Vol. 12 · pages 61–65

40 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES But the power of the Turks for a time suffered a blow that seemed to end it once for all. “Just at the moment when the Sultan seemed to have attained the pinnacle of his ambition, when his authority was unquestioningly obeyed over the greater part of the Byzantine empire in Europe and Asia, when the Christain states were regarding him with terror as the scourge of the world, another and a greater scourge came to quell him, and at one stroke all the vast fabric of empire which Bayezid had so triumphantly erected was shattered to the ground and this terrible conqueror was Timur, the Tartar or as we call him “Tamurlane”. He established his superiority over the petty chiefs that had arisen out of the ruins of the vast kingdom of Chengizkhan. Tamurlane carried every thing at the point of sword and subdued every province that was under Bayezid. The Tartar and the Turk faced in 1402. As the Turks were engaged in laying seige to Constantinople, the Sultan heard of the news of the victory of Tamurlane over his troops at Siwas. Bayezid collected his troops and hurried to give battle in person but lost it at Angora and the edifice of the Turkish empire crumbled to pieces.” 1 Reared with consummate skill and maintained with the utmost bravery the Turkish empire succumbed before the “Asiatic Despot”, the embodiment of “the wrath of God”. “The history of the Ottomans seemed to have suddenly come to an end. Seldom has the world seen so complete, so terrible, a catestrophe as the fall of Bayezid from the summit of the power to the shame of a chained captive.” 2 Unfortunately however Tamurlane did not survive to avail the fruits of his victory and his apparent stroke was far from being a final blow to the Ottoman empire. Mr. Lane Poole says “The most astonishing characteristic of the rule of the Turks is its vitality. Again and again its doom has been pronounced by wise prophets, and still it survives. Province after province has been cut off the empire, yet still the Sultan sits supreme over wide dominions, is revered or feared by subjects of many races. Considering how little of the great qualities of the ruler the Turk has often possessed, how little trouble he has taken to conciliate the subjects whom his sword has subdued, it is amazing 1 Stanley Lane- Poole— “ Turkey” (New York, 1899) p. 7. 2 Ibid., p. 73.

41COMMERCIAL RELATIONS IN THE MIDDLE AGES how firm has been his authority, how unshaken his power, . . Within a dozen years the lost provinces were reunited under the strong and able rule of Mahammud I, and the Ottoman Empire far from being weakened by the apparently crushing blow it had received in 1402, rose stronger and more vigourous after his fall, and like a giant refreshed, prepared for new and bolder feats of conquest.” 1 Cheered up by brilliant prospects Mohammed transferred his capital from Brusa in Asia to Adrianople in Europe. The Seljuk Turks reached the Hellespont but it was left to the Ottomans to cross it. Constantinople was the dream of many a Turkish ruler. They had longed for the possession of that imperial city ever since Ottoman had dreamed that he grasped it in his hand. “Thunderbolt Bayezid had besiged it. Musa had pressed it hard. Murad II had patiently planned its conquest. There was little to be won beside the city itself, for all the province round about it had long been subdued by the Ottomans, but the wealth and beauty and the strength and position, of the capital itself were quite enough to make its capture the crowning ambition of the Turks.” 2 With eagerness Mahammud II the sixth of the Ottoman emperors was in watchful waiting for pretext to capture the city. Taking advantage of the hostility of the emperor he prepared to attack the city which fell on the 29th of May 1453. The withstanding of the city for such a long time rather than its fall constitute real wonder for “at this period the state of the Byzantine empire was such as to render its powers of resistance insignificant, indeed the length of time during which it held out against the Turks is to be attributed rather to the lack of efficacious means at the disposal of its assailants than to any qualities possessed by its defenders.” 3 There is perhaps no place in the world more strategic than Constantinople in that it commands the three continents Asia, Europe and Africa, and whoever has had it, has enjoyed supremacy in all these three. Speaking of the physical strength of Constantinople and the attacks it has withstood Dr. Cunningham says, “As each century came, a new horde of invaders appeared. In the fourth 1 Stanley Lane- Poole— “Turkey”, pp. 74-75. 2 Ibid, p. 107-108. * Enc. Brit. Vol. XXVII, p. 443.

