<h1>XXIV <br/> DEMOCRACY, CHRISTIAN SOCIALISM AND NATIONALITY.</h1>
<p>Democracy is a word to conjure with but it is usually considered that
the thing it represents had its origin in the modern world much later
than the period with which we are occupied. The idea that the people
should be ready to realize their own rights, to claim their privileges
and to ask that they should be allowed to rule themselves, is supposed
ordinarily to be a product of the last century or two. Perhaps in this
matter more than any other does the Thirteenth Century need
interpretation to the modern mind, yet we think that after certain
democratic factors and developments in the life of this period are
pointed out and their significance made clear, it will become evident
that the foundations of our modern democracy were deeply laid in the
Thirteenth Century, and that the spirit of what was best in the
aspiration of people to be ruled by themselves, for themselves, and of
themselves had its birth in this precious seed time of so much that is
important for our modern life.</p>
<p>Lest it should be thought that this idea of the development of
democracy has been engendered merely in the enthusiastic ardor of
special admiration for the author's favorite century, it seems well to
call attention to the fact that historians in recent years have very
generally emphasized the role that the Thirteenth Century played in
the development of freedom. A typical example may be quoted from the
History of Anglo-Saxon Freedom by Professor James K. Hosmer,
[Footnote 31] who does not hesitate to say that "while in England
representative government was gradually developing during this
century, in Germany the cities were beginning to send deputies to the
Imperial Parliament and the Emperor, Frederick II., was allowing a
certain amount of representation in the Government of Sicily. In
Spain, Alfonso the Wise, of Castile, permitted the cities to send
representatives to the Cortez, and in France this same spirit
developed to such a degree that a representative parliament met at the
beginning of the Fourteenth Century." In none of these countries,
however, unfortunately did the spirit of representative government
continue to develop as in England and in many of them the privileges
obtained in the Thirteenth Century were subsequently lost.</p>
<p class="footnote">
[Footnote 31: Scribners, New York, 1890.]</p>
<p>Certain phases of the rise of the democratic spirit have already been
discussed, and the reader can only be referred to them now with the
definite idea of recognizing in them the democratic tendencies of the
time. What we have said about the trade guilds constitutes one
extremely important element of the movement which will be further
discussed in this chapter. After this comes the guild merchant in its
various forms. After all the Hanseatic League was only one
manifestation of these guilds. Its widespread influence in awakening
in people's minds the realization that they could do for themselves
much more, and secure success in their endeavors much better by their
own united efforts, than by anything that their accepted political
rulers could do or at least would do for them, will be readily
appreciated by all who read that chapter.</p>
<p>Hansa must have been a great enlightener for the Teutonic peoples. The
History of the league shows over and over again their political rulers
rather interfering with than fostering their commercial prosperity.
These rulers were always more than a little jealous of the wealth
which the citizens of these growing towns in their realm were able to
accumulate, and they showed it on more than one occasion. The history
of the Hansa towns exhibits the citizens doing everything to dissemble
the feelings of disaffection that inevitably came to them as the
result of their appreciation of the fact, that they could rule
themselves so much better than they were being ruled, and that they
could accomplish so much more for themselves by their commercial
combination with other cities than had ever been done for them by
these hereditary princes, who claimed so much yet gave so little in
their turn.</p>
<p>The training in self-government that came with the necessities
for defense as well as for the protection of commercial visitors from
other cities in the league, who trustfully came to deal with their
people, was an education in democracy such as could not fail to bring
results. The rise of the free cities in Germany represents the growth
of the democratic spirit down to our own time, better than any other
single set of manifestations that we have. The international relations
of these cities did more, as we have said, to broaden men's minds and
make them realize the brotherhood of man in spite of national
boundaries than any other factor in human history. Commerce has always
been a great leveler and such it proved to be in these early days in
Germany, only it must not be thought that these German cities had but
faint glimmerings of the great purpose they were engaged in, for
seldom has the spirit of popular government risen higher than with
them.</p>
<p>How clearly the Teutonic mind had grasped the idea of democracy can be
best appreciated perhaps from the attitude of the Swiss in this
matter. These hardy mountaineers whose difficult country and rather
severe climate separate them effectually from the other nations, soon
learned the advisability of ruling themselves for their own benefit.
