FOOTNOTES:

FOOTNOTES:[1]The reader will not need to be reminded of the striking summary given by Dr. Newman, in hisLectures on the Turks(pp. 131-133), of the successive measures, spiritual and otherwise, taken by the Popes, from the eleventh to the eighteenth century, to rouse Christendom to a common crusade against the Ottomans, and to mark each victory obtained over them as afait accompliin the commemorations of the Church.[2]St. John the Baptist, the patron of the Order.[3]Roger of Wendover, in hisFlowers of History, relates a similar instance of admirable courage on the part of the nuns of Coldingham in Berwickshire, when the country was invaded by the merciless Danes in the year 870. Assembling all the sisters, the holy abbess addressed them, and having obtained from them a promise of implicit obedience to her maternal commands, she “took a razor, and with it cut off her nose, together with her upper lip unto the teeth, presenting herself a horrible spectacle to those who stood by. Filled with admiration at this heroic deed, the whole community followed her example, and each did the like to themselves. With the morrow’s dawn came those most cruel tyrants, to disgrace the holy women dedicated to God, and to pillage and burn the monastery; but on beholding the abbess and all the sisters so frightfully mutilated and stained with their own blood from the sole of their foot unto their head, they retreated in haste from the spot, thinking a moment too long for tarrying there. But as they were retiring, the leaders ordered their wicked followers to set fire and burn the monastery, with all its buildings and its holy inmates. Which being done, the holy abbess and all the holy virgins with her attained the glory of martyrdom.”[4]The legend is as follows: “A huge serpent, or crocodile,—for it is described as an amphibious animal,—had taken up its abode in a cavern on the brink of a marsh situated at the base of Mount St. Stephen, about two miles from the city, from whence it sallied forth frequently in search of prey. Not only cattle, but even men, became its victims; and the whole island trembled at its voracity. Knight after knight, ambitious of the renown of slaying such a monster, stole singly and secretly to its haunt, and never returned. The creature was covered with scales, which were proof against the keenest arrows and darts: and at length the grand master held it his duty to forbid the knights from courting so unequal an encounter. Deodato de Gozon, a knight of Provence, alone failed to respect this prohibition, and resolved to deliver the island from the monster, or perish. Having often reconnoitered the beast from a distance, he constructed a model of it of wood or pasteboard, and habituated two young bull-dogs to throw themselves under its belly on a certain cry being given, while he himself, mounted and clad in armour, assailed it with his lance. Having perfected his arrangements, he bestrode his charger, and rode down privately into the marsh, leaving several confidential attendants stationed in a spot from whence they could behold the combat. The monster no sooner beheld him approach, than it ran, with open mouth and eyes darting fire, to devour him. Gozon charged it with his lance; but the impenetrable scales turned aside the weapon; and his steed, terrified at the fierce hissing and abominable effluvium of the creature, became so ungovernable that he had to dismount and trust to his good sword and his dogs. But the scales of the monster were as proof against his falchion as his lance. With a slap of its tail it dashed him to the earth, and was just opening its voracious jaws to devour him, helmet, hauberk, spurs and all, when his faithful dogs gripped it tightly with their teeth in a vulnerable part of the belly. On this the knight quickly sprang to his feet, and thrust his sword up to the hilt in a place which had no scales to defend it. The monster, rearing itself in agony, fell with a tremendous hiss on the knight, and again prostrated him in the dust; and though it instantly gasped its last, so prodigious was its size that Gozon would have been squeezed to death, had not his attendants, seeing the object of their terror deprived of life, made haste to his assistance. They found their master in a swoon; but after they had with great difficulty drawn him from under the serpent, he began to breathe again, and speedily recovered. The fame of this achievement being bruited in the city, a multitude of people hurried forth to meet him. He was conducted in triumph to the grand master’s palace; but that dignitary, heedless of popular acclamation, sternly demanded wherefore he had violated his orders, and commanded him to be carried to prison. At a subsequent meeting of the council he proposed that the culprit should atone for his disobedience with his life; but this severe sentence was mitigated to a deprivation of the habit of the order. To this degradation he was forced to submit; but in a little time the grand master relented, and not only restored him to his former rank, but loaded him with favours.” Sutherland’sKnights of Maltavol. i. pp. 275-277.[5]“In his bull, he bewails the sins of Christendom, which had brought upon them the scourge which is the occasion of his invitation. He speaks of the massacres, the tortures and slavery which had been inflicted on multitudes of the faithful. ‘The mind is horrified,’ he says, ‘at the very mention of these miseries; but it crowns our anguish to reflect, that the whole of Christendom, which if in concord might put an end to these and even greater evils, is either in open war, country with country, or if in apparent peace, is secretly wasted by mutual jealousies and animosities.’” Newman’sLectures on the History of the Turks, pp. 177-8.[6]The loss of this battle seems mainly attributable to the rash and arrogant confidence of the French chevaliers. The general conduct of the crusaders likewise was not such as to warrant any expectation of God’s blessing on their enterprise. Not only did they, at thesiege of Raco, refuse quarter to such as laid down their arms, but immediately before the first onset at Nicopolis they massacred a number of Turkish prisoners who had surrendered under promise that their lives should be spared. (Creasy’sHistory of the Ottoman Turks, vol. i. pp. 58-60.) This act of cruelty, however, has been attributed not to the veteran knights, but to some headstrong and intemperate men among their juniors who took the matter into their own hands. Sutherland, vol. i. p. 309.[7]Commonly called Tamerlane, from Timourlenk,i. e.Timour the Lame,—the name given him by his countrymen on account of the effects of a wound received in early life. His massacres were of a wholesale description. At Ispahan he had a tower constructed of 70,000 human heads; and when Bagdad revolted, he exacted no less than 90,000 for the same purpose. On his march to Delhi, the future capital of his empire, he ordered a general slaughter of his prisoners, 100,000 in number; compelling each of his captains and soldiers to kill his captives with his own hands, under penalty of being themselves put to death, and their property and wives given up to the informer. But Von Hammer relates an instance of his cruelty still more horrible. At the taking of Sebaste, 4,000 Armenian Christians had capitulated, on the condition that, though they were to be sent into slavery, their lives were to be spared. No sooner, however, had they surrendered than the tyrant, faithless to his oath, ordered them to be buried alive with circumstances of the most atrocious barbarity. They were thrown ten together into deep pits with their heads tied between their knees; planks were then laid across, and earth heaped upon them; and there they were left, in their living graves, to die a death of slow and lingering torture.[8]Here also Timour reared a tower of human heads; but as neither garrison nor town afforded a sufficient number to raise the structure to the accustomed height, he was compelled to have a layer of mud placed between each row of heads.[9]“Unless the Lord keep the city, he who keepeth it watcheth in vain.”[10]Vertot.