Question 1: A Comparative Examination of Feudalism. Question 2: Science and One God - Essay Example

?A Comparative Examination of Feudalism Feudalism is not a foreign concept to most Americans as the movies have used the concept in order to make period based films that incorporate fantasy or history in a medieval setting. Feudalism, however, was a much more complex social structure than is commonly understood with broad differences that can be seen between the various countries that have been defined for having had feudal forms of social structures. The most commonly understood form is that which was conducted in England, but feudalism with similar, yet very different structures was practiced in both Japan and India. The circumstances that led to the rise of feudalism in various cultures is the principle and importance of land ownership and the concept of production through agriculture and the agrarian society which are core economic elements of all of the feudal societies. The rise of feudalism in Japan, India, and Europe was predicated on the rise of the importance of the agrarian society in conjunction with the importance of land ownership as a means for production, but with differences that can be seen through cultural belief systems from each region where feudalism has appeared. The nature of European feudalism can be traced back to the assertion of personalization within the governance of the Germanic tribes.1 This evolved into meaningful relationships through which protection and loyalty became the basis of how networks of land were protected. As well, the transition from the Roman slave structure to the serf paradigm would seem to have occurred during the 3rd century A.D., but this transition was not clear cut nor easily defined from when the lower class went from being owned to the concept of a free serf class that was a tenant on the lands.2 The interpersonal relationship of one land owner to the authority above was mimicked on down the line until even the serf was in a relationship with his or her lord so that they were beholden to them for the protection that was provided. Private patronage had been the nature of the ancient modes of governance, but because of the high costs of patronage the development of the feudal estate system allowed for independence from the Roman Empire.3 This relational style of governance was abused, of course, with corruption coming through coercion and taxation so that the peasants were kept poor and the landowners kept control over them. The complexity of European feudal society was a system of lords and vassals that served in the absence of any sense of a strong central authority through which to find governance. Although the system was similar to the way in which the Roman Empire had been broken up with different levels of authority, the main difference was in the lack of a powerful and overpowering centralized government that was costly and remote from the furthest reaching places under Roman rule.4 The fragmentation of the government was supplanted by local controlling authorities, often knights that were mercenaries or thugs, who would control a region for their own benefit and for the benefit of any aristocratic figure to whom they were loyal. Allegiance was the reigning power as a vassal would give loyalty to a lord. Serfs provided labor for the manors with the knights providing security and safety for the operation of society. Private armies were the way in which that security was put into place. Where a lowered level of corruption was present, the knights provided for the development of law and policing, acting as functional extensions of their lord’s wishes on how the land should be run. Where there was corruption, however, the people suffered and their profits were little, leaving them with little food and sustenance. By the mid-7th century serfs were a recognized class, coming from the slavery and free peasants in the land who were recognized for their labor and contribution to the system. Because of the problem of a class of people that were primarily oppressed in often impoverished circumstances, depending on the estate, there was always the potential for instability which could manifest through rebellion against the lords of the manors. Despite this potential, there were viably large estates that developed throughout Germany, France, and England. Serfs were given the right to have land and pass it to their offspring. The obligations of the feudal serfs were to provide the labor needed on the demesne and to pay taxes to their lord for the privilege of the relationship that granted them protection. Serfs were not bought and sold and did not act as slave labor, but were often bound by law to a place and to an occupation as determined through family birthright. As an example, if born to a blacksmith, it would be likely that a son would become a blacksmith. Freedom from a lord was usually gained from his death, from running away, or through volunteering to help settle new lands.5 It is possible that this tradition of passing professions down came as much from the practicality of that concept as it did the Roman restructuring that occurred under Diocletian as he made it a regulation that sons would learn the crafts of their fathers and continue their position in order to support a more stable economic balance where needs were continued to be met.6 What the serf represents for the development of social structure through the European feudal system is a mode of production.7 This can be said of the Japanese form of feudalism in which the structure of the village patterns of production can be seen to be similar to that of the European structures. According to Hall there is a discussion among scholars as to whether or not the European development of the feudal society was unique or if the social structures within other nations can be compared to the European forms. Hall contends that it is possible that Japanese and European feudalism are the only two forms of proven feudalism. 