V* LIBRARY OF - The Reverend James R. Colby. \ ib^ James Sibley Colby LIBRARY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA PRESENTED BY MICHAEL J. MULLIN lHISTORY FOR READY REFERENCE FROM THE BEST HISTORIANS, BIOGRAPHERS, AND SPECIALISTS / THEm OWN WORDS IN A COMPLETE SYSTEM OF HISTORY FOR ALL USES, EXTENDING TO ALL COUNTRIES AND SUBJECTS, AND REPRESENTING FOR BOTH READERS AND STUDENTS THE BETTER AND NEWER LITERATURE OF HISTORY IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE BY J. N. LARNED WITH NUMEEOUS fflSTOBICAL MAPS FROM ORIGINAL STUDIES AND DRAWINGS BY ALAN C. REILEY REVISED AND ENLARGED EDITION IN SEVEN VOLUMES COMPANION VOLUME. APPENDICES SPRINGFIELD, MASS. THE C. A. NICHOLS CO., PUBLISHERS 1013 COPTRIOHT, 18II4, BY J. N. LARNED. Copyright, 1901, BY J. N. LARNED. Copyright, 1010, BY J. N. LARNED. Copyright, lOirt, BY S. .1. LARNED. (STbc niucc«i!ic pccsiri CAMBRIDGE . MASSACIIl'SETTS U . S . A LIST OF APPENDICES A. — Notes to Ethnograpbical Map, P*"^ 1 B. — Notes to Maps of Balkan Peninsula, 12tb-15th centuries, P-ige 6 C. — Notes to Map of Balkan Peninsula, present century Psige 10 D. — Notes to Development Map of Christianity, Page 14 E. — Notes on American Aborigines, Piige 19' F. — Chronology of important and indicative events, P'''ge 21 G. — Lineage of European Sovereigns and great historical families Page 101 H.— Selected Bibliography, Page 130- I. — List of Works from which passages have been quoted in "History for Keady Reference and Topical Reading," Page 155 J. — Study or Reading Courses, Page 182. APPENDIX A. Notes to Ethnographical SL^p, Placed at the BEGnrsiNG op Volume I. TO THE eye of modern scliolarship "lan- guage " forms the basis of every ethnic dis- tinction. Pliysical and exterior features like the stature, the color of the skin, the diversity of habits and customs, the distinctions wliicli once formed in great part the basis of ethnic research have all in our own day been relegated to a subordinate place. The "language" test is of course subject to very serious limitations. The intermingling of different peoples, more general to be sure in our own da)' thau in past ages, has nevertheless been sufficient!)' great in every age to make the trac- ing of linguistic forms a task of great difficulty. In special cases where both the civilization and language of one people have become lost in that of another the test must of course fail utterly. With all these restrictions however the adop- tion of the linguistic method by modern criticism has been practically universal. Its defence, if It t requires any, is apparent. It is the only method of ethnic study the deductions of which, where successful at all, approach anything like certainty. The points wherein linguistic criticism has failed have been freely admitted ; on the other hand the facts which it has established are unassailable by any other school of criticism. Taking language then as the only tangible working basis the subject resolves itself from the start into a two-fold division: the debatable and the certain. It is the purpose to indicate in the course of these notes, what is merely conjecture and what may be safely accepted as fact. The ethnology of Europe, studied on this basis, has for its central feature the Indo-Germanie (Indo-European) or Aryan race. The distinction between the races clearly Aryan and those doubt- ful or non- Aryan forms the primary division of the subject. As the map is intended to deal only with the Europe of the present, a historical dis- tinction must be made at the outset between the doubtful or non-Aryan peoples who preceded the Aryans and the non-Aryan peoples who have ap- peared in Europe in comparatively recent times. The simple formula, pre-Aryan, Aryan, non- Aryan, affords the key to the historical develop- ment of European ethnology. PRE-ARYAN PEOPLES. Of the presumably pre-Aryan peoples of western Europe the lUrians occupy easily the first place. The seat of this people at the dawn of history was in Spain and southern France; their ethnol- ogy belongs entirely to the realm of conjecture. They are of much darker comple.vion than the Aryans and their racial characteristic is conserva- tism even to stubbornness, which places them in marked contrast to their immediate Aryan neigh- bors, the volatile Cells. Among llie speculations concerning the origin of the Iberians a plausible one is that of Or. liodichon, who assigns to them an African origin making them, indeed, cognate with the modern Berbers (see R. II. Patterson's ' ' Ethnology of Europe "in " Lectures on History and Art "). This generalization is made to include also the Bretons of the north west. It is clear however that the population of modern Brittany is purely Celtic : made up largely from the immigrations from the British Isles during the fifth century. To the stubbornness with which the Iberians resisted every foreign aggression and refused intermingling with surrounding races is due the survival to the present day of their descendants, the Basques. The mountain ranges of northern Spain, the Cantabrians and Eastern Pyrenees have formed the very donjon-keep of this people in every age. Here the Cantabri successfully resisted the Roman arms for more than a century after the subjugation of the remainder of Spain, the final conquest not occurring until the last years of Augustus. While the Iberian race as a whole has become lost in the greater mass of Celtic and Latin intruders, it has remained almost pure in this quarter. The present seat of the Basgiies is in the Spanish provinces of Viscaya, Alava, Guipuzcoa, and Navarre and in the French department of Basses Pyrenees. The Ivernians of Ireland, now lost in the Celtic population, and the Liyurians along the shores of the Genoese gulf, later absorbed by the Romans, both belong likewise to this pre-Aryan class. fModern re- search concerning these pre-Aryan peoples has in large jjart taken its inspiration from the " Untersuchungen." of Humboldt, whose view concerning the connection between the Basques and Iberians is substantially the one stated.) Another early non-Aryan race now e.\tinct were the Etruscans of Italy. Tlieir origin was manifestly different from that of the pre-Aryan peoples just mentioned. By many they have been regarded as a branch of the great Ural- Altaic familj'. This again is conjecture. ARYAN PEOPLES. In beginning the survey of the Aryan peoples it is necessary to mention the principal divisions of the race. As generally cnuinerateti there are seven of these, viz., the Sanskrit (Hindoo), Zend (Persian), Greek, Latin, Celtic, Germanic and Slavic. To these may be added two others not definitely classified, the Albanian and the Lit/t- nanian. These bear the closest affinity respect- ively to the Latin and the Slavic. Speculation concerning the origin of the Aryans need not concern us. It belongs as yet entirely to the arena of controversy. The vital question which divides the opjjosin^ schools is concern- iiig their European or Asiatic origin. Of the numerous writers on this subject the two who perliaps afford the reader of English the best view of the opposing opinions are, on the Asiatic side. Dr. Sla.v MUUer (Lectures on the Science of Language); on the other, Prof. A. H. Sayce (In- troduction to the Science of Language). APPENDIX A. APPENDIX A. Of the divisions of the Aryan race above enu- merated the first two do not appear in European ethnology. Of the other branches, the Latin, Germanic and Slavic form by great odds the bulk of the European population. THE LATIN BRANCH. The Latin countries are France, Spain, Portu- gal, Italy and the territory north of the Danube, between