{2224}
MONGOLS: A. D. 1238-1391.
The Kipchak empire.
The Golden Horde.
"It was under Toushi [or Juchi], son of Tschingis, that the
great migration of the Moguls effected an abiding settlement
in Russia. … Toushi, with half a million of Moguls, entered
Europe close by the Sea of Azof. On the banks of the river
Kalka he encountered the united forces of the Russian princes.
The death of Toushi for awhile arrested the progress of the
Tatar arms. But in 1236, Batu, the son of Toushi, took the
command, and all the principalities and cities of Russia, with
the exception of Novogorod, were desolated by fire and sword
and occupied by the enemy. For two centuries Russia was held
cabined, cribbed, confined by this encampment or horde. The
Golden Horde of the Deshti Kipzak, or Steppe of the Hollow
Tree. Between the Volga and the Don, and beyond the Volga,
spreads this limitless region the Deshti Kipzak. It was
occupied in the first instance, most probably, by Hun-Turks,
who first attracted and then were absorbed by fresh
immigrants. From this region an empire took its name. By the
river Akhtuba, a branch of the lower Volga, at Great Serai,
Batu erected his golden tent; and here it was he received the
Russian princes whom he had reduced to vassalage. Here he
entertained a king of Armenia; and here, too, he received the
ambassadors of S. Louis. … With the exception of Novogorod,
which had joined the Hanseatic League in 1276, and rose
rapidly in commercial prosperity, all Russia continued to
endure, till the extinction of the house of Batu, a degrading
and hopeless bondage. When the direct race came to an end, the
collateral branches became involved in very serious conflicts;
and in 1380, Temnik-Mami was overthrown near the river Don by
Demetrius IV., who, with the victory, won a title of honour,
Donski, which outlasted the benefits of the victory; although
it is from this conflict that Russian writers date the
commencement of their freedom. … After an existence of more
than 250 years the Golden Horde was finally dissolved in 1480.
Already, in 1468, the khanate of Kusan [or Kazan] was
conquered and absorbed by the Grand Duke Ivan; and, after the
extinction of the horde, Europeans for the first time exacted
tribute of the Tatar, and ambassadors found their way
unobstructed to Moscow. But the breaking up of the Golden
Horde did not carry with it the collapse of all Tatar power in
Russia. Rather the effect was to create a concentration of all
their residuary resources in the Crimea."
C. I. Black,
The Proselytes of Ishmael,
part 3, chapter 4.
"The Mongol word yurt meant originally the domestic fireplace,
and, according to Van Hammer, the word is identical with the
German herde and the English hearth, and thence came in a
secondary sense to mean house or home, the chief's house being
known as Ulugh Yurt or the Great House. An assemblage of
several yurts formed an ordu or orda, equivalent to the German
hort and the English horde, which really means a camp. The
chief camp where the ruler of the nation lived was called the
Sir Orda, i. e., the Golden Horde. … It came about that
eventually the whole nation was known as the Golden Horde."
The power of the Golden Horde was broken by the conquests of
Timour (A. D. 1389-1391). It was finally broken into several
fragments, the chief of which, the Khanates of Kazan, of
Astrakhan, and of Krim, or the Crimea, maintained a long
struggle with Russia, and were successively overpowered and
absorbed in the empire of the Muscovite.
H. H. Howorth,
History of the Mongols,
part 2, pages 1 and x.
See, also, above: A. D. 1229-1294;
KIPCHAKS; and RUSSIA: A. D. 1237-1480.
MONGOLS: A. D. 1257-1258.
Khulagu's overthrow of the Caliphate.
See BAGDAD: A. D. 1258.
MONGOLS: A. D. 1258-1393.
The empire of the Ilkhans.
See PERSIA: A. D. 1258-1393.
MONGOLS: A. D. 1371-1405.
The conquests of Timour.
See TIMOUR.
MONGOLS: A. D. 1526-1605.
Founding of the Mogul (Mongol) empire in India.
See INDIA.: A. D. 1399-1605.
----------MONGOLS: End----------
MONITOR AND MERRIMAC, Battle of the.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1862 (MARCH).
MONKS.
See
AUSTIN CANONS;
BENEDICTINE ORDERS;
CAPUCHINS;
CARMELITE FRIARS;
CARTHUSIAN ORDER;
CISTERCIAN ORDER;
CLAIRVAUX;
CLUGNY;
MENDICANT ORDERS;
RECOLLECTS;
SERVITES;
THEATINES;
TRAPPISTS.
MONMOUTH, Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1778 (JUNE).
MONMOUTH'S REBELLION.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1685 (MAY-JULY).
MONOCACY, Battle of the.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1864 (JULY: VIRGINIA-MARYLAND).
MONOPHYSITE CONTROVERSY.
See NESTORIAN AND MONOPHYSITE CONTROVERSY;
also, JACOBITE CHURCH.
MONOTHELITE CONTROVERSY, The.
"The Council of Chalcedon having decided that our Lord
possessed two natures, united but not confused, the Eutychian
error condemned by it is supposed to have been virtually
reproduced by the Monothelites, who maintained that the two
natures were so united as to have but one will. This heresy is
ascribed to Heraclius the Greek emperor, who adopted it as a
political project for reconciling and reclaiming the
Monophysites to the Church, and thus to the empire. The
Armenians as a body had held, for a long time, the Monophysite
(a form of the Eutychian) heresy, and were then in danger of
breaking their allegiance to the emperor, as they had done to
the Church; and it was chiefly to prevent the threatened
rupture that Heraclius made a secret compromise with some of
their principal men. … Neither … the strenuous efforts of
the Greek emperors Heraclius and Constans, nor the concession
of Honorius the Roman pontiff to the soundness of the
Monothelite doctrine, could introduce it into the Church.
Heraclius published in A. D. 639 an Ecthesis, or a formula, in
which Monotheism was covertly introduced. The sixth general
council, held in Constantinople A. D. 680, condemned both the
heresy and Honorius, the Roman pontiff who had countenanced it.
{2225}
'The doctrine of the Monothelites, thus condemned and exploded
by the Council of Constantinople, found a place of refuge
among the Mardaites, a people who inhabited the mountains of
Libanus and Anti-Libanus, and who, about the conclusion of
this century, received the name of Maronites from John Maro,
their first bishop-a name which they still retain.' … In the
time of the Crusaders, the Maronites united with them in their
wars against the Saracens, and subsequently (A. D. 1182) in
their faith. After the evacuation of Syria by the Crusaders,
the Maronites, as their former allies, had to bear the
vengeance of the Saracenic kings; and for a long time they
defended themselves as they could, sometimes inflicting
serious injury on the Moslem army, and at others suffering the
revengeful fury of their enemies. They ultimately submitted to
the rule of their Mohammedan masters, and are now good
subjects of the sultan. … The Maronites now … are entirely
free from the Monothelite heresy, which they doubtless
followed in their earlier history; nor, indeed, does there
appear a single vestige of it in their histories, theological
books, or liturgies. Their faith in the person of Christ and
in all the articles of religion is now, as it has been for a
long time past, in exact uniformity with the doctrines of the
Roman Church."
J. Wortabet,
Researches into the Religions of Syria,
pages 103-111; with foot-note.
ALSO IN:
H. F. Tozer,
The Church and the Eastern Empire,
chapter 5.
E. Gibbon,
Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire,
chapter 47.
P. Schaff,
History of the Christian Church,
volume 4, chapter 11, sections 109-111.
MONROE, James,
Opposition to the Federal Constitution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1787-1789.
Presidential election and administration.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1816, to 1825.
MONROE DOCTRINE, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1823.
MONROVIA.
See SLAVERY, NEGRO: A. D. 1816-1847.
----------MONS: Start--------
MONS: A. D. 1572.
Capture by Louis of Nassau, recovery by the Spaniards,
and massacre.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1572-1573.
MONS: A. D. 1691.
Siege and surrender to Louis XIV.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1689-1691.
MONS: A. D. 1697.
Restored to Spain.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1697.
MONS: A. D. 1709.
Siege and reduction by Marlborough and Prince Eugene.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1708-1709.
MONS: A. D. 1713.
Transferred to Holland.
See UTRECHT: A. D. 1712-1714.
MONS: A. D 1746-1748.
Taken by the French and restored to Austria.
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1746-1747;
and AIX-LA-CHAPELLE, THE CONGRESS.
----------MONS: End--------
MONS GRAMPIUS, Battle of.
See GRAMPIANS.
MONS SACER, Secession of the Roman Plebeians to.
See ROME: B. C. 494-492.
MONS TARPEIUS.
See CAPITOLINE HILL.
MONSIEUR.
Under the old regime, in France, this was the special
designation of the elder among the king's brothers.
MONT ST. JEAN, Battle of.
The battle of Waterloo—
is sometimes so called by the French.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1815 (JUNE).
MONTAGNAIS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY,
and ATHAPASCAN FAMILY.
MONTAGNARDS, OR THE MOUNTAIN.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1791 (OCTOBER);
1792 (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER);
and after, to 1794-1795 (JULY-APRIL).
MONTAGNE NOIRE, Battle of (1794).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1794-1795 (OCTOBER-MAY).
----------MONTANA: Start--------
MONTANA: A. D. 1803,
Partly or wholly embraced in the Louisiana Purchase.
The question.
See LOUISIANA: A. D. 1798-1803.
MONTANA: A. D. 1864-1889.
Organization as a Territory and admission as a State.
Montana received its Territorial organization in 1864, and was
admitted to the Union as a State in 1889.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1889-1890.
----------MONTANA: End--------
MONTANISTS.
A name given to the followers of Montanus, who appeared in the
2d century, among the Christians of Phrygia, claiming that the
Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, "had, by divine appointment,
descended upon him for the purpose of foretelling things of
the greatest moment that were about to happen, and
promulgating a better and more perfect discipline of life and
morals. … This sect continued to flourish down to the 5th
century."
J. L. von Mosheim,
Historical Commentaries, 2d Century,
section. 66.
MONTAPERTI, Battle of (1260).
See FLORENCE: A. D. 1248-1278.
MONTAUBAN, Siege of (1621).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1620-1622.
MONTAUKS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: ALGONQUIAN FAMILY.
MONTBÉLIARD, Battle of (1871).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1870-1871.
MONTCALM, and the defense of Canada.
See CANADA: A. D. 1756, to 1759.
MONTE CASEROS, Battle of (1852).
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1819-1874.
MONTE CASINO, The Monastery of.
See BENEDICTINE ORDERS.
MONTE ROTUNDO, Battle of (1867).
See ITALY: A. D. 1867-1870.
MONTE SAN GIOVANNI, Battle and massacre (1495).
