I continue with my series debunking common misconceptions about the Middle Ages with a look at the notion that serfs were little better off than slaves.
The 20th
century popular image of serfs was expressed in the Hollywood film “The
Kingdom of Heaven” when the lead character (I hate to call him Balian
d’Ibelin because he bore so little resemblance to the historical figure)
says to the Hollywood Imad ad-Din that he “had been a slave ― or very
like” meaning (inaccurately) that he had been a serf before coming to
the Holy Land.
The
conflation of slavery and serfdom is not only inaccurate, it
fundamentally inhibits our understanding of feudal society. As I noted
in the opening essay on kings and subjects, feudal society was based on
the concept of mutual contracts ― a fact that made medieval Europe very
litigious by the way. The
fundamental difference between slaves and serfs was that the former
(slaves) had no rights, while the latter (serfs) had very clear rights.
Let
us start by looking at slavery. Slaves own nothing ― not even their own
bodies. They can be mutilated, tortured, raped and killed by their
masters without the latter committing a crime. Anything slaves produce,
even their own children, do not belong to them. Their children belong to
their master, who can choose to kill or sell them. As a result, slaves
cannot and do not have families. They rarely even know who their
parents, siblings, and children are. The products of their hands, from
crops to works of art, also belong to their masters. The magnificent
pottery of ancient Athens, for example, was the work of slaves who might
have been from any part of the ancient world.
From the Duke of Berry's Book of Hours |
Serfs historically derived from Roman slaves. With the spread of Christianity in the 4th
century AD, however, slavery became increasingly unacceptable because
Christianity viewed each human as a soul loved by God. Within a few
hundred years it was universally accepted in the Latin Church that no
Christian could be held as a slave. But the economy of the period was
still utterly dependent on the labor of those former slaves to plant and
harvest the food needed by all. So the status of slaves was altered and
became one of serfdom in which the former slave was still required to
till the land and was not free to leave it, but was granted control over
his person and with it the right to marry, have a family, and above all
retain 50% or more of his produce depending on locality. Compared to
slaves, serfs lived a very privileged life!
From the Duke of Berry's Book of Hours |
Furthermore,
at the time this status evolved, the concept of being “tied to the
land” was not seen as a brutal violation of “human rights.” On the
contrary, the contract between serf and lord gave the serf both physical
and economic security. The lord was responsible for providing armed
protection against outlaws and raiders, and the serf not be thrown off
the land any more than he could walk away from it; he was guaranteed his
share of the harvest not just one year at a time but for as long as he
and his children and his grandchildren and their children etc. lived.
Renowned French historian Regine Pernoud points out in her book Those Terrible Middle Ages: Debunking the Myths (Ignatius, 1977, p.88):
It
was this intimate connection between man and the soil on which he lived
that constituted serfdom, for, in all other respects, the serf had all
the rights of a free man: he could marry, establish a family, his land,
as well as the goods he was able to acquire, would pass to his children
at his death. The lord, let us note, had, although on a totally
different scale, the same obligations as the serf, for he could neither
sell nor give up his land nor desert it.
Furthermore,
archaeology increasingly provides evidence of the very high standard of
living serfs could attain. Clever peasants, like clever lords, made
judicious marriages. Through good marriages and careful husbandry,
peasants could accumulate more and more hereditary plots of land. It
mattered little that they did not “own” the land in the modern,
capitalist sense of the word; feudal lords didn’t own it either. The
point was that some serfs accumulated the right to use the land and
harvest its produce. Peasants that accumulated more land than they could
themselves cultivate, hired laborers to work it for them. A wealthy
serf could build a large house, purchase furnishings, and other
luxuries, and live like a lord ― just as long as he didn’t try to leave
his land.
From the Duke of Berry's Book of Hours |
The
standard of living among peasants increased as Europe became more
prosperous and new technologies, from the horse collar and horseshoe to
axles that swiveled and plows that could turn the soil, were introduced.
These new technologies increased farm productivity dramatically. By
using horses rather than oxen, for example, the amount of land one
farmer could cultivate doubled. These technologies also enabled land
that had previously been considered marginal to be brought under
cultivation. With more land under cultivation, it was possible to
introduce (in the eighth century) the three field system, which left
one-third of the land fallow each year. This
enabled the soil to regenerate and so the sustainability of agriculture
increased. As a result of these innovations, European serfs “began to
eat far better than common people anywhere, ever. Indeed, medieval
Europeans may have been the first human group whose genetic potential
was not badly stunted by a poor diet, with the result they were, on
average, bigger, healthier, and more energetic than ordinary people
elsewhere.” (Rodney Stark. God’s Battalions. HarperCollins, 2009, p. 70.)
From the Duke of Berry's Book of Hours |
As prosperity increased, so did the demand for goods, spawning an increase in industry and trade. This,
in turn, led to greater urbanization, and with improvements in
transportation technology (think of the splendid naval architecture of
the Vikings), trade started to spread farther and farther afield. The
First Crusade (1097-1099) re-established regular contact with the
Byzantine Empire and the Near East, and for the next three hundred
years, Europeans dominated the sea lanes of the Mediterranean. Pilgrim
traffic, crusades, and trade with the Levant produced a great economic
boom that financed the great palaces and cathedrals, monasteries and
guild halls, and many more humble dwellings as well.
Yet,
urbanization also made serfdom increasingly burdensome. Serfs no longer
feared losing their land but longed for the greater opportunities in
crafts, industry, and trade that beckoned from the cities. Thus by the
twelfth century, serfs were demanding their freedom and more and more
mechanisms for emancipation evolved. By the end of the Middle Ages,
there were, in fact, many more free peasants than serfs in Western
Europe.
The
crusader states were an exception to the overall feudal model. Founded
centuries after slavery had disappeared from Western Europe and settled
by free men (since serfs could not leave the land to pilgrim to the Holy
Land), there were no serfs at all in the crusader states.
For
readers tired of clichés and cartoons, award-winning novelist Helena P.
Schrader offers nuanced insight into historical events and figures
based on sound research and an understanding of human nature. Her
complex and engaging characters bring history back to life as a means to
better understand ourselves.
Find out more at: https://www.helenapschrader.com/crusades.html
No comments:
Post a Comment