the Dniester and the Theiss. In the strictest ethnic sense however the term Latin can be applied only to Italy and then only to the central part. As Italy first appears in history it is inhabited by a number of different races : the lapygians and Oenotrians oi the south who were thrown in direct contact with the Greek settlers; the Umhrians, Sabines, Latins, Volscians and Os- cans in the centre; the Etruscani on the west shore north of tlie Tiber; while in the north we find the Oauls in the valley of the Po, with the Ligurians and Venetians respectively on the west and east coasts. Of this motley collection the central group bore a close affinity to the Latin, yet all alike received the Latin stamp with the growing power of Rome. The ethnic complexion of Italy thus formed was hardly modified by the great Germanic in- vasions which followed with the fall of the West- Roman Empire. This observation applies with more or less truth to all the Latin countries, the Gennanic conquerors becoming everywhere merged and finally lost in the greater mass of the conquered. Only in Lombardy where a more enduring Ger- manic kingdom existed for over two centuries (568-774), has the Germanic made any impression, and this indeed a slight one, on the distinctly Latin character of the Italian peninsula. In Spain an interval between the Iberian period and the Roman conquest appears to have existed, during which the population is best described as Celt-Iberian. LTpon this population the Latin stamp was placed bj- the long and toilsome, but for that reason more thorough, Roman conquest. The ethnic character of Spain thus formed has passed without material change through the ordeal both of Germanic and Saracenic conquest. The Gwrtic kingdom of Spain (418-714) and the Suevic kingdom of northern Portugal (406-584) have left behind them scarcely a trace. The effects of the great Mohammedan invasion cannot be dismissed so lightly. Conquered entirely by the Arabs and Moors in 714, the entire country was not freed from the in- vader for nearly eight centuries. In the south (Granada) where the Moors clung longest their influence lias been greatest. Here their im- press on the pure Aryan stock has never been effaced. The opening phrase of Caesar's Gallic war, "all Gaul is divided into three parts," states a fact as truly ethnic as it is geographical or his- torical. In the south (Aquitania) we find the Celtic blending with the Iberian ; in the north- east the Cimbrian Beli/ae, the last comers of the Celtic family, are strongly marked by the char- acteristics of the Germans; while in the vast central territory the people " calling themselves Galli " are of pure Celtic race. This brief state- ment of Caesar, allowing for the subsequent in- flux of the German, is no mean description of the ethnic divisions of France as they exist at the present day, and is an evidence of the remarkable continuity of ethnological as opposed to mere political conditions. The four and a half centuries of Roman rule placed the Latin stamp on the Gallic nation, a preparation for the most determined siege of Germanic race influence which any Latin nation was fated to undergo. In Italy and Spain the exotic kingdoms were quickly overthrown; the Frankish kingdom in northern Gaul was in strictness never overthrown at all. In addition we soon have in the extreme north a second Germanic element in the Scandinavian Korman. Over all these outside elements, how- ever, the Latin influence eventually triumphed. While the Franks have imposed their name upon the natives, the latter have imposed their language and civilization on the invaders. The result of this clashing of influences is seen, however, in the present linguistic division of the old Gallic lands. The line running east and west through the centre of France marks the division between the French and the Provencal dialects, the langued'oil and the langued'oc. It is south of this line in the country of the langxied'oc that the Latin or Romance influence reigns most absolute in the native speech. In the northeast, on the other hand, in the Wal- loon provinces of Belgium, we have, as with the Belgae of classic times, the near approach of the Gallic to the Germanic stems. Our survey of the Latin peoples must close with a short notice of its outl3"ing members in the Balkan and Danubian lands. The Albanians {Skipetars) and the Iiouina7ia ( Vlaclis or Wallac/is) represent as nearly as ethnology can determine the ancient popidations respectively of Illyricuin and Thrace. The ethnology of the Albanians is entirely uncertain. Their present location, con- siderablj- to the south of their supposed pristine seat in Illyricum, indicates some southern migra- tion of the race. This migration occurred at an entirely unknown time, though it is generally believed to have been contemporary with the great southward movement of the Slavic races in the seventh century. The Albanian migrations of the time penetrated Attica, Aetolia and the entire Peloponnesus; with the Slavs and Vlachs they formed indeed a great part of the population of Greece during the Middle Ages. While the Slavic stems have since been merged in the native Greek population, and the Vlachs have almost entirely disappeared from these southern lands, the Albanians in Greece have shown a greater tenacity. Their part in later Greek history has been a prominent one and they form to-day a great part of the popu- lation of Attica and Argolis. The Houmans or Vlachs, the supposed native population of Thrace, are more closely identified than the Albanians with the other Latin peoples. They occupy at present the vast country north of the Danube, their boundary extending on the east to the Dniester, on the west almost to the Theiss. Historically these people form a perplexing yet interesting study. The tlieory once general that they represented a continuous Latin civiliza- tion north of the Danube, connecting the classic Dacia by an unbroken chain to the present, has now been generally abandoned. (See Roesler's " Romitnische Studieu" or Freeman's "Hist. Geog. of Europe," p. 435.) APPENDIX A. APPENDIX A. The present geographical location of the Vlach peoples ia probably the result of a migration from the Thracian lands south of the Danube, ■which occurred for unexplained causes in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The liernel of the race at the present day is the separate state of Roumania ; in the East and West they come under the respective rules of Russia and Hun- gary. In mediaeval times the part played by them south of the Balkans was an important one, and to this day they still linger in considerable num- bers on either side of the range of Pindus. (For a short dissertation on the Vlach peoples, see Finlay, "Hist, of Greece," vol. 3, pp. 234-330.) THE GERMANIC BRANCH. The Germanic nations of modern Europe are England, Germany, Holland, Denmark, 2\'orway and Sweden. The Germanic races also form the major part of the population of Switzerland, the Cis-Leithan division of the Austrian Empire, and appear in isolated settlements throughout Hungary and Russia. Of the earlier Germanic nations who overthrew the Roman Empire of the West scarcely a trace remains. The population of the British Isles at the dawn of history furnishes a close parallel to that of Gaul. The pre-Aryan leernians (the possible Iberians of the British Isles) had been forced back into the recesses of Scotland and Ireland ; next to them came the Celts, like those of Gaul, in two divisions, the Goidels or Gaels and the Britons. In Britain, contrary to the usual rule, the Roman domination did not give the perpetual Latin stamp to the