Chapter XXXIV: Front Matter (34)

"The Berlin Treaty, by cutting Bulgaria into three pieces,
contrary to the desire of her inhabitants, and with utter
disregard of both geographical and ethnical fitness, had
prepared the ground from which a crop of never-ending
agitation was inevitably bound to spring--a crop which the
Treaty of San Stefano would have ended in preventing. On
either side of the Balkans, both in Bulgaria and in Roumelia,
the same desire for union existed. Both parties were agreed as
to this, and only differed as to the means by which the end
should be attained. The Liberals were of opinion that the
course of events ought to be awaited; the unionists, on the
other hand, maintained that they should be challenged. It was
a few individuals belonging to the latter party and acting
with M. Karaveloff, the head of the Bulgarian Cabinet, who
prepared and successfully carried out the revolution of
September 18, 1885. So unanimously was this movement supported
by the whole population, including even the Mussulmans, that
it was accomplished and the union proclaimed without the least
resistance being encountered, and without the shedding of one
drop of blood!
{256}
Prince Alexander was in no way made aware of what was in
preparation; but he knew very well that it would be his duty
to place himself at the head of any national movement, and in
a proclamation dated the 19th of September, and addressed from
Tirnova, the ancient capital, he recommended union and assumed
the title of Prince of North and South Bulgaria. The Porte
protested in a circular, dated the 23rd of September, and
called upon the Powers who had signed the Treaty of Berlin, to
enforce the observance of its stipulations. On the 13th of
October, the Powers collectively declare 'that they condemn
this violation of the Treaty, and are sure that the Sultan
will do all that he can, consistently with his sovereign
rights, before resorting to the force which he has at his
disposal.' From the moment when there was opposition to the
use of force, which even the Porte did not seem in a hurry to
employ, the union of the two Bulgarias necessarily became an
accomplished fact. ... Whilst England and Austria both
accepted the union of the two Bulgarias as being rendered
necessary by the position of affairs, whilst even the Porte
(although protesting) was resigned, the Emperor of Russia
displayed a passionate hostility to it, not at all in accord
with the feelings of the Russian nation. ... In Russia they
had reckoned upon all the liberties guaranteed by the
Constitution of Tirnova becoming so many causes of disorder
and anarchy, instead of which the Bulgarians were growing
accustomed to freedom. Schools were being endowed, the country
was progressing in every way, and thus the Bulgarians were
becoming less and less fitted for transformation into Russian
subjects. Their lot was a preferable one, by far, to that of
the people of Russia--henceforth they would refuse to accept
the Russian yoke! ... If, then, Russia wanted to maintain her
high-handed policy in Bulgaria, she must oppose the union and
hinder the consolidation of Bulgarian nationality by every
means in her power; this she has done without scruple of any
sort or kind, as will be shown by a brief epitome of what has
happened recently. Servia, hoping to extend her territory in
the direction of Tru and Widdin, and, pleading regard for the
Treaty of Berlin and the theory of the balance of power,
attacks Bulgaria. On November 14th [17th to 19th?] 1885,
Prince Alexander defends the Slivnitza positions [in a three
days' battle] with admirable courage and strategic skill. The
Roumelian militia, coming in by forced marches of unheard-of
length, perform prodigies of valour in the field. Within eight
days, i. e., from the 20th to the 28th of November, the
Servian army, far greater in numbers, is driven back into its
own territory; the Dragoman Pass is crossed; Pirot is taken by
assault; and Prince Alexander is marching on Nisch, when his
victorious progress is arrested by the Austrian Minister,
under threats of an armed intervention on the part of that
country! On December 21st, an armistice is concluded,
afterwards made into a treaty of pence, and signed at
Bucharest on March 3rd by M. Miyatovitch on behalf of Servia,
by M. Guechoff on behalf of Bulgaria, and by Madgid Pascha for
the Sultan. Prince Alexander did all he could to bring about a
reconciliation with the Czar and even went so far as to
attribute to Russian instructors all the merit of the
victories he had just won. The Czar would not yield. Then the
Prince turned to the Sultan, and with him succeeded in coming
to a direct understanding. The Prince was to be nominated
Governor-General of Roumelia; a mixed Commission was to meet
and modify the Roumelian statutes; more than this, the Porte
was bound to place troops at his disposal in the event of his
being attacked, ... From that date the Czar swore that he
would cause Prince Alexander's downfall. It was said that
Prince Alexander of Battenberg had changed into a sword the
sceptre which Russia had given him and was going to turn it
against his benefactor. Nothing could be more untrue. Up to
the very last moment, he did everything he could to disarm the
anger of the Czar, but what was wanted from him was this--that
he should make Bulgaria an obedient satellite of Russia, and
rather than consent to do so he left Sofia. The story of the
Prince's dethronement by Russian influence, or, as Lord
Salisbury said, by Russian gold, is well known. A handful of
malcontent officers, a few cadets of the École Militaire, and
some of Zankoff's adherents, banding themselves together,
broke into the palace during the night of the 21st of August,
seized the Prince, and had him carried off, without escort, to
Rahova on the Danube, from thence to Reni in Bessarabia, where
he was handed over to the Russians! The conspirators
endeavoured to form a government, but the whole country rose
against them, in spite of the support openly given them by M.
Bogdanoff the Russian diplomatic agent. On the 3rd of
September, a few days after these occurrences, Prince
Alexander returned to his capital, welcomed home by the
acclamations of the whole people; but in answer to a
respectful, not to say too humble, telegram in which he
offered to replace his Crown in the hands of the Czar, that
potentate replied that he ceased to have any relations with
Bulgaria as long as Prince Alexander remained there. Owing to
advice which came, no doubt, from Berlin, Prince Alexander
decided to abdicate; he did so because of the demands of the
Czar and in the interests of Bulgaria."

