2007-04-18 12:54:35 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
it is barron s land in whom peasents are working.think about it
2007-04-18 12:57:33 · update #1
It was a reciprocal arrangement. Peasants gave a portion of their crops to the king or local lord, and in exchange the local lord had to provide for them a sense of security and peace. It was all about protection and care for the peasants. Yes, it was a fair agreement because each of them gave up something and each of them received something. The other choice, for the peasant, was to have no land at all, since it was owned by the king or lord. This system is called feudalism.
A system very much like this existed in the American South after the Civil War, called share-cropping. This was, in many ways, an even worse system.
2007-04-18 13:02:33 · answer #1 · answered by John B 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, we may think it unfair today, but people during the Medieval times just viewed it as a way of life. They mainly felt that it was not their place to question it- some people were born to be Lords, and some were born to be peasants. Wherever you happened to fall in the hierarchy of society was just where you belonged.
2007-04-18 20:09:28 · answer #2 · answered by ZeroCharisma 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Peasants were not tenant farmers, They were bound to the land and they did not have a choice, so it would not be considered fair by anyone who believes in free markets.
2007-04-18 20:14:03 · answer #3 · answered by meg 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The peasants owed their protection to the king or baron and they lived on his land. So they had to pay. Yes it was unfair and we no longer have that.
2007-04-18 19:58:27 · answer #4 · answered by redunicorn 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You pay the king, the king protects you when people attack the kingdom.
2007-04-18 19:57:50 · answer #5 · answered by GigGLeS! 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You got to work on your SPELLING!
2007-04-18 19:57:01 · answer #6 · answered by mar m 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