• Interior
• Windows
• Walls
• Projects
• Buildings

The results of feudal fragmentation in Western Europe. The era of feudal fragmentation in Europe, the distinctive features of feudalism in Russian lands

era feudal fragmentation in Europe, distinctive features feudalism in Russian lands.

The period of feudal fragmentation is a natural stage in the progressive development of feudalism. Dismemberment of the early feudal grandiose empires (Kievan Rus or the Carolingian Empire in Central Europe) into a number of virtually sovereign states was an inevitable stage in the development of feudal society.

Back in the 4th century. (395 ᴦ.) The Roman Empire split into two independent parts - Western and Eastern. The capital of the Eastern part became Constantinople, founded by Emperor Constantine on the site of the former Greek colony Byzantium. Byzantium was able to withstand the storms of the so-called “great migration of peoples” and survived after the fall of Rome (in 1410 the Visigoths took Rome after a long siege) as the “Roman Empire”. In the VI century. Byzantium occupied vast territories of the European continent (even Italy was unnecessarily conquered). Throughout the Middle Ages, Byzantium maintained a strong centralized state.

The overthrow of Romulus Augustine (1476 ᴦ.) is considered to be the end of the Western Roman Empire. On its ruins, numerous “barbarian” states arose: the Ostrogothic (and then Lombard) in the Apennines, the Visigothic kingdom on the Iberian Peninsula, the Anglo-Saxon kingdom in Britain, the Frankish state on the Rhine, etc.

The Frankish leader Clovis and his successors expanded the borders of the state, pushed back the Visigoths and soon became hegemons in Western Europe. The position of the empire strengthened even more under the Carolingians (VIII-IX centuries). At the same time, behind the external centralization of the empire of Charlemagne, its internal weakness and fragility was hidden. Created by conquest, it was very variegated in its ethnic composition: it included the Saxons, Frisians, Alamans, Thuringians, Lombards, Bavarians, Celts and many other peoples. Each of the lands of the empire had little connection with the others and, without constant military and administrative coercion, did not want to submit to the power of the conquerors.

This form of empire - outwardly centralized, but internally amorphous and fragile political unification, gravitating towards universalism - was characteristic of many of the largest early feudal states in Europe.

The collapse of the empire of Charlemagne (after the death of his son Louis the Pious) in the 40s of the 9th century. and the formation of France, Germany and Italy on its basis meant the beginning new era in the development of Western Europe.

X-XII centuries are a period of feudal fragmentation in Western Europe. There is an avalanche-like process of fragmentation of states: The feudal state in Western Europe in the X-XII centuries. exists in the form of small political entities - principalities, duchies, counties, etc., which had significant political power over their subjects, sometimes completely independent, sometimes only nominally united under the authority of a weak king.

Many cities of Northern and Central Italy - Venice, Genoa, Siena, Bologna, Ravenna, Lucca, etc.
Posted on ref.rf
- in the IX-XII centuries. became city-states. Many cities in Northern France (Amiens, Soussan, Laon, etc.) and Flanders also became self-governing commune states. They elected the council, its head - the mayor, had their own court and militia, their own finances and taxes. Often the city-communes themselves acted as a collective lord in relation to the peasants living in the territory surrounding the city.

In Germany, a similar position was occupied in the 12th-13th centuries. the largest of the so-called imperial cities. Formally they were subordinate to the emperor, but in reality they were independent city republics (Lübeck, Nuremberg, Frankfurt am Main, etc.). Οʜᴎ were governed by city councils, had the right to independently declare war, conclude peace and alliances, mint coins, etc.

Distinctive feature The development of Germany during the period of feudal fragmentation was the predominance of the territorial principle over the tribal principle in its political organization. In place of the old tribal duchies, about 100 principalities appeared, over 80 of which were spiritual. Territorial princes took the place of tribal dukes in the feudal hierarchy, forming the class of imperial princes - direct lenients of the crown. Many German imperial princes in the 12th century. found themselves in vassal dependence on foreign sovereigns (sometimes even from several states).

