7 ms·

I think it was the black death that effectively killed of feudalism in most of Europe. Wages went up and peasants were in high demand so it became easier to mov

I think it was the black death that effectively killed of feudalism in most of Europe. Wages went up and peasants were in high demand so it became easier to move. The effects of the Black death (1344) were probably being felt in 1400s Europe to at least the extent that WW2 still impacts on us today.

jxub 8y ago
Strangely, Poland was left largely unafected by the Black Death so the cause of this social arrngement wasn't there. The high regard for peasants in Poland contrasted with the neighboring East Slavic countries like Russia probably because of the influence of their Mongol rulers, but in the origin Slavic cultures were quite egalitarian and benevolent.
- wozmirek 8y ago
  Disagree with the high regard. As you said, it's not russian type of servitude/slavery, but at the same time, being a Polish (well, not really Polish - living in a land of a certain polish-slavic ruler) peasant was bad. If the plague hit Poland, then... but that's a what-if ;) I find the difference is really well explained by the description of the Refeudalization process [1]. source: being Polish, currently living in Berlin [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refeudalization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refeudalization
  - jxub 8y ago
    There was a class of well-off peasants who had fairly comfortably lives, but for the most part I think you're right as that part of my argument was really hand-wavy.
- chewz 8y ago
  It isn't strange that Poland wasn't affected by Black Death. King Casimir the Great have introduced sanitary cordon and quarantined cross-border travelers. https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/16699/why-was-poland-spared-from-the-black-death https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/16699/why-was-po...
pjc50 8y ago
> killed of feudalism in most of Europe It took a long time to die if that's really the case. The last bits of feudalism (feu duties) were removed from Scottish property law in 2004.
- maxerickson 8y ago
  Is there not still a pattern of concentrated, familial land ownership?
  - lawlessone 8y ago
    The royal family being one lol
  - toasterlovin 8y ago
    Feudalism is more than just concentrated property ownership. It’s primarily about people being bound by law to provide labor and resources to their feudal lord.
    - maxerickson 8y ago
      Sure. But half a pie in the fridge is a bit of pie, it doesn't matter that the whole thing isn't there anymore.
      - toasterlovin 8y ago
        Concentrated ownership of property is not a specific feature of feudalism. It is something which obtains in basically any large scale society which is non-communal.
- barking 8y ago
  Arguably Scotland is an exception, the reformation is still a hot topic there. 2004 wasn't too long after Rangers signed its first Catholic player. I'm kidding btw. I think you'll always find vestiges of ancient systems if you look for them especially in countries where evolution rather than revolution has been the way change has been effected.
DanielGee 8y ago
Black death didn't kill feudalism ( even if we could come to a consensus on what feudalism is ). The societal structure wasn't affected by the black death. Feudalism died as european monarchs and elites got wealthy and used that wealth to centralize power. Feudalism is a result of weak or nonexistent central power. A classic example of this is japan during the meiji period. The emperor centralized power by overthrowing the feudal lords of japan. Which he was able to because he opened trade and gained investment and weapons from the west which gave him enough power to central japan's feudal estates under his direct rule. The black death didn't cause rises in wages. What caused wages to rises was trade. There as something called the mongol empire ( you might have heard of it ) which allowed europe to trade directly with china, india and the rest of asia. The mongol empire ( particularly the golden horde ) was central to european wealth generation. So much so that when it finally fell in 1480, wealthy merchants were desperately seeking another trade route to the east. A few years later, you have columbus ( you might have heard of him as well ). The idea that death caused wage rises is ludicrous when you think about it for a second. If population decline causes wage increases then japan would be seeing a huge rise in income. Russia in the 90s should have seen a ridiculous rise in income. What increases wages are increasing population and increasing trade.
- barking 8y ago
  As an example I found on a moment's googling, I'll just quote you part of the conclusion from this article: (https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-economic-impact-of-the-black-death/ https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-economic-impact-of-the-black...) The European economy at the close of the Middle Ages (c. 1500) differed fundamentally from the pre—plague economy. In the countryside, a freer peasant derived greater material benefit from his toil. Fixed rents if not outright ownership of land had largely displaced customary dues and services and, despite low grain prices, the peasant more readily fed himself and his family from his own land and produced a surplus for the market. Yields improved as reduced population permitted a greater focus on fertile lands and more frequent fallowing, a beneficial phenomenon for the peasant.
  - DanielGee 8y ago
    I'm well aware of the theory. I used to subscribe to it myself when I was younger. I won't go into why reduce population wouldn't affect farm yields since back then, farming was a very physical endeavor requiring many people. If yields did increase, it was most likely because of population increase in the countryside due to europeans fleeing disease ridden cities. Lets not forget that most of the attributed population decline was due to cities being emptied because city dwellers moved to the countryside. Just like isaac newton did in the 1600s when disease struck england. I would think that numbers, knowledge, technology and goods from the east had more to do with changing european society than a population decrease. What do you think impacted korea more? The deaths during the korean war or trade with the west? What impacted european wages more? The deaths during WW2 or the american-led trade system? Also, throughout history, there have been quite a few plagues ( not to mention mass killings ). Those didn't lift wages. China's wages didn't rise after tens of millions of people died during the taiping rebellion. But you are free to believe what you want.

