Timeline of World History TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 
 

TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 

Loading
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
     
     
 
1800 - 1899
 
 
1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890
1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891
1802 1812 1822 1832 1842 1852 1862 1872 1882 1892
1803 1813 1823 1833 1843 1853 1863 1873 1883 1893
1804 1814 1824 1834 1844 1854 1864 1874 1884 1894
1805 1815 1825 1835 1845 1855 1865 1875 1885 1895
1806 1816 1826 1836 1846 1856 1866 1876 1886 1896
1807 1817 1827 1837 1847 1857 1867 1877 1887 1897
1808 1818 1828 1838 1848 1858 1868 1878 1888 1898
1809 1819 1829 1839 1849 1859 1869 1879 1889 1899
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1838 Part IV NEXT-1839 Part II    
 
 
     
1830 - 1839
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830-1839
History at a Glance
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part I
Webster Daniel
Hayne Robert Young
Webster–Hayne debate
Blaine James
Gascoyne-Cecil Robert Arthur Talbot
French conquest of Algeria
French Revolution of 1830
Charles X
Louis-Philippe
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part II
Francis Joseph I
Elisabeth of Austria
Diaz Porfirio
Gran Colombia
Wartenburg Johann David Ludwig
Petar II Petrovic-Njegos
Grey Charles
November Uprising (1830–31)
Milos Obrenovic I
Mysore
Red Jacket
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part III
William Cobbett: "Rural Rides"
Coulanges Numa Denis
Smith Joseph
Mormon
Honore de Balzac: La Comedie humaine
Dickinson Emily
Emily Dickinson
"Poems"
Genlis Comtesse
Goncourt Jules
Hayne Paul Hamilton
Heyse Paul
Victor Hugo: "Hernani"
Mistral Frederic
Rossetti Christina
Smith Seba
Stendhal: "Le Rouge et le Noir"
Tennyson: "Poems, Chiefly Lyrical"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part IV
Bierstadt Albert
Albert Bierstadt
Corot: "Chartres Cathedral"
Delacroix: "Liberty Guiding the People"
Leighton Frederic
Frederic Leighton
Pissarro Camille
Camille Pissarro
Impressionism Timeline
Ward John Quincy Adams
Waterhouse Alfred
Auber: "Fra Diavolo"
Bellini: "The Capulets and the Montagues"
Bulow Hans
Donizetti: "Anna Bolena"
Goldmark Karl
Karl Goldmark - Violin Concerto No 1
Karl Goldmark
Leschetizky Teodor
Remenyi Eduard
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1830 Part V
Reclus Jean Jacques Elisee
Markham Clements Robert
Brown Robert
Hessel Johann Friedrich Christian
Liverpool and Manchester Railway
Lyell Charles
Raoult Francois Marie
Reichenbach Karl
Royal Geographical Society
Thimonnier Barthelemy
Thomson Wyville
Lander Richard Lemon
Charting the Coastline
John Biscoe
Lockwood Belva Ann
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part I
Battle of Ostroleka
Caprivi Leo
Charles Albert
Leopold I of Belgium
Belgian Revolution (1830-1831)
Goschen George Joachim
Turner Nat
Gneisenau August Wilhelm Antonius
Labouchere Henry
Clausewitz Carl
Garfield James Abram
Egyptian–Ottoman War (1831–33)
Russell John
Pedro II of Brazil
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part II
Blavatsky Helena
Gregory XVI
Farrar Frederic William
Gilman Daniel Coit
Harrison Frederic
Miller William
Adventist
White Helen Gould Harmon
Roscoe William
Thomas Isaiah
Winsor Justin
Wright William Aldis
Rutherford Mark
Darby John Nelson
Plymouth Brethren
Balzac: "La Peau de chagrin"
Calverley Charles Stuart
Donnelly Ignatius
Victor Hugo: "Notre Dame de Paris"
Jackson Helen Hunt
Leskov Nikolai
Raabe Wilhelm
Sardou Victorien
Trumbull John
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part III
Begas Reinhold
Reinhold Begas
Meunier Constantin
Constantin Meunier
Bellini: "La Sonnambula"
Bellini: "Norma"
Joachim Joseph
Joseph Joachim - Violin Concerto, Op 11
Joseph Joachim
Meyerbeer: "Robert le Diable"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1831 Part IV
Barry Heinrich Anton
Guthrie Samuel
Liebig Justus
Chloroform
Colomb Philip Howard
Darwin and the Beagle
Maxwell James Clerk
North Pole
Routh Edward John
Sauria Marc Charles
Great cholera pandemic
Garrison William Lloyd
Godkin Edwin Lawrence
Hirsch Moritz
Hood John Bell
French Foreign Legion
London Bridge
Pullman George Mortimer
Schofield John
Smith Samuel Francis
Stephan Heinrich
Whiteley William
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part I
Reform Bill
Gentz Friedrich
Roberts Frederick Sleigh
Democratic Party
Clay Henry
Calhoun Caldwell John
"Italian Youth"
Falkland Islands
Revolution and Counter-Revolution in Europe, 1815-1832
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part II
Bancroft Hubert Howe
Fowler Thomas
Krause Karl Christian Friedrich
Rask Rasmus
Stephen Leslie
Vaughan Herbert Alfred
White Andrew Dickson
Alcott Louisa May
Alger Horatio
Arnold Edwin
Balzac: "Le Colonel Chabert"
Bjornson Bjornstjerne Martinius
Busch Heinrich
Carroll Lewis
Lewis Carroll
Lewis Carroll - photographer

"Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" 
"
Through the Looking-Glass" 
Delavigne Casimir
Echegaray Jose
Washington Irving: "Tales of the Alhambra"
Kennedy John Pendleton
Pellico Silvio
Aleksandr Pushkin: "Eugene Onegin"
Tennyson: "Lady of Shalott"
Watts-Dunton Theodore
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part III
Constable: "Waterloo Bridge from Whitehall Stairs"
Dore Gustave
Gustave Dore
Manet Edouard
Edouard Manet
Orchardson William
William Orchardson
Hughes Arthur
Arthur Hughes
Berlioz: "Symphonie Fantastique"
Damrosch Leopold
Donizetti: "L'Elisir d'Amore"
Garcia Manuel Vicente Rodriguez
Malibran Maria
Viardot Pauline
Garcia Manuel
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1832 Part IV
Wundt Wilhelm
Crookes William
Hayes Isaac Israel
Bolyai Janos
Koenig Rodolph
Nordenskiold Nils Adolf Erik
Reaching for the Pole
Nares George Strong
Scarpa Antonio
Vambery Armin
Conway Moncure Daniel
Declaration of Independence, 1776
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part I
Gordon Charles George
Otto of Greece
Amalia of Oldenburg
Randolph John
Harrison Benjamin
Isabella II
Santa Anna Antonio Lopez
Whig Party
Muhammad Ali dynasty
Zollverein
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part II
Bopp Franz
Bradlaugh Charles
Dilthey Wilhelm
Fawcett Henry
Furness Horace Howard
Ingersoll Robert Green
Pusey Edward Bouverie
Alarcon Pedro Antonio
Balzac: "Eugenie Grandet"
Booth Edwin
Charles Dickens: "Sketches by Boz"
George Cruikshank. From Charles Dickens, Sketches by Boz, 1836.
Gordon Adam Lindsay
Lamb: "Last Essays of Elia"
Longfellow: "Outre-Mer"
Morris Lewis
George Sand: "Lelia"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part III
Burne-Jones Edward
Edward Burne-Jones
Rops Felicien
Felicien Rops
Guerin Pierre-Narcisse
Pierre-Narcisse Guerin
Herold Ferdinand
Ferdinand Herold - Piano Concerto No.2
Ferdinand Herold
Brahms Johannes
Brahms - Hungarian Dances
Johannes Brahms
Chopin: Etudes Op.10 & 25
Heinrich Marschner: "Hans Heiling"
Mendelssohn: "Italian Symphony"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1833 Part IV
Weber Wilhelm Eduard
Muller Johannes Peter
Roscoe Henry Enfield
Wheatstone bridge
Back George
Factory Acts
Burnes Alexander
Home Daniel Dunglas
Nobel Alfred
SS "Royal William"
Slavery Abolition Act 1833
General Trades Union in New York
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part I
Grenville William Wyndham
Grand National Consolidated Trades Union
Quadruple Alliance
Peel Robert
South Australia Colonisation Act 1834
Xhosa Wars
Cape Colony
Carlism
First Carlist War
Battle of Alsasua
Battle of Alegria de Alava
Battle of Venta de Echavarri
Battle of Mendaza
First Battle of Arquijas
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part II
Acton John Emerich
Eliot Charles William
Gibbons James
Seeley John Robert
Spurgeon Charles
Treitschke Heinrich
Maurier George
Balzac: "Le Pere Goriot"
Bancroft George
Blackwood William
Edward Bulwer-Lytton: "The Last Days of Pompeii"
Dahn Felix
Frederick Marryat: "Peter Simple"
Alfred de Musset: "Lorenzaccio"
Pushkin: "The Queen of Spades"
Shorthouse Joseph Henry
Stockton Frank Richard
Browne Charles Farrar
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part III
Perov Vasily
Vasily Perov
Bartholdi Frederic Auguste
Degas Edgar
Edgar Degas
Ingres: "Martyrdom of Saint Symphorian"
Whistler James McNeill
James McNeill Whistler
Morris William
William Morris
Adolphe Adam: "Le Chalet"
Barnett John
John Barnett: "The Mountain Sylph"
John Barnett
Berlioz: "Harold en Italie"
Borodin Aleksandr
Alexander Borodin: Prince Igor
Aleksandr Borodin
Elssler Fanny
Kreutzer Conradin
Kreutzer - Das Nachtlager in Granada
Konradin Kreutzer
Santley Charles
Ponchielli Amilcare
 Amilcare Ponchielli - Dance of the Hours
Amilcare Ponchielli
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1834 Part IV
Haeckel Ernst
Arago Francois
Buch Leopold
Faraday: "Law of Electrolysis"
Langley Samuel Pierpont
McCormick Cyrus Hall
Mendeleyev Dmitry
Runge Friedlieb Ferdinand
Phenol
Steiner Jakob
Depew Chauncey Mitchell
Burning of Parliament
Gabelsberger Franz Xaver
Hansom Joseph Aloysius
Hunt Walter
Lloyd's Register
Poor Law Amendment Act 1834
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part I
Ferdinand I of Austria
Bernstorff Christian Gunther
Brisson Henri
Masayoshi Matsukata
Olney Richard
Lee Fitzhugh
Municipal Corporations Act 1835
Palma Tomas Estrada
Riyad Pasha
White George Stuart
Second Seminole War
Texas Revolution (1835 – 1836)
Battle of Gonzales
Siege of Bexar
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part II
Leake William Martin
Abbott Lyman
Brooks Phillips
Caird Edward
Dahlmann Friedrich
Finney Charles Grandison
Harris William Torrey
Hensen Viktor
Jevons William Stanley
Skeat Walter William
Cousin Victor
Strauss David Friedrich
Giacomo Leopardi: "Canti"
Austin Alfred
Butler Samuel
Gaboriau Emile
Hemans Felicia Dorothea
Hogg James
Ireland William Henry
Mathews Charles
Menken Adah Isaacs
Simms William Gilmore
Mark Twain
Carducci Giosue
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part III
Constable: "The Valley Farm"
Corot: "Hagar in the Desert"
Defregger Franz
Kunichika Toyohara
Toyohara Kunichika
Cui Cesar
Cesar Cui "Orientale"
Cesar Cui
Donizetti: "Lucia di Lammermoor"
Halevy Fromental
Halevy: "La Juive"
Placido Domingo - Rachel, quand du Seigneur
Fromental Halevy
Saint-Saens Camille
Camille Saint-Saens - Danse Macabre
Camille Saint-Saens
Thomas Theodore
Wieniawski Henri
Wieniawski - Polonaise de Concert in D major No. 1, Op. 4
Henri Wieniawski
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1835 Part IV
Newcomb Simon
Schiaparelli Giovanni Virginio
Geikie Archibald
Chaillu Paul
Locomotive: Electric traction
Talbot Wiliam Henry Fox
Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society
Sacher-Masoch Leopold Ritter
Masochism
Heth Joice
Bennett James Gordon
Carnegie Andrew
Chubb Charles
Colt Samuel
Field Marshall
Green Henrietta Howland
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part I
Crockett Davy
Houston Sam
Battle of the Alamo
Battle of San Jacinto
BATTLE OF SAN JACINTO
Cannon Joseph Gurney
Chartism
Arkansas
Chamberlain Joseph
Campbell-Bannerman Henry
Great Trek
Voortrekker
Xhosa
Inoue Kaoru
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part II
Ralph Waldo Emerson: "Nature"
Ramakrishna
Aldrich Thomas Bailey
Besant Walter
Frederick Marryat: "Mr. Midshipman Easy"
Burnand Francis Cowley
Carlyle: "Sartor Resartus"
Dickens: "Pickwick Papers"
Eckermann Johann Peter
Gilbert William Schwenk
Gogol: "The Government Inspector"
Harte Bret
Newell Robert Henry
Reuter Fritz
Pusckin: "The Captain's Daughter"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part III
Alma-Tadema Lawrence
Lawrence Alma-Tadema
Corot: "Diana Surprised by Actaeon"
Fantin-Latour Henri
Henri Fantin-Latour
Homer Winslow
Winslow Homer
Lefebvre Jules Joseph
Jules Joseph Lefebvre
Lenbach Franz
Franz von Lenbach
Poynter Edward
Edward Poynter
Tissot James
James Tissot
Carle Vernet
Carle Vernet
Adolphe Adam: "Le Postilion de long jumeau"
Delibes Leo
Delibes - Lakme - Flower duet
Leo Delibes
Reicha Antoine
Glinka: "A Life for the Tzar"
Mendelssohn: "St. Paul"
Meyerbeer: "Les Huguenots"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1836 Part IV
Bergmann Ernst
Daniell John Frederic
Davy Edmund
Ericsson John
Gray Asa
Lockyer Norman
Colt's Manufacturing Company
Crushed stone
Schwann Theodor
Pepsin
Schimper Karl Friedrich
Gould Jay
"The Lancers"
Ross Betsy
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part I
William IV, King of Great Britain
Michigan
Van Buren Martin
Cleveland Grover
Itagaki Taisuke
Holstein Friedrich
Boulanger Georges
Carnot Sadi
Caroline affair
Ernest Augustus I of Hanover
Rebellions of 1837
Lafontaine Louis-Hippolyte
Baldwin Robert
Sitting Bull
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part II
Thomas Carlyle: "The French Revolution"
Green John Richard
Lyon Mary
Mount Holyoke College
Mann Horace
Moody Dwight
Murray James
Oxford English Dictionary
Old School–New School Controversy
Balzac: "Illusions perdues"
Nathaniel Hawthorne: "Twice-told Tales"
Braddon Mary Elizabeth
Eggleston Edward
Ebers Georg
Howells William Dean
Swinburne Algernon Charles
Wyndham Charles
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part III
Carolus-Duran
Carolus-Duran
Legros Alphonse
Alphonse Legros
Marees Hans
Hans von Marees
Auber: "Le Domino  noir"
Balakirev Mily
Balakirev - Symphony No.1
Mily Balakirev
Berlioz: "Requiem"
Dubois Theodore
Theodore Dubois - Piano Concerto No. 2
Theodore Dubois
Lesueur Jean-Francois
Lesueur: Coronation music for Napoleon I
Jean-François Lesueur
Lortzing: "Zar und Zimmermann"
Cosima Wagner
Waldteufel Emile
Emile Waldteufel - waltzes
Emile Waldteufel
Zingarelli Niccolo
Nicola Antonio Zingarelli - Tre ore dell'Agonia
Nicola Zingarelli
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1837 Part IV
Analytical Engine
Borsig August
Burroughs John
Cooke William
Telegraph
d'Urville Jules Dumont
Kuhne Wilhelm
Van der Waals Johannes Diderik
Fitzherbert Maria Anne
Hanna Mark
Lovejoy Elijah
Morgan John Pierpont
Pitman Isaac
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part I
Osceola
Gambetta Leon
Weenen Massacre
Battle of Blood River
Anti-Corn Law League
Cobden Richard
Bright John
Rodgers John
Weyler Valeriano
Wood Henry Evelyn
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part II
Adams Henry
Bowditch Nathaniel
Bryce Viscount
Montagu Corry, 1st Baron Rowton
Lecky William Edward Hartpole
Lounsbury Thomas Raynesford
Mach Ernst
Mohler Johann Adam
Sacy Antoine Isaac Silvestre
Sidgwick Henry
Trevelyan George Otto
Lytton: "The Lady of Lyons"
Daly Augustin
Dickens: "Oliver Twist"
Victor Hugo: "Ruy Blas"
Irving Henry
Villiers de l'Isle-Adam
Rachel Felix
Roe Edward Payson
Schwab Gustav Benjamin
Scudder Horace Elisha
Creevey Thomas
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part III
Dalou Jules
Jules Dalou
Mauve Anton
Anton Mauve
Richardson Hobson Henry
Henry Hobson Richardson
Fortuny Maria
Maria Fortuny
Berlioz: "Benvenuto Cellini"
Bizet Georges
Bizet - Carmen - Habanera
Georges Bizet
Bruch Max
Max Bruch - Violinkonzert Nr. 1
Max Bruch
Lind Johanna Maria
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1838 Part IV
Abbe Cleveland
Cournot Antoine-Augustin
Daguerre-Niepce method of photography
Dulong Pierre-Louis
Hyatt Alpheus
Muir John
Perkin William Henry
Stevens John
Zeppelin Ferdinand
Belleny John
United States Exploring Expedition
Wilkes Charles
Hill Octavia
Wanamaker John
Woodhull Victoria
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part I
Uruguayan Civil War (1839-1851)
Rudini Antonio Starabba
Treaty of London
First Opium War (1839-1842)
Richter Eugen
Frederick VI of Denmark
Christian VIII of Denmark
Natalia Republic
Abdulmecid I
Ranjit Singh
Van Rensselaer Stephen
Cervera Pascual
First Anglo-Afghan War
Anglo-Afghan Wars
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part II
Fesch Joseph
Paris Gaston
Peirce Charles Sanders
Reed Thomas
Anzengruber Ludwig
Sparks Jared
Galt John
Herne James
Longfellow: "Hyperion"
De Morgan William
Ouida
Dickens:  "Nicholas Nickleby"
Pater Walter
Рое: "The Fall of the House of Usher"
Praed Winthrop Mackworth
Smith James
Sully-Prudhomme Armand
Stendhal: "La Chartreuse de Parme"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part III
Beechey William
William Beechey
Cezanne Paul
Paul Cezanne
Sisley Alfred
Alfred Sisley
Thoma Hans
Hans Thoma
Yoshitoshi Tsukioka
Tsukioka Yoshitoshi
Gomes Antonio Carlos
Antonio Carlos Gomes - Il Guarany - Ouverture
Antonio Carlos Gomes
Moussorgsky Modest
Moussorgsky - Boris Godunov
Modest Mussorgsky
Paine John Knowles
John Knowles Paine - Symphony No.1
John Knowles Paine
Randall James Rider
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1839 Part IV
Crozier Francis Rawdon Moira
Grey George
Into the Interior
Garnier Frangois
Goodyear Charles
Vulcanization
Jacobi Moritz
Mosander Carl Gustaf
Przhevalsky Nikolay
Smith William
Mond Ludwig
Stephens John Lloyd
Catherwood Frederick
George Henry
Kundt August
Schonbein Christian Friedrich
Steinheil Carl August
Doubleday Abner
Macmillan Kirkpatrick
Cadbury George
Cunard Samuel
Cunard Line
Grand National
Lowell John
Lowell Institute
Rockefeller John
Stanhope Hester Lucy
Weston Edward Payson
Willard Frances
 
