Part 1009

"The tunica was put on in the same way as the Greek chiton. Its cut was the same for men and women, and its simple original type was never essentially modified by the additions of later fashion. It was light and comfortable, and was worn especially at home; out of doors the toga was arranged over it."

_E. Guhl and W. Koner, Life of the Greeks and Romans, section 95._

TUNIS, Ancient.

See CARTHAGE, THE DOMINION OF; also, AFRICA, THE ROMAN PROVINCE.

TUNIS: A. D. 1270-1271. Crusade of Saint Louis.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1270-1271.

TUNIS: Modern history.

See BARBARY STATES.

Volume 4: End--------

Volume 5: Start--------

LIST OF MAPS AND PLANS.

Map of the United States Showing its territorial development, To follow page 3286.

Maps of the United States in 1783, in 1790, in 1803, in 1840, and in 1860, To follow page 3326.

Map of the principal theatre Of war in Virginia, 1861-1865, To follow page 3434.

Map of the Vicksburg Campaign, On page 3490.

Map of the Battle-field of Gettysburg, On page 3501.

Map of the Battle-field of Chattanooga, On page 3511.

Map of the Atlanta Campaign, On page 3531.

SUPPLEMENT.

"Abelard" to "Wheatstone," Pages 3669 to 3811.

Chronology of important and indicative events, Pages 3812 to 3856.

Lineage of European Sovereigns and great historical families, Pages 3857 to 3883.

Selected Bibliography, Pages 3885 to 3909.

List of works from which passages have been quoted in "History for Ready Reference and Topical Reading," Pages 3910 to 3985.

{3129}

TUNNAGE AND POUNDAGE. A tax or custom of two shillings on the tun of wine and sixpence on the pound of merchandise, which became, in England, from the fourteenth century, one of the regular parliamentary grants to the crown, for a long period. It grew out of an agreement with the merchants in the time of Edward II., to take the place of the former right of prisage; the right, that is, to take two tuns of wine from every ship importing twenty tuns or more,—one before and one behind the mast.

_W. Stubbs, Constitutional History of England, chapter 17, sections 276-277 (volume 2)._

See, also, ENGLAND: A. D. 1629.

TUPI, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: TUPI.

TUPUYAS, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: TUPI, ETC.

TURAN.

"The old Persians, who spoke an Aryan tongue, called their own land Iran, and the barbarous land to the north of it they called Turan. In their eyes, Iran was the land of light, and Turan was the land of darkness. From this Turan, the land of Central Asia, came the many Turkish settlements which made their way, first into Western Asia and then into Europe."

_E. A. Freeman, The Ottoman Power in Europe, chapter 2._

TURANIAN RACES AND LANGUAGES.

The name Turanian has been given to a large group of peoples, mostly Asiatic, whose languages are all in the agglutinative stage and bear evident marks of a family relationship. "This race, one of the largest, both numerically and with regard to the extent of territory which it occupies, is divided into two great branches, the Ugro-finnish and the Dravidian. The first must be again subdivided into the Turkish, including the populations of Turkestan and of the Steppes of Central Asia, as well as the Hungarians who have been for a long time settled in Europe; and the Uralo-finnish group, comprising the Finns, the Esthonians, the Tchoudes, and, in general, nearly all the tribes of the north of Europe and Asia. The country of the Dravidian branch is, on the contrary, to the south. This branch is in fact composed of the indigenous people of the Peninsula of Hindustan; Tamuls, Telingas, Carnates, who were subjugated by the Arian race, and who appear to have originally driven before them the negroes of the Australian group, the original inhabitants of the soil, who are now represented by the almost savage tribe of the Khonds. The Turanian race is one of the oldest in the world. … The skulls discovered in France, England and Belgium, in caves of the close of the quaternary epoch, appear from their characteristics to belong to a Turanian race, to the Uralo-finnish group, and particularly resemble those of the Esthonians. Wherever the Japhetic or pure Indo-European race extended, it seems to have encountered a Turanian population which it conquered and finally amalgamated with itself."

_F. Lenormant, Manual of Ancient History of the East, book 1, chapter 4._

"From the 'Shah-nameh,' the great Persian epic, we learn that the Aryan Persians called their nearest non-Aryan neighbours —the Turkic or Turcoman tribes to the north of them—by the name Turan, a word from which we derive the familiar ethnologic term Turanian."

