Disasters followed Balder's death. An immense fire burned up the world and the human race. The giants invaded Asgard and slaughtered its inhabitants. Odin fell a victim to the mighty wolf Fenris. Thor, having killed the Midgard serpent, was suffocated with the venom which the dying monster cast over him. The end of all things arrived. This was the catastrophe which had been predicted of old—the "Twilight of the Gods."
Besides the conception of Hel, the Northmen also framed the idea of Valhalla, [6] the abode to which Odin received the souls of those who had died, not ingloriously in their beds, but on the field of battle. A troop of divine maidens, the Valkyries, [7] rode through the air on Odin's service to determine the issue of battles and to select brave warriors for Valhalla. There on the broad plains they fought with one another by day, but at evening the slayer and the slain returned to Odin's hall to feast mightily on boar's flesh and drink deep draughts of mead.
As with most heathen religions that of the Northmen was full of terrors. Their lively imagination peopled the world with many strange figures. Fiends and monsters inhabited the marshes, giants lived in the dark forest, evil spirits haunted all solitary places, and ghosts stalked over the land by night. The use of charms and spells to guard against such creatures passed over into Christian times. Their memory also survives in folk tales, which are full of allusions to giants, dwarfs, goblins, and other supernatural beings.
Christianity first gained a foothold in Denmark through the work of RomanCatholic missionaries sent out by Charlemagne's son, Louis the Pious. [8]Two centuries elapsed before the Danes were completely converted. FromDenmark the new faith spread to Sweden. Norway owed its conversion largelyto the crusading work of King Olaf (1016-1029 A.D.), whose zeal forChristianity won him the title of Olaf the Saint. The Norwegians carriedChristianity to Iceland, where it supplanted the old heathenism in theyear 1000 A.D. With the general adoption of the Christian religion inScandinavian lands, the Viking Age drew to an end.
[Illustration: NORSE METAL WORK (Museum, Copenhagen) A door from a church in Iceland; date, tenth or eleventh century. The iron knob is inlaid with silver. The slaying of a dragon is represented above and below is shown the Midgard serpent.]
The Northmen were still heathen when they set forth on their expeditions of plunder and conquest. Doubtless the principal cause of this Viking movement is to be sought in the same hunger for land which prompted the Germanic invasions and, in fact, has led to colonial expansion in all ages. By the ninth century Scandinavia could no longer support its rapidly growing population, and enforced emigration was the natural consequence. The political condition of Scandinavia at this time also helps to explain the Viking expansion. Denmark and Norway had now become strong kingdoms, whose rulers forced all who would not submit to their sway to leave the country. Thus it resulted that the numbers of the emigrants were swelled by exiles, outlaws, and other adventurers who turned to the sea in hope of gain.
The Northmen started out as pirates and fell on the coasts of England, France, and Germany. In their shallow boats they also found it easy to ascend the rivers and reach places lying far inland. The Northmen directed their attacks especially against the churches and monasteries, which were full of treasure and less easily defended than fortified towns. Their raids inspired such great terror that a special prayer was inserted in the church services: "From the fury of the Northmen, good Lord, deliver us."
At first the incursions of the Northmen took place only in summer, but before long they began to winter in the lands which they visited. Year by year their fleets became larger, and their attacks changed from mere forays of pirates to well-organized expeditions of conquest and colonization. Early in the ninth century we find them making permanent settlements in Ireland, and for a time bringing a considerable part of that country under their control. The first cities on Irish soil, including Dublin and Limerick, were founded by the Northmen. Almost simultaneously with the attacks on Ireland came those on the western coast of Scotland. In the course of their westward expeditions the Northmen had already discovered the Faroe Islands, the Orkneys, the Shetlands and the Hebrides. These barren and inhospitable islands received large numbers of Norse immigrants and long remained under Scandinavian control.
[Illustration: Map, DISCOVERIES OF THE NORTHMEN IN THE WEST]
The Northmen soon discovered Iceland, where Irish monks had previously settled. Colonization began in 874 A.D. [9] One of the most valuable of the sagas—the "Book of the Land-taking"—describes the emigration to the island and enumerates the Viking chiefs who took part in the movement. Iceland soon became almost a second Norway in language, literature, and customs. It remains to-day an outpost of Scandinavian civilization.
The first settlement of Greenland was the work of an Icelander, Eric the Red, who reached the island toward the end of the tenth century. He called the country Greenland, not because it was green, but because, as he said, "there is nothing like a good name to attract settlers." Intercourse between Greenland and Iceland was often dangerous, and at times was entirely interrupted by ice. Leif Ericsson, the son of Eric the Red, established a new route of commerce and travel by sailing from Greenland to Norway by way of the Hebrides. This was the first voyage made directly across the Atlantic. Norway and Greenland continued to enjoy a flourishing trade for several centuries. After the connection with Norway had been severed, the Greenlanders joined the Eskimos and mingled with that primitive people.
