diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/61375-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/61375-0.txt | 25276 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 25276 deletions
diff --git a/old/61375-0.txt b/old/61375-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index ddef4fb..0000000 --- a/old/61375-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,25276 +0,0 @@ -Project Gutenberg's The Historical Geography of Europe., by Edward A. Freeman - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: The Historical Geography of Europe. - Vol. I.--Text - -Author: Edward A. Freeman - -Release Date: February 11, 2020 [EBook #61375] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY I *** - - - - -Produced by Susan Skinner and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - - - - - -[Transcriber’s note: Sidenotes are shown enclosed in diamond symbols -and multiple notes are separated by bars, as shown: ♦Note 1 | Note 2♦.] - - - - -THE - -HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF EUROPE - -VOL. I. - - - - -LONDON: PRINTED BY -SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE -AND PARLIAMENT STREET - - - - -THE - -HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY - -OF - -EUROPE - -BY - -EDWARD A. FREEMAN, D.C.L., LL.D. - -HONORARY FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD - -IN TWO VOLUMES - -_VOL. I.—TEXT_ - - -LONDON -LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. -1881 - -_All rights reserved_ - - - - -PREFACE. - - -It is now several years since this book was begun. It has been delayed -by a crowd of causes, by a temporary loss of strength, by enforced -absence from England, by other occupations and interruptions of various -kinds. I mention this only because of the effect which I fear it has -had on the book itself. It has been impossible to make it, what a book -should, if possible, be, the result of one continuous effort. The -mere fact that the kindness of the publishers allowed the early part -to be printed some years back has, I fear, led to some repetition and -even contradiction. A certain change of plan was found unavoidable. -It proved impossible to go through the whole volume according to the -method of the earlier chapters. Instead of treating Europe as a whole, -I found it needful to divide it into several large geographical groups. -The result is that each of the later chapters has had to go over again -some small amount of ground which had been already gone over in the -earlier chapters. In some cases later lights have led to some changes -of view or expression. I have marked these, as far as I could, in the -Additions and Corrections. If in any case I have failed to do so, the -later statement is the one which should be relied on. - -I hope that I have made the object of the work clear in the -Introductory Chapter. It is really a very humble one. It aims at little -more than tracing out the extent of various states at different times, -and at attempting to place the various changes in their due relation to -one another and to their causes. I am not, strictly speaking, writing -history. I have little to do with the internal affairs of any country. -I have looked at events mainly with reference to their effect on the -European map. This has led to a reversal of what to many will seem the -natural order of things. In a constitutional history of Europe, our own -island would claim the very first place. In my strictly geographical -point of view, I believe I am right in giving it the last. - -I of course assume in the reader a certain elementary knowledge of -European history, at least as much as may be learned from my own -General Sketch. Names and things which have been explained there I -have not thought it needful to explain again. I need hardly say that -I found myself far more competent to deal with some parts of the work -than with others. No one can take an equal interest in, or have an -equal knowledge of, all branches of so wide a subject. Some parts of -the book will represent real original research; others must be dealt -with in a far less thorough way, and will represent only knowledge -got up for the occasion. In such cases the reader will doubtless find -out the difference for himself. But I have felt my own deficiencies -most keenly in the German part. No part of European history is to me -more attractive than the early history of the German kingdom as such. -No part is to me less attractive than the endless family divisions and -unions of the smaller German states. - -In the Slavonic part I have found great difficulty in following any -uniform system of spelling. I consulted several Slavonic scholars. Each -gave me advice, and each supported his own advice by arguments which I -should have thought unanswerable, if I had not seen the arguments in -support of the wholly different advice given me by the others. When -the teachers differ so widely, the learner will, I hope, be forgiven, -if the result is sometimes a little chaotic. I have tried to write -Slavonic names so as to give some approach to the sound, as far as I -know it. But I fear that I have succeeded very imperfectly. - -In such a crowd of names, dates, and the like, there must be many small -inaccuracies. In the case of the smaller dates, those which do not mark -the great epochs of history, nothing is easier than to get wrong by a -year or so. Sometimes there is an actual difference of statement in -different authorities. Sometimes there is a difference in the reckoning -of the year. For instance, In what year was Calais lost to England? We -should say 1558. A writer at the time would say 1557. Then again there -is no slip of either pen or press so easy as putting a wrong figure, -and, except in the case of great and obvious dates, or again when the -mistake is very far wrong indeed, there is no slip of pen or press so -likely to be passed by in revision. And again there is often room for -question as to the date which should be marked. In recording a transfer -of territory from one power to another, what should be the date given? -The actual military occupation and the formal diplomatic cession are -often several years apart. Which of these dates should be chosen? I -have found it hard to follow any fixed rule in such matters. Sometimes -the military occupation seems the most important point, sometimes the -diplomatic cession. I believe that in each case where a question of -this sort might arise, I could give a reason for the date which has -been chosen; but here there has been no room to enter into discussions. -I can only say that I shall be deeply thankful to any one who will -point out to me any mistakes or seeming mistakes in these or any other -matters. - -The maps have been a matter of great difficulty. I somewhat regret -that it has been found needful to bind them separately from the text, -because this looks as if they made some pretensions to the character of -an historical atlas. To this they lay no claim. They are meant simply -to illustrate the text, and in no way enter into competition either -with such an elaborate collection as that of Spruner-Menke, or even -with collections much less elaborate than that. Those maps are meant -to be companions in studying the history of the several periods. Mine -do not pretend to do more than to illustrate changes of boundary in a -general way. It was found, as the work went on, that it was better on -the whole to increase the number of maps, even at the expense of making -each map smaller. There are disadvantages both ways. In the maps of -South-Eastern Europe, for instance, it was found impossible to show -the small states which arose in Greece after the Latin conquest at all -clearly. But this evil seemed to be counterbalanced by giving as many -pictures as might be of the shifting frontier of the Eastern Empire -towards the Bulgarian, the Frank, and the Ottoman. - -In one or two instances I have taken some small liberties with my -dates. Thus, for instance, the map of the greatest extent of the -Saracen dominion shows all the countries which were at any time under -the Saracen power. But there was no one moment when the Saracen power -took in the whole extent shown in the map. Sind and Septimania were -lost before Crete and Sicily were won. But such a view as I have -given seemed on the whole more instructive than it would have been to -substitute two or three maps showing the various losses and gains at a -few years’ distance from one another. - -I have to thank a crowd of friends, including some whom I have never -seen, for many hints, and for much help given in various ways. Such -are Professor Pauli of Göttingen, Professor Steenstrup of Copenhagen, -Professor Romanos of Corfu, M. J.-B. Galiffe of Geneva, Dr. Paul Turner -of Budapest, Professor A. W. Ward of Manchester, the Rev. H. F. Tozer, -Mr. Ralston, Mr. Morfill, Mrs. Humphry Ward, and my son-in-law Arthur -John Evans, whose praise is in all South-Slavonic lands. - - SOMERLEAZE, WELLS: - _December 16, 1880._ - - - - -CONTENTS. - - -CHAPTER I. - -INTRODUCTION. - - PAGE - -Definition of Historical Geography 1 - -Its relation to kindred studies 1-2 - -Distinction between geographical and political names 3-5 - - -§ 1. _Geographical Aspect of Europe._ - -Boundaries of Europe and Asia 5-6 - -General geography of the two continents—the great peninsulas 6-7 - - -§ 2. _Effects of Geography on History._ - -Beginnings of history in the southern peninsulas—characteristics - of Greece and Italy 7-8 - -Advance and extent of the Roman dominion; the Mediterranean lands, - Gaul, and Britain 8-9 - -Effects of the geographical position of Germany, France, Spain, - Scandinavia, Britain 9-10 - -Effect of geographical position on the colonizing powers 10 - -Joint working of geographical position and national character 11 - - -§ 3. _Geographical Distribution of Races._ - -Europe an Aryan continent—non-Aryan remnants and latter settlements 12 - -Fins and Basques 13 - -Order of Aryan settlements; Greeks and Italians 13 - -Celts, Teutons, Slaves, Lithuanians 14-15 - -Displacement and assimilation among the Aryan races 16 - -Intrusion of non-Aryans; Saracens 16 - -Turanian intrusions; Bulgarians; Magyars; Ottomans; differences in - their history 17 - - -CHAPTER II. - -GREECE AND THE GREEK COLONIES. - - -§ 1. _The Eastern or Greek Peninsula._ - -Geographical and historical characteristics of the Eastern, Greek, - or Byzantine peninsula 18-19 - -Its chief divisions; Thrace and Illyria; their relations to Greece 19-20 - -Greece Proper and its peninsulas 20-21 - -Peloponnêsos 21 - - -§ 2. _Insular and Asiatic Greece._ - -Extent of _Continuous Hellas_ 21 - -The Islands 22 - -Asiatic Greece 22-23 - - -§ 3. _Ethnology of the Eastern Peninsula._ - -The Greeks and the kindred races 23 - -Illyrians, Albanians, or Skipetar 24 - -Inhabitants of Epeiros, Macedonia, Sicily, and Italy 24 - -Pelasgians 24-25 - -The Greek Nation 25 - - -§ 4. _Earliest Geography of Greece and the Neighbouring Lands._ - -Homeric Greece: its extent and tribal divisions 25-27 - -Use of the name _Epeiros_ 26 - -The cities: their groupings unlike those of later times; supremacy - of Mykênê 27 - -Extent of Greek colonization in Homeric times 28 - -The Asiatic catalogue 28 - -Probable kindred of all the neighbouring nations 28 - -Phœnician and Greek settlements in the islands 28 - - -§ 5. _Change from Homeric to Historic Greece._ - -Changes in Peloponnêsos; Dorian and Aitolian settlements 29 - -Later divisions of Peloponnêsos 29-30 - -Change in Northern Greece; Thessaly 30 - -Akarnania and the Corinthian colonies 31 - -Foundation and destruction of cities 31 - - -§ 6. _The Greek Colonies._ - -The Ægæan and Asiatic colonies 32-33 - -Early greatness of the Asiatic cities; Milêtos 32 - -Their submission to Lydians and Persians 32-33 - -The Thracian colonies; abiding greatness of Thessalonikê - and Byzantion 33 - -More distant colonies; Sicily, Italy, Dalmatia 33-34 - -Parts of the Mediterranean not colonized by the Greeks; - Phœnician settlements; struggles in Sicily and Cyprus 34-35 - -Greek colonies in Africa, Gaul, and Spain 35 - -Colonies on the Euxine; abiding greatness of Cherson and Trebizond 36 - -Beginning of the artificial Greek nation 36 - - -§ 7. _Growth of Macedonia and Epeiros._ - -Growth of Macedonia; Philip; Alexander and the Successors; - effects of their conquests 37 - -Epeiros under Pyrrhos; Athamania 37 - -The Macedonian kingdoms; Egypt; Syria 38 - -Independent states in Asia; Pergamos 38 - -Asiatic states; advance of Greek culture 39 - -Free cities; Hêrakleia 39 - -Sinôpê; Bosporos 39 - - -§ 8. _Later Geography of Independent Greece._ - -The Confederations; Achaia, Aitolia; smaller confederations 40 - -Macedonian possessions 40 - -First Roman possessions east of the Hadriatic 40 - -Progress of Roman conquest in Macedonia and Greece 41 - -Special character of Greek history 42 - - -CHAPTER III. - -FORMATION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. - -Meanings of the name Italy; its extent under the Roman commonwealth 43 - -Characteristics of the Italian peninsula; the great islands 44 - - -§ 1. _The Inhabitants of Italy and Sicily._ - -Ligurians and Etruscans 45 - -The Italian nations; Latins and Oscans 45-46 - -Other nations; Iapygians; Gauls; Veneti; use of the name _Venetia_ 46-47 - -Greek colonies in Italy; Kymê and Ankôn 47 - -The southern colonies; their history 47-48 - -Inhabitants of Sicily; Sikanians and Sikels 48 - -Phœnician and Greek settlements; rivalry of Aryan and - Semitic powers 48-49 - - -§ 2. _Growth of the Roman Power in Italy._ - -Gradual conquest of Italy; different positions of the Italian - states 49 - -Origin of Rome; its Latin element dominant 49-50 - -Early Latin dominion of Rome 50 - -Conquest of Veii; more distant wars 50 - -Incorporation of the Italian states 50-51 - - -§ 3. _The Western Provinces._ - -Nature of the Roman provinces 51 - -Eastern and Western provinces 52 - -First Roman possessions in Sicily; conquest of Syracuse 53 - -State of Sicily; its Greek civilization 53 - -Sardinia and Corsica 53-54 - -Cisalpine Gaul 54-55 - -Liguria; Venetia; Istria; foundation of Aquileia 55 - -Spain; its inhabitants; Iberians; Celts; Greek and Phœnician - colonies 55-56 - -Conquest and Romanization of Spain 56-57 - -Transalpine Gaul; the Province 57 - -Conquests of Cæsar; threefold division of Gaul 57-58 - -Boundaries of Gaul purely geographical; survival of nomenclature 57-58 - -Roman Africa; restoration of Carthage 58-60 - - -§ 4. _The Eastern Provinces._ - -Contrast between the Eastern and Western provinces; Greek - civilization in the East 60 - -Distinctions among the Eastern provinces; boundary of Tauros 60-61 - -The Illyrian provinces; kingdom of Skodra; conquest of Dalmatia - and Istria 62-63 - -The outlying Greek lands: Crete, Cyprus, Kyrênê 63 - -The Asiatic provinces; province of Asia; Mithridatic War; - independence of Lykia 64 - -Syria; Palestine 65 - -Rome and Parthia 65 - -Conquest of Egypt; the Roman Peace 66 - - -§ 5. _Conquests under the Empire._ - -Conquests from Augustus to Nero; incorporation of vassal kingdoms 66-67 - -Attempted conquest of Germany; frontiers of Rhine and Danube; - conquests on the Danube 67-68 - -Attempt on Arabia 68 - -Annexation of Thrace and Byzantion 68 - -Conquest of Britain; the wall 69 - -Conquests of Trajan; his Asiatic conquests surrendered by Hadrian 70 - -Arabia Petræa 70 - -Dacia; change of the name 70-71 - -Roman, Greek, and Oriental parts of the Empire 71 - - -CHAPTER IV. - -THE DISMEMBERMENT OF THE EMPIRE. - - -§ 1. _The Later Geography of the Empire._ - -Changes under the Empire; loss of old divisions 73 - -New divisions of Italy under Augustus 74 - -Division of the Empire under Diocletian 74-75 - -The four Prætorian Prefectures 75 - -Prefecture of the East; its character 75-76 - -Its dioceses; the East; Egypt, Asia, Pontos 76 - -Diocese of Thrace; provinces of Scythia and Europa 76-77 - -Great cities of the Eastern prefecture 77 - -Prefecture of Illyricum; position of Greece 77-78 - -Dioceses of Macedonia and Dacia; province of Achaia 78 - -Prefecture of Italy; its extent 78 - -Dioceses of Italy, Illyricum, and Africa; greatness of Carthage 79 - -Prefecture of Gaul 79 - -Diocese of Spain; its African territory 79 - -Dioceses of Gaul and Britain; province of Valentia 79-80 - - -§ 2. _The Division of the Empire._ - -Change in the position of Rome 80 - -Division of the Empire, A.D. 395 81 - -Rivalry with Parthia and Persia inherited by the Eastern Empire 81-82 - -Teutonic invasions; no Teutonic settlements in the East 82-83 - - -§ 3. _The Teutonic Settlements within the Empire._ - -The Wandering of the Nations 83 - -New nomenclature of the Teutonic nations 83-84 - -Warfare on the Rhine and Danube; Roman outposts beyond the rivers 84 - -Teutonic confederations; Marcomanni; Quadi 84-85 - -Franks, Alemans, Saxons; Germans within the Empire 85-86 - -Beginning of national kingdoms 86 - -Loss of the Western provinces of Rome 86 - -Settlements within the Empire by land and by sea 87 - -Franks, Burgundians, Goths, Vandals 87-88 - -Early history of the Goths 88-89 - -The West-Gothic kingdom in Gaul and Spain 89-90 - -Alans, Suevi, Vandals; the Vandals in Africa 89-90 - -The Franks; use of the name _Francia_ 91 - -Alemans, Thuringians; Low-Dutch tribes 91 - -The Frankish dominions; Roman Germany Teutonized afresh; - peculiar position of the Franks 91-93 - -Celtic remnant in Armorica or Britanny 93 - -The Burgundians; various uses of the name _Burgundy_; - separate history of Provence 93-94 - -Inroads of the Huns; battle of Châlons; origin of Venice 94 - -Nominal reunion of the Empire in 476 94 - -Reigns of Odoacer and Theodoric 94-95 - - -§ 4. _Settlement of the English in Britain._ - -Withdrawal of the Roman troops from Britain 95 - -Special character of the English Conquest of Britain 96 - -The Low-Dutch settlers, Angles, Saxons, Jutes; origin of the - name _English_ 97 - -The Welsh and Scots 98 - - -§ 5. _The Eastern Empire._ - -Comparison of the two Empires; no Teutonic settlements in the - Eastern 98 - -The Tetraxite Goths 98 - -Rivalry with Parthia continued under the revived Persian kingdom 98-99 - -Position of Armenia 99 - -Momentary conquests of Trajan 99 - -Conquests of Marcus, Severus, and Diocletian; cessions of Jovian 100 - -Division of Armenia; Hundred Years’ Peace 100 - -Summary 101-102 - - -CHAPTER V. - -THE FINAL DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE. - - -§ 1. _The Reunion of the Empire._ - -Continued existence of the Empire; position of the Teutonic kings 103 - -Extent of the Empire at the accession of Justinian 104 - -Conquests of Justinian; their effects 104-106 - -Provence ceded to the Franks 105 - - -§ 2. _Settlement of the Lombards in Italy._ - -Early history of the Lombards; Gepidæ, Avars 106-107 - -Possibility of Teutonic powers on the Danube 107 - -Lombard conquest of Italy; its partial nature; territory kept - by the Empire 107-108 - - -§ 3. _Rise of the Saracens._ - -Loss of the Spanish province by the Empire 108 - -Wars of Chosroes and Heraclius 109 - -Extension of Roman power on the Euxine 109-110 - -Relation of the Arabs to Rome and Persia 110 - -Union of the Arabs under Mahomet; renewed Aryan and Semitic strife 110 - -Loss of the Eastern and African provinces of Rome 111 - -Saracen conquest of Persia 111 - -Conquest of Spain; Saracen province in Gaul 111-112 - -Effects of the Saracen conquests; distinction between the - Latin, Greek, and Eastern provinces 112 - -Greatest extent of Saracen provinces 112 - -Loss of Septimania 113 - - -§ 4. _Settlements of the Slavonic Nations._ - -Movements of the Slaves; Avars, Magyars, &c. 113-114 - -Geographical separation of the Slaves 114 - -Analogy between Teutons and Slaves 114 - -Slavonic settlements under Heraclius; the Dalmatian cities; - displacement of the Illyrians 115 - -Slavonic settlements in Greece 115-116 - -Settlement of the Bulgarians 116 - -Curtailment of the Empire; moral influence of Constantinople 116-117 - - -§ 5. _The Transfer of the Western Empire to the Franks._ - -Conquests of the Franks in Germany and Gaul 117-119 - -Their position in Germany, Northern Gaul, and Southern Gaul 119-120 - -Division of the Frankish dominion; Austria and Neustria 120-121 - -Use of the name _Francia_; Teutonic and Latin _Francia_; - modern forms of the name 121 - -The Karlings; their conquests; German character of their power 121-122 - -The great powers of the eighth century: Romans, Franks, Saracens 122 - -Character of the Caliphate; its divisions 122 - -Relations between the Franks and the Empire 123 - -Lombard conquest of the Exarchate 123 - -Conquest of the Lombards by Charles the Great; he holds - Lombardy as a separate kingdom 123 - -His Roman title of Patrician 123-124 - -Effects of his Imperial coronation; final division of the Empire 124 - -The two Empires become severally German and Greek; their - separation and rivalry 124-125 - -The two Empires and the two Caliphates 125-126 - -Extent of the Carolingian Empire 126 - -Conquest of Saxony; dealings with Scandinavia; frontier of - the Eider 126-127 - -Relations with the Slaves; overthrow of the Avars 127 - -The Spanish March 128 - -Divisions of the Empire; kingdoms of Aquitaine and Italy 128 - -Use of the names _Francia_, _Gallia_, _Germania_ 129 - - -§ 6. _Northern Europe._ - -Lands beyond the Empire: Scandinavia and Britain 129 - -Stages of English Conquest in Britain; Teutonic and Celtic - states 129-130 - -Supremacy of Wessex 130 - -Denmark; Norway; Sweden 130-131 - -Different directions of the Scandinavian settlements 131 - -Summary 131-133 - -Religious changes 132 - -Note on the Slavonic settlements 133 - - -CHAPTER VI. - -THE BEGINNING OF THE MODERN EUROPEAN STATES. - - -§ 1. _The Division of the Frankish Empire._ - -Break-up of the Frankish power; origin of the states of - modern Europe 134 - -Kingdoms of Italy and Aquitaine 134 - -Division of 817 135 - -Union of Neustria and Aquitaine; first glimpses of modern France 135 - -Division of Verdun; Eastern and Western _Francia_; _Lotharingia_; - the Western Kingdom or Karolingia 137 - -Middle Kingdom or _Burgundy_ 137 - -Union under Charles the Fat; division on his deposition 137 - -No formal titles used; various names for the German Kingdom 138 - -Connexion between the German Kingdom and the Roman Empire 139 - -Extent of the German Kingdom; its duchies and _marks_ 139-140 - -Lotharingia 140-141 - -Extent of the Western Kingdom 141 - -Its great fiefs; Aquitaine; France; Normandy cut off from France 142 - -Origin of the French kingdom and nation; union of the duchy of - France with the Western kingdom 143 - -New use of the word _France_; title of _Rex Francorum_ 143-144 - -Paris the kernel of France 144 - -Various uses of the name _Burgundy_ 144 - -The French Duchy; the Middle Kingdom; Transjurane and - Cisjurane Burgundy 144-145 - -Great cities of the Burgundian kingdom 145 - -Separation of Burgundy from the Frankish kingdom; its union - with Germany 145-146 - -Its later history; mainly swallowed up by France, but partly - represented by Switzerland 146 - -Kingdom of Italy; its extent; separate principalities 146-147 - -Italy represents the Lombard kingdom; Milan its capital 147 - -Abeyance of the Western Empire; its restoration by Otto the - Great; the three Imperial kingdoms 147-148 - -Rivalry between France and the Empire 148 - - -§ 2. _The Eastern Empire._ - -Rivalry of the Eastern and Western Empires and Churches; - Greek character of the Eastern Empire; fluctuations in - its extent 149 - -The _Themes_; Asiatic Themes 149-151 - -The European Themes; Hellas; Lombardy; Sicily 151-152 - -Older Greek names supplanted by new ones 151 - -Character of the European and Asiatic dominion of the Empire; - its supremacy by sea 152 - -Losses and gains; Crete; Sicily; Italy; Dalmatia; Greece; Syria; - Bulgaria; Cherson 152-153 - -Greatness of the Empire under Basil the Second 153 - - -§ 3. _Origin of the Spanish Kingdoms._ - -Special position of Spain; the Saracen conquest 153-154 - -Growth of the Christian states 154-155 - -Castile; Aragon; Portugal 155 - -Break-up of the Western Caliphate 156 - - -§ 4. _Origin of the Slavonic States._ - -Slavonic and Turanian invasions of the Eastern Empire; - Bulgarians; Magyars; Great Moravia 156-157 - -Special character of the Hungarian kingdom; effects of its - religious connexion with the West 157 - -The Northern and Southern Slaves split asunder by the Magyars 158 - -The South-eastern Slaves 158 - -The North-western Slaves; Bohemia; Poland 159 - -Special position of Russia 159 - - -§ 5. _Northern Europe._ - -Scandinavian settlements 159-160 - -Growth of the kingdom of England 160 - -The Danish invasions; division between Ælfred and Guthrum; - Bernicia; Cumberland 161 - -Second West-Saxon advance; Wessex grows into England; - submission of Scotland and Strathclyde; Cumberland and Lothian 162 - -Use of the Imperial titles by the English kings; Northern Empire - of Cnut; England finally united by the Norman Conquest 162-163 - -Summary 163-165 - - -CHAPTER VII. - -THE ECCLESIASTICAL GEOGRAPHY OF WESTERN EUROPE. - -Permanence of ecclesiastical divisions; they preserve earlier - divisions; case of Lyons and Rheims 166-167 - -Patriarchates, Provinces, Dioceses 167 - -Bishoprics within and without the Empire 167-168 - - -§ 1. _The Great Patriarchates._ - -The Patriarchates suggested by the Prefectures 168 - -Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, Jerusalem 168-169 - -Later Patriarchates 169-170 - - -§ 2. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Italy._ - -Great numbers and smaller importance of the Italian bishoprics 170 - -Rivals of Rome; Milan, Aquileia, Ravenna 171 - -The immediate Roman province; other metropolitan sees 171-172 - - -§ 3. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Gaul and Germany._ - -Gaulish and German dioceses 172 - -Provinces of Southern Gaul; position of Lyons 172-173 - -New metropolitan sees; Toulouse, Alby, Avignon, Paris; - comparison of civil and ecclesiastical divisions 174 - -Provinces of Northern Gaul and Germany; history of Mainz 178-179 - -The archiepiscopal electors; other German provinces; Salzburg, - Bremen, Magdeburg 176-177 - -Modern arrangements in France, Germany, and the Netherlands 177 - - -§ 4. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Spain._ - -Peculiarities of Spanish ecclesiastical geography; effects of - the Saracen conquest 178 - -Gothic and later dioceses; neglect of the Pyrenæan barrier 178-179 - - -§ 5. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of the British Islands._ - -Analogy between Britain and Spain 179 - -Tribal nature of the Celtic episcopate 179-180 - -Scheme of Gregory the Great; the two English provinces; - relation of Scotland to York 180-181 - -Foundation of the English sees; territorial bishoprics 181 - -Canterbury and its suffragan; effects of the Norman Conquest 181-182 - -Province of York; Scotland and Ireland 182-183 - - -§ 6. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Northern and Eastern Europe._ - -The Scandinavian provinces; Lund, Upsala, Trondhjem 184 - -Poland and neighbouring lands; Gnezna, Riga, Leopol 184-185 - -Provinces of Hungary and Dalmatia 186 - - -CHAPTER VIII. - -THE IMPERIAL KINGDOMS. - -The German Kingdom; its relation to the Western Empire; falling - off of Italy and Burgundy 188-190 - -Loss of territory by the German kingdom; its extension to the - north-east 190-191 - -Geographical contrast of the earlier and the later Empire 191 - - -§ 1. _The Kingdom of Germany._ - -Changes of boundaries and nomenclature in Germany; Saxony; - Bavaria; Austria; Burgundy; Prussia 191-192 - -Extent of the Kingdom; fluctuations of its western boundary; - Lorraine; Elsass; the left bank of the Rhine 192-194 - -Fluctuations on the Burgundian frontier; union of Burgundy - with the Empire 194 - -Frontier of Germany and Italy; union of the crowns 195 - -Northern and eastern advance of the Empire; the _marks_ 195 - -Hungarian frontier; marks of Austria, Carinthia, and Carniola 196 - -Danish frontier; Danish mark; boundary of the Eider 196 - -The Slavonic frontier 197 - -The Saxon mark; Slavonic princes of Mecklenburg, Lübeck; - the Hansa 198-199 - -Marks of Brandenburg, Lausitz, and Meissen 199 - -Bohemia and Moravia 199 - -Polish frontier; Pomerania, Silesia 200 - -Germanization of the Slavonic lands 200-201 - -Internal geography; growth of the principalities 201 - -Growth of the marchlands; Brandenburg or Prussia, and Austria; - analogies elsewhere 202 - -Decline of the duchies; end of the _Gauverfassung_ 202 - -Growth of the House of Austria; separation of Switzerland and - the Netherlands 203 - -The Circles 203 - -Powers holding lands within and without the Empire; Austria; - Sweden; Brandenburg and Prussia; Hannover and Great Britain 203-204 - -Dissolution of the kingdom; the Confederation 204 - -Greatness of Prussia and Austria 204 - -The new Empire 204 - -Germany under the Saxon and Frankish kings; vanishing of Francia; - analogy of Wessex 205-206 - -Changes in the twelfth century; beginning of Brandenburg and - Austria; the duchies and the circles 206-207 - -Duchy of Saxony; its divisions and growth 207 - -Break-up of the duchy; Westfalia; the new Saxony 207 - -Duchy of Brunswick; electorate and kingdom of Hannover 208 - -The new Saxony; Lauenburg; the Saxon Electorate 208-209 - -The North Mark of Saxony or Mark of Brandenburg 209 - -House of Hohenzollern; union of Brandenburg and Prussia 210 - -Advances in Pomerania, Westfalia, &c. 210 - -German character of the Prussian state; its contrast with - Austria; use of the name _Prussia_ 210-211 - -Conquest of Silesia; Polish acquisitions of Prussia; East - Friesland 211-212 - -Saxon Possessions of Denmark and Sweden 212-213 - -Free cities of Saxony; the Hansa; the cities and the bishoprics 213-214 - -Duchy of _Francia_; held by the bishops of Würzburg; the - Franconian circle 214 - -The Rhenish circles; Hessen; Bamberg; Nürnberg; the - ecclesiastical states on the Rhine 214-215 - -Palatinate of the Rhine; Upper Palatinate 215 - -Bavaria; its relations towards the Palatinate and towards Austria 215 - -Archbishopric of Salzburg 215 - -Lotharingia; falling off from the Empire; the later Lorraine - and Elsass 216 - -Swabia; ecclesiastical powers 216 - -Swabian lands of the Confederates 216 - -Baden and Württemberg 216 - -Circle of Austria; house of Habsburg 217 - -Extent of its German lands; Tyrol; Elsass; loss of Swabian lands 217 - -Bohemia and its dependencies 217 - -Trent and Brixen 217 - -Circle of Burgundy; not purely German; its origin 218 - - -§ 2. _The Confederation and Empire of Germany._ - -Germany changes from a kingdom to a confederation 218 - -The _Bund_; the new Confederation and Empire; the Empire - still federal 219 - -Wars of the French Revolution; loss of the left bank of the Rhine 220 - -Suppression of free cities and ecclesiastical states; new - electorates 220 - -Peace of Pressburg; new kingdoms; cessions made by Austria 221 - -Title of ‘Emperor of Austria;’ Confederation of the Rhine; end of - the Western Empire 221 - -German territories of Denmark and Sweden 221-222 - -Losses of Prussia and Austria; French annexations 222 - -Kingdoms of Saxony and Westfalia; Grand duchy of Frankfurt 222 - -Germany wiped out of the map 222 - -Losses of Prussia; Danzig; duchy of Warsaw 222-223 - -The German Confederation; princes holding lands within and - without the Confederation; kingdom of Hanover 223 - -Increase of Prussian territory; dismemberment of Saxony 224 - -Lands recovered by Austria; German possessions of Denmark and - the Netherlands; Sweden withdraws from Germany 224-225 - -Comparison of Prussia and Austria; Hannover 225 - -Kingdoms of Bavaria, Saxony, Württemberg; other German states; - the free cities; Lüttich passes to Belgium 226-227 - -Revival of German national life 227 - -Affairs of Luxemburg 228-229 - -War of Sleswick and Holstein; the duchies ceded to Austria - and Prussia 228 - -War of 1866; North German Confederation; exclusion of Austria; - great advance of Prussia 228-229 - -War with France; the new German Empire; recovery of - Elsass-Lothringen 229-230 - -Comparison of the old kingdom and the new Empire; name - of _Prussia_ 230-231 - - -§ 3. _The Kingdom of Italy._ - -Small geographical importance of the kingdom; changes on the - Alpine frontier 231-232 - -Case of Trieste 233 - -Apulia, Sicily, Venice, no part of the kingdom; their relation - to the Eastern Empire 233-234 - -Special history of the house of Savoy 234 - -Extent of the kingdom; Neustria and Austria; Æmilia, Tuscany; - Romagna 234-235 - -Lombardy proper; the marches 235 - -Comparison of Germany and Italy; the commonwealths, the - tyrants, the Popes; four stages of Italian history 235-236 - -Northern Italy; the Marquesses of Montferrat; the Lombard - cities; the Veronese march 236-238 - -Central Italy; Romagna and the march of Ancona; the Tuscan - commonwealths; Pisa and Genoa; Rome and the Popes 238-239 - -The tyrannies; Spanish dominion: practical abeyance of the - Empire in Italy; Imperial and Papal fiefs 239-240 - -Palaiologoi at Montferrat; house of Visconti at Milan; the duchy - of Milan; its dismemberment; duchy of Parma and Piacenza 240-242 - -Land power of Venice 242-243 - -Other principalities; duchy of Mantua, of Ferrara and Modena; - difference in their tenure 243-244 - -Romagna; Bologna; Urbino; advance of the Popes 244 - -The Tuscan cities; Lucca; rivalry of Pisa and Genoa; Siena; - Florence 245 - -Duchy of Florence; grand duchy of Tuscany 246 - - -§ 4. _The Later Geography of Italy._ - -The kingdom practically forgotten; position of Charles the Fifth 246 - -Italy a geographical expression; changes in the Italian states 246-247 - -Dominion of the two branches of the house of Austria 247 - -Italy mapped into larger states; exceptions at Monaco and - San Marino 247 - -Venice; Milan Spanish and Austrian; its dismemberment in favour - of Savoy; end of Montferrat and Mantua 248-249 - -Parma and Piacenza; separation of Modena and Ferrara; Genoa - and Lucca; Grand Duchy of Tuscany; advance of the Popes 249 - -The Norman kingdom of Sicily; Benevento 250 - -The Two Sicilies; their various unions and divisions; their - relations to the houses of Austria, Savoy and Bourbon 250-251 - -Use of the name _Sardinia_ 251 - -Wars of the French Revolution; the new republics; Treaty of - Campo Formio; Piedmont joined to France 251-253 - -Restoration of the Pope and the King of the Two Sicilies 253 - -The French kingdoms; Etruria; Italy 253 - -Various annexations; Rome becomes French; Murat King of Naples 253-254 - -Italy under French dominion; revival of the Italian name 254-255 - -Settlement of 1814-1815; the princes restored, but not the - commonwealths 255 - -Austrian kingdom of Lombardy and Venice; Genoa annexed by - Piedmont 255-256 - -The smaller states; the Papal states; Kingdom of the Two - Sicilies 256 - -Union of Italy comes from Piedmont; earlier movements; war of - 1859; Kingdom of Italy: Savoy and Nizza ceded to France 257-258 - -Recovery of Venetia and Rome; parts of the kingdom not recovered 258 - -Freedom of San Marino 258 - - -§ 5. _The Kingdom of Burgundy._ - -Union of Burgundy with Germany; dying out of the kingdom; - chiefly swallowed up by France, but represented by - Switzerland 258-259 - -Boundaries of the kingdom; fluctuation; Romance tongue prevails - in it 259 - -History of the Burgundian Palatinate; Besançon; Montbeliard 261 - -The Lesser Burgundy; partly German 261 - -The Dukes of Zähringen; the ecclesiastical states; the free cities; - the free lands; growth of the Old League of High Germany 262 - -Growth of Savoy; Burgundian possessions of its counts 263 - -States between the Palatinate and the Mediterranean; Bresse - and Bugey; principalities and free cities 263 - -County of Provence; its connexion with France 263-264 - -Progress of French annexation: 1310-1791: Lyons; the Dauphiny: - Vienne; Valence; Provence; Avignon and Venaissin 264-265 - -Nizza 265 - -History of Orange 265-266 - -States which have split off from the Imperial kingdoms: - Switzerland; Savoy; the duchy of Burgundy by Belgium - and the Netherlands 266-267 - -The Austrian power; its position as a marchland; its union - with Hungary; its relation to Eastern Europe 267-268 - - -§ 6. _The Swiss Confederation._ - -German origin of the Confederation; popular errors; sketch - of Swiss history 268-270 - -The Three Lands; the cities: Luzern, Zürich, Bern; the Eight - Ancient Cantons 270 - -Allies and subjects; dominion of Zürich and Bern; conquests - from Austria 270-271 - -Italian conquests; first conquests from Savoy; League of Wallis 271-272 - -The Thirteen Cantons 272 - -League of Graubünden; further Italian and Savoyard conquests 272-273 - -History of Geneva; territory restored to Savoy; division of - Gruyères 273-274 - -The Allied States; Neufchâtel; Constanz 274 - -The Confederation independent of the Empire; its position as - a middle state 274-275 - -Wars of the French Revolution; Helvetic Republic; freedom of - the subject lands; annexations to France 275-276 - -Act of Mediation; the nineteen cantons 276 - -The present Swiss Confederation 276 - -History of Neufchâtel 276 - - -§ 7. _The State of Savoy._ - -Position and growth of Savoy; three divisions of the Savoyard - lands; popular confusions 277-278 - -The Savoyard power originally Burgundian; Maurienne; Aosta 278 - -First Italian possessions 279 - -Burgundian advance; lands north of the lake 280-281 - -Relations to Geneva, France, and Bern 281-282 - -Acquisition of Nizza 282 - -Italian advance of Savoy; principally of Achaia, of Piedmont; - Saluzzo 283-284 - -Savoy a middle state 284 - -French influence and occupation; decline of Savoy 285 - -Loss of lands north of the lake; further losses to Bern and - her allies; recovery of the lands south of the lake; - the Savoyard power becomes mainly Italian 286 - -Savoy falls back in Burgundy and advances in Italy; history - of Saluzzo; finally acquired in exchange for Bresse, &c. 287 - -Duchy of Savoy annexed to France; restored; annexed again 288 - -French annexation of Nizza; Aosta the one Burgundian remnant 288 - -Savoyard advance in Italy 289 - - -§ 8. _The Duchy of Burgundy and the Low Countries._ - -Position of the Valois dukes as a middle power; result of - their twofold vassalage 290 - -Schemes of a Burgundian kingdom; their final effects; Belgium - and the Netherlands 290-291 - -History of the duchy of Burgundy; its union with Flanders, - Artois, and the county of Burgundy; relations to France - and the Empire 292-293 - -The Netherlands; the counts of Flanders; their Imperial fiefs 293 - -Holland and Friesland 293 - -Brabant; Hainault; union of Holland and Hainault 294 - -Common points in all these states; the great cities; Romance - and Teutonic dialects 294-295 - -South-western states; Liége; Luxemburg; Limburg; duchy - of Geldern 295 - -Middle position of these states; French influence; union - under the Burgundian dukes 296 - -Advance under Philip the Good; Namur, Brabant, and Limburg, - Holland and Hainault 296-297 - -The towns on the Somme; Flanders and Artois released - from homage 297-298 - -Philip’s last acquisition of Luxemburg; advance under Charles - the Bold and Charles the Fifth; union of the Netherlands 298 - -The Netherlands pass to Spain; war of independence; its - imperfect results 299 - -The Seven United Provinces; their independence of the Empire; - their colonies; lack of a name; use of the word _Dutch_ 299-300 - -The Spanish Netherlands; English possession of Dunkirk; - advance of France; the Spanish Netherlands pass to Austria 301 - -Annexation by France; kingdom of Holland; all the Burgundian - possessions French 302 - -Kingdom of the Netherlands; Liége incorporated; relation - of Luxemburg to Germany 303 - -Division of the Netherlands and Belgium; separation of - Luxemburg from Germany 303 - -General history and result of the Burgundian power 303-304 - - -§ 9. _The Dominions of Austria._ - -Origin of the name _Austria_; anomalous position of the - Austrian power; the so-called ‘Empire’ of Austria 305-307 - -The _Eastern Mark_; becomes a duchy; division of Carinthia; - union of Austria and Styria 307-308 - -County of Görz 309 - -Austria, &c., annexed by Bohemia; great power of Ottokar 309 - -House of Habsburg; their Swabian and Alsatian lands; their loss 309-311 - -King Rudolf; break-up of the power of Ottokar; Albert duke - of Austria and Styria 310 - -Relations between Austria and the Empire; division of the - Austrian dominions 311-312 - -Acquisition of Carinthia and Tyrol; commendation of Trieste; - loss of Thurgau 312-313 - -Austrian kings and emperors; possessions beyond the Empire 313-315 - -Union with Bohemia and Hungary 314-317 - -Consequences of the union with Hungary; slow recovery of - the kingdom 317 - -Acquisition of Görz; advance towards Italy; Austrian - dominion and influence in Italy 318 - -Connexion of Austria and Burgundy; the Austrian Netherlands 318-319 - -Loss of Elsass; of Silesia; acquisition of Poland; Dalmatia 320 - -Position and dominions of Maria Theresa 320-321 - -New use of the name _Austria_; the Austrian ‘Empire’ in 1811 321-322 - -Misuse of the Illyrian name 322 - -Austria in 1814-1815; recovery of Dalmatia; annexation of - Ragusa; of Cracow 322-323 - -Separation from Hungary; reconquest; the ‘Austro-Hungarian - Monarchy;’ Bosnia, Herzegovina, Spizza 323-324 - - -CHAPTER IX. - -THE KINGDOM OF FRANCE. - -Origin and growth of France; comparison with Austria 325 - -How far Karolingia split off from the Empire 326 - -France a nation as well as a power 326-327 - -Use of the name of _France_; its dukes acquire the western - kingdom; extent of their dominion 327-328 - -Two forms of annexation; first, of fiefs of the crown; - secondly, of lands beyond the kingdom 328 - -Distinctions among the fiefs; the great vassals; Normandy; - Britanny 328 - -The Twelve Peers; different position of the bishops in Germany - and Karolingia 328-329 - - -§ 1. _Incorporation of the Vassal States._ - -The duchy of France in 987; the King cut off from the sea 329-330 - -The neighbouring states; position of the Parisian kings 330 - -The kings less powerful than the dukes; advantages of their - kingship; first advances of the kings 331 - -The House of Anjou; gradual union of Normandy, Anjou, Maine, - Aquitaine, and Gascony 331-333 - -Acquisition of continental Normandy, Anjou, &c. 333-334 - -The English kings keep Aquitaine and insular Normandy 334 - -Sudden greatness of France 334 - -Fiefs of Aragon in Southern Gaul; counts of Toulouse and - Barcelona 334-335 - -Effects of the Albigensian war; French annexations; - Roussillon and Barcelona freed from homage 335 - -Languedoc 335 - -Other annexations of Saint Lewis 335-336 - -Annexation of Champagne; temporary possession of Navarre 336-337 - -The Hundred Years’ War; relations between France and Aquitaine; - momentary possession of Aquitaine by Philip the Fair 337 - -Peace of Bretigny; Aquitaine and other lands freed from homage 337-338 - -Peace of Troyes; momentary union of the French and English crowns 338 - -Final annexation of Aquitaine; beginning of the modern French - kingdom 338-339 - -Growths of the Dukes of Burgundy; the towns on the Somme; - momentary annexation of Artois and the County of Burgundy 339-340 - -Annexation of the duchy of Burgundy; Flanders and Artois - released from homage; analogy with Aquitaine 340-343 - - -§ 2. _Foreign Annexations of France._ - -Relations between France and England; Boulogne; Dunkirk 341-342 - -Relations between France and Spain; Roussillon; Navarre; - Andorra 342-343 - -Advance at the cost of the Imperial kingdoms, first Burgundy, - then Germany 343 - -Effect of the Burgundian conquests of France; relations with - Savoy and Switzerland 344 - -History of the _Langue d’oc_ 345 - -French dominion in Italy; slight extent of real annexation 345-346 - -French annexations from Germany; the Three Bishoprics; -effect of isolated conquests 346 - -French acquisitions in Elsass; France reaches and passes the - Rhine; increased isolation 347-348 - -Temporary annexation of Bar; annexation of Roussillon; - advance in the Netherlands 348-349 - -Annexation of Franche Comté and Besançon; seizure of - Strassburg; annexation of Orange 349-350 - -Annexation of Lorraine; thorough incorporation of French - conquests; effect of geographical continuity 350-351 - -Purchase of Corsica; its effects; birth of Buonaparte 351-352 - - -§ 3. _The Colonial Dominion of France._ - -French colonies in North America; Acadia; Canada; Louisiana 352 - -Colonial rivalry of France and England; English conquest - of Canada 353 - -French West India Islands 353 - -The French power in India; Bourbon and Mauritius 353-354 - - -§ 4. _Acquisitions of France during the Revolutionary Wars._ - -Distinction between the Republican and ‘Imperial’ Conquests 355-356 - -First class of annexations; Avignon, Mülhausen, Montbeliard; - Geneva; bishopric of Basel 355 - -Second zone; traditions of Gaul and the Rhine; Netherlands; - Savoy, &c.; feelings of Buonaparte towards Switzerland 355-356 - -Character of Buonaparte’s conquests; dependent and incorporated - lands; division of Europe between France and Russia 356-357 - -The French power in 1811 357-358 - -Arrangements of 1814-1815 358-359 - -Later changes; annexation of Savoy, Nizza, and Mentone; - loss of Elsass and Lorraine 359 - -Losses among the colonies; independence of Hayti; sale of - Louisiana 359-360 - -Conquest of Algeria; character of African conquests 360 - - -CHAPTER X. - -THE EASTERN EMPIRE. - -Comparison of the Eastern and Western Empires; the Western - falls to pieces from within; the Eastern is broken to - pieces from without 362-363 - -Tendencies to separation in the Eastern Empire 363 - -Closer connexion of the East with the elder Empire; retention - of the Roman name; _Romania_ 363-364 - -Importance of the distinction of races in the East 364 - -The original races; Albanians, Greeks, Vlachs 364 - -Slavonic settlers 364 - -Turanian invasions from the North; Bulgarians, Magyars, &c. 365 - -The Saracens 365 - -The Seljuk and Ottoman Turks; comparison of Bulgarians, - Magyars, and Ottomans 365 - -The Eastern Empire became nearly conterminous with the Greek - nation; reappearance of the other original races 366 - -The Latin Conquest, and the revived Byzantine Empire 366-367 - -States which arose out of the Empire or on its borders; - Sicily; Venice; Bulgaria; Hungary; Asiatic powers 367-368 - -Distinction between conquest and settlement 368 - - -§ 1. _Changes in the Frontier of the Empire._ - -Power of revival in the Empire 369 - -Western possessions of the Empire; losses in the islands; - advance in the mainland 369 - -Loss of Sardinia; gradual loss and temporary partial recovery - of Sicily 369-370 - -Fluctuations of the Imperial power in Italy; the Normans 370-371 - -Loss and recovery of Crete and Cyprus; separation of Cyprus 371-372 - -Summary of the history of the great islands 372-373 - -Relations to the Slavonic powers; three Slavonic groups 373 - -Bulgarian migrations; White Bulgaria; the first Bulgarian - kingdom south of the Danube 373-374 - -Use of the Bulgarian name 374 - -The slaves of Macedonia, &c. 375 - -Relations between the Empire and the Bulgarian kingdom 375 - -Recovery of Macedonia and Greece; use of the name _Hellênes_ 375-376 - -Servia, Croatia, and Dalmatia 376 - -Greatest extent of the first Bulgarian kingdom under Simeon 376-377 - -First conquest of Bulgaria 377 - -Second Bulgarian kingdom under Samuel; second conquest 377-378 - -Venice and Cherson 378 - -Asiatic conquests; annexation of Armenia 378-379 - -New enemies; Magyars; Turks 379 - -Revolt of Servia; loss of Belgrade 379 - -Advance of the Seljuk Turks; Sultans of _Roum_; loss of Antioch 379-380 - -Normans advance; loss of Corfu and Durazzo 380 - -Revival under John and Manuel, Komnênos; recovery of lands in - Asia and Europe 381 - -Splitting off of distant possessions; loss of Dalmatia; Latin - Kingdom of Cyprus 381 - -Third Bulgarian kingdom; the Empire more thoroughly Greek 382 - -Latin conquest of Constantinople; Act of Partition 383 - -Latin Empire of Romania 383-384 - -Latin kingdom of Thessalonikê 384-385 - -Despotat of Epeiros; Greek Empire of Thessalonikê; their - separation 385 - -Empire of Trebizond; loss of its western dominion 386 - -The old Empire continued in the Empire of Nikaia; its advance - in Europe and Asia; recovery of Constantinople 386-387 - -Loss in Asia and advance in Europe; recovery of Peloponnêsos 387-388 - -Advance in Macedonia and Epeiros 388 - -Losses in Asia; Knights of Saint John; advance of the Turks 389 - -Losses towards Servia and Bulgaria; conquests of Stephen Dushan 389-390 - -Fragmentary dominion of the Empire 390 - -Advance of the Turks in Europe; loss of Hadrianople; loss - of Philadelphia 390 - -Recovery of territory after the fall of Bajazet 390-391 - -Turkish conquest of Constantinople; of Peloponnêsos 391 - -States which grew out of the Empire; Slavonic, Hungarian, - and Rouman; Greek; Latin; Turkish 391-393 - - -§ 2. _The Kingdom of Sicily._ - -The Norman Power in Italy and Sicily; its relations to the - Eastern and Western Empires 393 - -Advance of the Normans in Italy; Aversa and Capua; duchy of - Apulia; Robert Wiscard in Epeiros 394-395 - -Norman conquest of Sicily 395 - -Roger King of Sicily; his conquests in Italy, Corfu, and Africa 395-396 - -Eastern dominion of the two Sicilian crowns; kingdom of - Margarito 396-397 - -Acre; Malta 398 - - -§ 3. _The Crusading States._ - -Comparison between Sicily and the crusading states 398 - -Jerusalem; Cyprus; Armenia 399 - -Extent of the Kingdom of Jerusalem; other Latin states in Syria; - loss and recovery of Jerusalem, final loss; loss of Acre 399-400 - -Kingdom of Cyprus; its relations to Jerusalem and Armenia 401 - -Frank principalities in Greece; possessions of the maritime - commonwealths 401-402 - - -§ 4. _The Eastern Dominion of Venice and Genoa._ - -The historic position of Venice springs from her relation to - the Eastern Empire 402-403 - -Connexion of her Greek and Dalmatian rule 402 - -Comparison between Venice and Sicily 402 - -Her share in the Act of Partition compared with her real - dominion; her main position Hadriatic 403-405 - -Venetian possessions not assigned by the partition; Crete; - Cyprus; Thessalonikê 404 - -Taking of Zara in the fourth crusade 405 - -Relations of the Dalmatian cities to Servia, Croatia, Venice, - Hungary, and the Empire 405-407 - -Pagania 406 - -Magyar Kingdom of Croatia; struggles between Venice and Hungary 407 - -Independence of Ragusa; Polizza 407 - -History of Corfu 408 - -Venetian posts in Peloponnêsos: history of Euboia; loss - of the Ægæan islands 409 - -Advance of Venice and Dalmatia, Peloponnêsos, and the - Western islands 410 - -Venice the champion against the Turk; losses of Venice; - fluctuations in the Western Islands 410-412 - -Conquest and loss of Peloponnêsos 412 - -Frontier of Ragusa 412 - -Venetian fiefs; history of the duchy of Naxos 413 - -Possessions of Genoa; Galata; her dominions in the Euxine 413-414 - -Genoese fiefs; Lesbos; Chios; the Maona 414 - -Revolutions of Rhodes; knights of Saint John; their removal - to Malta; revolutions of Malta 414-415 - - -§ 5. _The Principalities of the Greek Mainland._ - -Greek and Latin states; use of the name _Môraia_ 415-416 - -Lordship and duchy of Athens; the Catalans; the later - dukes; Ottoman conquest; momentary Venetian occupations 416-417 - -Salôna and Bodonitza 417 - -Principality of Achaia; recovery of Peloponnesian lands by - the Empire 417-418 - -Angevin overlordship in Achaia; dismemberment of the - principality 418 - -Patras under the Pope 418 - -Conquests of Constantine Palaiologos 418 - -Turkish conquest of Peloponnêsos; independence of Maina 419 - -Revolutions of Epeiros; dismemberment of the despotat; - recovery of Epeiros by the Empire 419 - -Servian conquests; beginning of the Albanian power; kings - of the house of Thopia 419-420 - -Servian dynasty in southern Epeiros; kingdom of Thessaly; - Turkish conquest 420 - -The Buondelmonti in Northern Epeiros; history of the house - of Tocco; _Karlili_; effects of their rule 420-421 - -Turkish conquest of Albania; revolt of Scanderbeg; Turkish - reconquest 421 - -Empire of Trebizond; its relations to Constantinople 422 - -Turkish conquest of Trebizond; of Perateia or Gothia 422-423 - - -§ 6. _The Slavonic States._ - -Effects of the Latin conquest on the Slavonic states 423 - -Comparison of Servia and Bulgaria; extent of Servia; its - relation to the Empire; conquest by Manuel Komnênos; - Servia independent 423-424 - -Relations towards Hungary; shiftings of Rama or Bosnia 424-425 - -Southern advance of Servia; Empire of Stephen Dushan 425 - -Break-up of the Servian power; the later Servian kingdom; - conquests and deliverances of Servia 426 - -Kingdom of Bosnia; loss of Jayce; duchy of Saint Saba or - Herzegovina; Turkish conquest of Bosnia; of Herzegovina 426-427 - -The Balsa at Skodra; loss of Skodra; beginning of Tzernagora - or Montenegro 428 - -Loss of Zabljak; establishment of Tzetinje 428 - -The Vladikas; the lay princes 429 - -Montenegrin conquests and losses 428-429 - -Greatest extent of the third Bulgarian kingdom; its decline; - shiftings of the frontier towards the Empire; Philippopolis 429-430 - -Break-up of the kingdom; principality of Dobrutcha; - Turkish conquest 430-431 - - -§ 7. _The Kingdom of Hungary._ - -Character and position of the Hungarian kingdom 431-432 - -Great Moravia overthrown by the Magyars; their relations to - the two Empires 432-433 - -The two Chrobatias separated by the Magyars; their geographical - position 433-434 - -Kingdom of Hungary; its relations to Croatia and Slavonia 434 - -Transsilvania or Siebenbürgen; origin of the name; German - and other colonies 435 - -Origin of the Roumans; their northern migration 435-436 - -Rouman element in the third Bulgarian kingdom; occupation - of the lands beyond the Danube; Great and Little Wallachia; - Transsilvania; Moldavia 436-437 - -Conquests of Lewis the Great; Dalmatia; occupation of Halicz - and Vladimir; pledging of Zips 437 - -Turkish invasion; disputes for Dalmatia 438 - -Reign of Matthias Corvinus; extension of Hungary east and west 438 - -Loss of Belgrade; the Austrian kings; Turkish conquest of - Hungary; fragment kept by the Austrian kings; their tribute - to the Turk; the Rouman lands 438-439 - -Recovery of Hungary from the Turk; peace of Carlowitz; - of Passarowitz; losses at the peace of Belgrade 439-440 - -Galicia and Lodomeria; Bukovina; Dalmatia 440-441 - -Annexation of Spizza; administration of Bosnia and Herzegovina; - renewed vassalage to the Turk 440-441 - - -§ 8. _The Ottoman Power._ - -The Ottoman Turks; special character of their invasion; - contrast with other Turanian invasions; comparison with - the Saracens in Spain 442-443 - -Comparison of the Ottoman dominions with the Eastern Empire 443 - -Effects of the Mongolian invasion; origin of the Ottomans; - their position in Europe and Asia; break-up and reunion - of their dominion; its permanence 443-444 - -Advance of the Ottomans in Asia; in Europe; dominion of - Bajazet 444-445 - -Victory of Timour; reunion of the Ottoman power under - Mahomet the First 445-446 - -Mahomet the Second; taking of Constantinople; extent of - his dominion; taking of Otranto 446 - -Conquest of Syria and Egypt 447 - -Reign of Suleiman; his conquests; Hungary; Rhodes; Naxos; - his African overlordship 447 - -Conquest of Cyprus; decline of the Ottoman power 447-448 - -Greatest extent of the Ottoman power; Crete and Podolia 448 - -Ottoman loss of Hungary; loss and recovery of Peloponnêsos; - Bosnia and Herzegovina; union of inland and maritime Illyria 448 - -English vassalage in Cyprus 449 - -Relations between Russia and the Turk; Azof; Treaty of - Kainardji; Crim; Jedisan; Bessarabia; shiftings of - the Moldavian frontier 449-450 - - -§ 9. _The Liberated States._ - -Lands liberated from the Turk; comparison of Hungary - with Greece, Servia, &c. 450 - -The Servian people the first to revolt 450 - -The Ionian Islands the first liberated state; the Septinsular - Republic; overlordship of the Turk 451 - -The Venetian outposts given to the Turk; surrender of Parga; - last Ottoman encroachment 451 - -The Ionian Islands under British protection 451 - -The Greek War of Independence; extent of the Greek nation; - extent of the liberated lands 451-452 - -Kingdom of Greece; addition of the Ionian Islands; promised - addition in Thessaly and Epeiros 452 - -First deliverance and reconquest of Servia 453 - -Second deliverance; Servia a tributary principality 452-453 - -Withdrawal of Turkish garrisons 453 - -Independence and enlargement of Servia 453 - -Fourfold division of the Servian nation 453 - -The Rouman principalities; union of Wallachia and Moldavia 453 - -Independence and new frontier of Roumania 453-454 - -Deliverance of part of Bulgaria; the Bulgaria of San Stefano 454 - -Treaty of Berlin; division of Bulgaria into free, half-free, - and enslaved 454-455 - -Principality of Bulgaria; Eastern Roumelia 454 - -General survey 455-460 - -Note on M. Sathas 460-461 - - -CHAPTER XI. - -THE BALTIC LANDS. - -Lands beyond the two Empires; the British islands; Scandinavia; - Spain 462-463 - -_Quasi_-imperial position of certain powers 462-463 - -Comparison of Scandinavia and Spain; of Aragon and Sweden 463-464 - -Eastern and Western aspect of Scandinavia 464 - -General view of the Baltic lands; the Northern Slavonic lands, - their relations to Germany and Hungary 465 - -Characteristics of Poland and Russia 465 - -The primitive nations, Aryan and non-Aryan 455-466 - -Central position of the North-Slavonic lands; barbarian - neighbours of Russia and Scandinavia; Russian conquest - and colonization by land 467 - -Relation of the Baltic lands to the two Empires; Norway - always independent; relations of Sweden and Denmark - to the Western Empire 467 - -The Western Empire and the West-Slavonic lands; relations - of Poland to the Western Empire 467 - -Relations of Russia to the Eastern Church and Empire; - Imperial style of Russia 468 - - -§ 1. _The Scandinavian Lands after the Separation of the Empires._ - -The Baltic still mainly held by the earlier races; formation - of the Scandinavian kingdom 468-499 - -Formation of the Danish kingdom; its extent; frontier of - the Eider; the Danish march 469 - -Use of the name _Northmen_; formation of the kingdom of - Norway 469-470 - -The Swedes and Gauts; the Swedish kingdom 470 - -Its fluctuations towards Norway and Denmark; its growth - towards the north 470 - -Western conquests and settlements of the Danes and Northmen 471 - -Settlements in Britain and Gaul 471 - -Settlements in Orkney, Man, Iceland, Ireland, &c. 471 - -Expeditions to the East; Danish occupation of Samland; Jomsburg 471 - -Swedish conquest of Curland; Scandinavians in Russia 472 - - -§ 2. _The Lands East and South of the Baltic at the Separation -of the Empires._ - -Slaves between Elbe and Dnieper; their lack of sea-board 472-473 - -Kingdom of Samo; Great Moravia 473 - -Four Slavonic groups 473-474 - -Polabic group; Sorabi, Leuticii, Obotrites; their relations to - the Empire 474-475 - -Early conquest of the Sorabi; marks of Meissen and Lusatia; - long resistance of the Leuticians; takings of Branibor; - mark of Brandenburg 475-476 - -Mark of the Billungs; kingdom of Sclavinia; house of Mecklenburg; - relations to Denmark 476 - -Bohemia and Moravia; their relations to Poland, Hungary, - and Germany 477 - -The Polish kingdom; its relations to Germany; rivalry of - Poland and Russia 478 - -Lechs or Poles; their various tribes 478 - -Beginning of the Polish state; its conversion and relations - to the Empire 479 - -Conquests of Boleslaf; union of the Northern Chrobatia with - Poland 479 - -The Polish state survives, though divided 479-480 - -Relations of Russia to the Eastern Church and Empire; Russia - created by the Scandinavian settlement; origin of the name 480 - -First centre at Novgorod; Russian advance; union of the - Eastern Slaves 481 - -Second centre at Kief; the princes become Slavonic; attacks - on Constantinople and Cherson 481-482 - -Conquests on the Caspian; isolation of Russia; Russian lands - west of Dnieper 482 - -Russian principalities; supremacy of Kief 482 - -Supremacy of the northern Vladimir; commonwealths of Novgorod - and Pskof; various principalities; kingdom of Halicz or Galicia 483 - -The Cuman power; Mongol invasion; Russia tributary to - the Mongols; Russia represented by Novgorod 483-484 - -The earlier races; Finns in Livland and Esthland 484 - -The Lettic nations; Lithuania; Prussia 484 - -Survey in the twelfth century 485 - - -§ 3. _German Dominion on the Baltic._ - -Time of Teutonic conquest on the Baltic; comparison of German - and Scandinavian influence; German influence the stronger 485-486 - -Beginning of Swedish conquest in Finland; German conquest - in Livland; its effect on Lithuania and Russia; the - Military orders 487 - -Polish gains and losses 487 - -Character of the _Hansa_ 487 - -Temporary Swedish possession of Scania; union of Calmar; - division and reunion; abiding union of Denmark and Norway 487-488 - -Union of Iceland with Norway; loss of the Scandinavian - settlements in the British isles 488 - -Swedish advance in Finland 488 - -Temporary greatness of Denmark, settlement of Esthland; - conquest of Sclavinia; Danish advance in Germany; - Holstein, &c.; long retention of Rügen 488-490 - -Duchy of South-Jutland or Sleswick; its relations to Denmark - and Holstein; royal and ducal lines; conquest - of Ditmarschen 490-491 - -Effect of the Danish advance on the Slavonic lands; western - losses of Poland; Pomerania; Silesia 491-492 - -Kingdom of Bohemia; dominion of Ottocar; the Luxemburg kings 492-493 - -Annexation of Silesia and Lusatia; territory lost to Matthias - Corvinus 493 - -Union with Austria; later losses 493 - -German corporations; the Hansa; its nature; not strictly - a territorial power 494-495 - -The Military Orders; Sword-brothers and Teutonic knights; - their connexion with the Empire; effects of their rule 495 - -The Sword-brothers in Livland and Esthland; extent of - their dominion 495-496 - -The Teutonic order in Prussia; union with the Sword-brothers; - acquisition of Culm, Pomerelia, Samogitia, Gotland; - the New Mark 496 - -Losses of the order; cession of Pomerelia and part of Prussia - to Poland; the remainder a Polish fief 496-497 - -Advance of Christianity; Lithuania the last heathen power; - its great advance 497-498 - -Consolidation of Poland; conquests of Casimir the Great; - shiftings of Red Russia 498 - -Union of Poland and Lithuania; recovery of the Polish - duchies; Lithuanian advance; closer union 498-499 - -Revival of Russia; power of Moscow; name of _Muscovy_ 499-500 - -Break-up of the Mongol power; the Khanats of Crim, Kazan, - Siberia, Astrakhan 501 - -Deliverance of Russia; Crim dependent on the Turk 501 - -Advance of Moscow; annexation of Novgorod, &c.; Russia - united and independent 501 - -Survey at the end of the fifteenth century 502 - - -§ 4. _The Growth of Russia and Sweden._ - -Growth of Russia; creation of Prussia; temporary greatness - of Sweden 503 - -Separation of the Prussian and Livonian knights; duchy of - Prussia; union of Prussia and Brandenburg; Prussia - independent of Poland 503-504 - -Fall of the Livonian knights; partition of their dominions; - duchy of Curland; shares of Denmark, Sweden, Poland, - and Russia 504 - -Greatest Baltic extent of Poland and Lithuania; union of Lublin 505 - -Advance of Russia; its order; the Euxine reached last 505-506 - -Recovery of Russian lands from Lithuania; Polish conquest - of Russia; second Russian advance; Peace of Andraszovo; - recovery of Kief 506 - -Russian superiority over the Cossacks; Podolia ceded to the - Turk 506-507 - -Comparison of Swedish and Russian advance 507 - -Advance under and after Gustavus Adolphus; conquests from - Russia and Poland; Ingermanland; Livland 507-508 - -Conquests from Denmark and Norway; Dago and Oesel; - Scania, &c.; restoration of Trondhjem 508-509 - -Fiefs of Sweden within the Empire; Pomerania; Bremen and Verden 509 - -Fluctuations in the duchies; Danish possession of Oldenburg 509 - -Sweden after the peace of Oliva 510 - -Eastern advance of Russia; Kasan and Astrakhan; Siberia 511 - - -§ 5. _The Decline of Sweden and Poland._ - -Decline of Sweden; extinction of Poland; kingdom of Prussia; - empire of Russia 511-512 - -Russia on the Baltic; conquest of Livland, &c.; foundation - of Saint Petersburg; advance in Finland 512 - -German losses of Sweden: Bremen, Verden, part of Pomerania 513 - -Union of the Gottorp lands and Denmark 513 - -First partition of Poland; recovery of lost lands by Russia; - geographical union of Prussia and Brandenburg; Polish - and Russian lands acquired by Austria 513-514 - -Second partition: Russian and Prussian shares 514 - -Third partition: extinction of Poland and Lithuania 514-515 - -No strictly Polish territory acquired by Russia; the old - Poland passes to Prussia, Chrobatia to Austria 515 - -Russian advance on the Euxine, Azof; Crim; Jedisan 515-516 - -Temporary Russian advance on the Caspian; superiority - over Georgia 516 - -Survey at the end of the eighteenth century 517 - - -§ 6. _The Modern Geography of the Baltic Lands._ - -Effects of the fall of the Empire; incorporation of the German - lands of Sweden and Denmark 518 - -Russian conquest of Finland 518 - -Union of Sweden and Norway; loss of Swedish Pomerania 518-519 - -Denmark enters the German Confederation for Holstein and - Lauenburg; loss of these duchies and of Sleswick 519 - -Polish losses of Prussia; commonwealth of Danzig; Duchy - of Warsaw 519-520 - -Polish territory recovered by Prussia; Russian kingdom of - Poland; commonwealth of Cracow; its annexation by Austria 520 - -Fluctuation on the Moldavian border 521 - -Russian advance in the Caucasus and on the Caspian 521 - -Advance in Turkestan and Eastern Asia; extent and character - of the Russian dominion 522-523 - -Russian America 523 - -Final survey of the Baltic lands 523-524 - - -CHAPTER XII. - -THE SPANISH PENINSULA AND ITS COLONIES. - -Analogy between Spain and Scandinavia; slight relation of - Spain with the Empire; break between its earlier and - later history 525 - -Comparison of Spain and the Eastern Empire; the Spanish nation - formed by the Saracen wars; analogy between Spain and - Russia 525-526 - -Extent of West-Gothic and Saracen dominions; two centres - of deliverance, native and Frankish 526-527 - -History of Aragon, Castile, and Portugal; use of the phrase - ‘Spain and Portugal’ 527-528 - -Navarre 528 - - -§ 1. _The Foundation of the Spanish Kingdoms._ - -Beginning of the kingdom of Leon 529 - -The Ommiad emirate; the Spanish March; its divisions 529 - -Navarre under Sancho the Great 529-530 - -Break-up of the kingdom of Navarre, and of the Ommiad - caliphate; small Mussulman powers 530 - -Invasion of the Almoravides; use of the name _Moors_ 530 - -New kingdoms: Castile, Aragon, and Sobrarbe; union of - Aragon and Sobrarbe 530 - -Shiftings of Castile, Leon, and Gallicia; final union; Castilian - Empire 531 - -Decline of Navarre; growth of Aragon; union of Aragon and - Barcelona; end of French superiority 531 - -County and kingdom of Portugal 532 - -Advance of Castile; taking of Toledo; checked by the Almoravides 532 - -Advance of Aragon; taking of Zaragoza 532 - -Advance of Portugal; taking of Lisbon 533 - -Second advance of Castile; invasion of the Almohades; - their decline 533 - -Advance of Aragon and Portugal 533 - -Final advance of Castile; kingdom of Granada; Gibraltar 534 - -Geographical position of the Spanish kingdoms 534-535 - -Title of ‘King of Spain;’ the lesser kingdoms 535-536 - - -§ 2. _Growth and Partition of the Great Spanish Monarchy._ - -Little geographical change in the peninsula; territories - beyond the peninsula; the great Spanish Monarchy 536 - -Conquest of Granada; end of Mussulman rule 536-537 - -Union of Castile and Aragon; loss, recovery, and final loss of - Roussillon; annexation and separation of Portugal 537-538 - -Gibraltar and Minorca 537 - -Advance of Aragon beyond the peninsula; union with the - Sicilies and Sardinia 538 - -Extension of Castile dominion; the Burgundian inheritance; - duchy of Milan 539 - -Extent of the Spanish Monarchy; loss of the United Netherlands; - lands lost to France 539 - -Partition of the Spanish Monarchy; later relations with the - Sicilies; duchy of Parma 539-540 - - -§ 3. _The Colonial Dominion of Spain and Portugal._ - -Character of the outlying dominion of Portugal 540 - -African conquests of Portugal; kingdom of Algarve beyond - the Sea; Ceuta, Tangier 541 - -Advance in Africa and the islands; Cape of Good Hope; - dominion in India and Arabia 541-542 - -Settlement and history of Brazil; the one American monarchy 542 - -Division of the Indies between Spain and Portugal; African - and insular dominion of Spain 542-543 - -American dominions of Spain; revolutions of the Spanish - colonies; two Empires of Mexico 543-544 - -The Spanish West Indies 544 - - -CHAPTER XIII. - -THE BRITISH ISLANDS AND COLONIES. - -Isolation and independence of Britain; late Roman conquest - and early loss; Britain another world and Empire 545 - -Shiftings of the Celtic and Teutonic kingdoms; little geographical - change in later times 546 - -English settlements beyond sea; new English nations 547 - - -§ 1. _The Kingdom of Scotland._ - -Greatness of Scotland due to its English elements; two English - kingdoms in Britain 548 - -Use of the Scottish name 549 - -Analogy with Switzerland 549 - -The three elements in the later Scotland; English, British, - Irish; Lothian, Strathclyde, Scotland 549 - -The Picts; their union with the Scots; Scottish Strathclyde; - Galloway 550 - -Scandinavian settlements; Caithness and Sutherland 550 - -English supremacy; taking of Edinburgh; grants of Cumberland - and Lothian 550-551 - -Difference of tenure gradually forgotten 551 - -Effects of the grant of Lothian; shiftings of Cumberland, - Carlisle, and Northumberland 551-552 - -Boundary of England and Scotland; relations between the kingdoms 552 - -Struggle with the Northmen; recovery of Caithness, Galloway, - and the Sudereys 553 - -History of Man; of Orkney 553 - - -§ 2. _The Kingdom of England._ - -Changes of boundary toward Wales; conquests of Harold 553 - -Norman conquest of North Wales 554 - -Princes of North Wales; English conquest 554 - -The principality of Wales; full incorporation with England 554-555 - -The English shires; two classes of shires; ancient - principalities; shires mapped out in the tenth century 555 - -The new shires; Cumberland, Westmoreland, Lancashire, Rutland 555-556 - - -§ 3. _Ireland._ - -Ireland the first Scotland; its provinces 556 - -Settlements of the Ostmen; increasing connexion with England; - the English conquest; fluctuations of the Pale 556-557 - -Lordship and kingdom of Ireland; its relations to England - and Great Britain 557 - - -§ 4. _Outlying European Possessions of England._ - -The Norman Islands; Aquitaine, Calais, &c. 558 - -Outposts and islands 558 - -Greek possessions; the Ionian Islands; Cyprus 558-559 - - -§ 5. _The American Colonies of England._ - -The United States of America 559 - -First English settlements; Virginia; the New England States; - Maryland; Carolina 559-561 - -Settlements of the United Provinces and Sweden; New - Netherlands; New Sweden; New York 561 - -The Jerseys; Pennsylvania; Delaware; Georgia 561-562 - -The thirteen Colonies; their independence 562 - -Nova Scotia; Canada; Louisiana; Florida 562-563 - -A new English nation formed; lack of a name; use of the - name _America_ 563-564 - -Second English nation in North America; the Canadian - confederation 564 - -The West India Islands, &c. 565 - - -§ 6. _Other Colonies and Possessions of England._ - -The Australian colonies 565-566 - -The South-African colonies 566 - -Europe extended by colonization; contrast with barbaric - dominion; Empire of India 567 - -Summary 568-569 - - -INDEX 571 - - * * * * * - - - - -ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. - - -[Transcriber’s note: These additions and corrections have not been made -in this electronic version of the text. Page numbers and line numbers -reflect the pagination of the original text and may not reflect the -structure of this version.] - -P. 19, l. 10. Latterly the name _Balkan Peninsula_ has come into more -general use. - -P. 38, side-note. For ‘Cities of independent state’ read ‘Growth of -independent states.’ - -P. 41, l. 10 from bottom. This is true in a rough practical way. -But when I wrote this, I hardly took in the fact that not a few -Greek cities, though practically subject to the Empire, were not -finally incorporated with it till ages later, perhaps never formally -incorporated at all. - -P. 55, l. 7. For ‘south-east’ read ‘south-west.’ - -P. 55, l. 8. For ‘north-west’ read ‘north-east.’ - -P. 71. When I wrote this, I had not taken in the true history of the -Rouman people. See below, p. 435. - -P. 88, l. 14. Since this was written, I wrote the article ‘Goths,’ in -the Encyclopædia Britannica, where I have gone rather more fully into -their history from later and minuter study. - -P. 90, l. 4 from the bottom. I believe the existence of a _Gothia_ -by that name in Spain is a little doubtful. As to the _Gothia_ in -Gaul, otherwise _Septimania_, and the other _Gothia_ in the Tauric -Chersonêsos, there is no doubt. - -P. 105, l. 14 from bottom. I believe however that the coins of some of -the Provençal cities point to a retention of allegiance to the Empire -much later. Still there is no doubt as to the formal cession. - -P. 115, l. 5 from bottom. I now see no reason to believe in any -Albanian migrations into Greece till long afterwards. But I still have -no doubt that the Albanians strictly represent the old Illyrians. - -P. 119. Dele side-note, ‘The cession of Gaulish possessions.’ - -P. 126, l. 6. For ‘_the_ great Mahometan powers’ read ‘_the two_ great -Mahometan powers.’ - -P. 138, l. 9. Dele ‘much as.’ - -P. 154. The growth of the Christian states in Spain will be found more -fully and accurately given in the specially Spanish chapter, Chapter -XII. - -P. 156, l. 4. It will be at once seen that this was written before -the events of 1877-8. The later changes in these lands will be found -described in Chapter X. - -P. 167, l. 10. For ‘division’ read ‘divisions.’ - -P. 172, side-note. For ‘province’ read ‘provinces.’ - -P. 180, side-note. For ‘schemes’ read ‘scheme.’ - -P. 189, l. 12. For ‘were’ read ‘some were.’ - -P. 216, side-note. For ‘ecclesiastical towns’ read ‘ecclesiastical -powers.’ - -P. 221, side-note. For ‘kingdom’ read ‘kingdoms.’ - -P. 258, l. 14. I was here speaking purely geographically, before much, -if anything, had been heard of the cry of _Italia irredenta_. How far I -go with that cry, how far not, I have explained in Historical Essays, -Third Series, p. 206. - -P. 261, l. 1. For ‘Montbeilliard,’ read ‘Montbeliard.’ - -P. 263, side-note. For ‘Burgundian possession of its county’ read -‘Burgundian possessions of its counts.’ - -P. 267, l. 1. For ‘maps’ read ‘map.’ - -P. 288, l. 11 from bottom. For ‘High and Low Savoy’ read ‘Savoy and -High Savoy.’ - -P. 300, side-note. For ‘1662’ read ‘1663.’ - -P. 306, l. 8. At present it would seem that this mysterious name takes -in all those kingdoms, counties, lordships, &c., which are held by -the Archduke of Austria, and which do not form part of the kingdom of -Hungary and its _partes annexæ_. For these I have elsewhere, according -to an old analogy, suggested the more intelligible name of _Nungary_. - -P. 319, l. 3. That is Philip ‘the Handsome,’ son of Maximilian and -father of Charles the Fifth. - -P. 334, l. 9. Aquitaine, the inheritance of Eleanor, did not come under -the forfeiture of the fiefs actually held by John. - -P. 340, l. 4 from bottom. Roussillon is another case of a land freed -from homage and afterwards annexed as a foreign conquest. - -P. 369, l. 17. For ‘farther’ read ‘further.’ - -P. 389, side-note. For ‘conquest’ read ‘conquests of.’ - -P. 408, side-note. For ‘final’ read ‘first.’ - -P. 413, side-note. For ‘possession of Venetian cities’ read -‘possessions of Venetian families.’ - -P. 429, l. 15. Since this was printed, Dulcigno has been restored to -Montenegro, in exchange for some inland Albanian territory given back -to the Turk. The formation of the Albanian League is not unlikely to -affect the geography of Herzegovina; but no change has yet (January -1881) taken place which can be shown on the map. - -P. 441, l. 8. How unpleasant this truth is felt to be in certain -quarters, is shown by a small incident of last year. I sent a set of -manuscript maps of Dalmatia to Mr. Arthur Evans for his suggestions. -Those maps vanished in the Imperial, Royal, and Apostolic post-office, -and never reached his address at Ragusa. If therefore the revolutions -of Dalmatian geography are less accurately marked in this book than -they should be, the fault is not mine. In Imperial, Royal, and -Apostolic quarters it is doubtless inconvenient to allow any memory -of days when free Ragusa had not bowed to any self-styled Emperor, -either from Corsica or from Lorraine, or of still later days when free -Tzernagora reached to her own sea at Cattaro. Those who have made it -their business to filch the substance may naturally enough think it -their business to filch the picture also. - -P. 450, l. 5 from bottom. It is quite accurate to say that the Turk -has never ruled at Tzetinje. It is perfectly true that the Turk has -more than once harried Montenegro and Tzetinje itself; the Turk -has professed to consider the land as included in a pashalik; but -Montenegro has never been a regularly and avowedly tributary state, as -Servia and Roumania were, as free Bulgaria is still. - -P. 452, l. 7 from bottom. The promises of Europe on this head still -remain unfulfilled (January 1881). It is hardly needful to notice the -diplomatic quibble that the European order for the liberation of these -lands was not contained in the document strictly called the Treaty of -Berlin, but in another paper signed at the same time and place. The -order has been renewed during the present year at the Second Berlin -Conference. - -P. 492, side-note. For ‘and’ read ‘under.’ - -P. 529, l. 9 from bottom. For ‘western’ read ‘eastern.’ - -P. 554, side-note. For ‘Northerners,’ read ‘Northmen.’ - - - - -HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY OF EUROPE. - - - - -CHAPTER I. - -INTRODUCTION. - - -♦Definition of Historical Geography.♦ - -The work which we have now before us is to trace out the extent of -territory which the different states and nations of Europe and the -neighbouring lands have held at different times in the world’s history, -to mark the different boundaries which the same country has had, and -the different meanings in which the same name has been used. It is of -great importance carefully to make these distinctions, because great -mistakes as to the facts of history are often caused through men -thinking and speaking as if the names of different countries, say for -instance England, France, Burgundy, Austria, have always meant exactly -the same extent of territory. Historical geography, in this sense, -differs from physical geography which regards the natural features of -the earth’s surface. It differs also from studies like ethnology and -comparative philology, which have to do directly with the differences -between one nation and another, with their movements from one part -of the world to another, and with the relations to be found among -the languages spoken by them. But, though it is distinct from these -studies, it makes much use of them. For the physical geography of a -country always has a great effect upon its political history, and -the dispersions and movements of different nations are exactly those -parts of history which have most to do with fixing the names and the -boundaries of different countries at different times. _England_, for -instance, is, in strictness, the land of the English wherever they -may settle, whether in their old home on the European continent, -or in the isle of Britain, or in New England beyond the Ocean. But -the extent of territory which was in this way to become England was -largely determined by the physical circumstances of the countries in -which the English settled. And the history of the English nation has -been influenced, above all things, by the fact that the great English -settlement which has made the English name famous was made in an -island. But, when England had become the name of a distinct political -dominion, its meaning was liable to change as that dominion advanced -or went back. Thus the borders of England and Scotland have greatly -changed at different times, and forgetfulness of this has led to many -misunderstandings in reading the history of the two countries. And so -with all other cases of the kind; the physical nature of the country, -and the settlements of the different nations which have occupied it, -have always been the determining causes of its political divisions. -But it is with the political divisions that historical geography has -to deal in the first place. With the nature of the land, and with -the people who occupy it, it has to deal only so far as they have -influenced the political divisions. Our present business in short is, -first to draw the map of the countries with which we are concerned as -it appeared after each of the different changes which they have gone -through, and then to point out the historical causes which have led to -the changes on the map. In this way we shall always see what was the -meaning of any geographical name at any particular time, and we shall -thus avoid mistakes, some of which have often led to really important -practical consequences. - -♦Distinction of Geographical and Political Names.♦ - -From this it follows that, in looking at the geography of Europe -for our present purpose, we must look first at the land itself, and -then at the nations which occupy it. And, in so doing, it may be -well first of all to distinguish between two kinds of names which we -shall have to use. Some names of countries are strictly geographical; -they really mean a certain part of the earth’s surface marked out by -boundaries which cannot well be changed. Others simply mean the extent -of country which is occupied at any time by a particular nation, and -whose boundaries may easily be changed. Thus _Britain_ is a strictly -geographical name, meaning an island whose shape and boundaries -must always be nearly the same. _England_, _Scotland_, _Wales_, are -names of parts of that island, called after different nations which -have settled in it, and the boundaries of all of which have differed -greatly at different times. _Spain_ again is the geographical name -of a peninsula which is almost as well marked out by nature as the -island of Britain. _Castile_, _Aragon_, _Portugal_, are political -names of parts of the peninsula of Spain. They are the names of states -whose boundaries have greatly varied, and which have sometimes formed -separate governments and sometimes have been joined together.[1] -_Gaul_ again is the geographical name of a country which is not so -clearly marked out all round by nature as the island of Britain and -the peninsula of Spain, but which is well marked on three sides, to -the north, south, and west. Within the limits of Gaul, names like -_France_, _Flanders_, _Britanny_, _Burgundy_, and _Aquitaine_, are -political names of parts of the country, whose limits have varied as -much at different times as those of the different parts of Britain and -Spain. This is the difference between strictly geographical names which -do not alter and political names which do alter. No doubt _Gaul_ and -_Britain_ were in the beginning political names, names given to the -land from those who occupied it, just as much as the names _France_ and -_England_. But the settlements from which those lands took the names of -Gaul and Britain took place long before the beginning of trustworthy -history, while the settlements from which parts of those lands took the -names of France and England happened in times long after trustworthy -history began, and for which we are therefore ready with dates and -names. Thus Gaul and Britain are the oldest received names of those -lands; they are the names which those lands bore when we first hear -of them. It is therefore convenient to keep them in use as strictly -geographical names, as always meaning that part of the earth’s surface -which they meant when we first hear of them. In this book therefore, -_Gaul_, _Britain_, _Spain_, and other names of the same kind, will -always be used to mean a certain space on the map, whoever may be its -inhabitants, or whatever may be its government, at any particular time. -But names like _France_, _England_, _Castile_, will be used to mean -the territory to which they were politically applied at the time of -which we may be speaking, a territory which has been greater and less -at different times. Thus, the cities of Carlisle and Edinburgh have -always been in _Britain_ since they were built. They have sometimes -been in _England_ and sometimes not. The cities of Marseilles, Geneva, -Strassburg, and Arras have always been in _Gaul_ ever since they -were built. They have sometimes been in _France_ and sometimes not, -according to political changes. - - -§ 1. _Geographical Aspect of Europe._ - -Our present business is with the Historical Geography of Europe, and -with that of other parts of the world only so far as they concern -the geography of Europe. But we shall have to speak of all the three -divisions of the Old World, Europe, Asia, and Africa, in those parts -of the three which come nearest to one another, and in which the real -history of the world begins. ♦The Mediterranean Lands.♦ These are those -parts of all three which lie round the Mediterranean sea, the lands -which gradually came to form the Empire of Rome. In these lands the -boundaries between the three great divisions are very easily marked. -Modern maps do not all place the boundary between Europe and Asia at -the same point; some make the river Don the boundary and some the -Volga. But this question is of little importance for history. In the -earliest historical times, when we have to do only with the countries -round the Mediterranean sea, there can be no doubt how much is Europe -and how much is Asia and Africa. Europe is the land to the north of the -Mediterranean sea and of the great gulfs which run out of it. If an -exact boundary is needed in the barbarous lands north of the Euxine, -the Tanais or Don is clearly the boundary which should be taken. In -all these lands the Mediterranean and its gulfs divide Europe from -Asia. But the northern parts of the two continents really form one -geographical whole, the boundary between them being one merely of -convenience. A vast central mass of land, stretching right across the -inland parts of the two continents, sends forth a system of peninsulas -and islands, to the north and south. And it is in the peninsular lands -of Europe that European history begins. - -Alike in Europe and in Asia, the southern or peninsular part of the -continent is cut off from the central mass by a mountain chain, which -in Europe is nearly unbroken. ♦The peninsulas of Europe and Asia.♦ Thus -the southern part of Europe consists of the three great peninsulas of -_Spain_, _Italy_, and what we may, in a wide sense, call _Greece_. -These answer in some sort to the three great Oceanic peninsulas of -Asia, those of _Arabia_, _India_, and _India_ beyond the _Ganges_. But -the part of Asia which has historically had most to do with Europe -is its Mediterranean peninsula, the land known as _Asia Minor_. In -the northern part of each continent we find another system of great -gulfs or inland seas; but those in Asia have been hindered by the cold -from ever being of any importance, while in Europe the Baltic sea and -the gulfs which run out of it may be looked on as forming a kind of -secondary Mediterranean. We may thus say that Europe consists of two -insular and peninsular regions, north and south, with a great unbroken -mass of land between them. But there are some parts of Europe which -seem as it were connecting links between the three main divisions of -the continent. Thus we said that the three great peninsulas are cut -off from the central mass by a nearly unbroken mountain chain. But the -connexion of the central peninsula, that of Italy, with the eastern -one or Greece, is far closer than its connexion with the western -one, or Spain. Italy and Spain are much further apart than Italy and -Greece, and between the Alps and the Pyrenees the mountain chain is -nearly lost. We might almost say that a piece of central Europe breaks -through at this point and comes down to the Mediterranean. This is the -south-eastern part of Gaul; and Gaul may in this way be looked on as a -land which joins together the central and the southern parts of Europe. -But this is not all; in the north-western corner of Europe lies that -great group of islands, two large ones and many small, of which our own -Britain is the greatest. The British islands are closely connected in -their geography and history with Gaul on one side, and with the islands -and peninsulas of the North on the other. In this way we may say that -all the three divisions of Europe are brought closely together on the -western side of the continent, and that the lands of Gaul and Britain -are the connecting links which bind them together. - - -§ 2. _Effect of Geography on History._ - -♦Beginning of history in the European peninsulas.♦ - -Now this geographical aspect of the chief lands of Europe has had its -direct effect on their history. We might almost take for granted that -the history of Europe should begin in the two more eastern among the -three great southern peninsulas. Of these two, Italy and Greece, -each has its own character. Greece, though it is the part of Europe -which lies nearest to Asia, is in a certain sense the most European -of European lands. The characteristic of Europe is to be more full of -peninsulas and islands and inland seas than the rest of the Old World. -♦Characteristics of Greece;♦ And Greece, the peninsula itself and the -neighbouring lands, are fuller of islands and promontories and inland -seas than any other part of Europe. On the other hand, Italy is the -central land of all southern Europe, and indeed of all the land round -the Mediterranean. It was therefore only natural that Greece should be -the part of Europe in which all that is most distinctively European -first grew up and influenced other lands. ♦of Italy.♦ And so, if any -one land or city among the Mediterranean lands was to rule over all the -rest, it is in Italy, as the central land, that we should naturally -look for the place of dominion. The destinies of the two peninsulas and -their relations to the rest of the world were thus impressed on them by -their geographical position. - -If we turn to recorded history, we find that it is only a working out -of the consequences of these physical facts. Greece was the first part -of Europe to become civilized and to play a part in history; but it was -Italy, and in Italy it was its most central city, Rome, which came to -have the dominion over the civilized world of early times—that is, over -the lands around the Mediterranean. These two peninsulas have, each -in its own way, ruled and influenced the rest of Europe as no other -parts have done. All the other parts have been, in one way or another, -their subjects or disciples. ♦Advance of the Roman dominion.♦ The -effect of the geographical position of these countries is also marked -in the stages by which Rome advanced to the general dominion of the -Mediterranean lands. She first subdued Italy; then she had to strive -for the mastery with her great rival Carthage, a city which held nearly -the same central position on the southern coast of the Mediterranean -which she herself did on the northern. Then she subdued, step by -step, the peninsulas on each side of her and the other coast lands of -the Mediterranean—European, Asiatic, and African. Into the central -division of Europe she did not press far, never having any firm or -lasting dominion beyond the Rhine and the Danube. Into Northern Europe, -properly so called, her power never reached at all. But she subdued the -lands which we have seen act as a kind of connecting link between the -different parts of Europe, namely Gaul and the greater part of Britain. -Thus the Roman Empire, at its greatest extent, consisted of the lands -round the Mediterranean, together with Gaul and Britain. For the -possession of the Mediterranean land would have been imperfect without -the possession of Gaul, and the possession of Gaul naturally led to the -possession of Britain. - -♦Effect of the geographical position of♦ - -In this way the early history of Greece and Italy, and the formation of -the Roman Empire, were affected by the geographical character of the -countries themselves. The same was the case with the other European -lands when they came to share in that importance which once belonged -to Greece and Italy only. ♦Germany,♦ Thus Germany, as being the most -central part of Europe, came at one time to fill something like the -same position which Italy had once held. It came to be the country -which had to do with all parts of Europe, east, west, north, and south, -and even to be a ruler over some of them. ♦France,♦ So, as France -became the chief state of Gaul, it took upon it something like the old -position of Gaul as a means of communication between the different -parts of Western Europe. ♦Spain and Scandinavia.♦ Meanwhile, as the -Scandinavian and Spanish peninsulas are both cut off in such a marked -way from the mainland of Europe, each of them has often formed a kind -of world of its own, having much less to do with other countries than -Germany, France, and Italy had. The same was for a long time the case -with our own island. Britain was looked on as lying outside the world. - -Thus the geographical position of the European lands influenced their -history while their history was still purely European. And when Europe -began to send forth colonies to other continents, the working of -geographical causes came out no less strongly. Thus the position of -Spain on the Ocean led Castile and Portugal to be foremost among the -colonizing nations of Europe. For the same reason, our own country was -one of the chief in following their example, and so was France also for -a long time. ♦The colonizing powers.♦ Holland too, when it rose into -importance, became a great colonizing power, and so did Denmark and -Sweden to some extent. But an Italian colony beyond the Ocean was never -heard of, nor has there ever been a German colony in the same sense -in which there have been Spanish and English colonies. Meanwhile, the -north-eastern part of Europe, which in early times was not known at -all, has always lagged behind the rest, and has become of importance -only in later times. This is mainly because its geographical position -has almost wholly cut it off both from the Mediterranean and from the -Ocean. - -Thus we see how, in all these ways, both in earlier and in later -times, the history of every country has been influenced by its -geography. ♦Influence of national character.♦ No doubt the history -of each country has also been largely influenced by the disposition -of the people who have settled in it, by what is called the national -character. But then the geographical position itself has often had -something to do with forming the national character, and in all cases -it has had an influence upon it, by giving it a better or a worse field -for working and showing itself. Thus it has been well said that neither -the Greeks in any other country nor any other people in Greece could -have been what the Greeks in Greece really were. The nature of the -country and the nature of the people helped one another, and caused -Greece to become all that it was in the early times of Europe. It is -always useful to mark the points both of likeness and unlikeness of -the different nations whose history we study. And of this likeness and -unlikeness we shall always find that the geographical character, though -only one cause out of several, is always one of the chief causes. - - -§ 3. _Geographical Distribution of Races._ - -Our present business then is with geography as influenced by history, -and with history as influenced by geography. With ethnology, with the -relations of nations and races to one another, we have to deal only so -far as they form one of the agents in history. And it will be well to -avoid, as far as may be, all obscure or controverted points of this -kind. But the great results of comparative philology may now be taken -for granted, and a general view of the geographical disposition of the -great European races is needful as an introduction to the changes which -historical causes have wrought in the geography of the several parts of -Europe. - -In European ethnology one main feature is that the population of -Europe is, and from the very beginnings of history has been, more -nearly homogeneous, at least more palpably homogeneous, than that of -any other great division of the world. ♦Europe an Aryan continent.♦ -Whether we look at Europe now, or whether we look at it at the earliest -times of which we have any glimmerings, it is pre-eminently an Aryan -continent. Everything non-Aryan is at once marked as exceptional. We -cannot say this of Asia, where, among several great ethnical elements, -none is so clearly predominant as the Aryan element is in Europe. -♦Non-Aryan remnants.♦ There are in Europe non-Aryan elements, both -earlier and later than the Aryan settlement; but they have, as a rule, -been assimilated to the prevailing Aryan mass. The earlier non-Aryan -element consists of the remnants which still remain of the races which -the Aryan settlers found in Europe, and which they either exterminated -or assimilated to themselves. The later elements consist of non-Aryan -races which have made their way into Europe within historical times, -in whose case the work of assimilation has been much less complete. It -follows almost naturally from the position of Europe that the primæval -non-Aryan element has survived in the west and in the north, while -the later or intrusive non-Aryan element has made its way into the -east and the south. In the mountains of the western peninsula, in the -border lands of Spain and Gaul, the non-Aryan tongue of the _Basque_ -still survives. In the extreme north of Europe the non-Aryan tongue of -the _Fins_ and _Laps_ still survives. The possible relations of these -tongues either to one another or to other non-Aryan tongues beyond -the bounds of Europe is a question of purely philological concern, -and does not touch historical geography. But historical geography is -touched by the probability, rising almost to moral certainty, that the -isolated populations by whom these primitive tongues are still spoken -are mere remnants of the primitive races which formed the population -of Europe at the time when the Aryans first made their way into that -continent. Everything tends to show that the _Basques_ are but the -remnant of a great people whom we may set down with certainty as the -præ-Aryan inhabitants of Spain and a large part of Gaul, and whose -range we may, with great probability, extend over Sicily, over part -at least of Italy, and perhaps as far north as our own island. Their -possible connexion with the early inhabitants of northern Africa hardly -concerns us. The probability that they were themselves preceded by -an earlier and far lower race concerns us not at all. The earliest -historical inhabitants of south-western Europe are those of whom the -Basques are the surviving remnant, those who, under the names of -_Iberians_ and _Ligurians_, fill a not unimportant place in European -history. - -♦Order of the Aryan settlement.♦ - -When we come to the Aryan settlements, we cannot positively determine -which among the Aryan races of Europe were the earliest settlers in -point of time. ♦Greeks and Italians.♦ The great race which, in its -many sub-divisions, contains the _Greeks_, the _Italians_, and the -nations more immediately akin to them, are the first among the European -Aryans to show themselves in the light of history; but it does not -necessarily follow that they were actually the first in point of -settlement. ♦Celts.♦ It may be that, while they were pressing through -the Mediterranean peninsulas and islands, the _Celts_ were pressing -their way through the solid central land of Europe. The Celts were -clearly the vanguard of the Aryan migration within their own range, the -first swarm which made its way to the shores of the Ocean. Partially in -Spain, more completely in Gaul and the British Islands, they displaced -or assimilated the earlier inhabitants, who, under their pressure and -that of later conquerors, have been gradually shut up in the small -mountainous region which they still keep. Of the Celtic migration we -have no historical accounts, but all probability would lead us to think -that the Celts whom in historic times we find on the Danube and south -of the Alps were not emigrants who had followed a backward course from -the great settlement in Transalpine Gaul, but rather detachments which -had been left behind on the westward journey. Without attempting to -settle questions as to the traces of Celtic occupancy to be found in -other lands, it is enough for our purpose that, at the beginnings of -their history, we find the Celts the chief inhabitants of a region -stretching from the Rubico to the furthest known points of Britain. -Gaul, Cisalpine and Transalpine, is their great central land, though -even here they are not exclusive possessors; they share the land with -a non-Aryan remnant to the south-west, and with the next wave of Aryan -new-comers to the north-east. - -The settlements of these two great Aryan races come before authentic -history. After them came the _Teutonic_ races, who pressed on the Celts -from the east; and in their wake, to judge from their place on the map, -must have come the vast family of the _Slavonic_ nations. ♦Teutons and -Slaves.♦ But the migrations of the Teutons and Slaves come, for the -most part, within the range of recorded history. Our first glimpse of -the Teutons shows them in their central German land, already occupying -both sides of the Rhine, though seemingly not very old settlers on its -left bank. The long wanderings of the various Teutonic and Slavonic -tribes over all parts of central Europe, their settlements in the -southern and western lands, are all matters of history. So is the great -Teutonic settlement in the British islands, which partly exterminated, -partly assimilated, their Celtic inhabitants, so as to leave them as -mere a remnant, though a greater remnant, as they themselves had made -the Basques. And, as the process which made the north-western islands -of Europe Teutonic is a matter of history, so also are the later -stages of the process which made the northern peninsulas Teutonic. -But it is only the later stages which are historical; we know that in -the strictly Scandinavian peninsula the Teutonic invaders displaced -non-Aryan Fins; we have only to guess that in the Cimbric Chersonêsos -they displaced Aryan Celts. ♦Lithuanians.♦ But beyond the Teutons -and Slaves lies yet another Aryan settlement, one which, in a purely -philological view, is the most interesting of all, the small and -fast vanishing group which still survives in _Lithuania_ and the -neighbouring lands. Of these there is historically really nothing to be -said. On the eastern shores of the Baltic we find people whose tongue -comes nearer than any other European tongue to the common Aryan model; -but we can only guess alike at the date when they came thither and at -the road by which they came. - -These races then, Aryan and non-Aryan, make up the immemorial -population of Europe. The remnants of the older non-Aryan races, -and the successive waves of Aryan settlement, are all immemorial -facts which we must accept as the groundwork of our history and -our geography. ♦Movements among the Aryan races.♦ They must be -distinguished from other movements which are strictly matters of -written history, both movements among the Aryan nations themselves -and later intrusions of non-Aryan nations. Thus the Greek colonies -and the conquests of the Hellenized Macedonians Hellenized large -districts of Europe, Asia, and Africa, partly by displacement, partly -by assimilation. The conquests of Rome, and the Teutonic settlements -within the Roman Empire, brought about but little in the way of -displacement, but a great deal in the way of assimilation. The -process indeed was opposite in the two cases. The Roman conqueror -assimilated the conquered to himself; the Teutonic conqueror was -himself assimilated by those whom he conquered. Britain and the -Rhenish and Danubian lands stand out as marked exceptions. The -Slavonic settlements in the East wrought far more of displacement than -the Teutonic settlements in the West. Vast regions, once Illyrian -or Thracian—that is, most likely, more or less nearly akin to the -Greeks—are now wholly Slavonic. ♦Later intrusion of Non-Aryan races.♦ -Lastly come the incursions on European lands made by non-Aryan -settlers in historic times. Their results have been widely different -in different cases. ♦Semitic.♦ The Semitic _Saracens_ settled in Spain -and Sicily, bringing with them and after them their African converts, -men possibly of originally kindred race with the first inhabitants -both of the peninsula and of the island. These non-Aryan settlers -have vanished. The displacement of large bodies of them is a fact of -comparatively recent history, but it can hardly fail that some degree -of assimilation must also have taken place. Then come the settlements, -chiefly in eastern Europe, of those whom for our purpose it is enough -to group together as the Turanian nations. The _Huns_ of Attila have -left only a name. The more lasting settlement of the _Avars_ has -vanished, how far by displacement, how far by assimilation, it might be -hard to say. _Chozars_, _Patzinaks_, a crowd of other barbarian races, -have left no sign of their presence. ♦Turanian.♦ The _Bulgarians_, -originally Turanian conquerors, have been assimilated by their Slavonic -subjects. The Finnish _Magyars_ have received a political and religious -assimilation; their kingdom became a member of the commonwealth of -Christian Europe, though they still keep their old Turanian language. -The latest intruders of all, the _Ottoman Turks_, still remain as -they were when they first came, aliens on Aryan and Christian ground. -But here again is a case of assimilation the other way; the Ottoman -Turks are an artificial nation which has been kept up by the constant -incorporation of European renegades who have thrown aside the speech, -the creed, and the civilization of Europe. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[1] In modern use we speak of _Spain_ as only one part, though much the -larger part, of the peninsula, and of _Portugal_ as another part. But -this simply comes from the accident that, for some centuries past, all -the other Spanish kingdoms have been joined under one government, while -Portugal has remained separate. In speaking of any time till near the -end of the fifteenth century of our æra, the word _Spain_ must always -be used in the geographical sense, as the name of the whole peninsula. - - - - -CHAPTER II. - -GREECE AND THE GREEK COLONIES. - - -§ 1. _The Eastern or Greek Peninsula._ - -♦Characteristics of the Eastern peninsula.♦ - -The Historical Geography of Europe, if looked at in chronological -order, must begin with the most eastern of the three peninsulas of -Southern Europe. Here the history of Europe, and the truest history of -the world, began. It was in the insular and peninsular lands between -the Ionian and Ægæan seas that the first steps towards European -civilization were taken; it is there that we see the first beginnings -of art, science, and political life. But Greece or _Hellas_, in the -strict sense of the name, forms only a part of the lands which must be -looked on as the great Eastern peninsula. It is however its leading -and characteristic portion. As the whole peninsular land gradually -tapers southwards from the great mass of central Europe, it becomes at -each stage more and more peninsular, and it also becomes at each stage -more and more Greek. Greece indeed and the neighbouring lands form, -as was long ago remarked by Strabo,[2] a series of peninsulas within -peninsulas. It is not easy to find a name for the whole region, as it -stretches far beyond any limits which can be given to Greece in any age -of the world or according to any use of the name. But the whole land -seems to have been occupied by nations more or less akin to the Greeks. -The history of those nations chiefly consists of their relations to the -Greeks, and all of them were brought more or less within the range of -Greek influences. We may therefore not improperly call the whole land, -as opposed to Italy and Spain, the _Greek_ peninsula. It has also been -called the _Byzantine peninsula_, as nearly answering to the European -part of the Eastern division of the Roman Empire, when its seat of -government was at Byzantion, Constantinople, or New Rome. - -♦Its chief divisions.♦ - -Taking the great range of mountains which divides southern from central -Europe as the northern boundary of the eastern or Greek peninsula, it -may be said to take in the lands which are cut off from the central -mass by the _Dalmatian Alps_ and the range of _Haimos_ or _Balkan_. -It is washed to the east, west, or south, by various parts of the -Mediterranean and its great gulf the Euxine. But the northern part of -this region, all that lies north of the Ægæan Sea, taking in therefore -the whole of the Euxine coast, still keeps much of the character of the -great central mass of Europe, and forms a land intermediate between -that and the more strictly peninsular lands to the south. Still the -boundary is a real one, for all the lands south of this range have -come more or less within Greek influences, and have played their part -in Grecian history. But when we get beyond the mountains, into the -valley of the Danube, we find ourselves in lands which, excepting -a few colonies on the coast, have hardly at all come under Greek -influences till quite modern times. This region between Haimos and the -more strictly Greek lands takes in _Thrace_, _Paionia_, and _Illyria_. -Of these, Thrace and Illyria, having a sea coast, received many Greek -colonies, especially on the northern coast of the Ægæan and on the -_Propontis_ or Sea of Marmora. The Thracian part of this region, as -bordering on these more distinctly Grecian seas, became more truly -a part of the Grecian world than the other lands to the west of it. -♦Thrace and Illyria.♦ Yet geographically Thrace is more widely cut off -from Greece than Illyria is. For there is no such great break on the -western shore of the great peninsula as that which, on the eastern -side, marks the point where we must draw the line between Greece and -its immediate neighbours and the lands to the north of them. This is at -the point where a peninsula within a peninsula breaks off to the south, -comprising _Greece_, _Macedonia_, and _Epeiros_. There is here no very -special break on the Illyrian coast, but the Ægæan coast of Thrace is -fenced in as it were at its two ends, to the east by the long narrow -peninsula known specially as the _Chersonêsos_, and to the west by the -group of peninsulas called _Chalkidikê_. These have nothing answering -to them on the Illyrian side beyond the mere bend in the coast above -Epidamnos. This last point however marks the extent of the earlier -Greek colonization in those regions, and which has become a still more -important boundary in later times. - -Beyond Chalkidikê to the west, the specially Greek peninsula projects -to the south, being itself again composed of peninsulas within -peninsulas. ♦Greece proper and its peninsulas.♦ The _Ambrakian Gulf_ on -the west and the _Pagasaian_ on the east again fence off a peninsula -to the south, by which the more purely Greek lands are fenced off -from _Macedonia_, _Epeiros_, and _Thessaly_. Within this peninsula -again another may be marked off by a line drawn from _Thermopylai_ -to the _Corinthian_ gulf near Delphoi. This again shuts out to the -east _Akarnania_, _Aitolia_, and some other of the more backward -divisions of the Greek name. ♦Peloponnêsos.♦ Thus _Phôkis_, _Boiôtia_, -and _Attica_ form a great promontory, from which Attica projects as -a further promontory to the south-east, while the great peninsula of -_Peloponnêsos_—itself made up on its eastern and southern sides of -smaller peninsulas—is joined on by the narrow isthmus of Corinth. -In this way, from Haimos to _Tainaros_, the land is ever becoming -more and more broken up by greater or smaller inlets of the sea. And -in proportion as the land becomes more strictly peninsular, it also -becomes more strictly Greek, till in Peloponnêsos we reach the natural -citadel of the Greek nation. - - -§ 2. _Insular and Asiatic Greece._ - -♦Continuous Hellas.♦ - -Greece Proper then, what the ancient geographers called _Continuous -Hellas_ as distinguished from the Greek colonies planted on barbarian -shores, is, so far as it is part of the mainland, made up of a system -of peninsulas stretching south from the general mass of eastern Europe. -But the neighbouring islands equally form a part of continuous Greece; -and the other coasts of the Ægæan, Asiatic as well as Thracian, were -so thickly strewed with Greek colonies as to form, if not part of -continuous Greece, yet part of the immediate Greek world. The western -coast, as it is less peninsular, is also less insular, and the islands -on the western side of Greece did not reach the same importance as -those on the eastern side. Still they too, the Ionian islands of -modern geography, form in every sense a part of Greece. ♦The Islands.♦ -To the north of _Korkyra_ or _Corfu_ there are only detached Greek -colonies, whether on the mainland or in the islands; but all the -islands of the Ægæan are, during historical times, as much part of -Greece as the mainland; and one island on each side, _Leukas_ on the -west and the greater island of _Euboia_ on the east, might almost be -counted as parts of the mainland, as peninsulas rather than islands. -To the south the long narrow island of _Crete_ forms a sort of barrier -between Greek and barbarian seas. It is the most southern of the purely -Greek lands. _Sicily_ to the east and _Cyprus_ to the west received -many Greek colonies, but they never became purely Greek in the same way -as Crete and the islands to the north of it. - -♦Asiatic Greece.♦ - -But, besides the European peninsulas and the islands, part of Asia -must be looked on as forming part of the immediate Greek world, though -not strictly of continuous Greece. The peninsula known as _Asia Minor_ -cannot be separated from Europe either in its geography or in its -history. With its central mass we have little or nothing to do; but -its coasts form a part of the Greek world, and its Ægæan coast was -only less thoroughly Greek than Greece itself and the Greek islands. -It would seem that the whole western coast of Asia Minor was inhabited -by nations which, like the European neighbours of Greece, were more -or less nearly akin to the Greeks. And the Ægæan coast of Asia is -almost as full of inlets of the sea, of peninsulas and promontories and -islands near to the shore, as European Greece itself. All these shores -therefore received Greek colonies. The islands and the most tempting -spots on the mainland were occupied by Greek settlers, and became -the sites of Greek cities. But Greek influence never spread very far -inland, and even the coast itself did not become so purely Greek as the -islands. When we pass from the Ægæan coast of Asia to the other two -sides of the peninsula, to its northern coast washed by the Euxine and -its southern coast washed by the Mediterranean, we have passed out of -the immediate Greek world. Greek colonies are found on favourable spots -here and there; but the land, even the coast as a whole, is barbarian. - - -§ 3. _Ethnology of the Eastern Peninsula._ - -♦The Greeks and the kindred races.♦ - -The immediate Greek world then as opposed to the outlying Greek -colonies, consists of the shores of the Ægæan sea and of the peninsulas -lying between it and the Ionian sea. Of this region a great part was -exclusively inhabited by the Greek nation, while Greek influences were -more or less dominant throughout the whole. But it would further seem -that the whole, or nearly the whole, of these lands were inhabited by -races more or less akin to the Greeks. They seem to have been races -which had a good deal in common with the Greeks, and of whom the Greeks -were simply the foremost and most fortunate, their higher developement -being doubtless greatly favoured by the geographical nature of the -country which they occupied. But a distinction must be drawn between -the nearer and the more remote neighbours of Greece. It is hardly -necessary for our present purpose to determine whether the Greeks had -or had not any connexion with Thracians, European or Asiatic, with -Phrygians and Lydians, and other neighbouring nations. ♦Nations more -remote, but probably kindred.♦ All these were in Greek eyes simply -Barbarians, but modern scholarship has seen in them signs of a kindred -with the Greek nation nearer than the share of both in the common -Aryan stock. We need not settle here whether all the inhabitants of -the geographical district which we have marked out were, or were not, -kinsmen in this sense; but with some among them the question assumes -a deeper interest and a nearer approach to certainty. ♦Illyrians.♦ -The great Illyrian race, of whom the Albanians or _Skipetars_ are the -modern representatives, a race which has been so largely displaced by -Slaves at one end and assimilated by Greeks at the other, can hardly -fail to have had a nearer kindred with the Greeks than that which they -both share with Celts and Teutons. When we come to the lands which are -yet more closely connected with Greece, both in geographical position -and in their history, the case becomes clearer still. ♦Epeiros, -Macedonia, Sicily and Italy.♦ We can hardly doubt of the close -connexion between the Greeks and the nations which bordered on Greece -immediately to the north in Epeiros and Macedonia, as well as with some -at least of those which they found occupying the opposite coasts of the -Ægæan, as well as in Sicily and Italy. The Greeks and Italians, with -the nations immediately connected with them, clearly belong to one, -and that a well marked, division of the Aryan family. Their kindred -is shown alike by the evidence of language and by the remarkable ease -with which in all ages they received Greek civilization. Into more -minute inquiries as to these matters it is hardly our province to go -here. ♦Pelasgians.♦ It is perhaps enough to say that the _Pelasgian_ -name, which has given rise to so much speculation, seems to have been -used by the Greeks themselves in a very vague way, much as the word -_Saxon_ is among ourselves. It is therefore dangerous to form any -theories about the matter. Sometimes the Pelasgians seem to be spoken -of simply as _Old-Hellênes_, sometimes as a people distinct from the -Hellênes. ♦The Greek nation.♦ Whether the Hellênes, on their entering -into Greece, found the land held by earlier inhabitants, whether Aryan -or non-Aryan, is a curious and interesting speculation, but one which -does not concern us. It is enough for our purpose that, as far back as -history or even legend can carry us, we find the land in the occupation -of a branch of the Aryan family, consisting, like all other nations, of -various kindred tribes. It is a nation which is as well defined as any -other nation, and yet it shades off, as it were, into the other nations -of the kindred stock. Clearly marked as Greek and Barbarian are from -the beginning, there still are frontier tribes in Epeiros and Macedonia -which must be looked on as forming an intermediate stage between the -two classes, and which are accordingly placed by different Greek -writers sometimes in one class and sometimes in the other. - - -§ 4. _The Earliest Geography of Greece and the Neighbouring Lands._ - -♦The Homeric map of Greece.♦ - -Our first picture of Greek geography comes from the Homeric catalogue. -Whatever may be the historic value of the Homeric poems in general, -it is clear that the catalogue in the second book of the Iliad -must represent a real state of things. It gives us a map of Greece -so different from the map of Greece at any later time that it is -inconceivable that it can have been invented at any later time. We have -in fact a map of Greece at a time earlier than any time to which we -can assign certain names and dates. Within the range of Greece itself -the various Greek races often changed their settlements, displacing -or conquering earlier Greek settlers; and the different states which -they formed often changed their boundaries by bringing other states -into subjection or depriving them of parts of their territory. The -Homeric catalogue gives us a wholly different arrangement of the -various branches of the nation from any that we find in the Greece of -historic times. The _Dorian_ and _Ionian_ names, which were afterwards -so famous, are hardly known; the name of _Hellênes_ itself belongs only -to a small district. ♦Tribal divisions of Homeric Greece.♦ The names -for the whole people are _Achaians_, _Argeians_ (_Argos_ seeming to -mean all Peloponnêsos), and _Danaoi_, the last a name which goes quite -out of use in historic times. The boundary of Greece to the west is -narrower than it was in later times. The land called _Akarnania_ has -not yet got that name, if indeed it was Greek at all. It is spoken of -vaguely as _Epeiros_ or the mainland,[3] and it appears as part of the -possessions of the king of the neighbouring islands, _Kephallênia_ -and _Ithakê_. The islands to the north, _Leukas_ and _Korkyra_, were -not yet Greek. The _Thesprotians_ in Epeiros are spoken of as a -neighbouring and friendly people, but they form no part of the Greek -nation. The _Aitolians_ appear as a Greek people, and so do most -of the other divisions of the Greek nation, only their position and -relative importance is often different from what it was afterwards. -Thus, to mention a few examples out of many, the _Lokrians_, who, in -historic times, appear both on the sea of Euboia and on the Corinthian -gulf, appear in the catalogue in their northern seats only. - -When we turn from tribes to cities, the difference is still greater. -♦Groupings of cities.♦ The cities which held the first place in -historic times are not always those which are greatest in the earlier -time, and their grouping in federations or principalities is wholly -unlike anything in later history. Thus in the historic _Boiotia_ we -find _Orchomenos_ as the second city of a confederation of which -_Thebes_ is the first. In the catalogue Orchomenos and the neighbouring -city _Aspledôn_ form a separate division, distinct from Boiôtia. Euboia -forms a whole; and, what is specially to be noticed, _Attica_, as a -land, is not mentioned, but only the single city of _Athens_, with -_Salamis_ as a kind of dependency. Peloponnêsos again is divided in a -manner quite different from anything in later times. The ruling city is -_Mykênê_, whose king holds also a general superiority over all Hellas, -while his immediate dominion takes in _Corinth_, _Kleônai_, _Sikyôn_, -and the whole south coast of the Corinthian Gulf, the _Achaia_ of later -times. The rest of the cities of the Argolic peninsula are grouped -round _Argos_. Northern Greece again is divided into groups of cities -which answer to nothing in later times. And its relative importance -in the Greek world is clearly far greater than it was in the historic -period. - -The catalogue also helps us to our earliest picture of the northern -and eastern coasts of the Ægæan and of the Ægæan islands. ♦Extent -of Greek colonization.♦ We see the extent which Greek colonization -had already made. It had as yet taken in only the southern islands -of the Ægæan. _Crete_ was already Greek; so were _Rhodes_, _Kôs_, -and the neighbouring islands; but these last are distinctly marked -as new settlements. The coast of Asia and the northern islands are -still untouched, except through the events of the Trojan war itself, -in which the Greek conquest of _Lesbos_ is distinctly marked. ♦The -Asiatic Catalogue.♦ In Asia, besides _Trojans_ and _Dardanians_, we -find _Pelasgians_ as a distinct people, as also _Paphlagonians_, -_Mysians_, _Phrygians_, _Maionians_, _Karians_, and _Lykians_. We find -in short the nations which fringe the whole Ægæan coast of Asia and the -south-western coast of the Euxine. In Europe again we have Thracians -and Paionians, names familiar in historic times, and whose bearers -seemingly occupied nearly the same lands which they do in later times. -The presence of Thracians in Asia is implied rather than asserted. The -_Macedonian_ name is not found. The northern islands of the Ægæan are -mentioned only incidentally. Everything leaves us to believe that the -whole region, European and Asiatic, to which we are now concerned, -was, at this earliest time of which we have any glimpses, occupied by -various races more or less closely allied to each other. ♦Phœnician and -Greek settlements in the islands.♦ The islands were largely Karian, but -the _Phœnicians_, a Semitic people from the eastern coast, seem to have -planted colonies in several of the Mediterranean islands. But Karians -and Phœnicians had now begun to give way to Greek settlements. The same -rivalry in short between Greeks and Phœnicians must have gone on in the -earliest times in the islands of the Ægæan which went on in historical -times in the greater islands of Cyprus and Sicily. - - -§ 5. _Change from Homeric to Historic Greece._ - -The state of things which is set before us in the catalogue was -altogether broken up by later changes, but changes which still come -before the beginnings of contemporary history, and which we understand -chiefly by comparing the geography of the catalogue with the geography -of later times. ♦Changes in Peloponnêsos.♦ According to received -tradition, a number of _Dorian_ colonies from Northern Greece were -gradually planted in the chief cities of Peloponnêsos, and drove out -or reduced to subjection their older _Achaian_ inhabitants. Mykênê -from this time loses its importance; Argos, Sparta, Corinth, and -Sikyôn become Dorian cities; and Sparta gradually wins the dominion -over all the towns, whether Dorian or Achaian, within her immediate -dominion of Lakonia. To the west of Lakonia arises the Dorian state of -_Messênê_, which is the name only of a district, as there was as yet -no city so called. As part of the same movement, an Aitolian colony -is said to have occupied _Êlis_ on the west coast of Peloponnêsos. -Elis again was at this time the name of a district only; the cities -both of Messênê and Êlis are of much later date. First Argos, and then -Sparta, rises to a supremacy over their fellow-Dorians and over the -whole of Peloponnêsos. Historical Peloponnêsos thus consists (i) of the -cities, chiefly Dorian, of the Argolic _Aktê_ or peninsula, together -with _Corinth_ on the Isthmus and _Megara_, a Dorian outpost beyond -the Isthmus; (ii) of _Lakonikê_, the district immediately subject to -Sparta, with a boundary towards Argos which changed as Sparta advanced -and Argos went back; (iii) of _Messênê_, which was conquered by Sparta -before the age of contemporary history, and was again separated in -the fourth century B.C.; (iv) of _Elis_, with the border-districts -between it and Messênê; (v) of the _Achaian_ cities on the coast of -the Corinthian Gulf; (vi) of the inland country of _Arkadia_. The -relations among these districts and the several cities within them -often fluctuated, but the general aspect of the map of Peloponnêsos did -not greatly change from the beginning of the fifth century to the later -days of the third. - -♦Changes in Northern Greece.♦ - -According to the received traditions, migrations of the same kind took -place in Northern Greece also between the time of the catalogue and -the beginning of contemporary history. Thus Thessaly, whose different -divisions form a most important part of the catalogue, is said to have -suffered an invasion at the hands of the half Hellenic _Thesprotians_. -They are said to have become the ruling people in Thessaly itself, and -to have held a supremacy over the neighbouring lands, including the -peninsula of Magnêsia and the Phthiôtic Achaia. It is certain that in -the historical period Thessaly lags in the back ground, and that the -true Hellenic spirit is much less developed there than in other parts -of Greece. There is less reason to accept the legend of a migration -out of Thessaly into Boiôtia; but in historic times Orchomenos no -longer appears as a separate state, but is the second city of the -Boiotian confederacy, yielding the first place to Thebes with great -unwillingness. The Lokrians also now appear on the Corinthian gulf as -well as on the sea of Euboia. And the land to the west of Aitôlia, -so vaguely spoken of in the catalogue, has become the seat of a -Greek people under the name of _Akarnania_. The Corinthian colonies -along this coast, the city of _Ambrakia_, the island or peninsula of -_Leukas_, the foundation of which is placed in the eighth century B.C., -come almost within the time of trustworthy history. They are not Greek -in the catalogue; they are Greek when we first hear of them in history. -Ambrakia forms the last outpost of continuous Hellas towards the -north-west; beyond that are only outlying settlements on the Illyrian -coasts and islands. - -These changes in the geography of continental Greece, both within and -without Peloponnêsos, make the main differences between the Greece of -the Homeric catalogue and the Greece of the Persian and Peloponnesian -wars. ♦Changes in later times.♦ During the sixth, fifth, and fourth -centuries before Christ there were constant changes in political -relations of the Greek states to one another; but there were not many -changes which greatly affected the geography. Cities were constantly -brought in subjection to one another, and were again relieved from -the yoke. ♦B.C. 370-369.♦ In the course of the fourth century two -new Peloponnesian cities, _Messênê_ and _Megalopolis_, were founded. -In Boiotia again, _Plataia_ and _Orchomenos_ were destroyed by the -Thebans, and Thebes itself was destroyed by Alexander, but these were -afterwards rebuilt. ♦B.C. 468.♦ In Peloponnêsos Mykênê was destroyed -by the Argeians, and never rebuilt. But most of these changes do not -affect geography, as they did not involve any change in the seats of -the great divisions of the Greek name. The only exception is that of -the foundation of _Messênê_, which was accompanied by the separation -of the old Messenian territory from Sparta, and the consequent -establishment of a new or restored division of the Greek nation. - - -§ 6. _The Greek Colonies._ - -♦The Ægæan colonies.♦ - -It must have been in the time between the days represented by the -catalogue and the beginnings of contemporary history, that most of the -islands of the Ægæan became Greek, and that the Greek colonies were -planted on the Ægæan coast of Asia. We have seen that the southern -islands were already Greek at the time of the catalogue, while some of -the northern ones, _Thasos_, _Lêmnos_, and others, did not become Greek -till times to which we can give approximate dates, from the eighth to -the fifth centuries. ♦Colonies in Asia.♦ During this period, at some -time before the eighth century, the whole Ægæan coast of Asia had -become fringed with Greek cities, _Dorian_ to the south, _Aiolian_ to -the north, _Ionian_ between the two. The story of the Trojan war itself -in the land is most likely a legendary account of the beginning of -these settlements, which may make us think that the Greek colonization -of this coast began in the north, in the lands bordering on the -Hellespont. At all events, by the eighth century these settlements had -made the Asiatic coast and the islands adjoining it a part, and a most -important part, not only of the Greek world, but we may almost say of -Greece itself. ♦Their early greatness.♦ The Ionian cities, above all, -_Smyrna_, _Ephesos_, _Milêtos_, and the islands of _Chios_ and _Samos_, -were among the greatest of Greek cities, more flourishing certainly -than any in European Greece. Milêtos, above all, was famous for the -number of colonies which it sent forth in its own turn. But, if their -day of greatness came before that of the European Greeks, they were -also the first to come under the power of the Barbarians. ♦Lydian and -Persian conquests.♦ In the course of the fifth century the Greek cities -on the continent of Asia came under the power, first of the _Lydian_ -kings and then of their _Persian_ conquerors, who subdued several of -the islands also. It was this subjection of the Asiatic Greeks to the -Barbarians which led to the Persian war, with which the most brilliant -time in the history of European Greece begins. We thus know the Asiatic -cities only in the days of their decline. ♦Colonies in Thrace.♦ The -coasts of Thrace and Macedonia were also sprinkled with Greek cities, -but they did not lie so thick together as those on the Asiatic coast, -except only in the three-fingered peninsula of _Chalkidikê_, which -became a thoroughly Greek land. Some of these colonies in Thrace, as -_Olynthos_ and _Potidaia_, play an important part in Greek history, -and two among them fill a place in the history of the world. _Thermê_, -under its later name of _Thessalonikê_, has kept on its importance -under all changes down to our own time. And _Byzantion_, on the -Thracian Bosporos, rose higher still, becoming, under the form of -_Constantinople_, the transplanted seat of the Empire of Rome. - -The settlements which have been thus far spoken of may be all counted -as coming within the immediate Greek world. They were planted in lands -so near to the mother-country, and they lay so near to one another, -that the whole country round the Ægæan may be looked on as more or less -thoroughly Greek. Some parts were wholly Greek, and everywhere Greek -influences were predominant. ♦More distant colonies.♦ But, during this -same period of distant enterprise, between the time of the Homeric -catalogue and the time of the Persian War, many Greek settlements were -made in countries much further off from continuous Greece. All of -course came within the range of the Mediterranean world; no Greek ever -passed through the Straits of Hêraklês to found settlements on the -Ocean. But a large part of the coast both of the Mediterranean itself -and of the Euxine was gradually dotted with Greek colonies. These -outposts of Greece, unless they were actually conquered by barbarians, -almost always remained Greek; they kept their Greek language and -manners, and they often spread them to some extent among their -barbarian neighbours. But it was not often that any large tract of -country in these more distant lands became so thoroughly Greek as the -Ægæan coast of Asia became. We may say however that such was the case -with the coast of Sicily and Southern Italy, where many Greek colonies -were planted, which will be spoken of more fully in another chapter. -All Sicily indeed did in the end really become a Greek country, though -not till after its conquest by the Romans. But in Northern and Central -Italy, the Latins, Etruscans, and other Italian nations were too strong -for any Greek colonies to be made in those parts. ♦Colonies in the -Hadriatic.♦ On the other side of the Hadriatic, Greek colonies had -spread before the Peloponnesian war as far north as _Epidamnos_. The -more northern colonies on the coast and among the islands of Dalmatia, -the Illyrian _Epidauros_, _Pharos_, _Black Korkyra_, and others, were -among the latest efforts of Greek colonization in the strict sense. - -In other parts of the Mediterranean coasts the Greek settlements -lay further apart from each other. But we may say that they were -spread here and there over the whole coast, except where there was -some special hindrance to keep the Greeks from settling. ♦Phœnician -colonies.♦ Thus, in a great part of the Mediterranean the Phœnicians -had got the start of the Greeks, both in their own country on the coast -of Syria, and in the colonies sent forth by their great cities of Tyre -and Sidon. The Phœnician colonists occupied a large part of the western -half of the southern coast of the Mediterranean, where lay the great -Phœnician cities of _Carthage_, _Utica_, and others. They had also -settlements in Southern Spain, and one at least outside the straits -on the Ocean. This is _Gades_ or _Cadiz_, which has kept its name -and its unbroken position as a great city from an earlier time than -any other city in Europe. The Greeks therefore could not colonize in -these parts. In the great islands of Sicily and Cyprus there were both -Phœnician and Greek colonies, and there was a long struggle between the -settlers of the two nations. In Egypt again, though there were some -Greek settlers, yet there were no Greek colonies in the strict sense. -That is, there were no independent Greek commonwealths. Thus the only -part of the southern coast of the Mediterranean which was open to Greek -colonization was the land between Egypt and the dominions of Carthage. -♦Greek colonies in Africa, Gaul, and Spain.♦ In that land accordingly -several Greek cities were planted, of which the chief was the famous -_Kyrênê_. On the southern coast of Gaul arose the great Ionian city of -_Massalia_ or _Marseilles_, which also, like the Phœnician Gades, has -kept its name and its prosperity down to our own time. Massalia became -the centre of a group of Greek cities on the south coast of Gaul and -the east coast of Spain, which were the means of spreading a certain -amount of Greek civilization in those parts. - -♦Colonies on the Euxine.♦ - -Besides these settlements in the Mediterranean itself, there were -also a good many Greek colonies on the western, northern, and -southern coasts of the Euxine, of which those best worth remembering -are the city of _Chersonêsos_ in the peninsula called the _Tauric -Chersonêsos_, now Crimea, and _Trapezous_ on the southern coast. -These two deserve notice as being two most abiding seats of Greek -influence. Chersonêsos, under the name of _Cherson_, remained an -independent Greek commonwealth longer than any other, and Trapezous or -_Trebizond_ became the seat of Greek-speaking Emperors, who outlived -those of Constantinople. Speaking generally then, we may say that, in -the most famous times of European Greece, in the time of the Persian -and Peloponnesian wars, the whole coast of the Ægæan was part of the -immediate Greek world, while in Sicily and Cyprus Greek colonies were -contending with the Phœnicians, and in Italy with the native Italians. -Massalia was the centre of a group of Greek states in the north-west, -and Kyrênê in the south, while the greater part of the coast of the -Euxine was also dotted with Greek cities here and there. In most of -these colonies the Greeks mixed to some extent with the natives, and -the natives to some extent learned the Greek language and manners. -♦Beginning of the artificial Greek nation.♦ We thus get the beginning -of what we call an artificial Greek nation, a nation Greek in speech -and manners, but not purely Greek in blood, which has gone on ever -since. - - -§ 7. _Growth of Macedonia and Epeiros._ - -♦Growth of Macedonia.♦ - -But while the spread of the Greek language and civilization, and -therewith the growth of the artificial Greek nation, was brought about -in a great degree by the planting of independent Greek colonies, it was -brought about still more fully by events which went far to destroy the -political independence of Greece itself. This came of the growth of -the kindred nations to the north of Greece, in Macedonia and Epeiros. -The Macedonians were for a long time hemmed in by the barbarians to -the north and west of them and by the Greek cities on the coast, and -they were also weakened by divisions among themselves. ♦Reign of -Philip, B.C. 360-336.♦ But when the whole nation was united under its -great King Philip, Macedonia soon became the chief power in Greece -and the neighbouring lands. Philip greatly increased his dominions at -the expense of both Greeks and barbarians, especially by adding the -peninsulas of Chalkidikê to his kingdom. But in Greece itself, though -he took to himself the chief power, he did not actually annex any of -the Greek states to Macedonia, so that his victories there do not -affect the map. ♦Conquests of Alexander, 336-323.♦ His yet more famous -son Alexander, and the Macedonian kings after him, in like manner held -garrisons in particular Greek cities, and brought some parts of Greece, -as Thessaly and Euboia, under a degree of Macedonian influence which -hardly differed from dominion; but they did not formally annex them. -The conquests of Alexander in Asia brought most of the Greek cities -and islands under Macedonian dominion, but some, as Crete, Rhodes, -Byzantion, and _Hêrakleia_ on the Euxine, kept their independence. -♦Epeiros under Pyrrhos, B.C. 295-272.♦ Meanwhile Epeiros became united -under the Greek kings of _Molossis_, and under Pyrrhos, who made -Ambrakia his capital, it became a powerful state. And a little kingdom -called _Athamania_, thrust in between Epeiros, Macedonia, and Thessaly, -now begins to be heard of. - -♦The Macedonian kingdoms in Asia.♦ - -The conquests of Alexander in Asia concern us only so far as they -called into being a class of states in Western Asia, all of which -received a greater or less share of Hellenic culture, and some of -which may claim a place in the actual Greek world. By the division -of the empire of Alexander after the battle of Ipsos, _Egypt_ became -the kingdom of Ptolemy, with whose descendants it remained down to -the Roman conquest. ♦B.C. 301.♦ The civilization of the Egyptian -court was Greek, and Alexandria became one of the greatest of Greek -cities. ♦Egypt under the Ptolemies.♦ Moreover the earlier kings of the -Ptolemaic dynasty held various islands in the Ægæan, and points on the -coast of Asia and even of Thrace, which made them almost entitled to -rank as a power in Greece itself. ♦The Seleukid dynasty.♦ The great -Asiatic power of Alexander passed to _Seleukos_ and his descendants. -The early kings of his house ruled from the Ægæan to the Hyphasis, -though this great dominion was at all times fringed and broken in upon -by the dominions of native princes, by independent Greek cities, and -by the dominions of other Macedonian kings. ♦Circa B.C. 256.♦ But in -the third century their dominion was altogether cut short in the East -by the revolt of the Parthians in northern Persia, by whom the eastern -provinces of the Seleukid kingdom were lopped away. ♦B.C. 191-181.♦ And -when Antiochos the Great provoked a war with Rome, his dominion was cut -short to the West also. The Seleukid power now shrank up into a local -kingdom of _Syria_, with Tauros for its north-western frontier. - -♦Cities of independent state in Asia Minor. B.C. 283.♦ - -By the cutting short of the Seleukid kingdom, room was given for the -growth of the independent states which had already sprung up in Asia -Minor. ♦Pergamos.♦ The kingdom of _Pergamos_ had already begun, and -the dominions of its kings were largely increased by the Romans at -the expense of Antiochos. Pergamos might count as a Hellenic state, -alongside of Macedonia and Epeiros. But the other kingdoms of Asia -Minor, _Bithynia_, _Kappadokia_, _Paphlagonia_, and _Pontos_, the -kingdom of the famous Mithridates, must be counted as Asiatic. ♦Spread -of Hellenic culture.♦ The Hellenic influence indeed spread itself -far to the East. Even the Parthian kings affected a certain amount -of Greek culture, and in all the more western kingdoms there was a -greater or less Greek element, and in several of them the kings fixed -their capitals in Greek cities. Still in all of them the Asiatic -element prevailed in a way in which it did not prevail at Pergamos. -Meanwhile other states, either originally Greek or largely Hellenized, -still remained East of the Ægæan. Thus, at the south-western corner of -Asia Minor, _Lykia_, though seemingly less thoroughly Hellenized than -some of its neighbours, became a federal state after the Greek model. -♦Seleukeia.♦ Far to the East, _Seleukeia_ on the Tigris, whether under -Syrian or Parthian overlordship, kept its character as a Greek colony, -and its position as what may be called a free imperial city. Further -to the West other more purely Greek states survived. ♦Hêrakleia. | -B.C. 188.♦ The Pontic _Hêrakleia_ long remained an independent Greek -city, sometimes a commonwealth, sometimes under tyrants; and _Sinôpê_ -remained a Greek city till it became the capital of the kings of -Pontos. On the north of the Euxine, _Bosporos_ still remained a Greek -kingdom. - - -§ 8. _The later Geography of Independent Greece._ - -♦Later political divisions of Greece.♦ - -The political divisions of independent Greece, in the days when it -gradually came under the power of Rome, differ almost as much from -those to which we are used during the Persian and Peloponnesian -wars, as these last differ from the earlier divisions in the Homeric -catalogue. The chief feature of these times was the power which -was held, as we have before seen, by the Macedonian kings, and the -alliances made by the different Greek states in order to escape or to -throw off their yoke. The result was that the greater part of Greece -was gradually mapped out among large confederations, much larger at -least than Greece had ever seen before. ♦The Achaian League, B.C. 280.♦ -The most famous of these, the League of _Achaia_, began among the old -Achaian cities on the south of the Corinthian Gulf. ♦B.C. 191.♦ It -gradually spread, till it took in the whole of Peloponnêsos, together -with Megara and one or two outlying cities. Thus Corinth, Argos, Elis, -and even Sparta, instead of being distinct states as of old, with a -greater or less dominion over other cities, were now simply members of -one federal body. ♦The Aitolian League.♦ In Northern Greece the League -of _Aitolia_ now became very powerful, and extended itself far beyond -its old borders. Akarnania, Phôkis, Lokris, and Boiôtia formed Federal -states of less power, and so did _Epeiros_, where the kings had been -got rid of, and which was now reckoned as a thoroughly Greek state. -The Macedonian kings held different points at different times: Corinth -itself for a good while, and Thessaly and Euboia for longer periods, -might be almost counted as parts of their kingdom. - -♦Roman interference in Greece.♦ - -This was the state of things in Greece at the time when the Romans -began to meddle in Greek and Macedonian affairs, and gradually to -bring all these countries, like the rest of the Mediterranean world, -under their power. But it should be remarked that this was done, -as the conquests of the Romans always were done, very gradually. -♦B.C. 229.♦ First the island of Korkyra and the cities of Epidamnos -and Apollônia on the Illyrian coast became Roman allies, which was -always a step to becoming Roman subjects. ♦B.C. 205.♦ The Romans -first appeared in Greece itself, as allies of the Aitolians, but by -the Peace of Epeiros Rome obtained no dominion in Greece, and merely -some increase of her Illyrian territory. ♦B.C. 200-197. | Progress of -Roman conquests. | B.C. 196.♦ The second Macedonian War made Macedonia -dependent on Rome, and all those parts of Greece which had been under -the Macedonian power were declared free at its close. ♦B.C. 189.♦ As -the Aitolians had joined Antiochos of Syria against Rome, they were -made a Roman dependency. From that time Rome was always meddling in -the affairs of the Greek states, and they may be counted as really, -though not formally, dependent on Rome. ♦B.C. 169. | B.C. 149.♦ After -the third Macedonian war, Macedonia was cut up into four separate -commonwealths; and at last, after the fourth, it became a Roman -province. ♦B.C. 146. | Remaining free states incorporated by -Vespasian.♦ About the same time the Leagues of Epeiros and Boiôtia -were dissolved; the Achaian League also became formally dependent on -Rome, and was dissolved for a time also. It is not certain when Achaia -became formally a Roman province; but, from this time, all Greece was -practically subject to Rome. Athens remained nominally independent, as -did Rhodes, Byzantion, and several other islands and outlying cities, -some of which were not formally incorporated with the Roman dominion -till the time of the Emperor Vespasian. - -As we go on with the geography of other countries which came under -the Roman dominion, we shall learn more of the way in which Rome thus -enlarged her territories bit by bit. But it seemed right to begin with -the geography of Greece, and this could not be carried down to the -time when Greece became a Roman dominion without saying something of -the Roman conquest. From B.C. 146 we must look upon Greece and the -neighbouring lands as being, some of them formally and all of them -practically, part of the Roman dominion. And we shall not have to speak -of them again as separate states or countries till many ages later, -when the Roman dominion began to fall in pieces. Having thus traced the -geography of the most eastern of the three great European peninsulas -down to the time when it became part of the dominion which took in all -the lands around the Mediterranean, we will now go on to speak of the -middle peninsula, which became the centre of that dominion, namely -that of Italy. ♦Special character of Greek history.♦ Greece and the -neighbouring lands are the only parts of Europe which can be said to -have a history quite independent of Rome, and beginning earlier than -the Roman history. Of the other countries therefore which became part -of the Roman Empire it will be best to speak in their relation to -Italy, and, as nearly as possible, in the order in which they came -under the Roman power. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[2] See the first chapter of his eighth book (vol. ii. p. 139 of -the Tauchnitz edition). He makes four peninsulas within peninsulas, -beginning from the south with Peloponnêsos, and he enlarges on the -general character of the country as made up of gulfs and promontories. - -[3] Ἤπειρος is simply the mainland, and came only gradually to mean a -particular country. We may compare the use of ‘terra firma’ in South -America. In the catalogue (_Iliad_, ii. 620-635), after the island -subjects of Odysseus have been reckoned up, we read: οἵ τ᾽ Ἤπειρον -ἔχον, ἠδ᾽ ἀντιπέραι᾽ ἐνέμοντο. This must mean the land afterwards -called Akarnania. It was remarked at a later time that the Akarnanians -were the only people of Greece who did not appear in the catalogue. - - - - -CHAPTER III. - -FORMATION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE. - - -The second of the three great peninsulas of southern Europe, that which -lies between the other two, is that of Italy. ♦Different meanings of -the name Italy.♦ The name of Italy has been used in several meanings -at different times, but it has always meant either the whole or a part -of the land which we now call Italy. The name gradually spread itself -from the extreme south to the north.[4] At the time when our survey -begins, the name did not go beyond the long narrow peninsula itself; -and indeed it hardly took in the whole of that. ♦Its meaning under -the Roman commonwealth.♦ During the time of the Roman commonwealth -Italy did not reach beyond the little rivers _Macra_ on one side, near -_Luna_, and _Rubico_ on the other side, near _Ariminum_. The land to -the north, as far as the Alps, was not counted for Italy till after -the time of Cæsar. But the Alps are the natural boundary which fence -off the peninsular land from the great mass of central Europe; so -that, looking at the matter as a piece of geography, we may count the -whole land within the Alps as Italy. It will be at once seen that the -Italian peninsula, though so long and narrow, is by no means cut up -into promontories and smaller peninsulas as the Greek peninsula is. Nor -is it surrounded by so many islands. It is only quite in the south, -where the long narrow peninsula splits off into two smaller ones, that -the coast has at all the character of the Greek coast, and there only -in a much slighter degree. ♦The Italian islands.♦ Close by this end of -Italy lies the great island of _Sicily_, whose history has always been -closely connected with that of Italy. Further off lie the two other -great islands of _Corsica_ and _Sardinia_, which in old times were not -reckoned to belong to Italy at all. Besides these there are several -smaller islands, _Elba_ and others, along the Italian coast; but they -lie a good way from each other, and do not form any marked feature in -the geography. There is nothing at all like even the group of islands -off western Greece, much less like the endless multitude, great and -small, in the Ægæan. Through the whole length of the peninsula, like -a backbone, runs the long chain of the _Apennines_. These branch off -from the Alps in north-western Italy near the sea, and run through the -whole length of the country to the very toe of the boot, as the Italian -peninsula has been called from its shape. From all this it follows -that, though Italy was the land which was destined in the end to have -the rule over all the rest, yet the people of Italy were not likely to -begin to make themselves a name so early as the Greeks did. Least of -all were they likely to take in the same way to a sea-faring life, and -to plant colonies in far off lands. - - -§ 1. _The Inhabitants of Italy and Sicily._ - -♦Non-Aryans in Italy.♦ - -We seem to have somewhat clearer signs in Italy than we have in Greece -of the men who dwelled in the land before the Aryans who appear as -its historical inhabitants came into it. ♦Ligurians.♦ On the coast of -_Liguria_, the land on each side of the city of Genoa, a land which was -not reckoned Italian in early times, we find people who seem not to -have been Aryan. And these Ligurians seem to have been part of a race -which was spread through Italy and Sicily before the Aryan settlements, -and to have been akin to the non-Aryan inhabitants of Spain and -southern Gaul, of whom the Basques on each side of the Pyrenees remain -as a remnant. ♦Etruscans.♦ And in historical times a large part of -Italy was held, and in earlier times a still larger part seems to -have been held, by the _Etruscans_. These are a people about whose -origin and language there have been many theories, but nothing can -as yet be said to be certainly known. These Etruscans, in historical -times, formed a confederacy of twelve cities in the land west of the -Apennines, between the Macra and the Tiber; and it is believed that in -earlier times they had settlements both more to the north, on the Po, -and more to the south, in Campania. If they were a non-Aryan race, the -part of the non-Aryans in the geography and history of Italy becomes -greater than it has been in any part of Western Europe except Spain. - -♦The Italians.♦ - -But whatever we make of the Etruscans, the rest of Italy in the older -sense was held by various branches of an Aryan race nearly allied to -the Greeks, whom we may call the _Italians_. Of this race there were -two great branches. One of them, under various names, seems to have -held all the southern part of the western coast of Italy, and to have -spread into Sicily. Some of the tribes of this branch seem to have been -almost as nearly akin to the Greeks as the Epeirots and other kindred -nations on the east side of the Hadriatic. ♦Latins.