_E. de Laveleye, The Balkan Peninsula, Introduction._

ALSO IN:
_A. Von Huhn, The Struggle of the Bulgarians._

_J. G. C. Minchin, Growth of Freedom in the Balkan
Peninsula._

_A. Koch, Prince Alexander of Battenberg._

BALKAN: A. D. 1879-1889 (Servia).
Quarrels and divorce of King Milan and Queen Natalia.
Abdication of the King.

"In October, 1875. ... Milan, then but twenty-one years old,
married Natalia Kechko, herself but sixteen. The present Queen
was the daughter of a Russian officer and of the Princess
Pulckerie Stourdza. She, as little as her husband, had been
born with a likelihood to sit upon the throne, and a quiet
burgher education had been hers at Odessa. But even here her
great beauty attracted notice, as also her abilities, her
ambition and her wealth. ... At first all went well, to
outward appearance at least, for Milan was deeply enamoured of
his beautiful wife, who soon became the idol of the Servians,
on account of her beauty and her amiability. This affection
was but increased when, a year after her marriage, she
presented her subjects with an heir. But from that hour the
domestic discord began. The Queen had been ill long and
seriously after her boy's birth; Milan had sought distractions
elsewhere. Scenes of jealousy and recrimination grew frequent.
{257}
Further, Servia was then passing through a
difficult political crisis: the Turkish war was in full swing.
Milan, little beloved ever since he began to reign, brought
home no wreaths from this conflict, although his subjects
distinguished themselves by their valour. Then followed in
1882 the raising of the principality into a kingdom--a fact
which left the Servians very indifferent, and in which they
merely beheld the prospect of increased taxes, a prevision
that was realized. As time went on, and troubles increased,
King Milan became somewhat of a despot, who was sustained
solely by the army, itself undermined by factious intrigues.
Meantime the Queen, now grown somewhat callous to her
husband's infidelities, aspired to comfort herself by assuming
a political role, for which she believed herself to have great
aptitude. ... As she could not influence the decisions of the
Prince, the lady entered into opposition to him, and made it
her aim to oppose all his projects. The quarrel spread
throughout the entire Palace, and two inimical factions were
formed, that of the King and that of the Queen. ... Meantime
Milan got deeper and deeper into debt, so that after a time he
had almost mortgaged his territory. ... While the husband and
wife were thus quarrelling and going their own ways, grave
events were maturing in neighbouring Bulgaria. The coup d'état
of Fillippopoli, which annexed Eastern Roumelia to the
principality, enlarged it in such wise that Servia henceforth
had to cut a sorry figure in the Balkans. Milan roused
himself, or pretended to rouse himself, and war was declared
against Bulgaria. ... There followed the crushing defeat of
Slivnitza, in which Prince Alexander of Battenberg carried off
such laurels, and the Servians had to beat a disgraceful and
precipitate retreat. Far from proving himself the hero
Nathalie had dreamed, Milan ... telegraphed to the Queen,
busied with tending the wounded, that he intended to abdicate
forthwith. This cowardly conduct gave the death blow to any
feeling the Queen might have retained for the King. Henceforth
she despised him, and took no pains to hide the fact. ... In
1887 the pair parted without outward scandals, the Queen
taking with her the Crown Prince. ... Florence was the goal of
the Queen's wanderings, and here she spent a quiet winter. ...
The winter ended, Nathalie desired to return to Belgrade.
Milan would not hear of it. ... The Queen went to Wiesbaden in
consequence. While residing there Milan professed to be
suddenly taken with a paternal craving to see his son. ... And
to the shame of the German Government, be it said, they lent
their hand to abducting an only child from his mother. ...
Before ever the excitement about this act could subside in
Europe, Milan ... petitioned the Servian Synod for a divorce,
on the ground of 'irreconcilable mutual antipathy.' Neither by
canonical or civil law was this possible, and the Queen
refused her consent. ... Nor could the divorce have been
obtained but for the servile complaisance of the Servian
Metropolitan Theodore. ... Quick vengeance, however, was in
store for Milan. The international affairs of Servia had grown
more and more disturbed. ... The King, perplexed, afraid,
storm-tossed between divided counsels, highly irritable, and
deeply impressed by Rudolph of Hapsburg's recent suicide,
suddenly announced his intention to abdicate in favour of his
son. ... Without regret his people saw depart from among them
a man who at thirty-five years of age was already decrepit,
and who had not the pluck or ambition to try and overcome a
difficult political crisis. ... After kneeling down before his
son and swearing fidelity to him as a subject (March, 1889),
Milan betook himself off to tour through Europe ... leaving
the little boy and his guardians to extricate themselves. ...
'Now I can see mamma again,' were the first words of the boy
King on hearing of his elevation. ... Three Regents are
appointed to aid the King during his minority."

_"Politikos," The Sovereigns, pages 353-363._

----------BALKAN: End----------

BALKH.
Destruction by Jingis Khan (A. D. 1221).

From his conquest of the region beyond the Oxus, Jingis Khan
moved southward with his vast horde of Mongols, in pursuit of
the fugitive Khahrezmian prince, in 1220 or 1221, and invested
the great city of Balkh,--which is thought in the east to be
the oldest city of the world, and which may not impossibly
have been one of the capitals of the primitive Aryan race.
"Some idea of its extent and riches [at that time] may
possibly be formed from the statement that it contained 1,200
large mosques, without including chapels, and 200 public baths
for the use of foreign merchants and travellers--though it has
been suggested that the more correct reading would be 200
mosques and 1,200 baths. Anxious to avert the horrors of storm
and pillage, the citizens at once offered to capitulate; but
Chinghiz, distrusting the sincerity of their submission so
long as Sultan Mohammed Shah was yet alive, preferred to carry
the place by force of arms--an achievement of no great
difficulty. A horrible butchery ensued, and the 'Tabernacle of
Islam'--as the pious town was called--was razed to the ground.
In the words of the Persian poet, quoted by Major Price, 'The
noble city he laid as smooth as the palm of his hand--its
spacious and lofty structures he levelled in the dust.'"

_J. Hutton, Central Asia, chapter 4._

ALSO IN: _H. H. Howorth, History of the Mongols,
volume 1, chapter 3._

BALL'S BLUFF, The Battle of.