[11]The Janizaries (Yeni tscheri, or “new troops”) were composed entirely of the children of Christians, who had been forced, usually at a tender age, to adopt Mahometanism. They were torn from their parents, and trained to renounce the faith in which they were born and baptised, and to profess the creed of Mahomet. They were then carefully educated for a soldier’s life; the discipline to which they were subjected being peculiar, and in some respects severe. They were taught to pay the most implicit obedience, and to bear without repining fatigue, pain, and hunger. At first they were made to share with the peasants the labours of the field, after which they were drafted into the companies of the Janizaries, but only to commence a second noviciate. Sometimes they were employed in the menial duties of the palace; sometimes in the public works, the dockyards, or the imperial gardens. But liberal honours and prompt promotion were the sure rewards of docility and courage. Some attained to the highest dignities in the state; and one of them married the sister of the sultan. Cut off from all ties of country, kith, and kin, but with high pay and privileges, with ample opportunities for military advancement and for the gratification of the violent, the sensual, and the sordid passions of their animal natures amid the customary atrocities of successful warfare, this military brotherhood grew up to be the strongest and fiercest instrument of imperial ambition which remorseless fanaticism, prompted by the most subtle state-craft, ever devised upon earth. As the Turkish power extended itself in Europe, care was taken to recruit the chosen corps from children who were natives of that continent rather than among the Asiatics. This terrible body of infantry, so long the scourge of Christendom and the terror of their own sovereigns, was during three centuries (the conquering period of the Ottoman power) recruited by an annual enrolment of 1000 Christian children; so that no less than 300,000 baptised souls were thus made the polluted and sanguinary ministers and agents of Mahometan crime and dominion. From the year 1648, in the reign of Mahomet IV., the recruits were taken from among the children of Janizaries and native Turks; and finally the whole corps, 20,000 in number, was annihilated in our own day by means of a barbarous massacre. Creasy, vol. i. pp. 20-24, 161. Newman’sLectures, pp. 137, 267-8.[12]Gulielmus Caoursinus.[13]Such is Vertot’s description. Von Hammer’s account differs; but the subject is involved in some confusion.[14]Now calledSunbullu,i. e.“covered with hyacinths.” (Von Hammer.)[15]Von Hammer questions this fact, as resting on no authority; but, however this may be, it is remarkable how many of the ablest leaders of the Ottoman forces, and of course the most inveterate foes of the Christian name, were apostates. Their malice seemed insatiable; and many of the worst atrocities recorded in Turkish warfare were perpetrated by them. It was at the instigation of three renegades from the order that Mahomet undertook this very expedition against Rhodes; and the reader of history will not fail to notice, that in almost every renewed enterprise against Christendom, an apostate from the faith was its contriver or its conductor. “If we look,” says Professor Creasy, “to the period when the Turkish power was at its height,—the period of the reign of Solyman I. and Selim II.,—we shall find that out of ten viziers of this epoch eight were renegades. Of the other high dignitaries of the Porte during the same period, we shall find that at least twelveof her bestgenerals, and four of her most renowned admirals,were supplied toher by Christian countries.”[16]D’Aubusson, in his despatch, omits all personal mention of himself, and merely says, “We of the relief party ascended from Jew street,” &c.[17]Written also Zain or Zizim.[18]Von Hammer considers this letter apocryphal.[19]This is Taaffe’s defence of D’Aubusson and of the order against the charge of “making money” by Djem’s captivity, as is asserted by Ottoman historians. That prince’s expenditure, he says, was very great, owing to the state in which he lived, and the constant coming and going of ambassadors to and from Constantinople and other courts. The knights also maintained at their own cost Djem’s only son Amurath, who became a Christian, and his family.[20]Taaffe gives the letter at length. D’Aubusson’s accusers of course deny its genuineness.[21]Subsequently appointed by Solyman grand admiral of the Turkish fleet.[22]“Such was the esteem with which the valour of the knights had inspired the Turks, that they refrained from defacing their armorial bearings and inscriptions on the buildings. For more than 300 years the Ottomans have treated the memory of their brave foemen with the same respect; and the escutcheons of the Knights of St. John, who fought against Sultan Solyman for Rhodes, still decorate the long-captured city.” “The street of the knights is uninjured,” writes Marshal Marmont, “and the door of each house is still ornamented with the escutcheon of the last inhabitant. The buildings have been spared, but are unoccupied; and we could almost fancy ourselves surrounded by the shades of departed heroes. The arms of France, the noblefleurs-de-lis, are seen in all directions. I observed those of the Clermont Tennerres, and of other ancient and illustrious families.” (Creasy, vol. i. p. 263.) “The Turks,” says Taaffe, “never destroyed so much of Rhodes as the French during their first days at Malta, pulling down all the statues of renowned heroes, and chiselling out the coats-of-arms every where, even over the palace.” Vol. iv. p. 217.[23]Fontanus, cited by Taaffe.[24]In the end there seem to have been 200,000 Turks, including pioneers, collected in Rhodes.[25]Some of these enormous balls are still found from time to time in front of the walls and within the fortress; proof positive of the truth of the assertion made by historians. The Turks also used shells for the first time in this siege. (Von Hammer.)[26]“Le grand maistre repoussa l’ennemien personne, la toste baissée, et la pique en main.” (Goussancourt.)[27]Mustapha was recalled the next year at the earnest representations of his wife, the sultan’s sister, and restored to the imperial favour. The end of Achmet was, that, being deprived of his office of grand vizier and sent to Egypt, he excited the Mamelukes to revolt, and was defeated and killed. He had even entered into correspondence with L’Isle Adam, and made proposals for restoring Rhodes to the order.[28]Fontanus declares that the sultan gave the grand master his right hand, and even raised the imperial diadem a little from his head in saluting him; a ceremony never used by Ottoman sovereigns even towards Mahometan kings. “It is but justice to say,” adds Boisgelin, “that his troops, belonging to a nation of all others most adverse to the arts, would have thought the splendour of their victory tarnished had they possessed themselves of the arms and escutcheons of the knights, which (as was mentioned in a previous note) they permitted to remain uninjured.” The archives and the relics were also faithfully preserved, and given up to the Knights, who carried with them at the same time their beloved image of our Lady of Philermos.[29]He had hoped to escape from the island in disguise, in the company of the Knights; but had been detected by the sultan’s spies.[30]“In adversity our only hope.”[31]“Les Chevaliers, selon leur ancienne instruction, pansoient et servoient les malades, mesme le grand maistre: ce qui fit admirer toute la ville de Messine, et les autres villes où les Chevaliers ont demeurés.” (Goussancourt.)[32]Lord Carlisle, in hisDiary in Turkish and Greek Waters, speaking of the present relative condition of Rhodes and Malta, says, “I have qualified myself for adjudging that, in most respects, the tables are now turned between the two islands; and they certainly afford a very decisive criterion of the results of Turkish and Christian dominion.”[33]A few weeks before their removal, in the spring of 1527, the Imperialists, who were marching to the sack of Rome under the Constable Bourbon, spared Viterbo, out of respect, it is said, for the grand master; although they plundered the neighbouring town, ill treated the inhabitants, burned down the churches, and committed excesses rivalling in atrocity those of the Turks themselves.