Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
The Ancient World Edit
Talmud The Talmud of Judaism is a collection of commentaries. It is the extended and loosely organized elaboration of selected tractates of the Mishnah, an earlier religious book. Its contents are not limited by the Mishnah but often serve as the base for wide-ranging discussions. Ancient rabbis found all kinds of reasons for recording their discussions on Talmudic topics, and this eventually became the constitution of medieval Jewish life. It is the source for the Torah among rabbinic Jews today, binding on orthodox Jews. Legal rulings within the Talmud are called the Halakhah, and the interpretations and the stories that support the rulings are the Haggadah. Technically the Talmud means the whole body of rabbinic materials, namely, the Mishnah and its later commentaries, while the Gemara refers specifi cally to the commentary on the Mishnah. In common parlance, however, the Talmud refers to the Gemara, or commentary on the Mishnah, written between 200 and 600 c.e. The writers of the Talmud are the “sages” of various periods of Jewish history. The rabbis before the Mishnah are called the tannaim, from a Hebrew word meaning “teach” or “repeat.” The rabbis who lived after the Mishnah are called the amoraim, from an Aramaic word meaning “discuss.” The sevoraim come after the amoraim, and their name comes from the Aramaic word for “reconsider” or “rethink an opinion.” Finally come the geonim, from the Hebrew word for “learned,” usually applied to the authoritative later teachers. The Talmud loosely follows the organization of the Mishnah, divided into the orders or tractates, then chapters, and then paragraphs. The technique of developing the topic is to go over each phrase of the Mishnah and discuss it thoroughly. Sometimes digressions slip in and go on for pages before the Mishnah lines are taken up again. For several generations sages debated and consulted about the meaning of the Mishnah. These discussions were collected and passed down orally or as makeshift documents. Additions and revisions and shifting within the collections meant that they were not standardized texts. Sometimes free associations of ideas and even extraneous materials were included and added to the confusion of the collections. As time went on, rabbis felt free to comment on the original commentaries in order to give clarity and relevance. The earliest comments were mostly law related: brief, apodictic statements of law; later, comments were longer dialectical treatments of laws and principles. There grew to be two centers where Jews compiled available Gemara into their own Talmuds: Palestine and Babylonia. The Yerushalmi, or Palestinian, Talmud mostly refl ects the work of Galilean rabbis, and it was completed by the mid-fi fth century c.e. It is characterized by brevity and an absence of clarifi cation and editorial transitions, which is in keeping with its early dating. Its discussions are seen as elliptical and terse, but occasionally dialogues arise and show development of argument and resolutions. The Bavli, or Babylonian, Talmud was completed by the year 500 c.e. However, there are discussions that show development over a longer time period (450–650). The Bavli is far more worked out than T 451 the Yerushalmi. It is more sophisticated and technical and formal for introducing source materials, considering objections and counterobjections. The sevoraim took a much bigger role in the Bavli, composing entire sections, especially introductions and transitions. In general, the Bavli is of a superior literary quality and logical clarity, and it is much longer. The last period of the Talmud teachers, the geonim, consists of Bavli authorities. The Bavli leaves out a lot of the fi rst order (“Blessings”) because many of the issues concern obligations that do not apply outside Israel. Harder to explain is the Bavli’s fascination with the regulations concerning the Temple—not found in the Yerushalmi. Otherwise, the two books of Talmud mostly cover the same ground. The Bavli gradually grew in its infl uence over the Yerushalmi. It is clear the Babylonian geonim of the latter part of the fi rst millennium c.e. were more prestigious than the Palestinian rabbis. Diaspora Jews gradually adopted the Bavli as their primary book. Palestinian Jewry declined, while the Diaspora communities spread throughout Spain, Portugal, and North Africa. Another blow to the Jews of Palestine and their Talmud was the crusades. At a certain point the Talmud always meant the Bavli, and that Yerushalmi only applied where the Bavli was silent or ambiguous. And the momentum continued: It became the focus of more and better commentaries and larger numbers of scribes. Modern scholarship therefore has more to work with in terms of Bavli materials, while Yerushalmi is less polished and extensive. Early Mishnah study and commentaries were oral, so that the Gemara was in the beginning an approximation of the spoken tradition. There is no reason, then, to speak of the “original Talmud,” and there are many parallel texts in various centers of Jewry. Standardization of text has come largely because of the Diaspora Jews’ adaptation to the modern world and eventually their access to the printing press and formation of education institutions. All these factors stood in favor of the Bavli. It is traditional to believe that Moses presented the Torah as the written laws for Israel but that his rulings about various applications of the written laws were passed on orally at the same time. As medieval Judaism developed more and more oral laws to interpret the Torah and to expand its application, the rabbis gave credit to various legendary nonbiblical fi gures (the “Great Synagogue” offi cials, Hillel and Shammai and Yohanan ben Zakkai). The only historical person to corroborate this process is Judah ha- Nasi, who presided over the compilation of the Mishnah around the year 200 c.e. The mode of composition is in dialogue form, a bit like the dialogue between Socrates and his followers. Questions regarding the Mishnah are introduced and then the dialogue seeks after causes and origins. The lengthy digressions are the Haggadah, while the conclusions are the Halakhah. While this method may strike the modern reader as drawn out and boring, it actually is a novel way of dealing with the complexity and monotony of legal rulings. The Talmud contains the rejected as well as the accepted opinions of the rabbis. The Talmud is a book of laws and opinions on the laws. Rarely does it appeal to the reader’s sense of inspiration and elevated speech. To the casual reader the rabbis appear as judges, teachers, and public administrators, and that was their role within the medieval Jewish community. The personalities of the thinkers—the rabbis— were not important in the Talmud, but the legal chains of thought were. Their genre was the text commentary, and even today the Talmud text page contains the text surrounded by several later celebrated commentaries. The religious current of the text is deeper and more satisfying. The law is a source of God’s creativity and thus a gift to Jews and a joy to fulfi ll. The task of the rabbi is to apply this law to every aspect of life, an opportunity and not a burden. In fact, by expanding the oral Torah, the rabbis were imitating what previously God accomplished through the written Torah. Thus, study and application of Torah were engaging in a form of divine creativity. Everyone was expected to join in the creative process, whether it was the ascetic holy man who studied 20 hours per day, or the common Jew who studied Torah only at the Sabbath service. Rabbinic skill was expressed in fi nely honed argumentation, and the argumentation became a sign of holiness. The rabbis taught that they became a “kingdom of priests and a holy nation” when they suffi ciently studied and understood the Torah. Rabbis were elected and rated according to their command of the Talmud. As medieval rabbis devoted themselves to Talmudic studies, they enhanced their stature as community leaders. As a result they had to work out their relationships with the political rulers of the lands where their Jewish followers were. The Roman authorities, the Byzantine governors, and even the designated Jewish offi cials (the Jewish patriarchs and the exiliarchs) eventually had to accommodate the rabbis. Nonetheless, the rabbis kept a low political profi le. The rabbis found their niche in the internal religious life of the Jews (marriages, divorces, religious rituals, calendar, and the education of the youth). Their opinions were treasured much like medieval Christians valued the fathers of the church. 452 Talmud The Talmuds are the major sources of information about Jewish culture and religion in the period of late antiquity and the early medieval period. Often its pages reveal even earlier stages of Jewish life and culture— perhaps preserving fragments of teachers and teachings of the period after the last writings of the Bible and before the completion of the New Testament. The problem is that the Talmuds add layer upon layer of editing so that the original historical kernel cannot be identifi ed with certainty. Another problem with determining the historicity of the Talmud came from outsiders: Christians often censored or destroyed copies of the Talmud in various regions of Europe. Often, in order to avoid destruction, Jews submitted the Talmud to censorship so that early rabbinic discussion of such topics as Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth or early Christianity was lost or scattered. See also Jewish revolts; Judaism, early (heterodoxies). Further reading: Goldenberg, R. “Talmud.” Encyclopedia of Religion. Detroit, MI: MacMillan Reference USA, 2004; Hezser, Catherine. The Social Structure of the Rabbinic Movement in Roman Palestine. Tübingen, Germany: Mohr [Siebeck], 1997. Neusner, Jacob, ed. Judaism in Late Antiquity. Part 1: Literary and Archaeological Sources. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 1995; Safrai, S., ed. The Literature of the Sages. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1987. Mark F. Whitters Tantrism Vajrayana Buddhism, or Tantrism, is a form of Buddhist thought that has fl ourished in northern India and particularly Tibet. The term vajra is a Sanskrit word that can mean either “diamond” or “thunderbolt.” Vajrayana Buddhism provides enlightenment in a single lifetime, rather than as a result of numerous incarnations as posited by other forms of Buddhism. These means, which are known as upaya, include meditation techniques, thought exercises, chanting, and sexual practices. Like Mahayana Buddhism, Vajrayana Buddhism aims to recreate the experience of Gautama Buddha and to enable the individual to attain Buddhahood, rather than just to escape from the endless wheel of death and rebirth that is caused by attachment to the insubstantial things of the world, which is the goal of Theravada Buddhism. Like the other forms of Buddhism, Vajrayana Buddhism also enjoins upon the follower to take such measures as proper behavior, abstinence from intoxicants, and supporting the monkhood. An alternative name for Vajrayana Buddhism is Mantrayana Buddhism, owing to the practice of reciting mantras to escape from the human desire to grasp illusory and impermanent sensory data as reality. Vajrayana Buddhism developed from Mahayana (or Great Vehicle) Buddhism around the sixth–seventh centuries and was particularly infl uential until the 11th century. Tibetan adherents claim that Sakyamuni Buddha taught the tantras as secret texts that were preserved in writing some time after the sutras. A tantra is a continuum that fl ows from fundamental ignorance to enlightenment, as well as being the text in which this message is recorded. Tantras include continua of the path, the ground, and the result. Three inner tantras, in addition to six outer tantras, once mastered, offer the capability of entering the Buddhahood. This is managed through sophisticated mental techniques that facilitate the resolution of states of mental dissonance into one of enlightening union. The three inner tantras are the Mahayoga, Anuyoga, and Atiyoga, which are the generation stage, the perfection stage, and the Great Perfection (dzogchen) stage. The Indian spiritual leaders Padmasambhaa, Vimalamitra, and Buddhaguhya (among others) introduced them. Their works have been subsequently collected in multiple-volume canons, notably in Tibetan translation by Buton Rinchendrub (1290–1364). The different collections of works gave rise to different schools of Vajrayana thought. Vajrayana adherents stress the importance of the teacher-student relationship and the esoteric transmission of knowledge and upayas through that relationship. Not only is meditation involved but also ritual chanting, the drawing of mystical charts, and the practice of tantric sexual congress with female priests known as yoginis. The most well known repetitive chant is Om mane padme hum (ah, the jewel is indeed in the lotus), which when repeated can help the mind overcome dissonance. Sexual congress is important in the quest for enlightenment because it is part of the attempt to resolve and unite opposing principles. In addition, as one of the Four Delights, it aims to unite bliss with emptiness, by means of liberating the body’s energy center to receive the pristine cognition of supreme delight. In some cases tantric activities, including sexual yoga, became associated with occult activities and sacred drinking of alcohol. Tantrism on the island of Java, for example, included drinking and fornication with yoginis that rather scandalized some visitors, unaware of the purpose of the rituals. Kertanagara (r. 1268–92), the last king of Singosari on Java, for example, was obliged to protect his people and demonstrate the legitimacy of Tantrism 453 his kingship by combating the demoniac energies loose in the land through seeking ecstasy through bouts of drinking and sexual congress. Kertanagara was unfortunately murdered in the course of one of these bouts. Tantric practices are also associated with Hinduism and differ from Buddhist tantrism accordingly. Vajrayana Buddhism was infl uential in Tibet and India, but has also been practiced in Central Asia, China, Java, Nepal, and what is now Pakistan. In addition, the Mongols adopted aspects of Tibetan Buddhist practice and helped spread them through the Asian continent. Variations of tantric practice spread further, although often dissociated from the essence of Vajrayana Buddhism. In aesthetic and artistic terms Vajrayana Buddhism has inspired the creation of the mandala, which is a representation of the universe employed in meditation. A series of concentric circles identifi es the individual and the womb and its connections with wider reality. Characteristic forms are found in China, Japan, and Tibet. Tibetan versions are one form of thang-ka (tanka), which are cloth paintings that may be used in personal meditation, used for display, or in processions. They are created according to a series of strict canonical rules and began to appear from about the 10th century. See also Theraveda and Mahayana Buddhism. Further reading: Hall, D. G. E. A History of South-East Asia. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan Press, 1994; Padmasambhava. The Tibetan Book of the Dead: The Great Liberation by Hearing in the Intermediate State. Revealed by Terton Karma Lingpa, trans. by Gyurme Dorje, ed. by Graham Coleman, with Thupten Jinpa. Introduction by the Dalai Lama. London: Allen Lane, 2005; Rinpoche, Kalu. Secret Buddhism: Vajrayana Practices. Ashland, OH: Clearpoint Press, 2002. John Walsh Taoism See Daoism (Taoism). Teotihuacán Located some 25 miles northeast of Mexico City in the Basin of Mexico, the massive ruins of the great city of Teotihuacán have long puzzled and intrigued observers. Despite more than a century of archaeological investigation, many mysteries remain about the people who built, ruled, and lived in this vast urban complex. The city was founded in the fi rst century b.c.e., just northeast of Lake Texcoco, which lay at the basin’s center. Its builders were most likely the former inhabitants of the ancient ceremonial center of Cuicuilco, at Lake Texcoco’s southwest corner, which was destroyed in the eruption of the volcano Xitle around 50 b.c.e. Construction on Teotihuacán began soon after the abandonment of Cuicuilco. The city fl ourished for the next 600 years, dominating most of the central highlands, before its partial destruction and abandonment around 650 c.e. The city’s civic and ceremonial core was built in stages, from its beginnings in the fi rst century b.c.e. to its completion by 300 c.e. Carefully designed in a gridlike pattern, the core was dominated by several towering structures connected by a broad avenue: the massive Pyramid of the Sun; the slightly less imposing Pyramid of the Moon; the Temple of Quetzalcoatl (Plumed, or Feathered, Serpent); and the large open-air Citadel. Scholars offer varying interpretations of its builders’ intentions regarding its orientation, with the Avenue of the Dead at 15.5 degrees west of south. Some argue that it is aligned with solar equinoxes; others, with the constellation Pleiades; others, with the nearby Cerro Gordo volcano; still others have proposed mathematical relationships between the city’s orientation and the sacred 260-day calendar. All agree that its exacting alignment carried deep meaning for its designers and builders. Its largest and oldest vertical structure, the massive Pyramid of the Sun, was built over a series of caves (discovered in 1971) whose interior chambers were modifi ed and used extensively during the pyramid’s construction phase (1–150 c.e.). In Mesoamerican mythology caves were linked to the underworld, the dwelling place of the gods, and the origin of creation, suggesting that the pyramid’s location held profound cosmological signifi - cance to its designers. Estimates of the city’s population range from a low of 80,000, to a high of 200,000. During its fi rst century its population grew rapidly, reaching perhaps 80,000 by 150 c.e., with many thousands of people from the Basin of Mexico migrating to the city. Growth slowed in subsequent decades, with the city’s population reaching its height probably around 200 c.e. In the 200s and 300s a series of more than 2,000 apartment or residential compounds were built to house the city’s huge population. The sizes and qualities of these compounds varied considerably, suggesting an intricate system of socioeconomic stratifi cation based on wealth, occupation, status, and lineage. Most scholars agree that persons claiming a common lineage inhabited these compounds. Different districts or neighborhoods within the city also varied widely. In some areas, specialized craft or 454 Taoism artisan workshops predominated. Elsewhere, distinct ethnic enclaves are evident, most notably, a cluster of some dozen compounds evidently inhabited by Oaxacans from Monte Albán. A “merchant’s neighborhood” has been identifi ed near the city’s eastern perimeter. Throughout much of the city, however, it is diffi cult to identify specifi c qualities that defi ned its spatial demographics. While the remnants of walls can be found in various parts of the city, there is no evidence that the city as a whole was walled. An estimated two-thirds of the city’s inhabitants worked in agriculture, in the fi elds surrounding city, with the remainder engaged in various types of craft production. The inhabitants of Teotihuacán employed a system of notational signs but had no system of writing comparable to the Maya during this same period. Scholars have identifi ed no grammatical or phonetic elements in the notational system and thus do not know what languages its inhabitants spoke or what they called themselves. Some scholars have proposed that its rulers sought to create a secretive, mysterious symbolism; others suggest that the signs’ meanings were probably clear to their creators and those who viewed them. The artistic style at Teotihuacán is repetitive, uniform, and somewhat stiff, in sharp contrast to the great variability of styles and motifs among the Maya city-states. Religion was practiced in at least two distinct spheres: at the level of the household and village and at the level of the state. Village- and household-level religious practices focused on ancestors and deities linked to specifi c lineages. There is no evidence that these household- and village-level religious practices were in confl ict with the state or that there was any organized or lower-class resistance to the state or ruling groups. State religion was very distinct from village-level religion, emphasizing especially the cult of the Feathered Serpent, most graphically expressed in the Temple of Quetzalcoatl, with its hundreds of huge sculpted heads gracing its massive walls and stairs. Other major state deities included what is commonly called Tlaloc, the rain god (though interpretations differ on whether this was indeed Tlaloc), the storm/war god, various death and underworld gods, and what E. Pasztory has termed the Great Goddess. State religion focused on legitimizing the dominance of ruling groups and providing ideological underpinning for the state and its political, military, and ideological dominion within the Basin of Mexico and beyond. Located northeast of Mexico City in the Basin of Mexico are the massive ruins of the great city of Teotihuacán. Despite extensive archaeological investigation, many mysteries remain about the people who built, ruled, and lived in this vast urban complex. Teotihuacán 455 This was a highly stratifi ed and militarized society with both extensive and intensive military capacities. The city dominated the Basin of Mexico, though probably not much beyond it, and regardless of the extent of its direct rule, it carried enormous ideological prestige throughout Mesoamerica. Perhaps providing a template for the later Aztec military, Teotihuacán’s armies were divided into military orders associated with particular creatures, such as the eagle and jaguar. Its military forces consisted of both commoners and elites that fought in disciplined groups and were highly effective in their use of dart- and spear-throwers (atlatl) and obsidianstudded clubs. The city’s impressive military capacities and ideological prestige worked together to facilitate exchange and trade relations with neighboring polities. Trade routes, as far south as Central America and as far north as the present- day U.S. Southwest, linked the city to all of Mesoamerica’s signifi cant polities. Long-distance trade was especially active in prestige items, such as shells, ceramics, obsidian, mica, hematite, jade, turquoise, and cinnabar. Marketplaces within the city were especially important, some suggesting that the Great Compound was also the city’s central marketplace, with cacao serving as a form of currency. Ritual human sacrifi ce was practiced at Teotihuacán, though the practice is depicted in the city’s artwork principally through portrayals of human hearts, some impaled on knives. Skeletons of sacrifi cial victims have been unearthed in the Pyramid of the Sun, the Temple of Quetzalcoatl, and other buildings. The decline of the great city was rooted in longterm ecological crises, particularly water shortages, deforestation, and soil degradation, trends exacerbated by a series of invasions or attacks by nomadic or seminomadic peoples from the north. Between 500 and 600 these deleterious ecological processes had become irreversible. Around 650 much of the city was destroyed by fi re, probably by external assailants, and most of its buildings and compounds were abandoned. The core ceremonial area around the temples saw the greatest destruction, suggesting a conscious effort to incapacitate the city’s ritual and ideological power. By 750 the city was completely abandoned. Some six centuries later, upon their arrival into the Basin of Mexico from the northern deserts, the Aztec would look upon the ruins of Teotihuacán as the dwelling place of the gods. Today Teotihuacán remains one of Mexico’s most popular tourist attractions. See also Maya: Classic Period; Maya: Preclassic Period; Mesoamerica: Archaic and Preclassic Periods; Mesoamerica: Classic Period. Further reading. Cowgill, George L. “State and Society at Teotihuacán, Mexico.” Annual Review of Anthropology (v.26, 1997); Millon, R. Urbanization at Teotihuacán. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1973; Pasztory, E. The Iconography of the Teotihuacán Tlaloc. Washington, DC: Dumbarton Oaks, 1974; ———. Teotihuacán: An Experiment in Living. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1997. M. J. Schroeder Tetrarchy The Tetrarchy, or “rule of four,” was a reform of the Roman imperial government initiated by the emperor Diocletian in 286 c.e. This was a total change of the princeps system begun by the emperor Augustus Caesar in 30 b.c.e. Augustus, despite his name of “revered one,” was addressed while emperor as “princeps,” or “fi rst citizen,” and his imperial rule was built informally around government offi ces of the Roman Republic. His true power had come from a combination of the offi ce of tribune and his role in society as “fi rst citizen.” Diocletian, on the other hand, changed the position of Roman emperor from one cloaked in republican virtue and offi ce into a full Eastern-style monarchy. Access to the emperor was limited under Diocletian and he was addressed as “Dominus Noster,” or “our lord.” This change in the imperial system had two main goals. The fi rst was a more effi cient military command and control, and the second was an attempt to change the way the emperor was chosen. Diocletian had good reason for instituting new changes for the Roman world. Prior to Diocletian’s imperial rule, beginning in 286, the Roman world had seen what historians now call the Crisis of the Third Century. Since only 235 c.e., which had seen the death of the emperor Alexander Severus, Rome had been ruled by generals, by some accounts as many as 50. During the exceedingly short rules of these generals, Rome had been raided by Vandals and Goths and attacked outright on her eastern border by the Sassanid Empire. While the Roman Empire was both politically and militarily unstable, Rome was also in terrible fi nancial straits. The Roman Empire had seen years of hyperinfl ation due to the debasing of the coinage. When Diocletian came to power, he had ample reason to introduce reforms, reforms that some scholars say saved the empire for two more centuries. This new imperial system was designed fi rst to provide for an increased military command capacity within the empire. No longer would the Roman army sit only 456 Tetrarchy on the frontiers, but there would now be a “defense in depth” policy. The army would patrol the farthest reaches of the empire and also provide a defense for all Roman territory. Diocletian secured these changes with two fundamental alterations to military policy. The fi rst was a de facto division of the empire into an eastern and western half, with each half having its own emperor. Beneath these two emperors, who held the title of Augustus, were two junior emperors who held the title of Caesar. In all, the new imperial college would contain four members: two Augusti and two Caesari. For the military this allowed for a total of four military commanders who could campaign on the very edge of empire, without the others having to worry about a victorious general being elevated to the rank of emperor by his troops. In addition to the edges of empire, there would be military resources and military commanders for the new defense in depth policy. The imperial college was also intended to create a sense of stability in the empire. The political division between East and West was not intended to be a true division. In fact, all imperial decrees continued to be made in the name of all four men of the imperial college. This allowed for a sense of stability during the sometimes-unstable transfer of power between Roman rulers. The previous princeps system of government had for hundreds of years left the empire with no formal way to choose a new emperor after the death of the previous reigning emperor. Diocletian’s reforms sought to rectify this. In theory, when the senior Augustus died, his Caesar would be elevated and would in turn choose a new Caesar. In this manner the Caesar would gain both experience and legitimacy with the Roman populace. In practice, however, Diocletian’s reforms did not even last for one full transfer. In order that he see his system of succession put into effect, Diocletian decided to retire after 20 years as emperor and forced his co-Augustus, Maximian, to retire as well. When this occurred, each man’s Caesar was elevated to the imperial throne, and two new Caesari were chosen. Maximian did not agree to this forced abdication, and eventually he attempted to regain his position as head of the Western Roman Empire. This failure by Maximian marked the beginning of the end of the Tetrarchy. By the end of Constantine the Great’s reign in 337, most of Diocletian’s reforms had failed. The rule of Constantine and his progeny was marked by civil war and competing imperial claims, just as had been the case before Diocletian’s reforms of 286. See also late barbarians; Rome: decline and fall; Rome: government. Further reading: Grant, Michael. The Roman Emperors. New York: Barnes and Noble Books, 1997; Shelton, Jo Ann. As the Romans Did. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998; Williams, Stephen. Diocletian and the Roman Recovery. New York: Routledge, 1997. Stephen Griffi n Thebes In the Iliad Homer famously described the city as “hundred- gated Thebes.” However, Thebes is better understood as an entire site that encompassed the east and west banks of the Nile, containing temples and palaces, the dwelling-places of the living and the everlasting homes of the dead. On the east bank were the temples of Amun at Karnak and Luxor. The ancient city lay to the east of the great temple of Karnak. As the temple expanded, the city had to move and was laid out on a grid plan. Across the river on the west bank, bordering the strip of cultivated fi elds, stood the mortuary temples of pharaohs from the Middle and New Kingdoms. Behind them lay the cemeteries of the nobility, while beyond in the desert valleys, the tombs of kings and queens of Egypt. On the west bank was the village of skilled craftsmen and scribes, who worked on the royal tombs, their burial places, and those of commoners. In effect there were two Thebes, one for the living, the other for the dead. Ironically, the mud-brick city of the living has long vanished under the fi elds and houses of the modern city of Luxor, while Thebes of the dead on the west bank remains one of Egypt’s primary tourist locations. It is one of the largest archaeological sites in the world. Thebes lies about 400 miles south of Cairo, just south of the Wadi Hammamat where the Nile Valley comes closest to the Red Sea. The Egyptians called the town Waset, “dominion,” and later simply Nìwt, “the city.” Although there are some remains from the Early Dynastic and Old Kingdom periods (3100–2181 b.c.e.), it was a small town, the capital of the fourth nome (district) of Upper Egypt. The Greeks would name it Thebes after the principal city of Boeotia in Greece. A family from the Theban nome ruled Upper Egypt at the close of the First Intermediate Period (2181–2055 b.c.e.). One of these rulers, Mentuhotep II (2055–04 b.c.e.), gained control over all Egypt founding the Middle Kingdom. His mortuary temple lies beside that of the female ruler Hatshepsut, at Deir el-Bahri. Although subsequent pharaohs moved away from Thebes, the rulers Thebes 457 of the Twelfth Dynasty (1985–1795 b.c.e.) made it the capital of Upper Egypt. At the end of the Second Intermediate Period (1650– 1550 b.c.e.), the local Theban princely family drove the Hyksos from Egypt and reunited the “Two Lands.” This inaugurated the New Kingdom, the time of Thebes’s greatest glory and that of Amun, its god. The Eighteenth Dynasty (1570–1293 b.c.e.) ruled from Thebes, with the brief exception of Akhenaten (1350–44 b.c.e.). The rulers of this dynasty built extensively at Thebes. The present temple of Amun at Karnak was begun at this time and endowed, enlarged, and embellished right down to the Greco-Roman period. The pharaohs of the Nineteenth Dynasty (1293–1185 b.c.e.) moved their capital to the eastern Delta, but Thebes remained a prestigious religious center and burial site. Power inevitably passed into the hands of the high priests of Amun, who controlled a huge clerical corporation that owned land all over Egypt. By the end of the New Kingdom (1069 b.c.e.) the priesthood of Amun controlled two-thirds of all temple lands and 90 percent of Nile shipping. Thebes was sacked and looted by the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal in 664 b.c.e. By this time the importance of the city even as a religious site had begun to diminish as successive foreign conquests, Persian, Greek and Roman, forced Egypt to look north to the Mediterranean. On the east bank of the Nile stand the temples of Amun at Karnak and Luxor. The site at Karnak includes the temple of Amun, the temple of Mut (the Mother), his wife, and the temple of their son Khonsu, a moon god. To the north of the precinct of Amun sits the temple of Montu, the old falcon war god of Thebes. At the south, at the end of an avenue of sphinxes, is the temple at Luxor. This is dedicated to Amun in his fertility aspect: It was called the “Place of Seclusion.” It was the destination of the Theban Triad at the “Beautiful Festival of Opet,” celebrated in the second month of the Inundation. Statues of Amun, Mut, and Khonsu were placed on their barques, loaded onto barges, and towed amid scenes of great jubilation from Karnak to Luxor. Thebes of the dead on the west bank is a rich archaeological site. At Deir el-Bahri, the mortuary temple of Hatshepsut preserves the illustrated record of the expedition to the fabled land of Punt that she ordered. There are several well-preserved mortuary temples including that of Ramses III at Medinet Habu. The Valley of the Kings contains the famous tomb of Tutankhamun, the tomb of Ramses VI with its astronomical ceiling, and that of Thutmose III. The Valley of the Queens holds the magnifi cently restored tomb of Ramses II’s chief wife, Nefertari. Any Theban palaces, built of mud brick, have long since vanished. Even the grand palace of the opulent Amenophis III at Malqata on the west bank has disappeared. However, the site of the craftsmen and artisans’ village at Deir el-Medina and their tombs opens a window into the lives and hopes of ordinary Egyptians. See also Egypt, culture and religion; Old Kingdom, Egypt. Further reading: Clayton, Peter A. Chronicles of the Pharaohs. London: Thames and Hudson, 1998; Romer, John. Ancient Lives: Daily Life in Egypt of the Pharaohs. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1984; Siliotti, Alberto. Guide of the Valley of the Kings. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1997; Strudwick, Nigel and Helen. Thebes in Egypt. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999. John Barclay Burns Themistocles (c. 524–459 b.c.e.) statesman and general Themistocles was a great Athenian statesman and general who played an important role in the Second Persian War by leading the Greeks to victory. Born to an Athenian father, Neocles, and what seems to have been a foreign mother, Themistocles demonstrated great potential from an early age. He is said to have spent his leisure time in youth composing and performing mock speeches, unlike other children who remained idle or engaged in play. An early teacher of Themistocles told him the following: “there is going to be nothing insig- The ancient city of Thebes lay to the east of the great temple of Karnak. As the temple expanded, the city had to move. 458 Themistocles nifi cant about you; somehow or other you will become a great man, either for good or for evil.” With much determination Themistocles strove for greatness in action and longed to distinguish himself from others, both politically and militarily. Themistocles also fought the Persians at the Battle of Marathon, and while most Athenians were convinced that the victory at Marathon would keep the Persians at bay, he believed otherwise. He sought to ensure that his city and its inhabitants would be ready for the enemy’s return. Themistocles successfully persuaded the Athenians to increase their naval fl eet by building more than 100 ships with the silver that was mined at Laurium, despite the many arguments against the idea and the desired alternative of distributing the wealth. His effectiveness was due to the fact that he played on popular Athenian fears of Aegina, a traditional enemy; however, Themistocles himself was undoubtedly preparing for the next encounter with Persia. Additionally, Themistocles persuaded his fellow citizens to believe in his interpretation of a prophecy given by the priestess at the Delphic oracle. It spoke of a wooden wall and great destruction at Salamis. While others felt that the allusion to a wooden wall meant the Athenians should hide behind the wall of the Acropolis, Themistocles convinced them that the wooden walls represented the naval fl eet and that the Athenians were destined to win the battle at Salamis against Xerxes. Sure enough, in 480 b.c.e. the enlarged Athenian fl eet met the Persians to wage the naval battle of Salamis with the courageous Themistocles at the helm. Themistocles managed to bring many of the Greek city-states together to fi ght on behalf of a common goal and against a common enemy, despite their recurring internal animosities. Largely due to the Athenian general’s wisdom the Greeks managed to fi ght in the narrow strait of Salamis, which was crucial for the Athenian advantage. Despite being outnumbered by nearly twice as many Persian ships, the Greeks fought valiantly and came out victorious in the end. The judgment and timing of Themistocles was instrumental as he crowded the large Persian fl eet in the strait and used the winds as well as the maneuverability of the smaller Greek triremes to ram and sink more than 200 enemy ships while only losing roughly 40 of his own. The Persians eventually retreated, and not only was Greece saved, but so too was Western civilization. Themistocles was generously honored for his leadership, and the historian Herodotus wrote, “Themistocles was acclaimed throughout the whole of Hellas and deemed to be the wisest man by far of the Hellenes.” As a political leader Themistocles rebuilt and fortifi ed Athens, which had suffered prior to the successful naval battle. The initial respect and praise that Themistocles was showered with quickly came to an end. Such was the nature of a fi ckle citizenry and manipulative rulers who used the city-state’s democratic structure to their advantage. By 471 b.c.e. Themistocles was ostracized by his political opponents and forced to live in Argos for a number of years. He was later summoned back to his native city due to criminal charges of treason, which were likely fabricated by his rivals in Athens. Convinced of certain failure against such powerful adversaries and trumped-up charges, he went into self-imposed exile. Ironically, he eventually ended up in Persia. Themistocles managed to convince the Persian king that he arrived voluntarily as an ally and that it was because of his decision making that the Hellenes had not pursued and destroyed more retreating Persian ships at Salamis. Having successfully convinced and wooed the king, the bounty that was formerly on Themistocles’ head was removed and instead the reward was given to him. After learning the Persian language Themistocles became a consultant on Greek matters in the Persian king’s court. He took up residence in Magnesia, one city of three in Asia Minor that he was additionally rewarded with. However, around 459 b.c.e. the Persian king called upon Themistocles not simply for the purposes of consultation but to fi ght directly against the Greeks. Instead of tarnishing and undermining his earlier reputation and the deeds done on behalf of his homeland, he is said to have called a banquet with friends at his home in Magnesia whereupon he poisoned himself. Disagreement persists surrounding the factual manner of Themistocles’ death, and it is not certain whether it was truly his loyalty to Athens that drove him to suicide. In any case the life and story of Themistocles remains a legendary and heroic one that continues to serve as an example of how a single man as both statesman and general can have a signifi cant impact on a political community and important historical events. See also ostracism; Persian invasions. Further reading: Herodotus. The Histories. New York: Norton, 1992; Lenardon, Robert J. The Saga of Themistocles. London: Thames and Hudson, 1978; Plutarch. Plutarch’s Lives. London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle, and Rivington, 1876; Richard, Carl J. Twelve Greeks and Romans Who Changed the World. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefi eld Publishers, 2003. Trevor Shelley Themistocles 459 Theodoric (c. 454–526 c.e.) Ostrogothic ruler Theodoric the Great was king of the Germanic tribe of the Ostrogoths, who dominated the western Balkans in the fi fth century c.e. He received a Roman education during his teenage years spent as a political hostage in Constantinople under the watchful eyes of the Byzantine government. When he returned to his people, Theodoric took up arms against the empire and gained additional land, a position in the Byzantine military command, and imperial rank. Faced with a powerful and sometimes hostile neighbor, Byzantine emperor Zeno encouraged Theodoric to attack Italy where another German, Odovacar, had deposed the last legitimate Roman ruler, Romulus Augustulus. Theodoric and his Ostrogoths migrated to Italy, defeated Odovacar, and ruled as the representative of the Byzantine emperor. His capital was in the northeastern Italian city of Ravenna, located on the Adriatic Sea. As ruler of Italy, Theodoric attended to the redevelopment of this land. He encouraged settlement to areas that had been depopulated due to war and fostered agricultural production and trade. He was also concerned with the repairing and building of walls, aqueducts, churches, and other buildings in Roman cities. Several of his impressive monuments still stand in Ravenna, including the Church of St. Apollinare Nuovo, the Arian Baptistery, and his own mausoleum. Although a German king, Theodoric respected Roman traditions. Since the majority of the subject population was Roman, Theodoric respected prevailing structures of government, from local urban magistrates to the Roman Senate, as well as Roman law. Many Romans served in his court, such as Boethius and Cassiodorus, two of the most important Latin authors of the period. Even the pope and the Roman Senate received him in the city of Rome, where he stayed for a short period before returning to Ravenna. Besides developing a certain harmony between cultures, Theodoric was also a shrewd and powerful German king, cognizant of the reality of German power in the West. He sought to expand his kingdom and also to secure his position. He married a sister of Clovis, the king of the Franks and founder of the Merovingian dynasty, and joined his family by marriage to the kings of the Vandals, Visigoths, and Burgundians. The Italian cultural harmony was made more diffi cult by the fact that the Ostrogoths were Arian Christians, while the Roman population was Orthodox Christian. They differed theologically over their understanding of Jesus’s relationship to God the Father, whether he was created (Arian) or begotten (Orthodox). The Orthodox condemned Arian theology at the Council of Nicaea (325) and Council of Constantinople (381). At fi rst Germans and Romans joined together as allies against the East. But when rapprochement occurred between Rome and Constantinople, Theodoric feared a Byzantine invasion with potential Roman support. Making matters worse, the Byzantine government began to persecute Arians in the early 520s. Theodoric commenced a more hostile approach to his Roman population. Roman offi cials were accused of collaboration and arrested, among them Boethius, who wrote his Consolation of Philosophy while awaiting his execution. Theodoric sent the pope to negotiate with Constantinople but did not trust him and, upon his return, imprisoned him. Theodoric died in 526, only a few years before the start of the Byzantine invasion that did, in fact, end Ostrogothic rule. See also Arianism; late barbarians; Roman Empire; rome: decline and fall; Rome: government. Further reading: Bury, J. B. A History of the Later Roman Empire. Vols. 1 and 2. New York: Dover, 1958; Moorhead, J. Theodoric in Italy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. Matthew Herbst Theodosius I (c. 347–395 c.e.) Roman emperor Theodosius was born in Spain and followed in his father’s footsteps as an able military commander. This changed when his father was condemned and executed, and Theodosius withdrew from public life. The Western Roman emperor desperately needed his talents in 378 c.e., when the German Goths defeated the Roman army and killed the Eastern Roman emperor at the Battle of Adrianople and overran the Balkans. Theodosius was recalled to military command and promoted to Eastern Roman emperor in 379. He recruited a new army (including many Germans), fought the Goths, and made peace by settling them as independent allies (foederati) inside the empire. They ruled their own people, provided military service, and received positions in the empire’s military command. It was a precarious situation, but it restored a level of order and security. Theodosius’s military ability was also demonstrated by two victorious campaigns against western usurpers in 384 and 394. In the latter campaign, the usurper murdered the Western Roman emperor but 460 Theodoric was defeated by Theodosius, which left him sole emperor for the entire empire from Britain to eastern Anatolia. This was the last occasion when a single emperor ruled both halves of the Roman Empire. Theodosius governed not from Rome in the West but at Constantinople in the wealthier and more populous East. Theodosius was a zealous Christian. When he fell ill in 380 and believed that he was near death, he was baptized. It was not uncommon to wait until just before death for baptism in order to wash away sins. However, he recovered unexpectedly, becoming the fi rst emperor to reign as a full member of the church. This gave bishops tremendous infl uence during his reign. When Christians destroyed a Jewish synagogue in an Eastern city, Theodosius ordered the local bishop to pay for its restoration. Ambrose was appalled, believing that this demonstrated the triumph of Judaism over Christianity. He demanded the emperor rescind his order if he wanted to stay in good standing with the church. The emperor yielded. In 390, after Theodosius had massacred several thousand citizens in Thessalonica for the murder of his military governor, Ambrose threatened Theodosius with excommunication. The emperor again yielded, publicly repenting for his action. When Theodosius had fi rst reached the East, he found the church struggling against Arianism, even though Arian theology had been condemned at the Council of Nicaea (325). Theodosius expelled Arian clergy in Constantinople and fi rmly stood by the Orthodox Church, including Patriarch Gregory Nazianzus. He called the Second Ecumenical Council that met in Constantinople in 381 and ended the Arian threat. Theodosius also supported the church by legislating against non-Christians. He closed pagan temples, banned pagan sacrifi ces, ended the pagan Olympic Games, and declared Orthodox Christianity the offi cial religion of the empire. Henceforth, loyalty to the emperor was determined by adherence to his theological position. Upon his death in 395 his younger son Honorius ruled in the West, while his older son Arcadius ruled in the East. The dynasty of Theodosius ruled the empire until at least 450. See also Cappadocians; late barbarians; Rome: decline and fall. Further reading: Bury, J. B. A History of the Later Roman Empire. Vols. 1 and 2. New York: Dover, 1958; Williams, S., and G. Friell. Theodosius: The Empire at Bay. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995. Matthew Herbst Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism (often called northern Buddhism) are forms of Buddhism, a spiritual religion and philosophy created by Gautama Buddha (b. c. 566 b.c.e.) and followed by more than 700 million people worldwide. Developed over thousands of years, Buddhist tradition ultimately leads to what is called enlightenment, becoming a Buddha, and breaking the cycle of reincarnation. Mahayana, derived from Theravada Buddhism, dominates in India, China, Taiwan, Tibet, Japan, Korea, and Vietnam. Theravada is often called southern Buddhism. Theravada Buddhism is more conservative and is popular in Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Myanmar (Burma). After his enlightenment the Buddha delivered his fi rst sermon and set the framework for his teachings, consisting of the Four Noble Truths. Buddha laid out the fundamental principles of nature that ruled the human condition. He taught that these Four Noble Truths were the way people should frame their experiences. The Four Noble Truths are Dukkha, the suffering of people, stress, and discontent of ignorance; Samudaya, the cause of this dissatisfaction is desire; Nirodha, the cessation of desire and the achievement of nirvana (extinguishing or liberation); and Magga, the path of practice that leads out of suffering and into nirvana, Noble Eightfold Path. Buddha wandered the Indian plains for 45 more years. Along his travels he taught what he had learned in the moment of his awakening. Around him a community of monks, and later nuns, developed from every tribe and caste. These followers believed in his path, or dharma, and devoted themselves to his teachings. Buddha did not call himself a deity, nor did he wish to be worshipped. THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS AND THE EIGHTFOLD PATH Buddhist tradition teaches that living in ignorance of the Four Noble Truths is due to inexperience and desire to frame the world on one’s own terms and thus, one remains bound to the cycle of birth, life, aging, illness, death, and rebirth in another life. Craving and desire propel this cycle over the course of countless lifetimes in accordance with karmic actions. The Buddha taught that gaining release from this cycle requires adherence to each of the Four Noble Truths and to assign a task to each one. The fi rst is to comprehend, the second to abandon, the third to realize, and the fourth to develop. The full realization of the third is the path to enlightenment and the achievement of nirvana. Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism 461 The Noble Eightfold Path is a set of personal qualities that must be developed. It is not a sequence of steps along a linear path. The Noble Eightfold Path is the right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. The development of the right view and right resolve, wisdom, and discernment facilitate the movement of right speech, right action, and right livelihood, the three factors associated with virtue. As virtue develops, it is thought that the factors associated with awareness, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration are further developed. Buddha taught that the practitioner is then lifted in an upward spiral of spiritual maturity that eventually leads to enlightenment. As the practitioner begins the Noble Eightfold Path, an individual’s well-being is not predestined by fate, nor is it left to the whims of a divine being or by random chance. Responsibility for happiness is only dependent on the individual. With this realization it is taught that habitual ignorance is replaced with awareness. The practitioner is then mindful of his or her actions and chooses them with care. At this point some followers make the personal commitment to become enlightened and become a Buddha. Buddha died at around the age of 80. His last words were “Impermanent are all created things; strive on with awareness.” Naming the religion and philosophy he founded the Dharma-vinaya, the doctrine and discipline, Buddha created a social structure supportive of his practice. The monks and nuns who followed his teachings organized and preserved his teachings for prosperity, although none of his teachings were recorded until hundreds of years after his death. Buddhism is sometimes criticized as a negative, or pessimistic, religion and philosophy in its assertion that life is suffering and disappointment. The Buddha based his teaching on what is considered a frank assessment of the plight of human life. Practitioners believe that the Buddha offered hope for an end to suffering. His teachings were thought to offer the reward of true happiness and the cycle of rebirth. Although release from the cycle of rebirth means to become extinct after death, this extinguishing is considered the ultimate freedom from suffering. Assimilating Hindu, Persian, and Greco-Roman infl uences, Buddhism grew across India, Central Asia, and Eastern Asia into the fi rst century b.c.e. In the third century c.e. the emperor Ashoka of India converted to Buddhism, sponsored several monasteries, and sent missionaries into neighboring countries. During this period the practice spread across India and into Sri Lanka. As Buddhism spread, differing interpretations of the Buddha’s original teachings emerged, which led to the differing schools of Buddhism. One of these gave birth to a sect called Mahayana (the Greater Vehicle), and from it emerged Theravada (the Lesser Vehicle, also the Teaching of the Elders). Due to the pejorative nature of the terms and the historical regions in which the two branches became popular, the two sects are often called northern Buddhism and southern Buddhism. THERAVADA BUDDHISM Theravada Buddhists believe that they practice the original form of Buddhism as it was handed down by the teachings of Buddha. The doctrine of Theravada Buddhism corresponds with the recorded teachings of Buddha and is based on the Four Noble Truths. Through the practice of the Eightfold Noble Path, an individual can eventually achieve nirvana. However, Theravada Buddhism primarily focused on meditation, the eighth of the Eightfold Noble Path, and emphasized a monastic life removed from society. In addition, Theravada Buddhism required an extremely large amount of time to meditate. These strict ideas were not practical for the majority of people. The Theravada texts are written in a language called Pali, which literally means “text” and is based on a Middle Indo-Aryan dialect probably spoken in central India during Buddha’s lifetime. Pali was originally a spoken language with no alphabet. It is thought that Ananda, Buddha’s cousin and personal attendant, committed the Buddha’s teachings to memory. After the Buddha’s death, Ananda and 500 senior monks recited and verifi ed the sermons they heard. Because the teachings were committed to memory, the teachings begin with the words “Thus I have heard . . .” Teachings were passed down orally within the monastic community. The body of classical Theravada literature consists of Buddha’s teachings arranged and compiled into three divisions. The Vinaya Pitaka, “basket of discipline,” concerns rules and customs. The Sutta Pitaka, “basket of discourses,” is a collection of sermons and utterances by the Buddha and his disciples. The Abhidharma Pitaka, “basket of higher doctrine,” is a detailed psychological and philosophical analysis of the dharma. Together, these are known as the Tripitaka, “three baskets.” By the third century c.e. monks in Sri Lanka created a series of commentaries on the Tripitaka, and by the fi fth century they were translated into Pali as the Tipitaka. Since then the Tripitaka has been translated into many different languages. However, many Theravada students commit to learning Pali in order to deepen their understanding of the Tripitaka and related commentaries. 462 Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism The Tripitaka and related commentaries are not considered statements of divine truth to be accepted by pure faith. The teachings of Buddha are to be experienced and assessed through personal experience. It is the fi nding of truth in the teachings of Buddha that matter, not the words of the teaching themselves. In this way the Tripitaka’s passages serve as a guide for followers to use in their own path to enlightenment. Until the late 19th century the teachings of Theravada were unknown outside of southern Asia, where it had grown for more than 2,000 years. MAHAYANA BUDDHISM While Theravada was constructed for serious followers who could devote a large bulk of their time to mediations, Mahayana Buddhism could accommodate a greater number of people. Calling their path the Greater Vehicle, Mahayana Buddhists distinguished themselves from Theravada by calling Theravada the Lesser Vehicle. Instead of following a direct line of teachings from the Buddha, the Mahayana Buddhists believed they were recovering the original teachings of the Buddha. Their canon of scriptures represented the fi nal teachings and accounted for the loss of their presence for hundreds of years by claiming that these secret teachings were only given to the most faithful. Regardless of its origins, Mahayana Buddhism is a departure from Theravada philosophy in that the overall goal was to extend religious authority over a greater number of people. In this quest Mahayana Buddhists developed a theory of progressions for attaining enlightenment. At the top level was becoming a Buddha. Preceding enlightenment was a series of lives, called the bodhisattvas, or beings of wisdom. The bodhisattva was a major contribution to Mahayana Buddhism in that it was a concept created to explain Buddha’s lives before his last. In this tradition the lives of Siddhartha Gautama before his last were spent working toward becoming a Buddha. In those lives he was a bodhisattva, a Buddha-to-be, that could achieve wonderful acts of joy and compassion for others. Literature surrounding those lives is collectively called the Jataka, or the Birth Stories. Although much is unknown about the earliest traditions in Buddhism, some evidence exists that followers thought there would only be one Buddha. Within a short amount of time, it was believed that another Buddha would soon follow. This concept of the Maitreya Buddha, or Future Buddha, grew to include the belief that if a Future Buddha was coming then a Buddha or bodhisattva was already on earth passing through life. This meant that someone alive at any given moment was the Maitreya. In addition, the numbers of Maitreya Buddhas were uncertain. The person serving food or cleaning the fl oors may be the Maitreya. Instead of the goal of attaining full enlightenment, as in Theravada Buddhism, a practitioners’ goal is to be the arhant, or the “worthy.” The worthy is one who has learned the truth from others and has realized it as truth. Mahayana Buddhists believe that in this way, the follower hears the truth, realizes it as truth, and then passes into nirvana. Mahayana Buddhists adhere to seven particular features of Mahayanism. The fi rst is Its Comprehensiveness. Mahayana Buddhists do not confi ne their beliefs to one Buddha but strive to see truth wherever it may be found. The second is Universal Love for All Sentient Beings. This belief differs from Theravada Buddhism in that it strives for general salvation of all people. Third is Its Greatness in Intellectual Comprehension, meaning that all things in general are not directed by a metaphysical deity. The fourth is Its Marvelous Spiritual Energy. The bodhisattvas are thought never to tire of working for universal salvation, and they do not worry about how much time it takes to achieve this. The fi fth feature is Its Greatness in the Exercise of the Upaya. Upaya translates as “expediency,” or acting as appropriate to achieve a goal. The sixth feature is Its Higher Spiritual Attainment, meaning that followers strive to achieve their highest spiritual level. Seventh is Its Greater Activity. When a bodhisattva becomes a Buddha, it is then able to manifest everywhere to minister to the spiritual needs of all beings. Mahayana Buddhism disappeared from India during the 11th century. In Southeast Asia, Theravada Buddhism replaced Mahayana Buddhism. However, Mahayana Buddhism is the most popular of branch of Buddhism in the world today. See also Buddhism in China; Buddhist councils; Sakyas; Tantrism. Further reading: Eastman, Roger. The Ways of Religion: New York: Oxford University Press, 1999; Gross, Rita M. Buddhism after Patriarchy. Albany, NY: State University of New York, 1993; Lester, Robert C. Theravada Buddhism in Southeast Asia. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, 1973; Lopez, Donald S. Jr. Critical Terms for the Study of Buddhism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2005; Suzuki, Daisetz Teitaro. Outlines of Mahayana Buddhism. New York: Schocken Books, 1963; Trainor, Kevin, ed. Buddhism. New York: Oxford University Press, 2004. Melissa Benne Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism 463 Three Kingdoms, China The Three Kingdoms period lasted between 220 and 280 c.e. It inaugurated almost four centuries of political division in Chinese history, comparable to the Dark Ages in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. This is because similar to the Roman Empire in western Europe, the fall of the unifi ed Han dynasty signaled a period of civil wars, intrigues, and nomadic invasions and rule over northern China. Several events heralded the fall of the Eastern Han dynasty, beginning with the Yellow Turban Rebellion in 184 c.e. This peasant revolt with messianic overtones was put down by regional warlords, who proceeded to war against one another, with the hapless emperors as their pawns. Cao Cao (Ts’ao Ts’ao) emerged as the most powerful warlord, but his attempt to reestablish unity under his leadership ended at the Battle of the Red Cliff in 208, when his forces were defeated by a coalition of two rivals. As a result, Cao could only control northern China, while one rival Liu Bei (Liu Pei), who was a descendant of the Han imperial house, established himself in Sichuan (Szechwan) and the southwest with a capital city in Chengdu (Cheng-tu), while Sun Quan (Sun Ch’uan) controlled the southeast from the Yangtze River valley to northern Vietnam with his capital in Nanjing (Nanking). Cao Cao, known as one of the most wily and ruthless politicians in Chinese history, consolidated his rule in the north, gave himself the title of king, and would probably have usurped the throne but died in 220. In 220 Cao Cao’s son Cao Pi (Ts’ao P’ei) forced the last Han emperor to abdicate in his favor and proclaimed the establishment of the Wei dynasty. However, his rivals immediately challenged him. Liu Bei proclaimed himself emperor because of his imperial lineage, and his dynasty was called the Shu Han (Shu is another name of Sichuan). Zhugo Liang (Chu-kuo Liang), a brilliant tactician who gained legendary renown, and Liu Bei’s sworn brothers, Zhang Fei (Chang Fei) and Guan Yu (Kuan Yu), aided him militarily. The latter became known as Guandi (Kuan-ti), or Emperor Guan, and was deifi ed as the god of war in Chinese popular religion. Liu Bei’s early death in 223 and the inability of his successor resulted in the annexation of Shu Han by Wei in 263. Sun Quan also proclaimed himself emperor in 222 and called his realm the Wu dynasty. Meanwhile, Cao Cao’s weak descendants would suffer the same fate as the last Han emperor. In 265 the last Wei ruler was forced to abdicate to his powerful general, Sima Yuan (Ssu-ma Yuan), who founded the Jin (Chin) dynasty. Sima Yuan then destroyed Wu in 280 and ended the era of the Three Kingdoms. It was an era of chaos, wars, and murderous intrigues but has been romanticized as one of chivalry and romance. See also Era of Division (China). Further readings: Crespigny, Rafe de. The Records of the Three Kingdoms. Canberra: Australian National University Press, 1970; Fang, Achilles. The Chronicle of the Three Kingdoms, 2 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1952–65. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Three Kingdoms, Korea The Three Kingdoms period refers to an era in Korean history in the fourth century c.e. when the three states of Koguryo, Silla, and Paekche existed simultaneously until the unifi cation of the peninsula by Silla in 668 c.e. Koguryo was the largest and earliest unifi ed kingdom, followed by Paekche and Silla. Our knowledge of the three kingdoms comes from archaeology and ancient historical texts from China, Japan, and Korea, particularly the Samguk Sagi, Korea’s fi rst history written in 1145. Koguryo was unifi ed as a kingdom under the sixth ruler, King T’aejo, and occupied the northern part of the Korean peninsula and Manchuria in northeastern China. The Yemaek tribes, who conquered the Puyo state in 37 b.c.e., founded Koguryo. For centuries Koguryo kings fought against tribes to the north and China to the west. In 313 c.e. the Koguryo king drove the Chinese out of their Lo-lang commandery centered in Pyongyang. However, the Chinese retaliated in 342, successfully attacked the Koguryo capital, dug up the corpse of the Koguryo king, and departed with 50,000 prisoners. Paekche took advantage of Koguryo’s weakness by invading the capital near Pyongyang and killing the ruler. The golden age of Koguryo’s territorial expansion was during the rule of King Kwanggaet’o. According to an inscription in his tomb, he conquered 64 fortresses and 1,400 villages. He also took over the Liaotung region of northeastern China, which had been a focal point for Chinese attacks against Koguryo. He drove back a Japanese invasion of Silla in 400 c.e. In 475 Kwanggaet’o attacked the Paekche capital and expanded his borders southward by defeating an allied force of the Chinese Northern Wei kingdom and Paekche soldiers. Koguryo 464 Three Kingdoms, China dominance did not last, however, and starting in the early seventh century Koguryo was constantly at war with the Chinese Sui dynasty. Although Koguryo defeated the Sui invasions, the largest consisting of 1 million soldiers, the years of warfare signifi cantly weakened the country. The subsequent Tang (T’ang) dynasty also invaded Koguryo and was defeated until a fateful alliance with Silla, which led to the unifi cation of the peninsula. After the fall of the Sui dynasty Koguryo prepared itself for further invasion by the Tang, setting up defenses along the border between the two states and forming an alliance with the Turks. The key to Koguryo’s destruction was the pact between Tang and Silla and internal power struggles. Under this agreement the Tang helped Silla defeat Paekche, and then the two attacked Koguryo. The Tang court was not content to simply defeat its Koguryo enemies but intended to incorporate the peninsula into its state. The Chinese left 10,000 troops in Paekche after the latter’s surrender in 660. They also established administrative and military offi ces throughout Paekche. The Chinese planned a similar strategy with Koguryo when the Tang-Silla alliance laid siege to the capital, Pyongyang, in 661. After the Koguryo king surrendered in 668, the Chinese removed the king, offi cials, and 200,000 prisoners and placed rule over the territory under a military governor and established commanderies. Paekche was a kingdom that mixed Puyo refugees (who had moved southward after their defeat by the Koguryo) with native Mahan tribes. Although the Samguk Sagi claims that Paekche was founded in 18 b.c.e., the state was unifi ed by the reign of King Koi in the mid-third century c.e. and became a centralized aristocratic state a century later. Paekche was located in the southwest part of the peninsula and shared a border with Koguryo to the north and Silla to the east. Between the mid-fourth and mid-seventh centuries Paekche maintained a relatively friendly and consistent relationship with Japan, providing various technical and cultural advisers in return for occasional military support against Koguryo. It was Paekche that acted as the main conduit of culture and technology between China and Japan. Silla unifi ed as a state under the rule of King Naemul (356–402 c.e.) when the Kim family was established as the reigning family of the kingdom. Silla’s unifi cation was aided by adopting Buddhism as the offi cial state religion. Located in the southeast section of the peninsula, Silla often allied with Koguryo to help defeat the smaller tribes that were eventually incorporated into their realm and to fi ght off the invading Japanese. Silla also unifi ed with Paekche to counter Koguryo’s dominance of the peninsula. During the Three Kingdoms period Silla had a famous military academy and a group of young warrior aristocrats called the Hwarang. Originally a local institution for educating young males and providing them with military training at the village level, it quickly grew into a national center for young, elite male cultivation. Even after the fall of the unifi ed Silla state, the Hwarang (fl ower knights) were the heroes of legendary tales. The legends of the Hwarang should not belittle the very real military power of the Silla kingdom. Although it was the smallest of the three kingdoms, the great Koguryo and Paekche formed an alliance in an unsuccessful attempt to stave the rise of Silla and its alliance with the Tang Chinese. The Silla leaders understood that the Tang planned to take over the peninsula, and immediately after the surrender of Koguryo, Silla began supporting rebellions in the fallen kingdom. The Silla followed up with an attack on Chinese-controlled Paekche in 671, eventually defeating the Chinese. In addition to Sillasupported rebellions in Koguryo, however, were the Malgal tribes who fought against the Tang and eventually took control of the Manchurian area of former Koguryo. The Koguryo natives and Malgal formed a new state called Parhae. The chaos accompanying the fall of the Tang dynasty weakened Parhae, which was eventually invaded by the Khitan tribes in 926. Refugees fl ed south into Silla and became part of the Koryo dynasty. See also Choson; Kija; Three Kingdoms, China; Wei Man (Wiman). Further reading: Best, Jonathan. “Diplomatic and Cultural Contacts between Paekche and China.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 42, no. 2 (1982); Lee, Ki-Baik. A New History of Korea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1984; Lee, Peter, and William Theodore de Bary. Sources of Korean Tradition, Vol. 1. New York: Columbia University Press, 1997; Nahm, Andrew. Historical Dictionary of the Republic of Korea. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press, 2004; Woo-Keun, Han. The History of Korea. Honolulu, HI: East- West Center Press, 1971. Michael Wert Thucydides See Herodotus, Thucydides, and Xenophon. Thucydides 465 Toba (T’o-pa) dynasty The Toba, or Northern Wei, were nomads variously described as belonging to Tungustic or Turkic ethnicity. During the Era of Division after the fall of the Han dynasty in 220 c.e., and after invading nomads drove the Jin (Chin) dynasty to south China, confusion reigned in northern China. In 386 the Toba established a dynasty called the Northern Wei that would control most of northern and northwestern China until 534. The fi rst capital of the Northern Wei was near modern Datong (Tatung), a frontier city near the Great Wall of China, important because it guarded the boundary between agricultural China and the steppes. There they built a city modeled on Han capitals Chang’an (Ch’angan) and luoyang (Loyang). The Toba converted to Buddhism and showed their devotion by commissioning the carving of huge cave temples into a rocky escarpment near their capital called Yungang (Yunkang), which remains a monument to Buddhist art. In 494 the Northern Wei dynasty capital was moved to Luoyang, a city resonant with the history of China. Outside Luo yang they began to build another monument to Buddhism called the Longmen (Lungmen) Caves. The move showed the sinicization of the Toba aristocracy and their identifi cation with Chinese civilization. In 494 the Northern Wei government outlawed the Toba language, names, and clothing and ordered the Toba people to adopt Chinese names and clothes and to use Chinese exclusively. The imperial family led the way by adopting the surname Yuan. Claiming to be the legitimate successor of ancient Chinese dynasties, the government also forbade tribal ritual and allowed only Confucian and Buddhist observances. Intermarriage between the tribal aristocracy and Chinese upper classes was actively encouraged. The Northern Wei also behaved toward other nomadic peoples beyond its frontier in the same manner as traditional Chinese dynasties, when not warring against them, accepting tribute and bestowing gifts, including princesses when necessary. These policies resulted in a severe split among the Toba. The tough Toba soldiers who still lived by their ancient ways and who guarded the northern and western frontiers revolted in 523. Ten years of civil war followed during which Luoyang was sacked and many of the sinicized aristocrats were massacred, including the empress dowager and the child emperor. Two strongmen emerged in 534 who divided the territory: One part was called Western Wei, with its capital city in Chang’an; it retained tribal traditions and Toba heritage. The other was called Eastern Wei, with its capital city at Ye (Yeh) in Henan (Honan), where the Toba and Chinese governed in collaboration. Both of them were short lived and were replaced by two equally ineffective dynasties of nomadic origin. In 581 a nobleman of mixed Sino-nomadic ancestry named Yang Qian (Yang Chien) proclaimed the founding of the Sui dynasty under his leadership. He would unify north and south and end the Era of Division. Among the northern dynasties the Northern Wei had the longest existence and controlled the most territory. It owed its success and also its ultimate destruction to the policy of sinicization. See also Buddhism in China. Further reading: Gascoigne, Bamber, and Christina Gascoigne. The Dynasties of China: A History. New York: Carroll and Graf Publishers, 2003. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Torah The Torah of Moses is a unique collection of writings that either refers to the fi rst fi ve books of the Bible, the whole of the Jewish Bible, or, generally speaking, the “teaching” or “instruction” of the religion of Israel. In this article the fi rst meaning will principally be used. Because the fi rst fi ve books cover most of the laws related to the religion of Israel and to the current Jewish faith, it is also called the Law. In Greek these books are called the Pentateuch, because they are fi ve (penta) and they are set apart as an order or collection (teuch) of books. The fi ve books are Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. The fi rst fi ve books of the Bible tell the story of the faith of the true religion, beginning with the creation and ending with the relationship that the God of the Bible makes with a particular people called Israel. There is no other work of such scope in the ancient civilized world, either in terms of length, complexity of sources, or subject matter. There are older religious canons that have endured even to modern times (such as the Vedas for Hindus), but the Torah is more systematic and coherent in its present form. For modern Jews it is the oldest and most important part of the Bible, and Jews and Christian alike view it as the introduction to the whole Bible. According to Deuteronomy, the Torah refers to the teaching copied by Moses on Mount Sinai in response to the divine command. The teaching was inscribed on stone tablets and deposited in the Ark of the Covenant, and so it was something like a written contract uniting Israel’s God and God’s Israel. However, only half of the Penta- 466 Toba (T’o-pa) dynasty teuch is legal code. The rest consists of narrative stories and rhetorical exhortations so that the reader can read it as an interesting and persuasive book and not simply as a compendium of religious law. The story line, or plot, can be summed up in the following broad outline: the history of the human race (Genesis 1–11), the history of Israel’s origins and ancestry (Genesis 12–50), the history of Israel in Egypt before the Torah (Exodus 1–18), the collection of laws for Israel (Exodus 19–Numbers 10), Israel’s response to the Torah laws (Numbers 11–36), and Moses’s fi nal exhortation to Israel to follow the Law contained in the Torah (Deuteronomy 1–34). Moses is important but is not present in all of the material. The reason for calling it the “Torah of Moses” is that Moses is its chief character and is also considered by religious tradition to be its author. Writings as early as 400 b.c.e. assign the authorship of the Pentateuch to Moses, as do later Jewish and Christian authorities, like Josephus, Philo, the Mishnah, the fathers of the church, and the Talmud. This belief continued almost unanimously until the time of the Renaissance when its authorship was questioned. Ancient authorities had a different notion of authorship than moderns: For them it was suffi cient to consider as author the one who provided the initial impulse and served as inspiration for the writing more than the one who actually fi nished the job. For them the author was the one who bore responsibility for the creative enterprise, not the scribe or editor. Today, however, few modern scholars regard Moses as the only—or even the main author—of the Pentateuch. No passage in the Bible says so in such terms, although certain parts are specifi cally stated as his writings. Later readers probably felt that if Moses wrote some of the pieces, he probably wrote them all: After all, he spent more than 40 days on Mt. Sinai learning about the Torah’s Law. A good parallel to Moses and the Pentateuch is Solomon and Solomonic literature, that is, a famous person comes to be associated with a particular type of literature so that the popularity of both is increased. In the legal material there are 613 commandments that defi ne the relationship that Israel is to have with its God. These laws pertain to ethical, religious, and civil matters. They date from the earliest days of Israel’s founding as a nation to the later stages of the Bible’s formation. There may be several sources of material for the fi ve books, and these arise from various perspectives and dates. Scholars claim to discern the outlines of these documents in the Torah, but often there is not agreement about the seams and interpretations. Other scholars have noticed the similarity between the Torah’s covenant and the ancient treaties that the Hittites’ rulers imposed upon their client vassal peoples. The centrality of the Torah of Moses is evident in the later parts of the Bible. It becomes the basis for the legitimacy and inspiration for these books even before they are included in the canon. The writings of the New Testament, especially those of Jesus (Christ) of Nazareth and Paul, and the Mishnah and the Talmud also claim their authority from the Torah. This is especially seen in the rabbinic doctrine of the “oral Torah,” that is, the words of Moses that were not written down in the Bible. The purpose of this new canon (Mishnah and Talmud) is to unlock the secrets of the written Torah of Moses. See also Bible translations; Christianity, early; Judaism, early (heterodoxies). Further reading: Boadt, Lawrence. “The Pentateuch.” In The Catholic Study Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990; Murphy, Roland E. “Introduction to the Pentateuch.” In Raymond E. Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Roland E. Murphy, eds. New Jerome Biblical Commentary. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990. Mark F. Whitters Trajan (53–117 c.e.) Roman emperor Trajan was one of the greatest Roman emperors. Born within a distinguished Roman family from Hispania, he spent the fi rst years of his public life as a renowned general whose victories spread quickly through the empire. During the last years of the fi rst century c.e. Nerva— one of the Antonine emperors—decided the destiny of such an extensive territory. Adopted by him in 98 c.e., Marcus Ulpius Nerva Traianus managed to seize power and hold it until 117. He was a good example of how adoption proved to be extremely fruitful, since its system allowed minimizing the contingencies of heritage. Under Nerva and Trajan, after almost 100 years of empire, a new understanding commenced between the supreme authority of the princeps, and the community submitted to him, based on a twofold concession: the acceptance that this form of government was indispensable and the recognition by the emperor of the legitimate privileges of the upper class. Thus, the princeps’s power not only became stable and dominant, but also his relationship with the citizens improved. Trajan was more a good administrator than an innovator, believing in the supremacy of good management Trajan 467 over an excessive confi dence in reforms. Nonetheless, he reacted militarily when the king of the Dacians, Decebalus, prevented the advance of the army in Germania. He declared war against Dacia and conducted the army to his territory, where the king was completely beaten. Trajan did not kill his enemy, but despite his mercy, two years later Decebalus organized a new rebellion against the emperor. This time the traitor was fi ercely defeated, and all the gold mines in the area were confi scated. Trajan used the great bounty to fi nance a huge program of public works. He built a large aqueduct, a new port in Ostia, four new big roads, and the amphitheater in Verona. His most famous construction was the Trajan Forum. During Trajan’s period Roman culture fl ourished with masterpieces of Latin literature. Pliny the Younger was one of the prominent advisers of Trajan. He left hundreds of letters in which we can appreciate the emperor’s personality as well as the customs of the time. Aiming at concluding the work of Caesar and Antony, Trajan tried to expand the limits of the empire as far as the Indian Ocean, which he managed to do by fi ghting the Parthians. He was also able to conquer Babylon, Seleucia, Ctesiphon, and Susa. Unfortunately, several rebellions arose, and he was compelled to return to Rome. He never arrived back to the urbs, as he died on the way. Hadrian succeeded him. See also Roman historians; Rome: buildings, engineers. Further reading: Bennett, J. Trajan Optimus Princeps: A Life and Times. New York: Routledge, 1997; Cizek, E. L’Époque de Trajan. Circonstances Politiques et Problèmes Idéologiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1983; Lepper, F. Trajan’s Parthian War. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1948; ———, and S. Frere. Trajan’s Column: A New Edition of the Cichorius Plates. Wolfboro, NH: Alan Sutton, 1988; Rossi, L. Trajan’s Column and the Dacian Wars. London: Thames and Hudson, 1971. Silvana A. Gaeta Tripitaka The Tripitaka (or Tipitaka) is the Sanskrit (or Pali) canon of religious discourse most highly regarded in Theravada Buddhism. The literal translation is the “three baskets,” so named because the original writings were kept in baskets. The three elements of the canon are the Vinaya Pitaka, which are the disciplinary rules by which monks are expected to live their lives; the Sutta Pitaka, which are the discourses of the Lord Buddha and other leading scholars of Buddhist belief; and the Abhidharma Pitaka, which are a series of philosophical discourses on the nature of the universe and of Buddhist belief. The Tripitaka was assembled shortly after the death of Gautama Buddha through a sangha, or council of monks. It was preserved in oral tradition for some four centuries before being committed to palm-leaf manuscript in the fi rst century c.e. Owing to linguistic and cultural differences, the Tripitaka varies from country to country where Theravada Buddhism is practiced. In each case the writings are extensive and occupy many volumes. The Sutta Pitaka, for example, contains more than 10,000 sutras of the Buddha. These include details of the life of the Buddha and his road to nirvana, or enlightenment; Mahayana and Vajrayana forms of Buddhism also have their own Tripitaka canons. The Vinaya Pitaka consists of rules and junctures for both monks and nuns, although in some societies the role of nuns is not offi cially accepted. Various offenses against the sangha are enumerated together with their degree of severity and, hence, the sanctions that they attract. Monks are expected both to know and to abide by the 227 rules of the Great Division (Maha- vibhanga), which greatly expand on the fi ve basic precepts that all followers of Buddhism are expected to follow. An additional section of the Vinaya Pitaka is the Khandhaka, which contains a variety of different sections that are not presented in an intuitively logical order. This section contains precepts for the monkhood that vary from country to country. Members of the sangha spend much of their time studying and attempting to master the many meanings and lessons inherent in the Tripitaka. Lay Buddhists may also do the same, either directly from the original canon or, more commonly, through the mediation of well-read monks who are able to translate the lessons into language and concepts easier for most people to understand. See also Tantrism; Theravada and Mahayana Buddhism. Further reading: Conze, Edward, ed. and trans. Buddhist Scriptures. New York: Penguin Classics, 1959; Rahula, Walpola. What the Buddha Taught. New York: Grove Press, 1974. John Walsh Triumvirate The years prior to the First Triumvirate were unstable and anticipated future confl icts. A series of external struggles—such as a long war to suffocate the rebel- 468 Tripitaka lion of Sertorius in Spain, the second war against Mithridates, and the fight against the gladiators and slaves commanded by Spartacus—weakened the vigor of the already wounded Roman Republic. After Marius and Sulla disappeared from the political arena, the civil wars seemed to be over but only temporarily. A much bloodier struggle was about to begin. The First Triumvirate was a tripartite alliance shared by three of the most influential men in politics during those days: Julius Caesar, Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus (Pompey), and Marcus Licinius Crassus. This coalition lasted from 60 to 54 b.c.e.; however, the name First Triumvirate was never used by the Romans, and it is somewhat deceptive since many other men were involved in the agreement, such as Lucius Lucceius and Lucius Calpurnius Piso. THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE AND CAESAR By 60 b.c.e. Caesar was the foremost figure of the popular party, particularly after his achievements in Spain, which put him in a position to demand an opportunity in the near election for consulship. The Senate considered him a powerful opponent, and his candidature arose considerable resistance from the optimates. Even though Caesar had overwhelming popularity within the citizen assemblies, he was compelled to forge alliances within the Senate in order to secure his election. He needed a wealthy ally to support his ambitions, and he found that backing in one of Pompey’s rivals, Crassus. Pompey was discouraged by the lack of land reform for his eastern veterans, and Caesar skillfully mended any differences between the two powerful leaders. On the other hand, Crassus, whose business in the East was significant, could not achieve his projects without a politician like Caesar supporting his interests, so he joined the coalition with enthusiasm. Under the protection of these two prominent men, Caesar won the consulship in 59 b.c.e., and one of his main concerns was conciliation with Pompey. He managed to secure the passage of an agrarian law providing Campanian lands for 20,000 indigent citizens and veterans, which was expected not only to lighten the problem of the unemployed mass in Rome but also to please Pompey and his legions. Julia, Caesar’s daughter, married Pompey, further securing the alliance. By the end of his consulship, through the lex Vatinia, he succeeded in obtaining the proconsulship of Cisalpine Gaul and Illyricum with four legions for the term of five years, from 58 to 54 b.c.e. The extension of this period, unprecedented for an area with no imminent seditious crisis, was a real sign of Caesar’s ambition for external conquests. During this time he accomplished remarkable achievements, such as the conquest of the Britons and the successful defeat of one of his greatest enemies, the Gaul leader Vercingetorix, who was vanquished in the Battle of Alesia in 52 b.c.e. During his absence old rivalries between Pompey and Crassus returned, and in 56 b.c.e. Caesar returned to Rome to patch up matters, and it was agreed that both Pompey and Crassus should be consuls in 55 b.c.e. They obtained—as proconsular provinces— Spain and Syria, respectively, and Caesar gained an extension of his command in Gaul until 49 b.c.e. BREAKUP OF THE FIRST TRIUMVIRATE The bonds that connected these three personalities were soon broken. The first symptom of the imminent rupture was the death of Caesar’s daughter, Julia, in 59 b.c.e. Furthermore, during the years Caesar spent abroad, Pompey progressively withdrew from the senatorial party, which had never fully accepted Caesar’s power. Since the beginning it was clear that the weakest element of the group was Crassus. He died soon after the Battle of Carrhae, leaving the ground ready for an open clash between the two remaining forces. Civil war broke out between Caesar and Pompey; they fought for control over Rome. In 49 b.c.e. Pompey convinced the Senate that Caesar was a danger to their interests. Ceaser was immediately ordered to disband his army and give up the province of Gaul. Instead, Caesar crossed the Rubicon River. The river, close to Rimini, indicated the frontier between the Cisalpine Gaul, where the proconsul had the right to instruct his army, and the Italic territory, where it was forbidden to drive the army. No Roman could legally cross that line, so Caesar’s decision was a slap in the Senate’s face, and war against Pompey and the optimates began. As Caesar marched to Rome, Pompey and his allies escaped to Brundisium and, from there, to Greece. Finally, in 48 b.c.e. in the famous Battle of Pharsalia, Caesar struck Pompey, who retreated to the court of King Ptolemy XII of Egypt, where he was assassinated as a gesture of gratitude to Caesar. Caesar went to Alexandria and participated actively in the internal political conflict between opposing Ptolemy and Cleopatra. From 47 to 45 b.c.e. Caesar fought with followers of Pompey. After Pompey’s death Caesar’s power grew, and the Senate felt unease with his power. In 44 b.c.e. a conspiracy grew, led by Cassius and Brutus—thought by some to be the illegitimate son of Casear. Caesar was murdered on the Ides of March before a meeting of the senators. The political situation changed abruptly after the assassination of Caesar, and the political map had to be redesigned. His murderers were amnestied and forced to leave the city, while Mark Antony and Marcus Aemilius Triumvirate 469 Lepidus, also named pontifex maximus, became the two offi cial heads of state. In his will Caesar adopted Gaius Octavius (Octavian) as his heir—the future Augustus Caesar—and left him almost all of his fortune. This practically unknown, inexperienced, and extremely young man was studying in Illyricum at the time of Caesar’s murder and promptly set out for Rome to take control of his heritage. He tried allying with Antony, who refused to help him, having been offended at not having been appointed Caesar’s legitimate inheritor. Octavian gained power and raised a private army. He gained infl uence in Rome, which he secured through a series of demagogical acts, such as the provisions of food and entertainment for the urban plebs and adopting the name of the late Caesar. MARK ANTONY AND THE SECOND TRIUMVIRATE Antony departed to Gaul where, by means of the powerful legions that were stationed there, he gained increasing strength. In November Octavian, Antony, and Lepidus met near the river Bononia with their legions and formed the Second Triumvirate. Whereas the First Triumvirate was almost a secret pact of mutual help, the lex Titia presented to the tribunal assembly consolidated the Second Triumvirate within an offi cial framework and invested the initiative with legality. The triumvirate was backed and sealed by the marital union of Octavian and Antony’s stepdaughter, Claudia, and by Antony’s marriage to Octavia, Octavian’s sister. Lepidus, a former consul in 46 b.c.e. with no major political accomplishments, had an impressive military force in Spain and was wealthy enough to support the huge expenses that foreign campaigns demanded. He also acted as a shield between Antony and Octavian, whose personal relationship was never quite strong, both eagerly looking for power. One of the fi rst political acts carried out by the new government was the persecution of Caesar’s assassins. Brutus, after fi nding out that the Senate’s support could no longer save him, escaped toward the East, but he was captured and executed on the way, and according to Suetonius, his head was sent to Rome to be placed under Caesar’s statue. The punishment extended to some 300 senators, and 2,000 knights were banned and their possessions confi scated. The most famous case was the murder of the orator Marcus Tullius Cicero. In 40 b.c.e. the Roman territories were divided into three regions: Lepidus received Africa, the West was granted to Octavian, and Antony obtained the Middle East, Greece, and Egypt, where in 42 b.c.e. he encountered Cleopatra. It was the beginning of a relationship that would seal Rome’s fortune and their destinies. ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA Octavian in Rome was dealing with one last menace: that of Sextus Pompey, son of Pompey, member of the First Triumvirate. Being the provincial governor of Sicily, he had a large amount of power in the area, and therefore many of the outlawed citizens sought his help. In 37 b.c.e. the Pact of Tarentum renewed the triumvirate for another fi ve years. Nevertheless, the relationship between Octavian and Antony was deteriorating daily. In 36 b.c.e. as the triumvirate foresaw a clear danger, the island of Sicily was invaded, and Agrippa—one of Octavian’s men— defeated Pompey’s army. Later that year Lepidus tried to keep Sicily for himself, but his troops did not support him and deserted to Octavian, who consequently deprived Lepidus of all his triumviral powers, leaving Octavian with 40 legions. In 35 b.c.e. Antony and his wife were in Greece, and he sent her back to Rome and carried his army against Labienus (the son of a general who had betrayed Caesar), who was helping the Persian king to assemble a powerful army. Cleopatra joined him. In 34 b.c.e. he celebrated a huge triumph in Alexandria. He repudiated Octavia, married Cleopatra, and declared Caesarion, Caesar’s son, the legitimate heir of Egypt and Cyprus. By doing so he cut the fi nal bond that connected him to Octavian. The latter openly attacked him and turned him, in the eyes of Rome, into an Eastern enemy, dominated by the Egyptian queen. In 31 b.c.e. Octavian, elected consul for the third time, defeated Antony in the famous naval battle of Actium, which sealed not only Antony’s fate—he and Cleopatra committed suicide in 30 b.c.e.—but also the Republic’s destiny. See also Roman Empire; Rome: government. Further reading: Beard, M., and M. Crawford. Rome in the Late Republic. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985; Brunt, P. A. Social Confl icts in the Roman Republic. New York: Norton, 1971; ———. Italian Manpower, 225 BC – AD 14. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971; Carter, J. The Battle of Actium: The Rise and Triumph of Augustus Caesar. London: Hamilton, 1970; Clarke, M. L. The Noblest Roman: Marcus Brutus and His Reputation. London: Thames and Hudson, 1981; Gelzer, M. Caesar: Politician and Statesman. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1968. Silvana A. Gaeta 470 Triumvirate Troy The ancient city of Troy is the basis of Homer’s Iliad and site of the Trojan War. Troy lies in present-day western Turkey, at Canakale on the ancient Scamander River. Troy is known through the writings of the poet Homer and the stories of Heracles, Laomedon, King Priam, Hector, Paris, Achilles, the Trojan Horse, and Helen of Troy. Virgil vividly discussed the Mycenean Greek sacking of Troy in his book the Aeneid. The events that Homer reported as taking place in Troy occurred around 1200 b.c.e., and he wrote and sang them around 800 b.c.e. Troy was thought to be a mythical city in modern times, but archaeologists found proof of its existence. In the 19th century a succession of excavators determined that the ancient city consisted of nine layers, one on top of the other. Troy is known as the cultural center of classical antiquity. After the Trojan War the city was abandoned for four centuries, until 700 b.c.e. when the Greeks settled there. The Romans captured Troy in 85 b.c.e., and the Roman general sulla attempted to restore the city. Excavators determined that Troy I to IV existed from 3000 to 1900 b.c.e., during the early Bronze Age. At this time fortifi cations were built around the city. Troy VI existed from 1790 to 1250 b.c.e., and Troy VII existed during the middle to late Bronze Age. An extensive fi re destroyed Troy V. Troy VI, an embellished reconstruction of Troy V, was destroyed by an earthquake. Survivors built Troy VII around 1250 b.c.e., but they died in the Trojan War. This is confi rmed by the existence of a mass grave containing the remains of a Greek army. Troy IX was a trading city during the reign of Roman emperor Augustus, however it waned in importance after the rise of Constantinople. Concrete knowledge about Troy emerged with the excavations of Charles Mclaren, who found the ruins of Troy VII to Troy IX in 1822. German archaeologist Heinrich Schliemann, a wealthy retired businessman, illegally excavated the city three times from 1870 to 1890. He ruined much of the site, taking most of the treasures he found, and was forced to pay a huge fi ne to the Turkish government for the theft. The treasure was displayed at the Museum of Prehistory and Early History in Berlin. At the end of World War II the Soviets claimed the treasure. Further excavation was done in 1893–94 and again in 1932 –38. Sponsored scientifi c excavations took place after 1988 under the leadership of Manfred Korfmann, and no further levels were discovered. Two geologists, Jan Craft and John V. Luce, determined in 2001 that the geology of present-day Troy is depicted in the Iliad. The site of Troy is known as New Ilium and consists of a huge mound, a replica Trojan Horse, and a small tourist museum. See also Greek mythology and pantheon; Homeric epics. Further reading: Latacz, Joachim. Troy and Homer: Towards a Solution of an Old Mystery. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004; Moorehead, Caroline. Lost and Found: The 9,000 Treasures of Troy: Heinrich Schliemann and the Gold That Got Away. New York: Viking, 1996. Annette Richardson Trung sisters (fi rst century c.e.) Vietnamese heroines Trung Trac and Trung Nhi are sisters who led a failed revolt against Chinese rule in northern Vietnam between 40 and 43 c.e. and are honored as heroines in Vietnam. The Southern Yue (Yueh), or Nanyue, people are a branch of Mongoloids who lived in tribal society and practiced slash-and-burn agriculture along the coast of China in present-day Guangdong (Kwangtung) and Guangxi (Kuanghsi) Provinces and the northern part of presentday Vietnam. The area was conquered during the reign of the fi rst emperor of the Qin (Ch’in) dynasty between 220 and 210 b.c.e. and divided into three commanderies. When the Qin dynasty fell in 206 b.c.e., a man from northern China named Zhao Tuo (Chao T’o) proclaimed himself king of Nanyue and made his capital in modern Guangzhou (Canton). Gaozu (Liu Bang), the fi rst emperor of the Han dynasty, confi rmed Zhao as king, and a loose tributary relationship was established between Nanyue and Han. In 113 b.c.e. the queen dowager of Nanyue, who was Chinese and wanted a close relationship with Han China, was murdered by her opponents. This action resulted in war between Han and Nanyue, the destruction of the kingdom, and its annexation by Han, which established nine commanderies in the former kingdom. Chinese rule resulted in economic advancement, with the introduction of irrigation and iron tools for agriculture. It also resulted in the gradual infl ux of Chinese immigrants to the best new lands, especially in the Red River valley. Friction led to a revolt led by two sisters, surnamed Trung (Zheng or Cheng in Chinese transliteration), daughters of a local chief, in 40 c.e. One proclaimed herself queen. A number of local tribes from 65 towns and settlements joined their cause. Emperor Guangwu (Kuang-wu) of the Han dynasty reacted slowly, waiting Trung sisters 471 until 42 c.e. to appoint General Ma Yuan as commanding offi cer in charge of suppressing the revolt. An experienced general, Ma was given the title “general who calms the waves.” He reached Guangdong in 43, sent his supplies via ships, and led the 10,000 troops overland to the Red River delta. The campaign was quickly over, the sisters were captured and executed (some say they committed suicide), and the mopping up was completed by the end of the year. Ma returned to capital city Luoyang (Loyang) in 44 and presented the emperor with a huge bronze horse, cast with the bronze melted from Yue drums that symbolized the power of the chiefs. Resistance to sinicization and Chinese immigration was the likely cause of this revolt and many other similar revolts by aboriginal peoples in the southern borderlands of the Han empire during the fi rst and second centuries c.e. The primary cause was Chinese immigrants moving deeper into the river valleys and appropriating good land, either assimilating the natives or driving them to less accessible areas. Some natives revolted, and the Han government felt compelled to put down the revolts to protect the Chinese settlements. Whereas Guangdong and Guangxi were eventually fully integrated into the Chinese state, Vietnam (Yuehnan in Chinese transliteration) became a separate state in the 10th century. In light of this the rebellion led by the Trung sisters had nationalistic overtones, and for this reason they were revered as symbols of resistance to Chinese domination. General Ma Yuan became deifi ed in Chinese popular religion and was especially revered in southern China. See also Han Wudi (Han Wu-ti). Further reading: Twitchett, Denis, and Michael Loewe, eds. The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 1, The Ch’in and Han Empires, 221 B.C.–A.D. 220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Turabdin While the history of Christianity focuses on the Greek Church and the Latin Church, a third major source of the faith is often ignored or unknown: Syriac (or Semitic) Christianity. Its traditional center lies in southeast Turkey in a region called Turabdin, which may mean “mountain of the servants.” It is not truly a mountain but a limestone plateau overlooking modern Syria, on which were founded at least 80 monasteries of the Oriental Orthodox Christian tradition. Its people descended from the Aramaeans, who were the dominant group of biblical times. The language of its inhabitants even today refl ects ancient Aramaic roots, a dialect of Syriac called Turoyo. Centuries later the Eastern Roman Empire established its epicenter near Turabdin, in ancient Edessa and its frontier city Nisibis. The region then became the bloody border between the Persians and the Romans and, later, the Byzantines. Edessa—to the west of Turabdin—did not fall to the Persians until 609 c.e. Nisibis—much closer to Turabdin—was largely cut off from the Greco-Roman world when the Persians took the area in 363 c.e. and kept the region isolated from the West for centuries afterward. Successive groups of Muslims kept up the same policy under the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Seljuk Empires. Thus, because of Turabdin’s origins and its colonial status, it is one of the most authentic descendants of the biblical world. Legends speak of Thomas the Apostle, Addai, Mari, and others who fi rst took the Christian message to Mesopotamia. The fi rst bishop came as early as 120 c.e., but full conversion of the region did not happen until the fourth century. Residents of Turabdin set such a high standard for themselves that nearly every town and village had its own monastery and its own mystics and miracle workers. The oldest continual monastery in the world, Mor Gabriel, owes its foundation to that burst of Turabdin enthusiasm between 350 and 400 c.e. Turabdin boasts an honor roll of teachers, poets, and missionaries. In the foothills nearby Jacob and his pupil Ephrem taught one of the most important schools of theology. Awgin, the founder of Mesopotamian monasticism, and Abraham of Kashkar, the reformer of Syriac monasticism, also claim the heritage of Turabdin. Many of its monks possessed healing gifts and supernatural abilities of self-denial. One of the great benefactions of Turabdin is its collection of Syriac manuscripts, many of which have not yet been published. From its earliest days Turabdin has preserved manuscripts so that Syriac Christianity will not stray from its Aramaic cultural and linguistic moorings. It is through these ancient books that scholars have been able to discern the roots and development of Christian liturgy in the other Greek and Latin churches. See also Oriental Orthodox Churches; Syriac culture and church. Further reading: Hollerweger, Hans, with Andrew Palmer. Introduction by Sebastian Brock. Turabdin. Linz, Austria: Friends of Turabdin, 1999. Mark F. Whitters
The Expanding World 600 CE to 1450 Edit
Taiho Code The Taiho Code went into effect in 702. It symbolized the advances Japan had made since the sixth century in the establishing of a state in the Chinese style. Prince Shotoku Taishi had begun the practice of sending Japanese students to China in the early seventh century, a practice that continued long after his death. The returned students understood that laws, especially administrative laws, were a crucial component of the strength of the Chinese empire, because they defi ned the forms and function of the bureaucracy, the collection of taxes, and performance of services and justifi ed the secular and ritual role of the emperor. Emperor Tenchi (Tenji) (r. 661–672) had ordered the compilation of an administrative code, reputedly 22 volumes long, but it has not survived. His brother and successor Temmu had ordered a reform of the laws promulgated under Tenchi, which supposedly was based on the Tang (T’ang) code of 651. Temmu’s code also no longer exists. Then came the Taiho (meaning “great precious”) penal and administrative code of 702. Fragments of this code survive and more can be extrapolated from commentaries and the Yoro Code derived from it that followed in 718. It consists of several important component parts. First, it provided for a system of household registration used for assessing taxes for land and labor services from the people. A complex system of land allocation based on Tang China’s equal fi eld system was put into effect. Second, it stipulated the collection of taxes, based on individuals and not households. Third, it defi ned the administration of local areas: Japan was divided into 60 provinces, each containing districts and villages. They had been administered under local chieftains, which were switched to Crown appointees. Fourth, it covered the administration of the central government, which the code put under councils and ministries in the Chinese model. Fifth, it involved administration of military affairs. Another entire section stipulated state control of Buddhist monks and nuns, their training, ordination, residence, activities, and responsibilities under canon and civil law. This too was taken from the Chinese model under the Tang (T’ang) dynasty. The promulgation of the Taiho Code was shortly followed by the building of a permanent capital called Nara on a reduced scale of the great Tang capital Chang’an (Ch’ang-an). Until now there had been no permanent capital in Japan. Each reigning emperor or empress had used his/her residence as the administrative center of the state, which changed as each reign came to an end. This impermanence was due to the simple structure of early Japanese government and the belief of ritual pollution associated with a place where the sovereign had died under indigenous Shinto belief. The change to permanent capitals was predicated on new ideals from China and the increasing complexity of Japan’s government. The Taiho Code was an ambitious attempt by Japanese leaders to implement a complex legal system on the Chinese model where the state had much greater resources and history of administration. It was well enforced during the fi rst half of the eighth century. But it became less effective as changing social and economic conditions weakened the imperial court’s control over the land and people. See also Taika Reforms. Further reading: Hall, John W. ed. The Cambridge History of Japan, Volume I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Packard, Jerrold M. Sons of Heaven, A Portrait of the Japanaese Monarchy. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1987; Reischauer, R. K. Early History of Japan. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1937. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Taika Reforms Taika means “great change.” It was adopted as the name of a “year period” in Japanese history (after the Chinese custom of designating the entire period or a portion of a monarch’s reign with a name to signify the intentions of the ruler) starting in 645. The reforms that were made in the years following 645 were thus called the Taika Reforms. They continued and accelerated the adoption of Chinese institutions begun by Prince Shotoku Taishi. Prince Shotoku died in 622, followed by Empress Suiko, who died in 628. A succession dispute followed because of resentment of the Soga clan by rival clans. It culminated in a coup d’etat in 645 led by a prince who became Emperor Tenchi (Tenji) (r. 668–671) and a nobleman, who was given a new family name as reward for his services to Tenchi. That family name was Fujiwara and the nobleman, Fujiwara Kamatari, became the progenitor of the Fujiwara clan that would dominate Japanese politics for many centuries. Tenchi and Kamatari began a new wave of reforms based on the Chinese model. They had the advantage of many students sent to study in China earlier who had returned with newly gained knowledge. Five more embassies were sent to China between 653 and 669. The China specialists were appointed as state scholars. The fi rst reforms were aimed at strengthening the government’s control over the provinces and instituting ing a Chinese-style centralized taxation system. A census was taken. Adopting the Chinese concept that all land belonged to the throne, a land survey was made by imperial messengers to facilitate the collection of taxes. It started with areas around the capital city, later fanning out to outlying areas. A fi rst attempt was made to establish a Chinese style capital city at Naniwa (near present-day Osaka) where central government ministries were set up. The ministries and offi cials all had names and ranks fashioned after those of China. A law code copied from the Chinese code of the Tang (T’ang) dynasty was promulgated. The Taika Reforms were a very ambitious attempt to introduce the highly advanced system of government in China to Japan, where conditions were more primitive. Many of the new concepts could not be realized and compromises had to be struck. For example, the emperor did not have the power to deprive the clan chiefs of their land, nor to appoint all local offi cials. In reality the clan chiefs and local magnates were given offi cial posts and ranks that confi rmed them in control of their traditional landholdings. Shotoku had begun a wave of reforms patterned after Chinese concepts and institutions. Tenchi followed in his footsteps and expanded upon them and his successors continued, making pragmatic compromises as Japanese conditions demanded. All the reforms were synthesized into law as the Taiho Code, which went into effect in 702. Thus the Taika Reforms were an important step in Japan’s absorption of Chinese culture. Further reading: De Bary, Wm. T. ed. Sources of Japanese Tradition, Volume I. New York: Columbia University Press, 1964; Reischauer, R. K. Early Japanese History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1937; Samson, Sir George B. A History of Japan to 1334. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1954. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Taira-Minamoto wars The Taira-Minamoto wars, which led to the fi rm establishment of the shogunate as Japan’s military government, began in the middle of the 12th century. At this time power in Japan was almost evenly divided between two families of feudal nobility, or the daimyo class, the Taira and the Minamoto. Save for an allegiance to the emperor, more often acknowledged tacitly rather than in reality, both families began to see Japan as a prize to be fought over. The Fujiwara clan, whom both the Taira and Minamoto sought to replace, had been a power in Japan since the seventh century, serving as regents for the imperial dynasty. Sensing a waning of the Fujiwara’s ability to rule, the Taira and Minamoto mustered their forces. The Taira and Minamotos had one qualitative edge: Whereas the Fujiwaras were largely cultivated court nobles, the Taira and Minamoto were daimyo from the rough samurai 388 Taika Reforms military class, the professional warriors of Japan, who followed “the Way of the Horse and the Bow.” In 1156, the fi rst skirmishes took place in the Taira-Minamoto struggle when the clans fought in both sides of an imperial succession dispute known as the Hogen incident, named for the year it took place. The side led by Taira Kiymori won out. Ironically he owed his place of power to Minamoto Yoshitomo, who lost his father and brother on the opposing side against the Tairas. The grief-stricken Yoshitomo declared, “A man could not live under the same heaven as the murderer of his father.” In 1160 in the Heiji rebellion, named again for the year it took place, Minamoto Yoshitomo gathered his knights, his samurai, and his footsoldiers, or ashigaru. The fi ghting raged in the imperial capital of Kyoto and featured some of the most brutal warfare yet seen among the Japanese. The entire capital became a battleground, in which the highlight was the Minamoto’s assault on the Sanjo Palace. In one such battle, “wild fl ames fi lled the heavens, and a tempestuous wind swept up clouds of smoke. The nobles, courtiers, and even the ladies in waiting of the women’s quarters were shot down [by arrows] or slashed to death.” Taira Kiyomori gained the upper hand, and the bloodied Minamoto retreated east to the region around Edo, modern Tokyo. Taira Kiyomori began a purge of the Minamoto, hoping to kill off the opposing clan. However he left, as Stephen R. Turnbull writes in The Book of the Samurai, “a few young boys and an aging courtier, Minamoto Yorimasa,” alive. These would prove the undoing of the Taira clan. With the Heiji uprising thwarted, Taira Kiyomori took up residence in the capital at Kyoto. Soon the Taira lost their combative edge and evolved into effete courtiers like the Fujiwara. Kiyomori even married into the imperial family. However the Minamoto had only been biding their time. In 1180 Emperor Takakura abdicated and Kitomori put his grandson Antonoku forward as the next emperor. However the rightful heir, Prince Mochito, issued a call to arms to support his claim to the throne. Minamoto Yorimasa rose in revolt against the Taira clan. A large Taira force along the Uji River confronted Minamoto Yorimasa in the Gempei War. In an overwhelming charge, the Taira cavalry forded the river and Yorimasa faced defeat. Rather than surrender to the enemy, Yorimasa committed ritual suicide as his sons held off the enemy. Yet the Minamoto, once up in arms against their old foes, would not back down. Although Yoritomo had as yet no army to support him, his plan of action offered great booty, always an inducement to the samurai class, to any who would join him in the eastern part of the country. When Taira Kiyomori died in 1181, the hold of his clan on the country began to weaken. Two years later Yoritomo saw his chance. In 1183 he attacked. His cousin, Minamoto Yoshinaka, defeated the Taira forces at Kurikawa and again at Shinohara. In August the Minamoto forces entered Kyoto and an agreement was reached with the retired emperor Go-Shirakawa. While the compact allowed the young Emperor Go-Toba to rule, it signaled an alliance between the imperial dynasty and the Minamoto clan. With the Taira in full retreat under Taira Munemori, Yoritomo ordered a full pursuit: He intended a complete and decisive victory. Yoritomo’s brother Yoshitsune was given the orders to fi nish the Taira. The Taira sought refuge in a cliff fortress at Ichi-no-tani near Kobe. However in a daring nighttime attack, Yoshitsune and 150 men climbed down the cliff to surprise and rout the Taira army. The Taira force was driven back to the safety of Taira-Minamoto wars 389 In a daring nighttime attack Minamoto Yoshitsune and 150 men surprised and routed the Taira army. their fl eet. There they sought refuge on the small island of Yashima, located off the island of Shikoku. On April 24, 1185, in one of the few decisive naval battles in Japanese history, the Minamoto and Taira fl eets met off the Dan-no-Ura peninsula, where the Strait of Shimonoseki separates the islands of Honshu and Kyushu. The battle began auspiciously for the Taira as, using the tide as a weapon, they attempted to surround the Minamoto ships. But during the battle, some of the Taira captains switched sides as Miura Yoshizumi attacked the Taira ships from the rear, and the Taira navy was defeated. Taira Kiyomori’s widow grabbed her grandson, the young Emperor Antoku, and plunged into the water. Both were drowned. Taira daimyo followed their example, choosing death by drowning to surrender. Antoku’s mother, who also attempted seppuku by drowning, was rescued. She was permitted to live out her life as a nun and died in 1191 at the age of 36. With the decisive defeat of the Taira, Emperor Go-Shirakawa appointed Yoritomo as shogun, the military dictator of Japan. Further reading: Newman, John. Bushido: The Way of The Warrior. London: Bison Books, 1989; Turnbull, S. R. The Book of the Samurai: The Warrior Class of Japan. New York: Bison Books, 1982; ———. Samurai: The World of the Warrior. Oxford: Osprey, 2003; ———. The Samurai Sourcebook. London: Arms and Armour Press, 1992; ———. Warriors of Feudal Japan. Oxford: Osprey, 2005. John F. Murphy, Jr. Taizong (T’ang-tsung) (599–649) Chinese emperor Tang Taizong (T’ang T’ai-tsung), meaning “Grand Ancestor of the Tang,” is the title of the second ruler and real founder of the Tang (T’ang) dynasty in China (618–909). Born Li Shimin (Li Shih-min), he was the second son of Li Yuan, the duke of Tang, who was an important governor under the Sui dynasty. Taizong’s achievements and the policies that he laid down would make the dynasty the most powerful, successful, and prosperous since the Han dynasty. The Li family was descended from Li Guangli (Li Kuang-li), a famous general under Emperor Wu of the Han dynasty. As most aristocratic families in northern China, it had intermarried with nomads who had settled in the region; Taizong’s mother, the empress Dou (Tou), came from a powerful Turkic clan. In 617 the Sui dynasty was collapsing and revolts were widespread. Eighteen-year-old Li Shimin maneuvered his father to revolt and played a leading part in defeating numerous other contenders to establish him on the throne of the new Tang dynasty in 618. Li Yuan is known in history as Tang Gaozu (T’ang Kao-tsu), meaning “High Ancestor of the Tang.” As second son, Shimin was the object of jealousy of his older brother, the crown prince, who planned to murder him. In a fi nal showdown in 624 the crown prince was killed, Shimin became crown prince and de facto ruler, and two years later Gaozu retired and Shimin ascended the throne. Brilliant and precocious, he had by his late teens mastered the Confucian Classics and literature, had gained experience in administration and martial skills, and had led men into battle. A dashing and fearless leader who placed himself at the forefront of cavalry charges and who excelled in hand-to-hand combat, he boasted that he had personally killed over 1,000 enemies before taking the throne. Taizong was immediately confronted with a crisis along the northern frontier. Taking advantage of China’s internal chaos the Eastern Turks had launched massive annual expeditions along the borders beginning in 623, to plunder and also to instigate revolts against the new dynasty. The one in 626 reached within a few miles of the capital Chang’an (Ch’ang-an). Only three weeks on the throne Taizong, who was a man of imperial and intimidating bearing, led his men to confront the enemy and secured their retreat with a combination of bravado and bribes. His long-term response was to train and bolster his army, which allowed him to launch a massive six-pronged offensive with 720 miles separating the easternmost and westernmost columns in 629. A combination of superior Tang tactics and internal disaffection among the Turkic tribes resulted in a one-sided Tang victory at the battle at Iron Mountain in which some 10,000 nomads were killed and more than 100,000 surrendered. This campaign ended the Eastern Turkish Khanate and established Chinese dominion over the Mongolian steppes. Taizong was acknowledged “Heavenly Khan” by the Turks, the fi rst Chinese ruler to hold that title. The surrendered Turks were treated with kindness; many were settled along the Ordos region of the Yellow River and other borderland areas. Thousands of others settled in Chang’an and served the dynasty. Peace would reign in the northern borders for 100 years. Other campaigns broke the power of the Western Turks; established Chinese power throughout Chinese Turkistan, across the Pamirs into Afghanistan to the bor- 390 Taizong der of Persia; and also brought Tibet under Chinese suzerainty. The marriage of a Tang princess to the Tibetan ruler, the fi rst of several throughout the dynasty, would bring Chinese culture to that land. In 648 a Chinese force, with Tibetan assistance, crossed into India and brought an Indian rebel who had assassinated King Harsha Vardhana of India (Taizong and Harsha had diplomatic exchanges thanks to the Chinese Buddhist monk Xuanzang’s [Hsuan-tsang’s] journey to India) to Chang’an for punishment. Taizong also sent two expeditions to Korea in the 640s but failed to bring the king of Koguryo to heel. Taizong rode six horses to battle. Relief carvings of all six, with accompanying inscriptions detailing their names and deeds, decorate the entrance to his mausoleum. Taizong was a rationalist and believed that men, not heaven, determined the course of history. He was conscientious and hardworking, was concerned with the welfare of the people, and respected the opinion and sought the criticism of his advisers. He surrounded himself with able ministers. Wei Cheng was the most fearless of his critics, yet never suffered from his blunt rebukes of the emperor. Taizong called Wei his mirror for showing up all his blemishes and mourned Wei’s death as a great loss to good government. Because the basic institutions of the Tang were already in place when he ascended the throne, Taizong’s task was to consolidate, rationalize, and improve where necessary. He halted the growth of the bureaucracy, redrew the empire’s administrative units, and continued the codifi cation of the laws but lightened many punishments. His economic policies led to recovery and prosperity after the wars that marked the end of the Sui dynasty and led to surpluses that fi nanced his military expansion. He established a network of granaries that provided against natural disasters and stabilized the prices. He also extended and improved the militia system begun by his father. Taizong’s last years were marred by poor health; the death of his wife, the Empress Zhangsun (Chang-sun), who had been his wise and able adviser; the demotion of his heir for plotting against him; and rivalry among his other sons for the succession. He fi nally settled on a younger son by the empress, who would be known as Emperor Gaozong (Kao-tsung). But in death his reputation would grow and he would be acknowledged one of the greatest rulers of all Chinese history. His reign came to represent exemplary civil government, unrivaled military might, and unmatched cultural brilliance. Further reading: Adshead, S. A. M. T’ang China, the Rise of the East in World History. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004; Graff, David A. Medieval Chinese Warfare, 300–900. London: Routledge, 2002; Wechsler, Howard J. Mirror to the Son Of Heaven: Wei Cheng at the Court of T’ang T’aitsung. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Taizu (T’ai-Tsu) (1328–1398) Chinese emperor Ming Taizu means “Grand Progenitor of the Ming”; this was the posthumous title for Zhu Yuanzhang (Chu Yuan-chang), who founded the Ming dynasty (1368– 1644) in China. He was the second commoner to found a Chinese dynasty, the fi rst being Liu Bang (Liu Pang), founder of the Han dynasty (220 b.c.e.–220 c.e.). The Ming founder drove out the Mongols who had ruled China oppressively for a century and restored Chinese self-confi dence, economic prosperity, and international prestige that equaled that of the previous great Han dynasty and Tang (T’ang) dynasty (618–909). Zhu Yuanzhang was the son of poor tenant farmers from Anhui province in southern China. Mongol misrule and natural disasters reduced the area to penury and a plague killed most of his family. Left an orphan he joined a Buddhist monastery, and when the monastery ran out of food, he went out begging, then joined a rebel movement called the Red Turbans, one of many that emerged in southern China as Mongol power disintegrated. His ability led to quick promotions and marriage to the leader’s daughter (née Ma). She became his key adviser and mother to his successors. While other rebels looted, Zhu captured Nanjing (Nanking), a key city south of the Yangzi (Yangtze) River in 1356; set up a rudimentary government; and then subdued the entire Yangzi valley by 1367. Marching north he captured the Yuan capital Dadu (T’a-tu) in 1368, ending the Yuan dynasty (1279–1368). Zhu assumed the reign name of Emperor Hongwu (Hung-wu), which means “bounteous martial emperor” (r. 1368–98). By 1388 Ming forces had conquered all southern and southwestern China, Inner Mongolia, Manchuria, and Xinjiang (Sinkiang). Remnant Mongols were driven beyond Karakorum to the shores of Lake Baikal. Korea, many oasis states in Central Asia, and some Southeast Asian states submitted as vassals. Taizu built up a new centralized government on the Tang model, reestablished the examination system to recruit offi cials, and encouraged and subsidized local education to nurture talented young men for government Taizu 391 service. He also proscribed eunuchs’ gaining political influence. He earned popular gratitude by freeing millions of Chinese enslaved by Mongols, confiscating large estates belonging to Mongols and their collaborators, and granting land to the landless. The people were also given free tools and seeds and tax remission to rebuild a neglected rural economy, especially in devastated northern China. Taizu was also suspicious and insecure, and after Empress Ma’s death in 1382, increasingly paranoid and cruel. He ruthlessly persecuted and purged many officials who had helped him gain power. Taizu was predeceased by his eldest son and crown prince, and according to Chinese practice, passed the throne to a youth, the son of the crown prince. This action would trigger a war of succession. See also Yongle (Yung-lo). Further reading: Chan, Albert. The Glory and Fall of the Ming Dynasty. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1982; Mote, Frederick W., and Denis Twitchett, eds. The Cambridge History of China. Vol. VII, The Ming Dynasty 1368–1644, Part 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Talas River, Battle of In 751 a Tang (T’ang) dynasty army commanded by Gao Xianzhi (Kao Hsien-chih), military governor of Anxi (An-hsi) in the Western Regions, met an Arab army in battle at Talas River near Samarkand. The Chinese were defeated. Although this was not a major military confrontation, it had great consequences. Tang power and prestige stood at their zenith up to 750. Tang military forces had scored major successes and secured the frontiers from Tibet to Central Asia; the northern steppes were under a friendly semisedentary people called Uighurs, while the Khitans in the northeast and the Xixia (Hsi Hsia) in the southwest were contained. International trade flourished by land along the Silk Road, and by sea routes. However soon all would change. The aging Emperor Xuanzong (Hsuan-tsung), infatuated with a young concubine, the Lady Yang (Yang Guifei), had been neglecting his duties while her corrupt family and favorites dominated the government. The military system that had made the empire strong during the previous 100 years was deteriorating. Many of the frontier garrisons were manned by nomadic mercenaries and commanded by non-Chinese generals. Meanwhile Muslim Arab power had been expanding eastward. The conflict began as one between two local states, Ferghana, a Chinese client state, and Tashkent. It led to battle between Ziyad bin Salih, governor of Samarkand under the Ummayyad Caliphate, assisting Tashkent, and General Gao Xianzhi and his Chinese forces. Gao was badly defeated when his ally the Western Turks defected to the Arabs and retreated across the Pamir Mountains. The battle was not significant in the short term, because the Arabs did not press eastward to threaten China, but because of what followed in the long term. In the same year, nearer to home, the aborigines in Yunnan in southwestern China revolted and declared independence, creating a state called Nanzhao (Nan-chao). Finally in 755 the Turkic general and once imperial favorite An Lushan (An Lu-Shan) began a rebellion that captured both Tang capital cities and threatened the throne. The immediate result of events in 755 was the recall of Chinese forces from Central Asia, creating a political vacuum. That left the Arabs in a strong position. Likewise the power vacuum enabled the Tibetans and the Xixia people to expand their power at China’s expense. Even as an ally the Uighurs expanded their power at the Tang’s expense. Without Chinese military protection the Buddhist states in Central Asia would fall to the rising power of Islam. Chinese power would not return to the region for another 600 years. See also Uighur Empire. Further reading: Beckwith, Christopher I. The Tibetan Empire of Central Asia: A History of the Struggle for Great Power among Tibetans, Turks, Arabs, and Chinese during the Early Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987; Grousset, René. The Empire of the Steppes, a History of Central Asia. Trans. by Naomi Walford. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1994. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Tamil culture Tamil is a Dravidian language group that originated in southern India and is not linked to the northern Aryan language group. Tamil speakers are found in Tamilnadu, the region surrounded by Kerela, Karnataka, and Pradesh and parts of present-day Sri Lanka. Historically, the two largest and most influential Tamil cities were Madras and Madura. Intense trade and military expansion resulted in Tamil cultural expansion from 392 Talas River, Battle of the second century to the 10th century. At the core of Tamil cultural identity is the Tamil language. As early as the end of the third century, Tamil script and Tamil as a distinct Dravidian language are documented. Thus literature and poetry are at the core of culture in this period. However religion, another important aspect of Tamil culture, informed art in the form of painting, sculpture, and architecture. The fourth century began after the end of the classical period in Tamil literature and was also the beginning of the rule of Pallavas, which would dominate until the 10th century. While this dynasty is not of Tamil origin, the integration of this dynasty into Tamil society transformed the cultural identity. Pallavas encouraged the worship of Shiva and Vishnu and built lavish temples to honor them. They modeled their society after the great Aryan northern dynasties, the Mauras and Guptas. The Pallava kingdom marked the beginning of the Bakthi poetry movement. The greatest collection of religious poetry that is indicative of this movement is the Thirumurai, which includes hymns of Appar, Sampanthar, Suntharar, and Manikkavasagar’s mystical poem Thiruvacagam. The Chola kingdom (c.985–1300) began with ascension of Raja Raja I (985–1014) and the installation of his son Rajendra I. Their power and the crystallization of Tamil cultural identity provided a rich environment to facilitate cultural output. The Cholas were able to conquer vast amounts of territory as far as Malaysia. As they conquered these lands they erected glorious temples and statues including bronzes of the dancing Lord Natarajan. By the 10th century the Cholas had a well-established trade relationship with China, which aided in enriching cultural connections. Under the Cholas, epic poetry was written by three great poets: Kampan, Ottakkootar, and Pukalenthi. The masterpiece of Tamil literature from this period was poetry created from stories written by Kamban. Ramayanam (epics) were told in temples and were a part of worship. These were episodic public works performed in the temple, and in many ways were a reaction to the Bakthi movement. Avvaiyar was a popular Tamil female poet, whose canon of expansive work spanned many topics, including spirituality and wisdom, which was largely popular among the people. By the 13th century the Pandyas grew in political importance and displaced the Cholas as the dominant power. The Pandyas were highly profi cient in trade and education. They controlled the pearl fi sheries between the southeastern India coast and Sri Lanka, which produced the fi nest quality of pearls. The Pandyas kings were known as far as Syria. The Nayaka period (c. 1336) was the instillation of the Nayaks of the Vijayanagar empire after the gradual spread of Muslim political authority in South Asia beginning in 711 with the Arabs and later, Turko-Afghans and Persians. The decline of Tamil literature ends with the Nayaka Viceroy period under the hegemony of Sanskrit and Tugulu languages. However there was resurgence in Tamil literature in the 16th and 17th centuries. Tamil culture from the seventh century until the mid-15th century was infl uenced heavily by religious devotion in the form of art, architecture, and sculpture. It was also in this period that Tamil literature underwent many transformations. This period provided the foundation for later articulations of Tamil identity. Further reading: Bashan, A. L. A Cultural History of India. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975; Gnanasoorian, K. An Introduction to Tamil Culture. London: Institute for International Tamil Renaissance, 1984; Nilakanta Sastra, K. A. The Culture and History of the Tamils. Calcutta: Firma K.L. Mukhopadhyay, 1964. Stefany Anne Boyle Tang (T’ang) dynasty The Tang dynasty (618–907) brought three centuries of greatness to China, called the second imperial age, continuing and consolidating the unifi cation of China that the preceding Sui dynasty (581–618) had begun. Its formal founder was Li Yuan, the duke of Tang, a provincial governor under the Sui dynasty. The Li clan Tang (T’ang) dynasty 393 The rule of Pallavas encouraged the worship of Shiva and Vishnu and they had temples such as these built to honor them. was descended from a celebrated general of the Han dynasty (202 b.c.e.–220 c.e.) and from Turkic aristocratic clans. But it was his 17-year-old second son, Li Shimin (Li Shih-min), who actually engineered the revolt and who led the campaigns that wrested power from the collapsing Sui dynasty and numerous other contenders and nomadic invaders after seven years of hard campaigning. Three great rulers made the dynasty militarily strong, territorially great, economically prosperous, and culturally brilliant. They were Li Shimin (r. 626–649), whose posthumous title is Taizong (T’angtsung); Empress Wu Zhao (Wu Chao), who formally reigned between 690 and 705 but actually held power from 660; and Minghuang, whose posthumous title is Xuanzang (Hsuan-tsang) (r. 712–756). MILITARY EXPLOITS Taizong was both a brilliant strategist and an unmatched warrior and was helped by outstanding generals. Their feats have become legend. Under Taizong the Eastern and Western Turks were soundly defeated. In submission they became vassals and proclaimed Taizong their heavenly khan, the fi rst Chinese ruler to be so recognized. Under him Chinese power extended throughout Chinese Turkistan, across the Pamir Mountains into Afghanistan, and Central Asia, establishing a chain of client states, and for the fi rst time Tibet came under Chinese suzerainty. In 648 a Tang force crossed into northern India and brought an offending local ruler to the Chinese capital Chang’an (Ch’ang-an) for punishment. After several invasions of Chinese forces into Korea (they had contributed to the downfall of the Sui) Empress Wu reached a compromise under which the new Korean Silla dynasty acknowledged Chinese overlordship. With Tang power supreme, a new era of peace, the Pax Sinica, made travel and trade safe. Four embassies from the Byzantine Empire (called Fu Lin by the Chinese) came to Chang’an between 643 and 719, probably to enlist Chinese aid against the attacks of Islamic forces. In 638 the Sassanian king of Persia also sent an embassy to Chang’an, to enlist aid against the advancing Arabs. China did not intervene in either case but gave refuge to the fl eeing Persians, including Firuz, son of the last Persian king, who was made a general in the Tang army. Persian refugees were allowed to build temples in Chang’an and other cities and practice their faith, Zoroastrianism. In 713 Minghuang received from Samarkand and Bokhara in Central Asia appeals for help against the advancing Arab armies, and an embassy from the caliph. Minghuang did not intervene in Central Asia. Chinese and Islamic forces fought in 751, in a minor battle with big consequences. The Tang army, without court authorization, clashed with them and was defeated at the Battle of Talas River. With the outbreak of the An Lushan (An Lu-Shan) Rebellion in 756 Tang garrisons in Central Asia were recalled, making the advance of Islam in this until now Buddhist region unopposed. Tang power never fully recovered even after the defeat of An Lushan and his supporters. Under warlike leaders the Tibetans would establish their power across northwestern China and dominate international trade. POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS The Tang government was modeled after that of the Han dynasty, with refi nements. It consisted of the general administration, the censorate, and the military; the head of each division met the emperor daily. The general administration consisted of six ministries, with different responsibilities in supervising the local governments, receiving reports, and transmitting orders. There were 10 provinces whose borders accorded with geographic divisions; each was subdivided into counties that tied in number—there were 1,538 counties in 754. Civil servants were increasingly selected through an examination system that began with triennial county exams; passing candidates would be eligible for provincial level exams; the successful ones could sit for the highest level exams, equivalent to a modern doctorate, held at the capital city. Those who passed were then tested on calligraphy, had their background checked for morals, and then took an oral exam to determine their ability to handle problems of administration and were checked for their appearance and speaking abilities. Successful candidates received the most coveted jobs, working for the government, where they were evaluated every three years for promotion and possible transfer. All offi cials received a salary. The widespread use of paper made books more available and opened up educational opportunities for more people. The rigorous educational and examination systems were based on the Confucian Classics. China was the fi rst civilization to develop a professional bureaucracy determined primarily by merit. The Tang legal code was based on the Han code; regular government offi cials administered the laws with the assistance of legal aids. The Tang legal code became the model for later Chinese codes and was copied almost verbatim by Japan in the mid-eighth century. Whereas feudal institutions remained in part under the Han, they had totally disappeared by the Tang. Noble ranks were awarded to members of the imperial family, the families 394 Tang (T’ang) dynasty of the empress and consorts of the emperor, and meritorious offi cials. But the nobles were not granted land; instead they were supported by state stipends that varied according to rank. Censors were unique to the Chinese political system. The most promising offi cials were regularly rotated to become censors and each government unit had censors among the offi cials. Censors were responsible for ferreting out abuses of power and misgovernment and could reprimand the emperor and even impeach members of the imperial family. Censors also acted as modern ombudsmen on behalf of ordinary people and could protect low-ranking offi cials from their superiors. The military during the early Tang was called the fubing (fu-ping), or militia system, which young men from good families at age 21 vied to join, for glory and promotion. They became elite professional soldiers, serving in 600 garrisons that rotated between the capitals (Luoyang served as secondary capital) and the northern frontier, and were given land to cultivate to help support themselves, until retirement at 60. The Tang empire remained strong so long as the fubing system remained prestigious. However by the mid-eighth century martial spirit had declined; the militia could no longer rely on good quality soldiers and thus had to resort to mercenaries, and fi nally nomadic mercenaries recruited from among frontier tribes, commanded by their own offi cers. This state of affairs set the stage for the An Lushan (An Lu-Shan) Rebellion. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS The government took censuses at regular intervals. Government land distribution, taxes, and corvee labor assessments were based on census fi gures. At its height in 754 the census reported 9,069,154 households, equaling almost 53 million persons. This refl ected not the total population, but the total taxpaying population, because nobles and offi cials were tax exempt, as were clergy, minorities (nomads and aboriginal peoples), and the poor, who were not included in census counts. Taxes were assessed in kind—grain and cloth (silk or hemp depending on location), and each able-bodied male was liable for 20 days a year of corvee labor (unpaid) on public works projects. The land tenure system in effect until the An Lushan Rebellion was called the “equal fi eld system,” loosely based on the well-fi eld system, supposedly created by the duke of Zhou (Chou) for the new Zhou dynasty in the 11th century b.c.e. Under the Tang system all land technically belonged to the state. At age 16 each male received 80 mou of land (about seven mou equal an acre) from the state and could inherit another 20 mou on which he paid taxes and owed the state corvee service. At 60 years old his allotment fell to 40 mou and he was exempted from taxes. A widow was alotted 30 mou and 50 mou if she headed a family, and she was exempted from taxes. The equal fi eld system was fairly well enforced on a large scale until the mid-eighth century, which brought domestic peace and presumed a very effi cient bureaucracy. This system was also emulated in eighth century Japan. Improvements in agriculture, which included breast strip harnesses and draft horses, oxen-drawn plows, water-powered mills, and crude sowing machines among others, increased yield and raised the economy. Domestic and international commerce increased. By the late Tang era merchants were using bills of credit and deposit that were the precursor of paper money. Confi dent and powerful, the Tang was the most cosmopolitan era in Chinese history. Chang’an was the largest city in the world with over 2 million people within a 36 square-mile walled city and beyond. Luoyang, Daming (Ta-ming), and Chengdu (Chengtu) each had around a million people. Peoples from many lands mingled in the great metropolises, worshipping in Buddhist, Daoist (Taoist), Nestorian Christian, Zoroastrian, and Manichean temples. Clothing and hairstyles from many lands were emulated by the fashion conscious. The Tang was also the golden age of poetry. In addition painting and sculpture fl ourished. The Tang government never fully recovered from the An Lushan Rebellion. Few late Tang emperors were capable, and those who were did not reign long enough to assert their authority over powerful provincial leaders. The fi nal collapse was brought about by another rebellion, lasting from 875 to 884. From that time until 907 Tang emperors were the puppets of powerful warlords, one of whom forced his captive emperor to abdicate in 907, ending the dynasty. See also Chinese poetry, golden age of. Further reading: Adshead, S. A. M. T’ang China, the Rise of the East in World History. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004; Benn, Charles. China’s Golden Age, Everyday Life in the Tang Dynasty. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002; Schafer, Edward H. The Golden Peaches of Samarkand, A Study of T’ang Exotics. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963; Twitchett, Denis, ed. The Cambridge History of China. Vol. III Sui and T’ang China 589–906. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Tang (T’ang) dynasty 395 Tarascans The Tarascans, like the Mixtec and Zapotec, were non-Aztec, non-Maya Native Americans who lived in the area of west Mexico in what is now the state of Michoacáan. The Spanish conquistadors referred to the people as Tarascans, which was actually a derogatory term that the indigenous Purépecha used for the Spaniards. In Nahuatl, a Mesoamerican language spoken by the Aztecs (their contemporary and antagonistic neighbors), Tarascan territory was called Michoaque (thosewho- have-fi sh). One of the challenges to linguists is to understand the origin of the Tarascan language. It was unique, unrelated to Mayan, Zuni, or Quechua. From the late Postclassic period until the conquest (1200–1524), these people inhabited an area of Mexico bounded on the south and west by Aztec-controlled lands and on the north by the Chichimecs, a group of roving Native Americans, inimical to whomever they encountered. The term Chichimecs does not refer to a specifi c group but a general term applied to a raiding people who varied in time and space with regard to their ethnic homogeneity, incorporating others as they traveled. The Tarascans themselves had incorporated so many Chichimecs that only about 10 percent of the Tarascans were not ethnically mixed. At the height of the Tarascan empire, in 1450, their kingdom encompassed a huge area. Its former capital, Pátzcuaro, a group of islands in a lake of the same name (established in 1325), was moved to a larger area, Tzintzúntzan, which means “place of the hummingbirds.” Consistently with other Mesoamerican sites, there were pyramids with platforms and tombs. However, a distinctive structure unlike most pyramids was built on this site. The Tarascan pyramid called a yácata was round, rather than rectangular, and connected to a traditionally shaped pyramid by a passageway. Kings and royalty were buried inside. When a king or ruler died, many of his servants and family were killed so that he would not be alone in his journey to the world of the dead. Their skeletons have been found near his grave goods. The social structure was complex with a hierarchy ruling various administrative centers, and various groups of crafts people and artisans. There were masons for stonework, musical instrument makers, curanderos (doctors), knife makers, silversmiths, and potters. They wore ear decorations called ear spools, some made of ultra thin sliced pieces of obsidian with inlaid sheet gold and turquoise. Although Europeans looted the metallic gold and silver riches of indigenous Mexicans, the natives valued turquoise more highly than either gold or silver. Religious leaders identifi ed themselves by wearing a gourd container for tobacco that was carried as a backpack. Tobacco played an important part in religious and healing rituals as it did in most New World cultures. Unlike in modern medicine, the doctor (rather than the patient) took the medicine to enter the world of the supernatural and consult with spirits to fi nd a cure for the ill person. Tobacco prepared in strong quantities caused a trancelike state, which was necessary in order to reach the world of the spirits. Hallucinations and foaming at the mouth demonstrated that the shaman (doctor) had reached such a state. When the ruling Aztec lord, Axayacatl, invaded Tarascan territory in 1478, the Tarascan soldiers outnumbered his 24,000 troups. The Aztecs were gravely injured and were forced to retreat. Although the Aztecs tried many times to conquer the Tarascans, it was not until the arrival of Hernán Cortés and the conquistadors that both the Aztec and the Tarascan cultures were destroyed. Perhaps history would have taken a different turn if the Tarascans had aided the Aztecs upon learning of the arrival of the Spanish in 1519. Instead, the Aztec messengers sent to warn the Tarascans from Tenochtitlán were killed. The last king, Tangaxoan II, gave up when confronted with the power of the European invaders. After he surrendered, the surrounding areas followed without resistance, many already weakened by the ravages of microbes introduced by the Spanish. See also Mesoamerica: Postclassic period; Mesoamerica: southeastern periphery. Further reading: Adkins, Julie, “Mesoamerican Anomaly? The Pre-Conquest Tarascan State,” www.smu.edu (September 2005); Coe, Michael. Mexico. New York: Thames and Hudson, 1984. Lana Thompson Tenchi (Tenji) (626–672) Japanese emperor The man who later became Emperor Tenchi played a major role in the coup d’etat that ousted the Soga clan from power in Japan in 645. His reign was remarkable for the many steps taken to advance Japan by implementing reforms modeled on China. Three men ruled as emperor after the coup d’etat until 661, when Emperor Tenchi ascended the throne. He was not formally enthroned until 668, probably because he was preoc- 396 Tarascans cupied with a great fear regarding China’s intentions toward his country. The Tang (T’ang) dynasty in China that Japan so admired and wished to emulate was at its zenith. It had sent strong forces against the states in Korea, subduing Paekche and threatening Koguryo and Silla. Tenchi feared the resurgence of Chinese power in Korea and the impact that might have on Japan. Even though the Soga clan had been ousted from power, the reforms that Prince Shotoku Taishi, the great Soga regent, had begun were continued after 645. The decades after 645 were called the era of Taika or Great Reforms era, when intense attempts were made to move toward Chinese institutions of government and law. In 645 the future emperor, Tenchi handed over 81 estates and 524 artisans to the emperor, signifying his support of the central government claim that all land belonged to the emperor, as was the practice in China. Perhaps because of fear of a Chinese invasion Tenchi ordered his brother, the crown prince (later to become Emperor Temmu), to take measures to tighten the central government’s control over the administration and strengthen the army. He also built Chinese-style palaces for his administration at Otsu, perhaps to be safe in case of a Chinese invasion because Naniwa, the previous administrative center, was near the coast. There are accounts of Tenchi and his courtiers holding Chinese poetry parties at his palace, but none of their works have survived. Writing poetry in Chinese had become an honored cultural activity. In 668 he ordered his ally in the coup, Fujiwara Katamari, to head a board to compile a set of administrative laws and ceremonial regulations. Later accounts say that the completed administrative code consisted of 22 volumes, but they have not survived. In 671 he also promulgated a system of ranking for bureaucrats called “cap ranks.” Other measures Tenchi took to strengthen the authority of the central government included state control of Buddhist priests and temples. Emperor Tenchi’s reign is significant in Japanese history because it represented further advances in Japanese government and culture based on the Chinese model. See also Fujiwara clan; Taiho Code; Taika Reforms. Further reading: Reischauer, R. K. Early Japanese History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1937; Samson, Sir George B. A History of Japan to 1334. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1954. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Teutonic Knights See Knights Templar, Knights Hospitallers, and Teutonic Knights; Poland. Thomas Aquinas See Aquinas, Thomas. Tibetan kingdom The Tibetan kingdom was at its height during the seventh and eighth centuries. After 842 a schism in the ruling lineage led to decline, decentralization, and civil wars. The Tibetan kingdom submitted to Genghis Khan in the early 13th century and formally acknowledged Mongol overlordship in 1247. Records of the Shang dynasty in China (ended c. 1122 b.c.e.) mention a tribal people called the Qiang (Ch’iang) living in the borderlands of western China. They later moved westward into the Tibetan highlands. Early Tibetan history is mostly gleaned from Chinese historical records, most notably the Dunhuang Records (Tun-huang Records). The rise of the Tibetan Kingdom was contemporaneous with the rise of the Tang (T’ang) dynasty in China; its capital city was called Ra-sa (later Lhasa). In 641 Emperor Taizong (T’ang-tsung) of the Tang dynasty agreed to marry his kinswomen Princess Wenzheng (Wen-ch’eng) to the Tibetan ruler. She went with a huge entourage of attendants and Chinese artisans and introduced many aspects of Chinese civilization, such as paper and tea, to Tibet. During the same period Tibetan rulers sent representatives to India to learn about Buddhism; they introduced to Tibet a written script derived from Sanskrit. Tantric or Vajrayana Buddhism from northeastern India was introduced to Tibet; it replaced and assimilated Tibetan shamanistic beliefs called Bon. In 779 Buddhism became Tibet’s state religion, monastic lands became tax-free, and monks enjoyed the same status as nobles, both groups owning the serfs who tilled the land. The Tibetan kingdom reached its zenith between 755 and 797. Its ascendancy coincided with the An Lushan (An Lu-Shan) Rebellion that rocked the Tang dynasty in the mid-eighth century, and its aftermath when Chinese power was reduced. The rebellion compelled the withdrawal of Chinese garrisons from Central Asia, leading to the submission of some of the minor states in the region to Tibetan hegemony. Tibetan power penetrated into Gansu (Kansu) province in northwestern China and threatened both the strategic Chinese outpost at Dunhuang and Hami and even the Chinese capital Chang’an (Ch’ang-an). Tibetan kingdom 397 To contain Tibet, Tang China made peace with its other neighbors, the Uighur Empire in the north, the Arabs in the west, and the Nanzhao (Nanchao) in the south, after 787. In 792 the Tibetan army was badly defeated by the Uighurs. In 821–822 Tibet made peace with both China and the Uighurs. By the mid-ninth century civil wars within the royal family and wars between powerful nobles and monks had fractured the Tibetan kingdom. In the early 13th century Tibet surrendered to Genghis Khan and was thus spared Mongol invasion. In 1247 it acknowledged Mongol overlordship and paid taxes to the Mongol court but was not subjected to a Mongol occupation force. Kubilai Khan converted to Tibetan Buddhism, greatly favored Tibetan monks, and encouraged his followers to convert. A Tibetan monk gave the Mongols a new written script called the Phagspa script named after its inventor; it replaced the earlier script based on Uighur. Further reading: Sinor, Denis ed. The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990; Beckwith, Christopher I. The Tibetan Empire in Central Asia: A History of the Struggle for Great Power among Tibetans, Turks, Arabs, and Chinese During the Early Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987; Richardson, H. Tibet and its History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1962; Twitchett, Denis, ed. The Cambridge History of China, Volume 3, Sui and T’ang China, 589–906. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Timurlane (Tamerlane) (1336–1405) ruler of Central and Southwest Asia Timurlane, or Timur the Lame, was the founder of the Timurid dynasty that lasted until 1506. Under the reign of the Timurid dynasty, culture, art, and trade experienced a successful revival and fl ourished in the region now known as Central Asia. During his military career of about 50 years cut short by his death by pneumonia in 1405, Timurlane’s empire spanned most of Central and Southwest Asia, from the Indus River valley to the Black Sea. On April 11, 1336, Timurlane, also known as Tamerlane, Timur Leng (Persian), or Tamarlang (Arabic), was born in Kesh, also known as Shahr-e-Sabz, situated at the edge of the mountains just south of Samarkand, which would be the future capital of his empire. He was the son of a Turco-Mongol tribal leader of Barlas. His father was the fi rst of his tribesmen to convert to Islam, and the young Timurlane, a Sunni Muslim, learned how to read the Qur’an. In fact Timurlane often attacked the lands of infi dels or other erring Muslims under the pretext of Islam, but this was only to justify his excesses. Similarly he maintained good relations with other Muslims for purely political reasons. His treatment of Muslims and non-Muslims who opposed him was similarly pitiless and brutal. He earned the title Timur the Lame because of an injury in the leg sustained early in his life, either during a local rebellion, or by an arrow in the thigh shot by a farmer whose sheep Timur had stolen. Timurlane was very much inspired by another great leader and conqueror, Genghis Khan, the great Mongol conqueror of the 12th and 13th centuries. Timurlane even claimed direct descent from Genghis Khan, although this has never been proved. Timur embarked on his grand quest to take over the world when he was only 21 years old. By 1358 he had already established himself as a military leader. Timurlane’s army consisted mainly of Turks and Turkic- speaking Mongols. He began his campaign by subduing rival forces in Turkistan. By 1370 both Turkistan and Samarkand were under his control. He established a stronghold in Samarkand, the capital city, in the form of a citadel in the western section with deep ravines around it. Samarkand became his favorite city, which he rebuilt into an opulent city with magnifi cent architecture in order to project himself as a wealthy and powerful ruler. He valued opulence so much that master craftsmen and artisans in each defeated country were spared from death. Instead Timurlane would employ them in order to build grand, imposing architectural structures in the lands that he conquered to refl ect the grandeur and luxury of his empire. From his military base in the city, Timur launched attacks on neighboring lands. His objective was to conquer as many countries as possible in order to gain taxable domains. Timurlane and his ally Mir Hussain conquered Transoxania in 1364 by driving out the Chaqatai (Jagatai) khans. Breaking away from Mir Hussain, Timur marched onward to Khwarazm, a fertile zone lying on the southern shore of the Aral Sea, in 1371, where war was to last another eight years resulting in a victory for Timurlane. Timurlane crushed the Chagatai khans and annexed territory in the Tian Shan (T’ien-shan) mountains after three years of warfare there. Timurlane continued to conquer land westward until he reached Herat (present-day Afghanistan) in 1381, the land of Toqtamish Khan of the Golden Horde, a successor of Genghis Khan’s world empire whom Timur had helped to conquer the White Horde. In 1386 Timur invaded western Iran, Iraq, and Georgia. The 398 Timurlane method of massacre this time around was pushing men off the cliffs. In 1391 he took on Toqtamish. Toqtamish retreated, even though his forces were greater in number than those of Timurlane; as the morale of his forces dipped, Timur seized his land, harem, and treasures. Georgia was again attacked by Timurlane in 1399 and was defeated. In 1400 Timurlane advanced into Anatolia, which had recently become part of the Ottoman Empire. Finally after taking Damascus and Aleppo, Timur faced his most formidable adversary, Bayezid I, the Ottoman sultan. In 1402 Timur besieged Ankara and after a grueling battle Bayezid was defeated. Timur was also known for his sadistic cruelty in dealing with those who stood in his way during his conquests. He often launched savage massacres of his enemies and resistors such as in Delhi, where he slaughtered 80,000 individuals and built grisly pyramids of their skulls to commemorate his victory. The same piling of skulls occurred earlier in Aleppo. In the late 1380s after a military rampage across the Middle East in Sistan, 2,000 people were laid in wet plaster and built into a briefl y living tower. By the time he died, Timurlane had conquered expansive regions in Russia, Iran, India, and Central Asia. Most historians agree that if not for his death, he would have attempted to conquer China as well. Timur is buried in the ostentatious Gur Emir mausoleum, covered in gold leaf and lapis blue. His tomb is made of nephrite jade; in contrast his other family members were buried in marble tombs around him. Further reading: Manz, Beatrice Forbes. The Rise and Fall of Tamerlane. London: Cambridge University Press, 1989; Nicolle, David. The Mongol Warlords: Genghis Khan, Kublai Khan, Hulegu, Tamerlane. Poole: Firebird Books, 1990. Nurfadzilah Yahaya Toghon Temur Khan (1320–1370) last Mongol ruler of China Toghon Temur Khan was the last ruler of the Mongol Yuan dynasty (1279–1368). He ascended the throne at age 13 in 1333 and ruled until 1368 when his dynasty collapsed. His Chinese reign name was Shundi (Shun-ti). Kubilai Khan, founder of the Yuan dynasty, ruled between 1279 and 1294. His son and heir predeceased him, and he appointed a grandson his successor, Temur Oljeitu, who ruled 1294–1307 and died without sons. The throne then became disputed, with short-reigned rulers being deposed, murdered, or dying young from lives fi lled with alcohol and dissipation. Because of his youth Toghon Temur’s early years as emperor saw court intrigues and struggles for power. The most powerful man during 1333–40 was his chancellor Bayan. Bayan’s goal was to restore the Yuan dynasty to its early glory by drawing a sharp line between Mongols and Chinese by forbidding Chinese to learn the Mongol language and banning intermarriages. He also banned Chinese from owning horses and iron tools, and, to combat opposition, he even proposed killing all Chinese bearing the fi ve most common surnames. Fortunately, by this time the government had Toghon Temur Khan 399 Timurlane attacking the Knights of St. John at Smyrna. Miniature created by Bihzad, 1467. insuffi cient resources to murder 90 percent of the total population who bore those surnames. In 1340 Bayan was ousted in a coup engineered by his nephew Toghto, who became chancellor. Although now a grown man, Toghon Temur showed no interest in government, spending his time indulging in bizarre Lamaist Buddhist practices and general debauchery. Faced with a shortage of revenue he ordered printed huge amounts of inadequately backed paper money. By the 1350s natural disasters combined with massive mismanagement had led to nationwide general uprisings as bandits, religious sectarians, and other dissidents ran amok, which the by now decadent Mongol military could not suppress. The Yangzi (Yangtze) River valley fi rst became the battleground of several Chinese rebel groups. Among them one leader of very humble origins, Zhu Yuanzhang (Chu Yuan-chang), emerged as a man of vision. In 1356 he seized Nanjing (Nanking) from the Mongols and made it his capital. While this was taking place Toghon Temur continued his life of debauchery as Mongol princes intrigued and fought one another in northern China for control. Zhu left Nanjing in August 1368 heading north at the head of his army. Toghon Temur fl ed his capital Dadu (T’a-tu) on September 10, back to the steppes of Mongolia, and died two years later, in 1370. Among his last recorded words were “My great city of Dadu, adorned with varied splendor; Shangdu [Shang-tu], my delectable cool summer retreat; and those yellowing plains, the delight and refreshment of my divine ancestors! What evil I have committed to lose my empire thus!” See also Ming dynasty; Taizu (T’ai-Tsu). Further reading: Franke, Herbert, and Denis Twitchett, eds. The Cambridge History of China. Vol. VI, Alien Regimes and Border States 907–1368. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994; Dardess, John W. Background Factors in the Rise of the Ming Dynasty. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1969; Langlois, John D., ed. China Under Mongol Rule. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1981; Mote, Frederick, and Denis Twitchett eds. The Cambridge History of China, Volume 7, The Ming Dynasty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Tours, Battle of The fi rst wave of Muslim expansion into Iberia, present- day Spain and Portugal, began in 711 during the reign of the Umayyad caliph Abd al-Malik. Led by a Berber commander, Tariq ibn al-Ziyad, this expedition landed in Gibraltar and was followed by further Muslim expansion and the foundation of an Umayyad dominion in Iberia, centered in the city of Córdoba. The Muslims were able to overcome the small states that existed in Iberia because of the fractured nature of Iberian Christendom. In 730 the Umayyad caliph Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik appointed a new governor, Abd al-Rahman al-Ghafi qi, of the Iberian Muslim state, known in Arabic as al-Andalus. Despite their religious differences, some Muslim and Christian rulers signed treaties with one another and formed alliances in order to further their political goals. In 721 the army of Eudes, Christian duke of Aquitaine, defeated an Umayyad invasion force at Toulouse. However Muslim incursions into France continued, reaching as far north as the province of Burgundy by the mid-720s. Eudes formed an alliance with Uthman ibn Naissa, the Berber ruler of Catalonia, and when Uthman rebelled against Abd al-Rahman, he was dragged into a confl ict with the Umayyads. After defeating Uthman’s forces, Abd al- Rahman began to campaign against Eudes, defeating him in a fi erce battle near the city of Bordeaux and the Garonne River. Desperate for aid, Eudes turned toward the Carolingian Frankish ruler Charles Martel, agreeing to submit to his authority. Charles, son of Pippin the Middle and mayor of the Palace and ruler of the Frankish realms of Austrasia, moved his infantry army south to intercept Abd al-Rahman and tens of thousands of Muslim cavalrymen heading toward the monastery of St. Martin in Tours. In October 732 Charles positioned the Frankish army, which was made up entirely of armored infantrymen equipped with heavy shields and long spears, between the Muslim invasion force and the monastery of St. Martin. Abd al-Rahman’s army, which was made up entirely of Arab and Berber cavalry, met the Franks near Tours and the two sides scouted one another’s positions and skirmished for nearly a week before commencing battle on the seventh day. Abd al-Rahman’s army was the larger of the two. The Frankish infantry formed into a tightly grouped phalanx and managed to repel successive Muslim cavalry charges throughout the day. Late in the battle Abd al-Rahman was killed while trying to rally waning Muslim forces and his army halted their attacks. With a substantial amount of captured treasure from their campaign in southern France, the Muslims decided to withdraw south back toward Ibe- 400 Tours, Battle of ria. In later campaigns, Charles continued to push the Iberian Muslims back across the Pyrenees Mountains and out of France. Scholars, including the 18th century English historian Edward Gibbon, saw Charles’s victory as a landmark moment in history when a Christian ruler halted Muslim forces from advancing farther into western Europe and establishing an Islamic state there. Because of his defeat of a much larger Muslim force, Charles was given the nickname Martel or “The Hammer” and continued to expand Carolingian power throughout France and Germany. His grandson Charlemagne would rule over a Frankish empire as one of the most powerful Christian rulers in Europe. See also Berbers; Carolingian dynasty; Frankish tribe; Muslim Spain; Umayyad dynasty. Further reading: Bachrach, Bernard S. Early Carolingian Warfare: Prelude to Empire. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001; Blankinship, Khalid Yahya. The End of the Jihad State: The Reign of Hisham Ibn ‘Abd al- Malik and the Collapse of the Umayyads. New York: State University of New York Press, 1994; Fouracre, Paul. The Age of Charles Martel. New York: Longman, 2000; Hawting, G. R. The First Dynasty of Islam: The Umayyad Caliphate, a.d. 661–750. New York: Routledge, 2000; Riché, Pierre. The Carolingians: A Family Who Forged Europe. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1993. Christopher Anzalone Truce and Peace of God The Truce and Peace of God was an effort or movement by the Roman Catholic Church that applied spiritual sanctions to limit the violence of private war in feudal society. The year 1000 was a fundamental turning point in European history. The feudal system as it had evolved since the Carolingian dynasty was undergoing change because of economic, political, and religious factors. European leaders began to cultivate imperial endeavors and were competing for natural resources and labor in order to expand their markets and acquire territories. The Truce of God was the solution to the problem of military groups taking the law into their own hands, prosecuting their own disputes without recognizing any authority, and confi scating lands. Prior to the development of the Truce of God, nobles became more powerful and contested monarchical authority, especially in France. Villagers became victims of incessant warfare, and they were subjected to the claimed authority of military lords who promised to defend the weak in return for the fruits and produce of servile labor. People turned to religious authorities for protection. The Truce of God was therefore a political and religious response to the competitiveness of feudal society. On the religious plane, the truce was a large peace movement spiritually connected to the millennial anniversary of Christ’s life on Earth. The primary goal of the Truce of God was to protect church lands and rights. Church and municipal organizations cooperated to deal with violence and used religious and spiritual techniques to counter the aggression of armed knights. Churchmen were particularly interested in defending their properties because they were the largest landowners in medieval society. While the Truce of God was a temporary suspension of hostilities, the Peace of God was considered perpetual. The Peace of God included only the clergy but eventually incorporated the poor, pilgrims, and crusaders. Although the Peace of God developed to include the laity (when they suspended judicial and military disputes), spiritual leaders expanded the Peace of God platform to establish sharp distinctions between the laity and the clergy, between the sacred and the secular. As the clerical establishment set limits to internal Christian warfare and sanctifi ed violence against the enemies of Europe, in particular Muslims, the Peace of God spread from France to the German empire. Warfare against the enemies of God and the enforcement of the division between spiritual and physical authority were both concepts and agendas that united diverse Christian societies in Europe. The popularity of the Truce of God was in part due to ancient devotions and the cult of the saints. Tradition supported new ideas and practices. Bishops and monks relied on saints and the relics of the saints to defend themselves. Churchmen convoked peace councils in order to convince warrior elites to take up the cross and oaths of peace. Churchmen reminded their fl ocks of the great martyrs and saints who endured torture and loss of property in return for divine favor. The memory of the sacrifi ces of the saints and martyrs inspired Christians to make sacrifi ces such as the cessation of hostilities. These peace councils were fi rst held in Aquitaine and Burgundy. In 975 Bishop Guy Le Puy called upon his community to protect the church from pillagers. Clerics across France formulated peace canons, and territorial Truce and Peace of God 401 princes formed peace movements centered on the cult of local saints and shrines containing relics. Prelates organized peace militia that protected monastic holdings and persecuted heretical groups. At the Synod of Arles in 1041, clerics, especially Cluniac monks, banned the shedding of Christian blood and suggested that Christians could not fi ght other Christians from Thursday to Monday morning (in commemoration of Christ’s passion), and important feast days such as Lent. Christian leaders encouraged military elites to divert their aggression toward the non-Christian, thus preparing a crusading spirit, which would manifest itself in the First Crusade in 1095. In 1095 Pope Urban II authorized the war against Muslims in the Holy Land on the basis that God would approve such noble efforts. Church leaders also encouraged powerful lords to centralize their government, redirecting the military power of the knights against the infi del. The most powerful lords were the kings, who by the 12th century began to enforce their own programs of national peace, monopolizing violence against infi dels and heretics. The struggle for power among the nobility resulted in new feudal relationships as new families came to prominence. Noble families fortifi ed their holdings by establishing primogeniture. With the consolidation of principalities and kingdoms and the stabilization of society by means of the implementation of the Peace and Truce of God, Europe became imperialistic and developed colonial projects. The European economy expanded because of higher agricultural yields, commercial development, demographic growth, the establishment of universities, and the implementation of reform programs that converged with the rise of the papal monarchy, the enforcement of disciplinary mechanisms, and the execution of policies of conquest. See also Crusades; feudalism: Europe; heresies, pre-Reformation. Further reading: Head, Thomas, and Richard Landes, eds. The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the Year 1000. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992; Moore, R. I. The Formation of a Persecuting Society: Power and Deviance in Western Europe, 950–1250. New York: Blackwell, 1987; Tellenbach, Gerd. The Church in Western Europe from the Tenth to the Early Twelfth Century. Trans. by Timothy Reuter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Aurelio Espinosa Tughlaq dynasty The Tughlaq dynasty was one of the dynasties ruling India collectively referred to as the Delhi Sultanate. Most historians mark the years of Tughlaq dynasty from 1321 to 1414. The Tughluq family was a Muslim clan that originated in Turkey. A number of alliances with Turks, Afghans, and other Asian Muslims characterized most of the Tughluq rule. In 1320 the last ruler of the Khilji dynasty, Nasir-ud- Din Khusro, confronted the governor of Punjab, Ghazi Malik, in a battle near Delhi. Khusro, a Hindu who had converted to Islam, began a purge of Muslim military offi cers while appointing Hindus in their place. This created a great deal of unrest throughout India. Ghazi Malik and his forces were victorious in the battle and he proclaimed himself king of Delhi. Malik followed with an attempt to locate a rightful successor to the Khalji dynasty. A successor could not be found and sentiment grew for Malik to follow Khusro. Soon after, Ghazi Malik changed his name to Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq. Ghazi Malik’s ascension to power was the beginning of the Tughlaq dynasty. Upon taking power, Tughluq commenced a policy of exterminating the former allies of Khusro. In addition, Tughluq introduced a series of administrative reforms in order to restore order throughout the kingdom. In 1325 Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq viewed a parade of elephants captured during the conquest of Bengal while sitting in a specially constructed pavilion. The elephants caused the viewing pavilion to collapse, causing the death of both Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq and his son, Prince Mahmud Khan. Some experts suggest that the incident was not an accident, but a plot to end Ghiyas- ud-Din’s regime. Another son of Ghiyas-ud-Din, Muhammad bin Tughluq, followed as ruler. Muhammad introduced a number of experimental reforms. Most notably Muhammad transferred the capital and all government offi cials, army, servants, and a number of citizens from Delhi to Daulatbad. In addition Muhammad allowed the production of copper coinage, which, ultimately, led to severe devaluation of local currencies. Muhammad bin Tughluq’s reign included a number of internal revolts as well as incursions from Mongol invaders. The most signifi cant development during Muhammad’s rule was the 1328 invasion by Mongols. In 1350 Muhammad died and was followed by his cousin Firuz Tughlaq. Firuz Tughlaq assumed the role of sultan in 1351. Militarily, his reign resulted in a loss of territory while his 402 Tughlaq dynasty financial policies brought economic successes. Firuz supported a number of improvements in the infrastructure— including irrigation and construction projects. In 1351 the Hindu region of the south regained its independence. Upon Firuz’s death, the Tughlaq dynasty began to disintegrate even more. Ghias-ud-din Tughlaq II reigned from 1388 until his murder in 1389 and was followed by Abu Baker. Abu Baker fell to the youngest son of Firuz Tughlaq, Naser-ud-din Muhammad, who ruled from 1390 to 1394. Humayun followed for one year. In 1395 the last of the Tughlaq dynasty, Mahmud Nasir-ud-din, grabbed power until 1413. Timurlane’s (Tamurlane’s) invasion of the subcontinent from Central Asia ultimately brought a final chapter to the Tughlaq monarchy, which had been slowly disintegrating from within. Further reading: Metcalf, Barbara D. and Thomas R. A Concise History of India. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001; Smith, V.A. and Percival Spear. The Oxford History of India. New York: Oxford University Press, 1981; Thapar, Romila. Early India: From the Origins to AD 1300. Berkley, CA: University of California Press, 2004. Matthew H. Wahlert Tului Khan (c. 1190–c. 1231) Mongol leader Tului (or Tolui) Khan was the fourth son of Genghis Khan and his principal wife, Borte. He was a warrior and a heavy drinker and as his brothers he accompanied his father on campaigns and also commanded troops. To minimize tensions among them Genghis had divided his empire among his sons shortly before his death in 1227. According to Mongol custom the oldest son is assigned lands farthest away from the paternal homeland. Since the eldest son, Juji, died six months before his death, Genghis gave Batu, eldest son of Juji, the westernmost conquest, which included Russia, called the khanate of the Golden Horde. His second son, Chagatai Khan, received most of Central Asia. His third son, Ogotai Khan, received western China and parts of Central Asia and was nominated (subject to confirmation by the Mongol council, or kuriltai) khaghan, or khan of khans. Tului was given the homeland, Mongolia (Mongol custom gave the youngest the paternal homeland) plus northern China and the bulk of the main Mongol military forces of over 100,000 men. His control of this force would greatly benefit the fortune of his sons as they competed for control of the inheritance of Genghis Khan. In 1203 after defeating his former ally the Kerait confederation (another nomad group), Genghis took its leader Ong Khan’s two nieces as war booty. He kept one as a minor wife for himself and wed the other, Sorghaghtani Beki, to Tului. She and Tului had four sons, Mongke Khan, Kubilai Khan, Hulagu Khan, and Arik Boke. Since Tului was away campaigning much of the time and died young of alcoholism, his wife was influential in raising her sons. She is credited with raising them not only to be hunters and warriors as Mongol tradition dictated, but also to read Mongol in the newly created Uighur script, to be religiously tolerant (she was a Nestorian Christian because of her Keriat heritage), and to attend to administration. After Tului died Ogotai Khaghan attempted to marry Sorghaghtani Beki or have his son marry her (under Mongol custom), thus uniting the two branches of the family. She was able to avoid marrying them, with the plea that she had to raise her sons. She also obtained an appanage, or fief, in northern China in presentday southwestern Hebei (Hopei) province, which she supervised conscientiously. Her second son, Kubilai, also received an appanage, which he first entrusted to alien managers who abused the population. Later under Sorghaghtani Beki’s influence, he took a personal interest in it and improved its administration. Ogotai died in 1241. His powerful widow became regent and maneuvered the Mongol leaders to elect her son Guyuk as the third khaghan in 1246. Guyuk died in 1248. In a succession struggle that followed Sorghaghtani Beki, with the support of Batu Khan of the Golden Horde, won election for her oldest son, Mongke, in 1251. Mongke raised Tului posthumously to the position of khaghan and buried him next to Genghis Khan; he also ordered the official worship of Genghis Khan and the veneration of his father, Tului Khan. His younger brother, Kubilai Khan, followed Mongke as khaghan. Further reading: Kahn, Paul. Secret History of the Mongols. Boston, MA: Cheng & Tsui Company. 1998; Morgan, David. The Mongols. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1990. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur
The First Global Age 1450 to 1750 Edit
Tabin Swehti (1512–1550) unifier of Burma Tabin Swehti was the Burmese king who helped to unify the country as part of what is known as the Second Burmese Empire or the Toungoo dynasty, created by his father, Minkyinyo, in 1486 and lasting until 1752. However, it was Tabin Swehti who was responsible for unifying the kingdom and identifying and adopting cultural institutions under which the country and its people could live together. Burma was divided into territories held by different ethnic minorities, principal among whom were the Burmans, the Shans, and the Mons. Tabin Swehti was a member of the numerically largest Burman group but he recognized the need to forge a sense of national unity to persuade the Mons in particular that they should be part of his state. He ascended the throne in 1531 and at once set out to defeat the Shans in Upper Burma. The Shans were members of the Tai family, which had migrated to the region. Having achieved this goal, Tabin Shwehti established his capital at Toungoo on the river Sittang and then dispatched a military campaign to conquer the Irrawaddy delta region and, in particular, the Mon capital of Pegu. By 1544, he had not only achieved this but defeated a Shan counterattack at Prome to the north and arranged for his coronation as king of all Burma at the ancient city of Pagan. This represented the peak of Tabin Swehti’s career for he was later defeated in his next two campaigns, first against coastal Arakan to the west and then against the rebellious Siamese Tais of Ayutthaya, bolstered by Mon refugees from Pegu. Disappointed, the king is said to have turned to drink for consolation and was assassinated in 1550. He was succeeded by his brother-in-law and chief general, Bayinnuang, who was responsible for extending Burmese power to an even greater extent. Nevertheless, Tabin Swehti is credited with uniting regions of Burma that had been torn apart since the Mongol invasion in the second half of the 13th century. Tabin Swehti’s conquest of the Mons was long and bitter. Pegu was only taken after recourse to a stratagem after four years of bitter conflict. He recognized that the Mons had a high culture (and had enjoyed a period of independence of their own since the Mongol conquest) and did what he could to conciliate them. This inspired him to take up a number of Mon practices and cultures, including adopting the Mon hairstyle. His legacy was to provide a unified state that formed the basis of further expansion and the reduction of internecine conflict. Further reading: Aung, Maung Htin. A History of Burma. New York: Columbia University Press, 1967; Chain, Tun Aung. “Pegu in Politics and Trade, Ninth to Seventeenth Centuries.” In Recalling Lost Pasts: Autonomous History in Southeast Asia, edited by Sunait Chutintaranond and Chris Baker. Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books, 2002; Hall, D. G. E. A History of South-East Asia. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1994. John Walsh Taj Mahal There are very few buildings in the world more famous than the Taj Mahal, a queen’s mausoleum in Agra, India. The sense of romance that the Taj Mahal invokes was developed as a result of British fascination with this structure during the late 18th century and has continued into the 21st century. This monument was built by the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan after his favorite wife, Mumtaz Mahal, died while giving birth in 1631. Shah Jahan was deeply affected by her passing, and her body was carried from Burhanpur to Agra to be entombed until the completion of the Taj Mahal. In 1631, Shah Jahan began the construction of the Taj Mahal. Despite the fact that a massive labor force was involved in its construction, it took approximately 17 years to complete the main structure. A small village of artisans was created near the site in order to accommodate their immediate needs. In fact, many of the materials used for the construction of the Taj Mahal originated from China, Egypt, and Tibet, and a large number of people were involved, including Europeans. The layout of the Taj Mahal has symbolic meaning; its main gate symbolizes a barrier between the outside world and the purity and serenity of the inside world. It is constructed of white marble, the color of purity. The use of water in the garden also symbolizes purity, emphasizing the belief that the Taj Mahal is a holy site. As one enters the heart of the mausoleum, Islamic prayers can be read above the doorway, which are recited before a person of the Islamic faith dies. It has been rumored that Shah Jahan wanted to construct a black marble mausoleum for himself beside his wife’s. But his son and successor, Aurangzeb, did not fulfill his wishes, and he was buried in a separate crypt beside his wife. The architecture and decorating of the Taj Mahal epitomized the highest achievement of the Indo-Islamic artistic style. See also Mughal empire. Further reading: Edensor, Tim. Tourists at the Taj: Performance and Meaning at a Symbolic Site. Oxford: Routledge, 1998; Eraly, Abraham. The Moghul Throne: The Saga of India’s Great Emperors. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2003; Ingpen, Robert, and Philip Wilkinson. Encyclopedia of Mysterious Places: The Life and Legends of Ancient Sites around the World. Toronto: Prospero Books, 1990; Keay, John. India: A History. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2000. Brian de Ruiter Teresa of Ávila and John of the Cross (1515–1582 and 1542–1591) religious reformers Juan de Yepes y Álvarez, later known as John of the Cross, was born in 1542 in Fontiveros, a small town north of Ávila, Spain. John’s father died when he was three and his mother was left to provide for her three sons, one of whom died in childhood. From the age of nine to 22, John lived in Medina del Campo, where he was fortunate to have the help of Don Alonso de Toledo, who provided him with a job as an orderly in a hospital and who paid for his studies at the Jesuit school. In 1563, John entered the Carmelite monastery of Santa Ana in Medina del Campo; from there he was sent to study for the priesthood at the University of Salamanca. He was an excellent student, yet he always found time to dedicate to prayer and to helping the poor. John was ordained a priest in 1566. A year later, he met Teresa of Ávila and, at her urging, he joined in her efforts to reform the Carmelite order in Spain. The story of the life of John of the Cross is intertwined with the story of the life of Teresa of Ávila. Teresa was born into a well-to-do family in Ávila, Spain, in 1515. Hers was a generation when the Reconquista Christians threw out Muslim overlords of Spain. It was a time of knights, chivalry, and fierce religious devotion reflected in her own writing and ideals. She entered the Carmelite Convent of the Incarnation in 1535. After 20 years in the convent, at the age of 39, Teresa experienced a deeper conversion and a desire The Taj Mahal, the most famous monument in India, is a mausoleum built by Mughal emperor Shah Jahan as a loving tribute to his wife. 38 0 Taj Mahal to return to the primitive Carmelite rule of Mount Carmel. The Carmelite order in Spain had lapsed in the observance of the rule of poverty, prayer, and seclusion lived out by the first hermits. Teresa felt called by God to bring about a reform in the practices of her religious order. She established her first house for nuns in 1562. She was looking for someone to help her with the reform of the friars when she heard about John. She arranged to meet John in 1567 and convinced him to join her cause. He inaugurated the first house of Discalced (barefoot) friars in Durelo, Spain, in 1568. The friars adopted the more ascetic and contemplative observance of the primitive rule that involved a very simple lifestyle and many hours of prayer. They made some changes to the rule that allowed them to leave the monastery to preach and to hear the confessions of the nuns. John traveled extensively in his work to reform the order. The efforts made by Teresa and John to bring about reform were met with mixed response. While many supported their efforts, some were threatened by the changes they were making. John was arrested several times by his own religious brothers. He spent nine months as a prisoner in a six-by-10 room at the monastery of the Carmelite friars in Toledo. During his imprisonment, John composed some of the poetry for which he would later be famous. After his escape from prison, John was elected superior of the Monastery of Calvario. For the next eight years, he served as superior of various houses of the Discalced friars in Andalusia, traveling extensively in his efforts to support the reform. In 1589, he left Granada and went to Segovia, where he lived until he became ill in 1591. As a result of the painful medical practices of his day and the scandalous neglect of the prior who held an old grudge against him, John’s condition worsened. He died at the age of 49 in the year 1591. His body was moved in 1603 to Segovia, where it still resides. Sainthood Declared John was declared a saint by the Catholic Church in 1726, and he was made a doctor of the church in 1926. He is best known for his poetry and prose reflecting his spiritual wisdom and his profound, very personal relationship with God. His major works are four books that consist of prose commentary on four of his most famous poems: The Ascent of Mount Carmel, The Dark Night, The Spiritual Canticle, and The Living Flame of Love. The remaining of John’s correspondence with others gives a taste of the personal, affectionate relationship that he had with those he counseled. John was an artist, a mystic, and, above all else, he was a lover of Christ, who lived a life of charity and service to others. Teresa is most known for her instruction on spirituality and prayer. Her most important works include Interior Castles, The Way of Perfection, Foundations, and her own account of her life. All of the correspondence between John of the Cross and Teresa of Ávila has been lost or destroyed. See also Loyola, Ignatius of, and the Society of Jesus. Further reading: Kavanaugh, Kieran, and Otilio Rodriguez, trans. The Collected Works of St. Teresa of Ávila. Washington, DC: Institute of Carmelite Studies, 1985; Kavanaugh, Kieran, and Otilio Rodriguez, trans. The Collected Works of St. John of the Cross. Washington, DC: ICS Publications, 1991; Matthew, Iain. The Impact of God. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1995; Medwick, Cathleen. Teresa of Avila: The Progress of a Soul. New York: Image Books, 1999. Susan Cummins Thirty Years’ War The Thirty Years’ War was a series of wars, escalating from armed clashes of German princes to military confrontations involving all major European monarchs from 1618 to 1648. It was a crucial stage in the ongoing European wars of religion between Catholicism and Protestantism. It was also the first civil war in continental Europe that mixed religious conflict with traditional princely territorial ambitions and emerging sentiments of national unity and transnational geopolitical balance of power. In 1617, Ferdinand of Styria (1578–1637), the Habsburg heir apparent to the imperial throne of the Holy Roman Empire, was elected to be king of Bohemia. The Calvinists, the majority in Bohemia, revolted against their new Catholic king. In May 1618, a group of Calvinist noblemen threw the two most hated Habsburg councilors from the Hradschin Castle’s window into a ditch, severely injuring both. This incident, termed the “defenestration of Prague,” put the Calvinists in temporary control over Bohemia and spread the religious conflict into surrounding principalities. In 1619, Ferdinand succeeded to the throne of the Holy Roman Empire as Emperor Ferdinand II. In Bohemia, the Calvinists openly rejected Ferdinand as their king and offered the Crown to Frederick V of the Palatinate. In response, Ferdinand II secured support from the papacy and the Catholic kings of Spain Thirty Years’ War 38 1 and Poland and formed an alliance with Maximilian I, duke of Bavaria (1573–1651) and leader of the German Catholic League. In November 1620, Catholic forces invaded Bohemia and defeated Frederick’s Union at the Battle of White Mountain. The Bohemian phase of the Thirty Years’ War ended with Catholic victory in 1623. Emperor Ferdinand recovered his Bohemian throne, and Maximilian acquired Palatinate after Frederick was deposed and his Union dissolved. In 1625, as the triumphs of the Catholic forces enabled Ferdinand to restore centralized monarchical power over Austria and Bohemia, Christian IV (r. 1588–1648), Lutheran king of Denmark and duke of Holstein, intervened to rescue the German Protestants. However, his army was no match for the Catholic League. Ferdinand secured assistance not only from Tilly, but also from Albrecht von Wallenstein, a Bohemian nobleman, who was a Lutheran by birth, then a converted Catholic, and now an ambitious mercenary with an eye on the Bohemian Crown lands. After a series of military victories, Tilly and Wallenstein scattered the renegade German princes and compelled Christian IV to make peace in 1628. The Danish phase of the war ended again with Catholic victory. In 1629, Emperor Ferdinand issued the Edict of Restitution. The edict outlawed Calvinism, restored the former ecclesiastic territories to the Catholic Church, and restricted the right of legal appeal to the imperial diet by the Protestant princes. The edict alienated the German Protestant princes. Meanwhile, the alliance between Spain and the Empire alarmed Lutheran king Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden (r. 1611–32) and King Louis XIII of France (r. 1610– 43) and his chief minister, Armand-Jean du Plessis, duc and cardinal de Richelieu. In the summer of 1630, the Swedish king, encouraged by the French Cardinal Richelieu and supported by the German Protestant princes, invaded Germany. After winning a few noteworthy battles in the early stage, he crushed Tilly’s Catholic League army in the battlefield at Breitenfeld in September of 1631. Facing this defeat, Ferdinand was forced to turn to Wallenstein, who had been disgraced by the German Catholic powerhouses for his greedy and fast expansion of personal power. In November 1632, Wallenstein led his newly formed army, engaged the Swedish force at the Battle of Lutzen, and killed King Gustavus Adolphus on the battlefield. He then entered into a secret negotiation with the Swedes. Because of his treachery, Ferdinand deprived him of his command and ordered his assassination in February 1634. The Swedish phase of the war ended with the Treaty of Prague of 1635, under which the Edict of Restitution was suspended and the Empire’s constitutional order was restored to pre-1618 conditions. Louis XIII and his cardinal became increasingly disturbed by any possible settlement that would give the Habsburgs in Europe opportunities to mount attacks against France—from Spain in the south, the Netherlands in the north, and from a number of Habsburg territories in the east. A few days before the Treaty of Prague was finalized, France declared war on Spain. In retaliation, Spain invaded France and defeated Sweden, the French ally, at the Battle of Wittstock in 1636. Meanwhile, the German Imperial armies, now combining the Catholics and the Protestants allied with a new sense of national unity, marched into France, forcing the French back in Alsace and Lorraine, ravaging Burgundy and Champagne, and threatening Paris. The French, supported by Dutch Protestants, carried out a few successful counterattacks but could not gain a clear advantage over the enemy. However, the deaths of Emperor Ferdinand (1637), Cardinal Richelieu (1642), and Louis XIII (1643) gradually slowed down the momentum of the war, and both the new emperor Ferdinand III and the new cardinal Mazarin under the child king Louis XIV began to work toward a peace settlement in 1643. The German people, after suffering from three decades of havoc of war, political treacheries, religious bloodshed, and economic devastation, had to live miserably for another fives years to see peace. The Peace of Westphalia was finally reached in October 1648, composed of a set of treaties among the enemies in the Thirty Years’ War. It reorganized Germany into a very loose confederation with a unified diet and unified army. The emperor remained in place symbolically as feudal overlord for the purpose of recognizing and protecting “German Liberties.” The peace legalized Calvinism, gave it equal status as Catholicism and Lutheranism, and recognized the rights of religious minorities in the electorates and principalities. In short, the peace treaties announced little new but redrew a constitutional framework, which would guarantee a decentralized Germany for another two centuries. However, the territorial changes defined in the treaties did help the rise of Prussia to challenge the traditional authority of Habsburg Austria in the Holy Roman Empire. In Europe, the peace marked the rapid decline of support for prolonging the ongoing wars of religion, and fresh sentiments of national unity, national interest, and national defense would gradually reshape European 382 Thirty Years’ War peoples and states. It also helped promote transnational cooperation and alliance. The immediate consequences of the Thirty Years’ War in European geopolitics were the isolation and decline of Spain and the rise of France as the dominant power till the French Revolution at the end of the 18th century. See also Calvin, John; Counter-Reformation (Catholic Reformation) in Europe; Habsburg dynasty; Luther, Martin; Reformation, the. Further reading: Gardiner, Samuel Rawson. The Thirty Years’ War: 1618–1648. New York: C. Scribner, 1903; Hughes, Michael. Early Modern Germany, 1477–1806. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1992; Ingrao, Charles W. The Habsburg Monarchy, 1618–1815. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994; Levy, Anthony. Cardinal Richelieu and the Making of France. New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2000; Pages, Georges. The Thirty Years War, Maland, David, and John Hooper, trans. New York: Harper, 1970; Wedgwood, Cicely Veronica. The Thirty Years’ War. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1949. Wenxi Liu tobacco in colonial British America Tobacco is an herb native to the Americas. It is believed to have originated in South America. In 1535, Jacques Cartier found natives on the Canadian island of Montreal using tobacco. The root of the word tobacco comes from the native word for pipe or instrument used to consume tobacco among some native people. Sir John Hawkins took tobacco to England about 1564 although some Englishmen may have been smoking tobacco before this. In less than two centuries, tobacco was the most important export of the English colonies in North America. It remained a main export of the United States until the addictive and destructive effects of tobacco use became widely understood in the 20th century. Among natives of the Americas, tobacco use generally had a ceremonial aspect. There is disagreement whether tobacco was always ceremonial or was used in everyday life among indigenous Americans. Because Native Americans believed tobacco was a gift from the spiritual world, they used it as a healing herb. Tobacco was used for toothaches and earaches and as a painkiller and antiseptic. Tobacco was an important gift item to seal commitments and social arrangements among Native Americas. In North America, a pipe was generally used in tobacco ceremonies. growth of colonies The future of the colonies in British North America, especially Virginia, grew because of the production of tobacco. Tobacco production affected the economic, social, and geographical development of much of the southern United States. John Rolfe of Jamestown colony in Virginia in 1612 was the first to find a means of curing tobacco so it could withstand the trip across the Atlantic to Europe. Sailors spread the habit of pipe smoking to northern Europe. When tobacco was introduced into European society, it became popular as a medicinal herb. Sir Walter Raleigh persuaded Queen Elizabeth I to smoke tobacco in 1600. Although tobacco growing soon began in many parts of the world, including Europe, the British North American colonies soon became the primary source of tobacco for much of the world. The English obtained tobacco by growing it in their colonies. King James I of England was one of the first to label smoking a filthy, unhealthful habit of lazy people. However, his dislike of tobacco did not prevent him from collecting taxes on the importation of tobacco into England. The Spanish Inquisition banned two other Native American drugs, coca and peyote but, as had King James I, respected the revenue tobacco brought to Spain and did not ban it. When the Dutch discovered tobacco, they saw it as a bond with the other major Protestant country of Europe, England. Unlike the English, the Dutch sought to gain tobacco by trading for it. The Dutch focus in the New World became setting up trading posts to buy tobacco in colonial British America 383 Jean Nicot presenting the tobacco plant to Queen Catherine de Médicis and the grand prior of the House of Lorraine tobacco rather than establishing colonies to grow it. The production of tobacco was highly labor intensive. At first, indentured servants from Europe labored to produce tobacco but by 1675, African slaves replaced them. Besides labor, the production of tobacco required large amounts of land. The coastal areas of Virginia and Maryland had lost nine-tenths of their Native American population in a smallpox epidemic in 1617–19. This left land open for the cultivation of tobacco. As indentured servants won their freedom, they too became tobacco growers. Soon the North American colonists needed more land to grow tobacco. Tobacco quickly removes the nutrients from the soil in which it is grown. Colonists traded with Native Americans for their land and forced the native population farther from the Atlantic coast. While the tidewater colonies of Virginia and Maryland were engaged in growing tobacco, some northern colonies were forbidding the use of tobacco. In 1632, the Massachusetts Court of Assistants and General Court levied fines on persons caught “ taking” tobacco. Later the colonies of New Netherland (now New York) banned smoking. Connecticut banned the public smoking of tobacco in 1647. Some bans on smoking were more concerned with the danger of fire caused by smoking materials. The Articles of Piracy had rules controlling the smoking of an open pipe on board a pirate ship. The Navigation Act in 1651 allowed only English ships to import tobacco into England. This angered the Dutch, the Scottish merchants, and the colonies. The Second Navigation Act of 1660 required colonists to sell tobacco only to the English. Fully 90 percent of all tobacco imported to Europe came through England. These acts were the beginning of what the colonists in British North America would see as tyrannical treatment by the British government. Used as Currency The value of tobacco was so high and reliable that it was used as currency in the colonies. When inferiorquality tobacco appeared in North American exports, Virginia enacted the Inspection Act of 1730. This regulation of export of tobacco required the product to pass through government-controlled warehouses, where it was inspected and approved for export from Virginia. The size of hogsheads, the barrels in which tobacco was packed, was also regulated. Soon Maryland enacted its own inspection acts. Since the planting of tobacco quickly exhausted the land, land was not the measure of wealth; rather wealth resided in the number of slave laborers a family owned. Most people who owned land owned slaves. Unlike slave holders in the Caribbean, North American colonists encouraged their slaves to have children. Slaves were not viewed as an expendable commodity. Tobacco was one reason why the culture of the southern colonies was different from that of the northern colonies. Villages were less important in tobacco-growing areas because people had to live farther apart. Landowning families often controlled the local government, unlike in the more democratic communities in New England. See also natives of North America; slave trade, Africa and the. Further reading: Gately, Iain. Tobacco: A Cultural History of How an Exotic Plant Seduced Civilization. New York: Grove Press, 2001; Kulikoff, Allan. Tobacco and Slaves: The Development of southern Cultures in the Chesapeake, 1680–1800. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1986; Price, Jacob M. Tobacco in Atlantic Trade: The Chesapeake, London and Glasgow, 1675–1775. Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Limited, 1996; Tobacco News and Information, Timeline. Available online. URL: www.tobacco.org/resources/history/Tobacco_History (cited December 2005). Nancy Pippen Eckerman Tokugawa bakuhan system, Japan The Tokugawa shoguns were the de facto rulers of Japan from 1603 to 1867, when emperors, symbolic rulers of the country, bestowed the title of shogun on the Tokugawa clan. After the Battle of Sekigahara in 1600, the first shogun, Ieyasu, instituted a form of government that established the dominance of the Tokugawa family completed under his grandson Iemitsu. They enacted laws to control Japan’s polity, society, and economy under the Tokugawas’ centralized authority. The center of the Tokugawa power was the Kanto Plain around Edo (Tokyo). The bakufu that they instituted unified Japan after the Warring States Era, brought peace to the land for 250 years, and created a vibrant domestic economy that flourished in a strict hierarchical society. Social order Ieyasu’s policy to establish Tokugawa hegemony began with freezing the social order. Adapting China’s Confucian system, Japanese society was organized into four classes, in descending order, scholar-officials (samurai), 38 4 Tokugawa bakuhan system, Japan peasants, artisans, and merchants. The samurai and their families composed about 6 percent of the population. Since peace prevailed, the samurai became educated to perform bureaucratic tasks of administration and tax collection. They were the only men allowed to carry a sword, which became a symbol of their social superiority. They were paid a stipend according to their rank by the lord, or daimyo, in whose domain they lived. Samurai were supposed to cultivate and follow a strict ethical code of behavior called Bushido, of duty to the shogun, disciplined lifestyle, and frugal living. Peasants were to live and work on the land and could not marry with samurai. Peasants were not allowed to sell their land. Artisans worked their crafts orgainized in guilds, and merchants belonged at the lowest levels of society, despised for an unproductive life. There was some mobility between artisans and merchants. Tokugawa Ieyasu created their strictly hierarchical society to preempt social chaos and rebellion. Their stability may have been welcomed by the Japanese themselves as it created stability after a protracted period of warfare. Government Stucture The basis of Tokugawa power was control of the land. Under the shogun were daimyo or feudal lords, who governed land given to them by the shogun, called han. Since powerful daimyo could pose challenges to the Tokugawa, Ieyasu immediately set about shuffling the domains of various daimyo; these numbered 295 but after the reallocation of lands there were reduced to 267. About a quarter of the han lands were put under direct Tokugawa family control. Ieyasu redistributed the remainder among the daimyo on the basis of their allegiance to him. Ieyasu, Hidetada, and Iemitsu then created a structure by which Tokugawa hegemony was ensured. Daimyo were classified into three categories: (1) shimpan were members of the Tokugawa family, (2) fudai (hereditary nobles) were those daimyo who had been allied with the Tokugawa before the Battle of Sekigahara, and (3) the tozama (outside nobles) were those who had surrendered to Tokugawa dominance after the battle. Since tozama were least reliable, their han were strategically placed the farthest from Edo or between two fudai domains; the intent was to watch for any signs of rebellion. The Buke Sho-Hatto, or Ordinances for the Military Houses, was first passed by Ieyasu in 1615 and then firmly reiterated by Iemitsu in 1635. These ordinances were a code of conduct for the daimyo. They included the sankin kotai system, which required that every daimyo live in Edo every other year for a full year; if he could not do so then he had to send his family to Edo. Also, a daimyo’s chief wife and heir had to be left in Edo at all times as permanent hostages. The requirement was expensive for the daimyo because they had to travel back and forth with large retinues and also had to maintain two residences, one in their own domains, another in Edo. Marriages between daimyo families could not take place without the shogun’s permission. The impressive castle-towns in which the daimyo resided, called the jokamachi, were put under shogunal surveillance and repairs or improvements to the castles needed permission from the shogun. Notably, the tozama daimyos were excluded from playing any active role in the bakufu. The daimyo were required to model their government on that of the bakufu. A collective form of government developed. The shogun was assisted by councilors in administration. Usually four or five roju were selected from among the fudai daimyo who controlled the finances, made policy decisions, and dealt with officialdom. Theoretically, the daimyo were free to manage their local affairs and retain their own vassals, who received stipends in kind from them. Initially, the bakufu closely supervised the daimyo. In the first 50 years of Tokugawa rule, there were 281 cases of daimyo moved from one han to another, and 213 of domain confiscation because of misrule or lack of an heir. Later, the daimyo replicated the shogunal system of government in their han. The bakufu’s interference in the hans was reduced. The main task of the civil officials in both bakuhan was to collect taxes. Rice was the primary form of taxation; the unit of rice, called koku, was equal to 4.97 bushels. The bakufu’s landholdings yielded 7 million koku out of the total 30 million koku produced nationwide; hence it enjoyed the most revenue. The common people lived on five koku of rice per capita per annum. The bakufu reserved the right to control all matters related to foreign affairs, minting and distribution of gold and silver coins, and interhan transportation. The machinery for collecting taxes was small and efficient. The bakuhan levied taxes on an entire village; it was decided within the village what each household paid as taxes. Junior-ranking samurai oversaw the collection of taxes. Nearly all the taxes were deposited to the bakufu and han treasuries. The bakufu is military force. It consisted of samurai recruited from Tokugawa lands. These were divided into two categories: 5,000 standard-bearers who Tokugawa bakuhan system, Japan 38 5 enjoyed high rank, and 18,000 middling rank and footsoldiers. In addition, the daimyo were required to provide armies and ammunition whenever the shogun needed them, which was infrequent. Samurai were used more for policing than as active warriors throughout the era. Fudai and Shimpan daimyo, and their samurai, kept watch over the tozama domains for a possible challenge to Tokugawa authority. The bakuhan system remained largely unchanged from the 1600s into the 1860s, an era of stability, economic growth, and peace internally and externally. There were only local rebellions, easily suppressed. However, the shogunate was never able to tame the tozama daimyo and it was the han of Choshu, Satsuma, and Tosa who eventually challenged the Tokugawa in the 1860s, bringing the Edo era to an end. See also Tokugawa Ieyasu. Further reading: Duus, Peter. Modern Japan. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1998; Hane, Mikiso. Modern Japan: A Historical Survey. Boulder and London: Westview Press, 1986; Reischauer, Edwin O. Japan: The Story of a Nation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990; Sansom, George. The History of Japan, Vols. 2 and 3. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986; Totman, Conrad D. Politics in the Tokugawa Bakufu, 1600–1843. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988. Jyoti Grewal Tokugawa Hidetada (1579–1632) Japanese ruler The second shogun of the Tokugawa family, Hidetada lived in his powerful father’s shadow until the latter’s death in 1616. He was Tokugawa Ieyasu’s third son; his two older brothers had died, making him Ieyasu’s successor. Hidetada nominally assumed the title of shogun in 1605 when his father voluntarily retired, but as long as Ieyasu lived, Hidetada’s role was to learn from and implement the policies of his father. He was a careful student, who watched his father build his realm for the family and the bakuhan system. Among Hidetada’s achievements were the continued organizing of the Bakufu and development of domestic commerce. Both of these ensured the Tokugawa family’s political and economic dominance in Japan. In 1614–15, Hidetada helped his father in leading a victorious campaign against Osaka castle that ended the residual power of the Toyotomi family. From 1616 onward, he boldly tamed the domains of vassals who might challenge his authority. Domestic commerce grew with the expanded control of Hidetada’s government. However, he was highly suspicious of foreign traders, missionaries, and those Japanese who had converted to Christianity. Tokugawa Hidetada reinforced Ieyasu’s ban on Christianity. In 1617, he had four missionaries executed. He later ordered the execution of 120 missionaries and Japanese Christians and banned any import of books related to the Christian religion. Hidetada’s severe reservations about all things foreign extended to their trading ships as well. In order further to regulate foreign presence, he ordered all foreign ships, other than Chinese, to dock only in the ports of Nagasaki and Hirado. The British had already pulled out of Japan because of nonprofitable trade relations. Hidetada severed all relationships with the Spanish, of whom he was highly suspicious because of their Christian influence. Hidetada effectively isolated Japan, a stance his son terminated when he became shogun. Hidetada had established a relationship with the imperial family through the marriage of his daughter to a member of the royal family. This relationship further solidified the base of the Tokugawa family. In 1623, Hidetada abdicated in favor of his son Iemitsu but continued to influence policy of the bakufu as retired shogun until his death. See also ships and shipping; Tokugawa bakuhan system, Japan; Tokugawa Ieyasu; Toyotomi Hideyoshi. Further reading: Craig, Albert M. The Heritage of Japanese Civilization. NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2003; Reischauer, Edwin O. Japan: The Story of a Nation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990; Sansom, George. The History of Japan, Vols. 2 and 3. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986. Jyoti Grewal Tokugawa Ieyasu (1542–1616) Japanese ruler Tokugawa Ieyasu was granted by the Japanese emperor, the title of shogun in 1603; his family was to rule Japan until 1867. In 1605, his son, Tokugawa Hidetada, officially took the office of the shogun, but Ieyasu remained the ruler from behind the scenes until his death. Reared in an atmosphere of unrelenting civil war among different clans of Japan during the Warring States Era, 386 Tokugawa Hidetada Ieyasu was a remarkable unifier of competing interests among warring vassals, and a leader who brought relative peace to a land torn by centuries of civil war. Ieyasu is remembered for his brilliant stratagems, his compassion for those enemies who accepted his authority, his skill in managing the rivalries of his generals, his commitment to keep Japan united, and his patience. He laid the foundations of a political, economic, and social system that was to lead to a century of dynamic growth in Japan. Ieyasu started his political career as a vassal of Toyotomi Hideyoshi, from whom he learned about governance, military planning, and management of state affairs. After Hideyoshi’s death, Ieyasu led a coalition of vassals against a rival group in the bloody Battle of Sekigahara, where he was victorious in 1600. He later got rid of Hideyoshi’s young heir. He already was the master of vast tracts of military holdings in eastern Japan. Entirely ignoring the authority of the imperial court, he established his central headquarters in edo (Tokyo); thus, the Tokugawa period is also known as the Edo era in Japanese history. He built a massive fortified castle with huge concentric moats in Edo; it is the Imperial Palace today. From here, Ieyasu used his military strength to reorganize Japan and to establish a government system called the bakufu. centralized Rule The system of rule that Ieyasu established was begun by his two predecessors in the 16th century. Because it was based on centralized control over daimyo (vassal) domains, it is called a feudal structure, though uniquely Japanese. Ieyasu sought stability for Japan and dominance for himself among the landed aristocracy. He demonstrated administrative skill that matched his military abilities. First, he redistributed the lands of the vassals. His enemies’ lands were confiscated and distributed to his allies as rewards in an organized way. He kept about a quarter of the confiscated domains under his family, the remainder distributed depending on the seniority and allegiance to other clans. The reallocation of about 265 domains ensured allegiance to the Tokugawa clan and stability. Moreover, he placed his most trusted vassals to keep a close eye on others whose allegiance was undependable. Ieyasu issued a code of behavior called Buke Sho-Hatto, or Ordinances for the Military Houses, which limited the power of the feudatories in personal, civil, and economic spheres. It required them to seek permission from the shogun or his representative for all important activities. Shogun Ieyasu amassed a huge fortune for the Tokugawa clan. This included property rights over commercial cities and trading ports such as Nara, Nagasaki, Osaka, Kyoto, Edo, and Yamada. He also owned profitable gold and silver mines and controlled the circulation of all the gold and silver coinage in the country. In a surprising turn of events between 1611 and 1614, Ieyasu issued ordinances prohibiting all teaching and practice of Christianity in Japan, deeply affecting political and economic relations of the Japanese, Portuguese, and Dutch, and moved toward seclusion. However, this seclusion did not hurt Japan’s economy, as domestic commerce was robust and vigorous. Tokugawa Ieyasu was a wealthy but frugal man. His sense of discipline directed his efforts in ensuring calm and peace for Japan after the civil war. By the time he died at 74, he had established his family’s de facto rule, which was to last for over two centuries. In so doing, he completed the process of reestablishing national unity by a combination of military and civilian talent that amounted to genius. See also Tokugawa bakuhan system, Japan; Tokugawa Hidetada. Further reading: Craig, Albert M. The Heritage of Japanese Civilization. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2003; Reischauer, Edwin O. Japan: The Story of a Nation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990; Sansom, George. The History of Japan. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1986; Totman, Conrad D. Politics in the Tokugawa Bakufu, 1600– 1843. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988. Jyoti Grewal Toledo, Francisco de (c. 1520–1584) Spanish viceroy of Peru The most important reformer of Spanish administration in the newly conquered Andean highlands during the early colonial period, Francisco de Toledo, in his capacity as viceroy of Peru (1569–81), was instrumental in the transition from the violence and tumult of conquest to the emergence of a mature settler society. Described by supporters and detractors alike as indefatigable, forceful, and ambitious, Toledo arrived in Peru just as the last of the civil wars among Spaniards were ebbing. His most enduring accomplishment in his 12 years as Toledo, Francisco de 38 7 viceroy was to strengthen and unify the colonial state under a grand design intended to consolidate Spanish rule and lay the foundations for continuing Spanish domination of the Andes and its native inhabitants. Distinguished Heritage Born in Andalusia, Spain, around 1520, Toledo hailed from one of the country’s most distinguished noble families. After effectively serving Charles V and Philip II, he was selected as viceroy (supreme administrator and direct representative of the king) of the newly conquered territories of New Castile (Peru). One of his first acts as viceroy was to launch a bold five-year visita, or tour of inspection, of all the Andean dominions subjugated by Spain. Accompanied by the pomp and majesty appropriate to his office, Toledo undertook a census of the entire colony; ordered the reducción (forced resettlement) of surviving Indian communities into Spanish-style towns under the rule of Spanish and native authorities; directed the collection of testimonies on the injustice and tyranny of Inca rule with the intention of ratifying the morality of the Spanish invasion and conquest; abolished the Inca system of mita labor in the Andean highlands and in its stead imposed a new and even more onerous system of obligatory native labor and tribute; reorganized and streamlined the territory’s bureaucracy and administration; revitalized the emergent mining economy, particularly the vast silver mines of Potosí and the mercury mines of Huancavelica; and issued a vast corpus of laws and decrees that effectively limited the autonomy of colonial officials, encomenderos, and other elites while linking their fortunes ever more tightly to the well-being of the colonial state. Intolerant of dissent or sustained challenge to Spanish rule, he also directed the invasion and destruction of the neo-Inca state of Vilcabamba, hidden for decades in one of the remotest and most inaccessible corners of the eastern highlands. His decision to execute by beheading the kingdom’s captured ruler, Tupac Amaru, a sentence carried out on September 24, 1572, in Cuzco, remains among his most controversial actions, even prompting a mild rebuke from King Philip, who declared in a letter to Toledo that “some things about the execution would have been better omitted.” All of these and related measures, commonly referred to as the Toledo reforms, had the effect of centralizing and strengthening the colonial state and laying the groundwork for a mature colonial economy and society that for the next two and a half centuries would ensure Spanish domination and funnel untold riches into Spain, thus marking Toledo as one of the most important actors in all of Peruvian history. In 1581, at the conclusion of his tenure as viceroy, Toledo returned to Spain. He died in Seville three years later. See also encomienda in Spanish America; Peru, conquest of; Peru, Viceroyalty of. Further reading: Hemming, John. The Conquest of the Incas. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1970; Stern, Steve J. Peru’s Indian Peoples and the Challenge of Spanish Conquest: Huamanga to 1640. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1982; Zimmerman, Arthur Franklin. Francisco de Toledo: Fifth Viceroy of Peru 1566–1881. Caldwell, ID: The Caxton Printers, Ltd., 1938. Michael J. Schroeder Tordesillas, Treaty of A modification of the papal Bull of Demarcation issued in 1493 by Pope Alexander VI, the Treaty of Tordesillas (June 7, 1494) divided the recently discovered New World between its two signatories, Spain and Portugal. The treaty created an imaginary pole-to-pole meridian in the Atlantic Ocean 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde Islands, granting all lands west of the demarcation line to Spain, and all lands east of it to Portugal. In this era of uncertain geographic knowledge, both sides recognized that the division was imprecise and unlikely to prevent future conflict. Spain reckoned that the newly discovered Indies (Caribbean) fell well within its sphere of dominion, while Portugal was mainly interested in securing its sea route to Asia around Africa’s Cape of Good Hope. Notably, the treaty was concluded six years before the Portuguese, under Pedro Álvares Cabral, discovered Brazil (1500), though once Brazil was on the map, there was little doubt that the land fell under Portugal’s jurisdiction. Thornier problems arose once it became clear that the Indies (Americas) lay between Europe and Asia, a fact that became clear after Portuguese navigator Vasco de Gama’s journey to India and back in 1497–99, Spanish explorer Vasco Núñez de Balboa’s discovery of the Pacific Ocean in 1513, and Portuguese navigator Ferdinand Magellan’s journey to the Pacific around the southern tip of South America in 1520 in the service of Spain. In the wake of these advances in Europe’s knowledge, Portugal refused to abide by a treaty that essentially granted all of Asia to its Iberian rival. 388 Tordesillas, Treaty of Thus, following a series of armed conflicts in the Moluccas and elsewhere in the Pacific, the Treaty of Tordesillas was modified in 1529 in the Treaty of Zaragoza, which continued the meridian established in 1494 onto the other side of the globe, to a position of 145 degrees east. Still, the reality remained that military might effectively determined who got what— illustrated for example by the case of the Philippines, which clearly fell within Portugal’s sphere, yet the Spanish first colonized and refused to relinquish until the United States took the island-colony in 1898. Seen in a broader context, the Treaty of Tordesillas represents the earliest instance of European powers’ carving up the globe among themselves in pursuit of their own domestic, strategic, and imperial designs, a tradition that continued well into the 19th century and after. See also voyages of discovery. Further reading: Bakewell, Peter. A History of Latin America. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997; Parry, John H., and Robert G. Keith, eds. New Iberian World: A Documentary History of the Discovery and Settlement of Latin America to the Early Seventeenth Century. New York: Times Books and Hector & Rose, 1984. Michael J. Schroeder Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1536/37–1598) Japanese general Toyotomi Hideyoshi was a Japanese lord who completed the unification of Japan begun by Oda Nobunaga and launched two invasions of the Korean Peninsula. Hideyoshi was born the son of a peasant and became a soldier in the army of Oda Nobunaga and fought in many of his major battles. In 1573, after destroying two daimyo, Nobunaga made him a lord of Nagahama, in Omi province. In 1587, he assumed a surname, Toyotomi, which means “wealth of the nation.” He continued to serve with distinction in Oda’s campaigns. Oda was assassinated by a lieutenant in 1582, followed by a power struggle during which Hideyoshi defeated his rivals in successive campaigns, winning final victory in 1590. As a result, Japan became a unified nation after centuries of divisive wars and an ineffectual shogunal government. Despite his power, Hideyoshi did not assume the title of shogun because by tradition that office had been held by a member of the Minamoto clan. However, with a faked geneology, he assumed high court posts, including that of chancellor, ruling from Kyoto, but also building a formidable castle at Osaka. Hideyoshi next decided to attack Korea as a base to invade China. In 1592, he launched his first invasion of Korea, landing his forces at Pusan. The Koreans were taken by surprise and offered only token resistance. Seoul, the capital, and Pyongyang in the north fell in rapid succession. Korea was saved by the Ming government, which eventually sent about 200,000 soldiers to repel the Japanese invaders. Korean admiral Yi Sun-sin, who built the world’s first metal-plated ships, wreaked havoc on Japanese supply lines, compelling Hideyoshi to abandon his invasion. Since peace negotiations failed, Hideyoshi renewed his attack in 1597, but with his sudden death, the invading forces withdrew in 1598. Hideyoshi left a young son, Toyotomi Hideyori. Hideyoshi attempted to ensure the boy’s survival by appointing a council of five regents. But by 1600, one regent, Tokugawa Ieyasu, had defeated his rivals to become shogun and in 1615 exterminated all of Hideyoshi’s heirs. Hideyoshi implemented several important domestic policies. One was to take a general survey of the land as basis to assign jobs to his allies and supporters. To prevent future civil wars he ordered the confiscation of all swords from peasants and ordered that all Japanese remain in their current occupation (warriors, peasants, advisers, merchants). He also issued a ban on Christianity and attempted to regulate foreign trade; these policies would be made effective by his successor. See also Bushido, Tokugawa period in Japan. Further reading: Berry, Mary Elizabeth. Hideyoshi. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 1989; Dening, Walter, and Sir Maberly Esler Dening. The Life of Toyotomi Hideyoshi. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing Company, 2006; Sansom, George. A History of Japan 1334–1615. London: The Cresset Press, 1961; Turnbull, Stephen R. Samurai Armies 1550–1615. London: Osprey, 1979. Justin Corfield Trent, Council of The Council of Trent was the longest, and one of the most significant, of the General Councils of the Catholic Church. It met at Trent in northern Italy between 1545 and 1563 (with significant interruptions). Trent, Council of 389 While there had been calls on many sides for a reforming council of the church to meet since the 15th century, this call took on new urgency with the advent of the Protestant Reformation. The Emperor Charles V, in his negotiations with the Protestant princes of Germany, had promised to work for a council, which they demanded should be held in German territory. The pope and many of the cardinals resisted holding such a meeting, arguing that the Protestants would not accede to its decisions. Moreover they tended to be suspicious of the whole idea of a council, seeing it as a threat to papal authority. When Paul III (r. 1534–49) became pope, he began in earnest to prepare for a council. In 1536, he commissioned a group including Cardinals Gasparo Contarini (1483–1542), Reginald Pole (1500–58), Gian Pietro Carafa (1476–1559), and Jacopo Sadoleto (1477– 1547) to study the problems confronting the church. Their report, the Consilium de emendanda ecclesiae, presented in 1537, advised reform of the papal curia, better discipline for bishops, and reform of the religious orders. The pope proposed holding the council at Mantua, and issued a bull summoning it to meet there in 1537. This proved impossible, owing to objections by the duke of Mantua, and the council was summoned instead to Vicenza in 1538. King Francis I of France, as well as the Protestant princes of Germany, objected to this proposal, and only six bishops traveled to Vicenza. The pope therefore postponed the council once again and entered into negotiations with the French king and the emperor. Trent was selected as the location for the council because while it was in Italy and easily accessible to Rome, it was in Imperial territory, meeting the objections of both the French and German rulers to a council too much subject to papal influence. War between France and the Empire delayed the opening of the council until after peace was concluded in 1544, when Francis I also promised to allow French bishops to attend the council. The bull Laetare Jerusalem, issued November 19, 1544, called the council to meet at Trent on March 15 (Laetare Sunday) 1545. The opening was delayed, however, and the council was not actually opened until December 13, 1545 (Gaudete Sunday). Cardinal Pole was one of the three legates who served as presidents for the first sessions, together with Cardinal Gian Maria del Monte (1487–1555) and Cardinal Marcello Cervini (1501–55). The first session of the council included about 40 bishops and heads of religious orders, who would be the voting members, and about 50 theologians. Most of the bishops were from Italy and Spain; in spite of the king’s earlier promise, French bishops were prevented from attending. The delegates decided to deal with decrees concerning the reform of the church’s government and practices at the same time as those concerning doctrine. Although 25 formal sessions were held during the life of the council, only 12 of them produced substantive decrees, the rest being concerned only with procedure. During the first period of the council, most of the influential theologians were members of the Dominican order, in particular Domingo de Soto (1494–1560), as well as the general of the Augustinians, Girolamo Seripando (1493–1563). The decrees issued during these sessions concerned the definition of the canon of Scripture, original sin, justification, and the sacraments, in particular baptism and confirmation. The council defined the canon of Scripture as containing the Deuterocanonical books rejected by Protestants and declared that the church recognized both the written Scriptures and unwritten traditions. With respect to justification, the council condemned both the semi-Pelagianism of some late medieval Scholastics and the Lutheran doctrine of justification by faith alone, upholding the necessity for the cooperation of free will and charity. Disciplinary decrees passed during this time mandated preaching by all bishops and other clergy with pastoral offices, demanded that bishops reside in their dioceses, and forbade the holding of more than one office involving pastoral care by the same person. In early 1547, a plague broke out in Trent, and on March 8, the council voted to move to Bologna in the Papal States. The emperor and a number of bishops supporting him refused to agree to this move, and the sessions held in Bologna produced no decrees. The council was suspended on September 14, 1547, and was still awaiting disposition when Paul III died on November 10, 1549. Cardinal Del Monte, who had presided over the council, was elected pope as Julius III, and on November 14, 1550, he issued a bull recalling the council. The council resumed at Trent on May 1, 1551. During the next two sessions, the council issued decrees concerning the sacraments of the Eucharist, penance, and extreme unction, and reform decrees dealing with the authority of bishops over the clergy in their dioceses. Two Jesuit theologians, Diego Lainez (1512–65) and Francisco Salmerón (1515–85), who had begun to participate in the earlier sessions, were influential during this period. The council offered safe conduct to Protes- 39 0 Trent, Council of tants who desired to attend, but the Protestant ambassadors made demands the council would not agree to, including that it withdraw its earlier teaching. On April 28, 1552, as the war between Elector Maurice of Saxony and the emperor threatened to engulf the city of Trent, the council voted to suspend for two years. Before Julius III could recall the council, he died on March 23, 1555. His successor was another former president of the council, Cardinal Cervini, who took the name Marcellus II. He died, however, after a reign of only 22 days. Cardinal Carafa was elected to succeed him and reigned as Pope Paul IV from 1555 to 1559 but did not recall the council. His successor, Pius IV, issued a bull recalling the council on November 29, 1560. To bring about an actual meeting required careful diplomatic negotiations with Emperor Ferdinand I and other monarchs, which were carried out by the pope’s nephew and secretary of state, Cardinal Charles Borromeo (1538–84), later renowned for implementing the council’s reforms as archbishop of Milan. Council Reopened The council finally reopened April 28, 1562, and the final sessions included many more bishops than had attended earlier, including a number of French bishops who had been previously forbidden to attend by their monarch. Seripando, now a cardinal, was one of the legates, and the theologians Salmerón and Lainez continued to be influential, along with a younger Jesuit, Peter Canisius (1521–97), who was particularly concerned with the church in Germany. During the last period of the council, decrees were issued concerning the celebration of Mass, the sacraments of holy orders and matrimony, purgatory, the use of images and relics, indulgences, and fasting. As with earlier sessions, these decrees mostly upheld traditional teaching that had been attacked by Protestants. The decrees concerning marriage embodied the most significant change in the church’s teaching, holding that marriage contracted without at least two witnesses was invalid, and that families could not force couples to marry or invalidate their marriages. Reforming Decrees Among the reforming decrees of this period was the requirement that bishops establish seminaries for the training of priests. The application of this provision had far-reaching implications for the shape of the Catholic Church as it entered the modern period. Other decrees regulated the lives of monks, friars, and nuns; provided for the establishment of an Index of Forbidden Books; called on the pope to issue a catechism and revisions of liturgical books; forbade dueling; and abolished the preaching of indulgences for the collection of alms, the practice that had occasioned Luther’s protest in 1517. The council held its final session over two days, December 3–4, 1563. The final acts were signed by 255 bishops and heads of orders. Pope Pius IV confirmed the acts of the council in the bull Benedictus Deus, January 26, 1564. The council’s disciplinary reforms were implemented only slowly, since they involved overcoming the resistance of many entrenched institutions and required the cooperation of secular rulers, many of whom saw the provisions of the council as threats to their own power and influence over the church. Over the next century, however, the application of the decrees of the Council of Trent led to a radical transformation of the Catholic Church. See also Counter-Reformation (Catholic Reformation) in Europe; Luther, Martin. Further reading: Bungener, L. F., and John McClintock, eds. History of the Council of Trent. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing Company, 2006; Görresgesellschaft, ed. Concilium Tridentinum: Diariorum, actorum, epistularum, tractatum nova collectio. Frieburg im Breisgau, Germany: Herder, 1901–38; Jedin, Hubert. A History of the Council of Trent. London: Thomas Nelson, 1961; Schaff, Phillip, the Reverend, and Johann Jakob Herzog. Scaff-Herzog Encylopedia of Religious Knowledge. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group, 1984; Schroeder, H. J., trans. Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Rockford, IL: Tan Books & Publishers, 1978. D. Henry Dieterich Tudor dynasty The Tudor dynasty includes the reigns of the following monarchs: Henry VII (1485–1509), Henry VIII (1509– 47), Edward VI (1547–53), Queen Mary I (1553–58), and Elizabeth I (1558–1603). The Tudor dynasty began with the clandestine marriage between Owen Tudor and Catherine of Valois and continued the Plantagenet line, although in a much modified form. This marriage produced a son, Edmund Tudor, who was made 13th earl of Richmond in 1453. His son, Henry, was eventually crowned Henry VII after his victory at the Battle of Bosworth, ending the Wars of the Roses and bringing the Tudors to power. Tudor dynasty 39 1 The Tudor dynasty, spanning from Henry VII’s reign in 1485 to the death of Elizabeth I in 1603, served as the catalyst for England’s maturation from a weak country in the Middle Ages into a powerful Renaissance state and encompassed some of the most dynamic and progressive changes in English history. Although marked by intermittent religious strife, this dynasty also brought the restructure of English society, the spread of capitalism, intellectual and cultural advancements, the Protestant Reformation, economic stability, the growth of nationalism, the beginnings of the Renaissance, and the birth of the Church of England. The 15th and the 16th centuries were a watershed time in English history because of a multitude of events, and the Tudor dynasty played a crucial part within the larger scope of both English and world history. The dynasty’s symbol, the Tudor rose, combined the red and white roses of the Lancastrian and Yorkist Houses and symbolized the union of the two factions, which was cemented by Henry VII in January 1486 when he married Elizabeth of York, eldest daughter of Edward IV. The Tudors began their rule among bloodshed and treason but left England a more peaceful and confident nation. As Henry VII claimed the throne of England, he was acutely aware that his succession was not absolute. Although pretenders attempted to stake claim to the throne during his rule, Henry VII managed to remain in power. His son, Henry VIII, succeeded him with no dispute regarding his right to rule. Henry VIII’s reign was highlighted by his necessity to secure the Tudors’ claim to the throne through a male heir and is remembered for his wives. He married six times, producing one son and two daughters. After Henry VIII’s death, his young and feeble son Edward VI ascended to the throne and ruled for a short time, dying of tuberculosis at 15 years old. Before Edward VI died, he named Lady Jane Grey, who married the duke of Northumberland’s son, as heir to the English throne. She ruled for nine days until she was deposed by Mary I, imprisoned, and eventually executed. Queen Mary’s rule was punctuated by her insistence on reinstating Catholicism and her quest to have a child. A devout Catholic and wife of philip of Spain, Mary returned England to Catholicism after the Protestant reigns of Henry VIII and Edward VI, reinstated the heresy laws, and commenced with burning Protestant bishops and others at the stake. This violent act only served to rally more Englishmen to adopt the Protestant faith. At two different times Mary believed she was pregnant; however, she bore no children. Her signs of pregnancy, a swollen stomach and nausea, were believed to be either a stomach or an ovarian tumor, and she eventually died in 1558, after naming Elizabeth heir to the throne. Elizabeth I, the last of the Tudors, found England in disarray when she ascended the throne in 1558. Her 44-year rule provided her with the longevity and the ability to solidify England’s dominance in world affairs through its development of a formidable navy that eventually defeated the Spanish Armada in 1588. By the end of her rule, religious strife had largely dissipated. The Crown possessed absolute supremacy over Parliament, but the two operated in relative cooperation. She refused to marry throughout her life, although she was inundated with marriage proposals from numerous suitors. Hours before she died, Elizabeth named James VI of Scotland to succeed her, ending the Tudor rule and ushering in James I of England and the Stuart dynasty. Tudor monarchs were known as politically gifted and quite charismatic; these traits were reflected in the years that they ruled. Henry VIII and Elizabeth I most accurately embodied these characteristics within their respective rules. As Henry VIII struggled to produce a male heir, he created the Church of England and was made both political and religious leader of England with the Act of Supremacy (1534). The Church of England was established by 1536, but its power and future were severely threatened by Mary’s reign. The Elizabethan Religious Settlement, drafted in two parliamentary acts, deftly settled this continuing religious feud. The Act of Supremacy (1559) reestablished the Church of England’s independence from Rome. The Act of Uniformity (1559) set the order of worship to be used in the English Book of Common Prayer and required every man to attend church once a week or face a monetary fine. The Tudor dynasty changed England from a disjointed nation into a cohesive international power. See also Stuart, House of. Further reading: Delderfield, Eric R. Kings and Queens of England and Great Britain. Devon: David and Charles, 1990; Fraser, Rebecca. The Story of Britain from the Romans to the Present: A Narrative History. New York: W. W. Norton, 2003; Guy, John. “The Tudor Age.” The Oxford Illustrated History of Britain. Kenneth O. Morgan, ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1992; Schama, Simon. A History of Britain at the Edge of the World. New York: Hyperion, 2000. Brian de Ruiter
Age of Revolution and Empire 1750 to 1900 Edit
Taiping Rebellion Among the many rebellions that enveloped China in the mid-19th century, the Taiping Rebellion (1850– 64) caused most devastation and posed the greatest danger to the Qing (Ch’ing) dynasty. The rebellions had many causes, the most serious being the population explosion, the result of prolonged peace and the introduction of new and better yielding crops. By the early 19th century, the available land could no longer sustain the burgeoning population, and there were no industries to absorb the surplus labor force. Natural disasters in the 1840s along the Yellow and Yangzi (Yangtse) River valleys further devastated the economy. Politically, the Qing dynasty was in decline, evident in the pervasive corruption among the bureaucracy. Defeat by Great Britain in the First Anglo-Chinese Opium war further discredited the dynasty and brought to the fore latent anti-Manchu sentiments among the majority Han Chinese. The Taiping Rebellion was led by Hong Xiuquan (Hung Hsisu-chuan), whose ambition to pass the state examinations and thus join the elite bureaucracy had been quashed by repeated failures. While in Canton waiting for the exams, he had met Protestant Christian missionaries who gave him religious tracts. He later equated their messages with visions he experienced while in a delirium during an illness after failing the exams for the fourth time. He claimed to be the second son of God and younger brother of Jesus and further stated that God had entrusted him with a mission to rid the world of demons and establish a heavenly kingdom on Earth. Hong studied briefl y with an American missionary, gaining some knowledge of the Old Testament, but was not baptized. In 1844 he founded the Society of God Worshippers and began preaching his version of Christianity among poor people in Guangxi (Kwangsi) province in southern China. An unsuccessful attempt by the Qing government to suppress the movement in 1850 ignited the rebellion. Hong then proclaimed himself the Heavenly King and his movement the Taiping Tianguo (Taiping t’ienkuo), or Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace. His foremost lieutenant Yang Xiuqing (Yang Hsiu-ch’ing), who claimed to be the third son of God and the Holy Spirit, became the Eastern King, while other supporters were given ranks as lesser kings and nobles. The Taiping army enjoyed tremendous success as it marched northward, culminating in the capture of Nanjing (Nanking) in 1853; it was renamed Tianjin, or the Heavenly capital, but the movement failed to gain headway north of the Yangzi Valley. Early Taiping success is attributable to the appeal of its messianic message, the prevalence of anti-Manchu sentiments in southern China, strict military discipline among its troops, and promise of social and economic reforms. The reforms, on paper, included nationalization of land and its distribution to men and women, a new calendar, equality between the sexes, revamping of the examination system to allow more candidates to succeed, and various modernization measures. However, most of the promised reforms T were unrealized because the Taiping leaders showed a lack of ability to govern and evidenced a great interest in giving themselves perks and privileges. Moreover, the leaders began quarreling among themselves. Both Hong and Yang claimed to receive messages from God, and their rivalry degenerated into a bloody confl ict in which Yang was defeated and killed. Hong thereafter trusted no one except his mediocre relatives and retired to a life of hedonism among his women. Western nations that were initially interested in the Taiping government because of its Christian trappings were quickly disillusioned by its bogus Christianity and its theocratic and universal claims. Finding the Qing government easier to deal with, they then proclaimed their neutrality in the confl ict. The Qing government also found in Zeng Guofan (Tseng kuo-fan) a committed Confucian scholar-offi cial of great ability and integrity. Zeng organized a militia among men of his home province (Hunan). They fi rst cleared Hong’s men from Hunan and then expanded the anti-Taiping forces with the aid of Zeng’s able colleagues and lieutenants, including Westerners and their modern arms. They reformed the administration in areas that they reconquered and ultimately gave the people a better alternative to the failed Taiping model. Nanjing was captured in July 1864; Hong died; and the rebellion ended. Some historians claim the Taiping movement as revolutionary but others dispute this claim on the basis that the Taiping leaders showed no real revolutionary spirit or wish to introduce fundamental changes to society. While the Taiping ideology showed some revolutionary elements, in practice the regime did not change social relations or better the lot of peasants. Rather, the Taiping leaders regarded their success as a way to attain elite status. The rebellion ultimately failed due to inconsistencies in the policies of the movement, strategic mistakes, internal dissension, and refusal to cooperate with other rebel movements for not following their brand of Christianity. Conversely, the anti-Taiping forces led by Zeng Guofan demonstrated integrity and ability, and their commitment to Confucian ideology was more in tune with the temper of the time. The rebellion devastated a huge area in southern China and caused upward of 20 million in lost lives. It also resulted in a shifting in the internal balance of power in China from the central government in Beijing (Peking), whose banner army had not been able to handle the rebellion, to Han Chinese loyalists who defeated the rebellion by raising local forces. The defeat of the Taiping and other mid-19th century rebellions and the domestic reforms and modernizing measures called the Tongzhi (T’ung-chih) Restoration gave the Qing dynasty a new lease of life. See also Gordon, charles. Further reading: Michael, Franz. The Taiping Rebellion, History and Documents, 3 Vols. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1966; Reilly, Thomas H. The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom, Rebellion and the Blasphemy of Empire. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2004; Shih, Vincent C. Y. The Taiping Ideology, the Sources, Interpretations, and Infl uence. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1967; Jen, Yuwen. The Taiping Revolutionary Movement. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1973. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Talleyrand, Charles-Maurice de (1754–1838) French diplomat Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord was one of the best-known diplomats in European history, having served the throne of France from the time of Louis XVI (the nation’s last absolute monarch) to Louis- Philippe (the last king), a time that encompassed the French Revolution and Napoleon. An aristocrat denied his inheritance because he was physically unfi t for the military service traditionally taken by his family, he fi rst sought a career in the church. Though he was ordained a priest and was later named bishop of Autun, he was not a pious man, and, in fact, was likely an atheist. His interest in the church was in its institutions and social merits, not any supernatural matters. During the French Revolution, he helped to secularize the church and its properties in France and was excommunicated by Pope Pius VI. He personally proposed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, which dissolved monastic orders in France, made the offi ces of bishop and priest elected ones, and denied any authority of the pope over French clergymen. The constitution stood from 1791 to 1795. Talleyrand helped France avoid war with Britain during the Revolution, while cultivating friendships with Napoleon I and Lucien Bonaparte. Talleyrand participated in the coup that brought Napoleon to power and was made his foreign minister—though the two rarely agreed about foreign policy. He rose to power quickly, becoming grand chamberlain of the 408 Talleyrand, Charles-Maurice de empire and prince of Benevento. Once so positioned, he felt freer to distance himself from Napoleon’s policies when he disagreed with them, and he resigned his ministry in 1807 over a disagreement with Bonaparte. In 1812 Napoleon made Talleyrand his representative in meetings with the Russian czar Alexander i—and Talleyrand responded by becoming a Russian secret agent, selling Napoleon’s secrets and reporting to Alexander in the future. Talleyrand was instrumental in restoring the Bourbons to power to succeed Napoleon and was an important negotiator in the Treaty of Paris, which helped to repair French-European relations after Napoleon’s abdication. For most of his remaining life, Talleyrand stayed out of the limelight, offering comment more than action, and probably brokering and breaking deals behind the scenes. He remained a womanizer and gourmand throughout his life and was a good friend of Alexander Hamilton despite the latter’s reputation for decadence. His home in Paris is now the American embassy. Further reading: Bernard, Jack. Talleyrand. New York: Putnam, 1973; Cooper, Duff. Talleyrand. New York: Fromm International, 1986; Lawday, David. Napoleon’s Master: A Life of Prince Talleyrand. London: Jonathan Cape, 2006. Bill Kte’pi Tanzimat, Ottoman Empire and The Tanzimat, meaning “reorganization,” was a series of reforms within the Ottoman Empire during the 19th century. Sultan Mahmud II initiated a number of sweeping reforms in order to strengthen the empire by centralizing administrative control and breaking the power of local provincial governors and the janissaries. He also supported reforms to Westernize the education system and established military and engineering schools. Although Mahmud II wanted mandatory elementary education, the Ottoman government lacked the fi nancial wherewithal and personnel to make it a reality. Like Muhammad Ali in Egypt during the same era, Mahmud II sent students to Europe; he also hired French and Prussian army offi cers to train his new military. Mustafa Reshid, who served in many offi cial positions, including grand vizier, helped to implement these reforms. Key reformers during the Tanzimat era included Mehmed Emin Ali Pasha and Kechejizade Mehmed Fuad Pasha, both of whom were mentored by Mustafa Reshid. Ali Pasha was the son of a shopkeeper and worked his way up in government service to the position of grand vizier. Fuad Pasha came from a wealthy family; fl uent in French, he negotiated with a number of foreign powers. He often served as foreign minister when Ali Pasha was vizier, and when Fuad Pasha was vizier, Ali Pasha often served as foreign minister. The reforms were supported and enlarged upon by Sultans Abd al-Majid and Abd al-Aziz. As part of the price for their support of the empire in its struggles against Russia, the European powers pushed the Sultan to institute sweeping reforms that often favored minorities within the empire, particularly Christians, as well as European fi nancial interests. The Hatti-Sherif Gulhane, the Imperial Rescript of the Rose Chamber, in 1839 declared the security of life and honor of Ottoman citizens, provided for tax reforms and the end of tax farming and abuses. It also mandated orderly army recruitment, fair trials with the creation of a council of justice, and equality of religious practices. The rescript ended the extra tax levied on religious minorities and their exemption from military Charles-Maurice de Talleyrand served two French monarchs, skillfully negotiating during times of revolution and imperial rivalries. Tanzimat, Ottoman Empire and 409 service. The Hatti Humayun, or Imperial Rescript, of 1856, was forced upon the Ottoman government following the Crimean War. It expanded on the earlier reforms and stressed that all Ottoman subjects regardless of religion were to be treated equally. Some elected local assemblies, with advisory functions, were created. Proposed new laws were debated by the Tanzimat Council and approved by the Council of Ministers. The Ottoman Land Law of 1858 aimed to increase agricultural production but had some unforeseen social and economic results. The law forced the registration of land, but many fellaheen (peasants) were traditionally reluctant to register anything from land to births for fear of government taxation and conscription of their sons into the Ottoman military. The educated, urban class, who had the disposable income to bribe their way out of heavy taxation and to pay for their sons to avoid the military, took advantage of the weakness of the peasantry to gain title to vast tracts of land, thereby creating a new landed gentry of often absentee land owners. Many peasants lost their traditional land holdings and were forced to become tenant farmers. This resulted in the further impoverishment of the peasantry in many parts of the empire, particularly in greater Syria. A civil law code (Mecelle) was put in place in 1869 and expanded in 1876. The new code, modeled on European legal systems, was largely formulated by Ahmed Cevdet Pasha. Under the new legal system, religious law was separated from civil law. A Judicial Council that included both Muslims and Christians dealt with appeals to new civil laws. The old millet courts continued to deal with matters involving religious law. The creation of a new secular legal system to the detriment of the old shari’a (Islamic law) was opposed by many conservative and religious elements, such as the Wahhabi movement in the Arabian Peninsula, who refused to adopt civil laws and maintained the shari’a. International investment, largely from Europe, increased in many parts of the Ottoman Empire. The 1838 British-Ottoman commercial convention granted the British highly favorable trading terms, and British commerce with the empire fl ourished. However, the infl ux of European goods hurt many local manufacturers, especially in the textile industry. As Ottoman expenditures on the army, which grew in numbers, and new government offi ces created under the Tanzimat increased, so too did the Ottoman indebtedness to European banks and investors. Foreign ownership and investments in new communication lines and railways also mounted. The capitulations, favorable legal and commercial status, including exemption from taxes, granted by the Ottomans to foreign residents in the empire, gave foreign merchants competitive advantages against local entrepreneurs. Foreign consuls frequently exercised extensive authority in local areas, even getting legal cases against their citizens dropped. Some Ottoman citizens were able, by legal and illegal means, to secure foreign citizenship and thereby enjoy the extra privileges granted foreign nationals. Although ports and cities, such as Izmir, Alexandria, and Beirut, grew in size, the majority of the population remained rural and continued to maintain their traditional lifestyles. In urban areas, especially in coastal cities where there were growing European populations, Ottoman elites adopted Western fashions in dress and emulated Western life styles in everything from the architecture of their homes and household furnishings to food, literature, and music. The number of schools following Western educational models increased. Educational and social opportunities for women in urban areas improved. By the 1850s a teachers’ training school for women had been established, and many secular schools replaced traditional religious ones. Missionary schools such as Roberts College (present-day Bogazici University) in Istanbul, Syrian Protestant College (present-day American University of Beirut) and the French Jesuit Université de St-Joseph in Beirut educated a new generation of liberal, Western-looking elites. Many of their graduates became leaders of the cultural reforms and nationalist movements in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. A new elite emerged, including the young Ottomans, who supported political reforms and the creation of a constitutional monarchy and a parliament along Western lines. However, no matter how committed Ottoman sultans and offi cials were to implementing these sweeping reforms, the Ottoman government simply could not provide enough qualifi ed administrators or judges to implement the reforms. The effects of the reforms were most evident in urban and coastal areas. The vast rural hinterland remained largely untouched by the process of Westernization and secularization. As the economic and social gaps between the urban, Westernized elites and local middle class and the traditional, highly religious peasantry grew, societal tensions and confl ict escalated. See also Arab reformers and nationalists; Young Ottomans and constitutionalism. Further reading: Davison, Roderic H. Reform in the Ottoman Empire, 1856–1876. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univer- 410 Tanzimat, Ottoman Empire and sity Press, 1963; Lewis, Bernard. The Emergence of Modern Turkey. London and New York: Oxford University Press, 1968; Shaw, Stanford J., and Ezel Kural Shaw. History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey, Vol. 2, The Rise of Modern Turkey, 1808–1975. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977. Janice J. Terry Texas War of Independence and the Alamo Texans have long taken pride in their state’s unique history as the only state in the Union to have fought for and achieved independence as a republic. For nearly 10 years, from April 1836 to December 1845, the Republic of Texas (or Lone Star Republic) existed as a sovereign nation-state—not recognized by Mexico for its illegal secession from the Estados Unidos Mexicanos (United Mexican States), and not annexed by the United States, despite the desire for annexation among many of its Anglo-American citizens. During this decade, the sectional divisions between North and South prevented Senate agreement on admission to the Union of another slave state. The long-term roots of the Texas War of Independence lay in the rapid expansion westward of the southern cotton and slave plantation system, especially after the widespread adoption of Eli Whitney’s cotton gin after 1793 and the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Cotton monoculture was extremely destructive of soils, prompting slaveholding cotton growers to seek new lands to the west. In the 1810s and 1820s many were drawn to Alabama, Mississippi, and further west to the fertile valleys of East Texas. In late 1820 Moses Austin, a leading lead mining and manufacturing entrepreneur, received permission from the Spanish government to settle 300 Anglo-American families in present-day San Antonio. He died soon after. Within the year, his son, Stephen F. Austin, secured permission for the settlement from the newly independent Mexican government. The colony’s population grew rapidly. In 1830 the roughly 10,000 Anglo-American settlers in East Texas outnumbered Mexicans by around two to one. On September 15, 1829, the Mexican government abolished slavery throughout the republic, including the territory of Texas, but the Anglo-American colonists ignored the law. They also ignored Mexican laws mandating adherence to Roman Catholicism, and an 1830 law banning further Anglo colonization of the territory. Tensions mounted through the early 1830s. Following a series of armed clashes in 1832, the Texas settlers held conventions in 1832 and 1833 demanding reforms from the Mexican government. The pivotal moment came with the passage of the Siete Leyes (Seven Laws) in December 1835, amending the 1824 Mexican constitution, effectively curtailing the political autonomy of states and territories, including Texas. The Anglo- Texans rebelled, and on March 2, 1836, Texas declared independence from Mexico, naming David Burnet provisional president and Sam Houston supreme military commander. Mexican president José Antonio López de Santa Ana took to the fi eld with some 6,000 troops. Crossing the Río Grande, he determined to take the San Antonio de Valero Mission in San Antonio de Béxar, also known as the Alamo, garrisoned by some 180 men under William B. Travis. After a two week siege, on March 6 the Mexican army overwhelmed and killed all the defenders, most famously Travis, Jim Bowie, and Davy Crockett. “Remember the Alamo!” became the rallying cry for the Texas army. An even more consequential military episode took place several weeks later at the small town of Goliad, where several hundred troops under Texas colonel James W. Fannin surrendered to Mexican general José Urrea. To these were added prisoners from other engagements. All were ordered shot by Santa Anna. The infamous “Goliad Massacre” of March 27, 1836, in which an estimated 342 Texan prisoners were executed by fi ring squads, infl amed the passions of the Battle of the Alamo: The Mexican army overwhelmed and killed all the defenders of the Texan fort. Texas War of Independence and the Alamo 411 Texans. A few weeks later, in the decisive engagement of the war, on the afternoon of April 21, 1836, General Houston, at the command of some 900 men, launched a surprise attack on the Mexican army encamped on the banks of the San Jacinto River. The battle was over in less than 20 minutes. Houston later reported 630 Mexicans killed and 730 taken prisoner, with fewer than 40 Texan casualties. The next day, Santa Ana was found hiding in the brush, taken prisoner, compelled to sign two treaties effectively granting Texan independence, and sent back to Mexico City. The Mexican government later refused to recognize Texan independence. Texas twice applied for annexation to the United States (in 1836 and 1844) but was prevented by a coalition of northern senators fearing the addition of another slave state to the Union. Texas joined the Union as the 28th state on December 29, 1845, its foundational mythologies becoming an integral part of the expanding nation’s stock of shared stories— especially events at the Alamo—mythologies that glorifi ed Anglo Texans’ heroism, decried the treachery of the Mexicans, and elided the contradictions of a struggle for freedom waged by men holding slaves in perpetual bondage. The state’s strong sense of nationalism endures to this day. Further Reading. Hardin, Stephen L. Texian Iliad: A Military History of the Texas Revolution. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1994; Lack, Paul D. The Texas Revolutionary Experience: A Political and Social History. College Station: Texas A&M University Press, 1992. Michael J. Schroeder Tilak, B. G. (1856–1920) Indian nationalist leader Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak was a prominent militant nationalist leader of the Indian freedom movement against British rule. He was born in Ratnagiri to a family of Brahmans in 1856. His father was an offi cer in the educational department. Tilak passed the bachelor of arts examination from Deccan College in 1879 and received a bachelor of law from Elphinston College, Bombay (now Mumbai). He was one of the founders of the New English School, Pune, and taught there in 1880. The success of the school encouraged him and his colleagues to set up the Deccan Educational Society in October 1884, and the following year the society opened Fergusson College. Tilak also led infl uential newspapers—Kesari and Mahratta, in Marathi and English respectively—in 1881. Tilak was a radical in politics, but he was not a socialist. He opposed the Age of Consent Act of 1891, saying that the British were interfering in the social life of Hindus. Tilak was strongly resistant to British rule, advocating an agenda of social conservatism and a return to a golden Hindu past. He became the extremist leader of Indian politics against moderates like G. K. Gokhale. In the 1890s he championed the cause of peasants and criticized the plague prevention policies of the British government. Tilak was sentenced to prison for 18 months on charges of sedition. Tilak was interested in the Indian National Congress (INC) right from its inception in 1885, and he was elected its joint secretary in 1895. He was elected to the Bombay Legislative Council in the same year. When Viceroy Lord Curzon partitioned the province of Bengal in 1905, Tilak joined those who opposed it and plunged into a swadeshi (indigenous) movement to advocate a boycott on British goods. The agitation galvanized the masses in a boycott of foreign goods. Tilak and his supporters dominated the INC session of 1906, which endorsed the idea of swaraj, or selfgovernment. The result was a split between moderates and the extreme nationalists at the Surat session of the INC in 1907, with Gokhale emerging as a leader of the moderates. In June 1908 Tilak was arrested in a bombing case and charged with sedition. Tilak defended himself brilliantly but was sentenced to six years of imprisonment. After his release Tilak formed the Indian Home Rule League in 1916, which collaborated closely with the Home Rule League of Annie Besant. Both leagues demanded Home Rule or self-government for India after the end of World War I. Because the moderates and extremists of the Congress had realized that a split among them was not serving Indian freedom, Tilak and his supporters returned to Congress again in 1916. Tilak was among those who signed the famous Lucknow Pact, which endorsed a Hindu-Muslim rapprochement. He then went to England in 1918 to open a branch of the Home Rule League, garnering the support of many Labour party leaders. He caught pneumonia and died on August 1, 1920, in Bombay. His courage, patriotism, and devotion guided latter-day freedom fi ghters. Mohandas Gandhi honored him as the “maker of modern India.” See also Aligarh College and movement; British East India Company. 412 Tilak, B. G. Further reading: Cashman, Richard I. The Myth of the Lokamanya: Tilak & Mass Politics in Maharashtra. Los Angeles: University of California, 1975; Kapoor, Suneera. Sri Aurobindo Ghosh and Bal Gangadhar Tilak: The Spirit of Freedom. New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications, 1991; Mascreen, P. J. Makers of Modern India. New Delhi: Kalyani Publisher, 1983; Nanda, B. R. Gokhale: The Indian Moderates and the British Raj. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1977; Pradhan, G. P. Lokamanya Tilak. New Delhi: NBT, 1994; Sathe, Shanta. Lokmanya Tilak, His Social and Political Thoughts. New Delhi: Ajanta: 1994. Patit Paban Mishra Tocqueville, Alexis de (1805–1859) French politician and philosopher Youngest son of an aristocratic Norman family, Alexis de Tocqueville became famous on two continents as an important supporter, interpreter, and critic of democracy. His books on the United States remain enduring analyses of the young republic. Born at the dawn of the Napoleonic era, Tocqueville would serve France during a period of great political upheaval as deputy and minister of foreign affairs. Ousted in the 1852 coup that launched the Second Empire, Tocqueville wrote an essential study of the origins, promise, and failures of the French Revolution. Tocqueville was just 25 when he and lifelong colleague Gustave de Beaumont engineered an official trip to the United States in 1831. Their stated purpose was to investigate America’s new systems of prison reform, which they did, visiting New York’s Auburn and Sing Sing penitentiaries, among others. The two young lawyers planned also to ask a much larger question: Could American democracy be a political and social prototype for a still struggling France? Beaumont was a distant relative of the Marquis de Lafayette, French hero of the American Revolution, and Tocqueville had read the frontier stories of James Fenimore Cooper. Neither was yet fully fluent in English. During eight months in the United States, however, they connected with important Americans, including former President John Quincy Adams; saw slavery and racial discrimination firsthand; lamented the decline of the Native Americans; and toured formerly French Québec, lost to Britain in the Seven Years’/French and Indian War. In Democracy in America, appearing in two parts in 1835 and 1840, Tocqueville saw America as both a stunning success and a cautionary example of the dangers inherent in a society where all assert equality. He described a restless nation, consumed by commercial values, and warned against tyranny of the majority. Yet he was impressed by American women’s relative freedom, the boldness of newspapers, and Americans’ propensity for forming voluntary associations. In the Chamber of Deputies from 1839 to 1852, Tocqueville would work to end international slavery but also supported France’s colonization of Algeria, even as he denounced misgovernance there, calling French policies “monstrous.” In the tumultuous wake of Europe’s revolutions of 1848, Tocqueville hoped to become minister of education but instead held the foreign affairs position for a hectic five months. Essentially an exile in his own country after the ascension of Napoleon III, Tocqueville, by then ailing from tuberculosis, took up a topic that had long fascinated him: the Revolution during which his maternal grandfather was executed and his father arrested. The result, in 1856, was the publication of L’Ancien Régime et la Révolution, a penetrating sociopolitical portrait of pre-1789 France. Like Democracy in America, the book was a financial and critical success. Alexis de Tocqueville—dutiful aristocrat, public servant, supporter and skeptic of liberal democracy—died at age 54 and was buried in his ancestral village. Renowned at his death, Tocqueville gained new currency in the 1930, as his writings helped people understand systems as diverse as Nazism and modern American society. In recent years, admirers have retraced his American trip. In France, a Tocqueville Commission oversees his intellectual legacy, and the U.S. boasts a host of Tocqueville societies, many affiliated with private charitable initiatives. See also newspapers, North American; women’s suffrage, rights, and roles. Further reading: Jardine, André. Tocqueville: A Biography. Translated by Lydia Davis with Robert Hemenway. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1998; Reeves, Richard. American Journey: Traveling with Tocqueville in Search of Democracy in America. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1982. Marsha E. Ackermann Tokugawa Shogunate, late The late Tokugawa Shogunate (1853–67) witnessed the end of the Edo period in Japan, when the country emerged from a period of self-imposed isolation and Tokugawa Shogunate, late 413 modernized from a feudal military society as a result of the Meiji Restoration. The expedition of Commodore Matthew Perry and other dealings with Western governments helped to expose the rift in Tokugawa society and the bakuhan system between the fudai daimyo (feudal lords originally Tokugawa allies), who for nearly two centuries had been favored by the shoguns, and the tozama (later Tokugawa supporters), who had been largely excluded from the shogun’s favor. It was the Choshu and Satsuma clans of the tozama daimyo that began a reaction in favor of the emperor and against the shogun Iesada. Two clans began to assert themselves against the shogunate: the Satsuma clan in southern Kyushu, and the Choshu in western Honshu. Their slogan “Revere the Emperor, Expel the Barbarians,” became the battle cry of the movement to overthrow the Tokugawa bakufu (military government). Politically, the Choshu and Satsuma samurai became known as the Imperial Loyalists. In 1857 the emperor Komei got a secret message to the Satsuma and Choshu clans asking for their support against the shogun. In a possible response to that message, in 1859, a Japanese scholar named Yoshida Shoin became involved in a plot to assassinate a representative of the shogun Iemochi. Because of this, he and an accomplice, Kusakabe, were taken by shogun authorities to Edo (now Tokyo), where they were beheaded for treason against the shogun in 1859. Although the Choshu and Satsuma samurai competed for leadership of the Loyalist Cause, eventually they realized that by making common cause they stood a greater chance for success. In April 1863 Emperor Komei issued his “Order to expel barbarians,” and the Choshu samurai forced the shogun to agree to expel all foreigners by July 1863, something which the Choshu leaders knew the Tokugawa were now powerless to do. Thus, they achieved their goal of making the Tokugawa appear even more politically irrelevant than before. At the same time, the Choshu and Satsuma clans, because of their wealth, were able to buy modern fi rearms from British traders, whose gun-running became a powerful force in what was to come. Sakamoto Ryoma, a samurai from Tosa, was instrumental in brokering an alliance between the two competing clans in 1866. By this time, the Tokugawa Shogunate had been shown powerless a second—and fatal—time. In 1864 foreign ships had been able to blast a passage through the Shimonoseki Strait to open it to commerce, showing again that the shogun was a paper tiger. Even when Shogun Iemochi created his Shinsengumi, a special samurai corps, in 1863 to keep his rule even by terror, little was accomplished. By 1866 the Choshu and Satsuma samurai were ripe for rebellion. A shogunal army was sent to restore order among the Choshu in the summer of 1866, but no other clans offered any assistance, and the Tokugawa army was forced to retreat. In 1867 the two clans came out in open rebellion for the new Emperor Meiji, whose given name was Mutsuhito. In December 1867 the 15th, and last, Tokugawa shogun, Yoshinobu, was forced to surrender to the emperor. The Meiji Restoration of imperial power had taken place. In January 1868 Yoshinobu decided to attempt a fi nal stand at Fushimi, where his forces were crushed. He surrendered to the imperial forces and formally opened Edo to the imperial troops. Emperor Meji entered the city, and, thus, in January 1868 the Meiji Restoration of imperial power had taken place. See also Satsuma Rebellion; Sino-Japanese War and the Treaty of Shimonoseki. Further reading: Gordon, Andrew. A Modern History of Japan from Tokugawa Times to the Present. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003; Henshall, Kenneth. A History of Japan from Stone Age to Superpower. New York: Palgrave, 2004; Hillsborough, Romulus. Shinsengumi: The Shogun’s Last Samurai Corps. North Clarendon, VT: Tuttle, 2005; Ikegami, Eiko. The Taming of The Samurai: Honorifi c Individualism and the Making of Modern Japan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1995; Morton, W. Scott. Japan: Its History and Culture. New York: McGraw Hill, 1984. John F. Murphy, Jr. Tongzhi (T’ung-chih) Restoration/ Self-Strengthening Movement The Treaty of Beijing (Peking; see Aigun) of 1860 that ended the Second Anglo-Chinese Opium War and the suppression of the Taiping and other rebellions in the 1860s gave the Qing (Ch’ing) dynasty a reprieve. The adjustments and reforms in the post- 1860 decades would give the dynasty a new lease on life. The dynastic revival began during the reign of Emperor Tongzhi (1862–74), hence the name Tongzhi Restoration. However, the era extended into the early part of his successor Guangxu’s reign; the expanded period of restoration is called the Self-Strengthening Movement. 414 Tongzhi (T’ung-chih) Restoration/Self-Strengthening Movement Two groups of leaders emerged during this era beginning with the succession of the child Tongzhi. The fi rst group was led by the child-emperor’s uncle, Prince Gong (Kung), and the Manchu offi cials who assisted him in conducting foreign affairs. They saw to the implementation of the Treaties of Beijing with Britain, France, and Russia and established new institutions to deal with the Western world. They were the Zongli Yamen (Tsungli Yamen, forerunner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs); the Superintendencies of Trade for the Northern and Southern Ports that supervised trade with the Western nations; the Tongwenguan (T’ung-wen kuan), a school to train students in Western languages and also to teach new subjects; and the Maritime Customs Service to collect customs as mandated by the treaties. Young men were also sent to study in the United States in the 1870s. Prince Gong also had works on international law translated into Chinese and sent retiring U.S. minister to China Anson Burlingame and Chinese diplomats as roving ambassadors to Western nations to renegotiate treaties for China. The second group of leaders was Han Chinese who worked with Prince Gong. They were governors of provinces and leaders of local armies that defeated various rebels and began a process of modernization in areas they governed. The foremost among them was Zeng Guofan (Tseng Kuo-fan), who formed a militia to defend his native Hunan Province from the Taiping rebels. His able lieutenants, most notably Li Hongzhang (Li Hung-chang) and Zho Zongtang (Tso Tsung-t’ang), also formed militias in Anhui and Zhejiang (Chekiang) Provinces. Together these men defeated the Taiping Rebellion in 1864, the Nian Rebellion in 1868, followed by the Muslim Rebellions. Zeng, Li, Zho and their colleagues were scholars-administrators-generals whose military victories were accompanied by genuine reforms based on traditional Confucian principles that led to economic recovery. They, as well as Prince Gong, were also keenly aware of Western military and technological superiority and were quick to employ Western military experts such as Charles Gordon of Britain to train Chinese soldiers in Western techniques of fi ghting and the use of modern Western fi rearms. They additionally established new arsenals, shipyards, and factories to manufacture arms. As provincial governors, these men also strove to modernize China’s economy by opening mines and building industries. However, as China’s defeat by France in 1885, and the much more catastrophic defeat by Japan in 1895 showed, the Self-Strengthening Movement failed effectively to modernize China and ensure its survival from imperialist encroachments. Many factors explain this failure. Foremost was the lack of leadership in the central government. Prince Gong was increasingly sidelined and fi nally dismissed by the ambitious and power-hungry mother of Tongzhi, the dowager empress Cixi (Tz’u-hsi), whose extravagance and ignorance of the world plunged China into repeated disasters. For example, she siphoned funds intended for building a modern navy to build and furnish a summer palace for herself, with the result that the inadequately equipped fl eet was destroyed by Japan in the Sino- Japanese War. Her corrupt minions pocketed the already inadequate funds needed for reforms and modernization. She also crushed the reform movement initiated by her nephew Emperor Guangxu in 1898, and fi nally her xenophobia led to the catastrophe of the Boxer Rebellion in 1900. That she was able to abort all reform and selfstrengthening initiatives and eliminate their leaders also showed the strength of conservatism among Chinese offi cials who clung to their visions of the past and rejected the modern world and reactionary Manchus who feared the loss of power. These men gave her support. Many other factors contributed to the long term failure of the attempt at dynastic revival. One was the huge size and diversity of China and the strength of its culture and traditions. Because China had in past eras been defeated by neighboring peoples, but had eventually absorbed and overpowered them, many failed to realize that the Western incursion was fundamentally different in nature and could not be dealt in the same way. Also, those “Restoration” movements in the past that had succeeded had invariably been led by a powerful national leader aided by dedicated lieutenants. Both Tongzhi and Guangxu came to the throne as very young boys (the latter was chosen and adopted by Cixi precisely because he was only three years old), necessitating long regencies. Thus, Cixi ruled China from 1862 until she died in 1908. By the time of her death, the Self-Strengthening Movement collapsed, and the European great powers and Japan were on the verge of carving up China. Further reading: Cohen, Paul A., and John E. Schreker, eds., Reform in Nineteenth Century China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1976; Feuerwerker, Albert. China’s Early Industrialization: Sheng Hsuan-huai (1844–1916) and Mandarin Enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958; Hail, W. H. Tseng Kuo-fan and the Taiping Rebellion, Tongzhi (T’ung-chih) Restoration/Self-Strengthening Movement 415 With a Short Sketch of His Later Career. New York: Paragon Book Reprint Corp., 1964; Hummel, Arthur W., ed. Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period (1644–1912). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Offi ce, 1944; Wright, Mary C. The Last Stand of Chinese Conservatism: The T’ung-chih Restoration, 1862–1874. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1957. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Toussaint Louverture (1744–1803) Haitian rebel leader Symbol of slaves’ struggles for freedom and dignity in the age of revolution, the onetime house slave Toussaint Louverture assumed leadership of the Haitian Revolution soon after its outbreak in August 1791. For more than a decade Toussaint led the island’s exslave insurgent forces—fi rst as an independent rebel chieftain; then, after the French abolition of slavery on the island in 1793, on the side of the French against the British and Spanish; then, as a renegade French offi cer after the decision of Napoleon I to retake the island and reestablish slavery. In June 1802 at the height of the French invasion, Toussaint was betrayed by his own men, turned over to Napoleon’s army, transported in chains to Brest, and then to Fort- de-Joux prison in the Jura Mountains in France. Within the year he died of privation and ill-treatment, though by this time his name had become legendary in his native Saint-Domingue (Haiti) and throughout much of the Atlantic world. Toussaint’s father was the son of a minor African chieftain, captured in war, sold into slavery, and transported to the French colony of Saint-Domingue, the most productive sugar-producing region in the world. At the time, more than 90 percent of the approximately 30,000 African slaves imported annually into Saint- Domingue toiled in the sugarcane fi elds and died within their fi rst seven years. Thanks to luck and the benevolence of a kind master, Toussaint’s father was among a tiny stratum of slaves who enjoyed certain freedoms and privileges. He converted to Catholicism, married, and was charged with cultivating a plot of land to provision the plantation near the northern port city of Cap-François. His eldest child, Toussaint Bréda as he was known, learned to read and write French and Latin, thanks to the tutelage of his godfather and neighbor, the house slave Pierre Baptiste. Reading Caesar’s Commentaries, the writings of the Abbé Raynal, and other works gave Toussaint a grounding in the nature of history and the politics of empire. He also became an herbalist and healer. Of unusual aptitude and intelligence, he assumed key responsibilities on his master’s estate, including coachman and stock steward, and earned a reputation in the community as a man of rectitude and learning. In September 1791, a month after the outbreak of the slave uprising that would engulf the island for more than a decade, “Old Toussaint” as he was known, age 45, abandoned his master’s estate and joined the rebel ranks. Soon he became one of their top leaders. On April 29, 1793, the French abolished slavery throughout Saint-Domingue, hoping to quell the slave uprising and more effectively prosecute the war against the British and Spanish. Toussaint, who had changed his surname to Louverture (“the opening”), brought his 4,000-strong army to the French side. In 1796 he was named brigadier-general, in command of all French forces on Saint-Domingue. Under Toussaint’s leadership, in April 1798, the British were fi nally driven from the island, after a fi ve-year campaign and at the cost of some 25,000 British lives. Before departing, the British had encouraged Toussaint to rebel against the French and declare independence; he refused. In February 1799 a mulatto army led by André Rigaud rebelled against Toussaint; by August 1800 Toussaint had crushed Rigaud’s rebellion. Meanwhile Toussaint sought to restore some semblance of order to the island’s economy. He revived its sugar plantations, compelled former slaves back to work as wage-earners, and promulgated a series of laws regarding labor, land ownership, and taxes. He also established diplomatic relations with the United States. Anticipating Napoleon’s invasion, he purchased some 30,000 guns from the United States and distributed them among his forces. On January 26, 1801, he marched into Spanish Santo Domingo, unifying the island’s eastern and western regions. He also promulgated a new constitution, permanently abolishing slavery and making Saint-Domingue effectively independent. On June 7, 1802, he was betrayed and turned over to the invading French. In the decades following his death in France, Toussaint’s remarkable life became the subject of songs, stories, poems, novels, plays, and oral traditions that paid homage to the honor, courage, and martyrdom of the liberator of Haiti. Further Reading. Dubois, Laurent. Avengers of the New World: The Story of the Haitian Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2004; ———. A Colony of 416 Toussaint Louverture Citizens: Revolution and Slave Emancipation in the French Caribbean, 1787–1804. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004. Michael J. Schroeder transcendentalism In its 1836–46 heyday, the New England–based religious, intellectual, and social movement known as transcendentalism fostered a truly American literature and inspired important social reforms, including abolition of slavery and new roles for women. Although it was never a mass movement, its adherents’ attempts to harmonize human freedom with religious belief, social responsibility, and the natural order continue to resonate in today’s American culture. Transcendentalism was deeply influenced by the romantic movement that swept Europe in the wake of the American Revolution and the French Revolution. Young Americans—children of the early 19th century—found themselves drawn to new ideas about how to interact with nature and find personal authenticity and wholeness. In so doing, they challenged old-line religious beliefs, questioned the growing Industrial Revolution, and energized emerging notions of American democracy. Well educated (many were Harvard graduates) and more urban than most Americans of their time, most who called themselves transcendentalists were clergy, writers, and teachers living in and near Boston. RALPH WALDO EMERSON In the beginning what became known as transcendentalism was mainly a revolt against many of the teachings and assumptions of the New England religious establishment. As Massachusetts, established as a Puritan “City on a Hill” in the early 17th century, evolved toward Unitarianism in the early 19th century, some church leaders and members came to see their modern creed as excessively rationalistic and inadequate to modern challenges. Bostonian Ralph Waldo Emerson was destined to follow in his Unitarian minister father’s respectable footsteps. When his 20-year-old wife died of tuberculosis in 1831, the young Harvard graduate was plunged into doubt, fi nding his own preaching of religious certitude of little comfort. Resigning his ministry at Boston’s Second Unitarian Church, Emerson went to Europe, learning French, German, and Italian and meeting such key romantic advocates as essayist Thomas Carlyle and poets Samuel Taylor Coleridge and William Wordsworth. By the 1830s the former minister was traveling the American lyceum circuit, preaching lay sermons to men and women seeking moral and intellectual improvement. In his famous 1841 lecture, “Self-Reliance,” Emerson urged people to think, and rethink, for themselves, saying “A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines . . . To be great is to be misunderstood.” Revered and attacked, admired, imitated, and sometimes mocked as a disembodied “transparent eyeball,” Emerson was the intellectual and personal center of the coterie of like-minded thinkers and doers who were the transcendentalists. He is generally considered to be America’s fi rst public intellectual and fi rst philosopher of the evolving republic. OTHER IMPORTANT TRANSCENDENTALISTS Emerson’s circle was marked by deep intellectual and personal friendships that could at times become A former slave, Toussaint Louverture led Haiti’s insurgent exslaves against the British and Spanish. transcendentalism 417 competitive or even petty. Transcendentalism tried to unleash human potential rather than codify it, and transcendentalists tended toward independence rather than orthodoxy. In the process, adherents made important contributions to the slavery and labor questions of their day and rethought education and women’s rights. HENRY DAVID THOREAU The person most closely associated with Emerson, Thoreau is best known for his two-year experiment in natural living at Walden Pond and his formulation of “civil disobedience,” the idea that free people of conscience can, and indeed must, refuse to go along with unjust government actions. A Harvard graduate like his mentor, Thoreau worked to develop practical skills and showed a real talent for making do with available resources. In important ways, he embodied the selfreliant man of Emerson’s orations. Thoreau wrote his essay, “Resistance to Civil Government,” after he was arrested at Walden in 1846 by Concord’s sheriff for refusing (for a sixth time) to pay a poll tax because he felt it aided Massachusetts’s participation in the Mexican- American War, a war that many believed was being fought to preserve and expand slavery. “Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them . . . ?” Thoreau asked. “The authority of government . . . can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it.” He served a night in jail; the essay became an inspiration for later activists. MARGARET FULLER Cofounder with Emerson of the infl uential but shortlived quarterly The Dial, Fuller was later an assistant editor and foreign correspondent for the New-York Tribune and one of America’s earliest exponents of women’s rights. In her essays and an infl uential 1845 book, Woman in the Nineteenth Century, Fuller argued that the kinds of self-realization and personal fulfi llment advocated by transcendental thinking must also be available to women. “As men become aware that all men have not had their fair chance,” she wrote in the July 1843 Dial, “they are inclined to say that no women have had a fair chance.” Fuller died in a shipwreck near New York as she returned from Italy with her husband and young son, who both also drowned. THEODORE PARKER Parker, a controversial minister, was forced out of the Unitarian Church. Although he had doubts about the intellectual equality of black people, he became an enthusiastic transcendentalist and a leader of the antislavery movement. A foe of the Mexican War like Thoreau, Parker led opposition in the Boston area to federal efforts to enforce the new Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, going so far as to hide an escaped slave in his home. Even more controversially, he helped fi nance arms purchases that helped antislavery zealot John Brown and others fi ght slaveholding settlers in the disputed Kansas-Nebraska Territory and enabled Brown to launch his failed raid on a U.S. armory at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in 1859. ORESTES A. BROWNSON Born in Vermont, Brownson was a lifelong religious seeker who ultimately became a Roman Catholic. During his years as an important transcendentalist, Brownson focused on inequitable treatment of workers, both free and enslaved. A socialist and editor of his own Boston-based journal, Brownson saw the gap between the wealthy and laboring classes growing disastrously in violation of God’s law and the supposed equality promised by American democracy. “What in one word is this American system?” he asked in 1840. “Is it not the abolition of all artifi cial distinctions, all social advantages founded on birth or any other accident, and leaving every man to stand on his own feet . . . ?” BRONSON ALCOTT Best known today as the often-absent father of Little Women author Louisa May Alcott, the self-educated Alcott pioneered new educational methods, some of which have continued to infl uence American schooling. Children, he believed, should not be forced to learn a rigid curriculum but taught ways to open their minds to a world of knowledge. The child, he wrote, “is the Book. The operations of his mind are the true system.” Although his ideas were controversial, partly because he disdained corporal punishment, Alcott was eventually appointed superintendent of Concord’s public schools. Less successful was Fruitlands, the agricultural community Alcott and a British friend founded in a rural Massachusetts town in 1843. It lasted just six months, done in by rules that included cold-water showers, strict vegetarianism, sexual abstinence, and opposition to animal exploitation so strict that colonists could not use horses or oxen to clear land for farming. GEORGE RIPLEY AND THE BROOK FARM EXPERIMENT Brook Farm, an experiment in communal living on a transcendental plane, proved more durable than 418 transcendentalism Alcott’s Fruitlands but collapsed in 1847 after six years of financial struggle, infighting, a disastrous fire, and a smallpox outbreak. Located on a 200- acre West Roxbury, Massachusetts, dairy farm, the “colony” was the brainchild of Unitarian minister George Ripley, his wife, Sophia, and other committed transcendentalists. In the wake of 1837’s socially destructive U.S. fi nancial panic, ideas of economic self-suffi ciency, the ennoblement of manual labor, and the in-gathering of likeminded intellectuals seemed especially appealing. Brook Farm’s founders were also infl uenced by the social thought of Frenchman Charles Fourier, whose American adherents would eventually gain control of this experiment in group living. Although Emerson was unenthusiastic about Ripley’s proposed “city of God,” planning proceeded apace in 1840–41. During a very cold and wet spring, the Ripleys and a dozen supporters—most lacking any agricultural experience whatsoever—took up residence at the farm. In 1842 a school of collegepreparatory caliber was established at Brook Farm, attracting some of the cream of New England society as students and teachers. The settlement quickly became a magnet for tourists, transcendentalists, and Fourierists, but its poor soil and inadequate fi nancing, as well as a series of disasters, led to its demise. As the community failed, George Ripley auctioned off his personal library in a vain effort to save the foundering utopian enterprise. LITERARY RENAISSANCE Emerson immersed himself in the ideas, poetry, and literature of early 19th-century Europe, but he and other transcendentalists were also convinced that their countrymen and -women must and could create a uniquely American voice in all the arts, especially fi ction and poetry. Eventually, writers who were not always best sellers in their own time would be canonized by 20thcentury critics and are still considered among the most important the United States ever produced. NATHANIEL HAWTHORNE An early settler and major investor in Brook Farm, Hawthorne was the descendant of Puritan elders, among them participants in the Salem witch trials. In 1852, 10 years after he spent more than six months milking cows and spreading manure, he satirized Brook Farm in his novel The Blithedale Romance. More important were novels such as The Scarlet Letter and short stories, including “Young Goodman Brown,” in which Hawthorne examined darker aspects of theology and human behavior. HERMAN MELVILLE A strong admirer and interpreter of Hawthorne’s work, Melville, a New Yorker, fi rst gained notice as the writer of popular seafaring stories based on his own experiences. His later stories and novels, including “Bartleby the Scrivener,” Benito Cereno, and Moby-Dick (dedicated to Hawthorne) were much bleaker, exploring issues of slavery, race, and madness before and after the Civil War. His sales languished during his lifetime but were revived by positive critical attention in the 1920s and later. WALT WHITMAN Born on a failing Long Island farm, Whitman was an itinerant teacher, printer, and editor whose poetry collection, Leaves of Grass, later much expanded, burst on the scene in 1855. “I greet you at the beginning of a great career,” Emerson wrote to the previously unknown poet days after its publication. Emerson viewed Whitman as the ideal poet he had proposed in an 1844 essay. An active opponent of slavery, Whitman used his poetry to mourn the violence of war as he nursed injured Union soldiers. His poem “When Lilacs Last in the Dooryard Bloomed” lamented Abraham Lincoln’s assassination. Whitman’s poetry celebrated ordinary men and women. That, and his radical use of free verse—characterized by some as “barbaric yawp”—became key aspects of his truly “American” poetics. ENDURING SIGNIFICANCE Always controversial in its own time, transcendentalism gained new respect and importance in the 20th century, as educators, literary critics, and social activists found in its teachings and experiments new energy and new lessons for the United States and other societies. In Thoreau, such social critics as Mohandas K. Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and American anti-Vietnam war protestors found inspiration and justifi cation for their opposition to colonialism, racism, and arrogant political power. Educational programs that seem to borrow from the child-centered focus of Alcott and others have met both praise and scorn in America and Europe. Emersonian concepts of self-reliance and personal fulfi llment, sometimes credited with improving American public life, have also been blamed for encouraging a “culture of narcissism.” Transcendentalism continues to transcend its own historical place and time. transcendentalism 419 See also financial panics in North America; women’s suffrage, rights, and roles. Further reading: Buell, Lawrence, ed. The American Transcendentalists: Essential Writings. New York: Modern Library, 2006; Delano, Sterling F. Brook Farm: The Dark Side of Utopia. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press, 2004; Porte, Joel. Representative Man: Ralph Waldo Emerson in his Time. New York: Oxford University Press, 1979. Marsha E. Ackermann Triple Alliance and Triple Entente (1882) Between 1882 and 1914 western Europe divided between the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance. The division allowed the preservation of an uneasy peace despite periodic disruptions, particularly in the Balkans. The map of Europe experienced major alterations in 1871 with the creation of the German Empire and the kingdom of Italy. Under Otto von Bismarck Germany’s main foreign policy goal was to keep France from becoming strong enough to take revenge for the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71) defeat and to fulfill its desire to retake Alsace and Lorraine. Germany allied with Austria-Hungary and Russia in the Three Emperors’ League. Russia and Austria-Hungary, however, were at odds with one another over the Balkans and the Russian-backed Pan-Slavic movement, which threatened to break up the multinational Austria-Hungary by unifying Slavs. Pan-Slavism became a greater menace after the Treaty of San Stefano (1878) created a Bulgarian state. The Congress of Berlin in 1878 broke the Three Emperors’ League. In 1879 Bismarck and Austria-Hungary formed the secret Dual Alliance. Germany and Austria-Hungary shared extensive common borders. Many regions of Austria were German-speaking, and both wanted to expand; Austria particularly had territorial ambitions in the Balkans. However, Austria was a fading empire, while Germany was young and ambitious. Germany soon dominated the alliance. Italy joined the Dual Alliance to form the Triple Alliance in 1882. Italy was an off-and-on enemy of Austria because it coveted the same lands, but France occupied Tunisia in 1881 and blocked Italy’s ambitions for an African empire. The Triple Alliance eased differences between Italy and Austria and gave Italy promises of aid against French aggression. Italy’s promise of aid against French attack helped Germany, whose agreement with Austria had no mutual assistance provision. The treaty was secret and temporary. The signatories renewed it in 1887 and 1903. In 1903 Italy canceled its promise to assist Germany against a French attack. In 1902 France secretly gave Italy free rein in Tripoli (present-day Libya in North Africa), thereby ending Italy’s anger at France. Italy was free to resume its rivalry with Austria in the Adriatic. In 1882 Serbia joined a treaty with Austria- Hungary. Romania joined in 1883. The result was a powerful bloc in central Europe. Such a powerful combination called for a counterweight, and the powers on the periphery—France, Russia, and Britain— responded accordingly. The Triple Alliance collapsed in 1914 at the onset of World War I when Italy argued that Serbia committed no aggression and declined to join her partners in war. The remaining alliance powers held together against the Triple Entente. When Germany refused to renew its treaty with Russia, Russia turned to France, which wanted an ally against a united and hostile central Europe. The two signed an understanding in 1891, a military agreement in 1893, and the Franco-Russian Dual Alliance of 1894, made public in 1895. Germany under Wilhelm II was aggressively seeking colonies and building a powerful navy. In response, the traditionally standoffish Britain sought allies. France was a traditional enemy and current rival in Africa. Anti-German Théophile Delcasse became French foreign minister in 1898. In 1901 Francophile Edward VII became king of Great Britain. In 1904 France and Britain signed the Entente Cordiale, an agreement of friendship but not military aid. After Russia lost the Russo-Japanese War, English rivalries with Russia in Asia cooled. Russia joined the Triple Entente in 1907. Europe, therefore, was divided and ready for an event that would spark a major confrontation. Further reading: BBC Schools online. “The Road to War: The Triple Alliance Who Was in the Triple Alliance and Why Was It Formed?” Available online. URL: www.bbc.co.uk/ schools/worldwarone/hq/causes1_01.shtml. Accessed May 2007. O’Brien, Joseph. “The Triple Alliance, 1882.” Reference Documents, Obee’s History Page. Available online. URL: http://web.jjay.cuny.edu/~jobrien/reference/ob59.html. Accessed May 2007. John H. Barnhill 420 Triple Alliance and Triple Entente (1882) Tunisia under French rule In 1881 a French expeditionary force attacked Tunisia from Algeria and along the coast. The French forced the local ruling bey, Muhammad al-Sadiq, to sign the Treaty of Bardo that agreed to a French occupation of Tunisia. France was interested in controlling Tunisia in order to guard the eastern border with Algeria (already under French control) and to stop Italian expansion into North Africa. During the Congress of Berlin in 1878, the British and Germans had agreed to French control over Tunisia. Meanwhile, the British expanded their imperial control over Egypt, in 1881–82. The resident-minister Paul Cambon legalized the French position with the Convention of Marsa in 1883, whereby Tunisia became a French protectorate. Although the position of the bey was retained, the French appointed a resident-general who became the real ruler of Tunisia. The French legal system was introduced, and the monetary system was based on the French franc. A customs union with France was established, and the French exercised a monopoly over tobacco plantations. Tunisia was divided into military and political zones with civil controllers. The government allowed immigrants from France and Italy settle in Tunisia, but unlike the situation in Algeria, where French colons often received free land, in Tunisia European settlers had to buy the land. Italian immigrants outnumbered French settlers until the 1930s. Under the French, areas of cultivation, particularly vineyards for the production of wine, a substance forbidden to the majority Muslim Tunisian population, were expanded. The French also supported the growth of industry and the mining of phosphates while modernizing and expanding the ports and railway systems. Education was based on the French model, with French as the primary language and Arabic as the second language. Vocational schools were established on the elementary level, but state schools took only a small percentage of children. The vast differences in education and social opportunities afforded European settlers and the indigenous Tunisian population contributed to urban elite Tunisians trying to reestablish their identity. Some advocated assimilating Western technology and political approaches and cooperating with the French regime. Others favored reviving Islamic traditions and customs. Shaikh Abd al-’Aziz al-Tha’alibi founded a newspaper in 1895 in which these ideas were discussed. Al-Tha’alibi became one of the foremost leaders of the fi rst generation of Tunisian nationalists. Tunisian nationalism fl ourished as Tunisians resisted French rule. A young Tunisian educated elite also emerged from Sadiqiyya College, which had been established during Khayr al-Din’s administration in the mid-19th century; many Sadiqiyya graduates became the leaders of the Tunisia nationalist movement in the 20th century. See also British occupation of Egypt. Further reading: Barbour, Nevill. A Survey of North West Africa [The Maghrib]. London: Oxford University Press, 1962; Ziadeh, Nicola A. Origins of Nationalism in Tunisia. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1962. Janice J. Terry
Crisis and Achievement 1900 to 1950 Edit
Taisho (1879–1926) emperor of Japan Emperor Taisho, whose personal name was Yoshihito, was the emperor of Japan from 1912 to 1926, the 123rd ruler of the Japanese imperial line, and the son of the heroemperor Meiji and an imperial lady-in-waiting, Yanagiwara Naruko. The Empress Shoken Haruko was appointed his offi cial mother. In 1912, he became emperor and took the reign name Taisho. Taisho’s father, the emperor Meiji, was a hard act to follow. Meiji had brought Japan’s economy into the modern world, and by the time of his death, Japan was an industrialized nation and a world power. His charisma and achievements transformed Meiji into a persona that was diffi cult to separate from the institution of the imperial system. His blend of humanity and heroism bolstered the belief in the emperor as a living deity. On the other hand, Taisho was a sickly man whom many considered not of the same caliber as Meiji. He was expected to have strength and intellectual acumen, to make quick, strong decisions, and to put Japan above all else. Advisers, intellectuals, and offi cers of the state felt that Taisho bore none of these traits and considered him indolent and impulsive. Taisho lacked knowledge of military strategy and negotiation skills. Taisho’s reign marked the attainment of universal male suffrage, the decrease of monarchical power, and greater freedoms. Historians mark the post–Russo- Japanese War period and the 1912 imperial change as the beginning of the Taisho democracy, meaning universal male suffrage, cabinet governments, and politics based on parties rather than the older fi ef-based political cliques. After World War I, the Taisho democracy also came to mean the infl ux of Western lifestyles, individualism, and cultural products. This infl ux of Western culture challenged the idea that the state was responsible for defi ning and enforcing proper moral life. As a child, Yoshihito had suffered from meningitis, said to have affected him throughout his entire life. When he was around 10 years old, his medical condition had worsened and his performance as a student had suffered miserably. Court attendants who had recognized his limitations eventually devised a program consisting of three parts learning to seven parts physical education. He withdrew from the school so as not to damage the carefully constructed image of an institution that did not allow for human failure. Despite these failings, there were high hopes upon his assumption of the throne. The reign name Taisho means “great rectifi cation and reform,” and he was pledged to correctness, rectifi cation, and adjustments. In 1919, Japan attended the peace conference at Versailles that ended World War I as one of the great military and industrial powers of the world. It participated in the proceedings as one of the Big Five powers. Japan also earned a seat on the council of the League of Nations. In 1921, Japan, the United States, Britain, and France signed the Four Power Treaty on Insular Possessions. They agreed to recognize the status quo in the Pacifi c region. Japan and Britain also agreed to terminate their T Treaty of Alliance. It signed the Five Power Naval Disarmament Treaty of 1922 that established an international ship ratio for the United States, Britain, Japan, France, and Italy. It also limited the size and armaments of capital ships already built or under construction. Although the ratio 5 : 5 : 3 : 1.75 : 1.75 allowed the U.S. and Britain larger fl eets, it gave the Japanese navy superiority in the Pacifi c. The original fi ve countries, along with Belgium, China, the Netherlands, and Portugal, signed the 1922 Nine Power Treaty to prevent war in the Pacifi c by agreeing to respect China’s independence and not to interfere with China domestically. Japan also agreed to withdraw its troops from Shandong (Shantung) in China and evacuated troops from Siberia. The most noteworthy change during the Taisho democracy was the rise of the political parties and the growth of universal male suffrage. Despite the rise of the political parties, the Taisho democracy remained highly elitist and shallowly rooted, resulting in the eventual downfall of the idea of democratic institutions. Emperor Taisho’s mental incapacity led to his oldest son, Hirohito, being appointed regent in 1921. Taisho died in 1926. Further reading: Bix, Herbert P. Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2000; Kinbara, Samon, ed. Taisho Democracy. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobunkan, 1994; Najita Tetsuo and J. Victor Koschmann. Confl ict in Modern Japanese History: The Neglected Tradition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1982; Silberman, Bernard S., and H. D. Harootunian. Japan in Crisis: Essays on Taisho Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1974; Sims, Richard L. Japanese Political History since the Meiji Renovation, 1868–2000. New York: Palgrave, 2001. Melissa Benne Tanganyika Tanganyika is the name applied to a section of East Africa given over to British rule after World War I. The territory had been part of German East Africa, which was captured by Britain. After World War II the United Nations made Tanganyika a trust territory still under British authority. The Republic of Tanganyika gained its independence from Britain in 1961 and joined with Zanzibar in 1964 to form the country of Tanzania. Tanganyika was bordered by Lake Tanganyika, from which it received its name, the Indian Ocean, Lake Victoria, and a number of African countries. Tanganyika was also home to Africa’s highest peak, Mount Kilimanjaro. The Indian Ocean along the eastern coast of Tanganyika provided ports that proved extremely valuable for the East Indian spice trade and the slave trade. One of the most important ports was that of Zanzibar, which received ships from many European nations. By the mid-1800s the coastal towns became important starting points for Arab trading caravans going to the interior. Recognizing its strategic importance and having taken part in the Berlin Conference of 1885 deciding 376 Tanganyika Under the reign of Emperor Taisho, Japan moved toward universal male suffrage and greater infl uence of political parties. the rules by which Europe would colonize Africa, Germany annexed the territories of Tanganyika, Burundi, and Rwanda as German East Africa. During World War I Britain invaded and occupied the German colony. In 1914 the Royal Navy took possession of the port of Mafia, and by 1916 the British had spread their presence throughout the colony. German opposition to the British during World War I was led by Commander Paul Emil von Lettow-Vorbeck. His tactics of guerrilla warfare and a scorched earth campaign left the territory in chaos. The League of Nations gave Britain authority over the Territory of Tanganyika and Belgium authority over the Rwandan and Burundian sections of German East Africa. The Colonial Office in London appointed General Sir H. A. Byatt the first administrator-general in 1921. In 1922 Britain outlawed slavery in Tanganyika, a practice that had continued in spite of earlier attempts to stop it. Indirect rule, which placed native leaders in positions of authority but under the British governor, was Britain’s policy in Africa. A legislative council was convened, but it was not until 1926 that it had significant African representation. Britain undertook considerable economic improvements in the area, building schools and hospitals and opening two major rail lines in 1928–29. The capital city was maintained in Dar-es-Salaam. Economic stability for Tanganyika continued during British rule. The discovery of diamonds by Canadian John Williamson in 1940 and the importance of Tanganyika’s rubber plantations during World War II helped the economy. Britain divested itself of many of its colonies and territories during the 1960s, and Tanganyika was given its independence in 1961. Further reading: Iliffe, John, David Anderson, Carolyn Brown, and Christopher Clapham. A Modern History of Tanganyika. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979; Listowel, Judith. The Making of Tanganyika. New York: London House and Maxwell, 1965. Jean Shepherd Hamm Tanganyika 377 Mount Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, formerly Tanganyika Tenente rebellion (1924) The Tenente rebellion took place in Brazil in 1924 and had the aim of overthrowing the oligarchy that was ruling the country at that time. The revolt rose out of “Tenentismo” politics—the name coming from lieutenants in the Brazilian army who wanted the country to have new leadership. These lieutenants and some others of higher rank took their inspiration from the overthrow of the Brazilian emperor in 1889 and the subsequent establishment of the republic. They viewed the Brazilian armed forces as needing to take on the social function of defending the constitution. To some extent, their beliefs resembled those of the Young Turks and other army reform movements of the 20th century. During World War I the inability of European countries to supply Brazil with imported goods had led to the enlargement of many factories in Brazil catering to the home market. This led in turn to a large-scale increase in the industrial urban working class and a rise in trade union activism. At the end of the war, the increasingly powerful labor movement was anxious for social changes, and in 1919 a mass walkout by 150,000 textile workers led to rising tensions throughout the country. Three years later soldiers in the Copacabana barracks on the outskirts of Rio de Janeiro openly rebelled under Antonio Siqueira Campos and Eduardo Gomes. Although this rebellion was quickly suppressed, the junior officer corps was becoming increasingly sympathetic to the demands of the trade unions. In July 1924 there was a mutiny among soldiers in São Paulo, Brazil’s second city, instigated by Major Miguel Costa, the commander of the São Paulo state militia. The soldiers declared that they were acting to save the country from corrupt politicians. The actions rapidly turned into a rebellion and drew support from many army officers, including General Isidoro Dias Lopes and junior officers in São Paulo at the time, including Joaquim and Juarez Tavora, Cordeiro de Farias, João Alberto, and Eduardo Gomes. For a month these soldiers were able to hold São Paulo while forces loyal to the government surrounded the city. The government, desperate for a way to break the revolt, used the newly created Brazilian air force to bomb parts of São Paulo. The resulting casualties led to an increase in sympathy for the rebels. A second revolt then broke out at Rio Grande do Sul, the southernmost state in Brazil. There rebel soldiers under Captain Luís Carlos Prestes declared themselves in support of the soldiers in São Paulo. Again, the area sympathetic to the rebellion was surrounded by government troops. Both the Costa forces in São Paulo and the Prestes forces from Rio Grande do Sul managed to break through the government lines, and they were able to join forces near Iguasu Falls, where Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina have a common border. At a meeting there, the two forces were formally merged, Costa became the commander in chief, and Prestes was elected chief of the general staff. Soon the force had shrunk to only a few hundred men, with Prestes the acknowledged leader. The surviving rebels soon became known as the Prestes Column, and these men fought their way through Brazil for the next three years in a feat that would be compared to the later Long March of the Communists in China. Not only were the members of the Prestes Column trying to evade their opponents, they were also eager to gain recruits and mobilize the people against the government. A few town militia groups were formed, but these were no match for the government. The Prestes Column was never able to attack a major city. The Tenente rebellion was a failure, and as the number of rebels dwindled, it began to be seen overseas as a romantic episode in Brazilian history. Prestes himself was to be important in Brazilian politics for years to come. Juarez Távora became governor of northeastern Brazil, and João Alberto went on to become chief of the federal police. Eduardo Gomes subsequently took over the Brazilian air force and contested the presidency in 1945 and again in 1950. Further reading: Alexander, Robert J. “Brazilian Tenentismo.” Hispanic American History Review 36, no. 2 (1956); Duff, Ernest A. “Luis Carlos Prestes and the Revolution of 1924.” Luso-Brazilian Review 4, no. 1 (1967); Hayes, Robert A. The Armed Nation: The Brazilian Corporate Mystique. Tempe: Arizona State University, 1989. Justin Corfield Tojo Hideki (1884–1948) Japanese prime minister With his bald, bullet-shaped head and large eyeglasses, Hideki Tojo was a definitive image of Japanese militarism writ in human form. But to many of his colleagues in Japan Hideki Tojo was a detail-obsessed, jumped-up filing clerk who led Japan in its largest and bloodiest war without any strategic vision. Hideki Tojo was born on December 30, 1884, the son of a career soldier who rose to the rank of gen- 378 Tenente rebellion (1924) eral. Short-sighted and short-built, young Tojo entered military school at age 15, showing no exceptional abilities except one for tackling hard work right away and with a driving purpose. In 1904 newly commissioned 2d Lt. Tojo was sent to Manchuria, arriving just too late to see battle in the Sino-Japanese War. He spent two dull years on garrison duty in Manchuria. In 1909 he married Katsu Ito, a 19-year-old student at a Kyushu women’s college, who was educated. They were a love match. They had seven children. Tojo served in staff jobs, including with the Japanese intervention in Siberia, before being posted to Switzerland and then Germany as a military attaché, where he admired German toughness in the face of defeat. En route home in 1922, Tojo went through the United States and drew a different conclusion from this brief journey: Americans lacked the spiritual strength of the Japanese. Hot tempered and with close-cropped hair, Tojo was known to his pals as Kamisori, or “Razor.” He worked long hours on his paperwork. Ferocious in discipline, he showed a softer side by providing his men with money when they retired to civilian life. Tojo rose steadily, if not spectacularly, through the Japanese army. In 1933 he was assigned to head the general affairs bureau of the war offi ce, the army’s public relations unit. His message repeated his own beliefs: With Russia, China, and the United States as enemies, Japan had to be on its guard. Tojo got his general’s star in early 1935. In late 1935 he got his second star and was given command of the Kwantung Army’s military police, or Kempei Tai, in charge of law and order in Japan’s Manchurian puppet state, where he suppressed internal and Chinese opposition to Japanese rule with ruthlessness and effi ciency. When Japanese offi cers attempted a coup d’état in Tokyo in February 1936, Tojo stayed loyal to the government and acted swiftly, jailing numerous dissident offi cers and civilians. In 1937 Tojo was promoted to lieutenant general and appointed chief of staff of the Kwantung Army. When the Japanese invaded China, Tojo led Japanese troops on a drive that outfl anked Beijing (Peking) and resulted in the seizure of Inner Mongolia. It was the only time he commanded troops in battle. He then returned to the Kwantung Army to build up Manchuria’s defenses against the Soviet invasion that Japan feared. Tojo was appointed deuputy war minister. Japan was now on the warpath, driving bloody fi sts deep into China, blasting cities, massacring civilians, and attacking U.S. and British ships on the Yangzi (Yangtze) River. MINISTER OF WAR In 1940, when Prince Konoye became prime minister, Tojo was appointed minister of war. That September he ordered Japanese troops into French Indochina, then wrote new regulations for the army that stressed Bushido ferocity, and purged the army’s pro-British and United States offi cers, replacing them with his own supporters. As Japanese-U.S. negotiations over peace in the Pacifi c collapsed, so did the Konoye government. As the only man who had the all-important army’s loyalty and the only one capable of leading Japan through the war he was planning to launch against the United States and Britain, Tojo was appointed prime minister on October 17, 1941. His contempt for the United States and Britain manifested itself in the attack on Pearl Harbor. As Japan’s war leader, Tojo took everything on himself in the best clerkish style. He also appointed himself minister of the interior, foreign affairs, education, commerce, industry, and munitions and chief of the army general staff. He appointed his Kwantung Army cronies as deputies, assuring loyalty if not effi ciency. Tojo’s management style stressed details, memoranda, and paperwork. He cleared his desk by the end of each day, worked late, slept only four hours, and worried over small details—even peering into garbage bins on Tokyo streets to see how food rationing was working out. BANISHED RIVALS Tojo also spent a lot of time battling his personal enemies. Many of those were of his own creation—offi cers and subordinates who brought him bad news. He banished potential rivals, like Lieutenant General Tomoyuki Yamashita, the conqueror of Malaya, dispatching him to Manchuria. As the war continued, Tojo concentrated power in his own hands, granting large contracts to cronies and relying on his secret police to maintain order and eliminate dissidents. Yet for all his power, Tojo was not the absolute dictator Adolf Hitler was. As Japan suffered defeat after defeat, his position became precarious. By early 1944 he was jailing rightwing opponents. His roof collapsed when the United States invaded the Marianas, conquered the islands, and defeated the Imperial Navy at the Battle of the Philippine Sea. Tojo kept this news from his citizens, but he could not keep it from his government colleagues. Saipan, coming after the fi rst B-29 raids on Japan, and the British victory at Kohima in Burma, were the fi nal straw. Tojo’s opponents now included members of the general staff, admirals, and the imperial privy council. Tojo Hideki 379 They forced him to resign in July 1944, replacing him with General Koiso Kuniaki, who remained committed to the war. Not invited to serve on the imperial privy council, Tojo returned to his home. He emerged from obscurity on February 28, 1945, at the request of the emperor, to assess the increasingly grim military situation. True to form, Tojo insisted that despite the numbers, Japan’s chances were better than 50-50. Events proved him wrong. After a failed suicide attempt, Tojo became the only head of an Axis government to stand trial before the International Military Tribunal for the Far East in Tokyo. On May 3, 1946, Tojo stood before the tribunal, determined to protect the emperor from any blame in the war and refuting the accusations of waging aggressive war, torturing and mistreating POWs, and murdering civilians with a 250-page deposition, which blamed the United States and Britain for the war, claiming the attacks on China, French Indochina, and Pearl Harbor were all self-defense, and showing no remorse for the millions of dead and maimed—only for losing the war. That was his fault, not the emperor’s. Tojo called no witnesses. Further reading: Brackman, Arnold. The Other Nuremberg. Glasgow: Collins and Son, 1989; Browne, Courtney. Tojo: The Last Banzai. Sydney: Angus and Robertson, 1967; Coox, Alvin D. Japan: The Final Agony. New York: Ballantine, 1970; Hoyt, Edwin P. Japan’s War. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1986; Toland, John. The Rising Sun. New York: Random House, 1970. David H. Lippman Tokyo International Court The Tokyo International Court was appointed by the supreme commander for the Allied powers, General Douglas MacArthur, to implement the terms of surrender for Japan in World War II. Also known as the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), it held proceedings from 1946 to 1948 at Ichigaya, the hilltop headquarters of the Japanese armed forces during the war. The accused were divided into three categories: Class A included those accused of crimes against peace, that is, planning, initiating, and waging aggressive war; class B included those accused of violating the laws of war; and class C referred to those accused of committing, with orders from above, torture, enslavement, and other crimes against humanity. The IMTFE at Tokyo tried only class A war criminals. Indictments were served against 28 out of 80 suspects in this category. Among them were four former prime ministers, three former foreign ministers, four former war ministers, two former navy ministers, six former generals, two former ambassadors, and three former economic and financial leaders. Others included an ideologue, an imperial adviser, a colonel, and an admiral. Trials of class B and class C suspects were held by military commissions of the Allied powers, individually and sometimes jointly, across Asia. From 1945 until 1951, about 2,000 trials were held by the United States, the Netherlands, France, China, Australia, and Britain. 380 Tokyo International Court General Hideki Tojo was instrumental in the rise of the militaristic policy in Japan that culminated in World War II. In these trials, 920 Japanese were executed and 3,000 were sentenced. Thousands were released with the end of the occupation of Japan in 1952. In Tokyo, the IMTFE sentenced 16 of the defendants to life imprisonment, seven to death by hanging, and two to varying lengths of time in prison. Of the remaining three, two had died of natural causes, and one was declared mentally unfi t to stand trial. The prosecution proved that Japan’s domestic politics had been controlled by militarists since the 1920s; that they had conspired, initiated, and waged aggressive war against China, the United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union; and that they had infl icted and condoned violence against prisoners of war and innocent civilians. An appendix to the indictment named 47 treaties, protocols, and international agreements that Japan had violated. The defense comprised a team of U.S. attorneys and Japanese lawyers. Chief defense counsel captain Beverly Coleman resigned during the trial. Japanese-American lawyer George Yamaoka took on a leadership role thereafter. The defense challenged the legality of the tribunal, arguing that it imposed ex post facto law on the defendants in the form of crimes against peace and crimes against humanity, that judges drawn from Allied nations could not guarantee a fair trial for the defendants, and that Japan’s war had been in self-defense after suffering from economic embargo. The prosecution rebutted the arguments, and the bench dismissed these motions by the defense. The bench comprised 11 judges, one each from the United States, Canada, Britain, France, the Netherlands, the Soviet Union, Australia, New Zealand, China, the Philippines, and India. Sir William Webb, then chief justice of the supreme court of Queensland in Australia, was president of the tribunal. Over the course of the trial, there were 419 witnesses, 779 depositions and affi davits, and 4,336 exhibits. Both in its proceedings and in its judgment, the IMTFE was infl uenced by the precedent set by the international court at Nuremberg, which had tried war criminals of Nazi Germany in 1945–46. The bench at the IMTFE arrived at its decisions on the basis of a majority vote. The majority decision on the judgment was signed by nine of the 11 judges. The defense appealed to General MacArthur, who upheld the sentences. The defense appealed again, this time to the U.S. Supreme Court, which voted to hear the case but on review decided it had no jurisdiction. CONSEQUENCES The Tokyo trial had important consequences. It served as a vital source of information to the Japanese people about the machinations of military cliques and fi nancial interests within prewar and wartime governments. It formally acknowledged Japan’s crimes in the war and laid the basis for vast changes in Japan’s new constitution and foreign policy. Though evidence of atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers in the rape of Nanjing, the Bataan death march, construction of the Burma-Siam railway, and the rape of Manila horrifi ed observers, the trial humanized the nation, as it became clear that ordinary people had been ignorant of the atrocities. The Tokyo trial has been subject to multiple criticisms. On the one hand, from the point of view of victims of Japan’s wartime policies, particularly China and Korea, the IMTFE elided issues such as the emperor’s responsibility for the war, Japan’s suspected biological weapons program, and the sexual slavery of “comfort women” because the United States needed Japan as an ally in the rapidly emerging cold war. On the other hand, according to some scholars, the trial had no basis in existing law at that time. For Japanese ultranationalists, it was punishment for Japan’s challenge to “liberate” Asia from European imperialism. The Tokyo trial was seen as “victor’s justice” because the United States was not brought to account for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945. Further reading: Brackman, Arnold C. The Other Nuremberg: The Untold Story of the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. New York: William Morrow, 1987; Minear, Richard H. Victor’s Justice: The Tokyo War Crimes Trial. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1971; Ushimura, Kei. Beyond the “Judgment of Civilization”: The Intellectual Legacy of the Japanese War Crimes Trials, 1946–49. LTCB International Library, No. 14. Translated by Steven J. Ericson. Tokyo: International House of Japan, 2003. Anuradha Chakravarty Trans-Siberian Railway Construction on the Trans-Siberian Railway began in May 1891. The main part of the system connected Moscow with the port of Vladivostok on the Pacifi c. Today that system runs between the two cities and a web of other cities for 9,297 kilometers (5,578 miles). This monumental achievement was undertaken under very diffi cult conditions. The climate in Siberia and the dense forests, rivers, lakes, and mountains all Trans-Siberian Railway 381 presented obstacles to the builders. Materials often had to be transported for thousands of miles. In addition, most of Russia where the rails were being laid was sparsely populated. The railway required thousands of Russian workers, many of them peasants, convicts, and soldiers. During 1895 and 1896 it is estimated that 85,000 individuals were at work on the railway. Initially, a section of the railway ran through Manchuria, avoiding the diffi cult construction that would have been faced if the system had been totally within Russian territory. However, after the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–05, offi cials decided that the route through China was too vulnerable to disruption. An alternate Russian route for this section was completed between 1908 and 1914. A connection between the Pacifi c coast and Chelyabinsk was opened in October 1916. At the turn of the 20th century, as links of the railway were completed, the Russian people quickly accepted its usefulness. The number of passengers grew from 609,000 in 1897 to 3.2 million by 1912. World War I slowed the growth of the railway and damaged many of the connections. Transport of troops and supplies clogged the single rail line, which could run only 13 trains a day. A special commission was appointed to make recommendations concerning the rail line. The major recommendation of the commission was construction of a double line. By 1908 over 3,000 kilometers of the second line had been built, and the project was completed in 1918, but not before other events disrupted rail service. The civil war within Russia did more damage to the railway system than foreign invaders might have. Up until the 1917 Russian Revolution, an international company had a contract with Czar Nicholas to manage the legendary Trans-Siberian Express between Moscow and Manchuria. The trip took nine days aboard a luxurious train equipped with sleeping cars, restaurant cars, a chapel, a music room, and a library. Staff aboard the train included nurses and a hairdresser. The fi ghting during the revolution not only stopped this train but also destroyed many other railcars and locomotives. Bridges were blown up, and miles of track were ruined. Even with the heavy rebuilding that was needed, the railway was able to reopen in March 1925 and was not seriously interrupted after that. During the 1920s Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was able to use the existing railway system to intensify his industrialization of the Soviet Union. However, this plan was carried out by exploiting the resources of rural areas, leading to a near collapse of agriculture and to mass starvation in some of the republics. During World War II, by transporting troops and supplies, the Trans-Siberian Railway and its connecting lines were again to prove essential in the Soviet resistance to German invasions. Further reading: Marks, Steven G. The Road to Power: The Trans-Siberian Railway and the Colonization of Asian Russia, 1850–1917. London: I. B. Tauris, 1991; Tupper, Harmon. To the Great Ocean: Siberia and the Trans-Siberian Railway. New York: Little, Brown, 1965. Jean Shepherd Hamm Triangle Shirtwaist Fire (1911) The Triangle Waist Company, which manufactured women’s cotton and linen blouses (known in the early 20th century as shirtwaists) was the site of New York City’s worst factory fi re on Saturday, March 25, 1911. The company occupied the top three fl oors of the 10- story Asch Building on Washington Square in Greenwich Village; its workforce consisted of some 500 young seamstresses, mainly Jewish and Italian immigrants between the ages of 13 and 23, and fewer than 100 men. It had been the scene of a successful strike by the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU) in 1909 and early 1910. The fi re began on the eighth fl oor at about 4:45 p.m. and soon became a confl agration. Because the doors and windows had been locked to keep the workers from sneaking out or stealing and because maintenance had been lax, the new, supposedly fi reproof factory turned into a furnace. Most of the workers on the eighth and 10th fl oors escaped, but on the ninth fl oor the rear door, which had been bolted, could not be opened. When the rear fi re escape collapsed there was no escape route. Many women remained in the building to burn or to suffocate; others jumped nine fl oors to their deaths with their clothing and hair on fi re. The fi re companies that responded to the fi ve-alarm fi re could do little since their ladders and hoses reached only to the sixth fl oor and their safety nets ripped under the weight of three or four women at a time. In fewer than 15 minutes 146 workers, almost all women, died. The fi re produced widespread revulsion and rage. The day after the fi re over 100,000 people visited the morgue. The owners of the company, who were themselves Jewish immigrants, were brought to trial for manslaughter and acquitted, but in 1914 a judge ordered them to pay $75 in damages to each of the 23 families 382 Triangle Shirtwaist Fire (1911) who had brought a civil suit against them. The fi re also provoked reform measures. New York City established the Bureau of Fire Investigation, which gave the fi re department authority to improve factory safety. It also formed a Committee of Safety headed by former secretary of war Henry Stimson. At Henry Morgenthau’s urging, the state of New York empanelled a Factory Investigating Commission led by Robert F. Wagner and Alfred E. Smith; its secretary was Frances Perkins (later Franklin D. Roosevelt’s secretary of labor), and it was assisted by investigators from the ILGWU. By the end of 1911, the commission had proposed new laws concerning fi re safety, factory inspection, and woman and child labor, eight of which were enacted. In 1913 the commission’s work prompted the legislature to pass 25 bills that mandated fi re drills, unlocked and outward-opening doors, and building inspections. These laws also increased protection for women and children and limited the practice of piecework. The fi re also accelerated efforts to organize factory and sweatshop workers, especially by the ILGWU. Further reading: Drehle, David Von. Triangle: The Fire that Changed America. New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2003; Stein, Leon. The Triangle Fire. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2001. David Miller Parker Trotsky, Leon (1879–1940) Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky, born Lev Davidovich Bronstein, was a principal participant in the Russian Revolution of 1917, which brought the Bolsheviks to power. Trotsky was born in the Ukraine to Jewish parents. His father, although illiterate, became a successful farmer and landowner, which enabled Trotsky to attend a good school in Odessa. In 1896 he became a committed student of Marxism and joined the Social Democratic Party. Because of his political activities he was sent to Siberia in 1898, where he served four years before escaping. He assumed his jailor’s name, Trotsky, secured a false passport under that name, and traveled abroad. Trotsky joined Vladimir Lenin in London and contributed to the revolutionary journal Iskra (spark). After the 1903 split of the Social Democratic Party into Menshevik and Bolshevik factions, Trotsky initially joined the Mensheviks. Upon his return to Russia in 1905, he became active with the St. Petersburg Soviet but again was arrested and sent to Siberia. During that internal exile he developed his notion of permanent revolution, which argued that communist revolution would consume the world as it spread from nation to nation. He believed that since Russia lacked a developed capitalist bourgeois stage it could immediately advance to a proletarian revolutionary state without historical hindrance. Siberia again failed to hold Trotsky, and he fl ed to Vienna. He worked as a journalist and between 1907 and 1914 was an editor of Pravda (truth). After the outbreak of World War I, he moved to Switzerland and later Paris, where he continued his agitation until expelled from France. He then went to New York City in early 1917 and along with Nikolai Bukharin and Aleksandra Kollontai worked on the journal Novy Mir (new world). However, the overthrow of Nicholas II made real revolution seem a possibility. Trotsky returned to Russia in 1917 and joined Lenin and the Bolsheviks, becoming a critical component in the overthrow of the Menshevik-Kerensky government. What followed was the establishment of the Bolshevik October Revolution under Lenin’s direction. In November 1917 Lenin made Trotsky the people’s commissar for foreign affairs, and he was responsible for negotiating with the Central Powers the humiliating peace treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which ended Russia’s participation in World War I. He then assumed the position of commissar of war in 1918 and was charged with the creation of the Red Army to defend the revolution. The Bolsheviks faced an unfolding civil war that threatened to end their rule as an assortment of conservative forces attempted to overthrow the October Revolution. To resist, Trotsky built a formidable force of 3 million soldiers. His Red Army fought a brutal war on numerous fronts to a successful end and preserved the revolution so that Communist power could be consolidated. It was during these years that Trotsky clashed over matters of policy with both Joseph Stalin and Lenin. Yet Trotsky was needed, and his harsh suppression of the antiparty Kronstadt Revolt of 1921 brought him back into Lenin’s fold. However, Lenin’s health was in permanent decline. Stalin assumed more party roles. He proved himself adept at political intrigue and manipulation, all assets that helped him become general party secretary in 1922. Lenin had reservations about Stalin, but his medical state left him too weak to intervene and save the Soviet Union from a painful dictatorship. Trotsky, Leon 383 When Lenin died in 1924, power was transferred to a triumvirate of Stalin, Lev Kamenev (Trotsky’s brother-in-law), and Gregori Zinoviev. Although Trotsky’s Red Army had ensured Communist success, his lack of control of the party apparatus and his failure to gain support in the triumvirate allowed Stalin to isolate him. As part of this process, he was fi red as commissar of war in 1925. Stalin moved to centralize authority in his own hands, and Trotsky and the other members of the triumvirate were a threat to him. Kamenev and Zinoviev realized the seriousness of the situation and now sought Trotsky’s cooperation in an effort to stem Stalin’s rise to total power. This effort failed, and Trotsky was removed from the Politburo in 1926 and eventually the party in 1927. Kamenev and Zinoviev were shot in 1936. Trotsky’s fall from grace was not complete, for Stalin still saw him as a major threat to his own authority and in 1928 had him internally exiled to Kazakhstan. He was then permanently exiled from the Soviet Union in 1929. Trotsky’s reputation as a revolutionary made fi nding a refuge diffi cult. He initially went to Istanbul, then to France in 1933 and Norway in 1935. Stalin strove to purge the party of all real and imagined Trotsky infl uences, which led to the great treason trials and purges of 1936–38. In 1936, because of pressure from the government of the Soviet Union, Trotsky was again forced to fl ee Norway. He moved to Mexico City, where he had the support of some prominent Mexicans, including the artist Diego Rivera. In Mexico Trotsky continued his attack on Stalin’s perversion of the revolutionary dictatorship, and in 1938 he established with other left-wing followers the Fourth International as a socialist opposition to Stalinism. Because he remained a thorn in Stalin’s side, he was viewed as a beacon for espionage. Trotsky’s days were clearly numbered. On August 20, 1940, he was assassinated by Ramon Mercader, who mortally wounded Trotsky with a blow to the head with an ice pick. Mercader (1914–78), a Spanish communist, was a suspected Stalinist GPU agent who was given support by the Communist Party of Mexico. He served 20 years for his crime and upon his release lived in Cuba before moving to the Soviet Union, where he became a hero. The Trotsky family, who remained in the Soviet Union, did not survive Stalin’s paranoid revenge. Trotsky blamed Stalin for the deaths of his daughters and son. His brother Alexander, although he renounced Trotsky, was shot in 1938, and his sister Olga, the wife of Kamenev, saw her sons shot in 1936 and was herself murdered in 1941. Trotsky became an infl uential 20th-century fi gure, and his intellectual standing and prolifi c writings made him a fi gure of importance in revolutionary circles. He remained a symbol for many extreme left-wing parties in the West who found themselves in opposition to both capitalism and the Soviet brand of communism. Further reading: Callinicos, Alex. Trotskyism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1990; Deutscher, Isaac. The Prophet Armed: Trotsky, 1879–1921. New York: Verso Press, 2003; ———. The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky, 1921–1929. Verso Press, 2003; ———. The Prophet Outcast: 1929–1940. New York: Verso Press, 2003; Wolfe, Bertram D. Three Who Made a Revolution: A Biographical History of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin. Lanham, MD: Cooper Square Press, 2001. Theodore W. Eversole Trujillo, Rafael (1891–1961) Dominican dictator One of the longest-serving Latin American dictators, Rafael Trujillo ran the Dominican Republic from 1930 until his assassination in 1961. For some of that period he was president of the country, and for the rest he was the effective dictator of the Caribbean nation, ruling through hand-picked presidential candidates. Rafael Leónidas Trujillo y Molina was born on October 24, 1891, the son of poor parents from San Cristóbal in the Dominican Republic. In 1918 he joined the country’s national guard, which was trained by the U.S. Marines. The United States, having invaded two years earlier, remained in occupation of the country until 1924. Rising to the rank of major in 1924, Trujillo became chief of staff in 1928, ousting President Horacio Vásquez in a coup d’état in February 1930. In the elections that followed the coup, Trujillo was the major candidate. Trujillo took offi ce on August 16, 1930, establishing a ruthless dictatorial regime that utilized the severe repression of political opponents. After a hurricane destroyed the capital, Santo Domingo, in September 1930, Trujillo set about rebuilding it—it was then renamed Ciudad Trujillo (Trujillo City). In the 1930s, when many European Jews were desperate to leave Germany and other countries, Trujillo encouraged Jewish migration to the Dominican Republic. At the end of the Spanish civil war he also allowed many Republicans to migrate to the Dominican Republic. Although many people hailed this humanitarianism of 384 Trujillo, Rafael the regime, others saw it as an attempt to increase the “white” population of the country at the expense of the blacks. Certainly the black Haitian sugarcane workers were treated harshly. In 1937 Dominican troops were involved in massacring between 15,000 and 20,000 of them, following Trujillo’s claims that Haiti—which occupied the other half of the island of Hispaniola— was supporting Dominican Republic exiles. When Trujillo stepped down as president on August 16, 1938, a friend, Hacinto Peynado, became president, and the ex-president remained commander in chief of the army. In February 1940, Manuel de Jesús Troncoso took offi ce, and on May 18, 1942, Trujillo returned as president. On December 8, 1941, the Dominican Republic, supporting the United States, declared war on Germany. Trujillo’s strident anticommunism made him a useful ally for the United States after the war, and U.S. vice president Richard Nixon visited the country in 1955. Although Trujillo was a brutal dictator and a corrupt administrator, the country prospered under his rule. The Dominican Republic’s small middle class essentially arose during his rule. He tried to rule with a veneer of democracy, although his Partido Dominicano allowed very little room for opposition in the political arena. In elections, the Partido Dominicano was usually the only party to put forward candidates. On May 16, 1952, Trujillo stepped down as president, and his younger brother, Hector Bienvenido Trujillo y Molina, succeeded him. Rafael Trujillo, however, continued to wield the real power in the Dominican Republic. Pressure on Trujillo over human rights abuses escalated. On March 12, 1956, Dr. Jesús de Galíndez, a Basque who had moved to the Dominican Republic, where he had worked for the government, was kidnapped in New York and disappeared. He had written a book called The Age of Trujillo, which was about to be published. It was believed that Galíndez had been taken back to the Dominican Republic and executed there. Trujillo was blamed for this, and the Organization of American States imposed economic sanctions. On May 30, 1961, Rafael Trujillo was assassinated when machine gun fi re raked his car on a highway in the southwestern outskirts of the capital. He was hit fi ve times and died in the street after having managed to get out of the car. Rumors point to U.S. interests being involved in the assassination to get rid of an international pariah whose repression might have led to a communist revolution as in nearby Cuba. The plot was organized by Antonio de la Maza, brother of pilot Octavio de la Maza, who was murdered in 1957. Many of the family were killed in the wake of Trujillo’s assassination, including General J. T. Díaz, who was said to have masterminded it. Trujillo’s body was taken to France, where he was buried in the Père Lachaise Cemetery in Paris. Further reading: Atkins, G. Pope, and Larman C. Wilson. The United States and the Trujillo Regime. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University, 1972; Crassweller, Robert D. Trujillo: The Life and Times of a Caribbean Dictator. New York: Macmillan, 1966; Dietrich, Bernard. Trujillo: The Death of the Goat. London: The Bodley Head, 1978; Espaillat, Arturo R. Trujillo: The Last Caesar. Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1963. Justin Corfi eld Truman, Harry S. (1884–1972) U.S. president Harry S. Truman was the 33rd president (1945–53) of the United States at a time when momentous events were taking place around the globe. World War II was nearly over, and other wars loomed on the horizon, while the specter of Soviet communism haunted U.S. policy makers. It fell to Truman to take on these issues while attempting to guide the United States into its role as an emergent superpower. Truman was born on May 8, 1884, in Lamar, Missouri, the eldest son of John and Martha Truman. Truman studied law at Kansas City Law School but did not earn a degree. His political career began in the year 1922, when he began his association with Thomas Pendergast, a leading Democrat of Kansas City. Truman was elected a judge in Jackson County in the same year. In 1934 he became the Democratic senator from Missouri and supported most of the policies of President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945). Truman became prominent due to his work on the Committee on Defense Expenditure, where he exposed corruption and profi teering. He was selected as the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 1944 and became president after the death of Roosevelt on April 12, 1945. When Truman took offi ce, World War II was not yet over. Germany capitulated on May 7, 1945, but the war against Japan in the Pacifi c continued with mounting casualties on both sides. Still, the Allied forces pressed on, sending strategic bombing runs against Japanese cities from forward Pacifi c bases. Truman met British premier Clement Attlee (1883– 1967) and Joseph Stalin (1879–1953) at Potsdam, Truman, Harry S. 385 Berlin, from July 17 to August 2, 1945, to map out the post–World War II world. To accelerate the end of the war, Truman authorized the use of the atomic bomb on Japan, and consequently, on August 6 and August 9, the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki witnessed the devastating impact of nuclear weapons. On September 2 Japan surrendered formally on the USS Missouri in Tokyo harbor. Immediately following the war, Truman was forced to take a hard-line approach against international communism, particularly with regard to events in Iran, Greece, and Turkey. In Iran the oil-rich province of Azerbaijan was a prize greatly desired by the Soviet Union; its moves were checked by Truman. At the same time, Truman sent U.S. ships to the Mediterranean to prevent Soviet advances in Turkey. Greece, on the verge of a communist takeover after the withdrawal of British troops, was the subject of the Truman Doctrine issued on March 12, 1947. With this, Truman proclaimed that the United States would continue to “support free peoples,” a claim backed up with a $400-million aid package for both Turkey and Greece. The doctrine was further buttressed by U.S. diplomat George F. Kennan (1904–2005) with the Kennan Thesis, which called for the containment of Soviet designs. To further prevent Soviet expansion in Europe, the Marshall Plan, created by secretary of state George C. Marshall, provided $12 billion in aid to various European countries, with the thought that American assistance might help reduce Soviet influence. In response, the Soviet Union consolidated its hold on Eastern Europe and claimed that the U.S. was attempting to divide the world into two blocs, further intensifying the cold war rivalry between the two superpowers. At home, Truman was faced with the massive reconstruction of the American economy following World War II. The transition to a peacetime economy was beset with many problems, including inflation, a shortage of consumer goods, and labor problems. The efforts to stem the earlier depression now came under harsh criticism as both Republicans and conservative Democrats no longer saw the need for the government’s involvement in the American economy. In response, Truman presented the Fair Deal to Congress on September 6, 1945. This plan called for increased social security, full employment, public housing projects, the clearance of slums, a permanent Fair Employment Practices Act, and public works projects. It did not meet with congressional approval, and much of the plan was eliminated or reduced in scope. Truman’s agenda hit further snags when in the midterm elections, the Republican Party won control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate. The new Republican Congress failed to pass the proposal for education, social security, the minimum wage, and power projects. Instead, Congress passed the Labor- Management Relations Act of 1947 (also known as the Taft-Hartley Act), which restricted union activities and removed some restrictions on employers. Truman did not sign the bill. It seemed that the president would not win a second term, but he curried favor with unions, African Americans, urban dwellers, and others. He initiated the civil rights bill in February 1948. Truman also racially integrated the armed forces by an executive order. The Democratic Party was divided, and Truman, with much difficulty, won the nomination to face the Republican Party candidate, Thomas E. Dewey (1902–71). Truman launched a blistering attack on the Republicans and led a vigorous campaign. Few expected him to win, but he proved the predictions of political pundits wrong. second term In his second term, Truman faced serious crises in domestic and external affairs. The Fair Deal was presented once again. The 81st Congress was also not amenable to his reform agenda. However, the president scored victories in raising the minimum wage from 40 to 75 cents, passing the National Housing Act of 1949 to build low-income houses, and establishing the Civil Rights Commission of 1948. Truman could not 386 Truman, Harry S. As the 33rd president of the United States, Truman oversaw the end of World War II and the war in Korea. implement many of his preferred programs such as limiting discrimination in hiring due to opposition by some southern Democrats. Truman’s second term witnessed an anticommunist hysteria that swept the nation. The president was charged with being soft on communism. Persons from the movie industry, intellectuals, liberal Democrats, and scientists came under investigation for being suspected communists or communist sympathizers. The Republican-controlled House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) investigated persons with fl imsy charges. Alger Hiss, a diplomat, was charged with espionage. Truman launched the Federal Loyalty Program to investigate the loyalty of federal employees. Congress passed the McCarran Internal Security Act in 1950, which barred communists from working in defense plants, and registration of communist organizations became mandatory. J. Edgar Hoover (1895–1972), the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) director, and Republican senator Joseph McCarthy conducted the anticommunist crusade, initiating proceedings against alleged radicals and communist sympathizers. FOREIGN POLICY Truman recognized the state of Israel in 1948, and it remained an ally of the United States during the cold war period. Formation of military alliances was another means to shore up the defenses of Western Europe against any future Soviet invasion, and the United States initiated the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in April 1949. Article 5 of the treaty stated that an attack against one would mean an attack against all. Meanwhile, Mao Zedong (Mao Tse-tung) proclaimed the Peoples Republic of China on October 1, 1959. Truman’s containment policy was of no avail there, and international communism had expanded with the inclusion of the most populous nation of the world. The Soviet Union and China signed a formal treaty on February 14, 1950, cementing their friendship. For Truman the task was to check the further onward march of communism. In Indochina a nationalist-communist battle was being waged against French colonialism in the fi rst Indochina War (1946–54) under the guidance of Ho Chi Minh. It was the United States that supported 40 percent of France’s military budget in the war and recognized the noncommunist associate state of South Vietnam in 1950. During the Korean War, the world was on the brink of a global war. Truman faced a serious crisis when Communist North Korea crossed the 38th parallel and invaded South Korea. Truman ordered the Seventh Fleet to move into the straits between China and Taiwan. The United Nations army operation, which consisted of 90 percent U.S. and South Korean forces, was commanded by General Douglas MacArthur. In November the Chinese interfered, and MacArthur advocated invading mainland China. He was relieved of his command amid much public outcry, and General Matthew Ridgway (1895–1993) retook the South Korean capital of Seoul from Sino–North Korean forces. The war dragged on until July 1953. Truman’s popularity diminished, and he decided not to seek reelection in 1952. He spent his time in Missouri after leaving Washington, writing his memoirs and addressing meetings. He died on December 26, 1972, due to medical complications. Further reading: Hamby, Alonzo L. Man of the People: A Life of Harry S Truman. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995; McCullough, David. Truman. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992; Newman, Robert P. Truman and the Hiroshima Cult. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press, 1995; O’Reilly, Kevin. Hoover and the UnAmericans: The FBI, HUAC, and the Red Menace. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1983; Truman, Harry S. The Autobiography of Harry S Truman. Norman, OK: University Press of Colorado, 1980; Truman, Margaret. Harry S Truman. New York: William Morrow, 1973; Wainstock, Dennis D. Truman, Macarthur and the Korean War. Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1999. Patit Paban Mishra Tunisia France controlled Tunisia from 1881 but, unlike in Algeria, maintained the local ruler, Bey Muhammad al-Sadiq, who offi cially continued to rule. By the end of the 19th century, wealthy, urban Tunisians were already seeking more equality under the French regime. Abdul Aziz al-Tha’alibi became the leader of this group, many of whom were graduates of the elite Sadiqiyya College. Prior to World War I France declared martial law over Tunisia. After the war, al-Tha’alibi attended the Paris Peace Conference but failed to gather international support for Tunisian independence. Although some French and Italians settled in Tunisia, their numbers were far smaller than in Algeria. Most colons lived in cities, not rural agricultural areas, so they had much less impact on the majority indigenous population than in Algeria, where many colons engaged in agriculture. Also, Tunisia, unlike Algeria, Tunisia 387 was not considered an integral part of France. In Tunisia the French established a form of joint sovereignty, much as Britain had in Egypt. Nationalism continued to rise during the interwar years, and in the 1920s, a Tunisian union of workers, the Confédération Générale des Travailleurs Tunisiens (CGTT), was established. A rival political party, the Neo-Destour, also emerged; its leader, Habib Bourguiba, a graduate of Sadiqiyya and French law school, had been a member of the older Destour Party. Bourguiba’s Neo-Destour attracted a younger membership. Bourguiba recognized that the Tunisians would not be strong enough to oust the French by force of arms and advocated a gradual approach. However, the French imprisoned Bourguiba for his nationalist activities. Tunisia was a major battleground during World War II. After mainland France fell to the German invasion, the pro-Axis Vichy French government continued to rule North Africa, and in 1942 both Allied and German troops landed in Tunisia. The bey and the Neo-Destour Party under Bourguiba both adopted pro-Allied stances in hopes of gaining independence after the war ended. When the Free French took over in the spring of 1943, they deported the bey. Bourguiba escaped to gather support for the nationalist cause. After the war France granted some reforms, to the dismay of the colons, but it did not grant Tunisia independence until 1956. See also Atatürk, Mustafa Kemal. Further reading: Barbour, Nevill. A Survey of North West Africa (The Maghrib). London: Oxford University Press, 1962; Green, Arnold H. The Tunisian Ulama, 1873–1915: Social Structure and Response to Ideological Currents. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1978; Ziadeh, Nicola A. Origins of Nationalism in Tunisia. Beirut: American University of Beirut, 1962. Janice J. Terry Turkey See Atatürk, Mustafa Kemal. Twenty-one Demands (1915) The Twenty-one Demands of 1915 were Japan’s most comprehensive and aggressive plan to control China up to that date. Immediately after Japan declared war against Germany in August 1914, it sent troops to the German sphere of infl uence in Shandong (Shantung) Province in China and conquered it. It was part of Japan’s plan to take advantage of the preoccupation of Western powers in World War I to expand its control of China. On January 18, 1915, it delivered the Twenty- one Demands to Chinese president Yuan Shikai (Yuan Shih-k’ai). They were divided into six groups as follows: 1. China recognizes Japan’s assumption of all of Germany’s privileges in Shandong, including control of ports, railways, mines, and other interests. 2. China grants Japan a special position in Manchuria and Inner Mongolia including rights to develop mines and factories, an extension of the existing Japanese lease of Port Arthur and Dairen, and railways in the region from 25 to 99 years. 3. Joint operation of China’s iron and steel industries. 4. Non-alienation of coastal areas to any other country. 5. Japan to control the Chinese police and military, and to provide advisers to other branches of the Chinese government. 6. China ordered to keep the demands a secret. Yuan Shikai was in a quandary because he realized the seriousness of the demands but was at the same time trying to become emperor. He realized that he could not succeed without Japan’s blessing. He thus tried to temporize while at the same time leaking the provisions to the press. Yuan was unsuccessful in his attempt to enlist Western support. Japan had already assured its allies Great Britain and Russia that it would not infringe on their rights in the Yangzi (Yangtze) valley and Mongolia, respectively, and the United States merely reiterated its commitment to the Open Door policy in China. Japan offered Yuan a carrot, expressing its willingness to restrict the activities of anti-Yuan Chinese in Japan if he cooperated, then sent him an ultimatum demanding acceptance of the fi rst four groups of its demands while agreeing to postpone discussion of group fi ve to a later date. Yuan capitulated, signing an agreement on May 25, 1915. Japan’s Twenty-one Demands infl amed the Chinese public and stirred Chinese nationalism. In protest, many Chinese students studying in Japan returned home, while merchants in China organized an anti-Japanese boycott. Yuan Shikai’s ineffectual response contributed to his unpopularity and the defeat of his imperial ambitions. It also demonstrated the retreat of Western imperi alism in China beginning with World War I and the rise of Japan as the imperialist power in Asia. 388 Turkey See also Lansing-Ishii Agreement; Shandong question (1919). Further reading: Ch’en, Jerome. Yuan Shih-k’ai, 1857–1916. 2d ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1972; Young, Ernest P. The Presidency of Yuan Shih-k’ai: Liberalism and Dictatorship in Early Republican China. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1977. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Tydings-McDuffi e Act (1934) With the Tydings-McDuffi e Act of 1934 the U.S. Congress created the Philippine Commonwealth and promised self-rule for the Philippines within a decade. Propelled by economic self-interest and xenophobia, the act marked a new stage in U.S. control of the Philippines, a shift from a period of political training to a period of transition toward full independence. It came at a diffi cult moment—just as imperial Japan was fl exing its muscles in the entire Far East—and thus even Filipino nationalists hesitated about independence. The Philippines had been under colonial rule since 1571, when it fi rst became a Spanish colony. Filipino nationalists, including the general Emilio Aguinaldo, fought and lost a war for independence with the Spanish in the mid-1890s. As part of a larger war against the Spanish, the United States intervened in the Philippines in May 1898 and, after defeating the Spanish, took offi cial control of the country through the Treaty of Paris, signed in December 1898 and ratifi ed by the U.S. Senate in February 1899. Under William Howard Taft, the head of the fi rst civil commission in charge of the Philippines, the United States retained ultimate control of the country but began a period of political tutelage for the Filipinos. Taft’s goal was to develop the political institutions and leadership of the Philippines to allow for a modicum of self-government. Taft, however, favored not eventual independence but “indefi nite retention,” giving Filipinos control of the local government and an elected Philippine legislature that shared lawmaking duties with a governing body, the Philippine Commission, appointed by the U.S. president. Philippine control was expanded under the Jones Act of 1916, but executive power remained in U.S. hands. Eventually, political parties coalesced. The Spanish-speaking planter elite, the ilustrados, formed the Federalista Party, later renamed the National Progressive Party. The Nacionalista Party was established in 1907. Two Nacionalista leaders—Sergio Osmeña and Manuel Quezon—would dominate Filipino politics for the entire colonial period. During the early 1930s two factors spurred a reconsideration of U.S. relations with the Philippines, neither of which related to the best interests of the Filipinos. First, economic pressures within the United States during the Great Depression encouraged many economic competitors of Filipino business to push for Filipino independence. After the U.S. takeover of the Philippines in the late 1890s, Filipino businesses had enjoyed duty-free trading with the United States. As the U.S. economy slumped during the 1930s, however, U.S. businessmen began to push for measures that would curtail competition from Filipino businesses. Second, a number of anti-Asian activists wanted to see the Philippines gain its independence in order to reduce Filipino immigration to the mainland United States. As part of a resurgence of U.S. racism and nativism, the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924 had closed the doors of the United States to immigrants from China, Japan, India, and the rest of Asia. Filipinos, however, could continue to move to the United States because they came from a possession of the United States, not an independent country. Opponents of Asian immigration to the United States thus supported Filipino independence because it would close this loophole. In 1933 the U.S. Congress passed the Hawes- Cutting Act despite the veto of President Herbert Hoover. This act provided for Philippine independence following 12 years of commonwealth government. Despite its passage by the U.S. Congress, the act was denied by the Philippine legislature, which objected to the tariff provisions. These had been put in place to protect American farmers, who feared the tarifffree import of Philippine sugar and coconut oil. In response, the Philippine legislature advocated a new bill and secured the support of the recently elected Franklin Delano Roosevelt. This would become the Tydings-McDuffi e Act. Public Law 127, the Tydings-McDuffi e Act, passed in 1934. The act promised full Philippine independence within 10 years and reorganized the Filipino political system into the Philippine Commonwealth. Under this system the United States administered Philippine foreign relations, defense, and major economic affairs but granted the Philippine legislature and the newly elected president the power to manage internal affairs. But Quezon won a concession: After independence Tydings-McDuffie Act (1934) 389 the United States would only retain control of military bases if the Philippines consented. In 1935 Manuel Quezon was elected the first president of the Philippine Commonwealth. The autocratic Quezon dominated the commonwealth period, solidifying his hold on power and dealing ruthlessly with political opponents. During his tenure he did little for the rural poor, crushing their protest movements with force. He led the commonwealth until forced to flee the Japanese invasion in late 1941 and died in exile in 1944. After World War II the United States fulfilled its commitment to grant the Philippines independence. The United States handed over full sovereignty to the Philippines on July 4, 1946, thereby fulfilling the promise made by the Tydings-McDuffie Act 12 years earlier. Further reading: Brands, H. W. Bound to Empire: The United States and the Philippines. New York: Oxford, 1992; Friend, Theodore. Between Two Empires: The Ordeal of the Philippines, 1929–1946. New Haven, CT: Solidaridad Publishing House, 1965; Karnow, Stanley. In Our Image: America’s Empire in the Philippines. New York: Trafalgar Square, 1989. Thomas Robertson
The Contemporary World 1950 to the Present Edit
Taiwan (Republic of China) The Nationalist (Kuomintang, or KMT) government of the Republic of China (ROC) lost the civil war against the Chinese Communist Party in 1949 and retreated to Taiwan, an island province that had been seized by Japan in 1895 and returned to China after World War II. About 2 million people from mainland China fled to Taiwan, joining about 6 million people who had earlier migrated to the island, mainly from the Fujian (Fukien) province across the Taiwan Strait. Chiang Kai-shek, who was elected president of China under the constitution in 1947 and who had stepped down in 1949, resumed his presidency in 1950. He was reelected president four more times and died in 1975. Chiang ruled Taiwan in an authoritarian manner and invoked martial law because of the threat of invasion from the communist-ruled People’s Republic of China (PRC). With the failure of the George Marshall mission to mediate the Chinese civil war, the United States became a bystander in the Chinese conflict until the invasion of Communist North Korea (later aided by “volunteers” from the PRC) of pro-Western South Korea in 1950. The U.S. Seventh Fleet then began to patrol the Taiwan Strait to prevent a PRC invasion of Taiwan, and in 1952 the United States and the ROC signed a Mutual Defense Treaty (ended in 1979), which provided protection for Taiwan. By 1954 Chiang’s government had completed a successful equitable land reform that transferred ownership to cultivators. Resource-poor Taiwan relied on social and educational reforms to produce a literate citizenry. U.S. economic aid helped to reform all aspects of the economy so that an even greater rate of growth became possible when it ended in 1964. Industrial development began with labor-intensive light industries that capitalized on a literate workforce. Infrastructure building allowed the economy to shift to heavy, and later high technology, industries. In 1978 the National Assembly elected chiang ching-kuo (son of Chiang Kai-shek) president; he was reelected in 1984 and died in 1989. Chiang Ching-kuo accelerated the rapid economic development of Taiwan, called an economic miracle by the rest of the world. He began political reforms that ended martial law, granted freedom of the press, and allowed opposition political parties. The Chiang “dynasty” ended with Chiang Ching-kuo’s death (he had disavowed succession by his family members), and he was followed by his vice president, Lee Teng-hui. Lee continued democratization and won two more terms, the second by a universal suffrage vote (rather than election by the National Assembly) under an amended constitution. In the 2000 election, the opposition Democratic Progressive Party candidate won the presidency. Taiwan thus added to its accomplishments the “political miracle” of a peaceful transformation from one-party rule to multiparty democracy without violence. With a population of 23 million, it continued to be one of the most advanced and prosperous nations in Asia. However, Taiwan’s political future remained unclear because of the PRC’s stated goal of national unification, by force if necessary. T See also democratic progressive party and chen shui-bian (Chen Shui-pien). Further reading: Clough, Ralph N. Reaching Across the Taiwan Strait, People-to-People Diplomacy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1993; Hu, Jason C., ed. Quiet Revolutions on Taiwan Republic of China. Taipei: Kwang Hwa Publishing, 1994; Lee Wei-chin and T. Y. Yang, eds. Sayonara to the Lee Teng-hui Era, Politics in Taiwan, 1988–2000. Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 2003; Taylor, Jay. The Generalissimo’s Son: Chiang Ching-kuo and the Revolutions in China and Taiwan. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Taliban Osama bin Laden was born on March 10, 1957, in Riyadh, into a family who owned a construction dynasty estimated worth $5 billion by the mid-1990s. When the Soviets invaded afghanistan in 1979, they began a war in which 1 million people were killed and 5 million were sent into exile. During the war, osama bin laden, then 22, lobbied his family and friends to support the cause of the Afghan freedom fighters, the mujahideen, and made several trips to Pakistan, where he continued his fundraising work. During this time the United States also supported the cause of the mujahideen against the Soviets. The reagan administration authorized the CIA to establish training camps for the mujahideen in Afghanistan and Pakistan and asked King Fahd of Saudi Arabia to match U.S. contributions. King Fahd instructed the minister of intelligence, Turki al-Faisal, to raise money from private sources and Faisal, knowing of bin Laden’s efforts toward the cause, entrusted bin Laden with the task of raising money. Besides raising money for the effort, bin Laden helped encourage Arab volunteers to fight in Afghanistan against the Soviets. He kept a database of his volunteers; the word database translates to Arabic as al-qaeda. When the Soviets left Afghanistan in 1989, the United States withdrew its support for the mujahideen, and the country was plunged into chaos and civil war. When Iraq, built up as a major military power by the United States against Iran, invaded kuwait, the United States sent thousands of troops into Saudi Arabia. The U.S.-Saudi alliance was criticized by bin Laden, who objected to the presence of U.S. troops on land sacred to Muslims. Bin Laden began publicly criticizing the Saudi regime. As a result, he was placed under house arrest. He convinced King Fahd that he had business to take care of in Pakistan as a means of escaping the country, and eventually found refuge in Sudan with hasan al-turabi, the leader of the country’s Islamic Front. While in Sudan, bin Laden opposed the presence of U.S. troops in Somalia, and al-Qaeda affiliates in Yemen bombed two hotels housing American troops in transit to Somalia. Following an attack by al-Qaeda on the World Trade Center in 1993, the Saudi government froze bin Laden’s assets in the country and stripped him of his citizenship. Meanwhile, in 1994, the Taliban (translated as “students”), a small group of graduates from madrassas (schools of Islamic learning) led by Mullah Muhammad Umar, took control of the city of Kandahar, Afghanistan. The Taliban were able to seize leaders of warring factions, and called for the city to disarm. Fatigued by two years of anarchy, the city willingly agreed to the restoration of order. The Taliban announced that it was their duty to set up an Islamic society in Afghanistan, and gained popular support. By 1996 they had taken Kabul and established a government willing to provide sanctuary to Osama bin Laden and to accept his support of their regime. In 2000, bin Laden was linked to the attack on the American guided missile destroyer USS Cole in Aden Harbor, Yemen, and on september 11, 2001, al-Qaeda was held responsible by the United States for the attack on the twin towers and the Pentagon. While the Taliban regime fell as a result of U.S. attacks on Afghanistan on October 10, 2001, the United States was unable to capture Osama bin Laden or destroy the Taliban. Further reading: Bergson, Peter. Holy War, Inc: Inside the Secret World of Osama Bin Laden. New York: Simon and Schuster, 2001; Haqqani, Husain. Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Brookings Institution Press, 2005; Rashid, Ahmed. Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil, and Fundamentalism in Central Asia. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000; Schulze, Reinhard. A Modern History of the Islamic World. New York: NYU Press, 2002. Taymiya R. Zaman Tamil Tigers The Tamil Tigers, officially known as the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam, or LTTE, concentrate operations 412 Taliban predominantly in Sri Lanka with the goal of achieving a separate state for the majority Tamil regions located in north and east Sri Lanka. The rebel group gains much of its internal support from the Tamil agricultural workers and dislocated Tamil youths. Tamil Tiger operations have targeted both military and political objectives since the early 1970s. The United States, the European union, Canada, and India all consider the Tamil Tigers a terrorist organization. Under the leadership of its founder, Velupillai Prabhakaran, the LTTE argues that they are freedom fighters. Until the 1970s the Tamils insisted upon autonomy but did not resort to violent methods. After a long period of attempts to negotiate, Tamils adopted the belief that the Sinhalese-dominated Sri Lankan government was unwilling to negotiate. A number of militant organizations were created—including the New Tamil Tigers and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. In 1979 the LTTE began a campaign of attacking military targets, including a July 1983 killing of 16 army soldiers that led to the killing of thousands of Tamil civilians. In response to the violence, LTTE membership dramatically increased. By 1984 the LTTE had begun higher intensity attacks and created a naval unit called the Sea Tigers. In 1987 a special elite unit of LTTE members known as the Black Tigers was formed. By 2001 the LTTE inexplicably dropped its call for a separate Tamil state and reduced its demands to regional autonomy. Norway negotiated a cease-fire, which as of mid-2006 was tenuous at best. In the summer of 2006 calls for a “Final War” for Tamil Eelam independence emerged. The LTTE, in addition to its military activities, provides a host of government services. The LTTE’s de facto government funds schools, hospitals, police stations, courts, and other municipal services. The LTTE informal government operates under the precepts of socialism. The LTTE also has a political wing, the Tamil National Alliance, although formal attempts have not been made by the LTTE to create political parties. External support for the Tamil Tigers has come from a number of Indian regimes. That support ended with a LTTE associate’s assassination of Indian prime minister rajiv gandhi. In addition the international arms of the Tamil Tigers, located in London and Paris, have facilitated a number of purchases of weaponry. Funding for activities originates in expatriate Tamil communities in the West. Other fund-raising activities include extortion and illegal trade as well as legitimate business fronts and charities. Many terror analysts note that part of the Tamil network includes cargo ships. This has prompted concerns over the use of the fleet in terror operations. Very few Tamil rebels are captured alive. This is because of a rigorous training regime that includes political indoctrination emphasizing the importance of not being captured. Hence Tamil recruits typically wear a capsule of cyanide around their necks and are encouraged to commit suicide rather than face capture. In addition, the LTTE were one of the first modern terrorist groups to encourage suicide bombings. Much has also been written concerning the LTTE practice of recruiting children to fight in the rebellion. The rebel organization has participated in both a conventional war and attacks targeting civilians. The Tamil Tigers have also been accused of ethnic cleansing. Specifically, the Tamil Tigers attempted to remove all non-Tamil residents from the Tamil state of Jaffna in 1990. Further reading: Brogan, Patrick. World Conflicts: A Comprehensive Guide to World Strife since 1945. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press, 1998; Bullion, Alan J. India, Sri Lanka and the Tamil Crisis 1976–1994. New York: Pinter, 1995; Laffin, John. The World in Conflict: War Annual 8. London: Brassey’s, 1997; O’Ballance, Edgar. The Cyanide War: Tamil Insurrection in Sri Lanka, 1937–88. London: Brassey’s, 1990. Matthew H. Wahlert Tashkent Agreement The Tashkent Agreement of 1966 brought a temporary end to the 1965 war between India and Pakistan and was important subsequently in regulating negotiations over the disputed territory of Kashmir. The united nations (UN) had organized a ceasefire in 1965 when it became clear that the fighting had the possibility of endangering large population centers. After 17 days of fighting, neither side wished to resume hostilities owing to the vulnerability of their people, the lack of ammunition and supplies, and the lack of war goals that could be held. Arms suppliers in the United States and the United Kingdom as well as in China were unwilling to provide more weapons. Consequently, all parties were amenable to finding a means of diplomatically resolving the confrontation. Soviet prime minister Alexei Nikolaevich Kosygin invited both sides to a conference at Tashkent in the southern Soviet Uzbek Republic. The subsequent agreement was signed by the president of Pakistan, mohammad ayub khan, and the Indian prime minister, lal bahadur shastri, on January 10, 1966. Unfortunately, Tashkent Agreement 413 Shastri died the following day of a heart attack. The main provisions included the withdrawal of all troops to their prewar positions, the restoration of diplomatic relations, the promise not to intervene in the internal affairs of the other side, and the agreement to hold discussions concerning various social and economic issues. The oversight of the withdrawal of forces was conducted by the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan (UNMOGIP) and the United Nations India- Pakistan Observation Mission (UNIPOM). These missions were successfully concluded. The permanent end to war and the renunciation of terrorist activities in Kashmir were not included in the final treaty, and both India and Pakistan suffered from some measure of internal disorder. In the case of Pakistan, unrest forced the resignation of Ayub Khan, the head of a military government, in 1969. Meanwhile, Shastri was succeeded by indira gandhi, whose administration was troubled by right-wing opposition. The two countries were at war again in 1971 as part of the secession of East Bengal from Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh. See also indo-pakistani war (kashmir). Further reading: Edwardes, Michael. “Tashkent and After.” International Affairs 42, no. 3 (July 1996); Schofield, Victoria. Kashmir in Conflict: India, Pakistan and the Unending War. 2nd rev. ed. I.B. Tauris, 2003; Talbot, Ian. Pakistan: A Modern History. Palgrave Macmillan, 2005; United Nations. “United Nations India-Pakistan Observation Mission (UNIPOM)— Background.” http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/dpko/ co_mission/unipombackgr.html (cited July 2006). John Walsh Tlatelolco massacre (1968) In one of the most important and controversial episodes in postwar Mexican history, on October 2, 1968, police and army units violently suppressed a demonstration in Tlatelolco Square in the heart of Mexico City. The government’s version of events differed starkly from those of eyewitnesses and the version that gained currency among much of the populace. The crackdown contributed to a growing crisis of legitimacy for the ruling party, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI), fueling popular sentiments that the PRI was corrupt, dictatorial, and antidemocratic, and tarnishing Mexico’s image on the eve of the country’s hosting of the 1968 Summer Olympics. The roots of the October 1968 events in Tlatelolco have been traced to the upsurge in student and worker democratic and anti-PRI activism from the late 1950s, including the Teachers’ Movement in 1958; the Railway Workers’ Movement in 1958–59; demonstrations in support of the Cuban Revolution (1959); a massive student strike at the National University (UNAM, spring 1966); and protest movements in the states of Puebla (1964), Morelia (1966), and Sonora and Tabasco (1967). More immediate antecedents include the government’s mobilization of an antiriot paramilitary squad, the granaderos, in response to street fights between two Mexico City schools in July 1968, and again in response to student protests commemorating the anniversary of fidel castro’s 26th of July Movement. Tensions mounted throughout August as students held huge demonstrations at the UNAM and the National Polytechnic Institute. The events prompted the formation of a National Student Strike Committee, which issued a list of demands that included disbandment of the granaderos and release of all political prisoners. An estimated 500,000 people, mostly students and workers, participated in antigovernment demonstrations in Mexico City’s central square (Zócalo) on August 27, to that date the country’s single largest mass protest. Law enforcement agencies responded with tanks and armored cars, killing at least one student. In mid-September, President Gustavo Díaz Ordaz ordered 10,000 army troops to occupy the UNAM campus. Some 500 protesters were jailed, and in the ensuing weeks tensions throughout Mexico City ran high. The exact sequence of events on the evening of October 2 in the Plaza de las Tres Culturas (Plaza of the Three Cultures) in the District of Tlatelolco, where 5,000 to 10,000 protesters had gathered, remains disputed. The next day the government claimed that terrorists had opened fire on the police from a nearby building and that police had responded to the unprovoked attack. Most newspapers at the time reported from 20 to 28 protestors killed. Eyewitnesses recalled with near unanimity that police and army units had instigated the violence, dropping flares from helicopters before spraying machine-gun and small-arms fire indiscriminately into the crowd, killing hundreds. The British newspaper The Guardian estimated after “careful investigation” that 325 were killed, a figure cited by Mexican writer Octavio Paz as the most plausible. In the ensuing days and weeks, thousands were jailed. Memories of Tlatelolco remained fresh into 414 Tlatelolco massacre (1968 ) the 1990s and after, evidenced by a 1997 congressional investigation into the massacre and the 2006 indictment of ex-president and then-interior minister Luis Echevarría for his role in the events, which remain a festering wound in the nation’s collective memory. Further reading: Ecker, Ronald L. “The Tlatelolco Massacre in Mexico.” www.hobrad.com/massacre.htm (cited February 2007); Poniatowska, Elena. Massacre in Mexico Translated by Helen R. Lane. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1975. Michael J. Schroeder Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre (1881–1955) scientist, mystic, writer Pierre Teilhard de Chardin was one of the most eloquent 20th-century voices for religion in an increasingly secular world. As a distinguished paleontologist and a Jesuit priest, he tried to synthesize evolutionary science with the incarnation of Christ. His ideas were new, speculative, and bold enough to figure into deliberations as diverse as the founding of the United Nations and the formulation of several Vatican Council documents. Even today his name is cited for a spiritual perspective on the convergence of human communication due to the Internet. He was born in France into a devout Catholic family of 11 children in 1881. His father was an intellectual and a farmer, and his mother was a great-grandniece of Voltaire. Teilhard’s father provided his son a keen interest in science, and his mother an inclination toward mysticism. He received a top-notch Jesuit education and entered their novitiate program by 1899. By 1911 he was ordained a priest after doing assignments in England and Egypt. World War I interrupted further studies in geology, and he saw action on the front lines. His close calls with death prompted him to consider a more speculative approach to science. After the war he brilliantly defended his doctorate at the Sorbonne in 1922. Soon thereafter he accepted the chair of the geology department at the Institut Catholique. From this platform he now began to publicize ideas about the synthesis of science and religion, and the resulting controversy cost him his license at the Institut and forced him abroad to do his research and study. For almost the rest of his career he lived abroad, almost as in a self-imposed exile. Most of that time he spent in China (1926–46), and there he collaborated with the Chinese Geological Survey and helped to discover the Peking Man skull. He wrote his important books, The Divine Milieu and The Human Phenomenon, during these years. For one brief time after World War II he returned to France, but the Jesuits refused to allow him to take an academic position lest he receive more critical scrutiny. He was banned from lecturing in public or publishing his writings. He decided to go to New York in 1951. Lonely and suffering, he died on Easter Sunday, 1955, and is buried in a Jesuit cemetery there. From a scientific point of view it is difficult to establish the methodology and provability of Teilhard’s ideas. He has clearly advanced the fields of geology, stratigraphy, and paleontology, with a supreme competence in the areas of China and the Far East. However, his dominant interest and the source of his infamy was in “anthropogenesis,” a new study focusing on the evolutionary position of humanity. He proposed that evolution had entered a new phase with the emergence of humanity, whereby complexity and consciousness converged and spiritualized evolution. The final development of humanity he termed the “Omega Point,” and he connected this perfection with Christ. In 1962 the Catholic Church issued a warning against the uncritical acceptance of Teilhard’s theories, though it did not question his scientific contributions or his integrity of faith. The best way of categorizing his unsystematized though eloquent speculation is as process theology, or perhaps even as a form of Christian pantheism. Further reading: King, Ursala. Spirit of Fire: The Life and Vision of Teilhard de Chardin. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 1996. Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre. The Human Phenomenon. Brighton, UK and Portland, OR: Sussex Academic Press, 1999; Mark F. Whitter Teresa of Calcutta, Mother (1910–1997) Albanian religious leader Small of stature but solid in fortitude, Mother Teresa was born on August 26, 1910, in Skopje, Albania. The youngest of the children of Nikola and Dran Bojaxhiu, she was baptized Gonxha Agnes. Her father’s sudden death when Gonxha was eight left the family in Teresa of Calcutta, Mother 415 difficult financial straits and left her mother as her guide for character and vocation. Her local Jesuit parish also contributed strongly to her formation. At 18, desiring to become a missionary, Gonxha joined the Institute of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Sisters of Loretto) in Ireland. There she received the name Sister Mary Teresa after St. Thérèse of Lisieux. In December she departed for India, arriving in Calcutta on January 6, 1929. After making her first profession of vows in May 1931, Sister Teresa was assigned to the Loretto Entally community in Calcutta and taught at St. Mary’s School for girls. On May 24, 1937, she made her final vows. From that time on she was called Mother Teresa. She continued teaching at St. Mary’s and in 1944 became the school’s principal. On September 10, 1946, during the train ride from Calcutta to Darjeeling for her annual retreat, Mother Teresa said she experienced a divine love for souls, a force within her that motivated her for the rest of her life. She felt called to establish a religious community, the Missionaries of Charity sisters, dedicated to the service of the poorest of the poor. Nearly two years passed in discernment before Mother Teresa received permission to begin. On August 17, 1948, she dressed for the first time in a white, blue-bordered sari and left Loretto to enter the world of the poor. On December 21 she went for the first time to the slums to find and serve among “the unwanted, the unloved, the uncared for.” After some months she was joined by a number of her former students. On October 7, 1950, the new congregation of the Missionaries of Charity was officially established in Calcutta. By the early 1960s Mother Teresa began to send her sisters to other parts of India. In February 1965 she opened a house in Venezuela. It was soon followed by foundations in Rome and Tanzania and, eventually, on every continent. During the years of rapid growth the world began to focus its attention on Mother Teresa. Numerous awards honored her work. An increasingly interested media began to follow her activities. Her humble stature and effective work also attracted the attention of many intellectuals and celebrities, many of whom were touched by her spirit. Mother Teresa’s life bore witness to the joy of loving, the dignity of every human person, the value of little things done faithfully, and the surpassing worth of faith in God. But only after her death was it revealed that her interior life was marked by a painful experience of feeling separated from God. At times she grappled with profound doubts and fears about her work and her faith. Despite increasingly severe health problems, she continued to govern her society of sisters and respond to the needs of the poor and the church. By 1997 Mother Teresa’s sisters numbered nearly 4,000 and were established in 610 foundations in 123 countries. In March 1997 she handed on her duties as superior to a newly elected successor. On September 3, 1997, Mother Teresa died. She was given a state funeral by the government of India, and her body was buried in the headquarters of her order. Her tomb quickly became a place of pilgrimage. Less than two years later, in view of Mother Teresa’s widespread reputation of holiness and the miracles reported as connected to her intercession, Pope John Paul II permitted official discussions about her canonization as a saint to begin. On October 19, 2003, he beatified Mother Teresa before a crowd of at least 300,000. Further reading: Egan, Eileen. Such a Vision of the Street: Mother Teresa—The Spirit and the Work. New York: Image Book (Doubleday), 1986; Muggeridge, Malcolm. Something 416 Teresa of Calcutta, Mother Mother Teresa’s life bore witness to the joy of loving, the dignity of every human person, and the surpassing worth of faith in God. Beautiful for God: Mother Teresa of Calcutta. New York: Harper and Row, 1971. Brian Kolodiejchuk terrorism Terrorism—attacks on civilians and noncombatants for political purposes—has an ancient history. In earlier eras, terrorism was often religiously motivated. In the first century c.e. Jewish Zealots fought the Romans; the Assassins, a Shi’i sect of Islam, killed Muslims who disagreed with their practices in the 11th century; and Hindu Thugees in India killed innocents as part of ritualistic practices from the 7th to the 19th century. From the 18th to the late 20th century, most terrorists were motivated by nationalist or political causes. Contemporary terrorism is systematic, political, conveys a message, and generates fear. Terrorism may be committed by a state or by individual groups, although some dispute the use of the term for governmental actions. In English the term terrorism derives from the French revolutionary reign of terror under Maximilien Robespierre, when thousands were sent to their deaths, often at the guillotine, in 1793–94. After World War II nonstate groups often adopted terrorist tactics to achieve political goals. Terrorism was usually the tactic of the weak and disaffected who lacked access to or possession of high technology and sophisticated weapons of war. In the modern era, the media and instant communications provided terrorists with ready platforms to publicize their programs and grievances. Publicity on a global scale permitted terrorists to have a psychological impact far beyond single deeds, thereby greatly magnifying their effects. In their struggles against imperial powers, Third World liberation movements sometimes adopted terrorist tactics by attacking civilians as well as colonial armed forces to achieve national independence. Third World leaders often argued that these tactics were no less “terrifying” or horrific than the bombing of villages, the use of napalm, or the imprisonment of thousands in concentration camps. However, governments tended terrorism 417 The Pentagon in Washington, D.C., was damaged by a terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, concurrently with attacks on the World Trade Center using hijacked airliners filled with passengers. Nearly 3,000 people lost their lives in the attack. to apply the term terrorist only to those groups they disliked or opposed, and to ignore or downplay those groups or countries that used similar tactics against their own citizens or enemies. During the 1960s–70s leftist groups were responsible for numerous terrorist attacks in Europe. The Baader Meinhof Gang, militant German anarchists, bombed U.S. military installations and police stations and attempted to assassinate Alexander Haig, the supreme Allied commander of NATO, as well as bankers and media moguls. After most of their leaders had been imprisoned or had died, the Meinhof Gang’s attacks ended in the 1990s. The communist Italian Red Brigades also kidnapped and killed leading establishment figures. In its struggle against the British, the nationalist Provisional irish republican army (IRA) planted bombs in shopping malls and killed Lord Louis mountbatten, first earl Mountbatten of Burma, and narrowly missed killing British prime minister margaret thatcher. Similarly, the nationalist Basque party (ETA) attacked Spanish leaders and placed bombs at targets with heavy civilian use. In the Middle East small Palestinian Marxist-Leninist groups skyjacked civilian airliners in dramatic and well-publicized attacks that brought world attention to the Palestinian national cause. The palestine liberation organization (PLO) also launched terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians as well as the military. At the 1972 Munich Olympic Games, Palestinians attacked and killed Israeli athletes. Israel retaliated by killing Palestinian leaders in Beirut and in Europe. The Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), under Abdullah Ocalan, mounted a separatist insurgency against turkey; the PKK placed bombs on buses and other civilian sites and was outlawed by the Turkish government. In Asia the nationalist tamil tigers in Sri Lanka attacked civilians, and the Japanese Red Army, a leftist paramilitary group, launched attacks in Europe and elsewhere. In 1995 the group Aum Shinrikyo released the poison gas sarin in the Tokyo subway. Terrorism escalated throughout much of South America and Latin America in the 1970s–80s. During the 1970s the Argentina military junta and right-wing death squads terrorized and killed opponents. In Chile General augusto pinochet’s regime tortured and “disappeared” opponents. The Pinochet regime was also implicated in the car bombing assassinations of a Chilean diplomat and Pinochet opponent, Orlando Letelier, and a U.S. colleague in downtown Washington, D.C., in 1976. During the same period, the Shining Path terrorized villagers and political leaders in Peru, while narco-terrorism by criminal drug cartels killed judges, police, and others in Colombia. Similarly, leftwing guerrilla forces and right-wing death squads killed thousands of civilians as well as religious and nongovernmental volunteers from the international community in El Salvador. The government in Guatemala used terrorism to repress its Amerindian population. From the 1960s onward a wide variety of political groups opposing the vietnam war and the conservative establishment or struggling for civil rights in the United States also adopted terrorist tactics. The Weathermen and other groups kidnapped high-profile individuals, bombed military and research installations, and sometimes killed law enforcement officers. In 1995 terrorists from the far right bombed a federal office building in Oklahoma City, killing over 100 people and wounding 400. There was a revival of religiously motivated terrorism beginning in the later part of the 20th century. As Yugoslavia split apart, sectarian violence escalated. Similarly, clashes among Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs in India proliferated. Prime Minister indira gandhi was killed by her Sikh bodyguard, and the Mumbai stock exchange was bombed. The 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran provided the impetus and support for numerous Islamist groups in the Middle East, including hizbollah in Lebanon and hamas in the occupied Palestinian territories of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Both of these groups used suicide bombers in an attempt to achieve their goals. When their governments failed to provide the means for legitimate political dissent or jobs, many disillusioned Muslim young people around the world joined Islamist organizations that used encouraged jihadis (fighters of holy war) to use terrorism to oust corrupt regimes and establish regimes based on sharia, Islamic law. Many Islamic groups were hostile to the West, particularly the United States. Much of their anger was fueled by the spread of Western culture, which threatened or undermined old traditions and practices. Many young jihadis gained military training and experience fighting with the taliban and other Islamic mujahideen groups against the Soviet occupation in afghanistan in the 1980s. After the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan, the Taliban managed to wrest power from its rivals and established an extreme theocracy. Its leader, Mullah Omar, provided a safe haven for one of the most extreme Islamic groups, al-qaeda, which was led by a disaffected Saudi Arabian, osama bin laden. In 1998 bin Laden issued a fatwa (religious proclamation) urging jihad against the United States. 418 terrorism Al-Qaeda members placed bombs that killed hundreds in Nairobi, Kenya, and attacked a U.S. military ship in Yemen. On suicide missions al-Qaeda members skyjacked planes that crashed into the world trade center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., on september 11, 2001. These were the most devastating terror attacks that the United States had ever experienced on its home territory. The United States and coalition forces retaliated and successfully overthrew the pro–al-Qaeda Taliban regime in Afghanistan; however they failed to destroy either the Taliban or al- Qaeda. Osama bin Laden managed to escape and continued to orchestrate terror attacks against U.S. forces and supporters. These included suicide bomb attacks on trains in Madrid, Spain, and the transit system in London, England. Further reading: Barber, Benjamin R. Jihad vs. McWorld: Terrorism’s Challenge to Democracy. New York: Ballantine, 1996; Gerges, Fawaz A. The Far Enemy: Why Jihad Went Global. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Sinclair, Andrew. An Anatomy of Terror: A History of Terrorism. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004; Whittaker, David J. The Terrorism Reader. London: Routledge, 2002. Janice J. Terry Thatcher, Margaret baroness Thatcher of Kesteven (1925– ) British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, Britain’s first woman prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party, helped reverse the economic decline of her country. Even her enemies grudgingly respected the strong-willed “iron lady.” She rejected the “consensus” politics that had characterized Britain since World War II in favor of polarizing “conviction” politics. During her 10 years as the head of the British government, she created a successful free-market economy, but at a high price: deindustrialization of many old factory towns and, for several years, massive unemployment. Strongly nationalistic, Thatcher fought for Britain within and sometimes against the european union. She was lucky that the main body of the Labour Party moved to the left and Labour moderates broke away to form their own party; she defeated her divided opponents at general elections without ever winning over a majority of the voters. She also was lucky to have the opportunity to fight a short, successful, and very popular war with distant Argentina, whose brutal military dictatorship had seized a sparsely populated and almost unknown British colony, the Falkland Islands. Labour eventually accepted her basic policies. She succeeded in changing the language of political discourse. Except for those from a few stubborn socialists, proposals for the nationalization of major industries disappeared from the debate over public policy. In part because Thatcher was personally abrasive, she was controversial in her own Conservative Party. It was a rebellion among her nominal supporters that ended her political career. According to rumor, moreover, she did not get along with the other important woman in the British government, Queen Elizabeth II. Intelligence and hard work, not family connections, explain Thatcher’s rise to power. Her principles owed much to the middle-class values of her upbringing. Thatcher was born Margaret Hilda Roberts on October 13, 1925, in Grantham, a small town in eastern England. Her father was a grocer, and the family lived over his shop. Active in civic affairs, her father served for many years on the city council and at one point held the title of mayor. After attending local state schools Margaret Roberts studied chemistry at Somerville College, a women’s college that was part of Oxford University. Already politically minded, she was elected president of Oxford’s student Conservative organization in 1946, the year after Labour had crushed her party in the general election that followed the defeat of Nazi Germany. After university she worked for several years as a research chemist. In addition, she stood for Parliament, always for seats that were hopeless for her party. During her political campaigns she met Dennis Thatcher, a wealthy businessman, whom she married in 1951. She left her first career as a research chemist to study law. In 1953 she gave birth to twins, Carol and Mark. Thatcher was in her mid-30s when in 1959 she was elected to the House of Commons for the safe Conservative seat of Finchley in north London. Two years later she was appointed to a junior position in the Harold Macmillan government as parliamentary secretary at the ministry of pensions and national service. Thatcher’s first cabinet office came in the Edward Heath government. In 1970 she was appointed minister for education. As part of broader cuts in spending she eliminated free milk for Thatcher, Margaret 419 school- children. The Labour Party attacked her as the heartless “Thatcher, the milk snatcher.” Heath’s failure to stand up to the trade unions successfully and his defeat in two 1974 general elections cost him the support of many Conservatives. Despite his weakness, his principal colleagues were reluctant to challenge him. Thatcher, a midlevel figure in the Conservative Party with limited ministerial experience, dared in 1975. After the first ballot Heath withdrew, and on the second ballot Thatcher was elected leader of the Conservative Party. Four years later, the Conservatives won the general election, and Thatcher became prime minister. She also led her party to victory in the next two general elections. Her policies during her more than a decade as prime minister came to be called “Thatcherism.” She acknowledged that many of her ideas came from an older Conservative politician, Sir Keith Joseph. He argued that Britain needed to revive its entrepreneurial spirit. Thatcher became prime minister during a two-sided economic crisis: a depression accompanied by rising prices. She made her first priority fighting double-digit inflation. She cut government spending, with higher education suffering particularly hard. She increased interest rates and sales taxes and eventually income taxes too. Manufacturing shrank, and several million workers lost their jobs. It took years for this bitter medicine to cure runaway inflation, but it did. Some members of Thatcher’s own party thought that the human cost of her policies was unacceptable. Convinced that the welfare state had ruined Britain, Thatcher wanted to encourage individualism and discourage reliance on the state. Consequently, she made it easy for tenants in council houses (public housing) to buy their homes. Pressured by an increase in rent, hundreds of thousands did. As property owners, they were more inclined to vote Conservative. Committed to competition and capitalism, Thatcher regarded the nationalized industries as a deadweight handicapping the British economy. In the early 1980s she sold off minor parts of the state’s array of industries, such as the railroad hotels, but it was not until the mid-1980s that privatization became dramatic. At this time Thatcher sold the telephone system, the gas industry, the principal automobile and truck manufacturers, the steel industry, and water companies. Thatcher worried that the power of Britain’s militant trade unions crippled the economy. She decided to tame them. In 1984 Parliament enacted legislation that required a majority vote by secret ballot for a legal strike. In the same year, the leader of the coal miners challenged the management of one of the last nationalized industries. He hoped to block the closing of unprofitable mines. He used outside militants to intimidate working miners. These tactics offended public opinion. Worried about their own jobs, few other unions supported the miners. After nearly a year, the strike collapsed. As a result of competition from oil and natural gas, the coal mining industry soon shrank to almost nothing. Priding herself on her decisiveness and rarely conciliatory toward opponents, Thatcher did not care how many people she alienated. She rejected compromise as weakness. Victory over Argentina in the falklands war was perhaps her only success that nearly everybody applauded. She refused any compromise when members of the irish republican army, imprisoned in Ulster, started a hunger strike to be recognized as political prisoners. Ten IRA men died of starvation. Labour controlled many local councils, including that of greater London. Thatcher considered their spending profligate, and so she had Parliament abolish the troublesome councils. She regarded the European Community without enthusiasm. Protective of British sovereignty, she was suspicious of the trend toward economic and political centralization within the European Union. In contrast to her ambivalence toward Europe, she was a staunch ally of the United States. She was particularly close to President ronald reagan. Although they were much alike in their economic and foreign policies and their insistence upon law and order, Thatcher did not share Reagan’s concern for moral issues in politics. She voted to decriminalize homosexuality and to legalize abortion. Thatcher’s relationship with the United States was, in part, the result of political realism. The world’s 42 0 Thatcher, Margaret British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher led an uncompromising conservative government in the United Kingdom during the 1980s. most powerful nation was a useful ally. Her realism also showed in her conciliatory relationship toward mikhail gorbachev, the last ruler of the Soviet Union. She recognized the importance of the reforms that he advocated in changing the nature of communism in his powerful country and the flexibility that he showed outside the Soviet Union. Unlike Reagan, she was not so entranced with Gorbachev as to propose mutual nuclear disarmament, but she did think the Soviet leader was somebody with whom she could “do business.” In her last years as prime minister Thatcher blundered politically, which gave an opening to her numerous enemies within the Conservative Party. In her biggest mistake, she proposed a reform of local government finance widely denounced as an unfair poll tax. Except for the well-off, nearly all households would pay more than they had in the past. Perhaps because she was preparing for war against Iraq in alliance with the United States,Thatcher paid insufficient attention to the political situation at home. She also erred by making provocatively anti–European Union remarks that caused her foreign secretary to resign. One of her old enemies, a former defense secretary, challenged Thatcher for the party leadership in late 1990. When she failed to win on the first ballot, she withdrew and threw her support to one of her loyalists, John Major. After Major became Conservative Party leader and prime minister, Thatcher quickly alienated her one-time favorite. Calling herself a “good back-seat driver,” she interfered too much, undermining the new prime minister’s authority. In retirement Thatcher took a nonhereditary peerage (baroness Thatcher of Kesteven) that made her a member of the House of Lords. She also wrote her memoirs. She outraged public opinion by visiting the former Chilean dictator augusto pinochet while he was under house arrest in Britain. Most people believed that he was guilty of torturing and murdering opponents in his home country. By the first years of the 21st century, Thatcher’s physical and mental health began to fail. She rarely made public appearances and no longer gave speeches. Her husband died in 2003, and her children sometimes proved to be an embarrassment. Her son, Mark, became involved in an abortive coup against an African government. Her daughter, Carol, appeared on a widely viewed and undignified “reality” television program. According to her, Thatcher suffered from a form of dementia that destroyed her short-term memory. Further reading: Green, E. H. H. Thatcher. London: Hodder Arnold, 2006; Letwin, Shirley Robin. The Anatomy of Thatcherism. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 1993; Reitan, Earl A. The Thatcher Revolution. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003; Seldon, Anthony, and Daniel Collings. Britain Under Thatcher. New York: Longman, 1999; Thatcher, Margaret. The Path to Power. New York: HarperCollins, 1995. David M. Fahey Third World/Global South The term Third World applies to those nations in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and the Western Hemisphere that mostly secured independence from the imperial powers after world war ii. In the cold war construct the First World, dominated by the United States, also included Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. These nations were wealthy, highly industrialized, urban, largely secular, democratic, and had capitalist economies. The Second World consisted of the Soviet bloc, dominated by the Soviet Union. These nations were industrialized but not as wealthy as the First World; they were secular, authoritarian, and had socialist economics. The Third World nations, consisting of two-thirds of the world’s population, were poor, rural, and agrarian, with traditional societies. After the breakup of the Soviet bloc and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the terms no longer applied and because most of the nations of the Third World were south of the equator the term Global South came to be used as a collective label for these nations. The gap between rich and poor nations grew in the 20th century. As the Indian prime minister jawaharlal nehru commented, “The poor have to run fast just to keep up.” Third World countries were caught in a cycle of poverty, with low incomes and low production. After independence many became dictatorships and attempted to improve their economies, usually unsuccessfully, by adopting socialist systems on the Soviet state capitalist model. Economists often referred to the poor developing nations as low-GDP (low Gross Domestic Product) countries, meaning they produced little in the way of goods and services. Countries in the Global South adopted a wide variety of methods to break out of the cycle of poverty. In China Mao Zedong led a socialist revolution and mobilized the masses, but only with privatization after his death did the Chinese economy begin to take off. India, the world’s most populous democracy, adopted a capitalist approach; India also successfully applied the technology of the green revolution, the use of Third World/Global South 42 1 hybrid seeds to increase agricultural productivity. At the beginning of the 20th century, India suffered major famines but by the end of the century it was exporting foodstuffs. India and many other poor nations also invested heavily in education. In southeast Asia educated workers became the backbone of industrialization and the development of high-tech firms. Other nations built huge development projects, such as the asw−an dam in Egypt and the Three Gorges Dam in China. Following Western advice in the 1950s and 1960s, many Third World nations concentrated on industrialization, to the detriment of the agricultural sector. That, along with ecological changes, droughts along wide bands of Africa, civil wars, political corruption, and instability, contributed to large famines and mass starvation in many African nations. In the Middle East oil-producing nations joined a cartel, the organization of petroleum exporting countries (OPEC), to gain increased revenues from their major resource. They then used the new revenues to build modern infrastructures. Kuwait was able to provide a complete welfare system from cradle to grave for its small population. Other countries, such as the “little dragons” in Southeast Asia (Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore), attracted foreign businesses and industries. Many nations in South America and Africa also borrowed vast amounts of money from private and public Western banks, such as the World Bank, to bring much-needed capital into their countries. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also provided assistance in welfare, food, education, and healthcare. Brazil used foreign loans to create new industries and provide jobs, but it, along with many other countries, became ensnared in a web of indebtedness that was impossible to repay. By the 1990s rich nations promised but often failed to deliver increased foreign aid and to forgive or restructure the debts of these nations, especially the poorest in Africa. Other nations had some modest successes in adopting appropriate technology to establish small, inexpensive grassroots projects. Population growth also contributed to economic problems. In Kenya the population doubled every 18 years and in Egypt every 26 years, compared to every 92 in the United States. By 2000 the world’s population had exceeded 6 billion, from 1 billion in 1800. It was expected to reach 9 billion by 2054. In poor countries high infant mortality contributed to the desire to have many children in hopes that at least some would survive to adulthood and be able to care for their parents, especially their mothers, in their old age. To limit its population China adopted a draconian one-child policy and strictly enforced it through its totalitarian system. India adopted numerous approaches in attempts to limit population growth; these were often accepted by urban elites, but peasants continued to value large families. In societies where women had low status, having children, especially boys, brought status and the hope of some security. The educational status of many improved, and literacy rates improved, although in many countries boys enjoyed higher rates of education than girls. While programs to empower women were often successful, they were also resisted by traditional and religious leaders. Women’s work continued to be undervalued and underpaid. Child labor was yet another problem. Globalization and privatization in the late 20th century actually caused some nations to become poorer as prices for agricultural goods and raw materials dropped. In some Global South nations, such as India, a few people became millionaires, but most remained desperately poor. In the 1990s, incomes in 54 nations actually declined, and in Zimbabwe life expectancy fell from 56 to 331, compared to over 80 in the United States and Japan. Disease, especially AIDS, contributed to further economic and social problems, particularly in many southern African countries. At the 2000 Millennium Summit, world leaders agreed to institute programs aimed at cutting in half the number of people living on under $1 a day and at halving the number of people suffering from hunger by 2015. Five years later the commitments of the donor nations, especially the United States, had fallen short of the promises made, and it remained uncertain whether the goals would be met. Further reading: Adjibolosoo, Senya B.-S. K., and Benjamin Ofori-Amoah, eds. Addressing Misconceptions About Africa’s Development: Seeing Beyond the Veil. New York: Edwin Mellen Press, 1998; Dorraj, Manochehr, ed. The Changing Political Economy of the Third World. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1995; Harrison, Paul. Inside the Third World. 3d ed. London: Penguin, 1993. Janice J. Terry Tiananmen Square massacre Throughout the 20th century, Tiananmen Square in central Beijing, China, has been the center of protest movements, the first being on May 4, 1919, when students and others demonstrated against the Treaty of Versailles, 422 Tiananmen Square massacre which had handed the formerly German-occupied Chinese city of Qingdao to Japan. Another large protest was held there in April 1976 by supporters of the former premier Zhou Enlai, who had recently died. In 1989 student protest movements started in Tiananmen Square following the April 15 death of Hu Yaobang, who had been general secretary of the Chinese Communist party. Some of the students felt that Hu Yaobang had been made a scapegoat for government failures in 1987. By April 18, some 10,000 students were in Tiananmen Square taking part in protests in front of the Zhongnanhai, the seat of the government. Three days later, there were 100,000 students and others in the square, and on May 4 some 100,000 students and workers marched through Beijing, demanding a formal dialogue between the student leaders and the government and the removal of all restrictions on the media, which the government rejected. The protest reached its first peak on May 13, just before the Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev came to visit Beijing. Some of the protestors urged for the reforms that Gorbachev had introduced in the Soviet Union and saw him as a possible ally, but Gorbachev diplomatically refused to become involved. Early in the morning of May 19, Zhao Ziyang, the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, urged the students to end their protests and a hunger strike they had started. However, the demonstrations continued, and on May 30 a statue that became known as the “Goddess of Democracy” was erected in the square. It was not long after that protests and strikes started taking place in factories and in other parts of China. On May 27 some 300,000 people gathered in Hong Kong to protest in support of the students in Beijing. By this time the Communist Party leadership was split as to how to deal with the protestors. Premier Li Peng urged for a hardline stance, supported by President Yang Shangkun, with Zhao Ziyang still urging for a moderate approach. Although Yang Shangkun’s presidency was a largely ceremonial role, it did, however, mean that he was the commander in chief of the armed forces. Martial law had been declared on May 20, and soldiers rushed to Beijing late in the evening of June 3. Tanks entered the square, and the accompanying soldiers cleared the square of demonstrators by the early morning. On June 5, in a famous photograph by Jeff Widener, a lone protestor stood in front of tanks advancing on the square, and the tank stopped and tried to drive around him. The lone demonstrator, never identified, was later pulled into the crowd. Nobody knows how many were killed in Tiananmen Square on those two days in June and in the subsequent crackdown around the country. Casualty estimates range from 200 civilians and several dozen soldiers—made by the mayor of Beijing, defending the actions of the soldiers—to estimates from foreign commentators that many thousands died. Further Reading: Calhoun, Craig J. Neither Gods Nor Emperors: Students and the Struggle for Democracy in China. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994; Feigon, Lee. China Rising: The Meaning of Tiananmen. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1990. Geoffrey Golson Tibetan Revolt (1959) Tibet’s political ties with China began in the seventh century. It was annexed into the Yuan dynasty by Kublai Khan and came under tight Mongol control in the 13th century. Under the subsequent Ming dynasty (1366–1644), China conferred titles on local Tibetan leaders but exercised only loose supervision over them. The Qing (Ch’ing) dynasty (1644–1911) exerted considerable control over Tibet during its prime, stationing imperial commissioners and garrisons in its major centers. The Qing rulers also honored Tibet’s spiritual leaders the Dalai and Panchen Lamas. Tibet became a pawn in international politics in the late 19th century; with the Qing dynasty in decline both Great Britain and Russia became interested in controlling Tibet and interfered in its internal politics, which neither China nor local Tibetans could resist. Weak Chinese central governments in the republican period were too beset by other problems to deal effectively with Tibet, which enjoyed autonomy. No country, however, recognized Tibet as an independent nation. An important goal of the People’s Republic of China was to assert control over Tibet. The Panchen Lama, the second leader of Tibet who was headquartered in Tashilhumpo, accepted Chinese sovereignty. The dalai lama’s government in Lhasa vainly tried to obtain international assistance in resisting China in 1950. His representatives then signed a Seventeen- Point Agreement in Beijing (Peking) in 1951 that allowed the Tibetans to maintain their traditional religious (Tibetan Buddhism), political (theocracy), and economic (large estates owned by monasteries and aristocrats) systems, under Chinese control. The Dalai Lama visited Beijing in 1954, had conversations Tibetan Revolt (1959) 423 with Chinese leader Mao Zedong (Mao Tse-tung), and expressed optimism that he could “work out a synthesis of Buddhist and Marxist doctrines.” The Chinese Communists, however, looked at the traditional Tibetan Buddhist society, the theocratic government, and the landed estate system with extreme distaste and began a program to dismantle both. By 1957 armed resistance had begun in eastern Tibet that culminated in an uprising in Lhasa against the Chinese government in 1959. Realizing that the revolt was suicidal and fearing that he would be captured by the Chinese, the Dalai Lama and his advisers fled Lhasa in disguise in March 1959 and headed for the Indian border. After putting down the revolt, China implemented a program that brought Tibet more in line with the rest of the country. Chinese-Indian relations, warm after the establishment of the People’s Republic, had become antagonistic by 1959, partly over Tibet. Popular sentiment in India sympathized with the Tibetans. In April the Dalai Lama and his party crossed into India and were granted political asylum. The Indian government also gave political asylum to 13,000 Tibetan refugees and allowed the Dalai Lama to establish a government in exile in Dharmasala, a Himalayan town near the Chinese border. These acts further soured Chinese-Indian relations and exacerbated a border dispute that negotiations between the premiers of the two countries failed to resolve, and that culminated in a border war in 1962. See also Nehru, Jawaharlal. Further reading: Dalai Lama. My Land and My People. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1962; Goldstein, M. C. A. A History of Modern Tibet. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989; Grunfeld, A. Tom. The Making of Modern Tibet. Rev. ed. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 1996; Schell, Orville. Virtual Tibet, Searching for Shangri-La from the Himalayas to Hollywood. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2000; Teufel Dreyer, June. China’s Forty Millions: Minority Nationalities and National Integration in the People’s Republic of China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985. Jiu-Hwa Lo Upshur Tito, Marshal (Josip Broz) (1892–1980) Yugoslav leader Josip Broz was born on May 7, 1892, and died on May 4, 1980. His life was caught up in some of the most momentous events of the 20th century. He fought in World War I, took part in the russian revolution, became a leader of guerrilla resistance to the German occupation of Yugoslavia, and after World War II until his death he was the leader of the country. During this period, he defied joseph stalin over the communist consolidation of power in Yugoslavia. “Tito” was a pseudonym that he adopted during his underground activities, and it was with this name that he became well known during World War II. Tito was born in the village of Kumroves, some 50 kilometers northwest of Zagreb in what was then Austria-Hungary. His native village is located in the valley of the river Sutla, which served as a boundary between Croatia and Slovenia. Tito’s father was a Croatian peasant, and his mother was Slovenian from a village across the river. In 1907, at the age of 15, he left home and went to the town of Sisak (Croatia), where he became an apprentice to a locksmith. Tito completed his apprenticeship in 1910 and began a series of mechanic jobs, which took him to factories across central Europe. In the autumn of 1913 Tito was called up for his military service, which he did with the 25th Croatian Territorial Infantry Regiment based in Zagreb. When Austria-Hungary attacked Serbia in July 1914, Tito, already a sergeant, was sent to fight on the Serbian front. In January 1915 his regiment was transferred to Galicia in anticipation of a Russian offensive. There Tito was put in charge of a reconnoitering section operating behind enemy lines. However, during a Russian attack in April 1915, he was seriously wounded and taken as a prisoner of war (POW). It was during this time that Tito began sympathizing with the ideas of Bolshevism. In June 1917 he escaped from the POW camp and made his way to Petrograd in search of work, but the suppression of Bolshevik demonstrations forced him to flee to Finland. While attempting to cross the border he was captured and sent back to the POW camp, but he escaped on the way and arrived in Bolshevik- controlled Omsk in Siberia in autumn 1917. He enrolled in the Red Guard and applied for membership in the Communist Party. When the Bolsheviks retook Omsk in 1919, he started making his way back to Croatia. Tito returned to Kumrovec in October 1920, where he found that his village had become part of the new Kingdom of Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes (changed to Yugoslavia in 1929). Upon his return he joined the newly founded Communist Party in Zagreb and became active in the union movement. During the 1920s he worked as a mechanic 424 Tito, Marshal in factories across Yugoslavia. In 1927 he became secretary of the Metalworkers’ Union of Croatia. His activities brought him to the attention of the police, and in August 1928 he was arrested. Upon his release from prison in 1934 Tito resumed full-time clandestine activities for the Yugoslav Communist Party. In February 1935 he was sent to Moscow for training with the Balkan Department of the comintern. He stayed there until September 1936, when he was sent back to consolidate the Yugoslav party and recruit volunteers to fight in the spanish civil war. During 1937 the factionalism within the Yugoslav Communist Party increased, and in the atmosphere of uncertainty Tito asserted his authority by setting up an interim secretariat under his leadership. Moscow offered him provisional approval in the beginning of 1939, and Tito was officially confirmed as a secretary at a party congress in October 1940. In April of 1941 the Axis powers invaded, occupied, and partitioned Yugoslavia, which triggered a civil war in the country. Tito formed the Partisan Army of National Liberation, which waged guerrilla war against the occupying forces. In the process Tito’s partisans also turned against rival guerrilla organizations, in particular the internationally recognized “Chetniks” of Draža Mihailovic´. Tito and his partisans emerged victorious from the war, and, despite his promises to form a government of national unity, he immediately began consolidating his authority and establishing communist rule over the territory of Yugoslavia. At the same time Tito was entertaining ideas of leading a Balkan federation involving Albania, Bulgaria, and potentially Greece. The prospect of a regional federation under Tito’s leadership seemed likely during 1947 and brought Tito into a direct confrontation with Stalin. In 1948 the Yugoslav Communist Party was excluded from the Cominform (the postwar name for the Comintern), and this turned Tito into the first communist leader to break with the Soviet Union. This gave him both new international prominence and domestic appeal, which helped him consolidate his position in Yugoslavia. In domestic affairs Tito promoted the principles of brotherhood and workers’ self-management (a form of market-oriented socialism), in parallel with his ongoing suppression of internal dissent. His death in 1980 was a shock for the country, and the seeming stability of Yugoslavia began to crack under the strains of national factionalism. Many commentators trace the origins of the 1990s Yugoslav dissolution to Tito’s authoritarian rule. See also Yugoslavia, breakup and war in. Further reading: Pawlowitch, Stevan. Tito: A Reassessment. London: Hurst, 1992; Ridley, Jasper. Tito: A Biography. London: Constable, 1994; West, Richard. Tito and the Rise and Fall of Yugoslavia. London: Sinclair-Stevenson, 1994. Emilian Kavalski Togo Togo is a small, narrow republic in western Africa. Slightly fewer than 22,000 square miles, with a northsouth distance of about 340 miles, Togo is situated between ghana and Benin. The capital and largest city of Lomé is located on the western side of the 56- kilometer coastline on the Gulf of Guinea. In spite of its small size, Togo’s population is diverse. There are 37 ethnic groups among its nearly 6 million people, who practice traditional religions, Christianity, and Islam. French is the official language although the African languages Ewe and Kabiyé are also taught. Togo has one of Africa’s highest rates of population growth and highest rates of deforestation. Over twothirds of the population are engaged in agriculture and lives in areas with limited safe drinking water. In addition to other serious health problems, either HIV or AIDS results in about 10,000 deaths per year. The slave trade was carried on in Togo during and after the 1600s. Germany made the territory the protectorate of Togoland in 1884 and during the next decade determined the permanent boundaries through agreements with France and Britain. The port city of Lomé was built by the Germans for shipment of goods from the interior. In 1914 Germany surrendered Togoland to British and French troops. After World War I, France received Togoland in exchange for interior land granted to the British. After World War II, the united nations gave Britain and France joint control of the territory. In 1956 British Togo became part of the Gold Coast, which later became Ghana, while French Togo moved for independence. Under the leadership of Sylvanus Olympio, the National Union Party gained control of French Togo and refused an overture to unite with Ghana. The United Nations granted membership to the new country in 1960. Three years later, Premier Olympio was assassinated in a military coup that installed Nicolas Grunitzky as president. A new constitution was drafted and approved by the nation. When the army staged a second coup in 1967, the new government, headed by Étienne Eyadéma, dismissed the legislature and threw out the constitution. Togo 42 5 Eyadéma and his party, Rassemblement du Peuple Togolais (RPT, or Togolese People’s Assembly), created a new constitution. In the elections that followed, Eyadéma was almost unanimously reelected president. On the 13th anniversary of his takeover of the government, Eyadéma announced the Third Togolese Republic. Unrest continued to plague Togo, and in 1986 France sent troops to help quell another attempted coup. Eyadéma was reelected to another seven-year term the same year. Eyadéma agreed in 1991 to work with a transitional government until general elections could be held. A national referendum in 1992 approved a new constitution. Among the provisions of the constitution were the establishment of multiparty elections and term limits for officials. In the 1993 election Eyadéma was still able to emerge as the victor for another term. The elections resulted in a new legislature, which demanded concessions. In 1994 he appointed Edem Kodjo prime minister of a new coalition government. Nevertheless Eyadéma was reelected in 1998 and in 2003, after the legislature removed the term limits from the constitution. When President Eyadéma died in February 2005, he was succeeded by his son Faure Gnassingbe. The succession, supported by the military but not by the constitution, was challenged by popular protest and a threat of sanctions from regional leaders. Gnassingbe easily won the elections he held in April 2005. Further reading: Cooper, Frederick, and Martin Klein. Africa Since 1940: The Past of the Present (New Approaches to African History). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002; Manning, Patrick. Francophone Sub-Saharan Africa, 1880–1995. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. Jean Shepherd Hamm Torrijos, Omar (1929–1981) Panamanian military chief General Omar Efraín Torrijos Herrera was the de facto ruler of Panama from his coup d’état of 1968 until his death in an airplane crash on July 31, 1981, after which he was succeeded by General manuel noriega. Best known for successfully negotiating a series of treaties in 1977 with the United States for the return of the Panama Canal to Panama in 2000, Torrijos (torr-EE-yos) was a staunch U.S. ally who instituted a range of popular reforms while also suppressing dissent and committing many human rights abuses during his years as the country’s supreme military ruler. Never elected to office, Torrijos dominated Panama’s political life for 13 years, his rule representing a significant departure from the country’s previous regimes, dominated by the country’s traditional landowning and commercial elite concentrated in Panama City. Denounced by many as a false populist whose dictatorship ruthlessly crushed dissent, paid lip service to anti-imperialism, and selectively dispensed government patronage to defuse and coopt opposition, Torrijos was born on February 13, 1929, in the town of Santiago, southwest of Panama City. In 1952 he joined the U.S.-created National Guard, was promoted to captain in 1956, and attended the U.S.-run school of the americas. As a lieutenant colonel, in 1968 he and Major Boris Martínez overthrew the democratically elected president Arnulfo Arías. Torrijos cultivated the political support of the urban and rural poor, the working class, the middle class, and students through government largesse, legal reforms, and the populist, nationalist, anti-imperialist rhetoric espoused by his People’s Party (Partido del Pueblo, or PdP). Leaving existing property relations largely intact, he excluded the country’s traditional powerholders from office, dissolving the national legislature and outlawing other political parties. The high point of his rule came in the 1977 treaties with the United States, though his expenditure of political capital in securing the treaties’ passage compelled him to approve amendments to the constitution in 1978 that paved the way for a return to civilian rule. The circumstances of his death remain the topic of considerable controversy, with some implicating his successor, Noriega, in the plane crash that killed him in 1981. Further reading: Haitt, Steven. A Game as Old as Empire: The Secret World of Economic Hit Men and the Web of Global Corruption. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2007; Koster, R. M., and Guillermo Sánchez Borbón. In the Time of Tyrants: Panama, 1968–1989. New York: Norton, 1990. Michael J. Schroeder Touré, Ahmed Sékou (1922–1984) Guinean president Sékou Touré, a prominent West African politician and anticolonial agitator, became president of the Republic of Guinea in 1958 and ruled the country as a singleparty state until his death in 1984. Touré was born on 426 Torrijos, Omar January 9, 1922, in Faranah and was a member of the Malinke people. Touré came from humble family circumstances. He improved his nationalist credentials by claiming the well-known anti-French resistance figure Samory Touré as his grandfather. Touré’s rise to power did not come through local social prominence and family connections but as the result of his success as a labor union organizer. His views were bitterly anticolonial, and complete independence from France was his desired goal. To achieve such a result he needed a strong political organization to promote his ambitions, and the Guinean Democratic Party (RDA), founded in 1946, became this vehicle. Through this affiliation he also linked with other emerging African politicians, such as Félix Houphouet- Boigny, a later president of the Ivory Coast. In 1952 Touré assumed the party leadership, and in 1956 he was elected to the French National Assembly. Touré was committed throughout the 1950s to the drive for a total break from France, and he argued against any half measures such as partial independence under an associated Francophone union. This brought him into serious conflict with General charles de gaulle. Touré took the total independence option on October 2, 1958, when he became Guinea’s president. France responded abruptly and harshly by ending all political and economic cooperation. Relations between France and the Republic of Guinea hardened, and eventually in 1965 all links were broken. The strong stand taken by Guinea proved costly, although it fitted the anticolonial mood. It also forced Touré to look to other powers for aid and assistance. Given his early Marxist orientation and admiration for Vladimir Lenin, it was not surprising that he found a ready friend in the Soviet Union and its satellites. His country’s extensive bauxite reserves gave him a tool to maintain his position and attract international interest. He was also keenly supported by kwame nkrumah of Ghana, who in 1957 led his country to independence from Great Britain. In 1978 Touré partially mended his political disagreements with France, and in that year President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing made a conciliatory gesture and visited Guinea. Touré had for a time friendly relations with the United States, especially during the john f. kennedy administration. By the late 1960s he feared Soviet intervention, but he was equally worried that U.S. involvement might undermine his regime. This suspicion of outside interference was confirmed when Portuguese Guinea in 1970 unsuccessfully invaded Guinea. This act, some have argued, caused Touré to abandon democratic principles and impose a harsh one-man, one-party political system. Although elections were held during this period, there was not a serious voice of opposition. Most other local political forces were either exiled or imprisoned. Touré abandoned some of his Marxist-Socialist roots in the late 1970s in an attempt to improve the country’s economic fortunes. To maintain his power and authority, Sékou Touré did not reject all communist practices. He particularly made use of the labor camp as a tool for the state’s domination of its people. His camps became watchwords for African oppression, brutality, and human rights abuses. He created the typical personality cult found in so many communist-inspired regimes. He also loaded his regime’s offices with members of his extended family and exploited tribal rivalries to his benefit. Relations with the international monetary fund (IMF) floundered toward the end of his rule; Guinea’s foreign debt increasingly mounted, and repayments fell into arrears. This dismal performance did not dampen Touré’s ambitions for a wider political stage. In the years immediately preceding his death, he saw himself as a statesman. Touré’s health declined in the early 1980s, and he died of complications following heart surgery in Cleveland, Ohio, on March 26, 1984. Upon his death the military seized power under the leadership of Colonel Lansana Conte and a new constitution was written. Elections saw Conte assume the presidency in 1993. Although there are claims that Touré was warmly regarded by his people, the imprisonment and murder of his opponents makes this assumption hard to assess. His lasting legacy seems to be one of failure, and Guinea and its people seem to be the principal victims. Political instability and impoverishment remain the country’s fate, and international estimates list Guinea as a prime example of a failed state. Further reading: Adamolekun, Lapido. Sékou Touré’s Guinea. London: Methuen, 1976; Camara, Mohamed Saliou. His Master’s Voice: Mass Communications and Single Party Politics in Guinea Under Seko Touré. Trenton, NJ: African Research and Publications, 2005; Schmidt, Elizabeth. Mobilizing the Masses: Gender, Ethnicity and Class in the Nationalist Movement in Guinea, 1939–1958. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, 2005; Touré, Ahmed Sékou. Freedom Through Culture. New York: UNESCO, 1980. Theodore W. Eversole Touré, Ahmed Sékou 427 Trudeau, Pierre (1919–2000) Canadian politician Pierre Trudeau served as prime minister of Canada from 1968 to 1979 and 1980 to 1984. Born to an affluent Montreal family on October 18, 1919, he was educated at Jean-de-Brébeuf, an elite Jesuit preparatory school, received a law degree from the University of Montreal, and studied at Harvard University, the École des Sciences Politiques in Paris, and the London School of Economics. During a brief teaching career, he acted as the assistant professor of law at the University of Montreal from 1961 to 1965. His 1965 election to the Canadian House of Commons marked the beginning of his ascendancy in Canadian politics. Lester B. Pearson appointed him parliamentary secretary in 1966 and then minister of justice and attorney general. Trudeau won the passage of social welfare reform measures regarding gun control, abortion, and homosexuality. As the leader of the Liberal Party, he became the prime minister in 1968, largely due to his opposition to the Quebec separatist group Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ). In 1972 his Liberal Party was weakened, possessing a minority of seats in the House of Commons, and relied on the support of the New Democratic Party (NDP) to pass its agenda. Trudeau struggled against economic and domestic problems throughout the 1970s. In 1979 Trudeau lost his position as prime minister to the Progressive Conservative Party; he regained power in the election of 1980, beginning his fourth term on March 3 of that year. His administration witnessed the defeat of a referendum in May 1980 on the separation of Quebec. Trudeau’s legacy as prime minister includes his successfully patriating the Canadian Constitution from the British Parliament, an act that gave Canada the power to amend the document without the need to seek the approval of the British Crown. He had included a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guaranteed certain civil liberties, in the constitution that year. Sensitive to the linguistic preferences of Francophone Canadians, he passed laws that made Canada an officially bilingual nation and used his office to support multiculturalism. Canadian journalists named Trudeau the top Canadian newsmaker of the 20th century in 1999. In 1971, at age 51, he married 22-year-old Vancouver socialite Margaret Sinclair. Their union, which produced three children and was the subject of enormous press coverage, ended in divorce in 1984. Trudeau’s works include Federalism and the French Canadians, Approaches to Politics, and Conversations with Canadians. Pierre Trudeau, the 15th Canadian prime minister, died on September 28, 2000. See also quebec sovereignty movement. Further reading: Axworthy, Tom, and Pierre Elliott Trudeau, eds. Towards a Just Society: The Trudeau Years. Toronto: Penguin Books, 1992; Bothwell, Robert, Andrew Cohen, and J. L. Granatstein. Trudeau’s Shadow: The Life and Legacy of Pierre Elliott Trudeau. Toronto: Random House of Canada, 1998; Laforest, Guy. Trudeau and the End of a Canadian Dream. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1995; Trudeau, Pierre Elliott. Memoirs. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1993. Christopher M. Cook Turabi, Hassan ‘abd Allah al- (1932– ) Sudanese Islamist and politician Hassan al-Turabi was born into a respected and educated family in the central Sudan in 1932. His father was a judge, and al-Turabi is related by marriage to Sadiq al-Mahdi, the great-grandson of the 19th-century Mahdi and a former Sudanese prime minister. He is also related by marriage to the Saudi Arabian Islamist Osama bin Laden. As a youth, Turabi received an Islamic education, but he also earned a law degree from Khartoum University and a doctorate in law from the Sorbonne in Paris. In the 1950s he joined the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood and later the Islamic Charter Front (ICF), an offshoot of the brotherhood. The party’s goal was the creation of an Islamic state as delineated in the Islamic Charter for an Islamic State. The constitution, as revised by Turabi in the 1960s, provided for the full equality of women and non-Muslims but also advocated the creation of a presidential rather than a parliamentary state. The ICF also encouraged missionary efforts to spread Islam throughout the south. Turabi opposed the military dictatorship of Ibrahim Abboud (r. 1958–64), who was overthrown in 1964. Turabi won a parliamentary seat in the 1965 elections. When Sadiq al-Mahdi became prime minister, Turabi’s influence increased until Mahdi’s political fortunes waned by 1968. In 1969 jaafar numeiri, with the support of Sudanese communist allies, successfully overthrew the parliamentary government in a military coup d’état, and Charter Front members were arrested. Turabi was jailed and then went into exile in Libya. Numeiri, struggling 428 Trudeau, Pierre to retain power, disavowed his former communist allies and moved closer to the Islamic forces in the Sudan. Turabi was permitted to return in 1977 and was subsequently appointed attorney general. With Turabi’s support in 1983 Numeiri instituted sharia law in Sudan, thereby exacerbating relations with the large Christian population in the southern Sudanese provinces. This directly contributed to an escalation in the ongoing civil war between the predominantly Muslim government in the north and the southern Christian and animist south. During this period the brotherhood’s influence in key institutions, especially schools and the military, markedly increased. In 1985 Numeiri, who had become increasingly isolated from all his former allies, was overthrown in a bloodless coup led by General Abdel Rahman Mohammed Hassan Siwar al-Dahab. In 1991 Turabi established the Popular Arab and Islamic People’s Congress, an umbrella organization of Islamist groups, and worked to bring Sunni and Shi’i Muslims closer together. He was elected secretary-general of the Congress in 1992. In the same year Turabi toured Europe, Canada, and the United States, speaking on behalf of the creation of liberal, nonviolent Islamic states. During the 1990s he also offered protection to the radical osama bin laden after bin Laden left Saudi Arabia for Sudan. Turabi was elected to Parliament in 1996 and became speaker of Parliament under the military dictatorship of Colonel Umar Hasan al-Bashir, who had seized power in 1989. But in 2004 al-Bashir had Turabi imprisoned; he was freed in 2005. After that time, Turabi adopted a far lower public profile, and although he was thought to exercise considerable political influence in the government, his exact role or impact remained unclear. Turabi has never published a comprehensive study of his ideology, but his career has demonstrated considerable political flexibility. Under his leadership Islamist forces in the Sudan have played key roles in the Sudanese civil service, professions, and military. He also supported the export of Islamic movements to neighboring African nations in the north and east, particularly in Egypt. See also sudanese civil wars (1970–present). Further reading: El-Effendi, Abdelwahab. Turabi’s Revolution: Islam and Power in Sudan. London: Grey Seal Books, 1991; Hamdi, Mohamed Elhachmi, and Hasan Turabi. The Making of an Islamic Political Leader: Conversations with Hasan Al-Turabi. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1998. Janice J. Terry Turkey Present-day Turkey lies in southeastern Europe and southwestern Asia and shares borders with Greece, Bulgaria, armenia, azerbaijan, Georgia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria. It is made up of 780,580 square kilometers. It contains the Bosporus Strait, which connects, the Black and Marmara seas, and is one of the busiest shipping lanes, in the world. Turkey also has coastline on the Aegean and Mediterranean seas. Turkey has 81 provinces, and Ankara is the capital city. Turkey’s population is almost 70 million, of which a majority are Turkish, with a significant minority of kurds, as well as Armenians, Greeks, Jews, Circassians, Assyrians, Arabs, and Laz communities. Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim. Turkey is a republican parliamentary democracy with a civil law system derived from several European legal systems such as the Swiss Code. The legislative branch is the unicameral Grand National Assembly, which contains 550 popularly elected seats. Turkey’s economy is a mix of industrial, agricultural, and commercial. The private sector is expanding, but the state still controls most basic industries and the banking, transport, and communication sectors. The main export industries are textile and clothing production, with automotive and electronic export production close behind. The main agricultural products include tobacco, cotton, grain, olives, sugar beets, pulses, citrus products, and livestock. In the 1990s Turkey’s economy suffered severe fluctuations, which culminated in financial disaster in February 2001. The international monetary fund (IMF) provides heavy backing, but the economy faces high debt and deficits. Ismet Inönü took over as president upon the death of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in 1938, and the Republican People’s Party (RPP) held the majority until 1950. Inönü managed to stay out of World War II until 1945, when Turkey declared war on Germany as a symbolic gesture in order to qualify as a founder of the newly forming united nations. Under the Truman Doctrine, Turkey, due to its close proximity to the Soviet Union, qualified for massive financial aid. Despite these achievements, the economy was weak, and the RPP and Inönü grew increasingly unpopular. Turkey had by then formed a multiparty system, and in 1950 the Democratic Party (Demokrati Partisi, or DP) received the majority in the elections, forcing the RPP to relinquish its 27-year majority. Celal Bayar became president, and Adnan Menderes became prime minister. The economic boom of the early 1950s strengthened Menderes and the DP’s position. By Turkey 42 9 1952 Turkey had become a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), largely due to the fact that Turkey had immediately volunteered troops for the korean war. Turkey’s entry into NATO ensured protection along its borders and allowed NATO a closer position against the USSR. After the 1954 elections the DP became more authoritarian. Conflict was exacerbated when a Greek citizen placed a bomb at the Turkish consulate in Thessalonica. The island of cyprus, under British control and with an 80 percent Greek majority, also became a point of conflict. These two issues culminated in riots in 1955 that targeted Greek homes, shops, and businesses and wrought havoc throughout Istanbul. Many Turkish citizens of Greek origin fled Turkey after these riots. During this period, Greek nationalists of the EOKA movement on Cyprus also began a struggle against the British forces. Turkey strongly opposed British suggestions that the Greeks might be allowed to annex Cyprus. Ultimately Cyprus became an independent nation. The DP lacked the support of the military, which had been vital to the RPP. This led to the DP’s downfall in 1960. Because of training, aid, and financial support gained as a result of joining NATO, the Turkish military was a strong and powerful mechanism within Turkey. Menderes grew increasingly unpopular with the military. In 1960, the military overthrew the Menderes government. The coup was popular among students, who had been repressed by the DP. A new constitution was drawn up that justified military intervention if the ruling government acted unconstitutionally. The military was also given a role in government. In January 1961 political activity was allowed once again, and 11 parties registered for the elections to be held at the end of 1961. One of the parties, the Justice Party (Adalet Partisi, or JP) appeared to be a phoenix of the old, outlawed DP. Menderes and two of his cabinet members were tried by a military tribunal and executed in September 1961. Elections were held in October 1961. The Justice and Republican People’s Parties formed a shaky coalition. In 1965 the JP, led by Süleyman Demirel, won a major victory in elections. Under Demirel, Turkey saw significant economic growth. The JP espoused Islamist and traditional beliefs that ran directly counter to communist and leftist thought. The left grew increasingly popular among the student population and industrial proletariat. The right also emerged as a strong force in the 1960s, setting the stage for the crisis of the 1970s. The formation of two strong, Islamic-leaning parties, the National Action Party (Milliyetçi Hareket Partisi) and the National Order Party (Millî Nizam Partisi), seriously threatened the JP’s hold on the government in 1969. Demirel’s JP government started to fall apart in 1971. On March 12, 1971, the army forced the Demirel government from office. Free elections were held in 1973, with a victory by Bülent Ecevit’s RPP. However, because they failed to capture the majority vote, they were forced into coalition governments. This continued throughout the 1970s as rightist and leftist violence escalated. Kurdish separatism also flared up in the 1970s. Kurdish nationalist Abdullah Öcalan formed the left-leaning Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK) in 1978. The sectarian violence escalated, and the military stepped in. After the Iranian revolution in 1979, Islamic groups in Turkey were suspected of receiving aid from Iran. The religious demonstrations in Konya in September 1980 provided an excuse for direct military intervention. the purge The military suspended all political parties and groups and instituted martial law and curfews. General Kenan Evren was declared acting head of state. The National Security Council (NSC) arrested 122,000 people during 1980–81 in order to stop the violence. Academics and politicians were purged from the system. A new constitution was enacted in 1982. Kenan Evren was then elected president, and the military began to restructure the political system. Elections were held in 1983, with the Motherland Party (Anavatan Partisi) gaining the majority under Turgut Özal. The old parties then reincarnated and changed their names in order to enter the 1984 elections. After Kenan Evren’s term ended in 1989, Turgut Özal became president. Turgut Özal’s presidency, although fraught with corruption and scandal, was also marked by impressive modernization. The 1990s were also marked by the rise of the PKK. After the 1980 coup the Kurdish language was forbidden, as was the term Kurdish as a separate identity. Abdullah Öcalan had fled to Damascus after the 1980 coup. Turkey until 1991 refused to acknowledge the presence of Kurds in the country and referred to them as “mountain Turks.” The government forbade their language, songs, customs, and names. Öcalan’s followers carried out their missions with an almost religious zeal. Talabani of the Kurdish PUK faction based in Iran helped Öcalan get financial support from Kurds living throughout the Middle East, which 43 0 Turkey The Hagia Sophia mosque in Istanbul, Turkey. Though a secular state, Turkey is a Muslim nation (mostly Sunni, but significant Shi’i, Alevi, and Sufi communities are present), where only 0.2 percent of the population are Christian or Jewish. brought the PKK beyond the sphere of Turkey. The PKK also received support from Kurds living in Europe. The PKK used guerrilla warfare to launch attacks within Turkey. The Turkish army responded brutally to the terrorist attacks. Villages thought to be harboring PKK terrorists were destroyed, and thousands were arrested, detained, and tortured. Many innocent people were killed and their homes destroyed. After the U.S. defeat of Iraq in 1991, Turkey feared the creation of a Kurdish state in northern Iraq that would be used as a base for Kurdish attacks on Turkey. Subsequently, President Özal officially recognized the existence of Kurds in Turkey and implemented a bill that would allow the Kurdish language to be used in everyday conversations but not in business, government, or any other official agency. Despite this, the PKK stepped up their campaigns against the Turkish government, committing more atrocities, which further enraged the Turkish public. Öcalan was captured in Nairobi, Kenya, by Turkish commandos in 1999. He was sentenced to death and imprisoned on an island in the Marmara Sea, where he remained for years. In 1993 the True Path Party came into power, and Tansu çiller became the first female prime minister of Turkey. Necmettin Erbakan was the leader of Refah, which was supported by the young, professional middle class and students. Erbakan did not engage in a radical Islamic changeover. He personally championed reforms to change the working hours during Ramadan and loosen control of the Directorate of Religious Affairs to make it harder for the government to monitor Islam. Erbakan also proposed lifting the Turkey 43 1 432 Turkey ban against wearing headscarves in universities and government institutions. The Erbakan/Çiller coalition also made significant overtures to Libya and Iran, and at the same time condemned Israel. With the advent of new freedoms under Erbakan, many other Islamic leaders eagerly expressed their long-silent opinions. Refah wanted to abolish the Swiss legal code instituted by Atatürk, and secularists feared a return to sharia, or Islamic law. Erbakan and Çiller both left government, and in 1998 the Constitutional Court formally disbanded Refah and forced its members out of Parliament. Bülent Ecevit emerged as the new president, in large part because of his handling of Öcalan and the Kurdish conflict. In 1999 a huge earthquake struck I . zmit, near Istanbul, killing between 15,000 and 40,000 people. The government was extremely slow to respond, and the public was enraged by the lack of support from both the government and the military. Memories of the earthquake played a role the emergence of the Justice and Development Party (JDP, or Ak Partisi). In the 2002 elections the JDP, led by Recep Tayyip Erdo˘gan, won a majority in the Grand National Assembly. Although the JDP espoused a moderate Islamic line, it was careful to respect the secular state. Erdo˘gan also instituted reforms to help pull Turkey out of its financial troubles. Erdo˘gan and the JDP also scored a major victory with the October 2005 decision by the European Union (EU) to start Turkey’s EU membership bid. See also gulf war, first (1991). Further reading: Ahmad, Feroz. Turkey: The Quest for Identity. Oxford: Oneworld Publications, 2003; Kinzer, Stephen. Crescent and Star: Turkey, between Two Worlds. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001; Zurcher, Erik J. Turkey: A Modern History. London: I.B. Tauris, 2001. Katie Belliel