♦ Of this branch -of the Italian race, the most famous people were the _Latins_; and it -was the greatest Latin city, the border city of the Latins against -the Etruscans, the city of _Rome_ on the Tiber, which became, step by -step, the mistress of Latium, of Italy, and of the Mediterranean world. -♦Opicans.♦ The other branch, which held a much larger part of the -peninsula, taking in the _Sabines_, _Æquians_, _Volscians_, _Samnites_, -_Lucanians_, and other people who play a great part in the Roman -history, may perhaps be classed together as _Opicans_ or _Oscans_, in -distinction from the Latins, and the other tribes allied to them. These -tribes seem to have pressed from the eastern, the Hadriatic, coast of -Italy, down upon the nations to the south-west of them, and to have -largely extended their borders at their expense. - -But part of ancient Italy, and a still larger part of Italy in the -modern sense, was inhabited by nations other than the Italians. -♦Iapygians.♦ In the heel of the boot were the _Iapygians_, a people of -uncertain origin, but who seem in any case to have had a great gift of -receiving the Greek language and manners. ♦Gauls.♦ And in the northern -part, in the lands which were not then counted as part of Italy, were -the _Gauls_, a Celtic people, akin to the Gauls beyond the Alps, and -whose country was therefore called _Cisalpine Gaul_ or Gaul on this -side of the Alps. They were found on both sides of the Po, and on the -Hadriatic coast they seem to have stretched in early times almost as -far south as _Ancona_. ♦Veneti.♦ In the north-east corner of Italy were -yet another people, the _Veneti_, perhaps of Illyrian origin, whose -name long after was taken by the city of _Venice_. But during the -whole time with which we have to do, there was no city so called, and -the name of _Venetia_ is always the name of a country. - -♦Greek colonies in Italy.♦ - -All these nations we may look on as the original inhabitants of Italy; -that is, all were there before anything like contemporary history -begins.[5] But besides these original nations, there were in one part -of Italy many Greek colonies, and also in the island of Sicily. Some -cities of Italy claimed to be Greek colonies, without any clear proof -that they were so. But there seems no reason to doubt that _Kymê_ or -_Cumæ_ on the western coast of Italy, and _Ankôn_ or _Ancona_ on the -Hadriatic, were solitary Greek colonies far away from any other Greek -settlements. Cumæ, though so far off, is said to have been the earliest -Greek colony in Italy. But where the Greeks mainly settled was in the -two lesser peninsulas, the heel and the toe of the boot, into which -the great peninsula of Italy divides at its southern end. Here, as -was before said, there is a nearer approach to the kind of coast to -which the Greeks were used at home. Here then arose a number of Greek -cities, stretching from the extreme south almost up to Cumæ. As in the -case of the Greek cities in Asia, the time of greatness of the Italian -Greeks came earlier than that of the Greeks in Greece itself. In the -sixth century B.C. some of these Greek colonies in Italy, as _Taras_ or -_Tarentum_, _Krotôn_ or _Crotona_, _Sybaris_, and others, were among -the greatest cities of the Greek name. But, as the Italian nations grew -stronger, the Greek cities lost their power, and many of them, Cumæ -among them, fell into the hands of Italian conquerors, and lost their -Greek character more or less thoroughly. Others remained Greek till -they became subject to Rome, and the Greek speech and manners did not -quite die out of southern Italy till ages after the Christian æra. - -♦Inhabitants of Sicily.♦ - -The geography and history of the great island of Sicily, which lies -so near to the toe of the boot, cannot be kept apart from those of -Italy. The mainland and the island were, to a great extent, inhabited -by the same nations. The _Sikanians_ in the western part of the island -may not unlikely have been akin to the Ligurians and Basques; but the -_Sikels_, who gave their name to the island, and who are the people -with whom the Greeks had most to do, were clearly of the Italian stock, -and were nearly allied to the Latins. ♦Phœnician and Greek colonies.♦ -The Phœnicians of Carthage planted some colonies in the western and -northern parts of the island, the chief of which was the city which the -Greeks called _Panormos_, the modern capital _Palermo_. But the western -and southern sides of the triangle were full of Greek cities, which are -said to have been founded from the eighth century B.C. to the sixth. -Several of these, especially _Syracuse_ and _Akragas_ or _Agrigentum_, -were among the chief of Greek cities; and from them the Greek speech -and manners gradually spread themselves over the natives, till in the -end Sicily was reckoned as wholly a Greek land. But for some centuries -Sicilian history is chiefly made up of struggles for the mastery -between Carthage and the Greek cities. This was in truth a struggle -between the Aryan and the Semitic race, and we shall see that, many -ages after, the same battle was again fought on the same ground. - - -§ 2. _Growth of the Roman power in Italy._ - -♦Gradual conquest of Italy.♦ - -The history of ancient Italy, as far as we know it, is the history of -the gradual conquest of the whole land by one of its own cities; and -the changes in its political geography are mainly the changes which -followed the gradual bringing of the whole peninsula under the Roman -dominion. But the form which the conquests of Rome took hindered those -conquests from having so great an effect on the map as they otherwise -might have had. The cities and districts of Italy, as they were one by -one conquered by Rome, were commonly left as separate states, in the -relation of dependent alliance, from which most of them were step by -step promoted to the rights of Roman citizenship. ♦Different positions -of the Italian cities.♦ An Italian city might be a dependent ally of -Rome; it might be a Roman colony with the full franchise or a colony -holding the inferior Latin franchise; or it might have been actually -made part of a Roman tribe. All these were very important political -differences; but they do not make much difference in the look of things -on the map. The most important of the changes which can be called -strictly geographical belong to the early days of Rome, when there were -important national movements among the various races of Italy. ♦Origin -of Rome.♦ Rome arose at the point of union of the -three races, Latin, Oscan, and Etruscan, and it arose from an union -between the _Latin_ and _Oscan_ races. ♦Rome a Latin city.♦ Two Latin -and one _Sabine_ settlements seem to have joined together to form -the city of Rome; but the Sabine element must have been thoroughly -Latinized, and Rome must be counted as a Latin city, the greatest, -though very likely the youngest, among the cities of Latium. - -♦Her early Latin dominion.♦ - -Rome, planted on a march, rose, in the way in which marchlands often do -rise, to supremacy among her fellows. Our first authentic record of the -early commonwealth sets Rome before us as bearing rule over the whole -of Latium. This dominion she seems to have lost soon after the driving -out of the kings, and some of her territory right of the Tiber seems -to have become Etruscan. Presently Rome appears, no longer as mistress -of Latium, but as forming one member of a triple league concluded on -equal terms with the Latins as a body, and with the Hernicans. ♦Wars -with her neighbours.♦ This league was engaged in constant wars with its -neighbours of the Oscan race, the _Æquians_ and _Volscians_, by whom -many of the Latin cities were taken. ♦More distant wars. | B.C. 396.♦ -But the first great advance of Rome’s actual dominion was made on the -right bank of the Tiber, by the taking of the Etruscan city of _Veii_. -♦B.C. 343.♦ Fifty years later Rome began to engage in more distant -wars; and we may say generally that the conquest of Italy was going on -bit by bit for eighty years more. ♦B.C. 296.♦ By the end of that time, -all Italy, in the older sense, was brought in one shape or another -under the Roman dominion. The neighbouring districts, both Latin and of -other races, had been admitted to citizenship. Roman and Latin colonies -were planted in various parts of the country; elsewhere the old cities, -Etruscan, Samnite, Greek, or any other, still remained as dependent -allies of Rome. ♦Incorporation of the Italian states. | B.C. 89.♦ -Presently Rome went on to win dominion out of Italy; but the Italian -states still remained in their old relation to Rome, till the Italian -allies received the Roman franchise after the _Social_ or _Marsian_ -war. The _Samnites_ alone held out, and they may be said to have been -altogether exterminated in the wars of Sulla. The rest of Italy was -Roman. - - -§ 3. _The Western Provinces._ - -The great change in Roman policy, and in European geography as affected -by it, took place when Rome began to win territory out of Italy. The -relation of these foreign possessions to the ruling city was quite -different from that of the Italian states. The foreign conquests of -Rome were made into _provinces_. ♦Nature of the Roman Provinces.♦ A -province was a district which was subject to Rome, and put under the -rule of a Roman governor, which was not done with the dependent allies -in Italy. But it must be borne in mind that, though we speak of a -province as having a certain geographical extent, yet there might be -cities within its limits whose formal relation to Rome was that of -dependent, or even of equal, alliance. There might also be Roman and -Latin colonies, either colonies really planted or cities which had -been raised to the Roman or Latin franchise. All these were important -distinctions as regarded the internal government of the different -states; still practically all alike formed part of the Roman dominion. -In a geographical survey it will therefore be enough to mark the extent -of the different provinces, without attending to their political, or -more truly municipal, distinctions, except in a few cases where they -are of special importance. - -♦Eastern and Western Provinces.♦ - -The provinces then are the foreign dominions of Rome, and they fall -naturally into two, or rather three, divisions. There are the -provinces of the West, in which the Romans had chiefly to contend with -nations much less civilized than themselves, and in which therefore -the provincials gradually adopted the language and manners of their -conquerors. But in the provinces to the east of the Hadriatic, the -Greek language and Greek manners had become the language and manners -of civilized life, and their supremacy was not supplanted by those of -Rome. And in the more distant parts, as in Syria and Egypt, the Greek -civilization was a mere varnish; the mass of the people still kept to -their old manners and languages as they were before the Macedonian -conquests. In these countries therefore the Latin tongue and Roman -civilization made but little progress. The Roman conquests went on -on both sides of the Hadriatic at the same time, but it was to the -west that they began. The first Roman province however forms a sort -of intermediate class by itself, standing between the eastern and the -western. - -♦Sicily.♦ - -This first Roman province was formed in the great island of _Sicily_, -which, by its geographical position, belongs to the western part of -Europe, while the fact that Greek became the prevailing language in -it rather connects it with the eastern part. ♦First Roman possessions -in the island. B.C. 241.♦ The Roman dominion in Sicily began when the -Carthaginian possessions in the island were given up to Rome, as the -result of the first Punic war. But, as Hierôn of _Syracuse_ had helped -Rome against Carthage, his kingdom remained in alliance with Rome, -and was not dealt with as a conquered land. ♦Conquest of Syracuse. -B.C. 212.♦ It was only when Syracuse turned against Rome in the -second Punic war that it was, on its conquest, formally made a Roman -possession. ♦B.C. 132.♦ Eighty years later the condition of Sicily -under the Roman government was finally settled, and it may be taken -as a type of the endless variety of relations in which the different -districts and cities throughout the Roman dominions stood to the ruling -commonwealth. ♦State of Sicily.♦ The greater part of the island became -simply subject; the land was held to be forfeited to the Roman People, -and the former inhabitants held it simply as tenants on payment of a -tithe. But some cities were called free, and kept their land; others -remained in name independent allies of the Roman People. Other cities -were afterwards raised to the Latin franchise; in others Latin or -Roman colonies were planted, and one Sicilian city, that of _Messana_, -received the full citizenship of Rome. It must be borne in mind that -these different relations, these exceptionally favoured cities and -districts, are found, not only in Sicily, but throughout all the -provinces. ♦Greek civilization of Sicily.♦ Sicily, by the time of the -conquest, was looked on as a thoroughly Greek land. The Greek language -and manners had now spread themselves everywhere among the Sikels and -the other inhabitants of the island. And Sicily remained a thoroughly -Greek land, till, ages afterwards, it again became, as it had been in -the days of the Greek and Phœnician colonies, a battle-field of Aryan -and Semitic races in the days of the Mahometan conquests. - -♦Sardinia and Corsica.♦ - -The two great islands of _Sardinia_ and _Corsica_ seem almost as -natural appendages to Italy as Sicily itself; but their history is -very different. They have played no important part in the history of -the world. The original stock of their inhabitants seems to have been -akin to the non-Aryan element in Spain and Sicily. The attempts at -Greek colonization in them were but feeble, and they passed under the -dominion, first of Carthage and then of Rome, without any important -change in their condition. ♦B.C. 238.♦ These two islands became a -Roman province, which was always reckoned one of the most worthless of -provinces, in the interval between the first and second Punic wars. - -♦Cisalpine Gaul.♦ - -Thus far the Roman dominions did not reach beyond what we should -look upon as the natural extent of the dominion of an Italian power. -Indeed, as long as Italy did not reach to the Alps, we should say that -it had not reached the natural extent of an Italian dominion. But -the conquest of Cisalpine Gaul cannot be separated from the general -conquest of Western Europe. The Roman conquest of Gaul and Spain, by -gradually spreading the Latin language and Roman civilization over -those countries, created two of the chief nations and languages of -modern Europe. But the process was simply the continuation of a process -which began within the borders of what we now call Italy. Gaul within -the Alps was as strictly a foreign conquest as Spain or as Gaul beyond -the Alps. Only the geographical position of Cisalpine Gaul allowed it -to be easily and speedily incorporated with Italy in a way which the -lands beyond the Alps could not be. The beginnings of conquest in this -direction took place after the end of the Samnite wars. ♦Foundation -of Sena Gallica. B.C. 282.♦ Then the colony of _Sena Gallica_, now -_Sinigaglia_, was founded on Gaulish soil, and it was presently -followed by the foundation of _Ariminum_ or _Rimini_. ♦Conquest of -Cisalpine Gaul. B.C. 201-191.♦ The Roman arms were carried beyond the -Po in the time between the first and the second Punic war; after the -second Punic war, Cisalpine Gaul was thoroughly conquered, and was -secured by the foundation of many Roman and Latin colonies. ♦B.C. 43.♦ -The Roman and Latin franchises were gradually extended to most parts -of the country, and at last Cisalpine Gaul was formally incorporated -with Italy. - -♦Conquest of Liguria and Venetia.♦ - -Closely connected with the conquest of Cisalpine Gaul was the conquest -of the other non-Italian lands within the boundaries of modern Italy. -These were _Liguria_ to the south-east of Cisalpine Gaul and _Venetia_ -to the north-west. Both these lands held out longer than Cisalpine -Gaul; but by the time of Augustus they were all, together with the -peninsula of _Istria_, counted as part of Italy. ♦Foundation of -Aquileia, B.C. 183.♦ The dominion of Rome in this region was secured at -an early stage of the conquest by the foundation of the great colony -of _Aquileia_. We thus see that, not only Venice, but Milan, Pavia, -Verona, Ravenna, and Genoa, cities which played so great a part in -the after history of Italy, arose in lands which were not originally -Italian. But we also see that Italy, with the boundaries given to it by -Augustus, took in a somewhat larger territory to the north-east than -the kingdom of Italy does now. - -♦Spain.♦ - -The lands within the Alps may be fairly said to have been conquered by -Rome in self-defence, and we cannot help looking on the three great -islands as natural parts of an Italian dominion. The conquests of the -Romans in lands altogether beyond their own borders may be said to -have begun in Western Europe with the conquest of _Spain_, which began -before that of Transalpine Gaul. ♦Connexion of Spain and Gaul.♦ Spain -and Gaul, using the names in the geographical sense, have much which -binds them together. ♦Iberians in Spain.♦ On the borders of the two -countries traces are still left of the old non-Aryan inhabitants who -still speak the Basque language. These represent the old _Iberian_ -inhabitants of Spain and Gaul, who, when our history begins, stretched -as far into Gaul as the Garonne. ♦Celts.♦ But the _Celts_, the first -wave of the Aryan migration in Europe, had pressed into both Gaul and -Spain; in Gaul they had, when trustworthy history begins, already -occupied by far the greater part of the country. ♦Greek and♦ The -Mediterranean coasts of Gaul and Spain were also connected together -by the sprinkling of Greek colonies along those shores, of which -_Massalia_ was the head. And, beside the primitive non-Aryan element, -there was an intrusive non-Aryan element also. ♦Phœnician settlements.♦ -In southern Spain several Phœnician settlements had been made, the -chief of which was _Gades_ or _Cadiz_, beyond the straits, the one -great Phœnician city on the Ocean. And between the first and second -Punic wars Carthage obtained a large Spanish dominion, of which _New -Carthage_ or _Carthagena_ was the capital. - -It was the presence of these last settlements which first brought Spain -under the Roman dominion. ♦First Roman province in Spain.♦ _Saguntum_ -was an ally of Rome, and its taking by Hannibal was the beginning of -the second Punic war. ♦B.C. 218-206.♦ The campaigns of the Scipios -during that war led to the gradual conquest of the whole country. ♦B.C. -49.♦ The Carthaginian possessions first became a Roman province, while -Gades became a favoured ally of Rome, and at last was admitted to the -full Roman franchise. ♦B.C. 133.♦ Meanwhile, the gradual conquest of -the rest of the country went on, till, after the taking of _Numantia_, -all Spain, except the remote tribes in the north-west, had become -a Roman possession. ♦Final conquest. B.C. 19.♦ These tribes, the -_Cantabrians_ and their neighbours, were not fully subdued till the -time of Augustus. ♦Romanization of Spain.♦ But long before that time -the Latin language and Roman manners had been fast spreading through -the country, and in Augustus’ time southern Spain was altogether -Romanized. It was only in a small district close to the Pyrenees that -the ancient language held out, as it has done ever since. - -♦Transalpine Gaul.♦ - -The conquest of Spain, owing to the connexion of the country with -Carthage, thus began while a large part even of Cisalpine Gaul was -still unsubdued. And the Roman arms were not carried into Gaul beyond -the Alps till the conquest of Spain was pretty well assured. ♦B.C. -122.♦ The foundation of the first Roman colony at _Aquæ Sextiæ_, the -modern _Aix_, was only eleven years later than the fall of Numantia. -The Romans stepped in as allies of the Greek city of Massalia, and, as -usual, from helping their allies they took to conquering on their own -account. ♦The Transalpine Province. B.C. 125-105.♦ A Roman province, -including the colonies of _Narbonne_ and _Toulouse_, was thus formed -in the south-eastern part of Transalpine Gaul. The advance of Rome -in this direction seems to have been checked by the invasion of the -Cimbri and Teutones, but through that long delay Roman influences were -able to establish themselves more firmly. This part of Gaul was early -and thoroughly Romanized, and part of it still keeps, in its name of -_Provence_, the memory of its having been the first Roman province -beyond the Alps. The rest of Gaul was left untouched till the great -campaigns of Cæsar. - -♦Conquests of Cæsar. B.C. 58-51.♦ - -It is from Cæsar, ethnologer as well as conqueror, that we get our -chief knowledge of the country as it was in his day. ♦Boundaries of -Transalpine Gaul.♦ Transalpine Gaul, as a geographical division, has -well-marked boundaries in the Mediterranean, the Alps, the Rhine, -the Ocean, and the Pyrenees. But this geographical division has -never answered to any divisions of blood and language. ♦Its three -divisions, and their inhabitants, Iberian, Celtic, and German.♦ Gaul -in Cæsar’s day, that is Gaul beyond the Roman province, formed three -divisions—_Aquitaine_ to the south-west, _Celtic Gaul_ in the middle, -and _Belgic Gaul_ to the north-east. Aquitaine, stretching to the -Garonne—the name was under Augustus extended to the Loire—was Iberian, -akin to the people on the other side of the Pyrenees: a trace of its -old speech remains in the small Basque district north of the Pyrenees. -Celtic Gaul, from the Loire to the Seine and Marne, was the most truly -Celtic land, and it was in this part of Gaul that the modern French -nation took its rise. In the third division, Belgic Gaul, the tribes -to the east, nearer to the Rhine, were some of them purely German, and -others had been to a great extent brought under German influences or -mixed with German elements. There was, in fact, no unity in Gaul beyond -that which the Romans brought with them. ♦Romanization of Gaul.♦ In -seven years Cæsar subdued the whole land, and the work of assimilation -began. The Roman language gradually displaced all the native languages, -except where Basque and Breton survive in two corners; but in a large -part of Belgic Gaul the events of later times brought the German tongue -back again. ♦Permanence of the ancient geography.♦ There is no Roman -province in which, among all changes, the ancient geography has had -so much effect upon that of all later times. In southern Gaul most of -the cities still keep their old names with very little change. But in -northern Gaul the cities have mostly taken the names of the tribes -of which they were the heads. Thus _Tolosa_ is still _Toulouse_; but -_Lutetia Parisiorum_ has become _Paris_. - -♦Roman Africa.♦ - -The lands which we have thus gone through, Cisalpine Gaul with Liguria -and Venetia, Spain, and Transalpine Gaul, form a marked division in -historical geography. They are those parts of Western Europe which Rome -conquered during the time of her Commonwealth, and they are those parts -which have mainly kept their Roman speech to this day. But these did -not make up the whole of the lands where Rome planted her Latin speech, -at least for a while. The conquest of Britain belongs to the days of -the Empire; but Rome, during the Commonwealth, made another conquest, -which, though not in Europe, may be counted as belonging to the -Western or Latin-speaking half of her dominion. This is the conquest -of that part of _Africa_ which Rome won as the result of her wars with -Carthage. ♦Province of Africa, B.C. 146;♦ The only African possession -won by Rome during the days of the Commonwealth was _Africa_ in the -strictest sense, the immediate dominion of Carthage. This became a -province when the Punic wars were ended by the destruction of Carthage. -♦of New Africa, B.C. 49.♦ The neighbouring state of _Numidia_, after -passing, like Carthage itself, through the intermediate state of a -dependency, was made a province by Cæsar, being called _New Africa_, -the former African province becoming the _Old_. ♦Restoration and -greatness of Carthage.♦ Cæsar also restored the city of Carthage as -a Roman colony, and it became the chief of the Latin-speaking cities -of the Empire, second only to Rome herself. But in Africa, just as -in Britain, the land never became thoroughly Romanized like Gaul and -Spain. The Roman tongue and laws therefore died out in both lands at -the first touch of an invader, the English in one case and the Saracens -in the other. The strip of fertile land between the sea on one side -and the mountains and the Great Desert on the other received, first -Phœnician and then Roman civilization. But neither of them could -really take root there in the way that the Roman civilization took root -in Gaul and Spain. - - -§ 4. _The Eastern Provinces._ - -♦Contrast between the Eastern and Western provinces.♦ - -The Hadriatic Sea may be roughly taken as the boundary between the -Eastern and Western parts of the Roman dominion. In the West, the -Romans carried with them not only their arms, but their tongue, their -laws, and their manners. They were not only conquerors but civilizers. -The native Iberians and Celts adopted Roman fashions, and the isolated -Greek and Phœnician cities, like Massalia and Gades, gradually became -Roman also. East of the Hadriatic the state of things was quite -different. Here the language and civilization of Greece had, through -the conquests of the Macedonian kings, become everywhere predominant. -♦Greek civilization in the East.♦ Greek was everywhere the polite and -literary language, and a certain varnish of Greek manners had been -everywhere spread. In some parts indeed it was the merest varnish; -still it was everywhere strong enough to withstand the influence -of Latin. Sicily and Southern Italy are the only lands which have -altogether thrown away the Greek tongue, and have taken to Latin or any -of the languages formed out of Latin. No part of the eastern half of -the Roman dominion ever became Roman in the same way as Gaul and Spain. - -The whole of the lands east of the Hadriatic may thus, as opposed to -the Latin-speaking lands of the west, be called Greek-speaking lands. -♦Distinctions among the Eastern provinces.♦ But there are some wide -distinctions to be drawn among them. First, there was old Greece itself -and the Greek colonies, and lands like _Epeiros_, which had become -thoroughly Greek. Secondly, there were the kingdoms, like _Macedonia_ -in Europe and _Pergamos_ in Asia, which had adopted the Greek speech -and manners, but which did not, like Epeiros, become Greek in any -political sense. Thirdly, there were a number of native states, -_Bithynia_ and others, whose kings also tried to imitate Greek ways, -but naturally could not do so as thoroughly as the kings of Macedonia -and Pergamos. ♦Lands beyond Tauros.♦ Fourthly, beyond Mount Tauros lay -the kingdoms of _Syria_ and _Egypt_, which were ruled by Macedonian -kings, which contained great Greek or Macedonian cities like _Antioch_ -and _Alexandria_, but where there were native languages, and an old -native civilization, which neither Greek nor Roman influences could -ever root out. We shall see as we go on that Tauros makes a great -historical boundary. The lands on this side of it really came, though -very gradually, under the dominion of the Greek speech and the Roman -law. Beyond Mount Tauros both the Greek and the Roman element lay -merely on the surface, and therefore those lands, like Africa, easily -fell away when they were attacked by the Saracens.[6] We must now go -through such of the lands east of the Hadriatic as were formed into -Roman provinces during the time of the Roman Commonwealth. - -♦The Illyrian Provinces.♦ - -But again, between the Latin and the Greek parts of the Roman dominion -there was a border land, namely, the lands held by the great _Illyrian_ -race. The southern parts of Illyria came within the reach of Greek -influences, and it was through the affairs of Illyria that Rome was -first led to meddle in the affairs of Greece. ♦The kingdom of Skodra.♦ -The use of the name _Illyria_ is at all times very vague; as a more -definite meaning as the name of a kingdom whose capital was _Skodra_, -and which, in the second half of the third century, was a dangerous -neighbour to the Greek cities and islands on that coast. ♦B.C. 168.♦ -This kingdom was involved in the third Macedonian war, and came to an -end at the same time. As usual, it is not easy to distinguish how much, -if any, of the country actually became a Roman province, and how much -was left for a while in the intermediate state of dependent alliance. -But, for all practical purposes, the Illyrian kingdom of Skodra formed -from this time a part of the Roman dominion. With the fall of Skodra, -the parts of Illyria which lay further to the north, beyond the bounds -of the Greek world, first came into notice. ♦Dalmatian Wars.♦ The -Greek colonies in Dalmatia had played their part in the first Illyrian -war; but the land itself, which was to become an outlying fringe of -Italy lying east of the Hadriatic, is now first heard of as a distinct -country formed by a separation from the kingdom of Skodra. ♦B.C. 156. | -B.C. 34.♦ The first Dalmatian war soon followed; but it was not till -after several wars that Dalmatia became a province, and even after that -time there were several revolts. ♦Roman colonies in Dalmatia.♦ Before -long, Dalmatia was settled with several Roman colonies, as _Jadera_ or -_Zara_, and, above all, _Salona_, which became one of the chief cities -of the Roman dominion. The neighbouring lands of _Liburnia_, _Istria_, -and the land of the _Iapodes_, were gradually reduced during the same -period. ♦Istria incorporated with Italy.♦ Istria, like the neighbouring -land of Venetia, was actually incorporated with Italy, and _Pola_, -under the name of _Pietas Julia_, became a Roman colony. - -♦The outlying Greek lands.♦ - -We have already traced the process by which old Greece and the -neighbouring lands of Macedonia and Epeiros gradually sank, first -practically, and then formally, into parts of the Roman dominion. It -would be hard to say at what particular moment many of the Greek cities -and islands sank from the relation of obedient allies into that of -acknowledged subjects. ♦Their late formal annexation.♦ We have seen -that some of them, as Rhodes and Byzantion, were not formally annexed -till the reign of Vespasian. The Greek cities on the Euxine do not seem -to have been formally annexed at all till a late period of the Eastern -Empire. Other outlying Greek lands and cities became so mixed up with -the history of some of the Asiatic kingdoms that they will come in -for a mention along with them. ♦Conquest of Crete, B.C. 67,♦ _Crete_ -kept its independence to become a nest of pirates, and to be specially -conquered. It then formed one province with the then recent conquest of -_Kyrênê_, the one great Greek settlement in Africa, which had become an -appanage of the Macedonian kings of Egypt. The same had been the fate -of _Cyprus_, an island which had always been partly Greek, and which -had been further Hellenized under its Macedonian kings. ♦of Cyprus, -B.C. 58.♦ Cyprus too became a province. Thus, before Rome lost her own -freedom, she had become the formal or practical mistress of all the -earlier abodes of freedom. Men could not yet foresee that a time would -come when _Greek_ and _Roman_ should be words having the same meaning, -and when the place and name of Rome herself should be transferred to -one of the Greek cities which Vespasian formally reduced from alliance -to bondage. - -♦The Asiatic Provinces.♦ - -In Roman history one war and one conquest always led to another, and, -as the affairs of Illyria had led to Roman interference in Greece, -so the affairs of Greece led to Roman interference in _Asia_. ♦B.C. -191-188.♦ The first war which Rome waged with _Antiochos_ of Syria led -to no immediate increase of the Roman territory, but all the Seleukid -possessions on this side Tauros were divided among the allies of Rome. -♦Province of Asia. B.C. 133-129.♦ This, as usual, was the first step -towards the conquest of Asia, and it is quite according to the usual -course of things that the first Roman province beyond the Ægæan, the -province of _Asia_, was formed of the dominions of Rome’s first and -most useful allies, the kings of Pergamos. The mission of Alexander -and his successors, as the representatives of Western civilization -against the East, now passed into the hands of Rome. Step by step, the -other lands west of Tauros came under the formal or practical dominion -of Rome. ♦Bithynia. B.C. 74.♦ _Bithynia_ was the first to be annexed, -and this acquisition was one of the causes which led to the second war -between Rome and the famous _Mithridates_ of _Pontos_. ♦Overthrow of -Mithridates. B.C. 64.♦ His final overthrow brought a number of other -lands under Roman dominion or influence. The Greek cities of _Sinôpê_ -and _Hêrakleia_ obtained a nominal freedom, and vassal kings went on -reigning in part of Pontos itself, and in the distant Greek kingdom -of _Bosporos_. Rome was now mistress of Asia Minor. ♦Lykia.♦ The land -was divided among her provinces and her vassal kings, save that the -wise federal commonwealth of _Lykia_ still kept the highest amount of -independence which was consistent with the practical supremacy of Rome. - -The Mithridatic war, which made Rome mistress of Asia in the narrower -sense, at once involved her in the affairs of the further East. -Tigranes of _Armenia_ had been the chief ally of Mithridates; but, -though his power was utterly humbled, no Armenian province was added -to the Roman dominion for a long time to come. ♦Province of Syria. -B.C. 64.♦ But the remnant of the Seleukid monarchy became the Roman -province of _Syria_. As usual, several cities and principalities were -allowed to remain in various relations of alliance and dependence on -the ruling commonwealth. ♦Palestine.♦ Among these we find _Judæa_ and -the rest of _Palestine_, sometimes under a Roman procurator, sometimes -united under a single vassal king, sometimes parted out among various -kings and tetrarchs, as suited the momentary caprice or policy of Rome. -♦Comparison with British India.♦ In all these various relations between -the native states and the ruling city we have a lively foreshadowing of -the relations between England and the subject and dependent princes of -India. ♦Rome the champion of the West.♦ The conquests of Rome in these -regions made her more distinctly than ever the sole representative of -the West against the East, and these conquests presently brought her -into collision with the one power in the known world which could at all -meet her on equal terms. She had stepped into the place of Alexander -and Seleukos so far as that all those parts of Alexander’s Asiatic -conquests which had received even a varnish of Hellenic culture had -become parts of her dominion. ♦Her rivalry with Parthia.♦ The further -East beyond the Euphrates was again under the command of a great -barbarian power, that of _Parthia_, which had stepped into the place -of Persia, as Rome had stepped into the place of Greece and Macedonia. -Rome had now again a rival, in a sense from which she had not had a -rival since the overthrow of Carthage and Macedonia. - -One only of the Macedonian kingdoms now remained to be gathered in. -♦Conquest of Egypt. B.C. 31.♦ The annexation of _Egypt_, an annexation -made famous by the names of Kleopatra, Antonius, the elder and the -younger Cæsar, completed the work. Rome was now fully mistress of her -own civilized world. Her dominion took in all the lands round the -great inland sea. If, here and there, her formal dominion was broken -by a city or principality whose nominal relation was that of alliance, -the distinction concerned only the local affairs of that city or -principality. ♦_Pax Romana._♦ Within the whole historic world of the -three ancient continents, the Roman Peace had begun. Rome had still to -wage wars, and even to annex provinces; but those wars and annexations -were now done rather to round off and to strengthen the territory which -had been already gained, than in the strictest sense to extend it. - - -§ 5. _Conquests under the Empire._ - -At the same moment when the Roman commonwealth was practically changed -into a monarchy, the Roman dominion was thus brought, not indeed to its -greatest extent, but to an extent of which its further extension was -only a natural completion. ♦Conquests under Augustus and Tiberius.♦ -There seems a certain inconsistency when we find Augustus laying -down a rule against the enlargement of the Empire, while the Empire -was, during his reign and that of his successor, extended in every -direction. But the conquests of this time were mainly conquests for -the purpose of strengthening the frontier; the occasional changes of -this and that city or district from the dependent to the provincial -relation, or sometimes from the provincial to the dependent, are now -hardly worth mentioning. ♦Incorporation of the dependent kingdoms.♦ -Between Augustus and Nero, or, at all events, between Augustus -and Vespasian, all the dependent states in Asia and Africa, such -as _Mauritania_, _Kappadokia_, _Lykia_, and others, were finally -incorporated with the Empire to which they had long been practically -subject. These annexations can hardly be called conquests. And it was -merely finishing a work which had been begun two hundred years before, -when the small corner of Spain which still kept its independence was -brought under the Roman power. ♦Strengthening of the frontier.♦ The -real conquests of this time consisted in the strengthening of the -European frontier. No frontier nearer than the Rhine and the Danube -could be looked on as safe. This lesson was easily learned; but it -had also to be accompanied by another lesson which taught that the -Rhine and the Danube, and no more distant points, were to be the real -frontiers of Rome. - -This brings us both to the lands which were then our own and to the -lands which became our own in after times. During the reign of Augustus -two conquests which most nearly concern our own history were planned, -and one of them was attempted. The annexation of the land which was to -become England was talked of; the annexation of the land which then -was England, along with the rest of the German lands, was seriously -attempted. But the conquest of Britain was put off from the days of -Augustus to the days of Claudius. ♦Attempted conquest of Germany. B.C. -11-A.D. 9.♦ The attempt at the conquest of Germany, which was deemed to -have been already carried out, was shivered when Arminius overthrew the -legions of Varus. ♦A.D. 19.♦ The expeditions of Drusus and Germanicus -into Northern Germany must have brought the Roman armies into contact -with our own forefathers, for the first time, and, for several ages, -for the last time. But from this time the relations between Rome -and southern Germany begin, and constantly increase in importance. -The two great rivers were fixed as a real frontier. ♦Conquests on -the Danube.♦ The lands between the Alps and the Danube, _Rætia_, -_Vindelicia_, _Noricum_, _Pannonia_, with _Mœsia_ on the lower Danube, -were all added to the Empire during the reign of Augustus. These were -strictly defensive annexations, annexations made in order to remove the -dangerous frontier further from Italy. Beyond the Rhine and the Danube -the Roman possessions were mere outposts held for the defence of the -land between the two great streams. - -♦Attempt on Arabia. B.C. 24.♦ - -Meanwhile, while the attempt of the conquest of Germany came to so -little, an attempt at conquest at the other end of the world, in the -_Arabian_ peninsula, came to even less. ♦Thrace.♦ It marks the policy -of Rome and the gradual nature of her advance that, while these more -distant conquests were made or attempted, _Thrace_ still retained her -dependent princes, the only land of any extent within the European -dominions of Rome which did so. But Thrace, surrounded by Roman -provinces, was in no way dangerous; it might remain a dependency while -more distant lands were incorporated. It was not till uniformity was -more sought after, till, under Vespasian, the nominal freedom of so -many cities and principalities came to an end, that Thrace became a -province. ♦Annexation of Byzantion.♦ It was then that, among her latest -formal acquisitions in Europe, Rome annexed the city which was, in the -course of ages, to take her own place and name. - -♦Conquest of Britain.♦ - -Thus, in the days between Augustus and Trajan, the conquests which -Rome actually made were mainly of a defensive and strengthening -character. To this rule there is one and only one exception of any -importance. This is the annexation to the Roman world of the land which -was looked on as another world, the conquest of the greater part of the -Isle of _Britain_. But Britain, though it did not come under the same -law as the defensive annexations of Rætia and Pannonia, was naturally -suggested by the annexation of Gaul and by the visits of the first -Cæsar to the island. ♦Claudius. B.C. 43.♦ No actual conquest however -took place till the reign of Claudius. ♦Agricola. B.C. 84.♦ Forty years -later the Roman conquests in Britain were pushed by _Agricola_ as far -as the isthmus between the friths of Forth and Clyde, the boundary -marked by the later rampart of _Antoninus_. But the lasting boundary of -the Roman dominion in Britain cannot be looked on as reaching beyond -the line of the southern wall of _Hadrian_, _Severus_, and _Stilicho_, -between the Solway and the mouth of the Tyne. The northern part of -Britain thus remained unconquered, and the conquest of Ireland was not -even attempted. For us the conquest of the land which afterwards became -our own has an interest above all the other conquests of Rome. But it -is a purely geographical interest. The British victories of Cæsar and -Agricola were won, not over our own forefathers, but over those Celtic -Britons whom our forefathers more thoroughly swept away. The history of -our own nation is still for some ages to be looked for by the banks of -the Elbe and the Weser, not by those of the Severn and the Thames. - -♦The Eastern conquests of Trajan.♦ - -Britain was the last to be won of the Western provinces of Rome, and -the first to be lost. Still it was, for more than three hundred years, -thoroughly incorporated with the Empire, and its loss did not happen -till that general break-up of the Empire of which its loss was the -first stage. But between the conquest of Britain and its loss there -was a short time in which Rome again extended her dominion in the old -fashion, both in Europe and Asia. ♦Conquests of Trajan. A.D. 98-117.♦ -This was during the reign of Trajan, when the Roman borders were again -widely extended in both Europe and Asia. Under him the Danube ceased -to be a boundary stream in one continent and the Euphrates in the -other. ♦His Asiatic and European conquests.♦ But a marked distinction -must be drawn between his Asiatic and his European warfare. Trajan’s -Asiatic conquests were strictly momentary; they were at once given up -by his successor; and they will be better dealt with when we speak in -another chapter of the long strife between Rome and her Eastern rival, -first Parthian and then Persian. ♦Conquest of Arabia Petræa. A.D. 106.♦ -The only lasting Asiatic conquest of Trajan’s reign was not made by -Trajan himself, namely the small Roman province in Northern _Arabia_. - -The European conquests of Trajan stand on another ground. If not -strictly defensive, like those of Augustus, they might easily seem to -be so. ♦Dacia.♦ The _Dacians_, to the north of the lower Danube, were -really threatening to the Roman power in those regions, and they had -dealt Rome more than one severe blow in the days of Domitian. ♦A.D. -106.♦ Trajan now formed the lands between the Thiess and the Danube, -the Dniester and the Carpathian Mountains, into the Roman province of -_Dacia_. ♦A.D. 270.♦ The last province to be won was the first to be -given up; for Aurelian withdrew from it, and transferred its name to -the Mœsian land immediately south of the Danube. But if Dacia was in -this way one of the most short lived of Roman conquests, it was in -another way one of the most lasting. ♦Later history of Dacia.♦ Cut off, -as it has been for so many ages, from all Roman influences, forming, -as it has done, one of the great highways of barbarian migration, a -large part of Dacia, namely the modern Rouman principality, still keeps -its Roman language no less than Spain and Gaul. In one way the land is -to this day more Roman than Spain or Gaul, as its people still call -themselves by the Roman name. Dacia, in fact, though geographically -belonging to the Eastern half of the Empire, stood in the same position -as the Western provinces. Greek influences had not reached so far -north, nor was there in Dacia any old-standing native civilization, -such as there was in Syria and Egypt. There was therefore nothing that -was at all able to hold up against Roman influences. The land was -speedily and thoroughly Romanized, and it remains Roman in speech and -name sixteen hundred years after the withdrawal of the Roman power. - - * * * * * - -♦Summary.♦ - -The Roman Empire was thus gradually formed by bringing, first Italy -and then the whole of the Mediterranean lands, under the dominion of -the one Roman city. In every part of that dominion the process of -conquest was gradual. The lands which became Roman provinces passed -through various stages of alliance and dependence before they were -fully incorporated. But, in the end, all the civilized world of those -times became Roman. Speaking roughly, three great rivers, the Rhine, -Danube, and Euphrates, formed the European and Asiatic boundaries of -the Empire. In Africa the Roman dominion consisted only of the strip -of fertile land between the Mediterranean and the mountains and -deserts. Britain and Dacia, the only two great provinces lying beyond -this range, were the last conquered and the first given up. In Western -Europe and in Africa Rome carried her language and her civilization -with her, and in those lands the Roman speech still remains, except -where it has been swept away by Teutonic and Saracen conquests. In the -lands from the Hadriatic to Mount Tauros, which had been brought more -or less under Greek influences, the Greek speech and civilization stood -its ground, and in those lands Greek still survives wherever it has not -been swept away by Slavonic and Turkish conquests. In the further east, -in Syria and Egypt, where there was an old native civilization, neither -Greek nor Roman influences took real root. The differences between -these three parts of the Roman Empire, the really Roman, the Greek, and -the Oriental, will be clearly seen as we go on. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[4] We shall come as we go on to two uses of the name in which Italy, -oddly enough, meant only the northern part of the land commonly so -called. But in both these cases the name had a purely political and -technical meaning, and it never came into common use in this sense. - -[5] Some may think that the Cisalpine Gauls ought to be excepted, as -the common Roman story represents them as having crossed the Alps from -Transalpine Gaul at a time which almost comes within the range of -contemporary history. But this is a point about which there is no real -certainty; and it seems quite as likely that the Gaulish settlements on -the Italian side of the Alps were as old as those on the other side. - -[6] In a more minute study of the history it will be found that Latin -Africa held out against the Saracens very much longer than Syria -and Egypt. But for our purpose the two may be classed together in -opposition to those lands in Europe and Asia which always remained -Roman or Greek. - - - - -CHAPTER IV. - -THE DISMEMBERMENT OF THE EMPIRE. - - -§ 1. _The Later Geography of the Empire._ - -The Roman dominion, as we have seen, grew up by the successive -annexation of endless kingdoms, districts, and cities, each of which, -after its annexation, still retained, whether as an allied province -or a subject state, much of the separate being which it had while it -was independent. The allies and subjects of Rome remained in a variety -of different relations to the ruling city, and the old names and the -old geographical boundaries were largely preserved. ♦Wiping out of old -divisions under the Empire.♦ But, as the old ideas of the commonwealth -gradually died out, and as the power of the Emperors gradually grew -into an avowed monarchy, the political change naturally led to a -geographical change. The Roman dominion ceased to be a collection -of allied and subject states under a single ruling city; it changed -into a single Empire, all whose parts, all whose inhabitants, were -equally subject to its Imperial head. The old distinctions of Latins, -Italians, and provincials died out when all free inhabitants of the -Empire became alike Romans. Italy had no longer any privilege; it -was simply part of the Empire, like any other part. The geographical -divisions which had been, first independent, then dependent states, -sank into purely administrative divisions, which might be mapped out -afresh at any time when it was found convenient to do so. Italy itself, -in the extended sense which the word Italy had then come to bear, was -mapped out afresh into _regions_ as early as the time of Augustus. ♦New -division of Italy under Augustus.♦ These divisions, eleven in number, -mark an epoch in the process by which the detached elements out of -which the Roman Empire had grown were fused together into one whole. As -long as Italy was a collection of separate commonwealths, standing in -various relations to the ruling city, there could not be any systematic -division of the country for administrative purposes. Now that the whole -of Italy stood on one level of citizenship or of subjection, the land -might be mapped out in whatever way was most convenient. ♦The eleven -Regions.♦ But the eleven regions of Augustus did not work any violent -change. Old names and old boundaries largely remained. The famous names -of _Etruria_, _Latium_, _Samnium_, _Umbria_, _Picenum_, and _Lucania_ -still lived on, though not always with their ancient boundaries. And, -though all the land as far as the Alps was now Italy, two of the -divisions of Italy kept their ancient names of _Gaul on this side the -Po_ and _Gaul beyond the Po_. _Liguria_ and _Venetia_, now Italian -lands, make up the remainder of Northern Italy. - -♦Divisions under Constantine.♦ - -Italy had thus been mapped out afresh; what was done with Italy in -the time of Augustus was done with the whole Empire in the time of -Constantine. What Italy was in the earlier time the whole Empire was -in the later; the old distinctions had been wiped out, and the whole -of the Roman world stood ready to be parted out into fresh divisions. -Under Diocletian, the Empire was divided into four parts, forming the -realms of the four Imperial colleagues of his system, the two Augusti -and their subordinate Cæsars. ♦Division of the Empire under Diocletian. -A.D. 292.♦ Diocletian’s system of government involved a practical -degradation of Rome from the headship of the Empire. Augusti and Cæsars -now dwelled at points where their presence was more needed to ward off -Persian and German attacks from the frontiers; Rome was forsaken for -Nikomêdeia and Milan, for Antioch, York, and Trier. ♦Reunion under -Constantine. A.D. 323. | Division between the sons of Theodosius. A.D. -395.♦ The division between the four Imperial colleagues lasted under -another form after the Empire was re-united under Constantine, and it -formed the groundwork of the more lasting division of the Empire into -East and West, between the sons of Theodosius. The whole Empire was -now mapped out according to a scheme in which ancient geographical -names were largely preserved, but in which they were for the most -part used in new or, at least, extended meanings. ♦The Four Prætorian -Prefectures.♦ The Empire was divided into four great divisions called -Prætorian _Prefectures_. These were divided into _Dioceses_—a name used -in this nomenclature without regard to the ecclesiastical sense which -was borrowed from it—and the dioceses again into _Provinces_. The four -great prefectures of the _East_, _Illyricum_, _Italy_, and _Gaul_, -answer nearly to the fourfold division under Diocletian; while we may -say that, in the final division, Illyricum and the East formed the -Eastern Empire, and Italy and Gaul formed the Western. But it is only -roughly that either the prefectures or their smaller divisions answer -to any of the great national or geographical landmarks of earlier times. - -♦Prefecture of the East.♦ - -The Prefecture of the _East_ is that one among the four which least -answers to anything in earlier geography, natural or historical. Its -boundaries do not answer to those of any earlier dominion, nor yet to -any great division of race or language. It stretched into all the three -continents of the old world, and took in all those parts of the Empire -which were never fully brought under either Greek or Roman influences. -But it also took in large tracts which we have learned to look on as -part of the Hellenic world—not only lands which had been, to a great -extent, Hellenized in later times, but even some of the earliest Greek -colonies. The four dioceses into which the Prefecture was divided -formed far more natural divisions than the Prefecture itself. - -♦Dioceses of the East,♦ - -Three of these were Asiatic. The first, specially called the _East_, -took in all the possessions of Rome beyond Mount Tauros, together with -Isauria, Kilikia, and the island of Cyprus. Its eastern boundaries -naturally fluctuated according as Rome or Persia prevailed on the -Euphrates and the Tigris, fluctuations of which we shall have again to -speak more specially. ♦Egypt,♦ The diocese of _Egypt_, besides Egypt in -the elder sense, took in, under the name of _Libya_, the old Greek land -of the Kyrenaic Pentapolis. ♦Asia.♦ The diocese of _Asia_, a reminder -of the elder province of that name and of the kingdom of Pergamos out -of which it grew, took in the Asiatic coasts of the Ægæan, together -with Pamphylia, Lykia, and the Ægæan Islands. The diocese of _Pontos_, -preserving the name of the kingdom of Mithridates, took in the lands on -the Euxine, with the fluctuating Armenian possessions of Rome. - -♦Diocese of Thrace.♦ - -Besides these Asiatic lands, the Eastern Prefecture contained -one European diocese, that of _Thrace_, which took in the lands -stretching from the Propontis to the Lower Danube. The names of two -of its provinces are remarkable. Rome now boasts of a province of -_Scythia_. But, among the varied uses of that name, it has now shrunk -up to mean the land immediately south of the mouths of the Danube. -♦Province of _Europa_.♦ The other name is _Europa_, a name which, as -a Roman province, means the district immediately round the New Rome. -Constantine had now fixed his capital on the site of the old Byzantion, -the site from which the city on the Bosporos might seem to bear rule -over two worlds. With whatever motive, the name of Europe was specially -given to that corner of the Western continent where it comes nearest -to the Eastern. Nor was the name ill-chosen for the district round the -city which was so long to be the bulwark of Europe against invading -Asia. ♦Great cities of the Eastern Prefecture.♦ And, besides the New -Rome, this Prefecture, as containing those parts of the Empire which -had belonged to the great Macedonian kingdoms, contained an unusual -proportion of the great cities of the world. Besides a crowd of less -famous places, it took in the two great Eastern seats of Grecian -culture, the most renowned Alexandria and the most renowned Antioch, -themselves only the chief among many others cities bearing the same -names. All these, it should be remarked, were comparatively recent -creations, bearing the names of individual men. That cities thus -artificially called into being should have kept the position which -still belonged to the great Macedonian capitals is one of the most -speaking signs of the effect which the dominion of Alexander and his -successors had on the history of the world. - -♦Prefecture of Illyricum.♦ - -The nomenclature of the second Prefecture marks how utterly Greece, as -a country and nation, had died out of all reckoning. The Prefecture -of the Eastern _Illyricum_ answered roughly to European Greece and -its immediate neighbours. It took in the lands stretching from the -Danube to the southern point of Peloponnêsos. Greece, as part of the -Roman Empire, was included under the name of the barbarian land through -which Rome was first brought into contact with Greek affairs. She was -further included under the name of the half-barbarian neighbour who -had become Greek through the process of conquering Greece. In the -system of Prefectures, Greece formed part of Macedonia, and Macedonia -formed part of Illyricum. So low had Greece, as a land, fallen at -the very moment when her tongue was making the greatest of all its -conquests, when a Greek city was raised to the rank of another Rome. -♦Dioceses of Macedonia and Dacia.♦ The Illyrian Prefecture contained -the two dioceses of _Macedonia_ and _Dacia_. This last name, it will -be remembered, had, since the days of Aurelian, withdrawn to the -south of the Danube. The Macedonian diocese contained six provinces, -among which, besides the familiar and venerable names of Macedonia -and Epeiros, we find the names, still more venerable and familiar, of -_Thessaly_ and _Crete_. And one yet greater name lives on with them. -_Hellas_ and _Græcia_ have alike vanished from the map; but the most -abiding name in Grecian history, the theme of Homer and the theme of -Polybios, has not perished. ♦Province of Achaia.♦ Among all changes, -_Achaia_ is there still. - -♦Prefecture of Italy.♦ - -In the new system Italy and Rome herself were in no way privileged over -the rest of the Empire. The _Italian_ Prefecture took in Italy itself -and the lands which might be looked on as necessary for the defence -and maintenance of Italy. It took in the defensive conquests of the -early Empire on the Upper Danube, and it took in the granary of Italy, -Africa. Its three dioceses were _Italy_, _Illyricum_, and _Africa_. -Here Illyricum strangely gave its name both to a distinct Prefecture -and to one diocese of the Prefecture of Italy. ♦Dioceses of Italy,♦ The -Italian diocese contained seventeen provinces. The Gaulish name has now -wholly vanished from the lands south of the Alps. The lands between the -older and the newer boundaries of Italy are now divided into _Liguria_ -and _Venetia_—the former name being used in a widely extended sense—and -the new names of _Æmilia_ and _Flaminia_, provinces named after the -great Roman roads, as the roads themselves were named after Roman -magistrates. But the new Italy has spread beyond the Alps, and reaches -to the Danube. Two Rætian provinces form part of it. Three other -provinces are formed by the three great islands, Sicily, Sardinia, and -Corsica. ♦Illyricum,♦ The diocese of the _Western Illyricum_ took in -_Pannonia_, _Dalmatia_, and _Noricum_. ♦Africa.♦ The third diocese, -that of _Africa_, took in the old _Africa_, _Numidia_, and western -_Mauritania_. ♦Greatness of Carthage.♦ The union of these lands with -Italy may seem less strange when we remember that the colony of the -first Cæsar, the restored Carthage, was the greatest of Latin-speaking -cities after Rome herself. - -♦Prefecture of Gaul.♦ - -The fourth Prefecture took in the Roman dominions in Western Europe, -the great Latin-speaking provinces beyond the Alps. ♦Diocese of -Spain; its African territory.♦ Among the seven provinces of _Spain_ -are reckoned, not only the Balearic islands, a natural appendage to -the Spanish peninsula, but a small part of the African continent, the -province of _Tingitana_, stretching from the now Italian Africa to the -Ocean. This was according to the general law by which, in almost all -periods of history, either the masters of Spain have borne rule in -Africa or the masters of Africa have borne rule in Spain. ♦Diocese of -Gaul;♦ The diocese of _Gaul_, with its seventeen provinces, keeps, at -least in name, the boundaries of the old Transalpine land. It still -numbers the two Germanies west of the Rhine among its provinces. ♦of -Britain.♦ The five provinces of the diocese of _Britain_ took in, at -the moment when the Empire was beginning to fall asunder, a greater -territory than Rome had held in the island in the days of her greatest -power. ♦Province of Valentia. A.D. 367.♦ The exploits of the elder -Theodosius, who drove back the Pict by land and the Saxon by sea, for -a moment added to the Empire a province beyond the wall of Antoninus, -which, in honour of the reigning Emperors Valentinian and Valens, -received the name of _Valentia_. - - -§ 2. _The Division of the Empire._ - -♦Change in the position of Rome.♦ - -The mapping out of the Empire into Prefectures, and its division -between two or more Imperial colleagues, led naturally to its more -lasting division into what were practically two Empires. The old -state of things had altogether passed away. Rome was no longer the -city ruling over subject states. From the Ocean to the Euphrates all -was alike, if not Rome, at least _Romania_; all its inhabitants were -equally Romans. But to be a Roman now meant, no longer to be a citizen -of a commonwealth, but to be the subject of an Emperor. The unity -of the Empire was not broken by the division of its administration -between several Imperial colleagues; but Rome ceased to be the only -Imperial dwelling-place, and, from the latter years of the third -century, it ceased to be an Imperial dwelling-place at all. As long -as Rome held her old place, no lasting division, nothing more than an -administrative partition among colleagues, could be thought of. There -could be no division to mark on the map. But, when the new system -had fully taken root at the end of the fourth century, we come to a -division which was comparatively lasting, one which fills an important -place in history, and which is capable of being marked on the map. -♦Division of the Empire between the sons of Theodosius. | A.D. 395.♦ -On the death of Theodosius the Great, the Empire was divided between -his two sons, Arcadius taking the Eastern provinces, answering nearly -to the Prefectures of the East and of Illyricum, while Honorius took -the Western provinces, the Prefectures of Italy and Gaul. Through the -greater part of the fifth century, the successors of Arcadius and of -Honorius formed two distinct lines of Emperors, of whom the Eastern -reigned at Constantinople, the Western most commonly at Ravenna. But as -the dominions of each prince were alike Roman, the Eastern and Western -Emperors were still looked on in theory as Imperial colleagues charged -with the administration of a common Roman dominion. ♦Practically two -Empires.♦ Practically however the dominions of the two Emperors may -be looked on as two distinct Empires, the Eastern having its seat at -the New Rome or Constantinople, while the Western had its seat more -commonly at Ravenna than at the Old Rome. - -This division of the Empire is the great political feature of the -fifth century; but the fate of the two Empires was widely different. -♦Enemies of Rome.♦ From the very beginning of the Empire, Rome had had -to struggle with two chief enemies, in the East and in the West, in -Europe and in Asia, the nature of whose warfare was widely different. -♦Rivalry with Parthia and Persia.♦ In the East she had, first the -Parthian and then the regenerate Persian, as strictly a rival power on -equal terms. This rivalry went on from the moment when Rome stepped -into the place of the Seleukids till the time when Rome was cut short, -and Persia overthrown, by the Saracenic invasions. But, except during -the momentary conquests of Trajan and during the equally momentary -alternate conquests of Rome and Persia in the seventh century, the -whole strife was a mere border warfare which did not threaten the -serious dismemberment of either power. This and that fortress was taken -and retaken; this and that province was ceded and ceded back again; -but except under Trajan and again under Chosroes and Heraclius, the -existence and dominion of neither power was ever seriously threatened. -♦Rivalry with Persia passes on to the Eastern Empire.♦ The Eastern -Empire naturally inherited this part of the calling of the undivided -Empire, the long strife with Persia. - -At the other end of the Empire, the enemy was of quite another kind. -♦Teutonic incursions in the Western Empire.♦ The danger there was -through the incursions of the various Teutonic nations. There was no -one Teutonic power which could be a rival to Rome in the same sense -in which Persia was in the East; but a crowd of independent Teutonic -tribes were pressing into the Empire from all quarters, and were -striving to make settlements within its borders. The task of resisting -these incursions fell of course to the Western Empire. ♦No Teutonic -settlements in the Eastern Empire.♦ The Eastern Empire indeed was often -traversed by wandering Teutonic nations; but no permanent settlements -were made within its borders, no dismemberment of its provinces capable -of being marked on the map was made till a much later time. But the -Western Empire was altogether dismembered and broken in pieces by -the settlement of the Teutonic nations within it. The geographical -aspects of the two Empires during the fifth century are thus strikingly -unlike one another; but each continues one side of the history of -the undivided Empire. It will therefore be well to trace those two -characteristic aspects of the two Empires separately. We will first -speak of the Teutonic incursions, through which in the end the Western -Empire was split up and the states of modern Europe were founded. We -will then trace the geographical aspect of the long rivalry between -Rome and Persia in the East. - - -§ 3. _The Teutonic Settlements within the Empire._ - -Our subject is historical geography, and neither ethnology nor -political history, except so far as either national migrations or -political changes produce a directly geographical effect. ♦The -Wandering of the Nations.♦ The great movement called the Wandering of -the Nations, and its results in the settlement of various Teutonic -nations within the bounds of the Roman Empire, concern us now only so -far as they wrought a visible change on the map. The exact relations -of the different tribes to one another, the exact course of the -migrations which led to the final settlement of each, belong rather -to another branch of inquiry. But there are certain marked stages in -the relations of the Empire to the nations beyond its borders, certain -marked stages in the growth and mutual relations of those nations, -which must be borne in mind in order to explain their settlements -within the Empire. ♦Changes in the nomenclature of the Teutonic -nations.♦ It will be at once seen that the geography and nomenclature -of the German nations in the third century is for the most part quite -different from their geography and nomenclature as we find it in Cæsar -and Tacitus. New names have come to the front, names all of which -play a part in history, many of which remain to this day; and, with -one or two exceptions, the older names sink into the background. It -is therefore hardly needful to go through the ethnology and geography -of Tacitus, or to deal with any of the controverted points which are -suggested thereby. We have to look at the German nations purely in -their relations to Rome. - -♦Warfare on the Rhine and the Danube.♦ - -We have seen that the history of Rome in her western provinces was, -from an early stage of the Empire, a struggle with the Teutonic nations -on the Rhine and the Danube. We have seen that all attempts at serious -conquest beyond those boundaries came to nothing. ♦Roman possessions -beyond those rivers.♦ The Roman possessions beyond the two great -rivers were mere outposts for the better security of the land within -the rivers. The district beyond them, fenced in by a wall and known -as the _Agri Decumates_, was hardly more than such an outlying post -on a great scale. The struggle along the border was, almost from the -beginning, a defensive struggle on the part of Rome. We hear of Roman -conquests from the second century to the fifth; but they are strictly -defensive conquests, the mere recovery of lost possessions, or at most -the establishment of fresh outposts. ♦Formation of confederacies -among the Germans.♦ From the moment of the first appearance of Rome -on the two rivers, the Teutonic nations were really threatening to -Rome, and the warfare of Rome was really defensive; and from the very -beginning too a process seems to have been at work among the German -nations themselves which greatly strengthened their power as enemies -of Rome. New nations or confederacies, bearing, for the most part, -names unknown to earlier times, begin to be far more dangerous than the -smaller and more scattered tribes of the earlier times had been. These -movements among the German nations themselves, hastened by pressure -of other nations to the east of them, caused the Teutonic attacks on -the Empire to become more and more formidable, and at last to grow into -Teutonic settlements within the Empire. But, in the course of this -process, several stages may be noticed. ♦Marcomanni and Quadi.♦ Thus -the _Marcomanni_ and the _Quadi_ play a part in this history from the -very beginning. The Marcomanni appear in Cæsar, and, from their name of -_Markmen_, we may be sure that they were a confederacy of the same kind -as the later confederacies of the Franks and Alemanni. In the first and -second centuries the Marcomanni are dangerous neighbours, threatening -the Empire and often penetrating beyond its borders, and their name -appears in history as late as the fifth century. But they play no part -in the Teutonic settlements within the Empire. They do not affect the -later map; they had no share in bringing about the changes out of which -modern Europe arose. Their importance ceases just at the time when a -second stage begins, when, in the course of the third century, we begin -to hear of those nations or confederacies whose movements really did -affect later history and geography. - -♦Beginning of modern European history.♦ - -In the third and fourth centuries the history of modern Europe begins. -♦The new confederacies.♦ We now begin to hear names which have been -heard ever since, _Franks_, _Alemans_, _Saxons_, all of them great -confederacies of German tribes. ♦Defensive warfare of Rome.♦ Defence -against German inroads now becomes the chief business of the rulers of -Rome. The invaders were constantly driven back; but new invaders were -as constantly found to renew their incursions. Men of Teutonic race -pressed into the Empire in every conceivable character. ♦Germans within -the Empire.♦ Besides open enemies, who came with the hope either of -plunder or settlement, crowds of Germans served in the Roman armies -and obtained lands held by military tenure as the reward of their -services. Their chiefs were promoted to every rank and honour, military -and civil, short of the Imperial dignity itself. These were changes -of the utmost importance in other points of view; still they do not -directly affect the map of the Empire. Lands and cities were won and -lost over and over again; but such changes were merely momentary; the -acknowledged boundaries of the Roman dominion were not yet altered; -it is not till the next stage that geography begins to be directly -concerned. - -♦Beginning of national kingdoms.♦ - -This last stage begins with the early years of the fifth century, and -thus nearly coincides with the division of the Empire into East and -West. Gothic and other Teutonic kings could now march at pleasure at -the head of their armies through every corner of the Empire, sometimes -bearing the titles of Roman officers, sometimes dictating the choice -of Roman Emperors, sometimes sacking the Old Rome or threatening the -New. It was when these armies under their kings settled down and formed -national kingdoms within the limits of the Empire, that the change -comes to have an effect on the map. In the course of the fifth century -the Western provinces of Rome were rent away from her. In most cases -the loss was cloaked by some Imperial commission, some empty title -bestowed on the victorious invader; but the Empire was none the less -practically dismembered. Out of these dismemberments the modern states -of Europe gradually grew. It will now be our business to give some -account of those nations, Teutonic and otherwise, who had an immediate -share in this work, passing lightly by all questions, and indeed all -nations, which cannot be said to have had such an immediate share in it. - - * * * * * - -♦Teutonic Settlements in the West.♦ - -The nations which in the fourth and fifth centuries made settlements -in the Western provinces of Rome fall under two chief heads; those -who made their settlements by land, and those who made them by sea. -This last class is pretty well coextensive with the settlement of -our own forefathers in Britain, which must be spoken of separately. -♦Settlements within the Empire.♦ Among the others, the nations who play -an important part in the fourth and fifth centuries are the _Goths_, -the _Vandals_, the _Burgundians_, the _Suevi_, and the _Franks_. And -their settlements again fall into two classes, those which passed away -within a century or two, and those which have had a lasting effect on -European history. ♦Franks, Burgundians, Suevi,♦ Thus it is plain at the -first glance that the Franks and the Burgundians have left their names -on the modern map. The Suevi have left their name also: but it is now -found only in their older German land; it has vanished for ages from -their western settlement. ♦Goths,♦ The name of the Goths has passed -away from the kingdoms which they founded, but their presence has -affected the history of both the Spanish and the Italian peninsulas. -♦Vandals.♦ The Vandals alone, as a nation and kingdom, have left no -traces whatever, though it may be that they have left their name to a -part of one of the lands of their sojourn. ♦Their kingdoms.♦ All these -nations founded kingdoms within the Western Empire, kingdoms which at -first admitted a nominal superiority in the Empire, but which were -practically independent from the beginning. ♦Various circumstances -of their history.♦ But the history of the several kingdoms is very -different. Some of them soon passed away altogether, while others -became the beginnings of the great nations of modern Europe. Gaul and -Spain fell off very gradually from the Empire. But, in the course of -the fifth century, all the nations of which we have been speaking -formed more or less lasting settlements within those provinces. -Pre-eminent among them are the great settlements of the Goths and the -Franks. Out of the settlement of the Franks arose the modern kingdoms -of Germany and France, and out of the settlement of the Goths arose -the various kingdoms of Spain. Those of the Burgundians, Vandals, and -Suevi were either smaller or less lasting. All of them however must be -mentioned in their order. - -♦Migrations of the West-Goths.♦ - -First and greatest come the _Goths_. It is not needful for our purpose -to examine all that history or legend has to tell us as to the origin -of the Goths, or all the theories which ingenious men have formed on -the subject. ♦Defeat of the Goths by Claudius. A.D. 269.♦ It is enough -for our purpose that the Goths began to show themselves as dangerous -enemies of the Empire in the second half of the third century; but -their continuous history does not begin till the second half of the -fourth. ♦Gothic kingdom on the Danube.♦ We then find them forming a -great kingdom in the lands north of the Danube. ♦Goths driven onwards -by the Huns.♦ Presently a large body of them were driven to seek -shelter within the bounds of the Eastern Empire from the pressure of -the invading _Huns_. These last were a Turanian people who had been -driven from their own older settlements by movements in the further -East which do not concern us, but who become an important element in -the history of the fifth century. They affected the Empire, partly by -actual invasions, partly by driving other nations before them but they -made no lasting settlements within it. Nor did the Goths themselves -make any lasting settlement in the Eastern Empire. ♦They cross the -Danube. A.D. 377.♦ While one part of the Gothic nation became subject -to the Huns, another part crossed the Danube; but they crossed it by -Imperial licence, and if they took to arms, it was only to punish -the treachery of the Roman officers. Presently we find Gothic chiefs -marching at pleasure through the dominions of the Eastern Cæsar; but -they simply march and ravage; it is not till they have got within the -boundary of the West that they found any lasting kingdoms. In fact, -the Goths, and the Teutonic tribes generally, had no real mission in -the East; to them the East was a mere highway to the West. ♦Career of -Alaric. A.D. 394-410.♦ The movements of Alaric in Greece, Illyricum, -and Italy, his sieges and his capture of Rome, are of the highest -historical importance, but they do not touch geography. The Goths first -win for themselves a local habitation and a place on the map when they -left Italy to establish themselves in the further West. - -♦Beginning of the West-Gothic kingdom under Athaulf. A.D. 412.♦ - -Under Alaric’s successor, Athaulf, the first foundations were laid of -that great West-Gothic kingdom which we are apt to look on as specially -Spanish, but which in truth had its first beginning in Gaul, and which -kept some Gaulish territory as long as it lasted. But the Goths passed -into those lands, not in the character of avowed conquerors, not as -founders of an avowed Gothic state, but as soldiers of the Empire, -sent to win back its lost provinces. ♦Condition of Gaul and Spain.♦ -Those provinces were now occupied or torn in pieces by a crowd of -invaders, _Suevi_, _Vandals_, and _Alans_. ♦The Alans.♦ These last -are a puzzling race, our accounts of whom are somewhat contradictory, -but who may perhaps be most safely set down as a non-Aryan, or, at -any rate, a non-Teutonic people, who had been largely brought under -Gothic influences. But early in the fifth century they possessed a -dominion in central Spain which stretched from sea to sea. ♦The Suevi -in Spain.♦ Their dominion passed for a few years into the hands of the -Suevi, who had already formed a settlement in north-western Spain, and -who still kept a dominion in that corner long after the greater part -of the peninsula had become Gothic. ♦The Vandals in Africa. A.D. 425.♦ -The Vandals occupied Bætica; but they presently passed into Africa, -and there founded the one Teutonic kingdom in that continent, with -Carthage to its capital, a kingdom which took in also the great islands -of the western Mediterranean, including Sicily itself. ♦Independence -of the Basques.♦ Through all these changes the unconquerable people -of the Basque and Cantabrian mountains seem never to have fully -submitted to any conquerors; but the rest of Spain and south-western -Gaul was, before half of the fifth century had passed, formed into the -great West-Gothic kingdom. ♦Gothic kingdom of Toulouse.♦ That kingdom -stretched from the pillars of Hêraklês to the Loire and the Rhone, -and its capital was placed, not on Spanish but on Gaulish ground, at -the Gaulish Tolosa or _Toulouse_. The Gothic dominion in Gaul was -doomed not to be lasting; the Gothic dominion in Spain lasted down to -the Saracen conquest, and all the later Christian kingdoms of Spain -may be looked on as fragments or revivals of it. Spain however never -changed her name for that of her conquerors. ♦Gothia.♦ The only parts -of the Gothic kingdom which ever bore the Gothic name were those small -parts both of Spain and Gaul which kept the name of _Gothia_ through -later causes. ♦Andalusia.♦ The Vandals, on the other hand, though they -passed altogether out of Spain, have left their name to this day in its -southern part under the form of _Andalusia_, a name which, under the -Saracen conquerors, spread itself over the whole peninsula. - -♦The Franks.♦ - -The other great Teutonic nations or confederacies of which we have to -speak have had a far more lasting effect on the nomenclature of Europe. -We have now to trace the steps by which the _Franks_ gradually became -the ruling people both of Germany and of Gaul. They have stamped their -name on both countries. ♦Uses of the word _Francia_.♦ The dominions -of the Franks got the name of _Francia_, a name whose meaning has -constantly varied according to the extent of the Frankish dominion at -different times. In modern use it still cleaves to two parts of their -dominions, to that part of Germany which is still called _Franken_ or -_Franconia_, and to that part of Gaul which is still called _France_. -♦The Alemanni.♦ And their history is closely mixed up with that of -another nation or confederacy, that of the _Alemanni_, who again have, -in the French tongue, given their name to the whole of Germany. ♦A.D. -275.♦ Franks and Alemanni alike begin to be heard of in the third -century, and the Alemanni even attempted an actual invasion of Italy; -but the geographical importance of both confederacies does not begin -till the fifth. All through the fourth century it is the chief business -of the Emperors who ruled in Gaul to defend the frontier of the Rhine -against their incursions, against the Alemanni along the upper part of -its course, and against the Franks along its lower part. ♦Thuringians. -| The Low-Dutch tribes.♦ To the east of the Franks and Alemanni lay -the _Thuringians_; to the north, along the coasts of the German Ocean, -the Low-Dutch tribes, _Saxons_ and _Frisians_. In the course of the -fifth century their movements also began to affect the geography of the -Empire. - -During the whole of that century the Franks were pressing into Gaul. -The Imperial city of Trier was more than once taken, and the seat of -the provincial government was removed to Arles. ♦Reign of Chlodwig. -A.D. 481-511.♦ The union of the two chief divisions of the Frankish -confederacy, and the overthrow of the Alemanni, made the Franks, under -their first Christian king, Chlodwig or Clovis, the ruling people of -northern Gaul and central Germany. Their territory thus took in both -lands which had been part of the Empire, and lands which had never -been such. ♦Character and divisions of the Frankish kingdom.♦ This is -a special characteristic of the Frankish settlement, and one which -influences the whole of their later history. There was, from the very -beginning, long before any such distinction was consciously drawn, a -_Teutonic_ and a _Latin Francia_. There were Frankish lands to the -East which never had been Roman. There were lands in northern Gaul -which remained practically Roman under the Frankish dominion. ♦Roman -Germany Teutonized afresh.♦ And between them lay, on the left bank -of the Rhine, the Teutonic lands which had formed part of the Roman -province of Gaul, but which now became Teutonic again. _Moguntiacum_, -_Augusta Treverorum_, and _Colonia Agrippina_, cities founded on -Teutonic soil, now again became German, ready to be in due time, by the -names of _Mainz_, _Trier_, and _Köln_, the metropolitan and electoral -cities of Germany. ♦Eastern and Western _Francia_.♦ These lands, with -the original German lands, formed the _Eastern_ or _Teutonic Francia_, -where the Franks, or their German allies and subjects, formed the real -population of the country. In the _Western Francia_, between the Loire -and the Channel, though the Franks largely settled and influenced -the country in many ways, the mass of the population remained Roman. -♦Armorica or Britanny.♦ Over the western peninsula of _Armorica_ the -dominion of the Franks was always precarious and, at most, external. -Here the ante-Roman population still kept its Celtic language, and it -was further strengthened by colonies from Britain, from which the land -took its later name of the _Lesser Britain_ or _Britanny_. ♦Extent -of the Frankish dominion. A.D. 500.♦ Thus, at the end of the fifth -century, the Frankish dominion was firmly established over the whole of -central Germany and Northern Gaul. Their dominion was fated to be the -most lasting of the Teutonic kingdoms formed on the Roman mainland. The -reason is obvious; while the Goths in Spain and the Vandals in Africa -were isolated Teutonic settlers in a Roman land, the Franks in Gaul -were strengthened by the unbroken Teutonic mainland at their back. - -♦The Burgundians.♦ - -The greater part of Gaul was thus, at the end of the fifth century, -divided between the Franks in the north and the West-Goths in the -south. But, early in the fifth century, a third Teutonic power grew up -in south-eastern Gaul. ♦Their kingdom.♦ The _Burgundians_, a people -who, in the course of the Wandering of the Nations, seem to have made -their way from the shores of the Baltic, established themselves in -the lands between the Rhone and the Alps, where they formed a kingdom -which bore their name. Their dominion in Gaul may be said to have -been more lasting than that of the Goths, less lasting than that of -the Franks. ♦Meaning of the word _Burgundy_.♦ _Burgundy_ is still a -recognized name; but no name in geography has so often shifted its -place and meaning, and it has for some centuries settled itself on a -very small part of the ancient kingdom of the Burgundians. ♦Provence -Burgundian. A.D. 500-510. | 510-536.♦ At the end of the fifth century -the Rhone was a Burgundian river; _Autun_, _Besançon_, _Lyons_, and -_Vienne_ were Burgundian cities; but the sea coast, the original Roman -_Province_, the land which has so steadily kept that name, though it -fell for a moment under the Burgundian power, followed at this time, -as became the first Roman land beyond the Alps, the fortunes of Italy -rather than those of Gaul. - -♦Invasion of the Huns.♦ - -Among these various conquests and shiftings of dominion, all of which -affected the map at the time, some of which have affected history and -geography ever since, it may be well to mention, if only by way of -contrast, an inroad which fills a great place in the history of the -fifth century, but which had no direct effect on geography. ♦Battle -of Châlons. A.D. 451.♦ This was the invasion of Italy and Gaul by -the _Huns_ under Attila, and their defeat at Châlons by the combined -forces of Romans, West-Goths, and Franks. This battle is one of the -events which is remarkable, not for working change, but for hindering -it. Had Attila succeeded, the greatest of all changes would have -taken place throughout all Western Europe. As it was, the map of Gaul -was not affected by his inroad. ♦Destruction of Aquileia, and origin -of Venice.♦ On the map of Italy it did have an indirect effect; he -destroyed the city of Aquileia, and its inhabitants, fleeing to the -Venetian islands, laid the foundation of one of the later powers of -Europe in the form of the commonwealth of _Venice_. - -While Spain and Gaul were thus rent away from the Empire, Italy and -Rome itself were practically rent away also, though the form which -the event took was different. ♦Reunion of the Empire. | Rule of -Odoacer. A.D. 476-493.♦ A vote of the Senate reunited the Western -Empire to the Eastern; the Eastern Emperor Zeno became sole Emperor, -and the government of the diocese of Italy—that is, it will be -remembered, of a large territory besides the Italian peninsula—was -entrusted by his commission to Odoacer, a general of barbarian -mercenaries, with the rank of Patrician. No doubt Odoacer was -practically independent of the Empire; but the union of the Empire was -preserved in form, and no separate kingdom of Italy was set up. ♦The -East-Goths in Italy.♦ Presently Odoacer was overthrown by Theodoric -king of the East-Goths, who, though king of his own people, reigned -in Italy by an Imperial commission as Patrician. ♦Rule of Theodoric. -A.D. 493-526.♦ Practically, he founded an East-Gothic kingdom, taking -in Italy and the other lands which formed the dioceses of Italy and -Western Illyricum. ♦Extent of his dominion.♦ His dominion also took in -the coast of what we may now call _Provence_, and his influence was -extended in various ways over most of the kingdoms of the West. The -seat of the Gothic dominion, like that of the later Western Empire, was -at Ravenna. Practically Theodoric and his successors were independent -kings, and, as chiefs of their own people, they bore the kingly title. -♦Theory of the Empire.♦ Hence, as Rome formed part of their dominions, -it is true to say that under them Rome ceased to be part of the Roman -Empire. Still in theory the Imperial supremacy went on, and in this -way it became much easier for Italy to be won back to the Empire at a -somewhat later time. - - -§ 4. _Settlement of the English in Britain._ - -Meanwhile, in another part of Europe, a Teutonic settlement of quite -another character from those on the mainland was going on. ♦The Romans -withdrawn from Britain. A.D. 411.♦ Spain and Gaul fell away from -the Empire by slow degrees; but the Roman dominion in Britain came -to an end by a definite act at a definite moment. The Roman armies -were withdrawn from the province, and its inhabitants were left to -themselves. Presently, a new settlement took place in the island which -was thus left undefended. ♦Difference between the conquest of Britain -and other Teutonic conquests.♦ It is specially important to mark -the difference between the Teutonic settlements in Britain and the -Teutonic conquests on the mainland. The Teutonic conquests in Gaul and -Spain were made by Teutonic neighbours who had already learned to know -and respect the Roman civilization, who were either Christians already -or became Christians soon after they entered the Empire. They pressed -in gradually by land; they left the Roman inhabitants to live after the -Roman law, and they themselves gradually adopted the speech and much of -the manners of Rome. The only exception to this rule on the continent -is to be found in the lands immediately on the Rhine and the Danube, -where the Teutonic settlement was complete, and where the Roman tongue -and civilization were pretty well wiped out. This same process happened -yet more completely in the Teutonic conquest of Britain. ♦Character of -the English settlement; | long struggle with the Britons.♦ The great -island possession of Rome had been virtually abandoned by Rome before -the Teutonic settlements in it began. The invaders had therefore to -struggle rather with native Britons than with Romans. Moreover, they -were invaders who came by sea, and who came from lands where little or -nothing was known of the Roman law or religion. They therefore made -a settlement of quite another kind from the settlement of the Goths -or even from that of the Franks. They met with a degree of strictly -national resistance such as no other Teutonic conquerors met with; -therefore in the end they swept away all traces of the earlier state -of things in a way which took place nowhere else. ♦The English remain -Teutonic.♦ As far as such a process is possible, they slew or drove out -the older inhabitants; they kept their heathen religion and Teutonic -language, and were thus able to grow up as a new Teutonic nation in -their new home without any important intermixture with the earlier -inhabitants, Roman or British. - -♦The Low-Dutch settlements in Britain.♦ - -The conquerors who wrought this change were our own forefathers, the -Low-Dutch inhabitants of the border lands of Germany and Denmark, -quite away from the Roman frontier; and among them three tribes, the -_Angles_, the _Saxons_, and the _Jutes_, had the chief share in the -conquest of Britain. ♦Saxons.♦ The Saxons had, as has already been -said, attempted a settlement in the fourth century. They were therefore -the tribe who were first known to the Roman and Celtic inhabitants of -the island; the Celts of Britain and Ireland have therefore called -all the Teutonic settlers _Saxons_ to this day. ♦Origin of the name -_English_.♦ But, as the Angles or _English_ occupied in the end much -the greater part of the land, it was they who, when the Teutonic tribes -in Britain began to form one nation, gave their name to that nation and -its land. That nation was the _English_, and their land was _England_. -While _Britain_ therefore remains the proper geographical name of the -whole island, _England_ is the name of that part of Britain which was -step by step conquered by the English. Before the end of the fifth -century several Teutonic kingdoms had begun in Britain. ♦Jutes in Kent. -A.D. 449.♦ The Jutes began the conquest by their settlement in _Kent_, -and presently the _Saxons_ began to settle on the South coast and on -a small part of the East coast, in _Sussex_, _Wessex_, and _Essex_. -♦Saxon and Anglian settlements.♦ And along a great part of the eastern -coast various _Anglian_ settlements were made, which gradually grew -into the kingdoms of _East-Anglia_, _Deira_, and _Bernicia_, which two -last formed by their union the great kingdom of _Northumberland_. But, -at the end of the sixth century, the English had not got very far from -the southern and eastern coasts. ♦The Welsh and Scots.♦ The Britons, -whom the English called _Welsh_ or strangers, held out in the West, and -the Picts and Scots in the North. The _Scots_ were properly the people -of Ireland; but a colony of them had settled on the western coast of -northern Britain, and, in the end, they gave the name of Scotland to -the whole North of the island. - - -§ 5. _The Eastern Empire._ - -♦Contrast between the Eastern and Western Empires.♦ - -We have already seen the differences between the position of the -Eastern and Western Empires during this period. While in the West the -provinces were gradually lopped away by the Teutonic settlements, the -provinces of the East, though often traversed by Teutonic armies, -or rather nations, did not become the seats of lasting Teutonic -settlements. ♦The Tetraxite Goths.♦ We can hardly count as an exception -the settlement of the _Tetraxite Goths_ in the Tauric Chersonêsos, a -land which was rather in alliance with the Empire than actually part -of it. ♦Rivalry with Persia.♦ The distinctive history of the Eastern -Empire consists, as has been already said, in the long struggle between -East and West, in which Rome had succeeded to the mission of Alexander -and the Seleukids as the representative of Western civilization. To -this mission was afterwards added the championship of Christianity, -first against the Fire-worshipper and then against the Moslem. In -Eastern history no event is more important and more remarkable than -the uprising of the regenerate _Persian_ nation against its Parthian -masters. ♦Revival of the Persian kingdom. A.D. 226.♦ But, as far as -either the history or the geography of Rome is concerned, the Persian -simply steps into the place of the Parthian as the representative of -the East against the West. From our point of view, the long wars -on the Eastern frontier of Rome, and the frequent shiftings of that -frontier, form one unbroken story, whether the enemy that was striven -against is the successor of Arsakes or the successor of Artaxerxes. -♦Position of Armenia.♦ And besides the natural rivalry of two great -powers in such a position, the border kingdom of _Armenia_, a name -which has changed its meaning and its frontiers almost as often as -Burgundy or Austria, supplied constant ground for dispute between Rome -and her eastern rival, whether Parthian or Persian. - -In the geographical aspect of this long struggle three special -periods need to be pointed out. ♦Conquests of Trajan. A.D. 114-117.♦ -The first is that of the momentary conquests of Trajan. Under him -_Armenia_, hitherto a vassal kingdom of Rome, was incorporated as a -Roman province. _Albania_ and _Iberia_ took its place as the frontier -vassal states. Beyond the Euphrates, even beyond the Tigris, the Roman -dominion took in _Mesopotamia_, _Atropatênê_, and _Babylonia_. The -Parthian capital of Ktesiphôn and the outlying Greek free city of -Seleukeia were included within the boundaries of an Empire which for a -moment touched the Caspian and the Persian Gulf. Rome, as the champion -of the West, seemed to have triumphed for ever over her Eastern rival, -when the Parthian kingdom was thus shorn of the border lands of the -two worlds, and when its king was forced to become a Roman vassal -for the dominions that were left to him. But this vast extension of -the Roman power was strictly only for a moment. ♦Conquests of Trajan -surrendered by Hadrian. A.D. 117.♦ What Trajan had conquered Hadrian -at once gave back; the Empire was again bounded by the Euphrates, and -Armenia was again left to form matter of dispute between its Eastern -and its Western claimant. ♦Conquests of Marcus. A.D. 162-166.♦ The -second stage begins when, under Marcus, the Roman frontier again began -to advance. ♦Of Severus. A.D. 197-202.♦ Between the Euphrates and the -Tigris _Osrhoênê_ became a Roman dependency: under the house of Severus -it became a Roman province; and the fortress of _Nisibis_, so famous -in later wars, was planted as the Eastern outpost of Rome against -the Parthian. Ten years later the Parthian power was no more; but, -as seen with Western eyes, the revived monarchy of Persia had simply -stepped into its place. The wars of Alexander Severus, the captivity -of Valerian, the wasting march of Sapor through the Roman provinces, -left no trace on the map. ♦Conquests under Diocletian. A.D. 297.♦ But -under the mighty rule of Diocletian the glories of Trajan were renewed. -Mesopotamia again became Roman; five provinces beyond the Tigris were -added to the Empire; Armenia, again the vassal of Rome, was enlarged -at the expense of Persia, and Iberia was once more a Roman dependency. -In the third stage the Roman frontier again went back. The wars of -the second Sapor did little but deprive Rome of two Mesopotamian -fortresses. ♦Surrender of provinces by Jovian. A.D. 363.♦ But after the -fall of Julian the lands beyond the Tigris were given back to Persia; -even Nisibis was yielded, and the Persian frontier again reached the -Euphrates. ♦Division of Armenia. 387. | The Hundred Years’ Peace. 421.♦ -Armenia was now tossed to and fro, conquered and reconquered, till the -kingdom was divided between the vassals of the two Empires, a division -which was again confirmed by the hundred years’ peace between Rome and -Persia. This was the state of the Eastern frontier of Rome at the time -when the West-Goths were laying the foundation of their dominion in -Spain and Aquitaine, when Goth and Roman joined together to overthrow -the mingled host of Attila at Châlons, and when the first English keels -were on their way to the shores of Britain. - -This then is the picture of the civilized world at the end of the -fifth century. The whole of the Western dominions of Rome, including -Italy and Rome herself, have practically, if not everywhere formally, -fallen away from the Roman Empire. The whole West is under the rule of -Teutonic kings. The Frank has become supreme in northern Gaul, without -losing his ancient hold on western and central Germany. The West-Goth -reigns in Spain and Aquitaine; the Burgundian reigns in the lands -between the Rhone and the Alps. Italy and the lands to the north of the -Alps and the Hadriatic have become, in substance though not in name, an -East-Gothic kingdom. But the countries of the European mainland, though -cut off from Roman political dominion, are far from being cut off -from Roman influences. The Teutonic settlers, if conquerors, are also -disciples. Their rulers are everywhere Christian; in Northern Gaul they -are even Orthodox. Africa, under the Arian Vandal, is far more utterly -cut off from the traditions of Rome than the lands ruled either by the -Catholic Frank or by the Arian Goth. To the north of the Franks lie the -independent tribes of Germany, still untouched by any Roman influence. -They are beginning to find themselves new homes in Britain, and, as -the natural consequence of a purely barbarian and heathen conquest, to -sever from the Empire all that they conquered yet more thoroughly than -Africa itself was severed. Such is the state of the West. In the East -the Roman power lives on in the New Rome, with a dominion constantly -threatened and insulted by various enemies, but with a frontier which -has varied but little since the time of Aurelian. No lasting Teutonic -settlement has been made within its borders. In its endless wars with -Persia, its frontier sometimes advances and sometimes retreats. In our -next chapter we shall see how much of life still clung to the majesty -of the Roman name, and how large a part of the ancient dominion of Rome -could still be won back again. - - - - -CHAPTER V. - -THE FINAL DIVISION OF THE EMPIRE. - - -§ 1. _The Reunion of the Empire._ - -♦Continuity of Roman rule.♦ - -The main point to be always borne in mind in the history, and -therefore in the historical geography, of the sixth, seventh, and -eighth centuries, is the continued existence of the Roman Empire. It -was still the Roman Empire, although the seat of its dominion was no -longer at the Old Rome, although for a while the Old Rome was actually -separated from the Roman dominion. Gaul, Spain, Africa, Italy itself, -had been lopped away. Britain had fallen away by another process. But -the Roman rule went on undisturbed in the Eastern part of the Empire, -and even in the West the memory of that rule had by no means wholly -died out. ♦Position of the Teutonic kings.♦ Teutonic kings ruled in -all the countries of the West; but nowhere on the continent had they -become national sovereigns. They were still simply the chiefs of their -own people reigning in the midst of a Roman population. The Romans -meanwhile everywhere looked to the Cæsar of the New Rome as their -lawful sovereign, from whose rule they had been unwillingly torn away. -Both in Spain and in Italy the Gothic kings had settled in the country -as Imperial lieutenants with an Imperial commission. The formal aspect -of the event of 476 had been the reunion of the Western Empire with -the Eastern. ♦Recovery of territory by the Empire.♦ It was perfectly -natural therefore that the sole Roman Emperor reigning in the New Rome -should strive, whenever he had a chance, to win back territories which -he had never formally surrendered, and that the Roman inhabitants of -those territories should welcome him as a deliverer from barbarian -masters. The geographical limits within which, at the beginning of the -sixth century, the Roman power was practically confined, the phænomena -of race and language within those limits, might have suggested another -course. But considerations of that kind are seldom felt at the time; -they are the reflexions of thoughtful men long after. ♦Extent of the -Roman dominion at the accession of Justinian, 527.♦ The Roman dominion, -at the accession of Justinian, was shut up within the Greek and -Oriental provinces of the Empire; its enemies were already beginning -to speak of its subjects as Greeks. Its truest policy would have been -to have anticipated several centuries of history, to have taken up the -position of a Greek state, defending its borders against the Persian, -withstanding or inviting the settlement of the Slave, but leaving the -now Teutonic West to develope itself undisturbed. But in such cases -the known past is always more powerful than the unknown future, and it -seemed the first duty of the Roman Emperor to restore the Roman Empire -to its ancient extent. - -♦Conquests of Justinian.♦ - -It was during the reign of Justinian that this work was carried out -through a large part of the Western Empire. Lost provinces were won -back in two continents. The growth of independent Teutonic powers was -for ever stopped in Africa, and it received no small check in Europe. -The Emperor was enabled, through the weakness and internal dissensions -of the Vandal and Gothic kingdoms, to win back Africa and Italy to the -Empire. The work was done by the swords of Belisarius and Narses—the -Slave and the Persian being now used to win back the Old Rome to the -dominion of the New. ♦Vandal war. 533-535.♦ The short _Vandal_ war -restored Africa in the Roman sense, and a large part of Mauritania, -to the Empire. ♦Gothic war. 537-554.♦ The long _Gothic_ war won back -Illyricum, Italy, and the Old Rome. Italy and Africa were still ruled -from Ravenna and from Carthage; but they were now ruled not by Teutonic -kings, but by Byzantine exarchs. ♦Conquest of southern Spain. 550.♦ -Meanwhile, while the war with the East-Goths was going on in Italy, -a large part of southern Spain was won back from the West-Goths. Two -Teutonic kingdoms were thus wiped out; a third was weakened, and the -acquisition of so great a line of sea-coast, together with the great -islands, Sicily, Sardinia, Corsica, and the Balearic Islands, gave -the Empire an undisputed supremacy by sea. In one corner only did the -Imperial frontier even nominally go back, or any Teutonic power advance -at its expense. ♦Provence ceded to the Franks, 548.♦ The sea-board of -Provence, which had long been practically lost to the Empire, was now -formally ceded to the Franks. In this one corner the Roman Terminus -withdrew. - -♦Geographical changes under Justinian.♦ - -In a geographical aspect the map of Europe has seldom been so -completely changed within a single generation as it was during the -reign of Justinian. At his accession his dominion was bounded to the -west by the Hadriatic, and he was far from possessing the whole of the -Hadriatic coast. Under his reign the power of the Roman arms and the -Roman law were again extended to the Ocean. The Roman dominion was -indeed no longer spread round the whole shore of the Mediterranean; -the Imperial territories were no longer continuous as of old: but, -if the Empire was not still, as it had once been, the only power in -the Mediterranean lands, it had again become beyond all comparison -the greatest power. ♦Effects of Justinian’s conquests.♦ Moreover, by -the recovery of so large an extent of Latin-speaking territory, the -tendency of the Empire to change into a Greek or Oriental state was -checked for several centuries. We are here concerned only with the -geographical, not with the political or moral aspect of the conquests -of Justinian. Some of those conquests, like those of Trajan, were -hardly more than momentary. But the changes which they made for the -time were some of the most remarkable on record, and the effect of -those changes remained, both in history and geography, long after their -immediate results were again undone. - - -§ 2. _Settlement of the Lombards in Italy._ - -The conquests of Justinian hindered the growth of a national Teutonic -kingdom in Italy, such as grew up in Gaul and Spain, and they -practically made the cradle of the Empire, Rome herself, an outlying -dependency of her great colony by the Bosporos. But the reunion of all -Italy with the Empire lasted only for a moment. The conquest was only -just over when a new set of Teutonic conquerors appeared in Italy. -♦Pannonian kingdom of the Lombards.♦ These were the _Lombards_, who, -in the great wandering, had made their way into the ancient Pannonia -about the time that the East Goths passed into Italy. They were thus -settled within the ancient boundaries of the Western Empire. But the -Roman power had now quite passed away from those regions, and the -Lombard kingdom in Pannonia was practically altogether beyond the -Imperial borders; it had not even that Roman tinge which affected the -Frankish and Gothic kingdoms. ♦Gepidæ.♦ To the east of the Lombards, -in the ancient Dacia, another Teutonic kingdom had arisen; that of the -_Gepidæ_, a people seemingly closely akin to the Goths. ♦Avars.♦ The -process of wandering had brought the Turanian _Avars_ into those parts, -and their presence seriously affected all later history and geography. -♦Teutonic powers on the Lower Danube.♦ With the Gepidæ in Dacia and -the Lombards in Pannonia, there was a chance of two Teutonic states -growing up on the borders of East and West. These might possibly have -played the same part in the East which the Franks and Goths played in -the West, and they might thus have altogether changed the later course -of history. But the Lombards allied themselves with the Avars. ♦The -Gepidæ overthrown by the Lombards and Avars. 566. | The Lombards pass -into Italy. 567.♦ In partnership with their barbarian allies, they -overthrew the kingdom of the Gepidæ, and they themselves passed into -Italy. Thus the growth of Teutonic powers in those regions was stopped. -A new and far more dangerous enemy was brought into the neighbourhood -of the Empire, and the way was opened for the Slavonic races to play in -some degree the same part in the East which the Teutons played in the -West. But while the East lost this chance of renovation, for such it -would have been, the Lombard settlement in Italy was the beginning of a -new Teutonic power in that country. ♦Character of the Lombard kingdom.♦ -But it was not a power which could possibly grow up into a national -Teutonic kingdom of all Italy, as the dominion of the East-Goths might -well have done. ♦Incomplete conquest of Italy.♦ The Lombard conquest -of Italy was at no time a complete conquest; part of the land was won -by the Lombards; part was kept by the Emperors; and the Imperial and -Lombard possessions intersected one another in a way which hindered -the growth of any kind of national unity under either power. ♦Lombard -duchies.♦ The new settlers founded the great Lombard kingdom in the -North of Italy, which has kept the Lombard name to this day, and the -smaller Lombard states of _Spoleto_ and _Beneventum_. But a large part -of Italy still remained to the Empire. ♦Imperial possessions in Italy.♦ -Ravenna, the dwelling-place of the Exarchs, Rome itself, Naples, and -the island city of Venice were all centres of districts which still -acknowledged the Imperial rule. The Emperors also kept the extreme -southern points of both the peninsulas of Southern Italy, and, for the -present, the three great islands. The Lombard Kings were constantly -threatening Rome and Ravenna. ♦Ravenna taken by the Lombards. c. 753.♦ -Rome never fell into their hands, but in the middle of the eighth -century Ravenna was taken, and with it the district specially known as -the _Exarchate_ was annexed to the Lombard dominion. But this greatest -extent of the Lombard power caused its overthrow: for it led to a chain -of events which, as we shall presently see, ended in transferring not -only the Lombard kingdom, but the Imperial crown of the West to the -hands of the Franks. - - -§ 3. _Rise of the Saracens._ - -But, before we give any account of the revolutions which took place -among the already existing powers of Western Europe, it will be well to -describe the geographical changes which were caused by the appearance -of absolutely new actors on two sides of the Empire. ♦Roman province -in Spain recovered by the Goths. 534-572.♦ One point however may be -noticed here, as standing apart from the general course of events, -namely, that the Roman province in Spain was won gradually back by the -West-Goths. ♦616-624.♦ The inland cities, as Cordova, were hardly kept -forty years, and the whole of the Imperial possessions in Spain were -lost during the reign of Heraclius. Thus the great dominion which -Justinian had won back in the West, important as were its historical -results, was itself of very short duration; a large part of Italy was -lost almost as soon as it was won, and the recovered dominion in Spain -did not abide more than ninety years. - -But meanwhile, in the course of the seventh century, nations which -had hitherto been unknown or unimportant began to play a great part -in history and greatly to change the face of the map. These new -powers fall under two heads; those who appeared on the northern and -those who appeared on the eastern frontier of the Empire. The nations -who appeared on the North were, like the early Teutonic invaders of -the Empire, ready to act, if partly as conquerors, partly also as -disciples; those who appeared on the East were the champions of an -utterly different system in religion and everything else. In short, the -old rivalry of the East and West now takes a distinctly aggressive form -on the part of the East. ♦Wars between Rome and Persia.♦ As long as -the Sassanid dynasty lasted, Rome and Persia still continued their old -rivalry on nearly equal terms. The long wars between the two Empires -made little difference in their boundaries. ♦Wars of Chosroes and -Heraclius, 603-628.♦ In the last stage of their warfare Chosroes took -Jerusalem and Antioch, and encamped at Chalkêdôn. Heraclius pressed his -eastern victories beyond the boundaries of the Empire under Trajan. -But even these great campaigns made no lasting difference in the map, -except so far as, by weakening Rome and Persia alike, they paved the -way for the greatest change of all. ♦Extension of the Roman power on -the Euxine.♦ More important to geography was a change which took place -at somewhat earlier time when, during the reign of Justinian, the -Roman power was extended on the Eastern side of the Euxine in _Colchis_ -or _Lazica_. ♦The Arabian vassals of Rome and Persia.♦ The southern -borders of each Empire were to some extent protected by the dominion -of dependent Arabian kings, the _Ghassanides_ being vassals of Rome, -and the _Lachmites_ to the east of them being vassals of Persia. But a -change came presently which altogether overthrew the Persian kingdom, -which deprived the Roman Empire of its Eastern, Egyptian, and African -provinces, and which gave both the Empire and the Teutonic kingdoms of -the West an enemy of a kind altogether different from any against whom -they hitherto had to strive. - -♦Rise of the Saracens.♦ - -The cause which wrought such abiding changes was the rise of the -_Saracens_ under Mahomet and his first followers. A new nation, that -of the Arabs, now became dominant in a large part of the lands which -had been part of the Roman Empire, as well as in lands far beyond its -boundaries. ♦Arabia united under Mahomet, 622-632.♦ The scattered -tribes of Arabia were first gathered together into a single power by -Mahomet himself, and under his successors they undertook to spread the -Mahometan religion wherever their swords could carry it. And, with the -Mahometan religion, they carried also the Arabic language, and what -we may call Eastern civilization as opposed to Western. A strife, in -short, now begins between Aryan and Semitic man. Rome and Persia, with -all their differences, were both of them Aryan powers. ♦Conquests of -the Saracens.♦ The most amazing thing is the extraordinary speed with -which the Saracens pressed their conquests at the expense of both Rome -and Persia, forming a marked contrast to the slow advance both of Roman -conquest and of Teutonic settlement. In the course of less than eighty -years, the Mahometan conquerors formed a dominion greater than that of -Rome, and, for a short time, the will of the Caliph of the Prophet was -obeyed from the Ocean to lands beyond the Indus. ♦Loss of the Eastern -provinces of Rome. 632-639.♦ In a few campaigns the Empire lost all -its possessions beyond Mount Tauros; that is, it lost one of the three -great divisions of the Empire, that namely in which neither Greek nor -Roman civilization had ever thoroughly taken root. - -While the Roman Empire was thus dismembered, the rival power of Persia -was not merely dismembered, but utterly overwhelmed. ♦Saracen conquest -of Persia. 632-651.♦ The Persian nationality was again, as in the -days of the Parthians, held down under a foreign power, to revive -yet again ages later. But the Saracen power was very far from merely -taking the place of its Parthian and Persian predecessors. The mission -of the followers of Mahomet was a mission of universal conquest, -and that mission they so far carried out as altogether to overthrow -the exclusive dominion of Rome in her own Mediterranean. Under -Justinian, if the Imperial possession of the Mediterranean coast was -not absolutely continuous, the small exceptions in Africa, Spain, and -Gaul in no way interfered with the maritime supremacy of the Empire, -and Gaul and Spain, even where they were not Roman, were at least -Christian. ♦Saracen conquest of Africa. 647-711.♦ But now a gradual -advance of sixty-four years annexed the Roman dominions in Africa to -the Mahometan dominion. ♦Of Spain. 711-714.♦ Thence the Saracens passed -into Spain, and found the West-Gothic kingdom an easier prey than the -Roman provinces. Within three years after the final conquest of Africa, -the whole peninsula was conquered, save where the Christian still held -out in the inaccessible mountain fastnesses. ♦Saracen provinces in -Gaul, 713-755.♦ The Saracen power was even carried beyond the Pyrenees -into the province of Septimania, the remnant of the Gaulish dominion of -the West-Gothic kings. Narbonne, Arles, Nîmes, all became for a while -Saracen cities. - -♦Effects of Saracen conquest.♦ - -In this way, of the three continents round the Mediterranean, Rome -lost all her possessions in Africa, while both in Europe and Asia -she had now a neighbour and an enemy of quite another kind from any -which she had had before. The Teutonic conquerors, if conquerors, -had been also disciples; they became part of the Latin world. The -Persian, though his rivalry was religious as well as political, was -still merely a rival, fighting along a single line of frontier. But -every province that was conquered by the Saracens was utterly lopped -away; it became the possession of men altogether alien and hostile in -race, language, manners, and religion. A large part of the Roman world -passed from Aryan and Christian to Semitic and Mahometan dominion. -♦Different fates of the Eastern, Latin, and Greek provinces.♦ But the -essential differences among the three main parts of the Empire now -showed themselves very clearly. The Eastern provinces, where either -Roman or Greek life was always an exotic, fell away at the first touch. -♦647-709.♦ Africa, as being so greatly Romanized, held out for sixty -years. The provinces of Asia Minor, now thoroughly Greek, were often -ravaged, but never conquered. Spain and Septimania were far more easily -conquered than Africa—a sign perhaps that the West-Gothic rule was -still felt as foreign by the Roman inhabitants. - -♦Greatest extent of Saracen provinces.♦ - -With the conquest of Spain the undivided Saracenic Empire, the dominion -of the single Caliph, reached its greatest extent in the three -continents. Detached conquests in Europe were made long after, but on -the whole the Saracen power went back. ♦750.♦ Forty years later they -lost _Sind_, their furthest possession to the East. ♦Separation of -Spain. 755.♦ Five years later Spain became the seat of a rival dynasty, -which after a while grew into a rival Caliphate. In the same year the -Saracen dominion for the first time went back in Europe. ♦Battle of -Tours. 732. | Frankish conquest of Septimania. 755.♦ The battle of -Tours answers to the repulse of Attila at Châlons; it did not make -changes, but hindered them; but before long the one province which the -Saracens held beyond the Pyrenees, that of _Septimania_ or _Gothia_, -was won from them by the Franks. - - -§ 4. _Settlements of the Slavonic Nations._ - -The movements of the sixth century began to bring into notice a -branch of the Aryan family of nations which was to play an important -part in the affairs both of the East and of the West. ♦Movements of -the Slaves.♦ These nations were the _Slaves_. It is needless for our -purpose to attempt to trace their earlier history; but the movements -of the _Avars_ in the sixth century seem to have had much the same -effect upon the Slaves which the movements of the Huns in the fourth -century had upon the Teutons. The inroads of the Avars had, as we have -seen, checked the growth of Teutonic powers on the Lower Danube, and -had led to the Lombard settlement in Italy. But the Avars only formed -the vanguard of a number of Turanian nations, some at least of them -Turkish, which were now pressing westward. ♦Kingdom of the Avars. | -Magyars, &c.♦ The Avars formed a great kingdom in the lands north of -the Danube; to the east of these, along the northern coasts of the -Euxine, bordering on the outlying possessions and allies of the Empire -in those regions, lay _Magyars_, _Patzinaks_, and the greater dominion -of the _Chazars_. All these play a part in Byzantine history; and -the Avars were in the seventh century the most dangerous invaders -and ravagers of the Roman territory. But south of the Danube they -appeared mainly as ravagers; geography knows them only in their settled -kingdom to the north of that river. Even that kingdom lasted no very -great time; the real importance of all these migrations consists in -the effect which they had on the great Aryan race which now begins to -take its part in history. ♦North-western and South-western Slaves.♦ -The Slaves seem to have been driven by the Turanian incursions in two -directions; to the North-west and to the South-west. The North-western -division gave rise to more than one European state, and their relations -with Germany form an important part of the history of the Western -Empire. These North-western Slaves do not become of importance till a -little later. But the South-western division plays a great part in the -history of the sixth and seventh centuries. ♦Analogy between Teutons -and Slaves.♦ Their position with regard to the Eastern Empire is a kind -of shadow of the position held by the Teutonic nations with regard to -the Western Empire. The Slaves play in the East, though less thoroughly -and less brilliantly, the same part, half conquerors, half disciples, -which the Teutons played in the West. During the sixth century they -appear only as ravagers; in the seventh they appear as settlers. -♦Slavonic settlements under Heraclius. c. 620.♦ There seems no doubt -that Heraclius encouraged Slavonic settlements south of the Danube, -doubtless with a view to defence against the more dangerous Avars. Much -like the Teutonic settlers in the West, the Slaves came in at first as -colonists under Imperial authority, and presently became practically -independent. A number of Slavonic states thus arose in the lands north -and east of the Hadriatic, as _Servia_, _Chrobatia_ or _Croatia_, -_Carinthia_, of which the first two are historically connected with -the Eastern, and the third with the Western Empire. _Istria_ and -_Dalmatia_ now became Slavonic, with the exception of the maritime -cities, which, among many vicissitudes, clave to the Empire. And even -among them considerable revolutions took place. ♦Destruction of Salona, -639.♦ Thus _Salona_ was destroyed, and out of Diocletian’s palace in -its neighbourhood arose the new city of _Spalato_. ♦Origin of Spalato -and Ragusa.♦ The Dalmatian _Epidauros_ was also destroyed, and _Ragusa_ -took its place. In many of these inroads Slaves and Avars were mixed up -together; but the lasting settlements were all Slavonic. And the state -of things which thus began has been lasting; the north-eastern coast of -the Hadriatic is still a Slavonic land with an Italian fringe. - -♦Displacement of the Illyrians.♦ - -In these migrations the Slaves displaced whatever remnants were left -of the old Illyrian race in the lands near the Danube. They have -themselves to some extent taken the Illyrian name, a change which has -sometimes led to confusion. But at the time the movement went much -further south than this. ♦Extent of Slavonic settlement.♦ The Slaves -pressed on into a large part of Macedonia and Greece, and, during the -seventh and eighth centuries, the whole of those countries, except the -fortified cities and a fringe along the coast, were practically cut -off from the Empire. The name of _Slavinia_ reached from the Danube -to Peloponnêsos, leaving to the Empire only islands and detached -points of coast from Venice round to Thessalonica. Their settlements -in these regions gave a new meaning to an ancient name, and the -word _Macedonian_ now began to mean _Slavonic_. ♦Albanians.♦ And it -must have been at this time that the Illyrians, the _Skipetar_ or -_Albanians_, pressed southward and formed those colonies in Greece, -some of which still keep the Albanian language, while the Slavonic -language has vanished from those lands for ages. ♦Nature of Slavonic -settlement in Greece.♦ The Slavonic occupation of Greece is a fact -which must neither be forgotten nor exaggerated. It certainly did not -amount to an extirpation of the Greek nation; but it certainly did -amount to an occupation of a large part of the country, which was -Hellenized afresh from those cities and districts which remained Greek -or Roman. While these changes were going on in the Hadriatic and Ægæan -lands, another immigration later in the seventh century took place -in the lands south of the lower Danube, and drove back the Imperial -frontier to Haimos. ♦Settlement of the Bulgarians, c. 679.♦ This was -the incursion of the _Bulgarians_, another Turanian people, but one -whose history has been different from that of most of the Turanian -immigrants. By mixture with Slavonic subjects and neighbours they -became practically Slavonic, and they still remain a people speaking a -Slavonic language. ♦The Eastern Empire cut short in its own peninsula.♦ -Thus the Empire, though it still kept its possessions in Italy with the -great Mediterranean islands, though its hold on Western Africa lasted -on into the eighth century, though it still kept outlying possessions -on the northern and eastern coasts of the Euxine, was cut short in that -great peninsula which seems made to be the immediate possession of the -New Rome. - -♦Moral influence of Constantinople.♦ - -But, exactly as happened in the West, the loss of political dominion -carried with it the growth of moral dominion. The nations which pressed -into these provinces gradually accepted Christianity in its Eastern -form, and they have always looked up to the New Rome with a feeling -the same in kind, but less strong in degree, as that with which the -West has looked up to the Old Rome. ♦Extent of the Eastern Empire.♦ -But, at the beginning of the eighth century, though the Imperial power -still held posts here and there from the pillars of Hêraklês to the -Kimmerian Bosporos, Saracens on the one side and Slaves on the other -had cut short the continuous Roman dominion to a comparatively narrow -space. The unbroken possessions of Cæsar were now confined to Thrace -and that solid peninsula of Asia Minor which the Saracens constantly -ravaged, but never conquered. Mountains had taken place of rivers as -the great boundaries of the Empire: instead of the Danube and the -Euphrates, the Roman Terminus had fallen back to Haimos and Tauros. - - -§ 5. _The Transfer of the Western Empire to the Franks._ - -♦Growth of the Franks.♦ - -Meanwhile we must go back to the West, and trace the growth of the -great power which was there growing up, a power which, while the elder -Empire was thus cut short in the East, was in the end to supplant it in -the West by the creation of a rival Empire. For a while the _Franks_ -and the Empire had only occasional dealings with each other. Next to -Britain, which had altogether ceased to be part of the Roman world, the -part of the Western Empire which was least affected by the re-awakening -of the Roman power in the East was the former province of Transalpine -Gaul. The power of the Franks was fast spreading, both in their old -home in Germany and in their new home in Gaul. ♦Frankish conquest -of the Alemanni, 496;♦ The victory of Chlodwig over the _Alemanni_ -made the Franks the leading people of Germany. The two German powers -which had so long been the chief enemies of the Roman power along -the Rhine were now united. Throughout the sixth century the German -dominion of the Franks was growing. ♦of the Thuringians, c. 530; | of -Bavaria.♦ The Frankish supremacy was extended over _Thuringia_, and -later in the century over _Bavaria_. The Bavaria of this age, it must -be remembered, has a much wider extent than the name has in modern -geography, reaching to the northern borders of Italy. The Bavarians -seem to have been themselves but recent settlers in the land between -the Alps and the Danube; but their immigration and their reduction -under Frankish supremacy made the lands immediately south of the Danube -thoroughly Teutonic, as the earlier Frankish conquests had done by -the lands immediately west of the Rhine. Long before this time, the -Franks had greatly extended their dominions in Gaul also. ♦Conquest -of Aquitaine [507-511] and Burgundy. 532-534.♦ In the later years of -Chlodwig the greater part of _Aquitaine_ was won from the West-Goths. -Further conquests at their expense were afterwards made, and about the -same time Burgundy came under Frankish supremacy. - -The Franks now held, either in possession or dependence, the whole -oceanic coast of Gaul; but they were still shut out from the -Mediterranean. The West-Goths still kept the land from the Pyrenees to -the Rhone, the land of _Septimania_ or _Gothia_, to which the last name -clave as being now the only Gothic part of Gaul. The land which was -specially _Provincia_, the first Roman possession in Transalpine Gaul, -the coast from the Rhone to the Alps, formed part of the East-Gothic -dominions of Theodoric. An invasion of Italy during the long wars -between the Goths and Romans failed to establish a Frankish dominion on -the Italian side of the Alps. But as the Franks, by their conquest of -Burgundy, were now neighbours of Italy, it led to a further enlargement -of their Gaulish dominions, and to their first acquisition of a -Mediterranean sea-board. ♦Cession of Provence. 536.♦ It was now that -Massalia, Arelate, and the rest of the Province were, by an Imperial -grant, one of the last exercises of Imperial power in those regions, -added to the kingdom of the Franks. ♦Extent of the Frankish dominions.♦ -By the time that the Roman reconquest of Italy was completed, the -Frankish dominion, united for a moment under a single head, took in -the whole of Gaul, except the small remaining West-Gothic territory, -together with central Germany and a supremacy over the Southern German -lands. To the north lay the still independent tribes of the Low-Dutch -stock, Frisian and Saxon. - -♦Position of the Franks.♦ - -As the Frankish dominion plays so great a part in European history and -geography, a part in truth second only to that played by the Roman -dominion, it will be needful to consider the historical position of -the Franks. Their dominion was that of a German people who had made -themselves dominant alike in Germany and in Gaul. But it was only in -a small part of the Frankish territory that the Frankish people had -actually settled. ♦The cession of Gaulish possessions.♦ It was only -in northern Gaul and central Germany, in the countries to which they -have permanently given their name, that the Franks can be looked on as -really occupying the land. In their German territory they of course -remained German; in northern Gaul their position answered to that of -the other Teutonic nations which had formed settlements within the -Empire. They were a dominant Teutonic race in a Roman land. Gradually -they adopted the speech of the conquered, while the conquered in the -end adopted the name of the conquerors. ♦Slow fusion of Franks and -Romans.♦ But the fusion of German and Roman was slower in the Frankish -part of Gaul than elsewhere, doubtless because elsewhere the Teutonic -settlements were cut off from their older Teutonic homes, while the -Franks in Gaul had their older Teutonic home as a background. ♦German -and Gaulish dependencies of the Franks.♦ Beyond the bounds of these -more strictly Frankish lands, German and Gaulish, the dominion of the -Franks was at most a political supremacy, and in no sense a national -settlement. In Germany Bavaria was ruled by its vassal princes; in Gaul -south of the Loire the Frank was at most an external ruler. Aquitaine -had to be practically conquered over and over again, and new dynasties -of native princes were constantly rising up. ♦Ethnology of Southern -Gaul.♦ The Teutonic element in these lands, an element much slighter -than the Teutonic element in Northern Gaul, is not Frankish, but Gothic -and Burgundian. The native Romance speech of those lands is wholly -different from the Romance speech of Northern Gaul. In short, there was -really nothing in common between the two great parts of Gaul, the lands -south and the lands north of the Loire, except their union, first under -Roman and then under Frankish dominion. And in Armorica the old Celtic -population, strengthened by the settlers from Britain, formed another -and a yet more distinct element. - -♦Divisions of the Frankish dominions.♦ - -Thus there were within the Frankish dominions wide national -diversities, containing the germs of future divisions. It needed a -strong hand even to keep the Teutonic and the Latin _Francia_ together, -much less to keep together all the dependent lands, German and Gaulish. -During the ages while the Empire was being cut short by Lombards, -Goths, Slaves, and Saracens, the Frankish dominion was never in the -like sort cut short by foreign settlements; but its whole history -under the Merowingian dynasty is a history of divisions and reunions. -The tendencies to division which were inherent in the condition of -the country were strengthened by endless partitions among the members -of the reigning house. ♦_Austria_ and _Neustria_.♦ Speaking roughly, -it may be said that the more strictly Frankish territory showed a -tendency to divide itself into two parts, the Eastern or Teutonic -land, _Austria_ or _Austrasia_, and _Neustria_, the Western or Romance -land. These were severally the germs which grew into the kingdoms of -Germany and France. ♦Use of the name _Francia_.♦ As for the mere name -of _Francia_, like other names of the kind, it shifted its geographical -use according to the wanderings of the people from whom it was derived. -After many such changes of meaning, it gradually settled down as the -name for those parts of Germany and Gaul where it still abides. There -are the Teutonic or Austrian _Francia_, part of which still keeps -the name of _Franken_ or _Franconia_, and the Romance or Neustrian -_Francia_, which by various annexations has grown into modern _France_. - -♦The Karlings. Dukes, 687-752; Kings, 752-987.♦ - -At last, after endless divisions, reconquests, and reunions of the -different parts of the Frankish territory, the whole Frankish dominion -was again, in the second half of the eighth century, joined together -under the Austrasian, the purely German, house of the _Karlings_. The -Dukes and Kings of that house consolidated and extended the Frankish -dominion in every direction. Under Pippin and Charles the Great, the -power of the ruling race was more firmly established over the dependent -states, such as Bavaria and Aquitaine. ♦Pippin conquers Septimania. -752. | Conquests of Charles the Great. 768-814.♦ Under Pippin the -conquest of the Saracen province of Septimania extended the Frankish -power over the whole of Gaul; and under Charles the Great, the Frankish -dominion was extended by a series of conquests in every direction. Of -these, his Italian conquests were rather the winning of a new crown for -the Frankish king than the extension of the Frankish kingdom. But the -conquest of _Saxony_ at the one end and of the _Spanish March_ at the -other, as well as the overthrow of the Pannonian kingdom of the Avars, -were in the strictest sense extensions of the Frankish dominions. -♦German character of the Frankish power.♦ The Frankish power which now -plays so great a part in the world was a power essentially German. The -Franks and their kings, the kings who reigned from the Elbe to the -Ebro, were German in blood, speech, and feeling; but they bore rule -over other lands, German, Latin, and Celtic, in many various degrees of -incorporation and subjection. - -♦The three great powers of the eighth century; Romans, Franks, -Saracens.♦ - -Thus the effect of the Saracen conquests was to leave in Europe one -purely European power, namely the kingdom of the Franks, one power -both European and Asiatic, namely the Roman Empire with its seat at -Constantinople, and one power at once Asiatic, African, and European, -namely the Saracen Caliphate. Through the eighth century these three -are the great powers of the world, to which the other nations of -Europe and Asia form, as far as we are concerned, a mere background. -♦Character of the Caliphate.♦ But the Caliphate, as a Semitic and -Mahometan power, could be European only in a geographical sense. -♦The Saracen dominion in Spain.♦ Even after the establishment of the -independent Saracen dominion in Spain, the new power still remained -an exotic. A great country of Western Europe was no longer ruled from -Damascus or Bagdad; but the emirate, afterwards Caliphate, of Cordova, -and the kingdoms into which it afterwards broke up, still remained only -geographically European. They were portions of Asia—in after times -rather of Africa—thrusting themselves into Europe, like the Spanish -dominion of Carthage in earlier times. The two great Christian powers, -the two great really European powers, are the Roman and the Frankish. -We now come to the process which for a while caused the Roman and -Frankish names to have the same meaning within a large part of Europe, -and by which the two seats of Roman dominion were again parted asunder, -never to be reunited. - -♦Relations of the Franks and the Empire.♦ - -The way by which the Roman and Frankish powers came to affect one -another was through the affairs of Italy. ♦The Imperial possessions in -Italy.♦ The steps by which the Imperial power was, during the eighth -century, weakened step by step in the territories which still remained -to the Empire in central Italy are, either from an ecclesiastical or -from a strictly historical point of view, of surpassing interest. But, -as long as the authority of the Emperor was not openly thrown off, -no change was made on the map. ♦Lombard conquest of the Exarchate. -| Overthrow of the Lombards by Charles. 774.♦ The events of those times -which did make a change on the map were, first the conquest of the -Exarchate by the Lombards, and secondly, the overthrow of the Lombard -kingdom itself by the Frank king Charles the Great. The Frankish power -was thus at last established on the Italian side of the Alps, but it -must be remarked that the new conquest was not incorporated with the -Frankish dominion. ♦Lombardy a separate kingdom.♦ Charles held his -Italian dominion as a separate dominion, and called himself King of -the Franks and Lombards. He also bore the title of Patrician of the -Romans; but, though the assumption of that title was of great political -significance, it did not affect geography. ♦Title of Patrician.♦ The -title of Patrician of itself implied a commission from the Emperor, -and, though it was bestowed by the Bishop and people of Rome without -the Imperial consent, the very choice of the title showed that the -Imperial authority was not formally thrown off. Charles, as Patrician, -was virtually sovereign of Rome, and his acquisition of the patriciate -practically extended his dominion from the Ocean to the frontiers -of Beneventum. ♦Nominal authority of the Empire.♦ But, down to his -Imperial coronation in the last week of the eighth century, the Emperor -who reigned in the New Rome was still the nominal sovereign of the old. -The event of the year 800, with all its weighty significance, did not -practically either extend the territories of Charles or increase his -powers. - -♦Effect of the Imperial coronation of Charles. 800.♦ - -Still the Imperial coronation of Charles is one of the great landmarks -both of history and of historical geography. The whole political -system of Europe was changed when the Old Rome cast off its formal -allegiance to the New, and chose the King of the Franks and Lombards -to be Emperor of the Romans. Though the powers of Charles were not -increased nor his dominions extended, he held everything by a new -title. ♦Final division of the Empire.♦ The Roman Empire was divided, -never to be joined together again. But its Western half now took in, -not only the greatest of its lost provinces, but vast regions which -had never formed part of the Empire in the days of Trajan himself. -Again, the distinctive character of the older Roman Empire had been -the absence of nationality. The whole civilized world had become Rome, -and all its free inhabitants had become Romans. ♦Growing nationality -of the two Empires, German and Greek.♦ But from this time each of the -two divisions of the Empire begins to assume something like a national -character. East and West alike remained Roman in name and in political -traditions. The Old Rome was the nominal centre of one; the New Rome -was both the nominal and the real centre of the other. But there was -a sense in which both alike ceased from this time to be Roman. The -Western Empire has passed to a German king, and later changes tended -to make his Empire more and more German. The Eastern Empire meanwhile, -by the successive loss of the Eastern provinces, of Latin Africa, and -of Latin Italy, became nearly conterminous with those parts of Europe -and Asia where the Greek speech and Greek civilization prevailed. From -one point of view, both Empires are still Roman; from another point of -view, one is fast becoming German, the other is fast becoming Greek. -♦Rivalry of the two Empires.♦ And the two powers into which the old -Roman Empire is thus split are in the strictest sense two Empires. -They are no longer mere divisions of an Empire which has been found -to be too great for the rule of one man. The Emperors of the East and -West are no longer Imperial colleagues dividing the administration -of a single Empire between them. They are now rival potentates, each -claiming to be exclusively the one true Roman Emperor, the one true -representative of the common predecessors of both in the days when the -Empire was still undivided. - -♦The two Caliphates.♦ - -It is further to be noted that the same kind of change which now -happened to the Christian Empire, had happened earlier in the century -to the Mahometan Empire. The establishment of a rival dynasty at -Cordova, even though the assumption of the actual title of Caliph -did not follow at once, was exactly analogous to the establishment -of a rival Empire in the Old Rome. The Mediterranean world has now -four great powers, the two rival Christian Empires, and the two rival -Mahometan Caliphates. Among these, it naturally follows that each -is hostile to its neighbour of the opposite religion, and friendly -to its neighbour’s rival. The Western Emperor is the enemy of the -Western Caliph, the friend of the Eastern. ♦Rivalry of the Empires and -Caliphates.♦ The Eastern Emperor is the enemy of the Eastern Caliph, -the friend of the Western. Thus the four great powers stood at the -beginning of the ninth century. And it was out of the dismemberments of -the two great Christian and the great Mahometan powers that the later -states, Christian and Mahometan, of the Mediterranean world took their -rise. - -♦Extent of the Carolingian Empire.♦ - -It is a point of geographical as well as of historical importance that -Charles the Great, after he was crowned Emperor, caused all those who -had been hitherto bound by allegiance to him as King of the Franks -to swear allegiance to him afresh as Roman Emperor. This marks that -all his dominions, Frankish, Lombard, and strictly Roman, are to be -looked on as forming part of the Western Empire. Thus the Western -Empire now took in all those German lands which the old Roman Emperors -never could conquer. Germany became part of the Roman Empire, not by -Rome conquering Germany, but by Rome choosing the German king as her -Emperor. ♦Contrast of its boundaries with those of the elder Empire.♦ -The boundaries of the Empire thus became different from what they had -ever been before. Of the old provinces of the Western Empire, Britain, -Africa, and all Spain save one corner, remained foreign to the new -Roman Empire of the Franks. But, on the other hand, the Empire now took -in all the lands in Germany and beyond Germany over which the Frankish -power now reached, but which had never formed part of the elder Empire. -♦Conquest of Saxony. 772-804.♦ The long wars of Charles with the Saxons -led to their final conquest, to the incorporation of _Saxony_ with the -Frankish kingdom, and, after the Imperial coronation of the Frankish -king, to its incorporation with the Western Empire. - -The conquests of Charles had thus, among their other results, welded -Germany into a single whole. For though the Franks had long been the -greatest power in Germany, yet Germany could not be said to form a -single whole as long as the Saxons, the greatest people of Northern -Germany, remained independent. The conquest of Saxony brought the -Frankish power for the first time in contact with the _Danes_ and the -other people of _Scandinavia_. ♦Boundary of the Eider.♦ The dominions -of Charles took in what was then called Saxony beyond the Elbe, that is -the modern Holstein, and the _Eider_ was fixed as the northern boundary -of the Empire. More than one Danish king did homage to Charles and to -some of the Emperors after him; but Denmark was never incorporated with -the Empire or even made permanently dependent. ♦Slavonic allies and -neighbours.♦ To the east, the immediate dominions of Charles stretched -but a little way beyond the Elbe; but here the Western Empire came in -contact, as the Eastern had done at an earlier time and by a different -process, with the widely spread nations of the Slavonic race. The same -movements which had driven one branch of that race to the south-west -had driven another branch to the north-west, and the wars of Charles -in those regions gave his Empire a fringe of Slavonic allies and -dependents along both sides of the Elbe, forming a barrier between -the immediate dominions of the Empire and the independent Slaves to -the east. ♦Overthrow of the Avar kingdom. 796.♦ To the south Charles -overthrew the kingdom of the _Avars_; he thus extended his dominions -on the side of south-eastern Germany, and here he came in contact with -the southern branch of the Slaves, a portion of whom, in _Carinthia_ -and the neighbouring lands, became subjects of his Empire. ♦The Spanish -March. 778.♦ In Spain he acquired the north-eastern corner as far as -the Ebro, forming the Spanish March, afterwards the county of Barcelona. - -♦Divisions of the Empire.♦ - -Thus the new Western Empire took in all Gaul, all that was then -Germany, the greater part of Italy, and a small part of Spain.[7] It -thus took in both Teutonic and Romance lands, and contained in it the -germs of the chief nations of modern Europe. It was a step towards -their formation when Charles, following the example both of earlier -Roman Emperors and of earlier Frankish kings, planned several divisions -of his dominions among his sons. Owing to the deaths of all his sons -but one, none of these divisions took effect. And it should be noticed -that as yet none of these schemes of division agreed with any great -natural or national boundary. They did not as yet foreshadow the -division which afterwards took place, and out of which the chief states -of Western Europe grew. In two cases only was anything like a national -kingdom thought of. ♦Kingdom of Aquitaine.♦ Charles’s son Lewis reigned -under him as king in _Aquitaine_, a kingdom which took in all Southern -Gaul and the Spanish March, answering pretty nearly to the lands of -the Provençal tongue or tongue of _Oc_. ♦Death of Charles. 814.♦ And -when Charles died, and was succeeded in the Empire by Lewis, Charles’s -grandson Bernard still went on reigning under his uncle as King of -Italy. ♦Kingdom of Italy.♦ The _Kingdom of Italy_ must be understood -as taking in the Italian mainland, except the lands in the south which -were held by the dependent princes of Beneventum and by the rival -Emperors of the East. ♦Use of the name _Francia_.♦ During this period -_Francia_ commonly means the strictly Frankish kingdoms, Gaulish -and German. The words _Gallia_ and _Germania_ are used in a strictly -geographical sense. - - -§ 6. _Northern Europe._ - -♦Scandinavians and English.♦ - -Meanwhile other nations were beginning to show themselves in those -parts of Europe which lay beyond the Empire. In north-western Europe -two branches of the Teutonic race were fast growing into importance; -the one in lands which had never formed part of the Empire, the other -in a land which had been part of it, but which had been so utterly -severed from it as to be all one as if it had never belonged to it. -These were the _Scandinavian_ nations in the two great peninsulas of -Northern Europe, and the _English_ in the Isle of Britain. The history -of these two races is closely connected, and it has an important -bearing on the history of Europe in general. - -♦Stages of the English conquest of Britain.♦ - -In Britain itself the progress of the English arms had been gradual. -Sometimes conquests from the Britons were made with great speed: -sometimes the English advance was checked by successes on the British -side, by mere inaction, or by wars between the different English -kingdoms. The fluctuations of victory, and consequently of boundaries, -between the English kingdoms were quite as marked as the warfare -between the English and the Britons. ♦The English kingdoms.♦ Among the -many Teutonic settlements in Britain, small and great, seven kingdoms -stand out as of special importance, and three of these, _Wessex_, -_Mercia_, and _Northumberland_, again stand out as candidates for a -general supremacy over the whole English name. ♦Britain at the end of -the eighth century.♦ At the end of the eighth century a large part -of Britain remained, as it still remains, in the hands of the elder -Celtic inhabitants; but the parts which they still kept were now cut -off from each other. ♦Celtic states.♦ _Cornwall_ or _West-Wales_, -_North-Wales_ (answering nearly to the modern principality), and -_Strathclyde_ or _Cumberland_ (a much larger district than the modern -county so called) were all the seats of separate, though fluctuating, -British states. Beyond the Forth lay the independent kingdoms of the -_Picts_ and _Scots_, which, in the course of the ninth century, became -one. - -♦West-Saxon supremacy under Ecgberht. 802-837.♦ - -It was the West-Saxon kingdom to which the supremacy over all the -kingdoms of Britain, Teutonic and Celtic, came in the end. Ecgberht, -its king, had been a friend and guest of Charles the Great, and he had -most likely been stirred up by his example to do in his own island -what Charles had done on the mainland. In the course of his reign, -West-Wales was completely conquered; the other English kingdoms, -together with North-Wales, were brought into a greater or less -degree of dependence. But both in North-Wales and also in Mercia, -Northumberland, and East-Anglia, the local kings went on reigning under -the supremacy of the King of the West-Saxons, who now began sometimes -to call himself _King of the English_. In the north both Scotland and -Strathclyde remained quite independent. - -♦The Scandinavian nations.♦ - -That part also of the Teutonic race which lay altogether beyond the -bounds of the Empire now begins to be of importance. ♦The Danes.♦ The -_Danes_ are heard of as early as the days of Justinian; but neither -they nor the other Scandinavian nations play any great part in history -before the time of Charles the Great. A great number of small states -gradually settled down into three great kingdoms, which remain still, -though their boundaries have greatly changed. The boundary between -Denmark and the Empire was, as we have seen, fixed at the Eider. -♦Extent of Denmark and Norway.♦ Besides the peninsula of Jutland -and the islands which still belong to it, Denmark took in _Scania_ -and other lands in the south of the great peninsula that now forms -_Sweden_ and _Norway_. Norway, on the other hand, ran much further -inland, and came down much further south than it does now. These points -are of importance, because they show the causes of the later history -of the three Scandinavian states. ♦Sweden.♦ Both Denmark and Norway -had a great front to the Ocean, while _Swithiod_ and _Gauthiod_, the -districts which formed the beginning of the kingdom of Sweden, had no -opening that way, but were altogether turned towards the Baltic. It -thus came about that for some centuries both Denmark and Norway played -a much greater part in the general affairs of Europe than Sweden did. -♦Danish and Norwegian settlements.♦ Denmark was an immediate neighbour -of the Empire, and from both Denmark and Norway men went out to conquer -and settle in various parts of Britain, Ireland and Gaul, besides -colonizing the more distant and uninhabited lands of _Iceland_ and -_Greenland_. ♦Pressure of Swedes to the East.♦ Meanwhile, the Swedes -pressed eastward on the Finnish and Slavonic people beyond the Baltic. -In this last way they had a great effect on the history of the Eastern -Empire; but in Western history Sweden counts for very little till a -much later time. - - * * * * * - -♦Summary.