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

BALMACEDA'S DICTATORSHIP.

See CHILE: A. D. 1885-1891.

BALNEÆ.

SEE THERMÆ.

BALTHI, OR BALTHINGS.

"The rulers of the Visigoths, though they, like the Amal kings
of the Ostrogoths, had a great house, the Balthi, sprung from
the seed of gods, did not at this time [when driven across the
Danube by the Huns] bear the title of King, but contented
themselves with some humbler designation, which the Latin
historians translated into Judex (Judge)."

_T. Hodgkin, Italy and her Invaders,
introduction, chapter 3._

See BAUX, LORDS OF.

BALTIMORE, Lord, and the Colonization of Maryland.

See MARYLAND: A. D. 1632, to 1688-1757.

BALTIMORE: A. D. 1729-1730.
Founding of the city.

See MARYLAND: A. D. 1729-1730.

BALTIMORE: A. D. 1812.
Rioting of the War Party.
The mob and the Federalists.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1812 (JUNE-OCTOBER).

{258}

BALTIMORE: A. D. 1814.
British attempt against the city.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1814
(AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).

BALTIMORE: A. D. 1860.
The Douglas Democratic and Constitutional Union Conventions.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1860 (APRIL-NOVEMBER).

BALTIMORE: A. D. 1861 (April).
The city controlled by the Secessionists.
The Attack on the Sixth Massachusetts Regiment.

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

BALTIMORE: A. D. 1861 (May).
Disloyalty put down.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (APRIL-MAY: MARYLAND).

----------BALTIMORE: End----------

BALUCHISTAN.

See Supplement in volume 5.

BAN.--BANAT.

"Ban is Duke (Dux), and Banat is Duchy. The territory
[Hungarian] east of the Carpathians is the Banat of Severin,
and that of the west the Banat of Temesvar. ... The Banat is
the cornucopia, not only of Hungary, but of the whole Austrian
Empire."

_A. A. Paton, Researches on the Danube and the Adriatic,
volume 2, page 28._

Among the Croats, "after the king, the most important officers
of the state were the bans. At first there was but one ban,
who was a kind of lieutenant-general; but later on there were
seven of them, each known by the name of the province he
governed, as the ban of Sirmia, ban of Dalmatia, etc. To this
day the royal lieutenant of Croatia (or 'governor-general,' if
that title be preferred) is called the ban."

_L. Leger, History of Austro-Hungary, page 55._

BAN, The Imperial.

See SAXONY: A. D. 1178-1183.

BANBURY, Battle of.

Sometimes called the "Battle of Edgecote"; fought July
26,1469, and with success, by a body of Lancastrian
insurgents, in the English "Wars of the Roses," against the
forces of the Yorkist King, Edward IV. The latter were routed
and most of their leaders' taken and beheaded.

_Mrs. Hookham, Life and Times of Margaret of Anjou,
volume 2, chapter 5._

BANDA ORIENTAL, The.

Signifying the "Eastern Border"; a name applied originally by
the Spaniards to the country on the eastern side of Rio de La
Plata which afterwards took the name of Uruguay.

See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.

BANGALORE, Capture of (1790).

See INDIA: A. D. 1785-1793.

BANK OF ST. GEORGE.

See GENOA: A. D. 1407-1448.

BANK OF THE UNITED STATES.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1833-1836.

BANKS, General Nathaniel P.
Command in the Shenandoah.

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

Siege and Capture of Port Hudson.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (MAY-JULY:
ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

Red River Expedition.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (MARCH-MAY: LOUISIANA).

BANKS OF AMSTERDAM, ENGLAND AND FRANCE.

The Bank of Amsterdam was founded in 1609, and replaced, after
1814. by the Netherland Bank. The Bank of England was founded
in 1694 by William Patterson, a Scotchman; and that of France
by John Law, in 1716. The latter collapsed with the
Mississippi scheme and was revived in 1776.

_J. J. Lalor, editor. Cyclopædia of Political Science._

ALSO IN: _J. W. Gilbart, History and Principles of
Banking, section 1 and 3._

BANKS, Wildcat.

See WILDCAT BANKS.

BANNACKS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SHOSHONEAN FAMILY.

BANNERETS, Knights.

See KNIGHTS BANNERETS.

BANNOCKBURN, Battle of (A. D. 1314).

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1314; and 1314-1328.

BANT, The.

See GAU.

BANTU TRIBES, The.

See SOUTH AFRICA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS;
and AFRICA: THE INHABITING RACES.

BAPTISTS.

See article in the Supplement, volume 5.

BAR, A. D. 1659-1735.
The Duchy ceded to France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661, and 1733-1735.

BAR: The Confederation of.

See POLAND: A. D. 1763-1773.

BARATHRUM, The.

"The barathrum, or 'pit of punishment' at Athens, was a deep
hole like a well into which criminals were precipitated. Iron
hooks were inserted in the sides; which tore the body in
pieces as it fell. It corresponded to the Ceadas of the
Lacedæmonians."

_G. Rawlinson, History of Herodotus,
book 7, section 133, note._

BARBADOES: A. D. 1649-1660.
Royalist attitude towards the English Commonwealth.

See NAVIGATION LAWS: A. D. 1651.

BARBADOES: A. D. 1656.
Cromwell's colony of disorderly women.

See JAMAICA: A. D. 1655.

BARBARIANS.

See ARYANS.

BARBAROSSAS, Piracies and dominion of.

See BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1516-1535.

----------BARBAROSSAS: End----------

BARBARY STATES.

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 647-709.
Mahometan conquest of North Africa.

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

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 908-1171.
The Fatimite Caliphs.

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

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1415.
Siege and capture of Ceuta by the Portuguese.

See PORTUGAL: A. D.1415-1460.

{259}

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1505-1510.
Spanish conquests on the coast.
Oran.
Bugia.
Algiers.
Tripoli.

