Rethinking Human Rights and Peace in

Post-Independence Timor-Leste
Through Local Perspectives Ying Hooi
Khoo
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/rethinking-human-rights-and-peace-in-post-independ
ence-timor-leste-through-local-perspectives-ying-hooi-khoo/
PALGRAVE MACMILLAN STUDIES ON
HUMAN RIGHTS IN ASIA
SERIES EDITOR: MIKYOUNG KIM

Rethinking Human Rights and

Peace in Post-Independence
Timor-Leste Through Local
Perspectives
Khoo Ying Hooi · Antero Benedito da Silva ·
Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam
Palgrave Macmillan Studies on Human Rights in Asia

Series Editor
Mikyoung Kim, Hiroshima, Japan
This Palgrave Macmillan book series addresses the rising interest in human
rights topics in Asia. It focuses on the largely underexplored territory
of Asian human rights topics highlighting its empirical manifestations,
historical trajectory and theoretical implications. It also goes beyond
the problematic dichotomy between “East” and “West” by engaging
in rigorous case-specific as well as cross-regional comparisons within
South-South context. China’s rise in world politics and its emergence
as a massive donor, for example, has significant yet troubling implica-
tions. The member countries of ASEAN and Northeast Asia, on the
other hand, would have different preoccupations and priorities calling for
context-sensitive diagnosis and prognosis to promote human right causes.
The series is multidisciplinary in nature and open to submissions
focusing on international organization, ethics, criminology, develop-
ment, freedom of expression, labour rights, environment, human/sex
trafficking, democratization, governance studies, disability, reproductive
rights, LGBT, post-/colonial as well as post-/authoritarian critiques and
social movement, among others.
The series publishes full-length monographs, and edited volumes.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/16483
Ying Hooi Khoo · Antero Benedito da Silva ·
Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam
Editors

Rethinking Human
Rights and Peace
in Post-Independence
Timor-Leste Through
Local Perspectives
Editors
Ying Hooi Khoo Antero Benedito da Silva
Department of International and Peace Center
Strategic Studies National University of
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences Timor-Lorosa’e
University of Malaya Dili, Timor-Leste
Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia

Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam

Community Development
Department
National University of
Timor-Lorosa’e
Dili, Timor-Leste

Palgrave Macmillan Studies on Human Rights in Asia

ISBN 978-981-16-3778-0 ISBN 978-981-16-3779-7 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3779-7

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer
Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for
general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa-
tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither
the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © Bhong-Jin Kim

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore
189721, Singapore
 Preface

The idea of this book was inspired by my empirical observations in Timor-

Leste, or East Timor, since 2016, based on informal conversations with
the Timorese community in general. During these conversations, one
intriguing question raised was what exactly human rights really mean for
the Timorese community, which endured a long period of bloody conflict
during Portuguese colonial rule and under Indonesian occupation. From
the restoration of its independence in 2002 to the United Nations (UN)-
assisted transition experience until now, where the country is moving
toward strengthening its state-building operations independently, oil-rich
Timor-Leste continues to be one of the world’s poorest countries, with
42% of the population below the national poverty line. The question
then arises: what do human rights and peace mean for Timorese in this
post-independence context?
On a personal note, people often ask how I came to learn about
politics and human rights in Timor-Leste, a country that has thus far
remained rather isolated in the discourse in the Southeast Asia region,
of which many misconceptions exist. Most scholarly work about Timor-
Leste comes from scholars attached to Australian or Portuguese universi-
ties due to their close historical relationship. Occasionally we find litera-
ture written from an Indonesian perspective. Timor-Leste can be consid-
ered “Asian” but also “Pacific” because of its ethno-linguistic and oral
history connections. Coming from the Southeast Asian region, as a South-
east Asian scholar, I realize the necessity of filling this research gap for us

v
vi PREFACE

to better understand Timor-Leste. And more importantly, to learn about

the country from the perspective of local actors.
By highlighting the importance of local voices surrounding the debates
about liberal–local and hybrid peace, this book intends to explore the
question of human rights and peace from the eyes of the Timorese
community. These concepts no longer mean just the absence of conflict;
rather, this book proposes that sustainable peace must be built from rights
frameworks to protect the locals’ interests in the processes of peace and
development. This book emphasizes the urgent need to provide for the
needs and facilitate the creation of political and social structures that can
support and offer contextual rights and dignity for the Timorese commu-
nity. It seeks to describe the on-the-ground processes by which those
conditions are constructed, maintained and replicated. In Chapter 1,
I explicitly explain Lederman’s (2006) “systematic openness to contin-
gency” in relation to the unintended responses to possibilities arising from
my topics of study.
In 2016, I was involved with an intergovernmental project between the
Ministry of Education in Malaysia and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Cooperation in Timor-Leste. Although it was my second time in Timor-
Leste, it was only during that assignment that I started to engage further
with the Timorese, particularly noting the simplicity of life there despite
its hardships. One of my earliest works on Timor-Leste, written in 2017,
relates to art and how it galvanizes youths. I wrote about Arte Moris, or
Living Art, that offers a place for young Timorese to express themselves
while helping them bond and share positive values about their country.1
But Arte Moris is not just meant to promote the arts; it is also a potential
way of helping the East Timorese people rebuild their lives after the inde-
pendence struggle. Two generations witnessed this struggle. The first was
the “Generation of ’99,” or Geracão Foun, born during the Indonesian
occupation. They are distinct from their predecessors, the “Generation
of ’75,” the Portuguese-speaking older leaders who mostly dominate the
government, some of whom emerged as national leaders in the 1980s
and 1990s. Through their arts and music, these artists voice their dissat-
isfaction and discontent with government policies, such as the lack of job
opportunities for youths.

1 See Khoo, Y. H. (2017). How arts heal and galvanise the youth of Timor-Leste.
The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/how-arts-heal-and-galvanise-the-youth-
of-timor-leste-7392. Accessed 18 January 2021.
 PREFACE vii

Over time, I started to learn about Timorese politics through the

stories of the people whom I met, which included loosely structured
discussions with the communities. This book is particularly interested in
the interplay between the various factors that come together to produce a
hybrid peace. I get to know the co-editors of this book, Antero Benedito
da Silva and Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam, both from the Univer-
sidade Nacional Timor Lorosa’e (UNTL). This approach was triggered
by my early learning phases on Timorese politics that opened the door
for me to learn, from a bottom-up approach, about the discourse on
human rights, peace and democracy. In many instances, international
actors are rarely able to act autonomously in an effective manner without
the partnership of local actors. This hybrid peace reminds us of the lack
of autonomy on the part of local actors in peace-making contexts. One
of the most significant limitations has been the weakness in integrating
the rights discourse during engagement with local actors. Many people
generously shared their knowledge and experience with me as I wrote.
With this, I dedicate this book to all contributors and to all the Timo-
rese whom I met along the journey toward the broad horizon of human
rights and peace. Words cannot express how grateful I am to them,
whose profound insights have touched me in many ways. I would like
to also thank the research grant provided by the Faculty of Arts and
Social Sciences, University of Malaya (PV027-2019) to enable this book
to become a reality.

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Ying Hooi Khoo

February 2021
 Praise for Rethinking Human Rights
and Peace in Post-Independence
Timor-Leste Through Local
Perspectives

“I was asked by Dr. Ying Hooi Khoo to write an endorsement on the book
that she, Dr. Antero B. da Silva and Dr. Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam
are going to publish, with the title ‘Rethinking Human Rights and Peace
in Post-Independence Timor-Leste through Local Perspectives.’ In fact,
this is a good opportunity to rethink Democracy, Human Rights, Peace
and Justice in Timor-Leste. The topics presented are all very important
and relevant. I hope the government and civil society groups are able to
read, reflect and take as a standard to improve the situation of Human
Rights and Justice in Timor-Leste. Only in this way can integral, harmo-
nious and sustainable development benefit the people of Timor-Leste. I
address my congratulations to all authors!”
—Dom Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo,Nobel Peace Prize 1996

“This is an excellent book written mostly by Timorese scholars, which

serves as a critical counter-narrative to some of more widely publi-
cised works on Timorese politics. I find much valuable information and
thought-provoking arguments particularly on the critique of capitalism,
and the dominant discourses on democracy and human rights in this fine
collection.”
—Jacqueline Siapno,University of California, Berkeley

ix
 Contents

1 What Is Peace and Human Rights for Timorese? 1

Ying Hooi Khoo
2 Transitional Justice: A Dispute Over Reconciliation
and Justice 27
Antero Benedito da Silva
3 Impunity for Human Rights Violations and its
Consequences in Timor-Leste 41
Juvinal Dias
4 Democratic Discourse and Consensus in Timor-Leste:
Reintegration to Neoliberal Capitalism? 55
Fernando A. T. Ximenes
5 Provedoria Dos Direitos Humanos e Justiça: Between
Human Rights Activism and Limitations 71
Ying Hooi Khoo and Horacio de Almeida
6 Political Uncertainty and Its Implications for Wellbeing
Rights of Timorese Society 89
Jose Cornelio Guterres
7 Patriarchy and Women’s Rights in Timor-Leste 99
Eugenia Urania da Costa Correia

xi
xii CONTENTS

8 The Neglected Rights of Elderly Women in Timor-Leste 109

Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam
9 Environmental Justice in Timor-Leste: Legal Practices
and Challenges 121
Adilsonio da Costa Junior

