fragments, some of which were secured by the conquerors and
loosely bound together in the feudal empire of Romania, while
others were snatched from the ruin and preserved by the
Greeks, themselves. For the sovereignty of these latter
numerous claimants made haste to contend. Three fugitive
emperors were wandering in the outer territories of the
shattered realm. One was that Alexius III., whose deposition
of Isaac Angelos had afforded a pretext for the crusading
conquest, and who had fled when Isaac was restored. A second
was Alexius V. (Murtzuphlos), who pushed Isaac Angelos and his
son Alexius IV. from the shaking throne when Constantinople
resolved to defend itself against the Christians of the West,
but who abandoned the city in the last hours of the siege. The
third was Theodore Lascaris, son-in-law of Alexius III., who
was elected to the imperial office as soon as the flight of
Alexius V. became known—even after the besiegers had entered
the city—and who, then, could do nothing but follow his
fugitive predecessors. This last was the only one of the three
who found a piece of defensible territory on which to set up
his throne. He established himself in Bithynia, associating
his claims with those of his worthless father-in-law, and
contenting himself with the title of Despot, at first. But the
convenient though objectionable father-in-law was not
permitted to enjoy any share of the sovereignty which he
acquired. Theodore, in fact, managed his affairs with great
vigor and skill. The district in which his authority was
recognized widened rapidly and the city of Nicæa became his
capital. There, in 1206, he received the imperial crown, more
formally and solemnly, anew, and rallied the Greek resistance
which was destined to triumph, a little more than half a
century later, over the insolent aggression of the Latin West.
{1612}
The small empire of Nicæa had to contend, not merely with the
Latins in Constantinople and Greece, and with the Turkish
Sultan of Iconium, but also with another ambitious fragment of
Greek empire at Trebizond, which showed itself persistently
hostile. His successors, moreover, were in conflict with a
third such fragment in Europe, at Thessalonica. But, ten years
after the flight of Theodore from Constantinople, his empire
of Nicæa "extended from Heracleia on the Black Sea to the head
of the Gulf of Nicomedia; from thence it embraced the coast of
the Opsikian theme as far as Cyzicus; and then descending to
the south, included Pergamus, and joined the coast of the
Ægean. Theodore had already extended his power over the
valleys of the Hermus, the Caister, and the Mæander." Theodore
Lascaris died in 1222, leaving no son, and John Dukas
Vatatzes, or Vataces as his name is written by some
historians, a man of eminent abilities and high qualities, who
had married Theodore's daughter, was elected to the vacant
throne. He was saluted as John III.—assuming a continuity
from the Byzantine to the Nicæan series of emperors. In a
reign of thirty-three years, this prudent and capable emperor,
as Gibbon expresses the fact, "rescued the provinces from
national and foreign usurpers, till he pressed on all sides
the imperial city [Constantinople], a leafless and sapless
trunk, which must fall at the first stroke of the axe." He did
not live to apply that blow nor to witness the fall of the
coveted capital of the East. But the event occurred only six
years after his death, and owed nothing to the energy or the
capability of his successors. His son, Theodore II., reigned
but four years, and left at his death, in 1258, a son, John
IV., only eight years old. The appointed regent and tutor of
this youth was soon assassinated, and Michael Paleologos, an
able officer, who had some of the blood of the imperial
Angelos family in his veins, was made in the first instance
tutor to the young emperor, and soon afterwards raised to the
throne with him as a colleague. In 1260 the new emperor made
an attack on Constantinople and was repulsed. But on the 25th
of July in the next year the city was taken by a sudden
surprise, while 6,000 soldiers of its garrison were absent on
an expedition against Daphnusia in the Black Sea. It was
acquired almost without resistance, the Latin emperor, Baldwin
II., taking promptly to flight. The destruction of life was
slight; but the surprising party fired a considerable part of
the city, to cover the smallness of its numbers, and
Constantinople suffered once more from a disastrous
conflagration. On the recovery of its ancient capital, the
Greek empire ceased to bear the name of Nicæa, and its history
is continued under the more imposing appellation of the Greek
empire of Constantinople.
G. Finlay,
History of the Byzantine and Greek Empires,
from 716 to 1453,
book 4, chapter 1 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 62.
GREEK EMPIRE OF TREBIZOND.
See TREBIZOND: A. D. 1204-1461.
GREEK FIRE.
"The important secret of compounding and directing this
artificial flame was imparted [in the later part of the
seventh century to the Greeks, or Byzantines, at
Constantinople] by Callinicus, a native of Heliopolis, in
Syria, who deserted from the service of the caliph to that of
the emperor. The skill of a chemist and engineer was
equivalent to the succour of fleets and armies; and this
discovery or improvement of the military art was fortunately
reserved for the distressful period when the degenerate Romans
of the East were incapable of contending with the warlike
enthusiasm and youthful vigour of the Saracens. The historian
who presumes to analyze this extraordinary composition should
suspect his own ignorance and that of his Byzantine guides, so
prone to the marvellous, so careless, and, in this instance,
so jealous of the truth. From their obscure, and perhaps
fallacious hints, it should seem that the principal ingredient
of the Greek fire was the naphtha, or liquid bitumen, a light,
tenacious, and inflammable oil, which springs from the earth.
