text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/450

Rh John Stanwigg, elected 1417 Ralf Newport, died 1456 Thomas Gryber (or Wolvercote), elected, resigned 1465 John Holt, elected 1465, resigned 1473 Eustace Bernard, elected 1473, resigned Ranulf Bleese, elected 1485 William Wittlesey, died 1509 John Penkith, elected 1509 Thomas Cockes last prior, occurs 1524

Only a fine fragment remains of the seal of the priory attached to a charter dated I278. It is pointed oval and creamy white in colour, and represents the Blessed Virgin seated on a carved throne. In base under a trefoiled arch with carved spandrils supported by a central pillar, a woman kneels, holding up some object. Legend defective : ...CD RAVEN ES. ..

The reverse is a smaller pointed oval counter- seal of Prior Ralph representing the Blessed Virgin, half length, under a trefoiled arch, the Holy Child on her left knee. In base, in a quadrilobe with arched spandrils, the prior is kneeling in prayer. Legend :. . . ADVLPH PRIORIS D'RAVE. . ..

The abbey of St. Mary the Virgin at Burn- ham was founded in 1266 for Austin canon- esses by Richard, King of the Romans, who endowed it with the surrounding lands and the church of Burnham. A complaint was made ten years later that he had gone beyond his rights in his desire to provide for the needs of the nuns : that he had turned aside a water- course through the village of Cippenham to the monastery, had given them twenty acres of wood from the common, and diverted a pathway which used to lead from Burnham to Dorney ; but it is uncertain whether these wrongs were proved. The endowment was not a very large one, but on the analogy of other houses it may have provided for about twenty nuns at the beginning : at the dissolu- tion however there were only ten.

The first abbess, Margery of Aston, had been sub-prioress of Goring. She was in- stalled, and made her profession of ' subjec- tion, reverence and obedience, under the rule of St. Augustine ' to Bishop Gravesend on the Feast of St. John Baptist, 1266, in the presence of an honourable company, which included the Archdeacon of Exeter, some canons of Missenden, and the prioress of Goring, her late superior.

Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, the son of the founder, confirmed his father's charters, and with the licence of the king granted to the nuns the privilege of free election without reference to himself or his heirs, so that his ministers might not interfere with the abbey lands in time of voidance. This charter was sometimes infringed, but the right could be proved by appeal to it.

In 1330 the abbess was involved in an ex- pensive suit with reference to a part of the manor of Bulstrode which had been recently leased to her by the king at a rent of £15 a year. Geoffrey de Bulstrode disputed the abbess's right, on the ground that the land had been taken from him by Hugh le Despen- ser, and made it impossible for her to pay her farm : he broke into her houses, wrecked her mill, cut down her hedges, corn and trees, and sent cattle to feed on her pastures ; and he so ill-treated her servants that she could not get anyone to serve her in that place. A com- mission of oyer and terminer was granted to examine the matter, and in the next year it was clearly proved that Geoffrey had no rights in the disputed lands, which were freshly granted to the abbess in fee farm. Her losses however had been severe, and she was compelled to ask a remittance of her rent for two years, which was granted. In 1335 she was still in arrears, in 1337 the king par- doned her a debt of £57 6s. 4d. because of the poverty of her house ; and the following year the collectors of wool were ordered to cause the abbess and convent of Burnham to

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/450


text:
Author:Charles Jarrott

Books

 * Ten Years of Motors and Motor Racing (1906)

Articles

 * Sport of Motor Racing to the Expert Driver (1907)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Author:Charles Jarrott


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/451

Rh have respite till the following Easter, for the wool they owed to the king. In 1396 the nuns were in some danger of losing the church of Dorney : but they evidently succeeded in proving their right, as it was part of their property at the dissolution.

The history of the house during the fif- teenth century is obscure : only a few names of abbesses can be recovered. As its whole revenue was under £200 a year, it should have been dissolved under the first Act of Suppres- sion, but on the petition of the local com- missioners the house was continued, and so the surrender was delayed until 19 September, 1539, when it was received by Dr. London. The Deed of Surrender is extant, and takes the common form ' with our unanimous assent and consent.' It is signed by the abbess, Alice Baldwin, and nine nuns. It is probable that some pensions were reserved, but their num- ber and value does not remain on record.

There are several notices in the Episcopal Registers relating to the internal history of the house. In 1281 the nuns of Burnham in- curred the displeasure of Archbishop Peck- ham by refusing to receive a certain Maud de Weston at his request. They seem to have given no satisfactory reason for this refusal except vague suggestions that they could not receive postulants without the consent of their patron ; and when the archbishop pressed the matter they pleaded their poverty. He wrote them a sharp letter in reply, de- claring that he was never one to put pressure on the poor, but showing very clearly that he did not believe their excuses to be true ones. He accused them indeed plainly of pride, or some other personal motives, and added that if they did not give him some lawful and ade- quate reason for refusing his candidate, he would provide for their alleged poverty by sending others in addition.

In 1300 Bishop Dalderby visited the house to explain the statute Pro clausura monialium. He ordered them, as he did all the convents of nuns in his diocese, to keep strictly within their enclosure and to admit no secular person within the cloister door on any excuse. It is probable however that the nuns of Burn- ham paid no more heed to these admonitions than did their sisters in other houses.

In 1311 a certain nun, Margery of Hedsor, left the house and forsook the habit of reli- gion : she was excommunicated in conse- quence, and the sentence was renewed at intervals until 1317. In that year she brought in a plea that she had been compelled by her father to enter the monastery when under age, and had been previously contracted in marriage to Roger Blacket of Rickmans- worth. The real truth of the matter is not known, as the results of the inquiry which followed are not given ; but it is instructive to note that the bishop gave orders that the sentence of excommunication should be re- moved, if the plea was proved on examination to be a true one.

In 1339 two nuns of Burnham were trans- ferred to Goring ' for the peace and quiet of the house.' Such occasional notices as these, though they must be duly recorded in a detailed history of the monastery, really tell us very little of its inner life, and may be even misleading if they are made too much of. Far more serious evidence than this, as regards the general tone of the house, is found in the visitation reports of Bishops Grey and Atwater. It seems that early in the fifteenth century the nuns of Burnham, like those of Elstow in Bedfordshire, had attempted to increase their revenues by taking in a number of ladies as boarders, and with much the same results : the house had become secularized. When Bishop Grey visited the abbey between 1431 and 1436, he ordered the removal of all secu- lars whatsoever. The order was probably obeyed only for a time, for Bishop Atwater in 1519 called attention to the same point. He enjoined the abbess again on no account to allow secular women to lodge in the monas- tery ; and not even young children (infantes) were to be admitted to the dormitory of the nuns. Other signs of worldliness appear in the injunction that the nuns should not use girdles ornamented with gold or silver, nor wear any rings except that which was the sign of their profession. He allowed them how-

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/451


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/453

Rh Stowe had already been quitclaimed to John de Rochford ; and the place called Snels- hall, with the chapel of Tattenhoe, was given in the next year to the Benedictine priory of that name. In 1231 two of the daughters of John de Bidun claimed the churches of Wootton and Shelton in Northamptonshire. The case was difficult to settle, as the last in- cumbent of Wootton had been presented by John de Bidun ; but while the abbot said he was presented before the charter was made, the heirs declared that he was presented after the charter. The abbot vouchsafed to war- rant two other daughters of John, but the case was not settled at that time for want of further evidence : and it seems that it was finally decided against the abbot, for he cer- tainly lost the churches from this time for- ward. Again in 1225 he lost the church of Tombstone in Norfolk, because it was finally proved that the de Biduns had no right in the church at all, and could not grant it to the abbey ; the last presentment, which had been made by Sarah de Bidun, had been irregular. In 1237 the abbot secured the church of Lavendon against John de St. Medard ; in 1272 the church of Lathbury was claimed by Robert Raynel, and again in 1281 by Andrew de Gatesden. The church of Kirkby must have been lost some time during the same century.

In 1339 a quarrel arose with Simon of Nor- wich, a near neighbour of the abbot's in Lav endon. Simon complained that whereas he had impounded certain cattle in his fee of Lavendon for default of service, the abbot had rescued the cattle, broken his close houses and doors, assaulted him, and carried away his goods. A month later the abbot brought a complaint against Simon for having prevented his tenants coming to his court leet, impounded his sheep, plotted against his servants so that they dared not go out to till his land, buried a boat with nets for taking fish in his fishery, and compelled his men to swear that they would no longer serve him.

There are a few notices of protection granted to abbots of Lavendon among others to cross the seas for the general chapters at Premontré. In 1226 an abbot of this house was the bearer of a special message from Henry III., granting favours to the order, and asking the benefit of their prayers at the com- ing chapter. The wars of the next century made these gatherings difficult for English monks to attend. A petition sent to the pope in 1397 from Lavendon shows that the house, never very rich, had fallen into great distress. It was hard by the high road, and there were constant demands upon it for hos- pitality ; but its revenues had been sorely diminished by the results of the Great Pesti- lence : lands had become barren for want of cultivation, labourers were few and wages very high, and great exactions had been made from religious during the wars, in spite of the bur- dens they had to sustain in maintaining the poor and infirm. The church of Aston in Northamptonshire, not two miles from the monastery, was appropriated at this time for their support.

At the time of the dissolution there were ten or eleven canons in this house, but as its revenue was under £200 it fell under the first Act of Suppression. The surrender was taken some time before 28 July, 1536, when William Gales, the abbot, received a pension of £12. Perhaps some of the others may have received benefices, but as the house was poor, no other pensions were assigned.

All Premonstratensian houses were free of episcopal jurisdiction, and the benediction of the diocesan was not necessary even at the election of a new abbot : consequently there are few entries relating to them in the Lincoln registers. As Bishop Bokyngham wrote a letter to the pope however in 1397 on behalf of the canons of Lavendon, we may conclude that he was prepared to endorse their plea of poverty, and had no reason to disapprove the house. The general visitation of the whole order in 1478 tells us very little of this abbey : its report simply states that the Abbot of Soleby was its father abbot, and that the canons had four churches to serve ; no details as to the order of the house are given.