Two of the sagas give accounts of a voyage which Leif Ericsson about 1000 A.D. made to regions lying southward from Greenland. In the sagas they are called Helluland (stone-land), Markland (wood-land), and Vinland. Just what part of the coast of North America these countries occupied is an unsolved problem. Leif Ericsson and the Greenlanders who followed him seem to have reached at least the shores of Labrador, Newfoundland, and Nova Scotia. They may have gone even farther southward, for the sagas describe regions where the climate was mild enough for wild vines and wild wheat to grow. The Northmen, however, did not follow up their explorations by lasting settlements. Before long all memory of the far western lands faded from the minds of men. The curtain fell on the New World, not again to rise until the time of Columbus and Cabot.
In the Viking movement westward across the Atlantic the Norwegians took the leading part. They also sailed far northward, rounding the North Cape and reaching the mouth of the Dwina River in the White Sea. Viking sailors, therefore, have the credit for undertaking the first voyages of exploration into the Arctic.
The Swedes, on account of their geographical position, were naturally the most active in expeditions to eastern lands. At a very early date they crossed the Gulf of Bothnia and paid frequent visits to Finland. Its rude inhabitants, the Finns, were related in language, and doubtless in blood also, to the Huns, Magyars, and other Asiatic peoples. Sweden ruled Finland throughout the Middle Ages. Russia obtained control of the country during the eighteenth century, but Swedish influence has made it largely Scandinavian in civilization.
The activities of the Swedes also led them to establish settlements on the southern shore of the Baltic and far inland along the waterways leading into Russia. An old Russian chronicler declares that in 862 A.D. the Slavs sent an embassy to the Swedes, whom they called "Rus," saying, "Our country is large and rich, but there is no order in it; come and rule over us." The Swedes were not slow to accept the invitation. Their leader, Ruric, established a dynasty which reigned in Russia for more than seven hundred years. [10]
The first Russian state centered in the city of Novgorod, near Lake Ilmen, where Ruric built a strong fortress. [11] Novgorod during the Middle Ages was an important station on the trade route between Constantinople and the Baltic. Some of Ruric's followers, passing southward along the Dnieper River, took possession of the small town of Kiev. It subsequently became the capital of the Scandinavian possessions in Russia.
The Northmen in Russia maintained close intercourse with their mother country for about two centuries. During this period they did much to open up northeastern Europe to the forces of civilization and progress. Colonies were founded, cities were built, commerce was fostered, and a stable government was established. Russia under the sway of the Northmen became for the first time a truly European state.
Having penetrated the wilds of Russia, it was comparatively easy for the Northmen to sail down the Russian rivers to the Black Sea and thence to Constantinople. Some of them went as raiders and several times devastated the neighborhood of Constantinople, until bought off by the payment of tribute. [12] Many Northmen also joined the bodyguard of the eastern emperor and saw service under his standard in different parts of the Mediterranean.
During the reign of Vladimir, a descendant of Ruric, the Christian religion gained its first foothold in Russia. We are told that Vladimir, having made up his mind to embrace a new faith, sent commissioners to Rome and Constantinople, and also to the adherents of Islam and Judaism. His envoys reported in favor of the Greek Church, for their barbarian imagination had been so impressed by the majesty of the ceremonies performed in Sancta Sophia that "they did not know whether they were on earth or in heaven." Vladimir accepted their report, ordered the idols of Kiev to be thrown into the Dnieper, and had himself and his people baptized according to the rites of the Greek Church. At the same time he married a sister of the reigning emperor at Constantinople.
Vladimir's decision to adopt the Greek form of Christianity is justly regarded as one of the formative influences in Russian history. It meant that the Slavs were to come under the religious influence of Constantinople, instead of under that of Rome. Furthermore, it meant that Byzantine civilization, then incomparably superior to the rude culture of the western peoples, would henceforth gain an entrance into Russia. The country profited by this rich civilization and during the early part of the Middle Ages took a foremost place in Europe.
No part of western Europe suffered more severely from the Northmen than France. They first appeared on the French coast toward the end of Charlemagne's reign. A well-known legend relates that the emperor, from window of his palace once saw the dark sails of the Vikings and wept at the thought of the misery which these daring pirates would some day inflict upon his realm.
After Charlemagne's death the wars of his grandsons left the empire defenseless, and the Northmen in consequence redoubled their attacks. They sailed far up the Seine, the Loire, and the Garonne to plunder and murder. Paris, then a small but important city, lay in the path of the invaders and more than once suffered at their hands. The destruction by the Northmen of many monasteries was a loss to civilization, for the monastic establishments at this time were the chief centers of learning and culture. [13]
The heavy hand of the Northmen also descended on Germany. The rivers Scheldt, Meuse, Rhine, and Elbe enabled them to proceed at will into the heart of the country. Liège, Cologne, Strassburg, Hamburg, and other great Frankish cities fell before them. Viking raiders even plundered Aachen and stabled their horses in the church which Charlemagne had built there. [14] Thus the ancient homeland of the Franks was laid completely waste.
