« السابقةمتابعة »
public said this, but even physicians have been known to suggest it, and have indeed used the equiVocal‘expression, the " apatheosis of surgery/Fin connexion with the operative treatment of a serious abdominal .lesion. But fortunately -the public have found out that the surgeon, being an honest man; does not 'advise operation unless he believes'that it is necessary or, at any rate, highly advisable. And this happy ,discovery' has led to much more confidence being placed in his decision; It has truly been said that a surgeon is a physician who can operate, and the public have begun to realize the fact that it is useless to try to relieve an acute abdominal lesion by diet or drugs. Not many years ago cases of acute, obscure or chronic affections of the abdomen which were admitted into' hQSpital Were sent as a matter of course into the. medical wards, and after the ,efiectof drugs had been tried with expectancy. and failure, the services of a surgeonwere called in; In acute cases this delay spoilt all surgical chances, and the‘idea was more widely spread that surgery, after all, was a poor handmaid to medicine. But now things are different. Acute or obscure abdominal cases are promptly relegated to the surgical wards; the surgeon is at once sent fer, and if operation is thought desirable it is performed Without any delay. The public have found that the surgeon is not a reckless operator, but a man who can take a broad view of a caSe in all its bearings. And so it has come about that the result’sof operations upon the interior of the abdomen have been iinprOving day-by day. And doubtless they will-continue to improve. - ' ‘- ' ‘
A great impetus was given to the surgery of wounded, mortiffied 'or disea‘sed pieces of intestine by the introduction from Chicago of an ingenious contrivance named, after the inventor, M urphy’s button. This consists of a short nickel-plated tube in 'two pieces, which are rapidly secured in the divided ends of the Howe], and in such a' mannerv that when the pieces are‘ subsequently"‘man'i;ed"’ the adjusted ends of the bowel are securely fixed together and the canal rendered practicable. In the course of time the button loosens itself into the interior of the bOWel ‘and‘c'omes away with the alvine evacuation." In many_‘other cases the use of the button has proved convenient and‘suceessful, as in the establishment of a permanent communication between the stomach and the small intestine when the ordinary gateway between these parts’ of the alimentary canal is'obstructed by an irrernovable malignant growth; between two parts of the small intestine so that some obstruction'may be passed; between small and large intestine. The operative procedure gees by the nameof short-circuiting; it enables the contents of the bo'rVel to get beyond an obstruction. In this, way also a permanent Working communication can beset up betWeen the gallbladder, ‘or a [dilated bile-duct, and the neighbouring small
intestine-the last-named operation ‘bears- the-“precise b'ut.
Very clumsy name of choledoooduodenostomy. By the use of
after operating on the abdomen gave small, repeated doses of Epsom salts to wash away the harmful liquids of the bovvel and to enable it at the same time to empty itself of the gas, which, by distending the intestines, was interfering with respiration and circulation.
Amongst still more recent improvements in abdominal surgery may be mentioned the placing of the patient in the sitting position as soon as practicableiafter the operation, and the slow administration of a hot saline solution into the lower bowel, or, in the more desperate cases, of injecting pints of this “normal saline ” fluid into the loose tissue 'of the armpit. Hot water thus administered or injected is quickly taken into the blood, increasing its volume, diluting its impurities and quenching the great thirst which is so marked a symptom in this condition. I ‘
Gunshot Wounds of the Abdomen—If a revolver bullet passes through the abdomen, the coils of intestine are likely to be traversed by it in several places. If the bullet be small and, by chance, surgically clean, it is possible that the openings may tightly close up behind it so that no leakage takes place into the general peritoneal cavity. If increasing collapse suggests that serious bleeding is occurring within the abdomen, the cavity is. opened forthwith and a thorough exploration made. When it is uncertain if'the bowel has been traversed‘or not, it is well to wait before opening the abdomen, due preparation being made for performing that operation on the first appearance of
‘ symptoms indicative of perforation having occurred. Small
perforating wounds of the bowel are treated by such suturing as the circumstances may suggest, the interior of the abdominal cavity being rendered as free from septic micro-organisms as possible. It is by the malign influence of such germs that a fatal issue is determined in the case of an abdominal wound, whether inflicted by firearms or by 'a pointed weapon. If aseptic procedure can be promptly resorted to and thoroughly carried out, abdominal wounds do well, but these essentials cannot be obtained upon the field of battle. When after ail action wounded' then come pouring into' the field-hospital, the many cannot be 'kept waiting whilst preparations are being made for the'thorough _carrying out of a prolonged aseptic abdominal operation upon a solitary case. "EXperience in the South Afi-ic'an‘war of woo—1902 showed that Mauser bullets could pierce coils of intestine 'and leave the soldiers in such a condition that, if treated by mere “expectancy,” more than 50 %‘ recoVered, whereas if operations were resorted to, fatal septic peritonitis was likely to ensue. In the close proximity of the fight; where time, assistants, pure water, towels, lotions and other necessaries for carrying out a thoroughly aseptic operation cannot be forthcoming, gunshot wounds of the abddmen had best not be interfered with. ' Stabs of the abdomen are serious if they have penetrated the abdominal wall, as, at the‘time of injury, septic germs may have been introduced, or the bowel may have been wounded. In either case a fatal inflammation of the peritoneum may be set up. It is inadvisable to probe a wound in order to find out if the belly-cavity has been penetrated, as the probe itself might carry inwards septic germs. In case of doubt it is better to en— large the wound in order to determine its depth, and to disinfect and close it if it be non-penetrating. If, however, the bellycavity has been opened, the neighbouring pieces of bowel should be examined, cleansed and, if need be, sutured. Should there have been an escape of the contents of the bowel the “ toilet of the peritoneum” would be duly made, and a drainage-tube would be left in. If the stab had injured a large blood-vessel either of the abdominal cavity, or of the liver or of some other organ, the bleeding 'would be arrested by ligature or suture, and the extravasated blood sponged out. Before the days of
antiseptic surgery, and of exploratory abdominal operations,
these cases were generally allowed to drift to almost certain
death, unrecbgnized and almost untreated: at the present time a large number of them are saved. , I
I ntussusception.—This is a terribly fatal disease of infants and
children, in which a piece of bowel slips into, and is gripped by, ‘. .1
' the piece next below it. Formerly it was generally the custom to endeavour to reduce the invagination by passing air or water up the rectum under pressure—a speculative method of treatment which sometimes ended in a fatal rupture of the distended bowel, and often—one might almost say generally—failed to do what was expected of it. The teaching of modern surgery is that a small incision into the abdomen and a prompt withdrawal of the invaginated piece of bowel can be trusted to do all that, and more than, injection can effect, without blindly risking a rupture of the bowel. It is certain that when the surgeon is unable to unravel the bowel with his fingers gently applied to the parts themselves, no speculative distension of the bowel could have been effective. But the outlook in these distressing cases, even when the operation is promptly resorted to, is extremely grave, because of' the intensity of the shock which the intussusception and resulting strangulation entail. Still, every operation gives them by far the best chancel ‘- '
Cancer of the Intestine—With the introduction of aseptic methods of operating, it has been found that the surgeon can reach the bowel through the peritoneum easily and safely. With the peritoneum opened, moreover, he can explore the diseased bowel and deal with it as circumstances suggest. If the cancerous mass is fairly movable the affected piece of bowel is -:xclsed and the cut ends are spliced together, and the continuity of the alimentary canal is permanently re-established. Thus in the case of cancer of the large intestine which is not too far advanced, the surgeon expects to be able not only to relieve the obstruction of the bowel, but actually to 'cure the patient of his disease. When the lowest part of the bowel was found to be occupied by a cancerous obstruction, the surgeon used formerly to secure an easy escape for the contents of the bowel by making an opening into the colon in the left loin. But in recent years this operation of lumbar colalomy has been almost entirely replaced by opening the colon. in the left groin. This operation of inguinal cololamy is usually divided into two stages: a loop of the large intestine is first drawn out through the abdominal wound and secured by stitches, and a few days afterwards, when it is firmly glued in place by adhesive inflammation, it is cut across, so that subsequently the motions can no longer find their way into the bowel below the artificial anus. If at the first stage of the operation symptoms of obstruction are urgent, one of the ingenious glass tubes with a rubber conduit, which Mr F. T. Paul has invented, may be forthwith introduced into the distended bowel, so that the contents may be allowed to escape without fear of soiling the peritoneum or even the surface-wound. (E. 03')
ABDUCTION (Lat. abductio, abducere, to lead away), a law term denoting the forcible or fraudulent removal of a person, limited by custom to the case where a woman is the victim. In the case of men or children, it has been usual to substitute the term kidnapping (q.v.). The old English laws against abduction, generally contemplating its object as the possession of an heiress and her fortune, have been repealed by the Ofi'ences against the Person Act 1861, which makes it felony for any one from motives of lucre to take away or detain against her will, with intent to marry or carnally know her, &c., any woman of any age who has any interest in any real or personal estate, or is an heiress presumptive, or co-heiress, or presumptive next of kin to any one having such an interest; or for any one to cause such a woman to be married or carnally known by any other person; or for any one with such intent to allure, take away, or detain any such woman under the age of twenty-one, out of the possession and against the will of her parents or guardians. By s. 54, forcible taking away or detention against her will of any woman of any age with'like intent is felony. The same act makes abduction without even any such intent a misdemeanour, where an unmarried girl under the age of sixteen is unlawfully taken out of the possession and against the will of her parents or guardians. In such a case the girl’s consent is immaterial, nor is it a defence that the person charged reasonably believed that the girl was sixteen or over. The Criminal Law Amendment Act 1885 made still more stringent
provisions with reference to abduction by making the procuretion or attempted procuration of any virtuous female under the age of twenty-one years a misdemeanour, as well as the abduction of any girl under eighteen years of age with the intent that she shall be carnally known, or the detaining of any female against her will on any premises, with intent to have, or that another person may have, carnal knowledge of her. In Scotland, where there is no statutory adjustment, abduction is similarly dealt with- by practice.