The original endowment of the abbey in- cluded the site and adjacent fields, with 29 acres besides, and a park and a mill ; the

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/453


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/454

Rh churches of Lavendon, Lathbury in this county ; Wootton and Shelton in North- amptonshire ; Stowe, Kirkby, Tombstone in Norfolk ; the place called Snelshall and the chapel of Tattenhoe ; with other parcels of arable land, wood and meadow in the neigh- bourhood. The churches of Wootton, Shel- ton, Kirkby, Stowe and Tombstone, as well as Snelshall and Tattenhoe, passed out of the abbot's hands in the thirteenth century. The churches of Aston near Bozeat (Northants), and Shotwell (Warwicks) were appropriated during the fourteenth century. In 1284 the Abbot of Lavendon answered for half the vill of Lathbury and one sixth of a knight's fee in Lavendon ; in 1302 for half a fee in Willen ; in 1346 for only one quarter of a knight's fee. The temporalia of the abbey were valued in 1291 at £34 4s. 2d. ; in 1535 its whole re- venue amounted only to 79 13s. 8d. The Ministers' Accounts after the dissolution amount to .90 cxr. 4^., including the rec- tories of Lathbury, Lavendon, Aston and Shotwell.

David, first abbot Austin, occurs 1236 and 1237 Jordan, occurs 1254 and 1271 Philip, occurs 1279 John of Lathbury, elected 1312 Richard of Emberton, occurs 1350, died William of Leicester, elected 1380 Nicholas of Lathbury, occurs 1413 Robert Helmdon, occurs 1478 William Curlew, occurs 1491 William Gales, last abbot, occurs 1529

Pointed oval twelfth century seal, taken from a cast at the British Museum, the im- pression of which is imperfect, represents St. John baptizing our Lord. Overhead a tre- foiled arch with a spire capped by a cross. Legend : +SIGILL'. . . BAPTISTS DE LAVEN-DUNE.

A fragment of a seal still exists attached to a charter dated 1375, the colour is creamy white, and it is very imperfect and indistinct.

The College of Bonhommes at Ashridge, was founded in 1283 by Edmund, Earl of Corn- wall in honour of The Precious Blood, on one of his manors which lay on the Hert- fordshire border, and now forms a part of that county. It was the only house of this order in England, except the small college at Edington in Wiltshire : the rule obeyed by the brethren differed however very little from that of the Austin Canons, though the dress they adopted was more distinctly monastic, consisting of a grey habit and scapulary, with a long grey cloak and cowl.

The endowment was not at first very large, and provided only for seven brethren who were to be all priests, and were to receive six marks yearly from the Earl's treasury for their support. The chronicler of Dun- stable tells us that there was at the time little hope that the house would continue, as the foundation was so insufficient, and some of the brethren had not at first a very good character, in spite of their name. The founder however seems to have been satisfied with his work ; the conventual church was dedicated in 1286 by Bishop Sutton, and enriched by a very valuable relic a phial containing a portion of the Precious Blood, bought in Germany by Richard King, of the Romans and divided between this house and the Abbey of Hailes. In 1290, Edward I.

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/454


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/455

Rh kept Christmas here with his Court. In 1300 the founder died at Ashridge, and his heart, embalmed in a casket, was placed beside that of St. Thomas de Cantilupe in the Conventual Church ; other parts of his body were buried separately here and at Hailes.

In 1307 the rector and brethren of Ashridge received the custody of the hospital of St. Thomas of Aeon in London ; but in 1315 it was alleged that they had obtained this by falsehood and suppression of the truth, during the absence of the master, and it was taken away from them. They were cited at the same time to appear before the pope in person or by proxy to clear themselves of this charge, and to bring all papers relating to the suit between them and the master of the hos- pital. It does not appear that they re- covered possession of it.

In 1323 there was a suit with the Prior of St. Bartholomew's, London, who finally sur- rendered to the brethren all his rights in the church of Hemel Hempstead. In 1346 a chantry was founded in the conventual church for the soul of Sir Bartholomew Burghersh, at the appropriation of the church of Am- brosden. After the Great Pestilence the endowment of the house was found to be so diminished in value as to be quite insuffi- cient ; and in 1376 the Black Prince increased it so considerably that he was reckoned as the second founder. At the same time the stat- utes were revised, and the house set on quite a new footing. From this time forward the ordinary number of the brethren was twenty, and even at the dissolution there were still seventeen.

In 1380, just after the re-modelling of the house, the rector, Ralf of Aston, claimed on behalf of his convent to hold one half of the roads or paths that led from Redbourne to Hemel Hempstead, and the Abbot of St. Albans ceded this without making any diffi- culty. Afterwards, on examination of the evidences, it was found that those rights had belonged from time immemorial to the abbey, but it was too late to take back what had been formally granted, and the monks of St. Albans had to endure their loss with as good a grace as they might, while ' the brethren ' of Ash- ridge, says the chronicler, ' gloried in the success of their fraud.' It is of course pos- sible that the whole transaction might have been very differently described by a chronicler of Ashridge : it is given by Walsingham from the point of view of his own house.

In the year 1381 the brethren of Ashridge suffered considerable losses on their manors at Berkhampstead and Hemel Hempstead, from the violence of the revolted peasantry, who extorted from them new charters of liberty, and treated them and their property in much the same way as they had the monks of St. Albans and the canons of Dunstable. It may have been partly in consequence of this as well as other causes that they found them- selves ' overwhelmed with great necessity ' in 1413, when the Bishop of Winchester granted them the church of Ivinghoe, and a clerk of his household gave them 100 towards the rebuilding of the choir.

During the last years of its existence, the conventual church was a notable place of pil- grimage in the county ; and those convicted of heresy were sometimes ordered to do their penance there, or even to pass some time in the monastery itself. The last rector, Thomas Waterhouse, assisted at the trial of the relapsed heretic, Thomas Harding of Chesham, who was condemned to death in 1532. He signed the Acknowledgment of Supremacy in 1535 and surrendered his house 6 November, 1539, receiving byway of pension the rectory of Quainton. The rest of the brethren, sixteen in number, re- ceived benefices or pensions of 6 or 7 a year ; two of them were living in 1552 as in- cumbents of Ayot St. Peter and Dachworth, and both of these were married. The old rector himself lived till 1554, and seems to have held steadily to the religion in which he had been bred,bequea thing to several churches at his death the vestments which he had con- trived to keep as personal property all through the reign of Edward VI. There was until

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/455


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Archelaus of Cappadocia


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/456

Rh recently a fine brass on his tomb in Hemel Hempstead Church, representing him in the vestments of the priesthood, it is now in the chapel at Ashridge.

We have it on the testimony of Harpsfield that the Bonhommes of Ashridge were in very deed what their name impliesboni homines : nevertheless there are some serious flaws in their record, as preserved in the episcopal registers and elsewhere. It has been already noticed that certain of the first chaplains of the house, according to the chronicles of Dun- stable, se habebant minus bene. At the elec- tion of Ralf of Aston in 1368, there was some dispute and opposition, and a commission was ordered to inquire into the matter ; the rector was specially enjoined to reside, which looks as if his predecessor had been at fault in this respect. It is natural to suppose that the revision of the statutes at the new foun- dation in 1376 brought about a renewal of religious fervour, and a fresh desire for the careful observance of the rule. It was the rule of St. Augustine to which the brethren of Ashridge were professed, with the addition of a few customs proper to their house. They were placed under the government of a rector, instead of an abbot or prior, and he was to be supported by a corrector. As the brethren were all priests, their time was to be given mainly to the divine office, to prayer and to study ; a granger superintended the tem- poral property of the house outside the limits of the cloister, and a cellarer had charge of all domestic affairs within the college. The life of the brethren was to be strict and regular, but not what would have been considered then very austere, either in respect of fasting, vigil or enclosure. They rose indeed, as all religious were bound to do, for the midnight office ; but it was the Use of Sarum they ob- served the ordinary office of secular priestsand they might retire again to rest till prime if they desired. They had ordi- narily two meals in the day, and were not altogether forbidden the use of linen for their undergarments. Only a few women were ever allowed to enter the cloisterthe foun- der's wife, the queen, the mothers and sisters of the brethrenbut with these they might speak, so it were briefly, and in the presence of a companion. Their profession, like that of Augustinians generally, took the form of a promise of obedience made to the rector per- sonally : the novice knelt and placed his hands between the rector's hands, saying : ' I promise obedience to God, to Blessed Mary, to thee, N., Rector of Ashridge, ac- cording to the rule of Blessed Augustine and the institutions of the Boni homines of this place ; and that I will be obedient to thee and to thy successors unto my life's end.'

It was a simple and a moderate rule, and we may hope that for the most part the brethren continued faithful to its observance, and so earned the character which Harpsfield gives them. Towards the end of the fifteenth cen- tury, however, they seemed to have shared in the general laxity that marked so many reli- gious houses, as well as the life of the clergy of that period. Bishop Smith visited the house and laid certain injunctions upon the breth- ren, but the record of these is not preserved. At the visitation of Bishop Atwater in 1519 it was observed that silence was not well kept, nor were the bells regularly rung. Complaint was made that the rector and corrector sometimes used bitter and opprobrious words in the exercise of discipline ; they were enjoined to use more self-restraint in this respect. The bishop also ordered that the younger brethren should be more diligent in study, and should not give themselves to idle- ness, to sport or to drinking : all were to sleep in the dormitory according to rule, and the accounts were to be more carefully kept. It seems that the last rector, Thomas Water- house, and perhaps his predecessors, took some pains to secure the observance of these injunctions, and to improve the discipline of the house. The last visitation report, that of Bishop Longland in 1530, is very instructive as showing the natural results of such efforts of reform, and also the free- dom of speech which was allowed on such occasions, so that anything like grave scandal would have been exceedingly difficult to hide.

More than one of the brethren complained that the granger was unfaithful in the exer- cise of his office, and sold poultry and other goods of the convent for his own profit. One or two brethren complained that the seniors

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/456


text: Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition/Boston (2.)


