Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site psivax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!psivax!friesen
From: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Feudal Taxes
Message-ID: <985@psivax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 29-Jan-86 14:21:54 EST
Article-I.D.: psivax.985
Posted: Wed Jan 29 14:21:54 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Feb-86 10:45:13 EST
References: <28200477@inmet.UUCP>
Reply-To: friesen@psivax.UUCP (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: Pacesetter Systems Inc., Sylmar, CA
Lines: 89

In article <28200477@inmet.UUCP> janw@inmet.UUCP writes:
>
>Feudal society was not libertarian. It had, however, certain  li-
>bertarian  features: governmental functions were diffuse and were
>based on contractual (liege-vassal) obligations. The analogy  was
>raised  here several times; it is worth further analysis. This
>note deals with the question of whether  taxation  (or  price  of
>protection) was exorbitant then .
>Proper time and space frame should be defined for feudal society:
>it arose in the 9th, and deteriorated in 13th century, in Western Europe.
>Many of its structures and attitudes lingered much longer.

	Quite true, my contention is that a libertarian would *evolve*
into a feudal one by economic assimilation.

>==================================================================
>
>(1) *Not true* even of serfs (whose life was certainly no picnic).
>Many of them demonstrably had a surplus left, which they invested
>in various ways. The simplest way was to raise a large healthy family.
>Raising livestock was another. Another (widespread later) was to
>buy their liberty. 
>
>>If some method were found to  increase  the  harvest  above  this
>>point,  a  new  tradition [justifying taxation] would be created.
>
>These traditions lapsed as often as  they  were  created.  A  few
>years  of  non-collection  (always  possible  in  these turbulent
>times) would invalidate a feudal claim.
>
>>Since there was no incentive to increase the harvest, this  hap-
>>pened rarely.
>
>*No incentive* ? *Rarely* ?! Whoa ! 
>Now you've put your finger on the crux of the matter  !  Had  the
>tax  system  been as you described it - there would be no surplus
>for investment (except on the highest rung of the tax ladder) and
>no  incentive  for  innovation.  And harvest increases would be
>rare. So this *is* the proper test. Let us apply it.
>
>In fact, you are speaking of the time of a great agricultural and
>industrial  REVOLUTION!  Never  before,  and  nowhere else, has
>progress come at such breathtaking pace.

	My Medieval History professor agrees with you.
>
>Let's stick to agriculture. I'll name just a *few*  innovations.
>
>(1) This is when Europe was *colonized*, the forests cleared  and
>plowed  over.

	To clarify, prior to this time the population of Europe was
effectively restricted to river valleys and other highly fertile
lowlands of that sort.
>
>(5) Heavy, wheeled plow ! The ancients just scratched the land: the
>feudal Europeans started really *plowing* it.

	Not to mention 5b) The modern flared plow-blade(you know, the
thing made of two blades joined along the front margin and the whole
thing pointed forward). And this predated the wheeled plow - it was
what allowed the clearing and farming of all that forest land. In
ancient times the plow was a simple straight vertical blade.
>
> 		etc. etc.
>
>Clearly, incentives were there - not taxed away !

	An excellent list. There were even some things here that my
Medieval History professor didn't mention!
>
>The reason taxes could not be raised indiscriminately, in  viola-
>tion  of  custom,  was  that there was no *irresistible force* in
>that pluralist society. A coalition of vassals would be  stronger
>than  the  suzerain and there was lots of competition in the suz-
>erain business.

	Remember the signing of the Magna Carta - where the vassals of
one of the most powerful kings in Europe forced him to sign a
document giving away some of his rights! (England at that time was
*much* more centralized than any other European nation except perhaps
Sicily). Could there be a better example of this?
>
-- 

				Sarima (Stanley Friesen)

UUCP: {ttidca|ihnp4|sdcrdcf|quad1|nrcvax|bellcore|logico}!psivax!friesen
ARPA: ttidca!psivax!friesen@rand-unix.arpa