Chapter LXII: Front Matter (62)

See INDIA: A. D. 1743-1752, to 1757-1772.

{480}

CLOACA MAXIMA OF ROME, The.

"Even at the present day there stands unchanged the great
sewer, the 'cloaca maxima,' the object of which, it may be
observed, was not merely to carry away the refuse of the city,
but chiefly to drain the large lake which was formed by the
Tiber between the Capitoline, Aventine and Palatine, then
extended between the Palatine and Capitoline, and reached as a
swamp as far as the district between the Quirinal and Viminal.
This work, consisting of three semicircles of immense square
blocks, which, though without mortar, have not to this day
moved a knife's breadth from one another ... equalling the
pyramids in extent and massiveness, far surpasses them in the
difficulty of its execution. It is so gigantic, that the more
one examines it the more inconceivable it becomes how even a
large and powerful state could have executed it. ... Whether
the cloaca maxima was actually executed by Tarquinus Priscus
or by his son Superbus is a question about which the ancients
themselves are not agreed, and respecting which true
historical criticism cannot presume to decide. But this much
may be said, that the structure must have been completed
before the city encompassed the space of the seven hills and
formed a compact whole. ... But such a work cannot possibly
have been executed by the powers of a state such as Rome is
said to have been in those times."

_B. G. Niebuhr, Lectures on the History of Rome,
lectures 5 and 8._

CLODOMIR, King of the Franks, at Orleans, A. D. 511-524.

CLONARD, Monastery of.

A great monastery founded in Meath, Ireland, by St. Finnian,
in the sixth century, "which is said to have contained no
fewer than 3,000 monks and which became a great
training-school in the monastic life." The twelve principal
disciples of Finnian were called the "Twelve Apostles of
Ireland," St. Columba being the chief.

_W. F. Skene, Celtic Scotland, book 2, chapter 2._

CLONTARF, Battle of.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1014.

CLONTARF MEETING, The.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1841-1848.

CLOSTER-SEVEN, Convention of.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1757 (JULY-DECEMBER), and 1758.

CLOTHAIRE I., King of the Franks, A. D. 511-561.

Clothaire II., King of the Franks (Neustria), A. D. 584-628;
(Austrasia), 613--622; Burgundy, 613--628.

Clothaire III., King of the Franks (Neustria and Burgundy),
A. D. 660-670.

Clothaire IV., King of the Franks
(Austrasia), A. D. 717-719.

CLOVIS, King of the Franks, A. D. 481-511.

Clovis II., King of the Franks (Neustria), A. D. 638-654;
(Austrasia), 650-654; (Burgundy), 638-654.

Clovis III., King of the Franks (Neustria and Burgundy),
A. D. 691-695.

CLUBS, Ancient Greek.

See LESCHE, HETÆRIES, ERANI and THIASI.

CLUBS: The Beef Steak,

"In 1735 there was formed in the capital [London] the
celebrated Beef Steak Club, or 'Sublime Society of Beef
Steaks,' as its members always desired to be designated. The
origin of this club is singular, and was in this wise. Rich,
a celebrated harlequin, and patentee of Covent Garden Theatre
in the time of George II., while engaged during the daytime
in directing and controlling the arrangements of the stage
scenery was often visited by his friends, of whom he had a
very numerous circle. One day, while the Earl of Peterborough
was present, Rich felt the pangs of hunger so keenly that he
cooked a beef-steak and invited the earl to partake of it,
which he did, relishing it so greatly that he came again,
bringing some friends with him on purpose to taste the same
fare. In process of time the beef-steak dinner became an
institution. Some of the chief wits and greatest men of the
nation, to the number of 24, formed themselves into a
society, and took as their motto 'Steaks and Liberty.' Among
its early celebrities were Bubb Doddington, Aaron Hill, Dr.
Hoadley, Richard Glover, the two Colmans, Garrick and John
Beard. The number of the 'steaks' remained at its original
limit until 1785, when it was augmented by one, in order to
secure the admission of the Heir-Apparent."

_W. C. Sydney, England and the English in the 18th Century,
chapter 6 (volume 1)._

CLUBS: The Brothers'.

In 1711, a political club which took this name was founded in
London by Henry St. John, afterwards Lord Bolingbroke, to
counteract the "extravagance of the Kit Cat" and "the
drunkenness of the Beefsteak." "This society ... continued for
some time to restrain the outburst of those elements of
disunion with which the Harley ministry was so rife. To be a
member of this club was esteemed a distinguished honour. They
addressed each other as 'brother'; and we find their ladies in
their correspondence claiming to be enrolled as sisters. The
members of this club were the Dukes of Ormond, Shrewsbury,
Beaufort; the Earls of Oxford, Arran, Jersey, Orrery,
Bathurst; Lords Harley, Duplin, Masham; Sir Robert Raymond,
Sir William Windham, Colonel Hill, Colonel Desney, St. John,
Granville, Arbuthnot, Prior, Swift, and Friend."

_G. W. Cooke, Memoirs of Bolingbroke,
volume 1, chapter 10._

CLUBS:
The Clichy.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1797 (SEPTEMBER).

CLUBS:
The French Revolutionary.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1790.

CLUBS:
The Hampden.

See ENGLAND: A.. D. 1816-1820.

CLUBS:
Dr. Johnson's.

