Reading this regarding the Prince of Wales’ income from the Duchy of Cornwall, I was reminded of the question above. I was about to introduce it into the other thread, thinking it didn’t merit a thread of its own, when I changed my mind and said to myself, "Of course it does!
Keep in mind that “feudalism”, to the extent that the term hasn’t been completely rejected by scholars, really deals relations among the gentry and higher classes, and the same is true of vassals. A vassal wasn’t a serf who cleaned out the stables, but rather a knight or other lower-ranking aristocrat who owed allegience to a higher lord, or perhaps the monarch.
Since England today has a functioning hereditary aristocracy, are there any vestigial feudal obligations such as rent in money or kind? Are there Earls in Cornwall who have to give Prince Charles, as the Duke of Cornwall, six chickens and a cow every other year? Or is there such a thing as the ceremonial rendition of military service, as a Knight would have been required to do in the old days?
I suppose the question can be extended to the other extant European monarchies as well.
I think one of the Scottish dukes (either the Duke of Argyll or the Duke of Atholl) supposedly has some vestigial feudal right to raise a private army, formed from among his tenantry. I believe they do still meet and “drill”, more for the quaintness of the custom than anything else.
Actually, until 1990 or so, the french president, as co-prince of Andorra, got each year some poultry and sheeps. For some reason, this quaint tradition has been abolished and the hens brought to the Elysee palace been replaced by a check of some minimal amount, which is no fun.
Isn’t there still a feudal lord, or rather lady, “ruling” as a fiefdom one of the channel islands?
Sybil Hathaway was the famous Dame of Sark for much of the twentieth century (including the period of German occupation during WWII). She died in 1974 and her grandson John Beaumont succeeded her as Seigneur of Sark. He’s a very gracious man. When I was at school I had to do a geography assignment on “an island”. I chose Sark and wrote to the Seigneur as part of my research. I didn’t think he’d bother to reply to a letter from far-away Australia, but he did: a long, hand-written letter with lots of wonderful information. I included his letter in my assignment. My teacher was most impressed.
To say that England (and UK) has a functioning hereditary aristocracy is only true in the most technical sense. We have aristocrats i.e. people in this country with hereditary titles, but I wouldn’t really call them functioning.
Constitutionally the Lords originally served in the House of Lords in Parliament and represented the position of the aristocracy and act as a “social betters” check on the legislation put through the House of Commons. However since the start of this century hereditary peers lost the right to sit in the House of Lords and it is now comprised mainly of people with the title ‘Lord’ or ‘Baroness’, but these titles are not hereditary and so the House no longer represents the aristocracy.
Also, outside of the royal family there is virtually no exercise of traditional feudal rights or powers/privileges beyond the occasional tongue-in-cheek presentation of a sheep to somebody which they then give back or donate. The civil list (which is one the sources of income for the royal family) is the closest thing that I can think of to a feudal income, and again the royal family is the exception not the rule.
Sorry to be pedantic but I don’t much like the (unintentional, I’m sure) inference that we’re still a feudal society with the nobs pushing the proles around, it’s not been like that here for over 100 years.