♦ - -During the period which has been dealt with in this chapter, taking in -the sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries, we thus see, first of all the -reunion of the greater part of the Roman Empire under Justinian—then -the lopping away of the Eastern and African provinces by the conquests -of the Saracens—then the gradual separation of all Italy except the -south, ending in the re-establishment of a separate Western Empire -under Charles the Great. We thus get two great Christian powers, the -Eastern and Western Empires, balanced by two great Mahometan powers, -the Eastern and Western Caliphates. All the older Teutonic kingdoms -have either vanished or have grown into something wholly different. -The Vandal kingdom of Africa and the East-Gothic kingdom have wholly -vanished. The West-Gothic kingdom, cut short by Franks on one side and -Saracens on the other, survives only in the form of the small Christian -principalities which still held their ground in Northern Spain. The -Frankish kingdom, by swallowing up the Gothic and Burgundian dominions -in Gaul, the independent nations of Germany, the Lombard kingdom, and -the more part of the possessions of the Empire in Italy, has grown -into a new Western Empire. The two Empires, both still politically -Roman, are fast becoming, one German and the other Greek. Meanwhile, -nations beyond the bounds of the Empire are growing into importance. -The process has begun by which the many small Teutonic settlements in -Britain grew in the end into the one kingdom of England. The three -Scandinavian nations, Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians or Northmen, now -begin to grow into importance. In a religious point of view, if Syria, -Egypt, Africa, and the more part of Spain were lost to Christendom, -the loss was in some degree made up by the conversion to Christianity -of the Angles and Saxons in Britain, of the Old-Saxons in Germany, and -of the other German tribes which at the beginning of the sixth century -had still been heathen. At no time in the world’s history did the map -undergo greater changes. This period is the time of real transition -from the older state of things represented by the undivided Roman -Empire to the newer state of things in which Europe is made up of a -great number of independent states. The modern kingdoms outside the -Empire, in Britain and Scandinavia, were already forming. The great -continental nations of Western Europe had as yet hardly begun to form. -They were to grow out of the break-up of the Carolingian Empire, the -Roman Empire of the Franks.[8] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[7] The geographical extent of the Frankish dominion before and after -the conquest of Charles is most fully marked by Einhard, Vita Karoli, -c. 15. - -[8] While I was revising this chapter, I became acquainted with C. J. -Jireček’s _Geschichte der Bulgaren_ (Prag, 1876), the third chapter -of which is devoted to an examination of the early settlements of -the Slaves in the Eastern peninsula. He makes it probable that they -were there earlier than is generally thought. They seem, exactly -like the Teutons, to have first entered the Empire as captives and -colonists, a process which may have begun as early as the second and -third centuries. He shows also that the march of Theodoric into Italy -had the effect of laying a large region open to their settlements. -But he leaves my general propositions untouched. It is not till the -sixth century that those Slavonic movements began which are of real -importance to historical geography. - - - - -CHAPTER VI. - -THE BEGINNING OF THE MODERN EUROPEAN STATES. - - -§ 1. _The Division of the Frankish Empire._ - -♦Dissolution of the Frankish dominion.♦ - -The great dominion of the Franks, the German kingdom which had so -strangely grown into a new Western Roman Empire, did not last long. -In the course of the ninth century it altogether fell to pieces. ♦The -chief states of modern Europe spring out of it.♦ But the process by -which it fell to pieces must be carefully traced, because it was out -of its dismemberment that the chief states of Western Europe arose. -Speaking roughly, the Carolingian Empire took in Germany, so far as -Germany had yet spread to the East, all Gaul, a great part of Italy, -and a small part of Spain. ♦National kingdoms not yet formed.♦ Of -these, it was only Italy, and sometimes Aquitaine, which showed any -approach to the character of a separate or national kingdom. ♦Extent -of _Francia_.♦ Northern Gaul and central Germany were still alike -_Francia_; and, though the Romance speech prevailed in one, and the -Teutonic speech in the other, no national distinction was drawn between -them during the time of Charles the Great. Among the proposed divisions -of his Empire, none proposed to separate _Neustria_ and _Austria_, -the Western and the Eastern _Francia_. ♦Separate being of Italy and -Aquitaine.♦ But Italy did form a separate kingdom under the superiority -of the Emperor; and so for a while there was an under-kingdom of -Aquitaine, answering roughly to Gaul south of the Loire. This is the -land of the _Provençal_ tongue, the _tongue of Oc_, a tongue which, -it must be remembered, reached to the Ebro. ♦Division under Lewis -the Pious. | First glimpses of Modern France.♦ It is in the various -divisions, contemplated and actual, among the sons of Lewis the Pious, -the successor of Charles the Great, that we see the first approaches to -a national division between Germany and Gaul, and the first glimmerings -of a state answering in any way to _France_ in the modern sense. - -♦Division of 817.♦ - -The earliest among those endless divisions that we need mention is the -division of 817, by which two new subordinate kingdoms were founded -within the Empire. Lewis and his immediate colleague Lothar kept in -their own hands _Francia_, German and Gaulish, and the more part of -Burgundy. South-western Gaul, Aquitaine in the wide sense, with some -small parts of Septimania and Burgundy, formed the portion of one -under-king; South-eastern Germany, Bavaria and the march-lands beyond -it, formed the portion of another. Italy still remained the portion of -a third. Here we have nothing in the least answering to modern France. -The tendency is rather to leave the immediate Frankish kingdom, both in -Gaul and Germany, as an undivided whole, and to part off its dependent -lands, German, Gaulish, and Italian. ♦Union of Neustria and Aquitaine -the first step to the creation of _France_. 838.♦ But, in a much later -division, Lewis granted Neustria to his son Charles, and in the next -year, on the death of Pippin of Aquitaine, he added his kingdom to -that of Charles. A state was thus formed which answers roughly to the -later kingdom of France, as it stood before the long series of French -encroachments on the German and Burgundian lands. ♦Character of the -_Western Kingdom_.♦ The kingdom thus formed had no definite name, and -it answered to no national division. It was indeed mainly a kingdom -of the Romance speech, but it did not answer to any one of the great -divisions of that speech. It was a kingdom formed by accident, because -Lewis wished to increase the portion of his youngest son. Still there -can be no doubt that we have here the first beginning of the kingdom -of _France_, though it was not till after several other stages that -the kingdom thus formed took that name. ♦Division of Verdun. 843.♦ The -final division of Verdun went a step further in the direction of the -modern map. It left Charles in possession of a kingdom which still more -nearly answered to France, as France stood before its Burgundian and -German annexations. It also founded a kingdom which roughly answered -to the later _Germany_ before its great extension to the East at the -expense of the Slavonic nations. And, as the Western kingdom was -formed by the addition of Aquitaine to the Western _Francia_, so the -Eastern kingdom was formed by the addition of the Eastern _Francia_ to -Bavaria. Lewis of Bavaria became king of a kingdom which we are tempted -to call the kingdom of _Germany_. Still it would as yet be premature -to speak of France at all, or even to speak of Germany, except in the -geographical sense. ♦Kingdoms of the Eastern and Western Franks.♦ The -two kingdoms are severally the kingdoms of the _Eastern_ and of the -_Western Franks_. But between these two states the policy of the ninth -century instinctively put a barrier. The Emperor Lothar, besides Italy, -kept a long narrow strip of territory between the dominions of his -Eastern and Western brothers. After him, Italy remained to his son the -Emperor Lewis, while the border lands of Germany and Gaul passed to the -younger Lothar. ♦Kingdom of _Lotharingia_, Lothringen, Lorraine.♦ This -land, having thus been the dominion of two Lothars, took the name of -_Lotharingia_, _Lothringen_, or _Lorraine_, a name which part of it has -kept to this day. This land, sometimes attached to the Eastern kingdom, -sometimes to the Western, sometimes divided between the two, sometimes -separated from both, always kept its character of a border-land. ♦The -Western Kingdom called _Karolingia_.♦ The kingdom to the west of it, in -like manner took the name of _Karolingia_, which, according to the same -analogy, should be _Charlaine_. It is only by a caprice of language -that the name of Lotharingia has survived, while that of Karolingia has -died out. - -♦Burgundy, or the Middle Kingdom.♦ - -Meanwhile, in South-eastern Gaul, between the Rhone and the Alps, -another kingdom arose, namely the kingdom of _Burgundy_. ♦Union under -Charles the Fat. 884.♦ Under Charles the Third, commonly known as the -Fat, all the Frankish dominions, except Burgundy, were again united for -a moment. ♦Division on his deposition. 887.♦ On his deposition they -split asunder again. We now have four distinct kingdoms, those of the -_Eastern_ and _Western Franks_, the forerunners of Germany and France, -the kingdom of _Italy_, and _Burgundy_, sometimes forming one kingdom -and sometimes two. _Lotharingia_ remained a border-land between the -Eastern and Western kingdoms, attached sometimes to one, sometimes to -another. Out of these elements arose the great kingdoms and nations -of Western Europe. The four can hardly be better described than they -are by the Old-English Chronicler: ‘Arnulf then dwelled in the land to -the East of Rhine; and Rudolf took to the middle kingdom; and Oda to -the West deal; and Berengar and Guy to the Lombards’ land, and to the -lands on that side of the mountain.’ But the geography of all the four -kingdoms which now arose must be described at somewhat greater length. - -It must be borne in mind that all these divisions of the great Frankish -dominion were, in theory, like the ancient divisions of the Empire, -a mere parcelling out of a common possession among several royal -colleagues. ♦No formal titles or names of the Frankish kingdoms.♦ The -Kings had no special titles, and their dominions had no special names -recognized in formal use. Every king who ruled over any part of the -ancient _Francia_ was a King of the Franks, just as much as all among -the many rulers of the Roman Empire in the days of Diocletian and -Constantine were equally Roman Augusti or Cæsars. As the kings and -their kingdoms had no formal titles specially set apart for them, the -writers of the time had to describe them as they might.[9] ♦Various -names of the Eastern Kingdom or _Germany_.♦ The Eastern part of the -Frankish dominions, the lot of Lewis the German and his successors, -is thus called the _Eastern Kingdom_, the _Teutonic Kingdom_. Its -king is the _King of the East-Franks_, sometimes simply the King of -the _Eastern men_, sometimes the _King of Germany_. This last name, -convenient in use, was inaccurate as a formal title, for the _Regnum -Teutonicum_ lay geographically partly in Germany, partly in Gaul.[10] -To the men of the Western kingdom the Eastern king sometimes appeared -as the _King beyond the Rhine_. The title of _King of Germany_ is -often found in the ninth century as a description, but it was not a -formal title. The Eastern king, like other kings, for the most part -simply calls himself _Rex_, till the time came when his rank as King of -Germany or of the East-Franks became simply a step towards the higher -title of Emperor of the Romans. ♦Connexion between the Eastern Kingdom -and the Empire.♦ But it must be remembered, that the special connexion -between the Roman Empire and the German kingdom did not begin at once -on the division of 887. ♦Imperial coronation of Arnulf. 896. | Homage -of Odo to Arnulf. 888.♦ Arnulf indeed, the first German King after the -division, made his way to Rome and was crowned Emperor; and it marks -the position of the Eastern kingdom as the chief among the kingdoms of -the Franks, that the West-Frankish King Odo did homage to Arnulf before -his lord’s Imperial coronation, when he was still simple German king. -♦Final union of Germany with the Empire under Otto the Great. 963.♦ -The rule that whoever was chosen King of Germany had a right, without -further election, to the kingdom of Italy and to the Roman Empire, -began only with the coronation of Otto the Great. Up to that time, the -German king is simply one of the kings of the Franks, though it is -plain that he held the highest place among them. - - * * * * * - -♦Extent of the German kingdom.♦ - -This Eastern or German kingdom, as it came out of the division of -887, had, from north to south, nearly the same extent as the Germany -of later times. It stretched from the Alps to the Eider. Its southern -boundaries were somewhat fluctuating. _Verona_ and _Aquileia_ are -sometimes counted as a German march, and the boundary between Germany -and Burgundy, crossing the modern Switzerland, often changed. To the -North-east the kingdom hardly stretched beyond the Elbe, except in the -small Saxon land between the Elbe and the Eider. The great extension of -the German power over the Slavonic lands beyond the Elbe had hardly -yet begun. ♦The Austrian and Carinthian marks.♦ To the South-east lay -the two border-lands or _marks_; the _Eastern Mark_, which grew into -the later duchy of _Oesterreich_ or the modern _Austria_, and to the -south of it the mark of _Kärnthen_ or _Carinthia_. ♦The great duchies.♦ -But the main part of the kingdom consisted of the great duchies of -_Saxony_, _Eastern Francia_, _Alemannia_, and _Bavaria_. ♦Saxony.♦ Of -these the two names of Saxony and Bavaria must be carefully marked -as having widely different meanings from those which they bear on -the modern map. Ancient Saxony lies, speaking roughly, between the -Eider, the Elbe, and the Rhine, though it never actually touches -the last-named river. ♦Eastern or Teutonic _Francia_.♦ To the south -of Saxony lies the Eastern _Francia_, the centre and kernel of the -German kingdom. The Main and the Neckar both join the Rhine within -its borders. To the south of Francia lie _Alemannia_ and _Bavaria_. -♦Alemannia and Bavaria.♦ This last, it must be remembered, borders on -Italy, with Bötzen for its frontier town. Alemannia is the land in -which both the Rhine and the Danube take their source; it stretches -on both sides of the _Bodensee_ or Lake of Constanz, with the Rætian -Alps as its southern boundary. For several ages to come, there is no -distinction, national or even provincial, between the lands north and -south of the Bodensee. - - * * * * * - -♦Lotharingia.♦ - -These lands make up the undoubted Eastern or German territory. To the -west of this lies the border land of _Lotharingia_, which has a history -of its own. For the first century after the division of 887, the -possession of Lotharingia fluctuated several times between the Eastern -and the Western kingdom. ♦987.♦ After the change of dynasty in the -Western kingdom, Lotharingia became definitely and undoubtedly German -in allegiance, though it always kept up something of a distinct being, -and its language was partly German and partly Romance. Lotharingia took -in the two duchies of the _Ripuarian Lotharingia_ and _Lotharingia on -the Mosel_. The former contains a large part of the modern Belgium -and the neighbouring lands on the Rhine, including the royal city of -Aachen. Lotharingia on the Mosel answers roughly to the later duchy of -that name, though its extent to the East is considerably larger. - - * * * * * - -♦The Western Kingdom.♦ - -The part of the Frankish dominions to which the Frankish name has -stuck most lastingly has been the Western kingdom or _Karolingia_, -which gradually got the special name of _France_. This came about -through the events of the ninth and tenth centuries. ♦Its extent.♦ -The Western kingdom, as it was formed under Charles the Bald and as -it remained after the division of 887, nominally took in a great part -of modern France, namely all west of the Rhone and Saône. It took in -nothing to the east of those rivers, and Lotharingia, as we have seen, -was a border land which at last settled down as part of the Eastern -kingdom. Thus the extent of the old _Karolingia_ to the east was very -much smaller than the extent of modern France. But, on the other hand, -the Western kingdom took in lands at three points which are not part -of modern France. These are the march or county of _Flanders_ in the -north, the greater part of which forms part of the modern kingdom of -Belgium; the _Spanish March_, or county of _Barcelona_, which is now -part of Spain; and the _Norman Islands_ which are now held by the -sovereign of England. And it is hardly needful to say that, even within -these boundaries, the whole land was not in the hands of the King of -the West-Franks. He had only a supremacy, which was apt to become -nearly nominal, over the vassal princes who held the great divisions -of the kingdom. ♦The great fiefs.♦ South of the Loire the chief of -these vassal states were the duchy of _Aquitaine_, a name which now -means the land between the Loire and the Garonne—the duchy of _Gascony_ -between the Garonne and the Pyrenees—the county of _Toulouse_ to the -east of it—the marches of _Septimania_ and _Barcelona_. North of the -Loire were _Britanny_, where native Celtic princes still reigned under -a very doubtful supremacy on the part of the Frankish kings—the march -of _Flanders_ in the north—and the duchy of _Burgundy_, the duchy which -had Dijon for its capital, and which must be carefully distinguished -from other duchies and kingdoms of the same name. ♦The Duchy of -France.♦ And, greatest of all, there was the duchy of _France_, that is -_Western_ or _Latin France_, _Francia Occidentalis_ or _Latina_. Its -capital was Paris, and its princes were called _Duces Francorum_, a -title in which the word _Francus_ is just beginning to change from its -older meaning of _Frank_ to its later meaning of _French_. ♦Normandy -cut off from France. 912.♦ From this great duchy of France several -great fiefs, as _Anjou_ and _Champagne_, were gradually cut off, and -the part of France between the Seine and the Epte was granted to the -Scandinavian chief Rolf, which, under him and his successors, grew -into the great duchy of _Normandy_. Its capital was Rouen, and this -settlement of the Normans had the effect of cutting off France and its -capital Paris from the sea. - -The modern French kingdom gradually came into being during the century -after the deposition of Charles the Fat. ♦Fluctuations between the -Duchy of the French at Paris and the Karlings at Laon. 888-987.♦ During -this time the crown of the Western kingdom passed to and fro more -than once between the Dukes of the French at Paris and the princes of -the house of Charles the Great, whose only immediate dominion was the -city and district of _Laon_ near the Lotharingian border. Thus, for -a hundred years, the royal city of the Western kingdom was sometimes -Laon and sometimes Paris, and the King of the West-Franks was sometimes -the same person as the Duke of the French and sometimes not. ♦Union -of the French Duchy with the West-Frankish kingdom. 987.♦ But after -the election of Hugh Capet, the kingdom and the duchy were never again -separated. The Kings of _Karolingia_ or the Western kingdom, and the -Dukes of the _Western Francia_, were now the same persons. ♦New meaning -of the word _France_.♦ _France_ then—the Western or Latin _Francia_, -as distinguished from the German _Francia_ or _Franken_—properly meant -only the King’s immediate dominions. Though Normandy, Aquitaine, and -the Duchy of Burgundy, all owed homage to the French king, no one -would have spoken of them as parts of France. ♦Advance of the French -kingdom.♦ But, as the French kings, step by step, got possession of the -dominions of their vassals and other neighbours, the name of _France_ -gradually spread, till it took in, as it now does, by far the greater -part of Gaul. On the other hand, Flanders, Barcelona, and the Norman -islands, though once under the homage of the French kings, have fallen -altogether away, and have therefore never been reckoned as parts of -France. Thus the name of _France_ supplanted the name of _Karolingia_ -as the name of the Western kingdom. ♦Title of _Rex Francorum_.♦ And, -as it so happened that the Western kings kept on the title of _Rex -Francorum_ after it had been dropped in the Eastern kingdom, that -title gradually came to mean, not King of the _Franks_, but King of -the _French_, King of the new Romance-speaking nation which grew up -under them. ♦Origin of the French nation.♦ Thus it was that the modern -kingdom and nation of France arose through the crown of the Western -kingdom passing to the Dukes of the Western _Francia_. ♦Paris the -kernel of France.♦ Paris is not only the capital of the kingdom; it is -the kernel round which the kingdom and nation grew. - - * * * * * - -♦The Middle Kingdom or Burgundy.♦ - -Of all geographical names, that which has changed its meaning the -greatest number of times is the name of _Burgundy_. ♦Various meanings -of the name _Burgundy_.♦ It is specially needful to explain its -different meanings at this stage, when there are always two, and -sometimes more, distinct states bearing the Burgundian name. ♦The -French Duchy.♦ Of the older Burgundian kingdom, the north-western -part, forming the land best known as the _Duchy of Burgundy_, was, -in the divisions of the ninth century, a fief of Karolingia or the -Western kingdom. This is the Burgundy which has Dijon for its capital, -and which was held by more than one dynasty of dukes as vassals of -the Western kings, first at Laon and then at Paris. This Burgundy, -which, as the name of France came to bear its modern sense, may be -distinguished as the _French Duchy_, must be carefully distinguished -from the _Royal_ Burgundy, the _Middle Kingdom_ of our own chronicler. -♦The Kingdom of Burgundy or Arles.♦ This is a state which arose out of -the divisions of the ninth century, and which, sometimes as a single -kingdom, sometimes as two, took in all the rest of the old Burgundian -kingdom which did not form part of the French duchy. It may be roughly -defined as the land between the Rhone and Saône and the Alps, though -its somewhat fluctuating boundaries sometimes stretched west of the -Rhone, and its eastern frontier towards Germany changed more than once. -It thus took in the original Roman province in Gaul, which may be now -spoken of as _Provence_, with its great cities, foremost among them -_Arelate_ or _Arles_, which was the capital of the kingdom, and from -which the land was sometimes called the _Kingdom of Arles_. ♦Cities -of the Burgundian kingdom.♦ It also took in Lyons, the primatial city -of Gaul, Geneva, Besançon, and other important Roman towns. In short, -from its position, it contained a greater number of the former seats -of Roman power than any of the new kingdoms except Italy itself. -♦Cis-jurane.♦ When Burgundy formed two kingdoms, the Northern or -_Trans-jurane_ Burgundy took in, speaking roughly, the lands north of -Lyons, and _Cis-jurane_ Burgundy those between Lyons and the sea. These -last are now wholly French. The ancient Transjurane Burgundy is in -modern geography divided between France and Switzerland. - -♦Burgundy separated from the Frankish kingdoms.♦ - -The history of this Burgundian kingdom differs in one respect from -that of any other of the states which arose out of the break-up of the -Frankish Empire. It parted off wholly from the Carolingian dominion -before the division of 887. It formed no part of the reunited Empire -of Charles the Fat. It may therefore be looked on as having parted off -altogether from the immediately Frankish rule, though it often appears -as more or less dependent on the kings of the Eastern Francia. But its -time of separate being was short. ♦Union of the kingdom with Germany. -| Later history of Burgundy: mostly annexed by France.♦ After about a -century and a half from its foundation, the Burgundian kingdom was -united under the same kings as Germany, and its later history consists -of the way in which the greater part of the old Middle Kingdom has -been swallowed up bit by bit by the modern kingdom of France. The only -part which has escaped is that which now forms the western cantons of -Switzerland. ♦Partly represented by Switzerland.♦ In truth the Swiss -Confederation may be looked on as having, in some slight degree, -inherited the position of the Burgundian kingdom as a middle state. -Otherwise, while the Eastern and Western kingdoms of the Franks have -grown into two of the greatest powers and nations in modern Europe, -the Burgundian kingdom has been altogether wiped out. Not only its -independence, but its very name, has passed from it. The name Burgundy -has for a long time past been commonly used to express the French duchy -only. - - * * * * * - -♦The Kingdom of Italy.♦ - -Italy, unlike Burgundy, formed part of the reunited dominion of -Charles the Fat; but it altogether passed away from Frankish rule -at the division of 887. It must be remembered that, though Lombardy -was conquered by Charles the Great, yet it was not merged in the -Frankish dominions, but was held as a separate kingdom by the King -of the Franks and Lombards. ♦Carolingian Kings of Italy.♦ Till the -reunion under Charles the Fat, Italy, as a separate kingdom, was -ruled by kings of the Carolingian house, some of whom were crowned -at Rome as Emperors. After the final division, it had separate kings -of its own, being not uncommonly disputed between two rival kings. -♦Italian Emperors.♦ Some of these kings even obtained Imperial rank. -♦Extent of the Italian kingdom.♦ The Italian kingdom, it must be -remembered, was far from taking in the whole Italian peninsula. Its -southern boundary was much the same as the old boundaries of Latium -and Picenum, reaching somewhat further to the south on the Hadriatic -coast. ♦Separate principalities of Benevento and Salerno.♦ To the south -were the separate principalities of _Benevento_ and _Salerno_, and -the lands which still clave to the Eastern Emperors. The kingdom thus -took in Lombardy, Liguria, _Friuli_ in the widest sense, taking in -_Trent_ and _Istria_, though these latter lands are sometimes counted -as a German march, while the Venetian islands still kept up their -connexion with the Eastern Empire. It took in also _Tuscany_, _Romagna_ -or the former Exarchate of Ravenna, _Spoleto_, and _Rome_ itself. ♦The -Kingdom of Italy represents the Lombard Kingdom.♦ The Italian kingdom -thus represented the old Lombard kingdom, together with the provinces -which were formally transferred from the Eastern to the Western Empire -by the election of Charles the Great. But it may be looked on as -essentially a continuation of the Lombard kingdom. ♦Milan its capital.♦ -The rank of capital of the Italian kingdom, as distinguished from the -Roman Empire, passed away from the old Lombard capital of _Pavia_ -to the ecclesiastical metropolis of _Milan_, and Milan became the -crowning-place of the Kings of Italy. - - * * * * * - -♦Abeyance of the Empire.♦ - -For nearly eighty years after the division of 887, the Roman Empire of -the West may be looked on as having fallen into a kind of abeyance. -One German and several Italian kings were crowned Emperors; but they -never obtained any general acknowledgement throughout the West. There -could not be said to be any Western Empire with definite geographical -boundaries. ♦Restoration of the Western Empire by Otto.♦ A change in -this respect took place in the second half of the tenth century under -the German king Otto the Great. ♦952.♦ While he was still only German -king, Berengar King of Italy became his man, as Odo of Paris had -become the man of Arnulf. ♦962, 963.♦ Afterwards Otto himself obtained -the Italian kingdom, and was crowned Emperor at Rome. The rule was now -fully established that the German king who was crowned at Aachen had -a right to be crowned King of Italy at Milan and Emperor at Rome. A -geographical Western Empire was thus again founded, consisting of the -two kingdoms of Germany and Italy, to which Burgundy was afterwards -added. ♦The three Imperial kingdoms.♦ These three kingdoms now formed -the Empire, which thus consisted of the whole dominions of Charles -the Great—allowing for a different eastern frontier—except the part -which formed the Western kingdom, _Karolingia_, afterwards _France_. -This union of three of the four kingdoms gave a more distinct and -antagonistic character to the fourth which remained separate. -Karolingia looked like a part of the great Frankish dominion lopped off -from the main body. ♦Relations between the Empire and France.♦ On the -other hand, now that the German kings, the Kings of the East-Franks, -were also Kings of Italy and Burgundy and Emperors of the Romans, they -gradually dropped their Frankish style. But, as that style was kept -by the Western kings, and still more as the name of their duchy of -France gradually spread over so large a part of Gaul, the kingdom of -France had a superficial look of representing the old Frankish kingdom. -The newly-constituted Empire had thus a distinctly rival power on its -western side. And we shall find that a great part of our story will -consist of the way in which, on this side, the Imperial frontier went -back, and the French frontier advanced. On the other side, the Eastern -frontier of the Empire was capable of any amount of advance at the cost -of its Slavonic neighbours. - - -§ 2. _The Eastern Empire._ - -♦The Eastern Empire.♦ - -The effect of the various changes of the seventh and eighth centuries, -the rise of the Saracens, the settlement of the Slaves, the transfer -of the Western Empire to the Franks, seem really to have had the -effect of strengthening the Eastern Empire which they so terribly cut -short. It began for the first time to put on something of a national -character. ♦It takes a Greek character.♦ As the Western Empire was -fast becoming German, so the Eastern Empire was fast becoming Greek. -♦Rivalry of the Eastern and Western or Greek and Latin Churches.♦ And -a religious distinction was soon added to the distinction of language. -As the schism between the Churches came on, the Greek-speaking lands -attached themselves to the Eastern, and not to the Western, form of -Christianity. The Eastern Empire, keeping on all its Roman titles and -traditions, had thus become nearly identical with what may be called -the artificial Greek nation. It continues the work of hellenization -which was begun by the old Greek colonies and which went on under the -Macedonian kings. ♦Fluctuations in the extent of the Empire.♦ No power -gives more work for the geographer; through the alternate periods of -decay and revival which make up nearly the whole of Byzantine history, -provinces were always being lost and always being won back again. And -it supplies also a geographical study of another kind, in the new -divisions into which the Empire was now mapped out, divisions which, -for the most part, have very little reference to the divisions of -earlier times. - -♦The _Themes_ as described by Constantine Porphyrogennêtos.♦ - -The _Themes_ or provinces of the Eastern Empire, as they stood in -the tenth century, have had the privilege of being elaborately -described by an Imperial geographer in the person of Constantine -Porphyrogennêtos.[11] He speaks of the division as comparatively -recent, and of some themes as having been formed almost in his own -time. The themes would certainly seem to have been mapped out after -the Empire had been cut short both to the north and to the east. -The nomenclature of the new divisions is singular and diversified. -♦Asiatic Themes.♦ Some ancient national names are kept, while the -titles of others seem fantastic enough. Thus in Asia _Paphlagonia_ -and _Kappadokia_ remain names of themes with some approach to their -ancient boundaries; but the _Armenian_ theme is thrust far to the -west of any of the earlier uses of the name, so that the Halys flows -through it. Between it and the still independent Armenia lay the theme -of _Chaldia_, with Trapezous, the future seat of Emperors, for its -capital. Along the Saracen frontier lie the themes of _Kolôneia_, -_Mesopotamia_—a shadowy survival indeed of the Mesopotamia of Trajan, -of which it was not even a part—_Sebasteia_, _Lykandos_, _Kappadokia_, -and _Seleukeia_, called from the Isaurian or Kilikian city of that -name. Along the south coast the city of _Kibyra_ has given—in mockery, -says Constantine—its name to the theme of the _Kibyrraiotians_, which -reaches as far as Milêtos. The isle of _Samos_ gives its name to a -theme reaching from Milêtos to Adramyttion, while the theme of the -_Ægæan Sea_, besides most of the islands, stretches on to the mainland -of the ancient Aiolis. The rest of the Propontis is bordered by themes -bearing the strange names of _Opsikion_ and _Optimatôn_, names of Latin -origin, in the former of which the word _obsequium_ is to be traced. -To the east of them the no less strangely named _Thema Boukellariôn_ -takes in the Euxine Hêrakleia. Inland and away from the frontier are -the themes _Thrakêsion_ and _Anatolikon_, while another Asiatic theme -is formed by the island of _Cyprus_. - -♦The European Themes.♦ - -The nomenclature of the European themes is more intelligible. Most -of them bear ancient names, and the districts which bear them are at -least survivals of the lands which bore them of old. After a good deal -of shifting, owing to the loss and recovery of so many districts, the -Empire under Constantine Porphyrogennêtos numbered twelve European -themes. _Thrace_ had shrunk up into the land just round Constantinople -and Hadrianople, the latter now a frontier city against the Bulgarian. -_Macedonia_ had been pushed to the east, leaving the more strictly -Macedonian coast-districts which the Empire still kept to form the -themes of _Strymôn_ and _Thessalonikê_. ♦Use of the name Hellas.♦ -Going further south, the name of _Hellas_ has revived, and that with -a singular accuracy of application. Hellas is now the eastern side of -continental Greece, taking in the land of Achilleus. The abiding name -of Achaia has vanished for a while, and the peninsula which had been -won back from the Slave again bears its name of _Peloponnêsos_. But -_Lakedaimonia_ now appears on the list of its chief cities instead -of Sparta. This and other instances in which one Greek name has been -supplanted by another are witnesses of the Slavonic occupation of -Hellas and its recovery by a Greek-speaking power. Off the west coast -the realm of Odysseus seems to revive in the theme of _Kephallênia_, -which takes in also the mythic isle of Alkinoos. Such parts of -Epeiros and Western Greece as clave to the Empire form the theme of -_Nikopolis_. ♦The Hadriatic lands.♦ To the north, on the Hadriatic -shore, was the theme of _Dyrrhachion_, and beyond that again, the -Dalmatian and Venetian cities still counted as outlying portions -of the Empire. ♦Possessions of the Empire in Italy.♦ Beyond the -Hadriatic, southern Italy forms the theme of _Lombardy_, interrupted -by the principality of _Salerno_, while Naples, Gaeta, and Amalfi were -outlying posts like Venice and Ragusa. _Sicily_ was still reckoned as -a theme; but it was now wholly lost to the Saracen. ♦Chersôn.♦ And far -away in the Tauric peninsula, the last of the Hellenic commonwealths, -the furthest outpost of Hellenic civilization, had sunk in the ninth -century into the Byzantine theme of _Chersôn_. - -♦Seeming Asiatic character of the Empire.♦ - -The first impression conveyed by this geographical description is that -the Eastern Empire had now become a power rather Asiatic than European. -It is only in Asia that any solid mass of territory is kept. ♦Nature -of its European possessions.♦ Elsewhere there are only islands and -fringes of coast. ♦Maritime supremacy of the Empire.♦ But they were -almost continuous fringes of coast, fringes which contained some of -the greatest cities of Christendom, and which gave their masters an -undisputed supremacy by sea. If the Mediterranean was not a Byzantine -lake, it was only the presence of the Saracen, the occasional visits -of the Northman, which hindered it from being so. Then again, the -whole history of the Empire, if a history of losses, is also a history -of recoveries, and before long the Roman arms again became terrible -by land. The picture of Constantine Porphyrogennêtos shows us the -Empire at a moment when neither process was actually going on; but -the times before and after his reign were times, first of loss and -then of recovery. ♦Loss and recovery of Crete. 823-960.♦ Early in the -ninth century _Crete_ was suddenly seized by Saracen adventurers from -Spain; about the same time began the long and slow Saracen conquest -of _Sicily_. ♦Loss of Sicily. 827-878. | Advance in Italy, Dalmatia, -and Greece. c. 802.♦ But, almost at the moment when Sicily was lost, -the Imperial province in Italy was largely increased, and the Imperial -influence in Dalmatia was largely restored. About the same time -Peloponnêsos was won back from the Slaves. ♦Recovery of provinces in -the East. 964-976.♦ In the latter half of the tenth century Crete was -won back; so were Kilikia and part of Syria, with the famous cities -of Tarsos, Edessa, and Antioch on the Orontes. ♦Conquest of Bulgaria. -981-1018.♦ Presently Basil the Second overthrew the _Bulgarian_ kingdom -in Europe and the _Armenian_ kingdom in Asia; the lands at the foot of -Caucasus admitted the Imperial supremacy, and the Byzantine rule was -carried round the greater part of the Euxine. ♦Loss of Cherson. 988.♦ -Cherson indeed was lost; the old Megarian city passed into the hands -of the Russian. At the other end of the Empire, the recovery of Sicily -was actually begun, and, if the Saracen was not driven out, his power -was weakened in the interest of the next set of invaders. ♦The Eastern -Empire under Basil the Second.♦ Early in the eleventh century the -Eastern Rome was again the head of a dominion which was undoubtedly the -greatest among Christian powers, a dominion greater than it had been at -any time since the Saracenic and Slavonic inroads began. - - -§ 3. _Origin of the Spanish Kingdoms._ - -The historical geography of two of the three great Southern peninsulas -is thus bound up with that of the Empires of which they were severally -the centres. ♦Position of Spain.♦ The case is quite different with -the third great peninsula, that of Spain. There the Roman dominion, -even the province which had been recovered by Justinian, had quite -passed away, and it was only a small part of the land which was ever -reincorporated, even in the most shadowy way, with either Empire. ♦The -Saracen conquest. 710-713.♦ Spain was now conquered by the Saracens, -as it had before been conquered by the Romans, with this difference, -that it had been among the longest and hardest of the Roman conquests, -while no part of the Saracen dominion was won in a shorter time. -But, if the Roman conquest was slow, it was in the end complete. The -swifter Saracen conquest was never quite complete; it left a remnant -by which the land was in the end to be won back. But the part of the -land which withstood the Saracen was, as could hardly fail to be the -case, the same part as that which held out for the longest time against -the Roman. The mountainous regions of the North were never wholly -conquered. ♦Asturia 732, | united with Cantabria, 751.♦ _Cantabria_ and -_Asturia_, which had never fully submitted to the Goths, now became the -seat of resistance under princes who claimed to represent the Gothic -kings, and part of whose dominions bore the name of _Gothia_. Twenty -years after the conquest, Asturia was again a Christian principality, -which was presently united with Cantabria. ♦Kingdom of Leon, 916.♦ This -grew into the kingdom of _Leon_. ♦County of Castile, 904. | Kingdom, -1033.♦ The great fiefs of this kingdom on its eastern and western -borders, the counties of _Gallicia_ and _Castile_—the last originally -a line of _castles_ against the Saracen enemy—both showed from an -early time strong tendencies to separation. ♦Kingdom of Navarre. 905.♦ -Meanwhile the kingdom of _Navarre_ grew up to the east, stretching, -it must be remembered, on both sides of the Pyrenees, though by far -the larger portion of it lay on their southern side. ♦County of Aragon -c. 760.♦ To the east of Navarre the small counties of _Aragon_ and -_Riparanensia_ were the beginning of the kingdom of _Aragon_. ♦The -Spanish March. 778.♦ To the east again of this was the land which, -after the final expulsion of the Saracens from Gaul, became part of the -Carolingian Empire by the name of the _Spanish March_. The shiftings -of territory, the unions and separations of these various kingdoms -and principalities, belong to the special history of Spain. But early -in the eleventh century the whole north-western part of Spain, and a -considerable fringe of territory in the north-east, had been formed -into Christian states. ♦Beginnings of Castile and Aragon.♦ Among these -had been laid the foundations of two kingdoms, those of Castile and -Aragon, which were to play a great part in the affairs of Europe. - -It will be at once seen that those among the Spanish powers which were -destined to play the greatest part in later history were not among -the first to take the form of separate kingdoms. ♦Slow growth of the -greater kingdoms.♦ At this stage even Castile has hardly taken the form -of a distinct state. Aragon is only beginning; _Portugal_ has not even -begun. ♦History of Castile and Aragon.♦ Of these three, Castile was -fated to play the same part that was played by Wessex in England and by -France in Gaul, to become the leading power of the peninsula. Aragon, -when her growth had brought her to the Mediterranean, was to fill for -a long time a greater place in general European politics than any -other Spanish power. The union of Castile and Aragon was to form that -great Spanish monarchy which became the terror of Europe. ♦Portugal.♦ -Meanwhile Portugal, lying on the Ocean, had first of all to extend -her borders at the cost of the common enemy, and afterwards to become -a beginner of European enterprise in distant lands, a path in which -Castile and other powers did but follow in her steps. - - * * * * * - -♦Break-up of the Spanish Caliphate.♦ - -Meanwhile the advance of the Christians was helped by the division of -the Saracenic power. The Caliphates of the East and of the West fell to -pieces, exactly as the Christian Empires did. The undivided Mahometan -dominion in Spain was at the height of its power in the tenth century. -Yet even then, amid many fluctuations, the Christian frontier was on -the whole advancing in the north-west. In the north-east Christian -progress was slower. ♦1028.♦ But, early in the eleventh century, the -Caliphate of Cordova broke in pieces, and out of its fragments arose -a crowd of small Mahometan kingdoms at Cordova, Seville, Lisbon, -Zaragoza, Toledo, Valencia, and elsewhere. It was now only by renewed -invasions from Africa that the Mahometan power in Spain was kept up. -But, as the Christian states are now fully formed, such mention of -these African dynasties as concerns geography will come more fittingly -at a later stage. - - -§ 4. _Origin of the Slavonic States._ - -♦Slavonic and Turanian invasions.♦ - -We left the borders of both the Eastern and the Western Empire beset by -neighbours of Slavonic race, who, in the case of the Eastern Empire, -were largely mingled with other neighbours of Turanian race. Of these -last, _Avars_, _Patzinaks_, _Khazars_, have passed away; they have -left no trace on the modern map of Europe. With two of the Turanian -settlements the case is different. ♦Bulgarians.♦ The settlement of -the _Bulgarians_, the foundation of a kingdom of Slavonized Turanians -south of the Danube, has been already mentioned. They still keep their -place and nation, though in bondage. Another Turanian settlement to the -north of the Bulgarians has been of yet greater importance in European -history. ♦Settlement of the Magyars or Hungarians, 895.♦ In the last -years of the ninth century the Finnish _Magyars_ or _Hungarians_, the -_Turks_ of the Byzantine writers, began to count as a power in Europe. -From their seats between the mouths of the Dnieper and the Danube, they -pressed eastward into the lands which had been Dacia and Pannonia. -♦Great Moravia.♦ The Bulgarian power was thus confined to the lands -south of the Danube, and _Great Moravia_, a name which then took in the -western part of modern Hungary, fell wholly under Magyar dominion. - -This settlement is one which stands altogether by itself. ♦Peculiar -character of the Magyar settlement.♦ The Magyars and the Ottoman Turks -are the only Turanian settlers in Europe who have grown into permanent -Turanian powers on European ground. The Bulgarians have been lost in -the mass of their Slavonic neighbours and subjects, whose language they -have adopted. Magyars and Ottomans still remain speaking a Turanian -tongue on Aryan soil. But of these it is only the Magyars that have -grown into a really European state. ♦The Kingdom of Hungary.♦ After -appearing as momentary ravagers in Germany, Italy, and even Gaul, -the Magyars settled down into a Christian kingdom, which, among many -fluctuations of supremacy and dependence, has remained a distinct -kingdom to this day. ♦Effect of its religious connexion with Rome.♦ The -Christianity of Hungary however came from the Western Church and not -from the Eastern. And this fact has had a good deal of bearing upon -the history of those regions. But for this almost incidental connexion -with the Old Rome, Hungary, though settled by a Turanian people, would -most naturally have taken its place among the Slavonic states which -fringed the dominion of the New Rome. As it has turned out, difference -of religion has stepped in to heighten difference of blood, and Hungary -has formed a kingdom quite apart, closely connected in its history -with Servia and Bulgaria, but running a course which has been in many -things unlike theirs. - -♦The Magyars separate the Northern and Southern Slaves.♦ - -The geographical results of the Magyar settlement were to place a -barrier between the Northern and the Southern Slaves. This it did -both directly and indirectly. The _Patzinaks_ pressed into what had -been the former Magyar territory; they appear in the pages of the -Imperial geographer as a nation with whom the Empire always strove to -maintain peace, as they formed a barrier against both Hungarians and -_Russians_. ♦The Russians.♦ This last name begins to be of importance -in the ninth century. A part of the Eastern branch of the Slavonic -race, they were cut off from the other members of that branch south -of the Danube by these new Turanian settlements. The Magyars again -parted the South-eastern Slaves from the North-western, while the -Russians were still neighbours of the North-western Slaves. ♦Effects -of the geographical position of the Slaves.♦ The geographical position -of these three divisions of the Slavonic race has had an important -effect on European history. ♦History of the South-eastern Slaves.♦ The -South-eastern Slaves in Servia, Croatia, Dalmatia, and the neighbouring -lands, formed a debateable ground between the two Empires, the Magyar -kingdom, and the Venetian republic, as soon as Venice grew into a -distinct and conquering state. These lands have, down to our own time, -played an important, but commonly a secondary, part in history. And in -later times their history has chiefly consisted in successive changes -of masters. The states which they formed will have to be spoken of in -connexion with the greater and more lasting powers to which they have -commonly been adjuncts. ♦The North-western Slaves.♦ The North-western -Slaves appear for the most part in different degrees of vassalage or -incorporation with the Western Empire. ♦Bohemia, Poland.♦ But, besides -several considerable duchies, there grew up among them the kingdoms of -_Bohemia_ and _Poland_, of which the latter established its complete -independence of the Empire, and became for a while one of the chief -powers of Europe. ♦Russia.♦ Russia meanwhile, forming a third division, -appears, in the ninth and tenth centuries, first as a formidable -enemy, then as a spiritual conquest, of the Empire and Church of -Constantinople. Russia had then already assumed the character which it -has again put on in later times, that of the one great European power -at once Slavonic in race and Eastern in faith. Russia is now fully -established as an European power. The variations of its territorial -extent must be traced in a distinct chapter. - - -§ 5. _Northern Europe._ - -♦The Scandinavian settlements.♦ - -The European importance of the Scandinavian nations at this time -chiefly arises from their settlements in various parts of Europe, and -specially in Britain and Ireland. The three great Scandinavian kingdoms -were already formed. Sweden was doing its work towards the east; the -Norwegians, specially known as Northmen, colonized the extreme north -of Britain, the Scandinavian earldoms of Caithness and Sutherland, -together with the islands to the north and west of Britain, Orkney, -Shetland, Faroe, the so-called Hebrides, and Man. They also colonized -the eastern coast of Ireland, where they were known as _Ostmen_. And -it was from Norway also that the settlers came by which the coast of -France in the strictest sense, the French duchy, was cut off from the -dominion of Paris to form the Duchy of Normandy. ♦England and Denmark. -789-1017.♦ But the chief field for the energy of Denmark properly so -called lay within the limits of that part of Britain which we may now -begin to call _England_. It was during this period that the united -English kingdom grew up, that the many English settlements in Britain -coalesced into one English nation. And this work was in a singular way -promoted by the very cause, namely, the Danish invasions, which seemed -best suited to hinder it. - -Up to this time the great island had been in truth, as it was often -called, another world, influencing but little, and but little -influenced by, any of the lands which formed part of either of the -continental Empires. ♦Formation of the Kingdom of England.♦ The English -history of these times, a history which is specially connected with -geography, consists of two great facts. The first is the union of -all the English states in Britain into one English kingdom under the -West-Saxon kings. The other is the establishment of a vague supremacy -on the part of those kings over the whole island. ♦West-Saxon supremacy -under Ecgberht. 825-830.♦ The dominion established by Ecgberht was -in no sense a kingdom of England. It consisted simply in a supremacy -on the part of the West-Saxon king over all the princes of Britain, -Teutonic and Celtic, save only the Picts, Scots, and Welsh of -Strathclyde or Cumberland. The smaller kingdoms of Kent, Sussex, and -Essex formed appanages for West-Saxon _æthelings_; but the superiority -over East-Anglia, Mercia, Northumberland, and the Welsh princes was -purely external. The change of this power into an united English -kingdom holding a supremacy over the whole island was largely helped -by the Danish incursions and settlements. ♦The Danish invasions. 789.♦ -These incursions began in the last years of the eighth century; they -became more frequent and more dangerous in the middle of the ninth; -and in the latter part of that century they grew from mere incursions -into actual settlements. This was the result of the great struggle in -the days of the first Æthelred and his more famous brother Ælfred. -♦Division between Ælfred and Guthrum. 878.♦ By Ælfred’s treaty with the -Danish Guthrum, the West-Saxon king kept his own West-Saxon kingdom -and all the other lands south of the Thames, together with western -Mercia. The rest of Mercia, with East-Anglia and _Deira_ or southern -Northumberland, passed under Danish rule. ♦Bernicia not Danish.♦ -_Bernicia_, or northern Northumberland from the Tees to the Forth, -still kept its Anglian princes, seemingly under Danish supremacy. -Over the lands which thus became Danish the West-Saxon king kept a -mere nominal and precarious supremacy. ♦Scandinavian settlements in -Cumberland.♦ In Scotland and Strathclyde the succession of the Celtic -princes was not disturbed; but in part at least of Strathclyde, in -the more modern Cumberland, a large Scandinavian population, though -probably Norwegian rather than Danish, must have settled. - -♦Increase of the immediate kingdom of Wessex.♦ - -By these changes the power of the West-Saxon king as an over-lord -was greatly cut short, while his immediate kingdom was enlarged. The -dynasty which had come so near to the supremacy of the whole island -seemed to be again shut up in its own kingdom and the lands immediately -bordering on it. ♦Second West-Saxon advance. 910-954.♦ But, by -overthrowing the other English kingdoms, the Danes had prepared the -way for the second West-Saxon advance in the tenth century. Saxon king -was now the only English king, and he further became the English and -Christian champion against intruders who largely remained heathen. -♦Wessex grows into England.♦ The work of the first half of the tenth -century was to enlarge the Kingdom of Wessex into the Kingdom of -England. Eadward the Elder, King, not merely of the West-Saxons but -of the English, extended his immediate frontier, the frontier of the -one English kingdom, to the Humber. ♦First submission of Scotland and -Strathclyde. 923.♦ Wales, Northumberland, English and Danish, and now, -for the first time, Scotland and Strathclyde, all acknowledged the -English supremacy. ♦926.♦ Under Æthelstan Northumberland was for the -first time incorporated with the kingdom, and after several revolts and -reconquests, it finally became an integral part of England, forming -sometimes one, sometimes two, English earldoms. ♦Cumberland granted -as a fief to Scotland. 945.♦ Meanwhile Cumberland was subdued by -Eadmund, and was given as a fief to the Kings of Scots, who commonly -granted it as an appanage to their sons. ♦Lothian granted to Scotland.♦ -Meanwhile, partly, it would seem, by conquest, partly by cession, the -Scottish kings became possessed of the northern part of Northumberland, -under the name of the earldom of Lothian. Thus, in the second half of -the tenth century, a single kingdom of England had been formed, of -which the Welsh principalities, as well as Scotland, Strathclyde, and -Lothian, were vassal states. - -♦The English Empire.♦ - -Thus the English kingdom was formed, and with it the English Empire. -♦Use of the Imperial titles.♦ For the English kings in the tenth and -eleventh centuries, acknowledging no superiority in the Cæsar either of -East or West and holding within their own island a position analogous -to that of the Emperors on the mainland, did not scruple to assume the -Imperial title, and to speak of themselves as Emperors of the other -world of Britain. The kingdom and Empire thus formed were transferred -by the wars of Swegen and Cnut from a West-Saxon to a Danish king. -♦Northern Empire of Cnut. 1016-1035.♦ Under Cnut England was for a -moment the chief seat, and Winchester the Imperial city, of a Northern -Empire which might fairly claim a place alongside of the Old and the -New Rome. England, Denmark, Norway, had a single king, whose supremacy -extended further over the rest of Britain, over Sweden and a large -part of the Baltic coast. That Empire split in pieces on his death. -The Scandinavian kingdoms were again separated; England itself was -divided for a moment. ♦The Norman Conquest. 1066-70.♦ The kingdom, -again reunited, first passed back to the West-Saxon house, and then, by -a second conquest, to the Norman. After this last revolution a division -of the kingdom was never more heard of. ♦England finally united by -William.♦ William the Conqueror put the finishing stroke to the work of -Ecgberht, and made England for ever one. And, by uniting England under -the same ruler as Normandy, and by thus leading her into the general -current of continental affairs, he gave her an European position such -as she had never held under her native kings. - - * * * * * - -♦Summary.♦ - -By the end of the eleventh century then the chief nations of Europe -had been formed. The Western Empire, after many shiftings, had taken -a definite shape. ♦The Western Empire and the Imperial Kingdoms.♦ -The Imperial dignity and the two royal crowns of Italy and Burgundy -were now attached to the German kingdom. The Empire, in short, -though keeping its Roman titles and associations, and with them its -influence over the minds of men, had practically become a German -power. Its history from this time mainly consists in the steps by -which the German Emperors of Rome lost their hold on their Italian and -Burgundian kingdoms, and of the steps by which the German dominion -was extended over the Slaves to the East. ♦France.♦ To the West the -Western Kingdom has altogether detached itself from the Empire; the -union of its crown with the Duchy of France has created the French -kingdom and nation, with its centre at Paris, and with a supremacy, as -yet little more than nominal, over a large part of Gaul. ♦The Eastern -Empire.♦ As the Western Empire has become German, the Eastern Empire -has become Greek; in the early years of the eleventh century it again -forms a powerful and compact state, ruling from Naples to Antioch. -♦The Slavonic states.♦ Of the states to the north of it, Bulgaria has -been reincorporated with the Empire; Servia, Hungary, Russia, have -taken their definite position among the Christian powers of Europe. So -have Poland and Bohemia on the borders of the Western Empire. Prussia, -Lithuania, and the Finnish lands to the immediate north of them remain -heathen. ♦Spain.♦ In Spain, the Christians have won back a large part -of the peninsula. Castile and Navarre are already kingdoms; Aragon, -though not yet a kingdom, has begun her history. ♦The Scandinavian -kingdoms.♦ In Northern Europe, the three Scandinavian nations are -clearly distinguished and firmly established. ♦England and Normandy.♦ -Within the isle of Britain the kingdoms of England and Scotland have -been formed, and the union of England and Normandy under a single -prince has opened the way to altogether new relations between the -continent and the great island. In short, the only European powers -which play a part in strictly mediæval history which are not yet formed -are Portugal and the Sicilian kingdoms. - -From this point then, when most of the European powers have come into -being, and when the two Roman Empires are fast becoming a German and a -Greek power alongside of other powers, it will be well to change the -form of our present inquiry. Thus far we have treated the historical -geography of Europe as a whole, gathering round two centres at the -Old and the New Rome. It will henceforth be more convenient to take -the history of the great divisions of Europe separately, and to trace -out in distinct chapters the changes which the boundaries of each have -gone through from the eleventh century to our own time. ♦Ecclesiastical -geography.♦ But before we enter on these several national divisions, it -will be well to take a view of the ecclesiastical divisions of Western -Christendom, which are of great importance and which are constantly -referred to in the times with which we are now concerned. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[9] The best account of the various names by which the East-Frankish -kings and their people are described is given by Waitz, _Deutsche -Verfassungsgeschichte_, v. 121 et seqq. - -[10] So Wippo (2) describes the gathering of the men of the kingdom: -‘Cis et circa Rhenum castra locabant. Qui dum Galliam a Germanis -dividat, ex parte _Germaniæ_ Saxones cum sibi adjacentibus Sclavis, -Franci orientales, Norici, Alamanni, convenere. De _Gallia_ vero Franci -qui super Rhenum habitant, Ribuarii, Liutharingi, coadunati sunt.’ The -two sets of Franks are again distinguished from the Latin or French -‘Franci.’ - -[11] See special treatise on the Themes in the third volume of the Bonn -edition. The Treatise which follows, ‘de Administrando Imperio,’ is -also full of geographical matter. - - - - -CHAPTER VII. - -THE ECCLESIASTICAL GEOGRAPHY OF WESTERN EUROPE. - - -♦Character of ecclesiastical geography.♦ - -The ecclesiastical geography of Western Europe was by this time -formed. The great ecclesiastical divisions were now almost everywhere -mapped out, and from hence they are more permanent than the political -divisions. ♦Permanence of the ecclesiastical divisions.♦ The -ecclesiastical geography in truth constantly preserves an earlier -political geography. ♦They represent older civil divisions.♦ The -ecclesiastical divisions were always mapped out according to the -political divisions of the time when they were established, and they -often remained unaltered while the political divisions went through -many revolutions. ♦Illustrations from England and France.♦ Thus -in France the dioceses represented the jurisdictions of the Roman -cities; in England they represented the ancient English kingdoms and -principalities. In both cases they outlived by many ages the political -divisions which they represented. While the political map was altered -over and over again, the ecclesiastical map remained down to quite -modern times, with hardly any change beyond the occasional division of -a large diocese or the occasional union of two smaller dioceses. Thus -the greater permanence of the ecclesiastical map often makes it useful -as a standard for reference in describing political changes. ♦Lyons and -Rheims.♦ To take an instance, the city of Lyons has been at different -times under Burgundian and under Frankish kings; it has been a free -city of the Empire and a city of the modern kingdom of France. But, -among all these changes, the Archbishop of Lyons has always remained -Primate of all the Gauls, while the Archbishop of Rheims has held a -wholly different position alongside of him as first prelate and first -peer of the modern kingdom of France. Paris meanwhile, the political -capital of the modern kingdom, remained till the seventeenth century -the seat of a simple bishoprick. - -In this way the ecclesiastical division will be found almost everywhere -to keep up the remembrance of an earlier political state of things. -♦Patriarchates, Provinces, Dioceses.♦ As the Empire became Christian, -it was mapped out into _Patriarchates_ as well as into Prefectures. -Under these were the metropolitan and episcopal districts, which in -after-times borrowed, though in a reverse order of dignity, the civil -titles of _provinces_ and _dioceses_. ♦Divisions within and without -the Empire.♦ As the Church carried her spiritual conquests beyond the -bounds of the Empire, new ecclesiastical districts were of course -formed in the newly converted countries. As a rule, every kingdom had -at least one archbishopric; the smaller principalities, provinces, -or other divisions became the dioceses of bishops. But the different -social conditions of southern and northern Europe caused a marked -difference in the ecclesiastical arrangements of the two regions. In -the South the bishop was bishop of a city; in the North he was bishop -of a tribe or a district. Within the Empire each city had its bishop. -Thus in Italy and Southern Gaul, where the cities were thickest on -the ground, the bishops were most numerous and their dioceses were -smallest. ♦Bishops of cities and of tribes.♦ In Northern Gaul the -cities are fewer and the dioceses larger, while outside the Empire, -the dioceses which represented a tribe or principality were larger -again. Also again, within the Empire the bishop, as bishop of a city, -always took his title from the city; outside the Empire, especially in -the British islands both Celtic and Teutonic, the bishop of a tribe or -principality bore a tribal or territorial title. - - -§ 1. _The Great Patriarchates._ - -♦The Patriarchates suggested by the Prefectures.♦ - -The highest ecclesiastical divisions, the Patriarchates, though they -did not exactly answer to the Prefectures, were clearly suggested -by them. And whenever the boundaries of the Patriarchates departed -from the boundaries of the Prefectures, they came nearer to the great -divisions of race and language. For our purpose, it is enough to -take the Patriarchates, as they grew up, after the establishment of -Christianity, in the course of the fourth and fifth centuries. The -four older ones were seated at the _Old_ and the _New Rome_, and at -the two great Eastern cities of _Antioch_ and _Alexandria_. Out of -the patriarchate of Antioch the small patriarchate of _Jerusalem_ was -afterwards taken. This last seems a piece of sentimental geography; -the other divisions were eminently practical. ♦Rome.♦ Whether we look -on the original jurisdiction of the Bishop of the Old _Rome_ as taking -in the whole _prefecture_ of Italy or only the _diocese_ of Italy, it -is certain that it was gradually extended over the two prefectures -of Italy and Gaul. ♦Extended beyond the Empire.♦ That is, it took in -the Latin part of the Empire, and it spread thence over the Teutonic -converts in the West, as well as over Hungary and the Western Slaves. -♦Constantinople.♦ The Patriarchate of _Constantinople_ or New Rome took -in the Prefecture of Illyricum, and three dioceses in the Prefecture -of the East, those of Thrace, Asia, and Pontus. This territory pretty -well answers to the extent of the Greek language and influence. The -two Illyrian dioceses, possibly through some confusion arising out of -the two meanings of the word _Illyricum_, were claimed by the Popes of -Old Rome; but, when the Empires and Churches parted asunder, Macedonia -and Greece were not likely to cleave to the Western division. ♦Its -relation to the Eastern Empire and to the Slaves.♦ In course of time -the Byzantine patriarchate became nearly coextensive with the Byzantine -Empire, and it became the centre of conversion to the Slaves of the -East, just as the patriarchate of Old Rome was to the Teutons of the -West. ♦Antioch. | Jerusalem.♦ The patriarchate of _Antioch_, before its -dismemberment in favour of the tiny patriarchate of _Jerusalem_, took -in the whole diocese of the East, and the churches beyond the limits -of the Empire in that direction. ♦Alexandria.♦ The patriarchate of -_Alexandria_ answered to the diocese of Egypt, with the churches beyond -the Empire on that side, specially the _Abyssinian_ church, which has -kept its nationality to our own time. That these Eastern patriarchates -have been for ages disputed by claimants belonging to different sects -of Christianity is a fact which concerns both theology and history, -but does not concern geography. Whether the see was in Orthodox or -heretical—that is commonly in national—hands, the see and its diocese, -the geographical extent on the map, remained the same. - -♦Later nominal patriarchates.♦ - -These then are the five great patriarchates which formed the most -ancient geographical divisions of the Church. In later times the -name patriarchate has been more loosely applied. As the Roman bishop -grew into something more than the Patriarch of the West, the title -of Patriarch was given to several metropolitans, sometimes, as far -as one can see, without any particular reason. ♦Lisbon, Venice, -Aquileia.♦ The title has been borne by the Bishops of _Lisbon_ and -_Venice_, and specially by the Metropolitans of _Aquileia_. These last -assumed the title during a time of separation from the Roman see. But -nominal patriarchates of this kind must be carefully distinguished -from the five great churches to which the name was anciently attached. -♦Patriarchate of Moscow. 1587.♦ In the East the name was never extended -beyond its four original holders, till a new patriarchate of _Moscow_ -arose in Russia, to mark the greatest spiritual conquest of the -Orthodox Church. Of the four original Eastern patriarchates it is only -that of Constantinople which plays much part in later history. The -seats of the other three fell into the hands of the Saracens in the -very beginning of their conquests. - - -§ 2. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Italy._ - -♦Great numbers of the Italian bishoprics.♦ - -In no part of Christendom do the bishoprics lie so thick upon the -ground as in Italy, and especially in the southern part. But from -that very fact it follows that the ecclesiastical divisions of Italy -are of less historical importance than those of most other Western -countries. ♦Small size of the provinces.♦ In southern Italy above -all, the bishoprics were so numerous, and the dioceses therefore -so small, that the archiepiscopal provinces were hardly so large -as the episcopal dioceses in more northern lands. So it is in the -islands; Sicily contained four provinces and Sardinia three. ♦Effect -of the commonwealths on the position of the prelates.♦ The peculiar -characteristics of Italian history also hindered ecclesiastical -geography from being of the same importance as elsewhere. Where every -city became an independent commonwealth, the Bishop, and even the -Metropolitan, sank to a lower rank than they held in the lands where -each prelate was a great feudal lord. - -It follows then that there are only a few of the archbishoprics -and bishoprics of Italy which at all stand out in general history. -♦Relation to the Roman See.♦ The growth of the Roman see also more -distinctly overshadowed the Italian bishops than it did those of other -lands. ♦Rivals of Rome.♦ The bishoprics which have most historical -importance are those which at one time or another stood out in rivalry -or opposition to Rome. ♦Milan. | Aquileia.♦ Such was the great see of -_Milan_, whose province took in a crowd of Lombard bishoprics; such was -the patriarchal see of _Aquileia_, whose metropolitan jurisdiction took -in Como at one end and the Istrian Pola at the other. The patriarchs of -Aquileia, standing as they did on the march of the Italian, Teutonic, -and Slavonic lands, grew, unlike most of the Italian prelates, -into powerful temporal princes. ♦Ravenna.♦ _Ravenna_ was the head -of a smaller province than either Milan or Aquileia; but _Ravenna_ -too stands out as one of the churches which kept up for a while an -independent position in the face of the growing power of Rome. Milan -and Ravenna, in short, never lost the memory of their Imperial days; -and Aquileia took advantage, first of a theological difference, and -secondly of its temporal position as the great border see. - -♦The immediate Roman Province.♦ - -In the rest of Italy the case is different. Rome herself was the -immediate head of a large province stretching from sea to sea. -Within this the _suburbicarian_ sees, those close around Rome, stood -in a special and closer relation to the patriarchal see itself. -♦Metropolitan sees of central Italy.♦ The famous cities of _Genoa_, -_Bologna_, _Pisa_, _Florence_, and _Sienna_, were also metropolitan -sees, though their ecclesiastical dignity is quite overshadowed by -their civic greatness. _Lucca_ has been added to the same list in -modern times. ♦Pisa and Genoa.♦ The provinces of Pisa and Genoa -are notable as having been extended into the island of Corsica -after its recovery from the Saracens. The history and extent of the -Italian dioceses is, with these few exceptions, a matter almost -wholly of local ecclesiastical concern. ♦The southern province.♦ In -the south and in Sicily the endless archiepiscopal sees preserve -the names of some famous cities, as _Capua_—the later Capua on the -site of Casilinum—_Tarentum_, _Bari_, and others. But some even of -the metropolitan churches are fixed in places of quite secondary -importance, and the simple bishoprics are endless. - - -§ 3. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Gaul and Germany._ - -By taking a single view of the ecclesiastical arrangements of the whole -of the Western Empire on this side of the Alps and the Pyrenees, some -instructive lessons may be learned. Such a way of looking at the map -will bring out more strongly the differences between bishoprics of -earlier and later foundation. ♦Gaulish and German dioceses.♦ And, if -we take the name of Gaul in the old geographical sense, taking in the -German lands west of the Rhine which formed part of the older Empire, -we shall find that several ecclesiastical provinces may be called -either Gaulish or German. With the boundaries of the French kingdom we -have no concern, except so far as the boundary between the Eastern and -Western kingdoms of the Franks did to some extent follow ecclesiastical -lines. Modern annexations of course have had no regard to them. - -♦Province of South Gaul.♦ - -On first crossing the Alps from Italy, we find the ecclesiastical -phænomena of Italy continued in the lands nearest to it. The two -provinces of _Tarantaise_ (answering to the civil division of _Alpes -Penninæ_) and _Embrun_ (_Alpes Maritimæ_) which take in the mountain -region between Italy and Gaul, are of small size, though of course in -the actual mountain lands the bishoprics are less thick on the ground. -♦Tarantaise.♦ The Tarantasian province contained only three suffragan -sees, _Sitten_, _Aosta_, and _St. John of Maurienne_, three bishoprics -which now belong to three distinct political powers. ♦Embrun.♦ But -in the southern part of the province of Embrun, which reaches to the -sea, the bishops’ sees are thick on the ground, just as they are in -Italy. ♦Aix and Arles.♦ So they are in the small provinces of _Aix_ -(_Narbonensis Secunda_) and _Arles_. But, as soon as we get out of -Provence into the parts of Gaul which were less thoroughly Romanized, -and where cities, and consequently bishoprics, lay less close together, -the phænomena of the ecclesiastical map begin to change. ♦Vienne. -| Narbonne.♦ The Provençal provinces of Aix and Aries are bounded to -the north and west by those of _Vienne_ (which with Arles answers -nearly to the civil _Viennensis_) and _Narbonne_ (answering nearly to -_Narbonensis Secunda_). These provinces are of much greater size, and -the suffragan sees are much further apart. ♦Auch.♦ To the west lies -_Auch_, answering to the oldest Aquitaine or _Novempopulana_, and to -the north of these, in the remainder of Gaul, the original provinces -are of still greater size. Most of them answer very nearly to the older -civil divisions. ♦Bourges, Bourdeaux, Lyons, Rouen, Tours, and Sens.♦ -_Aquitania Prima_ is the province of _Bourges_, _Aquitania Secunda_ -that of _Bourdeaux_. _Lugdunensis Prima_, _Secunda_, _Tertia_, and -_Quarta_, answer to _Lyons_, _Rouen_, _Tours_, and _Sens_. Of these -Lyons, as having been the temporal capital, became the seat of the -Primate of all the Gauls. The province of Rouen too answers very -nearly to the duchy of which that metropolis became the capital; its -Archbishop still bears the title of Primate of Normandy. - -These are the oldest ecclesiastical arrangements, closely following -the civil divisions of the Empire. These divisions lived through the -Teutonic conquests; and, though here and there a see was translated -from one city to another, they were not seriously interfered with till -the fourteenth century. ♦Foundation of the provinces of Toulouse and -Alby, 1322.♦ Pope John the Twenty-second raised the see of _Toulouse_ -in the province of Narbonne and that of _Alby_ in the province of -Bourges to metropolitan rank, thus forming two new provinces. He also -founded new bishoprics in several towns in these two new provinces -and in that of Narbonne. ♦Avignon, 1475.♦ In the next century Sixtus -the Fourth made the church of _Avignon_ metropolitan. These changes -help to give this whole district more of the character of Italy and -Provence than originally belonged to it. ♦Paris, 1622.♦ Lastly, in -the seventeenth century the province of _Sens_ was also divided, and -the church of _Paris_ became metropolitan. Some of these changes show -how closely the ecclesiastical divisions followed the oldest civil -divisions, and how slowly they were affected by changes in the civil -divisions. When Gaul was first mapped out, Tolosa was of less account -than Narbo; the Parisii and their city were of less account than the -great nation of the _Senones_. Tolosa became the royal city of the -Goth; but it did not rise to the highest ecclesiastical rank till ages -after the Gothic kingdom had passed away. Paris, after having been -several times a momentary seat of dominion, became the birthplace of -the modern French kingdom. But it had been the continuous seat of -kings for more than six hundred years before it became the seat of an -archbishop. - - * * * * * - -As we draw nearer to German ground, the ecclesiastical boundaries -are found to have been somewhat more strongly affected by political -changes. ♦Besançon.♦ The ecclesiastical province of _Besançon_ answers -to _Maxima Sequanorum_; but it is not quite of the same extent; the -boundary of the German and Burgundian kingdoms passed through the -Roman province: its eastern part is therefore found in a German -diocese. ♦Rheims.♦ The province of _Rheims_ answers nearly, but not -quite, to _Belgica Secunda_: for the ecclesiastical province took in -some territory to the east of the Scheld. Here again the boundary of -the Eastern and Western kingdoms passed through the province. The -metropolitan city lay within the region which became the kingdom -of France, and it became the ecclesiastical head of the kingdom. -Yet one of its suffragan sees, that of _Cambray_, was a city of the -Empire. ♦Trier, 785.♦ The province of _Trier_ took in no part of the -Western kingdom; but, besides the old province of _Belgica Prima_, it -stretched away over the German lands even beyond the Rhine. ♦Köln, -785.♦ When the old Gaulish bishoprick of _Colonia Agrippina_ became -metropolitan under Charles the Great, its province took in nearly all -the old Gaulish province of _Germania Secunda_; but it too came to -stretch beyond the Rhine and beyond the Weser. These two metropolitan -sees, Trier and Köln, were old Gaulish bishopricks of the frontier -land. ♦Mainz, 747.♦ The see of _Mainz_ has no certain historical being -before Boniface in the eighth century. It too was founded on what was -geographically Gaulish soil; but the greater part of its vast extent -was strictly German. Three only of its suffragans, _Worms_, _Speyer_, -and _Argentoratum_ or _Strassburg_, were even geographically Gaulish. -No province has had more fluctuating boundaries: the elevation of -Köln to metropolitan rank cut it short to the west, while it grew -indefinitely to the north, south, and east, as its boundaries were -enlarged by conversion and conquest. ♦Prag, 1344.♦ To the east it was -cut short in the fourteenth century when the kingdom of Bohemia and its -dependencies were formed into the ecclesiastical province of _Prag_. -♦Bamberg, 1007.♦ The famous bishoprick of _Bamberg_, locally in the -province of Mainz, was from the beginning immediately dependent on the -see of Rome. - -♦The three ecclesiastical Electors and Arch-chancellors.♦ - -These three great archbishopricks of the frontier land, all of whose -sees were on the Gaulish side of the Rhine, remained distinguished by -their temporal rank during the whole life of the German kingdom. All -the German prelates became princes; but only these three were Electors. -The prelates of these three were the Arch-chancellors of the three -Imperial kingdoms, Mainz of Germany, Köln of Italy, Trier of Gaul. -But, as the Frankish or German kingdom spread to the north-east, new -ecclesiastical provinces were formed. ♦Salzburg, 798.♦ The bishoprick -of _Salzburg_ became metropolitan under Charles the Great, with a -province stretching away to the East towards his conquests from the -Avars. ♦Bremen or Hamburg, 788.♦ The bishoprick of _Bremen_, another -foundation of Charles the Great, was transferred under his son to -_Hamburg_, as a metropolitan see which was designed to be a missionary -centre for the Scandinavian nations. ♦1223.♦ After some fluctuations, -the see was finally settled at Bremen, as the metropolis of a province, -which had now become in no way Scandinavian, but partly Old-Saxon, -partly Wendish. ♦Magdeburg, 968.♦ Lastly, Otto the Great founded the -metropolitan see of _Magdeburg_ on the Slavonic march. Thus the German -kingdom formed six ecclesiastical provinces, all of vast extent as -compared with those of Southern Europe, and with their suffragan sees -few and far apart. The difference is here clearly marked between the -earlier sees which arose from the very beginning in the Roman cities, -and the sees of later foundation which were gradually founded as new -lands were brought under the dominion of the Empire and the Church. -Still the old tradition went on so far that each Bishop had his see in -a city, and took his name from that city. Though the German dioceses -were of large extent, yet none of the German bishoprics were in -strictness territorial. - -♦Modern ecclesiastical divisions of Germany and France.♦ - -In no part of Christendom have the ecclesiastical divisions been more -completely upset in modern times than they have been in Germany. In -France the number of dioceses was greatly lessened by the _Concordat_ -under the first Buonaparte; but the main ecclesiastical landmarks were -to a great extent respected. In Germany, on the other hand, no trace -of them is left. The country has been mapped out afresh to suit the -boundaries of patched-up modern kingdoms. Mainz and Trier are no longer -metropolitan sees, while the modern map shows such novelties as an -Archbishop of München and an Archbishop of Freiburg. ♦Changes of Philip -the Second in the Netherlands.♦ Long before, under Philip the Second of -Spain, those parts of the German kingdom which had become practically -detached under the Dukes of Burgundy underwent a complete change in -their ecclesiastical divisions. ♦Cambray, Mechlin, Utrecht.♦ _Cambray_ -and _Mechlin_ in the province of Rheims, and _Utrecht_ in the province -of Köln, became metropolitan sees. Modern political changes have made -these three cities members of three distinct political powers. - - -§ 4. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Spain._ - -♦Peculiarities of Spanish ecclesiastical geography.♦ - -The ecclesiastical history of the Spanish peninsula presents phænomena -of a different kind from those of Italy, Gaul, or Germany. In Italy -and Gaul the ecclesiastical divisions go on uninterruptedly from the -earliest days of Christianity. Western Germany must count for these -purposes as part of Gaul. In eastern Germany the ecclesiastical -divisions were formed in later times, as Christianity was spread -over the country. In Spain the country must have been mapped out for -ecclesiastical purposes at least as early as Gaul. ♦Old divisions lost, -and mapped out afresh after the recovery from the Saracens.♦ But the -Mahometan conquest of the greater part of the country, followed by the -Christian reconquest, caused the old ecclesiastical lines to be wiped -out, and new divisions had to be traced out afresh as the land was -gradually won back. ♦Ecclesiastical divisions under the West-Goths.♦ -The ecclesiastical divisions of Spain in the time of the Gothic kingdom -simply reproduce the civil divisions of the period, as those civil -divisions are only a slight modification of the Roman provinces. -_Lusitania_ and _Bætica_ survived, with a slight change of frontier, -both as civil and as ecclesiastical divisions. _Tarraconensis_ was for -both purposes divided into three, _Tarraconensis_, _Carthagenensis_, -and _Gallæcia_. As the land was won back, and as new ecclesiastical -provinces were formed, the number was greatly increased, and some of -them found their way to new sites. ♦Tarragona, Zaragoza, Valencia.♦ -Thus the Tarraconensian province was again divided into three, those -of _Tarragona_, _Zaragoza_, and _Valencia_, answering nearly to the -kingdom of Aragon. ♦Toledo.♦ New Carthage lost its metropolitan rank in -favour of the great metropolis of _Toledo_, which numbered _Cordova_ -and _Valladolid_ among its suffragans. ♦Compostella, Burgos, Seville, -and Granada. | Braga, Evora, Lisbon.♦ Leaving out some anomalous -districts, the rest of the peninsula formed the provinces of St. -James of _Compostella_, _Burgos_, _Seville_, _Granada_, with _Braga_, -_Evora_, and the patriarchal see of _Lisbon_, the last three answering -to the kingdom of Portugal. And it must be remembered that the Pyrenees -did not form an eternal boundary in ecclesiastical, any more than in -civil geography. ♦Dioceses of Pampeluna and Bayonne.♦ As the kingdom of -Navarre stretched on both sides of the mountains, so did the diocese -of _Pampeluna_; and to the west of it the Gaulish diocese of _Bayonne_ -stretched on what is now Spanish ground. All these are survivals of a -time when, to use the phrase of a later day, there were no Pyrenees, or -when at least the same rulers, first Gothic and then Saracen, reigned -on both sides of them. - - -§ 5. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of the British Islands._ - -♦The British islands.♦ - -The historical phænomena of the British islands have points in common -with more than one of the continental countries. In a very rough and -general view of things, Britain has some analogies with Spain. It is -not altogether without reason that in some legendary stories the names -of Saxons and Saracens get confounded. In both cases a land which had -been Christian was overrun by conquerors of another creed; in both a -Christian people held their ground in a part of the country; and in -both the whole land was won back to Christianity, though by different -and even opposite processes in the two cases. ♦The Celtic episcopate.♦ -But there is no reason to believe that the Celtic churches in Britain -and Ireland had anything like the same complete ecclesiastical -organization as the Spanish churches under the Goths. ♦Tribal -episcopacy.♦ The Celtic episcopate was of an irregular and anomalous -kind, and, in its most intelligible shape, it was, as was natural under -the circumstances of the country, not a city episcopate, hardly a -territorial episcopate, but one strictly tribal. This is nearly the -only fact in the history of the early Celtic churches which is of any -importance for our purpose. It might be too much to say that traces of -this peculiarity were handed on from the Celtic to the English Church. -The little likeness that there is between them is rather due to the -fact that in Northern Europe generally, whether Celtic or Teutonic, -a strictly city episcopate like that of Italy and Gaul was something -which in the nature of things could not be. - -In truth the antiquities of the Celtic churches may fairly be left to -be matter of local or of special ecclesiastical inquiry. Their effect -on history is slight; their effect on historical geography is still -slighter. For our purpose the ecclesiastical geography of Britain may -be looked on as beginning with the mission of Augustine. The English -Church was formed, and the Welsh, Scottish, and Irish Churches were -reconstructed, partly under its authority, altogether after its model. -♦Schemes of Gregory the Great.♦ In the original scheme of Gregory the -Great, Britain was clearly meant to be divided into two ecclesiastical -provinces nearly equal in extent. ♦Two equal provinces in Britain.♦ -The Celtic churches were to be brought under the same ecclesiastical -obedience as the heathen English. As Wales was to form part of the -lot of the southern metropolitan, so Scotland was to form part of the -lot of the northern. This scheme was never fully carried out. Wales -was indeed brought into full submission to Canterbury; but Scotland -was never brought into the same full submission to York. ♦Relation of -the Scottish Bishops to York.♦ The allegiance of the Scottish sees to -their Northumbrian metropolis was at all times very precarious, and -it was in the end formally thrown off altogether. ♦Suffragan sees -of Canterbury and York.♦ Of this came the singular disproportion in -the territorial extent of the two English ecclesiastical provinces. -Canterbury, since the English Church was thoroughly organized, has -had a number of suffragans which would be unusual anywhere on the -continent, while York has always had comparatively few, and for a -considerable time had practically one only. - -♦Foundation of the existing dioceses.♦ - -The systematic mapping out of Britain for ecclesiastical purposes, as -designed by Gregory, was therefore never fully carried out. The actual -provinces and dioceses were gradually formed, as the various English -existing kingdoms embraced Christianity. As a rule, each kingdom or -independent principality became a diocese. ♦Territorial bishoprics♦ -And, except in the case of a few sees fixed in cities which kept -on something of old Roman memories, the bishops were more commonly -called from the people who formed their flock, than from the cities -which in some cases contained their chairs. For in many cases the -_bishop-settle_, as our forefathers called it, was not placed in a city -at all, but in some rural or even solitary spot. It was not till the -time of the Norman Conquest that a movement began for systematically -placing the ecclesiastical sees in the chief towns; from that time the -civic title altogether displaces the territorial. - -♦Canterbury.♦ - -As Kent was the first part of Teutonic Britain to accept Christianity, -the metropolitan see of the south was fixed at _Canterbury_, the -capital of that kingdom. It was thus fixed in a city which has at -no time held that temporal preeminence which has in different ages -belonged to York, Winchester, and London. ♦Rochester. | London.♦ -After Canterbury the earliest formed sees were _Rochester_ for the -West-Kentish kingdom, and _London_ for the East-Saxons. ♦Dorchester -or Winchester. Sherborne, Wells, Ramsbury.♦ The conversion of the -West-Saxons led to the foundation of the great diocese whose see was -first at _Dorchester_ on the Thames and then at _Winchester_, and from -which the sees of _Sherborne_, _Wells_, and _Ramsbury_ were gradually -parted off. ♦Elmham. | Dorchester or Lincoln.♦ The East-Angles formed a -diocese with its see at _Elmham_; the Middle-Angles settled down, after -some shiftings, into the vast diocese stretching from the Thames to the -Humber, whose see, first at _Dorchester_, was afterwards translated to -_Lincoln_. ♦Worcester, Hereford, Lichfield.♦ The West-Mercian lands -formed the dioceses of the Hwiccas at _Worcester_, of the Magesætas at -_Hereford_, and the great diocese of _Lichfield_, stretching northward -to the Ribble. The South-Saxons, whose see kept its tribal name down -to the Norman Conquest, had their see first at _Selsey_, and then at -_Chichester_. ♦Exeter.♦ Devonshire and Cornwall, after forming two -dioceses, were, just before the Norman Conquest, united under the -single see of _Exeter_. ♦The Welsh Sees.♦ The Conquest too brought -about the more complete submission of the four Welsh sees, _Saint -David’s_, _Llandaff_, _Bangor_, and _Saint Asaph_. ♦Salisbury, 1078. -| Ely, 1109.♦ To the times just before and just after the Conquest -belong the union of Sherborne and Ramsbury to form the diocese of -_Salisbury_, and the dismemberment of the huge diocese of Lincoln by -the foundation of an episcopal see at _Ely_. Thus the province of -Canterbury with its suffragan sees was gradually organized in the form -which it kept from the reign of Henry the First to that of Henry the -Eighth. - -Meanwhile in the northern province things never reached the same -regular organization. ♦York. | Lindisfarn | or Durham, | Carlisle, -1133.♦ York, after some changes, took the position of a metropolitan -see, with one suffragan, first at _Lindisfarn_ and afterwards at -_Durham_, and another at _Carlisle_. ♦Saint Andrews, 1471. | Glasgow. -1492.♦ As the Scottish dioceses broke off from York, they first -acknowledged a kind of precedence in the Bishop of _St. Andrews_; but -it was not till a far later time that Scotland was divided into two -regular ecclesiastical provinces with their sees at _St. Andrews_ and -_Glasgow_. ♦Edinburgh. 1634.♦ Several of the Scottish dioceses always -kept their territorial titles; their sees were mostly fixed in small -places; and of the chief seats of Scottish royalty, Dunfermline and -Stirling never attained episcopal rank at all, and _Edinburgh_ only -attained it in quite modern times. ♦The four Irish provinces.♦ The -endless and fluctuating bishoprics of Ireland were in the twelfth -century gathered into the four provinces of _Armagh_, _Dublin_, -_Cashel_, and _Tuam_, answering to the temporal divisions of _Ulster_, -_Leinster_, _Munster_, and _Connaught_. It is to be noticed that, in -marked contradiction to continental practice, the chief see in all the -three British kingdoms has been placed in a city which has never held -the first temporal rank. Canterbury, St. Andrews, Armagh, were never -the temporal heads of England, Scotland, and Ireland. York, Dublin, -Glasgow, though metropolitan sees, were of secondary rank, and London -and Winchester were ordinary bishoprics. - - -§ 6. _The Ecclesiastical Divisions of Northern and Eastern Europe._ - -♦Ecclesiastical division in the converted lands.♦ - -In the other parts of Europe which formed part of the communion of -the Latin Church, the ecclesiastical divisions mark the steps by -which Christianity was spread either by conversion or conquest. They -continued the process of which the ecclesiastical organization of -Eastern Germany was the beginning. As a rule, they strictly follow -the political divisions of the age in which they were founded. ♦The -Scandinavian provinces.♦ As the Church in the Scandinavian kingdoms -became more settled, its bishoprics parted off from their allegiance -to Hamburg or Bremen, and each of the three kingdoms formed an -ecclesiastical province, whose boundaries exactly answered to the -earlier boundaries of the kingdoms. ♦Lund, 1151.♦ Denmark had its -metropolitan see at _Lund_, in that part of the Danish kingdom which -geographically forms part of the greater Scandinavian peninsula, and -which is now Swedish territory. Its boundary to the south was the -Eider, the old frontier of Denmark and the Empire. The suffragan -sees of this province, among which the specially royal bishopric of -_Roeskild_ is the most famous, naturally lie thicker on the ground -than they do in the wilder regions of the two more northern kingdoms. -But the Baltic conquests of Denmark also placed part of the isle of -Rügen in the province of Lund and the diocese of Roeskild, and also -gave the Danish metropolitan a far more distant suffragan in the Bishop -of _Revel_ on the Finnish gulf. ♦Upsala.♦ The metropolitan see of -Sweden was placed at _Upsala_, and the province was carried by Swedish -conquest to the east of the Gulf of Bothnia, where the single bishopric -of _Abo_ took in the whole of the Swedish territory in that region. -♦Trondhjem.♦ In the like sort, the Norwegian province of _Nidaros_ or -_Trondhjem_ stretched far over the Ocean to the distant Colonies and -dependencies of Norway in Iceland, Greenland, and Man. - -♦Poland, &c.♦ - -The conversion of Poland and the conquest of Prussia and Livonia -brought other lands within the pale of the Latin Church and her -ecclesiastical organization. ♦Gnezna.♦ The original kingdom of Poland -formed the province of _Gnezna_, a province whose boundaries were for -some centuries very fluctuating, according as Poland or the Empire was -stronger in the Slavonic lands on the Baltic. Each change of temporal -dominion caused the ecclesiastical frontiers of Gnezna and Magdeburg -to advance or fall back. The Silesian bishopric of _Breslau_ always -kept its old relation to the Polish metropolis, except so far as it -was held to be placed under the immediate superiority of Rome. The -later union of Lithuania to the Polish kingdom added a _Lithuanian_ -and a _Samogitian_ bishopric to the original Polish province. ♦Riga. -| Leopol.♦ The earlier Polish conquests from Russia formed a new -province, the Latin province of _Leopol_ or _Lemberg_, a province whose -southern boundaries advanced and fell back along with the boundary of -the kingdom of which it formed a part. The conquests of the Teutonic -knights in Prussia and Livonia formed the ecclesiastical province of -_Riga_, which was divided into two parts by the province of Gnezna in -its greater extent. - - * * * * * - -It will be seen that some of the ecclesiastical divisions last -mentioned belong to a later stage of European history than the point -which we have reached in our general narrative. But it seemed better -to continue the survey over the whole of the Latin Church in Europe, -as the later foundations are a mere carrying out of the same process -which began in the earlier. The ecclesiastical divisions represent the -political divisions of the time, whether those political divisions are -Roman provinces or independent Teutonic or Slavonic kingdoms. But the -ecclesiastical divisions, when once fixed, were more lasting than the -temporal divisions, and many disputes have arisen out of political -changes which transferred one part of a province or diocese from one -political allegiance to another. Since the splitting-up of the Western -Church, the old ecclesiastical organization has altogether vanished -from some countries, and has been greatly modified in others, in -Germany most of all. - -It seems hardly needful for the understanding of European history -to carry our ecclesiastical survey beyond the limits of the Latin -Church. One of the Polish provinces, that of Leopol, has carried us -to the borderland of the Eastern and Western Churches, and, if we -pass southwards into the Magyar and South-Slavonic lands, we find -ourselves still more distinctly on an ecclesiastical march. ♦Hungary. -| Strigonium. | Kolocza.♦ The Kingdom of Hungary formed two Latin -provinces, those of _Strigonium_ or Gran, and of _Kolocza_; the latter -has a very fluctuating boundary to the south. ♦Dalmatia.♦ The Dalmatian -coast, the borderland of all powers and of all religions, formed three -Latin provinces. ♦Zara.♦ _Jadera_ or _Zara_, on her peninsula, was the -head of a small province chiefly made up of islands. ♦Spalato.♦ Another -metropolitan had his throne in the very mausoleum of Diocletian, and -the province of _Spalato_ stretched some way inland over the lands -which have so often changed masters. ♦Ragusa.♦ To the south, the see -of _Ragusa_, the furthest outpost of Latin Christendom properly so -called, had, besides its own coasts and islands, an indefinite frontier -inland. This marks the furthest extent to which it is needful to -trace our ecclesiastical map. It is the furthest point at which Latin -Christianity can be said to be in any sense at home. The ecclesiastical -organization of the crusading and Venetian conquests further to the -south and east have but little bearing on historical geography. But, -within the bounds of Latin Christendom, the ecclesiastical divisions -both of the provinces and dioceses within the older Empire and what -we may call the missionary provinces beyond it, are of the highest -importance, and they should always be kept in mind alongside of the -political geography. - - - - -CHAPTER VIII. - -THE IMPERIAL KINGDOMS. - - -♦The Kingdom of the _East-Franks_ or of _Germany_.♦ - -The division of 887 parted off from the general mass of the Frankish -dominions a distinct _Kingdom of the East-Franks_, the acknowledged -head of the Frankish kingdoms, which, as being distinguished from its -fellows as the _Regnum Teutonicum_, may be best spoken of as a _Kingdom -of Germany_. ♦Merging of the Kingdom in the Empire.♦ But the lasting -acquisition of the Italian and Imperial crowns by the German kings, and -their later acquisition of the kingdom of Burgundy, gradually tended -to obscure the notion of a distinct German kingdom. The idea of the -Kingdom was merged in the idea of the Empire of which it formed a part. -Later events too tended in the same direction. ♦The Emperors lose Italy -and Burgundy, but keep Germany.♦ The Italian kingdom gradually fell -off from any practical allegiance to its nominal king the Emperor. So -did the greater part of the Burgundian kingdom. Meanwhile, though the -powers of the Emperors as German kings were constantly lessening, their -authority was never wholly thrown off till the present century. The -Emperors in short lost their kingdoms of Italy and Burgundy, and kept -their kingdom of Germany. In the fifteenth century the coronation of -the Emperor at Rome had become a mere ceremony, carrying with it no -real authority in Italy. In the sixteenth century the ceremony itself -went out of use. ♦Charles the Fourth crowned at Arles, 1365.♦ The -Burgundian coronation at Arles became irregular at a very early time, -and it is last heard of in the fourteenth century. ♦1792.♦ But the -election of the German kings at Frankfurt, their coronation, in earlier -times at Aachen, afterwards at Frankfurt, went on regularly till the -last years of the eighteenth century. ♦Endurance of the German Diet.♦ -So, while the national assemblies of Italy and Burgundy can hardly be -said to have been regularly held at all, while they went altogether -out of use at an early time, the national assembly of Germany, in one -shape or another, never ceased as long as there was any one calling -himself Emperor or German King. The tendency in all three kingdoms was -to split up into separate principalities and commonwealths. ♦Comparison -of Germany, Italy, and Burgundy.♦ But in Germany the principalities and -commonwealths always kept up some show of connexion with one another, -some show of allegiance to their Imperial head. In Italy and Burgundy -they parted off altogether. Some became absolutely independent; were -incorporated with other kingdoms or became their distant dependencies; -some were even held by the Emperors themselves in some other character, -and not by virtue either of their Empire or of their local kingship. -♦The Empire identified with Germany.♦ Thus, as the Empire became more -and more nearly coextensive with the German Kingdom, the distinction -between the two was gradually forgotten. The small parts of the other -kingdoms which kept any trace of their Imperial allegiance came to be -looked on as parts of Germany. ♦The Empire becomes a Confederation.♦ In -short, the Western Empire became a German kingdom; or rather it became -a German Confederation with a royal head, a confederation which still -kept up the forms and titles of the Empire. ♦1530.♦ As no German king -received an Imperial coronation after Charles the Fifth, it might in -strictness be said that the Empire came to an end at his abdication. -♦1556.♦ And in truth from that date the Empire practically became a -purely German power. But, as the Imperial forms and titles still went -on, the Western Empire must be looked on as surviving, in the form of a -German kingdom or confederation, down to its final fall. - -♦The German Kingdom represents the Empire.♦ - -The Kingdom of Germany then may be looked on as representing the -Western Empire, as being what was left of the Western Empire after -the other parts of it had fallen away. But the German kingdom itself -underwent, though in a smaller degree, the same fate as the other -two Imperial kingdoms. ♦Separation of parts of the Kingdom.♦ While -all Italy and all Burgundy, with some very trifling exceptions, fell -away from the Empire, the mass of Germany remained Imperial. Still -large parts of Germany were lost to the Empire no less than Italy and -Burgundy. A considerable territory on the western and south-western -frontier of Germany gradually fell away. Part of this territory has -grown into independent states; part has been incorporated with the -French kingdom. The Swiss Confederation has grown up on lands partly -German, partly Burgundian, partly Italian, but of which the oldest and -greatest part belonged to the German kingdom. The Confederation of the -United Provinces, represented by the modern kingdom of the Netherlands, -lay wholly[12] within the old German kingdom: so did by far the greater -part of the modern kingdom of Belgium. ♦Modern Austria.♦ In our own -day the same tendency has been shewn in south-eastern as well as -south-western Germany; several members of the ancient kingdom have -fallen away to form part of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy. ♦Extension -of Germany to the north-east.♦ But on the northern and north-eastern -frontier the tendency to extension, with some fluctuations, has gone -on from the beginning of the kingdom to our own day. ♦Geographical -contrast of the earlier and later Empire.♦ This tendency to lose -territory to the west and south, and to gain territory to the east and -north, had the effect of gradually cutting off the Western Empire, -as represented by the German kingdom, from any close geographical -connexion with the earlier Empire of which it was the historical -continuation. The Holy Roman Empire, at the time of its final fall, -contained but little territory which had formed part of the Empire of -Trajan. It contained nothing which had formed part of the Empire of -Justinian, save some small scraps of territory in the north-eastern -corner of the old Italian kingdom. - - -§ 1. _The Kingdom of Germany._ - -♦Change in the geography and nomenclature of Germany.♦ - -In tracing out, for our present purpose, the geographical revolutions -of Germany, it will be enough to look at them, as far as may be, mainly -in their European aspect. Owing to the gradual way in which the various -members of the Empire grew into practical sovereignty—owing to the -constant division of principalities among many members of the same -family—no country has undergone so many internal geographical changes -as Germany has. In few countries also has the nomenclature shifted in -a more singular way. ♦Ancient and modern Saxony and Bavaria.♦ To take -two obvious examples, the modern kingdom of _Saxony_ has nothing but -its name in common with the Saxony which was brought under the Frankish -dominion by Charles the Great. The modern kingdom of _Bavaria_ has a -considerable territory in common with the ancient Bavaria; but it has -gained so much at one end and lost so much at the other that the two -cannot be said to be in any practical sense the same country. ♦Uses of -the name Austria.♦ The name of _Austria_ has shifted from the eastern -part of the old _Francia_ to the German mark against the Magyar, and -it has lately wandered altogether beyond the modern German frontier. -♦Burgundy.♦ The name of _Burgundy_ has borne endless meanings, both -within the Empire and beyond it. ♦Prussia.♦ Lastly, the ruling state -of modern Germany, a state stretching across the whole land from -east to west, strangely bears the name of the conquered and extinct -_Prussian_ race. Many of these changes affect the history of Europe -as well as the history of Germany; but many of the endless changes -among the smaller members of the Empire are matters of purely local -interest, which belong to the historical geography of Germany only, and -which claim no place in the historical geography of Europe. I shall -endeavour therefore in the present section, first to trace carefully -the shiftings of the German frontier as regards other powers, and then -to bring out such, and such only, of the internal changes as have a -bearing on the general history of Europe. - - * * * * * - -♦Extent of the Kingdom.♦ - -The extent of the German kingdom as it stood after the division of -887 has been roughly traced already. ♦Boundaries under the Ottos, -936-1002.♦ It will now be well to go over its frontiers somewhat more -minutely, as they stood at the time of final separation between the -Empire and the West-Frankish kingdom, the time of final union between -the Empire and the East-Frankish kingdom. This marks the great age of -the Saxon Ottos. ♦Boundary towards the West.♦ The frontier towards -the Western kingdom was now fairly ascertained, and it was subject -to dispute only at a few points. ♦Lotharingia.♦ It is hardly needful -to insist again on the fact that all Lotharingia, in the sense of -those days, taking in all the southern Netherlands except the French -fief of Flanders, was now Imperial. ♦Encroachments of France.♦ It -is along this line that the German border has in later times most -largely fallen back. The advance of France has touched Burgundy more -than Germany; but it has, first swallowed up, and afterwards partly -restored, a considerable part of the German kingdom. ♦The Netherlands.♦ -The Netherlands had been practically so cut off from Germany before the -annexations of France in that quarter began, that they will be better -spoken of in another section. ♦Lorraine and Elsass.♦ The other points -at which the frontier has fluctuated on a great scale have been the -border land of _Lorraine_—as distinguished from the Lower _Lotharingia_ -which has more to do with the history of the Netherlands—and the -Swabian land of _Elsass_. ♦Fluctuations of Bar.♦ The Duchy of _Bar_, -the borderland of the borderland, fluctuated more than once. ♦1473.♦ -After its union with the Duchy of Lorraine, it followed the fortunes -of that state. ♦The Three Bishoprics, 1552.♦ In the next century came -the annexation of the three Lotharingian bishoprics of _Metz_, _Toul_, -and _Verdun_, which gave France three outlying possessions within the -geographical borders of the Lotharingian duchy. ♦Loss of Austrian -Elsass, 1648.♦ In the next century, as the result of the Thirty Years’ -War, France obtained by the Peace of Westfalia the formal cession of -these conquests, and also the great advance of her frontier by the -dismemberment of _Elsass_. The cession now made did not take in the -whole of Elsass, but only the possessions and rights of the House of -Austria in that country. This cession still left both Strassburg and -various smaller towns and districts to the Empire; but it naturally -opened the way to further French advances in a land where the frontier -was so complicated and where difficulties were so easily raised as to -treaty-rights. ♦Gradual annexation of Elsass, 1679-1789.♦ A series of -annexations, _réunions_ as they were called, gradually united nearly -all Elsass to France. ♦Seizure of Strassburg, 1681.♦ _Strassburg_, -as all the world knows, was seized by Lewis the Fourteenth in time -of peace. ♦Seizure of Lorraine, 1678-1697.♦ During the wars with the -same prince, the duchy of Lorraine was seized and restored. ♦Its final -annexation. 1766.♦ In the next century it was separated from the -Empire to become the life-possession of the Polish king Stanislaus, -and on his death it was finally added to France just before a far -greater series of French annexations began. ♦Loss of the left bank -of the Rhine, 1801.♦ The wars of the French Revolution, confirmed by -the Peace of _Luneville_, tore away from Germany and the Empire all -that lay on the left bank of the Rhine. In other words, the Western -_Francia_, the duchy of the lords of Paris, advanced itself to the -utmost limits of the Gaul of Cæsar. This was the last annexation of -France at the expense of the old German kingdom. ♦Dissolution of the -Kingdom and Empire, 1806.♦ It was indeed the main cause of the formal -dissolution of the kingdom which happened a few years later. The utter -transformation of Germany within and without which now followed must be -spoken of at a later stage. - -♦Frontier of Germany and Burgundy.♦ - -The frontier of Germany and Burgundy, while they still remained -distinct kingdoms, fluctuated a good deal, especially in the lands -which now form Switzerland. ♦Union of Burgundy with the Empire, 1033.♦ -But this frontier ceased to be of any practical importance when the -Burgundian kingdom was united with the Empire. The later history of -Burgundy, consisting of the gradual incorporation by France of the -greater part of the kingdom, and the growth of the remnant into the -western cantons of the Swiss Confederation, will be told elsewhere. - -♦Frontier of Germany and Italy.♦ - -Towards Italy again the frontier was sometimes doubtful. _Chiavenna_, -for instance, sometimes appears in the tenth and eleventh centuries as -German; so do the greater districts of _Trent_, _Aquileia_, _Istria_, -and even _Verona_. ♦The Marchland.♦ All these formed a marchland, part -of which in the end became definitely attached to Germany and part to -Italy. ♦Union of the Crowns, 961-1530. | 961-1250.♦ But here again, -as long as the German and Italian crowns were united, and as long -as their common king kept any real authority in either kingdom, the -frontier was of no great practical importance. So in later times, both -before and after the dissolution of the German Kingdom, the question -has practically been a question between Italy and the House of Austria -rather than between Italy and Germany as such. These changes also will -better come in another section. - - * * * * * - -♦Eastern and Northern frontiers.♦ - -The case is quite different with regard to the eastern and northern -frontiers, on which the really greatest changes took place, and where -Germany, as Germany, made its greatest advances. ♦Advance of the -Empire.♦ Along this line the Roman Empire and the German Kingdom meant -the same thing. On this side the frontier had to be marked, so far as -it could be marked, against nations which had had nothing to do with -the elder Empire. Here then for many ages the Roman Terminus advanced -and fell back according to the accidents of a long warfare. - -The whole frontier of the kingdom towards its northern and eastern -neighbours was defended by a series of _marks_ or border territories -whose rulers were clothed with special powers for the defence and -extension of the frontier.[13] They had to guard the realm against the -Dane in the north, and against the Slave during the whole remaining -length of the eastern frontier, except where, in the last years of the -ninth century, the Magyar thrust himself in between the northern and -southern Slaves. ♦Hungarian frontier. | Mark of Austria.♦ Here the -frontier, as against Hungary and Croatia, was defended by the marks of -_Krain_ or _Carniola_, _Kärnthen_ or _Carinthia_, _Austrian_ mark to -the north of them. ♦Little change on this frontier.♦ This frontier has -changed least of all. It may, without any great breach of accuracy, be -said to have remained the same from the days of the Saxon Emperors till -now. The part where it was at all fluctuating was along the Austrian -mark, rather than along the two marks to the south of it. ♦Occasional -homage of Hungary to the Emperors.♦ The Emperors claimed, and sometimes -enforced, a feudal superiority over the Hungarian kings. But this kind -of precarious submission does not affect geography. Hungary always -remained a separate kingdom; the Imperial supremacy was something -purely external, and it was always thrown off on the first opportunity. - -♦Frontier towards Denmark.♦ - -The same may be said of _Denmark_. For a short time a German mark was -formed north of the Eider. ♦The Danish Mark, 934-1027. | Boundary of -the Eider, 1027-1806.♦ But, when the Danish kingdom had grown into -the Northern Empire of Cnut, the German frontier fell back here also, -and the _Eider_ remained the boundary of the Empire till its fall. -♦Occasional homage of the Danish Kings.♦ As with Hungary, so with -Denmark; more than one Danish king became the man of Cæsar; but here -again the precarious acknowledgement of Imperial supremacy had no -effect on geography. - -♦Slavonic frontier.♦ - -It is in the intermediate lands, along the vast frontier where -the Empire marched on the northern _Slavonic_ lands, that the real -historical geography of Germany lies for some ages. ♦Fluctuation of -territory.♦ Here the boundary was ever fluctuating. ♦Extent of the -Slaves.♦ At the time of the division of 887, the Slaves held all east -of the Elbe and a good deal to the west. How far they had during the -Wandering of the Nations stepped into the place of earlier Teutonic -inhabitants is a question which belongs to another field of inquiry. -We must here start from the geographical fact that, at the time when -the modern states of Europe began to form themselves, the Slaves were -actually in possession of the great North-Eastern region of modern -Germany. Their special mention will come in their special place; we -must here mark that modern Germany has largely formed itself by the -gradual conquest and colonization of lands which at the end of the -ninth century were Slavonic. The German kingdom spread itself far to -the North-East, and German settlements and German influences spread -themselves far beyond the formal bounds of the German kingdom. Three -special instruments worked together in bringing about this end. The -Saxon Dukes came first. In after times came the great league of German -cities, the famous _Hansa_ which, like some other bodies originally -commercial, became a political power, and which spread German -influences over the whole of the shores of the Baltic. Along with -them, from the thirteenth century onwards, worked the great military -order of the Teutonic knights. Out of their conquests came the first -beginnings of the Prussian state, and the extension of German rule -and the German speech over much which in modern geography has become -Russian. In a history of the German nation all these causes would -have to be dealt with together as joint instruments towards the same -end. In a purely geographical view the case is different. Some of -these influences concern the formation of the actual German kingdom; -others have geographically more to do with the group of powers more -to the north-east, the Slavonic states of Poland and Russia, and -their Lithuanian and Finnish neighbours. The growth and fall of the -military orders will therefore most naturally come in another section. -We have here to trace out those changes only which helped to give the -German kingdom the definite geographical extent which it held for some -centuries before its final fall. - -♦The Saxon Mark.♦ - -Beginning at the north, in the lands where German, Slave, and Dane came -into close contact, in _Saxony beyond the Elbe_, the modern _Holstein_, -the Slaves held the western coast, and the narrow _Saxon mark_ fenced -off the German land. ♦Mark of the Billungs, 960-1106.♦ The Saxon dukes -of the house of Billung formed a German mark, which took in the lands -reaching from the Elbe to the strait which divides the isle of Rügen -from the mainland. But this possession was altogether precarious. -♦Its fluctuations.♦ It again became a Slavonic kingdom; then it was a -possession of Denmark; it cannot be looked on as definitely becoming -part of the German realm till the thirteenth century. ♦Slavonic princes -continue in Mecklenburg.♦ The chief state in these lands which has -lasted till later times is the duchy of _Mecklenburg_, the rulers of -which, in its two modern divisions, are the only modern princes who -directly represent an old Slavonic royal house. Meanwhile a way was -opened for a vast extension of German influence through the whole -North, by the growth of the city of _Lübeck_. ♦Foundation of Lübeck, -1140-1158.♦ Twice founded, the second time by Henry the Lion Duke of -Saxony, it gradually became the leading member of the great merchant -League. ♦The Hanse Towns.♦ To the south of these lands come those -Slavonic lands which have grown into the modern kingdom of Saxony and -the central parts of the modern kingdom of Prussia. ♦Marchlands.♦ -These were specially marchlands, a name which some of them have kept -down to our own day. ♦Brandenburg. | Lausitz. | Meissen.♦ The mark -of _Brandenburg_ in its various divisions, the mark of _Lausitz_ or -_Lusatia_, where a Slavonic remnant still lingers, and the mark of -_Meissen_, long preserved the memory of the times when these lands, -which afterwards came to play so great a part in the internal history -of Germany, were still outlying and precarious possessions of the -German realm. - -To the south-east lay the _Bohemian_ lands, whose history has been -somewhat different. ♦Bohemia a fief, 928.♦ The duchy, afterwards -kingdom, of _Bohemia_, became, early in the tenth century, a fief of -the German kingdom. ♦Becomes a kingdom, 1198. | 1003.♦ From that time -ever afterwards, save during one moment of passing Polish annexation, -it remained one of its principal members, ruled, as long as the -Empire lasted, by princes holding electoral rank. The boundaries of -the kingdom itself have hardly varied at all. ♦Moravia. | 1019.♦ The -dependent marchland of _Moravia_ to the east, the remnant of the great -Moravian kingdom whose history will come more fittingly in another -chapter, fluctuated for a long while between Hungarian, Polish, and -Bohemian supremacy. But from the early part of the eleventh century it -remained under Bohemian rule, and therefore under Imperial superiority. -♦More distant Slavonic states.♦ To the east of this nearer zone of -Slavonic dependencies, lay another range of Slavonic states, some -of which were gradually incorporated with the German kingdom, while -others remained distinct down to modern times. ♦Pomerania.♦ _Pomerania_ -on the Baltic coast is a name which has often changed both its -geographical extent and its political allegiance. The eastern part of -the land now so called lay open, as will be hereafter seen, to the -occupation of the Pole, and its western part to that of the Dane. -♦Native princes go on.♦ But in the end it took its place on the map in -the form of two duchies, ruled, like Mecklenburg, by native princes -under Imperial supremacy. ♦Polish frontier.♦ South of Pomerania, the -German march bordered on the growing power of _Poland_, and between -Poland and Hungary lay the northern _Croatia_ or _Chrobatia_. The -German supremacy seems sometimes to have been extended as far as -the Wartha, and, in the Chrobatian land, even beyond the Vistula. -♦Occasional homage of the Polish kings.♦ But this occupation was quite -momentary; Poland grew up, like Hungary, as a kingdom, some of whose -dukes and kings admitted the Imperial supremacy, but which gradually -became wholly independent. ♦Silesia Polish, 999.♦ The border province -of _Silesia_, after some fluctuations between Bohemia and Poland, -became definitely Polish at the end of the tenth century. ♦Bohemian, -1289-1327.♦ Afterwards it was divided into several principalities, -whose dukes passed under Bohemian vassalage, and so became members -of the Empire. Thus in the course of some ages, a boundary was drawn -between Germany and Poland which lasted down to modern times. - - * * * * * - -♦Extension of the Empire to the east.♦ - -The result of this survey is to show how great, and at the same time -how gradual, was the extension of the German power eastward. A Roman -Empire with a long Baltic coast was something that had never been -dreamed of in earlier days. If the extension of the German name was -but the recovery of long lost Teutonic lands, the extension to them -of the Imperial name which had become identified with Germany was at -least wholly new. ♦The Slavonic lands Germanized.♦ In all the lands now -annexed, save in a few exceptional districts, German annexation meant -German colonization, and the assimilation of the surviving inhabitants -to the speech and manners of Germany. Colonists were brought, specially -from the Frisian lands, by whose means the Low-Dutch tongue was spread -along the whole southern coast of the Baltic. German cities were -founded. The marchlands grew into powerful German states. At last one -of these marchlands, united with a German conquest still further cut -off from the heart of the old German realm, has grown into a state -which in our own days has become the Imperial power of Germany. - - * * * * * - -♦Internal geography of Germany.♦ - -The internal geography of the German kingdom is the greatest difficulty -of such a work as the present. To trace the boundaries of the kingdom -as against other kingdoms is comparatively easy; but to trace out the -endless shiftings, the unions and the divisions, of the countless -small principalities and commonwealths which arose within the kingdom, -would be a hopeless attempt. ♦Growth of the principalities.♦ Still -the growth of the dukes, counts, and other princes of Germany into -independent sovereigns is the great feature of German history, as the -consequent wiping out of old divisions, and shifting to and fro of old -names, is the special feature of German historical geography. ♦Changes -in nomenclature.♦ The dying out of the old names has a historical -interest, and the growth of the new powers which have supplanted them -has both an historical and a political interest. ♦Origin of Prussia and -Austria.♦ It is specially important to mark how the two powers which -have stood at the head of Germany in modern times in no way represent -any of the old divisions of the German name. They have grown out of -the outlying _marks_ planted against the Slave and the Magyar. The -mark of _Brandenburg_, the mark against the Slave, has grown into the -kingdom of _Prussia_, the Imperial state of Germany in its latest form. -The _Eastern_ mark, the mark against the Magyar, has grown into the -archduchy which gave Germany so many kings, into the so-called Austrian -‘empire,’ into the Austro-Hungarian monarchy of our own day. ♦Analogies -between Brandenburg and other marchlands.♦ The growth of Brandenburg -or Prussia again affords an instructive comparison with the growth of -Wessex in England, of France in Gaul, and of Castile in Spain. In all -these cases alike, it has been a marchland which has come to the front -and has become the head of the united nation. - -♦The great Duchies under the Saxon and Frankish Kings, 919-1125.♦ - -Starting from the division of 887, we shall find several important -landmarks in the history of the German kingdom which may help us in -this most difficult part of our work. Under the Saxon and Frankish -kings we see the great duchies still forming the main divisions, -while the kingdom is enlarged by Slavonic conquests to the east and -by the definite adhesion of Lotharingia to the west. ♦Decline of the -Duchies under the Swabian Kings, 1137-1254.♦ Under the Swabian kings -we see the break-up of the great duchies. In the partition of Saxony -the process which was everywhere silently and gradually at work -was formally carried out in the greatest case of all by Imperial, -and national authority. ♦End of the _Gauverfassung_. | Growth of -territorial Principalities.♦ The _Gauverfassung_, the immemorial -system of Teutonic communities, now finally changes into a system of -territorial principalities, broken only by the many free cities and -the few free districts which owned no lord but the King. ♦Growth -of the march powers. 1254-1512.♦ During this period too we see the -beginnings of some of the powers which became chief at a later day, the -powers of the eastern marchland, _Brandenburg_, _Austria_, _Saxony_ -in the later sense. The time from the so-called _Interregnum_ to the -legislation under Maximilian is marked by the further growth of these -powers. ♦Growth of the House of Austria.♦ It is further marked by the -beginning of that connexion of the Austrian duchy, and of the Imperial -crown itself, with lands beyond the bounds of the Kingdom and the -Empire which led in the end to the special and anomalous position of -the House of Austria as an European power. ♦Separation of Switzerland, -1495-1648. | Of the Netherlands, 1430-1648.♦ During the same period -comes the practical separation of _Switzerland_ and the _Netherlands_ -from the German kingdom. In short it was during this age that Germany -in its later aspect was formed. ♦Legislation under Maximilian, -1495-1512.♦ The legislation of Maximilian’s reign, the attempts then -made to bring the kingdom to a greater degree of unity, have left their -mark on geography in the division of Germany into _circles_. ♦Division -into circles, 1500-1512.♦ This division, though it was not perfectly -complete, though it did not extend to every corner of the kingdom, was -strictly an administrative division of the kingdom itself as such; but -the mapping out of the circles, the difference of which in point of -size is remarkable, was itself affected by the geographical extent of -the dominions of the princes who held lands within them. ♦Thirty Years’ -War, 1618-1648.♦ The seventeenth century is marked by the results of -the Thirty Years’ War and of other changes. ♦Powers holding lands -within and without Germany.♦ Its most important geographical result -was to carry on the process which had begun with the Austrian House, -the formation of powers holding lands both within and without the -Empire. ♦Austria. | Sweden. | Union of Brandenburg and Prussia.♦ Thus, -beside the union of the Hungarian kingdom with the Austrian archduchy, -the King of Sweden now held lands as a prince of the Empire, and -the same result was brought about in another way by the union of the -Electorate of Brandenburg with the Duchy of Prussia. ♦Rivalry of -Prussia and Austria.♦ This, and other accessions of territory, now -made Brandenburg as distinctly the first power of northern Germany as -Austria was of southern Germany, and in the eighteenth century the -rivalry of these two powers becomes the chief centre, not only of -German but of European politics. ♦Hannover and Great Britain, 1715.♦ -The union of the Electorate of Hannover under the same sovereign with -the kingdom of Great Britain further increased the number of princes -ruling both within Germany and without it. ♦Dissolution of the Kingdom, -1806.♦ Lastly, the wars of the latter years of the eighteenth and the -beginning of the nineteenth century led to the dissolution alike of -the German kingdom and of the Roman Empire. ♦The German Confederation, -1815-1866.♦ Then, after a time of confusion and foreign occupation, -comes the formation of a Confederation with boundaries nearly the same -as the later boundaries of the kingdom. But the Confederation now -appears as something quite subordinate to its two leading members. -♦Austria and Prussia greater than the Confederation.♦ Germany, as such, -no longer counts as a great European power, but Prussia and Austria, -the two chief holders at once of German and of non-German lands, stand -forth among the chief bearers of European rank. ♦The new Confederation -and Empire, 1866-1870.♦ Lastly, the changes of our own day have given -us an Imperial Germany with geographical boundaries altogether new, -a Germany from which the south-eastern German lands are cut off, -while the Polish and other non-German possessions of Prussia to the -north-east have become an integral part of the new Empire. The task of -the geographer is thereby greatly simplified. Down to the last changes, -one of his greatest difficulties is to make his map show with any -clearness what was the extent of the German Kingdom or Confederation, -and at the same time what was the extent of the dominions of those -princes who held lands both in Germany and out of it. By the last -arrangements this difficulty at least is altogether taken away. - - * * * * * - -♦Germany under the Saxon and Frankish Empire.♦ - -If we look at the map of Germany under the Saxon and Frankish Kings, -we see that the old names, marking the great divisions of the German -people, still keep their predominance. ♦The great Duchies.♦ The kingdom -is still made up of the four great duchies, the Eastern _Francia_, -_Saxony_, _Alemannia_, and _Bavaria_, together with the great -border-land of _Lotharingia_. These are still the great duchies, to -which all smaller divisions are subordinate. ♦Eastern Francia cut off -from extension.♦ Among these, the kernel of the kingdom, the Eastern -_Francia_, is the only one whose boundaries had little or no chance of -being extended or lessened at the cost of foreign powers. It had the -smallest possible frontier towards the Slave. ♦Frontier position of -Saxony, Bavaria, and Alemannia.♦ On the other hand, _Saxony_ has an -ever fluctuating boundary against the Slave and the Dane; _Bavaria_ -marches upon the Slave, the Magyar, and the Kingdom of Italy, while -_Alemannia_ has a shifting frontier towards both Burgundy and Italy. -♦Exposed position of Lotharingia and Burgundy.♦ Lotharingia, and -Burgundy after its annexation, are the lands which lie exposed to -aggression from the West. ♦Vanishing of Francia.♦ It is perhaps for -this very reason that, of the four duchies which preserve the names -of the four great divisions of the German nation, the Eastern Francia -is the one which has most utterly vanished from the modern map and -from modern memory. Another cause may have strengthened its tendency -to vanish. The policy of the kings forbade that the Frankish duchy -should become the abiding heritage of any princely family. ♦Its -ecclesiastical Dukes.♦ The ducal title of the Eastern Francia was at -two periods of its history borne by ecclesiastical princes in the -persons of the Bishops of _Würzburg_; but it never gave its name, like -Saxony and Bavaria, to any ruling house. ♦Analogy with Wessex.♦ The -English student will notice the analogy by which, among all the ancient -English kingdoms, Wessex, the cradle of the English monarchy, is the -one whose name has most utterly vanished from modern memory. - -The only way to grasp the endless shiftings and divisions of the German -principalities, so as to give anything like a clear general view, -will be to take the great duchies, and to point out in a general way -the steps by which they split asunder, and the chief states of any -historical importance which rose out of their divisions. ♦Growth of -new powers in the twelfth century.♦ Most of these new powers begin to -be of importance in the twelfth century, a time which is specially -marked as the æra when those two states which have had most to do -with the making or unmaking of modern Germany begin to find their -place in history. ♦Brandenburg and Austria.♦ It is then that the two -great marchlands of Brandenburg and Austria begin to take their place -among the leading powers of the German kingdom. ♦The Circles.♦ And, -in making this survey, it will be well to bear in mind the much later -division into circles. The circles, an attempt to create administrative -divisions of the kingdom as such, were, in a faint way, a return to the -ancient duchies, the names of which were to some extent retained. Thus -we have the two _Saxon_ circles, _Upper_ and _Lower_, and the three of -_Franconia_, _Swabia_, and _Bavaria_. All of these keep up the names -of ancient duchies, and most of them keep up a stronger or fainter -geographical connexion with the ancient lands whose names they bore. -The other circles, the two _Rhenish_ circles, _Upper_ and _Lower_, and -those of _Westfalia_, _Austria_, and _Burgundy_—the last name being -used in a sense altogether new—arose out of changes which took place -between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries, some of which we shall -have to notice. - - * * * * * - -♦Saxony; its three divisions, Westfalia, Angria, Eastfalia.♦ - -First then, the great duchy of _Saxony_ consisted of three main -divisions, _Westfalia_, _Engern_ or _Angria_, and _Eastfalia_. -_Thuringia_ to the south-east, and the _Frisian_ lands to the -north-west, may be looked on as in some sort appendages to the Saxon -duchy. ♦Growth of Saxony at the expense of the Slaves.♦ The duchy -was also capable of any amount of extension towards the east, and -the lands gradually won from the Wends on this side were all looked -on as additions made to the Saxon territory. ♦Break-up of the Duchy, -1182-1191.♦ But the great Saxon duchy was broken up at the fall of -Henry the Lion. ♦Duchy of Westfalia.♦ The archiepiscopal Electors of -_Köln_ received the title of Dukes of _Westfalia_ and _Engern_. But in -the greater part of those districts the grant remained merely nominal, -though the ducal title, with a small actual Westfalian duchy, remained -to the electorate till the end. From these lands the Saxon name may -be looked on as having altogether passed away. ♦New use of the name -_Saxony_.♦ The name of _Saxony_, as a geographical expression, clave -to the Eastfalian remnant of the old duchy, and to Thuringia and the -Slavonic conquests to the east. ♦The Saxon Circles.♦ In the later -division of Germany these lands formed the two circles of _Upper_ and -_Lower Saxony_; and it was within their limits that the various states -arose which have kept on the Saxon name to our own time. - -From the descendants of Henry the Lion himself, and from the allodial -lands which they kept, the Saxon name passed away, except so far as -they became part of the Lower-Saxon circle. ♦Duchy of Brunswick.♦ -They held their place as princes of the Empire, no longer as Dukes -of Saxony, but as Dukes of _Brunswick_, a house which gave Rome one -Emperor and England a dynasty of kings. ♦Its division, 1203. | Lüneburg -and Wolfenbüttel.♦ After some of the usual divisions, two Brunswick -principalities finally took their place on the map, those of _Lüneburg_ -and _Wolfenbüttel_, the latter having the town of Brunswick for its -capital. The Lüneburg duchy grew. ♦Lüneburg acquires the bishoprics -of Bremen and Verden, 1715-1719.♦ Late in the seventeenth century it -was raised to the electoral rank, and early in the next century it was -finally enlarged by the acquisition of the bishoprics of _Bremen_ and -_Verden_. ♦Electorate of Hannover or Brunswick Lüneburg, 1692.♦ Thus -was formed the Electorate, and afterwards Kingdom, of _Hannover_, while -the simple ducal title remained with the Brunswick princes of the other -line. - -♦The new Saxony.♦ - -The Saxon name itself withdrew in the end from the old Saxony to the -lands conquered from the Slave. ♦Bernhard duke of Saxony, 1180-1212.♦ -On the fall of Henry the Lion, the duchy of Saxony, cut short by -the grant to the archbishops of Köln, was granted to Bernhard of -Ballensted, the founder of the Ascanian House. ♦Sachsen-Lauenburg.♦ Of -the older Saxon land his house kept only for a while the small district -north of the Elbe which kept the name of _Sachsen-Lauenburg_, and which -in the end became part of the Hannover electorate. ♦1423.♦ But it was -in Thuringia and the conquered Slavonic lands to the east of Thuringia -that a new Saxony arose, which kept on somewhat of the European -position of the Saxon name down to modern times. This new Saxony, with -Wittenberg for its capital, grew, through the addition of _Thuringia_ -and _Meissen_, into the Saxon Electorate which played so great a -part during the three last centuries of the existence of the German -kingdom. ♦Divisions and unions.♦ But in Saxony too the usual divisions -took place. Lauenburg parted off; so did the smaller duchies which -still keep the Saxon name. ♦1547.♦ The ducal and electoral dignities -were divided, till the two, united under the famous Maurice, formed -the Saxon electorate as it stood at the dissolution of the kingdom. -It was in short a new state, one which had succeeded to the name, but -which could in no other way be thought to represent, the Saxony whose -conquest cost so many campaigns to Charles the Great. - - * * * * * - -♦The Mark of Brandenburg.♦ - -Another power which arose in the marchland of Saxon and Slave, to the -north of Saxony in the later sense, was the land known specially as -the _Mark_, the groundwork of the power which has in our own day risen -to the head of Germany. The _North Mark_ of Saxony became the _Mark of -Brandenburg_. ♦Reign of Albert the Bear, 1134-1170.♦ In the twelfth -and thirteenth centuries, under Albert the Bear and his house, the -Mark greatly extended itself at the expense of the Slaves. ♦Union with -Bohemia, 1373-1415. | House of Hohenzollern, 1415.♦ United for a time -with the kingdom of Bohemia, it passed into the house of the Burgraves -of _Nürnberg_, that House of Hohenzollern which has grown step by -step till it has reached Imperial rank in our own day. The power thus -formed presently acquired a special character by the acquisition of -what may be called a German land out of Germany, a land which gave them -in the end a higher title, and which by its geographical position led -irresistibly to a further increase of territory. ♦Union of Brandenburg -and Prussia, 1611-1618.♦ Early in the seventeenth century the Electors -of Brandenburg acquired by inheritance the _Duchy of Prussia_, that is -merely Eastern Prussia, a fief, not of the Empire but of the crown of -Poland, and which lay geographically apart from their strictly German -dominions. ♦Prussia independent of Poland, 1656; becomes kingdom, -1701.♦ The common sovereign of Brandenburg and Prussia was thus the -man of two lords; but the Great Elector Frederick William became a -wholly independent sovereign in his duchy, and his son Frederick took -on himself the kingly title for the land which was thus freed from all -homage. Both before and after the union with Prussia, the Electors -of Brandenburg continued largely to increase their German dominions. -♦1523-1623.♦ A temporary possession of the principality of _Jägerndorf_ -in Silesia, unimportant in itself, led to great events in later times. -♦Westfalian possessions of Brandenburg, 1614-1666. | 1702-1744.♦ The -acquisition, at various times in the seventeenth century, of _Cleve_ -and other outlying Westfalian lands, which were further increased -in the next century, led in the same way to the modern dominion of -Prussia in western Germany. ♦Acquisitions in Pomerania, 1638-1648. -| 1713-1719.♦ But the most solid acquisition of Brandenburg in this -age was that of _Eastern Pomerania_, to which the town of Stettin, -with a further increase of territory, was added after the wars of -Charles the Twelfth of Sweden. The events of the Thirty Years’ War also -increased the dominions both of Brandenburg and Saxony at the expense -of the neighbouring ecclesiastical princes. ♦Later acquisitions of -Prussia.♦ The later acquisitions of the House of Hohenzollern, after -the Electors of Brandenburg had taken the kingly title from their -Prussian duchy, concern Prussia as an European power at least as much -as they concern Brandenburg as a German power. ♦German character of -the Prussian Monarchy.♦ Yet their proper place comes in the history of -Germany. Unlike the other princes who held lands within and without the -German kingdom, the Kings of Prussia and Electors of Brandenburg have -remained essentially German princes. Their acquisitions of territory -out of Germany have all been in fact enlargements, if not of the soil -of Germany, at least of the sphere of German influence. And, at last, -in marked contrast to the fate of the rival House of Austria, the whole -Prussian dominions have been incorporated with the new German Empire, -and form the immediate dominion of its Imperial head. ♦Spread of the -name of _Prussia_.♦ The outward sign of this change, the outward sign -of the special position of Brandenburg, as compared with Holstein or -Austria, is the strange spread of the name of _Prussia_ over the German -dominions of the King of Prussia. No such spread has taken place with -the name of Denmark or of Hungary. - -♦Conquest of Silesia, 1741.♦ - -Within Germany the greatest enlargement of the dominion of Prussia—as -we may now begin to call it instead of Brandenburg—was the acquisition -of by far the greater part of _Schlesien_ or _Silesia_, hitherto part -of the Bohemian lands, and then held by the House of Austria. This, -it should be noted, was an acquisition which could hardly fail to -lead to further acquisitions. ♦Geographical character of the Prussian -dominions.♦ The geographical characteristic of the Prussian dominions -was the way in which they lay in detached pieces, and the enormous -extent of frontier as compared with the area of the country. The -kingdom itself lay detached, hemmed in and intersected by the territory -of Poland. The electorate, with the Pomeranian territory, formed a -somewhat more compact mass; but even this had a very large frontier -compared with its area. The Westfalian possessions, the district of -_Cottbus_, and other outlying dominions, lay quite apart. The addition -of Silesia increased this characteristic yet further. ♦Position of -Silesia.♦ The newly won duchy, barely joining the electorate, ran out -as a kind of peninsula between Saxony, Bohemia, and Poland. Silesia, -first as a Polish and then as a Bohemian fief, had formed part of a -fairly compact geographical mass; as part of the same dominion with -Prussia and Brandenburg, it was an all but isolated land with an -enormous frontier. ♦Acquisitions from Poland, 1772-1795.♦ The details -of the Polish acquisitions of Prussia will be best given in our survey -of Poland. ♦Their geographical character.♦ But it should be noted that -each of the portions of territory which were added to Prussia by the -several partitions has a geographical character of its own. ♦1772.♦ -The addition of _West-Prussia_—that is the geographical union of the -kingdom and the electorate—was something which could not fail in the -nature of things to come sooner or later. ♦1793.♦ The second addition -of _South-Prussia_ might seem geographically needed in order to leave -Silesia no longer peninsular. ♦1795.♦ The last, and most short-lived -addition of _New-East-Prussia_ had no such geographical necessity as -the other two. Still it helped to give greater compactness to the -kingdom, and to lessen its frontier in comparison with its area. - -Another acquisition of the House of Hohenzollern during the eighteenth -century, though temporary, deserves a passing notice. ♦East-Friesland, -1744.♦ Among its Westfalian annexations was _East-Friesland_. The King -of Prussia thus became, during the last half of the eighteenth century, -an oceanic potentate, a character which he presently lost, and which, -save for a moment in the days of confusion, he obtained again only in -our own day. - - * * * * * - -♦Parts of Saxony held by foreign kings.♦ - -A large part of Saxony, both in the older and in the later sense, thus -came to form part of a dominion containing both German and non-German -lands, but in which the German character was in every way predominant. -Other parts of Saxony in the same extended sense also came to form part -of the dominions of princes who ruled both in and out of Germany, but -in whom the non-German character was yet more predominant. ♦Holstein:♦ -The old _Saxony beyond the Elbe_, the modern _Holstein_, passed into -the hands of the Danish Kings. ♦its relation to Sleswick.♦ Its shifting -relations towards Denmark and Germany and towards the neighbouring land -of _Sleswick_, as having become matter of international dispute between -Denmark and Germany, will be best spoken of when we come to deal with -Denmark. The events of the Thirty Years’ War also made the Swedish -kings for a while considerable potentates in northern Germany. ♦German -territories of Sweden, 1648-1815.♦ The Peace of Westfalia confirmed -to them _Western Pomerania_ and the town of _Wismar_ on the Baltic, -and the bishoprics of _Bremen_ and _Verden_ which gave them an oceanic -coast. ♦1720.♦ But these last lands were, as we have seen afterwards, -ceded to Hannover, and the Pomeranian possessions of Sweden were also -cut short by cession to Brandenburg. But the possession of Wismar and -a part of Pomerania still gave the Swedish kings a position as German -princes down to the dissolution of the Empire. - -These are the chief powers which rose to historical importance within -the bounds of Saxony, in the widest sense of that word. To trace every -division and union which created or extinguished any of the smaller -principalities, or even to mark every minute change of frontier among -the greater powers, would be impossible. ♦Free cities of Saxony. | The -Hanse Towns.♦ But it must be further remembered that the Saxon circles -were the seats of some of the greatest of the free cities of Germany, -the leading members of the Hanseatic League. In the growth of German -commerce the Rhenish lands took the lead, and, in the earliest days -of the Hansa, _Köln_ held the first place among its cities. ♦Lübeck, -Bremen, Hamburg.♦ The pre-eminence afterwards passed to havens nearer -to the Ocean and the Baltic, where, among a crowd of others, the -Imperial cities of _Lübeck_ and _Bremen_ stand out foremost, and with -them _Hamburg_, a rival which has in later times outstripped them. -And at this point it may be noticed that Lübeck and Bremen specially -illustrate a law which extended to many other of the episcopal cities -of Germany. ♦The cities and the bishoprics.♦ The Bishop became a -prince, and held a greater or smaller extent of territory in temporal -sovereignty. But the city which contained his see remained independent -of him in temporal things, and knew him only as its spiritual shepherd. -Such were the archbishopric of Bremen and the bishopric of Lübeck, -principalities which, after the change of religion, passed into secular -hands. Thus we have seen the archbishopric of Bremen pass, first to -Sweden, and then to Hannover. But the two cities always remained -independent commonwealths, owning no superior but the Emperor. - - * * * * * - -♦Franconia.♦ - -The next among the great duchies, that of _Eastern Francia_, _Franken_, -or _Franconia_, is of much less importance in European history than -that of Saxony. ♦Bishops of Würzburg Dukes.♦ It gave the ducal title -to the Bishops of Würzburg; but it cannot be said to be in any sense -continued in any modern state. ♦Extent of the Circle.♦ Its name -gradually retreated, and the circle of _Franken_ or _Franconia_ took in -only the most eastern part of the ancient duchy. ♦The Rhenish Circles.♦ -The western and northern part of the duchy, together with a good deal -of territory which was strictly Lotharingian, became part of the two -Rhenish circles. Thus _Fulda_, the greatest of German abbeys, passed -away from the Frankish name. In north-eastern Francia, the _Hessian_ -principalities grew up to the north-west. Within the Franconian circle -lay _Würzburg_, the see of the bishops who bore the ducal title, -the other great bishopric of _Bamberg_, together with the free city -of _Nürnberg_, and various smaller principalities. ♦Ecclesiastical -States on the Rhine.♦ In the Rhenish lands, both within and without -the old Francia, one chief characteristic is the predominance of the -ecclesiastical principalities, _Mainz_, _Köln_, _Worms_, _Speyer_, -and _Strassburg_. The chief temporal power which arose in this region -was the _Palatinate of the Rhine_, a power which, like others, went -through many unions and divisions, and spread into four circles, those -of Upper and Lower Rhine, Westfalia, and Bavaria. ♦Bavaria.♦ This last -district, though united with the Palatine Electorate, was, from the -early part of the fourteenth century, distinguished from the Palatinate -of the Rhine as the _Oberpfalz_ or _Upper Palatinate_. To the south -of it lay the _Bavarian_ principalities. These, united into a single -duchy, formed the power which grew into the modern kingdom. But neither -this duchy nor the whole Bavarian circle at all reached to the extent -of the ancient Bavaria which bordered on Italy. ♦Shiftings between -Bavaria and the Palatinate, 1623. | Electorate of Bavaria, 1648.♦ The -early stages of the Thirty Years’ War gave the Rhenish Palatinate, -with its electoral rights, to Bavaria; the Peace of Westfalia restored -the Palatinate, leaving Bavaria as a new electorate. ♦Union of the -two, 1777.♦ Late in the eighteenth century, Bavaria itself passed to -the Elector Palatine, thus forming what may be called modern Bavaria -with its outlying Rhenish lands. ♦Cession to Austria, 1778.♦ This -acquisition was at the same time partly balanced by the cession to -Austria of the lands east of the Inn, known as the _Innviertel_. -♦Archbishopric of Salzburg.♦ The other chief state within the Bavarian -circle was the great ecclesiastical principality of the archbishops of -_Salzburg_ in the extreme south-east. - -♦Lotharingia.♦ - -The old _Lotharingian_ divisions, as we see them in the time of the -great duchies, utterly died out. ♦Lower Lotharingia.♦ The states which -arose in the _Lower Lotharingia_ are among those which silently fell -off from the German Kingdom to take a special position under the name -of the _Netherlands_. ♦Duchy of Lothringen or Lorraine.♦ The special -duchy of _Lothringen_ or _Lorraine_ was held to belong to the circle of -Upper Rhine. ♦Elsass.♦ _Elsass_ also formed part of the same circle, -the circle which was specially cut short by the encroachments of -France. ♦Circle of Swabia.♦ The _Swabian_ circle answered more nearly -than most of the new divisions to the old Swabian duchy, as that duchy -stood without counting the marchland of Elsass. No part of Germany was -more cut up into small states than the old land of the Hohenstaufen. -A crowd of principalities, secular and ecclesiastical, among them the -lesser principalities of the Hohenzollern House, of free cities, and -of outlying possessions of the houses of Austria made up the main -part of the circle. ♦Ecclesiastical towns of Swabia.♦ _Strassburg_, -_Augsburg_, _Constanz_, _St. Gallen_, _Chur_, _Zürich_, are among -the great bishoprics and other ecclesiastical foundations of the old -Swabia. ♦Part of Swabia becomes Switzerland.♦ But, as I shall show -more fully in another section, large districts in the south-east, -those which formed the _Old League of High Germany_, had practically -fallen away from the kingdom before the new division was made, and -were therefore never reckoned in any circle. ♦Baden. | Württemberg.♦ -Two Swabian principalities, the mark of _Baden_, and _Württemberg_, -first county and then duchy, came gradually to the first place in this -region. As such they still remain, preserving in some sort a divided -representation of the old Swabia. - - * * * * * - -Two important parts of the old kingdom, two circles of the division of -Maximilian, still remain. These are the lands which form the circles -of _Burgundy_ and _Austria_. These are lands which have, in earlier -or later times, wholly fallen off from the German Kingdom. ♦Circle of -_Austria_.♦ The _Austrian_ circle was formed of the lands in southern -Germany which gradually gathered in the hands of the second Austrian -dynasty, the House of Habsburg. ♦Growth of the House of Austria.♦ -Starting from the original mark on the Hungarian frontier, those lands -grew, first into a great German, and then into a great European, power, -and the latest changes have made even their German lands politically -non-German. The growth of the Austrian House will therefore be properly -dealt with in a separate section. ♦Extent of its German lands.♦ It is -enough to say here that the Austrian dominion in Germany gradually -took in, besides the original duchy, the south-eastern duchies of -_Steiermark_ or _Styria_, _Kärnthen_ or _Carinthia_, and _Krain_ or -_Carniola_, with the Italian borderlands of _Görz_, _Aquileia_, and -part of _Istria_. ♦Tyrol.♦ Joined to these by a kind of geographical -isthmus, like that which joins Silesia and Brandenburg, lay the western -possessions of the house, the Bavarian county of _Tyrol_ and various -outlying strips and points of lands in _Swabia_ and _Elsass_. ♦Loss of -Swabian lands.♦ The growth of the Confederates cut short the Swabian -possessions of Austria, as the later cession to France cut short its -Alsatian possessions. Still a Swabian remnant remained down to the -dissolution of the Kingdom. ♦Bohemia and its dependencies.♦ The kingdom -of _Bohemia_, with the dependent lands of Moravia and _Silesia_, though -held by the Archdukes of Austria and giving them electoral rank, was -not included in any German circle. ♦Trent and Brixen.♦ The Austrian -circle moreover was not wholly made up of the dominions of the Austrian -house; besides some smaller territories it also took in the bishoprics -of _Trent_ and _Brixen_ on the debateable frontier of Italy and old -Bavaria. - -♦Circle of Burgundy.♦ - -The _Burgundian_ circle was the last and the strangest use of the -Burgundian name. ♦Dominion of the Valois Dukes within the Empire.