_I. Taylor, Etruscan Researches, chapter 2._

TURCOMANS, Russian subjugation of the.

See RUSSIA: A.D. 1869-1881.

TURDETANI, The.

"There is a tradition that the Turdetani (round Seville) possessed lays from very ancient times, a metrical book of laws, of 6,000 verses, and even historical records. At any rate, this tribe is described as the most civilized of all the Spanish tribes, and at the same time the least warlike."

_T. Mommsen, History of Rome, book 3, chapter 7._

"The most mixed portion of the Peninsular population … is that of the water-system of the Guadalquiver and the parts immediately south and east of it, … the country of the Turdetani and Bastitani, if we look to the ancient populations—Bætica, if we adopt the general name of the Romans, Andalusia in modern geography; … it was the Iberians of these parts who were the first to receive foreign intermixture, and the last to lose it."

_R. G. Latham, Ethnology of Europe, chapter 2._

TURDETANIA.

The ancient name of modern Andalusia, in Spain; known still more anciently as Tartessus.

TURENNE, Vicomte de: Campaigns in the Thirty Years War and the war with Spain.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1640-1645; 1643-1644; 1646-1648; and ITALY: A. D. 1635-1659.

TURENNE, Vicomte de: The wars of the Fronde.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1649; 1650-1651; 1651-1653.

TURENNE, Vicomte de: Campaigns against the Spaniards under Condé.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1653-1656; and 1655-1658.

TURENNE, Vicomte de: Last campaigns.

See NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND): A. D. 1667; 1672-1674; and, 1674-1678.

TURGOT, Ministry of.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1774-1788.

TURIERO, The.

See AMERICAN ABORIGINES: CHIBCHAS.

TURIN: Start--------

TURIN: A. D. 312. Defeat of Maxentius by Constantine.

See ROME: A. D. 305-323.

TURIN: 11-12th Centuries. Acquisition of Republican Independence.

See ITALY: A. D. 1056-1152.

TURIN: 12th Century, Included in the original Italian possessions of the House of Savoy.

See SAVOY: 11-15TH CENTURIES.

TURIN: A. D. 1536-1544. Occupation by the French and restoration to the Duke of Savoy.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1532-1547.

TURIN: A. D. 1559. Held by France while other territory of the Duke of Savoy was restored to him.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1547-1559.

TURIN: A. D. 1562-1580. Evacuation by the French. Establishment of the seat of government by Duke Emanuel Philibert. Increased importance.

See SAVOY: A. D. 1559-1580.

TURIN: A. D. 1639-1657. Extraordinary siege within a siege. The citadel, and its restoration by France to the Duke of Savoy.

See ITALY: A. D. 1635-1659.

TURIN: A. D. 1706. Siege by the French and rout of the besiegers.

See ITALY (SAVOY AND PIEDMONT): A. D. 1701-1713.

TURIN: End--------

{3130}

TURIN PAPYRUS, The.

An Egyptian papyrus preserved in the Turin Museum, for which it was purchased from M. Drovetti, consul-general of France. "If this papyrus were entire, the science of Egyptian antiquities could not possess a more valuable document. It contains a list of all the mythical or historical personages who were believed to have reigned in Egypt, from fabulous times down to a period we cannot ascertain, because the end of the papyrus is wanting. Compiled under Ramses II. (19th dynasty), that is, in the most flourishing epoch of the history of Egypt, this list has all the characteristics of an official document, and gives us the more valuable assistance, as the name of each king is followed by the duration of his reign, and each dynasty by the total number of years during which it governed Egypt. Unfortunately this inestimable treasure exists only in very small pieces (164 in number), which it is often impossible to join correctly."

_F. Lenormant, Manual of Ancient History of the East, book 3, chapter 1, section 2._

TURKESTAN: Start--------

TURKESTAN.

