Chapter V: Front Matter (5)

"A 'tyranny,' in the Greek sense of the word, was the
irresponsible dominion of a single person, not founded on
hereditary right, like the monarchies of the heroic ages and
of many barbarian nations, nor on a free election, like that
of a dictator or æsymnete, but on force. It did not change its
character when transmitted through several generations, nor
was any other name invented to describe it when power, which
had been acquired by violence, was used for the public good;
though Aristotle makes it an element in the definition of
tyranny, that it is exercised for selfish ends. But, according
to the ordinary Greek notions, and the usage of the Greek
historians, a mild and beneficent tyranny is an expression
which involves no contradiction."

_C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapter 10._

"In spite of the worst which has been said against them, the
tyrants hold a legitimate place in the progress of Greek
constitutional history. They were the means of breaking down
the oligarchies in the interests of the people. … It was at
Sicyon that the first tyrannis arose. … About the year 670 B.
C. a certain Orthagoras, who is said to have been a cook,
succeeded in establishing himself as tyrant in Sicyon. Of his
reign no incident is recorded. He was succeeded by his son
Myron."

_E. Abbott,
History of Greece,
part 1, chapter 12._

ALSO IN:
_J. P. Mahaffy,
Problems in Greek History,
chapter 4._

See, also, DESPOTS.

TYRAS, The.

The ancient name of the river Dniester.

TYRCONNEL'S DOMINATION IN IRELAND.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1685-1688.

----------TYRE: Start--------

TYRE.

"Justin represents Tyre as having been founded a year before
the Capture of Troy, thus apparently reducing by about 1,500
years the date assigned to it by the priests of the temple of
Hercules. … Josephus places the settlement of Tyre 240 years
before the building of Solomon's Temple. He refers no doubt to
the same event as Justin, the occupation of the island by the
Sidonians, as he cannot have been ignorant of the mention of
Tyre in the Old Testament more than 240 years before Solomon.
The date of the building of Solomon's Temple is itself
disputed, estimates varying from 1012 B. C. to 969 B. C. …
Tyre consisted of two parts, an island about three-quarters of
a mile in length, separated from the mainland by a strait four
stadia, about half a mile, in width at its northern end, and a
town on the shore. The latter was distinguished as Palæ-Tyrus,
or Ancient Tyre, and was the chief seat of the population,
till the wars of the Assyrian monarchs against Phœnicia. It
extended along the shore from the river Leontes in the north
to the fountain of Rusel-Ain in the south, a distance of seven
miles, great part of which would be suburb rather than city.
Pliny, who wrote when its boundaries could still be traced,
computes the circuit of Palæ-Tyrus and the island together at
nineteen Roman miles, that of the island town being 22 stadia.
… Though called Old Tyre, because it lay in ruins, when the
younger city on the island was in the height of its
prosperity, it was from the first connected with it; and the
name of Tyre (Tsour), 'a rock,' would hardly be appropriate,
except to the island. … It is probable that, from the first,
the island, from the excellence of its natural harbour, was a
naval station to the city on the mainland, and, as a place of
security, the seat of the worship of the national deities,
Astarte, Belus, Hercules. … The situation of Palæ-Tyrus was
one of the most fertile spots on the coast of Phœnicia. The
plain is here about five miles wide, the soil is dark, and the
variety of its productions excited the wonder of the
Crusaders. Near the southern extremity of the city was a
fountain, which, communicating with some natural receptacle in
the mountains above, poured forth copious and perennial
streams of pure and cool water. An aqueduct distributed them
through the town. … Whatever may have been the relative
importance of Palæ-Tyrus and the island, previous to the great
migration from Sidon, occasioned by the victory of the
Ascalonites, there can be no doubt that from this time the
population of the island greatly increased. The colonization
of Gades took place about a century later. But we have no
connected history of Tyre till near the age of Solomon."

_J. Kenrick,
Phœnicia: History,
chapter 1._

See, also, PHŒNICIANS.

TYRE:
The founding of the colony of Carthage.

See CARTHAGE: THE FOUNDING OF.

TYRE: B. C. 598-585.
Siege by Nebuchadnezzar.

See PHŒNICIANS: B. C. 850-538.

{3160}

TYRE: B. C. 332.
Siege and capture by Alexander the Great.

After defeating the Persians at Issus (see MACEDONIA: B. C.
334-330), Alexander turned his attention to the tributary
Phœnician cities, whose fleets gave to the Great King a naval
power more formidable than the hosts of the nations which
marched at his command. Sidon, Byblus, and other towns
submitted promptly to the conqueror. Tyre offered a qualified
surrender, which did not satisfy the haughty Macedonian, and
he instantly laid siege to the city. Having no adequate fleet
with which to reach the island-town, he resolved to carry a
causeway across the channel which separated the island from
Old Tyre, on the mainland, and he demolished the buildings of
the latter to provide materials for the work. It was an
undertaking of immense magnitude and difficulty, and the
ingenious Tyrians found many modes of interfering with it.
They succeeded in destroying the mole when half of it had been
built; but Alexander, with obstinate perseverance, began his
work anew, on a larger scale than before. He also collected a
strong fleet of war-galleys, from Cyprus and from the
Phœnicians who had submitted to him, with which the opposition
of the enemy was checked and his own operations advanced.
After seven months of prodigious labor and incessant battle,
the strong walls of Tyre were beaten down and the city taken.
"It soon became a scene of unresisted carnage and plunder. The
Macedonians, exasperated by the length and labours of the
siege, which had lasted seven months, and by the execution of
their comrades [Greek prisoners, whom the Tyrians had put to
death on the walls, before the eyes of the besiegers, and cast
into the sea], spared none that fell into their hands. The
king—whom the Greeks call Azelmicus—with the principal
inhabitants, and some Carthaginian envoys who had been sent
with the usual offerings to Melkart, took refuge in his
sanctuary: and these alone, according to Arrian, were exempted
from the common lot of death or slavery. It was an act of
clemency, by which the conqueror at the same time displayed
his piety to the god. Of the rest, 8,000 perished in the first
slaughter, and 30,000, including a number of foreign
residents, were sold as slaves. But if we may believe Curtius,
15,000 were rescued by the Sidonians [of Alexander's navy],
who first hid them in their galleys, and afterwards
transported them to Sidon—not, it must be presumed, without
Alexander's connivance or consent. It sounds incredible, that
he should have ordered 2,000 of the prisoners to be crucified.
… Tyre was still occupied as a fortress, and soon recovered
some measure of her ancient prosperity."

