THE CRIMEAN WAR
Russia and Turkey――A protectorate over the Greek Christians
――The question of the “Holy Places”――The Greek Church――_Sultan_
Mahmud II. and the _Tsar_ Nicholas I.――Jurisdiction in Turkey
――_Prince_ Menschikoff――The Alliance between France, Great
Britain and Turkey――Sardinia――Alexander II.――The fall of
Sebastopol――The conclusion of peace in Paris――The question
of reforms――The Jewish point of view――The Crimean War
and Palestine――Dr. Benisch in the _Jewish Chronicle_――The
Christian Zionist propaganda――Rev. W. H. Johnstone――Mr. Robert
Young.
IN 1853 a great struggle broke out between Russia and Turkey,
the immediate cause of which was the desire of Russia to force a
protectorate upon the Greek Christians in the Turkish dominions. This
was accompanied by a dispute between Russia and other European powers,
especially France, which had arisen over the guardianship of the
“Holy Places.” The fate of Palestine was involved in the issue of
this struggle.
The pretension of the Greek Church to exercise the right of possession
of the “Holy Places” dates back to the early days of Christianity.
The Greek Church has always posed as the genuine representative of
the Eastern Church, professing to have inherited its claim to the
allegiance of the orthodox when the cleavage came, in the second
century, concerning the proper season for the celebration of Easter,
and divided its community into two distinct sections.
The alleged and proved purpose of the Church was to obtain complete
and undisturbed possession of the “Holy Places,” where the Greek
Church deems it of vital importance that certain religious ceremonies
shall be observed, to which pilgrimages are to be made by its devout
members. Some of these members furnished the Russian Government with
reasons for its claims, presumably based on facts. At that period the
greater part of the Christian Communities in the whole of Syria and
Palestine adhered to the Greek Orthodox faith. In the whole Ottoman
Empire their number was very considerable; the estimate in 1852‒53
reached as high a total as 11,000,000 members of the Greek Church.
In Greece it was the established religion, while throughout the
Greek islands its members outnumbered those of any other Christian
denomination. North of the Danube, Wallachia and Moldavia were under
its sway and were considered to be under the protection of Russia.
The Greek monasteries of the Holy Land were not only under the
protection and control of Russia, but were chiefly supported by loans
from that country. Under this influence these communities continued
to make the greatest progress possible, and put forth every effort to
advance themselves step by step, leaving no stone unturned in their
endeavour to raise themselves above the other Churches.
Rumours gained currency that a strong Russian propaganda was on foot.
It was even said that the late _Sultan_ Mahmud II. gave an assurance
to the effect, that at the death of Mehemet Ali, the Holy Land should
be given up to Russian dominion on certain stipulated conditions.
Imagination had, of course, free scope in inventing myths of this kind.
But at any rate there was a general impression abroad that Russia was
anxious to conquer and annex the Holy Land.
The unhappy empire for which England and France had shed so much blood
and made so many sacrifices continued to give anxiety and trouble
to Europe. Turkey had gained much by the war in the way of security
from invasion and extension of the central authority to provinces
which previously had been partly independent. The Western Powers, and
particularly England, waited anxiously for the reforms and progress
which were promised by the sanguine friends of the Turkish cause.
But Turkey did nothing. Her finances were in confusion. The schemes
which English enterprise had kept going were delayed. While the Porte
was borrowing at enormous interest the money required for current
expenditure, it could hardly be expected to guarantee dividends on
many millions sterling, and it would have inspired little confidence
if it had done so. This, then, was the time for statesmen to study the
question and to elaborate their plans.
Of all the evils with which the Turkish State was afflicted,
corruption――in the sense of the denial of justice――seems to have been
the worst. Each of the non-Mohammedan nations was permitted to appear
before tribunals of its own bishops in matters of litigation in which
only its members were concerned. The civil law was administered in the
Greek courts; the Armenians were subject to many regulations brought
from the interior of Asia. The Turkish courts were presided over
by functionaries who had much of the character of priests, and the
law founded on the Koran was what might have been expected from a
text-book interpreted by such commentators. The literal sense meant
one thing, the metaphorical sense another, and the best chance of
getting justice was when the judge could find nothing to fit the case
and decided according to his own common sense. Both his Scriptural
authorities and his private opinions were, however, continually
influenced by arguments more persuasive than any pleadings. The
corruption of this sort of court was notorious, and the Christian
bishops were not considered much better than the believers. As for
the _Frank_¹ jurisdiction, it was chaos, being void of all system.
