MODULE V: FEUDALISM IN TRANSITION

Nature of feudalism- Castles and Lords- Manorial villages-Merits –Demerits-Crusades-

Nature- Causes- Important Crusades-Failure- Consequences- Monastic Foundations-
Benedictine-Carthusian- Cistercian-Franciscan- Dominican- Contributions- Decay of
Feudalism- Growth of Cities and Trade Routes- Merchant and Craft Guilds

1. FEUDALISM
Feudalism was a system of society which originated in Europe in the early Middle Ages and
reached its fullest development in the 11th 12th and 13th centuries. Several factors paved
the way for the origin of feudalism. It can be considered as the product of ancient Roman
institutions. Roman citizens when they had to face attacks sought the protection of wealthy
and powerful men and became their personal dependents or clients. Thus, the system of
clientage originated. This is considered as a stage in the emergence of feudalism.

Another Roman institution which paved the way for the birth of feudalism was the colonate.
When a terrible decline of agricultural production in the Roman Empire happened during
the third and fourth centuries, the Imperial government bound many agricultural labourers
to the soil as coloni or serf and place them under the control of big landlords. But feudalism
developed as a system when general insecurity of life felt to the people after the fall of the
Roman Empire. The Barbarian invasions destroyed law and order and it took centuries for
strong and stable order of society to be built up in Europe.

In the meanwhile, feudalism emerged in the absence of something better to give protection
and security. When Central protection failed, the local baron or bishop organised a local
order and defence with his own military force and his own court of law. The Frankish
monarchs paid their generals and administrators not in cash but in the form of grants of
land. Gradually, these fiefs became hereditary and semi- independent through the weakness
of Carolingian kings. Along with this, many freemen who could no longer protect
themselves offered their land or labour to some strong man in return of protection.
“Feudalism was the economic subjection and military alliance of a man to a superior in return
for economic organization and military protection.”
Feudalism was the child of circumstances. Hence it had many variations in time and place. It
had its origin in Italy and Germany, but its most characteristic development was in France.
In Britain, it began under the Anglo-Saxon conquerors, but as a political system it was the
importation of the Normans. In the 11th and 12th centuries, feudalism had an octopus- hold
on England and France.

Features of Feudalism

Feudalism may be defined as a political, economic and social system based upon holding of
land. In feudalism a man’s legal and social status and rank were determined mainly by the
conditions on which he held or possessed land. It was based on the notion that the right to
govern was the privilege of a man who was the holder of fief and that all government rest
upon contract. Rulers must govern in accordance with laws both human and divine and the
subjects must obey so long as the rulers govern justly. Under the feudal theory, no ruler had
the right to make law according to his personal will. All law was the productof custom or of
the will of God. Thus, under feudalism the ruler had only limited sovereignty.
Under feudalism the society took the form of a pyramid with the king at the apex,
immediately below him tenants- in- chief and below them other tenants in graded ranks.
All the land in a country belongs to the king; he would divide the land into number of holdings
or fiefs and grant them to the chief nobles at his Court. In return they were to swear loyalty
to him and do him some specific services. The nobles who held land or fief from the king
were called tenants- in-chief. They sublet the land to numerous lesser nobles. Those who
received the land from the tenants- in- chief were called sub-tenants. The sub-tenants could
sublet their lands to those below them. The lowest rank belonged to the serfs or villeins.

The tenants- in- chief were to render both personal service and financial payments to the
king and their tenants were to do likewise to them. Personal service was usually military
service. The tenants were to supply so many archers and so many armed horsemen to their
overlord when required. The person from whom the land was held was called the overlord
and the person who thus held the land was called the vassal. The tenant- in- chief was both
overlord and vassal. He was the vassal of the king and overlord of sub-tenants below them.
the vassal had to render military service and had to make money payments to overlord on
certain occasions, such as the marriage of the overlord’s eldest daughter, the knighting of the
Lord's eldest son etc. A fief is the property held by a vassal from an overlord. It was also
called feudum. The term feudalism is derived from this.

The base of the pyramid of the feudalist structure of society was the class of people called
serfs or villeins. They could not serve as soldiers because they have neither weapons nor
horses and they could only work in their master’s fields, build his castles and bridges, repair
his roads and guard his Castle. The Serf was bought and sold with the land to which he was
attached. He had to toil from sunrise to sunset for his Lord. But the serfs had some security
because they had some strips of land which they could cultivate for their living. There was
another class of service called cotters whose condition was more miserable than that of the
serfs. They had no land to cultivate for their living. They occupied small cottages and did
casual labour for the feudal overlords. There were also a few slaves in the feudal society.
They were employed mainly as household servants. After 1000 AD, slavery was practically
extinct in Western Europe due to the influence of Christianity.
One important feature of feudalism was the hereditary nature of the holding land. The right
of holding the land passed from father to the eldest son. So long as the conditions of holding
the land were not violated, the tenant could rightfully possess his holding. Thus, feudalism
was based on mutual obligation; the obligation of the overlord to protect his vassal and the
obligation of the vassal to render certain stipulated services to the overlord.

Privatized power

The main implication for all this was that power was widely distributed. A king was regarded
as owning all the land of his kingdom, and to command its entire military and economic
resources. However, he owned his land, and exercised his authority, through a large number
of vassals.

Military power

For military purposes, the mechanism by which a feudal king could mobilize the military
resources of his realm was to order his direct vassals, the magnates, to provide him with
soldiers. The magnates in turn ordered their own vassals (the lesser barons) to provide them
with soldiers to fight for the king. These barons then ordered their vassals to go and join the
lord’s standard and fight for the king. All this gave the vassals and sub-vassals a great deal of
power to raise troops, which they occasionally used against a king rather than on his behalf.

Justice and administration

In terms of exercising justice, making laws, and overseeing administrative matters, a similar
situation prevailed. The king presided over his magnates in the royal council. The magnates
oversaw justice and administration within their own fiefs, and lesser vassals did
likewise within their sub-fiefs. Thus, feudal administration tended to be very fragmented and
localized.

Private realms

From all this, it is clear that a fief was not just a piece of private property, it carried with it
what would now be regard as public responsibilities, which are normally exercised by such
public bodies as central government, local government, law courts and so on. In medieval
Europe these public responsibilities had been granted away to individuals, along with the
land over which they were exercised.

Results

Members of the Frankish royal family fought amongst themselves for territory, and the
ceaseless civil wars created a disordered and fragmented society. At the best of times the
kings would have found it hard to provide effective protection against the Vikings raiders,
given the primitive communications of the day. In the anarchic conditions of the 9th and 10th
centuries, they found it impossible.

In these circumstances the local dukes and counts filled the power vacuum and were able to
organize resistance (or payment) to invaders. They built up local defenses around a growing
network of castles – new defensive structures which give much-needed protection in a
violent and disorderly society.

