This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
The description is good, but a simple illustration of a typical seigneurie layout (with several seigneuries included) would be a great addition.
Twas Now 05:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this topic used for just the seigneurial system of New France? Isn't the term just as applicable to France itself? -- Jmabel 08:28, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I don't know, I thought it was an adaptation of the remnants of the feudal system, based on the specific geography and circumstances of the St. Lawrence River. But I don't really know about 17th century French peasants or whatever :) Adam Bishop 08:32, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I changed the first couple of sentences to mention the broader use, but (at least for now) left the article otherwise intact. Jmabel 09:55, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)
There's an article on Intendant and another on the Intendant System that I think should be considered for merging, or at least cross referencing. I'm not so concerned about the 'Intendant' article as I am about the 'Intendant System' article that is currently proposed to be merged into it. Some high level consideration is definitely in order. --Chaleur 19:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well they should be cross-referenced, but this should definitely NOT be merged into the Intendant article. Adam Bishop 15:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
what are the benefits of the seigneurial system? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.45.119.112 (talk) 18:00, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's been years since my French history, and I'd want to review and research before answering in concrete detail. But the topic is certainly worth mentioning in the article (with reliable references, natch).
A factor that may not be emphasized in sources — which I found to be significantly ill-considered or intentionally ignored in classwork — is how profoundly ignorant many people were before the 20th century. America was proud of its early literacy rate, but what they meant by literacy might be the equivalent of a poor grammar school education today. (E.g., I remember an annecdote that American cowboy's "literacy" was largely limited to reading the backs of soup cans around campfires.)
People who, for practical purposes. could not read or write needed the help and protection of those who could: landowners, military officers, clergy, judges. So they traded their labor for services. That's not to say that was a good thing, or the best approach, by any means, but it was a workable approach. Piano non troppo (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are we talking about the benefits of distinguishing between the seigneurial system and other systems of land tenure? because I think it's worthwhile to mention that the last couple sentences of the introduction are so general as to describe any system of land tenure, and any subject of a higher authority as "free." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.111.25.182 (talk) 04:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Seigneurial system of New France. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to trueorfailed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
