The Daily Davis

Digging through my archives a bit. This paper was done for a History class last year. Got a great grade on it, and was asked to revise it for an Honors conference, but never got around to it. It is a bit dry to read through, but I thought it would be good to share regardless. Probably a lot of minor punctuation and grammatical errors, as my work always seems to have a lot of them. This is probably the paper that got me interested in the honors program, as the instructor is the head of the Honors society for the campus.

Ultimately, I love the subject, as history rocks, but I feel as though my execution is lacking. I hope maybe, one day, to make this much more interesting to read. To those of you brave to slog through it now, however, I give you my thanks. The essay here is presented as a direct paste of my Open Office Document, which I believe was the Final Draft. It is presented without annotations.

Samurai, Knights and Feudalism

The similarities between the Japanese samurai and the medieval knight are many, and despite key differences in philosophies, combat and other various areas, they operated around the same historical period, and to the same ends. The reason for this similar development is based on a form of governing known as feudalism. The unique pressures of feudalism on the class structure and management of these medieval societies allowed for the formations of these specialized warrior-classes.

What was the reason for the development of such similar warriors in such differing lands? The common thread is the niche formed by the feudal governing system. It is unfortunate, but understandable that the most common definition for feudalism displays a tendency to define it as being a fully European development, while instances in other cultures are delegated as being “similar”. Feudalism is a concept that is most often associated with medieval Europe, however it is not exclusive to it. While this is a situation that is oft-repeated in history, the element that makes feudalism so key is that the factions are of the same region and culture, struggling to gain control in a power vacuum. This distinction separates feudalism from typical warfare amongst cultures. It is an issue of an internal struggle, rather than external. Within this struggle, there are of course the various strata of social classes, and particularly high in these strata are the warriors who were employed to fight and keep the peace in these feudal societies. Two major societies associated with feudalism were medieval Japan and medieval Europe. These featured the warrior-classes of samurai and knights, respectively.

Philosophies were considered core to both the order of knights and the order of samurai. These philosophies are well known to many in todays population, though mostly as an abstract concept, or by name alone. Bushido was the code of the samurai order, while knights followed a code known as chivalry. One important note is that referring to these philosophies as codes is a much easier method that defining them as closely related ideas on life, combat, honor, and courtly love, as these were not so much compiled into a single definitive source, but rather these ideas essentially fell under the broad terms of chivalry and bushido. As there are no writings from the past that serve as a “checklist” for bushido or chivalry, historians have been forced to piece together different sources in an attempt to develop the basic concepts. It is striking just how similar these concepts were to one another, and beyond this, how influential these ideas were to their respective cultures. What exactly are the tenets of bushido and chivalry though?

Bushido translated to “the way of the warrior” and primarily focused on honor, and while the same can be said about chivalry, bushido was particularly devout in its pursuit and maintaining of honor. Much honor, according to bushido, can be derived from combat. Samurai served under a lord, often a shogun. The shogun owned land and employed samurai to serve and protect, which the samurai did in exchange for payment and land of their own. This exchange of land for services (often known as a fiefdom) is key to feudal societies and is clearly shown in Europe around this period (Foss 83). Samurai would then swear loyalty to their shogun and their honor depended on their service to their lord. Samurai who failed to serve their lord (often meaning the death of the shogun they were in service to) became ronin- master less samurai, and endured a lower social status. This was the direct result to a loss of honor. Indeed it was better for a samurai to die at his own hands through sepukku, a form of ritualistic suicide rather than to be dishonored by being defeated by his opponents. Other aspects commonly associated with bushido in samurai life include frugality and loyalty. Confucian scholar Muro Kyuso wrote this on samurai attitude:

The disciplined and rightful attitude of the samurai should include the following: not to speak falsehood; not to work for selfish gain; to keep the mind straightforward and honest; simplicity in external appearance; to maintain a disciplined and courteous bearing, neither flattering one’s superiors nor being arrogant toward one’s juniors; to keep promises unfailingly; and not to ignore another in hardship. . . . (Ikegami)

Samurai were obligated to be humble and serve others with respect and humility. Much of this is echoed in the west concerning knights.