See ITALY: A. D. 1494-1496.
MONTEBELLO,
Battle of (1800).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1800-1801 (MAY-FEBRUARY).
Battle of (1859.)
See ITALY: A. D. 1856-1859.
MONTECATINI, Battle of (1315).
See ITALY: A. D. 1313-1330.
MONTENEGRO.
See BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES.
MONTENOTTE, Battles at (1796).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1796 (APRIL-OCTOBER).
MONTEREAU, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).
MONTEREAU, The Bridge of (1419).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1415-1419.
MONTEREY, California:
Possession taken by the American fleet (1846).
See CALIFORNIA: A. D. 1846-1847.
MONTEREY, Mexico:
Siege by the Americans (1846).
See MEXICO: A. D. 1846-1847.
MONTEREY, Pennsylvania, The Battle of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1863 (JUNE-JULY: PENNSYLVANIA).
MONTEVIDEO: Founding of the city.
See ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1580-1777.
{2226}
MONTEZUMA, The so-called Empire of.
See MEXICO: A. D. 1325-1502.
MONTFORT, Simon de (the elder), The Crusade of.
See CRUSADES: A. D.1201-1203.
MONTFORT, Simon de (the younger),
The English Parliament and the Barons' war.
See PARLIAMENT, THE ENGLISH: EARLY STAGES IN ITS EVOLUTION;
and ENGLAND: A. D. 1216-1274.
MONTGOMERY, General Richard, and his expedition against Quebec.
See CANADA: A. D. 1775-1776.
MONTGOMERY CONSTITUTION and Government.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1861 (FEBRUARY).
MONTI OF SIENA, The.
See SIENA.
MONTLEHERY, Battle of (1465).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1461-1468.
----------MONTMÉDY: Start--------
MONTMÉDY: A. D. 1657.
Siege and capture by the French and English.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1655-1658.
MONTMÉDY: A. D. 1659.
Cession to France.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1659-1661.
----------MONTMÉDY: End--------
MONTMIRAIL, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).
MONTPELIER, Treaty of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1620-1622.
MONTPELIER, Second Treaty of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1624-1626.
MONTPENSIER, Mademoiselle, and the Fronde.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1651-1653.
----------MONTREAL: Start--------
MONTREAL: A. D. 1535.
The Naming of the Island.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1534-1535.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1611.
The founding of the City by Champlain.
See CANADA: A. D. 1611-1616.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1641-1657.
Settlement under the seigniory of the Sulpicians.
See CANADA: A.D. 1637-1657.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1689.
Destructive attack by the Iroquois.
See CANADA: A. D. 1640-1700.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1690.
Threatened by the English Colonists.
See CANADA: A. D. 1689-1690.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1760.
The surrender of the city and of all Canada to the English.
See CANADA: A. D. 1760.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1775-1776.
Taken by the Americans and recovered by the British.
See CANADA: A. D. 1775-1776.
MONTREAL: A. D. 1813.
Abortive expedition of American forces against the city.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA:
A. D. 1813 (OCTOBER-NOVEMBER).
----------MONTREAL: End--------
MONTROSE, and the Covenanters.
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1638-1640; and 1644-1645.
MONZA, Battle of (1412).
See ITALY: A. D. 1412-1447.
MONZON,
MONÇON, Treaty of (1626).
See FRANCE: A. D. 1624-1626.
MOODKEE, Battle of (1845).
See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849.
MOOKERHYDE, Battle of (1574).
See NETHERLANDS: A. D. 1573-1574.
MOOLTAN,
MULTAN: A. D. 1848-1849.
Siege and capture by the English.
See INDIA: A. D. 1845-1849.
MOORE, Sir John:
Campaign in Spain and death.
See SPAIN: A. D. 1808-1809 (AUGUST-JANUARY).
MOORE'S CREEK, Battle of (1776).
See NORTH CAROLINA: A. D. 1775-1776.
MOORISH SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES.
See EDUCATION, MEDIÆVAL.
----------MOORS: Start--------
MOORS, OR MAURI,
Origin.
See NUMIDIANS.
MOORS: A. D. 698-709.
Arab conquest.
See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 647-709;
and MAROCCO.
MOORS: A. D. 711-713.
Conquest of Spain.
See SPAIN: A. D. 711-713, and after.
MOORS: 11-13th Centuries.
The Almoravides and Almohades in Morocco.
See ALMORAVIDES; and ALMOHADES.
MOORS: A. D. 1492-1609.
Persecution and final expulsion from Spain.
The deadly effect upon that country.