In general, the period of feudal fragmentation was a period of economic growth in Europe. In the X-XII centuries. The feudal system in Western Europe took on a pan-European character and was experiencing a period of takeoff: the growth of cities, commodity production, and the in-depth division of labor turned commodity-money relations into most important factor public life. Clearing for arable land was accompanied by deforestation and reclamation work (Lombardy, Holland). The secondary landscape has increased; The area of ​​marshes has decreased. Mining and metallurgical production experienced a qualitative leap: in Germany, Spain, Sweden, and England, mining and metallurgical industries grew into independent, special industries. Construction is also on the rise. In the 12th century. The first water supply system with sewerage elements is being built in Troyes. Production of mirrors begins (Venice). New mechanisms are being created in weaving, mining, construction, metallurgy and other crafts. So, in Flanders in 1131 ᴦ. the first loom appeared modern look etc. There was an increase in foreign and domestic trade.

On the other hand, the increase in the needs of the feudal lords in connection with the development of the market not only led to an increase in the exploitation of the peasantry, but also increased the desire of the feudal lords to seize other people's lands and wealth. This gave rise to many wars, conflicts, and clashes. Many feudal lords and states found themselves drawn into them (due to the complexity and interweaving of vassal ties). State borders were constantly changing. More powerful sovereigns sought to subjugate others, making claims to world dominion, and tried to create a universalist (all-encompassing) state under their hegemony. The main bearers of universalist tendencies were the Roman popes, Byzantine and German emperors.

Only in the XIII-XV centuries. In the countries of Western Europe, the process of centralization of the state begins, which gradually takes the form of an estate monarchy. Here, relatively strong royal power is combined with the presence of class-representative assemblies. The process of centralization took place most rapidly in the following Western European states: England, France, Castile, and Aragon.

In Rus', the period of feudal fragmentation began in the 30s of the 12th century. (in 1132 ᴦ. the Grand Duke of Kiev Mstislav, the son of Vladimir Monomakh, dies; under 1132 ᴦ. the chronicler wrote: ʼʼAnd the whole Russian land was angry...ʼʼ). In place of a single state, sovereign principalities began to live an independent life, equal in scale to Western European kingdoms. Novgorod and Polotsk became isolated earlier than others; followed by Galich, Volyn and Chernigov, etc. The period of feudal fragmentation in Rus' continued until the end of the 15th century.

Within this more than three-century period of time there was a clear and difficult line - Tatar invasion 1237-1241, after which the foreign yoke sharply disrupted the natural course of the Russian historical process and greatly slowed it down.

Feudal fragmentation became a new form of statehood in the conditions of rapid growth of productive forces and was largely due to this development. Tools were improved (scientists count more than 40 types of them made of metal alone); Arable farming became established. Cities became a major economic force (there were about 300 of them in Rus' at that time). The connections with the market of individual feudal estates and peasant communities were very weak. They sought to satisfy their needs as much as possible using internal resources. Under the dominance of subsistence farming, it was possible for each region to separate from the center and exist as independent lands.

The local boyars of many thousands received recent years existence Kievan Rus The extensive Russian Truth, which determined the norms of feudal law. But the book on parchment, stored in the grand ducal archive in Kyiv, did not contribute to the real implementation of boyar rights. Even the strength of the grand ducal virniks, swordsmen, and governors could not really help the distant provincial boyars of the outskirts of Kievan Rus. Zemsky boyars of the 12th century. they needed their own, close, local government, which would be able to quickly implement the legal norms of the Truth, help in clashes with the peasants, and quickly overcome their resistance.

Feudal fragmentation was (as paradoxical as it may seem at first glance!) the result not so much of differentiation as of historical integration. Feudalism grew in breadth and was strengthened locally (under the dominance of subsistence farming); feudal relations were formalized (vassal relations, immunity, right of inheritance, etc.).

The optimal scale and geographical boundaries for feudal integration of that time were developed by life itself, even on the eve of the formation of Kievan Rus - “tribal unions”: Polyans, Drevlyans, Krivichi, Vyatichi, etc. - Kievan Rus collapsed in the 30s. XII century into one and a half dozen independent principalities, more or less similar to one and a half dozen ancient tribal unions. The capitals of many principalities were at one time centers of tribal unions (Kyiv near the Polyans, Smolensk among the Krivichi, etc.). Tribal unions were a stable community that took shape over centuries; their geographical limits were determined by natural boundaries. During the existence of Kievan Rus, cities that competed with Kiev developed here; the clan and tribal nobility turned into boyars.