8 He continues his discussion by quoting Von Siebold who wrote in the 19th century that the Japan system was feudal through the strictest definition of feudalism in that the nominal proprietor and sovereign divided the external domains into principalities, with the exclusion of his own portion. The princes of these lands also divided their portions to those who served through military service, leaving them to grow through hereditary status as they would be passed within the family.9 One of the differences stated by Hall is that the oaths of loyalty taken in Japan did not typically contain the contractual obligations that would be found in Europe.10 The oaths were not necessarily economically defined, in other words. The lord in Japanese feudalistic relationships was the absolute authority with no other court having jurisdiction should a vassal feel he has been slighted or harmed by the relationship. Behaviors were specifically outlined in the social ranks of Japan with high elements of ritual and ceremony, where contractual elements were more important in the European form of feudal relationships.11 Sharma discusses the same line of inquiry as does Hall when the question of the validity of Indian feudalism is raised. Sharma uses the example of tribalism and the many structures and forms of the tribal society in order to create a parallel between the many societies that might have claim to feudalism in that there are variations throughout the nations of the world in how different structures manifested.12 Just like in the European form of feudalism, land was an important and core resource for production. The peasants were obligated to concede to the wishes of the landowners and to also pay them taxes for the protection that they afforded.13 The feudalism of India appears to have very strong ties in relationship to the structures that were provided within the European forms. Significant differences included the concepts of the land being given in exchange for production in European structures while in Indian structures it was for the expressed purpose of collecting taxes. In India the landowners did not have to pay to a King, but in European feudal systems there was a wide hierarchal structure that required payments to sustain its existence. As Sharma asserted, one can look at the rise of feudal systems in much the same way in which tribal societies emerged. The differences that can be observed are based upon cultural ideologies, while the basic social structures are very similar. The economic factors also play an important part in the development of feudal structures as production and taxation frameworks are vital to the support of the system. The systems evolved as technologies evolved and the spread of land ownership through independence began to emerge as a way in which to both protect the overall ownership of land and to facilitate the daily governance of remote areas. While there is some argument as to the validity of considering both Japan and India as feudal systems, the basic structures of feudal society appear to have existed and the evolution of both social and economic structures in each of these nations is congruent with the basic concepts found in European examples. Science and One God When Christianity emerged as a primary force in the 3rd century, the heralding in of science as a means to understand the world was quite possibly also developed. Where older religions had assigned different entities to the various phenomenon of the world, Christianity provided for one God who was the resource for all things within the world. Where the emotions and whims of many of the old gods were responsible for the wind, the rain, and any of dozens of other events in the world, the Judeo-Christian world meant that followers could look to their God for all answers – but it also inspired them to ask how and why things occurred the way that they did. Through the freedom to explore ideas and reason based arguments to explain the world, voyages by explorers like Christopher Columbus and possibly Marco Polo may not have been possible. Through the ideologies that are associated with a single God in relationship to the evolution of Christianity in the Western world, rationale and reason began to frame scientific exploration with the explanations associated with the supernatural no longer having as strong a hold on academic discovery. One can look towards the condemnation that Augustine made about the belief that the celestial bodies in the heavens had an influence on the fate and lives of those on Earth to find evidence that the Judeo-Christian influence began to inspire reason within the world. According to Molland Augustine began to cast doubt on the predictive powers of the stars, the influence of the sun and the moon on weather not included in his discussion.14 Because the concept those entities were not specifically tied to different aspects of life and the rise of the belief in only one God, it is possible that it was easier to look at the nature of the world through means that were less supernatural and were more built upon premises that could be proven through scientific means. Just as Augustine looked at the idea that the bodies in the sky had an influence on fate and discounted it as not reasonable, others began to look at their world and find reasonable explanations for what they observed. Molland brings forward the idea that what was once vague was being brought into a more orderly conceptualization, the thoughts that were being transformed into human knowledge no longer framed by fantasies, but through reason and rationality. The period of the Middle Ages which is defined by the rise of the Church and its influence on politics, social belief systems, and worship, can also be seen as a time in which old beliefs were shed to make room for looking at the world through more constructive ideas. When the time of the Middle Ages in European nations is compared to that of the development of other nations, there is often seen a decided difference in the development of science during that period of time. This is not to say that there were not great cities in other parts of the world. It is likely that many of the cities of the other nations were far more beautiful and well developed than those of Medieval Europe. Goodwin uses the example of Ghana in order to show some of the splendor that existed on the African continent during the medieval period. He discusses the fact that during sixteen hundred years of existence, the Sudan held a series of kingdoms that were wealthy and magnificent, each rising and falling according to the social and political climate of the time. The legends report that the first leader was Wakayamgha who gained control of the region in the 4th century with the next 300 years seeing about 22 leaders of the kingdom. In the year 1076 Islam entered the nation, although the king of the time and his family held onto their old belief systems, rejecting the Islamic traditions. There were sacred groves of trees, national idols, and important tombs that all were a part of the belief systems of the king and those of his people who did not convert to Islam.15 Goodwin writes that is very likely that the kingdom in Ghana was far richer than any European nation of the 14th century and that the people were far more literate. Mansa Musa was the leader during this time and through his influence the nation grew more powerful and sophisticated. By the fifteenth century, however, the nation had been torn apart, the rich heritage gone and the learning that had occurred during the period of flourishing civilization mostly lost. While it was to fall to conquering nations, it is possible that some of the reasons that it was not sustained was that technology had reached a point where continuing forward would fly in the face of all known traditional beliefs, the nation constricted by not being able to let go of supernatural belief systems that constrain progress. As Phillips discusses the influences on Christopher Columbus, he uses the term Judeo-Christian intellectual heritage in order to describe the academic nature of theologians and scholars of the period associated with the educational vision of the church.16 Through scholarly pursuits that put the rational of the ocean into perspective, Columbus was able to make his voyages without the fear that he would fall off the edge of the world. His knowledge had been framed by reason, which was challenging to some where belief was concerned, but understood by a great deal of others who supported his travels. It is through knowledge that the accounts of Marco Polo are made, even though it is possible that he did not make the trips that are associated with his name.17 Even if Polo was not able to make the voyages that he made, it was through the freedom of exploration that is ideas have been sustained throughout history. Getz begins to explore the idea of the advancement of human existence in relationship with the event of the Black Death which took over 55 million people when it ravaged Europe. Where the result of such an event might have been to create an even deeper belief in the supernatural, Getz uses this event to suggest that it was seminal to the rise of the Renaissance period, one of the most prolific periods in human history where science, literature, thought and the arts were concerned.18 Where other civilizations have seen disasters as signs from God or gods that they were displeased, the Black Plague ended with the result of a time of reason in which philosophy was based upon humanism, which was a return to the classics of Ancient Rome and Greece. The interesting twist is that the reason that was gained from this return was not burdened with a belief system that included a pantheon of gods who controlled the various aspects of the human condition. The freedom from this constraint allowed the works from that ancient time period to be read through the belief systems that were being developed based upon rationality and science. The supernatural was still very present during the medieval period and the belief s that had come before Christianity and the Judeo-Christian heritage had begun to spread still existed as historical and cultural belief systems, influencing a great many during this time. The example of the Black Plague provides for a time in history where the catastrophe was instigation towards new discovery. This does not mean, however, that the idea that it was retribution from God was not considered. In looking at the history of the world, however, it is clear that something changed on the European continent that provided for not only increases in knowledge, but the globalization of knowledge from which great leaps of advancement have been made. Where the kingdom of Ghana likely had great technologies, they were confined to an extent and did not last beyond that nation. It is possible that the development of a globalized world and the increases in overall knowledge in the past two millennia can be attributed to the belief in a single God that provided for the belief systems to develop that thought could be combined with reason in order to pursue scientific explanations for how the world works. Through belief systems that could expand and make room for ideas that were not confined by a pantheon of gods that held sway over how scientific discovery was made, it is possible that the knowledge of the world grew from a shift in ideologies. Read More