Before the end of the Thirteenth Century they had formed a defensive
and offensive union among themselves against the Hapsburgs, and though
for a time overborne by the influence of this house after its head
ascended the Imperial throne, immediately on Rudolph's death they
proceeded to unite themselves still more firmly together. They then
formed the famous league of 1291 which represents so important a step
in the democracy of modern times. The formal document which
constituted this league a federal government deserves to be quoted. It
is the first great declaration of independence, and its ideas were to
crop out in many another declaration in the after times. It is an
original document in the strictest sense of the word. It runs as
follows:</p>
<p class="footnote">
"Know all men that we, the people of the valley of Uri, the
community of the valley of Schwiz, and the mountaineers of the lower
valley, seeing the malice of the times, have solemnly agreed and
bound ourselves by oath to aid and defend each other with all our
might and main, with our lives and property, both within and
without our boundaries each at his own expense, against every enemy
whatever who shall attempt to molest us, either singly or
collectively. This is our ancient covenant. Whoever hath a lord let
him obey him according to his bounden duty. We have decreed that we
shall accept no magistrate in our valleys who shall have obtained
his office for a price, or who is not a native or resident among us.
Every difference among us shall be decided by our wisest men; and
whoever shall reject their award shall be compelled by the other
confederates. Whoever shall wilfully commit a murder shall suffer
death, and he who shall attempt to screen the murderer from justice
shall be banished from our valleys. An incendiary shall lose his
privileges as a free member of the community, and whoever harbors
him shall make good the damage. Whoever robs or molests another
shall make full restitution out of the property he possesses among
us. Everyone shall acknowledge the authority of a chief magistrate
in either of the valleys. If internal quarrels arise, and one of the
parties shall refuse fair satisfaction, the confederates shall
support the other party. This covenant for our common weal, shall,
God willing, endure forever."</p>
<p>In England democracy was fostered in the guilds, which, as we have
already seen in connection with the cathedrals, proved the sources of
education and intellectual development in nearly every mode of thought
and art. The most interesting feature of these guilds was the fact
that they were not institutions suggested to the workmen and tradesmen
by those above them, but were the outgrowth of the spirit of self help
and organization which, came over mankind during this century. At the
beginning they were scarcely more than simple beneficial associations
meant to be aids in times of sickness and trial, and to make the
parting of families and especially the death of the head of the family
not quite so difficult for the survivors, since affiliated brother
workmen remained behind who would care for them. During this century,
however, the spirit of democracy, that is the organized effort of the
people to take care of themselves, better their conditions, and add to
their own happiness, led to the development of the guilds in a fashion
that it is rather difficult for generations of the modern time to
understand, for our trades' unions do not, as yet at least,
present anything that quite resembles their work in our times.</p>
<p>It was because of the effective social work of these guilds that
Urbain Gohier, the well-known French socialist and writer on
sociological subjects, was able to say not long ago in the North
American Review:</p>
<p>"When the workmen of the European Continent demand 'the three
eights'—eight hours of work, eight hours of rest and refreshment,
physical and mental, and eight hours of sleep—some of them are aware
of the fact that this reform already exists in the Anglo-Saxon
countries; but all are ignorant of this other fact that, during the
Middle Ages, in an immense number of labor corporations and cities, a
work-day was often only nine, eight and even seven hours long. Nor
have they ever been told that every Saturday, and on the eve of over
two dozen holidays, work was stopped everywhere at four o'clock." The
Saturday half holiday began it may be said even earlier, namely at the
Vesper Hour which according to medieval church customs was some time
between two and three p. m. and the same was true on the vigils, as
the eves of the important church festivals were called.</p>
<p>The only possible way to give a reasonably good idea of the spirit of
the old-time guilds which succeeded in accomplishing such a wonderful
social revolution, is to quote some of their rules, which serve to
show their intents and purposes at least, even though they may not
always have fulfilled their aims. Their rules regard two things
particularly—the religious and the social functions of the guild.
