1 1054, Schism ofalso called East–West Schismevent that precipitated the final separation between the Eastern Christian churches (led by the patriarch of Constantinople, Michael Cerularius) and the Western Church (led by Pope Leo IX). The mutual excommunications by the Pope and the Patriarch that year became a watershed in church history. The excommunications were not lifted until 1965, when Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras, following their historic meeting in Jerusalem in 1964, presided over simultaneous ceremonies that revoked the excommunication decrees.The relation of the Byzantine Church to the Roman may be described as one of growing estrangement from the 5th to the 11th century. In the early church three bishops stood forth prominently, principally from the political eminence of the cities in which they ruled—the bishops of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. The transfer of the seat of empire from Rome to Constantinople and the later eclipse of Alexandria andAntioch as battlegrounds of Islam and Christianity promoted the importance of Constantinople. Concurrently, the theological calmness of the West, in contrast to the often violent theological disputes that troubled the Eastern patriarchates, strengthened the position of the Roman popes, who made increasing claims to preeminence. But this preeminence, or rather the Roman idea of what was involved in it, was never acknowledged in the East. To press it upon the Eastern patriarchs was to prepare the way for separation; to insist upon it in times of irritation was to cause a schism.The theological genius of the East was different from that of the West. The Eastern theology had its roots in Greek philosophy, whereas a great deal of Western theology was based on Roman law. This gave rise to misunderstandings and at last led to two widely separate ways of regarding and defining one important doctrine—the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father or from the Father and the Son—with the Roman churches, without consulting the East, incorporating the Son into their creed. The Eastern churches alsoresented the Roman enforcement of clerical celibacy, the limitation of the right of confirmation to the bishop, and the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist.Political jealousies and interests intensified the disputes; and at last, after many premonitory symptoms, the final break came in 1054, when Pope Leo IX struck at Michael Cerularius and his followers with an excommunication and when the Patriarch retaliated with a similar excommunication. There had been mutual excommunications before, but they had not resulted in permanent schisms. At the time there seemed possibilities of reconciliation, but the rift grew wider; in particular, the Greeks were bitterly antagonized by such events as the Latin capture of Constantinople in 1204. Western pleas for reunion (on Western terms), such as those at the Council of Lyon (1274) or the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1439), were rejected by the Byzantines. The schism has never been healed.2 12-tone musiclarge body of music, written roughly since World War I, that uses the so-called 12-tone method or technique of composition. The Austrian-born composer Arnold Schoenberg is credited with the invention of this technique, although other composers (e.g., the American composer Charles Ives and the Austrian Josef Hauer) anticipated Schoenberg's invention by writing music that in a few respects was similar technically to his 12-tone music.Between 1912 and 1922 Schoenberg came to realize that he was searching for a new method of composition that would provide a new basis for musical structure to replace the old basis of tonality, which he felt was being stretched and distorted too much to remain a unifying structural principle. Instead of using 1 or 2 tones as main points of focus for an entire composition (as key centres in tonal music), Schoenberg suggested using all 12 tones “related only to one another.” In such a system, unlike tonality, no notes would predominate as focal points, nor would any hierarchy of importance be assigned to the individual tones.The new unifying principle in composition would then arise from the particular order given to a collection of the 12 tones, an order that would be different for each composition. The basic order for any one composition came to be known as its basic set, its 12-tone row, or its 12-tone series, all of which terms are synonymous. The basic set for Schoenberg's Wind Quintet (1924) is E–G–A–B–C–C–B–D–E–F–A –F; for his String Quartet No. 4 (1936) it is D–C –A–B–F–E–E–C–A–G–F–B.The basic set is not a theme, for it has no specific shape, rhythm, or loudness. It is a backbone, a musical idea that permeates the composition in which it is used. Because of the various principles of composing and manipulating the basic