"During his literary career Dr. Johnson assisted in the
foundation of no fewer than three clubs, each of which was
fully deserving of the name. In 1749 he established a club at
a house in Ivy Lane, Paternoster Row, and only the year before
he died he drafted a code of rules for a club, of which the
members should hold their meetings, thrice in each week, at
the Essex Head in the Strand; an establishment which was then
kept by a former servant of his old friends the Thrales. Those
members who failed to put in an appearance at the club were
required to forfeit the sum of two pence. There is an
interesting account of one of the meetings of the Ivy Lane
Club, at which Johnson presided, in Sir John Hawkins's
biography of him. ... The next club with which Johnson became
acquainted was the most influential of them all, and was the
one which is now chiefly remembered in connection with his
name. It was, however, a plant of slow and gradual growth. The
first meeting of its members, who exulted in the designation
of 'The Club,' was held in 1763 at a hostelry called the
Turk's Head, situated in Gerard Street, Soho.
{481}
'The Club' retained that title until after the funeral of Garrick,
when it was always known as 'The Literary Club.' As its
numbers were small and limited, the admission to it was an
honour greatly coveted in political, legal, and literary
circles. 'The Club' originated with Sir Joshua Reynolds, then
President of the Royal Academy, who at first restricted its
numbers to nine, these being Reynolds himself, Samuel Johnson,
Edmund Burke, Dr. Christopher Nugent (an accomplished Roman
Catholic physician), Bennet Langton, Topham Beauclerk, Sir
John Hawkins, Oliver Goldsmith, and M. Chamier, Secretary in
the War Office. The members assembled every Monday evening
punctually at seven o'clock, and, having partaken of an
inexpensive supper, conversed on literary, scientific and
artistic topics till the clock indicated the hour of retiring.
The numbers of the Literary Club were subsequently augmented
by the enrolment of Garrick, Edward Gibbon, Lord Charlemont,
Sir William Jones, the eminent Oriental linguist, and James
Boswell, of biographical fame. Others were admitted from time
to time, until in 1791 it numbered 35. In December, 1772, the
day of meeting was altered to Friday, and the weekly suppers
were commuted to fortnightly dinners during the sitting of
parliament. Owing to the conversion of the original tavern
into a private house, the club moved, in 1783, first to
Prince's, in Sackville Street; next to Le Telier's in Dover
Street; then, in 1792, to Parsloe's in St. James's Street; and
lastly, in February, 1799, to the Thatched House Tavern in St.
James's Street, where it remained until long after 1848."

_W. C. Sydney, England and the English in the 18th
Century, chapter 6 (volume 1)._

CLUBS:
The King's Head.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1678-1679.

CLUBS:
The Kit Cat.
"The Kit Cat Club was instituted in 1699. Its most illustrious
members were Congreve, Prior, Sir John Vanbrugh, the Earl of
Orrery, and Lord Somers; but the members becoming more
numerous, the most violent party obtained the majority, and
the Earl and his friends were less regular in their
attendance. ... The Kit Cat took its name from a pastry-cook
[Christopher Katt], whose pies formed a regular dish at the
suppers of the club."

_G. W. Cooke, Memoirs of Bolingbroke,
volume 1, chapter 10, foot-note._

ALSO IN:
_J. Timbs, Clubs and Club Life in London, pages 47-53._

_W. C. Sydney, England and the English in the 18th century,
chapter 6._

CLUBS:
The Mohocks.

See MOHOCKS.

CLUBS:
The October and the March.

"The October Club came first into importance in the latest
years of Anne, although it had existed since the last decade
of the 17th century. The stout Tory squires met together in
the 'Bell' Tavern, in narrow, dirty King Street, Westminster,
to drink October ale, under Dahl's portrait of Queen Anne, and
to trouble with their fierce uncompromising Jacobitism the
fluctuating purposes of Harley and the crafty counsels of St.
John. The genius of Swift tempered their hot zeal with the
cool air of his 'advice.' Then the wilder spirits seceded, and
formed the March Club, which retained all the angry Jacobitism
of the parent body, but lost all its importance."

_J. McCarthy, History of the Four Georges, volume 1, chapter 5._

ALSO IN:
_W. C. Sydney, England and the English in the 18th
century, chapter 6._

CLUBMEN.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1645 (JULY-AUGUST).

CLUGNY, OR CLUNY, The Monastery of.

The famous monastery of Clugny, or Cluny, was founded A. D.
910, at Cluny, near Macon, in Burgundy, by the abbot Count
Berno, who had previously established and ruled the monastery
of Gigni, near Lyons. It was founded under the auspices and at
the expense of William, Count of Auvergne, commonly called
William the Pious. "In the disastrous times which followed the
death of Charles the Great and the failure of his scheme to
reorganize the Western world under a single head, the
discipline of the religious houses fell with everything else;
fell, not perhaps quite so soon, yet by the end of the ninth
century had fallen almost as low as it was possible to fall.
But here symptoms of a moral reaction showed themselves
earlier than elsewhere. The revival dates from 910, the year
of the foundation of the Monastery of Clugny in Burgundy,
which was destined to exercise an enormous influence on the
future of the Church. While matters at Rome were at their
worst, there were silently training there the men who should
inaugurate a new state of things [notably Hildebrand,
afterwards Pope Gregory VII.] Already, so one said at the
time, the whole house of the Church was filled with the sweet
savour of the ointment there poured out. It followed that
wherever in any religious house there were any aspirations
after a higher life, any longings for reformation, that house
affiliated itself to Clugny; thus beginning to constitute a
Congregation, that is a cluster of religious houses, scattered
it might be over all Christendom, but owning one rule,
acknowledging the superiority of one mother house, and
receiving its abbots and priors from thence. In the Clugnian
Congregation, for example, there were about two thousand
houses in the middle of the twelfth century--these mostly in
France; the Abbot, or Arch-Abbot, as he was called, of Clugny,
being a kind of Pope of Monasticism, and for a long time, the
Pope excepted, quite the most influential Church-ruler in
Christendom."

_R. C, Trench, Lect's on Mediæval Church History,
chapter 8._

ALSO IN:
_S. R. Maitland, The Dark Ages, chapter 18-26._

_A. F. Villemain, Life of Gregory, VII. book 1._

_S. R. Gardiner and J. B. Mullinger, Introduction to
the Study of English History, chapter 3, section 8._

E. F. Henderson, Select Historical Documents of the
Middle Ages, book 3, no. 4.

CLUNIAC MONKS.

See CLUGNY.

CLUSIUM, Battle of (B. C. 83).

See ROME: B. C. 88-78.

CLYPEUS, The.

The round iron shield of the Romans.

_E. Guhl and W. Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans,
section 107._

CNOSSUS.

See CRETE.

CNUT.

See CANUTE.

CNYDUS, Battle of (B. C. 394).

See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.

COAHUILTECAN FAMILY, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: COAHUILTECAN FAMILY.

COAJIRO, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: COAJIRO.

COALITION MINISTRY OF FOX AND LORD NORTH.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1782-1783; and 1783-1787.