 
 

View of the European factories in Canton
 
 
 
 
 HISTORY, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY, ART, LITERATURE, MUSIC, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, DAILY LIFE
 
 
 
 
YEAR BY YEAR:  1800 - 1899
 
 
 
1839 Part I
 
 
 
1839
 
 
Uruguayan Civil War (1839-1851)
 

The Uruguayan Civil War, also known in Spanish as the Guerra Grande ("Great War"), was a series of armed conflicts that took place between the Colorado Party and the National Party in Uruguay from 1839 to 1851.

 
The two parties received backing from foreign sources including both neighbouring countries such as the Empire of Brazil and the Argentine Confederation as well as imperial powers, primarily the British Empire and the Kingdom of France, but also a legion of Italian volunteers including Giuseppe Garibaldi.

Background

The political scene in Uruguay during the 1830s became split between two parties, the conservative Blancos ("Whites") and the liberal Colorados ("Reds").

The Colorados were led by Fructuoso Rivera and represented the business interests of Montevideo; the Blancos were headed by Manuel Oribe, who looked after the agricultural interests of the countryside and promoted protectionism.

The two groups took their names from the color of the armbands that they wore; initially, the Colorados wore blue, but when it faded in the sun, they replaced it with red.
  Origin of the War
In 1838, France started a naval blockade over the port of Buenos Aires, supporting their allies in the Peru–Bolivian Confederation, who were involved in the War of the Confederation after Argentina and Chile declared war on them. Unable to deploy land troops, France sought allied forces to fight Juan Manuel de Rosas on their behalf. For this purpose they helped Fructuoso Rivera to topple the Uruguayan president Manuel Oribe, who was staying in good terms with Rosas. Oribe was exiled to Buenos Aires and Rivera assumed power in October 1838. Rosas did not recognize Rivera as a legitimate president, and sought to restore Oribe in power. Rivera and Juan Lavalle prepared troops to attack Buenos Aires. Both British and French troops intervened, transforming the conflict into an international war.

On December 6, 1842, the Blancos under Manuel Oribe and the Colorados under Fructuoso Rivera fought the Battle of Arroyo Grande. Rivera's forces were utterly defeated, and Oribe proceeded to lay siege to Montevideo.

 
 
The Great Siege of Montevideo
With the destruction of the Uruguayan army at the battle of Arroyo Grande, it was assumed that the country's capital, Montevideo, would fall to the combined forces of the Buenos Aires governor Juan Manuel de Rosas and the former Uruguayan president Manuel Oribe. Oribe's siege of Montevideo, Uruguay's capital, lasted for nine years. The Great Siege of Montevideo meant an unusual situation, with two parallel governments:
-Gobierno de la Defensa in Montevideo, led by Joaquín Suárez (1843–1852)
-Gobierno del Cerrito (with headquarters at the present neighbourhood Cerrito de la Victoria), ruling the rest of the country, led by Manuel Oribe (1843–1851)
 
Siege of Montevideo, Uruguay, during the Uruguayan Civil War (1839-1852)
 
 
The newly freed slaves, who formed a contingent 5,000 strong, and the community of foreign exiles were mostly responsible for the defense of the city. The British Empire eventually saved the city by allowing it to receive supplies. First, the British and French naval forces temporarily blockaded the port of Buenos Aires during the December of 1845. Then, the French and British fleets protected Montevideo from the sea. French, Spanish  and Italian legionnaires, led by Giuseppe Garibaldi, teamed up with the Colorados in defending the city. Historians believe that the French and British forces intervened in the region to ensure free navigation along the Rio Parana and Rio Uruguay. However, in 1850, both the French and British withdrew after signing a treaty which represented a triumph for Juan Manuel de Rosas and his Federal Party in Argentina.

After the withdrawal of British and French troops, it appeared that Montevideo would fall to Juan Manuel de Rosas and former president Oribe. However, an uprising against de Rosas led by fellow Federalist Justo José de Urquiza, governor of Argentina's Entre Ríos Province, with the assistance of a small Uruguayan force, changed the situation. Manuel Oribe was defeated in 1851, leaving the Colorados in full control of the country. Brazil followed up by intervening in Uruguay in May 1851, supporting the Colorados with financial and naval forces. This led to the Platine War with Rosas in August 1851.
In February 1852, after being defeated at Caseros, Rosas resigned and Urquiza's pro-Colorado forces lifted the siege of Montevideo.
  Consequences of the war
The government of Montevideo rewarded Brazil's financial and military support by signing five treaties in 1851 that provided for perpetual alliance between the two countries.

Montevideo confirmed Brazil's right to intervene in Uruguay's internal affairs.

Brazil was required to extradite runaway slaves and criminals from Uruguay.

In fact, during the war, both the Blancos and the Colorados had abolished slavery in Uruguay in order to mobilize the former slaves to reinforce their respective military forces.

The treaties also allowed joint navigation on the Rio Uruguay and its tributaries, and tax exempted cattle and salted meat exports.

The Uruguayan cattle industry was devastated by the war.
The treaty also acknowledged Uruguay's debt to Brazil for its aid against the Blancos, and Brazil's commitment for granting an additional loan.

Uruguay renounced its territorial claims north of the Río Cuareim, thereby reducing its area to about 176,000 square kilometers, and recognized Brazil's exclusive right of navigation in the Laguna Merin and the Rio Yaguaron, the natural border between the countries.

 
 

Uruguayan president Fructuoso Rivera.

José Fructuoso Rivera y Toscana (October 17, 1784 – January 13, 1854) was a Uruguayan general and patriot who assisted in the efforts to force Brazilians out of the Banda Oriental.
He served as the first President of Uruguay from 6 November 1830 to 24 October 1834.
 
Uruguayan president Manuel Oribe.

Manuel Ceferino Oribe y Viana (August 26, 1792 – November 12, 1857) was the 2nd Constitutional president of Uruguay.

He served as President of Uruguay between 1835 and 1838.
 
 
Later conflicts
Both parties were weary of the chaos. In 1870, they came to an agreement to define spheres of influence: the Colorados would control Montevideo and the coastal region, the Blancos would rule the hinterland with its agricultural estates.

In addition, the Blancos were paid half a million dollars to compensate them for the loss of their stake in Montevideo.

But the caudillo mentality was difficult to erase from Uruguay and political feuding continued culminating in the Revolution of the Lances (Revolución de las Lanzas) (1870–1872), and later with the uprising of Aparicio Saravia.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1839
 
 
Rudini Antonio Starabba
 

Antonio Starabba marchese di Rudinì (Palermo,16 April 1839 – Rome,7 August 1908) was the 18th and 21st Prime Minister of Italy between 1891 and 1892 and from 1896 until 1898.

 

Antonio Starabba marchese di Rudinì
  Early career
He was born in Palermo (then part of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies) into an aristocratic Sicilian family. However, his family was of a more cultured, liberal disposition than many of their contemporaries.

In 1859, he joined the revolutionary committee which paved the way for Garibaldi's triumphs in the following year.
After spending a short time at Turin as attaché to the Italian foreign office, he was elected mayor of Palermo. In 1866, he displayed considerable personal courage and energy in quelling an insurrection of separatist and reactionary tendencies.

The prestige thus acquired led to his appointment as prefect of Palermo. It was while occupying that position that he put down brigandage throughout the province. In 1868, he was prefect of Naples.

In October 1869 he became minister of the interior in the Menabrea cabinet. The cabinet fell a few months later, and although Starabba was an elected member of parliament for Canicattì, he held no important position until, upon the death of Marco Minghetti in 1886, he became leader of the Right.

 
 
First term as Prime Minister
Early in 1891, he succeeded Francesco Crispi as premier and minister of foreign affairs, forming a coalition cabinet with a part of the Left under Giovanni Nicotera. His administration proved vacillating, but it initiated the economic reforms by virtue of which Italian finances were put on a sound basis and also renewed the Triple Alliance.

He was overthrown in May 1892 by a vote of the Chamber and was succeeded by Giovanni Giolitti. Upon the return of his rival, Crispi, to power in December 1893, he resumed political activity, allying himself with the Radical leader, Felice Cavallotti.

 
 
Second term as Prime Minister
The crisis consequent upon the disaster of Adowa enabled Rudinì to return to power as premier and minister of the interior in a cabinet formed by the veteran Conservative, General Ricotti. He signed the Treaty of Addis Ababa that formally ended the First Italo–Ethiopian War recognizing Ethiopia as an independent country. He endangered relations with Great Britain by the unauthorized publication of confidential diplomatic correspondence in a Green-book on Abyssinian affairs.

Di Rudinì recognized the excessive brutality of the repression of the Fasci Siciliani under his predecessor Crispi. Many Fasci members were pardoned and released from jail. He made it clear though that a reorganization of the Fasci would not be tolerated. Di Rudini’s minister of the treasury Luigi Luzzatti passed two measures of social legislation in 1898. The industrial workmen’s compensation scheme from 1883 was made obligatory with the employer bearing all

  costs; and a voluntary fund for contributory disability and old age pensions was created.

