CHAPTER XIII.
THE BRITISH ISLANDS AND COLONIES.
We have now gone, first through that great mass of European lands which formed part either of the Eastern or of the Western Empire, and then through those more distant, and mainly peninsular, lands which so largely escaped the Imperial dominion. ♦The British islands.♦ We end by leaving the mainland of Europe, by leaving the world of either Empire, for that great island, or rather group of islands, which for ages was looked on as forming a world of its own.[87] ♦Late Roman conquest and early loss of Britain.♦ In Western Europe Britain was the last land to be won, and the first to be lost, in the days of the elder Empire. And, after all, Britain itself was only partly won, while the conquest of Ireland was never tried at all. ♦Independence of Britain in the later Empire.♦ After the English Conquest, Britain had less to do with the revived Western Empire than any Western land except Norway. The momentary dealings of Charles the Great with Scotland and Northumberland, the doubtful and precarious homage done by Richard the First to Henry the Sixth, are the only exceptions, even in form, to its complete independence on the continental Empire. ♦Britain another world and another Empire.♦ The doctrine was that Britain, the other world, formed an Empire of its own. That Empire, being an island, was secured against the constant fluctuations of its external boundary to which continental states lie open. ♦Changes within Britain.♦ For several centuries the boundaries, both of the Celtic and Teutonic occupants and of the Teutonic kingdoms among themselves, were always changing. But these changes hardly affect European history, which is concerned only with the broad general results—with the establishment of the Teutonic settlers in the island—with the union of those settlers in one kingdom under the West-Saxon house—with the extension of the imperial power of the West-Saxon kings over the whole island of Britain. ♦Slight change in the internal divisions of England.♦ And, from the eleventh century onwards, there has been singularly little change of boundaries within the island. The boundaries of England towards Scotland and Wales changed much less than might have been looked for during ages of such endless warfare. Even the lesser divisions within the English kingdom have been singularly lasting. The land, as a whole, has never been mapped out afresh since the tenth century. While a map of France or Germany in the eleventh century, or even in the eighteenth, is useless for immediate practical objects, a map of England in the days of Domesday practically differs not at all from a map of England now. The only changes of any moment, and they are neither many nor great, are in the shires on the Welsh and Scottish borders.
Thus the historical geography of the isle of Britain comes to little more than a record of these border changes, down to the incorporation of England, Scotland, and Wales into a single kingdom. In the other great island of Ireland there is little to do except to trace how the boundary of English conquest advanced and fell back, a matter after all of no great European concern. The history of the smaller outlying islands, from Scandinavian Shetland to the insular Normandy, has really more to do with the general history of Europe. The dominion of the English kings on the continent is of the highest European moment, but, from its geographical side, it is Gaul and not Britain which it affects. ♦English settlements beyond sea.♦ The really great geographical phænomenon of English history is that which it shares with Spain and Portugal, and in which it surpasses both. This is the vast extent of outlying English dominion and settlement, partly in Europe, but far more largely in the distant lands of Asia, Africa, America, and Australia. But it is not merely that England has become a great power in all quarters of the world; England has been, like Portugal, but on a far greater scale, a planter of nations. ♦English nations.♦ One group of her settlements has grown into one of the great powers of the world, into a third England beyond the Ocean, as far surpassing our insular England in geographical extent as our insular England surpasses the first England of all in the marchland of Germany and Denmark. The mere barbaric dominion of England concerns our present survey but little; but the historical geography of Europe is deeply concerned in the extension of England and of Europe in lands beyond the Western and the Southern Ocean.
In tracing out the little that we have to say of the geography of Britain itself, it will be well to begin with that northern part of the island where changes have been both more numerous and more important than they have been in England.
§ 1. The Kingdom of Scotland.
In Northern Britain, as in some other parts of
Europe, we see a land which has taken its name from
a people to which it does not owe its historic importance.
Scotland has won for itself a position in Britain
and in Europe altogether out of proportion to its size
and population. But it has not done this by virtue of
its strictly Scottish element.
♦Greatness
of Scotland
due to its
English
element.♦
The Irish settlers who
first brought the Scottish name into Britain[88] could
never have made Scotland what it really became. What
founded the greatness of the Scottish kingdom was the
fact that part of England gradually took the name of
Scotland and its inhabitants took the name of Scots.
The case is as when the Duke of Savoy and Genoa
and Prince of Piedmont took his highest title from that
Sardinian kingdom which was the least valuable part
of his dominions. It is as when the ruler of a mighty
German realm calls himself king of the small duchy of
Prussia and its extinct people.
♦Two
English
kingdoms
in Britain.♦
The truth is that, for
more than five hundred years, there were two English
kingdoms in Britain, each of which had a troublesome
Celtic background which formed its chief difficulty.
