France And Japan Feudal Society

Despite both countries fitting the characterization of a feudal society to a great extent, France and Japan were differentiated by variations in political structure and traits. Their origins were naturally dissimilar, as were the moral and religious codes which drove the politics of the two countries.

Japan, as an island nation, was largely isolated from the rest of the world. Its feudal structure was an organic development, unsullied by political connections and fears of its neighbors. Japan wasn’t threatened by outside invasion, so immediate protection was less a concern than in France; thus, the transition into feudal structure was slower, as the main sources of turmoil were disputes over local land rights. In France, however, there was
There was a widespread belief in not only hereditary claims to power, but that those who held power should be deserving of it. The Kemmu Shikimoku (Kemmu Code) of 1336 stated that “In selecting shugo (protectors) for different provinces, men with special talents for administration matters shall be chosen.” It was crucial that men in public offices be carefully selected. This demonstrated a divergence from the French feudal norm of continued dissociation from central power, as the shogunate maintained control over many political matters, and did its best to serve the people whom it controlled. The kings of France were often preoccupied with personal and selfish matters; they had little control over their people at this time, in any case. The Tokugawa shogunate (1603-1868) was established by Tokugawa Ieyasu, who officially divided society into four main classes. Japan’s goals of escaping feudal chaos were finally achieved in 1868, with the Meiji Restoration. The Charter Oath of the Meiji Restoration stated that the aim was to establish a national government and frame a constitution and laws. The first condition of the charter oath was that there be democratic discussion and assemblies widely established throughout
In France, as Montesquieu said, “One cannot separate the dignity of the monarch from that of the kingdom; one can scarcely separate the dignity of the noble from that of his fief.” This sentiment was echoed in Japan, as the local samurai were more likely to defend its own lands than an army of professional troops would be, but shīdo, commonly known as the way of the samurai, demanded a higher level of honor. Yamaga Sokō, who wrote The Way of the Samurai, maintained that the samurai’s duty was to “uphold the proper moral principles in the land.” Although the warriors were not laborers or merchants, they had a function in society that exceeded being a mere bodyguard for the nobility, as the vassals in France were. The powerful in Japan were expected to use their standing for the betterment of society, to “bear in mind the the security of the sovereign, and… strive to dispel the anxieties of the people.” The pride and virtue that Japan found in a good government was not easily found in France, where in the chaos of warfare and political turbulence, it was every man for