_C. Thirlwall,
History of Greece,
chapter 50._

ALSO IN:
_Arrian,
Anabasis of Alexander,
book 2, chapters 15-24._

TYRE: B. C. 332-A. D. 638.
Under Greek and Roman domination.

"The Carians, with whom Alexander repeopled the city [of Tyre]
fell into the habits of the former population, and both Tyre
and Sidon recovered much of their commercial greatness. After
a long struggle be·tween the kingdoms of Egypt and Syria,
Phœnicia was finally secured to the latter by Antiochus the
Great (B. C. 198). But the commercial rivalry of Egypt proved
more serious even than political subjection; and the
foundation of Berenice on the Red Sea diverted to Alexander
much of the oriental commerce that had previously flowed
through Tyre and Sidon. But still they did not succumb to
their younger rival. Under the Romans, to whom Phœicia was
subjected with Syria [by Pompeius the Great, B. C. 64], Tyre
was still the first commercial city of the world."

_P. Smith,
History of the World: Ancient,
chapter 24._

TYRE: A. D. 638.
Capture by the Moslems.

After the taking of Jerusalem by the Caliph Omar, the Moslems
made themselves masters of the remainder of Palestine very
quickly. Tripoli was first won by treachery, and then the same
traitor who had delivered it, making his way to Tyre,
succeeded in bringing about the betrayal of that place. Many
of the inhabitants were put to the sword; but many others are
said to have saved their lives by accepting the religion of
the victors. The fall of Tyre was followed by the flight from
Cæsarea of Constantine, son of the Emperor Heraclius, who
commanded in Syria, and the entire abandonment of that rich
province to the Moslems.

_S. Ockley,
History of the Saracens,
pages 251-253 (Bohn ed.)._

TYRE: A. D. 1124.
Siege and Conquest by the Venetians and Crusaders.

The Venetians took little or no part in the First Crusade,
being largely engaged in commerce with the Saracens. But in
1124—a full quarter of a century after the taking of
Jerusalem—they found it wise to obtain an interest in the
Christian conquests that were spreading along the Levantine
coasts. They accordingly sent their doge, with a formidable
fleet, to offer aid to the Latin king of Jerusalem—then
Baldwin II.—for the reduction of either Ascalon or Tyre, both
of which cities were still held by the Moslems. Finding it
difficult to make choice between the two places, a solemn
drawing of lots took place, at the altar of the Holy
Sepulchre, as a means of ascertaining the will of God. The lot
decided that Tyre should be attacked, and operations were
accordingly begun. But "the Venetians, more devoted to the
interests of their commerce and of their nation than to those
of a Christian kingdom, demanded, before beginning the siege
of Tyre, that they should enjoy a church, a street, a common
oven, and a national tribunal in every city in Palestine. They
further demanded other privileges and the possession of a
third of the conquered city." The demands of the Venetians
were complied with, and Tyre, after a siege of over five
months, beleaguered by land and sea, was taken. The
capitulation was an honorable one and honorably respected. The
Moslem inhabitants were permitted to leave the city; the
Christians entered it triumphally, and the day on which the
news reached Jerusalem was made a festival.

_J. F. Michaud,
History of the Crusades,
book 5._

----------TYRE: End--------

TYROL:
Origin of the county and its name.

"Tyrol freed herself from the suzerainty of Bavaria in very
early times. She was divided among a number of princes, lay
and ecclesiastical. The principal of these were the counts of
the Adige or of the Tyrol, and the counts of Andechs, who
obtained the title of duke from Frederick I. [1152-1190], and
called themselves dukes of Meran. Their race came to an end in
1248, and their domains were united to those of the counts of
Tyrol who thus be·came possessed of the larger part of the
lands between the Inn and the Adige. Tyrol takes its name from
the castle of Tirol, which was built on the site of the Roman
station Teriolis, not far from Meran, on the upper waters of
the Adige."

_L. Leger,
History of Austro-Hungary,
page 144, footnote._

{3161}

"After the dissolution of the classic Roman Empire, the
Province of Rætia split up into parcels. … It is impossible,
in a sketch like this, to follow the various dynastic and
other changes, most of them extremely perplexed and obscure,
which ensued between the 5th and 10th centuries. At the end of
this period, the main constituents of the old province had
assumed something like the shape which they now bear. That is
to say, Rætia Secunda was separated from Rætia Prima, which
had also lost what formerly belonged to it south of the Alpine
ridge. … Tirol again had been detached from Rætia Prima, and
had begun to form a separate entity. Meanwhile a power of
first rate importance in the future history of Graubünden [the
Grisons] had arisen: namely the Bishopric of Chur. … The
Bishops of Chur took rank as feudal lords of the first class.
… Originally an insignificant house, exercising … the
functions of Bailies to the See of Chur, the Counts of Tirol
acquired influence and territory under the shadow of distant
ecclesiastical superiors."

_J. A. Symonds,
History of Graubünden
(In Strickland's "The Engadine"),
pages 23-27._

TYROL: A. D. 1363.
Acquired by the House of Austria.

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1330-1364.

TYROL: A. D. 1805.
Taken from Austria and annexed to Bavaria.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1805-1806.

TYROL: A. D. 1809.
Heroic rising under Hofer, against the Bavarians and the French.
The crushing of the revolt.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1809-1810 (APRIL-FEBRUARY).

