provocation by Charles III., 7,000 men of Bern appeared within Geneva. To reach the city they had traversed the Pays de Vaud; after entering it they passed onwards to the provinces of Gex and Chablais. All that they traversed they annexed. Even the city which they had entered they would have ruled, had not some sparks of honour and the entreaties of its inhabitants restrained them from the annihilation of the liberties which they had been called on to defend. The men of Freyburg and of the Valais at the same time made humbler conquests from Savoy. Later, the strong fortress of Chillon, and the rich bishopric of Lausanne, were seized upon by Bern. A wide extent of territory was thus added to the Confederacy; and again a considerable population speaking the French tongue was brought under the dominion of the Teutonic Cantons. These acquisitions were extended, in 1555, by the cession of the county of Gruyère, through the embarrassments of its last impoverished Count. They were diminished, however, by the loss of Gex and Chablais in 1564. The jealousy of many of the cantons at the good fortune of their confederates, and the reviving power of the House of Savoy, had made the conquests insecure. Emmanuel Philibert, the hero of St. Quentin, the ally of the great sovereigns of France and Spain, asked back his provinces; and prudence counselled the surrender of the two, in order to obtain a confirmation of the possession of the rest.

See SAVOY AND PIEDMONT: A. D. 1559-1580.

The southern side of the Lake Leman, which had thus been momentarily held, and which nature seemed to have intended to belong to the Confederacy, was thus abandoned. The frontiers, however, which were now secured became permanent ones. The Dukes of Savoy had transferred much of their ambition, with their capital, beyond the Alps; and the Confederates remained secure in their remaining possessions. The Confederacy might now have added further to its power by admitting new members to its League. … Constance … had urged its own incorporation. The religious tendencies of its inhabitants, however, had made it suspected: and it was allowed to fall, in 1548, without hope of recovery, under the dominion of Austria. Geneva … was pleading loudly for admission. The jealousy of Bern, and later the hostility of the Catholic Cantons to the faith of which the city had become the centre, refused the request. She remained a mere ally, with even her independence not always ungrudgingly defended against the assaults of her enemies. Religious zeal indeed was fatal during this century to political sagacity. Under its influence the alliance with the rich city of Mulhausen, which had endured for more than a hundred years, was thrown off in 1587; the overtures of Strasburg for alliance were rejected; the proposals of the Grisons Leagues were repulsed. The opportunities of the Confederates were thus neglected, while those of their neighbours became proportionately increased. … The progress that is to be traced during the 16th century is such as was due to the times rather than to the people. The cessation of foreign wars and the fewer inducements for mercenary service gave leisure for the arts of peace; and agriculture and trade resumed their progress. Already Switzerland began to be sought by refugees from England, France, and Italy. The arts of weaving and of dyeing were introduced, and the manufacture of watches began at Geneva. … War, which had been almost abandoned except in the service of others, comes little into the annals of the Confederation as a State. … As another century advances, there is strife at the very gates of the Confederation. … But the Confederacy itself was never driven into war."