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Archelaus, King of Judaea


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/457

Rh were not sufficiently consulted nor held in due honour by the rector ; nor did the juniors reverence or bow to them as custom required. Others however were ready to bear witness that the chief complainant was dis- obedient, impatient, and wont to contend with the rector. Another simply stated his opinion that the rector's rule was beneficial to the college. There were smaller complaints as to eating and drinking between meals ; that a woman had once spent two nights in the monastery ; that a brother had once been out in secular habit.

The injunctions show a real grasp of the situation. The brethren are exhorted to live in virtue, in concord and in charity, and to be pure alike in heart and body. They are gently reminded that the reform of all dis- orders lies with the rector and corrector, and that complaining serves no good purpose. All, under pain of contempt, are to abstain from eating and drinking between meals without reasonable cause ; those who do so without licence of the rector or corrector shall fast upon bread and water. The rector and cor- rector are to see that all women are kept outside the cloister ; they are to repress all murmuring by prudent government. The accounts are to be shown yearly to four senior brethren ; the granger and cellarer are to give a faithful account of their stewardship. Licences to go out are to be rarely given, and the juniors are never to go alone.

In 1538 one of the brethren of Ashridge incurred some danger by rash words spoken against ' Mr. Dr. Petre '  probably in con- nection with the dissolution of some neigh- bouring houses and a letter was sent up to Cromwell by Sir John Russell on his behalf, saying that he was but a simple man, and that what he did was for lack of discretion. It is probable that no proceedings were taken against him ; but the danger of such words at that time was a very real one.

The Deed of Surrender, now lost, probably acknowledged that the brethren with unanimous consent gave up their house to the king. The last- entry in their register, for which the rector was probably responsible, speaks their mind more truly. ''Hoc anno nobilis domus de Asscherugge destructa fuit et fratres expulsi sunt in die S. Leonardi. Hoc anno deca-pitatus fuit ille eximius haereticus et proditor Thomas Cromwell, qui causa fuit destruccionis omnium domorum religiosorum in Anglia''

The original endowment of the house in- cluded the manors of Ashridge, Pitstone (Bucks), Little Gaddesden and Hemel Hemp- stead (Herts), with the advowson of the church of Hemel Hempstead. Before his death the founder added the manors of Am- brosden and Chesterton (Oxon), with their churches. The church of Pitstone with Nettleden chapel was appropriated in 1381, and that of Ivinghoe in 1420. From 1302 until 1346 the Rector held one quarter of a knight's fee at Ashridge, half a fee in Hemel Hempstead, a quarter of a fee in Flaunden, and half a fee in Little Gaddesden.

The temporalities of the house in 1291 were valued at £72 5s. 7d. ; in 1535 its clear in- come was £416 16s. 4d. The Ministers' Accounts give a total of £467 3s. 7½d., in- cluding the manors of Aldbury, Ambrosden, Chesterton, and Hemel Hempstead, and the churches of Hemel Hempstead, Pitstone, Ambrosden, Chesterton and Ivinghoe.

Richard of Watford, first rector, elected, resigned 1297. Ralf of Aston, elected 1297, resigned 1336 Richard of Saretta, elected 1336, died 1346

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/457


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Archelaus, King of Macedonia


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Archelaus of Miletus


text: 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/Archenholz, Johann Wilhelm von


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Pan-Turanianism

PAN-TURANIANISM. Only a few years before the outbreak of the World War in 1914, a new political movement came into prominence in Constantinople. The awakening of a Turkish national consciousness began to aim at the purification of the

Turkish language by the expulsion of all foreign elements, especially Persian and Arabic, and the establishment of a civilization based entirely on old Turkish traditions. In this movement Ziya Bey, Shinassi Bey, and Namik Kemal Bey were particularly active. The researches of the Academy of Turkish Science, established after the Young Turk revolution, dealing with the original home and the pre-Mahommedan history of the Turks, were then artificially utilized greatly to widen the scope of the Turkish national movement. The goal was now the formation of a powerful and independent union of all the peoples of the world kindred to the Osmanli Turks and alleged to embrace a population of 50,000,000 (about double the actual number of those speaking Turkish dialects). For the national designation “Turk” was now to be substituted the more comprehensive “Turanian,” and the Mahommedan crescent was to be abandoned for the pre-Mahommedan Turkish wolf as a racial emblem. Turkish writers began to speak of their ideal fatherland, their Turania, the cradle of their nation, and the home of their race. The poet Ziya Gök Alp, called by a countryman “the great Apostle of Turanianism,” celebrates Attila, Jenghiz and Oghuz Khan as heroic figures that stand for the proud fame of his race, and describes the fatherland of the Turks not as Turkey or Turkestan, but as the “broad eternal land of Turania.” This wider movement involves a policy of Irredentism which aspires not only to stimulate by moral and intellectual propaganda a feeling of racial unity among the kindred peoples, but under favourable circumstances to free those peoples from foreign rule. Curiously enough, the circumstances since the conclusion of the war seem to be more favourable to the realization of this ideal than they were before its outbreak. It is an ideal that is not likely to disappear, for its fulfilment is the only remaining prospect for Turkey of expansion as compensation for the great territorial losses that empire has sustained in recent times.

It now becomes necessary to inquire what possibilities this somewhat vague term Pan-Turanianism implies. The earliest form of the name “Turanian” occurs perhaps about 800 B.C. in

the Avesta, the sacred book of Zoroastrianism, as Tura, to designate a country which was contiguous to Iran (Persia) and the inhabitants of which were in constant conflict with the Iranians. It is met with again about A.D. 1000 in the Shahname or Book of Kings, of the Persian poet Firdusi as Turan*, the country beyond the Oxus (now the Amu Darya). Persian sources show that the ancient Turan (Turania) corresponded roughly to the Russian Turkestan of to-day. In the second half of the 19th century “Turanian” came to be used as a loose designation of Asiatic languages that were neither Aryan nor Semitic, and to be similarly applied in a racial sense to the nomadic peoples speaking those languages, as opposed to the agricultural Aryans. The term has more recently become synonymous with “Altaic” or “Ural-Altaic.” “Turanian” is here treated in this definite sense.

Having spread in prehistoric times from the Altai mountains in the centre of Asia, this ethnic family at the present day occupies a broad belt of territory extending from Thrace across Asia to the sea of Japan and reaching from about 35° N. lat. to the coast of the Arctic Ocean. It consists of five main branches, the Samoyeds, the Finno-Ugrians and the Tunguses constituting the northern, and the Mongols and the Turks the southern division. The countries inhabited by the Turanians are Siberia, Mongolia, Manchuria, Chinese and Russian Turkestan, Asia Minor, parts of Persia and Afghanistan, the Caucasus, the Crimea, the Volga and Pechora regions of eastern Russia, Lapland, Finland, Hungary, and portions of the Balkans.

Down to the outbreak of the World War all the Turanian peoples were subject to foreign (Russian, Chinese, Persian, Afghan) domination except the Magyars and the Osmanli Turks. Only those sections of the Turanians that have come into close contact with the Aryans of Europe have succeeded in rising from their primitive state to a comparatively advanced degree of civilization: the Finns, the Magyars and the Osmanli Turks.

The Turanians in Europe number in round figures 22,000,000: 10,000,000 Magyars; 6,000,000 Samoyeds and Finns; and 6,000,000 Turks. In Asia there are 26,000,000: 115,000 Finns,

and Tunguses, all in Siberia; 6,000,000 Manchus, Mongols and Turks, all until recently under Chinese rule; 8,200,000 Turks in Asiatic Russia; 3,500,000 in Persia and Afghanistan; and 8,000,000 Osmanli Turks in Asia Minor. The Turks in Russia are usually called Tatars, and those elsewhere outside the Turkish Empire, Turco-Tatars. Their language is the most characteristic feature of the Turanians. As contrasted with the highly inflexional Indo-European and Semitic linguistic families on the one hand, and the monosyllabic Chinese on the other, the Turanian languages are typical examples of the agglutinative form of speech. Here unchangeable roots are combined with suffixes by means of what is called progressive vowel harmony, in such a way that the vowels of the endings are assimilated to that of the root. Thus the infinitive element mak, which appears in Osmanli Turkish yaz-mak, “to write,” becomes mek in sev-mek, “to love.”

The Mongolians best represent the Turanian physical type. They have broad faces, small, slanting eyes, high cheek-bones, broad, flat noses, thick lips and low foreheads; their complexion is yellowish brown, their hair straight, and their beards scanty. The various branches of the Turanians have intermingled to a considerable extent, but it was only on their western confines that they mixed much with aliens, especially Slavs. Thus many Finnish tribes have been absorbed by the surrounding Russians; the Magyars and the Osmanli Turks, though they have retained their Turanian speech, have lost most of their physical Turanian characteristics; while the Volga Bulgars have no trace of their original Turanian language and physique left, their name alone having survived among the Bulgarians of to-day.

The primitive religion of the Turanians is called Shamanism because its distinctive feature is the agency of the Shaman, a wizard priest, whose services are required to influence the supernatural powers. Witchcraft predominates in this religion, it being the function of the Shaman to master all that in nature is hostile to man, to curb the elements, to conjure spirits, to produce health or disease, fortune or misfortune. The Shamanist operates mainly against demons, but he also believes in higher gods, whom he calls to his aid by means of prayer and sacrifice. Ancestor worship is, moreover, a characteristic feature of Shamanism. An important instrument in the rites of the Shaman is the drum, by means of which he can summon spirits, and compel them to give active assistance. Shamanism is still found in all the Asiatic branches of the Turanian family. But it is only general among the Tunguses, all the tribes of whom (except the Manchus) are devoted to their old faith. The Samoyeds, too, are still largely Shamanists. Among the Mongols, the Buryats on Lake Baikal are the only tribe in which Shamanism prevails. Among the Turks, the old religion survives only in the tribes that remained behind in the Altai range. From the rest of the Turkish peoples it has been extirpated by Islam, though single tribes of Turkish nomads show clear traces of their original beliefs. On the other hand, the Magyars and the Finns adopted Christianity many centuries ago.