TYROL: A. D. 1814-1815.
Restored to Austria.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (APRIL-JUNE);
and VIENNA, THE CONGRESS OF.

----------TYROL: End--------

TYRONE'S REBELLIONS.
The Wars of the O'Neils.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1559-1603.

TYRRHENIANS. TYRRHENIAN SEA.

The ancient race of people in western Italy whom the Romans
called Etrusci, and who called themselves the Rasenna, were
known to the Greeks as the Turrhenoi, or Tyrrhenians. They
were an enterprising maritime people, and hence the Greeks
called that part of the Mediterranean which washes the western
Italian coast the Tyrrhenian Sea.

See ETRUSCANS.

TZAR, CZAR.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1547.

TZOMBOR, Battle of (1849).

See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1848-1849.

U.

U. C., A. U. C., A. U.

Anno Urbis Conditæ: the "Year of Rome," reckoned from the
founding of the city.

See ROME: B. C. 753.

U. E. LOYALISTS.

See TORIES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

UAUPE, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.

UBERTI FAMILY, The.

See FLORENCE: A. D. 1248-1278.

UCHEES, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: UCHEAN FAMILY.

UCLES,
Battle of (1108).

See PORTUGAL: A. D. 1095-1325.

Battle of (1809).

See SPAIN: A. D. 1808-1809 (DECEMBER-MARCH).

UDAIPORE, OODEYPOOR.

See RAJPOOTS.

UDHA-NALA, Battle of (1763).

See INDIA: A. D. 1757-1772.

UGANDA.