jxub 8y ago

Strangely, Poland was left largely unafected by the Black Death so the cause of this social arrngement wasn't there. The high regard for peasants in Poland contrasted with the neighboring East Slavic countries like Russia probably because of the influence of their Mongol rulers, but in the origin Slavic cultures were quite egalitarian and benevolent.

wozmirek 8y ago
Disagree with the high regard. As you said, it's not russian type of servitude/slavery, but at the same time, being a Polish (well, not really Polish - living in a land of a certain polish-slavic ruler) peasant was bad. If the plague hit Poland, then... but that's a what-if ;) I find the difference is really well explained by the description of the Refeudalization process [1]. source: being Polish, currently living in Berlin [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refeudalization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refeudalization
- jxub 8y ago
  There was a class of well-off peasants who had fairly comfortably lives, but for the most part I think you're right as that part of my argument was really hand-wavy.
chewz 8y ago
It isn't strange that Poland wasn't affected by Black Death. King Casimir the Great have introduced sanitary cordon and quarantined cross-border travelers. https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/16699/why-was-poland-spared-from-the-black-death https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/16699/why-was-po...

pjc50 8y ago

> killed of feudalism in most of Europe It took a long time to die if that's really the case. The last bits of feudalism (feu duties) were removed from Scottish property law in 2004.

maxerickson 8y ago
Is there not still a pattern of concentrated, familial land ownership?
- lawlessone 8y ago
  The royal family being one lol
- toasterlovin 8y ago
  Feudalism is more than just concentrated property ownership. It’s primarily about people being bound by law to provide labor and resources to their feudal lord.
  - maxerickson 8y ago
    Sure. But half a pie in the fridge is a bit of pie, it doesn't matter that the whole thing isn't there anymore.
    - toasterlovin 8y ago
      Concentrated ownership of property is not a specific feature of feudalism. It is something which obtains in basically any large scale society which is non-communal.
barking 8y ago
Arguably Scotland is an exception, the reformation is still a hot topic there. 2004 wasn't too long after Rangers signed its first Catholic player. I'm kidding btw. I think you'll always find vestiges of ancient systems if you look for them especially in countries where evolution rather than revolution has been the way change has been effected.

DanielGee 8y ago

Black death didn't kill feudalism ( even if we could come to a consensus on what feudalism is ). The societal structure wasn't affected by the black death. Feudalism died as european monarchs and elites got wealthy and used that wealth to centralize power. Feudalism is a result of weak or nonexistent central power. A classic example of this is japan during the meiji period. The emperor centralized power by overthrowing the feudal lords of japan. Which he was able to because he opened trade and gained investment and weapons from the west which gave him enough power to central japan's feudal estates under his direct rule. The black death didn't cause rises in wages. What caused wages to rises was trade. There as something called the mongol empire ( you might have heard of it ) which allowed europe to trade directly with china, india and the rest of asia. The mongol empire ( particularly the golden horde ) was central to european wealth generation. So much so that when it finally fell in 1480, wealthy merchants were desperately seeking another trade route to the east. A few years later, you have columbus ( you might have heard of him as well ). The idea that death caused wage rises is ludicrous when you think about it for a second. If population decline causes wage increases then japan would be seeing a huge rise in income. Russia in the 90s should have seen a ridiculous rise in income. What increases wages are increasing population and increasing trade.

barking 8y ago
As an example I found on a moment's googling, I'll just quote you part of the conclusion from this article: (https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-economic-impact-of-the-black-death/ https://eh.net/encyclopedia/the-economic-impact-of-the-black...) The European economy at the close of the Middle Ages (c. 1500) differed fundamentally from the pre—plague economy. In the countryside, a freer peasant derived greater material benefit from his toil. Fixed rents if not outright ownership of land had largely displaced customary dues and services and, despite low grain prices, the peasant more readily fed himself and his family from his own land and produced a surplus for the market. Yields improved as reduced population permitted a greater focus on fertile lands and more frequent fallowing, a beneficial phenomenon for the peasant.
- DanielGee 8y ago
  I'm well aware of the theory. I used to subscribe to it myself when I was younger. I won't go into why reduce population wouldn't affect farm yields since back then, farming was a very physical endeavor requiring many people. If yields did increase, it was most likely because of population increase in the countryside due to europeans fleeing disease ridden cities. Lets not forget that most of the attributed population decline was due to cities being emptied because city dwellers moved to the countryside. Just like isaac newton did in the 1600s when disease struck england. I would think that numbers, knowledge, technology and goods from the east had more to do with changing european society than a population decrease. What do you think impacted korea more? The deaths during the korean war or trade with the west? What impacted european wages more? The deaths during WW2 or the american-led trade system? Also, throughout history, there have been quite a few plagues ( not to mention mass killings ). Those didn't lift wages. China's wages didn't rise after tens of millions of people died during the taiping rebellion. But you are free to believe what you want.