there may be for him in Dante is to consider the great Italian epic
poet in comparison with our greatest of English epic poets, Milton.
While any such comparison in the expressive Latin phrase is sure to
walk lame, it serves to give an excellent idea of the methods of the
two men in the illustration of their ideas. We venture therefore to
quote a comparison between these two poets from a distinguished critic
who knows both of them well, and whose modern training in English
methods of thought, would seem to make him likely to be partial to the
more modern poet though as a matter of fact he constantly leans toward
the great medieval bard.
"The poetry of Milton differs from that of Dante as the
hieroglyphics of Egypt differ from the picture-writing of Mexico.
The images which Dante employs speak for themselves; they stand
simply for what they are. Those of Milton have a {316} signification
which is often discernible only to the initiated. . . . However
strange, however grotesque, he never shrinks from describing it. He
gives us the shape, the color, the sound, the smell, the taste; he
counts the numbers; he measures the size. His similies are the
illustrations of a traveler. Unlike those of other poets, and
especially of Milton, they are introduced in a plain business-like
manner, not for the sake of any of the beauty in the objects from
which they are drawn; not for the sake of any ornament they may
impart to the poem; but simply in order to make the meaning of the
writer as clear to the reader as it is to himself."
"Still more striking is the similarity between Dante and Milton.
This may be said to lie rather in the kindred nature of their
subjects, and in the parallel development of their minds, than in
any mere external resemblance. In both the man was greater than the
poet, the souls of both were 'like a star and dwelt apart.' Both
were academically trained in the deepest studies of their age; the
labour which made Dante lean made Milton blind. The 'Doricke
sweetnesse' of the English poet is not absent from the tender pages
of the Vita Nuova. The middle life of each was spent in active
controversy; each lent his services to the state; each felt the
quarrels of his age to be the 'business of posterity,' and left his
warnings to ring in the ears of a later time. The lives of both were
failures. 'On evil days though fallen, and evil tongues,' they
gathered the concentrated experience of their lives into one
immortal work, the quintessence of their hopes, their knowledge, and
their sufferings. But Dante is something more than this. Milton's
voice is grown faint to us--we have passed into other modes of
expression and of thought."
The comparison with Vergil is still more striking and more favorable
to the Italian poet. "Dante's reputation has passed through many
vicissitudes, and much trouble has been spent by critics in comparing
him with other poets of established fame. Read and commented upon in
the Italian universities in the generation immediately succeeding his
death, his name bcame obscured as the sun of the Renaissance rose
higher towards its meridian. In the Seventeenth Century he was less
read than Petrarch, Tasso, or Ariosto; in the Eighteenth he was {317}
almost universally neglected. His fame is now fully vindicated.
Translations and commentaries issue from every press in Europe and
America. Dante Societies are formed to investigate the difficulties of
his works. He occupies in the lecture-rooms of regenerated Italy a
place by the side of those great masters whose humble disciple he
avowed himself to be. The Divine Comedy is indeed as true an epic as
the AEneid, and Dante is as real a classic as Vergil. His metre is as
pliable and flexible to every mood of emotion, his diction as
plaintive and as sonorous. Like him he can immortalize by a simple
expression, a person, a place, or a phase of nature. Dante is even
truer in description than Vergil, whether he paints the snow falling
in the Alps, or the homeward flight of birds, or the swelling of an
angry torrent. But under this gorgeous pageantry of poetry there lies
a unity of conception, a power of philosophic grasp, an earnestness of
religion, which to the Roman poet were entirely unknown."
If we would have a very recent opinion as to the position of Dante as
a literary man and as a great intellectual force, perhaps no better
can be obtained than from some recent expressions of Mr. Michael
Rossetti, whose Italian descent, English training, and literary and
artistic heredity, seem to place him in an ideal position for writing
this generation's ultimate judgment with regard to the great poet of
the Thirteenth Century. In his Literature of Italy he said:--
"One has to recur time after time, to that astounding protagonist,
phenomenon and hero, Dante Alighieri. If one were to say that
Italian literature consists of Dante, it would, no doubt, be an
exaggeration, and a gross one, and yet it would contain a certain
ultimate nucleus of truth."
"Dante fixed the Italian language, and everyone had to tread in his
vestiges. He embodied all the learning and thought of his age and
transcended them. He went far ahead of all his predecessors,
contemporaries, and successors; he wrote the first remarkable book
in Italian prose, La Vita Nuova; and a critical exposition of it in
the Convito; in Latin, a linguistic treatise, the De Vulgari
Eloquio, which upholds the Vulgare Illustre, or speech of the best
cultivated classes, markedly in Tuscany and Bologna, against the
common dialects; and a {318} political study, De Monarchia, of the
most fundamental quality, which even to us moderns continues to be
sane and convincing in its essence, though its direct line of
argument has collapsed; and finally, and most important by far, he
produced in La Commedia Divina the one poem of modern Europe that
counter-balances Shakespeare and challenges antiquity. This is the
sole book which makes it a real pity for anyone to be ignorant of
Italian. Regarded singly, it is much the most astonishing poem in
the world, dwarfing all others by its theme, pulverizing most of
them by its majesty and sustainment, unique in the force of its
paraded personality and the thunderous reverberation of its
judgments on the living and the dead."
{319}
XX
THE WOMEN OF THE CENTURY.
In generations whose men proved so unending in initiative and so
forceful in accomplishment, so commanding in intelligence, so
persistent in their purposes, so acute in their searching, so
successful in their endeavors, the women of the time could not have
been unworthy of them. Some hints of this have been already given, in
what has been said about the making of furnishings for the church,
especially in the matter of needlework and the handpainting of various
forms of ornaments. There are further intimations in the histories of
the time, though unfortunately not very definite information, with
regard to even more ambitious accomplishments by the women of the
period. There are, for instance, traditions that the designs for some
of the Cathedrals and certainly for portions of many of them came from
women's hands. It is in the ethical sphere, however, that women
accomplished great things during the Thirteenth Century. Their
influence stood for what was best and highest in the life of the time
and their example encouraged not only their own generation, but many
people in many subsequent generations "to look up, not down, to look
within, not without" for happiness, and to trust that "God's in his
heaven and all's well with the world."
There are a number of women of the time whose names the race will not
let die. While if the ordinary person were asked to enumerate the
great women of the Thirteenth Century it would be rare to find one
able properly to place them, as soon as their names are mentioned, it
will be recognized that they succeeded in accomplishing work of such
significance that the world is not likely to let the reputation of it
perish. Some of these names are household words. The bearers of them
have been written of at length in quite recent years in English as
well as in other languages. Their work was of the kind that ordinarily
stands quite apart from the course of history and {320} so dates are
usually not attached to it. It is thought of as a portion of the
precious heritage of mankind rather than as belonging to any
particular period. Three names occur at once. They are St. Clare of
Assisi, St. Elizabeth of Hungary, and Queen Blanche of Castile, the
mother of St. Louis. To these should be added Queen Berengaria, the
sister of Blanche, and the mother of Ferdinand of Castile; Mabel Rich,
the London tradesman's wife, the mother of St. Edmund of Canterbury;
and Isabella, the famous Countess of Arundel.
The present day interest in St. Francis of Assisi, has brought St.
Clare under the lime-light of publicity. There is no doubt at all that
her name is well worthy to be mentioned along with his and that she,
like him, must be considered one of the strongest and most beautiful
characters of all time. She was the daughter of a noble family at
Assisi, who, having heard St. Francis preach, became impressed with
the idea that she too should have the opportunity to live the simple
life that St. Francis pictured. Of course her family opposed her in
any such notion. That a daughter of theirs should take up with a
wandering preacher, who at that time was looked on not a little
askance by the regular religious authorities, and whose rags, and
poverty made him anything but a proper associate for a young lady of
noble birth, could not but seem an impossible idea. Accordingly Clare
ran away from home and told Francis that she would never go back and
that he must help her to live her life in poverty just as he was doing
himself. He sent her to a neighboring convent to be cared for, and
also very probably so as to be assured of her vocation.
After a time a special convent home for Clare and some other young
women, who had become enamored with the life of poverty and simplicity
was established, and to this Clare's sister Agnes came as a postulant.
By this time apparently the family had become reconciled to Clare's
absence from home, but they would not stand another daughter following
such a foolish example. Accordingly Agnes was removed from the convent
by force after a scene which caused the greatest excitement in the
little town. It was not long, however, before Agnes returned to the
convent and within a few years their mother followed them, and became
one of the most fervent members of the little community.
{opp320}
[Illustration]
ST. CLARE'S FAREWELL TO THE DEAD ST. FRANCIS (GIOTTO)
{321}
The peace and happiness that came with this life of absolute poverty
soon attracted many other women and Clare was asked to establish
houses at a distance. Gradually the order of Poor Clares, the second
order of St. Francis, thus came into existence. When it was necessary
to draw up constitutions for the order, Clare showed not only the
breadth of her intelligence, but the depth of her knowledge of human
nature, and her appreciation of what was absolutely necessary in order
to keep her order from degeneration. Against the counsels of all the
ecclesiastics of her time, including many cardinals and even a Pope,
she insisted on the most absolute poverty as the only basis for the
preservation of the spirit of her second order of St. Francis. Her
character was well manifested in this contest from which she came out
victorious.
Her body has been miraculously preserved and may still be seen at
Assisi. Anyone who has seen the strongly set lips and full firm chin
of the body in the crypt of San Damiano, can easily understand the
strength of purpose and of character of this young woman who moulded a
generation to her will. The story is told of her, that once when the
Saracens invaded Italy and attacked the convent, she mounted the walls
with a monstrance containing the Blessed Sacrament in her hands, and
the marauders turned away in consternation from the stern brave figure
that confronted them, and bothered the nuns no more. After St.
Francis' death she, more than anyone else, succeeded in maintaining
the spirit of the Franciscan order in the way in which St. Francis
would have it go. Long after her death a copy of the original rules
was found in the fold of her garments and did much to restore the
Franciscan life to its primitive simplicity and purpose, so that even
after she was no more on earth, she was still the guardian and
promoter of St. Francis' work.
If one wants to know how much of happiness there came to her in life
one should read the famous passage which describes her visit to St.
Francis, and how she and he with sisters and brothers around them
broke bread together, with a sweetness that was beyond human. The
passage is to be found in the "Little Flowers of St. Francis of
Assisi" which was written {322} within a century after the occurrences
described. It recalls nothing so much as the story of the disciples at
Emaus and is worthy to be thought of beside the Scripture story.
[Footnote 26]
[Footnote 26: When came the day ordained by Francis, Saint Clare
with one companion passed forth from out the convent and with the
companions of Saint Francis to bear her company came unto Saint Mary
of the Angels, and devoutly saluted the Virgin Mary before her
altar, where she had been shorn and veiled; so they conducted her to
see the house, until such time as the hour for breaking bread was
come. And in the meantime Saint Francis let make ready the table on
the bare ground, as he was wont to do. And the hour of breaking
bread being come, they set themselves down together. Saint Francis
and Saint Clare, and one of the companions of Saint Francis with the
companion of Saint Clare, and all the other companions took each his
place at the table with all humility. And at the first dish, Saint
Francis began to speak of God so sweetly, so sublimely and so
wondrously, that the fulness of Divine grace came down on them, and
they all were wrapt in God. And as they were thus wrapt, with eyes
and hands uplift to heaven, the folk of Assisi and Bettona and the
country round about, saw that Saint Mary of the Angels, and all the
House, and the wood that was just hard by the house, were burning
brightly, and it seemed as it were a great fire that filled the
church and the House and the whole wood together: for the which
cause the folk of Assisi ran thither in great haste to quench the
flames, believing of a truth that the whole place was all on fire.