"It was in 1858 that the travellers Burton and Speke, starting
from Zanzibar, first made Europe acquainted with the existence
of that vast inland sea, the Victoria Lake, of which Rebmann
and Ernhardt had already heard native reports. Four years
later Speke and Grant, passing round the western shore,
reached Uganda; and they found here, if I may employ the
paradox, a singular, barbaric civilisation. Combined with the
most barbarous usages and the grossest superstition were many
of those advances in the scale of humanity which we are wont
to accept as indications of civilisation. There was an appeal
to law, and cases were decided after a formal hearing. The
administration was vested in the king,—an absolute despot,
—and from him downwards there existed a regular chain of
delegated power and control. Well-made roads, kept constantly
in repair, intersected the country in all directions. Rough
bridges were constructed across river swamps. An army was
maintained, and also a fleet of canoes on the waters of the
lake. The arts of building, smith-work, &c., were very far in
advance of anything to be found between Uganda and the coast.
The ideas of decency, the use of clothing, and the planting of
trees, were indications of long years of development, of which
the intricate customs and etiquettes surrounding the Court
were an additional proof. Speke traces the earliest
developments of this civilisation to Unyoro and its shepherd
kings, descendants of a nomadic, pastoral race—the Wahuma—whom
he supposes to be an offshoot from the Abyssinians or Gallas.
Uganda and the countries lying along the lake shore, being the
richest province of this Wahuma empire—called Kitara—had to
bring large quantities of produce to Unyoro for the king's
use, and their inhabitants were looked on as slaves. The
legend relates that a hunter named Uganda headed a revolt, and
was proclaimed king under the name of Kimera. Mtesa was the
seventh of the dynasty, according to Speke, which shows it to
be of some little antiquity. Speke was enthusiastic about the
fertility of Uganda, and the development of its people as
compared with the savage tribes of Africa. The next European
to visit the country was Colonel Chaillé Long, who was sent by
Gordon in the summer of 1874. Stanley followed in 1875, and
simultaneously Linant arrived in the country. In 1876 Gordon
sent Emin with a party of soldiers to Mtesa's capital. They
were for some time quartered there, and Gordon had views of
annexing Uganda to the Egyptian Sudan. … Stanley was even
louder in his praises of Uganda than Speke had been, and
described it as the 'Pearl of Africa.' In consequence of his
appeal on behalf of the people, a fund was started, and
missionaries were despatched to Uganda. These arrived in June
1877. … Some two years later—February 1879—the French (Roman
Catholic) Algerian Mission despatched a party of 'White
Fathers' to begin mission-work in Uganda.
{3162}
The religious differences between these two conflicting
creeds, which marked the very inauguration of the Roman
Catholic mission, much puzzled and confused Mtesa, since both
alike called themselves 'Christians.' The Arabs from the coast
had already settled in Uganda, and brought with them the
religion of Islam. … Mtesa showed great toleration to all
creeds, though at one time he had leaned to Mohammedanism, and
had ordered all Uganda to embrace that creed. Shortly after,
however, as the followers of Islam refused to eat the king's
meat because it was not killed in the orthodox way according
to the Koran, he ordered the massacre of all Mohammedans.
Mtesa died in the autumn of 1884, and Mwanga, then about
eighteen years old, succeeded him—being selected from among
Mtesa's sons on account of his personal likeness to the late
king, since in Uganda paternity is often difficult to prove.
At this time the three religions had made great progress, and
their disintegrating influences on the old customs began to be
more and more apparent. This was especially the case with
regard to the Christians, who no longer regarded the king as
divine, nor his acts, however gross and cruel, as having a
divine sanction. They owned a Higher allegiance, though they
remained obedient subjects, and distinguished themselves by
bravery in war. Such an attitude was, of course, intolerable
to a cruel despot like Mwanga. … There was still a further
reason for suspicion and fear of the white men. … The Egyptian
flag had been hoisted at Mruli and Fauvera in Unyoro, only
just beyond the borders of Uganda, and Gordon's envoys—Colonel
Long and Emin—and his troops had penetrated to Mtesa's
capital. The Arabs also told of the doings of the Belgians on
the Congo. At a later period reports reached Mwanga of German
annexations in Usagara on the East Coast. Last, and most
disturbing of all, was the news of Mr. Thomson's arrival near
Usoga in the East—the route from the coast by which native
tradition said that the conquerors of Uganda would come.
Mwanga had succeeded his father in November 1884. Early in
1885 he determined to stamp out those dangerous religions,
Mohammedan and Christian alike, which were disintegrating his
country. The missionaries Mackay and Ashe, were seized, and
their followers persecuted. But the religion spread the more.
A plot to depose Mwanga was discovered and crushed. With
varying fortunes—sometimes treated leniently, sometimes the
victims of violent persecution—the missionaries held their own
till the autumn of 1885. Then came news of Bishop Hannington's
approach." Unhappily the Bishop came by the forbidden Usoga
route, and Mwanga ordered that he be killed, with all his men,
which was done in October, 1885. "After this the position of
the Europeans was very precarious, but not till the following
May (1886) did the storm burst. Mwanga then threw aside all
restraint, and butchered the Christian converts wholesale. …
But in spite of the martyrdom by torture and burning, the
religion grew. … The heroism inspired by religion in the early
history of our own Church was repeated here in the heart of
Africa." At length, in 1888, there was a revolt, in which
Christians and Mohammedans seem to have combined, and Mwanga
fled to an island at the south of the Lake. His brother Kiwewa
was made king, and for a time, the Christians were in control
of affairs. But the Mohammedans grew jealous, and by a sudden
rising drove the Christians out. Kiwewa refusing to accept the
creed of Islam, was deposed, and another brother, Karema, was
raised to the throne. The exiled Christians now made overtures
to Mwanga, and an alliance was concluded, which resulted in
the overthrow of the Mohammedan or Arab party, and the
restoration of Mwanga to the throne, in October, 1889. The two
Christian factions, Catholic and Protestant, or French and
English, divided the country and all the offices of government
between them, but were bitterly jealous of each other and
perpetually quarreled, while the defeated Mohammedans were
still strong and unsubdued. Affairs were in this state when
Dr. Peters, the explorer in command of the German "Emin Relief
Expedition," came to Uganda, having learned of the rescue of
Emin Pasha by Stanley. Dr. Peters, with the aid of the French
party, succeeded in arranging some kind of treaty with Mwanga,
and this alarmed the Imperial British East Africa Company (see
AFRICA: A. D. 1884-1891) when news of it had been received.
That alarm was soon increased by intelligence that Emin Pasha
had entered the German service and was about to conduct a
strong expedition to the south of Lake Victoria Nyanza. These
and other circumstances led to the despatching of Captain
Lugard with a small force to Uganda to represent the British
East Africa Company and establish its influence there. Captain
Lugard arrived at Mengo, the capital of Uganda, on the 18th of
December, 1890. Meantime Great Britain and Germany, by the
Anglo-German Agreement of July 1, 1890 (see AFRICA: A. D.
1884-1891) had settled all questions between them as to their
respective "spheres of influence," and Uganda had been
definitely placed within the British "sphere." This enabled
Captain Lugard to secure the signing of a treaty which
recognized the suzerainty of the Company, established its
protectorate over Uganda, and conceded to it many important
commercial and political powers. He remained in the country
until June, 1892, during which time he was driven to take part
in a furious war that broke out between the Catholic and
Protestant parties. The war ended in a partition of territory
between the factions, and three small provinces were, at the
same time, assigned to the Mohammedans. After maintaining
Captain Lugard and his force in the country for eighteen
months, the Company found the cost so heavy and the prospect
of returns so distant, that it came to a resolution to
withdraw; but was induced by a subscription of £16,000 from
the Church Missionary Society to remain for another year in
the exercise of the control which it had acquired. At the end
of 1892 the Company renewed its resolution to evacuate the
region west of Lake Victoria, and the British Government was
urgently pressed to take upon itself the administration of the
country. It was only persuaded, however, to assume the cost of
a further occupation of Uganda for three months by the
Company's officers, in order to give more time for ensuring
the safety of missionaries and other Europeans. It consented,
moreover, to despatch a Commissioner to investigate the
situation and report upon it. The official selected for that
duty was Sir Gerald Porter, Consul-General at Zanzibar.
{3163}
Sir Gerald returned to England with his report in December,
1893, and died of typhoid fever in the month following. His
report urged the maintenance of an effective control over the
government of Uganda, to be exercised directly by the British
Government, in the form of a Protectorate, keeping the king on
his throne, with a Commissioner at his side to direct his
action in all important particulars. After much discussion,
the decision of the Government was announced at the beginning
of June, 1894. It determined to establish the proposed
Protectorate in Uganda, not extending to Unyoro, and to place
a Sub-Commissioner on duty between Lake Victoria and the sea,
for the purpose of watching over communications, and
apparently without political powers. The Government declined
to undertake the building of the railway from Mombassa on the
coast to the Lake, for which the Imperial British East Africa
Company had made surveys.

_Captain F. D. Lugard,
The Rise of our East African Empire._

ALSO IN:
_Sir Gerald Porter,
The British Mission to Uganda in 1893._

_P. L. McDermott,
British East Africa, or Ibea.
The Spectator, June 9, 1894._

See, also, AFRICAN EXPLORATION, &c., in Supplement.

UGRI.

See HUNGARIANS.

UGRO-FINNISH RACES.

See TURANIAN.

UHILCHES, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.

UIRINA, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.

UKASE.

An edict of the Russian government, deriving the force of law
from the absolute authority of the Czar.

UKRAINE, The.

See RUSSIA, GREAT, &c.;
also COSSACKS.

ULADISLAUS I.,
King of Poland, A. D. 1083-1102.

Uladislaus II., King of Bohemia, 1471-1516.

Uladislaus II., Duke of Poland, 1138-1146.

Uladislaus III., Duke of Poland, 1296-1333.

Uladislaus IV. (Jagellon), King of Bohemia, 1471-1516;
V. of Hungary, 1490-1516.