To satisfy the anti-colonial party, he ceded Kassala to Great Britain, thereby provoking much indignation in Italy. His internal policy was marked by continual yielding to Radical pressure and by persecution of Crispi. During his second term of office, he thrice modified his cabinet (July 1896, December 1897, and May 1898) without strengthening his political position. By dissolving the Chamber early in 1897 and favoring Radical candidates in the general election, he paved the way for the outbreak of popular uprisings about rising prices in May 1898. Rudinì declared the state of siege at Naples, Florence, Livorno and Milan, and the suppression of the riot resulted into a bloodshed in Milan.
Indignation at the results of his policy left him without support of both the Left – who blamed him for the bloodshed – and the Right – who blamed him for the permissiveness that allegedly had promoted the uprisings and led to his overthrow in June 1898.
 
 
Death and legacy
Di Rudinì retained his seat in Parliament until his death in 1908. Has reputed to be a thorough gentleman and grand seigneur. One of the largest and wealthiest landowners in Sicily, he managed his estates on liberal lines, and was never troubled by agrarian disturbances. The marquis, who had not been in office since 1898, died at Rome in August, 1908, leaving a son, Carlo, who married a daughter of Henry Labouchere.

In many respects Rudinì, though leader of the Right and nominally a Conservative politician, proved a dissolving element in the Italian Conservative ranks. By his alliance with the Liberals under Nicotera in 1891, and by his understanding with the Radicals under Cavallotti in 1894-1898; by abandoning his Conservative colleague, General Ricotti, to whom he owed the premiership in 1896; and by his vacillating action after his fall from power, he divided and demoralized a constitutional party which, with more sincerity and less reliance upon political cleverness, he might have welded into a solid parliamentary organization.

Many books have been written about his life, including La settimana dell'anarchia del 1866 a Palermo by Gaspare di Mercurio.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1839
 
 
Treaty of London
 

The Treaty of London of 1839, also called the First Treaty of London, the Convention of 1839, the London Treaty of Separation, the Quintuple Treaty of 1839, or the Treaty of the XXIV articles, was a treaty signed on 19 April 1839 between the Concert of Europe, the United Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Kingdom of Belgium. It was a direct follow-up to the 1831 Treaty of the XVIII Articles which the Netherlands had refused to sign, and the result of negotiations at the London Conference of 1838–1839.

 
Under the treaty, the European powers recognized and guaranteed the independence and neutrality of Belgium and confirmed the independence of the German-speaking part of Luxembourg. Article VII required Belgium to remain perpetually neutral, and by implication committed the signatory powers to guard that neutrality in the event of invasion.
 
 

Belgian borders claimed before The Treaty of the XXIV articles
 
 
Territorial consequences
Since 1815, Belgium had been a part of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. With the treaty, the southern provinces of the Netherlands became internationally recognized as the Kingdom of Belgium (which it was de facto since 1830), while the province of Limburg was split into Belgian and Dutch parts.

The same happened to the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg which lost two-thirds of its territory to the new Province of Luxembourg in what is termed the 'Third Partition of Luxembourg'. This left a rump Grand Duchy, covering one-third of the original territory and inhabited by one-half of the original population, in personal union with the Netherlands, under King-Grand Duke William I (and subsequently William II and William III). This arrangement was confirmed by the 1867 Treaty of London, known as the 'Second Treaty of London' in reference to the 1839 treaty, and lasted until the death of King-Grand Duke William III 23 November 1890.

 
 
Iron Rhine
The Treaty of London also guaranteed Belgium the right of transit by rail or canal over Dutch territory as an outway to the German Ruhr. This right was reaffirmed in a 24 May 2005 ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in a dispute between Belgium and the Netherlands on the railway track.

In 2004 Belgium requested a reopening of the Iron Rhine. This is the result of the increasing transport of goods between the port of Antwerp and the German Ruhr Area.

As part of the European policy of modal shift on the increasing traffic of goods, transport over railway lines and waterways is preferred over road transport. The Belgian request was based on the treaty of 1839, and the Iron Rhine Treaty of 1873. After a series of failed negotiations, the Belgian and Dutch governments agreed to take the issue to the Permanent Court of Arbitration and respect its ruling in the case.

In its ruling of 24 May 2005, the court acknowledged both the Belgian rights under the cessation treaty of 1839 and the Dutch concerns for the nature reserve. The 1839 treaty still applies, the court found, giving Belgium the right to use and modernize the Iron Rhine. However, it has to finance the modernization of the line, while the Netherlands have to fund the repairs and maintenance of the route. Both countries will split the costs of the construction of a tunnel beneath the nature reserve.

"Scrap of paper"
Belgium's de facto independence had been established through nine years of intermittent fighting, the Belgian Revolution.

 
"The Scrap of Paper - Enlist Today", a British WW1 recruitment poster of 1914, Canadian War Museum.
 
 
The co-signatories of the Treaty of London—Great Britain, Austria, France, the German Confederation (led by Prussia), Russia, and the Netherlands—now officially recognised the independent Kingdom of Belgium, and at Britain's insistence agreed to its neutrality.

The treaty was an important document, especially in its role in bringing about World War I. When the German Empire invaded Belgium in August 1914 in violation of the treaty, the British declared war on 4 August. Informed by the British ambassador that Britain would go to war with Germany over the latter's violation of Belgian neutrality, German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg exclaimed that he could not believe that Britain and Germany would be going to war over a mere "scrap of paper."

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1839
 
 
First Opium War (1839-1842)
 

The First Opium War (1839–42), also known as the Opium War and as the Anglo-Chinese War, was fought between Britain and China over their conflicting viewpoints on diplomatic relations, trade, and the administration of justice for foreign nationals.

 
In the 17th and 18th centuries, the demand for Chinese goods (particularly silk, porcelain, and tea) in the European market created a trade imbalance because the market for Western goods in China was virtually non-existent; China was largely self-sufficient and Europeans were not allowed access to China's interior. European silver flowed into China when the Canton System, instituted in the mid-17th century, confined the sea trade to Canton and to the Chinese merchants of Thirteen Hongs. The British East India Company (E.I.C.) had a matching monopoly of British trade. E.I.C. began to auction opium grown on its plantations in India to independent foreign traders in exchange for silver. The opium was then transported to the China coast and sold to Chinese middlemen who retailed the drug inside China. This reverse flow of silver and the increasing numbers of opium addicts alarmed Chinese officials.

In 1839, the Daoguang emperor, rejecting proposals to legalize and tax opium, appointed Lin Zexu to solve the problem by abolishing the trade. Lin confiscated around 20,000 chests of opium (approximately 1210 tons or 2.66 million pounds) without offering compensation, blockaded trade, and confined foreign merchants to their quarters. The British government, although not officially denying China's right to control imports of the drug, objected to this arbitrary seizure and used its naval and gunnery power to inflict quick and decisive defeat.

In 1842, the Treaty of Nanking—the first of what the Chinese later called the unequal treaties—granted an indemnity and extraterritoriality to Britain, the opening of five treaty ports, and the cession of Hong Kong Island. The failure of the treaty to satisfy British goals of improved trade and diplomatic relations led to the Second Opium War (1856–60). The war is now considered in China as the beginning of modern Chinese history.

 
 

View of the European factories in Canton
 
 
Background – European trade with Asia
Direct maritime trade between Europe and China began in 1557 when the Portuguese leased an outpost at Macau. Other European nations soon followed the Portuguese lead, inserting themselves into the existing Asian maritime trade network to compete with Arab, Chinese, Indian, and Japanese traders in intra-regional trade. Mercantilist governments in Europe objected to the perpetual drain of silver to pay for Asian commodities, and so European traders often sought to generate profits from intra-regional Asian trade to pay for their purchases to be sent back home.

After the Spanish acquisition of the Philippines, the exchange of goods between China and western Europe accelerated dramatically. From 1565, the annual Manila Galleon brought in enormous amounts of silver to the Asian trade network, and in particular China, from Spanish silver mines in South America.

As demand increased in Europe, the profits European traders generated within the Asian trade network, used to purchase Asian goods, were gradually replaced by the direct export of bullion from Europe in exchange for the produce of Asia.

British ships began to appear sporadically around the coasts of China from 1635; without establishing formal relations through the tributary system, British merchants were allowed to trade at the ports of Zhoushan and Xiamen in addition to Guangzhou (Canton).

Trade further benefited after the Qing dynasty relaxed maritime trade restrictions in the 1680s, after Taiwan came under Qing control in 1683, and even rhetoric regarding the "tributary status" of Europeans was muted. Guangzhou (Canton) was the port of preference for most foreign trade; ships did try to call at other ports but they did not match the benefits of Guangzhou's geographic position at the mouth of the Pearl river trade network and Guangzhou's long experience in balancing the demands of Beijing with those of Chinese and foreign merchants. From 1700–1842, Guangzhou came to dominate maritime trade with China, and this period became known as the "Canton System".

Official British trade was conducted through the auspices of the EIC, which held a royal charter for trade with the Far East. The EIC gradually came to dominate Sino-European trade from its position in India.

From the inception of the Canton System in 1757, trade in goods from China was extremely lucrative for European and Chinese merchants alike.

However, foreign traders were only permitted to do business through a body of Chinese merchants known as the Cohong and were restricted to Canton. Foreigners could only live in one of the Thirteen Factories, near Shameen Island, and were not allowed to enter, much less live or trade in, any other part of China.

  While silk and porcelain drove trade through their popularity in the west, an insatiable demand for tea existed in Britain. However, only silver was accepted in payment by China, which resulted in a chronic trade deficit. From the mid-17th century around 28 million kilograms of silver were received by China, principally from European powers, in exchange for Chinese goods.

Britain had been on the gold standard since the 18th century, so it had to purchase silver from continental Europe and Mexico to supply the Chinese appetite for silver. Attempts by a British embassy (led by Macartney in 1793), a Dutch mission (under Van Braam in 1794), Russia's (Golovkin in 1805) and the British again (Amherst in 1816) to negotiate access to the China market were all vetoed by successive Emperors.

By 1817, the British realized they could reduce the trade deficit as well as turn the Indian colony profitable by counter-trading in narcotic Indian opium. The Qing administration initially tolerated opium importation because it created an indirect tax on Chinese subjects, while allowing the British to double tea exports from China to England, thereby profiting the monopoly on tea exports held by the Qing imperial treasury and its agents.

Opium was produced in traditionally cotton-growing regions of India under EIC monopoly (Bengal) and in the Princely states (Malwa) outside the company's control. Both areas had been hard hit by the introduction of factory-produced cotton cloth, which used cotton grown in Egypt. The opium was auctioned in Calcutta (now Kolkata) on the condition that it be shipped by British traders to China. Opium as a medicinal ingredient was documented in texts as early as the Tang dynasty but its recreational use was limited and there were laws against its abuse.

British sales of opium began in 1781, and sales increased fivefold between 1821 and 1837[verification needed]. East India Company ships brought their cargoes to islands off the coast, especially Lintin Island, where Chinese traders with fast and well-armed small boats took the goods for inland distribution, paying for them with silver and causing a shift in its flow. By 1820, just when the Qing treasury needed to finance the suppression of rebellions, the flow of silver had reversed: Chinese merchants were now exporting it to pay for opium. The imperial court debated whether or how to end the opium trade, but its efforts were complicated by local officials (including the Governor-general of Canton) who profited greatly from the bribes and taxes involved.

A turning point came in 1834: reformers in England who advocated free trade had succeeded in ending the monopoly of the EIC under the Charter Act of the previous year, finally opening British trade to private entrepreneurs, many of whom joined in the lucrative trade of opium to China. American merchants then got involved and began to introduce opium from Turkey into the Chinese market — this was of lesser quality but cheaper to produce, and competition between and among British and American merchants drove down the price of opium, increasing sales.

 
 

Engagement between British and Chinese ships in the First Battle of Chuenpee, 1839.
 
 
Napier Affair
In late 1834, to accommodate the revocation of the East India Company's monopoly, the British sent Lord William John Napier to Macau along with John Francis Davis and Sir George Best Robinson, 2nd Baronet as British Superintendents of Trade in China. Napier tried to circumvent the restrictive Canton System that forbade direct contact with Chinese officials by attempting to send a letter directly to the Viceroy of Canton. The Viceroy refused to accept it, and closed trade starting on 2 September of that year. Lord Napier had to return to Macau (where he died a few days later) and, unable to force the matter, the British agreed to resume trade under the old restrictions.
 
 

British troops at the Battle of Amoy, 1841
 
 
Destruction of opium at Humen
By 1838, the British were selling roughly 1,400 tons of opium per year to China. Legalization of the opium trade was the subject of ongoing debate within the Chinese administration, but it was repeatedly rejected, and as of 1838 the government sentenced native drug traffickers to death.

In 1839, the Daoguang Emperor appointed scholar-official Lin Zexu to the post of Special Imperial Commissioner, with the task of eradicating the opium trade. Lin sent an open letter to Queen Victoria questioning the moral reasoning of the British government. Citing what he understood to be a strict prohibition of the trade within Great Britain, Lin questioned how it could then profit from the drug in China. He wrote: "Your Majesty has not before been thus officially notified, and you may plead ignorance of the severity of our laws, but I now give my assurance that we mean to cut this harmful drug forever." The letter never reached the queen, with one source suggesting that it was lost in transit.

Lin banned the sale of opium and demanded that all supplies of the drug be surrendered to the Chinese authorities. He also closed the channel to Canton, effectively holding British traders hostage in the city.

  As well as seizing opium supplies in the factories, Chinese troops boarded British ships in international waters outside Chinese jurisdiction, where their cargo was still legal, and destroyed the opium aboard.

The British Superintendent of Trade in China, Charles Elliot, got the British traders to agree to hand over their opium stock with the promise of eventual compensation for their loss from the British government.

While this amounted to a tacit acknowledgment that the British government did not disapprove of the trade, it also placed a huge liability on the exchequer. This promise, and the inability of the British government to pay it without causing a political storm, was an important casus belli for the subsequent British offensive.

Overall 20,000 chests (each holding about 55 kilograms) were handed over and destroyed beginning 3 June 1839. After the opium was surrendered, trade was restarted on the strict condition that no more drugs would be smuggled into China. Lin demanded that all merchants sign a bond promising not to deal in opium, under penalty of death. The British officially opposed signing of the bond, but some merchants who did not trade opium, such as Olyphant & Co. were willing to sign.

