History for ready reference, Volumes 1 to 5

Part 43

Chapter 433,679 wordsPublic domain

"The Argentine constitutional system in its outward form corresponds closely to that of the United States. … But the inward grace of enlightened public opinion is lacking, and political practice falls below the level of a self-governing democracy. Congress enacts laws, but the President as commander-in-chief of the army, and as the head of a civil service dependent upon his will and caprice, possesses absolute authority in administration. The country is governed by executive decrees rather than by constitutional laws. Elections are carried by military pressure and manipulation of the civil service. … President Roca [who succeeded Avellaneda in 1880] virtually nominated, and elected his brother-in-law, Juarez Célman, as his successor. President Juarez set his heart upon controlling the succession in the interest of one of his relatives, a prominent official; but was forced to retire before he could carry out his purpose. … Nothing in the Argentine surprised me more than the boldness and freedom with which the press attacked the government of the day and exposed its corruption. … The government paid no heed to these attacks. Ministers did not trouble themselves to repel charges affecting their integrity. … This wholesome criticism from an independent press had one important effect. It gave direction to public opinion in the capital, and involved the organization of the Unión Cívica. If the country had not been on the verge of a financial revulsion, there might not have been the revolt against the Juarez administration in July, 1890; but with ruin and disaster confronting them, men turned against the President whose incompetence and venality would have been condoned if the times had been good. The Unión Cívica was founded when the government was charged with maladministration in sanctioning an illegal issue of $40,000,000 of paper money. … The government was suddenly confronted with an armed coalition of the best battalions of the army, the entire navy, and the Unión Cívica. The manifesto issued by the Revolutionary Junta was a terrible arraignment of the political crimes of the Juarez Government. … The revolution opened with every prospect of success. It failed from the incapacity of the leaders to co-operate harmoniously. On July 19, 1890, the defection of the army was discovered. On July 26 the revolt broke out. For four days there was bloodshed without definite plan or purpose. No determined attack was made upon the government palace. The fleet opened a fantastic bombardment upon the suburbs. There was inexplicable mismanagement of the insurgent forces, and on July 29 an ignominious surrender to the government with a proclamation of general amnesty. General Roca remained behind the scenes, apparently master of the situation, while President Juarez had fled to a place of refuge on the Rosario railway, and two factions of the army were playing at cross purposes, and the police and the volunteers of the Unión Cívica were shooting women and children in the streets. Another week of hopeless confusion passed, and General Roca announced the resignation of President Juarez and the succession of vice-President Pellegrini. Then the city was illuminated, and for three days there was a pandemonium of popular rejoicing over a victory which nobody except General Roca understood. … In June, 1891, the deplorable state of Argentine finance was revealed in a luminous statement made by President Pellegrini. … All business interests were stagnant. Immigration had been diverted to Brazil. … All industries were prostrated except politics, and the pernicious activity displayed by factions was an evil augury for the return of prosperity. … During thirty years the country has trebled its population, its increase being relatively much more rapid than that of the United States during the same period. The estimate of the present population [1892] is 4,000,000 in place of 1,160,000 in 1857. … Disastrous as the results of political government and financial disorder have been in the Argentine, its ultimate recovery by slow stages is probable. It has a magnificent railway system, an industrious working population recruited from Europe, and nearly all the material appliances for progress."

_I. N. Ford. Tropical America, chapter 6._

See CONSTITUTION, ARGENTINE.

ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: A. D. 1892. Presidential Election.

Dr. Luis Saenz-Pena, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and reputed to be a man of great integrity and ability, was chosen President, and inaugurated October 12, 1892.

ARGENTINE REPUBLIC: End----------

ARGINUSAE, Battle of.

See GREECE: B. C. 406.

ARGONAUTIC EXPEDITION, The.