In 1505, a Spanish expedition planned and urged by Cardinal
Ximenes, captured Mazarquiver, an "important port, and
formidable nest of pirates, on the Barbary coast, nearly
opposite Carthagena." In 1509, the same energetic prelate led
personally an expedition of 4,000 horse and 10,000 foot, with
a fleet of 10 galleys and 80 smaller vessels, for the conquest
of Oran. "This place, situated about a league from the former,
was one of the most considerable of the Moslem possessions in
the Mediterranean, being a principal mart for the trade of the
Levant," and maintained a swarm of cruisers, which swept the
Mediterranean "and made fearful depredations on its populous
borders." Oran was taken by storm. "No mercy was shown; no
respect for age or sex; and the soldiery abandoned themselves
to all the brutal license and ferocity which seem to stain
religious wars above every other. ... No less than 4,000 Moors
were said to have fallen in the battle, and from 5,000 to
8,000 were made prisoners. The loss of the Christians was
inconsiderable." Recalled to Spain by King Ferdinand, Ximenes
left the army in Africa under the command of Count Pedro
Navarro. Navarro's "first enterprise was against Bugia (January
13th, 1510), whose king, at the head of a powerful army, he
routed in two pitched battles, and got possession of his
flourishing capital (January 31st). Algiers, Teunis, Tremecin,
and other cities on the Barbary coast, submitted one after
another to the Spanish arms. The inhabitants were received as
vassals of the Catholic king. ... They guaranteed, moreover,
the liberation of all Christian captives in their dominions;
for which the Algerines, however, took care to indemnify
themselves, by extorting the full ransom from their Jewish
residents. ...On the 26th of July, 1510, the ancient city of
Tripoli, after a most bloody and desperate defence,
surrendered to the arms of the victorious general, whose name
had now become terrible along the whole northern borders of
Africa. In the following month, however (Aug. 28th), he met
with a serious discomfiture in the island of Gelves, where
4,000 of his men were slain or made prisoners. This check in
the brilliant career of Count Navarro put a final stop to the
progress of the Castilian arms in Africa under Ferdinand. The
results obtained, however, were of great importance. ... Most
of the new conquests escaped from the Spanish crown in later
times, through the imbecility or indolence of Ferdinand's
successors. The conquests of Ximenes, however, were placed in
so strong a posture of defence as to resist every attempt for
their recovery by the enemy, and to remain permanently
incorporated with the Spanish empire."

_W. H. Prescott, History of the Reign of Ferdinand and
Isabella, chapter 21 (volume 3)._

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1516-1535.
Piratical dominion of the Barbarossas in Algiers.
Establishment of Turkish sovereignty.
Seizure of Tunis by the Corsairs and its conquest by Charles V.

"About the beginning of the 16th century, a sudden revolution
happened, which, by rendering the states of Barbary formidable
to the Europeans, hath made their history worthy of more
attention. This revolution was brought about by persons born
in a rank of life which entitled them to act no such
illustrious part. Hornc and Hayradin, the sons of a potter in
the isle of Lisbos, prompted by a restless and enterprising
spirit, forsook their father's trade, ran to sea, and joined a
crew of pirates. They soon distinguished themselves by their
valor and activity, and, becoming masters of a small
brigantine, carried on their infamous trade with such conduct
and success that they assembled a fleet of 12 galleys, besides
many vessels of smaller force. Of this fleet Hornc, the elder
brother, called Barbarossa from the red color of his beard,
was admiral, and Hayradin second in command, but with almost
equal authority. They called themselves the friends of the
sea, and the enemies of all who sail upon it; and their names
soon became terrible from the Straits of the Dardanelles to
those of Gibraltar. ... They often carried the prizes which
they took on the coasts of Spain and Italy into the ports of
Barbary, and, enriching the inhabitants by the sale of their
booty, and the thoughtless prodigality of their crews, were
welcome guests in every place at which they touched. The
convenient situation of these harbours, lying so near the
greatest commercial states at that time in Christendom, made
the brothers wish for an establishment in that country. An
opportunity of accomplishing this quickly presented itself
[1516], which they did not suffer to pass unimproved." Invited
by Entemi, king of Algiers, to assist him in taking a Spanish
fort which had been built in his neighbourhood, Barbarossa was
able to murder his too confiding employer, master the Algerine
kingdom and usurp its crown. "Not satisfied with the throne
which he had acquired, he attacked the neighbouring king of
Tremecen, and, having vanquished him in battle, added his
dominions to those of Algiers. At the same time, he continued
to infest the coasts of Spain and Italy with fleets which
resembled the armaments of a great monarch, rather than the
light squadrons of a corsair. Their frequent cruel
devastations obliged Charles [the Fifth--the great Emperor and
King of Spain: 1519-1555], about the beginning of his reign,
to furnish the Marquis de Comares, governor of Oran, with
troops sufficient to attack him." Barbarossa was defeated in
the ensuing war, driven from Tremecen, and slain [1518]. "His
brother Hayradin, known likewise by the name of Barbarossa,
assumed the sceptre of Algiers with the same ambition and
abilities, but with better fortune. His reign being
undisturbed by the arms of the Spaniards, which had full
occupation in the wars among the European powers, he regulated
with admirable prudence the interior police of his kingdom,
carried on his naval operations with great vigour, and
extended his conquests on the continent of Africa. But
perceiving that the Moors and Arabs submitted to his
government with reluctance, and being afraid that his
continual depredations would one day draw upon him the arms of
the Christians, he put his dominions under the protection of
the Grand Seignior [1519], and received from him [with the
title of Bey, or Beylerbey] a body of Turkish soldiers
sufficient for his domestic as well as foreign enemies. At
last, the fame of his exploits daily increasing, Solyman
offered him the command of the Turkish fleet. ... Barbarossa
repaired to Constantinople, and ... gained the entire
confidence both of the sultan and his vizier. To them he
communicated a scheme which he had formed of making himself
master of Tunis, the most flourishing kingdom at that time on
the coast of Africa; and this being approved of by them, he
obtained whatever he demanded for carrying it into execution.
His hopes of success in this undertaking were founded on the
intestine divisions in the kingdom of Tunis." The last king of
that country, having 34 sons by different wives, had
established one of the younger sons on the throne as his
successor. This young king attempted to put all of his
brothers to death; but Alraschid, who was one of the eldest,
escaped and fled to Algiers. Barbarossa now proposed to the
Turkish sultan to attack Tunis on the pretence of vindicating
the rights of Alraschid. His proposal was adopted and carried
out; but even before the Turkish expedition sailed.
{260}
Alraschid himself disappeared--a prisoner, shut up in the
Seraglio--and was never heard of again. The use of his name,
however, enabled Barbarossa to enter Tunis in triumph, and the
betrayed inhabitants discovered too late that he came as a
viceroy, to make them the subjects of the sultan. "Being now
possessed of such extensive territories, he carried on his
depredations against the Christian states to a greater extent
and with more destructive violence than ever. Daily complaints
of the outrages committed by his cruisers were brought to the
emperor by his subjects, both in Spain and Italy. All
Christendom seemed to expect from him, as its greatest and
most fortunate prince, that he would put an end to this new
and odious species of oppression. At the same time
Muley-Hascen, the exiled king of Tunis, ... applied to Charles
as the only person who could assert his rights in opposition
to such a formidable usurper." The Emperor, accordingly, in
1535, prepared a great expedition against Tunis, drawing men
and ships from every part of his wide dominions--from Spain,
Italy, Germany and the Netherlands. "On the 16th of July the
fleet, consisting of near 500 vessels, having on board above
30,000 regular troops, set sail from Cagliari, and, after a
prosperous navigation, landed within sight of Tunis." The fort
of Goletta, commanding the bay, was invested and taken; the
corsair's fleet surrendered, and Barbarossa, advancing boldly
from Tunis to attack the invaders, was overwhelmingly beaten,
and fled, abandoning his capital. Charles's soldiers rushed
into the unfortunate town, escaping all restraint, and making
it a scene of indescribable horrors. "Above 30,000 of the
innocent inhabitants perished on that unhappy day, and 10,000
were carried away as slaves. Muley-Hascen took possession of a
throne surrounded with carnage, abhorred by his subjects, on
whom he had brought such calamities." Before quitting the
country, Charles concluded a treaty with Muley-Hascen, under
which the latter acknowledged that he held his kingdom in fee
of the crown of Spain, doing homage to the Emperor as his
liege, and maintaining a Spanish garrison in the Goletta. He
also released, without ransom, all the Christian slaves in his
dominions, 20,000 in number, and promised to detain in
servitude no subject of the Emperor thereafter. He opened his
kingdom to the Christian religion, and to free trade, and
pledged himself to exclude Turkish corsairs from his ports.