island ; it is in fact the only country save the Pannonian and Kliactiau lands south of the upper Danube, once a Roman possession, where tlie Germanic element has since gained a complete mastery. The invasion of tlie Germanic races, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes, from the sixth to the eightli centuries, were practically wars of extermination. The Celtic race is to-day represented on the Britisli Isles only in Wdles and the western portions of Scotland and Ireland. The invasions of the Danes, and later tlie Norman conquest, bringing witli them only slight infu- sions of kindred Germanic nations, have produced in England no markeil modification of the Saxon stock. The German Empire, with the smaller adjoin- ing realms, Holland and Switzerland and tlie Austrian provinces of Austria, Styria, Carinthia, Salzburg and Tyrol, contain the great mass of the Germanic peoples of the continent. During the confusion following the overthrow of the West-Roman Emiiire the Germanic peoples were grouped much furtlior westward than they are at present ; the eastward reaction involving the dispossession of the Slavic peoples on Die Elbe anil Oder, has been going on ever since the days of Charlemagne. Germany like France possesses a linguistic division. Low German (Niedcr-Deutsclie) being generally spoken in the lands north of the cross line. High German (Hoch-Dcntsclie) from whicli tlie written language is derived, to the south of it. Holland uses the Flemish, a form of the Niedcr-Deutsclie ; Belgium is about equally divided between the Flemish and the ^Va^loon. Switzerland, though predominantly German, is encroached upon by the French in the western cantons, while in the southeast is used the Italian and a form allied to the same, the Romance speech of the Rhaetian (Tyrolese) Alps. This form also prevails in Friuli and some mountainous parts of northern Italy. The present population of the German Empire is almost exclusively Germanic, the exceptions being the Slavic Poles of Posen, Pomerellen, southeastern Prussia and eastern Silesia, the remnant of the Wends of Lusatia and the French element in the recently acquired Imperial lands of Alsace and Lorraine. Beyond the Empire we find a German population in the Austrian terri- tories already noted, in the border lands of Bo- hemia, and in isolated settlements further east. The great settlement in the SiebenbUrgen was made by German emigrants iu the eleventh cen- tury and similar settlements dot the map both of Hungary and Russia. On the Volga indeed exists the greatest of them all. Denmark, Norway and Sweden are peopled by the Scandinavian branch of the Germanic race. Only in the extreme north do we find another and non-Aryan race, the Lapps. On the other hand a remnant of the Swedes still retain a precarious hold on the coast line of their former possession, the Russian Finland. THE SLAVIC BRANCH. The Slavs, though the last of the Aryan na- tions to appear in history, form numerically by far the greatest branch of the Indo-European family. Their present number in Europe is com- puted at nearly one hundred million souls. At the time of the great migrations they extended over nearly all modern Germany ; their slow dispossession by the Germanic peoples, beginning in the eighth century, has already been noticed. In the course of this dispossession the most westerly Slavic group, the Polahic, between the Elbe and the Oder, were merged in the German, and, barring the remnant of ^Vends in Lusatia (the Sorabi or Northern Serbs), have dis- appeared entirely from ethnic geography. The great Slavic nation of the present day is Russia, but the great number of Slavic peoples who are not Russian and the considerable Rus- sian population wliich is not Slavic renders im- possible the study of this race on strictly national lines. The Slavic peoples are separated, partly by geographical conditions, into three great divisions : the Eastern, the Wentcrn and the Soiitliern. Tlie greatest of these divisions, the Eastern, lies entirely within the biniiidaries of the Ru.ssian Empire. The sub-divisions of the Eastern group are as follows: The Great liiissians occn- pying the vast inland territory and numbering alone between forty and fifty millions, the Little Jiiissians inhabiting the entire south of Russia from Poland to the Caspian, and the _ White liii.isians, the least numerous of this division, in Smolensk, Wilna, and Jlinsk, the west provinces bordering on the Lithuanians and Poles. The West Slavic group, omitting names of peoples now extinct, are the I'oles, Slovaks, Czechs and the remnants of the Lusatian Wends. The Poks, excepting those already mentioned as within the German empire, and the Austrian Poles of Cracow, are all uniier the domination of Rus- sia. Under the sovereignty of Austria are the Slovaks, Moravians and Czechs of Bohemia, the latter the most westerly as well as historically the APPENDIX A. APPENDIX A. oldest of the surviving Slavic peoples, having appeared in their present seats in the last years of the fifth century. In connection with this West Slavic group we should also refer to the Lithuanians whose his- tory, despite the racial difference, is so closely allied with that of Poland. Their present loca- tion in the Russian provinces of Kowno, Kurland and Livland has been practically the same since the dawn of history. The South Slavic peoples were isolated from their northern kinsmen by the great Pinno-Tatar invasions. The invasion of Europe by the Avars in the sixth century clove like a wedge the two great divisions of the Slavic race, the southernmost being forced upon the confines of the East-Roman Em- pire. Though less imposing as conquests than the Germanic invasions of the Western Empire, the racial importance of these Slavic movements is far greater since they constitute, in connection with the Finno-Tatar invasions which caused them, the most important and clearly defined series of ethnic changes which Europe has ex- perienced during the Christian Era. During the sixth and seventh centuries these Slavic emi- grants spread over almost the entire Balkan peninsula, including Epirus and the Pelopon- nesus. In Greece they afterwards disappeared as a separate people, but in the region between the Danube, tlie Save and the Balkans they immedi- ately developed separate states (Servia in 641, Bulgaria in 678). As they exist at present they may be classed in three divisions. The Bul- garians, so called from the Finno-Tatar people whom they absorbed while accepting their name, occupy the district included in the separate state of Bulgaria and Eastern Roumelia, with a considerable territory to the south of it in Mace- donia and Thrace. It was this last named ter- ritory or one very nearly corresponding to it that was actually ceded to Bulgaria by the peace of San Stefano, though she unfortunately lost it by the subsequent compromise effected at the Congress of Berlin. The second divi- sion includes the Servians, Montenegrans, Bos- nians and Croatians, the last two under Austrian control; the third and smallest are the Slov- enes of Camiola, likewise under Austrian sover- eignty. (Schafarik's " Slawische Alterthilmer" is the greatest single authority on the early history and also comparative ethnology of the Slavs.) The territory occupied by the Orefk speaking people is clearly shown on the accompanying map. As in all history, it is the coast lands where they seem to have formed the strongest hold. In free Greece itself and in tlie Turkish territories immediately adjoining, the ffreei pop- ulation overwhelmingly preponderates. Nevertheless there is still a considerable Al- banian