set recognized by Schoenberg and others, it is not often possible nor even desirable to hear the basic set when the composition is performed. This situation has led many people to attack Schoenberg's method as unmusical and as mathematical madness. Such views seem unjustifiable, because, as Schoenberg pointed out, his method specifies only a tiny fraction of the total nature of acomposition—certainly no more than composing with tonality specifies.Schoenberg's best-known pupils were the Austrian composers Anton von Webern and Alban Berg, each of whom wrote 12-tone music. Neither used the idea of the basic set in the same manner as Schoenberg did, and their music differs greatly in many respects from each other's and from Schoenberg's. Other important composers include the Russian-born Igor Stravinsky, the American Roger Sessions, the Austrian-born Ernst Krenek, the Italian Luigi Dallapiccola, and the German Hans Werner Henze. Many, such as Stravinsky (who had earlier criticized the approach severely) and Sessions, began writing 12-tone music after composing muchnon-12-tone music.Some composers also have used some of the notions behind the basic set while simultaneously writing tonal music; among them are Schoenberg himself, the Austrian-born Ernst Toch, the American Walter Piston, and the Russian Dmitry Shostakovich. The American composer Benjamin Johnston combined principles of 12-tone music withmicrotonality (use of intervals smaller than whole tones or semitones). There are no sufficient analytic techniques used by musicians in understanding 12-tone music, which is partly why it remains not very well understood as a total musical phenomenon by composers, performers, and listeners alike. Twelve-tone music is an example of serialism (q.v.) in music.3 1763, Proclamation ofproclamation declared by the British crown at the end of the French and Indian War in North America, mainly intended to conciliate the Indians by checking the encroachment of white settlers on their lands. After Indian grievances had resulted in the start of Pontiac's War (1763–64), British authorities determined to subdue intercolonial rivalries and abuses by dealing with Indian problems as a whole. To this end, the proclamation organized new British territories in America—the provinces of Quebec, East and West Florida, and Grenada (in the Windward Islands)—and a vast British-administered Indian reservation west of the Appalachians, from south of Hudson Bay to north of the Floridas. It forbade all white settlement on Indian territory, ordered those settlers already there to withdraw, and strictly limited future settlement. For the first time in the history of European colonization in the New World, the proclamation formalized the concept of Indian land titles, prohibiting issuance of patents to any lands claimed by a tribe unless the Indian title had first been extinguished by purchase or treaty.Although not intended to alter western boundaries, the proclamation was nevertheless offensive to the colonies as undue interference in their affairs. Treaties following Pontiac's War drew a more acceptable line of settlement (see Fort Stanwix, Treaties of), and the balance of territory north of the Ohio River was added to Quebec in 1774. The proclamation, however, failed to stem the westward movement of pioneers, whose disregard of its provisions evoked decades of continued Indian warfare throughout the area.4 1801, Concordat ofagreement reached on July 15, 1801, between Napoleon Bonaparte and papal and clerical representatives in both Rome and Paris, defining the status of the Roman Catholic Church in France and ending the breach caused by the church reforms and confiscations enacted during the French Revolution. The Concordat was formally promulgated on Easter day, 1802.In the agreement the First Consul (Napoleon) was given the right to nominate bishops; the bishoprics and parishes were redistributed; and the erection of seminaries was allowed. The Pope (Pius VII) condoned the actions of those who had acquired church property, and by way of compensation the government engaged to give the bishops and curés suitable salaries. The government added to it unilateral provisions of Gallican tendencies, which were known as the Organic Articles. After having been the law of the church of France for a century, it was denounced by the French government in 1905, when by the “Separation Law” church and state were sundered.5 1812, War ofIntroductionBattle between the frigates HMS Shannon and USS Chesapeake off Boston during the War …Theatre map for the War of 1812. Click on one hyperlink for a detailed map of the major battles in …(June 18, 1812–Feb. 17, 1815), conflict fought between the United States and Great Britain over British violations of U.S. maritime rights. It ended with the exchange of ratifications of the Treaty of Ghent.Major causes of the warThe tensions that caused