Such, as the National Alumni regard it, are the general char

Produced by David Kline, Jared Ryan Buck and the Online

Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net

THE GREAT EVENTS

BY

FAMOUS HISTORIANS

A COMPREHENSIVE AND READABLE ACCOUNT OF THE WORLD'S HISTORY, EMPHASIZING

THE MORE IMPORTANT EVENTS, AND PRESENTING THESE AS COMPLETE NARRATIVES

IN THE MASTER-WORDS OF THE MOST EMINENT HISTORIANS

NON-SECTARIAN NON-PARTISAN NON-SECTIONAL

ON THE PLAN EVOLVED FROM A CONSENSUS OF OPINIONS GATHERED FROM THE MOST

DISTINGUISHED SCHOLARS OF AMERICA AND EUROPE, INCLUDING BRIEF

INTRODUCTIONS BY SPECIALISTS TO CONNECT AND EXPLAIN THE CELEBRATED

NARRATIVES, ARRANGED CHRONOLOGICALLY, WITH THOROUGH INDICES,

BIBLIOGRAPHIES, CHRONOLOGIES, AND COURSES OF READING

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

ROSSITER JOHNSON, LL.D.

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

CHARLES F. HORNE, Ph.D. JOHN RUDD, LL.D.

_With a staff of specialists_

_VOLUME 1_

The National Alumni

COPYRIGHT, 1905,

By THE NATIONAL ALUMNI

CONTENTS

VOLUME I

_General Introduction_

_An Outline Narrative of the Great Events_

CHARLES F. HORNE

_Dawn of Civilization_ (_B.C. 5867_)

G.C.C. MASPERO

_Compilation of the Earliest Code_ (_B.C. 2250_)

HAMMURABI

_Theseus Founds Athens_ (_B.C. 1235_)

PLUTARCH

_The Formation of the Castes in India_ (_B.C. 1200_)

GUSTAVE LE BON

W.W. HUNTER

_Fall of Troy_ (_B.C. 1184_)

GEORGE GROTE

_Accession of Solomon_

_Building of the Temple at Jerusalem_ (_B.C. 1017_)

HENRY HART MILMAN

_Rise and Fall of Assyria_

_Destruction of Nineveh_ (_B.C. 789_)

F. LENORMANT AND E. CHEVALLIER

_The Foundation of Rome_ (_B.C. 753_)

BARTHOLD GEORG NIEBUHR

_Prince Jimmu Founds Japan's Capital_ (_B.C. 660_)

SIR EDWARD REED

THE "NEHONGI"

_The Foundation of Buddhism_ (_B.C. 623_)

THOMAS W. RHYS-DAVIDS

_Pythian Games at Delphi_ (_B.C. 585_)

GEORGE GROTE

_Solon's Early Greek Legislation_ (_B.C. 594_)

GEORGE GROTE

_Conquests of Cyrus the Great_ (_B.C. 550_)

GEORGE GROTE

_Rise of Confucius, the Chinese Sage_ (_B.C. 550_)

R.K. DOUGLAS

_Rome Established as a Republic_

_Institution of Tribunes_ (_B.C. 510-494_)

HENRY GEORGE LIDDELL

_The Battle of Marathon_ (_B.C. 490_)

SIR EDWARD SHEPHERD CREASY

_Invasion of Greece by Persians under Xerxes_

_Defence of Thermopylæ_ (_B.C. 480_)

HERODOTUS

_Universal Chronology_ (_B.C. 5867-451_)

JOHN RUDD

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

VOLUME I

_Sphinx, with Great and Second Pyramids of Gizeh_ (_page 12_)

Frontispiece From an original photograph.

_The Rosetta Stone, and Description_

Facsimile of original in the British Museum.

_The Sabine Women_--_now mothers_--_suing for peace between the

combatants_ (_their Roman husbands and their Sabine relatives_)

Painting by Jacques L. David.

THE GREAT EVENTS

BY

FAMOUS HISTORIANS

* * * * *

General Introduction

THE GREAT EVENTS BY FAMOUS HISTORIANS is the answer to a problem which

has long been agitating the learned world. How shall real history, the

ablest and profoundest work of the greatest historians, be rescued from

its present oblivion on the dusty shelves of scholars, and made welcome

to the homes of the people?

THE NATIONAL ALUMNI, an association of college men, having given this

question long and earnest discussion among themselves, sought finally

the views of a carefully elaborated list of authorities throughout

America and Europe. They consulted the foremost living historians and

professors of history, successful writers in other fields, statesmen,

university and college presidents, and prominent business men. From this

widely gathered consensus of opinions, after much comparison and sifting

of ideas, was evolved the following practical, and it would seem

incontrovertible, series of plain facts. And these all pointed toward

"THE GREAT EVENTS."

In the first place, the entire American public, from top to bottom of

the social ladder, are at this moment anxious to read history. Its

predominant importance among the varied forms of literature is fully

recognized. To understand the past is to understand the future. The

successful men in every line of life are those who look ahead, whose

keen foresight enables them to probe into the future, not by magic, but

by patiently acquired knowledge. To see clearly what the world has done,

and why, is to see at least vaguely what the world will do, and when.