ABD-UL-AZIZ (1830—1876), sultan of Turkey, son of Sultan Mahmud II., was born on the 9th of February 1830, and succeeded his brother Abd-ul-Mejid in 1861. His personal interference in government affairs was not very marked, and extended to little more than taking astute advantage of the constant issue of State loans during his reign to acquire wealth, which was squandered in building useless palaces and in other futile ways: he is even said to have profited, by means of “bear” sales, from the default on the Turkish debt in 1875 and the consequent fall in prices. Another source of revenue was afforded by Ismail Pasha, the khedive of Egypt, who paid heavily in bakshish for the firman of 1866, by which the succession to the khedivate was made hereditary from father to son in direct line and in order of primogeniture, as well as for the subsequent firmans of 1867, 1869 and 1872 extending the khedive's prerogatives. It is, however, only fair to add that the' sultan was doubtless influenced by the desire to bring about a similar change in the succession to the Ottoman throne find to ensure the succession after him of his eldest son, Yussuf Izz-ed-din. Abd-ul-Aziz visited Europe in 1867, being the first Ottoman sultan to do so, and was made a Knight of the Carter by Queen Victoria. In 1869 he received the visits of' the emperor of Austria, the Empress Eugenie and other foreign princes, on their way to the opening of the Suez Canal, and King Edward VII., while prince of Wales, twice visited Constantinople during his reign. The mis-government and financial straits of the country brought on the outbreak of Mussulman'discontent and fanaticism which eventually culminated in the murder of two consuls at Salonica and in the “Bulgarian atrocities,” and cost Abd-ul-Aziz his throne. His deposition on the 30th of May 1876 was hailed with joy throughout Turkey; a fortnight later he was found dead in the palace where he was confined, and trustworthy medical evidence attributed his death to suicide. Six children survived him: Prince ‘Yussuf Izz-ed-din, born 1857; Princess Saliha, wife of Kurd Ismail Pasha; Princess Nazimé, wife of Khalid Pasha; Prince Abd-ul-Mejid, born 1869; Prince Seif-ed-din, born 1876; Princess Emine, wife of Mahommed Bey; Prince Shefket, born 1872, died 1899.
ABD-UL-HAMID I. (1725-1789), sultan of Turkey, son of Ahmed III., succeeded his brother Mustafa III. in 1773. Long confinement in the palace aloof from state affairs had left him pious, God-fearing and pacific in disposition. At his accession the financial straits of the treasury were such that the usual donative could not be given to the janissaries. War was, however, forced on him, and less than a year after his accession the complete defeat of the Turks at Kozluja led to the treaty of Kuchuk Kainarji (21st July 1774), the most disastrous, especially in its after effects, that Turkey has ever been obliged to conclude. (See TURKEY.) Slight successes in Syria and the Morea against rebellious outbreaks there could not compensate for the loss of the Crimea, which Russia soon showed that she meant to absorb entirely. In 1787 war was again declared against Russia, joined in the following year by Austria, Joseph II. being entirely won over to Catherine, whom he accompanied in her triumphal progress in the Crimea. Turkey held her own against the Austrians, but in 1788 Ochakov fell} to the Russians. Four months later, on the 7th of April 1789, the sultan'died, aged sixty-four.
