Their purported habits are used as proof of recent folly, but also of future possibility. Our ancestors of the distant past can be invoked in conversations about nearly anything: They supposedly worked less, relaxed more, slept better, had better sex, and enjoyed better diets, among other things. Her book was published in 1978 and won the National Book Award for History, but in the nearly half century since, the Middle Ages have been a common hobbyhorse for people of all political persuasions who suspect modernity might be leading us down the primrose path, especially as the internet has become a more central and inescapable element of daily life. Tuchman’s warning was prescient, if not especially well heeded. Draw broad, confident conclusions at your own peril. What’s even more complicated is determining the nature of life-how well different kinds of people lived, the quality of familial bonds, what people did to occupy their time and amuse themselves, how they thought about their lives. Historians, she noted, have disagreed mightily on basic facts of the era: how many people there were in various parts of Europe, what they ate, how much money they had, and whether war deaths meant society was overpopulated with women, or childbirth deaths meant it was overpopulated with men. “No age is tidy or made of whole cloth, and none is a more checkered fabric than the Middle Ages,” Tuchman wrote. The period, which spans roughly 500 to 1500, presents some problems for people trying to craft uncomplicated stories. Tuchman offered a warning to people with simplistic ideas about what life was like in the medieval world, and what that might say about humanity as a whole: You think you know, but you have no idea. In the foreword to her book A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century, the historian Barbara W.
The vassal owed service to the lord and the lord owed certain things to the vassal.Created an obligation for the powerful to help and protect the weak.Feudalism benefited everyone even Serfs and Peasants were included in society.
A lord had a unique relationship with his vassals, which was a step forward to recognizing the individuality of a vassal.Allowed stability and social security in society.People were separated from those who wanted to fight and those who did not want to fight.Was a flexible system making power and decision making localized and not left in control of a distant monarch.Benefited people at the top of the ladder but also those at the bottom.Strict separation and segregation in Europe’s social classes also served to only hinder the development of its society Due to the small number of educated people in Europe and the absence of meritocracy, intellect had little to do with feudalism.Relied on gaining status through work and power, rather than being qualified or intelligent for the position.Gave all kings power, which created an oppressive system.The kings were not in direct control of all their subjects, so to maintain control they would have to appoint or have people they trusted, otherwise the un loyal people could easily appoint other Dukes and feudal Lords that supported their side.Serfs had almost no say in this system and because of that they had to pay higher taxes to the lords that protected them.90% of population were were commoners or peasants.
0 kommentar(er)