Moreover, no man can understand himself unless he understands others;

and he cannot do that without some idea of the past, which has produced

both him and them. To know his neighbors, he must know something of the

country from which they came, the conditions under which they formerly

lived. He cannot do his own simple duty by his own country if he does

not know through what tribulations that country has passed. He cannot be

a good citizen, he cannot even vote honestly, much less intelligently,

unless he has read history. Fortunately the point needs little urging.

It is almost an impertinence to refer to it. We are all anxious, more

than anxious to learn--_if only the path of study be made easy_.

Can this be accomplished? Can the vanishing pictures of the past be made

as simply obvious as mathematics, as fascinating as a breezy novel of

adventure? Genius has already answered, yes. Hand to a mere boy

Macaulay's sketch of Warren Hastings in India, and the lad will see as

easily as if laid out upon a map the host of interwoven and elaborate

problems that perplexed the great administrator. Offer to the youngest

lass the tale told by Guizot of King Robert of France and his struggle

to retain his beloved wife Bertha. Its vivid reality will draw from the

girl's heart far deeper and truer tears than the most pathetic romance.

We begin to realize that in very truth History has been one vast

stupendous drama, world-embracing in its splendor, majestic, awful,

irresistible in the insistence of its pointing finger of fate. It has

indeed its comic interludes, a Prussian king befuddling ambassadors in

his "Tobacco Parliament"; its pauses of intense and cumulative suspense,

Queen Louise pleading to Napoleon for her country's life; but it has

also its magnificent pageants, its gorgeous culminating spectacles of

wonder. Kings and emperors are but the supernumeraries upon its boards;

its hero is the common man, its plot his triumph over ignorance, his

struggle upward out of the slime of earth.

_Yet the great historians are not being widely read_. The ablest and

most convincing stories of his own development seem closed against the

ordinary man. Why? In the first place, the works of the masters are too

voluminous. Grote's unrivalled history of Greece fills ten large and

forbidding volumes. Guizot takes thirty-one to tell a portion of the

story of France. Freeman won credit in the professorial world by

devoting five to the detailing of a single episode, the Norman Conquest.

Surely no busy man can gather a general historic knowledge, if he must

read such works as these! We are told that the great library of Paris

contains over four hundred thousand volumes and pamphlets on French

history alone. The output of historic works in all languages approaches

ten thousand volumes every year. No scholar, even, can peruse more than

the smallest fraction of this enormously increasing mass. Herodotus is

forgotten, Livy remains to most of us but a recollection of our

school-days, and Thucydides has become an exercise in Greek.

There is yet another difficulty. Even the honest man who tries, who

takes down his Grote or Freeman, heroically resolved to struggle through

it at all speed, fails often in his purpose. He discovers that the

greatest masters nod. Sometimes in their slow advance they come upon a

point that rouses their enthusiasm; they become vigorous, passionate,

sarcastic, fascinating, they are masters indeed. But the fire soon dies,

the inspiration flags, "no man can be always on the heights," and the

unhappy reader drowses in the company of his guide.

This leads us then to one clear point. From these justly famous works a

selection should be made. Their length should be avoided, their prosy

passages eliminated; the one picture, or perhaps the many pictures,

which each master has painted better than any rival before or since,

that and that alone should be preserved.

Read in this way, history may be sought with genuine pleasure. It is

only pedantry has made it dreary, only blindness has left it dull. The

story of man is the most wonderful ever conceived. It can be made the

most fascinating ever written.

With this idea firmly established in mind, we seek another line of

thought. The world grows smaller every day. Russia fights huge battles

five thousand miles from her capital. England governs India. Spain and

the United States contend for empire in the antipodes. Our rapidly

improving means of communication, electric trains, and, it may be,

flying machines, cables, and wireless telegraphy, link lands so close

together that no man lives to-day the subject of an isolated state.

Rather, indeed, do all the kingdoms seem to shrink, to become but

districts in one world-including commonwealth.

To tell the story of one nation by itself is thus no longer possible.

Great movements of the human race do not stop for imaginary boundary

lines thrown across a map. It was not the German students, nor the

Parisian mob, nor the Italian peasants who rebelled in 1848; it was the

"people of Europe" who arose against their oppressors. To read the

history of one's own country only is to get distorted views, to

exaggerate our own importance, to remain often in densest ignorance of

the real meaning of what we read. The ideas American school-boys get of

the Revolution are in many cases simply absurd, until they have been

modified by wider reading.

From this it becomes very evident that a good history now must be, not a

local, but a world history. The idea of such a work is not new. Diodorus

penned one two hundred years before Christ. But even then the tale took

forty books; and we have been making history rather rapidly since

Diodorus' time. Of the many who have more recently attempted his task,

few have improved upon his methods; and the best of these works only

shows upon a larger scale the same dreariness that we have found in

other masters.

Let us then be frank and admit that no one man can make a thoroughly

good world history. No one man could be possessed of the almost infinite

learning required; none could have the infinite enthusiasm to delight

equally in each separate event, to dwell on all impartially and yet

ecstatically. So once more we are forced back upon the same conclusion.

We will take what we already have. We will appeal to each master for the

event in which he did delight, the one in which we find him at his best.

