was feudalism a necessary evil in England in the Middle Ages?

Question

It would seem that under William 1 the feudal system was introduced in order to keep order in his newly conquered land. Was this system a necessary evil to be endured?

Answer 1

Feudalism wasn't just a one-way street. In order to survive the peasants relied just as much on the protection of the Lords as the Lords relied on the peasants. To put it simply, the Lords needed food and the peasants needed protecting, therefore the relationship was reciprocal.

Answer 2

The English had to endure feudalism because William had conquered the country!

There were rebellions against Feudalism, notably the Peasants' revolt led by Watt Tyler in 1380. So ordinary people could conceive of a better system of Government, but they did not have the power to enforce it.

The economic expansion of England following the Reformation in the sixteenth century, and elsewhere in Europe in the Renaissance arguably suggests that a different economic and political system would have been better for the large majority of the population, if not the ruling minority and the Church. So does the prosperity of the Venetian Republic. In this sense feudalism was neither necessary nor desirable, but it was an evil.

As a final point, there were elements of feudalism in Anglo-Saxon England although Willam changed the rulers and introduced new features to the political system,

Answer 3

Clearly society has evolved through the generations. None of us today would be at ease in the society of 1066. Prior to the invasion of William I England had a system that had some aspects similar to the feudalism of the continent but there were also differences.

People were more or less born into the position they would hold for life. But, while Harold was King, he didn’t have absolute control of William. That is, he was responsible to the Lords. So too at the lower levels of society, those in villages had some power. There were recognized responsibilities from those lower to those above, but there were also responsibilities from those above to those lower in the social scale and this had evolved from both Celtic and Saxon law which was the evolving Common Law. With William this became raw power of those above over those below.

It is interesting that by 1215 the underlying Common Law of the Celtic and Saxon peoples returned in the formalized Great Charter, Magna Carta. YThe underlying culture won through and laid the foundation for Common Law development of individual freedoms.

It is unlikely that William would have succeeded if it wasn’t for the fortune of the weather in the Channel and that King Harold hadn’t just fought (and won) a hard battle with Harald Hardrada the Viking. The feudalism that William brought to England wasn’t necessary but occurred by chance.

Answer 4

feudalism didn't really end in England- they still have a law which restricts land ownership to the "nobility". Anyone can lease land- but only the "nobles" can own it what ended feudalism was gunpowder (or rather large amounts of muskets) the Plague had no effect- people simply moved up the ladder and filled the vacant posts. Feudalism had one great advantage- just about no matter what happened everyone knew their place and duties. If a higher up post became vacant there was a rule on who could fill it.

Answer 5

It probably was a necessary evil for the Normans! As you said, they had to keep order somehow.

But the idea that prior to the Norman conquest everyone was "free" is rubbish. Saxon Headmen would rule the village in a similar way and prior to the coming of the Saxons, Celtic British society was organised along similar lines - with a chieftain or ruling family lording it over everyone else.

Feudalism was just another step down the road. It at least allowed for some degree of social mobility in that Villeins could buy or be granted their freedom and rise in status through the favour of their Lord. This is probably the origin of the British Class system.

Answer 6

It seems a bit pointless to ask if it was a necessary evil. It is just the way life was- not good for many but good for the rulers. You can't compare life then and now in the terms you suggest.

Answer 7

I don't think the populus had much of a choice... join the system or die. Necessary evil or not!

Answer 8

the Saxons didn,t really have much choice..they were well and truly conquered and had to submit to the new Norman Laws

Answer 9

It was a stage in our development.

It focused resources instead of dissipating them.

Glad it's not here now.