Chapter CIV: Act 8: Parliament 1. repeated in Act 99. Parliament 7 (30)

The blotches of smoke are still visible on the walls and roofs
of the subterranean quarries where these poor serfs, in the
dim torchlight and suffocating air, 'laboured without reward,
perished without pity, and suffered without redress.' The sad
narrative reveals to us, and modern research confirms, that
the purple of Solomon had a very seamy side, and that an abyss
of misery heaved and moaned under the glittering surface of
his splendour. … Apart from the lavish costliness of its
materials the actual Temple was architecturally a poor and
commonplace structure. It was quite small —only 90 feet long,
35 feet broad, and 45 feet high. It was meant for the symbolic
habitation of God, not for the worship of great congregations.
… Of the external aspect of the building in Solomon's day we
know nothing. We cannot even tell whether it had one level
roof, or whether the Holy of Holies was like a lower chancel
at the end of it; nor whether the roof was flat or, as the
Rabbis say, ridged; nor whether the outer surface of the
three-storied chambers which surrounded it was of stone, or
planked with cedar, or overlaid with plinths of gold and
silver; nor whether, in any case, it was ornamented with
carvings or left blank; nor whether the cornices only were
decorated with open flowers like the Assyrian rosettes. Nor do
we know with certainty whether it was supported within by
pillars or not. … It required the toil of 300,000 men for
twenty years to build one of the pyramids. It took two hundred
years to build and four hundred to embellish the great Temple
of Artemis of the Ephesians. It took more than five centuries
to give to Westminster Abbey its present form. Solomon's
Temple only took seven and a half years to build; but … its
objects were wholly different from those of the great shrines
which we have mentioned. … Needing but little repair, it stood
for more than four centuries. Succeeded as it was by the
Temples of Zerubbabel and of Herod, it carried down till
seventy years after the Christian era the memory of the
Tabernacle in the wilderness, of which it preserved the
general outline, though it exactly doubled all the proportions
and admitted many innovations."

_F. W. Farrar,
The First Book of Kings,
chapter 14 (Expositor's Bible)._

TEN, The Council of.

See VENICE: A. D. 1032-1319.

TEN THOUSAND, The Retreat of the.

See PERSIA: B. C. 401-400.

TEN TRIBES OF ISRAEL, The.

See JEWS: THE KINGDOMS OF ISRAEL AND JUDAH.

TEN YEARS WAR, The.

The long conflict between Athens and her confederated enemies,
Sparta at the head, which is usually called the Peloponnesian
War, was divided into two periods by the Peace or Nicias. The
war in the first period, covering a decade, was known as the
Ten Years War; though the Peloponnesians called it the Attic
War.

_E. Curtius,
History of Greece,
book 4, chapter 2._

See ATHENS: B. C. 421.

TENANT RIGHT, The Ulster.
The Tenant League.

See IRELAND: A. D.1848-1852.

TENCHEBRAY, Battle of (1106).

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1087-1135.

TENCTHERI, The.

See USIPETES.

TENEDOS.

See TROJA;
and ASIA MINOR: THE GREEK COLONIES.

TENEZ, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ZAPOTECS, ETC.

----------TENNESSEE: Start--------

TENNESSEE:
The aboriginal inhabitants.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: SHAWANESE, and CHEROKEES.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1629.
Embraced in the Carolina grant to Sir Robert Heath.

See AMERICA: A. D. 1629.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1663.
Embraced in the Carolina grant to Monk,
Shaftesbury and others.

See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1663-1670.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1748.
First English exploration from Virginia.

See OHIO (VALLEY): A. D. 1748-1754.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1768.
The Treaty with the Six Nations at Fort Stanwix.
Pretended cession of country south of the Ohio.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1769-1772.
The first settlers in the eastern valley.
The Watauga commonwealth and its constitution.

"Soon after the successful ending of the last colonial
struggle with France, and the conquest of Canada, the British
king issued a proclamation forbidding the English colonists
from trespassing on Indian grounds, or moving west of the
mountains.

See NORTHWEST TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES: A. D. 1763.

But in 1768, at the treaty of Fort Stanwix, the Six Nations
agreed to surrender to the English all the lands lying between
the Ohio and the Tennessee.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1765-1768.