The very primitive stage of civilization which the Turanians had attained when they first appear in history, has remained on much the same level, with the few exceptions caused by European contact, down to the present day. As the cultivable soil of the ancient world had already been occupied by the Chinese, the Aryans and the Semites, the Turanians, when driven by the expansion of population to migrate from their ancient homes in the Altai mountains, were compelled to wander in barren steppes in order to maintain themselves. Their civilization thus acquired the stamp of nomadism, in which the isolation of small communities caused by their mode of life prevented the patriarchal system of government from advancing to any higher stage of political organization. The struggle for existence naturally brought them constantly into predatory conflict with their settled and more prosperous neighbours, while boundary disputes tended to perpetual internal strife. The unsettled habits thus produced have, since the adoption of Islam by the Turkish branch, made that branch for many centuries the main cause of unrest in the history of the world, because the directing force of fanaticism has been added to their unorganized restlessness.

The above account of the various branches of the Turanians will supply the material on the basis of which the prospects of Pan-Turanianism may be judged. The movement in its wider aspect having in the years preceding the war been the product of the German-educated Intelligentsia of Constantinople, was, after Turkey joined the Central Powers, much used in support of the alliance between Turkey and Hungary on the strength of racial kinship, and as a lure for the Tatars of the Russian Empire. In the summer of 1918, Halil Pasha, an uncle of Enver Pasha, had an interview, reported in a Berlin journal in 1920, with a German commanding officer in Anatolia, to whom he expounded the aims of the Pan-Turanian movement. Placing the national policy in the foreground, he said it was necessary to unite all Turkish-speaking peoples. The beginning must be made with the conquest of Turkestan, the cradle of the Turkish Empire. The next step would be to establish a connexion with the Siberian Yakuts, the farthest outpost of the Turkish Turanians in the north-east of Asia. After that, the Tatars of the Caucasus were to be included. This nationally exclusive Turkish Empire must, he continued, as a Mahommedan supreme power, have a great attraction for the Turks of Afghanistan and Persia. The incorporation of Azerbaijan, the richest Persian province, might thus be hoped for in the near future. When, on the conclusion of the war, Constantinople had been occupied by the Entente Powers, Halil Pasha was thrown into prison there by them, but, managing to escape, he continued his activities in favour of a Pan-Turkish Empire. Enver Pasha had previously been emphasizing the Pan-Islamic policy and been using Arabs as Turcophil propagandists in the Caucasus. The general plan of this double procedure was by fusing the religious movement of Pan-Islamism with the racial movement of Pan-Turanianism to establish a great Turkish Empire, with Constantinople as the centre of both.

Pan-Turanianism, from the point of view of practical politicians, does not go beyond the ideal of a Turkish Empire comprising all the divisions of the Turkish race, the numbers of which do not really exceed about 26,000,000. As the Ottoman Empire contains no more than 10,000,000 Turks within its present limits, the Irredentism of the Pan-Turanian movement embraces a population of 16,000,000. Before the war, 12,000,000 of these were under Russian and 4,000,000 under Chinese, Persian and Afghan rule. At that period Russia could scarcely be regarded as a very promising field for Pan-Turanian propaganda; for generally speaking the Russian Mahommedans had been loyal, conservative, and somewhat narrow in their political outlook. Had Russia emerged intact from the conflict, her Turkish territory could have been wrested from her only at the price of another war, which the Ottoman Empire would hardly have been willing to face. But the whole situation has been transformed by the Russian Revolution and the consequent break-up of Russia. The Irredentist ambitions of Pan-Turanianism have now been brought appreciably nearer the possibility of realization. A warmer sympathy has been developed among the Russian Mahommedans with the Mahommedans abroad. Russian Turkestan and the two Khanates of Khiva and Bukhara have asserted their independence; the Tatars of the Caucasus have become republics. These new conditions might render the voluntary incorporation of all these outside Turkish populations in the Ottoman Empire not unlikely. For the important unifying elements of general identity of language, religion, and civilization, besides contiguity of territory, are all present. The speech of the Turkish branch of the Turanians has changed so comparatively little that all the divisions may be said to speak one single language, Turkish, differing only to the extent of dialects. Islam is the religion of all the divisions of the Turkish branch, which, though it only adopted this religion, has been its main protagonist. The Turkish-speaking peoples, again, have a common civilization which, based on their primitive nomadism, has as its superstructure the ethics and the culture of the Koran. Finally, with the exception of the Yakuts in the north-east of Siberia, the Turkish peoples are practically in continuous geographical contact from Thrace eastward to the frontier of Mongolia and northward into south-eastern Russia. The connexion of eastern Asia Minor, by way of the Caucasus

with Central Asia, which was closed by Tsarist Russia, is now open for the union of the Turks. This road to the East is of great importance both on political and economic grounds.

If the spirit of independence among the Turks of Central Asia, the Caucasus, and Azerbaijan could be overcome by the unifying power of common language, race, religion, and culture, Turkey might become a formidable political power based on the combined moral force of the Caliphate and of Turkish nationalism.

Pan-Turanianism, however, if pushed to extremes, is an artificial and a retrograde movement, and would then come into irreconcilable conflict with Pan-Islamism. Thus the attempt to carry out the proposal of some of the Turks of Constantinople to renounce the religion of Mahomet, or even to substitute Turkish for the sacred language of the Koran, would incense the fanatical Moslem. Again, the Turkish peoples outside the Ottoman Empire do not form coherent populations, containing as they do large nomadic elements. On the other hand, the Ottoman Turks, indolent by nature, have never displayed any ability or energy in state-building. It is therefore not likely that they will develop enough statecraft and driving-power to succeed in welding together the different Turkish peoples into a single strong united empire containing perhaps 25,000,000 of the Turkish race. The extension of Pan-Turanianism so as to include other branches of the Turanians can only be pronounced to be a purely visionary idea. The only connecting link between them and the Turks at the present day is the descent of their various languages from a single parent speech that existed in remote antiquity; but Lapp and Manchu are to-day farther apart than English and Sanskrit. The other four branches now differ from the Turks in religion and civilization, besides being separated from them by great and often immense distances. The Samoyeds are nominally Christians, but really Shamanists. The Tunguses, who inhabit a vast tract of north-eastern Asia as Shamanists and reindeer nomads, are slowly dying-out in Siberia while their most prominent tribe, the Manchus, are being entirely absorbed by Chinese civilization. The Mongols, who are the eastern neighbours of Turkish tribes, and were many centuries ago politically associated with the Turks as warlike invaders of the West, are nomads and for the most part adherents of Buddhism, which has transformed them into a peaceful and unenterprising people that at the present day has hardly anything in common with the Turks. The Finno-Ugrian branch, for the most part separated by long distances from the Turks, have with very slight exceptions been thoroughly Europeanized and Christianized for many centuries. The Magyars, conquered by the Turks in the 16th and 17th centuries, fought on the side of the Turks during the World War owing to the pressure of the German alliance; but there seems to be no permanent prospect of political association between these two racially and linguistically related races. It thus seems clear that at least 20,000,000 Turanians will never have the slightest inherent tendency to be drawn into union with the Islamic religion and civilization of the Turkish Empire.

.—Sarron, La Jeune Turquie et la Revolution (1912); Tekin Alp, The Turkish and Pan-Turkish Ideal (1916); La Turquie et la Guerre (1916); “Islam and the War,” Quarterly Review (April 1918); Macdonell, Turanians and Pan-Turanianism (1918); Eurasian Routes (1920); Berliner Tageblatt (Jan. 24 and 28 1920).
 * (A. A. M.)


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/458

Rh Gilbert Boweles, elected 1346 Ralf of Aston, elected 1368, died 1396 John of Tring, elected 1396 Abel Robert Farneburgh, occurs 1416 and 1428 John (Audelee), occurs 1435 and 1445 John Whytton or Wilton, occurs 1482 and 1492 Ralf John of Berkampstead, resigned 1521 John Maiden, elected 1521, died 1529 Thomas Waterhouse, last rector, elected 1529

Red pointed oval seal of the fourteenth cen- tury, of which only a fine fragment remains attached to the Acknowledgment of Suprem- acy 1534. The impression represents on an altar with large cover the Agnus Dei. In base a lion rampant in allusion to the arms of the founder, Edmund, son of Richard, Earl of Cornwall, 1283. Legend: COMVN. . . VIR.

The Commandery of Hogshaw was prob- ably founded during the reign of Henry II. on lands which were originally the gift of William Peverel. The commandery was never an important one. There was a survey taken of its lands, income, expenses, etc., in 1338, when there was a preceptor in resi- dence with one other knight. It had then all the ordinary accessories of a small monastery a court, garden, mill and dove house, with arable land and pastures attached ; the chap- lain serving Hogshaw Church, with the chap- lain who served the house, and a certain Thomas Fitz Neel, who held a knight's cor- rody, sat at table with the preceptor and his brother. There were the usual servants in the house, an attendant squire, a porter, a cook, a pistor, and two grooms for the preceptor. Twice a year the prior of the Hospitallers in England visited the house. Beyond this little is known of its inner or outer life. It was suppressed with the rest of the com- manderies of the order in 1541.

The manor of Wydende or Widmer in Great Marlow also belonged to the Hos- pitallers, and the remains of a chapel, with a crypt below, have been thought to indicate the existence of a small commandery there. In 1338 however the 'camera' of Wydende was being farmed by William de Langford, and there were no knights there ; it is quite uncertain whether there were any at an earlier date. The survey of the property of the order in 1314 merely states that the manor of Wydende, as well as that of Hogshaw, had always belonged to the Hospitallers and not to the Templars. The commandery of Hogshaw was origin- ally endowed with the manor of Hogshaw and the churches of Cholesbury, Hogshaw, Oving, Addington, Creslow and Ludgershall. In 1302 the lands at Hogshaw were held as half a knight's fee ; in 1312 the preceptor also held half the vill of Drayton. Its valuation in 1338 amounts to 74 i^s, iod., including pensions from the churches of Oving, Adding- ton, Creslow and Ludgershall, and the whole revenue of Hogshaw Church (only nine marks) ; the expenses of the household, with the chaplains who served the house and the church, amounted to £28 16s. 4d. At the dissolution the lands of the Hospitallers at Hogshaw and Claydon, were valued only at £2 121s. annually.