Within their territories, the magnates increasingly usurped the royal authority. Their own
domains, however, were subject to the same process of fragmentation. Command of a castle
gives its local lord strong protection against foreign raiders, against neighboring lords – and
against his superior lord. Commanders of castles increasingly treated their castles and the
land around them as their own.

The result was that public authority at every level disintegrated, and the functions of
government – military, judicial, administrative – became delegated and privatized in the
hands of regional magnates and local lords. A kings’ direct power was confined to his own
territories (royal domains). In the wider realms, he could no longer issue orders to officials
obedient to his command; instead, he had to win the cooperation of the magnates through a
process of negotiation. When a king lost the support of his magnates, as happened on a
regular basis, he lost control of his kingdom.

As feudal relationships became more established, the Church was called upon to give them
religious sanction in the ceremonies of investiture in which lords and vassals swore solemn
oaths to sanctify the agreements between them. The Church then played a major part in
defining the ideal ethical behavior of the feudal nobility, and thus helped to give rise to the
chivalric code of knighthood.

Knights

It can be seen from the above that feudalism arose as a response to circumstances in which
widespread warfare was the order of the day. The feudal society was one organized for war;
a central reason for its coming into being was the need for kings and great lords to call forth
armies of mounted warriors.

From the 10th century at the latest the central figure of medieval warfare was the mounted
warrior. This figure is known by various names in different parts of Europe – chevalier in
France, cavalier in Italy, caballero in Spain, ritter in Germany and knight in England.

The innovation which gave mounted warriors a distinct advantage over soldiers fighting on
foot seems to have been the iron stirrup. This allowed them to put their whole weight behind
their weapons –battle axes, lances,great swords – which combined with the height the horse
to give them a decisive military superiority.

These mounted soldiers began life as rough henchmen of the magnates and local lords.
However, with the increasing expense of their equipment – horses, armor and so on – lords
found it more convenient to grant many of them their own small fiefs, so that they could pay
their own expenses. This turned them into fully-fledged, although junior, members of the
landed aristocracy. In most of Europe this knightly class gained all the legal privileges of the
higher nobility.

Manorialism

Manors were economic and political units – blocs of farm land which formed the base of fief-
holding. Fiefs consisted of one or more manors; and manors provided a fief-holder with
income, status and power.

Manorialism had its origins in Roman times. The classical estates which had dominated the
land-holding patterns of Greek and Roman society – large, slave-run farms surrounding villa
complexes – evolved into proto-manors of the later Roman empire. This evolution took place
for a number of reasons: sources of cheap slaves became less reliable; heavy taxation
impoverished the class of independent peasant farmers, who sought protection by selling
their lands to local landowners; new laws bound peasants to their hereditary farms, thus
starting them down on the road to serfdom; and many lesser landowners, like the
independent peasants, were crushed by the weight of taxation and so were forced to sell to
larger landowners. In this way estates grew larger, and gangs of slaves were succeeded by
peasant masses tied to the estate on a hereditary basis.

These large estates of the late Roman empire were much more economically self-sufficient
than their predecessors had been. This self-sufficiency enabled these estates to survive much
better than the towns during the anarchy of the years when the western Roman empire
collapsed. In this period, they became the dominant social and economic unit, their owners
– Roman landowning families alongside newly arrived German chieftains, with the two
gradually intermarrying to form single elite: the new landed nobility.

Miniature states

The period of anarchy must also have forced the estates to function as so many little
principalities, seeing to their own defense and administering their own law and order. From
being merely landowners, estate owners became local lords. The new German kings did not
maintain large professional armies, as the Romans had done, but continued to use the tribal
levies. Under this system, German tribal nobles, who had been invested with some of these
estates (theoretically a third of all land in conquered territories was given to the new German
invaders), had to bring themselves and their warriors to the royal standard at the start of a
campaign. For the rest of the time these followers lived in their lords’ halls, provided for out
of the proceeds of the estate.

In the new disorders of the 9th and 10th centuries, these primitive arrangements were
modified by the emergence of formal feudal lord/vassal relationships. At the same time the
old tribal warrior, fighting on foot, became the mounted warrior, who was a much more
expensive military asset. This led to the sub-infeudation of the larger estates as these
mounted warriors received grants of land from which to support themselves. The old estates
became lordships consisting of several knight’s fees, with much of their land now parceled
out as new manors of one knight’s fee each.

Characteristics of manors

Traditionally, manors were at least the equivalent of one knight’s fee. Originally, they were
formed of single village communities, but over time, as pieces of land were given away here
and acquired there, many manors came to be scattered through several neighboring villages;
the consequence of this was that villages were often divided amongst more than one manor.
Alternatively, they could be taken together with other villages into a large manor (of several
knight’s fees).

The defining feature of a manor was that it was “held in the hand” (the word manor comes
from the Latin for “hand”) by a lord. This lord could be a secular lord like a knight or a baron,
or an ecclesiastical lord like a bishop, church or monastery. Whoever or whatever the lord
was, he or it had control over the land and people of the manor. This power involved
economic, judicial/administrative and military power: the lord had a right to a share in
his people’s labor or income; the people of the manor were subject to the manorial court,
presided over by the lord or his official, which ordered their lives; and the men of the manor
were liable to be chosen to follow their lord to war, fighting under his orders.

A manor usually consisted of three parts:

1. landed estate directly under the control of the lord and his officials, the purpose of which
was to support him and his household;

2. dependent land, which carried obligations to the lord, usually mainly labor service but
often including contributions in kind, or even money gifts – this land was farmed by serfs;
and

3. free lands, for which peasants paid money rent – this land was farmed by free peasants
called yeomen (in English).

Serfs
Dependent land was farmed by “serfs”: peasants who were bound to the manor on a
hereditary basis, and had hereditary obligations to the lord. These usually involving working
on his demesne land for a set number of days per week, and giving him gifts in kind or money
on certain days. Serfs were not allowed to leave the manor without the lord’s permission.
Nor were they allowed to marry without his permission; they usually had to pay a “fine” (or
tax) for permission to marry. When a son inherited land from his father he also had to pay a
fine, and most punishments in the manorial court were dealt out as fines (hence our
association of the word “fine” with punishment).

The balance between demesne, dependent and free land varied from manor to manor, and
more so from region to region. It also varied over time, as a lord took more land into his
demesne, or divided demesne land amongst his serfs and free peasants.

As well as labor services and rents in kind or money, lords could usually extract fees for the
use of the manor’s mill, bakery or wine press.

Manors usually attempted to be as self-sufficient as possible. The work of making and

repairing equipment, for example, was carried out as far as practicable within the manor.
Towns were few and far between, and transporting goods to and from them was slow and
expensive, so self-sufficiency was a sensible aim.

