* * * * *

144. CONQUEST OF ENGLAND BY THE DANES; ALFRED THE GREAT

ENGLAND OVERRUN BY THE DANES

Even before Egbert of Wessex succeeded in uniting all the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, [19] bands of Vikings, chiefly from Denmark, had made occasional forays on the English coast. Egbert kept the Danes at bay, but he died in 839 A.D., and from that time the real invasion of England began. The Danes came over in large numbers, made permanent settlements, and soon controlled all England north of the Thames.



KING ALFRED AND THE DANES

Wessex before long experienced the full force of the Danish attack. The country at this time was ruled by Alfred, the grandson of Egbert. Alfred came to the throne in 871 A.D., when he was only about twenty-three years old. In spite of his youth, he showed himself the right sort of leader for the hard-pressed West Saxons. For several years fortune favored the Danes. Then the tide turned. Issuing from the marshes of Somersetshire, where he had rallied his dispirited troops, Alfred suddenly fell on the enemy and gained a signal success. The beaten Danes agreed to make peace and to accept the religion of their conquerors.

THE DANELAW

Alfred's victory did not end the war. Indeed, almost to the end of his reign, the heroic king had to face the Vikings, but he always drove them off and even recovered some of the territory north of the Thames. The English and Danes finally agreed to a treaty dividing the country between them. The eastern part of England, where the invaders were firmly established, came to be called the Danelaw, because here the Danish, and not the Anglo-Saxon, law prevailed. In the Danelaw the Danes have left memorials of themselves in local names [20] and in the bold, adventurous character of the inhabitants.



CIVILIZING ACTIVITIES OF ALFRED

It was a well-nigh ruined country which Alfred had now to rule over and build up again. His work of restoration invites comparison with that of Charlemagne. Alfred's first care was to organize a fighting force always ready at his call to repel invasion. He also created an efficient fleet, which patrolled the coast and engaged the Vikings on their own element. He had the laws of the Anglo-Saxons collected and reduced to writing, taking pains at the same time to see that justice was done between man and man. He did much to rebuild the ruined churches and monasteries. Alfred labored with especial diligence to revive education among the English folk. His court at Winchester became a literary center where learned men wrote and taught. The king himself mastered Latin, in order that he might translate Latin books into the English tongue. So great were Alfred's services in this direction that he has been called "the father of English prose."



ALFRED'S CHARACTER

Alfred alone of English rulers bears the title of "the Great." He well deserves it, not only for what he did but for what he was. Through the mists of ten centuries his figure still looms large. It is the figure of a brave, patient, and modest man, who wore himself out in the service of his people. The oft-quoted words which he added to one of his translations form a fitting epitaph to this noble king: "My wish was to live worthily as long as I lived, and after my life to leave to them that should come after, my memory in good works." His wish has been fulfilled.

FROM ALFRED TO THE NORMAN CONQUEST, 901-1066 A.D.

About seventy-five years after Alfred's death the Danes renewed their invasions. It then became necessary to buy them off with an annual tribute called the Danegeld. Early in the eleventh century Canute, the son of a Danish king, succeeded in establishing himself on the English throne (1016-1035 A.D.). His dynasty did not last long, however, and at length the old West-Saxon line was restored in the person of Edward the Confessor (or "the Saint"). Edward had spent most of his early life in Normandy, and on coming to England brought with him a large following of Normans, whom he placed in high positions. During his reign (1042-1066 A.D.) Norman nobles and churchmen gained a foothold in England, thus preparing the way for the Norman conquest of the country.

145. NORMAN CONQUEST OF ENGLAND; WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR

HAROLD AND WILLIAM

Edward the Confessor having left no direct heirs, the choice of his successor fell lawfully upon the Witenagemot, [21] as the national assembly of noblemen and higher clergy was called. This body chose as king, Harold, earl of Wessex, the leading man in England. Harold's right to the succession was disputed by William, duke of Normandy, who declared that the crown had been promised to him by his cousin, the Confessor. William also asserted that Harold had once sworn a solemn oath, over a chest of sacred relics, to support his claim to the throne on Edward's death. When word came of Harold's election, William wrathfully denounced him as a usurper and began to prepare a fleet and an army for the invasion of England.

WILLIAM'S PREPARATIONS

Normandy under Duke William had become a powerful, well-organized state. Norman knights, attracted by promises of wide lands and rich booty, if they should conquer, formed the core of William's forces. Adventurers from every part of France, and even from Spain and Italy, also entered his service. The pope blessed the enterprise and sent to William a ring containing a hair from St. Peter's head and a consecrated banner. When all was ready in the late fall of 1066 A.D., a large fleet, bearing five or six thousand archers, foot soldiers, and horsemen, crossed the Channel and landed in England.



BATTLE OF HASTINGS, 1066 A.D.

William at first met no resistance. Harold was far away in the north fighting against the Norwegians, who had seized the opportunity to make another descent on the English coast. Harold defeated them decisively and then hurried southward to face his new foe. The two armies met near Hastings on the road to London. All day they fought. The stout English infantry, behind their wall of shields, threw back one charge after another of the Norman knights. Again and again the duke rallied his men and led them where the foe was thickest. A cry arose that he was slain. "I live," shouted William, tearing off his helmet that all might see his face, "and by God's help will conquer yet." At last, with the approach of evening, Harold was killed by an arrow; his household guard died about him; and the rest of the English took to flight. William pitched his camp on the field of victory, and "sat down to eat and drink among the dead."



WILLIAM BECOMES KING

The battle of Hastings settled the fate of England. Following up his victory with relentless energy, William pressed on to London. That city, now practically the capital of the country, opened its gates to him. The Witenagemot, meeting in London offered the throne to William. On Christmas Day, 1066 A.D., in Westminster Abbey the duke of Normandy was crowned king of England.

WILLIAM'S PERSONALITY

What manner of man was William the Conqueror? Tall of stature, endowed with tremendous strength, and brave even to desperation, he seemed an embodiment of the old viking spirit. "No knight under heaven," men said truly, "was William's peer." A savage temper and a harsh, forbidding countenance made him a terror even to his closest followers. "So stern and wrathful was he," wrote an English chronicler, "that none durst do anything against his will." Though William never shrank from force or fraud, from bloodshed or oppression, to carry out his ends, he yet showed himself throughout his reign a patron of learning, a sincere supporter of the Church, and a statesman of remarkable insight. He has left a lasting impress on English history.

146. RESULTS OF THE NORMAN CONQUEST

NORMAN ELEMENT IN THE ENGLISH PEOPLE

The coming of the Normans to England formed the third and last installment of the Teutonic invasion. Norman merchants and artisans followed Norman soldiers and settled particularly in the southern and eastern parts of the island. They seem to have emigrated in considerable numbers and doubtless added an important element to the English population. The Normans thus completed the work of the Anglo-Saxons and Danes in making England a Teutonic country.

NORMAN ELEMENT IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

It must be remembered, however, that the Normans in Normandy had received a considerable intermixture of French blood and had learned to speak a form of the French language (Norman-French). In England Norman-French naturally was used by the upper and ruling classes—by the court, the nobility, and the clergy. The English held fast to their own homely language, but could not fail to pick up many French expressions, as they mingled with their conquerors in churches, markets, and other places of public resort. It took about three hundred years for French words and phrases to soak thoroughly into their speech. The result was a very large addition to the vocabulary of English. [22]

UNION OF ENGLAND AND NORMANDY

Until the Norman Conquest England, because of its insular position, had remained out of touch with Continental Europe. William the Conqueror and his immediate successors were, however, not only rulers of England, but also dukes of Normandy and subjects of the French kings. Hence, the union of England with Normandy brought it at once into the full current of European affairs. The country became for a time almost a part of France and profited by the more advanced civilization which had arisen on French soil. The nobility, the higher clergy, and the officers of government were Normans. The architects of the castles and churches, the lawyers, and the men of letters came from Normandy. Even the commercial and industrial classes were largely recruited from across the Channel.

ENGLAND AND THE PAPACY

The Norman Conquest much increased the pope's authority over England. The English Church, as has been shown, [23] was the child of Rome, but during the Anglo-Saxon period it had become more independent of the Papacy than the churches on the Continent. William the Conqueror, whose invasion of England took place with the pope's approval, repaid his obligation by bringing the country into closer dependence on the Roman pontiff.

FUSION OF ENGLISH AND NORMAN

Although the Normans settled in England as conquerors, yet after all they were near kinsmen of the English and did not long keep separate from them. In Normandy a century and a half had been enough to turn the Northmen into Frenchmen. So in England, at the end of a like period, the Normans became Englishmen. Some of the qualities that have helped to make the modern English a great people—their love of the sea and fondness for adventure, their vigor, self-reliance, and unconquerable spirit—are doubtless derived in good part from the Normans.

147. NORMAN CONQUEST OF SOUTHERN ITALY AND SICILY

NORMAN EXPANSION SOUTHWARD

The conquest of England, judged by its results, proved to be the most important undertaking of the Normans. But during this same eleventh century they found another field in which to display their energy and daring. They turned southward to the Mediterranean and created a Norman state in Italy and Sicily.