There was a fine for absence from the special religious services held
for the members but also a fine of equal amount for absence from the
annual banquet. In this they resemble the rules of the religious
orders which were coming to be widely known at the end of the Twelfth
and the beginning of the Thirteenth Century, and according to which
the members of the religious community were required quite as strictly
to be present at daily recreation, that is, at the hour of
conversation after meals, as at daily prayer. An interesting phase of
the social rules of the guild is that a member was expected to bring
his wife with him, or if not his wife then his sweetheart. They were
franker in these matters in this simpler age and doubtless the
custom encouraged matrimony a little bit more than our modern colder
customs.</p>
<p>As giving a fair idea of the ordinances of the pre-Reformation guilds
in their original shape the rules of the Guild of St. Luke at Lincoln,
may be cited. St. Luke had been chosen as patron because according to
tradition he was an artist as well as an evangelist. The patron saint
was chosen always so that he might be a model of life as well as a
protector in Heaven. Its members were the painters, guilders,
stainers, and alabaster men of the city. The first rule provides that
on the Sunday next after the feast of St. Luke all the brothers and
sisters of the Guild shall, with their officers, go in procession from
an appointed place, carrying a great candle, to the Cathedral Church
of Lincoln, and there every two of the brethren and sisters shall
offer one half-penny or more after their devotion, and then shall
offer the great candle before an image of St. Luke within the church.
And any who were absent without lawful cause shall forfeit one pound
of wax to the sustentation of the said great candle.</p>
<p>On the same Sunday, "for love and amity and good communication to be
had for the several weal of the fraternity," the guildmen dined
together, every brother paying for himself and his wife, or
sweetheart, the sum of four pence. Absentees were fined one pound of
wax towards the aforesaid, candle.</p>
<p>The third rule provided that four "mornspeeches"—that its business
meetings—should be held each year, "for ordering and good rule to be
had and made amongst them." Absentees from a mornspeech forfeited one
pound of wax to St. Luke's candle. Another rule provided that the
decision of ambiguities or doubts about the forfeitures prescribed
should be referred to the mayor and four aldermen of the city. Rules 4
to 11, and also 13, regulate the taking of apprentices and the setting
up in trade; forbid the employing of strangers; provide for the
settlement of disputes and the examination of work not sufficiently
done after the sample. Already the tendency to limit the number of
workmen that might be employed which was later to prove a stumbling
block to artistic progress is to be noted. On the other hand the
effort to keep work up to a certain standard, which was to mean so
much for artistic accomplishment in the next few generations
must be noted as a compensatory feature of the Guild regulations.</p>
<SPAN name="opp381">{opp381}</SPAN>
<p class="image">
<ANTIMG alt="" src="images/i_opp381a.jpg" border=1><br/>
DOORWAY (LINCOLN)</p>
<p class="image">
<ANTIMG alt="" src="images/i_opp381b.jpg" border=1><br/>
NAVE (DURHAM CATHEDRAL)</p>
<p class="image">
<ANTIMG alt="" src="images/i_opp381c.jpg" border=1><br/>
BROKEN ARCH (ST. MARY'S, YORK, CLIMAX OF GOTHIC)</p>
<p>Rule 12 directs that "when it shall happen any brother or sister of
the said fraternity to depart and decease from the world, at his first
Mass the gracemen and wardens (skyvens) for the time being shall offer
of the goods and chattels of the said fraternity, two pence; and at
his eighth day, or thirtieth day, every brother and sister shall give
to a poor creature a token made by the dean, for which tokens every
brother and sister shall pay the dean a fixed sum of money, and with
the money thus raised he shall buy white bread to give to the poor
creatures" holding the tokens, the bread to be distributed at the
church of the parish in which the deceased lived.</p>
<p>This twelfth rule with regard to the manner of giving charity is
particularly striking, because it shows a deliberate effort to avoid
certain dangers, the evil possibilities of which our modern organized
charity has emphasized. According to this rule of the Guild of St.
