Free Essays on Feudalism

The feudal system was a way of government based on obligations between the lord or king and vassal. The king gave large estates to his friends and relatives. These estates known as the fief included houses, barns, tools, animals, and serfs or peasants. The king also promised to protect the vassal on the field or in the courts. In return the nobles who were granted the fiefs swore an oath of loyalty to the king. The nobles promised never to fight against the king. They also had to give the king whatever he asked for. The king may ask for men to fight a war, money, or advice. The nobles also gave the king a place to stay when he traveled. Each of the king's vassals was also a lord or tenant in chief with vassals of his own. Each vassal would be an overlord to those he granted fiefs while remaining a vassal of the king. The subtenants in turn subdivided the land. Sometimes there were many levels of lords who had vassals under them. The most important promise of the vassal to the lord was the military. The vassal usually served as a knight. This service lasted about 40 to 60 days a year. If they actually had to fight in a war they usually did so for two months. If there was no war the knights did 40 days of training at the castle. There were only a few nobles. Most people, approximately nine-tenths, were serfs who worked the land for a noble. The serf was bound to the land. If the noble sold the land the serf went with it. This was not much better than being a slave. A peasant village had between ten to sixty families. Each family lived in a hut made out of wood or straw. The floor was covered with straw or reeds. Beds were made from a pile of dried leaves or straw. Animal skins were used as blankets. A cooking fire burned in the middle of the hut with the smoke escaping through a hole in the roof. Furnishings included a plank table, a few stools, and a chest. Each hut had its own vegetable garden. About half the serfs... Free Essays on Feudalism Free Essays on Feudalism The feudal system was a way of government based on obligations between the lord or king and vassal. The king gave large estates to his friends and relatives. These estates known as the fief included houses, barns, tools, animals, and serfs or peasants. The king also promised to protect the vassal on the field or in the courts. In return the nobles who were granted the fiefs swore an oath of loyalty to the king. The nobles promised never to fight against the king. They also had to give the king whatever he asked for. The king may ask for men to fight a war, money, or advice. The nobles also gave the king a place to stay when he traveled. Each of the king's vassals was also a lord or tenant in chief with vassals of his own. Each vassal would be an overlord to those he granted fiefs while remaining a vassal of the king. The subtenants in turn subdivided the land. Sometimes there were many levels of lords who had vassals under them. The most important promise of the vassal to the lord was the military. The vassal usually served as a knight. This service lasted about 40 to 60 days a year. If they actually had to fight in a war they usually did so for two months. If there was no war the knights did 40 days of training at the castle. There were only a few nobles. Most people, approximately nine-tenths, were serfs who worked the land for a noble. The serf was bound to the land. If the noble sold the land the serf went with it. This was not much better than being a slave. A peasant village had between ten to sixty families. Each family lived in a hut made out of wood or straw. The floor was covered with straw or reeds. Beds were made from a pile of dried leaves or straw. Animal skins were used as blankets. A cooking fire burned in the middle of the hut with the smoke escaping through a hole in the roof. Furnishings included a plank table, a few stools, and a chest. Each hut had its own vegetable garden. About half the serfs...

The Social Significance of the Blues and its Impact on Jazz essays

The Social Significance of the Blues and its Impact on Jazz essays The Social Significance of the Blues and its Impact on Jazz To understand the part played by the blues in American society, we need to consider what psychological imprints the blacks inherited from the years of slavery as well as what cultural and artistic forms existed during those times. The spirituals, plantation songs, work songs, banjo music, fiddle tunes and dances. All these elements were present, and to understand how and why the blues emerged at the end of the nineteenth century, we must first look at the society of slavery. In 1661 the colony of Virginia legalized slavery and the other colonies soon followed. At the time of the American War of Independence (1775-1783), the Northern states declared slavery illegal, but the South did not. The wealth of the Southern land owners depended on it, as did the prosperity of the slave traders of Bistrol and Liverpool. When the slave trade was officially abolished in 1807, the Southern states virtually ignored it and illicit trade continued. The ban had the effect of increasing the value of slaves and breeding was intensified. It was the American Civil War of 1861-1865 which finally dealt the death blow to slavery in the South. Torn from their own environment, terrified and bewildered, the survivors of the Atlantic crossing brought with them what little they could of their own way of life. But for the majority of the Africans, their culture was rapidly suppressed. 2. Tribes were deliberately split up, their religious practices banned and the majority of their music ceased. There wasnt any formal means of communication among the slaves in the fields, so as a form of communication and comfort they would sing. As a form of music or a type of song, the blues did not come from the time of slavery. Slaves never sang what...

Leadership theory skills approach Research Paper

Leadership theory skills approach - Research Paper Example What particular skills do effective leaders possess? Why do some leaders possess remarkable problem-solving skills while others do not? (Northouse, 2009, 47) In general, the researchers tried to find out the leadership aspects that bring about commendable performance in real-world organizations. Derived from the wide-ranging findings of the research, Mumford and associates (2000) developed a skill-oriented leadership approach. The approach is defined as a capability framework because it focuses on the correlation between the skills and knowledge of a leader and his/her actual performance. Leadership skills can be learned or acquired over time through practice, experience, and training (Northouse, 2009; Rowe & Guerrero, 2010). Not like the ‘great man’ theory, which states that leadership is limited to a talented and exceptional few, the skills model argues that most individuals have the potential to become great leaders. If individuals are able to learn or acquire positive outcomes from their experiences, they can develop leadership skills (Northouse, 2009, 47-48). Instead of highlighting the behavior or actions of leaders, the skills model views leadership as the skills and knowledge that facilitate successful leadership. The leadership skills approach resembles the trait model, but rather than placing emphasis on the traits of a leader, leader skills are regarded to be the most important ingredient for successful leadership. The leadership skills approach focuses on the behavior of the leader. Nevertheless, the skills approach argues that leadership behavior cannot be separated from its social setting (Daft, 2008). Furthermore, the skills approach implies that leadership capabilities are enhanced through experience. Knowledge is the core leadership capability that is talked about in skills theory (Lussier &