♦ It -consisted of those parts of the dominions of the Dukes of Burgundy of -the House of Valois which remained to their descendants of the House -of Austria at the time of the division into circles. These did not all -lie strictly within the boundaries of the German kingdom. ♦The Imperial -Netherlands.♦ Within that kingdom indeed lay the Northern Netherlands, -the Frisian lands of _Holland_, _Zealand_, and _West-Friesland_, as -also _Brabant_ and other Lotharingian lands. ♦County of Burgundy.♦ But -the circle also took in the _County of Burgundy or Franche Comté_, part -of the old kingdom of Burgundy, and lastly _Flanders_ and _Artois_, -lands beyond the bounds of the Empire. ♦Flanders and Artois released -from homage to France, 1526.♦ These were fiefs of France which were -released from their homage to that crown by the treaty between Charles -the Fifth and Francis the First of France. The Burgundian circle thus -took in all the Imperial fiefs of the Valois dukes, together with a -small part of their French fiefs. As all, or nearly all, of these -lands altogether fell away from the German kingdom, and as those parts -of them which now form the two kingdoms of the Low Countries have a -certain historical being of their own, it will be well to keep their -more detailed mention also for a special section. - - -§ 2. _The Confederation and Empire of Germany._ - -♦Germany changed from a kingdom to a confederation.♦ - - -Our survey in the last section has carried us down to the beginning -of the changes which led to the break-up of the old German Kingdom. -Germany is the only land in history which has changed from a kingdom -to a confederation. ♦Sketch of the process, 1806-1815.♦ The tie -which bound the vassal princes to the king became so lax that it was -at last thrown off altogether. In this process foreign invasion -largely helped. Between the two processes of foreign war and domestic -disintegration, a chaotic time followed, in which boundaries were ever -shifting and new states were ever rising and falling. ♦The German -_Bund_, 1815.♦ In the end, nearly all the lands which had formed the -old kingdom came together again, with new names and boundaries, as -members of a lax Confederation. ♦The new Confederation and Empire, -1866-1871.♦ The latest events of all have driven the former chief of -the Confederation beyond its boundaries; they have joined its other -members together by a much closer tie; they have raised the second -member of the former Confederation to the post of perpetual chief -of the new Confederation, and they have further clothed him with -the Imperial title. ♦The new Empire still federal.♦ But it must be -remembered that the modern Empire of Germany is still a Federal state. -Its chief bears the title of Emperor; still the relation is federal and -not feudal. The lesser members of the Empire are not vassals of the -Emperor, as they were in the days of the old kingdom. They are states -bound to him and to one another by a tie which is purely federal. -That the state whose prince holds Imperial rank far surpasses any of -its other members in extent and power is an important political fact; -but it does not touch the federal position of all the states of the -Empire, great and small. Reuss-Schleiz is not a vassal of Prussia; -it is a member of a league in which the voice of Prussia naturally -goes for more than the voice of Reuss-Schleiz. ♦Wars of the French -Revolution, 1793-1814.♦ The dissolution of the German kingdom, and with -it the wiping out of the last tradition of the Roman Empire, cannot -be separated from the history of wars of the French Revolution which -went before it, and which indeed led to it. For our purely geographical -purpose, we must distinguish the changes which directly affected the -German kingdom from those which affected the Austrian states, the -Netherlands, and Switzerland, lands which have now a separate historic -being from Germany. ♦War between France and the Empire, 1793-1801.♦ -The last war which the Empire as such waged with France was the eight -years’ war which was ended by the Peace of Luneville. ♦The left bank -of the Rhine ceded by the Peace of Luneville, 1801.♦ By that peace, -all Germany on the left bank on the Rhine was ceded to France. What -a sacrifice this was we at once see, when we bear in mind that it -took in the three metropolitan cities of Köln, Mainz, and Trier, the -royal city of Aachen, and the famous bishoprics of Worms and Speyer. -♦The _Reichsdeputationshauptschluss_, 1803.♦ A number of princes thus -lost all or part of their dominions, and it was presently agreed that -they should compensate themselves within the lands which remained to -the kingdom at the expense of the free cities and the ecclesiastical -princes. ♦End of the Ecclesiastical principalities.♦ The great German -hierarchy of princely bishops and abbots now came to an end, with a -solitary exception. ♦The Prince-Primate of Regensburg.♦ As the ancient -metropolis of Mainz had passed to France, the see of its archbishop was -removed to _Regensburg_, where, under the title of _Prince-Primate_, -he remained an Elector and Arch-Chancellor of the Empire. ♦Salzburg -a secular electorate.♦ _Salzburg_ became a secular electorate. ♦The -Free Cities.♦ The other ecclesiastical states were annexed by the -neighbouring princes, and of the free cities six only were left. -These were the Hanseatic towns of _Lübeck_, _Bremen_, and _Hamburg_, -and the inland towns of _Frankfurt_, _Nürnberg_, and _Augsburg_. -♦New Electorates.♦ Besides Salzburg, three new Electorates arose, -_Württemberg_, _Baden_, and _Hessen-Cassel_. None of these new Electors -ever chose any King or Emperor. ♦Peace of Pressburg, 1805. | Kingdom of -Württemberg and Bavaria.♦ The next war led to the Peace of Pressburg, -in which the Electors of Bavaria, Württemberg, and Baden appear as -allies of France, and by which those of Bavaria and Württemberg are -acknowledged as Kings. ♦They divide the western lands of Austria.♦ -Austria was now wholly cut off from south-western Germany. Württemberg -and Baden divided her Swabian possessions, while Tyrol, Trent, Brixen, -together with the free city of Augsburg, fell to the lot of Bavaria. -♦Grand Duchy of Würzburg.♦ Austria received Salzburg; its prince -removed himself and his electorate to Würzburg, and a _Grand Duchy of -Würzburg_ was formed to compensate its Elector. - -These were the last changes which took place while any shadow of the -old Kingdom and Empire lasted. ♦Title of ‘Emperor of Austria.’♦ The -reigning King of Germany and Emperor-elect, Francis King of Hungary -and Bohemia and Archduke of Austria, had already begun to call himself -‘_Hereditary Emperor of Austria_.’ In the treaty of Pressburg he -is described by the strange title, unheard of before or after, of -‘Emperor of Germany and Austria,’ and the Empire itself is spoken of -as a ‘Germanic Confederation.’ These formulæ were prophetic. ♦The -Confederation of the Rhine, July 12, 1806.♦ The next year a crowd -of princes renounced their allegiance, and formed themselves into -the _Confederation of the Rhine_ under the protectorate of France. -♦Dissolution of the Empire, August 6, 1806.♦ The formal dissolution -of the Empire followed at once. The succession which had gone on from -Augustus ended; the work of Charles the Great was undone. Instead of -the Frank ruling over Gaul, the Frenchman ruled over Germany. ♦Repeated -changes, 1806-1811.♦ A time of confusion followed, in which boundaries -were constantly shifting, states were constantly rising and falling, -and new portions of German ground were being constantly added to -France. ♦Germany in 1811-1813.♦ At the time of the greatest extent -of French dominion, the political state of Germany was on this wise. -♦Territories of Denmark and Sweden.♦ The dissolution of the Empire -had released all its members from their allegiance, and the German -possessions of the Kings of Denmark and Sweden had been incorporated -with their several kingdoms. ♦Losses of Prussia and Austria.♦ Hannover -was wholly lost to its island sovereign; seized and lost again more -than once by Prussia and by France, it passed at last wholly into the -hands of the foreign power. Prussia had lost, not only its momentary -possession of Hannover, but also everything west of the Elbe. Austria -had yielded _Salzburg_ to Bavaria, and part of her own south-western -territory in Krain and Kärnthen had passed to France under the name of -the _Illyrian Provinces_. ♦Annexations to France.♦ France too, beside -all the lands west of the Rhine, had incorporated _East Friesland_, -_Oldenburg_, part of _Hannover_, and the three _Hanseatic_ cities. -♦Confederation of the Rhine.♦ The remaining states of Germany formed -the _Confederation of the Rhine_. The chief among these were the four -Kingdoms of _Bavaria_, _Württemberg_, _Saxony_, and _Westfalia_. -♦Kingdoms of Saxony and Westfalia.♦ Saxony had become a kingdom under -its own Elector presently after the dissolution of the Empire: the -new-made kingdom of Westfalia had a French king in Jerome Buonaparte. -♦Grand Duchy of Frankfurt.♦ Besides _Mecklenburg_, _Baden_—now a Grand -Duchy—_Berg_, _Nassau_, _Hessen_, and other smaller states, there were -now among its members the Grand Duchy of _Würzburg_, and also a Grand -Duchy of _Frankfurt_, the possession of the Prince Primate, once of -Mainz, afterwards of Regensburg. ♦Germany wiped out.♦ We may say with -truth that during this time Germany had ceased to exist; its very name -had vanished from the map of Europe. - - * * * * * - -Prussia was a power so thoroughly German that the fate even of its -non-German possessions cannot well be separated from German geography. -♦The Kingdom of Prussia cut short, 1807.♦ The same blow which cut -short the old electorate of Brandenburg no less cut short the kingdom -of Prussia in its Polish acquisitions. ♦Commonwealth of Danzig.♦ -_West-Prussia_ only was left, and even here _Danzig_ was cut off to -form a separate republic. ♦Duchy of Warsaw, 1806-1814.♦ The other -Polish territories of Prussia formed the _Duchy of Warsaw_, which was -held by the new King of Saxony. ♦Position of Silesia.♦ Silesia thus -fell back again on its half-isolated position, all the more so as it -lay between the German and the Polish possessions of the Saxon king. -The territory left to Prussia was now wholly continuous, without any -outlying possessions; but the length of its frontier and the strange -irregularity of its shape on the map were now more striking than ever. - - * * * * * - -The liberation of Germany and the fall of Buonaparte brought with -it a complete reconstruction of the German territory. ♦The German -Confederation, 1815.♦ Germany again arose, no longer as an Empire or -Kingdom, but as a lax Confederation. Austria, the duchy whose princes -had been so often chosen Emperors, became its presiding state. The -boundaries of the new Confederation differed but slightly from those -of the old Kingdom; but the internal divisions had greatly changed. -♦Princes holding lands both within the Confederation and out of it.♦ -Once more a number of princes held lands both in Germany and out of -it. The so-called ‘Emperor’ of Austria, the Kings of Prussia, Denmark, -and the Netherlands, became members of the Confederation for those -parts of their dominions which had formerly been states of the Empire. -In the like sort, the King of Great Britain and Ireland, having -recovered his continental dominions, entered the Confederation by the -title of _King of Hannover_. ♦Kingdom of Hannover, 1815-1866.♦ This -new kingdom was made up of the former electorate with some additions, -including _East-Friesland_. ♦Increase of the Prussian territory. | -Dismemberment of Saxony.♦ In other parts the Prussian territories were -largely increased. _Magdeburg_ and _Halberstadt_ were recovered. -_Swedish Pomerania_ was added to the rest of the ancient duchy; and, -more important than this, a large part of the kingdom of _Saxony_, -including the greater part of _Lausitz_ and the formerly outlying-land -of _Cottbus_, was incorporated with Prussia. This change, which made -the Saxon kingdom far smaller than the old electorate, altogether put -an end to the peninsular position of Silesia, even as regarded the -strictly German possessions of Prussia. ♦Posen.♦ The kingdom was at -the same time rendered more compact by the recovery of part of its -Polish possessions under the name of the Grand Duchy of _Posen_. In -western Germany again Prussia now made great acquisitions. ♦Rhenish -and Westfalian territory.♦ Its old outlying Rhenish and Westfalian -possessions grew into a large and tolerably compact territory, though -lying isolated from the great body of the monarchy. The greater part -of the territory west of the Rhine which had been ceded to France -now became Prussian, including the cities of _Köln_, no longer a -metropolitan see, _Trier_, _Münster_, and _Paderborn_. The main part -of the Prussian possessions thus consisted of two detached masses, of -very unequal size, but which seemed to crave for a closer geographical -union. ♦Neufchâtel.♦ The Principality of _Neufchâtel_, which made the -Prussian king a member of the Swiss Confederation, will be mentioned -elsewhere. - -♦Territory recovered by Austria.♦ - -Of the other powers which entered the Confederation for the German -parts of their dominions, but which also had territories beyond the -Confederation, _Austria_ recovered _Salzburg_, _Tyrol_, _Trent_, and -_Brixen_, together with the south-eastern lands which had passed to -France. Thus the territory of the Confederation, like that of the -old Kingdom, again reached to the Hadriatic. ♦Possession of Denmark. -| Holstein and Lauenburg.♦ _Denmark_ entered the Confederation for -_Holstein_, and for a new possession, that of _Lauenburg_, the duchy -which in a manner represented ancient Saxony. ♦Luxemburg.♦ The King -of the _Netherlands_ entered the Confederation for the Grand Duchy -of _Luxemburg_, part of which however was cut off to be added to the -Rhenish possessions of Prussia. ♦Sweden gives up Pomerania.♦ Sweden, by -the cession of its last remnant of _Pomerania_, ceased altogether to be -a German power. - -There were thus five powers whose dominions lay partly within the -Confederation, partly out of it. ♦Prussia the greatest German Power.♦ -In the case of one of these, that of Prussia, the division of German -and non-German territory was purely formal. Prussia was practically -a purely German power, and the greatest of purely German powers. -♦Austria.♦ Her rival Austria stood higher in formal rank in the -Confederation, and ruled over a much greater continuous territory; but -here the distinction between German and non-German lands was really -practical, as later events have shown. ♦Comparison of the position of -Austria and Prussia.♦ It has been found possible to shut out Austria -from Germany. To shut out Prussia would have been to abolish Germany -altogether. ♦Hannover.♦ Hannover, though under a common sovereign with -Great Britain, was so completely cut off from Great Britain, and had so -little influence on British politics, that it was practically as much a -purely German state before its separation from Great Britain as it was -afterwards. ♦Holstein and Luxemburg.♦ In the cases of Denmark and the -Netherlands, princes the greater part of whose territories lay out of -Germany held adjoining territories in Germany. Here then were materials -for political questions and difficulties; and in the case of Denmark, -these questions and difficulties became of the highest importance. - -♦Kingdom of Bavaria.♦ - -Among those members of the Confederation, whose territory lay wholly -within Germany, the Kingdom of _Bavaria_ stood first. Its newly -acquired lands to the south were given back to Austria; but it made -large acquisitions to the north-east. Modern Bavaria consists of a -large mass of territory, Bavarian, Swabian, and Frankish, counting -within its boundaries the famous cities of _Augsburg_ and _Nürnberg_ -and the great bishoprics of _Bamberg_ and _Würzburg_. ♦Her Rhenish -territory.♦ Besides this, Bavaria recovered a considerable part of the -ancient Palatinate west of the Rhine, which adds _Speyer_ to the list -of Bavarian cities. ♦Württemberg. | Saxony.♦ The other states which -bore the kingly title, _Württemberg_ and the remnant of _Saxony_, were -of much smaller extent. Saxony however kept a position in many ways out -of all proportion to the narrowed extent of its geographical limits. -Württemberg, increased by various additions from the _Swabian_ lands -of _Austria_ and from other smaller principalities, had, though the -smallest of kingdoms, won for itself a much higher position than had -been held by its former Counts and Dukes. ♦Baden.♦ Along with them -might be ranked the Grand Duchy of _Baden_, with its strange irregular -frontier, taking in Heidelberg and Constanz. ♦Hessen.♦ Among a crowd -of smaller states stand out the two Hessian principalities, the -Grand Duchy of _Hessen-Darmstadt_, and _Hessen-Cassel_, whose prince -still kept the title of Elector, and the Grand Duchy of _Nassau_. -♦Oldenburg.♦ The Grand Duchy of _Oldenburg_ nearly divided the Kingdom -of Hannover into two parts. ♦Anhalt.♦ The principalities of _Anhalt_ -stretched into the Prussian territory between Halberstadt and the -newly-won Saxon lands. ♦Brunswick.♦ The Duchy of _Brunswick_ helped -to divide the two great masses of Prussian territory. ♦Mecklenburg.♦ -In the north _Mecklenburg_ remained, as before, unequally divided -between the Grand Dukes of _Schwerin_ and _Strelitz_. Germany was thus -thoroughly mapped out afresh. Some of the old names had vanished; some -had got new meanings. The greater states, with the exception of Saxony, -became greater. A crowd of insignificant principalities passed away. -Another crowd of them remained, especially the smaller Saxon duchies -in the land which had once been Thuringian. But, if we look to two of -the most characteristic features of the old Empire, we shall find that -one has passed away for ever, while the other was sadly weakened. ♦No -ecclesiastical principality.♦ No ecclesiastical principality revived -in the new state of things. ♦Lüttich added to Belgium.♦ The territory -of one of the old bishoprics, that of _Lüttich_, formerly absorbed by -France, now passed wholly away from Germany, and became part of the new -kingdom of Belgium. ♦The four Free Cities.♦ Of the free cities four did -revive, but four only. The three _Hanse Towns_, no longer included in -French departments, and Frankfurt, no longer a Grand Duchy, entered the -Confederation as independent commonwealths. ♦Revival of German national -life.♦ Germany, for a while utterly crushed, had come to life again; -she had again reached a certain measure of national unity, which could -hardly fail to become closer.[14] - -The Confederation thus formed lasted, with hardly any change that -concerns geography, till the war of 1866. ♦Division of Luxemburg, -1831.♦ The Grand Duchy of _Luxemburg_, which had, by the arrangements -of 1815, been held by the King of the Netherlands as a member of -the German Confederation, was, on the separation of Belgium and the -Netherlands, cut into two parts. Part was added to Belgium; another -part, though quite detached from the kingdom of the Netherlands, was -held by its king as a member of the Confederation. In 1839 he also -entered it for the Duchy of Limburg. ♦War in Sleswick and Holstein, -1848-1851.♦ The internal movements which began in 1848, and the war -in _Sleswick_ and _Holstein_ which began in the same time, led to no -lasting geographical changes. In 1849 the Swabian principalities of -Hohenzollern were joined to the Prussian crown. ♦Cession of the Duchies -to Austria and Prussia, 1864.♦ The last Danish war ended by the cession -of Sleswick and Holstein, together with Lauenburg, to Prussia and -Austria jointly, an arrangement in its own nature provisional. Austria -ceded her right in Lauenburg to Prussia in the next year, and in the -next year again came the Seven Weeks’ War, and the great geographical -changes which followed it. ♦Abolition of the Confederation. | Exclusion -of Austria. | North-German Confederation. | Cession of Sleswick and -Holstein to Prussia, 1866.♦ The German Confederation was abolished; -Austria was shut out from all share in German affairs, and she ceded -her joint right in Sleswick and Holstein to Prussia. ♦Prussian -annexations.♦ The Northern states of Germany became a distinct -Confederation under the presidency of Prussia, whose immediate dominion -was increased by the annexation of the kingdom of _Hannover_, the duchy -of _Nassau_, the electorate of _Hessen_, and the city of _Frankfurt_. -The States south of the Main, Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden, and the -southern part of Hessen-Darmstadt, remained for a while outside of the -new League. ♦All the Prussian lands admitted to the Confederation.♦ -The non-German dominions of Prussia, Prussia strictly so called with -the Polish duchy of Posen and the newly acquired land of Sleswick, -were now incorporated with the Confederation; on the other hand, -all that Austria had held within the Confederation was now shut out -of it. ♦Settlement of Luxemburg, 1867.♦ _Luxemburg_ also was not -included in the new League, and, after some disputes, it was in the -next year recognized as a neutral territory under its own duke the -King of the Netherlands. ♦Liechtenstein.♦ The little principality of -_Liechtenstein_ was perhaps forgotten altogether; but, as not being -included in the Confederation, nor yet incorporated with anything else, -it must be looked on as becoming an absolutely independent state. -♦Great geographical changes, 1866.♦ Thus the geographical frontiers -of Germany underwent, at a single blow, changes as great as they had -undergone in the wars of the French Revolution. The geography of the -presiding power of the new League was no less changed. - -That extraordinary extent of frontier which had hitherto been -characteristic of Prussia was not wholly taken away by the new -annexations, but it was greatly lessened. The kingdom, as a kingdom, -is made far more compact, and the two great detached masses in which -it formerly lay are now joined together. Moreover, the geographical -character of Prussia becomes of much less political importance, now -that her frontier marches to so great an extent on the smaller members -of the League of which she is herself President. ♦War with France, -1870-1871. | The German Empire. | Incorporation of the Southern -states.♦ Next came the war with France, the first effect of which -was the incorporation of the southern states of Germany with the new -League, which presently took the name of an Empire, with the Prussian -King as hereditary Emperor. ♦Recovery of Elsass-Lothringen, 1871.♦ Then -by the peace with France, nearly the whole of _Elsass_ and part of -_Lotharingia_, including the cities of _Strassburg_ and _Metz_, were -restored to Germany. They have, under the name of _Elsass-Lothringen_, -become an Imperial territory, forming part of the Empire and owning -the sovereignty of the Emperor, but not becoming part of the kingdom -of Prussia or of any other German state. ♦The Imperial title.♦ -The assumption of the Imperial title could hardly be avoided in a -confederation whose constitution was monarchic, and which numbered -kings among its members. No title but Emperor could have been found -to express the relation between the presiding chief and the lesser -sovereigns. - -♦The new Empire a revival of the German Kingdom, but not of the Roman -Empire. | Comparison of the old Kingdom and the new Empire.♦ - -Still it must be borne in mind that the new German Empire is in no -sense a continuation or restoration of the Holy Roman Empire which -fell sixty-four years before its creation. But it may be fairly -looked on as a restoration of the old German Kingdom, the Kingdom of -the East-Franks. Still, as far as geography is concerned, no change -can be stranger than the change in the boundaries of Germany between -the ninth century and the nineteenth. The new Empire, cut short to -the north-west, south-west, and south-east, has grown somewhat to -the north, and it has grown prodigiously to the north-east. ♦Name of -_Prussia_.♦ Its ruling state, a state which contains such illustrious -cities as Köln, Trier, and Frankfurt, is content to call itself after -an extinct heathen people whose name had most likely never reached -the ears of Charles the Great. ♦Position of Berlin.♦ The capital of -the new Empire, placed far away from any of the antient seats of -German kingship, stands in what in his day, and long after, was a -Slavonic land. ♦Formation of the new Empire.♦ Germany, with its chief -state bearing the name of _Prussia_, with the place of its national -assemblies transferred from Frankfurt to Berlin, presents one of the -strangest changes that historical geography can show us. But, strange -as is the geographical change, it has come about gradually, by the -natural working of historical causes. The Slavonic and Prussian lands -have been Germanized, while the western parts of the old kingdom -which have fallen away have mostly lost their German character. Those -German lands which have formed the kernel of the Swiss Confederation -have risen to a higher political state than that of any kingdom or -Empire. But the German lands which still remain so strangely united -to the lands of the Magyar and the southern Slave await, at however -distant a time, their natural and inevitable reunion. So does a Danish -population in the extreme north await, with less hope, its no less -natural separation from the German body. Posen, still mainly Slavonic, -remains unnaturally united to a Teutonic body, but it is not likely to -gain by a transfer to any other ruler. The reconstruction of the German -realm in its present shape, a shape so novel to the eye, but preserving -so much of ancient life and ancient history, has been the greatest -historical and geographical change of our times. - - -§ 3. _The Kingdom of Italy._ - -♦Small geographical importance of the kingdom as such.♦ - -We parted from the Italian kingdom at the moment of its separation -from the Eastern and Western kingdoms of the Franks. Its history, -as a kingdom, consists in little more than its reunion with the -East-Frankish crown, and in the way in which the royal power gradually -died out within its limits. There is but little to say as to any -changes of frontier of the kingdom as such. As long as Germany, Italy, -and Burgundy acknowledged a single king, any shiftings of the frontiers -of his three kingdoms were of secondary importance. When the power -of the Emperors in Italy had died out, the land became a system of -independent commonwealths and principalities, which had hardly that -degree of unity which could enable us to say that a certain territory -was added to Italy or taken from it. Even if a certain territory -passed from an Italian to a German or Burgundian lord, the change was -rather a change in the frontier of this or that Italian state than -in the frontier of Italy itself. ♦Changes on the Alpine frontier.♦ -The shiftings of frontier along the whole Alpine border have been -considerable; but it is only in our own day that we can say that Italy -as such has become capable of extending or lessening her borders. ♦Case -of Verona.♦ When, in 1866, Venice and Verona were added to the Italian -kingdom, that was a distinct change in the frontier of Italy. We can -hardly give that name to endless earlier changes on the same marchland. -♦Case of Trieste, 1380.♦ In the fourteenth century, for instance, the -town of _Trieste_, disputed between the patriarchs of Aquileia and -the commonwealth of Venice, was acknowledged as an independent state, -and it presently gave up its independence by commendation to the Duke -of Austria. It is not likely that the question entered into any man’s -mind whether the frontiers of the German and Italian kingdoms were -affected by such a change. Whether as a free city or as an Austrian -lordship, Trieste remained under the superiority, formally undoubted -but practically nominal, of the common sovereign of Germany and Italy, -the Roman Emperor or King. Whether the nominal allegiance of the city -was due to him in his German or in his Italian character most likely no -one stopped to think. ♦No eastern or western frontiers.♦ East and west, -the Italian kingdom had no frontiers; the only question which could -arise was as to the relation of the islands of Corsica and Sardinia -to the kingdom itself or to any of the states which arose within it. -To the south lay the independent Lombard duchies, and the possessions -which still remained to the Eastern Empire. ♦The Norman kingdom of -Sicily not an Imperial fief.♦ These changed in time into the Norman -duchy of _Apulia_ and kingdom of _Sicily_; but that kingdom, held as -it was as a fief of the see of Rome, was never incorporated with the -Italian kingdom of the Emperors, nor did its kings ever become the -men of the Emperor. Particular Emperors in the thirteenth century, in -the sixteenth, and in the eighteenth, were also kings of one or both -the Sicilian kingdoms; but at no time before our own day were Sicily -and southern Italy ever incorporated with a Kingdom of Italy. When we -remember that it was to the southern part of the peninsula that the -name of Italy was first given, we see here a curiosity of nomenclature -as remarkable as the shiftings of meaning in the names of Saxony and -Burgundy. - -Naples and Sicily then, the Two Sicilies of later political -nomenclature, lie outside our present subject. ♦Venice no part of -Italy.♦ So does the commonwealth of _Venice_, except so far as Venice -afterwards won a large subject territory on the Italian mainland. -♦Her Italian dominions.♦ Both these states have to do with Italy as -a geographical expression, but neither the Venetian commonwealth nor -the Sicilian kingdom is Italian within the meaning of the present -section. They formed no part of the Carolingian dominion. ♦Venice -and the Sicilies part of the Eastern Empire.♦ They were parts of the -Eastern Empire, not of the Western. They remained attached to the New -Rome after an Imperial throne had again been set up in the Old. They -gradually fell away from their allegiance to the Eastern Empire, but -they were never incorporated with the Empire of the West. I shall deal -with them here only in their relations to the Imperial Kingdom of -Italy, and treat of their special history elsewhere among the states -which arose out of the break-up of the Eastern Empire. Again, on the -north-western march of Italy a power gradually arose, partly Italian, -but for a long time mainly Burgundian, which has in the end, by a -strange fate, grown into a new Italian Kingdom. ♦The House of Savoy.♦ -This is the House of _Savoy_. The growth of the dominions of that -house, the process by which it gradually lost territory in Burgundy -and gained it in _Italy_, form another distinct subject. ♦Its special -history.♦ It will be dealt with here only in its relations to the -kingdom of Italy. - -♦The Kingdom of Italy continues the Lombard kingdom.♦ - -The Italian Kingdom of the Karlings, the kingdom which was reunited -to Germany under Otto the Great, was, as has been already said, a -continuation of the old Lombard kingdom. It consisted of that kingdom, -enlarged by the Italian lands which fell off from the Eastern Empire -in the eighth century; that is by the _Exarchate_ and the adjoining -_Pentapolis_, and the immediate territory of _Rome_ itself. ♦Austria -and Neustria.♦ The Lombard kingdom, in the strictest sense, took in -the two provinces north of the Po, in which we again find, as in -other lands, an _Austria_ to the east and a _Neustria_ to the west. -♦Æmilia. | Tuscany.♦ It took in _Æmilia_ south of the Po—the district -of Piacenza, Parma, Reggio, and Modena—also _Tuscany_, a name, which, -as it no longer reaches to the Tiber, answers pretty nearly to its -modern use. ♦Romagna.♦ The Tuscan name has lived on; the Exarchate and -Pentapolis, as having been the chief seat of the later Imperial power -in Italy, got the name of _Romania_, _Romandiola_, or _Romagna_. This -name also lives on; but the Lombard Neustria and Austria soon vanish -from the map. Their disappearance was perhaps lucky, as one knows not -what arguments might otherwise have been built on the presence of an -Austria south of the Alps. ♦Lombardy proper. | Venetia.♦ The Lombard -Neustria together with Æmilia got the special name of _Lombardy_, while -the Lombard Austria, after various shiftings of names taken from the -principalities which rose and fell within it, came back in the end to -its oldest name, that of _Venetia_. ♦Mark of Ivrea. | Duchy of Friuli.♦ -In the north-west corner _Iporedia_ or _Ivrea_ appears as a distinct -march; but the Venetian march at the other corner, known at this stage -as the duchy of _Friuli_, is of more importance. It takes in the county -of _Trent_, the special march of _Friuli_, and the march of _Istria_. -♦Fluctuation of boundary at the north-west corner.♦ This is the corner -in which the German and Italian frontier has so often fluctuated. We -have seen that, after the union of the Italian and German crowns, even -Verona itself was sometimes counted as German ground. - -♦Comparison of Italy and Germany.♦ - -Under the German kings Italy came under the same influences as the -other two Imperial kingdoms. Principalities grew up; free cities -grew up; but, while in Germany the principalities were the rule and -the cities the exception, in Italy it was the other way. ♦Growth -of a system of commonwealths in Italy.♦ The land gradually became -a system of practically independent commonwealths. Feudal princes, -ecclesiastical or temporal, flourished only in the north-western and -north-eastern corners of the kingdom. But, if the range of the German -cities was less wide, and their career less brilliant, than those of -Italy, their freedom was more lasting. ♦Tyrants grow into princes.♦ The -Italian cities gradually fell under tyrants, and the tyrants gradually -grew into acknowledged princes. ♦Growth of the dominion of the Popes.♦ -The Bishops of Rome too, by a series of claims dexterously pressed -at various times, contrived to form the greatest of ecclesiastical -principalities, one which stretched across the peninsula from sea to -sea. ♦Four stages of Italian history.♦ The geographical history of -Italy consists of four stages. In the first the kingdom fell asunder -into principalities. In the second the principalities vanished before -the growth of the free cities. In the third the cities were again -massed into principalities, till in the fourth the principalities were -at last merged in a kingdom of united Italy. - - * * * * * - -Under the Saxon and Frankish Emperors the old Lombard names of Neustria -and Æmilia pass away. Several small marches lie along the Burgundian -frontier, as _Savona_ on the coast, _Ivrea_ among the mountains to -the north-west, between them _Montferrat_, _Vasto_, and _Susa_, -whose princes, as special guardians of the passage between the two -kingdoms, bore the title of Marquess in Italy. It was in this region -that the feudal princes were strongest, and that the system of free -cities had the smallest developement. ♦The Marquesses of Montferrat, -938-1533.♦ The Savoyard power was already beginning to grow up in -the extreme north-west corner; but at this time a greater part in -strictly Italian history is played by the Marquesses of Montferrat, -who for many centuries kept their position as important feudal princes -quite apart from the lords of the cities. In the north-east corner -of the kingdom the place of the old Austria is taken by the border -principalities where the Italian, the German, and the Slave all come -in contact, and which fluctuated more than once between the Italian -and the German crowns. We have here the great march of Verona, beyond -it that of Friuli, Trent, the marchland of the marchland, between -Verona and Bavaria, and the Istrian peninsula on the Slavonic side -of the Hadriatic. Between the border districts on either side lay -the central land, Lombardy, in the narrower sense, the chosen home -of the free cities. ♦Growth of the Lombard cities.♦ Here, by the -middle of the twelfth century, every city had practically become a -separate commonwealth, owning only the most nominal superiority in -the Emperor. Guelfic cities withstood the Emperor; Ghibelin cities -welcomed him; but both were practically independent commonwealths. -♦Wars of the Swabian Emperors.♦ Hence came those long wars between -the Swabian Emperors and the Italian cities which form the chief -feature of Italian history in the second half of the twelfth century -and the first half of the thirteenth. ♦Milan and Pavia. | The other -Lombard cities. | Alessandria, 1168.♦ Round the younger and the elder -capital, round Guelfic Milan and Ghibelin Pavia, gathered a crowd of -famous names, _Como_, _Bergamo_, and _Brescia_, _Lodi_, _Crema_, and -_Cremona_, _Tortona_, _Piacenza_, and _Parma_, and _Alessandria_, the -trophy of republican and papal victory over Imperial power. ♦Verona -and Padua.♦ The Veronese march was less rich in cities of the same -historical importance; but both _Verona_ itself and _Padua_ played -a great part, as the seats first of commonwealths, then of tyrants. -Further north and east, the civic element was weaker again. ♦Trent. -| Aquileia.♦ _Trent_ gradually parted off from Italy to become an -ecclesiastical principality of the German kingdom; and the Patriarchs -of _Aquileia_ grew into powerful princes at the north-eastern corner -of the Hadriatic. ♦The lords of Romano and Este.♦ Within the Veronese -or Trevisan march itself, the lords of _Romano_ and the more important -marquesses of _Este_ also demand notice. Romano gave the Trevisan march -its famous tyrant Eccelino in the days of Frederick the Second, and the -Marquesses of Este, kinsmen of the great Saxon dukes, came in time to -rank among the chief Italian princes. ♦The north-eastern march falls -off from Italy.♦ The extreme north-eastern march so completely fell off -from Italy that it will be better treated in tracing the growth of the -powers of Venice and Austria. - -♦Tuscany, Romagna, and the March of Ancona.♦ - -In the more central lands of the kingdom, in the old exarchate, -now known as _Romagna_, in the march variously called by the names -of _Camerino_, _Fermo_, or _Ancona_, and above all in the march of -_Tuscany_ on the southern sea, the same developement of city life also -took place, but somewhat later. North of the Apennines, along the -Hadriatic coast, arose a crowd of small commonwealths which gradually -passed into small tyrannies. ♦The Tuscan commonwealths.♦ Tuscany, on -the other hand, was parted off into a few commonwealths of illustrious -name. For a while one of these ran a course which stood rather apart -from the common run of Italian history. ♦Pisa; | her wars with the -Saracens 1005-1115.♦ _Pisa_, then one of the great maritime and -commercial states of Europe, became, early in the eleventh century, -a power which forestalled the crusades and won back lands from the -Saracen. Though she was in every sense a city of the Italian kingdom, -Pisa at this time held a position not unlike that which was afterwards -held by Venice. Like her, she was a power which colonized and conquered -beyond the seas, but which came only gradually to take a share in the -main course of Italian affairs. ♦Genoa.♦ Beyond the borders of Tuscany, -the same position was held by _Genoa_ on the Ligurian gulf. ♦Occupation -of the island of Sardinia by Pisa, and of Corsica by Genoa.♦ Pisa won -_Sardinia_ from the Saracen; Genoa, after long disputes with Pisa, -obtained a more lasting possession of _Corsica_. Returning to Tuscany, -three great commonwealths here grew up, which gradually divided the -land between them. ♦Lucca, Siena, Florence.♦ These were _Lucca_ -and _Siena_, and _Florence_, the last of Italian cities to rise to -greatness, but the one which became in many ways the greatest among -her fellows. ♦Perugia.♦ In the centre of Italy, within the bounds of -old Etruria but not within those of modern Tuscany, _Perugia_, both as -commonwealth and as tyranny, held a high place among Italian cities. -♦Rome.♦ Of Rome herself it is almost impossible to speak. She has much -history, but she has little geography. Emperors were crowned there; -Popes sometimes lived there; sometimes Rome appears once more as a -single Latin city, waging war against Tusculum or some other of her -earliest fellows. ♦Claims of the Popes.♦ The claims of her Bishops -to independent temporal power, founded on a succession of real or -pretended Imperial and royal grants, lay still in the background; but -they were ready to grow into reality as occasion served. - - * * * * * - -♦Second stage, c. 1250-1530.♦ - -The next stage of Italian political geography may be dated from -the death of Frederick the Second, when all practical power of an -Imperial kingdom in Italy may be said to have passed away. ♦Growth of -tyrannies.♦ Presently begins the gradual change of the commonwealths -into tyrannies, and the grouping together of many of them into larger -states. We also see the beginning of more definite claims of temporal -dominion on behalf of the Popes. ♦Dominion of Spain, 1555-1701.♦ In -the course of the three hundred years between Frederick the Second and -Charles the Fifth, these processes gradually changed the face of the -Italian kingdom. It became in the end a collection of principalities, -broken only by the survival of a few oligarchic commonwealths and by -the anomalous dominion of Venice on the mainland. Between Frederick -the Second and Charles the Fifth, we may look on the Empire as -practically in abeyance in Italy. The coming of an Emperor always -caused a great stir for the time, but it was only for the time. ♦Grant -of Rudolf, 1278.♦ After the grant of Rudolf of Habsburg to the Popes, -a distinction was drawn between Imperial and papal territory in Italy. -♦Imperial and papal fiefs.♦ While certain princes and commonwealths -still acknowledged at least the nominal superiority of the Emperor, -others were now held to stand in the same relation of vassalage to the -Pope. - -We must now trace out the growth of the chief states which were formed -by these several processes. Beginning again in the north, it must be -remembered that all this while the power of Savoy was advancing in -those north-western lands in which the influences which mainly ruled -this period had less force than elsewhere. Montferrat too kept its old -character of a feudal principality, a state whose rulers had in various -ways a singular connexion with the East. ♦Palaiologoi at Montferrat, -1306.♦ As Marquesses of Montferrat had claimed the crown of Jerusalem -and had worn the crown of Thessalonica, so, as if to keep even the -balance between East and West, in return a branch of the Imperial house -of Palaiologos came to reign at Montferrat. To the east of these more -ancient principalities, two great powers of quite different kinds grew -up in the old Neustria and Austria. ♦Duchy of Milan. Venice.♦ These -were the _Duchy of Milan_ and the land power of _Venice_. Milan, like -most other Italian cities, came under the influence of party leaders, -who grew first into tyrants and then into acknowledged sovereigns. -♦The Visconti at Milan, 1310-1447.♦ These at Milan, after the shorter -domination of the Della Torre, were the more abiding house of the -Visconti. Their dominion, after various fluctuations and revolutions, -was finally established when the coming of the Emperor Henry the -Seventh generally strengthened the rule of the Lords of the cities -throughout Italy. - -♦Grant of the Duchy by King Wenceslaus, 1395.♦ - -At the end of the fourteenth century their informal lordship passed by -a royal grant into an acknowledged duchy of the Empire. The dominion -which they had gradually gained, and which was thus in a manner -legalized, took in all the great cities of Lombardy, those especially -which had formed the Lombard League against the Swabian Emperors. -♦County of Pavia.♦ Pavia indeed, the ancient rival of Milan, kept a -kind of separate being, and was formed into a distinct county. ♦Extent -of the duchy.♦ But the duchy granted by Wenceslaus to Gian-Galeazzo -stretched far on both sides of the lake of Garda. _Belluno_ at one end -and _Vercelli_ at the other formed part of it. It took in the mountain -lands which afterwards passed to the two Alpine Confederations; it took -in _Parma_, _Piacenza_, and _Reggio_ south of the Po, and _Verona_ -and _Vicenza_ in the old Austrian or Venetian land. Besides all this, -_Padua_, _Bologna_, even _Genoa_ and _Pisa_, passed at various times -under the lordship of the Visconti. But this great power was not -lasting. The Duchy of Milan, under various lords, native and foreign, -lasted till the wars of the French Revolution; but, long before that -time, it had been cut short on every side. ♦Decrease on the death of -Gian Galeazzo, 1402.♦ The death of the first Duke was followed by a -separation of the duchy of Milan and the county of Pavia between his -sons, and the restored duchy never rose again to its former power. -♦The eastern cities won by Venice, 1406-1447.♦ The eastern parts, -Padua, Verona, Brescia, Bergamo, were gradually added to the dominion -of Venice. By the middle of the fifteenth century, that republic -had become the greatest power in northern Italy. ♦House of Sforza, -1450-1535. | Claims of the Kings of France, 1499-1525.♦ In the duchy of -Milan the house of Sforza succeeded that of Visconti; but the opposing -claims of the Kings of France were one chief cause of the long wars -which laid Italy waste in the latter years of the fifteenth century -and the early years of the sixteenth. The duchy was tossed to and fro -between the Emperor, the French King, and its own dukes. Meanwhile the -dominion which was thus struggled for was cut short at the two ends. -♦Cession to the Alpine Leagues, 1512-1513.♦ It was dismembered to the -north in favour of the two Alpine Leagues, as will be hereafter shown -more in detail. ♦The Popes obtain Parma and Piacenza, 1515. | Duchy -of Parma and Piacenza, 1545.♦ South of the Po, the Popes obtained -_Parma_ and _Piacenza_, which were afterwards granted as papal fiefs to -form a duchy for the house of Farnese. Thus the Duchy of Milan which -became in the end a possession of Charles the Fifth, and afterwards -of his Spanish and Austrian successors, was but a remnant of the -great dominion of the first Duke. The duchy underwent still further -dismemberments in later times. - -♦Land power of Venice only.♦ - -With Venice we have here to deal in her somewhat unnatural position -as an Italian land power. ♦War of the League of Cambray, 1508-1517.♦ -This position she took on herself in the fifteenth century; in the -sixteenth it led to the momentary overthrow and wonderful recovery of -her dominion in the war of the League of Cambray. This land power of -Venice stands quite distinct from the Venetian possessions east of -the Hadriatic. ♦Istria.♦ With this last her possession of the coast -of the _Istrian_ peninsula must be reckoned, rather than with her -Italian dominions. Between these lay Aquileia, Trieste, and the other -lands in this quarter which gradually came under the power of Austria. -♦Extent of Venetian dominion. | Ravenna, 1441-1530.♦ The continuous -Italian dominion of Venice took in _Udine_ at one end and _Bergamo_ -at the other, besides _Crema_, and for a while _Ravenna_, as outlying -possessions. Thus the Byzantine city which lay anchored off the shore -of the Western Empire could for a season call the ancient seat of the -Exarchate its own. ♦Two parts of the Venetian territory.♦ But even the -continuous land territory of Venice lay in two portions. Brescia and -Bergamo were almost cut off from Verona and the other possessions to -the east by the Lake of Garda, the bishopric of Trent to the north, and -the principality of _Mantua_ to the south. - -The mention of this last state leads us back again to the commonwealths -which, like Milan, changed, first into tyrannies, and then into -acknowledged principalities. It is impossible to mention all of them, -and some of those which played for a while the most brilliant part in -Italian history had no lasting effect on Italian geography. ♦Rule of -the Scala at Verona, 1260-1387; | of the Carrara at Padua, 1318-1405;♦ -The rule of the house of Scala at Verona, the rule of the house of -Carrara at Padua, left no lasting trace on the map. It was otherwise -with the two states which bordered on the Venetian possessions to the -south. ♦of the Gonzaga at Mantua, 1328-1708. | Marquesses, 1433; -| Dukes, 1530.♦ The house of Gonzaga held sovereign power at _Mantua_, -first as captains, then as marquesses, then as dukes, for nearly four -hundred years. ♦House of Este.♦ Of greater fame was the power that -grew up in the house of _Este_, the Italian branch of the house of -Welf. Their position is one specially instructive, as illustrating the -various tenures by which dominion was held. ♦The lords of Ferrara and -Modena, 1264-1288.♦ The marquesses of Este, feudal lords of that small -principality, became, after some of the usual fluctuations, permanent -lords of the cities of _Ferrara_ and _Modena_. About the same time -they lost their original holding of Este, which passed to Padua, and -with Padua to Venice. Thus the nominal marquess of Este and real lord -of Ferrara was not uncommonly spoken of as Marquess of Ferrara. In the -fifteenth century these princes rose to ducal rank; but by that time -the new doctrine of the temporal dominion of the Popes had made great -advances. Modena, no man doubted, was a city of the Empire; but Ferrara -was now held to be under the supremacy of the Pope. The Marquess Borso -had thus to seek his elevation to ducal rank from two separate lords. -♦Duchy of Modena, 1453. | Duchy of Ferrara, 1471.♦ He was created Duke -of Modena and Reggio by the Emperor, and afterwards Duke of Ferrara -by the Pope. This difference of holding, as we shall presently see, -led to the destruction of the power of the house of Este. In the times -in which we are now concerned, their dominions lay in two masses. To -the west lay the duchy of Modena and Reggio; apart from it to the -east lay the duchy of Ferrara. ♦Loss of Rovigo, 1484.♦ Not long after -its creation, this last duchy was cut short by the surrender of the -border-district of _Rovigo_ to Venice. - -♦Cities of Romagna.♦ - -Between the two great duchies of the house of Este lay _Bologna_, -gradually changed from _Romania_ in one sense into _Romagna_ in -another. Like most other Italian cities, the commonwealths of the -Exarchate and the Pentapolis changed into tyrannies, and their petty -princes were one by one overthrown by the advancing power of the -Popes. ♦Bologna, Perugia, Rimini.♦ Every city had its dynasty; but -it was only a few, like the houses of _Bentevoglio_ at _Bologna_, of -_Baglioni_ at _Perugia_, and _Malatesta_ at _Rimini_, that rose to -any historical importance. One only combined historical importance -with acknowledged princely rank. ♦The Duchy of Urbino, 1478-1631.♦ The -house of _Montefeltro_, lords of _Urbino_, became acknowledged dukes by -papal grants. From them the duchy passed to the house of La Rovere, and -it flourished under five princes of the two dynasties. ♦Expansion of -the papal dominions.♦ Gradually, by successive annexations, the papal -dominions, before the middle of the sixteenth century, stretched from -the Po to Tarracina. Ferrara and Urbino still remained distinct states, -but states which were confessedly held as fiefs of the Holy See. - -♦Creation of the Tuscan cities.♦ - -To the west, in Tuscany, the phænomena are somewhat different. The -characteristic of this part of Italy was the grouping together of the -smaller cities under the power of the larger. Nearly all the land -came in the end under princely rule; but both acknowledged princely -rule and the tyrannies out of which it sprang came into importance in -Tuscany later than anywhere else. ♦Lucca under Castruccio Castracani, -1320-1338.♦ _Lucca_ had in the fourteenth century a short time of -greatness under her illustrious tyrant Castruccio; but, before and -after his day, she plays, as a commonwealth, only a secondary part in -Italy. Still she remained a commonwealth, though latterly an oligarchic -one, through all changes down to the general crash of the French -Revolution. ♦Pisa.♦ _Pisa_ kept for a while her maritime greatness, -and her rivalry with the Ligurian commonwealth of _Genoa_. ♦Genoa.♦ -Genoa, less famous in the earliest times, proved a far more lasting -power. ♦Her rule in Corsica.♦ She established her dominion over the -coast on both sides of her, and kept her island of Corsica down to -modern times. ♦Sardinia ceded to Aragon, 1428. | Pisa subject to -Florence, 1416.♦ Physical causes caused the fall of the maritime power -of Pisa; Sardinia passed from her to become a kingdom of the House -of Aragon, and she herself passed under the dominion of _Florence_. -♦Greatness of Florence.♦ This last illustrious city, the greatest of -Tuscan and even of Italian commonwealths, begins to stand forth as -the foremost of republican states about the time when her forerunner -Milan came under the rule of tyrants. She extended her dominion over -_Volterra_, _Arezzo_, and many smaller places, till she became mistress -of all northern Tuscany. ♦Siena.♦ To the south the commonwealth of -_Siena_ also formed a large dominion. ♦Rule of the Medici. 1434-1494. -| 1512-1527.♦ In Florence the rule of the Medici grew step by step into -a hereditary tyranny; but it was an intermittent tyranny, one which was -supported only by foreign force, and which was overturned whenever -Florence had strength to act for herself. ♦Alexander, Duke of Florence, -1530.♦ It was only after her last overthrow by the combined powers of -Pope and Cæsar that she became, under Alexander, the first duke of the -house of Medici, an acknowledged principality. ♦Cosmo annexes Siena, -1557. | Elba, &c.♦ Cosmo the First, the second duke, annexed Siena, -and all the territory of that commonwealth, except the lands known as -_Stati degli Presidi_, that is the isle of _Elba_ and some points on -the coast. These became parts of the kingdom of Naples; that is, at -that time, parts of the dominion of Spain. The state thus formed by -Cosmo was one of the most considerable in Italy, taking in the whole -of Tuscany except the territory of Lucca and the lands which became -Spanish. ♦Cosmo Grand Duke of Tuscany, 1567.♦ Its ruler presently -exchanged by papal authority the title of Duke of Florence for that of -Grand Duke of Tuscany. - - -§ 4. _The Later Geography of Italy._ - -♦Abeyance of the kingdom of Italy, 1530-1805.♦ - -Under Charles the Fifth it might have seemed that both the Roman Empire -and the kingdom of Italy had come to life again. A prince who wore -both crowns was practically master of Italy. But though the power of -the Emperor was restored, the power of the Empire was not. In truth -we may look on all notion of a kingdom of Italy in the elder sense as -having passed away with the coronation of Charles himself. The thing -had passed away long before; after the pageant at Bologna the name was -not heard for more than two centuries and a half. ♦Italy a geographical -expression.♦ Italy became truly a ‘geographical expression;’ the land -consisted of a number of principalities and a few commonwealths, all -nominally independent, some more or less practically so, but the more -part of which were under foreign influence, and some of them were -actually ruled by foreign princes. ♦Changes among the Italian states.♦ -The states of Italy were united, divided, handed over from one ruler to -another, according to the fluctuations of war and diplomacy, without -any regard either to the will of the inhabitants or to the authority of -any central power. A practically dominant power there was during the -greater part of this period; but it was not the power of even a nominal -King of Italy. For a long time that dominant power was held by the -House of Austria in its two branches. The supremacy of Charles in Italy -passed, not to his Imperial brother, but to his Spanish son. ♦Dominion -of Spain, 1555-1701;♦ Then followed the long dominion of the Spanish -branch of the Austrian house; then came the less thorough dominion of -the German branch. ♦of Austria, 1713-1793.♦ This last was a dominion -strictly of the House of Austria as such, not of the Empire or of -either of the Imperial kingdoms. And now that the name of Italy means -merely a certain surface on the map, we must take some notice, so far -as they regard Italian history, at once of Savoy at one end and of the -Sicilian kingdoms at the other. From this time both of them have a more -direct bearing on Italian history. - -♦Massing of Italy into larger states.♦ - -By the time of the coronation of Charles the Fifth, or at least within -the generation which could remember his coronation, the greater part -of Italy had been massed into a few states, which, as compared with -the earlier state of things, were of considerable size. ♦Monaco♦ A few -smaller principalities and lordships still kept their place, of which -one of the smallest, that of _Monaco_ in the extreme south-west, has -lived on to our own time. ♦San Marino♦ So has the small commonwealth of -_San Marino_, surrounded, first by the dominions of the Popes and now -by the modern kingdom. But such states as these were mere survivals. -♦Dominion of Venice on the mainland, 1406-1797.♦ In the north-east, -Venice kept her power on the mainland untouched, from the recovery -of her dominions after the league of Cambray down to her final fall. -♦She loses her outlying Italian possessions, 1530.♦ By the treaty of -Bologna she lost _Ravenna_; she lost too the towns of _Brindisi_ and -_Monopoli_ which she had gained during the wars of Naples; but her -continuous dominion, both properly Venetian and Lombard, remained. -♦Duchy of Milan: | Spanish, 1540-1706; | Austrian, 1706-1796.♦ The -duchy of _Milan_ to the west of her was held in succession by the -two branches of the House of Austria, first the Spanish and then -the German. ♦Advance of Savoy towards Milan.♦ But the duchy, as an -Austrian possession, was being constantly cut short towards the west -by the growing power of Savoy. For a while the Milanese and Savoyard -states were conterminous only during a small part of their frontier. -♦Montferrat.♦ The marquisate of _Montferrat_, as long as it remained -a separate principality, lay between the southern parts of the two -states. On the failure of the old line of marquesses, Montferrat was -disputed between the Dukes of Savoy and Mantua. ♦United to Mantua -1536, but claimed by Savoy, 1613-1631.♦ Adjudged to Mantua, and raised -into a duchy by Imperial authority, it was still claimed, and partly -conquered by, Savoy. ♦Mantua forfeited to the Empire, and Montferrat -joined to Savoy, 1708-1713.♦ At last, by one of the last exercises of -Imperial authority in Italy, the duchy of Mantua itself was held to be -forfeited to the Empire; that is, it became an Austrian possession. At -the same time the Imperial authority confirmed Montferrat to Savoy. The -Austrian dominions in Italy were thus extended to the south-east by -the accession of the Mantuan territory; but the whole western frontier -of the Milanese now lay open to Savoyard advance. ♦First dismemberment -of Milan in favour of Savoy, 1713.♦ The same treaties which confirmed -Montferrat to Savoy and Milan to Austria also dismembered Milan -in favour of Savoy. A corner of the duchy to the south-west, -_Alessandria_ and the neighbouring districts, were now given to Savoy; -the Peace of Vienna further cut off _Novara_ to the north and _Tortona_ -to the south. ♦Further cessions, 1738.♦ The next peace, that of -Aix-la-Chapelle, gave up all west of the Ticino, which river became a -permanent frontier. - -♦Parma and Piacenza given to the Spanish Bourbons, 1731-1749.♦ - -Among the other states, the duchy of _Parma_ and _Piacenza_ was, -on the extinction of the house of Farnese, handed over to princes -of the Spanish branch of the Bourbons. ♦Ferrara confiscated to the -Popes, 1598.♦ _Modena_ and _Ferrara_ remained united, till Ferrara -was annexed as an escheated fief to the dominions of its spiritual -overlord. ♦1718.♦ But the house of Este still reigned over Modena with -_Reggio_ and _Mirandola_, while its dominions were extended to the -sea by the addition of _Massa_ and other small possessions between -Lucca and Genoa. ♦1771-1803.♦ The duchy in the end passed by female -succession to the House of Austria. ♦Corsica ceded to France, 1768.♦ -_Genoa_ and _Lucca_ remained aristocratic commonwealths; but Genoa -lost its island possession of _Corsica_, which passed to France. -♦Extinction of the Medici, 1737. | Francis of Lorraine Grand Duke of -Tuscany.♦ The Grand Duchy of _Tuscany_ remained in the house of Medici, -till it was assigned to Duke Francis of Lorraine, afterwards the -Emperor Francis the First, and after that it remained in the House of -Habsburg-Lorraine. ♦Urbino annexed by the Popes, 1631.♦ The States of -the Church, after the annexation of Ferrara, were in the next century -further enlarged by the annexation of the duchy of Urbino. - -♦1530-1797. | Comparatively little geographical change.♦ - -Thus, except on the frontier of Piedmont and Milan, the whole time -from Charles the Fifth to the French Revolution was, within the old -kingdom of Italy, much less remarkable for changes in the geographical -frontiers of the several states than for the way in which they are -passed to and fro from one master to another. ♦Kingdom of the Two -Sicilies♦ This is yet more remarkable, if we look to the southern -part of the peninsula, and to the two great islands which in modern -geography we have learned to look on as attached to Italy. ♦The Norman -kingdom of Sicily.♦ The Norman kingdom which, by steps which will -be told elsewhere, grew up to the south of the Imperial Kingdom of -Italy, has hardly ever changed its boundaries, except by the various -separations and unions of the insular and the continental kingdom. -♦Benevento.♦ Even the outlying papal possession of _Benevento_ after -each war went back to its ecclesiastical master. But the shiftings, -divisions, and reunions of the Two Sicilies and of the island of -Sardinia have been endless. ♦Charles of Anjou, 1265.♦ The Sicilian -kingdom of the Norman and Swabian kings, containing both the island -and the provinces on the mainland, passed unchanged to Charles of -Anjou. ♦Revolt of the island of Sicily, 1282. | The two kingdoms.♦ -The revolt of the island split the kingdom into two, one insular, one -continental, each of which called itself the _Kingdom of Sicily_, -though the continental realm was more commonly known as the _Kingdom -of Naples_. The wars of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries caused -endless changes of dynasty in the continental kingdom, but no changes -of frontier. ♦Union of Aragon, Sardinia, and continental Sicily under -Alfonso, 1442.♦ Under the famous Alfonso in the fifteenth century, -Aragon, Sardinia, and the continental Sicily were three kingdoms -under one sovereign, while the insular Sicily was ruled by another -branch of the same house. ♦Aragonese kings of the island, 1296-1442. -| 1458-1701.♦ Then continental Sicily passed to an illegitimate -branch of the House of Aragon, while Sardinia and insular Sicily -were held by the legitimate branch. ♦Wars beginning with Charles the -Eighth, 1494-1528. | Spanish, 1556-1701.♦ The French invasion under -Charles the Eighth and the long wars that followed, the conquests, -the restorations, the schemes of division, all ended in the union -of both the Sicilian kingdoms, now known as the _Kingdom of the Two -Sicilies_, along with Sardinia, as part of the great Spanish monarchy. -♦1554-1555.♦ A momentary separation of the insular kingdom, in order -to give the husband of Mary of England royal rank while his father yet -reigned, is important only as the first formal use of the title of -_King of Naples_. ♦Sardinia and Naples Austrian. | Duke of Savoy king -of Sicily, 1713.♦ In the division of the Spanish monarchy, Sardinia -and Naples fell to the lot of the Austrian House, while Sicily was -given to the Duke of Savoy, who thus gained substantial kingly rank. -♦Exchange of Sicily and Sardinia, 1718.♦ Presently the kings of the two -island kingdoms made an exchange; Sardinia passed to Savoy, and the -Emperor Charles the Sixth ruled, like Frederick the Second and Charles -the Fifth, over both Sicilies. ♦The Spanish Bourbons, 1735-1806. -| 1817-1860.♦ Lastly, the kingdom was handed over from an Austrian to a -new Spanish master, the first of the line of Neapolitan Bourbons. Thus, -at the end of the last century, the Two Sicilies formed a distinct and -united kingdom, while Sardinia formed the outlying realm of the Duke of -Savoy and Prince of Piedmont. His kingdom was of far less value than -his principality or his duchy. ♦Use of the name _Sardinia_.♦ But, as -Sardinia gave their common sovereign his highest title, the Sardinian -name often came in common speech to be extended to the continental -dominions of its king. - - * * * * * - -♦Time of the Revolution, 1797-1814.♦ - -This period, a period of change, but of comparatively slight -geographical change, was followed by a time when, in Italy as in -Germany, boundaries were changed, new names were invented or forgotten -names revived, when old land-marks were rooted up, and thrones were -set up and cast down, with a speed which baffles the chronicler. The -first strictly geographical change which was wrought in Italy by the -revolutionary wars was a characteristic one. ♦Cispadane Republic, -1796.♦ A _Cispadane Republic_, the first of a number of momentary -commonwealths bearing names dug up from the recesses of bygone times, -took in the duchy of Modena and the Papal Legations of Romagna. Without -exactly following the same boundaries, it answered roughly to the old -Exarchate. ♦Transpadane Republic, 1797.♦ Then the French victories -over Austria caused the Austrian duchies of Milan and Mantua to become -a _Transpadane Republic_. ♦Treaty of Campo Formio, 1797. | Cisalpine -Republic.♦ Then Venice was wiped out at Campo Formio, and her Lombard -possessions were joined together with the two newly made commonwealths, -to form a _Cisalpine Republic_. But the same treaty wrought another -change which was more distinctly geographical. ♦Venice surrendered -to Austria.♦ Venice and the eastern part of her possessions on the -mainland, the old Venetia, the Lombard _Austria_, was now handed over -to the modern state which bore the latter name. This change may be -looked on as distinctly cutting short the boundaries of Italy. The -duchy of Milan in Austrian hands had been an outlying part of the -Austrian dominions; but Venetia marches on the older territory of -the Austrian house, and was thus more completely severed from Italy. -The whole north of the Hadriatic coast thus became Austrian in the -modern sense. One Italian commonwealth—for Venice had long counted as -Italian—was thus wiped out, and handed over to a foreign king. But -elsewhere, at this stage of revolutionary progress, the fashion ran -in favour of the creation of local commonwealths. ♦Ligurian Republic, -1797. | Parthenopæan Republic. | Tiberine Republic, 1798-1801.♦ The -dominions of Genoa became a _Ligurian Republic_; Naples became a -_Parthenopæan Republic_; Rome herself exchanged for a moment the -memories of kings, consuls, emperors, and pontiffs to become the head -of a _Tiberine Republic_. ♦Piedmont joined to France, 1798-1800.♦ -Piedmont was overwhelmed; the greater part was incorporated with -France. Some small parts were added to the neighbouring republics, and -the king of Sardinia withdrew to his island kingdom. Amid this crowd -of new-fangled states and new-fangled names, ancient San Marino still -lived on. - -Thus far revolutionary Italy followed the example of revolutionary -France, and the new states were all at least nominal commonwealths. In -the next stage, when France came under the rule of a single man, above -all when that single ruler took on him the Imperial title, the tide -turned in favour of monarchy. In Rome and Naples it had already turned -so in another way. ♦Restoration of the Pope and the King of the Two -Sicilies, 1801.♦ By help of the Czar and the Sultan, the new republics -vanished, and the old rulers, Pope and King, came back again. And now -France herself began to create kingdoms instead of commonwealths. -♦Kingdom of Etruria, 1801-1808.♦ Parma was annexed to France, and its -Duke was sent to rule in Tuscany by the title of _King of Etruria_. -Presently Italy herself gave her name to a kingdom. ♦Kingdom of Italy, -1805-1814.♦ The Cisalpine republic, further enlarged by Venice and -the other territory ceded to Austria at Campo Formio, enlarged also -by the _Valtellina_ and the former bishopric of _Trent_ at one end -and by the march of _Ancona_ at the other, became the _Kingdom of -Italy_. ♦Buonaparte king of Italy.♦ Its King, the first since Charles -the Fifth who had worn the Italian crown, was no other than the new -ruler of France, the self-styled ‘Emperor.’ But, in Buonaparte’s later -distributions of Italian territory, it was not his Italian kingdom, -but his French ‘empire’ whose frontiers were extended. ♦Annexation -of Liguria, 1805; | of Etruria, 1808. | Grand duchy of Lucca.♦ The -Ligurian Republic was annexed; so before long was the new kingdom -of Etruria; _Lucca_ meanwhile was made into a grand duchy for the -conqueror’s sister. ♦Incorporation of Rome and France, 1809.♦ Lastly, -Rome itself, with what was left of the papal dominions, was also -incorporated with the French dominion. The work alike of Cæsar and of -Charles was wiped out from the Eternal City. The Empire of the Gauls, -which Civilis had dreamed of more than seventeen centuries before, had -come at last. - -The fate of the remainder of the peninsula had been already sealed -before Rome became French. The kingdom of the Two Sicilies fell -asunder. The Bourbon king kept his island, as the Savoyard king kept -his. ♦Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, 1806. | 1809. | _Stati degli -Presidi._♦ The continental kingdom passed, as a _Kingdom of Naples_, -first to Joseph Buonaparte, and then to Joachim Murat. ♦Benevento.♦ -But the outlying Tuscan possessions of the Sicilian crown had already -passed to France, and _Benevento_, the outlying papal possession in the -heart of the kingdom, became a separate principality. - -♦Italy under French dominion.♦ - -Thus all Italy—unless we count the island kingdoms of Sardinia and -Sicily as parts of Italy—was brought under French dominion in one form -or another. But of that dominion there were three varieties. ♦Part -incorporated with France.♦ The whole western part of the land, from -Aosta to Tarracina—unless it is worth while to except the new Lucchese -duchy—was formally incorporated with France. ♦Extent of the kingdom of -Italy.♦ The north-eastern side, from Bözen to Ascoli, formed a Kingdom -of Italy, distinct from France, but held by the same sovereign. And -this Kingdom of Italy was further increased to the north by part of -those Italian lands which had become Swiss and German. ♦Kingdom of -Naples.♦ Southern Italy, the Kingdom of Naples, remained in form an -independent kingdom; but it was held by princes who could not be looked -on as anything but the humble vassals of their mighty kinsman. Never -had Italy been brought more completely under foreign dominion. ♦Revival -of the Italian name.♦ Still, in a part at least of the land, the name -of Italy, and the shadow of a Kingdom of Italy, had been revived. ♦Its -effects.♦ And, as names and shadows are not without influence in human -affairs, the mere existence of an Italian state, called by the Italian -name, did something. The creation of a sham Italy was no unimportant -step towards the creation of a real one. - - * * * * * - -♦Settlement of, 1814-1815.♦ - -The settlement of Italy after the fall of Buonaparte was far more -strictly a return to the old state of things than the contemporary -settlement of Germany. Italy remained a geographical expression. Its -states were, as before, independent of one another. ♦No tie between the -Italian states.♦ They were practically dependent on a foreign power: -but they were in no way bound together, even by the laxest federal tie. -♦The princes restored, but not the commonwealths.♦ The main principle -of settlement was that the princes who had lost their dominions should -be restored, but that the commonwealths which had been overthrown -should not be restored. Only harmless San Marino was allowed to live -on. Venice, Lucca, and Genoa remained possessions of princes. ♦Kingdom -of Lombardy and Venice.♦ The sovereign of Hungary and Austria, now -calling himself ‘Emperor’ of his archduchy, carved out for himself -an Italian kingdom which bore the name of the _Kingdom of Lombardy -and Venice_. On the strength of this, the Austrian, like his French -predecessor, took upon him to wear the Italian crown. ♦Its extent.♦ The -new kingdom consisted of the former Italian possessions of Austria, -the duchies of Milan and Mantua, enlarged by the former possessions -of Venice, which had become Austrian at Campoformio. The old boundary -between Germany and Italy was restored. Trent, Aquileia, Trieste, were -again severed from Italy. They remained possessions of the same prince -as Milan and Venice, but they formed no part of his Lombardo-Venetian -kingdom. On another frontier, where restoration would have had to be -made to a commonwealth, the arrangements were less conservative, and -the _Valtellina_ remained part of the new kingdom. The Ticino formed, -as before, the boundary towards Piedmont. ♦Genoa annexed to Piedmont.♦ -The King of Sardinia came again into possession of this last country, -enlarged by the former dominions of _Genoa_. ♦Monaco.♦ This gave him -the whole Ligurian seaboard, except where the little principality of -_Monaco_ still went on. ♦Tuscany, Parma, Modena, Lucca.♦ _Parma_, -_Modena_, and _Tuscany_ again became separate duchies. _Lucca_ remained -a duchy alongside of them. ♦Lucca annexed to Tuscany.♦ The family -arrangements by which these states were handed about to this and that -widow do not concern geography; all that need be marked is that, by -virtue of one of these compacts, Lucca was in the end added to Tuscany. -That grand-duchy was further increased by the addition of the former -outlying possessions of the Sicilian crown, including Elba, the island -which for a moment was an Empire. ♦The Papal states.♦ The Pope came -back to all his old Italian possessions, outlying Benevento included. -♦The Two Sicilies.♦ The Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was formed again -by the restoration of the Kingdom of Naples to the Bourbon king. Thus -was formed the Italy of 1815, an Italy which, save in the sweeping away -of its commonwealths, and the consequent extension of Sardinian and -Austrian territory, differed geographically but little from the Italy -of 1748. But in 1815 there were hopes which had had no being in 1748. -Italy was divided on the map; but she had made up her mind to be one. - - * * * * * - -♦The union of Italy comes from Piedmont.♦ - -The union of Italy was at last to come from one of those corners which -in earlier history we have looked on as being hardly Italian at all. -It was not Milan or Florence or Rome which was to grow into the new -Italy. That function was reserved for a princely house whose beginnings -had been Burgundian rather than Italian, whose chief territories had -long lain on the Burgundian side of the Alps, but which had gradually -put on an Italian character, and which had now become the one national -Italian dynasty. The Italian possessions of the Savoyard house, -Piedmont, Genoa, and the island of Sardinia, now formed one of the -chief Italian states, and the only one whose rule, if still despotic, -was not foreign. Savoy, by ceasing to be Savoy, was to become Italy. -♦Movements of 1848.♦ The movements of 1848 in Italy, like those in -Germany, led to no lasting changes on the map: but they do so far -affect geography that new states were actually founded, if only for a -moment. ♦Momentary commonwealths.♦ Rome, Venice, Milan, were actually -for a while republics, and the Two Sicilies were for a while separated. -In the next year all came back as before. The next lasting change -on the map was that which at last restored a real Kingdom of Italy. -♦Campaign of 1859.♦ The joint campaign of France and Sardinia won -_Lombardy_ for the Sardinian kingdom. Lombardy was now defined as that -part of the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom which lay west of the Mincio, -except that Mantua was left out. She was left to Austria. A French -scheme for an Italian confederation came to nothing. ♦Union of the -smaller states, 1860.♦ Tuscany, Modena, Parma, and Romagna voted their -own annexation to Piedmont. The Two Sicilies were won by Garibaldi, -and the kingly title of Sardinia was merged in that of the restored -Kingdom of Italy. ♦Addition of the Sicilies.♦ This new Italian kingdom -was, by the addition of the Sicilies, extended over lands which had -never been part of the elder Italian kingdom. But Venetia was still -cut off; the Pope kept the lands on each side of Rome, the so-called -_Patrimony_ and the _Campagna_. ♦Cession of Savoy and Nizza to France.♦ -But France annexed the lands, strictly Burgundian rather than Italian, -of _Savoy_ and _Nizza_. The Italian kingdom was thus again called into -being; but it had not yet come to perfection. Italy had ceased to be a -geographical expression; but the Italian frontier still presented some -geographical anomalies. - -♦Recovery of Venetia, 1866; | of Rome, 1870.♦ - -The war between Prussia and Austria gave Venetia to Italy; the war -between Germany and France allowed Italy to recover Rome. ♦Part of the -old kingdom not yet recovered.♦ The two great gaps in her frontier -were thus made good; but, to say nothing of the annexations made by -France, a large Italian-speaking population, lying within the bounds -of the old Italian kingdom, still remains outside its modern revival. -Trent, Aquileia, Trieste, Istria, are still parts, not of an Italian -kingdom, not of a German kingdom, confederation, or empire, but of an -Austro-Hungarian monarchy. Otherwise the Italian kingdom has formed -itself, and it has taken its place among the great powers of Europe. -Yet the whole peninsula does not form part of the Italian kingdom. ♦San -Marino remains free.♦ Surrounded on every side by that kingdom, the -commonwealth of _San Marino_, like Rhodes or Byzantium under the early -Cæsars, still keeps its ancient freedom. - - -§ 5. _The Kingdom of Burgundy._ - -♦Union of Burgundy with Germany and Italy, 1032.♦ - -The Burgundian Kingdom, which was united with those of Germany and -Italy after the death of its last separate king Rudolf the Third, -has had a fate unlike that of any other part of Europe. ♦Dying out -of the kingdom.♦ Its memory, as a separate state, has gradually died -out. ♦Chiefly annexed by France;♦ The greater part of its territory -has been swallowed up bit by bit by a neighbouring power, and the -small part which has escaped that fate has long lost all trace of -its original name or its original political relations. By a long -series of annexations, spreading over more than five hundred years, -the greater part of the kingdom has gradually been incorporated with -France. ♦part Italian; | part Swiss.♦ Of what remains, a small corner -forms part of the modern kingdom of Italy, while the rest still keeps -its independence in the form of the commonwealths which make up the -western cantons of Switzerland. ♦Burgundy represented by Switzerland.♦ -These cantons, in fact, are the truest modern representatives of the -Burgundian kingdom. ♦Neutrality of Switzerland and Belgium.♦ And it is -on the Confederation of which they form a part, interposed as it is -between France, Italy, the new German Empire, and the modern Austrian -monarchy, as a central state with a guaranteed neutrality, that some -trace of the old function of Burgundy, as the middle kingdom, is -thrown. This function it shares with the Lotharingian lands at the -other end of the Empire, which now form part of the equally neutral -kingdom of Belgium, lands which, oddly enough, themselves became -Burgundian in another sense. - -The Burgundian Kingdom, lying between the Alps, the Saône and the -Rhone, and the Mediterranean, might be thought to have a fair natural -boundary. ♦Boundaries of the kingdom.♦ And, while it kept any shadow of -separate being, its boundaries did not greatly change. ♦Fluctuation of -its frontier.♦ They were however somewhat fluctuating on the side of -the Western kingdom, being sometimes bounded by the Rhone and sometimes -reaching to the line of hills to the west of it. They were also, as -we have seen, somewhat fluctuating on the side of Germany. ♦Chiefly -Romance speaking.♦ At this end the kingdom took in some German-speaking -districts; otherwise the language was Romance, including several -dialects of the tongue of _Oc_. - -♦County Palatine. | Lesser Burgundy.♦ - -The northern part of the kingdom, answering to the former Transjurane -kingdom—the _Regnum Jurense_—formed two chief states, the _County -Palatine of Burgundy_—the modern _Franche Comté_—and the _Lesser -Burgundy_, roughly taking in western Switzerland and northern Savoy. -♦Provence.♦ On the Mediterranean lay the great county of _Provence_, -with a number of smaller counties lying between it and the two northern -principalities. ♦The Free Cities.♦ But the great characteristic of -the land was that, next to Italy, no part of Europe contained so many -considerable cities lying near together. Many of these at different -times strove more or less successfully after a republican independence, -and a few have kept it to our own day. - -♦Little real unity in the kingdom.♦ - -But, though the Burgundian kingdom might be thought to have, on three -sides at least, a good natural frontier, it had but little real unity. -The northern part naturally clave to its connexion with the Empire much -longer than the southern. ♦The Burgundian Palatinate.♦ The _County -Palatine_ of Burgundy often passed from one dynasty to another, and it -is remarkable for the number of times that it was held as a separate -state by several of the great princes of Europe. ♦Held by the Emperor -Frederick, 1156-1189; | by Philip of France, 1315-1330.♦ It was held by -the Emperor Frederick Barbarossa in right of his wife; the marriage of -one of his female descendants carried it to Philip the Fifth of France. -♦United with the French Duchy.♦ Then it became united with the French -duchy of Burgundy under the dukes of the House of Valois. ♦1477. | Held -by the House of Austria, Charles the Fifth Count of Burgundy.♦ Saving -a momentary French occupation after the death of Charles the Bold, it -remained with them and their Austrian and Spanish representatives. -Among these it had a second Imperial Count in the person of Charles -the Fifth. ♦Annexed to France, 1674.♦ But, through all these changes -of dynasty, it remained an acknowledged fief of the Empire, till its -annexation to France under Lewis the Fourteenth. ♦Dole the capital of -the county.♦ The capital of this county, it must be remembered, was -_Dole_. ♦Besançon a Free Imperial city. 1189-1651.♦ The ecclesiastical -metropolis of _Besançon_, though surrounded by the county, remained a -free city of the Empire from the days of Frederick Barbarossa to those -of Ferdinand the Third. ♦United to France.♦ It was then merged in the -county, and along with the county it passed to France. ♦Montbeilliard.♦ -And it should be noticed that a small Burgundian land in this quarter, -the county of _Montbeilliard_ or _Mümpelgard_, first as a separate -state, then in union with the duchy of Württemberg, kept its allegiance -to the Empire till the wars of the French Revolution, when it was -annexed to France and was never restored. - -♦The Lesser Burgundy.♦ - -While the Burgundian Palatinate thus kept its history as an unit in -European geography, the _Lesser Burgundy_ to the south-west of it had -a different history. The geography here gets somewhat confused through -the fact that this Lesser Burgundy, which in the twelfth century passed -under the power of the _Dukes of Zähringen_ in Swabia as _Rectors_, -took in some districts which were not parts of the Burgundian kingdom. -♦The eastern part German.♦ The eastern part of the kingdom itself -was of German speech, and its frontier towards the German duchy of -Alemannia or Swabia was somewhat fluctuating. The Aar may be taken -as the boundary of the kingdom, while the Lesser Burgundy, as an -administrative division, stretched somewhat further to the East. -♦Cities of the Lesser Burgundy.♦ Thus Basel, as well the foundations -of the House of Zähringen at Bern and Freiburg, stood on strictly -Burgundian ground, while the city of Luzern and the land of Unterwalden -come under the head of the Lesser Burgundy, without forming part of the -Burgundian kingdom. These lands long kept up their connexion with the -Empire, though the Lesser Burgundy did not long remain as a separate -unit. ♦Dukes of Zähringen. | End of their house, 1218.♦ When the House -of Zähringen came to an end, the country began to split up into small -principalities and free cities which gradually grew into independent -commonwealths. ♦Break-up of the duchy. | Savoyard territory.♦ The -counts of Savoy, of whom more presently, acquired a large territory on -both sides of the Lake of Geneva. ♦Bishops, Counts, and Free Cities.♦ -Other considerable princes were the bishops of _Basel_, _Lausanne_, -_Geneva_, and _Sitten_, the counts of _Geneva_, _Kyburg_, _Gruyères_, -and _Neufchâtel_. ♦The Free Lands.♦ _Basel_, _Solothurn_, and _Bern_ -were Imperial cities. The complicated relations between the Bishops -and the city of Geneva hindered that city from having a strict right -to that title. In Unterwalden and in _Wallis_, notwithstanding the -possessions and claims of various spiritual and temporal lords, the -most marked feature was the retention of the old rural independence. -♦The Old League of High Germany.♦ Of the cities in this region, Luzern, -Bern, Freiburg, Solothurn, and Basel, all gradually became members of -the _Old League of High Germany_, the ground-work of the modern Swiss -Confederation. ♦Conquests of Bern and Freiburg from Savoy, 1536.♦ The -Savoyard lands north of the lake were conquered by Bern and Freiburg in -the sixteenth century, a conquest which also secured the independence -of Geneva. ♦The Burgundian cantons of Switzerland.♦ All these lands, -after going through the intermediate stage of allies or subjects -of some or other of the confederate cantons, have in modern times -become independent cantons themselves. This process of annexation and -liberation will be traced more fully when we come to the history of the -Swiss Confederation. - -To the south of this group of states, and partly intermingled with -them, lay another group, lying partly within the Cisjurane and partly -within the Transjurane kingdom, which gradually grew into a great -power. ♦Growth of Savoy.♦ These were the states which were united step -by step under the Counts of _Maurienne_, afterwards Counts of _Savoy_. -♦Burgundian possession of its county.♦ When their dominions were at -their greatest extent, they held south of the Lake of Geneva, besides -Maurienne and Savoy strictly so called, the districts of _Aosta_, -_Tarantaise_, the _Genevois_, _Chablais_, and _Faucigny_, together with -_Vaud_ and _Gex_ north of the lake. Thus grew up the power of Savoy, -which has already been noticed in its purely Italian aspect, but which -must receive fuller separate treatment in a section of its own. - -♦States between the Palatinate and the Mediterranean.♦ - -The remainder of the Burgundian Kingdom consisted of a number of small -states stretching from the southern boundary of the Burgundian county -to the Mediterranean. ♦Bresse and Bugey become Savoyard. | Bugey, -1137-1344; | Bresse, 1272-1402.♦ North of the Rhone lay the districts -of _Bresse_ and _Bugey_, which passed at various times to the House -of Savoy. ♦Lyons, Vienne, Orange, &c. | Provence.♦ Southwards on the -Rhone lay a number of small states, among which the most important -in history are the archbishopric, the county, and the free city of -_Lyons_, the county or _Dauphiny_ of _Vienne_ and the city of _Vienne_, -the county or principality _of Orange_, the city of _Avignon_, the -county of _Venaissin_, the free city of _Arles_, the capital of the -kingdom, the free city of _Massalia_ or _Marseilles_, the county of -_Nizza_ or _Nice_, and the great county or marquisate of _Provence_. -In this last power lay the first element of danger, especially to the -republican independence of the free cities. ♦Changes of dynasty. | The -Angevins, 1246.♦ After being held by separate princes of its own, as -well as by the Aragonese kings, it passed by marriage into the hands -of a French prince, Charles of Anjou, the conqueror of Sicily, and -also the destroyer of the second freedom of Massalia. ♦Growing French -connexion.♦ The possession of the greatest member of the kingdom by -a French ruler, though it made no immediate change in the formal -state of things, gave fresh strength to every tendency which tended to -withdraw the Burgundian lands from their allegiance to the Empire and -to bring them, first into connexion with France, and then into actual -incorporation with the French kingdom. - -♦Process of French annexation.♦ - -Step by step, though by a process which was spread over many centuries, -all the principalities and commonwealths of the Burgundian kingdom, -save the lands which have been Swiss and the single valley which is -now Italian, have come into the hands of France. The tendency shows -itself early. ♦Avignon first seized, 1226. | Annexation of Lyons, -1310.♦ _Avignon_ was seized for a moment during the Albigensian wars; -but the permanent process of French annexation began when Philip the -Fair took advantage of the disputes between the archbishops and the -citizens of _Lyons_, to join that Imperial city to his dominions. The -head of all the Gauls, the seat of the Primate of all the Gauls, thus -passed into the hands of the new monarchy of Paris, the first-fruits of -French aggrandizement at the cost of the Middle Kingdom. ♦Purchase of -the Dauphiny of Vienne, 1343.♦ Later in the same century, the Dauphiny -of _Vienne_ was acquired by a bargain with its last independent -prince. This land also passed, through the intermediate stage of an -Imperial fief held by the heir-apparent of the French crown, into a -mere province of France. ♦The city of Vienne annexed, 1448.♦ But the -acquisition of the Dauphiny did not carry with it that of the city -of _Vienne_, which escaped for more than a century. ♦Valence, 1446.♦ -Between the acquisition of the Dauphiny and the acquisition of the -city, the county of _Valence_ was annexed to the Dauphiny. ♦Provence, -1481.♦ Later in the same century followed the great annexation of -_Provence_ itself. The rule of French princes in that county for two -centuries had doubtless paved the way for this annexation. And the -acquisition of Provence carried with it the acquisition of the cities -of _Arles_ and _Marseilles_, which the counts of Provence had deprived -of their freedom. By this time the whole of the land between the Rhone -and the sea had been swallowed up, save one state at the extreme -south-east corner of the kingdom, and a group of small states which -were now quite hemmed in by French territory. ♦Nizza passes to Savoy, -1388.♦ The first was the county of _Nizza_ or Nice, which had passed -away from Provence to Savoy before the French annexation of Provence. -But by this time Savoy had become an Italian power, and Nizza was -from henceforth looked on as Italian rather than Burgundian. Between -Provence and the Dauphiny lay the city of _Avignon_, the county of -_Venaissin_, and the principality of _Orange_. ♦Avignon and Venaissin -become Papal, 1348. | Annexed to France, 1791.♦ Avignon and Venaissin -became papal possessions by purchase from the sovereign of Provence; -and, though they were at last quite surrounded by French territory, -they remained papal possessions till they were annexed in the course of -the great Revolution. These outlying possessions of the Popes perhaps -did somewhat towards preserving the independence of a more interesting -fragment of the ancient kingdom. ♦Orange.♦ This was the Principality -of _Orange_, which the neighbourhood of the Pope hindered from being -altogether surrounded by French territory. This little state, whose -name has become so much more famous than itself, passed through several -dynasties, and for a long time it was regularly seized by France in the -course of every war. ♦Its annexation to France, 1714-1771.♦ But it was -as regularly restored to independence at every peace, and its final -annexation did not happen till the eighteenth century. The acquisition -of Orange, Avignon, and Venaissin, completed the process of French -aggrandizement in the lands between the Rhone and the Var. The stages -of the same process as applied to the Savoyard lands will be best told -in another section. - - * * * * * - -♦Modern states which have split off from the three kingdoms.♦ - -We have thus traced the geographical history of the three Imperial -kingdoms themselves. It now follows to trace in the like sort the -origin and growth of certain of the modern powers of Europe which -have grown out of one or more of those kingdoms. Certain parts of -the German, Italian, and Burgundian kingdoms have split off from -these kingdoms, so as to form new political units, distinct from -any of them. Five states of no small importance in later European -history have thus been formed. ♦Their character as middle states.♦ -Most of them partake more or less of the character of middle states, -interposed between France and one or more of the Imperial kingdoms. -♦Switzerland.♦ First, there is the Confederation of _Switzerland_, -which arose by certain German districts and cities forming so close -an union among themselves that their common allegiance to the Empire -gradually died out. The Confederation grew into its present form by the -addition to these German districts of certain Italian and Burgundian -districts. ♦Savoy.♦ Secondly, there are, or rather were, the dominions -of the Dukes of _Savoy_, formed by the union of various Italian and -Burgundian districts. This however, as a middle power, has ceased -to exist; nearly all its Burgundian possessions have been joined to -France, while its Italian possessions have grown into a new Italy. ♦The -Dukes of Burgundy.♦ Thirdly, there were the dominions of the Dukes of -_Burgundy_, forming a middle power between France and Germany, and -made up by the union of French and Imperial fiefs. ♦Represented by the -kingdoms of the Low Countries.♦ These are represented on the modern -maps by the kingdoms of the _Netherlands_ and _Belgium_, the greater -part of both of which belonged to the Burgundian dukes. Of these -kingdoms much the greater part had split off from the old kingdom of -Germany. Certain parts were once French fiefs, but had ceased to be -so. ♦Recognized neutrality of Belgium, Switzerland, and once of part -of Savoy.♦ The position of three out of these four states as middle -powers, and their importance in that character, has been acknowledged -even by modern diplomacy in the neutrality which is still guaranteed -to Belgium and Switzerland, and which was formerly extended to certain -districts of Savoy. - -Of these four states, Switzerland, Savoy, and the duchy of Burgundy as -represented by the two kingdoms of the Low Countries, some have been -merged in other powers, and those which still remain count only among -the secondary states of Europe. But a fifth power has also broken off -from Germany which still ranks among the greatest in Europe. ♦The -Austrian dominions.♦ This is the power which, starting from a small -German mark on the Danube, has, by the gradual union of various lands, -German and non-German, grown into something distinct from Germany, -first under the name of the _Austrian ‘Empire’_ and more latterly -under that of the _Austro-Hungarian Monarchy_. This power differs -from the other states of which we have been just speaking, not only -in its vastly greater extent, but also in its position. ♦Position of -the Austrian dominion as a marchland.♦ It is a marchland, a middle -kingdom, but in a different sense from Burgundy, Switzerland, Savoy, -or Belgium. ♦Comparison with the western marchlands.♦ All these were -marchlands between Christian states, between states all of which had -formed part of the Carolingian Empire. All lie on the western side of -the German and Italian kingdoms. Austria, on the other hand, as its -name implies, arose on the eastern side of the German kingdom, as -a mark against Turanian and heathen invaders. ♦Austria as the march -against the Magyar.♦ The first mission of Austria was to guard Germany -against the Magyar. When the Magyar was admitted into the fellowship of -Europe and Christendom—when, after a while, his realm was united under -a single sovereign with Austria—the same duty was continued in another -form. ♦Austria and Hungary the mark of Christendom against the Turk.♦ -The power formed by the union of Hungary and Austria was one of the -chief among those which had to guard Christendom against the Turk. Its -history therefore forms one of the connecting links between Eastern and -Western Europe. In this chapter it will be dealt with chiefly on its -Western side, with regard to its relations towards Germany and Italy. -The Eastern aspect of the Austro-Hungarian power has more to do with -the states which arose out of the break up of the Eastern Empire. - -These states then, Switzerland, Savoy, the Duchy of Burgundy, the -Netherlands, and Austria, form a proper addition to the sections given -to the three Imperial kingdoms. I will now go on to deal with them in -order. - - -§ 6. _The Swiss Confederation._ - -♦The original Confederation practically German,♦ - -I have just spoken of the Swiss Confederation as being in its origin -purely German. This statement is practically correct, as 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, as we have seen in the last -section, a small Burgundian element in the Confederation, if not from -the beginning, at least from its aggrandizement in the thirteenth and -fourteenth centuries. ♦though part of it geographically Burgundian.♦ -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 -north-east corner may be looked on as practically German ground. ♦All -the old Cantons German in speech.♦ A more practical division than the -old boundaries of the kingdoms is the boundary of the Teutonic and -Romance speech; in this sense all the cantons of the old Confederation, -except part of Freiburg, are German. ♦The later Romance Cantons.♦ -The Romance cantons are those which were formed in modern times -out of the allied and subject states. ♦Many popular errors.♦ It is -specially needful to bear in mind, first, that, till the last years of -the thirteenth 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 seventeenth 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 -nineteenth 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. ♦The Swiss do not represent the Helvetii.♦ -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. -♦Summary of Swiss history. | A German League having become more united -and independent than others, annexes Romance allies and subjects.♦ -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. - -♦The Three Lands on the boundary of the three kingdoms.♦ - -The three Swabian lands 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. -♦First known document of union, 1291.♦ The first known document of -confederation between the three lands dates from the last years of the -thirteenth century. But that document is likely to have been rather -the confirmation than the actual beginning of their union. They had -for their neighbours several ecclesiastical and temporal lords, some -other Imperial lands and towns, and far greater than all, the Counts -of the house of _Kyburg_ and _Habsburg_, who had lately grown into the -more dangerous character of Dukes of Austria. ♦Growth of the League.♦ -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. ♦Luzern, 1332.♦ First of all, the city of -_Luzern_ joined the League. ♦Zürich, 1351.♦ Then came the Imperial -city of _Zürich_, which had already begun to form a little dominion -in the adjoining lands. ♦Glarus and Zug, 1352.♦ Then came the land -of _Glarus_ and the town of _Zug_ with its small territory. ♦Bern, -1353.♦ And lastly came the great city of _Bern_, which had already won -a dominion over a considerable body of detached and outlying allies -and subjects. ♦The Eight Ancient Cantons.♦ 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. ♦Their growth.♦ 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. These lesser -changes and annexations cannot all be recorded here; but it must be -carefully borne in mind that the process was constantly going on. -♦Dominion of Zürich and Bern.♦ Zürich, and yet more Bern, each formed, -after the manner of an ancient Greek city, what in ancient Greece -would have passed for an empire. ♦Conquests from Austria, 1415-1460.♦ -In the fifteenth century, 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. -♦Aargau, Thurgau, &c.♦ 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 canton formed for a long time.♦ - -It is a fact to be specially noticed in the history of the -Confederation, that, for nearly a hundred and thirty years, though -the territory and the power of the Confederation were constantly -increasing, 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. ♦Beginning of -Italian dominions.♦ The first extension beyond the original German -lands and those Burgundian lands which were practically German began in -the direction of Italy. ♦Uri obtains Val Levantina, 1441.♦ Uri had, by -the annexation of Urseren, become the neighbour of the Duchy of Milan, -and in the middle of the fifteenth 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. ♦First Savoyard -conquest of Bern. | 1475.♦ The war with Charles of Burgundy enabled -Bern to win several detached possessions in the Savoyard lands north -and east of the lake, and even on the lower course of the Rhone. -♦Savoyard conquests of Freiburg and Wallis.♦ And, while Bern advanced, -some points in the same direction were gained by her allies who are not -yet members of the Confederation, by the city of _Freiburg_ and the -League of _Wallis_. ♦Growth of Wallis.♦ This last confederation had -grown up on the upper course of the Rhone, where the small free lands -had gradually displaced the territorial lords. ♦Freiburg and Solothurn -become Cantons, 1481.♦ Soon after this came the next admission of -new cantons, those of the cities of _Freiburg_ and _Solothurn_, each -of them bringing with it its small following of allied and subject -territory. ♦Basel and Schaffhausen, 1501.♦ Twenty years later, _Basel_ -and _Schaffhausen_, the latter being the only canton north of the -Rhine, were admitted with their following of the like kind. ♦Appenzell, -1513.♦ Twelve years later, _Appenzell_, a little land which had set -itself free from the rule of the abbots of _Saint Gallen_, after having -long been in alliance with the Confederates, was admitted to the rank -of a canton. ♦The Thirteen Cantons, 1513-1798.♦ Thus was made up the -full number of Thirteen Cantons, which remained unchanged down to the -wars of the French Revolution. - -But the time when the Confederation was finally settled as regards -the number of cantons was also a time of great extension of territory -on the part both of the Confederation and of several of its members. -♦Graubünden.♦ At the south-east corner of the Confederate territory, on -the borders of the duchy of Milan and the county of Tyrol, the League -of _Graubünden_ or the _Grey Leagues_ had gradually arisen. A number -of communities, as in Wallis, had got rid of the neighbouring lords, -and had formed themselves into three leagues, the _Grey League_ proper, -the _Gotteshausbund_, and the League of _Ten Jurisdictions_, which -three were again united by a further federal tie. ♦Their alliance with -the Confederates.♦ At the end of the fifteenth century, the Leagues so -formed entered into an alliance with the Confederates. ♦1495-1567.♦ -Then began a great accession of territory towards the south on the part -both of the Confederates and of their new allies. ♦Italian dominion -of the Confederation, 1512;♦ The Confederates received a considerable -territory within the duchy of Milan, including _Bellinzona_, _Locarno_, -and _Lugano_, as the reward of services done to the House of Sforza. -♦of the Grey Leagues, 1513.♦ The next year their new allies of the -Grey Leagues also won some Italian territory, the _Valtellina_ and the -districts of _Chiavenna_ and _Bormio_. ♦Early Savoyard conquests of -Bern, Freiburg, and Wallis, 1536.♦ Next came the conquest of a large -part of the Savoyard lands, of all north of the Lake and a good deal to -the south, by the arms of Bern, Freiburg, and Wallis. ♦Vaud.♦ Bern and -Freiburg divided _Vaud_ in very unequal proportions. ♦Lausanne.♦ Bern -and Wallis divided _Chablais_ on the south side of the lake, and Bern -annexed the bishopric of _Lausanne_ on the north. ♦Geneva in alliance -with Bern and Freiburg.♦ _Geneva_, the ally of Bern and Freiburg, -with her little territory of detached scraps, was now surrounded by -the dominion of her most powerful allies at Bern. ♦Territory restored -to Savoy, 1567.♦ But by a later treaty Bern and Wallis gave back to -Savoy all that they had won south of the Lake, with the territory of -_Gex_ to the west of it. Geneva thus again had Savoy for a neighbour, -a neighbour at whose expense she even made some conquests—Gex among -them—conquests which the French ally of the free city would not allow -her to keep. Later changes gave her a neighbour yet more dangerous than -Savoy in the shape of France itself. ♦Gruyères divided between Bern and -Freiburg, 1554.♦ Before these changes, Bern and Freiburg divided the -county of _Gruyères_ between them, the last important instance of that -kind of process. - -♦The Allies.♦ - -The Confederation was thus fully formed, with its Thirteen Cantons and -their allied states. ♦Saint Gallen. | Bienne.♦ Of these the _Abbot of -Saint Gallen_, the _town of Saint Gallen_, and the town of _Biel_ or -_Bienne_, were so closely allied with the Confederates as to have a -place in their Diets. Besides relations of less close alliance which -the Confederates had with various Alsatian cities, several other states -had a connexion so close and lasting with the Confederation or with -some of its members, as to form part of the same political system. -♦_Bischofbasel._ | Mühlhausen and Rottweil. | Neufchâtel passes to -Prussia, 1707.♦ Such were the Leagues of Wallis and Graubünden, the -Bishop of _Basel_, the outlying town of _Mühlhausen_ in Elsass, and -for a while that of _Rottweil_. Bern too, and sometimes other cantons, -had relations both with the town and with the princes of _Neufchâtel_, -which, after passing through several dynasties, was at last inherited -by the Kings of Prussia. ♦Constanz.♦ _Constanz_, at the other end of -the Confederate land, was refused admission as a canton, but for a -while it was in alliance with some of the cantons. ♦Passes to Austria, -1548.♦ But this connexion was severed when Constanz, instead of a free -Imperial city, became a possession of Austria. ♦The Confederation -released from the allegiance to the Empire, 1658.♦ The power thus -formed, a power in which a body of German Confederates was surrounded -by a body of allies and subjects, German, Italian, and Burgundian, all -of them originally members of the Empire, was by the Peace of Westfalia -formally released from all allegiance to the Empire and its chief. -♦Date of the practical separation, 1495.♦ Their practical separation -may be dated much earlier, from the time when the Confederates refused -to accept the legislation of Maximilian. - -♦Geographical position of the League.♦ - -The growth of the League into an independent power was doubtless -greatly promoted by its geographical position, as occupying the -natural citadel of Europe. ♦Its anomalous frontier.♦ But the piecemeal -way in which it grew up was marked by the anomalous nature of its -frontier on several points. On the north the Rhine would seem to be a -natural boundary, but Schaffhausen beyond the Rhine formed part of the -Confederation, while Constanz and other points within it did not. To -the south the possession of territory on the Italian side of the Alps -seems an anomaly, an anomaly which is brought out more strongly by a -singularly irregular and arbitrary frontier. ♦The Confederation as a -middle state.♦ But looking on the Confederation as the middle state, -arising at the point of junction of the three Imperial kingdoms, it was -in a manner fitting that it should spread itself into all three. - - * * * * * - -♦Wars of the French Revolution.♦ - -The form which the Confederation thus took in the sixteenth -century remained untouched till the wars of the French Revolution. -♦Dismemberment of the Grey Leagues, 1797.♦ The beginning of change was -when the Italian districts subject to the Grey Leagues were transferred -to the newly formed _Cisalpine Republic_. In the next year the whole -existing system was destroyed. ♦Abolition of the Federal system, 1798. -| The Helvetic Republic.♦ The Federal system was abolished; instead of -the Old League of High Germany, there arose, after the new fashion -of nomenclature, a _Helvetic Republic_, in which the word _canton_ -meant no more than _department_. Yet even by such a revolution as -this some good was done. ♦Freedom of the subject districts.♦ The -subject districts were freed from the yoke of their masters, whether -those masters were the whole Confederation or one or more of its -several cantons. ♦Freedom of Vaud.♦ Thus, above all, the Romance land -of _Vaud_ was freed from subjection to its German masters at Bern. -♦Annexation of _Bischofbasel_ and Geneva to France.♦ Some of the -allied districts, as the bishopric of Basel and the city of Geneva, -were annexed to France. But the Leagues of Wallis and Graubünden -were incorporated with the Helvetic Republic. ♦Act of Mediation, -1803.♦ In 1803 the Federal system was restored by Buonaparte’s _Act -of Mediation_, which formed a Federal republic of nineteen cantons. -♦The nineteen cantons.♦ These were the original thirteen, with the -addition of _Aargau_, _Graubünden_, _St. Gallen_, _Ticino_, _Thurgau_, -and _Vaud_, which were formed out of the formerly allied and subject -lands. ♦Wallis incorporated with France.♦ _Wallis_ was separated from -the Confederation, and became, first a nominally distinct republic, -and afterwards a French department. ♦Neufchâtel. | 1806.♦ _Neufchâtel_ -was, in the course of Buonaparte’s wars with Prussia, detached from -that power, to form a principality under his General Berthier. ♦The -Swiss Confederation of twenty-two cantons. 1815.♦ At last, in 1815, the -present _Swiss Confederation_ was established, consisting of twenty-two -cantons, the number being made up by the addition of _Neufchâtel_, -_Wallis_, and _Geneva_. ♦_Bischofbasel_ added to Bern.♦ The bishopric -of Basel was also again detached from France, and added to the canton -of Bern, a canton differing in language and religion, and cut off -by a mountain range. ♦Neufchâtel separated from Prussia, 1848.♦ The -great constitutional changes which have been made since that time -have not affected geography, unless we count the division of the city -and district of Basel, _Baselstadt_ and _Baselland_, into distinct -half-cantons, and the surrender of all rights over Neufchâtel by the -King of Prussia. But this last was not strictly a geographical change; -it was rather a change from a _quasi_ monarchic to a purely republican -government in that particular canton. - - -§ 7. _The State of Savoy._ - -♦Position and growth of Savoy.♦ - -The growth of the power of Savoy, the border state of Burgundy and -Italy, has necessarily been spoken of more than once in earlier -sections; but it seems needful to give a short connected account of its -progress, and to mark the way in which a power originally Burgundian -gradually lost on the side of Burgundy and grew on the side of Italy, -till it has in the end itself grown into a new Italy. ♦Geographical -position of the Savoyard lands.♦ The lands which have at different -times passed under the rule of the House of Savoy lie continuously, -though with an irregular frontier, and though divided by the great -barrier of the Alps. ♦Their three divisions.♦ They fall however into -three main geographical divisions, which at one time became also -political divisions, being held by different branches of the Savoyard -House. ♦Italian.♦ There are the Italian possessions of that House, -which have grown into the modern Italian kingdom. ♦Burgundian south of -the lake.♦ There are the more strictly Savoyard lands south of the Lake -of Geneva, and the other lands south of the Rhone after it issues from -that lake, all of which have passed away under the power of France. -♦Burgundian north of the lake.♦ And there are the lands north of the -Lake and of the Rhone, part of which have also become French, while -others have become part of the Swiss Confederation. Both these last lay -within the kingdom of Burgundy, and stretched into both its divisions, -Transjurane and Cisjurane. In no part of our story is it more necessary -to avoid language which forestalls the arrangements of later times. -♦Popular confusions.♦ A wholly false impression is given by the use -of language such as commonly is used. We often hear of the princes of -Savoy holding lands ‘in France’ and ‘in Switzerland. They held lands -which by virtue of later changes have severally become French and -Swiss; but those lands became French and Swiss only by ceasing to be -Savoyard. On the other hand, to speak of them from the beginning as -holding lands in Italy is perfectly accurate. The Savoyard states -were a large and fluctuating assemblage of lands on both sides of the -Alps, lying partly within the Italian and partly within the Burgundian -kingdom. These last have shared the fate of the other fiefs of that -crown. - -♦The Savoyard state originally Burgundian.♦ - -The cradle of the Savoyard power lay in the Burgundian lands -immediately bordering upon Italy and stretching on both sides of -the Alps. It was to their geographical position, as holding several -great mountain passes, that the Savoyard princes owed their first -importance, succeeding therein in some measure to the Burgundian kings -themselves.[15] The early stages of the growth of the house are very -obscure; and its power does not seem to have formed itself till after -the union of Burgundy with the Empire. ♦Possessions of the Counts -of Maurienne.♦ But it seems plain that, at the end of the eleventh -century, the Counts of _Maurienne_, which was their earliest title, -held rights of sovereignty in the Burgundian districts of _Maurienne_, -_Savoy_ strictly so called, _Tarantaise_, and _Aosta_. ♦Aosta; its -special position.♦ This last valley and city, though on the Italian -side of the Alps, had hitherto been rather Burgundian than Italian.[16] -Its allegiance had fluctuated several times between the two kingdoms; -but, from the time that Savoy held lands in both, the question became -of no practical importance. And, without entering into minute questions -of tenure, it may be said that the early Savoyard possessions reached -to the Lake of Geneva, and spread on both sides of the inland mouth -of the Rhone. The power of the Savoyard princes in this region was -largely due to their ecclesiastical position as advocates of the -abbey of Saint Maurice. ♦Geographical character of the Burgundian -territories.♦ Thus their possessions had a most irregular outline, -nearly surrounding the lands of _Genevois_ and _Faucigny_. A state of -this shape, like Prussia in a later age and on a greater scale, was, as -it were, predestined to make further advances. But for some centuries -those advances were made much more largely in Burgundy than in Italy. -♦Their early Italian possessions.♦ The original Italian possessions -of the House bordered on their Burgundian counties of Maurienne and -Aosta, taking in _Susa_ and _Turin_. ♦Marquesses in Italy.♦ This small -marchland gave its princes the sounding title of _Marquesses in Italy_. -The endless shiftings of territory in this quarter could be dealt with -only at extreme length, and they are matters of purely local concern. -♦Fluctuations of dominion.♦ In truth, they are not always fluctuations -of territory in any strict sense at all, but rather fluctuations of -rights between the feudal princes, the cities, and their bishops. -♦Their position in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.♦ In the -twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the princes of Savoy were still -hemmed in in their own corner of Italy by princes of equal or greater -power, at _Montferrat_, at _Saluzzo_, at _Iverea_, and at _Biandrate_. -And it must be remembered that their position as princes at once -Burgundian and Italian was not peculiar to them. ♦Other princes at once -Italian and Burgundian.♦ The Dauphins of the Viennois and the Counts of -Provence both held at different times territories on the Italian side -of the Alps. The Italian dominions of the family remained for a long -while quite secondary to its Burgundian possessions, and the latter may -therefore be traced out first. - -♦Advance of Savoy in Burgundy. | Faucigny and the Genevois.♦ - -The main object of Savoyard policy in this region was necessarily the -acquisition of the lands of _Faucigny_ and the _Genevois_. ♦First -advance north of the lake.♦ But the final incorporation of those lands -did not take place till they were still more completely hemmed in by -the Savoyard dominions through the extension of the Savoyard power to -the north of the Lake. ♦Grant of Moudon. 1207.♦ This began early in -the thirteenth century by a royal grant of _Moudon_ to Count Thomas of -Savoy. ♦Romont the northern capital.♦ _Romont_ was next won, and became -the centre of the Savoyard power north of the Lake. ♦Peter, Count -of Savoy. 1263-1268.♦ Soon after, through the conquests of Peter of -Savoy, who was known as the Little Charlemagne and who plays a part in -English as well as in Burgundian history, these possessions grew into -a large dominion, stretching along a great part of the shores of the -Lake of Neufchâtel and reaching as far north as _Murten_ or _Morat_. -♦1239-1268.♦ But it was a straggling, and in some parts fragmentary, -dominion, the continuity of which was broken by the scattered -possessions of the Bishops of Lausanne and other ecclesiastical and -temporal lords. This extension of dominion brought Peter into close -connexion with the lands and cities which were afterwards to form the -Old League of High Germany. ♦His relations with Bern.♦ Bern especially, -the power to which his conquests were afterwards to be transferred, -looked on him as a protector. ♦Barons of Vaud. | Union of Vaud with -the elder branch. 1349.♦ This new dominion north of the Lake was, -after Peter’s reign, held for a short time by a separate branch of -the Savoyard princes as _Barons of Vaud_; but in the middle of the -fourteenth century, their barony came into the direct possession of the -elder branch of the house. The lands of Faucigny and the Genevois were -thus altogether surrounded by the Savoyard territory. ♦Faucigny held -by the Dauphins of the Viennois.♦ Faucigny had passed to the Dauphins -of the Viennois, who were the constant rivals of the Savoyard counts, -down to the time of the practical transfer of their dauphiny to France. -♦Savoy acquires Faucigny and Gex. 1355.♦ Soon after that annexation, -Savoy obtained _Faucigny_, with _Gex_ and some other districts beyond -the Rhone, in exchange for some small Savoyard possessions within the -Dauphiny. ♦The Genevois. 1401.♦ The long struggle for the Genevois, -the _county_ of Geneva, was ended by its purchase in the beginning -of the fifteenth century. This left the _city_ of Geneva altogether -surrounded by Savoyard territory, a position which before long -altogether changed the relations between the Savoyard counts and the -city. ♦Changed relations to city of Geneva.♦ Hitherto, in the endless -struggles between the Genevese counts, bishops, and citizens, the -Savoyard counts, the enemies of the immediate enemy, had often been -looked on by the citizens as friends and protectors. Now that they had -become immediate neighbours of the city, they began before long to -be its most dangerous enemies. ♦Amadeus the Eighth, Count 1391; | Duke -1417; | Antipope 1440; | died 1451.♦ The acquisition of the Genevois -took place in the reign of the famous Amadeus the Eighth, the first -Duke of Savoy, who received that rank by grant of King Siegmund, -and who was afterwards the Antipope Felix. ♦Greatest extent of the -dominions of Savoy in Burgundy.♦ In his reign the dominions of Savoy, -as a power ruling on both sides of the Alps, reached their greatest -extent. But the Savoyard power was still pre-eminently Burgundian, -and Chambery was its capital. The continuous Burgundian dominion of -the house now reached from the Alps to the Saône, surrounding the -lake of Geneva and spreading on both sides of the lake of Neufchâtel. -♦Annexation of Nizza. 1388.♦ Besides this continuous Burgundian -dominion, the House of Savoy had already become possessed of _Nizza_, -by which their dominions reached to the sea. This last territory -had however, though technically Burgundian, geographically more to -do with the Italian possessions of the house. ♦Savoy brought into -the neighbourhood of France.♦ But this great extension of territory -brought Savoy on its western side into closer connexion with the most -dangerous of neighbours. Her frontier for a certain distance joined -the actual kingdom of France. The rest joined the Dauphiny, which was -now practically French, and the county of Provence, which was ruled by -French princes and which before the end of the century became an actual -French possession. ♦New relations towards Bern and the Confederates.♦ -To the North again the change in the relations between the House of -Savoy and the city of Geneva led in course of time to equally changed -relations towards Bern and her Confederates. ♦Loss of the Burgundian -dominion of Savoy.♦ Through the working of these two causes, all that -the House of Savoy now keeps of this great Burgundian territory is -the single city and valley of Aosta. After the fifteenth century, the -Burgundian history of that house consists of the steps spread over more -than three hundred years by which this great dominion was lost. - - * * * * * - -♦Growth of Savoy in Italy.♦ - -The real importance of the house of Savoy in Italy dates from much the -same time as the great extension of its power in Burgundy. ♦The largest -dominions cut short in the twelfth century.♦ During the eleventh and -twelfth centuries, partly through the growth of the cities, partly -through the enmity of the Emperor Henry the Sixth, the dominions of -the Savoyard princes as marquesses of Susa had been cut short, so as -hardly to reach beyond their immediate Alpine valleys. ♦Grants to -Count Thomas. 1207.♦ In the beginning of the thirteenth century, when -Count Thomas obtained his first royal grant north of the lake, he also -obtained grants of _Chieri_ and other places in the neighbourhood of -Turin. These grants were merely nominal; but they were none the less -the beginning of the Italian advance of the house. ♦First homage of -Saluzzo. 1216.♦ In the same reign _Saluzzo_ for the first time paid -a precarious homage to Savoy. ♦Italian dominion of Charles of Anjou. -1259.♦ Later in the thirteenth century, Charles of Anjou, now Count of -Provence and King of Sicily, made his way into Northern Italy also, -and thus brought the house of Savoy into a dangerous neighbourhood -with French princes on its Italian as well as on its Burgundian -side. Through the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries the Savoyard -border went on extending itself. But the Italian possessions of the -house, like its possessions north of the lake, were separated from -the main body of Savoyard territory to form a fief for one of the -younger branches. ♦Counts of Achaia in Piedmont. 1301-1418.♦ This -branch bore by marriage the empty title of Counts of _Achaia_ and -_Morea_—memories of Frank dominion within the Eastern Empire—while, -as if to keep matters straight, a branch of the house of Palaiologos -reigned at Montferrat. ♦Advance in the fourteenth century.♦ During -the fourteenth century, among many struggles with the marquesses of -Montferrat and Saluzzo, the Angevin counts of Provence, and the lords -of Milan, the Savoyard power in Italy generally increased. ♦Reunion -of Piedmont. 1418.♦ Under Amadeus the Eighth, the lands held by the -princes of Achaia were united to the possessions of the head of the -house. ♦Acquisition of Biella, &c. 1435.♦ Before the end of the reign -of Amadeus, the dominions of Savoy stretched as far as the Sesia, -taking in _Biella_, _Santhia_ and _Vercelli_. Counting Nizza and Aosta -as Italian, which they now practically were, the Italian dominions of -the House reached from the Alps of Wallis to the sea. ♦Relations with -Montferrat.♦ But they were nearly cut in two by the dominions of the -Marquesses of _Montferrat_, from whom however the Dukes of Savoy now -claimed homage. ♦Claims on Saluzzo; its doubtful homage.♦ _Saluzzo_, -lying between the old inheritance of Susa and the new possession of -Nizza, also passed under Savoyard supremacy. But it lay open to a very -dangerous French claim on the ground of a former homage done to the -Viennese Dauphins. Amadeus, the first Duke of Savoy, took the title of -_Count of Piedmont_, and afterwards that of _Prince_. ♦Establishment of -Savoy as a middle state.♦ His possessions were now fairly established -as a middle state, Italian and Burgundian, in nearly equal proportions. - -♦Effects of the Italian wars.♦ - -In the course of the next century and a half the Savoyard state -altogether changed its character in many ways. The changes which -affected all Europe, especially the great Italian wars, could not fail -greatly to affect the border state of Italy and Gaul. And there is no -part of our story which gives us more instructive lessons with -regard to the proper limits of our subject. During this time the -Savoyard power was brought under a number of influences, all of which -deeply affected its history, but which did not all alike affect its -geography. ♦French influence and occupation.♦ We have a period of -French influence, a period of French occupation, and more than one -actual fresh settlement of the frontier. Mere influence does not -concern us at all. Occupation concerns us only when it takes the form -of permanent conquest. An occupation of nearly forty years comes very -near to permanent conquest; still when, as in this case, it comes to -an end without having effected any formal annexation, it is hardly to -be looked on as actually working a change on the map. ♦Occupation by -France.♦ France occupied Piedmont for nearly as long a time as Bern -occupied the lands south of the lake. Yet we look on the one occupation -as simply part of the military history, while in the other we see a -real, though only temporary, geographical change. ♦Increased Italian -character of Savoy.♦ But the result alike of influence, of occupation, -and of actual change of boundaries, all tended the same way. They all -tended to strengthen the Italian character of the House of Savoy, to -cut short its Burgundian possessions, and, if not greatly to increase -its Italian possessions, at least to put it in the way of greatly -increasing them. - -♦Decline of Savoy.♦ - -During the second half of the fifteenth century, the power of the -House of Savoy greatly declined, partly through the growing influence -of France, partly through the division, in the form of appanages, of -the lands which had been so lately formed together into a compact -state. ♦The Italian wars.♦ Then came the Italian wars, in which the -Savoyard dominions became the highway for the kings of France in their -invasions of Italy. The strictly territorial changes of this period -chiefly concern the marquisate of Saluzzo on the Italian side and the -northern frontier on the Burgundian side. In the end these two points -of controversy were merged in a single settlement. ♦First loss of -lands north of the lake. 1475.♦ The first loss of territory on the -northern frontier, the first sign that the Savoyard power in Burgundy -was gradually to fall back, was the loss of part of the lands north of -the lake in the war between Charles of Burgundy and the Confederates. -_Granson_ on the lake of Neufchâtel, _Murten_ or _Morat_ on its own -lake, _Aigle_ at the south-east end of the great lake, _Échallens_ -lying detached in the heart of Vaud, all passed away from Savoy and -became for ever Confederate ground. Sixty years later, the affairs of -Geneva led to the great intervention of Bern, Freiburg and Wallis, by -which Savoy was for ever shorn of her possessions north of the lake. -♦Loss of the lands on both sides of the lake. 1536.♦ For a while indeed -she was cut off from the lake altogether; Chablais passed away as well -as Vaud. Geneva, with her detached scraps of territory, was now wholly -surrounded by her own allies. ♦Reunion of the lands south of the lake. -1567.♦ Thirty years later, Bern restored all her conquests south of the -lake, together with Gex to the west, leaving Geneva again surrounded by -the dominions of Savoy. Wallis too gave up part of her share, keeping -only the narrow strip on the left bank of the Rhone. ♦Charles the Good. -1504-1553. | Emanuel Filibert. 1553-1580.♦ The loss and the recovery -mark the difference between the reigns of Duke Charles the Third, -called the Good, and Duke Emmanuel Filibert with the Iron Head. The -difference of the two reigns is equally marked with regard to France. -♦Beginning of French occupation 1536. | Its end. 1574.♦ Almost at the -same moment as the conquests made by Bern, began that occupation, whole -or partial, of Savoyard territory by the French arms which did not come -wholly to an end for thirty-eight years. Savoy then appeared again -as a power whose main strength lay in Italy, whose capital, instead -of Burgundian Chambery, was Italian Turin. And all later changes of -frontier and the changes of frontier in her more southern dominions -also tended the same way to increase the Italian character of the -Savoyard power, and to lessen its extent in the lands which we may -distinguish as Transalpine, for the Burgundian name has now altogether -passed away from them. - -The first formal exchange of Burgundian for Italian ground happened -under Emmanuel Filibert, shortly after the emancipation of his -dominions. ♦Acquisition of Tenda.♦ The small county of _Tenda_ was -acquired in exchange for the marquisate of _Villars_ in Bresse. -This extended the Italian frontier, without formally narrowing the -Burgundian frontier; still it was a step in the direction of more -important changes. ♦Disputes about the homage of Saluzzo.♦ The first -of these was caused by the endless disputes which arose out of the -disputed homage of Saluzzo. ♦Annexation of Saluzzo by France. 1548.♦ -The Marquesses of Saluzzo preferred the French claimant of their -homage to the Savoyard, a preference which led in the end to definite -annexation by France. This was the first acquisition of Italian soil -by France as such, as distinguished from the claims of French princes -over Milan, Naples, and Asti. France thus threw a continuous piece -of French territory into the heart of the states of Savoy. When the -French occupation ceased, Saluzzo still remained to France. ♦Conquest -of Saluzzo. 1588.♦ Presently it was conquered by Duke Charles Emmanuel. -♦Reign of Charles Emanuel. 1580-1630.♦ The reign of this prince marks -the final change in the destiny of the house of Savoy. He himself -had dreamed of wider conquests on the Gaulish side of the Alps than -had ever presented himself to any prince of his house. He was to be -Count of Provence, King of Burgundy, perhaps King of France. The real -results of his reign told in exactly the opposite way. ♦Bresse, &c. -exchanged for Saluzzo. 1601.♦ By the treaty which ended his war with -France, Saluzzo was ceded to Savoy in exchange for _Bresse_, _Bugey_, -_Valromey_, and _Gex_. ♦Loss of position beyond the Alps.♦ A powerful -neighbour was thus shut out from a possession which cut the Savoyard -states in twain; but the price at which this advantage was gained -amounted to a final surrender of the old position of the Savoyard House -beyond the Alps. The Rhone and not the Saône became the boundary, -while the surrender of Gex brought France to the shores of the Lake. -Geneva, her city and her scattered scraps of territory, had now, -besides Bern, two other neighbours in France and Savoy. ♦Attempts on -Geneva. 1602-1609.♦ The two attempts of Charles Emmanuel to seize upon -the city were fruitless. Savoy now became distinctly an Italian power, -keeping indeed the lands between the Alps and the Lake, the proper -Duchy of Savoy, but having her main possessions and her main interests -in Italy. ♦Later history of Savoy.♦ We may here therefore finish the -history of the Transalpine possessions of the Savoyard House. ♦Annexed -to France. 1792-1796.♦ The Duchy of Savoy remained in the hands of its -own Dukes till their continental dominion was swept away in the storm -of the French Revolution. ♦Restored. 1814-1815.♦ It was restored after -the first fall of Buonaparte, but with a narrowed frontier, which left -its capital _Chambery_ to France. This was set right by the treaties -of the next year. ♦Savoy and Nizza annexed to France. 1860.♦ Lastly, -as all the world knows, Savoy itself, including the guaranteed neutral -lands on the Lake, passed, along with Nizza, to France. Savoy itself -was so far favoured as to be allowed to keep its ancient name, and -to form the departments of _High_ and _Low Savoy_, instead of being -condemned, as in the former temporary annexation, to bear the names of -_Leman_ and _Mont Blanc_. The Burgundian Counts who have grown into -Italian Kings have thus lost the land under whose name their House -grew famous. ♦Aosta spared.♦ Aosta alone remains as the last relic of -the times when the Savoyard Dukes, the greatest lords of the Middle -Kingdom, still kept their place as the truest representatives of the -Middle Kingdom itself. - - * * * * * - -♦Italian history of the House of Savoy.♦ - -The purely Italian history of the house now begins, a history which -has been already sketched in dealing with the geography of Italy. -♦Its character.♦ Savoy now takes part in every European struggle, and, -though its position led to constant foreign occupation, some addition -of territory was commonly gained at every peace. ♦French occupation. -1629.♦ Thus, before the reign of Charles Emmanuel was over, Piedmont -was again overrun by French troops. ♦Annexation of part of Montferrat. -1631. | French occupation of Pinerolo. 1630-1696.♦ Though the Savoyard -possessions in Italy were presently increased by a part of the Duchy of -_Montferrat_, this was a poor compensation for the French occupation -of _Pinerolo_ and other points in the heart of Piedmont, which lasted -till nearly the end of the century. ♦Later Italian advance.♦ The -gradual acquisition of territory at the expense of the Milanese duchy, -the acquisition and exchange of the two island kingdoms, the last -annexation by France, the acquisition of the Genoese seaboard, the -growth of the Kingdom of Sardinia into the Kingdom of Italy, have been -already told. Our present business has been with Savoy as a middle -power, a character which practically passed from it with the loss of -Vaud and Bresse, and all traces of which are now sunk in the higher but -less interesting character of one of the great powers of Europe. From -Savoy in its character of a middle power, as one of the representatives -of ancient Burgundy, we naturally pass to another middle power which -prolonged the existence of the Burgundian name, and on part of which, -though not on a part lying within its Burgundian possessions, some -trace of the ancient functions of the middle kingdom is still laid by -the needs of modern European policy. - - -§ 8. _The Duchy of Burgundy and the Low Countries._ - -♦Position of the Valois Dukes of Burgundy.♦ - -Among all the powers which we have marked as having for their special -characteristic that of being middle states, the one which came most -nearly to an actual revival of the middle states of earlier days was -the Duchy of Burgundy under the Valois Dukes. A great power was formed -whose princes held no part of their dominions in wholly independent -sovereignty. ♦Their twofold vassalage.♦ In practical power they were -the peers of their Imperial and royal neighbours; but their formal -character throughout every rood of their possessions was that of -vassals of one or other of those neighbours. ♦Its effects.♦ Such -a twofold vassalage naturally suggested, even more strongly than -vassalage to a single lord could have done, the thought of emancipation -from all vassalage, and of the gathering together of endless separate -fiefs into a single kingdom. ♦Schemes for a Burgundian kingdom.♦ The -gradual acquisitions of earlier princes, especially those of Philip the -Good, naturally led up to the design, avowed by his son Charles the -Bold, of exchanging the title of Duke for that of King. The memories of -the older Burgundian and Lotharingian kingdoms had no doubt a share in -shaping the schemes of a prince who possessed so large a share of the -provinces which had formed those kingdoms. The schemes of Charles, one -can hardly doubt, reached to the formation of a realm like that of the -first Lothar, a realm stretching from the Ocean to the Mediterranean. -His actual possessions, at their greatest extent, formed a power to -which Burgundy gave its name, but which was historically at least -as much Lotharingian as Burgundian. ♦Historical importance of the -Burgundian power.♦ And though this actual dominion was only momentary, -no power ever arose which fills a wider and more œcumenical place in -history than the line of the Valois Dukes. Their power connects the -earliest settlement of the European states with the latest. ♦1870.♦ -It spans a thousand years, and connects the division of Verdun with -the last treaty that guaranteed the neutrality of Belgium. The growth -of their power was directly influenced by memories of the early -Carolingian partitions; and, even in its fall, it has itself influenced -the geography and politics of Europe ever since. As a Burgundian power, -it was as ephemeral as all other Burgundian powers have ever been. As a -Lotharingian power, it abides still in its effects. ♦History of the Low -Countries.♦ The union of the greater part of the Low Countries under a -single prince, and that a prince who was on the whole foreign to the -Empire, strengthened that tendency to split off from the Empire which -was already at work in some of those lands. Later events caused them -to split off in two bodies instead of one. This last tendency became -so strong that a modern attempt to unite them broke down, and their -place in the modern polity of Europe is that of two distinct kingdoms. -♦Final result of the Burgundian dominion.♦ The existence of those two -kingdoms is the final result of the growth of the Burgundian power in -the fifteenth century. ♦Its effect on language.♦ And by leading to the -separation of the northern Netherlands from the Empire, it has led to -one result which could never have been reckoned on, the preservation -of one branch of the Low-Dutch tongue as the acknowledged and literary -speech of an independent nation. ♦The Netherlands and Belgium.♦ Its -political results were the creation, in the shape of the northern -Netherlands, of a power which once held a great place in the affairs -of Europe and of the world, and the slower growth, in the shape of -the southern Netherlands, of a state in which modern European policy -still acknowledges the character of a middle kingdom. As the neutral -confederation of Switzerland represents the middle kingdom of Burgundy, -so the neutral kingdom of Belgium represents the middle kingdom of -Lotharingia. - -♦Ducal Burgundy a fief of the Western Kingdom.♦ - -The Duchy of Burgundy which gave its name to the Burgundian power of -the fifteenth century was that one among the many lands bearing the -Burgundian name which lay wholly outside the Burgundian kingdom of the -Emperors. This Burgundy, the only one which has kept the name to our -own time, the duchy of which Dijon is the capital, never was a fief -of the Eastern Kingdom or of the Empire, after the final separation. -It always acknowledged the supremacy of the kings of Laon and Paris. -♦Two lines of Dukes. 1032.♦ By these last the duchy was twice granted -in fief to princes of their own house, once in the eleventh century -and once in the fourteenth. ♦The Valois. 1363.♦ This last grant was -the beginning of the Dukes of the House of Valois, with the growth -of whose power we have now to deal. ♦Union of Flanders and Burgundy. -1369. | The county of Burgundy.♦ Philip the Hardy, the first Duke of -this line, obtained, by his marriage with Margaret of Flanders, the -counties of _Flanders_, _Artois_, _Rhetel_, and _Nevers_, all fiefs of -the crown of France, together with the _County Palatine of Burgundy_ as -a fief of the Empire. The peculiar position of the Dukes of Burgundy -of this line was at once established by this marriage. ♦Two masses of -territory.♦ Duke Philip held of two lords, and his dominions lay in -two distinct masses. The two Burgundies, duchy and county, and the -county of Nevers, lay geographically together; Flanders and Artois -lay together at a great distance; the small possession of Rhetel lay -again detached between the two. Any princes who held such a territory -as this could hardly fail to devote their main policy to the work of -bringing about the geographical union of their scattered possessions. -Nor was this all. The possession of the two Burgundies made their -common sovereign a vassal at once of France and of the Empire. -♦Position of the Netherlands.♦ The possession of Flanders, Artois, -and Rhetel further brought him into connexion with those border -lands of the Empire and of the French kingdom where the authority of -either over-lord was weakest, and which had long been tending to form -themselves into a separate political system distinct from both. The -results of this complicated position, as worked out, whether by the -prudence of Philip the Good or by the daring of Charles the Bold, form -the history of the Dukes of Burgundy of the House of Valois. - -♦Imperial and French fiefs in the Netherlands.♦ - -The lands which we are accustomed to group together under the name of -the _Netherlands_ or _Low Countries_ lay chiefly within the bounds -of the Empire; but the county of Flanders had always been a fief of -France. ♦Fief of the Counts of Flanders within the Empire.♦ Part -however of the dominions of its counts, the north-eastern corner of -their dominions, the lands of _Alost_ and _Waas_, were held of the -Empire. ♦Zealand.♦ These lands, together with the neighbouring islands -of _Zealand_, formed a ground of endless disputes between the Counts of -Flanders and their northern neighbours the Counts of _Holland_. ♦County -of Holland.♦ This last county gradually disentangles itself from the -general mass of the Frisian lands which lie along the whole coast from -the mouth of the Scheld to the mouth of the Weser. ♦Inroads of the -sea. 1219, 1282.♦ And those great inroads of the sea in the thirteenth -century which gave the Zuyder-Zee its present extent helped to give the -country a natural boundary, and to part it off from the Frisian lands -to the north-east. ♦Disputes with the free Frisians.♦ Towards the end -of the thirteenth century Friesland west of the Zuyder-Zee had become -part of the dominions of the Counts. ♦Independence of West Friesland. -1417-1447. | County of East Friesland. 1454.♦ The land immediately east -of the gulf established its freedom, while _East Friesland_ passed to -a line of counts, under whom its fortunes parted off from those of the -Netherlands. Part of its later history has been already given in the -character of a more purely German state. ♦The Bishops of Utrecht.♦ -Both the counts and the free Frisians had also dangerous neighbours -in the Bishops of _Utrecht_, the great ecclesiastical princes of this -region, who held a large temporal sovereignty lying apart from their -city on the eastern side of the gulf. These disputes went on, as also -disputes with the Dukes of Geldern, without any final settlement, -almost to the time when all these lands began to be united under the -Burgundian power. But before this time, the Counts of Holland had -become closely connected with lands much further to the south. ♦Duchy -of Brabant.♦ Among a number of states in this region, the most powerful -was the Duchy of _Brabant_, which represented the Duchy of the Lower -Lotharingia, and whose princes held the mark of _Antwerp_ and the -cities of _Brussels_, _Löwen_ or _Louvain_, and _Mechlin_. ♦County -of Hennegau or Hainault united with Holland. 1299.♦ To the South of -them lay the county of _Hennegau_ or _Hainault_. At the end of the -thirteenth century, this county was joined by marriage with that of -Holland. Holland and Hainault were thus detached possessions of a -common prince, with Brabant lying between them. ♦Mark of Namur.♦ South -of Brabant lay the small mark or county of _Namur_, which, without -being united to Flanders, was held by a branch of the princes of that -house. - -♦Common character of these states.♦ - -All these states, though their princes held of two separate over-lords, -had much in common, and were well fitted to be worked together into -a single political system. They had much in common in the physical -character of the country, and in the unusual number of great and -flourishing cities which these countries contained. ♦Importance of the -cities.♦ None of these cities indeed actually reached the position -of free cities of the Empire; but their wealth, and the degree of -practical independence which they possessed, forms a main feature in -the history of the Low Countries. In point of language, the northern -part of these states spoke various dialects of Low-Dutch, from Flemish -to Frisian; in the southern lands of Hainault, Artois, and Namur, the -language, though not French, was not Teutonic, but an independent -Romance speech, the Walloon. ♦South-western group of states.♦ To -the west of these states lay another group of small principalities -connected with the former greater group in many ways, but not so -closely as those which we have just gone through. ♦Bishopric of -Lüttich. | Duchies of Luxemburg and Limburg.♦ The great ecclesiastical -principality of _Lüttich_ or _Liège_, lying in two detached parts, -divided the lands of which we have been speaking from the counties, -afterwards duchies, of _Lüzelburg_ or _Luxemburg_ and of _Limburg_. Of -these the more distant Limburg passed in the fourteenth century to the -Dukes of Brabant. ♦Luxemburg a Duchy. 1353.♦ Luxemburg is famous as -having given a series of princes to the kingdom of Bohemia and to the -Empire, and in their hands it rose to the rank of a duchy. ♦Geldern.♦ -Lastly, to the north of Lüttich, forming a connecting link between this -group of states and the more purely Frisian powers, lay the duchy of -_Geldern_, of whose quarters the most northern portion stretched to -the Zuyder Zee. These eastern states, though not so closely connected -with one another as those to the west, were easily led into the same -political system. ♦Middle position of all these states.♦ Without -drawing any hard and fast line, we may say that all the states of this -region formed, if not yet a middle state, yet a middle system, apart -alike from France and the Empire, though in various ways connected -with both. Mainly Imperial, mainly Teutonic, they were not wholly so. -♦French influence.♦ Besides the homage lawfully due to France from -Flanders and Artois, French influence in various ways, in politics, -in manners, and in language, had made great inroads in the southern -Netherlands. Brabant and Hainault had practically quite as much to do -with France as with the Empire. ♦Walloon language.♦ And this French -influence was of course helped by the fact that a considerable region -in the south was, though not of French, yet not of Teutonic speech. -Altogether, with much to unite them to the great powers on either side, -with much to keep them apart from either of them, with much more to -unite them to one another, the states of the Netherlands might almost -seem to be designed by nature to be united under a single political -head. ♦Union of the Netherlands under the Dukes of Burgundy.♦ Such a -head was supplied by the Dukes of Burgundy and Counts of Flanders, by -whom, in the course of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, nearly -the whole of the Netherlands was united into a single power which was -to be presently broken into two by the results of religious divisions. - - * * * * * - -Leaving then for the present the growth and fall of the Burgundian -power in the lands more to the south, we will go on to trace the steps -by which the provinces of the Low Countries were united under the -Valois Dukes and their Austrian descendants. ♦Reign of Philip the Good. -1419-1467.♦ The great increase of territory in this region was made -during the long reign of Philip the Good. ♦Namur. 1421-1429.♦ His first -acquisition was the county of _Namur_, a small and outlying district, -but one which, as small and outlying, would still more strongly suggest -the rounding off of the scattered territory. ♦1429-1433.♦ A series -of marriages and disputes next enabled Philip to make a much more -important extension of his dominions. ♦1405.♦ Brabant and Limburg had -passed to a younger branch of the Burgundian House. ♦1418.♦ John, -Duke of Brabant, the cousin of Philip by a marriage with Jacqueline, -Countess of Holland and Hainault, united those states for a moment. The -disputes and confusions which followed on her marriages and divorces -led to the annexation of her territories by the Duke of Burgundy, -a process which was finally concluded by the formal cession of her -dominions by Jacqueline. ♦Brabant and Limburg. 1430. | Holland and -Hainault. 1433.♦ Meanwhile Philip had succeeded to Brabant and Limburg, -and the union of Flanders, Brabant, Hainault, Zealand, and Holland, -together made a dominion which took in all the greatest Netherland -states, and formed a compact mass of territory. On this presently -followed a great acquisition of territory which was more strictly -French than the fiefs which Philip already held of the French crown in -Flanders and Artois. The Treaty of Arras, by which Philip, hitherto -the ally of England against France, made peace with his western -overlord, gave him, under the form of mortgage, the lands on the Somme. -♦The towns on the Somme. 1435-1483.♦ The acquisition of these lands, -_Ponthieu_, _Vermandois_, _Amiens_, and _Boulogne_, advanced the -Burgundian frontier to a dangerous neighbourhood to Paris on this side -as well as on the other. It had the further effect of keeping the small -continental possessions which England still kept at Calais and Guisnes -apart from the French territory. During the reigns of Philip and -Charles the Bold, the continental neighbour of England was not France -but Burgundy. But this great southern dominion was not lasting. The -towns on the Somme, redeemed and again recovered, passed on the fall of -Charles the Bold once more into French hands. ♦Recovered by France.♦ -So did Artois itself, and, though Artois was won back, Amiens and the -rest were not. Yet, if the towns on the Somme had stayed under the rule -of the successive masters of the Low Countries, it might by this time -have seemed as natural for Amiens to be Belgian as it now seems natural -for Cambray and Valenciennes to be French. The Treaty of Madrid drew a -definite boundary. ♦France resigns the homage of Flanders and Artois. -1526.♦ France gave up all claim to homage from Flanders and Artois, -and Charles the Fifth, in his Burgundian, or rather in his Flemish, -character, finally gave up all claim to the lands on the Somme. - -The south-western frontier was thus fixed; but meanwhile the new -state had advanced in other directions. ♦Luxemburg. 1443.♦ Philip’s -last great acquisition was the duchy of _Luxemburg_. He now possessed -the greater part of the Netherlands; but his dominions were still -intersected by the bishoprics of Utrecht and Lüttich and the duchy of -Geldern. ♦Geldern and Zutphen. 1472.♦ The duchy of Geldern and county -of Zutphen were added by Charles the Bold. ♦Final annexation. 1543.♦ -But they formed a precarious possession, lost and won more than once, -down to their final annexation under Charles the Fifth. ♦Bishopric of -Lüttich never annexed.♦ Of the two great ecclesiastical principalities -by which the Burgundian possessions in the Netherlands were cut -asunder, the bishopric of _Lüttich_, though its history is much mixed -up with that of the Burgundian Dukes, and though it came largely -under their influence, was never formally annexed. ♦Annexation of the -bishopric of Utrecht, 1531; | and Friesland, 1515.♦ But the temporal -principality of the Bishop of _Utrecht_ was secularized under Charles -the Fifth. _Friesland_, the Friesland immediately east of the Zuyder -Zee, was already reincorporated with the dominions of the prince who -represented the ancient counts of Holland. ♦Dominions of Charles the -Fifth.♦ The whole Netherlands were thus consolidated under the rule -of Charles the Fifth. They were united with the far distant county of -Burgundy, and with it they formed the Burgundian circle in the new -division of the Empire. The bishopric of Lüttich, which intersected -the whole southern part of the country, remained in the circle of -Westfalia. ♦The seventeen provinces.♦ Seventeen provinces, each keeping -much of separate being, were united under a single prince, and, since -the treaty of Madrid, they were free from any pretensions on the part -of foreign powers. The Netherlands formed one of the most compact and -important parts of the scattered dominions of the Emperor who was also -lord of Burgundy and Castile. ♦Their separation from the Empire.♦ -But the final union of these lands under the direct dominion of an -Emperor at once led to their practical separation from the Empire. -♦The possessions of Philip of Spain. 1555.♦ They passed, with all the -remaining possessions and claims of the Burgundian House, to Philip of -Spain, and they were reckoned among the crowd of distant dependencies -which had come under the rule of the crowns of Castile and Aragon. -In Spanish hands they acted less as a middle state than as a power -which helped to hem in France on both sides. Had the great revolt of -the Netherlands ended in the final liberation of the whole seventeen -provinces, the middle state would have been formed in its full -strength. ♦The War of Independence. 