ABD-UL-HAMID II. (1842- ), sultan of Turkey, son of Sultan Abd-ul-Mejid, was born on the 21st of September 1842, and succeeded to the throne on the deposition of his brother Murad V., on the 315t of August 1876. He accompanied hi8 uncle Sultan Abd-ul-Aziz on- his visit to England and France in 1867. .At his accession spectators were struck by the fearless manner inwhich he rode, practically unattended, on his way to be girt with the sword of Eyub. He was supposed to be of liberal principles, and the more conservative of his subjects were for some years after his accession inclined to regard him with suspicion as a too ardent reformer. But the circumstances of the country at his accession were ill adapted for liberal devalopments. Default in the public funds and an empty treasury, the insurrection in Bosnia and the Herzegovina, the war with Servia and Montenegro, the feeling aroused throughout Europe by the methods adopted in stamping out the Bulgarian rebellion, all combined to prove to the new sultan that he could expect little aid from the Powers. But, still clinging to the groundless belief, for which British statesmen had, of late at least, afiorded Turkey no justification, that Great Britain at all events would support him, he obstinately refused to give ear to the pressing requests of the Powers that the necessary reforms should be instituted. The international Conference which met at Constantinople towards the end of 1876 was, indeed, startled by the salvo of guns heralding the promulgation of a constitution, but the, demands of the Conference were rejected, in spite of the solemn warnings addressed to the sultan by the Powers; Midhat Pasha, the author of the constitution, was exiled; and soon afterwards his work was suspended, though figuring to this day on the Statute-Book._ Early in 1877 the disastrous war with Russia followed. The hard terms, embodied in the treaty of San Stefano, to which Abd-ul-Hamid was forced to consent, were to some extent amended at Berlin, thanks in the main to British diplomacy (see EUROPE, History); but by this time the sultan had lost all confidence in England, and thought that be discerned in Germany, whose supremacy was evidenced in his eyes by her capital being selected as the meeting-place of the Congress, the future friend of Turkey. He hastened to employ Germans for the reorganization of his finances and his army, and set to work in the determination to maintain his empire in spite of the difficulties surrounding him, to resist the encroachments of foreigners, and to take gradually the reins of absolute power into his own hands, being animated by a profound distrust, not unmerited, of his ministers. Financial embarrassments forced him to consent to a foreign control over the Debt, and the decree of December 1881, whereby many ofv the revenues of the empire were handed over to the Public Debt Administration for the benefit of the bondholders, was a sacrifice. of principle to which he could only have consented with the greatest reluctance. Trouble in Egypt, where a discredited khedive had to be deposed, trouble on the Greek frontier and in Montenegro. where the Powers were determined that the decisions of the Berlin Congress should be carried into effect, were more or less satisfactorily got over. In his attitude towards Arabi, the would-be saviour of Egypt, Abd-ul-Hamid showed less than his usual astuteness, and the resulting consolidation of England’s hold over the country contributed still further to his estrangement from Turkey’s old ally. The union in 1885 of Bulgaria with Eastern Rumelia, the severance of which had been the great triumph of the Berlin Congress, was another blow. Few people south of the Balkans dreamed that Bulgaria‘could be anything but a Russian province, and apprehension was entertained of the results of the union until it was seen that Russia really and entirely disapproved of it. Then the best Was made of it, and for some years the sultan preserved towards Bulgaria an attitude skilfully calculated so as to avoid running counter'either to Russian or to German wishes. Germany’s friendship was not entirely disinterested, and had to be fostered with a railway or loan concession from time to time, until in 1899' the great object aimed at, the Bagdad railway, was conceded. Méanwhile, aided by docile instruments, the sultan had succeeded in reducing his ministers to the position of secretaries, and in concentrating the whole administration of the country into-his own hands at Yildiz. But internal dissension was not ‘ thereby lessened. Crete wasconstantly in turmoil, the Greeks were dissatisfied, and from about r890 the Armenians began a
violent agitation with a view to obtaining the reforms promised them at Berlin. Minor troubles had occurred in 1892 and 1893 at Marsovan and Tokat. In 1894 a more serious rebellion in the mountainous region of Sassun was ruthlessly stamped out; the Powers insistently demanded reforms, the eventual grant of which in the autumn of 1895 was the signal for a series of massacres, brought on in part by the injudicious and threatening acts of the victims, and extending over many months and throughout Asia Minor, as well as in the capital itself. The reforms became more or less a dead letter. Crete indeed profited by the grant of extended privileges, but these did not satisfy its turbulent population, and early in 1897 a Greek expedition sailed to unite the island to Greece. War followed, in which Turkey was easily successful and gained a small rectification of frontier; then a few months later Crete was taken over “at depot ” by the Four Powers—Germany and Austria not participating,-—and Prince George of Greece was appointed their mandatory. In the next year the sultan received the visit of the German emperor and empress.