CONQUESTS OF ROBERT GUISCARD

The unsettled condition of Italy [24] gave the Normans an opportunity for interference in the affairs of the country. The founding of Norman power there was largely the work of a noble named Robert Guiscard ("the Crafty"), a man almost as celebrated as William the Conqueror. He had set out from his home in Normandy with only a single follower, but his valor and shrewdness soon brought him to the front. Robert united the scattered bands of Normans in Italy, who were fighting for pay or plunder, and wrested from the Roman Empire in the East its last territories in the peninsula. Before his death (1085 A.D.) most of southern Italy had passed under Norman rule.

ROGER GUISCARD'S CONQUESTS

Robert's brother, Roger, crossed the strait of Messina and began the subjugation of Sicily, then a Moslem possession. Its recovery from the hands of "infidels" was considered by the Normans a work both pleasing to God and profitable to themselves. By the close of the eleventh century they had finally established their rule in the island.

KINGDOM OF THE TWO SICILIES

The conquests of the Normans in southern Italy and Sicily were united into a single state, which came to be known as the kingdom of the Two Sicilies. The Normans governed it for only about one hundred and fifty years, but under other rulers it lasted until the middle of the nineteenth century, when the present kingdom of Italy came into existence.

NORMAN CULTURE IN THE SOUTH

The kingdom of the Two Sicilies was well-governed, rich, and strong. Art and learning flourished in the cities of Naples, Salerno, and Palermo. Southern Italy and Sicily under the Normans became a meeting-point of Byzantine and Arabic civilization. The Norman kingdom formed an important channel through which the wisdom of the East flowed to the North and to the West.

148. THE NORMANS IN EUROPEAN HISTORY

NORMAN FACULTY OF ADAPTATION

The conquests of the Normans in England, Italy, and Sicily were effected after they had become a Christian and a French-speaking people. In these lands they were the armed missionaries of a civilization not their own. The Normans, indeed, invented little and borrowed much. But, like the Arabs, they were more than simple imitators. In language, literature, art, religion, and law what they took from others they improved and then spread abroad throughout their settlements.

ASSIMILATION OF THE NORMANS

It seems at first sight remarkable that a people who occupied so much of western Europe should have passed away. Normans as Normans no longer exist. They lost themselves in the kingdoms which they founded and among the peoples whom they subdued. Their rapid assimilation was chiefly the consequence of their small numbers: outside of Normandy they were too few long to maintain their identity.

NORMAL INFLUENCE

If the Normans themselves soon disappeared, their influence was more lasting. Their mission, it has been well said, was to be leaders and energizers of society—"the little leaven that leaveneth the whole lump." The peoples of medieval Europe owed much to the courage and martial spirit, the genius for government, and the reverence for law, of the Normans. In one of the most significant movements of the Middle Ages—the crusades—they took a prominent part. Hence we shall meet them again.

STUDIES

1. What events are associated with the following dates: 988 A.D.; 862 A.D.; 1066 A.D.; 1000 A.D.; and 987 A.D.?

2. What was the origin of the geographical names Russia, Greenland, Finland, and Normandy?

3. Mention some of the striking physical contrasts between the Arabian and Scandinavian peninsulas.

4. Why has the Baltic Sea been called a "secondary Mediterranean"?

5. How does it happen that the gulf of Finland is often frozen over in winter, while even the northernmost of the Norse fiords remain open?

6. Why is an acquaintance with Scandinavian mythology, literature, and history especially desirable for English-speaking peoples?

7. What is meant by the "berserker's rage"?

8. What names of our weekdays are derived from the names of Scandinavian deities?

9. Compare the Arab and Scandinavian conceptions of the future state of departed warriors.

10. What is meant by "sea-power"? What people possessed it during the ninth and tenth centuries?

11. Compare the invasions of the Northmen with those of the Germans as to (a) causes, (b) area covered, and (c) results.

12. What was the significance of the fact that the Northmen were not Christians at the time when they began their expeditions?

13. Show how the voyages of the Northmen vastly increased geographical knowledge.

14. Show that the Russian people have received from Constantinople their writing, religion, and art.

15. Mention three conquests of England by foreign peoples before 1066 A.D. Give for each conquest the results and the approximate date.

16. On the map, page 405, trace the boundary line between Alfred's possessions and those of the Danes.

17. Compare Alfred and Charlemagne as civilizing kings.

18. Compare Alfred's cession of the Danelaw with the cession of Normandy to Rollo.

19. Why is Hastings included among "decisive" battles?

20. "We English are not ourselves but somebody else." Comment on this statement.

21. What is meant by the "Norman graft upon the sturdy Saxon tree"?

22. What settlements of the Northmen most influenced European history?

23. Compare the Norman faculty of adaptation with that of the Arabs.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Webster, Readings in Medieval and Modern History, chapter vii, "The Saga of a Viking"; chapter viii, "Alfred the Great"; chapter ix, "William the Conqueror and the Normans in England."

[2] See page 67.

[3] The word perhaps comes from the old Norse vik, a bay, and means "one who dwells by a bay or fiord." Another meaning assigned to Viking is "warrior."

[4] See the illustration, page 240.

[5] The word is derived from old Norse segya, "to say"; compare German sagen.

[6] "Hall of the slain."

[7] "Choosers of the slain."

[8] See page 312.

[9] The Icelanders in 1874 A.D. celebrated the thousandth anniversary of the Scandinavian settlement of their island.

[10] Russia in 1862 A.D. celebrated the millenary of her foundation by Ruric.

[11] The Norse word for "fort" is preserved in the gorod of Novgorod.

[12] See page 335.

[13] See page 358.

[14] See the illustration, page 310.

[15] "Norman" is a softened form of "Northman."

[16] In 1911 A.D. Normandy celebrated in the ancient capital of Rouen the thousandth anniversary of its existence.

[17] See pages 315, 317.

[18] The abolition of the French monarchy dates from 1792 A.D., when Louis XVI was deposed from the throne.

[19] See page 320.

[20] The east of England contains more than six hundred names of towns ending in by (Danish "town"), compare by-law, originally a law for a special town.

[21] "Meeting of wise men." The word gemot or moot was used for any kind of formal meeting.

[22] See page 556.

[23] See page 325.

[24] See page 317.



CHAPTER XVIII

FEUDALISM

149. RISE OF FEUDALISM

A DARK AGE

The ninth century in western Europe was, as we have learned, [1] a period of violence, disorder, and even anarchy. Charlemagne for a time had arrested the disintegration of society which resulted from the invasions of the Germans, and had united their warring tribes under something like a centralized government. But his work, it has been well said, was only a desperate rally in the midst of confusion. After his death the Carolingian Empire, attacked by the Northmen and other invaders and weakened by civil conflicts, broke up into separate kingdoms.

DECLINE OF ROYAL AUTHORITY

Charlemagne's successors in France, Germany, and Italy enjoyed little real authority. They reigned, but did not rule. Under the conditions of the age, it was impossible for a king to govern with a strong hand. The absence of good roads or of other easy means of communication made it difficult for him to move troops quickly from one district to another, in order to quell revolts. Even had good roads existed, the lack of ready money would have prevented him from maintaining a strong army devoted to his interests. Moreover, the king's subjects, as yet not welded into a nation, felt toward him no sentiments of loyalty and affection. They cared far less for their king, of whom they knew little, than for their own local lords who dwelt near them.

INCREASED POWER OF THE NOBLES

The decline of the royal authority, from the ninth century onward, meant that the chief functions of government would be more and more performed by the nobles, who were the great landowners of the kingdom. Under Charlemagne these men had been the king's officials, appointed by him and holding office at his pleasure. Under his successors they tended to become almost independent princes. In proportion as this change was accomplished during the Middle Ages, European society entered upon the stage of feudalism. [2]

PARALLELS TO EUROPEAN FEUDALISM

Feudalism in medieval Europe was not a unique development. Parallels to it may be found in other parts of the world. Whenever the state becomes incapable of protecting life and property, powerful men in each locality will themselves undertake this duty; they will assume the burden of their own defense and of those weaker men who seek their aid. Such was the situation in ancient Egypt for several hundred years, in medieval Persia, and in modern Japan until about two generations ago.

EXTENT OF EUROPEAN FEUDALISM

European feudalism arose and flourished in the three countries which had formed the Carolingian Empire, that is, in France, Germany, and northern Italy. It also spread to Bohemia, Hungary, and the Christian states of Spain. Toward the close of the eleventh century the Normans transplanted it into England, southern Italy, and Sicily. During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the crusaders introduced it into the kingdoms which they founded in the East. [3] Still later, in the fourteenth century, the Scandinavian countries became acquainted with feudalism. Throughout this wide area the institution, though varying endlessly in details, presented certain common features.

150. FEUDALISM AS A SYSTEM OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT

FEUDAL SOVEREIGNTY

The basis of feudal society was usually the landed estate. Here lived the feudal noble, surrounded by dependents over whom he exercised the rights of a petty sovereign. He could tax them; he could require them to give him military assistance; he could try them in his courts. A great noble, the possessor of many estates, even enjoyed the privilege of declaring war, making treaties, and coining money. How, it will be asked, did these rights and privileges arise?

FEUDAL TENURE OF LAND

Owing to the decay of commerce and industry, land had become practically the only form of wealth in the early Middle Ages. The king, who in theory was absolute owner of the soil, would pay his officials for their services by giving them the use of a certain amount of land. In the same way one who had received large estates would parcel them out among his followers, in return for their support. Sometimes an unscrupulous noble might seize the lands of his neighbors and compel them to become his tenants. Sometimes, too, those who owned land in their own right might surrender the title to it in favor of a noble, who then became their protector.