This also has been attempted before, but perhaps in a manner too

lengthy, too exact, too pedantic to be popular. The aim has been to get

in everything. Everything great or small has been narrated, and so the

real points of value have been lost in the multiplicity of lesser facts,

about which no ordinary reader cares or needs to care. After all, what

we want to know and remember are the Great Events, the ones which have

really changed and influenced humanity. How many of us do really know

about them? or even know what they are? or one-twentieth part of them?

And until we know, is it not a waste of time to pore over the lesser

happenings between?

Yet the connection between these events must somehow be shown. They must

not stand as separate, unrelated fragments. If the story of the world is

indeed one, it must be shown as one, not even broken by arbitrary

division into countries, those temporary political constructions, often

separating a single race, lines of imaginary demarcation, varying with

the centuries, invisible in earth's yesterday, sure to change if not to

perish in her to-morrow. Moreover, such a system of division

necessitates endless repetition. Each really important occurrence

influences many countries, and so is told of again and again with

monotonous iteration and extravagant waste of space.

It may, however, be fairly urged that the story should vary according to

the country for which it is designed. To our individual lives the events

happening nearest prove most important. Great though others be, their

influence diminishes with their increasing distance in space and time.

For the people of North America the story of the world should have the

part taken by America written large across the pages.

From all these lines of reasoning arose the present work, which the

National Alumni believe has solved the problem. It tells the story of

the world, tells it in the most famous words of the most famous writers,

makes of it a single, continued story, giving the results of the most

recent research. Yet all dry detail has been deliberately eliminated;

the tale runs rapidly and brightly. Whatever else may happen, the reader

shall not yawn. Only important points are dwelt on, and their relative

value is made clear.

Each volume of THE GREAT EVENTS opens with a brief survey of the period

with which it deals. The broad world movements of the time are pointed

out, their importance is emphasized, their mutual relationship made

clear. If the reader finds his interest specially roused in one of these

events, and he would learn more of it, he is aided by a directing note,

which, in each case, tells him where in the body of the volume the

subject is further treated. Turning thither he may plunge at once into

the fuller account which he desires, sure that it will be both vivid and

authoritative; in short, the best-known treatment of the subject.

Meanwhile the general survey, being thus relieved from the necessity of

constant explanation, expansion, and digression, is enabled to flow

straight onward with its story, rapidly, simply, entertainingly. Indeed,

these opening sketches, written especially for this series, and in a

popular style, may be read on from volume to volume, forming a book in

themselves, presenting a bird's-eye view of the whole course of earth,

an ideal world history which leaves the details to be filled in by the

reader at his pleasure. It is thus, we believe, and thus only, that

world history can be made plain and popular. The great lessons of

history can thus be clearly grasped. And by their light all life takes

on a deeper meaning.

The body of each volume, then, contains the Great Events of the period,

ranged in chronological order. Of each event there are given one,

perhaps two, or even three complete accounts, not chosen hap-hazard, but

selected after conference with many scholars, accounts the most accurate

and most celebrated in existence, gathered from all languages and all

times. Where the event itself is under dispute, the editors do not

presume to judge for the reader; they present the authorities upon both

sides. The Reformation is thus portrayed from the Catholic as well as

the Protestant standpoint. The American Revolution is shown in part as

England saw it; and in the American Civil War, and the causes which

produced it, the North and the South speak for themselves in the words

of their best historians.

To each of these accounts is prefixed a brief introduction, prepared for

this work by a specialist in the field of history of which it treats.

This introduction serves a double purpose. In the first place, it

explains whatever is necessary for the understanding and appreciation

of the story that follows. Unfortunately, many a striking bit of

historic writing has become antiquated in the present day. Scholars have

discovered that it blunders here and there, perhaps is prejudiced,

perhaps extravagant. Newer writers, therefore, base a new book upon the

old one, not changing much, but paraphrasing it into deadly dullness by

their efforts after accuracy. Thanks to our introduction we can revive

the more spirited account, and, while pointing out its value to the

reader, can warn him of its errors. Thus he secures in briefest form the

results of the most recent research.

Another purpose of the introduction is to link each event with the

preceding ones in whatever countries it affects. Thus if one chooses he

may read by countries after all, and get a completed story of a single

nation. That is, he may peruse the account of the battle of Hastings and

then turn onward to the making of the _Domesday Book_, where he will

find a few brief lines to cover the intervening space in England's

history. From the struggles of Stephen and Matilda he is led to the

quarrel of her son, King Henry, with Thomas Becket, and so onward step

by step.

Starting with this ground plan of the design in mind, the reader will

see that its compilation was a work of enormous labor. This has been

undertaken seriously, patiently, and with earnest purpose. The first

problem to be confronted was, What were the Great Events that should be

told? Almost every writer and teacher of history, every well-known

authority, was appealed to; many lists of events were compiled, revised,

collated, and compared; and so at last our final list was evolved,

fitted to bear the brunt of every criticism.