the War of 1812 arose from the French revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars (1792–1815). During this nearly constant conflict between France and Britain, American interests were injured by each of the two countries' endeavours to block the United States from trading with the other.American shipping initially prospered from trade with the French and Spanish empires, although the British countered the U.S. claim that “free ships make free goods” with the belated enforcement of the so-called Rule of 1756 (trade not permitted in peacetime would not be allowed in wartime). The Royal Navy did enforce the act from 1793 to 1794, especially in the Caribbean Sea, before the signing of the Jay Treaty(Nov. 19, 1794). Under the primary terms of the treaty, American maritime commerce was given trading privileges in England and the British East Indies, Britain agreed to evacuate forts still held in the Northwest Territory by June 1, 1796, and the Mississippi River was declared freely open to both countries. Although the treaty was ratified by both countries, it was highly unpopular in the United States and was one of the rallying points used by the pro-French Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, in wresting power from the pro-British Federalists, led by George Washington and John Adams.After Jefferson became president in 1801, relations with Britain slowly deteriorated, and systematic enforcement of the Rule of 1756 resumed after 1805. Compounding this troubling development, the decisive British naval victory at the Battle of Trafalgar (Oct. 21, 1805) and efforts by the British to blockade French ports prompted the French emperor, Napoleon, to cut off Britain from European and American trade. The Berlin Decree (Nov. 21, 1806) established Napoleon's Continental System, which impinged on U.S. neutral rights by designating ships that visited British ports as enemy vessels. The British responded with Orders in Council(Nov. 11, 1807) that required neutral ships to obtain licenses at English ports before trading with France or French colonies. In turn, France announced the Milan Decree (Dec. 17, 1807), which strengthened the Berlin Decreeby authorizing the capture of any neutral vessel that had submitted to search by the British. Consequently, American ships that obeyed Britain faced capture by the French in European ports, and if they complied with Napoleon's Continental System, they could fall prey to the Royal Navy.The Royal Navy's use of impressment to keep its ships fully crewed also provoked Americans. The British accosted American merchant ships to seize alleged Royal Navy deserters, carrying off thousands of U.S. citizens into the British navy. In 1807 the frigate H.M.S. Leopard fired on the U.S. Navy frigate Chesapeake and seized four sailors, three of them U.S. citizens. London eventually apologized for this incident, but it came close to causing war at the time. Jefferson, however, chose to exert economic pressure against Britain and France by pushing Congress in December 1807 to pass the Embargo Act, which forbade all export shipping from U.S. ports and most imports from Britain.The Embargo Act hurt Americans more than the British or French, however, causing many Americans to defy it. Just before Jefferson left office in 1809, Congress replaced the Embargo Act with the Non-Intercourse Act, which exclusively forbade trade with Great Britain and France. This measure also proved ineffective, and it was replaced by Macon's Bill No.2 (May 1, 1810) that resumed trade with all nations but stipulated that if either Britain or France dropped commercial restrictions, the United States would revive nonintercourse against the other. In August, Napoleon insinuated that he would exempt American shipping from the Berlin and Milan decrees. Although the British demonstrated that French restrictions continued, U.S. Pres. James Madison reinstated nonintercourse against Britain in November 1810, thereby moving one step closer to war.Britain's refusal to yield on neutral rights derived from more than the emergency of the European war. British manufacturing and shipping interests demanded that the Royal Navy promote and sustain British trade against Yankee competitors. The policy born of that attitude convinced many Americans that they were being consigned to a de facto colonial status. Britons, on the other hand, denounced American actions that effectively made the United States a participant in Napoleon's Continental System.Events on the U.S. northwestern frontier fostered additional friction. Indian fears over American encroachment coincidentally became conspicuous as Anglo-American tensions grew. Shawnee brothers Tecumseh and Tenskwatawa (The Prophet) attracted followers arising from this discontent and attempted to form an Indian confederation to counteract American expansion. Although Maj. Gen. Isaac Brock, the British