What are 3 social classes of feudalism?

Answer 1

AnswerNoblemen

Serfs

Clergy

AnswerThe answer above was what was usually said in the Middle Ages, and is a convenient way of looking at things.

The social classes in the Middle Ages, exemplified by those of England, were a little more complicated.

The royalty were at the top. They were not memberso f the nobility unless they also had titles of nobility; the royalty was separate.

The nobility were next, but included various grades. Those with hereditary titles were peers, ordered from high to low as dukes, marquesses, earls, viscounts, and barons.

Those members of the nobility with titles that were not inherited were knights. In later times, the baronets were at the same level, as they were not peers, but they were not technically members of the nobility unless they were also landed gentry.

Those members of the nobility without titles were the landed gentry. If they left their land, as younger children often did, they also left the nobility.

The people who were of classes below peers were the commoners. These included knights, untitled children of any rank, the landed gentry, freemen, and serfs.

Clearly there was a middle class, consisting of the people who had left the nobility for whatever reason, and those serfs who were freed and moved off the manorial estates.

Freemen who lived on the manorial estates were not serfs, but they were peasants and were not middle class.

At the bottom of the social ladder were serfs.

The clergy were not part of this class system, but were in an analogous system, in which the bishops were considered to be at the same level as titled nobility. Priest and deacons were lower, and possibly the equivalent of the gentry, as were abbots. Other monks and nuns, who had not been ordained, were at a lower level.

There are links below.

Answer 2

One three part class system divides people into these: the nobility, who protect all

the clergy, who save the souls of all

the peasants, who feed all (the bulk of the population)

There are a lot of problems with this, however, and it is only a very simplistic way of looking at things.

Part of the problem is that who were included in the nobility was not clearly defined. Members of the royal families were not necessarily also members of the nobility (today, the children of the Prince of Wales are technically commoners). So the members of the royal family do not fit into the three way class division. They were above the nobility, but they did not fit into either of the other two classes. (see the link on commoners)

Also, there was a very important division of the nobility into those who were peers, and those who were commoners. People who held inherited titles of nobility were peers, in the Middle Ages, but knights were not peers, and so were technically commoners, even though they were nobles. Also, not all members of the nobility had titles, as there was technically no requirement that a person actually be a knight to have an estate, and the numbers of untitled landed gentry increased as the Middle Ages went on.

The nobility included landed gentry, and the children of landed gentry. But a son of a member of the landed gentry could become a merchant and have no estate. By doing this, he might have become very much richer than his father, but it also meant his children were not of the nobility, instead being simply commoners related to nobility. The commoners always included a number of people in the middle class, who were above peasants, but not members of the nobility. One example of such a person who grew up in such status was Thomas Becket, the son of a cloth merchant, whose father was a knight. (see the link on Thomas Becket)

The middle class also included skilled craftsmen of all sorts, from bakers to stone cutters. The guilds these people formed existed through the Middle Ages, and include some that seem to have gone back to the Roman Empire, before the Middle Ages began. The presence of a middle class through the Middle Ages is proven by this. We can also see the middle class in operation in the establishment of the Republic of Venice, in the 8th century. (see the links on guilds and the Republic of Venice)

Another part of the problem of viewing medieval society as having three simple classes is that even during the Middle Ages no one was quite sure who the clergy were. According to one view, the clergy were technically those people who were ordained, and included deacons, priests, and bishops; but this left no room for monks or nuns. Another view was that there were secular clergy, who were ordained and served in secular situations, and regular clergy, who had taken monastic orders; but this did not include the nuns and also might not have included some friars. At the other end of the spectrum was a legal point of view, which needed a precise definition under the law, and included all clerics, regardless of ordination or vows; this extended benefits of clergy to all studying to be ordained, then to all students regardless of intentions, and finally to all who could read. (see the link below to an article on benefit of clergy)

There was, among peasants, the important distinction between those who were serfs, bound to the soil, and those who were free. Freemen who were peasants were above serfs, where serfdom existed, and serfs were above slaves, were slavery existed. But freemen could also be commoners in the towns and cities, and even during the Early Middle Ages, they owned their own businesses as merchants and craftsmen.

Also, during the Middle Ages, in most places slavery disappeared, and serfdom became more and more obsolete. (see the link on serfdom)

Answer 3

There were serfs, nobility, and clergy. There were other groups too, including the merchants, but they were not so important in the early times when the manors were intended to be self sufficient.

Answer 4

The classes the people of the Middle Ages wrote about were the nobility, the clergy, and the peasants. There was always a middle class, made up of merchants, craftsmen, and so on, but they might not even have had a name for this group.

Answer 5

The First Estate was made up of the clergy.

The Second Estate was made up of the nobles.

The Third Estate was made up of commoners.

You should understand that this is not as simple as it might seem. The meanings of these terms varied from one country to another and from one time to another. For example, in France, the third estate included peasants and people of middle class. In England of the Late Middle Ages, however, the third estate did not include peasants, but did include members of the lower nobility, younger children of the higher nobility, and middle class. According to this scheme, the second estate was made up of people qualified to sit in the House of Lords, and peasants were considered to be of a Fourth Estate.

There is a link below to an article on Estates of the Realm.

Answer 6

The three classes were the clergy (their duty was basically to pray), the nobility (their duty was to fight), and the serfs (they were to work).

Answer 7

People in the Middle Ages were members of three classes:

1.Noblemen

2.Serfs

3.Clergy

Answer 8

Kings and Queens were at the top peasants were at the bottom

Answer 9

You had the noble men. The journeymen and masters. And then you had the serfs.