COALITIONS AGAINST NAPOLEON.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (JANUARY-APRIL);

{482}

COALITIONS AGAINST NAPOLEON:
GERMANY: A. D. 1812-1813, and 1813 (MAY-AUGUST),
and FRANCE: A. D. 1814-1815.

COALITIONS AGAINST REVOLUTIONARY FRANCE.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (MARCH-SEPTEMBER);
1798-1799 (AUGUST-APRIL).

COBBLER'S LEAGUE, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1524-1525.

COBDEN, Richard, and the Free Trade movement.

See TARIFF LEGISLATION (ENGLAND):
A. D. 1836-1839; 1842; 1845-1846;
and TARIFF LEGISLATION (FRANCE): A. D. 1853-1860.

COBDEN-CHEVALIER COMMERCIAL TREATY, The.

See TARIFF LEGISLATION (FRANCE): A. D. 1853-1860.

COBURG, Origination of the Dukedom of.

See SAXONY: A. D. 1180-1553.

COCCIUM.

An important Roman town in Britain, the remains of which are
supposed to be found at Ribchester.

_T. Wright, Celt, Roman and Saxon, chapter 5._

COCHIBO, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.

COCHIQUIMA, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.

COCO TRIBES.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.

COCONOONS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MARIPOSAN FAMILY.

COCOSATES, The.

See AQUITAINE, THE ANCIENT TRIBES.

COD, Cape: A. D. 1602.
Named by Bartholomew Gosnold.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1602-1605.

COD, Cape: A. D. 1605.
Called Cap Blanc by Champlain.

See CANADA (NEW FRANCE): A. D. 1603-1605.

COD, Cape: A. D. 1609.
Named New Holland by Hudson.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1609.

----------COD, Cape: End----------

CODE NAPOLEON, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1801-1804.

CODES.

See LAWS, &c.

CODS, The.

See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1345-1354;
and 1482-1493.

CŒLE-SYRIA.

"Hollow Syria"--the long, broad, fertile and beautiful valley
which lies between the Libanus and Antilibanus ranges of
mountains, and is watered by the Orontes and the Leontes or
Littany rivers. "Few places in the world are more remarkable,
or have a more stirring history, than this wonderful vale."

_G. Rawlinson, Five Great Monarchies: Babylonia, chapter 1._

CŒNOBIUM.--CŒNOBITES.

"The word 'Cœnobium' is equivalent to 'monasterium' in the
later sense of that word. Cassian distinguishes the word thus.
'Monasterium,' he says, 'may be the dwelling of a single monk,
Cœnobium must be of several; the former word,' he adds,
'expressed only the place, the latter the manner of living.'"

_I. G. Smith, Christian Monasticism, page 40._

ALSO IN:
_J. Bingham, Antiquity of the Christian Church,
book 7, chapter 2, section 3._

COFAN, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ANDESIANS.

COGNOMEN, NOMEN, PRÆNOMEN.

See GENS, ROMAN.

COHORTS.

See LEGION, ROMAN.

COIMBRA: Early history.

See PORTUGAL: EARLY HISTORY.

COLBERT, The System of.
Colbertism.

See TARIFF LEGISLATION: A. D. 1664-1667 (FRANCE).

Also, FRANCE: A. D. 1661-1683.

COLCHESTER, Origin of.

When Cæsar first opened to the Romans some knowledge of
Britain, the site of modern Colchester was occupied by an
"oppidum," or fastness of the Trinobantes, which the Romans
called Camulodunum. A little later, Camulodunum acquired some
renown as the royal town of the Trinobantine king, or prince,
Cunobelin,--the Cymbeline of Shakespeare. It was after the
death of Cunobelin, and when his son Caractacus was king,
during the reign of the emperor Claudius, that the Romans
began their actual conquest of Britain. Claudius was present,
in person, when Camulodunum was taken, and he founded there
the first Roman colony in the island, calling it Claudiana
Victricensis. That name was too cumbrous to be preserved; but
the colonial character of the town caused it to be called
Colonia-ceaster, the Colonia fortress,--abbreviated, in time,
to Colne-ceaster, and, finally, to Colchester. The colony was
destroyed by the Iceni, at the time of their rising, under
Boadicea, but was reconstituted and grew into an important
Roman town.

_C. L. Cutts, Colchester, ch, 1-6._

COLCHESTER: A. D. 1648.
The Roundhead siege and capture.

On the collapse of the Royalist rising of 1648, which produced
what is called the Second Civil War of the Puritan
revolutionary period, Colchester received the "wreck of the
insurrection," so far as London and the surrounding country
had lately been threatened by it. Troops of cavaliers, under
Sir Charles Lucas and Lord Capel, having collected in the
town, were surrounded and beleaguered there by Fairfax, and
held out against their besiegers from June until late in
August. "After two months of the most desperate resistance,
Colchester, conquered by famine and sedition, at last
surrendered (Aug. 27); and the next day a court-martial
condemned to death three of its bravest, defenders, Sir
Charles Lucas, Sir George Lisle, and Sir Bernard Gascoign, as
an example, it was said, to future rebels who might be tempted
to imitate them. In vain did the other prisoners, Lord Capel
at their head, entreat Fairfax to suspend the execution of the
sentence, or at least that they should all undergo it, since
all were alike guilty of the offence of these three. Fairfax,
excited by the long struggle, or rather intimidated by Ireton,
made no answer, and the condemned officers were ordered to be
shot on the spot." Gascoign, however, was reprieved at the
last moment.

_F. P. Guizot, History of the English Revolution, book 8._

ALSO IN:
_C. R. Markham, Life of the Great Lord Fairfax, chapter 26-27._

----------COLCHESTER: End----------

COLCHIANS, The.

"The Colchians appear to have been in part independent, in
part subject to Persia. Their true home was evidently that
tract of country [on the Euxine] about the river Phasis. ...
Here they first became known to the commercial Greeks, whose
early dealings in this quarter seem to have given rise to the
poetic legend of the Argonauts. The limits of Colchis varied
at different times, but the natural bounds were never greatly
departed from. They were the Euxine on the east, the Caucasus
on the north, the mountain range which forms the watershed
between the Phasis (Rion) and the Cyrus (Kur) on the west, and
the high ground between Batoum and Kars (the Moschian
mountains) on the south. ... The most interesting question
connected with the Colchians is that connected with their
nationality. They were a black race dwelling in the midst of
whites, and in a country which does not tend to make its
inhabitants dark complexioned. That they were comparatively
recent immigrants from a hotter climate seems therefore to be
certain. The notion entertained by Herodotus of their Egyptian
extraction appears to have been a conjecture of his own. ...
Perhaps the modern theory that the Colchians were immigrants
from India is entitled to some share of our attention. ... If
the true Colchi were a colony of blacks, they must have become
gradually absorbed in the white population proper to the
country."

_G. Rawlinson, History of Herodotus,
book 7, appendix. 1._

See, also, ALARODIANS.

{483}

COLD HARBOR, First and second battles of.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1862
(JUNE-JULY: VIRGINIA),
and 1864 (MAY-JUNE: VIRGINIA).

COLDEN, Cadwallader, The lieutenant-governorship of.

See NEW YORK: A. D. 1773-1774 to 1775 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER).

COLIGNY, Admiral de,
The religious wars in France.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1560-1563 to 1572.

American Colonies.

See FLORIDA: A. D. 1562-1563, 1564-1565, and 1565.

COLLAS, The.

See PERU: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.

COLLEGIA.

Numerous associations called "collegia" existed in ancient
Rome, having various purposes. Some were religious
associations (collegia templorum); some were organizations of
clerks or scribes; some were guilds of workmen; some appear to
have had a political character, although the political clubs
were more commonly called "sodalitates."

_G. Long, Decline of the Roman Republic, volume 3, chapter 11._

COLLINE GATE, D'HERBOIS Battle of the (B. C. 83).

See ROME: B. C. 88-78.

COLLOT, and the French Revolutionary Committee of Public Safety.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (JUNE-OCTOBER), to
1794-1795 (JULY-APRIL).

COLMAR, Cession to France.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1648.

COLMAR, Battle of (1674).

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

COLOGNE: Origin.

See COLONIA AGRIPPINENSIS.

COLOGNE: The Electorate.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1125-1152.

COLOGNE: In the Hanseatic League.

See HANSA TOWNS.

----------COLOGNE: End----------

COLOMAN.

See KOLOMAN.

COLOMBEY-NOUILLY, OR BORNY, Battle of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1870 (JULY-AUGUST).

COLOMBIA, United States of.

See COLOMBIAN STATES.

COLOMBIAN STATES, The.

This general title will be used, for convenience, to cover,
for considerable periods of their history, the territory now
divided between the republics of Venezuela, Ecuador, and the
United States of Colombia (formerly New Granada), the latter
embracing the Isthmus of Panama. The history of these
countries being for a long time substantially identical in the
main, and only distinguishable at intervals, it seems to be
difficult to do otherwise than hold it, somewhat arbitrarily,
under one heading, until the several currents of events part
company distinctly.

COLOMBIAN STATES:
The aboriginal inhabitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CHIBCHA.

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1536-1731.
The Spanish conquest of New Granada.
Creation of the new vice-royalty.

"For some time after the disastrous failure of the attempt of
Las Casas to found a colony on the Pearl coast of Cumaná, the
northern portion of Spanish South America, from the Orinoco
westwards, is almost lost to history. The powers working for
good had signally failed, and the powers of evil seemed to
have it almost all their own way. ... Lying behind these
extensive coasts to the westward in the interior, is the
region to which the Spaniards gave the name of the kingdom of
New Granada, the name being applied in consequence of a
resemblance which was detected between the plain around Santa
Fe de Bogotá and the royal Vega which adjoins the historical
Moorish capital. New Granada was a most extensive region,
comprising as it did the entire country from sea to sea in the
north, lying between 60° and 78° longitude, and from 6° to 15°
of latitude." The Spanish conquest of New Granada was achieved
in the main by Ximenes de Quesada, who invaded the country
from the north, although the governor of Quito, Benalcazar,
entered it likewise from the south. "Ximenes de Quesada came
to America about the year 1535, in the suite of the Governor
of Santa Marta, by whom he was selected to lead an expedition
against the Chibchas, who dwelt on the plain of Bogotá and
around the headwaters of the Magdalena. Setting out in April
1536 with 800 men, he succeeded in pushing his way through the
forest and across innumerable streams. He contrived to subsist
for eight months, during which he traversed 450 miles,
enduring meanwhile the very utmost exertions and privations
that human nature could support. ... When he had surmounted
the natural difficulties in his path, his remaining force
consisted of but 166 men, with 60 horses. On March 2d, 1537,
he resumed his advance; and, as usually happened, the mere
sight of his horsemen terrified the Indians into submission.
At Tunja, according to the Spanish historians, he was
treacherously attacked whilst resting in the palace of one of
the chiefs. ... In any case, the chief was taken, and, after
much slaughter, Ximenes found himself the absolute possessor
of immense riches, one golden lantern alone being valued at
6,000 ducats. From Tunja Ximenes marched upon the sacred city
of Iraca, where two Spanish soldiers accidentally set fire to
the great Temple of the Sun. The result was that, after a
conflagration which lasted several days, both the city and the
temple were utterly destroyed. ... On the 9th of August, 1538,
was founded the city of Bogotá. Ximenes was soon here joined
by Frederman, a subject of the Emperor Charles V., with 160
soldiers, with whom he had been engaged in conquering
Venezuela; and likewise by Benalcazar, the conqueror of Quito.
This latter warrior had crossed the continent in triumph at
the head of 150 Spaniards, together with a multitude of native
followers."
{484}
In the intrigues and jealous rivalries between the three which
followed, Ximenes de Quesada was pushed aside, at first, and
even fined and banished by the Emperor; but in the end he
triumphed and was appointed marshal of the kingdom of New
Granada. "On his return to Bogotá in 1551, he, to his credit,
exhibited an energy in protecting the people of the country
against their invaders, equal to that which he had displayed
in effecting their conquest. Ten years later he commanded a
force organized to repel an attack from the ruler of
Venezuela; shortly after which he was appointed Adelantado of
the Kingdom of New Granada. He devoted three years, and an
enormous amount of toil and money, to an absurd expedition in
quest of the fabled El Dorado [see EL DORADO]." Quesada died
of leprosy in 1572. Until 1718 the kingdom of New Granada
remained subject to the Viceroy of Peru. In that year the
Viceroyalty of Peru "was divided into two portions, the
northern region, from the frontiers of Mexico as far as to the
Orinoco, and on the Southern Sea from Veragua to Tumbez,
forming the Viceroyalty of New Granada, of which the capital
was Bogota. To this region, likewise, was assigned the inland
province of Quito. The Viceroyalty of New Granada, in fact,
comprised what now [1884] forms the Republic of Venezuela, the
United States of Columbia, and the Republic of Equador." In
1731 "it was deemed expedient to detach from the Viceroyalty
of New Granada the provinces of Venezuela, Maracaibo, Varinas,
Cumaná, and Spanish Guyana, and to form them into a separate
Captain-Generalship, the residence of the ruler being fixed at
Caracas in Venezuela."