"The ship Argo was the theme of many songs during the oldest periods of the Grecian Epic, even earlier than the Odyssey. The king Æêtês, from whom she is departing, the hero Jason, who commands her, and the goddess Hêrê, who watches over him, enabling the Argo to traverse distances and to escape dangers which no ship had ever before encountered, are all circumstances briefly glanced at by Odysseus in his narrative to Alkinous. … Jason, commanded by Pelias to depart in quest of the golden fleece belonging to the speaking ram which had carried away Phryxus and Hellé, was encouraged by the oracle to invite the noblest youth of Greece to his aid, and fifty of the most distinguished amongst them obeyed the call. Hêraklês, Thêseus, Telamôn and Pêleus, Kastor and Pollux, Idas and Lynkeus—Zêtês and Kalaïs, the winged sons of Boreas—Meleager, Amphiaraus, Kêpheus, Laertês, Autolykus, Menœtius, Aktor, Erginus, Euphêmus, Ankæus, Pœas, Periklymenus, Augeas, Eurytus, Admêtus, Akastus, Kæneus, Euryalus, Pêneleôs and Lêitus, Askalaphus and Ialmenus, were among them. … Since so many able men have treated it as an undisputed reality, and even made it the pivot of systematic chronological calculations, I may here repeat the opinion long ago expressed by Heyne, and even indicated by Burmann, that the process of dissecting the story, in search of a basis of fact, is one altogether fruitless."

_G. Grote, History of Greece, volume 1, part 1, chapter 13._

"In the rich cluster of myths which surround the captain of the Argo and his fellows are preserved to us the whole life and doings of the Greek maritime tribes, which gradually united all the coasts with one another, and attracted Hellenes dwelling in the most different seats into the sphere of their activity. … The Argo was said to have weighed anchor from a variety of ports—from Iplcus in Thessaly, from Anthedon and Siphæ in Bœotia: the home of Jason himself was on Mount Pelion by the sea, and again on Lemnos and in Corinth; a clear proof of how homogeneous were the influences running on various coasts. However, the myths of the Argo were developed in the greatest completeness on the Pagasean gulf, in the seats of the Minyi; and they are the first with whom a perceptible movement of the Pelasgian tribes beyond the sea—in other words, a Greek history in Europe—begins."

_E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapters 2-3._

{130}

ARGOS. ARGOLIS. ARGIVES.

"No district of Greece contains so dense a succession of powerful citadels in a narrow space as Argolis [the eastern peninsular projection of the Peloponnesus]. Lofty Larissa, apparently designed by nature as the centre of the district, is succeeded by Mycenæ, deep in the recess of the land; at the foot of the mountain lies Midea, at the brink of the sea-coast Tiryns; and lastly, at a farther distance of half an hour's march, Nauplia, with its harbour. This succession of ancient fastnesses, whose indestructible structure of stone we admire to this day [see Schliemann's 'Mycenæ' and 'Tiryns'] is clear evidence of mighty conflicts which agitated the earliest days of Argos; and proves that in this one plain of Inachus several principalities must have arisen by the side of one another, each putting its confidence in the walls of its citadel; some, according to their position, maintaining an intercourse with other lands by sea, others rather a connection with the inland country. The evidence preserved by these monuments is borne out by that of the myths, according to which the dominion of Danaus is divided among his successors. Exiled Prœtus is brought home to Argos by Lycian bands, with whose help he builds the coast-fortress of Tiryns, where he holds sway as the first and mightiest in the land. … The other line of the Danaidæ is also intimately connected with Lycia; for Perseus. … [who] on his return from the East founds Mycenæ, as the new regal seat of the united kingdom of Argos, is himself essentially a Lycian hero of light, belonging to the religion of Apollo. … Finally, Heracles himself is connected with the family of the Perseidæ, as a prince born on the Tirynthian fastness. … During these divisions in the house of Danaus, and the misfortunes befalling that of Prœtus, foreign families acquire influence and dominion in Argos: these are of the race of Æolus, and originally belong to the harbour-country of the western coast of Peloponnesus—the Amythaonidæ. … While the dominion of the Argive land was thus sub-divided, and the native warrior nobility subsequently exhausted itself in savage internal feuds, a new royal house succeeded in grasping the supreme power and giving an entirely new importance to the country. This house was that of the Tantalidæ [or PELOPIDS, which see], united with the forces of Achæan population. … The residue of fact is, that the ancient dynasty, connected by descent with Lycia, was overthrown by the house which derived its origin from Lydia. … The poetic myths, abhorring long rows of names, mention three princes as ruling here in succession, one leaving the sceptre of Pelops to the other, viz., Atreus, Thyestes and Agamemnon. Mycenæ is the chief seat of their rule, which is not restricted to the district of Argos."

