More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare and contrast style essay
Medieval europe and feudal japan similar essay
College essay compare and contrast
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Usually when a medieval period is spoken about, our minds roll back and think of medieval Europe with knights, chivalry and feudal Kings. Few, if not any, think of the Japanese medieval period which took place almost six centuries after the European medieval period started. Medieval Japan had a social structure much like medieval Europe’s but also varied because of the different cultural backgrounds. Both Japan’s and Europe’s medieval periods have similarities as well as differences in their political organization, warrior bonds, and the predominance of religion.
Both medieval periods’ had a political structure that revolved around feudalism. Feudalistic Japan’s political construct is very similar to Europe’s where they had a shogun, a feudal
…show more content…
warlord which basically took the place of king, a Daimyo, or also known as nobles, which basically lead the samurai, the Samurai which are knights, and the lowest class being peasants.
The main difference between medieval European political structure and Japan’s is that Japan has an emperor and three subclasses of peasants. According to Columbia University’s database article, Medieval Japan (1185-1600), “the emperor [during the Edo period] had no power and was just there as a figure head”; much like the British look up to their queen today. The second dissimilarity between the two political structures, stated by Nakamura and Matao, that there are three distinct subclasses of peasants (239). These subclasses could be categorized into an upside down hierarchical pyramid structure where the populous farmers are at the top of this pyramid, artisans in the center, and merchants amongst the bottom with other indistinct outcasts and subclasses. Land owning farmers where the highest above all peasants and the merchants where among the lowest. According to Confucian ideology, the merchant class were akin to leeches and basically served no good in a societal role. Because of this, the farmers and artisans where looked upon as the salt of the earth since they produced something that was needed. Honestly, I feel as if the Shogunate wanted to keep the farmers happy and avoid them from going on strike. This is mainly because the Shogunate knew that the merchants …show more content…
had the power to make more than just substantial needs and if the Shogunate threw the farmers to be on the bottom of the social ladder the farmers would riot about their disdainfulness towards them. This would end up throwing Japan into a more brutal period than it already had been. Forcing the Shogunate to uphold laws using sheer and utter brute force; turning the samurai against their peasants, breaking bonds in the process. Speaking of bonds, the Knights of medieval Europe and the Samurai of Tokugawa Japan have a bond which is formed through their codes of honor. Medieval Europe’s chivalry is to Tokugawa Japan’s bushido code, two forms of a code of honor with distinct ways to deal with situations.
Not only does bushido stress a whole hearted loyalty and sacrifice for a superior, it also implements a strong sense of honor and the samurai must defend his master’s honor or commit suicide if this honor was trounced upon. On top of this, the bushido code has seven virtues which can be simplified down to: rectitude, courage, benevolence, respect, honesty, glory, and loyalty. On the other hand, the knights had chivalry which focused on helping the weak. Even though there is not a distinct rule set of chivalry, I noticed a pattern emerging of at least ten characteristics of chivalry. The first is morality, defending your values, third is pity for the weak and defending them, love for their country, no retreat, unmerciless slaughter of evil, obeying any command that does not imbue a form of pious to what you know as just, honesty, generosity, and finally you must be a champion of good and all that is right. The main difference is that a knight does not commit suicide if his king’s honor is trampled on, but keeps fighting for what is just. What creates the warrior bond between two different fighters from different cultures and different hemispheres is that they are men of honor. They fight for what is right and do not back down when it becomes even harder. Not only do I believe that this warrior bond is between knights and samurai, but I also
believe that this bond is shared with every warrior that ever was. This bond is a rare temperament that will always be involved in warriors who fight for what is right no matter the cost. the predominance of religion during the middle ages and Tokugawa period of Japan was one way to maintain the moral of a king or shogunate’s subjects. Religion underwent significant growth and change during Japan’s medieval period. In conclusion, both Europe’s and Japan’s medieval periods have similarities as well as differences in their feudalistic political organization, bonds shared between knights and samurai, and the predominance of Christian and Buhddist idelogy. Both medieval periods’ had a political structure that strongly revolved around feudalism and utilized the work of peasants. The only differences are that japan had an emperor as a head figure but the Shogunate had all the power and that there where three classes of peasants. These classes included farmers, artisans and mercahnts. Then we have the warrior bonds of chivalry and bushido. Medieval Europe’s chivalry could easily be compared to Tokugawa Japan’s bushido code, two forms of a code of honor with distinct ways to deal with honor and evil. This warrior bond is not only a bond between samurai and knight but between all warriors over time.
War played a central part in the history of Japan. Warring clans controlled much of the country. A chief headed each clan; made up of related families. The chiefs were the ancestors of Japan's imperial family. The wars were usually about land useful for the production of rice. In fact, only 20% of the land was fit for farming. The struggle for control of that land eventually ga...
Do you know someone in the military? A loved one, a friend, do you know what they go through? I may not, but I do know about the harsh training and war that occurred for the Samurais and Knights. In Europe and Japan the empires were falling and Clans were taking over Japan. The government came up with an idea to create feudalism. There was an agreement in both Europe and Japan that exchanged land for protection. The similarities between Samurai and Knights were greater than the differences. This can be shown by looking at the three most similar areas: social position, training and armor, and life, honor, and death. The Samurai and Knights has their differences, but were the similarities greater than those differences.
State of War: The Violent Order of Fourteenth Century Japan by Thomas Donald Conlan tracks the events in Japan between 1336 and 1392. Conlan provides his wisdom on how state and society operated in the Nanbokucho period through various source documents portraying the warriors not by their romanticized “knights of the round table” ideal, but rather showing that while there were alliances of connivence, they could be broken just as easily as they were made, revealing that pragmatism was paramount above all else.
“Feudalism was a political and economical system in Europe from the 9th to about the 15th century.” Japan also had time periods that can be called feudal age including: Heian, Kamakura and Tokugawa. Medieval Japan shared a lot of similarities with medieval Europe, however, there are also many differences. One of the differences is their warriors who played vital roles fighting for their country in both Europe and Japan. In medieval Europe they had knights, and in medieval Japan they had samurais. European knights and Japanese Samurais were different in training, armor, weaponry, true values and codes.
European feudalism was based on contract and Japanese feudalism was based on personal relationship with the lord and vassal. This helps prove that the differences between European and Japanese feudalism made limited government more likely to develop in the West because a contract limits what the lords and vassals could do. William, the king of English, said, “I command you [the vassal] to summon all those who are under your charge......and bring ready with you those five knights that you owe me[.]”1 This helps prove that European feudalism was based on contract because when you owe someone something, it implies an agreement. The key terms are I command you and owe. The vassal has to send troops because he has to. He is under the rule of his lord. The lord tells his vassal that “[H]e will perform everything [that] was in [their] agreement [because] [he] submitted himself to him and chose his will.”2 This helps prove that European feudalism was based on a contract because a contract implies an agreement. The vassal chose the lord himself, so therefore, the vassal is under the lord's rule and needs to follow the agreement. On Japan's view of feudalism, their feudalism wasn't based on contract. On page 122 and 124 of The Tale of Heike, it implies personal relationships with the lord and vassal. “Despite his predicament, [the lord] still thought of [his vassal].”3 When the lord dies, the vassal kills himself saying, “For whom do I have to fight now?”4 This helps prove that Japanese feudalism was based on a personal relationship with lord and vassal because the lord and vassal actually cared for each other. Even through major problems, the lord and vassal's actions showed how close their relationship was with each other. Also on page 5...
Japanese revolts ensue with the opening of Japan to the Western World. The middle and lower classes wanted Japan to be open while the conservative daimyo did not. Both of these groups looked to the emperor for a decision. The shogunate, reliant on the isolation, collapsed under pressures caused by outsid...
Japan lasted from 1185-1603. During that time Japan had emperors, shoguns, daimyos, samurai, and peasants who were all apart of a social class, and all together it was called the Samurai Society. The emperor was just a figurehead for the shogun. The shogun was a powerful military leader that ruled in the emperor’s name. Daimyo were powerful landlords. The daimyo often led armies of samurai. These samurai were trained professional warriors who served daimyo and shoguns. The samurai had to follow a certain code of rules for samurai called Bushido. One of their rules included to always have self-discipline to become a good samurai. The samurai warriors wore light armor, helmets (usually shaped like an animal), and had two swords around their waist. Their armor had a lot of detail and color to it, like their unique helmets. After the samurai comes the peasants, which included farmers and fishermen. They usually always work, then pay takes to the shogun. They usually gave the shogun what they earned from working like food or crops. What made their jobs a bit difficult was their topography. Japan’s topography included many mountains, undersea volcanoes, and barely any flat land to farm on. The Japanese didn’t only work they also practiced their religion. For example, they practiced Confucianism, Buddhism (...