Feudal complexity

There occurred complexities after fief-holding had become hereditary.

For example, a vassal of one lord might marry the heiress of the vassal of another lord, thus
acquiring obligations to a different lord. This was not an unusual situation. The most famous
case is probably that of the dukes of Burgundy, who in the 15th century held lands from both
the king of France and the emperor of Germany, who were hereditary rivals.

The inhabitants of towns did not fit neatly into the feudal scheme of things. Many early towns
were located in areas between manors. They formed no part of any fief and were answerable
directly to the king. Other towns grew up within existing fiefs. In either case, it was quite
impossible for a king to a great lord to deal with each individual within a town, so they dealt
with towns as whole communities – which in practice meant dealing with the leaders of the
towns.

It followed from this that, in internal matters, towns were able to run their own affairs with
a comparatively free hand, and that townsmen, as individuals, were free of feudal
obligations. This was most clearly expressed in the medieval proverb that “towns make free”.
Famously, if a serf arrived in a town and was able to stay there for a year and a day without
being caught and sent back to his manor, he became a free citizen of that town.

Wealthy towns and powerful cities

If the medieval economy expanded and towns became wealthier, their leaders were able to
bargain with their superiors, whether king or lords, for more autonomy. Large towns and
cities thus came to run their own affairs with minimal interference from kings and other
rulers. The revenue they contributed to the royal and feudal coffers effectively purchased
their autonomy.

Representative assemblies

It can be seen that at heart of it was a system of relationships between lords and their vassals,
with rights and duties on both sides.The medieval lords did not have dictatorial powers over
their vassal. For example, a lord had no rights to help himself to his vassal’s property.
Indeed, embedded in the system of western European feudalism was the principle that a
lord could not tax his subjects without their consent.

The key to rulers gaining the consent of their leading subjects was to seek their advice: to
bring them in on his thinking, listen to their anxieties, and adapt his policies accordingly.
Indeed, as we have seen, one of the duties of a vassal to his lord was to provide him with
counsel; and vassals regarded this duty as one of their most cherished privileges, that their
lord should consult with them on important matters. Each lord had his council of vassals,
which provided the forum for such consultation.

Over time, as towns and cities became wealthier, kings’ “great councils” expanded to include
not only leading nobles and churchmen, but also representatives from the major towns. The
great councils evolved into assemblies which represented the main “estates” of the medieval
realm: nobility, church and commoners.

These assemblies went by different names: in Spain, they were the Cortes; in France,
the Estates-General; in Germany, the Landtage, in Scandinavia the Rigstag or Rikstag; and in
England, Scotland, Ireland, Sicily, the Papal States and the kingdom of Naples, they
were Parliaments. They all had similar origins, in rulers’ obligations to consult with their
leading vassals.

One of the key principles that underlay this development was the idea that one person could
speak for many. This meant not only communicating their views but committing them to
action (such as paying a tax). Given the responsibility of this role, it was important that the
representative should be someone who commanded the confidence of the majority of those
whom he represented. The notion of electing representatives by majority vote thus took
hold, and so developed a practice which would lie at the heart of modern democracy.

Merits

1. In times of turmoil and anarchy, feudalism provided peace and security in society.
2. Among the nobles, it sowed the seeds of the spirit of chivalry. Chivalry was the social
and moral code of feudalism. It was the embodiment of the highest ideals of feudalism
and the expression of its virtues. The ideal of chivalry was to be brave and loyal,
generous, truthful, reverent and kind to the poor. As a result of the spirit of chivalry,
women in the late Middle Ages were raised to a much higher status then they had
enjoyed in the early Middle Ages.
3. Feudalism also curbed upon the tyranny of selfish kings. Usually, the tenants in chief
were more powerful than the king himself.

Demerits

1. The demerits of feudalism outweigh its merits. Feudalism was a child of anarchy and
at the same time, the parent of anarchy too. All vassals were bound to be loyal only
towards their immediate overlords. This,often created chaos and confusion in society.
 2. The feudal nobles acquired undue authority as they enjoyed two important rights -
the right of private jurisdiction and the right of private war. The right to private war
enjoyed by the feudal barons plunged the country into anarchy. War was the law of
the feudal world.
3. The worst evil of feudalism was the disabilities and sufferings of the serfs in the feudal
society. it was the hard labour of the serfs that enabled the Lords to roll in luxury and
indulge in their passion for fighting. The peasant was a despised and degraded
creature. He had to do forced labour for his Lord. he lived a very miserable life; he
was illiterate, ignorant and a victim of superstitions.

Decay of Feudalism

Political Feudalism began to decline in the 13th Century A.D. Economic Feudalism continued
for some more time. It also declined in the later Middle Ages. The causes for the decay of
Feudalism are many and varied.

• The main factor that contributed to the slow decline of Feudalism was the gradual
increase of royal power. This made the services of the feudal barons unnecessary.
The kings supported by the Church, the cities and the common people were able to
deal a blow to the power and prestige of the nobles. In England, France, and Spain the
royal power advanced at the expense of the nobility.
• The changed methods of warfare and newly developed weapons of war rendered
the feudal forces inefficient and ineffective. The use of gun powder and fire- arms
and the national armies recruited made the feudal devices useless.
• The Church with its growing power and wealth was a great source of strength to the
new monarchs against the feudal lords.
• The crusades weakened the nobles. Desiring to participate in the crusades many
nobles sold their estates or mortgaged them to raise the funds for the voyage. A great
many of the nobles died a heroic death in the Holy Land. Hence the power and
influence of the nobles passed into the hands of the new monarchs or wealthy
merchants.
 • The newly emerged towns with immense power and wealth threw off the feudal
yoke. Feudalism could not enter the principal centres of commerce and industry.
• Various other forces like the Black Death which carried a heavy toll of the lives of the
peasants also contributed to the decline of feudalism. The majority of the peasants
gained emancipation.

As feudalism faded, it was gradually replaced by the early capitalist structures of the
Renaissance. Land owners now turned to privatized farming for profit. Laborers began
demanding and were given better wages and additional liberties. Thus, the slow growth of
urbanization began, and with it came the cosmopolitan worldview that was the hallmark of
the Renaissance.

2. CRUSADES
Crusades are religious wars fought by the Christians against the Muslims in Palestine to
liberate Jerusalem; the Holy City of the Christians in the 12th and 13th centuries. Crusade
means battle of the Cross.The Holy Land was and still is a place that is very important for
the three major monotheistic religions: Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. There are many
important religious sites in the Holy Land. This is the land now
called Israel or Palestine. Jerusalem, Nazareth, Bethlehem and other religious sites fell
under the control of Muslims during the Caliphate of Omar.