One English king reigned at Winchester or London,
and had his difficulties in Wales and afterwards in
Ireland. Another English king reigned at Dunfermline
or Stirling, and had his difficulties in the true
Scotland.
♦Extension
of the Scottish
name.♦
But the southern kingdom, ruled by kings
of native English or of foreign descent, but never by
kings of British or Irish descent,[89] always kept the
English name, while the northern kingdom, ruled by
kings of Scottish descent, adopted the Scottish name.
The English subjects of the King of Scots gradually
took the Scottish name to themselves.
♦Analogy of
Switzerland.
Threefold
elements in
the later
Scotland.♦
As the present
Swiss nation is made up of parts of the German, Burgundian,
and Italian nations which have detached
themselves from their several main bodies, so the
present Scottish nation is made up of parts of the
English, Irish, and British nations which have detached
themselves from their several main bodies. But in
both cases it is the Teutonic element which forms the
life and strength of the nation, the kernel to which the
other elements have attached themselves.
♦True position
of the
Kings of
Scots.♦
We cannot
read the mediæval history of Britain aright, unless we
remember that the King of Scots was in truth the
English king of Teutonic Lothian and Teutonized
Fife.
♦Enmity of
the true
Scots.♦
The people from whom he took his title were at
most his unwilling subjects; they were often his open
enemies, the allies of his southern rival.
The modern kingdom of Scotland was made up of English Lothian, British Strathclyde, and Irish Scotland. The oldest Scotland is Ireland, whence the Scottish name, long since forgotten in Ireland itself, came into Britain and there spread itself. These three elements stand out plainly. ♦The Picts.♦ But the Scottish or Irish element swallowed up another, that of the Picts, of whom there can be no doubt that they were Celts, like the Scots and Britons, but about whom it may be doubted whether their kindred was nearer to the Scots or to the Britons. For our purpose the question is of little moment. The Picts, as far as geography is concerned, either vanished or became Scots.
Early in the ninth century the land north of the
firths of Clyde and Forth was still mainly Pictish. The
second Scotland (the first Scotland in Britain) had not
spread far beyond the original Irish settlement in the
south-west.
♦Union of
Picts and
Scots,
843.
The Celtic
Scotland.♦
The union of Picts and Scots under a
Scottish dynasty created the larger Scotland, the true
Celtic Scotland, taking in all the land north of the
firths, except where Scandinavian settlers occupied the
extreme north.
♦Bernicia.♦
South of the firths, English Bernicia,
sometimes a separate kingdom, sometimes part of Northumberland,
stretched to the firth of Forth, with Edinburgh
as a border fortress.
♦Strathclyde
or
Cumberland.♦
To the west of Bernicia,
south and east of the firth of Clyde, lay the British kingdom
of Cumberland or Strathclyde, with Alcluyd or
Dumbarton as its border fortress.
♦Galloway.♦
To the south-west
again lay the outlying Pictish land of Galloway, which
long kept up a separate being. Parts of Bernicia, parts
of Strathclyde, were one day to join with the true
Scotland to make up the later Scottish kingdom. As
yet the true Scotland was a foreign and hostile land
alike to Bernicia and to Strathclyde.
In the next century we see the Scottish power cut short to the north and west, but advancing towards the south and east. ♦Caithness.♦ The Northmen have settled in the northern and western islands, in those parts of the mainland to which they gave the names of Caithness and Sutherland, and even in the first Scottish land in the west. ♦Scotland acknowledges the English supremacy, 924.♦ Scotland itself has also admitted the external supremacy of the English overlord. ♦Taking of Edinburgh, c. 954.♦ On the other hand, the Scots have pressed within the English border, and have occupied Edinburgh, the border fortress of England. ♦Cession of Lothian, 966 or 1018.♦ Later in the same century or early in the next, the Kings of Scots received Northern Bernicia, the land of Lothian, as an English earldom. On the other side, Strathclyde or Cumberland—its southern boundary is very uncertain—had become in a manner united to England and Scotland at once. ♦Grant of Cumberland, 945.♦ An English conquest, it was granted in fief to the King of Scots, and was commonly held as an appanage by Scottish princes.[90] ♦Different tenures of the dominion of the King of Scots.♦ Thus the King of Scots held three dominions on three different tenures. Scotland was a kingdom under a merely external English supremacy; Cumberland was a territorial fief of England; Lothian was an earldom within the English kingdom. ♦The distinctions forgotten in later controversies.♦ In after times these distinctions were forgotten, and the question now was whether the dominions of the King of Scots, as a whole, were or were not a fief of England. When the question took this shape, the English king claimed more than his ancient rights over Scotland, less than his ancient rights over Lothian.