_R. G. Watson, Spanish and Portuguese South America,
volume 2, chapter 9._

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1810-1819.
The struggle for independence and its achievement.
Miranda and Simon Bolivar.
The Earthquake in Venezuela.
The founding of the Republic of Colombia.

"The Colombian States occupy the first place in the history of
South American independence. ... The Colombian States were
first in the struggle because they were in many ways nearest
to Europe. It was through them that intercourse between the
Pacific coast and Europe was mainly carried on: Porto Bello
and Carthagena were thus the main inlets of European ideas.
Besides, there was here constant communication with the West
Indies; and government, population and wealth were less
centralised than in the more important viceroyalties of Mexico
and Peru. The Indians of New Granada had always been a
restless race, and the increase of taxation which was resorted
to for the defence of the coast in the war with Great Britain
(1777-1783) produced discontents among the whole population,
both red and white. ... The French Revolution, coming soon
afterwards, was another link in the chain of causes. ... In
Venezuela, which the industry of its inhabitants had raised
from a poor mission district to a thriving commercial
province, the progress of modern ideas was yet faster. ... The
conquest of Trinidad by England in 1797 gave a new turn to the
movement. ... It was from Trinidad that the first attempts
were made to excite the Spanish colonists to revolution.
Francis Miranda, by whom this was done, was a type of many
other men to whom is due the credit of leading the South
American peoples to independence. He was a native of Caraccas,
and when a young man had held a French commission in the
American War of Independence. On his return to Venezuela in
1783 he found the populace, as we have already mentioned, in
an excited state, and finding that he was suspected of designs
for liberating his own country, he went to Europe, and again
attached himself to the French service. ... Being proscribed
by the Directory, he turned to England, and ... when the war
[between England and Spain] broke out afresh in 1804, and
England sent out an expedition to invade Buenos Ayres, Miranda
believed that his opportunity was come. In 1806, by English
and American aid, he sailed from Trinidad and landed with 500
men on the coast of Venezuela. But the 'Colombian Army,' as
Miranda named it, met with a cool reception among the people.
His utter inability to meet the Spanish forces compelled him
to retreat to Trinidad, nor did he reappear on the continent
until after the revolution of 1810. The principal inhabitants
of Caraccas had been meditating the formation of a provisional
government, on the model of the juntas of Spain, ever since
the abdication of the king [see SPAIN: A. D. 1807-1808]; but
it was not until 1810, when the final victory of Napoleon in
Spain appeared certain, that they made a decisive movement in
favour of independence. Spain, for the time at least, was now
blotted out of the list of nations. Acting, therefore, in the
name of Ferdinand VII., they deposed the Spanish colonial
officers, and elected a supreme junta or council. Similar
juntas were soon established in New Granada, at Santa Fe,
Quito, Carthagena, and the other chief towns of the
Viceroyalty ... and the fortune of the patriot party in new
Granada, from their close neighbourhood, was closely linked
with that of the Venezuelans. The Regency of Cadiz, grasping
for itself all the rights and powers of the Spanish nation,
determined to reduce the colonists to subjection. They
therefore declared the port of Caraccas in a state of
blockade, as the British government had done in the previous
generation with that of Boston; and, as in the case of Boston,
this resolution of the Regency amounted to a declaration of
war. ... A congress of all the provinces of Venezuela now met
at Caraccas, and published a declaration of independence on
the 5th of July, 1811, and those of Mexico and New Granada
soon followed. ... The powers of nature seemed to conspire
with the tyranny of Europe to destroy the young South American
Republic. On the 26th of March, 1812, Venezuela was visited by
a fearful earthquake, which destroyed the capital [Caraccas]
and several other towns, together with 20,000 people, and many
others perished of hunger and in other ways. This day was Holy
Thursday; and the superstitious people, prompted by their
priests, believed this awful visitation to be a judgment from
God for their revolt. The Spanish troops, under Monteverde,
now began a fresh attack on the disquieted Venezuelans.
Miranda, who on his return had been placed at the head of the
army, had in the meantime overrun New Granada, and laid the
foundation of the future United States of Colombia. But the
face of affairs was changed by the news of the earthquake.
Smitten with despair, his soldiers now deserted to the
royalists; he lost ground everywhere; the fortress of Puerto
Cavello, commanded by the great Bolivar, then a colonel in the
service of the Republic, was surrendered through treachery.
{485}
On the 25th of June Miranda himself capitulated, with all his
forces; and Venezuela fell once more into the hands of the
royalists. Miranda himself was arrested, in defiance of the
terms of the surrender, and perished in an European dungeon,
as Toussaint had perished a few years before. ... Monteverde
emptied the prisons of their occupants, and filled them with
the families of the principal citizens of the republic; and
Caraccas became the scene of a Reign of Terror. After
Miranda's capitulation, Bolivar had gone to New Granada, which
still maintained its independence, and entered into the
service of that republic. Bolivar now reappeared in a new
character, and earned for himself a reputation in the history
of the new world which up to a certain point ranks with that
of Washington. Simon Bolivar, like Miranda, was a native of
Caraccas. ... Like Miranda, he had to some extent learned
modern ideas by visiting the old world and the United States.
When the cruelties of Monteverde had made Venezuela ripe for a
new revolt, Bolivar reappeared on his native soil at the head
of a small body of troops from the adjacent republic. The
successes which he gained so incensed the royalists that they
refused quarter to their prisoners, and war to the death
('guerra a muerte') was proclaimed. All obstacles disappeared
before Bolivar's generalship, and on the 4th of August, 1813,
he publicly entered Caraccas, the fortress of Puerto Cavello
being now the only one in the possession of the royalists.
Bolivar was hailed with the title of the liberator of
Venezuela. He was willing to see the republic restored; but
the inhabitants very properly feared to trust at this time to
anything but a military government, and vested the supreme
power in him as dictator (1814). The event indeed proved the
necessity of a military government. The defeated royalists
raised fresh troops, many thousands of whom were negro slaves,
and overran the whole country; Bolivar was beaten at La
Puerta, and forced to take refuge a second time in New
Granada; and the capital fell again into the hands of the
royalists. ... The War of Independence had been undertaken
against the Regency; and had Ferdinand, on his restoration to
the throne in 1814, shown any signs of conciliation, he might
yet have recovered his American provinces. But the government
persisted in its course of absolute repression. ... New
Granada, where Bolivar was general in chief of the forces, was
the only part where the insurrection survived; and in 1815 a
fleet containing 10,000 men under General Morillo arrived off
Carthagena, its principal port. ... Carthagena was only
provisioned for a short time: and Bolivar, overpowered by
numbers, quitted the soil of the continent and went to the
West Indies to seek help to relieve Carthagena, and maintain
the contest for liberty." Obtaining assistance in Hayti, he
fitted out an expedition "which sailed in April from the port
of Aux Cayes. Bolivar landed near Cumana, in the eastern
extremity of Venezuela, and from this point he gradually
advanced westwards, gaining strength by slow degrees. In the
meantime, after a siege of 116 days, Carthagena surrendered;
5,000 of its inhabitants had perished of hunger. Both
provinces were now in Morillo's hands. Fancying himself
completely master of the country, he proceeded to wreak a
terrible vengeance on the Granadines. But at the news of
Bolivar's reappearance, though yet at a distance, the face of
affairs changed. ... His successes in the year 1817 were sure,
though slow: in 1818, after he had been joined by European
volunteers, they were brilliant. Bolivar beat the royalists in
one pitched battle after another [Sagamoso, July 1, 1819, and
Pantano de Bargas, July 25]: and at length a decisive victory
was won by his lieutenant, Santander, at Boyaca, in New
Granada, August 1, 1819. This battle, in which some hundreds
of British and French auxiliaries fought on the side of
liberty, completely freed the two countries from the yoke of
Spain."