Index 133
 Notes on Contributors

Eugenia Urania da Costa Correia is the Executive Director of Comite

Orientador 25 (CO25). She has helped CSOs and other agencies under-
stand the development of CSOs in Timor-Leste.
Adilsonio da Costa Junior is the Strategy and Engagement Lead at
Oxfam in Timor-Leste. He was previously attached as a researcher with
La’o Hamutuk, the Timor-Leste Institute for Development Monitoring
and Analysis. His work focuses on the environmental impacts of large
infrastructure projects and good governance.
Antero Benedito da Silva, Ph.D. is a university lecturer on peace and
conflict studies and the Director of Peace Center at the Timor Lorosa’e
National University (UNTL). Da Silva and the East Timor Student
Solidarity Council (ETSSC) were awarded the Student Peace Prize of
1999 for their nonviolent struggle for independence against the brutal
Indonesian occupation.
Horacio de Almeida is the former Deputy Ombudsman at the PDHJ.
He has been involved in the independence process of Timor-Leste in
different capacities including the National Resistance of East Timo-
rese Students (RENETIL); the Association of East Timor Students
(IMPETTU); the Office of Political Affairs, Legal Affairs, Human Rights
and Transitional Justice Section of UNOTIL, UNMISET and UNMIT;
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation (MNEC), CAC, Ministry
of Health and CAVR.

xiii
xiv NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

Juvinal Dias is the President of Konsellu Konsultivu Fundu Petrolíferu/

Timor-Leste Petroleum Fund Consultative Council (KKFP). He was
previously attached as a researcher with La’o Hamutuk.
Jose Cornelio Guterres, Ph.D. is the Executive President of the
National Institute For Science and Technology (INCT), a public insti-
tute for science and technology. He is also a lecturer of Cultural Philos-
ophy at UNTL, Sociology of Politics at Universidade da Paz (UNPAZ)
and Instituto Filosofico Sao Francisco de Sales (IFFS). He was previously
the director of the Parliamentary Research Centre and the director of the
Master Program at UNPAZ.
Ying Hooi Khoo, Ph.D. is a university lecturer at the Department of
International and Strategic Studies, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
at the University of Malaya. She is the Editor-in-Chief of the Malaysian
Journal of International Relations (MJIR), and board members of the
Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, Journal of Southeast Asian
Human Rights (JSEAHR) and Indonesian Law Review (ILREV). She has
been active in the works related to human rights and democracy in the
Southeast Asia region for more than a decade.
Therese Nguyen Thi Phuong Tam, Ph.D. is a university lecturer and
researcher at the Community Development Department, Faculty of Social
Science, UNTL. She is also a board member of KDA’I, a newly established
public policy institute in Timor-Leste. Nguyen holds a Ph.D. in Sociology
from the University of Minho, Portugal. Her main research areas are on
women, gender and development.
Fernando A. T. Ximenes is a researcher in the Peace Center, Faculty of
Social Sciences, UNTL. He is also the coordinator of CO25.
 Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank

ADR Alternative Dispute Resolution
AJAR Asia Justice & Rights (Indonesia)
AMP Alliance of Majority in Parliament
APODETI Associação Popular Democrática Timorense
ASDT2 Timorese Social Democratic Association. Later FRETILIN
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BOP Batalhão de Ordem Público (Timor-Leste)
CAC Anti-Corruption Commission
CAT Convention against Torture and Other Cruel Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment
CAT-OP Optional Protocol of the Convention against Torture
CAVR Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation of East
Timor
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimina-
tion Against Women
CMW International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of
All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families
CNRM National Council of Maubere Resistance (Timor-Leste)
CNRT National Congress for Timorese Reconstruction
CO25 Comite Orientador 25

2 The original ASDT is not to be confused with the political party of the same name,
which emerged afterward.

xv
xvi ABBREVIATIONS

CPD-RDTL Popular Committee for Defence of the Democratic Republic

of Timor-Leste
CRC Convention on the Rights of the Child
CRC-OP-AC Optional Protocol to the CRC on the Involvement of
Children in Armed Conflict
CRC-OP-SC Optional Protocol to the CRC on the Sale of Children Child
Prostitution and Child Pornography
CRPD Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
CRRN Revolutionary Council of National Resistance (Timor-Leste)
CSOs Civil Society Organizations
CTF Commission of Truth and Friendship (Indonesia and Timor-
Leste)
DNCPIA National Directorate for Pollution Control and the Environ-
ment (Timor-Leste)
DNDI National Directorate for Information Dissemination
DOPI Department of Political and Ideological Orientation (of
FRETILIN)
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EIU Economist Intelligence Unit
EMP Environmental Management Plan
ETAN East Timor and Indonesia Action Network
EU European Union
F-FDTL Timor-Leste Defence Force (Forcas Defesa Timor Lorosa’e)
FALINTIL National Liberation of East Timor
FM Fundasaun Mahein
FRETILIN Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (Frente
Revolucionária de Timor-Leste Independente). Formerly
ASDT
GBV Gender-Based Violence
GMN Grupo Media Nacional
HAK Association for Law, Human Rights and Justice (Hukum,
Hak Asasi dan Keadilan) (Timor-Leste)
HDI Human Development Index
ICC International Criminal Court
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
ICCPR-OP2-DP Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR Aiming to the
Abolition of the Death Penalty
ICERD International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination
ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights
ICJ International Court of Justice
 ABBREVIATIONS xvii

ICPPED International Convention for the Protection of All Persons

from Enforced Disappearance
ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross
IDPs Internally Displaced Persons
IFA International Federation of Aging
ILO International Labour Organization
IMF International Monetary Fund
INTERFET International Force in East Timor
JSMP Judicial System Monitoring Programme (Programa Monitor-
izasaun Sistema Judisiál)
KDN National Directive Commission
KHUNTO K’manek Haburas Unidade Nacional Timor Oan
Komnas HAM National Commission on Human Rights of Indonesia
KPP-HAM National Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights Viola-
tions in Timor-Leste
KRM Maubere Revolutionary Council (Conselho Revolucionário
de Maubere)
MIPAA Madrid International Plan of Action on Aging
MFA Movimento das Forças Armadas (Timor-Leste)
NAP 1325 National Action Plan for the implementation of the UNSCR
1325 on Women, Peace and Security
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
NHRI National Human Rights Institution
OHCHR Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
PD Democratic Party (Timor-Leste)
PDHJ Provedoria Dos Direitos Humanos e Justiça (Timor-Leste)
PLP People’s Liberation Party (Timor-Leste)
PNTL National Police of East Timor (Policía Nacional Timor
Lorosa’e)
POLRI Indonesian National Police
RAEOA Special Administrative Region of Oé-Cusse Ambeno
RDTL Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (República
Democrática de Timor-Leste)
RENITIL National Resistance of East Timorese Students
RTTL Radio e Televisão de Timor-Leste
SECOMS Secretariat of State for Social Communication
SOPs Standard Operating Procedures
SPD Social Democratic Party (Timor-Leste)
SRHR Sexual Reproductive Health Rights
SSB Suai Supply Base
TNI Indonesian National Army (Tentara Nasional Indonesia)
TLSDP Timor-Leste Strategic Development Plan (referring specifi-
cally to 2011–2030 plan)
xviii ABBREVIATIONS

TRC Truth and Reconciliation Commission

UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights
UDT União Democrática Timorense
UN United Nations
UNAMET UN Mission in East Timor
UNCLOS UN Conventions of the Sea
UNDP UN Development Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organi-
zation
UNHCHR UN High Commission on Human Rights
UNHRTJS UN Human Rights and Transitional Justice Section
UNMIT UN Integrated Mission in Timor-Leste
UNMISET UN Mission of Support to East Timor
UNOTIL United Nations Office in Timor-Leste
UNSCR UN Security Council Resolution
UNTAET UN Transitional Administration in East Timor
UNTL Universidade Nacional Timor Lorosa’e
UPR Universal Periodic Review
US United States of America
USAID United States Agency for International Development
VDPA Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action
 CHAPTER 1

What Is Peace and Human Rights

for Timorese?

Ying Hooi Khoo

The Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste (República Democrática de

Timor-Leste, or RDTL) became fully independent on May 20, 2002,
which Noam Chomsky described as “the miracle of the [twentieth]
century” (Chomsky, 2015). Geographically located at the edge of South-
east Asia, Timor-Leste shares more in common with the small island states
of the Pacific, and the result is that its affairs are often left out of regional
discourse. Southeast Asian countries share commonalities yet have expe-
rienced diverse historical and geopolitical circumstances that have created
different political structures and institutional polities. In addition to being
a parliamentary republic with multiparty system, Timor-Leste’s Constitu-
tion (RDTL, 2002) establishes a semi-presidential system of governance
that follows the system of a separation of powers and interdependence

Y. H. Khoo (B)
Department of International and Strategic Studies,
University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
e-mail: yinghooi@um.edu.my

