Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

can be ascertained, but, as far as can be seen now, it augurs well, and ought to be extended.

The most important legislative measure of 1884 has undoubtedly been the new university statute. For more than ten years the reactionary party endeavoured without success to overthrow the regulations of 1863, which, it was contended, created small States within the State. Last August, at length, the new scheme, though partly rejected by the majority of the Privy Council, was accepted by the Emperor, and the universities are now undergoing a momentous change which will affect most seriously the whole system of teaching. The chief idea pervading the new statute stands out clearly if we compare the rules of 1883 and of 1884; all the diversities of any importance point in one direction-namely, towards strengthening of the action of the central authority at the expense of the academical body. Formerly, vacant chairs were filled by election in the congregation or council, consisting of all the professors of the university; now, appointment by the Ministry has superseded the election, and, though the Faculties may recommend candidates, their votes have no decisive influence. Rectors and deans are similarly to be appointed, and not elected. Altogether, the congregation, which formerly constituted the chief agent in the government of the university, has been deprived of its important functions, and the interference of the curator-that is, of the superintendent of education of the district-has grown in proportion. For the management of all matters connected with the police of the university an inspectorship has been created which has an almost independent position in reference to the rector and other university authorities, but at the same time stands under the immediate supervision of the curator. Along with these modifications in the constitution of the academical body, a change in the way of its teaching is aimed at. The main point in this respect concerns the examinations. The statute of 1883 entrusted the professors with the duty of examiners on the basis of their own lectures. This system, though defective in many respects, vouched at least for the freedom of the teaching. For this very reason it has been superseded by another — the examinations for ordinary degrees are to be carried on by boards appointed for the purpose by the Government. Of course this contrivance will give the best means of inquiring into the character of university lectures, and of shaping them according to the scientific notions of the powers that be. Even the mere publication of the programmes to be followed at the examinations will have a great influence on the course of academical studies, which are always apt to conform themselves more or less to their practical end. It must be added that the reactionary tendency of the new statute is quite openly acknowledged by its advocates; they hail it as the dawn of a new era.

The publicists of the reactionary party have been clamouring for a good while against all the institutions created during the last reign with the view of checking the arbitrary action of the Government. Trial by jury, the more or less independent position of the courts of justice, municipal and provincial self-government, have been singled out as points for special attack. A great fuss is made about silly verdicts of "the judges from the street," as the jurymen are termed, as if some unreasonable acquittals could weigh against the soundness of the

whole method, and as though the notorious corruption and unfairness of the old system was a matter quite unknown to the present generation.

It requires all the obstinacy produced by party spirit not to notice the change for the better, which in no other sphere, perhaps, has been so striking as in the legal one. The publicity of procedure; the introduction of trial by jury; the appointment of judges who have to answer for their conduct, not in the way of administrative subordination, but on legal grounds; lastly, the influx into the profession of men who had gone through the universities in the place of pettifogging clerks and retired officers of the army, have quite changed the whole aspect of the courts of law. The weak point of the new order is the Bar, the members of which enjoy a better reputation for cleverness than for a high level of morality. The Bench, on the other hand, is quite free from the great vice of Russian history and life-venality; and such a fact is the more to the credit of its members that they are very numerous, scattered all about the empire, and poorly paid. An English judge with his five thousand a year is not exposed to the same temptations as a Russian judge with three or four hundred, and his integrity is cheaper in proportion. Though these facts are more or less recognized in society, anything in the way of reaction seems so likely to happen at present in Russia that a real scare was created by the persistent campaign of some daily papers against the law reforms of Alexander II. The journey of the Minister of Justice, Nabokoff, who visited some of the provincial courts in November, 1884, assumed for this reason an importance it would scarcely have had under other circumstances. He ultimately made a speech in Moscow discountenancing the rumours about an impending change of principles in the administration of the law, and there was much talk subsequently of an audience in which the Emperor ratified, as it were, his Minister's conduct in the whole affair.

In the case of provincial and local institutions, there are even greater reasons to fear a general convulsion. The Minister for Home Affairs, Count Tolstoy, is not likely to recoil from any measure which might strengthen the central authority, no matter what consequences might follow. At the same time, even the Liberals acknowledge that there is much to be amended in the present machinery of self-government: though, of course, they would prefer to keep it as it is, with all its drawbacks, rather than submit to bureaucratic administration. The complexity of the problems involved in a revision of this department seems to have been till now the great obstacle to attempts in that direction. A Commission sat for nearly two years under the presidency of a Secretary of State, Kachanoff, and its proceedings served to show what wide differences of opinion prevailed on all mooted questions in this subject, but, just as this hard-working body was beginning to draw up its conclusions, its existence was suddenly cut short, and the materials it had gathered were absorbed by the Home Office. Whatever may have been the cause of that unexpected collapse, it is clear that a new start is hardly to be expected just now. The state of Count Tolstoy's health has forced him to resign the immediate direction of his Ministry to his under-secretaries, and it is not likely that such an important subject as the reform of local and provincial insti3 D

VOL. XLVII.

tutions will be brought forward before the internal policy of the empire is again concentrated firmly in the hands of a representative leader.

Home affairs and interests have been engrossing public attention within the last four months. Everybody is feeling in Russia that the present time is not opportune for an enterprising foreign policy, and the very inadequate results obtained by the war of 1877-78 have cooled Russian jingoism for a good while. The Skernevitzy meeting and its consequences have been accepted by general opinion, not with enthusiasm, of course, but as a necessary recognition of the real distribution of influence in Europe. On the other hand, the latest complications in Central Asia have not produced the slightest political excitement. A curious contrast to the agitation created in England is presented by the indifference with which the news of movements on the Afghan frontier, interpellations in the Houses of Parliament, and agreements by telegraph between the Courts have been received in Russia. Even the most chauvinistic papers did not try to raise the war-cry against England, certain as they were that it would be met by general disapprobation. No man in his senses ever believed here that a conflict was imminent; but this does not preclude a feeling of uneasiness as to the possible arising of "exceptional circumstances." At any rate, if the opinion of the country has any weight in such matters, the prevailing wish for peace, and distrust of adventures which may lead to war, must be taken as a favourable augury at least for the immediate future.

