th were urgent and oft repeated, and the
chivalry of France began to talk once more of arming in the defence of
the birthplace of Jesus. The kings of Europe, whose interest it had not
been to take any part in the first Crusade, began to bestir themselves
in this; and a man appeared, eloquent as Peter the Hermit, to arouse
the people as he had done.

We find, however, that the enthusiasm of the second did not equal that
of the first Crusade: in fact, the mania had reached its climax in the
time of Peter the Hermit, and decreased regularly from that period. The
third Crusade was less general than the second, and the fourth than the
third, and so on, until the public enthusiasm was quite extinct, and
Jerusalem returned at last to the dominion of its old masters without a
convulsion in Christendom. Various reasons have been assigned for this;
and one very generally put forward is, that Europe was wearied with
continued struggles, and had become sick of "precipitating itself upon
Asia." M. Guizot, in his admirable lectures upon European civilization,
successfully combats this opinion, and offers one of his own, which is
far more satisfactory. He says, in his eighth lecture, "It has been
often repeated, that Europe was tired of continually invading Asia.
This expression appears to me exceedingly incorrect. It is not possible
that human beings can be wearied with what they have not done--that the
labours of their forefathers can fatigue them. Weariness is a personal,
not an inherited feeling. The men of the thirteenth century were not
fatigued by the Crusades of the twelfth. They were influenced by
another cause. A great change had taken place in ideas, sentiments, and
social conditions. The same desires and the same wants were no longer
felt. The same things were no longer believed. The people refused to
believe what their ancestors were persuaded of."

This is, in fact, the secret of the change; and its truth becomes more
apparent as we advance in the history of the Crusades, and compare the
state of the public mind at the different periods when Godfrey of
Bouillon, Louis VII. and Richard I. were chiefs and leaders of the
movement. The Crusades themselves were the means of operating a great
change in national ideas, and advancing the civilization of Europe. In
the time of Godfrey, the nobles were all-powerful and all-oppressive,
and equally obnoxious to kings and people. During their absence along
with that portion of the c