element in Attica and Argolis, a Vlach element in Epirus while the Tui-k himself still lingers in certain quarters of Thessaly. All these are remnants left over from the successive migra- tions of the Middle Ages. The Slans, who also figured most prominently in these migrations, have disappeared in Greece as a distinct race. The question as to the degree of Slavic admixture among the modern Greeks is however another fruitful source of ethnic controversy. The gen- eral features of the question are most compactly Btated in Finlay, vol. 4, pp. 1-37. NON-ARYAN PEOPLES. The Kon- Aryan peoples on the soil of modern Europe,.excepting the Jetvs and also probably ex- cepting those already placed in the unsolved class of pre- Aryan, all belong to the Finno-Tatar or Ural-Altaic family, and all, possibly excepting the Finns, date their arrival in Europe from com- paratively recent and historic times. The four principal divisions of this race, the Ugric, Finnic, Turkic and Mongolic, all have their European representatives. Of the first the only representatives are the Hungarians (Magyars). The rift between the North and South Slavic peoples opened by the Huns in the fifth century, reopened and enlarged by the Avars in the sixth, was finally occupied by their kinsmen the Magyars in the ninth. The receding of this wave of Asiatic invasion left the Magyars in utter isolation among their Aryan neighbors. It follows as a natural consequence that they have been the only one of the Ural- Altaic peoples to accept the religion and civiliza- tion of the West. Since the conversion of their king St. Stephen in the year 1000, their geographi- cal position has not altered. Roughly speaking, it comprises the western half of Hungary, with an outlying branch in the Carpathians. Jlore closely allied to the Magyars than to their more immediate neighbors of the same race are the Finnic stems of the extreme north. Stretch- ing originally over nearly the whole northern half of Scandinavia and Russia they have been gradually displaced, in the one case by their Germanic, in the other by their Slavic neighbors. Their present representatives are the Ehsts and Tschudes of Ehstland, the Finns and Earelians of Finland, the Tscheremissians of the upper Volga, the Siryenians in the basin of the Petchora and the Lapps in northern Scandinavia and along the shores of the Arctic ocean. East of the Lapps, also bordering the Arctic ocean, lie the Samojedes, a people forming a dis- tinct branch of the Ural-Altaic family though most closely allied to the Finnic peoples. The great division of the Ural-Altaic family known indifferently as Tatar {Tartar) or Turk, has, like the Aryan Slavs, through the accidents of historical geography rather than race diverg- ence been separated into two great divisions : the northern or Russian division commonly com- prised under the specific name of Tartar; and the southern, the Turk. These are the latest additions to the European family of races. The Mongol-Tartar invasion of Russia occurred as late as the thirteenth century, while the Turks did not gain their first foothold in Europe through the gates of Gallipoli until 1353. The bulk of the Turks of the present day are congregated in Asia-ilinor. Barring the Armenians, the Georgians of the northeast, the Greeks of the seacoast and the scattered Circassians, the whole peninsula is sub- stantially Turkish. In Europe proper the Turks as a distinct people never cut a great figure. Even in the grandest days of Osmanli conquest they were always outnumbered by the conquered nations whose land they occupied, and with the decline of their power this numerical inferiority has become more and more marked. At the present day there are very few portions of the Balkan penin- sula where the Turkish population actually pre- APPENDIX A. APPENDIX A. dominates; their general distribution is clearly shown on tlie map. The Tartu IS or Russian Turks represent the siftings of the Asiatic invasions of the thirteenth century. Tbeir number has been steadily dwindling until tbey now count scarcely three millions, a mere handful in the mass of their former Slavic subjects. The survivors are scattered in irregular and isolated groups over the south and east. Promi- nent among them are the Crim Tartars, the kin- dred XogaU of tlie west shores of the Caspian, the Eirgliia of the north shore and Ural valley, and the Bashkirs between the upper Ural aud the Volga, with an isolated branch of lartars in the valley of the Araxes south of the Cau- casus. The great Asiatic irruption of the thirteenth centurj' has been commonly known as the Jlongol invasion. Such it was in leadership, tliough the residuum which it has left behind in European Russia proves that tlie rank and file were mostly Tartars. One Mongol people however, the Kal- mucks, did make their way into Europe and still exist in the steppes between the lower Don and the lower Volga. The etlmology of the Caucasian peoples is the most difficult part of the entire subject. On the steppes of the Black and Caspian seas up to the very limit of the Caucasus we have two races between whom the ethnic distinction is clearly defined, the Mongol-Tartar and the Slav. Enter- ing the Caucasus however we find a vast number of races differing alike from these and from each other. To enumerate all the different divisions of these races, whose ethnology is so very imccrtain, would be useless. Grouped in three general divisions however they are as follows: the so-called Cir- cassians wlio formerly occui)icd the whole western Caucasus with the adjoining Black sea coast but who, since the Russian conquest of 18G4, have for the most part emigrated to different quarters of the Turkish Empire; the Lesyliians, under which general name are included the motley crowd of peoples inhabiting the eastern Caucasus ; and the Georgians, the supposed descendants of the ancient Iberians of the Caucasus, who inhabit the southern slope, including all the Tiflis province and the Trapezuntine lands on the southeast coast of the Black sea. The 7<( ;•<«;-« are hardly foimd in the Caucasus though they reappear immediately south of it in the lower basin of the Kura and the Araxes. Here also appear the various /ra«i'«(t stems of the Asiatic Aryans, the Armenians, the Persians and the Kurds. R. H. Latham's worlis on "European Ethno- logy " are the best general authority in Eng- lish. Of more recent German guides, map aud otherwise, the following are noteworthy: Bas- tain's " Ethnologisches Bilderbuch," " Das Be- standige in den Menschenrasseu, " "AUgemeine Grundziige der Ethnologic," Kiepert's "Ethno- graphische Uebersichtskarte des Europaischen Orients," Menke's " Europa nach seiuen Ethno- logischen Verhaltnissen in der Mitte des 19. Jalirhundert," Rittich's "Ethnographic des euro- pilischen Russland," Sax's " Ethnographische Karte der europaisehen Turkei," Berghaus's ' ' Ethnographische Karte vom osterreichischen Kaiserstaat. " Wendt's " Bilder Atlas der Lander und VOlkerkunde, " Andree's ' ' Allgemeincr Hand- atlas (Ethnographischen Karten), " Gerland's ' 'At- las der Ethnographic." — A. C. Reiley. APPENDIX B. Notes to Fotik Maps op the Baikan Peniksula. (Twelfth to the Fifteenth Cbntttrt.) rriHERE exists to-dar upon the map of Europe I no section whose historical geography has a greater present interest than the Danubian, Ballian and Levantine states. It is these and the Austro-Hungarian lands immediately adjoining which have formed one of the great fulcrums for those national movements which constitute the prime feature of the historical geography of the present age. Upon the present map of Europe in this quarter we discover a