Are Feudal Japan And Feudal Europe The Same?

“Are Feudal Japan and Feudal Europe the same?” Despite similarities in structure, Japanese Feudalism and European Feudalism are not the same, in fact, they aren't even close. Feudalism is a social system in which lords, typically kings or shoguns, lend their land to their vassals in exchange for the ability to command that vassal’s soldiers. This system allows for Feudal Lords to gain more military power in exchange for giving their vassals an extremely comfortable life of little to no worry. Even though both societies follow this system, they still harbor a battery of major differences that set them apart from each other. Japanese and European Feudalism are more different than similar because not only do all of their classes interact with

In European Feudalism, Lords interact with their vassals in an extremely contractual manner. The relationships between lords and vassals were entirely centered upon business, and this was the extent of a lord-vassal relationship. In Japan, things were very different. Lords and vassals had much more familiar relationships, with Lords acting in an almost paternal capacity. The feudal relationships that Japan produced were much more centered around respect and loyalty than Europe’s entirely contractual feudal relationships. This difference shows that in Europe, a lord’s vassals are often much less loyal than a Japanese lord’s vassals, because the nature of a European feudal relationship creates no benefit to being loyal after one has completed their service. In Japanese Feudalism, this loyalty is part of the relationship, causing vassals to be not only retained for longer periods of time, but also to be more likely to obey their respective lords. This is a major difference between both societies because Feudalism is characterized by its relationships between lords and their vassals, and these societies have a vast difference in those interactions. This shows how different both societies are, even at their core

In European Feudalism, there were multiple different monarchs who would stand atop of the social hierarchy. This caused a disparity between each of the lord's vassals, as with all of them being loyal to different men, they had no reason to make peace with each other. This caused private wars between each of the vassals’ soldiers, which is equally detrimental to the vassal who loses his soldiers and the lord who controls them. In Japan, there were two men who stood at the top of the social hierarchy, the Emperor and the shogun. The Emperor did not actually hold any power, he was more of a figurehead for the shogun, who actually held all of the power. Because of this system in which the shogun held complete power over his land, all of the vassals were either his, or his daimyos’. This disincentivized wars amongst the shogun’s vassals, and created more unity as all of the fiefs that were dispersed amongst the vassals were technically owned by the shogun. This not only shows another major difference between both societies, but it also illustrates how both societies' social structures are significantly different, to the point where it influences the unity of the entire