This treaty was at once seized upon by the backwoodsmen as
offering an excuse for settling beyond the mountains. However,
the Iroquois had ceded lands to which they had no more right
than a score or more other Indian tribes. … The great
hunting-grounds between the Ohio and the Tennessee formed a
debatable land, claimed by every tribe that could hold its own
against its rivals. The eastern part of what is now Tennessee
consists of a great hill-strewn, forest-clad valley, running
from northeast to southwest, bounded on one side by the
Cumberland, and on the other by the Great Smoky and Unaka
Mountains; the latter separating it from North Carolina. In
this valley arise and end the Clinch, the Holston, the
Watauga, the Nolichucky, the French Broad, and the other
streams, whose combined volume makes the Tennessee River. The
upper end of the valley lies in southwestern Virginia, the
headwaters of some of the rivers being well within that State;
and though the province was really part of North Carolina, it
was separated therefrom by high mountain chains, while from
Virginia it was easy to follow the watercourses down the
valley. Thus, as elsewhere among the mountains forming the
western frontier, the first movements of population went
parallel with, rather than across, the ranges.
{3095}
As in western Virginia the first settlers came, for the most
part, from Pennsylvania, so, in turn, in what was then western
North Carolina, and is now eastern Tennessee, the first
settlers came mainly from Virginia, and, indeed, in great
part, from this same Pennsylvanian stock. Of course, in each
case there was also a very considerable movement directly
westward. They were a sturdy race, enterprising and
intelligent, fond of the strong excitement inherent in the
adventurous frontier life. Their untamed and turbulent
passions, and the lawless freedom of their lives, made them a
population very productive of wild, headstrong characters;
yet, as a whole, they were a God-fearing race, as was but
natural in those who sprang from the loins of the Irish
Calvinists. Their preachers, all Presbyterians, followed close
behind the first settlers and shared their toil and dangers. …
In 1769, the year that Boon first went to Kentucky, the first
permanent settlers came to the banks of the Watauga, the
settlement being merely an enlargement of the Virginia
settlement, which had for a short time existed on the
head-waters of the Holston, especially near Wolf Hills. At
first the settlers thought they were still in the domain of
Virginia, for at that time the line marking her southern
boundary had not been run so far west. … But in 1771, one of
the new-comers, who was a practical surveyor, ran out the
Virginia boundary line some distance to the westward, and
discovered that the Watauga settlement came within the limits
of North Carolina. Hitherto the settlers had supposed that
they themselves were governed by the Virginian law, and that
their rights as against the Indians were guaranteed by the
Virginian government; but this discovery threw them back upon
their own resources. They suddenly found themselves obliged to
organize a civil government. … About the time that the Watauga
commonwealth was founded; the troubles in North Carolina came
to a head. Open war ensued between the adherents of the royal
governor, Tryon, on the one hand, and the Regulators, as the
insurgents styled themselves, on the other, the struggle
ending with the overthrow of the Regulators at the battle of
Alamance.

See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1766-1771.

As a consequence of these troubles, many people from the back
counties of North Carolina crossed the mountains, and took up
their abode among the pioneers on the Watauga and upper
Holston; the beautiful valley of the Nolichucky soon receiving
its share of this stream of immigration. Among the first
comers were many members of the class of desperate adventurers
always to be found hanging round the outskirts of frontier
civilization. … But the bulk of the settlers were men of
sterling worth; fit to be the pioneer fathers of a mighty and
beautiful state. … Such were the settlers of the Watauga, the
founders of the commonwealth that grew into the State of
Tennessee, who early in 1772 decided that they must form some
kind of government that would put down wrong-doing and work
equity between man and man. Two of their number already
towered head and shoulders above the rest in importance and
merit especial mention; for they were destined for the next
thirty years to play the chief parts in the history of that
portion of the Southwest which largely through their own
efforts became the State of Tennessee. These two men, neither
of them yet thirty years of age, were John Sevier and James
Robertson. … With their characteristic capacity for
combination, so striking as existing together with the equally
characteristic capacity for individual self-help, the settlers
determined to organize a government of their own. They
promptly put their, resolution into effect early in the spring
of 1772, Robertson being apparently the leader in the
movement. They decided to adopt written articles of agreement,
by which their conduct should be governed; and these were
known as the Articles of the Watauga Association. They formed
a written constitution, the first ever adopted west of the
mountains, or by a community composed of American-born
freemen. It is this fact of the early independence and
self-government of the settlers along the head-waters of the
Tennessee that gives to their history its peculiar importance.
They were the first men of American birth to establish a free
and independent community on the continent. … The first step
taken by the Watauga settlers, when they had determined to
organize, was to meet in general convention, holding a kind of
folk-thing, akin to the New England town-meeting. They then
elected a representative assembly, a small parliament or
'witanagemot,' which met at Robertson's station. Apparently
the freemen of each little fort or palisaded village, each
block-house that was the centre of a group of detached cabins
and clearings, sent a member to this first frontier
legislature. It consisted of thirteen representatives, who
proceeded to elect from their number five—among them Sevier
and Robertson—to form a committee or court, which should carry
on the actual business of government, and should exercise both
judicial and executive functions. This court had a clerk and a
sheriff, or executive officer, who respectively recorded and
enforced their decrees. … In fact, the dwellers, in this
little outlying frontier commonwealth, exercised the rights of
full statehood for a number of years; establishing in true
American style a purely democratic government with
representative institutions."

_T. Roosevelt,
The Winning of the West,
volume 1, chapter 7._

ALSO IN:
_E. Kirke (pseudonym J. R. Gilmore),
The Rear-Guard of the Revolution,
chapters 2-6._

_J. Phelan,
History of Tennessee,
chapters 1-3._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1776-1784.
Annexation to North Carolina.
Cession by that state to the Congress of the Confederation.
Consequent revolt.
Repeal of the act of cession.

"The Watauga people had hopes, when the articles of
association were adopted, of being able eventually to form an
independent government, governed as the older colonies were
governed, by royal governors. When the disagreements between
the colonies and the mother country arose, they modified their
views to the new order of things, and regarded themselves as a
distinct though as yet inchoate state. But their weakness …
rendered the protection of some more powerful state necessary
for their welfare. … They petitioned North Carolina for
annexation in 1776. Their petition was granted. … The
provincial congress of North Carolina met at Halifax in
November, 1776, and [Robertson, Sevier and two others] were
delegates from Washington District, Watauga settlement. …
{3096}
After the annexation of the Washington District the old form
of government was allowed to stand until the spring of 1777. …
In November of this year, 1777, the District of Washington
became Washington County. … From 1777 until the disturbances
of eight years later, the history of Tennessee was a part of
the history of North Carolina. … The part played by the
inhabitants of Tennessee in the war for independence was
active, and in one instance [at King's Mountain] decisive.
Their operations were chiefly of a desultory, guerrilla kind,
under the leadership of Sevier … and Shelby." Sevier was also
the leader in wars with the Indians, which were carried on
with unsparing fierceness on both sides. "In the April session
of 1784, the General Assembly of North Carolina, in accordance
with the recommendation of Congress itself, as well as with
the dictates of a far-seeing and enlightened statesmanship,
imitated the example of Virginia and New York, and ceded to
the United States all the territory which is now the State of
Tennessee.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D.1781-1786.