Then came the heavier problem of what authorities to quote for each

event. And here also the editors owe much to the capable aid of many

generous, unremunerated advisers. Thus, for instance, they sought and

obtained from the Hon. Joseph Chamberlain his advice as to the

authorities to be used for the Jameson raid and the Boer war. The

account presented may therefore be fairly regarded as England's own

authoritative presentment of those events. Several little known and

wholly unused Russian sources were pointed out by Professor Rambaud,

the French Academician. But this is mentioned only to illustrate the

impartiality with which the editors have endeavored to cover all fields.

If, under the plea of expressing gratitude to all those who have lent us

courteous assistance, we were to spread across these pages the long roll

of their distinguished names, it would sound too much like boasting of

their condescension.

The work of selecting the accounts has been one of time and careful

thought. Many thousands of books have been read and read again. The

cardinal points of consideration in the choice have been: (1) Interest,

that is, vividness of narration; (2) simplicity, for we aim to reach the

people, to make a book fit even for a child; (3) the fame of the author,

for everyone is pleased to be thus easily introduced to some

long-heard-of celebrity, distantly revered, but dreaded; and (4)

accuracy, a point set last because its defects could be so easily

remedied by the specialist's introduction to each event.

These considerations have led occasionally to the selection of very

ancient documents, the original "sources" of history themselves, as, for

instance, Columbus' own story of his voyage, rather than any later

account built up on this; Pliny's picture of the destruction of Pompeii,

for Pliny was there and saw the heavens rain down fire, and told of it

as no man has done since. So, too, we give a literal translation of the

earliest known code of laws, antedating those of Moses by more than a

thousand years, rather than some modern commentary on them. At other

times the same principles have led to the other extreme, and on modern

events, where there seemed no wholly satisfactory or standard accounts,

we have had them written for us by the specialists best acquainted with

the field.

As the work thus grew in hand, it became manifest that it would be, in

truth, far more than a mere story of events. With each event was

connected the man who embodied it. Often his life was handled quite as

fully as the event, and so we had biography. Lands had to be

described--geography. Peoples and customs--sociology. Laws and the

arguments concerning them--political economy. In short, our history

proved a universal cyclopædia as well.

To give it its full value, therefore, an index became obviously

necessary--and no ordinary index. Its aim must be to anticipate every

possible question with which a reader might approach the past, and

direct him to the answer. Even, it might be, he would want details more

elaborate than we give. If so, we must direct him where to find them.

Professional index-makers were therefore summoned to our help, a

complete and readable chronology was appended to each volume, and the

final volume of the series was turned over to the indexers entirely. We

believe their work will prove not the least valuable feature of the

whole. Briefly, the Index Volume contains:

1. A complete list of the Great Events of the world's history. Opposite

each event are given the date, the name of the author and standard work

from which our account is selected, and a number of references to other

works and to a short discussion of these in our Bibliography. Thus the

reader may pursue an extended course of study on each particular event.

2. A bibliography of the best general histories of ancient, mediæval,

and modern times, and of important political, religious, and educational

movements; also a bibliography of the best historical works dealing with

each nation, and arranged under the following subdivisions: (_a_) The

general history of the nation; (_b_) special periods in its career;

(_c_) the descriptions of the people, their civilization and

institutions. On each work thus mentioned there is a critical comment

with suggestions to readers. This bibliography is designed chiefly for

those who desire to pursue more extended courses of reading, and it

offers them the experience and guidance of those who have preceded them

on their special field.

3. A classified index of famous historic characters. The names are

grouped under such headings as "Rulers, Statesmen, and Patriots,"

"Famous Women," "Military and Naval Commanders," "Philosophers and

Teachers," "Religious Leaders," etc. Under each person's name is given a

biographical chronology of his career, showing every important event in

which he played a part, together with the date of the event, and the

volume and page of this series where a full account of it may be found.

This plan provides a new and very valuable means of reading the

biography of any noted personage, one of the great advantages being that

the accounts of the various events in his life are not all in the

language of the same author, not written by a man anxious to bring out

the importance of his special hero. The writers are mainly interested in

the event, and show the hero only in his true and unexaggerated relation

to it. Under each name will also be found references to such further

authorities on the biography of the personage as may be consulted with

profit by those students and scholars who wish to pursue an exhaustive

study of his career.

4. A biographical index of the authors represented in the series. This

consists of brief sketches of the many writers whose work has been drawn

upon for the narratives of Great Events. It is intended for ready

reference, and gives only the essential facts. This index serves a

double purpose. Suppose, for instance, that a reader is familiar with

the name of John Lothrop Motley, but happens not to know whether he is

still living, whether he had other occupation than writing, or what

offices he held. This index will answer these questions. On the other

hand, an admirer of Thomas Jefferson or Theodore Roosevelt may wish to

know whether we have taken anything--and, if so, what--from their

writings. This index will answer at once.

5. A general index covering every reference in the series to dates,

events, persons, and places of historic importance. These are made

easily accessible by a careful and elaborate system of cross-references.

6. A separate and complete chronology of each nation of ancient,

mediæval, and modern times, with references to the volume and page where

each item is treated, either as an entire article or as part of one; so

that the history of any one nation may be read in its logical order and

in the language of its best historians.