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1

Singapore Pte Ltd. 2022
Y. H. Khoo (ed.), Rethinking Human Rights and Peace in
Post-Independence Timor-Leste Through Local Perspectives,
Palgrave Macmillan Studies on Human Rights in Asia,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-3779-7_1
2 Y. H. KHOO

between the organs of sovereignty: the President, the National Parliament

(henceforth Parliament), the Government and the Courts.
The Portuguese colonized Timor-Leste from 1515 onwards, after
which it was known as Portuguese Timor. The independence move-
ment, the Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (Frente
Revolucionária de Timor-Leste Independente, or FRETILIN), which was
founded in 1974, unilaterally declared independence from Portugal in
November 1975 and proclaimed the RDTL. However, this indepen-
dence only lasted for a brief nine days, after which it was invaded by the
Indonesian military and continued to be occupied until 1999, a period
of 24 years (Simpson, 2005) during which approximately a third of the
population died from abuses such as execution, starvation or disease.
Timor-Leste’s path to independence was protracted and many did not
expect self-determination to succeed. Its success was due to a unique
combination of resistance from the armed wing in the jungle, the diplo-
matic front (Molnar, 2009; Rothschild, 2017), present at the UN in New
York, Africa, Australia, Portugal and elsewhere, and the clandestine front
of civilians within the country, particularly young people. In June 1998,
the Habibie government proposed a referendum on special autonomy for
the territory. In January 1999, after tripartite negotiations with Portugal
and the UN led by Secretary-General Kofi Anan, the Habibie govern-
ment finally agreed to a UN-sponsored popular consultation that actually
allowed the people of Timor-Leste to decide their own fate: whether to
remain with Indonesia as an autonomous region or gain full independence
(He, 2008).
The popular referendum that took place on August 20, 1999 witnessed
a total of almost 78.9% of the population opting to leave Indonesia. This
result led to widespread violence from pro-Indonesian groups that later
required the intervention of UN peacekeepers (Feijó, 2020). The inter-
national community, under the leadership of the UN, responded with an
influx of foreign aid to rebuild a new Timor-Leste (McGregor, 2007). It
was reported that hundreds of people were killed, the destruction of 70%
of buildings and physical infrastructure occurred as well as the unresolved
displacement of almost two-thirds of the population.
This wave of violence then prompted the deployment of an
Australian-led multinational force, the International Force in East Timor
(INTERFET), with the aim of restoring law and order. Subsequently, the
United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor (UNTAET),
 1 WHAT IS PEACE AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TIMORESE? 3

established through UN Security Council Resolution 1272, was estab-

lished with the objectives of ensuring political and social stability,
preventing any further violence as well as restoring order (Alcott et al.,
2003; Gorjão, 2002). The UN mission, in particular its leader the late
Sergio Viero de Mello, was vested with all sovereign powers to prepare the
territory for political independence and to assist in creating democratic
state institutions for the smooth transition of independence (Santos &
Cravo, 2014). In the first two and a half years of this transition, the state
of Timor-Leste depended entirely on international development assistance
(bilateral and multilateral) as well as support from international non-
governmental organizations (NGOs), which created the impetus behind
the transition.
Until the full restoration of independence to an elected government,
the Constitution was written by an elected body and the first development
plan was prepared. It is important to say something about this UNTAET-
led phase since the debates that took place during this time determined
which human rights instruments were prioritized. The historical back-
ground impacted how the Constitution, founded on the basis of a liberal
peace model with emphasis on democracy, was drafted. The Constitution
stipulates that Timor-Leste is to be a “democratic, sovereign, indepen-
dent and unitary state based on the rule of law, the will of the people
and respect for the dignity of the human person”. It has adopted all basic
and fundamental human rights. In addition, the Constitution requires the
state to engage in administrative decentralization. Timor-Leste is divided
into 13 districts and 65 subdistricts, each headed by a centrally appointed
local leader. The subdistricts are further divided into 442 villages or suco,
which are made up of 2, 225 hamlets or aldeia (McWilliam, 2008),
with local leaders largely selected according to local sociopolitical prac-
tices (Nixon, 2006). According to Wallis (2012), Timor-Leste is a good
case study with which to test the literature relating to the emergence of a
liberal–local hybrid peace. This book intends to offer more on-the-ground
views by presenting writings by locals.
Despite the Indonesian occupation, where justice was denied and
human rights were violated, the Timorese continued to be united. Timor-
Leste is widely considered a liberal peace state-building success story,
compared to similar UN-led efforts in other parts of the world. In 2020,
it ranked 54th in the Global Peace Index issued by the Institute for
Economics and Peace, moving up from the 63rd place in 2019. It also
ranked 78th in the World Press Freedom Index, moving up from 84th in
4 Y. H. KHOO

2019. Among the Southeast Asian countries, Timor-Leste continues to

rank highest in the Democracy Index, issued by the Economist Intel-
ligence Unit (EIU). However, it has been claimed that the policies
implemented have not improved the living standards of the local popula-
tion even after two decades. This is shown in the Human Development
Index (HDI), where Timor-Leste’s HDI value for 2019 was 0.626, which
puts the country in the medium human development category, at 131st
place out of 189 countries and territories. Between 2000 and 2017,
Timor-Leste’s HDI value increased from 0.507 to 0.625, an increase of
23.3% (UNDP, 2018).

What Do Human Rights

and Peace Mean to the Timorese?1
With the long struggle for the restoration of independence, Timor-Leste’s
economy and development suffered. As in other post-conflict countries,
the state-building operation was dominated by attempts to institutionalize
liberal peace. Wallis (2012) lists four main challenges in these attempts.
First is the persistence of local sociopolitical practices. As argued by Mac
Ginty (2010), hybrid peace is the result of the interplay between the
following components: (1) the compliance powers of liberal peace agents,
networks and structures; (2) the incentivizing powers of liberal peace
agents, networks and structures; (3) the ability of local actors to resist,
ignore or adapt liberal peace interventions; and (4) the ability of local
actors, networks and structures to present and maintain alternative forms
of peacemaking. All too often, high-level talks between leaders and the
state have dominated the public notion of peace processes.
After independence, many Timorese continued to follow local sociopo-
litical practices centred on their suco and aldeia (Nixon, 2006), as
explained above. During the Portuguese colonial period, a policy of
indirect rule was imposed, which meant that local sociopolitical prac-
tices remained influential among the communities (Dunn, 2003). There
was a more concerted attempt to entrench state institutions during the
Indonesian occupation, but local practices continued to be observed and

1 Some parts of this section have been published in Human Rights Outlook
in Southeast Asia 2016, SHAPE-SEA, 147–162; Human Rights Outlook in Southeast
Asia 2017, SHAPE-SEA, 139–151; and Human Rights Outlook in Southeast Asia
2018, SHAPE-SEA, 155–168.
 1 WHAT IS PEACE AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TIMORESE? 5

were utilized by the resistance (Nixon, 2006). After the withdrawal of

Indonesia and prior to the UNTAET’s establishment, there were effec-
tively no state institutions or laws, which meant that the Timorese had to
rely solely on their local practices (Hohe & Nixon, 2003). Recognizing
the fact that the newly independent state was not yet able to permeate
rural areas, and that local communities continued to provide the social
support network (Hohe & Nixon, 2003), the new state began to formally
engage with local practices. For instance, the Secretariat of State for Social
Communication (SECOMS), through the National Directorate for Infor-
mation Dissemination (DNDI), launched the “Naroman ba suku” (Light
for Suco), part of its “Government Among the People” program, in
Quiri-Lelo Village at Suco Liurai in Aileu (RDTL, 2019). The Naroman
ba suku programs seek to bring information to the local level (the suco
communities) allowing them to present the concerns or obstacles they
face in the national media, in order to give them greater visibility.
The second challenge, as pointed out by Wallis (2012), is a fragmented
society, in which the promotion of democracy is challenged. According
to Richmond and Pogodda (2016), peace formation seeks to find ways
of establishing peace processes and the dynamics of local forms of peace
within their social and historical context, from which political institutions,
norms, laws, rights and processes of redistribution may emerge. These
actors are influenced by the hybrid forms of peace at the state, regional
and global levels, where they operate in relation to the local context
while maintaining sociohistorical continuity. But at the same time, there
is also a focus on transformation, drawing on external influences. There
are three assumptions in the liberal peace model. The first is that it is
often driven from above, or by external actors. The second assumption
is the prioritization of international interventions over local ones, and
top-down state-building over bottom-up approaches. The third assump-
tion is that liberal democratic societies are more peaceful and prosperous
than undemocratic “illiberal societies” (Zakaria, 1997). Liberal peace has
become a model through which Western-led agencies have attempted to
unite the world under a hegemonic system that replicates its liberal insti-
tutions, norms, and political, social and economic systems (Richmond,
2010).
However, local resistance in Timor-Leste reveals the weaknesses of the
model when it confronts key norms and values of the society within
the framework of peace-building. The local peace agency may attempt
to resolve conflict issues so as to be more relevant in local conflict
6 Y. H. KHOO

spheres, in order to move beyond these blockages. In most cases, both

the local and international actors enter into a bargaining relationship
whereby each actor imposes its own cultural values, norms and practices—
when this happens, a condition that termed as hybrid peace governance
has occurred (Jarstad & Belloni, 2012). The reason for this hybridity is
twofold. On one hand, this type of local peace agency lacks local legiti-
macy, suffering a lack of resources, low public and political support and
its inability to counter the structural framework of the elites (Richmond
& Pogodda, 2016). On the other hand, the inability of international
actors to accept differences in terms of identity, local culture, institutions
and pace of development impose hindrances. It is therefore argued that
a peace process dominated by local-scale peace formation, connected to
externalized peace-building efforts, is likely to be more viable, where both
actors are influenced in a progressive interrelationship. Without it, peace
formation may take the form of poorer quality peace in the local context,
as so many post-Cold War cases of intervention have revealed (Richmond
& Pogodda, 2016).
The third challenge is legal pluralism, and fourth is the subsistence
economy (Wallis, 2012). For instance, while people were aware that
Timor-Leste had become an independent state, there was limited aware-
ness of what the Constitution meant. These perceptions, as argued by
Soares (2003), were partly due to the rushed nature of the constitution-
making process, which allowed little time for public consultation or civic
education. In this book, we argue that another crucial challenge is the
lack of rights framework in the process of state- and peace-building in
Timor-Leste.
Timor-Leste’s Constitution has adopted all basic and fundamental
human rights conventions and declarations, and it has established a
National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) and other institutions for
the promotion and protection of human rights. Article 29 (2) declares
that the State recognizes and protects the life of all citizens, and Article
32 (1) places limits on sentences and security measures, and that there
will be no life imprisonment, sentences or security measures lasting for
an unlimited or indefinite period of time. Domestically, there have been
efforts to improve human rights and democracy due to its indepen-
dence struggle. In 2014, based on instructions from the Prime Minister,
No.17/X/2014, the National Directive Commission (KDN) was estab-
lished, led by the Ministry of Justice, comprising representatives from UN
agencies in Timor-Leste, the Provedoria Dos Direitos Humanos e Justiça
 1 WHAT IS PEACE AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TIMORESE? 7

