Name: _________________________
Due Next Class
Read the following sources and Answer the Following Questions
The Carolingian West: The Genesis of Feudal Relationships
1. What are some reasons that historians ‘dispute’ the term Feudalism?
2. Explain why Nicholas argues that ‘feudal relations’ is a more useful (and less problematic) term.
An Evaluation of Feudalism
3. List a few examples of feudalism’s “shortcomings” identified by McGarry.
4. What are some examples of “positive” aspects of feudalism political organization?
As printed in Dennis Sherman’s Western Civilizations: Sources, Images, and Interpretations
The Carolingian West: The Genesis of Feudal Relationships
David Nicholas
Scholars have long differed over the precise meaning of feudalism. In the following selection
David Nicholas surveys this scholarly debate, pointing out some of the problem with the different
approaches. He then argues that the term 'feudal relations," emphasizing vassalage and the fief
as the key components of the feudal bond, is more useful than the term 'feudalism."
Consider: The ways scholars have disagreed over feudalism; why feudal relations might be a
better term; the ways this interpretation might be supported by the primary sources in this
chapter.
The Frankish age witnessed the birth of feudal relations, in the stage that the American
medievalist Joseph Strayer called the feudalism of the armed retainer, as distinguished from the
later feudalism of the counts and other great lords. The term 'feudalism' has occasioned
considerable dispute among scholars. It is applied by Marxists and some capitadist politicians for
any economic or political regime that they consider aristocratic or oppressive. Others have
identified it with decentralisation of governmental function, but this ignores the fact that those
areas where feudal bonds were most completely developed, France and England, became
centralised states, while non-feudal Germany and Italy split into numerous principalities. Forces
other than extent of feudalisation were involved in these cases, but lords of feudal vassals had a
measure of control over their fiefs that princes did not have over allodial (public, non-feudal)
land.
Some have defined feudalism very broadly, including the non-honourable bonds of serf to
landlord as an economic feudalism. Others prefer to avoid the term entirely, since 'feudalism' is a
modern word that was not used during the Middle Ages. Much of the confusion comes from the
'all or nothing' approach of some historians. Although some lords compiled lists of their
fiefholders, there was never a feudal 'system'. 'Feudal relations' seems preferable, for even
feudal'ism' suggests more rigidity than was ever present. Feudal relations developed gradually.
We learn much about them in the late Merovingian and Carolingian periods, but the sources then
say little more until the eleventh century and particularly the twelfth. When the records
recommence, they show that feudal bonds had been evolving in many but not all parts of Europe
in the intervening period.
For while the word 'feudalism' did not exist, Latin and the vernacular languages had words for
vassal and fief, the necessary component parts of the feudal bond. Vassalage was a personal tie
of man to lord that developed characteristics that set it apart from other such bonds. The vassal,
the subordinate party, owed honourable obligations, notably military service, that did not
compromise his social rank. In the language of contemporary texts, he was a'free man in a
relationship of dependence'. Not all vassals held fiefs. Princes throughout the Middle Ages
continued to maintain warriors in their households. It is inexact to speak of these people as being
in a feudal bond with their lords, for they lived in proximity to their lords and did not hold fiefs.
The fief was the proprietary nexus between vassal and lord and was held on conditions of tenure
that were sharply different from non-feudal property. Vassals who held fiefs were expected to
use the income of those properties to pay the costs of performing their own vassalic obligations.
They were not maintained directly in the lords' households. Pope Gregory VII (1073-85), whose
vassals included Robert Guiscard, the ruler of much of southern Italy, and who claimed the right
to give Hungary and England in fief to their kings, would have been astonished at some scholars'
notion that he was fighting for a figment of his imagination. Although there was no feudal
system, to deny the existence of vassalage and fiefholding is to deny fact.
An Evaluation of Feudalism
Daniel D. McGarry
Feudalism developed gradually during the Early Middle Ages, becoming a prevailing system in
many areas between the ninth and thirteenth centuries. By the Late Middle Ages, the feudal
system was in decline, though elements of it would remain well into the early modern period.
Since the Renaissance, scholars have often evaluated medieval feudalism negatively,
emphasizing its weakness and localism. In recent decades, scholars have looked at feudalism
more positively, emphasizing its adaptiveness to certain historical circumstances. In the
following selection Daniel McGarry evaluates the shortcomings and the positive features of
feudalism.
Consider: Whether you agree with McGarry's evaluation of what feudalism's "shortcomings"
were and what its "Positive" characteristics were; whether the strengths of feudalism outweigh
its weaknesses.
While feudalism had serious shortcomings, it also rendered valuable services. On the negative
side, it resulted in numerous small, semi-independent local governments, incapable of providing
many needed public services. Usually roads and bridges were inadequately maintained, while
excessive tolls and duties were collected, and brigands and pirates flourished. Excessive
emphasis was placed upon personal relationships, to the neglect of concepts of the community
and public welfare. The components of the body politic were too loosely bound together by oaths
and customs, with a minimum of firm enforceable obligations. The central government was too
dependent upon voluntary cooperation and moral responsibility. Obligations were often so
indeterminate as to admit of easy evasion. Confusion frequently prevailed, private wars were
common, and commerce was severely handicapped.
On the positive side, feudalism was a realistic adaptation to existing circumstances: a flexible
workable compromise between Germanic and Roman elements. In a time of great insecurity, it
provided local defense and government, without entirely sacrificing unity. It was just flexible
enough, on the one hand, and just conservative enough on the other, to surmount contemporary
challenges yet allow for future reunification. Those states, such as France and England, where
feudalism prevailed in the early Middle Ages emerged strong and united at the close of the
Middle Ages, whereas those such as Germany and Italy where mixed political patterns were
maintained, emerged weak and divided. Feudalism helped to give Western Europe a military
proficiency which eventually enabled it to spread its colonies and civilization over the world. It
encouraged the contract theory of government, according to which government is the result of a
free agreement among the governed; and it contained the principle that all government is limited.
Many favorable features of feudalism, first applied only to the upper classes, were progressively
extended downward to benefit all the people. Feudal great councils eventually evolved into
general representative assemblies, known as Parliaments, Cortes, Estates, Diets, etc. The
principle of "No taxation without representation" or "No new taxes without popular consent" is
traceable back to the feudal requirement of the imposition of other than customary aids upon the
aristocracy. The modem "code of the gentleman," and many of our ideals of courtesy, good
manners, and fair play also derive from feudalism.