Abd-ul-Hamid had always resisted the pressure of the European Powers to the last moment, in order to seem to yield only to overwhelming force, while posing'as the champion of Islam against aggressive Christendom. The Panislamic propaganda was encouraged; the privileges of foreigners in the Ottoman Empire— of ten an obstacle to government—were curtailed; the new railway to the Holy Places was pressed on, and emissaries were sent to distant countries preaching Islam and the caliph’s supremacy. This appeal to Moslem sentiment was, however, powerless against the disafiection due to perennial misgovernment. In Mesopotamia and Yemen disturbance was endemic; nearer home, a semblance of loyalty was maintained in the army and among the Mussulman population by a system of delation and espionage, and by wholesale arrests ; while, obsessed by terror of assassination, the sultan withdrew himself into fortified seclusion in the palace of Yildiz.
The national humiliation of the situation in Macedonia (q.v.), together with the resentment in the army against the palace spies and informers, at last brought matters to a crisis. The remarkable revolution associated with the names of Niazi Bey and Enver Bey, the young Turk leaders, and the Committee of Union and Progress is described elsewhere (see TURKEY: History); here it must suffice to say that Abd-ul-Hamid, on learning of the threat of the Salonica troops to march on Constantinople (July 23), at once capitulated. On the 24th an iradé announced the restoration of the suspended constitution of r875; next day, further iradé: abolished espionage and the censorship, and ordered the release of political prisoners. On the 10th of December the sultan opened the Turkish parliament with a speech from the throne in which he said that the first parliament had been “temporarily dissolved until the education of the people had been brought to a sufliciently high level by the extension of instruction throughout the empire.”
The correct attitude of the sultan did not save him from the suspicion of intriguing with the powerful reactionary elements in the state, a suspicion confirmed by his attitude towards the counter-revolution of the 13th of April, when an insurrection of the soldiers and the Moslem populace of the capital overthrew the committee and the ministry. The committee, restored by the Salonica troops, now decided on Abdul-Hamid’s deposition, and on the 27th of April his brother Reshid Efi'endi was proclaimed sultan as Mahommed V. The ex-sultan was conveyed into dignified captivity at Salonica.
ABD-UL-MEJID (1823—1861), sultan of Turkey, was born on the 23rd of April 1823, and succeeded his father Mahmud II. on the 2nd of July 1839. Mahmud appears to have been unable to effect the reforms he desired in the mode of educating his children, so that his son received no better education than that given, according to use and wont, to Turkish princes in the harem. When Abd-ul-Mejid succeeded to the throne, the affairs of Turkey were in an extremely critical state. At the very time his father died, the news was on its way to Constantinople that the Turkish army had been signally defeated at Nezib by that of the rebel Egyptian viceroy, Mehemet Ali; and the Turkish fleet was at the same time on its way to Alexandria, where it was handed over by its commander, Ahmed Pasha, to the same enemy, on the pretext that the young sultan’s advisers were sold to Russia. But through the intervention of the European Powers Mehemet Ali was obliged to come to terms, and the Ottoman empire was saved. (See MEHEMET ALI.) In compliance with his father’s express instructions, Abd-ul-Mejid set at once about carrying out the reforms to which Mahmud had devoted himself. In November 1839 was proclaimed an edict, known as the Hatt-i-sherif of Gulhané, consolidating and enforcing these reforms, which was supplemented at the close of the Crimean war by a similar statute issued in February 1856. By these enactments it was provided that all classes of the sultan’s subjects should have security for their lives and property; that taxes should be fairly imposed and justice impartially administered; and that all should have full religious liberty and equal civil rights. The scheme met with keen opposition from the Mussulman governing classes and the ulema, or privileged religious teachers, and was but partially put in force, especially in the remoter parts of the empire; and more than one conspiracy was formed against the ‘sultan’s life on account of it. Of the other measures of reform promoted by Abd-ul-Mejid the more important were—the reorganization of the army (184 3—i844), the institution of a council of public instruc
tion (1846), the abolition of an odious and unfairly imposed,