The name of the preceptor in 1338 was William Warde : no others are at present known.

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/458


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/459

Rh

All that is known of the preceptory of Bui- strode is that it certainly existed in 1276, for in that year Brother John, the preceptor, was accused of taking a bribe of half a mark from a certain robber to let him go free. An in- quisition taken in the year 1330 reported that the manor of Bulstrode had once formed part of the lands of the Templars, and after the annulling of their order passed to the Hospitallers. It is mentioned again among the lands of the Hospitallers in 1338, but they never had a commandery there : the manor was simply leased on their behalf for 75 marks. The Templars had also lands at Radnage and at High Wycombe.

The house of Grey Friars at Aylesbury was founded by James Butler, Earl of Ormond, as late as 1386. At the dissolution there were only seven friars there, but it is possible that at the foundation there may have been a larger number.

At a time when friars did not rank very high in popular esteem these Minorites of Ayles- bury seem to have shown something of the same independent and fearless spirit as their brethren of the strict observance in the six- teenth century. Richard II. had been a benefactor of this house, and at the beginning of the next reign a friar was accused by one of his own brethren of spreading a report that the late king was still alive. He was brought before Henry IV., but the story of his ending cannot be better told than in the words of the mediaeval chronicle, whether strictly histori- cal or no. It happened at the time ' when the people began to grudge against King Harry, and bear him heavy, because he took their goods and paid not therefore,' that the friar of Aylesbury was brought into the royal presence. Said the king to the friar, ' Thou hast heard that King Richard is alive, and art glad thereof.' And the friar answered, ' I am glad as a man is glad of the life of his friend, for I am holden to him, and all my kin, for he was our furtherer and promoter.' But the king said, ' Thou hast noised and told openly that he liveth, and so thou hast ex- cited and stirred the people against me.' ' Nay,' said the friar. But the king went on, ' Tell me the truth as it is in thine heart : if thou sawest King Richard and me in the field fighting together, with whom wouldst thou hold ? ' ' Forsooth with him, for I am more beholden to him,' replied the bold friar. ' Then thou wouldest that I and all the lords of my realm were dead ? ' ' Nay,' said the friar again. ' What wouldst thou do with me if thou hadst the victory over me ? ' 'I would make you Duke of Lancaster,' an- swered the friar. ' Thou art not my friend, and therefore thou shalt lose thine head,' was the king's reply : and the poor friar was ' dampned befor the justice, and drawe and hanged and beheddid.'

At the dissolution the house at Aylesbury was a very poor place, and in debt ; the church however was in good condition, and had lately been repaired. Dr. London reported to Cromwell that there was scarce money enough, even after the sale of the plate and lead, to ' dispatch the friars honestly.' No attempt was therefore made to provide them with pensions : but London desired special capacities for them to serve cures. Whether these were granted or no remains uncertain.

The guardian of the house in 1535 was Ed- ward Ryly ; the one who signed the sur- render was Henry Meyn. The Deed of Surrender, which is dated I October, 1538, is identical with that of the friars of Bedford, and therefore obviously not of their own composition. The acknowledgment which it containsthat, after profound consideration, the brethren had discovered that their reli- gion consisted mainly of pharisaical cere- moniesis in consequence quite as formal

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/459


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/41

 frighten and repel the white intruders from the country. Many of the beds of the creeks were dry, and there was a continuous absence of rain, indicating in a country still so full of vegetation, that the time of the party's visit, June to August, was the dry season of the tropical climate. The weather was exceedingly hot in the day time, as much so as if in the middle of summer, but the nights were cool. On 25th June the party came upon the Roper, a copious and beautiful river, and so deep as to cause much trouble and delay in finding a crossing place. On 10th July they struck the Adelaide, after enjoying, from a rocky and precipitous platform, a magnificent prospect of the luxuriantly wooded and grassed vale through which it flows. But these pleasures of the day were marred by the torment of mosquitoes at night. On the 24th July they reached the sea, as has been already related.

These exploits of Stuart exceed, alike for their extent of travel and adventure as for the importance of their results, those of all preceding Australian explorers. Of the very considerable legion that now claims to have aided the cause of Australian discovery, Stuart is indisputably the prominent figure. He has disencumbered the vast interior of Australia of its repelling awe and mystery; and he has shown that it is not only readily accessible to the colonists, but to a large


text:
Page:Tracks of McKinlay and party across Australia.djvu/42

 extent available for immediate colonization. And towards facilitating this colonization, he has shown how little of all those costly paraphernalia of vehicles, baggage, and retinue that were deemed unavoidable for previous government expeditions, is really necessary to a good Australian bushman. If the "through route" of central Australia is some day to be Bradshawed after its own fashion, and to be accounted as the easily accomplished business or pastime of a well-mounted party of hardy colonists; we must never forget how difficult, nay, even impossible, the feat was long held to be, until Stuart's pioneering journeys practically demonstrated its facilities.

BURKE AND WILLS, 1860-61.

Stuart had aroused a general attention towards Australian discovery. While upon his first great expedition in 1860, a movement was made in the adjacent colony of Victoria with the view of fitting out another with the same object as that of Stuart. A private colonist, who concealed his name for some time, but who proved to be Mr. Ambrose Kite, of Melbourne, offered £1000 towards this object. Others of the public, and subsequently the Government, assisted, and a large and well-provided expedition was the result. Amongst other adjuncts of the party were a number of camels, which the Victoria Government had shortly before


text:
1922 Encyclopædia Britannica/Pan-Islamism

PAN-ISLAMISM. One of the results of the World War was to bring into new prominence, in connexion with Turkey and the Middle East, the movement known as Pan-Islamism, for uniting the peoples who profess the Mahommedan religion under one banner. The history of Pan-Islamism from 1910 onwards is analyzed below.

1. Before the Italian War.—The proclamation of the Ottoman Constitution in 1908 seemed to cut at the root of Pan-Islamism, since the idea of the former was to substitute for preëxisting religious and national divisions an Ottoman nationality, wherein the different communities of the empire should equally share. Writers of the year 1909 show many reasons why the “Young Turks” could never favour Pan-Islamism, which indeed they had officially repudiated. It was pointed out that the more conservative Moslem nations of Africa would never approve a Sultan in whose eyes all creeds were to be equal. By 1910 it was realized that this prospect was chimerical; Tal‛at Bey, Minister of the

Interior, in a speech delivered at Salonika on Aug. 6 of that year at a private meeting of the Committee of Union and Progress, asserted that, though according to the Constitution all Ottoman subjects were equal before the law, such an order of things was clearly impossible; this equality was in defiance of the Shari‛ah (religious code), and the Christians themselves had no desire to become Ottomans. At the Salonika Congress of 1911 a definite scheme of Pan-Islamic propaganda was adopted, and it was resolved that a congress of delegates from all the Moslem countries of the world ought to meet annually in Constantinople to discuss questions of interest to all Moslems. Emissaries appear to have been actually sent out during these years to win or to confirm adherents to the Ottoman Caliph wherever Moslems were subject to Europeans, even to remote parts of Africa, including Morocco; others worked among the Moslems of China. These missions seem to have been fairly effective, as a Pan-Islamic writer asserts that the khutbah (Friday sermon) continued to be pronounced in the name of the Ottoman Caliph in Tunis in spite of French objection; and that when, in 1912, a republic was proclaimed in China the Chinese Moslems signified their adhesion on condition that the rights of the Ottoman Caliph were not infringed thereby.

Attempts were also made to deal with the old difficulty which had confronted Pan-Islamism, the schism between Sunnah and Shi‛ah. Early in 1911 a letter was published by a number of Ottoman and Persian jurists assembled at Nejef, asserting that there was no difference of principle between the two sects and urging coöperation between the two empires, Persia being at that time, it was supposed, menaced by England and Russia. The Agha Khan, head of a sect so heretical that ‛Abdul Hamid II. had declined to admit him to an audience, made a tour in India to advocate the claims of a Moslem university. Articles advocating union appeared in various Sunni and Shi‛i journals; indeed, the Moslem press as a whole was Pan-Islamic.

Nevertheless, as early as 1910 prominence had been given to a new antithesis, which may be said to have ultimately wrecked the schemes for reunion of the Moslem communities. In that year the Constantinople journal Iqdam, an organ of the Committee, adopted a tone unfriendly to the Arabs, whom it charged with readiness to sell their honour for gold—an accusation vehemently resented in the Arabic-speaking countries. But in fact the seeds of dissension between the Turkish and Arab elements in the Ottoman Empire had been sown in the Constitution, in Art. 68, par. 10 of which it is enacted that after the expiration of a period of four years a condition of eligibility to the Chamber of Deputies shall be ability to read and write Turkish. This rule definitely aimed at making Turkish the language of the empire; and in the resolutions in favour of Pan-Islamic propaganda the encouragement of the study of Turkish was recommended. The true Pan-Islamic view was that Arabic should be the common language of Islam; some, indeed, suggested that the empire should be bilingual, with Turkish for its secular and Arabic for its religious language; in any case, that every Moslem should learn Arabic in addition to any idiom which happened to be his mother tongue. Journals were started in the Turkish and Arabic interests respectively; the latter were represented in Constantinople by one called at first Sirat Muslaqim, afterwards Sabil al-Rashad. The Committee of Union and Progress more and more inclined to the Turkish side and to the substitution of Pan-Turanianism for the Ottoman nationality. In the races subject to the Russian Empire and speaking different varieties of Turkish they found their natural allies; and for these the Ottoman literature could count as classical, being in any case far superior to anything of their own. This policy of Turkification involved the Committee in wars in Albania, the Hauran and S. Arabia; they planned treating the Arab parts of the empire as colonies, to be ruled from Constantinople without the right of sending deputies to the Chamber; and they were charged with the design of disarming all Moslems in the empire except the Turks, and with advocating neglect of the ritual of Islam. Where military exercises interfered with religious the latter were to give way; devout officers were, it is said, dismissed and replaced by free-thinkers.

