the use against Christians of the arbalest or cross-bow, and of machines for throwing projectiles, such as the ballista." A gloss, however, restricted the operation of this rule to unjust wars." The prejudice against firearms is shown by the anecdote of Bayard, who, it is said, “when lying mortally wounded of a harquebus shot, thanked God that he had never showed mercy to a musketeer."" The provision of the Council of Clermont heretofore cited, which extended a very general exemption to noncombatants in private warfare, seems to have been applied to public warfare also. Some of the leading canonists of the fifteenth century considered it a dead-letter, however, and it was not unusual to hold for ransom wealthy noncombatants as well as soldiers." Merchants were generally allowed a reasonable time to wind up their affairs and depart the country," a provision to that effect, conditioned on reciprocity, being included in the Magna Charta." The dark side of mediaeval warfare.-While there was thus much that was bright in mediaeval war practice, there was perhaps more that was dark and gloomy. Pillage invariably followed a successful assault. Garrisons of places taken by assault could expect little mercy, and often where terms were granted the commandant and leading citizens were excluded from them. Those who were guilty of obstinate resistance were especially liable to find little mercy at the hands of the enemy. Incomparably the worst feature of mediaeval warfare, however, was the lack of discipline and organization in the armies. Without these, rules of any kind mean almost nothing. Practice in the English armies.-The numerous English army regulations of the period, however, would indicate a better condition in the English army than elsewhere." Under Henry V the organization was good and the discipline effective, but this was exceptional. Mountague Bernard 12 Nys, p. 192; Decret. Greg., Lib. V, Tit. XV, C. Unicum. 74 Walker, History of the Law of Nations, Vol. I, p. 190. 76 Nys, p. 194; Ward, II, p. 356. gives the following account of the campaigns of Edward III and Henry V: "In the summer of 1346 an English army, under Edward III, landed on the coast of Normandy, amongst a peaceful and industrious people, who, says Froissart, had never heard a battle-cry, or seen an armed man. They took and sacked Barfleur and Cherbourg, and marched on St. Lo. * "Fair and cheerful province-delicious sight to a hungry invader, with its hamlets and church towers, its substantial farms and large sleek cattle, thick orchards and green pastures, sweeping up hill and down dale to the winding margin of the sea! The English scattered themselves over it, 'ardant et exillant le pais,' and so advanced, burning and destroying-burning and destroying-over the rich flats of the Beauvoisin to the suburbs of Paris. Immense booty was taken; yet the English host, when it met the power of France at Crecy, was reduced to the utmost extremity of want. "Nearly seventy years had passed from this time, when Henry V appeared before the gates of Barfleur. This time no such scourge was to fall upon the Norman peasantry, who now knew too well the martial sounds so unfamiliar to their ears in the days of his great grandfather. It was the policy of Henry, and was agreeable to his free and kindly disposition, to treat the French as subjects rather than as enemies. Great stores of bread, beef and beer provided at home, followed his army, and he allowed nothing to be exacted from the inhabitants, even when they resisted his passage, but bread and wine. Sir Harris Nicolas, in the Appendix to his Battle of Agincourt, has preserved the General Orders issued on this occasion, which followed pretty closely those published in 1386 by Richard II. They/ prohibit strictly all bloodshed, insults to women and wanton injury to property. The ordinances of Henry were strictly enforced. The hanging of Bardolph for stealing a pix was a real incident of this campaign and it occurred when the army was in its greatest straits, before the battle of Agincourt." The lack of organization by which, in a 80 Bernard, Growth of Laws and Usages of War, pp. 97-99 (Oxford Essays, 1856). land of plenty, Edward III was reduced to want, is typical of the Middle Ages. War practice of the Swiss and Italians.—Of special interest is the war practice of the Swiss and of the Italians. The former seem to have considered terror one of their most effective weapons, and they have been likened to the Romans for the ferocity which they sometimes displayed." The practice among the Italians, on the other hand, except for the use of poison, was distinctly mild. In the twelfth chapter of the Prince, Machiavelli could not find words too bitter for the mercenaries who had taken the place of. all other troops in Italy. He says: "They endeavored with all possible industry to prevent trouble or fear, either to themselves or their soldiers, and their way was by killing nobody in fight, only taking one another prisoners, and dismissing them afterwards without either prejudice or ransom. When they were in leaguer before a town, they shot not rudely amongst them in the night, nor did they in the town disturb them with any sallies in their camp; no approaches or intrenchments were made at unseasonable hours, and nothing of lying in the field when winter came on; and all these things did not happen by any negligence in their officers, but were part of their discipline, and introduced, as is said before, to ease the poor soldier both of labor and of danger, by which practices they have brought Italy both into slavery and contempt.'' War practice at sea. The anarchy which prevailed on land during the Middle Ages was, if anything, surpassed by that at sea. Piracy was widespread and truces and treaties of peace had little effect on maritime hostilities.** Piracy had not been stamped out at the end of the Middle Ages," but a more or less firm control had been gained over the forces avowedly in the service of belligerents by the requirement of privateering commissions and the establishment of institutions similar to the Court of Admiralty in England. At first, the validity of prizes had been ad 31 Oman, Art of War in the Middle Ages, Lothian Prize Essay, p. 63. 82 Machiavelli, The Prince, Chap. XII (Trans. Morley). 83 Nys, pp. 211–215. 84 Walker, I, p. 165. judged summarily by the admiral of the fleet, but with the grant of privateering commissions the royal power insisted on judging the conduct of its subjects itself. The Court of Admiralty in England dates back to the reign of Edward III. Under Henry V, private vessels were required to bring their prizes into court before disposing of them and to make a declaration concerning them under penalty of confiscation." * Nys, pp. 259–260. 9 CHAPTER IIL GROTIUS AND HIS TIMES. The Renaissance and the outburst of literature on the art and law of war.-In nothing is the change from mediaeval to modern times more noticeable than in the intense interest that came to be manifested in everything the ancients had to teach of the art of war. Especially in Italy and Spain, this resulted in a great output of works on the art of war, which was followed somewhat later by a similar profusion of works on the law of war. Pierino Belli.-Of the Italian writers, the most notable was Pierino Belli (1502-1575), who occupied a position as military judge in the armies of both Charles V and Philip II, and later was one of the most respected members of the Council of State of Emanuel Filibert of Savoy. His work De re militari et de bello appeared in 1563, and was dedicated to Philip II. "His purpose is merely to remind princes of what is permissible and honorable in the declaration of war and conclusion of peace; what should be the treatment of combatant enemies, of prisoners, of the non-combatant population, of property of all kinds, animate or inanimate. Belli's conception of his subject was an admirable one, but he was not so successful in working it out in detail. He seems to be led aside in order to touch upon all the questions which had come before him as military judge, and indeed apologizes for defects due to an active life spent for the most part at a distance from books."" Spanish writers.-In Spain the controversy over the right to enslave the Indians caused special attention to be directed towards the law of war and the rights it gave. Two Dominicans, Franciscus Victoria (1480-1546), a professor at the University of Salamanca, and Dominicus Soto (1494-1560), his pupil, gave scientific form to the claims 1 Holland, Studies in International Law, pp. 48-49. See also Nys, Le Droit de la Guerre et les Precurseurs de Grotius, PP. 170-172. |