THE FIEF

An estate in land which a person held of a superior lord, on condition of performing some "honorable" service, was called a fief. At first the tenant received the fief only for a specified term of years or for his lifetime; but in the end it became inheritable. On the death of the tenant his eldest son succeeded him in possession. This right of the first-born son to the whole of the father's estate was known as primogeniture. [4] If a man had no legal heir, the fief went back to its lord.

VASSALAGE

The tie which bound the tenant who accepted a fief to the lord who granted it was called vassalage. Every holder of land was the vassal of some lord. At the apex of the feudal pyramid stood the king, the supreme landlord, who was supposed to hold his land from God; below the king stood the greater lords (dukes, marquises, counts, and barons), with large estates; and below them stood the lesser lords, or knights, whose possessions were too small for further subdivision.

PERSONAL SERVICES OF THE VASSAL

The vassal, first of all, owed various services to the lord. In time of war he did garrison duty at the lord's castle and joined him in military expeditions. In time of peace the vassal attended the lord on ceremonial occasions, gave him the benefit of his advice, when required, and helped him as a judge in trying cases.

THE VASSAL'S MONEY PAYMENTS

Under certain circumstances the vassal was also compelled to make money payments. When a new heir succeeded to the fief, the lord received from him a sum usually money equivalent to one year's revenue of the estate. This payment was called a "relief." Again, if a man sold his fief, the lord demanded another large sum from the purchaser, before giving his consent to the transaction. Vassals were also expected to raise money for the lord's ransom, in case he was made prisoner of war, to meet the expenses connected with the knighting of his eldest son, and to provide a dowry for his eldest daughter. Such exceptional payments went by the name of "aids."

THE LORD'S DUTY TO THE VASSAL

The vassal, in return for his services and payments, looked to the lord for the protection of life and property. The lord agreed to secure him in the enjoyment of his fief, to guard him against his enemies, and to see that in all matters he received just treatment. This was no slight undertaking.

HOMAGE

The ceremony of homage [5] symbolized the whole feudal relationship. One who proposed to become a vassal and hold a fief came into the lord's presence, bareheaded and unarmed, knelt down, placed his hands between those of the lord, and promised henceforth to become his "man." The lord then kissed him and raised him to his feet. After the ceremony the vassal placed his hand upon the Bible or upon sacred relics and swore to remain faithful to his lord. This was the oath of "fealty." The lord then gave the vassal some object—a stick, a clod of earth, a lance, or a glove—in token of the fief with the possession of which he was now "invested."

FEUDAL GOVERNMENT A SUBSTITUTE FOR ANARCHY

It is clear that the feudal method of land tenure, coupled with the custom of vassalage, made in some degree for security and order. Each noble was attached to the lord above him by the bond of personal service and the oath of fidelity. To his vassals beneath him he was at once protector, benefactor, and friend. Unfortunately, feudal obligations were far less strictly observed in practice than in theory. Both lords and vassals often broke their engagements, when it seemed profitable to do so. Hence they had many quarrels and indulged in constant warfare. But feudalism, despite its defects, was better than anarchy. The feudal lords drove back the pirates and hanged the brigands and enforced the laws, as no feeble king could do. They provided a rude form of local government for a rude society.

151. FEUDAL JUSTICE

FEUDALISM AS A SYSTEM OF LOCAL JUSTICE

Feudalism was not only a system of local government; it was also a system of local justice. Knights, barons, counts, and dukes had their separate courts, and the king had his court above all. Cases arising on the lord's estate were tried before him and the vassals whom he called to his assistance in giving justice. Since most wrongs could be atoned for by the payment of a fine, the conduct of justice on a large fief produced a considerable income. The nobles, accordingly, regarded their judicial rights as a valuable property, which they were loath to surrender to the state.

JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION

The law followed in a feudal court was largely based on old Germanic customs. The court did not act in the public interest, as with us, but waited until the plaintiff requested service. Moreover, until the case had been decided, the accuser and the accused received the same treatment. Both were imprisoned; and the plaintiff who lost his case suffered the same penalty which the defendant, had he been found guilty, would have undergone.

THE OATH

Unlike a modern court, again, the feudal court did not require the accuser to prove his case by calling witnesses and having them give testimony. The burden of proof lay on the accused, who had to clear himself of the charge, if he could do so. In one form of trial it was enough for him to declare his innocence under oath, and then to bring in several "oath- helpers," sometimes relatives, but more often neighbors, who swore that they believed him to be telling the truth. The number of these "oath- helpers" varied according to the seriousness of the crime and the rank of the accused. This method was hardly as unsatisfactory as it seems to be, for a person of evil reputation might not be able to secure the required number of friends who would commit perjury on his behalf. To take an oath was a very solemn proceeding; it was an appeal to God, by which a man called down on himself divine punishment if he swore falsely.

ORDEALS

The consequences of a false oath were not apparent at once. Ordeals, however, formed a method of appealing to God, the results of which could be immediately observed. A common form of ordeal was by fire. The accused walked barefoot over live brands, or stuck his hand into a flame, or carried a piece of red-hot iron for a certain distance. In the ordeal by hot water he plunged his arm into boiling water. A man established his innocence through one of these tests, if the wound healed properly after three days. The ordeal by cold water rested on the belief that pure water would reject the criminal. Hence the accused was thrown bound into a stream: if he floated he was guilty; if he sank he was innocent and had to be rescued. Though a crude method of securing justice, ordeals were doubtless useful in many instances. The real culprit would often prefer to confess, rather than incur the anger of God by submitting to the test.

THE JUDICIAL DUEL

A form of trial which especially appealed to the warlike nobles was the judicial duel. [6] The accuser and the accused fought with each other; and the conqueror won the case. God, it was believed, would give victory to the innocent party, because he had right on his side. When one of the adversaries could not fight, he secured a champion to take his place. Though the judicial duel finally went out of use in the law courts, it still continued to be employed privately, as a means of settling disputes which involved a man's honor. The practice of dueling is only now dying out in civilized communities.



FEUDAL AND ROMAN LAW

Oaths, ordeals, and duels formed an inheritance from Germanic antiquity. [7] They offered a sharp contrast to Roman law, which acted in the public interest, balanced evidence, and sought only to get at the truth. After the middle of the twelfth century the revival of the study of Roman law, as embodied in Justinian's code, [8] led gradually to the abandonment of most forms of appeal to the judgment of God. At the same time the kings grew powerful enough to take into their own hands the administration of justice.

152. FEUDAL WARFARE

FEUDALISM AS A SYSTEM OF LOCAL DEFENSE

Feudalism, once more, was a system of local defense. The knight must guard his small estate, the baron his barony, the count his county, the duke his duchy. At the lord's bidding the vassal had to follow him to war, either alone or with a certain number of men, according to the size of the fief. But this assistance was limited. A vassal served only for a definite period (varying from one month to three in the year), and then only within a reasonable distance from the lands for which he did homage. These restrictions made it difficult to conduct a lengthy campaign, or one far removed from the vassal's fief, unless mercenary soldiers were employed.

THE FEUDAL ARMY

The feudal army, as a rule, consisted entirely of cavalry. Such swiftly moving assailants as the Northmen and the Magyars could best be dealt with by mounted men who could bring them to bay, compel them to fight, and overwhelm them by the shock of the charge. In this way the foot soldiers of Charlemagne's time came to be replaced by the mailed horsemen who for four centuries or more dominated European battlefields.



ARMS AND ARMOR

The armor used in the Middle Ages was gradually perfected, until at length the knight became a living fortress. [9] In the early feudal period he wore a cloth or leather tunic covered with iron rings or scales, and an iron cap with a nose guard. About the beginning of the twelfth century he adopted chain mail, with a hood of the same material for the head. During the fourteenth century the knight began to wear heavy plate armor, weighing fifty pounds or more, and a helmet with a visor which could be raised or lowered. Thus completely incased in metal, provided with shield, lance, straight sword or battle-ax, and mounted on a powerful horse, the knight could ride down almost any number of poorly armed peasants. Not till the development of missile weapons—the longbow, and later the musket—did the foot soldier resume his importance in warfare. The feudal age by this time was drawing to a close.

PREVALENCE OF PRIVATE WAR

The nobles regarded the right of waging war on one another as their most cherished privilege. Fighting became almost a form of business enterprise, which enriched the lords and their retainers through the sack of castles, the plunder of villages, and the ransom of prisoners. Every hill became a stronghold and every plain a battlefield. Such neighborhood warfare, though rarely very bloody, spread terrible havoc throughout the land.

THE PEACE AND TRUCE OF GOD

The Church, to its great honor, lifted a protesting voice against this evil. It proclaimed a "Peace of God" and forbade attacks on all defenseless people, including priests, monks, pilgrims, merchants, peasants, and women. But it was found impossible to prevent the feudal lords from warring with each other, even though they were threatened with the eternal torments of Hell; and so the Church tried to restrict what it could not altogether abolish. A "Truce of God" was established. All men were to cease fighting from Wednesday evening to Monday morning of each week, during Lent, and on various holy days. The truce would have given Christendom peace for about two hundred and forty days each year; but it seems never to have been strictly observed except in limited areas.