Uladislaus V. (Jagellon), King of Poland
and Duke of Lithuania, 1385-1434.

Uladislaus VI., King of Poland, 1434-1444.

Uladislaus VII., King of Poland, 1632-1648.

ULCA, Battle of the (A. D. 488).

See Rom:: A. D. 488-526.

ULEMA.

See SUBLIME PORTE.

----------ULM: Start--------

ULM: A. D. 1620.
Treaty of the Evangelical Union with the Catholic League.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1618-1620.

ULM: A. D. 1702-1704.
Taken by the Bavarians and French,
and recovered by Marlborough.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1702; and 1704.

ULM: A. D. 1805.
Mack's capitulation.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1805 (MARCH-DECEMBER).

----------ULM: End--------

ULMENES.

See CHILE: THE ARAUCANIANS.

ULSTER, The Plantation of.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1607-1611.

ULSTER TENANT-RIGHT.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1848-1852.

ULTIMA THULE.

See THULE.

ULTRA VIRES.

See LAW, COMMON: A. D. 1846.

ULTRAMONTANE. ULTRAMONTANISM.

The term ultramontane (beyond the mountain) has been used for
so long a time in France and Germany to indicate the extreme
doctrines of Papal supremacy maintained beyond the Alps—that
is, in Italy, and especially at Rome—that it has come to have
no other meaning. The ultramontanists in each country are
those who make themselves partisans of these doctrines, in
opposition to the more independent division of the Roman
Catholic Church.

UMBRIANS, The.

"The Umbrians at one time possessed dominion over great part
of central Italy. Inscriptions in their language also remain,
and manifestly show that they spoke a tongue not alien to the
Latin. The irruption of the Sabellian and of the Etruscan
nations was probably the cause which broke the power of the
Umbrians, and drove them back to a scanty territory between
the Æsis, the Rubicon, and the Tiber."

_H. G. Liddell,
History of Rome,
introduction, section 2._

See, also, ITALY: ANCIENT.

UNALACHTIGOS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: DELAWARES, and ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.

UNAMIS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: DELAWARES, and ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.

UNCIA, The.

See As;
also, FOOT, THE ROMAN.

UNCTION.

See CORONATION.

UNDERGROUND RAILROAD.

See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D, 1840-1860.

UNELLI, The.

The Unelli were one of the Armorican tribes of ancient Gaul.
Their country was "the Cotantin of the ante-revolutionary
period, the present department of Manche."

_G. Long,
Decline of the Roman Republic,
volume 4, chapter 6._

UNIFORMITY, Acts of.

Two Acts of Uniformity were passed by the English Parliament
in the reign of Edward VI. (1548 and 1552), both of which were
repealed under Mary. In 1559, the second year of Elizabeth, a
more thorough-going law of the same nature was enacted, by the
provisions of which, "
(1) the revised Book of Common Prayer as established by Edward
VI. in 1552, was, with a few alterations and additions,
revised and confirmed.
(2) Any parson, vicar, or other minister, whether beneficed or
not, wilfully using any but the established liturgy, was to
suffer, for the first offence, six months' imprisonment, and,
if beneficed, forfeit the profits of his benefice for a year;
for the second offence, a year's imprisonment; for the third,
imprisonment for life.
(3) All persons absenting themselves, without lawful
or reasonable excuse, from the service at their parish church
on Sundays and holydays, were to be punished by ecclesiastical
censures and a fine of one shilling for the use of the poor."

_T. P. Taswell-Langmead,
English Constitutional History,
chapter 12._

See, also, ENGLAND: A. D. 1559.

In 1662 soon after the Restoration, another Act of Uniformity
was passed, the immediate effect of which was to eject about
2,000 ministers from the established Church.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1662-1665.

UNIGENITUS, The Bull.

See PORT ROYAL, AND THE JANSENISTS: A. D.1702-1715.

UNION, The German Protestant (17th Century).

See GERMANY: A. D. 1608-1618.

UNION JACK.

The national flag of Great Britain and Ireland, uniting the
red cross of St. George and the diagonal crosses of St. Andrew
and St. Patrick, on a blue ground.

{3164}

UNION LEAGUE, The.

A secret political society formed in the United States soon
after the outbreak of the American Civil War, having for its
object a closer and more effective organization of the
supporters of the national government. It was very large in
numbers for a time, but declined as the need of such an
organization disappeared.

UNION OF BRUSSELS.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581.

UNION OF CALMAR, The.

See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1018-1397; and 1397-1527.

UNION OF HEILBRONN, The.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1632-1634.

UNION OF UTRECHT, The.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581.

UNITARIANISM.

"In its restricted sense Unitarianism means belief in the
personal unity of God instead of in a community of divine
persons. … Among the articles of Unitarian faith so
understood, besides the doctrine of one supreme divine person,
may be enumerated belief in human nature, in moral freedom, in
human reason, in character as of more worth than ritual or
creed, in the equal justice not to say mercy of God, in the
unreality of a devil, not to say of evil, and in the ultimate
salvation, or evolution into something better, of all souls.
Without being in any sense the first article of the faith,
either in the historical order as having been the
starting-point, or in the logical order as underlying the
whole system, or in the order of importance as being with us
the doctrine of doctrines, it has happened in spite of a
thousand protests that belief in God's personal unity has
given its name to the entire confession. The movement first
called Socinian, then Arminian, and finally Unitarian, began
as a protest of the 'natural man' against two particularly
hateful doctrines of Calvinism, that of total depravity and
that of predestination."

