20240313_What I Learned and Thought About State Forms in Medieval Europe_World History of Game Changers_Introduction and Impressions 31

Introduction

Hello, I'm Kei.

Up until now, I have introduced content and ways of thinking that I felt were "encouraging" or "might be useful." This time, I will also introduce a way of thinking that I felt "might be useful" for living a good life.

Reference Book

The book I referred to this time is
"World History of Game Changers" by Masafumi Jinno
.

Content and Impressions

In the previous article, I wrote about what I felt after reading up to the part about "Game changing from the 'Middle Ages' to the 'Early Modern Period'!"

In this article, I will write about what I felt after reading up to the part about "State systems without sovereignty."

Content

The form of a sovereign state (a country with power that is not subject to any external pressure), which is taken for granted today, is merely a "new form of state" that was born 500 years ago in human history. In the state system of medieval Europe (feudalism), the king was essentially no different from the feudal lords and did not have unified, effective control over the country. Even a king could not interfere with the fiefs within the lords' territories. Furthermore, it was not uncommon for lords to serve two masters (to have dual allegiance).

Impressions

This was a good opportunity to learn about the forms of countries. It was a learning experience to realize that the form of a sovereign state, which is taken for granted today, is a "new form of state" from a historical perspective. It is impossible to imagine this when the values and ways of thinking of that era are taken for granted, but I think it is possible to recognize that the current form of state will not necessarily continue forever. I believe that if one is trapped by the common sense of an era or region, one's ideas and thinking will become biased. To acquire free and flexible thinking, I thought it would be good to be conscious of reducing "common sense that one just happens to feel" as much as possible.
I was able to learn about feudalism, which was educational. The point that "the king was essentially no different from the feudal lords" was a learning experience. I felt it was unexpected because I had a strong image of kings from the era of absolute monarchy. I think it means that even for the same position, the "essential meaning differs" depending on the era. I thought I should look closely at the historical background and the situation at the time.
I found the point that "lords sometimes serve two masters" to be unexpected. I think this is a feat that is possible precisely because the difference in power between the king and the lords was not absolute. I felt that it was difficult for the king to handle, and that his "capacity as a king" was also being tested. I thought that the ability to live skillfully according to the situation at the time is a necessary skill for anyone.

Conclusion

By knowing that common sense also changes with the times, I think it is possible to live a life that is not trapped only by modern common sense. I thought it would be good to aim to be a person who can live their own way while being conscious of free and flexible thinking.
Let's live a fulfilling life by choosing our own way of living without being trapped only by modern common sense!

I hope this will be helpful to someone.

Below are my article list page and self-introduction page.
I would be happy if you could take a look if you are interested.

This is an introduction to X.
Please take a look if you would like.