feudalism essay

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

Origins of the idea

• Development in the 19th and 20th centuries
• Modern critiques

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Internet Encyclopedia of Ukraine - Feudalism
• Khan Academy - Feudal system during the Middle Ages
• Academia - What is Feudalism
• The History Learning Site - Feudalism
• Dallas Baptist University - Medieval Resources - The "Feudalism" Model: Its Limits
• World History Encyclopedia - Feudalism
• Chemistry LibreTexts - Feudalism
• CORE - The Idea of Feudalism
• feudalism - Children's Encyclopedia (Ages 8-11)
• feudalism - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

feudalism , historiographic construct designating the social, economic, and political conditions in western Europe during the early Middle Ages , the long stretch of time between the 5th and 12th centuries. Feudalism and the related term feudal system are labels invented long after the period to which they were applied. They refer to what those who invented them perceived as the most significant and distinctive characteristics of the early and central Middle Ages. The expressions féodalité and feudal system were coined by the beginning of the 17th century, and the English words feudality and feudalism (as well as feudal pyramid ) were in use by the end of the 18th century. They were derived from the Latin words feudum (“fief”) and feodalitas (services connected with the fief), both of which were used during the Middle Ages and later to refer to a form of property holding. Use of the terms associated with feudum to denote the essential characteristics of the early Middle Ages has invested the fief with exaggerated prominence and placed undue emphasis on the importance of a special mode of land tenure to the detriment of other, more significant aspects of social, economic, and political life.

The terms feudalism and feudal system were generally applied to the early and central Middle Ages—the period from the 5th century, when central political authority in the Western empire disappeared, to the 12th century, when kingdoms began to emerge as effective centralized units of government. For a relatively brief period, from the mid-8th to the early 9th century, the Carolingian rulers, especially Pippin (reigned 751–768) and Charlemagne (reigned 768/771–814), had remarkable success in creating and maintaining a relatively unified empire. Before and afterward, however, political units were fragmented and political authority diffused. The mightier of the later Carolingians attempted to regulate local magnates and enlist them in their service, but the power of local elites was never effaced. In the absence of forceful kings and emperors, local lords expanded the territory subject to them and intensified their control over the people living there. In many areas the term feudum , as well as the terms beneficium and casamentum , came to be used to describe a form of property holding. The holdings these terms denoted have often been considered essentially dependent tenures , over which their holders’ rights were notably limited. As the words were used in documents of the period, however, the characteristics of the holdings to which they were applied are difficult to distinguish from those of tenures designated by such words as allodium , which has generally been translated as “freehold property.”

Fiefs still existed in the 17th century, when the feudal model—or, as contemporary historians term it, the feudal construct—was developed. At that time, the fief was a piece of property, usually land, that was held in return for service, which could include military duties. The fief holder swore fidelity to the person from whom the fief was held (the lord , dominus , or seigneur ) and became his (or her) man. The ceremony in which the oath was taken was called homage (from the Latin, homo ; “man”). These institutions survived in England until they were abolished by Parliament in 1645 and, after the Restoration , by Charles II in 1660. Until their eradication by the National Assembly between 1789 and 1793, they had considerable importance in France, where they were employed to create and reinforce familial and social bonds. Their pervasiveness made students of the past eager to understand how they had come into being. Similarities of terminology and practice found in documents surviving from the Middle Ages—especially the Libri feudorum (“Book of Fiefs”), an Italian compilation of customs relating to property holding, which was made in the 12th century and incorporated into Roman law —led historians and lawyers to search for the origins of contemporary feudal institutions in the Middle Ages.

As defined by scholars in the 17th century, the medieval “feudal system” was characterized by the absence of public authority and the exercise by local lords of administrative and judicial functions formerly (and later) performed by centralized governments; general disorder and endemic conflict; and the prevalence of bonds between lords and free dependents ( vassals ), which were forged by the lords’ bestowal of property called “ fiefs ” and by their reception of homage from the vassals. These bonds entailed the rendering of services by vassals to their lords (military obligations, counsel , financial support) and the lords’ obligation to protect and respect their vassals. These characteristics were in part deduced from medieval documents and chronicles, but they were interpreted in light of 17th-century practices and semantics. Learned legal commentaries on the laws governing the property called “fiefs” also affected interpretation of the sources. These commentaries, produced since the 13th century, focused on legal theory and on rules derived from actual disputes and hypothetical cases. They did not include (nor were they intended to provide) dispassionate analysis of historical development. Legal commentators in the 16th century had prepared the way for the elaboration of the feudal construct by formulating the idea, loosely derived from the Libri feudorum , of a single feudal law, which they presented as being spread throughout Europe during the early Middle Ages.

The terms feudalism and feudal system enabled historians to deal summarily with a long span of European history whose complexities were—and remain—confusing. The Roman Empire and the various emperors’ accomplishments provided a key to understanding Roman history, and the reemergence of states and strong rulers in the 12th century again furnished manageable focal points for historical narrative, particularly since medieval states and governmental practices can be presented as antecedents of modern nations and institutions. The feudal construct neatly filled the gap between the 5th and the 12th century. Although Charlemagne may seem an anomaly in this evolution, he was presented as “sowing the seeds” from which feudalism emerged. A variety of Roman, barbarian, and Carolingian institutions were considered antecedents of feudal practices: Roman lordship and clientage, barbarian war chiefdoms and bands, grants of lands to soldiers and to officeholders, and oaths of loyalty and fidelity. In the 17th century, as later, the high point of feudalism was located in the 11th century. Later rulers who adopted and adapted feudal institutions to increase their power were labeled “feudal” and their governments called “feudal monarchies.” Despite the survival of institutions and practices associated with the medieval feudal system in the 17th century, historians of that time presented medieval feudalism and the feudal system as declining in importance in the 14th and 15th centuries. This period was later dubbed an age of “ bastard feudalism ” because of the use of salaries and written contracts between lords and dependents.

Those who formulated the concept of feudalism were affected by the search for simplicity and order in the universe associated with the work of Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) and especially Isaac Newton (1642–1727). Historians and philosophers were persuaded that if the universe operated systematically, so too must societies. In the 16th century some students of the law and customs of the fief declared that feudal institutions were universal and maintained that feudal systems had existed in Rome, Persia , and Judaea . The philosopher Giambattista Vico (1668–1744) considered the fief one of humankind’s eternal institutions. Adopting a similar position, Voltaire (1694–1778) contested the judgment of Montesquieu (1689–1755) that the appearance of feudal laws was a unique historical event. The philosophical historians of 18th-century Scotland searched for feudalism outside western Europe, and they expanded the construct’s field of significance to encompass peasants as well as lords. Adam Smith (1723–90) presented feudal government as a stage of social development characterized by the absence of commerce and by the use of semi-free labour to cultivate land. Smith’s student John Millar (1735–1801) found “the outlines of the feudal policy” in Asia and Africa. The association popularly made between the feudal construct and ignorance and barbarism fostered its extension to regions which Europeans scarcely knew and which they considered backward and primitive.

Following Millar’s precedent, some later historians continued to look for feudal institutions in times and places outside medieval Europe, most notably Japan . These efforts, predictably, resulted in misconceptions and misunderstanding. Historians using the feudal model for comparative purposes emphasized those characteristics which resemble or seem to resemble Western feudal practices and neglected other, dissimilar aspects, some of which were uniquely significant in shaping the evolution of the areas in question. For Westerners, the use of the feudal model necessarily created a deceptive sense of familiarity with societies that are different from their own.

Server Costs Fundraiser 2024

Feudalism was the system in 10th-13th century European medieval societies where a social hierarchy was established based on local administrative control and the distribution of land into units (fiefs). A landowner (lord) gave a fief, along with a promise of military and legal protection, in return for a payment of some kind from the person who received it (vassal).

The payment of the vassal to the lord typically came in the form of feudal service which could mean military service or the regular payment of produce or money. Both lord and vassal were freemen and the term feudalism is not generally applied to the relationship between the unfree peasantry (serfs or villeins) and the person of higher social rank on whose land they laboured.

Problems of Defining Feudalism

Although the term 'feudalism' and 'feudal society' are commonly used in history texts, scholars have never agreed on precisely what those terms mean. The terms were applied to European medieval society from the 16th century onwards and subsequently to societies elsewhere, notably in the Zhou period of China (1046-256 BCE) and Edo period of Japan (1603-1868). The term feudalism was not used by the people who lived in the Middle Ages. Neither can the feudal system, once defined, be applied uniformly across different European states as there were variations in laws and customs in different geographical areas and in different centuries. As a consequence, many historians believe that the term feudalism is only of limited use in understanding medieval societies.

The Oxford English Dictionary has as concise a definition for feudalism as anywhere while still including its various levels of application:

The dominant social system in medieval Europe , in which the nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labour, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection.