_W. Robertson, History of the Reign of Charles V.,
book 5 (volume 2)._

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1541.
The disastrous expedition of Charles V. against Algiers.

Encouraged, and deceived, by his easy success at Tunis, the
emperor, Charles V., determined, in 1541, to undertake the
reduction of Algiers, and to wholly exterminate the
freebooters of the north African coast. Before his
preparations were completed, "the season unfortunately was far
advanced, on which account the Pope entreated, and Doria
conjured him not to expose his whole armament to a destruction
almost unavoidable on a wild shore during the violence of the
autumnal gales. Adhering, however, to his plan with determined
obstinacy, he embarked at Porto Venere. ... The force ...
which he had collected ... consisted of 20,000 foot and 2,000
horse, mostly veterans, together with 3,000 volunteers. ...
Besides these there had joined his standard 1,000 soldiers
sent by the Order of St. John, and led by 100 of its most
valiant knights. Landing near Algiers without opposition,
Charles immediately advanced towards the town. To oppose the
invaders, Hassan had only 800 Turks, and 5,000 Moors, partly
natives of Africa, and partly refugees from Spain. When
summoned to surrender he, nevertheless, returned a fierce and
haughty answer. But with such a handful of troops, neither his
desperate courage nor consummate skill in war could have long
resisted forces superior to those which had formerly defeated
Barbarossa at the head of 60,000 men." He was speedily
relieved from danger, however, by an opportune storm, which
burst upon the region during the second day after Charles's
debarkation. The Spanish camp was flooded; the soldiers
drenched, chilled, sleepless and dispirited. In this condition
they were attacked by the Moors at dawn, and narrowly escaped
a rout. "But all feeling of this disaster was soon obliterated
by a more affecting spectacle. As the tempest continued with
unabated violence, the full light of day showed the ships, on
which alone their safety depended, driving from their anchors,
dashing against one another, and many of them forced on the
rocks, or sinking in the waters. In less than an hour, 15
ships of war and 140 transports, with 8,000 men, perished
before their eyes; and such of the unhappy sailors as escaped
the fury of the sea, were murdered by the Arabs as soon as
they reached land." With such ships as he could save, Doria
sought shelter behind Cape Matafuz, sending a message to the
emperor, advising that he follow with the army to that point.
Charles could not do otherwise than act according to the
suggestion; but his army suffered horribly in the retreat,
which occupied three days. "Many perished by famine, as the
whole army subsisted chiefly on roots and berries, or on the
flesh of horses, killed for that purpose by the emperor's
orders; numbers were drowned in the swollen brooks; and not a
few were slain by the enemy." Even after the army had regained
the fleet, and was reembarked, it was scattered by a second
storm, and several weeks passed before the emperor reached his
Spanish dominions, a wiser and a sadder man.

_M. Russell, History of the Barbary States, chapter 8._

ALSO IN: _W. Robertson, History of the Reign of Charles V.,
book 6 (volume 2.)_

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1543-1560.
The pirate Dragut and his exploits.
Turkish capture of Tripoli.
Disastrous Christian attempt to recover the place.