_E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, chapter 16._

ALSO IN:
_C. S. Cochrane, Journal of a Residence in Colombia,
volume 1, chapters 6-8._

_H. Brownell, North and South America Illustrated,
pages 316-334._

_C. Cushing, Simon Bolivar
(N. Am. Review, January, 1829, and January, 1830)._

_H. L. V. D. Holstein, Memoirs of Bolivar, chapter 3-20._

_Major Flintner, History of the Revolution of Caraccas._

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1819-1830.
The glory and the fall of Bolivar.
Dissolution of the Colombian Federation.
Tyranny under the Liberator, and monarchical schemes.

Three days after the battle of Boyaca, Bolivar entered Bogota
in triumph. "A congress met in December and decided that
Venezuela and Nueva Granada should form one republic, to be
called Colombia. Morillo departed for Europe in 1820, and the
victory gained by Bolivar at Carabobo on June 24, 1821,
decided the fate of Colombia. In the following January General
Bolivar assembled an army at Popayan to drive the Spaniards
out of the province of Quito. His second in command, General
Sucre, led an advanced guard, which was reinforced by a
contingent of volunteers from Peru, under Santa Cruz. The
Spanish General Ramirez was entirely defeated in the battle of
Pichincha, and Quito was incorporated with the new republic of
Colombia."

_C. R. Markham, Colonial History of South America
(Narrative and Critical History of America,
volume 8, chapter 5)._

