The ratification was not a predetermined conclusion. Acutely articulate men used newspapers, brochures, and public meetings to discuss the ratification of the Constitution. Those known as Antifederalists opposed the Constitution for various reasons. Some were still arguing that delegates surpassed congressional authority when they replaced the Articles of Confederation with an illegal new document. Others complained that the delegates in Philadelphia represented only a few landowners and as a result had created a document that served their special interests and reserved the right to vote to the wealthy classes. Another common objection was that the Constitution gave much power to the central government at the expense of the states and that a representative government could not handle a republic as big as this one. The most serious criticism was that the Constitutional Assembly failed to adopt a statute of rights proposed by George Mason. In New York, Governor George Clinton expressed these concerns in several essays published in newspapers using Cato's nickname, while Patrick Henry and James Monroe drilled the opposition in Virginia.
Therefore, the first real examination of the ratification process took place in Massachusetts, where fully recorded debates indicate that the recommendation that a bill of rights be written was the perfect remedy for the end of disagreements in the ratification assembly. Therefore, four other states also ratified the constitution but with amendments.
The feudal system was a pyramid of 4 sections at the bottom it had the peasants and on top it had the royals. Each class worked for the person who had more power than them/in-front of them and in return they receive a service. hope the picture explains it better :)