The Crusades were a group of religious wars that took place in the medieval period. They
were sanctioned by the Latin Church in an effort to reclaim Christian territory and remove
Islamic rule from the Holy Land. Other Christian military campaigns were referred to
crusades as well, when fighting heresy or paganism, or for gaining an advantage politically.
The First Crusade took place in 1095 after a call to arms by Pope Urban II. The result was the
capture of Jerusalem in 1099.

Causes

The primary cause of the Crusades was religious. During the Caliphate, the Christians of
Jerusalem were allowed to have custody of all their holy places in that city. But when in 1076
AD, Jerusalem was conquered by the Seljuk Turks; they began to persecute the Christians.
The stories of this persecution spread to Europe. One pilgrim to Jerusalem from France,
Peter the Hermit roused the feelings of Christians against the Turks through his powerful
preaching. The Pope of that time, urban II appealed to the Christians of Europe to take part
in the holy war against the Turks. He wanted to maintain the prestige of Christianity and
the Church. Besides, he wanted to divert the quarrelsome and warlike spirit of the feudal
barons in Europe into a holy war to save Europe both from Islam and from the barons
themselves. Moreover, he wanted to bring the Eastern Church under the papal rule and
visualize a powerful Christendom united under the authority of the Popes and to make
Rome once more the capital of the world. He looked up on the crusades as an instrument to
achieve this goal. For this purpose, he toured places like Northern Italy, Southern France etc.,
preaching crusades. Thus, Europe was made one under the spiritual leadership of the Pope
to fight against a common enemy.

Another cause that prompted the feudal Knights of Europe to go for the crusades was the
spirit of chivalry, characteristic of the age.

Third cause for the Crusades was the weakening of the Byzantine Empire. This empire for
the past seven centuries heroically fought against the enemies of Asia and preserved the
glory of the ancient Roman Empire. It was now so much weakened by internal conflicts. The
Turks were conquering its Asiatic provinces. If Constantinople, the capital of Eastern Roman
Empire was to fall to the Turks, Eastern Europe lies open to the Turks. So, the emperor
appealed to the Pope to help him to drive back the Turks. This was an added incentive for
the Crusades.

There were economic causes also. The feudal system of agriculture in Europe had reduced
the fertility of the soil and so many nobles fallen into debt. According to the feudal law in
England and France only the elder son could inherit the property of the father and there
arose the question of what to do with the younger ones.Besides, Palestine was pictured as a
land floweth with milk and honey. This was a powerful inducement for the nobles of Western
Europe to respond to the Pope’s call to go for the crusades. Many people joined the Crusades
to escape from their debts. Many serfs joined to escape from the clutches of their lords.
Some went to gratify their love of travel. Even criminals went in order to escape from
punishment.

Another cause of the Crusades was the ambition of Italian cities like Genoa and Venice to
extend their rising commercial power. They planned to end the Muslim ascendancy in trade
in the Eastern Mediterranean and open the markets of the nearest to Western European
goods. So, they encouraged Crusades and sometimes financed them.

Main Crusades

First crusade (1097-1099)

There were 4 important crusades. Of these, the first was the most successful. This was
preceded by a Peasants’ Crusade in1096. A mob of 12000 persons set out from France
under Peter the Hermit and reached Constantinople and began looting the Byzantine
capital. But the Turks annihilated them.

The first of the organised Crusades was started in late 1096 and reached Palestine early
in1097. The majority who participated in this Crusade were Frenchmen and
Normans.Antioch and Jerusalem were captured by the crusaders. It is estimated that 70,000
Muslims including women and children were slaughtered. The Jews in the city were burned
alive inside a Synagogue. The Christian conquerors committed shameful acts of brutality.
This was followed by the establishment of Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem with 3 principalities
to its North; Tripoli, Antioch and Edessa. This Kingdom survived for nearly a century.

Second crusade

The second Crusade began in 1147. Soon after the first Crusade, the Muslims regained their
power. In 1144 Edessa was conquered by the Turks. The Christians of Europe under Saint
Bernard, the leading figure of the Cistercian movement preached the second crusade. In
response to this, Emperor Conrad III, King Louis VII of France and other rulers took up arms
and marched to Palestine. But they could achieve nothing and the second Crusade was a
disastrous failure. It was a stunning blow to the Christians.

Third Crusade 1189 -1191

This is the most renowned of all Crusades. Two attractive figures played the leading role in
this Crusade; Richard I of England known as the ‘Lion-heart’ led the Christians and Saladin
on the side of the Muslims. Richard was the noblest example of a medieval chivalrous Knight;
Saladin was a great ruler and a great man. He was gentle to the weak and merciful to the
vanquished. Saladin captured the Holy city (Jerusalem) in 1187 and the third Crusade was
now preached by the Pope.

In this Crusade, largest number of kings among the Christians took part. The most prominent
of them were the German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa, the French king Philip II and the
English King Richard. There was no unity of purpose or action among the crusaders.
Frederick Barbarossa was drowned while crossing a River on horseback; Richard and Philip
quarrelled with each other. The outcome of the war was a failure of the Christians. Richard
performed wonders of valour and made some conquests. Finally, he concluded a treaty with
Saladin in 1192 whereby acknowledged conquests of the latter; in return the Christians were
allowed to have free access to the holy places in Jerusalem.

Fourth Crusade

The fourth Crusade was not a crusade except in name. It was a disgraceful war faced by the
Christians waged by the Christians of the west against the Christians of the East. In response
to the call of Pope Innocent III, France and Germany took up arms against the Turks in 1202.
On their way, they interfered in a dispute of succession to the Imperial throne of
Constantinople. The Crusaders forgetting their mission plundered Constantinople and the
spoils were divided among the crusaders. A Latin Kingdom of Constantinople was
established in 1204.The Byzantine Empire was divided into feudal dominions each ruled by
a Latin nobleleading to the downfall of the Byzantine Empire.

After the fourth Crusade there were many minor crusades which are not very much worthy
of mention.

Albigensian Crusade

The Albigensian Crusade or Cathars' Crusade, (1209-1229 CE), was the first crusade to
specifically target heretic Christians - the Cathars of southern France. Not successful in
repressing the heresy, the campaigns over two decades led by Simon IV de Montfort, did
achieve their real purpose: the political annexation of the Languedoc region, eventually
bringing it under the control of the French Crown. The Crusade set a precedent for attacking
fellow Christians which would be repeated in Germany, Bosnia and the Baltic regions. The
Albigensian Crusade was started in 1209 to eliminate the Cathars of southern France.

Medieval Languedoc was a region of southern France with its unofficial capital at Toulouse.
The Albigensian Crusade directed against this region in the first quarter of the 13th century
CE takes its name from Albi, the cathedral city 65 kilometres north-east of Toulouse.
Albigensian means 'from Albi' but the heretics are more accurately known as the Cathars of
Languedoc, even if their first important centre was established at Albi.