2. The Italian War.—To some extent this split was retarded by European aggression, which may be said to have culminated in 1911. The interference of Great Britain and Russia in Persia and the French scheme for governing Morocco as a protectorate had made it clear that Turkey was the only Islamic state which could compete with the European Powers on anything like equal terms. The Italian attack on Tripoli in Sept. of that year evoked widespread sympathy with Turkey among the Islamic communities. The Javanese press, e.g., made no secret of its desire to see Turkey triumph, and the Mahommedan press of Egypt warmly espoused the side of Turkey. At a meeting held in Kabul the Amir of Afghanistan took part in a demonstration in favour of the Turks, and in India money was collected for their assistance. Care, indeed, had been taken by Italy to avoid all appearance of an attack on Islam itself, and the Pope himself warned Christian soldiers against considering the campaign as a crusade; but to the Moslem, Christian and European are not very clearly distinguished, and it was plausibly argued that Europe was not now satisfied with protecting Christians within the Ottoman Empire, but had resolved on partitioning that empire among non-Moslem Powers. In proclamations issued in Constantinople the Sultan whose dominions were thus attacked was described as the legitimate ruler of 300 million Moslems (swelled by some journalist to 400 million), and a demand was raised for the restoration of his arbitrary powers.

Islam was not united on this occasion in the defence of the Ottoman Caliph, for while the Iman of San‛a ceased hostilities, the Idrisi chieftain in Asir favoured the Italians. On the other hand, the Turks had the coöperation of the Senussis, who in the preceding century had kept aloof from their quarrels. The Committee of Union and Progress is said to have been astonished at the amount of sympathy which the cause of Turkey had evoked, having expected, e.g., that the Tripolitans would be indifferent to the change of rule, whereas they in fact stubbornly resisted the invaders. The Committee in consequence proceeded to make certain concessions to Arab sentiment, without, it is said, actually altering their policy. A beneficent Islamic society was founded in Constantinople, under the patronage of the heir apparent, chiefly with Egyptian money; and an attempt was made to found a Moslem university in Medina. Schemes were started for promoting the study of Arabic under efficient instructors; and there were authoritative pronouncements that racial differences in the Ottoman Empire need not be suppressed.

3. The Balkan War and its Consequences.—This war, which broke out in Oct. 1912, demonstrated the military weakness of Turkey, though the recovery of Adrianople after the Armistice was greeted with telegrams of congratulation from all parts of the Moslem world. Clearly, however, up to this point Pan-Islamism had failed in its original design, that of arresting the progress of European aggression and eventually restoring Islamic rule in Asia and Africa. It had, however, aroused fairly general sympathy with Turkey and perhaps brought home to many Moslems the idea that someone claiming to be their Caliph existed. Subscriptions to the national defence fund of the Ottoman Empire flowed in from various quarters; owing to the efforts of a deputy of the Duma, Tas-pula ‛Abdul Jalil Oghlu, the Moslems of Samarkand sent a handsome subscription in Aug. 1913; and in Bosnia, which had quite lately formed part of the empire, the opinion was said to be general that the ruin of Turkey would be an immense disaster from the religious point of view. From this region, too, sums of money were sent to the Red Crescent and the national defence fund. In May the Moslems of Delhi sent the sum of £1,600 to the Ottoman Minister of Finance for the housing of immigrants who had lost their homes in the recent war. Subscriptions were also promised from Java and the Malay States. The talk about the need for union between Moslems was renewed in the Moslem press throughout the world; notably in the Habl al-Matin, a Pan-Islamic journal in the Persian language published in Calcutta; and societies with the object of either spreading Islam or producing unity among Moslems were founded in different regions; e.g. a jam‛iyyat al-itlifaq, “Society of Concord,” founded in Muscat, a khariji state. An

“Society for the Defence of Islam,” of Auckland, California, is also mentioned.

The language used by journalists caused some apprehension to the European governments responsible for great numbers of Moslems, and complaints were made that in the Islamic territories of Russia the charge of Pan-Islamism was easily leveled and resulted in frustrating the efforts that were being made for spreading education. The Islamic reactionaries, who dreaded the modern learning, obtained the imprisonment of modernist teachers by informing the authorities that the latter were engaged in Pan-Islamic propaganda. Any Moslem who took in the journals of Cairo or Constantinople, or had studied in either of those cities, was suspected of pursuing these schemes. On the other hand, the plan pursued by the imperial government in its scheme for enforced education was the Russification of all its subjects. One member of the Duma, Sadr ad Din Maqsudoff, had some years before defended his co-religionists from the charge of Pan-Islamism which the Moslem schemes for education had incurred; while claiming that the Russian Moslems were loyal to the Government, he maintained that their nationality was Islam.

In Syria and Mesopotamia nationalism at this time was developing, and Pan-Islamism making little way.

Two works issued in Constantinople in the year 1913 illustrate the ideas of Moslem publicists on the phase which the question had now assumed.

One of these is the Ittihad al-Islam (“Unity of Islam” or “Pan-Islamism ”) of Jalal Nuri Bey, of sufficient importance to be translated into Arabic in 1920, seven years after its first appearance. In the face of the weakness displayed by Turkey in her last wars it was no longer advisable to demand a general uprising of Islamic peoples to free themselves from European oppression; hence the author, while anticipating yet further defeats and losses, substitutes for a plan of coöperation a vague hope, to which Moslems should cling. This hope is not confined to proceedings in Islamic areas.

He hopes that China and Japan will become cordial friends and so prevent the further spread of European domination in Asia; and thinks that the republican Government of China will be better for the Moslems there than the imperial Government had been. He thinks that the Arabic-speaking people of Africa and Asia will one day form a single state, without indicating what the relation of that state to the Ottoman Empire is to be; the older Pan-Islamism had on the whole favoured “decentralization,” i.e., a confederation of Moslem countries under Ottoman hegemony. He advises the English to bestow on their Asiatic possessions the status of Canada or Australia, as in that case the inhabitants will coöperate cordially against their enemies.

In the matter of the sectarian divisions of Islam, which from the first have rendered Pan-Islamism impracticable, this writer's method is to some extent drastic: the minor sects in the Ottoman Empire (i.e. probably the Zeidis, Isma‛ilis, Nuseiris, etc.) should be wiped out. In the case of the more important Shi‛ah sect his advice is that the Moslem should forget that he is a Sunni or a Shi‛i and remember only that he is a Moslem. This probably means that the Shi‛is, who are in a minority, should abandon their system in favour of the other.

While asserting the superiority of Islam morally to Christianity as practised in Europe, he is anxious that European science should be adopted and its methods assimilated; and he advises the adoption of the distinction between the civil and the religious code, to the unification of which he attributes the decadence of Islam. Education should, he holds, be taken out of the hands of religious authorities and be secularized; thus mediaeval scholasticism will be abolished. What concerns the conscience should be left to religion, whereas commercial affairs should be regulated by codes which admit of improvement. These doctrines are so unorthodox that his Arabic translator has occasionally to register a protest. They look like Pan-Islamism with the Islam omitted.

This writer repeatedly speaks of the Moslems as a nation of 300 million individuals attached to each other by a bond of unique strength; indeed, the phrase Union of Islam is, he thinks, tautologous, as the word Islam of itself implies union. Whatever

may be the truth of this as a theory, it is confirmed neither by ancient nor by modern practice. Some writers, in general favourable to Islam, speak of dissension and civil war as unavoidable in Moslem communities; and doubtless this has led to that loss of political power which gave rise to the Pan-Islamic movement.

The work called Qaum Jadid (“The New Nation”), by Ubaid-alla Efendi, formerly member for Aidin, and at one time editor of an anti-Arabian journal in Arabic, which appeared about the same time, perhaps in the main advocated the same ideas, only it was far more outspoken. It demanded that every Moslem should give half his wealth to the Ottoman treasury in order to enable it to muster forces capable of recovering its lost provinces; anyone who declined to make this sacrifice was to be considered an apostate. Its idea of Islam was somewhat loose—there was no occasion to study Arabic, as the Friday sermon might be delivered in Turkish, and the Qur‛an and other sacred books might be translated. The Sacred War was a duty incumbent on all Moslems, and such of them as lived contentedly under non-Moslem rulers were apostates, for by pleasing unbelievers they offended God. All Moslems in Ottoman countries who failed to enlist under the banner of the party of Union and Progress were to be regarded as apostates; as such the Albanians were to be branded. To follow the ritual prescribed in the books of the orthodox jurists was unlawful, for the new school had deduced five principles from the Qur‛an. These were: 1, reason; 2, the Moslem formula of faith; 3, good character; 4, the duty of fighting with person and wealth; 5, that of striving to furnish the requisites of war by uniting under the banner of the Caliph.

Little could in fact be hoped from attempts to rouse men to make great sacrifices in the cause of Islam when all which constitutes Islam to the ordinary believer is abandoned; and Mr. Wyman Bury, in his acute analysis of the causes which militate against Pan-Islamism, gives the first place to the contempt shown by the Turks for the ordinances which Islam holds sacred. “Even before the war,” he says, “ Yemen Arabs talked of Turks and Moslems, a distinctly damning discrimination.” The Turkish proclivity towards European dress and civilization, which he regards as another source of weakness, is scarcely to be distinguished from this, though the antithesis between civilization and its absence is to be found in other Moslem countries; and the Pan-Islamic encouragement of education as Europeans understand it, while in appearance rendering the movement formidable, has also rendered it suspect to large multitudes who would gladly emulate the ancient Islamic heroes. For the Islamic cult, which is thus so altered as to be unrecognizable, the Pan-Turanians endeavour to substitute a national ideal with a set of heroes, largely pagan, who are to displace the Prophet's family and the Four Pious Caliphs as objects of general reverence. This disrespect is naturally resented by Arab and other non-Turkish Moslems.