commander of Upper Canada (modern Ontario), had orders to avoid worsening American frontier problems, American settlers blamed British intrigue forheightened tensions with Indians in the Northwest Territory. As war loomed, Brock sought to augment his meagre regular and Canadian militia forces with Indian allies, which was enough to confirm the worst fears of American settlers. Brock's efforts were aided in the fall of 1811, when Indiana territorial governor William Henry Harrison fought the Battle of Tippecanoe and destroyed the Indian settlement at Prophet's Town (near modern Battle Ground, Ind.). Harrison's foray convinced most Indians in the Northwest Territory that their only hope of stemming further encroachments by American settlers lay with the British. American settlers, in turn, believed that Britain's removal from Canada would end their Indian problems. Meanwhile, Canadians suspected that American expansionists were using Indian unrest as an excuse for a war of conquest.Under increasing pressure, Madison summoned the U.S. Congress into session in November 1811. Pro-war western and southern Republicans (War Hawks) assumed a vocal role, especially after Kentucky War Hawk Henry Clay was elected speaker of the House of Representatives. Madison sent a war message to the U.S. Congress on June 1, 1812, and signed the declaration of war on June 18, 1812. The vote seriously divided the House (79–49) and was gravely close in the Senate (19–13). Because seafaring New Englanders opposed the war, while westerners and southerners supported it, Federalists accused war advocates of expansionism under the ruse of protecting American maritime rights. Expansionism, however, was not as much a motive as was the desire to defend American honour. The United States attacked Canada because it was British, but no widespread aspiration existed to incorporate the region. The prospect of taking East and West Florida from Spain encouraged southern support for the war, but southerners, like westerners, were sensitive about the United States's reputation in the world. Furthermore, British commercial restrictions hurt American farmers by barring their produce from Europe. Regions seemingly removed from maritime concerns held a material interest in protecting neutral shipping. “Free trade and sailors' rights” was not an empty phrase for those Americans.The onset of war both surprised and chagrined the British government, especially because it was preoccupied with the fight against France. In addition, political changes in Britain had already moved the government to assume a conciliatory posture toward the United States. Prime Minister Spencer Perceval's assassination on May 11, 1812, brought to power a more moderate Tory government under Lord Liverpool. British West Indies planters had been complaining for years about the interdiction of U.S. trade, and their growing influence, along with a deepening recession in Great Britain, convinced the Liverpool ministry that the Orders in Councilwere averse to British interests. On June 16, two days before the United States declared war, the Orders were suspended.Some have viewed the timing of this concession as a lost opportunity for peace because slow transatlantic communication meant a month's delay in delivering the news to Washington. Yet, because Britain's impressment policy remained in place and frontier Indian wars continued, in all likelihood the repeal of the Orders alone would not have prevented war.WarNeither the British in Canada nor the United States were prepared for war. Americans were inordinately optimistic in 1812. William Eustis, the U.S. secretary of war, stated, “We can take the Canadas without soldiers, we have only to send officers into the province and the people…will rally round our standard.” Henry Clay said that “the militia of Kentucky are alone competent to place Montreal and Upper Canada at your feet.” And Thomas Jefferson famously wroteThe acquisition of Canada this year, as far as the neighborhood of Quebec, will be a mere matter of marching, and will give us experience for the attack of Halifax the next, and the final expulsion of England from the American continent.The death of British commander Isaac Brock at the Battle of Queenston Heights (Oct. 13, 1812), …The British government, preoccupied with the European conflict, saw American hostilities as a bothersome distraction, resulting in a paucity of resources in men, supplies, and naval presence until late in the event. As the British in Canada conducted operations under the shadow of scarcity, their only consolation was an American military malaise. Michigan territorial governor William Hull led U.S. forces into Canada from Detroit, but Isaac Brock and Tecumseh's warriors chased Hull back across the border and frightened him into surrendering Detroit on Aug. 16, 1812, without firing a shot—behaviour that Americans and even