"The provinces of New Granada and Venezuela, together with the
Presidency of Quito, now sent delegates to the convention of
Cucuta, in 1821, and there decreed the union of the three
countries as a single state by the name of the Republic of
Colombia. The first Colombian federal constitution was
concocted by the united wisdom of the delegates; and the
result might easily have been foreseen. It was a farrago of
crude and heterogeneous ideas. Some of its features were
imitated from the American political system, some from the
English, some from the French. ... Bolivar of course became
President: and the Republic had need of him. The task of
liberation was not yet completed. Carthagena, and many other
strong places, remained in Spanish hands. Bolivar reduced
these one by one, and the second decisive victory of Carabobo,
in 1822, finally secured Colombian freedom. The English claim
the chief share in the battle of Carabobo: for the British
legion alone carried the main Spanish position, losing in the
feat two-thirds of its numbers. The war now fast drew to its
close. The republic was able to contest with the invaders the
dominion of the sea: General Padilla, on the 23rd of July,
1823, totally destroyed the Spanish fleet: and the Spanish
commander finally capitulated at Puerto Cavello in December.
{486}
All these hard-won successes were mainly owing to the bravery
and resolution of Bolivar. Bolivar deserves to the full the
reputation of an able and patriotic soldier. He was now set
free ... to render important services to the rest of South
America: and among the heroes of independence perhaps his name
will always stand first. But Bolivar the statesman was a man
very different from Bolivar the general. He was alternately
timid and arbitrary. He was indeed afraid to touch the
problems of statesmanship which awaited him: but instead of
leading the Colombian people through independence to liberty,
he stubbornly set his face against all measures of political
or social reform. His fall may be said to have begun with the
moment when his military triumphs were complete. The
disaffection to the constitution of the leading people in
Venezuela and Ecuador [the new name given to the old province
of Quito, indicating its position at the equator] in 1826 and
1827, was favoured by the Provincial governors, Paez and
Mosquera; and Bolivar, instead of resisting the disintegration
of the state, openly favoured the military dictatorships which
Paez and Mosquera established. This policy foreshadowed the
reign of absolutism in New Granada itself. Bolivar ... had now
become not only the constitutional head of the Colombian
federation, but also the military head of the Peruvian
republics [see PERU: A. D. 1820-1826, 1825-1826, and
1826-1876]: and there can be no doubt that he intended the
Colombian constitution to be reduced to the Peruvian model. As
a first step towards reuniting all the South American nations
under a military government, Paez, beyond reasonable doubt,
with Bolivar's connivance, proclaimed the independence of
Venezuela, April 30th, 1826. This practically broke up the
Colombian federation: and the destruction of the constitution,
so far as it regarded New Granada itself, soon followed.
Bolivar had already resorted to the usual devices of military
tyranny. The terrorism of Sbirri, arbitrary arrests, the
assumption of additional executive powers, and, finally, the
suppression of the vice-presidency, all pointed one way. ...
At length, after the practical secession of Venezuela and
Ecuador under their military rulers, Congress decreed a
summons for a Convention, which met at Ocaña in March, 1828.
... The liberals, who were bent on electoral reform and
decentralization, were paralyzed by the violent bearing of the
Bolivian leaders: and Bolivar quartered himself in the
neighbourhood, and threatened the Convention at the head of an
army of 3,000 veterans. He did not, however, resort to open
force. Instead of this, he ordered his party to recede from
the Convention: and this left the Convention without the means
of making a quorum. From this moment the designs of Bolivar
were unmistakable. The dissolution of the Convention, and the
appointment of Bolivar as Dictator, by a junta of notables,
followed as a matter of course; and by the 'Organic decree' of
August 1828, Bolivar assumed the absolute sovereignty of
Colombia. A reign of brute force now followed: but the triumph
of Bolivar was only ephemeral. ... The Federation was gone:
and it became a question of securing military rule in the
separate provinces. A portentous change now occurred in
Ecuador. The democratic party under Flores triumphed over the
Bolivians under Mosquera: and Paez assured his chief that no
help was to be expected from Venezuela. At the Convention of
Bogota, in 1830, though it was packed with Bolivar's nominees,
it became clear that the liberator's star had set at last. ...
This convention refused to vote him President. Bolivar now
withdrew from public life: and a few months later, December
17, 1830, he died broken-hearted at San Pedro, near Santa
Martha. Bolivar, though a patriot as regarded the struggle
with Spain, was in the end a traitor to his fellow citizens.
Recent discoveries leave little doubt that he intended to
found a monarchy on the ruins of the Spanish dominion. England
and France, both at this time strongly conservative powers,
were in favour of such a scheme; and a Prince of the House of
Bourbon had already been nominated to be Bolivar's successor."

_E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, chapter 16._

"About one month before his death, General Bolivar, the
so-called 'Liberator' of South America, wrote a letter to the
late General Flores of Ecuador, in which the following
remarkable passages occur, which have never before been
published in the English language: 'I have been in power for
nearly 20 years, from which I have gathered only a few
definite results: 1. America, for us, is ungovernable. 2. He
who dedicates his services to a revolution, plows the sea. 3.
The only thing that can be done in America, is to emigrate. 4.
This country will inevitably fall into the hands of the
unbridled rabble, and little by little become a prey to petty
tyrants of all colors and races.'"

_F. Hassaurek, Four Years among Spanish-Americans,
chapter 12._

ALSO IN:
_J. M. Spence, The Land of Bolivar, volume 1, chapter 7._

_E. B. Eastwick, Venezuela, chapter 11 (Battle of
Carabobo)._

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1821-1854.
Emancipation of slaves.

The abolition of slavery in the three republics of New
Granada, Venezuela and Ecuador was initiated in the Republic
of Colombia, while it embraced them all. "By a law of the 21st
of July, 1821, it was provided that the children of slaves,
born after its publication in the principal cities of the
republic, should be free. ... Certain revenues were
appropriated to the creation of an emancipation fund in each
district. ... Aside from a certain bungling looseness with
which almost all Spanish-American laws are drawn, it [the act
of 1821] contains some very sensible regulations, and served
to lay a solid foundation for the work of emancipation, since
completed by the three republics which then constituted
Colombia." In Ecuador the completion of emancipation was
reached in 1854.

_F. Hassaurek, Four Years among Spanish-Americans,
pages 330-333._

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1826.
The Congress of Panama.

"The proposition for assembling this body emanated from
Bolivar, who, in 1823, as president of Colombia, invited the
governments of Mexico, Peru, Chile, and Buenos Ayres, to form
a confederacy of the Spanish-American states, by means of
plenipotentiaries to be convened, in the spirit of classic
analogy, in the isthmus of Panama. To this invitation the
governments of Peru and Mexico promptly acceded, Chile and
Buenos Ayres neglected or declined to be represented in the
assembly, for the reasons which we shall presently state.
{487}
This magnificent idea of a second Achæan League seized on the
imaginations of many speculative and of some practical men in
America and Europe, as destined to create a new era in the
political history of the world by originating a purer system
of public law, and almost realizing Bernardin de Saint
Pierre's league of the modern nations. In its original shape,
it was professedly a plan of a belligerent nature, having for
its main object to combine the revolutionized states against
the common enemy. But time was required for carrying it into
effect. Meanwhile the project, magnified by the course of
events, began to change its complexion. The United States were
invited to participate in the Congress, so as to form an
American policy, and a rallying point for American interests,
in opposition to those of Europe; and, after the discussions
which are so familiar to all, the government of the United
States accepted the invitation, and despatched its
representatives to Panama. ... In the interval, between the
proposal of the plan and its execution, Central America was
added to the family of American nations, and agreed to take
part in the Congress. At length, after many delays, this
modern Amphictyonic Council, consisting of plenipotentiaries
from Colombia, Central America, Peru and Mexico, assembled in
the city of Panama, June 22, 1826, and in a session of three
weeks concluded various treaties; one of perpetual union,
league, and confederation; others relating to the contingents
which the confederates should contribute for the common
defence; and another for the annual meeting of the Congress in
time of war. Having thus promptly despatched their private
affairs, the assembly adjourned to Tacubaya in Mexico, on
account of the insalubrious climate of Panama, before the
delegation of the United States had arrived; since when it has
justly acquired the epithet of 'introuvable,' and probably
never will reassemble in its original form. Is there not a
secret history of all this? Why did Chile and Buenos Ayres
refuse to participate in the Congress? Why has it now vanished
from the face of the earth? The answer given in South America
is, that Bolivar proposed the assembly as part of a grand
scheme of ambition,--ascribed to him by the republican party,
and not without some countenance from his own conduct,--for
establishing a military empire to embrace the whole of
Spanish-America, or at least an empire uniting Colombia and
the two Perus. To give the color of plausibility to the
projected assembly, the United States were invited to be
represented; and it is said Bolivar did not expect, nor very
graciously receive, their acceptance of the invitation."

_C. Cushing, Bolivar and the Bolivian Constitution (N. A.
Review, January, 1830)._

In the United States "no question, in its day, excited more
heat and intemperate discussion, or more feeling between a
President and Senate, than this proposed mission to the
Congress of American nations at Panama; and no heated question
ever cooled off and died out so suddenly and completely. ...
Though long since sunk into oblivion, and its name almost
forgotten, it was a master subject on the political theatre
during its day; and gave rise to questions of national and of
constitutional law, and of national policy, the importance of
which survive the occasion from which they sprung; and the
solution of which (as then solved), may be some guide to
future action, if similar questions again occur. Besides the
grave questions to which the subject gave rise, the subject
itself became one of unusual and painful excitement. It
agitated the people, made a violent debate in the two Houses
of Congress, inflamed the passions of parties and individuals,
raised a tempest before which Congress bent, made bad feeling
between the President [John Quincy Adams] and the Senate; and
led to the duel between Mr. Randolph and Mr. Clay. It was an
administration measure, and pressed by all the means known to
an administration. It was evidently relied upon as a means of
acting upon the people--as a popular movement which might have
the effect of turning the tide which was then running high
against Mr. Adams and Mr. Clay. ... Now, the chief benefit to
be derived from its retrospect--and that indeed is a real
one--is a view of the firmness with which was then maintained,
by a minority, the old policy of the United States, to avoid
entangling alliances and interference with the affairs of
other nations;--and the exposition of the Monroe doctrine,
from one so competent to give it as Mr. Adams."

_T. H. Benton, Thirty Years' View, chapter 25 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_G. F. Tucker, The Monroe Doctrine, chapter 3._

_C. Schurz, Life of Henry Clay, chapter 11 (volume 1)._

_International American Conference (of 1889): Reports and
Discussions, volume 4, History appendix._

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1830-1886.
Revolutions and civil wars.
The New Confederation (1863) of the United States of Colombia.
The Republic of Colombia.

"New Granada was obliged in 1830 to recognize the disruption
of Colombia, which had long been an accomplished fact. From
this date the three states have a separate history, which is
very much of a piece, though Venezuela was for some years
preserved from the intestine commotions which have from the
beginning distracted New Granada and Ecuador. ... Mosquera,
who had won the election which decided the fate of Bolivar did
not long occupy the presidency. ... Mosquera was soon driven
out by General Urdanete, who was now at the head of the
conservative or Bolivian party. But after the death of their
leader, this party suffered a natural relapse, and Urdanete
was overthrown early in 1831. The history of New Granada may
be said really to commence with the presidency of Bolivar's
old rival and companion in arms, Santander, who was elected
under the constitution of 1832. ... His presidency ... was a
comparatively bright episode: and with its termination in 1836
begins the dark and troubled period which the Granadines
emphatically designate by the name of the 'Twelve Years.' The
scanty measure of liberalism which Santander had dealt out to
the people was now withdrawn. Marquez, his successor, was a
sceptic in politics and a man of infirm will. ... Now began
the ascendancy of clericalism, of absolutist oligarchy, and of
government by the gallows. This same system continued under
President Herran, who was elected in 1841; and then appeared
on the scene, as his chief minister, the famous Dr. Ospina,"
who brought back the Jesuits and curtailed the constitution.
Liberalism again gained ground, electing General Lopez to the
presidency in 1849 find once more expelling the Jesuits. In
April 1854 a radical revolution overturned the constitution
and President Obando was declared dictator. The conservatives
rallied, however, and regained possession of the government
before the close of the year.
{488}
In 1857 Ospina entered on the presidency and civil war soon
raged throughout the country. "After a hundred fights the
revolution triumphed in July, 1861. ... Mosquera, who was now
in possession of the field, was a true pupil of Bolivar's, and
he thought the time had come for reviving Bolivar's plans. ...
In 1863 Mosquera's new Federal Constitution was proclaimed.
Henceforth each State [of the eight federal States into which
the 44 provinces of New Granada were divided] became
practically independent under its own President; and to mark
the change the title of the nation was altered. At first it
was called the Granadine Confederation: but it afterwards took
the name of Colombia [the United States of Colombia], which
had formerly been the title of the larger Confederation under
Bolivar. Among the most important facts in recent Colombian
history is the independence of the State of Panama, which has
become of great importance through the construction of the
railway connecting the port of Colon, or Aspinwall, as it was
named by the Americans, on the Atlantic, with that of Panama
on the Pacific. This rail way was opened in 1855; and in the
same year Panama declared itself a sovereign state. The State
of Panama, after many years of conservative domination, has
now perhaps the most democratic government in the world. The
President is elected for two years only, and is incapable of
re-election. Panama has had many revolutions of its own; nor
has the new Federal Constitution solved all the difficulties
of the Granadine government. In 1867 Mosquera was obliged to
have recourse to a coup d'état, and declared himself dictator,
but he was soon afterwards arrested; a conservative revolution
took place; Mosquera was banished; and Gutierrez became
President. The liberals, however, came back the next year,
under Ponce. Since 1874 [the date of writing being 1879],
General Perez has been President of Colombia."

_E. J. Payne, History of European Colonies, chapter 16._

"The federal Constitution of 1863 was clearly formed on the
model of the Constitution of the United States of America. It
remained in force until 1886, when it was superseded by a law
which gave the State a centralized organization and named it
the 'Republic of Colombia.'"

_Constitution of the Republic of Colombia, with
Historical Introduction by B. Moses (Supplement to Annals
of American Academy of Political and Social Science,
January, 1893)._

COLOMBIAN STATES: A. D. 1885-1891.
The Revolution of 1885.
The constitution of 1886.
The presidency of Dr. Nuñez.