Hi everyone!
**** Remember that the test will take place during this week's lecture time (March 21). The test will take place during the second hour of lecture (11am). It will be multiple choice. All material from the lectures and tutorial readings is the focus of the test. There will be some questions related to a map, however, there will be no other images. You are expected to attend the first hour of lecture as normal and then once you have completed the test you will be free to go. You may take as much time to complete the test as you need. ****
This week we will be focusing on the chapter from A History of Medieval Europe by R.H.C. Davis on the economic situation of the early Middle Ages (with a focus on trade and the agrarian economy). For your first assignment you will be asked to summarize the arguments Davis makes in this chapter so it is very important you look over this reading in detail.
The goal of the assignment is to help students develop their reading and note-taking skills, as well as their ability to synthesize material and summarize arguments.
With that in mind I thought I would ask a few different types of questions here to help get you started.
.....
What is Davis' argument in this chapter? Can you summarize it in one or two sentences?
In your opinion, what are the key points to Davis' argument?
.....
To help you zero in on some of the key points in the article have a look over the tutorial discussion questions for this week. They will help you examine the first part of the article (focusing on trade in the Mediterranean). For help examining the second part of the article (on the agrarian economy) have a think about the following questions.
1) What is a polyptych? Why are they useful historical sources?
2) What is the demesne? What is tributary land?
3) Why might a peasant proprietor surrender his land to his lord?
4) What is a serf? Are they different in the early medieval period from a colonus?
5) What is a manse?
6) How and why was ninth-century agrarian society in a state of transition?
7) What is meant by the term 'manorial system'?
8) What is the difference between the 'open-field' and 'enclosure' field systems?
.....
Finally, what aspects of this assignment do you feel confident about? What aspects are you a little worried or nervous about?
.....
Remember, your comments can address the points above or be the result of any of your thoughts, reflections or questions about the reading for this week. Happy posting everyone!
.....
Here are some images to help spark our imaginations!
 |
| Serfs reaping the harvest overseen by a reeve |
 |
| The three-field system |
 |
| An impression of a medieval plow team |
 |
| An early Byzantine besant |
And just for fun.......I think we could all do with a laugh at this point in term! The first link here is to the video we watched in lecture on the 'Codex IT' sketch, and the second is a fun clip from Monty Python's 'The Holy Grail'. Enjoy!
When reading this week’s article I initially found it hard to pinpoint Davis’ argument to solely one. It seemed to me that he had two central arguments, one focusing on the failure of the economy in Western Europe in the ninth century; the other upon the reasons that lead to the development of the Manorial system in the Agrarian society.
ReplyDeleteAfter outlining Henri Pirenne’s view upon the reasons for the demise of the Western economy, Davis highlights his points of disagreement. The most notable (to me at least) being that if the Mediterranean trade had been declining over time, then we cannot place the blame upon the Muslim invasions. Also Davis’ example concerning the adjustments to monetary value- could not have happened if the Frankish Kingdom and Islam did not have commercial contact.
Davis’ main reason for the decline of the Western Economy was the general insecurity of communications (waterways and valleys were being targeted by Vikings). As merchants relied heavily on the security of travel, this had a major impact on the economy and regulation of trade. Davis also argues that it was not entirely an ‘economy of no outlets’ as Pirenne suggested, rather as some travelers and merchants still braved the roads in order to trade.
In reference to the Agrarian society, it seemed to me that according to Davis the Manorial system came about as a result of the transition Agrarian society was undertaking in the ninth century. However, Davis does stress the importance of not taking what is translated from the polyptychs at face value (as we cannot be sure what they really meant when translated).
A big point stated by Davis is the advantage of this system, in that it rendered the use of money unnecessary and hence is a perfect example of an ‘economy of no outlets’. According to Davis, landowners went through many problems as a result of a shortage of labour (man power). Hence, they did not care if it were free man or slave that helped them out- blurring the line between free manse and serf manse.
Wouldn’t mind seeing what other people think Davis’ main argument is- was a little confusing!
Hi everyone!
ReplyDeleteIn this weeks reading I think Davis highlights reasons for the decline in west trade in the late 9th centaury, and the consequential development of, and reliance on, a local based agrarian society.
Although he acknowledges the importance of Pirenne’s view in so far as providing an insight into the decline in trade, Davis refutes many of Pirenne’s conclusions into the emergence of an isolated agrarian community. In contrast to Pirenne’s belief that the pirate’s occupation of the Mediterranean was the reason for ‘an economy with no outlets’, Davis asserts that in fact trade had been on the decline for centuries, and the ninth centaury was simply the culmination of this. He also acknowledges that the adverse balance of trade (which had previously been offset by subsidies) had contributed to the decline once the byzantine emperors could no longer afford to support the west.
Similar to Pirenne Davis does acknowledge the role of Vikings, but states that the Muslims and Hungarians were ‘equally responsible.’ He also argues that communication between the west and the byzantine and Islamic empires did not cease- this statement strengthened by historical evidence indicating the value of silver could not have changed during this time without contact between the Frankish kingdom and Islam.
Davis highlights that as a result of the stagnant economy the treatment of arable land did not necessarily change- but the role of its peasant cultivators did, as well as the ideas surrounding ownership.
During the growth of the manorial system he emphasizes the importance of the creation of a surf like character. During this time of transition one was neither completely free nor completely enslaved- they were tied to the soil, yet still called a ‘free cultivator,’ and though no one could dispossess them they were not allowed to leave either. In this state of transition Davis emphasises their participatory role in developing both open fields and bosky land in a new agrarian society.
Pirenne contends that the decline of the economy of the Latin West was caused by Muslim invasions which disrupted the navigation of the Mediterranean. The disruption caused by these conquests in both trade and commerce is what Pirenne argues created an ‘economy of no outlets’ at the close of the seventh century. Davis questions the validity of Pirenne’s argument by noting that certain Mediterranean goods were still prevalent in the Frankish Kingdom, indicating that Mediterranean trade was still prevalent well into the eighth century. Davis goes on to say that Pirenne had merely made the assumption that Muslim invasion had put an end to commerce, without any legitimate evidence to base this on. Davis then argues that sea-communication had not ceased, as was thought by Pirenne, evident by the import of luxury goods in the eighth, ninth and tenth centuries. Pirenne also noted the change-over from gold to silver, supposedly indicative of economic turmoil, whereas Davis attributes this to a mere standardisation of coinage, which in turn suggests trade. Davis concedes that, despite Pirenne’s over exaggeration, the commercial dealings of the eighth and ninth centuries was considerably less compared to those of the previous and successive centuries. The two reasons he gives for this are the West’s inability to import Eastern goods, as they were no longer able to pay for them (obviously due to a slowed economy), and the general insecurity of communication, which he attributes not only to the Muslims, but also the Vikings and the Hungarians, in their disruptions of the Mediterranean and of Northern Europe. As a result of the state of the economy, an emphasis was placed on a local, agrarian economy. This system made the use of money unnecessary, and acts as a perfect example of the aforementioned ‘economy of no outlets’.
ReplyDeleteIn his description of the manorial system, he makes a comment about ‘free cultivators’ and a ‘free manse’ and being ‘tied to the soil’, and saying that one could refuse to perform certain services, and even complain about one’s lord to the king, but ultimately these men belonged to their lord’s. Then came the interesting part – ‘the number and names of his children were carefully recorded, because they were the lord’s property’. I wasn’t too sure I liked the sound of that!
Really good to have a reading that focused more on peasant or day-to-day life in the middle ages. Especially after the recent readings on the glorious and seemingly faultless (in the eyes of Einhard) life and conquests of Charlemagne. I think this'coming back down to earth' was really necessary - it was very easy to get caught up in all the brilliance of Charlemagne.
ReplyDeleteObviously Davis is pretty sceptical about Pirenne's theory of "no outlets" and provides almost a critical analysis of this theory. It appears as though Davis' viewpoint is more thought out and logically constructed than Pirenne's overreaction to what was undeniably a dire situation. The economy certainly did appear to be a shadow of its former self (under the ancient Romans) and no doubt the reasons pointed to by Pirenne (mainly the Muslim invasion) were obviously contributing factors to this decline.
In terms of the description of the manorial system, I found it interesting how the rights and lives of citizens under this system were halfway slave, yet half way free. Essentially, a new class of human being was created under this system, a human being that owed almost as much as they owned and had many basic rights (but not all) that would be expected of a free citizen. I can't help but to notice the similarities between the manorial system and that of communism. Firstly, the trade based economy is one of communisms key practices. Secondly, the lord might represent the state for whom the workers are working. The dues owed by the serfs might be considered as similar to citizens performing work or giving over crops or producing guns for the government to feed a communist army. Even the idea of the plough teams follow communist trends. I know it probably isn't professional to refer to X-men in this post (but I am going to do so anyway), but this community spirit shared by villagers under 'open-field' system of farming reminds me very much of Peter Rasputin (a.k.a Colossus) using his mutant abilities to help out the other Russian farmers in his village. Really fascinating stuff.
Hi -
ReplyDeleteI think that it was reasonably clear that Davis' argument in this document was that in the 9th and 10th century, there was still some trade and agricultural development in amongst the crumbling Carolingian Empire. I appreciated that this document was not say, from Pirenne's work. His views that the Muslim (only pirates, by the way)caused the end of a whole entire market economy in the Mediterranean seem quite extreme and I was instantly a bit weary of his proclamations. I enjoyed reading Pirenne's almost over-the-top argument then have Davis' come right back with a stronger counter argue Pirenne's statements, using different evidence and actually asking thought provoking and realistic questions of the period. I actually found it really humorous to read the part about the change in currency - while Pirenne stated that merchants had begun using silver instead of gold coins meant economic disaster, Davis humbly argues that it was just actually a practical change so the merchant's no longer lost coins and found money easier to handle. I like that Davis has a very practical view of looking at situations, that he's not too hyped up like Pirenne.
I really agree also with Phillip's point of view in the above comment. The fact that the citizens were halfway slave, yet halfway free, the communist-outlook to this situation and even the X-Men point :) I thought that in terms of trade, it was interesting that the citizens accumulated enough courage to begin tackling the overgrown forests and attempt to clear and reopen some trade routs. Throughout Davis' descriptions here, I was fascinated to read just how much these forests had dominated the peasant's life and trade altogether. I had never heard of the 'open fields' concept before, and when reading found it a really logical solution to the slaves agricultural issues.
While it is really enjoyable to read about Charlemagne and the triumph of Kings and artists alike from the earlier weeks, it was great to now focus on those individuals who actually made up medieval society, and how they had to live, work, sweat under the Kings rule. I think once I understood what Davis was trying to say, the document was an intriguing read.
Davis seems to have more knowledge of happenings than Pirenne which is why I believe he opposed much of Pirenne’s theory as to what was happening regards to the decline of trade. The fact that Barbarism was on the increase didn’t leave much time and money for trading when there was the ever increasing battles to fight.
ReplyDeleteWhat interested me from this weeks readings was mostly how people lived in the Manorial and Feudal systems. Land being allocated to Vassals / Lords in exchange for servicing the army to protect King and country. Villages were built, common people (peasants) being “employed” to provide basic necessities for themselves and to these Vassal / Lord / warriors (I get confused with who is who or who is what) and his family in exchange for “protection” from barbarians and a place to live for themselves and their family. The polyptych system of recording names of families, what they provided and what skills they had makes me think of the census nights we have these days… does that make us slaves (half and half)? I wouldn’t like to think so! These Manors did provided places for prayer, education for children, entertainment (I guess).. I don’t think it was all bad. Unless your land lord was evil…
Another comment that got my attention was how the Church opposed usury, which means lending money at high interest. It did occur but the “sums of money involved was trivial”. In 768 there is a “record of a moneyer who bought a plot a land” but “the vendor had no use for money” so “accepted a horse in lieu”. An “economy of no outlets” being the result of feudal society as Pirenne stated, makes sense because what could people spend money on if they weren’t free and everything they had belonged to “their” Lords.
Davis's key concept revolves around the reasons for the decline in the West trade in the 9th century, but also the concept of an agrarian society which essentially held that life in rural areas was more desirable than life in urban areas, this way of thinking brought consequences both good and bad. Davis frequently attacks Pirenne's theory of 'no outlets' for exaggerating how bad the situation was at the time, I think its crucial that Davis acknowledges the influence that attacking muslims had at the time but still argues that trade did exist, whilst at lower levels than in ancient roman days but did exist none the less.
ReplyDeleteA polyptych was a painting or a drawing, split up into sections or panels and they are tremendous historical accounts because they give what appears to be a very accurate account of life at the time and factors such as size and colour and tone give an impression of the importance of various people/figures.
I find Davis article amusing for a number of reasons, namely it makes sense. Pirenne's arguments seem to kindof collapse when you take into account the exaggerated base. The point made about the change in currency from gold to silver, merely highlights this.
Ninth century agrarian was a state of transition because it was a different way of thinking than had previously been advocated, productivity on the farms was now a critical component of life and suddenly city urban areas had to be a lot more reliant upon the countryside.
Jess Kopp here.
ReplyDeleteWell, I think it's clear from the reading that Davis has a divided interest in Pirenne's theories. Although he notes that they have been useful in providing a contrast between the relatively low commercial dealings in the 9th and 10th centuries, than those of previous and following centuries. Davis also argues that there was no 'sudden cessation of trade', and that although trade wasn't 'booming' as it were, it was none-the-less still puddling along in certain areas and in certain ways.
Pirenne's arguments seem to collapse quicker than a Carolingian Empire when exposed to Davis' probing, which do suggest he was making claims based on very little actual evidence, and more on connecting unconnectable dots. (pardon the use of a non-word). It is obvious even from a rookie's view point, that the luxury trade of the east did not suddenly collapse due to the presence of a couple of swashbuckling muslim pirates. A kingdom that could introduce banking, paper production and expensive textiles would not be so vulnerable. It merely fluctuated due to major political events in this period, such as the invasion by the Muslims and the changing values of gold/silver. These events did not cause a CESSATION of trade, rather a contraction.
Similarly 9th and 10th century agrarian opinions on land began to change. Land became hugely important, not just as a form of currency, but also to support a population that was becoming more local and less dependant on the King (this, due to the collapse of the Carolingian Empire). During this period, two different methods of land ownership were established. The more community based open-field method and the independent enclosed method. Although these methods were both used during this period, it has not yet been discovered why these methods evolved in particular areas.
In conclusion, the 9th and 10th centuries were the years of flux, the catalysts being as numerous as the changes they caused.
Pirenne suggests that the trade economy of western Europe was virtually non-existant during the 9th and 10th centuries, mentioning such reasons as merchants feeling unsafe to trade due to Muslim pirates terrorising the mediterranean amongst others.
ReplyDeleteDavis suggests this extreme view that trade ceased to occur is not quite accurate and that the truth lies somewhere between no trade and a flourishing outlet economy. Whilst trade did decline during this peroiod, there was a definite trade economy between the west and Byzantium, especially for those few kings and nobles who could afford the luxury wares of the east such as silks, spices and precious metals.
I found Davis'information about the state of the economies and trading of the East and West.I always knew that the Byzantine Empire had strong trading and general commerce but i didn't realise that the Islamic Empires had such a strong economical position that they did. Also i particularly enjoyed Davis'readings when he dissects and picks apart Pirennes theory that the economy of the West was stagnant and that land was the real form of wealth in the ninth century. Also Pirennes evidence or support for his view appears to be what could be called convenient evidence or even selective. Yes the Islamic take over of Tunisia would've had an effect and certain trade for a time but it could have enabled more trading with the West given the geographical position. As well something that stood out from Davis'writings about the trade and commerce was the effect that religion had on certain aspects of it. For Muslims their belief prevented usury and the Christians unable to also partake in it due to Churches view, which led to Jewish bankers as well as merchants becoming rather prominent.
ReplyDeleteDavis contends in this chapter that despite the probability that Pirenne was talking out of his arse when he concluded that East/West trade ceased entirely in the ninth and tenth centuries, he does agree that there was a massive contraction in it in the period as the Carolingian Empire fell apart probably because of muslim pirates.
ReplyDeleteDavis pretty much just builds off of Pirenne's original statements, for example, Pirenne connects the Muslim invasions directly to the fall of the economy, whereas Davis takes a step back and concludes that it was possible the economy was declining gradually over centuries etc. Also, Pirenne makes some assumptions like trade shrinkage as evidenced by the downgrade from gold coins to silver ones, whereas Davis decides that the opposite is "more likely" based on information of what he says is known about Charlemagne working to create a more standardized coinage, though this is also an assumption.
I've gotta say, now I know all this, I can't wait for the new movie, Pirates of the Mediterranean: Treasure of Charlemagne, it sounds like they've got a lot to work with in the way of plot lines on the subject.
I'll see you all tomorrow,
From Sean.
Davis’ arguments, to me seemed to be centred around highlighting the grossly dramatic viewpoint taken by Pirenne as well as disproving claims made regarding the “economy of no outlets” . He also outlined the large shift in the operation and structure of agricultural societies across Europe.
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to note the great amount of transition underway over the Ninth and Tenth Centuries, and the way in which Agrarian society moved towards the manorial system. I found it amazing too that the way English villages are set out today,-in terms of having small villages developed around a church surrounded by farming land- is a product of the late ninth century.
I highly enjoyed learning about the life of the everyday person in this time as it seems that people of the lower social standings are usually the ones who are overlooked in historical documentation.
Hey everyone!
ReplyDeleteI had a similar problem to you maddi, although I think that his central argument was that the downfall of the economy was the reason, or a major reason in the rise of the manorial system and serfdom in the middle ages.
I think Davis aknowledges that Pirenne's argument was important in highlighting the situation in the economy and also that it is not totally wrong, Pirenne just made the mistake of assuming some things.
I like everyone else really enjoyed reading about the lives of the ordinary people, you don't often learn about them.
I found the piece on everyday life particularly interesting, and I'd be interested to see similar accounts of other classes' daily lives, such as nobles or army men, to compare the standards of life at this time. The other points, such as those about the movement of society from an agrarian to a more manorial system, were particularly intriguing, as I've seen the same lay out as they describe (with a village built around a church) in England today.
ReplyDeleteAs for the other pieces, I found myself agreeing with Sean- Davis seems to base on Pirenne's argument, rather than coming up with his own or contradicting Pirenne strongly. I'd be interested to compare their arguments to a different perspective.