ABOLITION OF PRIVATE WARFARE

As the power of the kings increased in western Europe, they naturally sought to put an end to the constant fighting between their subjects. The Norman rulers of Normandy, England, and Sicily restrained their turbulent nobles with a strong hand. Peace came later in most parts of the Continent; in Germany, "fist right" (the rule of the strongest) prevailed until the end of the fifteenth century. The abolition of private war was the first step in Europe toward universal peace. The second step—the abolition of public war between nations—is yet to be taken.

153. THE CASTLE AND LIFE OF THE NOBLES

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CASTLE

The outward mark of feudalism was the castle, [10] where the lord resided and from which he ruled his fief. In its earliest form the castle was simply a wooden blockhouse placed on a mound and surrounded by a stockade. About the beginning of the twelfth century the nobles began to build in stone, which would better resist fire and the assaults of besiegers. A stone castle consisted at first of a single tower, square or round, with thick walls, few windows, and often with only one room to each story. [11] As engineering skill increased, several towers were built and were then connected by outer and inner walls. The castle thus became a group of fortifications, which might cover a wide area.



THE CASTLE AS A FORTRESS

Defense formed the primary purpose of the castle. Until the introduction of gunpowder and cannon, the only siege engines employed were those known in ancient times. They included machines for hurling heavy stones and iron bolts, battering rams, and movable towers, from which the besiegers crossed over to the walls. Such engines could best be used on firm, level ground. Consequently, a castle would often be erected on a high cliff or hill, or on an island, or in the center of a swamp. A castle without such natural defenses would be surrounded by a deep ditch (the "moat"), usually filled with water. If the besiegers could not batter down or undermine the massive walls, they adopted the slower method of a blockade and tried to starve the garrison into surrendering. But ordinarily a well-built, well- provisioned castle was impregnable. Behind its frowning battlements even a petty lord could defy a royal army.



A CASTLE DESCRIBED

A visitor to a medieval castle crossed the drawbridge over the moat and approached the narrow doorway, which was protected by a tower on each side. If he was admitted, the iron grating ("portcullis") rose slowly on its creaking pulleys, the heavy, wooden doors swung open, and he found himself in the courtyard commanded by the great central tower ("keep"), where the lord and his family lived, especially in time of war. At the summit of the keep rose a platform whence the sentinel surveyed the country far and wide; below, two stories underground, lay the prison, dark, damp, and dirty. As the visitor walked about the court-yard, he came upon the hall, used as the lord's residence in time of peace, the armory, the chapel, the kitchens, and the stables. A spacious castle might contain, in fact, all the buildings necessary for the support of the lord's servants and soldiers.



THE CASTLE AS A RESIDENCE

The medieval castle formed a good fortress, but a poor home. Its small rooms, lighted only by narrow windows, heated only by fireplaces, badly ventilated, and provided with little furniture, must have been indeed cheerless. Toward the close of the feudal period, when life became more luxurious, the castle began to look less like a dungeon. Windows were widened and provided with panes of painted glass, walls were hung with costly tapestries, and floors were covered with thick Oriental rugs. The nobles became attached to their castle homes and often took their names from those of their estates.

AMUSEMENTS OF THE NOBLES

Life within the castle was very dull. There were some games, especially chess, which the nobles learned from the Moslems. Banqueting, however, formed the chief indoor amusement. The lord and his retainers sat down to a gluttonous feast and, as they ate and drank, watched the pranks of a professional jester or listened to the songs and music of ministrels or, it may be, heard with wonder the tales of far-off countries brought by some returning traveler. Outside castle walls a common sport was hunting in the forests and game preserves attached to every estate. Deer, bears, and wild boars were hunted with hounds; for smaller animals trained hawks, or falcons, were employed. But the nobles, as we have just seen, found in fighting their chief outdoor occupation and pastime. "To play a great game" was their description of a battle.



154. KNIGHTHOOD AND CHIVALRY

APPRENTICESHIP OF THE KNIGHT

The prevalence of warfare in feudal times made the use of arms a profession requiring special training. A nobleman's son served for a number of years, first as a page, then as a squire, in his father's castle or in that of some other lord. He learned to manage a horse, to climb a scaling ladder, to wield sword, battle-ax, and lance. He also waited on the lord's table, assisted him at his toilet, followed him in the chase, and attended him in battle. This apprenticeship usually lasted from five to seven years.

CONFERRING OF KNIGHTHOOD

When the young noble became of age, he might be made a knight, if he deserved the honor and could afford the expense. The ceremony of conferring knighthood was often most elaborate. The candidate fasted, took a bath—the symbol of purification—and passed the eve of his admission in prayer. Next morning he confessed his sins, went to Mass, and listened to a sermon on the duties of knighthood. This ended, his father, or the noble who had brought him up, girded him with a sword and gave him the "accolade," that is, a blow on the neck or shoulder, at the same time saying, "Be thou a good knight." Then the youth, clad in shining armor and wearing golden spurs, mounted his horse and exhibited his skill in warlike exercises. If a squire for valorous conduct received knighthood on the battlefield, the accolade by stroke of the sword formed the only ceremony.

CHIVALRY

In course of time, as manners softened and Christian teachings began to affect feudal society, knighthood developed into chivalry. The Church, which opposed the warlike excesses of feudalism, took the knight under her wing and bade him be always a true soldier of Christ. To the rude virtues of fidelity to one's lord and bravery in battle, the Church added others. The "good knight" was he who respected his sworn word, who never took an unfair advantage of another, who defended women, widows, and orphans against their oppressors, and who sought to make justice and right prevail in the world. Chivalry thus marked the union of pagan and Christian virtues, of Christianity and the profession of arms.

THE CHIVALRIC CODE

Needless to say, the "good knight" appears rather in romance than in sober history. Such a one was Sir Lancelot, in the stories of King Arthur and the Round Table. [12] As Sir Lancelot lies in death, a former companion addresses him in words which sum up the best in the chivalric code: "'Thou wert the courtliest knight that ever bare shield; and thou wert the truest friend to thy lover that ever bestrode horse; and thou wert the truest lover among sinful men that ever loved woman; and thou wert the kindest man that ever struck with sword; and thou wert the goodliest person that ever came among press of knights; and thou wert the meekest man, and the gentlest, that ever ate in hall among ladies; and thou wert the sternest knight to thy mortal foe that ever put spear in the rest.'" [13]

JOUSTS AND TOURNAMENTS

The all-absorbing passion for fighting led to the invention of mimic warfare in the shape of jousts and tournaments. [14] These exercises formed the medieval equivalent of the Greek athletic games and the Roman gladiatorial shows. The joust was a contest between two knights; the tournament, between two bands of knights. The contests took place in a railed-off space, called the "lists," about which the spectators gathered. Each knight wore upon his helmet the scarf or color of his lady and fought with her eyes upon him. Victory went to the one who unhorsed his opponent or broke in the proper manner the greatest number of lances. The beaten knight forfeited horse and armor and had to pay a ransom to the conqueror. Sometimes he lost his life, especially when the participants fought with real weapons and not with blunted lances and pointless swords. The Church now and then tried to stop these performances, but they remained universally popular until the close of the Middle Ages.

INFLUENCE OF CHIVALRY

Chivalry arose with feudalism, formed, in fact, the religion of feudalism, and passed away only when the changed conditions of society made feudalism an anachronism. [15] While chivalry lasted, it produced some improvement in manners, particularly by insisting on the notion of personal honor and by fostering greater regard for women (though only for those of the upper class). Our modern notion of the conduct befitting a "gentleman" goes back to the old chivalric code. Chivalry expressed, however, simply the sentiments of the warlike nobles. It was an aristocratic ideal. The knight despised and did his best to keep in subjection the toiling peasantry, upon whose backs rested the real burden of feudal society.

155. FEUDALISM AS A SYSTEM OF LOCAL INDUSTRY

DECLINE OF URBAN LIFE

Under the Roman Empire western Europe had been filled with flourishing cities. [16] The Germanic invasions led to a gradual decay of trade and manufacturing, and hence of the cities in which these activities centered. As urban life declined, the mass of the population came to live more and more in isolated rural communities. This was the great economic feature of the early Middle Ages.

FEUDALISM AND RURAL LIFE

The introduction of feudalism fostered the movement from town to country, for feudalism, as has been shown, rested on the soil as its basis. The lord, his family, his servants, and his retainers were supported by the income from landed property. The country estate of a lord was known as a manor.

THE MANOR

A manor naturally varied in size, according to the wealth of its lord. In England perhaps six hundred acres represented the extent of an average estate. Every noble had at least one manor; great nobles might have several manors, usually scattered throughout the country; and even the king depended on his many manors for the food supply of the court. England, during the period following the Norman Conquest, contained more than nine thousand of these manorial estates. [17]

COMMON CULTIVATION OF THE ARABLE LAND

Of the arable land of the manor the lord reserved as much as needful for his own use. The lord's land was called his "demesne," or domain. The rest of the land he allotted to the peasants who were his tenants, They cultivated their holdings in common. A farmer, instead of having his land in one compact mass, had it split up into a large number of small strips (usually about half an acre each) scattered over the manor, and separated, not by fences or hedges, but by banks of unplowed turf. The appearance of a manor, when under cultivation, has been likened to a vast checkerboard or a patchwork quilt. [18] The reason for the intermixture of strips seems to have been to make sure that each farmer had a portion both of the good land and of the bad. It is obvious that this arrangement compelled all the peasants to labor according to a common plan. A man had to sow the same kinds of crops as his neighbors, and to till and reap them at the same time. Agriculture, under such circumstances, could not fail to be unprogressive.