[34]Some account of these English martyrs may not be here out of place. The first knight who suffered death in England for the faith was Adrian Fortescue, beheaded on the 8th of July 1539. After him followed two others, Ingley and Adrian Forrest, “who,” says Goussancourt, “being called on to recognise the king as head of the Church and to approve of his ordinances, chose, rather, courageously to suffer death than to live in delicacy, having made shipwreck of the faith. Thus they gave their lives as gloriously at home as they could ever have done in combat.” Henry offered Sir William Weston, Lord Prior of England (the priors sat in parliament on an equality with the first barons of the realm), a pension of 1000l. a-year; but that knight was so overwhelmed with grief at the suppression of his order that he never received a penny, but soon after died, and was buried in the chancel of the old church of St. James, Clerkenwell. Marmaduke Bohun, whom Goussancourt calls “the blessed,” was beheaded under Queen Elizabeth in 1585. Many others died in prison, in the same reign, from the horrible sufferings endured in their confinement; among whom we find the names of Sir Thomas Mytton and Sir Edward Waldegrave.[35]“Here lies Virtue victorious over Fortune.”[36]It was arranged by a secret treaty between Ferdinand and Zapolya that the latter should retain the crown till his death, when the whole of the kingdom should revert to Austria, Zapolya’s son retaining only his hereditary dignity of countship of Zips. But at Zapolya’s death his widow asserted the rights of her son as king of Hungary, and called in the sultan to her aid. Solyman turned the country into a Turkish province, professing all the time to be merely holding it until the child had attained his majority. War with Austria continued for many years, until, in 1547, a truce for five years was concluded, which left the sultan in possession of nearly the whole of Hungary and Transylvania, and which bound Ferdinand to the humiliating condition of paying a tribute of 30,000 ducats a-year. Hostilities were resumed on the very day the armistice expired.[37]Von Hammer, as cited inTwo Sieges of Vienna(Murray).[38]Khaireddin, better known in Europe by his surname of Barbarossa, was a native of Mitylene, and with his brothers practised piracy in the reigns of Bajazet and Selim, the latter of whom he formally recognised as his sovereign. He seized the strong city of Algiers, desolated the coasts of Naples, and captured Tunis. Solyman took him into his service, and conferred upon him the highest naval dignity, making him his admiral, or kapitan pasha. In the great battle off Previsa, September 28th, 1538, he defeated the combined fleets of the Pope (Paul III.), the emperor, and the republic of Venice.[39]At the taking of Tunis (July 21st, 1535) the Imperialists and liberated slaves committed such frightful excesses that Vertot says, it seemed as if Christians tried to rival and even to surpass the worst barbarians in cruelty and licentiousness. The details he gives are of the most revolting description. Tunis was retaken by the corsair Ouloudj Ali, in 1570, with the exception of the citadel, which was still held by the Spaniards. Don John of Austria retook it; but at the end of eighteen months it again fell into the power of the Turks, in whose possession it has since remained.[40]European historians (e. g.Vertot) have confounded this place with the town of Africa, or Afrikiya. (Von Hammer.)[41]Taaffe puts the number at 474 knights and 67 servants-at-arms, giving Bosio as his authority; but it does not appear that Bosio considered his list to be complete. His division according to countries is as follows:Knights.Servants-at-arms.Provence6115Auvergne2514France5724Italy1645England10Germany131Castile686Arragon852-----47467Prescott says that “the whole force which La Valette could muster in defence of the island amounted to about 9000 men. This included 700 knights, of whom about 600 had already arrived. The remainder were on their way, and joined him at a later period of the siege. Between 3000 and 4000 were Maltese, irregularly trained, but who had already gained some experience of war in their contests with the Barbary coasts. The rest of the army, with the exception of 500 galley-slaves and the personal followers of the knights, was made up of levies from Spain and Italy.”History of the Reign of Philip II., book iv. chap. 3.These volumes, which have appeared since the present sketch was written, contain a detailed and very animated description of this memorable siege.[42]This Turkish corsair (commonly called Ochiali) made himself famous in the succeeding reign. We shall meet with him again in the battle of Lepanto.[43]Piali was by birth a Croatian. On the 14th of May 1560 he had defeated and almost annihilated the combined Christian fleet commanded by the Genoese Doria, the favourite admiral of Charles V. The battle took place off the island of Djerbé.[44]Goussancourt gives the names of thirteen as having been found still alive by the Turks. One—Lawrence de Bonlieu—before being fastened to the cross, was firstflayed![45]Prescott says that the number of Christians who fell amounted to about 1500, of whom 123 were members of the order. The loss of the infidels he estimates at 8000.[46]Von Hammer says that both Turks and Christians declared that at the last assault they suddenly beheld upon the ramparts a lady and two men whom they had never seen before; that the Christians devoutly believed that it was the Blessed Virgin herself, accompanied by St. Paul and St. John Baptist, the patron of the order, and were animated in consequence to perform prodigies of valour; while the infidels, on the other hand, were seized with consternation.[47]The last knight who fell was Giovanni Malespina, and his death happened under curious circumstances. He was standing at the bastion of Castile, from whence he watched the embarkation of the Turks, and, full of joy andthankfulness, sangaloud theTe Deum. Whilst doing so, a chance shot struck him to the ground, but without interrupting his devotions; and he expired as he pronounced the words, “In te, Domine, speravi.”[48]Taaffe. It was, however, the custom at that time to give every city anepithetas well as a name. That chosen by the grand master was intended to express the modesty of an order whose only pride was to be in the Cross of Christ: it was “Humilissima.”[49]At the dispersion of the Knights, upon the occupation of Malta by the French, some took refuge in Russia; where, in the year 1801, a council met to deliberate on the election of a grand master. It was resolved that, as the elements of a general chapter could not be assembled at St. Petersburg, the different grand priors should be invited to convene their chapters for the purpose of forming lists of such knights as were worthy of succeeding to the sovereign dignity. These lists the council proposed afterwards to submit to the Pope, for him to choose a grand master out of them. Accordingly (Feb. 9, 1805) his Holiness Pius VII. nominated Tommasi, an Italian knight, grand master. In 1814 the French knights taking heart at the humiliation of their arch-enemy Napoleon, assembled at Paris in a general chapter, under the presidency of the prince Camille de Rohan, grand prior of Aquitaine, for the election of a permanent capitulary commission. Under the direction of this commission a formal but fruitless application was made to the congress of Vienna for a grant of some sovereign independency, in lieu of that of which the order had been so wrongfully despoiled. In 1823, when the Greek cause began to wear a prosperous aspect, the same chapter entered into a treaty with the Greeks for the cession of Sapienza and Cabressa, two islets on the western shore of the Morea, as a preliminary step to the re-conquest of Rhodes; to facilitate which arrangement an endeavour was made to raise a loan of 640,000l.in England, but the attempt failed. The council of the order is now established at Rome, and presided over by the Venerable Balio di Colloredo, lieutenant of the grand-mastership. A novitiate and hospital of the order are about to be erected at Jerusalem, under the sanction of the Holy See. His Holiness Pius IX. has approved a plan for the extension of the order, and for a more strict observance of its rule. The Englishlangue, or language of the order, no longer exists, though there are several English knights. The crowns of Spain, Russia, and Prussia give the cross of St. John as a decoration; but those knights are not members of the order, which is sovereign, and not subject to any temporal prince, and is accordingly styled the Sovereign, Military, and Religious Order of St. John of Jerusalem. The eight-cornered cross represents the eight beatitudes; and it is not a mere decoration, but the badge of a Catholic religious order.