Brock's officers found disgraceful. The Northwest subsequently fell prey to Indian raids and British incursions led by Maj. Gen. Henry Procter. Hull's replacement, William Henry Harrison, could barely defend a few scattered outposts. On the northeastern border, U.S. Brig. Gen. Henry Dearborn could not attack Montreal because ofuncooperative New England militias. U.S. forces under Stephen van Rensselaer crossed the Niagara River to attack Queenston on Oct. 13, 1812, but ultimately were defeated by a stiff British defense organized by Brock, who was killed during the fight. U.S. Gen. Alexander Smyth's subsequent invasion attempts on the Niagara were abortive fiascoes.In 1813, Madison replaced Dearborn with Maj. Gens. James Wilkinson and Wade Hampton, an awkward arrangement made worse by a complicated invasion plan against Montreal. The generals refused to coordinate their efforts, and neither came close to Montreal. To the west, however, American Oliver Hazard Perry's Lake Erie squadron won a great victory off Put-in-Bay on Sept. 10, 1813, against Capt. Robert Barclay. The battle opened the way for Harrison to retake Detroit and defeat Procter's British and Indian forces at the Battle of the Thames (Oct. 5). Tecumseh was killed during the battle, shattering his confederation and the Anglo-Indian alliance. Indian anger continued elsewhere, however, especially in the southeast where the Creek War erupted in 1813 between Creek Indian nativists (known as Red Sticks) and U.S. forces. The war also took an ugly turn late in the year, when U.S. forces evacuating the Niagara Peninsula razed the Canadian village of Newark, prompting the British commander, Gordon Drummond, to retaliate along the New York frontier, leaving communities such as Buffalo in smoldering ruins.Early in the war, the small U.S. navy boosted sagging American morale as officers such as Isaac Hull, Stephen Decatur, and William Bainbridge commanded heavy frigates in impressive single-ship actions. The British Admiralty responded by instructing captains to avoid individual contests with Americans, and within a year the Royal Navy had blockaded important American ports, bottling up U.S. frigates. British Adm. George Cockburn also conducted raids on the shores of Chesapeake Bay. In 1814, Britain extended its blockade from New England to Georgia, and forces under John Sherbrooke occupied parts of Maine.By 1814, capable American officers, such as Jacob Brown, Winfield Scott, and Andrew Jackson, had replaced ineffective veterans from the American Revolution. On March 27, 1814, Jackson defeated the Red Stick Creeks at the Battle of Horseshoe Bend in Alabama, ending the Creek War. That spring, after Brown crossed the Niagara River and took Fort Erie, Brig. Gen. Phineas Riall advanced to challenge the American invasion, but American regulars commanded by Scott repulsed him at the Battle of Chippewa(July 5, 1814). In turn, Brown retreated when Commodore Isaac Chauncey's Lake Ontario squadron failed to rendezvous with the army, and during this retrograde the war's costliest engagement occurred at the Battle of Lundy's Lane (July 25). Riall, reinforced by Drummond, fought the Americans to a bloody stalemate in which each side suffered more than 800 casualties before Brown's army withdrew to Fort Erie.∙Battle of Plattsburgh Bay, Sept. 11, 1814, in which a British squadron under George Downie was …∙G. Thompson's wood engraving of ―The Burning of the City of Washington‖ during the War …In 1814, Napoleon's defeat allowed sizable British forces to come to America. That summer, veterans under Canadian governor-general George Prevost marched south along the shores of Lake Champlain into New York, but they returned to Canada after Thomas Macdonough defeated a British squadron under Capt. George Downie at the Battle of Plattsburgh Bay (see Plattsburgh), N.Y. (Sept. 11, 1814). British raids in Chesapeake Bay directed by Adm. Alexander Cochrane were more successful. British Gen. Robert Ross captured Washington (August 24) and burned government buildings, including the United States Capitol and the Executive Mansion (now known as the White House). The British justified this action as retaliation for the American destruction of York (modern Toronto), the capital of Upper Canada, the previous year. The British assault on Baltimore (September 12–14) foundered when Americans fended off an attack at Northpoint and withstood the naval bombardment of Fort McHenry, an action that inspired Francis Scott Key's "Star-Spangled Banner." Ross was killed at Baltimore, and the British left Chesapeake Bay to plan an offensive against New Orleans.Meanwhile, New England Federalists, angry about the war's effect on commerce, gathered at Hartford, Conn., to propose ways of redressing their grievances. Convening from Dec. 15, 1814 to Jan. 5, 1815, the Hartford Convention adopted moderate resolutions, but its mere