The history of the Northmen in France began in 911 A.D., when the Carolingian king granted to a Viking chieftain, Rollo, dominion over the region about the lower Seine. Rollo on his part agreed to accept Christianity and to acknowledge the French ruler as his lord. It is said, however, that he would not kneel and kiss the king's foot as a mark of homage, and that the follower who performed the unwelcome duty did it so awkwardly as to overturn the king, to the great amusement of the assembled Northmen. The story illustrates the Viking sense of independence.
The district ceded to Rollo developed into what in later times was known as the duchy of Normandy. Its Scandinavian settlers, henceforth called Normans, [15] soon became French in language and culture. It was amazing to see how quickly the descendants of wild sea-rovers put off their heathen ways and made their new home a Christian land, noted for its churches, monasteries, and schools. Normandy remained practically independent till the beginning of the thirteenth century, when a French king added it to his possessions. [16]
The Normans helped to found the medieval French monarchy. During the tenth century the old Carolingian line of rulers, which had already died out in Germany and Italy, [17] came also to an end in France. A new dynasty was then founded by a nobleman named Hugh Capet, who secured the aid of the powerful Norman dukes in his efforts to gain the throne. The accession of Hugh Capet took place in 987 A.D. His descendants reigned over France for almost exactly eight hundred years. [18]
* * * * *
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.
[Illustration: ALFRED THE GREAT A lofty bronze statue by H. Thorneycraft set up at Winchester Alfred's ancient capital. It was dedicated in 1901 A.D. on the thousandth anniversary of his death. The inscription reads:
"Alfred found learning dead,And he restored it,Education neglectedAnd he revived it,The laws powerlessAnd he gave them force,The Church debased,And he raised it,The land ravaged by a fearful enemyFrom which he delivered it."]
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.
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.
[Illustration: Map, ENGLAND UNDER ALFRED THE GREAT]
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."
[Illustration: ALFRED'S JEWEL (Ashmolean Museum, Oxford) A jewel of blue enamel inclosed in a setting of gold, with the words around it "Alfred had me wrought." Found at Athelney in the seventeenth century.]
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.
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.
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.
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.
[Illustration: A SCENE FROM THE BAYEUX TAPESTRY (Museum of Bayeux,Normandy)
The Bayeux Tapestry, which almost certainly belongs to the time of the Norman Conquest, is a strip of coarse linen cloth, about 230 feet long by 20 inches wide, embroidered in worsted thread of eight different colors. There are seventy-two scenes picturing various events in the history of the Norman Conquest. The illustration given above represents an attack of Norman cavalry on the English shield wall at the battle of Hastings.]
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."
[Illustration: Map, DOMINIONS OF WILLIAM THE CONQUEROR]
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.
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.
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.
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]
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
[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 Norsevik, 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 Norsesegya, "to say"; compare Germansagen.
[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 inby(Danish "town"), compareby-law, originally a law for a special town.
[21] "Meeting of wise men." The wordgemotormootwas used for any kind of formal meeting.
[22] See page 556.
[23] See page 325.
[24] See page 317.
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.
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.
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]
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
[Illustration: TRIAL BY COMBATFrom a manuscript of the fifteenth century.]
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.
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, 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.
[Illustration: MOUNTED KNIGHT Seal of Robert Fitzwalter, showing a mounted knight in complete mail armor; date about 1265 A.D.]
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
[Illustration: PLAN OF CHÂTEAU GAILLARDThe plan is intended to represent that of a typical castle, as the plan ofKirkstall Abbey represents that of a typical monastery.]
[Illustration: PIERREFONDS A castle near Paris built about 1400 A.D. by a brother of the king of France. It was dismantled in 1632 A.D., but was carefully restored in the nineteenth century by order of Napoleon III. The exterior faithfully reproduces the appearance of a medieval 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.
[Illustration: CHÂTEAU GAILLARD (RESTORED) The finest of all medieval castles. Located on a high hill overlooking the Seine about twenty miles from Rouen. Built by Richard the Lion hearted within a twelvemonth (1197-1198 AD) and by him called Saucy Castle. It was captured a few years later by the French king Philip Augustus and was dismantled early in the seventeenth century. The castle consisted of three distinct series of fortifications, besides the keep which in this case was merely a strong tower.]
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.
[Illustration: KING AND JESTERFrom a manuscript of the early fifteenth century.]
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.
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.
[Illustration: FALCONRYFrom a manuscript of the thirteenth century in the Bibliothèque Nationale,Paris.]
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.
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.
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.
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]
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.
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.
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.
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.
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]
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.
[Illustration: FARM WORK IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURYPlowing, Harrowing, Cutting Weeds, Reaping.]
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.
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.
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.
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.