1568-1609.♦ As it was, the work of -the War of Independence was imperfect. The northern provinces won their -freedom in the form of a federal commonwealth. The southern provinces -remained dependencies of Spain, to become the chosen fighting ground of -European armies, the chosen plaything of European diplomacy. - -♦The Seven United Provinces. 1578.♦ - -The end of the long war of independence waged by the northern provinces -was the establishment of the famous federal commonwealth of the _Seven -United Provinces_, _Holland_, _Zealand_, _Utrecht_, _Gelderland_, -_Over-Yssel_, _Friesland_, and _Groningen_. These answered nearly to -the dominions of the Counts of Holland and Bishops of Utrecht in -earlier times. ♦Gelderland.♦ But besides these, part of the duchy of -_Geldern_ formed one of the United Provinces, while its southern part -shared the fate of the southern provinces. But, besides the United -Seven, the Confederation also kept parts of Brabant, Geldern, and -Flanders as common possessions. ♦Formal independence of the Empire. -1648.♦ The power thus formed, one which so long held an European -importance quite disproportioned to its geographical extent, had under -Burgundian rule become practically independent of the Empire, but it -was only by the Peace of Westfalia that its independence was formally -acknowledged. The maritime strength of the Confederation made it more -than an European power. It became a colonizing power in three parts -of the world. ♦Colonies of the Netherlands.♦ In the course of the -seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Seven Provinces extended -their dominion over many points on the continent of India and over the -neighbouring island of _Ceylon_, over the great equatorial islands of -_Java_, _Sumatra_, and the _Moluccas_, over many points in _Guinea_ -and southern Africa, and over part of _Guiana_ in South America. ♦New -Netherland passes to England. 1664.♦ But the great North American -settlement of _New Netherland_ passed to England, and _New Amsterdam_ -became _New York_. ♦No real name for the county.♦ Singularly enough, -this great power never had any strict geographical name. _Netherlands_ -was too large, as it took in the whole of the Low Countries and not the -emancipated provinces only. _Holland_ was too small, as being the name -of one province only, though the greatest. ♦Use of the name _Dutch_.♦ -And, by one of the oddest cases of caprice of language, in common -English usage the name of the whole Teutonic race settled down on this -one small part of it, and the men of the Seven Provinces came to be -exclusively spoken of as _Dutch_. - -♦The Spanish Netherlands. 1578-1706.♦ - -Meanwhile the southern provinces, the greater part of Brabant -and Flanders, with Artois, Hennegau or Hainault, Namur, Limburg, -Luxemburg, and the southern part of Geldern,—taking in Antwerp at -one end and Cambray at the other—remained under the sovereignty of -the representatives of the Burgundian Dukes. That is, they remained -an outlying dependency of the Spanish monarchy. But their southern -frontier was open to constant aggressions on the part of France. -♦Dunkirk held by England. 1658-1662.♦ _Dunkirk_ indeed was for a moment -held by England, as Calais and Boulogne had been in earlier times. -♦Cession of parts of Artois and of Gravelines, 1659;♦ By the Peace of -the Pyrenees France obtained Arras and the greater part of Artois, -leaving Saint Omer to Spain. ♦Dunkirk, 1662;♦ France also began to -work her way up along the coast of Flanders, taking _Gravelines_ by -virtue of the treaty, and presently adding Dunkirk by purchase from -England. ♦Philippeville, Marienburg, Thionville.♦ The treaty also -added to France several points along the frontiers of Hainault, Liège, -and Luxemburg, including the detached fortresses of _Philippeville_ -and _Marienburg_, and _Thionville_ famous in far earlier days. During -the endless wars of Lewis’ reign, the boundary fluctuated with each -treaty. ♦1668. | 1677.♦ Acquisitions were made by France at the -Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, some of which were surrendered, and others -gained, by the Peace of Nimwegen. ♦Boundary fixed by the Peace of -Utrecht. 1713.♦ At last the boundary was finally fixed by the Peace -of Utrecht in the last days of Lewis. Parts of Flanders and Hainault -were finally confirmed to France, which thus kept _Lille_, _Cambray_, -and _Valenciennes_. ♦The Spanish Netherlands pass to Austria.♦ The -provinces which had hitherto been Spanish now passed to the only -surviving branch of the House of Austria, that which reigned in the -archduchy and supplied the hereditary candidates for the Empire. -♦Annexed by France. 1792.♦ The first wars of the French Revolution -added the Austrian Netherlands to France, and with them the bishopric -of Lüttich which still so oddly divided them. ♦Kingdom of Holland. -1806-1810.♦ A later stage of the days of confusion changed the Seven -United Provinces, enlarged by the addition of East Friesland, into a -_Kingdom of Holland_, one of the states which the new conqueror carved -out for the benefit of his kinsfolk. ♦Holland annexed by France. -1810-1813.♦ Presently the new kingdom was incorporated with the new -‘Empire,’ along with the German lands to the north-east of it. The -Corsican had at last carried out the schemes of the Valois kings, and -the whole Burgundian heritage formed for a moment part of France. - - * * * * * - -At the general settlement of Europe, after the long wars with France, -the restoration of the Low Countries as a middle state was a main -object. ♦Kingdom of the Netherlands. 1814.♦ This was brought about -by the union of the whole Netherlands into a single kingdom bearing -that name. The southern boundary did not differ very greatly from -that fixed by the Peace of Utrecht. ♦The boundaries.♦ As in the -case of the Savoyard frontier, France kept a little more by the -arrangements of 1814 than she finally kept by those of 1815. To the -east, East-Friesland passed to Hannover, leaving the boundary of the -new kingdom not very different from that of the two earlier powers -which it represented, gaining only a small territory on the banks of -the Maes. ♦Incorporation of Lüttich.♦ But the bishopric of Lüttich was -incorporated with the lands which it had once parted asunder, and so -ceased altogether to be German ground. ♦Grand Duchy of Luxemburg.♦ The -new king, as we have already seen, entered the German confederation in -his character of Grand Duke of _Luxemburg_, the duchy being somewhat -shortened to the east in favour of Prussia. Lastly, after fifteen years -of union, the new kingdom again split asunder. ♦Kingdom of Belgium. -1830-1831.♦ It was now divided into the kingdom of the Netherlands, -answering to the old United Provinces, and the kingdom of Belgium, -answering to the old Spanish or Austrian Netherlands. ♦Luxemburg -divided.♦ But part of Limburg remained to the northern kingdom, and its -sovereign also kept part of Luxemburg, as a district state, forming -part of the German confederation. The western part of the duchy formed -part of the kingdom of Belgium. ♦1867.♦ Later events, as has been -already recorded, have severed the last tie between Germany and the -Netherlands; they have wiped out the last survival of the days when the -Counts of Holland and of Luxemburg were alike princes of the German -kingdom. - - * * * * * - -♦Effects of Burgundian rule.♦ - -The above may pass as a sketch of the fluctuations along the borderland -in their European aspect. It is needless to go through every small -shifting of frontier, or to recount in detail the history of small -border principalities like _Saint Pol_ and _Bouillon_. The main -historical aspect of these countries is their tendency, in all ages, to -form somewhat of a middle system between two greater powers on either -side of them. The guaranteed neutrality of Belgium and the guaranteed -neutrality of Switzerland are alike survivals or revivals—it is hard -to say which they should be called—of the instinctive feeling which, -in the ninth century, called the Lotharingian kingdom into being. The -modern form of this thousand-year old idea was made possible through -the growth of the power of the Burgundian Dukes of the House of Valois. - -The real historical work of those dukes was thus done in those parts -of their dominions from which they did not take their name, but which -took their name from them. The history of their other dominions -may be told in a few words; indeed a great part of it has been told -already. ♦Schemes of Charles the Bold.♦ The schemes of Charles the -Bold for uniting his scattered dominions by the conquest of the duchy -of Lorraine, for extending the power thus formed to the sea-board of -the royal Burgundy, for forming in short a middle kingdom stretching -from the Ocean to the Mediterranean, acting as a barrier alike between -France and Germany and between France and Italy, remained mere schemes. -They are important only as showing how deeply the idea or the memory of -a middle state was still fixed in men’s minds. The conquests of Charles -in Lorraine, his purchases in Elsass, were momentary possessions -which hardly touch geography. But the fall of Charles, by causing -the break-up of the southern dominion of his house, helped to give -greater importance to its northern dominion. While the Netherlands grew -together, the Burgundies split asunder. After the fall of Charles the -fate of the two Burgundies was much the same as the fate of Flanders -and Artois. Both were for a while seized by France; but the county, -like Artois, was afterwards recovered for a season. The duchy of -Burgundy was lost for ever; the county, along with the outlying county -of Charolois, remained to those who by female succession represented -the Burgundian Dukes, that is to Charles the Fifth and his Spanish -son. The annexation of the Burgundian county, and with it of the city -of Besançon, by Lewis the Fourteenth has been recorded in an earlier -section. - - -§ 9. _The Dominions of Austria._ - -We now come to one among these German states which have parted off -from the kingdom of Germany whose course has been widely different -from the rest, and whose modern European importance stands on a widely -different level. As the Lotharingian and Frisian lands parted off on -the north-west of the kingdom, as a large part of the Swabian lands -parted off to the south-west of the kingdom, so the _Eastern Mark_, -the mark of _Austria_, parted off no less, but with widely different -consequences. ♦Origin of the name _Oesterreich_, _Austria_.♦ The name -of _Austria_, _Oesterreich_—_Ostrich_ as our forefathers wrote it—is, -naturally enough, a common name for the eastern part of any kingdom. -♦Other lands so called.♦ The Frankish kingdom of the Merwings had its -_Austria_; the Italian kingdom of the Lombards had its _Austria_ also. -We are half inclined to wonder that the name was never given in our own -island either to Essex or to East-Anglia. But, while the other Austrias -have passed away, the _Oesterreich_, the _Austria_, the Eastern mark, -of the German kingdom, its defence against the Magyar invader, has -lived on to our own times. It has not only lived on, but it has become -one of the chief European powers. And it has become so by a process -to which it would be hard to find a parallel. ♦Special position of -the Austrian power.♦ The Austrian duchy supplied Germany with so many -Kings, and Rome with so many Emperors, that something of Imperial -character came to cleave to the duchy itself. Its Dukes, in resigning, -first, the crown of Germany, and then all connexion with Germany, have -carried with them into their new position the titles and bearings -of the German Cæsars. ♦Union with Hungary.♦ The power which began -as a mark against the Magyar came to have a common sovereign with -the Magyar kingdom; and the Austrian duchy and Magyar kingdom, each -drawing with it a crowd of smaller states of endless nationalities, -have figured together in the face of modern Europe as the _Austrian -Empire_ or the _Austro-Hungarian Monarchy_. ♦The so-called ‘Empire’ of -Austria.♦ It is not easy, in drawing a map, to find a place for the -‘Empire’ of Austria. The Archduchy is there, and its sovereign has not -dropped his archiducal title. A crowd of kingdoms, duchies, counties, -and lordships, all acknowledging the sovereignty of the same prince, -are there also. But it is not easy to find the geographical place of an -‘Empire’ of Austria, as distinct from the Archduchy. Nor is it easy to -understand on what principle an ‘Empire’ of Austria can be understood -as taking in all the states which happen to own the Hungarian King -and Austrian Archduke as their sovereign. The matter is made more -difficult when we remember that the title of ‘Hereditary Emperor of -Austria’ was first taken while its bearer was still King of Germany -and Roman Emperor-elect. ♦Union of separate states under the Austrian -House.♦ But, putting questions like these aside, the gradual union of -a great number of states, German and non-German, under the common rule -of the archiducal house of Austria, by whatever name we call the power -so formed, is a great fact both of history and of geography. A number -of states, originally independent of one another, differing in origin -and language and everything that makes states differ from one another, -some of them members of the former Empire, some not, have, as a matter -of fact, come together to form a power which fills a large space in -modern history and on the modern map. ♦Lack of national unity.♦ But it -is a power which is altogether lacking in national unity. It is a power -which is not coextensive with any nation, but which takes in parts of -many nations. It cannot even be said that there is a dominant nation -surrounded by subject nations. ♦German, Magyar, and other races.♦ The -Magyar nation in its unity, and a fragment of the German nation, stand -side by side on equal terms, while Italians, Roumans, and Slaves of -almost every branch of the Slavonic race, are grouped around those two. -♦No strictly federal tie.♦ There is no federal tie; it is a stretch of -language to apply the federal name to the present relation between the -two chief powers of Hungary and Austria. Nor can any strictly federal -tie be said to unite Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, and Galicia. And yet -these other members of the general body are not mere subject provinces, -like the dominions of Old Rome. The same prince is sovereign of a crowd -of separate states, two of which stand out prominently as centres -among the rest. There is neither national unity, nor federation, nor -mere subjection of one land or nation to another. All this has come by -the gradual union by various means of many crowns upon the same brow. -♦Anomalous nature of the Austrian power.♦ The result is an anomalous -power which has nothing else exactly like it, past or present. But the -very anomaly makes the growth of such a power a more curious study. - - * * * * * - -♦The Eastern Mark.♦ - -The beginnings of the Austrian state are to be found in the small -_Mark_ on the Danube, lying between Bohemia, Moravia, and the Duchy of -Kärnthen or Carinthia. It appears in its first form as an appendage -to Bavaria.[17] This mark Frederick Barbarossa raised into a duchy, -under its first duke Henry the Second, and it was enlarged to the -westward at the expense of Bavaria by the addition of the lands above -the Enns. ♦Duchy of Austria, 1156.♦ Thus was formed the original -_Duchy of Austria_, the duchy of the Dukes of the House of Babenberg. -It had not long risen to ducal rank before it began to extend itself at -the expense of states which had hitherto been of greater moment than -itself. Itself primarily a mark against the Magyar, Austria had to the -south of it the lands where the German Kingdom marched at once upon -the Magyar, the Slave, and the Kingdom of Italy. ♦Duchy of Carinthia.♦ -Here lay the great Duchy of Carinthia, a land where the population -was mainly Slave, though on this frontier the Slavonic population had -been brought into much earlier and more thorough subjection to the -German Kings than the Slaves on the north-eastern frontier. ♦Duchy of -Styria, 1180;♦ At the time of the foundation of the duchy of Austria, -the Carinthian duchy had begun to split in pieces, and its northern -part, hitherto the _Upper Carinthian Mark_, grew into the Duchy of -_Steyermark_ or _Styria_. ♦united to Austria, 1192.♦ Twelve years -later, Leopold the Fifth of Austria inherited the duchy of Styria, a -duchy greater than his own, by the will of its duke Ottokar. Carinthia -itself went on as a separate duchy; but it now took in only a narrow -territory in the south-western part of the old duchy, and that broken -up by outlying possessions of the archbishops of Salzburg and other -ecclesiastical lords. ♦The county of Görz.♦ To the south grew up a -considerable power in the hands of the counts of _Görz_ or _Gorizia_ -on the Italian border. ♦Ecclesiastical position of its Counts.♦ The -possessions of these counts stretched, though not continuously, from -Tyrol to Istria, and their influence was further enlarged by their -position as advocates of the bishoprics of _Trent_ and _Brixen_ and -of the more famous patriarchate of _Aquileia_. These are the lands, -the marchlands of Germany towards its eastern and south-eastern -neighbours, which came by gradual annexations to form the German -possessions of the Austrian power. But the further growth of that power -did not begin till the duchy itself had passed away to the hands of a -wholly new line of princes. - -♦Momentary union of Austria and Bohemia.♦ - -The first change was one which brought about for a moment from one side -an union which was afterwards to be brought about in a more lasting -shape from the other side. This was the annexation of Austria by the -kingdom of _Bohemia_. ♦Bohemia a kingdom, 1158.♦ That duchy had been -raised to the rank of a kingdom, though of course without ceasing to -be a fief of the Empire, a few years after the mark of Austria had -become a duchy. The death of the last duke of Austria of the Babenberg -line led to a disputed succession and a series of wars, in which the -princes of Bavaria, Bohemia, and Hungary all had their share. ♦Ottokar -of Bohemia annexes Austria and Styria, 1252-1262. | Carinthia, 1269.♦ -In the end, between marriage, conquest, and royal grant, Ottokar king -of Bohemia obtained the duchies of Austria and Styria, and a few years -later he further added Carinthia by the bequest of its Duke. Thus a new -power was formed, by which several German states came into the power -of a Slavonic king. ♦Great power of Ottokar.♦ The power of that king -for a moment reached the Baltic as well as the Hadriatic; for Ottokar -carried his arms into Prussia, and became the founder of Königsberg. -But this great power was but momentary. Bohemia and Austria were again -separated, and Austria, with its indefinite mission of extension over -so many lands, including Bohemia itself, passed to a house sprung from -a distant part of Germany. - - * * * * * - -♦House of Habsburg.♦ - -We have now come to the European beginnings of the second House of -Austria, the house whose name seems to have become inseparably -connected with the name of Austria, though the spot from which that -house drew its name has long ceased to be an Austrian possession. This -is the house of the Counts of _Habsburg_. They took this name from -their castle on the lower course of the Aar, in the north-west corner -of the Aargau, in that southern Swabian land where the Old League of -High Germany was presently to arise, and so greatly to extend itself -at the cost of the power of Habsburg. ♦Union of Habsburg, Kyburg, and -Lenzburg.♦ By an union of the lands of Habsburg with those of the -Counts of _Kyburg_ and _Lenzburg_, a considerable, though straggling, -dominion was formed. It stretched in and out among the mountains and -lakes, taking in Luzern, and forming a dangerous neighbour to the free -city of Zürich. ♦Their possession in Elsass.♦ Besides these lands, -the same house also held _Upper Elsass_ with the title of Landgrave, -a dominion separated from the other Swabian lands of the House by -the territory of the free city of Basel. ♦Rudolf king, 1273. | His -victories over Ottokar, 1276-1278. | Albert of Habsburg Duke of Austria -and Styria, 1282.♦ The lord of this great Swabian dominion, the famous -Rudolf, being chosen to the German crown, and having broken the power -of Ottokar, bestowed the duchies of Austria and Styria on his son -Albert, afterwards King. ♦Meinhard Duke of Carinthia and Count of -Tyrol, 1286.♦ Carinthia at first formed part of the same grant; but it -was presently granted to Meinhard Count of Görz and Tyrol. Görz passed -to another branch of the house of its own Counts. Three powers were -thus formed in these regions, the duchies of _Austria_ and _Styria_, -the duchy of _Carinthia_ with the county of _Tyrol_, and the county of -_Görz_. - -♦Scattered territories of the House of Habsburg.♦ - -Thus under Albert the possessions of the House of Habsburg were large, -but widely scattered. The two newly acquired eastern duchies not only -gave its princes their highest titles, but they formed a compact -territory, well suited for extension northward and southward. ♦Falling -off of the Swabian lands.♦ But among the outlying Swabian territories, -though some parts remained to the Austrian House down to the end of the -German Kingdom, the tendency was to diminish and gradually to part off -altogether from Germany. In the lands south of the Rhine this happened -through union with the Confederates; in the Alsatian lands it happened -at a later stage through French annexation. - -♦Connexion of Austria with the Empire.♦ - -It is to be hoped that it is no longer needful to explain that the -hereditary lands of the House of Habsburg or Austria had no inherent -connexion with the German Kingdom and Roman Empire of which they were -fiefs, beyond the fact that they were among its fiefs. They were -further connected with it only by the accident that, from Rudolf -onwards, many princes of that house were chosen Kings, and that, from -the middle of the fifteenth century, onwards, all the Kings were chosen -from that house and from the house into which it merged by female -succession. It is to be hoped that there is no longer any need to -explain that every Emperor was not Duke of Austria, and that every Duke -of Austria was not Emperor. But it may be needful to explain that every -Duke of Austria was not master of the whole dominions of the House of -Austria. ♦Divisions of the Austrian dominions.♦ The divisions, the -reunions, the joint reigns, which are common to the House of Austria -with other German princely houses, become at once more important and -more puzzling in the case of a house which gradually came to stand -above all the others in European rank. The caution is specially needful -in the case of the Swabian lands, as the history of the Confederates -is liable to be greatly misunderstood, if every Duke of Austria -who appears there is taken for the sole sovereign of the Austrian -dominions. It is needless to go here through all these shiftings -between princes of the same house. Through all changes the unity of -the house and its possessions was maintained, even while they were -parted out or held in common by different members of the house. But -it is important to bear in mind that some of the Dukes of Austria who -figure in the history of Switzerland were rather Landgraves of Elsass -or Counts of Tyrol than Dukes of Austria in any practical sense. - -The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries may be defined as a time during -which the Austrian House on the whole steadily advanced in the Eastern -part of its dominions and steadily fell back in the Western. But in the -course of the fourteenth century an acquisition was made which, without -making them absolutely continuous, brought them into something more -like geographical connexion with one another. ♦Acquisition of Carinthia -and Tyrol, 1335.♦ This was the acquisition of the Duchy of Carinthia -and County of _Tyrol_, the latter of which lands lay conveniently -between the Eastern and Western dominions of the house. ♦Extent of the -Austrian territory.♦ These now stretched continuously from the Bohemian -frontier to Istria, and they threw out, in the form of Tyrol and the -Swabian lands, a scattered, but nearly continuous, territory stretching -to the borders of Lorraine and the county of Burgundy. The Austrian -possessions now touched the eastern gulf of the Hadriatic and came -into the neighbourhood of the Dalmatian Archipelago. ♦Commendation of -Trieste, 1382.♦ Somewhat later they reached the main Hadriatic itself, -when the city of _Trieste_, hitherto disputed between the commonwealth -of Venice and the patriarchs of Aquileia, commended itself to the -Austrian Duke Leopold as its lord. This is the same Leopold who four -years later fell at Sempach. By this time the Swabian possessions -had been increased north of the Rhine, while south of the Rhine the -Austrian dominion was steadily giving way. ♦Loss of Thurgau, 1460.♦ -The Confederates and their several cantons advanced in every way, by -purchase and conquest, till, after the loss of Thurgau, the House of -Austria kept nothing south of the Rhine except the towns known as the -_Waldstädte_. - -By this time the division of the estates of the house had taken a more -lasting shape. One branch reigned in Austria, another in Carinthia and -Styria, a third in Tyrol and the other western lands. At this time -begins the unbroken series of Austrian elections to the German and -Imperial crowns. ♦Albert the Second, king, 1437-1440.♦ The first was -Albert the Second, Duke of Austria. ♦Frederick the Third, king, 1440; -Emperor, 1452. | Archduke of Austria, 1453.♦ Then Frederick the Third, -the first Emperor of the House, united the Austrian and Carinthian -duchies, and raised Austria to the unique rank of an Archduchy. -♦Siegmund, Count of Tyrol, &c., 1429-1496.♦ Meanwhile, Siegmund Count -of Tyrol held the western lands, and appears as Duke of Austria in -Confederate and Burgundian history. He there figures as the prince who -lost Thurgau to the Confederates and who mortgaged his Alsatian lands -to Charles the Bold. ♦Maximilian, King of the Romans, 1486; Archduke, -1493; Count of Tyrol, 1496; Emperor-elect, 1508.♦ In Maximilian the -whole possessions of the house of Austria were united. ♦Beginning of -union with lands beyond the Empire.♦ But by this time the affairs of -the purely German lands which had hitherto formed the possessions of -the Austrian house had begun to be mixed up with the succession to -lands and kingdoms beyond the Empire, and with lands which, though -technically within the Empire, had a distinct being of their own. In -the course of the fifteenth century the house of Austria, hitherto -simply one of the chief German princely houses, put on two special -characters. ♦Succession of Austrian Kings and Emperors.♦ It became, as -we have already seen, the house which exclusively supplied kings and -Emperors to Germany and the Empire. And it became, by virtue of its -hereditary possessions rather than of its Imperial position, one of the -chief European powers. For a while the greatest of European powers, it -has remained a great European power down to our own time. - -♦Union with Bohemia and Hungary.♦ - -The special feature in the history of the house of Austria from the -fifteenth century onwards is its connexion—a connexion more or less -broken, but still constantly recurring till in the end it becomes fully -permanent—with the kingdom of Bohemia within the Empire and with the -kingdom of Hungary beyond its bounds. These possessions have given the -Austrian power its special character, that of a power formed by the -union under one prince of several wholly distinct nations or parts of -nations which have no tie beyond that union. The Austrian princes, -originally purely German, equally in their Swabian and in their -Austrian possessions, had already, by the extension of their power to -the south, obtained some Slavonic and some Italian-speaking subjects. -Still, as a power, they were purely German. ♦Various acquisitions of -Austria.♦ But in the period which begins in the fifteenth and goes on -into the nineteenth century, we shall see them gradually gathering -together, sometimes gaining, sometimes losing—gaining and losing by -every process, warlike and peaceful, by which territory can be gained -or lost—a crowd of kingdoms, duchies, and counties, scattered over -all parts of Europe from Flanders to Transsilvania. But it is the -acquisition of the two crowns of Bohemia and Hungary which, above all -others, gave the House of Austria its special position as a middle -power, a power belonging at once to the system of Western and to -the system of Eastern Europe. Among the endless shiftings of the -states which have been massed together under the rule of the House -of Habsburg, that house has more than once been at the same moment -the neighbour of the Gaul and the neighbour of the Turk; and it has -sometimes found Gaul and Turk arrayed together against it. Add to -all this that, though the connexion between the house of Austria and -the Empire was a purely personal one, renewed in each generation by -a special election, still the fact that so many kings of Hungary and -archdukes of Austria were chosen Emperors one after another, caused -the house itself, after the Empire was abolished, to look in the eyes -of many like a continuation of the power which had come to an end. The -peculiar position of the Austrian house could hardly have been obtained -by a mere union of Hungary, Austria, and the other states under princes -none of whom were raised to Imperial rank. Nor could it have been -obtained by a series of mere dukes of Austria, even though they had -been chosen Emperors from generation to generation. It was through the -accidental union under one sovereign of a crowd of states which had no -natural connexion with each other, and through the further accident -that the Empire itself seemed to become a possession of the House, that -the House of Habsburg, and its representative the House of Lorraine, -have won their unique position among European powers. - -The first hints, so to speak, of a coming union between the Hungarian -and Bohemian kingdoms and the Austrian duchy began, as we have seen, -in the days of Ottokar. A Bohemian king had then held the Austrian -duchy, while a Hungarian king had for a moment occupied part of -Styria. ♦Relations with Hungary and Bohemia.♦ But the later form which -the union was to take was not that of the Bohemian or the Hungarian -reigning over Austria, but that of the Austrian reigning over Hungary -and Bohemia. The duchy was not to be added to either of the kingdoms; -but both kingdoms were in course of time to be added to the duchy. -The growth of both Hungary and Bohemia as kingdoms will be spoken -of elsewhere. We have now to deal only with their relations to the -Austrian House. ♦Rudolf, son of Albert, King of Bohemia, 1306.♦ For a -moment, early in the fourteenth century, an Austrian prince, son of the -first Austrian King of Germany, was actually acknowledged as King of -Bohemia. But this connexion was only momentary. The first beginnings -of anything like a more permanent connexion begin a hundred and thirty -years later. ♦Albert the Second, King of Hungary and Bohemia, 1438.♦ -The second Austrian King of Germany wore both the Hungarian and the -Bohemian crowns by virtue of his marriage with the daughter of the -Emperor and King Siegmund. The steps towards the union of the various -crowns are now beginning. ♦Siegmund, King of Hungary, 1386; King of the -Romans, 1414; King of Bohemia, 1419; Emperor, 1433.♦ Siegmund was the -third King of Bohemia who had worn the crown of Germany, the second -who had worn the crown of the Empire. Under his son-in-law, Hungary, -Bohemia, and Austria were for a moment united with the German crown; in -the next reign, as we have seen, begins the lasting connexion between -Austria and the Empire. But the Hungarian and Bohemian kingdoms parted -again. ♦Wladislaus Postumus, Duke of Austria, 1440-1457; King of -Hungary and Bohemia, 1453-1457.♦ One Austrian King, the son of Albert, -reigned at least nominally over both kingdoms, as well as over the -special Austrian duchy. But the final union did not come for another -eighty years. The Turk was now threatening and conquering. At Mohacz -Lewis, king of the two kingdoms, fell before the invaders. ♦Ferdinand, -Archduke of Austria, 1519; King of Hungary and Bohemia, 1527; King of -the Romans, 1531; Emperor-elect, 1556. | Permanent union of Bohemia.♦ -His Bohemian kingdom passed to Ferdinand of Austria, and from that day -to this, unless we except the momentary choice of the Winter King, the -Palatine Frederick, the Bohemian crown has always stayed in the House -of Austria. And for many generations it has been worn by the actual -sovereign of the Austrian archduchy. - -♦Effects of the union with Hungary.♦ - -The acquisition of the crown of Hungary was of greater importance. It -at once put the Austrian House into a wholly new position; it gave it -its new later character of a middle state between Eastern and Western -Europe. The duchy had begun as a mark against the Turanian and heathen -invaders of earlier times. Those Turanian and heathen invaders had -long before settled down into a Christian kingdom; they had latterly -become the foremost champions of Christendom against the Turanian and -Mahometan invaders who had seized the throne of the Eastern Cæsars. -♦Mission against the Turk.♦ With the crown of Hungary, the main duty of -the Hungarian crown, the defence of Christendom against the Ottoman, -passed to the Archdukes and Emperors of the Austrian House. ♦The -Austrian kings in Hungary.♦ But for a long time Hungary was a most -imperfect and precarious possession of its Austrian Kings. ♦1526-1699.♦ -For more than a century and a half after the election of Ferdinand, his -rule and that of his successors was disputed and partial. They had from -the very beginning to strive against rival kings, while the greater -part of the kingdom and of the lands attached to the crown was either -held by the Turk himself or by princes who acknowledged the Turk as -their superior lord. These strictly Hungarian affairs, as well as the -changes on the frontier towards the Turk, will be spoken of elsewhere. -♦Peace of Passarowitz, 1718.♦ It was not till the eighteenth century -that the Austrian Kings were in full possession of the whole Hungarian -kingdom and all its dependencies. - -♦Acquisition of Görz, 1500.♦ - -Meanwhile the Austrian power had been making advances in other -quarters. At the end of the fifteenth century the Austrian possessions -at the north-east of the Hadriatic were greatly enlarged by the -addition of the county of _Görz_, which carried with it the fallen city -of Aquileia. ♦New position towards Italy.♦ A more direct path towards -Italian dominion was thus opened. The wars of the League of Cambray -made no permanent addition to Austrian dominion in this quarter; but -the master of Trieste and Aquileia, whose territory cut off Venice -from her Istrian possessions, might already almost pass for an Italian -sovereign. ♦Dominions of Charles the Fifth.♦ Under Charles the Fifth -the House of Austria became, as we have seen, possessed of a vast -Italian dominion. But after him it passed away alike from the Empire -and the German branch of the house, to become part of the heritage of -the Austrian Kings of Spain. ♦Austrian rule in Italy.♦ It was not, as -we have already seen, till the beginning of the eighteenth century that -either an Emperor or a reigning archduke again obtained any territory -within the acknowledged bounds of Italy. The fluctuations of Austrian -rule in Italy, from the acquisition of the Duchy of Milan down to our -own day, have been already told in the Italian section. Lombardy and -Venetia are now again Italian; but Austria still keeps the north-east -corner of the great gulf. She still keeps Görz and Aquileia, Trieste -and all Istria, to say nothing of the dangerous way which her frontier -still stretches on Italian ground in the land of Trent and Roveredo. - -♦Burgundian possessions.♦ - -These last named possessions still abide as traces of the Austrian -advance in these regions, and its fluctuations there have been among -the most important facts of modern history. Another series of Austrian -acquisitions in the West of Europe have altogether passed away. -The great Burgundian inheritance passed to the House of Austria. -♦Maximilian and Philip.♦ But it was only for a short time, in the -persons of Maximilian and Philip, that it was in any way united to the -actual Austrian Archduchy. ♦The Austrian Netherlands.♦ After Charles -the Fifth the Burgundian possessions passed, like those in Italy, to -the Spanish branch of the House, and, just as in Italy, it was not till -the eighteenth century that actual Emperors or archdukes again reigned -over a part of the Netherlands. ♦Loss of Elsass.♦ Before this time the -Alsatian dominion of Austria had passed away to France, and the remnant -of her Swabian possessions passed away, as we have seen, in the days of -general confusion. The changes of her territory in Germany during that -period have been already spoken of. Her acquisitions in Eastern Europe -will come more fully elsewhere; but a word must be given to them here. -♦Loss of Silesia, 1740. | Final partition of Poland, 1772.♦ Looking at -the House of Austria simply as a power, without reference to the German -or non-German character of its dominions, the loss of _Silesia_ may -be looked on as counterbalanced by the territory gained from Poland -at the first and third partitions. ♦Galicia and Lodomeria.♦ The first -partition gave the Austrian House a territory of which the greater -part was originally Russian rather than Polish, and in which the old -Russian names of _Halicz_ and _Vladimir_ were strangely softened -into a _Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria_. ♦Third partition, 1795. -| New-Galicia.♦ The third partition added _Cracow_ and a considerable -amount of strictly Polish territory. These last passed away, first -to the Duchy of Warsaw, and then to the restored Kingdom of Poland. -♦Annexation of Cracow, 1846.♦ But Galicia has been kept, and it has -been increased in our day by the seizure of the republic of Cracow. -These lands lie to the north of the Hungarian kingdom. Parted from them -by the whole extent of that kingdom, and adjoining that kingdom at -its south-west corner lie the coast lands of Austria on the Hadriatic. -♦Dalmatia, 1797.♦ By the Peace of Campoformio, Austria took _Dalmatia_ -strictly so called, and the other Venetian possessions as far south as -Budua. ♦Recovered, 1814. | Ragusa, 1814.♦ These lands, lost in the wars -with France, were won again at the Peace, with the addition of _Ragusa_ -and its territory. - - * * * * * - -This account of the gains and losses of a power which has gained and -lost in so many quarters is necessary somewhat piecemeal. It may be -well then to end this section with a picture of the Austrian power as -it stood at several points of the history of the last century and a -half, leaving the fluctuating frontier towards the Turk to be dealt -with in our survey of the more strictly Eastern lands. - -♦Reign of Maria Theresa, 1740-1780.♦ - -We will begin at a date when we come across a sovereign whose position -is often strangely misunderstood, the Empress-Queen Maria Theresa—Queen -in her own right of Hungary and Bohemia, Empress by the election of -her husband to the Imperial Crown. ♦Her hereditary dominions.♦ The -Pragmatic Sanction of her father Charles the Sixth made her heiress -of all his hereditary dominions. That is, it made her heiress, -within the Empire, of the kingdom of Bohemia with its dependencies -of Moravia and Silesia—of the Archduchy of Austria with the duchies, -counties, and lordships of Styria, Carinthia, Carniola, Tyrol, Görz, -and Trieste—of Constanz and a few other outlying Swabian points—as -also of Milan, Mantua, and the Austrian Netherlands, lands which it -needs some stretch, whether of memory or of legal fiction, to look -on as being then in any sense lands of the Empire. Altogether beyond -the Empire, it gave her the Kingdom of Hungary with its dependent -lands of Croatia, Slavonia, and Transsilvania or Siebenbürgen. These -hereditary dominions, lessened by the loss of Silesia, increased by the -addition of Galicia, she handed on to their later Kings and Archdukes. -Her marriage transferred those hereditary dominions, it indirectly -transferring the Empire itself, to a new family, the House of Lorraine. -The husband of Maria Theresa, Francis, who had exchanged his duchy -of Lorraine for that of Tuscany, was in truth the first Lotharingian -Emperor. After him came three Emperors of his house, under the third of -whom the succession of Augustus and Charles came to an end. - -♦Austrian dominions in 1811.♦ - -We may take another view of the Austrian territory at the moment when -the French power in Germany was at its height. The Roman Empire and -the German kingdom had now come to an end; but their last sovereign -still, with whatever meaning, called himself Emperor of his archduchy, -though without dropping his proper title of Archduke. ♦New use of the -name _Austria_.♦ From this time the word Austria was used, commonly -but inaccurately, to take in all the possessions of the House of -Austria. And, as all the possessions of the House of Austria were now -geographically continuous, it became more natural to speak of them by -a single name than it had been when the dominions of that house in -Italy and the Netherlands lay apart from the great mass of Austrian -territory. And at this moment, when the Empire had come to an end -and when the German Confederation had not yet been formed, there was -no distinction between German and non-German lands. The ‘Empire’ of -Francis the Second or First, as it stood at the time of Buonaparte’s -greatest power, had, as compared with the hereditary dominions of Maria -Theresa, gone through these changes. Tyrol and the Swabian lands had -passed to other German princes; Salzburg had been won and lost again. -In Italy the Venetian possessions had been won and lost, and they, -together with the older Italian possessions of Austria, had passed to -the French kingdom of Italy. France in her own name had encroached -on the Austrian dominions at two ends. She had absorbed the Austrian -Netherlands at one corner, the newly won territory of Dalmatia at -another. This last territory, with parts of Carinthia and Carniola, and -with the Hungarian kingdom of Croatia, received, on passing to France, -the name of the _Illyrian Provinces_. Illyrian they were in the widest -and most purely geographical sense of that name. But this use of the -Illyrian name was confusing and misleading, as tending to put out of -sight that the true representatives of the old Illyrian race dwell to -the south, not only of Carinthia and Carniola, but of Dalmatia itself. -The loss of the Austrian possessions in this quarter brought back -the new Austrian ‘Empire’ to the condition of the original Austrian -duchy. It became a wholly inland dominion, without an inch of sea-coast -anywhere. - -♦Austria at the peace. 1814-5.♦ - -We have already seen how Austria won back her lost Italian and -Dalmatian territory, and so much of her lost German territory as was -geographically continuous. ♦Ragusa and Cattaro.♦ Released from her -inland prison, provided again with a great sea-board on both sides -of the Hadriatic, she now refused to Ragusa the restoration of her -freedom, and filched from Montenegro her hard-won haven of Cattaro. -The recovered lands formed, in the new nomenclature of the Austrian -possessions, the kingdoms of Lombardy and Venice, of Illyria, and of -Dalmatia. The last was an ancient title of the Hungarian crown. The -Kingdom of Illyria was a continuation of the affected nomenclature -which had been bestowed on the lands which formed it under their -French occupation. We have already traced the driving out of the -Austrian power from Lombardy and Venetia, its momentary joint -possession in Sleswick, Holstein, and Lauenburg. ♦Cracow, 1846.♦ -The only other actual change of frontier has been the annexation of -the inland commonwealth of Cracow, to match the annexation of the -sea-faring commonwealth of Ragusa. ♦Separation of Hungary, 1848.♦ The -movement of 1848 separated Hungary for a moment from the Austrian -power. ♦Recovery of Hungary, 1849.♦ Won back, partly by Russian help, -partly by the arms of her own Slavonic subjects, the Magyar kingdom -remained crushed till Austria was shut out alike from Germany and -from Italy. ♦Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, 1867.♦ Then arose the present -system, the so called _dualism_, the theory of which is that the -‘Austro-Hungarian Monarchy’ consists of two states under a common -sovereign. By an odd turning about of meanings, Austria, once really -the _Oesterreich_, the Eastern land, of Germany, has become in truth -the Western land, the _Neustria_, of the new arrangement. With the -Hungarian kingdom are grouped the principality of Transsilvania and -the kingdoms of Slavonia and Croatia. The Austrian state is made up -of _Austria_ itself—the archduchy with the addition of _Salzburg_—the -duchy of _Styria_, the county of _Tyrol_, the kingdoms of _Bohemia_, -_Galicia_ and _Lodomeria_, _Illyria_, and _Dalmatia_ with _Ragusa_ and -_Cattaro_. These last lands are not continuous. Thus two states are -formed. ♦Modern Austria.♦ In one the dominant German duchy has Slavonic -lands on each side of it, and an Italian fringe on its coast. ♦Modern -Hungary.♦ In the other state, the ruling Magyar holds also among the -subjects of his crown the Slave, the Rouman, and the outlying Saxon of -Siebenbürgen. ♦Herzegovina, Bosnia, and Spizza, 1878.♦ Add to this that -the latest arrangements of all have added to the Austrian dominions, -under the diplomatic phrase of ‘administration,’ the Slavonic lands of -_Herzegovina_ and _Bosnia_, while the kingdom of Dalmatia is increased -by the harbour of _Spizza_. A power like this, which rests on no -national basis, but which has been simply patched together during -a space of six hundred years by this and that grant, this and that -marriage, this and that treaty, is surely an anachronism on the face -of modern Europe. Germany and Italy are nations as well as powers. -Austria, changed from the _Austria_ of Germany into the _Neustria_ of -Hungary, is simply a name without a meaning. - - * * * * * - -We have thus gone through the geographical changes of the three -Imperial kingdoms, and of the states and powers which were formed -by parts of those kingdoms falling away, and in some cases uniting -themselves with lands beyond the Empire. They have all to some extent -kept a common history down to our own time. We have now to turn to -another land which parted off from the Empire in like manner, but which -parted off so early as to become a wholly separate and rival land, with -an altogether independent history of its own. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[12] Unless we except the small part of Flanders held by the -Confederation. - -[13] On the marks, see Waitz, _Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichten_, vii. -62, et seq. - -[14] No influence was more powerful for this end than the _Zollverein_ -or customs union, which gradually united most of the German states -for certain purposes. But as it did not affect the boundaries or the -governments of sovereign states, it hardly concerns geography. Neither -do the strivings after more perfect union in 1848 and the following -years. - -[15] Compare the mention of Rudolf in the letter of Cnut, on his Roman -Pilgrimage, in Florence of Worcester, 1031. He is there ‘Rodulphus rex, -qui maxime ipsarum clausurarum dominatur.’ - -[16] That Aosta was strictly Burgundian appears from the ‘Divisio -Imperii, 806’ (Pertz, Leges, i. 141), where Italy is granted whole -to Pippin, Burgundy is divided between Charles and Lewis; but it is -provided that both Charles and Lewis shall have success to Italy, -‘Karolus per vallem Augustanam quæ ad regnum ejus pertinet.’ The -Divisio Imperii of 839 is still plainer (Pertz, Leges, i. 373, -Scriptores, i. 434). There the one share takes in ‘Regnum Italiæ -partemque Burgundiæ, id est, vallem Augustanam,’ and certain other -districts. So Einhard (Vita Karoli, 15) excludes Aosta from Italy. -‘Italia tota, quæ ab Augusta Prætoria usque in Calabriam inferiorem, in -qua Græcorum et Beneventanorum constat esse confinia, porrigitur.’ As -Calabria was not part of Italy in this sense, so neither was Aosta. - -[17] See Waitz, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte, iv. 73. - - - - -CHAPTER IX. - -THE KINGDOM OF FRANCE. - - -♦Origin and growth of France.♦ - -The process by which a great power grew up to the west of the Western -Empire has something in common with the process by which the powers -spoken of in the later sections of the last Chapter split off from the -Western Empire. As in the case of Switzerland and the United Provinces, -so in the case of France, a land which had formed part of the dominions -of Charles the Great became independent of his successors. ♦Comparison -with Austria.♦ As in the case of Austria to the east, so in the case -of France to the west, a duchy of the old Empire grew into a power -distinct from the Empire, and tried to attach to itself the old -Imperial titles and traditions. ♦Different nature of the Austrian and -the French territories.♦ But there is more than one point of difference -between the two cases. As a matter of geography, the power of the -Austrian house has for some centuries largely rested on the possession -of dominions beyond the boundaries of the Carolingian Empire, while -it has been only for a moment, and that chiefly by the annexation of -territory from Austria itself, that France has ever held any European -possessions beyond the Carolingian frontier.[18] ♦Difference in the -process of separation.♦ But the true difference lies in the date and -circumstances of the separation. ♦The other powers split off after -the Empire has become German.♦ The Swabian, Lotharingian, Frisian, -and Austrian lands which gradually split off from the Empire to form -distinct states split off after the Empire had been finally annexed to -the crown of Germany, indeed after Germany and the Empire had come to -mean nearly the same thing. But France can hardly be said to have split -off from the German kingdom or from the Empire itself. The first prince -of the Western _Francia_ who bore the kingly title was indeed the man -of the King of the East-Franks.[19] But no lasting relation, such as -afterwards bound the princes of the Empire to its head, sprang out of -his homage. Again from 887 to 963 the Imperial dignity was not finally -attached to any one kingdom. It fluctuated between Germany and Italy; -it might have passed to Burgundy; it might have passed to Karolingia, -as it had once already done in the person of Charles the Bald. ♦The -Empire divided into four kingdoms, of which three are again united, -while one remains distinct.♦ The truer way of putting the matter is to -say that in 887 the Empire split up into four kingdoms, of which three -came together again, and formed the Empire in a new shape. The fourth -kingdom remained separate; it can hardly be said to have split off -from the Empire, but its separation hindered the full reconstruction -of the Empire. It has had a distinct history, a history which made -it the special rival of the Empire. ♦Karolingia receives the name of -_France_.♦ This was _Karolingia_, the kingdom of the West-Franks, to -which, through the results of the change of dynasty in 987, the name of -_France_ gradually came to be applied. - -♦France a nation as well as a power.♦ - -But there is yet another distinction of greater practical importance. -France was so early detached from the rest of the elder Frankish -dominions that it was able to form from the first a nation as well as a -power. Its separation happened at the time when the European nations -were forming. The other powers did not split off till long after those -nations were formed, and they did not in any strict sense form nations. -But France is a nation in the fullest sense. Its history is therefore -different from the history of Austria, of Burgundy, of Switzerland, or -even of Italy. As a state which had become wholly distinct from the -Empire, which was commonly the rival and enemy of the Empire, which -largely grew at the expense of the Empire, above all, as a state which -won for itself a most distinct national being, France fully deserves -a chapter, and not a mere section. Still that chapter is in some sort -an appendage to that which deals with the Imperial kingdoms of the -West. It naturally follows on our survey of those kingdoms, before we -go on further to deal with the European powers which arose out of the -dismemberment of the Empire of the East. - - * * * * * - -♦Extent of the royal domain at the accession of the Parisian house. -987.♦ - -We left Karolingia or the Western Kingdom at that point where the -modern French state took its real beginning under the kings of the -house of Paris. Their duchy of France had since its foundation been cut -short by the great grant of Normandy, and by the practical independence -which had been won by the counts of _Anjou_, _Maine_, and _Chartres_. -By their election to the kingdom the Dukes of the French added to -their duchy the small territory which up to that time had still been -in the immediate possession of the West-Frankish Kings at Laon. And, -with the crown and the immediate territory of those kings, the French -kings at Paris also inherited their claim to superiority over all the -states which had arisen within the bounds of the Western Kingdom. -♦Definition of the word _France_.♦ But the name _France_, as it was -used in the times with which we are dealing, means only the immediate -territory of the King. ♦Two forms of growth; annexation of fiefs of the -French crown and of lands altogether beyond the kingdom.♦ The use of -the name spreads with every increase of that territory, whether that -increase was made by the incorporation of a fief or by the annexation -of territory wholly foreign to the kingdom. These two processes must be -carefully distinguished. Both went on side by side for some centuries; -but the incorporation of the vassal states naturally began before the -annexation of altogether foreign territory. - -♦Various feudal gradations.♦ - -Among the fiefs which were gradually annexed a distinction must be -drawn between the great princes who were really national chiefs owing -an external homage to the French crown, and the lesser counts whose -dominions had been cut off from the original duchy of France. And a -distinction must be again drawn between these last and the immediate -tenants of the Crown within its own domains, vassals of the Duke as -well as of the King. ♦The great vassals.♦ To the first class belong -the Dukes and Counts of _Burgundy_, _Aquitaine_, _Toulouse_, and -_Flanders_; to the second the Counts of _Anjou_, _Chartres_, and -_Champagne_. ♦Special character of Normandy.♦ Historically, _Normandy_ -belongs to the second class, as the original grant to Rolf was -undoubtedly cut off from the French duchy. But the whole circumstances -of the Norman duchy made it a truly national state, owing to the French -crown the merest external homage. ♦Britanny.♦ _Britanny_, yet more -distinct in every way, was held to owe its immediate homage to the -Duke of the Normans. ♦The Twelve Peers.♦ The so-called Twelve Peers of -France seem to have been devised by Philip Augustus out of the romances -of Charlemagne; but the selection shows who were looked on as the -greatest vassals of the crown in his day. The six lay peers were the -Dukes of Burgundy, Normandy, and Aquitaine, the Counts of Flanders, -Toulouse, and Champagne. ♦Champagne.♦ This last was the only one of the -six who could not be looked upon as a national sovereign. His dominions -were _French_ in a sense in which Normandy or Aquitaine could not be -called French. ♦Different position of the Bishops in the Eastern and -Western kingdom.♦ The six ecclesiastical peers offer a marked contrast -to the ecclesiastical electors of the Empire. The German bishops became -princes, holding directly of the Empire. But the bishops within the -dominions of the great vassals of the French crown were the subjects of -their immediate sovereigns. The Archbishop of Rouen or the Archbishop -of Bourdeaux stood in no relation to the King of the French. The -ecclesiastical peerage of France consisted only of certain bishops -who were immediate vassals of the King in his character of King, -among whom was only one prelate of the first rank, the Archbishop and -Duke of _Rheims_. The others were the Bishops and Dukes of _Langres_ -and _Laon_, and the Bishops and Counts of _Beauvais_, _Noyon_, and -_Châlons_. As the bishops within the dominions of the great feudatories -had no claim to rank as peers of the kingdom, neither had those -prelates who were actually within the King’s immediate territory, -vassals therefore of the Duke of the French as well as of the King. -Thus the Bishop of _Paris_ and his metropolitan the Archbishop of -_Sens_ had no place among the twelve peers. - - -§ 1. _Incorporation of the Vassal States._ - -At the accession of the Parisian dynasty, the royal domain took in the -greater part of the later _Isle of France_, the territory to which the -old name specially clung, the greater part of the later government of -_Orleans_, besides some outlying fiefs holding immediately of the King. -♦Chief vassals within the royal domain.♦ Within this territory the -counties of _Clermont_, _Dreux_, _Moulins_, _Valois_, and _Gatinois_, -are of the greatest historical importance. Two of the great rivers of -Gaul, the Seine and the Loire, flowed through the royal dominions; but -the King was wholly cut off from the sea by the great feudatories who -commanded the lower course of the rivers. ♦States on the Channel and♦ -The coast of the channel was held by the princes of Britanny, Normandy, -and Flanders, and the smaller county of _Ponthieu_, which lay between -Normandy and Flanders and fluctuated in its homage between the two. -♦on the Ocean;♦ The ocean coast was held by the rulers of Britanny, -of _Poitou_ and _Aquitaine_ united under a single sovereign, and of -_Gascony_ to the south of them. ♦on the Mediterranean coast.♦ That -small part of the Mediterranean coast which nominally belonged to the -Western Kingdom was held by the counts of _Toulouse_ and _Barcelona_. -♦Neighbours of the royal domain.♦ Of these great feudatories, the -princes of Flanders, Burgundy, Normandy, and Champagne, were all -immediate neighbours of the King. To the west of the royal domain -lay several states of the second rank which played a great part in -the history of France and Normandy. ♦Chartres and Blois. 1125-1152.♦ -These were the counties of _Chartres_ and _Blois_, which were for a -while united with _Champagne_. ♦Anjou and Touraine united. 1044. -| Maine.♦ Beyond these, besides some smaller counties, were _Anjou_ and -_Touraine_, and _Maine_, the great borderland of Normandy and France. -Thus surrounded by their own vassals, the early Kings of the house of -Paris had far less dealings with powers beyond their own kingdom than -their Karolingian predecessors. They were thus able to make themselves -the great power of Gaul before they stood forth on a wider field as -one of the great powers of Europe. - -♦The kingdom smaller than the old duchy.♦ - -As regards their extent of territory, the Kings of the French at the -beginning of the eleventh century had altogether fallen away from the -commanding position which had been held by the Dukes of the French -in the middle of the tenth. But this seeming loss of power was fully -outweighed by the fact that there were now Kings and not merely Dukes, -lords and no longer vassals. ♦Advantage of the kingly position.♦ -As feudal principles grew, opportunities were constantly found for -annexing the lands of the vassal to the lands of his lord. ♦First -advances of the Kings. | Gatinois. 1068. | Viscounty of Bourges. 1100.♦ -Towards the end of the eleventh century the royal domain had already -begun to increase by the acquisition of the _Gatinois_ and of the -viscounty of _Bourges_, a small part only of the later province of -Berry, but an addition which made France and Aquitaine more clearly -neighbours than before. Towards the end of the twelfth century began -a more important advance to the north-east. The first aggrandizement -of France at the expense of Flanders was the beginning of an important -chain of events in European history. ♦Amiens and Vermandois. 1183. -| Valois. 1185.♦ In the early years of Philip Augustus the counties of -_Amiens_ and _Vermandois_ were united to the crown, as was the county -of _Valois_ two years later. ♦Artois. 1180-1187.♦ So for a while was -the more important land of _Artois_. Later in the reign of the same -prince came an annexation on a far greater scale, which did not happen -till the first years of the thirteenth century, but which was the -result of causes which had been going on ever since the eleventh. - -♦Growth of the House of Anjou.♦ - -In the course of the twelfth century a power grew up within the -bounds of the Western Kingdom which in extent of territory threw the -dominions of the French King into insignificance. The two great powers -of northern and southern Gaul, Normandy and Aquitaine, each carrying -with it a crowd of smaller states, were united in the hands of a -single prince, and that a prince who was also the king of a powerful -foreign kingdom. The Aquitanian duchy contained, besides the county of -_Poitou_, a number of fiefs, of which the most important were those of -_Perigueux_, _Limoges_, the dauphiny of _Auvergne_, and the county of -_Marche_ which gave kings to Jerusalem and Cyprus. ♦Union of Aquitaine -and Gascony. 1052.♦ To these, in the eleventh century, the duchy of -_Gascony_, with its subordinate fiefs, was added, and the dominions -of the lord of Poitiers stretched to the Pyrenees. ♦Conquests of -William of Normandy. Ponthieu. 1056. | Domfront. 1049. | Maine. 1063.♦ -Meanwhile Duke William of Normandy, before his conquest of England, had -increased his continental dominions, by acquiring the superiority of -_Ponthieu_ and the immediate dominion, first of the small district of -_Domfront_ and then of the whole of _Maine_. Maine was presently lost -by his successor, and passed in the end to the house of Anjou. ♦Union -of Maine and Anjou. 1110.♦ But the union of several lines in descent -in the same person united England, Normandy, Anjou, and Maine in the -person of Henry the Second. - -♦Dominions of Henry the Second.♦ - -For a moment it seemed as if, instead of the northern and southern -powers being united in opposition to the crown, one of them was to be -itself incorporated with the crown. ♦Momentary union of France and -Aquitaine. 1137.♦ The marriage of Lewis the Seventh with Eleanor of -Aquitaine united his kingdom and her duchy. A king of Paris for the -first time reigned on the Garonne and at the foot of the Pyrenees. -♦Their separation. 1152. | Union of Aquitaine, Normandy, and Anjou. -1152-1154.♦ But the divorce of Lewis and Eleanor and her immediate -re-marriage with the Duke of Normandy and Count of Anjou again severed -the southern duchy from the kingdom, and united the great powers of -northern and southern Gaul. Then their common lord won a crown beyond -the sea and became the first Angevin king of England. ♦Britanny. 1169.♦ -Another marriage brought Britanny, long the nominal fief of Normandy, -under the practical dominion of its Duke. The House of Anjou thus -suddenly rose to a dominion on Gaulish soil equal to that of the French -king and his other vassals put together, a dominion which held the -mouths of the three great rivers, and which was further strengthened -by the possession of the English kingdom. But a favourable moment soon -came which enabled the King to add to his own dominions the greater -part of the estates of his dangerous vassal. ♦Claims of Arthur of -Britanny.♦ On the death of Richard, first of England and fourth of -Normandy, Normandy and England passed to his brother John, while in -the other continental dominions of the Angevin princes the claims of -his nephew Arthur, the heir of Britanny, were asserted. ♦Possible -effects of his success.♦ The success of Arthur would have given the -geography of Gaul altogether a new shape. The Angevin possessions on -the continent, instead of being held by a king of England, would have -been held by a Duke of Britanny, the prince of a state which, though -not geographically cut off like England, was even more foreign to -France. ♦Annexation of Normandy, Anjou, &c. 1202-1205.♦ On the fall of -Arthur, Philip, by the help of a jurisprudence devised for the purpose, -was able to declare all the fiefs which John held of the French crown -to be forfeited to that crown, a sentence which did not apply to the -fiefs of his mother Eleanor. In the space of two years Philip was -able to carry that sentence into effect everywhere on the mainland. -♦1258.♦ Continental Normandy, Maine, Anjou, and Touraine, were joined -to the dominions of the French crown, and by a later treaty they were -formally surrendered by John’s son Henry. Poitou went with them, and -all these lands may from this time be looked on as forming part of -France. ♦Character and effects of the annexation.♦ Thus far the process -of annexation was little more than the restoration of an earlier state -of things. For all these lands, except Poitou, had formed part of the -old French duchy. ♦Territories kept by the English kings.♦ The Kings -of England still kept the duchy of Aquitaine with Gascony. ♦The Norman -Islands.♦ They kept also the insular Normandy, the Norman islands -which have ever since remained distinct states attached to the English -crown. ♦Aquitaine.♦ Aquitaine was now no longer part of the continental -dominions of a prince who was equally at home on both sides of the -Channel. It was now a remote dependency of the insular kingdom, a -dependency whose great cities clave to the English connexion, while its -geographical position and the feelings of its feudal nobility tended to -draw it towards France. - -♦Sudden greatness of France.♦ - -The result of this great and sudden acquisition of territory was to -make the King of the French incomparably greater on Gaulish ground than -any of his own vassals. France had now a large sea-board on the Channel -and a small sea-board on the Ocean. And now another chain of events -incorporated a large territory with which the crown had hitherto stood -in no practical relation, and which gave the kingdom a third sea-board -on the Mediterranean. - - * * * * * - -♦Fiefs of Aragon in Southern Gaul.♦ - -While north-western and south-western Gaul were united in the hands -of an insular king, the king of a peninsular kingdom became only less -powerful in south-eastern Gaul. ♦Counts of Toulouse.♦ Hitherto the -greatest princes in this region had been the counts of _Toulouse_, -who, besides their fiefs of the French crown, had also possessions in -the Burgundian kingdom beyond the Rhone. But during the latter part -of the eleventh century and the beginning of the twelfth, the Counts -of _Barcelona_, and the kings of Aragon who succeeded them, acquired -by various means a number of Tolosan fiefs, both French and Imperial. -_Carcassonne_, _Albi_, and _Nîmes_ were all under the lordship of the -Aragonese crown. ♦The Albigensian War. 1207-1229.♦ The Albigensian -war seemed at first likely to lead to the establishment of the house -of Montfort as the chief power of Southern Gaul. ♦Simon of Montfort -at Toulouse.♦ But the struggle ended in a vast increase of the power -of the French crown, at the expense alike of the house of Toulouse -and of the house of Aragon. ♦Settlement of Meaux.♦ The dominions of -the Count of Toulouse were divided. ♦Annexation of Narbonne, 1229;♦ -A number of fiefs, _Beziers_, _Narbonne_, _Nîmes_, _Albi_, and some -other districts, were at once annexed to the crown. ♦of Toulouse, -1270.♦ The capital itself and its county passed to the crown fifty -years later. By a settlement with Aragon, the domains of the French -king were increased, while the French kingdom itself was nominally -cut short. ♦Roussillon and Barcelona released from homage. 1258.♦ Two -of the Aragonese fiefs, the counties of _Roussillon_ and _Barcelona_, -were relieved from even nominal homage. The name of Toulouse, except as -the name of the city itself, now passed away, and the new acquisitions -of France came in the end to be known by the name of the tongue which -was common to them with Aquitaine and Imperial Burgundy. ♦Province -of Languedoc.♦ Under the name of _Languedoc_ they became one of the -greatest and most valuable provinces of the French kingdom. - -The great growth of the crown during the reign of Saint Lewis was thus -in the south; but he also extended his borders nearer home. ♦Purchase -of Blois and Chartres. 1234. | Escheat of Perche. 1257.♦ He won back -part of the old French duchy when he purchased the superiority of -_Blois_ and _Chartres_, to which _Perche_ was afterwards added by -escheat. ♦Annexation of Macon, 1239.♦ Further off, he added _Macon_ to -the crown, a possession which afterwards passed away to the House of -Burgundy. - - * * * * * - -♦Southern advance of the Crown.♦ - -Thus, during the reigns of Philip Augustus and his grandson, the -royal possessions had been enlarged by the annexations of two of -the chief vassal states, two of the lay peerages, annexations which -gave the French King a sea-board on two seas and which brought him -into immediate connexion with the affairs of the Spanish peninsula. -♦Marriage of Philip the Fair, 1284, with the heiress of Champagne and -Navarre.♦ Later in the thirteenth century, the marriage of Philip the -Fair with the heiress of _Champagne_ not only extinguished another -peerage, but made the French kings for awhile actually Spanish -sovereigns, and made France an immediate neighbour of the German -kingdom. The county of _Champagne_ had for two generations been united -with the kingdom of Navarre. These dominions were held in right of -their wives by three kings of France. ♦Separation of Navarre. 1328. -| Union of Champagne, 1335; incorporation, 1361.♦ Then Navarre, though -it passed to a French prince, was wholly separated from France, while -Champagne was incorporated with the kingdom. This last annexation gave -France a considerable frontier towards Germany, and especially brought -the kingdom into the immediate neighbourhood of the Lotharingian -bishoprics. These acquisitions, of Normandy and the states connected -with it, of Toulouse and the rest of Languedoc, and now of Champagne, -were the chief cases of incorporation of vassal states with the royal -domain up to the middle of the fourteenth century. ♦Appanages.♦ The -mere grants and recoveries of appanages hardly concern geography. We -now turn to two great struggles which, in the course of the fourteenth -and fifteenth centuries, the Kings of France had to wage with two of -their chief vassals who were also powerful foreign princes. In both -cases, events which seemed likely to bring about the utter humiliation -of France did in the end bring to it a large increase of territory. - - * * * * * - -♦The Hundred Years’ War with England.♦ - -The former of these struggles was the great war between England and -France, called by French writers the _Hundred Years’ War_. This war -might be called either a war for the annexation of France to England -or a war for the annexation of Aquitaine to France. ♦Designs of the -French kings on Aquitaine.♦ By the peace between Henry the Third and -Saint Lewis, Aquitaine became a land held by the king of England as a -vassal of the French crown. From that time it was one main object of -the French kings to change their feudal superiority over this great -duchy into an actual possession. This object had been once obtained for -a moment by the marriage of Eleanor and Lewis the Seventh. ♦Momentary -occupation by Philip the Fair. 1294.♦ It was again obtained for a -moment by the negotiations between Edward the First and Philip the -Fair. The Hundred Years’ war began through the attempts of Philip of -Valois on the Aquitanian dominions of Edward the Third. ♦1337.♦ Then -the King of England found it politic to assume the title of King of -France. ♦1339.♦ But the real nature of the controversy was shown by -the first great settlement. ♦Peace of Bretigny. 1360.♦ At the Peace -of _Bretigny_ Edward gave up all claim to the crown of France, in -exchange for the independent sovereignty of his old fiefs and of -some of his recent conquests. _Aquitaine_ and _Gascony_, including -_Poitou_ but not including _Auvergne_, together with the districts on -the Channel, _Calais_ with _Guines_ and the county of _Ponthieu_, were -made over to the King of England without the reservation of any homage -or superiority of any kind. These lands became a territory as foreign -to the French kingdom as the territory of her German and Spanish -neighbours. ♦Renewal of the war. 1370-1374. | Losses of the English.♦ -But in a few years the treaty was broken on the French side, and the -actual possessions of England beyond the sea were cut down to Calais -and Guines, with some small parts of Aquitaine adjoining the cities of -Bourdeaux and Bayonne. ♦Conquests of Henry the Fifth.♦ Then the tide -turned at the invasion of Henry the Fifth. ♦Treaty of Troyes. 1420.♦ -The Treaty of Troyes united the crowns of England and France. ♦1431.♦ -Aquitaine and Normandy were won back; Paris saw the crowning of an -English king, and only the central part of the country obeyed the heir -of the Parisian kingdom, no longer king of Paris but only of Bourges. -♦Conquest of Aquitaine. 1451-1453.♦ But the final result of the war was -the driving out of the English from all Aquitaine and France, except -the single district of Calais. The geographical aspect of the change is -that Aquitaine, which had been wholly cut off from the kingdom by the -Peace of Bretigny, was finally incorporated with the kingdom. ♦Final -union of Aquitaine with France.♦ The French conquest of Aquitaine, -the result of the Hundred Years’ War, was in form the conquest of a -land which had ceased to stand in any relation to the French crown. -Practically it was the incorporation with the French crown of its -greatest fief, balanced by the loss of a small territory the value of -which was certainly out of all proportion to its geographical extent. -In its historical aspect the annexation of Aquitaine was something yet -more. The first foreshadowing of the modern French kingdom was made -by the addition of Aquitaine to Neustria, of southern to northern -Gaul.[20] Now, after so many strivings, the two were united for ever. -Aquitaine was merged in France. The grant to Charles the Bald took -effect after six hundred years. ♦Beginning of the modern Kingdom of -France.♦ France, in the sense which the word bears in modern use, may -date its complete existence from the addition of Bourdeaux to the -dominions of Charles the Seventh. - - * * * * * - -♦Growth of the Dukes of Burgundy.♦ - -Thus, in the course of somewhat less than four hundred years, the -conquest of England by a vassal of France, followed by the union of -a crowd of other French fiefs in the hands of a common sovereign of -England and Normandy, had led to the union with France of all the -continental possessions of the prince who thus reigned on both sides -of the sea. Meanwhile, on the eastern side of the kingdom, the holder -of a great French fief swelled into an European power, the special -rival of his French overlord. ♦Escheat of the duchy of Burgundy. 1361. -| Grant to Philip the Hardy. 1364.♦ The duchy of Burgundy, granted -to a branch of the royal house in the earliest days of the Parisian -kingdom, escheated to the crown in the fourteenth century, and was -again granted out to a son of the reigning king. ♦Advance of the Valois -Dukes.♦ A series of marriages, purchases, conquests, transactions of -every kind, gathered together, in the hands of the Burgundian dukes, -a crowd of fiefs both of France and of the Empire.[21] The duchy -of _Burgundy_ with the county of _Charolois_, and the counties of -_Flanders_ and _Artois_, were joined under a common ruler with endless -Imperial fiefs in the Low Countries and with the Imperial _County of -Burgundy_. ♦Advance to the Somme.♦ More than this, under Philip the -Good and Charles the Bold, the Burgundian frontier was more than -once advanced to the Somme, and Amiens was separated from the crown. -♦Annexations at the death of Charles the Bold. 1479.♦ The fall of -Charles the Bold laid his dominions open to French annexation both -on the Burgundian and on the Flemish frontier. ♦Momentary annexation -of Artois and the County of Burgundy.♦ In the first moments of his -success, Lewis the Eleventh possessed himself of a large part of the -Imperial as well as the French fiefs of the fallen Duke. ♦Treaty of -Arras. 1435.♦ But in the end Flanders and Artois remained French fiefs -held by the House of Burgundy, which also kept the county of Burgundy -and the isolated county of Charolois. ♦Incorporation of the duchy of -Burgundy. 1479.♦ But France not only finally recovered the towns on -the Somme, but incorporated the Burgundian duchy, one of the greatest -fiefs of the crown. ♦French advance to the east.♦ This was the addition -of a territory which the kings of France had never before ruled, and -it marks an important stage in the advance of the French power towards -the Imperial lands on its eastern border. By the marriage of Mary of -Burgundy and Maximilian of Austria, the remains of the Burgundian -dominions passed to the House of Austria, and thereby in the end to -Spain. The result was that a French king had for a moment an Emperor -for his vassal in his character of Count of Flanders and Artois. -♦Flanders and Artois relieved from homage. 1525.♦ But by the treaty of -Madrid Flanders and Artois were relieved from all homage to France, -exactly as Aquitaine had been by the Peace of Bretigny. They now became -lands wholly foreign to France, and, as foreign lands, large parts of -them were afterwards conquered by France, just as Aquitaine was. But -the history of their acquisition belongs to the story of the advance of -France at the expense of the Empire. - -♦All the great fiefs annexed except Britanny.♦ - -Thus, by the end of the reign of Lewis the Eleventh, all the fiefs -of the French crown which could make any claim to the character of -separate sovereignties had, with a single exception, been added to the -dominions of the crown. The one which had escaped was that one which, -more than any other, represented a nationality altogether distinct -from that of France. _Britanny_ still remained distinct under its own -Dukes. ♦1491-1499; incorporated 1532.♦ The marriages of its Duchess -Anne with two successive French kings, Charles the Eighth and Lewis -the Twelfth, added Britanny to France, and so completed the work. The -whole of the Western Kingdom, except those parts which had become -foreign ground—that is to say, insular Normandy and Calais, Barcelona, -Flanders, and Artois—was now united under the kings of Paris. Their -duchy of _France_ had spread its power and its name over the whole -kingdom. We have now to see how it also spread itself over lands which -had never formed part of that kingdom. - - -§ 2. _Foreign Annexations of France._ - -♦Foreign neighbours of Karolingia. | Imperial and Spanish neighbours.♦ - -When the Western Kingdom finally parted off from the body of the -Empire, its only immediate neighbours were the Imperial kingdoms to -the east, and the Spanish kingdoms to the south. ♦England.♦ The union -of Normandy and England in some sort made England and France immediate -neighbours. And the long retention of Aquitaine by England, the English -possession of Calais for more than two hundred years and of the insular -Normandy down to our own day, have all tended to keep them so. ♦Small -acquisitions of France from England and Spain.♦ But the acquisitions -of France from England, and from Spain, in its character as Spain, -have been comparatively small. Indeed the separation of the Spanish -March and the insular Normandy may be thought to turn the balance -the other way. From England France has won Aquitaine and Calais, -territories which had once been under the homage of the French King. -♦English conquest of Boulogne. 1544-1550. | 1663.♦ So in the sixteenth -century _Boulogne_ was lost to England and won back again; so in the -seventeenth century _Dunkirk_, which had become an English possession, -was made over to France. Since the final loss of Aquitaine, the wars -between England and France have made most important changes in the -English and French possessions in distant parts of the world, but they -have had no effect on the geography of England, and very little on that -of France. - -♦Boundary of the Pyrenees.♦ - -Nearly the same may be said of the geographical relations between -France and Spain. The long wars between those countries have added to -France a large part of the outlying dominions of Spain; but they have -not greatly affected the boundaries of the two countries themselves. -♦Roussillon, its shiftings.♦ The only important exception is the county -of _Roussillon_, the land which Aragon kept on the north side of the -mountain range. ♦Finally becomes French. 1659.♦ United to France by -Lewis the Eleventh, given back by Charles the Eighth, it was finally -annexed to France by the Peace of the Pyrenees. Towards the other end -of the mountain frontier, a small portion of Spanish territory has -been annexed to France, perhaps quite unconsciously. ♦Navarre north -of the Pyrenees.♦ The old kingdom of _Navarre_, though it lay chiefly -south of the Pyrenees, contained a small territory to the north. ♦Union -of France and Navarre. 1589.♦ The accidents of female succession had -given Navarre to more than one King of France, and in the person of -Henry the Fourth the crown of France passed to a King of Navarre who -held only the part of his kingdom north of the Pyrenees. This little -piece of Spain within the borders of Gaul was thus united with France. -♦Protectorate of Andorra.♦ On the other hand, the Kings of France, as -successors of the Counts of Foix, and the other rulers of France after -them, have held, not any dominion but certain rights as advocates or -protectors, over the small commonwealth of _Andorra_ on the Spanish -side of the mountains. - - * * * * * - -♦Advance at the expense of the Imperial kingdoms.♦ - -Of far greater importance is the steady acquisition of territory -by France at the expense of the Imperial kingdoms, and of the -modern states by which those kingdoms are represented. ♦Burgundy. -| 1310-1860.♦ In the case of Burgundy, French annexation has taken the -form of a gradual swallowing up of nearly the whole kingdom, a process -which has been spread over more than five hundred years, from the -annexation of Lyons by Philip the Fair to the last annexation of Savoy -in our own day. ♦Annexations from Germany. 1552-1811.♦ The advance at -the expense of the German kingdom did not begin till the greater part -of the Burgundian kingdom was already swallowed up. ♦Late beginning of -annexations from Germany.♦ The north-eastern frontier of the Western -Kingdom changed but little from the accession of the Parisian house -in the tenth century till the growth of the Dukes of Burgundy in the -fifteenth. After Lotharingia finally became a part of the Eastern -Kingdom, there was no doubt that the homage of Flanders was due to -France, no doubt that the homage of the states which had formed the -Lower Lotharingia was due to the Empire. The frontier towards the Upper -Lotharingia and the Burgundian county also remained untouched. The -Saône remained a boundary stream long after the Rhone had ceased to be -one. ♦Effect of the Burgundian acquisitions of France;♦ It was on this -latter river that the great Burgundian annexations of France began, -annexations which gave France a wholly new European position.[22] -♦of the Dauphiny; | of Provence.♦ The acquisition of the Dauphiny of -Viennois made France the immediate neighbour of Italy; the acquisition -of Provence at once strengthened this last position and more than -doubled her Mediterranean coast. ♦Relations with the Swiss.♦ Add to -this that, though France and the Confederate territory did not yet -actually touch, yet the Burgundian wars and many other events in the -latter half of the fifteenth century enabled France to establish a -close connexion with the power which had grown up north of Lake Leman. -France had thus become a great Mediterranean and Alpine power, ready -to threaten Italy in the next generation. Later acquisitions within -the old border of the Burgundian kingdom had a somewhat different -character. ♦Annexations at the expense of Savoy;♦ Annexations at the -expense of Savoy, even when geographically Burgundian, were annexations -at the cost of a power which was beginning to be Italian rather than -Burgundian. ♦of the County of Burgundy.♦ The annexation of the County -of Burgundy goes rather with the Alsatian annexations. It was territory -won at the cost of the Empire and of the House of Austria. ♦Middle -character of the Burgundian lands.♦ But the lands between the Rhone, -the Alps, and the sea, still kept, negatively at least, their middle -character. They were lands which at least were neither German, French, -nor Italian. ♦They become French.♦ The events of the fourteenth and -fifteenth centuries ruled that this intermediate region should become -French. And none of the acquisitions of France ever helped more towards -the real growth of her power. - -It was while the later stages of this process were going on that -the French kings added to their dominions the Aquitanian lands on -one side and the Burgundian duchy on the other. The acquisition of -Aquitaine has, besides its other characters, a third aspect which -closely connects it with the annexations between the Rhone and the -Alps. ♦Effect of French annexations on the _Langue d’oc_.♦ The strife -between Northern and Southern Gaul, between the tongue of _oil_ and the -tongue of _oc_, now came to an end. Had the chief power in Gaul settled -somewhere in Burgundy or Aquitaine, the tongue of _oil_ might now pass -for a _patois_ of the tongue of _oc_. Had French dominion in Italy -begun as soon and lasted as permanently as French dominion in Burgundy -and Aquitaine, the tongue of _si_, as well as the tongue of _oc_, might -now pass for a _patois_ of the tongue of _oil_. But now it was settled -that French, not Provençal, was to be the ruling speech of Gaul. The -lands of the Southern speech which escaped were almost wholly portions -of the dominions of other powers. There was no longer any separate -state wholly of that speech, except the little principality of Orange. -♦Extinction of the Provençal speech and nation.♦ The work which the -French kings had now ended amounted to little short of the extinction -of an European nation. A tongue, once of at least equal dignity with -the tongue of Paris and Tours, has sunk from the rank of a national -language to the rank of a provincial dialect. - - * * * * * - -♦Italian conquests of France.♦ - -The next great conquests of France were made on Italian soil, but -they are conquests which do not greatly concern geography. This -distinguishes the relations of France towards Italy from her relations -towards Burgundy. France has constantly interfered in Italian affairs; -she has at various times held large Italian territories, and brought -all Italy under French influence. But France has never permanently -kept any large amount of Italian territory. The French possession -of Naples and Milan was only temporary. ♦Not strictly extensions of -France.♦ And, if it had been lasting, the possession of these isolated -territories by the French king could hardly have been looked on as an -extension of the actual French frontier. Those lands could never have -been incorporated with France in the same way in which other French -conquests had been. Their retention would in truth have given the later -history of France quite a different character, a character more like -that which actually belonged to Spain. The long occupation of Savoyard -territory on both sides of the Alps[23] would, if it had lasted, have -been a real extension of the French kingdom. But down to our own day, -while the lands won by France from the Burgundian kingdom form a large -proportion of the whole French territory, French acquisitions from -Italy hardly go beyond the island of Corsica and the insignificant -district of _Mentone_. - - * * * * * - -♦Annexations at the expense of Germany.♦ - -The great annexations of France at the expense of the German kingdom -and the lands more closely connected with it begin in the middle of -the sixteenth century. ♦Annexation of Metz, Toul, and Verdun. 1552.♦ -The first great advance was the practical annexation of the three -Lotharingian bishoprics, though their separation from the Empire was -not formally acknowledged till the Peace of Westfalia. ♦Effect of -isolated conquests.♦ This kind of conquest can hardly fail to lead to -other conquests. France now held certain patches of territory which lay -detached from one another and from the main body of the kingdom. Yet -the rounding off of the frontier was not the next step taken in this -direction. The cause was most likely the close connexion which for -somewhile existed between the ruling houses of France and Lorraine. - -Before the next French advance on German ground, the frontier had -been extended in other directions. ♦Recovery of Calais, 1558; | of -Boulogne, 1550.♦ Almost at the same time as the acquisition of the -Three Bishoprics, _Calais_ was won back from England—the short English -possession of _Boulogne_ had already come to an end. ♦Surrender of -Saluzzo and annexation of Bresse, Bugey, and Gex.♦ The first year of -the sixteenth century saw the surrender of _Saluzzo_, in exchange for -_Bresse_, _Bugey_, and _Gex_. ♦Occupation of Pinerolo. 1630-1696.♦ -Thirty years later came the renewed occupation of Italian territory at -_Pinerolo_ and other points in Piedmont, which lasted till nearly the -end of the seventeenth century. - -The next great advance was the work of the Thirty Years’ War and of the -war with Spain which went on for eleven years longer. ♦The Bishoprics -surrendered by the Empire.♦ Now came the legal cession of the -Bishoprics and the further acquisition of the Alsatian dominions and -rights of the House of Austria. The irregularities of the frontier, and -the temptation to round off its angles, were increased tenfold. ♦French -acquisitions in Elsass. 1648.♦ France received another and larger -isolated territory lying to the east both of her earlier conquests and -of the independent lands which surrounded them. A part of her dominion, -itself sprinkled with isolated towns and districts which did not -belong to her dominion, stretched out without any connexion into the -middle of the Empire. The Duchy of Lorraine, dotted over by the French -lands of Metz, Toul, and Verdun, lay between the old French land of -Champagne and the new French land of _Elsass_ or _Alsace_. ♦Breisach.♦ -And while France was allowed, by the possession of _Breisach_, to -establish herself at one point on the right bank of the Rhine, her new -territory on the left bank was broken up by the continued independence -of _Strassburg_ and the other Alsatian towns and districts which were -still left to the Empire. ♦France reaches the Rhine.♦ Such a frontier -could hardly be lasting; now that France had reached and even crossed -the Rhine, the annexation of the outlying Imperial lands to the west of -that river was sure to follow. - -But, even after this further advance into the heart of Germany, the -gap was not filled up at the next stage of annexation. ♦Annexation -of Bar. 1659.♦ At the Peace of the Pyrenees, France obtained the -scattered lands of the duchy of Bar, which made the greater part of -the Three Bishoprics continuous with her older possessions. ♦Bar -restored. 1661.♦ But Bar was presently restored, and, though Lorraine -was constantly occupied by French armies, it was not incorporated with -France for another century. Up to this last change the Three Bishoprics -still remained isolated French possessions surrounded by lands of the -Empire. But France advanced at the expense of the outlying possessions -of Spain, lands only nominally Imperial, as well as of the Spanish -lands on her own southern frontier. ♦Annexation of Roussillon. 1659.♦ -At the Peace of the Pyrenees _Roussillon_ finally became French. No -Spanish kingdom any longer stretched north of the great natural barrier -of the peninsula. ♦Annexation in the Netherlands. 1659.♦ The same -Treaty gave France her first acquisitions in _Flanders_ and _Artois_ -since they had become wholly foreign ground, as well as her first -acquisitions from _Hainault_, _Liége_, and _Luxemburg_, lands which -had never owed her homage. Here again the frontier was of the same -kind as the frontier towards Germany. ♦Isolated points held by each -power.♦ Isolated points like _Philippeville_ and _Marienburg_ were -held by France within Spanish or Imperial territory, and isolated -points like _Aire_ and _St. Omer_ were still held by Spain in what -had now become French territory. ♦Further annexations. 1668.♦ The -furthest French advance that was recognized by any treaty was made -by the earlier Peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, when, amongst other places, -_Douay_, _Tournay_, _Lille_, _Oudenarde_, and _Courtray_ became French. -♦Changes at the Peace of Nimwegen. 1678.♦ By the Peace of Nimwegen -the frontier again fell back in eastern Flanders, and Courtray and -Oudenarde were restored. But in the districts more to the south -France again advanced, gaining the outlying Spanish towns in Artois, -_Cambray_ and its district, and _Valenciennes_ in Hainault. ♦1697.♦ -The Peace of Ryswick left the frontier as it had been fixed by the -Peace of Nimwegen. ♦Treaty of Utrecht and Barrier Treaty. 1713-1715.♦ -Finally, the Treaty of Utrecht and the Barrier Treaty left France in -possession of a considerable part of Flanders, and of much land which -had been Imperial. ♦The Barrier Towns.♦ The Netherlands, formerly -Spanish and now Austrian, kept a frontier protected by the barrier -towns of _Furnes_, _Ypres_, _Menin_, _Tournai_, _Mons_, _Charleroi_, -_Namur_. The French frontier on the other side had its series of -barrier towns stretching from _St. Omer_ to _Charlemont_ on the Maes. -The arrangements now made have, with very slight changes, lasted -ever since, except during the French annexation of the whole of the -Netherlands during the revolutionary wars. - -The reign of Lewis the Fourteenth was also a time of at least equal -advance on the part of France on her more strictly German frontier. -The time was now come for serious attempts to consolidate the -scattered possessions of France between Champagne and the Rhine. -♦Franche Comté conquered. 1668. | Conquered again. 1674.♦ _Franche -Comté_, as the county of Burgundy was now more commonly called, with -the city of _Besançon_, was twice seized by Lewis, and the second -seizure was confirmed by the peace of Nimwegen. ♦Freiburg.♦ By that -peace also France kept _Freiburg-im-Breisgau_ on the right bank of -the Rhine. A number of small places in Elsass were annexed after the -peace of Nimwegen by the process known as _Reunion_. ♦Seizure of -Strassburg 1681.♦ At last in 1681 _Strassburg_ itself was seized in -time of peace, and its possession was finally secured to France by -the peace of Ryswick. ♦Restoration of Freiburg and Breisach.♦ But -Freiburg and Breisach were restored, and Lorraine, held by France, -though not formally ceded, was given back to its own Duke. ♦Peace -of Rastadt. 1714.♦ The arrangements of Ryswick were again confirmed -by the peace of Rastadt. ♦Annexation of Orange. 1714.♦ In the same -year the principality of _Orange_ was annexed to France, leaving -the Papal possessions of Avignon and Venaissin surrounded by French -territory, the last relic of the Burgundian realm between the Rhone -and the Alps. ♦Effects of the reign of Lewis the Fourteenth.♦ France -had thus obtained a good physical boundary towards Spain and Italy, -and a boundary clearly marked on the map towards the now Austrian -Netherlands. Her eastern frontier was still broken in upon by the duchy -of Lorraine, by the districts in Elsass which had still escaped, by -the county of _Montbeliard_, and by the detached territories of the -commonwealth of _Geneva_. But France could now in a certain part of her -territory call the Rhine her frontier. It was an easy inference that -the Rhine ought to be her frontier through the whole of its course. - - * * * * * - -The next reign, that of Lewis the Fifteenth, in a manner completed -the work of Henry the Second and Lewis the Fourteenth. The gap which -had so long yawned between Champagne and Elsass was now filled up. -♦Arrangements as to Lorraine. 1735. | Its incorporation. 1766.♦ France -obtained a reversionary right to the duchy of Lorraine, which was -incorporated thirty-one years later. The lands of Metz, Toul, and -Verdun were no longer isolated. Elsass, which, by the acquisition -of Franche Comté, had ceased to be insular, now ceased to be even -peninsular. Leaving out of sight a few spots of Imperial soil which -were now wholly surrounded by France, the French territory now -stretched as a solid and unbroken mass from the Ocean to the Rhine. -♦Thorough incorporation of French Conquests.♦ And it must be remembered -that all the lands which the monarchy of Paris had gradually brought -under its power were in the strictest sense incorporated with the -kingdom. There were no dependencies, no separate kingdoms or duchies. -♦Effect of geographical continuity. | Contrast with Spain and Austria.♦ -The geographical continuity of the French territory enabled France -really to incorporate her conquests in a way in which Spain and Austria -never could. And the process was further helped by the fact that each -annexation by itself was small compared with the general bulk of the -French monarchy. Except in the case of the fragment of Navarre which -was held by its Bourbon king, France never annexed a kingdom or made -any permanent addition to the royal style of her kings. - -♦Purchase of Corsica. 1768.♦ - -The same reign saw another acquisition altogether unlike the rest -in the form of the Italian island of _Corsica_. In itself the -incorporation of this island with the French kingdom seems as unnatural -as the Spanish or Austrian dominion in Sicily or Sardinia. ♦Its -effects.♦ But the result has been different. Corsica has been far more -thoroughly incorporated with France than such outlying possessions -commonly are. The truth is that the strong continuity of the -continental dominions of France made the incorporation of the island -easier. There were no traditions or precedents which could suggest -the holding of it as a dependency or as a separate state in any form. -♦Birth of Buonaparte. 1769.♦ Corsica again was more easily attached to -France, because the man who did most to extend the dominion of France -was a Frenchman only so far as Corsicans had become Frenchmen. Corsica -has thus become French in a sense in which Sardinia and Sicily never -became Spanish, partly because France had no other possession of the -kind, partly because Napoleon Buonaparte was born at Ajaccio. - - -§ 3. _The Colonial Dominion of France._ - -♦Early French colonization.♦ - -France, like all the European powers which have an oceanic coast, -entered early on the field of colonization and distant dominion. At one -time indeed it seemed as if France was destined to become the chief -European power both in India and in North America. ♦French colonies in -North America. 1506.♦ French attempts at colonization in the latter -country began early in the sixteenth century. ♦1540. | 1603.♦ Thus -_Cape Breton_ at the mouth of the Saint Lawrence was reached early in -the sixteenth century, the colonization of _Canada_ began a generation -later, and French dominion in America was confirmed by the foundation -of _Quebec_. ♦Acadia ceded to England. 1713.♦ The peninsula of _Acadie_ -or _Nova Scotia_ was from this time a subject of dispute between France -and Great Britain, till it was finally surrendered by France at the -Peace of Utrecht. ♦Canada and Louisiana.♦ France now, under the names -of _Canada_ and _Louisiana_, or of _New France_, held or claimed a vast -inland region stretching from the mouth of the Saint Lawrence to the -mouth of the Mississippi, while the eastern coast was colonized by -other powers. ♦Colonization at the mouth of the Mississippi. 1699. -| Foundation of New Orleans. 1717.♦ At the end of the seventeenth -century the first colonization began at the mouth of the Mississippi; -and the city of New Orleans was founded eighteen years later. ♦Rivalry -of English and French settlements.♦ France and England thus became -distinctly rival powers in America as well as in Europe. The English -settlers were pressing westward from the coast to the Ocean. The French -strove to fix the Alleghany range as the eastern boundary of English -advance. ♦Share of the Colonies in European Wars.♦ In every European -war between the two powers the American colonies played an important -part. ♦English conquest of Canada. 1759. | 1763.♦ Canada was wrested -from France; and by the Treaty of Paris all the French possessions -north of the present United States were finally surrendered to England, -except a few small islands kept for fishing purposes. ♦The Mississippi -boundary.♦ The Mississippi was now made the boundary of Louisiana, -leaving nothing to France on its left bank except the city of New -Orleans. These cessions ruled for ever that men of English blood, -whether remaining subjects of the mother-country or forming independent -states, should be the dominant power in the North American continent. - -♦The West India islands.♦ - -Among the West India islands, France in the seventeenth century -colonized several of the _Antilles_, some of which were afterwards lost -to England. ♦St. Domingo. 1697.♦ Later in the century she acquired part -of the great island called variously _Hispaniola_, _Saint Domingo_, and -_Hayti_. ♦French Guiana. 1624. | Cayenne. 1635.♦ On the coast of South -America lay the French settlements in _Guiana_, with _Cayenne_ as their -capital. This colony grew into more importance after the war of Canada. - -♦The French in India.♦ - -Nearly the same course of things took place in the eastern world as -in the western. In India neither English nor French colonized in any -strict sense. But commercial settlements grew into dominion, or what -seemed likely to become dominion: and in India, as in America, the -temporary greatness of France came before the more lasting greatness -of England. ♦1664.♦ The French East India Company began later than -the English; but its steps towards dominion were for a long time -faster. ♦Bourbon. 1657.♦ Before this the French had occupied the -_Isle of Bourbon_, an important point on the road to India. ♦Factory -at Surat. 1668.♦ The first French factory on the mainland was at -Surat. ♦Pondicherry. 1672.♦ During the later years of the century -various attempts at settlement were made; but no important or lasting -acquisition was made, except that of _Pondicherry_. This has ever since -remained a French possession, often lost in the course of warfare, but -always restored at the next peace. ♦Chandernagore. 1676.♦ A little -later France obtained _Chandernagore_ in Bengal. ♦Isle of France. -1720.♦ In the next century the island of _Mauritius_, abandoned by -the Dutch, became a French colony under the name of the _Isle of -France_. Under Labourdonnais and Dupleix France gained for a moment a -real Indian dominion. ♦Taking of Madras. 1746.♦ Madras was taken, and -a large dominion was obtained on the eastern coast of India in the -Carnatic and the Circars. ♦Restored. 1748.♦ But all hope of French -supremacy in India came to an end in the later years of the Seven -Years’ War. ♦Effects of the Peace of Paris. 1763.♦ France was confined -to a few points which have not seriously threatened the eastern -dominion of England. - - -§ 4. _Acquisitions of France during the Revolutionary Wars._ - -Thus the French monarchy grew from the original Parisian duchy into -a kingdom which spread north, south, east, and west, taking in all -the fiefs of the West-Frankish kings, together with much which had -belonged to the other kingdoms of the Empire. ♦Acquisitions in the -Revolutionary Wars.♦ With the great French revolution began a series of -acquisitions of territory on the part of France which are altogether -unparalleled. ♦Different classes of annexations.♦ First of all, there -were those small annexations of territory surrounded or nearly so by -French territory, whose annexation was necessary if French territory -was to be continuous. ♦Avignon. | Mülhausen.♦ Such were Avignon, -Venaissin, the county of _Montbeliard_, the few points in Elsass which -had escaped the reunions, with the Confederate city of _Mülhausen_. -Avignon and Venaissin, and the surviving Alsatian fragments, were -annexed to France before the time of warfare and conquest had begun. -Mülhausen, as Confederate ground, was respected as long as Confederate -ground was respected. ♦1796.♦ Montbeliard had been annexed already. -♦Geneva and _Bischofbasel_. 1801.♦ And with these we might be inclined -to place the annexations of Geneva and of the _Bishopric of Basel_, -lands which lay hardly less temptingly when the work of annexation -had once begun. ♦Second zone;♦ And beyond these roundings off of the -home estate lay a zone of territory which might easily be looked -upon as being French soil wrongfully lost. ♦traditions of Gaul and -the Rhine frontier.♦ When the Western _Francia_ had made such great -strides towards the dimensions of the Gaul of Cæsar, the inference -was easily made that it ought to take in all that Gaul had once taken -in. The conquest and incorporation of the Austrian Netherlands, of -all Germany on the left bank of the Rhine, of Savoy and Nizza, thus -became a matter of course. ♦Buonaparte’s feeling towards Switzerland.♦ -That the Gaul of Cæsar was not fully completed by the complete -incorporation of Switzerland, seems to have been owing to a personal -tenderness for the Confederation on the part of Napoleon Buonaparte, -who never incorporated with his dominions any part of the territory -of the Thirteen Cantons. Otherwise, France under the Consulate might -pass for a revival of the Transalpine Gaul of Roman geography. And -there were other lands beyond the borders of Transalpine Gaul, which -had formed part of Gaul in the earlier sense of the name, and whose -annexation, when annexation had once begun, was hardly less wonderful -than that of the lands within the Rhine and the Alps. ♦Piedmont, -&c.♦ The incorporation of Piedmont and Genoa was not wonderful after -the incorporation of Savoy. ♦Distinction between conquests under -the Republic and under the ‘Empire.’♦ In short, the annexations of -republican France are at least intelligible. They have a meaning; we -can follow their purpose and object. They stand distinct from the wild -schemes of universal conquest which mark the period of the ‘Empire.’ - -♦Example of Corsica.♦ - -Still the example of such schemes was given during the days of the old -monarchy. There was nothing to suggest a French annexation of Corsica, -any more than a French annexation of Cerigo. ♦Character of Buonaparte’s -conquests.♦ Both were works of exactly the kind, works quite different -from incorporating isolated scraps of Elsass or of the old Burgundy, -from rounding off the frontier by Montbeliard, or even from advancing -to the left bank of the Rhine. The shiftings of the map which took -place during the ten years of the first French Empire, the divisions -and the unions, the different relations of the conquered states, -seem like several centuries of the onward march of the old Roman -commonwealth crowded into a single day. ♦Dependent and incorporated -lands.♦ In both cases we mark the distinction between lands which -are merely dependent and lands which are fully incorporated. And in -both cases the dependent relation is commonly a step towards full -incorporation. All past history and tradition, all national feelings, -all distinctions of race and language, were despised in building -up the vast fabric of French dominion. Such a power was sure to -break in pieces, even without any foreign attack, before its parts -could possibly have been fused together. As it was, Buonaparte never -professed to incorporate either Spain or the whole of Italy and Germany -with his Empire. He was satisfied with leaving large parts either in -the formally dependent relation, in the hands of puppet princes, or -even in the hands of powers which he deemed too much weakened for -further resistance. ♦Buonaparte’s treatment of Germany;♦ A large part -of Germany was incorporated with France, another large part was under -French protection or dependence, but a large part still remained in the -hands of the native princes of Austria and Prussia. ♦of Italy.♦ Much of -Italy was incorporated, and the rest was held, partly by the conqueror -himself under another title, partly by a prince of his own house. This -last was the case with Spain. ♦Division of Europe between France and -Russia.♦ Till the final breach with Russia, the idea of Buonaparte’s -dominion seems to have been that of a twofold division of Europe -between Russia and himself, a kind of revival on a vaster scale of the -Eastern and Western Empires. The western potentate was careful to keep -everywhere a dominant influence within his own world; but whether the -territory should be incorporated, made dependent, or granted out to his -kinsfolk and favourites, depended in each case on the conqueror’s will. - -♦Europe in 1811.♦ - -A glance at the map of Europe, as it stood at the beginning of 1811, -will show how nearly this scheme was carried out. The kernel of -the French Empire was France as it stood at the beginning of the -Revolution, together with those conquests of the Republic which gave -it the Rhine frontier from Basel to Nimwegen. Beyond these limits the -former United Provinces, with the whole oceanic coast of Germany as -far as the Elbe, and the cities of Bremen, Hamburg, and Lübeck, were -incorporated with France. France now stretched to the Baltic, and, as -Holstein was now incorporated with Denmark, France and Denmark had -a common frontier. The Confederation of the Rhine was a protected -state, and the Kingdom of Prussia and the self-styled ‘Empire’ of -Austria could practically hardly claim a higher place. Of the former -Austrian possessions, those parts which had passed to Bavaria and to -the kingdom of Italy formally stood in the dependent relation, and the -so-called Illyrian provinces were actually incorporated with France. -So were the Ionian islands yet further on. In Italy, the whole western -side of the ancient kingdom, with Rome itself, was incorporated with -France. North-eastern Italy formed a separate kingdom held by the ruler -of France. Naples, like Spain, was a dependent kingdom. In northern -Europe, Denmark and Sweden, like Prussia and Austria, could practically -claim no higher place. And the new duchy of Warsaw and the new republic -of Danzig carried French influence beyond the ancient borders of -Germany. - -♦Arrangements of 1814-1815.♦ - -Such was the extent of the French dominion when the power of Buonaparte -was at its highest. At his fall all the great and distant conquests -were given up. ♦The first class of annexations retained by France, -the rest restored.♦ But those annexations which were necessary for -the completion of France as she then stood were respected. The new -Germanic body took back Köln, Trier, and Mainz, Worms and Speyer, but -not Montbeliard or any part of Elsass. The new Swiss body received -the Bishopric of Basel, Neufchâtel, Geneva, and Wallis. ♦Boundary -of Savoy.♦ Savoy and Nizza went back to their own prince. But here a -different frontier was drawn after the first and the second fall of -Buonaparte. The earlier arrangement left Chambéry to France. The Pope -again received Rome and his Italian dominions, but not his outlying -Burgundian city of Avignon and county of Venaissin. The frontier of the -new kingdom of the Netherlands, though traced at slightly different -points by the two arrangements, differed in either case but little from -the frontier of the Barrier Treaty. In short the France of the restored -Bourbons was the France of the old Bourbons, enlarged by those small -isolated scraps of foreign soil which were needed to make it continuous. - -The geographical results of the rule of the second Buonaparte consist -of the completion of the work which began under Philip the Fair, -balanced by the utter undoing of the work of Richelieu, the partial -undoing of the work of Henry the Second and Lewis the Fourteenth. -♦Annexation of Savoy and Nizza. 1860. | Loss of Elsass and Lorraine. -1871.♦ _Savoy_, _Nizza_, and _Mentone_ were added; but Germany -recovered nearly all _Elsass_ and a part of _Lorraine_. The Rhine now -neither crosses nor waters a single rood of French ground. As it was -in the first beginnings of Northern European history, so it is now; -Germany lies on both sides of the German river. - - * * * * * - -The time of the greatest power of France in Europe was by no means -equally favourable to her advance in other parts of the world. -♦Independence of Hayti, 1801.♦ The greatest West India colony of -France, Saint Domingo, now known as _Hayti_, became an independent -negro state whose chiefs imitated home example by taking the title -of Emperor. About the same time the last remnant of French dominion -on the North American continent was voluntarily given up. ♦Louisiana -ceded to Spain, 1763; recovered, 1800; sold to United States, 1803.♦ -Louisiana, ceded to Spain by the Peace of Paris and recovered under the -Consulate, was sold to the United States. All the smaller French West -India islands were conquered by England; but all were restored at the -peace, except _Tobago_ and _Saint Lucia_. ♦Mauritius kept by England.♦ -The isles of _Bourbon_ and _Mauritius_ were also taken by England, -and _Bourbon_ alone was restored at the Peace. ♦Pondicherry lost and -restored.♦ In India _Pondicherry_ was twice taken and twice restored. - -But since France was thus wholly beaten back from her great schemes of -dominion in distant parts of the world, she has led the way in a kind -of conquest and colonization which has no exact parallel in modern -times. ♦French conquest of Algeria, 1830;♦ In the French occupation of -_Algeria_ we see something different alike from political conquests in -Europe and from isolated conquests in distant parts of the world. ♦of -Constantine, 1837.♦ It is conquest, not actually in Europe, but in a -land on the shores of the great European sea, in a land which formed -part of the Empire of Constantine, Justinian, and Heraclius. ♦Character -of African conquests.♦ It is the winning back from Islam of a land -which once was part of Latin-speaking Christendom, a conquest which, -except in the necessary points of difference between continental and -insular conquests, may be best paralleled with the Norman Conquest of -Sicily. Sicily could be wholly recovered for Europe and Christendom; -but the French settlement in Algeria can never be more than a mere -fringe of Europe and its civilization on the edge of barbaric Africa. -It is strictly the first colony of the kind. Portugal, Spain, England, -had occupied this or that point on the northern coast of Africa; France -was the first European power to spread her dominion over a long range -of the southern Mediterranean shore, a land which in some sort answers -alike to India and to Australia, but lying within two days’ sail of her -own coast. - - * * * * * - -We have thus finished our survey of the states which were formed out -of the break-up of the later Western Empire. The rest of Western -Europe must be postponed, as neither the Spanish, the British, nor the -Scandinavian kingdoms rose out of the break-up of the Empire of Charles -the Great. In our next Chapter we must trace the historical geography -of the states which arose out of the gradual dismemberment of the -dominion of the Eastern Rome, a survey which will lead us to the most -stirring events and to the latest geographical changes of our own day. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[18] Namely in the Illyrian Provinces and in the Ionian Islands. See -above, p. 322. - -[19] See above, p. 139. - -[20] See above, p. 135. - -[21] See above, p. 292. - -[22] See above, p. 264. - -[23] See above, pp. 284, 285. - - - - -CHAPTER X. - -THE EASTERN EMPIRE. - - -♦Contrast between the Eastern and Western Empires.♦ - -The geographical, like the political, history of the Eastern Empire is -wholly unlike that of the Western. ♦The Western Empire fell to pieces.♦ -The Western Empire, in the strictest sense, fell asunder. Some of its -parts fell away formally, others practically. The tie that held the -rest snapped at the first touch of a vigorous invader. But that invader -was an European power whose territories had once formed part of the -Empire itself. From the invasions of nations beyond the European pale -the Western Empire, as such, suffered but little. The Western Empire -again, long before its fall, had become, so far as it was a power at -all, a national power, the _Roman Empire of the German nation_. Its -fall was the half voluntary parting asunder of a nation as well as of -an Empire. ♦Position of the Western Emperors;♦ The Western Emperors -again had, as Emperors, practically ceased to be territorial princes. -No lands of any account directly obeyed the Emperor, as such, as their -immediate sovereign. When the Empire fell, the Emperor withdrew to -his hereditary states, taking the Imperial title with him. In the -Eastern Empire all is different. It did to some extent fall asunder -from within, but its overthrow was mainly owing to its being broken in -pieces from without. ♦of the Eastern.♦ But, throughout its history, the -Emperor remained the immediate sovereign of all that still clave to -the Empire, and, when the Empire fell, the Emperor fell with it. ♦The -Eastern Empire fell mainly through foreign invasion.♦ The overthrow of -the Empire was mainly owing to foreign invasion in the strictest sense. -It was weakened and dismembered by the Christian powers of Europe, -and at last swallowed up by the barbarians of Asia. ♦Tendencies to -separation.♦ At the same time the tendency to break in pieces after -the Western fashion did exist and must always be borne in mind. But it -existed only in particular parts and under special conditions. It is -found mainly in possessions of the Empire which had become isolated, in -lands which had been lost and won again, and in lands which came under -the influence of Western ideas. The importance of these tendencies is -shown by the fact that three powers which had been cut off in various -ways from the body of the Empire, Bulgaria, Venice, and Sicily, became -three of its most dangerous enemies. But the actual destruction of the -Empire came from those barbarian attacks from which the West suffered -but little. - -Speaking generally then, the Western Empire fell asunder from within; -the Eastern Empire was broken in pieces from without. Of the many -causes of this difference, perhaps only one concerns geography. At the -time of the separation of the Empires, the Western Empire was really -only another name for the dominions of the King of the Franks, whether -within or without the elder Empire. ♦Closer connexion of the East with -Roman political traditions.♦ The Eastern Empire, on the other hand, -kept the political tradition of the elder Empire unbroken. ♦Disuse of -the Roman name in the West.♦ No common geographical or national name -took in the three Imperial kingdoms of the West and their inhabitants. -♦Its retention in the East.♦ But all the inhabitants of the Eastern -Empire, down to the end, knew themselves by no national name but that -of _Romans_, and the land gradually received the geographical name -of _Romania_. But the Western Empire was not _Romania_, nor were its -people _Romans_. The only _Romania_ in the West, the Italian land so -called, took its name from its long adhesion to the Eastern Empire. - -♦Importance of distinctions of race in the East.♦ - -In the East again differences of race are far more important than -they ever were in the West. In the West nations have been formed by a -certain commingling of elements; in the East the elements remain apart. -All the nations of the south-eastern peninsula, whether older than the -Roman conquest or settlers of later times, are there still as distinct -nations. - -♦The original nations.♦ - -First among them come three nations whose settlement in the peninsula -is older than the Roman conquest. One of these has kept its name and -its language. One has kept its language, but has taken up its name -afresh only in modern times. The third has for ages lost both its -name and its language. ♦Albanians.♦ The most unchanged people in the -peninsula must be the _Albanians_, called by themselves _Skipetar_, the -representatives of the old Illyrians. ♦Greeks.♦ Next come the Greeks, -who keep their language, but whose name of _Hellênes_ went out of -ordinary use till its revival in modern times. ♦Vlachs.♦ Lastly there -are the _Vlachs_, representing those inhabitants of Thrace, Mœsia, and -other parts of the peninsula, who, like the Western nations, exchanged -their own speech for Latin. They must mainly represent the Thracian -race in its widest sense. ♦Use of the Roman name.♦ Both Greeks and -Vlachs kept on the Roman name in different forms, and the Vlachs, the -_Roumans_ of our own day, keep it still. Of the invading races, the -Goths passed through the Empire without making any lasting settlements -in it. ♦Slavonic settlers.♦ The last Aryan settlers, setting aside mere -colonists in later times, were the _Slaves_. ♦Turanian settlers.♦ -Then came the Turanian settlers, Finnish, Turkish, or any other. Of -these the first wave, the _Bulgarians_, were presently assimilated by -the Slaves, and the Bulgarian power must be looked at historically as -Slavonic. ♦Turanian neighbours.♦ Then come Avars, Chazars, Magyars, -Patzinaks, Cumans, all settling on or near the borders of the Empire. -♦The Magyars.♦ Of these the Magyars alone grew into a lasting European -state, and alone established a lasting power over lands which had -formed part of the Empire. All these invaders came by the way of the -lands north of the Euxine. Lastly, there are the non-Aryan invaders who -came by way of Asia Minor or of the Mediterranean sea. ♦The Saracens.♦ -The Semitic Saracens, after their first conquests in Syria, Egypt, and -Africa, made no lasting conquests. They occupied for a while several -of the great islands; but on the mainland of the Empire, European and -Asiatic, they were mere plunderers. ♦The Seljuk and Ottoman Turks.♦ -In their wake came the most terrible enemies of all, the Turks, first -the Seljuk, then the Ottoman. Ethnologically they must be grouped with -the nations which came in by the north of the Euxine. Historically, -as Mahometans, coming in by the southern route, they rank with the -Saracens, and they did the work which the Saracens tried to do. Most -of these invading races have passed away from history; three still -remain in three different stages. ♦Comparison of Bulgarians, Magyars -and Ottomans.♦ The Bulgarian is lost among the Aryan people who have -taken his name. The Magyar abides, keeping his non-Aryan language, -but adopted into the European commonwealth by his acceptance of -Christianity. The Ottoman Turk still abides on European soil, unchanged -because Mahometan, still an alien alike to the creed and to the tongues -of Europe. - -♦The Eastern Empire becomes Greek.♦ - -Among all these nations one holds a special place in the history of -the Eastern Empire. The loss of the Oriental and Latin provinces of -the Empire brought into practical working, though not into any formal -notice, the fact that, as the Western Empire was fast becoming German, -so the Eastern Empire was fast becoming Greek. ♦Loss of the Oriental -provinces,♦ To a state which had both a Roman and a Greek side the loss -of provinces which were neither Roman nor Greek was not a loss but a -source of strength. ♦of the Latin provinces.♦ And if the loss of the -Latin provinces was not a source of strength, it at least did much to -bring the Greek element in the Empire into predominance. ♦Dying out -of Roman ideas.♦ Meanwhile, within the lands which were left to the -Empire, first the Latin language, and then Roman ideas and traditions -generally, gradually died out. Before the end of the eleventh century, -the Empire was far more Greek than anything else. Before the end -of the twelfth century, it had become nearly conterminous with the -Greek nation, as defined by the combined use of the Greek language -and profession of the Orthodox faith. The name _Roman_, in its Greek -form, was coming to mean _Greek_. And, about the same time, the other -primitive nations of the peninsula, hitherto merged in the common mass -of Roman subjects, began to show themselves more distinctly alongside -of the Greeks. ♦Appearance of Albanians and Vlachs.♦ We now first -hear of _Albanians_ and _Vlachs_ by those names, and the importance -of the nations which have thus come again to light increases as we go -on. ♦The Latin Conquest, 1204.♦ Then the Greek remnant of the Empire -was broken in pieces by the great Latin invasion, and, instead of -a single power, Roman or Greek, we see a crowd of separate states, -Greek and Frank. ♦The revived Byzantine Empire.♦ The reunion of some -of these fragments formed the revived Empire of the Palaiologoi. But -at no moment since the twelfth century has the whole Greek nation -been united under a single power, native or foreign. ♦1461-1821.♦ And -from the Ottoman conquest of Trebizond to the beginning of the Greek -War of Independence, the whole of the Greek nation was under foreign -masters.[24] - - * * * * * - -We have now first to trace out the steps by which the Empire was broken -in pieces, and then to trace out severally the geographical history -of the states which rose out of its fragments. And with these last -we may class certain powers which do not strictly come under that -definition, but which come within the same geographical range and which -absorbed parts of the Imperial territory. Beginning in the West, the -territory which the Empire at the final separation still held west of -the Hadriatic, was gradually lost through the attacks, first of the -Saracens, then of the Normans. ♦Sicily.♦ These lands grew into the -kingdom of _Sicily_, which has its proper place here as an offshoot -from the Eastern Empire. ♦Venice.♦ At the other end of the Italian -peninsula, _Venice_ gradually detached itself from the Empire, to -become foremost in its partition: here then comes the place of Venice -as a maritime power. ♦Slavonic powers. | Bulgaria.♦ Then come the -powers which arose on the north and north-west of the Empire, powers -chiefly Slavonic, reckoning as Slavonic the great Bulgarian kingdom. -♦Hungary.♦ Here too will come the kingdom of Hungary, which, as a -non-Aryan power in the heart of Europe, has much both of likeness and -of contrast with Bulgaria. The kingdom of Hungary itself lay beyond the -bounds of the Empire, but a large part of its dependent territory had -been Imperial soil. ♦Albanians. | Roumans.♦ Here also we must speak -of the states which arose out of the new developement of the Albanian -and Rouman races, and of the states, Greek and Frank, which arose just -before and at the time of the Latin Conquest. ♦Asiatic powers.♦ Then -there are the powers, both Christian and Mahometan, which arose within -the Imperial dominions in Asia. Here we have to speak alike of the -states founded by the Crusaders and of the growth of the Ottoman Turks. -Lastly, we come to the work of our own days, to the new European states -which have been formed by the deliverance of old Imperial lands from -Ottoman bondage. - -♦800-1204.♦ - -We will therefore first trace the geographical changes in the frontier -of the Empire itself down to the Latin Conquest. ♦1204-1453.♦ The -Latin Empire of _Romania_, the Greek Empire of _Nikaia_, the revived -Greek Empire of Constantinople, will follow, as continuing, at least -geographically, the true Eastern Roman Empire. Then will come the -powers which have fallen off from the Empire or grown up within the -Empire, from Sicily to free Bulgaria. But it must be remembered that it -is not always easy to mark, either chronologically or on the map, when -this or that territory was finally lost to the Empire. This is true -both on the Slavonic border and also in southern Italy. ♦Distinction -between conquest and settlement.♦ On the former above all it is often -hard to distinguish between conquest at the cost of the Empire and -settlement within the Empire. In either case the frontier within which -the Emperors exercised direct authority was always falling back and -advancing again. Beyond this there was a zone which could not be said -to be under the Emperor’s direct rule, but in which his overlordship -was more or less fully acknowledged, according to the relative -strength of the Empire and of its real or nominal vassals. - - -§ 1. _Changes in the Frontier of the Empire._ - -♦Power of revival in the Empire.♦ - -In tracing the fluctuations of the frontier of the Eastern Empire from -the beginning of the ninth century, we are struck by the wonderful -power of revival and reconquest which is shown throughout the whole -history. Except the lands which were won by the first Saracens, hardly -a province was finally lost till it had been once or twice won back. -No one could have dreamed that the Empire of the seventh century, cut -short by the Slavonic settlements to a mere fringe on its European -coasts, could ever have become the Empire of the eleventh century, -holding a solid mass of territory from Tainaros to the Danube. But -before this great revival, the borders of the Empire had both advanced -and fallen back in the farther West. ♦Sardinia, Sicily, Southern -Italy.♦ At the time of the separation of the Empires, the New Rome -still held Sardinia, Sicily, and a small part of southern Italy. The -heel of the boot still formed the theme of _Lombardy_,[25] while the -toe took the name of _Calabria_ which had once belonged to the heel. -_Naples_, _Gaeta_, and _Amalfi_ were outlying Italian cities of the -Empire; so was _Venice_, which can hardly be called an Italian city. -♦Loss of the islands. | Advance on the continent.♦ In the course of the -ninth century the power of the Empire was cut short in the islands, but -advanced on the mainland. ♦Loss of Sardinia.♦ The history of Sardinia -is utterly obscure; but it seems to have passed away from the Empire -by the beginning of the ninth century. ♦Loss of Sicily, 827-965.♦ -Sicily was now conquered bit by bit by the Saracens of Africa during -a struggle of one hundred and forty years. ♦Loss of Agrigentum, 827; -| of Palermo, 831;♦ _Agrigentum_, opposite to the African coast, fell -first; _Palermo_, once the seat of Phœnician rule, became four years -later the new Semitic capital. ♦Messina, 842;♦ _Messina_ on the strait -soon followed; but the eastern side of the island, its most thoroughly -Greek side, held out much longer. ♦Malta, 869;♦ Before the conquest -of this region, _Malta_, the natural appendage to Sicily, passed into -Saracen hands. ♦Syracuse, 878.♦ _Syracuse_, the Christian capital, -did not fall till fifty years after the first invasion, and in the -north-western corner of the island a remnant still held out for nearly -ninety years. ♦Tauromenion, 902-963. | Rametta, 965.♦ _Tauromenion_ or -_Taormina_, on its height, had to be twice taken in the course of the -tenth century, and the single fort of _Rametta_, the last stronghold -of Eastern Christendom in the West, held out longer still. By this -time Eastern Christendom was fast advancing on Islam in Asia; but the -greatest of Mediterranean islands passed from Christendom to Islam, -from Europe to Africa, and a Greek-speaking people was cut off from the -Empire which was fast becoming Greek. ♦Partial recovery and final loss -of Sicily, 1038-1042.♦ But the complete and uninterrupted Mussulman -dominion in Sicily was short. The Imperial claims were never forgotten, -and in the eleventh century they were again enforced. By the arms of -George Maniakês, Messina and Syracuse, with a part of the island which -at the least took in the whole of its eastern side, was, if only for a -few years, restored to the Imperial rule. - -♦Advance of the Empire in Italy.♦ - -While Sicily was thus lost bit by bit, the power of the Empire was -advancing in the neighbouring mainland of Italy. ♦Taking of Bari, 871.♦ -_Bari_ was won back for Christendom from the Saracen by the combined -powers of both Empires; but the lasting possession of the prize fell -to the Cæsar of the East. At the end of the ninth century, the Eastern -Empire claimed either the direct possession or the superiority of all -southern Italy from Gaeta downwards. ♦Fluctuations of the Imperial -power in Italy.♦ The extent of the Imperial dominion was always -fluctuating; there was perhaps no moment when the power of the Emperors -was really extended over this whole region; but there was perhaps no -spot within it which did not at some time or other admit at least the -Imperial overlordship. The eastern coast, with the heel and the toe in -a wider sense than before, became a real and steady possession, while -the allegiance of _Beneventum_, _Capua_, and _Salerno_ was always very -precarious. ♦Naples, Gaeta, and Amalfi.♦ But _Naples_, _Gaeta_, and -_Amalfi_, however nominal their allegiance might be, never formally -cast it aside. - -Thus, at the beginning of the ninth century, the Eastern Emperors -held all Sicily, with some patches of territory on the neighbouring -mainland. At the beginning of the eleventh century, the island had -been wholly lost, while the dominion on the mainland had been greatly -enlarged. ♦The Normans in Italy and Sicily.♦ In the course of the -eleventh century a new power, the Normans of Apulia, conquered the -Italian possessions of the Empire, won Sicily from the Mussulman, and -even made conquests from the Empire east of the Hadriatic. Thus arose -the Sicilian kingdom, the growth of which will best be traced when we -come to the powers which arose out of the breaking-up of the Empire. - - * * * * * - -The great islands of the Eastern Mediterranean also fluctuated between -Byzantine and Saracen dominion. ♦Loss of Crete, 823.♦ _Crete_ was won -by a band of Mussulman adventurers from Spain nearly at the time -when the conquest of Sicily began. ♦Its recovery, 963.♦ It was won -back in the great revival of the Imperial power one hundred and forty -years later. ♦Cyprus lost, 708; recovered and lost again c. 881-888; -recovered again, 965.♦ _Cyprus_ was lost sooner; but it went through -many fluctuations and divisions, a recovery and a second loss, before -its final recovery at the same time as the recovery of Crete and the -complete loss of Sicily. ♦Loss and gain among the great islands.♦ -Looking at the Empire simply as a power, there can be no doubt that the -loss of Sicily was altogether overbalanced by the recovery of Crete -and Cyprus. Geographically Sicily was an outlying Greek island; Crete -and Cyprus lay close to the body of the Empire, essential parts of a -Greek state. But Crete and Cyprus, as lands which had been lost and -won back, were among the lands where the tendency to fall away from -within showed itself earliest. Crete never actually separated from the -Empire. ♦Separation of Cyprus, 1182-1185. | Conquered by Richard of -Poitou, 1191.♦ Cyprus fell away under a rebel Emperor, to be presently -conquered by Richard, Count of Poitou and King of England, and to pass -away from the Empire for ever. - -♦Fluctuations in the possession of the great islands, 801.♦ - -We may thus sum up the fluctuations in the possession of the great -islands. At the beginning of the ninth century, the Eastern Empire -still took in Sardinia, Sicily, and Crete; Cyprus was in the hands of -the Saracens. ♦901.♦ At the beginning of the tenth century, the Empire -held nothing in any of the four except the north-eastern corner of -Sicily. ♦1001.♦ At the beginning of the eleventh, Crete and Cyprus had -been won back; Sicily was wholly lost. ♦1101.♦ At the beginning of the -twelfth, Crete and Cyprus were still Imperial possessions; a great part -of Sicily had been won and lost again. ♦1201.♦ At the beginning of the -thirteenth, Cyprus, like Sicily, had passed to a Western master; Crete -was still held by the Empire, but only by a very feeble tie. Thus they -stood at the fall of the old Roman Empire of the East; of the revived -Empire of the Palaiologoi none of them ever formed a part. - - * * * * * - -♦Relations of the Empire towards the Slavonic powers.♦ - -In the islands the enemies with whom the Empire had to strive were, -first the Saracens, and then the Latins or Franks, the nations of -Western Europe. On the mainland the part of the Saracen was taken -by the Slave. During the four hundred years between the division of -the Empires and the Frank conquest of the East, the geographical -history of the Eastern Empire has mainly to deal with the shiftings -of its frontier towards the Slavonic powers. ♦Three Slavonic groups.♦ -These fall into three main groups. ♦Servia and Croatia.♦ First, in -the north-western corner of the Empire, are the Croatian and Servian -settlements, whose history is closely connected with that of the -kingdom of Hungary and the commonwealth of Venice. ♦Macedonia and -Greece.♦ Secondly, there are the Slaves of Thrace, Macedonia, and -Greece. ♦Bulgaria.♦ Thirdly, the great Bulgarian kingdom comes between -the two. These two last ranges gradually merge into one; the first -remains distinct throughout. Servia, Croatia, and Dalmatia, will be -best treated of in another section, remembering that, amidst all -fluctuations, the claims of the Empire over them were never denied -or forgotten, and were from time to time enforced. It was towards -the Bulgarian kingdom that the greatest fluctuations of the Imperial -frontier took place. - - * * * * * - -♦The Bulgarian kingdom.♦ - -The original Finnish Bulgarians were the vanguard of Turanian invasion -in the lands with which we have to do. Earlier, it would seem, in their -coming than the Avars, they were slower to settle down into actual -occupation of European territory. But when they did settle, it was -not on the outskirts of the Empire, but in one of its acknowledged -provinces. ♦Settlement south of the Danube, 679.♦ Late in the seventh -century, the first Bulgarian kingdom was established between Danube -and Hæmus. It must be remembered that another migration in quite -another direction founded another Bulgarian power on the Volga and the -Kama. ♦White Bulgaria.♦ This settlement, _Great_ or _White Bulgaria_, -remained Turanian and became Mahometan; _Black Bulgaria_ on the Danube -became Christian and Slavonic. ♦Use of the Bulgarian name.♦ The -modern Bulgarians bear the Bulgarian name only in the way in which -the Romanized Celts of Gaul bear the name of their Frankish masters -from Germany, in which the Slaves of Kief and Moscow bear the name of -their Russian masters from Scandinavia. In all three cases, the power -formed by the union of conquerors and conquered has taken the name of -the conquerors and has kept the speech of the conquered. But though -the Bulgarian power became essentially Slavonic, it took quite another -character from the less fully organized Slavonic settlements to the -west and south of it. ♦The Empire and the Macedonian Slaves.♦ Towards -the Slaves of Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece, it cannot be said that the -Empire had any definite frontier. Settled within the Empire, they were -its tributaries or its enemies, according to the strength of the Empire -at any particular moment. Up to the coming of the Bulgarians, we might, -from different points of view, place the Imperial border either at the -Danube or at no great distance from the Ægæan. ♦The Empire and the -Bulgarian kingdom.♦ But from the Bulgarian conquest onwards, there was -on the Bulgarian side a real frontier, a frontier which often shifted, -but which was often fixed by treaty, and which, wherever it was fixed, -marked off lands which were, for the time, wholly lost to the Empire. -♦Loss of the Danubian frontier.♦ With the first Bulgarian settlement, -the Imperial frontier definitely withdrew for three hundred years from -the lower Danube to the line of Hæmus or Balkan. ♦Bulgarians south of -Hæmus.♦ As the Bulgarian power pushed to the south and west the two -fields of warfare, against the Bulgarians to the north and against the -half-independent Slaves to the west, gradually melted into one. But -as long as the Isaurian Emperors reigned, the two fields were kept -distinct. ♦Extent of Bulgaria in the eighth century.♦ They kept the -Balkan range against the Bulgarians, whose kingdom, stretching to the -north-west over lands which are now Servian, had not, at the end of the -eighth century, passed the mountain barrier of the Empire. - -♦Recovery of the Slavonic settlements in Macedonia and Greece.♦ - -Meanwhile, as a wholly distinct work, the Imperial power was restored -over the Slaves of Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece. In the middle of -the eighth, century the inland parts of Greece were chiefly occupied -by Slavonic immigrants, while the coast and the cities remained -Greek. ♦775-784. | 807.♦ Before the end of the century, the Slaves of -Macedonia were reduced to tribute, and early in the ninth, those of -Greece wholly failed to recover their independence. ♦Recovery of Greece -from the Slaves. | Slaves on Ta getos.♦ The land was gradually settled -afresh by Greek colonists, and by the middle of the tenth, only two -Slavonic tribes, _Melings_ and _Ezerites_ (_Melinci_ and _Jezerci_), -remained, distinct, though tributary, on the range of Ta getos or -Pentedaktylos. From this time to the Frankish conquest, Greece, as a -whole, was held by the Empire. But, as a recovered land, it was one -of those parts of the Empire in which a tendency to separate began to -show itself. In the course of these changes, the name _Hellênes_, as a -national name, quite died out. ♦Hellênes of Maina.♦ It had long meant -_pagan_, and it was confined to the people of _Maina_, who remained -pagan till near the end of the ninth century. The Greeks now knew no -name but that of _Romans_. The local, perhaps contemptuous, name of the -inhabitants of Hellas was _Helladikoi_. - -Thus, at the division of the Empires, Thrace, Macedonia, and Greece had -been more or less thoroughly recovered by the Eastern Empire, while -the lands between Hæmus and Danube were wholly lost. ♦Romania.♦ The -Imperial dominion from the Hadriatic to the Euxine formed, together -with the Asiatic provinces, _Romania_, the land of the Romans of the -East. ♦Dalmatia, Servia, and Croatia.♦ The Emperors also kept the -cities on the Dalmatian coast, and the precarious allegiance of the -Servian and Croatian principalities. These lands were bound to the -Empire by a common dread of the encroaching Bulgarian. ♦Greatness of -the first Bulgarian kingdom.♦ The ninth century and the early years of -the tenth was a great time of Bulgarian advance. ♦Attempt on Pannonia, -818-829.♦ The Bulgarians seem to have failed in establishing any -lasting dominion to the north-west in Pannonia;[26] at the expense of -the Empire they were more successful. ♦Advance against the Empire.♦ -At the end of the eighth century _Anchialos_ and _Sardica_—afterwards -called _Triaditza_ and _Sofia_—were border cities of the Empire. The -conquest of Sardica early in the ninth marks a stage of Bulgarian -advance. At the end of the century, after the conversion of the nation -to Christianity, comes the great era of the first Bulgarian kingdom, -the kingdom of _Peristhlava_. ♦Conquests of Simeon, 923-934.♦ The -Tzar Simeon established the Bulgarian supremacy over Servia, and -carried his conquests deep into the lands of the Empire. In Macedonia -and Epeiros the Empire kept only the sea-coast, Ægæan and Hadriatic; -Sardica, Philippopolis, Ochrida, were all cities of the Bulgarian -realm. Hadrianople, a frontier city of the Empire, passed more than -once into Bulgarian hands. Nowhere in Europe, save in old Hellas, did -the Imperial dominion stretch from sea to sea. - -♦Revival of the Imperial power.♦ - -So stood matters in the middle of the tenth century. Then came that -greatest of all revivals of the Imperial power which won back Crete -and Cyprus, and which was no less successful on the mainland of Europe -and Asia. ♦Conquest of Bulgaria.♦ Bulgaria was conquered and lost and -conquered again. But the first time it was conquered, not from the -Bulgarian but from the Russian. ♦The Russians and Bulgarians. 968-971.♦ -The Russians, long dangerous to Constantinople, now suddenly appear as -a land power. Their prince Sviatoslaf overthrew the first Bulgarian -kingdom, and Philippopolis became for a moment a Russian outpost. -But John Tzimiskês restored the power of the Empire over the whole -Bulgarian dominions. The Danube was once more the frontier of the -Eastern Rome. - -♦The second Bulgarian kingdom.♦ - -It remained so for more than two hundred years during the lower part -of its course. But in the inland regions the Imperial power fell back -almost at once, to advance again further than ever. A large part of -the conquered land soon revolted, and a second Bulgarian kingdom, -Macedonian rather than Mœsian, arose. The kingdom of _Ochrida_, the -kingdom of Samuel, left to the Empire the eastern part of the old -Bulgaria between Danube and Hæmus, together with all Thrace and the -Macedonian coast. But it took in all the inland region of Macedonia; -it stretched down into Thessaly and Epeiros; and, while it nowhere -touched the Euxine or the Ægæan, it had a small seaboard on the -Hadriatic. Now came the great struggle between Romania and Bulgaria -which fills the last years of the tenth century and the opening years -of the eleventh. ♦Second conquest of Bulgaria, 1018.♦ At last all -Bulgaria, and with it for a while Servia, was restored to the Empire. -♦Croatia.♦ Croatia continued its vassalage, and its princes were -presently raised to royal rank by Imperial authority. - -Thus the Eastern Empire again took in the whole south-eastern -peninsula. Of its outlying European possessions, southern Italy was -still untouched. ♦Venice.♦ At what moment Venice ceased to be a -dependency of the Empire, it would be hard to say. Its dukes still -received the Imperial investiture, and Venetian ships often joined -the Imperial fleet. This state of things seems never to have been -formally abolished, but rather to have dropped out of sight as Venice -and Constantinople became practically hostile. In the other outlying -city north of the Euxine the ninth and tenth centuries change places. -Through all changes the Empire kept its maritime province in the Tauric -Chersonêsos. ♦Cherson annexed, 829-842; | taken by Vladimir, 988.♦ -There the allied city of _Cherson_, more formally annexed to the Empire -in the ninth century, was taken by the Russian Vladimir in the interval -between the two great Bulgarian wars. - -♦The Empire in Asia.♦ - -In Asia the Imperial frontier had changed but little since the first -Saracen conquests. The solid peninsula of Asia Minor was often -plundered by the Mussulmans, but it was never conquered. Now, in -Asia as in Europe, came a time of advance. For eighty years, with -some fluctuations, the Empire grew on its eastern side. The Bagdad -caliphate was now broken up, and the smaller emirates were more -easily overcome. ♦Asiatic conquests of Nikêphoros and John, 963-976;♦ -The wars of Nikêphoros Phôkas and John Tzimiskês restored _Kilikia_ -and _Syria_ to the list of Roman provinces, _Tarsos_, _Antioch_, -and _Edessa_ to the list of Christian cities. ♦of Basil the Second, -991-1022. | Beginning of the annexation of Armenia 1021; Ani, 1045; -of Kars, 1064.♦ Basil the Second extended the Imperial power over the -_Iberian_ and _Abasgian_ lands east of the Euxine, and began a series -of transactions by which, in the space of forty years, all _Armenia_ -was added to the Empire on the very eve of the downfall of the Imperial -power in Asia. - - * * * * * - -♦New enemies.♦ - -For the great extension of the Empire laid it open to new enemies in -both continents. ♦Turks. | Magyars.♦ In Asia it became the neighbour of -the Seljuk _Turks_, in Europe of the Magyars or Hungarians, who bear -the name of _Turks_ in the Byzantine writers of the tenth century. -Hungary had now settled down into a Christian kingdom. ♦Revolt of -Servia, 1040. | Loss of Belgrade, 1064.♦ A Servian revolt presently -placed a new independent state between Hungary and Romania, but -Belgrade remained an Imperial possession till it passed under Magyar -rule twenty-four years later. ♦Advance of the Turks.♦ By this time the -Empire had begun to be cut short in a far more terrible way in Asia. -The Seljuk Turks now reached the new Roman frontier. ♦Loss of Ani, -1064.♦ Plunder grew into conquest, and the first Turkish conquest, that -of _Ani_, happened in the same year as the last Imperial acquisition of -_Kars_. The Emperors now tried to strengthen this dangerous frontier -by the erection of vassal principalities. The very name of _Armenia_ -now changes its place. ♦Lesser Armenia, 1080.♦ The new or _Lesser -Armenia_ arose in the Kilikian mountains, and was ruled by princes of -the old Armenian dynasty, whose allegiance to the Empire gradually died -out. But before this time the Turkish power was fully established in -the peninsula of Asia Minor. The plunderers had become conquerors. -♦1071.♦ The battle of Manzikert led to formal cessions and further -advances. ♦1074.♦ Throughout Asia Minor the Empire at most kept the -coast; the mass of the inland country became Turkish. ♦The Sultans of -_Roum_. | 1081.♦ But the Roman name did not pass away; the invaders -took the name of Sultans of _Roum_. Their capital was at _Nikaia_, a -threatening position indeed for Constantinople. But distant positions -like Trebizond and Antioch were still held as dependencies. ♦Loss of -Antioch, 1081.♦ Antioch was before long betrayed to the Turks. - -By this time the Empire was attacked by a new enemy in its European -peninsula. ♦Normans in Corfu and Epeiros. 1081-1085.♦ The Norman -conquerors of Apulia and Sicily crossed the Hadriatic, and occupied -various points, both insular and continental, especially _Dyrrhachion_ -or _Durazzo_ and the island of _Korkyra_, now called by a new Greek -name, _Koryphô_ or _Corfu_. At every point of its frontier the Empire -had, towards the end of the eleventh century, altogether fallen -back from the splendid position which it held at its beginning. -♦Geographical aspect of the Empire.♦ The geographical aspect of the -Empire was now the exact opposite of what it had been in the eighth -and ninth centuries. Then its main strength seemed to lie in Asia. Its -European dominion had been cut down to the coasts and islands; but its -Asiatic peninsula was firmly held, touched only by passing ravages. -Now the Asiatic dominion was cut down to the coasts and islands, while -the great European peninsula was, in the greater part of its extent, -still firmly held. Never before had the main power of the Empire been -so thoroughly European. No wonder that in Western eyes the Empire of -Romania began to look like a kingdom of Greece. - - * * * * * - -The states founded by the Crusaders will be dealt with elsewhere. -♦Recovery of Asiatic territory, 1097.♦ The crusades concern us here -only as helping towards the next revival of the Imperial power under -the house of Komnênos. Alexios himself won back Nikaia and the other -great cities of western Asia Minor. Some of these, as _Laodikeia_, were -received rather as free cities of the Empire than as mere subjects. -♦Reigns of John and Manuel.♦ The conquering reigns of John and Manuel -again extended the Empire in both continents. ♦1097.♦ The Turk still -ruled in the inland regions of Asia, but his capital was driven back -from Nikaia to _Ikonion_. ♦1137.♦ The superiority of the Empire was -restored over Antioch and Kilikian Armenia at the one end, over Servia -at the other. ♦1148.♦ Hungary itself had to yield _Zeugmin_, _Sirmium_, -and all Dalmatia. ♦1163-1168.♦ For a moment the Empire again took in -the whole eastern coast of the Hadriatic and its islands; even on -its western shore _Ancona_ became something like a dependency of the -Eastern Cæsar. - -♦Falling of distant possessions.♦ - -The conquests of Manuel were clearly too great for the real strength -of the Empire. Some lands fell away at once. ♦Dalmatia, 1181.♦ -Dalmatia was left to be struggled for between Venice and Hungary. -And the tendency to fall away within the Empire became strengthened -by increased intercourse with the feudal ideas of the West. Cyprus, -Trebizond, old Greece itself, came into the hands of rulers who were -rather feudal vassals than Roman governors. We have seen how Cyprus -fell away. Its Poitevin conqueror presently gave it to Guy of Lusignan. -♦Latin kingdom of Cyprus, 1192.♦ Thus, before the Latin conquest of -Constantinople, a province had been torn from the Eastern Empire to -become a Latin kingdom. The Greek-speaking lands were now beginning -largely to pass under Latin rule. In Sicily the Frank might pass for a -deliverer; in Corfu and Cyprus he was a mere foreign invader. - -♦The third Bulgarian kingdom, 1187.♦ - -Meanwhile the Empire was again cut short to the north by a new -Bulgarian revolt, which established a third Bulgarian kingdom, but a -kingdom which seems to have been as much Vlach or Rouman as strictly -Bulgarian. The new kingdom took in the old Bulgarian land between -Danube and Hæmus, and it presently spread both to the west and to the -south. ♦Other Slavonic revolts.♦ The Bulgarian revolt was followed by -other movements among the Thracian and Macedonian Slaves, which did not -lead to the foundation of any new states, but which had their share in -the general break-up of the Imperial power. ♦Increased Greek character -of the Empire.♦ The work of Basil and Manuel was now undone, but its -undoing had the effect of making the Empire more nearly a Greek state -than ever. It did not wholly coincide with the Greek-speaking lands: -the Empire had subjects who were not Greeks, and there were Greeks who -were not subjects of the Empire. But the Greek speech and the new Greek -nationality were dominant within the lands which were still left to the -Empire. The Roman name was now merely a name: Roman and Greek meant -the same thing. Whatever was not Greek in European Romania was mainly -Albanian and Vlach. The dominion of the Empire in the peninsula was -mainly confined to the primitive races of the peninsula. ♦The Slavonic -states.