capitation tax, the repression of slave trading, and various provisions for the better administration of the public service and for the advancement of commerce. For the public history of his times—the disturbances and insurrections in different parts of his dominions throughout his reign, and the great war successfully carried on against Russia by Turkey, and by England, France and Sardinia, in the interest of Turkey (r853—r856)— see TURKEY, and CRIMEAN WAR. When Kossuth and others sought refuge in Turkey, after the failure of the Hungarian rising in 1849, the sultan was called on by Austria and Russia to surrender them, but boldly and determinedly refused. It is to his credit, too, that he would not allow the conspirators against his own life to be put to death. He bore the character ‘of being a kindand honourable man, if somewhat weak and easily led. Against this, however, must be set down his excessive extravagance, especially towards the end of his life. He died on the 25th of June 1861, and was succeeded by his brother, Abd-ul-Aziz, as the oldest survivor of the family of Osman. He left several sons, of whom two, Murad V. and Abd-ul-Hamid II., eventually succeeded to the throne. In his reign was begun,the reckless system of foreign loans, carried to excess in the ensuing reign, and culminating in default, which led to the alienation of European sympathy from Turkey and, indirectly, to the dethronement and death of Abd~ul-Aziz.
ABDUR KAI-[HAN KHAN, amir of Afghanistan (c. 1844— roor), was the son of Afzul Khan, who was the eldest son of Dost Mahomed Khan, the famous amir, by whose success in war the Barakzai family established their dynasty in the rulership of Afghanistan. Before his death at Herat, 9th June 1863, Dost Mahomed had nominated as his successor Shere Ali, his third son, passing over the two elder brothers, Afzul Khan and Azim Khan; and at first the new amir was quietly recognized. But after a few months Afzul Khan raised an insurrection in the northern province, between the Hindu Kush mountains and the Oxus, where he had been governing when his father died; and then began a fierce contest for power among the sons of Dost Mahor‘ned, which lasted for nearly five years. In this war, which resembles in character, and in its striking vicissitudes, the English War of the Roses at the end of the 1 5th century, Abdur Rahman soon became distinguished for ability and daring energy. Although his father, Afzul Khan, who had none of these qualities, came to terms with the Amir Shere Ali, the son’s behaviour in the northern province soon excited the amir’s suspicion, and Abdur Rahman, when he was summoned to Kabul, fled across the Oxus into Bokhara. Shere Ali threw Afzul Khan into prison, and a serious revolt followed in south Afghanistan; but the amir had scarcely suppressed it by
winning a desperate battle, when Abdurv Rahman’s "reappearance in the north was a signal for a mutiny of the troops stationed in those parts and a gathering of armed bands to his standard. After some delay and desultory fighting, he and his uncle, Azim Khan, occupied Kabul (March 1866). The amir Shere Ali marched up against them from Kandahar; but in the battle that ensued at Sheikhabad on roth May he was deserted by a large body of his troops, and after his signal defeat‘Abdur Rahman released his father, Afzul Khan, from prison in' Ghazni, and installed him upon the throne as amir‘of Afghanistan. Notwithstanding the new amir’s incapacity, and some jealousy between the real leaders, Abdur Rahman and his uncle, they again routed Shere Ali’s forces, and occupied Kandahar in-1867; and when at the end of that year Afzul Khan died, Azim Khan succeeded to the rulership, with Abdur Rahman as-his governor in the northern province. But towards the‘ end of 1868 Shere Ali’s return, and a general rising in his favour, resulting in their defeat at Tinah Khan on the 3rd of January 1869, forced them both to seek refuge in Persia, whence Abdur Rahman proceeded afterwards to place himself under Russian protection at Samarkand. Azim died in Persia in October 1869. 1 i This brief account of the conspicuous part taken by Abdur Rahman in an eventful war, at the beginning of which'lhe was not more than twenty years old, has been given to show the rough school that brought out his qualities of resource and fortitude, and the political capacity needed for rulership in Afghanistan. He lived in exile for eleven years, until on the death, in r879, of Shere Ali, who had retired from Kabul ‘when the British armies entered Afghanistan, the Russian governorgeneral at Tashkent sent for Abdur Rahman, and pressed him to try his fortunes once more across the Oxus. In March r880 a report reached India that he was in northern Afghanistan; and the governor-general, Lord Lytton, opened communications with him to the effect that the British government were'prepared to withdraw their troops, and torecognize Abdur: Rahman as amir of Afghanistan, with the exception of Kandahar and some