[50]Known in history as “Selim the Sot.” It is said he was instigated to the conquest of the island by a Jew, his boon companion, who represented to him how easily he could make himself master of the soil on which grew the grapes which produced his favourite wine.[51]For a short but spirited account of this heroic defence and its fatal catastrophe the reader is referred toThe Four Martyrs, by M. Rio.[52]On one of the last days of the siege he was struck by a ball and killed, while praying in the garden of his palace.[53]“Lord, into Thy hands I commend my spirit.”[54]“Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”[55]It was afterwards stolen by a Christian slave and taken to Venice, where it was deposited in an urn in the church of St. John and St. Paul; the martyr’s bones were also carefully collected, and buried in the church of St. Gregory.[56]Dr. Newman thus describes the effects of Turkish domination: “As to Cyprus, from holding a million of inhabitants, it now has only 30,000. Its climate was that of a perpetual spring, now it is unwholesome and unpleasant; its cities and towns nearly touched each other, now they are simply ruins. Corn, wine, oil, sugar, and the metals are among its productions; the soil is still exceedingly rich; but now, according to Dr. Clarke, ‘in that paradise of the Levant, agriculture is neglected, the inhabitants are oppressed, population is destroyed.’”The Turks, p. 149.[57]Nephew of the great admiral of the emperor Charles V.[58]In 1587, when the armada was in preparation, Queen Elizabeth tried to draw Sultan Amurath III. into an alliance with her against Philip and the Pope. Von Hammer gives the letters written on the occasion. With characteristic astuteness she appealed to the religious sympathies of the Turk, making common cause with him as the “destroyer of idolatry,” and declaring that together they could “strike down the proud Spaniard and the lying Pope with all their adherents.” Such were the representations made by the English envoy as to the religious belief of his queen and nation, that one of the Turkish ministers remarked to the Austrian ambassador, that “nothing more was wanted to turn the English into good Mussulmans than that they should lift a finger and recite the Eshdad” (or creed of Mahomet).[59]Von Hammer makes the Turkish fleet consist of 240 galleys and 60 vessels of smaller size, just 300 in all. His account of the Christian fleet is as follows: 70 Spanish galleys, 6 Maltese, 3 Savoy, 12 Papal, 108 Venetian; in all 199 galleys, to which he adds 6 huge galeasses contributed by Venice; making the sum-total 205 vessels.[60]Vertot. Von Hammer, as has been said, mentions six.[61]Von Hammer says that Ouloudj Ali struck off Giustiniani’s head with his own hand. Contarini, on the contrary, writes that he was “so badly wounded that he was all but killed.”[62]Allthe members of the order did not live in community; some were scattered about, and were liable to be called in, in case of emergencies—e. g.we find several Knights of St. John among the early governors and settlers of Canada.[63]“A trifling price to pay (he says in the Preface to the second part ofDon Quixote) for the honour of partaking in the first great action in which the naval supremacy of the Ottoman was successfully disputed by Christian arms.”[64]Von Hammer says fifteen; and that the Turks lost 224 vessels, of which 94 were burnt or shattered on the coast; the rest were divided among the allies. But this calculation leaves 36 vessels unaccounted for, after reckoning the 40 which Ouloudj Ali succeeded in saving. The number of prisoners he estimates at 3468.[65]Sutherland, vol. ii. p. 244.[66]Cervantes calls it “that day so fortunate to Christendom, when all nations were undeceived of their error in believing the Turks to be invincible at sea.”Don Quixote.[67]It was calculated by contemporary writers of credit that, in this very expedition, the Turks carried off into slavery from Austria 6000 men, 11,000 women, 19,000 girls—of whom 200 were of noble extraction—and 56,000 children.[68]Two Sieges of Vienna, pp. 95-98.[69]Kolschitzki was rewarded for his extraordinary services during the siege by a permission to set up the first coffee-house in Vienna; and “to this day,” says the authority from whom we have taken the above, “the head of the corporation of coffee-providers is bound to have in his house a portrait of this patriarch of his profession.” It was in consequence of the enormous stores of coffee found in the abandoned camp of the Turks, after the raising of the siege, that it became from that day the favourite drink of the Viennese.[70]The fate of Kara Mustapha, the leader of the Ottoman forces, although one of common occurrence in the history of oriental despotism, has enough of singularity in it to demand a notice. When tidings first reached the sultan that all was not advancing as prosperously before the walls of Vienna as his proud confidence had decreed, his fury was such, that he was hardly restrained from ordering a general massacre of all the Christians in his dominions; but to this succeeded a fit of sullen gloom, from which he was not roused even by the news of the vizier’s defeat and flight. He seemed, however, to accept the interpretation which the commander’s despatches put upon his conduct, sent him the usual marks of honour, and, to all appearance, regarded him with his wonted favour. But his rage did not so much slumber as coil and gather itself up, to spring with the more fatal suddenness on its prey. After the unsuccessful issue of the Hungarian campaign, with the silence and celerity which not inaptly represent the dread resistless force of that fate to which the haughtiest follower of the false prophet bows without a murmur, an officer of the court is sent to fetch the vizier’s head. The affair is conducted with all due solemnity; not a point of ceremonious etiquette is omitted. The messengers reverently announce their mission, and present their credentials, which are as formally acknowledged. The carpet is spread; the vizier gravely says his prayers; then yields with calm dignity his neck to the bowstring; and in a few moments the commander of 200,000 men lies a hideous trunk on the floor of his pavilion. His head is taken to Adrianople, and thence is sent by the sultan to Belgrade, to be deposited in a mosque; but its fortunes ended not there. Ere long the latter place is captured (1688) by the Christians; the mosque once more becomes a Christian Church, and is given to the Jesuit fathers: and the unholy relic is despatched by them to the good bishop Kollonitsch. Strange reversal of the vow which the proud infidel had made, when he swore that he would send the head of the brave prelate on a lance’s point to the sultan his master, for daring to stay even the ravages of the plague, that was playing the part of an ally to the besieging Moslem! The skull of the vizier was presented by the bishop to the arsenal of Vienna, where, for aught we know, it still remains.[71]Kollonitsch, who, at the siege of Crete, had so valorously defended the Christian faith, at that of Vienna showed himself the benefactor of mankind, a second Vincent de Paul.Von Hammer.[72]The king, it has been observed, does not mention in this letter the reply he made to the emperor’s cold and formal thanks: “I am glad, sire, to have done you this little service.”