(PDHJ) and representatives of civil society and human rights focal points
from each ministry (RDTL, 2016). Timor-Leste also established action
plans such as a national action plan on gender-based violence (GBV), a
national action plan for zero hunger (ibid.) and a national action plan
for persons with disabilities. In 2016, the government launched an action
plan on women, peace and security.
Timor-Leste joined the UN right after their restoration of indepen-
dence. Thus far, the Timor-Leste government has ratified seven inter-
national instruments out of nine as listed in Table 1.1. The remaining
major international instruments that it has not ratified are the Convention
on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the International
Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappear-
ance (ICPPED). Although the Constitution has adopted the general and
customary principles of ratified international law and treaties, ensuring
that all national legislation must not contradict international law, Timor-
Leste has not been able to fully fulfil the general recommendations of the
treaty bodies.
Having ratified the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
(ICC), Timor-Leste has included the provisions of the Rome Statute in
national law to criminalize actions against humanity. As set out in Article
124 of the Penal Code, it will punish, with 15–30 years imprisonment,
the following acts:

Homicide, extermination, forcible deportation of a population, imprison-

ment or depriving a person of physical liberty in violation of international
law, torture, rape, sexual enslavement, forced prostitution, forced steriliza-
tion, any form of sexual violence of comparable seriousness, persecution
against a group or a collective entity due to politics, race, nationality,
ethnicity, religion, sex, enforced disappearances, apartheid, and inhumane
acts that cause suffering, serious injury to body or to mental or physical
health. (RDTL, 2016)

But it has not yet enacted legislation providing for cooperation with the
ICC, reflecting the weaknesses in the implementation of its Penal Code,
which is not just insufficient to challenge impunity for past crimes, it is
also not consistent with the Rome Statute, other human rights treaties
or customary international law. Specifically, the Penal Code did not
include guarantees that there will be no national amnesties, pre-conviction
8 Y. H. KHOO

Table 1.1 Ratification status of international treaties in Timor-Leste

Treaty Signature date Ratification date and

status: accession (a)

Convention Against Torture April 16, 2003 (a)

and Other Cruel Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or
Punishment (CAT)
Optional Protocol of the September 16, 2005
Convention Against Torture
(CAT-OP)
International Covenant on Civil September 18, 2003 (a)
and Political Rights (ICCPR)
Second Optional Protocol to September 18, 2003 (a)
the ICCPR Aiming to the
Abolition of the Death Penalty
(ICCPR-OP2-DP)
Convention on the Elimination April 16, 2003 (a)
of All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women (CEDAW)
International Convention on April 16, 2003 (a)
the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination (ICERD)
International Covenant on April 16, 2003 (a)
Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights (ICESCR)
International Convention on January 30, 2004 (a)
the Protection of the Rights of
All Migrant Workers and
Members of Their Families
(CMW)
Convention on the Rights of April 16, 2003 (a)
the Child (CRC)
Optional Protocol to the CRC August 2, 2004 (a)
on the Involvement of Children
in Armed Conflict
(CRC-OP-AC)
Optional Protocol to the CRC April 16, 2003 (a)
on the Sale of Children Child
Prostitution and Child
Pornography (CRC-OP-SC)

Source Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)

 1 WHAT IS PEACE AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TIMORESE? 9

pardons or similar measures of impunity for crimes under international

law in the future (OHCHR, 2016b).
As a post-conflict small state, access to justice remains a challenge for
a large part of the population. Currently, there are a total of four perma-
nent courts for 13 municipalities. Access to justice is made even more
challenging with the poor road conditions and the high costs of travel-
ling. The concept of a “mobile court” was introduced and implemented,
with the intention to increase access to the court, but it has not been
very successful thus far. Another limitation is language, where the formal
justice system and legislation uses only Portuguese, while most of the
Timorese population speaks Tetun and do not understand Portuguese.
Moreover, many Timorese prefer traditional dispute resolution mecha-
nisms owing to their familiarity and accessibility, but such mechanisms do
not always adhere to international human rights standards, for instance,
women’s rights (OHCHR, 2016a).
Development-related human rights issues are the top concerns in
Timor-Leste. For example, a comprehensive legal basis for determining
land use and tenure remains lacking, although Article 54 (1) of the
Constitution states that every individual has the right to private prop-
erty and can transfer it during his or her lifetime or on death. Most
Timorese in the countryside can access and hold land through customary
and informal systems, where there are no formal legal recognitions.
The related challenges to land issues include landlessness and forced
displacement, disputes caused by massive land occupation, and the legit-
imacy of formal land titles issued during the Portuguese and Indonesian
administrations originated from its post-colonial and post-conflict legacies
(Almeida & Wassel, 2017).
Women and children rights’ issues are also key areas in Timor-Leste,
which has a relatively strong patriarchal system that becomes a factor in
preventing women from obtaining work opportunities. There are also
concerns about the failure to prevent and provide redress for crimes
against women and girls and about the low number of investigations,
prosecutions and convictions in cases of alleged rape and sexual abuse,
lenient sentences in domestic violence cases, failure to issue protection
orders and the excessive use of mediation under the informal justice
system in cases of domestic violence. For instance, although the Civil
Code (Law No. 10/2011) acknowledges equal rights of women and men
in marriage, the fault-based divorce system enshrined in the Civil Code
puts women, including victims of domestic violence, at a disadvantage.
10 Y. H. KHOO

Moreover, neither the Constitution nor its ordinary legislation includes a

definition of discrimination against women in accordance with Article 1 of
CEDAW. The Law against Domestic Violence (No. 7/2010) criminalized
domestic violence, including sexual violence, “even within a marriage”.
Timor-Leste also appeared at CEDAW along with civil society members
who critiqued the government’s performance.
In 2016, Timor-Leste launched its National Action Plan for the imple-
mentation of the UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 on
Women, Peace and Security (UN Women Asia and the Pacific, 2016),
henceforth NAP 1325, the third country in Southeast Asia to adopt such
a measure. It calls for actions to advance the participation and leadership
of women in all aspects of decision-making and peace-building. It aims
to increase the role of women in preventing and mediating conflicts, and
to ensure that women can live free from violence and reap the benefits of
development. But policing and judicial processes for survivors of domestic
violence seeking both protection and justice are lacking. Due to fear of
reprisals, most victims often prefer not to report abuses; rather, domestic
disputes are often solved using traditional laws and practices, either within
the family or before the community leaders. This situation highlights the
important gaps in the legislative, policy and institutional framework for
human rights protection in the country.
With half of Timor-Leste’s population living in poverty, the govern-
ment struggles to find ways to improve the livelihoods of the 1.3
million-strong population (The World Bank, n.d.). The economy, corrup-
tion and the government’s failure to utilize the wealth generated by
oil resources to support development and create jobs dominate polit-
ical discourse. These issues will not go away until feasible solutions are
found. Timorese want to be better and are eager to see more improve-
ment, so as to be able to compete globally. Timor-Leste has shown
strong determination in its commitment to democracy (being more boldly
democratic than many countries in Southeast Asia) and optimism about
the future despite the obstacles faced (Khoo, 2018). For instance, since
the restoration of independence, Timor-Leste has had competitive elec-
tions which have been universally recognized as free and fair. Even when
 1 WHAT IS PEACE AND HUMAN RIGHTS FOR TIMORESE? 11

tensions were high during the 2006 internal political crisis,2 presiden-
tial and parliamentary elections were held the following year with only
minor incidents of violence. The Timorese people have demonstrated a
commitment to democracy; despite polarizing opinions and differences
in ideological beliefs, they are consistently united.
In 2017, more than 20 political parties contested in the March 20 pres-
idential election and the July 22 parliamentary election, the first elections
held in Timor-Leste without assistance from the international community
since the UN mission departed in 2012. The elections were a significant
success because they were held in an orderly and peaceful manner, which
showed how much the Timorese valued their hard-won democratic rights,
demonstrating an awareness that political stability is particularly crucial for
a young democratic nation (ibid.). While the calling of the early election
triggered questions about the principles of consensus politics and political
inclusion, it was crucial for settling the power struggle between the polit-
ical parties and their coalitions so that Timor-Leste’s government could
start governing properly. Furthermore, Timorese are aware that peace
is not only the absence of conflict; it must also be complemented with
sustainable development. A major issue lies in the fact that Timor-Leste’s
social and economic development has not proceeded in parallel with the
maturity of democracy within the country (ibid.).
These challenges reveal the weaknesses of the development in the state-
building process, where it is widely acknowledged that the government
needs to diversify its resource-dependent economy. Another issue is the
government’s ambitious and rapidly developing infrastructure projects,
with possible negative implications for the environment. Increasing rural-
based development is critical but it will not be simple; progress is also
intertwined with the issues of governance and balanced development.
These are some of the issues that cannot be neglected in Timor-Leste’s
political discourse, which are obvious in every part of the country. In
economic and social terms, sustainable transformation requires a contin-
uous investment in capacity-building and empowerment of the people.
The government also needs to prevent vested interests from leading the

2 Tensions between the national police and the armed forces resulted in open conflict
between the two institutions, a breakdown of law and order and the displacement of
more than 150,000 people. Political and security efforts to resolve conflict and to bring
stability continued and despite attacks on both the President and the Prime Minister in
2008, the country gradually recovered from the crisis. See also Chapter 3.
12 Y. H. KHOO

resource-rich country to the “resource curse” and implement reforms in

key areas that remain under-explored, such as agriculture and community-
based tourism (Khoo, 2017).
Why then has so little been done in terms of economic diversifica-
tion? Has the role of international actors such as the UN, European
Union (EU) and others failed? The decentralization of political power
is crucial to empowering the Timorese people for self-governance at the
grassroots level, so as to enable them to build their capacity for socioe-
conomic development. A renewed effort on democratic decentralization,
so that marginalized groups facing various issues (such as poverty, land
right issues, illiteracy, low employment, corruption and cronyism) can
move toward sustainable democracy is crucial. Unemployment is partic-
ularly critical given that around 70% of Timorese are below 30. While
infrastructure has been receiving the biggest portion of Timor-Leste’s
annual budget for the past decade, grievances about poor infrastructure
such as roads, water and sanitation, irrigation and the availability of basic
infrastructure continue. On top of that, there are also concerns that devel-
opment has been heavily focused on Dili, the capital city. Within the
model of liberal–local hybrid peace, it is significant that most development
projects focus more in Dili, which increases the growing gap between Dili
and the other 12 districts (Neves & Khoo, 2017).

Sustainable Peace with a Rights Framework

While the concepts of human rights and peace are increasingly linked,
there is great variance in the debates on how exactly these concepts are
linked, especially in practice (Hannum, 2006). Increasingly, scholars have
attempted to examine the nexus between peace, development and human
rights. For instance, Hoole (2009, p. 136) notes that “there is no shortcut
to peace without human rights” and Lopatka (1980, p. 364) states that
“there cannot be a real peace in a society in which human rights and
the fundamental freedoms are mass-violated”. As Sharp (2013) notes, the
“increasingly shared space between transitional justice and post-conflict
peace-building initiatives has sparked new interest among both scholars
and policymakers in sounding out potential connections between both
fields”. This book stems from the increased recognition of envisaging the
peace and development processes within the rights framework. Peace in
the contemporary context of Timor-Leste does not mean just the absence
of conflict, as which Galtung refers to as “negative peace” (1969). Making
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
grandfather, Alfred, seeing and embracing him affectionately, when
he was a boy of astonishing beauty and graceful manners, had most
devoutly prayed that his government might be prosperous; indeed,
he had made him a knight unusually early, giving him a scarlet cloak,
a belt studded with diamonds, and a Saxon sword with a golden
scabbard.” This, and similar instances which might be cited, is
supposed by some to prove the existence of knights as a distinct
order among the Saxons, while others think that it may amount to
nothing more than the first bestowing of arms. Louis le Débonnaire, it
is remarked, ense accinctus est, received his arms at thirteen years
old. But this was in some degree “knighting,” for we read in Leland’s
History of Ireland, of Irish knighthood being conferred on recipients
only seven years old.
If William the Conqueror made many knights in order to celebrate his
conquest, the gentlemen with new honors did not always obtain
peaceable possession of the estates which were sometimes added
to the title. Here is an instance in the case of the ancient family of the
Kinnersleys. William’s commissioners had appeared in
Herefordshire, and in course of their predatory excursion, they came
before the castle of John de Kinnersly, an old man, who is described
as a knight, albeit some assert that there were no more knights in
England before the conquest than there was rain on the earth before
the flood. The old man who was blind, stood at his castle-gate in
front of a semicircle formed by his twelve sons. Each had sword on
thigh and halberd in hand. When the sheriffs and other
commissioners asked him by what tenure he held his castle and
estates, blind John exclaimed, “By my arms; by sword and spear;
and by the same will keep them!” To which all his lively lads uttered a
vigorous “Ay, ay,” and the Norman commissioners were so satisfied
with the title, that they did not venture to further question the same,
but left the possessor of castle and land undisturbed in that
possession which is said to be nine points out of the ten required by
the law.
During many reigns, no man was knighted, but who was of some
“quality,” and generally because he was particularly useful to his own
or succeeding generations. These require no notice. Some of these
introduced customs that are worth noticing, and here is a sample.
Among the lucky individuals knighted by Edward I., Sir William Baud
holds a conspicuous place. Sir William gave rise to a curious
custom, which was long observed in Old St. Paul’s. During his
lifetime, the dean and chapter had made over to him some laud in
Essex. In return, or perhaps in “service” for this, the knight presented
at the high altar of the cathedral, a doe “sweet and seasonable,” on
the conversion of St. Paul, in winter; and a buck, in equally fitting
condition, on the commemoration of St. Paul in summer. The
venison was for the especial eating of the canons resident. The doe
was carried to the altar by one man, surrounded by processional
priests, and he was to have nothing for his trouble. The buck had
several bearers and a more numerous accompaniment of priests,
who disbursed the magnificent sum of twelve pence to the carriers.
The knight’s buck made the dean and chapter so hilarious that when
they appeared at the doors of the cathedral to escort it to the altar,
they wore copes and vestments, and their reverences wore wreaths
of roses on their solemn heads! Indeed, there was a special dress
for the cathedral clergy on either day; each, according to the
occasion, being ornamented with figures of bucks or does. At the
altar, the dean sent the body to be baked, but the head was cut off
and carried on a pike to the western door, where the huntsmen blew
a mort, and the notes proclaiming the death of the stag were taken
up and repeated by the “horners” of the city, who received a trifle
from the rosy dean and chapter, for thus increasing the noisy
importance of the occasion.
There is something, too, worthy of notice in the fact that Richard II.
was the first king who knighted a London tradesman. Walworth, who
struck down Wat Tyler, and who was knighted by that king for his
good service, was engaged in commercial pursuits. This lord mayor,
however, derived very considerable profits from pursuits less
creditable to him. He was the owner of tenements by the water side,
which were of the very worst reputation, but which brought him a
very considerable yearly revenue. Sir William pocketed this with the
imperially-complacent remark of “non olet.” The dagger in the city
arms is not in memory of this deed; it simply represents the sword of
St. Paul, and it has decorated the city shield since the first existence
of a London municipality.
Walworth then is not a very respectable knight. We find one of better
character in a knight of ancient family name, whose deeds merit
some passing record.
Sir Robert Umfreville, a knight of the Garter, who owed his honors to
the unfortunate Henry VI., found leisure, despite the busy and
troubled times in which he lived, to found the Chantry of Farmacres,
near Ravensworth, where two chaplains were regularly to officiate
according to the law of Sarum. If the knight’s charity was great, his
expectations of benefit were not small. The chaplains were daily to
perform service for the benefit of the souls of the founder, and of all
his kith, kin, and kindred. Nay, more than this, service was to be
performed for the soul’s profit of all knights of the Garter, as long as
the order existed, and of all the proprietors of the estate of
Farmacres. The chaplains were to reside, board, and sleep, under
the roof of the chapel. Once every two years the pious will of the
founder allowed them a renewal of costume, consisting of “a sad and
sober vest sweeping to their heels.” Upon one point Sir Robert was
uncommonly strict; he would not allow of the presence of a female in
the chapel, under any pretence whatever—even as a servant to the
chaplains—quia frequenter dum colitur Martha, expellitur Maria. The
latter, too, were bound to exercise no office of a secular nature,
especially that of bailiff. To a little secular amusement, however, the
sagacious knight did not object, and two months’ leave of absence
was allowed to the chaplains every year; and doubtless no questions
were asked, on their return, as to how it had been employed.
While touching on the matters which occurred during the reign of that
unhappy Lancastrian king, Henry VI., I will observe that we have
foreign testimony to the fact of our civil wars having been carried on
with more knightly courtesy than had hitherto been the case in any
other country. “In my humble opinion,” says Comines, “England is, of
all the dominions with which I am acquainted, the one alone in which
a public interest is properly treated. There is no violence employed
against the people, and in war-time no edifice is destroyed or injured
by the belligerents. The fate and misery of war falls heaviest on
those immediately concerned in carrying it on.” He alludes
particularly to the knights and nobles; but it is clear that, let war be
carried on in ever so knightly a fashion, the people must be the chief
sufferers. The warehouses may stand, but so also will commerce—
very still and unproductive.
Courteous as the knights of this age may have been, they were by
no means incorruptible. There were many of them in the service of
Edward IV., who were the pensioners of Louis XI., who used to
delight in exhibiting their names at the foot of acknowledgments for
money received. One official, however, Hastings, would never attach
his autograph to his receipt, but he had no scruples with regard to
taking the money. The Czar buys Prussian service after the fashion
of Louis XI.
Henry VIII. cared more for merit than birth in the knights whom he
