INTROD.] EFFECTS OF MODERN INVENTIONS. 3 Crusades the wars of the European Christians against the Infidels of Asia. The Imperial and the Papal dominion of Rome were respectively acquired by means of two powers which form the sum of human capability and govern the world-physical and intellectual force. But everything necessarily falls through the same means by which it was erected. The Roman Empire, founded by arms, fell before the arms of the Barbarians; the Papal dominion, established by the subjugation of the mind, has been already in great part overthrown by an intellectual revolution, and in spite of some symptoms of recovery it can hardly be doubted that in process of time its fall will be complete. Before the termination of the dark ages, two inventions had been made which were destined to have important effects on modern Europe-gunpowder and the printing press. Of these, one revolutionized the methods of physical force or warfare, whilst the other gave new vigour to the operations of the intellect. Had gunpowder been known during the existence of the Roman Empire, it would hardly have been subdued by the Barbarians; had the press been invented, it may be doubted whether the Popes would have succeeded in establishing their power. The employment of gunpowder gave a first and fatal blow to feudalism, by rendering useless the armour and the castles of the nobles. It made warfare more extensive and more scientific, and, combined with the establishment of a professional soldiery and standing armies, introduced those new methods of fighting which were necessary to decide the quarrels between nations which had grown numerous and powerful. In like manner in the intellectual world, the introduction of printing, and the consequent diffusion of knowledge, prepared the minds of men for that resistance to the Papal doctrines and pretensions which had already partially manifested itself among the higher and more enlightened classes. Its effects produced the Reformation,—one of the first great revolutions which we shall have to contemplate in the history of modern Europe. The practical application of another great invention, the mariner's compass, and its effects on navigation and commerce, belong to a rather later period, and will be considered further on. By the Protestant Reformation the religious bond of European unity was in a great degree broken, though not altogether destroyed. But a new bond was springing up from the very dissensions of Europe; we mean a system of international policy and 4 ORIGIN OF MODERN EUROPEAN SYSTEM. [INTROD. law, to which the various nations submitted themselves and which was maintained through negotiations, embassies, treaties, and finally by the theory of the balance of power. During the darker ages the aggressions committed by one State upon another were viewed with indifference by the rest; and thus, for instance, the conquests of the English in France were utterly disregarded. But when, by the consolidation of the great monarchies, and the establishment of standing armies, the various European States were able to enter upon long and distant wars with one another, the aggressive ambition of one became the common concern of all. Leagues and alliances were made to check and repress the attempts of grasping sovereigns, and to preserve an equilibrium of power. Europe thus began to form one large Republic of nations, acknowledging the same system of international law, and becoming amenable to the voice of public opinion. Thus the history of modern Europe presents, in fact, as much unity as that of Greece in early times. Composed of a cluster of independent States, of which one, now Sparta, now Athens, now Thebes, aspired to the hegemony, her only rallying cry was against the Barbarians, as that of Christendom once was against the Infidels; whilst her chief bond of union was also a religious one, manifested in the Amphictyonic Council and the games at Olympia and other places, which bear some analogy to the General Councils, and the festivals, and jubilees of the Roman Church. It is, then, the change from a unity cemented by religion to a political unity which chiefly distinguishes modern Europe from the Europe of the Middle Ages. The beginning of this change dates from the invasion of Italy by the French towards the close of the fifteenth century. But as the taking of Constantinople by the Turks, and the destruction of the last vestiges of the Eastern Roman Empire, have commonly been regarded, and we think with reason, as the true epoch of modern history, it has been adopted in the present work. The real importance of that event, however, and what renders it truly an epoch, lies more in the final and complete establishment in Europe of the Ottoman power than in the fall of the Byzantine Empire, which had long been effete, and must at no distant period have either perished of natural decay or been swallowed up by some of its more powerful Christian neighbours. And for a considerable period after the fall of Constantinople, the chief interest of European history centres in the progress of the Turks, and the efforts made to oppose them. INTROD.] RISE OF THE OTTOMAN POWER. 5 At the epoch we have chosen, Constantine Palæologus, the last feeble heir of Grecian culture and Roman magnificence, still enjoyed at Constantinople the title of Emperor. His Empire, however, was in the last stage of decay; though the walls and suburbs of his capital comprised a great part of his dominions, he had been compelled to share even those narrow precincts with the Republics of Genoa and Venice, and, what was still worse, Constantinople existed only by sufferance of the Turks. Sultan Bajazet I., surnamed Ilderim, or the Thunderbolt (1389-1403), had compelled the Greek Emperor to pay him tribute, to admit a Turkish colony at Constantinople, having four mosques and the independent jurisdiction of a cadi, and even to permit coins with the Sultan's superscription to be minted there. From year to year all Europe looked forward with unavailing anxiety and compassion to the certain fall of the city in which the Christian faith had been established as the religion of the Empire; and at length, in May, 1453, Constantinople yielded to the arms of Sultan Mahomet II. With its capture the curtain falls on the nations of antiquity; and the final establishment of the Turks in Europe, the latest settlers among the various races which composed its population, forms the first great episode of modern history. The lingering vestiges of antiquity then vanished altogether; the Cæsars were no longer represented, except by an unreal shadow in Germany; and the language of the Greek classical authors, which till then the scholars of Italy could acquire in Greece in tolerable purity as a living tongue, rapidly degenerated into the barbarous dialect now spoken in Greece. The decline and fall of the Eastern Empire, as well as the rise and progress of the Ottoman Turks, who during some centuries filled Europe with the dread of their power, and now by their weakness excite either its cupidity or its solicitude, have been described by Gibbon;1 but as neither that historian nor Mr. Hallam, in his brief account of the Ottomans,2 has entered into any detailed description of their institutions and government, we shall here supply a few particulars that may serve to illustrate some parts of the following narrative.3 See particularly the Decline and Fall, ch. lxiii.