Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 8.djvu/425

 JERUSALEM

363

JERUSALEM

resent in the name of her son Hugh II, whereas others Would f;ivo their alN'fjiance to none other than Con- r:uUu. f^ranilson of l''i'<'il(-ripk II. Moreover, civil war Ijnjke out at Acn' lictuci'ii the (Jenoese and the Vene- tians, between the llospilalleis and Ihc'l'emplars, ami on 31 July, I25S, the X'cnctians destroyed tlie (ienoese fleet before Aero. The Maniehikc SuUan Bibars, "the Cross-bowman" (Et-Buncbikiliirce), recom- menced the conquest of Syi-ia witht)Ut meeting any resistance and, in 126S, the last Christian cities, Tripoli, Sidon, and Acre, were cut off from one an- other. King Hugh II of Lusignan had died in 1267, and his succession was disputed by his nephew, Hugh III. already King of ( 'y]irus, and Mary of Antioch, who.se maternal grandfather was Amaury of Lusignan. In 1261) the barons acknowledged Hugh III, but the new king, unable to cope with the lack of discii)line among his subjects, retired to Cyprus after naming Balian d'Ibelin regent of the kingdom (1276). But, in 1277, Mary of Antioch sold her rights to Charles of Anjou, King of Naples, who, thinking to subdue the East, sent a garrison under command of Roger of San Severino to occupy Acre. After the Sicilian Vespers (1282), which ruined the projects of Charles of Anjou, the inhabitants of Acre expelled his sen- eschal antl proclaimed Henri/ II of Cyprus (15 August, 1286) their king. But at this time the remnants of the Christian possessions were hard pressed by the Mamelukes. On 5 April, 1291, the Sultan Malek- Aschraf appeared before Saint-Jean d'Acre and, de- spite the courage of its defenders, the city was taken by storm on 28 May. The Kingdom of Jerusalem no longer existed, and none of the expeditions of the four- teenth century succeeded in re-establishing it. The title of King of Jeru.salem continued to be borne in a spirit of rivalry: by the Kings of Cyprus belonging to the House of Lusignan; and by the two Houses of Anjou which claimed to hold their rights from Mary of Antioch. In 1459 Charlotte, daughter of John III, King of Cyprus, married Louis of Savoy, Count of Geneva, and in 1485 ceded her rights to Jerusalem to her nephew Charles of Savoy; hence, from that time up to 1870, the title of King of Jerusalem was borne by the princes of the House of Savoy.

(2) Institutions and Civilization. — Towards the middle of the twelfth centvn-y, when the Kingdom of Jerusalem had attained its greatest dimensions, it comprised the entire coast of Syria from Beirut on the north to Raphia on the south. On the north-east its territory, bounded by the Lebanon district, which separated it from the Mussulman principality of Damascus, was hardly more than a few leagues in breadth; on the south-east it extended beyond the Dead Sea and the Jordan as far as the Arabian Desert and even included the port of Aila on the Red Sea. In the north the Countship of Tripoli was under the suzerainty of the King of Jerusalem. But in the very interior of the kingdom the power of the king was checked by numerous obstacles, and the sov- ereignty belonged less to the king than to the body of feudatories whose power was centred in the High Court, composed of vassals and rear-vassals. Its authority governed even the succession to the throne, in event of dispute between two members of the royal family; it alone was empowered to make laws or "assizes", and to its initiative was due the com- pilation of the "A.ssizes of Jerusalem", erroneously ascribed to Godfrey of Bouillon. The king took an oath in presence of this court and had no right to confiscate a fief unless in accordance with the regular judgment of that assembly. Moreover, if the king were to violate his oaths, the assizes formally pro- claimed the right of the lieges to resist. The High Court, presided over by the constable or marshal, assembled only when convoked by the king; in ju- dicial matters it constituted the supreme tribunal and its judgments were without appeal: "NuUe chose

faite par court n'en doit estrc desfaite" (Assizes, I, clxxvii). A "Court of the Burgesses", organized in the twelfth century, had analagous jurisdiction over the burgesses and could sentence to exile or even condemn to death. In the great fiefs mixed enurts of knights and burges.ses had similar eiintrol independ- ently of the liege. Even within these limits the king was incapable of compelling vassals to fulfil their feudal obligations. Domiciled in impregnable cas- tles, the architecture of which had been perfected after Mu.ssulman models, the nobles led an almost inde- pendent life A fief like that of .Montreal with its four castles of Crac, Crac de Montreal, .Vhamant, and Vau de Moise, situated lietween the Dead antl Red Seas, formed a really independent state. Renauil de Chatillon, who became Lord of Montr^il in 1174, him- self waged war against the Mussulmans, whom he terrified by his cruise in the Red Sea, and his indi- vidual policy was counter to that of King Baldwin IV, who was powerless to prevent him from waging war against Saladin.

The Church, at this period, was also a power inde- pendent of the kings, and, with the exception of the king, the Patriarch of Jerusalem was the most im- portant personage in the realm. After the First Cru- sade a very powerful Latin Church was established in Palestine; numerous monasteries were founded and received large donations of landed property in Pales- tine as well as in Europe. Some patriarchs, espe- cially Daimbert, who was at enmity with Baldwin I, even endeavoured to found a power thoroughly in- pendent of royalty; nevertheless,' both of these powers generally lived in harmony. The Patriarch of Jerusalem, who was elected by the clergy and ac- claimed by the people, had his powers confirmed liy the pope, who continued to exercise great authority in Palestine. Moreover, the orders of religious knight- hood, the Ho.spitallers of St. John, organized in 1113, the Templars founded by Hugh of Payens in 1128, and the Teutonic Knights created in 1143, formed regular powers, equally independent of Church and State. Most lavishly endowed, they soon owned an incalculable number of fiefs and castles in Palestine and in Europe. In spiritual matters they were di- rectly subject to the pope; but the king could not interfere in their temporal affairs, and each of the three orders had its own army and exercised the right of concluding treaties with the Mussulmans.

Although royal authority was restricted to rather narrow limits by these various powers, it nevertheless succeeded in having at its disposal resources adequate to the defence of the Christian states. Its financial revenues were more considerable than those of the majority of the European princes of the twelfth cen- tury, amongst the most profitable sources of income being the customs duties enforced at all the ports and of which the register was kept by natives who wrote in Arabic. The king also levied toll upon caravans, had the monopoly of certain industries, and the exclusive right to coin money. At times he obtained from the court of barons authority to levy extraordinary taxes; and in 1182, in order to meet the invasion of Saladin, all revenues, even those of the ( 'hurcli, were subjected to a tax of 2 per cent. Although the kings of the twelfth century were surrounded by high officials, and kept a sufficiently grand court, at which Byzantine etiquette ruled, they devoted most of their income to the defence of their kingdom. Their vassals owed military service, unlimited as to time, unlike the pre- vailing Western customs, but in exchange they re- ceived pay. Moreover, the king enlisted natives or foreigners, settling on them a life-annuity or fief de soudce; a light cavalry of Turcopoles mounted and equipped in Saracenic style, Maronite archers from the Lebanon, anil .\mienian and Syrian foot-soldiers com- pleted the list of this cosmopolitan army of which the effective force was hardly over 20,000 men, some few