"Few even of the leading authorities are of accord as to the exact meaning of such common expressions as Turkestán or Central Asia. The Russians themselves often designate as Central Asia the second great administrative division of their Asiatic possessions, which is mainly comprised within the Aralo-Caspian depression. But this expression is misguiding in a geographical sense. To the portion of this division directly administered by the Governor-General, whose headquarters are at Tashkent, they give the still more questionable name of Eastern Turkestán—the true Eastern Turkestán, if there be any, lying beyond his jurisdiction in the Chinese province of Kashgaria. … Russian Turkestán is bordered on the west by the Caspian, the Ural river and mountains, on the east by the Pamir plateau, the Tian-Shan and Ala-tau ranges separating it from the Chinese Empire, northwards by the low ridge crossing the Kirghis steppes about the 51st parallel, and forming the water-parting between the Aralo-Caspian and Ob basins."

_Stanford's Compendium of Geography and Travel: Asia, page 391-392._

Of the region sometimes called Chinese Turkestan, the name "Kashgaria," "lately current in Europe, has no raison d'être since the collapse of the independent state founded by Yakub of Kashgar. In the same way the expression 'Kingdom of Khotan' fell into disuse after the city of Khotan had ceased to be the capital. The term 'Little Bokhara,' still in use some thirty years ago, pointed at the former religious ascendancy of Bokhara, but is now all the less appropriate that Bokhara itself has yielded the supremacy to Tashkent. Lastly, the expressions Eastern Turkestan and Chinese Turkestan are still applicable, because the inhabitants are of Turki speech, while the Chinese have again brought the country under subjection."

_E. Reclus, The Earth and its Inhabitants: Asia, volume 2, chapter 3._

See, also, YAKOOB BEG.

TURKESTAN: Ancient.

See SOGDIANA.

TURKESTAN: 6th Century. Turkish conquest.

See TURKS: 6TH CENTURY.

TURKESTAN: A. D. 710. Mahometan conquest.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 710.

TURKESTAN: A. D. 1859-1865. Russian conquest.

See RUSSIA: A. D. 1859-1876.

TURKESTAN: Start--------

TURKEY.

See TURKS (THE OTTOMANS): A. D. 1240-1326, and after; also, SUBLIME PORTE.

TURKS: Start--------

TURKS: 6th Century. Beginning of their career.

"At the equal distance of 2,000 miles from the Caspian, the Icy, the Chinese, and the Bengal seas, a ridge of mountains is conspicuous, the centre, and perhaps the summit, of Asia, which, in the language of different nations has been styled Imaus, and Caf, and Altai, and the Golden Mountains, and the Girdle of the Earth. The sides of the hills were productive of minerals; and the iron-forges, for the purpose of war, were exercised by the Turks, the most despised portion of the slaves of the great khan of the Geougen. But their servitude could only last till a leader, bold and eloquent, should arise to persuade his countrymen that the same arms which they forged for their masters might become in their own hands the instruments of freedom and victory. They sallied from the mountain; a sceptre was the reward of his advice. … The decisive battle which almost extirpated the nation of the Geougen established in Tartary the new and more powerful empire of the Turks. … The royal encampment seldom lost sight of Mount Altai, from whence the river Irtish descends to water the rich pastures of the Calmucks, which nourish the largest sheep and oxen in the world. … As the subject nations marched under the standard of the Turks, their cavalry, both men and horses, were proudly computed by millions; one of their effective armies consisted of 400,000 soldiers, and in less than fifty years they were connected in peace and war with the Romans, the Persians, and the Chinese. … Among their southern conquests the most splendid was that of the Nephthalites, or White Huns, a polite and warlike people, who possessed the commercial cities of Bochara and Samarcand, who had vanquished the Persian monarch, and carried their victorious arms along the banks and perhaps to the month of the Indus. On the side of the west the Turkish cavalry advanced to the lake Mæotis [Sea of Azov]. They passed that lake on the ice: The khan, who dwelt at the foot of Mount Altai, issued his commands for the siege of Bosphorus, a city the voluntary subject of Rome and whose princes had formerly been the friends of Athens."

_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 42._

_W. Smith, Note to E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 42._ {3131}

ALSO IN: _J. H. Newman, Lectures on the History of the Turks (Historical Sketches, volume 1), lectures 1-4._

See, also, TARTARS; and MONGOLS: ORIGIN, &c.; and BALKAN AND DANUBIAN STATES: RACES EXISTING.

TURKS: A. D. 710. Subjugation by the Saracens.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST: A. D. 710.

TURKS: A. D. 815-945. Slaves and masters of the Caliphate.

