jjj - Thesis
jjj - Addresses all parts of the question
jjj - Substantiates thesis with appropriate historical evidence
jjj - Makes at least one or two relevant direct comparisons between or among societies.
jjj - Analyzes at least one reason for a similarity or difference identified in a direct comparison.
Japan and Europe were similarly defined in their social lives, were both influenced by reciprocation, and both used feudalism in their economy. Of course, it wasn’t called feudalism at the time, but the classes shared mutual transaction nonetheless.
In Japanese hierarchy, the rule of Japan was by regional families and clans, as well as a shogun (war lord). It developed slightly later than Europe, because of its isolation, until the trading ships brought Christianity to them. In Europe, the land was ruled in kingdoms, ruled by, obviously, a king. Then the land was divided down to lords, then vassals, then lesser vassals, and finally peasants. The feudalism ran in a way so that no one could live without the other. The peasants provide the food to the upper classes, the lesser vassal provides loyalty to the vassal, the vassal provides loyalty to the lord, the lord provides loyalty to the king, and the king provides protection for his people. The same goes for the Japanese (although the titles were different).
But on what the feudalism was based was different. While Europe was still recovering from the fall of the Roman Empire, it was grounded in the Roman legal structure, while Japanese feudalism had its basis from Chinese Confucian morality. This makes sense because Europe, despite multiple wars and invasions, didn’t know any other way to rule by since the Roman Empire, and that left a big impact on them because the Roman Empire was so strong (despite its spectacular fall). The Japanese were constantly influenced by China once the first Chinese landed on their shores, and for a while upheld some of the Confucian and Buddhist traditions.
The problem with feudalism is that it sucked for the peasants. Living under feudalism wasn’t pretty for the peasants, and if they didn’t serve a lord or vassal, they could be destroyed by invaders. They had little freedoms and were constantly working to keep themselves and the upper classes fed.
Japanese social life was based on how militaristic you were. The warriors (or samurai) of Japan were highly respected and served the shogun. Traders were not as highly respected as the samurai were. This is influenced by the fact that Japan is very isolated, and because the Chine Confucian ways influenced their traditions (Confucian despises foreigners). On the other hand, Europe was much more welcoming to traders because not every kingdom could support itself with food, clothing, and other necessities. Not all of the kingdoms could produce wine or silk, and some couldn’t fish or didn’t have the proper ground for planting. Then there were some that couldn’t make its own armor and weapons for the knights. To them, trading was something to be happy about.
The problem with their social hierarchy is that either the traders are getting a lot or not enough. European traders were generally wealthy, while the ones in Japan were not. Because Japan was isolated, it found a way to support itself, and really only valued such things as new weapons, armor, and metals from other countries. Plus, because of their low value of traders, they were not influenced as easily as other countries, and news from other countries was rather limited. It is no surprise that they still remain with their old religion, Shinto, all these years.
Europe and Japan were so similar yet so far apart, so therefore creating a social hierarchy and using feudalism to govern is something that humans do naturally. Japan could not have gotten the idea of feudalism straight from Europe, or vice versa. And even if the basis of their social structure was different, humans tend to adopt and adapt to new ideas brought from other places.