districts adjacent. After some negotiations, an interview took place between him and Mr (afterwards Sir) Lepel Grifiin, the diplomatic representative at Kabul of the Indian government, who described Abdur Rahman as a man of middle height, with an exceedingly intelligent face and frank and courteous manners. shrewd and able in conversation on the business in hand. A; the durbar on the 22nd of July 1880, Abdur Rahman was officially recognized as amir, granted assistance in arms and money, and promised, in case of unprovoked foreign aggression, such further aid as might be necessary to repel it, provided that he followed British advice in regard to his external relations. The evacuation of Afghanistan was settled on the terms proposed, and in 1'88: the British troops also made over Kandahar to the new amir; but Ayub Khan, one of Shere Ali’s sons, marched upon that city from Herat, defeated Abdur Rahman’s troops, and occupied the place in July. This serious reverse roused the amir, who had not at first displayed much activity. He led a force from Kabul, met Ayub's army close to Kandahar, and the complete victory which he there won forced Ayub Khan to fly into Persia. From that time'Abdur Rahman was fairly seated on the throne at Kabul, and in the course of the next few years he consolidated his dominion over all Afghanistan, suppressing insurrections by a sharp and relentless use' of his despotic authority. Against the severity of his measures the-powerful Ghilzai tribe revolted, and were crushed by the end of r887. In that year Ayub Khan made a fruitless inroad from Persia; and in 1888 the amir’s cousin, Ishak Khan, rebelled against him in the north; but these two enterprises came to nothing. In 1885, at the moment when (see Arommsriu) the amir was in conference with the British viceroy, Lord Dufierin, in India, the news came of a collision between Russian and Afghan troops at Panjdeh, over a disputed point in the demarcation of the north-western frontier of Afghanistan. Abdur Ralhinan’s attitude at this critical juncture is a good example of his political sagacity. To one who had been a man of war from his youth up, who had won and lost many fights, the rout of a detachment and the forcible seizure of some debateable frontier lands was an untoward incident; but it was no sufficent reason for calling upon the British, although they had guaranteed his territory’s integrity, to vindicate his rights by hostilities which would certainly bring upon him a Russian invasion from the north, and would compel his British allies to throw an army into Afghanistan from the south-east. His interest lay in keeping powerful neighbours, whether friends or foes, outside his kingdom. He knew this to be the only policy that would be supported by the Afghan nation; and although for some time a rupture with Russia seemed imminent, while the Indian government made ready for that contingency, the amir’s reserved and circumspect tone in the consultations with him helped to turn the balance between peace and war, and substantially conduced towards a pacific solution. Abdur Rahman left on those who met him in India the impression of a clear-headed man of action, with great self-reliance and hardihood, not without indications of the implacable severity that too often marked his administration. His investment with the insignia of the highest grade of the Order of the Star of India appeared to give him much pleasure.
From the end of 1888 the amir passed eighteen months in his northern provinces bordering upon the Oxus, where he was engaged in pacifying the country that had been disturbed by revolts, and in punishing with a heavy hand all who were known or suspected to have taken any part in rebellion. Shortly afterwards (1892) he succeeded in finally beating down the resistance of the Hazara tribe, who vainly attempted to defend their immemorial independence, within their highlands, of the central authority at Kabul.
In 1893 Sir Henry Durand was deputed to Kabul by the government of India for the purpose of settling an exchange of territory required by the demarcation of the boundary between north-eastern Afghanistan and the Russian possessions, and in order to discuss with the amir other pending questions. The amir showed his usual ability in diplomatic argument, his tenacity where his own views or claims were in debate, with a sure underlying insight into the real situation. The territorial exchanges were amicably agreed upon; the relations between the Indian and Afghan governments, as previously arranged, were confirmed; and an understanding was reached upon the important and difficult subject of the border line of Afghanistan on the east, towards India. In 1895 the amir found himself unable, by reason of ill-health, to accept an invitation from Queen Victoria to visit England; but his second son Nasrullah Khan went in his stead.