FARMING METHODS

In other ways, too, agriculture was very backward. Farmers did not know how to enrich the soil by the use of fertilizers or how to provide for a proper rotation of crops. Hence each year they cultivated only two-thirds of the land, letting the other third lie "fallow" (uncultivated), that it might recover its fertility. It is said that eight or nine bushels of grain represented the average yield of an acre. Farm animals were small, for scientific breeding had not yet begun. A full-grown ox reached a size scarcely larger than a calf of to-day, and the fleece of a sheep often weighed less than two ounces. Farm implements were few and clumsy. The wooden ploughs only scratched the ground. Harrowing was done with a hand implement little better than a large rake. Grain was cut with a sickle, and grass was mown with a scythe. It took five men a day to reap and bind the harvest of two acres.

COMMON USE OF THE NON-ARABLE LAND

Besides his holding of farm land, which in England averaged about thirty acres, each peasant had certain rights over the non-arable land of the manor. He could cut a limited amount of hay from the meadow. He could turn so many farm animals—cattle, geese, swine—on the waste. He also enjoyed the privilege of taking so much wood from the forest for fuel and building purposes. A peasant's holding, which also included a house in the village, thus formed a complete outfit.

156. THE VILLAGE AND LIFE OF THE PEASANTS

A VILLAGE DESCRIBED

The peasants on a manor lived close together in one or more villages. Their small, thatch-roofed, and one-roomed houses would be grouped about an open space (the "green"), or on both sides of a single, narrow street. The only important buildings were the parish church, the parsonage, a mill, if a stream ran through the manor, and possibly a blacksmith's shop. The population of one of these villages often did not exceed one hundred souls.

A VILLAGE AS SELF-SUFFICING

Perhaps the most striking feature of a medieval village was its self- sufficiency. The inhabitants tried to produce at home everything they required, in order to avoid the uncertainty and expense of trade. The land gave them their food; the forest provided them with wood for houses and furniture. They made their own clothes of flax, wool, and leather. Their meal and flour were ground at the village mill, and at the village smithy their farm implements were manufactured. The chief articles which needed to be brought from some distant market were salt, used to salt down farm animals killed in autumn, iron for various tools, and millstones. Cattle, horses, and surplus grain also formed common objects of exchange between manors.

HARD LOT OF THE PEASANTRY

Life in a medieval village was rude and rough. The peasants labored from sunrise to sunset, ate coarse fare, lived in huts, and suffered from frequent pestilences. They were often the helpless prey of the feudal nobles. If their lord happened to be a quarrelsome man, given to fighting with his neighbors, they might see their lands ravaged, their cattle driven off, their village burned, and might themselves be slain. Even under peaceful conditions the narrow, shut-in life of the manor could not be otherwise than degrading.

ALLEVIATIONS OF THE PEASANT'S LOT

Yet there is another side to the picture. If the peasants had a just and generous lord, they probably led a fairly comfortable existence. Except when crops failed, they had an abundance of food, and possibly wine or cider drink. They shared a common life in the work of the fields, in the sports of the village green, and in the services of the parish church. They enjoyed many holidays; it has been estimated that, besides Sundays, about eight weeks in every year were free from work. Festivities at Christmas, Easter, and May Day, at the end of ploughing and the completion of harvest, relieved the monotony of the daily round of labor. [19] Perhaps these medieval peasants were not much worse off than the agricultural laborers in most countries of modern Europe.



157. SERFDOM

FREEMEN, SLAVES, AND SERFS

A medieval village usually contained several classes of laborers. There might be a number of freemen, who paid a fixed rent, either in money or produce, for the use of their land. Then there might also be a few slaves in the lord's household or at work on his domain. By this time, however, slavery had about died out in western Europe. Most of the peasants were serfs.

NATURE OF SERFDOM

Serfdom represented a stage between slavery and freedom. A slave belonged to his master; he was bought and sold like other chattels. A serf had a higher position, for he could not be sold apart from the land nor could his holding be taken from him. He was fixed to the soil. On the other hand a serf ranked lower than a freeman, because he could not change his abode, nor marry outside the manor, nor bequeath his goods, without the permission of his lord.

OBLIGATIONS OF THE SERF

The serf did not receive his land as a free gift; for the use of it he owed certain duties to his master. These took chiefly the form of personal services. He must labor on the lord's domain for two or three days each week, and at specially busy seasons, such as ploughing and harvesting, he must do extra work. At least half his time was usually demanded by the lord. The serf had also to make certain payments, either in money or more often in grain, honey, eggs, or other produce. When he ground the wheat or pressed the grapes which grew on his land, he must use the lord's mill, the lord's wine-press, and pay the customary charge. In theory the lord could tax his serfs as heavily and make them work as hard as he pleased, but the fear of losing his tenants doubtless in most cases prevented him from imposing too great burdens on them.

ORIGIN OF SERFDOM

Serfdom developed during the later centuries of the Roman Empire and in the early Middle Ages. It was well established by the time of Charlemagne. Most serfs seem to have been the descendants, or at least the successors, of Roman slaves, whose condition had gradually improved. The serf class was also recruited from the ranks of freemen, who by conquest or because of the desire to gain the protection of a lord, became subject to him. Serfdom, however, was destined to be merely a transitory condition. By the close of medieval times, the serfs in most parts of western Europe had secured their freedom. [20]

158. DECLINE OF FEUDALISM

DURATION OF FEUDALISM

Feudalism had a vigorous life for about five hundred years. Taking definite form early in the ninth century, it flourished throughout the later Middle Ages, but became decadent by the opening of the fourteenth century.

FORCES OPPOSED TO FEUDALISM: THE KINGS

As a system of local government, feudalism tended to pass away when the rulers in England, France, and Spain, and later in Germany and Italy, became powerful enough to put down private warfare, execute justice, and maintain order everywhere in their dominions. The kings were always anti- feudal. We shall study in a later chapter (Chapter XXII) the rise of strong governments and centralized states in western Europe.

FORCES OPPOSED TO FEUDALISM: THE CITIES

As a system of local industry, feudalism could not survive the great changes of the later Middle Ages, when reviving trade, commerce, and manufactures had begun to lead to the increase of wealth, the growth of markets, and the substitution of money payments for those in produce or services. Flourishing cities arose, as in the days of the Roman Empire, freed themselves from the control of the nobles, and became the homes of liberty and democracy. The cities, like the kings, were always anti- feudal. We shall deal with their development in a subsequent chapter (Chapter XXIII).

THE CHURCH AND FEUDALISM

There was still another anti-feudal force, namely, the Roman Church. It is true that many of the higher clergy were feudal lords, and that even the monasteries owned vast estates which were parceled out among tenants. Nevertheless, the Roman Church as a universal organization, including men of all ranks and classes, was necessarily opposed to feudalism, a local and an aristocratic system. The work and influence of this Church will now engage our attention.

STUDIES

1. Write a brief essay on feudal society, using the following words: lord; vassal; castle; keep; dungeon; chivalry; tournament; manor; and serf.

2. Explain the following terms: vassal; fief; serf; "aid"; homage; squire; investiture; and "relief."

3. Look up the origin of the words homage, castle, dungeon, and chivalry.

4. "The real heirs of Charlemagne were from the first neither the kings of France nor those of Italy or Germany; but the feudal lords." Comment on this statement.

5. Why was the feudal system not found in the Roman Empire in the East during the Middle Ages?

6. Why has feudalism been called "confusion roughly organized"?

7. Contrast feudalism as a political system with (a) the classical city- states, (b) the Roman Empire, and (c) modern national states.

8. What was the effect of feudalism on the sentiment of patriotism?

9. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of primogeniture as the rule of inheritance?

10. Explain these phrases: "to be in hot water;" "to go through fire and water;" and "to haul over the coals."

11. Compare the oaths administered to witnesses in modern courts with medieval oaths.

12. Why was war the usual condition of feudal society?

13. Compare the "Peace of God" with the earlier "Roman Peace" (Pax Romana).

14. Mention some modern comforts and luxuries which were unknown in feudal castles.

15. What is the present meaning of the word "chivalrous"? How did it get that meaning?

16. Why has chivalry been called "the blossom of feudalism"?

17. Contrast the ideal of a chivalry with that of monasticism.

18. Show that the serf was not a slave or a "hired man" or a tenant-farmer paying rent.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See page 312.

[2] The word has nothing to do with "feuds," though these were common enough in feudal times. It comes from the medieval Latin feudum, from which are desired the French fief and the English fee.

[3] See pages 472, 478.

[4] The practice of primogeniture has now been abolished by the laws of the various European countries and is not recognized in the United States. It still prevails, however, in England.

[5] Latin homo, "man."

[6] Sir Walter Scott's novel, Ivanhoe (chapter xliii), contains an account of a judicial duel.

[7] See page 326.

[8] See page 331.

[9] See the illustrations, pages 408, 421, 422, 473.

[10] The French form of the word is chateau.

