What is feudalism based on?

Question

What is feudalism based on?

Answer 1

The evolution of highly diverse forms, customs, and institutions makes it almost impossible to accurately depict feudalism as a whole, but certain components of the system may be regarded as characteristic: strict division into social classes, i.e., nobility, clergy, peasantry, and, in the later Middle Ages, burgesses; private jurisdiction based on local custom; and the landholding system dependent upon the fief or fee. Feudalism was based on contracts made among nobles, and although it was intricately connected with the manorial system, it must be considered as distinct from it. Although some men held their land in alod, without obligation to any person, they were exceptions to the rule in the Middle Ages.

In an ideal feudal society (a legal fiction, most nearly realized in the Crusaders' Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem), the ownership of all land was vested in the king. Beneath him was a hierarchy of nobles, the most important nobles holding land directly from the king, and the lesser from them, down to the seigneur who held a single manor. The political economy of the system was local and agricultural, and at its base was the manorial system. Under the manorial system the peasants, laborers, or serfs, held the land they worked from the seigneur, who granted them use of the land and his protection in return for personal services (especially on the demesne, the land he retained for his own use) and for dues (especially payment in kind).

Answer 2

Its base on the survival of the fittest.

Answer 3

What was the purpose of feudalism?

Feudalism was a system of government enforced by William I. He put this into place after his victory at Hastings. From then on it was used for many years as the system of government in Medieval England. William was forced to put this form of government into place for his own safety. He was a foreigner who had just taken over England and was hated by the English people. He was constantly concerned with the threat of rebellion against him. His rule over England was a forceful one. The Feudal system was his solution to this threat. He needed to reward those that had been loyal to him but at the same time keep them loyal and under his service.

So he payed them of with land. After dividing England into plots of land he would present parts of land to nobles. This was on the condition that they stayed loyal to him. They also had to perform duties such as tax collecting. When William was under attack it was the nobles that had to give soldiers and even fight themselves. The feudal system ensured William's safety but also required a lot of his trust. This would apply right down the social positions in these times.

2. Who controlled it?

King William I was supposed to have controlled it. This was not the case at all. In this system every man had a bit of power and all was fair for the Normans. The king controlled the tenants in chief. The Tenants in chief controlled the sub tenants. These were all Normans. The lower positions were the overtaken English men. The sub tenants controlled the peasants and the peasants controlled no one. This was the clever thing about this system. The English had no power over England whatsoever. The king could ask for soldiers from the tenants in chief in return for their awarded land. The tenants in chief would ask the sub tenants for soldiers as well as other duties such as tax collection in return for their own plot of land given to the sub tenants from the tenants in chief.

This meant that the tenants in chief made the sub tenants do their dirty work'. The sub tenants ended up doing the real work. They usually ended up organising and fighting the wars. However in turn the sub tenants could request the English to do what ever he needed them to do. The peasants had no control and were used as soldiers and slaves at complete mercy to the Normans.

3. Who got advantage/disadvantaged out of it?

William I planned out this feudal system in order to reward his friends and get money for protection against his enemies. Being Duke of Normandy e ensured that all the Normans got the most advantage out of this system. Most Normans involved in the invasion became tenants in chief. This was the highest position of power second to king. They had power over great stretches of land. They had control over the English peasants. The Normans got a huge advantage out of the Feudal System.

The English didn't get this treatment. As they were mostly peasants they had to do whatever they were ordered to do. To them it was as if England was becoming a second Normandy! As William had tough rules enforced, rebellion was out of the question. The English were very threatened and treated like refuse.

4. What were the different positions in the system?

The King was the highest position. This was obviously taken by William I. For William this was probably the most threatening position. The Tenants in Chief were Normans. Tenants in chief were usually barons, Earls and Dukes. They had taken oath under the bible to support William at all costs in return for the land awarded to them. When William needed soldiers he went to the tenants in chief. When William wanted the annual tax collection he appointed the duty to the tenants in chief. So it sounds like they had a huge responsibility, this was not the case. The land given to the tenants in chief was still too large for them to control.

The land was divided further still. The under tenants who were Norman knights were awarded this land in return for their services as tax collectors and soldiers. The tenants in chief basically handed their work to the under tenants. I think that they must have had the most strain on them. Who did they order around? The English peasants that fell on their plot of land were immediately under the under tenants service. They were the labourers. They were used as slaves to build the great Norman Castles. In return for all of this they were given a place to live.

http://www.helium.com/tm/866024/1what-pu...

best of luck to you!