acter of Christianity for near 800 years. Hurtful as it ultimately became, by reviving a universal despotism over conscience and freedom of thought, it was long powerful for good by giving a common centre to Europe, broken into fragments as it was by the rise of feudalism. That was disorganizing; this was centralizing, and kept the channels of communication open and the missionary spirit and the elements of a restored learning in activity. Its influence in commencing and carrying forward the crusades, which substantially broke the strength of feudalism, was of immense import ance. 622 Mahomet arose in the Arabian peninsula, and his new religion spread with astonishing rapidity. In one hun732 dred years from the death of Mahomet the Saracens had established a vast empire, covering two thirds of the Roman empire, viz.: all of the old Persian empire, Egypt, and all of nothern Africa and Spain, and threatened to inundate Europe. They poured a vast army over the Pyrenees into France. This was defeated in a great battle at Tours, by Charles Martel, who founded a new dynasty, replacing the Merovingian, called the Carlovingian, and made France the most powerful, as it became the leading, nation in Europe, for promoting civilization during many centuries. By this means the center of political influence, "The Star of Empire," took another step westward. His son, Pepin le Bref, or the Short, caused himself to be 752 crowned king of France by the Roman Pontiff, Stephen II, which added to his own prestige, as it also did to that of the pope. It was a sort of league between the rising temporal and spiritual powers in Europe, and set an example long followed. Charlemagne, or Charles the Great, the son of Pepin, ascended the throne in 771, 771 and by his intelligence, energy, and wise statesmanship, by his encouragement of learning, his organizing talents 814 and his success in conquering and civilizing the seething mass of nationalities in Germany, he may be said to have really founded modern civilization during his long reign of forty-three years. He conquered the Lombard kingdom in Italy, and was crowned by the pope, Adrian I, Emperor of the Romans," kneeling at the altar in Rome; but he virtually confirmed the temporal authority of the popes, and associated their influence in all his conquests. He thoroughly broke the spirit of the pagan Saxons, in northwestern Germany, by a war of thirty-three years, carried his conquests east over most of the present Austrian empire, civilizing and bringing the barbarians into the pale of Christendom by the aid of Christian missionaries, and conquered some portions of Spain from the Saracens. It seemed as if the history of the western Roman Empire, which had fallen three hundred years before, was to be repeated. That was the hope and dream of both Charlemagne and the Roman Pontiff, who joined hands to realize it. This new western emperor had great abilities and the church was very strong. The centre of Europe had so long been within the reach of civilizing influences, and had attained such a point of development in its various nationalities, that they readily accepted permanent institutions, when presented by a power so strong as that of the mighty Frank ruler. But when he died, it was found that there was no other hand strong enough to wield his sceptre. All the memories of the old empire, all the influence of the Christian church, the remains of the Roman organization, and the ripening vigor of new races, which had begun to lay aside their barbarous impulses, were united to aid the vast designs of this great statesman. But the tendencies of the new society, in general, were in a different direction. The Germanic civilization was totally different from the Roman, and had there been a succession of rulers as large minded and strong willed as Charlemagne, they could not have repeated the history of the ancient world. The tendency of the races that overthrew the empire was invincibly against centralization, and instead of a new Roman Empire in western Europe, appeared the Feudal System. SECTION XIV. THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 1. This system was the direct opposite of centralization. Under it all Christendom broke up into fragments; the king exerted but a loose general control, that continued to decrease for several centuries; and most of the real authority was exerted by the feudal lords from their fortified castles, which, for three hundred years, had been springing up over all the territory conquered from the Romans. It had its true origin. in the marked personal assertion, the strong individuality of the Teutonic Race, which was, and is, one of its most prominent traits. While in their native barbarous state their armies were formed for their expeditions of foreign conquest, that proved so fatal to the Romans, on the voluntary principle. The prowess and fame of a leader, or chief, drew to him a multitude of warriors, longing for activity and booty. So long as he could lead them to success, to gain their individual ends, they obeyed him. When he failed to reward their ambition they held themselves free to leave him. 2. It was not immense disciplined armies, but innumerable bands, organized in this way, that, through a long course of years, gradually overran Britain, Gaul, Spain and Italy. For four hundred years the civilized world had been accustomed to the control and protection of a distant ruler whose powerful armies rendered resistance vain, and all thought of organization for self-protection against the terrible barbarians was wanting when they were attacked. Each city or region defended itself as well as possible, or submitted at once. The conquerors took what they wanted and passed on to other lands, or spread themselves out over the province. They usually settled in the country parts, fortifying the country seats of the richer inhabitants, or building themselves castles near the larger towns, to hold them in awe. The leader considered himself the owner of the conquered territory, and divided it among his followers, who settled themselves, each in his new domain, as its owner and ruler. The conquered inhabitants were his subjects from whom he took tribute. The conquerors were few in number in proportion to the conquered; but there was little resistance throughout the old Roman provinces. Organization and spirit were wanting to them, and resistance would provoke complete ruin, since the conqueror could easily call to his aid any number of his fellows in return for a share of the spoils. Thus they gave what was demanded and made themselves content with what was left. The cities paid tribute, the cultivators gave a portion of their harvests to the new rulers. The territory not given to his followers was considered the property of the original leader. In return for the gift each of the recipients of territory was held bound to aid him in his wars, and each larger chief stood in similar relations to the king of his tribe or nation. Out of this grew, at length, what was called the Feudal System, feudal being derived, by some, from the old German words "fee," salary, and "od," landed possessionsa payment, or salary, in land, for services rendered, with a certain obligation to the giver. 3. The kings of the Franks the German nation that conquered Gaul-up to the time of Charlemagne, labored to consolidate their power and rule like the Roman emperors. But the genius of their race and the peculiarities of the situation were both opposed to that purpose. Charles Martel, Pepin, his son, and Charlemagne, his grandson, were all rulers of great vigor, and the last, apparently, succeeded for a time. But the military strength lay only in the scattered feudal chieftains, each of whom sought to build up his own power on his own estates. It was not possible to maintain a strong central government for any length of time, or under an ordinary man. For two hundred years these petty lords grew in strength at the expense of the king. They were still held to him by the necessity of supporting him in war, by a system of checks, which, in time, were increased, and still more enlarged, when the people began to make themselves felt in the twelfth century; but from the fifth to the fifteenth century feudalism was the prevailing system in all the civilized European nations. 4. It was a very rude and violent period, but some of the most happy traits of modern life grew out of it. The isolation of the feudal lord in his fortified chateau or castle, where his wife and children were his only equals, combined with the constant influence of the church, gradually elevated the condition of the woman, the rudeness and violence of the time were modified by the rise of chivalry, which was, in great part, founded on this new respect for the gentler sex, and sympathy for her helpless condition when exposed, without a powful protector, to unrestrained insolence and passion; and the feudal system held all the elements of society in suspense until the mighty forces-revived learning, the printing press, and a new commerce and industry- were ready to take a prominent part in making it what we now find it -- far superior to the old society. 5. Feudalism held men apart, and individually subject to the refining influence of Christian precepts, from the fifth to the ninth century, when the romantic practice of chivalry became popular as a relief from the tedium of isolation, and a channel for the flow of the softer sentiments of respect for woman, of compassion for weakness, and, at the same time, a vent for the martial spirit which the constant conflicts of the time cultivated. The age of chivalry indicates that Christianity was powerfully moulding the character of the new nations. Working on qualities as stern and rude as those of |