The Feudal Society in Medieval Europe Simeon Netchev (CC BY-NC-ND) {"@context":"https://schema.org","@id":"https://www.worldhistory.org/image/15424/the-feudal-society-in-medieval-europe/#imageobject","@type":"ImageObject","acquireLicensePage":"https://www.worldhistory.org/image/15424/the-feudal-society-in-medieval-europe/","caption":"An illustration depicting the strict hierarchical structure of the societies of Western Europe in the Middle Ages (c.10th-13th century) based on a tenement-based distribution of the land into units or \"fiefs.\" During a period commonly known as Feudalism, the Crown owned all of the Realm (except the Church's possessions) and portioned it out to the nobles in exchange for military service or rent. Knights were, in turn, tenants of the nobles. The lowest class - the peasants (villeins or serfs) were obliged to work the land and give labor, homage, and a share of the produce to their lord in exchange for protection.","contentUrl":"https://www.worldhistory.org/uploads/images/15424.png","copyrightNotice":"Simeon Netchev - CC BY-NC-ND - This licence only allows others to download this content and share it with others as long as the author is credited, but they can't change the content in any way or use it commercially. When republishing on the web a hyperlink back to the original content source URL must be included.","creator":{"@type":"Person","@id":"https://www.worldhistory.org/user/simeonnetchev/#person","name":"Simeon Netchev","url":"https://www.worldhistory.org/user/simeonnetchev/","sameAs":["https://www.linkedin.com/in/simeon-netchev/"],"image":"https://www.worldhistory.org/uploads/profile_photos/150-simeonnetchev.jpg","description":"Simeon is a freelance visual designer with a deep interest in the human side of history.\r\nHe believes that every image should be an interaction, a commentary, and a narrative, and every map should lead on an exciting journey of exploration and discovery.","jobTitle":"Graphic Designer","worksFor":"https://www.worldhistory.org#organization"},"creditText":"Simeon Netchev / World History Encyclopedia","dateModified":"2024-08-31T16:19:15+0000","datePublished":"2022-03-16T07:34:01+0000","encodingFormat":"image/png","headline":"The Feudal Society in Medieval Europe","height":2697,"isAccessibleForFree":true,"isFamilyFriendly":true,"isPartOf":"https://www.worldhistory.org#website","license":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0","mainEntityOfPage":"https://www.worldhistory.org/image/15424/the-feudal-society-in-medieval-europe/","publisher":"https://www.worldhistory.org#organization","representativeOfPage":false,"url":"https://www.worldhistory.org/image/15424/the-feudal-society-in-medieval-europe/","width":4795}

What were the origins of feudalism.

The word 'feudalism' derives from the medieval Latin terms feudalis , meaning fee, and feodum , meaning fief. The fee signified the land given (the fief) as a payment for regular military service. The system had its roots in the Roman manorial system (in which workers were compensated with protection while living on large estates) and in the 8th century kingdom of the Franks where a king gave out land for life ( benefice ) to reward loyal nobles and receive service in return. The feudal system proper became widespread in Western Europe from the 11th century onwards, largely thanks to the Normans as their rulers carved up and dished out lands wherever their armies conquered.

Lords & Vassals

Starting from the top of society's pyramid , the monarch – a good example is William the Conqueror (r. 1066-1087) who considered all the lands of England as his personal property – could give a parcel of land (of no fixed size) to a noble who, in return, would be that monarch's vassal, that is he would promise loyalty and service when required. Thus, a personal bond was created. The most common and needed service was military service. Military obligations included fighting in that monarch's army or protecting assets of the Crown such as castles. In some cases, a money payment (known as scutage), which the monarch then used to pay mercenary soldiers, might be offered instead of military service. The vassal received any income from the land, had authority over its inhabitants and could pass the same rights on to his heirs.

The nobles who had received land, often called suzerain vassals, could have much more than they either needed or could manage themselves and so they often sub-let parts of it to tenant vassals. Once again, the person was given the right to use and profit from this land and in return, in one form or another, then owed a service to the landowner. This service could again take the form of military service (typical in the case of a knight) or, as tenants might be of a lower social class (but still be freemen) and they might not have had the necessary military skills or equipment, more usually they offered a percentage of their revenue from the land they rented (either in money or produce) or, later in the Middle Ages, made a fixed payment of rent. There were also irregular special fees to be paid to the lord such as when his eldest daughter married or his son was knighted.

The arrangement which created a vassal was known as 'homage' as they often knelt before their particular feudal lord and swore an oath of loyalty, for which, in return, they not only received the land but also their lord's protection if and when required. The promise of protection was no small matter in times of war , when there were frequent raids from hostile neighbouring states, and when there was a perpetual danger of general banditry. Protection also came in the form of legal support and representation if a vassal found himself in a civil or church court. A tenant usually handed down their tenancy to their heir although it was sometimes possible to sell the right of tenancy to a third party, provided the lord who owned the land agreed.

Another type of relationship in feudal societies, especially in medieval Germany and France, involved the allod , an inalienable property, i.e. one that could not be taken back. Holders of an allod still owed some form of allegiance to a superior local lord but the relationship was not based on land ownership and so that allegiance was harder to enforce.

The feudal system perpetuated itself as a status quo because the control of land required the ability to perform military service and, because of the costs involved (of weapons, armour and horses), land was required to fund military service. Thus there was a perpetual divide between the landed aristocracy (monarchs, lords, and some tenants) and those who worked the land for them who could be free or unfree labourers. Unfree labourers were serfs, also known as villeins, who were at the bottom of the social pyramid and who made up the vast majority of the population. The peasantry worked, without pay, on the land owned or rented by others to produce food for themselves and, just as importantly, food and profit for their masters. They were often treated as little more than slaves and could not leave the estate on which they lived and worked. The term feudalism, however, is generally applied by modern historians only to the relationship between lords and vassals, and not the peasantry. Rather, the relationship between serf and landowner or tenant is referred to as the manorial system after the most common unit of land, the 'manor'.

Consequences & Effects of Feudalism

The consequence of the feudal system was the creation of very localised groups of communities which owed loyalty to a specific local lord who exercised absolute authority in his domain. As fiefs were often hereditary, a permanent class divide was established between those who had land and those who rented it. The system was often weighted in favour of the sovereign as when a noble died without an heir, his estate went back to the monarch to either keep for themselves or to redistribute to another noble. Monarchs could distribute land for political purposes, fragmenting a noble's holdings or distancing him from the court. It also became difficult to keep track of who owned what which led to such controls as Domesday Book of 1087.

Additional effects were the presence of vassals in the local courts which deliberated on cases involving the estates of their lords. Thus, there could be a clear conflict of interest and lack of impartiality, even if the more serious criminal cases were referred to the courts of the Crown.

In addition, the system of feudal relationships could create serious unrest. Sometimes a monarch might insist on active military service because of a war but nobles might also refuse, as happened to King John of England in 1215 and the Barons' Revolt which led to the signing of the Magna Carta . In 1215, and in subsequent revolts in the 13th century, the barons were acting collectively for their own interests which was a direct threat to the entire system of feudalism, based as it was upon single lords and vassals working out their own private arrangements. Military service was reduced to fixed terms, typically 40 days in England, in an effort to reduce the burden on nobles so that they did not leave their lands unattended for too long. However, 40 days was not usually enough to see out a campaign and so a monarch was obliged to pay mercenaries, dealing another blow to the tradition of feudalism and vassalage.

Why Did Feudalism Decline?

Medieval feudalism was essentially based on the relationship of reciprocal aid between lord and vassal but as that system became more complex over time, so this relationship weakened. Lords came to own multiple estates and vassals could be tenants of various parcels of land so that loyalties became confused and even conflicting with people choosing to honour the relationship that suited their own needs best.

Another blow to the system came from sudden population declines caused by wars and plagues, particularly the Black Death (which peaked between 1347-1352), and by peasant revolts (most famously in England in 1381). Such crises caused a chronic shortage of labour and the abandonment of estates because there was no one to work them. The growth of large towns and cities also saw labour leave the countryside to find a better future and the new jobs available there.

By the 13th century, the increase in commerce and the greater use of coinage changed the way the feudal system worked. Money allowed feudal lords to pay their sovereign instead of performing military service; the monarch's use of mercenaries then meant military service, and thus the barons themselves became less important to the defence of the realm. Conversely, a monarch could now distribute money instead of land in his system of rewards. A rich merchant class developed with no ties of loyalty to anyone except their sovereign, their suppliers and their customers. Even serfs could sometimes buy their freedom and escape the circumstances into which they were born. All of these factors conspired to weaken the feudal system based on land ownership and service even if feudalism would continue beyond the medieval period in some forms and in some places.

Subscribe to topic Related Content Books Cite This Work License

Bibliography

• Anonymous. Chambers Dictionary of World History. Chambers Harrap, 2018.
• Blockmans, W. Introduction to Medieval Europe 300–1500. Routledge, 2017.
• Davies, N. Europe. Oxford University Press, 2014.
• Gies, F. Life in a Medieval Village. Harper Perennial, 2016.
• Gies, J. Life in a Medieval Castle. Harper Perennial, 2015.
• Keen, M. The Penguin History of Medieval Europe. Penguin Books, 1991.
• McDowall, D. An Illustrated History of Britain. Pearson Education Ltd, 1989.
• OED - Feudalism , accessed 19 Mar 2020.
• Singman, J.L. The Middle Ages. Sterling, 2013.

About the Author

Translations

We want people all over the world to learn about history. Help us and translate this definition into another language!

Questions & Answers

What is a simple definition of feudalism, what is the main idea of feudalism, why did feudalism decline, related content.

Domesday Book

Magna Carta

Manorialism

What was Feudalism in Medieval Europe?

Leptis Magna

Free for the world, supported by you.

World History Encyclopedia is a non-profit organization. For only $5 per month you can become a member and support our mission to engage people with cultural heritage and to improve history education worldwide.

Recommended Books

External Links

Cite this work.

Cartwright, M. (2018, November 22). Feudalism . World History Encyclopedia . Retrieved from https://www.worldhistory.org/Feudalism/

Chicago Style

Cartwright, Mark. " Feudalism ." World History Encyclopedia . Last modified November 22, 2018. https://www.worldhistory.org/Feudalism/.

Cartwright, Mark. " Feudalism ." World History Encyclopedia . World History Encyclopedia, 22 Nov 2018. Web. 31 Aug 2024.

License & Copyright

Submitted by Mark Cartwright , published on 22 November 2018. The copyright holder has published this content under the following license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike . This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon this content non-commercially, as long as they credit the author and license their new creations under the identical terms. When republishing on the web a hyperlink back to the original content source URL must be included. Please note that content linked from this page may have different licensing terms.