Dragut, or Torghūd, a native of the Caramanian coast, opposite
the island of Rhodes, began his career as a Mediterranean
corsair some time before the last of the Barbarossas quitted
the scene and was advanced by the favor of the Algerine. In
1540 he fell into the hands of one of the Dorias and was bound
to the oar as a galley-slave for three years,--which did not
sweeten his temper toward the Christian world. In 1543 he was
ransomed, and resumed his piracies, with more energy than
before. "Dragut's lair was at the island of Jerba [called
Gelves, by the Spaniards]. ... Not content with the rich
spoils of Europe, Dragut took the Spanish outposts in Africa,
one by one--Susa, Sfax, Monastir; and finally set forth to
conquer 'Africa.'
{261}
It is not uncommon in Arabic to call a country and its capital
by the same name. ... 'Africa' meant to the Arabs the province
of Carthage or Tunis and its capital, which was not at first
Tunis but successively Kayrawan and Mahdiya. Throughout the
later middle ages the name 'Africa' is applied by Christian
writers to the latter city. ... This was the city which Dragut
took without a blow in the spring of 1550. Mahdiya was then in
an anarchic state, ruled by a council of chiefs, each ready to
betray the other, and none owing the smallest allegiance to
any king, least of all the despised king of Tunis, Hamid, who
had deposed and blinded his father, Hasan, Charles V. 's
protégé. One of these chiefs let Dragut and his merry men into
the city by night. ... So easy a triumph roused the emulation
of Christendom. ... Don Garcia de Toledo dreamed of outshining
the Corsair's glory. His father, the Viceroy of Naples, the
Pope, and others, promised their aid, and old Andrea Doria
took the command. After much delay and consultation a large
body of troops was conveyed to Mahdiya and disembarked on June
28, 1550. Dragut, though aware of the project, was at sea,
devastating the Gulf of Genoa, and paying himself in advance
for any loss the Christians might inflict in Africa: his
nephew Hisar Reis commanded in the city. When Dragut returned,
the siege had gone on for a month," but he failed in
attempting to raise it and retired to Jerba. Mahdiya was
carried by assault on the 8th of September. "Next year, 1551,
Dragut's place was with the Ottoman navy, then commanded by
Sinan Pasha. ... With nearly 150 galleys or galleots, 10,000
soldiers, and numerous siege-guns, Sinan and Dragut sailed out
of the Dardanelles--whither bound no Christian could tell.
They ravaged, as usual, the Straits of Messina, and then
revealed the point of attack by making direct for Malta." But
the demonstration made against the strong fortifications of
the Knights of St. John was ill-planned and feebly executed;
it was easily repelled. To wipe out his defeat, Sinan "sailed
straight for Tripoli, some 64 leagues away. Tripoli was the
natural antidote to Malta: for Tripoli, too, belonged to the
Knights of St. John--much against their will--inasmuch as the
Emperor had made their defence of this easternmost Barbary
state a condition of their tenure of Malta." But the
fortifications of Tripoli were not strong enough to resist the
Turkish bombardment, and Gaspard de Villiers, the commandant,
was forced to surrender (August 15th), "on terms, as he
believed, identical with those which Suleyman granted to the
Knights of Rhodes. But Sinan was no Suleyman; moreover, he was
in a furious rage with the whole Order. He put the
garrison--all save a few--in chains and carried them off to
grace his triumph at Stambol. Thus did Tripoli fall once more
into the hands of the Moslems. ... The misfortunes of the
Christians did not end here. Year after year the Ottoman fleet
appeared in Italian waters. ... Unable as they felt themselves
to cope with the Turks at sea, the powers of Southern Europe
resolved to strike one more blow on land, and recover Tripoli.
A fleet of nearly 100 galleys and ships, gathered from Spain,
Genoa, 'the Religion,' the Pope, from all quarters, with the
Duke de Medina-Celi at their head, assembled at Messina. ...
Five times the expedition put to sea; five times was it driven
back by contrary winds. At last, on February 10, 1560, it was
fairly away for the African coast. Here fresh troubles awaited
it. Long delays in crowded vessels had produced their
disastrous effects: fevers and scurvy and dysentery were
working their terrible ravages among the crews, and 2,000
corpses were flung into the sea. It was impossible to lay
siege to Tripoli with a diseased army, and when actually in
sight of their object the admirals gave orders to return to
Jerba. A sudden descent quickly gave them the command of the
beautiful island. ... In two months a strong castle was built,
with all scientific earthworks, and the admiral prepared to
carry home such troops as were not needed for its defence.
Unhappily for him, he had lingered too long. ... He was about
to prepare for departure when news came that the Turkish fleet
had been seen at Goza. Instantly all was panic. Valiant
gentlemen forgot their valour, forgot their coolness. ...
Before they could make out of the strait ... the dread Corsair
[Dragut] himself, and Ochiali, and Piali Pasha were upon them.
Then ensued a scene of confusion that baffles description.
Despairing of weathering the north side of Jerba the
panic-stricken Christians ran their ships ashore and deserted
them, never stopping even to set them on fire. ... On rowed
the Turks; galleys and galleons to the number of 56 fell into
their hands; 18,000 Christians bowed down before their
scimitars; the beach on that memorable 11th of May, 1560, was
a confused medley of stranded ships, helpless prisoners, Turks
busy in looting men and galleys--and a hideous heap of mangled
bodies. The fleet and the army which had sailed from Messina
... were absolutely lost."

_S. Lane-Poole, Story of the Barbary Corsairs._

ALSO IN: _W. H. Prescott, History of the Reign of Philip II.,
book 4, chapter 1._

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1563-1565.
Repulse of the Moors from Oran and Mazarquiver.
Capture of Penon de Velez.

In the spring of 1563 a most determined and formidable attempt
was made by Hassem, the dey of Algiers, to drive the Spaniards
from Oran and Mazarquiver, which they had held since the
African conquests of Cardinal Ximenes. The siege was fierce
and desperate; the defence most heroic. The beleaguered
garrisons held their ground until a relieving expedition from
Spain came in sight, on the 8th of June, when the Moors
retreated hastily. In the summer of the next year the
Spaniards took the strong island fortress of Penon de Velez,
breaking up one more nest of piracy and strengthening their
footing on the Barbary coast. In the course of the year
following they blocked the mouth of the river Tetuan, which
was a place of refuge for the marauders.

