Well I understand the historians don’t have one unified definition but despite reading and looking it up the Web I still feel like I don’t get it. So that’s why I’m asking for a more “simplified” explanation.
Also if it isn’t a problem….is there a modern version of feudalism?
In: 0
Feudalism is an economic and political system that dominated most of Europe throughout the Middle Ages, between the fall of Rome and the development of a merchant elite around the time of the Renaissance. Different versions of feudalism in different places and times were different, so you can only give a pretty broad description.
A feudal system is defined by a hierarchy of control over land. The primary relationships in this system are between *lords* and *vassals*, and between lords and *serfs*.
The lord-vassal relationship was between a *lord* who had legal control over a wide section of land, and a *vassal* who was granted control over some of that land in return for service to their lord. That service almost always involved military duties in case of invasion, but could involve other obligations as well. Since communication at that time was slow, and since the ability to quickly raise an army in defense was essential, lords used their vassals to maintain control over their domains. Lordship went all the way up to the sovereign (= king, queen, etc.). Mid-ranking nobles might be vassals of a lord above them, and lords to vassals below them. (It may help to note how this differs from, say, a modern democracy: subordinate officials in a democracy are often elected themselves, not appointed by higher-ranking officials.) Tighter definitions of feudalism limit themselves to this political hierarchy, and don’t include the economic part from the next paragraph.
The lord-serf relationship was between a lord (usually a low-ranking vassal of higher ranking lords in control of a local area) and a *serf*, a non-land-owning person living in the region controlled by the lord. Serfdom was in some respects similar to slavery, in that serfs had an obligation to work for the lord, but serfs couldn’t be bought and sold the way slaves could be. Serfs were “tied to the land”, in the sense that they did not have the freedom to leave: they were obligated to remain and work for their lord, and could be punished if they did not. Serfs owed a portion of their labor to their lords, and in exchange were permitted to farm on land controlled by the lord for their own survival. Lords, for their part, were responsible for the protection and well-being of their serfs, at least in principle, because the production of serfs under their control was what ultimately increased their power and wealth. In practice, being a serf was pretty crappy. This lord-serf relationship is also called [manorialism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manorialism).
There were other classes in this system, like free merchants, but they were a relatively small part of the population and didn’t have much formal power beyond their wealth (although a very wealthy person could potentially buy their way into lordship). The rise of the power of other classes – particularly the merchant elite – signaled the end of feudalism and the rise of early forms of a modern market economy.
Well I understand the historians don’t have one unified definition but despite reading and looking it up the Web I still feel like I don’t get it. So that’s why I’m asking for a more “simplified” explanation.
Also if it isn’t a problem….is there a modern version of feudalism?
In: 0
Feudalism is an economic and political system that dominated most of Europe throughout the Middle Ages, between the fall of Rome and the development of a merchant elite around the time of the Renaissance. Different versions of feudalism in different places and times were different, so you can only give a pretty broad description.
A feudal system is defined by a hierarchy of control over land. The primary relationships in this system are between *lords* and *vassals*, and between lords and *serfs*.
The lord-vassal relationship was between a *lord* who had legal control over a wide section of land, and a *vassal* who was granted control over some of that land in return for service to their lord. That service almost always involved military duties in case of invasion, but could involve other obligations as well. Since communication at that time was slow, and since the ability to quickly raise an army in defense was essential, lords used their vassals to maintain control over their domains. Lordship went all the way up to the sovereign (= king, queen, etc.). Mid-ranking nobles might be vassals of a lord above them, and lords to vassals below them. (It may help to note how this differs from, say, a modern democracy: subordinate officials in a democracy are often elected themselves, not appointed by higher-ranking officials.) Tighter definitions of feudalism limit themselves to this political hierarchy, and don’t include the economic part from the next paragraph.
The lord-serf relationship was between a lord (usually a low-ranking vassal of higher ranking lords in control of a local area) and a *serf*, a non-land-owning person living in the region controlled by the lord. Serfdom was in some respects similar to slavery, in that serfs had an obligation to work for the lord, but serfs couldn’t be bought and sold the way slaves could be. Serfs were “tied to the land”, in the sense that they did not have the freedom to leave: they were obligated to remain and work for their lord, and could be punished if they did not. Serfs owed a portion of their labor to their lords, and in exchange were permitted to farm on land controlled by the lord for their own survival. Lords, for their part, were responsible for the protection and well-being of their serfs, at least in principle, because the production of serfs under their control was what ultimately increased their power and wealth. In practice, being a serf was pretty crappy. This lord-serf relationship is also called [manorialism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manorialism).
There were other classes in this system, like free merchants, but they were a relatively small part of the population and didn’t have much formal power beyond their wealth (although a very wealthy person could potentially buy their way into lordship). The rise of the power of other classes – particularly the merchant elite – signaled the end of feudalism and the rise of early forms of a modern market economy.
Latest Answers