Children's Crusade

The Children's Crusade is a crusade of 1212 by a gathering of children in France and

Germany. A boy, from either France or Germany, said that Jesus had visited him, and told him
to peacefully convert Muslims to Christianity. Following this vision, many children formed
bands, and marched to Italy. There, they were put onto ships which either capsized in a
storm, or which went to Morocco. Most of the children either starved to death or were sold
into slavery.

Fifth Crusade

During 1213, Pope Gregory IX pushed Frederick II into leading the Fifth Crusade. The Church
tried another crusade to attack the Holy Land. A crusading force from Hungary, Austria,
and Bavaria captured Damietta, a city in Egypt, in 1219. The crusaders had to surrender, due
to losing the battle for Cairo.

Sixth Crusade

In 1228, Emperor Frederick II set sail from Brindisi (Italy) for Syria. He had success,
and Jerusalem, Nazareth, and Bethlehem were given to the Crusaders for ten years without
fighting. This was the first major crusade not initiated by the Papacy, a trend that was to
continue for the rest of the century. This crusade only lasted for a year, from 1228-1229.
Seventh Crusade

The Templars argued with Egypt in 1243. In 1244, Egypt attacked Jerusalem. Louis IX of
France started a crusade against Egypt from 1248 to 1254. It was a failure, and Louis spent
much of the crusade living in Acre. In the midst of this crusade was the first Shepherds'
Crusade in 1251 (The Shepherds' Crusade of 1251 was a popular crusading movement in
northern France aimed at rescuing King Louis IX during the Seventh Crusade).

Eighth Crusade

The Eighth Crusade was organized by Louis IX of France in 1270, to help the Crusader states
in Syria. However, the crusade got as far as Tunis, where Louis died a month later.

Ninth Crusade

Before he was the king, Edward I of England started a crusade in 1271. He retired the
following year after a truce.

The end of the Crusades

In time, the people went on Crusades for other purposes. The Crusades ended
two centuries after they had begun, achieving mixed results. The crusades ended with the
Fall of Acre (in Israel) in 1291.

Causes for the failure of the crusades

The crusades failed due to many reasons.

First of all, the crusading expeditions were badly managed. There was no unity of
command and unity of action and sometimes no unity of purpose. The leaders were
frequently quarrelling among themselves.

Secondly, even when the crusaders were victorious, they could not take hold of the
conquered territory due to the fact that the people of the conquered territory were alien to
them.
Thirdly, the conflicting ambitions the East and the West undermined the success of the
Crusades. While the chief motive of the Byzantine Empire for the Crusade was not to rescue
the holy City for the Christians but to conquer all the Asiatic provinces of his Empire. The
Pope on the other hand organised the Crusades mainly with objective of strengthening
papacy and Latin Christianity. Thus, the Pope and the East Roman Emperor acted at cross
purposes.

Lastly, in the earlier stages the Italian merchants interfered in the Crusades with the
ambition of extending their commercial Empire; they had an eye on the trade passed through
Constantinople and therefore more interested in capturing that city than in a holy war
against Muslims.

Results of the crusades

Religious

The crusades did not serve their purpose. In fact, Christianity profited little. It had given
opposite effects to what was aimed at. The Muslim powers that were once tolerant of
religious diversity had been made intolerant by the attacks of the Christians. In the fourth
Crusade, the Christians of the West plundered and weakened Constantinople. This was a
great blow to Christianity in the East that paved the way for the attacks of Islam into Eastern
Europe.

Even though the first Crusade helped to enhance the power and prestige of the Papacy, the
failure in the later Crusades refuted the claims of the Pope to be the representative of God on
Earth. The Crusades caused great demoralization in the Christian Church and fostered the
spirit of fanaticism and stimulated the spirit of religious persecution.

Political

Politically also the crusades were a failure. The Christians were not able to free Jerusalem
from the Turks. Islam was also weakened by the crusades. The Crusades helped the
destruction of feudalism and the emergence of nationalism in Europe, particularly in France.
The feudal nobles sold their lands and privileges to find resources for the crusades; some of
them never returned and others returned powerless. The Crusades also led to the
development of towns. The cities of Italy owed the rapid advance of their commerce to the
Crusades.

Economic

Economically, the Crusades led to great development of Commerce between the East and the
West. “Trade followed the Cross”. The Knights lost Palestine, but the Italian merchants
gained control over the Mediterranean. It led to a great degree of Commerce and Maritime
transport. Many new articles of Commerce such as silk, sugar and spices made their way into
Europe through the crusades. New markets in the east led to the development of Italian
industry. Better techniques of Banking were introduced from the East and new forms and
instruments of credit appeared.

Social

Socially the great effects of the crusades were the emancipation of the serfs from the clutches
of the feudal barons. Besides, ideas of luxury passed into Europe through the crusades. Thus,
the social standards of Europe were considerable considerably raised.

Cultural

Many Arab words came into the European languages through the crusaders. They
transmitted technical secrets from the East that led to the improved stained glass of the
Gothic Cathedral. The compass, the gunpowder and printing might have entered Europe
in the wake of Crusades. The geographical knowledge of the Europeans was very much
widened and great interest was aroused in the study of geography. This gave the Europeans
the impetus to undertake long journeys of exploration and discovery. It may be said that the
Crusades richly contributed to the Renaissance by widening the horizon of knowledge
among the Europeans.

3. Monasticism

Monasticism is a way of living that is religious, isolated from other people, and self-
disciplined. In many religions, monks and nuns practice monasticism. It is an
institutionalized religious practice or movement whose members attempt to live by a rule
that go beyond those of either the laity or the ordinary spiritual leaders of their religions.
Commonly celibate and universally ascetic, the monastic individual separates himself or
herself from society either by living as a hermit or anchorite (religious recluse) or by joining
a community (coenobium) of others who profess similar intentions.

The word monasticism is derived from the Greek monachos (“living alone”), but this
etymology highlights only one of the elements of monasticism and is somewhat misleading,
because a large proportion of the world’s monastics live in cenobitic (common
life) communities. The term monasticism implies celibacy, or living alone in the sense of
lacking a spouse, which became a socially and historically crucial feature of the monastic life.

Early Medieval Monasticism

In the immediate centuries following the death of Jesus Christ, a culture of

monasticism developed and prospered throughout the early Christian world. There was the
growing opinion among a group of believers that the best way to serve Christ was through
living a life of simplicity, asceticism, and isolation from mainstream civilization. Throughout
the early medieval period, two different types of monasticism formed— solitary and
cenobitic (communal). Figures such as Saint Anthony, Pachomius, and St. Benedict, in
particular, developed principles for both varieties of monastic life that shaped the course of
monasticism in Europe forever.