Hard and soft, day and night, girl and boy. These are all differences but one that is not mentioned is samurai and knights. Japanese emperors and the imperial court was challenged by the rise of clans. Like Europe, Japan found itself in pieces. In turn, nobles trained warriors who, in exchange for farmland or food and lodging, swore to be loyal to the nobles and to defend them. The warriors from Europe were called knights. The warriors from Japan were called samurai. From 1000 to 1600 CE in Japan and Europe, samurai and knights were the muscle and the soul of the warrior class. Critics may argue samurai and knights are very similar but in reality, they have more differences. They different because of their loyalty and honor, and their training
During the 17th and 18th centuries, the Chinese and Japanese faced much internal conflict, but while China faced a combination of economic setbacks and political weakness, the Japanese were riddled with wars along their countryside. First, the Chinese emperor was too weak in comparison to his bureaucracy, which ended up making most of the decisions for the last Ming dynasty emperor. This was due to the emperor’s realization that having a title as Son of Heaven did not mean he had all the power of the empire. Instead he lived a laid back life where the bureaucrats vied for power and wealth amongst themselves and he merely managed them. Like the Chinese, the Japanese also saw elites battling it out for power, but this time on the battlefield with armies of samurai. These battles put Japan in a period much like the Warring States period in early Chinese history, where families fought and fought for power almost endlessly. The political weakness in China contributed to its economic failure as well. With no force to manage to seas, pirates were free to raid trade ships and villages along the coast line, weakening the Chinese economy that relied on a transport system to supply the country. These two major forces led to China’s fragmentation and eventual takeover by the Manchu. In contrast, the battles happening in Japan were not harmful to the economy as much as they were in China. This is due to the fact that the Japanese daimyos were independent...
The top structure of the society includes the Shoguns, Daimyos and Samurais. ‘Shogun’ was the title granted by the Emperor to Japan’s top military commander (Web-japan.org, 2013). Initially Emperors controlled the country but over time Shoguns became more powerful than the Emperor and took over the whole government, the Shogun was generally the real ruler of the country until 1867 when feudalism was abolished (Web-japan.org, 2013). Daimyos were the lords and their roles were to manage and maintain the law, collect taxes and aiding in armed forces for the Shogun (Ask.com, 2013). Samurais were the members of the military class, they were the warriors of traditional Japan. The roles of the Samurais were to protect and serve their daimyos or lords usually in wars (Answers.yahoo.com, 2013).
Another difference is the amount of people at the top of the hierarchies. In Japanese Feudalism, there was one person at the top, the Japanese emperor. In the Encomienda system, there was a certain ethnicity, the peninsulares, at the apex of the social pyramid. This is an indication of how politics were in both societies. From the fact that there was one ruler at the top of the Japanese feudalist system, there is a higher probability of absolutism than compared to the Encomienda system where it was more likely that there was local power shared between the peninsulares.
I believe we can all agree that Japanese samurais and European knights are two of the most skilled and famous forms of warriors in history, right? Well both warriors began their trade at a very young age, and went through multiple stages of training throughout their lives. They both had a code of honor basically, but they differed from one another in quite a few ways. The big question is, “Were the similarities greater than the differences?”. Right off the bat I began to ponder the technicalities of the answer to this question. Before I get too scrambled up in the technicalities, let’s discuss some these differences and the similarities and figure out how this plays out. Before we conduct this discussion, let’s review our key terms. A clan is a group of close-knit and interrelated families. Feudalism was a political and economic system that flourished in Europe from the 9th to the 15th century, based on higher classes giving random services and items in exchange for something else. Knights were men who served their lord as a mounted soldier in armor. Samurai’s were members of a powerful military social class in feudal Japan. A shogun was a hereditary commander-in-chief in feudal Japan. Chivalry was the medieval knightly system with its religious, moral, and social code. Bushido was the code of honor and morals developed by the Japanese samurai.
Stories about war and implements of such can be observed throughout the course of Japanese history. This shows the prevalence of martial training and the profession of arms as a tradition that has not faded since ancient times (Friday and Humitake 13).
...high power status, Japan had to have a self-reliant industrial common ground and be able to move all human and material resources (S,195). Through the Shogun Revolution of 1868, the abolition of Feudalism in 1871, the activation of the national army in 1873, and the assembly of parliament in 1889, the political system of Japan became westernized (Q,3). Local Labor and commercial assistance from the United States and Europe allowed Japan’s industry to bloom into a developed, modern, industrial nation (Q,3). As a consequence production surplus, and food shortage followed (Q,3). Because of how much it relied on aid of western powers, Japan’s strategic position became especially weak. In an attempt to break off slightly from the aid of the west Japanese leaders believed that it would be essential for Japan to expand beyond its borders to obtain necessary raw materials.
Deal, William E. 2006. Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan. Facts on File, Inc., 2006. eBook