But coming closer up to the House and finding no fire at all, they
entered within and found Saint Francis and Saint Clare and all their
company in contemplation rapt in God and sitting around that humble
board. Whereby of a truth they understood that this had been a
heavenly flame and no earthly one at all, which God had let appear
miraculously, for to show and signify the fire of love divine
wherewith the souls of those holy brothers and holy nuns were all
aflame; wherefor they got them gone with great consolation in their
hearts and with holy edifying. Then after some long space. Saint
Francis and Saint Clare, together with all the others, returning to
themselves again and feeling of good comfort from the spiritual food
took little heed of the food of the body.]
{opp322}
[Illustration]
CHURCH (DOBERAN, GERMANY)
[Illustration]
SAN DAMIANO (ASSISI)
What Saint Clare accomplished as her life work was the making of a new
vocation for women. There are always a certain number of women who
look for peace and quiet rather than the struggle for existence. For
these the older monasteries did not supply a place unless they were of
the wealthier class as a rule. Among the Poor Clares women of all
classes were received. In this way a great practical lesson in
equality was {323} taught. Women did not have to marry, perhaps
unsuitable, often even objectionable men, simply in order to have a
mode of life. They could join one of these communities and though in
absolute poverty, with many hours each day devoted to meditation and
prayer, had time to give to beautiful needlework, to painting and book
illumination, and to other feminine occupations; and might thus pass
long, happy lives, apart from the bustle of the strenuous time.
Italy at this time, it must be recalled, was a seething cauldron of
political and military strife. Wars were waged, and struggles of all
kinds engaged in for precedence and power. These women got away from
this unfortunate state of affairs. Occasionally in times of
pestilence, when they were specially needed, as happened at least once
in Saint Clare's life, they took care of the ailing and lent their
convent as a hospital. Above all they stood in the eyes of their
generation for chosen people who saw things differently from others.
They taught the great lesson of not caring too much for the things of
this world and of not living one's life in order to get admiration
though usually envy comes, nor idle praise for qualities they either
do not possess or that are not worthy of notice. They showed people
the real value of this life by its reflection upon the other. Many a
man turned aside from ambitious schemes that would have injured
others, because of the kindly influence of these unselfish women and
because of the memory of a sister, or an aunt whose sacrificing life
was thus a rebuke to his foolish selfishness. Other women learned
something of the vanity of human things by learning to value the
character of these Poor Clares and realizing how much of happiness
came to them from the accomplishment of their simple duties. Professor
Osler said, in his lecture on Science and Immortality, of these
self-forgetting ones:--"The serene faith of Socrates with the cup of
Hemlock at his lips, the heroic devotion of a St. Francis or a St.
Teresa, but more often for each one of us the beautiful life of some
good woman whose--
Eyes are homes of silent prayer,
. . .
Whose loves in higher love endure.
{324}
do more to keep alive among the Laodiceans a belief in immortality
than all the preaching in the land." This is what St. Clare
accomplished for her own generation and her influence is still a great
living force in the world.
What especially should attract the attention of the modern time is the
perfect basis of equality on which the Franciscan and Dominican orders
of men and of women were organized. Each community had the opportunity
to elect its own superiors. The rules were practically the same for
the first (for men) and the second (for women) order of St. Francis,
except that while the first order were supposed to live on alms
collected by begging from door to door, this menial obligation was not
imposed upon the women, who were expected to be supported by alms
brought to their convents by the faithful, and by the labor of their
own hands. This equality of men and women in the monastic
establishments became widespread after the Thirteenth Century and made
itself felt in the social order of the time as a factor for feminine
uplift. Undoubtedly Saint Clare's work in the foundation of the second
order of St. Francis must be held responsible to no small degree for
this. Before her death, there were half a dozen scions of royal
families in various parts of Europe who had become members of her
order, and literally hundreds of the daughters of the nobility, many
of them of high rank, had put off their dignity and position in the
world, to become poor daughters of Saint Clare. They did so for the
peace and the happiness of the vocation, and the opportunity to seek
their souls and live their lives in their own quiet way, which her
convents afforded them.
{opp325}
[Illustration]
ST. ELIZABETH'S CATHEDRAL (MARBURG)
After Saint Clare, the best known woman of the Thirteenth Century is
undoubtedly Saint Elizabeth of Hungary, of whom the world knows some
pretty legends, while the serious historian recognizes that she was
the first settlement worker of history. As a child she wandered down
from the castle walls in which she lived and saw the poor in their
suffering. She felt so much for them that she stripped herself of most
of her garments and finally even of her shoes in order to clothe them.
When she was taken to task for this, she said that she had suffered
whatever inconvenience there was in it only for a few minutes while
the poor had suffered all their lives. She became {325} the wife of
the Duke of Thuringia, and there were three years of ideal happiness
with her husband and her children. When he went away on the Crusade
she gave herself up to the care of the poor. When he died, though she
was only twenty, and according to tradition one of the handsomest
women of her time, she devoted herself still more to her poor and even
went to live among them. She tried to teach them, as do the settlement
workers of the modern time, something of the true significance of
life, to bring them to realize to some degree at least, that so many
of the things they so vainly desire are not worth thinking about, but
that happiness consists in lopping off one's desires rather than
trying vainly, as it must ever be, to satisfy them. It is no wonder
that throughout all Germany she came to be called "the dear St.
Elizabeth." Literally thousands of women since her time have turned to
read the story of her beautiful devotion to charity, and have been
incited by her example to do more and more for the poor around them.
Those who know it only through Kingsley's, "The Saint's Tragedy,"
though this is disfigured by many failures to understand parts of her
career and her environment, can scarcely fail to realize that hers was
one of the world's sublimely beautiful characters. All she attempted
in the thorny paths of charity was accomplished in such a practical
way that the amount of good done was almost incalculable. The simple
recital of what she did as it has often been told, is the story of a
great individuality that impressed itself deeply upon its generation
and left the example of a precious life to act as a leaven for good in
the midst of the social fermentations of succeeding generations.
Yet Elizabeth succeeded in accomplishing all this in spite of the fact
that she was born the daughter of a king and married the reigning
prince of one of the most important ducal houses in Germany. One would
expect to find that her life had been long, so many traditions have
gathered around her name. She was twenty when her husband died, and
she survived him only four years. Literally she had accomplished a
long space in a short time and her generation in raising in her honor
the charming Gothic Cathedral at Marburg, one of the most {326}
beautiful in Germany, was honoring itself nobly as well as her. It is
the greatest monument to a woman in all the world.
The next great woman of the century also belonged to a reigning family
and is for obvious historical reasons better known, perhaps, than her
Saint contemporaries. This was Blanche, daughter of the King of
Castile, but intimately related to the English royal family. Married
to Louis VIII of France she is known principally as the mother of
Louis IX. She ruled France for many years while her boy was a minor
and when he came to the age, when he might ordinarily assume the reins
of government, he voluntarily permitted his mother to continue her
regency for some time longer. France was probably happier under her
than under any ruler that the country has ever had with the possible
exception of her son Louis. She succeeded in suppressing to a great
extent the quarrels so common among the nobility, she strengthened and
centralized the power of the crown, she began the correction of abuses
in the administration of justice which her son was to complete so
well, she organized charity in various ways, and the court was an
example to the kingdom of simple dignified life, without any abuse of
power, or wealth, or passion. No wonder that when Louis went on the
Crusade, he left his mother to reign in his stead confident that all
would go well. If one needed a demonstration that women can rule well
there is an excellent example in the life of Blanche.
Personally she seems to have had not only an amiable but a deeply
intellectual character. She encouraged education and beautiful
book-making and the Gothic architecture which was developing in France
so wonderfully during her period. Of course she also worshipped her
boy Louis, but how much her motherly tenderness was tempered with the
most beautiful Christian feeling can be understood from the famous
expression attributed to her on good authority, that she "would rather
see her boy dead at her feet, than have him commit a mortal offense
against his God or his neighbor." One might almost say that it is no
wonder that Louis became a saint. As a matter of fact he attributed to
his mother whatever of goodness there was in himself. There is a touch
of humanity in the picture, however, a trait that shows, that Blanche
was a woman, {327} though it is a fault which draws our sympathy to
her even more surely than if she were the type of perfection she might
have been without it. She did not get on well with her daughter-in-law
and one of the trials of Louis' life, as we have said, was to keep the
scales evenly balanced between his mother and his wife, both of whom
he loved very dearly. After Blanche's life there could be no doubt
that a woman, when given the opportunity, can manage men and
administer government quite as well as any masculine member of the
race, and the Thirteenth Century had given another example of its
power to bring out what was best in its fortunate children.
One of the most interesting women of the Thirteenth Century was
neither a Saint nor a member of the nobility, but only the wife of a
simple London merchant. This was Mabel Rich, the mother of Saint
Edmund of Canterbury. Edmund is one of the striking men of a supreme
century. He had been a student at Paris, and later a professor at
Oxford. Then, he became the treasurer of the Cathedral at Salisbury
about the time when, not a little through his influence, that
magnificent edifice was receiving the form which was to make it one of
the world's great churches for all time. Later he was the Archbishop
of Canterbury and while defending the rights of his church and his
people, came under the ban of Henry III, and spent most of the latter
years of his life in exile on the continent. Edmund insisted that he
owed more to his mother than to any other single factor in life. With
her two boys, aged ten and fourteen, Mabel Rich was left to care for
the worldly concerns of the household as well as for their education.
When they were twelve and sixteen, with many misgivings she sent them
off to the University of Paris to get their education. Edmund tells
how besides packing their linen very carefully she also packed a
hairshirt for each of them, which they were to wear occasionally
according to their promise to her, to remind them that they must not
look for ease and comfort in life, above all must not yield to sensual
pleasures, but must be ready to suffer many little troubles
voluntarily, in order that they might be able to resist temptation
when severer trials came. Mabel Rich believed in discipline, as a
factor in education, and thought that character was formed by habits
of fortitude in resisting {328} petty annoyances until, finally, even
serious troubles were easy to bear.
Both of her sons proved worthy of her maternal solicitude. Edmund
tells how the poor around her home in London blessed her for her
charity. All during his life the thought of his mother was uppermost
in his mind, and in the immortality that has been given his name,
because of the utter forgetfulness of self which characterized his
life, his mother has been associated. Unfortunately details are
lacking that would show us something of the manner of living of this
strong woman of the people, but we know enough to make us realize that
she was a fine type of the Christian mother, memory of whose goodness
means more not only for her children but for all those who come in
contact with her, than all the sermons and pious exhortations that
they hear, and often, such is the way of human nature, even than the
divine commandments or the personal conscience of those whom she
loves.
There were noble women among the gentlewomen of England at this time
too, and though space will not let us dwell on them, at least one must
be mentioned. This is the famous Isabella, Countess of Arundel, who
with a dignity which, Matthew Paris says, was more than that of woman,
reproached Henry III (1252), when he sought to browbeat her. She made
bold to tell the king, "You govern neither us nor yourself well." On
this the king, with a sneer and a grin, said with a loud voice, "Ho,
ho, my lady countess, have the noblemen of England granted you a
charter and struck a bargain with you to become their spokeswoman
because of your eloquence?" She answered, "My liege, the nobles have
made no charter, but you and your father have made a charter, and you
have sworn to observe it inviolably, and yet many times have you
extorted money from your subjects and have not kept your word. Where
are the liberties of England, often reduced to writing, so often
granted, so often again denied?" [Footnote 27]
[Footnote 27: Medieval England, English Feudal Society, from the
Norman Conquest to the Middle of the Fourteenth Century, by Mary
Bateson.]