42 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES century, immediately after its foundation, it was threatened by the Goths ; in the fifth, by Huns and Vandals ; in the sixth, by Slavs ; these were succeeded by Arabs and Persians in the seventh, and Magyars, Bulgars and Russians in the eighth and ninth. Even after its prestige had been broken by the success of Venice and the Fourth Crusade, and the establishment of a Latin Kingdom, the restored empire was able to maintain a long resistance against the Turks. It had often been shaken, but not till 1453 did it utterly succumb.” 1 It was a great fortune that this imperial city should have withstood these incessant attacks and should have conserved the wreck of the classical civilization. It was also a great fortune for the propagation of Christanity that the wave of Mohomedanism should have been checked long enough before Christainity to have become a real force in Europe. It bore the brunt of barbarism allowed the classic civilization to develop itself. What Constantinople did on the eastern side Tours did on the western side at a very early date, though not perhaps so brilliantly. Being disappointed in their attempt to take Constantinople the Arabs long before the Turks succeeded in taking it, deployed to the South and carrying their religion triumphantly through Africa thought of entering Europe from the western side through Gibralter. Here in their preliminary advance they met with little opposition for the kingdom of the West, Goths could hardly defend itself against their masterful onrush and by 711 A. D. Spain fell into the hands of the Arabs and the Babers and was flooded with Moorish immigrants. Encouraged by success the Arabs thought of crossing over into Gaul but were held in check by the Duke of Aquilaine who however was defeated near Bordeaux in 732. With redoubled energy they advanced to Poiturs and marched for Tours. But here they dashed against a stronger enemy. The Franks under Charles, the Hammer (Mortel) defeated the Arabs at Tours and thus permanently stayed their advance. The Arabs never more made any attempts to cross the Pyrenees. What would have been the fate of European civilization had the Arabs succeeded in subjugating it, is hard to speculate. This much is certain that the Moors were far in 1 W. Cunnigham. “Western Civilization—Ancient Times”, p. 197-198.

43COMMERCIAL RELATIONS IN THE MIDDLE AGES advance of the Franks. Prof. Robinson says, “Historians commonly regard it as a matter of great good luck that Charles, the Hammer and his barbarus soldiers succeeded in defeating and driving back the Mohomedans at Tours. But had they been permitted to settle in Southern France they might have developed science and art more repidly than did the Franks.” While these rapid movements of the Asiatic nomads were upsettling all peaceful activities in central Asia the Roman empire was fast crumbling into decay and Europe fell back into a dull lull broken only by the incessant warfare of the Germanic people. Under these circumstances commerce was bound to decline. There were innumerable hindrances to medieaval commerce. Rapidity of exchange was greatly hindered by the lack of money all throughout western Europe. Christianity was anything but an optimistic religion, it was a protest against the comforts of life. Economics was held down by religion. The doctrine of “just price” and the prohibition of whole sale trade greatly depressed commerce. The greatest hindrance that was put in the way of commercial activity was the Christain doctrine of usuary. In one sweep the entire mass of people was prohibited to loan money at interest. When combined with the scarcity of money we can realize the retrograding character of this prohibition. The Jews not being within the pale of Christianity were the only people left to deal in monetory transaction and their service to economics is immeasurable. “This ill-starred people played a most important part in the Economic development of Europe, but they were terribly maltreated by the Christians, who held them guilty of the supreme crime of putting Christ to death.”2 Added to all these were the annoying transit duties arbitrary in their character. The geographic knowledge of the time was bewilderingly miserable. Dangers of the sea were by no means small and the pirates were the source of constant dread. To crown all the most effective hindrance was the dilapidation of the Roman roads. Under the combined force of these unfavourable circumstances there is no wonder that since the fall of the Roman Empire, there prevailed in Western Europe a long lull and a dull monotony of static life. 1 Brasely and Robinson—“Outlines of European History” Part I. (N. Y.) 1914, p. 368. 2 Ibid., Part I, p. 506.

44 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES Constantinople did not pay much attention to commerce. Its policy was that of extortion. It never cared to achieve to the full the gains due to its situation on the Bosphorus. There was very little trade between the West and Constantinople military operation constituted the only stimulus to trade activities. (Space left blank-ed.) **** Nay the rule of the Saracens in Syria and Egypt was far more enlightened than that of the contemporary rulers of the Byzantine Empire. But amidst all this ruin Italy conserved the merchantile and intellectual forces of the middle ages. The 9th century A.D. marks the rise of real merchantile activity in the North-East and South-West of Italy. It was the Era of the rise of the Italian City-Republic and Eastern commerce was the thing upon which they fed themselves fat. Each city-state rose to hold “The Gorgeous East in fee.” First and foremost is Amalfi. It wrested its independence from the Eastern Empire by 820. Her maritime activity grew so rapidly that within 20 years their navy was powerful enough to fight the Saracens in their naval attacks on Rome. Her factories (agencies of modern days) were scattered in Palermo, Syracuse, Messina, Durazzo and Constantinople and her reputation as a commercial state grew so wide-spread that, “The maritime laws of Tabula Amalfitana were current among traders on every coast of the Inland Sea and the coinage of the Republic was the chief medium of exchange between Latin Europe and the Levout.” 1 The smallness of the harbour prevented Amalfi from being a great emporium. She therefore had to give way to her rivals. She fell prey to the land powers of the Normans who had subdued Naples, Salerno or Brindisi while the sea power was immeasurably outdone by other and better situated city states. Venice rose as Amalfi went down. “From the time of Charlemagne the Queen of the Adriatic began to take a place in the politics as well as in the commerce of the Latine world. Its 1 Reymond Beazlcy—“ The Dawn of Modern Geography,” Vol. II .