This of course included all the settlements. The condition of
the cession was its acceptance by Congress within two years.
Until Congress should have accepted the ceded territory, the
jurisdiction of North Carolina over it was to remain in every
respect the same as heretofore. … When the question of cession
was first broached, it was accepted by the four
representatives of the western counties at Hillsboro, as well
as by those who proposed it, as the natural and legitimate
solution of a complex problem. No one apparently dreamed of
opposition on the part of the settlers themselves. … There is
no reason to think that the Watauga people had any objection
to the cession. … The objection was against the manner of the
cession and its conditions. … The main cause of complaint was
that North Carolina had left them without any form of
government for two years. … A storm of indignation swept
through the entire settlement. … The people regarded
themselves without government, and, true to the traditions of
their race, they sought the solution of the difficulty in
their own resources. … It is one of the noteworthy facts in
the history of institutions that the possessors of English
tradition always begin with the first primal germ of local
self-government at hand, be it court leet, court of quarter
sessions, township, county, school district, or military
company, and build upward. The Watauga people had nothing so
convenient as the militia companies, and they began with them
as representing a more minutely varied constituency than the
county court. Each company elected two representatives, and
the representatives so elected in each county formed
themselves into a committee, and the three committees of
Washington, Sullivan, and Greene counties met as a kind of
impromptu or temporary legislature, and decided to call a
general convention to be elected by the people of the
different counties. This convention met on the 23d of August,
1784, at Jonesboro. John Sevier was elected president, and
Landon Carter secretary. … It is supposed that the convention
which met at Jonesboro adopted the resolution to form a
'separate and distinct State, independent of the State of
North Carolina.' … Provision was made for the calling of a
future convention in which representation was to be according
to companies. … The meeting adjourned, having fairly
inaugurated the contest with North Carolina, which still
claimed jurisdiction." Soon afterward the legislature of North
Carolina repealed the act of cession, and "for a time it was
supposed that this would terminate the agitation in favor of a
new State."

_J. Phelan,
History of Tennessee,
chapters 5-10._

ALSO IN:
_J. R. Gilmore,
John Sevier as a Commonwealth Builder,
chapter 2._

_J. G. M. Ramsey,
Annals of Tennessee,
chapter 3._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1780.
The Battle of King's Mountain.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1785.
The organization of the State of Franklin.

"Toward the close of May [1785] the western lands being again
under discussion [in Congress], a resolution was carried
urging North Carolina to reconsider her act of the previous
November, and once more cede to Congress her possessions
beyond the mountains. Had the request been granted, there can
be no doubt, the measure would have speedily brought peace and
quiet to that distracted region. But North Carolina was too
intent on bringing her rebellious subjects to terms to think
for a moment of bestowing them with their lands and goods on
Congress. Indeed, when the news of the request was carried
into the district some months later, the malcontents expressed
much surprise. They could not, they said, understand why
Congress should apply to North Carolina; North Carolina had
nothing to do with them. The parent State had, by her act of
1784, given them away. Congress did not take them under its
protection. They belonged, therefore, to nobody, and while in
this condition had called a convention, had framed a
constitution, had formed a new State, had chosen for it a
name, and elected a Legislature which was actually in session
at the time the act of the 23d of May was passed. … Much of
what they stated was strictly true. The delegates to the
second convention had assembled early in 1785. These had given
the State the name of Franklin, and had drawn up a
constitution which they submitted to the people. It was
expected that the men of the district would consider it
carefully, and select delegates to a third convention, which
should have full power to ratify or reject. The place fixed
upon for the meeting of the convention was Greenville. But as
there was then no printing-press nearer than Charleston or
Richmond, and as much time must elapse before the constitution
could become known to all, the delegates were not to convene
till the 14th of November. Meanwhile the Legislature was to
organize. Elections were held without delay; members were
chosen after the manner in which the settlers had long been
accustomed to elect representatives to the Assembly of the
parent State, and these, meeting at Jonesboro, conducted their
business with so much dispatch that on the last day of March
they adjourned. Many acts were passed by them. But one alone
excited general comment, and was the cause of unbounded
merriment across the mountains. A list of articles at that
time scarce to be met with in the State of Franklin would be a
long one. But there would be no article in the list less
plentiful than money. … When, therefore, the Legislature came
to determine what should be the legal currency of the State,
it most wisely contented itself with fixing the value of such
articles as had, from time immemorial, been used as money.
{3097}
One pound of sugar, the law said, should pass for a
shilling-piece; the skin of a raccoon or a fox for a shilling
and threepence. A gallon of rye whiskey, it was thought, was
worth twice that sum, while a gallon of peach-brandy or a yard
of good nine hundred flax linen was each to pass for a
three-shilling piece. Some difficulty was met with in
selecting articles that could be easily carried from place to
place and expressive of large values. It was, however, finally
determined that a clean beaver-skin, an otter or a deer-skin,
should each of them be the representative of six shillings. In
this kind of money, the law further prescribed, the salary of
every officer of the State, from the Governor down to the
hangman, was to be paid. When this act became known in the
East the wits were greatly amused. … In the belief that the
new money could not be counterfeited they were much mistaken.
Many bundles of what seemed to be otter-skins were soon
passing about, which, on being opened, were found to be skins
of raccoons with tails of otters sewed to them. … The name of
the State has often been asserted to be Frankland, the land of
the Franks, or Freemen. … But letters are extant from high
officials of the State to Benjamin Franklin declaring that it
was named after him."