The acquisition of Lothian made the Scottish
kingdom English. Lothian remained English; Cumberland
and the eastern side of Scotland itself, the
Lowlands north of the firth of Forth, became practically
English also. The Scottish kings became English
princes, whose strength lay in the English part of their
dominions.
♦Fate of
southern
Cumberland.♦
But late in the eleventh century it would
seem that the southern part of Cumberland had
become a separate principality ruled by a refugee
Northumbrian prince under Scottish supremacy.
♦Carlisle
and its district
added
to England
by William
Rufus,
1092.♦
This
territory, the city of Carlisle and its immediate district,
the old diocese of Carlisle, was added to England
by William Rufus.
♦Cumberland
and
Northumberland
granted to
David,
1136.♦
On the other hand, in the troubles
of Stephen’s reign, the king of Scots received as
English earldoms, Cumberland—in a somewhat wider
sense—and Northumberland in the modern sense, the
land from the Tweed to the Tyne. Had these earldoms
been kept by the Scottish kings, they would doubtless
have become Scottish lands in the same sense in
which Lothian did; that is, they would have become
parts of the northern English kingdom.
♦Recovered
by England,
1157.
The boundary
permanent,
except as
to Berwick.♦
But these
lands were won back by Henry the Second; and the
boundary has since remained as it was then fixed, save
that the town of Berwick fluctuated according to the
accidents of war between one kingdom and the other.
But though the boundaries of the kingdoms were
fixed, their relations were not.
♦1292.♦
Scotland in the modern
sense—that is, Scotland in the older sense, Lothian,
and Strathclyde—was for a moment held strictly as a
fief of England.
♦1296.♦
It was then for another moment
incorporated with England.
♦1327.♦
It was then acknowledged
as an independent kingdom.
♦1333.♦
It again fell under
vassalage for a moment, and again won its independence.
♦1603.♦
Then, at the beginning of the seventeenth
century, England and Scotland, as distinct, independent,
and equal kingdoms, passed under a common king.
♦1649.♦
They were separated again for a moment when Scotland
acknowledged a king whom England rejected.
♦1652.♦
For
another moment Scotland was incorporated with an
English commonwealth.
♦1660.
1707.♦
Again Scotland and England
became independent kingdoms under a common king,
till the two kingdoms were, by common consent, joined
in the one kingdom of Great Britain.
Meanwhile the Scottish kings had, like those of England somewhat earlier, to struggle against Scandinavian invaders. ♦Scandinavian advance, 1014-1064.♦ The settlements of the Northmen advanced, and for some years in the eleventh century they took in Moray at one end and Galloway at the other. But it was only in the extreme north and in the northern islands that the land really became Scandinavian. ♦The Sudereys, and Man.♦ In the Sudereys or Hebrides—the southern islands as distinguished from Orkney and Shetland—and in Man, the Celtic speech has survived. ♦Caithness submits, 1203.♦ Caithness was brought under Scottish supremacy early in the thirteenth century. ♦Galloway incorporated, 1235.♦ Galloway was incorporated. ♦Sudereys and Man submit, 1263-1266.♦ Later again, after the battle of Largs, the Sudereys and Man passed under Scottish supremacy. But the authority of the Scottish crown in the islands was for a long time very precarious. ♦History of Man.♦ Man, the most central of the British isles, lying at a nearly equal distance from England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales, remained a separate kingdom, sometimes under Scottish, sometimes under English, superiority. Granted to English subjects, the kingdom sank to a lordship. ♦1764-1826.♦ The lordship was united to the crown of Great Britain, and Man, like the Norman islands, remains a distinct possession, forming no part of the United Kingdom. ♦Orkney. 1469.♦ The earldom of Orkney meanwhile remained a Norwegian dependency till it was pledged to the Scottish crown. Since then it has silently become part, first of the kingdom of Scotland, and then of the kingdom of Great Britain.
§ 2. The Kingdom of England.
