Tent Work in Palestine: A Record of Discovery and Adventure

by C. R. Conder

The fundamental fallacy in all schemes of European colonisation, which disregard the rights and the power of the native peasantry in Palestine, has already been noticed. The Fellah can outlive, outwork, and undersell the European agriculturist in his native land, and were a settled and prosperous condition of the country ensured, the numbers of the native population would soon rapidly increase, and the sickly colonist, even though backed by European capital and influence, would be inevitably shouldered out of the country.

The question of administration is, however, quite distinct from that of colonisation. It is a question of political, not of philanthropic action—of the influence of a great power, not of a private or semi-religious society. In India we have a living witness of the fact, that to some Western nations, and to England pre-eminently, is given the capability of governing Oriental races with benefit to both the ruler and the subject.

As regards Syria also, we have historical evidence of the possibility of Western rule becoming consolidated and prosperous; and the history of the Crusading kingdom is remarkably suggestive of the true principles on which such government should be framed, and of the causes of failure in the past, which might be avoided in the future.

The kingdom of Jerusalem, according to the constitution of John d’Ibelin, included in the thirteenth century the four baronies of Jaffa (including Ascalon and the seigneury of Ramleh, with Mirabel and Ibelin), of Sidon (with Cæsarea and Bisan), of Hebron, and of Galilee. Jerusalem, Tyre, Acre, and Nâblus, belonged directly to the Crown; and there were two grand fiefs, or tributary states—namely, the principality of Antioch (embracing the greater part of Northern Syria), and the county of Tripoly extending along the shore north of Beirut.

The Assizes of Jerusalem inform us that two great courts were instituted by King Godfrey for the government of the land. The high court had for its president the king himself, and its judges were taken from the liege barons and knights, who tried those of their own rank, and assigned the number of knights and yeomen, who were to be furnished by the fiefs, the church, the military orders, and the burghs, for the king’s army.

The second court, that of the burgesses, was presided over by a viscount appointed by the king, and consisted of a jury of burghers, or citizens of Frank extraction. It exercised authority over all freemen who did not appeal to the high court, but was not capable of judging nobles, while the burghers were in like manner free from the authority of the superior tribunal. Each court had its own code of laws, and these applied not only to Jerusalem, where the great tribunal sat, but also to the principal towns where similar courts existed.

As the kingdom became consolidated, another tribunal arose for the judgment of the native subjects of the realm. It consisted originally of a Reiyis, or head man, with a jury of natives, who administered native laws, and followed native usages, but who had no power in capital or other criminal cases, or in matters connected with the ancient institution of the blood-feud.

Abuses appear to have occurred which rendered necessary the conversion of this native Mejlis into a mixed court, called Cour de la Fonde, presided over by the Baillie de la Fonde, with a jury of four Syrians and two Franks.

Such was the civil constitution of the Frankish kingdom. Accustomed as we are to think of the history of the Crusades as that of a series of marvellous raids gradually decreasing in impetuosity and success, we are apt to forget that for nearly a century the French kings of Jerusalem ruled a dominion embracing some 15,000 square miles, and that the princes of Antioch preserved their power until the fierce Bibars recaptured the city in 1268 A.D., eighty years after the fall of Jerusalem. For more than 150 years the Syrians were ruled by a Latin race, and there is every reason to believe that they were content to be so governed.

The subjects of the Latin kingdom were divided into the three classes of lieges, burgesses, and vilains. The first two—the knights and citizens—were free Franks, owing military service, but the vilains, or native serfs (whether Greeks, Turks, or Syrians, Christian or Moslem), were, as a rule, exempt from military duty, and payed taxes for every Casale or village community.