_E. Curtius, History of Greece, book 1, chapter 3._

After the Doric invasion of the Peloponnesus (see GREECE: THE MIGRATIONS; also, DORIANS AND IONIANS), Argos appears in Greek history as a Doric state, originally the foremost one in power and influence, but humiliated after long years of rivalry by her Spartan neighbours. "Argos never forgot that she had once been the chief power in the peninsula, and her feeling towards Sparta was that of a jealous but impotent competitor. By what steps the decline of her power had taken place, we are unable to make out, nor can we trace the succession of her kings subsequent to Pheidon [8th century B. C.]. … The title [of king] existed (though probably with very limited functions) at the time of the Persian War [B. C. 490-479]. … There is some ground for presuming that the king of Argos was even at that time a Herakleid—since the Spartans offered to him a third part of the command of the Hellenic force, conjointly with their own two kings. The conquest of Thyreates by the Spartans [about 547 B. C.] deprived the Argeians of a valuable portion of their Periœkis, or dependent territory. But Orneæ and the remaining portion of Kynuria still continued to belong to them: the plain round their city was very productive; and, except Sparta, there was no other power in Peloponnesus superior to them. Mykenæ and Tiryns, nevertheless, seem both to have been independent states at the time of the Persian War, since both sent contingents to the battle of Platæa, at a time when Argos held aloof and rather favoured the Persians."

_G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 8 (volume 2)._

ARGOS: B. C. 496-421. Calamitous War with Sparta. Non-action in the Persian War. Slow recovery of the crippled State.

"One of the heaviest blows which Argos ever sustained at the hand of her traditional foe befell her about 496 B. C., six years before the first Persian invasion of Greece. A war with Sparta having broken out, Cleomenes, the Lacedæmonian king, succeeded in landing a large army, in vessels he had extorted from the Æginetans, at Nauplia, and ravaged the Argive territory. The Argeians mustered all their forces to resist him, and the two armies encamp cd opposite each other near Tiryns. Cleomenes, however, contrived to attack the Argeians at a moment when they were unprepared, making use, if Herodotus is to be credited, of a stratagem which proves the extreme incapacity of the opposing generals, and completely routed them. The Argeians took refuge in a sacred grove, to which the remorseless Spartans set fire, and so destroyed almost the whole of them. No fewer than 6,000 of the citizens of Argos perished on this disastrous day. Cleomenes might have captured the city itself; but he was, or affected to be, hindered by unfavourable omens, and drew off his troops. The loss sustained by Argos was so severe as to reduce her for some years to a condition of great weakness; but this was at the time a fortunate circumstance for the Hellenic cause, inasmuch as it enabled the Lacedæmonians to devote their whole energies to the work of resistance to the Persian invasion without fear of enemies at home. In this great work Argos took no part, on the occasion of either the first or second attempt of the Persian kings to bring Hellas under their dominion. Indeed, the city was strongly suspected of 'medising' tendencies. In the period following the final overthrow of the Persians, while Athens was pursuing the splendid career of aggrandisement and conquest that made her the foremost state in Greece, and while the Lacedæmonians were paralyzed by the revolt of the Messenians, Argos regained strength and influence, which she at once employed and increased by the harsh policy … of depopulating Mycenæ and Tiryns, while she compelled several other semi-independent places in the Argolid to acknowledge her supremacy. During the first eleven years of the Peloponnesian war, down to the peace of Nicias (421 B. C.), Argos held aloof from all participation in the struggle, adding to her wealth and perfecting her military organization. As to her domestic conditions and political system, little is known; but it is certain that the government, unlike that of other Dorian states, was democratic in its character, though there was in the city a strong oligarchic and philo-Laconian party, which was destined to exercise a decisive influence at an important crisis."