The changes of boundary between England and Wales begin, as far as we are concerned with them, with the great Welsh campaign of Harold. ♦Enlargement of the border shires.♦ All the border shires, Cheshire, Shropshire, Herefordshire, Gloucestershire, seem now to have been enlarged; the English border stretched to the Conway in the north, and to the Usk in the south. ♦The Marches.♦ But part of this territory seems to have been recovered by the Welsh princes, while part passed into the great march district of England and Wales, ruled by the Lords Marchers. ♦Conquest of South Wales, 1070-1121.♦ The gradual conquest of South Wales began under the Conqueror and went on under his sons; but it was more largely the work of private adventurers than of the kings themselves. The lands of Morganwg, Dyfed, Ceredigion, and Breheiniog, answering nearly to the modern South Wales, were gradually subdued. ♦Flemish settlement in Pembrokeshire, 1111.♦ In some districts, especially in the southern part of the present Pembrokeshire, the Britons were actually driven out, and the land was settled by Flemish colonists, the latest of the Teutonic settlements in Britain. ♦Character of the conquest of South Wales.♦ Elsewhere Norman lords, with a Norman, English, and Flemish following, held the towns and the more level country, while the Welsh kept on a half independence in the mountains. ♦Princes of North Wales.♦ Meanwhile in North Wales native princes—Princes of Aberffraw and Lords of Snowdon—still ruled, as vassals of the English king, till the conquest by Edward the First. ♦Cessions to England, 1277.♦ In the first stage the vassal prince was compelled again to cede to his overlord the territory east of the Conway. ♦Conquest of North Wales, 1282.♦ Six years later followed the complete conquest. But complete incorporation with England did not at once follow. ♦The Principality of Wales.♦ Wales, North and South, remained a separate dominion, giving the princely title to the eldest son of the English king.[91] Some shires were formed; some new towns were founded; the border districts remained under the anomalous jurisdiction of the Marchers. ♦Full incorporation. 1535.♦ The full incorporation of the principality and its marches dates from Henry the Eighth. Thirteen new counties were formed, and some districts were added or restored to the border shires of England. One of the new counties, Monmouthshire, was, under Charles the Second, added to an English circuit, and it has since been reckoned as an English county.
Setting aside these new creations, all the existing shires of England were in being at the time of the Norman Conquest, save those of Lancaster, Cumberland, Westmoreland, and Rutland. The boundaries were not always exactly the same as at present; but the differences are commonly slight and of mere local interest. ♦Two classes of shires.♦ The shires, as they stood at the Conquest, were of two classes. ♦Ancient kingdoms and principalities.♦ Some were old kingdoms or principalities, which still kept their names and boundaries as shires. Such were the kingdoms of Kent, Sussex, and Essex, and the East-Anglian, West-Saxon, and Northumbrian shires. Most of these keep old local or tribal names; a few only are called from a town. ♦Mercian shires mapped out in the tenth century.♦ In Mercia on the other hand, the shires seem to have been mapped out afresh when the land was won back from the Danes. They are called after towns, and the town which gives the name commonly lies central to the district, and remains the chief town of the shire, except when it has been outstripped by some other in modern times.[92] Both classes of shires survived the Conquest, and both have gone on till now with very slight changes.
On the Welsh border, all the shires, for reasons already given, stretch further west in Domesday than they do now. ♦Cumberland and Westmoreland.♦ On the Scottish border Cumberland and Westmoreland were made out of the Cumbrian conquest of William Rufus, enlarged by districts which in Domesday appear as part of Yorkshire. ♦Lancashire.♦ Lancashire was made up of lands taken from Yorkshire and Cheshire, the Ribble forming the older boundary of those shires. The older divisions are marked by the boundaries of the dioceses of York, Carlisle, and Lichfield or Chester, as they stood down to the changes under Henry the Eighth. ♦Rutland.♦ In central England the only change is the formation of the small shire of Rutland out of the Domesday district of Rutland (which, oddly enough, appears as an appendage to Nottinghamshire), enlarged by a small part of what was then Northamptonshire.
§ 3. Ireland.
The second great island of the British group, Ireland,
the original Scotia, has had less to do with the general
history of the world than any other part of Western
Europe. Its ancient divisions have lived on from the
earliest times.
♦The five
provinces.♦
The names of its five great provinces,
Ulster, Meath, Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, are all
in familiar use, though Meath has sunk from its old
rank alongside of the other four. The Celtic inhabitants
of the island remained independent of foreign
powers till the days of Scandinavian settlement. Just
like the English kingdoms in Britain, the great divisions
of Ireland were sometimes independent, sometimes
united under the supremacy of a head king.
♦Settlement
of the
Ostmen.♦
Gradually
the Northmen, called in Ireland Ostmen, settled on
the eastern coast, and held the chief ports, as Dublin,
Waterford, Wexford, two of which names bear witness to
Teutonic occupation.
♦Irish victory
at
Clontarf.
1012.♦
The great Irish victory at Clontarf
weakened, but did not destroy, the Scandinavian power.
♦Increasing
connexion
with
England.♦
And, from the latter half of the tenth century onward,
the eastern coast of Ireland shows a growing connexion
with England. Any actual English supremacy seems
doubtful; but both commercial and ecclesiastical ties became
closer during the eleventh and twelfth centuries.
