40 REN A I H H A JN V.'. Kh the part of the Transoxanian townspeople and 'ufomii which begun us an insurrection against a Chaghatay ascendancy and was followed tip by Timur's military genius with a counter-offensive in which Cain took his long overdue revenge on a provocative Abel. In thin place we have only to notice that Timur followed up his overt assumption of sovereign power at Balkh on the 8th April, 1369, by re- validating the S/utn'tth in all fields that came within the MMF? tilt's cngnmmec; and. though he seems to have refrained from following up this positive net by the negative one of expressly abrogating the Mongol Vf/,vrty, its ahrnpttion was accomplished in effect by the reinstatement of an Islamic I, aw in whose sight nihil hwnammi was alwnum*1 (c) RENAISSANCES Ol> I'll 1UJSO |»H IKS In other contexts2 we have watched the Confucian Httenitt surviving the dissolution of a Sink universal state embodied in the Jlan Kntpire and eventually regaining their monopoly of an imperial civil .service, after a ghost of the' Han Kmpire had been raised by the Siii Dynasty and kept on foot by the Sui's successors the T'ung; and in the name eon- texts we have also observed that, in achieving thin remarkable recovery of lost ground on the plane of public administration, the Ctmf'ttctitiiH were winning a political victory over Taoist and Mtmuyaiuun Buddhist contemporaries and rivals. The recHtublishment by T'ung T*;u Tnimg, in A.D. 622, of an official examination in the Confucian ClitssicM UH the method of selecting new recruits for the imperial civil Mervice minified that, in this political field, the Taowts and Buddhintn h;ui lee slip an opportunity for supplanting the Confucian* which hud seemed to be within the grasp of these upstart competitor* for public otltee during u post-Sinic intcrregnunrij when the preHtige of tin* Ctmfueian* hud been damaged by the collapse of the universal ytnte with which they were identified, while, in a defunct Ilan Kmpire*H former northern pro- vinces, which had been the cradle of the Sinic culture, TiioiMtM and Buddhists were enjoying the political patronage of barbarian rulem of local successor-states who found the Mahfiyfintt more attnietive than Confucianism and who would have been gltui in any cane t»» recruit their civil ( servants from any non-Confucian community that might he qualified for office by possessing the neccaaary ntummrti of etittcution, rather than place themselves in the hands of Confucianw whfwc loyalty they sagely doubted, The contrast between this political failure of the MahHySna in Northern China in a post-Binic Age and the auccewi with which the Christian Church seized and harvested it« corresponding nnpwtunittai in Western Europe in a post-Hellenic Age bring* out the tact that—lit any rate by comparison with Christianity— the MahSyHnn w«* u politic- ally incompetent religion. The patronage of the parochial prince* in Northern China during the best part of three centuries, running from 77 {Act T, icano i, Jln« a«), 8*t C*h at Mong , , , ., i Wtrct at Mongol* d** Orieinn 4 t^X (Parii 1^6, Colin), J *nd Bouv*tf L': £ im&& M^olt ^w&» ^*« #«*• *947, ltocc«faj «o VI. vlU 355»8f and pp. 64^-