Each man came under the representative of his own nation; through
this official or his deputy he had to be sued, and by him he had to
be tried for any offence. If a French officer and a German shoemaker
had differences concerning a pair of boots, one had to make his
application through the Austrian Internunciate, the other had to
respond through the French Embassy. The matter was in the first
instance referred to the Consuls, who knew little of law, and the
appeal came before the Ambassadors, who knew less. Commercial courts
existed in some of the chief cities, and exercised a good influence;
but as the country was opened more and more to commercial enterprise,
and this increased with the progress of the non-Mohammedan populations,
these courts became inadequate.
¹ European.
The country was, no doubt, very badly in need of material improvements:
roads and canals are generally the initial work of a renewed
civilization. But the real basis of improvement is confidence in the
Government, and the guarantee of undisturbed ownership of property.
Such confidence cannot exist without impartial courts and sensible
laws. The most capable judge could not do justice according to the
_Koran_, while the codes of Justinian and Napoleon were unavailing so
long as the longest purse was the best argument.
It was therefore the duty of the Western Powers to consider how
justice might be administered so as to encourage both the native and
the settler to join in the work of amelioration. Few thinking men
had visited the East without formulating some plan for supplying
this first and greatest want. The general conclusion was based on
the supposition of the necessity for continuing the “Capitulations.”
It was supposed to be impossible for strangers to submit themselves
to the authority of the monarch who ruled the land; and indeed the
experience of the native courts, and the fact that no man ventured
to undertake any commercial business without security, naturally
suggested foreign protection. More than one traveller, therefore,
recommended that a code of laws should be agreed to by the Great
Powers, and that in every seaport French, English, _etc._, judges
should decide such cases as involved the liberty or property of
Europeans. Such a system was regarded as being superior to the earlier
ineffective regulations. But, on the other hand, it was held that such
an expedient should only be resorted to temporarily.
Turkey had already suffered greatly through the power of European
Embassies and their enmity towards one another. The Western Powers
did not forget that they had gone to war for the independence and
integrity of the Ottoman Empire. They knew that a mixed court sitting
in its capital to try foreigners was a thing that no high-spirited
nation would permit, and that, if circumstances made it necessary
to demand jurisdiction for foreigners in the capital of the Sultan,
that could only be until the elements of a better state of things
came into being. The Powers had, therefore, to look forward to a time
when Turkey would stand alone, and all protection and jurisdiction in
the way of Capitulations would cease to exist. A well-framed code of
laws suited to all races and religions, administered by well-educated
men, and obeyed by native and foreigner alike, was the ideal object
for which the supporters of Turkey had to work. The sovereign of the
country must be at the head of this system and supreme in his own
dominions. Although such a scheme was deemed visionary at that time,
and the gap had to be filled by “mixed” courts, yet public opinion
in England thought that nothing should be done that could prevent the
subsequent establishment of the better system. It was also believed
that if a suitable legal system were set up, men might be found in
England, France and other countries to administer it successfully.
But it was admitted on all hands that the judicial system of
Turkey deserved the immediate attention of thinking politicians;
that questions of taxation and the tenure of land were especially
interesting in view of the increasing commerce with the East and of
possible developments in the matter of immigration; that nothing that
could throw light on the causes of Turkish decay should be neglected;
and that the absence of good laws and security was the first obstacle
to improvement, and should therefore be the first thought of the
statesman and philanthropist.
Here we see all the elements of the political Zionist problem. All
this development prepared the way for the idea of the protection of
the Jews in the East, and gave a powerful stimulus to projects for the
colonization of Palestine by the Jews.
In the spring of 1853 the Russian Government submitted to the Porte,
through _Prince_ A. S. Menschikoff (1787‒1869), an ultimatum in regard
to the Greek Christians and other matters. England and France prepared
to support _Sultan_ Abdul Medjid against Russia, and stationed their
fleets in Bezika Bay. In July the Russian forces advanced into the
Danubian principalities. On October 4th, 1853, Turkey declared war.
The English and French fleets thereupon passed through the Dardanelles.
On March 12th, 1854, France and Great Britain concluded an alliance
with Turkey, and two weeks later they declared war against Russia.