The order of occupation of the throne that existed in Kievan Rus based on seniority in the princely family gave rise to a situation of instability and uncertainty. The transfer of the prince by seniority from one city to another was accompanied by the movement of the entire domain apparatus. To resolve personal disputes, the princes invited foreigners (Poles, Cumans, etc.). The temporary stay of the prince and his boyars in any land gave rise to increased, “hasty” exploitation of peasants and artisans. New forms of political organization of the state were needed, taking into account the existing balance of economic and political forces. Feudal fragmentation became such a new form of state-political organization. In the centers of each of the principalities, their own local dynasties formed: Olgovichi - in Chernigov, Izyaslavich - in Volyn, Yuryevich - in the Vladimir-Suzdal land, etc. Each of the new principalities fully satisfied the needs of the feudal lords: from any capital of the 12th century. it was possible to ride to the border of this principality in three days. Under these conditions, the norms of Russian Truth could be confirmed by the sword of the ruler in a timely manner. A calculation was also made on the prince's interest - to transfer his reign to his children in good economic condition, to help the boyars, and help them settle here.

Each of the principalities kept its own chronicle; the princes issued their statutory charters. In general, the initial phase of feudal fragmentation (before the factor of conquest intervened in normal development) was characterized by the rapid growth of cities and the vibrant flowering of culture in the 12th - early 13th centuries. in all its manifestations. New political form contributed to progressive development, created conditions for the expression of local creative forces (each principality developed its own architectural style, its own artistic and literary movements).

Let us also pay attention to the negative aspects of the era of feudal fragmentation:

A clear weakening of the overall military potential, facilitating foreign conquest. However, a caveat is needed here too. Authors of the book ʼʼHistory of the Russian State. Historical and bibliographical essays pose the question: “Would the Russian early feudal state be able to resist the Tatars?” Who will dare to answer in the affirmative? The forces of only one of the Russian lands - Novgorod - a little later turned out to be enough to defeat the German, Swedish and Danish invaders by Alexander Nevsky. In the person of the Mongol-Tatars, there was a clash with a qualitatively different enemy.

Internecine wars. But even in a single state (when it came to the struggle for power, for the grand ducal throne, etc.), princely strife was sometimes more bloody than during the period of feudal fragmentation. The goal of strife in the era of fragmentation was already different than in a single state: not the seizure of power in the entire country, but the strengthening of one’s principality, the expansion of its borders at the expense of its neighbors.

Increasing fragmentation of princely possessions: in the middle of the 12th century. there were 15 principalities; at the beginning of the 13th century. (on the eve of Batu’s invasion) - about 50, and in the 14th century. (when the unification process of the Russian lands had already begun), the number of great and appanage principalities reached approximately 250. The reason for such fragmentation was the division of the princes' possessions between their sons: as a result, the principalities became smaller, weakened, and the results of this spontaneous process gave rise to ironic sayings among contemporaries (ʼʼIn the Rostov land - a prince in every village; “In the Rostov land, seven princes have one warrior,” etc.). Tatar-Mongol invasion 1237-1241. Russia found Rus' a flourishing, rich and cultural country, but already stricken by the “rust” of feudal appanage fragmentation.

In each of the allocated principalities-lands on initial stage During the feudal fragmentation, similar processes took place:

the growth of the nobility ("youths", "children", etc.), palace servants;

strengthening the positions of the old boyars;

the growth of cities - a complex social organism of the Middle Ages. The unification of artisans and merchants in cities into “brotherhoods”, “communities”, corporations close to the craft guilds and merchant guilds of the cities of Western Europe;

the development of the church as an organization (dioceses in the 12th century coincided territorially with the borders of the principalities);

intensifying contradictions between the princes (the title “Grand Duke” was borne by the princes of all Russian lands) and the local boyars, the struggle between them for influence and power.

In each principality, due to the peculiarities of its historical development, its own balance of forces developed; its own special combination of the elements listed above appeared on the surface.

Thus, the history of Vladimir-Suzdal Rus' is characterized by the victory of the grand ducal power over the landed aristocracy by the end of the 12th century. The princes here were able to suppress the separatism of the boyars, and power was established in the form of a monarchy.

In Novgorod (and later in Pskov), the boyars were able to subjugate the princes and established boyar feudal republics.

In the Galicia-Volyn land there was extremely intense rivalry between the princes and local boyars, and there was a kind of “balance of power”. The boyar opposition (moreover, constantly relying either on Hungary or on Poland) failed to transform the land into a boyar republic, but significantly weakened the grand ducal power.