"After the reduction … of the last Mohammedan kingdom in
Spain, the great object of the Spaniards became to convert
those whom they had conquered [in violation of the treaty made
on the surrender of Granada]. … By torturing some, by burning
others, and by threatening all, they at length succeeded; and
we are assured that, after the year 1526, there was no
Mohammedan in Spain, who had not been converted to
Christianity. Immense numbers of them were baptized by force;
but being baptized, it was held that they belonged to the
Church, and were amenable to her discipline. That discipline
was administered by the Inquisition, which, during the rest of
the 16th century, subjected these new Christians, or Moriscoes,
as they were now called, to the most barbarous treatment. The
genuineness of their forced conversions was doubted; it
therefore became the business of the Church to inquire into
their sincerity. The civil government lent its aid; and among
other enactments, an edict was issued by Philip II., in 1566,
ordering the Moriscoes to abandon everything which by the
slightest possibility could remind them of their former
religion. They were commanded, under severe penalties, to
learn Spanish, and to give up all their Arabic books. They
were forbidden to read their native language, or to write it,
or even to speak it in their own houses. Their ceremonies and
their very games were strictly prohibited. They were to
indulge in no amusements which had been practised by their
fathers; neither were they to wear such clothes as they had
been accustomed to. Their women were to go unveiled; and, as
bathing was a heathenish custom, an public baths were to be
destroyed, and even an baths in private houses. By these and
similar measures, these unhappy people were at length goaded
into rebellion; and in 1568 they took the desperate step of
measuring their force against that of the whole Spanish
monarchy. The result could hardly be doubted; but the
Moriscoes maddened by their sufferings, and fighting for their
all, protracted the contest till 1571, when the insurrection was
finally put down. By this unsuccessful effort they were
greatly reduced in numbers and in strength; and during the
remaining 27 years of the reign of Philip II. we hear
comparatively little of them. Notwithstanding an occasional
outbreak, the old animosities were subsiding, and in the
course of time would probably have disappeared. At all events,
there was no pretence for violence on the part of the Spaniards,
since it was absurd to suppose that the Moriscoes, weakened in
every way, humbled, broken, and scattered through the kingdom,
could, even if they desired it, effect anything against the
resources of the executive government.
{2227}
But, after the death of Philip II., that movement began …
which, contrary to the course of affairs in other nations,
secured to the Spanish clergy in the 17th century, more power
than they had possessed in the 16th. The consequences of this
were immediately apparent. The clergy did not think that the
steps taken by Philip II. against the Moriscoes were
sufficiently decisive. … Under his successor, the clergy …
gained fresh strength, and they soon felt themselves
sufficiently powerful to begin another and final crusade
against the miserable remains of the Moorish nation. The
Archbishop of Valencia was the first to take the field. In
1602, this eminent prelate presented a memorial to Philip III.
against the Moriscoes; and finding that his views were
cordially supported by the clergy, and not discouraged by the
crown, he followed up the blow by another memorial having the
same object. … He declared that the Armada, which Philip II.
sent against England in 1588, had been destroyed, because God
would not allow even that pious enterprise to succeed, while
those who undertook it, left heretics undisturbed at home. For
the same reason, the late expedition to Algiers had failed; it
being evidently the will of Heaven that nothing should prosper
while Spain was inhabited by apostates. He, therefore,
exhorted the king to exile all the Moriscoes, except some whom
he might condemn to work in the galleys, and others who could
become slaves, and labour in the mines of America. This, he
added, would make the reign of Philip glorious to all
posterity, and would raise his fame far above that of his
predecessors, who in this matter had neglected their obvious
duty. … That they should all be slain, instead of being
banished, was the desire of a powerful party in the Church,
who thought that such signal punishment would work good by
striking terror into the heretics of every nation. Bleda, the
celebrated Dominican, one of the most influential men of his
time, wished this to be done, and to be done thoroughly. He
said, that, for the sake of example, every Morisco in Spain
should have his throat cut; because it was impossible to tell
which of them were Christians at heart, and it was enough to
leave the matter to God, who knew his own, and who would
reward in the next world those who were really Catholics. …
The religious scruples of Philip III. forbade him to struggle
with the Church; and his minister Lerma would not risk his own
authority by even the show of opposition. In 1609 he announced
to the king, that the expulsion of the Moriscoes had become
necessary. 'The resolution,' replied Philip, 'is a great one;
let it be executed.' And executed it was, with unflinching
barbarity. About 1,000,000 of the most industrious inhabitants
of Spain were hunted out like wild beasts, because the
sincerity of their religious opinions was doubtful. Many were
slain, as they approached the coast; others were beaten and
plundered; and the majority, in the most wretched plight,
sailed for Africa. During the passage, the crew, in many of
the ships, rose upon them, butchered the men, ravished the
women, and threw the children into the sea. Those who escaped
this fate, landed on the coast of Barbary, where they were
attacked by the Bedouins, and many of them put to the sword.
Others made their way into the desert, and perished from
famine. Of the number of lives actually sacrificed, we have no
authentic account; but it is said, on very good authority,
that in one expedition, in which 140,000 were carried to
Africa, upwards of 100,000 suffered death in its most
frightful forms within a few months after their expulsion from
Spain. Now, for the first time, the Church was really
triumphant. For the first time there was not a heretic to be
seen between the Pyrenees and the Straits of Gibraltar. All
were orthodox, and all were loyal. Every inhabitant of that
great country obeyed the Church, and feared the king. And from
this happy combination, it was believed that the prosperity
and grandeur of Spain were sure to follow. … The effects
upon the material prosperity of Spain may be stated in a few
words. From nearly every part of the country, large bodies of
industrious agriculturists and expert artificers were suddenly
withdrawn. The best systems of husbandry then known, were
practised by the Moriscoes, who tilled and irrigated with
indefatigable labour. The cultivation of rice, cotton, and
sugar, and the manufacture of silk and paper were almost
confined to them. By their expulsion all this was destroyed at
a blow, and most of it was destroyed for ever. For the Spanish
Christians considered such pursuits beneath their dignity. In
their judgment, war and religion were the only two avocations
worthy of being followed. To fight for the king, or to enter
the Church was honourable; but everything else was mean and
sordid. When, therefore, the Moriscoes were thrust out of
Spain, there was no one to fill their place; arts and
manufactures either degenerated, or were entirely lost, and
immense regions of arable land were left uncultivated. …
Whole districts were suddenly deserted, and down to the
present day have never been repeopled. These solitudes gave
refuge to smugglers and brigands, who succeeded the
industrious inhabitants formerly occupying them; and it is
said that from the expulsion of the Moriscoes is to be dated
the existence of those organized bands of robbers, which,
after this period, became the scourge of Spain, and which no
subsequent government has been able entirely to extirpate. To
these disastrous consequences, others were added, of a
different, and, if possible, of a still more serious kind. The
victory gained by the Church increased both her power and her
reputation. … The greatest men, with hardly an exception,
became ecclesiastics, and all temporal considerations, all
views of earthly policy, were despised and set at nought. No
one inquired; no one doubted; no one presumed to ask if all
this was right. The minds of men succumbed and were prostrate.
