thor has found these divisions, into chapters and sections, a stubborn
necessity. I must beg the reader to unite what here is put asunder. The
arrangement of the chapters is partly based on sequence in time,
though basically the whole plan is topical. In the second half of the
book, I may seem to have given too large a space to imaginative liter-
ature. This is done because there are no accounts available which treat
the European literatures of the Middle Ages from an international
point of view, and a fuller discussion seems, thus, more justified than
in other fields. I do not mean to imply that mediaeval literature has
greater value than the philosophy, political thought, and art of the
period. The "Epilogue" may be read either as an introduction to the
book, or as a conclusion, or as both.

These chapters are heavily factual, with perhaps too many names.
They are more descriptive than interpretive, more annals than analy-
ses. But some interpretation undoubtedly runs through the exposition.
This must be the case, since one of my colleagues, after reading one
chapter, told me I was too favorably disposed to all things mediaeval,
and shortly after, a Jesuit scholar, who read the same chapter, wrote
me that I was so unsympathetic to all things mediaeval that I could
never have any real understanding of the period. I have tried to avoid
interpretations that generalize the significance of ideas beyond their
particular historical context. Even the most radical and the most origi-
nal of mediaeval thinkers never ceased to maintain vestiges of their
own time and they were never wholly modern. Moreover, it should
always be borne in mind that in such a condensed account it is not
possible to show the mediaeval centuries in all their diversities. Even
in any given century there were differences not only from decade to
decade, and from one nationality to another, but even from one dis-
trict to the next, for, unlike the culture of modern times, that of the
eleven centuries between A.D. 400 and 1500 was tied to the soil. Com-
munication was difficult, and there was little political or economic
interdependence of one area on another. Hence all these generaliza-
tions can never be more than approximate.

This survey is the outgrowth of a quarter century of teaching. Be-
sides the stimulus of my students, who, like the wedding guest in the
"Ancient Mariner," "could not choose but hear," I have had the help
of a number of scholars who have read parts of the manuscript. To

-viii-