when we study europe in the late middle
ages from about 1200 to 1450
we find a region that was riddled with
many small states
most of which were monarchies within
these states
monarchs often struggled to maintain
authority over noble families who were
sometimes more influential and wealthier
than their kings
moreover conflicts between states were
common
and very often truces were ephemeral
they didn't last long at all
meanwhile the vast majority of the
european population was largely divorced
from these political struggles
as they labored in europe's main
economic activity
agricultural production and over it all
influencing both
peasant and noble were the religious
values of christianity
at this time about 80 percent of
europe's population
lived in a rural setting but that 80
percent included clergy and nobles as
well as peasants
a clergy are people associated with the
church
clergy who lived in the countryside were
most usually monks or nuns
and they lived in isolated monasteries
or
they were parish priests who managed
churches and villages
noble families who controlled most of
europe's land lived in the countryside
so they could better manage their lands
most people who lived in the countryside
though were peasants
and the overwhelming majority of them
were agricultural workers
throughout the middle ages europe's
overwhelming economic focus was
agricultural production and animal
husbandry
growing crops and raising animals for
food
in any period in history agricultural
production
requires enormous amounts of human labor
in order to be a successful enterprise
europe's solution to this required labor
was to create a system called
manorialism which utilized the labor of
people categorized as peasants and serfs
in europe individual properties were
known as manors
and these manos were owned by noble
families and sometimes by church
officials
these manor owners the lords of the
manor
often owned multiple manors and so they
traveled between their properties to
oversee the management of those lands
the people who lived in hamlets and
villages on these lands
provided the labor force for the manners
these laborers were broadly called
peasants some peasants were free
laborers who were paid for their work
usually by being given a portion of the
harvest
peasant families sometimes owned small
farms that they managed in addition to
working on the manner
up to half of all peasants and in some
places more than half of all peasants
were categorized as serfs serfs were
coerced
laborers that is in exchange for the
protection of the manor lord
and for being allowed to live his
tenants on the land
they were required to work on the
manor's lands
moreover unlike peasants who could move
away from a manor if they wanted to
serfs were legally tied to the land they
could not move away
or marry without the lord's permission
however serfs weren't entirely unfree
that is they weren't categorized as
slaves
and yes slaves did exist in medieval
europe
slaves were most often non-christian
peoples
often from still pagan eastern europe or
from muslim areas around the
mediterranean basin
by about 1300 most slaves had
transitioned to serfdom in western and
central europe
but the institution of slavery did
remain in areas around the mediterranean
unlike slaves who were owned by other
people and
rarely had the opportunity to gain any
sort of personal wealth
serfs could save money they weren't
owned by a person but were tied to land
serfs could even become land owners if
their lords allowed it
surf spent most of their time working on
the lord's lands
in their limited free time they could
cultivate food for their own families
in the common areas of the manor they
could go hunting or fishing to
supplement their family's diets as well
so medieval europe depended on both free
peasant and coerced serfs laborers
to produce the various agricultural
products that formed the backbone of
europe's economy
agricultural laborers despite their
incredibly important work
had almost no political influence in
medieval europe
while manorialism was the economic
system supporting europe
it only partly helps to explain the
social organization in europe at this
time
manorialism's laborers peasants and
serfs were at the lowest level of the
social structure
we know they had no power so who did
have
power and why
during europe's middle ages a person's
level of political power and status
was largely dependent on three things
your family ties
your family wealth and your perceived
gender
europe was patriarchal women usually had
very little political power or
influence and usually didn't control
their own wealth
not even in noble families back then
wealth came in the form of land the more
land your family owned
the more wealthy your family was and
generally speaking the only people who
could own land
were those whose families had fought for
and been loyal to the monarch
in fact it was the relationship between
the monarch and his loyal followers
his vassals which formed the basis of
europe's social system which was called
feudalism the feudal system theorized
that the ruler the monarch
owned all of the land in the kingdom the
monarch then rewarded those who'd fought
for him and been loyal to him with gifts
of land with manners
these followers were called vassals
vassals were always nobles
in fact families initially gained
recognition as nobility when they served
the monarch
faithfully vassals especially those who
came to own lots of land
could in turn give gifts of land to
their followers and establish vassals of
their own
you can see this illustrated on the
graphic where in the lower level of