Such, as the National Alumni regard it, are the general character, wide

scope, and earnest purpose of THE GREAT EVENTS BY FAMOUS HISTORIANS. Let

us end by saying, in the friendly fashion of the old days when

bookmakers and their readers were more intimate than now: "Kind reader,

if this our performance doth in aught fall short of promise, blame not

our good intent, but our unperfect wit."

THE NATIONAL ALUMNI.

AN OUTLINE NARRATIVE

TRACING BRIEFLY THE CAUSES, CONNECTIONS, AND CONSEQUENCES OF

THE GREAT EVENTS

A GENERAL SURVEY OF THE PROGRESS OF THE HUMAN RACE, ITS ADVANCE IN

KNOWLEDGE AND CIVILIZATION, AND THE BROAD WORLD MOVEMENTS WHICH HAVE

SHAPED ITS DESTINY

CHARLES F. HORNE, Ph.D.

CONTINUED THROUGH THE SUCCESSIVE VOLUMES AND COVERING THE SUCCESSIVE

PERIODS OF

THE GREAT EVENTS BY FAMOUS HISTORIANS

AN OUTLINE NARRATIVE

TRACING BRIEFLY THE CAUSES, CONNECTIONS, AND CONSEQUENCES OF

THE GREAT EVENTS

(FROM THE BEGINNING TO THE OVERTHROW OF THE PERSIANS)

CHARLES F. HORNE

History, if we define it as the mere transcription of the written

records of former generations, can go no farther back than the time such

records were first made, no farther than the art of writing. But now

that we have come to recognize the great earth itself as a story-book,

as a keeper of records buried one beneath the other, confused and half

obliterated, yet not wholly beyond our comprehension, now the historian

may fairly be allowed to speak of a far earlier day.

For unmeasured and immeasurable centuries man lived on earth a creature

so little removed from "the beasts that die," so little superior to

them, that he has left no clearer record than they of his presence here.

From the dry bones of an extinct mammoth or a plesiosaur, Cuvier

reconstructed the entire animal and described its habits and its home.

So, too, looking on an ancient, strange, scarce human skull, dug from

the deeper strata beneath our feet, anatomists tell us that the owner

was a man indeed, but one little better than an ape. A few æons later

this creature leaves among his bones chipped flints that narrow to a

point; and the archæologist, taking up the tale, explains that man has

become tool-using, he has become intelligent beyond all the other

animals of earth. Physically he is but a mite amid the beast monsters

that surround him, but by value of his brain he conquers them. He has

begun his career of mastery.

If we delve amid more recent strata, we find the flint weapons have

become bronze. Their owner has learned to handle a ductile metal, to

draw it from the rocks and fuse it in the fire. Later still he has

discovered how to melt the harder and more useful iron. We say roughly,

therefore, that man passed through a stone age, a bronze age, and then

an iron age.

Somewhere, perhaps in the earliest of these, he began to build rude

houses. In the next, he drew pictures. During the latest, his pictures

grew into an alphabet of signs, his structures developed into vast and

enduring piles of brick or stone. Buildings and inscriptions became his

relics, more like to our own, more fully understandable, giving us a

sense of closer kinship with his race.

SOURCES OF EARLY KNOWLEDGE

There are three different lines along which we have succeeded in

securing some knowledge of these our distant ancestors, three telephones

from the past, over which they send to us confused and feeble

murmurings, whose fascination makes only more maddening the vagueness of

their speech.

First, we have the picture-writings, whether of Central America, of

Egypt, of Babylonia, or of other lands. These when translatable bring us

nearest of all to the heart of the great past. It is the mind, the

thought, the spoken word, of man that is most intimately he; not his

face, nor his figure, nor his clothes. Unfortunately, the translation of

these writings is no easy task. Those of Central America are still an

unsolved riddle. Those of Babylon have been slowly pieced together like

a puzzle, a puzzle to which the learned world has given its most able

thought. Yet they are not fully understood. In Egypt we have had the

luck to stumble on a clew, the Rosetta Stone, which makes the ancient

writing fairly clear.[1]

[Footnote 1: See page 1 for an engraving and account of this famous

stone. It was found over a century ago and its value was instantly

recognized, but many years passed before its secrets were deciphered. It

contains an inscription repeated in three forms of writing: the early

Egyptian of the hieroglyphics, a later Egyptian (the demotic), and

Greek.]

Where this mode of communication fails, we turn to another which carries

us even farther into the past. The records which have been less

intentionally preserved, not only the buildings themselves, but their

decorations, the personal ornaments of men, idols, coins, every

imaginable fragment, chance escaped from the maw of time, has its own

story for our reading. In Egypt we have found deep-hidden, secret tombs,

and, intruding on their many centuries of silence, have reaped rich

harvests of knowledge from the garnered wealth. In Babylonia the rank

vegetation had covered whole cities underneath green hillocks, and

preserved them till our modern curiosity delved them out. To-day, he who

wills, may walk amid the halls of Sennacherib, may tread the streets

whence Abraham fled, ay, he may gaze upon the handiwork of men who lived

perhaps as far before Abraham as we ourselves do after him.