A special situation has developed in Kyiv. On the one hand, he became first among equals. Soon, some Russian lands caught up and even ahead of him in their development. On the other hand, Kyiv remained an “apple of discord” (they joked that there was not a single prince in Rus' who did not want to “sit” in Kyiv). Kyiv was “reconquered,” for example, by Yuri Dolgoruky, the Vladimir-Suzdal prince; at 1154 ᴦ. he achieved the Kyiv throne and sat on it until 1157 ᴦ. His son Andrei Bogolyubsky also sent regiments to Kyiv, etc. Under such conditions, the Kiev boyars introduced a curious system of “duumvirate” (co-government), which lasted throughout the second half of the 12th century. The meaning of this original measure was as follows: at the same time, representatives of two warring branches were invited to the Kyiv land (an agreement was concluded with them - ʼʼryadʼʼ); Thus, relative balance was established and strife was partially eliminated. One of the princes lived in Kyiv, the other in Belgorod (or Vyshgorod). They went on military campaigns together and conducted diplomatic correspondence in concert. So, the duumvirs-co-rulers were Izyaslav Mstislavich and his uncle, Vyacheslav Vladimirovich; Svyatoslav Vsevolodovich and Rurik Mstislavich.

The era of feudal fragmentation in Europe, the distinctive features of feudalism in the Russian lands. - concept and types. Classification and features of the category "The era of feudal fragmentation in Europe, the distinctive features of feudalism in the Russian lands." 2017, 2018.

What did Charles Martel's military reform change in Frankish society?

Why did Charlemagne's empire collapse? What is feudal fragmentation? 1.

“There is no war without fires and blood.” In

During the times of feudal fragmentation (IX-XI centuries), the possession of any large feudal lord became, as it were, a state within a state.

The feudal lord collected taxes from the subject population, judged them, and could declare war on other feudal lords and make peace with them.

Feast at a noble lord. Medieval miniature

Peasants are harvesting.

Medieval miniature

2 - E. V. Agibalova

The battle of the Franks led by Roland with the locals in the Pyrenees Mountains. Miniature from the 14th century.

The gentlemen almost constantly fought among themselves: such wars were called internecine. During civil strife they were burned

Death of Roland. Stained glass window of the cathedral. XIII century On the right, the mortally wounded Roland blows his horn, calling for help. On the left - he unsuccessfully tries to break the sword on the rock

villages, cattle were stolen, crops were trampled. Those who suffered the most from this

peasants. 2.

Lords and vassals.

Each large feudal lord distributed part of the land with peasants to small feudal lords as a reward for their service, and they swore an oath of allegiance to him. He was considered a lord in relation to these feudal lords

(senior), and the feudal lords, who seemed to “hold” the lands from him, became his vassals (subordinates).

Vassals were obliged to

the order of the lord to go on a campaign and bring with him a detachment of warriors, to participate in the lord’s battle, to help him with advice, to ransom the lord from captivity. The lord defended “my vassals from attacks by other feudal lords and rebel peasants, rewarded them for their service, and was obliged to take care of their orphaned children.

It happened that vassals opposed their lords, did not carry out their orders, or moved to another lord. And then only force could force them to obey. 3.

Feudal staircase. The king was considered the head of all feudal lords and the first lord of the country: he was the highest judge in disputes between them and during the war he led the army. The king was the lord of the highest nobility (aristocracy) - dukes and nobles.

Excerpt from "The Song of Roland"

In the 11th century, the French epic “The Song of Roland” was written down. It tells about the heroic death of Count Roland’s detachment during the retreat of Charlemagne from Spain and about the revenge of the Frankish king for the death of his nephew:

The count felt that death had overtaken him,

Cold sweat streams down your forehead.

The Count says: “Mother of God, help me,

It's time for us, Durandal6, to say goodbye to you,

I won't need you anymore.

You and I have beaten many enemies,

With you, large lands were conquered.

There Charles the greybeard now rules...

He turned his face to Spain,

So that King Charles can see

When he and his army are here again,

That the count died, but won the battle.

What qualities of a vassal were valued in the early Middle Ages?

fov. There were usually hundreds of villages in their domains, and they commanded large detachments of warriors. Below were barons and viscounts - vassals of dukes and counts. Usually they owned two to three dozen villages and could field a detachment of warriors. Barons were lords of knights, who sometimes no longer had their own vassals, but only dependent peasants. Thus, the same feudal lord was the lord of a smaller feudal lord and the vassal of a larger one. In Germany and France there was a rule: “The vassal of my vassal is not my vassal.”