At the beginning of October the Allies began the regular siege of
Sebastopol. Sardinia joined the Allies in January, 1855. Meanwhile the
_Emperor_ Nicholas I. died,¹ and Alexander II. acceded to the throne.
On November 8th Sebastopol fell into the hands of the Allies.
¹ Feb. 18, 1855 [_o.s._].
* * * * *
The Western Powers completed the occupation of Turkey within two
years; but the reforms, of which they spoke so much, were still to
come. Turkey remained what it was in internal rule and mismanagement.
Fear may have controlled the abuses of fanaticism, despair may have
destroyed whatever remained of national pride; but the abuses which
ages had fostered still prevailed. Now the social regeneration of the
Ottoman State was part of the legitimate policy of the Western Powers.
The presence of large foreign armies had broken down the pride of
the Mussulmans, or enforced its concealment; the Sultan, though less
exposed to the vagaries of diplomatists, had become more responsible
to the European States and the brotherhood of sovereigns among whom he
now held a place; the Turk himself, in spite of courage and a certain
amount of dignity, was degenerating day by day, through want of modern
culture; the Christian tribes were increasing in numbers and power;
the merchants of Constantinople, Smyrna, and Alexandria were growing
rich with British gold, while British enterprise seemed to be surely,
though gradually, adding the Sultan’s empire to the area of its wide
activities.
Justice, humanity, England’s promises, the arguments with which
she had opposed her enemies, demanded that her tutelage should not
suddenly cease. She and France were now the protectors of the Ottoman
territory and its outlying provinces; they were the masters of every
military position; every sea was traversed by their fleets; every
port was full of the merchandize required for their vast armies. Nor
was their supremacy one of force alone. Whatever may have been the
feelings aroused by their policy, each class and creed had learned to
respect their motives and to acquiesce in their presence. Whatever may
have been thought on racial and religious grounds, certainly material
interests in the end prevailed over every other. Every business man
saw clearly that his own prosperity was enhanced by the presence
of two wealthy nations, in need of large and constant supplies, and
willing to pay liberally and at once. In their hearts they had no wish
to be again reduced to a miserable traffic with their own bankrupt
Government, or with the poverty-stricken towns of the Turkish and
Persian interior. The peasants who tilled the ground had gained
wherever local tyranny did not rob them of the just rewards of their
labour. The landed proprietor had also become wealthy, and had no
reason to regret the Western crusade, which gave his possessions a
fourfold value. So tangible was the advantage, and so soon did the
Turks acquiesce in what affected only their patriotism and self-esteem,
that it was doubtful whether even the most bigoted Mussulman wanted
the evacuation of the country by the Allied armies. Englishmen,
of course, looked upon the advancement of Turkey in a different
light from that in which it was seen by its own people. Still, even
Englishmen could not fail to realize that if they withdrew there was
no doubt that the old stagnation would immediately return, and that
it would even become worse than before, for old fame and the habit of
command kept the Mussulman in his pre-eminence, while the “_Rajah_”
was accustomed to obey, and the foreigner was a mere sojourner,
who cared for nothing but his own peace and prosperity. Now all was
changed: the Turk was still master, without the authority to rule;
the Christian was without rights, but had felt his power; while every
country had its adventurers or capitalists in the land, each with his
own scheme launched or prospective, and all agreeing in the demand
that this rich land should no longer be the heritage of sloth and
fatuity.
Peace was signed at Paris――where a Congress of the Powers had been in
session――on March 30th, 1856. The integrity of the Ottoman Empire was
guaranteed by the Powers; reforms were promised by the Sultan; Russia
renounced her protectorate over the Danubian principalities, and ceded
a strip of Bessarabia to Moldavia; the Black Sea was neutralized. The
Congress united in the “Declaration of Paris,” which laid down some
principles of international law.
The question in which the Jews were interested was first of all that
of their position in Palestine, as well as in the whole of the Turkish
Empire. According to the wording of the treaty the Jews were excluded
from the general guarantee and the immunities of the “_Rajahs_” under
the protection of the contracting powers. But, on the other hand,
all the rights hitherto granted by the _Sultan_ to his Christian
subjects had been extended to the Jews as well; and it was clear
that, if Turkey understood her position rightly, this would also be
her future policy, seeing that it was in her interest not to create
dissatisfaction among a large and loyal body by refusing to one
section of non-Mohammedans what had been conceded to another, and thus
alienating the only non-Mohammedan section of the population which did
not entertain sentiments of revenge, and the only section which was
capable of neutralizing any possible machinations on the part of other
sections.