B.

CONTEMPORARY RECORDS.

I.-ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY.

THE Fayûm manuscripts, of which I spoke in my Record of December last, have been discussed in various quarters. Wessely, the Viennese scholar, who takes charge of the Latin and Greek documents, has printed in the first number of the Wiener Studien for this year (1885) no less than three articles on the subject. One deals with the contents of a Thucydidean manuscript, containing an extract from the eighth book, equal to two pages of Bekker's edition. A second deals with a series of Christian documents belonging to the family archives of a certain Aurelios Pachymios, a dealer in purple. They are all dated, and range from the year 592 to 616 A.D. They are very interesting illustrations of the social life and customs of Egypt during the last days of Roman rule, and immediately before the Mahometan conquest. One of these documents is a contract wherein a certain Aur. Dioscoros, a tradesman, binds himself to work for Pachymios; another is a receipt for a supply of timber; while another deals with the purchase of a house. Wessely prints at length three documents, two being formal acknowledgments of loans made by this Aurelios Pachymios, who seems to have united the business of a banker to that of dye merchant; while a third is a lease of a house made by a certain Aurelia Maria. These documents are full of details, important alike for the religious, political, social, and financial condition of Egypt in times when its last great change was impending. Thus from one of these loan documents we learn the name of a street in Panopolis in the year 600. A house, which is designated with a care equal to that of a modern solicitor, is described as joining on to that of a holy man named Timotheus, and as standing in the street called Hagia Ekklesia Megale. All the documents begin with the invocation of the Trinity. The clergy play an important part even in business transactions, and sign as witnesses. The monetary system of Egypt is there set forth, the documents describe the amount of money lent, and then translate it into the currency and standard of Alexandria. The religious feelings of the people find expression too in their names. name system of the sixth and seventh centuries illustrate and confirm the statements of Eusebius. That historian embodies large and valuable portions of the writings of Dionysius of Alexandria, who wrote in the middle of the third century. Eusebius tells us, on his authority, (H. E. vii. 25) that the names of Peter and Paul were the most popular among the faithful in Egypt; while in another passage he mentions that the Egyptians, when converted, gave up their pagan names, and adopted distinctively Christian ones. The papyri now published abound with such distinctively apostolic or Christian names. Peter and Paul

are chief favourites, and then come Theodore, John, Mary, Abraham; while the names of great Christian and monastic leaders of the fourth century are perpetuated in Senuti and Athanasius. Wessely contributes yet a third article to this same Review, describing some fragments of St. Luke vii., which he has found. They form a portion of a prayer-book, as we should say, or an Evangelistarium-extracts from the Gospels used by the people at the Holy Communion. This one is the earliest hitherto discovered, All others came from the eighth century, while this is assigned by him to the year 500. It agrees in a marked manner with the Sinaitic and Alexandrian texts, and shows that the Greek Bible popularly used by the Egyptian Church of centuries four and five was identical with them. In this third article he has also incorporated a fragment of a new Greek poem. The fourth and fifth centuries were marked by the rise of a school of Græco-Egyptian poets, of whom the best known are Nonnus of Panopolis, author of the Dionysiacs; Quintus Smyrnæus, author of a poem on Homer; and Tryphiodor. Nonnus is the most celebrated of them all, and has been regarded as the last of the Greek poets. He wrote both on pagan and Christian topics, and has afforded much matter for speculation to German critics. Wessely has discovered one relic of this school, and Stern of Berlin, another. Stern's "find," a poem on an invasion of the Blemmyes, was published in the Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache, 1881, p. 71. The variety of subjects dealt with by Wessely proves the importance of these discoveries for ecclesiastical history. The Zeitschrift just mentioned and the Revue Egyptolique abound in similar illustrations. The student of Church history must now indeed keep a sharp eye upon Egyptian publications and literature, as it is there we may for some time expect our chief discoveries. The Zeitschrift für Ägyptische Sprache suffered a great loss during last year in the death of its learned editor, Lepsius, but it has pursued, under Dr. Stern, of Berlin, the same steady course as hitherto. Last year's issue includes many important papers on the Church history of the earlier ages. Thus, Stern himself has contributed papers dealing with fragments of the ancient Coptic Bible, with the Coptic Calendar, and with Coptic wills drawn up in the seventh and eighth centuries. Brugsch, again, the original founder of this Review, and the highest living authority, perhaps, on such subjects, contributes an article (p. 110) illustrating Egyptian religion under the Ptolemies, as shown by inscriptions from the Serapeum. This subject of the ancient religion of Egypt has lately received a good deal of attention. We are well acquainted with classical Paganism, but do not know so much of that of Egypt, which yet largely influenced the world of Roman life in the first and second centuries. A work has recently appeared in Paris dealing with this topic. Its author, G. Lafaye, from a careful study of the monuments and documents brought to light by modern research, describes its cult, moral teaching, and extension to Rome, where he thinks it did a good work in preparing the way for Christian doctrines. It taught the doctrine of an Osiris who suffered, died, and rose again, and commemorated his death and resurrection on November 12-14. But Lafaye also shows the spiritual weakness of this religion, and its inability to minister to "Histoire du Culte des divinités d'Alexandrie Serapis, Iris, Harpocrate et Anubis." Par G. Lafaye. Paris. 1884.

*

« ElőzőTovább »