Visiting Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion?

You must join the virtual exhibition queue when you arrive. If capacity has been reached for the day, the queue will close early.

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Feudalism and knights in medieval europe.

Viking Sword

Aquamanile in the Form of a Mounted Knight

A Knight of the d'Aluye Family

Michael Norris Department of Education, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

October 2001

From the ninth to the early eleventh centuries, invasions of the Magyars from the east, Muslims from the south, and Vikings from the north struck western Europe. This unrest ultimately spurred greater unity in England and Germany, but in northern France centralized authority broke down and the region split into smaller and smaller political units. By the ninth century, many knights and nobles held estates (fiefs) granted by greater lords in return for military and other service. This feudal system (from the medieval Latin feodum or feudum , fee or fief) enabled a cash-poor but land-rich lord to support a military force. But this was not the only way that land was held, knights maintained, and loyalty to a lord retained. Lands could be held unconditionally, landless knights could be sheltered in noble households, and loyalties could be maintained through kinship, friendship, or wages.

Mounted armored warriors , or knights (from the Old English cniht , boy or servant), were the dominant forces of medieval armies. The twelfth-century Byzantine princess Anna Komnena wrote that the impact of a group of charging French knights “might rupture the walls of Babylon .” At first, most knights were of humble origins, some of them not even possessing land, but by the later twelfth century knights were considered members of the nobility and followed a system of courteous knightly behavior called chivalry (from cheval , the French word for horse). During and after the fourteenth century , weapons that were particularly effective against horsemen appeared on the battlefield, such as the longbow, pike, halberd, and cannon. Yet despite the knights’ gradual loss of military importance, the system by which noble families were identified, called heraldry, continued to flourish and became more complex. The magnificence of their war games—called tournaments—also increased, as did the number of new knightly orders, such as the Order of the Garter.

Norris, Michael. “Feudalism and Knights in Medieval Europe.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/feud/hd_feud.htm (October 2001)

Further Reading

Bennett, Judith M., and C. Warren Hollister. Medieval Europe: A Short History . 10th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2005.

Gies, Joseph and Frances Gies. Life in a Medieval Castle . New York: Harper & Row, 1979.

Additional Essays by Michael Norris

• Norris, Michael. “ The Papacy during the Renaissance .” (August 2007)
• Norris, Michael. “ Arms and Armor in Medieval Europe .” (October 2001)
• Norris, Michael. “ Life of Jesus of Nazareth .” (originally published June 2008, last revised September 2008)

Related Essays

• Arms and Armor in Medieval Europe
• The Crusades (1095–1291)
• The Decoration of Arms and Armor
• Fashion in European Armor, 1000–1300
• The Function of Armor in Medieval and Renaissance Europe
• The Age of Saint Louis (1226–1270)
• Arms and Armor in Renaissance Europe
• Arms and Armor—Common Misconceptions and Frequently Asked Questions
• Art and Death in the Middle Ages
• Byzantium (ca. 330–1453)
• Courtship and Betrothal in the Italian Renaissance
• The Decoration of European Armor
• Domestic Art in Renaissance Italy
• Famous Makers of Arms and Armors and European Centers of Production
• Fashion in European Armor
• Fashion in European Armor, 1300–1400
• Fashion in European Armor, 1400–1500
• Medieval Aquamanilia
• Nuptial Furnishings in the Italian Renaissance
• Romanesque Art
• Techniques of Decoration on Arms and Armor

List of Rulers

• List of Rulers of Europe
• France, 1000–1400 A.D.
• Great Britain and Ireland, 1000–1400 A.D.
• Low Countries, 1000–1400 A.D.
• 10th Century A.D.
• 11th Century A.D.
• 12th Century A.D.
• 13th Century A.D.
• 14th Century A.D.
• 9th Century A.D.
• Frankish Art
• Great Britain and Ireland
• Horse Trappings
• Islamic Art
• Medieval Art

This domain has expired. Is this your domain? Renew Now!

Get a new domain registered at NameSilo.com. Find out who owns any domain name with the WHOIS tool.

This webpage was generated by the domain owner using Sedo Domain Parking . Disclaimer: Sedo maintains no relationship with third party advertisers. Reference to any specific service or trade mark is not controlled by Sedo nor does it constitute or imply its association, endorsement or recommendation.

Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History

This essay about feudalism explores its intricate social, economic, and political interdependencies and their deep impact on human history. It examines feudalism’s origins from the decline of the Roman Empire, its peak during the High Middle Ages, and its eventual decline due to events like the Black Death. The essay also highlights the enduring legacy of feudalism on modern concepts of land ownership, property rights, and societal values of loyalty and duty.

How it works

Feudalism, an intricate tapestry of social, economic, and political interdependencies, has woven itself deeply into the history of humanity. Born from the remnants of crumbling empires and fractured sovereignties, its influence extended far beyond medieval Europe, leaving its mark on societies across different eras and regions. To understand its role in shaping human civilization is to navigate through the corridors of power, the landscapes of labor, and the ties of loyalty that defined an age.

At its core, feudalism was a complex web of mutual obligations, centered around the exchange of land for loyalty and protection.

Lords, at the pinnacle of the feudal hierarchy, granted fiefs to vassals in return for military service and allegiance. This intricate system of land and loyalty provided a semblance of stability in an otherwise chaotic and uncertain time.

The origins of feudalism can be traced back to the decline of the Roman Empire, as its centralized authority disintegrated, giving rise to local strongmen and warlords. In the vacuum left by the absence of centralized governance, power gravitated towards those who could offer protection and security, setting the stage for the feudal order to emerge.

Feudalism reached its zenith during the medieval period, particularly in the High Middle Ages. The feudal landscape was a mosaic of fiefs and domains, interconnected by ties of homage and service. At the top stood the sovereign, whose largesse supported a network of nobles and knights, all bound by oaths of fealty and kinship.

Beneath the surface of feudal hierarchy, however, lay a complex and nuanced social structure. Peasants worked the land, living a subsistence existence in exchange for the protection offered by their lord’s castle. Serfs, bound to the land, endured a life of bondage in a world where freedom was an elusive ideal.

Feudalism was not exclusive to Europe; its principles spread across different cultures and continents, adapting to local customs. In Japan, samurai followed a strict code of honor known as “bushido,” creating bonds of loyalty and duty with their daimyo lords. In China, the feudal-like “fengjian” system governed the relationships between regional rulers and their subjects, shaping the societal and governance structures.

The decline of feudalism in Europe was a gradual process, marked by the erosion of noble privileges and the rise of centralized monarchies. Events such as the Black Death and the Hundred Years’ War accelerated its decline, as economic upheaval and social unrest undermined the old order.

Despite its decline, the legacy of feudalism endures, influencing modern concepts of land ownership and property rights, which are foundational to capitalism and the modern nation-state. The feudal values of loyalty and duty also left a lasting impact on the collective consciousness, shaping ideas of honor, obligation, and citizenship for future generations.

Feudalism’s history is a testament to the resilience of human society amidst adversity. Its rise and fall reflect the shifting tides of power, the fragility of empires, and the enduring spirit of human cooperation and ingenuity. Although the era of feudalism has faded into history, its echoes continue to resonate, reminding us of the bonds that unite us in a world that is constantly evolving.

Cite this page

Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History. (2024, Jun 17). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-role-of-feudalism-in-world-history/

"Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History." PapersOwl.com , 17 Jun 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-role-of-feudalism-in-world-history/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-role-of-feudalism-in-world-history/ [Accessed: 1 Sep. 2024]

"Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History." PapersOwl.com, Jun 17, 2024. Accessed September 1, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-role-of-feudalism-in-world-history/

"Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History," PapersOwl.com , 17-Jun-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-role-of-feudalism-in-world-history/. [Accessed: 1-Sep-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Understanding the Role of Feudalism in World History . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/understanding-the-role-of-feudalism-in-world-history/ [Accessed: 1-Sep-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Home — Essay Samples — History — Feudalism — Feudalism in England [1000-Word]

Feudalism in England [1000-word]

• Categories: England Feudalism

About this sample

Words: 1030 |

Published: Jun 24, 2024

Words: 1030 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Geography & Travel History

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1237 words

4 pages / 1692 words

2 pages / 927 words

4 pages / 1988 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Feudalism

Feudalism was established in Europe by the 800s CE but appeared later in the 1100s in japan. European feudalism ended by the growth of a stronger political states in the 16th century, but Japanese feudalism held on until the [...]

Feudalism in France stands as a cornerstone of medieval European history, representing a complex social, economic, and political system that dominated the region for centuries. This essay delves into the intricacies of feudalism [...]

Feudalism, a system of social organization that dominated Medieval Europe, has been a topic of much debate among historians. In this essay, we will explore the definition of feudalism, its history, and the ongoing debates [...]

Feudalism, a socio-economic system that dominated European societies from the 9th to the 15th century, has often been a topic of debate among historians and scholars. While some view it as a crucial and functional structure, [...]

After the collapse of the Roman Empire, feudalism was by far the most prevalent of social systems during the ninth and fifteenth centuries throughout Western Europe. This system found its supposed highest authority in the king [...]

Feudalism was the way of life for people in the Middle Ages. Some people, like the royalty and nobles, supported and liked feudalism. Others, like serfs and slaves, did not enjoy feudalism. Everybody in society was involved with [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

The Problem With Feudalism

Later historians say the concept doesn't match reality

De Agostini / G. Dagli Orti / Getty Images

• People & Events
• American History
• African American History
• African History
• Ancient History and Culture
• Asian History
• European History
• Latin American History
• Military History
• The 20th Century
• Women's History
• B.A., History, University of Texas at Austin

Medieval historians generally aren't bothered by words. The intrepid medievalist is always ready to leap into the rough-and-tumble milieu of Old English word origins, medieval French literature, and Latin Church documents. Icelandic sagas hold no terror for the medieval scholar. Next to these challenges, the esoteric terminology of medieval studies is mundane, no threat to the historian of the Middle Ages.