number of separate and diminutive national entities, the Roumanian, Bulgarian, iSer- vian and Montenegrin, the G-reek and Albanian, all struggling desperately to establish them- selves on the debris of the crumbling Turkish Empire. What the issue will be of these numerous and mutually conflicting struggles for separate na- tional existence it is out of our province to fore- cast. It is only intended in this map series to throw all possible light on their true character from the lessons and analogies of the past. At first sight the period treated in the four Levantine maps (from the last of the twelfth to the middle of the fifteenth century) must appear the most intri- cate and the most obscure in the entire history of this region. The most intricate it certainly is, and possibly the most obscure, though the ob- scurity arises largely from neglect. Its impor- tance, however, arises from the fact that it is the only past period of Levantine history which pre- sents a clear analogy to the present, not alone in its purely transitionary character, but also from the several national movements which during this time were diligently at work. During the Roman and the earlier Byzantine periods, which from their continuity may be taken as one, any special tendency was of course stifled under the preponderant rule of a single great empire. The same was equally true at a later time, when all of these regions passed under the rule of the Turk. These four maps treat of that most interesting period intervening between the crumbling of the Byzantine power and the Turk- ish conquest. That in our own day the crumb- ling in turn of the Turkish power has repeated, In its general features, the same historical situa- tion, is the point upon which the interest must Inevitably centre. What the outcome will be in modern times forms the most interesting of political studies. Whether the native races of the Danube, the Balkans and the southern peninsula are to work out their full national development, either feder- ately or independently, or whether they are des- tined to pass again, as is threatened, under the domination of another and greater empire, is one of the most important of the questions which agitates the mind of the modern European states- man. That the latter outcome is now the less Ukely is due to the great unfolding of separate national spirit which marks so strongly the age in wliich we live. The reason why tlie previous age treated in this map series ended in nothing better than foreign and Mohammedan conquest may perhaps be sought in the imperfect develop- ment of this same national spirit. the BYZANTINE EMPIRE. The first map (Asia Minor and the Balkans near the close of the twelfth century) is intended to show the geographical situation as it existed immediately prior to the dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire. The Byzantine Empire of this period is in itself an important study. It must be regarded more as the offspring than the direct continuation of the great East-Roman Empire of Arcadius and Justinian ; for with the centuries which had intervened the great changes in polity, internal geography, external neighbors and lastly the continual geographical contraction, present us with an entirely new series of rela- tions. It is this geographical contraction which concerns us most vitally, for with it the frontiers of the empire conform more and more closely to the ethnic limits of the Q-reek nation. The later Byzantine Empire was, therefore, essentially a Greek Empire, and as such it ap- peals most vividly to the national consciousness of the Greek of our own time. The restoration of this empire, with the little kingdom of free Greece as the nucleus, is the vision which in- spires the more aggressive and venturesome school of modern Greek politicians. In the twelfth century the bulk of Asia Elinor had been wrested from the Byzantine Empire by the Turks, but it was the Crusaders, not the Turks, who overthrew the first empire. In one view this fact is fortunate, otherwise there would have been no transition period whose study would be productive of such fruitful re- sults. Owing to the artful policy of the Comnenian emperors, the Byzantine Empire actually prof- ited by the early crusades and was enabled through them to recover a considerable part of Asia JMinor from the Turks. This apparent success, however, was only the prelude to final disaster. Isolated from western Christendom by the schism, the Greeks were an object of suspicion and hatred to the Latin Crusaders and it only required a slight abatement of the original crusading spirit for their warlike ardor to be diverted from Jerusalem to Constantinople. Cyprus was torn away from the Greek Empire and created a separate kingdom under Latin rule, in 1191. Finally, the so-called Fourth Crusade, controlled by Venetian intrigue, ended in tlie complete dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire (1204). This nefarious enterprise forms a dark spot in history : it also ushers in the greatest period of geographical intricacy in Levantine annals. The APPEXDIX B. APPENDIX B. geography which immediately resulted from it is not directly shown iu tliis Levantine map series, but can be seen on the ceneral map of Europe at the opening of the thirteenth century. Briefly stated, it represented the establishment of a frag- mentary and disjointed Latin Empire in the place o"f the former Greelc Empire of Constanti- nople. Known as the Latin Empire of Romania, this new creation included the Empire of Con- stantinople proper and its feudal dependencies, the liingdom of Thessalonica, the duchy of Athens, and the principality of Achaia. Three orphan Greek states survived the fall of the parent power: in Europe, the despotat of Epirus, and in Asia, the empires of Nictea and Trebizond. Tlie Latin states of the East are scarcely worthy the historian's notice. They have no place what- ever in the natural development, either political or geographical, of the Levantine states. They were not only forced by foreign lances upon an unwilling population, "but were clumsy feudal- isms, established among a people to whom the feudal idea was unintelligible and barbarous. Like their prototypes, the Crusading states of Syria, they resembled artificial encroachments upon the sea, standing for a time, but with the ordinary course of nature the ocean reclaims its own. Even the weak little Greek states were strong in comparison and immediately began to recover ground at their expense. The kingdom of Thes- salonica was overtlirown by the despot of Epirus in 1222 ; the Latin Empire of Constantinople it- self fell before the Greek Emperor of Nicffa in 1261 ; while the last of the barons of the princi- pality of Achaia submitted to the Byzantine despots of the Jlorca in 1430. The duchy of Atliens alone of all these Latin states survived long enough to fall at last before the Turkish conquest. The Levantine posses- sions won by Venice at this and later times were destined, partly from their insular or maritime location, and partly from the greater vitality of trade relations, to enjoy a somewhat longer life. To the Nica;an emperors of the house of Pa- leologus belongs the achievement of having re- stored the Byzantine Empire in the event of 1261. The expression licstored Byzantine Empire has been employed, since it has the sanction of u.sage, though a complete restoratiim never occurred. The geography of tlie Restored Empire as shown on the second map (1265 A. D.) fails to include the greater part of wliat we may term the cradle of the Greek race. The only subsequent exten- sion was over tlie balance of the