Help on conclusion to essay on Feudalism in Europe during the middle ages?
The last sentence is all I have of a "conclusion" so far... Not much of a conclusion.. Political turmoil and constant warfare led to the rise of the European feudalism, a political and economic system based on land ownership and personal loyalty. During the Middle Ages invaders raised... show more The last sentence is all I have of a "conclusion" so far... Not much of a conclusion..
Political turmoil and constant warfare led to the rise of the European feudalism, a political and economic system based on land ownership and personal loyalty. During the Middle Ages invaders raised havoc all over Europe, and as a result people looked at local leaders for protection, causing kings to lose political power. A new social order was set up as well as a different economic system. Feudalism changed the economic, social, and political systems severely, and made the way we know the Middle Ages in Europe today.
From about 800 to 1000 invasions tore apart Europe. Vikings terrorized locals with fearsome raids, Magyars attacked and captured locals to sell as slaves, and Muslims were out to conquer and settle Europe. The Vikings came from Scandinavia by huge ships that held up to 300 hundred warriors. These huge ships had 72 oars and held tons in weight, yet could still maneuver through waters as shallow as 3 feet, making it easier for them to invade inland villages and monasteries. The Vikings carried out with terrifying speeds. Their approach was to beach their ships and get what they wanted then leave. The Magyars invaded sometime in the late 800’s. They were nomadic people that attacked from the east from what is now Hungary. They were excellent horsemen and attacked isolated villages and monasteries. The Muslims struck from North Africa. Since they were superb seafarers they were able to attack settlements on the Atlantic and Mediterranean coasts. In the 600’s and 700’s there goal was to strictly conquer and settle. By the 800’s and 900’s they added plunder to their goals. Kings couldn’t effectively defend all the lands from these invasions, causing people to no longer look to a central ruler for protection. Local rulers who had their own armies gained political strength and power. During 850 to 950, the time of the worst years of the invaders’ attacks, agreements were made all over Europe to ensure security, thus, the start of feudalism.
Feudalism structured society creating a pyramid of power and defined social classes. The feudal system was based on rights and obligation, so a lord granted land to a vassal in exchange for military protection. It all depended on the control of land. The structure of feudal society was much like a pyramid. The pyramid determined a person’s power. At the tip top was the king, then came church officials and nobles. Beneath them were the knights. Knights pledged to defend their lords’ land in exchange for fiefs. At the very bottom were the peasants. This feudal system enabled a cash-poor but land-rich lord to support a military force. But, in the end, the people were classified into only three different groups: those who fought (nobles and knights), those who prayed (people of the church), and those who worked (peasants). The social class you received was usually inherited. During the Middle Ages, the majority of people were peasants, and most peasants were serfs. Serfs could not lawfully leave the land they were born on, but weren’t slaves because their lord could not buy or sell them, but whatever their labor produced belonged to the lord.
Feudalism had an economic side as well, the manorial system. The manor system was the basic economic arrangement during the middle ages. It as well rested on a set of rights and obligations, but between lords and serfs. Lords provided serfs with housing, farmland, and protection from bandits and in return serfs tended the lord’s lands and all other tasks needed to maintain the estate. All peasants owed the lord certain duties, whether they’re a serf or not. Usually it was a few days a week of labor and a portion of the grain. But generally, peasants didn’t within 25 miles of their own manor. They could walk out into the middle of the field and see their whole world. A manor covered about a few square miles of land, and it usually had the lord’s manor house, a church, and workshops. Typically, 15 to 30 families lives in the village on a manor. To live on the lord’s land all peasants paid a hefty price. They had to pay a tax on all grain ground in the lord’s mill and a marriage tax to the lord. Plus a church tax to the priest.
Due to the turmoil and constant warfare brought about by the invaders, a new political and economic system had emerged and made its’ mark.
2 answers 2
Are you sure you want to delete this answer?
Differences Between Feudalism in Europe and Japan Essay
1031 Words5 Pages
European feudalism was based on contract and Japanese feudalism was based on personal relationship with the lord and vassal. This helps prove that the differences between European and Japanese feudalism made limited government more likely to develop in the West because a contract limits what the lords and vassals could do. William, the king of English, said, “I command you [the vassal] to summon all those who are under your charge......and bring ready with you those five knights that you owe me[.]”1 This helps prove that European feudalism was based on contract because when you owe someone something, it implies an agreement. The key terms are I command you and owe. The vassal has to send troops because he has to. He is under the rule of…show more content…
They were both worried for each other. Japan was more concerned about keeping order. This helps prove that the differences between European and Japanese feudalism made limited government more likely to develop in the West because order is should be the main priority of a government. “There are also reports [of] vagabonds from gangs[,] [who] treat villages as if they were their own possessions.”7 This helps prove that Japan was more concerned about keeping order because Japan doesn't want people who wander around from place to place causing disorder. With these vagabonds all around the streets, Japan would be very disastrous. “When a newly appointed governor travels to....[where] he is assigned, some of his entourage and other followers either rob things from other [people] or engage in quarrels[.]”8 This helps prove Japan was more concerned about keeping order because if the government is the one who is causing the crimes, it would give people the idea that it is OK to do it also, which may cause an increase in crimes and violence. The governor's entourage is supposed to be keeping order but they are the ones who are robbing people and also causing commotions with others. The government is being a bad role model. They are supposed to set a good example but now,