Although the Catholic Church and the papacy in Rome exerted official and formal
power over Christendom in Western Europe, the monks of this growing monastic movement
widely influenced several facets of early medieval society. During the early medieval period,
monastic monks were revered as religious heroes throughout the larger European society.
While their image fluctuated over time, these medieval monks greatly impacted and
contributed to the religious and secular culture in Europe throughout the medieval period
and beyond.

Early Christian Monasticism

One of the earliest figures of solitary monasticism was Saint Anthony, who lived a
solitary life in Egypt during the third century. But life as an ascetic hermit was difficult on
numerous levels. As a result, the cenobitic monastic movement began to gain popularity
under leaders such as Pachomius, who created a community of monastic individuals during
the first part of the fourth century. Pachomius was responsible for devising some of the first
foundational rules for monastic living. These included the strict principle of total obedience
to superiors, as well as the practice and observance of chastity and poverty. By the first few
decades of the fifth century, communal monastic living continued to grow and expand
throughout Western Europe. Monasteries established across Europe expounded specific and
distinct forms of asceticism. During the early medieval period, the Italian monk Benedict
(ca. 480–543) was instrumental in shaping the contours of communal monasticism. His
system, which came to be known as the “Rule,” influenced the features of monastic life, and
in some respects early medieval culture, for several centuries. The Rule of St. Benedict
continues to be used today in monasteries worldwide.

St. Benedict and the Benedictine Rule

Although the early medieval period saw many monastic monks who sought to live an
austere lifestyle in order to fulfill their devotion to Christ, St. Benedict successfully brought
a type of uniformity and discipline to an otherwise dissimilar movement. During his time as
a young man studying in Rome, Benedict grew increasingly shocked by the pretentious
conduct of the Catholic Church in Rome, and decided to retreat from society entirely.
Benedict began as a solitary hermit practicing an extreme version of asceticism. Over time,
he gained a number of followers who sought to emulate his lifestyle. He and his disciples
eventually moved to the mountains near Rome, where Benedict created a unique structure
for his monastic community at Monte Cassino (founded in 529). Before Benedict died he
produced a set of guidelines for his own monastic community, which, over time, was adopted
by large numbers of monasteries throughout Europe.

Benedict’s model for monastic living promoted the community as a symbol for the family.
The abbot was considered the father, and all of the monks were to be thought of as brothers.
Each day was structured around private and communal prayer, sleep, religious reading and
study, and manual labor. Daily life was primarily centered on a strict schedule of prayer and
meditation, as monks were expected to convene eight times every day to engage in prayer.
The Benedictine Rule included the following directives:

1. The abbot was endowed with full sovereignty and authority within a given monastic
community. He was elected to his position for the duration of his lifetime and could not be
replaced.

2. Monks were forbidden from leaving the monastic community.

3. All monks were required to exercise strict and complete obedience to authority regarding
all lawful matters.

4. Monks were advised to use speech moderately, but silence was not mandated.

5. Humility was divided into twelve degrees, or steps, that were said to lead to heaven. These
included the fear of God, patience, confession of sin, humble and modest speech as well as
bodily posture. It also required monks to perceive themselves as worthless workmen who
were inferior to all others. Benedict’s Rule allowed for a less severe lifestyle than some of the
earlier and contemporary styles of devotion promoted by other monastic figures such as
Pachomius. For example, Benedictine monks were provided two full meals, along with fresh
fruits and vegetables, and even a small amount of wine, every day.

Monasticism in the High Middle Ages (1000–1300)

Following the first few centuries of the spread of European monasteries, an increasing
amount of fraud and corruption began in pockets throughout the monastic world. The first
major signs of reform came from a monk named Berno. In the early tenth century, Berno
established a monastery in Cluny, France, which restored the Benedictine Rule to its original
intention. Over time, however, Berno’s monastery, like many others, fell victim to wealth,
greed, and power.

Cluniacs were a reformed order of Benedictines founded in France at the Abbey of Cluny in
910 CE. The Cluniac Reforms were a response to what was seen as too much interference
from nobility in the lives of monks. Many nobles donated land to monasteries as their tithe
to the Church or as a means of staking a claim to retire there but then inserted themselves
into the lives of the monks and interfered with their daily schedules. The Cluniacs were
especially devoted to caring for the poor and those who had been uprooted or left homeless
by Viking raids. Their emphasis on art as a means of honoring God resulted in the creation
and preservation of many significant works.

Cistercian Movement

The next wave of monastic reform after the Benedictines came with the Cistercian
movement. The first Cistercian abbey was founded in 1098, at Cîteaux Abbey. The keynote
of Cistercian life was a return to a literal observance of the Benedictine Rule, rejecting the
developments of the Benedictines. The most striking feature in the reform was the return to
manual labour, and especially to field work. Inspired by Bernard of Clairvaux, the primary
builder of the Cistercians, the Cistercians became the main force of technological diffusion in
medieval Europe. By the end of the 12th century the Cistercian houses numbered 500, and
at its height in the 15th century the order claimed to have close to 750 houses. Most of these
were built in wilderness areas, and played a major part in bringing such isolated parts of
Europe into economic cultivation.

Carthusians were an order emphasizing the value of silence and contemplation. Monks lived
in cells, emerging to take part in rituals and work primarily in silence. Certain days of the
week were allowed for communal walks in which adherents could speak freely with each
other but, for the most part, the monks lived in silence. The order was founded by Bruno of
Cologne (l. c. 1030-1101 CE) in 1084 CE and was open to both monks and nuns. The
monasteries followed the same paradigm as Hilda of Whitby (l. 614-680 CE) at Whitby
Abbey in Britain of men and women living separately but worshipping together. The name
comes from the site of the first hermitage Bruno founded in the Chartreuse Mountains and
the monks continue to be known for the alcoholic drink Chartreuse which they have been
producing since the 18th century CE.

Mendicant Monasticism (Franciscan and Dominican orders)

During the second half of the twelfth century, a new style of monasticism formed and gained
popularity under the original leadership of Peter Waldo. Waldo’s version of the monastic
lifestyle involved the actions of preaching and the embracing of poverty. This philosophy
came to be referred to as mendicant monasticism. Mendicant monasticism promoted
poverty and begging for charity. Today, mendicant monasticism is primarily associated with
orders established by St. Francis of Assisi (1182–1226) and St. Dominic (1170–1221). As
a result of the Franciscan and Dominican orders, mendicant monasticism spread widely
throughout medieval Europe and challenged the dependence on wealth and power that had
evolved among traditional monasteries over time.