[1]The reader will not need to be reminded of the striking summary given by Dr. Newman, in hisLectures on the Turks(pp. 131-133), of the successive measures, spiritual and otherwise, taken by the Popes, from the eleventh to the eighteenth century, to rouse Christendom to a common crusade against the Ottomans, and to mark each victory obtained over them as afait accompliin the commemorations of the Church.

[2]St. John the Baptist, the patron of the Order.

[3]Roger of Wendover, in hisFlowers of History, relates a similar instance of admirable courage on the part of the nuns of Coldingham in Berwickshire, when the country was invaded by the merciless Danes in the year 870. Assembling all the sisters, the holy abbess addressed them, and having obtained from them a promise of implicit obedience to her maternal commands, she “took a razor, and with it cut off her nose, together with her upper lip unto the teeth, presenting herself a horrible spectacle to those who stood by. Filled with admiration at this heroic deed, the whole community followed her example, and each did the like to themselves. With the morrow’s dawn came those most cruel tyrants, to disgrace the holy women dedicated to God, and to pillage and burn the monastery; but on beholding the abbess and all the sisters so frightfully mutilated and stained with their own blood from the sole of their foot unto their head, they retreated in haste from the spot, thinking a moment too long for tarrying there. But as they were retiring, the leaders ordered their wicked followers to set fire and burn the monastery, with all its buildings and its holy inmates. Which being done, the holy abbess and all the holy virgins with her attained the glory of martyrdom.”

[4]The legend is as follows: “A huge serpent, or crocodile,—for it is described as an amphibious animal,—had taken up its abode in a cavern on the brink of a marsh situated at the base of Mount St. Stephen, about two miles from the city, from whence it sallied forth frequently in search of prey. Not only cattle, but even men, became its victims; and the whole island trembled at its voracity. Knight after knight, ambitious of the renown of slaying such a monster, stole singly and secretly to its haunt, and never returned. The creature was covered with scales, which were proof against the keenest arrows and darts: and at length the grand master held it his duty to forbid the knights from courting so unequal an encounter. Deodato de Gozon, a knight of Provence, alone failed to respect this prohibition, and resolved to deliver the island from the monster, or perish. Having often reconnoitered the beast from a distance, he constructed a model of it of wood or pasteboard, and habituated two young bull-dogs to throw themselves under its belly on a certain cry being given, while he himself, mounted and clad in armour, assailed it with his lance. Having perfected his arrangements, he bestrode his charger, and rode down privately into the marsh, leaving several confidential attendants stationed in a spot from whence they could behold the combat. The monster no sooner beheld him approach, than it ran, with open mouth and eyes darting fire, to devour him. Gozon charged it with his lance; but the impenetrable scales turned aside the weapon; and his steed, terrified at the fierce hissing and abominable effluvium of the creature, became so ungovernable that he had to dismount and trust to his good sword and his dogs. But the scales of the monster were as proof against his falchion as his lance. With a slap of its tail it dashed him to the earth, and was just opening its voracious jaws to devour him, helmet, hauberk, spurs and all, when his faithful dogs gripped it tightly with their teeth in a vulnerable part of the belly. On this the knight quickly sprang to his feet, and thrust his sword up to the hilt in a place which had no scales to defend it. The monster, rearing itself in agony, fell with a tremendous hiss on the knight, and again prostrated him in the dust; and though it instantly gasped its last, so prodigious was its size that Gozon would have been squeezed to death, had not his attendants, seeing the object of their terror deprived of life, made haste to his assistance. They found their master in a swoon; but after they had with great difficulty drawn him from under the serpent, he began to breathe again, and speedily recovered. The fame of this achievement being bruited in the city, a multitude of people hurried forth to meet him. He was conducted in triumph to the grand master’s palace; but that dignitary, heedless of popular acclamation, sternly demanded wherefore he had violated his orders, and commanded him to be carried to prison. At a subsequent meeting of the council he proposed that the culprit should atone for his disobedience with his life; but this severe sentence was mitigated to a deprivation of the habit of the order. To this degradation he was forced to submit; but in a little time the grand master relented, and not only restored him to his former rank, but loaded him with favours.” Sutherland’sKnights of Maltavol. i. pp. 275-277.

[5]“In his bull, he bewails the sins of Christendom, which had brought upon them the scourge which is the occasion of his invitation. He speaks of the massacres, the tortures and slavery which had been inflicted on multitudes of the faithful. ‘The mind is horrified,’ he says, ‘at the very mention of these miseries; but it crowns our anguish to reflect, that the whole of Christendom, which if in concord might put an end to these and even greater evils, is either in open war, country with country, or if in apparent peace, is secretly wasted by mutual jealousies and animosities.’” Newman’sLectures on the History of the Turks, pp. 177-8.

[6]The loss of this battle seems mainly attributable to the rash and arrogant confidence of the French chevaliers. The general conduct of the crusaders likewise was not such as to warrant any expectation of God’s blessing on their enterprise. Not only did they, at thesiege of Raco, refuse quarter to such as laid down their arms, but immediately before the first onset at Nicopolis they massacred a number of Turkish prisoners who had surrendered under promise that their lives should be spared. (Creasy’sHistory of the Ottoman Turks, vol. i. pp. 58-60.) This act of cruelty, however, has been attributed not to the veteran knights, but to some headstrong and intemperate men among their juniors who took the matter into their own hands. Sutherland, vol. i. p. 309.

[7]Commonly called Tamerlane, from Timourlenk,i. e.Timour the Lame,—the name given him by his countrymen on account of the effects of a wound received in early life. His massacres were of a wholesale description. At Ispahan he had a tower constructed of 70,000 human heads; and when Bagdad revolted, he exacted no less than 90,000 for the same purpose. On his march to Delhi, the future capital of his empire, he ordered a general slaughter of his prisoners, 100,000 in number; compelling each of his captains and soldiers to kill his captives with his own hands, under penalty of being themselves put to death, and their property and wives given up to the informer. But Von Hammer relates an instance of his cruelty still more horrible. At the taking of Sebaste, 4,000 Armenian Christians had capitulated, on the condition that, though they were to be sent into slavery, their lives were to be spared. No sooner, however, had they surrendered than the tyrant, faithless to his oath, ordered them to be buried alive with circumstances of the most atrocious barbarity. They were thrown ten together into deep pits with their heads tied between their knees; planks were then laid across, and earth heaped upon them; and there they were left, in their living graves, to die a death of slow and lingering torture.

[8]Here also Timour reared a tower of human heads; but as neither garrison nor town afforded a sufficient number to raise the structure to the accustomed height, he was compelled to have a layer of mud placed between each row of heads.

[9]“Unless the Lord keep the city, he who keepeth it watcheth in vain.”

[10]Vertot.