… The naphtha was mingled, I know not by what methods or in
what proportions, with sulphur and with the pitch that is
extracted from evergreen firs. From this mixture, which
produced a thick smoke and a loud explosion, proceeded a
fierce and obstinate flame … ; instead of being extinguished
it was nourished and quickened by the element of water; and
sand, urine, or vinegar were the only remedies that could damp
the fury of this powerful agent. … It was either poured from
the ramparts [of a besieged town] in large boilers, or
launched in red-hot balls of stone and iron, or darted in
arrows and javelins, twisted round with flax and tow, which
had deeply imbibed the inflammable oil; sometimes it was
deposited in fire-ships … and was most commonly blown
through long tubes of copper, which were planted on the prow
of a galley, and fancifully shaped into the mouths of savage
monsters, that seemed to vomit a stream of liquid and
consuming fire. This important art was preserved at
Constantinople, as the palladium of the state. … The secret
was confined, above 400 years, to the Romans of the East. …
It was at length either discovered or stolen by the
Mahometans; and, in the holy wars of Syria and Egypt, they
retorted an invention, contrived against themselves, on the
heads of the Christians. … The use of the Greek, or, as it
might now be called, the Saracen fire, was continued to the
middle of the fourteenth century."
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 52.
GREEK GENIUS AND INFLUENCE.
See HELLENIC GENIUS, &c.
GREELEY, Horace,
The Peace Conference at Niagara.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864 (JULY).
Presidential candidacy and defeat.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1872.
GREEN, Duff, in the "Kitchen Cabinet" of President Jackson.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1829.
GREEN MOUNTAIN BOYS.
See VERMONT: A. D. 1749-1774.
GREENBACK PARTY, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1880.
GREENE, General Nathaniel, and the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1775 (MAY-AUGUST); 1780-1781;
and 1781 (JANUARY-MAY).
----------GREENLAND: Start--------
GREENLAND: A D.876-984.
Discovery and settlement by the Northmen.
See NORMANS.—NORTHMEN: A. D. 876-984.
GREENLAND: A. D. 1450-1585.
The lost Icelandic colony, absorbed by Eskimo. Rediscovery of
the country.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ESKIMAUAN FAMILY.
----------GREENLAND: End----------
{1613}
GREENS, Roman Faction of the.
See CIRCUS, FACTIONS OF THE ROMAN.
GREENVILLE TREATY WITH THE INDIAN TRIBES.
See NORTHWEST TERRITORY: A. D. 1790-1795.
GREGORIAN CALENDAR.—GREGORIAN ERA.
See CALENDAR, GREGORIAN.
GREGORY I. (called The Great), Pope, A. D. 590-604.
Gregory II., Pope, 715-731.
Gregory III., Pope, 731-741.
Gregory IV., Pope, 827-844.
Gregory V., Pope, 996-999.
Gregory VI., Pope, 1044-1046.
Gregory VII., Pope, 1075-1085.
Gregory VIII., Pope, 1187, October to December.
Gregory IX., Pope, 1227-1241.
Gregory X., Pope, 1271-1276.
Gregory XI., Pope, 1371-1378.
Gregory XII., Pope, 1406-1415.
Gregory XIII., Pope, 1572-1585.
Gregory XIV., Pope, 1590-1591.
Gregory XV., Pope, 1621-162.
Gregory XVI., Pope, 1831-1846.
GRENVILLE MINISTRY, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1760-1763; and 1765-1768.
GRÉVY, Jules, President of the French Republic, 1879-1887.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1875-1889.
GREY, Earl, The Ministry of.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1830-1832; and 1834-1837.
GREY FRIARS.
See MENDICANT ORDERS.
GREY LEAGUES, The.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1396-1499.
GREYS, OR BIGI, of Florence, The.
See BIGI.
GRIERSON'S RAID.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (APRIL-MAY: MISSISSIPPI).
GRIQUAS.—GRIQUALAND.
"The Griquas or Baastards, a mixed race sprung from the
intercourse of the 'Boers' [of South Africa] with their
Hottentot slaves," migrated from Cape Colony after the
Emancipation Act of 1833, "and, under the chiefs Waterboer and
Adam Kok, settled in the country north of the confluence of
the Orange and Vaal, the present Griqualand West.
Subsequently, in 1852, Adam Kok's section of the Griquas again
migrated to the territory then called No Man's Land, between
Kafraria and southern Natal, now known as Griqualand East, or
New Griqualand. … In consequence of the discovery of
diamonds in the Griqua country in 1867, and the rush thither
of thousands of Europeans from all the surrounding states, as
well as from Europe, America, and Australia, the chief
Waterboer ceded his rights to the British Government, and this
region was annexed to the Cape Colony as the
Lieutenant-Governorship of Griqualand West in 1871."
Hellwald-Johnston,
Africa (Stanford's Compendium),
chapter 23, section 5.
----------GRISONS: Start--------
GRISONS, The.
Achievement of democratic independence.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1396-1499.
GRISONS: The Valtelline revolt and war.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1624-1626.
----------GRISONS: End----------
GROCHOW, Battles of (1831).
See POLAND: A. D. 1830-1832.
GROL, Capture of (1627).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1621-1633.
GRONENBURG: A. D. 1593.
Capture by Prince Maurice.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1588-1593.
GROS VENTRE INDIANS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: HIDATSA,
and ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
GROSS BEEREN, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (AUGUST).
GROSS GÖRSCHEN, OR LUTZEN, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (APRIL-MAY).
GROSSE RATH, The.
See SWITZERLAND: A. D. 1848-1890.