But one word has become the bane of medievalists everywhere. Use it in discussing medieval life and society, and the average medieval historian's face will screw up in revulsion.

What word has this power to annoy, disgust, and even upset the ordinarily cool, collected medievalist?

What Is Feudalism?

Every student of the Middle Ages is at least somewhat familiar with the term, usually defined as follows:

Feudalism was the dominant form of political organization in medieval Europe. It was a hierarchical system of social relationships wherein a noble lord granted land known as a fief to a free man, who in turn swore fealty to the lord as his vassal and agreed to provide military and other services. A vassal could also be a lord, granting portions of the land he held to other free vassals; this was known as "subinfeudation" and often led all the way up to the king. The land granted to each vassal was inhabited by serfs who worked the land for him, providing him with income to support his military endeavors; in turn, the vassal would protect the serfs from attack and invasion.

This is a simplified definition, and many exceptions and caveats go along with this model of medieval society. It is fair to say that this is the explanation for feudalism you'll find in most history textbooks of the 20th century, and it is very close to every dictionary definition available.

The problem? Virtually none of it is accurate.

Description Inaccurate

Feudalism  was not the "dominant" form of political organization in medieval Europe. There was no "hierarchical system" of lords and vassals engaged in a structured agreement to provide military defense. There was no "subinfeudation" leading up to the king. The arrangement whereby serfs worked the land for a lord in return for protection, known as manorialism or seignorialism, was not part of a "feudal system." Monarchies of the early Middle Ages had their challenges and their weaknesses, but kings didn't use feudalism to exert control over their subjects, and the feudal relationship wasn't the "glue that held medieval society together," as had been said.

In short, feudalism as described above never existed in Medieval Europe.

For decades, even centuries, feudalism has characterized our view of medieval society. If it never existed, then why did so many historians say it did? Weren't entire books written on the subject? Who has the authority to say that all those historians were wrong? If the current consensus among "experts" in medieval history is to reject feudalism, why is it still presented as reality in nearly every medieval history textbook?

Concept Questioned

The word feudalism was never used during the Middle Ages. The term was invented by 16th- and 17th-century scholars to describe a political system of several hundred years earlier. This makes feudalism a post-medieval construct.

Constructs help us understand alien ideas in terms more familiar to our modern thought processes. Middle Ages and medieval are constructs. (Medieval people didn't think of themselves as living in a "middle" age—they thought they were living in the now, just like we do.) Medievalists might not like the way the term medieval is used as an insult or how absurd myths of past customs and behavior are commonly attributed to the Middle Ages, but most are confident that using Middle Ages and medieval to describe the era as between the ancient and early modern eras is satisfactory, however fluid the definition of all three timeframes might be.

But medieval has a fairly clear meaning based on a specific, easily defined viewpoint. Feudalism cannot be said to have the same.

In 16th-century France, Humanist scholars grappled with the history of Roman law and its authority in their own land. They examined a substantial collection of Roman law books. Among these books was the  Libri Feudorum —the Book of Fiefs.

'Libri Feudorum'

The  Libri Feudorum  was a compilation of legal texts concerning the proper disposition of fiefs, which were defined in these documents as lands held by people referred to as vassals. The work had been put together in Lombardy, northern Italy, in the 1100s, and over the intervening centuries, lawyers and scholars had commented on it and added definitions and interpretations, or  glosses.  The  Libri Feudorum  is an extraordinarily significant work that has been barely studied since 16th-century French lawyers gave it a good look.

In their evaluation of the Book of Fiefs, the scholars made some reasonable assumptions:

• The fiefs under discussion in the texts were pretty much the same as the fiefs of 16th-century France—that is, lands belonging to nobles.
• Te  Libri Feudorum  was addressing actual legal practices of the 11th century, not simply expounding on an academic concept.
• The explanation of fiefs' origins in the  Libri Feudorum —that grants were initially made for as long as the lord chose but were later extended to the grantee's lifetime and afterward made hereditary—was a reliable history and not mere conjecture.

The assumptions might have been reasonable, but were they correct? French scholars had every reason to believe they were and no real reason to dig any deeper. They weren't so much interested in the historical  facts of the time period as they were in the legal questions addressed in the ​ Libri Feudorum.  Their foremost consideration was whether the laws had any authority in France. Ultimately, French lawyers rejected the authority of the Lombard Book of Fiefs.

Examining Assumptions

However, during their investigations, based in part on the assumptions outlined above, scholars who studied the  Libri Feudorum  formulated a view of the Middle Ages. This general picture included the idea that feudal relationships, wherein noblemen granted fiefs to free vassals in return for services, were important in medieval society because they provided social and military security at a time when the central government was weak or nonexistent. The idea was discussed in editions of the  Libri Feudorum  made by legal scholars Jacques Cujas and François Hotman, who both used the term  feudum  to indicate an arrangement involving a fief .

Other scholars soon saw value in the works of Cujas and Hotman and applied the ideas to their own studies. Before the 16th century ended, two Scottish lawyers—Thomas Craig and Thomas Smith—were using feudum in their classifications of Scottish lands and their tenure. Craig apparently first expressed the idea of feudal arrangements as a hierarchical system imposed on nobles and their subordinates by their monarch as a matter of policy. In the 17th century, Henry Spelman, a noted English antiquarian, adopted this viewpoint for English legal history.

Although Spelman never used the word feudalism , his work went a long way toward creating an "-ism" from the ideas over which Cujas and Hotman had theorized. Not only did Spelman maintain, as Craig had done, that feudal arrangements were part of a system, but he related the English feudal heritage with that of Europe, indicating that feudal arrangements were characteristic of medieval society as a whole. Spelman's hypothesis was accepted as fact by scholars who saw it as a sensible explanation of medieval social and property relations.

Fundamentals Unchallenged

Over the next several decades, scholars explored and debated feudal ideas. They expanded the meaning of the term from legal matters to other aspects of medieval society . They argued over the origins of feudal arrangements and expounded on the various levels of subinfeudation. They incorporated manorialism and applied it to the agricultural economy. They envisioned a complete system of feudal agreements running throughout Britain and Europe.

But they didn't challenge Craig's or Spelman's interpretation of the works of Cujas and Hotman, nor did they question the conclusions that Cujas and Hotman drew from the  Libri Feudorum.

From the vantage point of the 21st century, it's easy to ask why the facts were overlooked in favor of the theory. Present-day historians engage in a rigorous examination of the evidence and clearly identify a theory as such. Why didn't 16th- and 17th-century scholars do the same? The simple answer is that history as a scholarly field has evolved over time; in the 17th century, the academic discipline of historical evaluation was in its infancy. Historians didn't have the tools, both physical and figurative, taken for granted today, nor did they have the example of scientific methods from other fields to incorporate into their learning processes.

Besides, having a straightforward model by which to view the Middle Ages gave scholars the sense that they understood the time period. Medieval society becomes so much easier to evaluate and comprehend if it can be labeled and fit into a simple organizational structure.

By the end of the 18th century, the term feudal system was used among historians, and by the middle of the 19th century, feudalism had become a fairly well-fleshed-out model, or construct, of medieval government and society. As the idea spread beyond academia, feudalism became a buzzword for any oppressive, backward, hidebound system of government. In the  French Revolution , the "feudal regime" was abolished by the  National Assembly , and in Karl Marx's "Communist Manifesto ,"   feudalism was the oppressive, agrarian-based economic system that preceded the industrialized, capitalist economy.

With such far-ranging appearances in academic and mainstream usage, breaking free of what was, essentially, a wrong impression would be an extraordinary challenge.

Questions Arise

In the late 19th century, the field of medieval studies began to evolve into a serious discipline. No longer did the average historian accept as fact everything that had been written by his or her predecessors and repeat it as a matter of course. Scholars of the medieval era began to question interpretations of the evidence and the evidence itself.

This wasn't a swift process. The medieval era was still the bastard child of historical study; a "dark age" of ignorance, superstition, and brutality, "a thousand years without a bath." Medieval historians had much prejudice, fanciful invention, and misinformation to overcome, and there was no concerted effort to shake things up and re-examine every theory ever floated about the Middle Ages. Feudalism had become so entrenched that it wasn't an obvious choice to overturn.

Even once historians began to recognize the "system" as a post-medieval construct, its validity wasn't questioned. As early as 1887, F.W. Maitland observed in a lecture on English constitutional history that "we do not hear of a feudal system until feudalism ceased to exist." He examined in detail what feudalism supposedly was and discussed how it could be applied to English medieval law, but he didn't question its existence.

Maitland was a well-respected scholar; much of his work is still enlightening and useful today. If such an esteemed historian treated feudalism as a legitimate system of law and government, why should anyone question him?

For a long time, nobody did. Most medievalists continued in Maitland's vein, acknowledging that the word was a construct—an imperfect one, at that—yet going forward with articles, lectures, treatises, and books on what feudalism had been or, at the very least, incorporating it into related topics as an accepted fact of the medieval era. Each historian presented his or her own interpretation of the model; even those claiming to adhere to a previous interpretation deviated from it in some significant way. The result was an unfortunate number of varying, sometimes conflicting, definitions of feudalism.

As the 20th century progressed, the discipline of history grew more rigorous. Scholars uncovered new evidence, examined it closely, and used it to modify or explain their view of feudalism. Their methods were sound, but their premise was problematic: They were trying to adapt a deeply flawed theory to a wide variety of facts.