Luke's at Lincoln, all the members were bound to give a certain amount
in charity, for the benefit of a deceased member. This was not,
however, by direct alms, but by means of tokens for which they paid a
fixed price to the Dean, who redeemed the tokens when they were
presented by the deserving poor. This guaranteed that each member
would give the fixed sum in charity and at the same time safeguarded
the almsgiving from any abuses, since the member of the guild himself
would be likely to know something of the poor person and his
deservingness, and if not there was always the question of the Dean
being informed with regard to the needs of the case. All of this was
accomplished, however, without hurting the feelings of the recipients
of the charity, since they felt that it was done not for them but for
the benefit of a deceased member.</p>
<p>How much the guilds came to influence the life of the people during
the next two centuries may be best appreciated from their great
increase in number and wealth.</p>
<p>In England, it is computed that at the beginning of the Sixteenth
Century there were thirty thousand of these institutions spread over
the country. The county of Norfolk alone had nine hundred, of which
number the small town of Wymondham had at least eleven still
known by names, one—the Guild of Holy Trinity, Wymondham—being
possessed of a guild-hall of its own, whilst it and the other guilds
of the town are said to have been "well endowed with lands and
tenements." In Bury St. Edmunds, Suffolk, there were twenty-three
guilds; Boston, Lincolnshire, had fourteen, of which the titles and
other particulars are known, whilst in London their number must have
been very great. Of the London trade guilds, Stow, the Elizabethan
antiquary, records the names of sixty of sufficient importance to
entitle their representatives to places at the civic banquets in the
reign of Henry VIII. Many of them are still in existence, having been
spared at the time of the Reformation on the plea that they were
trading or secular associations. Fifteen of the largest of
them—including the merchant tailors, the goldsmiths and the
stationers—have at the present time an annual income of over $50,000
each.</p>
<p>The reasons for their popularity can be readily found in the many
social needs which they cared for. Socialistic cooperation has,
perhaps, never been carried so far as in these medieval institutions
which were literally "of the people, by the people, and for the
people." Often their regulation made provisions for insurance against
poverty, fire, and sometimes against burglary. Frequently they
provided schoolmasters for the schools. Their funds they loaned out to
needy brethren in small sums on easy terms, whilst trade and other
disputes likely to give rise to ill-feeling and contention were
constantly referred to the guilds for arbitration. One of the rules of
the Guild of our Lady at Wymondham thus ordains, that for no manner of
cause should any of the brothers or sisters of the fraternity go to
law till the officers of the guild had been informed of the
circumstances and had done their best to settle the dispute and
restore "unity and love betwixt the parties." To assist at the burial
of deceased brethren, and to aid in providing for the celebration of
obits for the repose of their souls, were duties incumbent on all,
defaulters without good excuse being subject to fines and censure.</p>
<p>It must not be thought that these tendencies to true democracy were
confined to the trades guilds, however. The historian of the merchant
guilds has demonstrated that they had the same spirit and this
was especially true for the great guild merchant. He says:</p>
<p class="cite">
"To this category of powerful affinities must be added the Gild
Merchant. The latter was from the outset a compact body emphatically
characterized by fraternal solidarity of interests, a protective
union that naturally engendered a consciousness of strength and a
spirit of independence. As the same men generally directed the
counsels of both the town and the Gild, there would be a gradual,
unconscious extension of the unity of the one to the other, the
cohesive force of the Gild making itself felt throughout the whole
municipal organism. But the influence of the fraternity was material
as well as moral. It constituted a bond of union between the
heterogeneous sokes (classes of tenants) of a borough; the townsmen
might be exclusively amenable to the courts of different lords, but,
if engaged in trade within the town, they were all members of one
and the same Gild Merchant. The independent regulation of trade also
accustomed the burgesses to self-government, and constituted an