GROSSWARDEIN, Treaty of.
See HUNGARY: A. D. 1526-1567.
GROTIUS, HUGO, Imprisonment and escape of.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1603-1619.
GROVETON, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (AUGUST-SEPTEMBER).
GRUTHUNGI, The.
See GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 376.
GRÜTLI, OR RÜTLI, The Meadow of.
See SWITZERLAND: THE THREE FOREST CANTONS.
GRYNEUM, The Oracle of.
See ORACLES OF THE GREEKS.
GUADACELITO OR SALADO, Battle of (1340).
See SPAIN: A. D. 1273-1460.
GUADALETE, Battle of the.
See SPAIN: A. D. 711-713.
GUADALOUPE HIDALGO, Treaty of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1848.
GUADALUPES.
See GACHUPINES.
GUAICARUS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
GUAJIRA, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: COAJIRO.
GUANAJUATO, Battles of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1810-1819.
GUANAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
GUANCHES, The.
See LIBYANS.
GUARANI, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: TUPI.
GUASTALLA, Battle of (1734).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1733-1735.
----------GUATEMALA: Start--------
GUATEMALA:
The name.
"According to Fuentes y Guzman, derived from 'Coctecmalan'
—that is to say 'Palo de leche,' milk-tree, commonly called
'Yerba mala,' found in the neighborhood of Antigua Guatemala.
… In the Mexican tongue, if we may believe Vasquez, it was
called 'Quauhtimali,' rotten-tree. … Others derive it from
'Uhatezmalha,' signifying 'the hill which discharges water';
and Juarros suggests that it may be from Juitemal, the first
king of Guatemala."
H. H. Bancroft,
History of the Pacific States,
volume 1, page 620, foot-note.
GUATEMALA:
Aboriginal inhabitants, and ruins of Ancient Civilization.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MAYAS, and QUICHES;
also, MEXICO, ANCIENT.
GUATEMALA: A. D. 1524.
Conquest by Alvarado, the lieutenant of Cortes.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1521-1524.
GUATEMALA: A. D. 1821-1871.
Separation from Spain.
Brief annexation to Mexico.
Resistance to Central American Federation.
The wars of the states.
See CENTRAL AMERICA: A. D. 1821-1871.
----------GUATEMALA: End----------
GUAYANAS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
{1614}
GUCK OR COCO TRIBES.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: GUCK OR COCO GROUP.
----------GUELDERLAND: Start--------
GUELDERLAND: A. D. 1079-1473.
Under the House of Nassau.
Acquisition by the Duke of Burgundy.
"The arable extent of Guelderland, its central position, and
the number of its ancient towns, rendered it at all times of
great importance. The men of Zutphen and Arnheim were foremost
among the claimants of civic freedom; and at Tiel and Bommel
industry struck early root, and struggled bravely to maturity
through countless storms of feudal violence and rapine.
Guelderland was constituted a county, or earldom, by Henry
III. [Emperor, A. D. 1079], and bestowed on Otho, count of
Nassau; and thus originated the influence of that celebrated
family in the affairs of the Netherlands. Three centuries
later the province was created a duchy of the empire. Vigour
and ability continued to distinguish the house of Nassau, and
they were destined to become eventually the most popular and
powerful family in the nation. Apart from their influence,
however, Guelderland hardly occupies as important a place in
the general history of the country as Utrecht or Holland." In
1473, when the House of Burgundy had acquired sovereignty over
most of the Netherland states, Charles the Bold availed
himself of a domestic quarrel between the reigning prince of
Guelderland and his heir "to purchase the duchy from the
former for 92,000 crowns of gold. The old duke died before the
pecuniary portion of the bargain was actually completed; and,
the rightful heir being detained in prison, the grasping lord
of Burgundy entered into possession of his purchase, for which
no part of the price was ever paid."
W. T. McCullagh,
Industrial History of Free Nations,
chapters 8 and 10 (volume 2).
GUELDERLAND: A. D. 1713.
The Spanish province ceded to Prussia.
See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.
----------GUELDERLAND: End----------
GUELF PARTY, Captains of the.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1358.
GUELF PARTY:
Guelfic origin of the House of Hanover, or Brunswick-Lüneburg.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1714;
also, GUELFS AND GHIBELLINES;
and ESTE, HOUSE OF.
----------GUELFS: Start--------
GUELFS, OR GUELPHS, AND GHIBELLINES:
German origin of these Factions and their feuds.
On the death (A. D. 1125) of Henry V., the last of the
Franconian dynasty of Germanic emperors, Lothaire, Duke of
Saxony, was elected emperor, in rather a tumultuous and
irregular manner. Lothaire, and the Saxons generally, were
embittered in enmity against the house of Franconia, and
against the new family—the Suabiau or Hohenstauffen—which
succeeded by inheritance, through the female line, to the
Franconian claims. It was the object of his reign, moreover,
to pass the imperial crown from his own head to that of his
son-in-law, Henry the Proud. Hence arose a persecution of the
Suabian family, under Lothaire, which stirred deep passions.