♦ The great element of later times, the Slavonic settlers, had -almost wholly separated themselves from the Empire, establishing their -independence, but not their unity. They formed a group of independent -powers which had simply fallen away from the Empire; it was by the -powers of the West that the Empire itself was to be broken in pieces. - - * * * * * - -♦Latin conquest of Constantinople, 1204.♦ - -The taking of Constantinople in the Fourth Crusade was the work of an -alliance between the now independent commonwealth of Venice and a body -of Western crusaders who, along with the states which they founded, may -be indifferently called _Latins_ or _Franks_. ♦Act of Partition.♦ A -regular act of partition was drawn out, by which the Empire was to be -divided into three parts. One was to be assigned to a Latin _Emperor -of Romania_, another of the pilgrims as his feudatories, a third to -the commonwealth of Venice. But the partition was never carried out. A -large part of the Empire was never conquered; another large part was -not assigned by the act of partition. In fact the scheme of partition -is hardly a geographical fact at all. The real partition to which the -Latin conquest led was one of quite another kind, a partition of the -Empire among a crowd of powers, Greek, Frank, and Venetian, more than -one of which had some claim to represent the Empire itself. - -♦Latin Empire of Romania.♦ - -These were the Latin Empire of _Romania_, and the Greek Empire which -maintained itself at _Nikaia_, and which, after nearly sixty years of -banishment, won back the Imperial city. In the crusading scheme the -Latin Emperor was to be the feudal superior of the lesser princes who -were to establish themselves within the Empire. For his own Imperial -domain he was to have the whole of the Imperial possessions in Asia, -with a Thracian dominion stretching as far north as _Agathopolis_. -Hadrianople, with a narrow strip of territory stretching down to the -Propontis, was to be Venetian. The actual result was very different. -♦Its extent.♦ The Latin Emperors never got any footing in Asia -beyond parts of the themes bordering on the Propontis, reaching from -Adramyttion to the mouth of the Sangarios. In Europe they held the -eastern part of Thrace, with a fluctuating border towards Bulgaria on -the north, and to the new Latin and Greek states which arose to the -west. Their dominion also took in _Lêmnos_, _Lesbos_, _Chios_, and some -others of the Ægæan islands. - -But the Latin Empire of Romania was not the only Empire which arose -out of the break-up of the old East-Roman power. Two, for a time -three, Greek princes bore the Imperial title; there was also a Latin -king. It will be convenient for a while to leave out of sight both -Asia and southern Greece, and to look to the revolutions of Thrace, -Macedonia, northern Greece, and what we may now begin to call -_Albania_. The immediate result of the Latin conquest was to divide -these lands between three powers, two Latin and one Greek. ♦Kingdom of -Thessalonikê. 1204-1222. | Despotat of Epeiros.♦ Besides the Empire of -Romania, there was the Latin kingdom of _Thessalonikê_, and the Greek -_despotat_[27] of _Epeiros_ held by the house of Angelos. Of these the -Thessalonian kingdom was the most short-lived, and there can be little -doubt that its creation was the ruin of the Latin Empire. It cut off -the Emperor from his distant vassals in Greece, whose vassalage soon -became nominal. It gave him, in successive reigns, a powerful neighbour -who knew his own power, and a weak neighbour, who fell before the Greek -advance sooner than himself. But the beginnings of the kingdom, under -its first king Boniface, were promising. His power stretched over -Thessaly, now known as _Great Vlachia_, and he received the homage of -the Frank princes further to the south. But within twenty years from -its foundation, Frank rule had ceased in Macedonia. ♦Thessalonikê again -Greek.♦ Thessalonikê was again a Greek and an Imperial city, and its -recovery by the Greeks split the Latin Empire asunder. - -♦The Epeirot despotat.♦ - -This blow came from the west. It was the Nicene Empire which did in -the end win back the Imperial city; but, for some years after the -Latin conquest, things looked as if the restoration of the Greek power -in Europe was designed for Epeiros. The first despot Michael paid a -nominal homage to all the neighbouring powers, Greek and Frank, in -turn; but in truth he was the lord of an independent and growing state. -His power began in the Epeirot land west of Pindos. ♦1208-1210.♦ For -a moment he held in Peloponnêsos Corinth, Nauplia, and Argos. Durazzo -and Corfu were won from Venice. ♦1215.♦ The Epeirot power advanced also -to the east. ♦1222. | 1225.♦ Thessalonikê was taken; its ruler took -the Imperial title; Hadrianople followed, and the new Empire stretched -across the peninsula from sea to sea, and took in Thessaly to the -south. But the Thessalonian Empire was hardly more long-lived than the -Thessalonian kingdom. It was first dismembered among the princes of -the ruling house. ♦Separation of Epeiros and Thessalonia. 1237.♦ The -original Epeirot despotat, along with Corfu, parted away from the new -Macedonian power, to survive it by many years. But by this time the -championship of the Greek speech and faith against the Latin lords of -Constantinople had passed to the foremost of the Greek powers which -had grown up in Asia, to the Empire of Nikaia. - -These Greek powers were two, which arose at the same time, but -by different processes and with different destinies. ♦The Empire -of Trebizond, 1204-1461.♦ The Empire of _Nikaia_ was the truer -continuation of the old East-Roman power; the Empire of _Trapezous_ or -_Trebizond_ was the last independent fragment of Roman dominion and -Greek culture. The Trapezuntine Empire was not in strictness one of the -states which arose out of the Latin partition. One of the parts of the -Empire which showed most disposition to fall away was independently -seized by a rival Emperor, at the very moment of the Latin conquest. -Alexios Komnênos occupied Trebizond, an occupation largely wrought by -Iberian help, as if the Empire, already dismembered by the Christians -of the West, was to be further dismembered by the Christians of the -further East. ♦Extent of the Komnenian dominion.♦ The dominions of -Alexios, enlarged by his brother David to the west, at first took in -the whole south coast of the Euxine from the Sangarios eastward, broken -by the city of _Amisos_, which contrived to make itself virtually -independent, and by the neighbouring Turkish settlement at _Samsoun_. -But this dominion was only momentary. The eastern part alone survived -to form the later Empire of Trebizond; the western part, the government -of David, soon passed to the rising power of Nikaia. - -♦Empire of Nikaia. 1206-1261.♦ - -The founder of that power was Theodore Laskaris, in whom the succession -of the Eastern Empire was held to be continued. ♦1214.♦ Ten years -after the taking of Constantinople, a treaty fixed his border towards -the small Latin dominion in Asia. ♦1220. | 1240.♦ Six years later the -Latins kept only the lands north of the gulf of Nikomêdeia; sixteen -years later they held only the Asiatic coast of the Bosporos. ♦1247.♦ -Seven years later Chios, Lêmnos, Samos, Kôs, and other islands were -won back by the growing Greek state. ♦The Nicene Empire in Europe. -1235.♦ But, long before this, the Nicene Empire had become an European -power. The Thracian Chersonêsos was first won, the work beginning -at _Kallipolis_. ♦1242. | 1246.♦ Presently the Thessalonian Emperor -sank to the rank of a despot under him of Nikaia; four years later -Thessalonikê was incorporated with the Nicene dominions. ♦1245-1256.♦ -A series of Bulgarian campaigns carried the Imperial frontier, first -to the Hebros—already the Slavonic _Maritza_—and then to the foot of -Hæmus. ♦1254-1259.♦ A series of Epeirot campaigns won a Hadriatic -seaboard, and made _Durazzo_ for a while again a city of the Empire. -♦1259.♦ The Nicene power in these regions was confirmed by the victory -of Pelagonia, won over the combined forces of Epeiros, Achaia, and -Sicily. ♦1260.♦ The next year _Selymbria_ was won from the Latins, and -the Frank Empire was cut down to so much territory as could be guarded -from the walls of Constantinople. ♦Recovery of Constantinople, 1261.♦ -At last the recovery of Constantinople changed the Empire of Nikaia -into the revived Byzantine Empire of the Palaiologoi. - -That Empire still lasted a hundred and ninety years, and we must -carefully distinguish between its European and its Asiatic history. -The Asiatic border fell back almost as soon as the seat of rule was -restored to Europe. ♦Advance of the Empire in Europe.♦ In Europe the -revived Empire kept the character of an advancing power till just -before the entrance of the Ottoman into Europe, in some parts till just -before the fall of Constantinople. Many events helped to weaken the -real power of the Empire, which did not affect its geography. ♦1302.♦ -Such were the earlier Turkish inroads and the destroying visit of -the Catalans. ♦Advance in Peloponnêsos.♦ The land in which advance -was most steady was Peloponnêsos, where, at the time of the recovery -of Constantinople, the Empire did not hold a foot of ground. ♦1262.♦ -_Misithra_, _Monembasia_, and _Maina_ were the fruits of the day of -Pelagonia. For a while the Imperial frontier was stationary, but from -the beginning of the fourteenth century it steadily advanced. It -advanced perhaps all the more after Peloponnêsos became an Imperial -dependency, or an appanage for princes of the Imperial house, rather -than an immediate possession of the Empire. ♦1404.♦ Early in the -fifteenth century the greater part of the peninsula, including Corinth, -was again in Greek hands. ♦1430.♦ At last, twenty-three years only -before the Turkish conquest of Constantinople, all Peloponnêsos, except -the points held by Venice, was under the superiority of the Empire. - -♦Advance in Macedonia and Epeiros.♦ - -In more northern parts the advance of the Empire, though chequered -by more reverses, went on steadily till the growth of the Servian -power in the middle of the fourteenth century. ♦1308.♦ The frontier -varied towards Servia, Bulgaria, Epeiros, and the Angevin power which -established itself on the Hadriatic coast. Even under Andronikos the -Second the Imperial dominion was extended over the greater part of -Thessaly or _Great Vlachia_. ♦1318-1339.♦ Later still, all Epeiros, -_Jôannina_ and _Arta_—once _Ambrakia_—were won. At the moment of the -great Servian advance, the Empire held the uninterrupted seaboard from -the Euxine to the Pagasaian Gulf, as well as its Hadriatic seaboard -from the Ambrakian gulf northward. But the Frank principalities -still cut off the main body of the Empire from its possessions in -Peloponnêsos. - -♦Losses of the Empire in Asia.♦ - -In Asia there is another tale to tell. There the frontier of the Empire -steadily went back from the recovery of Constantinople. A few points -gained or lost to European powers go for little. ♦1260.♦ _Smyrna_ -passed for a while to Genoa. ♦The Knights of Saint John, 1309-1315.♦ -The Knights of Saint John won _Rhodes_, _Kôs_, and other islands, but -they did not become a power on the mainland of Asia till the Empire -had almost withdrawn from that continent. ♦Advance of the Turks.♦ The -Imperial power steadily crumbled away before the advance of the Turk, -first the Seljuk and then the Ottoman. The small Turkish powers into -which the Sultanate of Roum had now split up began to encroach on the -Greek dominion in Asia as soon as its centre was transferred to Europe. -By the end of the thirteenth century, the Imperial possessions in Asia -had again shrunk up to a narrow strip on the Propontis, from the Ægæan -to the Euxine. Losses followed more speedily when the Turkish power -passed from the Seljuk to the Ottoman. ♦1326-1338.♦ _Brusa_, _Nikaia_, -_Nikomêdeia_, were all lost within twelve years. By the middle of the -fourteenth century, the Emperors kept nothing in Asia, save a strip -of land just opposite Constantinople, and the outlying cities of -_Philadelphia_ and _Phôkaia_, their allies rather than their subjects. - -The Ottoman was now all but ready to pass into Europe, and the way -was made easier for him by the rise and fall of an European power -which again cut short the Empire in its western provinces. ♦The Empire -falls back towards Servia and Bulgaria. | 1331.♦ While the Imperial -frontier was advancing in Epeiros and Thessaly, it fell back towards -Servia, and advanced towards Bulgaria only to fall back again. ♦Loss -of Philippopolis, 1344.♦ _Philippopolis_, so often lost and won, now -passed away for ever. ♦Conquest. Stephen Dushan.♦ And now came the -great momentary advance of _Servia_ under Stephen Dushan, which wrested -from the Empire a large part of its Thracian, Macedonian, Albanian, -and Greek possessions. ♦Extent of the Empire.♦ At the middle of the -fourteenth century, the Empire, all but banished from Asia, kept no -unbroken European dominion out of Thrace. Its other possessions were -isolated. It kept Thessalonikê and Chalkidikê, with a small strip of -Macedonia as far as _Berrhoia_ and _Vodena_. It kept a small Thessalian -territory about _Lamia_ or _Zeitouni_. There was the Peloponnesian -province, fast growing into importance; there was _Lesbos_ and a few -other islands. ♦1355.♦ On Stephen’s death his dominion broke in pieces, -but the Empire did not win back its lost lands. For the Ottoman was -already in Europe, ready, in the space of the next hundred years, to -swallow up all that was left. - -♦1336.♦ - -As in the recovery of Romania by the Greeks of Nikaia, so in the final -conquest of Romania by the Turks of Brusa, Constantinople itself -was—with the exception of the Peloponnesian appanage—the last point -of the Empire to fall. The Turk, like the Greek, made his way in by -Kallipolis; like the Greek, he hemmed in the Imperial city for years -before it fell into his hands. ♦Loss of Hadrianople, 1361. | 1366.♦ -In seven years from his first landing, Hadrianople had become the -European capital of the Turk; the Empire was his tributary, keeping, -besides its outlying possessions, only the land just round the city. -The romantic expedition of Amadeo of Savoy gave back to the Empire its -Euxine coast as far as _Mesêmbria_. ♦Loss of Philadelphia, 1374-1391.♦ -Before the end of the century Philadelphia was lost in Asia, and the -Imperial dominion in Europe hardly reached beyond the city itself and -the Peloponnesian province. Thessalonikê and the Thessalian province -were both lost for a while. ♦Effects of Timour’s invasion, 1401.♦ -Bajazet was on the point of doing the work of Mahomet, when the Empire -was saved for another half-century by the invasion of Timour and the -consequent break-up of the Ottoman power. During the Ottoman civil -wars, the outlying points of the Empire were restored and seized again -more than once. ♦1424.♦ At last the boundaries of the Empire were fixed -by treaty between Sultan Mahomet and the Emperor Manuel, much as they -had stood sixty years before. The coast of the Propontis to Selymbria, -the coast of the Euxine to Mesêmbria, Thessalonikê and Chalkidikê, -the Peloponnesian province, the smaller Thessalian province, the -overlordship of Lesbos, Ainos, and Thasos, was all that was left. -Further losses soon followed. ♦1426.♦ Thessalonikê passed from the -Empire within two years. ♦1453.♦ At last, as all the world knows, the -Imperial city itself fell, and the name of the Eastern Roman Empire was -blotted out of European geography. ♦1460.♦ Six years later came the -conquest of Peloponnêsos, and the whole of European Greece passed into -the hands of foreign masters. - - * * * * * - -♦States growing out of the Empire.♦ - -Having thus sketched the changes in the extent of the Eastern Roman -Empire during a period of six hundred and fifty years, we have now to -trace the geography of the states which, within that time, grew up -within its borders or upon its frontiers. These fall naturally into -four groups. ♦The Slavonic states.♦ First come the national states -which were formed by throwing off the dominion of the Empire. These are -mainly the Slavonic powers to the north, Bulgaria, Servia, Croatia, and -the later states which arose out of their divisions and combinations. -♦Hungary. | Rouman states.♦ And with these, different as was their -origin, we must, for our purposes, place both the _Hungarian_ kingdom -which annexed so many of the Slavonic lands, and the _Rouman_ states, -so closely connected with Hungarian history, which arose by migrations -out of the Empire. ♦The Greek states.♦ Another group consists of the -Greek states which split off from the Empire before or at the Latin -conquest, and which were not recovered by the Greek Emperors of Nikaia -and Constantinople. Both these classes of states belong strictly to -Eastern Christendom. Catholic Hungary ruling over Orthodox Slaves -forms a link between the East and the West; so do those Slaves who -themselves belong to the Latin Church. ♦Latin states with the Empire.♦ -Another link is supplied by a third group of states, namely, those -parts of the Empire which, either at or before the Latin conquest, -came under Latin rule. This class is not confined to the Frank powers -in Romania or to the Eastern settlements of Venice and Genoa. ♦Kingdom -of Sicily. | Kingdom of Jerusalem.♦ From our point of view it takes in -the Norman kingdom of Sicily and the crusading kingdom of Jerusalem -with its fiefs. In all these cases, territory which had formed part -of the Eastern Empire came under Latin rule. And in all these cases, -Latin masters bore rule over alien subjects, Greek, Slave, Syrian, -or any other. None of the Latin powers were national states, like -the Slavonic or even like the Greek powers. But the foreign masters -of these lands were at least European and Christian. The last class -consists of powers which lie beyond the range of European and Christian -civilization. ♦Turkish dynasties.♦ These are the Turkish dynasties -which arose within the Empire. ♦The Ottomans.♦ Of these only the last -and greatest, the dynasty of _Othman_, became geographically European, -and swallowed up nearly all the lands which had belonged to the Empire -in Europe, together with much which lay beyond its bounds. Here we -have, not only the absence of national being, but the rule of the -Asiatic over the European, of the Mussulman over the Christian. ♦The -New States.♦ Lastly, we come to the partial redressing of this wrong by -the re-establishment of independent Greek and Slavonic states in our -own century. - -These seem to make four natural groups, and it is needful to bear -in mind their nature and relations to each other. But it will be -more convenient to speak of the several states thus formed in an -order approaching more nearly to the order of their separation from -the Empire. And first comes a power which parted off so early, and -which became so thoroughly a part of Western Europe, that it needs -an effort to grasp the fact that its right place is among the powers -which had their beginning in separation from the Imperial throne of -Constantinople. - - -§ 2. _The Kingdom of Sicily._ - -♦The Norman power in Italy and Sicily.♦ - -This is the power which, in the course of the eleventh century, was -formed by the Norman adventurers in southern Italy and in Sicily. It -was not wholly formed at the expense of the Eastern Empire. But all -its insular, and the greater part of its continental, territory, was -either won from the Eastern Empire and its vassals, or else had once -formed part of that Empire. Its kings also more than once established -their power, for a longer or shorter time, in the Imperial lands east -of the Hadriatic. With the Western Empire and the Kingdom of Italy the -Sicilian kingdom had in its beginnings nothing to do, though it was -afterwards somewhat enlarged at their expense. - -♦Possessions of the Empire in Italy.♦ - -When the Norman conquests in Italy began, early in the eleventh -century, the Eastern Empire still kept the coast of both seas from the -further side of the peninsula of _Gargano_ to the head of the gulf -of _Policastro_. The Imperial duchies of Naples, Gaeta, and Amalfi, -lying to the north of this point, were cut off by the duchies of -_Benevento_, _Capua_, and _Salerno_, over which the Empire had at the -most a very precarious superiority. ♦Advance of the Normans.♦ Within -a hundred years, all these lands, together with the island of Sicily, -were brought under Norman rule. Thus grew up a new European power, -sometimes forming one kingdom, sometimes two, sometimes held alone, -sometimes together with other kingdoms. This power supplanted alike -the Eastern Empire, the Saracen powers of Sicily, and the Lombard -princes of southern Italy. It started from two points, two distinct -Norman settlements, of which the later outshone the earlier. ♦County -of Aversa, 1021.♦ The earliest Norman territorial settlement was the -county of _Aversa_, held in vassalage of the Imperial duchy of Naples. -♦Principality of Capua, 1062-1068.♦ Forty years later its counts became -possessed of the principality of _Capua_, of which they received a -papal confirmation which implied a denial of all dependence on either -Empire. The more lasting duchy of _Apulia_ began later under the -adventurers of the house of Hauteville. ♦County of Apulia, 1042.♦ Their -first stage is marked by the foundation of the county of Apulia, with -_Melfi_ as its capital, under William of-the-Iron-arm. This took in -the peninsula of Gargano and the lands immediately to the south of it. -♦Investiture by Pope Leo, 1053.♦ The next stage is when Leo the Ninth -invested Count Humfrey, or rather the Normans as a body, with all that -they could conquer in Apulia, Calabria, and Sicily. ♦Robert Wiscard -Duke, 1059. | Completion of the Apulian duchy, 1077.♦ The first of -several takings of _Tarentum_, and the assumption of the ducal title by -Robert Wiscard, mark another stage. Less than twenty years later the -Eastern Empire kept nothing but the duchy of Naples; _Benevento_ had -passed to the Popes. The rest of the lands both of the Empire and of -the Lombard princes were now very unequally divided between two Norman -lords, the Duke of Apulia and the Prince of Capua. ♦Robert Wiscard in -Epeiros, 1081-1085.♦ The Byzantine power west of the Hadriatic being -thus overthrown, Robert Wiscard for the first time pushed the Norman -arms into the Eastern peninsula itself. For the last few years of -his life he held the islands of Corfu and Kephallênia, with Durazzo -and the coast to the south, and even inland as far as _Kastoria_ and -_Trikkala_. ♦1147-1150.♦ His power was renewed for a moment by his son -Bohemond, and in the middle of the next century Corfu was again for a -short time held by King Roger. - -♦Norman Conquest of Sicily, 1060-1093.♦ - -For by that time the island of Sicily was a kingdom of Western -Christendom. The second time of Mussulman rule over the whole island -was short. In the space of thirty years Count Roger won the great -island alike from Islam and from Eastern Christendom. ♦Taking of -Messina, 1061; | of Palermo, 1072; | of Syracuse, 1086; | of Noto, -1091;♦ Greek Messina was first won; after a while Saracen Palermo -followed; Syracuse was won much later; the last Saracen post in the -island to hold out was _Noto_ in the south-eastern corner. ♦of Malta, -1091.♦ _Malta_, the natural appendage of Sicily, was soon added. The -first Norman capital was _Messina_. Duke Robert, as overlord of his -brother Count Roger, kept Palermo and the surrounding district in his -own hands. It was not till the next century that the Count of Sicily -won full possession of the city. ♦Palermo capital of Sicily.♦ Palermo -then became again, as it had been under the Saracens, the head of -Sicily. - -The ruler of Sicily also became a potentate on the Italian mainland. -First the half, then the whole, of Calabria formed part of his -dominions. ♦Roger the Second, 1105-1154. | King, 1130.♦ The third Great -Count, the first King, of Sicily, Roger the Second, gradually won the -whole possessions of his family on the mainland. ♦Capua, 1132-1136.♦ -To these he presently added the Norman principality of Capua, first as -a dependent territory, then as fully incorporated with his dominions. -♦Naples, 1138.♦ He next won the last possession in the West which was -still held by the Eastern Empire, the city of Naples. ♦The Abruzzi, -1140.♦ He then pressed beyond the bounds both of the Eastern Empire -and of the early Norman conquests by the annexation of the _Abruzzi_. -He then, as we have seen, extended his power for a moment east of the -Hadriatic. Meanwhile he was more successful against the common enemies -of Eastern and Western Christendom. ♦Conquests in Africa, 1135-1137.♦ -As Sicily had twice been conquered from Africa, Africa now began to be -conquered from Sicily. ♦1160.♦ Roger held a considerable dominion on -the African coast including _Mehadia_, _Bona_, and other points, which -were lost under his son William. - -Thus was founded a kingdom which has, perhaps oftener than any other -European state, been divided and united and handed over from one -dynasty of strangers to another, but whose boundaries, strictly so -called, have hardly changed at all. For the only immediate neighbour -of the Sicilian king was his ecclesiastical overlord. The question was -whether the king of the mainland should be also king of the island. -But the successive dynasties which reigned both over the whole kingdom -and over its divided parts were for a long time eager to carry out the -policy of their first founder, by conquests east of the Hadriatic. -♦Epeirot conquests of William the Good, 1185.♦ Before the fall of the -old Empire, William the Good began again to establish an Epeirot and -insular dominion by the conquest of Durazzo, Corfu, Kephallênia, and -Zakynthos. ♦Kingdom of Margarito, 1186. | 1338.♦ But these outlying -dominions were granted in fief to the Sicilian Admiral Margarito,[28] -who, himself bearing the strange title of _King of the Epeirots_, -founded a dynasty which, with the title of Count Palatine, held -_Kephallênia_, _Zakynthos_, and _Ithakê_ into the fourteenth century. -Thus these lands, like Cyprus and Trebizond, were cut off from the -Empire just before its fall, and the revolutions of Sicily cut them off -equally from the Sicilian kingdom. ♦Epeirot dominion of Manfred, 1258.♦ -A more lasting power in these regions began under Manfred, who received -with his Greek wife Corfu, Durazzo, and a strip of the Albanian coast, -with the title of _Lord of Romania_. ♦Of Charles of Anjou, 1266-69. -| 1272-1276.♦ This dominion passed to his conqueror Charles of Anjou, -who further established a feudal superiority over the Epeirot despotat. -♦1282.♦ But his plans were cut short by the revolution of the Vespers. -♦History of Durazzo, 1322. | Duchy of Durazzo, 1333-1360. | 1378.♦ -Durazzo was lost and won more than once; but it came back to the -Angevin house, to become a separate Angevin duchy, till it fell before -the growth of the Albanian powers. Another branch held _Lepanto_—once -_Naupaktos_—which lasted longer. ♦1373-1386.♦ Corfu and Butrinto became -immediate possessions of the Neapolitan crown till they found more -lasting masters at Venice. - -This Eastern dominion of the two Sicilian crowns, besides their -influence of which we shall have presently to speak in southern Greece, -tends to keep up the connexion of the Sicilian kingdoms with the Empire -out of which they sprang. But it can hardly be called a geographical -enlargement of the kingdoms themselves. ♦Acre occupied by Charles of -Anjou.♦ Still less can that name be given to the short occupation of -_Acre_ by Charles of Anjou in his character of one of the many Kings of -Jerusalem. ♦Malta granted to the Knights, 1530.♦ The Sicilian kingdoms -themselves cannot be said to have gained or lost territory till Charles -the Fifth granted Malta to the Knights of Saint John, till Philip the -Second added the _Stati degli Presidi_ to the Two Sicilies. The great -revolution of all has taken place in our own day. The name of Sicily -has for the first time been wiped from the European map. The island of -Hierôn and Roger has sunk to form seven provinces of a prince who has -not deigned to take the crown or the title of that illustrious realm. - - -§ 3. _The Crusading States._ - -♦Comparison between Sicily and the crusading states.♦ - -The Sicilian kingdom has much in common with the states formed by -the crusaders in Asia and Eastern Europe. Both grew out of lands won -by Western conquerors, partly from the Eastern Empire itself, partly -from Mussulman holders of lands which had belonged to the Eastern -Empire. But the order of the two processes is different. The Sicilian -Normans began by conquering lands of the Empire, and then went on -to win the island which the Saracens had torn from the Empire. The -successive crusades first founded Christian states in the lands which -the Mussulmans had won from the Empire, and then partitioned the Empire -itself. The first crusaders undertook to hold their conquest as fiefs -of the Eastern Empire. This condition was only very partially carried -out; but the mere theory marks a stage in the relations between the -Eastern Empire and the Latin powers of Palestine which has nothing -answering to it in the case of Sicily. - -♦Kingdom of Jerusalem and Frank principalities in Syria.♦ - -First among these powers come the _Kingdom of Jerusalem_ and the other -Frank principalities which arose out of the first crusade. ♦Cyprus.♦ -The kingdom of _Cyprus_, which in some sort continued the Kingdom of -Jerusalem, forms a link between the true crusading states and those -which arose out of the partition of the Empire in the fourth crusade. -♦Armenia.♦ And closely connected with this was the kingdom of _Kilikian -Armenia_ whose foundation we have already mentioned.[29] This last was -an Eastern state which became to some extent Latinized. But the Syrian -states, Cyprus, and the Latin powers which arose out of the partition -of the Empire, all agree in being colonies of Western Europe in Eastern -lands, states where the Latin settlers appear as a dominant race over -the natives, of whatever blood or creed. - -♦The Crusaders cut off the Mussulmans from the sea.♦ - -The great geographical result of the first crusade was to cut off the -Mussulman powers from the seas of Asia and Eastern Europe. In the first -years of the twelfth century the Christian powers, Byzantine, Armenian, -and Latin, held the whole coast of Asia Minor and Syria. ♦Extent of -the Kingdom of Jerusalem.♦ The Kingdom of Jerusalem, at its greatest -extent, stretched along the coast from _Berytos_ to _Gaza_. To the -east it reached some way beyond Jordan and the Dead Sea, with a strip -of territory reaching southward to the eastern gulf of the Red Sea. To -the north lay two Latin states which, in the days of Komnenian revival, -acknowledged the superiority of the Eastern Emperor. ♦Tripolis. -| Antioch.♦ These were the county of _Tripolis_, reaching northwards -to the Syrian _Alexandretta_, and the more famous principality of -_Antioch_. ♦640. | 968. | 1081. | 1098. | 1268.♦ That great city, lost -to Christendom in the first days of Saracen conquest, won back to -the Empire in the Macedonian revival, lost to the Turk, won back by -the Frank, remained a Christian principality long after the fall of -Jerusalem, and did not pass again under Mussulman rule till late in the -thirteenth century. ♦Edessa.♦ North-east of Antioch lay the furthest -of the Latin possessions, the inland county of _Edessa_. ♦1128-1173.♦ -This was the first to be lost; it fell under the power of the Turkish -Attabegs of Syria. ♦Loss of the lands beyond Jordan.♦ They cut short -the kingdom of Jerusalem, taking away the territory east of Jordan. On -their ruin arose the mightier power of Saladin, lord alike of Egypt -and Syria. ♦Jerusalem taken by Saladin, 1187.♦ He took Jerusalem, and -the kingdom which still bore that name was cut down to the lands just -round Tyre. ♦Jerusalem recovered by Frederick the Second, 1228.♦ The -crusades which followed won back _Acre_ and various points, and at -last the diplomacy of Frederick the Second won back from the Egyptian -Sultan Tyre, Sidon, and the Holy City itself. A strip of coast running -inland at two points, so as to take in Tiberias and Nazareth at one -end, Jerusalem and Bethlehem at the other, formed the Eastern realm of -the lord of Rome and Sicily. ♦1239-1243. | Final loss of Jerusalem, -1244.♦ Lost and won again by the Christians, Jerusalem was finally won -for Islam by the invasion of the Chorasmians from the shores of the -Caspian. But for nearly fifty years longer the points on the coast -were lost and won, as the Mussulman powers or fresh crusaders from -Europe had the upper hand. ♦Fall of Acre, 1291.♦ With the fall of -_Acre_, the Latin dominion on the Syrian mainland came to an end. The -land won by the Western Christians from the Mussulman went back to the -disciples of the Prophet. The land won by the Western Christian from -the Eastern, and the land where the Eastern Christian still maintained -his independence, held out longer. - -♦Cyprus.♦ - -These were the kingdoms of _Cyprus_ and _Armenia_. ♦Famagosta Genoese.♦ -The frontier of Cyprus hardly admitted of geographical change, unless -it were when, for a part of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, -the city and haven of _Famagosta_ passed to Genoa. ♦Connexion between -Cyprus and Jerusalem.♦ The kings of Cyprus however claimed the crown of -Jerusalem, and sometimes, before the whole Syrian coast was lost, they -really held this or that piece of territory on the mainland. ♦Armenia -acknowledges the Western Emperor, 1190.♦ Meanwhile the Armenian kingdom -in some sort entered the Western world, when its king, after receiving -one confirmation from the Eastern Emperor, thought it wise to receive -another from the Western Emperor also. ♦1342.♦ The kingdom, though -sadly cut short by its Mussulman neighbours, lived on under native -princes till the middle of the fourteenth century. ♦Connexion between -Armenia and Cyprus, 1393.♦ Then the fragments of the kingdom passed, -first to a branch of the Cypriot royal family, and then to the reigning -king of Cyprus. But the first joint reign was the last. ♦End of Armenia -and Cyprus, 1489.♦ The remnant of independent Armenia was swallowed up -by the Mameluke lords of Syria, while Cyprus lingered on till Saint -Mark and his commonwealth became the heirs of its last king. - - * * * * * - -The kingdom of Cyprus forms a link between the Latin states in Syria -and those which arose in Romania after the crusading capture of -Constantinople. And these last again fall into two classes. ♦Frank -principalities in Greece. | Possessions of the maritime commonwealths.♦ -There are the Frank principalities on the mainland of Greece, and -there are the lands, chiefly insular, which fell to the lot of the -maritime commonwealths of the West and of their citizens. Among these -the first place belongs to the great commonwealth which had now cast -off all traces of allegiance to the Empire. ♦Genoa.♦ _Genoa_, which had -no share in the original partition of the Empire, obtained several -points of Imperial territory, both for the commonwealth itself and for -particular Genoese citizens. ♦Venice.♦ But the part played by Genoa -in the East is small beside the great and abiding dominion of Venice. -No result of the partition was greater than the field which it gave -to Venetian growth. ♦Comparison between the two.♦ The position of the -two commonwealths is different. Genoa was a mere stranger in the East; -Venice was in a manner at home. Once an outlying possession of the -Empire, her really great historical position is due to her share in its -overthrow. - - -§ 4. _The Eastern Dominion of Venice and Genoa._ - -We have already seen the origin of the Venetian state, and the -beginning of Venetian rule over the Slavonic coasts of the Hadriatic. -♦Connexion of the Dalmatian and Greek dominion of Venice.♦ The Eastern -dominion of Venice now began, and, in a strictly geographical view, her -Istrian and Dalmatian dominion cannot be separated from her Albanian -and purely Greek dominion. But Venice did not become a great European -power till she passed from the Slavonic lands whose connexion with the -Empire was nominal or precarious into the Albanian and Greek lands -which were among its immediate possessions. ♦Effect of the partition -on Venice.♦ The greatness of Venice dates from that partition of the -Empire which was the surest proof that she had wholly cast aside her -Byzantine allegiance. ♦Comparison between Venice and Sicily.♦ In this -point of view the history of Venice may be compared and contrasted -with the history of Sicily. In each case, a part of the dominions of -the Eastern Rome grew into a separate power; that power passed, so -to speak, from Eastern Europe to Western, and, in its new Western -character, it appeared as a conqueror in the Eastern lands. But, as -Venice and Sicily parted from the Empire in different ways, so their -later relations to the Empire were widely different. The Sicilian state -began in actual conquests made by foreign invaders at the expense of -the Empire. Venice was a dependency of the Empire which gradually -drifted into independence. Thus Sicily became more thoroughly Western -than Venice. The attempts of the kings, both of the whole Sicilian -kingdom and of its divided parts, to establish an Eastern dominion were -attacks from without, and were not really lasting. ♦Venice inherits -the position of the Empire.♦ But Venice, whose princes were lords of -one fourth and one eighth of the Empire of Romania,[30] took up in -some sort the position of the Empire itself. If she destroyed one -bulwark against the Mussulman, she set up another. As long as Venice -was really a great power, her main interests lay east of the Hadriatic. -♦Importance of the fourth crusade in Venetian history.♦ The fourth -crusade was her turning point. It was at once the beginning of her -Greek dominion and the recovery of her Dalmatian dominion. - -♦Territory assigned to Venice by the Act of Partition.♦ - -The scheme of partition gave to Venice a vast dominion, insular and -continental. She was to be mistress of the Hadriatic and Ionian seas. -To her were assigned, not only the islands off the west coast of the -Empire, but the whole western coast itself, from the north of Albania -to the southern point of Peloponnêsos. She was to have some points -in the Ægæan, among them _Oreos_ and _Karystos_ at the two ends of -Euboia. She was to have her quarter of the capital, with a Thracian -and an Asiatic dominion, including, according to some versions, the -strange allotment of _Lazia_ at the east of the Euxine[31]. ♦Her actual -possessions.♦ The actual possessions of Venice in the East have a -very different look. Much of the territory which was assigned to the -republic never became hers, while she obtained large possessions which -were not assigned to her. ♦Her dominion primarily Hadriatic.♦ But the -main point, the dominion of the Hadriatic, was never forgotten, though -some both of her earliest and of her latest conquests lay beyond its -necessary range. - -♦Possessions not assigned by the partition. | Crete. 1206-1669.♦ - -Among those possessions of Venice which were not assigned to her in the -act of partition was her greatest and most lasting possession of all, -the island of _Crete_. ♦1645-1669.♦ This she won almost at the first -moment of the conquest, and she kept it for more than four centuries -and a half, till the war of _Candia_ handed over all Crete, save two -fortresses, to the Ottoman. ♦Acquisition of Cyprus. 1489.♦ Before -this loss, Saint Mark had won and lost another great island which lay -altogether beyond the scheme of the Latin conquerors of Constantinople. -Late in the fifteenth century the republic succeeded the Latin kings -in the possession of _Cyprus_. ♦Loss of Cyprus, 1571.♦ But this was -held for less than a century. Cyprus, like Crete and Sicily, was a -special scene of struggle between European and barbarian powers. But it -shared the fate, not of Sicily but of Crete, and became the solid prize -of the Ottoman, when Christendom won the barren laurels of Lepanto. -♦Occupation of Thessalonikê, 1426-1430.♦ Another possession which lay -out of the usual course of Venetian dominion was the short occupation -of _Thessalonikê_. Bought of a Greek despot, it was after four years -taken by the Turk. Had Thessalonikê been kept, it might have passed as -a late compensation to the republic for the early loss of Hadrianople -and her other Thracian territory. - -♦Venetian power both Dalmatian and Greek.♦ - -But the true scene of Venetian enterprise in the East is primarily -the Hadriatic, and next to that, the coasts and islands of the Ægæan. -She remained both a Dalmatian and a Greek power down to the moment of -her overthrow, and, at the moment of her overthrow, it was not eighty -years since she had ceased to be a Peloponnesian and an Ægæan power. -The Greek dominion of Venice was an enlargement of her Dalmatian -dominion. ♦Taking of Zara, 1202.♦ It is significant that Zara was -taken—not for the first or the last time—on the way to the taking of -Constantinople. ♦Hadriatic dominion of Venice.♦ Already mistress, or -striving to be mistress, of the northern part of the eastern coast of -the Hadriatic, the partition of the Empire opened to Venice the hope -of becoming mistress of the southern part. Mistress of the whole coast -she never was at any one moment; one point was gained and another lost. -But extension in those lands was steadily aimed at for more than seven -hundred years, and the greater part of the eastern Hadriatic coast has -been, at one time or another, under Venetian rule. - -The story of Venetian dominion in these parts cannot be kept apart -from the story of the neighbouring Slavonic lands. The states of -Servia and Croatia were from the beginning the inland neighbours -of the Dalmatian coast cities. ♦Servian districts on the coast.♦ -The river Tzettina may pass as the boundary between the Servian and -Croatian states. _Pagania_ on the Narenta, _Zachloumia_ between the -Narenta and Ragusa, _Terbounia_, represented by the modern _Trebinje_, -the coast district of the _Canali_, _Dioklea_, taking in the modern -Montenegro with the coast as far as the Drin—_Skodra_ or _Scutari_ on -its lake, the harbours of _Spizza_, _Antivari_, and _Dulcigno_, were -all originally Servian. ♦The Dalmatian cities.♦ The Dalmatian coast -cities, _Dekatera_ or _Cattaro_, _Raousion_ or _Ragusa_, _Tragourion_ -or _Traü_, _Diadora_, _Jadera_, or _Zara_, formed a Roman fringe -on what had become a Slavonic body. It was not even a continuous -fringe, as the Slaves came down to the sea at more than one point. -♦Pagania.♦ _Pagania_ above all, the land of the heathen Narentines, -cut Roman Dalmatia into two marked parts. ♦The Islands.♦ It even took -in most of the great islands, _Curzola_—once _Black Korkyra_—_Meleda_, -_Lesina_—once _Pharos_—and others. At the separation of the two Empires -the Croatian power was strongest in those lands. ♦Croatia under Charles -the Great, 806-810.♦ The wars of Charles the Great left the coast -cities to the Eastern Empire, while inland Dalmatia and Croatia passed -under Frankish rule. ♦825-830.♦ Presently Croatia won its independence -of the Western Empire, while the coast cities were practically lost by -the Eastern. ♦Settlement under Basil the Macedonian, 868-878.♦ Under -Basil the Macedonian the Imperial authority was admitted, in name at -least, both by the cities and by the Croatian prince. ♦First Venetian -Conquest, 995-997.♦ More than a century later came the first Venetian -conquest, which was looked on at Venice as a deliverance of the cities -from Croatian rule. The pagan power on the Narenta was destroyed, -and the Duke of Venice took the title of _Duke of Dalmatia_. But all -this involved no formal separation from the Empire.[32] ♦The cities -under Croatia, 1052. | Dalmatian Kingdom, 1062.♦ Such a separation -may be held to have taken place in the middle of the next century, -when the cities again passed under Croatian rule, and when the taking -of the title of _King of Dalmatia_ by Croatian Kresimir may pass for -an assertion of complete independence. ♦Magyar Kingdom of Croatia, -1091; | of Dalmatia, 1102.♦ But the kingdoms, first of Croatia, then -of Dalmatia, were presently swallowed up by the growing power of the -Magyar. Then comes a time in which this city and that passes to and -fro between Venice and Hungary. ♦Croatia and Dalmatia restored to the -Empire, 1171. | Dalmatia passes to Hungary.♦ Under Manuel Komnênos the -whole of Croatia and Dalmatia was fully restored to the Empire; but ten -years later the cities again passed to Hungary. This was their final -separation from the Empire, and by this time Venice had thrown off all -Byzantine allegiance. - -♦Struggle for the dominion of Dalmatia.♦ - -From this time the history of Croatia forms part of the history of -the Hungarian kingdom. The history of Dalmatia becomes part of the -long struggle of Venice for Hadriatic dominion. For five hundred years -the cities and islands of the whole Hadriatic coast were lost and won -over and over again in the strifes of the powers of the mainland. -These were in Dalmatia the Hungarian and Bosnian Kings; more to the -south they were the endless powers which rose and fell in Albania and -northern Greece. In after times the Ottoman took the place of all. -And many of the cities were able, amid the disputes of their stronger -neighbours, to make themselves independent commonwealths for a longer -or shorter time. ♦Independence of Ragusa;♦ _Ragusa_, above all, kept -her independence during the whole time, modified in later times by a -certain external dependence on the Turk. ♦of Polizza.♦ And the almost -invisible inland commonwealth of _Polizza_—a Slavonic San Marino—kept -its separate being into the present century. - -♦Fluctuations between Venice and Hungary, 1315.♦ - -The crusading conquest of Zara was the beginning of this long -struggle. The frontier fluctuated during the whole of the thirteenth -century; early in the fourteenth the whole coast was again Venetian. -Meanwhile the republic was striving to make good her position further -south. The Epeirot despotat long hindered her establishment either -on the coasts or the islands of northern Greece. ♦Final conquest of -Durazzo and Corfu, 1206. | 1216.♦ Durazzo, the central point between -the older and the newer Venetian range, was won, along with Corfu, in -the earliest days of the conquest; but they were presently lost, to -come back again in after times. ♦History of Corfu.♦ The famous island -of Korkyra or Corfu has a special history of its own. No part of Greece -has been so often cut off from the Greek body. Under Pyrrhos and -Agathoklês, no less than under Michael Angelos and Roger, it obeyed an -Epeirot or a Sicilian master. It was among the first parts of Greece to -pass permanently under Roman dependence. ♦Second Venetian conquest of -Corfu, 1386-1797.♦ At last, after yet another turn of Sicilian rule, it -passed for four hundred years to the great commonwealth. In our own day -Corfu was not added to free Greece till long after the deliverance of -Attica and Peloponnêsos. But, under so many changes of foreign masters, -the island has always remained part of Europe and of Christendom. -Alone among the Greek lands, Corfu has never passed under barbarian -rule. ♦1716. | 1800.♦ It has seen the Turk only, for one moment as an -invader, for another moment as a nominal overlord. - -♦Greek advance of Venice.♦ - -The second Venetian occupation of Corfu was the beginning of a great -advance among the neighbouring islands. But, during the hundred -and eighty years between the two occupations, the main fields of -Venetian action lay more to the north and more to the south. The Greek -acquisitions of the republic at this time were in Peloponnêsos and the -Ægæan islands. ♦Modon and Coron, 1206.♦ On the mainland she won, at -the very beginning of Latin settlement in the East, the south-western -peninsula of Peloponnêsos, with the towns of _Methônê_ and -_Kôrônê_—otherwise _Modon_ and _Coron_—which she held for nearly three -hundred years. ♦History of Euboia.♦ Among the Ægæan islands Venice -began very early to win an influence in the greatest of their number, -that of _Euboia_, often disguised under the specially barbarous name -of _Negropont_.[33] The history of that island, the endless shiftings -between its Latin lords and the neighbouring powers of all kinds, is -the most perplexed part of the perplexed Greek history of the time. -♦Complete occupation of Euboia, 1390.♦ Venice, mixed up in its affairs -throughout, obtained in the end complete possession, but not till after -the second occupation of Corfu. ♦Turkish conquest of Euboia, 1470.♦ The -island was kept till the Turkish conquest eighty years later. Several -other islands were held by the republic at different times. ♦Loss of -the Ægæan islands, 1718.♦ Of these _Tênos_ and _Mykonos_ were not -finally lost till Venice was in the eighteenth century confined to the -western seas. - -Between the first and the second occupation of Corfu, the Venetian -power in Dalmatia had risen and fallen again. ♦Peace of Zara, 1358. -| Dalmatia Hungarian.♦ By the peace of Zara, Lewis the Great of Hungary -shut out Venice altogether from the Dalmatian coasts, and, as Dalmatian -King, he required the Venetian Duke to give up his Dalmatian title. -♦New advance of Venice.♦ Later in the century Venice again gained -ground, and her Dalmatian, Albanian, and Greek possessions began to -draw near together, and to form one whole, though never a continuous -whole. ♦1378-1455. | Recovery of Dalmatia.♦ In the space of about -eighty years, amid many fluctuations towards Hungary, Bosnia, and -Genoa—a new claimant called into rivalry by the war of Chioggia—Venice -again became mistress of the greater part of Dalmatia. Some districts -however formed part of the Duchy of _Saint Sava_, and Hungary kept part -of the inland territory, with the fortress of _Clissa_. The point where -the Hadriatic coast turns nearly due south may be taken as the boundary -of the lasting and nearly continuous dominion of the Republic; but for -the present the Venetian power went on spreading far south of that -point. ♦Advance in Albania and Greece, 1392.♦ On the second occupation -of Corfu followed the acquisition of _Durazzo_, _Alessio_, and of the -Albanian _Skodra_ or _Scutari_. ♦1401. | 1407.♦ _Butrinto_ and the -ever memorable _Parga_ put themselves under Venetian protection, and -_Lepanto_ was ceded by a Prince of Achaia. ♦1388.♦ In Peloponnêsos the -Messenian towns were still held, and to them were now added _Argos_ -and its port of _Nauplia_, known in Italian as _Napoli di Romania_. -♦1408-1415. | 1419. | 1423.♦ _Patras_ was held for a few years, -_Monembasia_ was won, and the isle of _Aigina_, which might almost pass -for part of Peloponnêsos. On the other side of Greece, the possession -of Corfu led to the acquisition of the other so-called Ionian -Islands. ♦The Western Islands. 1449.♦ The prince of _Kephallênia_, of -_Zakynthos_ or _Zante_, and of _Leukadia_ or _Santa Maura_, found it to -his interest, for fear of the advancing Ottoman, to put his dominions -under the overlordship of Saint Mark. - -♦Venice the champion against the Turk.♦ - -This marks an epoch in the history of Venice and of Europe. The -championship of Christendom against the Turk now passes from the New -Rome to the hardly less Byzantine city in the Lagoons. The short -occupation of Thessalonikê may pass for the beginning of the struggle. -Later in the fifteenth century, Venice and the Turk were meeting at -every point. ♦Loss of Argos, 1463.♦ In Peloponnêsos, _Argos_ was first -lost to the Turk; at the same moment he appeared far to the north, and -gradually occupied the Bosnian and Hungarian districts of Dalmatia. -♦1505-1699.♦ Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries -the inland districts and the smaller towns were lost over and over -again, but the Republic always kept the chief coast cities, _Zara_, -_Sebenico_, and _Spalato_. ♦Losses of Venice.♦ Meanwhile, to the south -of Dalmatia, the Venetian power went back everywhere, except in the -western islands. ♦1474-1478.♦ On the mainland _Croja_, the city of -Scanderbeg, was held for a while. ♦1479.♦ But both Croja and Skodra -were won by Mahomet the Conqueror, and the treaty which ended this -war left to the Republic nothing on the coast of Albania and Northern -Greece, save _Durazzo_, _Antivari_, and _Butrinto_. ♦1500.♦ The treaty -which followed the next war took away _Durazzo_, _Butrinto_, and -_Lepanto_. ♦The Western Islands, 1481-1483.♦ A series of revolutions -in the islands of which the Republic already held the overlordship -placed them under her immediate dominion, to be struggled for against -the Turk. ♦1485. | 1502.♦ By the next peace _Zakynthos_ was kept, on -payment of a tribute to the Sultan; _Kephallênia_ passed to the Turk, -to be won back seventeen years later, and then to be permanently kept. -♦1502-1504.♦ _Leukadia_ was at the same time won for a moment and -lost again. ♦Loss of the Peloponnesian fortresses, 1502. | 1540.♦ In -Peloponnêsos _Modon_ and _Koron_ were lost along with _Durazzo_ and -_Lepanto_, and the great naval war with Suleiman cost the Republic her -last Peloponnesian possessions, _Nauplia_ and _Monembasia_, together -with all her Ægæan islands, except _Tênos_ and _Mykonos_. The strictly -Greek dominion of Venice was now for a hundred and forty years confined -to the islands, and, after the loss of Cyprus and Crete, almost wholly -to the Western islands. But after the loss of Crete came a revival -of the Venetian power, like one of the old revivals of the Empire. -♦Venetian conquest of Peloponnêsos, 1685-1699.♦ The great campaigns -of Francesco Morosini, confirmed by the peace of Carlowitz, freed all -Peloponnêsos from the Turk, and added it to the dominion of Saint Mark. - -The same treaty confirmed Venice in the possession of the greater part -of Dalmatia. ♦Loss of Peloponnêsos, 1715-1718.♦ The next war cost her -the whole of Peloponnêsos, her two Cretan fortresses, and her two -remaining Ægæan islands. She now withdrew wholly to the western side -of Greece, where she had again won _Leukadia_ and _Butrinto_, and -had enlarged her dominion by the acquisition of _Prevesa_. ♦Extent -of Venetian dominion in Greece in the last century.♦ During the last -century the Venetian possessions in Greece consisted of the seven -so-called Ionian islands, with the continental posts of _Butrinto_, -_Prevesa_, and _Parga_. - -♦Venetian territory in Dalmatia.♦ - -The Dalmatian territory of the Republic during the same time consisted -of a considerable inland district in the north-east, and of the whole -coast down to _Budua_, except where the territory of independent -Ragusa broke the continuity of her rule. ♦Ragusan frontier.♦ Ragusa -was so jealous of the mightier commonwealth that she preferred the -Turk as a neighbour. At two points of the coast, at _Klek_ at the -bottom of the gulf formed by the long peninsula of Sabbioncello, and -again at _Sutorina_ on the _Bocche_, the Ottoman territory came down -to the sea, so as to isolate the dominion of Ragusa from the Venetian -possessions on either side. Such was the frontier of the two Hadriatic -commonwealths down to the days when, first Venice and then Ragusa, -passed away. - -♦Possession of Venetian cities.♦ - -Meanwhile, besides the direct possessions of the Venetian commonwealth, -there were other lands within the former dominions of the Eastern -Empire which were held by Venetian lords, as vassals either of the -republic or of the Empire of Romania. It would be endless to trace out -the revolutions of every Ægæan island; but one among the few which -claim our notice became the seat of a dynasty which proved, next to the -Venetian commonwealth itself, the most long-lived Latin power in the -Greek world. ♦The Duchy of Naxos.♦ This is the duchy variously known as -that of _Naxos_, of the _Dôdekannêsos_, and of the _Archipelago_, the -barbarous name given to the Ægæan or _White Sea_.[34] ♦1207. | 1566.♦ -Founded in the early years of Latin settlement by the Venetian Marco -Sanudo, the island duchy lived on as a Latin state, commonly as a -vassal or tributary state of some greater power, till the last half of -the sixteenth century. ♦Annexed by the Turk, 1579. | 1617.♦ Shorn of -many of its islands by its Ottoman overlord, granted afresh to a Jewish -duke, it passed thirteen years later under the immediate dominion of -the Sultan. Most of the _Kyklades_ were either parts of this duchy or -fiefs held of it by other Venetian families. All came into the hands of -the Turk; but some of the very smallest remained merely tributary, and -not fully annexed, into the seventeenth century. - - * * * * * - -♦Settlements of Genoa and of Genoese citizens.♦ - -The year which saw the Naxian duchy pass from Latin to Hebrew hands saw -the fall of the most remarkable of the Genoese settlements in the Greek -lands. These settlements, like those of Venice, formed two classes, -those which were possessions of the Genoese commonwealth itself and -those which came into the hands of Genoese citizens. ♦1304.♦ Genoa -had no share in the fourth Crusade; she had therefore no share in the -division of the Empire, though, after the restoration of Byzantine -rule, her colony of _Galata_ made her almost a sharer in the capital -of the Empire. ♦Possessions of Genoa on the Euxine, 1461.♦ But the -seat of direct Genoese dominion in the East was not the Ægæan but the -Euxine. On the southern coast of that sea the republic held _Amastris_ -and _Amisos_, and in the Tauric Chersonêsos was her great colony of -_Kaffa_. ♦1475.♦ The Euxine dominion of Genoa came to an end during the -later half of the fifteenth century; but it outlived the Empires both -of Constantinople and of Trebizond. - -The Ægæan dominion of the citizens of Genoa was longer lived than the -Euxine dominion of Genoa herself. ♦Lesbos. 1354-1462.♦ The family of -Gattilusio received _Lesbos_ as an Imperial fief in the fourteenth -century, and kept it till after the fall of Constantinople. But the -most remarkable Genoese settlement in the Ægæan was that of _Chios_. -♦The Zaccaria at Chios. 1304-1346. | The Maona. 1346-1566.♦ First held -by princes of the Genoese house of Zaccaria, the island, with some of -its neighbours, passed into the hands of a Genoese commercial company -or _Maona_, a body somewhat like our own East India Company. ♦1566.♦ -_Samos_, _Kôs_, and _Phôkaia_ on the mainland, came at different times -under their power, and Chios did not fall under the Ottoman yoke till -the same year as the duchy of Naxos. - - * * * * * - -One more insular dominion remains, chiefly famous as the possession, -not indeed of a commonwealth, but of an order. ♦Revolutions of Rhodes.♦ -In a few years of the thirteenth century the island of _Rhodes_ passed -through all possible revolutions. ♦1233.♦ In the first moment of the -Latin conquest, it became an independent Greek principality, like -Epeiros and Trebizond. ♦1246.♦ Then it admitted the overlordship of the -Nicene Emperors. ♦1249.♦ Seized by Genoa, it was presently won back to -the Empire, till seventy years later it was again seized by the Knights -of Saint John. ♦Establishment of the Knights, 1310. | 1315.♦ From -Rhodes as a centre, the order established its dominion over _Kôs_ and -some other islands, and on some points of the Asiatic coast, especially -their famous fortress of _Halikarnassos_. ♦1480. | 1522.♦ They beat -back Mahomet the Conqueror, but they yielded to Suleiman the Lawgiver -forty years later. ♦Their removal to Malta, 1530.♦ Banished from -Rhodes, the order received _Malta_ from Charles the Fifth as a fief of -his Sicilian kingdom. We are thus brought back to the island which had -been lost to the Eastern Empire for seven hundred years. ♦1566.♦ The -knights in their new home beat back their former conqueror Suleiman, -and kept their island till the times of confusion. ♦Revolutions of -Malta. | 1814.♦ Held by France, held by England, held, nominally at -least, by its own Sicilian overlord, this fragment of the Empire of -Leo and of the kingdom of Roger finally passed at the peace under the -acknowledged rule of England. - - -§ 5. _The Principalities of the Greek Mainland._ - -The Greek possessions of Venice, of Genoa, and of the Knights of Saint -John, consisted mainly of islands and detached points of coast. The -Venetian conquest of Peloponnêsos was the only exception on a great -scale. In this they are distinguished from the several powers, Greek -and Frank, which arose on the Greek mainland. We have already heard, -and we shall hear again, of the Greek despotat of Epeiros, which for -a moment grew into an Empire of Thessalonikê. Among the Latin powers -two rose to European importance. ♦Duchy of Athens. | Principality of -Achaia.♦ These are the _duchy of Athens_ in central Greece—in _Hellas_, -according to the Byzantine nomenclature—and the principality of -_Achaia_ or _Môraia_ in Peloponnêsos. ♦Use of the name Môraia.♦ This -last name, of uncertain origin,[35] has come, in its Italian shape, -to be a modern name of the peninsula itself. But the name of _Môraia_ -seems strictly to belong to the domain lands of the principality, and -never to go beyond the bounds of the principality, which at no time -took in the whole of Peloponnêsos. - -Both these powers were founded in the first days of the Latin conquest, -and the Turk did not finally annex the territories of either till after -the fall of Constantinople. But while the Athenian duchy lived on to -become itself the prize of Mahomet the Conqueror, the lands of the -Achaian principality had already gone back into Greek hands. ♦Lordship -of Athens. 1204-1205.♦ The lordship of Athens, founded by Otho de la -Roche, was first a fief of the kingdom of Thessalonikê, then of the -Empire of Romania. ♦The Duchy.♦ But it was by the grant of Saint Lewis -of France that the title of _Great Lord_[36] was exchanged for that of -_Duke_. ♦1260. | The Catalan Conquest, 1311.♦ The duchy fell into the -hands of the Catalan Great Company, who in central Greece grew from -mere ravagers into territorial occupiers. ♦The Sicilian Dukes.♦ They -brought with them the Thessalian land of _Neopatra_, and transferred -the nominal title of _Duke of Athens and Neopatra_ to princes of the -Sicilian branch of the House of Aragon. Thus the two claimants of the -Sicilian crown were brought face to face on old Greek ground. ♦Dukes -of the house of Acciauoli.♦ The duchy next passed to the Florentine -house of Acciauoli, which already held Corinth, Megara, Sikyôn, and the -greater part of Argolis. But their Peloponnesian dominion passed to -the Byzantine lords of the peninsula, and Neopatra fell into the hands -of the Turk. ♦1390.♦ The Athenian duchy itself, taking in Attica and -Boiôtia, lived on, the vassal in turn of the Angevin king at Naples, of -the Greek despot of Peloponnêsos, and of the Ottoman Sultan. ♦Ottoman -conquest. 1456-1460. | 1466. | 1687.♦ Annexed at last to the Ottoman -dominions, Athens remained in bondage till our own day, save only two -momentary occupations by Venice, one soon after the first conquest, the -other in the great war of Morosini. - - * * * * * - -♦Salôna and Bodonitza. The Principality of Achaia.♦ - -The smaller principalities of _Salôna_ and _Bodonitza_ play their part -in the history of the Athenian duchy; but we turn to the chief Latin -power of Peloponnêsos, the principality of Achaia. The shiftings of its -dynasties and feudal relations are endless; its geographical history is -simpler. The peninsula was, at the time of the Latin conquest, already -beginning to fall away from the Empire. ♦1205.♦ King Boniface of -Thessalonikê had to win the land from its Greek lord Leôn Sgouros. The -princes of the house of Champlitte and Villehardouin were his vassals. -They had to struggle with the Venetian settlement in Messênia, and with -the Greek despot of Epeiros, who, oddly enough, held Corinth, Argos, -and Nauplia. ♦1210-1212.♦ These last towns were won by the Latins, and -became an Achaian fief in the hands of Otho of Athens. ♦Its greatest -extent. 1248.♦ Before the end of half a century, the conquest of the -whole peninsula, save the Venetian possessions, was completed by the -taking of _Monembasia_. Things looked as if, now that the Latin power -was waning at Constantinople, a stronger Latin power had arisen in -Peloponnêsos. A crowd of Greek lands, Zakynthos, Naxos, Euboia, Athens, -even Epeiros and Thessalonikê, acknowledged at one time or another the -supremacy of Achaia. But Latin Achaia, like Latin Constantinople, had -to yield to revived Greek energy. ♦Recovery of lands in Peloponnêsos -by the Empire 1262.♦ The Empire won back the three Lacedæmonian -fortresses,[37] and presently made _Kalabryta_ in northern Arkadia a -Greek outpost. ♦1263.♦ Here the Greek advance stopped for a while. - -♦Angevin overlordship. 1278.♦ - -Before the end of the century the Frank principality lost its -independence. It passed into vassalage to the Angevin crown, and -was held, sometimes by the Neapolitan kings themselves, sometimes -by princes of their house—some of them nominal Emperors of -Romania—sometimes by princes of Savoy, who carried the Achaian name -into Northern Italy.[38] ♦Dismemberment of the principality. 1337.♦ -In the course of the fourteenth century the principality crumbled -away. ♦1356.♦ _Patras_ became an ecclesiastical principality under the -overlordship of the Pope of the Old Rome. Argos and its port became -a separate lordship. ♦1358.♦ Both of these passed for a longer or a -shorter time under the power of Venice. Corinth and the north-east -corner of the peninsula passed to the Acciauoli. ♦Byzantine advance. -1348-1383.♦ Meantime the Byzantine province grew. For some while, -under despots of the house of Kantakouzênos, it might almost pass for -an independent Greek state. ♦1381. | 1387. | 1442.♦ Notwithstanding -the inroads of the Navarrese, the second Spanish invaders of Greece, -and the first appearance of the Ottoman, the Greek power advanced, -till it took in all Peloponnêsos save the Venetian towns. ♦Conquests -of Constantine Palaiologos.♦ The last Constantine even appeared as a -conqueror at Athens and in central Greece. ♦1458-1460.♦ Then came -more Ottoman inroads, dismemberment, Albanian colonization, final -annexation by the Turk. ♦Successive Turkish conquests of Peloponnêsos.♦ -But the last conqueror has been twice driven to conquer Peloponnêsos -afresh. The first revolt under Venetian support was crushed a few -years after the first conquest. ♦1463-1540. | 1670. | 1685.♦ Then the -Turk gradually gathered in the Venetian ports, and the whole peninsula -was his, save so far as _Maina_ kept on a kind of wild independence -almost down to the last Venetian conquest. The complete and unbroken -possession of all Peloponnêsos by the Ottoman has never filled up the -whole of any one century. - - * * * * * - -♦Despotat of Epeiros.♦ - -We have seen how the despotat of Epeiros parted away from the momentary -Empire of Thessalonikê. The despots, like their neighbours, often found -it convenient to acknowledge the overlordship of some other power, -Venice, Nikaia, Sicily, or Achaia. The boundaries of their dominions -were greatly cut short by the advance of the restored Empire and by -the cessions to Manfred of Sicily. ♦Dismemberment of the despotat.♦ A -state was left which took in old Epeiros, Akarnania, and Aitôlia, save -the points on the coast which were held by other powers. _Arta_, the -old _Ambrakia_, was, as in the days of Pyrrhos, its head. ♦1271-1318. -| 1309.♦ Another branch reigned in _Great Blachia_ or Thessaly, with -its capital at _Neopatra_, a capital presently lost to the Catalan -invaders. ♦1318. | 1339. | Servian conquest. 1331-1355.♦ Next the -greater part of Thessaly, and then Epeiros itself, were recovered by -the Empire, and then all gradually passed under the Servian power. On -the break-up of that power came a time of utter confusion and endless -shiftings, which has however one marked feature. ♦Advance of the -Albanians.♦ The Albanian race now comes fully to the front. Albanian -settlers press into all the southern lands, and Albanian principalities -stand forth on a level with those held by Greek and Latin lords. - -♦Kings of Albania of the house of Thopia, 1358-1392.♦ - -The chief Albanian power which arose within the bounds of the despotat -was the house of _Thopia_ in northern Epeiros. ♦1366.♦ They called -themselves _Kings of Albania_; they won Durazzo from the Angevins, -and their power lasted till that duchy passed to Venice. ♦Servian -dynasty in Epeiros. 1359.♦ To the south of them, in southern Epeiros, -Akarnania, and Aitolia, reigned a Servian dynasty, whose prince Stephen -Urosh added Thessaly to his dominions, and called himself _Emperor of -the Serbs and Greeks_.[39] ♦1363.♦ His western dominion passed from -him. A Servian despot ruled at _Jôannina_, and an Albanian despot at -_Arta_. ♦Kingdom of Thessaly. | Turkish conquest. | 1393.♦ But Thessaly -went on as a kingdom, taking in the greater part of the land anciently -so called,[40] a kingdom which was the first Hellenic land to pass -under the power of the Turk. ♦1396.♦ Neopatra and Salôna followed, -and the Ottoman power stretched to the Corinthian gulf, and parted -asunder the still independent states of Western Greece from Attica and -Peloponnêsos. - -In Epeiros the Servian and Albanian despots had both to yield to -Italian houses. ♦Buondelmonti in Northern Epeiros.♦ Northern Epeiros -passed to the Florentine house of _Buondelmonte_. ♦The house of Tocco.♦ -To the south arose a dynasty of greater interest, the Beneventan house -of _Tocco_, the last independent princes in Western Greece. ♦1357.♦ -They first, as counts palatine, held Kephallênia and Zakynthos as a -fief of the Latin Empire. ♦1362.♦ Then they won Leukadia with the ducal -title. ♦1394.♦ They next began a continental dominion, first for a -moment in Peloponnêsos, then more lastingly in the lands near their -island duchy. ♦1405-1418.♦ Duke Charles of Leukadia gradually won all -Epeiros save the Venetian posts; and he, his wife, and his heirs were -called Despot of Romania, King of Epeiros, and even Empress of the -Romans.[41] ♦Its effects.♦ This dynasty, though not long-lived on the -mainland, is of real and abiding importance in the history of the Greek -nation. The advance of the Albanians was checked; their settlements -were thrust further north and further south, while the Beneventan -dominions became and remained purely Greek. ♦Venetian and Turkish -occupation. 1430.♦ Soon after the death of Duke Charles, the Turk won -Jôannina and the greater part of Epeiros; but his son kept _Arta_ and -its neighbourhood for nineteen years as a vassal of Venice. ♦1449.♦ -Then the dominions of Duke _Charles_ became the Turkish province of -_Karlili_. ♦1449-1479. | 1481-1483.♦ The house of Tocco kept its island -possessions for thirty years longer. Then they too passed to the -Turk, to be recovered for a moment by their own Duke, and then to be -struggled for between Turk and Venetian. - -♦Northern Albania.♦ - -Meanwhile the strictly Albanian lands, from the Akrokeraunian point -northwards, were subdued by the Turk, were freed, and subdued again. -♦1414. | Turkish conquest. 1431.♦ Early in the fifteenth century the -Turk won all Albania, except the Venetian posts. ♦Revolt. 1448.♦ -Seventeen years later came a revolt and a successful defence of -the country, whose later stages are ennobled by the name of George -Kastriota of Croja, the famous Scanderbeg. ♦Death of Scanderbeg. 1467.♦ -His death gave his land back to the Ottoman, while Croja itself was for -a while held by Venice. The whole Greek and Albanian mainland was now -divided between Turk and Venetian. - -♦The Empire of Trebizond.♦ - -Lastly, we must not forget that Greek state which outlived all the -rest. Far away, on the furthest bounds of the elder Empire, the Empire -of _Trebizond_ had the honour of being the last remaining fragment -of the Eastern Roman power. The rule of the Grand Komnênos survived -the fall of Constantinople; it survived the conquest of Athens and -Peloponnêsos. - -♦Origin of the Empire. 1204.♦ - -We have seen the origin and early history of this power. After its -western dominions passed to the Nicene Emperors and Sinôpê to the Turk, -the Trapezuntine Empire was confined to the eastern part of the south -coast of the Euxine, stretching over part of Iberia, and keeping the -Imperial possessions in the Tauric Chersonêsos. Sometimes independent, -sometimes tributary to Turks or Mongols, the power of Trebizond lived -on for nearly eighty years as a distinct and rival Roman Empire. -♦Agreement between Constantinople and Trebizond, 1281.♦ Then, when -Constantinople was again in Greek hands, John Komnênos of Trebizond was -content to acknowledge Michael Palaiologos as Emperor of the Romans, -and to content himself with the style of ‘Emperor of all the East, of -Iberia, and of _Perateia_.’ This last name means the _province beyond -the sea_, in the Tauric Chersonêsos or _Crim_. We thus see that the -style of ‘Emperor of the East,’ which it is sometimes convenient to -give to him of Constantinople, strictly belongs to him of Trebizond. -The new Empire of the East suffered many fluctuations of territory, -chiefly at the hands of the neighbouring Turkomans. _Chalybia_, -the land of iron, was lost; the coast-line was split asunder; the -Empire bowed to Timour. ♦Turkish conquest of Trebizond; 1461.♦ But -the capital and a large part of the coast bore up to the last, and -did not pass under the Ottoman yoke till eight years after the fall -of Constantinople. ♦of Perateia. 1472.♦ The outlying dependency of -_Perateia_ or _Gothia_ was not conquered till eleven years later still. -As the Tauric Chersonêsos had sheltered the last Greek commonwealth, it -sheltered also the last Greek principality. - - -§ 6. _The Slavonic States._ - -The Greek and Frank states of which we have just been speaking arose, -for the most part they directly arose, out of the Latin partition of -the Empire. ♦Effects of the partition of the Empire on the Slavonic -states.♦ On the Slavonic powers the effect of that partition was -only indirect. Servia and Bulgaria had begun their second career of -independence before the partition. The partition touched them only so -far as the splitting up of the Empire into a number of small states -took away all fear of their being again brought under its obedience. In -Croatia and Dalmatia all trace of the Imperial power passed away. The -Magyar held the inland parts; the question was whether the Magyar or -the Venetian should hold the coast. - -♦Servia and Bulgaria.♦ - -The chief independent Slavonic powers were those of _Servia_ and -_Bulgaria_. Of these, Servia represents the unmixed Slave, as unmixed, -that is, as any nation can be; Bulgaria represents the Slave brought -under some measure of Turanian influence and mixture. The history of -the purer race is the longer and the more brilliant. The Servian people -made a longer resistance to the Turk than the Bulgarian people; they -were the first to throw off his yoke; one part of them never submitted -to his yoke at all. ♦Extent of Servia.♦ The oldest Servia, as we have -seen, stretched far beyond the bounds of the present principality, -and had a considerable Hadriatic sea-board, though interrupted by the -Roman cities. Among the Zupans or princes of the many Servian tribes, -the chief were the northern Grand-Zupans of _Desnica_ on the Drina, -and the southern Grand-Zupans of _Dioklea_ or _Rascia_, so called from -their capital _Rassa_, the modern _Novi-Bazar_. This last principality -was the germ of the historical kingdom of Servia. ♦Relations to the -Empire.♦ But till the fall of the old Empire, the Imperial claims -over Servia were always asserted and were often enforced. ♦1018.♦ -Indeed common enmity to the Bulgarian, the momentary conqueror of -Servia,[42] formed a tie between Servia and the Empire down to the -complete incorporation of Servia by Basil the Second. ♦1040. | Conquest -by Manuel Komnênos; 1148.♦ The successful revolt of Servia made room -for more than one claimant of Servian dominion and kingship; but -the Imperial claims remained, to be enforced again in their fulness -by Manuel Komnênos. At last the Latin conquest relieved Servia from -all danger on the part of Constantinople; Servia stood forth as an -independent power under the kings of the house of Nemanja. - -♦Relations towards Hungary.♦ - -They had to struggle against more dangerous enemies to the north in -the Kings of Hungary. ♦Loss of Bosnia.♦ Even before the last Imperial -conquest, the Magyars had cut away the western part of Servia, the land -beyond the Drina, known as _Bosnia_ or _Rama_. Under the last name it -gave the Hungarian princes one of their royal titles. ♦1286.♦ This -land was more than once won back by Servia; but its tendency was to -separation and to growth at the cost of Servia. ♦1326.♦ In the first -half of the fourteenth century, Bosnia was enlarged by the Servian -lands bordering on the Dalmatian coast, the lands of _Zachloumia_ and -_Terbounia_, which were never permanently won back. So the lands on the -Save, between the Drina and the Morava, taking in the modern capital -of Belgrade, passed, in the endless shiftings of the frontier, at one -time to Bulgaria and at another to Hungary. ♦Servian advance eastward -and southward.♦ Servia, thus cut short to the north and west, was -driven to advance southward and eastward, at the expense of Bulgaria -and of the powers which had taken the place of the Empire on the -lower Hadriatic coast. From the latter part of the thirteenth century -onwards, Servia grew to be the greatest power in the south-eastern -peninsula. ♦Her seaboard. 1296.♦ Shorn of her old Hadriatic seaboard, -she gained a new and longer one, stretching from the mouths of Cattaro -to Durazzo. ♦1319-1322.♦ Durazzo itself twice fell into Servian hands; -but at the time of the highest power of Servia that city remained an -Angevin outpost on the Servian mainland. ♦Reign of Stephen Dushan, -1331-1355.♦ That highest power was reached in the reign of Stephen -Dushan, who spread his dominions far indeed at the cost of Greeks and -Franks, at the cost of his old Slavonic neighbours and of the rising -powers of Albania. In the new Servian capital of _Skopia_, _Skoupi_, -or _Skopje_, the Tzar Stephen took an Imperial crown as _Emperor of -the Serbs and Greeks_. ♦1346. | The Servian Empire.♦ The new Empire -stretched uninterruptedly from the Danube to the Corinthian gulf. At -one end Bosnia was won back; at the other end the Servian rule was -spread over Aitôlia and Thessaly, over Macedonia and Thrace as far as -_Christopolis_. It only remained to give a head to this great body, and -to make New Rome the seat of the Servian power. - -♦Break up of the Servian power, 1355.♦ - -But the Servian tzardom broke in pieces at the death of the great -Servian Tzar; and before he died, the Ottoman was already in Europe. In -fact the historical result of the great advance of Servia was to split -up the whole of the Greek and Slavonic lands, and to leave no power of -either race able to keep out the barbarian. We have seen how the titles -of Stephen’s Empire lived for a generation in the Greek part of his -dominions.[43] In Macedonia and Thrace several small principalities -sprang up, and a power arose at Skodra of which we shall have to speak -again. To the north Bosnia fell away, and carried Zachloumia with it. -♦Later Kingdom of Servia.♦ Servia itself comes out of the chaos as a -separate kingdom, a kingdom wholly cut off from the sea, but stretching -southward as far as _Prisrend_, and again holding the lands between the -Drina and the Morava. ♦Conquests and deliverances of Servia. 1375.♦ The -Turk first took _Nish_, and brought the kingdom under tribute. ♦1389.♦ -The overthrow at Kossovo made Servia wholly dependent. ♦1403.♦ With -the fall of Bajazet it again became free for a generation. ♦1438.♦ -Then the Turk won the whole land except Belgrade. ♦1442. | 1444.♦ Then -the campaign of Huniades restored Servia as a free kingdom; the event -of Varna again brought her under tribute. ♦1459.♦ At last Mahomet the -Conqueror incorporated all Servia, except Belgrade, with his dominions. - - * * * * * - -♦The Kingdom of Bosnia.♦ - - -The history of _Bosnia_, as a really separate power, holding its own -place in Europe, begins with the break-up of the momentary Servian -Empire. ♦Its origin, 1376.♦ The Ban Stephen Tvartko became the first -king of the last Bosnian dynasty, under the nominal superiority of the -Hungarian crown. Thus, at the very moment of the coming of the Turk, a -kingdom of Latin creed and associations became the first power among -the south-eastern Slaves. For a while it seemed as if Bosnia was going -to take the place which had been held by Servia. ♦Greatest extent of -Bosnia, 1382.♦ The Bosnian kingdom at its greatest extent took in all -the present Bosnia and Herzegovina, with, it would seem, all Dalmatia -except Zara, and the north-west corner of Servia stretching beyond -the Drina. But the Bosnian power was broken at Kossovo as well as -that of Servia. ♦Loss of Jayce, 1391.♦ In the time of confusion which -followed, Jayce in the north-west corner became a power connected with -both Hungary and Bosnia, while the Turk established himself in the -extreme south. The Turk was driven out for a while, but the kingdom -was dismembered to form a new Latin power. ♦Duchy of Saint Saba or -Herzegovina. 1440.♦ The Lord of the old Zachloumia, a Bosnian vassal, -transferred his homage to the Austrian king of the Romans, and, became -sovereign Duke of _Saint Sava_, perhaps rather of _Primorie_. Thus -arose the state of _Herzegovina_, that is the _Duchy_, commemorating in -its half-German name the relation of its prince to the Western Empire. -But neither kingdom nor duchy was long-lived. ♦1449.♦ Within ten years -after the separation of Herzegovina the Turk held western Bosnia. -♦Turkish conquest of Bosnia, 1463;♦ Fourteen years later he subdued -the whole kingdom. ♦of Herzegovina, 1483.♦ The next year the duchy -became tributary, and twenty years after the conquest of Bosnia it was -incorporated with the now Turkish province of Bosnia. But in the long -struggle between Venice and the Turk various parts of its territory, -especially the coast, came under the power of the Republic. - - * * * * * - -Meanwhile one small Slavonic land, one surviving fragment of the great -Servian dominion, maintained its independence through all changes. - -In the break-up of the Servian Empire, a small state, with Skodra for -its capital, formed itself in the district of Zeta, reaching northwards -as far as Cattaro. ♦Dominion of the house of Balsa at Skodra. | Loss -of Skodra, 1394.♦ For a moment its princes of the house of _Balsa_ -spread their power over all Northern Albania; but the new state was -cut short on all sides by Bosnia, Venice, and the Turk, and Skodra -itself was sold to Venice. In the middle of the fifteenth century, the -state took a more definite shape, though with a smaller territory, -under a new dynasty, that of Tzernojevich. ♦Beginning of Montenegro, -1456.♦ This independent remnant answered to the modern _Tzernagora_ -or _Montenegro_, with a greater extent to the east and with a small -seaboard taking in Antivari. ♦Establishment of Tzetinje, 1488.♦ Its -capital _Zabljak_ was more than once lost and won from the Turk; at -the end of the century it was found hopeless to defend the lower -districts, and prince and people withdrew to the natural fortress of -the Black Mountain with its newly founded capital of Tzetinje. ♦The -Vladikas, 1499. | Lay princes, 1851.♦ The last prince of the dynasty -resigned his power to the metropolitan bishop, and Montenegro remained -an independent state under its Vladikas or hereditary prelates, till -their dominion was in our own time again exchanged for that of temporal -princes. During all this time the territory of Montenegro was simply -so much of the mountain region as could maintain its independence -against the ceaseless attacks of the Turk. Yet Montenegro, as the ally -of England and Russia, bore her part in the great European struggle, -and won for herself a haven and a capital at Cattaro. ♦1813. | 1858.♦ -Her allies stood by while Cattaro was filched by the Austrian; and, -more than forty years later, when a definite frontier was first traced, -Western diplomacy so traced it as to give the Turk an inlet on both -sides to the unconquered Christian land. ♦Montenegrin conquests, -1876-1877.♦ In the latest times the Montenegrin arms set free a large -part of the kindred land of Herzegovina, and won back a considerable -part of the lost territory to the east, including part of the old -seaboard as far as _Dulcigno_. ♦1878.♦ Then Western diplomacy drew -another frontier, which forbade any large incorporation of the kindred -Slavonic districts, while a small extension was allowed in that part of -the lost ancient territory which had become Albanian. Of three havens -won by Montenegro in the war, _Dulcigno_ has been given back to the -Turk. ♦Spizza.♦ Austria has been allowed to filch _Spizza_, as she had -before filched Ragusa and Cattaro. The third haven, that of _Antivari_, -was left to those who had won it under such restrictions as armed wrong -knows how to impose on the weaker power of right. - - * * * * * - -The continued independence of Montenegro enables the Servian branch -of the Slavonic race to say that their nation has never been wholly -enslaved. ♦The third Bulgarian kingdom.♦ The case has been different -with Bulgaria. We have seen the origin of the third Bulgarian, or -rather _Vlacho-Bulgarian_, kingdom which won its independence of the -Empire in the last years of the twelfth century. From that time to -the Turkish conquest, one or more Bulgarian states always existed. -And throughout the thirteenth century, the Bulgarian kingdom, though -its boundaries were ever shifting, was one of the chief powers of the -south-eastern peninsula. - -The oldest Bulgaria between Danube and Hæmus was the first to throw -off the Byzantine dominion, and the last to come under the power of -the Turk. ♦Bulgarian advance. 1197-1207.♦ But the new Bulgarian power -grew fast, and for a while called back the days of Simeon and Samuel. -Under Joannice the frontier stretched far to the north-west, over -lands which gradually passed to Servia, taking in Skupi, Nish, and -even Belgrade. ♦Dominion of John Asan. 1218-1241.♦ Under the Tzar John -Asan the new Bulgaria, the kingdom of _Tirnovo_, reached its greatest -extent. The greater part of Thrace, Philippopolis and the whole land of -_Rhodopê_ or _Achridos_, Hadrianople itself, Macedonia too stretching -away to Samuel’s Ochrida and to _Albanon_ or Elbassan, were all under -his rule. If his realm did not touch the Hadriatic or the Ægæan, it -came very near to both; but Thessalonikê at least always remained to -its Frank and Greek lords.[44] But this great power, like so many other -powers of its kind, did not survive its founder. ♦Decline of Bulgaria. -1246-1257.♦ The revived Greek states, the Nicene Empire and the Epeirot -despotat, cut the Bulgarian realm short. The disputes of an older and -of a later time went on.[45] ♦Shiftings of the frontier.♦ There was -undisputed Bulgaria north of Hæmus, an ever-shifting frontier south of -it. The inland Philippopolis, and the coast towns of _Anchialos_ and -_Mesêmbria_, passed backwards and forwards between Greek and Bulgarian. -♦Philippopolis finally Bulgarian. 1344-1366.♦ The last state of things, -immediately before the common overthrow, gave Philippopolis to Bulgaria -and the coast towns to the Empire. - -♦Wars with Hungary. 1260.♦ - -An attempt at extension of the north by an attack on the Hungarian -Banat of _Severin_, the western part of modern Wallachia, led only to a -Hungarian invasion, to a temporary loss of _Widdin_, and the assumption -of a Bulgarian title by the Magyar king. ♦Cuman dynasty in Bulgaria. -1280.♦ Presently a new Turanian dynasty, this time of Cuman descent, -reigned in Bulgaria, and soon after, the kingdom passed for the moment -under a mightier overlord in the person of Nogai Khan. ♦Break-up of -the kingdom. 1357.♦ In the fourteenth century the kingdom broke up. -♦Principality of Dobrutcha.♦ The despot _Dobroditius_—his name has many -spellings—formed a separate dominion on the seaboard, stretching from -the Danube to the Imperial frontier, cutting off the King of Tirnovo -from the sea. Part of his land preserves his memory in its modern -name _Dobrutcha_. Presently we hear of three Bulgarias, the central -state at Tirnovo, the sea-land of Dobroditius, and a north-western -state at Widdin. ♦1362. | 1365-1369.♦ By this time the Ottoman inroads -had begun; Philippopolis was lost, and Bulgarian princes were blind -enough to employ Turkish help in a second attack on Severin, which -led only to a second temporary loss of Widdin. ♦1382. | 1388.♦ The -Turk now pressed on; Sofia was taken; the whole land became a Turkish -dependency. ♦Conquest by Bajazet, 1393.♦ After Kossovo the land was -wholly conquered, save only that the northern part of the land of -Dobroditius passed to Wallachia. Bulgaria passed away from the list -of European states both sooner and more utterly than Servia. Servia -still had its alternations of freedom and bondage for sixty years. In -after times large parts of it passed to a rule which, if foreign, was -at least European. In later days Servia was the first of the subject -nations to win its freedom. But the bondage of Bulgaria was never -disturbed from the days of Bajazet to our own time. - - -§ 7. _The Kingdom of Hungary._ - -The origin of the Hungarian kingdom and the reasons for dealing with -along with the states which arose out of the break-up of the Eastern -Empire have already been spoken of.[46] ♦Character of the Hungarian -kingdom.♦ The Finnish conquerors of the Slave, admitted within the -pale of Western Christendom, founding a new Hungary on the Danube and -the Theiss while they left behind them an older Hungary on the Kama, -have points of contact at once with Asia and with both Eastern and -Western Europe. ♦Its position in south-eastern Europe.♦ But, as closely -connected in their history with the nations of the south-eastern -peninsula, as sharers in the bondage and in the deliverance of Servia, -Greece, and Bulgaria, in our geographical survey they claim a place -where they may be looked at strictly as part of the south-eastern world. - -♦Effects of the Magyar invasion.♦ - -It has been already noticed[47] that the main geographical work of the -Magyar was to cut off that south-eastern world, the world where the -Greek and the Slave, struggling for its supremacy, were both swallowed -up by the Ottoman, from the Slavonic region between the Carpathians -and the Baltic. ♦Great Moravia. 884-894.♦ At the moment of the Magyar -inroad, the foundation of the _Great-Moravian_ kingdom, the kingdom -of Sviatopluk, made it more likely than it has ever been since that -the Slaves of the two regions might be united into a single power. -That kingdom, stretching to Sirmium, marched on the north-western -dependencies of the Eastern Empire, while on the north it took in the -Chrobatian land which was afterwards Little Poland. Such a power might -have been dangerous to both Empires at once; but the invaders whom the -two Emperors called in proved far more dangerous than Great Moravia -could ever have been. The Magyars, Ogres, or Hungarians, the Turks -of the Imperial geographer,[48] were called in by his father Leo to -check the Bulgarians, as they were called in by Arnulf in the West to -check the new power of Moravia. They passed, from the north rather than -from the east, into the land which was disputed between Moravian and -Bulgarian. ♦906. Relations between Hungary and Germany.♦ The Moravian -power was overthrown, and the Magyars, stepping into its place, became -constant invaders of both Empires and their dependent lands. But to the -west, the victories of the Saxon kings put a check to their inroads, -and, save some shiftings on the Austrian march, the frontier of Germany -and Hungary has been singularly abiding. - -♦The two Chrobatias separated by the Magyars.♦ - -While the Magyar settlement placed a barrier between the two chief -regions of the Slavonic race as a whole, it specially placed a barrier -between the two divisions of the _Croatian_ or _Chrobatian_ people, -those on the Vistula and those on the Drave and Save. ♦1025.♦ The -northern _Chrobatia_ still reached south of the Carpathians, and it -was not until the eleventh century that the Magyar kingdom, by the -acquisition of its southern part, gained a natural frontier which, -with some shiftings, served to part it off from the Slavonic powers to -the north of it. To the south-east an uncultivated and wooded tract -separated the Magyar territory from the lands between the Carpathians -and the lower Danube which were still held by the Patzinaks. -♦Geographical position of the Magyars.♦ The oldest Magyar settlement -thus occupied the central part of the modern kingdom, on the Theiss and -the middle Danube. There the Turanian invaders formed a ruling and -central race, within a Slavonic fringe at each end. There were northern -and southern Croats, _Slovaks_ to the north, and _Ruthenians_ to the -north-west, towards the kindred land of _Halicz_ or _Red Russia_. - -♦Hungary a kingdom: its growth.♦ - -Hungary, ranking from the beginning of the eleventh century as a -kingdom of Latin Christendom, presently grew in all directions. We have -just seen its advance at the expense of the northern Chrobatian land. -Its advance at the expense of the southern branch of that race, and of -the other Slavonic lands which owed more or less of allegiance to the -Eastern Empire, was still more marked. ♦Hungary and Croatia.♦ All these -lands at one time or another gave royal titles to the King of Hungary, -King also of Croatia, of Dalmatia, of Rama, even of Bulgaria. But in -most of these lands the Hungarian kingship was temporary or nominal; in -Croatia alone, though the frontier has often shifted, Hungarian rule -has been abiding. Croatia has never formed an independent state since -the first Hungarian conquest; it has never been fully wrested from -Hungary since the days of Manuel Komnênos. In those days it was indeed -a question whether Hungary itself had not an overlord in the Eastern -Emperor. After the great Bulgarian revolt that question could never be -raised again. But the Hungarian frontier was ever shifting towards the -former lands of the Empire, Venetian, Servian, and Bulgarian. ♦Kingdom -of Slavonia. 1492.♦ One part of the old Croatian kingdom, the land -between Save and Drave, was cut off to form, first an appanage, then an -annexed kingdom, by the special name of _Slavonia_, a name shared by it -with lands on the Baltic, perhaps on the Ægæan. - -But, from the first days of its conversion, the Hungarian realm -began to advance in other directions, in lands which had formed no -part of the Empire since the days of Aurelian. ♦Transsilvania or -_Siebenbürgen_. | 1004.♦ Before their Chrobatian conquest, the Magyars -passed the boundary which divided them from the Patzinaks, and won the -land which from its position took the name of _Transsilvania_.[49] -Colonists were invited to settle in the thinly inhabited land. One -chief settlement was of the Low-Dutch speech from Saxony and Flanders. -♦Various colonies.♦ Another element was formed by the Turanian -_Szeklers_, whose Latin form of _Siculi_ might easily mislead. Another -migration brought back the name and speech of the Old Rome to the first -land from which she had withdrawn her power. - -♦Origin of the Roumans.♦ - -The legendary belief in the unbroken life of the Roman name and speech -in the lands north of the Danube is merely a legendary belief.[50] -There can be no reasonable doubt that the present principality of -Roumania and the Rouman lands beyond its borders derived their present -population and language from a settlement of the Rouman people further -south. South of the Danube, the Rouman or Vlach population, scattered -among Greeks, Slaves, and Albanians, at many points from Pindos -northwards, has kept its distinct nationality, but it has never formed -a political whole. ♦Their Northern migration.♦ But a migration beyond -the Danube enabled the Roumans in course of time to found two distinct -principalities, and to form a chief element in the population of a -third. There is no sign of any Rouman population north of the Danube -before the thirteenth century. The events of that century opened a way -for a reversal of the ordinary course of migration, for the settlement -of lands beyond the Empire by former subjects of the Empire. - -♦Rouman element in the third Bulgarian kingdom.♦ - -We have seen that the third Bulgarian kingdom, that which arose at -the end of the twelfth century, was in its origin as much Rouman as -Bulgarian. ♦Cumans in Dacia.♦ By this time the rule of the Patzinaks -beyond the lower Danube had given way to that of the kindred _Cumans_. -♦Mongolian invasion.♦ Then the storm of Mongolian invasion, which -crushed Hungary itself for a moment, crushed the Cuman power for -ever. But the remnant of the Cuman nation lived on within the Magyar -realm, and gave its king yet another title, that of _King of Cumania_. -♦Rouman settlement in the Cuman land.♦ The former Cuman land now -lay open to new settlers, and the Rouman part of the inhabitants of -the new Bulgaria began to cross the Danube into that land and the -neighbouring districts. In the course of the thirteenth century they -occupied the present Wallachia, and already formed an element in the -mixed population of Transsilvania. A Rouman state thus began to be -formed, which took the name by which the Roumans were known to their -neighbours. The new _Vlachia_, _Wallachia_, stretched on both sides -of the Aluta. ♦Little Wallachia.♦ To the west of that river, _Little -Wallachia_ formed, as the banat of _Severin_, an integral part of the -Hungarian kingdom. ♦Great Wallachia.♦ _Great Wallachia_ to the east -formed a separate principality, dependent or independent on Hungary, -according to its strength from time to time. ♦Dobrutcha.♦ And, towards -the end of the fourteenth century, the land south of the Danube, called -_Dobrutcha_, passed from Bulgaria to Wallachia. ♦Moldavia. c. 1341.♦ -Another Rouman migration, passing from the land of _Marmaros_ north -of Transsilvania, founded the principality of _Moldavia_ between the -Carpathians and the Dniester. This too stood to the Hungarian crown -in the same shifting relation as Great Wallachia, and sometimes -transferred its vassalage to Lithuania and Poland. - -♦Lewis the Great, 1342-1382;♦ - -The greatest extension of the Hungarian dominion was in the fourteenth -century, under the Angevin King Lewis the Great. Before his time -the Magyar frontier had advanced and fallen back. ♦First possession -of Halicz, 1185-1220,♦ Hungary, having a Russian population within -its borders, had for a while enlarged its Russian dominion by the -annexation of the Red Russian land of _Halicz_ or _Galicia_. ♦of -Widdin, 1260-1264.♦ It had also, for a shorter time, occupied the -Bulgarian town of Widdin. ♦Conquests of Lewis, Halicz and Vladimir, -1342; Widdin, 1365-1369.♦ Lewis renewed both these conquests, and -made others. Halicz was not only won again, but was enlarged by the -neighbouring principality of _Vladimir_. The great day of Hungary was -contemporary with the great day of Servia, but it was a longer day, and -Hungary profited greatly by the fall of Servia. ♦1356.♦ While Lewis -annexed Dalmatia, he also at various times established his supremacy -over Bosnia and the Rouman principalities. That Lewis was king of -Poland by a personal union did not affect Hungarian geography. ♦Red -Russia restored to Poland, 1390.♦ But the separation of the crowns at -his death led presently to the restoration of the Red Russian provinces -to Poland. ♦Pledging of Zips, 1412.♦ Somewhat later, under Sigismund, -a territory within the Hungarian border, part of the county of _Zips_ -or _Czepusz_, was pledged to Poland, and continued to be held by that -power. - - * * * * * - -Meanwhile the Ottoman was on his march to overthrow Hungary as well -as its neighbours, though the position of the Magyar kingdom made it -the last to be devoured and the first to be delivered. The Turkish -inroads as yet barely grazed the strictly Hungarian frontier. ♦First -Turkish invasion. 1391.♦ The first Turkish invasion of Hungary, the -first Turkish exaction of tribute from Wallachia, came in the same year -in which Sigismund established his supremacy over Bosnia. ♦Battle of -Nikopolis. 1396. | Campaign of Huniades 1443. | Battle of Varna. 1444.♦ -The defeat of Nikopolis confirmed the Turkish supremacy in Wallachia, -a supremacy which was again won for Hungary in the great campaign -of Huniades, and was again lost at Varna. ♦Disputes for Dalmatia.♦ -Meanwhile the full possession of Dalmatia did not outlive the reign of -Lewis. Henceforth Hungary is merely one competitor among others in the -ceaseless shiftings of the Dalmatian frontier. - -♦Hungary under Matthias Corvinus. 1458-1490.♦ - -Later in the fifteenth century came another day of Hungarian greatness -under the son of Huniades, Matthias Corvinus. ♦1477. | 1485.♦ Its most -distinguishing feature was the extension of the Magyar power to the -west, over Bohemia and its dependencies, and even over the Austrian -archduchy. ♦1467.♦ In the south-eastern lands Wallachia and Moldavia -again became Hungarian dependencies. ♦1463.♦ _Jayce_ was won back -from the Turk, now lord of Bosnia, and, Belgrade being now Hungarian, -the frontier towards the Ottoman was fixed till the time of his great -advance northwards. - -♦Loss of Belgrade. 1521.♦ - -The first stage of Ottoman conquest in Hungary, as distinguished from -mere ravage, was the taking of Belgrade. ♦Battle of Mohacz. 1526.♦ With -the battle of Mohacz, five years later, the separate history of Hungary -ends. ♦Turkish occupation of the greater part of Hungary. | 1552-1687.♦ -That victory, followed by the disputes for the Hungarian crown between -an Austrian archduke and a Transsilvanian palatine, enabled Suleiman -to make himself master of the greater part of the kingdom, especially -of the part which was most thoroughly Magyar. From the middle of -the sixteenth century till the latter years of the seventeenth, the -Austrian Kings of Hungary kept only a fragment of Croatia, including -_Zagrab_ or _Agram_, and a strip of north-western Hungary, including -_Pressburg_. The whole central part of the kingdom passed under the -immediate dominion of the Turk, and a Pasha ruled at Buda. Besides -this great incorporation of Hungarian soil, the Turk held three vassal -principalities within the dominions of Lewis the Great. ♦Tributary -principalities: Transsilvania, Wallachia, Moldavia. 1497.♦ One was -_Transsilvania_, increased by a large part of north-eastern Hungary; -the second was _Wallachia_; the third was _Moldavia_, which began to be -tributary late in the fifteenth century. The Rouman lands became more -and more closely dependent on the Turk, who took on him to name their -princes. ♦1606.♦ Indeed, one might for a while add the Austrian kingdom -of Hungary itself as a fourth vassal state, as it paid tribute to the -Turk into the seventeenth century. ♦The Rouman lands disputed between -Poland and the Turk.♦ For the superiority of the Rouman principalities -an endless struggle went on between Poland and the Turk. At last the -same Slavonic power stepped in to deliver Hungary and Austria also. -♦Battle of Vienna. 1683.♦ With the overthrow of the Turk before Vienna -began the reaction of Christendom against Islam which has gone on to -our own day. - -♦Recovery of Hungary from the Turk.♦ - -The wars which follow answer to the wars of independence in Servia and -Greece in so far as the Turk was driven out of a Christian land. They -differ in this, that the Turk was driven out of Greece and Servia to -the profit of Greece and Servia themselves, while he was driven out -of Hungary to the profit of the Austrian king. ♦Peace of Carlowitz. -1699.♦ The first stage of the work, the war which was ended by the -Peace of Carlowitz, won back nearly all Croatia and Slavonia, and all -Hungary proper, except the land of _Temeswar_ between Danube, Theiss, -and Maros. ♦Incorporation of Transsilvania. 1713.♦ Transsilvania -became a dependency of the Hungarian kingdom, with which it was -presently incorporated. Wallachia and Moldavia remained under Turkish -supremacy. ♦Peace of Passarowitz. 1718.♦ The next war, ended by the -Peace of Passarowitz, fully restored the Hungarian kingdom as part of -Christendom. The Turk kept only a small part of Croatia. All Slavonia -and the banat of Temeswar were won back; the frontier was even carried -south of the Save, so as to take in a small strip of Bosnia and a -great part of Servia, as also the Lesser Wallachia, the old banat -of Severin. Thus, while the first stage delivered Buda, the second -delivered Belgrade. But the next war, ended by the Peace of Belgrade, -largely undid the work. ♦Losses by the Peace of Belgrade. 1739.♦ The -frontier fell back to the point at which it stayed till our own day. -From the mouth of the Unna to Orsovo, the Save and the Danube became -the frontier. Belgrade, and all the land south of those rivers, passed -again to the Turk, and Little Wallachia became again part of a Turkish -dependency. ♦Final loss of Belgrade. 1789-1791.♦ At a later stage of -the century Belgrade was again delivered and again lost. - -♦Acquisitions from Poland.♦ - -The later acquisitions of the House of Austria were made in the -character of Hungarian kings, but they did not lead to any enlargement -of the Hungarian kingdom. Thus the claim to the Austrian acquisitions -made at the first and third partitions of Poland, rested solely on the -two Hungarian occupations of Red Russia. ♦Galicia and Lodomeria.♦ Under -the softened forms of _Galicia_ and _Lodomeria_, the Red Russian lands -of _Halicz_ and _Vladimir_, together with part of Poland itself, became -a new kingdom of the House of Habsburg, as the greater part of the -territory thus won still remains. ♦Acquisition of Bukovina. 1776-1786.♦ -Between the two partitions the new kingdom was increased by the -addition of _Bukovina_, the north-western corner of Moldavia, which was -claimed as an ancient part of the Transsilvanian principality. It was -again only in its Hungarian character that the House of Habsburg could -make any claim to Dalmatia. ♦Dalmatia.♦ Certainly no Austrian duke had -ever reigned over Dalmatia, Red Russia, or the Rouman principalities. -Yet in the present dual arrangement of the Austro-Hungarian monarchy -the so-called _triple kingdom_ of Croatia, Dalmatia, and Slavonia, -is divided between the rule of Pest and the rule of Vienna. Galicia -also counts to the Austrian, and not to the Hungarian, division of the -monarchy. All this is perhaps in harmony with the generally anomalous -character of the power of which they form part. ♦Spizza. 1878.♦ The -port of _Spizza_ has been added to the Dalmatian kingdom. ♦Bosnia and -Herzegovina.♦ It is hard to say in which of his many characters the -Hungarian King and Austrian Archduke holds the lands of _Bosnia_ and -_Herzegovina_, of which the Treaty of Berlin confers on him, not the -sovereignty, but the administration. They might have been claimed by -the Hungarian king in his ancient character of King of Rama. But the -formal aspect of the transaction would seem rather to be that he has, -like his predecessors in the sixteenth century, become the man of the -Turk. - - * * * * * - -♦Later history of Roumania.♦ - -After the restoration of the Lesser Wallachia to the Turk and the -addition of Bukovina to Galicia, the geographical history of the Rouman -principalities parts off wholly from that of Hungary, and will be more -fittingly treated in another section. - - -§ 8. _The Ottoman Power._ - -♦The Ottoman Turks.♦ - -Last among the powers which among them supplanted the Eastern Empire, -comes the greatest and most terrible of all, that which overthrew the -Empire itself and most of the states which arose out of its ruins, and -which stands distinguished from all the rest by its abiding possession -of the Imperial city. This is the power of the Ottoman Turks. ♦Their -special character as Mahometans.♦ They stand distinguished from all -the other invaders of the European mainland of the Empire by being -Mahometan invaders. The examples of Bulgaria and Hungary show that -Turanian invaders, as such, are not incapable of being received into -European fellowship. This could not be in the case of a Mahometan -power, bound by its religion to keep its Christian subjects in the -condition of bondmen. The Ottomans could not, like the Bulgarians, be -lost in the greater mass of those whom they conquered. ♦Preservation of -the subject nations.♦ But this very necessity helped in some measure to -preserve the national being of the subject nations. Greeks, Servians, -Bulgarians, have under Ottoman rule remained Greeks, Servians, and -Bulgarians, ready to begin their national career afresh whenever the -time for independence should come. ♦Comparison with the Saracen power -in Spain.♦ The dominion of the Turk in Eastern Europe answers, as a -Mahometan dominion, to the dominion of the Saracen in Western Europe. -But in everything, save the mere reckoning of years, it has been far -more abiding. The Mahometan dominion in southern Spain did indeed last -two hundred years longer than Mahometan dominion has yet lasted in any -part of Eastern Europe. But the Saracen power in the West began to fall -back as soon as it was established, and its last two hundred years -were a mere survival. The Ottomans underwent no considerable loss of -territory till more than four centuries and a half after their first -appearance in Asia, till more than three centuries after their passage -into Europe. Constantinople has been Ottoman sixty years longer than -Toledo was Saracen. - -♦Extent of the Ottoman dominion compared with the Eastern Empire.♦ - -The Ottoman, possessor of the Eastern Rome, does in a rough way -represent the Eastern Roman in the extent of his dominion. The -dominions and dependencies of the Sultans at the height of their power -took in, in Eastern Europe, in Asia, and in Africa, nearly all that had -formed part of the Empire of Justinian, with a large territory, both in -Europe and Asia, which Justinian had not held. Justinian held nothing -north of the Danube; Suleiman held, as sovereign or as overlord, a vast -dominion from Buda to Azof. On the other hand, no part of the dominions -of Justinian in Western Europe, save one city for one moment, ever came -under Ottoman rule. The Eastern Empire in the year 800 was smaller than -even the present reduced dominion of the Turk. The Eastern Empire, -at its height in the eleventh century, held in Europe a dominion far -smaller than the dominion of the Turk in the sixteenth century, far -larger than his dominion now. But in the essential feature of Byzantine -geography, the possession of Constantinople and of the lands on each -side of the Bosporos and Hellespont, the Ottoman Sultan took the place -of the Eastern Emperor, and as yet he keeps it. - -♦Effects of the Mongolian advance.♦ - -The history of the Eastern Empire, and that of the Ottomans in -connexion with it, was largely affected by the movements of the Mongols -in the further East. Mongolian pressure weakened the Seljuk Turks, and -so allowed the growth of the Nicene Empire. Mongolian invasions also -led indirectly to the growth of the Ottoman power, and at a later time -they gave it its greatest check. ♦Origin of the Ottomans.♦ The Ottomans -grew out of a Turkish band who served the Seljuk Sultan against the -Mongols. As his vassals, they began to be a power in Asia and to harry -the coasts of Europe. They passed into Europe, and won a great European -dominion far more quickly than they had won their Asiatic dominion. -This is the special characteristic of the Ottoman power. Asiatic in -everything else, it is geographically European; most of its Asiatic and -all its African dominion was won from an European centre. ♦Break-up and -reunion of the Ottoman power.♦ Already a power in Europe, but not yet -in possession of the Imperial city, the new Ottoman power was for a -moment utterly broken in pieces by the second flood of Mongol invasion. -That the shattered dominion came together again is an event without -a parallel in Eastern history. The restored Ottoman power then won -Constantinople, and from Constantinople, as representing the fallen -Empire, it won back the lost dominion of the Empire. ♦Its permanence.♦ -The permanence of the Ottoman power, when Constantinople was once won, -is in no way wonderful. Even the unreclaimed Asiatic, when he was once -seated on the throne of the New Rome, inherited his share of Rome’s -eternity. - - * * * * * - -♦First settlements of the Ottomans.♦ - -The first settlements of the Ottoman Turks were on the banks of the -_Sangarios_, which gave them from the beginning a threatening position -towards Europe. ♦1299.♦ By the end of the thirteenth century they were -firmly established in that region. In the first half of the fourteenth -they became the leading power in Western Asia. ♦Conquest of Brusa. -1326-1330.♦ _Brusa_, the Asiatic capital, won in the last days of -the Emir Othman, has a manifest eye towards Europe. ♦Of Nikaia and -Nikomêdeia. 1330-1338.♦ _Nikaia_ and _Nikomêdeia_ followed, and the -Ottoman stepped geographically into the same position towards the -revived Greek Empire which the Nicene princes had held towards the -Latin Empire. ♦Entry into Europe. 1354. | Conquest of Hadrianople. -1361.♦ In the last days of the Emir Othman came their passage into -Europe, and a few more years saw Amurath in his European capital of -Hadrianople, completely hemming Constantinople in. ♦Ottoman advance.♦ -The second half of the fourteenth century was a time of the most -speedy Ottoman advance, and the amount of real advance is by no means -represented by the change on the map. We have seen in the case of -Servia, of Greece, and of Hungary, that the course of Turkish invasion -commonly went through three stages. There was first the time of mere -plunder. Then came the tributary stage, and lastly, the day of complete -bondage. ♦Bajazet first Sultan, 1389-1402.♦ Under Bajazet, the first -Ottoman prince who bore the title of Sultan, the immediate Ottoman -dominion in Europe stretched from the Ægæan to the Danube. It took in -all Bulgaria, all Macedonia, Thessaly, and Thrace, save only Chalkidikê -and the district just round Constantinople. Servia and Wallachia were -dependent states, as indeed was the Empire itself. Central and southern -Greece, Bosnia, Hungary, even Styria, were lands open to plunder. - -♦Battle of Angora. 1402.♦ - -This great dominion was broken in pieces by the victory of Timour -at Angora. It seemed that the empire of the Ottoman had passed away -like the empire of the Servian. ♦Break up of the Ottoman power.♦ -The dominion of Bajazet was divided among his sons and the princes -of the dispossessed Turkish dynasties. The Christian states had a -breathing-time, and the sons of Bajazet were glad to give back to the -Empire some important parts of its lost territories. ♦Reunited under -Mahomet. 1413.♦ The Ottoman power came together again under Mahomet -the First; but for nearly half a century its advance was slower than -in the half-century before. The conquests of Mahomet and of Amurath -the Second lay mainly in the Greek and Albanian lands. ♦Conquest of -Thessalonikê. 1430.♦ The Turk now reached the Hadriatic, and the -conquest of Thessalonikê gave him a firmer hold on the Ægæan. Towards -Servia and Hungary he lost and he won again; he hardly conquered. -♦Mahomet the Conqueror. 1451-1481.♦ It was the thirty years of Mahomet -the Conqueror which finally gave the Ottoman dominion its European -position. ♦Conquest of Constantinople. 1453.♦ From his first and -greatest conquest of the New Rome, he gathered in what remained, Greek, -Frank, and Slave. The conquest of the Greek mainland, of Albania and -Bosnia, the final conquest of Servia, made him master of the whole -south-eastern peninsula, save only the points held by Venice and the -unconquered height of the Black Mountain. He began to gather in the -Western islands, and he struck the first great blow to the Venetian -power by the conquest of Euboia. Around the Euxine he won the Empire of -Trebizond and the points held by Genoa. The great mass of the islands -and the few Venetian points on the coast still escaped. ♦Extent of his -dominion.♦ Otherwise Mahomet the Conqueror held the whole European -dominions of Basil the Second, with a greater dominion in Asia than -that of Manuel Komnênos. From the Danube to the Tanais and beyond it, -he held a vast overlordship, over lands which had obeyed no Emperor -since Aurelian, over lands which had never obeyed any Emperor at all. -At last the Mussulman lord of Constantinople seemed about to win back -the Italian dominion of its Christian lords. ♦Taking of Otranto, 1480.♦ -In his last days, by the possession of Otranto, Mahomet ruled west of -the Hadriatic. - -It might have been deemed that the little cloud which now lighted on -Otranto would grow as fast as the little cloud which a hundred and -thirty years before had lighted on Kallipolis. But Bajazet the Second -made no conquests save the points which were won from Venice. ♦Conquest -of Syria and Egypt. 1516-17.♦ Selim the First, the greatest conqueror -of his line against fellow Mahometans, had no leisure, while winning -Syria and Egypt, to make any advance on Christian ground. ♦Conquests -of Suleiman. 1520-1566.♦ But under Suleiman the Lawgiver, not only the -overlordship but the immediate rule of Constantinople under its Turkish -Sultans was spread over wide European lands which had never obeyed its -Christian Emperors. ♦His African overlordship.♦ Then too its Mussulman -lords won back at least the nominal overlordship of that African -seaboard which the first Mussulmans had rent away from the allegiance -of Constantinople. The greatest conquest of Suleiman was made in -Hungary; but he also made the Ægæan an Ottoman sea. The early years of -his reign saw the driving of the Knights from Rhodes, and the winning -of their fortress of Halikarnassos, the last European possession on -Asiatic ground. His last days saw the annexation of the Naxian duchy; -at an intermediate stage Venice lost her Peloponnesian strongholds. -♦Algiers. 1519.♦ In Africa the Turk received the commendation of -_Algiers_ and of _Tunis_. ♦Tunis conquered by Charles the Fifth. -1531. | 1535.♦ But Tunis, won for Christendom by the Imperial King of -the Two Sicilies, was lost and won again, till it was finally won for -Islam by the second Selim. _Tripolis_, granted to the Knights, also -passed to Suleiman. ♦1574.♦ Under Selim _Cyprus_ was added; the fight -of Lepanto could neither save nor recover it; but the advance of the -Turk was stopped. ♦Decline of the Ottoman power.♦ The conquests of the -seventeenth century were small compared with those of earlier days, -and, before that century was out, the Ottoman Terminus had begun to go -back. - -♦Greatest extent of the Ottoman power.♦ - -Yet it was in the last half of the seventeenth century that the -Ottoman Empire reached its greatest geographical extent. ♦Conquest of -Crete. 1641-1669. | of Podolia. 1672-1676.♦ _Crete_ was now won; a -few years later _Kamienetz_ and all _Podolia_ were ceded to the Turk -by Poland. This was not absolutely his last European acquisition, but -it was his last acquisition of a great province. The Ottoman dominion -now covered a wider space on the map than it had done at any earlier -moment. Suleiman in all his glory had not reigned over Cyprus, Crete, -and Podolia. The tide now turned for ever. ♦The Ottoman frontier falls -back.♦ From that time the Ottoman has, like his Byzantine predecessor, -had his periods of revival and recovery, but on the whole his frontier -has steadily gone back. - -♦Ottoman loss of Hungary. 1683-1699.♦ - -The first great blow to the integrity and independence of the -Ottoman Empire was dealt in the war which was ended by the Peace of -Carlowitz. We have seen how Hungary and Peloponnêsos were won back -for Christendom; so was Podolia. We have seen too how at the next -stage the Turk gained at one end and lost at the other, winning back -Peloponnêsos, winning Mykonos and Tênos, but losing on the Save and the -Danube. The next stage shows the Ottoman frontier again in advance; -in our own day we have seen it again fall back. And the change which -has given Bosnia and Herzegovina to the master of Dalmatia, Ragusa, -and Cattaro has, besides throwing back the frontier of the Turk, -redressed a very old geographical wrong. ♦Union of inland and maritime -Illyricum.♦ Ever since the first Slavonic settlements, the inland -region of northern Illyricum has been more or less thoroughly cut off -from the coast cities which form its natural outlets. Whatever may be -the fate of those lands, the body is again joined to the mouth, and the -mouth to the body, and we can hardly fancy them again severed. - - * * * * * - -The same arrangements which transferred the ‘administration’ of Bosnia -and Herzegovina to the King of Hungary and Dalmatia, have transferred -another part of the Ottoman dominion to a more distant European power -on terms which are still less easy to understand. ♦Cyprus. 1878.♦ The -Greek island of _Cyprus_ has passed to English rule; but it is after -a fashion which may imply that the conquest of Richard of Poitou is -held—not, it is to be hoped, by the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland, -but possibly by the Empress of India—as a tributary of the Ottoman -Sultan. - - * * * * * - -During the former half of the eighteenth century the shiftings of -the Ottoman territory to the north were all on the side of Austria -or Hungary. ♦Relations of the Turk towards Russia.♦ But a new enemy -of the Turk appeared towards the end of the seventeenth century, one -who was, before the end of the eighteenth, to stand forth as his -chief enemy. ♦Loss and recovery of Azof. 1696-1711.♦ Under Peter the -Great _Azof_ was won by Russia and lost again. Sixty years later -great geographical changes took place in the same region. ♦Treaty of -Kainardji. 1774. | Independence of Crim.♦ By the Treaty of Kainardji, -the dependent khanate of _Crim_—the old Tauric Chersonêsos and the -neighbouring lands—was released from the superiority of the Sultan. -♦Russian annexation of Crim. 1783.♦ This was a natural step towards -its annexation by Russia, which thus again made her way to the Euxine. -♦Of Jedisan. 1791.♦ The Bug was now the frontier; presently, by the -Russian annexation of _Oczakow_ and the land of Jedisan, it fell back -to the Dniester. By the treaty of Bucharest the frontier alike of the -dominion and of the overlordship of the Turk fell back to the Pruth and -the lower Danube. ♦Of Bessarabia. 1812. | Shiftings of the Moldavian -frontier.♦ Russia thus gained _Bessarabia_ and the eastern part of -_Moldavia_. ♦Treaty of Hadrianople. 1829.♦ By the Treaty of Hadrianople -she further won the islands at the mouth of the Danube. ♦Treaty of -Paris, 1856;♦ The Treaty of Paris restored to Moldavia a small part -of the lands ceded at Bucharest, so as to keep the Russian frontier -away from the Danube. ♦of Berlin, 1878.♦ This last cession, with the -exception of the islands, was recovered by Russia at the Treaty of -Berlin. But changes of frontier in those regions no longer affect the -dominion of the Turk. - - -§ 9. _The Liberated States._ - -♦Lands liberated from the Ottoman.♦ - -The losses which the Ottoman power has undergone at the hands of its -independent neighbours, Russia, Montenegro, and Austria or Hungary, -must be distinguished from the liberation of certain lands from Turkish -rule to form new or revived European states. We have seen that the -kingdom of Hungary and its dependent lands might fairly come under this -head, and we have seen in what the circumstances of their liberation -differ from the liberation of Greece or Servia or Bulgaria. But it is -important to bear in mind that the Turk had to be driven from Hungary, -no less than from Greece, Servia, and Bulgaria. If the Turk has ruled -at Belgrade, at Athens, and at Tirnovo, he has ruled at Buda no less. -All stand in the same opposition to Tzetinje, where he has never ruled. - -As the Servian people was the only one among the south-eastern nations -of which any part maintained its abiding independence, so the enslaved -part of the Servian people was the first among the subject nations to -throw off the yoke. ♦The Ionian Islands.♦ But the first attempt to form -anything like a free state in south-eastern Europe was made among a -branch of the Greek nation, in the so-called _Ionian Islands_. But the -form which the attempt took was no lessening of the Turkish dominion, -but its increase. ♦Ceded to France. 1797.♦ By the peace of Campoformio, -the islands, with the few Venetian points on the mainland, were to -pass to France. ♦Septinsular Republic under Ottoman overlordship. -1798.♦ By the treaty of the next year between Russia and the Turk, -the points on the mainland were to be handed over to the Turk, while -the islands were to form a commonwealth, tributary to the Turk, but -under the protection of Russia. ♦The Venetian outposts given to the -Turk.♦ Thus, besides an advance of the Turk’s immediate dominion on -the mainland, his overlordship was to be extended over the islands, -including Corfu, the one island which had never come under his power. -♦Surrender of Parga. 1819.♦ The other points on the mainland passed, -not so much to the Sultan as to his rebellious vassal Ali of Jôannina; -but _Parga_ kept its freedom till five years after the general peace. -♦All Albania and continental Greece under the Turk.♦ Thus the Turk made -his last encroachment on Christendom, and held for a moment the whole -of the Greek and Albanian mainland. ♦The Ionian Islands under English -protection. 1815.♦ The islands meanwhile, tossed to and fro during the -war between France and England, were at the peace again made into a -nominal commonwealth, but under a form of British protection which it -is not easy to distinguish from British sovereignty. Still a nominally -free Greek state was again set up, and the possibility of Greek freedom -on a larger scale was practically acknowledged. - -♦The Greek War of Independence. 1821.♦ - -It was only for a very short time that the Turk held complete -possession of all Albania and continental Greece. Two years after the -betrayal of Parga began the Greek War of Independence. ♦Extent of -the Greek nation.♦ The geographical disposition of the Greek nation -has changed very little since the Latin conquest of Constantinople; -it has changed very little since the later days of old Hellas. At -all these stages some other people has held the solid mainland of -south-eastern Europe and of western Asia, while the Greek has been the -prevailing race on the coasts, the islands, the peninsular lands, of -both continents, from Durazzo to Trebizond. ♦General Greek revolt.♦ -Within this range the Greeks revolted at every point where they were -strong enough to revolt at all. ♦Extent of the liberated territory.♦ -But it was only in the old Hellenic mainland, and in Crete and others -of the Ægæan islands, that the Greeks were able to hold their ground. -♦1829-1833.♦ Of these lands some parts were allowed by Western -diplomacy to keep their freedom. ♦Kingdom of Greece.♦ A _Kingdom of -Greece_ was formed, taking in Peloponnêsos, Euboia, the Kyklades, and -a small part of central Greece, south of a line drawn from the gulf -of Arta to the gulf of Volo. But the Turk was allowed to hold, not -only the more distant Greek lands and islands, but Epeiros, Thessaly, -and Crete. ♦Ionian islands added to Greece. 1864.♦ The kingdom was -afterwards enlarged by the addition of the Ionian islands, whose -nominal Septinsular Republic was merged in the kingdom. ♦Treaty of -Berlin. 1878.♦ By the Treaty of Berlin, Crete, which had twice risen, -was thrust back into bondage, but parts of Thessaly and Epeiros were -ordered to be set free and to be added to the kingdom. ♦Its promises -unfulfilled.♦ But even this small instalment of Greek emancipation has -not yet been carried out. - - * * * * * - -♦First revolt and deliverance of Servia. 1805-1812.♦ - -Between the first and the second establishment of the Ionian -commonwealth, Servia had been delivered and had been conquered again. -The first revolt made Servia a tributary principality. ♦Second revolt -and deliverance. 1817-1829.♦ It was then won back by the Turk and -again delivered. ♦1826-1829.♦ Its freedom, modified by the payment of -tribute and by the presence of Turkish garrisons in certain towns, was -decreed by the peace of Akerman, and was carried out by the treaty of -Hadrianople. ♦Withdrawal of Turkish garrisons. 1867.♦ Fifty years after -the second establishment of the principality, its practical freedom -was made good by the withdrawal of the Turkish garrisons. ♦Servia -independent with an enlarged territory. 1878.♦ The last changes have -made Servia, under a native dynasty, an independent state, released -from all tribute or vassalage. The same changes have given Servia a -slight increase of territory. ♦Servian territory left to the Turk.♦ -But the boundary is so drawn as to leave part of the old Servian land -to the Turk, and carefully to keep the frontiers of the Servian and -Montenegrin principalities apart. That is to say, the Servian nation -is split into four parts—Montenegro, free Servia, Turkish Servia, and -those Servian lands which are, some under the ‘administration,’ some -under the acknowledged rule, of the King of Hungary and Dalmatia. - - * * * * * - -♦The Rouman principalities.♦ - -While Servia and Greece were under the immediate rule of the Turk, -the Rouman lands of _Wallachia_ and _Moldavia_ always kept a certain -measure of separate being. The Turk named and deposed their princes, -but they never came under his direct rule. ♦Union of Wallachia and -Moldavia. 1861.♦ After the Treaty of Paris, the two principalities, -being again allowed to choose for themselves, took the first step -towards union by choosing the same prince. Then followed their complete -union as the _Principality of Roumania_, paying tribute to the Turk, -but otherwise free. ♦Independence of Roumania. 1878.♦ The last changes -have made Roumania, as well as Servia, an independent state. Its -frontier towards Russia, enlarged at Paris, was cut short at Berlin. -♦Change of its frontier.♦ But this last treaty restored to it the -land of _Dobrutcha_ south of the Danube, thus giving the new state a -certain Euxine sea-board. Thus the Roumans, the Romance-speaking people -of Eastern Europe, still a scattered remnant in their older seats, -have, in their great colony on the Danube, won for themselves a place -among the nations of Europe. - - * * * * * - -Lastly, while Servia and Roumania have been wholly freed from the -yoke, a part of _Bulgaria_ has been raised to that position of -practical independence which they formerly held. ♦The Bulgaria of San -Stefano. 1878.♦ The Russian treaty of San Stefano decreed a tributary -principality of Bulgaria, whose boundaries came most nearly to those -of the third Bulgarian kingdom at its greatest extent. But it was to -have, what no Bulgarian state had had before, a considerable Ægæan -sea-board. This would have had the effect of splitting the immediate -dominion of the Turk in two. It would also have had the real fault -of adding to Bulgaria some districts which ought rather to be added -to free Greece. ♦Treaty of Berlin. | Division of Bulgaria.♦ By the -Treaty of Berlin the Turk was to keep the whole north coast of the -Ægæan, while the Bulgarian nation was split into three parts, in -three different political conditions. ♦Free.♦ The oldest and latest -Bulgarian land, the land between Danube and Balkan, forms, with the -exception of the corner ceded to Roumania, the tributary _Principality -of Bulgaria_. ♦Half-free.♦ The land immediately south of the Danube, -the southern Bulgaria of history—northern Roumelia, according to the -compass—receives the diplomatic name of _Eastern Roumelia_, a name -which would more naturally take in Constantinople. Its political -condition is described as ‘administrative autonomy,’ a half-way house, -it would seem, between bondage and freedom. ♦Enslaved.♦ Meanwhile in -the old Macedonian land, the land for which Basil and Samuel strove so -stoutly, the question between Greek and Bulgarian is held to be solved -by handing over Greek and Bulgarian alike to the uncovenanted mercies -of the Turk. - - * * * * * - -♦General Survey.♦ - -We may end our survey of the south-eastern lands by taking a general -view of their geographical position at some of the most important -points in their history. ♦800.♦ At the end of the eighth century we -see the Eastern Empire still stretching from Tauros to Sardinia; but -everywhere, save in its solid Asiatic peninsula, it has shrunk up into -a dominion of coasts and islands. It still holds Sicily, Sardinia, and -Crete, the heel and the toe of Italy, the outlying duchies of Campania, -the outlying duchy at the head of the Hadriatic. In its great European -peninsula it holds the whole of the Ægæan coast, a great part of the -coasts of the Euxine and the Hadriatic. But the lord of the sea rules -nowhere far from the sea; the inland regions are held, partly by the -great Bulgarian power, partly by smaller Slavonic tribes fluctuating -between independence and formal submission. ♦900.♦ At the end of the -next century the general character of the East-Roman dominion remains -the same, but many points of detail have changed. Sardinia and Crete -are lost; a corner is all that is left in Sicily; but the Imperial -power is acknowledged along the whole eastern Hadriatic coast; the -heel and the toe have grown into the dominion of all southern Italy; -all Greece has been won back to the Empire. But the Empire has now new -neighbours. The Turanian Magyar is seated on the Danube, and other -kindred nations are pressing in his wake. Russians, Slaves that is -under Scandinavian leadership, threaten the Empire by sea. ♦1000.♦ -The last year of the tenth century shows Sicily wholly lost, but -Crete and Cyprus won back; Kilikia and Northern Syria are won again; -Bulgaria is won and lost again; Russian establishment on the Danube -is put off for eight hundred years; the great struggle is going on -to decide whether the Slave or the Eastern Roman is to rule in the -south-eastern peninsula. ♦c. 1040.♦ At one moment in the eleventh -century we see the dominion of the New Rome at its full height. Europe -south of the Danube and its great tributaries, Asia to Caucasus and -almost to the Caspian, form a compact body of dominion, stretching -from the Venetian isles to the old Phœnician cities. The Italian and -insular dominion is untouched; it is enlarged for a moment by Sicilian -conquest. ♦c. 1090.♦ Another glance, half-a-century later, shows the -time when the Empire was most frightfully cut short by old enemies -and new. The Servian wins back his own land; the Saracen wins back -Sicily. The Norman in Italy cuts down the Imperial dominion to the -nominal superiority of Naples, the last of Greek cities in the West, -as Kymê was the first. For a moment he even plants himself east of -Hadria, and rends away Corfu and Durazzo from the Eastern world, as -Rome rent them away thirteen centuries before. The Turk swallows up the -inland provinces of Asia; he plants his throne at Nikaia, and leaves -to the Empire no Asiatic dominion beyond a strip of Euxine and Ægæan -coast. ♦c. 1180.♦ Towards the end of the twelfth century, the Empire -is restored to its full extent in Europe; Servia and Dalmatia are won -back, Hungary itself looks like a vassal. In Asia the inland realm -of the Turk is hemmed in by the strong Imperial grasp of the whole -coast-line, Euxine, Ægæan, and Mediterranean. ♦c. 1200.♦ At the next -moment comes the beginning of the final overthrow; before the century -is out, the distant possessions of the Empire have either fallen away -of themselves, or have been rent away by other powers. Bulgaria, -Cyprus, Trebizond, Corfu, even Epeiros and Hellas, have parted away, -or are in the act of parting away. ♦1204.♦ Venice, its long nominal -homage cast aside, joins with faithless crusaders to split the Empire -in pieces. The Flemish Emperor reigns at Constantinople; the Lombard -King reigns at Thessalonikê; Achaia, Athens, Naxos, give their names -to more abiding dynasties; Venice plants herself firmly in Crete and -Peloponnêsos. Still the Empire is not dead. The Frank, victorious -in Europe, hardly wins a footing in Asia. Nikaia and Trebizond keep -on the Imperial succession, and a third Greek power, for a moment -Imperial also, holds it in Western Greece and the islands. ♦1250.♦ -Fifty years later, the Empire of Nikaia has become an European power; -it has already outlived the Latin dominion at Thessalonikê; it has -checked the revived power of Bulgaria; it has cut short the Latin -Empire to the immediate neighbourhood of the Imperial city. To the -north Servia is strengthening herself; Bosnia is coming into being; -the Dalmatian cities are tossed to and fro among their neighbours. -♦1300.♦ Another glance at the end of the thirteenth century shows us -the revived East-Roman Empire in its old Imperial seat, still in Europe -an advancing and conquering power, ruling on the three seas of its -own peninsula, established once more in Peloponnêsos, a compact and -seemingly powerful state, as compared with the Epeirot, Achaian, and -Athenian principalities, or with the scattered possessions of Venice -in the Greek lands. But the power which seems so firmly established -in Europe has all but passed away in Asia. There the Turk has taken -the place of the Greek, and the Greek the place of the Frank, as they -stood a hundred years earlier. And behind the immediate Turkish enemies -stands that younger and mightier Turkish power which is to swallow up -all its neighbours, Mussulman and Christian. ♦c. 1354.♦ In the central -years of the fourteenth century we see the Empire hemmed in between two -enemies, European and Asiatic, which have risen to unexpected power -at the same time. Part of Thrace, Chalkidikê, part of Thessaly, a few -scattered points in Asia, are left to the Empire; in Peloponnêsos alone -is it an advancing power; everywhere else its frontiers have fallen -back. The Servian Tzar rules from the Danube to the Gulf of Corinth. -The Ottoman Emir has left but a few fragments to the Empire in Asia, -and has already fixed his grasp on Europe. ♦1400.♦ Before the century -is ended, neither Constantinople, nor Servia, nor any other Christian -power, is dominant in the south-eastern peninsula. The Ottoman rules -in their stead. The Empire is cut short to a corner of Thrace, with -Thessalonikê, Chalkidikê, and the Peloponnesian province which now -forms its greatest possession. Instead of the great power of Servia, -we see a crowd of small principalities, Greek, Slavonic, and Albanian, -falling for the most part under either Ottoman or Venetian supremacy. -The Servian name is still borne by one of them; but its prince is a -Turkish vassal; the true representative of Servian independence has -already begun to show itself among the mountains which look down on the -mouths of Cattaro and the lake of Skodra. Bulgaria has fallen lower -still; the Turk’s immediate power reaches to the Danube. Bosnia at one -end, the Frank principalities at the other end, the Venetian islands -in either sea, still hold out; but the Turk has begun, if not to rule -over them, at least to harry them. Within the memory of men who could -remember when the Empire of Servia was not yet, who could remember when -the eagles of Constantinople still went forth to victory, the Ottoman -had become the true master of the South-Eastern lands; whatever has -as yet escaped his grasp remained simply as remnants ready for the -gleaning. - -♦1500.♦ - -We will take our next glance in the later years of the fifteenth -century, a few years after the death of the great conqueror. The -momentary break-up of the power of the Ottoman has been followed by the -greatest of his conquests. All now is over. The New Rome is the seat of -barbarian power. Trebizond, Peloponnêsos, Athens, Euboia, the remnant -of independent Epeiros, Servia, Bosnia, Albania, all are gathered in. -The islands are still mostly untouched; but the whole mainland is -conquered, save where Venice still holds her outposts, and where the -warrior prelates of the Black Mountain, the one independent Christian -power from the Save to Cape Matapan, have entered on their career of -undying glory. With these small exceptions, the whole dominion of the -Macedonian Emperors has passed into Ottoman hands, together with a -vast tributary dominion beyond the Danube, much of which had never -bowed to either Rome. ♦1600.♦ At the end of another century, we see all -Hungary, save a tributary remnant, a subject land of the Turk. We see -Venice shorn of Cyprus and all her Peloponnesian possessions. The Dukes -have gone from Naxos and the Knights from Rhodes, and the Mussulman -lord of so many Christian lands has spread his power over his fellow -Mussulmans in Syria, Egypt, and Africa. ♦1700.♦ Another century passes, -and the tide is turned. The Turk can still conquer; he has won Crete -abidingly and Podolia for a moment. But the crescent has passed away -for ever from Buda and from the Western isles; it has passed away for a -moment from Corinth and all Peloponnêsos. ♦1800.♦ At the end of another -century we see the Turk’s immediate possession bounded by the Save -and the Danube, and his overlordship bounded by the Dniester. His old -rivals Poland and Venice are no more; but Austria hems in his Slavonic -provinces; France struggles for the islands off his western shore; -Russia watches him from the peninsula so long held by the free Goth -and the free Greek. ♦1878.♦ Seventy-eight years more, and his shadow -of overlordship ends at the Danube, his shadow of immediate dominion -ends at the Balkan. Free Greece, free Servia, free Roumania—Montenegro -again reaching to her own sea—Bulgaria parted into three, but longing -for reunion—Bosnia, Herzegovina, Cyprus, held in a mysterious way by -neighbouring or distant European powers—all join to form, not so much -a picture as a dissolving view. We see in them a transitional state of -things, which diplomacy fondly believes to be an eternal settlement of -an eternal question, but of which reason and history can say only that -we know not what a day may bring forth. - - [Long after this chapter was written, after the whole of it was - printed, after a great part of it was revised for the press, there - appeared the first volume of the great collection of C. N. Sathas, - Μνημεῖα τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς Ἱσορίας, _Documents Inédits relatifs à - l’Histoire de la Grèce au Moyen Âge_ (Paris, 1880). In his preface - M. Sathas insists on two points. One is the Greek character of the - Eastern Empire throughout its whole being; that it had a Greek - side no one ever thought of denying. He brings together a good - many occasional instances, largely from unprinted manuscripts, of - the use of Ἕλλην and Ἑλλάς through the whole period of the Empire. - That the name came into rhetorical use by a kind of _Renaissance_ - about the thirteenth century is undoubted. I brought together some - few instances in my Historical Essays, iii. 246, and the whole - history of Laonikos Chalkokondylas is one long instance. M. Sathas - brings several others from much earlier times. But they seem to me - to be mainly cases of the rhetorical use of an antiquated name, - such as is common among all nations. They do not seem to affect - the proposition that the regular national name of the Empire and - its people was always _Roman_. M. Sathas’ other point is somewhat - startling. It is that the Slavonic occupation of a large part of - Greece, as to the extent of which there has been much disputing, - but which I never before saw altogether denied, is all a mistake. - According to him the settlers were not Slaves, but Albanians, - called Slaves by that lax use of national names of which there - certainly are plenty of instances. I cannot undertake either to - accept or to refute M. Sathas’ doctrine during the process of - revising a proof-sheet. I can only put the fact on record that one - who has gone very deeply into the matter has come to this, to me at - least, altogether new conclusion.] - -FOOTNOTES: - -[24] Unless we except the momentary existence of the first Septinsular -Republic, to be spoken of below. - -[25] The longer form Λογγιβαρδία clave to this theme, while the Greeks -learned to apply the contracted form Λαμπαρδοί to the Lombards of -Northern Italy. - -[26] A temporary Bulgarian occupation seems clear from Einhard, Annals, -827, 828. But on the supposed existence of a Bulgarian duchy in the -present Hungary see Roesler, _Romänische Studien_, 201. - -[27] It must be remembered that δεσπότης was and is a common Byzantine -title, with no worse meaning than _dominus_ or any of the words which -translate it. - -[28] On this very singular, but very obscure, little state see our -own Benedict (ii. 199) and Roger of Howden (iii. 161, 269), and -the Ghibeline Annals of Placentia, Pertz, xix. 468. See also Hopf, -_Geschichte Griechenlands_, vi. 161. - -[29] See above, p. 379. - -[30] It is well to see this familiar title in Greek. The Duke (δοὺξ -Βενετίας) was δεσποτικῷ ἀξιώματι τιμηθεὶς, ἔχειν τε ἐξ ὅλου πρὸς τὸ -ὅλον ὃ τὸ τῶν Φράγκων ἐκτήσατο γένος τὸ τέταρτον καὶ τοῦ τετάρτου τὸ -ἥμισυ. George Akropolitês, 15. ed. Bonn. - -[31] If this is what is really meant by _Laza_ or _Lacta_ in the Act of -Partition. Muratori, xii. 357. - -[32] See the Venetian Chronicle in Pertz, viii. 29, 32. After the -Venetian conquest the Duke’s name is placed after that of the Emperor -in religious ceremonies. But we see how slight was the real hold of -the Empire on these distant dependencies, when we find that, on the -submission of Croatia and Dalmatia to Basil the Macedonian, the tribute -of the cities was assigned to the Croatian prince. - -[33] _Negroponte_—a wild corruption of _Euripos_—is strictly the -name of one of the Latin baronies in Euboia, and has been carelessly -transferred to the whole island, as Crete used often to be called -_Candia_. - -[34] Ἄσπρη θάλασσα, as distinguished from the Euxine, the μαύρη θάλασσα. - -[35] Fallmerayer gives the name a Slavonic origin; Hopf and Hertzberg -make Μωραία a transposition of Ῥὡμαία. Neither derivation is -satisfactory; but either is better than the mulberry-leaf. - -[36] _Grand Sire_, _Megaskyr_, = μέγας κύριος. See Nikêphoros Grêgoras, -vii. 5, vol. i. p. 239. - -[37] See above, p. 388. - -[38] See above, p. 283. - -[39] See below, p. 425. - -[40] See p. 141. It was Thessaly, less _Neopatra_ attached to Athens, -_Pteleon_ held by Venice, _Zeitouni_ by the Empire. - -[41] ‘Basilissa Romæorum’ = Ῥωμαίων βασίλισσα. ‘Rom_æ_i’ is not -uncommonly used for the Ῥωμαῐωι of the East, as distinguished from the -‘Rom_an_orum Imperator’ of the West. - -[42] See above, p. 377. - -[43] See above, p. 420. - -[44] He claimed (see Jireček, _Geschichte der Bulgaren_, p. 351) -to rule over the Greek, the Albanian, and the Servian lands, from -Hadrianople to Durazzo. - -[45] The history of George Akropolitês gives a narrative of these wars -which is worth studying, if only for its close bearing on the most -recent events. - -[46] See above, p. 157. - -[47] See above, p. 158. - -[48] On the origin of the name, see Roesler, _Romänische Studien_, 159, -218, 260. There is something strange in Constantine calling the Finnish -Magyars Τοῠρκοι, in opposition to the really Turkish Patzinaks. His -Τουρκία and Φραγγία are of course Hungary and Germany. De Adm. Imp. 13, -40. pp. 81, 173. ed. Bonn. - -[49] Also called _Siebenbürgen_, a corruption of the name of the -fortress of _Cibin_, which has many spellings. - -[50] I must have given far more faith to it than I do now when I -wrote p. 71. Roesler’s book, _Romänische Studien_, has since put the -whole matter in a clear light; nor can I think that his arguments are -at all set aside by the answer of Jung, _Römer und Romanen in den -Donauländern_. Innsbruck, 1877. - - - - -CHAPTER XI. - -THE BALTIC LANDS. - - -♦Lands beyond the two Empires.♦ - -Our survey of the two Empires and of the powers which sprang out of -them has still left out of sight a large part of Europe, including some -lands which formed part of the elder Empire. It is only indirectly that -we have spoken of the extreme north, the extreme east, or the extreme -west, of Europe. ♦_Quasi_-Imperial position of certain powers.♦ In -all these regions powers have risen and fallen which might pass for -shadows of the two Empires of Rome. ♦The British islands.♦ Thus in the -north-west lie two great islands with a following of smaller ones, of -which the elder Empire never held more than part of the greater island -and those of the smaller ones which could not be separated from it. -Britain passed for a world of its own, and the princes who rose to a -_quasi_-Imperial position within that world took, by a kind of analogy, -the titles of Empire.[51] ♦Scandinavia.♦ In the extreme north are a -larger and smaller peninsula, with their attendant islands, which lay -wholly beyond the elder Empire, and of which the later Western Empire -took in only a very small part for a short time. ♦Empire of Cnut.♦ -The momentary union of these two insular and peninsular systems, of -Britain and Scandinavia, formed more truly a third Empire of the North, -fully the fellow of those of the East and West.[52] ♦Spain.♦ In the -south-west of Europe again lay another great peninsula, which had -been fully incorporated with the elder Empire, parts of which—at two -opposite ends—had belonged to the Empire of Justinian and to the Empire -of Charles, but whose history, as a whole, stands apart from that of -either the Eastern or the Western Roman power. And in Spain also, as -being, like Britain, in some sort a world of its own, the leading power -asserted an Imperial rank. ♦Castilian Emperors.♦ As Wessex had its -Emperors, so had Castile. - -♦History of the lands beyond the Empires.♦ - -Britain, Scandinavia, and Spain, thus form three marked geographical -wholes, three great divisions of that part of Europe which lay -outside the bounds of either Empire at the time of the separation. -But the geographical position of the three regions has led to marked -differences in their history. Insular Britain is wholly oceanic. -♦Geographical comparison of Scandinavia and Spain.♦ Peninsular Spain -and Scandinavia have each an oceanic side; but each has also a side -towards one of the great inland seas of Europe—Spain towards the -Mediterranean, Scandinavia towards the northern Mediterranean, the -Baltic. But the Baltic side of Scandinavia has been of far greater -relative importance than the Mediterranean side of Spain. ♦Position -of Aragon in the Mediterranean.♦ Of the three chief Spanish kingdoms -Aragon alone has a Mediterranean history; the seaward course of Castile -and Portugal was oceanic. Of the three Scandinavian kingdoms Norway -alone is wholly oceanic. ♦Position of Sweden in the Baltic.♦ Denmark is -more Baltic than oceanic; the whole historic life of Sweden lies on the -Baltic coasts. The Mediterranean position of Aragon enabled her to win -whole kingdoms as her dependencies. But they were not geographically -continuous, and they never could be incorporated. Sweden, on the other -hand, was able to establish a continuous dominion on both sides of the -great northern gulfs, and to make at least a nearer approach to the -incorporation of her conquests than Aragon could ever make. ♦Growth -and decline of Sweden.♦ The history of Sweden mainly consists in the -growth and the loss of her dominion in the Baltic lands out of her -own peninsula. It is only in quite modern times that the union of the -crowns, though not of the kingdoms, of Sweden and Norway has created a -power wholly peninsular and equally Baltic and oceanic. - -♦Eastern and western aspects of Scandinavia.♦ - -This eastern aspect of Scandinavian history needs the more to be -insisted on, because there is another side of it with which we -are naturally more likely to be struck. Scandinavian inroads and -conquests—inroads and conquests, that is, from Denmark and Norway—make -up a large part of the early history of Gaul and Britain. When this -phase of their history ends, the Scandinavian kingdoms are apt to pass -out of our sight, till we are perhaps surprised at the great part which -they suddenly play in Europe in the seventeenth century. But both -Denmark and Sweden had meanwhile been running their course in the lands -north, east, and south of the Baltic. And it is this Baltic side of -their history which is of primary importance in our general European -view. - -♦The Baltic lands generally.♦ - -It follows then that, for the purposes of our present survey, while the -British islands and the Spanish peninsula will each claim a distinct -treatment, we cannot separate the Scandinavian peninsulas from the -general mass of the Baltic lands. ♦The Northern Slavonic lands.♦ We -must look at Scandinavia in close geographical connexion with the -region which stretches from the centre to the extreme east of Europe, -a region which, while by no means wholly Slavonic, is best marked as -containing the seats of the northern branch of the Slavonic race. This -region has a constant connexion with both German and Scandinavian -history. ♦Germanized Slavonic lands.♦ It takes in those wide lands, -once Slavonic, which have at various times been more or less thoroughly -incorporated with Germany, but which did not become German without -vigorous efforts to make large parts of them Scandinavian. In another -part of our survey we have watched them join on to the Teutonic body; -we must now watch them drop off from the Slavonic body. ♦Northern -Slaves under Hungary or Austria.♦ And with them we must take another -glimpse at those among the Northern Slaves who passed under the power -of the Magyar, and of that composite dominion which claims the Magyar -crown among many others. These North-Slavonic lands which have passed -to non-Slavonic rulers form a region stretching from Holstein to -the Austrian kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria and to the Slovak and -Ruthenian districts of Hungary. But above all, this North-Slavonic -region takes in those two branches of the Slavonic race which have in -turn lorded it over one another, neither of which passed permanently -under the lordship of either Empire, but one of which owed its -unity and national life to settlers from the Scandinavian north. -♦Characteristics of Poland and Russia.♦ That is to say, it is the -land of the Pole and the Russian, the land of the two branches of the -Slavonic race which passed severally under the spiritual dominion of -the elder and the younger Rome without passing under the temporal -dominion of either. ♦The primitive nations.♦ And within the same -region we have to deal with the remnant that is left of those ancient -nations, Aryan and non-Aryan, which so long refused all obedience to -either Church as well as to either Empire. ♦Aryan nations; Prussians -and Lithuanians.