[11]The Janizaries (Yeni tscheri, or “new troops”) were composed entirely of the children of Christians, who had been forced, usually at a tender age, to adopt Mahometanism. They were torn from their parents, and trained to renounce the faith in which they were born and baptised, and to profess the creed of Mahomet. They were then carefully educated for a soldier’s life; the discipline to which they were subjected being peculiar, and in some respects severe. They were taught to pay the most implicit obedience, and to bear without repining fatigue, pain, and hunger. At first they were made to share with the peasants the labours of the field, after which they were drafted into the companies of the Janizaries, but only to commence a second noviciate. Sometimes they were employed in the menial duties of the palace; sometimes in the public works, the dockyards, or the imperial gardens. But liberal honours and prompt promotion were the sure rewards of docility and courage. Some attained to the highest dignities in the state; and one of them married the sister of the sultan. Cut off from all ties of country, kith, and kin, but with high pay and privileges, with ample opportunities for military advancement and for the gratification of the violent, the sensual, and the sordid passions of their animal natures amid the customary atrocities of successful warfare, this military brotherhood grew up to be the strongest and fiercest instrument of imperial ambition which remorseless fanaticism, prompted by the most subtle state-craft, ever devised upon earth. As the Turkish power extended itself in Europe, care was taken to recruit the chosen corps from children who were natives of that continent rather than among the Asiatics. This terrible body of infantry, so long the scourge of Christendom and the terror of their own sovereigns, was during three centuries (the conquering period of the Ottoman power) recruited by an annual enrolment of 1000 Christian children; so that no less than 300,000 baptised souls were thus made the polluted and sanguinary ministers and agents of Mahometan crime and dominion. From the year 1648, in the reign of Mahomet IV., the recruits were taken from among the children of Janizaries and native Turks; and finally the whole corps, 20,000 in number, was annihilated in our own day by means of a barbarous massacre. Creasy, vol. i. pp. 20-24, 161. Newman’sLectures, pp. 137, 267-8.

[12]Gulielmus Caoursinus.

[13]Such is Vertot’s description. Von Hammer’s account differs; but the subject is involved in some confusion.

[14]Now calledSunbullu,i. e.“covered with hyacinths.” (Von Hammer.)

[15]Von Hammer questions this fact, as resting on no authority; but, however this may be, it is remarkable how many of the ablest leaders of the Ottoman forces, and of course the most inveterate foes of the Christian name, were apostates. Their malice seemed insatiable; and many of the worst atrocities recorded in Turkish warfare were perpetrated by them. It was at the instigation of three renegades from the order that Mahomet undertook this very expedition against Rhodes; and the reader of history will not fail to notice, that in almost every renewed enterprise against Christendom, an apostate from the faith was its contriver or its conductor. “If we look,” says Professor Creasy, “to the period when the Turkish power was at its height,—the period of the reign of Solyman I. and Selim II.,—we shall find that out of ten viziers of this epoch eight were renegades. Of the other high dignitaries of the Porte during the same period, we shall find that at least twelveof her bestgenerals, and four of her most renowned admirals,were supplied toher by Christian countries.”

[16]D’Aubusson, in his despatch, omits all personal mention of himself, and merely says, “We of the relief party ascended from Jew street,” &c.

[17]Written also Zain or Zizim.

[18]Von Hammer considers this letter apocryphal.

[19]This is Taaffe’s defence of D’Aubusson and of the order against the charge of “making money” by Djem’s captivity, as is asserted by Ottoman historians. That prince’s expenditure, he says, was very great, owing to the state in which he lived, and the constant coming and going of ambassadors to and from Constantinople and other courts. The knights also maintained at their own cost Djem’s only son Amurath, who became a Christian, and his family.

[20]Taaffe gives the letter at length. D’Aubusson’s accusers of course deny its genuineness.

[21]Subsequently appointed by Solyman grand admiral of the Turkish fleet.

[22]“Such was the esteem with which the valour of the knights had inspired the Turks, that they refrained from defacing their armorial bearings and inscriptions on the buildings. For more than 300 years the Ottomans have treated the memory of their brave foemen with the same respect; and the escutcheons of the Knights of St. John, who fought against Sultan Solyman for Rhodes, still decorate the long-captured city.” “The street of the knights is uninjured,” writes Marshal Marmont, “and the door of each house is still ornamented with the escutcheon of the last inhabitant. The buildings have been spared, but are unoccupied; and we could almost fancy ourselves surrounded by the shades of departed heroes. The arms of France, the noblefleurs-de-lis, are seen in all directions. I observed those of the Clermont Tennerres, and of other ancient and illustrious families.” (Creasy, vol. i. p. 263.) “The Turks,” says Taaffe, “never destroyed so much of Rhodes as the French during their first days at Malta, pulling down all the statues of renowned heroes, and chiselling out the coats-of-arms every where, even over the palace.” Vol. iv. p. 217.

[23]Fontanus, cited by Taaffe.

[24]In the end there seem to have been 200,000 Turks, including pioneers, collected in Rhodes.

[25]Some of these enormous balls are still found from time to time in front of the walls and within the fortress; proof positive of the truth of the assertion made by historians. The Turks also used shells for the first time in this siege. (Von Hammer.)

[26]“Le grand maistre repoussa l’ennemien personne, la toste baissée, et la pique en main.” (Goussancourt.)

[27]Mustapha was recalled the next year at the earnest representations of his wife, the sultan’s sister, and restored to the imperial favour. The end of Achmet was, that, being deprived of his office of grand vizier and sent to Egypt, he excited the Mamelukes to revolt, and was defeated and killed. He had even entered into correspondence with L’Isle Adam, and made proposals for restoring Rhodes to the order.

[28]Fontanus declares that the sultan gave the grand master his right hand, and even raised the imperial diadem a little from his head in saluting him; a ceremony never used by Ottoman sovereigns even towards Mahometan kings. “It is but justice to say,” adds Boisgelin, “that his troops, belonging to a nation of all others most adverse to the arts, would have thought the splendour of their victory tarnished had they possessed themselves of the arms and escutcheons of the knights, which (as was mentioned in a previous note) they permitted to remain uninjured.” The archives and the relics were also faithfully preserved, and given up to the Knights, who carried with them at the same time their beloved image of our Lady of Philermos.

[29]He had hoped to escape from the island in disguise, in the company of the Knights; but had been detected by the sultan’s spies.

[30]“In adversity our only hope.”

[31]“Les Chevaliers, selon leur ancienne instruction, pansoient et servoient les malades, mesme le grand maistre: ce qui fit admirer toute la ville de Messine, et les autres villes où les Chevaliers ont demeurés.” (Goussancourt.)

[32]Lord Carlisle, in hisDiary in Turkish and Greek Waters, speaking of the present relative condition of Rhodes and Malta, says, “I have qualified myself for adjudging that, in most respects, the tables are now turned between the two islands; and they certainly afford a very decisive criterion of the results of Turkish and Christian dominion.”

[33]A few weeks before their removal, in the spring of 1527, the Imperialists, who were marching to the sack of Rome under the Constable Bourbon, spared Viterbo, out of respect, it is said, for the grand master; although they plundered the neighbouring town, ill treated the inhabitants, burned down the churches, and committed excesses rivalling in atrocity those of the Turks themselves.

[34]Some account of these English martyrs may not be here out of place. The first knight who suffered death in England for the faith was Adrian Fortescue, beheaded on the 8th of July 1539. After him followed two others, Ingley and Adrian Forrest, “who,” says Goussancourt, “being called on to recognise the king as head of the Church and to approve of his ordinances, chose, rather, courageously to suffer death than to live in delicacy, having made shipwreck of the faith. Thus they gave their lives as gloriously at home as they could ever have done in combat.” Henry offered Sir William Weston, Lord Prior of England (the priors sat in parliament on an equality with the first barons of the realm), a pension of 1000l. a-year; but that knight was so overwhelmed with grief at the suppression of his order that he never received a penny, but soon after died, and was buried in the chancel of the old church of St. James, Clerkenwell. Marmaduke Bohun, whom Goussancourt calls “the blessed,” was beheaded under Queen Elizabeth in 1585. Many others died in prison, in the same reign, from the horrible sufferings endured in their confinement; among whom we find the names of Sir Thomas Mytton and Sir Edward Waldegrave.

[35]“Here lies Virtue victorious over Fortune.”

[36]It was arranged by a secret treaty between Ferdinand and Zapolya that the latter should retain the crown till his death, when the whole of the kingdom should revert to Austria, Zapolya’s son retaining only his hereditary dignity of countship of Zips. But at Zapolya’s death his widow asserted the rights of her son as king of Hungary, and called in the sultan to her aid. Solyman turned the country into a Turkish province, professing all the time to be merely holding it until the child had attained his majority. War with Austria continued for many years, until, in 1547, a truce for five years was concluded, which left the sultan in possession of nearly the whole of Hungary and Transylvania, and which bound Ferdinand to the humiliating condition of paying a tribute of 30,000 ducats a-year. Hostilities were resumed on the very day the armistice expired.

[37]Von Hammer, as cited inTwo Sieges of Vienna(Murray).

[38]Khaireddin, better known in Europe by his surname of Barbarossa, was a native of Mitylene, and with his brothers practised piracy in the reigns of Bajazet and Selim, the latter of whom he formally recognised as his sovereign. He seized the strong city of Algiers, desolated the coasts of Naples, and captured Tunis. Solyman took him into his service, and conferred upon him the highest naval dignity, making him his admiral, or kapitan pasha. In the great battle off Previsa, September 28th, 1538, he defeated the combined fleets of the Pope (Paul III.), the emperor, and the republic of Venice.

[39]At the taking of Tunis (July 21st, 1535) the Imperialists and liberated slaves committed such frightful excesses that Vertot says, it seemed as if Christians tried to rival and even to surpass the worst barbarians in cruelty and licentiousness. The details he gives are of the most revolting description. Tunis was retaken by the corsair Ouloudj Ali, in 1570, with the exception of the citadel, which was still held by the Spaniards. Don John of Austria retook it; but at the end of eighteen months it again fell into the power of the Turks, in whose possession it has since remained.

[40]European historians (e. g.Vertot) have confounded this place with the town of Africa, or Afrikiya. (Von Hammer.)

[41]Taaffe puts the number at 474 knights and 67 servants-at-arms, giving Bosio as his authority; but it does not appear that Bosio considered his list to be complete. His division according to countries is as follows:Knights.Servants-at-arms.Provence6115Auvergne2514France5724Italy1645England10Germany131Castile686Arragon852-----47467Prescott says that “the whole force which La Valette could muster in defence of the island amounted to about 9000 men. This included 700 knights, of whom about 600 had already arrived. The remainder were on their way, and joined him at a later period of the siege. Between 3000 and 4000 were Maltese, irregularly trained, but who had already gained some experience of war in their contests with the Barbary coasts. The rest of the army, with the exception of 500 galley-slaves and the personal followers of the knights, was made up of levies from Spain and Italy.”History of the Reign of Philip II., book iv. chap. 3.These volumes, which have appeared since the present sketch was written, contain a detailed and very animated description of this memorable siege.

Prescott says that “the whole force which La Valette could muster in defence of the island amounted to about 9000 men. This included 700 knights, of whom about 600 had already arrived. The remainder were on their way, and joined him at a later period of the siege. Between 3000 and 4000 were Maltese, irregularly trained, but who had already gained some experience of war in their contests with the Barbary coasts. The rest of the army, with the exception of 500 galley-slaves and the personal followers of the knights, was made up of levies from Spain and Italy.”History of the Reign of Philip II., book iv. chap. 3.

These volumes, which have appeared since the present sketch was written, contain a detailed and very animated description of this memorable siege.

[42]This Turkish corsair (commonly called Ochiali) made himself famous in the succeeding reign. We shall meet with him again in the battle of Lepanto.

[43]Piali was by birth a Croatian. On the 14th of May 1560 he had defeated and almost annihilated the combined Christian fleet commanded by the Genoese Doria, the favourite admiral of Charles V. The battle took place off the island of Djerbé.

[44]Goussancourt gives the names of thirteen as having been found still alive by the Turks. One—Lawrence de Bonlieu—before being fastened to the cross, was firstflayed!

[45]Prescott says that the number of Christians who fell amounted to about 1500, of whom 123 were members of the order. The loss of the infidels he estimates at 8000.

[46]Von Hammer says that both Turks and Christians declared that at the last assault they suddenly beheld upon the ramparts a lady and two men whom they had never seen before; that the Christians devoutly believed that it was the Blessed Virgin herself, accompanied by St. Paul and St. John Baptist, the patron of the order, and were animated in consequence to perform prodigies of valour; while the infidels, on the other hand, were seized with consternation.

[47]The last knight who fell was Giovanni Malespina, and his death happened under curious circumstances. He was standing at the bastion of Castile, from whence he watched the embarkation of the Turks, and, full of joy andthankfulness, sangaloud theTe Deum. Whilst doing so, a chance shot struck him to the ground, but without interrupting his devotions; and he expired as he pronounced the words, “In te, Domine, speravi.”

[48]Taaffe. It was, however, the custom at that time to give every city anepithetas well as a name. That chosen by the grand master was intended to express the modesty of an order whose only pride was to be in the Cross of Christ: it was “Humilissima.”

[49]At the dispersion of the Knights, upon the occupation of Malta by the French, some took refuge in Russia; where, in the year 1801, a council met to deliberate on the election of a grand master. It was resolved that, as the elements of a general chapter could not be assembled at St. Petersburg, the different grand priors should be invited to convene their chapters for the purpose of forming lists of such knights as were worthy of succeeding to the sovereign dignity. These lists the council proposed afterwards to submit to the Pope, for him to choose a grand master out of them. Accordingly (Feb. 9, 1805) his Holiness Pius VII. nominated Tommasi, an Italian knight, grand master. In 1814 the French knights taking heart at the humiliation of their arch-enemy Napoleon, assembled at Paris in a general chapter, under the presidency of the prince Camille de Rohan, grand prior of Aquitaine, for the election of a permanent capitulary commission. Under the direction of this commission a formal but fruitless application was made to the congress of Vienna for a grant of some sovereign independency, in lieu of that of which the order had been so wrongfully despoiled. In 1823, when the Greek cause began to wear a prosperous aspect, the same chapter entered into a treaty with the Greeks for the cession of Sapienza and Cabressa, two islets on the western shore of the Morea, as a preliminary step to the re-conquest of Rhodes; to facilitate which arrangement an endeavour was made to raise a loan of 640,000l.in England, but the attempt failed. The council of the order is now established at Rome, and presided over by the Venerable Balio di Colloredo, lieutenant of the grand-mastership. A novitiate and hospital of the order are about to be erected at Jerusalem, under the sanction of the Holy See. His Holiness Pius IX. has approved a plan for the extension of the order, and for a more strict observance of its rule. The Englishlangue, or language of the order, no longer exists, though there are several English knights. The crowns of Spain, Russia, and Prussia give the cross of St. John as a decoration; but those knights are not members of the order, which is sovereign, and not subject to any temporal prince, and is accordingly styled the Sovereign, Military, and Religious Order of St. John of Jerusalem. The eight-cornered cross represents the eight beatitudes; and it is not a mere decoration, but the badge of a Catholic religious order.