The question of womanly occupations apart from their household duties
will be of great interest to our generation.
{opp328}
[Illustration]
MARRIAGE OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN (GIOTTO, PADUA)
A hint of one form of woman's occupation has already been {329} given
in discussing the needlework done for the Cathedrals and especially
the Cope of Ascoli. It must not be forgotten that this was the age not
alone of Cathedrals but also of monasteries and of convents. In all of
these convents every effort was made to have whatever was associated
with the religious ceremonial as beautiful as possible. Hence it was
that needlework rose to a height of accomplishment such as has never
been reached since according to the best authorities, and many
examples of it have come down to us to confirm such an opinion. This
needlework was done not only for religious purposes, however, but also
as presents for Kings and Queens and the nobility, and such presents
proved to be exemplars of artistic beauty that must have helped to
raise the taste of the time. This was essentially woman's work, and in
their distant castles the women of the households of the nobility
occupied themselves with it to much better effect than their sisters
of the modern time with the grievous burden of their so-called social
duties.
Miss Bateson [Footnote 28: Ibidem.] has given a pretty, yet piquant
picture of woman at these occupations. She says:--"There are not
wanting Thirteenth Century satires to tell the usual story of female
levities, and of female devotion to the needle, to German work and
pierced work, Saracen work and combed work, cutout work and wool-work,
and a multitude of other "works" to which the clue seems to be now
wholly lost. Whilst the women are thus engaged, the one who knows most
reads to them, the others listen attentively, and do not sleep as they
do at mass, 'pur la prise de vanite dont ont grant leesce (joy).' The
'opus anglicum' consisted of chain-stitch in circles, with hollows,
made by a heated iron rod, to represent shadows. A cope of this work
was made by Rose de Burford at Edward II's order, and sent to Rome.
One, known as the Syon cope, passed into the possession of the nuns of
Syon, Isleworth, and can be seen at the Victoria and Albert Museum."
Another form of woman's work that came to prominence during the
century was the service in hospitals. While the records of the
hospitals of the Holy Ghost, which under Innocent Third's fostering
care spread so widely throughout Europe in this century, are mainly
occupied with the institutions of {330} the Brothers of the Holy
Ghost, there were many hospitals under the care of women, and indeed
there was an almost universally accepted idea, that women patients and
obstetrical cases should be cared for by women rather than men. It is
easy to make little of the hospitals of this time but any such thought
will be the result of ignorance rather than of any serious attempt to
know what was actually accomplished. The sisters' hospitals soon
usurped the most prominent place in the life of the time and during
succeeding centuries gradually replaced those which had been
originally under the control of men. It was recognized that nursing
was a much more suitable occupation for the gentler sex and that there
were many less abuses than when men were employed. The success of
these hospitals in gradually eradicating leprosy and in keeping down
the death-rate from St. Anthony's fire, or erysipelas, shows how
capable they were of accomplishing great humanitarian work.
Perhaps the most interesting feature of the story of woman's position
during the Thirteenth Century is that at the Italian universities at
least, co-education was not only admitted in principle but also in
practice, and many women were in attendance at the universities. In
the West of Europe this feature did not exist. It is a startling
comment on how comparatively trivial a thing may change the course of
history, that the lamentable Heloise and Abelard incident at the
University of Paris during the Twelfth Century, precluded all
subsequent possibility of the admission of women students to the
University of Paris. Oxford, it will be remembered, was formed by the
withdrawal of students from the University of Paris, and the same
tradition was maintained. Cambridge was a grand-daughter of the
University of Paris and the French and Spanish universities must all
be considered as standing in the relation of its direct descendants.
The unfortunate experience at Paris shaped the policy as to the
co-education of the sexes for all these. It would have been too much
to expect that university authorities would take the risks which had
been so clearly demonstrated even with regard to a distinguished
professor, and so co-education was excluded.
It is not easy to say what proportion of women there were {331} in
attendance at the university of Bologna during the Thirteenth Century.
Apparently it should not be difficult to take the lists of the
matriculates as far as they have been preserved and by a little
calculation obtain rather exact figures. Italy, like most of the Latin
countries, differs from the Teutonic regions in not being quite so
exact in the distribution of names to the different sexes, that the
first name inevitably determines whether the individual is male or
female. It is not an unusual thing even at the present day for a man
to have as a first name in Italy, or France, or Spain, the equivalent
of our name Mary. On the other hand, not a few girls are called by
men's names and without the feminine termination which is so
distinctive among the English speaking peoples. In the olden times
this was still more the case. Until very recently at least, if not
now, every child born in Venice was given two names at its
baptism--Maria and Giovanni--in honor of the two great patron saints
of the city and then the parents might add further names if they so
desired. A matriculation list of the University of Bologna then, tells
very little that is absolute with regard to the sex of the
matriculates.
All that we know for sure is that there were women students at the
University of Bologna apparently from the beginning of the Thirteenth
Century, and that some of them secured the distinction of being made
Professors. Of one of these there is a pretty legend told, which seems
to illustrate the fact that charming young women of profound
intellectual qualities did not lose the characteristic modesty and
thoughtfulness for others of their sex, because of their elevation to
university professorship. This young woman, Maria di Novella, when
only twenty-five became the Professor of mathematics at the University
of Bologna. According to tradition she was very pretty and as is usual
in life was not unaware of that happy accident. She feared that her
good looks might disturb the thoughts of her students during her
lessons and accordingly she delivered her lectures from behind a
curtain. The story may, of course, be only a myth. One of the best
woman educators that I know once said to me, that if the tradition
with regard to her beauty were true, then she doubted the rest of the
story, but then women are not always the best judges of the {332}
actions of other women and especially is this true when there is
question of a grave and learned elderly woman passing judgment on a
young and handsome professor of mathematics.
The Italians became so much impressed with the advisability of
permitting women to study at the universities, that a certain amount
of co-education has existed all down the centuries in Italy and not a
century has passed since the Thirteenth, which has not chronicled the
presence of at least one distinguished woman professor at some Italian
university. Indeed it was doubtless the traditional position of
tolerance in this matter that made it seem quite natural for women,
when the Renaissance period came around, to take their places beside
their brothers and their cousins in the schools where the new learning
was being taught.
It may be rather difficult for some to understand how with this
opening wedge for the higher education of women well placed, the real
opportunity for widespread feminine education should only have come in
our own time. This last idea, however, which would represent ours as
the only generation which has given women adequate opportunities for
intellectual development, is one of those self-complacent bits of
flattery of ourselves and our own period that is so irritatingly
characteristic of recent times. There have been at least three times
in the world's history before our own when as many women as wanted
them, in the class most interested in educational matters, were given
the opportunities for the higher education. As a matter of fact
whenever there have been novelties introduced into educational
systems, women have demanded and quite naturally--since, "What a good
woman wants," said a modern saint, "is the will of God"--have obtained
the privilege of sharing the educational opportunities of the time.
This was true in Charlemagne's time when the women of the court
attended the lectures in the traveling palace school the great Charles
founded and fostered. It was true four centuries later, as we have
seen, when a great change in educational methods was introduced with
the foundation of the universities. It was exemplified again when the
"New Learning" came in and the study of the classics took the place of
the long hours spent in scholastic disputation, that had previously
occupied {333} so much university attention. In our own time it was
the introduction of the study of the social sciences particularly,
with the consequent appearance of many novelties in the educational
curriculum, that once more was the signal for women asking and quite
naturally obtaining educational privileges.
{opp333}
[Illustration]
MOSAIC (ST. MARK'S, VENICE, 1220)
Each of the previous experiences in the matter of feminine education
has been followed by a considerable period during which there was a
distinct incuriousness on the part of women in educational matters. Of
course that is only an analogy and though history is worth studying,
only because the lessons of the past are the warnings of the future,
yet this does not foretell a lessening of feminine interest in
educational matters, after a few generations of experience of its
vanity to make up to them for the precious special privileges of their
nature, the proper enjoyment and exercise of which it is so likely to
hamper. It would be interesting to know just why feminine education,
after a period of efflorescence during the Thirteenth Century,
retrograded during the next century. There have been some ungallant
explanations offered, which we mention merely because of their
historical interest but without any hint of their having any real
significance in the matter.
A distinguished German educational authority has called attention to
the fact that a well-known prepared food, for which Bologna is famous,
is first heard of about the time that the higher education for women
came into vogue at the Italian universities. Towards the end of the
same century a special kind of pudding, since bearing the name of its
native city, Bologna, which might very well have taken the place of an
ordinary dessert, also began to come into prominence. This German
writer suggests then, that possibly the serving of meals consisting of
these forms of prepared food, which did not require much household
drudgery and did not necessitate the bending over the kitchen range or
whatever took its place in those days, may have led the men to grumble
about the effects of the higher education. After all, he adds, though
the women get whatever they want, when they ask for it seriously, if
it proves after a time that the men do not want them to have it, then
women lose interest and care for it no longer. This, of course, must
be taken with the proverbial grain of salt, though it {334}
illustrates certain phases of the domestic life of the time as well as
affording a possible glimpse into the inner circle of the family life.
The real story of woman's intellectual position in the century is to
be found in its literature. How deep was the general culture of the
women of the Thirteenth Century, in Italy at least, can be judged from
the Sonnets of Dante and his friends to their loved ones at the end of
this century. Some of the most beautiful poetry that was ever written
was inspired by these women and like the law of hydrostatics, it is
one of the rules of the history of poetry, that inspiration never
rises higher than its source and that poetry addressed to women is
always the best index of the estimation in which they are held, the
reflection of the highest qualities of the objects to which it is
addressed. Anyone who reads certain of the sonnets of Dante, or of his
friends Guido Cavalcanti or Gino da Pistoia or Dante da Maiano, will
find ready assurance of the high state of culture and of intellectual
refinement that must have existed among the women to whom they were
dedicated. This same form of reasoning will apply also with regard to
the women of the South of France to whom the Troubadours addressed
their poetry; to those of the north of France who were greeted by the
Trouveres; and those of the south of Germany for whom the Minnesingers
tuned their lyres and invoked the Muses to enable them to sing their
praises properly. It would seem sometimes to be forgotten that poetry
generally is written much more for women than for men. Everyone
realizes that for one man who has read Tennyson's "Idyls of the King"
there are probably five women to whom they have been a source of
delight. When we think of the Thirteenth Century as not affording
opportunities of intellectual culture for its women, we should ask
ourselves where then did the Meistersingers and the poets of England,
Germany and France who told their romantic tales in verse find an
audience, if it was not among the women. The stories selected by the
Meistersingers are just those which proved so popular to feminine
readers of Tennyson in the Nineteenth Century, and the chosen subjects
of interest in the stories show that men and women have not changed
much during the intervening centuries. The literature of any {335}
period reflects the interest of the women in it and, as interest is
itself an index of intellectual development, Thirteenth Century
literature must be taken as the vivid reflection of the cultural
character of the women of the time, and this is of itself the highest
possible tribute to their intelligence and education.
On the other hand the best possible testimony to the estimation of
women during the Thirteenth Century, is to be found in the attitude of
the men of the generations towards them, as it is clearly to be seen
in the literature of the time. In the Holy Graal, the Cid, the
Minnesingers and the Meistersingers, woman occupies the higher place
in life and it is recognized that she is the highest incentive to
good, unfortunately also sometimes to evil, but always the best reward
that men can have for their exertions in a great cause. The supreme
tribute to woman comes at the end of the century in Dante's apotheosis
of her in the Divine Comedy. In this it is a woman who inspires, a
woman who leads, a woman who is the reward of man's aspirations, and
though the symbolism may be traced to philosophy, the influence of an
actual woman in it all is sure beyond all doubt. Nor must it be
thought that it was merely in this highest flight of his imagination
that this greatest of poets expressed such lofty sentiments with
regard to women. Anyone who thinks this does not know Dante's minor
poems, which contain to women in the flesh and above all to one of
them, the most wonderful tributes that have ever been paid to woman.