_J. B. McMaster,
History of the People of the United States,
volume 1, chapter 3, with foot-note._

ALSO IN:
_J. G. M. Ramsey,
Annals of Tennessee,
chapter 4._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1785-1796.
The troubled history and the fall of the state of Franklin.
The rise of the state of Tennessee.

On receiving news of the organization of the independent state
of Franklin, Governor Martin, of North Carolina, issued a
proclamation which was skilfully addressed to the cooler
judgment of the mountaineers and which "was not without its
effect." But, although the adherents of North Carolina
"gradually gained ground in the new commonwealth, a majority
still clung to Sevier, and refused to recognize any government
but the one they themselves had organized. In this opposition
of parties, disorders sprang up which presently degenerated
into lawlessness. Both governments claimed jurisdiction, and
both sought to exercise it. The consequence was that both
became inefficient. Party quarrels ensued; old friends became
enemies; Tipton and his followers openly supported the claims
of North Carolina; Sevier sought to maintain his authority as
the executive officer of Franklin. This antagonistic spirit
led to the commission of various outrages. … But in the midst
of these inglorious quarrels, Governor Sevier did not neglect
to defend from Indian aggressions the state over which he had
been called to preside. … He was far less successful, however,
in giving peace to the distracted state of Franklin. The
continuance of intestine dissensions, and the nice balance of
parties which took place in 1787, induced the people to refuse
to pay taxes either to North Carolina or to the local
government, until the supremacy of one or the other should be
more generally acknowledged. In this state of affairs, with
his government tottering to its downfall, Sevier earnestly
appealed to North Carolina for a ratification of the
independence of the state of Franklin, and to Franklin
himself, and the governors of Georgia and Virginia, for
counsel and assistance. Disappointed on all sides, he finally
rested for support upon his immediate friends, conscious of
the rectitude of his own intentions. … But the people were
already weary of a feud which threatened, at every fresh
outbreak, to end in bloodshed. In 1787 the last legislature of
the state of Franklin held its session at Greenville. … The
conciliatory measures of North Carolina presently disarmed the
malecontents of all further arguments for opposing the
reunion; and in February, 1788, the state of Franklin ceased
to exist." Fierce conflicts between Sevier and Tipton and
their hotter partisans still continued for some time; until,
in October, Sevier was arrested for high treason and
imprisoned at Morgantown. He escaped soon after, through the
aid of his sons, was elected to the North Carolina senate, and
was permitted to qualify for the seat on renewing his oath of
allegiance. "His services were remembered and his faults
forgotten." Meantime, settlements on the Cumberland, founded
in 1779 by James Robertson, had prospered and grown strong,
and Nashville, the chief among them, assumed its name in 1784,
"in commemoration of the patriotic services of Colonel Francis
Nash," of North Carolina, who fell in the battle of
Germantown. In 1790, after ratifying the Federal Constitution,
North Carolina, re-enacted the cession of her western
territory, coinciding with the present state of Tennessee, to
the United States, stipulating "that no regulation made or to
be made by Congress shall tend to the emancipation of slaves."
The "Territory southwest of the Ohio" was then organized, with
William Blount for governor. Six years later (January, 1796),
the population of the Territory having been ascertained by a
census to be 67,000 free white inhabitants and 10,000 slaves,
a constitution was adopted, the State of Tennessee was formed,
with John Sevier for Governor, and, after some opposition in
Congress, it was formally admitted to its place and rank as
one of the United States of America. Its first Representative
in the House was Andrew Jackson.

_W. H. Carpenter,
History of Tennessee,
chapters 13-17._

ALSO IN:
_J. R. Gilmore,
John Sevier as a Commonwealth-Builder,
chapters 4-12._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1785-1800.
The question of the Free Navigation of the Mississippi.
Discontent of the settlers and intrigues among them.

See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1785-1800.

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1813-1814.
The Creek War.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1813-1814 (AUGUST-APRIL).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1861 (JANUARY-MAY).
The mode in which the state was dragged into Rebellion.

"The Legislature of Tennessee met on the 6th of January. On
the 12th, a bill for the calling of a state convention [with
the object of following the lead, in secession, which South
Carolina had taken on the 20th of December was passed.]

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

{3098}

It was passed subject to the approval of the voters. The
election took place on the 8th day of February. The people
voted against holding a convention by 67,360, to 54,156. In
disregard of this vote of the people, however, the
legislature, on May 1st, passed a joint resolution authorizing
the governor to enter into a military league with the Confederate
States. The league was formed. The Governor, Isham G. Harris,
sent a message to the legislature, announcing the fact. He
stated its terms. … It stipulated that until the state should
become a member of the Confederacy, 'the whole military force
and military operations, offensive and defensive, of said
state, in the impending conflict with the United States, shall
be under the chief control and direction of the President of
the Confederate States.' It was also agreed that the state
would, as soon as it should join the Confederacy, turn over
all public property it might acquire from the United States.
The legislature ratified the league by decided majorities of
both branches. These final proceedings took place on the 7th
day of May. On the preceding day, the legislature put forth a
declaration of independence. It was submitted to the votes of
the people for ratification. This document waives the right of
secession, as follows: 'We, the people of the State of
Tennessee, waiving an expression of opinion as to the abstract
doctrine of secession, but asserting the right, as a free and
independent people,' declare that all the laws and ordinances
by which Tennessee became a member of the Federal Union, 'are
hereby abrogated.' The vote for separation was declared by the
governor to be 104,019 for, and 47,238 against that measure.
It thus appears that the Legislature of Tennessee, in
declaring the separation of the state from the Federal Union,
placed its action upon the ground of a revolutionary right,
which all admit to be inalienable, if the cause be just."

