|

|
|
On Turnpikes and Medievalism
by G.K. Chesterton
All I Survey, 1933
Opening my newspaper the other day, I saw a short but emphatic leaderette
entitled 'A Relic of Medievalism'. It expressed a profound indignation
upon the fact that somewhere or other, in some fairly remote corner of
this country, there is a turnpike-gate, with a toll. It insisted that
this antiquated tyranny is insupportable, because it is supremely important
that our road traffic should go very fast; presumably a little faster
than it does. So it described the momentary delay in this place as a relic
of medievalism. I fear the future will look at that sentence, somewhat
sadly and a little contemptuously, as a very typical relic of modernism.
I mean it will be a melancholy relic of the only period in all human history
when people were proud of being modern. For though to-day is always to-day
and the moment is always modern, we are the only men in all history who
fell back upon bragging about the mere fact that to-day is not yesterday.
I fear that some in the future will explain it by saying that we had precious
little else to brag about. For, whatever the medieval faults, they went
with one merit. Medieval people never worried about being medieval; and
modern people do worry horribly about being modern.
To begin with, note the queer, automatic assumption that it must always
mean throwing mud at a thing to call it a relic of medievalism. The modern
world contains a good many relics of medievalism, and most of us would
be surprised if the argument were logically enforced even against the
things that are commonly called medieval. We should express some regret
if somebody blew up Westminster Abby, because it is a relic of medievalism.
Doubts would trouble us if the Government burned all existing copies of
Dante's Divine Comedy and Chaucer's Canterbury Tales,
because they are quite certainly relics of medievalism. We could not throw
ourselves into unreserved and enthusiastic rejoicing even if the Tower
of Giotto were destroyed as a relic of medievalism. And only just lately,
in Oxford and Paris (themselves, alas! relics of medievalism), there has
been a perverse and pedantic revival of the Thomist Philosophy and the
logical method of the medieval Schoolmen. Similarly, curious and restless
minds, among the very youngest artists and art critics, have unaccountably
gone back even farther into the barbaric period than the limit of the
Tower of Giotto, and are even now telling us to look back to the austerity
of Cimabue and Byzantine diagrams of the Dark Ages. These relics must
be more medieval even than medievalism.
But, in fact, this queer phrase would not cover only what is commonly
called medievalism. If a relic of medievalism only means something that
has come down to us from medieval times, such writers would probably be
surprised at the size and solidity of the relics. If I told these honest
pressmen that the Press is a relic of medievalism, they would probably
prove their love of a cliché by accusing me of a paradox. But it is at
least certain that the Printing Press is a relic of medievalism. It was
discovered and established by entirely medieval men, steeped in medieval
ideas, stuffed with the religion and social spirit of the Middle Ages.
There are no more typically medieval words than those noble words of the
eulogy that was pronounced by the great English printer on the great English
poet; the words of Caxton upon Chaucer. If I were to say that Parliament
is a relic of medievalism, I should be on even stronger ground; for, while
the Press did at least come at the end of the Middle Ages, the Parliaments
came much more nearly at the beginning of the Middle Ages. They began,
I think, in Spain and the provinces of the Pyrenees; but our own traditional
date, connecting them with the revolt of Simon de Montfort, if not strictly
accurate, does roughly represent the time. I need not say that half the
great educational foundations, not only Oxford and Cambridge, but Glasgow
and Paris, are relics of medievalism. It would seem rather hard on the
poor journalistic reformer if he is not allowed to pull down a little
turnpike-gate till he has proved his right to pull down all these relics
of medievalism.
Next we have, of course, the very considerable historic doubt about
whether the turnpike-gate is a relic of medievalism. I do not know what
was the date of this particular turnpike; but turnpikes and tolls of that
description were perhaps most widely present, most practically enforced,
or, at least, most generally noted, in the eighteenth century. When Pitt
and Dundas, both of them roaring drunk, jumped over a turnpike-gate and
were fired at with a blunderbuss, I hope nobody will suggest that those
two great politicians were relics of medievalism. Nobody surely could
be more modern than Pitt and Dundas, for one of them was a great financial
statesman, depending entirely on the bankers, and the other was a swindler.
It is possible, of course, that some such local toll was really medieval,
but I rather doubt whether the journalist even inquired whether it was
medieval. He probably regards everything that happened before the time
of Jazz and the Yellow Press as medieval. For him medieval only means
old, and old means bad; so that we come to the last question, which ought
to have been the first question, of whether a turnpike really is necessarily
bad. If we were really relics of medievalism--that is, if we had really
been taught to think--we should have put that question first, and discussed
whether a thing is bad or good before discussing whether it is modern
or medieval. There is no space to discuss it here at length, but a very
simple test in the matter may be made. The aim and effect of tolls is
simply this: that those who use the roads shall pay for the roads. As
it is, the poor people of a district, including those who never stir from
their villages, and hardly from their firesides, pay to maintain roads
which are ploughed up and torn to pieces by the cars and lorries of rich
men and big businesses, coming from London and the distant cities. It
is not self-evident that this is a more just arrangement than that by
which wayfarers pay to keep up the way, even if that arrangement were
a relic of medievalism. Lastly, we might well ask, is it indeed so certain
that our roads suffer from the slowness of petrol traffic; and that, if
we can only make every sort of motor go faster and faster, we shall all
be saved at last? That motors are more important than men is doubtless
an admitted principle of a truly modern philosophy; nevertheless, it might
be well to keep some sort of reasonable ratio between them, and decide
exactly how many human beings should be killed by each car in the course
of each year. And I fear that a mere policy of the acceleration of traffic
may take us beyond the normal modern recognition of murder into something
resembling a recognition of massacre. And about this, I for one still
have a scruple; which is probably a relic of medievalism.
This newspaper column was collected into the book All I Survey, published
in 1933. |