Nor are our means of penetrating the past even thus exhausted. A third

chain yet more subtle and more marvellous has been found to link us to

an ancestry immeasurably remote. This unbroken chain consists of the

words from our own mouths. We speak as our fathers spoke; and they did

but follow the generations before. Occasional pronunciations have

altered, new words have been added, and old ones forgotten; but some

basal sounds of names, some root-thoughts of the heart, have proved as

immutable as the superficial elegancies are changeful. "Father" and

"mother" mean what they have meant for uncounted ages.

Comparative philology, the science which compares one language with

another to note the points of similarity between them, has discovered

that many of these root-sounds are alike in almost all the varied

tongues of Europe. The resemblance is too common to be the result of

coincidence, too deep-seated to be accounted for by mere communication

between the nations. We have gotten far beyond the possibility of such

explanations; and science says now with positive confidence that there

must have been a time when all these nations were but one, that their

languages are all but variations of the tongue their distant ancestors

once held in common.

Study has progressed beyond this point, can tell us far more intricate

and fainter facts. It argues that one by one the various tribes left

their common home and became completely separated; and that each

root-sound still used by all the nations represents an idea, an object,

they already possessed before their dispersal. Thus we can vaguely

reconstruct that ancient, aboriginal civilization. We can even guess

which tribes first broke away, and where again these wanderers

subdivided, and at what stage of progress. Surely a fascinating science

this! And in its infancy! If its later development shall justify present

promise, it has still strange tales to tell us in the future.

THE RACES OF MAN

Turn now from this tracing of our means of knowledge, to speak of the

facts they tell us. When our humankind first become clearly visible they

are already divided into races, which for convenience we speak of as

white, yellow, and black. Of these the whites had apparently advanced

farthest on the road to civilization; and the white race itself had

become divided into at least three varieties, so clearly marked as to

have persisted through all the modern centuries of communication and

intermarriage. Science is not even able to say positively that these

varieties or families had a common origin. She inclines to think so; but

when all these later ages have failed to obliterate the marks of

difference, what far longer period of separation must have been required

to establish them!

These three clearly outlined families of the whites are the Hamites, of

whom the Egyptians are the best-known type; the Semites, as represented

by ancient Babylonians and modern Jews and Arabs; and the great Aryan or

Indo-European family, once called the Japhites, and including Hindus,

Persians, Greeks, Latins, the modern Celtic and Germanic races, and even

the Slavs or Russians.

The Egyptians, when we first see them, are already well advanced toward

civilization.[2] To say that they were the first people to emerge from

barbarism is going much further than we dare. Their records are the most

ancient that have come clearly down to us; but there may easily have

been other social organisms, other races, to whom the chances of time

and nature have been less gentle. Cataclysms may have engulfed more than

one Atlantis; and few climates are so fitted for the preservation of

man's buildings as is the rainless valley of the Nile.

[Footnote 2: See the _Dawn of Civilization_, page 1.]

Moreover, the Egyptians may not have been the earliest inhabitants even

of their own rich valley. We find hints that they were wanderers,

invaders, coming from the East, and that with the land they appropriated

also the ideas, the inventions, of an earlier negroid race. But whatever

they took they added to, they improved on. The idea of futurity, of

man's existence beyond the grave, became prominent among them; and in

the absence of clearer knowledge we may well take this idea as the

groundwork, the starting-point, of all man's later and more striking

progress.

Since the Egyptians believed in a future life they strove to preserve

the body for it, and built ever stronger and more gigantic tombs. They

strove to fit the mind for it, and cultivated virtues, not wholly animal

such as physical strength, nor wholly commercial such as cunning. They

even carved around the sepulchre of the departed a record of his doings,

lest they--and perhaps he too in that next life--forget. There were

elements of intellectual growth in all this, conditions to stimulate the

mind beyond the body.

And the Egyptians did develop. If one reads the tales, the romances,

that have survived from their remoter periods, he finds few emotions

higher than childish curiosity or mere animal rage and fear. Amid their

latest stories, on the contrary, we encounter touches of sentiment, of

pity and self-sacrifice, such as would even now be not unworthy of

praise. But, alas! the improvement seems most marked where it was most

distant. Perhaps the material prosperity of the land was too great, the

conditions of life too easy; there was no stimulus to effort, to

endeavor. By about the year 2200 B.C. we find Egypt fallen into the grip

of a cold and lifeless formalism. Everything was fixed by law; even

pictures must be drawn in a certain way, thoughts must be expressed by

stated and unvariable symbols. Advance became well-nigh impossible.

Everything lay in the hands of a priestly caste the completeness of

whose dominion has perhaps never been matched in history. The leaders

lived lives of luxurious pleasure enlightened by scientific study; but

the people scarce existed except as automatons. The race was dead; its

true life, the vigor of its masses, was exhausted, and the land soon

fell an easy prey to every spirited invader.

Meanwhile a rougher, stronger civilization was growing in the river

valleys eastward from the Nile. The Semitic tribes, who seem to have had

their early seat and centre of dispersion somewhere in this region, were

coalescing into nations, Babylonians along the lower Tigris and

Euphrates, Assyrians later along the upper rivers, Hebrews under David

and Solomon[3] by the Jordan, Phoenicians on the Mediterranean coast.

[Footnote 3: See _Accession of Solomon_, page 92.]