_W. H. Prescott, History of the Reign of Philip II.,
book 4, chapter 1 (volume 2)._

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1565.
Participation in the Turkish Siege of Malta.
Death of Dragut.

See HOSPITALLERS OF ST. JOHN: A. D. 1,130-1565.

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1570-1571.
War with the Holy League of Spain, Venice and the Pope.
The Battle of Lepanto.

See TURKS: A. D. 1566-1571.

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1572-1573.
Capture of Tunis by Don John of Austria.
Its recovery, with Goletta, by the Turks.

See TURKS: A. D. 1572-1573.

{262}

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1579.
Invasion of Morocco by Sebastian of Portugal.
His defeat and death.

See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1579-1580.

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1664-1684.
Wars of France against the piratical powers.
Destructive bombardments of Algiers.

"The ancient alliance of the crown of France with the Ottoman
Porte, always unpopular, and less necessary since France had
become so strong, was at this moment [early in the reign of
Louis XIV.] well-nigh broken, to the great satisfaction both
of the Christian nations of the South and of the Austrian
empire. ... Divers plans were proposed in the King's council
for attacking the Ottoman power on the Moorish coasts, and for
repressing the pirates, who were the terror of the
merchant-shipping and maritime provinces. Colbert induced the
king to attempt a military settlement among the Moors as the
best means of holding them in check. A squadron commanded by
the Duke de Beaufort ... landed 5,000 picked soldiers before
Jijeli (or Djigelli), a small Algerine port between Bougiah
and Bona. They took possession of Jijeli without difficulty
(July 22, 1664); but discord arose between Beaufort and his
officers; they did not work actively enough to fortify
themselves," and before the end of September they were obliged
to evacuate the place precipitately. "The success of
Beaufort's squadron, commanded under the duke by the
celebrated Chevalier Paul, ere long effaced the impression of
this reverse: two Algerine flotillas were destroyed in the
course of 1665." The Dey of Algiers sent one of his French
captives, an officer named Du Babinais, to France with
proposals of peace, making him swear to return if his mission
failed. The proposals were rejected; Du Babinais was loyal to
his oath and returned--to suffer death, as he expected, at the
hands of the furious barbarian. "The devotion of this Breton
Regulus was not lost: despondency soon took the place of anger
in the heart of the Moorish chiefs. Tunis yielded first to the
guns of the French squadron, brought to bear on it from the
Bay of Goletta. The Pacha and the Divan of Tunis obligated
themselves to restore all the French slaves they possessed, to
respect French ships, and thenceforth to release all Frenchmen
whom they should capture on foreign ships. .... Rights of
aubaine, and of admiralty and shipwreck, were suppressed as
regarded Frenchmen (November 25, 1665). The station at Cape
Negro was restored to France. ... Algiers submitted, six'
months after, to nearly the same conditions imposed on it by
Louis XIV.: one of the articles stipulated that French
merchants should be treated as favorably as any foreign
nation, and even more so (May 17, 1666). More than 3,000
French slaves were set at liberty." Between 1669 and 1672,
Louis XIV. was seriously meditating a great war of conquest
with the Turks and their dependencies, but preferred, finally,
to enter upon his war with Holland, which brought the other
project to naught. France and the Ottoman empire then remained
on tolerably good terms until 1681, when a "squadron of
Tripolitan corsairs having carried off a French ship on the
coast of Provence, Duquesne, at the head of seven vessels,
pursued the pirates into the waters of Greece. They took
refuge in the harbor of Scio. Duquesne summoned the Pacha of
Scio to expel them. The Pacha refused, and fired on the French
squadron, when Duquesne cannonaded both the pirates and the
town with such violence that the Pacha, terrified, asked for a
truce, in order to refer the matter to the Sultan (July 23,
1681). Duquesne converted the attack into a blockade. At the
news of this violation of the Ottoman territory, the Sultan,
Mahomet IV., fell into a rage ... and dispatched the
Captain-Pacha to Scio with 32 galleys. Duquesne allowed the
Turkish galleys to enter the harbor, then blockaded them with
the pirates, and declared that he would burn the whole if
satisfaction were not had of the Tripolitans. The Divan
hesitated. War was about to recommence with the Emperor; it
was not the moment to kindle it against France." In the end
there was a compromise, and the Tripolitans gave up the French
vessel and the slaves they had captured, promising, also, to
receive a French consul at Tripoli. "During this time another
squadron, commanded by Château-Renault, blockaded the coasts
of Morocco, the men of Maghreb having rivalled in depredations
the vassals of Turkey. The powerful Emperor of Morocco, Muley
Ismael, sent the governor of Tetuan to France to solicit peace
of Louis XIV. The treaty was signed at Saint-Germain, January
29, 1682, on advantageous conditions," including restitution
of French slaves. "Affairs did not terminate so amicably with
Algiers. From this piratical centre had proceeded the gravest
offenses. A captain of the royal navy was held in slavery
there, with many other Frenchmen. It was resolved to inflict a
terrible punishment on the Algerines. The thought of
conquering Algeria had more than once presented itself to the
king and Colbert, and they appreciated the value of this
conquest; the Jijeli expedition had been formerly a first
attempt. They did not, however, deem it incumbent on them to
embark in such an enterprise; a descent, a siege, would have
required too great preparations; they had recourse· to another
means of attack. The regenerator of the art of naval
construction, Petit-Renau, invented bomb-ketches expressly for
the purpose. ... July 23, 1682, Duquesne anchored before
Algiers, with 11 ships, 15 galleys, 5 bomb-ketches, and
Petit-Renau to guide them. After five weeks' delay caused by
bad weather, then by a fire on one of the bomb-ketches, the
thorough trial took place during the night of August 30. The
effect was terrible: a part of the great mosque fell on the
crowd that had taken refuge there. During the night of
September 3-4, the Algerines attempted to capture the
bomb-ketches moored at the entrance of their harbor; they were
repulsed, and the bombardment continued. The Dey wished to
negotiate; the people, exasperated, prevented him. The wind
shifting to the northwest presaged the equinoctial storm;
Duquesne set sail again, September 12. The expedition had not
been decisive. It was begun anew. June 18, 1683, Duquesne
reappeared in the road of Algiers; he had, this time, seven
bomb-ketches instead of five. These instruments of
extermination had been perfected in the interval. The nights
of June 26-27 witnessed the overthrow of a great number of
houses, several mosques, and the palace of the Dey. A thousand
men perished in the harbor and the town." The Dey opened
negotiations, giving up 700 French slaves, but was killed by
his Janizaries, and one Hadgi-Hussein proclaimed in his stead.
{263}
"The bombardment was resumed with increasing violence. ... The
Algerines avenged themselves by binding to the muzzles of
their guns a number of Frenchmen who remained in their hands.
... The fury of the Algerines drew upon them redoubled
calamities. ... The bombs rained almost without intermission.
The harbor was strewn with the wrecks of vessels. The city was
... a heap of bloody ruins." But "the bomb-ketches had
exhausted their ammunition. September was approaching.
Duquesne again departed; but a strong blockading force was
kept up, during the whole winter, as a standing threat of the
return of the 'infernal vessels.' The Algerines finally bowed
their head, and, April 25, 1684, peace was accorded by
Tourville, the commander of the blockade, to the Pacha, Dey,
Divan, and troops of Algiers. The Algerines restored 320
French slaves remaining in their power, and 180 other
Christians claimed by the King; the janizaries only which had
been taken from them were restored; they engaged to make no
prizes within ten leagues of the coast of France, nor to
assist the other Moorish corsairs at war with France; to
recognize the precedence of the flag of France over all other
flags, &c., &c.; lastly, they sent an embassy to carry their
submission to Louis XIV.; they did not, however, pay the
damages which Duquesne had wished to exact of them."