While every other country was advancing, Spain alone was
receding. Every other country was making some addition to
knowledge, creating some art, or enlarging some science, Spain
numbed into a death-like torpor, spellbound and entranced by
the accursed superstition which preyed on her strength,
presented to Europe a solitary instance of constant decay."
H. T. Buckle,
History of Civilization,
volume 2, chapter 8.
ALSO IN:
W. H. Prescott,
History of the Reign of Philip II.,
book 5, chapters 1-8 (volume 3).
R. Watson,
History of the Reign of Philip III.,
book 4.
J. Dunlop,
Memoirs of Spain, 1621-1700,
volume 1, chapter 1.
See, also, INQUISITION: A. D. 1203-1525.
MOORS: 15-19th Centuries.
The kingdom of Marocco.
See MAROCCO.
----------MOORS: End--------
MOPH.
See MEMPHIS.
{2228}
MOQUELUMNAN FAMILY, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: MOQUELUMNAN FAMILY.
MOQUIS, The.
See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: PUEBLOS.
MORA, The.
The name of the ship which bore William the Conqueror to
England, and which was the gift of his wife, the Duchess
Matilda.
MORAT, Battle of (1476).
See BURGUNDY (THE FRENCH DUKEDOM): A. D. 1476-1477.
----------MORAVIA: Start--------
MORAVIA:
Its people and their early history.
See BOHEMIA: ITS PEOPLE, &c.
MORAVIA: 9th Century.
Conversion to Christianity.
The kingdom of Svatopluk and its obscure destruction.
"Moravia has not even a legendary history. Her name appears
for the first time at the beginning of the 9th century, under
its Slav form, Morava (German 'March,' 'Moehren'). It is used
to denote at the same time a tributary of the Danube and the
country it waters; it is met with again in the lower valley of
that stream, in Servia, and appears to have a Slav origin.
During the 7th and 8th centuries there is no doubt Moravia was
divided among several princes, and had a hard struggle against
the Avars. The first prince whose name is known was Moïmir,
who ruled at the beginning of the 9th century. … During his
reign Christianity made some progress in Moravia. … Moïmir
tried to withstand the Germans, but was not successful; and in
846 Louis the German invaded his country, deposed him, and
made his nephew Rostislav, whom the chroniclers call Rastiz,
ruler in his stead. … The new prince, Rostislav, determined
to secure both the political and moral freedom of his country.
He fortified his frontiers and then declared war against the
emperor. He was victorious, and when once peace was secured he
undertook a systematic conversion of his people. Thus came
about one of the great episodes in the history of the Slavs,
and their Church, the mission of the apostles Cyril and
Methodius. … After having struggled successfully for some
time against the Germans" Rostislav was "betrayed by his
nephew and vassal, Svatopluk, into the hands of Karloman, duke
of Carinthia and son of Louis the German, who put out his eyes
and shut him up in a monastery. Svatopluk believed himself
sure of the succession to his uncle as the price of his
treachery, but a very different reward fell to his lot, as
Karloman, trusting but little in his fidelity to the Germans,
threw him also into captivity. The German yoke was, however,
hateful to the Moravians; they soon rebelled, and Karloman
hoped to avert the danger by releasing Svatopluk and placing
him at the head of an army. Svatopluk marched against the
Moravians, then suddenly joined his forces to theirs and
attacked the Germans. This time the independence of Moravia
was secured, and was recognized by the treaty of Forcheim
(874). … Thenceforward peace reigned between Svatopluk and
Louis the German. … At one time he [Svatopluk] was the most
powerful monarch of the Slavs; Rome was in treaty with him,
Bohemia gravitated towards the orbit of Moravia, while Moravia
held the empire in check. … At this time [891] the kingdom
of Svatopluk … included, besides Moravia and the present
Austrian Silesia, the subject country of Bohemia, the Slav
tribes on the Elbe and the Vistula as far as the neighbourhood
of Magdeburg, part of Western Galicia, the country of the
Slovaks, and Lower Pannonia." But Svatopluk was ruined by war
with his neighbor, Arnulf, duke of Pannonia. The latter
"entered into an alliance with Braclav, a Slovene prince,
sought the aid of the king of the Bulgarians, and, what was of
far graver importance, summoned to his help the Magyars, who
had just settled themselves on the Lower Danube. Swabians,
Bavarians, Franks, Magyars, and Slovenes rushed simultaneously
upon Moravia. Overwhelmed by numbers, Svatopluk made no
attempt at resistance; he shut up his troops in fortresses,
and abandoned the open country to the enemy, who ravaged it
for four whole weeks. Then hostilities ceased; but no durable
peace could exist between the two adversaries. War began again
in the following year, when death freed Arnulf from Svatopluk.
