Friday, April 23, 2010

What's wrong with social orders?

In the medieval times the people practices a system of social orders called feudalism. Feudalism is a system of obligations that bound lords and their subjects in Europe during much of the middle Ages. In theory, the king owned all or most of the land and gave it to his leading nobles in return for their loyalty and military service. The nobles in turn held land that peasants, including serfs, were allowed to farm in return for the peasants' labor and a portion of their produce. Under feudalism, people were born with a permanent position in society. (Dictionary.com). The problem with social orders is that no one can move up or make a change in their life, whether it is good or bad.

The feudal system was made of serfs, nobility, and the church. The Church was at the very top, then the nobility which was consisted of the kings then barons then knights. At the very bottom of the social ladder were the serfs who worked on the land of knights and barons. Whatever social class you were born into was the one you died out of. The only exception to that was that some nobility gave their children to the Church as a sort of “sacrifice” to God. Serfs were a part of the land, if their Lord asked something of them they had to do it, if their Lord so some of the land they could also be sold with it. Barons were given land from the king which in turn they had protected by knights. The Knights owned the land that the Baron’s gave to them and also owned serfs. The King may be seen as the one in complete control except for the Church had a hand in many of the decisions he made. In the end the church had the most power. “We have also learned that it sometimes happens that when tenants die their relatives are not allowed to succeed them, but their property is taken over for the use of the Church”(Pope Gregory the Great).

The main problem with the feudal system is that it is to final. When a prince is born he would probably die a king, when a serf’s son is born, he will die a serf. Just because said prince is born a prince does not necessarily mean that when he grows up and succeeds his father and becomes king that he will be good for that job. The feudal system gave people power that they could not handle. Another example for which power should not just be handed down is the Julio-Claudean dynasty in which all the power was kept in the family but all the family was mentally instable. The reason for democracy today is so that those who gain power are for sure the ones that are right for the job. During the medieval times the Church was a source of power for those who needed it. Those who belonged to the church, such as priests and monks, were not oblivious to the power they held. In some cases this power was abused and the priests in a particular town could get their way with the nobles because if not they could be separated from the Church. At the top of the Church was the Pope who had way more power than the king. Although someone has power there are many instances where those in power become corrupt because of it.

Human Dignity is lost when it comes to social orders of the medieval times. Human dignity is the idea that because all people are created in God's image, they have fundamental worth. This notion is the foundation of Catholic social teaching.(Catholic Faith Handbook). It is quite ironic that the Church had all the power at the top of the social order yet they still condoned the unfair treatment happening to most of the medieval population. Those at the bottom of the chain are treated like cattle. They were a part of the land; if the land was sold they were also sold. Serfs even had to take an oath when first entering “serfdom”. “By the Lord before whom this sanctuary is holy, I will to N. be true and faithful, and love all which he loves and shun all which he shuns, according to the laws of God and the order of the world. Nor will I ever with will or action, through word or deed, do anything which is unpleasing to him, on condition that he will hold to me as I shall deserve it, and that he will perform everything as it was in our agreement when I submitted myself to him and chose his will.”(“Feudal” Oaths). There greatest wrong of medieval social order is how the serfs had to live. Their lives were to serve and if they tried to run away with it by law their Lords could do whatever they felt they needed, even death.

The social order, or feudal system, of medieval times is wrong because most of the population was treated unfairly and they could do nothing about it. The possibility of the corruption of those in power was too high because they may not have deserved it. Social order is wrong because no one can “pursue happiness”.

Works cited

The Great, Canute. "Medieval Sourcebook: Canute the Great: Granting of Fiefs, 1028." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. .

Ladder_silver. Digital image. Wikimedia Commons. Wikipedia. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. .

"Medieval Life - Feudalism." History on the Net Main Page. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. .

"Medieval Sourcebook: "Feudal" Oaths of Fidelity." FORDHAM.EDU. Fordham. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. .

"Pope Gregory the Great: Succession to Tenant Holdings on Church Land, C." FORDHAM.EDU. Web. 22 Apr. 2010. .

1 comment:

  1. There are a couple of things you could change around here to produce a really high quality essay.

    First, focus like a laser-beam on your thesis statement: your second paragraph is on target... but the example of the Julio-Claudians in the third paragraph seems clumsy -- I'd stick to Medieval examples in an essay this short.

    Nice job finding primary sources; however, I question your final statement: do 'social orders' not allow for mobility, or is it something else which manifests as social orders? After all, in many societies one can move through different social orders, while the peculiarity of the Middle Ages was that born into a social class, one could not leave it.

    ReplyDelete