Prior to the development and establishment of feudalism in medieval Europe and Japan from 600 to 1450 AD, both civilizations were fragmented. The collapse of the Roman Empire left Europe open to invaders from all fronts, and Japan had long been a land of clans. There was much in common between the two feudal systems, including their stabilizing effects and similar hierarchical structures. However, many aspects of the militaristic part of feudalism, especially knights and samurai, were in stark contrast to each other. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The Roman Empire had ruled Europe for hundreds of years before its collapse and served as a powerful and central government. He had a large and powerful army, which repelled the invaders. After the collapse, invaders such as the Huns and Goths took the opportunity to try to conquer lands that were divided among themselves, unsure of what to do. The implementation of the feudal system created a ruler, a monarch, who would rule over the citizens through a chain of command. Peasants would work on a manor, supporting those who own the manor, those who supported the monarch, and those who helped protect the manor. Japan, on the other hand, has a long history of independent clans. With the establishment of a feudal system, they had some form of central government. With a shogun overseeing the civilization, they could work together and focus on the advance as a whole instead of trying to conquer more lands. Although the structures of the Japanese and European feudal systems appear to be the same, there are some small but fundamental differences between them. At the top of the European system sat the monarch, which meant the king or queen. As for the Japanese system, on paper their monarch, the emperor, was also at the top. In reality the emperor was at the top only for show, as he was believed to have divine attributes. The real leader was the shogun, placed at the top by the samurai. Below the monarchs were the nobles, which was pretty much the same between both civilizations. Below them were the knights and the samurai, both of which I will discuss in the next paragraph. In Europe, below the knights were peasants, who worked on manors or did forced labor. Tradesmen were considered more important than the common worker. In Japan we see the exact opposite. In fact, the gap between the two was not as blurred as in Europe but it was very clear. The Japanese believed that workers were better than the merchant because while the worker spent grueling hours to produce a profit, the merchant simply took someone else's work and sold it. There is a lot to be said about the differences between knights and samurai in the Japanese world. feudal eras. Both served the same general purpose; to protect people from external threats. However, the ethics and morals of the two were very, very different from each other. In Europe, knights were just that: knights. Many times they were not literate or educated, but simply strong and adventurous. In Japan, samurai not only had strength, but also had to possess other skills to earn the title. It was common for a samurai to be literate and trained in the fine arts. Knights served their employers through contracts. If a contract with a lord expired, it was not unusual to see that knight being purchased by a rival who paid a higher price. They functioned just like mercenaries, working for the highest bidder. The samurai, on the other hand, felt an obligation to help those in power not because they were.