♦The
English
conquest,
1169-1652.♦
This led to the actual English conquest of Ireland,
begun under Henry the Second, but really finished only
by Cromwell.
♦1171.
Fluctuations
of
the Pale.♦
All Ireland admitted for a moment the
supremacy of Henry; but, till the sixteenth century,
the actual English dominion, called the Pale, with
Dublin for its centre, was always fluctuating, and for a
while it fell back rather than advanced.
In the early days of the conquest Ireland is spoken
of as a kingdom; but the title soon went out of use.
The original plan seems to have been that Ireland, like
Wales afterwards, should form an appanage for a son
of the English King. It became instead, so far as it
was an English possession at all, a simple dependency
of England, from which the King took the title of Lord
of Ireland.
♦1542.
Relations
of Ireland
to England.♦
Henry the Eighth took the title of King
of Ireland; but the kingdom remained a mere dependency,
attached to the crown, first of England and then
of Great Britain.
♦1652.
1689.♦
This state of things was diversified
by a short time of complete incorporation under the
Commonwealth, and a short time of independence
under James the Second.
♦1782-1800.♦
But for the last eighteen
years of the last century, Ireland was formally acknowledged
as an independent kingdom, connected with
Great Britain only by the tie of a common king.
♦1801.♦
Since
that time it has formed an integral part of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
§ 4. Outlying European Possessions of England.
Ireland, the sister island of Britain, has thus been united with Britain into a single kingdom. Man, lying between the two, remains a distinct dependency. ♦The Norman Islands. 1205.♦ This last is also still the position of that part of the Norman duchy which clave to its own dukes, which never became French, but always remained Norman. It might be a question what was the exact position of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, Sark, and their smaller neighbours, when the English kings took the titles of the French kingdom and actually held the Norman duchy. Practically the islands have, during all changes, remained attached to the English crown; but they have never been incorporated with the kingdom. ♦Other European dependencies, Aquitaine, &c.♦ Other more distant European lands have been, some still are, in the same position. Such were Aquitaine, Ponthieu, and Calais, as fixed by the Peace of Bretigny. Since the loss of Aquitaine, England has had no considerable continental dominion in Europe, but she has from time to time held several islands and detached points. ♦Outposts and islands.♦ Such are Calais, Boulogne, Dunkirk, Gibraltar, Minorca, Malta, Heligoland, all of which have been spoken of in their natural geographical places. To these we may add Tangier, which has more in common with the possession of Gibraltar and Minorca than with the English settlements in the further parts of Africa. Of these points, Gibraltar, Heligoland, and Malta, are still held by England. ♦Greek possessions, Ionian Islands, 1814-1864.♦ The virtual English possession of the Ionian Islands made England for a while a sharer in the fragments of the Eastern Roman Empire. ♦Cyprus, 1878.♦ And later still she has again put on the same character by the occupation, on whatever terms, of another Greek and Imperial land, the island of Cyprus.
§ 5. The American Colonies of England.
England, like France and Holland, became a colonizing power by choice. Extension over barbarian lands was not a necessity, as in the case of Russia, nor did it spring naturally out of earlier circumstances, as in the case of Portugal. But the colonizing enterprise of England has done a greater work than the colonizing enterprise of any other European power. The greatest colony of England—for in a worthier use of language the word colony would imply independence rather than dependence[93]—is that great Confederation which is to us what Syracuse was to Corinth, what Milêtos was to Athens, what Gades and Carthage were to the cities of the older Canaan. ♦The United States.♦ The United States of America, a vaster England beyond the Ocean, an European power, on a level with the greatest European powers, planted beyond the bounds of Europe, form the great work of English and European enterprise in non-European lands.
The settlements which grew into the United States
were not the first English possessions in North America,
but they were the first which really deserved to be
called colonies. The first discoveries of all led only
to the establishment of the Newfoundland fisheries.
♦Attempts
of Raleigh,
1585-1587.♦
Raleigh’s attempts at real colonization ninety years
later only pointed the way to something more lasting.
♦The Thirteen
Colonies.♦
In the seventeenth century began the planting of the
thirteen settlements which won their independence.
Of these the earliest and the latest, the most southern
and the most northern, began through English colonization
in the strictest sense.
♦Virginia,
1607.♦
First came Virginia.
♦The New
England
States,
1620-1638.♦
Then
followed the Puritan colonization much further to the
north which founded the New England states. The
shiftings among these settlements, from Plymouth to
Maine, the unions, the divisions, the colonies of colonies—the
Epidamnos and the Sinôpê of the New World—the
various and varying relations between the different
settlements, read like a piece of old Greek or of Swiss
history.[94]
♦1629-1692.♦
By the end of the seventeenth century they
had arranged themselves into four separate colonies.