Feudal staircase

king! dukes and counts barons Historians call this organization of feudal lords the feudal ladder. Despite frequent conflicts between feudal lords, which even the kings themselves could not always cope with, vassal relations united the lords into a single class in importance and place in society (albeit consisting of different layers and groups). This was a class of noble (from a good family) people who dominated over the commoners.

When a war with another state began, the king called dukes and counts on a campaign, and they turned to the barons, who brought detachments of knights with them. This is how a feudal army was created, which is usually called knightly (from the German “ritter” - horseman, mounted warrior).

L. The weakness of royal power in France. The power of the last kings of the Carolingian dynasty in France weakened significantly. Contemporaries gave the kings humiliating nicknames: Karl the Fat, Karl the Simple, Louis the Stutterer, Louis the Lazy.

At the end of the 10th century, the large feudal lords of France elected the rich and powerful Count of Paris - Hugo Capet (the nickname was given by the name of his favorite headdress - the hood) as king. From then until the end of the 18th century, the royal throne remained in the hands of the Capetian dynasty or its side branches - the Valois and Bourbons.

The French kingdom then consisted of 14 large fiefs. Many feudal lords had larger lands than the king himself. The dukes and counts considered the king only the first among equals and did not always obey his orders.

The king owned a domain (domain) in the northeast of the country with the cities of Paris on the Seine River and Orleans on the Loire River. In other lands, the castles of rebellious vassals rose. As a contemporary put it, the inhabitants of these “hornets’ nests”

“They devoured the country with their robbery.”

Lacking power over the entire country, the king did not issue general laws and could not collect taxes from its population.

Therefore, the king had neither a permanent strong army nor paid officials. His military forces consisted of detachments of vassals who received fiefs in his possession, and he ruled with the help of his courtiers7.

Otto I. Image from a chronicle of the 12th century. 5.

Formation of the Holy Roman Empire. In Germany, the power of the king was at first stronger than in France. A unified state was necessary for protection from external enemies.

Attacks by the Hungarians (Magyars) were very frequent. These tribes of nomadic pastoralists moved at the end of the 9th century from the foothills Southern Urals to Europe and occupied the plain between the Danube and Tissa rivers. From there, the Hungarian light cavalry raided the countries of Western Europe. She broke through the Rhine and reached Paris. But Germany suffered especially: the Hungarians ravaged and captured many of its inhabitants.

In 955, German and Czech troops led by the German king Otto I utterly defeated the Hungarians in a battle in southern Germany. Soon the Hungarian invasions ceased. At the beginning of the 11th century, the Kingdom of Hungary was formed, where King Stephen introduced Christianity.

In 962, taking advantage of the fragmentation of Italy, Otto I marched on Rome, and the pope proclaimed him emperor. In addition to Germany, part of Italy fell under the rule of Otto I. Thus the Roman Empire was restored once again. Later, this political entity began to be called the Holy Roman Empire of the German nation.

This became possible because Germany and Italy at that time also did not

2* Dust by united states. Like France, they consisted of many separate independent duchies, counties, baronies, principalities, etc., each of which had its own main city, its own sovereign, its own flag and coat of arms. Feudal fragmentation in these countries existed throughout the Middle Ages.

Crown and holder; Emperors of the Holy Roman Empire

The Emperor wanted to be considered the voice of all the rulers of Europe. But real power was limited. Even the German dukes gradually achieved independence from him. The population of Italy did not stop fighting the invaders. Each new German king, in order to be crowned with the imperial crown, had to march beyond the Alps and reconquer Italy.

1. Prove that every major feudal lord had the same power in his possessions as the ruler of the state. Why was this possible? 2. What was the weakness of royal power in France in the 9th-11th centuries? 3. When was the Holy Roman Empire formed? 4. Explain why the German emperors sought to be crowned in Rome. 5. Calculate how many years there was no empire in Europe (how much time elapsed between the collapse of the empire of Charlemagne and the proclamation of Emperor Otto I).

S1.If the king, during feudal fragmentation, was considered only “first among equals,” then why was royal power maintained at all? 2. Can one knight be a vassal of several lords? Justify your answer 3.