During the rule of Pope Innocent III (1198–1216), two of the most famous monastic orders
were founded. They were called the mendicant, or begging, orders because their members
begged for the food and clothes. At their foundation these orders rejected the previously
established monastic model of living in one stable, isolated community where members
worked at a trade and owned property in common, including land, buildings, and other
wealth. By contrast, the mendicants avoided owning property, did not work at a trade, and
embraced a poor, often itinerant (wandering) lifestyle. They depended for their survival on
the goodwill of the people to whom they preached. They would usually travel in pairs,
preaching, healing the sick, and helping the poor. Francis of Assisi founded the order of the
Franciscans, who were known for their charitable work. The Dominicans, founded by Saint
Dominic, focused on teaching, preaching, and suppressing heresy.

The Dominican Order came into being in the Middle Ages at a time when religion was starting
to be contemplated in a new way. Men of God were no longer expected to stay behind the
walls of a cloister (monastery). Instead, they traveled among the people, taking as their
examples the apostles of the primitive Church. Like his contemporary Francis, Dominic saw
the need for a new type of organization, and the quick growth of the Dominicans and
Franciscans during their first century of existence confirms that the orders of mendicant
friars met a need.

The inspiration for the Franciscan Order came in 1209 when Francis heard a sermon on
Matthew 10:9 that made such an impression on him that he decided to devote himself wholly
to a life of apostolic poverty. Clad in a rough garment, barefoot, and, after the Evangelical
principle, without staff or scrip, he began to preach repentance.
Francis was soon joined by a prominent fellow townsman, Bernard of Quintavalle, who
contributed all that he had to the work, and by other companions, who are said to have
reached eleven within a year. The brothers lived in the deserted leper colony of Rivo Torto
near Assisi, but they spent much of their time traveling through the mountainous districts of
Umbria, always cheerful and full of songs, yet making a deep impression on their hearers by
their earnest exhortations. Their life was extremely ascetic, though such practices were
apparently not prescribed by the first rule that Francis gave them (probably as early as
1209), which seems to have been nothing more than a collection of Scriptural passages
emphasizing the duty of poverty.

Similar to Francis, Dominic sought to establish a new kind of order, one that would bring the
dedication and systematic education of the older monastic orders like the Benedictines to
bear on the religious problems of the burgeoning population of cities, but with more
organizational flexibility than either monastic orders or the secular clergy. Dominic’s new
order was to be a preaching order, with its members trained to preach in the vernacular
languages. Rather than earning their living on vast farms as the monasteries had done, the
new friars would survive by begging— “selling” themselves through persuasive preaching.

Dominic inspired his followers with loyalty to learning and virtue, a deep recognition of the
spiritual power of worldly deprivation and the religious state, and a highly developed
governmental structure. At the same time, Dominic encouraged the members of his order to
develop a “mixed” spirituality. They were both active in preaching and contemplative in
study, prayer, and meditation. The brethren of the Dominican Order were urban and learned,
as well as contemplative and mystical in their spirituality. While these traits had an impact
on the women of the order, the nuns especially absorbed the latter characteristics and made
them their own. In England, the Dominican nuns blended these elements with their own
defining characteristics and created a spirituality and collective personality that set them
apart.

Impact on Culture

The monastic orders of the Middle Ages are well-known for the production of illuminated
Manuscripts, highly ornamented books on biblical themes or illustrated texts of biblical books,
which were highly prized in their day and continued to be throughout the Renaissance and up to the
present day. These monasteries also preserved classical works from antiquity by authors such
as Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Lucretius, Homer, Sophocles, and other writers whose pieces would
otherwise have been lost.

Celtic Monasticism, centred in Ireland, was responsible for the preservation of numerous
works of lasting cultural value. Ireland was never conquered by the Roman legions and so
was left to develop on its own and, further, was unaffected by the fall of the Western Roman
Empire in 476 CE. Irish literacy and scholarship were profoundly respected in the Hoy
Roman empire. The monastic orders, though secluded from mainstream society,
nevertheless informed it in many ways.

The modern-day concept of the hospital seems outdated when compared with the same sort
of institution established by the monastic orders in which anyone in need was cared for
whether they could pay for the service. The development of the Cult of Mary in the Middle
Ages elevated women's status to a level previously unknown in Europe. Female monastics
(nuns) took part in copying and illustrating manuscripts along with their male counterparts
and initiated social programs to help their neighboring communities. Monastic communities
and monasteries frequently acted as educational centres, medical centres, and lodges for
medieval travellers.

Early medieval monks also greatly contributed to the agricultural and economic
development of Europe. The Benedictine Rule included habitual sessions of manual labor,
and as a result, reestablished a certain degree of dignity and spirituality to the act of physical
labor. Over the course of the medieval period, it became fashionable for powerful, elite
families to build monasteries on the grounds of their estates. This led to strong ties between
the monasteries and the influential civic forces in medieval society.

4. MEDIEVAL CITIES AND GUILDS

At the start of the Middle Ages, most people lived in the countryside, either on feudal manors
or in religious communities. But by the 12th century, towns were growing up around castles
and monasteries and along trade routes. These bustling towns became centers of trade and
industry.

The Growth of Medieval Towns

In the ancient world, town life was well established, particularly in Greece and Rome. Ancient
towns were busy trading centres. But after the fall of the Roman Empire in the west, trade
with the east suffered, and town life declined. In the Early Middle Ages, most people in
Western Europe lived in scattered communities in the countryside.

By the High Middle Ages, towns were growing again. One reason for their growth was
improvements in agriculture. Farmers were clearing forests and adopting better farming
methods. As a result, they had a surplus of crops to sell in town markets. And because of
these surpluses, not everyone had to farm to feed themselves. With the growing
specialization, produces like wine and cotton were shipped to longer distances. Not only
river and sea routes were extensively used, but land routes were also felt necessary, for that
improved road building, bridge building etc. From the 11th century, extensive sea-borne
trade for shorter as well as longer distances began to be resorted to. Between 1050 and 1300,
the Italian city states of Genoa, Pisa and Venice freed much of the Mediterranean from
Muslim control and as a result, luxury goods such as spices, gems, perfumes and fine clothes
began to be appeared in Western markets.

Another reason for the growth of towns was the revival of trade. Seaport towns, such as
Venice and Genoa in Italy, served as trading centers for goods from the Middle East and Asia.
Within Europe, merchants often traveled by river, and many towns grew up near these
waterways. The revival of trade called for new patterns of payment and the development of
new commercial techniques. It became significant that Western Europe returned to a money
economy after about four centuries. During the manorialism, as the traditional manors had
been self- sufficient, a few external items needed could be bartered for. But with the growth
of money economy, coins became indispensible. At first, there were coins of smallest
denominations, but as trade grew, the denominations increased rapidly and by the 13th
century, gold coins were minted by Italian states like Florence and Venice. Thus happened
the medieval urban revolution that had its reflections in the social, political, economic and
cultural life of the people.