 
 

British troops capture Chinkiang in the last major battle of the war, 21 July 1842
 
 
War
In late October, the Thomas Coutts arrived in China and sailed to Canton Province. This ship was owned by Quakers, who refused to deal in opium. The ship's captain, Warner, believed Elliot had exceeded his legal authority by banning the signing of the "no opium trade" bond. The captain negotiated with the governor of Canton and hoped that all British ships could unload their goods at Chuenpee, an island near Humen.

To prevent other British ships from following the Thomas Coutts, Elliot ordered a blockade of the Pearl River. Fighting began on 3 November 1839, when a second British ship, the Royal Saxon, attempted to sail to Canton. Then the British Royal Navy ships HMS Volage and HMS Hyacinth fired a warning shot at the Royal Saxon.

The Qing navy's official report claimed that the navy attempted to protect the British merchant vessel, also reporting a great victory for that day. In reality, they were out-classed by the Royal Naval vessels and many Chinese ships were sunk.
Elliot reported that they were protecting their 29 ships in Chuenpee between the Qing batteries. Elliot knew that the Chinese would reject any contacts with the British and there would eventually be an attack with fire boats. Elliot ordered all ships to leave Chuenpee and head for Tung Lo Wan, 20 miles (30 km) from Macau, but the merchants preferred to harbour in Hong Kong.

In 1840, Elliot asked the Portuguese governor in Macau to let British ships load and unload their goods there in exchange for paying rent and any duties. The governor refused for fear that the Qing Government would discontinue supplying food and other necessities to Macau. On 14 January 1840, the Qing Emperor asked all foreigners in China to halt material assistance to the British in China. In retaliation, the British Government and EIC decided that they would attack Canton. The military cost would be paid by the British Government.

Some commentators claim that Lord Palmerston, the British Foreign Secretary, initiated the Opium War to maintain the principle of free trade. Professor Glenn Melancon, for example, argues that the issue in going to war was not opium but Britain's need to uphold its reputation, its honour, and its commitment to global free trade. China was pressing Britain just when the British faced serious pressures in the Near East, on the Indian frontier, and in Latin America. In the end, says Melancon, the government's need to maintain its honour in Britain and prestige abroad forced the decision to go to war.

  Critics, however, focused on the immorality of opium. William Ewart Gladstone denounced the war as "unjust and iniquitous" and criticised Lord Palmerston's willingness "to protect an infamous contraband traffic." The public and press in the United States and Britain expressed outrage that Britain was supporting the opium trade. Lord Palmerston justified military action by saying that no one could "say that he honestly believed the motive of the Chinese Government to have been the promotion of moral habits" and that the war was being fought to stem China's balance of payments deficit. John Quincy Adams commented that opium was "a mere incident to the dispute... the cause of the war is the kowtow—the arrogant and insupportable pretensions of China that she will hold commercial intercourse with the rest of mankind not upon terms of equal reciprocity, but upon the insulting and degrading forms of the relations between lord and vassal."

In June 1840, an expeditionary force of British Indian army troops aboard 15 barracks ships, four steam-powered gunboats and 25 smaller boats reached Canton from Singapore. The marines were headed by James Bremer. Bremer demanded the Qing Government compensate the British for losses suffered from interrupted trade.

British military superiority drew heavily on newly applied technology. British warships wrought havoc on coastal towns; the steam ship Nemesis was able to move against the winds and tides and support a gun platform with very heavy guns and congreve rockets. In addition, the British troops were the first to be armed with modern rifles, which fired more rapidly and with greater accuracy than matchlock muskets and artillery wielded by Manchu Bannermen and Han Green Standard Army troops, though Chinese cannons had been in use since previous dynasties.

Following the orders of Lord Palmerston, a British expedition blockaded the Mouth of Pearl River and moved north to take Zhoushan. Led by Commodore J.J. Gordon Bremer in the Wellesley, they captured the empty city after an exchange of gunfire with shore batteries that caused only minor casualties.

The next year, 1841, the British captured the Bogue forts that guarded the mouth of the Pearl River—the waterway between Hong Kong and Canton. Meanwhile, at the far west in Tibet, the start of the Sino-Sikh war added another front to the strained Qing military. By January 1841, British forces commanded the high ground around Canton and defeated Bannermen at Ningbo and at the military post of Dinghai. In the same year the British made three unsuccessful attempts to capture the harbour of Keelung on the northeast coast of Taiwan.

 
 
Once the British took Canton, they sailed up the Yangtze and captured the emperor's tax barges, a devastating blow since it slashed the revenue of the imperial court in Beijing to just a fraction of what it had been.

By the middle of 1842, the British had defeated the Chinese at the mouth of their other great riverine trade route, the Yangtze, and occupied Shanghai. The war finally ended in August 1842, with the signing of China's first Unequal Treaty, the Treaty of Nanking.

In the supplementary Treaty of the Bogue, the Qing empire also recognised Britain as an equal to China and gave British subjects extraterritorial privileges in treaty ports. In 1844, the United States and France concluded similar treaties with China, the Treaty of Wanghia and Treaty of Whampoa respectively.

 
 

First Opium War (1839-1842)
 
 
Legacy
The war marked the start of what 20th century nationalists called the "Century of Humiliation". The ease with which the British forces defeated the numerically superior Chinese armies damaged the dynasty's prestige. The Treaty of Nanking was a step to opening the lucrative Chinese market to global commerce and the opium trade. The interpretation of the war which was long the standard in the People's Republic of China was summarized in 1976: The Opium War, "in which the Chinese people fought against British aggression, marked the beginning of modern Chinese history and the start of the Chinese people's bourgeois-democratic revolution against imperialism and feudalism."

Lin Zexu, first known as "Lin the Clear Sky" for his moral probity, was made a scapegoat. He was blamed for ultimately failing to stem the tide of opium import and use and for provoking an unwinnable war by his rigidity and lack of understanding of the changing world. Nevertheless, as the Chinese nation formed in the 20th century, Lin Zexu became viewed as a hero, and has been immortalized at various locations around the world.

The First Opium War both reflected and contributed to a further weakening of the state's power and legitimacy. Anti-Qing sentiment grew in the form of rebellions, such as the Taiping Rebellion, a war lasting from 1850–64 in which at least 20 million Chinese died. The decline of the Qing dynasty was beginning to be felt by much of the Chinese population.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1839
 
 
Richter Eugen
 

Eugen Richter (July 30, 1838 in Düsseldorf – March 10, 1906 in Lichterfelde, Berlin) was a German politician and journalist in Imperial Germany. He was one of the leading advocates of liberalism in the Prussian Diet and the German Reichstag.

 
Career
Son of a combat medic, Richter attended the Gymnasium in his home town of Düsseldorf. In 1856 he began to study Law and Economics, first at the University of Bonn, and later at the Berlin and Heidelberg.
He obtained a law degree in 1859. Richter became a strong advocate of free trade, a market economy, and a Rechtsstaat; views he held for all his life.
 

Eugen Richter
  In 1859 he became a civil servant in the judiciary. He achieved some renown for his essay Über die Freiheit des Schankgewerbes (On the liberty of the tavern trade). His liberal views caused some trouble with the Prussian bureaucracy. In 1864 he was elected the mayor of Neuwied, but the president of the provincial government refused to confirm his election result. Richter left the civil service, and became the parliamentary correspondent of the Elberfelder Zeitung in Berlin. In 1867 he entered the Reichstag, and after 1869 also became a member of the Prussian Lower House.

He became the leader of the German Progress Party (Deutsche Fortschrittspartei), after 1884 the German Freeminded Party (Deutsche Freisinnige Partei), after 1893 the Freeminded People's Party (Freisinnige Volkspartei), and was one of the leading critics of the policies of Otto von Bismarck. In response to the Anti-Socialist Laws passed in 1878 banning the Social Democrat Party Richter said: "I fear Social-Democracy more under this law than without it".

Responding to rumors that Bismarck was going to introduce a tobacco monopoly, Richter unsuccessfully sought to persuade the Reichstag to pass a resolution condemning such a monopoly as "economically, financially, and politically unjustifiable". When Bismarck proposed a system of social insurance paid by the state he denounced it as "not Socialistic, but Communistic". From 1885 to 1904 he was the chief editor of the liberal newspaper Freisinnige Zeitung.

 
 
Political positions
Opposition to socialism

His novel "Pictures of the Socialistic Future" (1891) is a dystopian novel which predicts what would happen to Germany if the socialism espoused by the trade unionists, social democrats, and Marxists was put into practice. It is a 19th-century version of George Orwell's 1984. He aims to show that government ownership of the means of production and central planning of the economy would lead to shortages, not abundance as the socialists claimed. He seeks to draw attention to the problem of incentives in the absence of profits, and the public choice vested interests of bureaucrats and politicians. He also focuses on the connection between economic and political liberty. Written in the form of a diary by a supporter of the socialist revolution who comes to see the horrors he has wrought, the narrator begins by applauding expropriation, the use of force to prevent emigration, and the reassignment of people to new tasks, all the while assuring doubters that paradise is just around the corner. At one point he asks rhetorically: "What is freedom of the press if the government owns all the presses? What is freedom of religion if the government owns all the houses of worship?" highlighting the abuse of power possible when these are owned by the state. Society however begins to deteriorate as shortages begin to occur, the wealth generated by capitalism declines, while the military and the police forces grow. Parallels with the real life state of East Germany may be seen, particularly in the brutal measures to stop people from emigrating.
 
Opposition to anti-semitism
Anti-semitism was prevalent in the 1870s in Germany, but when the historian Heinrich von Treitschke and the Court Preacher Adolph Stöcker endorsed it in 1879, what had been a fringe phenomenon gained national attention. Various newspapers (such as the "Berliner Antisemitismusstreit") published articles attacking Jews. A petition to the Reich Chancellor Otto von Bismarck called for administrative measures banning Jewish immigration, and restricting their access to positions in education and the judiciary ("Antisemitenpetition", German Wikipedia).

Although anti-semitism was opposed by Eugen Richter's Progess Party and some National Liberals led by Theodor Mommsen and Heinrich Rickert (father of the philosopher Heinrich Rickert), other National Liberals, and the other parties — Conservatives, Center Party, and Socialists — mostly either stayed aloof or flirted with anti-semitism. In November 1880, a declaration by 75 leading scientists, businessmen, and politicians was published in major newspapers condemning anti-semitism ("Notabeln-Erklärung"). It was signed by among others the Mayor of Berlin Max von Forckenbeck, the anthropologist Rudolf Virchow, the historian Theodor Mommsen, and the entrepreneur and inventor Werner Siemens (founder of Siemens AG).On November 20, 1880 the Progress Party brought the issue before the Prussian Diet, asking the government to take a stand on whether or not legal restrictions were to be introduced ("Interpellation Hänel"). The government confirmed that the legal status of Jews was not to be altered, but fell short of condemning anti-semitism. Rudolf Virchow complained in the ensuing debate:

Well, meine Herren (Sirs), even if I have called the reply given by the Royal state government correct, I cannot deny that on the whole it could have been somewhat warmer. It was correct, but cold down to the heart.

 
How Berolina sifted the six. In the Reichstag elections of 1881, the candidates of the Progress Party (among them Eugen Richter and Rudolf Virchow) won all six seats in Berlin, here personified as Berolina. The candidates of the anti-semitic movement were not elected.
From the satirical weekly Berliner Wespen (Berlin Wasps), November 2, 1881
 
 
How Berolina sifted the six. In the Reichstag elections of 1881, the candidates of the Progress Party (among them Eugen Richter and Rudolf Virchow) won all six seats in Berlin, here personified as Berolina. The candidates of the anti-semitic movement were not elected. From the satirical weekly Berliner Wespen (Berlin Wasps), November 2, 1881
While on the first day of the debate a consensus seemed to emerge against the anti-semitic movement, on the second day, November 22, 1880 some politicians began to declare their anti-semitism. In his speech, Eugen Richter predicted the eventual consequences of the anti-semitic movement:

Meine Herren, the whole movement has by all means a similar character regarding its final goal, regarding its methods, as the Socialist movement. (Call from the floor.) That is what matters. The small gradual differences completely cede into the background, that is what is particularly insidious about the whole movement, that while the Socialists only turn against the economically better-off, here racial hatred is nourished, that is, something the individual cannot alter and that can only be ended by either killing him or forcing him out of the country.

He concluded his speech with the words:

Exactly to give the government the opportunity to speak its mind, how it stands on the matter, including the Reich Chancellor, that is why we have introduced this interpellation, and we are pleased about the success and wish that from now on throughout the country a sturdy reaction will crush this anti-semitic movement, which truly does not confer honor and adornment on our country.

Responding to an anti-semitic meeting on December 17, 1880, the Progress Party invited all electors for the Prussian Diet to a meeting in the Reichshallen on January 12, 1881 to demonstrate that the citizens of Berlin did not support anti-semitism. Eugen Richter delivered a speech before an audience of 2.500 electors, attacking anti-semitic university students:

 
 
And what do we see now as an outrageous phenomenon? Young people who have not lived a great time with a political consciousness like we have — because they were still in 6th and 5th grade (Amusement) — Young people who have not yet proved what they are worth, force their way to the fore and dare to hurl at the Jewish cavaliers of the Iron Cross, and at the fathers who have given their sons to Germany, that they do not belong to the German nation?!! (Longlasting, tempestuous applause. Calls of Boo!)

He turned the anti-semitic accusations around:

Nowadays it is seen as the act of an hero if you drink more than the Jews, and as an educated nation you reproach the Jews for sending so many children to higher education. And after you have worked all those valiant deeds, then you sing: "Deutschland, Deutschland über Alles!" (Tempestuous amusement.) Truly! Our friend Hoffmann von Fallersleben has been saved by a kind fate from experiencing this abuse of his magnificent song. Since, that's something I admit openly, if this is supposed to be German, if this is supposed to be Christian, then I want to be anywhere else in the world but in Christian Germany! (Vigorous applause.)

Already in February 1880, the German Crown Prince and latter Emperor Frederick III had called the anti-semitic movement in a private conversation with the president of the Jewish corporation of Berlin, Meyer Magnus, "a disgrace for Germany" (in some reports also "a disgrace of our time" or "a disgrace for our nation"). Eugen Richter referred to these words, which the Crown Prince confirmed two days later:

One day, it will not be the smallest leaf of laurel in the wreath of our Crown Prince that already at the first stirrings of this movement, something that our deceased colleague Wulffsheim overheard with his own ears and which has also been confirmed otherwise as trustworthy — he declared to the president of the Jewish corporation of Berlin that this movement is a disgrace for the German nation! (Tempestuous, long lasting applause.)