See MAHOMETAN CONQUEST AND EMPIRE: A. D. 815-945.

TURKS: A. D. 999-1183. The Gaznevide empire.

The decline of the Caliphate at Bagdad in the 9th century was signalized by the rise to practically independent power of several dynasties in its Persian and Central Asian dominions. Among these was the dynasty of the Samanides who ruled, for a hundred and twenty-five years, an extensive dominion in northern Persia and modern Afghanistan and in the Turkoman regions to the Oxus and beyond. In this dominion of the Samanides was included the Turkish tribes which had submitted to Islam and which were presently to become the master champions of the faith. Their first attainment of actual empire in the Moslem world was accomplished by the overthrow of the Samanide princes, and the chief instruments of that revolution were two Turks of humble origin—Sebectagi, or Sabektekin, and his son Mahmud. Sebectagi had been a slave (in the service of a high official under the Samanides) who gained the favor of his masters and acquired command of the city and province of Gazna; whence his famous son Mahmud was called the Gaznevide, and the wide conquests which the latter made are sometimes distinguished as the Gaznevide empire. "For him the title of Sultan was first invented [see SULTAN]; and his kingdom was enlarged from Transoxiana to the neighbourhood of Ispahan, from the shores of the Caspian to the mouth of the Indus. But the principal source of his fame and riches was the holy war which he waged against the Gentoos of Hindostan. … The Sultan of Gazna surpassed the limits of the conquests of Alexander; after a march of three months, over the hills of Cashmir and Thibet, he reached the famous city of Kinoge, on the Upper Ganges, and, in a naval combat on one of the branches of the Indus, he fought and vanquished 4,000 boats of the natives. Delhi, Lahor, and Multan were compelled to open their gates; the fertile kingdom of Guzarat attracted his ambition and tempted his stay." The throne of Mahmud scarcely outlasted himself. In the reign of his son Massoud, it was nearly overturned by another Turkish horde—later comers into the region of Bokhara from the steppes beyond. In a great battle fought at Zendecan, in Khorassan, A. D. 1038, Massoud was defeated and driven from Persia to a narrowed kingdom in Cabul and the Punjaub, which survived for more than a century longer and then disappeared.

_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 57._

ALSO IN: _J. H. Newman, Lectures on the History of the Turks (Historical Sketches, volume 1), lecture 4._

See, also, INDIA: A. D. 977-1290.

TURKS: (Seljuk), A. D. 1004-1063. Conquests of Seldjuk and Togrul Beg.

"The history of the origin of the Seldjukides is obscured by numerous myths, but it appears from it that Seldjuk, or more correctly Seldjik, the son of Tokmak, and Subash, commander of the army of a prince named Pigu or Bogu, were expelled from their native steppes for some crime, and forced to seek their fortunes in strange countries. Seldjuk, with 100 horsemen, 1,000 camels, and 50,000 sheep, migrated to a place on the southern confines of the desert, in the neighbourhood of Djend [described as distant twenty fersakhs from Bokhara]. He settled there and, with all his followers, embraced Islamism." Under Seldjuk and his two grandsons, Togrul and Tchakar, the Seldjukides grew formidable in numbers and power, on the border of the empire of Mahmud the Ghaznevide, then rising on the ruins of the principality of the Samanides. Thinking to control these turbulent kinsmen of his race, Mahmud unwisely proposed to them to quit the country they occupied, between the Oxus and the Jaxartes, and to settle themselves in Khorasan. "In the year … (1030), that is, within a year of the death of Sultan Mahmud, we find the Seldjukides west of Merv, on the ground now occupied by the Tekke-Turkomans, in the neighbourhood of the southern cities of Nisa and Abiverd, from which point they molested the rich province of Khorasan by constant raids, as grievously as is done by the Turkomans to this very day.' When it was too late, the Ghaznevide Sultan attempted to expel the marauders. His armies were routed, and the grandsons of Seldjuk were soon (A. D. 1039) in undisputed possession of the whole of Khorasan, with the rich and flourishing cities of Merv, Balkh, and Nishabur. A few years later they had pushed forward "over the ruins of the former power of the Buyyides [or Bouides, of Persia] to Azerbaïdjan, and, in the year 446 (1054) the skirmishers of the Turkish army, led by Togrul Beg, penetrated into the interior of the eastern Roman Empire [that is, into Asia Minor]; and although the bold inhabitants of the desert in their raid on the land of the Cæsars were bent rather on plunder than on actual conquest, yet even their temporary success against the great name of Rome—so long one of awe to the ancient Asiatic—increased enormously the prestige and reputation of the Seldjukides. Togrul Beg was said to meditate a pilgrimage to Mecca, with the object at the same time of clearing the road thither, which the state of anarchy in Bagdad had long rendered unsafe."

