Re: Anyone feeling daring?

--
Brian M. Scott
Which merely proves that once again you don't know what you're
talking about. That is only *one* of the many incompatible ways
in which the term has been used, even if we limit ourselves to
uses by historians.

James A. Donald:
Could you give an example of an incompatible usage by well
educated and reputable source, other than incompatible usages that
by an amazing coincidence turn out to be compatible with the
Marxist theory of history?

Brian M. Scott
I suggest that you read Constance Brittain Bouchard's _Strong of
Body, Brave & Noble: Chivalry & Society in Medieval France_,
Cornell, 1998. Alternatively, you could read some relevant extracts
at
<http://groups.google.com/group/soc.history.medieval/msg/fa7059674ce
89b8e>. Susan Reynolds, _Fiefs and Vassals_, OUP, 1994, also deals
with the problem; if I remember correctly, Chapter 1 is especially
pertinent.

She complains of "many" incompatible usages, but they don't seem to be
many. They seem to be the regular meaning, which she somewhat turns
her nose up at, and the various incoherent Marxist usages, which are
mutually incompatible because they are part of a theory that makes no
sense.

The regular meaning being the one she is quoted somewhat snearing at
in
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.history.medieval/msg/fa7059674ce89b
8e

: : "Feudalism" has sometimes taken on political signficance,
: : describing a system in which power is decentralized, held by
: : many different people acting essentially independently, so
: : that the wealthy became the de facto political leaders. More
: : weakly, but even more pervasively, "feudal" is sometimes used
: : as a synonym for "noble," so that every castle becomes a
: : "feudal" castle, the Crusades become an exercise in "feudal"
: : warfare, and monasteries that buried their noble patrons
: : become "feudal" churches.

Nothing wrong, nor inconsistent, in using "feudal" to refer to nobles
whose power is decentralized, and substantially independent of higher
authority, as it was in the Crusades, nor wrong to refer to anything
associated with them as feudal. Castles that the King found
politically or militarily difficult to subdue were indeed feudal
castles, and the monasteries back in the days when they could give the
finger to both king and pope were indeed feudal.

And of course this political order was characteristic of a particular
place and time, so it is reasonable to refer to that place and time,
and anything of that place and time, as feudal.

--digsig
James A. Donald
6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
/YRhPec91pxHZoAeLZGyPgng7lzMHCBtkcq4xs0H
4ViV3Tkqpkq7+XA6w6foa6AmdHGHuYUXwWhzzuZ/W

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: I need help explaining basic linguistic concepts to a lay person
    ... >> Brian M. Scott wrote: ... Wikipedia article on MM claims that "Kramer was condemned by the ... scholarly sources on this. ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Phonemes
    ... >> Brian M. Scott wrote: ... Marcus Didius Falco mysteries, which are pb.ed after one year -- because ... (If he doesn't like his characters stating the obvious, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Reference material
    ... "Brian M. Scott" ... legitimate force, the gentry had a substantial right to ... And that is why feudal societies are so popular in ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: medieval english was knight ranks and titles
    ... >> Brian M. Scott wrote: ... > me to find it in crossword puzzles. ... > meaning 'lively, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Foreign is foreign, right?
    ... >> Brian M. Scott wrote: ... >>> anything to suggest that the other pronunciation is better. ... >>> Obviously the name entered English via German. ...
    (sci.lang)