_S. C. Beach,
Unitarianism and the Reformation
(Unitarianism: its Origin and History)._

"The establishment of distinct Unitarian churches in England
dates back to 1774, when Theophilus Lindsey left the Church of
England and went up to London to start the first avowedly
Unitarian place of worship in the country. But that was not
the beginning of Unitarianism. Centuries before this,
Unitarianism began in England as an individual opinion, had
first its martyr-age, then a period when it was a great
ferment of controversy, and finally the distinct development
of it which stands today in our English Unitarian body. The
names of some of the Unitarian martyrs on the continent of
Europe are comparatively well known,—Servetus, burned by
Calvin; Valentine Gentilis the Italian; and other isolated
students here and there, who had been stirred up by the
Reformation spirit to read the Bible for themselves, and who
could not stop where Luther and Calvin stopped. … What is
called the 'era of toleration' began immediately after the
overthrow of the Stuarts in 1688. The sects were now at
liberty to go quietly on in their own way. On the one hand
there was the great established Episcopal Church,—at a pretty
low ebb in religious life, for its most earnest life had gone
out of it on that 'black Bartholomew's Day, 1662,' when the
two thousand Puritan clergy were ejected.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1662-1665.

On the other hand were these Puritans,—'Dissenters' they began
now to be called,—divided into three great sects, Baptists,
Independents, and English Presbyterians. Now, these were all
free. They could build churches, and they did. From 1693 to
1720 was the great 'chapel'-building time. … But now, in this
great development of chapel-building by these three
denominations, a curious thing took place, which unexpectedly
affected their after history. That curious thing was, that
while the Baptists and Independents (or Congregationalists)
tied down all these new chapels to perpetual orthodox uses by
rigid doctrinal trust-deeds, … the English Presbyterians left
theirs free. It seems strange that they should do so; for the
Presbyterians had begun by being the narrowest sect of the
Puritans, and the Scotch Presbyterians always remained so. But
the English Presbyterians had very little to do with the
Scotch ones, and through all the changes and sufferings they
had had to go through they had become broadened; and so it
carne to pass that now, when they were building their churches
or chapels up and down the country, they left them free. … The
English Presbyterians, thus left free, began to grow more
liberal. … A general reverence for Christ took the place of
the old distinct belief in his deity. … They opened the
communion to all; they no longer insisted on the old
professions of 'church-membership,' but counted all who
worshipped with them 'the church.' Thus things were going on
all through the middle of the last century. Of course it was
not the same everywhere; some still held the old views. … One
man among them, … Dr. Joseph Priestley, … was one of the
leading scientists of his time,—a restless investigator, and
at the same time an earnest religious thinker and student,
just as eager to make out the truth about religion as to
investigate the properties of oxygen or electricity. So he
investigated Christianity, studied the creeds of the churches,
came to the conclusion that they were a long way from the
Christianity of Christ, and gradually came to be a
thoroughgoing Unitarian. When he came to this conclusion he
did not hide it; he proclaimed it and preached it. … The
upshot of it was, that at length he aroused a large part of
the body to the consciousness that they were really
Unitarians. They still did not take the name; they disliked
sect-names altogether. … And so, though they mostly continued
to call themselves English Presbyterians, or simply
Presbyterians, all the world began to call them Unitarians;
and more and more the Baptists and Independents, or
Congregationalists, who had formerly fellowshipped and worked
with them, drew apart, and left them, as they are to-day, in
the reluctant isolation of a separate Unitarian body. Two
other movements of thought of a somewhat similar kind
increased and strengthened this development of a separate
Unitarian body,—one among the General Baptists, the other in
the great Episcopal Church itself."

_B. Herford,
Unitarianism in England
(Unitarianism: its Origin and History)._

{3165}

"It is hard to trace the early history of Unitarianism in New
England. The name was seldom used, yet not omitted with any
view to concealment; for we have abundant proof that the
ministers to whom it belonged preached what they believed
clearly and fully. … But a marvellous change had taken place
in the last century, at the beginning of which the denial of
the Trinity would have seemed no better than blasphemy; while
at its close nearly all the clergy of Boston and its vicinity
and many others in Massachusetts were known to dissent from
the ancestral creed, to have ceased to use Trinitarian
doxologies, and to preach what was then known as Arianism,
regarding Jesus Christ as the greatest and oldest of created
beings, but in no proper sense as God. At the same time, so
little stress was laid on the Trinity by its professed
believers that, with two or three exceptions, these Arians
remained in full church fellowship with those of the orthodox
faith. In the territory now within the limits of Boston there
were, a century ago, but two professedly Trinitarian
ministers, one of them being Dr. Thacher, of the liberal
Brattle Square Church, while Dr. Eckley, of the Old South
Church, was known to entertain doubts as to the deity of
Christ."

_A. P. Peabody,
Early New England Unitarians
(Unitarianism: its Origin and History)._

UNITED BRETHREN (Unitas Fratrum).

See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1434-1457, and 1621-1648;
also MORAVIAN OR BOHEMIAN BRETHREN.

UNITED EMPIRE LOYALISTS.

See TORIES OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

UNITED IRISHMEN, The Society of.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1793-1798.

UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN, Formation of the.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1707.

UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND, Creation of the.

See IRELAND: A. D. 1798-1800.

UNITED NETHERLANDS,
or United Provinces, or United States of the Netherlands.

See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1577-1581, 1581-1584,
1584-1585, and after.

UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, The.

See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1843.

----------UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Start--------

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1492-1620.
Discovery and exploration of the Atlantic coast.

See AMERICA.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1607-1752.
First settlement and organization of the
thirteen original English colonies.