… At his death he left three sons; he chose the eldest,
Moïmir II., as his heir, and assigned appanages to each of the
others. On his death-bed he begged them to live at peace with
one another, but his advice was not followed. … Bohemia soon
threw off those bonds which had attached her as a vassal to
Svatopluk; the Magyars invaded Moravian Pannonia, and forced
Moïmir into an alliance with them. … In the year 900 the
Bavarians, together with the Chekhs, invaded Moravia. In 903
the name of Moïmir disappears. As to the cause of his death,
as to how it was that suddenly and for ever the kingdom of
Moravia was destroyed, the chronicles tell us nothing. Cosmas
of Prague shows us Moravia at the mercy of Germans, Chekhs,
and Hungarians; then history is silent, towns and castles
crumble to pieces, churches are overthrown, the people are
scattered."
L. Leger,
History of Austro-Hungary,
chapter 4.
ALSO IN:
G. F. Maclear,
Conversion of the West: The Slavs,
chapter 4.
MORAVIA: A. D. 1355.
Absorption in the kingdom of Bohemia.
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1355.
----------MORAVIA: End----------
MORAVIAN OR BOHEMIAN BRETHREN (Unitas Fratrum):
Origin and early history.
See BOHEMIA: A. D. 1434-1457; and 1621-1648.
MORAVIAN OR BOHEMIAN BRETHREN (Unitas Fratrum):
In Saxony and in America.
The Indian Missions.
"In 1722, and in the seven following years, a considerable
number of these 'Brethren,' led by Christian David, who were
persecuted in their homes, were received by Count Zinzendorf
on his estate at Berthelsdorf in Saxony. They founded a
village called Herrnhut, or 'the Watch of the Lord.' There
they were joined by Christians from other places in Germany,
and, after some time, Zinzendorf took up his abode among them,
and became their principal guide and pastor. … In 1737, he
consecrated himself wholly to the service of God in connection
with the Moravian settlement, and was ordained a bishop. …
Zinzendorf had before been received into the Lutheran
ministry. The peculiar fervor which characterized his
religious work, and certain particulars in his teaching,
caused the Saxon Government, which was wedded to the
traditional ways of Lutheranism, to exclude him from Saxony
for about ten years (1736-1747). He prosecuted his religious
labors in Frankfort, journeyed through Holland and England,
made a voyage to the West Indies, and, in 1741, another voyage
to America.
{2229}
New branches of the Moravian body he planted in the countries
which he visited. … It was a church within a church that
Zinzendorf aimed to establish. It was far from his purpose to
found a sect antagonistic to the national churches in the
midst of which the Moravian societies arose. … With a
religious life remarkable as combining warm emotion with a
quiet and serene type of feeling, the community of Zinzendorf
connected a missionary zeal not equalled at that time in any
other Protestant communion. Although few in number, they sent
their gospel messengers to all quarters of the globe."
G. P. Fisher,
History of the Christian Church,
pages 506-507.
The first settlement of the Moravians in America was planted
in Georgia, in 1735. "But Oglethorpe's border war with the
Spaniards compelled him to call every man in his colony to
arms, and the Moravians, rather than forsake their principles
[of non-resistance, and dependence upon prayer], abandoned
their lands and escaped to Pennsylvania [1740]. Here some of
their brethren were already fixed. Among the refugees was the
young David Zeisberger, the future head of the Ohio missions.
Bethlehem on the Lehigh became, and is yet, the centre in
America of their double system of missions and education. They
bought lands, laid out villages and farms, built houses,
shops, and mills, but everywhere, and first of all, houses of
prayer, in thankfulness for the peace and prosperity at length
found. The first mission established by Zinzendorf in the
colonies was in 1741, among the Mohican Indians, near the
borders of New York and Connecticut. The bigoted people and
authorities of the neighborhood by outrages and persecution
drove them off, so that they were forced to take refuge on the
Lehigh. The brethren established them in a new colony twenty
miles above Bethlehem, to which they gave the name of
Gnadenhütten (Tents of Grace). The prosperity of the Mohicans
attracted the attention and visits of the Indians beyond. The
nearest were the Delawares, between whom and the Mohicans
there were strong ties of affinity, as branches of the old
Lenni Lenape stock. Relations were thus formed between the
Moravians and the Delawares. And by the fraternization between
the Delawares and Shawanees … and their gradual emigration
to the West to escape the encroachments of Penn's people, it
occurred that the Moravian missionaries, Zeisberger foremost,
accompanied their Delaware and Mohican converts to the
Susquehanna in 1765, and again, when driven from there by the
cession at Fort Stanwix, journeyed with them across the
Alleghanies to Goshgoshink, a town established by the
unconverted Delawares far up the Alleghany River." In 1770,
having gained some important converts among the Delawares of
the Wolf clan, at Kuskuskee, on Big Beaver Creek, they
transferred themselves to that place, naming it Friedenstadt.