_C. H. Hanson, The Land of Greece, chapter 10._

ALSO IN: _G. Grote, History of Greece, part 2, chapter 36 (volume 4)._

{131}

ARGOS: B. C. 421-418. League formed against Sparta. Outbreak of War. Defeat at Mantinea. Revolution in the Oligarchical and Spartan interest.

See GREECE: B. C. 421-418.

ARGOS: B. C. 395-387. Confederacy against Sparta. The Corinthian War. Peace of Antalcidas.

See GREECE: B. C. 399-387.

ARGOS: B. C. 371. Mob outbreak and massacre of chief citizens.

See GREECE: B. C. 371-362.

ARGOS: B. C. 338. Territories restored by Philip of Macedon.

See GREECE: B. C. 357-336.

ARGOS: B. C. 271. Repulse and death of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus.

See MACEDONIA: B. C. 277-244.

ARGOS: B. C. 229. Liberated from Macedonian control.

See GREECE: B. C. 280-146.

ARGOS: A. D. 267. Ravaged by the Goths.

See GOTHS: A. D. 258-267.

ARGOS: A. D. 395. Plundered by the Goths.

See GOTHS: A. D. 395.

ARGOS: A. D. 1463. Taken by the Turks, retaken by the Venetians.

See GREECE: A. D. 1454-1479.

ARGOS: A. D. 1686. Taken by the Venetians.

See TURKS: A. D. 1684-1696.

ARGOS: End----------

ARGYRASPIDES, The.

"He [Alexander the Great] then marched into India, that he might have his empire bounded by the ocean, and the extreme parts of the East. That the equipments of his army might be suitable to the glory of the Expedition, he mounted the trappings of the horses and the arms of the soldiers with silver, and called a body of his men, from having silver shields, Argyraspides."

_Justin, History (translated by J. S. Watson), book 12, chapter 7._

ALSO IN: _C. Thirlwall, History of Greece, chapter 58._

See, also, MACEDONIA: B. C. 323-316.

ARGYRE.

See CHRYSE.

ARIA. AREIOS. AREIANS.

The name by which the Herirud and its valley, the district of modern Herat, was known to the ancient Greeks. Its inhabitants were known as the Areians.

_M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, book 7, chapter 1._

ARIANA.

"Strabo uses the name Ariana for the land of all the nations of Iran, except that of the Medes and Persians, i. e., for the whole eastern half of Iran."—Afghanistan and Beloochistan.

_M. Duncker, History of Antiquity, volume 5, book 7, chapter 1._

ARIANISM. ARIANS.

From the second century of its existence, the Christian church was divided by bitter controversies touching the mystery of the Trinity. "The word Trinity is found neither in the Holy Scriptures nor in the writings of the first Christians; but it had been employed from the beginning of the second century, when a more metaphysical turn had been given to the minds of men, and theologians had begun to attempt to explain the divine nature. … The Founder of the new religion, the Being who had brought upon earth a divine light, was he God, was he man, was he of an intermediate nature, and, though superior to all other created beings, yet himself created? This latter opinion was held by Arius, an Alexandrian priest, who maintained it in a series of learned controversial works between the years 318 and 325. As soon as the discussion had quitted the walls of the schools, and been taken up by the people, mutual accusations of the gravest kind took the place of metaphysical subtleties. The orthodox party reproached the Arians with blaspheming the deity himself, by refusing to acknowledge him in the person of Christ. The Arians accused the orthodox of violating the fundamental law of religion; by rendering to the creature the worship due only to the Creator. … It was difficult to decide which numbered the largest body of followers; but the ardent enthusiastic spirits, the populace in all the great cities (and especially at Alexandria) the women, and the newly-founded order of the monks of the desert … were almost without exception partisans of the faith which has since been declared orthodox. … Constantine thought this question of dogma might be decided by an assembly of the whole church. In the year 325, he convoked the council of Nice [see NICÆA, COUNCIL OF], at which 300 bishops pronounced in favour of the equality of the Son with the Father, or the doctrine generally regarded as orthodox, and condemned the Arians to exile and their books to the flames."

