 |
Business | Industries | Finance | Tax |
| Index: > A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
|
|||||
| First Prev [ 1 2 3 4 ] Next Last |
In 1974, U.S. historian Elizabeth A.R. Brown , in "The Tyranny of a Construct: Feudalism and Historians of Medieval Europe" (American Historical Review 79), challenged the value of using the word at all, rejecting the label as an anachronistic construct which imparted a false sense of uniformity to the concept. She noted that with so many different, contradictory feudalism definitions circulating that, in the absence of any accepted definition, feudalism is a construct with no basis in medieval reality, an invention of modern historians read back "tyrannically" into the historical record. Supporters of Brown have gone so far as to suggest that the term should be expunged from history textbooks and lectures on medieval history entirely. In Fiefs and Vassals: The Medieval Evidence Reinterpreted, Susan Reynolds expanded upon Brown's original thesis. Although some of her contemporaries questioned Reynolds' methodology, her thesis has received support from certain historians. Who would support the removal of the term feudalism? Those historians who have been traditionally disadvantaged in the profession - such as women historians and historians not from the elite institutions - who gain advantage by shaking up the status quo have been some of the most vocal supporters of Brown and Reynolds in rejecting the term feudalism. The historians and institutions that benefit the most from the status quo, the more conservative elements of the historical profession, are generally more interested in keeping the traditional term feudalism, such as defined by Francois-Lois Ganshof and Marc Bloch.
Vassalage agreements similar to what would later develop into legalized medieval feudalism originated from the blending of ancient Roman and Germanic traditions. The Romans had a custom of patronage whereby a stronger patron would provide protection to a weaker client in exchange for gifts, political support and prestige. Germans had a custom of equality among warriors, an elected leader who kept the majority of the wealth (land) and who distributed it to members of the group in return for loyalty.
Feudalism had begun as a bargain, the exchange of service for protection. But in the end, the bargain was not kept, one party continuing to provide service while the other failed to provide protection.
The introduction of money in the 11th Century meant that by the 14th Century it had spread to replace land as the primary medium of exchange. The influence of urban towns and the money system weakened land-based feudalism. The nobility, hard hit by rising costs, were obliged to sell land and to sell serfs their freedom. The feudal army had become obsolete and the mercenary army, paid in money not land, replaced it. The refinement of gunpowder-based weapons and technologies contributed to a decline in the utility of castles, though it by no means rendered them obsolete. Nevertheless, it was not uncommon for nobles to exchange life in an isolated and uncomfortable castle in favour of life in a spacious manor house or a residence in some vibrant and bustling town.
A noble vassal was expected to deal with most local issues and could not always expect help from a distant king. The nobles were independent and often unwilling to cooperate for a greater cause (military service). By the end of the Middle Ages, the kings sought a way to become independent of willful nobles, especially for military support. The kings first hired mercenaries and later created standing national armies.
Historian J. J. Bagley noted that the 14th Century marked the end of the true feudal age and began paving the way for strong monarchies, nation states, and national wars of the 16th Century. Much 14th Century feudalism had become artificial and self-conscious. Already men were finding it a little curious. It was acquiring an antiquarian interest and losing its usefulness. It was ceasing to belong to the real world of practical living.
The following are historic examples that call into question the traditional use of the term feudalism.
Extant sources reveal that the early Carolingians had vassals, as did other leading men in the kingdom. This relationship did become more and more standardized over the next two centuries, but there were differences in function and practice in different locations. For example, in the German kingdoms that replaced the kingdom of Eastern Francia, as well as in some Slavic kingdoms, the feudal relationship was arguably more closely tied to the rise of serfdom, a system that tied peasants to the land (for more on this see the works of Leonard Blum on the history of serfdom).
Moreover, the evolution of the Holy Roman Empire greatly affected the history of the feudal relationship in central Europe. If one follows long-accepted feudalism models, one might believe that there was a clear hierarchy from Emperor to lesser rulers, be they kings, dukes, princes, or margraves. These models are patently untrue: the Holy Roman Emperor was elected by a group of seven magnates, three of whom were princes of the church, who in theory could not swear allegiance to any secular lord.
The French kingdoms also seem to provide clear proof that the models are accurate, until we take into consideration the fact that, when Hrolf or Rollo the Gangler kneeled to pay homage to Charles the Simple in return for the Duchy of Normandy, accounts tell us that he knocked the king on his rump as he rose, demonstrating his view that the bond was only as strong as the lord -- in this case, not strong at all.
The autonomy with which the Normans ruled their duchy supports the view that, despite any legal "feudal" relationship, the Normans did as they pleased. In the case of their own leadership, however, the Normans utilized the feudal relationship to bind their followers to them. It was the influence of the Norman invaders which strengthened and to some extent institutionalized the feudal relationship in England after the Norman Conquest.
Since we do not use the medieval term vassalage how are we to use the term feudalism? Though it is sometimes used indiscriminately to encompass all reciprocal obligations of support and loyalty in the place of unconditional tenure of position, jurisdiction or land, the term is restricted by most historians to the exchange of specifically voluntary and personal undertakings, to the exclusion of involuntary obligations attached to tenure of "unfree" land: the latter are considered to be rather an aspect of Manorialism, an element of Feudal society but not of feudalism proper.
| Politics | Business | Finance |
 |
 |
 |
|