vassalage
you see the nightly class knights were
professional medieval soldiers
these internal hierarchies of vassalage
are why various states recognize levels
of noble titles
someone who is a prince or princess is
directly related to the monarch
the title duke or duchess originally
recognized more distant members of the
royal family
the title earl or countess originally
recognized a monarch's most loyal
followers
and etc down the line of noble titles
as you can imagine non-noble people
city dwellers artisans peasants serfs
etc
formed at the bottom of the feudal
hierarchy which is usually illustrated
as a pyramid
even though these people were important
economically
they had no social influence or
political power
and so were largely excluded from policy
making
every time a monarch went to war and was
successful
monarchs were almost always male
because of patriarchy
rewarded his vassals with land it's a
great system to keep people
invested in one monarch and one royal
family
but over time it was also a system that
created imbalances
while the monarch was supposed to be in
charge in reality
vassals sometimes became more wealthy
and more influential than the monarchs
at times these powerful vassals often
called magnates
married into the royal family or broke
their promises of loyalty
and challenged the royal family for
control
rather than risk such chaos it was often
easier for monarchs to
allow their vassals to be powerful in
their own lands
as long as they paid lip service to the
loyalty to their monarch
there were some empires in europe at
this time
generally speaking empires tend to be
more centrally organized in order to
control big territories
however europe's empires weren't very
powerful
the byzantine empire was in the east
basically modern-day turkey and greece
it had been established way back in the
5th century
and had once encompassed nearly the
entire mediterranean basin
however by 1300 it was already falling
apart
it would be conquered by the ottomans in
1453
the holy roman empire in central europe
was established in the 10th century
but it was more a confederation of
states than a traditional empire
it was an empire in name only
all of the crests on this painting at
the top right represent the very many
states that made up the holy roman
empire
and so europe maintained a system of
political decentralization
a system where there's little central
authority within a state
for centuries in fact in 1215
king john of england was forced to
recognize this decentralization
by signing the magna carta a document
which recognized the rights of england's
nobles
and set some limits to the power of the
monarch
vassals in england and elsewhere treated
their own territories as
many kingdoms within a larger state and
as long as they didn't challenge the
monarch outright
they got to keep right on doing that
so this seems like a pretty fragile
system right
this political system that's based on a
feudal system which is based on
inequality what stops a vassal who knows
he's more powerful than the monarch from
just
taking over was there maybe another
factor at play
spoiler alert there was in fact there
were several
for one the more you have the more you
risk
if a powerful vassal challenged the
monarch and lost
then he risked losing all his lands too
right
that risk was sometimes just too big to
take
beyond that though was the belief that
when you swore loyalty to the monarch
you did so with all your being with your
soul
as well as your body and matters of the
soul were
incredibly important to medieval people
medieval europeans were overwhelmingly
christian but they didn't all belong to
the same christian denomination
in 1054 the christian church had split
into two churches
western and central europeans were roman
catholic while eastern europeans mostly
people living in the byzantine empire
and what is today russia
were greek orthodox this split was
fairly significant
because each region in europe had a
particular tradition
with regards to the relationship between
the christian church and the civil that
is the non-religious
state in the east the tradition was that
the monarch
first the byzantine emperor and later
the russian czar
had significant influence over the
institution of the church
it was in many ways a symbiotic
relationship
orthodox religious authorities who
governed themselves with councils
supported rulers and in turn rulers
protected the orthodox clergy
byzantine and russian rulers though were
also often dealing directly with people
of different religious traditions
both of these states fought against
muslim states in fact
the byzantine empire would eventually
fall to the muslim ottomans
perhaps because of that situation
orthodox authorities
exempted the emperor from censure and
allowed him to
in some cases dictate institutional
decisions such as
approving local religious leaders
although emperors had no authority when
deciding matters of faith
so in the east civil authorities did
have some authority
over religious institutions the
relationship between church and civil
authorities was much more fluid in
western and central europe
unlike most of europe's estates the
catholic church
was centralized there was a singular
leader for all roman catholics the pope
who maintained a court in rome from rome
the pope and other church leaders called
cardinals governed the church
they developed laws to govern moral
behavior and determine punishments for
sins
they collected money called the tithe
from all catholics and usually
redispersed it across the roman catholic
world
their government was much more connected
