Feudalism in England- Books

I am looking for good books on the decline of feudalism in England from circa 1290 (Quia Emptores) to the Abolition of Tenure Act 1666.

Any suggestions would be most welcome.

McArmalite

Deleted User wrote: »

I am looking for good books on the decline of feudalism in England from circa 1290 (Quia Emptores) to the Abolition of Tenure Act 1666.

Any suggestions would be most welcome.

"the decline of feudalism in England" - http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/

Fratton Fred

McArmalite wrote: »

"the decline of feudalism in England" - http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/

we are playing Newcastle saturday if you want to come along:D

Erin Go Brath

Fratton Fred wrote: »

we are playing Newcastle saturday if you want to come along:D

Newastle; home of one the great feuds: Bowyer v Dyer

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/n/newcastle_united/4404473.stm

Very helpful bunch ye are.

brianthebard

Don't heed the local trolls. A quick look at amazon suggests one title, so it doesn't seem that big a topic. Whats the purpose of your search, personal reading, essay topic?

I am doing a research essay and basically looking for some more material. I expected to see the same old titles (there are actually more than Amazon might lead one to believe) I ma working on a new theory as to the reasons for the decline of the feudal system and I am coming to the end of my primary source materials so I am lookling to read more secondary sources.

hivizman

Some of the relevant literature is Marxist in flavour - there was a lot of interest in how countries such as Britain moved from the "feudal mode of production" to the "capitalist mode of production". If you can get a copy from a library, you could look at Rodney Hilton's The Transition from Feudalism to Capitalism, which was published in 1978. One of the main Marxist researchers in the area was Maurice Dobb, and the Hilton volume reprints an early article by Dobb arising from a debate with the US Marxist Paul Sweezy. There is an interesting paper on this debate at:

http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/economicHistory/pdf/WP9406Epstein.pdf

brianthebard

Deleted User wrote: »

I am doing a research essay and basically looking for some more material. I expected to see the same old titles (there are actually more than Amazon might lead one to believe) I ma working on a new theory as to the reasons for the decline of the feudal system and I am coming to the end of my primary source materials so I am lookling to read more secondary sources.

Some of the books on my second year dealt with the period, I'll have a look at home and see if they have anything of interest and report back. Personally I would've thought it was caused by a gradual move towards centralised government and taxation. Whats your theory or are you keeping it under wraps?

Sorry it took so long for me to get back on here guys - I have been mental busy.

OK my thesis is as follows, see if it helps in getting the right materials:

"The feudal system was unsustainable as it did not allow for a flow of money towards the crown and the decrees of Edward I were an attempt by the crown to re-write the rules of feudalism so as to re-order the flow of capital. This was the death-knell of the feudal system"

donaghs

If you're seriously writing a history thesis, are there people in your History Dept. who can be of better advice than the usual "I don't know much but here's my 2 cents" you see in these threads?

The college library you use should have books grouped by period. If you are at the level of a thesis writing history student, you must know a few tricks for gettings sources. Have you one recent book which is well-respected on the subject? Then go to the bibliography at the back and track down some of the sources used by that writer.

Orchard Rebel

Kayroo

Can't think of any books off the top of my head. Interesting thesis subject though.

Not sure I'd agree that Quia Emptores itself signalled the death knell for feudalism. Edward I needed the cash to fund his forthcoming wars in Wales and Scotland but this was part of a game that had been going on since Magna Carta 75 years previously - the king seeking money and the Barons demanding a greater say in government in return. Longshanks was probably wise enough to have seen his father's mistakes with regard to the handling of the Barons but not wise enough to educate his son about it.

My view, for what it's worth, is that by demanding reform the Barons had inadvertently let the genie out of the bottle. Whereas in the 13th century, the Barons were the ones demanding reform, by the 14th century this discontent (with both church and state) had spread further down the social order - think of a line of down through Wycliffe to John Ball and beyond.

I'd suggest that the key moment was probably the Peasants Revolt, a century later. Although it was ultimately put down, the screws of feudalism were never again "tightened" after that, as I think one English historian put it - possibly because of the great social upheaval that the Wars of the Roses brought.

Good luck with your search.

Orchard Rebel,

Thanks for the pointers. Technically it is a legal project I am working on in the area of Property Law. However the thesis is, believe it or not, relevant.

As for your points Orchard I agree there was a constant struggle for power but my thesis is primarily interested in the economic factors. The problem with sub-infeudation is comparable, I believe, with the modern day pyramid schemes. However given the dynastic nature of the feudal system the initial pay off was not sufficient to sustain the coffers of the King and his chief tenants and as such more circumspect methods of fundraising were required.

The reason I have singled out Quia Emptores is because of the effect it has on escheats. As Lyall mentioned the long term effect of escheats post-1290 was to remove a layer of the feudal system without any mechanism to replace it. Non obstante decrees were only issued in Ireland, and even then pre-dominantly to fee farm grants with money rents, rather than feudal tenure. This led to the collapse of the feudal pyramid and the centralisation of power in the crown much faster than in other areas of Europe. (On an interesting note I wondered whether this process helped keep England out of the revolutionary fervours of other nations in the 18th century, but I digress)

So with that in mind, it is primarily economic and quasi-political works I am looking for. Apparently this area is one which has attracted very little academic interest other than some notable journal atricles and a fantastic book by JMW Bean. Given the other events of the time it is hardly surprising I suppose.

Orchard Rebel

Kayroo

The Norman property system was never my strongpoint but I think what you're driving at is that Quia Emptores and escheats boosted the move from feudal tenure to copyhold, where rent and not feudal service was the dominating factor.

Economically, this would, I suppose, have enriched the local noble but reduced him militarily. This would have the effect of stabilising the country (less petty wars between feudal neighbours) and thus allowed trade to flourish more freely - for example, the rise of the wool trade throughout East Anglia, as seen in the "wool churches" still standing today.

I wouldn't discount historical factors though. 14th and early 15th century England had the distinct advantage of being largely conflict free (border skirmishes with the Scots and Welsh notwithstanding). Compare that to France, which was riven by the Hundred Years War during the same period or Spain where the Christians were in the process of driving out the Moors. Small wonder that feudalism vanished in England centuries before other parts of Europe - France or Russia for example.

From a political point of view, the wiping out of much of the nobility of England in the Wars of the Roses would also presumably have contributed to the economic evolution (if not revolution) that was occuring. By the mid-16th century, commoners (Wolsey, Cromwell, Cecil etc) were beginning to outstrip noble families (the Seymours or the Howards) in political and economic influence.

Will you also be taking in the economic effects of enclosure, where the nobles tried to cream off the common land? Even Saint Thomas More himself wasn't averse to a bit of a land grab, as his appearances in the courts proved.

brianthebard

Where do you study kayroo? You should be able to get a pass from one of your lecturers to go to Trinners for a day or two. I don't know if that is convient for you but it is almost certainly worth it, their libraries are fantastic.

Orchrad,

Much thanks for the suggestion of the comparative element re France et al. The island element should have occured to me sooner. I disagree with the miltary weakening idea in principal, there were still after all incident of tenure after QE, but I may have to look further into it before I can comment conclusively.