Jlorea, In every other quarter the frontiers of tlie Restored Empire soon began to recede until it included only the city of Constantinople and an ever de- creasing portion of Thrace. With the commence- ment of the fourteenth century the I'nrk.i, hav- ing tlirown off the JIoiigol-Tartar dominion, began under tlio house of Osniaiilis their final Ciirecr of conquest. This, of course, was tlie be- ginning of the end. Their first footliold iu Europe was gained in 1353, but over a century was destined to elapse before the completion of their sovereignty in all the lands south of the Danube. There remains, tlierefore, a considera- ble period during which whatever separate na- tional tendencies existed had full opportunity to work. THE FIRST AND SECOND BULGARIAN KINGDOMS. It was this age which saw not only the high. est point in the national greatness of Bulgaria and Servia, but also witnessed the evolution of the Wallacliian principalities in the lands north of the Danube. The separate states of Bulgaria and Servia, bom in the seventh century of the great south- ward migration of the Slavic peoples, iiad in after times risen or fallen according to the strength or weakness of the Byzantine Empire. Bulgaria had hitherto shown the greatest power. At sev- eral different periods, notably under Simeon (883- 927), and again under Samuel (976-1014), it de- veloped a strength which fairly overawed the Empire itself. These Slavic states had, however, been subjected by the Byzantine Empire in the first half of the eleventh century, and, though Servia enjoyed another period of independence (1040-1148), it was not until the final crumbling of the Byzantine Empire, the premonition of the event of 1204, that their expansion recommences. The Wallachian, or Second Bulgarian kingdom, whicli came into existence in 1187 in the lands between the Balkans and tlie Danube, has been the subject of an ethnic discussion which need not detain us. That it was not purely Slavic is well established, for the great and singular revival of the Vlach or Rounuiii peoples and their move- ment from the lands soutli of Haemus to their present seats north of the Danube, which is one of the great features of tliis age, had already begun. (The country between the Danube and the Balkans, the seat of tlie Second Bulgarian kingdom, appears as Aspro or White-Wallachia in some Byzantine writings. So also nortli of tlio Danube the later Moldavia and Great Wallachia are known respectively as Mavro [Black] and Hungarowallachia. Still the fact of a continuous Rouman civilization north of the Danube is not established. The theory of a great northward movement of the Vlach peoples is the one now generally accepted and is ably advocated in Rocs- ler's " Romiluische Studien.") At the present day this movement has been so long completed that scarcely the trace of a Vlach population remains in the lands south of the Danube. These emigrants ai)|)ear, as it were, in passing, to liave shared witli tlie native Bulgari- ans in the creation of tliis Secoud Bulgarian kingdom. This realm achieved a momentary greatness under its rulers of the house of Asau. The dismemberment of the Byzantine Empire in 1204 enabled tlieni to make great eneroaclimeiits to the .south, and it seemed for a time that to tlie Bulgarian, not the Greek, would fall the task of overtlirowing the Latin Empire of Roumania (see general map of Europe at the opening of the thirteentli century). With the reL'stablishment, however, of tlie Greek Empire of Constantinople, in 1261, the Bulgarian kingdom began to lose much of its importance, and its power was finally broken in 1285 by the Mongols. SERVIA. In the following century it was the turh of Servia to enjoy a period of preeminent greatness. The latter kingdom had recovered its independ- ence under tlie liouse of Neman ja in 1183. Under tlie great giant conqueror Stephen Dushan (1321-1355) it enjoyed a period of greater power than has ever before or since fallen to the APPENDIX B. APPENDIX B. lot of a single Balkan state. The Restored By- zantine Empire had sustained no permanent loss from the period of Bulgarian greatness: it was by the sudden Servian conquest that it was de- prived forever of nearly all its European posses- sions (see Balkan map III). A Byzantine reaction might have come under other conditions, but already another and greater enemy was at her gates. Dushan died in 1355; and already, in 1353, two years before, the Turk at Gallipoli had made his entrance into Europe. From this time every Christian state of the East grew steadily weaker until Bulgaria, Servia, the Greek Empire, and finally even Hungary, had passed under the Turkish dominion. THE VLACHS. Passing on from these Slavic peoples, another national manifestation of the greatest importance belonging to this period, one which, unlike the Greek and Slavic, may be said in one sense to have originated in the period, was that of the Vlachs. This Latin population, which ethnolo- gists have attempted to identify with the ancient Thraciam, was, previous to the twelfth century, scattered in irregular groups throughout the en- tire Balkan peninsula. During the twelfth cen- tury their great northward migration began. A single result of this movement has already been noticed in the rise of the Second Bulgarian king- dom. South of the Danube, however, their influ- ence was transitory. It was north of the river that the evolution of the two principalities. Great Wallachia (Roumania) and Moldavia, and the growth of a Vlach population in the Transyl- vanian lands of Eastern Hungary, has yielded the ethnic and in great part the political geography of the present day. The process of this evolution may be under- stood from a comparative study of the four Balkan maps. Upon the first map the Cumani- ans, a Finno-Tatar people, who in the twelfth century had displaced a kindred race, the Patzin- aks or Petachenegs, occupy the whole country between the Danube and the Transylvanian Alps. These were in turn swept forever from the map of Europe by the Mongols (1224). With the re- ceding of this exterminating wave of Asiatic con- quest the great wilderness was thrown open to new settlers. The settlements of the Vlachs north of the Danube and east of the Aluta became the principality of Great Wallachia, the nucleus of the modern Roumania. West of the Aluta the district of Little Wallachia was incorporated for a long period, as the banat of Severin, in the Hungarian kingdom. Finally, the principality of Moldavia came into existence in 1341, in land previously won by the Hungarians from the Mongols, between the Dniester and the Carpathians. Both the princi- palities of Great Wallachia and Moldavia were in the fourteenth century dependencies of Hungary. The grasp of Hungary was loosened, however, towards the close of the century and after a period of shifting dependence,, now on Hungary, now on Turkey, and for a time, in the case of Moldavia, on Poland, we come to the period of permanent Turkish supremacy. With the presence and influence of the Vlachs south of the Balkans, during this period, we are less interested, since their subsequent disappear- ance has removed the subject from any direct connection with modem politics. The ordy quar- ter where they still linger and where this in- fluence led to the founding of an independent state, was in the country east of the range of Pin- dus, the Great Wallachia of the Byzantines. Here the principality of Wallachian Thessaly appeared as an offshoot of the Greek despotat of Eplrus in 1259 (see map II). This state retained its independent existence until 1308, when it was divided between the Cata- lan dukes