created. He first recognised the abilities of him who was afterward
Sir John Mason, the eminent statesman of five reigns. This king was
so pleased with an oration delivered in his presence by Mason, at All
Souls, Oxford, that he took upon himself the charge of having him
educated abroad, as one likely to prove an able minister of state. He
was a faithful servant to the king. Elizabeth had one as gallant in Sir
Henry Unton, who challenged the great Guise for speaking lightly of
his royal mistress. The motives for the royal patronage of these
knights was better than that which moved Richard I. when he raised
the lowly-born Will Briewer to favoriteship and knighthood. Henry
VIII. was fond of conferring the honor of chivalry on those who
served him well; thus of the Cornish lawyer, Trigonnel, he made a
knight, with forty pounds a year to help him to keep up the dignity, in
acknowledgment of the ability with which, as proctor, he had
conducted the case of divorce against Queen Katharine. It was
better service than John Tirrell rendered to Richard III., who knighted
him for his aid in the murder of the young princes, on which occasion
he kept the keys of the Tower, and stood at the foot of the stairs,
while Forest and Dighton were despatching the young victims. We
have a knight of a different sort of reputation in Sir Richard Hutton,
Charles I.’s “honest judge,” at whose opposition against the levying
of ship-money, even the king could not feel displeased. Sir Richard
deserved his honors; and we may reckon among them the fact, that
“when he was a barrister at Gray’s Inn, he seldom or never took a
fee of a clergyman.”
The old crest of the Huntingdonshire Cromwells was a lion rampant,
holding a diamond ring in its fore-paw. This crest has reference to an
individual knighted by Henry VIII. In the thirty-second year of that
king’s reign, Richard Williams, aliàs Cromwell, with five other
gentlemen, challenged all or any comers from Scotland, Flanders,
France, or Spain, who were willing to encounter them in the lists.
The challenge was duly accepted, and on the day of encounter,
Richard Cromwell flung two of his adversaries from their horses.
Henry loved the sport, and especially such feats as this exhibited by
Cromwell, whom he summoned to his presence. The king said, “You
have hitherto been my Dick, now be my diamond;” and taking a
diamond ring from his own finger, and placing it on that of Cromwell,
he bade the latter always carry it for his crest. The king, moreover,
knighted Richard, and what was better, conferred on him Romney
Abbey, “on condition of his good service, and the payment of £4,663
4s. 2d. held in capite by the tenth part of a knight’s fee, paying £29
16s.”
It was in the reign of Henry VIII. that for the first time a serjeant-at-
law received the honor of knighthood. This seems to have been
considered by the learned body as a corporate honor, by which the
entire company of sergeants were lifted to a level with knights-
bachelors, at least. It is doubtless for this reason that sergeants-at-
law claim to be equal in rank with, and decline to go below those
said knight’s bachelors.
Of Elizabeth, it is sufficient to name but one sample of her knights.
She created many, but she never dubbed one who more nobly
deserved the honor than when she clapped the sword on the
shoulder of Spielman, the paper-maker, and bade him rise a knight.
This was done by way of recompense for the improvements he had
introduced into his art, at a time when printers and paper-makers
were considered by Romanists anything but angels of light.
Hume, referring to the chivalry of James I.’s time, remarks that the
private soldiers were drawn from a better class of men than was the
case in Hume’s time. They approached, he says, nearer to an
equality with the rank of officers. It has been answered that no such
rank existed as that from which they are chiefly drawn now. This,
however, is not the case. There were then, as now, doubtless many
of the peasant and working classes in the army; but there is not now,
as there was then, any encouragement to men of respectable station
to begin the ascent in profession of arms at the lowest round of the
ladder.
One of James I.’s knights was the well-known Sir Herbert Croft.
James knighted him at Theobalds, out of respect to his family, and
personal merits. Some years subsequently Sir Herbert, then above
fifty years of age, joined the Church of Rome, and retired to Douay,
where he dwelt a lay-brother, among the English Benedictines. He
died among them, after a five years’ residence, in the year 1622. His
eldest son William was also knighted, I think, by Charles I. He is an
example of those who were both knights and clergymen, for after
serving as colonel in the civil wars, he forsook catholicism, in which
he had been brought up by his father, entered the Church of
England, and like so many other knights who in former times had
changed the sword for the gown, rose to the dignity of carrying an
episcopal pastoral staff, and was made Bishop of Hereford in 1661.
It was a descendant of his who wrote the very inaccurate biography
of Young, in “Johnson’s Lives of the Poets.” Wood, in his Athenæ,
shows that the first Sir Herbert was a literary knight, who took up pen
in the service of the communion into which he had entered. These
were;—1. Letters persuasive to his wife and children to take upon
them the Catholic religion. 2. Arguments to show that the Church, in
communion with the See of Rome, is the true Church. 3. Reply to the
answers of his daughter, Mary Croft, which she made to a paper of
his sent to her concerning the Roman Church. All these pieces
appeared in the same year, 1619, and they seem to have been very
harmless weapons in the hands of a very amiable knight.
Among the most worthy of the knights created by James I. was
Leonard Holliday, who served the office of Lord Mayor in 1605, and
was dubbed chevalier by a king who is said never to have conferred
the honor without being half afraid of the drawn sword which was his
instrument. Sir Leonard did good service in return. In his time
Moorfields consisted of nothing but desolate land, the stage whereon
was enacted much violence and terrible pollution. In this savage
locality, Sir Leonard effected as wonderful a change as Louis
Napoleon has done in the Bois de Boulogne; and even a greater; for
there were more difficulties in the knight’s way, and his will was less
sovereign and potent to work mutation. Nevertheless, by
perseverance, liberal outlay, and hard work of those employed in the
manual labor, he transformed the hideous and almost pathless
swamp into a smiling garden, wherein the citizens might take the air
without fearing violence either to body or goods. They blessed king
James’s knight as they disported themselves in the rural district with
their wives and children. The laborers employed were said to have
been less lavish of benedictions upon the head of him from whom
they took their wages. They complained bitterly of the toil, and for a
long time in London, when any great exertions were necessary to
produce a desired end, promptly, men spoke of the same as being
mere “Holiday work.”
James I. was not so perfect a knight in presence of a sword as he
was in presence of a lady. He made more knights than any other
king, not excepting William IV.; but he never dubbed one without
some nervousness at the sight of the weapon with which he laid on
the honor. Kenelm Digby states that when he was knighted by
James, the sword, had it not been guided in the King’s hand by the
Duke of Buckingham, would have gone, not upon his shoulder, but
into his eye. James’s aversion from the sight of a sword is said to
have descended to him from his mother who, a short time previous
to his birth, was the terrified spectator of the murder of Rizzio. The
same King used to remark that there were two great advantages in
wearing armor, namely, that the wearer could neither receive nor
inflict much injury. Indeed, as James sagaciously remarked, the chief
inconvenience to be dreaded from armor was in being knocked down
in it, and left without a squire to lend assistance. In this case the
knight stood, or lay, in imminent peril of suffocation; the armor being
generally too heavy to admit of a knight rising from the ground
without help. If he lay on his face his condition was almost hopeless.
The sentiment of chivalry was, after all, not so foreign to James as is
popularly supposed. Witness the circumstance when Sully came
over here as embassador extraordinary, James made the
embassador lower his flag to the pennant of the English vessel sent
out to receive or escort him. This, however, had been well nigh
construed into an affront. The poets of this time too began to have a
chivalrous feeling for the hardships of common women. The feeling
used to be all for princesses and courtly dames, but it was now
expressed even for shop-wives, behind counters. Thus the author of
“The Fair Maid of the Inn” says:—