The laws of Germany of the 11th century say that the lord cannot take away the fief from you without guilt, but only if the vassal violated his duties: abandoned the lord in battle, attacked the lord or killed his brother. What role did this law play in the organization of medieval society? 4. Were peasants included in the feudal ladder? Why? 5. Pair with one-click. The dialogue between the lord and his vassal is dreary as they sort out a controversial situation about the breaking of a vassal oath. What arguments will both sides bring to prove that they are right? How will the dispute end?

About the Verdun division of 843, when the empire of Charlemagne was divided between his grandchildren, although the title of emperor was preserved.

Compare the first and second information: what question do you have? Compare with the authors' version (p. 273).

Question: Why is the time from the 9th century called the period of fragmentation, if the empire was restored in the 10th century?

Answer: Formally, the empire was restored, but the feudal lords gained more and more power and ceased to obey their lords. At first this happened with large feudal lords, and then even with many middle-men. Kings and emperors actually ruled only small territories; the remaining lands were divided among smaller lords, who were constantly at war with each other.

Prove that a period of state fragmentation has begun in Western Europe. Have there been changes in other areas of society?

In 843, at Verdun, the empire was divided into three parts among the grandchildren of Charlemagne. But the new rulers tried to leave the management system and other aspects of life unchanged. All these features of the state underwent changes slowly, being separated by state borders over centuries of history.

Starting with Charlemagne's grandchildren, his empire begins to disintegrate. But this was a division into quite large parts, so it is not entirely fragmentation. In addition, the owners of benefices had not yet turned into feudal lords - kings or the emperor could still take away their lands for improper service.

What parts did Charlemagne's empire fall into?

The empire disintegrated into the domains of Lothair I, Louis (Ludwig) II the German and Charles II the Bald.

Compare with the map on p. 37, what states were formed on the site of the empire?

Given that Lothair's possessions were soon divided between two other kingdoms, the West Frankish Kingdom (future France) and the East Frankish Kingdom (future Holy Roman Empire) arose in place of Charlemagne's empire.

Prove that a period of feudal fragmentation has begun in Western Europe.

The feudal lords received full power in their domains: to judge the people under their rule, to transfer the land by inheritance, to transfer it to their own vassals. The right of kings and the emperor to take away land was usually only a fiction. The main thing is that the feudal lords did not openly obey the monarchs and even went to war against them and each other. In these wars, feudal fragmentation is most evident.

Give her reasons.

Wars between claimants to the throne. For example, in the West Frankish kingdom there was a long struggle between two dynasties that laid claim to the royal title - the Carolingians and the Capetians. At the same time, the applicants bought more and more privileges for the help of the feudal lords.

Viking and Hungarian raids. The royal army often did not have time to arrive to repel the raid (and sometimes the contenders for the throne simply had no time for this). Troops were needed on the ground who could assemble quickly and repel the attack. Gradually, more and more rights flowed into the hands of those who could organize such defense.

Draw a conclusion about the lesson problem.

The combination of wars for the throne and barbarian raids strengthened the feudal lords so much that they were able to go against the power of the monarchs.

Try to find a European country where you could live in safety from the attacks of barbarian tribes.

Only the Cordoba Caliphate was safe. The Vikings sometimes attacked its coasts, but received a worthy rebuff, so they rarely attacked and did not go deep into the mainland. The lands from which the raids came - Scandinavia and Hungary - were not attacked. The map shows that no one attacked Poland, Croatia and Serbia, but information about these countries in the 10th century is so scarce that perhaps information about such raids simply has not been preserved. Otherwise, there is no reason why the Vikings and Hungarians should avoid them. All other countries were subject to raids, and even conquests, either by the Vikings, or their descendants (I remember, first of all, the campaign of Svyatoslav Igorevich against Bulgaria), or the Hungarians.

Which parts of Charlemagne's empire became an empire again in 962?

The lands of many Germanic tribes, as well as the kingdoms of Burgundy and Lombardy, were united into the empire.

Can the formation of the Holy Roman Empire be considered the re-creation of a single Western imperial state?

You can't think like that. Firstly, it did not unite all the territories that were part of the empire of Charlemagne. Secondly, it quite quickly actually disintegrated into the possessions of large feudal lords; the power of the emperor was weak and weakened even more by rivalry with the popes.

Draw a conclusion about the lesson problem.

The proclamation of the restoration of the empire did not stop feudal fragmentation even within the empire itself.