Many merchants who sold their wares in towns became permanent residents. So did people
practicing various trades. Some towns grew wealthier because local people specialized in
making specific types of goods. For example, towns in Flanders (present-day Belgium and
the Netherlands) were known for their fine woolen cloth. The Italian city of Venice was
known for making glass. Other towns built their wealth on the banking industry that grew
up to help people trade more easily.

At the beginning of the middle Ages, towns were generally part of the domain of a feudal
lord—whether a monarch, a noble, or a high-ranking Church official. As towns grew
wealthier, town dwellers began to resent the lord’s feudal rights and his demands for taxes.
They felt they no longer needed the lord’s protection—or his interference.

In some places, such as northern France and Italy, violence broke out as towns struggled to
become independent. In other places, such as England and parts of France, the change was
more peaceful. Many towns became independent by purchasing a royal charter. A charter
granted them the right to govern themselves, make laws, and raise taxes. Free towns were
often governed by a mayor and a town council. Power gradually shifted from feudal lords to
the rising class of merchants and craftspeople.

What brought most people to towns was business—meaning trade and commerce. As trade
and commerce grew, so did towns. At the beginning of the Middle Ages, most trade was in
luxury goods, which only the wealthy could afford. People made everyday necessities for
themselves. By the High Middle Ages, more local people were buying and selling more kinds
of products. These included everyday goods, such as food, clothing, and household items.
They also included the specialized goods that different towns began producing, such as
woolen cloth, glass, and silk.

Most towns had a market, where food and local goods were bought and sold. Much larger
were the great merchant fairs, which could attract merchants from many countries. A town
might hold a merchant fair a couple of times a year. The goods for sale at large fairs came
from all over Europe, the Middle East, and beyond.

With the growth of trade and commerce, merchants grew increasingly powerful and wealthy.
They ran sizable businesses and looked for trading opportunities far from home. Merchant
guilds came to dominate the business life of towns and cities. In towns that had become
independent, members of merchant guilds often sat on town councils or were elected mayor.

Guilds

The most distinctive form of economic and social organization in medieval towns was the
guilds. A guild was a professional organization to protect and promote special interests.
Medieval towns began as centers for trade, but they soon became places where many goods
were produced, as well. Both trade and the production of goods were overseen by
organizations called guilds.

There were two main kinds of guilds: merchant guilds and craft guilds. The primary
functions of the merchant guilds were to maintain a monopoly of the local markets for its
members and to preserve a stable economic system. For achieving this, the merchant guilds
severely restricted trading by foreigners in the city, guaranteed to its members the right to
participate in sales, enforced uniform pricing etc. Similarly, all types of crafts people had
their own guilds, from cloth makers to cobblers and the stonemasons who built the great
cathedrals. Craft guilds regulated the affairs of artisans.

Guilds provided help and protection for the people doing a certain kind of work, and they
maintained high standards. Guilds controlled the hours of work and set prices. They also
dealt with complaints from the public. If, for example, a coal merchant cheated a customer,
all coal merchants might look bad. The guilds therefore punished members who cheated.

Guild members paid dues to their guild. Their dues paid for the construction of guildhalls
and for guild fairs and festivals. Guilds also used the money to take care of members and
their families who were sick and unable to work.
It was not easy to become a member of a guild. Starting around age 12, a boy, and sometimes
a girl, became an apprentice. An apprentice’s parents signed an agreement with a master
of the trade. The master agreed to house, feed, and train the apprentice. Sometimes, the
parents paid the master a sum of money. Apprentices rarely got paid for their work. At the
end of seven years, apprentices had to prove to the guild that they had mastered their trade.
To do this, an apprentice produced a piece of work called a “masterpiece.” If the guild
approved of the work, the apprentice was given the right to become a master and set up his
or her own business. Setting up a business was expensive, however, and few people could
afford to do it right away. Often they became journeymen instead. The word journeyman
does not refer to a journey. It comes from the French word journee, for “day.” A journeyman
was a craftsperson who found work “by the day,” instead of becoming a master who
employed other workers.

Contributions of the Medieval Towns of Europe:

The urban revolution in the eleventh and the twelfth centuries had far-reaching economic,
social, political and cultural effects. It is significant to discuss the contributions of the
medieval towns here;

(a) To the society the medieval towns introduced two new classes,

(i) The first class belonging bourgeoisie of merchants, bankers, capitalists, industrialists, etc.,
and

(ii) The working classes of both skilled and unskilled labourers.

With the introduction of these two classes, the major part of the economic, social and even
political history of the west was dominated by these two classes. In the working classes of
skilled and unskilled labourers we can see the beginning of the proletariat class of the future.

The towns played an important part in under mining the feudal and manorial systems.
Possession of land was no longer the only title to rank and status. Fortunes earned through
industry and trade made the capitalists equally, if not more, important than the former.

The towns and the cities became shelters of freedom for the serfs. Serfdom received its burial
ground in towns where they were no longer bound by feudal ties and could sell their
agricultural produce in open market for money. Runaway serfs could get easy shelters in
towns and cities where a continuous stay for ninety days would make them free citizens.
From this practice emerged the fiction ‘city air makes man free’.

(b) In their political effects, the towns may be said to have contributed to the emergence of
absolute national monarchy. The kings relied on the middle class, i.e. the bourgeoisie. The
kings found a natural ally in them against the feudal anarchy. The middle class paid for the
maintenance of the standing army which freed the kings from dependence on feudal military
services.

(c) Economically the medieval towns may be regarded as a transitional structure bridging
the medieval with the modern economic systems. Medieval towns and cities formed into
independent economic units with their respective customs barriers. It worked as an
intermediate stage between the natural economy of modern states and the medieval manor.

Mercantilism which began with the medieval towns was one of the major economic weapons
in the hands of the absolute monarchs of Europe. Medieval towns and cities were centres of
industrial and commercial life and it was from the medieval towns that the system of
international exchange and traffic emerged, which forms one of the most characteristic
features of modern European civilization.

(d) Culturally speaking, the development of towns and cities meant an acceleration of all the
social processes of growth and change. New ideas followed the merchants and goods and
travelled from town to town.

The moneyed class contributed liberally for the improvements of the towns and cities. With
the growth of urban population new experiments in municipal life were undertaken to solve
the problems that emerged. The wealth of the burghers, i.e. merchants, brought liberal
patronage of arts, architecture, painting, etc.

The ruined high-gabled houses, sculptured guild halls, artistic gateways, superb palaces,
imposing cathedrals even today bear testimony to the fact that the medieval towns and cities
were the foster home of culture. The urban life with all its amenities made life worth living
and the luxury that came in the wake of wealth made monastic life or asceticism naturally
monasticism less attractive.

-------------------------------------------------------