Construct Denounced

Although several historians expressed concerns over the indefinite nature of the model and the term's imprecise meanings, it wasn't until 1974 that anyone thought to point out the most fundamental problems with feudalism. In a groundbreaking article titled "The Tyranny of a Construct: Feudalism and Historians of Medieval Europe," Elizabeth A.R. Brown leveled a finger at the academic community, denouncing the term feudalism and its continued use.

Brown maintained that the feudalism construct, developed after the Middle Ages, bore little resemblance to actual medieval society. Its many differing, even contradictory, definitions had so muddied the waters that it had lost any useful meaning and was interfering with the proper examination of evidence concerning medieval law and society. Scholars viewed land agreements and social relationships through the warped lens of the feudalism construct and either disregarded or dismissed anything that didn't fit into their version of the model. Brown asserted that, even considering how difficult it is to unlearn something, continuing to include feudalism in introductory texts would do readers a grave injustice.

Brown's article was well received in academic circles. Virtually no American or British medievalists objected to any part of it, and almost everyone agreed: Feudalism wasn't a useful term and really should go.

Yet, it stuck around.

Hasn't Disappeared

Some new publications in medieval studies avoided the term altogether; others used it sparingly, focusing on actual laws, land tenures, and legal agreements instead of on the model. Some books on medieval society refrained from characterizing that society as "feudal." Others, while acknowledging that the term was in dispute, continued to use it as a "useful shorthand" for lack of a better term, but only as far as it was necessary.

But some authors still included descriptions of feudalism as a valid model of medieval society, with little or no caveat. Not every medievalist had read Brown's article or had a chance to consider its implications or discuss it with colleagues. Additionally, revising work conducted on the premise that feudalism was a valid construct would require the kind of reassessment that few historians were prepared to engage in.

Perhaps most significantly, no one had presented a reasonable model or explanation to use in place of feudalism. Some historians and authors felt they had to provide their readers with a handle by which to grasp the general ideas of medieval government and society. If not feudalism, then what?

Yes, the emperor had no clothes, but for now, he would just have to run around naked.

• The Early, High and Late Middle Ages
• Role and Importance of Children in the Middle Ages
• The History of Algebra
• History of Canopy Beds
• King Henry IV of England
• Alexander Nevsky
• The Council of Constance, End of the Catholic Church's Great Schism
• The Sixth-Century Plague
• The Tudor Dynasty
• Richard the Lionheart
• Profile of Ibn Khaldun, Philosopher and Historian
• Holy Roman Emperor Otto I
• Underwear in the Medieval Period
• Medieval Sumptuary Laws
• 8 Best Books About the History of the Knights Templar

Ch. 8 The Middle Ages in Europe

Learning objective.

• Recall the structure of the feudal state and the responsibilities and obligations of each level of society
• Feudalism flourished in Europe between the 9th and 15th centuries.
• Feudalism in England determined the structure of society around relationships derived from the holding and leasing of land, or fiefs .
• In England, the feudal pyramid was made up of the king at the top with the nobles, knights, and vassals below him.
• Before a lord could grant land to a tenant he would have to make him a vassal at a formal ceremony. This ceremony bound the lord and vassal in a contract.
• While modern writers such as Marx point out the negative qualities of feudalism, such as the exploitation and lack of social mobility for the peasants, the French historian Marc Bloch contends that peasants were part of the feudal relationship; while the vassals performed military service in exchange for the fief, the peasants performed physical labour in return for protection, thereby gaining some benefit despite their limited freedom.
• The 11th century in France saw what has been called by historians a “feudal revolution” or “mutation” and a “fragmentation of powers” that increased localized power and autonomy.

In the Middle Ages this was the ceremony in which a feudal tenant or vassal pledged reverence and submission to his feudal lord, receiving in exchange the symbolic title to his new position.

An oath, from the Latin fidelitas (faithfulness); a pledge of allegiance of one person to another.

Persons who entered into a mutual obligation to a lord or monarch in the context of the feudal system in medieval Europe.

Heritable property or rights granted by an overlord to a vassal.

mesne tenant

A lord in the feudal system who had vassals who held land from him, but who was himself the vassal of a higher lord.

Feudalism was a set of legal and military customs in medieval Europe that flourished between the 9th and 15th centuries. It can be broadly defined as a system for structuring society around relationships derived from the holding of land, known as a fiefdom or fief, in exchange for service or labour.

The classic version of feudalism describes a set of reciprocal legal and military obligations among the warrior nobility, revolving around the three key concepts of lords, vassals, and fiefs. A lord was in broad terms a noble who held land, a vassal was a person who was granted possession of the land by the lord, and a fief was what the land was known as. In exchange for the use of the fief and the protection of the lord, the vassal would provide some sort of service to the lord. There were many varieties of feudal land tenure, consisting of military and non-military service. The obligations and corresponding rights between lord and vassal concerning the fief formed the basis of the feudal relationship.

Feudalism, in its various forms, usually emerged as a result of the decentralization of an empire, especially in the Carolingian empires, which lacked the bureaucratic infrastructure necessary to support cavalry without the ability to allocate land to these mounted troops. Mounted soldiers began to secure a system of hereditary rule over their allocated land, and their power over the territory came to encompass the social, political, judicial, and economic spheres.

Many societies in the Middle Ages were characterized by feudal organizations, including England, which was the most structured feudal society, France, Italy, Germany, the Holy Roman Empire, and Portugal. Each of these territories developed feudalism in unique ways, and the way we understand feudalism as a unified concept today is in large part due to critiques after its dissolution. Karl Marx theorized feudalism as a pre-capitalist society, characterized by the power of the ruling class (the aristocracy) in their control of arable land, leading to a class society based upon the exploitation of the peasants who farm these lands, typically under serfdom and principally by means of labour, produce, and money rents.

While modern writers such as Marx point out the negative qualities of feudalism, the French historian Marc Bloch contends that peasants were an integral part of the feudal relationship: while the vassals performed military service in exchange for the fief, the peasants performed physical labour in return for protection, thereby gaining some benefit despite their limited freedom. Feudalism was thus a complex social and economic system defined by inherited ranks, each of which possessed inherent social and economic privileges and obligations. Feudalism allowed societies in the Middle Ages to retain a relatively stable political structure even as the centralized power of empires and kingdoms began to dissolve.

Structure of the Feudal State in England

Feudalism in 12th-century England was among the better structured and established systems in Europe at the time. The king was the absolute “owner” of land in the feudal system, and all nobles, knights, and other tenants, termed vassals, merely “held” land from the king, who was thus at the top of the feudal pyramid.

Below the king in the feudal pyramid was a tenant-in-chief (generally in the form of a baron or knight), who was a vassal of the king. Holding from the tenant-in-chief was a mesne tenant—generally a knight or baron who was sometimes a tenant-in-chief in their capacity as holder of other fiefs. Below the mesne tenant, further mesne tenants could hold from each other in series.

Before a lord could grant land (a fief) to someone, he had to make that person a vassal. This was done at a formal and symbolic ceremony called a commendation ceremony, which was composed of the two-part act of homage and oath of fealty. During homage, the lord and vassal entered into a contract in which the vassal promised to fight for the lord at his command, while the lord agreed to protect the vassal from external forces.

Roland pledges his fealty to Charlemagne. Roland (right) receives the sword, Durandal, from the hands of Charlemagne (left). From a manuscript of a chanson de geste, c. 14th Century.

Once the commendation ceremony was complete, the lord and vassal were in a feudal relationship with agreed obligations to one another. The vassal’s principal obligation to the lord was “aid,” or military service. Using whatever equipment the vassal could obtain by virtue of the revenues from the fief, he was responsible for answering calls to military service on behalf of the lord. This security of military help was the primary reason the lord entered into the feudal relationship. In addition, the vassal could have other obligations to his lord, such as attendance at his court, whether manorial or baronial, or at the king’s court.

The vassal’s obligations could also involve providing “counsel,” so that if the lord faced a major decision he would summon all his vassals and hold a council. At the level of the manor this might be a fairly mundane matter of agricultural policy, but could also include sentencing by the lord for criminal offenses, including capital punishment in some cases. In the king’s feudal court, such deliberation could include the question of declaring war. These are only examples; depending on the period of time and location in Europe, feudal customs and practices varied.

Feudalism in France

In its origin, the feudal grant of land had been seen in terms of a personal bond between lord and vassal, but with time and the transformation of fiefs into hereditary holdings, the nature of the system came to be seen as a form of “politics of land.” The 11th century in France saw what has been called by historians a “feudal revolution” or “mutation” and a “fragmentation of powers” that was unlike the development of feudalism in England, Italy, or Germany in the same period or later. In France, counties and duchies began to break down into smaller holdings as castellans and lesser seigneurs took control of local lands, and (as comital families had done before them) lesser lords usurped/privatized a wide range of prerogatives and rights of the state—most importantly the highly profitable rights of justice, but also travel dues, market dues, fees for using woodlands, obligations to use the lord’s mill, etc. Power in this period became more personal and decentralized.

• Boundless World History. Authored by : Boundless. Located at : https://www.boundless.com/world-history/textbooks/boundless-world-history-textbook/ . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike

Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism Research Paper

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Critique of the major historiographic views.

Bibliography

The history of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance continues to attract the attention of many contemporary historians. Much attention is paid to such a concept as feudalism and its major peculiarities. Researchers focus on such questions as the evolution of this socio-political system, conflicts between various interest groups as well as the reasons why it eventually fell into oblivion.

This paper is aimed at discussing the major historiographic views on this system. In particular, one should mention that feudalism can be interpreted from a political and legal perspective. This research paradigm is supposed to examine the relations between the main stakeholders such as lords and vassals. From this viewpoint, the main characteristic of feudalism is the decentralization of authority.