♦1820.♦
These were Massachusetts, formed by the union of Massachusetts
and Plymouth, with its northern dependency
of Maine, which became a separate State long after the
Revolution; New Hampshire, annexed by Massachusetts
and after a while separated from it; Connecticut, formed
by the union of Connecticut and Newhaven; Rhode Island,
formed by the union of Rhode Island and Providence.
These New England States form a distinct geographical
group, with a marked political and religious character
of their own.
♦The
Southern
Colonies.♦
Meanwhile, at some distance to the
south, around Virginia as their centre, grew up another
group of colonies, with a history and character in many
ways unlike those of New England.
♦Maryland.
1646.
Carolina.
1650-1663.
Divided,
1720.♦
To the north
of Virginia arose the proprietary colony of Maryland;
to the south arose Carolina, afterwards divided into
North and South. South Carolina for a long while
marked the end of English settlement to the south, as
Maine did to the north.
English Conquest of New Netherlands, 1664.♦
But between these two groups of English colonies in the strictest sense lay a region in which English settlement had to take the form of conquest from another European power. Earlier than any English settlement except Virginia, the great colony of the United Provinces had arisen on Long Island and the neighbouring mainland. ♦New Netherlands, 1614.♦ It bore the name of New Netherlands, with its capital of New Amsterdam. ♦New Sweden, 1658.♦ To the south, on the shores of Delaware Bay, the other great power of the seventeenth century founded the colony of New Sweden. Three European nations, closely allied in race, speech, and creed, were thus for a while established side by side on the eastern coasts of America. ♦Union of New Sweden with New Netherlands, 1655.♦ But the three settlements were fated to merge together, and that by force of arms. A local war added New Sweden to New Netherlands; a war between England and the United Provinces gave New Netherlands to England. ♦New York.♦ New Amsterdam became New York, and gave its name to the colony which was to become the greatest State of the Union. ♦1674.♦ Ten years later, in the next war between the two colonizing powers, the new English possession was lost and won again.
Meanwhile the gap which was still left began to be
filled up by other English settlements.
♦The
Jerseys.
1665.
1702.♦
East and West
Jersey began as two distinct colonies, which were afterwards
united into one.
♦Pennsylvania,
1682.
Delaware,
1703.♦
The great colony of Pennsylvania
next arose, from which the small one of Delaware
was parted off twenty years later. Pennsylvania was
thus the last of the original settlements of the seventeenth
century, which in the space of nearly eighty
years had been formed fast after one another.
♦Georgia,
1733.♦
Fifty
years after the work of the benevolent Penn came the
work of the no less benevolent Oglethorpe; Georgia,
to the south of all, now filled up the tale of the famous
Thirteen, the fitting number, it would seem, for a
Federal power, whether in the Old World or in the
New.
By the Peace of Paris the Thirteen Colonies were
acknowledged as independent States. The great work
of English settlement on foreign soil was brought to
perfection. The new and free English land beyond the
Ocean took in the whole temperate region of the North
American coast, all between the peninsula of Acadia to
the north and the other peninsula of Florida to the south.
Both of these last lands were English possessions at the
time of the War of Independence, but neither of them
had any share in the work.
♦Nova
Scotia,
1713.♦
Acadia, under the name of
Nova Scotia, had been ceded by France in the interval
between the settlement of Pennsylvania and the settlement
of Georgia.
♦Conquest of
Canada,
1759-1763.♦
Next came the conquest of Canada,
in which the men of the colonies played their part.
♦The French
barrier at
Alleghany.♦
Hitherto the English colonies had been shut in to the
West by the French claim to the line of the Alleghany
mountains. The Treaty of Paris took away this bugbear,
and left the whole land as far as the Mississippi
open to the enterprise of the English colonists. Thus,
when the Thirteen States started on their independent
career, the whole land between the great lakes, the
Ocean, and the Mississippi, was open to them.
♦Florida
again
Spanish,
1781-1821.♦
Florida
indeed, first as an English, then again as a Spanish possession,
cut them off from the Gulf of Mexico. The
city of New Orleans remained, first a Spanish, then a
French, outpost east of the Mississippi, and the possessions
still held by England kept them from the mouth
of the Saint Lawrence.
♦Extension
to the
West.♦
But within these limits, such
of the old States as were allowed by their geographical
position might extend themselves to the west, and
new States might be formed. Both processes went on,
and two of the barriers formed by European powers
were removed.
♦Louisiana,
1803.
Florida,
1821.♦
The purchase of Louisiana from France,
the acquisition of Florida from Spain, gave the States
the sea-board of the Gulf of Mexico, and allowed their
extension to the Pacific. The details of that extension,
partly by natural growth, partly at the expense of the
Spanish element in North America, it is hardly needful
to go through here.
