SECTION CCXXV.. The History of Luxury.--in the Middle Ages.

THE HISTORY OF LUXURY.--IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

During the middle ages, industry and commerce had made as yet but little progress. Hence it was as difficult then for luxury to be ministered to by fine furniture as by the products of foreign countries. Individual ornamental pieces, especially arms and drinking cups,[225-1] were wont to be the only articles of luxury. We have inventories of the domains of Charlemagne from which we find that in one of them, the only articles of linen owned were two bed-sheets, a table-cloth and a pocket handkerchief.[225-2] Fashion is here very constant; because clothing was comparatively dearer than at present. And so now in the East. In the matter of dwellings, too, more regard was had to size and durability, than to elegance and convenience. The palaces of Alfred the Great were so frailly built that the walls had to be covered with curtains as a protection against the wind, and the lights to be inclosed in lanterns.[225-3]

Hence the disposition to use the products of the home soil as articles of luxury was all the greater, but more as to quantity than to quality.[225-4] Since the knight could personally neither eat nor drink a quantity beyond the capacity of his own stomach, he kept a numerous suite to consume his surplus. It is well known what a great part was played among the ancient Germans by their retinues of devoted servants (comitatus), which many modern writers have looked upon as constituting the real kernel of the migration of nations.

In England, it was a maxim of state policy with Henry VII., whose reign there terminated the middle age, to prohibit the great liveried suites of the nobility (19 Henry VII., ch. 14) as Richard II., Henry IV. and Edward IV. had already attempted to do. But even under James I., we find ambassadors accompanied by a suite of 500 persons or 300 noblemen.[225-5]

The rich man welcomed every opportunity which enabled him to make others share in a dazzling manner the magnitude of his superfluous wealth: hence the numberless guests at weddings who were frequently entertained for weeks.[225-6] These festivities are memorable not because of the delicacies or great variety of the dishes, but because of their colossal magnitude. Even William of Orange, 1561, entertained at his wedding guests who had brought with them 5,647 horses; and he appeared himself with a suite of 1,100 men on horseback. There were consumed on the occasion 4,000 bushels of wheat, 8,000 of rye, 11,300 of oats, 3,600 eimers of wine, 1,600 barrels of beer.[225-7] In the ordinance of Münden regulating weddings, promulgated in the year 1610, it is provided, that, at a large wedding there should not be over 24 tables, nor at a small one over 14, with 10 persons at each table.[225-8]

The hospitality of the lower stages of civilization[225-9] must be ascribed as well to this peculiar kind of luxury as to mere good nature. Arabian chiefs have their noon-day table set in the street and welcome every passer-by to it.[225-10] (Pococke.) And so, distinguished Indians keep an open cauldron on the fire cooking all the time, from which every person who comes in may help himself. (Catlin.)

Compared with this luxury of the rich, the poverty found side by side with it appears less oppressive. There is no great gap between the modes of life of the different classes.[225-11] This is the golden age of aristocracy, when no one questions its legitimateness. When, later, the nobleman, instead of keeping so many servants, begins to buy costly garments for himself, he, indeed, supports indirectly just as many and even more men; but these owe him nothing. Besides, in this last kind of luxury, it is very easily possible for him to go beyond his means, which is scarcely ever the case in the former.[225-12]