“A goldsmith keeps his wife

Wedged into his shop like a mermaid; nothing of her
To be seen, that’s woman, but her upper part.”

The ladies too, themselves were growing ambitious, and as fanciful

as any knight’s “dame par amour” of them all. The Goldsmith’s
daughter in “Eastward Ho!” who wants to be made a lady, says to
her “sweet knight,” “Carry me out of the scent of Newcastle coal and
the hearing of Bow bells!” and à-propos to titles, let me add that, in
James’s time, it was, according to Jonson—

“—— a received heresy

That England bears no Dukes.”

Southey commenting on this passage, said that the title was

probably thought ominous, so many dukes having lost their heads.
In the second year of the reign of James I., he made not less than
three hundred knights; and on another occasion he is said to have
made two hundred and thirty-seven in six weeks. In France, when
the state was in distress, knighthood was often a marketable
commodity; but it probably was never more so there, than it was in
England under the first James. No one was more conscious than he,
when he had an unworthy person before him; and it sometimes
happened that these persons had the same uncomfortable
consciousness touching themselves. Thus, we are told that when “an
insignificant person” once held down his head, as the king was about
to knight him, James called out, “Hold up thy head, man, I have more
need to be ashamed than thou.”
The indiscriminate infliction of the order caused great confusion.
Knights-aldermen in the city claimed precedence of knights-
commoners, and violent was the struggle when the question was
agitated. Heralds stood forth and pleaded before “my lords,” as
lawyers do, with reference to the party by which they were retained.
One party considered it absurd that a knight who happened to be an
alderman should take precedence of one who was only a knight. The
civic dignitary, it was said, was no more above the chivalric, than a
rushlight was superior to the sun. Such an idea, it was urged, by
York against Garter, was an insult to God and man. The case was
ultimately gained by the chivalric aldermen, simply because the
knights-commoners did not care to pursue it, or support their own
privileges. York thought that knights-commoners, though tradesmen,
who had been lord mayors, and yet were not now aldermen, ought to
take precedence of mere alderman knights. The commoners lost
their cause by neglect; but it has been ruled that ex-lord mayors, and
provosts of Scotland, shall precede all knights, as having been the
Sovereign’s lieutenants.
James may be said, altogether, to have shown very little regard for
the dignity of knights generally. By creating a rank above them, he
set them a step lower in degree of precedence. This monarch is, so
to speak, the inventor of the baronet. When money was required for
the benefit of the Irish province of Ulster, a suggestion was made
that they who supplied it liberally should have the hereditary title of
“Sir” and “Baronet.” James himself was at first a little startled at the
proposition, but he soon gave it his sanction upon Lord Salisbury
observing, “Sire, the money will do you good, and the honor will do
them none.” James thought that a fair bargain, and the matter was
soon arranged. The knights were not pleased, but it was intimated to
them, that only two hundred baronets would be created, and that as
the titles became extinct, no new hereditary “Sirs” would be
nominated. The successors of James did not think themselves
bound by the undertaking of their predecessor. George III. the least
regarded it, for during four or five years of his reign he created
baronets at the rate of one a-month.
A particular annoyance to the poor knights was, that esquires could
purchase the title, and so leap over them at a bound, or could be
dubbed knights first, if they preferred to take that rank, by the way.
But if the knights were aggrieved, much more so were their ladies,
for the wife of a baronet was allowed precedence of all knights’
ladies, even of those of the Garter. The baronets themselves took
precedence of all knights except of those of the Garter; and their
elder sons ranked before simple knights, whose distinction of “Sir”
they were entitled to assume, at the age of twenty-one, if they were
so minded. Few, however, availed themselves of this privilege.
This matter went so much to the satisfaction of James, that he
resolved to sell another batch of baronet’s titles, and thereupon
followed his “Baronets of Nova Scotia.” All these titles were bought
of the crown, the pecuniary proceeds being applied to the
improvement of the outlying province of Nova Scotia. A sneer, not
altogether rightly directed, has been occasionally flung at these
purchased hereditary baronetcies. No doubt a title so acquired did
not carry with it so much honor as one conferred for great and
glorious service rendered to the country. But there have been many
titled sneerers whose own dignity stood upon no better basis than
that their ancestress was a king’s concubine, or the founder of their
house an obsequious slave to monarch or minister. The first
baronets, whether of Ulster or Nova Scotia, rendered some better
service than this to their country, by giving their money for purposes
of certain public good. They were not, indeed, rewarded accordingly.
They were public benefactors, only on condition that they should be
recompensed with an hereditary title. The morality here is not very
pure; the principle is not very exalted; but a smaller outlay of morality
and principle has purchased peerages before now, and the baronets,
therefore, have no reason to be ashamed of the origin of their order.
Least of all have those baronets of later creation, men who have
made large sacrifices and rendered inestimable services to their
country. On these the rank of baronet conferred no real dignity which
they did not before possess, but it served as an acknowledgment of
their worth in the eyes of their fellow-men. I may notice here, that
when Sir Walter Scott makes record of the gallant action performed
at Pinkie by Ralph Sadler, when he rallied the English cavalry so
effectually as to win a battle almost lost, and seized the royal
standard of Scotland with his own hand, the biographer adds that the
rank to which the gallant Ralph was then raised—of knight-banneret,
“may be called the very pinnacle of chivalry. Knight-bannerets could
only be created by the king himself or, which was very rare, by a
person vested with such powers as to represent his person. They
were dubbed either before or after a battle, in which the royal
standard was displayed; and the person so to be honored, being
brought before the king led by two distinguished knights or nobles,
presented to the sovereign his pennon, having an indenture like a
swallow’s tail at the extremity. The king then cut off the fished
extremity, rendering the banner square, in shape similar to that of a
baron, which, thereafter, the knight-banneret might display in every
pitched field, in that more noble form. If created by the king, the
banneret took precedence of all other knights, but if by a general,
only of knights of the Bath and knights-bachelors. Sir Francis Brian,
commander of the light horsemen, and Sir Ralph Vane, lieutenant of
the men-at-arms, received this honor with our Sir Ralph Sadler, on
the field of Pinkie. But he survived his companions, and is said to
have been the last knight-banneret of England.”
I suppose Washington thought that he had as much right as the
English Protector to dub knights; which is not, indeed, to be
disputed. But Washington went further than Cromwell, inasmuch as
that he instituted an order. This was, what it was said to be,
trenching on the privilege of a king. It was a military order, and was
named after the agricultural patriot, who was summoned from his
plough to guide the destinies of Rome; for the Romans had a very
proper idea that nations created their own destinies. The order of
Cincinnatus being decreed, the insignia of the order were sent to
Lafayette, then in Paris, where the nobility, who could no more spell
than Lord Duberly, trusting to their ears only, took it for the order of
St. Senatus. A little uproar ensued. The aristocracy not only sneered
at the American Dictator for assuming the “hedging” of a king, but
they considered also that he had encroached upon the privileges of
a pope, and, as they had searched the calendar and could not find a
St. Senatus, they at once came to the conclusion that he had
canonized some deserving but democratic individual of the city of
Boston.
The commonwealth knights, whether in the naval or land service,
had perhaps less of refined gallantry than prevailed among the
“Cavaliers” par excellence. Thus it was a feat of which old chivalry
would have been ashamed—that of Admiral Batten, when he
cannonaded the house in which Queen Henrietta Maria was
sleeping, at Bridlington, and drove her into the fields. But, what do I
say touching the gallant refinement on the respective sides?—after
all, the rudeness of Batten was civility itself compared with the
doings of Goring and his dragoons. On the other hand, there was not
a man in arms, in either host, who in knightly qualifications excelled
Hampden—“a supreme governor over all his passions and
affections, and having thereby a great power over those of other
men.” With regard to Cromwell himself, Madame de Sévigné has
remarked, that there were some things in which the great Turenne
resembled him. This seems to me rather a compliment to Turenne
than to the Protector. The latter, like Hampden could conceal, at
least, if he could not govern his passions. He had the delicacy of
knighthood; and he was not such a man as Miles Burket, who, in his
prayer on the Sunday after the execution of the king, asked the
Almighty if he had not smelt a sweet savor of blood?
The fighting chivalry of Goring, let me add, was nevertheless perfect.
The courtesies of chivalry were not his; but in ability and bravery he
was never surpassed. His dexterity is said to have been especially
remarkable in sudden emergencies; and it was this dexterity that
used to be most praised in the knight of olden times. Many other
cavaliers were poor soldiers, but admirable company.
The fierce but indomitable spirit of chivalry, on the other hand, that
spirit which will endure all anguish without relinquishing an iota of
principle, or yielding an inch of ground in the face of overwhelming
numbers, was conspicuous in other men besides the martial
followers of Cromwell. I will only instance the case of Prynne, who,
under the merciless scourge, calmly preached against tyranny; and
with his neck in the pillory, boldly wagged his tongue against cruelty
and persecution. “Freeborn John” was gagged for his audacity, but
when he was thus rendered speechless, he stamped incessantly
with his unshackled feet, to express that he was invincible and
unconvinced still. If this was not as great courage as ever was
shown by knight, I know not what to call it.
Against the courage of Cromwell, Dugdale and Roger Manby say
more than can ever be alleged against Prynne—namely, that his
heart failed him once in his life. It is said, that when he was captain
of a troop of horse in Essex’s regiment, at Edgehill, “he absented
himself from the battle, and observing, from the top of a neighboring
steeple the disorder that the right wing sustained from Prince Rupert,
he was so terrified, that slipping down in haste by a bell-rope, he
took horse, and ran away with his troop, for which cowardice he had
been cashiered, had it not been for the powerful mediation of his
friends.” This passage shows that the legendary style of the
chivalrous romance still was followed as an example by historians.
Indeed romance itself claimed Oliver for a hero, as it had done with
many a knight before him. It was gravely told of him that, before the
battle of Worcester, he went into a wood, like any Sir Tristram, where
he met a solemn old man with a roll of parchment in his hand. Oliver
read the roll—a compact between him and the Prince of Darkness,
and was heard to say, “This is only for seven years; I was to have
had one for one-and-twenty.” “Then,” says the Chronicler, “he stood
out for fourteen; but the other replied, that if he would not take it on
those terms, there were others who would. So he took the
parchment and died that day seven years.” This is history after the
model of the Seven Champions.
The observance of knightly colors was kept up in the contest
between commonwealth men and the crown. Those of Essex were
deep yellow; and so acute were the jealousies of war, that they who
wore any other were accounted as disaffected to the good cause.
I have remarked before, that Siri puts blame upon the Scottish men-
at-arms, whose alleged mercenary conduct was said to have been
the seed of a heavy crop of evil. The Scots seem to have been
unpopular on all sides. Before the catastrophe, which ended king
and kingdom, the French embassador, then in the north, was
escorted to some point by a troop of Scots horse. On leaving them,
he drew out half-a-crown piece, and asked them how many pence it
contained. “Thirty,” was the ready-reckoned answer of an
arithmetical carabinier. “Exactly so!” replied the envoy, flinging the
piece among them with as much contempt as the Prince of Orange
felt respect, when he threw his cross among the Dutch troops at
Waterloo. “Exactly so! take it. It was the price for which Judas
betrayed his master.”
If the saints were unsainted in the time of the commonwealth, they
found some compensation at the hands of Mr. Penry, the author of
Martin Mar-Prelate, who chose to knight the most distinguished—
