Essay On The Serfs Dbq

Social DBQ

Beginning in the 16th century, there was a growing unrest among the serfs primarily in modern day Germany. High taxes, joined with the fact that peasants had no opportunity to increase their social standing, let alone the right to do so, gave an atmosphere of disaccord between the noble, and lower class. Internalizing the egalitarian ideologies of Martin Luther, it was easy for the peasants to feel like they had greater place in among society. However, due to semi-feudalistic attitudes of those days, peasants were the lowest social class and needed to stay that way for such a social structure to function. Martin Luther’s teachings that through faith everyone could be equal in God’s eyes gave peasants a false sense of equality,

In document 3, the lords responded to the peasants by claiming that the lower-class were their property, having been purchased by them for “a considerable sum of money.” The lords continued to mock the serfs, explaining to them that they are certain their social status would not hinder their positions in heaven. The peasants who claimed their only master was Jesus, stating, “Christ has purchased and redeemed us with His precious blood2,” were then told that that the council was sympathetic to their plea: to regain their independence, they would simply have to pay the sum of which they are worth. An ironic proposition, as the nobles know very well the serf’s wealth was negligible. This response to the peasants’ plea was fuel to the fire of revolt. The peasants viewed this ignorance of their rights as people unacceptable, given their new found of idea of worth, which they interpreted from Luther’s teachings. Such a response from the lords was yet another step towards a revolt, indirectly having been started by Luther inspiring the peasants to want more. The upheaval of peasants against their oppressing social structure is also seen in the French Revolution of the late 18th century. The feudal system had been gradually disappearing in parts of Europe, replaced with early capitalist structures. The peasants living in these parts of Europe had attained a higher

The nobles responding with a mockery of the peasants, left the peasants angered and bitter. As such, they started forming private assemblies, where they would preach their views on equality, and plot to revolt against the nobles. A secret report regarding a peasant's assembly shows the nobles views on the matter. “... They believed the rich should share with the poor, especially rich persons who had acquired their property from trade or had otherwise won it from the poor...” The speaker in this source was the chief advisor for the Archbishop of Wurzburg. The Archbishop of Wurzburg being of a highly recognized class would highly disapprove of this intolerance from the peasants. Seen in the diction of the speaker, he talks of the peasants as if they are inferior beings. The tone in this source much differed from that of document 3, as this document paints the nobles as eagerly awaiting to strike down on the peasants. “The same was heard from many peasants in the countryside where a prosperous man, who had hitherto observed and taken pleasure in the peasants’ uprising, began to scratch his head and reflect on what a troublesome situation this might be.” This source shows how the noble was realizing of the adverse effects that could be caused by the peasants’ uprising. As the peasants were severely undertrained and under-armed, they had no chance of overthrowing the nobles. However, the nobles - almost