Henry the Proud, for whose succession Lothaire labored, but
vainly, united in himself several ancient streams of noble
blood. He "was fourth in descent from Welf [or Guelf], son of
Azon marquis of Este, by Cunegonda, heiress of a distinguished
family, the Welfs of Altorf in Suabia." His ancestor, Welf,
had been invested with the duchy of Bavaria. He himself
represented, by right of his mother, the ancient ducal house
of Saxony; and, by favor of his imperial father-in-law, the
two powerful duchies, Bavaria and Saxony, were both conferred
on him. He also received Hanover and Brunswick as the dowry of
his wife. "On the death of Lothaire in 1138 the partisans of
the house of Suabia made a hasty and irregular election of
Conrad [one of the Hohenstauffen princes], in which the Saxon
faction found itself obliged to acquiesce. The new emperor
availed himself of the jealousy which Henry the Proud's
aggrandizement had excited. Under pretence that two duchies
could not legally be held by the same person, Henry was
summoned to resign one of them, and on his refusal, the diet
pronounced that he had incurred a forfeiture of both. Henry
made but little resistance, and before his death, which
happened soon afterwards, saw himself stripped of all his
hereditary as well as acquired possessions. Upon this occasion
the famous names of Guelf [or Guelph] and Ghibelin were first
heard, which were destined to keep alive the flame of civil
dissension in far distant countries, and after their meaning
had been forgotten. The Guelfs, or Welfs, were, as I have
said, the ancestors of Henry, and the name has become a sort
of patronymic in his family. The word Ghibelin is derived from
Wibelung, a town in Franconia, whence the emperors of that
line are said to have sprung. The house of Suabia were
considered in Germany as representing that of Franconia; as
the Guelfs may, without much impropriety, be deemed to
represent the Saxon line."
H. Hallam,
The Middle Ages,
chapter 5 (volume 2).
Sir Andrew Halliday, in his "Annals of the House of Hanover,"
traces the genealogy of the Guelfs with great minuteness and
precision—with more minuteness, perhaps, in some remote
particulars, and more precision, than seems consistent with
entire credibility. He carries the line back to Edico, king or
prince of the Heruli, or Rugii, or Scyrii,—the stock from
which came Odoacer, who overturned the Western Roman Empire
and made himself the first king of Italy. Edico, who was
subject to Attila, and the favorite adviser of the king of the
Huns, is thought to have had a son or brother named Guelf or
Welf, who fell in battle with the Ostrogoths. It is to him
that Sir Andrew is disposed to assign the honor of being the
historical chief of the great family of the Guelfs. If not
from this shadowy Guelf, it is from another of like name in
the next generation—a brother of Odoacer—that he sees the
family spring, and the story of its wide-branching and
many-rooted growth, in Friuli, Altdorf, Bavaria, old Saxony,
Brunswick, Hanover,—and thence, more royally than ever, in
England,—is as interesting as a narrative of highly
complicated genealogy can be.
Sir A. Halliday,
Annals of the House of Hanover.
From the Guelf uncertainly indicated above were descended two
Marquesses of Este, "successively known in German and Italian
story as the first and second of that name. … Azo, the
second Marquess of Este in Italy (born A. D. 995, died 1097),
the head of the Italian (junior) branch of Guelphs [see ESTE],
married Cunigunda, the sole heiress of the German Guelphs of
Altdorf, thus uniting in his family the blood, wealth, and
power of both branches of the old Guelphs, and becoming the
common father of the later German and Italian princes of the
name of Guelph.
{1615}
No wonder, then, that he was elected by the Emperor, Henry
III., as his representative in Italy. … Cunigunda, the first
wife of Azo II., bore him one son, Guelph, who was known in
German history as Guelph VI. He succeeded to his mother's
titles and vast estates on her death, A. D. 1055, and to those
of his father, A. D. 1097. … Henry IV. invested him with the
Duchy of Bavaria, A. D. 1071—a title first assumed 170 years
before (A. D. 900) by his almost mythological ancestor, Henry
of the Golden Chariot." This Guelph VI. was the grandfather of
Henry the Proud, Duke of Saxony and Bavaria, referred to
above.
P. M. Thornton,
The Brunswick Accession,
chapter 1.
ALSO IN:
O. Browning,
Guelfs and Ghibellines.
See, also,
SAXONY: A. D. 1178-1183;
and GERMANY: A. D. 1138-1268;
and, also, ESTE, HOUSE OF.
GUELFS:
The outcrop of the contention in Italy.
Its beginnings, causes, course and meaning.
See ITALY: A. D. 1215;
and FLORENCE: A. D. 1248-1278.
----------GUELFS: End----------
GUÉLFS. White and Black (Bianchi and Neri).
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1295-1300;
and 1301-1313.
GUELPHS OF HANOVER, The Order of the.
"The Hanoverian troops having much distinguished themselves at
the battle of Waterloo, George IV. (then prince regent)
determined to found an order of merit which might, with
especial propriety, be conferred upon such of them as deserved
the distinction, and the 12th of August, 1815, was fixed upon
as the date of its foundation. By the second statute, the
Order is inseparably annexed to the possession of the
Hanoverian crown, by vesting the grand-mastership in the
sovereign of that country for the time being."
C. R. Dodd,
Manual of Dignities,
part 3.
GUERANDE. Treaty of.
See BRITTANY: A. D. 1341-1365.
GUERNSEY, The Isle of.
See JERSEY AND GUERNSEY.
GUERRA DOS CABANOS.
See BRAZIL: A. D. 1825-1865.
GUERRILLAS.
A term of Spanish origin, derived from 'guerilla', signifying
little or petty warfare, and applied to small, irregular bands
of troops, carrying on war against an enemy by harassing,
destructive raids.
GUEUX OF THE NETHERLAND REVOLT.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1562-1566.