  He rejected the claim that the anti-semitic movement had grown from the ranks of craftsmen, workers, and businessmen:

It confers honor on the German craftsmen, workers, and businessmen that this movement, which is supposed to be in their interest, did not arise from their circles, (Vigorous applause), just like the corn tariff propaganda did not arise from peasant circles. It arose from young people who do not earn anything at all, but live out of their parents' pockets.

Furthermore, from people who in positions of trust as officials obtain their salaries from the public coffers and often cannot have any idea of how a businessman sometimes feels who struggles to earn his daily bread and to pay the obligatory taxes!
(Tempestuous, general applause).

Such people who call themselves “educated” have put Jew baiting into action. Indeed, here it shows again that superior mental culture if it is not aligned with a culture of the heart and true religiosity — not a religiosity that has God on its lips, but the devil in its heart — often only leads to nothing more than barbarity in a more refined form!

In his concluding words, he called upon his audience:

In this vein, let us also fight against the depravity of this movement in a league without party distinction, and let us feel united in this resolution — drawing on the New Year’s Address of the city councilors to the Kaiser and his reply — that only if all powers of national life, before which no distinction of denominations is justified, working peacefully together, can the welfare of the German Reich and her individual citizens prosper. (Vigorous, continuous applause.)

On October 27, 1881 the Progress Party defeated the anti-semitic "Berliner Bewegung" (Berlin Movement), winning all six seats for the capital, with Eugen Richter gaining 66% of the vote in the first round.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1839
 
 
Frederick IV, King of Denmark, d.; succeeded by his nephew Christian VIII (-1848)
 
 
Frederick VI of Denmark
 

Frederick VI (Danish: Frederik den Sjette; 28 January 1768 – 3 December 1839) was King of Denmark from 13 March 1808 to 3 December 1839 and King of Norway from 13 March 1808 to 7 February 1814. From 1784 until his accession, he served as regent during his father's mental illness and was referred to as the "Crown Prince Regent" (kronprinsregent).

 
Frederick belonged to the House of Oldenburg and was the only son of Christian VII and Caroline Matilda of Great Britain.

For his motto he chose: God and the just cause (Danish: Gud og den retfærdige sag) and since the time of his reign, Danish monarchs have only used mottos in the Danish language instead of the usual Latin.

The Royal Frederick University in Oslo was named in his honour.

 
 

Frederick VI
  Early life
Frederick was born at Christiansborg Palace, Copenhagen on 28 January 1768. His parents were King Christian VII and Caroline Matilda of Great Britain. He was born after 15 months of marriage, just a day before his father's 19th birthday, when his mother was 16. As the eldest son of the ruling king, he automatically became crown prince at birth.
On 30 January of the same year, he was baptised at Christiansborg Palace by Ludvig Harboe, Bishop of Zealand. His godparents were King Christian VII (his father), the dowager queen Juliana Maria (his stepgrandmother) and Hereditary Prince Frederick (his half-uncle).

His father suffered from serious psychological problems, including suspected schizophrenia expressed by catatonic periods that resulted in his standing down from power for most of his reign, ceding power to his doctor Johann Friedrich Struensee. From 1770 to 1772 Struensee was de facto regent, as well as lover of Caroline Matilda, Frederick's mother. Struensee was ideologically influenced by Enlightenment thinkers such as Voltaire and Jean Jacques Rousseau. While Struensee was in power young Frederick was raised at Hirschholm Palace following the educational approach advocated by Rousseau in his famous work Émile. Frederick received no direct instruction in this period, but was expected to learn everything through his own efforts, through playing with two commoner boys who were his companions following Struensee's instructions.

 
 
On 8 January 1772, after the revolt against Struensee, his 18-year-old half-uncle Hereditary Prince Frederick (father of Christian VIII of Denmark) was made regent, although the real power was held by Queen Juliana Maria, who was aided by Ove Høegh-Guldberg. Finally, on 14 April 1784, the crown prince was declared of legal majority, and in a coup, where he actually engaged in a fistfight with his half-uncle over the king Christian VII, took the regency from his half-uncle. He continued as regent of Denmark under his father's name until the latter's death in 1808.
 
 

19-year-old Crown Prince Frederick, surrounded by his staff. In the background Frederiksberg Palace. Painted by Christian August Lorentzen.
 
 
Crown prince's regency
During the regency, Frederick instituted widespread liberal reforms with the assistance of Chief Minister Andreas Peter Bernstorff, including the abolition of serfdom in 1788. Crises encountered during his reign include disagreement with the British over neutral shipping. This resulted in two British attacks on Copenhagen, the Battle of Copenhagen of 1801 and the Battle of Copenhagen of 1807. The conflict continued in the Gunboat War between Denmark-Norway and the United Kingdom, which lasted until the Treaty of Kiel in 1814.

There was speculation that he was to marry a Prussian princess, a choice supported by his step-grandmother Juliana Maria and her brother-in-law Frederick the Great. To show his independence from advisors, he personally selected his first-cousin Marie Sophie of Hesse-Kassel, a member of a German family with close marriage links with the royal families of both Denmark and Great Britain.
They married in Gottorp on 31 July 1790 and had eight children. The youngest of them, Princess Wilhelmine, became the wife of the future Frederick VII of Denmark. None of Frederick VI's sons survived infancy, however, and when he died, he was succeeded by his cousin Christian.

  King of Denmark and loss of Norway
Frederick became King of Denmark on 13 March 1808. When the throne of Sweden seemed likely to become vacant in 1809, Frederick was interested in being elected there, too. Frederick actually was the first monarch of Denmark and Norway to descend from Gustav I of Sweden, who had secured Sweden's independence in 1520s after a period of union with other Scandinavian countries. However, Frederick's brother-in-law, Prince Christian Augustus of Augustenborg, was first elected to the throne of Sweden, then the French Marshal Bernadotte.

He made Denmark the most loyal ally of Napoleon. After the French defeat in Russia in 1812, the Allies again and again asked him to change sides. He refused. Many Danish historians portray the king as stubborn, incompetent, and motivated by a misconceived loyalty towards Napoleon. However some historians in recent years have provided a different interpretation that sheds a better light on the king. He stayed with Napoleon in order to protect the exposed situation of Norway, which was dependent on grain imports and had become the target of Swedish territorial ambitions. He expected the wars would end with a great international conference in which Napoleon would have a major voice, and would help protect Denmark's interests, especially in Norway.

 
 
After his defeat in the Napoleonic Wars in 1814 and the loss of Norway, Frederick VI carried through an authoritarian and reactionary course, giving up the liberal ideas of his years as a prince regent. Censorship and suppression of all opposition together with the poor state of the country's economy made this period of his reign somewhat gloomy, though the king himself in general maintained his position of a "patriarch" and a well-meaning autocrat. From the 1830s the economic depression was eased a bit and from 1834 the king reluctantly accepted a small democratic innovation by the creation of the Assemblies of the Estate (purely consultative regional assemblies); this had the unintended result of later exacerbating relations between Danes and Germans in Schleswig, whose regional assembly became a forum for constant bickering between the two national groups.
 
 

The anointment of King Frederick VI at Frederiksborg Palace on 31 July 1815.
 
 
Later life
Frederick VI was known as a patron of astronomy and in 1832 offered gold medal prizes to anyone who discovered a comet using a telescope. His successors continued this until 1850. The prize was terminated in the aftermath of the First War of Schleswig.

After the discovery of the Haraldskær Woman in a peat bog in Jutland in the year 1835, Frederick VI ordered a royal interment in an elaborately carved sarcophagus for the Iron Age mummy, decreeing it to be the body of Queen Gunnhild. Later this identification proved incorrect, but the action suited his political agenda at the time.

Frederik VI died at the age of 71, on 3 December 1839 at Amalienborg Palace and was buried in Frederick V's chapel in Roskilde Cathedral. Frederick reigned over Denmark for a total of 55 years; 24 years as crown prince regent and 31 years as king. He was the 894th Knight of the Order of the Golden Fleece in Spain and the 654th Knight of the Order of the Garter in 1822.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
Christian VIII of Denmark
 

Christian VIII (Christian Frederik) (18 September 1786 – 20 January 1848) was the King of Denmark from 1839 to 1848 and, as Christian Frederick, King of Norway in 1814. He was the eldest son of Hereditary Prince Frederick of Denmark and Norway and Duchess Sophia Frederica of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, born in 1786 at Christiansborg Palace in Copenhagen. His paternal grandparents were King Frederick V of Denmark and his second wife, Duchess Juliana Maria of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel.

Christian inherited the talents of his highly gifted mother, and his amiability and handsome features are said to have made him very popular in Copenhagen.

 
First marriage
Christian first married his cousin Duchess Charlotte Frederica of Mecklenburg-Schwerin at Ludwigslust on 21 June 1806. Charlotte Frederica was a daughter of Friedrich Franz I, Grand Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, and Princess Louise of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg. His first-born son was Christian Frederik, who was born and died at Schloss Plön on 8 April 1807. His second son became Frederick VII of Denmark. The marriage was dissolved by divorce in 1810 after Charlotte Frederica was accused of adultery.
 
 

Christian VIII
  King of Norway
In May 1813, as the heir presumptive of the kingdoms of Denmark and Norway, Christian was sent as stattholder (the Danish king's highest representative in overseas territories) to Norway to promote the loyalty of the Norwegians to the House of Oldenburg, which had been very badly shaken by the disastrous results of Frederick VI's adhesion to the falling fortunes of Napoleon I of France. Christian did all he could personally to strengthen the bonds between the Norwegians and the royal house of Denmark. Though his endeavours were opposed by the so-called Swedish party, which desired a dynastic union with Sweden, he placed himself at the head of the Norwegian party of independence after the Treaty of Kiel had forced the king to cede Norway to the king of Sweden. He was elected Regent of Norway by an assembly of notables on 16 February 1814.

This election was confirmed by the Norwegian Constituent Assembly convoked at Eidsvoll on 10 April, and on 17 May the constitution was signed and Christian was unanimously elected king of Norway under the name Christian Frederick.

Christian next attempted to interest the great powers in Norway's cause, but without success. On being pressed by the commissioners of the allied powers to bring about a union between Norway and Sweden in accordance with the terms of the treaty of Kiel, and then return to Denmark, he replied that, as a constitutional king, he could do nothing without the consent of the parliament (Storting), which would not be convoked until there was a suspension of hostilities on the part of Sweden. Sweden refused Christian's conditions and a short military campaign ensued in which the Norwegian army was defeated by the forces of the Swedish crown prince Charles John.

 
 
The brief war concluded with the Convention of Moss on 14 August 1814. By the terms of this treaty, King Christian Frederick transferred executive power to the Storting, then abdicated and returned to Denmark. The Storting in its turn adopted the constitutional amendments necessary to allow for a personal union with Sweden and on 4 November elected Charles XIII of Sweden as the new king of Norway.
 
 

Christian VIII and his consort Caroline Amalie of Augustenborg during his anointing on 28 June 1840 in Frederiksborg Palace Chapel.
 
 
Back in Denmark
Upon his return to Denmark, Christian married his second wife, Princess Caroline Amalie of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg (daughter of Louise Augusta of Denmark, the only sister of Frederick VI) at Augustenborg Palace on 22 May 1815.

The couple was childless and lived in comparative retirement as leaders of the literary and scientific society of Copenhagen until Christian ascended the throne of Denmark.

Christian's suspected democratic principles made him persona ingratissima at all the reactionary European courts, the court of Denmark included. It was not until 1831 that King Frederick gave Christian a seat on the council of state.

  King of Denmark
On 13 December 1839 he ascended the Danish throne as Christian VIII. The Liberal party had high hopes of “the giver of constitutions,” but he disappointed his admirers by steadily rejecting every Liberal project. Administrative reform was the only reform he would promise. In his attitude to the growing national unrest in the twin duchies of Schleswig and Holstein he often seemed hesitated and half-hearted, which damaged his position there. It was not until 1846 that he clearly supported the idea of Schleswig being a Danish area.

Some historians and biographers believe, however, that king Christian would have given Denmark a free constitution had he lived long enough, and his last words are sometimes (rather tragically) recorded as "I didn't make it". ("Jeg nåede det ikke.")

 
 
King Christian VIII continued his predecessor's patronage of astronomy, awarding gold medals for the discovery of comets by telescope and financially supporting Heinrich Christian Schumacher with his publication of the scientific journal Astronomische Nachrichten.

Seeing that his only legitimate son, the future Frederick VII, was apparently unable to beget heirs, he commenced arrangements to secure the succession in Denmark. The result was the selection of the future Christian IX as hereditary prince, the choice made official by a new law enacted on 31 July 1853 after an international treaty made in London.

He died of blood poisoning in Amalienborg Palace in 1848 and was interred in Roskilde Cathedral.

Christian had ten extramarital children, for whom he carefully provided.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1839
 
 
Natalia Republic
 

The Natalia Republic was a short-lived Boer republic, established in 1839 by local Afrikaans-speaking Voortrekkers shortly after the Battle of Blood River. The republic was located on the coast of the Indian Ocean beyond the Eastern Cape, and was previously named Natália by Portuguese sailors. The republic was conquered and annexed by Britain in 1843. After the British annexation of the Natalia Republic, most local Voortrekker Boers trekked north into Transorangia, later known as the Orange Free State, and the Transvaal.

 
History
European settlement and setbacks

Long inhabited by varying cultures of indigenous Africans, the region was colonized and renamed in their language by the Portuguese. The first Europeans to settle the country were emigrant Boers from the Cape Colony, led by Piet Retief (c. 1780-1838). He was of Huguenot descent. Passing through the almost deserted upper regions, Retief arrived at the bay[clarification needed] in October 1837. During this journey, he chose a site for the capital of the future state which he envisioned. He went to the capital or kraal of the Zulu king, Dingane, to obtain a cession of territory for the Dutch farmers. Dingane consented on condition that the Boers recover cattle stolen by the Tlokwa chief. Retief managed that and, with the help of the Rev. F. Owen, a missionary living at Dingane's kraal, he drew up a deed of cession in English. Dingane and Retief signed it on 4 February 1838.

Two days later, Dingane ordered the execution of Retief and all of his party, 66 whites and 34 Khoikhoi servants. The Zulu king commanded his impis to kill all the Boers who had entered Natal. The Zulu forces crossed the Tugela the same day, and the most advanced parties of the Boers were massacred, many at a spot near where the town of Weenen now stands, its name (meaning wailing or weeping) commemorating the event. Other of the farmers hastily laagered and were able to repulse the Zulu attacks; the assailants suffering serious loss at a fight near Bushman River. In one week after the murder of Retief, the Zulus killed 600 Boers - men, women and children.

Hearing of the attack on the Boers, the British settlers at the bay sent a force to help them. Robert Biggar commanded 20 British and a following of 700 friendly Zulus and crossed the Tugela near its mouth. On the 17 April, in a desperate fight with a Zulu force led by Nongalaza KaNondela, the British were overwhelmed and only four Europeans escaped to the bay. Pursued by the Zulus, the surviving inhabitants of Durban took refuge on a ship then in harbour. After the Zulus retired, fewer than a dozen Englishmen returned to live at the port; the missionaries, hunters and other traders returned to the Cape.

The Boers had repelled the Zulu attacks on their laagers; joined by others from the Drakensberg, about 400 men under Hendrik Potgieter and Piet Uys advanced to attack Dingane. On 11 April, they were attacked and with difficulty cut their way out. Among those slain were Piet Uys and his son Dirk, aged 15.

  Battle of Blood River
Toward the end of the year, the Boers received reinforcements. In December 460 men set out under Boer General Andries Pretorius to take on the Zulus. Andries Pretorius selected Jan Gerritze Bantjes (1817-1887) as his scribe and secretary in recording events of the campaign and coming retaliation battle with the Zulus. Bantjes wrote in his journal the daily progress of the commando when they started out 27 Nov.1838. until they reached their selected battle site over two weeks later the 15.Nov. 1838. They avoided being led into a trap as happened on the previous attempt to attack the Zulus in April which ended in disaster. On the journey, they had small skirmishes with various kraals but the main Zulu army had not arrived yet to attack. Boer and Zulu scouts were constantly monitoring each other's whereabouts. On Sunday 09.December as Bantjes wrote in his journal, the Boers congregated under a clear sky to sing appropriate psalms and celebrate the Sabbath, taking a vow which became known as the "Day of The Vow or Covenant" that "if the Lord might give us victory, we hereby deem to found a house as a memorial of his Great Name at a place where it shall please Him", and that they also implore the help and assistance of God in accomplishing this Vow and that they write down this Day of Victory in a book and disclose this event to our very last posterities in order that this will forever be celebrated in the honour of God."

On Sunday 16 December 1838, while laagered near the Umslatos River or Hippo Pool, they were attacked by more than 30 000+ Zulus and outnumbered more than 60 to 1. As Bantjes wrote in his journal - "Sunday, December 16 was like being newly born for us - the sky was clear, the weather fine and bright. We hardly saw the twilight of the break of day or the guards, who were still at their posts and could just make out the distant Zulus approaching. All the patrols were called back into the laager by firing alarm signals from the cannons. The enemy came forward at full speed and suddenly they had encircled the area around the laager. As it got lighter, so we could see them approaching over their predecessors who had already been shot back. Their rapid approach (though terrifying to witness due to their great numbers) was an impressive sight. The Zulus came in regiments, each captain with his men behind (as the patrols had seen them coming the day before) until they had surrounded us. I could not count them, but I was told that a captive Zulu gave the number at thirty-six regiments, each regiment calculated to be "nine hundred to a thousand men strong." The battle now began and the cannons unleashed from each gate, such that the battle was fierce and noisy, even the discharging of small arms fire from our marksmen on all sides was like thunder.

 
 

After more than two hours of fierce battle, the Commander in Chief gave orders that the gates be opened and mounted men sent to fight the enemy in fast attacks, as the enemy near constantly stormed the laager time and again, and he feared the ammunition would soon run out.

With the power of their firearms and with their ox wagons in a laager formation and some excellent tactics, the Boers fought off the Zulu. After three hours, the Boers had killed an estimated 3,000 Zulus and had only three of their men wounded, among them Pretorius. Jan Gerritze Bantjes kept his journal of the entire campaign and the Battle of Blood River. The Zulus withdrew in defeat, many crossing the river which had turned red with blood and thereafter known as the Battle of Blood River. The Boers celebrated the Day of the Covenant every year on 16 December and most of them credit the victory to God.

 
 

Location of Natal
 
 
British at Port Natal
Returning south, Pretorius and his commandos found that the British had annexed Port Natal (now Durban) on 4 December with a detachment of the 72nd Highlanders from Cape Colony. While the governor of the Cape, Major-General Sir George Napier, had invited the emigrants to return to the colony, he had stated his intention to take military possession of the port. He wanted to prevent the Boers from establishing an independent republic on the coast with a harbour through which access to the interior could be gained. Napier withdrew the Highlanders on Christmas Eve 1839.
 
 
Overthrow of Dingane
After the battle, Pretorius took advantage of dissension in the Zulu kingdom to ally himself with Mpande, brother of the Zulu king Dingane. Dingane's attempt to extend his kingdom north to compensate for losses to the Boers had failed. He was defeated by the Swazi people in 1839, leading to discontent with his rule. In exchange for cattle and territory Pretorius agreed to support Mpande's bid to overthrow Dingane.

A Boer force supported Mpande's Zulu impi in the invasion. At the Battle of Maqongqo, Dingane was crushed and was put to flight with what retainers chose to follow him into exile. Pretorius took 36,000 head of cattle and proclaimed a large tract of land extending from St. Lucia Bay to be part of the Natalia Republic. According to Maxwell Shamase,

On 14 February 1840 Pretorius issued a proclamation whereby the territory from the sea next to the Black Mfolozi River, where it ran through the double mountains, close to the origin and then next to Hooge Randberg in a straight line to the Drakensberg, St. Lucia Bay inclusive was declared as border between KwaZulu and the Republic of Natalia.

On the banks of the Klip River the Voortrekkers received about 36 000 head of cattle looted after the Maqongqo battle. They received an additional 15 000 head of cattle from Mpande as a token of allegiance.

Natalia's government
Internal affairs

Meantime the Boers had founded Pietermaritzburg, named in honour of leaders Piet Retief and Gerrit Maritz. They made it their capital and the seat of their volksraad.

Legislative power was vested in the volksraad (consisting of 24 members), while the president and executive were changed every three months. For issues of importance, a meeting was called of het publiek, that is, of all who chose to attend, to sanction or reject it. "The result," says the historian Theal, "was utter anarchy.

Decisions of one day were frequently reversed the next, and every one held himself free to disobey any law that he did not approve of.. .. Public opinion of the hour in each section of the community was the only force in the land." (History of South Africa 1834 - 1854, chap. xliv.).

  Territorial policy
The Zulus continued to exist as a distinct and numerous people with their own dispensation within their own territory to the north and east, in the region known as Zululand.

The settlers were in loose alliance with and in quasi-supremacy over the Boer communities that had left the Cape and settled at Winburg and at Potchefstroom. They declared a free and independent state under the title of "The Republic of Port Natal and adjacent countries," and sought (September 1840) from Sir George Napier an acknowledgment of their independence by Great Britain.

Sir George did not give an answer but was sympathetic to the Boer farmers. He was disturbed when a commando force under Andries Pretorius attacked the Xhosa in December 1840. The national government declined to recognized Natalia's independence but proposed to trade with it if the people would accept a military force to defend against other European powers. Sir George communicated this decision to the volksraad in September 1841.

British and Dutch influences
The Boers strongly resented the contention of the British that they could not shake off British nationality though beyond the bounds of any recognized British possession, nor were they prepared to see their only port garrisoned by British troops. They rejected Napier's overtures.

In December 1841, Napier announced his intention to resume military occupation of Port Natal, citing the Boers' attack on the Xhosa. In February 1842 the settlers responded, with a document written by J. N. Boshoff (afterwards president of the Orange Free State). The farmers complained about the lack of representative government, and concluded by a protest against the occupation of any part of their territory by British troops.

Soon after, the Boers were encouraged in their opposition to Great Britain. In March 1842 a Dutch vessel sent out by G. G. Ohrig, an Amsterdam merchant who sympathized with the farmers, reached Port Natal. J. A. Smellekamp concluded a treaty with the volksraad assuring them of the protection of Holland. The Natal Boers believed the Netherlands to be one of the great powers of Europe, and were firmly persuaded that its government would aid them in resisting England.

 
 
Transfer to colonial government
Napier takes charge

The British government was still undecided as to its policy towards Natal. In April 1842 Lord Stanley (afterwards 14th earl of Derby), then secretary for the colonies in the second Peel Administration, wrote to Sir George Napier that the establishment of a colony in Natal would be attended with little prospect of advantage, but at the same time stated that the pretensions of the emigrants to be regarded as an independent community could not be admitted. Various measures were proposed which would but have aggravated the situation.

Napier took the initiative however, and dispatched Captain J. Charlton Smith with a garrison to occupy Port Natal. They arrived on 4 May 1842, much to the vehement demands from the Boers that the British should leave.

Captain Smith (according to his Dispatch of 25 May 1842), who had hitherto been at pains to avoid hostilities and in favour of conciliation, on receiving an "insolent" letter demanding that the force he commanded should immediately quit Natal, followed up the removal by armed men of a quantity of cattle belonging to the troops deemed it absolutely necessary that some steps should be taken in order to prevent a repetition of such outrages.

He therefore determined, after mature consideration, to march and attack their camp at the Congella. A Royal Artillery boat was fitted with a howitzer and the sergeant in charge of the boat was given instructions to drop down the channel to within 500 yards of Congella and await the troops in order that they might form under the cover of its fire, aided by that of two six-pounders which accompanied Captain Smith's force. To Smith's mortification, the boat failed to arrive until it was too late to be of any use and, besides, took up a position too distant for her fire to be of much effect.

Though Smith was informed the Boers (the Emigrant Farmers) suffered severe losses in the action, the result for Smith's force was a disaster and the loss of life very severe. Smith retreated to his camp, where he was besieged until 26 June 1842, when Lieutenant-colonel A. J. Cloete's relief force arrived in the war ship Southampton.

  Annexation
Finally, in deference to the strongly urged views of Sir George Napier, Lord Stanley, in a despatch of 13 December, received in Cape Town on 23 April 1843, consented to Natal becoming a British colony. The institutions adopted were to be as far as possible in accordance with the wishes of the people, but it was a fundamental condition "that there should not be in the eye of the law any distinction or disqualification whatever, founded on mere difference of colour, origin, language or creed."

Sir George then appointed Mr Henry Cloete (a brother of Colonel Josias Cloete) a special commissioner to explain to the Natal volksraad the decision of the government. There was a considerable party of Natal Boers still strongly opposed to the British, and they were reinforced by numerous bands of Boers who came over the Drakensberg from Winburg and Potchefstroom. Commandant Jan Mocke of Winburg (who had helped to besiege Captain Smith at Durban) and others of the "war party" attempted to induce the volksraad not to submit, and a plan was formed to murder Pretorius, Boshoff and other leaders, who were now convinced that the only chance of ending the state of complete anarchy into which the country had fallen was by accepting British sovereignty.

Extent of the colony
In these circumstances the task of Mr Henry Cloete was one of great difficulty and delicacy. He behaved with the utmost tact and got rid of the Winburg and Potchefstroom burghers by declaring that he should recommend the Drakensberg as the northern limit of Natal. On 8 August 1843 the Natal volksraad unanimously agreed to the terms proposed by Lord Stanley. Many of the Boers who would not acknowledge British rule trekked once more over the mountains into what became the Orange Free State and Transvaal provinces to seek their freedom and independence. At the end of 1843 there were not more than 500 Dutch families left in Natal.

Cloete, before returning to the Cape, visited Mpande and obtained from him a valuable concession. Hitherto the Tugela River from source to mouth had been the recognized frontier between Natal and Zululand. Mpande gave up to Natal all the territory between the Buffalo and Tugela rivers, now forming Klip River county.

 
 
Aftermath
Proclaimed a British Colony of Natal in 1843, it became a part of Cape Colony in 1844. The power of the volksraad did not truly end until 1845, when an effective British administration was established under Martin West as lieutenant-governor. After the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879, the British defeated the Zulu army, and annexed Zululand to Natal in 1893. One of the four founding provinces of South Africa, it is now KwaZulu-Natal. This province is still home to the Zulu nation, which forms the majority of the population and Zulu is, together with English and Afrikaans, an official languages. The province also has a large ethnic Indian population, as well as Boer-descended residents in the north and ethnic British descendants, mainly in the cities.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1839
 
 
Abdul Mejid becomes Sultan of Turkey
 
 
Abdulmecid I
 

Abdulmecid I, (born April 25, 1823, Constantinople, Ottoman Empire [now Istanbul, Tur.]—died June 25, 1861, Constantinople), Ottoman sultan from 1839 to 1861 who issued two major social and political reform edicts known as the Hatt-ı Şerif of Gülhane (Noble Edict of the Rose Chamber) in 1839 and the Hatt-ı Hümayun (Imperial Edict) in 1856, heralding the new era of Tanzimat (“Reorganization”).

 

Abdulmecid I
  Well educated, liberal minded, and the first sultan to speak French, Abdülmecid continued the reform program of his father, Mahmud II, and was strongly assisted by his ministers Mustafa Reşid Paşa, Mehmed Emin Âli Paşa, and Fuad Paşa. The reform edicts were in part directed toward winning the support of European powers. The edicts proclaimed the equality of all citizens under the law and granted civil and political rights to the Christian subjects. The main purpose of the reforms, however, remained the preservation of the Ottoman state. The army was reorganized (1842) and conscription introduced; new penal, commercial, and maritime codes were promulgated; and mixed civil and criminal courts with European and Ottoman judges were established. In 1858 a new land law confirming the rights of ownership was introduced, and an attempt was made to establish a new system of centralized provincial administration. The sultan’s educational reforms included the formation of a Ministry of Education and the establishment of military preparatory schools and secondary schools; he also established an Ottoman school in Paris (1855).

Abdülmecid’s foreign policy was directed toward maintaining friendly relations with the European powers to preserve the territorial integrity of the Ottoman state. He ascended the throne as a mere boy a few days after the Ottoman defeat by the Viceroy of Egypt at the Battle of Nizip (June 1839). Only an alliance of European powers (excluding France) saved the Ottomans from accepting disastrous terms from Egypt (Treaty of London, July 1840). In 1849 Abdülmecid’s refusal to surrender Lajos Kossuth and other Hungarian revolutionary refugees to Austria won him the respect of European liberals. Finally, in 1853 the Ottomans were assisted by France, Great Britain, and Sardinia in the Crimean War against Russia and were admitted as participants in the Treaty of Paris (1856).