important step toward autonomy; the town judiciary was always more
dependent upon the crown or mesne lord than was the Gild Merchant."</p>
<p>Because of the supreme interest in everything connected with
Shakespeare, the existence of one of the most important guilds in
Stratford, has led to the illustration of guilds' works there better
than for any English town during this period. The Guild of the Holy
Cross was the most important institution of Stratford and enthusiastic
Shakespeare scholars have applied themselves to find out every detail
of its history as far as it is now available, in order to make clear
the conditions—social and religious—that existed in the great
dramatist's birthplace. Halliwell, in his Descriptive Calendar of the
Records of Stratford on Avon, and Sidney Lee, in his Stratford on Avon
in the Time of the Shakespeares, have gathered together much of this
information:—"The Guild has lasted, wrote its chief officer in 1309,
for many, many years and its beginning was from time whereunto the
memory of man reaches not." Bowden, in his volume on the Religion of
Shakespeare, has a number of the most important details with regard to
Stratford's Guild. The earliest extant documents with regard to it are
from the Reign of Henry III., 1216-1272, and include a deed of
gift by one William Sede, of a tenement to the Guild, and an
indulgence granted October 7th, 1270, by Giffard, Bishop of Wooster,
of forty days to all sincere penitents who after having duly confessed
had conferred benefits on the Guild.</p>
<p>By the close of the reign of Edward I., at the beginning of the
Fourteenth Century, the Guild was wealthy in houses and lands, and the
foundation was laid of its chapel and almshouses which, with the hall
of meeting—the "Rode or Reed Hall"—stood where the Guild Hall is at
the present day. Edward III. and Richard II., during the Fourteenth
Century, confirmed the rights of the Guild and even added to its
privileges. Though it was a purely local institution, the fame of its
good works had spread so wide during these next centuries that
affiliation with it became a distinction, and the nobility were
attracted to its ranks. George, Duke of Clarence, brother of Edward,
with his wife and children, and the Earl of Warwick, and the Lady
Margaret were counted among its members, and merchants of distant
towns counted it an honor to belong to it. Later, also, Judge
Littleton, one of the famous founders of English law, was on its roll
of membership.</p>
<p>The objects of the Guild were many and varied and touched the social
life of Stratford at every point. The first object was mutual prayer.
The Guild maintained five priests or chaplains who were to say masses
daily, hour by hour, from six to ten o'clock for its members, it being
expected that some of them would be present at each of the masses. Out
of the fees of the Guild one wax candle was to be kept alight every
day throughout the year at every mass in the church before the rood,
or cross, "so that God and our Blessed Virgin and the Venerated Cross
may keep and guard all the brethren and sisters of the Guilds from
every ill." The second object was charity, under which was included
all the various Works of Mercy. The needs of any brother or sister who
had fallen into poverty or been robbed were to be provided for "as
long as he bears himself rightly towards the brethren." When a brother
died all the brethren were bound to follow the body to the church and
to pray for his soul at its burial. The Guild candle and eight smaller
ones were to be kept burning by the body from the time of death
till the funeral. When a poor man died in the town the brethren and
sisters were, for their soul's health, to find four wax candles, a
sheet, and a hearse cloth for the corpse. This rule also applied in
the event of a stranger's death, if the stranger had not the necessary
means for burial. Nor were the efforts of the Guild at Stratford
devoted solely to the alleviation of the ills of mankind and the more
serious purposes of life. Once a year, in Easter Week, a feast of the
members was held in order to foster peace and true brotherly love
among them. At this time offerings were made for the poor in order
that they too might share in the happiness of the festival time. There
was attendance at church before the feasting and a prayer was offered
by all the "brethren and sisters that God and our Blessed Virgin and
the Venerated Cross in whose honor we have come together will keep us
from all ills and sins." This frequent reference to the Cross will be
better understood if it is recalled that the Guild at Stratford bore