----------GUIANA: Start--------
GUIANA: The aboriginal inhabitants.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CARIBS.
GUIANA: 16th Century.
The search for El Dorado.
See EL DORADO.
GUIANA: A. D. 1580-1814.
Dutch, French and English settlements and conquests.
"There was one European nation which was not likely to hunt
for a golden city, when gold was to be earned by plain and
matter of fact commerce. The Dutch had as early as 1542
established a systematic if contraband trade with the Spanish
Main; and in 1580 they began to settle in Guiana by planting a
depot on the river Pomeroon, in what is now the county of
Essequibo. In 1599 they built two forts at the mouth of the
Amazon, but were driven out by the Portuguese; and about 1613
they established a colony on the Essequibo, building the fort
of 'Kyk over al', 'Look over all,' on an island where the
Massaruni flows into the Essequibo. The colony was founded by
Zeeland merchants, was known as Nova Zeelandia, and came under
the control of the Netherlands West India Company, which was
incorporated in 1621. Shortly afterwards colonisation began
further to the east on the Berbice river. The founder was a
Flushing merchant, Van Peere by name; he founded his
settlement about 1624, and he held his rights under contract
with the Chamber of Zeeland. … Thus was the present province
of British Guiana colonised by Dutchmen. … While English
discovery was attracted to the west and Orinoco, the first
attempts at English settlement were far to the east on the
Wyapoco or Oyapok river. Here, in 1604, while Ralegh was in
prison, Captain Charles Leigh founded a colony at the mouth of
the river. … In 1609 Robert Harcourt of Stanton Harcourt in
Oxfordshire took up the work in which Leigh had failed. … In
1613 he obtained from King James a grant of 'all that part of
Guiana or continent of America lying between the river of
Amazones and the river of Dessequebe,' which was not actually
possessed or inhabited by any Christian power in friendship
with England. … In 1619 a scheme was started for an Amazon
Company, the leading spirit in which was Captain Roger North.
… The company was fortunate enough to secure the powerful
patronage of the Duke of Buckingham. Harcourt threw in his lot
with them, and on the 19th of May 1627 a royal grant was made
to the Duke of Buckingham and 55 other adventurers, including
the Earl of Pembroke and Montgomery, who were incorporated
under the title of 'the governor and company of noblemen and
gentlemen of England for the plantation of Guiana.' The Duke
of Buckingham was Governor, North was Deputy-Governor, and the
grant included the 'royal' river of the Amazon. For about two
years the company did some solid work, sending out four ships
and 200 colonists; an attempt was then made in 1629 to bring
the territory covered by their grant immediately under royal
protection, and upon its failure their efforts at colonisation
appear to have gradually died away. The English were not the
only Europeans who tried their hand at settlement in the east
of Guiana. … In 1613, 160 French families settled in
Cayenne. The first colony failed, but in 1624 and 1626 fresh
attempts were made a little to the west on the rivers Sinamari
and Cananama; and in 1643 a Rouen Company, incorporated under
the name of the Cape North Company, sent out three or four
hundred men to Cayenne under the Sieur de Bretigny. Bretigny
ruined the scheme by savage ill-treatment of Indians and
colonists alike, and the remains of the settlement were
absorbed by a new and more powerful Normandy Company." This
failed in its turn, and gave way to a "French Equinoctial
Company," organized under the auspices of Colbert, which sent
out 1,200 colonists and fairly established them at Cayenne.
Colbert, in 1665, placed the colony, "with all the other
French possessions in the West Indies, under one strong West
India Company. Such were the beginnings of colonisation in the
west and east of Guiana. Between them lies the district now
known as Dutch Guiana or Surinam." The first settlement in
this was made in 1630 by 60 English colonists, under a Captain
Marshall.
{1616}
The colony failed, and was revived in 1650 by Lord Willoughby,
then representing the fugitive King Charles II., as Governor
of Barbadoes. In 1663, after the Restoration, Lord Willoughby,
in conjunction with Lawrence Hyde, second son of the Earl of
Clarendon, received Letters Patent "constituting them lords
and proprietors of the district between the Copenam and the
Maroni (which included the Surinam river) under the name of
Willoughby Land." Soon afterwards "war broke out with the
Dutch, and in March 1667 the colony capitulated to the Dutch
admiral Crynsenn. The peace of Breda between Great Britain and
the Netherlands, which was signed in the following July,
provided that either nation should retain the conquests which
it had made by the preceding 10th of May, and under this
arrangement Surinam was ceded to the Netherlands, while New
York became a British possession. … Thus ended for many long
years all British connexion with Guiana. … When at length
the English returned [in 1796 and 1803, during the subjection
of the Dutch to Napoleon, and while they were forced to take
part in his wars], they came as conquerors rather than as
settlers, and by a strange perversity of history, the original
Dutch colonies on the Berbice and Essequibo became a British
dependency, while the Netherlanders retain to this day the
part of Guiana which Lord Willoughby marked out for his own."
These arrangements were settled in the convention between
Great Britain and the Netherlands signed at London in 1814.
C. P. Lucas,
History Geography of the British Colonies,
volume 2, section 2, chapter 8.
ALSO IN:
H. G. Dalton,
History of British Guiana.
----------GUIANA: End--------
GUIENNE, OR GUYENNE.
A corruption of the name of Aquitaine, which came into use,
apparently, about the 13th century.
