1066, the Norman conquest of England

Eng go through...was a farming country, land was its absorbing interest; and

originally plots of land had been owned outright by the men who settled and

cleared them, and genetical by their children. But such independent farmers

had no demur against the Viking raids, or resources to tide them over disasters

like cattle sickness, a serial of bad harvests, fire or storm. In the course of time,

almost e truly man in the country had attached himself by correlative promises to

somebody more powerful, who could help to protect him and his family in times

of stress. Small landowners had surrendered the nominal phrase ownership of their

land to their protectors - who in turn held the land in vocation to somebody higher.

This evolution has often been called a loss of freedom, and so it was; but

absolute personal freedom had come to be, as perhaps it has ever so been, a

dangerous illusion. Its loss was really a gain; the acceptance of the duties and

mutual admit of a social system, the end of anarchy(13-14).

        The first paragraph sums up the life of the commoners in England and

also very equal to Normandy. Both countries were very much alike but yet

distinct in their own subtle ways.



In my essay I will discuss the similarities

and differences amidst Anglo-Saxon England and Normandy including their

feudal system. I will also compare and demarcation line Harold of England and William

the Conqueror as portrayed in 1066.

        England and Normandy had very similar feudal system. In both systems

everyone held his plot of land in duty to someone higher (61). The English had

serfs and the Normans had peasants at the very bottom. They were the workers

(slaves) that grew the crops and took perplexity of the land for the upper class. The

Normans had lords and...

If you want to get a honest essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com



If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper