History of Human SocietyBlackmar, Frank W. (Frank Wilson)
History
History of Human Society
Blackmar, Frank W. (Frank Wilson)
Civilization; Progress; Sociology
While there was a relation of common interest between the {301}
villagers clustered around the feudal castle, the union was not
sufficient to make a compact organization. Their rights were not
common, as there was a recognized superiority on one hand and a
recognized inferiority on the other. This grew into a common hatred of
the lower classes for the upper, which has been a thousand times
detrimental to human progress. The little group of people had their
own church, their own society. Those who had a fellow-feeling for them
had much influence directly, but not in bridging over the chasm between
them and the feudal lord. Feudalism gave every man a place, but
developed the inequalities of humanity to such an extent that it could
not be lasting as a system. Society became irregular, in which extreme
aristocracy was divorced from extreme democracy. Relief came slowly,
through the development of monarchy and the citizenship of the modern
state. It was a rude attempt to find the secret of social
organization. The spirit of revolt of the oppressed lived on
suppressed by a galling tyranny.
To maintain his position as proprietor of the soil and ruler over a
class of people treated as serfs required careful diplomacy on the part
of the lord, or else intolerant despotism. He usually chose the
latter, and sought to secure his power by force of arms. He cared
little for the wants or needs of his people. He did not associate with
them on terms of equality, and only came in contact with them as a
master meets a servant. Consulting his own selfish interest, he made
his rule despotic, and all opposition was suppressed with a high hand.
The only check upon this despotism was the warlike attitude of other
similar despotic lords, who always sought to advance their own
interests by the force of arms. Feudalism in form of government was
the antithesis of imperialism, yet in effect something the same. It
substituted a horde of petty despots for one and it developed a petty
local tyranny in the place of a general despotism.
_Lack of Central Authority in Feudal Society_.--So many feudal lords,
each master of his own domain, contending with one {302} another for
the mastery, each resting his course on the hereditary gift of his
ancestors, or, more probably, on his force of armed men and the
strength of his castle, made it impossible that there should be any
recognized authority in government, or any legal determination of the
rights of the ruler and his subjects. Feudal law was the law of force;
feudal justice the right of might. Among all of these feudal lords
there was not one to force by will all others into submission, and thus
create a central authority. There was no permanent legislative body,
no permanent judicial machinery, no standing army, no uniform and
regular system of taxation. There could be no guaranty to permanent
political power under such circumstances.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account