The war having on the one hand raised very considerably the prices of
provisions, and on the other hand cut off the supplies obtained by the
Palestinian Jews in times of peace from those countries in which the
masses of Jews reside, an awful famine broke out in the Holy Land, and
affected most severely all those who had hitherto depended for their
livelihood upon the small pittances doled out to them by the Jews
in foreign countries. A pitiable cry of distress was raised in the
East and resounded throughout the Western world. Now the right time
had arrived. “We find”, wrote Dr. Abraham Benisch¹ (1811‒1878), “no
other parallel in Jewish history to it save that offered by some of
the events narrated in the books of _Ezra_ (_fl._ 3413 _a.m._) and
_Nehemiah_ (_fl._ 3426 _a.m._). The generous Abdul-Medjed has his
prototype in the God-fearing _Cyrus_ (_ob._ 529 _b.c.e._); and the
pious affection for brethren and country, the devotion and patriotism
then kindling in the bosoms of patriots on the shores of the Euphrates
have transferred their seat to the banks of the Thames. So far God’s
blessing had rested upon the work. But Rome was not built in a day,
nor is a nation regenerated within a few years.”
¹ _Jewish Chronicle_, March 21, 1856, _p._ 524.
Needless to say, the reference here was to the regeneration of the
Jewish nation in Palestine. But for this purpose safety and full
security were wanted――the very problem with which modern Zionism was
confronted, and which was answered by the Basle programme of 1897.
“The Jew, it is true, may now sow and plant. But will he also be
permitted to reap? Will not the wild son of the desert trample down
and carry off the crop even before it is ripe for the sickle? The
_Sultan_ may emancipate his Jewish subjects in the Holy Land, but,
in order to be enabled to reap any benefit from the boon conceded, he
must give them a government strong enough to protect life and property.
The mighty arm of justice must repress lawlessness and strike down
the wrong-doer.... Will the Porte as easily be able to establish in
Palestine a strong government as it was to bless her with liberal
institutions? This is another question which time, and time alone, can
answer, and yet upon the reply thereto the success of the agricultural
scheme for the Palestinian Jews must depend entirely.”
No doubt 1856 offered a great opportunity, had the legal guarantees
been available and the Jews prepared. Unfortunately these essential
conditions did not yet obtain at that time, and no practical result
was achieved.
The Rev. William Henry Johnstone, Chaplain of Addiscombe, and an
author of several theological works, preached the Restoration of
_Israel_ to the Holy Land:――
“If political events are hastening a crisis, when it may be desirable
to consider what is to be done with Palestine, it behoves the Jews
to take earnest heed to their duty.... It is not an extravagant
supposition that Palestine may be placed within the grasp of its
ancient owners....” “In one matter I feel that the Jews have just
reason to complain of many Christians. The Divine Law, of which they
have been the guardians, has never been repealed. Jehovah gave it,
and Jehovah has never taken it away.” “For the present I waive all
consideration of Scriptural predictions. But, without any reference to
the Bible, it must be clear to all that the residence of _Israel_ in
the Holy Land would be fraught with the greatest blessings to mankind.
The Jews, though now scattered over the entire habitable globe,
are united by every national tie,... They have connections with all
large towns; they possess the moving spring of modern industry and
enterprise; and they are renowned for vigour and intelligence. They
have that gift, also, which no other nation had since the dispersion
of Babel,――they can converse with all people in their own languages.
They have naturally, what the apostolic Christians received by
miraculous interposition, the gift of tongues. They may, therefore,
not only undo the work of Babel, but may carry on the work of the
apostles.”¹
¹ Israel in the World: or, The Mission of the Hebrews to the
great military monarchies. By William Henry Johnstone, M.A.,
... Illustrated with a map. London: ... 1844. (_pp._ viii.,
193‒195.)
Another religious writer gave poetical expression to this idea.
Arise, great God! and let thy grace
Shed its glad beams on Jacob’s race;
Restore the long-lost scatter’d band,
And call them to their native land.
Their mis’ry let thy mercy heal,
Their trespass hide, their pardon seal:
O God of Israel! hear our prayer,
And grant them still thy love to share.¹
¹ _Hebrew Melodies_, _p._ 74. Published by Robert Young
(1822‒1888), Edinburgh [1855].