Take this one of his sonnets for instance.
So gentle and so fair she seems to be.
My Lady, when she others doth salute,
That every tongue becomes, all trembling, mute,
And every eye is half afraid to see;
She goes her way and hears men's praises free.
Clothed in a garb of kindness, meek and low.
And seems as if from heaven she came, to show
Upon the earth a wondrous mystery:
To one who looks on her she seems so kind,
That through the eye a sweetness fills the heart,
Which only he can know who doth it try.
{336}
And through her face there breatheth from her mind
A spirit sweet and full of Love's true art,
Which to the soul saith, as it cometh, "Sigh."
It will be noted that though this contains the highest possible praise
of the woman whom he loved, it has not a single reference to any of
her physical perfections, or indeed to any of those charms that poets
usually sing. We have already called attention to this, that it is not
the beauty of her face or her figure that has attracted him, but the
charm of her character, which all others must admire--which even women
do not envy, it is so beautiful--that constitutes the supreme reason
for Dante's admiration. Nor must it be thought that this is a unique
example of Dante's attitude in this matter; on the contrary, it is the
constant type of his expression of feeling. The succeeding sonnet in
his collection is probably quite as beautiful as the first quoted, and
yet is couched in similar terms. It will be found in the chapter on
Dante the Poet. Need we say more to prove that the women of the
century were worthy of the men and of the supreme time in which they
lived; that they were the fit intellectual companions of perhaps the
greatest generation of men that ever lived?
[Illustration]
STONE CARVING (AMIENS)
{337}
XXI
CITY HOSPITALS--ORGANIZED CHARITY.
While the Thirteenth Century was engaged in solving the problems of
the higher education and of technical education for the masses, and
was occupied so successfully, as we have seen, with the questions of
the rights of man and the development of law and of liberty, other and
more directly social and humanitarian works were not neglected. There
had been hospitals in existence from even before the Christian era,
but they had been intended rather for the chronic ailments and as the
name implies, for the furnishing of hospitality to strangers and
others who had for the time no habitation, than for the care of the
acutely ill. In the country places there was a larger Christian
charity which led people to care even for the stranger, and there was
a sense of human duty that was much more binding than in the modern
world. The acutely ill were not infrequently taken into the houses of
even those who did not know them, and cared for with a solicitude
difficult to understand in this, colder time. This was not so much
typical of the times, however, as of the social conditions, since we
have many stories of such events in our colonial days.
In the cities, however, which began more and more to be a feature of
life in the Thirteenth Century, though they counted their inhabitants
only by a few thousands where ours count them by hundreds of
thousands, the need of some other method of caring for such cases made
itself distinctly felt. At the end of the Twelfth and the beginning of
the Thirteenth centuries this need became demandingly manifest, and
the consequence was a movement that proved to be of great and
far-reaching practical benevolence. It is to the first Pope of the
Thirteenth Century, Innocent III., that we owe the modern city
hospital as we have it at the present time, with its main purpose to
care for the acutely ill who may have no one to take care of them
properly, as well as for those who have been injured or {338} who have
been picked up on the street and whose friends are not in a position
to care for them.
The deliberateness with which Innocent III. set about the
establishment of the mother city hospital of the world, is a striking
characteristic of the genius of the man and an excellent illustration
of the practical character of the century of which he is so thoroughly
representative.
Pope Innocent recognized the necessity for the existence of a city
hospital in Rome and by inquiry determined that the model hospital for
this purpose existed down at Montpelier in connection with the famous
medical school of the university there. Montpelier had succeeded to
the heritage of the distinguished reputation in medical matters which
had been enjoyed by Salernum, not far from Naples, during the Ninth,
Tenth, and Eleventh centuries. The shores of the Mediterranean have
always been recognized as possessing a climate especially suitable for
invalids and with the diminution of the influence of the Salernitan
school, a transfer of its prestige to Montpelier, where the close
relationship with Spain had given the medical schools the advantage of
intimate contact with the medicine of the Arabs, is not a matter of
surprise. At Montpelier the hospital arrangements made by Guy de
Montpelier were especially efficient. The hospital of which he had
charge was under the care of the members of the order of the Holy
Spirit.
Pope Innocent summoned Guy, or Guido as he was known after this, to
Rome and founded for him the hospital of the Holy Spirit in the Borgo,
not far from St. Peter's, where it still exists. This was the mother
and model hospital for the world. Visitors to Rome saw it, and could
not fail to admire its great humanitarian work. Bishops from all over
the world on their official visits to the head of the Church, admired
the policy under which the hospital was conducted, recognized the
interest of the Pope in it, and went back to their homes to organize
institutions of the same kind. How many of these were established in
various parts of Europe is hard to determine. Virchow in his History
of the Foundations of the German Hospitals, has a list of over one
hundred towns in Germany in which hospitals of the Holy Spirit, or
medical institutions modeled on this hospital at Rome were founded.
{339} Many of these towns were comparatively small. Most of them
contained at the time less than five thousand inhabitants, so that it
can be said without hesitation, that practically every town of any
importance, at least in Germany, came under the influence of this
great philanthropic hospital movement.
With regard to other countries, it is more difficult to determine the
number of places in which such institutions were established. As both
France and Italy were, however, much more closely in touch with the
Holy See at this time, it would be surprising if they had not been
affected as much as Germany by the Pope's enthusiasm in the matter. We
do know that in various large cities, as in Florence, Siena, Paris and
London, there was a development of existing hospitals and the
establishment of new ones, that points to a distinct community of
interest in the hospital movement. At Paris, the Hotel Dieu was moved
from the Petit Pont, where it had been, to its present situation and
received large extensions in size and in usefulness. It was at this
time, particularly, that it received donations for endowment purposes
that would enable it to be self-supporting. A number of bequests of
property, the rent of which was to be paid to the hospital, were made,
and the details of some of these bequests have an interest of their
own. Houses were not numbered at this time but were distinguished by
various signs, usually figures of different kinds that formed part of
their facade. The Hotel Dieu acquired the houses with the image of St.
Louis, with the sign of the golden lion of Flanders, with the image of
the butterfly, with the group of the three monkeys, with the image of
the wolf, with the image of the iron lion, with the cross of gold,
with the chimneys, etc. The Hotel Dieu, indeed, seems to have become
practically a fully endowed institution during the course of the
Thirteenth Century, for there are apparently no records of special
revenues voted by the city or the king, though there are such records
with regard to other places. For instance the Hospital of St. Louis
received the right to collect a special tax on all the salt that came
into the city.
In England the hospital movement during the Thirteenth Century is
evidently quite as active as in Germany, at least as far as the
records go. These refer mainly to London and show {340} that the
influence of the work of Innocent III. and his enthusiasm was felt in
the English capital. The famous St. Bartholomew's Hospital in London
had been a Priory founded at the beginning of the Twelfth Century,
which took care of the poor and the ailing, but at the beginning of
the Thirteenth Century it became more frankly a hospital in the modern
sense of the word. St. Thomas' Hospital, which remains to the present
day one of the great medical institutions of London, was founded by
Richard, Prior of Bermondsey, in 1213. Bethlehem or Bedlam, which
afterwards became a hospital for the insane, was founded about the
middle of the Thirteenth Century. The name Bedlam is a corruption of
Bethlehem, since adopted into the English language to express a place
where fools do congregate. Bridewell and Christ's Hospital, which were
the other two of the institutions long known as the five Royal
Hospitals of London, also seem either to have been founded, or to have
received a great stimulus and reorganization in the Thirteenth
Century, but both ceased after some time to be places for the
reception, of the ailing and became, one of them a prison and the
other a school.
The names of some of these institutions became associated with that of
Edward VI. about the middle of the Sixteenth Century. For this,
however, there was no proper justification, since, at most, all that
was accomplished within the reign of the boy king, was the
reestablishment of institutions formerly in existence which had been
confiscated under the laws of Henry VIII., but the necessity for whose
existence had been made very clear, because of the suffering entailed
upon the many ailing poor by the fact, that in their absence there was
nowhere for them to go to be cared for. As Gairdner points out in his
History of the English Church in the Sixteenth Century, "Edward has
left a name in connection with charities and education which critical
scholars find to be little justified by fact." The supposed foundation
of St. Thomas' Hospital was only the reestablishment of this
institution, and even when it was granted by him to the citizens of
London, this was not, as Gairdner says, "without their paying for it."
How much all this hospital movement owes to Innocent III. will be best
appreciated from Virchow's account of the German {341} hospitals, the
great German Scientist not being one of those at all likely to
exaggerate, the beneficent influence of the Popes, he says:
"The main cause decisive in influencing and arousing interest of the
people of the time in the hospitals of the Holy Ghost was the Papal
enthusiasm in the matter. The beginning of their history is
connected with the name of that Pope, who made the boldest and
farthest-reaching attempt to gather the sum of human interest into
the organization of the Catholic Church. The hospitals of the Holy
Ghost were one of the many means by which Innocent III. thought to
bind humanity to the Holy See. And surely it was one of the most
effective. Was it not calculated to create the most profound
impression, to see how the mighty Pope who humbled emperors and
deposed kings, who was the unrelenting adversary of the Albigenses,
turned his eyes sympathetically upon the poor and sick, sought the
helpless and the neglected on the streets, and saved the
illegitimate children from death in the waters. There is something
conciliating and fascinating in the fact that at the very same time
at which the Fourth Crusade was inaugurated through his influence,
the thought of founding a great organization of an essentially
humane character to extend throughout all Christendom, was also
taking form in his soul; and that in the same year (1204) in which
the new Latin Empire was founded in Constantinople, the newly
erected hospital of the Santo Spirito, by the Old Bridge across the
Tiber, was blessed and dedicated as the future center of this
universal humanitarian organization."
{opp341}
[Illustration]
HOSPITAL OF THE HOLY GHOST (LUeBECK)
Virchow, of course, considers Innocent's action as due to the entirely
interested motive of binding the Catholic world to the Holy See.
Others, however, who have studied Innocent's life even more
profoundly, have not considered his purpose as due to any such mean
motive. Hurter who wrote a history of Pope Innocent III., the
researches for which he began as a Protestant with the idea that in
the life of this Pope better than anywhere else the pretensions of the
papacy could be most effectively exposed, but who was so taken by the
character of the man that before he completed his history he had
become a Catholic, looks at it in a very different way. Even Virchow
himself quotes {342} Hurter's opinion, though not without taking some
exceptions to it. Hurter said with regard to charitable foundations in
his history of Pope Innocent III.: "All benevolent institutions which
the human race still enjoys, all care for the deserted and needy
through every stage of suffering from the first moment of birth to the
return of the material part to earth, have had their origin in the
church. Some of them directly, some of them indirectly through the
sentiments and feelings which she aroused, strengthened and vivified
into action. The church supplied for them the model and sometimes even
the resources; that these great humanitarian needs were not neglected
and their remedies not lacking in any respect is essentially due to
her influence upon human character."
With regard to this Virchow says that hospitals had existed among the
Arabs and among the Buddhists in the distant East, "nevertheless," he
adds, "it may be recognized and admitted, that it was reserved for the
Roman Catholic Church and above all for Innocent III., to establish
institutions for the care of those suffering from diseases."