The term chivalry originated in France from the French word for knight- chevalier. The concept however seemed to collect from various European cultures. Much of the life of a knight has a focus on combat and warfare. Loyalty was incredibly important as well as a knight was expected to display intense loyalty to his lord. Knightly behavior often concerned the treatment and defense of others and certain traditions concerning “courtly love”. Many of these aspects of courtly love and relationships with women are echoed by their Japanese counterparts. The knight’s expressed purpose was essentially the act of defending the weak, often serving under a lord who would coordinate these defensive activities. Of course, the role of the samurai was similar as well, as they were obligated to defend the homeland, and also served under a lord. It is argued that in the early ages of the samurai order that this idea of defense of the citizenry was not explicitly implied, and that it was often based on the discretion of the warrior and their benefactor (Friday 156). This exercise in eliminating even non-combatants had its merits however, as there was great care to avoid a possible uprising when a new power came into control. It is not unreasonable to associate activities such as these within the European knightly orders as well. Chivalry and bushido also dealt with battle conduct in particular, as medieval battles were highly structured with definite rules of engagement, often using declarations of intent and the setting of times to determine when and how battles would occur. However, these guidelines were not always honored as the romantic ideas of samurai and knights lead the public to believe.

Romanticism clearly influences modern perceptions of these warriors, however these clichés are not entirely accurate. While it is true that both had their own form of rules of conduct, it was not uncommon to have abuses of power. Samurai were not always noble, nor were knights. In fact, in many cases, these warriors were no more than thugs, hitmen, and thieves: often times abusing peasants and citizens under the command of their employer. Treachery, deceit and manipulation has always existed throughout history, and it is natural to expect those behaviors from warrior classes. “Early medieval warriors were [...] highly in tune to seizing, to exploiting and, especially, to creating favorable opportunities” (Friday 130). Particularly, due to the competitive and dangerous nature of a feudalistic society, these tactics were likely very valid in the acquisition of power, if never exclusively stated as being so. Furthermore, a sense of restlessness may have contributed to corruption, as warriors truly only know how to battle (Phillips 1). During treaties and peace time between factions, it is reasonable to see warriors become restless and desire an outlet for their abilities outside of a kind of law keeping role. It is likely though that these abuses represented a minority and that these also represented the early stages of these groups, as codes and guidelines became more important to their roles in society, so to would chances of corruption and unregulated violence and abuse. There is also the issue of the collateral damage. As these feudal warriors often had single-minded pursuits, third parties would run the risk of suffering or being slain if caught between opposing forces.

Culture was very important to both samurai and knights. Tapping into the social-aspect of these social-military classes, we see remarkably similar enthusiasm for the arts, such as painting, poetry, story, and song. Furthermore, these moral codes play significant roles in these visual and social arts. Much poetry, visual artwork and lore exists concerning the exploits of these heroic figures. While many of these exploits were exaggerations and highly imaginative, they helped to shape the romantic concepts of samurai and knights. Dramatic performance in Japan and writings and art from both cultures served as a form of record as to what the roles of these feudal warriors were. A common theme amongst warriors from east and west were their use of symbols. Crests and banners served to signify each knight and samurai. These were like advertisements or family heirlooms. In the case of knights, shields and banners would be associated with a family crest that would reflect the long history of chivalrous culture in the family. Samurai banners served to appeal to opponents and match up combatants of different rankings of sorts, as more prestigious opponents could be differentiated by their banners. The process of nanori -name calling, included the use of these banners as well as formal declarations of their worth as samurai (Friday 145). Art, writing, and theater served as publicity of sorts for these warriors, often hoping to use these to raise their own merits. These cultural developments also served to help define what knights and samurai considered their roles to be in their societies, and interestingly the same way, they arrived at the same conclusions.

While correlations between bushido and chivalry are astounding, it is important to note there were also some profound cultural differences. While these differences are important and give these differing cultures their own unique flair, they do not work against the concept of feudalism influencing the formations of these similar warrior codes. Religion had profound influence on bushido and chivalry. The primary religion of the European knight was Christianity, while samurai beliefs were more based around Buddhism and Zen. Samurai also looked to Shinto and Confucianism, much of which likely helped establish bushido. One of the primary differences between samurai and knights concerned the emphasis on religion. Religious ideals had a much more direct impact on knights in Europe, who not only acted as private soldiers, but around the time of the Crusades shifted focus to taking up sword for religious reasons (James). Religion and its impact was heavily differentiated in Japan and in Europe, religion became a motivating force for knightly deeds in Europe while in Japan, divine aspects influenced battles and actions but did not motivate samurai action. In Europe, knights shifted their attention from performing deeds for the dominant landowners to performing religious quests. The focus on knighthood eventually shifted from serving their lord, and serving the church. In the case of the samurai, battle victories and failings were often associated with the divine wills of the gods (Turnbull 60). Suicide was considered honorable to the samurai and it was better to control one’s destiny rather than to let the opponent control ones entrance to the afterlife. Due to Christianity’s influence however, knights were discouraged from committing suicide, however were encouraged that giving their life for the good of the homeland and for god was honorable. Many knights were influenced due to this to try and die in battle rather than of natural causes or old age. As they were in warfare constantly, they were presented with many opportunities to do this.

Eventually the feudalistic form of government began to disappear as powers began to become consolidated under a central government and the power vacuum decreased. Knights and samurai were forced to adapt, but ultimately could not. The Samurai order began a steady decline with the industrialization of Japan. War was beginning to be fought differently and the majority of the country had been brought under a singular rule. With nothing to do in their homeland, combined with Japanese isolationism (as there was no need to send Samurai to war) brought about an end to the Samurai order during the time of the Meiji Restoration (Yamanaka). Some integrated into the new industrial Japan, taking up jobs as farmers or other lower duties, while many others embraced city culture and eventually became impoverished. Compared to their European counterparts, samurai existed in an active form clear into the middle 1800s, but in a form that had severely less power then was held at the order’s height. For the European knight however, the closing of the dark ages brought about the decline for a need for knights roughly around the 16^th century. As this period of civil war died down due to the consolidation of power under a central governing body, knights has little presence and influence in Europe at this time, as many had migrated to the middle east to engage in holy war. With the end of the crusades and the beginning of the Enlightenment, knights were all but gone. It seems as though the samurai outlasted their European cousins by nearly three hundred years. Though, the samurai lost so much of their power it can be argued that the class had vanished long before 19^th century.

Knighthood currently exists in the form of an honor system for citizens in different countries, however these titles bestow no real form of power and do not obligate carriers to engage in battles. During World War 2, the Japanese military looked to the samurai order for military guidance and techniques, gaining much influence from the concept of bushido when it came to the engagement of warfare. At this time there was even a resurgence in use of the katana, one of the traditional blades wielded by samurai throughout history. Because of the rise of centralized powers and the disappearance of feudal societies, classes similar to samurai and knights are not currently seen. It is likely that if feudalistic societies were to come into existence again, the resulting class system would again create a form of code-bound warrior to serve in the interest in feudal lords. These warriors, due to the strains feudal society places on the classes, would likely follow the similar path of the samurai and the knight.

Feudalism represents a form of constant warfare and tensions that create many warriors; as the warrior class grows more important, influential and larger, traditions and techniques are developed within that culture. In the case of the samurai and the knight, the adoption of moral guidelines called bushido and chivalry reflected the growing culture of these warrior classes. Bushido and chivalry served to help these warriors define their role in society and how to perform that role. As these were classes geared for constant warfare, their existence thrived on the unique circumstances that feudalism offered. When feudalism was no longer a part of their environment, these classes began their decline. Perhaps the most lasting effect of these classes on their respective cultures is the romantic aspect, most clearly seen in their concepts of bushido and chivalry in popular culture and history.

Works Cited

Friday, Karl F.. Samurai, Warfare and the State in Early Medieval Japan. First Edition. New York: Routledge, 2004.

Foss, Michael. Chivalry. First Edition. Great Britain: Book Club Associates, 1976.

Ikegami, Eiko. “Shame and the Samurai: Institutions, Trusthworthiness, and Autonomy in the Elite Honor Culture.” Social Research 70.4 (2003): 1351- 1378. 3 Sep. 2008 <http://www.proquest.com>

James, Lee. “A Quest for Knighthood. ” Read 5 Jan. 2007: 14-15. 3 Sep. 2008 <http://www.proquest.com>

Phillips, Jonathan. “Who were the first crusaders? ” History Today 47.3 (1997): 16- 22. 3 Sep. 2008 <http://www.proquest.com>

Turnbull, Stephen. Samurai and the Sacred. First Edition. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2006.

Yamanaka, Christina. “Chapter 27: The New Power Balance”. In Class Lecture. History 104. MSJC. 28 Oct 2008.