♦A new
English
nation.♦
But, out of the English settlements
on the North-American coast, a new English
nation has arisen, none the less English, in a true view
of history, because it no longer owes allegiance to the
crown of Great Britain. But the power thus formed,
exactly like earlier confederations in Europe, lacks a
name.
♦Lack of a
name.♦
The United States of America is hardly a geographical
or a national name, any more than the names
of the Confederates and the United Provinces. In the two
European cases common usage gave the name of a single
member of the Union to the whole, and in the case of
Switzerland the popular name at last became the formal
name. In the American case, on the other hand,
popular usage speaks of the Confederation by the name
of the whole continent of which its territory forms part.
♦Use of the
word
America.♦
For several purposes, the words America and American
are always understood as shutting out Canada and
Mexico, to say nothing of the southern American continent.
For some other purposes, those names still take
in the whole American continent, north and south. But
it is easier to see the awkwardness of the usual nomenclature
than to suggest any improvement on it.
While one set of events in the eighteenth century
created an independent English nation on North
American soil, another set of events in the same century,
earlier in date but later in their results, has led
to the formation in its immediate neighbourhood of
another English nation which still keeps its allegiance
to the English crown.
♦Dependent
confederacy.♦
A confederation of states, practically
independent in their internal affairs, but remaining
subjects of a distant sovereign, is a novelty in political
science.
♦British
North
America.♦
Such is the Confederation of British North
America. But this dependent Confederation did not
arise out of colonization in the same sense as the independent
Confederation to the south of it. The central
land which gives it its character is the conquered
land of Canada.
♦New Brunswick,
&c.♦
Along with Canada came the possession
of the smaller districts which received the
names of New Brunswick and Prince Edward’s Island,
districts which were at first joined to Nova Scotia, but
which afterwards became distinct colonies.
♦The
Dominion,
1867.♦
Now they
are joined with the Dominion of Canada, which, like
the United States, grows by the incorporation of new
states and territories.
♦British
Columbia,
1871.
Rupertsland.♦
The addition of British Columbia
has carried the Confederation to the Pacific; that of
Rupertsland carries it indefinitely northward towards
the pole. This second English-speaking power in
North America, stretches, like the elder one, from
Ocean to Ocean.
♦Newfoundland,
1713.♦
Newfoundland alone, a possession
secured to England after many debates at the same
time as Nova Scotia, remains distinct.
Of the British possessions in the West Indies a few only, among them Barbadoes, the earliest of all, were colonies in the same sense as Virginia and Massachusetts. ♦Jamaica, 1655.♦ The greater number, Jamaica at their head, were won by conquest from other European powers. No new English nation, like the American and the Canadian, has grown up in them. ♦Smaller settlements.♦ Still less is there any need to dwell on the Bahamas, the Falkland Islands, or the South-American possession of British Guiana.
§ 6. Other Colonies and Possessions of England.
The story of the North-American colonies may be both compared and contrasted with the story of two great groups of colonies in the southern hemisphere. ♦Australia.♦ In Australia and the other great southern islands, a body of English colonies have arisen, the germs at least of yet another English nation, but which have not as yet reached either independence or confederation. ♦South Africa.♦ In South Africa, another group of possessions and colonies, beginning, like Canada, in conquest from another European power, seems to be feeling its way towards confederation, while one part has in a manner stumbled into independence.
The beginning of English settlement in the greatest
of islands began in the years which immediately followed
the establishment of American independence.
♦New South
Wales,
1787.♦
First
came New South Wales, on the eastern coast, designed
originally as a penal settlement.
♦Western
Australia,
1829.♦
It outgrew this stage,
and another penal settlement was founded in Western
Australia.
♦South
Australia,
1836.
Victoria,
1837.
Queensland,
1859.♦
Then colonization spread into the intermediate
region of Southern Australia (which however
stretches right through the island to its northern
coast) into the district called Victoria, south-west of the
original settlement, and lastly, into Queensland to the
north-east.
♦Colonies
Act,
1850.♦
Since the middle of the present century
all these colonies have gradually established constitutions
which give them full internal independence.
♦Tasmania,
1804.
1839.♦
South of the great island lies one smaller, but still
vast, that of Van Diemen’s Land, now Tasmania,
which was settled earlier than any Australian settlement
except New South Wales.
♦Six
colonies,
1852.
United,
1875.♦
And to the east lie
the two great islands of New Zealand, where six
English colonies founded at different times have been
united into one.
While the Australian settlements were colonies in
the strictest sense, the English possessions in South
Africa began, like New York, in a settlement first planted
by the United Provinces.
♦Conquest of
the Cape,
1806.