A corresponding hospital movement that received considerable attention
within the Thirteenth Century was the erection of Leproseries or
hospitals for the care of lepers. Leprosy had become quite common in
Europe during the Middle Ages, and the contact of the West with the
East during the Crusades had brought about a notable increase of the
disease. It is not definitely known how much of what was called
leprosy at that time really belonged to the specific disease now known
as lepra. There is no doubt that many affections which have since come
to be considered as quite harmless and non-contagious, were included
under the designation leprosy by the populace and even by physicians
incapable as yet of making a proper differential diagnosis. Probably
severe cases of eczema and other chronic skin diseases, especially
when complicated by the results of wrongly directed treatment or of
lack of cleansing, were sometimes pronounced to be leprosy. Certain of
the severer forms of what is now known as psoriasis--a non-contagious
skin disease--running a very slow course and sometimes extremely
obstinate to treatment, were almost surely included under the
diagnosis of leprosy. Personally I have seen {343} in the General
Hospital in Vienna, a patient who had for many months been compelled
by the villagers among whom he lived to confine himself to his
dwelling, sustained by food that was thrown into him at the window by
the neighbors who were fearful of the contagiousness of his skin
disease, yet he was suffering from only a very neglected case of
psoriasis.
There is no doubt, however, of the existence of actual leprosy in many
of the towns of the West from the Twelfth to the Fifteenth centuries,
and the erection of these special hospitals proved the best possible
prophylactic against the further spread of the disease. Leprosy is
contagious, but only mildly so. Years of association with lepers may
and usually does bring about the communication of the disease to those
around them, especially if they do not exercise rather carefully
certain precise precautions as to cleanliness, after personal contact
or after the handling of things which have previously been in the
leper's possession. As the result of the existence of these houses of
segregation, leprosy disappeared during the course of the next three
centuries and thus a great hygienic triumph was obtained by sanitary
regulation.
This successful hygienic and sanitary work, which brought about
practically the complete obliteration of leprosy in the Middle Ages,
furnished the first example of the possibility of eradicating a
disease that had become a scourge to mankind. That this should have
been accomplished by a movement that had its greatest source in the
Thirteenth Century, is all the more surprising, since we are usually
accustomed to think of the people of those times, as sadly lacking in
any interest in sanitary matters. The significance of the success of
the segregation movement was lost upon men down almost to our own
time. This was, however, because it was considered that most of the
epidemic diseases were conveyed by the air. They were thought
infectious and due to a climatic condition rather than to contagion,
that is conveyed by actual contact with the person having the disease
or something that had touched him, which is the view now held. With
the beginning of the crusade against tuberculosis in the latter part
of the Nineteenth Century, however, the most encouraging factor for
those engaged in it, was the history of the success of segregation
methods and careful {344} prevention of the spread of the disease
which had been pursued against leprosy. In a word the lessons in
sanitation and prophylaxis of the Thirteenth Century are only now
bearing fruit, because the intervening centuries did not have
sufficient knowledge to realize their import and take advantage of
them.
Pope Innocent III. was not the only occupant of the papal throne whose
name deserves to be remembered with benedictions in connection with
the hospital movement of the Thirteenth Century. His successors took
up the work of encouragement where he had left it at his death and did
much to bring about the successful accomplishment of his intentions in
even wider spheres. Honorius III. is distinguished by having made into
an order the Antonine Congregation of Vienna, which was especially
devoted to the care of patients suffering from the holy fire and from
various mutilations. The disease known as the holy fire seems to have
been what is called in modern times erysipelas. During the Middle Ages
it received various titles such as St. Anthony's fire, St. Francis'
fire, and the like, the latter part of the designation evidently being
due to the intense redness which characterizes the disease, and which
can be compared to nothing better than the erythema consequent upon a
rather severe burn. This affection was a great deal commoner in the
Middle Ages than in later times, though it must not be forgotten that
its disappearance has come mainly in the last twenty-five years.
It is now known to be a contagious disease and indeed, as Oliver
Wendell Holmes pointed out over half a century ago, may readily be
carried from place to place by the physician in attendance. It does
not always manifest itself as erysipelas when thus carried, however,
and the merit of Dr. Holmes' work was in pointing out the fact that
physicians who attended patients suffering from erysipelas and then
waited on obstetrical cases, were especially likely to carry the
infection which manifested itself as puerperal fever. A number of
cases of this kind were reported and discussed by him, and there is no
doubt that his warning served to save many precious lives.
Of course nothing was known of this in the Thirteenth Century, yet the
encouragement given to this religious order, which devoted itself
practically exclusively to the care in special {345} hospitals of
erysipelas, must have had not a little effect in bringing about a
limitation of the spread of the disease. In such hospitals patients
were not likely to come in contact with many persons and consequently
the contagion-radius of the disease was limited. In our own time
immediate segregation of cases when discovered has practically
eradicated it, so that many a young physician, even though ten years
in practise, has never seen a case of it. It was so common in America
during the Civil War and for half a century prior thereto, that there
were frequent epidemics of it in hospitals and it was generally
recognized that the disease was so contagious that when it once gained
a foothold in a hospital, nearly every patient suffering from an open
wound was likely to be affected by it.
It is interesting then to learn that these people of the Middle Ages
attempted to control the disease by erecting special hospitals for it,
though unfortunately we are not in a position to know just how much
was accomplished by these means. A congregation devoted to the special
care of the disease had been organized, as we have said, early in the
Thirteenth Century. At the end of this century this was given the full
weight of his amplest approval by Pope Boniface VIII., who conferred
on it the privilege of having priests among its members. It will be
remembered that Pope Boniface VIII. is said to have issued the Bull
which forbade the practise of dissection. The decretal in question,
however, which was not a Bull, only regulated, as I have shown, the
abuse which had sprung up of dismembering bodies and boiling them in
order to be able to carry them to a distance for burial, and was in
itself an excellent hygienic measure.
Many orders for the care of special needs of humanity were established
during the Thirteenth Century. It is from this period that most of the
religious habits worn by women originate. These used to be considered
rather cumbersome for such a serious work as the nursing and care of
the sick, but in recent years quite a different view has been taken.
The covering of the head, for instance, and the shearing of the hair
must have been of distinct value in preventing communication of
certain diseases. There has been a curious assimilation in the last
few years, of the dress required to be worn by nurses in operating
{346} rooms to that worn by most of the religious communities. The
head must be completely covered, and the garments worn are of material
that can be washed. It will be recalled that the headdresses of
religious, being as a rule of spotless white, must be renewed
frequently and therefore must be kept in a condition of what is
practically surgical cleanliness. While this was not at all the
intention of those who adopted the particular style of headdress worn
by religious, yet their choice has proved, in what may well be
considered a Providential way, to be an excellent protective for the
patients against certain dangers that would inevitably have been
present, if their dress had been the ordinary one of the women of
their class during these many centuries of hospital nursing by
religious women.
The organization of charity is supposed to be a feature of social life
that was reserved for these modern times. A subsequent chapter on
Democracy, Christian Socialism and National Patriotism, shows how
false this notion is from one standpoint; a little additional
interpretation will show that the generations which organized the
hospitals, took care of the lepers in such a way as to prevent their
becoming sources of infection for others, and segregated such severe
contagious diseases as erysipelas, not only knew how to organize
charitable efforts, but were able to accomplish their purposes in this
matter in such a way, that the friction of the charity organization
itself absorbed as little as possible of the beneficent energy put
into it, and much less than is the case in our own time. Besides the
monasteries were really active centers of charity organization of the
most practical character. They not only gave to the people when their
necessities required it, but they were active employers of labor and
in times of scarcity constantly made large sacrifices in order to keep
their people employed, and even the community itself went on short
rations in order that the suffering in the neighborhood might not be
extreme. In times of prosperity there were, no doubt, abuses in
monasteries, but no one ever accused them of neglecting the poor
during times of famine.
While the Thirteenth Century was so intent upon the relief of the
social needs consequent upon illness and injury, it did not neglect
other forms of social endeavor. One of the crying {347} evils of the
Thirteenth Century was the fact that mariners and merchants, as well
as pilgrims to the Holy Land, were not infrequently captured by
corsairs from the northern coast of Africa, and sold into slavery. At
times, if there was hope of a very large ransom, news of the condition
of these poor victims might find its way to their homes. As a rule,
however, they were as much lost to family and friends as if they had
actually been swallowed up by the sea, which was usually concluded to
have been their fate. The hardships thus endured and the utter
helplessness of their conditions made them fitting subjects for
special social effort. The institution which was to provide relief for
this sad state of affairs had its rise in a typically Thirteenth
Century way--what, doubtless, the modern world would be apt to think
of as characteristically medieval--but the result achieved was as
good an example of practical benevolence as has ever been effected in
the most matter-of-fact of centuries.
{opp347}
[Illustration]
CHARITY (GIOTTO)
[Illustration]
FORTITUDE (GIOTTO)
[Illustration]
HOPE (GIOTTO)
Shortly after the beginning of the Thirteenth Century two very
intelligent men, whose friends honored them very much for the
saintliness of their lives--meaning by saintliness not only their
piety but their thoughtfulness for others before themselves--had a
dream in which they saw poor captives held in slavery and asking for
some one out of Christian charity to come and ransom them. One of
these men was John of Matha, a distinguished teacher of Theology at
the University of Paris. The other was Felix of Valois, more
distinguished for his piety than his learning, but by no means an
ignorant man. On the same night, though living at a distance from one
another, they had this identical dream. Having told it next day to
some friends, it happened that after a time it came to their mutual
knowledge that the other had had a similar vision. The circumstance
seemed so striking to them that they applied to the Pope for an
interpretation of it. The Pope, who was Innocent III., the founder of
city hospitals, saw in it a magnificent opportunity for the foundation
of another great Christian charity.
Accordingly in interpreting it, he directed their thoughts toward the
redemption of Christian captives taken by the Saracens. He has as a
consequence been regarded as the founder of the order of Trinitarians
(A. D. 1198), and did, in {348} fact, draft its Rule. It was called,
from its object, Ordo de Redemptione Captivorum, (Order for the
Redemption of Captives), but its members were more generally known as
Trinitarians. They wore a white habit, having a red and blue cross on
the breast. They were well received in France, where they had
originated, were the recipients of large sums of money to be devoted
to the objects of the order, and had large accessions to their number,
among whom were many distinguished by ability and profound learning.
In the year 1200 the first company of ransomed captives arrived from
Morocco, and one may easily imagine their joy on again regaining their
freedom and beholding once more their friends and native land.
The members of this order were sometimes called Mathurins, from the
title of the first church occupied by them in Paris. They spread
rapidly in Southern France, through Spain, Italy, England, Saxony, and
Hungary, and foundations of a similar kind were also opened for women.
Cerfroid, in the diocese of Meaux, where the first house of the order
was opened, became the residence of the General (minister generalis).
There was a fine field for their labors in Spain, where the Moors were
constantly at war with the Christians. The self-sacrificing spirit of
these religious, which led them to incur almost any dangers in the
accomplishment of their purpose, was only equaled by their zeal in
arousing interest for the poor captives. They became the accredited
agents for the ransoming of prisoners, and also for their exchange and
even the Mahometans learned to trust and eventually to reverence them.
When they could not ransom at once they thus succeeded in ameliorating
the conditions in which slave prisoners were kept, and proved a great
source of consolation to them.
