Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎Feudalism had been successful in defending against Viking invasions: Thanks for your insights. You may be right. I took out the sentence that you criticized.
Line 37: Line 37:     
::No, feudalism was a dreadful system of defence because there was no centralised control of military power and the Norse could bribe lords to ensure that they wouldn't defend their neighbours. Feudalism proved to be very successful on the OFFENSIVE, as in Henry V's campaign in France, but as a defensive system it was appalling. The Norse overran scores of feudal lords, and were only checked by Alfred the Great, who unified the English forces. --[[User:VTraynor|VTraynor]] 22:32, 8 October 2011 (EDT)
 
::No, feudalism was a dreadful system of defence because there was no centralised control of military power and the Norse could bribe lords to ensure that they wouldn't defend their neighbours. Feudalism proved to be very successful on the OFFENSIVE, as in Henry V's campaign in France, but as a defensive system it was appalling. The Norse overran scores of feudal lords, and were only checked by Alfred the Great, who unified the English forces. --[[User:VTraynor|VTraynor]] 22:32, 8 October 2011 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::Thanks for your insights.  You may be right.  I took out the sentence that you criticized.  Please feel free to edit the lecture if you see other problems, or ways to improve it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:39, 8 October 2011 (EDT)
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,898

edits

Navigation menu