[11] A good example is the "White Tower," which forms a part of the Tower of London. It was built by William the Conqueror. See the illustration, page 498.

[12] See page 560.

[13] Malory, Morte d'Arthur, xxi, 13. See also Tennyson's poem, Sir Galahad, for a beautiful presentation of the ideal knight.

[14] Sir Walter Scott's novel, Ivanhoe (chapter xii), contains a description of a tournament.

[15] Don Quixote, by the Spanish writer, Cervantes (1547-1616 A.D.), is a famous satire on chivalry. Our American "Mark Twain" also stripped off the gilt and tinsel of chivalry in his amusing story entitled A Connecticut Yankee at the Court of King Arthur.

[16] See page 208.

[17] According to Domesday Book (see page 499) there were 9250 manors, of which William the Conqueror possessed 1422. His manors lay in about thirty counties.

[18] This "open field" system of agriculture, as it is usually called, still survives in some parts of Europe. See the plan of Hitchin Manor, page 435.

[19] See page 581-582.

[20] See page 612.



CHAPTER XIX

THE PAPACY AND THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, 962-1273 A.D. [1]

159. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE MEDIEVAL CHURCH

THE ROMAN CHURCH

A preceding chapter dealt with the Christian Church in the East and West during the early Middle Ages. We learned something about its organization, belief, and worship, about the rise and growth of the Papacy, about monasticism, and about that missionary campaign which won all Europe to Christianity. Our narrative extended to the middle of the eleventh century, when the quarrel between pope and patriarch led at length to the disruption of Christendom. We have now to consider the work and influence of the Roman Church during later centuries of the Middle Ages.

TERRITORIAL EXTENT OF THE CHURCH

The Church at the height of its power held spiritual sway over all western Europe. Italy and Sicily, the larger part of Spain, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, British Isles, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Iceland yielded obedience to the pope of Rome.

THE CHURCH AS UNIVERSAL

Membership in the Church was not a matter of free choice. All people, except Jews, were required to belong to it. A person joined the Church by baptism, a rite usually performed in infancy, and remained in it as long as he lived. Every one was expected to conform, at least outwardly, to the doctrines and practices of the Church, and anyone attacking its authority was liable to punishment by the state.

THE CHURCH AS INTERNATIONAL

The presence of one Church throughout the western world furnished a bond of union between European peoples during the age of feudalism. The Church took no heed of political boundaries, for men of all nationalities entered the ranks of the priesthood and joined the monastic orders. Priests and monks were subjects of no country, but were "citizens of heaven," as they sometimes called themselves. Even difference of language counted for little in the Church, since Latin was the universal speech of the educated classes. One must think, then, of the Church as a great international state, in form a monarchy, presided over by the pope, and with its capital at Rome.

TWOFOLD DUTIES OF THE CHURCH

The Church in the Middle Ages performed a double task. On the one hand it gave the people religious instruction and watched over their morals; on the other hand it played an important part in European politics and provided a means of government. Because the Church thus combined ecclesiastical and civil functions, it was quite unlike all modern churches, whether Greek, Roman, or Protestant. Both sides of its activities deserve, therefore, to be considered.

160. CHURCH DOCTRINE AND WORSHIP

"THE GATE OF HEAVEN."

In medieval times every loyal member of the Church accepted without question its authority in religious matters. The Church taught a belief in a personal God, all-wise, all-good, all-powerful, to know whom was the highest goal of life. The avenue to this knowledge lay through faith in the revelation of God, as found in the Scriptures. Since the unaided human reason could not properly interpret the Scriptures, it was necessary for the Church, through her officers, to declare their meaning and set forth what doctrines were essential to salvation. The Church thus appeared as the sole repository of religious knowledge, as "the gate of heaven."

THE SACRAMENTAL SYSTEM

Salvation did not depend only on the acceptance of certain beliefs. There were also certain acts, called "sacraments," in which the faithful Christian must participate, if he was not to be cut off eternally from God. These acts formed channels of heavenly grace; they saved man from the consequences of his sinful nature and filled him with "the fullness of divine life." Since priests alone could administer the sacraments, [2] the Church presented itself as the necessary mediator between God and man.

BAPTISM, CONFIRMATION, MATRIMONY, AND EXTREME UNCTION

By the thirteenth century seven sacraments were generally recognized. Four of these marked critical stages in human life, from the cradle to the grave. Baptism cleansed the child from the taint of original sin and admitted him into the Christian community. Confirmation gave him full Church fellowship. Matrimony united husband and wife in holy bonds which might never be broken. Extreme Unction, the anointing with oil of one mortally ill, purified the soul and endowed it with strength to meet death.

PENANCE

Penance held an especially important place in the sacramental system. At least once a year the Christian must confess his sins to a priest. If he seemed to be truly repentant, the priest pronounced the solemn words of absolution and then required him to accept some punishment, which varied according to the nature of the offense. There was a regular code of penalties for such sins as drunkenness, avarice, perjury, murder, and heresy. Penances often consisted in fasting, reciting prayers, abstaining from one's ordinary amusements, or beating oneself with bundles of rods. A man who had sinned grievously might be ordered to engage in charitable work, to make a contribution in money for the support of the Church, or to go on a pilgrimage to a sacred shrine. The more distant and difficult a pilgrimage, the more meritorious it was, especially if it led to some very holy place, such as Rome or Jerusalem. People might also become monks in order to atone for evil-doing. This system of penitential punishment referred only to the earthly life; it was not supposed to cleanse the soul for eternity.

HOLY EUCHARIST

The sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, generally known as the Mass, formed the central feature of worship. It was more than a common meal in commemoration of the Last Supper of Christ with the Apostles. It was a solemn ceremony, by which the Christian believed himself to receive the body and blood of Christ, under the form of bread and wine. [3] The right of the priest to withhold the Eucharist from any person, for good cause, gave the Church great power, because the failure to partake of this sacrament imperiled one's chances of future salvation. It was also supposed that the benefits of the ceremony in purifying from sin might be enjoyed by the dead in Purgatory; hence masses were often said for the repose of their souls.

ORDINATION

The seventh and last sacrament, that of Ordination, or "Holy Orders," admitted persons to the priesthood. According to the view of the Church the rite had been instituted by Christ, when He chose the Apostles and sent them forth to preach the Gospel. From the Apostles, who ordained their successors, the clergy in all later times received their exalted authority. [4] Ordination conferred spiritual power and set such an indelible mark on the character that one who had been ordained could never become a simple layman again.

[Illustration: PILGRIMS TO CANTERBURY From a medieval manuscript. Canterbury with its cathedral appears in the background. The shrine of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, formed a celebrated resort for medieval pilgrims. The archbishop had been murdered in the church (1180 A.D.), if not at the instigation, at any rate without the opposition of King Henry II, whose policies he opposed. Becket, who was regarded as a martyr, soon received canonization. Miracles were said to be worked at his grave and at the well in which his bloody garments had been washed. He remained the most popular saint in England until the Protestant Reformation in the sixteenth century, when his shrine was destroyed.]

REVERENCE FOR SAINTS

The Church did not rely solely on the sacramental system as a means to salvation. It was believed that holy persons, called saints, [5] who had died and gone to Heaven, offered to God their prayers for men. Hence the practice arose of invoking the aid of the saints in all the concerns of life. The earliest saints were Christian martyrs, [6] who had sealed their faith with their blood. In course of time many other persons, renowned for pious deeds, were exalted to sainthood. The making of a new saint, after a rigid inquiry into the merits of the person whom it is proposed to honor, is now a privilege reserved to the pope.

DEVOTION TO THE VIRGIN

High above all the saints stood the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God. Devotion to her as the "Queen of Heaven" increased rapidly in the Church after the time of Gregory the Great. The popularity of her cult owed not a little to the influence of chivalry, [7] for the knight, who vowed to cherish womanhood, saw in the Virgin the ideal woman. Everywhere churches arose in her honor, and no cathedral or abbey lacked a chapel dedicated to Our Lady.

RELICS

The growing reverence for saints led to an increased interest in relics. These included the bones of a saint and shreds of his garments, besides such objects as the wood or nails of the cross on which Christ suffered. Relics were not simply mementos; they were supposed to possess miraculous power which passed into them through contact with holy persons. This belief explains the use of relics to heal diseases, to ward off danger, and, in general, to bring good fortune. An oath taken upon relics was especially sacred. [8] Every church building contained a collection of relics, sometimes amounting to thousands in number, and even private persons often owned them.

PURGATORY

The Church also taught a belief in Purgatory as a state or place of probation. [9] Here dwelt the souls of those who were guilty of no mortal sins which would condemn them to Hell, but yet were burdened with imperfections which prevented them from entering Heaven. Such imperfections, it was held, might be removed by the prayers of the living, and hence the practice arose of praying for the dead.

161. CHURCH JURISDICTION

CHURCH COURTS

The Church had regular courts and a special system of law [10] for the trial of offenders against its regulations. Many cases, which to-day would be decided according to the civil or criminal law of the state, in the Middle Ages came before the ecclesiastical courts. Since marriage was considered a sacrament, the Church took upon itself to decide what marriages were lawful. It forbade the union of first cousins, of second cousins, and of godparents and godchildren. It refused to sanction divorce, for whatever cause, if both parties at the time of marriage had been baptized Christians. The Church dealt with inheritance under wills, for a man could not make a legal will until he had confessed, and confession formed part of the sacrament of Penance. All contracts made binding by oaths came under Church jurisdiction, because an oath was an appeal to God. [11] The Church tried those who were charged with any sin against religion, including heresy, blasphemy, the taking of interest (usury), and the practice of witchcraft. Widows, orphans, and the families of pilgrims or crusaders also enjoyed the special protection of Church courts.

"BENEFIT OF CLERGY"

The Church claimed the privilege of judging all cases which involved clergymen. No layman, it was declared, ought to interfere with one who, by the sacrament of Ordination, had been dedicated to God. This demand of the Church to try its own officers, according to its own mild and intelligent laws, seems not unreasonable, when we remember how rude were the methods of feudal justice. But "benefit of clergy," as the privilege was called, might be abused. Many persons who had no intention of acting as priests or monks became clergymen, in order to shield themselves behind the Church in case their misdeeds were exposed.

RIGHT OF "SANCTUARY."

An interesting illustration of the power of the Church is afforded by the right of "sanctuary." Any lawbreaker who fled to a church building enjoyed, for a limited time, the privilege of safe refuge. It was considered a sin against God to drag even the most wicked criminal from the altar. The most that could be done was to deny the refugee food, so that he might come forth voluntarily. This privilege of seeking sanctuary was not without social usefulness, for it gave time for angry passions to cool, thus permitting an investigation of the charges against an offender.

EXCOMMUNICATION

Disobedience to the regulations of the Church might be followed by excommunication. It was a punishment which cut off the offender from all Christian fellowship. He could not attend religious services nor enjoy the sacraments so necessary to salvation. If he died excommunicate, his body could not be buried in consecrated ground. By the law of the state he lost all civil rights and forfeited all his property. No one might speak to him, feed him, or shelter him. This terrible penalty, it is well to point out, was usually imposed only after the sinner had received a fair trial and had spurned all entreaties to repent. [12]

INTERDICT

The interdict, another form of punishment, was directed against a particular locality, for the fault of some of the inhabitants who could not be reached directly. In time of interdict the priests closed the churches and neither married the living nor buried the dead. Of the sacraments only Baptism, Confirmation, and Penance were permitted. All the inhabitants of the afflicted district were ordered to fast, as in Lent, and to let their hair grow long in sign of mourning. The interdict also stopped the wheels of government, for courts of justice were shut, wills could not be made, and public officials were forbidden to perform their duties. In some cases the Church went so far as to lay an interdict upon an entire kingdom, whose ruler had refused to obey her mandate. [13] The interdict has now passed out of use, but excommunication still retains its place among the spiritual weapons of the Church.

162. THE SECULAR CLERGY

THE SECULAR AND REGULAR CLERGY

Some one has said that in the Middle Ages there were just three classes of society: the nobles who fought; the peasants who worked; and the clergy who prayed. The latter class was divided into the secular [14] clergy, including deacons, priests, and bishops, who lived active lives in the world, and the regular [15] clergy, or monks, who passed their days in seclusion behind monastery walls.

POSITION OF THE CLERGY

It has been already pointed out how early both secular and regular clergy came to be distinguished from the laity by abstention from money-making activities, differences in dress, and the obligation of celibacy. [16] Being unmarried, the clergy had no family cares; being free from the necessity of earning their own living, they could devote all their time and energy to the service of the Church. The sacrament of Ordination, which was believed to endow the clergy with divine power, also helped to strengthen their influence. They appeared as a distinct order, in whose charge was the care of souls and in whose hands were the keys of heaven.

PARISH PRIESTS

An account of the secular clergy naturally begins with the parish priest, who had charge of a parish, the smallest division of Christendom. No one could act as a priest without the approval of the bishop, but the nobleman who supported the parish had the privilege of nominating candidates for the position. The priest derived his income from lands belonging to the parish, from tithes, [17] and from voluntary contributions, but as a rule he received little more than a bare living. The parish priest was the only Church officer who came continually into touch with the common people. He baptized, married, and buried his parishioners. For them he celebrated Mass at least once a week, heard confessions, and granted absolution. He watched over all their deeds on earth and prepared them for the life to come. And if he preached little, he seldom failed to set in his own person an example of right living.

THE PARISH CHURCH

The church, with its spire which could be seen afar off and its bells which called the faithful to worship, formed the social center of the parish. Here on Sundays and holy days the people assembled for the morning and evening services. During the interval between religious exercises they often enjoyed games and other amusements in the adjoining churchyard. As a place of public gathering the parish church held an important place in the life of the Middle Ages.

BISHOPS

A group of parishes formed a diocese, over which a bishop presided. It was his business to look after the property belonging to the diocese, to hold the ecclesiastical courts, to visit the clergy, and to see that they did their duty. The bishop alone could administer the sacraments of Confirmation and Ordination. He also performed the ceremonies at the consecration of a new church edifice or shrine. Since the Church held vast estates on feudal tenure, the bishop was usually a territorial lord, owing a vassal's obligations to the king or to some powerful noble for his land and himself ruling over vassals in different parts of the country. As symbols of his power and dignity the bishop wore on his head the miter and carried the pastoral staff, or crosier. [18]



ARCHBISHOPS

Above the bishop in rank stood the archbishop. In England, for example, there were two archbishops, one residing at York and the other at Canterbury. The latter, as "primate of all England," was the highest ecclesiastical dignitary in the land. An archbishop's distinctive vestment consisted of the pallium, a narrow band of white wool, worn around the neck. The pope alone could confer the right to wear the pallium.

THE CATHEDRAL

The church which contained the official seat or throne [19] of a bishop or archbishop was called a cathedral. It was ordinarily the largest and most magnificent church in the diocese. [20]

163. THE REGULAR CLERGY

DECLINE OF MONASTICISM

The regular clergy, or monks, during the early Middle Ages belonged to the Benedictine order. By the tenth century, however, St. Benedict's Rule had lost much of its force. As the monasteries increased in wealth through gifts of land and goods, they sometimes became centers of idleness, luxury, and corruption. The monks forgot their vows of poverty; and, instead of themselves laboring as farmers, craftsmen, and students, they employed laymen to work for them. At the same time powerful feudal lords frequently obtained control of the monastic estates by appointing as abbots their children or their retainers. Grave danger existed that the monasteries would pass out of Church control and decline into mere fiefs ruled by worldly men.

THE CLUNIAC REVIVAL

A great revival of monasticism began in 910 A.D., with the foundation of the monastery of Cluny in eastern France. The monks of Cluny led lives of the utmost self-denial and followed the Benedictine Rule in all its strictness. Their enthusiasm and devotion were contagious; before long Cluny became a center from which a reformatory movement spread over France and then over all western Europe. By the middle of the twelfth century more than three hundred monasteries looked to Cluny for inspiration and guidance.

THE "CONGREGATION OF CLUNY"

Each of the earlier Benedictine monasteries had been an isolated community, independent and self-governing. Consequently, when discipline grew lax or when the abbot proved to be an incapable ruler, it was difficult to correct the evils which arose. In the Cluniac system, however, all the monasteries formed parts of one organization, the "Congregation of Cluny." The abbot of Cluny appointed their "priors," or heads, and required every monk to pass several years of his monastic life at Cluny itself. This monarchical arrangement helps to explain why for two hundred years the abbot of Cluny was, next to the pope, the most important churchman in western Europe.

THE CISTERCIAN ORDER

Other monastic orders arose in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. Of these, the most important was the Cistercian, founded in 1098 A.D. at Citeaux, not far from Cluny. The keynote of Cistercian life was the return to a literal obedience of St. Benedict's Rule. Hence the members of the order lived in the utmost simplicity, cooking their own meager repasts and wearing coarse woolen garments woven from the fleeces of their own sheep. The Cistercians especially emphasized the need for manual labor. They were the best farmers and cattle breeders of the Middle Ages. Western Europe owes even more to them than to the Benedictines for their work as pioneers in the wilderness. "The Cistercians," declared a medieval writer, "are a model to all monks, a mirror for the diligent, a spur to the indolent."

ST. BERNARD, 1090-1153 A.D.

The whole spirit of medieval monasticism found expression in St. Bernard, a Burgundian of noble birth. While still a young man he resolved to leave the world and seek the repose of the monastic life. He entered Citeaux, carrying with him thirty companions. Mothers are said to have hid their sons from him, and wives their husbands, lest they should be converted to monasticism by his persuasive words. After a few years at Citeaux St. Bernard established the monastery of Clairvaux, over which he ruled as abbot till his death. His ascetic life, piety, eloquence, and ability as an executive soon brought him into prominence. People visited Clairvaux from far and near to listen to his preaching and to receive his counsels. The monastery flourished under his direction and became the parent of no less than sixty-five Cistercian houses which were planted in the wilderness. St. Bernard's activities widened, till he came to be the most influential man in western Christendom. It was St. Bernard who acted as an adviser of the popes, at one time deciding between two rival candidates for the Papacy, who combated most vigorously the heresies of the day, and who by his fiery appeals set in motion one of the crusades. [21] The charm of his character is revealed to us in his sermons and letters, while some of the Latin hymns commonly attributed to him are still sung in many churches, both Roman Catholic and Protestant.