The earliest attempts at European settlement (as distinct from
exploration) within the present limits of the United States
were made by French Huguenots, under the patronage of Admiral
Coligny; first at Port Royal, on Beaufort River, Florida,
where Jean Ribaut, in 1562, placed a few colonists who soon
abandoned the spot, and, two years later, at Fort Caroline, on
St. John's River, in the same peninsula. The second colony,
commanded by René de Laudonnière, was considerable in numbers
but unpromising in character, and not likely to gain a footing
in the country, even if it had been left in peace. It was
tragically extinguished, however, by the Spaniards in
September, 1565. The Spaniards had then established themselves
in a fortified settlement at St. Augustine. It was surprised
and destroyed in 1567 by an avenging Huguenot, but was
promptly restored, and has survived to the present day,—the
oldest city in the United States. (See FLORIDA.)—The first
undertakings at colonization from England were inspired and
led by Sir Walter Raleigh. After unsuccessful attempts, in
conjunction with his elder half-brother, Sir Humphrey Gilbert,
to establish settlements in Newfoundland, Raleigh obtained a
grant from Queen Elizabeth, in 1584, under which he planted a
colony of 108 settlers, commanded by Ralph Lane, on Roanoke
Island, within the boundaries of the present State of North
Carolina. In honor of the virgin queen of England, the name
Virginia was given to the region at large. Lane's colonists
had expected to find gold, silver and pearls, and lost
interest in the country when none could be discovered. In
June, 1586, they persuaded Sir Francis Drake, who had touched
at Roanoke with his fleet, to carry them home. Soon
afterwards, several ships, sent out by Raleigh with
reinforcements and supplies, arrived at the island, to find it
deserted. They left fifteen men to hold the ground; but a year
passed before another expedition reached the place. The fort
was then found in ruins; the fifteen men had disappeared, and
nothing of their fate could be learned. The new colony
perished in the same way—its fate an impenetrable secret of
the savage land. This was Raleigh's last venture in
colonization. His means were exhausted; England was absorbed
in watching and preparing for the Spanish Armada; the time had
not come to "plant an English nation in America." Sir Walter
assigned his rights and interests in Virginia to a company of
merchant adventurers, which accomplished nothing permanently.
Twenty years passed before another vigorous effort of English
colonization was made. In 1606 King James issued a royal
charter to a company singularly formed in two branches or
divisions, one having its headquarters at London, and known as
the London Company, the other established at Plymouth and
known as the Plymouth Company. Between them they were given
authority to occupy territory in America from the 34th to the
45th degree of latitude; but the two grants overlapped in the
middle, with the intention of giving the greater domain to the
company which secured it by the earliest actual occupation.
The London Company, holding the southward grant, despatched to
Virginia a company of 105 emigrants, who established at
Jamestown, on the northerly bank of James River (May 13,
1607), the first permanent English settlement in America, and
founded there the colony and the subsequent State of Virginia.
The colony survived many hardships and trials, owing its
existence largely to the energy and courage of the famous
Captain John Smith, who was one of its chief men from the
beginning. Its prosperity was secured after a few years by the
systematic cultivation of tobacco, for which the demand in
England grew fast. In 1619, negro slavery was introduced; and
by that time the white inhabitants of Virginia had increased
to nearly 4,000 in number, divided between eleven settlements.

See VIRGINIA.

{3166}

Meantime, the Plymouth Company had done nothing effectively in
the northward region assigned to it. Bartholomew Gosnold, in
1602, had examined the coast from Maine to Cape Cod, and built
a lonely house on the island of Cuttyhunk; Martin Pring, in 1603,
had loaded two ships with sassafras in Massachusetts Bay; a
colony named in honor of the chief justice of England, Sir
John Popham, had shivered through the winter of 1607-8 near
the mouth of Kennebec River and then gone home; Captain John
Smith, in 1614, had made a voyage to the country, in the
interest of London merchants, and had named it New England;
but no lasting English settlement had been made anywhere
within the bounds of King James' grant to the Plymouth
Company, at the waning of the year 1620, when Virginia was
well grown. It was then by chance, rather than by design, that
the small ship Mayflower landed a little company of religious
exiles on the Massachusetts coast, at Plymouth (December 21,
1620), instead of bearing them farther south. Driven from
England into Holland by persecutions, twelve years before,
this congregation of Independents, or Separatists, now sought
liberty of conscience in the New World. They came with a
patent from the London, or South Virginia Company, and
expected to plant their settlement within that company's
territorial bounds. But circumstances which seemed adverse at
the time bent their course to the New England shore, and they
accepted it for a home, not doubting that the proprietors of
the land, who desired colonists, would permit them to stay.
The next year they received a patent from the Council for New
England, which had succeeded to the rights of the Plymouth
Company. Of the hardships which these Pilgrim Fathers endured
in the first years of their Plymouth Plantation, who does not
know the story! Of the courage, the constancy and the prudence
with which they overcame their difficulties, who has not
admired the spectacle! For eight years they remained the only
successful colony in New England. Then came the memorable
movement of Puritans out of Old England into New England,
beginning with the little settlement at Salem, under John
Endicott; expanding next year into the "Governor and Company
of Massachusetts Bay"; founding Dorchester, Roxbury,
Charlestown, Watertown, and Boston, in 1630, and rapidly
possessing and putting the stamp of the stern, strong Puritan
character on the whole section of America which it planted
with towns. In the Puritan colony of Massachusetts Bay a
cleavage soon occurred, on lines between democratic and
aristocratic or theocratic opinion, and democratic seceders
pushed southwestwards into the Connecticut Valley, where Dutch
and English were disputing possession of the country. There
they settled the question decisively, in 1635 and 1636, by
founding the towns of Hartford, Windsor, Wethersfield and
Springfield. Three years later the three towns first named
confederated themselves in a little republic, with a frame of
government which is the first known written constitution, and
so gave birth to the future State of Connecticut. In 1638 New
Haven was founded by a company of wealthy nonconformists from
England, under the lead of their minister, John Davenport, and
was a distinct colony until 1662, when it was annexed to
Connecticut by a royal charter. Another State, the smallest of
the New England commonwealths, was taking form at this same
time, in a little wedge of territory on Narragansett Bay,
between Connecticut and Massachusetts. Roger Williams, the
great apostle of a tolerant Christianity, driven from Salem by
the intolerant Puritanism of the Bay, went forth with a few
followers into the wilderness, bought land from the
Narragansett Indians, and laid the foundations (1636) of the
town of Providence. In that same year another small company of
people, banished from Boston for receiving the teachings of
Mrs. Anne Hutchinson, bought the island of Aquidneck or
Aquetnet from the Indians and settled at its northern end.
This community was soon divided, and part of it removed to the
southern end of the island, beginning a settlement which grew
to be the town of Newport. The island as a whole received the
name of the Isle of Rhodes, or Rhode Island; and in 1644 its
two settlements were united with Providence, under a charter
procured in England by Roger Williams, forming the colony of
Providence Plantations. In 1643 the colonies of Massachusetts,
Plymouth, Connecticut and New Haven, entered into a
confederation, from which Rhode Island was excluded, calling
themselves "The United Colonies of New England." The object of
the confederation was common action in defence against the
Indians and the Dutch on the Hudson. It was the beginning of
the cementing of New England. Before this time, small
settlements had been planted here and there in northern New
England, within territory covered by grants made to Sir
Ferdinando Gorges and Captain John Mason. The province claimed
by Gorges was subsequently called Maine, and that of Mason,
New Hampshire; but Maine never rose to an independent colonial
existence. After years of dispute and litigation, between
1651, and 1677, the jurisdiction of Massachusetts was extended
over the province, and it remained the "District of Maine"
until 1820, when Massachusetts yielded the separation which
made it a sovereign state in the American Union. The New
Hampshire settlements were also annexed to Massachusetts, in
1641, after Captain Mason's death; were separated in 1679, to
be organized as a royal province; were temporarily reclaimed
without royal authority in 1685; but finally parted from
Massachusetts in 1692, from which time until the Revolution
they remained a distinct colony.

