The Feudal System, Well it Might be better than you Think

  The purpose of this post is not to explain the Feudal System, but discuss good and bad aspects of it to those that are already familiar with it. There is much indeed to be said, and one post can only touch on the basics.  What is commonly refereed to as the Feudal System, was widespread and common throughout the Middle Ages. There was much confusion after Emperor Charlemagne's empire fell. As barbarian kingdoms ransacked the eastern weaker kingdoms of Christendom, a new system was needed to defend the people. The Feudal System was established to protect people within one culture and kingdom or another from outside attack. The more one understands the Feudal System, the more we understand the context of Middle English Literature.

         Although feudalism had existed for centuries, it was brought to England after the Norman Conquest and established by King William I.

 In the Feudal System, freemen and slaves lived on a lord's land by paying him rent, while slaves owned no land of their own. Serfs, the lowest in power of society, were slaves {some scholars would say they were not slaves} to the lord of the land. Although serfs were bound to the land they worked on, and were a type of slave to their lord, they actually had more legal rights than did many that were the victims of the modern slave trade. Serfs originally payed his rent for his land not in money but in labor. With the limited rights Serfs had though, one advantage they had over slaves: serfs were supposed to be protected by the lord {though there was no authority to enforce this}. In fact, it was expected that the lord or his brothers or sons of his land defend the people.  Though Serfs had legal rights to sue against the lord in court, the lord was usually both the party and judge of the affair. Serfs had little chance against the bigger guys in power, and had a less of success chance in France than in England.

While it is true that much abuse came out of the Feudal System, this was less so in England. For example, many serfs could not marry serfs on another lord's land without their lord's granting permission, and if they did their marriage would be unrecognized. According to Coughton, this fact did possibly not apply to England ''where some of the most oppressive feudal burdens do not seem to have grown up, but certainly on the continent.'' * While originally serfs could not marry serfs on different lands at all, it became the eventual custom throughout Europe that this was permissible by the lord's permission. Serfs usually had to pay a fine for marrying someone outside of the land they worked on, though this could be exempted by cases such as when the lord had illegitimate children with one of the peasant women. Like slaves, Serfs had to work the entire day without rest.
How did the Roman Catholic Church feel about the issue of slavery throughout the Middle Ages? Coughton discusses that many of the church fathers did not condemn slavery. In fact, Gregory the Great owned thousands of slaves. Coughton, an Anglican by religion, and a historian, was critical of Roman Catholicism in many aspects. He speaks of how the popes were involved in many affairs throughout Europe, though having never once in the Middle Ages worked to abolish slavery.  Many monks owned slaves. Coughton claims Pope Leo XIII claimed the opposite of what actually happened historically. Whereas Pope Leo had taught that the Medieval Church had fought for the freedom of slaves, Coughton says this is contrary to historical facts. Coughton does claim that Thomas Aquinas took his view of slavery from Aristotle, and saw the institution of slavery as a negative force. Coughton then goes through history, to show that many Catholic theologians all the ways through the seventeenth century, actually accepted the institution of slavery. Perhaps most significant, not only does Coughton reveal that many past popes supported slavery, but that it was Catholic nations which began the negro-slave trade. He also discusses that while Pope Paul III and some Jesuits opposed the slavery of Indians on the North American frontier, that the pope did nothing to free slaves within his own country, and that actually, the Jesuits did nothing to stop slavery of the Negro. He makes the claim that the Quakers were the first Christian group to totally opposes slavery.
In relation to Roman Catholicism, it is interesting that many of the abolitionist of the American Civil War were actually anti-Catholic as they saw Catholicism as firmly opposed to the abolition of slavery. Many of the Abolitionist were Arminian Postmillennialist. On the other hand, most Irish Roman Catholics that fought for the Union didn't care at all about the freedom of African American slaves, and a number of slave plantation owners were Roman Catholics.

One can of course choose to argue whether slavery is theologically right or wrong. Such a debate, divided many over their interpretations of Holy Writ. throughout the American Civil War. Whichever of these two views however one takes, one cannot ignore obvious historical facts that historian Coughton covers in the book, The Medieval Village.
By the end of the Middle Ages, the slave trade had ended in England, France and Germany.

Historian Norman F. Cantor seems to present a more anti-slavery history of Catholicism than did Coughton. According to Cantor, slavery had declined since the fifth century due to criticism from Christianity. He also traces the history of slavery more to the conquest of the Muslims than to the Catholics. Cantor discusses how the Church only allowed Eastern pagans to be slaves to the Christians. Before the ninth century, slaves were allowed to grow crops on their own land, and while having little more rights than previous, this paved the way for more economic independence of the Medieval peasantry. Lords pushed peasants to work by the use of religion and intimidation by the threat of arms.
Serfdom would not decline until the thirteenth century. Its decline came largely from the Black death,wars and other events that caused feudal lords to have less power over their subjects.

Sometimes people get the idea that The Feudal System was a terrible form of government that gave nobility all power while some peasants had no rights. This picture of the past has especially been painted by many Americans that portray the United States of America as the perfect land of liberty and justice.  In reality, medieval peasants under The Feudal System had more rights than African American slaves did in colonial America under the laws of The United States. The Supreme Court Case of Dred Scott vrs. Sanford for instance, gave slaves no legal rights. This case is not alone. It took until the end of the American Civil War to abolish slavery in America, while slavery had already been abolished by the British Empire earlier in the 19th century. So much for the view that America has always supported freedom, while the British have only been out for power!
 The picture blow is a diagram of The Feudal System being briefly explained.

Many of the ideas that formed America came from Medieval England. The Magna Charta restored many English rights that had been lost previously in the Feudal System, and Anglo-Saxon law was inspirational to the ideas that formed The United States. While The Feudal System was certainly not perfect, it did protect many of its people from barbarians and other dangers in the days that it existed. It is important Americans give the motherland credit for many of the liberties that they enjoy today.
In the next post, I will address peasant life before the Norman Conquest, showing that peasants in pre-1066 England actually had more rights than those after the Norman Conquest.

 


 * The Medieval Village pp. 79 by G. G. Coulton. 

Further Sources: Kingfisher History Encyclopedia, The Medieval Village by G. G. Coulton, Streams of Civilization Volume I, The Middle Ages: A Watts Guide for Children edited by William Chester Jordan,  The Church in History by B. K. Kuiper, The Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages by Norman F. Cantor, The Usborne Traveler Book of Knights and Castles by Judy Hindley.