164. THE FRIARS

COMING OF THE FRIARS

The history of Christian monasticism exhibits an ever-widening social outlook. The early hermits [22] had devoted themselves, as they believed, to the service of God by retiring desert for prayer, meditation, and bodily mortification. St. Benedict's wise Rule, as followed by the medieval monastic orders, marked a change for the better. It did away with extreme forms of self-denial, brought the monks together in a common house, and required them to engage in daily manual labor. Yet even the Benedictine system had its limitations. The monks lived apart from the world and sought chiefly the salvation of their own souls. A new conception of the monastic life arose early in the thirteenth century, with the coming of the friars. [23] The aim of the friars was social service. They lived active lives in the world and devoted themselves entirely to the salvation of others. The foundation of the orders of friars was the work of two men, St. Francis in Italy and St. Dominic in Spain.

ST. FRANCIS, 1181(?)-1226 A.D.

Twenty-eight years after the death of St. Bernard, St. Francis was born at Assisi. As the son of a rich and prominent merchant St. Francis had before him the prospect of a fine career in the world. But he put away all thoughts of fame and wealth, deserted his gay companions, and, choosing "Lady Poverty" as his bride, started out to minister to lepers and social outcasts. One day, while attending Mass, the call came to him to preach the Gospel, as Christ had preached it, among the poor and lowly. The man's earnestness and charm of manner soon drew about him devoted followers. After some years St. Francis went to Rome and obtained Pope Innocent III's sanction of his work. The Franciscan order spread so rapidly that even in the founder's lifetime there were several thousand members in Italy and other European countries.



ST. FRANCIS, THE MAN

St. Francis is one of the most attractive figures in all history. Perhaps no other man has ever tried so seriously to imitate in his own life the life of Christ. St. Francis went about doing good. He resembled, in some respects, the social workers and revivalist preachers of to-day. In other respects he was a true child of the Middle Ages. An ascetic, he fasted, wore a hair-cloth shirt, mixed ashes with his food to make it disagreeable, wept daily, so that his eyesight was nearly destroyed, and every night flogged himself with iron chains. A mystic, he lived so close to God and nature that he could include within the bonds of his love not only men and women, but also animals, trees, and flowers. He preached a sermon to the birds and once wrote a hymn to praise God for his "brothers," sun, wind, and fire, and for his "sisters," moon, water, and earth. When told that he had but a short time to live, he exclaimed, "Welcome, Sister Death!" He died at the age of forty-five, worn out by his exertions and self-denial. Two years later the pope made him a saint.

ST. DOMINIC, 1170-1221 A.D.

St. Dominic, unlike St. Francis, was a clergyman and a student of theology. After being ordained he went to southern France and labored there for ten years among a heretical sect known as the Albigenses. The order of Dominicans grew out of the little band of volunteers who assisted him in the mission. St. Dominic sent his followers—at first only sixteen in number—out into the world to combat heresy. They met with great success, and at the founder's death the Dominicans had as many as sixty friaries in various European cities.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FRIARS

The Franciscans and Dominicans resembled each other in many ways. They were "itinerant," going on foot from place to place, and wearing coarse robes tied round the waist with a rope. They were "mendicants," [24] who possessed no property but lived on the alms of the charitable. They were also preachers, who spoke to the people, not in Latin, but in the common language of each country which they visited. The Franciscans worked especially in the "slums" of the cities; the Dominicans addressed themselves rather to educated people and the upper classes. As time went on, both orders relaxed the rule of poverty and became very wealthy. They still survive, scattered all over the world and employed in teaching and missionary activity. [25]

THE FRIARS AND THE PAPACY

The friars by their preaching and ministrations did a great deal to call forth a religious revival in Europe during the thirteenth century. In particular they helped to strengthen the papal authority. Both orders received the sanction of the pope; both enjoyed many privileges at his hands; and both looked to him for direction. The pope employed them to raise money, to preach crusades, and to impose excommunications and interdicts. The Franciscans and Dominicans formed, in fact, the agents of the Papacy.

165. POWER OF THE PAPACY

THE POPE'S EXALTED POSITION

The name "pope" [26] seems at first to have been applied to all priests as a title of respect and affection. The Greek Church still continues this use of the word. In the West it gradually came to be reserved to the bishop of Rome as his official title. The pope was addressed in speaking as "Your Holiness." His exalted position was further indicated by the tiara, or headdress with triple crowns, worn by him in processions. [27] He went to solemn ceremonies sitting in a chair supported on the shoulders of his guard. He gave audience from an elevated throne, and all who approached him kissed his feet in reverence. As "Christ's Vicar" he claimed to be the representative on earth of the Almighty.

THE POPE AS THE HEAD OF WESTERN CHRISTENDOM

The pope was the supreme lawgiver of the Church. His decrees might not be set aside by any other person. He made new laws in the form of "bulls" [28] and by his "dispensations" could in particular cases set aside old laws, such as those forbidding cousins to marry or monks to obtain release from their vows. The pope was also the supreme judge of the Church, for all appeals from the lower ecclesiastical courts came before him for decision. Finally, the pope was the supreme administrator of the Church. He confirmed the election of bishops, deposed them, when necessary, or transferred them from one diocese to another. No archbishop might perform the functions of his office until he had received the pallium from the pope's hands. The pope also exercised control over the monastic orders and called general councils of the Church.

THE PAPAL LEGATES

The authority of the pope was commonly exercised by the "legates," [29] whom he sent out as his representatives at the various European courts. These officers kept the pope in close touch with the condition of the Church in every part of western Europe. A similar function is performed in modern times by the papal ambassadors known as "nuncios."

THE CARDINALS

For assistance in government the pope made use of the cardinals, [30] who formed a board, or "college." At first they were chosen only from the clergy of Rome and the vicinity, but in course of time the pope opened the cardinalate to prominent churchmen in all countries. The number of cardinals is now fixed at seventy, but the college is never full, and there are always ten or more "vacant hats," as the saying goes. The cardinals, in the eleventh century, received the right of choosing a new pope. A cardinal ranks above all other church officers. His dignity is indicated by the red hat and scarlet robe which he wears and by the title of "Eminence" applied to him.

INCOME OF THE PAPACY

To support the business of the Papacy and to maintain the splendor of the papal court required a large annual income. This came partly from the States of the Church in Italy, partly from the gifts of the faithful, and partly from the payments made by abbots, bishops, and archbishops when the pope confirmed their election to office. Still another source of revenue consisted of "Peter's Pence," a tax of a penny on each hearth. It was collected every year in England and in some Continental countries until the Reformation. The modern "Peter's Pence" is a voluntary contribution made by Roman Catholics in all countries.

THE CAPITAL OF THE PAPACY

The Eternal City, from which in ancient times the known world had been ruled, formed in the Middle Ages the capital of the Papacy. Hither every year came tens of thousands of pilgrims to worship at the shrine of the Prince of the Apostles. Few traces now remain of the medieval city. Old St. Peter's Church, where Charlemagne was crowned emperor, [31] gave way in the sixteenth century to the world-famous structure that now occupies its site. [32] The Lateran Palace, which for more than a thousand years served as the residence of the popes, has also disappeared, its place being taken by a new and smaller building. The popes now live in the splendid palace of the Vatican, adjoining St. Peter's.

THE PAPACY AND THE EMPIRE

The powers exercised by the popes during the later Middle Ages were not secured without a struggle. As a matter of fact the concentration of authority in papal hands was a gradual development covering several hundred years. The pope reached his exalted position only after a long contest with the Holy Roman Emperor. This contest forms one of the most noteworthy episodes in medieval history.

166. POPES AND EMPERORS, 962-1122 A.D.

RELATIONS BETWEEN POPE AND EMPEROR IN THEORY

One might suppose that there could be no interference between pope and emperor, since they seemed to have separate spheres of action. It was said that God had made the pope, as the successor of St. Peter, supreme in spiritual matters and the emperor, as heir of the Roman Caesars, supreme in temporal matters. The former ruled men's souls, the latter, men's bodies. The two sovereigns thus divided on equal terms the government of the world.

THEIR RELATIONS IN PRACTICE

The difficulty with this theory was that it did not work. No one could decide in advance where the authority the pope ended and where that of the emperor began. When the pope claimed certain powers which were also claimed by the emperor, a conflict between the two rulers became inevitable.



OTTO THE GREAT AND THE PAPACY

In 962 A.D. Otto the Great, as we have learned, [33] restored imperial rule in the West, thus founding what in later centuries the came to be known as the Holy Roman Empire. Otto as emperor possessed the rights of making the city of Rome the imperial capital, of approving the election of the pope, and, in general, of exerting much influence in papal affairs. All these rights had been exercised by Charlemagne. But Otto did what Charlemagne had never done when he deposed a pope who proved disobedient to his wishes and on his own authority appointed a successor. At the same time Otto exacted from the people of Rome an oath that they would never recognize any pope to whose election the emperor had not consented.

THE PAPACY AND OTTO'S SUCCESSORS

The emperors who followed Otto repeatedly interfered in elections to the Papacy. One strong ruler, Henry III (1039-1056 A.D.), has been called the "pope-maker." Early in his reign he set aside three rival claimants to the Papacy, creating a German bishop pope, and on three subsequent occasions filled the papal throne by fresh appointments. It was clear that if this situation continued much longer the Papacy would become simply an imperial office; it would be merged in the Empire.