and this not only did he do to the male, but to the female saints. The
facetious Penry, accordingly, spoke of Sir Paul, Sir Peter, and Sir
Martin, and also of Sir Margaret and Sir Mary.
Passing on to later times, those of James II., I may observe that
Poor Nat Lee, when mad, said of a celebrated knight of this time, Sir
Roger Lestrange, that the difference between the two was that one
was Strange Lee, the other Lestrange. “You poor in purse,” said Lee,
“as I am poor in brains.” Sir Roger was certainly less richly endowed
mentally than the poet, but he had one quality which a knight of old
was bound to have, above most men who were his contemporaries
—namely, intense admiration for the ladies. This gallantry he carried
so far that when he was licenser of books, it is said that he would
readily wink at unlicensed volumes, if the printer’s wife would only
smile at him.
Though not exactly germane to the immediate subject of Sir Roger, I
will notice here that it was the custom for children, as late as the
reign of James II., on first meeting their parents in the morning, to
kneel at their feet and ask a blessing. This was an observance
seldom omitted in the early days of chivalry by knights who
encountered a priest. We often hear praises of this filial reverence
paid by errant knights to the spiritual fathers whom they encountered
in their wanderings.
Another social custom connected with chivalry was still observed
during this, and even during the reign of William III. It is noticed by
Dryden, in the dedication to his “Love Triumphant,” in the following
words:—“It is the usual practice of our decayed gentry to look about
them for some illustrious family, and then fix their young darling
where he may be both well-educated and supported.” The knightly
courage and the education were not always of the highest quality, if
we might put implicit faith in the passage in Congreve’s Old
Bachelor, wherein it is said, “the habit of a soldier now-a-days as
often cloaks cowardice, as a black coat does atheism.” But the stage
is not to be taken as fairly holding the mirror up to nature; and for my
part, I do not credit the assertion of that stage-knight, Sir Harry
Wildair, that in England, “honesty went out with the slashed doublets,
and love with the close-bodied gown.” Nor do I altogether credit what
is said of Queen Anne’s time, in the Fair Quaker of Deal, that “our
sea-chaplains, generally speaking, are as drunk as our sea-
captains.”
William III. knighted many a man who did not merit the honor, but he
was guilty of no such mistake when he laid the sword of chivalry on
the shoulders of honest Thomas Abney, citizen of London. Abney
was one of those happy architects who build up their own fortunes,
and upon a basis of rectitude and commonsense. In course of time,
he achieved that greatness which is now of so stupendous an aspect
in the eyes of the Parisians; in other words, he became Lord Mayor
of London. The religious spirit of chivalry beat within the breast that
was covered with broadcloth, and Sir Thomas Abney humbled
himself on the day on which he was exalted. He had been “brought
up” a dissenter, but he certainly was not one when he became
sovereign of the city in the year 1700. He was none the less a
Christian, and it is an exemplary and an agreeable trait that we have
of him, as illustrated in his conduct on the day of his inauguration.
The evening banquet was still in progress, when he silently withdrew
from the glittering scene, hurried home, read evening prayers to
such of his household as were there assembled on the festive day,
and then calmly returned and resumed his place among the joyous
company.
This knight’s hospitality was of the same sterling quality. Who forgets
that to him Dr. Watts (that amiable intolerant!) was indebted during
thirty years for a home? The Abney family had a respect for the
author of “the Sluggard,” which never slept. It almost reached
idolatry. I have said thirty years, but in truth, Dr. Watts was at home,
at the hearth of Sir Thomas, during no briefer a period than six-and-
thirty years. The valetudinarian poet, the severity of whose early
studies had compelled him to bid an eternal vale to the goddess of
health, was welcomed by the knight, with an honest warmth born of
respect for the worth and genius of a kind-hearted man who
“scattered damnation” in gentle rhymes, and yet who would not have
hurt a worm. In the little paradise where he was as much at ease as
his precarious health would allow, it is astonishing with what vigor of
spirit and weakness of phrase the good-intentioned versifier thrust
millions from the gates of a greater paradise. Such at least was my
own early impression of the rhymes of the knight’s guest. They
inspired much fear and little love: and if I can see now that such was
not the author’s design, and that he only used menace to secure
obedience, that thereby affection might follow, I still am unable to
come to any other conclusion, than that the method adopted is open
to censure.
He sat beneath the knightly roof, without a want unsupplied, with
every desire anticipated; exempted from having to sustain an active
share of the warfare in the great battle of life, he was beset by few,
perhaps by no temptations; and free from every care, he had every
hour of the day wherein to walk with God. His defect consisted in
forgetting that other men, and the children of men, had not his
advantage, and while, rightly enough, he accounted their virtue as
nothing, he had no bowels of compassion for their human failings. It
is well to erect a high standard, but it is not less so to console rather
than condemn those who fall short of it. “Excelsior” is a good advice,
on a glorious banner, but they who are luxuriously carried on
beneath its folds should not be hasty to condemn those who faint by
the way, fall back, and await the mercy of God, whereby to attain the
high prize which they had for their chief object. I should like to know
if Sir Thomas ever disputed the conclusions adopted by his guest.
This mention of the metropolitan knight and the poet who sat at his
hearth, reminds me of a patron and guest of another quality, who
were once well known in the neighborhood of Metz;—“Metz sans
Lorraine,” as the proud inhabitants speak of a free locality which was
surrounded by, but was never in Lorraine.
The patron was an old chevalier de St. Louis, with a small cross and
large “aîles de pigeon.” The guest was the parish priest, who resided
under his roof, and was the “friend of the house.” The parish was a
poor one, but it had spirit enough to raise a subscription in order to
supply the altar with a new ciborium—the vessel which holds the
“body of the Lord.” With the modest sum in hand, the Knight of St.
Louis, accompanied by the priest, repaired to Metz, to make the
necessary purchase. The orthodox goldsmith placed two vessels
before them. One was somewhat small, but suitable to the funds at
the knight’s disposal; the other was large, splendidly chased, and
highly coveted by the priest.
“Here is a pretty article,” said the chevalier, pointing to the simpler of
the two vessels: “But here is a more worthy,” interrupted the priest.
“It corresponds with the sum at our disposal,” remarked the former. “I
am sure it does not correspond with your love for Him for whom the
sum was raised,” was the rejoinder. “I have no authority to exceed
the amount named,” whispered the cautious chevalier. “But you have
wherewith of your own to supply the deficiency,” murmured the
priest. The perplexed knight began to feel himself a dissenter from
the church, and after a moment’s thought, and looking at the smaller
as well as the simpler of the two vessels, he exclaimed—“it is large
enough for the purpose, and will do honor to the church.” “The larger
would be more to the purpose, and would do more honor to the
Head of the Church,” was the steady clerical comment which
followed. “Do you mean to say that it is not large enough?” asked the
treasurer. “Certainly, since there is a larger, which we may have, if
you will only be generous.” “Mais!” remonstrated the knight, in a
burst of profane impatience, and pointing to the smaller ciborium,
“Cela contiendroit le diable!” “Ah, Monsieur le Chevalier,” said the
priest, by no means shocked at the idiomatic phrase. “Le Bon Dieu
est plus grand que le diable!” This stroke won the day, and the
goldsmith was the most delighted of the three, at this conclusion to a
knotty argument.
George I. was not of a sufficiently generous mind to allow of his
distributing honors very profusely. The individuals, however, who
were eminently useful to him were often rewarded by being
appointed to enjoy the emoluments, if not exercise the duties of
several offices, each in his own person. At a period when this was
being done in England, the exact reverse was being accomplished in
Spain. Thus we read in the London Gazette of March 29 to April 1,
1718, under the head of Madrid, March 21, the following details,
which might be put to very excellent profit in England in these more
modern times:—
“The King having resolved that no person shall enjoy more than one
office in his service, notice has been given to the Duke d’Arco, who
is Master of the Horse, and Gentleman of the Bedchamber; the
Marquis de Montelegre, Lord Chamberlain and Captain of the Guard
of Halberdiers; the Marquis de St. Juan, Steward of the Household,
and Master of the Horse to the Queen; and one of the Council of the
Harinda, the Marquis de Bedmar, the Minister of War, and President
of the Council; and several others who are in the like case, to choose
which of their employments they will keep. To which they have all
replied that they will make no claim, but will be determined by what
his Majesty shall think fit to appoint. The like orders are given in the
army, where they who receive pay as General Officers, and have
Colonels’ commissions besides, are obliged to part with their
regiments.”
This regulation seriously disturbed the revenue of many a Spanish
knight; but it was a wise and salutary regulation, nevertheless. At the
very period of its being established, Venice was selling her titles of
knighthood and nobility. In the same Gazette from which the above
details are extracted, I find it noticed, under the head of “Venice,
March 25,” that “Signor David, and Paul Spinelli, two Geneva
gentlemen, were, upon their petition, admitted this week by the
Grand Council, into the Order of the Nobility of this Republic, having
purchased that honor for a hundred thousand ducats.” It was a large
price for so small a privilege.
I have treated of knighthood under George II., sufficiently at length,
when speaking of that king himself; and I will add only one trait of his
successor.
It was not often that George III. was facetious, but tradition has
attributed to him a compound pun, when he was urged by his
minister to confer knighthood upon Judge Day, on the return of the
latter from India. “Pooh! pooh!” remonstrated the king, “how can I
turn a Day into night?” On the ministerial application being renewed,
the king asked, if Mr. Day was married, and an affirmative reply
being given, George III. immediately rejoined, “Then let him come to
the next drawing-room, and I will perform a couple of miracles; I will
not only turn Day into Knight, but I will make Lady-Day at Christmas.”
There was a saying of George III. which, put into practice, was as
beneficial as many of the victories gained by more chivalrous
monarchs. “The ground, like man, was never intended to be idle. If it
does not produce something useful it will be overrun with weeds.”
Among the men whom James I. knighted, was one who had passed
through the career of a page, and notice of whom I have reserved,
that I might contrast his career with that of a contemporary and well-
known squire.
 RICHARD CARR, PAGE; AND GUY FAUX,
ESQUIRE.
Of all the adventurers of the seventeenth century, I do not know
any who so well illustrate the objects I have in view, as the two
above-named gentlemen. The first commenced life as a page; the
second was an esquire by condition, and a man-at-arms. Master
Faux, for attempting murder, suffered death; and Richard Carr,
although he was convicted of murder, was suffered to live on, and
was not even degraded from knighthood.
When the Sixth James of Scotland reigned, a poor king in a poor
country, there was among his retinue a graceful boy—a scion of the
ancient house of Fernyhurst, poor in purse, and proud in name. At
the court of the extravagant yet needy Scottish king, there was but
scant living even for a saucy page; and Richard Carr of Fernyhurst
turned his back on Mid Lothian, and in foreign travel forgot his
northern home.
James, in his turn, directed his face toward the English border; and
subsequently, in the vanities of Whitehall, the hunting at Theobald’s,
the vicious pleasure of Greenwich, and the roysterings at Royston,
he forgot the graceful lad who had ministered to him at Holyrood, St.
Andrews, and Dunbar.
When this James I. of England had grown nearly tired of his old
favorite and minister, Salisbury, for want of better employment he
ordered a tilting match, and the order was obeyed with alacrity. In
this match Lord Hay resolved to introduce to the King’s notice a
youth who enjoyed his lordship’s especial patronage. Accordingly,
when the monarch was seated in his tribune, and the brazen throats
of the trumpets had bidden the rough sport to begin, the young
squire of Lord Hay, a handsome youth of twenty, straight of limb, fair
of favor, strong-shouldered, smooth-faced, and with a modesty that
enhanced his beauty, rode up on a fiery steed, to lay his master’s
shield and lance at the feet of the monarch. The action of the