of Athens and the Byzantine Empire. ALBANIANS. The Skipetars {Albanicnu) during this period appear to have been the slowest to grasp out for a separate national existence. The southern sec- tion of Albania formed, after the fall of Constan- tinople, a part of the despotat of Epirus, and whatever independence existed in the northern section was lost in the revival, first of the Byzan- tine, then, in the ensuing century, of the Servian power. It was not until 1444 that a certain George Castriot, known to the Turks as Iskander-i-beg, or Scanderbeg, created a Christian principality in the mountain fastnesses of Albania. This little realm stretched along the Adriatic from Butrinto almost to Antivari, embracing, fur- ther inland, Kroja and the basin of the Drin (see map IV). It was not until after Scanderbeg's death that Ottoman control was confirmed over this spirited Albanian population. THE TURKISH CONQUEST. The reign of Mohammed II. (1451-1481) wit- nessed the final conquest of the entire country south of the Danube and the Save. The extent of the Turkish Empire at his accession is shown on map IV. The acquisitions of territory during his reign included in Asia Minor the old Greek Empire of Trebizond (1461) and the Turkish dy- nasty of Karaman; in Europe, Constantinople, whose fall brought the Byzantine Empire to a close in 1453, the duchy of Athens (1456), the despotats of Patras and Misithra (1460), Servia (1458), Bosnia (1463), Albania (1468), Epirus and Acarnania, the continental dominion of the Counts of Cephalonia (1479), and Herzegovina (1481). In the mountainous district immediately south of Herzegovina, the principality of Montenegro, situated in lands which had formed the southern part of the first Servian kingdom, alone pre- served its independence, even at the height of the Turkish domination. The chronicle of Turkish history thereafter re- cords only conquest after conquest. The islands of the ^gean were many of them won during Mohammed's own reign, the acquisition of the re- mainder ensued shortly after. Venice was hunted step by step out of all her Levantine possessions save the Ionian Islands; the superiority over the Crim Tartars, Wallachia, Moldavia and Jedisan followed, finally, tlie defeat at Mohacs (1526), and the subsequent internal anarchy left nearly all Hungary at the mercy of the Ottoman con- queror. The geographical homogeneity thus restored by the Turkish conquest was not again disturbed until the present century. The repetition of al- most the same conditions in our own time, though with the process reversed, has been referred to in the sketch of Balkan geography of the present day. The extreme importance of the period just described, for the purposes of minute historical 8 APPENDIX B. APPENDIX B. analogy, will be apparent at once wherever com- parison is attempted. The thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth cen- turies were of course periods of far greater geo- graphical intricacy, but the purpose has been rather to indicate the nature of this intricacy than to describe it in detail. The principal feature, namely, the national movements, wherever they have manifested themselves, have been more carefully dwelt upon. The object has been sim- ply to show that the four separate national move- ments, the Greek, the Slavic, the lioumati, and the Albanian, which maybe said to have created the present Levantine problem, were all present, and in the case of the two last may even be said to have had their inception, in the period just traversed. In the present century the unfolding of na- tional spirit has been so much greater and far- reaching that a different outcome may be looked for. It is sufficient for the present that the in- cipient existence of these same movements has been shown to have existed in a previous age. The best general text authority in English for the geography of this period is George Finlay's " History of Greece," vols. III. and IV. ; a more exhaustive guide in German is Hopf's " Ge- schichte Griechenlands." For the purely geo- graphical works see the general bibliography of historical geography. — A. C. Reiley. 9 APPENDIX C Notes to the Map of the Balkan Peninsula. (Present Centubt.) THE present century has been a remarkable one for the settlement of great political and geographical questions. These questions re- solve themselves into two great classes, which indicate the political forces of the present age, — the first, represented in the growth of demo- cratic tliought, and the second arising from the awakening of national spirit. The first of these concerns historical geography only incidentally, but the second has already done much to recon- struct the political geography of our time. recent national movements. Within a little over thirty years it has changed the map of central Europe from a medley of small states into a united Italy and a imited Germany ; it has also led to a reconstruction of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, In Italy, Ger- many and Austria-Hungary, the national ques- tions may, however, be regarded as settled ; and If, in the case of Austria-Hungary, owing to exactly reverse conditions, the settlement has been a tentative one, it has at least removed the question from the more immediate concern of the present. In a diilerent quarter of Europe, how- ever, the rise of the national movements has led to a question, infinitely more complicated than the others, and which, so far from being settled, is becoming ever more pressing year by year. This reference is to the great Balkan problem. That this question has been delayed in its solution for over four centuries, is due, no doubt, to the conquests of the Turk, and it is still com- plicated by his presence. In the notes to the four previous Balkan maps (1191-1451), attention ■was especially directed to the national move- ments, so far as they had opportunity to develop themselves during this period. These move- ments, feeble in tlieir character, were all smoth- ered by the Turkish conquest. With the decline of this power in the present century these forces once more have opportunity for reappearance. In this regard the history of the Balkans during the nineteenth century is simply the history of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries read back- wards. The Turkish Empire had suUered terrible re- verses during' the eighteenth century. Hungary (1699), the Crim Tartars (1774), Bukovina (1777), Jedisan (1792), Bessarabia and Eastern Moldavia (1813) were all successively wrested from the Ottomans, while Egypt on one^ide and Moldavia and Wallachia on another recovered practical autonomy, the one under the restored rule of the Slanielukes (1766), the other under native hospo- dars. the SERVIAN AND GREEK REVOLTS. All of these losses, though greatly weakening the Ottoman power, did not destroy its geographi- cal integrity. It was with the Servian revolt of 1804 that the series of events pointing to the actual disruption of the Turkish Empire may be said to have begun. The first period of dissolu- tion was measured by the reign of Blahmoud II. (1808-1839), at once the greatest and the most tm- fortunate of all the later Turkish sultans. Servia, first under Kara Georg, then under Milosch Obrenovitch, the founder of the present dynasty, maintained a struggle which led to the recogni- tion of Servian local autonomy in 1817. The second step in the process of dissolution was the tragic Greek revolution (1821-1828). The Sultan, after a terrible war of extermination, had practi- cally reduced Greece to subjection, when all his work was undone by the intervention of the great powers. The