_J. C. L. de Sismondi, Fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 4._

"The victorious faction [at the Council of Nice] … anxiously sought for some irreconcilable mark of distinction, the rejection of which might involve the Arians in the guilt and consequences of heresy. A letter was publicly read and ignominiously torn, in which their patron, Eusebius of Nicomedia, ingeniously confessed that the admission of the homoousion, or consubstantial, a word already familiar to the Platonists, was incompatible with the principles of their theological system. The fortunate opportunity was eagerly embraced. … The consubstantiality of the Father and the Son was established by the Council of Nice, and has been unanimously received as a fundamental article of the Christian faith by the consent of the Greek, the Latin, the Oriental and the Protestant churches." Notwithstanding the decision of the Council of Nice against it, the heresy of Arius continued to gain ground in the East. Even the Emperor Constantine became friendly to it, and the sons of Constantine, with some of the later emperors who followed them on the eastern throne, were ardent Arians in belief. The Homoousians, or orthodox, were subjected to persecution, which was directed with special bitterness against their great leader, Athanasius, the famous bishop of Alexandria. But Arianism was weakened by hair-splitting distinctions, which resulted in many diverging creeds. "The sect which asserted the doctrine of a 'similar substance' was the most numerous, at least in the provinces of Asia. … The Greek word which was chosen to express this mysterious resemblance bears so close an affinity to the orthodox symbol, that the profane of every age have derided the furious contests which the difference of a single diphthong excited between the Homoousians and the Homoiousians." {132} The Latin churches of the West, with Rome at their head, remained generally firm in the orthodoxy of the Homoousian creed. But the Goths, who had received their Christianity from the East, tinctured with Arianism, carried that heresy westward, and spread it among their barbarian neighbors— Vandals, Burgundians and Sueves—through the influence of the Gothic Bible of Ulfilas, which he and his missionary successors bore to the Teutonic peoples. "The Vandals and Ostrogoths persevered in the profession of Arianism till the final ruin [A. D. 533 and 553] of the kingdoms which they had founded in Africa and Italy. The barbarians of Gaul submitted [A. D. 507] to the orthodox dominion of the Franks: and Spain was restored to the Catholic Church by the voluntary conversion of the Visigoths [A. D. 589]."

_E. Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, chapters 21 and 37. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25717_

Theodosius formally proclaimed his adhesion to Trinitarian orthodoxy by his celebrated edict of A. D. 380, and commanded its acceptance in the Eastern Empire.

See ROME: A. D. 379-395.

_A. Neander, General History of Christian Religion and Church, translated by Torry, volume 2, section 4._

ALSO IN: _J. Alzog, Manual of Universal Church History, section 110-114._

_W. G. T. Shedd, History of Christian Doctrine, book 3._

_J. H. Newman, Arians of the Fourth Century._

_A. P. Stanley, Lectures on the History of the Eastern Church, lectures 3-7._

_J. A. Dorner, History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ, division 1 (volume 2)._

See, also, GOTHS: A. D. 341-381; FRANKS: A. D. 481-511; also, GOTHS (VISIGOTHS): A. D. 507-509.

ARICA, Battle of (1880).

See CHILE: A. D. 1833-1884.

ARICIA, Battle of.

A victory won by the Romans over the Auruncians, B. C. 497, which summarily ended a war that the latter had declared against the former.

_Livy, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 26._

ARICIAN GROVE, The.

The sacred grove at Aricia (one of the towns of old Latium, near Alba Longa) was the center and meeting-place of an early league among the Latin peoples, about which little is known.

_W. Ihne, History of Rome, book 2, chapter 3._

_Sir. W. Gell, Topography of Rome, volume 1._