the name of the Guild of the Holy Cross, and the figure of the
crucified One was one of its most respected symbols and was always
looked upon as a special object of veneration on the part of the
members.</p>
<p>The thoroughly progressive spirit of the Guild at Stratford will
perhaps be best appreciated by the modern mind from the fact, that to
it the town owed the foundation of its famous free school. During the
Thirteenth and Fourteenth centuries the study of grammar, and of the
various theoretical branches, was not considered the essential part of
an education. Gradually, however, there had arisen the feeling that
all the children should be taught the ground-work of the vulgar
tongue, and that those whose parents wished it should receive
education in Latin also; hence the establishment of grammar schools,
that at Stratford being founded for the children of the members of the
Guild about the middle of the Fifteenth Century. This was only the
normal development of the earlier spirit of the Guild which enabled it
to meet the growing social needs of the time. It was at this school,
as reconstituted under Edward VI., that Shakespeare was educated, and
the reestablishment by Edward was only in response to the many
complaints which arose because of the absence of the school after its
suppression by Henry VIII. The fact that Shakespeare was
educated at an Edward VI. grammar school, has often given occasion for
commentators to point out that it was practically the Reformation in
England which led to the establishment of free schools. Any such
suggestion, however, can be made only in complete ignorance of the
preexisting state of affairs in which the people, by organization,
succeeded in accomplishing so much for themselves.</p>
<p>As a matter of fact the Guild at Stratford, as in most of the towns in
England—for we have taken this as an example only because it is
easier to get at the details of its history—was the most important
factor in the preservation of social order, in the distribution of
charity, in the providing of education, and even the maintenance of
the security of the life and property of its inhabitants. When it was
dissolved, in 1547, Stratford found itself in a chaotic state and had
to petition Edward VI. to reconstitute the Guild as a civil
corporation, which he did by charter in 1553.</p>
<p>After this consideration of the guilds and their purpose and success,
it is no wonder that we should declare that the wind of the spirit of
democracy was blowing in England and carrying away the old landmarks
of absolute government. It is to the spirit thus fostered that must be
attributed the marvelous progress in representative government, the
steps of which we recall.</p>
<p>In 1215, all England united against the odious John Lackland and
obliged him to grant the Magna Charta—a declaration of national
liberty.</p>
<p>In 1257, the Provisions of Oxford, under Henry III., established, for
the moment, the stated recurrence of the great national council of
Parliament.</p>
<p>In 1265, under the same Prince, the earl of Leicester admitted to
Parliament the knights of the shire and the representatives of the
townspeople, who formed later the lower house, or House of Commons,
while those personally summoned to attend by the king from the great
nobles formed the upper house, or House of Lords.</p>
<p>Beginning with the year 1295, in the reign of Edward I., the
attendance of the county and town members became regular, making
Parliament really representative of the country.</p>
<p>In 1309, in the reign of Edward II., Parliament revealed its possible
strength by putting conditions on its vote for taxes.</p>
<p>There were other factors at work, however, and one of them at least,
because of its importance, deserves to be recalled here. In the
chapter on Great Beginnings of Modern Commerce we call attention to
the fact, that the Crusades were responsible to a great degree for the
spirit of enterprise which led to the formation of the Lombard league
of cities, and later to the great Hanseatic League, which seems to
have taken at least its incentive from the Southern Confederation. In
the chapter on Louis IX. we point out that the Crusades, and his
connection with them, far from being blots on Louis's career must
rather be considered as manifestations of the great heart of the time
which was awakening to all needs, and had its religious aspirations
stirred so deeply that men were ready to give up everything in order
to follow an idea. One thing is certain, the Crusades did more to set
ferments at work in the social organization of Europe than would have
been possible by any other movement. These ferments brought about two