In turn, some scholars prefer socio-economic analysis of this phenomenon. In particular, they regard feudalism as a system that legitimized the exploitations of peasants by the aristocracy. One should keep in mind that contemporary researchers such as Marc Bloch tend to combine these historiographic views. These two interpretations form the basis of their discussions.

This is why it is necessary to analyze these approaches in great detail. Furthermore, one should mention that some historians such as Susan Reynolds believe that the concept of feudalism is rather contradictory and it may not fit various societies which existed at that time.

Overall, it is possible to argue that current historiographic views on this period can supplement each other. Yet, none of them can fully explain the complexities of this political, economic, and legal system which could vary across regions and evolve with time passing. This is one of the main arguments that should be examined more closely.

Political and legal interpretation

One should mention that some historians such as François-Louis Ganshof concentrate primarily on the legal and political foundations of feudalism. Researchers, who accept this approach, regard feudalism as a body of institutions that regulated the relationship between the landowners who provided tenure and knights offering military service 1 .

Therefore, one can say that feudalism is primarily aimed at facilitating the exchange between stakeholders. This historiographic view can be important for understanding the work of institutions which were supposed to re-enforce the rights of these stakeholders; for instance, François-Louis Ganshof examines the institution of vassalage which was supposed to reconcile the interests of landlords and knights 2 .

Moreover, according to political and legal interpretations, feudalism has several important characteristics. In particular, one should speak about the decentralization of authority which means that kings could not impose their will on landowners. Additionally, much attention should be paid to land as the main source of authority.

This approach implies that during the period, states in the modern sense of that word were only at the stage of formation. Furthermore, according to this approach, feudalism can be viewed as a system for recruiting military professionals who were critical for the sustainability of the communities which existed at that time. This view of feudalism is one of the major research paradigms that can used for examining medieval societies.

Overall, this approach is helpful for analyzing the main political and legal norms of the society. Moreover, this framework can be useful for analyzing the way in which the empowered interest groups regulated their relations. Nevertheless, there are several important limitations of this approach. In particular, this historiographic view completely excludes peasants who had no political or legal representation.

It should be noted that these stakeholders also played a critical role for the sustainability of feudal societies. Furthermore, this historiagraphic approach does not show how these people could oppose to the existing hierarchy. For instance, one can speak about anti-feudal rebellions that took place in England and France 3 in the twelfth century.

Therefore, this particular approach can lead to the exclusion of many narratives that are important for understanding the peculiarities of this historical period. This framework can certainly explain the behavior of people who set the legal and political norms of feudal societies.

However, one should pay more attention to people who were underrepresented due to existing social, political, and legal norms. The voices of these people could be almost completely silenced. This is one of the limitations that should be considered by people who study the development of feudal societies.

Socio-economic interpretation

Additionally, it is possible to focus on the economic interpretation of feudalism. This approach is aimed at discussing the experiences of various social groups. Therefore, feudalism can be defined as the political and legal system which was supposed to subordinate peasantry to the interests of the landowning aristocracy 4 .

Therefore, this approach implies that this socio-political system can be regarded primarily as the system of exploitation. Thus, this view of feudalism was often adopted by Marxist historians who attached much importance to the concept of class struggle.

Although, this particular concept may not be applicable to feudal societies, social and economic interpretations are not fully rejected by the modern scholars. Historians who adopt this approach pay attention to the experiences of the most underprivileged classes.

One can distinguish the following characteristics of the feudal system:

• the use of coercion to subdue underrepresented groups;
• social stratification;
• unequal bargaining power of different stakeholders 5 .

Admittedly, this approach should not be disregarded because it is important for understanding the experiences of different social groups. Nevertheless, this interpretation does not fully explain the conflicts between the most powerful stakeholders in the feudal society. In particular, one should speak about monarchs and landlords. It should be mentioned that sometimes, vassals could have conflicting obligations to monarchs and land owners 6 .

In other words, one cannot examine this period only from an economic viewpoint because this approach cannot fully the power struggles which existed at that period. This is one of the drawbacks that should not be disregarded.

This historiographic continued to be used by historians because it is more inclusive, especially in comparison with the paradigm developed by François-Louis Ganshof who examines primarily the interactions between stakeholders who could better protect their interests.

Marc Bloch’s views on feudalism

It should be mentioned that some historians attempt to combine legal and socio-economic views on fuedalism. For instance, one can speak about the works of Marc Bloch. He focuses on the following characteristics of feudalism:

• the subordinate position of peasantry
• the decentralization of authority;
• the use of service tenement instead salary;
• regular conflicts between kings and landlords 7 .

To some degree, this method lays stress on the legal and political structures of feudalism, but at the same time, it can throw light on the experiences of different social groups. It is important to remember that Mark Bloch distinguishes two stages of feudalism.

In particular, this historian believes that economic transformation of feudal societies led to the eventual centralization of power and formation of more powerful monarchies. Overall, Marc Bloc believes that the economic perspective should not be excluded because the intensification of trade and commerce strengthened the bargaining power of monarchs 8 .

Overall, Marc Bloch’s approach is more beneficial because it enables the author to examine the experiences of different stakeholders who represented the medieval society. Additionally, this historiographic view is advantageous because it shows how feudal system evolved and why it eventually disappeared.

In this case, one should mention that technological and economical development diminished the role of agriculture and land ownership 9 . In turn, growing trade could lead in the strengthening of the centralized power. In particular, this paradigm demonstrates the connections between economy, law, and politics.

These are the main strengths of this framework. Nevertheless, this approach may not show how feudalism evolved in various in various cultural environments that could profoundly influence the interactions between different groups. Additionally, this approach does not show how individual decisions of monarchs or landlords could have shaped the development of feudalism.

This is one of the limitations that should be considered because researchers should not assume that the development of this socio-political system could be predetermined. To a great extent, this perception reduces the role of a separate individual who could also shape the way in which a certain community could evolve.

Re-evaluation of feudalism as a concept

These approaches that have been described are based on the premise that feudalism as a system existed in various regions or countries. Furthermore, they imply that there are certain common principles which are inherent to the nature of this political and legal system.

Therefore, the experiences of people could be similar in such countries as England, France, Germany, and so forth. Nevertheless, one should also keep in mind that some researchers do not believe that feudalism was a universal and consistent phenomenon.

This opinion is expressed by different historians such as Susan Reynolds 10 . This approach implies that it is not permissible to generalize the experiences of different countries. For instance, the institution of vassalage was not the same in different medieval societies. The customs adopted in different countries could differ dramatically. This is one of the points that should be considered.

This is why even researchers such as Marc Bloch focus on different lands and regions while discussing feudalism. Apart from that, researchers may examine the distinctions between feudalism in England and Scotland 11 . Overall, it is important to examine local customs that were not similar to one another. Furthermore, these customs could evolve significantly with time passing.

This is one of the reasons why researchers speak about the existence of pre-feudal and post-feudal societies 12 . In many cases, these societies had the main characteristics identified by Ganshof and Bloc. Moreover, researchers argue that the relations between various groups were not always the same because they could be influenced by the cultural norms established in various feudal societies.

This approach implies that historians should not try to twist historical evidence so that it could match historical constructs or concepts such as feudalism. Instead, they need to concentrate on primary evidence which can throw light on the diversity of feudal societies. Thus, one can say that feudalism can be depicted as a changing and diverse phenomenon that cannot be described with the help of a single model.

These are the main peculiarities of this historiographic view. The main advantage of this approach is that it urges researchers to focuses on the particularities of the feudal system in different countries. In this way, historians can gain better insights into various aspects of feudalism. This historiographic view is also popular since modern researchers examine the cultural peculiarities of feudalism.

These examples demonstrate historians do not have the same perception of feudalism. The differences can be explained by the fact that researchers focus on different aspects of this historical period. In particular, it is possible to speak about the distribution of power in the society and the norms regulating the relations between the main stakeholders.

In turn, scholars can focus on the study of economic development and the way in which some social groups could be marginalized. Apart from that, many researchers such as Marc Bloch tend use each of these paradigms. Apart from that historians may discard the ideas that feudalism was a universal construct that existed in different countries.

In particular, it is important to mention that feudalism could take different paths, and one cannot say that it could always fit the models constructed by historians. Overall, none of the historiographic views discussed in this paper can be dismissed because each of them can throw light on the experience of different social groups.

Furthermore, the use of these paradigms is important for understanding the evolution of this socio-political system. These are the main aspects that can be distinguished because they can be helpful for understanding the main peculiarities of feudalism.

Bloch, Marc. Feudal Society. Translated by Leonard Manyon. London: Routledge. 1962.

Braun, Jerome. Democratic Culture and Moral Character: A Study in Culture and Personality . New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013.

Ganshof, François-Louis. “Benefice and Vassalage in the Age of Charlemagne.” Cambridge Historical Journal 6, no. 2 (1939): 147-175.

Hammond, Matthew, New Perspectives on Medieval Scotland, 1093-1286 . New York, Boydell & Brewer Ltd, 2013.

McKitterick, Rosamond, and Michael Jones. The New Cambridge Medieval History: Volume 6, C.1300-c.1415 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Murray, Mary. The Law of the Father?: Patriarchy in the transition from feudalism to capitalism. New York: Routledge, 2005.

Reynolds, Susan. Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted . New York, Clarendon Press. 1994.

Sanderson, Stephen. Social Transformations: A General Theory of Historical Development . New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999.

Tendler, Joseph. Opponents of the Annales School . London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.

White, Lynn. Medieval technology and social change . Oxford University Press. 1962.

1 Joseph Tendler, Opponents of the Annales School (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013), 158.

2 François-Louis Ganshof, “Benefice and Vassalage in the Age of Charlemagne,” Cambridge Historical Journal 6, no. 2 (1939): 147.