Turkish fleet was destroyed by the com- bined squadrons of England, France and Russia at Navarin, October 20, 1827, and in the campaign of the ensuing 3'ear the Moscovite arms for the first time in history penetrated south of the Balkans. The treaty of Adrianople, between Russia and Turkey (September 14, 1829), gave to the Czar the protectorate over Jloldavia and Wallachia. By the treaty of London earlier in this year Greece was made autonomous under the suzerainty of the Sultan, and the pi;otocol of Jlarch 23, 1829, drew her northern frontier in a line between the gulfs of Arta and Volo. The titular sovereignty of the Sultan over Greece was annulled later in the year at the peace of Adrianople, though the northern boundary of the Hellenic kingdom was then curtailed to a line drawn from the mouth of the Achelous to the gulf of Lamia. With the accession of the Bavarian king Otho, in 1833, after the failure of the republic, the northern boundary was again adjusted, returning to about the limits laid down in the March protocol of 1829. Greece then remained for over fifty years bounded on the north by Mount Othrys, the Pin- dus range and the gulf of Arta. In 1863, on the accession of the Danish king George I. , the Ionian Isles, which had been under English administra- tion since the Napoleonic wars, were ceded to the Greek kingdom, and in May, 1881, almost the last change in European geography to the present day was accomplished in the cession, by the Sul- tan, of Thessaly and a small part of Eplrus. The agitation in 1886 for a further extension of Greek territory was unsuccessful. THE TREATY OF UNKIAR SKBLESSI. A series of still greater reverses brought the reign of the Sultan Mahmoud to a close. The chief of these were the defeats sustained at the hands of his rebellious vassal Jlehemet All, pacha of Egypt, a man who takes rank even be- fore the Sultan himself as the greatest figure in tlie Jloliammedan world during the present cen- tury. The immediate issue of this struggle was the practical independence of Egypt, where the descendants of Meliemct still rule,' their title hay- ing been changed in 1867 from viceroy to that of khedive. An event incidental to the strife be- tween Mehemet Ali and the Sultan is of far 10 APPENDIX C. APPENDIX C. greater Importance in the history of European Turkey. Mahmouil in his distress looked for aiii to tlic great powers, and tlie final issue of Un; rival interests struggling at Constantinople was the memorable treaty of Unkiar Skelessi (July, 18;i;S) by which the Sultan resigned himself com- pletely to the interests of his former implacable foe, the Czar of Russia. In outward appearance this treaty was an offensive and defensive alli- ance; in practical results it gave the Moscovite, In exchange for armed assistance, when needed, ■the practical control of the Dardanelles. It is no extravagance of s'lutement to say that this treaty forms alisolutely the high watermark of Russian predominance in the affairs of the Levant, Dur- ing the subsequent sixty years, this inllucncc, taken as a whole, strange paradox as it may seem, has rather receded than advanced. The utter prostration of the Turkish Empire on the death of Mahmoud (1839) compelled Russia to recede from the conditions of Unkiar Skelessi while a concert of the European powers under- took the task of rehabilitating the prostrate power; the Crimean war (18547-1855) struck a more damaging blow at the Russian power, and the events of 1878, though they again shattered the Turkish Empire, did not, as will be shown, lead to corresponding return of the Czar's ascendency. THE CRIMEAN WAR AND TREATY OF PARIS. The Crimean War was brought on by the at- tempt of the Czar to dictate concerning the in- ternal affairs of the Ottoman Empire — a policy which culminated in the occupation of Moldavia and Wallachia (185IJ). All Europe became ar- rayed against Rii.ssia on this question, — Prussia and Austria in tacit opposition, while England, France, and afterwards Piedmont, drifted into war with the norlhcrn power. By the treaty of Paris (1856), which terminated the sanguinary struggle, the Danube, closed since the peace of Adrianoplc (1829), was reopened; the southern part of Bessarabia was taken from Russia and added to the principality of Moldavia ; the treaty powers renounced all right to interfere in the internal affairs of the Porte; and, lastly, the Black St'a, which twenty _vears liefore, Ijy tlie treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, had become a private Russian pond, was swept of the Russian Ueets and converted into a neutral sea. The latter condition however was abrogated by the powers (March IS, 1871). Despite the defeat of Russia, the settlement effected at the congress of Paris was bvit tenta- tive. The most that the allied powers could pos- sibly have hoped for, was .so far to cripple Russia as to render her no longer a menace to the Otto- man Empire. They succeeded only in so far as to defer the recurrence of a Turkish crisis for another twenty years. The chief event of importance during this in- terval was the birth of the united Roumania. In 1857 the representjitive councils of both Moldavia and Wallachia voted for their union under this name. This personal union was accomplished by the choice of a conunon rulcT, John Cu/.a (1859), whose election was continued by a new conference at Paris in 1801. A single nnnistry .and single assembly were fomied al HucbareHtin 1H(U. Prince Karl of IIoliciiZDJiern Sij;mariiigen was elected hospodar in 18(iU, and liually crowned fts king in 1881. THE REVIVED EASTERN QUESTION OF 1875-78. The Eastern question was reopened with all its perplexities in the Herzegovinian and Bosnian revoltof August, 1875. These provinces, almost cut off from the Turkish Empire liy Montenegro and Servia, occupied a position wliich rendered their subjugation almost a hopeless task. Preparations were already undi^r way for a settlement by joint action of the powers, when a wave of fanatical fury swceiiing o\-er the Otto- man Empire rendered all these efforts aljorlive. Another Christian insurrection in Bulgaria was suppressed in a series of wholesale and atrocious massacres. Servia and Montenegro in a ferment declared war on Turkey (July 2, 187C). The Turkish arras, however, were easily victorious, and Russia only saved the Servian capital bj' com- pelling an armistice (October 30). A conference of the representatives of the powers was then held at Constantinople in a tinal etfort to arrange for a reorganization of the Empire, which should include the granting of autonomy to Bosnia, Herzegovina and Bulgaria. These conditions, though subsequently embodied in a general ulti- matum, the Loudon protocol of March 31, 1877, were rejected by the Porto, and Russia, who had determined to proceed alone in the event of this rejection, innnediately declared war (April 24). Into this war, owing to the horror excited in England by the Bulgarian massacres, and the altered policy of Prance, the Turk was compelled to go without allies, and thus unassisted his de- feat was assured. Then followed the sanguinary campaigns in Bulgaria, the memories of which are still recent and unobscured. Plevna, the central point of the Turkish resistance, fell on December 10th ; Adrianoplc was occupied by the Russians on January 20th, 1878; and on January 31st, an armistice was granted. Great Britain now seemed roused to a sense of the danger to herself in the Russian aitjiroach to Constantinople, and public opinion at last per- mitted Lord Beaconsfield to send a tlect to the Bosporus. By the Russo-Turkish peace of San Stephano (March 3, 1878) Turkey rccogiiiz