results, one the uplift of the common people, the other the
centralization of power in the hands of the kings with the gradual
diminution of the influence of the nobility. While fostering the
spirit of democracy on the one hand, they gave birth to the spirit of
nationality and to all that this has accomplished in modern history.</p>
<p>Storrs, in his life of St. Bernard, recently issued, has given
expression to this thought in a very striking fashion. He says:</p>
<p class="cite">
"It used to be the fashion to regard the Crusades as mere fantastic
exhibitions of a temporary turbulent religious fanaticism, aiming at
ends wholly visionary, and missing them, wasting the best life of
Europe in colossal and bloody undertakings, and leaving effects only
of evil for the time which came after. More reasonable views now
prevail; and while the impulse in which the vast movement took its
rise is recognized as passionate and semi-barbaric, it is seen that
many effects followed which were beneficial rather than harmful,
which could not perhaps have been at the time in other ways
realized. As I have already suggested, properties were to an
important extent redistributed in Europe, and the
constitutions of states were favorably affected. Lands were sold at
low prices by those who were going on the distant expeditions, very
probably, as they knew, never to return; and horses and armor, with
all martial equipments, were bought at high prices by the Jews, who
could not hold land, and the history of whom throughout the Middle
Ages is commonly traced in fearful lines of blood and fire, but who
increased immeasurably their movable wealth through these transfers
of property. Communes bought liberties by large contributions to the
needs of their lord; and their liberties, once secured, were
naturally confirmed and augmented, as the years went on. The smaller
tended to be absorbed in the larger; the larger often to come more
strictly under royal control, thus increasing the power of the
sovereign—which meant at the time, general laws, instead of local,
a less minutely oppressive administration, the furtherance of the
movement toward national unity. It is a noticeable fact that Italy
took but a comparatively small part in the Crusades; and the long
postponement of organic union between different parts of the
magnificent peninsula is not without relation to this. The influence
which operated elsewhere in Europe to efface distinction of custom
and language in separate communities, to override and extinguish
local animosities, to make scattered peoples conscious of kinship,
did not operate there; and the persistent severance of sections from
each other, favored, of course, by the run of the rivers and the
vast separating walls of the Apenines, was the natural consequence
of the want of this powerful unifying force." [Footnote 32]</p>
<p class="footnote">
[Footnote 32: Storrs, "Bernard of Chairvaux," New York
(Scribners), 1897, pp. 544-45. ]</p>
<p>As a matter of fact very few people realize how much was accomplished
for the spirit of democracy, for liberty, for true progress, as
regards the rights of men of all classes, and for the feeling of the
brotherhood of man itself, by the Crusades. A practical money-making
age may consider them examples of foolish religious fanaticism, but
those who have studied them most profoundly and with most sympathy,
who are deeply interested in the social amelioration which they
brought about, and, above all, those who look at them in the higher
poetic spirit of what they did to lift man above the sordid
cares of everyday life, see them in a far different way. Charles
Kingsley sang in the poem of The Saints Tragedy:</p>
<p class="cite">
"Tell us how our stout crusading fathers<br/>
Fought and bled for God and not for gold."</p>
<p>But quite apart from the poetry of them, from the practical side much
can be said which even the most matter of fact of men will appreciate.
Here, for instance, are a series of paragraphs from the history of the
Middle Ages by George Washington Greene, which he confesses to have
taken chiefly from the French, [Footnote 33] which will make clear
something of the place these great expeditions should be considered as
holding in the history of democracy and of liberty:</p>
<p class="footnote">
[Footnote 33: New York, Appleton, 1867.]</p>
<p class="cite">
"Christendom had not spent in vain its treasures and its blood in
the holy wars. Its immense sacrifices were repaid by immense
results, and the evils which these great expeditions necessarily
brought with them were more than compensated for by the advantages
which they procured for the whole of Europe.
