In the contest between Gregory and the emperor, it seemed for the moment

as if the secular power had won the victory; but, in fact, throughout

the twelfth century; the claims which Gregory had put forward were

becoming practically effective partly from the great influence exercised

through the Crusades. These Papal pretensions reached their climax in

the great Pope Innocent III., who asserted with practical success the

right to pronounce absolutely on all disputes between princes or between

princes and their subjects, and to depose those who rejected his

authority. Throughout the thirteenth century Rome was once more mistress

of the world.

The Church derived great influence from the institution of mendicant

orders, especially those of St. Dominic and St. Francis which recovered

much of the esteem forfeited by the old Monastic orders. Another

instrument of Papal influence was the power of granting dispensations

both with regard to marriages and as to the keeping of oaths. If the

clergy were free for the most part from civil taxation, they were

nevertheless severely mulcted by the Papacy. The ecclesiastical

jurisdiction encroached upon the secular tribunals; the classes of

persons with respect to whom it claimed exclusive authority were

persistently extended, in spite of the opposition of such Princes as

Henry II. and Edward I.

At last, however, the Papal aggressor met his match in Philip the Fair.

When Boniface VIII. died, his successors first submitted to the French

monarchy and then became its nominees; while they resided at Avignon,

virtually under French control. The restoration of the pontificate to

Rome in 1375 was shortly followed by the Great Schism. For some years

there were two rival Popes, each of whom was recognised by one or the

other half of Western Christendom. This was terminated by the Council of

Constance, which incidentally affirmed the supremacy of general councils

over the Pope. The following council at Basle was distinctly anti-papal;

but the Papacy had the better of the contest.

_IV.--England_

The Anglo-Saxon polity limited the succession of the Crown to a

particular house but allowed a latitude of choice within that house. The

community was divided into Thames or gentry, Ceorls or freemen, and

serfs. The ceorls tended to sink to the position known later as

villeinage. The composition of the king's great council called the

Witenagemot is doubtful. The country was divided into shires, the shire

into districts called hundreds, and the hundreds into tithings. There

appears to be no adequate authority for the idea that trial by jury was

practised; the prevailing characteristic of justice was the system of

penalty by fine, and the responsibility of the tithing for the misdeeds

of any of its members. There is no direct evidence as to the extent to

which feudal tenures were beginning to be established before the Norman

conquest.

The Norman conquest involved a vast confiscation of property and the

exclusion of the native English from political privileges. The feudal

system of land tenure was established; but its political aspect here and

in France was quite different. There were no barons with territories

comparable to those of the great French feudataries. That the government

was extremely tyrannical is certain. The Crown derived its revenues from

feudal dues, customs duties, tallages--that is, special charges on

particular towns,--and the war tax called the Danegelt; all except the

first being arbitrary taxes. The violence of King John led to the demand

of the barons for the Great Charter, the keystone of English liberty,

securing the persons and property of all freemen from arbitrary

imprisonment or spoliation. Thenceforth no right of general taxation is

claimed. The barons held themselves warranted in refusing supplies.

The King's Court was gradually separated into three branches, King's

Bench, Exchequer, and Common Pleas. The advance in the study of law had

the definite effect of establishing a fixed rule of succession to the

Crown. One point must still be noticed which distinguishes England from

other European countries; that the law recognises no distinction of

class among freemen who stand between the peers and villeins.

The reign of Edward I. forms an epoch. The Confirmation of the Charters

put an end to all arbitrary taxation; and the type of the English

Parliament was fixed. In the Great Councils the prelates and greater

barons had assembled, and the lesser barons were also summoned; the term

baron being equivalent to tenant in chief. A system of representation is

definitely formulated in Montfort's Parliament of 1265. Whether the

knights were elected by the freemen of the shire or only by the tenants

in chief, is not clear. Many towns were self governing--independent,

that is, of local magnates--under charters from the Crown. Montfort's

Parliament is the first to which towns sent representatives. Edward

established the practice in his Model Parliament; probably in order to

ensure that his demands for money from the towns might in appearance at

least receive their formal assent.

Parliament was not definitely divided into two houses until the reign of

Edward III. In this reign the Commons succeeded in establishing the

illegality of raising money without consent; the necessity that the two

houses should concur for any alterations in the law; and the right of

the Commons to enquire into public abuses and to impeach public

counsellors. Under the second heading is introduced a distinction

between statutes and ordinances; the latter being of a temporary

character, and requiring to be confirmed by Parliament before they

acquire permanent authority. In the next reign the Commons assert the

right of examining the public expenditure. Moreover the Parliaments more

openly and boldly expressed resentment at the acts of the king's

ministers and claimed rights of control. For a time, however, the king

secured supremacy by a coup d'état; which in turn brought about his

deposition, and the accession of Henry IV., despite the absurd weakness

of his title to the inheritance of the Crown.

The rights thus acquired developed until the War of the Roses. Notably

redress of grievances became the condition of supply; and the

inclination of the Crown to claim a dispensing power is resolutely

combated. It is also to be remarked that the king's foreign policy of

war or peace is freely submitted to the approval of Parliament.

This continues during the minority of Henry VI.; but the revival of

dissatisfaction with the government leads to a renewed activity in the

practice of impeachments; and Parliament begins to display a marked

sensitiveness on the question of its privileges. The Commons further

definitely express their exclusive right of originating money bills.

At this time it is clear that at least all freeholders were entitled to

vote in the election of the knights of the shire. The selection of the

towns which sent up members, and the franchise under which their members

were elected, seems to have been to a considerable extent arbitrary. Nor

can we be perfectly certain of the principles on which writs were issued

for attendance in the upper house. We find that for some time the lower

clergy as well as the higher were summoned to attend Parliament; but

presently, sitting in a separate chamber, they ceased to take part in

Parliamentary business.

We have seen the King's Court divided into three courts of justice. The

court itself, however, as the king's Council, continued to exercise a

juridical as well as a deliberative and administrative function. In

spite of the charter, it possessed an effective if illegal power of

arbitrary imprisonment.

So far the essential character of our constitution appears to be a

monarchy greatly limited by law but swerving continually into irregular

courses which there was no constraint adequate to correct. There is

absolutely no warrant for the theory that the king was merely a

hereditary executive magistrate, the first officer of the State. The

special advantage enjoyed by England lay in the absence of an

aristocracy with interests antagonistic to those of the people. It would

be truer to say that the liberties of England were bought by money than

by the blood of our forefathers.

The process by which the villein became a hired labourer is obscure and

an attempt was made to check it by the Statute of Labourers at the time

of the Black Death. This was followed by the peasant's revolt of 1382,

which corresponded to the far worse horrors of the French Jacquerie.

Sharply though this was suppressed, the real object of the rising seemed

to have been accomplished. Of the period of the Wars of the Roses it is

here sufficient to say that it established the principle embodied in a

statute of Henry VII. that obedience to the _de facto_ government is not

to be punished on the ground that government is not also _de jure_.

_V.--Europe_

In spite of the Teutonic incursion, Latin remained the basis of language

as it survived in Italy, France, and Spain. But the pursuit of letters

was practically confined to the clergy and was by them employed almost

exclusively in the interests of clerical authority. To this end a

multitude of superstitions were encouraged; superstitions which were the

cause of not a few strange and irrational outbursts of fanaticism. The

monasteries served indeed a useful purpose as sanctuaries in days of

general lawlessness and rapine; but the huge weight of evidence is

conclusive as to the general corruption of morals among the clergy as

among the laity. The common diversion of the upper classes, lay and

clerical, when not engaged in actual war, was hunting. An extended

commerce was impossible when robbery was a normal occupation of the

great.

Gradually, however, a more orderly society emerged. Maritime commerce

developed in two separate areas, the northern and western, and the

Mediterranean. The first great commerce in the north arises from the

manufacture in Flanders of the wool exported from England. And in the

fourteenth century England herself began to compete in the woollen

manufacture. The German free manufacturing towns established the Great

Hanseatic League; but maritime commerce between the Northern and

Southern areas was practically non-existent till the fifteenth century,

by which time English ships were carrying on a fairly extensive traffic

in the Mediterranean. In that area the great seaports of Italy, and in a

less degree, of Catalonia and the French Mediterranean seaboard,

developed a large commerce. Naturally, however, the law which it was

sufficiently difficult to enforce by land was even more easily defied on

the sea, and piracy was extremely prevalent.

Governments as well as private persons were under a frequent necessity

of borrowing, and for a long time the great money lenders were the Jews.

They, however, were later to a great extent displaced by the merchants

of Lombardy, and the fifteenth century witnesses the rise of the great

bankers, Italian and German.

The structure and furniture of all buildings for private purposes made

exceedingly little provision for comfort, offering an extreme contrast

to the dignity of the public buildings and the sublimity of

ecclesiastical architecture.

During the last three hundred years of our period it is clear that there

was a great diminution of the status of servitude and a great increase

in the privileges extended to corporate towns. Private warfare was

checked and lawless robbery to a considerable extent restrained. It is

tolerably clear that the rise of heretical sects were both the cause and

the result of moral dissatisfaction, tending to the adoption of higher

moral standards. Some of these sects were cruelly crushed by merciless

persecution, as in the case of the Albigenses. The doctrines of

Wickliffe, however, were never stamped out in England; and the form

which they took in Bohemia among the followers of the martyred John Huss

had little about them that was beneficial.

The great moral school of the Middle Ages was the institution of

chivalry, which existed to animate and cherish the principle of honour.

To this a strong religious flavor was superadded, perhaps by the

Crusades. To valour and devotion was added the law of service to

womanhood, and chivalry may fairly claim to have developed generally the

three virtues essential to it, of loyalty, courtesy, and liberality.

Resting, however, as it did on the personal prowess and skill of the

individual in single combat, the whole system of chivalry was destroyed

by the introduction on an extensive scale of the use of firearms.

We turn lastly to the intellectual improvement which may be referred to

four points: the study of civil laws the institution of universities;

the application of modern languages to literature, and especially to

poetry; and the revival of ancient learning. Education may almost be

said to have begun with the establishment of the great schools by

Charlemagne out of which sprang the European universities. For a long

time of course all studies were dominated by that of theology, and the

scholastic philosophy which pertained to it. Barren as these pursuits

were, they kept alive an intellectual activity which ultimately found

fresh channels. The Romance languages developed a new literature first

on the tongues of the troubadours and then in Italy--the Italy which

gave birth to Dante and Petrarch. It was about the fourteenth century

that a new enthusiasm was born for the study of classical authors,

though Greek was still unknown. And the final and decisive impulse was

given when the invention of printing made the great multiplication of

books possible.

* * * * *

STANLEY LANE-POOLE

Egypt in the Middle Ages

Stanley Lane-Poole, born on December 18, 1845, studied Arabic

under his great-uncle, Lane, the Orientalist, and, before

going up to Oxford for his degree, began his "Catalogue of

Oriental Coins in the British Museum," which appeared in

fourteen volumes between 1875 and 1892, and founded his

reputation as the first living authority on Arabic

numismatics. In 1883, 1896, and 1897 he was at Cairo

officially employed by the British Government upon the

Mohammedan antiquities, and published his treatise on "The Art

of the Saracens in Egypt" in 1886, in which year he visited

Stockholm, Helsingfors, St. Petersburg, Moscow, and

Constantinople to examine their Oriental collections. He has

written histories of the "Moors in Spain," "Turkey," "The

Barbary Corsairs," and "Mediæval India," which have run to

many editions; and biographies of Saladin, Babar, Aurangzib;

of Lord Stratford de Redcliffe, and Sir Harry Parkes. He has

also published a miniature Koran in the "Golden Treasury"

series, and written "Studies in a Mosque," besides editing

three volumes of Lane's "Arabic Lexicon." For five years he

held the post of Professor of Arabic at Trinity College,

Dublin, of which he is Litt.D. Mohammedan Egypt, his special

subject, he has treated in several books on Cairo, the latest

being "The Story of Cairo." But his most complete work on this

subject is "The History of Egypt in the Middle Ages," here

epitomised by the author.

_I.--A Province of the Caliphate_

Ever since the Arab conquest in 641 Egypt has been ruled by Mohammedans,

and for more than half the time by men of Turkish race. Though now and

again a strong man has gathered all the reins of control into his own

hands and been for a time a personal monarch, as a rule the government

has been, till recent years, a military bureaucracy.

The people, of course, had no voice in the government. The Egyptians

have never been a self-governing race, and such a dream as

constitutional democracy was never heard of until a few years ago. By

the Arab conquest in the seventh century the people merely changed

masters. They were probably not indisposed to welcome the Moslems as

their deliverers from the tyranny of the Orthodox Church of the East

Roman or Byzantine Empire, invincibly intolerant of the native

monophysite heresy; and when the conquest was complete they found

themselves, on the whole, better off than before. They paid their taxes

to officials with Arabic instead of Greek titles, but the taxes were

lighter and the amount was strictly laid down by law.

The land-tax of about a pound per acre was not excessive on so fertile a

soil, and the poll-tax on nonconformity, of the same amount, was a

moderate price to pay for entire liberty of conscience and freedom in

public worship guaranteed by solemn treaty. The other taxes were

comparatively insignificant, and the total revenue in the eighth century

was about £7,000,000. The surplus went to the caliph, the head of the

vast Mohammedan empire, which then stretched from Seville to Samarkand,

whose capital was first Damascus and afterwards Baghdad.

For over 200 years (till 868) Egypt was a mere province of this huge

caliphate, and was governed, like other provinces, with a sole view to

revenue. "Milk till the udder be dry and let blood to the last drop" was

a caliph's instructions to a governor of Egypt. As these governors were

constantly changed--there were sixty-seven in 118 years under the

Abbasid caliphs of Baghdad--and as a governor's main object was to "make

hay while the sun shines," the process of milking the Egyptian cow was

often accelerated by illegal extortion, and the governor's harvest was

reaped before it was due. Illegality was, however, checked to some

extent by the generally wise and just influence of the chief justice, or

kadi, whose probity often formed the best feature of the Arab government

in Egypt.

Nor did the caliphs extort taxes without giving something in return. The

development of irrigation works was always a main consideration with the

early Mohammedan rules, from Spain to India, and in Egypt, where

irrigation is the country's very life, it was specially cared for, with

a corresponding increase in the yield. Moreover, the governors usually

held to the agreement that the Christians should have liberty of

conscience, and protected them from the Moslem soldiery. As time went

on, this toleration abated, partly because the Moslems had gradually

become the predominant population. At the beginning the caliphs had

taken anxious precautions against the colonising of Egypt; they held it

by an army, but they were insistent that the army should not take root,

but be always free to join the caliph's standard. But it was inevitable

that the Arabs should settle in so fertile and pleasant a land. Each

governor brought a small army as his escort, and these Arab troops

naturally intermarried with Egyptian women, who were constitutionally

inclined to such alliances. A few Arab tribes also settled in Egypt.

This gradual and undesigned Arabising of the country would lead to

oppression of the Christians, to the "squeezing" of wealthy natives, and

occasionally to the institution of humiliating distinctions of dress and

other vexations, and even to the spoiling of Coptic churches. Then

sometimes the Copts, as the Egyptian Christians are called, would rebel.

Their last and greatest rebellion, which occurred in the Delta in

830-832, was ruthlessly trampled out by Turkish troops under Mamun, the

only Abbasid caliph who made a visit to Egypt. Many Copts now

apostatised, and from this time dates the predominance of the Moslem

population and the settling of Arabs in the villages and on the land,

instead of as heretofore only in the two or three large towns.

The coming of the Turkish troops with the caliph Mamun was an ominous

event for the country. Up to 846 all the successive governors had been

Arabs, and many of them were related to the caliphs themselves. With

some unfortunate exceptions, they seem to have been men of simple

habits--the Arabs were never luxurious--and usually of strict Mohammedan

principles. They made money, honestly if possible, during their brief

tenure; but they did not harass the people much by their personal

interference, and left the local officials to manage matters in their

own way, as had always been the custom. They lived at the new capital,

Fustat, which grew up on the site of the conqueror's camp, and very near

the modern Cairo; for Alexandria, the symbol of Roman domination, was

dismantled in 645 after the Emperor Manuel's attempt at reconquest. If

they did not do much active good, they did little harm, and Egypt

pursued her immemorial ways.

The last Arab governor, Anbasa, was a man of fine character, and his

term of office was distinguished by the building of the fort of

Damietta, as a protection against Roman raids, and by a defeat of the

tributary Sudanis near Dongola.

_II.--Turkish Governors_

The Arabs have neither the ferocity nor the luxuriousness, nor, it

should be added, the courage and the genius for administration of the

Turkish race. In the arrival of Turkish troops in 830 we see a symptom

of what was going on all over the eastern caliphate. Turks were taking

the place of Arabs in the army and the provincial governments, just as

the Persians were filling up the civil appointments. The caliph's

Turkish bodyguard was the beginning of the dismemberment of the

caliphate. It became the habit of the caliphs to grant the government of

Egypt, as a sort of fief, to a leading Turkish officer, who usually

appointed a deputy to do his work and to pay him the surplus revenue.

Such a deputy was Ahmad-ibn-Tulun (868-884), the first of the many

Turkish despots of Egypt. Ibn-Tulun was the first ruler to raise Egypt

from a mere tax-paying appendage of the caliphate to a kingdom,

independent save for the recognition of the caliph on the coinage, and

he was the first to found a Moslem dynasty there. A man of fair

Mohammedan education, iron will, and ubiquitous personal attention to

affairs, he added Syria to his dominions, defeated the East Romans with

vast slaughter near Tarsus (883), kept an army of 30,000 Turkish slaves

and a fleet of a hundred fighting ships.

He beautified his capital by building a sumptuous palace and his

well-known mosque, which still stands in his new royal suburb of Katai;

he encouraged the small farmers and reduced the taxation, yet he left

five millions in the treasury when he died in 884. His son maintained

his power, and more than his luxury and artistic extravagance; but there

were no elements of stability in the dynasty, which depended solely upon

the character of the ruler. The next generation saw Egypt once more

(905) a mere province of the caliphate, but with this difference, that

its governors were now Turks, generally under the control of their own

soldiery, and much less dependent upon the ever-weakening power of the

Caliph of Baghdad. One of them, the Ikhshid, in 935 emulated Ibn-Tulun

and united part of Syria to Egypt; but the sons he left were almost

children, and the power fell into the hands of the regent Kafur, a black

eunuch from the Sudan, bought for £25, who combined a luxurious and

cultivated court with some military successes and real administrative

capacity.

_III.--The Fatimid Caliphs_

The Mohammedan world is roughly divided into Sunnis and Shia. The Shia

are the idealists, the mystics of Islam; the Sunnis are the formalists,

the schoolmen. The Shia trace an apostolic succession from Ali, the

husband of the prophet Mohammed's daughter Fatima, hold doctrines of

immanence and illumination, adopt an allegorical interpretation of

scripture, and believe in the coming of a Mahdi or Messiah. The Sunnis

adhere to the elective historical caliphate descended from Mohammed's

uncle, maintain the eternal uncreated sufficiency of the Koran,

literally interpreted, and believe in no Messiah save Mohammed.

The World's Greatest Books — Volume 11 — Ancient and Mediæval History · 第 20 / 25 段