See NEW ENGLAND;
also MASSACHUSETTS, CONNECTICUT, RHODE ISLAND,
NEW HAMPSHIRE, and MAINE.

While the English were thus colonizing New England at the
north and Virginia at the south, the Dutch, not recognizing
their claims to the country between, had taken possession of
the important valley of the Hudson River and the region around
its mouth, and had named the country "New Netherland." The
river had been discovered in 1609 by Henry Hudson, an English
sailor, but exploring in the service of the Dutch. Trading
with the Indians for furs was begun the next year; the coast
and the rivers of the region were actively explored; a New
Netherland Company was chartered; a trading-house, called Fort
Nassau, was built on the Hudson as far to the north, or nearly
so, as Albany; but no real colonization was undertaken until
1623. The New Netherland Company had then been superseded by
the Dutch West India Company, with rights and powers extending
to Africa as well as the West Indies and the North American
coasts. It bought Manhattan Island and large tracts of land
from the Indians, but had little success for several years in
settling them. In 1629 it introduced a strange experiment,
creating a kind of feudal system in the New World, by
conveying great estates to individuals, called Patroons, or
Patrons, who would undertake to colonize them, and who
received with their territorial grant much of the powers and
many of the characteristics of a feudal lord.
{3167}
Several Patroon colonies were established on a baronial scale;
but, generally, the system did not produce satisfactory
results, and in 1640 the Company tried the better experiment
of making the trade of New Netherland free to all comers,
offering small independent grants of land to settlers, and
limiting the Patroons in their appropriation of territory. The
Company government, however, as administered by the directors
or governors whom it sent out, was too arbitrary to permit a
colonial growth at all comparable with that of New England.
Collisions with the English in Connecticut arose, over
questions of boundary, but the latter held their ground.
Southward, on the Delaware, the Swedes made a settlement where
the city of Wilmington now stands, and refused to be warned
off by the Dutch, who claimed the region. This Swedish colony
prospered and enlarged itself during sixteen years, but was
overcome by Director Stuyvesant of New Netherland in 1654. A
little later than the appearance of the Swedes on the
Delaware, certain colonists from New Haven bought lands from
the Indians on both banks of the Delaware and made attempts at
settlement, in what is now New Jersey and on the site of the
future city of Philadelphia. The Dutch and Swedes combined
against them and they failed. In 1664 the whole situation in
this middle region was changed by the English conquest of New
Netherland. The territory so acquired—or regained, if the
original English claim had been good—passed then, by royal
grant, to the Duke of York (afterwards King James II.), and
became the proprietary province of New York.

See NEW YORK.

The Duke of York, in turn, the same year, transferred to Lord
John Berkeley and Sir George Carteret the part of his domain
which lay between the Hudson and the Delaware, and it received
the name of New Cæsarea, or New Jersey. Under encouragement
from Berkeley and Carteret the New Haven colonization was
resumed. Ten years later Berkeley sold his rights to a party
of Quakers who were seeking a refuge for their persecuted sect
in the New World. A division of the province was made and the
Quaker proprietors received West Jersey, while East Jersey
remained to Carteret.

See NEW JERSEY.

Before this time, William Penn had become the principal owner
of the West Jersey interest. Not long afterwards (1681), by
surrendering a claim which his father held against the British
government, Penn procured from King Charles II. a much greater
proprietary domain, on the western side of the Delaware, being
no less than the vast tract, 40,000 square miles in extent,
which received the name of Pennsylvania. To his title from the
king he added a deed of purchase from the Indians. Penn's
scheme of colonization was very liberally framed, and it was
conducted with marked success. Philadelphia, first laid out in
1683, had 2,000 inhabitants in 1685, and Pennsylvania at large
had 8,000. Penn himself did not find peace or happiness in his
position as a princely proprietor; but he founded a great and
prosperous commonwealth on noble lines.

See PENNSYLVANIA.

In order to possess one bank of the Delaware River and Bay to
the sea, William Penn, after securing his grant from the king,
bought additionally from the Duke of York the claims of the
latter to that strip of territory which the Swedes had settled
on and struggled for with the Dutch, and which took an
independent political form in later days as the State of
Delaware. The Delaware "territories," as they were called,
never accepted their dependent relationship to Pennsylvania,
and as early as 1702 it was found necessary to concede them a
separate legislature, though they continued under Penn's
proprietary government.

See DELAWARE.