The early Babylonian civilization may antedate even the Egyptian; but

its monuments were less permanent, its rulers less anxious for the

future. The "appeal to posterity," the desire for a posthumous fame,

seems with them to have been slower of conception. True, the first

Babylonian monarchs of whom we have any record, in an era perhaps over

five thousand years before Christianity, stamped the royal signet on

every brick of their walls and temples. But common-sense suggests that

this was less to preserve their fame than to preserve their bricks.

Theft is no modern innovation.

They were a mathematical race, these Babylonians. In fact, Semite and

mathematician are names that have been closely allied through all the

course of history, and one cannot help but wish our Aryan race had

somewhere lived through an experience which would produce in them the

exactitude in balance and measurement of facts that has distinguished

the Arabs and the Jews. The Babylonians founded astronomy and

chronology; they recorded the movements of the stars, and divided their

year according to the sun and moon. They built a vast and intricate

network of canals to fertilize their land; and they arranged the

earliest system of legal government, the earliest code of laws, that has

come down to us.[4]

[Footnote 4: _Compilation of the Earliest Code_, page 14.]

The sciences, then, arise more truly here than with the Egyptians. Man

here began to take notice, to record and to classify the facts of

nature. We may count this the second visible step in his great progress.

Never again shall we find him in a childish attitude of idle wonder.

Always is his brain alert, striving to understand, self-conscious of its

own power over nature.

It may have been wealth and luxury that enfeebled the Babylonians as,

it did the Egyptians. At any rate, their empire was overturned by a

border colony of their own, the Assyrians, a rough and hardy folk who

had maintained themselves for centuries battling against tribes from the

surrounding mountains. It was like a return to barbarism when about B.C.

880 the Assyrians swept over the various Semite lands. Loud were the

laments of the Hebrews; terrible the tales of cruelty; deep the scorn

with which the Babylonians submitted to the rude conquerors. We approach

here a clearer historic period; we can trace with plainness the

devastating track of war;[5] we can read the boastful triumph of the

Assyrian chiefs, can watch them step by step as they adopt the culture

and the vices of their new subjects, growing ever more graceful and more

enfeebled, until they too are overthrown by a new and hardier race, the

Persians, an Aryan folk.

[Footnote 5: See _Rise and Fall of Assyria_, page 105.]

Before turning to this last and most prominent family of humankind, let

us look for a moment at the other, darker races, seen vaguely as they

come in contact with the whites. The negroes, set sharply by themselves

in Africa, never seem to have created any progressive civilization of

their own, never seem to have advanced further than we find the wild

tribes in the interior of the country to-day. But the yellow or Turanian

races, the Chinese and Japanese, the Turks and the Tartars, did not

linger so helplessly behind. The Chinese, at least, established a social

world of their own, widely different from that of the whites, in some

respects perhaps superior to it. But the fatal weakness of the yellow

civilization was that it was not ennobling like the Egyptian, not

scientific like the Babylonian, not adventurous and progressive as we

shall find the Aryan.

This, of course, is speaking in general terms. Something somewhat

ennobling there may be in the contemplations of Confucius;[6] but no man

can favorably compare the Chinese character to-day with the European,

whether we regard either intensity of feeling, or variety, range,

subtlety, and beauty of emotion. So, also, the Chinese made scientific

discoveries--but knew not how to apply them or improve them. So also

they made conquests--and abandoned them; toiled--and sank back into

inertia.

[Footnote 6: See _Rise of Confucius_, page 270.]

The Japanese present a separate problem, as yet little understood in its

earlier stages.[7] As to the Tartars, wild and hardy horsemen roaming

over Northern Asia, they kept for ages their independent animal strength

and fierceness. They appear and disappear like flashes. They seem to

seek no civilization of their own; they threaten again and again to

destroy that of all the other races of the globe. Fitly, indeed, was

their leader Attila once termed "the Scourge of God."

[Footnote 7: See _Prince Jimmu_, page 140.]

THE ARYANS

Of our own progressive Aryan race, we have no monuments nor inscriptions

so old as those of the Hamites and the Semites. What comparative

philology tells is this: An early, if not the original, home of the

Aryans was in Asia, to the eastward of the Semites, probably in the

mountain district back of modern Persia. That is, they were not, like

the other whites, a people of the marsh lands and river valleys. They

lived in a higher, hardier, and more bracing atmosphere. Perhaps it was

here that their minds took a freer bent, their spirits caught a bolder

tone. Wherever they moved they came as conquerors among other races.

In their primeval home and probably before the year B.C. 3000, they had

already acquired a fair degree of civilization. They built houses,

ploughed the land, and ground grain into flour for their baking. The

family relations were established among them; they had some social

organization and simple form of government; they had learned to worship

a god, and to see in him a counterpart of their tribal ruler.

From their upland farms they must have looked eastward upon yet higher

mountains, rising impenetrable above the snowline; but to north and

south and west they might turn to lower regions; and by degrees, perhaps

as they grew too numerous for comfort, a few families wandered off along

the more inviting routes. Whichever way they started, their adventurous

spirit led them on. We find no trace of a single case where hearts

failed or strength grew weary and the movement became retrograde, back

toward the ancient home. Spreading out, radiating in all directions, it

is they who have explored the earth, who have measured it and marked its

bounds and penetrated almost to its every corner. It is they who still

pant to complete the work so long ago begun.

Before B.C. 2000 one of these exuded swarms had penetrated India,

probably by way of the Indus River. In the course of a thousand years or

so, the intruders expanded and fought their way slowly from the Indus to

the Ganges. The earlier and duskier inhabitants gave way before them or

became incorporated in the stronger race. A mighty Aryan or Hindu empire

was formed in India and endured there until well within historic times.

Yet its power faded. Life in the hot and languid tropics tends to

weaken, not invigorate, the sinews of a race. Then, too, a formal

religion, a system of castes[8] as arbitrary as among the Egyptians,

laid its paralyzing grip upon the land. About B.C. 600 Buddhism, a new

and beautiful religion, sought to revive the despairing people; but they

were beyond its help.[9] Their slothful languor had become too deep.

From having been perhaps the first and foremost and most civilized of

the Aryan tribes, the Hindus sank to be degenerate members of the race.

We shall turn to look on them again in a later period; but they will be

seen in no favorable light.

[Footnote 8: See _The Formation of the Castes_, page 52.]

[Footnote 9: See _The Foundation of Buddhism_, page 160.]

Meanwhile other wanderers from the Aryan home appear to the north and

west. Perhaps even the fierce Tartars are an Aryan race, much altered

from long dwelling among the yellow peoples. One tribe, the Persians,

moved directly west, and became neighbors of the already noted Semitic

group. After long wars backward and forward, bringing us well within the

range of history, the Persians proved too powerful for the whole Semite

group. They helped destroy Assyria,[10] they overthrew the second

Babylonian empire which Nebuchadnezzar had built up, and then, pressing

on to the conquest of Egypt, they swept the Hamites too from their place

of sovereignty.[11]

[Footnote 10: See _Destruction of Nineveh_, page 105.]

[Footnote 11: See _Conquests of Cyrus_, page 250.]

How surely do those tropic lands avenge themselves on each new savage

horde of invaders from the hardy North. It is not done in a generation,

not in a century, perhaps. But drop by drop the vigorous, tingling,

Arctic blood is sapped away. Year after year the lazy comfort, the loose

pleasure, of the south land fastens its curse upon the mighty warriors.

As we watch the Persians, we see their kings go mad, or become

effeminate tyrants sending underlings to do their fighting for them. We

see the whole race visibly degenerate, until one questions if

Marathon[12] were after all so marvellous a victory, and suspects that

at whatever point the Persians had begun their advance on Europe they

would have been easily hurled back.

[Footnote 12: See _The Battle of Marathon_, page 322.]

It was in Europe only that the Aryan wanderers found a temperate

climate, a region similar to that in which they had been bred. Recent

speculation has even suggested that Europe was their primeval home, from

which they had strayed toward Asia, and to which they now returned.

Certainly it is in Europe that the race has continued to develop.

Earliest of these Aryan waves to take possession of their modern

heritage, were the Celts, who must have journeyed over the European

continent at some dim period too remote even for a guess. Then came the

Greeks and Latins, closely allied tribes, representing possibly a single

migration, that spread westward along the islands and peninsulas of the

Mediterranean. The Teutons may have left Asia before B.C. 1000, for they

seem to have reached their German forests by three centuries beyond that

time, and these vast migratory movements were very slow. The latest

Aryan wave, that of the Slavs, came well within historic times. We

almost fancy we can see its movement. Russian statesmen, indeed, have

hopes that this is not yet completed. They dream that they, the youngest

of the peoples, are yet to dominate the whole.

THE GREEKS AND LATINS

Of these European Aryans the only branches that come within the limits

of our present period, that become noteworthy before B.C. 480, are the

Greeks and Latins.

Their languages tell us that they formed but a single tribe long after

they became separated from the other peoples of their race. Finally,

however, the Latins, journeying onward, lost sight of their friends, and

it must have taken many centuries of separation for the two tongues to

grow so different as they were when Greeks and Romans, each risen to a

mighty nation, met again.

The Greeks, or Hellenes as they called themselves, seem to have been

only one of a number of kindred tribes who occupied not only the shores

of the Ægean, but Thrace, Macedonia, a considerable part of Asia Minor,

and other neighboring regions. The Greeks developed in intellect more

rapidly than their neighbors, outdistanced them in the race for

civilization, forgot these poor relations, and grouped them with the

rest of outside mankind under the scornful name "barbarians."

Why it was that the Greeks were thus specially stimulated beyond their

brethren we do not know. It has long been one of the commonplaces of

history to declare them the result of their environment. It is pointed

out that in Greece they lived amid precipitous mountains, where, as

hunters, they became strong and venturesome, independent and

self-reliant. A sea of islands lay all around; and while an open ocean

might only have awed and intimidated them, this ever-luring prospect of

shore beyond shore rising in turn on the horizon made them sailors, made

them friendly traffickers among themselves. Always meeting new faces,

driving new bargains, they became alert, quick-witted, progressive, the

foremost race of all the ancient world.

The Great Events by Famous Historians, Volume 01 · 第 1 / 37 段