<br/><br/>
"The Crusades saved Europe from the Mussulman invasion and this was
their immediate good. Their influence was felt, too, in a manner
less direct, but not less useful. The Crusades had been preached by
a religion of equality in a society divided by odious distinctions.
All had taken part in them, the weak as well as the strong, the serf
and the baron, man and woman, and it was by them that the equality
of man and woman, which Christianity taught, was made a social fact.
St. Louis declared that he could do nothing without the consent of
his queen, his wife. It was from this period that we must date that
influence of woman which gave rise to chivalric courtesy, the first
step towards refinement of manners and civilization. The poor, too,
were the adopted children of the Christian chivalry of the Crusades.
The celebrated orders of Palestine were instituted for the
protection of poor pilgrims. The Knights of the hospitals called the
poor their masters. Surely no lesson was more needed by these proud
barons of the Middle Ages than that of charity and humility.</p>
<p class="cite">
"These ideas were the first to shake the stern despotism of
feudality, by opposing to it the generous principles of chivalry
which sprang all armed from the Crusades. Bound to the military
orders by a solemn vow—and in the interests of all Christendom—the
knight felt himself free from feudal dependence, and raised above
national limits, as the immediate warrior and servant of the united
Christendom and of God. Chivalry founded not upon territorial
influence, but upon personal distinction, necessarily weakened
nobility by rendering it accessible to all, and diminishing the
interval which separated the different classes of society. Every
warrior who had distinguished himself by his valor could kneel
before the king to be dubbed a knight, and rise up the equal, the
superior even, of powerful vassals. The poorest knight could sit at
the king's table while the noble son of a duke or prince was
excluded, unless he had won the golden spurs of knighthood. Another
way by which the Crusades contributed to the decay of feudalism was
by favoring the enfranchisement of serfs, even without the consent
of their masters. Whoever took the cross became free, just as every
slave becomes free on touching the soil of England or France.
<br/><br/>
"The communities whose development is to be referred to the period
of the Crusades, multiplied rapidly; the nobility gladly granting
charters and privileges in exchange for men and money. With the
communities the royal power grew, and that of the aristocracy
decreased. The royal domain was enlarged, by the escheating of a
great number of fiefs which had been left vacant by the death of
their lords. The kings protected the communities, favored their
enfranchisement, and employed them usefully against insubordinate
vassals. The extension of the royal power favored the organization
of the nation, by establishing a principle of unity, for till then,
and with that multitude of masters, the nation had been little else
than an agglomeration of provinces, strangers to one another, and
destitute of any common bond or common interest. The great vassals,
themselves, often united under the royal banner, became accustomed
during these distant expeditions to submission and discipline, and
learned to recognize a legitimate authority; and if they lost by
this submission a part of their personal power, they gained in
compensation the honorable distinctions of chivalry.
<br/><br/>
"But it was not the national feeling alone which was fostered by the
Crusades. Relations of fraternity, till then wholly unknown, grew up
between different nations, and softened the deep-rooted antipathy of
races. The knights, whom a common object united in common dangers,
became brothers in arms and formally formed permanent ties of
friendship. That barbarous law which gave the feudal lord a right to
call every man his serf who settled in his domains was softened.
Stranger and enemy seemed to be synonymous, and 'the Crusaders,' say
the chroniclers of the times, 'although divided by language, seemed
to form only one people, by their love for God and their neighbor.'
And without coloring the picture too warmly, and making all due
allowance for the exaggerations which were so natural to the first
recorders of such a movement, we may say that human society was
founded and united and Europe began to pass from the painful period
of organization, to one of fuller and more rapid development."</p>
<p>Here in reality modern democracy had its rise, striking its roots deep
into the disintegrating soil of the old feudalism whence it was never
to be plucked, and though at times it languished it was to remain ever
alive until its luxuriant growth in recent times.</p>
<p class="image">
<ANTIMG alt="" src="images/i391.jpg" border=1><br/>
ANIMALS FROM BESTIARIUM, THIRTEENTH CENTURY MS.</p>
<br/>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />