Beyond the debate over the extent of the Norman Conquest's impact on England is
the different analyses of the class relationships, with many recognising that William did not
establish 'a perfect feudal pyramid'. As discussed by the historians below, the connections
between the classes were not as straightforward as thought. Christopher Daniell focuses on
the relationship between a lord and his tenant, with a ‘looser, less formal, bond’ between
the two present prior to the Norman Conquest, but formalised into stricter terms after
1066, including ‘no tenure without service’. 10 Commonly, this service was an agricultural
labourer on the land, but may have involved military service as a knight, the occurrence of
which waned by the late twelfth-century (although subservience to the lord did continue
throughout the Middle Ages).
As referenced above, the 'perfect feudal pyramid' is not an accurate portrayal of
English feudalism, with this ‘idealistic’ chain of command uncommon as many tenants may
be the subject of several lords. 11 As stated by Phillipp Schofield, the focus on class
relationships became significant post-Second World War. 12 The breakdown of rigid
boundaries between the classes in England, that had begun in the First World War and
continued by the Second World War, was now flowing into other areas of academic study,
including the medieval. Therefore, a likely explanation for disagreements in interpretations
is the historian's proximity to such social upheaval, particularly for English historians
studying the country's past, as brought about by the two World Wars. Schofield's reference
to social upheaval is apt in his broader focus on the decades between the Black Death (1348)
and the Peasants' Revolt (1381). Here, he examines the debates over the extent to which
10 Christopher Daniell, From Norman Conquest to Magna Carta: England 1066-1215 (London: Routledge, 2003), p. 88
11 Daniell, p. 89-90 12 Schofield, p. 103
13
Made with FlippingBook HTML5