_A. Vámbéry, History of Bokhara, chapter 6._

"Togrul Beg, under pretence of a pilgrimage to Mekka had entered Irak at the head of a strong army, and sought to obtain admission into Baghdad. The khalif, in opposition to the advice of his vizier and the officers of the Turkish militia, consented; on the 22nd Ramadan, 447 (December, 1050), the name of Togrul was inserted in the public prayer; and three days after he made his entry into the city. He had taken an oath, before entering, to be the faithful and obedient servant of the khalif; but it is needless to add that he broke this immediately afterwards, and occupied the city in force. A dispute broke out between the Seljuk soldiers and some shop-keepers. The Baghdad Turks took the side of the citizens, the foreigners were driven out, and several of them killed and wounded. This riot was followed by a general attack upon the ill-fated city by the army of Togrul Beg. It was useless for the khalif and his vizier to protest their innocence. The Turkish chief denounced them as the murderers of his soldiers, and summoned the vizier to his camp to explain his conduct. {3132} On his arrival there he was arrested and flung into prison. With this occurrence the rule of the Bouides in Baghdad may be said to have terminated, and that of the Seljuks commenced. Togrul Beg remained for a year inactive in Baghdad, neither visiting the khalif nor heeding his entreaties to put an end to the ravages and outrages perpetrated by his fierce and lawless soldiery on the wretched townspeople." The khalif was forced, nevertheless, to crown Sultan Togrul with two crowns, one to represent the sovereignty of Persia and the other the sovereignty of Arabia, and to confer on him the title of "The Sultan of the Court, the Right Hand of the Chief of Believers, the King of the East and of the West." The Seljuk sultan was now master of the Asiatic Mahometan empire. But civil war was still protracted for a period, by struggles of the partisans of the Bouides, assisted by the Fatimite Kalif of Egypt, and the unfortunate city of Baghdad suffered terribly at the hands of each party in turn. Togrul Beg, in the end, destroyed the opposition to his rule, and was at the point of marrying one of the kalif's daughters, when a sudden illness ended his life, A. D. 1063. He was succeeded by his nephew, Alp Arslan, who extended the empire of the Seljukides in Asia Minor and Armenia.

_R. D. Osborn, Islam under the Khalifs of Baghdad, part 3, chapter 2._

TURKS: A. D. 1063-1073. Conquests of Alp Arslan.

"Alp Arslan, the nephew and successor of Togrul Beg, carried on the havoc and devastation which had marked the career through life of his uncle. Togrul Beg had on two or three occasions invaded the Asiatic territories of the Byzantine Emperor; Alp Arslan carried these partial conquests to completion. He invaded in person the northern parts of Armenia and Iberia. He laid waste the country in the cruellest manner, for it was the notion of these barbarians that a country was not really conquered unless it was also depopulated. Iberia had been long celebrated for the industry of its inhabitants, the wealth of its numerous towns, and the valour of its people. There is no doubt they could have flung back the invaders had the Byzantine Empire come to their aid. But avarice was the dominant passion of the Emperor, Constantine X., and rather than disburse his loved hoards, he preferred to look idly on, while his fairest provinces were laid waste and overrun. The country was, in consequence, compelled to submit to the Seljuk Turks, and the invaders settling upon it, like a swarm of locusts, swiftly converted the happiest and most flourishing portion of Asia into a scene of poverty and desolation. From Iberia, Alp Arslan passed into Armenia. Ani, the capital, was stormed and taken, after a gallant defence, on the 6th June, 1064. … So great was the carnage that the streets were literally choked up with dead bodies; and the waters of the river were reddened from the quantity of bloody corpses."

_R. D. Osborn, Islam under the Khalifs of Baghdad, part 3, chapter 2._