But there they were opposed with such hostility by warriors
and white traders that they determined "to plunge a step
further into the wilderness, and go to the head chief of the
Delawares at Gepelmukpechenk (Stillwater, or Tuscarawi) on the
Muskingum. It was near this village that Christian Frederick
Post, the brave, enterprising pioneer of the Moravians, had
established himself in 1761, with the approbation of the
chiefs. … By marriage with an Indian wife he had forfeited
his regular standing with the congregation. His intimate
acquaintance with the Indians, and their languages and
customs, so far gained upon them that in 1762 he was permitted
to take Heckewelder to share his cabin and establish a school
for the Indian children. But in the autumn the threatened
outburst of Pontiac's war had compelled them to flee." Early
in 1772 the Moravian colony "was invited by the council at
Tuscarawi, the Wyandots west of them approving it, to come
with all their Indian brethren from the Alleghany and
Susquehanna, and settle on the Muskingum (as the Tuscarawas
was then called), and upon any lands that they might choose."
The invitation was accepted. "The pioneer party, in the
removal from the Beaver to Ohio, consisted of Zeisberger and
five Indian families, 28 persons, who arrived at this
beautiful ground May 3, 1772. … The site was at the large
spring, and appropriately it was named for it Shoenbrun. In
August arrived the Missionaries Ettwein and Heckewelder, with
the main body of Christian Indians who had been invited from
the Alleghany and the Susquehanna, about 250 in number. …
This, and further accessions from the east in September, made
it advisable to divide the colony into two villages. The
second [named Gnadenhütten] was established ten miles below
Shoenbrun. … In April, 1773, the remnants of the mission on
the Beaver joined their brethren in Ohio. The whole body of
the Moravian Indians … was now united and at rest under the
shelter of the unconverted but … tolerant Delaware warriors.
… The population of the Moravian villages at the close of
1775 was 414 persons. … The calamity of the Moravians was
the war of the American Revolution. It developed the dangerous
fact that their villages … were close upon the direct line
between Pittsburgh and Detroit, the outposts of the two
contending forces." The peaceful settlement became an object
of hostility to the meaner spirits on both sides. In
September, 1781, by order of the British commander at Detroit,
they were expelled from their settlement, robbed of all their
possessions, and sent to Sandusky. In the following February,
a half-starved party of them, numbering 96, who had ventured
back to their ravaged homes, for the purpose of gleaning the
corn left standing in the fields, were massacred by a brutal
American force, from the Ohio. "So perished the Moravian
missions on the Muskingum. Not that the pious founders ceased
their labors, or that these consecrated scenes knew them no
more. But their Indian communities, the germ of their work,
the sign of what was to be accomplished by them in the great
Indian problem, were scattered and gone, Zeisberger, at their
head, labored with the remnants of their congregation for
years in Canada. They then transferred themselves temporarily
to settlements on the Sandusky, the Huron, and the Cuyahoga
rivers. At last he and Heckewelder, with the survivors of
these wanderings, went back to their lands on the Tuscarawas,
now surrounded by the whites, but fully secured to them by the
generosity of Congress."
R. King,
Ohio,
chapter 6.
ALSO IN:
D. Cranz,
History of the United Brethren.
F. Bovet,
The Banished Count (Life of Zinzendorf).
E. de Schweinitz,
Life and Times of David Zeisberger.
D. Zeisberger,
Diary.
D. Berger,
United Brethren
(American Church History),
volume 12.
{2230}
----------MOREA: Start--------
MOREA:
Origin of the name.
"The Morea must … have come into general use, as the name of
the peninsula [of the Peloponnesus] among the Greeks, after
the Latin conquest [of 1204-1205], even allowing that the term
was used among foreigners before the arrival of the Franks.
… The name Morea was, however, at first applied only to the
western coast of the Peloponnesus, or perhaps more
particularly to Elis, which the epitome of Strabo points out
as a district exclusively Sclavonian, and which, to this day,
preserves a number of Sclavonian names. … Originally the
word appears to be the same geographical denomination which
the Sclavonians of the north had given to a mountain district
of Thrace in the chain of Mount Rhodope. In the 14th century
the name of this province is written by the Emperor
Cantacuzenos, who must have been well acquainted with it
personally, Morrha. Even as late as the 14th century, the
Morea is mentioned in official documents relating to the Frank
principality as a province of the Peloponnesus, though the
name was then commonly applied to the whole peninsula."
G. Finlay,
History of Greece from its Conquest by the Crusaders,
chapter 1, section 4.
MOREA:
The Principality of the.
See ACHAIA: A. D. 1205-1387.
----------MOREA: End--------
MOREAU, General,
The Campaigns and the military and political fortunes of.
See FRANCE:
A. D. 1796 (APRIL-OCTOBER);
1796-1797 (OCTOBER-APRIL);
1799 (APRIL-SEPTEMBER), (NOVEMBER);
1800-1801 (MAY-FEBRUARY); and 1804-1805;
also, GERMANY: A. D. 1813 (AUGUST).
MORETON BAY DISTRICT.
See AUSTRALIA: A. D. 1800-1840, and 1859.
MORGAN, General Daniel, and the War or the American Revolution.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1780-1781.
MORGAN, General John H., and his raid into Ohio and Indiana.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1863 (JULY: KENTUCKY).
MORGAN, William, The abduction of.
See NEW YORK: A. D. 1826-1832.
MORGANATIC MARRIAGES.
