AKSHUALLY feudalism would be dynasties renting (defacto owning) land from the king. Kings historically didnt control a lot of land directly. Absolutism which laid the foundation for the modern nation state, was the consoldation of most land in the hand of the king.
Ah ok. My understanding was that the land belonged to the King and he let aristocrats manage it based on his favor or personal opinion, where the aristocrats had to come up with the tribute to the king and in turn got to manage the land however they saw fit. I’ll have to look into absolutism; never heard of it. I’m sure there was different ways of doing it too though, like Japan vs. England.
Honestly it depends on the country. Many european kingdoms like Germany, Poland or Great Moravia were more like consolidated tribal confederations at first, so the King was more closer to “first among equals” and only firmly controlled “his” tribal base. In cases like England or Castile where there was massive land redistribution (Reconquista & Norman Conquest) it was closer to what you said. Carolingian Feudalism also worked that way, where aristocrats where more like viceroys or mangers with their lands being “easily” revoked if run afoul of the King - back then most peasants were also free farmers and not serfs.
Absolutism was then the transitional state towards modern capitalist nation states. It saw the rise of like the principles of “the states does things” and territorialization with things like border patrol or the idea of a closed space constituting a country.
Can’t have feudalism without land fully concentrated in the hand of the king.
AKSHUALLY feudalism would be dynasties renting (defacto owning) land from the king. Kings historically didnt control a lot of land directly. Absolutism which laid the foundation for the modern nation state, was the consoldation of most land in the hand of the king.
Ah ok. My understanding was that the land belonged to the King and he let aristocrats manage it based on his favor or personal opinion, where the aristocrats had to come up with the tribute to the king and in turn got to manage the land however they saw fit. I’ll have to look into absolutism; never heard of it. I’m sure there was different ways of doing it too though, like Japan vs. England.
Honestly it depends on the country. Many european kingdoms like Germany, Poland or Great Moravia were more like consolidated tribal confederations at first, so the King was more closer to “first among equals” and only firmly controlled “his” tribal base. In cases like England or Castile where there was massive land redistribution (Reconquista & Norman Conquest) it was closer to what you said. Carolingian Feudalism also worked that way, where aristocrats where more like viceroys or mangers with their lands being “easily” revoked if run afoul of the King - back then most peasants were also free farmers and not serfs.
Absolutism was then the transitional state towards modern capitalist nation states. It saw the rise of like the principles of “the states does things” and territorialization with things like border patrol or the idea of a closed space constituting a country.
Cool thank you for the info!
Don’t sweat it!