than that of other european states
importantly it was the pope and his
advisors who determined promotion
within the church they named important
regional leaders called bishops
who served both as priests and as
administrators of the church in their
various territories
as the church owned property across all
of europe monasteries church buildings
lands etc this meant the church was in
some ways
just like another noble family
interacting with civil authorities in
europe's various kingdoms
except this particular noble family was
huge
with influence all across europe
popes and church officials believed that
their spiritual authority should grant
them influence over monarchs and all
other civil rulers as you can imagine
though
this kind of extensive influence was
viewed with suspicion by monarchs
often europe's monarchs sought to
intervene in church affairs
they'd try to name their own bishops for
example to ensure that the person who
became bishop
was loyal to the king church authorities
and especially the pope viewed such
action as
immoral it was a sin that deserved
punishment unsurprisingly
the power struggle that often
characterized the relationship between a
monarch and his vassals
was also seen in the relationship
between a monarch and the church
authorities in his kingdom
were these monarchs practicing catholics
who believed in the catholic faith
who went to church and generally
followed the values of their faith
absolutely they were but
were these monarchs also powerful men
who were trying to protect their own
power bases in their own kingdoms from
the church
oh yes absolutely yes
so relations between these monarchs and
the roman catholic church
seemed ever fluid sometimes they were
close allies with monarchs depending on
the catholic clergy for legitimacy and
support
sometimes however they were enemies with
some monarchs even raising armies and
marching against church authorities
or supporting rival popes on those
occasions when the church was in chaos
of course not everyone in europe was
christian
in the east the muslim ottomans were
building an empire in the balkans
in the iberian peninsula the emirate of
granada in the south was also a muslim
state
while european muslims sometimes
traveled outside of their states
they most usually did so via muslim
routes that is
they sailed across the mediterranean or
sailed first to africa
and then traveled over land in general
christians and muslims viewed one
another with great suspicion
their states rarely had friendly
diplomatic relationships
there wasn't a lot of mixing of
christian and muslim communities
as you've already learned the muslim
faith played an enormous and
obvious role in muslim government and in
muslim law
and even on the social structures in
muslim states
while christianity was often influential
in some ways
it was often not the basis for these
institutions in europe
judaism was also practiced across europe
european jews were scattered throughout
the continent
as with muslims christians tended to
view jews with suspicion
and even though jewish families had
lived within the borders of some
european states for centuries
they were still viewed as outsiders
in some states laws prevented jews from
owning land
and so many european jews were city
dwellers by default
the vast majority of european christians
living as they did in the countryside
probably never came into contact with a
jewish person
despite these various restrictions
european jews established strong
communities
across europe these communities were
often connected together by commercial
ties as banking and trade were some of
the job opportunities still open to jews
jewish communities were united by a
shared language
hebrew even when two jews didn't speak
the same first language because
say one was from france and another from
austria
they could still communicate because all
jews learned hebrew so they could read
the torah and participate in religious
life
this language formed a basis for their
community across europe
european jews stood outside of the
memorial and feudal systems for the most
part
but they nonetheless contributed to the
states in which they lived
in the spanish kingdom of castilla in
the iberian peninsula
jews served as advisors to king pedro
the first in the 14th century
of course his brother reversed course
and persecuted spanish jews
in england jews were considered royal
serfs which in this case
actually granted jews significant
freedom of movement mostly because
english kings benefited from the trade
that jews brought to england
in 1290 however king edward the first
expelled all the jews from england
italian jews translated many arabic
works into latin in the 13th century for
the court of the holy roman emperor
but yes jews were subject to sporadic
waves of violence across the holy roman
empire as well
especially during the years of the black
death in the 14th century
as evidenced by this image at the bottom
right of jews being massacred by
villagers
europe between 1200 and 1450 was a place
of much
similarity most people were christian
most people were of non-noble status
most people were agricultural workers
states were decentralized
and this lack of a central authority
meant that military conflict was
common both within states and between
states
in fact this era in europe would end in
a huge war
the hundred years war fought
intermittently between 1337 and 1453
this was a war which challenged europe's
medieval structures
the outcome of the hundred years war
shaped european politics for centuries
and it helped bring about a definitive
end to the european
middle ages