See AQUITAINE: A. D. 884-1151.
GUILDS, OR GILDS, Mediæval.
"The history of the Gild Merchant begins with the Norman
Conquest. The latter widened the horizon of the English
merchant even more than that of the English annalist. The
close union between England and Normandy led to an increase in
foreign commerce, which in turn must have greatly stimulated
internal trade and industry. Moreover, the greatly enhanced
power of the English crown tempered feudal turbulence,
affording a measure of security to traders in England that was
as yet unknown on the continent. … With this expansion of
trade the mercantile element would become a more potent factor
in town life, and would soon feel the need of joint action to
guard its nascent prosperity against encroachments. Not until
there was something of importance to protect, not until trade
and industry began to predominate over agriculture within the
borough, would a protective union like the Gild Merchant come
into being. Its existence, in short, presupposes a greater
mercantile and industrial development than that which
prevailed in England in the tenth century. This circumstance
and the absence of all mention of the Gild Merchant in the
records of the Anglo-Saxon period render it probable that this
fraternity first appeared in England soon after the Conqueror
had established his sway and restored order in the land.
Whether it was merely a reorganization of older gilds, a
spontaneous adaptation of the gild idea to the newly-begotten
trade interests, or a new institution directly transplanted
from Normandy, we have no means of determining with certainty.
The last-mentioned view is strongly favoured by the
circumstance that, at the time of the Conquest, the Gild
Merchant doubtless existed in Northern France and Flanders.
From the Frenchmen who became burgesses of English towns, and
from the Norman merchants who thronged the marts of England
after the Conquest, the English would soon ascertain the
advantages of formal trade organization. The earliest distinct
references to the Gild Merchant occur in a charter granted by
Robert Fitz-Hamon to the burgesses of Burford (1087-1107), and
in a document drawn up while Anselm was Archbishop of
Canterbury (1093-1109). … Whether we place the inception of
the fraternity immediately before or after the Norman
Conquest, whether we make it a continuation of older
Anglo-Saxon gilds, or a derivative from Normandy, or a wholly
new and spontaneous growth, it was doubtless at first merely a
private society, unconnected with the town government, having
for its object the protection of its members, the tradesmen of
the borough, and the maintenance of the newly invigorated
trade interests. During the twelfth century it gradually
became a recognised part of the town constitution, thus
entering upon its second stage of development. How this came
to pass can be easily realised from the later history of
English gilds in general. For in the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries … a simple social-religious gild at times
attained such power in a community that it came to be regarded
as an important constituent element of the civic
administration. Quite similar must have been the growth of the
Gild Merchant, which from the outset was doubtless composed of
the most influential burgesses, and which, as the exponent of
the mercantile interests, must always have been greatly
concerned in the increase of the privileges and prosperity of
the borough in general. It was very natural that the town
authorities should use such a society for public purposes,
entrusting to it the surveillance of the trade monopoly, in
which its members were particularly interested,—allowing it
to gradually become an important part of the civic
administrative machinery. … The beginning of this third and
final stage of development cannot be definitely fixed; for in
some places it was of an earlier date than in others. The
fourteenth century may in general be called the period of
gradual transition. In the fifteenth century the
transformation was completed. In this and the following
centuries the term 'Gilda Mercatoria' became less and less
frequent. In many places it soon wholly disappeared. Where it
continued to subsist, the Gild no longer had an individuality
of its own. Its alderman and other peculiar officers, its
whole organization as a distinctive entity, had vanished. It
had merged its identity in that of the general municipal
organism. The head of the fraternity was now the head of the
town; borough and Gild, burgesses and gildsmen were now
identical. What had once been a distinct integral part of the
civic body politic became vaguely blended with the whole of it.
{1617}
The old Gild Merchant was now rarely mentioned in connection
with the municipal trade restrictions and regulations, the
latter being commonly applied to burgesses, craftsmen,
freemen, or 'foreigners.' The exegesis of this transformation
… was due mainly to three causes: (1) the expansion of trade
and the multiplication of the craft and mercantile
fraternities, which absorbed the ancient functions of the Gild
Merchant and rendered it superfluous; (2) the growth of the
select governing body, which usurped most of the privileges of
the old burghers at large, and hence tended to obliterate the
distinction between them, or their less privileged successors,
and the ancient gildsmen, leaving both only certain trade
immunities; (3) the decay of the leet—the rallying point of
the old burghers as distinguished from that of the
gildsmen—the functions of which passed, in part, to the crafts,
but mainly to the select body and to the justices of the
peace. But even after the Gild Merchant and the borough had
thus become identical, the old dual idea did not completely
disappear, the Gild being often regarded as a particular phase
or function of the town, namely, the municipality in its
character of a trade monopoly. Hence the modern survivals of
the Gild Merchant help to elucidate its actual functions in
ancient times. In a few boroughs the select governing body of
the town—the narrow civic corporation, in distinction from
the burgesses or freemen at large—succeeded to the name and
traditions of the Gild Merchant. In some of these cases the
signification of the latter gradually dwindled down to a
periodical civic feast of the privileged few. … In the
eighteenth century we meet the word much less frequently than
in the seventeenth; and toward the beginning of the present
century it became very rare. The Municipal Corporations
Commission, in 1835, found it still used in only a few
boroughs. The remnants of the Gild Merchant and of the craft
fraternities were rapidly vanishing before the new ideas of a
more liberal age,—the age of laissez faire. The onerous,
self-destructive restrictions of gilds were now being
superseded by the stimulating measures of Chambers of
Commerce. More than six centuries elapsed before the enactment
of Magna Carta that all merchants 'may go through England, by
land and water, to buy and sell, free from all unjust
imposts,' became a realised fact throughout the realm. The
Municipal Corporations Act of 1835 provided that 'every person
in any borough may keep any shop for the sale of all lawful
wares and merchandizes by wholesale or retail, and use every
lawful trade, occupation, mystery, and handicraft, for hire,
gain, sale, or otherwise, within any borough.' In a single
town of England the Gild Merchant still subsists, but only as
the shadow of its former self—a spectre from the distant
past. At Preston the Gild Merchant has been 'celebrated'
regularly once every twenty years for more than three
centuries, on which occasions the burgesses renew their
freedom and indulge in all the festivities of a civic
carnival. The last Gild Merchant was held in 1882. There was
then much feasting and dancing, there were gay processions of
townsmen, and much talk of the glories of the past. And yet
how few even of the scholars and noblemen there assembled from
various parts of Great Britain knew what an important role the
Gild Merchant had played in the annals of English municipal
history, what strange vicissitudes it had undergone, what a
remarkable transformation the centuries had wrought in it."