Abdur Rahman died on the rst of October 1901, being succeeded by his son Habibullah. He had defeated all enterprises by rivals against his throne; he had broken down the power of local chiefs, and tamed the refractory tribes; so that his orders were irresistible throughout the whole dominion. His government was a military despotism resting upon a well-appointed army; it was administered through officials absolutely subservient to an inflexible will and controlled by a widespread system of espionage; while the exercise of his personal authority was too often stained by acts of unnecessary cruelty. He held open courts for the receipt of petitioners and the dispensation of justice; and in the disposal of business he was indefatigable. He succeeded in imposing an organized government upon the fiercest and mest unruly population in Asia; he availed himself of European inventions for strengthening his armament, while he sternly set his face against all innovations which, like railways and telegraphs, might give Europeans a foothold within his country. His adventurous life, his forcible character, the position of his state as a barrier between the Indian and the Russian empires, and the skill with which he held the balance in dealing with them, combined to make him a prominent figure in contemporary Asiatic politics and will mark his reign as an epochin the history of Afghanistan.
The amir received an annual subsidy from the British government of 18} lakhs of rupees. He was allowed to import munitions of war. In 1896 he adopted the title of Zia-ul-Millat-ud
ABECEDARIANS, a nickname given to certain extreme Anabaptists (q.v.), who regarded the teaching of the Holy Spirit as all that was necessary. and so despised all human learning and even the power of reading the written word.
A BECKE'I'T, GILBERT ABBOTT (1811-1856), English writer, was born in north London on the 9th of January 1811. He belonged to a family claiming descent from the father of St Thomas Becket. His elder brother, Sir William 5 Beckett (1806—1869), became chief justice of Victoria (Australia). Gilbert Abbott a Beckett was educated at Westminster school, and was called to the bar at Gray’s Inn in 1841. He edited Figaro in L0 on, and was one of the original stafi of Punch and a contributor all his life. He was an active journalist on The Times and The Morning Herald, contributed a series of light articles to The Illustrated London News, conducted in 1846 The Almanac/e of the Month and found time to produce some fifty or sixty plays, among them dramatized versions of Dickens’s shorter stories in collaboration with Mark Lemon. As poor-law commissioner he presented a valuable report to the home secretary regarding scandals in connexion with the Andover Union, and in 1849 he became a metropolitan police magistrate. He died at Boulogne on the 30th of August 1856 of typhus fever.
His eldest son GILBERT ARTHUR A Bscxnr'r (1837—1891) was born at Hammersmith on the 7th of April 1837. He went up to Christ Church, Oxford, as :1 Westminster scholar in 1855, graduating in 1860. He was entered at LinColn’s Inn, but gave his attention chiefly to the drama, producing Diamonds and Hearts at the Haymarket in 1867, which was followed by other light comedies. His pieces include numerous burlesques and pantomimes, the libretti of Sat'onarola (Hamburg, 1884) and of The Canterbury Pilgrims (Drury Lane, 1884) for the music of Dr (afterwards Sir) C. V. Stanford. The Happy Land (Court Theatre, 1873), a political burlesque of W. S. Gilbert’s Wicked World, was written in collaboration with F. L. Tomline. For the last ten years of his life he was on the regular stafl of Punch. His health was seriously affected in 1889 by the death of his only son, and he died on the 15th of October 1891.
A younger son, ARTHUR WILLIAM A BECKETT (1844—1909), a well-known journalist and man of letters, was also on the stafI of Punch from 1874 to 1902, and gave an account of his father and his own reminiscences in The /l Becketls of Punch (1903). He died in London on the 14th of January 1909.
See also M. H. Spielmann, The History of Punch (X895).
ABEDNEGO, the name given in Babylon to Azariah, one of the companions of Daniel (Dan. i. 7, &c.). It is probably a corruption, perhaps deliberate, of Abednebo, “ servant of Nebo,” though G. Hoffmann thinks that the original form was Abednergo, for Abednergal, “ servant of the god Nergal.” C. H. Toy compares Barnebo, “son of Nebo,” of which he regards Barnabas as a slightly disguised form (Jewish Encycloflaedia).
ABEKEN, HEINRICH (1809—1872), German theologian and Prussian official, was born at Berlin on the 8th of August 1809. He studied theology at Berlin and in 1834 became chaplain t0 the Prussian embassy in Rome. In 1841 he visited. England, being commissioned by King Frederick William IV. to make arrangements for the establishment of the Protestant bishopric of Jerusalem. In 1848 he received an appointment in the Prussian ministry for foreign affairs, and in 1853 was promoted to be privy councillor of legation (Geheimer Legationsrath). He was much employed by Bismarck in the writing of official despatches, and stood high in the favour of King William, whom he often