[50]Known in history as “Selim the Sot.” It is said he was instigated to the conquest of the island by a Jew, his boon companion, who represented to him how easily he could make himself master of the soil on which grew the grapes which produced his favourite wine.

[51]For a short but spirited account of this heroic defence and its fatal catastrophe the reader is referred toThe Four Martyrs, by M. Rio.

[52]On one of the last days of the siege he was struck by a ball and killed, while praying in the garden of his palace.

[53]“Lord, into Thy hands I commend my spirit.”

[54]“Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”

[55]It was afterwards stolen by a Christian slave and taken to Venice, where it was deposited in an urn in the church of St. John and St. Paul; the martyr’s bones were also carefully collected, and buried in the church of St. Gregory.

[56]Dr. Newman thus describes the effects of Turkish domination: “As to Cyprus, from holding a million of inhabitants, it now has only 30,000. Its climate was that of a perpetual spring, now it is unwholesome and unpleasant; its cities and towns nearly touched each other, now they are simply ruins. Corn, wine, oil, sugar, and the metals are among its productions; the soil is still exceedingly rich; but now, according to Dr. Clarke, ‘in that paradise of the Levant, agriculture is neglected, the inhabitants are oppressed, population is destroyed.’”The Turks, p. 149.

[57]Nephew of the great admiral of the emperor Charles V.

[58]In 1587, when the armada was in preparation, Queen Elizabeth tried to draw Sultan Amurath III. into an alliance with her against Philip and the Pope. Von Hammer gives the letters written on the occasion. With characteristic astuteness she appealed to the religious sympathies of the Turk, making common cause with him as the “destroyer of idolatry,” and declaring that together they could “strike down the proud Spaniard and the lying Pope with all their adherents.” Such were the representations made by the English envoy as to the religious belief of his queen and nation, that one of the Turkish ministers remarked to the Austrian ambassador, that “nothing more was wanted to turn the English into good Mussulmans than that they should lift a finger and recite the Eshdad” (or creed of Mahomet).

[59]Von Hammer makes the Turkish fleet consist of 240 galleys and 60 vessels of smaller size, just 300 in all. His account of the Christian fleet is as follows: 70 Spanish galleys, 6 Maltese, 3 Savoy, 12 Papal, 108 Venetian; in all 199 galleys, to which he adds 6 huge galeasses contributed by Venice; making the sum-total 205 vessels.

[60]Vertot. Von Hammer, as has been said, mentions six.

[61]Von Hammer says that Ouloudj Ali struck off Giustiniani’s head with his own hand. Contarini, on the contrary, writes that he was “so badly wounded that he was all but killed.”

[62]Allthe members of the order did not live in community; some were scattered about, and were liable to be called in, in case of emergencies—e. g.we find several Knights of St. John among the early governors and settlers of Canada.

[63]“A trifling price to pay (he says in the Preface to the second part ofDon Quixote) for the honour of partaking in the first great action in which the naval supremacy of the Ottoman was successfully disputed by Christian arms.”

[64]Von Hammer says fifteen; and that the Turks lost 224 vessels, of which 94 were burnt or shattered on the coast; the rest were divided among the allies. But this calculation leaves 36 vessels unaccounted for, after reckoning the 40 which Ouloudj Ali succeeded in saving. The number of prisoners he estimates at 3468.

[65]Sutherland, vol. ii. p. 244.

[66]Cervantes calls it “that day so fortunate to Christendom, when all nations were undeceived of their error in believing the Turks to be invincible at sea.”Don Quixote.

[67]It was calculated by contemporary writers of credit that, in this very expedition, the Turks carried off into slavery from Austria 6000 men, 11,000 women, 19,000 girls—of whom 200 were of noble extraction—and 56,000 children.

[68]Two Sieges of Vienna, pp. 95-98.

[69]Kolschitzki was rewarded for his extraordinary services during the siege by a permission to set up the first coffee-house in Vienna; and “to this day,” says the authority from whom we have taken the above, “the head of the corporation of coffee-providers is bound to have in his house a portrait of this patriarch of his profession.” It was in consequence of the enormous stores of coffee found in the abandoned camp of the Turks, after the raising of the siege, that it became from that day the favourite drink of the Viennese.

[70]The fate of Kara Mustapha, the leader of the Ottoman forces, although one of common occurrence in the history of oriental despotism, has enough of singularity in it to demand a notice. When tidings first reached the sultan that all was not advancing as prosperously before the walls of Vienna as his proud confidence had decreed, his fury was such, that he was hardly restrained from ordering a general massacre of all the Christians in his dominions; but to this succeeded a fit of sullen gloom, from which he was not roused even by the news of the vizier’s defeat and flight. He seemed, however, to accept the interpretation which the commander’s despatches put upon his conduct, sent him the usual marks of honour, and, to all appearance, regarded him with his wonted favour. But his rage did not so much slumber as coil and gather itself up, to spring with the more fatal suddenness on its prey. After the unsuccessful issue of the Hungarian campaign, with the silence and celerity which not inaptly represent the dread resistless force of that fate to which the haughtiest follower of the false prophet bows without a murmur, an officer of the court is sent to fetch the vizier’s head. The affair is conducted with all due solemnity; not a point of ceremonious etiquette is omitted. The messengers reverently announce their mission, and present their credentials, which are as formally acknowledged. The carpet is spread; the vizier gravely says his prayers; then yields with calm dignity his neck to the bowstring; and in a few moments the commander of 200,000 men lies a hideous trunk on the floor of his pavilion. His head is taken to Adrianople, and thence is sent by the sultan to Belgrade, to be deposited in a mosque; but its fortunes ended not there. Ere long the latter place is captured (1688) by the Christians; the mosque once more becomes a Christian Church, and is given to the Jesuit fathers: and the unholy relic is despatched by them to the good bishop Kollonitsch. Strange reversal of the vow which the proud infidel had made, when he swore that he would send the head of the brave prelate on a lance’s point to the sultan his master, for daring to stay even the ravages of the plague, that was playing the part of an ally to the besieging Moslem! The skull of the vizier was presented by the bishop to the arsenal of Vienna, where, for aught we know, it still remains.

[71]Kollonitsch, who, at the siege of Crete, had so valorously defended the Christian faith, at that of Vienna showed himself the benefactor of mankind, a second Vincent de Paul.Von Hammer.

[72]The king, it has been observed, does not mention in this letter the reply he made to the emperor’s cold and formal thanks: “I am glad, sire, to have done you this little service.”

Back to Index Next