Try to describe a dispute between a close king and a count, a large landowner, in which one will argue for the need for a unified state, and the other will argue against it.

Such a dispute could be started by a supporter of the king with accusations against the count, who violated the feudal oath. To this, a supporter of the count would begin to say that the king was the first to violate the duties of a sovereign and therefore lost the right to the loyalty of his vassal.

This could be followed by an argument from a supporter of the king about the raids of the Vikings and Hungarians. In his opinion, as long as the kingdom was united, there were no such raids. To this, a supporter of the count could give many examples when the royal troops moved too slowly and it was the local counts who had to repel the raids.

A weak argument for a supporter of the king would be the benefits for trade, which was difficult to conduct when new borders had to be crossed every few kilometers. But he himself had to understand that a truly noble person, like the participants in this dispute, did not care about trade, he cared about military exploits and glory.

At that time, only the first pair of arguments were truly worthwhile. Because feudal law was relevant then. It described when a vassal has the right to consider himself free from the oath, and when for its violation he is worthy of losing the feud.

Try to explain the difference in the concepts of state and feudal fragmentation. Check yourself in the dictionary.

With state fragmentation, a single state is split into several, the ruler of each of them becomes a monarch. With feudal fragmentation, the state formally remains united, the feudal lords recognize the power of the monarch over themselves, again, formally, but in reality they do not obey him and even fight against him.

History [Crib] Fortunatov Vladimir Valentinovich

10. Feudalism and feudal fragmentation in Europe

Europe did not suffer from the Mongol-Tatar invasion. The Mongol armies reached the Adriatic Sea. Although they completely defeated the Polish-German army at the Battle of Legnica in 1241, vast Russian lands remained behind the Mongols, in which the powerful Prince Alexander Nevsky gathered forces to fight the invaders.

In the X–XI centuries. after the collapse of the empire Charlemagne in Western Europe it is approved feudal fragmentation. Kings retained real power only within their domains. Formally, the king's vassals were obliged to perform military service, pay him a monetary contribution upon entering into inheritance, and also obey the decisions of the king as the supreme arbiter in inter-feudal disputes. In fact, the fulfillment of all these obligations already in the 9th–10th centuries. depended almost entirely on the will of the powerful feudal lords The strengthening of their power led to feudal civil strife.

In France, the Capetian dynasty (987–1328) was weak and could not resist the feudal lords, who lived freely and did not particularly take the king into account. The feudal lords waged endless wars among themselves. Serfs suffered under the burden of many duties. The Valois dynasty (1328–1589) managed to complete the process of gathering French lands and French people under its leadership.

The social system that developed in the Middle Ages (V–XV centuries) in many Western and eastern countries usually called feudalism. The land plot, which belonged to the landowner together with the peasant farmers who worked on the land, had different names in many countries. Feud in Western Europe, it is a hereditary land ownership granted by a lord to a vassal on the condition of performing service or paying customary fees. The fief was also called beneficiary(“good deed”). The owners of feuds, landowners in the era of feudalism constituted the first estate - class of feudal lords. Peasants and small producers were not the owners of the cultivated land.

For the use of the allotment, the peasant was obliged to cultivate the land of the feudal lord on enslaving conditions, to pay rent - labor, food or cash, that is, quitrent (chinsh). Happened comment, establishing relationships of dependence of the weak on the strong. The peasant's personal dependence often approached slavery. But the peasant had some immunity. On the land given to him to keep, the peasant led independent a small farm, owning a house, livestock and, most importantly, tools with which he cultivated the plot at his disposal, as well as plowing the feudal lord in the case of working rent. A feudal lord in Western Europe could not kill a serf, but had the right of the first wedding night in relation to the female part of the serfs. The economic autonomy of the peasant inevitably gave rise to non-economic coercion, characteristic of the feudal economic system, since peasants were forced to perform duties. Addiction serfs from feudal lords was determined by law. Feudal law sometimes called fist, since it was based on direct violence. The feudal economy was predominantly natural, since most of the products produced were consumed within the farm itself. The feudal lords, having different incomes (war trophies, money from the king, from the sale of part of the products), ordered weapons, clothes, jewelry etc.

Along with secular feudal lords (dukes, counts, barons, etc.) among the second estate - clergy - there were also many feudal landowners. Solid land was managed by the Pope, bishops, abbots of monasteries, etc.