3 Rosamond McKitterick and Michael Jones, The New Cambridge Medieval History: Volume 6, C.1300-c.1415 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 457.

4 Stephen Sanderson, Social Transformations: A General Theory of Historical Development (New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999), 157.

5 Mary Murray, The Law of the Father?: Patriarchy in the transition from feudalism to Capitalism (New York: Routledge, 2005), p. 10.

6 François-Louis Ganshof, “Benefice and Vassalage in the Age of Charlemagne,” Cambridge Historical Journal 6, no. 2 (1939): 175

7 Marc Bloch, Feudal Society, trans. Leonard Manyon (London: Routledge. 1962), 13

8 Marc Bloch, Feudal Society, trans. Leonard Manyon (London: Routledge. 1962), 69.

9 Lynn White, Medieval technology and social change (Oxford University Press. 1962), 63.

10 Susan Reynolds, Fiefs and Vassals : The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted (New York: Clarendon Press, 1994), 32.

11 Matthew Hammond, New Perspectives on Medieval Scotland, 1093-1286 (New York, Boydell & Brewer Ltd, 2013), 10.

12 Jerome Braun, Democratic Culture and Moral Character: A Study in Culture and Personality (New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 2013), 119.

• "The Thatcher Revolution" by Earl A. Reitan
• History of Feudal System
• Klimt's "The Portrait of Adele Bloch-Bauer I" and "The Kiss"
• “Religion a Figment of Human Imagination” by Andy Coghlan
• The Fall of Roman Empire and the Rise of Feudalism
• "British Society Since 1945: The Penguin Social History of Britain" by Arthur Marwick
• Nationalism and Its 19th Century History From a Moral and Functional Perspective
• Nationalism and Its 19th Century History
• To What Extent did Hitler Rule Germany with Popular Consent?
• What were the implications of Germany's reunification for France and how did Francois Mitterrand respond to it
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, June 21). Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism. https://ivypanda.com/essays/feudalism/

"Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism." IvyPanda , 21 June 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/feudalism/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism'. 21 June.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism." June 21, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/feudalism/.

1. IvyPanda . "Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism." June 21, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/feudalism/.

IvyPanda . "Major Historiographic Views on Feudalism." June 21, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/feudalism/.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

What is Feudalism debate in Medieval Indian History, its perspective and understanding in larger discussion

2021, isara solutions

The feudalism debate once play a major role in any medieval researchers, but now it's long gone, still then it relevant for any medieval scholars to understand, as it is the essence of every aspect as it related to urbanisation, trade, land grant and so on. The notion of an 'Indian feudalism' has predominated in the recent historiography of pre-colonial India. Early medieval India has been described by historian, largely as a dark phase of Indian history characterised only by political fragmentation and culture. Such a characterisation being assigned to it, this period remained by and large a neglected one in terms of historical research. We owe it completely in new research in the recent decades to have brought to light the many important and interesting aspects of this period. Fresh studies have contributed to the removal of the notion of 'dark age' attached to this period by offering fresh perspectives. Indeed the every absence of political unity that was considered a negative attribute by earlier scholars in now seen as a factor that had made possible the emergence of rich cultures of the medieval period.

Related Papers

The Book Review

TULIIP BISWAS

THIS IS MY ARTICLE CUM ASSIGNMENT ON THE DEBATE OF EARLY MEDIEVAL INDIAN FEUDALISM.

ZOYA SIDDIQUI, LADY SHRI RAM COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

zoya siddiqui

The concept of feudalism comes from the European historiography. Feudalism is a kind of social and economic system which is characterized by the close relationship of the peasants with the land.Various historians have tried to implement this concept in early medieval India, which is further questioned by other historians; it has led to the feudalism debatein India. This debate is one of the richest historical debates in Indian historiography. We shall be pointing out the various approaches of different historians on this debate in North India specifically.

Siddhant Sarang

Use of the term feudalism to describe India applies a concept of medieval European origin, according to which the landed nobility held lands from the Crown in exchange for military service, and vassals were in turn tenants of the nobles, while the peasants were obliged to live on their lord's land and give him homage, labor, and a share of the produce, notionally in exchange for military protection. Feudalism is most likely introduced to India when the Kushan Dynasty from Central Asia invaded India and introduced new policies of their own. The term Indian feudalism is used to describe taluqdar, zamindar, jagirdar, ghatwals, mulraiyats, sardar, mankari, deshmukh, chaudhary and samanta. Most of these systems were abolished after the independence of India and the rest of the subcontinent. D. D. Kosambi and R. S. Sharma, together with Daniel Thorner, brought peasants into the study of Indian history for the first time. In this paper, we will try to find out how far it is correct to term Early India as Feudal.

Ramita Udayashankar

R.S. Sharma, in his response, wrote an essay entitled ‘How Feudal Was Indian Feudalism?’ (1985)

Huberttu Siby

The recent approaches to the study of early medieval Indian history and how it challenged the hypothesis of Indian Feudalism. This essay will be looking at the different approaches to the study of early medieval Indian history from the 1950s to the latest by looking at the ideas and concepts put forward by historians like D.D. Kosambi, R. S. Sharma, B. N. S. Yadava, D.C. Sircar, Harbans Mukhia, D.N. Jha, Burton Stein, B.D. Chattopadhyaya, and Irfan Habib and how it changed over time.

gian chauhan

Pavan Tiwari

Presently, varied schemes of periodization of history are prevalent in historical studies, the most common being the tripartite scheme of ancient-medieval-modern periods. In European history, ancient, medieval and modern eras have remained the dominant standard epochal frontiers since the eighteenth century. In the wake of colonial rule, this scheme was applied by the European historians and orientalists to the colonized regions in Africa and Asia, including India, for historiographical purposes. The concept of medieval period in Indian history is not without problems and limitations. First, not only there are conceptual intricacies involved in it, the whole process of periodization has been politicized. Moreover, the chronological frontiers of medieval India have become conceptual barriers, which restrict historical imagination. Secondly, the medieval period in Indian history, as in European history, is often referred to as the 'Middle Ages'. It is understood as a post-classical age denoting a radical shift from ancient or classical period. Moreover, there seems to be an inherent bias in it, as it implies decline and degeneration in medieval times as opposed to the splendor and glory of the ancient era. Thirdly, despite its common usage, there is no consensus among historians as to what constitute medieval India, though the construction of ancient and modern India is also controversial. As for the ancient India, almost all historians begin it with an account of the prehistoric times followed by the Aryan invasion and the Vedic age, but the problem arises where to bring ancient India to a close and

AKHILESH KUMAR

Indian Historical Review

Vijaya Laxmi Singh

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Arkamitra Ghatak

Tanvir Anjum

Bhupesh Singh Danu

Audrey Truschke

International Research Journal Commerce arts science

Kulke Hermann

Harbans Mukhia

Erasmus Law Review

Barbara Pozzo

Manu V. Devadevan

Social HIstory 39, 3

South Asian Archaeology and Art 2014, ed. Eva Myrdal. New Delhi: Dev Publishers, pp. 169-183.

Jason Hawkes

JOHN MOHAN RAZU

Contributions to Indian Sociology

Jesse Knutson

Suchandra Ghosh

Ranabir Chakravarti

Niti Deoliya

MAYANK KUMAR

Sumbul Halim Khan

The Social Scientist

Vishwa Mohan Jha

History Compass

Richard Abels

Snehamogilinaik Gugulothu

Rajni Palriwala

Anastasia Piliavsky

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

We use cookies to enhance our website for you. Proceed if you agree to this policy or learn more about it.

• Essay Database >
• Essay Examples >
• Essays Topics >
• Essay on Politics

Essay On Feudalism

Type of paper: Essay

Topic: Politics , Military , Security , Economics , Money , Europe , Society , Agriculture

Published: 01/19/2020

ORDER PAPER LIKE THIS

Feudalism refers to the spread of political influence between noble figures. This political system reached the height of its power during Europe’s middle Ages. Europe’s feudal society incorporated the king, lords, and vassals as the predominate figure heads. By exploring concepts of feudalism throughout Europe one can gain a better understanding of political systems during the middle Ages.

The Rise of Feudalism

At the onset of the middle Ages, Europe was facing severe economic and population depletion. This was largely due to the threat of invasion and war with other world populations. In order to resolve this need for protection, Europe implemented a feudal system to ensure that areas could receive proper protection, support, and supervision. The job was simply to over whelming for a single king to maintain these vast areas of land alone. The land was known as the “fief” (“feudalism”). Each fief was overseen by a lord who owned that land and a vassal that was granted access to that land. The vassal was expected to provide military protection for that area of land in return for its use. Peasants typically work for the vassal and provide labor and military forces under the command of the vassal.

Characteristics of Feudalism in Europe

Feudalism in Europe has a few key characteristics. The first is that the economy is primarily supported by agricultural endeavors (“feudalism”). Usually there is not much in the way of actual money, instead relying on agricultural trade. Most land areas are self-sustaining. The second characteristic is the use of the Church to assist in societal and military structure. The Church is in turn entitled to a part of the land and a share in any economic profits.

Decline of feudalism

As available land began to diminish, so did feudalism. The cost of providing land to vassals and the lack of available property meant that lords were eventually unable to keep up with demands. A new money based economy was also beginning to slowly creep into Europe’s consciousness. Instead of relying solely on agricultural trade, the value of currency was beginning to be recognized. The circulation of currency made feudalism less important to society. This also allowed people to become independent of lords and vassals by earning their own place amongst society. The Black Death in Europe also contributed to the end of feudalism. Great masses were essential wiped out by disease leading to a labor shortage (“feudalism”). Those who were fortunate to survive the Black Death moved to towns to fill these positions. Peasants no longer wished to work under their superiors when new opportunities were presented to them. In conclusion, feudalism began in Europe to ensure protection against other populations and create a self-sustaining agricultural economy. The system allowed land, called fief, to be controlled by lords and vassals. In return they provided protection for the area. The lords, vassals, and the Church all held political influence in the area. Feudalism eventually died out as the result of the new currency system and lack of land availability. The Black Death provided survivors the opportunity to break out the role of peasants and create a new system of government.

Works Cited:

"European Feudalism." Middle Ages. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Dec. 2012. . "European Feudalism." For Students. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Dec. 2012.

Cite this page

Share with friends using:

Removal Request

Finished papers: 1135

This paper is created by writer with

ID 263341840

If you want your paper to be:

Well-researched, fact-checked, and accurate

Original, fresh, based on current data

Eloquently written and immaculately formatted

275 words = 1 page double-spaced

Get your papers done by pros!

Other Pages

Tourism personal statements, cache case studies, packing case studies, punch case studies, triangle case studies, disposition case studies, punctuation case studies, fundraising case studies, folk case studies, intuition case studies, spell case studies, research paper on quality management, example of critical thinking on united states government, essay on aging update, answers to questions essay example, mma financial essay examples, free approach to cancer care research paper sample, good name essay example 3, good ethical analysis sexual harassment in medical facilities course work example, anthropology evolution of gender roles research paper sample, people ought to have a right not to vaccinate their kids argumentative essay, good economics share of benefits essay example, free criminology essay sample, free essay about a review summary report of the scientific merit of movie quot the day after tomorrow, good example of conflicts in a rose for emily by william faulkner research paper, good example of overstock com strategy essay, education part 3 unequal childrens book essay sample, free article review on blood breath alcohol, essay on films and history american wars, peace players international course work sample, free course work on a principals responsibility for the actions of their agent, example of debate questions essay, good essay about dunkin donuts, sample argumentative essay on look at description, report on why egyptian soccer players fail to pursue soccer career abroad, free essay on data of submission, carlton essays, bedridden essays, mike trout essays, henry schein essays, cuviers essays, ciliogenesis essays, circuit city stores essays.

Password recovery email has been sent to [email protected]

Use your new password to log in

You are not register!

By clicking Register, you agree to our Terms of Service and that you have read our Privacy Policy .

Now you can download documents directly to your device!

Check your email! An email with your password has already been sent to you! Now you can download documents directly to your device.

or Use the QR code to Save this Paper to Your Phone

The sample is NOT original!

Short on a deadline?

Don't waste time. Get help with 11% off using code - GETWOWED

No, thanks! I'm fine with missing my deadline

Essay on Feudalism

Feudalism Western Europe suffered numerous hardships through the ninth and tenth centuries and this was the ultimate reason they established a new political organization which was known as feudalism. By providing honor, protection, and a sense of control, this new social system revived peace and order in Western Europe after the fall of the Carolingian Empire. Feudalism was a necessary ingredient to yield stability in during these times of calamity. The primary motive behind creating this organization was to render protection to the people since the government was unable to do so. Instead of depending on the Government as their defense, people resorted to finding a powerful lord who could grant protection in exchange for …show more content…

Then they would grant portions of this land to vassals who in return would fight for their lord. The relationship between the lord and vassal became official by having a public ceremony. In the ceremony the vassal would perform an act of homage to his lord. This alliance was based on loyalty. During the ninth century, the land that was granted to a vassal was now known as a fief. After owning the land for a while, many vassals would possess the power to exercise rights of jurisdiction or political and legal authority within their fiefs. When the Carolingian political system began to fall, because of numerous invasions and internal differences, various powerful lords arose. Now it was the people’s job to keep order, they could no longer depend on the government. Since number of lords substantially increased, the number of vassals multiplied also. This abundant increase brought about the development of subinfeudation. This is where fief-holding became complicated. Vassals of a king might also have vassals who might owe them military service for land that was granted to them. These vassals sometimes also had other vassals under them who might only have enough land to provide their equipment. Even though this system brought about greater and lesser landowners, this relationship was still honorable. Since this was a willing relationship between free men, it was not based on servitude. This

Magna Carta Declaration Of Independence

During the medieval times Kings had absolute power and the Catholic Church made sure God help the King retain this power. During this time feudalism was the structure that shaped society. In the feudalism structure the people that work the land the poor got cero power and live at the mercy of the barons. Barons where the owners of the land that people where let to work and make really low amounts of money while the baron sells and exchange the goods produced by the land and makes a fortune. At the end of the day the land belongs to the king and the king taxes the barons and collects money from all the land making him very, very wealthy and powerful.

Question of: How did Charlemagne build and Govern his Empire? (covers all aspects)

The fact that it is a hierarchy, with one allegiance after the next, means that everyone in the end is loyal to the King. And indeed, a Knight's (the mounted riders that composed the nobility, and that were the mainstay of the army) first allegiance was to his King, and then his Lord. His family came last. Because everyone was loyal to the one above him, and he was the top, everyone was loyal to him. Therefore, even though he himself didn't really own much land anymore, he still had the loyalty of all of the army.

Vassalage And Senmenment In The Song Of Roland, Oliver And Roland

According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, vassalage is defined as a position of subordination or submission to a political power. While a vassal is someone who is under the protection of someone with authority such as a feudal lord. This person (vassal) will feel obligated to vow their loyalty to that person in power. In “The Song of Roland”, Oliver and Roland both have a different definition on what makes a great vassal. This paper will discuss both viewpoints on what makes a “marvelous vassal”, why the poet used Roland and Oliver to balance out vassals, and a brief understanding of vassalage and fief holding.

Feudalism Dbq

This part of feudalism was just the beginning where Charlemagne appointed nobles to rule local areas, gave them land and in return they were expected to help with defense of his empire. “According to the feudal arrangements, vassals promised military service and loyalty to the nobles in return for land.” An answer to the question asked by document 2 , a stained glass picture of three vassals asking their noble for land. These pieces of land that each vassal owned was known as fief, and on those fiefs were serfs. Serfs were not slaves, but they were bound to the land- they could not leave without the lord permission.

Ap Euro Dbq Essay

To begin, Europeans lived under a system called feudalism which was important to their social status. “Feudalism was a political, economic, and social system in which nobles were granted to use of land that legally belonged to the king”(Doc1).The kings provided money for the knights(Doc1). Then the knights provided protection and military services for the serfs,nobles and kings(Doc1). The serfs farmed the land. Lastly the nobles gave land to the serfs, collected food from them, and reported to the king (Doc. 1). These roles were important because their rank in feudalism controlled their social status.

Roman Empire Dbq

The feudal system originated in Europe during the eighth century was because of the collapse of the Roman Empire. The order that Rome had once brought to Europe had left with the absence of Rome's stability. Not only did political advancement recede but the advancement of infrastructure, such as waste systems and roads also declined. The lack of the innovation of technology created a major setback in Western Europe after Rome's fall. As big cities were relinquished to the dirt, many people moved to rural areas and set up small villages known as manors.

Age Of Feudalism Dbq Essay

Between the years of 500 and 1400, Europe had evolved into the Middle Ages. The Dark Ages was a period of time where barbarians killed others and burned villages. The kings and nobility granted land to the knights and serfs in exchange for crops and military service this was known as the Age of Feudalism. The Age of Faith relates to how strong the christian church was, the church was an important part of life for the people in the community.The Dark Ages, the Age of Feudalism, the Age of Faith all describe the Middle Ages between the era of 500 and 1400.

Robin Hood and Feudalism Essay

A lord would grant land to another noble in exchange for protection and military services. This grant was called a fief. Those who received fiefs were called vassals. Within the fief, the vassal was the highest authority. Fiefs could be various seizes. Some were single estates just big enough for a knight and his family. Others were large, as big as an entire country or province.

Essay on What Is Feudal Warfare

Feudalism was a contrasting system dealing with political and military relationships existing among members of the higher social class, Kings, Lords and other owners of large lands in Western Europe during the Middle Ages. The Feudal system started by the granting of fiefs, chiefly in the form of land and labor, in return the lord would receive political and

Essay about 1066: the Year of the Conquest

The feudal system of the time operated on the premise of peasants or serfs, and thanes, or lords. The lords owned the land, and the peasants worked on it. In turn, they received the protection

The High Middle Ages

Monarchs owned the land and he would divide the land that he did not need up between the men who were called lords in return for loyalty to him in times of war. The lords enlisted soldiers who were called knights to be the fighting force in these wars. The lowest people in the feudal system were called peasants; these people farmed the land to provide food and provided other services for the kingdom in exchange for protection.

Middle Ages Economy Essay

protection. As an old medieval saying states, "No land without the lord, no lord without the

The Effects of Feudalism Essay

• 7 Works Cited

In Medieval times during the 10th and 13th centuries, a form of political and social organization called feudalism was a way of life that had great effect on people of the time and on the modern world. Feudalism was developed because of the weakness of Europe and it's kings. The word feudalism comes from the word fief, which was the land held on condition of feudal service, similar to an estate (English). The fiefs bound together lords and vassals. Feudalism was a structure in which a lord divided his land into smaller parts to give to lesser lords (“Feudalism”).

The Rise and Fall of Feudalism

Feudalism, as a decentralized political system, flourished in Medieval Europe. In this essay, the main political and economic characteristics of Feudalism will be mentioned, while discussing the main historical factors to the rise and fall of feudalism.

Matewan Feudalism

• 8 Works Cited

Economic processes are those involving the production and distribution of goods and services. However, they do not alone determine this production and distribution. There is an interrelationship of economic, cultural, environmental, and political processes that all help to shape each other. Nothing that we do can be defined as a single process, for it is the interaction itself that helps to produce the final results that we observe. To understand this more fully the following basic definitions may be of use:

Related Topics