"Besides the dowry which was given before the marriage
ceremony had been performed, it was customary [among some of
the ancient German peoples] for the husband to make his wife a
present on the morning after the first night. This was called
the 'morgengabe,' or morning gift, the presenting of which,
where no previous ceremony had been observed, constituted a
particular kind of connexion called matrimonium morganaticam,
or 'morganatic marriage. As the liberality of the husband was
apt to be excessive, we find the amount limited by the
Langobardian laws to one fourth of the bridegroom's
substance."
W. C. Perry,
The Franks,
chapter 10.
MORGARTEN, Battle or (1315).
See SWITZERLAND: THE THREE FOREST CANTONS.
MORINI, The.
See BELGÆ.
MORISCOES.
This name was given to the Moors in Spain after their nominal
and compulsory conversion to Christianity.
See MOORS: A. D. 1492-1609.
MORMAERS,
MAARMORS.
A title, signifying great Maer or Steward, borne by certain
princes or sub-kings of provinces in Scotland in the 10th and
11th centuries. The Macbeth of history was Mormaer of Moray.
W. F. Skene,
Celtic Scotland,
volume 3, pages 49-51.
See, also, SCOTLAND: A. D. 1039-1054.
MORMANS, Battle of.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814 (JANUARY-MARCH).
----------MORMONISM: Start--------
MORMONISM: A. D. 1805-1830.
Joseph Smith and the Book or Mormon.
"Joseph Smith, Jr., who … appears in the character of the
first Mormon prophet, and the putative founder of Mormonism
and the Church of Latter Day Saints, was born in Sharon,
Windsor County, Vermont, December 13, 1805. He was the son of
Joseph Smith, Sr., who, with his wife Lucy and their family,
removed from Royalton, Vermont, to Palmyra, New York, in the
summer of 1816. The family embraced nine children, Joseph,
Jr., being the fourth in the order of their ages. … At
Palmyra, Mr. Smith, Sr., opened 'a cake and beer shop,' as
described by his signboard, doing business on a small scale,
by the profits of which, added to the earnings of an
occasional day's work on hire by himself and his elder sons,
for the village and farming people, he was understood to
secure a scanty but honest living for himself and family. …
In 1818 they settled upon a nearly wild or unimproved piece of
land, mostly covered with standing timber, situate about two
miles south of Palmyra. … Little improvement was made upon
this land by the Smith family in the way of clearing, fencing,
or tillage. … The larger proportion of the time of the
Smiths … was spent in hunting and fishing … and idly
lounging around the stores and shops in the village. … At
this period in the life and career of Joseph Smith, Jr., or
'Joe Smith,' as he was universally named, and the Smith
family, they were popularly regarded as an illiterate,
whiskey-drinking, shiftless, irreligious race of people—the
first named, the chief subject of this biography, being
unanimously voted the laziest and most worthless of the
generation. … Taciturnity was among his characteristic
idiosyncrasies, and he seldom spoke to anyone outside of his
intimate associates, except when first addressed by another;
and then, by reason of his extravagancies of statement, his
word was received with the least confidence by those who knew
him best. He could utter the most palpable exaggeration or
marvellous absurdity with the utmost apparent gravity. … He
was, however, proverbially good-natured, very rarely if ever
indulging in any combative spirit toward anyone, whatever
might be the provocation, and yet was never known to laugh.
Albeit, he seemed to be the pride of his indulgent father, who
has been heard to boast of him as the 'genus of the family,'
quoting his own expression. Joseph, moreover, as he grew in
years, had learned to read comprehensively, in which
qualification he was far in advance of his elder brother, and
even of his father. … As he … advanced in reading and
knowledge, he assumed a spiritual or religious turn of mind,
and frequently perused the Bible, becoming quite familiar with
portions thereof. … The final conclusion announced by him
was, that all sectarianism was fallacious, all the churches on
a false foundation, and the Bible a fable. … In September,
1819, a curious stone was found in the digging of a well upon
the premises of Mr. Clark Chase, near Palmyra. This stone
attracted particular notice on account of its peculiar shape,
resembling that of a child's foot. It was of a whitish, glassy
appearance, though opaque, resembling quartz.
{2231}
Joseph Smith, Sr., and his elder sons Alvin and Hyrum, did the
chief labor of this well-digging, and Joseph, Jr., who had
been a frequenter in the progress of the work, as an idle
looker-on and lounger, manifested a special fancy for this
geological curiosity, and he carried it home with him. …
Very soon the pretension transpired that he could see
wonderful things by its aid. … The most glittering sights
revealed to the mortal vision of the young impostor, in the
manner stated, were hidden treasures of great value, including
enormous deposits of gold and silver sealed in earthen pots or
iron chests, and buried in the earth in the immediate vicinity
of the place where he stood. These discoveries finally became
too dazzling for his eyes in daylight, and he had to shade his
vision by looking at the stone in his hat! … The imposture
was renewed and repeated at frequent intervals from 1820 to
1827, various localities being the scenes of … delusive
searches for money [for carrying on which Smith collected
contributions from his dupes], as pointed out by the
revelations of the magic stone. … Numerous traces of the
excavations left by Smith are yet remaining as evidences of
his impostures and the folly of his dupes, though most of them
have become obliterated by the clearing off and tilling of the
lands where they were made." In the summer of 1827 "Smith had
a remarkable vision. He pretended that, while engaged in
secret prayer, alone in the wilderness, an 'angel of the Lord'
appeared to him, with the glad tidings that 'all his sins had
been forgiven'; … also that he had received a 'promise that
the true doctrine and the fulness of the doctrine and the
fulness of the gospel should at some future time be revealed