_H. Martin, History of France: Age of Louis XIV.,
volume 1, chapter 4 and 7._

BARBARY STATES: A. D. 1785-1801.
Piratical depredations upon American commerce.
Humiliating treaties and tribute.
The example of resistance given by the United States.

"It is difficult for us to realize that only 70 years ago the
Mediterranean was so unsafe that the merchant ships of every
nation stood in danger of being captured by pirates, unless
they were protected either by an armed convoy or by tribute
paid to the petty Barbary powers. Yet we can scarcely open a
book of travels during the last century without mention being
made of the immense risks to which everyone was exposed who
ventured by sea from Marseilles to Naples. ... The European
states, in order to protect their commerce, had the choice
either of paying certain sums per head for each captive, which
in reality was a premium on capture, or of buying entire
freedom for their commerce by the expenditure of large sums
yearly. The treaty renewed by France, in 1788, with Algiers,
was for fifty years, and it was agreed to pay $200,000
annually, besides large presents distributed according to
custom every ten years, and a great sum given down. The peace
of Spain with Algiers is said to have cost from three to five
millions of dollars. There is reason to believe that at the
same time England was paying an annual tribute of about
$280,000. England was the only power sufficiently strong on
the sea to put down these pirates; but in order to keep her
own position as mistress of the seas she preferred to leave
them in existence in order to be a scourge to the commerce of
other European powers, and even to support them by paying a
sum so great that other states might find it difficult to make
peace with them. When the Revolution broke out, we [of the
United States of America] no longer had the safeguards for our
commerce that had been given to us by England, and it was
therefore that in our very first negotiations for a treaty
with France we desired to have an article inserted into the
treaty, that the king of France should secure the inhabitants
of the United States, and their vessels and effects, against
all attacks or depredations from any of the Barbary powers. It
was found impossible to insert this article in the treaty of
1778, and instead of that the king agreed to 'employ his good
offices and interposition in order to provide as fully and
efficaciously as possible for the benefit, conveniency and
safety of the United States against the princes and the states
of Barbary or their subjects.'"

Direct negotiations between the United States and the
piratical powers were opened in 1785, by a call which Mr.
Adams made upon the Tripolitan ambassador. The latter
announced to Mr. Adams that "'Turkey, Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers,
and Morocco were the sovereigns of the Mediterranean; and that
no nation could navigate that sea without a treaty of peace
with them.' ... The ambassador demanded as the lowest price
for a perpetual peace 30,000 guineas for his employers and
£3,000 for himself; that Tunis would probably treat on the
same terms; but he could not answer for Algiers or Morocco.
Peace with all four powers would cost at least $1,000,000, and
Congress had appropriated only $80,000. ... Mr. Adams was
strongly opposed to war, on account of the expense, and
preferred the payment of tribute. ... Mr. Jefferson quite as
decidedly preferred war." The opinion in favor of a trial of
pacific negotiations prevailed, and a treaty with the Emperor
of Morocco was concluded in 1787. An attempt at the same time
to make terms with the Del of Algiers and to redeem a number
of American captives in his hands, came to nothing. "For the
sake of saving a few thousand dollars, fourteen men were
allowed to remain in imprisonment for ten years. ... In
November, 1793, the number of [American] prisoners at Algiers
amounted to 115 men, among whom there remained only ten of the
original captives of 1785." At last, the nation began to
realize the intolerable shame of the matter, and, "on January
2, 1794, the House of Representatives resolved that a 'naval
force adequate for the protection of the commerce of the
United States against the AIgerine forces ought to be
provided.' In the same year authority was given to build six
frigates, and to procure ten smaller vessels to be equipped as
galleys. Negotiations, however, continued to go on," and in
September, 1795, a treaty with the Dey was concluded. "In
making this treaty, however, we had been obliged to follow the
usage of European powers--not only pay a large sum for the
purpose of obtaining peace, but an annual tribute, in order to
keep our vessels from being captured in the future. The total
cost of fulfilling the treaty was estimated at $992,463. 25."

_E. Schuyler, American Diplomacy, part 4._