1815.♦
The Cape Colony, after some
shiftings during the French revolutionary wars, was
conquered by England, and its possession by England
was confirmed at the general peace.
♦Eastern
Colony and
Natal,
1820-1836.♦
Migration northward,
both of the English and Dutch inhabitants, has
produced new settlements, as the Eastern Colony and
Natal.
♦Orange
River State,
1847-1856.
Transvaal,
1861-1877.♦
Meanwhile independent Dutch states have arisen,
as the Orange River Republic, annexed by England,
then set free, and lastly dismembered, and the Transvaal,
more lately annexed after sixteen years of independence.
Lastly a scheme of confederation for
all these settlements awaits some more peaceful time
to be carried into effect.
In all these cases of real colonization, of real extension of the English or any other European nation, it is hardly a figure to say that the bounds of Europe have been enlarged. All that makes Europe Europe, all that parts off Europe from Africa and Asia, has been carried into America and Australia and Africa itself. The growth of this new Europe, no less than the changes of the old, is an essential part of European geography. ♦Barbarian dominion.♦ It is otherwise with territories, great or small, which have been occupied by England and other European powers merely for military or commercial purposes. Forts, factories, or empires, on barbarian soil, where no new European nation is likely ever to grow up, are not cases of true colonization; they are no extension of the bounds of Europe. ♦English dominion in India.♦ The climax of this kind of barbarian dominion is found in those vast Indian possessions in which England has supplanted Portugal, France, and the heirs of Timour. ♦Empire of India. 1876.♦ Of that dominion the scientific frontier has yet to be traced; yet it has come to give an Imperial title to the sovereign of Great Britain and Ireland, while those two European islands, as perhaps befits their inferiority in physical size, remain content with the lowlier style of the United Kingdom. Whether the loftier pretensions of Asia do, or do not, imply any vassalage on the part of Europe, it is certain that the Asiatic Empire of the sovereign of the British kingdom is no extension of England, no extension of Europe, no creation of a new English or European nation. The Empire of India stands outside the European world, outside the political system which has gathered round the Old and the New Rome. But a place amongst the foremost members of that system belongs to the great European nation on American soil, where the tongue of England is kept, and the constitution of old Achaia is born again, in a confederation stretching from the Western to the Eastern Ocean.
We have thus traced the geography, and in tracing the geography we have in a slighter way traced the history, of the various states and powers of Europe, and of the lands beyond the Ocean which have been planted from Europe. We have throughout kept steadily before our eyes the centre, afterwards the two centres, of European life. We have seen how the older states of Europe gradually lose themselves in the dominion of Rome, how the younger states gradually spring out of the dominion of Rome. We have followed, as our central subjects, the fates of those powers in the East and West which continued the Roman name and Roman traditions. We have traced out the states which were directly formed by splitting off from those powers, and the states which arose beyond the range of Roman power, but not beyond the range of Roman influence. We have seen the Western Empire first pass to a German prince, then gradually shrink into a German kingdom, to be finally dissolved into a German confederation. We have watched the states which split off at various dates from its body, the power of France on one side, the power of Austria on another, the powers of Italy on a third, the free states of Switzerland at one end, the free states of the Netherlands at the other. We have beheld the long tragedy of the Eastern Rome; we have told the tale of the states which split off from it and arose around it. We have seen its territorial position pass to a barbarian invader, and something like its position in men’s minds pass to the mightiest of its spiritual disciples. And we have seen, painted on the map of our own century, the beginning of the great work which is giving back the lands of the Eastern Rome to their own people. We have then traced the shiftings of the powers which lay wholly or partly beyond the bounds of either Empire, the great Slavonic mainland, the Scandinavian and the Iberian peninsulas, ending with that which is geographically the most isolated land of all, the other world of Britain. We have seen too how Europe may be said to have spread herself beyond her geographical limits in the foundation of new European states beyond the Ocean. We have contrasted the different positions and destinies of the colonizing European powers—where, as in the days of Old Rome, a continuous territory has been extended over neighbouring barbarian lands—where growth beyond the sea was the natural outcome of growth at home—where European powers have colonized and conquered simply of their own free will. In thus tracing the historical geography of Europe, we have made the round of the world. But we have never lost sight of Europe; we have never lost sight of Rome. Wherever we have gone, we have carried Europe with us; wherever we have gone, we have never got beyond the power of the two influences which, mingling into one, have made Europe all that it has been. The whole of European history is embodied in the formula which couples together the ‘rule of Christ and Cæsar;’ and that joint rule still goes on, in the shape of moral influence, wherever the tongues and the culture of Europe win new realms for themselves in the continents of the western or in the islands of the southern Ocean.