C. Gross,
The Gild Merchant,
chapters 1 and 9 (volume 1).
"The rise of the craft gilds is, roughly speaking, a century
later [than the rise of the merchant gilds]; isolated examples
occur early in the twelfth century, they become more numerous
as the century advances, and in the thirteenth century they
appear in all branches of manufacture and in every industrial
centre. Craft gilds were associations of all the artisans
engaged in a particular industry in a particular town, for
certain common purposes. … Their appearance marks the second
stage in the history of industry, the transition from the
family system to the artisan (or gild) system. In the former
there was no class of artisans properly so called; no class,
that is to say, of men whose time was entirely or chiefly
devoted to a particular manufacture; and this because all the
needs of a family or other domestic group, whether of
monastery or manor-house, were satisfied by the labours of the
members of the group itself. The latter, on the contrary, is
marked by the presence of a body of men each of whom was
occupied more or less completely in one particular
manufacture. The very growth from the one to the other system,
therefore, is an example of 'division of labour,' or, to use a
better phrase, of 'division of employments.' … When the
place of the young manufactures of the twelfth century in the
development of mediæval society is thus conceived, the
discussion as to a possible Roman 'origin' of the gilds loses
much of its interest. No doubt modern historians have
exaggerated the breach in continuity between the Roman and the
barbarian world; no doubt the artisans in the later Roman
Empire had an organization somewhat like that of the later
gilds. Moreover, it is possible that in one or two places in
Gaul certain artisan corporations may have had a continuous
existence from the fifth to the twelfth century. It is even
possible that Roman regulations may have served as models for
the organization of servile artisans on the lands of
monasteries and great nobles,—from which, on the continent,
some of the later craft gilds doubtless sprang. But when we
see that the growth of an artisan class, as distinguished from
isolated artisans here and there, was impossible till the
twelfth century, because society had not yet reached the stage
in which it was profitable or safe for a considerable number
of men to confine themselves to any occupation except
agriculture; and that the ideas which governed the craft gilds
were not peculiar to themselves but common to the whole
society of the time; then the elements of organization which
may conceivably have been derived from or suggested by the
Roman artisan corporations become of quite secondary
importance. There is, as we have said, little doubt that some
of the craft gilds of France and Germany were originally
organizations of artisan serfs on the manors of great lay or
ecclesiastical lords. This may also have been the case in some
places in England, but no evidence has yet been adduced to
show that it was so. … The relation of the craft gilds to
the merchant gild is a still more difficult question. In many
of the towns of Germany and the Netherlands a desperate
struggle took place during the thirteenth and fourteenth
centuries between a burgher oligarchy, who monopolized the
municipal government, and were still further strengthened in
many cases by union in a merchant gild, and the artisans
organized in their craft gilds; the craftsmen fighting first
for the right of having gilds of their own, and then for a
share in the government of the town.
{1618}
These facts have been easily fitted into a symmetrical theory
of industrial development; the merchant gilds, it is said,
were first formed for protection against feudal lords, but
became exclusive, and so rendered necessary the formation of
craft gilds; and in the same way the craft gilds became
exclusive afterwards, and the journeymen were compelled to
form societies of their own for protection against the
masters. … The very neatness of such a theory, the readiness
with which it has been accepted by popular writers in spite of
the paucity of English evidence, have perhaps led some
historians to treat it with scant consideration. … At the
end of the reign of Edward III. there were in London
forty-eight companies or crafts, each with a separate
organization and officers of its own, a number which had
increased to at least sixty before the close of the century."
W. J. Ashley,
An Introduction to English Economic History and Theory,
book 1, chapter 2 (volume 1).
"The unions known by the names of mystery, faculty, trade,
fellowship, or (from the fact of possessing particular
costumes) livery company, existed in large numbers throughout
the realm, and were frequently divided into two or three
categories. Thus in London the principal crafts were the
twelve 'substantial companies' or 'livery companies' [Mercers,
Grocers, Drapers, Fishmongers, Goldsmiths, Skinners, Merchant
Tailors, Haberdashers, Salters, Ironmongers, Vintners,
Cloth-workers]. … A perfect acquaintance with the details of
the trade and the desire as well as the ability to produce
good work were in all cases preliminary requisites [of
membership]. In fact the main provisions of the craft, the
very soul of its constitution, were the regulations intended
to ensure the excellence of the products and the capacity of
the workman. … The whole character of the craft guild is
explained by these regulations, designed to prevent fraud and
deception of the public."