♦ The region at which we now look takes in the land of -those elder brethren of the European family whose speech has changed -less than any other European tongue from the Aryan speech once common -to all. Alongside of the Orthodox Russian, of the Catholic Pole, of the -Swede first Catholic and then Lutheran, we have to look on the long -abiding heathendom of the Lithuanian and the Prussian.[53] ♦Non-Aryan -Fins.♦ And at their side we have to look on older races still, on the -præ-Aryan nations on either side of the Bothnian and Finnish gulfs. -The history of the eastern coast of the Baltic is the history of the -struggle for the rule or the destruction of these ancient nations at -the hands of their Teutonic and Slavonic neighbours. - -♦Central position of the North-Slavonic lands.♦ - -The whole North-Slavonic region, north-eastern rather than central -with regard to Europe in general, has still a central character of its -own. It is connected with the history of northern, of western, and -of south-eastern Europe. The falling away of so many Slavonic lands -to Germany is of itself no small part of German history. But besides -this, the strictly Polish and Russian area marches at once on the -Western Empire, on the lands which fringe the Eastern Empire, on the -Scandinavian North, and on the barbarian lands to the north-east. This -last feature is a characteristic both of the North-Slavonic region and -of the Scandinavian peninsula. ♦Barbarian neighbours of Russia and -Scandinavia.♦ Norway, Sweden, Russia, are the only European powers -whose land has always marched on the land of barbarian neighbours, -and have therefore been able to conquer and colonize in barbarian -lands simply by extending their own frontiers. This was done by Norway -and Sweden as far as their geographical position allowed them; but it -has been done on a far greater scale by Russia. ♦Russian conquest and -colonization by land.♦ While other European nations have conquered -and colonized by sea, Russia, the one European state of later times -which has marched upon Asia, has found a boundless field for conquest -and colonization by land. She has had her India, her Canada, and -her Australia, her Mexico, her Brazil, her Java, and her Algeria, -geographically continuous with her European territory. This fact is the -key to much in the later history of Russia. - -♦Relation of the Baltic lands to the two Empires.♦ - -With regard to the two Empires, the lands round the Baltic show us -several relations. ♦Norway always independent.♦ In Scandinavia, -Norway stands alone in never having had anything to do with the Roman -power in any of its forms. ♦Relations of Sweden and Denmark to the -Empire.♦ Sweden itself has always been equally independent; but in -later times Swedish kings have held fiefs within the Western Empire. -The position of Denmark has naturally caused it to have much more to -do with its Roman or German neighbour. In earlier times some Danish -kings became vassals of the Empire for the Danish crown; others made -conquests within the lands of the Empire. In later times Danish kings -have held fiefs within the German kingdom and have been members of the -more modern Confederation. ♦The Empire and the West-Slavonic lands.♦ -The western parts of the Slavonic region became formally part of the -Western Empire. But this was after the Empire had put on the character -of a German state; these lands were not drawn to it from its strictly -Imperial side. ♦Poland and the Empire.♦ Poland sometimes passed in -early days for a fief of the German kingdom; in later days it was -divided between the two chief powers which arose out of that kingdom. -♦Relations of Russia to the Eastern Church and Empire.♦ Russia, on the -other hand, the pupil of the Eastern Empire, has never been the subject -or the vassal of either Empire. When Russia had an external overlord, -he was an Asiatic barbarian. ♦Imperial style of Russia.♦ The peculiar -relation between Russia and Constantinople, spiritual submission -combined with temporal independence, has led to the appearance in -Russia of Imperial ideas and titles with a somewhat different meaning -from that with which they were taken in Spain and in Britain. The -Russian prince claims the Imperial style and bearings, not so much as -holding an Imperial position in a world of his own, as because the -most powerful prince of the Eastern Church in some sort inherits the -position of the Eastern Emperor in the general world of Europe. - - -§ 1. _The Scandinavian Lands after the Separation of the Empires._ - -At the end of the eighth century the Scandinavian and Slavonic -inhabitants of the Baltic lands as yet hardly touched one another. The -most northern Scandinavians and the most northern Slaves were still -far apart; if the two races anywhere marched on one another, it must -have been at the extreme south-western corner of the Baltic coast. ♦The -Baltic still mainly held by the earlier races.♦ The greater part of -that coast, all its northern and eastern parts, was still held by the -earlier nations, Aryan and non-Aryan. ♦Formation of the Scandinavian -kingdoms.♦ But, within the two Scandinavian peninsulas, the three -Scandinavian nations were fast forming. A number of kindred tribes were -settling down into the kingdoms of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden,[54] -which, sometimes separate, sometimes united, have existed ever since. - -Of these three, Denmark, the only one which had a frontier towards the -Empire, was naturally the first to play a part in general European -history. ♦Formation of the Danish kingdom.♦ In the course of the tenth -century, under the half-mythical Gorm and his successors Harold and -Sven, the Danish kingdom itself, as distinguished from other lands held -in after times by its kings, reached nearly its full historical extent -in the two peninsulas and the islands between them. ♦Denmark in the -northern peninsula.♦ _Halland_ and _Skåne_ or _Scania_, it must always -be remembered, are from the beginning at least as Danish as Zealand and -Jutland. ♦Frontier of the Eider. | The Danish March. 934-1027.♦ The -Eider remained the frontier towards the Empire, save during part of the -tenth and eleventh centuries, when the Danish frontier withdrew to the -Dannewerk, and the land between the two boundaries formed the _Danish -March_ of the Empire. Under Cnut the old frontier was restored. - -The name of _Northmen_,[55] which the Franks used in a laxer way for -the Scandinavian nations generally, was confined to the people of -_Norway_. ♦Formation of the kingdom of Norway.♦ These were formed into -a single kingdom under Harold Harfagra late in the ninth century. The -Norwegian realm of that day stretched far beyond the bounds of the -later Norway, having an indefinite extension over tributary Finnish -tribes as far as the White Sea. The central part of the eastern side of -the northern peninsula, between Denmark to the south and the Finnish -nations to the north, was held by two Scandinavian settlements which -grew into the Swedish kingdom. ♦The Swedes and _Gauts_.♦ These were -those of the Swedes strictly so called, and of the _Geátas_ or _Gauts_. -This last name has naturally been confounded with that of the Goths, -and has given the title of _King of the Goths_ to the princes of -Sweden. _Gothland_, east and west, lay on each side of Lake Wettern. -_Swithiod_ or _Svealand_, Sweden proper, lay on both sides of the -great arm of the sea whose entrance is guarded by the modern capital. -♦The Swedish kingdom.♦ The union of Svealand and Gothland made up the -kingdom of Sweden. ♦Fluctuations towards Norway and Denmark. 1111.♦ -Its early boundaries towards both Denmark and Norway were fluctuating. -_Wermeland_, immediately to the north of Lake Wenern, and _Jamteland_ -farther to the north, were long a debateable land. At the beginning of -the twelfth century Wermeland passed finally to Sweden, and Jamteland -for several ages to Norway. _Bleking_ again, at the south-east corner -of the peninsula, was a debateable land between Sweden and Denmark -which passed to Denmark. ♦Growth to the north.♦ For a land thus bounded -the natural course of extension by land lay to the north, along the -west coast of the Gulf of Bothnia. In the course of the eleventh -century at the latest, Sweden began to spread itself in that direction -over _Helsingland_. - -Sweden had thus a better opportunity than Denmark and Norway for -extension of her own borders by land. ♦Western expeditions of the -Danes and Northmen.♦ Meanwhile Denmark and Norway, looking to the -west, had their great time of Oceanic conquest and colonization -in the ninth and tenth centuries.[56] These two processes must be -distinguished. ♦Conquests.♦ Some lands, like the Northumbrian and -East-Anglian kingdoms in Britain and the duchy of Normandy in Gaul, -received Scandinavian princes and a Scandinavian element in their -population, without the geographical area of Scandinavia being -extended. ♦Colonies.♦ But that area may be looked on as being extended -by colonies like those of _Orkney_, _Shetland_, _Faroe_, the islands -off the western coast of Scotland, _Man_, _Iceland_, _Greenland_. Some -of these were actually discovered and settled for the first time by the -Northmen. ♦Settlements in Ireland.♦ The settlements on the east coast -of Ireland, Dublin, Waterford, Wexford, may also pass as outposts of -Scandinavia on Celtic ground. Of these outlying Scandinavian lands, -some of the islands, specially Iceland, have remained Scandinavian; the -settlements on the mainland of Britain and Ireland, and on the islands -nearest to them, have been merged in the British kingdoms or have -become dependencies of the British crown. - -♦Expedition to the east.♦ - -Against this vast range of Oceanic settlement there is as yet little to -set in the form of Baltic conquest on the part of Norway and Denmark. -Norway indeed hardly could become a Baltic power. ♦Danes in Samland. -950.♦ But there was a Danish occupation of _Samland_ in Prussia in the -tenth century, which caused that land to be reckoned among the kingdoms -which made up the Northern Empire of Cnut.[56] ♦Jomsburg. 935-1043.♦ -There is also the famous settlement of the _Jomsburg_ Wikings at the -mouth of the Oder. But the great eastern extension of Danish power came -later. Nor did the lasting Swedish occupation of the lands east of -the gulf of Bothnia begin till the twelfth century. But there is no -doubt that, long before this, there were Swedish inroads and occasional -Swedish conquests in other parts of the Baltic lands. ♦Swedish conquest -of Curland.♦ Thus _Curland_ is said to have been won for a while by -Sweden, and to have been again won back by its own Lettic people.[57] -The ninth century indeed saw a wonderful extension of Scandinavian -dominion far to the east and far to the south. But it was neither -ordinary conquest nor ordinary settlement. No new Scandinavian people -was planted, as in Orkney and Iceland. Nor were Scandinavian outposts -planted, as in Ireland. ♦Scandinavians in Russia.♦ But Scandinavian -princes, who in three generations lost all trace of their Scandinavian -origin, created, under the name of _Russia_, the greatest of Slavonic -powers. The vast results of their establishment have been results on -the history and geography of the Slaves; on Scandinavian geography it -had no direct effect at all. Still it forms a connecting link between -the Scandinavian lands west and north of the Baltic and the Slavonic -region to the east and south of that sea. - - -§ 2. _The Lands East and South of the Baltic at the Separation of the -Empires._ - -♦Slaves between Elbe and Dnieper.♦ - -At the beginning of the ninth century the inland region stretching from -the Elbe a little beyond the Dnieper was continuously held by various -Slavonic nations. Their land marched on the German kingdom at one end, -and on various Finnish and Turkish nations at the other. ♦Their lack -of sea-board.♦ But their sea-board was comparatively small. Wholly cut -off from the Euxine, from the northern Ocean, and from the great gulfs -of the Baltic, their only coast was that which reaches from the modern -haven of Kiel to the mouth of the Vistula. And this Slavonic coast was -gradually brought under German influence and dominion, and has been in -the end fully incorporated with the German state. It follows then that, -in tracing the history of the chief Slavonic powers in this region, -of Bohemia, Poland, and Russia, we are dealing with powers which are -almost wholly inland. At the time of the separation of the Empires, -there was no one great Slavonic power in these parts. One such, with -Bohemia for its centre, had shown itself for a moment in the seventh -century. ♦Bohemian kingdom of Samo. 623.♦ This was the kingdom of -Samo, which, if its founder was really of Frankish birth, forms an -exact parallel to Bulgaria and Russia, also Slavonic powers created by -foreign princes.[58] ♦Great-Moravia. 884.♦ The next considerable power -which arose nearly on the same ground was the Great Moravian kingdom of -Sviatopluk, which passed away before the advance of the Magyars. Before -its fall the Russian power had already begun to form itself far to the -north-east. ♦Four Slavonic groups.♦ Looking at the map just before the -beginning of the momentary Moravian and the lasting Russian power, -the North-Slavonic nations fall into four main historical groups. -♦North-western group; thoroughly Germanized.♦ There are, first, the -tribes to the north-west, whose lands, answering roughly to the modern -Mecklenburg, Pomerania, Brandenburg, and Saxony, have been thoroughly -Germanized. ♦South-western group under German supremacy♦ Secondly, -there are the tribes to the south-west in _Bohemia_, _Moravia_, and -_Lusatia_, which were brought under German dominion or supremacy, but -from which Slavonic nationality has not in the same sort passed away. -_Silesia_, connected in different ways with both these groups, forms -the link between them and the third group. ♦Central group; Polish.♦ -This is formed by the central tribes of the whole region, lying between -the Magyar to the south and the Prussian to the north, whose union -made up the original Polish kingdom. ♦Eastern group; Russian.♦ Lastly, -to the east lie the tribes which joined to form the original Russian -state. Looking at these groups in our own time, we may say that from -the first of them all signs of Slavonic nationality have passed away. -The second and third, speaking roughly, keep nationality without -political independence. The fourth group has grown into the one great -modern power whose ruling nationality is Slavonic. - - * * * * * - -With regard to the first group, we have now to trace from the -Slavonic side the same changes of frontier which we have already -slightly glanced at from the German side. ♦Polabic group.♦ In the -land between the Elbe and the Oder, taking the upper course of those -rivers as represented by their tributaries the Saale and the Bober, -we find that division of the Slaves which their own historian marks -off as _Polabic_.[59] These again fall under three groups. ♦Sorabi.♦ -First, to the south, in the modern Saxony, are the _Sorabi_, the -northern Serbs, cut off for ever from their southern brethren by the -Magyar inroad. ♦Leuticii.♦ To the north of them lie the _Leuticii_, -_Weleti_, _Weletabi_, or _Wiltsi_, and other tribes stretching to -the Baltic in modern Mecklenburg and Western Pomerania. ♦Obotrites:♦ -In the north-west corner, in Mecklenburg and eastern Holstein, were -the _Obotrites_, _Wagri_, and other tribes. ♦their relations to the -Empire.♦ Through the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries the relations -between these lands and the Western Empire was not unlike the relation -of the southern Slaves to the Eastern Empire during the same ages. Only -the Western Emperors never had such a rival on their immediate border -as the Bulgaria of Simeon or Samuel. ♦Fluctuations of tribute and -independence. 921-968.♦ The Slavonic tribes on the north-eastern border -of the Western Empire were tributary or independent, according as the -Empire was strong or weak. Tributary under Charles the Great, tributary -again under the great Saxon kings, they had an intermediate period -of independence. The German dominion, which fell back in the latter -part of the tenth century, was again asserted by the Saxon dukes and -margraves in the eleventh and twelfth. ♦Final conquest.♦ Long before -the end of the twelfth century the work was done. The German dominion, -and with it the Christian religion, had been forced on the Slaves -between Elbe and Oder. - -♦Conquest of the Sorabi.♦ - -The Serbs between Elbe and Saale seem to have been the earliest and the -most thoroughly conquered. They never won back their full independence -after the victories of the first Saxon kings. The Serbs between Elbe -and Bober, sometimes tributary to the Empire, were also sometimes -independent, sometimes under the superiority of kindred powers like -Poland or Bohemia. ♦Meissen.♦ The lands included in the mark of -_Meissen_ were thoroughly Germanized by the twelfth century. ♦Lusatia.♦ -But in the lands included in the mark of _Lusatia_ the Slavonic speech -and nationality still keep a firm hold. - -♦The Leuticians.♦ - -The Leutician land to the north was lost and won over and over again. -♦927-1157.♦ _Branibor_, the German _Brandenburg_, was often taken -and retaken during a space of two hundred years. ♦983.♦ Late in the -tenth century the whole land won back its freedom. ♦1030-1101.♦ In the -eleventh it came under the Polish power. ♦1134-1157.♦ At last, the -reign of Albert the Bear finally added to Germany the land which was to -contain the latest German capital, and made Brandenburg a German _mark_. - -In the land lying on that narrow part of the Baltic which bore the -special name of the _Slavonic Gulf_, the alternations of revolt and -submission, from the ninth century to the twelfth, were endless. Here -we can trace out native dynasties, one of which has lasted to our own -day. ♦Kingdom of Sclavinia.♦ The mark of the Billungs[60] alternates -with the _kingdom of Sclavinia_, and the kingdom of Sclavinia -alternates between heathen and Christian princes. ♦Przemyslaf. -1161. | House of Mecklenburg.♦ At last, in the twelfth century, the -last heathen King of the Wends became the first Christian Duke, the -founder of the house of Mecklenburg. Part of this region, Western -Pomerania and the island of _Rügen_, became, both in this and in later -times, a special borderland of Germany and Scandinavia. ♦Rügen under -Denmark. 1168-1325.♦ Rügen and the neighbouring coast became a Danish -possession in the twelfth century, and so remained into the fourteenth. -♦1214-1223.♦ The kingdom of Sclavinia itself became Danish for a short -season. A Scandinavian power appeared again in the same region in the -seventeenth century. With these exceptions, the history of these lands -from the twelfth century onward, is that of members of the German -kingdom. - - * * * * * - -It was otherwise with the second group, with the Slaves who dwelled -within the fence of the Giant Mountains, and with their neighbours -to the north-east, on the upper course of the Oder as well as on the -Wag and the northern Morava. ♦Kingdom of Bohemia.♦ Here a Slavonic -kingdom has lived on to this day, though it early passed under German -supremacy, and though it has been for ages ruled by German kings. -♦928.♦ _Bohemia_, the land of the _Czechs_, tributary to Charles -the Great, part of the kingdom of Sviatopluk, became definitely a -German fief through the wars of the Saxon kings. But this did not -hinder Bohemia from becoming, later in the century, an advancing and -conquering power, the seat of a short-lived dominion, like those of -Samo and Sviatopluk. ♦Moravians and Slovaks.♦ To the east of the Czechs -of Bohemia lie the _Moravians_ and _Slovaks_, that branch of the -Slavonic race which formed the centre of the kingdom of Sviatopluk, -and which bore the main brunt of the Magyar invasion. ♦Magyar conquest -of Moravia. 906-955.♦ A large part of the Slaves of this region fell -permanently under Magyar rule; so did Moravia itself for a season. -Since then Bohemia and Moravia have usually had a common destiny. -♦Advance of Bohemia. 973-999.♦ Later in the century the Czechish -dominion reached to the Oder, and took in the Northern _Chrobatia_ on -the upper Vistula. This dominion passed away with the great growth -of the Polish power. ♦Bohemia and Moravia under Poland. 1003-1004. -| 1003-1029.♦ Bohemia itself for a moment, Moravia for a somewhat longer -time, became Polish dependencies, and the Magyar won a further land -between the Wag and the Olzava. Later events led to another growth of -Bohemia, in more forms than one, but always as a member of the Roman -Empire and the German kingdom. - - * * * * * - -♦The Polish kingdom.♦ - -While our second group thus passed under German dominion without -ceasing to be Slavonic, among the third group a great Slavonic power -arose whose adhesion to the Western Church made it part of the general -Western world, but which was never brought under the lasting supremacy -of the Western Empire. ♦Its relations to Germany.♦ Large parts of the -old Polish lands have passed under German rule; some parts have been -largely Germanized. But Poland, as a whole, has never been either -Germanized or brought under lasting German rule. Holding the most -central position of any European state, Poland has had to struggle -against enemies from every quarter, against the Swede from the Baltic -and the Turk from the Danube. ♦Rivalry of Poland and Russia.♦ But the -distinguishing feature of its history has been its abiding rivalry with -the Slavonic land to the east of it. The common history of Poland and -Russia is a history of conquest and partition, wrought by whichever -power was at the time the stronger. - -♦The Lechs or Poles.♦ - -Our first glimmerings of light in these parts show us a number of -kindred tribes holding the land between Oder and Vistula, with the -coast between the mouths of those rivers. East of the Vistula they -are cut off from the sea by the Prussians; but in the inland region -they stretch somewhat to the east of that river. To the west the -Oder and Bober may be taken as their boundary. ♦White Chrobatia.♦ -But the upper course of these rivers is the home of another kindred -people, the northern branch of the Chrobatians or Croats, whose land -of _White Chrobatia_ stretched on both sides of the Carpathians. -These Slaves of the central and lower Oder and Vistula would seem to -be best distinguished as _Lechs_; _Poland_ is the name of the land -rather than of the people. ♦Polish tribes.♦ _Mazovia_, _Cujavia_, -_Silesia_—the German _Schlesien_—with the sea land, _Pomore_, -_Pommern_, or _Pomerania_, mark different districts held by kindred -tribes. ♦Beginning of the Polish kingdom at Gnesen.♦ In the tenth -century a considerable power arose for the first time in these regions, -having its centre between the Warta and the Vistula, at _Gniezno_ or -_Gnesen_, the abiding metropolitan city of Poland. ♦931-992. Conversion -of Poland.♦ The extent of the new power under the first Christian -prince Mieczïslaf answered nearly to the later Great Poland, Mazovia, -and Silesia. ♦Tributary to the Empire. 963. | 973.♦ But the Polish -duke became a vassal of the Empire for his lands west of Warta, and -suffered some dismemberments to the advantage of Bohemia. ♦Conquests -of Boleslaf. 996-1025.♦ Under his son Boleslaf, Poland rose to the -same kind of momentary greatness as Moravia and Bohemia had already -done. The dominions of Boleslaf took in, for longer or shorter times, -Bohemia, Moravia, Lusatia, Silesia, Pomerania, Prussia, part of -Russia, and part of that middle Slavonic land which became the mark of -Brandenburg, the districts of _Barnim_ and _Custrin_. Of this great -dominion some parts fell away during the life of Boleslaf, and other -parts at his death. ♦Effects of his reign.♦ But he none the less -established Poland as a power, and some of his conquests were abiding. -♦Chrobatia becomes _Little Poland_.♦ Western Pomerania, Silesia, Barnim -and Custrin, were kept for a longer or shorter time; and Chrobatia -north of the Carpathians—the southern part fell to the Magyar at his -death—remained, under the name of _Little Poland_, as long as Poland -lasted at all. It supplied the land with its second capital, _Cracow_. -From this time Poland ranked sometimes as a kingdom, sometimes as a -duchy.[61] ♦Internal divisions.♦ Constant divisions among members of -the ruling house, occasional admissions of the outward supremacy of -the Empire, did not destroy its national unity and independence. -♦The Polish state survives.♦ A Polish state always lived on. And from -the end of the thirteenth century, it took its place as an important -European kingdom, holding a distinctive position as the one Slavonic -power at once attached to the Western Church and independent of the -Western Empire. - - * * * * * - -♦Relations of Russia to the Eastern Church.♦ - -To the east of the Lechs and Chrobatians lay that great group of -Slavonic tribes whose distinctive historical character is that they -stood in the same relation to Eastern Christendom in which Poland -stands to Western. Disciples of the Eastern Church, they were never -vassals of the Eastern Empire. ♦Teutonic influence among eastern and -western Slaves.♦ The Western Slaves were brought under Christian -and under Teutonic influences by the same process, a process which -implied submission, or attempted submission, to the Western Empire or -to some of its princes. The Eastern Slaves were also brought under -both Christian and Teutonic influences, but in wholly different -shapes. The Teutonic influence came first. ♦Russia created by the -Scandinavian settlement.♦ It did not take the form of submission to any -existing Teutonic power; it was the creation of a new Slavonic power -under Teutonic rulers. Christianity did not come till those Teutonic -influences had died away, except in their results, and, coming from -the Eastern centre of Christendom, it had the effect of keeping its -disciples aloof from both the Christian and the Teutonic influences of -the West. ♦The name _Russian_.♦ A group of Slavonic tribes, without -losing their Slavonic character, grew up to national unity, and took up -a national name from Scandinavian settlers and rulers, the Warangians -or _Russians_ of the Swedish peninsula.[62] - -♦Origin of Russia. 862. | First seat at Novgorod. Russian advance.♦ - -The Russian power began by the Scandinavian leaders obtaining, in the -latter half of the ninth century, the dominion of the most northern -members of the Slavonic race, the Slaves of _Novgorod_ on the Ilmen. -Thence they pushed their dominion southwards. ♦Extent of the eastern -Slavonic lands.♦ East and north-east of the Lechs and Chrobatians lay -a crowd of Slavonic tribes stretching beyond the Dnieper as far as the -upper course of the Oka. Cut off from the Baltic by the Fins and Letts, -they were cut off from the Euxine by various Turanian races in turn, -first Magyars, then Patzinaks. To the south-east, from the Dnieper -to the Caspian, lay the _Chazar_ dominion, to which the Slaves east -of Dnieper were tributary. To the north-east lay a crowd of Finnish -tribes, among which is only one Finnish power of historic name, the -kingdom of _Great_ or _White Bulgaria_ on the Volga. ♦Union of the -eastern Slaves. 862-912.♦ Within this region, in the space of fifty -years, the various Slavonic tribes joined in different degrees of unity -to form the new power, called _Russian_ from its Scandinavian leaders. -♦Advance against Chazars and Fins.♦ The tribes who were tributary to -the Chazars were set free, and the Russian power was spread over a -certain Finnish area on the Upper Volga and its tributaries, nearly as -far north as Lake Bielo. ♦Second centre at Kief.♦ The centres of the -new power were, first _Novgorod_, and then _Kief_ on the Dnieper. - -♦The rulers of Russia become Slavonic. | 957-972.♦ - -How early the Scandinavian rulers of the new Slavonic power became -themselves practically Slavonic is shown by the name of the prince -Sviatoslaf, of whom we have already heard in the Danubian Bulgaria. -♦Russian enterprise. Euxine.♦ Already had Russian enterprise taken -the direction which it took in far later days. It was needful for -the developement of the new Russian nation to have free access to the -Euxine. From this they were cut off by a strange fate for nine hundred -years. But from the very beginning more than one attempt was made on -Constantinople, though the _Tzargrad_, the Imperial city, could be -reached only by sailing down the Dnieper through an enemy’s country. -♦Conquests on the Caspian. | Vladimir takes Cherson.♦ Sviatoslaf also -appears as a conqueror in the lands by the Caucasus and the Caspian, -and Vladimir, the first Christian prince, won his way to baptism by an -attack on the Imperial city of Cherson. - -♦Isolation of Russia.♦ - -The oldest Russia was thus, like the oldest Poland, emphatically -an inland state; but it was far more isolated than Poland. Its -ecclesiastical position kept it from sharing the history of the Western -Slaves. Its geographical position kept it from sharing the history -of the Servians and Bulgarians. ♦Russian lands west of Dnieper.♦ And -it must not be forgotten that the oldest Russia was formed mainly of -lands which afterwards passed under the rule of Poland and Lithuania. -_Little Russia_, _Black Russia_, _White Russia_, _Red Russia_, all came -under foreign rule. The Dnieper, from which Russia was afterwards cut -off, was the great central river of the elder Russia; of the Don and -the Volga she held only the upper course. The northern frontier barely -passed the great lakes of Ladoga and Onega, and the Gulf of Finland -itself. It seems not to have reached what was to be the Gulf of Riga, -but some of the Russian princes held a certain supremacy over the -Finnish and Lettish tribes of that region. - -♦Russian principalities. 1054. | Supremacy of Kief;♦ - -In the course of the eleventh century, the Russian state, like that of -Poland, was divided among princes of the reigning family, acknowledging -the superiority of the great prince of _Kief_. ♦of the Northern -Vladimir, 1169.♦ In the next century the chief power passed from Kief -to the northern _Vladimir_ on the Kiasma. ♦Susdal Russian.♦ Thus -the former Finnish land of _Susdal_ on the upper tributaries of the -Volga became the cradle of the second Russian power. ♦Commonwealths -at Novgorod and Pskof.♦ _Novgorod the Great_ meanwhile, under -elective princes, claimed, like its neighbour _Pskof_, to rank among -commonwealths. Its dominion was spread far over the Finnish tribes to -the north and east; the White Sea, and, far more precious, the Finnish -Gulf, had now a Russian seaboard. It was out of Vladimir and Novgorod -that the Russia of the future was to grow. ♦The principalities.♦ -Meanwhile a crowd of principalities, _Polotsk_, _Smolensk_, the -_Severian Novgorod_, _Tchernigof_, and others, arose on the Duna and -Dnieper. ♦Commonwealth of Viatka. 1174. | Halicz or Galicia. 1186.♦ Far -to the east across the commonwealth of _Viatka_, and on the frontiers -of Poland and Hungary arose the principality of _Halicz_ or _Galicia_, -which afterwards grew for a while into a powerful kingdom. - -♦The Cumans. 1114.♦ - -Meanwhile in the lands on the Euxine the old enemies, Patzinaks and -Chazars, gave way to the _Cumans_,[63] known in Russian history as -_Polovtzi_ and _Parthi_. They spread themselves from the Ural river to -the borders of Servia and Danubian Bulgaria, cutting off Russia from -the Caspian. ♦1223. | Mongol invasion.♦ In the next century Russians -and Cumans—momentary allies—fell before the advance of the _Mongols_, -commonly known in European history as _Tartars_. Known only as ravagers -in the lands more to the west, over Russia they become overlords for -two hundred and fifty years. ♦Russia tributary to the Mongols.♦ All -that escaped absorption by the Lithuanian became tributary to the -Mongol. ♦1240.♦ Still the relation was only a tributary one; Russia was -never incorporated in the Mongol dominion, as Servia and Bulgaria were -incorporated in the Ottoman dominion. ♦Russia represented by Novgorod.♦ -But Kief was overthrown; Vladimir became dependent; Novgorod remained -the true representative of free Russia in the Baltic lands. - - * * * * * - -♦The earlier races on the Baltic.♦ - -But besides the Slaves of Poland and Russia, our survey takes in also -the ancient races by which both Poland and Russia were so largely -cut off from the Baltic. Down to the middle of the twelfth century, -notwithstanding occasional Polish or Scandinavian occupations, those -races still kept their hold of the whole Baltic north-eastwards from -the mouth of the Vistula. ♦Fins in Livland and Esthland.♦ The non-Aryan -Fins, besides their seats to the north, still kept the coast of -_Esthland_ and _Lifland_, in Latin shape _Esthonia_ and _Livonia_, from -the Finnish Gulf to the Duna and slightly beyond, taking in a small -strip of the opposite peninsula. ♦The Lettic nations.♦ The inland part -of the later Livland was held by the _Letts_, the most northern branch -of the ancient Aryan settlers in this region. ♦Curland. | Samogitia. -| Lithuania.♦ Of this family were the tribes of _Curland_ in their own -peninsula, of _Samigola_ or _Semigallia_, the _Samaites_ of _Samogitia_ -to the south, the proper _Lithuanians_ south of them, the _Jatwages_, -_Jatwingi_—in many spellings—forming a Lithuanian wedge between the -Slavonic lands of Mazovia and Black Russia. ♦Prussia.♦ The Lithuanians, -strictly so called, reached the coast just north of the Niemen; from -the mouth of the Niemen to the mouth of the Vistula the coast was -held by the _Prussians_. Of these nations, Aryan and non-Aryan, the -Lithuanians alone founded a national dominion in historic times. The -history of the rest is simply the history of their bondage, sometimes -of their uprooting. - - * * * * * - -♦Survey in the twelfth century.♦ - -Taking a general survey of the lands round the Baltic about the middle -of the twelfth century, we see the three Scandinavian kingdoms, the -first fully formed states in these regions, all living and vigorous -powers, but with fluctuating boundaries. Their western colonies are -still Scandinavian. East and south of the Baltic they have not got -beyond isolated and temporary enterprises. The Slavonic nations on the -middle Elbe have fallen under German dominion; to the south Bohemia -and its dependencies keep their Slavonic nationality under German -supremacy. Poland, often divided and no longer conquering, still keeps -its frontier, and its position as the one independent Slavonic power -belonging to the Western Church. Russia, the great Eastern Slavonic -power, has risen to unity and greatness under Scandinavian masters, -and has again broken up into states connected only by a feeble tie. -The submission of Russia to barbarian invaders comes later than our -immediate survey; but the weakening of the Russian power both by -division and by submission is an essential element in the state of -things which now begins. ♦Teutonic advance, German and Scandinavian.♦ -This is the spread in different ways of Teutonic dominion, German and -Scandinavian, over the southern and eastern coasts of the Baltic, -largely at the expense of the Slaves, still more largely at the expense -of the primitive nations, Aryan and non-Aryan. - - -§ 3. _The German Dominion on the Baltic._ - -♦Time of Teutonic conquest.♦ - -In the first half of the twelfth century, no Teutonic power, German or -Scandinavian, had any lasting hold on any part of the eastern coast of -the Baltic or its gulfs, nor had any such power made any great advances -on the southern coast. Early in the fourteenth century the whole of -these coasts had been brought into different degrees of submission to -several Teutonic powers, German and Scandinavian. ♦German influence -stronger than Scandinavian.♦ Of the two influences the German has been -the more abiding. Scandinavian dominion has now wholly passed away from -these coasts, and it is only in the lands north of the Finnish Gulf -that it can be said to have ever been really lasting. ♦Extent of German -dominion.♦ But German influence has destroyed, assimilated, or brought -to submission, the whole of the earlier inhabitants, from Wagria to -Esthland. In our own day the whole coast, from the isle of Rügen to the -head of the gulf of Bothnia, is in the possession of two powers, one -German, one Slavonic. ♦German influence abiding.♦ But German influence -abides beyond the bounds of German rule. Not only have Pomerania -and Prussia become German in every sense, but Curland, Livland, and -Esthland, under the dominion of Russia, are still spoken of as German -provinces. - -This great change was brought about by a singular union of mercantile, -missionary, and military enterprise. ♦Beginning of Swedish conquest in -Finland. 1155.♦ The beginning came from Scandinavia, when the Swedish -King Saint Eric undertook the conquest and conversion of the proper -Finland, east of the Gulf of Bothnia. Here, in the space of about a -century, a great province was added to the Swedish kingdom, a province -whose eastern boundary greatly shifted, but the greater part of which -remained Swedish down to the present century. To the south of the Gulf -of Finland the changes of possession have been endless. The settled -dominion of Sweden in those lands comes later; Danish occupation, -though longer, was only temporary. ♦German conquest in Livland.♦ Soon -after the beginning of Swedish conquest in Finland began the work of -German mercantile enterprise, followed fifty years later by German -conquest and conversion, in Livland and the neighbouring lands. This -hindered the growth of any native power on those coasts. ♦Its effect on -Lithuania and Russia.♦ Even Lithuania in the days of its greatness was -cut off from the sea. Whatever tendencies towards Russian supremacy had -arisen in those parts were hindered from growing into Russian dominion. -♦The Military Orders.♦ The Knights of the Sword in Livland were -followed by the Teutonic Knights in Prussia, and the two orders became -one. ♦Danish advance.♦ Further west, the latter part of the twelfth -and the beginning of the thirteenth century saw a great, but mostly -short-lived, extension of Danish power over both German and Slavonic -lands. ♦The Scandinavian kingdoms.♦ While the coasts are thus changing -hands, the relations of Scandinavian kingdoms to one another are ever -shifting. ♦Polish gains and losses.♦ Poland is ever losing territory -to the west, and, still more after the beginning of its connexion with -Lithuania, ever gaining it to the east. ♦The _Hansa_.♦ And, alongside -of princes and sovereign orders, this time is marked by the appearance -of the first germs of the great German commercial league, which, -without becoming a strictly territorial power, exercised the greatest -influence on the disposal of power among all its neighbours. - - * * * * * - -♦Scania Swedish. 1332-1360.♦ - -In Scandinavia itself the chief strictly geographical change was a -temporary transfer to Sweden in the fourteenth century of the Danish -lands within the northern peninsula. ♦Union of Calmar. 1396.♦ At -the end of that century came the union of Calmar, the principle of -which was that the three kingdoms, remaining separate states, should -be joined under a common sovereign. But this union was never firmly -established, and the arrangements of the three crowns were shifting -throughout the fifteenth century; a lasting state of things came only -with the final breach of the union in the sixteenth century. ♦Sweden -separated, Denmark and Norway united. 1520.♦ From that time, Sweden, -under the house of Vasa, forms one power; Denmark and Norway, under the -house of Oldenburg, form another. - -♦Loss of oceanic colonies.♦ - -With regard to the more distant relations of the three kingdoms, this -period is marked by the gradual withdrawal of Scandinavian power from -the oceanic lands. ♦Iceland and Greenland united to Norway. 1261-1262.♦ -The union of Iceland and Greenland with Norway was the union of one -Scandinavian land with another. But Greenland, the most distant -Scandinavian land, vanishes from history about the time of the Calmar -union. The Scandinavian settlements in and about the British Islands -all passed away. ♦Ireland.♦ The Ostmen of Ireland were lost in the mass -of the Teutonic settlers who passed from England into Ireland. ♦The -Western Isles. Man. 1264.♦ The Western Isles were sold to Scotland; Man -passed under Scottish and English supremacy. ♦Orkney pledged. 1468.♦ -Orkney and Shetland were pledged to the Scottish crown; and, though -never formally ceded, they have become incorporated with the British -kingdom. - -♦Swedish advance in Finland. | 1248-1293.♦ - -East of the Gulf of Bothnia Swedish rule advanced. Attempts at conquest -both in Russia and in Esthland failed, but _Finland_ and _Carelia_ were -fully subdued, and the Swedish power reached to Lake Ladoga. ♦Esthland -Danish. 1238-1346.♦ Denmark made a more lasting, but still short-lived, -settlement in Esthland. ♦Short-lived greatness of Denmark.♦ The growth -of Denmark at the other end of the Baltic lands began earlier and was -checked sooner. But at the beginning of the thirteenth century things -looked as if Denmark was about to become the chief power on all the -Baltic coasts. - -♦Holstein.♦ - -South of the boundary stream of the Eider the lands which make up -the modern Holstein formed three settlements, two Teutonic and one -Slavonic. ♦Ditmarschen.♦ To the west lay the free Frisian land of -_Ditmarschen_. ♦Holstein.♦ In the middle were the lands of the Saxons -beyond the Elbe—the _Holtsætan_—with _Stormarn_ immediately on the -Elbe. ♦Wagria.♦ On the Baltic side lay the Slavonic land of _Wagria_, -which at the beginning of the twelfth century formed part of the -kingdom of _Sclavinia_, a kingdom stretching from the haven of Kiel to -the islands at the mouth of the Oder. ♦Danish conquest of Sclavinia. -1168-1189.♦ In these lands began the eastern advance of Denmark in the -latter half of the twelfth century. All Sclavinia was won, with at -least a supremacy over the Pomeranian land as far as the Riddow. Thus -far the Danish conquests, won mainly over Slaves, continue the chain -of occasional Scandinavian occupation on those coasts, from the tenth -century to the nineteenth. In another point of view, the Christian -advance, the overthrow of the chief centre of Slavonic heathendom in -Rügen, carries on the work of the Saxon Dukes. ♦Danish advance in -Germany.♦ But in the first years of the next century began a Danish -occupation of German ground. Holstein, and Lübeck itself, were won; -a claim was set up to the free land of Ditmarschen; and all these -conquests were confirmed by an Imperial grant.[64] ♦1214.♦ The Danish -kings now took the title of _Kings of the Slaves_, afterwards of the -_Vandals_ or _Wends_. ♦Fall of the Danish power. 1223-1227.♦ But -this dominion was soon broken up by the captivity of the Danish king -Waldemar. The Eider became again the boundary. ♦Denmark keeps Rügen, -till ceded 1325, 1438.♦ Of her Slavonic dominion Denmark kept only an -outlying fragment, the isle of Rügen and the neighbouring coast. This -remained Danish for a hundred years longer, nominally for a hundred -years longer still. - -The next changes tended to draw the lands immediately on each side -of the Eider into close connexion with one another. ♦Duchy of South -Jutland. 1232.♦ The southern part of the Danish peninsula, from the -Eider to the Aa, became a distinct fief of the Danish crown, held by a -Danish prince under the name of the duchy of _South-Jutland_—_Jutia_ -or _Sunder-Jutia_. ♦United with Holstein. 1325.♦ In the next century -this duchy and the county of Holstein are found in the hands of -the same prince, and it is held that his grant of the Danish duchy -contained a promise that it should never be united with the Danish -crown. ♦Duchy of Sleswick.♦ Henceforth South-Jutland begins to be -spoken of as the _duchy of Sleswick_. But of the lands held together, -Sleswick remained a fief of Denmark, while Holstein remained a fief -of the Empire. ♦Fluctuations of Sleswick and Holstein.♦ The duchy was -several times united to the crown and again granted out. ♦1424.♦ At -one moment of union the Roman King Sigismund expressly confirmed the -union, and acknowledged Sleswick as a Danish land. ♦1448.♦ At the -next grant of the duchy, its perpetual separation from the crown is -alleged to have been again confirmed by Christian the First. ♦1460.♦ -Yet Christian himself, already king of the three kingdoms, was -afterwards elected Duke of Sleswick and Count of Holstein. The election -was accompanied by a declaration that the two principalities, though -the one was held of the Empire and the other of the Danish crown, -should never be separated. ♦Duchy of Holstein. 1474.♦ In the same -reign an Imperial grant raised the counties of Holstein and Stormarn -with the land of Ditmarsh to the rank of a duchy. But the dominions -of its duke were not a continuous territory stretching from sea to -sea. ♦Freedom in Ditmarschen. | Bishopric of Lübeck.♦ To the west, -_Ditmarschen_—notwithstanding a renewed Imperial grant—remained free; -to the east, some districts of the old Wagria formed the _bishopric of -Lübeck_. ♦Denmark, Sleswick, and Holstein under Christian.♦ But now for -the first time the same prince reigned in the threefold character of -King of Denmark, Duke of the Danish fief of Sleswick, and Duke of the -Imperial fief of Holstein. Endless shiftings, divisions, and reunions -of various parts of the two duchies followed. ♦Royal and Ducal lines. -1580.♦ In the partitions between the _royal_ and _ducal_ lines of the -house of Oldenburg, the several portions of the Kings of Denmark and -of the Dukes of Gottorp paid no regard to the boundary of the Eider, -but each was made up of detached parts of both duchies. ♦Conquest of -Ditmarschen. 1559.♦ Meanwhile the freedom of Ditmarschen came to an -end, and the old Frisian land became part of the royal share of the -duchy of Holstein. ♦Acquisition of Dago and Oesel.♦ And, as we began -our story of Danish advance with the settlement in Esthland, we have to -end it for the present with the acquisition of the islands of _Dago_ -and _Oesel_ off the same coasts. - - * * * * * - -♦Effect of the Danish advance on the Slavonic lands.♦ - -After the loss of Rügen, Denmark had little to do with the Slavonic -lands, except so far as the possession of Holstein carried with it -the possession of the old Slavonic land of Wagria. Still the advance -of Denmark at the end of the twelfth century had a lasting effect on -the Slavonic lands by altogether shaking the Polish dominion on the -Baltic. But it shook it to the advantage, not of Scandinavia, but of -Germany. Between the twelfth century and the fourteenth Poland lost all -its western dominions. _Pomore_, _Pommern_, _Pomerania_, the seaboard -of the Lechish Slaves, is strictly the land between the mouth of the -Vistula and the mouth of the Oder; but the name had already spread -further to the West. ♦Pomerania falls away from Poland.♦ After the -fall of the Danish power on this coast, Pomerania west of the Riddow -altogether fell away from Poland. ♦Duchy of Slavia.♦ As the duchy of -_Slavia_, it became, like Mecklenburg, a land of the Empire, though -ruled by Slavonic princes. ♦1298-1305. Loss of western territory by -Poland.♦ But the eastern part of Pomerania, _Cassubia_ and the mark -of _Gdansk_ or _Danzig_, remained under Polish superiority till the -beginning of the fourteenth century. Then the greater part fell away, -partly for ever, to the Pomeranian duchy of _Wolgast_, partly, for -a season only, to the Teutonic Knights. ♦1220-1260.♦ To the south -_Barnim_ and _Custrin_ passed, after some shiftings, to the mark of -Brandenburg. ♦Silesia. 1289-1327.♦ Further to the south, Silesia, -divided among princes of the house of Piast, gradually fell under -Bohemian supremacy. Thus the whole western part of the Polish kingdom -passed into the hands of princes of the Empire, and was included within -the bounds of the German realm. - - * * * * * - -The fate of Silesia brings us again to the history of the inland -Slavonic land of the Czechs. _Bohemia_ went on, as duchy and -kingdom,[65] ruled by native princes as vassals of the Empire. Moravia -was a fief of Bohemia. In the end Bohemia passed to German kings, but -not till it had become again the centre of a dominion which recalls -the fleeting powers of Samo and Sviatopluk. ♦Bohemia and Ottocar. -1269-1278.♦ Ottocar the Second united the long-severed branches of the -Slavonic race by annexing the German lands which lay between them. ♦His -German dominion.♦ Lord of Bohemia, Moravia, Austria, Styria, Carinthia, -and Carniola, the Czech king reigned on the upper Oder and the middle -Danube as far as the Hadriatic. The same lands were in after times to -be again united, but from the opposite side. - -♦Luxemburg kings of Bohemia. 1308.♦ - -The successors of Ottocar reigned only over Bohemia and Moravia. -Early in the next century the Bohemian crown passed to the house of -Luxemburg. Under them Bohemia became a powerful state, but a state -becoming more and more German, less and less Slavonic. ♦Silesia, 1355.♦ -The gradual extension of Bohemian superiority over Silesia led to -its formal incorporation. ♦Lusatia. 1320-1370.♦ In the same century -_Lusatia_, High and Low, was won from Brandenburg. ♦Brandenburg. -1373-1417.♦ The mark of Brandenburg itself became for a while a -Bohemian possession, before it passed to the burgraves of Nürnberg. -♦1353.♦ The Bohemian possession of the Upper Palatinate lies out of our -Slavonic range. Among the revolutions of the fifteenth century, we find -the Bohemian crown at one time held conjointly with that of Hungary, -at another time held by a Polish prince. ♦Conquests of Matthias -Corvinus, 1478-1490.♦ Later in the century the victories of Matthias -Corvinus took away Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia, from the Bohemian -crown. ♦Bohemia and Austria. | Its losses. 1635. | 1740.♦ But it was -the fourfold dominion of Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia, and Lusatia, which -finally passed to the House of Austria, to be shorn of its northern and -eastern lands to the profit, first of Saxony, and then of Brandenburg -or Prussia. - - * * * * * - -Thus far the Teutonic advance, both on the actual Baltic coast and -on the inland Slavonic region, had been made to the profit, partly -of the Scandinavian kingdoms, partly of the princes of the Empire. -♦German corporations.♦ But there were two other forms of Teutonic -influence and dominion, which fell to the share, not of princes, but -of corporate bodies, mercantile and military or religious. ♦The -Hansa.♦ The Hanseatic League was indeed a power in these regions, -but it hardly has a place on the map. ♦Second foundation of Lübeck. -1158.♦ Even before the second foundation of Lübeck by Henry the Lion, -German mercantile settlements had begun at Novgorod, in Gotland, and -in London. ♦Extent of the League.♦ Gradually, in the course of the -thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, the League into which the union -of the merchant towns of Germany grew spread itself over the Baltic, -the Westfalian, and the Netherlandish lands. A specially close tie -bound together the five _Wendish_ towns, _Lübeck_, _Rostock_, _Wismar_, -_Stralsund_, and _Greifswald_. ♦Nature of the union.♦ But the union -of a town with the Hansa did not necessarily affect its political -position. It might, at least in the later stages of the League, be -a free city of the Empire, a town subject to some prince of the -Empire, or a town subject to a prince beyond its bounds. Not only the -Pomeranian and Prussian cities under the rule of the Knights, but Revel -in Esthland under Danish rule formed part of the League. ♦The Hansa -not a territorial power.♦ The League waged wars, made peace, overthrew -and set up kings, as suited its interests; but territorial dominion, -strictly so called, was not its object. Still in some cases privileges -grew into something like dominion; in others military occupation might -pass for temporary dominion. ♦The Hansa in Gotland and Scania. | 1361. -| 1368-1385.♦ Thus in the isle of _Gotland_ the Hansa had an ascendency -which was overthrown by the conquest of the island by the Danish king -Waldemar, a conquest avenged by a temporary Hanseatic occupation of -Scania. In fact the nature of the League, the relations of the cities -to one another, geographical as well as political, hindered the Hansa -from ever becoming a territorial power like Switzerland and the United -Provinces. In the history of the Baltic lands it takes for some ages a -position at least equal to that of any kingdom. But it is only casually -and occasionally that its triumphs can be marked on the map. - - * * * * * - -The other great German corporation was not commercial, but military and -religious. ♦The Swordbearers and the Teutonic Order.♦ The conquests of -the Order of Christ and of the Order of Saint Mary—better known as the -_Sword-brothers_ and the _Teutonic Order_—were essentially territorial. -These orders became masters of a great part of the Baltic coast, and -wherever they spread their dominion, Christianity and German national -life were, by whatever means, established. ♦Their connexion with the -Empire.♦ As both the chiefs of the Order and the Livonian prelates -ranked as princes of the Empire, the conquests of the Knights were in -some sort an extension of the bounds of the Empire. Yet we can hardly -look on Livonia and Prussia as coming geographically within the Empire -in the same sense as Pomerania and Silesia. ♦Effects of their rule.♦ -But whether strictly an extension of the Western Empire or not, the -conquests of the Knights were an extension of the Western Church, the -Western world, and the German nation, as against both heathendom and -Eastern Christianity, as against all the other Baltic nationalities, -non-Aryan and Aryan. - -♦The Swordbearers in Livland. 1201.♦ - -The first settlement began in _Livland_. In the beginning of the -thirteenth century, the Knights of the Order of Christ were called in -as temporal helpers by Bishop Albert of Riga, and they gradually won -the dominion of the lands on the gulf called from his city. ♦The Danes -in Esthland.♦ For a while they had a partner in the Danish crown, which -held part of _Esthland_. ♦Extent of their dominion. | Dago and Oesel.♦ -But the rest of Esthland, Livland in the narrower sense, Curland, -Semigola, the special Lettish land, and the Russian territory on the -Duna, made up this Livonian dominion, which was afterwards enlarged -by the isles of Dago and Oesel and by the Danish portion of Esthland. -♦Esthland. 1346.♦ _Riga_ and _Revel_ became great commercial cities, -and Riga became an ecclesiastical metropolis under a prince-archbishop. -The natives were reduced to bondage, and the Russian powers of Novgorod -and Polotsk were effectually kept away from the gulf. - -♦The Teutonic Order in Prussia. 1226.♦ - -The dominion of the Knights of Saint Mary, the Teutonic Order, in -Prussia and in a small part of Lithuania, began a little later -than that of the Sword-brothers in Livland. Invited by a Polish -prince, Conrad of Mazovia, they received from him their first Polish -possession, the palatinate of _Culm_. ♦Union of the Orders. 1237.♦ -Eleven years later the Prussian and Livonian orders were united. Their -dominion grew. ♦Purchase of Pomerelia. 1311.♦ The acquisition of -_Pomerelia_, the eastern part of the old _Pomore_, immediately west of -the lower Vistula, cut off Poland from the sea. ♦Conquest of Samogitia. -1384.♦ Later in the century, Lithuania was equally cut off by the -cession of _Samogitia_. ♦Occupation of Gotland. 1398-1408. | The New -Mark pledged to the Order. 1402.♦ The isle of _Gotland_ was held for -a while; the _New Mark_ of Brandenburg was pledged by King Sigismund. -♦Their coast line.♦ The whole coast from Narva on the Finnish gulf -to the point where the Pomeranian coast trends south-west formed the -unbroken sea-board of the Order. - -♦Losses of the Prussian Knights.♦ - -Of the two seats of the Order the northern one proved the stronger and -more lasting. Livland remained untouched long after Poland had won -back her lost ground from the Prussian Knights. ♦Samogitia restored -to Lithuania. 1410.♦ The battle of Tannenberg won back Samogitia for -Lithuania, and again parted the Livonian and Prussian lands of the -Order. ♦Peace of Thorn. 1646.♦ By the peace of Thorn its Prussian -dominion was altogether cut short. ♦Cessions of the Order to Poland.♦ -_Culm_ and _Pomerelia_, with the cities of _Danzig_ and _Thorn_, went -back to Poland. And a large part of Prussia itself, the bishopric of -_Ermeland_, a district running deep into the land still left to the -knights, was added to Poland. ♦Vassalage of the Order.♦ The rest of -Prussia was left to the Order as a Polish fief. - - * * * * * - -The thirteenth century was the special time when Teutonic dominion -spread itself over the Baltic lands. ♦Advance of Christianity.♦ It was -also the time when heathendom gave way to Christianity at nearly every -point of those lands where it still held out. But, while the old creeds -and the old races were giving way, a single one among them stood forth -for a while as an independent and conquering state, the last heathen -power in Europe. ♦Lithuania the last heathen power.♦ While all their -kinsfolk and neighbours were passing under the yoke, the _Lithuanians_, -strictly so called, showed themselves the mightiest of conquerors in -all lands from the Baltic to the Euxine. ♦Advance of Lithuania. c. -1220.♦ From their own land on the Niemen they began, under their prince -Mendog, to advance at the expense of the Russian lands to the south. -♦Mendog king. 1252.♦ Mendog embraced Christianity, and was crowned -King of Lithuania, a realm which now stretched from the Duna to beyond -the Priepetz. But heathendom again won the upper hand, and the next -century saw the great advance of the Lithuanian power, the momentary -rule of old Aryan heathendom alike over Christendom and over Islam. -♦Conquests from Russia. 1315-1340. 1345-1377.♦ Under two conquering -princes, Gedymin and Olgierd, further conquests were made from the -surrounding Russian lands. ♦1315-1360.♦ The Lithuanian dominion was -extended at the expense of Novgorod and Smolensk; the Lithuanian -frontier stretched far beyond both the Duna and the Dnieper; Kief was -a Lithuanian possession. ♦Volhynia and Podolia.♦ The kingdom of Galicia -lost _Volhynia_ and _Podolia_, which became a land disputed between -Lithuania and Poland. These last conquests carried the Lithuanian -frontier to the Dniester, and opened a wholly new set of relations -among the powers on the Euxine. ♦Perekop. 1363.♦ By the conquest of -the Tartar dominion of _Perekop_, Lithuania, cut off from the Baltic, -reached to the Euxine. - -♦Consolidation of Poland. 1295-1320.♦ - -Meanwhile Poland, from a collection of duchies under a nominal head, -had again grown into a consolidated and powerful kingdom. The western -frontier had been cut short by various German powers, and the Teutonic -Order shut off the kingdom from the sea. Mazovia and Cujavia remained -separate duchies; but Great and Little Poland remained firmly united, -and were ready to enlarge their borders to the eastward. ♦Conquests of -Casimir the Great. 1333-1370. | Red Russia. 1340.♦ Casimir the Great -added _Podlachia_, the land of the _Jatvingi_, and in the break-up of -the Galician kingdom, he incorporated _Red Russia_ as being a former -possession of Poland. ♦Annexed to Hungary. 1377.♦ But, as it had also -been a former possession of Hungary,[66] Lewis the Great, the common -sovereign of Hungary and Poland, annexed it to his southern kingdom. - -♦Union of Poland and Lithuania.♦ - -The two powers which had thus grown up were now to be gradually fused -into one. ♦1386.♦ The heathen Lithuanian prince Jagiello became, by -marriage and conversion, a Christian King of Poland. ♦Volhynia and -Podolia added to Poland.♦ He enlarged the kingdom at the expense of -the duchy, by incorporating _Podolia_ and _Volhynia_ with Poland, -making Poland as well as Lithuania the possessor of a large extent -of Russian soil. ♦Recovery of Red Russia. 1392. | Moldavia. | Pledge -of Zips. 1412.♦ The older Russian territory of Poland, Red Russia, -was won back from Hungary; _Moldavia_ began to transfer its fleeting -allegiance from Hungary to Poland; within Hungary itself part of the -county of _Zips_ was pledged to the Polish crown. ♦Recovery of the -Polish duchies. 1401.♦ The Polish duchies now began to fall back to the -kingdom. ♦1463-1476.♦ _Cujavia_ came in early in the fifteenth century, -and parts of _Mazovia_ in its course. Of the relation of the kingdom -to the Teutonic order we have already spoken. Lithuania meanwhile, -as part of Western Christendom, remained, under its separate grand -dukes of the now royal house, the rival both of Islam and of Eastern -Christendom. ♦Conquests of Witold. 1392-1430.♦ Under Witold the advance -on Russian ground was greater than ever. _Smolensk_ and all _Severia_ -became Lithuanian; Kief was in the heart of the grand duchy; Moscow -did not seem far from its borders. ♦Loss of Perekop, 1474.♦ Lithuania -was presently cut short further to the south by the loss of its -Euxine dominion. ♦Closer union of Poland and Lithuania. 1501.♦ At the -beginning of the sixteenth century Poland and Lithuania were united as -distinct states under a common sovereign. But by that time a new state -of things had begun in the lands on the Duna and the Dnieper. - - * * * * * - -♦Revival of Russia.♦ - -While the military orders had thus established themselves on the Baltic -coast, and had already largely given way to the combined Polish and -Lithuanian power behind them, a new _Russia_ was growing up behind -them all. ♦Power of Moscow.♦ Cut off from all dealings with Western -Europe, save with its immediate western neighbours, cut off from its -own ecclesiastical centre by the advance of Mussulman dominion, the -new power of _Moscow_ was schooling itself to take in course of time a -greater place than had ever been held by the elder power of Kief. The -Mongol conquest had placed the Russian principalities in much the same -position as that through which most of the south-eastern lands passed -before they were finally swallowed up by the Ottoman. ♦The Russian -princes dependent on the Golden Horde.♦ The princes of Russia were -dependent on the Tartar dominion of _Kiptchak_, which stretched from -the Dniester north-eastwards over boundless barbarian lands as far as -the lower course of the Jenisei. Its capital, the centre of the _Golden -Horde_, was at _Sarai_ on the lower course of the Volga. ♦Homage of -Novgorod. 1252-1263.♦ Even Novgorod, under its great prince Alexander -Nevsky, did homage to the Khan. But this dependent relation did not, -like the Lithuanian conquests to the west, affect the geographical -frontiers of Russia. The Russian centre at the time of the Mongol -conquest was the northern Vladimir. ♦Moscow the new centre, c. 1328.♦ -Towards the end of the thirteenth century, _Moskva_, on the river of -that name, grew into importance, and early in the next century it -became the centre of Russian life. ♦Name of _Muscovy_.♦ From _Moskva_ -or _Moscow_ comes the old name of _Muscovy_, a name which historically -describes the growth of the second Russian power. Muscovy was to Russia -what France in the older sense was to the whole land which came to bear -that name. Moscow was to Russia all, and more than all, that Paris was -to France. It was to Moscow as the centre that the separate Russian -principalities fell in; it was from Moscow as the centre that the lost -Russian lands were won back. ♦Other Russian states.♦ Besides Novgorod, -there still were the separate states of _Viatka_, _Pskof_, _Tver_, and -_Riazan_. Disunion and dependence lasted till late in the fifteenth -century. ♦Decline of the Mongol power.♦ But the Tartar power had -already begun to grow weaker before the end of the fourteenth, and the -invasion of Timour, while making Russia for a moment more completely -subject, led to the dissolution of the dominion of the older Khans. - -♦Break-up of the Mongol power.♦ - -In the course of the fifteenth century the great power of the Golden -Horde broke up into a number of smaller khanats. ♦Khanat of Crim;♦ -The khanat of _Crim_—the old Tauric Chersonêsos—stretched from its -peninsula inwards along the greater part of the course of the Don. -♦of Kazan, 1438;♦ The khanat of _Kazan_ on the Volga supplanted the -old kingdom of White Bulgaria. ♦of Siberia;♦ Far to the east, on the -lower course of the Obi, was the khanat of _Siberia_. ♦of Astrakhan.♦ -The Golden Horde itself was represented by the khanat of _Astrakhan_ -on the lower Volga, with its capital at the mouth of that river. Of -these Crim and Kasan were immediate neighbours of the Muscovite state. -♦Deliverance of Russia. 1480.♦ The yoke was at last broken by Ivan the -Great. ♦1487.♦ Seven years later he placed a tributary prince on the -throne of Kazan, and himself took the title of _Prince of Bulgaria_. -♦Crim dependent on the Ottoman.♦ By this time the khans of Crim had -become dependents of the Ottoman Sultans, the beginning of the long -strife between Russia and the Turk in Europe. - -♦Advance of Moscow in Russia.♦ - -But before Muscovy thus became an independent power, it had taken the -greatest of steps towards growing into Russia. ♦Annexation of Novgorod. -1470;♦ Novgorod the Great, the only Russian rival of Moscow, first lost -its northern territory, and then itself became part of the Muscovite -dominion. ♦of Viatka, 1478; | of Tver, 1493.♦ The commonwealth of -_Viatka_, the principality of _Tver_, and some small appanages of the -house of Moscow followed. ♦Reign of Basil Ivanovitch, 1505-1533. -| Annexation of Pskof and Riazan.♦ The annexation of what remained, -as _Pskof_ and _Riazan_, was only a question of time, and it came in -the next reign. Of the three works which were needful for the full -growth of the new Russia, two were accomplished. ♦Russia united and -independent.♦ The Russian state was one, and it was independent. And -the third work, that of winning back the lost Russian lands, had -already begun. - -♦Survey at the end of the fifteenth century.♦ - -Thus, at the end of the fifteenth century, five powers held the Baltic -coast. Sweden held the west coast from the Danish frontier northward, -with both sides of the gulf of Bothnia and both sides of the gulf -of Finland. Denmark held the extreme western coast and the isle of -Gotland. Poland and Lithuania had a small seaboard indeed compared to -their inland extent. Poland had only the Pomeranian and Prussian coast -which she had just won from the Knights. Lithuania barely touched -the sea between Prussia and Curland. To the west of the Polish coast -lay the now Germanized lands of Pomerania and Mecklenburg. To the -north-west lay the coast of the German military Order, under Polish -vassalage in Prussia, independent in its northern possessions. Thus -almost the whole Baltic coast was held by Teutonic powers; the Slavonic -powers still lie mainly inland. The Polish frontier towards the Empire -has been cut down to the limit which it kept till the end. Pomerania, -Silesia, a great part of the mark of Brandenburg, have fallen away from -the Polish realm. On the other hand, that realm and its confederate -Lithuania have grown wonderfully to the east at the cost of divided and -dependent Russia, and have begun to fall back again before Russia one -and independent. Bohemia, enlarged by Silesia and Lusatia, has entered -so thoroughly into the German world as almost to pass out of our sight. - - -§ 4. _The Growth of Russia and Sweden._ - -♦Changes of the last four centuries.♦ - -The work of the last four centuries on the Baltic coast has been to -drive back the Scandinavian power, after a vast momentary advance, -wholly to the west of the Baltic—to give nearly the whole eastern -coast to Russia—to make the whole southern coast German. These changes -involve the wiping out, first of the German military Order, and then of -Poland and Lithuania. ♦Growth of Russia and creation of Prussia.♦ This -last change involves the growth of Russia, and the creation of Prussia -in the modern sense, a sense so strangely different from its earlier -meaning. These two have been the powers by which Sweden and Denmark -have been cut short, by which Poland and Lithuania have been swallowed -up. In this last work they indeed had a third confederate. Still the -share of Austria in the overthrow of Poland was in a manner incidental. -But the existence of such a Polish and Lithuanian state as stood at -the end of the fifteenth, or even of the seventeenth, century was -inconsistent with the existence of either Russia or Prussia as great -European powers. - -The period with which we have now to deal takes in only the former -stage of this process. Russia advances; Prussia in the modern sense -comes into being. ♦Greatness of Sweden.♦ But Sweden is still the most -advancing power of all; and, if Denmark falls back, it is before the -power of Sweden. The Hansa too and the Knights pass away; Sweden is the -ruling power of the Baltic. - - * * * * * - -The sixteenth century saw the fall of both branches of the Teutonic -Order. Out of the fall of one of them came the beginnings of modern -_Prussia_. ♦Separation of the Prussian and Livonian knights. 1515.♦ -The two branches of the Order were separated; the Livonian lands had -an independent Master. ♦Beginning of the Duchy of Prussia. 1525.♦ -Before long the Prussian Grand Master, Albert of Brandenburg, changed -from the head of a Catholic religious order into a Lutheran temporal -prince, holding the hereditary _duchy of Prussia_ as a Polish fief. -♦Geographical position of Prussia.♦ That duchy had so strange a -frontier towards the kingdom that it could not fail sooner or later -either to be swallowed up by the kingdom which hemmed it in, or else -to make its way out of its geographical bonds. ♦Union of Prussia and -Brandenburg. 1611.♦ When the Prussian duchy and the mark of Brandenburg -came into the hands of one prince, when the dominions of that prince -were enlarged by the union of Brandenburg and Pomerania, the second of -these solutions became only a question of time. ♦Prussia independent of -Poland. 1647.♦ The first formal step towards it was the release of the -duchy from all dependence on Poland. Prussia became a distinct state, -one now essentially German, but lying beyond the bounds of the Empire. - -As the rights of the Empire had been formally cut short when Prussia -passed under Polish vassalage, they were also formally cut short by -the dissolution of the northern branch of the Teutonic order. ♦Fall -of the Livonian Order. 1558-1561.♦ The rule of the Livonian Knights -survived the secularization of the Prussian duchy by forty years; their -dominion then fell asunder. ♦Duchy of Curland.♦ As in the case of -Prussia, part of their territory, _Curland_ and _Semigallia_, was kept -by the Livonian Master Godhard Kettler, as an hereditary duchy under -Polish vassalage. The rest of the lands of the order were parted out -among the chief powers of the Baltic. ♦Momentary kingdom of Livonia.♦ A -Livonian kingdom under the Danish prince Magnus was but for a moment. -♦Denmark takes Dago and Oesel.♦ Denmark in the end received the islands -of _Dago_ and _Oesel_, her last conquests east of the Baltic. ♦Sweden -takes Esthland.♦ Sweden advanced south of the Finnish gulf, taking -the greater part of Esthland. ♦Livland goes to Poland and Russia.♦ -Northern Livland fell to Russia, the southern part to Poland. ♦All -Livland Polish. 1582.♦ Twenty years later all Livland became a Polish -possession. - -♦Greatest Baltic extent of Poland and Lithuania.♦ - -This acquisition of Livland and of the superiority over Prussia and -Curland raised the united power of Poland and Lithuania to its greatest -extent on the Baltic coast. ♦Union of Lublin, 1569.♦ Meanwhile the -union of _Lublin_ joined the kingdom and the grand duchy yet more -closely together. But, long before this time, the eastern frontier -of Lithuania had begun to fall back. ♦Russian advance.♦ The central -advance of Russia to the west had begun. ♦Its causes.♦ A revived -state, such as Russia was at the end of the fifteenth century, must -advance, unless it be artificially hindered; and the new Russian state -was driven to advance if it was to exist at all. It had no sea-board, -except on the White Sea; it did not hold the mouth of any one of its -great rivers, except the Northern Dvina, a stream thoroughly cut off -from European life. The dominions of Sweden, Lithuania, and the Knights -cut Russia off from the Baltic and from central Europe. To the south -and east she was cut off from the Euxine and the Caspian, from the -mouths of the Don and the Volga, by the powers which represented her -old barbarian masters. Russia was thus not only driven to advance, -but driven to advance in various directions. She had to win back her -lost lands; she had, if she was really to become an European power, -to win her way to the Baltic and to the Euxine. ♦Advance to the -north-east.♦ Her position made it almost equally needful to win her -way to the Caspian, and made it unavoidable that she should spread her -power over the barbarian lands to the north-east. Of these several -fields of advance the path to the Euxine was the longest barred. -♦Order of Russian advances.♦ First, at the end of the fifteenth -century, began the recovery of the lost lands, a work spread over -the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. Then, in the -sixteenth, came the eastern extension at the cost of the now weakened -Mongol enemy. Strictly Baltic extension was in the sixteenth century -merely momentary; it did not become lasting till the beginning of the -eighteenth. ♦The Euxine reached last.♦ But Russia had been established -on the Caspian for more than two centuries, she had become a Baltic -power for more than two generations, before she made her way to the -oldest scene of her seafaring enterprise. - -♦Recovery of the lands conquered by Lithuania.♦ - -The recovery of the lands which had been lost to Lithuania began before -the end of the fifteenth century. Ivan the Great won back _Severia_, -with _Tchernigof_ and the Severian _Novgorod_ and part of the territory -of _Smolensk_. ♦1514. | 1563.♦ Under Basil Smolensk itself followed; -under Ivan the Terrible Polotsk again became Russian. Then the tide -turned for a season. Russia first lost her newly-won territory in -Livland. ♦Recovery of Smolensk by Poland. 1582. | Polish conquest of -Russia, 1606.♦ The recovery of Smolensk by Poland was followed by the -momentary Polish conquest of independent Russia, and the occupation of -the throne of Moscow by a Polish prince. ♦Second revival of Russia, and -second advance.♦ The Muscovite state came again to life; but it was -shorn of a large part of the national territory, which had to be won -again by a second advance. ♦Cessions to Poland.♦ Smolensk, Tchernigof, -and the greater part of the Lithuanian conquests beyond the Dnieper, -were again surrendered to the united Polish and Lithuanian state. In -the middle of the century came the renewed Russian advance. ♦Lands -recovered by the Peace of Andraszovo, 1667.♦ The Treaty of Andraszovo -gave back to Russia most of the lands which had been surrendered fifty -years before. ♦Recovery of Kief. 1686.♦ By the last advance in the -seventeenth century Russia won back a small territory west of the -Dnieper, including her ancient capital of Kief. ♦Superiority over the -Ukraine Cossacks.♦ At the same time Poland finally gave up to Russia -the superiority over the Cossacks of Ukraine, between the Bug and the -Lower Dnieper. ♦Russian lands still kept by Poland.♦ But, with this -exception, Poland and Lithuania still kept all the Russian lands south -of Duna and west of Dnieper, with some districts beyond those rivers. -Nor was Russia the only power to which Poland had to give way on her -south-eastern frontier. ♦Podolia lost to the Turk.♦ In this quarter the -Ottoman for the last time won a new province from a Christian state by -the acquisition of _Kamienetz_ and all _Podolia_.[67] - - * * * * * - -But Poland had during this period to give way at other points also. -This was the time of the great growth of the Swedish power. ♦Growth of -Sweden and Russia compared.♦ The contrast between the growth of Sweden -and the contemporary growth of Russia is instructive. The revived power -of Moscow was partly winning back its own lost lands, partly advancing -in directions which were needful for national growth, almost for -national being. The growth of Sweden in so many directions was almost -wholly a growth beyond her own borders. ♦Russian advance lasting. -| Swedish advance temporary.♦ Hence doubtless it came that the advance -of Russia has been lasting, while the advance of Sweden was only for a -season. Sweden has lost by far the greater part of her conquests; she -has kept only those parts of them which went to complete her position -in her own peninsula. - -On the Swedish conquest of Esthland followed a series of shiftings -of the frontiers of Sweden and Russia which lasted into the present -century. ♦Advance under and after Gustavus Adolphus. 1611-1660.♦ During -the reign of Gustavus Adolphus, and the period which we might almost -call the continuation of his reign after his death, Sweden advanced -both in her own peninsula and east of the Baltic, while she also -gained a wholly new footing on German ground, both on the Baltic and -on the Ocean. ♦Wars between Sweden and Russia. 1576-1617. | Peace of -Stalbova.♦ A long period of alternate war and peace, a time in which -Novgorod the Great passed for a moment into Swedish hands, was ended, -as far as Sweden and Russia were concerned, by the peace of Stalbova. -♦Sweden gains Ingermanland.♦ The Swedish frontier thus fixed took in -all _Carelia_ and _Ingermanland_, and wholly cut off Russia from the -Baltic and its gulfs. Such an advance could not fail to lead to further -advance, though at the expense of another enemy. ♦Wars between Sweden -and Poland. 1619-1660. | Swedish conquest of Livland, 1621-1625;♦ The -long war between Sweden and Poland gave to Sweden Riga and the greater -part of Livland. ♦of Dago and Oesel, 1645.♦ Her conquests in this -region were completed by winning the islands of Dago and Oesel from -Denmark. - -♦Advance of Sweden against Denmark and Norway.♦ - -This last acquisition, geographically connected with the Swedish -conquests from Russia and Poland, was politically part of an equally -great advance which Sweden was making at the cost of the rival -Scandinavian power, the united realms of Denmark and Norway. ♦Conquest -of Gotland and Bornholm. 1645. | Of Jämteland.♦ Along with the two -eastern islands, Denmark lost the isle of _Gotland_ for ever and that -of _Bornholm_ for a moment,[68] and the Norwegian provinces east of the -mountains, _Jämteland_ and _Hertjedalen_. The treaty of Roskild yet -further enlarged Sweden at the expense of Norway. ♦Of Trondhjemlän. -1658.♦ By the cession of _Trondhjemlän_ the Norwegian kingdom was -split asunder; the ancient metropolis was lost, and Sweden reached to -the Ocean. ♦Of Bohuslän, and Scania, &c.♦ With Trondhjem Sweden also -received _Bohuslän_, the southern province of Norway, and, more than -all, the ancient possessions of Denmark in the northern peninsula, -with her old metropolis of _Lund_. Here comes in the application of -the rule. ♦Trondhjem restored to Norway. 1660.♦ In annexing Trondhjem -Sweden had overshot her mark; it was restored within two years. It was -otherwise with Bohuslän, Scania, and her other conquests within what -might seem to be her natural borders; they have remained Swedish to -this day. - -♦Lands held by Sweden in Germany, Pomerania and Rügen, Bremen and -Verden. 1648.♦ - -The Swedish acquisition of the eastern lands of Denmark was made more -necessary by the position which Sweden had now taken on the central -mainland. The peace of Westfalia had confirmed her in the possession of -_Rügen_ and _Western Pomerania_ on the Baltic, and of the bishoprics -of _Bremen_ and _Verden_ which made her a power on the Ocean. These -lands were not strictly an addition to the Swedish realm; they were -fiefs of the Empire held by the Swedish king. Here again comes in the -geographical law. The Swedish possession of the German lands on the -Ocean was short; part of the German lands on the Baltic was kept into -the present century. - - * * * * * - -The peace of Roskild, which cut short the kingdoms of Denmark -and Norway in the northern peninsula, also marks an epoch in the -controverted history of the duchies of Sleswick and Holstein. ♦Denmark -gives up the sovereignty of the Gottorp lands. 1658.♦ The Danish king -gave up the _sovereignty_ of the Gottorp districts of the duchies. Even -if that cession implied the surrender of his own feudal superiority -over the Gottorp districts of Sleswick, he could not alienate any part -of the Imperial rights over Holstein. ♦Fluctuations in the duchies. -1675-1700.♦ This sovereignty, in whatever it consisted, was lost -and won several times between king and Duke before the end of the -century. ♦Danish possession of Oldenburg. 1678.♦ Meanwhile the Danish -crown became possessed of the outlying duchies of _Oldenburg_ and -_Delmenhorst_, which in some sort balanced the Swedish possession of -Bremen and Verden. - -♦Sweden after the peace of Oliva.♦ - -The wars and treaties which were ended by the peace of Oliva fixed the -boundaries of the Baltic lands for a season. They fixed the home extent -of Sweden down to the present century. They cut off Denmark, save its -one outpost of _Bornholm_, from the Baltic itself, as distinguished -from the narrow seas which lead to it. They fixed the extent of Poland -down to the partitions. What they failed to do for any length of time -was to cut off Russia from the Baltic, and to establish Sweden on -the Ocean. But for the present we leave Sweden ruling over the whole -western and the greater part of the eastern coast of the Northern -Mediterranean, and holding smaller possessions both on its southern -coast and on the Ocean. The rest of the eastern and southern coast of -the Baltic is divided between the Polish fief of Curland, the dominions -of the common ruler of Pomerania and Prussia,—now an independent prince -in his eastern duchy,—and the small piece of Polish coast placed -invitingly between the two parts of his dominions. In her own peninsula -Sweden has reached her natural frontier, and has given back what she -won for a moment beyond it. While Sweden has this vast extent of coast -with comparatively little extent inland, the vast inland region of -Poland and Lithuania has hardly any seaboard, and the still vaster -inland region of Russia has none at all in Europe, except on the White -Sea. Thus the most striking feature of this period is the advance of -Sweden; but we have seen that it was also a time of great advance on -the part of Russia. It was a time of yet greater advance on that side -of her dominion where Russia had no European rivals. - -♦Eastern advance of Russia.♦ - -In the case of Russia, the only European power which could conquer -and colonize by land in barbarian regions,[69] her earlier barbarian -conquests were absolutely necessary to her existence. No hard line can -be drawn between her earliest and her latest conquests, between the -first advance of Novgorod and the last conquests in Turkestan. But the -advance which immediately followed the deliverance from the Tartar yoke -marks a great epoch. The smaller khanats into which the dominion of -the Golden Horde had been broken up still kept Russia from the Euxine -and the Caspian. ♦Conquest of Kazan and Astrakhan. 1552-1554.♦ The two -khanats on the Volga, _Kazan_ and _Astrakhan_, were subdued by Ivan -the Terrible. The coast of the Caspian was now reached. But the khans -of _Crim_ remained, unsubdued and dangerous enemies, still cutting off -Russia from the Euxine. ♦Superiority over the Don Cossacks. 1577.♦ Yet, -even in this direction an advance was made when the Russian supremacy -was acknowledged by the Cossacks of the Don. ♦Beginning of Siberian -conquest. 1581. | 1592-1706.♦ The conquest of the Siberian khanat, with -its capital _Tobolsk_, next followed, and thence, in the course of the -next century, the boundless extent of northern Asia was added to the -Russian dominion. - - -§ 5. _The Decline of Sweden and Poland._ - -In the last section we traced out the greatest advance of Sweden and -a large advance of Russia, both made at the cost of Poland, that of -Sweden also at the cost of Denmark. We saw also the beginnings of -a power which we still called _Brandenburg_ rather than _Prussia_. -♦Growth of Prussia.♦ In the present section, describing the work of the -eighteenth century, we have to trace the growth of this last power, -which now definitely takes the Prussian name, and which we have to -look at in its Prussian character. ♦Decline of Sweden. | Extinction of -Poland.♦ The period is marked by the decline of Sweden and the utter -wiping out of Poland and Lithuania, Russia and Prussia in different -degrees being chief actors in both cases. ♦Kingdom of Prussia. 1701.♦ -At the beginning of the period Prussia becomes a kingdom—a sign of -advance, though not accompanied by any immediate increase of territory. -♦Empire of Russia. 1721.♦ A little later the ruler of Russia, already -Imperial in his own tongue,[70] more definitely takes the Imperial -style as _Emperor of all the Russias_. This might pass as a challenge -of the Russian lands, Black, White, and Red, which were still held by -Poland. - -♦Russia on the Baltic.♦ - -But more pressing than the recovery of these lands was the breaking -down of the barrier by which Sweden kept Russia away from the Baltic. -To a very slight extent this was a recovery of old Russian territory; -but the position now won by Russia was wholly new. ♦Wars of Charles and -Peter. 1700-1721. | Foundation of Saint Petersburg. 1703.♦ The war with -Charles the Twelfth made Russia a great Baltic power, and Peter the -Great, early in the struggle, set up the great trophy of his victory -in the foundation of his new capital of Saint Petersburg on ground -won from Sweden. ♦Cession of Livland, &c., by Sweden.♦ The peace of -Nystad confirmed Russia in the possession of Swedish Livland, Esthland, -Ingermanland, part of Carelia, and a small part of Finland itself. -♦Further advance of Russia. 1741-1743.♦ Another war, ended by the Peace -of Åbo, gave Russia another small extension in Finland. - -At the same time Sweden was cut short in her other outlying -possessions. ♦Sweden loses Bremen, Verden, and part of Pomerania.♦ -Of her German fiefs, the duchies of Bremen and Verden passed, first -to Denmark, then to Hannover. But her Baltic possessions were only -partly lost, to the profit of Brandenburg. The frontier of Swedish -Pomerania fell back to the north-west, losing Stettin, but keeping -Stralsund, Wolgast, and Rügen. Denmark meanwhile advanced in the -debateable land on her southern frontier. ♦Danish conquest of the -Gottorp lands. 1713-1715.♦ The Danish occupation of Bremen and Verden -was only momentary; but the Gottorp share of Sleswick and Holstein was -conquered, and the possession of all Sleswick was guaranteed to Denmark -by England and France. ♦The Gottorp lands in Holstein restored.♦ But -the Gottorp share of Holstein, as an Imperial fief, was given back to -its Duke. ♦They pass to Denmark in exchange for Oldenburg. 1767-1773.♦ -Lastly, when the house of Gottorp had mounted the throne of Russia, -the Gottorp portion of Holstein was ceded to Denmark in exchange for -Oldenburg and Delmenhorst, which were at once given to another branch -of the family. - - * * * * * - -♦First partition of Poland. 1772.♦ - -In the latter part of the eighteenth century the three partitions -of Poland brought about the all but complete recovery of the lands -which the Lithuanian dukes had won from Russia. ♦Russian share.♦ The -first partition gave Russia Polish Livland, and all the lands which -Poland still kept beyond Duna and Dnieper. The greater part of _White -Russia_ was thus won back. ♦Prussian share. | Brandenburg and Prussia -geographically united.♦ At the same time the house of Hohenzollern -gained its great territorial need, the geographical union of the -kingdom of Prussia with the lands of Brandenburg and Pomerania, now -increased by nearly all Silesia. This union was made by Poland giving -up _West Prussia_—Danzig remaining an outlying city of Poland—and part -of _Great Poland_ and _Cujavia_, known as the _Netz District_.[71] -♦Austrian share. | Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria.♦ The Austrian -share, the new kingdom of _Galicia and Lodomeria_, was a kind of -commemoration of the conquests of Lewis the Great:[72] but, while it -did not take in all _Red Russia_, it took in part of _Podolia_ and of -_Little Poland_ south of the Vistula, making Cracow a frontier city. -♦Russian territory held by Austria.♦ Austria thus became possessed of -a part of the old Russian territory, most of which she has kept ever -since. - -♦Second partition. 1793.♦ - -The Polish state was thus maimed on all sides; but it still kept a -considerable territorial extent. The second partition, the work of -Russia and Prussia only, could only be a preparation for the final -death-blow. ♦Russian share.♦ It gave to Russia the rest of _Podolia_ -and _Ukraine_, and part of _Volhynia_ and _Podlasia_. _Little Russia_ -and _White Russia_ were thus wholly won back, and the Russian frontier -was advanced within the old Lithuanian duchy. ♦Prussian share.♦ Prussia -took nearly all that was left of the oldest Polish state, the rest of -_Great Poland_ and _Cujavia_, and part of _Mazovia_, forming the _South -Prussia_ of the new nomenclature. Gnesen, the oldest Polish capital, -the metropolis of the Polish Church, now passed away from Poland. - -The remnant that was left to Poland took in the greater part of _Little -Poland_, part of _Mazovia_, the greater part of the old _Lithuania_ -with the fragment still left of its Russian territory, _Samogitia_ and -the fief of _Curland_. ♦Third partition. 1795.♦ The final division -was delayed only two years. This time all three partners joined. -♦Russian share.♦ Russia took all _Lithuania_ east of the Niemen, with -its capital _Vilna_, also _Curland_ and _Samogitia_ to the north, and -the old Russian remnant to the south. ♦Austrian share.♦ Austria took -_Cracow_, with nearly all the rest of _Little Poland_, as also part -of _Mazovia_, by the name of _New Galicia_. ♦Prussian share.♦ Prussia -took _Danzig_ and _Thorn_, as also a small piece of _Little Poland_ to -improve the frontiers of South Prussia and Silesia, perhaps without -thinking that this last process was an advance of the Roman Terminus. -The capital _Warsaw_, with the remnant of _Mazovia_ and the strip of -_Lithuania_ west of the Niemen, also fell to Prussia. The names of -Poland and Lithuania now passed away from the map. - -♦No original Polish territory gained by Russia in the partitions.♦ - -It is important to remember that the three partitions gave no part -of the original Polish realm to Russia. Russia took back the Russian -territory which had been long before won by Lithuania, and added the -greater part of Lithuania itself, with the lands immediately to the -north. ♦The old Poland divided between Prussia and Austria.♦ The -ancient kingdom of Poland was divided between Prussia and Austria, and -the oldest Poland of all fell to the lot of Prussia. ♦Poland passes to -Prussia,♦ Great Poland, Silesia, Pomerania, the Polish lands which had -passed to the mark of Brandenburg, once united under Polish rule, were -again united under the power to which they had gradually fallen away. -♦Chrobatia to Austria.♦ Austria or Hungary meanwhile took the rest of -the northern Chrobatia, seven hundred years after the acquisition of -the former part, and also the Russian land which had been twice before -added to the Magyar kingdom. - - * * * * * - -♦Advance to the Euxine.♦ - -Meanwhile Russia made advances in other quarters of nearly equal -extent. As the remnant of the Saracen at Granada cut off the Castilian -from his southern coast or the Mediterranean, for more than two hundred -years, so did the remnant of the Tartar in _Crim_ cut off the Russian -for as long a time from his southern coast on the Euxine. ♦Occupation -of Azof. 1696-1711.♦ Peter the Great first made his way, if not to -the Euxine, at least to its inland gulf, by the taking of _Azof_. -But the new conquest was only temporary. After seventy years more -the work was done. ♦Independence of Crim 1774. | Annexation of Crim. -1783.♦ First came the nominal independence of the Crimean khanat, -then its incorporation with Russia. The work at which Megarian and -Genoese colonists had laboured was now done; the northern coast of the -Euxine was won for Europe.[73] The road through which so many Turanian -invaders had pressed into the Aryan continent was blocked for ever. -♦Conquest of Jedisan. 1791.♦ The next advance, the limit of Russian -advance made strictly at the expense of the barbarian as distinguished -from his Christian vassals, carried the Russian frontier from the Bug -to the Dniester. - -♦Russian conquests from Persia. 1727-1734.♦ - -The chief Asiatic acquisition of Russia in the eighteenth century took -a strange form. It was conquest beyond the sea, though only beyond the -inland Caspian. Turk and Russian joined to dismember Persia, and for -some years Russia held the south coast of that great lake, the lands -of _Daghestan_, _Ghilan_, and _Mazanderan_. ♦Superiority over Georgia. -1783.♦ Later in the century the ancient Christian kingdom of _Georgia_ -passed under Russian superiority, the earnest of much Russian conquest -on both sides of Caucasus. ♦Superiority over the Kirghis. 1773.♦ And -nearly at the same time as the first steps towards the acquisition of -Crim, the Russian dominion was spread over the _Kirghis_ hordes west -of the river Ural, winning a coast on the eastern Caspian, the sea of -Aral, and the Baltash lake. - -♦Survey at the end of the eighteenth century.♦ - -Thus, by the end of the eighteenth century, the Swedish power has -fallen back. Its territory east of the Baltic is less than it was at -the beginning of the sixteenth century. Denmark, on the other hand, has -grown by an advance in the debateable southern duchies. All Sleswick -is added to the Danish crown; all Holstein is held by the Danish king. -Poland has vanished. The anomalous power on the middle Danube, whose -princes, it must be remembered, still wore the crown of the Empire, has -thrust itself into the very heart of the old Polish land. But the power -which has gained most by the extinction of Poland has been the new -kingdom of Prussia. If part of her annexations lasted only a few years, -she made her Baltic coast continuous for ever. But Prussia and Austria -alike, by joining to wipe out the central state of the whole region, -have given themselves a mighty neighbour. Russia has wholly cast aside -her character as a mere inland power, intermediate between Europe and -Asia. She has won her way, after so many ages, to her old position and -much more. She has a Baltic and an Euxine seaboard. Her recovery of her -old lands on the Duna and the Dnieper, her conquest of new lands on the -Niemen, have brought her into the heart of Europe. And she has opened -the path which was also to lead her into the heart of Asia, and to -establish her in the intermediate mountain land between the Euxine and -the Caspian. - - -§ 6. _The Modern Geography of the Baltic Lands._ - -♦The French revolutionary wars.♦ - -The territorial arrangements of Northern and Eastern Europe were not -affected by the French revolutionary wars till after the fall of the -Western Empire. At that moment the frontier of Germany and Denmark -was still what it had been under Charles the Great; “Eidora Romani -terminus Imperii.” Only now the Danish king ruled to the south of the -boundary stream in the character of a prince of the Empire. ♦Holstein -incorporated with Denmark, and Swedish Pomerania with Sweden. 1806.♦ -The fall of the Empire put an end to this relation, and the duchy of -Holstein was incorporated with the Danish realm. In the like sort, -the Swedish kingdom was extended to the central mainland of Europe, -by the incorporation of the Pomeranian dominions of the Swedish king. -♦Russian conquest of Finland, 1809.♦ Before long, the last war between -Sweden and Russia was ended by the peace of Friderikshamn, when Sweden -gave up all her territory east of the gulf as far as the river Tornea, -together with the isles of _Aland_. ♦Grand Duchy of Finland.♦ These -lands passed to the Russian Emperor as a separate and privileged -dominion, the _Grand Duchy of Finland_. Thus Sweden withdrew to her own -side of the Baltic, while Russia at last became mistress of the whole -eastern coast from the Prussian border northward. ♦Union of Sweden and -Norway. 1814-1815.♦ The general peace left this arrangement untouched, -but decreed the separation of Norway from Denmark and its union with -Sweden. This was carried out so far as to effect the union of Sweden -and Norway as independent kingdoms under a single king. ♦Swedish -Pomerania passes to Denmark.♦ Denmark got in compensation, as diplomacy -calls it, a scrap of its old Slavonic realm, Rügen and Swedish -Pomerania. ♦Exchanged with Prussia for Lauenburg.♦ These detached lands -were presently exchanged with Prussia for a land adjoining Holstein, -the duchy of _Lauenburg_, the representative of ancient Saxony.[74] -♦Heligoland passes to England.♦ Denmark kept Iceland, but the Frisian -island of _Heligoland_ off the coast of Sleswick passed to England. -Thus the common king of Sweden and Norway reigns over the whole of the -northern peninsula and over nothing out of it. No such great change had -affected the Scandinavian kingdoms since the union of Calmar. - -♦Holstein and Lauenburg join the German Confederation.♦ - -Meanwhile the king of Denmark, remaining the independent sovereign -of Denmark, Iceland, and Sleswick, entered the German Confederation -for his duchies of Holstein and Lauenburg. ♦Disputes and wars in the -Duchies.♦ Disputes and wars made no geographical change till the war -which followed the accession of the present king. The changes which -then followed have been told elsewhere.[75] ♦Transfer of Sleswick -and Holstein, with Lauenburg to Prussia. 1864-1866.♦ They amount to -the transfer to Prussia of Lauenburg, Holstein, and Sleswick, with a -slight change of frontier and a redistribution of the smaller islands. -A conditional engagement for the restoration of northern Sleswick to -Denmark was not fulfilled, and has been formally annulled. - - * * * * * - -♦Losses of Prussia. 1806.♦ - -In the lands which had been Poland and Lithuania, the immediate result -of the French wars was the creation of a new Polish state; their -final result was a great extension of the dominion of Russia. Prussia -had to surrender its whole Polish territory, save West Prussia.[76] -♦Bialystok added to Russia. | Danzig a commonwealth.♦ A small -Lithuanian territory, the district of _Bialystok_, was given to Russia; -_Danzig_ became a separate commonwealth. ♦Duchy of Warsaw♦ The rest of -the Prussian share of Poland formed the new _Duchy of Warsaw_. This -state was really no bad representative of the oldest Poland of all. -Silesia was gone; but the new duchy took in Great Poland and Cujavia, -with parts of Little Poland, Mazovia, and Lithuania. It took in the -oldest capital at Gnesen and the newest at Warsaw. ♦Enlarged by part -of Austrian Poland. 1810.♦ The new state was presently enlarged by -the addition of the territory added to Austria by the last partition. -Cracow, with the greater part of Little Poland, was again joined to -Great Poland. ♦Extent of the Duchy.♦ Speaking roughly, the duchy took -in nearly the whole of the old Polish kingdom, without Silesia, but -with some small Lithuanian and Russian territory added. - -♦Arrangements of 1815.♦ - -It was the Poland thus formed, a state which answered much more -nearly to the Poland of the fourteenth than to the Poland of the -eighteenth century, which, by the arrangements of the Vienna Congress, -first received a Russian sovereign. ♦Danzig and Posen restored to -Prussia.♦ Prussia now again rounded off her _West-Prussian_ province -by the recovery of Danzig and Thorn, and she rounded off her southern -frontier by the recovery of Posen and Gnesen, which had been part -of her _South-Prussian_ province. The _Grand Duchy of Posen_ became -again part of the Prussian state. ♦Cracow a commonwealth. | Annexed by -Austria. 1846.♦ _Cracow_ became a republic, to be annexed by Austria -thirty years later. ♦Kingdom of Poland united to Russia. 1831-1863.♦ -The remainder of the Duchy of Warsaw, under the style of the _Kingdom -of Poland_, became a separate kingdom, but with the Russian Emperor -as its king. ♦Russia takes old Polish territory for the first time.♦ -Later events have destroyed, first its constitution, then its separate -being; and now all ancient Poland, except the part of Great Poland kept -by Prussia and the part of Little Poland kept by Austria, is merged in -the Russian Empire. Thus the Russian acquisition of strictly Polish, -as distinguished from old-Russian and Lithuanian territory, dates, not -from the partitions, but from the Congress of Vienna. It was to the -behoof of Prussia and Austria, not of Russia, that the old kingdom of -the Piasts was broken in pieces. - -The changes of the nineteenth century with regard to the lands on -the European coasts of the Euxine have been told elsewhere.[77] -♦Fluctuation of the Russian frontier towards Moldavia. | 1812-1878.♦ -They amount, as far as the geographical boundaries of Russia are -concerned, to her advance to the Pruth and the Danube, her partial -withdrawal, her second partial advance. ♦Advance in the Caucasus.♦ -Meanwhile the Russian advance in the nineteenth century on the Asiatic -shores of the Euxine and in the lands on and beyond the Caspian has -been far greater than her advance during the eighteenth. It is in our -own century that Russia has taken up her commanding position between -the Euxine and the Caspian seas, one which in some sort amounts to an -enlargement of Europe at the expense of Asia. The old frontier on the -Caspian, which had hardly changed since the conquest of Astrakhan, -reached to the _Terek_. The annexation of Crim made the _Kuban_ the -boundary on the side of the Euxine. ♦Incorporation of Georgia. 1800.♦ -The incorporation of the _Georgian_ kingdom gave Russia an outlying -territory south of the Caucasus on the upper course of the _Kur_. -♦Advance on the Caspian. 1802.♦ Next came the acquisition of the -Caspian coast from the mouth of the Terek to the mouth of the Kur, the -land of _Daghestan_ and _Shirwan_, including part of the territory -which had been held for a few years in the eighteenth century. -♦Advance in Armenia and Circassia. 1829.♦ The Persian and Turkish wars -gave Russia the Armenian land of _Erivan_ as far as the _Araxes_, -_Mingrelia_ and _Immeretia_, and the nominal cession of the Euxine -coast between them and the older frontier. ♦1859.♦ But it was thirty -years before the mountain region of _Circassia_ was fully subdued. -♦1878.♦ The last changes have extended the Trans-Caucasian frontier of -Russia to the south by the addition of _Batoum_ and _Kars_. - -♦Advance in Turkestan. 1853-1868.♦ - -In the lands east of the Caspian the new province of Turkestan -gradually grew up in the lands on the Jaxartes, reaching southward -to Samarkand. ♦1875.♦ _Khokand_ to the south-east followed, while -_Khiva_ and _Bokhara_, the lands on the Oxus, have passed under Russian -influence. The Turcoman tribes immediately east of the Caspian have -also been annexed. The Caspian has thus nearly become a Russian lake. -Hardly anything remains to Persia except the extreme southern coast -which was once for a moment Russian. - -♦Advance in Eastern Asia. 1858.♦ - -Far again to the east, Russia has added a large territory on the -Chinese border on the river Amoor. ♦Extent and character of the Russian -dominion.♦ All these conquests form the greatest continuous extent of -territory by land which the world has ever seen, unless during the -transient dominion of the old Mongols. No other European power in any -age has, or could have had, such a continuous dominion, because no -other European power has ever had the unknown barbarian world lying -in the same way at its side. Nowhere again has any European power -held a dominion so physically unbroken as that which stretches from -the gulf of Riga to the gulf of Okhotsk. The greater part of the -Asiatic dominion of Russia belongs to that part of Asia which has -least likeness to Europe. It is only on the Frozen Ocean that we find -a kind of mockery of inland seas, islands, and peninsulas. Massive -unbroken extent by land is its leading character. And as this character -extends to a large part of European Russia also, Russia is the only -European land where there can be any doubt where Europe ends. The -barbarian dominion of other European states, a dominion beyond the -sea, has been a dominion of choice. The barbarian dominion of Russia in -lands adjoining her European territory is a dominion forced on her by -geographical necessity. The annexation of Kamtschatka became a question -of time when the first successors of Ruric made their earliest advance -towards the Finnish north. - -♦Russian America.♦ - -Alongside of this continuous dominion in Europe and Asia, the Russian -occupation of territory in a third continent, an occupation made by sea -after the manner of other European powers, has not been lasting. The -Russian territory in the north-west corner of America, the only part -of the world where Russia and England marched on one another, has been -sold to the United States. - - * * * * * - -♦Final Survey.♦ - -To return to Europe, the events of the nineteenth century have, -in the lands with which we are dealing, carried on the work of the -eighteenth by the further aggrandizement of Russia and Prussia. The -Scandinavian powers have withdrawn into the two Scandinavian peninsulas -and the adjoining islands, and in the southern peninsula the power -of Denmark has been cut short to the gain of Prussia. The Prussian -power meanwhile, formed in the eighteenth century by the union of -the detached lands of Prussia and Brandenburg, has in the nineteenth -grown into the imperial power of Germany, and has, even as a local -kingdom, become, by the acquisition of Swedish Pomerania, Holstein, and -Sleswick, the dominant power on the southern Baltic. The acquisition of -the duchies too, not only of Sleswick and Holstein, but of Bremen and -Verden also, as parts of the annexed kingdom of Hannover, have given -her a part of the former oceanic position both of Denmark and Sweden. -Russia has acquired the same position on the gulfs of the Baltic which -Prussia has on the south coast of the Baltic itself. The acquisition -of the new Poland has brought her frontier into the very midst of -Europe; it has made her a neighbour, not merely of Prussia as such, but -of Germany. The third sharer in the partition has drawn back from her -northern advance, but she has increased her scrap of Russia, her scrap -of Little Poland, her scrap of Moldavia,[78] by the suppression of a -free city. The southern advance of Russia on European ground has been -during this century an advance less of territory than of influence. The -frontier of 1878 is the restored frontier of 1812. It is in the lands -out of Europe that Russia has in the meanwhile advanced by strides -which look startling on the map, but which in truth spring naturally -from the geographical position of the one modern European power which -cannot help being Asiatic as well. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[51] See above, pp. 160-162. - -[52] See above, p. 163. - -[53] A common name for these closely allied nations is sometimes -needed. _Lettic_ is the most convenient; _Lett_, with the adjective -_Lettish_, is the special name of one of the obscurer members of the -family. - -[54] See above, p. 130. - -[55] See Einhard, Annals A. 815, where we read, ‘trans Ægidoram -fluvium in terram Nordmannorum ... perveniunt.’ So Vita Karoli 12: -‘Dani ac Sueones quos Nortmannos vocamus,’ and 14, ‘Nortmanni qui Dani -vocantur.’ But Adam of Bremen (ii. 3) speaks of ‘mare novissimum, quod -Nortmannos a Danis dirimit.’ But the name includes the Swedes: as in i. -63 he says, ‘Sueones et Gothi, vel, si ita melius dicuntur, Nortmanni,’ -and i. 16, ‘Dani et ceteri qui trans Daniam sunt populi _ab historicis -Francorum_ omnes Nordmanni vocantur.’ - -[56] See above, p. 131, 159. - -[57] See Adam of Bremen, iv. 16. - -[58] The origin of Samo and the chief seat of his dominion, whether -Bohemia or Carinthia, is discussed by Professor Fasching of Marburg -(Austria) in the _Zweiter Jahresbericht der kk. Staats-Oberrealschule -in Marburg_, 1872. - -[59] See Schafarik, _Slawische Alterthümer_, ii. 503. - -[60] See above, p. 198. - -[61] The Poles claim Boleslaf the First as the first king. But Lambert -(1067), who strongly insists on the tributary condition of Poland, -makes Boleslaf the Second the first king. The royal dignity was -certainly forfeited after his death. - -[62] There can be no doubt that the Russian name strictly belongs to -the Scandinavian rulers, and not to the Slavonic people. See Schafarik, -i. 65; Historical Essays, iii. 386. The case is parallel to that of the -Bulgarians and the Franks, save that the name _Rus_ is said to be, not -a Scandinavian name, but a name applied to the Swedes by the Fins. - -[63] See above pp. 365, 436. - -[64] This document, granted at Metz in 1214, will be found in -Bréholles’ _Historia Diplomatica Friderici Secundi_, i. 347. It reads -like a complete surrender of all Imperial rights in both the German -and the Slavonic conquests of Waldemar. It may be that it seems to -have that meaning only because the retreating of Terminus was deemed -inconceivable. - -[65] Vratislaf, who reigned from 1061 to 1092, is called the first king -of Bohemia, but his royal dignity was only personal. The succession of -kings begins only with Ottocar the First, who reigned from 1197 to 1230. - -[66] See above, p. 437. - -[67] See above, p. 448. - -[68] Conquered by Sweden 1643, restored to Denmark 1645. Ceded to -Sweden 1658, but recovered the same year. - -[69] See above, p. 467. - -[70] There is no doubt that the title of _Czar_, or rather _Tzar_, -borne by the Russian princes, as by those of Servia and Bulgaria in -earlier times, is simply a contraction of _Cæsar_. In the Treaty of -Carlowitz Peter the Great appears as Tzar of endless countries, but he -is not called _Imperator_, though the Sultan is. - -[71] See above, p. 212. - -[72] See above, pp. 319, 437. - -[73] It is however to be regretted that, in bringing back the old names -into these regions, they have been so often applied to wrong places. -Thus the new _Sebastopol_ answers to the old _Cherson_, while the new -_Cherson_ is elsewhere. The new _Odessa_ has nothing to do with the old -_Odêssos_, and so in other cases. - -[74] See above, p. 208. - -[75] See above, p. 228. - -[76] See also p. 222. - -[77] See above, p. 449. - -[78] See above, p. 441. - - - - -CHAPTER XII. - -THE SPANISH PENINSULA AND ITS COLONIES. - - -♦Analogy between Spain and Scandinavia.♦ - -The great peninsula of the West has much in common with the great -peninsula of the North. ♦Slight relations with the Empire.♦ Save Sweden -and Norway, no part of Western Europe has had so little to do with the -later Empire as Spain. ♦Break between earlier and later history.♦ And -in no land that formed part of the earlier Empire, save our own island, -is the later history so completely cut off from the earlier history. -The modern kingdoms of Spain have still less claim to represent the -West-Gothic kingdom than the modern kingdom of France had to represent -the Frankish kingdom. ♦Modern Spanish history begins with the Saracen -conquest.♦ The history of Spain, as an element in the European system, -begins with the Saracen invasion. For a hundred years before that time -all trace of dependence on the elder Empire had passed away. With the -later Western Empire Spain had nothing to do after the days of Charles -the Great and his immediate successors. Their claims over a small part -of the country passed away from the Empire to the kings of Karolingia. - -♦Analogy between Spain and South-eastern Europe.♦ - -With the Eastern Empire and the states which grew out of it Spain -has the closest connexion in the way of analogy. ♦Comparison of the -effects of conquest and deliverance in each.♦ Each was a Christian land -conquered from the Mussulman. Each has been wholly or partially won -back from him. But the deliverance of south-western Europe was mainly -the work of its own people, and its deliverance was nearly ended when -the bondage of south-eastern Europe was only beginning. Again, in -south-eastern Europe the nations were fully formed before the Mussulman -conquest, and they have lived through it. ♦The Spanish nation formed -by the war with the Mussulmans.♦ In Spain the Mussulman conquest cut -short the West-Gothic power just as it was growing into a new Romance -nation; the actual Romance nation of Spain was formed by the work of -withstanding the invaders. ♦Analogy between Spain and Russia.♦ The -closest analogy of all is between Spain and Russia. Each was delivered -by its own people. In each case, long after the main deliverance had -been wrought, long after the liberated nation had begun again to take -its place in Europe, the ransomed land was still cut off, by a fragment -of its old enemies, from the coasts of its own southern sea. - - * * * * * - -♦Extent of the West-Gothic and the Saracen dominions.♦ - -The Saracen dominion in the West, as established by the first -conquerors, answered very nearly to the West-Gothic kingdom, as it -then stood: but it did not exactly answer to _Spain_, either in the -geographical or in the later Roman sense.[79] When the Saracen came, -the Empire, not the Goth, still held the Balearic Isles, and the -fortresses of _Tangier_ and _Ceuta_ on the Mauretanian side of the -strait. On the other hand, the Goth did not hold quite the whole -of the peninsula, while his dominion took in the Gaulish land of -_Septimania_. Strictly speaking, the conquest was one, not of Spain -geographically, but of the West-Gothic dominions in and out of Spain, -and of the outlying Imperial possessions in their neighbourhood. ♦Two -centres of deliverance.♦ It was from the lands which hindered both -the West-Gothic and the Saracen dominion from exactly answering to -geographical Spain that deliverance came, and it came in two forms. -♦The independent lands.♦ From the land to the north-west, which held -out against both Goth and Saracen, came that form of deliverance which -was strictly native. ♦The Frankish dominion. 752-759.♦ At the other -end, the Frank first won back for Christendom the Saracen province -in Gaul, and then carried his arms into the neighbouring corner of -Spain. ♦778.♦ Thus we get two centres of deliverance, two groups of -states which did the work. There are the north-western lands, whose -history is purely Spanish, which simply withstood the Saracen, and -the north-eastern lands, which were first won from the Saracen by the -Frank, and which gradually freed themselves from their deliverer. -♦Represented severally by Castile and Portugal, and by Aragon.♦ The -former class are represented in later Spanish history by the kingdoms -of Castile and Portugal, the latter by the kingdom of Aragon. Navarre -lies between the two, and shares in the history of both. The former -start geographically from the mountain region washed by the Ocean. -The latter start geographically from the mountains which divide -Gaul and Spain, and which stretch westward to the Mediterranean. -The geographical position of the regions foreshadows their later -history.[80] ♦Later history of Aragon.♦ It was Aragon, looking to the -East, which first played a great part in European affairs, and which -carried Spanish influence and dominion into Gaul, Sicily, Italy, and -Greece. ♦Of Castile and Portugal.♦ It was Portugal and Castile, looking -to the West, which established an Iberian dominion beyond the bounds -of Europe. The fact that a Queen of Castile in the fifteenth century -married a King of Aragon and not a King of Portugal has led us to -speak of the peninsular kingdoms as ‘_Spain_ and _Portugal_.’[81] For -some ages ‘Spain and Aragon’ would have been a more natural division. -But the very difference in the fields of action of Castile and Aragon -hindered any such strong opposition. Between Castile and Portugal, on -the other hand, a marked rivalry arose in the field which was common to -both. - -♦The more strictly native centre foremost in the work of deliverance.♦ - -Of these two centres, one purely Spanish, the other brought for a -long time under a greater or less degree of foreign influence, the -more strictly native region was foremost in the work of national -deliverance. How far western Spain stood in advance of eastern Spain is -shown by the speaking fact that Toledo, so much further to the south, -was won by Castile a generation before Zaragoza was won by Aragon. -♦Relations of Castile and Aragon towards Navarre.♦ But both Castile and -Aragon, as powers, grew out of the break-up of a momentary dominion in -the land which lay between them, and whose later history is much less -illustrious than theirs. In the second quarter of the eleventh century -the kingdom of _Pampeluna_ or _Navarre_ had, by the energy of a single -man, the Sviatopluk or Stephen Dushan of his little realm, risen to the -first place among the Christian powers of Spain. Castile and Aragon do -not appear with kingly rank till both had passed under the momentary -rule of a neighbour which in after times seemed so small beside either -of them. And the name of _Castile_, whether as county, kingdom, or -empire, marks a comparatively late stage of Christian advance. We must -here go back for a moment to those early days of the long crusade of -eight hundred years at which we have already slightly glanced.[82] - - -§ 1. _The Foundation of the Spanish Kingdoms._ - -♦Founding of the kingdom of Leon. 753. | 916.♦ - -We have seen how the union of the small independent lands of the north, -_Asturia_ and _Cantabria_, grew into the kingdom, first of _Oviedo_ -and then of _Leon_. _Gallicia_, on the one side, representing in some -sort the old Suevian kingdom, _Bardulia_ or the oldest _Castile_, the -land of Burgos, on the other side, were lands which were early inclined -to fall away. ♦Christian advance.♦ The growth of the Christian powers -on this side was favoured by internal events among the Mussulmans, by -famines and revolts which left a desert border between the hostile -powers. ♦The Ommiad emirate. 755.♦ The Ommiad emirate, afterwards -caliphate, was established almost at the moment of the Saracen loss -of Septimania. ♦The Spanish March. 778-801.♦ Then came the _Spanish -March_ of Charles the Great, which brought part of northern Spain once -more within the bounds of the new Western Empire, as the conquests of -Justinian had brought back part of southern Spain within the bounds of -the undivided Empire. ♦Its extent.♦ This march, at its greatest extent, -took in Pampeluna at one end and Barcelona at the other, with the -intermediate lands of _Aragon_, _Ripacurcia_, and _Sobrarbe_. But the -Frankish dominion soon passed away from Aragon, and still sooner from -Pampeluna. ♦Its division.♦ The western part of the march, which still -acknowledged the superiority of the Kings of Karolingia, split up into -a number of practically independent counties, which made hardly any -advance against the common enemy. - -Meanwhile the land of Pampeluna became, at the beginning of the -eleventh century, an independent and powerful kingdom. ♦Navarre under -Sancho the Great. 1000-1035.♦ The Navarre of Sancho the Great stretched -some way beyond the Ebro; to the west it took in the ocean lands of -_Biscay_ and _Guipuzcoa_, with the original Castile; to the east it -took in _Aragon_, _Ripacurcia_, and _Sobrarbe_. The two Christian -kingdoms of Navarre and Leon took in all north-eastern Spain. The -Douro was reached and crossed; the Tagus itself was not far from the -Christian boundary; but the states which owned the superiority of the -power which we may now call _France_ were still far from the lower Ebro. - -♦Break-up of the kingdom of Navarre (1035), and of the Ommiad caliphate -(1028).♦ - -At the death of Sancho the Great his momentary dominion broke up. -Seven years earlier the dominion of the Ommiad caliphs had broken up -also. These two events, so near together, form the turning-point in -the history of the peninsula. Instead of the one Ommiad caliphate, -there arose a crowd of separate Mussulman kingdoms, which had to call -for help to their Mussulman brethren in Africa. ♦Invasion of the -Almoravides. 1086-1110.♦ This led to what was really a new African -conquest of Mussulman Spain. The new deliverers or conquerors spread -their dominion over all the Mussulman powers, save only Zaragoza. -♦Use of the name _Moors_.♦ This settlement, with other later ones of -the same kind, gives a specially African look to the later history -of Mahometan Spain, and has doubtless helped to give the Spanish -Mussulmans the common name of _Moors_. But their language and culture -remained Arabic, and the revolution caused by the African settlers -among the ruins of the Western caliphate was far from being so great as -the revolution caused by the Turkish settlers among the ruins of the -Eastern caliphate. - -♦New kingdoms, Castile, Aragon, and Sobrarbe 1035.♦ - -Out of the break-up of the dominion of Sancho came out the separate -kingdom of Navarre, and the new kingdoms of _Castile_, _Aragon_, and -_Sobrarbe_. ♦Union of Aragon and Sobrarbe. 1040.♦ Of these the two last -were presently united, thus beginning the advance of Aragon. Thus we -come to four of the five historic kingdoms of Spain—Navarre, Castile, -Aragon, and Leon, whose unions and divisions are endless. ♦Shiftings -of Castile and Leon. 1037. | 1065-1073.♦ The first king Ferdinand of -Castile united Castile and Leon; Castile, Leon, and Gallicia were -again for a moment separated under his son. ♦1076-1134.♦ Aragon and -Navarre were united for nearly sixty years. ♦The Emperor Alfonso -1135.♦ Presently Spain has an Emperor in Alfonso of Castile, Leon, and -Gallicia. ♦1157.♦ But Empire and kingdom were split asunder. Leon and -Castile became separate kingdoms under the sons of Alfonso, and they -remained separate for more than sixty years. ♦Final union of Castile -and Leon. 1230.♦ Their final union created the great Christian power of -Spain. - -♦Decline of Navarre.♦ - -Navarre meanwhile, cut short by the advance of Castile, shorn of its -lands on the Ocean and beyond the Ebro, lost all hope of any commanding -position in the peninsula. ♦1234.♦ It passed to a succession of French -kings, and for a long time it had no share in the geographical history -of Spain. ♦Growth of Aragon.♦ But the power of Aragon grew, partly by -conquests from the Mussulmans, partly by union with the French fiefs -to the east. ♦Union with Barcelona. 1131.♦ The first union between -the crown of Aragon and the county of _Barcelona_ led to the great -growth of the power of Aragon on both sides of the Pyrenees and even -beyond the Rhone.[83] ♦1213.♦ This power was broken by the overthrow of -King Pedro at Muret. ♦Settlement with France. 1258.♦ But by the final -arrangement which freed _Barcelona_, _Roussillon_, and _Cerdagne_, from -all homage to France, all trace of foreign superiority passed away from -Christian Spain. The independent kingdom of Aragon stretched on both -sides of the Pyrenees, a faint reminder of the days of the West-Gothic -kings. - -On the other side of the peninsula the lands between Douro and Minho -began to form a separate state. ♦County of Portugal. 1094.♦ The county -of _Portugal_ was held by princes of the royal house of France, as a -fief of the crown of Castile and Leon. ♦Kingdom, 1139.♦ The county -became a kingdom, and its growth cut off Leon, as distinguished from -Castile, from any advance against the Mussulmans. Navarre was cut off -already. But the three kingdoms of Castile, Aragon, and Portugal were -all ready for the work. A restored Western Christendom was growing -up to balance the falling away in the East. ♦Beginning of the great -Christian advance.♦ The first great advance of the Christians in Spain -began about the time of the Seljuk conquests from the Eastern Empire. -The work of deliverance was not ended till the Ottoman had been for -forty years established in the New Rome. - - * * * * * - -The Christian powers however were disunited, while the Mussulmans -had again gained, though at a heavy price, the advantage of union. -♦Conquest of Toledo. 1085.♦ Alfonso the Sixth, commanding the powers -of Castile and Leon, pressed far to the south, and won the old Gothic -capital of _Toledo_. ♦Battle of Zalacca. 1086.♦ But his further -advance was checked by the African invaders at the battle of Zalacca. -♦Advance of the Almoravides. | Advance of Aragon.♦ The Almoravide -power was too strong for any present hope of conquests on the part -of Castile; but the one independent Mussulman state at _Zaragoza_ -lay open to the Christians of the north-east. ♦Conquest of Zaragoza. -1118. | Of Tarragona.♦ Zaragoza itself was taken by the king of Aragon, -and _Tarragona_ by the Count of Barcelona. ♦Of Tortosa. 1148.♦ Both -these powers advanced, and the conquest of _Tortosa_ made the Ebro -the Christian boundary. ♦Advance of Portugal.♦ As the power of the -Almoravides weakened, Castile and Portugal again advanced on their -side. ♦Conquest of Lisbon. 1147. | Of Silvas. 1191.♦ The latter kingdom -made the great acquisition of its future capital _Lisbon_, and a -generation later, it reached the southern coast by the conquest of -_Silvas_ in Algarve. ♦Advance of Castile. 1147-1166.♦ Castile meanwhile -pressed to the Guadiana and beyond, counting _Calatrava_ and _Badajoz_ -among its cities. The line of struggle had advanced in about a century -from the land between Douro and Tagus to the land between Guadiana and -Guadalquivir. - -This second great Christian advance in the twelfth, century was again -checked in the same way in which the advance in the eleventh century -had been. ♦Invasion of the Almohades. 1146.♦ A new settlement of -African conquerors, the _Almohades_, won back a large territory from -both Castile and Portugal. ♦Battle of Alarcos. | 1196.♦ The battle -of Alarcos broke for a while the power of Castile, and the Almohade -dominion stretched beyond the lower Tagus. To the east, the lands -south of Ebro remained an independent Mussulman state. ♦Decline of -the Almohades.♦ But, as the Almohades were of doubtful Mahometan -orthodoxy, their hold on Spain was weaker than that of any other -Mahometan conquerors. ♦Battle of Navas de Tolosa. 1211.♦ Their power -broke up, and the battle of Navas de Tolosa ruled that Spain should be -a Christian land. All three kingdoms advanced, and within forty years -the Mussulman power in the peninsula was cut down to a mere survival. -♦Conquest of the Balearic Isles. 1228-1236. | Of Valencia. 1237-1305.♦ -Aragon won the _Balearic Isles_ and formed her kingdom of _Valencia_. -♦Of Murcia. 1243-1253.♦ But as Castile, by the incorporation of -_Murcia_, reached to the Mediterranean, any further advance in the -peninsula was forbidden to Aragon. ♦Advance of Portugal. 1217-1256.♦ On -the eastern side Portugal won back her lost lands, reached her southern -coast, kept all the land west of the lower Guadiana and some points to -the east of it. ♦Kingdom of Algarve.♦ To the kingdom of Portugal was -added the kingdom of _Algarve_. - -But the central power of Castile pressed on faster still. ♦Conquest -of Castile under Saint Ferdinand.♦ Under Saint Ferdinand began the -recovery of the great cities along the Guadalquivir. ♦Conquest of -Cordova. 1236. | Of Jaen. 1246. | Of Seville. 1248.♦ _Cordova_, the -city of the caliphs, was won; _Jaen_ followed; then more famous -_Seville_; and _Cadiz_, eldest of Western cities, passed again, as when -she first entered the Roman world, from Semitic into Aryan hands. ♦Of -Nibla. 1257. | Of Tarifa. 1285.♦ The conquest of _Nibla_ and _Tarifa_ -at last made the completion of the work only a question of time. - -No one in the middle of the twelfth century could have dreamed that -a Mussulman power would live on in Spain till the last years of -the fifteenth. ♦Kingdom of Granada. 1238.♦ This was the kingdom of -_Granada_, which began, amid the conquests of Saint Ferdinand, as a -vassal state of Castile. ♦Reconquered from Castile. 1298.♦ Yet, sixty -years later, it was able to win back a considerable territory from its -overlord. ♦Recovery by Castile. 1316. | 1430.♦ Part of the land now -gained was soon lost again; but part, with the city of _Huascar_, was -kept by the Mussulmans far into the fifteenth century. ♦Gibraltar lost -and won. 1309. 1333. 1344.♦ Meanwhile, on the strait between the ocean -and the Mediterranean, _Gibraltar_ was won by Castile, lost, and won -again. - - * * * * * - -♦Geographical position of the four kingdoms.♦ - -Thus, in the latter part of the thirteenth century, the peninsula -of Spain was very unequally divided between one Mussulman and four -Christian states. Aragon on the one side, Portugal on the other, were -kingdoms with a coast line out of all proportion to their extent -inwards. Aragon had become a triangle, Portugal a long parallelogram, -cut off on each side from the great trapezium formed by the whole -peninsula. Between these two lay the central power of Castile, with -Christian Navarre still separate at one corner and Mussulman Granada -still separate at another. Of these five kingdoms, Navarre and Aragon -alone marched to any considerable extent on any state beyond the -peninsula. Castile barely touched the Aquitanian dominions of England, -while Navarre and Aragon, both stretching north of the Pyrenees, had -together a considerable frontier towards Aquitaine and France. Navarre -and Aragon again marched on one another, while Portugal and Granada -marched only on Castile, the common neighbour of all. The destiny of -all was written on the map. Navarre at one end, Granada at the other, -were to be swallowed up by the great central power. Aragon, after -gaining a high European position, was to be united with Castile under -a single sovereign. Portugal alone was to become distinctly a rival of -Castile, but wholly in lands beyond the bounds of Europe. - -♦Title of ‘King of Spain.’♦ - -Of the five Spanish powers Castile so far outtopped the rest that -its sovereign was often spoken of in other lands as _King of Spain_. -But Spain contained more kingdoms than it contained kings. ♦The -lesser kingdoms.♦ Castile, Aragon, and Portugal were all formed by -a succession of unions and conquests, each of which commonly gave -their kings a new title. The central power was still the power of -_Castile and Leon_, not of Castile only. _Leon_ was made up of the -kingdoms of _Leon_ and _Gallicia_. Castile took in Castile proper or -_Old Castile_, with the principality of the _Asturias_, and the free -lands of _Biscay_, _Guipuzcoa_, and _Alava_. To the south it took -in the kingdoms—each marking a stage of advance—of _Toledo_ or _New -Castile_, of _Cordova_, _Jaen_, _Seville_, and _Murcia_. The sovereign -of Portugal held his two kingdoms of _Portugal_ and _Algarve_. ♦1262.♦ -The sovereign of Aragon, besides his enlarged kingdom of _Aragon_ and -his counties of _Catalonia_, _Roussillon_, and _Cerdagne_, held his -kingdom of _Valencia_ on the mainland, while the Balearic Isles formed -the kingdom of _Majorca_. ♦1349.♦ This last, first granted as a vassal -kingdom to a branch of the royal house, was afterwards incorporated -with the Aragonese state. - - -§ 2. _Growth and Partition of the Great Spanish Monarchy._ - -♦Little geographical change after the thirteenth century.♦ - -After the thirteenth century the strictly geographical changes within -the Spanish peninsula were but few. The boundaries of the kingdoms -changed but little towards one another, and not much towards France, -their only neighbour from the fifteenth century onwards. But the five -kingdoms were gradually grouped under two kings, for a while under one -only. ♦Territories beyond the peninsula.♦ The external geography, so -to speak, forms a longer story. We have to trace out the acquisition -of territory within Europe, first by Aragon and then by Castile, and -the acquisition of territory out of Europe, first by Portugal and -then by Castile. ♦The great Spanish Monarchy.♦ The permanent union -of the dominions of Castile and Aragon, the temporary union of the -dominions of Castile, Aragon, and Portugal, formed that great _Spanish -Monarchy_ which in the sixteenth century was the wonder and terror of -Europe, which lost important possessions in the sixteenth and in the -seventeenth century, and which was finally partitioned in the beginning -of the eighteenth. - - * * * * * - -♦1410-1430.♦ - -Within the peninsula we have seen Castile, in the first half of -the fifteenth century, win back the lands which had been lost to -Granada at the end of the fourteenth. ♦Conquest of Granada. 1492.♦ -The last decade of the fifteenth saw the ending of the struggle. -Men fondly deemed that the recovery of Granada balanced the loss of -Constantinople. ♦End of Mussulman rule in Spain.♦ But the last Moorish -prince still kept for a moment a small tributary dominion in the -Alpujarras, and it was the purchase of this last remnant which finally -put an end to the long rule of the Mussulman in Spain. - -The conquest of Granada was the joint work of a queen of Castile and -a king of Aragon. ♦1469.♦ But the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabel -did not at once unite their crowns. ♦Union of Castile and Aragon. -1506.♦ That union may be dated from the beginning of Ferdinand’s -second reign in Castile. ♦Loss and recovery of Roussillon. 1462-1493.♦ -Meanwhile _Roussillon_ and _Cerdagne_ had been, after thirty years’ -French occupation, won back by Aragon. ♦Conquest of Navarre. 1513.♦ -Then came the conquest of _Navarre_ south of the Pyrenees, which left -only the small part on the Gaulish side to pass to the French kings -of the House of Bourbon. Portugal was now the only separate kingdom -in the peninsula, and the tendency to look on the peninsula as made -up of _Spain_ and _Portugal_ was of course strengthened. ♦Annexation -and separation of Portugal. 1581-1640.♦ But later in the century -Portugal itself was for sixty years united with Castile and Aragon. -♦Final loss of Roussillon. 1659.♦ Portugal won back its independence; -and the Spanish dominion was further cut short by the final loss of -_Roussillon_. The Pyrenees were now the boundary of France and Spain, -except so far as the line may be held to be broken by the French right -of patronage over _Andorra_.[84] Since the Peace of the Pyrenees, the -peninsula itself has seen hardly any strictly geographical change. -♦Gibraltar lost to England, 1704-1713.♦ _Gibraltar_ has been for nearly -a hundred and eighty years occupied by England. ♦Oliverca. 1801.♦ -The fortress of _Oliverca_ has been yielded by Portugal to Spain. -♦Minorca.♦ And during the last century _Minorca_ passed to and fro -between Spain and England more times than it is easy to remember.[85] - - * * * * * - -♦Advance of Aragon beyond the peninsula.♦ - -The acquisition of territory beyond the peninsula naturally began -with Aragon. The acquisition of the Balearic isles may pass as the -enlargement of a peninsular kingdom; but before that happened, -Aragon had won and lost what was practically a great dominion north -of the Pyrenees. But this dominion was continuous with its Spanish -territory. ♦Union of Aragon and Sicily. 1282-1285.♦ The real beginning -of Aragonese dominion beyond the sea was when the war of the Vespers -for a moment united the crowns of Aragon and the insular Sicily. -♦Second union of Aragon and Sicily. 1409.♦ Then the island crown was -held by independent Aragonese princes, and lastly was again united -to the Aragonese crown. ♦Union of Aragon and continental Sicily. -1442-1458.♦ The continental Sicily had, during the reign of Alfonso the -Magnanimous, a common king with Aragon and the island. ♦Continental -Sicily under Aragonese princes. | Final union of Aragon and the -Sicilies. 1503.♦ Then the continental kingdom was—save during the -momentary French occupations—held by Aragonese princes till the final -union of the crowns of Aragon and the Two Sicilies. ♦War of Sardinia. -1309-1428.♦ Meanwhile a war of more than a hundred years gave to Aragon -the island of _Sardinia_ as a new kingdom. Thus, at the final union of -Castile and Aragon, Aragon brought with it the outlying crowns of the -Two Sicilies and of Sardinia. ♦1530.♦ The insular Sicilian kingdom was -slightly lessened by the grant of _Malta_ and _Gozo_ to the Knights -of Saint John. ♦1557.♦ The continental kingdom was increased by the -addition of a small Tuscan territory. - -♦Difference between the outlying possessions of Aragon and those of -Castile.♦ - -The outlying possessions of Aragon were thus strictly acquisitions -made by the Kings of Aragon on behalf of the crown of Aragon. ♦The -Burgundian inheritance. 1504.♦ But the extension of Castilian dominion -over distant parts of Europe was due only to the fact that the crown -of Castile passed to an Austrian prince who had inherited the greater -part of the dominions of the Dukes of Burgundy. But thereby the -_Netherlands_ and the counties of _Burgundy_ and _Charolois_ became -appendages to Castile, and went to swell the great Spanish Monarchy. -♦Duchy of Milan. 1535. | 1555.♦ The duchy of _Milan_ too, in whatever -character the Emperor Charles held it, became a Spanish dependency when -it passed to his son Philip. - -♦Extent of the Spanish Monarchy.♦ - -The European possessions of the Spanish Monarchy thus took in, at the -time of their greatest extent, the whole peninsula, the Netherlands -and the other Burgundian lands of the Austrian house, Roussillon, -the Sicilies, Sardinia, and Milan. ♦Loss of the United Netherlands. -1578-1609.♦ But this whole dominion was never held at once, unless for -form’s sake we count the United Netherlands as Spanish territory till -the Twelve Years’ Truce. Holland and its fellows had become practically -independent before Portugal was won. ♦Lands lost to France. 1659-1677.♦ -But it was not till after the loss of Portugal that Spain suffered her -great losses on the side of France, when the conquests of Lewis the -Fourteenth cost her Roussillon, Cerdagne, Charolois, the County of -Burgundy, Artois, and other parts of the Netherlands. The remainder of -the Netherlands, with Milan and the three outlying Aragonese kingdoms, -were kept till the partitions in the beginning of the eighteenth -century. ♦Partition of the Spanish Monarchy. 1713.♦ The final results -of so much fighting and treaty-making was to take away all the outlying -possessions of both Aragon and Castile, and to confine the Spanish -kingdom to the peninsula and the Balearic isles, less Portugal and -Gibraltar for ever, and less Minorca for a season. ♦Recovery of Sicily. -1718, 1735.♦ Since then Spain has never won back any part of the lost -possessions of Castile; but she has more than once won back the lost -possessions of Aragon, insular Sicily twice, continental Sicily once. -♦Spanish kings of the Two Sicilies. 1735-1860. | Duchy of Parma, -1731-1860.♦ And if the Sicilies were not kept as part of the Spanish -dominions, they passed to a branch of the Spanish royal house, as the -duchies of _Parma_ and _Piacenza_ passed to another. - - -§ 3. _The Colonial Dominion of Spain and Portugal._ - -The distinction between Spain and Portugal is most strikingly marked in -the dominion of the two powers beyond the bounds of Europe. ♦Character -of the Portuguese dominion out of Europe.♦ Portugal led the way among -European states to conquest and colonization out of Europe. She had a -geographical and historical call so to do. Her dominion out of Europe -was not indeed a matter of necessity like that of Russia, but it stood -on a different ground from that of England, France, or Holland. It -was not actually continuous with her own European territory, but it -began near to it, and it was a natural consequence and extension of -her European advance. The Asiatic and American dominion of Portugal -grew out of her African dominion, and her African dominion was the -continuation of her growth in her own peninsula. - -When the Moor was driven out of Spain, it was natural to follow him -across the narrow seas into a land which lay so near to Spain, and -which in earlier geography had passed as a Spanish land. ♦Portugal -fully formed in the thirteenth century.♦ But as far as Castile was -concerned, the Moor was not driven out till late in the fifteenth -century; as far as Portugal was concerned, he was driven out in the -thirteenth. Portugal had then reached her full extent in the peninsula, -and she could no longer advance against the misbelievers by land. One -is tempted to wonder that her advance beyond sea did not begin sooner. -♦Her African conquests, 1415-1471.♦ It came in the fifteenth century, -when fifty years of conquest gave to Portugal her kingdom of _Algarve -beyond the Sea_, an African dominion older than the Castilian conquest -of Granada. ♦The Algarves.♦ The king of _Portugal and the Algarves_ -thus held the southern pillar of Hercules, while Castile held the -northern. ♦Loss of African dominion, 1578.♦ The greater part of this -African kingdom was lost after the fall of Sebastian. ♦Ceuta Spanish.♦ -_Ceuta_ remained a Spanish possession after the dominion of Portugal, -so that Spain now holds the southern pillar and England the northern. -♦Tangier English, 1662-1683.♦ _Tangier_ too once passed from Portugal -to England as a marriage gift, and was presently forsaken as useless. - -♦Advance in Africa and the islands.♦ - -But before the kingdom of Algarve beyond the sea had passed away, -its establishment had led to the discovery of the whole coast of the -African continent, and to the growth of a vast Portuguese dominion in -various parts of the world. ♦Madeira, 1419. | Azores and Cape Verde -Islands. 1448-1454.♦ _Madeira_ was the first insular possession, -followed by the _Azores_ and _Cape Verde Islands_. Gradually, under the -care of Don Henry, the Portuguese power spread along the north-west -coast of Africa. ♦Cape of Good Hope, 1497. | Dominion of Arabia and -India.♦ The work went on: Vasco de Gama made his great discovery of the -Cape of Good Hope; the road to India was opened; dominion on the coasts -of Arabia and India, and even in the islands of the Indian Archipelago, -was added to dominion on the coast of Africa. This dominion perished -through the annexation of Portugal by Spain. Since the restoration -of Portuguese independence, only fragments of this great African and -Indian dominion have been kept. ♦Modern extent of Portuguese dominion -abroad.♦ But Portugal still holds the Atlantic islands, various points -and coasts in Africa, and a small territory in India and the Eastern -islands. - -But Portuguese enterprise led also to a more lasting work, to the -creation of a new European nation beyond the Ocean, the single European -monarchy which has taken root in the New World. ♦Discovery of Brazil, -1500. | 1531.♦ _Brazil_ was discovered by Portuguese sailors at the end -of the fifteenth century; it was settled as a Portuguese possession -early in the sixteenth. ♦1624-1654.♦ During the union of Portugal with -Spain the Dutch won for a while a large part of the country, but the -whole was won back by independent Portugal. The peculiar position of -Portugal, ever threatened by a more powerful neighbour, gave her great -Transatlantic dominion a special importance. ♦1807.♦ It was looked to -as possible place for shelter, which it actually became during the -French invasion of Portugal. ♦Kingdom of Portugal and Brazil, 1813.♦ -The Portuguese dominions took the style of ‘the United Kingdom of -Portugal, Brazil, and Algarve.’ Nine years later these kingdoms were -separated, and Brazil became an independent state. ♦Empire of Brazil, -1822.♦ But it remains a monarchy with the title of Empire, and it is -still ruled by the direct representative of the Portuguese royal house, -while Portugal itself has passed away from the native line by the -accidents of female succession. - -In the sixteenth century Brazil held a wholly exceptional position. -It was the only settlement of Portugal, it was the only considerable -settlement of any European power, in a region which Spain claimed as -her exclusive dominion. ♦Division of the Indies between Spain and -Portugal. 1494.♦ By Papal authority Spain was to have all the newly -found lands that lay to the west, and Portugal all that lay to the -east, of a line on the map, drawn at 370 leagues west of the Cape -Verde Islands. Spain thus held the whole South American continent, with -the exception of Brazil, together with that part of the North American -continent which is most closely connected with the southern. While the -non-European dominion of Portugal was primarily African and Indian, the -non-European dominion of Spain was primarily American. It did not in -the same way spring out of the European history of the country; it was -rather suggested by rivalry of Portugal. ♦Oran, 1516-1708. 1732-1791.♦ -In Africa the Spanish dominion hardly went beyond the possession of -_Oran_ and the more lasting possession of _Ceuta_. ♦Tunis, 1531.♦ -The conquest of _Tunis_ by Charles the Fifth[86] was made rather in -his Sicilian than in his Castilian character. Within the range of -Portuguese dominion the settlements of Spain were exceptional. But -they took in the _Canaries_ off the Atlantic coast of Africa, and the -_Philippine Islands_ in the extreme eastern Archipelago. ♦Insular -possessions of Spain.♦ These insular possessions Spain still keeps. - -♦Spanish dominion in America.♦ - -Meanwhile the great Spanish dominion in the New World, in both Americas -and in the adjoining islands of the West Indies, has risen and fallen. -♦Hispaniola, 1492.♦ It began with the first conquest of Columbus, -_Hispaniola_ or Saint _Domingo_. Thus the dominion of Castile beyond -the Ocean began at the very moment when she reached the full extent -of her own Mediterranean coast. ♦1519. | 1532.♦ Then followed the -great continental dominion in _Mexico_, _Peru_, and the other lands -on or south of the isthmus which joins the two western continents. -But into the body of the North American continent, the land which was -to be disputed between France and England, Spain never spread. _New -Mexico_, _California_, _Florida_, barely stretched along its western -and southern coasts. ♦Revolutions of the Spanish colonies.♦ The whole -of this continental dominion passed away in a series of revolutions -within our own century. While Portugal and England have really founded -new European nations beyond the Ocean, the result of Spanish rule in -America has been to create a number of states of ever shifting extent -and constitution, keeping the Spanish language, but some of which are -as much native American as Spanish. ♦Mexico.♦ Of these _Mexico_ is -the one which has had most to do with the general history of Europe -and European America. ♦Two Mexican Empires, 1822-1823. | 1866-1867.♦ It -has twice taken the name of Empire, once under a native, once under a -foreign, adventurer. And vast provinces, once under its nominal rule, -have passed to the United States. ♦Cessions to the United States.♦ The -loss of _Texas_, _New Mexico_, and _Upper California_, has cut down the -present Mexico nearly to the extent of the first Spanish conquests. - -♦Spanish West India islands. | Jamaica, 1655.♦ - -Of the Spanish West India islands, some, like _Jamaica_ and _Trinidad_, -have passed to other European powers. ♦Saint Domingo, 1864.♦ The oldest -possession of all, the Spanish part of Hispaniola, has become a state -distinct from that of Hayti in the same island. ♦Puerto Rico.♦ _Puerto -Rico_ remains a real Spanish possession. ♦Cuba.♦ The allegiance of -_Cuba_ is always doubtful. In short, the dominion of Spain out of -Europe has followed its European dominion out of Spain. The eighteenth -century destroyed the one; the nineteenth century has cut down the -other to mere fragments. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[79] See above, p. 154. - -[80] See above, p. 155. - -[81] See above, p. 4. - -[82] See above, p. 154. - -[83] See above, p. 335. - -[84] See above, p. 343. - -[85] Conquered by England 1708. Ceded 1713. Recovered 1756. Ceded to -England 1763. Recovered 1782. Conquered by England 1798. Recovered 1802. - -[86] See above, p. 447. - - - - -CHAPTER XIII. - -THE BRITISH ISLANDS AND COLONIES. - - -We have now gone, first through that great mass of European lands -which formed part either of the Eastern or of the Western Empire, and -then through those more distant, and mainly peninsular, lands which -so largely escaped the Imperial dominion. ♦The British islands.♦ We -end by leaving the mainland of Europe, by leaving the world of either -Empire, for that great island, or rather group of islands, which for -ages was looked on as forming a world of its own.[87] ♦Late Roman -conquest and early loss of Britain.♦ In Western Europe Britain was the -last land to be won, and the first to be lost, in the days of the elder -Empire. And, after all, Britain itself was only partly won, while the -conquest of Ireland was never tried at all. ♦Independence of Britain -in the later Empire.♦ After the English Conquest, Britain had less -to do with the revived Western Empire than any Western land except -Norway. The momentary dealings of Charles the Great with Scotland and -Northumberland, the doubtful and precarious homage done by Richard the -First to Henry the Sixth, are the only exceptions, even in form, to its -complete independence on the continental Empire. ♦Britain another world -and another Empire.♦ The doctrine was that Britain, the other world, -formed an Empire of its own. That Empire, being an island, was secured -against the constant fluctuations of its external boundary to which -continental states lie open. ♦Changes within Britain.♦ For several -centuries the boundaries, both of the Celtic and Teutonic occupants and -of the Teutonic kingdoms among themselves, were always changing. But -these changes hardly affect European history, which is concerned only -with the broad general results—with the establishment of the Teutonic -settlers in the island—with the union of those settlers in one kingdom -under the West-Saxon house—with the extension of the imperial power of -the West-Saxon kings over the whole island of Britain. ♦Slight change -in the internal divisions of England.♦ And, from the eleventh century -onwards, there has been singularly little change of boundaries within -the island. The boundaries of England towards Scotland and Wales -changed much less than might have been looked for during ages of such -endless warfare. Even the lesser divisions within the English kingdom -have been singularly lasting. The land, as a whole, has never been -mapped out afresh since the tenth century. While a map of France or -Germany in the eleventh century, or even in the eighteenth, is useless -for immediate practical objects, a map of England in the days of -Domesday practically differs not at all from a map of England now. The -only changes of any moment, and they are neither many nor great, are in -the shires on the Welsh and Scottish borders. - -Thus the historical geography of the isle of Britain comes to little -more than a record of these border changes, down to the incorporation -of England, Scotland, and Wales into a single kingdom. In the other -great island of Ireland there is little to do except to trace how the -boundary of English conquest advanced and fell back, a matter after -all of no great European concern. The history of the smaller outlying -islands, from Scandinavian Shetland to the insular Normandy, has -really more to do with the general history of Europe. The dominion -of the English kings on the continent is of the highest European -moment, but, from its geographical side, it is Gaul and not Britain -which it affects. ♦English settlements beyond sea.♦ The really great -geographical phænomenon of English history is that which it shares with -Spain and Portugal, and in which it surpasses both. This is the vast -extent of outlying English dominion and settlement, partly in Europe, -but far more largely in the distant lands of Asia, Africa, America, and -Australia. But it is not merely that England has become a great power -in all quarters of the world; England has been, like Portugal, but on a -far greater scale, a planter of nations. ♦English nations.♦ One group -of her settlements has grown into one of the great powers of the world, -into a third England beyond the Ocean, as far surpassing our insular -England in geographical extent as our insular England surpasses the -first England of all in the marchland of Germany and Denmark. The mere -barbaric dominion of England concerns our present survey but little; -but the historical geography of Europe is deeply concerned in the -extension of England and of Europe in lands beyond the Western and the -Southern Ocean. - - * * * * * - -In tracing out the little that we have to say of the geography of -Britain itself, it will be well to begin with that northern part of the -island where changes have been both more numerous and more important -than they have been in England. - - -§ 1. _The Kingdom of Scotland._ - -♦Historical position of Scotland.♦ - -In Northern Britain, as in some other parts of Europe, we see a land -which has taken its name from a people to which it does not owe its -historic importance. _Scotland_ has won for itself a position in -Britain and in Europe altogether out of proportion to its size and -population. But it has not done this by virtue of its strictly Scottish -element. ♦Greatness of Scotland due to its English element.♦ The Irish -settlers who first brought the Scottish name into Britain[88] could -never have made Scotland what it really became. What founded the -greatness of the Scottish kingdom was the fact that part of England -gradually took the name of Scotland and its inhabitants took the -name of Scots. The case is as when the Duke of Savoy and Genoa and -Prince of Piedmont took his highest title from that Sardinian kingdom -which was the least valuable part of his dominions. It is as when -the ruler of a mighty German realm calls himself king of the small -duchy of Prussia and its extinct people. ♦Two English kingdoms in -Britain.♦ The truth is that, for more than five hundred years, there -were two English kingdoms in Britain, each of which had a troublesome -Celtic background which formed its chief difficulty. One English king -reigned at Winchester or London, and had his difficulties in Wales and -afterwards in Ireland. Another English king reigned at Dunfermline or -Stirling, and had his difficulties in the true Scotland. ♦Extension -of the Scottish name.