_S. S. Cox,
Three Decades of Federal Legislation,
chapter 6._

ALSO IN:
_F. Moore, editor,
Rebellion Record,
volume 1, documents 201-205._

_O. J. Victor,
History of the Southern Rebellion,
division 4, chapter 11 (volume 2)._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1861 (April).
Governor Harris' reply to President Lincoln's call for troops.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1861 (June).
The loyalty of East Tennessee and its resistance to Secession.

"For separation and representation at Richmond, East Tennessee
gave [at the election, June 8, when the question of secession
was nominally submitted to the people, the state having been
already delivered by its governor and legislature to the
Confederacy] 14,700 votes; and half of that number were Rebel
troops, having no authority under the Constitution to vote at
any election. For 'no separation' and 'no representation,'—the
straight-out Union vote,—East Tennessee gave 33,000, or 18,300
of a majority, with at least 5,000 quiet citizens deterred
from coming out by threats of violence, and by the presence of
drunken troops at the polls to insult them. … By … fraud and
villainy, … the great State of Tennessee was carried out of
the Union. The loyal people of East Tennessee, to their great
honor, had no lot or part in the work."

_W. G. Brownlow,
Sketches of the Rise, Progress and Decline of Secession,
pages 222-223._

"Finding themselves powerless before the tyranny inaugurated,
the Unionists of East Tennessee resolved, as a last resort, to
hold a Convention at Greenville, to consult as to the best
course to pursue. This Convention met June 17th. The
attendance was very large—thirty-one counties having delegates
present on the first day. Judge Nelson presided. After a four
days' session it adopted a Declaration of Grievances and
Resolutions," declaring that "we prefer to remain attached to
the Government of our fathers. The Constitution of the United
States has done us no wrong. The Congress of the United States
has passed no law to oppress us. … The secession cause has
thus far been sustained by deception and falsehood." The
Convention protested on behalf of East Tennessee against being
dragged into rebellion, and appointed commissioners to pursue
measures looking to the formation of a separate state. "Vain
protest! It was not long before those Unionists and
protestants against wrong were flying for their lives, and
were hunted down like wild beasts."

_O. J. Victor,
History of the Southern Rebellion,
division 5, chapter 5 (volume 2)._

ALSO IN:
_T. W. Humes,
The Loyal Mountaineers of Tennessee,
chapters 6-11._

_W. Rule,
Loyalists of Tennessee in the late War
(Sketches of War History, Ohio Commandery, L. L. volume 2)._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862 (February).
The breaking of the Rebel line of defense at Fort Henry and
Fort Donelson.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JANUARY-FEBRUARY: KENTUCKY-TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862 (March).
Andrew Johnson appointed military governor.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862 (April).
The continued advance of the Union armies.
Battle of Shiloh, or Pittsburg Landing.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (FEBRUARY-APRIL: TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862 (April-May).
The Union advance upon Corinth, Mississippi.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (APRIL-MAY: TENNESSEE-MISSISSIPPI).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862 (June).
Evacuation of Fort Pillow and surrender
of Memphis by the Confederates.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JUNE: ON THE MISSISSIPPI).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862 (June-October).
The Buell-Bragg campaign.
Chattanooga secured by the Confederates.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (JUNE-OCTOBER: TENNESSEE-KENTUCKY).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1862-1863 (December-January).
Bragg and Rosecrans.
The Battle of Stone River, or Murfreesborough.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863 (February-April).
Engagements at Dover and Franklin.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (FEBRUARY-APRIL: TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863 (June-July).
The Tullahoma campaign of Rosecrans.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (JUNE-JULY: TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863 (August-September).
Burnside in east Tennessee.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863 (August-September).
The Chickamauga campaign and battle.
The Union army at Chattanooga.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863 (October-November).
The Siege and the Battles of Chattanooga.
Lookout Mountain.
Missionary Ridge.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER: TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863 (October-December).
Siege of Knoxville.

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

{3099}

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1863-1864 (December-April).
Winter operations.
Withdrawal of Longstreet from east Tennessee.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1864 (April).
The Fort Pillow Massacre.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (APRIL: TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1864 (September-October).
Forrest's raid.
The capture of Athens.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (SEPTEMBER-OCTOBER: GEORGIA).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1864 (November).
Hood's invasion and destruction.
The Battles of Franklin and Nashville.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (NOVEMBER: TENNESSEE),
and (DECEMBER: TENNESSEE).

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1865.
President Johnson's recognition of the
reconstructed State Government.

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

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1865-1866.
Reconstruction.
Abolition of Slavery.
Restoration of the State to its
"former, proper, practical relation to the Union."