The former of the works described is far more characteristic than the latter of the general tone of Pan-Islamic journalism. It is full of accusations against the European Powers in control of Islamic territories, charging them with oppressing the Moslems, depriving them of elementary human rights, sowing dissension among them, and the like; yet rarely able to bring evidence justifying these charges, and compelled to ignore the fact that the Moslems prosper far more in countries protected by Europeans than where they are left to themselves. Its great hero is the Ottoman Sultan Selim I., whose chief title to fame is that he fought against and overthrew another Islamic sultanate, that of Egypt, and forcibly incorporated various Islamic countries in the Ottoman Empire. In places it is asserted that the unity of Islam is an undeniable fact wherewith Europe is confronted; in others, that the troubles of Islam are all due to its divisions. Hence the vagueness of both aim and method which characterized the earlier Pan-Islamism is conspicuous in this statement; and many a prophecy is uttered with regard to the future of European states which the years following its publication have falsified. To the latter work the term Pan-Islamism can scarcely be applied. Its programme is indeed clear enough—a general revolt of all Moslems against their European rulers in order to swell the armies of the Ottomans, the Ottomans meanwhile

practically abandoning Islam. The summing-up of the situation in Arabia by Mr. Wyman Bury in 1914 would hold good of many other Islamic lands: “The Arab still acknowledges the Sultan as Caliph, but repudiates the Ottoman Government and all its works.” Some Moslems of Java threatened to abandon the khutbah to the Sultan if the ideas of the Turkish extremists materialized. And indeed Pan-Islamism at this stage contained no practical formula which any but Turks would adopt.

4. Pan-Islamism during the World War (1914-1918).—Shortly after the Turkish Empire entered the war on the side of the German alliance the Grand Mufti declared a jihad, summoning all Moslems to arms in defence of their faith. General Liman von Sanders asserts that this call was absolutely without response; the reason, he holds, being that the pretext was obviously false, inasmuch as Turkey was itself in alliance with non-Moslem Powers and, indeed, fighting for their benefit and under their command. He quotes an Italian minister for the statement that the call was absolutely neglected by the Moslems of Tripoli. Further, the French Government issued a counterblast in a collection of expressions of loyalty from Moslem authorities of the French African Empire (Collection de la Revue du Monde Musulman, 1915, 1916, called Le Salut au Drapeau, in the English edition Honour to the Flag), wherein all Moslems are called upon to fight for France. The call seems to have been issued half-heartedly, even within the Ottoman dominions. When the official at the Mosque of Damascus had to proclaim the Sacred War from its pulpit, seeing a group of German officers among the congregation he said: “I am ordered to proclaim jihad. A jihad is, as you know, a Holy War to protect our Holy Places against infidels. This being so, what are those infidel pigs doing in our mosque?” This story is told by Mr. Wyman Bury (Pan-Islam, 1919, p. 81), who adds: “Those who forged the blade of this counterfeit jihad could not temper it in the flame of religious fervour, and it shattered against the shield of religious tolerance and good faith.”

Doubtless the most serious blow which the unity of Islam received during the war was the entry into it of the Sherif of Mecca on the British side in 1916. The Sherif in his proclamations (published in his organ, the Qibla, and reprinted in the Manar, vol. xix.) made it clear that his quarrel was not with the Ottoman Empire, but only with the Party of Union and Progress, who had reproduced the worst atrocities of the Umayyads by firing at the House of God and slaughtering worshippers. As, however, this party represented the Ottoman Government, this act produced a definite division in Islam which is unlikely ever to be repaired. Uncertain as the sense to be attached to the title Caliph has ordinarily been, the idea has on the whole prevailed that he should have control of the sanctuaries and the access to them; there seems no means of devising a formula which should combine a Turkish Caliphate with an independent Hejaz. On the other hand, the removal of Turkish rule from Arabia, to which the events which followed the secession of the Hejaz led, has done little or nothing to realize the dream of Jalal Nuri of an empire embracing all the speakers of Arabic. The establishment of the Hejaz kingdom probably on the whole accentuated the sectarian differences which were already rife in the peninsula. A mission was indeed sent by the Emperor of Morocco to the Sherif of Mecca to congratulate him on his assertion of independence; but the legal authority who accompanied it gave it as his opinion that where Islamic countries were at a great distance from each other there was no objection to their being subject to different Imams; Morocco had at no time recognized the Eastern Caliphate, in whosesoever possession it happened to be; the independence of the Sherif therefore in no way affected the Moroccan Caliphate. Moreover, the history of Islam attested the frequent coexistence of numerous Caliphs (Revue du Monde Musulman, xxxiv., 1917-8, p. 140). The rise of this new power in the sanctuaries was not therefore to furnish a new principle of unity for Islam; it only helped to get rid of that round which the old Pan-Islamic ideas had been grouped.

In lieu of this there is some Pan-Arabian agitation; such at least is the purpose of a violent diatribe reprinted in the Manar

for August 1919 from an Arabic newspaper appearing in Brazil called Suriyyah al-Jadidah (“New Syria”), for the preceding May, wherein the author urges the Arabs to unite and emulate the exploits of the early heroes of Islam. Apparently he contemplates an Arab federation, to be governed by an assembly which is to meet at one of “the great Arabian cities,” with home rule for the separate states. This orator names the Turks with the English and the French among the oppressors of the Arabs, whence his proposed confederation is evidently not intended to include any who are not Arabs by race or adoption; and indeed he traces the servitude of the Arabs to the practice of the Abbasid Caliphs, who relied on Persian and Turkish retainers in lieu of depending on Arab forces exclusively. In addition to this he traces their downfall to the personal ambition of the Arabs, each one of whom aspires to be chief. Probably this is in the main intended as anti-French propaganda; but it would seem that quite early in the war some persons had aimed at establishing a union between the various states in Arabia itself, to be extended into the neighbouring countries with a view to resist the enforced Turkification with which they were threatened. It failed to materialize because the Sherif of Mecca had reasons for refusing to join it, and the course of the war by no means tended to allay divisions between the states of Arabia; indeed, in July 1918 the King of the Hejaz issued a proclamation declaring the Wahabis infidels and urging his subjects to resist them with force. This conflict “wounded the heart of every Arab who desired the unity of his race and every Moslem who disliked discord between his co-religionists.”

The attempts that have been made during these years in other Islamic countries to propagate the idea of a Moslem union seem to have been ordinarily similar to those which preceded the Ottoman Constitution. They consist largely in the encouragement of education, and the founding of societies and journals whose purpose is to keep the Moslems together, and to maintain some sort of relations with their co-religionists in other parts of the world. Certain countries, indeed, appear to have been outside the reach of such efforts; and there are some wherein if attempted they have been unsuccessful. The general result of the war would seem to be to show that the Pan-Islamic idea was doomed to disappointment from the first. The European Powers against whom it was directed—England, France, Russia and afterwards Italy—received during the course of it great proofs of loyalty and attachment from their Moslem subjects; and even if we do not take every protestation at its face value, it seems clear that there was little sense of unity with the Turks on the ground of common religion on the part of these populations, in which, on the contrary, the sense of patriotism to the empires within which they are incorporated had been developed. The proclamation of a jihad with no response shows that the time for the employment of that instrument has passed, if indeed it was ever effective; the insertion of the Ottoman Sultan's name in the khutbah of so many peoples, to whom he was unknown, no more made him their real ruler in this century than that of an Abbasid in the 10th or 15th century secured for the Caliph any real power. Possibly the call attracted attention to the nature of and qualifications for the Caliphate, a subject which the Ottomans were imprudent in bringing to the forefront.

This is not, indeed, the view of some Moslems in India, who have established an All-India Caliphate Committee, with a series of publications on the Question of the Caliphate. The first of this series contains the presidential address of “Maulana Abul-Kalam,” purporting to have been delivered at the provincial Caliphate Conference held in Calcutta Feb. 28 and 29, 1920. This treatise presents the most bellicose aspect of Pan-Islamism, and differs little from the Qaum Jadid described above. The jihad, according to it, is the primary duty of the Moslem; if the Turks are apt to be lax in their ritual, it must be remembered that for centuries they alone maintained the jihad, at a time when the Indian Moslems were enjoying peace and security. An endeavour is made to show that ever since the time of Sultan Selim I. the Caliphate of the Ottoman Sultan has been generally recognized. It is argued that there can be only one Caliph, and that

it is the duty of every Moslem to be his obedient subject; and in particular to aid him in repelling invasions by unbelievers of Islamic territory and expelling them where they are already in possession; Islamic territory would appear to include the whole inhabited world. At the least the author claims that Arabia, Palestine and Iraq are the property of the Ottoman Sultan, which must be restored to him if the sentiments of the Moslems are not to be wounded. The Indian Caliphate Delegation sent to London went so far as to demand the cession of all the European lands which the Ottomans had ever occupied.

Ideas of this sort—not always carried to these lengths—are expressed by various authors and journalists in India, few of whose names are known in Europe. The best known of those who are claimed as advocates of them is probably the poet and philosopher Mohammed Iqbal, M.A., Ph.D. See this writer's Secrets of the Self, transl. R. A. Nicholson, London, 1920.

5. After the War. To what extent we can speak of Pan-Islamism since the Armistice is not clear. On the one hand it is evident that the occupation of Constantinople by foreign forces and the redaction of the Ottoman Empire to a comparatively small area have produced a feeling of depression among the Islamic peoples, who can no longer look with confidence to a great Islamic Power as the natural leader in some scheme for the recovery of hegemony in Asia and Africa; on the other hand, the feud between Sunnah and Shi‛ah shows no signs of healing, and though an Arabian Caliphate may not yet have been formally proclaimed, the severance of the Arabs from the Turks appears to have been definitely concluded. Even within the Ottoman system there is at this moment a schism, since the authority in power at Angora acts independently of the Caliph of Constantinople, and appears to rely on Turanian support, so far as it obtains any from Islamic peoples; while its endeavour to obtain support from Bolshevism is calculated to wound the sentiment of orthodox Islam, which is far removed from the principles of that system. Further, it would appear that the tendency of recent events has been to emphasize nationalism, and create a desire in the various Arabic-speaking countries for complete independence rather than for absorption in an Islamic empire, even on the condition of decentralization, which was the catch-word of the old Pan-Islamism. A Pan-Islamic tendency may perhaps be found in the Indian Caliphate agitation, but, even if it be taken at its face value, it is clear that it is making demands for the Ottoman Caliph which his former subjects do not back, and many who have made sacrifices for this idea have found no encouragement from Islamic rulers who at one time were supposed to recognize this title.