Another order, having the same object in view but differing somewhat
in its constitution, was founded in 1218, by Peter of Nolasco, a
distinguished Frenchman, and Raymond of Pennafort the famous authority
on canon law. In this, too, medieval supernaturalism evolved the usual
practical results. In consequence of a vision, the order was placed
under the special protection of the Blessed Virgin, and called the
Order of the Blessed Virgin of Mercy (Ordo. B. Mariae de Mercede). Its
{349} members bound themselves by vow to give their fortunes and to
serve as soldiers in the cause. Their devotion was so ardent that for
the accomplishment of their purpose they vowed if necessary to make a
sacrifice of their very persons, as Peter actually did in Africa, for
the redemption of Christian captives. Hence their members were divided
into Knights who wore a white uniform, and Brothers, who took orders
and provided for the spiritual wants of the community. Gregory IX.,
admiring the heroic devotion of these intrepid men, approved the
order. Many thousands of captive Christians who would otherwise have
dragged out a miserable existence as slaves among the Mahometans of
North Africa, were thus rescued and restored to their families and a
life of freedom and happiness in Europe. This was a fine practical
example of Abolitionism worthy of study and admiration.
[Illustration]
HOSPITAL INTERIOR
{350}
XXII
GREAT ORIGINS IN LAW.
Perhaps the most surprising phase of Thirteenth Century history is
that much of what is most valued and most valuable in our modern laws,
especially as they concern the fundamental rights of man, is to be
found clearly expressed in the great lawmaking of the Thirteenth
Century. It can scarcely fail to astonish those who look upon the
Middle Ages as hopelessly barren in progress, to find that human
liberty in its development reached such a pass before the end of the
Middle Ages, or that any period so long before the Renaissance and the
reformation so-called, could be picked out as representing a
distinctive epoch in supremely liberal legislation. After careful
study, the surprise is apt to be rather that there should have been
comparatively so little advance since that time, seeing how much the
generations of this marvelous century were able to accomplish in
definitely formulating principles of human rights.
The first great document in the laws of the Thirteenth Century is, of
course, Magna Charta, signed in 1215, the foundation of all the
liberties of English speaking people ever since. Perhaps the highest
possible tribute to the Great Charter is the fact that it has grown in
the estimation of intelligent men, rather than lost significance. In
quite recent years it has become somewhat the custom to belittle its
import and its influence. But it must not be forgotten that over and
over again in times of national crises in England, Magna Charta has
been confidently appealed to as a fundamental law too sacred to be
altered, as a talisman containing some magic spell capable of averting
national calamity. Bishop Stubbs said of it, that "the Great Charter
was the first supreme act of the nation after it had realized its own
identity."
Perhaps in nothing does its supremacy as basic legislation for
national purposes so shine forth, as from the fact that it is {351}
not a vague statement of great principles, not a mere declaration of
human rights, not a documentary rehearsal of fundamental legalities,
but a carefully collected series of practical declarations for the
solution of the problems that were then disturbing the peace of the
kingdom, and leading to charge and countercharge of infringement of
right on the part of the king and his subjects. As might have been
expected from the men of the Thirteenth Century--from the generations
who more than any other in all human history succeeded in uniting the
useful with the beautiful in everything from the decoration of their
churches and other great architectural structures to the ordinary
objects of everyday life--it was of eminently practical character.
While it is the custom to talk much of Magna Charta and to praise its
wonderful influence there are very few people who have ever actually
read its provisions. The classics are said to be books that everyone
praises but no one reads, and Magna Charta and the Constitution of the
United States are documents that are joined in the same fate. A little
consideration of some of the chapters of the Charter will give an
excellent idea of its thoroughly straightforward practicalness, though
it may serve also to undeceive those who would expect to find in this
primal document a lofty statement of abstract human rights, such as
the men of the Thirteenth Century were never conscious of, since their
thoughts were always in the concrete and their efforts were bent to
the solution of the problems lying just before them, and not to the
lifting of all the burdens that human nature has to bear.
Before this, of course, there had been some development of legislation
to furnish the basis for what was to come in the Thirteenth Century.
The famous Constitutions of Clarendon under Henry II. and the Assizes
of Clarendon (quite a different matter) and of North Hampton and the
Forest under Henry II., gave assurances of rights that had only
existed somewhat shadily before. According to the Constitutions of
Clarendon sworn men gave their verdict in cases from their own
knowledge. This was, of course, quite a different matter from the
giving of a verdict from knowledge obtained through witnesses at a
trial, but the germ of the jury trial can be seen. It was not,
however, until the next reign that the men of England {352} did not
merely wait for the free gifts of legal rights but demanded and
obtained them. There was a new hitherto undreamt-of spirit abroad in
the Thirteenth Century, by which men dared to ask for the rights they
considered should be theirs.
The opening chapter of Magna Charta states especially the subjects of
the rights that are guaranteed by the document. It is not surprising
then, to find that the first subject is the Church and that the most
extensive guarantees are made that the English Church liberties shall
be inviolate. Churchmen had been largely concerned in the movement
which secured the signing of Magna Charta, and then after all, as must
never be forgotten, the Church at this time was distinctly felt by all
to be the spiritual expression of the religious aspirations of the
people. Over the concluding sentence of this chapter, "the grant of
the unwritten liberties to all freemen of our kingdom," there has been
no little discussion. There are some who would consider that it
applied to all Englishmen above the condition of villeins or serfs,
while there are others who would limit its application practically to
those nobly born in the kingdom. Posterity undoubtedly came to
translate it in the broader sense, so that, whatever the original
intention, the phrase became as a grant eventually to all free
Englishmen.
Chapter I.: "In the first place we have granted to God, and by this
our present charter confirmed for us and our heirs for ever, that the
English Church shall be free, and shall have her rights entire, and
her liberties inviolate; and we will that it be thus observed; which
is apparent from this that the freedom of elections, which is reckoned
most important and very essential to the English Church, we of our
pure and unconstrained will, did grant, and by our charter confirm and
did obtain the ratification of the same from our lord, Pope Innocent
III. before the quarrel arose between us and our barons, and this we
will observe, and our will is that it be observed in good faith by
our heirs for ever. We have also granted to all freemen of our
kingdom, for us and for our heirs for ever, all the underwritten
liberties, to be had and held by them and their heirs, of us and our
heirs for ever."
Perhaps the most interesting feature of Magna Charta is to {353} be
found in the fact, that it did actually in most cases come to be
applied ever so much wider than had apparently been the original
intention. It was in this sense a vital document as it were, since it
had within itself the power of developing so as to suit the varying
circumstances for which recourse was had to it. There is no doubt at
all of the good faith of the men who appealed to it, nor of their firm
persuasion that the document actually intended what they claimed to
find in it. Modern criticism has succeeded in stripping from the
original expressions many of the added meanings that posterity
attached to them, but in so doing has really not lessened the
estimation in which Magna Charta must be held.
The position is indeed noteworthily analagous to that of the original
deposit of faith and the development of doctrine which has taken
place. Higher criticism has done much to show how little of certain
modern ideas was apparently contained explicitly in the original
formulas of Christian faith, and yet by so doing has not lessened our
beliefs, but has rather tended to make us realize the vitality of the
original Christian tenets. As everything living in God's creation,
they have developed by a principle implanted within them to suit the
evolutionary conditions of man's intelligence and the developing
problems that they were supposed to offer solutions for. The
comparison, of course, like all comparisons, must walk a little lame,
since after all Magna Charta is a human document, and yet the very
fact that it should have presented itself under so many varying
conditions, ever with new significance to succeeding generations of
thinking men, is the best evidence of how nearly man's work at its
best may approach that of the Creator. It is an exemplification, in a
word, of the creative genius of the century, a worthy compeer of the
other accomplishments which have proved so enduring and so capable of
making their influence felt even upon distant generations.
It is of the very essence of the practicality of Magna Charta that
among the early chapters of the important document--Chapter VII.--is
one that concerns widows and their property rights immediately after
the death of their husbands. Previous chapters had discussed questions
of guardianship and inheritance, since it was especially minors who in
this rude period {354} were likely to suffer from the injustice of the
crown, of their over-lords in the nobility, and even from their
guardians. While Magna Charta, then, begins with the principles for
the regulation of matters of property as regards children, it proceeds
at once to the next class most liable to injustice because of their
inability to properly defend themselves by force of arms--the widows.
Chapter VII.: "A widow, after the death of her husband, shall
forthwith and without difficulty have her marriage portion and
inheritance; nor shall she give anything for her dower or for her
marriage portion, or for the inheritance which she and her husband
held on the day of the death of that husband; and she may remain in
the house of her husband for forty days after his death, within which
time her dower shall be assigned to her."
Chapter VIII.: "Let no widow be compelled to marry, so long as she
prefers to live without a husband; provided always that she gives
security not to marry without our consent, if she holds of us, or
without the consent of the lord of whom she holds, if she holds of
another."
The first of these provisions serves to show very well how early in
the history of English jurisprudence a thoroughgoing respect for
woman's legal rights began to have a place. The beginning Thirteenth
Century made an excellent start in their favor. For some reason the
movement for justice thus initiated did not continue, but suffered a
sad interruption down almost to our own times.
The second of these provisions for widows, embodied in Chapter VIII.,
sounds a little queer to the modern ear. This protection of widows
from compulsion to marry is apt to seem absolutely unnecessary in
these modern days. Some of the unmarried are indeed prone to think,
perhaps, that widows have more than their due opportunity in this
matter without any necessity for protecting them from compulsion. Of
course it is to be understood that it was not always so much the
charms of the lady herself that must be protected from compulsion, as
those of the property which she inherited and the political and
martial influence that she might be expected to bring her husband. In
these troublous times when disputes with {355} appeals to arms were
extremely frequent, it was important to have the regulation, that
after the death of a husband there should be no sudden unbalancing of
political power because of the compelled marriage of the widow of some
powerful noble.
In certain subsequent chapters up to the twelfth there is question
mainly of the rights of the Jews, as money-lenders, to collect their
debts with interest after the death of the principal to whom it was
loaned. For instance, according to Chapter X., the debt shall not bear
interest while the heir is under age and if the debt fell to the hands
of the crown, nothing but the principal was to be taken. In Chapter
XI. if any one died indebted to the Jews his wife should have her
dower and pay nothing of that debt. For children under age the same
principle held and they had a right to the provision of necessaries in
keeping with the condition of their father. This last clause has been
perpetuated in the practice of our courts, as some consider even to
the extent of an abuse, so that debtors cannot collect from the income
of a young man to whom money has been left, if by so doing the income
should be impaired to such an extent as to make his method of living
unsuitable to the condition in life to which he was born and brought
up.
Chapter XII. has been the subject of more discussion perhaps than any
other. McKechnie, the most recent commentator on Magna Charta, says of
it: [Footnote 29]
[Footnote 29: Magna Carta, a Commentary on the Great Charter of King
John, with an Historical Introduction by William Sharp McKechnie,
M.D., LL.B., D. Phil. Glasgow, James Maclehose and Sons, Publishers
to the University, 1905.]
"This is a famous clause, greatly valued at the time it was framed
because of its precise terms and narrow scope (which made evasion
difficult), and even more highly valued in after days for exactly
opposite reasons. It came indeed to be interpreted in a broad
general sense by enthusiasts who, with the fully-developed British
constitution before them, read the clause as enunciating the modern
doctrine that the Crown can impose no financial burden whatsoever on
the people without consent of Parliament."
Readers may judge for themselves from the tenor of the {356} chapter,
how wide a latitude in interpretation it not only permits, but
invites.
Chapter XII.: "No scutage nor aid shall be imposed in our kingdom,
unless by common counsel of our kingdom, except for ransoming our
person, for making our eldest son a knight, and for once marrying our
eldest daughter; and for these there shall not be levied more than a
reasonable aid. In like manner it shall be done concerning aids from
the citizens of London."
