บทที่ บทที่ 29 · Feudalism

HOW CENTRAL EUROPE, ATTACKED FROM THREE SIDES, BECAME AN ARMED

CAMP AND WHY EUROPE WOULD HAVE PERISHED WITHOUT THOSE PROFESSIONAL

SOLDIERS AND ADMINISTRATORS WHO WERE PART OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM

The following, then, is the state of Europe in the year one thousand,

when most people were so unhappy that they welcomed the prophecy

foretelling the approaching end of the world and rushed to the

monasteries, that the Day of Judgement might find them engaged upon

devout duties.

At an unknown date, the Germanic tribes had left their old home in Asia

and had moved westward into Europe. By sheer pressure of numbers they

had forced their way into the Roman Empire. They had destroyed the

great western empire, but the eastern part, being off the main route of

the great migrations, had managed to survive and feebly continued the

traditions of Rome’s ancient glory.

During the days of disorder which had followed, (the true “dark ages”

of history, the sixth and seventh centuries of our era,) the German

tribes had been persuaded to accept the Christian religion and had

recognised the Bishop of Rome as the Pope or spiritual head of the

world. In the ninth century, the organising genius of Charlemagne had

revived the Roman Empire and had united the greater part of western

Europe into a single state. During the tenth century this empire had

gone to pieces. The western part had become a separate kingdom, France.

The eastern half was known as the Holy Roman Empire of the German

nation, and the rulers of this federation of states then pretended that

they were the direct heirs of Cæsar and Augustus.

Unfortunately the power of the kings of France did not stretch beyond

the moat of their royal residence, while the Holy Roman Emperor was

openly defied by his powerful subjects whenever it suited their fancy

or their profit.

To increase the misery of the masses of the people, the triangle

of western Europe (look at page 128, please) was for ever exposed

to attacks from three sides. On the south lived the ever dangerous

Mohammedans. The western coast was ravaged by the Northmen. The eastern

frontier (defenceless except for the short stretch of the Carpathian

mountains) was at the mercy of hordes of Huns, Hungarians, Slavs and

Tartars.

The peace of Rome was a thing of the remote past, a dream of the “Good

Old Days” that were gone for ever. It was a question of “fight or die,”

and quite naturally people preferred to fight. Forced by circumstances,

Europe became an armed camp and there was a demand for strong

leadership. Both King and Emperor were far away. The frontiersmen (and

most of Europe in the year 1000 was “frontier”) must help themselves.

They willingly submitted to the representatives of the king who were

sent to administer the outlying districts, _provided they could protect

them against their enemies_.

Soon central Europe was dotted with small principalities, each one

ruled by a duke or a count or a baron or a bishop, as the case might

be, and organised as a fighting unit. These dukes and counts and barons

had sworn to be faithful to the king who had given them their “feudum”

(hence our word “feudal,”) in return for their loyal services and a

certain amount of taxes. But travel in those days was slow and the

means of communication were exceedingly poor. The royal or imperial

administrators therefore enjoyed great independence, and within the

boundaries of their own province they assumed most of the rights

which in truth belonged to the king.

[Illustration: THE NORSEMEN ARE COMING]

But you would make a mistake if you supposed that the people of the

eleventh century objected to this form of government. They supported

Feudalism because it was a very practical and necessary institution.

Their Lord and Master usually lived in a big stone house erected on

the top of a steep rock or built between deep moats, but within sight

of his subjects. In case of danger the subjects found shelter behind

the walls of the baronial stronghold. That is why they tried to live

as near the castle as possible and it accounts for the many European

cities which began their career around a feudal fortress.

But the knight of the early middle ages was much more than a

professional soldier. He was the civil servant of that day. He was

the judge of his community and he was the chief of police. He caught

the highwaymen and protected the wandering pedlars who were the

merchants of the eleventh century. He looked after the dikes so that

the countryside should not be flooded (just as the first noblemen

had done in the valley of the Nile four thousand years before). He

encouraged the Troubadours who wandered from place to place telling

the stories of the ancient heroes who had fought in the great wars of

the migrations. Besides, he protected the churches and the monasteries

within his territory, and although he could neither read nor write,

(it was considered unmanly to know such things,) he employed a number

of priests who kept his accounts and who registered the marriages and

the births and the deaths which occurred within the baronial or ducal

domains.

In the fifteenth century the kings once more became strong enough

to exercise those powers which belonged to them because they were

“anointed of God.” Then the feudal knights lost their former

independence. Reduced to the rank of country squires, they no longer

filled a need and soon they became a nuisance. But Europe would have

perished without the “feudal system” of the dark ages. There were

many bad knights as there are many bad people to-day. But generally

speaking, the rough-fisted barons of the twelfth and thirteenth

century were hard-working administrators who rendered a most useful

service to the cause of progress. During that era the noble torch of

learning and art which had illuminated the world of the Egyptians and

the Greeks and the Romans was burning very low. Without the knights

and their good friends, the monks, civilisation would have been

extinguished entirely, and the human race would have been forced to

begin once more where the cave-man had left off.