existence prompted other parts of the country to question New England's patriotism and Federalist loyalty, spelling eventual doom to the party.Final stages of the war and the aftermathImmediately after the war started, the tsar of Russia offered to mediate. London refused, but early British efforts for an armistice revealed a willingness to negotiate so that Britain could turn its full attention to Napoleon. Talks began at Ghent (in modern Belgium) in August 1814, but, with France defeated, the British stalled while waiting for news of a decisive victory in America. Most Britons were angry that the United States had become an unwitting ally of Napoleon, but even that sentiment was half-hearted among a people who had been at war in Europe for more than 20 years. Consequently, after learning of Plattsburgh and Baltimore and upon the advice of the Duke of Wellington, commander of the British army at the Battle of Waterloo, the British government moved to make peace. Americans abandoned demands about ending impressment (the end of the European war meant its cessation anyway), and the British dropped attempts to change the Canadian boundary and establish an Indian barrier state in the Northwest. The commissioners signed a treaty on Dec. 24, 1814. Based on the status quo antebellum (the situation before the war), the Treaty of Ghent did not resolve the issues that had caused the war, but at that point Britain was too weary to win it, and the U.S. government deemed not losing it a tolerable substitute for victory. Nevertheless, many Americans became convinced that they had won the contest.Unaware of the treaty, British forces under Edward Pakenham assaulted New Orleans on Jan. 8, 1815, and were soundly defeated by Andrew Jackson's ragtag army, an event that contributed to the notion of a U.S. triumph. The unanimous ratification by the U.S. Senate of the Treaty of Ghent and the celebrations that followed cloaked the fact that the United States had achieved none of its objectives.Contention in the United States had hobbled the war effort, and domestic disaffection had menaced the Union, but after the war a surge of patriotism inspired Americans to pursue national goals. Contrary to American expectations, Canada remained British and eventually developed its own national identity, partly from pride over repulsing U.S. invasions. Meanwhile, Britain's influence among the northwestern Indians was forever ended, and American expansion in that region proceeded unchecked. In the South, the Creek War opened a large part of that region for settlement and led to the events that persuaded Spain to cede Florida to the United States in 1821.The most enduring international consequence of the war was in the arbitration clauses of Ghent, perhaps the treaty's most important feature. Its arrangements to settle outstanding disagreements established methodsthat could adapt to changing U.S. administrations, British ministries, and world events. There lay the seeds of an Anglo-American comity that would weather future disagreements to sustain the longest unfortified border in the world.David S. HeidlerJeanne T. HeidlerAdditional ReadingDavid S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler, The War of 1812 (2002), contains essays that examine the causes of the war, the diplomatic ramifications, and the military conduct of the conflict. David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler(eds.), Encyclopedia of the War of 1812(1997, reissued 2004), is the only all-inclusive reference work on the war that examines its causes as well as the social, military, political, and diplomatic facets of the war.Donald R. Hickey, The War of 1812: A Forgotten Conflict (1989, reissued 1995), is a good one-volume narrative of the war that emphasizes the politics of the clash. J.C.A. Stagg, Mr. Madison's War: Politics, Diplomacy, and Warfare in the Early American Republic, 1783–1830(1983), is an exemplary examination of the civil-military relations in the United States during the war.Richard V. Barbuto, Niagara 1814: America Invades Canada (2000), offers an excellent analysis of this pivotal theatre of the war. J. Mackay Hitsman, The Incredible War of 1812: A Military History, rev. ed. updated by Donald E. Graves (1999), examines the war on the border from the Canadian viewpoint.Pierre Berton, Flames Across the Border: The Canadian-American Tragedy, 1813–1814(1981, reissued 2001), views the beginning of Canadian national identity as originating in the war on the border.Robert Gardner (ed.), The Naval War of 1812 (1998), provides some of the latest scholarship on the naval war. C. Edward Skeen, Citizen Soldiers in the War of 1812 (1999), examines the role of militia in the war.Sandy Antal, A Wampum Denied: Procter's War of 1812(1997), is an interesting revisionist examination of Britain's war in the Northwest that sees British efforts there as largely successful.。
