Answer:
Not particularly.
Explanation:
I honestly can't even keep track of time nowadays though.
Answer: Judaism
Details:
The covenant that YAHWEH made with Abraham was a unilateral (one-sided) promise. Apart from anything Abraham did, God was promising that he was going to bring about a great nation from Abraham's offspring, and that the nation descended from him would possess the land of Canaan. The descendants of Abraham are the Jewish people, and Canaan became known as their land, Israel. (Israel was a name God gave to Abraham's grandson, Jacob, that then became the name of his descendant people.)
God also included the promise of a Messiah in the covenant with Abraham, saying, "Through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed" (Genesis 22:18).
See Genesis chapter 17 and also Genesis 22:15-18 for the Bible's account of these covenant promises.
Feudalism worked easy because it was a system that worked from top to bottom. At the top you had the King which provided money for the Nobility that provided troops and protection for the king. Then the Nobility would bestow the land to his knights that would give the land to the peasants and they owned the land and farmer on it. The knights would provide military service for food that they farmed.
Answer:
What do peasant farmers do when they lost their crops?
Peasant farmers often depended on <em>subsistence agriculture</em> - this means that the farmers primarily grew crops to feed themselves and their families, rather than selling their crops for economic gain.
So, if the peasant farmers lose their crops, they will have nothing to eat. The peasants will probably go hungry and perhaps starve.
And what common pattern do we see when the masses are starving? They <em>revolt </em>! I suppose that's a bit of a stretch, but in general, the peasant class would definitely be upset at having no crops to feed themselves and their children. Such tensions will be directed at their leader or "King" who is supposed to be prepared for any disaster.
Wouldn't people think, "The leader has everything he wants and can get anything he does not have, can't he share with us?"
Anyways, that's how I would interpret this question.
Hope this helps!
:D