In the early part of 1865, Andrew Johnson, though
Vice-President-elect, was "still discharging the functions of
military governor of Tennessee. A popular convention
originating from his recommendation and assembling under his
auspices, was organized at Nashville on the 9th day of
January, 1865. Membership of the body was limited to those who
'give an active support to the Union cause, who have never
voluntarily borne arms against the Government, who have never
voluntarily given aid and comfort to the enemy.' … Tennessee,
as Johnson bluntly maintained, could only be organized and
controlled as a State in the Union by that portion of her
citizens who acknowledged their allegiance to the Government
of the Union. Under this theory of procedure the popular
convention proposed an amendment to the State constitution,
'forever abolishing and prohibiting slavery in the State,' and
further declaring that 'the Legislature shall make no law
recognizing the right of property in man.' The convention took
several other important steps, annulling in whole and in
detail all the legislation which under Confederate rule had
made the State a guilty participant in the rebellion. Thus was
swept away the ordinance of Secession, and the State debt
created in aid of the war against the Union. All these
proceedings were submitted to popular vote on the 22d of
February, and were ratified by an affirmative vote of 25,293
against a negative vote of 48. The total vote of the State at
the Presidential election of 1860 was 145,333. Mr. Lincoln's
requirement of one-tenth of that number was abundantly
complied with by the vote on the questions submitted to the
popular decision. … Under this new order of things, William G.
Brownlow, better known to the world by his soubriquet of
'Parson' Brownlow, was chosen governor without opposition on
the 4th day of March, 1865, the day of Mr. Lincoln's second
inauguration. The new Legislature met at Nashville a month
later, on the 3d of April, and on the 5th ratified the
Thirteenth Amendment; thus adding the abolition of slavery by
National authority to that already decreed by the State. The
Legislature completed its work by electing two consistent
Union men, David T. Patterson and Joseph S. Fowler, to the
United States Senate. The framework of the new Government was
thus completed and in operation before the death of Mr.
Lincoln."

_J. G. Blaine,
Twenty Years of Congress,
volume 2, chapter 3._

After the organization of a loyal government in Tennessee,
more than a year passed before the restoration of the State to
its constitutional relations with the United States, by the
admission of its Senators and Representatives to Congress.
Tennessee was the first, however, among the seceded States to
obtain that recognition, by being the first to ratify the
Fourteenth Constitutional Amendment. "Immediately on the
reception of the circular of the Secretary of State containing
the proposed amendment, Governor Brownlow issued a
proclamation summoning the Legislature of Tennessee to
assemble at Nashville on the 4th of July [1866]. … Every
effort was made to prevent the assembling of the required
number [to constitute a quorum]. The powerful influence of the
President himself was thrown in opposition to ratification."
By arresting recalcitrant members, and by "the expedient of
considering the members who were under arrest and confined in
a committee room as present in their places," the quorum was
assumed to have been made up and the amendment was ratified.
"Immediately after the news was received in Washington, Mr.
Bingham, in the House of Representatives, moved to reconsider
a motion by which a joint resolution relating to the
restoration of Tennessee had been referred to the Committee on
Reconstruction," and, this motion being adopted, he introduced
a substitute which declared, "That the State of Tennessee is
hereby restored to her former, proper, practical relation to
the Union, and again entitled to be represented by Senators
and Representatives in Congress, duly elected and qualified,
upon their taking the oaths of office required by existing
laws." On the following day this joint resolution passed the
House, and a day later (July 21st), it was adopted by the
Senate.

_W. H. Barnes,
History of the 39th Congress,
chapter 20._

ALSO IN:
_Ira P. Jones,
Reconstruction in Tennessee
(Why the Solid South? chapter 7)._

TENNESSEE: A. D. 1866-1871.
The Ku Klux Klan.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1866-1871.

----------TENNESSEE: End--------

TENNIS-COURT OATH, The.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1789 (JUNE).

TENOCHTITLAN.

The native name of the city of Mexico.

See MEXICO: A. D. 1325-1502.

TENPET, The.

See MAGIANS.

TENURE-OF-OFFICE BILL, The.

See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1866-1867 (DECEMBER-MARCH).

TEOTIHUACAN, Pyramids at.

See MEXICO, ANCIENT: THE TOLTEC EMPIRE, &c.

TEQUESTA, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: TIMUQUANAN FAMILY.

TERENTILIAN LAW, The.

See ROME: B. C. 451-449.

TERMILI, The.

See LYCIANS.

TEROUENNE: Siege and capture by the English (1513).

See FRANCE: A. D. 1513-1515.

TERRA FIRMA.

See TIERRA FIRME.

{3100}

TERROR, The Reign of.

As commonly used, this phrase describes the fearful state of
things that prevailed in France during a period of the French
Revolution which ended with the fall of Robespierre, July 27
(Ninth Thermidor), 1794. The beginning of the period so called
is usually placed at the date of the coup d'état, May 31-June
2, 1793, which overthrew the Girondists and gave unrestrained
power into the hands of the Terrorists of the Mountain. The
Reign of Terror was not however fully organized as a
deliberately merciless system, and made, according to the
demand of the Paris Commune, "the order of the day," until the
following September. In another view, the Reign of Terror may
be said to have begun with the creation of the terrible
Revolutionary Tribunal, March, 1793.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1793 (FEBRUARY-APRIL), to 1794 (JULY).

TERTIARII, The.

See BEGUINES, ETC.

TESCHEN, Treaty of (1779).

See BAVARIA: A. D. 1777-1779.

TESHER.

The name which the Egyptians gave to the Arabian desert,
signifying red earth.

See EGYPT: ITS NAMES.

TESSERA HOSPITALIS.

See HOSPES.

TEST ACT, and its Repeal.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1672-1673,
and 1827-1828 REMOVAL OF DISABILITIES.

TESTRI, Battle of (A. D. 687).

See FRANKS: A. D. 511-752.

TESTS, Religious, in the English Universities: Abolished.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1871.

TETONS, The.

See AMERICAN' ABORIGINES: SIOUAN FAMILY.

TETRARCH.

As originally used, this official title, from the Greek,
signified the governor of one fourth part of a country or
province. Later, the Romans applied it to many tributary
princes, in Syria and elsewhere, to whom they wished to give a
rank inferior to that of the tributary kings.

TETZEL, and the sale of Indulgences.

See PAPACY: A. D. 1517 TETZEL.

TEUKRIANS, The.

"The elegiac poet Kallinus, in the middle of the seventh
century B. C., was the first who mentioned the Teukrians; he
treated them as immigrants from Krête, though other authors
represented them as indigenous, or as having come from Attica.
However the fact may stand as to their origin, we may gather
that, in the time of Kallinus, they were still the great
occupants of the Troad [northwestern Asia Minor]. Gradually
the south and west coasts, as well as the interior of this
region, became penetrated by successive colonies of Æolic
Greeks. … The name Teukrians gradually vanished out of present
use and came to belong only to the legends of the past."

_G. Grote,
History of Greece,
part 2, chapter 14._

TEUTECAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ZAPOTECS, ETC.

TEUTONES. TEUTONIC.

"In the way of evidence of there being Teutones amongst the
Germans, over and above the associate mention of their names
with that of the Cimbri [see CIMBRI], there is but little.
They are not so mentioned either by Tacitus or Strabo. …
Arguments have been taken from … the supposed connection of
the present word 'Deut-sch' =='German,' with the classical
word 'Teut-ones.' … The reasoning … runs thus: The syllable in
question is common to the word 'Teut-ones,' 'Teut-onicus,'
'Theod-iscas,' 'teud-uiscus,' 'teut-iscus,' 'tût-iske,'
'dût-iske,' 'tiut-sche,' 'deut-sch'; whilst the word Deut-sch
means German, As the 'Teut-ones' were Germans, so were the
Cimbri also. Now this line of argument is set aside by the
circumstance that the syllable 'Teut-' in Teut-ones and
Teut-onicus as the names of the confederates of the Cimbri, is
wholly unconnected with the 'Teut-' in 'theod-iscus' and
Deut-sch. This is fully shown by Grimm in his dissertation on
the words German and Dutch. In its oldest form the latter word
meant 'popular,' 'national,' 'vernacular'; it was an adjective
applied to the 'vulgar tongue,' or the vernacular German, in
opposition to the Latin. In the tenth century the secondary
form 'Teut-onicus' came in vogue even with German writers.
Whether this arose out of imitation of the Latin form
'Romanice,' or out of the idea of an historical connection
with the Teutones of the classics, is immaterial. It is clear
that the present word 'Deut-sch' proves nothing respecting the
Teutones. Perhaps, however, as early as the time of Martial
the word 'Teutonicus' was used in a general sense, denoting
the Germans in general. Certain it is that, before his time,
it meant the particular people conquered by Marius,
irrespective of origin or locality."

_R. G. Latham,
The Germany of Tacitus,
appendix 3._

TEUTONIC KNIGHTS OF THE HOSPITAL:
The founding of the order.

"It is not possible to find the exact date of the foundation
of the Teutonic Order, but it was probably about A. D. 1190
that it received its full organization as one of the
recognized Religious Military Orders. Its actual commencement,
like that of the other Orders, was obscure and humble. About
1128 or 1129, a wealthy German, who had taken part in the
siege and capture of Jerusalem, settled there with his wife,
intending to spend the remainder of his life in the practice
of religion and in visiting the holy places. His attention and
interest were soon excited by the misfortunes of his poorer
countrymen, who came in great numbers as pilgrims to
Jerusalem. Many fell sick, and endured great miseries and
hardships. Moved with compassion, he received some of the more
distressing cases into his own house. But he soon found that
the work grew beyond this, and he built a hospital, with a
chapel dedicated to the Blessed Virgin. In this institution he
passed the whole of his time, nursing the sick pilgrims; and
to their maintenance he devoted the whole of his means." One
by one, others of his countrymen joined the pious German in
his benevolent work, and "banded themselves together after the
pattern of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, and united the
care of the sick and poor with the profession of arms in their
defence, under the title of Hospitallers of the Blessed
Virgin. This little band put themselves under the direction of
the Grand Prior of the Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem,
although they did not actually join this Order, whose
operations they so closely imitated. … It was, however, during
the siege of Acre [A. D. 1189-1191] that the Teutonic Order
received its final and complete organization as one of the
great Military Religious Orders of Europe." At Acre, the
Hospitallers of the Blessed Virgin, then driven from Jerusalem
by Saladin's conquest, joined certain citizens of Bremen and
Lu·beck in providing a field-hospital for the wounded and
sick, and in their new sphere of labor they acquired the
designation of the Teutonic Knights of the Hospital of the
Blessed Virgin at Jerusalem. "It is said that the Order owed
its constitution to Frederick, Duke of Suabia; but there is
much obscurity, and little authentic record to determine this
or to furnish particulars of the transaction. The Order seems,
however, to have been confirmed by Pope Celestine III."

_F. C. Woodhouse,
Military Religious Orders,
part 3, chapter 1._

{3101}

TEUTONIC KNIGHTS OF THE HOSPITAL:
Conquest of Prussia.

See PRUSSIA: 13TH CENTURY; and LIVONIA.

TEUTONIC KNIGHTS OF THE HOSPITAL:
Subjection to Poland, secularization of the Order
and surrender of its territories.

See POLAND: A. D. 1333-1572.

TEUTONIC KNIGHTS OF THE HOSPITAL: A. D. 1809.
Suppression by Napoleon.

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

TEWFIK, Khedive of Egypt, The reign of.

See EGYPT: A. D. 1875-1882; and 1882-1883.

TEWKESBURY, Battle of (1471).

The final battle of the "War of the Roses," in which Edward
IV. of England overthrew the last Lancastrian army, collected
by Queen Margaret of Anjou and her adherents; fought May 4,
1471. Three weeks previously, at Barnet, he had defeated and
slain the Earl of Warwick. At Tewkesbury Queen Margaret was
taken prisoner, her young son disappeared, how or when is
uncertain, and her husband, the deposed King Henry VI., died
mysteriously a few days afterwards in his prison in the tower.
It was the end of the Lancastrian struggle.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1455-1471.

----------TEXAS: Start--------

TEXAS:
The aboriginal inhabitants and the name.

Amongst the small tribes found early in the 19th century
existing west of the Mississippi on Red River and south of it,
and believed to be natives of that region, were the Caddoes,
"the Nandakoes, the Inies or Tachies, who have given their
name to the province of Texas, and the Nabedaches, … [who]
speak dialects of the Caddo language." Also, the Natchitoches,
the Yatassees, the Adaize, the Appelousas, etc.

_A. Gallatin,
Synopsis of the Indian Tribes
(Archœologia Americana, volume 2),
introduction, section 3._

ALSO IN:
_President's Message, February 19, 1806,
with accompanying documents._

See, also, AMERICAN ABORIGINES: APACHE GROUP.

TEXAS: A. D. 1685-1687.
La Salle's shipwrecked colony.

See CANADA: A. D. 1669-1687.

TEXAS: A. D. 1819-1835.
Relinquishment of American claims to Spain.
Condition as a Mexican province.
Encouragement of immigration from the United States and Europe.

"By the treaty of 1819 with Spain for the cession of the
Floridas, the United States relinquished all claim to the
western portion of Louisiana lying south of Red River and west
of the Sabine.

See FLORIDA: A. D. 1819-1821;
and LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.

After the final ratification of that treaty by both
governments, and the cession and delivery of the Floridas to
the United States, the Spaniards took formal possession of the
country west of the Sabine, and erected it into the 'Province
of Texas,' under the authority and jurisdiction of the Viceroy
of Mexico. From that time the Sabine River was the western
boundary of the United States, near the Gulf of Mexico. The
province of Texas at this time was occupied by the native
tribes of savages, interrupted only by a few Spanish
settlements. … The whole population, including some
settlements in the vicinity of the seacoast, scarcely exceeded
5,000 souls, of whom the greater portion were the remains of
old colonies formed during the Spanish dominion over the
province of Louisiana. Each principal settlement, from San
Antonio de Bexar to Nacogdoches, was placed under the
government of a military commandant, who exercised civil and
military authority within the limits of his presidio. … Such
was the province of Texas under the Spanish monarchy until the
year 1821, when Mexico became an independent nation. … On the
24th of October, 1824, the Mexican States adopted a Republican
form of government, embracing 'a confederation of independent
states,' known and designated as the 'United States of
Mexico.' In this confederation the departments of Texas and
Coahuila were admitted as one state, and were jointly
represented in the Congress of Mexico. Soon after the
establishment of independence in the United States of Mexico,
the colonization and settlement of Texas became a favorite
subject of national policy with the new government. To attract
population for the settlement of the country, colonization
laws were enacted, to encourage enterprising individuals from
foreign countries to establish large colonies of emigrants
within the limits of Texas. Under the provisions of these laws
enterprise was awakened in the United States and in some
portions of Europe. Founders of colonies, or 'Empresarios,'
were induced to enter into engagements for the occupancy and
settlement of large tracts of country, designated in their
respective 'grants'; the extent of the grant being
proportionate to the number of colonists to be introduced. The
first grant was made to Moses Austin, a native of Durham,
Connecticut, in 1821, and under its provisions he was required
by the Mexican authorities to introduce 300 families from the
United States. This enterprising man, having departed from
Bexar for the introduction of his colony, died on his journey
through the wilderness, leaving his plans of colonization to
be prosecuted by his son, Colonel Stephen F. Austin, who
possessed the talents, energy, and judgment requisite for the
arduous undertaking. Having succeeded to his father's
enterprise, he subsequently acquired more influence with the
Mexican government than any other 'empresario' in the
province. … But a few years had elapsed when nearly the whole
area of the department of Texas had been parceled out into
extensive grants for settlement by the different 'empresarios'
with their colonies. … Emigration from the United States, as
well as from Great Britain and Ireland, continued to augment
the population in all the departments until the year 1834,
when political troubles began to convulse the "Mexican
Republic." In 1835 "the whole Anglo-American population of
Texas was about 20,000; of this number General Austin's colony
comprised no less than 13,000, or more than half the entire
population. These were chiefly emigrants from the United
States. … The Mexicans within the limits of Texas at this
period scarcely exceeded 3,000, most of whom resided in the
vicinity of Bexar."

_J. W. Monette,
Discovery and Settlement of the Mississippi Valley,
volume 2, pages 569-572._

ALSO IN:
_H. Yoakum,
History of Texas,
volume 1, chapters 15-21._

{3102}

TEXAS: A. D. 1824-1836.
The introduction of Slavery.
Schemes of the Slave Power in the United States.
Revolutionary movement under Houston.
Independence of Mexico declared,
and practically won at San Jacinto.