E. R. A. Seligman,
Mediæval Guilds of England
(American Economics Association,
volume 2, number 5), part 2, section 2.
ALSO IN:
W. Stubbs,
Constitutional History of England,
chapter 11.
W. Herbert,
History of Twelve Great Livery Companies.
See, also, COMMUNE.
GUILDS OF FLANDERS.
"In the course of the tenth century Bruges had waxed great and
wealthy through its trade with England, while the Ghent people
constructed a port at the junction of their two rivers. The
Flemings, nevertheless, were still noted for the boorishness
of their demeanour, their addiction to intemperance, and their
excessive turbulence. Their pagan ancestors had been
accustomed to form associations for their mutual protection
against accidents by fire or water, and similar misadventures.
These unions were called 'Minne,' or Friendships—an idea
reproduced in the 'Amicitiæ,' to which allusion is so
frequently made in the deeds of ancient corporations. …
After a time the name of 'Minne' came to be supplanted by that
of 'Ghilde,' meaning a feast at the common expense. Each
ghilde was placed under the tutelage of a departed hero, or
demigod, and was managed by officers elected by the members—
social equality being the foundation of each fraternity.
Subsequent to the introduction of Christianity the demigod was
replaced by a saint, while the members were enjoined to
practise works of piety. … The Ghildes were the base of the
municipal administration, and gradually assumed the government
of the town, but took another form and appellation. The word
was thenceforward applied, in its restricted sense of Guild,
as referring to trade corporations, while the previous
organisation came to be described in French and Latin
documents as Commune or Communia, and embraced all who were
entitled to gather together in the cauter, or public place,
when the bell rang out the summons from the town belfry. In
Flanders the Communes grew out of popular institutions of
ancient date, and, though, no doubt, their influence was
sensibly increased by their confirmation at the hands of King
or Count, they did not owe their origin to royal or
seigniorial charters."
J. Hutton,
James and Philip Van Arteveld,
part 1, chapter 1.
GUILDS OF FLORENCE.
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1250-1293.
GUILFORD COURT HOUSE, Battle of (1781).
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781.
GUILLOTINE, The origin of the.
"It was during these winter months [of the session of the
French National Assembly, 1790] that Dr. Guillotin read his
long discourse upon the reformation of the penal code; of
which the 'Moniteur' has not preserved a single word. This
discourse attracts our attention on two accounts:—First, it
proposed a decree that there should be but one kind of
punishment for capital crimes; secondly, that the arm of the
executioner should be replaced by the action of a machine,
which Dr. Guillotin had invented. 'With the aid of my
machine,' said the glib doctor, 'I will make your head spring
off in the twinkling of an eye, and you will suffer nothing.'
Bursts of laughter met this declaration; nevertheless, the
Assembly listened with attention, and adopted the proposal."
G. H. Lewes,
Life of Robespierre,
chapter 10.
ALSO IN:
G. Everitt,
Guillotine the Great and her Successors.
J. W. Croker,
History of the Guillotine.
----------GUINEGATE: Start--------
GUINEGATE, Battle of (1478).
A bloody but indecisive battle, fought between the French, on
one side, and Flemish and Burgundian troops on the other, in
the war produced by the attempt of Louis XI. to rob Mary of
Burgundy of her heritage. It was followed by a long truce, and
a final treaty.
E. Smedley,
History of France,
part 1, chapter 17.
GUINEGATE: Battle of (1513).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1513-1515.
----------GUINEGATE: End----------
GUINES, Treaty of (1547).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.
GUISCARD, Robert, and Roger and the Norman conquest of Southern
Italy and Sicily.
See ITALY: A. D. 1000-1090; and 1081-1194.
GUISE, Duke of, Assassination.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1584-1589.
GUISES, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1547-1559.
GUIZOT'S MINISTRY.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1841-1848.
GUJERAT, Battle of (1849).
See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849.
GUNDEBERTUS, King of the Lombards, A. D. 662-672.
{1619}
GUNPOWDER PLOT, The.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1605.
GURKHAS, OR GOORKAS, The.
See INDIA: THE ABORIGINAL INHABITANTS.
GURU, OR GOOROO.
See SIKHS.
GUSTAVUS (I.) Vasa, King of Sweden, A. D. 1523-1560.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1397-1527, and 1523-1604.
Gustavus (II.) Adolphus, King of Sweden, 1611-1632.
Campaigns and death in Germany.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1630-1631, to 1631-1632.
Gustavus III., King of Sweden, 1771-1792.
Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden, 1792-1809.
GUTBORM, King of Norway, A. D. 1204-1205.
GUTENBERG, and the invention of Printing.
See PRINTING: A. D. 1430-1456.
GUTSTADT, Battle of.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1807 (FEBRUARY-JUNE).
GUTHRIE, The founding of the city of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.
GUTTONES, The.
See PRUSSIAN LANGUAGE, THE OLD.
GUUCHIES, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PAMPAS TRIBES.
GUY FAWKES' DAY.
November 5, the anniversary of the day on which the
conspirators of the "Gunpowder Plot" intended to blow up King
and Parliament, in England.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1605.
GWENT.