Conjectures are indeed at times put forward concerning the existence of agencies organizing simultaneous outbreaks in different Islamic countries against their European protectors; such may certainly exist, but the results hitherto achieved indicate little in the way of coöperation or clearness of aim; and indeed ‛Abdul Hamid II., who gave some encouragement to the Pan-Islamic idea, which was that Turkey should lead a jihad against the European possessors of Islamic countries, does not appear himself to have entertained such a project, though he thought the fear of it might help him in checking European interference with his internal government. The governments which have followed have probably hoped for greater results, but have obtained very much less, being unable either to maintain the independence of Moslem states outside their empire or to preserve the integrity of that empire itself. It would seem then that Pan-Islamism, should it again acquire importance, must seek some other point d'appui than the Ottoman Empire; but only the future can tell whether such a point d'appui will be found.

(D. S. M.*)


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/460

Rh and meaningless as the ordinary Deeds of Surrender.

The Valor Ecclesiasticus gives the clear in- come of the friars at Aylesbury as £3 2s. 5d. London valued the whole propertyclose, fields, garden and siteat £6 2s. 4d. ; the timber round the house was worth £6 13s. 4d.

Pointed oval seal, red in colour and chipped at the top, attached to the Deed of Surrender dated 1 October, 1538. The impression, which is somewhat indistinct, represents St. Francis to the right beneath a tree lifting up the right hand and holding in the left hand a pastoral staff. In the branches of the tree are two birds before him and on the left a friar kneeling. The whole may represent the story of St. Francis preaching to the birds. Legend : ... COMUNITATIS : FRA ... UM : AYLESBURIE.

The oldest hospital in Buckinghamshire seems to have been that of St. John Baptist at Aylesbury, which is said to have been founded during the reign of Henry I. by Robert Ilhale, William atte Hide, William son of Robert and John Palnok for the main- tenance of lepers and sick persons. The men of Aylesbury appointed the masters. It was endowed with a messuage and 21 acres of land and 4 acres of meadow in Aylesbury. The house had however fallen into great poverty by the reign of Edward III., and was united in 1384 with that of St. Leonard in the same town.

The hospital of St. Leonard at Aylesbury was founded apparently at about the same time as the Hospital of St. John Baptist, and was intended also to receive lepers. It was endowed with a messuage and 14 acres of land and 2 acres of meadow in Aylesbury, but fell into poverty at the same time as the hospital of St. John, and was united to it before 1384. Both had ceased to exist long before the suppression of the chantries. The founders' names are said to have been Samson son of William, Reginald Wauncy, and others. In 1360 Eleanor, Countess of Ormond, claimed to hold the ad- vowson as lady of the town of Aylesbury, and she is said to have presented John de Adyn- grave, John Synekere and another as masters. In 1384 Walter Bere was appointed master of the united hospitals by the king by reason of the wardship of the heir of James Butiller, Earl of Ormonde.

The hospital of St. John Baptist is men- tioned only once, under the year 1279, in the Hundred Rolls of this county, where it is stated that the master held one acre of land for which he paid id. yearly. It is just pos- sible that the chapel of St. John Baptist, be- longing to the hospital of St. Thomas of Aeon in London, and endowed with a chantry by Matthew Stratton in 1268, may have ori- ginally been the chapel of this hospital ; but this is mere conjecture.

The hospital of St. Laurence was founded, for the purpose of sheltering lepers, probably during the thirteenth century, though it is not mentioned earlier than the fourteenth. The master and brethren received an indul- gence in 1321 from Bishop Burghersh, to in- duce the faithful of the neighbourhood to contribute to their necessities. In 1337 it was stated that they had not enough for their livelihood unless they could be relieved by contributions from a somewhat wider circle, and they were consequently allowed to seek alms from those outside the town of Bucking- ham. In 1 347 a certain Gilbert of Bucking- ham endowed the hospital with lands of the value of 10 marks, out of compassion for the poverty of the master and brethren. The depreciation of property after the Great Pes- tilence probably made it impossible for the house to be maintained any longer. Nearly all the hospitals of the county came to an end at this period.

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/460


text:
Author:Charles Henry Hart

Works

 * "The Earliest Painter in America" from Harper's New Monthly Magazine (March 1898)

title: Author:Charles Henry Hart


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/Lysons, Daniel (1816-1898)


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/461

Rh There were certainly two hospitals, at Newport Pagnel, even if we identify the ' New Hospital ' of 1240 with that of St. John Baptist. If the identification should prove to be a mistake there would be three, but it seems most probable that it is correct. The ' New Hospital ' is first mentioned in a will of 1240 : an inquisition of 1245 alludes to the master of the hospital of St. John Baptist among the tenants of Roger de Somery. According to a foundation charter quoted in Bull's History of Newport Pagnel the hospital of St. John Baptist was said to have been founded by John de Somery ; a commission appointed at the new foundation under James I. reported that it was first built in the reign of Henry III. or earlier, and until 1275 had a master, brethren and sisters. Letters of protection were granted in that year to a master and brethren only, but in 1329 again to a master, brethren and sisters ; Indul- gences were granted to those who would con- tribute to the maintenance of the house in 1301 and 1336 ; in 1332 the brethren received a licence from the king to collect alms once a year. In 1336 it was stated that the master and brethren had become quite depen- dent on charity. By 1387 there is no more allusion to the hospital : masters were insti- tuted from that time forward to the ' free chapel or hospital ' of St. John Baptist and St. John Evangelist. At the Suppression of the Chantries and Hospitals the commissioners stated that the original intent of the founda- tion was unknown : the house was down, the chapel sore in decay, and no hospitality had been kept for sixteen years. The incumbent was ' of honest understanding,' but non- was resident. The clear revenue of the house was £6 10s. 6d.

It seems probable that as there was another hospital founded at Newport, this one may have been originally intended for the poor. It was refounded for this purpose, under the name of Queen Anne's Hospital, in the reign of James I.

Adam Russell, resigned 1291 Gilbert de Luda, elected 1291, died 1303 Richard of Willen, elected 1303 John Drayton, elected 1340 William Draper, elected 1345, resigned Thomas Atte More, elected 1355, died Henry de Hauksherd, instituted 1360, died 1369 Ralf Hey ward, instituted 1369, resigned John Dene, instituted 1374, resigned 1381 John Carter, instituted 1381, died 1386 Thomas Mody, instituted 1386 Henry Smith, died 1483 William Baynton, S.T.P., instituted 1483, died 1496 Thomas Wimeston, instituted 1496, died Thomas Smytheson, instituted 1501, died Thomas Copland, S.T.P., instituted 1506, resigned 1510 Edward Champion, instituted 1510, died Thomas Thornham, instituted 1528, died John Saunderson, instituted 1548

This hospital is only mentioned once in a will dated 1240. Its date of foundation, its purpose, and the time when it finally dis- appeared are alike unknown.

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/461


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/Macallum, Hamilton


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/Macartney, James


text:
Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/462

Rh

This hospital was built upon the bridge of Stony Stratford, and was intended for the poor. It was in existence in 1306, and prob- ably some time before, as it seems to have been rebuilt in 1310. It contained a master and brethren, who received grants of indul- gence for those who should contribute to the fabric of the hospital in 1306, 1310, and 1313. It was still in existence in 1353, but probably not much later, for already in 1329 the master and brethren were without the means of living unless others would come to their aid.

An indulgence was granted to the hospital of St. John Baptist at Wendover, and to the brethren of the same, in 1311. Nothing further is known of the history of the house.

The hospital of St. Margaret is mentioned first in 1229, when a yearly fair was granted to the master and leprous brethren on the vigil of the feast of St. Margaret. Richard, mas- ter of ' the hospital for the sick ' at Wycombe, jointly with the master of the hospital of Crowmersh, sued Walter Champion for tithes in 1268 ; and the same two masters claimed a tenth sheaf in the fields of Wigan de Walling- ford in Oving, after the church tithes had been collected. These suits may refer either to the hospital of St. Margaret or to that of St. Giles, the hospital of St. John being appar- ently for the poor.

An indulgence was granted in 1368 to the hospital of ' St. Gilbert and St. Margaret next Wycombe ' by Bishop Bokyngham.

The hospital of St. Giles, High Wycombe, was founded for the reception of lepers before 1229, when letters of protection were issued to these. In 1389 John Skefthyngwas ap- pointed warden, but shortly after this date it was dissolved. It was granted early in the reign of Henry V. to a certain Thomas Giles, and its endowments were finally bestowed upon the college of Windsor.

This hospital was certainly in existence early in the thirteenth century, if not in the twelfth. In an inquisition taken in 1245, it was found that the brethren and sisters of this house were bound to distribute annually on Lady Day to the poor who should ask alms at their gate bread to the amount of two quarters of wheat, and also to pray for the soul of Adam Walder, who may have been the founder. A fragment of a charter exists which must have been made out between 1235 and 1241. In 1236 the master of the hospital gained the day in a suit with Richard of Rouen concerning a carucate of land in High Wycombe. In 1239 the brethren re- ceived a grant of a yearly fair on the vigil of the Translation of St.Thomas of Canterbury.

In 1548 the commissioners found that there was a master in possession of the hospital, but no brethren. The original purpose of the foun- dation was quite forgotten, and the charter had been burnt. It was still however a part of the master's duty to find three beds for poor and infirm persons coming through the town.

After the Suppression of Chantries the house was sold to the mayor and burgesses, and converted into a grammar school. In 1302 and 1346 the master of St. John's Hospital held one-fifth of a knight's fee in Wycombe. Its clear value at the suppres- sion was £8 10s. {{c|{{sc|Masters of the Hospital}}

Gilbert, occurs 1236 Robert, occurs 1265 {{smallrefs}} {{c|394}}

title: Page:VCH Buckinghamshire 1.djvu/462


text: Dictionary of National Biography, 1901 supplement/McCosh, James