pull down to refresh
52 sats \ 1 reply \ @unboiled 7 Oct \ parent \ on: Why Taxes Were So Hated in the Middle Ages econ
From what I gather as I'm reading through The Sovereign Individual, there are key differences worth considering.
For one, vassals had their own armies from which they provided numbers when the king called on them. The kings' own armies, ie. with direct fealty to them, wouldn't necessarily outnumber those of their vassals combined.
This leads to the second factor, that their vassals could (and did) work together to keep the tributes and dues in check. Together they often could field a force that would make a ruler think twice in trying to enforce new/higher tributes.
In essence, vassals had more bargaining power over how much they'd pay than a citizen has today.
The main difference therefore when comparing to governments today is someone else (other voters and/or government officials) decide how much someone else (you) have to pay in new taxes whereas vassals struck bargains directly on how much they would be required to pay.
That fits with my understanding of the period, too.
It's one reason why I think the tax system under the Articles of Confederation was better. The national government received taxes from the states, rather than the citizens, which meant the states could push back.
reply