There is no doubt that it is hard to read in this chapter all that has
been found in it by enthusiastic appellants to Magna Charta at many
times during the succeeding centuries. As a matter of fact, however,
within half a century after it had been promulgated, it was appealed
to confidently as one of the reasons why an English Parliament should
meet if the King required special levies of money for the purpose of
carrying on war. It was during the sixth and seventh decades of the
Thirteenth Century that the great principle of English Legislation:
"There shall be no taxation without representation"--which six
centuries later was to be appealed to by the American Colonies as the
justification for their war for independence, gradually came to be
considered as a fundamental principle of the relationship between the
government and the people. That it had its origin in Magna Charta
there seems no doubt, and it is only another example of that
unconscious development of a vital principle which, as we know from
History, took place so often with regard to chapters of the Great
Charter.
Undoubtedly one of the most important chapters of Magna Charta is the
very brief one, No. 17, which concerns itself with the holding of a
Court of Common Pleas. The whole of the chapter is, "Common Pleas
shall not follow our Court but shall be held in some fixed place."
This represented a distinct step in advance in the dispensing of
justice. It is a little bit hard for us to understand, but all
departments of government were originally centered in the king and his
household--the court--which attended to royal and national business of
every kind. As pointed out by Mr. McKechnie in his Magna Charta, the
court united in itself the functions of the modern cabinet of the
administrative department--the home office, the foreign office and the
admiralty, and of the various legal tribunals. It {357} was the parent
of the Court at St. James and the courts at Westminster. Almost
needless to say, it is from the fact that the dispensing of justice
was a function of royalty, that the places of holding trials are still
called courts.
According to this chapter of Magna Charta, thereafter ordinary trials,
Common Pleas, did not have to follow the Court, that is the royal
household, in its wanderings through various parts of the kingdom, but
they were held at an appointed place. In the days of Henry II. the
entire machinery of royal justice had to follow the monarch as he
passed, sometimes on the mere impulse of the moment, from one of his
favorite hunting-seats to another. Crowds thronged after him in hot
pursuit, since it was difficult to transact business of moment before
the court without being actually present. This entailed almost
intolerable delay, extreme annoyance and great expense upon litigants,
who brought their pleas for the king's decision. There is an account
of the hardships which this system inflicted upon suitors told of one
celebrated case. Richard D'Anesty gives a graphic record of his
journeyings in search of justice throughout a period of five years,
during which he visited in the king's wake most parts of England,
Normandy, Aquitaine, and Anjou. Ultimately successful he paid dearly
for his legal triumph. He had to borrow at a ruinous rate of interest
in order to meet his enormous expenses, mostly for traveling, and was
scarcely able to discharge his debts.
All litigation then, that did not directly involve the crown or
criminal procedures, could be tried thereafter by a set of judges who
sat permanently in some fixed spot, which though not named was
probably intended from the beginning to be Westminster. Hence it has
been said by distinguished English jurists that Magna Charta gave
England a Capital. On the other hand Chapter XXIV. insured justice in
criminal cases by reserving these pleas to judges appointed by the
crown. This short chapter reads: "No sheriff, constable, coroner, or
others of our bailiffs shall hold pleas of our Crown." This last
expression did not necessarily mean matters concerned with royal
business as might be thought, but had in King John's time come to
signify criminal trials of all kinds. It is easy to understand that
those accused of crime would look confidently for {358} justice to the
representative of the central government, while they dreaded the
jurisdiction of the less responsible officials resident in the
counties, who had a wide-spread reputation for cruelty and oppression,
and for a venality that it was hard to suppress.
It would seem as though these quotations would serve to make even the
casual reader appreciate how thoroughly Magna Charta deserves the
reputation which it has borne now for nearly seven centuries, of an
extremely valuable fundamental document in the history of the
liberties of the English speaking people. Some of the subsequent
chapters may be quoted without comment because they show with what
careful attention to detail the rights of the people were guaranteed
by the Charter, and how many apparently trivial things were considered
worthy of mention. We may call attention to the fact that in Chapters
forty-one and forty-two there are definite expressions of guarantee
for the rights even of aliens, which represent a great advance over
the feelings in this respect that had animated the people of a century
or so before, and foreshadow the development of that international
comity which is only now coming to be the distinguishing mark of our
modern civilization.
"A freeman shall not be amerced for a small offence, except in
accordance with the degree of the offence; and for a grave offence
he shall be amerced in accordance with the gravity of his offence,
yet saving always his 'contentment'; and a merchant in the same way,
saving his wares; and a villein shall be amerced in the same way,
saving his wainage--if they have fallen into our mercy; and none of
the aforesaid amercements shall be imposed except by the oath of
honest men of the neighborhood.
"If any freeman shall die intestate, his chattels shall be
distributed by the hands of the nearest kinsfolk and friends, under
the supervision of the church, saving to everyone the debts which
the deceased owed to him.
"No constable or other bailiff of ours shall take corn or other
provisions from anyone without immediately tendering money therefor,
unless he can have postponement thereof by permission of the seller.
"No sheriff or bailiff of ours, or any other person shall take {359}
the horses or carts of any freeman for transport duty, against the
will of the said freeman.
"All kydells for the future shall be removed altogether from the
Thames and Medway, and throughout all England, except upon the sea
coast.
"Nothing in the future shall be taken or given for a writ of
inquisition of life or limbs, but freely it shall be granted, and
never denied.
"No bailiff for the future shall put any man to his 'law' upon his
own mere word of mouth, without credible witnesses brought for this
purpose.
"No freeman shall be arrested or detained in prison, or deprived of
his freehold, or outlawed, or banished, or in any way molested, and
we will not set forth against him, nor send against him, unless by
the lawful judgment of his peers and by the law of the land.
"To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or
justice.
"All merchants shall have safe and secure exit from England, and
entry to England, with the right to tarry there and to move about as
well by land as by water, for buying and selling by the ancient and
right customs, quit from all evil tolls, except (in time of war)
such merchants as are of the land at war with us. And if such are
found in our land at the beginning of the war, they shall be
detained without injury to their bodies or goods, until information
be received by us, or by our chief justiciar, how the merchants of
our land found in the land at war with us are treated and if our men
are safe there, the others shall be safe in our land.
"It shall be lawful in future for any one (excepting always those
imprisoned or outlawed in accordance with the law of the kingdom,
and natives of any country at war with us, and merchants, who shall
be treated as is above provided) to leave our kingdom, and to
return, safe and secure by land and water, except for a short period
in time of war, on grounds of public policy--reserving always the
allegiance due to us.
"We will appoint as justices, constables, sheriffs or bailiffs only
such as know the law of the realm and mean to observe it well.
{360}
"We shall have, moreover, the same respite and the same manner in
rendering justice concerning the disafforestation or retention of
those forests which Henry our father and Richard our brother
afforested and concerning the wardship of lands which are of the
fief of another (namely, such wardships as we have hitherto had by
reason of a fief, which any one held of us by knight's service) and
concerning abbeys founded on other fiefs than our own, in which the
lord of the fee claims to have right; and when we have returned, or
if we desist from our expedition, we will immediately grant full
justice to all who complain of such things.
"All fines made with us unjustly and against the law of this land,
and all amercements imposed unjustly and against the law of this
land, shall be entirely remitted, or else it shall be done
concerning them according to the decision of the five and twenty
barons of whom mention is made below, in the clause for securing the
peace, or according to the judgment of the majority of the same,
along with the aforesaid Stephen Archbishop of Canterbury, if he can
be present, and such others as he may wish to bring with him for
this purpose, and if he cannot be present the business shall
nevertheless proceed without him, provided always that if any one or
more of the aforesaid five and twenty barons are in a similar suit,
they shall be removed as far as concerns this particular judgment,
others being substituted in their places after having been selected
by the rest of the same five and twenty for this purpose only, and
after having been sworn.
"Moreover, all the aforesaid customs and liberties, the observance
of which we have granted in our kingdom as far as pertains to us
towards our men, shall be observed by all of our kingdom, as well by
clergy as by laymen, as far as pertains to them towards their men.
"And, on this head, we have caused to be made out letters patent of
Stephen, Archbishop of Canterbury, Henry, Archbishop of Dublin, the
bishops aforesaid, and Master Pandulf, as evidence of this clause of
security and of the aforesaid concessions."
These last provisions show how closely the Church was bound up with
the securing and maintenance of the rights of {361} the English
people. The clauses we have quoted just before, need no comment to
show how sturdily the spirit of liberty strode abroad even at the
beginning of the Thirteenth Century, for Magna Charta was signed in
1215. The rest of the century was to see great advances in liberty and
human rights, even beyond the guarantees of the Great Charter.
Magna Charta, glorious as it was, was only the beginning of that basic
legislation which was to distinguish the Thirteenth Century in
England. About the middle of the century Bracton began his collection
of the laws of the land which has since been the great English classic
of the Common Law. His work was accomplished while he was the Chief
Justiciary during the reign of Henry III. For many years before he had
occupied various judicial positions, as Justice Itinerant of the
counties of Nottingham and Derby and for seventeen years his name
appears as one of the justices of the Aula Regis. This experience put
him in an eminently fitting position to be the mouthpiece of English
practice and law applications, and his book was at once accepted as an
authority. It is a most comprehensive and systematic work in five
volumes, bearing the title De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae, and
was modeled after the Institutes of Justinian.
It was during the reign of Edward I., the English Justinian as he has
been called, that the English Common Law came to its supreme
expression, and this monarch has rightly been placed among the great
benefactors of mankind for his magnanimous generosity in securing the
legal rights of his subjects and framing English liberties for all
time. Not a little of Edward's greatness as a law-maker and his
readiness to recognize the rights of his subjects, with his consequent
willingness to have English law arranged and published, must be
attributed to his connection during his earlier years as Prince of
Wales with the famous Simon De Montfort. To this man more than to any
other the English speaking people owe the development of those
constitutional rights, which gradually came to be considered
inalienably theirs during the Thirteenth Century. He is undoubtedly
one of the very great characters of history and the Thirteenth Century
is by so much greater for having been the scene of his labors, during
so many years, for the {362} establishment of constitutional
limitations to the power of the monarch, and the uplifting of the
rights of subjects not only among the nobility, but also among the
lower classes.
It was in Edward's time that the English Common Law was fashioned into
the shape in which it was to exist for many centuries afterwards. How
true this is may perhaps best be judged by the fact that even the laws
with regard to real estate have not been changed in essence since that
time, though medieval titles to land would seem to be so different to
those of the present day. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica the
changes which have been made since that time have been mainly due to
the action of equity and legislation, the latter sometimes interpreted
by the courts in a manner very different from the intention of
Parliament. The same authority is responsible for the statement that
the reign of Edward I., is notable for three leading real estate
statutes which are still law. One of these was with regard to
Mortmain, while the important statute known as _Quia Emptores_ (the
eighteenth of Chapter I. of the Laws of Edward I.) had the practical
effect of making the transfer of land thenceforward, more of a
commercial and less of a legal transaction. It is to this same period
that is owed the writ _Elegit_ which introduced the law practice of a
creditor's remedy over real estate. How little was accomplished in the
matter of law-making in subsequent centuries, may be gathered from the
fact that Mr. James Williams who writes the article on real estate in
the Encyclopedia Britannica ninth edition, says that from 1290 to the
reign of Henry VIII., that is down to the Sixteenth Century, there is
no statute of the first importance dealing with real estate.