♦ But the southern kingdom, ruled by kings of -native English or of foreign descent, but never by kings of British or -Irish descent,[89] always kept the English name, while the northern -kingdom, ruled by kings of Scottish descent, adopted the Scottish name. -The English subjects of the King of Scots gradually took the Scottish -name to themselves. ♦Analogy of Switzerland. | Threefold elements in -the later Scotland.♦ As the present Swiss nation is made up of parts -of the German, Burgundian, and Italian nations which have detached -themselves from their several main bodies, so the present Scottish -nation is made up of parts of the English, Irish, and British nations -which have detached themselves from their several main bodies. But in -both cases it is the Teutonic element which forms the life and strength -of the nation, the kernel to which the other elements have attached -themselves. ♦True position of the Kings of Scots.♦ We cannot read the -mediæval history of Britain aright, unless we remember that the King of -Scots was in truth the English king of Teutonic Lothian and Teutonized -Fife. ♦Enmity of the true Scots.♦ The people from whom he took his -title were at most his unwilling subjects; they were often his open -enemies, the allies of his southern rival. - - * * * * * - -♦Lothian, Strathclyde, and Scotland.♦ - -The modern kingdom of Scotland was made up of English _Lothian_, -British _Strathclyde_, and Irish _Scotland_. The oldest Scotland is -Ireland, whence the Scottish name, long since forgotten in Ireland -itself, came into Britain and there spread itself. These three elements -stand out plainly. ♦The Picts.♦ But the Scottish or Irish element -swallowed up another, that of the _Picts_, of whom there can be no -doubt that they were Celts, like the Scots and Britons, but about whom -it may be doubted whether their kindred was nearer to the Scots or to -the Britons. For our purpose the question is of little moment. The -Picts, as far as geography is concerned, either vanished or became -Scots. - -♦Position of the Picts and Scots in the ninth century.♦ - -Early in the ninth century the land north of the firths of Clyde and -Forth was still mainly Pictish. The second Scotland (the first Scotland -in Britain) had not spread far beyond the original Irish settlement in -the south-west. ♦Union of Picts and Scots, 843. | The Celtic Scotland.♦ -The union of Picts and Scots under a Scottish dynasty created the -larger Scotland, the true Celtic Scotland, taking in all the land north -of the firths, except where Scandinavian settlers occupied the extreme -north. ♦Bernicia.♦ South of the firths, English _Bernicia_, sometimes a -separate kingdom, sometimes part of _Northumberland_, stretched to the -firth of Forth, with _Edinburgh_ as a border fortress. ♦Strathclyde or -Cumberland.♦ To the west of Bernicia, south and east of the firth of -Clyde, lay the British kingdom of _Cumberland_ or _Strathclyde_, with -_Alcluyd_ or _Dumbarton_ as its border fortress. ♦Galloway.♦ To the -south-west again lay the outlying Pictish land of _Galloway_, which -long kept up a separate being. Parts of Bernicia, parts of Strathclyde, -were one day to join with the true Scotland to make up the later -Scottish kingdom. As yet the true Scotland was a foreign and hostile -land alike to Bernicia and to Strathclyde. - -♦Settlements of the Northmen.♦ - -In the next century we see the Scottish power cut short to the north -and west, but advancing towards the south and east. ♦Caithness.♦ The -Northmen have settled in the northern and western islands, in those -parts of the mainland to which they gave the names of _Caithness_ -and _Sutherland_, and even in the first Scottish land in the west. -♦Scotland acknowledges the English supremacy, 924.♦ Scotland itself -has also admitted the external supremacy of the English overlord. -♦Taking of Edinburgh, c. 954.♦ On the other hand, the Scots have -pressed within the English border, and have occupied Edinburgh, the -border fortress of England. ♦Cession of Lothian, 966 or 1018.♦ Later -in the same century or early in the next, the Kings of Scots received -Northern Bernicia, the land of _Lothian_, as an English earldom. On -the other side, _Strathclyde_ or _Cumberland_—its southern boundary is -very uncertain—had become in a manner united to England and Scotland at -once. ♦Grant of Cumberland, 945.♦ An English conquest, it was granted -in fief to the King of Scots, and was commonly held as an appanage by -Scottish princes.[90] ♦Different tenures of the dominion of the King of -Scots.♦ Thus the King of Scots held three dominions on three different -tenures. Scotland was a kingdom under a merely external English -supremacy; Cumberland was a territorial fief of England; Lothian was -an earldom within the English kingdom. ♦The distinctions forgotten in -later controversies.♦ In after times these distinctions were forgotten, -and the question now was whether the dominions of the King of Scots, -as a whole, were or were not a fief of England. When the question took -this shape, the English king claimed more than his ancient rights over -Scotland, less than his ancient rights over Lothian. - -♦Effects of the grant of Lothian.♦ - -The acquisition of Lothian made the Scottish kingdom English. Lothian -remained English; Cumberland and the eastern side of Scotland itself, -the Lowlands north of the firth of Forth, became practically English -also. The Scottish kings became English princes, whose strength lay in -the English part of their dominions. ♦Fate of southern Cumberland.♦ -But late in the eleventh century it would seem that the southern part -of Cumberland had become a separate principality ruled by a refugee -Northumbrian prince under Scottish supremacy. ♦Carlisle and its -district added to England by William Rufus, 1092.♦ This territory, -the city of _Carlisle_ and its immediate district, the old diocese -of Carlisle, was added to England by William Rufus. ♦Cumberland and -Northumberland granted to David, 1136.♦ On the other hand, in the -troubles of Stephen’s reign, the king of Scots received as English -earldoms, Cumberland—in a somewhat wider sense—and _Northumberland_ -in the modern sense, the land from the Tweed to the Tyne. Had these -earldoms been kept by the Scottish kings, they would doubtless have -become Scottish lands in the same sense in which Lothian did; that -is, they would have become parts of the northern English kingdom. -♦Recovered by England, 1157. | The boundary permanent, except as to -Berwick.♦ But these lands were won back by Henry the Second; and the -boundary has since remained as it was then fixed, save that the town -of _Berwick_ fluctuated according to the accidents of war between one -kingdom and the other. - -♦Relations between England and Scotland.♦ - -But though the boundaries of the kingdoms were fixed, their relations -were not. ♦1292.♦ Scotland in the modern sense—that is, Scotland in the -older sense, Lothian, and Strathclyde—was for a moment held strictly as -a fief of England. ♦1296.♦ It was then for another moment incorporated -with England. ♦1327.♦ It was then acknowledged as an independent -kingdom. ♦1333.♦ It again fell under vassalage for a moment, and again -won its independence. ♦1603.♦ Then, at the beginning of the seventeenth -century, England and Scotland, as distinct, independent, and equal -kingdoms, passed under a common king. ♦1649.♦ They were separated -again for a moment when Scotland acknowledged a king whom England -rejected. ♦1652.♦ For another moment Scotland was incorporated with an -English commonwealth. ♦1660. | 1707.♦ Again Scotland and England became -independent kingdoms under a common king, till the two kingdoms were, -by common consent, joined in the one kingdom of _Great Britain_. - - * * * * * - -♦Struggle with the Northerners.♦ - -Meanwhile the Scottish kings had, like those of England somewhat -earlier, to struggle against Scandinavian invaders. ♦Scandinavian -advance, 1014-1064.♦ The settlements of the Northmen advanced, and -for some years in the eleventh century they took in _Moray_ at one -end and _Galloway_ at the other. But it was only in the extreme north -and in the northern islands that the land really became Scandinavian. -♦The Sudereys, and Man.♦ In the _Sudereys_ or _Hebrides_—the southern -islands as distinguished from Orkney and Shetland—and in _Man_, the -Celtic speech has survived. ♦Caithness submits, 1203.♦ _Caithness_ -was brought under Scottish supremacy early in the thirteenth century. -♦Galloway incorporated, 1235.♦ _Galloway_ was incorporated. ♦Sudereys -and Man submit, 1263-1266.♦ Later again, after the battle of Largs, the -Sudereys and Man passed under Scottish supremacy. But the authority of -the Scottish crown in the islands was for a long time very precarious. -♦History of Man.♦ Man, the most central of the British isles, lying at -a nearly equal distance from England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, -remained a separate kingdom, sometimes under Scottish, sometimes under -English, superiority. Granted to English subjects, the kingdom sank -to a lordship. ♦1764-1826.♦ The lordship was united to the crown of -Great Britain, and Man, like the Norman islands, remains a distinct -possession, forming no part of the United Kingdom. ♦Orkney. 1469.♦ The -earldom of Orkney meanwhile remained a Norwegian dependency till it was -pledged to the Scottish crown. Since then it has silently become part, -first of the kingdom of Scotland, and then of the kingdom of Great -Britain. - - -§ 2. _The Kingdom of England._ - -♦Harold’s conquests from Wales, 1063.♦ - -The changes of boundary between England and _Wales_ begin, as far as -we are concerned with them, with the great Welsh campaign of Harold. -♦Enlargement of the border shires.♦ All the border shires, Cheshire, -Shropshire, Herefordshire, Gloucestershire, seem now to have been -enlarged; the English border stretched to the _Conway_ in the north, -and to the _Usk_ in the south. ♦The Marches.♦ But part of this -territory seems to have been recovered by the Welsh princes, while part -passed into the great _march_ district of England and Wales, ruled by -the Lords Marchers. ♦Conquest of South Wales, 1070-1121.♦ The gradual -conquest of South Wales began under the Conqueror and went on under his -sons; but it was more largely the work of private adventurers than of -the kings themselves. The lands of _Morganwg_, _Dyfed_, _Ceredigion_, -and _Breheiniog_, answering nearly to the modern South Wales, were -gradually subdued. ♦Flemish settlement in Pembrokeshire, 1111.♦ -In some districts, especially in the southern part of the present -Pembrokeshire, the Britons were actually driven out, and the land was -settled by Flemish colonists, the latest of the Teutonic settlements in -Britain. ♦Character of the conquest of South Wales.♦ Elsewhere Norman -lords, with a Norman, English, and Flemish following, held the towns -and the more level country, while the Welsh kept on a half independence -in the mountains. ♦Princes of North Wales.♦ Meanwhile in North Wales -native princes—_Princes of Aberffraw_ and _Lords of Snowdon_—still -ruled, as vassals of the English king, till the conquest by Edward -the First. ♦Cessions to England, 1277.♦ In the first stage the vassal -prince was compelled again to cede to his overlord the territory -east of the Conway. ♦Conquest of North Wales, 1282.♦ Six years later -followed the complete conquest. But complete incorporation with England -did not at once follow. ♦The Principality of Wales.♦ Wales, North and -South, remained a separate dominion, giving the princely title to the -eldest son of the English king.[91] Some shires were formed; some new -towns were founded; the border districts remained under the anomalous -jurisdiction of the Marchers. ♦Full incorporation. 1535.♦ The full -incorporation of the principality and its marches dates from Henry the -Eighth. Thirteen new counties were formed, and some districts were -added or restored to the border shires of England. One of the new -counties, _Monmouthshire_, was, under Charles the Second, added to an -English circuit, and it has since been reckoned as an English county. - -♦The Domesday shires.♦ - -Setting aside these new creations, all the existing shires of -England were in being at the time of the Norman Conquest, save those -of _Lancaster_, _Cumberland_, _Westmoreland_, and _Rutland_. The -boundaries were not always exactly the same as at present; but the -differences are commonly slight and of mere local interest. ♦Two -classes of shires.♦ The shires, as they stood at the Conquest, were -of two classes. ♦Ancient kingdoms and principalities.♦ Some were old -kingdoms or principalities, which still kept their names and boundaries -as shires. Such were the kingdoms of _Kent_, _Sussex_, and _Essex_, -and the East-Anglian, West-Saxon, and Northumbrian shires. Most of -these keep old local or tribal names; a few only are called from a -town. ♦Mercian shires mapped out in the tenth century.♦ In Mercia on -the other hand, the shires seem to have been mapped out afresh when -the land was won back from the Danes. They are called after towns, and -the town which gives the name commonly lies central to the district, -and remains the chief town of the shire, except when it has been -outstripped by some other in modern times.[92] Both classes of shires -survived the Conquest, and both have gone on till now with very slight -changes. - -On the Welsh border, all the shires, for reasons already given, -stretch further west in Domesday than they do now. ♦Cumberland and -Westmoreland.♦ On the Scottish border _Cumberland_ and _Westmoreland_ -were made out of the Cumbrian conquest of William Rufus, enlarged by -districts which in Domesday appear as part of Yorkshire. ♦Lancashire.♦ -_Lancashire_ was made up of lands taken from Yorkshire and Cheshire, -the Ribble forming the older boundary of those shires. The older -divisions are marked by the boundaries of the dioceses of _York_, -_Carlisle_, and _Lichfield_ or _Chester_, as they stood down to the -changes under Henry the Eighth. ♦Rutland.♦ In central England the -only change is the formation of the small shire of _Rutland_ out of -the Domesday district of Rutland (which, oddly enough, appears as an -appendage to _Nottinghamshire_), enlarged by a small part of what was -then _Northamptonshire_. - - -§ 3. _Ireland._ - -♦Ireland the first Scotland.♦ - -The second great island of the British group, _Ireland_, the original -_Scotia_, has had less to do with the general history of the world -than any other part of Western Europe. Its ancient divisions have -lived on from the earliest times. ♦The five provinces.♦ The names of -its five great provinces, _Ulster_, _Meath_, _Leinster_, _Munster_, -and _Connaught_, are all in familiar use, though _Meath_ has sunk from -its old rank alongside of the other four. The Celtic inhabitants of -the island remained independent of foreign powers till the days of -Scandinavian settlement. Just like the English kingdoms in Britain, -the great divisions of Ireland were sometimes independent, sometimes -united under the supremacy of a head king. ♦Settlement of the Ostmen.♦ -Gradually the Northmen, called in Ireland _Ostmen_, settled on the -eastern coast, and held the chief ports, as _Dublin_, _Waterford_, -_Wexford_, two of which names bear witness to Teutonic occupation. -♦Irish victory at Clontarf. 1012.♦ The great Irish victory at Clontarf -weakened, but did not destroy, the Scandinavian power. ♦Increasing -connexion with England.♦ And, from the latter half of the tenth -century onward, the eastern coast of Ireland shows a growing connexion -with England. Any actual English supremacy seems doubtful; but both -commercial and ecclesiastical ties became closer during the eleventh -and twelfth centuries. ♦The English conquest, 1169-1652.♦ This led to -the actual English conquest of Ireland, begun under Henry the Second, -but really finished only by Cromwell. ♦1171. | Fluctuations of the -Pale.♦ All Ireland admitted for a moment the supremacy of Henry; but, -till the sixteenth century, the actual English dominion, called the -_Pale_, with Dublin for its centre, was always fluctuating, and for a -while it fell back rather than advanced. - -♦Kingdom and Lordship of Ireland.♦ - -In the early days of the conquest Ireland is spoken of as a kingdom; -but the title soon went out of use. The original plan seems to have -been that Ireland, like Wales afterwards, should form an appanage for a -son of the English King. It became instead, so far as it was an English -possession at all, a simple dependency of England, from which the King -took the title of _Lord of Ireland_. ♦1542. | Relations of Ireland to -England.♦ Henry the Eighth took the title of _King of Ireland_; but the -kingdom remained a mere dependency, attached to the crown, first of -England and then of Great Britain. ♦1652. | 1689.♦ This state of things -was diversified by a short time of complete incorporation under the -Commonwealth, and a short time of independence under James the Second. -♦1782-1800.♦ But for the last eighteen years of the last century, -Ireland was formally acknowledged as an independent kingdom, connected -with Great Britain only by the tie of a common king. ♦1801.♦ Since that -time it has formed an integral part of the United Kingdom of Great -Britain and Ireland. - - -§ 4. _Outlying European Possessions of England._ - -Ireland, the sister island of Britain, has thus been united with -Britain into a single kingdom. Man, lying between the two, remains a -distinct dependency. ♦The Norman Islands. 1205.♦ This last is also -still the position of that part of the Norman duchy which clave to -its own dukes, which never became French, but always remained Norman. -It might be a question what was the exact position of _Guernsey_, -_Jersey_, _Alderney_, _Sark_, and their smaller neighbours, when the -English kings took the titles of the French kingdom and actually held -the Norman duchy. Practically the islands have, during all changes, -remained attached to the English crown; but they have never been -incorporated with the kingdom. ♦Other European dependencies, Aquitaine, -&c.♦ Other more distant European lands have been, some still are, in -the same position. Such were _Aquitaine_, _Ponthieu_, and _Calais_, as -fixed by the Peace of Bretigny. Since the loss of Aquitaine, England -has had no considerable continental dominion in Europe, but she has -from time to time held several islands and detached points. ♦Outposts -and islands.♦ Such are _Calais_, _Boulogne_, _Dunkirk_, _Gibraltar_, -_Minorca_, _Malta_, _Heligoland_, all of which have been spoken of in -their natural geographical places. To these we may add _Tangier_, which -has more in common with the possession of Gibraltar and Minorca than -with the English settlements in the further parts of Africa. Of these -points, Gibraltar, Heligoland, and Malta, are still held by England. -♦Greek possessions, Ionian Islands, 1814-1864.♦ The virtual English -possession of the _Ionian Islands_ made England for a while a sharer in -the fragments of the Eastern Roman Empire. ♦Cyprus, 1878.♦ And later -still she has again put on the same character by the occupation, on -whatever terms, of another Greek and Imperial land, the island of -_Cyprus_. - - -§ 5. _The American Colonies of England._ - -♦Colonies of England.♦ - -England, like France and Holland, became a colonizing power by choice. -Extension over barbarian lands was not a necessity, as in the case -of Russia, nor did it spring naturally out of earlier circumstances, -as in the case of Portugal. But the colonizing enterprise of England -has done a greater work than the colonizing enterprise of any other -European power. The greatest colony of England—for in a worthier -use of language the word _colony_ would imply independence rather -than dependence[93]—is that great Confederation which is to us what -Syracuse was to Corinth, what Milêtos was to Athens, what Gades and -Carthage were to the cities of the older Canaan. ♦The United States.♦ -The _United States of America_, a vaster England beyond the Ocean, an -European power, on a level with the greatest European powers, planted -beyond the bounds of Europe, form the great work of English and -European enterprise in non-European lands. - -♦First English settlements in North America, 1497.♦ - -The settlements which grew into the United States were not the first -English possessions in North America, but they were the first which -really deserved to be called colonies. The first discoveries of all led -only to the establishment of the _Newfoundland_ fisheries. ♦Attempts -of Raleigh, 1585-1587.♦ Raleigh’s attempts at real colonization ninety -years later only pointed the way to something more lasting. ♦The -Thirteen Colonies.♦ In the seventeenth century began the planting of -the thirteen settlements which won their independence. Of these the -earliest and the latest, the most southern and the most northern, -began through English colonization in the strictest sense. ♦Virginia, -1607.♦ First came _Virginia_. ♦The New England States, 1620-1638.♦ -Then followed the Puritan colonization much further to the north -which founded the _New England_ states. The shiftings among these -settlements, from _Plymouth_ to _Maine_, the unions, the divisions, the -colonies of colonies—the Epidamnos and the Sinôpê of the New World—the -various and varying relations between the different settlements, read -like a piece of old Greek or of Swiss history.[94] ♦1629-1692.♦ By the -end of the seventeenth century they had arranged themselves into four -separate colonies. ♦1820.♦ These were _Massachusetts_, formed by the -union of _Massachusetts_ and _Plymouth_, with its northern dependency -of _Maine_, which became a separate State long after the Revolution; -_New Hampshire_, annexed by Massachusetts and after a while separated -from it; _Connecticut_, formed by the union of _Connecticut_ and -_Newhaven_; _Rhode Island_, formed by the union of _Rhode Island_ and -_Providence_. These New England States form a distinct geographical -group, with a marked political and religious character of their own. -♦The Southern Colonies.♦ Meanwhile, at some distance to the south, -around Virginia as their centre, grew up another group of colonies, -with a history and character in many ways unlike those of New England. -♦Maryland. 1646. | Carolina. 1650-1663. | Divided, 1720.♦ To the north -of Virginia arose the proprietary colony of _Maryland_; to the south -arose _Carolina_, afterwards divided into _North and South_. South -Carolina for a long while marked the end of English settlement to the -south, as Maine did to the north. - -♦Intermediate space occupied by the United Provinces and Sweden. | -English Conquest of New Netherlands, 1664.♦ - -But between these two groups of English colonies in the strictest -sense lay a region in which English settlement had to take the form -of conquest from another European power. Earlier than any English -settlement except Virginia, the great colony of the United Provinces -had arisen on Long Island and the neighbouring mainland. ♦New -Netherlands, 1614.♦ It bore the name of _New Netherlands_, with its -capital of _New Amsterdam_. ♦New Sweden, 1658.♦ To the south, on the -shores of Delaware Bay, the other great power of the seventeenth -century founded the colony of _New Sweden_. Three European nations, -closely allied in race, speech, and creed, were thus for a while -established side by side on the eastern coasts of America. ♦Union of -New Sweden with New Netherlands, 1655.♦ But the three settlements were -fated to merge together, and that by force of arms. A local war added -New Sweden to New Netherlands; a war between England and the United -Provinces gave New Netherlands to England. ♦New York.♦ New Amsterdam -became _New York_, and gave its name to the colony which was to become -the greatest State of the Union. ♦1674.♦ Ten years later, in the next -war between the two colonizing powers, the new English possession was -lost and won again. - -Meanwhile the gap which was still left began to be filled up by other -English settlements. ♦The Jerseys. 1665. | 1702.♦ _East_ and _West -Jersey_ began as two distinct colonies, which were afterwards united -into one. ♦Pennsylvania, 1682. | Delaware, 1703.♦ The great colony of -_Pennsylvania_ next arose, from which the small one of _Delaware_ was -parted off twenty years later. Pennsylvania was thus the last of the -original settlements of the seventeenth century, which in the space of -nearly eighty years had been formed fast after one another. ♦Georgia, -1733.♦ Fifty years after the work of the benevolent Penn came the work -of the no less benevolent Oglethorpe; _Georgia_, to the south of all, -now filled up the tale of the famous Thirteen, the fitting number, it -would seem, for a Federal power, whether in the Old World or in the New. - -♦Independence of the United States, 1783.♦ - -By the Peace of Paris the Thirteen Colonies were acknowledged as -independent States. The great work of English settlement on foreign -soil was brought to perfection. The new and free English land beyond -the Ocean took in the whole temperate region of the North American -coast, all between the peninsula of _Acadia_ to the north and the other -peninsula of _Florida_ to the south. Both of these last lands were -English possessions at the time of the War of Independence, but neither -of them had any share in the work. ♦Nova Scotia, 1713.♦ Acadia, under -the name of _Nova Scotia_, had been ceded by France in the interval -between the settlement of Pennsylvania and the settlement of Georgia. -♦Conquest of Canada, 1759-1763.♦ Next came the conquest of _Canada_, in -which the men of the colonies played their part. ♦The French barrier at -Alleghany.♦ Hitherto the English colonies had been shut in to the West -by the French claim to the line of the Alleghany mountains. The Treaty -of Paris took away this bugbear, and left the whole land as far as the -Mississippi open to the enterprise of the English colonists. Thus, when -the Thirteen States started on their independent career, the whole land -between the great lakes, the Ocean, and the Mississippi, was open to -them. ♦Florida again Spanish, 1781-1821.♦ Florida indeed, first as an -English, then again as a Spanish possession, cut them off from the Gulf -of Mexico. The city of _New Orleans_ remained, first a Spanish, then a -French, outpost east of the Mississippi, and the possessions still held -by England kept them from the mouth of the Saint Lawrence. ♦Extension -to the West.♦ But within these limits, such of the old States as were -allowed by their geographical position might extend themselves to the -west, and new States might be formed. Both processes went on, and two -of the barriers formed by European powers were removed. ♦Louisiana, -1803. | Florida, 1821.♦ The purchase of _Louisiana_ from France, the -acquisition of _Florida_ from Spain, gave the States the sea-board of -the Gulf of Mexico, and allowed their extension to the Pacific. The -details of that extension, partly by natural growth, partly at the -expense of the Spanish element in North America, it is hardly needful -to go through here. ♦A new English nation.♦ But, out of the English -settlements on the North-American coast, a new English nation has -arisen, none the less English, in a true view of history, because it -no longer owes allegiance to the crown of Great Britain. But the power -thus formed, exactly like earlier confederations in Europe, lacks -a name. ♦Lack of a name.♦ The _United States of America_ is hardly -a geographical or a national name, any more than the names of the -_Confederates_ and the _United Provinces_. In the two European cases -common usage gave the name of a single member of the Union to the -whole, and in the case of Switzerland the popular name at last became -the formal name. In the American case, on the other hand, popular usage -speaks of the Confederation by the name of the whole continent of which -its territory forms part. ♦Use of the word _America_.♦ For several -purposes, the words _America_ and _American_ are always understood -as shutting out Canada and Mexico, to say nothing of the southern -American continent. For some other purposes, those names still take -in the whole American continent, north and south. But it is easier -to see the awkwardness of the usual nomenclature than to suggest any -improvement on it. - - * * * * * - -♦Second English nation in North America.♦ - -While one set of events in the eighteenth century created an -independent English nation on North American soil, another set of -events in the same century, earlier in date but later in their results, -has led to the formation in its immediate neighbourhood of another -English nation which still keeps its allegiance to the English crown. -♦Dependent confederacy.♦ A confederation of states, practically -independent in their internal affairs, but remaining subjects of a -distant sovereign, is a novelty in political science. ♦British North -America.♦ Such is the _Confederation of British North America_. But -this dependent Confederation did not arise out of colonization in the -same sense as the independent Confederation to the south of it. The -central land which gives it its character is the conquered land of -_Canada_. ♦New Brunswick, &c.♦ Along with Canada came the possession -of the smaller districts which received the names of _New Brunswick_ -and _Prince Edward’s Island_, districts which were at first joined -to Nova Scotia, but which afterwards became distinct colonies. ♦The -Dominion, 1867.♦ Now they are joined with the _Dominion of Canada_, -which, like the United States, grows by the incorporation of new states -and territories. ♦British Columbia, 1871. | Rupertsland.♦ The addition -of _British Columbia_ has carried the Confederation to the Pacific; -that of _Rupertsland_ carries it indefinitely northward towards the -pole. This second English-speaking power in North America, stretches, -like the elder one, from Ocean to Ocean. ♦Newfoundland, 1713.♦ -_Newfoundland_ alone, a possession secured to England after many -debates at the same time as Nova Scotia, remains distinct. - - * * * * * - -♦The West Indies. Barbadoes, 1605.♦ - -Of the British possessions in the _West Indies_ a few only, among them -_Barbadoes_, the earliest of all, were colonies in the same sense -as Virginia and Massachusetts. ♦Jamaica, 1655.♦ The greater number, -_Jamaica_ at their head, were won by conquest from other European -powers. No new English nation, like the American and the Canadian, -has grown up in them. ♦Smaller settlements.♦ Still less is there -any need to dwell on the _Bahamas_, the _Falkland Islands_, or the -South-American possession of _British Guiana_. - - -§ 6. _Other Colonies and Possessions of England._ - -♦Colonies in the southern hemisphere.♦ - -The story of the North-American colonies may be both compared and -contrasted with the story of two great groups of colonies in the -southern hemisphere. ♦Australia.♦ In Australia and the other great -southern islands, a body of English colonies have arisen, the germs at -least of yet another English nation, but which have not as yet reached -either independence or confederation. ♦South Africa.♦ In South Africa, -another group of possessions and colonies, beginning, like Canada, -in conquest from another European power, seems to be feeling its way -towards confederation, while one part has in a manner stumbled into -independence. - -The beginning of English settlement in the greatest of islands began -in the years which immediately followed the establishment of American -independence. ♦New South Wales, 1787.♦ First came _New South Wales_, on -the eastern coast, designed originally as a penal settlement. ♦Western -Australia, 1829.♦ It outgrew this stage, and another penal settlement -was founded in _Western Australia_. ♦South Australia, 1836. | -Victoria, 1837. | Queensland, 1859.♦ Then colonization spread into the -intermediate region of _Southern Australia_ (which however stretches -right through the island to its northern coast) into the district -called _Victoria_, south-west of the original settlement, and lastly, -into _Queensland_ to the north-east. ♦Colonies Act, 1850.♦ Since -the middle of the present century all these colonies have gradually -established constitutions which give them full internal independence. -♦Tasmania, 1804. | 1839.♦ South of the great island lies one smaller, -but still vast, that of _Van Diemen’s_ Land, now _Tasmania_, which was -settled earlier than any Australian settlement except New South Wales. -♦Six colonies, 1852. | United, 1875.♦ And to the east lie the two -great islands of _New Zealand_, where six English colonies founded at -different times have been united into one. - -♦South Africa.♦ - -While the Australian settlements were colonies in the strictest sense, -the English possessions in South Africa began, like New York, in a -settlement first planted by the United Provinces. ♦Conquest of the -Cape, 1806. | 1815.♦ The _Cape Colony_, after some shiftings during -the French revolutionary wars, was conquered by England, and its -possession by England was confirmed at the general peace. ♦Eastern -Colony and Natal, 1820-1836.♦ Migration northward, both of the English -and Dutch inhabitants, has produced new settlements, as the _Eastern -Colony_ and _Natal_. ♦Orange River State, 1847-1856. | Transvaal, -1861-1877.♦ Meanwhile independent Dutch states have arisen, as the -_Orange River Republic_, annexed by England, then set free, and lastly -dismembered, and the _Transvaal_, more lately annexed after sixteen -years of independence. Lastly a scheme of confederation for all these -settlements awaits some more peaceful time to be carried into effect. - - * * * * * - -♦Europe extended by colonization.♦ - -In all these cases of real colonization, of real extension of the -English or any other European nation, it is hardly a figure to say -that the bounds of Europe have been enlarged. All that makes Europe -Europe, all that parts off Europe from Africa and Asia, has been -carried into America and Australia and Africa itself. The growth of -this new Europe, no less than the changes of the old, is an essential -part of European geography. ♦Barbarian dominion.♦ It is otherwise -with territories, great or small, which have been occupied by England -and other European powers merely for military or commercial purposes. -Forts, factories, or empires, on barbarian soil, where no new European -nation is likely ever to grow up, are not cases of true colonization; -they are no extension of the bounds of Europe. ♦English dominion in -India.♦ The climax of this kind of barbarian dominion is found in those -vast Indian possessions in which England has supplanted Portugal, -France, and the heirs of Timour. ♦Empire of India. 1876.♦ Of that -dominion the scientific frontier has yet to be traced; yet it has -come to give an Imperial title to the sovereign of Great Britain and -Ireland, while those two European islands, as perhaps befits their -inferiority in physical size, remain content with the lowlier style of -the United Kingdom. Whether the loftier pretensions of Asia do, or do -not, imply any vassalage on the part of Europe, it is certain that the -Asiatic Empire of the sovereign of the British kingdom is no extension -of England, no extension of Europe, no creation of a new English or -European nation. The Empire of India stands outside the European world, -outside the political system which has gathered round the Old and the -New Rome. But a place amongst the foremost members of that system -belongs to the great European nation on American soil, where the tongue -of England is kept, and the constitution of old Achaia is born again, -in a confederation stretching from the Western to the Eastern Ocean. - - * * * * * - -♦Summary.♦ - -We have thus traced the geography, and in tracing the geography we have -in a slighter way traced the history, of the various states and powers -of Europe, and of the lands beyond the Ocean which have been planted -from Europe. We have throughout kept steadily before our eyes the -centre, afterwards the two centres, of European life. We have seen how -the older states of Europe gradually lose themselves in the dominion -of Rome, how the younger states gradually spring out of the dominion -of Rome. We have followed, as our central subjects, the fates of those -powers in the East and West which continued the Roman name and Roman -traditions. We have traced out the states which were directly formed -by splitting off from those powers, and the states which arose beyond -the range of Roman power, but not beyond the range of Roman influence. -We have seen the Western Empire first pass to a German prince, then -gradually shrink into a German kingdom, to be finally dissolved into -a German confederation. We have watched the states which split off at -various dates from its body, the power of France on one side, the power -of Austria on another, the powers of Italy on a third, the free states -of Switzerland at one end, the free states of the Netherlands at the -other. We have beheld the long tragedy of the Eastern Rome; we have -told the tale of the states which split off from it and arose around -it. We have seen its territorial position pass to a barbarian invader, -and something like its position in men’s minds pass to the mightiest of -its spiritual disciples. And we have seen, painted on the map of our -own century, the beginning of the great work which is giving back the -lands of the Eastern Rome to their own people. We have then traced the -shiftings of the powers which lay wholly or partly beyond the bounds -of either Empire, the great Slavonic mainland, the Scandinavian and -the Iberian peninsulas, ending with that which is geographically the -most isolated land of all, the other world of Britain. We have seen too -how Europe may be said to have spread herself beyond her geographical -limits in the foundation of new European states beyond the Ocean. We -have contrasted the different positions and destinies of the colonizing -European powers—where, as in the days of Old Rome, a continuous -territory has been extended over neighbouring barbarian lands—where -growth beyond the sea was the natural outcome of growth at home—where -European powers have colonized and conquered simply of their own free -will. In thus tracing the historical geography of Europe, we have made -the round of the world. But we have never lost sight of Europe; we -have never lost sight of Rome. Wherever we have gone, we have carried -Europe with us; wherever we have gone, we have never got beyond the -power of the two influences which, mingling into one, have made Europe -all that it has been. The whole of European history is embodied in the -formula which couples together the ‘rule of Christ and Cæsar;’ and that -joint rule still goes on, in the shape of moral influence, wherever the -tongues and the culture of Europe win new realms for themselves in the -continents of the western or in the islands of the southern Ocean. - -FOOTNOTES: - -[87] See Norman Conquest, vol. i. p. 564. - -[88] See above, p. 98. - -[89] The Tudor kings were doubtless of British descent; but they did -not reign by virtue of that descent, and they did not come in till ages -after the English kingdom was completely formed. - -[90] See Norman Conquest, vol. i. p. 580. - -[91] It should be remembered that the principality became the appanage -of the eldest son only by accident. The first English prince, -afterwards Edward the Second, was not his father’s eldest son at the -time of his creation. The title moreover is newly created each time. - -[92] See Norman Conquest, vol. i. p. 48; and Macmillan’s Magazine, -April, 1880. - -[93] The Latin _colonia_ certainly does not imply independence; but, -the word _colony_, in our use of it, rather answers to the Greek -ἀποικία which does. - -[94] It may be well to give the dates in order:— - - Plymouth 1620 - Massachusetts 1628 - New Hampshire 1629 - Connecticut 1635 - Newhaven 1638 - Providence 1644 - Rhode Island 1634 - Maine 1638 - New Hampshire annexed by Massachusetts 1641 - Rhode Island and Providence united 1644 - Connecticut and Newhaven united 1664 - New Hampshire separated from Massachusetts 1671 - Maine purchased by Massachusetts 1677 - Plymouth and Massachusetts united 1691 - - - - - -INDEX. - - -Aachen, crowning-place of the German kings, 189. - annexed to France, 220. - -Aargau, 271. - -Åbo, bishopric of, 184. - peace of, 512. - -Abruzzi, the, annexed to Sicily, 396. - -Abyssinian Church, 169. - -Acadia; _see_ NOVA SCOTIA. - -Acciauoli, Dukes of Athens, 417. - -Achaia, League of, 40. - dependent on Rome, 41. - province of, 78. - principality of, 416, 417. - Angevin overlordship of, 418. - its dismemberment, _ib._ - Savoyard counts of, 283, 418. - -Achaians, use of the name in the Homeric catalogue, 26. - -Acre, lost and won in the Crusades, 398, 400. - fall of, 400. - -Ægæan Sea, Greek colonies on its coasts, 21, 22, 32. - theme of, 150. - -Ælfred, his treaty with Guthrum, 161. - -Æmilia, province of, 79. - -Æquians, 46. - their wars with Rome, 50. - -Africa, Greek colonies in, 35. - Roman province of, 59. - New, province of, _ib._ - diocese of, 78, 79. - Vandal kingdom, 90. - recovered to the Empire, 104. - Saracen conquest of, 111. - Norman conquests in, 396. - Portuguese conquests in, 541. - French conquests in, 360. - South, English possessions in, 565, 566. - -Agram (Zagrab), 439. - -Agri Decumates, 84. - -Agricola, his conquest of Britain, 69. - -Agrigentum (Akragas), 48. - conquered by the Saracens, 370. - -Aigina, held by Venice, 410. - -Aiolian colonies in Asia, 32. - -Aire, 349. - -Aitolia, geographical position of, 21. - League of, 40. - its alliance with and dependence on Rome, 40, 41. - -Aitolians, their place in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - -Aix (Aquæ Sextiæ), Roman colony, 57. - ecclesiastical province of, 173. - -Aix-la-Chapelle, Peace of, 249, 349. - -Ajaccio, birthplace of Buonaparte, 352. - -Akarnania, 21, 30. - league of, 40. - -Akarnanians, not in the Homeric catalogue, 26 (_note_). - -Akerman, Peace of, 453. - -Akragas; _see_ AGRIGENTUM. - -Aktê, Argolic, 29. - -Alans, origin of, 89. - their settlements in Spain, 90. - -Alarcos, battle of, 533. - -Alaric, king of the West-Goths, 89. - -Alava, 535. - -Albania, Asiatic, 99. - -Albania, kings of, 420. - Turkish conquest of, 421. - revolt of, under Scanderbeg, _ib._ - -Albanians, their origin, 24. - their settlements in Greece, 115, 364, 366. - -Albanon (Elbassan), 430. - -Albigensian War, 335. - -Albi, ecclesiastical province of, 174. - under Aragon, 335. - annexed to France, _ib._ - -Alemanni, 85, 91. - conquered by the Franks, 117. - -Alemannia, Duchy of, 140. - -Alessandria, 237. - ceded to Savoy, 249. - -Alessio, taken by Venice, 410. - -Alexander the Great, his conquests, 37. - -Alexandria, greatness of, 38, 61, 77. - Patriarchate of, 168, 169. - -Alexios Komnênos, his conquests in Asia Minor, 381. - -Alexios Komnênos, founds the Empire of Trebizond, 386. - -Alfonso VI. of Castile, Emperor, 531. - his conquests, 532. - -Algarve, 533, 535. - -Algarve-beyond-the-Sea, kingdom of, 541. - -Algeria, character of the French conquest of, 360. - -Algiers, 447. - -Almohades, invade Spain, 533. - decline of, _ib._ - -Almoravides, invade Spain, 530. - -Alps, the, 43. - -Alsace; _see_ ELSASS. - -Amadeus VI., Count of Savoy, his Eastern expedition, 390. - -Amadeus VIII., first Duke of Savoy, 281. - his title of Prince of Piedmont, 284. - -Amalfi, 369. - -Amastris, held by Genoa, 414. - -Ambrakia, Corinthian colony, 31. - capital of Pyrrhos, 37; _see_ ARTA. - -America, Spanish dominion in, 543. - use of the word, 563. - -America, North, French settlements in, 352. - English and French rivalry in, 353. - Russian settlements in, 523. - first English settlements in, 559. - formation of the thirteen colonies in, 560-562. - colonies of the United Provinces and Sweden in, 561. - confederation of British North America, 564; _see also_ UNITED STATES. - -Amiens, county of, added to France, 331. - to Burgundy, 340. - -Amisos, held by Genoa, 414. - -Amurath I., Sultan, takes Hadrianople, 445. - -Anatolikon, theme of, 151. - -Anchialos, 376. - -Ancona (Ankôn), 47. - march of, 238. - occupied by Manuel Komnênos, 381. - -Andalusia, origin of the name, 90. - -Andorra, French protectorate of, 343, 537. - -Andraszovo, Peace of, 506. - -Angles, their settlements in Britain, 97. - -Angora, battle of, 445. - -Anhalt, principality of, 226. - -Ani, annexed to the Eastern Empire, 379. - taken by the Turks, _ib._ - -Anjou, county of, 142. - united to Touraine, 330. - to Maine and England, 332. - annexed by Philip Augustus, 333. - -Anjou, House of, its growth, 332, 333. - its overlordship in Peloponnêsos, 418. - -Ankôn; _see_ ANCONA. - -Anne of Britanny, effects of her marriages, 341. - -Antilles, French colonies in, 353. - -Antioch, greatness of, 61, 77. - taken by Chosroes, 109. - patriarchate of, 168, 169. - restored to the Eastern Empire, 379. - taken by the Turks, 380. - recovered by the Empire, 381. - its later captures, 399. - -Antiochos the Great, his war with Rome, 38, 41, 64. - -Antivari, Servian, 406. - part of Montenegro, 428. - recovered by Montenegro, 429. - -Aosta, bishopric of, 173. - part of the kingdom of Burgundy, 278. - its relations to Savoy, 288. - -Apennines, the, 44. - -Apollônia, its alliance with Rome, 40. - -Appenzell, joins the Confederates, 272. - -Apulia, Norman conquest of, 394. - -Aquæ Sextiæ; _see_ AIX. - -Aquileia, foundation of, 55. - destroyed by Attila, 94. - Patriarchate of, 170, 171, 237, 308. - fluctuates between Germany and Italy, 195. - under Austria, 255, 318. - -Aquitaine, south-western division of Transalpine Gaul, 58. - its inhabitants, _ib._ - Frankish conquest of, 118, 120. - kingdom of, 128. - united with Neustria, 135, 339. - duchy of, 142. - extent of, 332. - united with Gascony, _ib._ - its union with and separation from France, _ib._ - united with England and Normandy, 333. - kept by England, 334. - French designs on, 337. - released from homage, 338. - its final union with France, 338, 558. - -Arabia, attempted Roman conquest of, 68. - Portuguese conquests in, 541. - -Arabia Petræa, Roman conquest of, 70. - -Aragon, county of, 154, 155. - its position in the Mediterranean, 463. - its later history, 527. - its relations towards Navarre, 528. - formation of the kingdom, 530. - Sobrarbe joined to, 531. - united with Barcelona, _ib._ - advances beyond the Pyrenees and Rhone, 334, 531. - conquers the Balearic isles and Valencia, 533. - extent of in the thirteenth century, 534, 536. - united with Castile, 537. - its second advance beyond the peninsula, 538. - united with Sicily, _ib._ - its conquests in Sardinia, _ib._ - its outlying possessions compared with those of Castile, 539. - -Arcadius, Emperor of the East, 81. - -Archipelago, Duchy of, 413. - -Argos, its place in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - its early greatness, 29. - joins the Achaian League, 40. - won from Epeiros by the Latins, 417. - held by Venice, 410, 418. - taken by the Turks, 411. - -Ariminum; _see_ RIMINI. - -Arkadia, its place in the Homeric catalogue, 30. - -Arles, later Roman capital of Gaul, 92. - Saracen conquest of, 112. - kingdom of, 145. - ecclesiastical province of, 173. - crowning-place of the kings of Burgundy, 189. - annexed to France, 265. - -Armagh, ecclesiastical province of, 183. - -Armenia, conquered by Trajan, 99. - given up by Hadrian, _ib._ - division of, 100. - conquered by Basil II., 153, 379. - Russian advance in, 521. - -Armenia, Lesser, 379, 399. - acknowledges the Western Emperor, 401. - its connexion with Cyprus, _ib._ - end of the kingdom, _ib._ - -Arminius, his victory over Varus, 67. - -Armorica; _see_ BRITANNY. - -Arnulf, king of the East Franks and Emperor, 139. - -Arras, Treaty of, 297. - ceded to France, 301. - -Arta (Ambrakia), won by the Eastern Empire, 388, 420. - -Arthur of Britanny, possible effects of the success of his claims, 333. - -Artois, added to France, 331. - to the Duchy of Burgundy, 339. - its momentary annexation by Lewis XI., 340. - relieved from homage, _ib._ - within the Burgundian circle, 218. - French acquisitions in, 348, 349. - -Aryan nations of Europe, order of their settlements, 13-15. - -Asia, its geographical character, 6. - Macedonian kingdoms in, 37, 38. - Roman province of, 64. - -Asia Minor, historically connected with Europe, 6. - Greek colonies in, 22, 34. - kingdoms in, 38. - Roman conquest of, 64. - Saracen ravages in, 117, 378. - Turkish conquests of, 380, 389. - -Aspledôn, its place in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - -Astrakhan, khanat of, 501. - conquered by Russia, 511. - -Asturia, united to Cantabria, 154, 529. - grows into the kingdom of Leon, _ib._ - -Asturias, principality of, 534. - -Athamania, kingdom of, 37. - -Athaulf, king of the West Goths, 89. - -Athens, its position in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - nominally independent of Rome, 41. - lordship and duchy of, 416. - Ottoman and Venetian conquests of, 417. - -Atropatênê, 99. - -Attabegs, their wars with the Crusaders, 400. - -Attica, 21, 27. - -Attila, effects of his inroads, 94. - -Auch, ecclesiastical province of, 173. - -Augsburg, bishopric of, 216. - free city, 220. - annexed by Bavaria, 221. - -Aurelian, Emperor, gives up Dacia, 70. - -Australia, English settlement in, 565. - -Austria, Lombard, 234. - -Austria, origin and use of the name, 121, 192, 305, 321. - beginning of, 140. - mark of, 196-202, 203, 305, 307. - its position as a marchland, 267. - duchy of, 308. - annexed by Bohemia, 309. - under the Habsburgs, 310. - archduchy of, 313. - its connexion with the Western Empire, 311. - circle of, 217. - its acquisitions and divisions, 312, 315. - its union with Bohemia and Hungary, 314, 317. - its foreign possessions, 318, 319. - its rivalry with Prussia, 204. - Venice surrendered to, 252, 255. - so-called Empire of, 221, 267, 306. - changes of, during the revolutionary wars, 221-224. - its position compared with that of Prussia, 225. - loses and recovers Hungary, 323. - modern extent of, 321-324. - cedes its rights in Sleswick and Holstein, 228. - Bosnia and Herzegovina administered by, 441. - -Austro-Hungary, dual system in, 323. - -Autun, 93. - -Auvergne, counts of, 332. - -Avars, a Turanian people, 17, 365. - allied with the Lombards against the Gepidæ, 107, 113. - kingdom of, 113. - overthrown by Charles the Great, 122, 127. - -Aversa, county of, 394. - -Avignon, archbishopric of, 174. - taken by France, 264. - sold to the Pope, 265. - annexed to France, 265, 355. - -Azof, won and lost by Russia, 449, 516. - -Azores, conquered by Portugal, 541. - - -Babylonia, 99. - -Badajoz, 533. - -Baden, mark, electorate, and duchy of, 216, 220, 226. - -Bahamas, the, 565. - -Bajazet the Thunderbolt, Sultan, defeated by Timour, 390, 445. - his conquest of Bulgaria, 431. - extent of his dominion, 445. - -Balearic Isles, conquered by Aragon, 533. - -Balsa, house of, its dominion in Albania, 428. - -Baltic Sea, Scandinavian and German influence on, compared, 486. - -Baltic lands, general view of, 464-468. - -Bamberg, bishopric of, 176, 215, 226. - -Bangor, bishopric of, 182. - -Bar, duchy of, united to Lorraine, 193. - annexed by France, 348. - restored to Lorraine, _ib._ - -Barbadoes, 565. - -Barcelona, county of, 320. - joined to Aragon, 531. - released from homage to France, 335, 531. - -Bardulia, the original Castile, 529. - -Bari, archbishopric of, 172. - won from the Saracens, 370. - -Barnim, under Poland, 479. - passes to Brandenburg, 492. - -Barrier Treaty, 349. - -Basel, joins the Confederates, 262, 272. - -Basel, bishopric of, annexed by France, 355. - restored by France, 359. - -Basil II., Eastern Emperor, his conquests, 153, 379. - incorporates Serbia, 424. - -Basques, remnant of non-Aryan people in Europe, 12, 13. - their independence, 90. - -Batoum, annexed to Russia, 522. - -Bavaria, duchy of, 140. - conquered by the Franks, 117, 118, 120. - modern use of the name, 191, 192. - electorate of, 215. - united with the Palatinate, _ib._ - kingdom of, 220. - extent of, 226. - -Bayonne, diocese of, 179. - -Belgium, kingdom of, 303. - -Belgrade, taken by the Magyars, 379. - by the Turk, 438. - Peace of, 440. - -Belisarius, ends the Vandal kingdom in Africa, 105. - -Benevento, Lombard duchy of, 108, 147, 254. - papal possession of, 250. - -Berengar, king of Italy, submits to Otto the Great, 147. - -Berlin, its position, 230. - -Berlin, Treaty of, 429, 450, 452. - -Bern, joins the Confederates, 262, 270. - its Savoyard conquests, 272, 273. - annexes Lausanne, 273. - restores lands north of the lake, _ib._ - -Bernhard, duke of Saxony, 208. - -Bernicia, kingdom of, 97, 161, 550. - -Berwick, 552. - -Besançon, 93. - ecclesiastical province of, 175. - an Imperial city, 261. - united to France, 261, 349. - -Bessarabia, annexed by Russia, 449. - -Beziers, annexed by France, 335. - -Bialystok, 519. - -Bienne, 274. - -Billungs, their mark, 198, 476. - -Biscay, 535. - -Bithynia, kingdom of, 38, 61. - Roman conquest of, 64. - -Bleking, 470. - -Blois, united to Champagne, 330. - purchased by Saint Lewis, 336. - -Bodonitza, principality of, 417. - -Bohemia, whether the seat of Samo’s kingdom, 473 (_note_). - kingdom of, 159, 199, 217, 477. - annexes Austria, 309, 315. - its union with Brandenburg, 209, 493. - its permanent union with Austria, 317, 323, 493. - sketch of its history, 477, 492, 493. - -Bohuslän, ceded to Sweden, 508. - -Boiôtia, 21. - legendary Thessalian settlement of, 30. - league of, 40. - dissolved, 41. - -Bokhara, 522. - -Boleslaf I., of Poland, his conquests, 479. - whether the first king, 479 (_note_). - -Bologna, archbishopric of, 171. - -Bona, 396. - -Boniface, king of Thessalonikê, extent of his kingdom, 385, 417. - -Bormio, won by Graubünden, 273. - -Bornholm, 508. - -Bosnia, Hungarian conquest of, 424. - won back by Stephen Dushan, 425. - origin of the kingdom, 426. - its greatest extent, 427. - Turkish conquest of, _ib._ - administered by Austro-Hungary, 324, 441. - -Bosporos, kingdom of, 39, 64. - -Boukellariôn, theme of, 151. - -Boulogne, lost and won by France, 342, 347, 558. - -Bourbon, Isle of, occupied by the French, 354. - taken by England but restored, 360. - -Bourdeaux, ecclesiastical province of, 173. - -Bourges, ecclesiastical province of, 173. - viscounty of, added to France, 331. - -Brabant, duchy of, 294. - united to Burgundy, 297. - -Braga, 179. - -Brandenburg, mark of, 199, 209, 476. - grows into modern Prussia, 202, 203, 210. - New Mark of, pledged to the Teutonic knights, 496. - its union with Bohemia, 209, 493. - united to Prussia, 204, 209, 504, 513. - -Branibor, takings of, 475. - -Brazil, discovery of, 542. - Empire of, _ib._ - -Breisach, annexed by France, 347. - restored, 350. - -Bremen, archbishopric of, 176, 214. - held and lost by Sweden, 509, 513. - annexed to Hannover, 208. - -Bremen, city, one of the Hanse towns, 214, 220. - its independence of the Bishop, 214. - -Brescia, 237. - -Breslau, bishopric of, 185. - -Bresse, annexed to Savoy, 263. - ceded to France, 287, 347. - -Bretigny, Peace of, 337. - -Brindisi, lost by Venice, 248. - -Britain, use of the name, 3, 4. - early position of, 10. - Celtic settlements in, 14. - Roman conquest of, 69, 545. - diocese of, 80. - Roman troops withdrawn from, 95. - Teutonic settlements in, 15, 96. - English kingdoms in, 129. - Celtic states in, 130. - Empire of, 462, 545. - its independence of the Western Empire, 545. - two English kingdoms in, 548. - -Britanny, origin of the name, 93. - duchy of, 142. - its relations to Normandy, 328, 333. - incorporated with France, 341. - -Brixen, bishopric of, 217, 308. - united to Bavaria, 221. - recovered by Austria, 224. - -Brunswick, duchy of, 208, 227. - -Brusa, Turkish conquest of, 389, 444. - -Bucharest, Treaty of, 450. - -Bugey, annexed to Savoy, 263. - to France, 287, 347. - -Bukovina, annexed by Austria, 441. - -Bulgaria, White and Black, 374, 481. - extent of, in the eighth century, 375. - under Simeon, 376. - conquered by Sviatoslaf, 377. - by John Tzimiskês, _ib._ - extent of, under Samuel, _ib._ - recovered by Basil II., 153, 378. - third kingdom of, 382, 429. - advance of, under John Asan, 430. - its decline, _ib._ - Cuman dynasty in, 431. - break up of, _ib._ - Turkish conquest of, _ib._ - triple partition of, by the Treaty of Berlin, 454. - -Bulgarians, a Turanian people, 17, 365. - their settlements, 116, 156, 365. - compared with the Magyars and Ottomans, 365. - -Buonaparte, Napoleon, his kingdom of Italy, 253, 254. - his feeling towards Switzerland, 355. - character of his conquests, 356. - his treatment of Germany and Italy, 357. - his scheme for the division of Europe, _ib._ - extent of France under, 358. - -Buonaparte, Louis Napoleon, his annexations, 359. - -Buondelmonte, house of, in Northern Epeiros, 420. - -Burgos, ecclesiastical province of, 179. - -Burgundians, 87. - their settlement in Gaul, 93. - -Burgundy, Frankish conquest of, 118. - use of the name, 93, 192. - -Burgundy, Kingdom of, 137, 144. - Trans- and Cis-jurane, 145. - chiefly annexed by France, 146, 264. - represented by Switzerland, 146, 259. - its language, 259. - importance of its acquisition by France, 343, 344. - -Burgundy, County of, 218. - revolutions of, 260. - joined with the duchy, 339. - momentary annexation of, by Lewis XI., 340. - an appendage to Castile under Charles V., 539. - finally annexed by France, 261, 344, 349, 539. - -Burgundy, Duchy of, 142, 144. - escheat of, 339. - union of Flanders with, 292. - its growth, 339. - annexed by Lewis XI., 340. - -Burgundy, Lesser, Duchy of, 260, 261. - -Burgundy, circle of, 216, 218. - -Butrinto, under the Angevins, 397. - commends itself to Venice, 410. - ceded to the Turk, 411. - won back by Venice, 412. - -Byzantium, annexed by Vespasian, 41, 63, 68. - capital of the Eastern Empire, 33, 77. - _see_ CONSTANTINOPLE. - - -Cæsar, Augustus, his conquests, 56, 66. - his division of Italy, 74. - -Cæsar, Caius Julius, his conquests in Gaul, 57, 58. - forms the province of New Africa and restores Carthage, 59. - -Cadiz, joined to Castile, 534; - _see_ GADES. - -Caithness, 550. - -Calabria, change of the name, 369. - -Calais, English conquest of, 338, 558. - won back by France, 342, 347. - -Calatrava, 533. - -California, Upper, ceded by Spain to the United States, 544. - -Caliphate, Eastern, extent of, 112. - division of, 113, 122, 125. - -Caliphate, Western, beginning of, 113, 122, 125. - broken up, 156. - -Calmar, Union of, 487. - -Cambray, bishopric of, 175. - becomes an archbishopric, 177. - League of, 242. - annexed to France, 301, 349. - -Camerino, march of, 238. - -Campo Formio, treaty of, 252. - -Canada, colonized by France, 352. - conquered by England, 353, 562. - part of the confederation of British North America, 564. - -Canali, district of, originally Servian, 405. - -Canaries, conquered by Spain, 543. - -Candia, war of, 404. - use of the name, 409 (_note_). - -Cantabria, conquered by Augustus, 56. - united with Asturia, 154, 529. - -Canterbury, archbishopric of, 181. - -Cape Breton, French settlement at, 352. - -Cape Colony, conquered by England, 566. - -Cape of Good Hope, discovery of, 541. - -Cape Verde Islands, conquered by Portugal, 541. - -Capua, Archbishopric of, 172. - Principality of, 394. - annexed to Sicily by King Roger, 396. - -Carcassonne, 335. - -Carelia, conquered by Sweden, 488. - part of, ceded to Russia, 512. - -Carinthia (Kärnthen), mark of, 114, 127, 140, 196. - Duchy of, 217, 308. - whether the seat of Samo’s kingdom, 473 (_note_). - -Carlisle, bishopric of, 183. - added to England by William Rufus, 551. - -Carlowitz, Peace of, 412, 439, 448. - -Carniola, (Krain), Duchy of, 217. - mark of, 196. - -Carolina, 561. - its division, _ib._ - -Carthage, Phœnician colony, 35. - greatness of, 79. - its possessions in Sicily, 48. - holds Sardinia and Corsica, 54. - its power in Spain, 56. - destroyed, 59. - restored, _ib._ - capital of the Vandal kingdom, 90. - -Carthagena (New Carthage), 56. - -Cashel, ecclesiastical province of, 183. - -Casimir the Great, king of Poland, his conquests, 498. - -Caspian, Russian advance on, 521. - -Cassubia, 492. - -Castile, county of, 154. - origin of the name, _ib._ - kingdom of, 155, 530, 535. - its Emperor, 463. - later history of, 527. - its relations towards Navarre, 528. - shiftings of, 531. - its final union with Leon, _ib._ - advance of, 533. - conquests of, under Saint Ferdinand, 534. - conquers Granada, 534, 537. - loses and recovers Gibraltar, 534. - its union with Aragon, 537. - its outlying possessions compared - with those of Aragon, 539. - -Catalans, conquests of, in Greece, 387, 416. - -Catalonia, county of, 536. - -Cattaro, won and lost by Montenegro, 322, 428. - -Caucasus, Russian advance in, 521. - -Cayenne, 353. - -Celts, earliest Aryan settlers in western Europe, 13, 14, 56. - effects of their settlements, 14. - -Cerdagne, released from homage to France, 531. - recovered by Aragon, 537. - loss of, 539. - -Ceuta, under the Empire, 526. - under Spain, 541, 543. - -Ceylon, Dutch colony, 300. - -Chablais, 273. - -Chaldia, theme of, 150. - -Chalkidikê, 20. - Greek colonies in, 33. - united to Macedonia, 37. - kept by the Empire, 390. - -Châlons, battle of, 94. - -Chambéry, Savoyard capital, 282, 288. - -Champagne, county of, 142. - character of its vassalage, 329. - joined to France, 336. - -Chandernagore, a French settlement, 354. - -Channel Islands, kept by the English kings, 334, 558. - -Charles the Great, his conquests, 121, 122. - conquers Lombardy, 123. - his title of Patrician, _ib._ - conquers Saxony, 126. - overthrows the Avars, 127. - crowned Emperor, 124. - extent of his Empire, 126, 127. - his divisions of the Empire, 128. - his death, _ib._ - archbishoprics founded by, 176. - -Charles the Fat, Emperor, union of the Frankish kingdoms under, 137. - -Charles V., Emperor, dominions of, 249, 298, 539. - his conquest of Tunis, 447, 543. - extension of Castilian dominion under, 539. - -Charles VI., Emperor, his Pragmatic Sanction, 320. - -Charles XII., of Sweden, his wars with Peter the Great, 512. - -Charles of Anjou, his kingdom of Sicily, 250. - his Italian dominion, 283. - his dominion in Epeiros, 397. - occupies Acre, 398. - -Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, his schemes for a Burgundian kingdom, 290, 304. - effects of his death, 340. - -Charles, Duke of Leukadia, his conquests and title, 421. - -Charles the Good, Duke of Savoy, 286. - -Charles Emmanuel, Duke of Savoy, 287. - -Charolois, under the Dukes of Burgundy, 339. - an appendage to Castile under Charles V., 539. - conquered by Lewis XIV., _ib._ - -Chartres, county of, united to Champagne, 330. - purchased by Saint Lewis, 336. - -Chazars, their settlements, 17, 113, 365. - Russian advance against, 481. - -Chersôn (Chersonêsos), city of, 36. - theme of, 152. - annexed to the Eastern Empire, 378. - taken by Vladimir, 153, 378, 482. - not the site of modern Cherson, 516 (_note_). - -Chiavenna, 195, 273. - -Chichester, bishopric of, 182. - -Chios, early greatness of, 32. - under the Zaccaria and the Maona, 414. - under the Turks, _ib._ - -Chlodwig, King of the Franks, 92, 117. - -Chosroes II., his conquests, 109. - -Christian I., King of Denmark, unites Denmark, Sleswick, and Holstein, 490, 491. - -Chrobatia, Northern and Southern, 433. - _See also_ CROATIA. - -Chrobatia, Northern, becomes Little Poland, 479. - passes to Austria, 515. - -Chur, bishopric of, 216. - -Church, Eastern, its relations to Russia, 468. - -Cibin, gives its name to Siebenbürgen, 435 (_note_). - -Circassia, Russian advance in, 521. - -Cispadane Republic, the, 251. - -Clermont, county of, 330. - -Cleve, 210. - -Clissa, 410. - -Clontarf, Irish victory at, 557. - -Cnut, his conquest of England, 162. - his northern Empire, 162, 462. - -Colony, meaning and use of the word, 559. - -Columbia, British, 564. - -Como, 237. - -Compostella, ecclesiastical province of, 179. - -Confederation of the Rhine, 221, 222, 358. - -Connaught, 183, 556. - -Connecticut, 560. - -Conrad of Mazovia, grants Culm to the Teutonic knights, 496. - -Constantine, French conquest of, 360. - -Constantine the Great, divisions of the Empire under, 74. - his new capital, 33, 77. - -Constantine Porphyrogennêtos, his description of the themes of the Empire, 149. - -Constantine Palaiologos, his conquests in Peloponnêsos, 418. - -Constantinople, foundation of, 33, 77. - its moral influence, 116. - Patriarchate of, 168. - early Russian attempts on, 482. - Latin conquest of, 383. - won back under Michael Palaiologos, 387. - taken by the Turks, 391. - -Constanz, bishopric of, 216. - passes to Austria, 274. - -Cordova, bishopric, of, 178. - conquered by Ferdinand, 534, 535. - Caliphate of; _see_ CALIPHATE, Western. - -Corfu, Norman conquests of, 380, 395, 396. - held by Margarito, 397. - won from Venice by Epeiros, 385. - granted to Manfred, _ib._ - under Charles of Anjou, _ib._ - under Venice, _ib._ - summary of its history, 408. - _see also_ KORKYRA. - -Corinth, in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - a Dorian city, 29. - joins the Achaian League, 40. - under Macedonia, _ib._ - won from Epeiros by the Latins, 417. - -Cornwall, 130. - -Coron (Kôrônê), held by Venice, 409. - lost by her, 411. - -Corsica, 44. - early inhabitants of, 53. - Roman conquest of, 54. - province of, 79. - held by Genoa, 238, 245. - ceded to France, 249. - effects of its incorporation with France, 351, 356. - -Cosmo de’ Medici, Duke of Florence and Grand Duke of Tuscany, 246. - -Cottbus, 211, 224. - -Courtray, 349. - -Cracow, capital of Poland, 479. - annexed by Austria, 514. - joined to the duchy of Warsaw, 82, 520. - republic of, _ib._ - second Austrian annexation of, 323, 520. - -Crema, 237. - -Cremona, 237. - -Crete, its geographical position, 22. - in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - keeps its independence, 37. - conquered by Rome, 63. - province of, 78. - lost and recovered by the Eastern Empire, 152, 153, 371, 372. - conquered by Venice, 404. - by the Turks, 404, 448. - re-enslaved by the Treaty of Berlin, 452. - -Crim, khanat of, 501. - dependent on the Sultans, _ib._ - annexed to Russia, 449, 516. - -Croatia, Slavonic settlement in, 114. - its relations to the Eastern and Western Empires, 378, 406, 407. - its relations to Hungary, 323, 407, 434. - part of the Illyrian Provinces, 322. - -Croja, won and lost by Venice, 411. - -Crotona; _see_ KROTÔN. - -Crusade, first, its geographical result, 399. - -Crusaders, take Constantinople, 383. - their conquests compared with those of the Normans in Sicily, 398. - -Cuba, 544. - -Cujavia, 478, 499. - -Culm, granted to the Teutonic knights, 496. - restored to Poland, 497. - -Cumæ, 47, 48. - -Cumania, king of, a Hungarian title, 436. - -Cumans, settlements of, 365, 436, 483. - dynasty of in Bulgaria, 431, 436. - crushed by the Mongols, 436, 483. - -Cumberland, (Strathclyde), Scandinavian settlements in, 161. - grant of, to Scotland, 162, 551. - southern part united to England, 551, 552. - formation of the shire, 556. - -Curland, Swedish conquest of, 472. - tribes of, 484. - dominion of the Sword-brothers in, 496. - duchy of, 504. - -Curzola; _see_ KORKYRA, BLACK. - -Custrin, under Poland, 479. - passes to Brandenburg, 492. - -Cyprus, Greek colonies in, 22. - Phœnician colonies in, 35. - Roman conquest of, 63. - theme of, 151. - lost and won by the Eastern Empire, 372. - conquered by Richard, _ib._ - kingdom of, 401. - its connexion with Jerusalem and with Armenia, _ib._ - conquered by Venice, 404. - by the Turks, 404, 447. - under English rule, 449, 559. - -Czar; _see_ TZAR. - -Czechs, 477. - -Czepusz; _see_ ZIPS. - - -Dacia, wars of, with Rome, 70. - made a province by Trajan, _ib._ - given up by Aurelian, _ib._ - its later history, 71. - diocese of, 78. - -Daghestan, 516, 521. - -Dago, under the Sword-brothers, 496. - under Denmark, 491, 504. - under Sweden, 508. - -Dalmatia, Greek colonies in, 34. - its wars with Rome, 62. - Roman colonies in, _ib._ - province of, 79. - Slavonic settlement in, 115. - kingdom of, 407, 409. - its relations to the Eastern Empire, 376, 406. - history of the coast cities, 406. - Venetian conquest in, 406, 407. - joined to Croatia, _ib._ - recovered by Manuel, 381, 407. - fluctuates between Hungary and Venice, 407, 409-412. - annexed by Lewis the Great, 409, 437. - taken, lost, and recovered by Austria, 320, 322, 441. - -Danaoi, 26. - -Danes, the, 127, 130. - their settlements, 131, 471. - their invasions of England, 160. - -Danish Mark, 196, 469. - -Danube, Roman conquests on, 68, 70. - boundary of the Empire, 71. - Gothic settlement on, 88. - crossed by the Goths, 89. - -Danzig, mark of, 492. - lost and recovered by Poland, 492, 497. - commonwealth of, 223, 519. - restored to Prussia, 520. - -Dardanians, 28. - -Dauphiny; _see_ VIENNOIS. - -Deira, kingdom of, 97, 161. - -Delaware, 562. - -Delmenhorst, 509, 513. - -Denmark, extent of, 131. - its relations to the Western Empire, 127, 196, 467. - formation of the kingdom, 469. - conquests and colonies of, 471. - united with England under Cnut, 163. - bishoprics of, 184. - conquers Sclavinia, 489. - advance of, in Germany, _ib._ - titles of its kings, _ib._ - keeps Rügen, 490. - effect of its advance on the Slavonic lands, 491. - its settlement in Esthland, 488. - united with Sweden and Norway, 487. - with Norway only, 488. - its wars with Sweden, 508. - gives up the sovereignty of the Gottorp lands, 509. - gets Oldenburg and Delmenhorst, _ib._ - recovers the Gottorp lands, 513. - gives up Oldenburg and Delmenhorst, _ib._ - incorporation of Holstein with, 518. - -Desnica, Zupania of, 424. - -δεσπότης, a Byzantine title, 384 (_note_). - -Dijon, capital of the duchy of Burgundy, 142, 144. - -Diocletian, Emperor, division of the Empire under, 75. - his conquests, 100. - -Dioklea, Zupania of, the germ of the Servian kingdom, 424. - -Ditmarsh, 489. - joined to Holstein, 490. - freedom of, 491. - Danish conquest of, _ib._ - -Dobroditius, his dominion, 431. - -Dobrutcha, origin of the name, 431. - joined to Wallachia, 431, 436. - restored to Roumania, 454. - -Dôdekannêsos; _see_ NAXOS. - -Dole, capital of Franche Comté, 261. - -Domfront, acquired by William of Normandy, 332. - -Dorchester, bishoprics of, 182. - -Dorian settlement in Peloponnêsos, 29. - in Asia, 32. - -Douay, becomes French, 349. - -Dreux, county of, 330. - -Drusus, his campaigns in Germany, 67. - -Dublin, ecclesiastical province of, 183. - -Dulcigno, originally Servian, 406. - won and lost by Montenegro, 429. - -Dunkirk, held by England, 301, 558. - bought back by France, 301, 342. - -Durazzo (Epidamnos), taken by the Normans, 380, 395, 396. - held by Margarito, 397. - conquered by Venice, 408. - won from Venice by Epeiros, 385. - recovered by the Eastern Empire, 387, 397. - under Charles of Anjou, 397. - won by Servia, 425. - duchy of, 397. - second Venetian conquest of, 410. - won by the Albanians, 420. - by the Turks, 411. - -Durham, bishopric of, 183. - -Dutch, use of the name, 300. - -Dyrrhachion, theme of, 152. - _see_ DURAZZO. - - -Eadmund, his conquest and grant of Cumberland to Scotland, 162. - -Eadward the Elder, extent of England under, 162. - -East, the, prefecture of, 75, 77. - dioceses of, 76. - -East Angles, kingdom of, 130. - diocese of, 182. - -East India Company, French, 354. - -Eastern Mark; _see_ AUSTRIA. - -Ecgberht, king of the West-Saxons, his supremacy, 130, 160. - -Edessa, restored to the Eastern Empire, 153, 379. - taken by the Turks, 400. - -Edinburgh, bishopric of, 183. - taken by the Scots, 550. - -Egypt under the Ptolemies, 38, 61. - Roman conquest of, 66. - diocese of, 76. - conquered by Selim I., 447. - -Eider, boundary of Charles the Great’s empire, 127, 196, 469. - -Eleanor of Aquitaine, effects of her marriages, 332, 337. - -Elba, annexed to the kingdom of Naples, 44, 246. - -Êlis, district of, 29. - city of, 30. - joins the Achaian league, 40. - -Elmham, bishopric of, 182. - -Elsass, 193. - annexed by France, 194, 347. - recovered by Germany, 229, 359. - -Ely, bishoprick of, 182. - -Embrun, ecclesiastical province of, 173. - -Emmanuel Filibert, Duke of Savoy, 286. - -Emperors, Eastern, position of, 362. - -Emperors, Western, position of, 362. - -Empire, Roman, greatest extent of, 9. - conquests under, 66. - its river boundaries, 71. - division of under Diocletian, 75. - united under Constantine, _ib._ - division of, 75, 81. - reunited under Zeno, 94, 103. - continuity of, 95, 103. - loses its eastern provinces, 111. - final division of, 124. - its political tradition unbroken in the East, 363. - -Empire, Western, beginning of, 81. - Teutonic invasions and settlements in, 82, 86, 87. - united with the Eastern Empire, 94, 103. - contrasted with the Eastern, 98, 362. - divisions of, 135, 137, 326. - its relations to Germany, 124-126, 128, 189, 190. - restored by Otto the Great, 147. - position of its Emperors, 362. - its relations to Scandinavia, 467. - to the Northern Slaves, 475. - -Empire, Eastern, wars of, with Persia, 82. - contrasted with the Western, 98, 362. - extent of, in the eighth century, 116. - its Greek character, 149, 366, 382. - its themes, 149-152. - its dominion in Italy, 152, 371, 393. - position of its Emperors, 362. - falls mainly through foreign invasion, 363, 367. - its partial tendencies to separation, 363. - keeps the political tradition of the Roman Empire, _ib._ - distinction of races in, 364. - its power of revival, 369, 377. - its loss and gain in the great islands, 372. - its relations towards the Slavonic powers, 373, 375. - Bulgarian settlement in, 374, 376. - recovers Greece from the Slaves, 375. - its conquests of Bulgaria, 377-378. - its relations to Venice, 378. - its fluctuations in Asia, _ib._ - Turkish invasions in, 379. - Norman invasions in, 380, 394. - its geographical aspect in 1085, 380. - under the Komnênoi, 366, 381, 386. - act of partition, 383, 402, 403. - losses and gains, 387-391. - under the Palaiologoi, 387. - effect of Timour’s invasion, 391. - its final fall, _ib._ - states formed out of, 391-393. - general survey of its history, 455-460. - compared with the Ottoman dominion, 443. - -Empire, Latin, 383. - its end, 387. - -Empire of Nikaia, 387. - -Empire of Trebizond, 36, 386, 422. - -Empire of Thessalonikê, 385. - -Empire, Serbian, 420, 425. - -Empire of Britain, 162, 462, 545. - -Empire of Spain, 463, 531. - -Empire of Russia, 512. - -Empire, French, 356. - -Empire of Austria, 221, 267, 306. - -Empire of Hayti, 359. - -Empires of Mexico, 544. - -Empire of Brazil, 542. - -Empire, German, 229, 230. - -Empire of India, 567. - -England, use of the name, 2, 3. - origin of the name, 97. - formation of the kingdom, 160. - West-Saxon supremacy in, 160, 161. - Danish invasions, _ib._ - advance of, 162. - united with Scandinavia under Cnut, _ib._ - Norman conquest of, 163. - its ecclesiastical geography, 166. - its wars with France, 337, 338. - its rivalry with France in America and India, 353. - slight change in its internal divisions, 546. - its relations with Scotland, 552. - changes of its boundary towards Wales, 553. - its relations with Ireland, 557. - its settlements beyond sea, 547. - its outlying European possessions, 558. - its American colonies, 559-565. - West Indian possessions, 565. - other colonies and possessions of, 565, 566. - its dominion in India, 567. - -English, character of their settlement, 96. - origin of the name, 97. - -Epeiros, its ethnical relations to Greece, 24. - use of the name, 26. - kingdom of Pyrrhos, 37. - league of, 40, 41. - Roman province of, 78. - Norman conquests in, 395, 396. - granted in fief to Margarito, 397. - despotat of, 384, 385. - its conquest of and separation from Thessalonikê, 385. - under Manfred and Charles of Anjou, 397. - its first dismemberment, 419. - recovered by the Eastern Empire, 388. - under Servian, Albanian, and Italian rule, 419, 420. - Venetian and Turkish occupation of, 421. - -Ephesos, its early greatness, 32. - -Epidamnos, 34. - its alliance with Rome, 40. - _see_ DURAZZO. - -Epidauros (Dalmatian), Greek colony, 34. - destroyed, 115. - -Eric, Saint, king of Sweden, his conquests in Finland, 486. - -Erivan, 521. - -Ermeland, bishopric of, added to Poland, 497. - -Essex, kingdom of, 160, 555. - -Este, house of, 237, 243, 249. - -Esthland (Esthonia), Fins in, 484. - Danish settlement in, 488. - dominion of the Swordbearers in, 496. - under Sweden, 504. - under Russia, 512. - -Etruria, kingdom of, 253. - -Etruscans, their doubtful origin and language, 45. - confederation of their cities, _ib._ - -Euboia, 22. - its position in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - under Macedonian influence, 37, 40. - conquered by Venice, 409. - by the Turks, _ib._ - -Euphrates, Asiatic boundary of the Roman Empire, 71, 99. - -Europa, Roman province of, 77. - -Europe, its geographical character, 5, 6, 8. - its three great peninsulas, 6. - its colonizing powers, 10. - Aryan settlements in, 12-15. - non-Aryan races in, 12, 13, 16, 17. - beginning of the modern history of, 85. - Buonaparte’s scheme for the division of, 357. - extended by colonization, 566. - -Euxine, Greek colonies on, 35. - -Evora, 179. - -Exeter, diocese of, 182. - -Ezerites, 375. - - -Falkland Islands, 565. - -Famagosta, under Genoa, 401. - -Faroe Islands, 471. - -Faucigny, annexed to Savoy, 280. - held by the Dauphins of Viennois, 281. - -Ferdinand, Saint, king of Castile, his conquests, 534. - -Fermo, march of, 238. - -Ferrara, duchy of, 243, 244, 249. - -Finland, Swedish conquests in, 486, 488. - Russian conquests in, 512, 518. - -Fins, remnant of non-Aryan people in Europe, 12, 466. - in Livland and Esthland, 484. - -Flaminia, province of, 79. - -Flanders, county of, 141, 142. - united to Burgundy, 292, 339. - within the Burgundian circle, 218. - released from homage to France, 218, 298, 340. - French acquisitions in, 348. - -Flemings, their settlement in Pembrokeshire, 554. - -Florence, archbishopric of, 171. - its greatness, 238. - Pisa submits to, 245. - rule of the Medici in, _ib._ - -Florida, held by England and Spain, 563. - acquired by the States, _ib._ - -France, effect of its geographical position, 9. - origin and use of the name, 4, 5, 91, 121, 325-327. - beginning of, 135, 136. - its ecclesiastical divisions, 166. - its annexations, 222, 252, 264, 265, 341-352. - compared with Austria, 325. - a nation in the fullest sense, 327. - great fiefs of, 328. - twelve peers of, _ib._ - its incorporation of vassal states, 329-341. - effects of the wars with England, 337-339. - beginning of the modern kingdom, 339. - thorough incorporation of its conquests, 351. - its colonial dominions, 352-354. - its rivalry with England in America and India, 353, 354. - its barrier towns against the Netherlands, 349. - effects of the Peace of 1763 on, 354. - its annexations under the Republic and Empire, 355, 356. - extent of under Buonaparte, 358. - restorations made by, after his fall, _ib._ - later annexations and losses, 359, 360. - character of its African conquests, 360. - its war with Prussia, 229. - -France, duchy of, 142. - united with the kingdom of the West Franks, 143. - -Franche Comté; _see_ BURGUNDY, County of. - -Francia, meanings of the name, 91, 121, 128. - extent of, 134. - -Francia, Eastern, 92, 121, 205. - -Francia, Western, 92. - -Francis I., Emperor, exchanges Lorraine for Tuscany, 321. - -Francis II., Emperor, his title of ‘Emperor of Austria,’ 221. - -Franconia, origin of the name, 91, 121. - extent of the circle, 214. - _see_ FRANCIA, Eastern. - -Frankfurt, election and coronation of the German kings at, 189. - a free city, 220, 227. - Grand Duchy of, 222. - annexed by Prussia, 228. - -Franks, the, 85. - their settlements, 87, 88. - extent of their kingdom under Chlodwig, 92. - their conquest of the Alemanni, 117. - of Thuringia and Bavaria, _ib._ - of Aquitaine and Burgundy, 118. - their position, 119. - their German and Gaulish dependencies, 120. - division of their kingdom, _ib._ - kingdom of united under the Karlings, 121. - their relations with the Empire, 123. - their conquest of Lombardy, _ib._ - -Franks, East, their kingdom grows into Germany, 138. - -Franks, West, kingdom of, its extent, 141. - its union with the duchy of France, 143. - grows into modern France, _ib._ - -Frederick II., Emperor, recovers Jerusalem, 400. - -Frederick William I., the Great Elector of Brandenburg, 210. - -Frederick I., King of Prussia, 210. - -Freiburg, joins the Confederates, 262, 272. - -Freiburg-im-Breisgau, conquered by France, 350. - restored, _ib._ - -French language, becomes the dominant speech of Gaul, 345. - -Friderikshamn, Peace of, 518. - -Friesland, East, annexed by Prussia, 212. - annexed by France, 222. - part of the kingdom of Hannover, 223. - -Friesland, West, county of, 293. - annexed to Burgundy, 298. - -Frisians, 91. - -Friuli, duchy of, 235. - -Fulda, 214. - -Furnes, Barrier Town, 349. - - -Gades, Phœnician colony, 35, 56. - admitted to the Roman franchise, 56. - _see_ CADIZ. - -Gaeta, 369. - -Galata, colony of Genoa, 414. - -Galicia (Halicz), kingdom of, 483. - twice annexed to Hungary, 437, 498. - recovered by Poland, 498. - Austrian possession of, 319, 323, 440, 514. - -Galicia, New, 515, 520. - -Gallicia, 529. - -Galloway, incorporated with Scotland, 553. - -Gascony, Duchy of, 142. - its union with Aquitaine, 332. - ceded by the Peace of Bretigny, 337. - -Gatinois, county of, 330, 331. - -Gattilusio, family of, receives Lesbos in fief, 414. - -Gaul, use of the name, 3, 4. - its geographical position, 7. - non-Aryan people in, 13. - Greek colonies in, 35. - prefecture of, 75, 79. - its gradual separation from the Empire, 88. - Teutonic invasions of, 89. - West Gothic kingdom in, 90. - position of the Franks in, 91, 119. - extent of Frankish kingdom in, 93. - Burgundian settlement in, _ib._ - Hunnish invasion of, 94. - ecclesiastical divisions of, 172-174. - -Gaul, Cisalpine, 46. - Roman conquest of, 54. - -Gaul, Transalpine, first Roman province in, 57. - its boundaries, _ib._ - its divisions and inhabitants, 58. - Romanization of, _ib._ - nomenclature of its northern and southern part, _ib._ - -Gauls, their settlements, 14, 46, 47. - -Gauthiod, 131, 470. - -Gauts, Geátas, of Sweden, name confounded with Goths, 470. - -Gauverfassung, 202. - -Gdansk; _see_ DANZIG. - -Gedymin, king of Lithuania, 497. - -Geldern, Gelderland, duchy of, 295. - annexed to Burgundy, 298. - division of, 299. - United Province of, 300. - -Geneva, annexed by Savoy, 281. - allied to Bern and Freiburg, 273. - annexed by France, 276. - restored by France, 359. - joins the Swiss Confederation, 276. - -Genoa, archbishopric of, 171. - holds Smyrna, 389. - holds Corsica, 238, 245. - cedes Corsica to France, 249. - annexed to Piedmont, 256. - compared with Venice, 402. - her settlements, 413. - -George Akropolitês, 430 (_note_). - -George Kastriota; _see_ SCANDERBEG. - -Georgia, kingdom of, 516, 521. - -Georgia, state of, 562. - -Gepidæ, their kingdom, 107. - conquered by the Lombards, _ib._ - -Germans, early confederacies of, 84. - serve within the Empire, 86. - -Germany, effect of its geographical character, 9. - Roman campaigns in, 67. - Frankish dominion in, 119. - its relations to the Western Empire, 126, 188-190. - beginning of the kingdom, 136, 138. - its extent, 139, 192-195. - ecclesiastical divisions of, 175-177. - its losses, 190, 203. - its changes in geography and nomenclature, 191, 201. - its eastern extension, 200. - the great duchies, 202. - circles of, 203, 206. - later history of, 204. - late beginnings of French annexation from, 343, 346. - Buonaparte’s treatment of, 357. - state of in 1811, 221, 222. - the Confederation, 218, 223-226. - last geographical changes in, 229. - its war with France, _ib._ - Empire of, 219, 229, 230. - its influence on the Baltic, 486. - -Gex, under Savoy, 273, 281. - annexed by France, 287, 347. - -Ghilan, 516. - -Gibraltar, lost and won by Castile, 534. - occupied by England, 537, 558. - -Glarus, joins the Swiss Confederation, 270. - -Glasgow, ecclesiastical province of, 183. - -Gnezna (Gniezno, Gnesen), ecclesiastical province of, 184. - beginning of the Polish kingdom at, 479. - passes to Prussia, 514, 520. - -Görz (Gorizia), county of, 217, 308. - annexed by Austria, 318. - -Gothia; _see_ PERATEIA or SEPTIMANIA. - -Gothland, 470. - -Goths, their settlements in the Western Empire, 87, 89. - defeated by Claudius, 88. - driven on by the Huns, _ib._ - their conquests in Spain, 90, 108, 526. - make no lasting settlement in the Eastern Empire, 364. - -Goths, East, their dominion in Italy, 95. - -Goths, West, extent of their dominions, 526. - -Goths, Tetraxite, their settlement, 98. - -Gotland, power of the Hansa in, 494. - held by the military orders, 496. - conquered by Sweden, 508. - -Gottorp lands, sovereignty of, resigned by Denmark, 509. - annexed to Denmark, 513. - -Gozo, granted to the knights of Saint John, 538. - -Granada, ecclesiastical province of, 179. - kingdom of, 534. - final conquest of, 537. - -Graubünden, League of, 272, 273. - loses its subject districts, 275. - -Gravelines, taken by France, 301. - -Greece, one of the three great European peninsulas, 6. - its geographical character, 8, 11, 18. - its history earlier than that of Rome, 8, 42. - use of the name, 19. - its chief divisions, 19-21. - insular and Asiatic, 19-23. - its Homeric geography, 25, 26. - its cities, 27. - leagues in, 40. - Roman conquests in, 41. - Slavonic occupation of, 116, 375, 461. - recovered by the Eastern Empire, 375. - war of independence, 452. - kingdom of formed, _ib._ - Ionian Islands ceded to, _ib._ - promised extension of, _ib._ - -Greeks, order of their coming into Europe, 13. - their kindred with Italians and other nations, 23-25. - their rivalry with the Phœnicians, 28. - their colonies, 28, 32-35. - their revival of the name Hellênes, 364. - -Greenland, Norwegian and Danish settlements in, 131. - united to Norway, 488. - -Greifswald, 494. - -Guiana, British, French, Dutch, 300, 353, 565. - -Guinea, Dutch settlements in, 300. - -Guines, made over to England, 338. - -Guipuzcoa, 535. - -Guthrum, his treaty with Ælfred, 161. - - -Habsburg, House of, 270, 309, 310. - scattered territories of, 310. - its connexion with the Western Empire, 311, 315. - -Hadrian, surrenders Trajan’s conquests, 99. - -Hadrianople, taken by the Bulgarians, 377. - by Michael of Epeiros, 385. - by the Turks, 390, 445. - treaty of, 450, 453. - -Hadriatic Sea, Greek colonies in, 34. - -Hainault (Hennegau), county of, 294. - united with Holland, _ib._ - French acquisitions in, 348. - -Halberstadt, 224. - -Halicz; _see_ GALICIA. - -Halikarnassos, held by the knights of Saint John, 415. - Turkish conquest of, 447. - -Halland, 469. - -Hamburg, archbishopric of, 176. - one of the Hanse Towns, 214, 220. - -Hannover, Electorate, 208. - its union with Great Britain, 204. - kingdom of, 223. - annexed by Prussia, 228. - -Hansa, the, 197, 487. - extent and nature of its power, 494. - -Hanse Towns, the, 213, 214, 220. - surviving ones annexed by France, 222. - join the German Confederation, 227. - -Harold, his Welsh conquests, 553. - -Hayti; _see_ SAINT DOMINGO. - -Hebrides, Scandinavian settlement in, 553. - submit to Scotland, _ib._ - -Heligoland, passes to England, 518, 558. - -Helladikoi, use of the name, 376. - -Hellas, use of the name, 18. - ‘continuous,’ 21. - theme of, 151. - later use of the name, 151, 461. - -Hellênes, use of the name in the Homeric catalogue, 26. - later history of the name, 375, 376, 461. - its modern revival, 364. - -Helsingland, 470. - -Helvetic Republic, 275. - -Hennegau; _see_ HAINAULT. - -Henry II., of England, his dominions, 332. - -Henry V., of England, his conquests, 338. - crowned in Paris, _ib._ - -Henry IV., of France, unites France and Navarre, 342. - -Heraclius, Emperor, his Persian campaigns, 109. - Slavonic settlements under, 114. - -Hêrakleia, commonwealth of, 37, 39, 64. - -Hereford, bishopric of, 182. - -Hertjedalen, conquered by Sweden, 508. - -Herzegovina, origin of the name, 427. - Turkish conquest of, _ib._ - administered by Austro-Hungary, 324, 427. - -Hessen-Cassel, Electorate of, 220, 226. - annexed by Prussia, 228. - -Hessen-Darmstadt, Grand Duchy of, 226. - -Hierôn, king of Syracuse, his alliance with Rome, 52. - -Hispaniola; _see_ SAINT DOMINGO. - -Hohenzollern, House of, 209. - -Holland, county of, 293. - united to Hainault, 294. - to Burgundy, 297. - kingdom of, 302. - annexed by France, _ib._ - _see_ UNITED PROVINCES. - -Holstein, 198, 488. - first Danish conquest of, 489. - fluctuations of, 490. - made a duchy, _ib._ - under Christian I., 491. - effect of the peace of Roskild on, 509. - incorporated with Denmark, 518. - joins the German Confederation, 225, 519. - final cession of to Prussia, 228, 519. - -Homeric Catalogue, the, 26-29. - -Honorius, Emperor of the West, 81. - -Huascar, 534. - -Hugh Capet, Duke of the French, chosen king, 143. - -Hundred Years’ Peace between Rome and Persia, 100. - -Hundred Years’ War, 337. - -Hungarians; _see_ MAGYARS. - -Hungary, kingdom of, 157, 367, 432. - its relations to the Western Emperors, 196. - extent of the kingdom, 323, 324. - whether a Bulgarian duchy existed in, 376 (_note_). - its frontier towards Germany, 433. - its relations with Croatia, 433, 434. - acquires Transsilvania, 435. - conquests of the Komnênoi from, 381. - its struggles with Venice for Dalmatia, 407. - Mongol invasion of, 436. - its wars with Bulgaria, 430. - its conquest of Bosnia, 424. - extension of under Lewis the Great, 437. - Turkish conquests in, 438. - its kings tributary to the Turk, 439. - recovered from the Turk, 439, 448. - acquisitions of by the Peace of Passarowitz, 440. - later losses and acquisitions of, 440, 441. - separated from and recovered by Austria, 323. - its dual relations to Austria, 441. - -Huniades, John, his campaign against the Turks, 426, 438. - -Huns, a Turanian people, 17. - their invasions, 88, 94. - - -Iapodes, 62. - -Iapygians, 46. - -Iberia, Asiatic, 99, 100. - -Iberians, a non-Aryan people, 13, 55. - -Iceland, Norwegian and Danish settlements in, 131, 471. - united to Norway, 488. - kept by Denmark, 518. - -Ikonion, Turkish capital, 381. - -Illyria, Illyricum, Greek colonies in, 20. - Roman conquests in, 40, 41, 62. - use of the name, 62. - prefecture of, 75, 77, 78. - western diocese of, 79. - kingdom of, 322. - -Illyrian Provinces, incorporated with France, 222, 322, 358. - misleading use of the name, 322. - recovered by Austria, 322. - -Illyrians, their kindred with the Greeks, 24. - displaced by Slavonic invasions, 115. - -Immeretia, 521. - -India, French settlements in, 353. - Portuguese settlements in, 541. - English dominion in, 567. - Empire of, _ib._ - -Indies, division of, between Spain and Portugal, 542. - -Ingermanland, 508, 512. - -Ionian colonies in Asia, 32. - -Ionian Islands, 22. - ceded to France, 358, 451. - to the Turks, 451. - under English protection, 451, 558. - added to Greece, 452. - -Ireland, the original Scotia, 549, 556. - provinces of, 183, 556. - Scandinavian settlements in, 471, 556. - its increasing connexion with England, 557. - English conquest of, _ib._ - kingdom and lordship of, _ib._ - its shifting relations with England, _ib._ - its union with Great Britain, _ib._ - -Isle of France, 329. - -Isle of France; _see_ MAURITIUS. - -Istria, Roman conquest of, 55, 62. - incorporated with Italy, 62. - Slavonic settlements in, 115. - March of, 147, 195, 235. - fluctuates between Germany and Italy, 195. - possessions of Venice in, 242. - under Austria, 258, 318. - -Italians, their origin, 13. - their kindred with the Greeks, 24. - two branches of, 45. - -Italy, one of the three great European peninsulas, 6, 7. - its geographical position, 8, 44. - use of the name, 43, 246. - inhabitants of, 45, 46. - Greek colonies in, 47. - growth of Roman power in, 50. - divisions of, under Augustus, 74. - prefecture of, 75, 78. - diocese of, 79. - invaded by the Huns, 94. - rule of Odoacer in, _ib._ - rule of Theodoric in, 95. - recovered to the Empire, 105. - Lombard conquest of, 107. - Imperial possessions in, 108, 123, 152, 371. - rule of Charles the Great in, 123. - Imperial kingdom of, 128, 134, 137, 146, 147, 234. - its ecclesiastical divisions, 170, 171. - changes on the Alpine frontier, 232. - system of commonwealths in, 235, 238. - four stages in its history, 236. - growth of tyrannies in, 239. - a ‘geographical expression,’ 246, 255. - dominion of Spain and Austria in, 247. - revolutionary changes in, 252-55. - French kingdom of, 253-55, 345, 357. - settlement of in 1814, 255. - restored kingdom of, 257. - its extension, 258. - part not yet recovered, _ib._ - -Ithakê, in the Homeric Catalogue, 26. - held in fief by Margarito, 397. - -Ivan the Great, of Russia, his conquests, 501, 506. - styles himself Prince of Bulgaria, 501. - -Ivan the Terrible, of Russia, his conquests, 506, 511. - -Ivrea, Mark of, 235, 236. - - -Jadera; _see_ ZARA. - -Jaen, 534, 535. - -Jägerndorf, principality of, 210. - -Jagiello, union of Lithuania and Poland under, 498. - -Jamaica, 544, 565. - -Jämteland, 470. - conquered by Sweden, 508. - -Jatwages, the, 484, 498. - -Java, Dutch settlement in, 300. - -Jayce, 427. - -Jedisan, annexed by Russia, 449, 516. - -Jerseys, East and West, 561. - -Jerusalem, patriarchate of, 168, 169. - taken by Chosroes, 109. - extent of the Latin kingdom, 399. - taken by Saladin, 400. - recovered and lost by the Crusaders, _ib._ - crown of, claimed by the kings of Cyprus, 401. - -Jezerci; _see_ EZERITES. - -Jireček, C. J. on Slavonic settlements, 133 (_note_). - -Jôannina, restored to the Empire, 388. - taken by the Turks, 421. - -John Asan, extent of Bulgaria under, 430. - -John Komnênos, Emperor, his conquests, 381. - -John Komnênos, Emperor of Trebizond, acknowledges the supremacy of - Constantinople, 422. - -John Tzimiskês, Emperor, recovers Bulgaria, 377. - his Asiatic conquests, 379. - -Jomsburg Vikings, settlement of, 471. - -Judæa, its relations with Rome, 65. - -Jung, on the Roumans, 435 (_note_). - -Justinian, extent of the Roman power under, 104, 105, 106. - -Jutes, their settlement in Kent, 97. - -Jutland, South, duchy of, united with Holstein, 490. - called Duchy of Sleswick, _ib._ - - -Kaffa, colony of Genoa, 414. - -Kainardji, Treaty of, 449. - -Kalabryta, 418. - -Kamienetz, ceded by Poland to the Turk, 448, 507. - -Kappadokia, kingdom of, 38. - annexed by Rome, 67. - theme of, 151. - -Karians, in the Homeric Catalogue, 28. - -Karlili, why so called, 421. - -Karlings, Frankish dynasty of, 121. - -Kärnthen; _see_ CARINTHIA. - -Karolingia, kingdom of, 137, 141, 143, 148, 326. - -Kars, joined to the Eastern Empire, 379. - annexed by Russia, 522. - -Karystos, 403. - -Kazan, Khanat of, 501. - conquered by Russia, 511. - -Kent, settlement of the Jutes in, 97. - kingdom of, 160, 555. - -Kephallênia, in the Homeric Catalogue, 26. - theme of, 151. - Norman conquests in, 395, 397. - held in fief by Margarito, _ib._ - commended to Venice, 410. - lost and won by Venice, 411. - -Khiva, 522. - -Kibyrraiotians, theme of, 150. - -Kief, Russian centre at, 481. - supremacy of, 482. - taken by the Mongols, 483. - by the Lithuanians, 498. - recovered by Russia, 506. - -Kilikia, 76. - restored to the Empire, 153, 379. - -Kirghis, Russian superiority over, 516. - -Klek, Ottoman frontier extends to, 412. - -Kleônai, 27. - -Köln (Colonia Agrippina), 92. - ecclesiastical province of, 175. - its archbishops chancellors of Italy and electors, 175, 176. - chief of the Hansa, 213. - annexed to France, 220. - restored to Germany, 224, 358. - -Kolocza, ecclesiastical province of, 186. - -Kolôneia, theme of, 150. - -Korkyra, 22, 26. - alliance of with Rome, 40. - _See also_ CORFU. - -Korkyra, Black (Curzola), Greek colony, 34, 406. - -Kôrônê; _see_ CORON. - -Kôs, Greek colony, 28. - held by the knights of St. John, 389, 415. - by the Maona, 414. - -Kossovo, battle of, 426. - -Krain; _see_ CARNIOLA. - -Kresimir, king of Croatia and Dalmatia, 407. - -Krotôn, early greatness of, 47. - -Ktesiphôn, conquered by Trajan, 99. - -Kymê; _see_ CUMÆ. - -Kyrênê, Greek colony, 35, 36. - Roman conquest of, 63. - - -Lakedaimonia, 151. - -Lakonikê, 29. - -Λαμπαρδοί, use of the form, 369 (_note_). - -Lancashire, formation of the shire, 556. - -Langue d’oc, extent of, 135. - effects of French annexations on, 345. - -Languedoc, province of, 335. - -Laodikeia, 381. - -Laon, capital of the Karlings, 143. - -Laps, remnant of non-Aryan people in Europe, 12. - -Latins, 46. - their alliance with Rome, 50. - -Lauenburg, represents the elder Saxony, 208. - held by the kings of Denmark, 225, 518. - joins the German confederation, 225, 519. - final cession of, to Prussia, 228, 519. - -Lausanne, annexed by Bern, 273. - -Lausitz; _see_ LUSATIA. - -Lazia, allotment of, 404. - -Lechs; _see_ POLES. - -Leinster, 183, 556. - -Lemberg, ecclesiastical province of, 185, 186. - -Lêmnos, becomes Greek, 32. - -Leo IX. Pope, grants Apulia as a fief to the Normans, 394. - -Leon, kingdom of, 154, 529. - shiftings of, 531. - its final union with Castile, _ib._ - -Leopol; _see_ LEMBERG. - -Lepanto (Naupaktos) under Anjou, 397. - ceded to Venice, 410. - to the Turk, 411. - -Lesbos, mention of in the Iliad, 28. - a fief of the Gattilusi, 414. - -Lesina; _see_ PHAROS. - -Leukas, Leukadia (Santa Maura), 22, 26. - date of its foundation, 31. - commended to Venice, 410. - lost and won by her, 411, 412. - -Leuticii, the, 474, 475. - -Letts, 466 (_note_). - settlements of, 484. - -Lewis I. (the Pious), Emperor, 128, 135. - -Lewis II. Emperor, 136. - -Lewis VII. of France, effects of his marriage and divorce, 332, 337. - -Lewis IX. (Saint) of France, growth of France under, 335. - -Lewis XII. of France, effects of his marriage, 341. - -Lewis XIV. of France, effects of his reign, 350. - his conquests from Spain, 539. - -Lewis XV. of France, effects of his reign, 350. - -Lewis the Great, of Hungary, his conquests, 409, 437. - annexes Red Russia, 498. - -Liburnia, 62. - -Libya, 76. - -Lichfield, bishopric of, 182. - -Liechtenstein, principality of, 229. - -Liége; _see_ LÜTTICH. - -Liguria, Roman conquest of, 55. - province of, 79. - part of the kingdom of Italy, 147. - -Ligurian Republic, the, 252. - -Ligurians, non-Aryan people in Europe, 13, 45. - -Lille, annexed by France, 301, 349. - -Limburg, passes to the Dukes of Brabant, 295. - duchy of, within the German confederation, 228. - -Limoges, 332. - -Lincoln, diocese of, 182. - -Lindisfarn, bishopric of, 182. - -Lisbon, patriarchate of, 170, 179. - conquered by Portugal, 533. - -Lithuania, bishopric of, 185. - effect of the German conquest of Livland on, 487. - its conquests from Russia, 497. - joined with Poland, 185, 498, 499. - -Lithuanians, settlements of, 15, 484. - long remain heathen, 466, 497. - -Livland, Livonia, Finnish population of, 484. - German conquests in, 486. - dominion of the Sword-brothers in, 495. - momentary kingdom of, 504. - conquered by Poland, _ib._ - by Sweden, 508. - by Russia, 512. - -Livonian Knights; _see_ SWORD-BROTHERS. - -Llandaff, bishopric of, 182. - -Lodi, 237. - -Lodomeria; _see_ VLADIMIR. - -Λογγιβαρδία, use of the form, 369 (_note_). - -Lokrians, their position in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - settle on the Corinthian Gulf, 30. - -Lokris, league of, 40. - -Lombards, their settlement in Italy, 106, 107. - take Ravenna, 108, 123. - overthrown by Charles the Great, 123. - -Lombardy, kingdom of, 107, 234. - under Charles the Great, 123. - growth of her cities, 237. - ceded to Sardinia, 257. - -Lombardy, theme of, 152, 369. - -Lombardy and Venice, kingdom of, 255, 322. - -London, bishopric of, 182. - -Lorraine, duchy of, 193. - seized by Lewis XIV., 194. - exchanged for Tuscany, 321. - finally annexed to France, 194, 351. - recovered by Germany, 359. - -Lorraine, House of, Emperors of, 321. - -Lothar I., Emperor, 135, 136. - -Lotharingia, kingdom of, 137, 140, 193. - -Lothian, granted to Scotland, 162, 550. - effects of the grant, 551. - -Lothringen; _see_ LORRAINE. - -Louisiana, colonized by France, 352. - ceded to Spain, 353, 360. - recovered and sold to the United States, 360, 563. - -Louvain (Löwen), 294. - -Low Countries; _see_ NETHERLANDS. - -Lübeck, founded by Henry the Lion, 198, 494. - its independence of the bishop, 214. - one of the Hansa, 214, 220, 494. - conquered by Denmark, 489. - -Lübeck, bishopric of, 491. - -Lublin, Union of, 505. - -Lucanians, 46. - -Lucca, 238. - under Castruccio, 245. - remains a commonwealth, 249. - archbishopric of, 171. - Grand Duchy of, 253. - annexed to Tuscany, 256. - -Lund, archbishopric of, 184. - ceded to Sweden, 508. - -Lüneburg, duchy of, 208. - -Luneville, peace of, 194. - -Lusatia (Lausitz), Mark of, 199, 475. - won by Bohemia, 493. - -Lüttich (Liége), bishopric of, 295, 298. - annexed by France, 302. - added to Belgium, 227, 302. - French acquisitions from, 348. - -Luxemburg (Lüzelburg), duchy of, 295. - annexed to Burgundy, 298. - French acquisitions from, 348. - within the German confederation, 225. - division of, 229, 303. - neutrality of, 229. - -Luxemburg, House of, kings of Bohemia, 493. - -Luzern, joins the Confederates, 262, 270. - -Lydians, 33. - -Lykandos, theme of, 150. - -Lykia, league of, 39. - preserves its independence, 64. - annexed by Rome, 67. - -Lykians, in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - -Lyons, in the kingdom of Burgundy, 145, 263. - archbishopric of, 167, 173. - annexed by Philip the Fair, 264. - - -Macedonia, 20, 21. - its close connexion with Greece, 24. - not in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - growth of the kingdom, 36, 37. - Roman conquest of, 41. - diocese of, 78. - theme of, 151. - recovered by the Empire, 388. - -Macedonian, use of the name, 115. - -Macon, annexed by Saint Lewis, 336. - -Madeira, colonized by Portugal, 541. - -Madras, taken by the French, 354. - -Madrid, Treaty of, 298, 340. - -Magdeburg, archbishopric of, 176. - recovered by Prussia, 224. - -Magyars, a Turanian people, 17. - their settlements, 17, 157, 365, 433. - effects of their invasion on the Slaves, 158, 432. - called Turks, 379. - origin of the name, 433 (_note_). - -Mahomet, union of Arabia under, 110. - -Mahomet I., Sultan, Ottoman power under, 446. - -Mahomet the Conqueror, Sultan, his conquests, 411, 446. - extent of his dominions, 446. - -Maina, name of Hellênes confined to, 376. - recovered by the Empire, 388, 418. - independence of, 419. - -Maine, county of, 330. - conquered by William of Normandy, 332. - united with Anjou, _ib._ - annexed to France, 333. - -Maine, State of, 560. - -Mainz, 92. - ecclesiastical province of, 175. - its archbishops chancellors of Germany and electors, 176. - annexed to France, 220. - restored to Germany, 358. - -Maionians, in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - -Majorca, kingdom of, 536. - -Malta, taken by the Saracens, 370. - by the Normans, 395. - granted to the knights of Saint John, 398, 415, 538. - revolutions of, 415. - held by England, 415, 558. - -Man, Scandinavian settlement in, 471, 553. - its later history, 488, 553. - -Manfred, King of Sicily, his dominion in Epeiros, 397. - styled Lord of Romania, _ib._ - -Mantua, 243, 248, 257. - -Manuel Komnênos, his conquests, 381, 424. - -Manzikert, battle of, 380. - -Maona, the, its dominions, 414. - -Marche, county of, 332. - -Marcomanni, 85. - -Margarito, king of the Epeirots, 397. - -Maria Theresa, Empress-Queen, her hereditary dominions, 320. - effects of her marriage, 321. - -Marienburg, 301, 348. - -Marseilles, acquired by France, 265. - -Mary of Burgundy, effects of her marriage, 340. - -Maryland, 561. - -Massa, 249. - -Massachusetts, 560. - -Massalia, Ionian colony, 35, 36, 56. - _see_ MARSEILLES. - -Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary, his conquests, 438, 493. - -Maurienne, Counts of, 278. - -Mauritania, 67. - -Mauritius (Isle of France), a French colony, 354. - taken and held by England, 360. - -Maximilian I., his legislation, 203. - effects of his marriage, 340. - -Mazanderan, 516. - -Mazovia, duchy of, 478. - recovered by Poland, 499. - -Meath, 556. - -Meaux, settlement of, 335. - -Mechlin, archbishopric of, 177. - -Mecklenburg, duchy of, 198. - Slavonic princes continue in, 198, 476. - -Mediation, act of, 276. - -Medici, the, rule of in Florence, 245, 246. - -Mediterranean Sea, centre of the three old continents, 5, 6. - -Megalopolis, its foundation, 31. - -Megara, 29. - joins the Achaian League, 40. - -Mehadia, 396. - -Meissen, Mark of, 199, 475. - -Meleda, 406. - -Melfi, 394. - -Melinci, Melings, 375. - -Mendog, king of Lithuania, his conquests, 497. - -Mentone, annexed by France, 346, 359. - -Mercia, kingdom of, 129, 130, 160, 161. - -Mesopotamia, conquest of, under Trajan, 99. - under Diocletian, 100. - -Messana (Messina), receives Roman citizenship, 53. - recovered and lost by the Eastern Empire, 270. - taken by the Saracens, 370. - by the Normans, 395. - first Norman capital, _ib._ - -Messênê, Dorian, 29. - conquered by Sparta, 30. - foundation of the city, 31. - -Metz, annexed by France, 193, 346. - restored to Germany, 229. - -Mexico, Spanish conquest of, 543. - two Empires of, 544. - -Mexico, New, ceded by Spain, 544. - -Michael Palaiologos, Eastern Emperor, 422. - -Michael, despot of Epeiros, his conquests, 385. - -Mieczïslaf, first Christian prince of Poland, 479. - -Milan, capital of kingdom of Italy, 147. - archbishopric of, 171. - -Milan, duchy of, 240, 241, 248. - temporary French possession of, 346. - a Spanish dependency, 539. - -Milêtos, its colonies, 32. - -Military Orders, 487, 495-497. - -Mingrelia, 521. - -Minorca, 538. - -Misithra, restored to the Empire, 388, 418. - -Mississippi, colonization at the mouth of, 353. - made the boundary of Louisiana, _ib._ - -Mithridates, king of Pontos, his wars with Rome, 64. - -Modena, duchy of, 243, 244, 249, 256. - annexed to Piedmont, 257. - -Modon, held by Venice, 409. - lost by her, 411. - -Mœsia, Roman conquest of, 68. - -Mohacz, battle of, 438. - -Moldavia, Rouman settlement, 437. - tributary to the Turk, 439. - fluctuations of its homage, 499. - joined to Wallachia, 453. - shiftings of the frontier, 450. - -Molossis, 37. - -Moluccas, Dutch settlements in, 300. - -Monaco, principality of, 247, 256. - -Montbeliard, county of, 261, 350. - annexed by France, 355. - -Monembasia, restored to the Empire, 388, 418. - held by Venice, 410. - lost by her, 411. - -Mongols, invade Europe, 436, 483. - Russia tributary to, 483, 500. - effects of their invasion on the Ottomans, 443, 444. - decline and break up of their power, 500, 501. - -Monmouthshire, becomes an English county, 555. - -Monopoli, lost by Venice, 248. - -Montenegro, origin and independence of, 427, 428. - its Vladikas, 428. - joins England and Russia against France, _ib._ - its conquest and loss of Cattaro, 322, 428. - later conquests and diplomatic concessions to, 429. - -Montferrat, marquisate and duchy of, 236, 240, 248. - homage claimed from by Savoy, 284. - partially annexed by Savoy, 248, 289. - -Montfort, Simon of, at Toulouse, 335. - -Moors, use of the name, 530. - -Môraia, origin and use of the name, 416. - -Moravia, 199. - history of, 477. - -Moravia, Great, kingdom of, 157, 432, 473. - overthrown by the Magyars, 433. - -Morosini, Francesco, his conquests, 412. - -Moscow, patriarchate of, 170. - centre of Russian power, 500, 501. - advance of, 501. - -Moudon, granted to Savoy, 280. - -Moulins, county of, 330. - -Mülhausen, in alliance with the Confederates, 274. - annexed by France, 355. - -Munster, 183, 556. - -Münster, 224. - -Murcia, conquered by Castile, 533, 535. - -Muret, battle of, 531. - -Muscovy, origin of the name, 500. - -Mykênê, its position in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - destruction of, 31. - -Mykonos, held by Venice, 409, 411. - -Mysians, in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - - -Namur, Mark of, 294. - annexed to Burgundy, 296. - -Naples, cleaves to the Eastern Empire, 369. - conquered by King Roger, 396. - kingdom of, 250, 254. - temporary French possession of, 346. - title of king of, 251, 254. - Parthenopæan republic, 252. - restored to the Bourbons, 256. - -Narbonne, Roman colony, 57. - Saracen conquest of, 112. - ecclesiastical province of, 173. - annexed to France, 335. - -Narses, wins back Italy to the Empire, 105. - -Nassau, Grand Duchy of, 226. - annexed by Prussia, 228. - -Natal, 566. - -Naupaktos; _see_ LEPANTO. - -Nauplia, won from Epeiros by the Latins, 417. - held by Venice, 410. - lost by her, 411. - -Navarre, kingdom of, 154, 528. - extent of under Sancho the Great, 529. - break-up of, 530. - its decline, 531. - union with, and separation from France, 336, 531. - conquered by Ferdinand, 537. - northern part united to France, 342. - -Navas de Tolosa, battle of, 533. - -Naxos, duchy of, 413. - annexed by the Turk, 413, 447. - -Negroponte, use of the name, 409 (_note_). - -Neopatra, Epeirot dynasty of, 419. - Catalan conquest of, 416. - taken by the Turks, 417, 420. - -Netherlands, their separation from Germany, 203, 291, 299. - Imperial and French fiefs in, 293. - an appendage to Castile under Charles V., 539. - French annexations in, 348. - barrier towns against France, 349. - _see_ UNITED PROVINCES. - -Netherlands, kingdom of, 302. - divided, 303. - -Netz District, 514. - -Neufchâtel, allied with Bern, 274. - passes to Prussia, 224, 274. - granted to Berthier, 276. - joined to the Swiss Confederation, 276, 359. - separated from Prussia, 276. - -Neustria, Lombard, 234. - -Neustria, kingdom of, 121, 134. - united with Aquitaine, 135, 339. - -New Amsterdam, 300, 561. - -New Brunswick, 564. - -New England, settlements of, 560. - form four colonies, _ib._ - -New France, settlement of, 352. - -New Hampshire, 560. - -New Netherlands, colony of, 300, 561. - united to New Sweden, 561. - conquered by England, 300, 561. - -New Orleans, 353, 563. - -New South Wales, 565. - -New Sweden, 561. - united to New Netherlands, _ib._ - -New York, 300, 561. - -New Zealand, 566. - -Newfoundland, first settlements in, 559. - remains distinct from Canada, 565. - -Nibla, taken by Castile, 534. - -Nidaros; _see_ TRONDHJEM. - -Nikaia, Turkish capital of Roum, 380. - recovered by Alexios Komnênos, 381. - Empire of, 386. - its extent and growth, 387. - taken by the Turks, 389, 445. - -Nikêphoros Phôkas, Eastern Emperor, his Asiatic conquests, 379. - -Nikomêdeia, taken by the Turks, 389, 445. - -Nikopolis, theme of, 152. - battle of, 438. - -Nîmes, Saracen conquest of, 112. - under Aragon, 335. - annexed to France, _ib._ - -Nimwegen, Peace of, 301, 349. - -Nish, taken by the Turks, 426. - -Nisibis, fortress of, 100. - -Nizza, annexed by Savoy, 265, 282. - taken by Buonaparte, 355. - restored to Savoy, 359. - finally annexed by France, 258, 288, 359. - -Nogai Khan, overlord of Bulgaria, 431. - -Noricum, conquest of, 68. - in the diocese of Illyricum, 79. - -Normandy, duchy of, 142. - character of its vassalage, 328. - union of with Aquitaine, Anjou, and Britanny, 333. - annexed by Philip Augustus, 333. - -Normans, their conquests in Italy and Sicily, 370, 393-395. - in England, 163. - in Epeiros, 380, 395. - their conquests in Sicily compared with those of the Crusaders, 398. - -Northmen, use of the name, 469. - their settlements, 471, 550, 552, 556. - -Northumberland, kingdom of, 97, 129, 162. - earldom of granted to David, 551. - recovered by England, 552. - -Norway, its extent and settlements, 131, 159, 471. - united to England under Cnut, 163. - its independence of the Empire, 467. - formation of the kingdom, 469. - Iceland and Greenland united to, 488. - united with Sweden and Denmark, 488. - its wars with Sweden, 508. - united with Sweden, 464, 518. - -Noto, taken by Count Roger, 395. - -Nova Scotia, ceded to England, 352, 562. - -Novara, 249. - -Novempopulana, 173. - -Novgorod, beginning of, 481. - commonwealth at, 483. - Russia represented by, 484. - does homage to the Mongols, 500. - annexed by Muscovy, 501. - -Novgorod, Severian, principality of, 483. - -Novi-Bazar (Rassa), 424. - -Numantia, Roman conquest of, 56. - -Numidia, province of, 59. - -Nürnberg, 209, 215, 220, 226. - -Nystad, Peace of, 512. - - -Obotrites, 474. - -Ochrida, taken by the Bulgarians, 377. - kingdom of, its extent, 377, 378. - -Oczakow, annexed by Russia, 449. - -Odessa, does not answer to Odêssos, 516 (_note_). - -Odo, king of the West Franks, does homage to Arnulf, 139, 326. - -Odoacer, his reign in Italy, 94. - overthrown by Theodoric, 95. - -Oesel, won by Denmark, 491, 504. - under the Sword-brothers, 496. - under Sweden, 508. - -Ogres; _see_ MAGYARS. - -Oldenburg, united with Denmark, 509. - becomes a separate duchy, 513. - Grand Duchy of, 226. - annexed by France, 222. - -Olgierd, king of Lithuania, 497. - -Oliva, Peace of, 510. - -Oliverca, ceded to Spain by Portugal, 538. - -Olynthos, 33. - -Opicans, Oscans, 46. - -Opsikion, theme of, 151. - -Optimatôn, theme of, 151. - -Oran, conquered by Spain, 543. - -Orange, 263. - annexed to France, 265, 350. - -Orange River State, 566. - -Orchomenos, its position in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - its secondary position in historic times, 30. - destroyed by the Thebans, 31. - -Oreos, 403. - -Orkney, Scandinavian colony, 471. - earldom of, 553. - pledged to Scotland, 488. - -Osrhoênê, 100. - -Ostmen, their settlements in Ireland, 159, 556. - -Otho de la Roche, founds the lordship of Athens, 416. - -Otranto, Turkish conquest of, 446. - -Otto the Great, Emperor, subdues Berengar, 147. - crowned at Rome, 148. - -Ottocar II., king of Bohemia, his German dominion, 492. - -Ottoman Turks, their position in Europe, 17. - compared with the Magyars and Bulgarians, 365. - with the Saracens, 442. - their special character as Mahometans, _ib._ - their dominion compared with the Eastern Empire, 443. - their origin, 444. - effect on, of the Mongol invasion, _ib._ - their first settlements, _ib._ - invade Europe, 445. - under Bajazet, 445. - their conquests of Servia, 426. - of Thessaly and Albania, 420, 421. - of Bulgaria, 431. - invade Hungary, 438. - overthrown by Timour, 390, 445. - reunited under Mahomet I., 446. - under Mahomet the Conqueror, _ib._ - take Constantinople, 391, 446. - their conquests in Peloponnêsos, 419. - of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 427. - under Selim and Suleiman, 447. - their conquest of Hungary, _ib._ - greatest extent of their dominion, 448. - decline of their power, 448-450. - their wars with Russia, 449. - -Oudenarde, becomes French, 349. - restored, _ib._ - -Oviedo, 529. - - -Paderborn, 224. - -Padua, 237. - -Pagania, originally Servian, 405. - its extent, 406. - -Paionia, 20. - -Paionians, in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - -Palaiologos, House of, 366. - branch of at Montferrat, 240. - -Palatinate of the Rhine, 215. - united with Bavaria, _ib._ - -Pale, fluctuations of the, 557. - -Palermo (Panormos), a Phœnician colony, 48. - taken by the Saracens, 370. - taken by the Normans, 395. - becomes the capital of Sicily, 395. - -Palestine, its relations to Rome, 65. - -Pampeluna, diocese of, 179. - kingdom of; _see_ NAVARRE. - -Pannonia, Roman conquest of, 68. - in the diocese of Illyricum, 79. - Lombard kingdom in, 106. - Bulgarian attempt on, 376. - -Panormos; _see_ PALERMO. - -Papal Dominions, beginning and growth of, 239, 242, 244, 249. - its overthrow and restoration, 252, 253, 359. - annexed by France, 253, 256. - annexed to the kingdom of Italy, 258. - -Paphlagonia, kingdom of, 38. - theme of, 150. - -Paphlagonians, 28. - -Parga, commends itself to Venice, 410. - surrendered to the Turks, 451. - -Paris (Lutetia Parisiorum), 58. - capital of the duchy of France, 142. - capital and centre of the kingdom of France, 144, 167. - becomes an archbishopric, 174. - -Paris, treaty of, 353, 354, 360, 450. - -Parma, 237, 241. - given to the Spanish Bourbons, 249. - the duchy restored, 256. - annexed to Piedmont, 257. - -Parthenopæan Republic, the, 252. - -Parthia, its rivalry with Rome, 65, 81. - -Partition, crusading act of, 383. - -Passarowitz, Peace of, 440. - -Patras, under the Pope, 418. - held by Venice, 410, 418. - -Patriarchates, the, 168, 169. - -‘Patrician,’ title of, 123. - -Patzinaks, 17, 113, 156, 158, 365. - -Pavia, old Lombard capital, 147, 237. - county of, 241. - -‘Pax Romana,’ 66. - -Pelasgians, use of the name, 24. - in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - -Peloponnêsos, its geographical position, 21. - Homeric divisions of, 27. - changes in, 29. - united under the Achaian League, 40. - Slavonic settlements in, 116, 375, 461. - theme of, 151. - won back to the Eastern Empire, 153. - Latin conquests in, 417. - Venetian settlements in, 409, 410. - recovered by the Eastern Empire, 418. - becomes an Imperial dependency, 388. - conquered by the Turks, 391, 419. - Venetian losses in, 411. - conquered by Venice, 412. - recovered by the Turks, 412. - -Pembrokeshire, Flemish settlement in, 554. - -Pennsylvania, 561. - -Pentedaktylos; _see_ TAŸGETOS. - -Perateia, meaning of the name, 422. - Turkish conquest of, 423. - -Perche, united to France, 336. - -Perekop, conquered by Lithuania, 498. - added to Poland, _ib._ - lost by Poland, 499. - -Pergamos, kingdom of, 38, 61. - -Persia, wars of with Greece, 33. - with Rome, 81, 99, 109. - Saracen conquest of, 82, 111. - revival of, 98, 100. - Russian conquests in, 516. - -Peru, Spanish conquest of, 543. - -Perugia, 239. - -Peter the Great of Russia, his wars with Charles XII., 512. - -Peter, count of Savoy, 278. - -Pharos (Lesina), 34, 406. - -Philadelphia, taken by the Turks, 390. - -Philip, rise of Macedonia under, 37. - -Philip Augustus, King of France, his annexations, 333. - -Philip the Fair, King of France, effects of his marriage, 336. - his momentary occupation of Aquitaine, 337. - -Philip of Valois, King of France, his attempt on Aquitaine, 337. - -Philip the Hardy, Duke of Burgundy, duchy of Burgundy granted to, 339. - -Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy, his acquisitions, 296-298. - -Philippeville, held by France, 301, 348. - -Philippine Islands, conquered by Spain, 543. - -Philippopolis, first Bulgarian occupation of, 377. - first Russian occupation of, _ib._ - finally becomes Bulgarian, 389, 430. - taken by the Turks, 431. - -Phœnicians, their colonies, 28, 35, 48. - -Phôkaia, held by the Maona, 414. - -Phôkis, 21. - league of, 40. - -Phrygians, in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - -Piacenza, 237, 241. - given to the Spanish Bourbons, 249. - -Picts, 98, 549. - united with the Scots, 550. - -Piedmont, joined to France, 252, 356. - reunited with Sardinia, 256. - union of Italy comes from, _ib._ - -Pietas Julia; _see_ POLA. - -Pinerolo, occupied by France, 347. - -Pippin, king of the Franks, conquers Septimania, 121. - -Pisa, archbishopric of, 171. - position of, 238. - conquers Sardinia, _ib._ - subject to Florence, 245. - -Plataia, destroyed by Thebes, 31. - -Podlachia, conquered by Poland, 498. - -Podolia, lost by Galicia, 498. - added to Poland, _ib._ - ceded to the Turks, 448, 507. - recovered by Poland, _ib._ - -Poitou, annexed by Philip Augustus, 334. - -Pola (Pietas Julia), Roman colony, 63. - -Polabic branch of the Slaves, 474. - -Poland, kingdom of, 159, 200, 479. - its ecclesiastical relations, 465. - its relations to the Empire, 467, 478. - wars of, with Russia, 478, 506. - various tribes in, 478. - its conversion, 479. - its extent under Boleslaf, 478. - internal divisions of, _ib._ - consolidation of, 498. - Pomerania falls away from, 492. - conquests of, 498, 499. - joined with Lithuania, 498, 499. - Red Russia restored to, 437. - Zips pledged to, _ib._ - its acquisitions from the Teutonic knights, 497. - acquires Livland, 504. - its relations with Wallachia and Moldavia, 439. - its wars with Sweden, 508. - cedes Podolia to the Turk, 448. - partitions of, 212, 440, 513, 515. - formation of the new kingdom, 520. - united to Russia, 520. - -Poland, Little, 479. - -Poles (Lechs), their settlements, 478. - -Polizza, independence of, 407. - -Polotsk, principality of, 483. - -Pomerania, Pomore, Pommern, its extent, 199, 200. - its early relations to Poland, 478, 479. - Danish conquests in, 489. - falls away from Poland, 491, 492. - its divisions, 200, 492. - divided between Brandenburg and Sweden, 210, 213, 504. - its western part incorporated with Sweden, 518. - ceded to Denmark and then to Prussia, 225, 518. - -Pomerelia, purchased by the Teutonic knights, 496. - restored to Poland, 497. - -Pondicherry, a French settlement, 354. - conquests and restorations of, 360. - -Ponthieu, county of, 330. - acquired by William of Normandy, 332. - made over to England in 1360, 338, 558. - -Pontos, kingdom of, 38. - Roman conquest of, 64. - diocese of the Eastern Prefecture, 76. - -Portugal, 155, 527. - formation of the kingdom, 532. - its growth, 533. - kingdom of Algarve added to, 534. - extent of, in the thirteenth century, 534, 535, 540. - its African conquests, 541. - its colonies, 541, 542. - divides the Indies with Spain, _ib._ - annexed to and separated from Spain, 537. - -Posen, Grand Duchy of, 224, 231, 520. - -Potidaia, 33. - -Prag, ecclesiastical province of, 176. - -Prefectures, of the Roman Empire, 75-79. - -Pressburg, Peace of, 220. - -Prevesa, held by Venice, 412. - ceded to the Turk, 451. - -Primorie; _see_ HERZEGOVINA. - -Provençal language, its fall, 345. - -Provence, origin of the name, 57. - part of Theodoric’s kingdom, 93, 95. - ceded to the Franks, 105, 118. - part of the kingdom of Burgundy, 145. - Angevin counts of, 263. - annexed to France, 264, 344. - -Provinces, Roman, nature of, 51. - Eastern and Western, 52. - -Prussia, use of the name, 192, 211, 230. - long remains heathen, 466. - dominion of the Teutonic Knights in, 496. - beginning of the duchy, 503. - its geographical position, 504. - united with Brandenburg, 204, 209, 504, 513. - independent of Poland, 504. - growth of, 202, 511. - kingdom of, 512. - its acquisition of Silesia, 211. - of East Friesland, _ib._ - its share in the partition of Poland, 212, 513-515. - losses of, 222, 223, 519. - recovery and increase of its territory, 224. - head of North German confederation, 228. - annexes Sleswick, Holstein, and Lauenburg, 519. - war with France, 229. - -Prussia Western, 212, 513. - -Prussia South, 212, 514. - -Prussia New East, 212. - -Przemyslaf, king of the Wends, founds the house of Mecklenburg, 476. - -Pskof, commonwealth of, 483. - annexed by Muscovy, 501. - -Puerto Rico, 544. - -Punic Wars, the, 52, 56. - -Pyrenees, Peace of, 301, 348. - -Pyrrhos, 37. - - -Quadi, 85. - -Quebec, 352. - -Queensland, 566. - - -Rætia, conquest of, 68. - -Ragusa, origin of, 115. - ecclesiastical province of, 186. - keeps her independence, 407, 412. - prefers the Turk to Venice, 412. - annexed to Austria, 320, 322. - -Raleigh, Sir Walter, 559. - -Rama, Hungarian kingdom of, 424, 441. - -Rametta, taken by the Saracens, 370. - -Ramsbury, see of, 182. - -Rascia; _see_ DIOKLEA. - -Rassa (Novi Bazar), capital of Dioklea, 424. - -Rastadt, Peace of, 350. - -Ravenna, residence of the Western Emperors, 81. - of the Gothic kings, 95. - of the exarchs, 105. - taken by the Lombards, 108, 123. - its ecclesiastical position, 171. - under Venice, 242. - lost by Venice, 248. - -Red Russia; _see_ GALICIA. - -Regensburg, 220. - -Revel, bishopric of, 184. - -_Rex Francorum_, title of, 144. - -Rheims, position of the archbishop, 167. - ecclesiastical province of, 175. - -Rhine, the boundary of the Roman Empire, 71. - frontier of, 348, 350, 355. - -Rhodes, in the Homeric Catalogue, 28. - keeps its independence, 37, 41. - annexed by Vespasian, 41, 63. - held by the knights of Saint John, 389, 415. - revolutions of, 414. - knights driven out from, 447. - -Rhode Island, 560. - -Riazan, annexed by Muscovy, 501. - -Richard I., of England, takes Cyprus, 372. - grants it to Guy of Lusignan, 318. - -Riga, ecclesiastical province of, 185. - under the Sword-brothers, 496. - under Sweden, 508. - -Rimini (Ariminum), 54, 244. - -Riparanensia, 154, 529. - -Robert Wiscard, duke of Apulia, 394. - his conquests in Epeiros, 395. - -Rochester, bishopric of, 181. - -Roesler, R., on the origin of the name Magyar, 433 (_note_). - on the Roumans, 435 (_note_). - -Roger I., count of Sicily, his conquests, 395. - -Roger II., king of Sicily, his conquests, 395. - -Romagna (Romania), represents the old Exarchate, 147, 238. - origin of the name, 234, 364. - cities in, 244. - annexed to Piedmont, 257. - -Roman, name kept on in the Eastern Empire, 63, 363, 364, 366. - continued under the Turks, 380. - -Roman Empire; _see_ EMPIRE, ROMAN. - -Romania, geographical name of the Eastern Empire, 364, 376. - Latin Empire of, 383. - -Romania in Italy; _see_ ROMAGNA. - -Romano, lordship of, 237. - -Rome, the centre of European history, 9. - origin of, 49. - becomes the head of Italy, 50. - nature of her provinces, 51. - her Macedonian wars and conquests, 41. - her rivalry with Parthia, _ib._ - wars of, with Persia, 81. - Patriarchate of, 168, 171. - her later history, 239. - becomes the Tiberine Republic, 252. - restored to the Pope, 253. - incorporated with France, _ib._ - restored to the Pope, 256, 359. - recovered by Italy, 258. - -Roskild, Treaty of, 508. - bishopric of, 184. - -Rostock, 494. - -Rottweil, 274. - -Rouen, capital of Normandy, 142. - ecclesiastical province of, 173. - -Roum, Sultan of, 380. - -Roumans, origin of the name, 71, 364, 435. - their northern settlements, 435. - -Roumania, 436. - principality of, 453. - effects of the Treaty of Berlin on, 453. - -Roumelia, Eastern, 454. - -Roussillon, released from homage to France, 335, 531. - recovered by Aragon, 537. - finally annexed by France, 342, 348, 537. - -Rovigo, annexed by Venice, 244. - -Rügen, held by Denmark, 476, 490. - by Sweden, 509. - -Rupertsland, 564. - -Russia, its origin, 158, 159, 480, 481. - its relations towards the Turks, 449. - geographical continuity of its conquests, 467. - origin of the name, 480 (_note_), 481. - ecclesiastical relations of, 465, 468, 480. - its relations to the Eastern Empire, 159, 468. - its imperial style, 468. - Scandinavian settlement in, 472. - advance of against Chazars and Fins, 481. - its rulers become Slavonic, _ib._ - attempts on Constantinople, 482. - its isolation, _ib._ - its first occupation of Bulgaria, 377. - divided into principalities, 482, 483. - becomes tributary to the Mongols, 483, 500. - effect of the German conquest of Livland on, 487. - revival of, 499 _et seq._ - delivered by Ivan the Great, 501. - advance of, 505-507, 511-517, 521-523. - compared with Sweden, 507. - wars with Sweden, 508, 512, 518. - conquered by Poland, 506. - lands recovered by, _ib._ - assumes the title of Empire, 512. - becomes a Baltic power, 512. - its share in the partitions of Poland, 513-515. - no original Polish territory gained at this time by, 515, 520. - new kingdom of Poland united to, 520. - extent and character of its dominion, 522. - its territory in America sold to the United States, 523. - -Russia, Red; _see_ GALICIA. - -Ruthenians, 434. - -Rutland, formation of the shire, 556. - -Ryswick, Peace of, 349. - - -Sabines, 46. - -Sachsen-Lauenburg; _see_ LAUENBURG. - -Saguntum, taken by Hannibal, 56. - -Saint Andrews, ecclesiastical province of, 183. - -Saint Asaph, bishopric of, 182. - -Saint Davids, bishopric of, 182. - -Saint Domingo, Spanish settlements in, 543. - French settlement in, 353. - distinct from Hayti, 544. - -Saint Gallen, abbey of, 216. - -Saint John, knights of, conquer Rhodes, 389, 415. - their conquests, 415. - Malta granted to, 398, 415. - driven out of Rhodes, 447. - -Saint John of Maurienne, bishopric of, 173. - -Saint Lucia, kept by England, 360. - -Saint Omer, held by Spain, 349. - -Saint Petersburg, foundation of, 512. - -Saint Sava, duchy of; _see_ HERZEGOVINA. - -Saladin, takes Jerusalem, 400. - -Salamis, its position in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - -Salerno, principality of, 147, 152. - -Salisbury, diocese of, 182. - -Salona, Roman colony, 62. - destroyed, 115. - -Salôna, principality of, 417. - conquered by the Turks, 420. - -Saluzzo, disputed homage of, 283, 284, 287. - annexed by France, 287. - ceded to Savoy, 287, 347. - -Salzburg, archbishopric of, 176, 215. - becomes a secular electorate, 220. - annexed by Austria, 221, 322. - by Bavaria, 222. - recovered by Austria, 224, 322. - -Samaites, 484. - -Samigola, 484. - -Samland, Danish occupation of, 471. - -Samnites, 46. - their wars with Rome, 51. - conquered by Sulla, _ib._ - -Samo, kingdom of, 473. - -Samogitia, purchased by the Teutonic knights, 496. - restored to Lithuania, _ib._ - -Samos, 32. - theme of, 150. - held by the Maona, 414. - -Sancho the Great, king of Navarre, extent of his dominion, 529. - -San Marino, independence of, 247, 255, 258. - -San Stefano, treaty of, 454. - -Santa Maura; _see_ LEUKAS. - -Saracens, their settlements in Europe, 16. - rise of, 110. - their conquests of Persia, Africa, and Spain, 111, 365. - their province in Gaul, 112, 527. - greatest extent of their power, 112, 526. - conquest of Sicily, 370. - compared with the Ottoman Turks, 442. - end of their rule in Spain, 537. - -Sarai, capital of the Mongols, 500. - -Sardica; _see_ SOFIA. - -Sardinia, 44. - its early inhabitants, 53. - Roman conquest of, _ib._ - province of, 79. - lost to the Eastern Empire, 369. - occupied by Pisa, 238. - conquered by Aragon, 245, 538. - united to Savoy, 251. - kingdom of, 257. - -Sathas, M., referred to, 460. - -Savona, march of, 236. - -Savoy, House of, 234. - position and growth of, 277 _et seq._ - originally Burgundian, 278. - its relations to Geneva, 281. - annexes Nizza, 282. - its claims on Saluzzo, 283. - Bernese conquests from, 272. - Italian and French influence on, 284. - its decline, 285. - its later history, 288-289. - French annexations from, 344. - French occupation of, 286, 346. - Italian advance of, 248. - its union with Sicily and Sardinia, 251. - boundaries of, after the fall of Buonaparte, 359. - annexed by France, 258, 359. - -Saxon Mark, the, 198. - -Saxons, 85, 91. - their settlement in Britain, 97. - -Saxony, conquered by Charles the Great, 122, 126. - duchy of, 140, 207. - use of the name, 191, 207. - break-up of the duchy, 207. - new duchy and electorate of, 208, 209. - circle of, _ib._ - kingdom of, 222, 226. - dismemberment of, 224. - -Scanderbeg, revolt of Albania under, 421. - -Scandinavia, ecclesiastical provinces of, 184. - its momentary union with Britain, 462. - compared with Spain, 463. - Eastern and Western aspects of, 464. - its barbarian neighbours, 466. - kingdoms of, 130, 468. - its influence on the Baltic, compared with that of Germany, 486. - -Scania, originally Danish, 131, 184, 469. - its momentary transfer to Sweden, 487. - Hanseatic occupation of, 494. - annexed to Sweden, 508. - -Schaffhausen, joins the Confederates, 272. - -Schlesien; _see_ SILESIA. - -Sclavinia, kingdom of, 476. - Danish conquest of, 489. - -Scotland, origin of the name, 98, 549. - dioceses of, 183. - its greatness due to its English element, 548. - historical position of, 549. - analogy of Switzerland to, _ib._ - formation of the kingdom, 550, 551. - settlements of the Northmen in, 550, 552. - acknowledges the English supremacy, 550. - different tenures of the dominions of its kings, 551. - grant of Lothian and Cumberland to, 162, 550, 551. - its shifting relations towards England, 552. - its union with England, _ib._ - -Scots, their settlement in Britain, 98, 548. - their union with the Picts, 556. - -Scutari; _see_ SKODRA. - -Scythia, Roman province of, 77. - -Sebasteia, theme of, 150. - -Sebastopol, answers to old Cherson, 516 (_note_). - -Sebenico, under Venice, 411. - -Seleukeia, independence of, 39. - annexed to the Empire by Trajan, 99. - theme of, 150. - -Seleukids, extent and decline of their kingdom, 38. - -Selim I., Sultan, his conquests in Syria and Egypt, 447. - -Seljuk Turks, their invasions, 365, 379. - driven back by the Komnênoi, 381. - weakened by the Mongols, 443. - -Selsey, see of, 182. - -Selymbria, won back to the Empire, 387, 391. - -Semigallia, Semigola, part of the duchy of Curland, 514. - dominion of the Sword-brothers in, 496. - -Semitic nations in Europe, 16. - -Sena Gallica (Sinigallia), Roman colony, 54. - -Sens, ecclesiastical province of, 173. - divided, 174. - -Septimania (Gothia), 90, 154, 526. - Saracen conquest of, 112, 118. - recovered by the Franks, 113, 121. - march of, 142. - -Servia, Slavonic character of, 114, 373, 423. - conquered by Simeon, 377, 424. - its relations to the Empire, 424. - restored to the Empire, 378, 424. - revolts from the Empire, 379, 424. - recovered by Manuel, 381, 424. - beginning of the house of Nemanja, 424. - its possessions on the Hadriatic, 405. - loses Bosnia, 424. - advance of under Stephen Dushan, 389, 419-420, 425. - Empire of, 420, 425. - break up of the Empire, 426. - later kingdom of, _ib._ - conquests and deliverances of, _ib._ - revolts and deliverance of, 452. - enlarged by the Berlin Treaty, 453. - -Servians, never wholly enslaved, 429. - fourfold separation of the nation, 453. - -Severia, conquered by Lithuania, 499. - -Severin, Banat of, attacked by Bulgaria, 430. - -Seven Weeks’ War, the, 228. - -Seville, ecclesiastical province of, 179. - recovered by Castile, 534, 535. - -Sforza, House of, 241. - -Sherborne, see of, 182. - -Shetland, Scandinavian colony, 471. - pledged to Scotland, 488. - -Shires, mentioned in Domesday, 555. - two classes of, _ib._ - -Shirwan, 521. - -Siberia, khanat of, 501. - Russian conquest of, 511. - -Sicily, early inhabitants of, 45, 48. - Phœnician colonies in, 35. - Greek colonies in, 22, 34, 53. - the first Roman province, 52, 79. - state of under Rome, 53. - theme of, 152. - Saracen conquest of, 153, 370. - recovered by George Maniakês, 370. - Norman kingdom of, 250, 367, 371, 393-395. - its conquests from the Eastern Empire, 397. - never a fief of the Western Empire, 233. - under Charles of Anjou, 250, 397. - its revolt, _ib._ - its union with Aragon, 250, 538. - united with Savoy, 251. - with Austria, _ib._ - with Naples, 251, 540. - its practical effacement, 398. - compared with the Crusading states, _ib._ - compared with Venice, 402. - -Sicilies, The Two, kingdom of, 250, 251, 253, 398. - union of with Aragon, 538. - part of the Spanish monarchy, 240, 540. - divided, 254. - reunited, 256. - joined to Italy, 257. - -Siculi; _see_ SZEKLERS. - -Sidon, Phœnician colony, 35. - -Siebenbürgen, origin of the name, 435 (_note_); _see_ TRANSSILVANIA. - -Siena, archbishopric of, 171. - commonwealth of, 238, 245. - annexed by Florence, 246. - -Sikanians, 48. - -Sikels, 48. - -Sikyôn, in the Homeric catalogue, 27. - a Dorian city, 29. - -Silesia, its early relations to Poland, 200, 478, 479. - passes under Bohemian supremacy, 200, 492. - joined to the Bohemian kingdom, 493. - becomes a dominion of the House of Austria, 493. - the greater part conquered by Prussia, 211. - Polish territory added to, 515. - -Silvas, conquered by Portugal, 533. - -Simeon, Tzar of Bulgaria, his conquests, 376. - -Sind, 113. - -Sinôpê, 39, 64, 422. - -Sirmium, 81. - -Sitten, see of, 173. - -Skipetars; _see_ ALBANIANS. - -Skodra (Scutari), kingdom of, 62. - Servian, 406. - dominion of the Balsa at, 428. - sold to Venice, 410, 428. - taken by Mahomet the Conqueror, 411. - -Skopia, 425. - -Slaves, their settlement and migrations, 14, 113, 133, 365. - compared with those of the Teutons, 16, 114. - their two main divisions, 114, 158. - parted asunder by the Magyars, 158, 432. - their settlements within the Eastern Empire, 115. - in Greece and Macedonia, 116, 373, 374, 461. - recovered to the Eastern Empire, 375. - remain on Taÿgetos, _ib._ - their relations to the Western Empire, 159, 197, 199, 201, 465, 466. - general history of the Northern Slaves, 472-485. - -Slavia, duchy of, 492. - -Slavinia, name of, 115. - -Slavonia, 323, 434. - -Slavonic Gulf, 476. - -Sleswick, duchy of, 213, 490. - its relations with Denmark, 490. - under Christian I., 491. - effect of the Peace of Roskild on, 509. - guaranteed to Denmark, 513. - wars in, 228. - transferred to Prussia, 228, 519. - -Slovaks, 434, 477. - -Smolensk, principality of, 483. - conquered by Lithuania, 499. - its shiftings between Russia and Poland, 506. - -Smyrna, 32. - acquired by Genoa, 389. - -Sobrarbe, formation of the kingdom, 530. - united to Aragon, 531. - -Social War, the, 51. - -Sofia (Sardica), taken by the Bulgarians, 376. - by the Turks, 431. - -Solothurn, joins the Confederates, 262, 270. - -Sorabi, 474, 475. - -Spain, use of the name, 3 (_note_). - its geographical character, 10. - non-Aryan people in, 12, 13. - Celtic settlements in, 14, 56. - Greek and Phœnician settlements in, 35, 56. - its connexion with Gaul, 55. - first Roman province in, _ib._ - final conquest of, _ib._ - diocese of, 79. - settlements of Suevi and Vandals in, 90. - West-Gothic kingdom in, 89. - southern part won back to the Empire, 105. - reconquered by West-Goths, 108, 526. - Saracen conquest of, 111, 154, 526. - separated from the Eastern Caliphate, 113. - conquests of Charles the Great in, 127, 527. - foundation of its kingdoms, 154, 155, 549 _et seq._ - its ecclesiastical divisions, 178. - its geographical relations with France, 342. - its quasi-imperial character, 463. - compared with Scandinavia, 463, 525. - with South-eastern Europe, 525. - nation of, grew out of the war with the Mussulmans, 526. - king of, use of the title, 535. - African Mussulmans in, 530, 532, 533. - end of their rule in, 537. - divides the Indies with Portugal, 542. - extent of under Charles V., 247, 298, 539. - its conquests in Africa, 543. - its insular possessions, _ib._ - revolutions of its colonies, 544. - its possessions in the West Indies, _ib._ - -Spalato, its origin, 115. - ecclesiastical province of, 186. - under Venice, 44. - -Spanish March, the, conquered by Charles the Great, 122, 128, 529. - remains part of Karolingia, 141, 155. - division of, _ib._ - -Spanish Monarchy, the greatest extent of, 539. - partition of, _ib._ - -Sparta, her supremacy, 29. - joins the Achaian league, 40. - -Speyer, bishopric of, 175. - annexed to France, 220. - restored to Germany, 358. - becomes Bavarian, 226. - -Spizza, originally Servian, 406. - annexed by Austria, 324, 429, 441. - -Spoleto, Lombard duchy of, 108, 147. - -Stalbova, Peace of, 508. - -Stati degli Presidi, 246. - -Steiermark; _see_ STYRIA. - -Stephen Dushan, extent of the Servian Empire under, 389, 419, 420, 425. - -Stephen Tvartko, king of Bosnia, 426. - -Stephen Urosh, his conquest of Thessaly and title, 420, 426. - -Stettin, 210. - -Stormarn, 489, 490. - -Strabo, his description of Hellas, 18 (_note_). - -Stralsund, 494. - -Strassburg, bishopric of, 175. - seized by Lewis XIV., 194, 350. - restored to Germany, 229. - -Strathclyde, 130, 549, 550. - acknowledges the English supremacy, 162. - granted to Scotland, 162, 551. - -Strigonium (Gran), ecclesiastical province of, 186. - -Strymôn, theme of, 151. - -Styria (Steiermark), duchy of, 217, 308. - -Sudereys; _see_ HEBRIDES. - -Suevi, their settlements, 87, 90. - -Suleiman, the Lawgiver, his conquests, 438, 447. - his African overlordship, 447. - -Sumatra, Dutch settlement in, 300. - -Surat, French factory at, 354. - -Susdal, 483. - -Sussex, kingdom of, 160, 555. - -Sutherland, 550. - -Sutorina, Ottoman frontier extends to, 412. - -Svealand, 131. - -Sviatopluk, founds the Great Moravian kingdom, 473. - -Sviatoslaf, overruns Bulgaria, 377. - his Asiatic conquests, 482. - -Swabia, circle of, 216. - ecclesiastical towns in, _ib._ - -Sweden, 131, 159, 470. - its position in the Baltic, 463. - its relation to the Empire, 467. - its conquest of Curland, 472. - of Finland, 486, 488. - joined with Norway and Denmark, 487. - separated, 488. - growth of, compared with Russia, 507. - advance of under Gustavus Adolphus, _ib._ - wars of with Russia and Poland, 508. - advance of against Denmark and Norway, _ib._ - its German territories, 213. - greatest extent of, 509, 510. - its settlements in America, 561. - its decline, 512. - its later wars with Russia, 512, 518. - losses of, 512, 518. - its union with Norway, 464, 518. - -Swiss League, beginning and growth of, 262, 268-274. - -Swithiod, 470. - -Switzerland, represents the Burgundian kingdom, 146, 259, 291. - German origin of the Confederation, 262, 268, 269. - popular errors about, 269. - eight ancient cantons of, 270. - effect of on the Austrian power, 217, 311. - beginning of its Italian dominions, 271, 286. - thirteen cantons of, 272, 274. - its allied and subject lands, 272, 273. - extent and position of the League, 275. - its Savoyard conquests, 272, 273. - its relations with France, 344. - abolition of the federal system in, _ib._ - restored by the Act of Mediation, 276. - Buonaparte’s treatment of, 355. - nineteen cantons of, 276. - present confederation of twenty-two cantons, 276, 359. - -Sword-Brothers, their connexion with the Empire, 495. - established in Livland, _ib._ - extent of their dominion, 496. - joined to the Teutonic Order, _ib._ - separated from them, 496, 503. - fall of the Order, 504. - -Sybaris, Greek colony, 47. - -Syracuse, Greek colony, 48. - Roman conquest of, 52. - taken by the Saracens, 370. - recovered and loss by the Eastern Empire, _ib._ - by the Normans, 395. - -Syria, kingdom of, 38, 61. - Roman province of, 65. - Saracen conquest of, 111. - partially restored to the Empire, 379. - conquered by Selim I., 447. - -Szeklers, settle in Transsilvania, 435. - - -Tangier, 527, 541, 558. - -Tannenberg, battle of, 496. - -Taormina (Tauromenion), taken by the Saracens, 370. - -Tarantaise, ecclesiastical province of, 173. - -Tarentum, (Taras), early greatness of, 47. - archbishopric of, 172. - taken by the Normans, 394. - -Tarifa, taken by Castile, 534. - -Tarragona, ecclesiastical province of, 178. - joined to Barcelona, 532. - -Tarsos, restored to the Empire, 153, 379. - -Tartars; _see_ MONGOLS. - -Tasmania, 566. - -Tauros, Mount, 61. - -Tauromenion; _see_ TAORMINA. - -Taÿgetos, Slave settlement on, 375. - -Tchernigof, principality of, 483. - lost and recovered by Poland, 506. - -Temeswar, 440. - -Tenda, county of, 287. - -Tênos, held by Venice, 409, 411. - -Terbounia (Trebinje), 405, 425. - -Terra Firma, compared with ἤπειρος, 26 (_note_). - -Teutonic Knights, their connexion with the Western Empire, 495. - effects of their rule, _ib._ - extent of their dominion, 496. - joined to the Sword-brothers, _ib._ - separated from them, 496. - their losses, 496, 497. - their cessions to Poland, 497. - their vassalage to Poland, _ib._ - secularization of their dominion, 503. - -Teutons, their settlements, 15, 16, 82, 87, 96. - their wars with Rome, 84. - confederacies among, _ib._ - -Thasos, 32. - -Thebes, head of the Boiôtian League, 27, 30. - destroyed by Alexander, 31. - -Theodore Laskaris, founds the Empire of Nikaia, 386. - -Theodoric, King of the East Goths, his reign in Italy, 95. - -Thermê, 33; _see_ THESSALONIKÊ. - -Thesprotians, in the Homeric catalogue, 26. - invade Thessaly, 30. - -Thessalonikê, theme of, 151. - kingdom of, 384. - its effects on the Latin Empire, _ib._ - its extent under Boniface, 385. - taken by Michael of Epeiros, 385. - Empire of, _ib._ - separated from Epeiros, _ib._ - incorporated with the Empire of Nikaia, 387. - sold to Venice, 404, 410. - taken by the Turks, 391, 404, 446. - -Thessaly, Thesprotian invasion of, 30. - subservient to Macedonia, 37, 40. - province of, 78. - part of the kingdom of Thessalonikê, 385. - added to Servia by Stephen Urosh, 420. - Turkish conquest of, _ib._ - -Thionville, 301. - -Thirty Years’ War, the, 203, 347. - -Thopia, House of, Albanian kings in Epeiros, 420. - -Thorn, Peace of, 497. - recovered by Prussia, 520. - -Thrace, Greek colonies in, 20, 33. - its geography, _ib._ - conquered by Rome, 68. - diocese of, 76. - theme of, 151. - -Thracians, in the Homeric catalogue, 28. - -Thrakêsion, theme of, 151. - -Thurgau, won from Austria by the Confederates, 271, 313. - -Thuringians, 91. - conquered by the Franks, 117. - -Tiberine Republic, 252. - -Tigranes, king of Armenia, subdued by the Romans, 65. - -Timour, overthrows Bajazet, 390, 445. - -Tingitana, province of, 79. - -Tirnovo, kingdom of, 430. - -Tobago, 360. - -Tocco, House of, effects of their rule in Western Greece, 421. - -Toledo, archbishopric of, 178. - conquered by Alfonso VI., 532, 535. - -Tortona, 237, 249. - -Tortosa, Aragonese conquest of, 532. - -Toul, annexed by France, 193, 346. - -Toulouse, Roman colony, 57. - capital of the West Gothic kingdom, 90. - county of, 142, 330. - ecclesiastical province of, 174. - annexed to France, 335. - -Touraine, united to Anjou, 330. - annexed by Philip Augustus, 333. - -Τοῠρκοι, 433 (_note_). - -Tournay, becomes French, 349. - -Tours, battle of, 113. - bishopric of, 173. - -Trajan, Emperor, his conquests, 70, 99. - forms the province of Dacia, _ib._ - -Transpadane Republic, 252. - -Transsilvania, 323. - conquered by the Magyars, 435. - Teutonic colonies in, 435. - tributary to the Turk, 439. - incorporated with Hungary, 440. - -Transvaal, annexation of, 566. - -Traü, 406. - -Trebinje; _see_ TERBOUNIA. - -Trebizond (Trapezous), city of, 36, 150. - Empire of, 386, 422. - acknowledges the Eastern Emperor, _ib._ - conquered by the Turks, 423. - -Trent, county of, 235. - bishopric of, 147, 195, 237. - fluctuates between Germany and Italy, 195. - within the Austrian circle, 217. - annexed by Bavaria, 221. - recovered by Austria, 224, 255, 318. - -Triaditza; _see_ SOFIA. - -Trier, taken by the Franks, 92. - ecclesiastical province of, 175. - chancellorship of Gaul held by its archbishops, 176. - annexed to France, 220. - restored to Germany, 358. - -Trieste, commends itself to Austria, 232, 312. - -Trinidad, 544. - -Tripolis (Asia), county of, 399. - -Tripolis (Africa), conquered by Suleiman, 447. - -Trojans, 28. - -Trondhjem (Nidaros), ecclesiastical province of, 184. - -Trondhjemlän, ceded to Sweden, 508. - restored to Norway, 509. - -Troyes, treaty of, 338. - -Tuam, ecclesiastical province of, 183. - -Tunis, conquests and losses of by the Turk, 447. - conquered by Charles V., 447, 543. - -Turanian nations in Europe, 17, 365. - -Turks, Magyars so called, 379, 433 (_note_). - _see also_ OTTOMANS and SELJUKS. - -Tuscany, use of the name, 234. - commonwealths of, 238. - grand duchy of, 249, 256. - exchanged for Lorraine, 321. - annexed to Piedmont, 257. - -Tver, annexed by Muscovy, 501. - -Tyre, Phœnician colony, 35. - -Tyrol, within the circle of Austria, 217. - taken by Bavaria, 221. - recovered by Austria, 224, 323. - -Tzar, origin of the title, 512 (_note_). - -Tzernagora; _see_ MONTENEGRO. - -Tzernojevich, dynasty of, 428. - -Tzetinje, foundation of, 428. - - -Ukraine Cossacks, 506. - -Ulster, province of, 183. - -United Provinces, the, 299. - recognition of their independence, 300. - colonies of, 300, 561. - -United States of America, the greatest colony of England, 559. - formation of, 560-562. - acknowledgement of their independence, 562. - their extension to the West, 563. - their lack of a name, _ib._ - cessions to by Spain, 544. - -Upsala, archbishopric of, 184. - -Urbino, duchy of, 244. - annexed by the Popes, 249. - -Uri, obtains the Val Levantina, 271. - -Utica, Phœnician colony, 35. - -Utrecht, its bishops, 294. - annexed to Burgundy, 298. - archbishopric of, 177. - peace of, 301, 349, 352. - - -Val Levantina, won by Uri, 271. - -Valence, annexed to the Dauphiny, 264. - -Valencia, ecclesiastical province of, 178. - conquered by Aragon, 533, 536. - -Valenciennes, annexed by France, 349. - -Valentia, province of, 80. - -Valladolid, bishopric of, 178. - -Valois, county of, 330. - added to France, 331. - -Valtellina, won by Graubünden, 273. - united to the French kingdom of Italy, 253. - to the kingdom of Lombardy and Venice, 256. - -Vandals, 87. - their settlements in Spain and in Africa, 89, 90. - end of their kingdom, 105. - -Varna, battle of, 426, 438. - -Varus, defeated by Arminius, 67. - -Vasco de Gama, discovers Cape of Good Hope, 541. - -Vasto, 236. - -Vaud, conquered from Savoy, 273. - freed, 275. - -Veii, conquered by Rome, 50. - -Venaissin, annexed to France, 265, 355. - -Veneti, 46. - -Venetia, 47, 235. - Roman conquests of, 55. - province of, 79. - -Venice, her origin, 94. - patriarchal see of, 170. - her greatness, 241, 367. - relations to the Eastern Empire, 233, 369, 378. - compared with Genoa and Sicily, 402. - her first conquests in Dalmatia and Croatia, 406, 407. - her share in the Latin conquest of Constantinople, 383. - compared with Sicily, 402. - effect of the fourth Crusade on, 402, 403. - inherits the position of the Eastern Empire, 403, 410. - her dominion primarily Hadriatic, 404, 405. - her possession of Crete, Cyprus, and Thessalonikê, _ib._ - her Greek and Albanian possessions, 408-410. - loses and recovers Dalmatia, 409, 410. - acquires Skodra, 410, 428. - her losses, 411. - her Italian dominions, 241, 242, 248. - losses of by the treaty of Bologna, 248. - conquest and loss of the Peloponnêsos, 412. - annexed to Austria, 252. - part of the French kingdom of Italy, 253. - restored to Austria, 255. - momentary republic of, 267. - united to Italy, 232, 258. - -Verden, bishopric of, 208, 213. - held and lost by Sweden, 509, 513. - -Verdun, division of, 136. - bishopric of annexed by France, 193, 346. - -Vermandois, annexed to France, 331. - -Verona, fluctuates between Germany and Italy, 139, 195. - history of, 237. - subject to Venice, 241. - to Austria, 252. - restored to Italy, 232. - -Vespasian, his annexations, 41. - -Viatka, commonwealth of, 483. - annexed by Muscovy, 501. - -Victoria (Australia), 566. - -Vienna, Congress of, 520 - battle of, 439. - -Vienne, 93, 263. - ecclesiastical province of, 173. - annexed to France, 264. - -Viennois, Dauphiny of, 263. - annexed to France, 264, 344. - -Vindelicia, conquest of, 68. - -Visconti, House of, 240. - -Vlachia; _see_ WALLACHIA AND ROUMANIA. - -Vlachia, Great; _see_ THESSALY. - -Vlachs, use of the name, 366. - _see_ ROUMANS. - -Vladimir, first Christian prince of Russia, takes Cherson, 378, 482. - -Vladimir, on the Kiasma, supremacy of, 482. - -Vladimir (Lodomeria) annexed by Lewis the Great, 437. - under Austria, 323, 440, 514. - -Volhynia, conquered by Lithuania, 498. - recovered by Russia, 514. - -Volscians, 46. - their wars with Rome, 50. - -Vratislaf, king of Bohemia, 492 (_note_). - - -Wagri, Wagria, 474, 489. - -Waldemar, king of Denmark, conquests and losses, 489. - -Wales, North, use of the name, 130. - -Wales, Harold’s conquests from, 553. - conquest of, 554. - full incorporation of, 555. - -Wales, principality of, 554. - -Wallachia, formation of, 436. - shiftings of, 438-440. - its union with Moldavia, 453. - -Wallis, League of, 272. - its conquests from Savoy, 273. - united with France, 274. - becomes a Swiss Canton, 276, 359. - -‘Wandering of the Nations,’ 83. - -Warsaw, duchy of, 223, 519. - extent of, 520. - -Weleti, Weletabi, Wiltsi, 474. - -Wells, bishopric of, 182. - -Welsh, use of the name, 98. - -Wessex, kingdom of, 97, 129. - its growth and supremacy, 130, 160, 161, 162. - -Westfalia, duchy of and circle, 207. - kingdom of, 222. - -Westfalia, Peace of, 215, 346, 509. - -West Indies, French colonies in, 353. - British possessions in, 360, 565. - -Westmoreland, formation of the shire, 556. - -Widdin, twice annexed by Hungary, 430, 431, 437. - -William the Conqueror, his continental conquests, 332. - England united by, 163. - -William of Hauteville, founds the county of Apulia, 394. - -William the Good, king of Sicily, his Epeirot conquests, 396. - -Winchester, bishopric of, 182. - -Wismar, 494. - -Witold, of Lithuania, his conquests, 499. - -Worcester, bishopric of, 182. - -Worms, bishopric of, 175. - annexed to France, 220. - restored to Germany, 358. - -Württemberg, county of, 216. - electorate and kingdom of, 220. - its extent, 226. - -Würzburg, bishopric of, 226. - its Bishops Dukes of East Francia, 206, 214. - Grand Duchy of, 221, 222. - - -York, archbishopric of, 182. - - -Zabljak, ancient capital of Montenegro, 428. - -Zaccaria, princes of, hold Chios, 414. - -Zachloumia, 405, 425. - -Zagrab; _see_ AGRAM. - -Zähringen, dukes of, 261, 262. - -Zakynthos (Zante), conquered by William the Good, 396. - held in fief by Margarito, 397. - commended to Venice, 410. - tributary to the Sultan, 411. - -Zalacca, battle of, 532. - -Zante; _see_ ZAKYNTHOS. - -Zara (Jadera), Roman colony, 62. - ecclesiastical province of, 186. - held by Venice, 405, 411. - Peace of, 409. - -Zaragoza, ecclesiastical province of, 178. - conquered by Aragon, 532. - -Zealand, province of, 218. - -Zealand, Danish island, 469. - -Zeno, reunion of the Empire under, 94. - -Zeugmin, recovered by Manuel Komnênos, 381. - -Zips, pledged to Poland, 437, 499. - -Zug, joins the Confederates, 270. - -Zürich, minster of, 216. - joins the Confederates, 270. - -Zutphen, county of, annexed to Burgundy, 298. - -Zuyder-Zee, inroads of, 293. - - -_Spottiswoode & Co., Printers, New-street Square, London._ - - * * * * * - -[Transcriber’s note: The following changes have been made to this text: - -Page ix: ‘Kyrêne’ to ‘Kyrênê’—‘Crete, Cyprus, Kyrênê’. - -Page xxviii: ‘Brobant’ to ‘Brabant’—‘Brabant; Hainault’. - -Page xlii: ‘Lauenberg’ to ‘Lauenburg’—‘Saxony; Lauenburg;’. - -Page 31: ‘Peloponnêsian’ to ‘Peloponnesian’—‘Peloponnesian cities’. - -Page 94, sidenote: ‘B.C. 476-493’ to ‘A.D. 476-493’. - -Page 114, sidenote: ‘South-eastern’ to ‘South-western’. - -Page 208, sidenote: ‘121.’ to ‘1212.’—‘1180-1212.’ - -Page 217: ‘Görtz’ to ‘Görz’—‘borderlands of _Görz_’. - -Page 240, sidenote: ‘Palaiologioi’ to ‘Palaiologoi’—‘Palaiologoi at -Montferrat, 1306.’ - -Page 320: ‘at’ to ‘as’—‘as it stood.’ - -Page 352: ‘Napoleone’ to ‘Napoleon’—‘Napoleon Buonaparte was born’. - -Page 354: ‘theatened’ to ‘threatened’—‘seriously threatened’. - -Page 368: ‘setttlement’ to ‘settlement’—‘conquest and settlement’. - -Page 372: ‘begining’ to ‘beginning’—‘beginning of the eleventh’. - -Page 373: missing word ‘time’ added—‘to time enforced.’ - -Page 379: ‘posssession’ to ‘possession’—‘Imperial possession’. - -Page 389: ‘Nikomédeia’ to ‘Nikomêdeia’—‘_Nikaia_, _Nikomêdeia_’. - -Page 396, sidenote: ‘Epirot’ to ‘Epeirot’—‘Epeirot conquests of William’. - -Page 407: ‘Kommênos’ to ‘Komnênos’—‘Under Manuel Komnênos’. - -Page 418, sidenote: ‘1343.’ to ‘1383.’—‘1348-1383.’ - -Page 428: ‘Balza’ to ‘Balsa’—‘the house of Balsa’. - -Page 432, sidenote: ‘84’ to ‘884’—‘884-894.’ - -Page 493: ‘burggraves’ to ‘burgraves’—‘burgraves of Nürnberg.’ - -Page 512: ‘Ăbo’ to ‘Åbo’—‘Peace of Åbo’. - -Page 539, sidenote: ‘possesions’ to ‘possessions’—‘outlying possessions’. - -Page 550: ‘Northhumberland’ to ‘Northumberland’—‘part of -Northumberland’. - -Page 561, sidenote: ‘1346’ to ‘1646’—’Maryland. 1646.’ - -Page 564, sidenote: ‘Dependen’ to ‘Dependent’—‘Dependent confederacy.’ - -Page 580: ‘ecclesiastial’ to ‘ecclesiastical’—‘Embrun, ecclesiastical -province’. - -Page 583: ‘Geatas’ to ‘Geátas’—‘Gauts, Geátas’. - -Page 586: ‘Jagerndorf’ to ‘Jägerndorf’—‘Jägerndorf, principality of’. - -Page 587: ‘Kamenietz’ to ‘Kamienetz’—‘Kamienetz, ceded by Poland’. - -Page 587: ‘Korônê’ to ‘Kôrônê’—‘Kôrônê; _see_ CORON.’ - -Page 587: ‘Koloneia’ to ‘Kolôneia’—‘Kolôneia, theme of’. - -Page 589: ‘Luzelburg’ to ‘Lüzelburg’—‘Luxemburg (Lüzelburg)’. - -Page 590: ‘Monbeliard’ to ‘Montbeliard’—‘Montbeliard, county of’. - -Page 592: ‘Komnenos’ to ‘Komnênos’—‘Alexios Komnênos, 381.’ - -Page 594: ‘Phokaia’ to ‘Phôkaia’—‘Phôkaia, held by’. - -Page 594: ‘Julii’ to ‘Julia’—‘Pietas Julia; _see_ POLA.’ - -Page 595: ‘remain’ to ‘remains’—‘long remains heathen’. - -Page 595: ‘Bradenburg’ to ‘Brandenburg’—‘united with Brandenburg’. - -Page 599: ‘Maniakes’ to ‘Maniakês’—‘recovered by George Maniakês’. - -Page 599: ‘Sinopê’ to ‘Sinôpê’—‘Sinôpê, 39’. - -Page 600: ‘Soluthurn’ to ‘Solothurn’—‘Solothurn, joins the -Confederates’. - -Page 600: ‘610’ to ‘10’—‘its geographical character, 10’. - -Page 600: ‘Califate’ to ‘Caliphate’—‘Eastern Caliphate, 113.’ - -Page 600: ‘Presidenti’ to ‘Presidi’—‘Stati degli Presidi’. - -Page 603: ‘Tzernoievich’ to ‘Tzernojevich’—‘Tzernojevich, dynasty of’.] - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Historical Geography of Europe., by -Edward A. Freeman - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HISTORICAL GEOGRAPHY I *** - -***** This file should be named 61375-0.txt or 61375-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/1/3/7/61375/ - -Produced by Susan Skinner and the Online Distributed -Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |