No, there was no advantage to being a peasant. The feudal system was designed to benefit the upper classes, not the lower. People did not choose to be peasants, they were forced into that role.
In the feudal system, vassals held a crucial role by providing military service to their liege lords in exchange for land or fiefs. They were responsible for managing and protecting the land, ensuring its productivity, and collecting taxes from the peasants who worked it. Additionally, vassals were expected to offer counsel and support to their lords, maintaining loyalty and fulfilling any obligations outlined in their feudal contract.
I do not believe women in the feudal era had any rights unless they were of noble blood or were priestess'.
A lack of true central power weakened and doomed the Rus' to outside ... Lacking a feudal system of vassal loyalty made it impossible for any prince, .... In theory, this meant that the land was held under The Crown as ultimate feudal superior.
No. The king was the most important figure in the feudal system. He owned all the land in england and infeudated (rent in return for certain things such as military service) to his barons who infeudated it to knights and so on and so forth until the peasants. Therefore the priests and the church actually did not own any land at all making them less powerful if anything than prior to the Battle of Hastings. However King William had vowed to reform the church of England (hence gaining the papal banner to invade england with). Regardless of wether they gained or lost power, the church and priests were definitely not the most powerful people in the feudal system.
Villeins were peasants in the feudal system of medieval Europe who were bound to the land and required to provide labor and services to their lord in exchange for protection and the right to work a portion of the land for their own sustenance. They were not free and could not leave the estate without permission. Boarders, on the other hand, are individuals who rent a room or stay in someone else's home, usually in exchange for meals and lodging, and are typically not tied to any specific obligations beyond the terms of their agreement. Unlike villeins, boarders have more freedom and are not bound by feudal obligations.
Monks were not part of the feudal system. They were part of the Church clergy and held no land of their own; they owed no feudal obligation to any overlord and were not governed by the king's law.The Church as an institution held land and might also have manors, peasants and knights owing feudal obligations to an abbot or bishop, but monks were in no way connected with any of this.
because there are more peasants than any kings, knights or lords. kings are the least populus.
In the feudal system, vassals held a crucial role by providing military service to their liege lords in exchange for land or fiefs. They were responsible for managing and protecting the land, ensuring its productivity, and collecting taxes from the peasants who worked it. Additionally, vassals were expected to offer counsel and support to their lords, maintaining loyalty and fulfilling any obligations outlined in their feudal contract.
I don't think there are any peasants in Scotland in the 21st century
I do not believe women in the feudal era had any rights unless they were of noble blood or were priestess'.
No, it was not, because it gave rights over land to a tiny minority at the expense of the vast majority. Lords owned the land and any peasants or serfs who lived on it. Peasants were allowed to till the land in exchange for a substantial portion of their harvest, which had to be surrendered as tax to the landowner (landlord). Lords, on the other hand essentially did nothing. Remittances forced from peasants were used either to support lavish lifestyles or to purchase more land through which they could exploit even more serfs. The feudal system was also inhumane in the sense that it was hereditary. People had no hope of progressing beyond the positions held by their parents. In this manner, the system condemned many to perpetual poverty while maintaining undeserved privileges for a few.
A lack of true central power weakened and doomed the Rus' to outside ... Lacking a feudal system of vassal loyalty made it impossible for any prince, .... In theory, this meant that the land was held under The Crown as ultimate feudal superior.
"Begar" is a historical term used in India and Nepal referring to unpaid or forced labor required by feudal lords or authorities from peasants or common people for public works or personal gain. It was a form of bonded labor where individuals were compelled to provide labor without any compensation.
No. The king was the most important figure in the feudal system. He owned all the land in england and infeudated (rent in return for certain things such as military service) to his barons who infeudated it to knights and so on and so forth until the peasants. Therefore the priests and the church actually did not own any land at all making them less powerful if anything than prior to the Battle of Hastings. However King William had vowed to reform the church of England (hence gaining the papal banner to invade england with). Regardless of wether they gained or lost power, the church and priests were definitely not the most powerful people in the feudal system.
Villeins were peasants in the feudal system of medieval Europe who were bound to the land and required to provide labor and services to their lord in exchange for protection and the right to work a portion of the land for their own sustenance. They were not free and could not leave the estate without permission. Boarders, on the other hand, are individuals who rent a room or stay in someone else's home, usually in exchange for meals and lodging, and are typically not tied to any specific obligations beyond the terms of their agreement. Unlike villeins, boarders have more freedom and are not bound by feudal obligations.
if any computer fails it doesn't affect the entire system
Of course they did.