 
 
The European powers, however, while insisting on reforms regarding the Christians and minorities in the Ottoman Empire, obstructed the sultan’s efforts at centralization and at recovering power in Bosnia and Montenegro in the Balkans. They also forced the Ottomans to grant autonomy in Lebanon (1861), while the effect of the Treaty of Paris was to unify the Danubian principalities, paving the way for the independence of Romania (1878).

Abdülmecid restored Hagia Sophia, built the Dolmabahçe Palace, and founded the first French theatre in Constantinople. See also Âli Paşa, Mehmed Emin; Reşid Paşa, Mustafa.

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 
 
1839
 
 
Ranjit Singh
 

Ranjit Singh, also spelled Runjit Singh, byname Lion of the Punjab (born Nov. 13, 1780, Budrukhan, or Gujranwala [now in Pakistan]—died June 27, 1839, Lahore [now in Pakistan]), founder and maharaja (1801–39) of the Sikh kingdom of the Punjab.

 

Maharaja Ranjit Singh
  Ranjit Singh was the only child of Maha Singh, on whose death in 1792 he became chief of the Shukerchakias, a Sikh group. His inheritance included Gujranwala town and the surrounding villages, now in Pakistan. At 15 he married the daughter of a chieftain of the Kanhayas, and for many years his affairs were directed by his ambitious mother-in-law, the widow Sada Kaur. A second marriage, to a girl of the Nakkais, made Ranjit Singh preeminent among the clans of the Sikh confederacy.

In July 1799 he seized Lahore, the capital of the Punjab (now the capital of Punjab province, Pak.). The Afghan king, Shah Zamān, confirmed Ranjit Singh as governor of the city; in 1801, however, Ranjit Singh proclaimed himself maharaja of the Punjab. He had coins struck in the name of the Sikh Gurus, the revered line of Sikh leaders, and proceeded to administer the state in the name of the Sikh commonwealth. A year later he captured Amritsar, the most important commercial entrepôt in northern India and sacred city of the Sikhs. Thereafter he proceeded to subdue the smaller Sikh and Pashtun (Afghan) principalities that were scattered over the Punjab. But his later forays east were checked by the English, with whom he signed the Treaty of Amritsar (1809), fixing the Sutlej River as the eastern boundary of his territories. Ranjit Singh then turned his ambitions toward the north and west, against the Pashtuns. In the summer of 1818 his troops captured the city of Multan and six months later entered the Pashtun citadel, Peshawar. In July 1819 he finally expelled the Pashtuns from the Vale of Kashmir. By 1820 he had consolidated his rule over the whole Punjab between the Sutlej and Indus rivers.

 
 
All of Ranjit Singh’s conquests were achieved by Punjabi armies composed of Sikhs, Muslims, and Hindus. His commanders were also drawn from different religious communities, as were his cabinet ministers. In 1820 Ranjit Singh began to modernize his army, using European officers to train the infantry and the artillery. The modernized Punjabi army fought well in campaigns in the North-West Frontier (on the Afghanistan border). Ranjit Singh added Ladakh (a region of eastern Kashmir) to his kingdom in 1834, and his forces repulsed an Afghan counterattack on Peshawar in 1837.
 
 

Runjit Singh and his Suwarree
 
 
In 1838 he agreed to a treaty with the British viceroy Lord Auckland to restore Shah Shojāʿ to the Afghan throne at Kabul. In pursuance of this agreement, the British Army of the Indus entered Afghanistan from the south, while Ranjit Singh’s troops went through the Khyber Pass and took part in the victory parade in Kabul.

Shortly afterward, Ranjit Singh was taken ill, and he died at Lahore in June 1839, almost exactly 40 years after he had entered the city as a conqueror. In little more than six years after his death, the Sikh state he had created collapsed because of the internecine strife of rival chiefs.

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 
 
1839
 
 
Van Rensselaer Stephen
 

Stephen van Rensselaer III (November 1, 1764 – January 26, 1839) was Lieutenant Governor of New York as well as a statesman, soldier, and land-owner, the heir to one of the largest estates in the New York region at the time, which made him the tenth richest American of all time, based on the ratio of his fortune to contemporary GDP. He founded the institution which became Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

 

Stephen van Rensselaer
  Early life
Van Rensselaer was born in New York City, the eldest child of Stephen van Rensselaer II, the ninth patroon of Rensselaerswyck a large land grant in upstate New York awarded by the Dutch to his ancestor Kiliaen van Rensselaer. His mother was Catharina Livingston the daughter of Philip Livingston, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. His family was very wealthy, and the Van Rensselaer Manor House was a rich childhood environment for the young boy to grow up in. However, his father died in 1769 when Van Rensselaer was only five.

Van Rensselaer was raised by his mother and his stepfather, the Rev. Eilardus Westerlo, whom his mother married in 1775, and his Livingston grandfather.

His uncle, Abraham Ten Broeck, administered the Van Rensselaer estate after the untimely death of Van Rensselaer's father. At an early age, Van Rensselaer was raised to succeed his father as lord of the manor.

To this end he was sent off to school, first to Princeton College. Since Princeton was near to troops and battles of the ongoing American Revolution, Van Rensselaer was later sent to Harvard College, from which he graduated in 1782. In 1783 he married Margarita Schuyler, the daughter of renowned Revolutionary War general Philip Schuyler and a distant cousin as Van Ressselaer was also a Schuyler through his Livingston roots.

 
 
Margarita died in 1801; a year later Van Rensselaer married Cornelia Paterson, daughter of former New Jersey Governor William Paterson.

On his 21st birthday, Van Rensselaer took possession of his family's prestigious estate, close to 1,200 square miles (3,072 km²) in size, named Rensselaerswyck, and began a long tenure as lord of his family's manor. Van Rensselaer desired to make money off of the land that was suddenly his, but was extremely reluctant to sell it off.

Instead, he granted tenants perpetual leases at moderate rates, which saved would-be landholders from having to pay all of their money up front. This meant that they could invest more in their operations, which led to increased productivity in the area. Over time, Van Rensselaer would become landlord over 3,000 tenants, and proved a lenient and benevolent landowner. In the First Census of the United States in 1790, it was noted that he owned fifteen slaves.

 
 

Stephen van Rensselaer
  Politics and the War of 1812
Van Rensselaer also spent a great deal of time in political pursuits; it is said that he did this more out of a sense of duty than of ambition. He was a member of the New York State Assembly from 1789 to 1791, and the New York State Senate from 1791 to 1796. He was elected as an honorary member of the New York Society of the Cincinnati in 1781.

He was Lieutenant Governor of New York from 1795 to 1801, elected with Governor John Jay. Van Rensselaer, over his time in politics, acquired a reputation as something of a reformer, voting in favor of extending suffrage and going against much of New York's upper class in doing so. He was one of the first to advocate for a canal from the Hudson River to the Great Lakes and was appointed to a commission to investigate the route in 1810.
In 1786, Van Rensselaer was made a major of the United States militia, which set him on a brief military career. Though the military was not Van Rensselaer's major pursuit, he was a militia major-general by 1801, a path which would come to a head during the War of 1812. Van Rensselaer, despite having held high rank in the militia for several decades, was, like most American militia officers at the time, virtually untrained and inexperienced. Clearly, Van Rensselaer was not a good choice to command an entire American army, but politics as much as military tactics dictated many of the military appointments of the day.

 
 
When war was declared on Great Britain in June 1812 Van Rensselaer was a leading opposition candidate for Governor of New York, and he made the incumbent Daniel D. Tompkins quite wary of running against him. Therefore, the Democratic-Republican Tompkins devised a way to remove van Rensselaer from the picture. He did this by offering him command of the United States Army of the Centre. If Van Rensselaer, who was, technically, a militia major-general, declined the post, then he would lose esteem in the eyes of the voters. If he accepted, he would be unable to run for Governor with the Federalists. If Van Rensselaer proved a poor general (which seemed likely), he would be discredited and his reputation would be damaged. However, even if Van Rensselaer proved a natural and was able to do well, he would not be able to run for Governor because the military powers-that-be would refuse to remove him. Tompkins' clever maneuvering had eliminated his main rival, but it had given short shrift to the war that had only just begun.

Van Rensselaer accepted the post, and with his decidedly more soldierly cousin Solomon as his aide-de-camp, attempted to safeguard the honor of his country in the war (despite the fact that, as a Federalist, he had been against the war in the first place). But the Army of the Centre consisted largely of soldiers like himself — untrained, inexperienced militiamen, who, under the Constitution, did not actually have to cross over into Canada to fight.
 
 
The British were in the process of fortifying the Queenston Heights that Van Rensselaer would have to attack, and his officers were itching for action despite their general's desire to delay. To make matters worse, Brigadier-General Alexander Smyth, Van Rensselaer's subordinate, had a large force of trained regulars that was theoretically under Van Rensselaer's overall command. However, Smyth, a regular soldier, continuously refused to obey van Rensselaer's commands or answer his summons. With his officers planning to try and force van Rensselaer out, the General saw that he had to act without Smyth against the fortified Queenston Heights position. It was a prodigious miscalculation.

On 13 October 1812, Van Rensselaer launched an attack on the British position that would evolve into the Battle of Queenston Heights, in which Van Rensselaer's forces were badly beaten by the British generals Isaac Brock and, after Brock's death, Roger Hale Sheaffe. Van Rensselaer's preparations and his plan of attack were clearly a major reason for the scale of the defeat. He was unable to secure the element of surprise, he did not procure enough boats for his men to cross easily, and he was even unable to supply his soldiers with sufficient ammunition. Despite significantly outnumbering the British in the early stages of the battle, the American soldiers, untried and untrained, sometimes refused to cross the river.

Van Rensselaer was not even able to coax the boatmen into going back over to rescue the doomed attack force. The defeat at Queenston Heights spelled the end to Van Rensselaer's military career, and after the battle, he resigned his post. Van Rensselaer's political ambitions were far from over, but, as Daniel Tompkins had hoped, Van Rensselaer would never become Governor of New York: He lost the gubernatorial election in April 1813 to Tompkins – Tompkins 43,324 votes, Van Rensselaer 39,718.

  Later life
After the war, Van Rensselaer still enjoyed a fair measure of popularity, and still had the energy to try to serve his country. He was on the canal commission for twenty-three years (1816 – 1839), fourteen of which he served as its president. In 1821, he was a member of the New York State Constitutional Convention, and two years later, he was elected by special election to the seat in the House of Representatives that his cousin Solomon had vacated. He served from February 27, 1822 to March 3, 1829, during the Seventeenth, Eighteenth, Nineteenth, and Twentieth Congresses; during the last three sessions, he was the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture. During this time he memorably cast the vote that put John Quincy Adams in the White House at the expense of Andrew Jackson.

After 1829, Van Rensselaer did not stand for re-election, and retired from political life to focus on educational and public welfare interests. He was regent of the University of the State of New York from 1819 to 1839.

Van Rensselaer was a Freemason, and served as Grand Master in the Grand Lodge of New York from 1825-1829.

Despite his active life, Van Rensselaer's most lasting contribution to the world was to establish, with Amos Eaton, the Rensselaer School (now known as Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, or RPI) "for the purpose of instructing persons, who may choose to apply themselves, in the application of science to the common purposes of life" in 1824. RPI has since become a well-respected American university.

Stephen van Rensselaer III died in 1839, aged 74. He was buried on his family plot, but was later reinterred in the Albany Rural Cemetery.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1839
 
 
Cervera Pascual
 

Pascual Cervera y Topete, (born Feb. 18, 1839, Medina Sidonia, Spain—died April 3, 1909, Puerto Real), Spanish admiral whose fleet was destroyed in battle off Cuba in the Spanish–American War (1898).

 

Pascual Cervera y Topete
  A graduate of a naval cadet school, he engaged in operations off Morocco and in the Sulu Islands and the Philippines. Afterward he was on the West Indian station during the early part of the first Cuban War (1868–78), returning to Spain in 1873 to serve on the Basque coast against the Carlists. Over the years he rose to flag rank and in 1892 became minister of marine in the cabinet of Praxedes Mateo Sagasta; he soon resigned, however, when he was unable to receive backing for naval reforms and added funds.

In April 1898, when the Spanish-American War broke out, Cervera was chosen to command a squadron composed of four cruisers and several destroyers stationed in the Cape Verde Islands. This ill-fated squadron started upon its reckless cruise across the ocean only after its commander had repeatedly sent dispatches warning both the minister of marine and the prime minister, Sagasta, that the ships were insufficiently provided with coal and ammunition. In compliance with the instructions of the government, Admiral Cervera made for the landlocked harbour of Santiago de Cuba, where he cooperated in the defense by landing some guns and a naval brigade.

In spite of his energetic representations, Cervera received an order from Madrid, dictated by political considerations, to sally forth.

 
 
The squadron met forces trebly superior to it and was totally destroyed. The admiral, three of his captains, and 1,800 sailors and marines were taken by the victors to Portsmouth, N.H. After the war Cervera and his captains were tried before the supreme naval and military court of Spain, which honourably acquitted them all. In 1901 he became vice admiral, in 1902 was appointed chief of staff of the Spanish navy, and in 1903 was made life senator.

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 
 
1838
 
 
First Anglo-Afghan War
 
The First Anglo-Afghan War (also known as Auckland's Folly) was fought between the British East India Company and Afghanistan from 1839 to 1842. It is famous for the killing of 4,500 British and Indian soldiers, plus 12,000 of their camp followers, by Afghan tribal fighters, but the British defeated the Afghans in the concluding engagement. It was one of the first major conflicts during the Great Game, the 19th century competition for power and influence in Asia between the United Kingdom and the Russian Empire.
 
Causes
In the 1830s the British Empire was firmly entrenched in India, but by 1837 Lord Palmerston and John Hobhouse, fearing the instability of Afghanistan, the Sindh, and the increasing power of the Sikh kingdom to the northwest, raised the spectre of a possible Russian invasion of India through Afghanistan. The Russian Empire was slowly extending its domain into Central Asia, and this was seen as an encroachment south that might prove fatal for the British Company rule in India. The British sent an envoy to Kabul to form an alliance with Afghanistan's Emir, Dost Mohammad Khan against Russia.

Dost Mohammad had recently lost Afghanistan's second capital of Peshawar to the Sikh Empire and wanted support to retake it, but the British were unwilling. When Governor-General of India Lord Auckland heard about the arrival of Russian envoy Yan Vitkevich in Kabul and the possibility that Dost Mohammad might turn to Russia for support, his political advisers exaggerated the threat. British fears of a Russian invasion of India took one step closer to becoming a reality when negotiations between the Afghans and Russians broke down in 1838. The Qajar dynasty of Persia, with Russian support, attempted the Siege of Herat (1838) but backed down when Britain threatened war.

Russia, wanting to increase its presence in South and Central Asia, had formed an alliance with Qajar Persia, which had territorial disputes with Afghanistan as Herat had been part of the Safavid Persia before 1709. Lord Auckland's plan was to drive away the besiegers and replace the ruler of Afghanistan with one who was pro-British, Shuja Shah Durrani.

The British denied that they were invading Afghanistan, claiming they were merely supporting its "legitimate" Shuja government "against foreign interference and factious opposition."

  British Indian invasion of Afghanistan
An army of 21,000 British and Indian troops under the command of John Keane, 1st Baron Keane (subsequently replaced by Sir Willoughby Cotton and then by William Elphinstone) set out from Punjab in December 1838.

With them was William Hay Macnaghten, the former chief secretary of the Calcutta government, who had been selected as Britain's chief representative to Kabul.

By late March 1839 the British forces had crossed the Bolan Pass, reached the Afghan city of Quetta, and begun their march to Kabul.

They advanced through rough terrain, across deserts and 4,000-metre-high mountain passes, but made good progress and finally set up camps at Kandahar on 25 April 1839.

On 22 July 1839, in a surprise attack, the British-led forces captured the fortress of Ghazni, which overlooks a plain leading eastward into the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.

The British troops blew up one city gate and marched into the city in a euphoric mood.

In taking this fortress, they suffered 200 men killed and wounded, while the Afghans lost nearly 500 men. 1,600 Afghans were taken prisoner with an unknown number wounded. Ghazni was well-supplied, which eased the further advance considerably.

Following this, the British achieved a decisive victory over Dost Mohammad's troops, led by one of his sons.

Dost Mohammad fled with his loyal followers across the passes to Bamyan, and ultimately to Bukhara.

In August 1839, after almost thirty years, Shuja was again enthroned in Kabul.

 
 
Qalat/Kalat
On November 13, 1839, while en route to India, the Bombay column of the British Indian Army attacked, as a form of reprisal, the Baluchi tribal fortress of Kalat, from where Baloch tribes had harassed and attacked British convoys during the move towards the Bolan Pass.
 
 

A British-Indian force attacks Ghazni fort during the First Afghan War, c.1839.
 
 
Occupation and rise of the Afghans
The majority of the British troops returned to India, leaving 8,000 in Afghanistan, but it soon became clear that Shuja's rule could only be maintained with the presence of a stronger British force. The Afghans resented the British presence and the rule of Shah Shuja. As the occupation dragged on, William Hay Macnaghten allowed his soldiers to bring their families to Afghanistan to improve morale; this further infuriated the Afghans, as it appeared the British were setting up a permanent occupation[citation needed]. Dost Mohammad unsuccessfully attacked the British and their Afghan protégé, and subsequently surrendered and was exiled to India in late 1840.

By this time, the British had vacated the fortress of Bala Hissar and relocated to a cantonment built to the northeast of Kabul. The chosen location was indefensible, being low and swampy with hills on every side. To make matters worse, the cantonment was too large for the number of troops camped in it and had a defensive perimeter almost two miles long. In addition, the stores and supplies were in a separate fort, 300 yards from the main cantonment.

Between April and October 1841, disaffected Afghan tribes were flocking to support Dost Mohammad's son, Akbar Khan, in Bamiyan and other areas north of the Hindu Kush mountains, organised into an effective resistance by chiefs such as Mir Masjidi Khan and others. In November 1841, a senior British officer, Sir Alexander 'Sekundar' Burnes, and his aides were killed by a mob in Kabul. The British forces took no action in response, which encouraged further revolt.
The British situation soon deteriorated when Afghans stormed the poorly defended supply fort inside Kabul on November 9.

In the following weeks the British commanders tried to negotiate with Akbar Khan. Macnaghten secretly offered to make Akbar Afghanistan's vizier in exchange for allowing the British to stay, while simultaneously disbursing large sums of money to have him assassinated, which was reported to Akbar Khan.[citation needed] A meeting for direct negotiations between Macnaghten and Akbar was held near the cantonment on 23 December, but Macnaghten and the three officers accompanying him were seized and slain by Akbar Khan. Macnaghten's body was dragged through the streets of Kabul and displayed in the bazaar. Elphinstone had partly lost command of his troops already and his authority was badly damaged.

  Destruction of Elphinstone's army
On 1 January 1842, following some unusual thinking by Elphinstone, which may have had something to do with the poor defensibility of the cantonment, an agreement was reached that provided for the safe exodus of the British garrison and its dependants from Afghanistan. Five days later, the withdrawal began. The departing British contingent numbered around 16,500, of which about 4,500 were military personnel, and over 12,000 were camp followers. The military force consisted mostly of Indian units and one British battalion, 44th Regiment of Foot.

They were attacked by Ghilzai warriors as they struggled through the snowbound passes. The evacuees were killed in huge numbers as they made their way down the 30 miles (48 km) of treacherous gorges and passes lying along the Kabul River between Kabul and Gandamak, and were massacred at the Gandamak pass before a survivor reached the besieged garrison at Jalalabad. The force had been reduced to fewer than forty men by a withdrawal from Kabul that had become, towards the end, a running battle through two feet of snow. The ground was frozen, the men had no shelter and had little food for weeks. Of the weapons remaining to the survivors, there were approximately a dozen working muskets, the officers' pistols and a few swords. The remnants of the 44th were all killed except Captain James Souter, Sergeant Fair and seven soldiers who were taken prisoner. The only soldier to reach Jalalabad was Dr. William Brydon.

Reprisals
At the same time as the attacks on the garrison at Kabul, Afghan forces beleaguered the other British contingents in Afghanistan. These were at Kandahar (where the largest British force in the country had been stationed), Jalalabad (held by a force which had been sent from Kabul in October 1841 as the first stage of a planned withdrawal) and Ghazni. Ghazni was stormed, but the other garrisons held out until relief forces arrived from India, in spring 1842. Akbar Khan was defeated near Jalalabad and plans were laid for the recapture of Kabul and the restoration of British hegemony.

However, Lord Auckland had suffered a stroke and had been replaced as governor-general by Lord Ellenborough, who was under instructions to bring the war to an end following a change of government in Britain. Ellenborough ordered the forces at Kandahar and Jalalabad to leave Afghanistan after inflicting reprisals and securing the release of prisoners taken during the retreat from Kabul.

 
 
In August 1842 General Nott advanced from Kandahar, pillaging the countryside and seizing Ghazni, whose fortifications he demolished. Meanwhile, General Pollock, who had taken command of a demoralized force in Peshawar used it to clear the Khyber Pass to arrive at Jalalabad, where General Sales had already lifted the siege. From Jalalabad, General Pollock inflicted a further crushing defeat on Akbar Khan. The combined British forces defeated all opposition before taking Kabul in September. A month later, having rescued the prisoners and demolished the city's main bazaar as an act of retaliation for the destruction of Elphinstone's column, they withdrew from Afghanistan through the Khyber Pass. Dost Muhammad was released and re-established his authority in Kabul. He died on June 9, 1863.
 
 

Afghan forces attacking retreating Indian troops
 
 
Legacy
Many voices in Britain, from Lord Aberdeen[ to Benjamin Disraeli, had criticized the war as rash and insensate. The perceived threat from Russia was vastly exaggerated, given the distances, the almost impassible mountain barriers, and logistical problems that an invasion would have to solve. In the three decades after the First Anglo-Afghan War, the Russians did advance steadily southward towards Afghanistan. In 1842 the Russian border was on the other side of the Aral Sea from Afghanistan; but five years later the tsar's outposts had moved to the lower reaches of the Amu Darya. By 1865 Tashkent had been formally annexed, as was Samarkand three years later. A peace treaty in 1873 with Amir Alim Khan of the Manghit Dynasty, the ruler of Bukhara, virtually stripped him of his independence. Russian control then extended as far as the northern bank of the Amu Darya.

In 1878, the British invaded again, beginning the Second Anglo-Afghan War.

Lady Butler's famous painting of Dr. William Brydon, initially thought to be the sole survivor, gasping his way to the British outpost in Jalalabad, helped make Afghanistan's reputation as a graveyard for foreign armies and became one of the great epics of empire.

In 1843 British army chaplain G.R. Gleig wrote a memoir of the disastrous (First) Anglo-Afghan War, of which he was one of the very few survivors. He wrote that it was

a war begun for no wise purpose, carried on with a strange mixture of rashness and timidity, brought to a close after suffering and disaster, without much glory attached either to the government which directed, or the great body of troops which waged it. Not one benefit, political or military, was acquired with this war. Our eventual evacuation of the country resembled the retreat of an army defeated”.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
Anglo-Afghan Wars
 
Anglo-Afghan Wars, also called Afghan Wars, three conflicts (1839–42; 1878–80; 1919) in which Great Britain, from its base in India, sought to extend its control over neighbouring Afghanistan and to oppose Russian influence there.
 
First Anglo-Afghan War
Following a protracted civil war that began in 1816, the Bārakzay clan became the ruling dynasty of Afghanistan, with its most powerful member, Dōst Moḥammad Khan, ascending the throne in 1826. With Great Britain and Russia maneuvering for influence in Afghanistan, Dōst Moḥammad was forced to balance his country between the two great powers. The British, feeling that Dōst Moḥammad was either hostile to them or unable to resist Russian penetration, moved to take a direct role in Afghan affairs. First they negotiated unsatisfactorily with Dōst Moḥammad, and then an invasion of Afghanistan was ordered by the governor-general of India, Lord Auckland, with the object of restoring exiled Afghan ruler Shah Shojāʿ to the throne.

In April 1839, after suffering great privations, the British army entered Kandahār, and Shojāʿ was then crowned shah. Ghazna (now Ghaznī) was captured the following July, and in August Shojāʿ was installed at Kabul. The Afghans, however, would tolerate neither a foreign occupation nor a king imposed on them by a foreign power, and insurrections broke out. Dōst Moḥammad—who had escaped first to Balkh and then to Bukhara, where he was arrested—escaped from prison and returned to Afghanistan to lead his partisans against the British. In a battle at Parwan on November 2, 1840, Dōst Moḥammad had the upper hand, but the next day he surrendered to the British in Kabul. He was deported to India with most of his family.

Outbreaks continued throughout the country, and the British eventually found their position untenable. Terms for their withdrawal were discussed with Akbar Khan, Dōst Moḥammad’s son, but Sir William Hay Macnaghten, the British political agent, was killed during a parlay with the Afghans. On January 6, 1842, some 4,500 British and Indian troops, with 12,000 camp followers, marched out of Kabul. Bands of Afghans swarmed around them, and the retreat ended in a bloodbath. Shojāʿ was killed after the British left Kabul. Although in the summer of that same year British forces reoccupied Kabul, the new governor-general of India, Lord Ellenborough, decided on the evacuation of Afghanistan, and in 1843 Dōst Moḥammad returned to Kabul and was restored to the throne.

  Second Anglo-Afghan War
In November 1875 British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli appointed Lord Lytton governor-general of India. Lytton during his service there was concerned primarily with India’s relations with Afghanistan. At the time of his appointment, Russian influence was growing in Afghanistan, and Lytton had orders to counteract it or to secure a strong frontier by force.

Soon after Lytton arrived in India, he notified Shīr ʿAlī Khan—the third son of Dōst Moḥammad, who succeeded to the throne upon his father’s death—that he was sending a “mission” to Kabul. When the emir refused Lytton permission to enter Afghanistan, Lytton bellicosely declaimed that Afghanistan was but “an earthen pipkin between two metal pots.”

He did not, however, take action against the kingdom until 1878, when Russia’s General Stolyetov was admitted to Kabul while Lytton’s envoy, Sir Neville Chamberlain, was turned back at the border by Afghan troops.

Viceroy Lytton decided to crush his neighbouring “pipkin” and launched the Second Anglo-Afghan War on November 21, 1878, with a British invasion. Shīr ʿAlī fled his capital and country, dying in exile early in 1879.

The British army occupied Kabul, as it had in the first war, and a treaty signed at Gandamak (Gandomak) on May 26, 1879, recognized Shīr ʿAlī’s son, Yaʿqūb Khan, as emir. He subsequently agreed to receive a permanent British embassy at Kabul. In addition, he agreed to conduct his foreign relations with other states in accordance “with the wishes and advice” of the British government.

This British triumph was short-lived, however. On September 3, 1879, the British envoy, Sir Louis Cavagnari, and his escort were murdered in Kabul. British forces were again dispatched, and before the end of October they occupied Kabul.

Yaʿqūb abdicated the throne, which remained vacant until July 1880, when ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, nephew of Shīr ʿAlī, became emir. During the reign of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, the boundaries of modern Afghanistan were drawn by the British and the Russians.

 
 

Third Anglo-Afghan War
With the outbreak of World War I (1914–18), there was in Afghanistan widespread support of Ottoman Turkey against the British. However, the ruler of Afghanistan at the time, Ḥabībullāh Khan, was able to maintain a policy of noninvolvement throughout the war. When Ḥabībullāh was assassinated on February 20, 1919, by persons associated with the anti-British movement, his son Amānullāh Khan took possession of the throne. At that time Britain still exercised an important influence on Afghan affairs. In his coronation address Amānullāh declared total independence from Great Britain. This declaration launched the inconclusive Third Anglo-Afghan War in May 1919.

Fighting was confined to a series of skirmishes between an ineffective Afghan army and a British Indian army exhausted from the heavy demands of World War I. Nevertheless, the monthlong war gained the Afghans the conduct of their own foreign affairs. A peace treaty recognizing the independence of Afghanistan was signed at Rawalpindi (now in Pakistan) on August 8, 1919, and was amended in 1921. Before signing the final document with the British, the Afghans concluded a treaty of friendship with the new Bolshevik regime in the Soviet Union. Afghanistan thereby became one of the first states to recognize the Soviet government, and a “special relationship” evolved between the two governments that lasted until December 1979, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.

Encyclopædia Britannica

 
 
 

 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1838 Part IV NEXT-1839 Part II