In a word, then, it may be said that these law-makers of the
Thirteenth Century anticipated most of the legal difficulties of the
after-time. Their statutory provisions, as in the case of the chapters
of Magna Charta, seemed originally only to have a narrow application
to certain urgent legal questions of the time, but proved eventually
to contain in themselves the essence of legal principles that could be
applied in circumstances such as the original law-maker had not even
imagined. This is indeed the typical triumph of the century in every
line of endeavor, that while apparently it devoted itself only to the
{363} narrow problems of its own time, its solutions of them whether
in art and architecture or decoration, in literary expression or
poetic effectiveness, in educational methods or social uplift, always
proved so complete, so thoroughly human in the broadest sense of that
word and so consonant with development, that their work did not have
to be done over again. No greater praise than this could be bestowed.
[Illustration]
SPIRE OF ST. ELIZABETH'S (MARBURG)
{364}
XXIII
JUSTICE AND LEGAL DEVELOPMENT.
It must not be thought because we have devoted so much time to the
triumphs of English law-making in the Thirteenth Century that,
therefore, there is little or nothing to be said about this same
admirable feature of the time in other countries. As a matter of fact
every nation in Europe saw the foundation of its modern legal system
laid, and was responsive witness to the expression of the first
principles of popular rights and popular liberties. Montalembert in
his Life of St. Elizabeth of Hungary [Footnote 30] makes no mention
in the Introduction which is really a panegyric of the Thirteenth
Century, of the progress of English law-making, and yet considers that
he is able to bring together enough evidence to show that legislation
had its acme of development just at this time. His paragraph on the
subject will serve as the best possible preface to the scant treatment
of continental law-making and enforcement of justice in this period,
that our limited space will allow. He says:
[Footnote 30: Life of St. Elizabeth of Hungary by the Count De
Montalembert, translated by Francis Deming Hoyt, New York,
Longman's, Green and Company, 1904.]
"Legislation never, perhaps, had a more illustrious period. On the
one hand, the Popes, supreme authorities in matters of law as well
as of faith, gave to canon law the fullest development possible to
this magnificent security of Christian civilization; sat themselves
as judges with exemplary assiduity, published immense collections,
and founded numerous schools. On the other hand, that period gave
birth to most of the national legislation of the various states of
Europe; the great _Mirrors_ of Swabia and Saxony, the first laws
published in the German language by Frederick II. at the diet of
Mentz, and the code given by him to Sicily; in France, the
Institutes of St. Louis, together with the _Common Law_ of Pierre
des Fontaines, {365} and the _Statutes of Beauvoisis_ of Philip of
Beaumanoir; and lastly the French version of the _Assizes of
Jerusalem_, in which is to be found the most complete resume now
extant of Christian and chivalric law. All these precious monuments
of the old Christian organization of the world are preserved in the
native languages of the various people, and are distinguished, less
even by this fact than by their generous and pious spirit, from that
pernicious Roman law, the progress of which was destined soon to
change all the principles of the former."
Most of Montalembert's paragraph refers to the law-making in France
with which he is naturally more familiar. He has supplied ample
material for consultation for those who wish to follow out this
interesting theme further. Even more significant, however, than the
law-making in France, were the new ideas with regard to the
enforcement in law that came in during the reign of Louis IX. We have
not had to wait until this generation to realize, that as a rule it is
not the absence of law so much as the lack of enforcement of such laws
as exist, that gives rise to many of the injustices between men. St.
Louis made it his business to bring about the enforcement of the laws
with proper construction of their terms in such a way as to secure the
rights of all. He himself sat under the famous old oak of Versailles
as a Court of Appeals, reviewing especially the cases of the poor. It
soon came to be known, that it would be a sad occasion for any and
every court official who was found to have given judgment against the
poor because of partiality or the yielding to unlawful influence. On
the other hand, in order to keep the right of appeal from being
abused, punishments were meted out to those who made appeals without
good reason.
Finding that he was unable to hear so many causes as were appealed to
him, Louis chose Stephen Boileau to act as Chief Justice and committed
the care of proper legal enforcement with confidence into his hands.
Boileau had become famous by having condemned some very near
relatives, under circumstances such that relationship might have been
expected to weigh down the wrong side of the scales of justice, and in
a few years he enhanced his reputation by the utter disregard of all
motives in the settlement of suits at law, except those of {366} the
strictest justice. How much Louis himself did in order to safeguard
the rights of the poor can be judged from the famous incident told by
all his biographers, in which he risked the enmity of the most
powerful among his barons, in order to secure the punishment of one of
them who had put two students to death. This was the first time that
the rights of men, as men, were asserted and it constitutes the best
possible testimony to the development of law and true liberty in
France.
"Three young nobles of the county of Flanders were surprised,
together with the abbot of St. Nicholas, in a wood pertaining to
Coucy, with bows and arrows. Although they had neither dogs nor
hunting implements, they were found guilty of having gone out to
hunt and were hanged. The abbot and several women of their families
made complaint to the king, and Enguerrard was arrested and taken to
the Louvre. The king summoned him before him; he appeared, having
with him the King of Navarre, the King of Burgundy, the counts of
Bar, Soissons, Brittany, and Blois, the Archbishop of Rheims, Sire
John of Thorote, and nearly all the great men in the kingdom. The
accused said that he wished to take counsel, and he retired with
most of the seigneurs who had accompanied him, leaving the king
alone with his household. When he returned, John of Thorote, in his
name, said that he would not submit to this inquiry, since his
person, his honour, and his heritage were at stake, but that he was
ready to do battle, denying that he had hanged the three young men,
or ordered them to be hanged. His only opponents were the abbot and
the women, who were there to ask for justice. The king answered that
in causes in which the poor, the churches, and persons worthy of
pity, took part, it was not fitting to decide them in battle; for it
was not easy to find anyone to fight for such sorts of people
against the barons of the kingdom. He said that his action against
the accused was no new thing, and he alleged the example of his
predecessor Philip Augustus. He therefore agreed to the request of
the complainants, and caused Enguerrard to be arrested by the
sergeants and taken to the Louvre. All prayers were useless; St.
Louis refused to hear them, rose from his seat, and the barons went
away astonished and confused.
{367}
"They did not, however, consider that they were beaten. They again
came together; the King of Navarre, the Count of Brittany, and with
them the Countess of Flanders, who ought rather to have intervened
for the victims. It was as if they had conspired against the king's
power and honour; for they were not content to implore Coucy's
release, but asserted that he could not be kept in prison. The Count
of Brittany maintained that the king had no right to institute
inquiries against the barons of his kingdom in matters which
concerned their persons, their heritage or their honour. The king
replied, 'You did not speak thus in former times when the barons in
direct dependence upon you came before me with complaints against
yourself, and offered to sustain them in battle. You then said that
to do battle was not in the way of justice.' The barons put forward
a final argument, namely, that according to the customs of the
kingdom, the king could only judge the accused and punish him in
person after an inquiry to which he had refused to submit. The king
was resolute, and declared that neither the rank of the guilty man
nor the power of his friends should prevent him from doing full
justice. Coucy's life was, however, spared. The fact that he had not
been present at the judgment, nor at the execution, prevailed in his
favour. By the advice of his counsellors, the king condemned him to
pay 1200 livres parisis, which, considering the difference in the
purchasing power of money, may be estimated at considerably more
than 400,000 pounds, and he sent this sum to St. John of Acre for
the defense of Palestine. The wood in which the young men were
hanged was confiscated to the abbey of St. Nicholas. The condemned
man was also constrained to found three perpetual chapelries for the
souls of his victims, and he forfeited jurisdiction over his woods
and fish ponds, so that he was forbidden to imprison or execute for
any offense which had to do with them. Since Enguerrard's defender,
John of Thorote, had in his anger told the barons that the king
would do well to hang them all, the king, who had been told of this,
sent for him and said, 'How comes it, John, that you have said I
should hang my barons? I certainly will not have them hanged, but I
will punish them when they do amiss.' John of Thorote denied that he
had said this, and offered to {368} justify himself on the oath of
twenty or thirty knights. The king would not carry the matter
further, and let him go."
One of the best evidences of the development of the spirit of law in
Germany during this time is the establishment of the famous Fehmic
Courts, or Vehmgerichte, which achieved their highest importance
during the Thirteenth Century. As with regard to the universities,
there is a tradition that carries the origin of these courts back to
the time of Charlemagne. They are much more likely to have been
developments out of the relics of the ancient free courts of the old
Teutonic Tribe. The first definite knowledge of their existence cannot
be traced much earlier than a decade or two before the Thirteenth
Century. They had their principal existence in Westphalia. Practically
the whole country between the Rhine and the Weser was ruled to a
subordinate degree by these Fehmic courts. During the Thirteenth
Century they were used only in the most beneficial and liberal spirit,
supplying a means of redress at a time when the public administration
of justice was almost completely in abeyance. As a matter of fact,
before their establishment disregard for authority to the extent of
utter lawlessness prevailed in this part of Germany.
{opp368}
[Illustration]
CITY GATE (NEUBRANDENBURG)
[Illustration]
RATHHAUS (STRALSUND)
The significance of these courts has sometimes been missed. They
arose, however, out of the justice loving spirit of the people
themselves and were meant to supply legal enforcements when the
regularly constituted authorities were unable to secure them. They
remind one very much of the vigilance committees, which in our own
country, in the cities of the distant West, bravely and with the
admirable prudence of the race, have so often supplied the place of
regular courts and have brought justice and order out of the chaos of
lawlessness. The last place most people would expect their prototypes,
however, would be here in the Germany of the Thirteenth Century. How
much these Vehmgerichte accomplished during the Thirteenth and
Fourteenth centuries it would be difficult to say. They represent an
outgrowth of the spirit of the people themselves, that constitutes
another striking feature of the practical side of the generations of
the Thirteenth Century. They had much more to do with bringing about
the development of the modern acute sense of justice among the
Teutonic peoples {369} than is usually thought. They are the German
expression of the same feelings that in England dictated trial by
jury, and secured for the English speaking people of all time the
precious privileges of even-handed justice and the right to be judged
by one's peers.
It was not alone in the western countries of Europe that great
advances were made in liberty. The democratic spirit that was abroad
made itself felt everywhere and the foundations of rights for the
people were laid even in central Europe, in countries which ordinarily
are thought of at this time as scarcely more than emerging from
barbarism. Hungary may be cited as an example. Andrew II. is usually
set down by narrow-minded historians as having been entirely too
visionary in his character, and the fact that he led the fifth
Crusade, apparently even more fruitless than were most of the others,
is supposed to be an additional proof of this. Even Duruy in his
History of the Middle Ages says of him, "he organized a state of
anarchy by decreeing his Golden Bull, that if the King should violate
the privileges of the nobility, they should be permitted to resist him
by force and such resistance should not be treated as rebellion." As a
matter of fact, his people were thus granted a constitution more
liberal even than that of Magna Charta, but containing quite similar
provisions in many respects, and the curious historical analogy is
heightened when we recall that at the two ends of civilized Europe
these constitutions were given in the same decade. One cannot help but
wonder whether the Saxon elements which were in both peoples, for many
Saxon and Frisian colonists had been induced to settle in certain
parts of Transylvania just half a century before, did not have much to
do with this extremely interesting development in Hungary, so like the
corresponding evolution of the democratic spirit among their western
kinsfolk.
In Poland the development in law came a little later but evidently as
the result of the same factors that were at work during the Thirteenth
Century. Casimir the Great, who was born shortly after the close of
the Thirteenth Century, gave wise laws to Poland which have
constituted the basis of Polish law ever since. At this time Poland
was one of the most important countries in Europe. Casimir, besides
giving laws to {370} his people, also founded a university for them
and in every way encouraged the development of such progress as would
make his subjects intelligently realize their own rights and maintain
them, apparently foreseeing that thus the King would be better able to
strengthen himself against the many enemies that surrounded him in
central Europe.