-lxviii. 2 Middle Ages, ch. vi. The principal authorities for the fall of the Greek Empire and the establishment of the Turks in Europe are the Byzantine historians, Chalcocondyles, Phrantzes, Pachymeres, Nicephorus Gregoras, Can tacuzenus, Ducas, &c.; Seadeddin, the 6 INSTITUTIONS OF ORCHAN AND ALAEDDIN. [INTROD. It was Osman, or Othman1 (1299-1326), who, by the extent of his conquests and the virtual independence of the Iconium Sultans which he acquired, became the recognized founder and eponymous hero of the Ottoman Empire. To the territories which Othman had won by arms a permanent organization was given under his son and successor Orchan (1326-1360). This, however, was the work of Orchan's brother, Alaeddin, who acted as his Vizier. Renouncing all share in his father's inheritance, Alaeddin retired to a village near Prusa, now through Orchan's conquests the capital of the Ottoman dominions, and being a man of talent, and well skilled both in civil and military affairs, he applied himself to model, with his brother's approbation, the institutions of the State. Three subjects chiefly engaged his attention: the coinage, the people's dress, and the organization of the army. Among the rights of Islam sovereignty, those of the Prince to coin money and to have his name mentioned in the public prayers on Friday occupy the first place. The sovereignty of Orchan was marked by gold and silver coins being struck with his superscription in 1328. His name was also inserted in the public prayers; but for a considerable period the Ottoman Princes were prayed for only as temporal sovereigns, and it was not till after the conquest of Egypt by Selim I. in 1517 that they became the spiritual heads of Islam. The last remnants of the Abassid Caliphate were then transferred to the race of Othman ; Mohammed Ab'ul Berekeath, Sheikh of Mecca, sent to the conqueror of the Mamelukes, by his son Abu Noumi, the keys of the Caaba upon a silver platter, and raised him to be the protector of the holy cities, Mecca and Medina. The Sultan, thus become, by a most singular revolution, the representative of the Prophet, the High Priest and Imaum of all the Faithful, added to his temporal titles that of Zill'ullah, the shadow or image of God upon earth. He was now prayed for as Imaum and Caliph, and his name was joined with those of the Prophet himself, his posterity, and the first Caliphs. The regulations of Alaeddin with regard to dress were principally intended to distinguish the different classes of the people ; Von Hammer, Gesch. des osmanischen 1 Osman is the true name of this prince, whence the Turks still call themselves Osmanlis. But the corrupted form Othman, and the epithet Ottoman derived from it, are become so established by custom, that we shall continue to retain them; and the same practice will be observed with regard to other Turkish names. INTROD.] TURKISH ARMY.-SAIM AND TIMARLI. 7 and a white turban was assigned, as the most honourable colour, to the Court of the Sultan and to the soldiery. But of all the measures then adopted, those respecting the army were by far the most important. As the Turkish forces had hitherto principally consisted of light cavalry, which were of course wholly ineffective against towns, Alaeddin applied himself to the creation of an infantry on the Byzantine model, and under his care, and that of Kara Chalil Tchendereli, another Minister of Orchan's, arose the celebrated corps of the Janissaries. We shall not, however, here trace in detail the origin and progress of the Ottoman army and other institutions, but shall view them as wholes, and when they had attained, at a later period, to their full organization and development. The Turkish army may be divided into two grand classes: those who served by obligation of their land tenure, and those who received pay. All conquered lands were divided among the Spahis (horsemen), on conditions which, like the feudal tenures of Christian Europe, obliged the holders to serve in the field. Here, however, ends the likeness between the Turkish Timar and the European fief. The Timarli were not, like the Christian knighthood, a proud and hereditary aristocracy, almost independent of the Sovereign, and having a voice in his councils, but the mere creatures of the Sultan's breath. The Ottoman constitution recognized no order of nobility, and was essentially a democratic despotism. The military tenures were modified by Amurath I., who divided them into large and smaller (siamet and timar), the holders of which were called Saim and Timarli. Every cavalier, or Spahi, who had helped to conquer by his bravery, was rewarded with a fief, which, whether large or small, was called a Kilidsch (sword). The symbols of his investment were a sword and banner (Kilidsch and Sandjak). The smaller fiefs were of the yearly value of 20,000 aspers2 and under; the larger were all that exceeded that estimate. The holder of a fief valued at 3,000 aspers was obliged to furnish one man fully armed and equipped, who in tenures of that low value could be no other than himself. The holders of larger fiefs were obliged to find a horseman for every 5,000 aspers of yearly value; so that 1 Chalcocondyles (lib. i. p. 8, ed. Par.) erroneously ascribes the institution of the Janissaries to Othman I.; and Leunclavius (Ann. Turcici, p. 13, and note, p. 129, ed. Frankf. 1596) and Marsigli (Stato militare dell' Imperio Ottomano, t. i. p. 67), still more erroneously to Amurath I. See Von Hammer, Geschicte des osm. Reiches, 2 Early in the fifteenth century an asper was equal to the tenth part of a Venetian ducat, or about one shilling English, but it afterwards greatly dwindled in value. |