Feudalism vs Empire

>>3301249
>Why did feudalism work best in Europe after Rome fell
Well exactly because of that, because Rome fell. The collapse of the Roman state created chaos and a power vacuum that was quickly filled by literal bandits and warlords bullying others into obedience. Once their power structure became formalized, said warlords became the first aristocrats and noble landlords of feudal Europe, and this didn't change until the rise of the bourgeoise in 16th century.

>>3301249
>Why did feudalism work best in Europe
It didn't work best. It was literally forced by glorified bandits that ex-carolingian state servants were unable or unwilling to properly control.

>>3301289
>>3301266
Well, Europe and even the individual European countries were never able to go back to unified bureaucratic rule until the French Revolution, while China was.

>>3301249
Imperial beauracracy if poorly managed can lead to coreupt government offices.
Feudalism is basically corruption made into a government.

>>3301249
i hope you're not implying that Westeros has anything close to a feudal system

File: ScreenShot122.jpg (104KB, 704x459px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 704x459px

>>3302592
of course it is based on the feudal system

The King - Iron Throne
The Crownvasalls - The Houses in OP's pic
The Undervasalls - lower families like Tarlys, Freys, Cleganes etc.

>>3303112
>
Literally nothing common with "feudalism" (which ironically didn't exist outside of North Italy)

>>3303112
It's a work of fiction that uses elements of a ruling system that resembles feudalism.

>>3303112
the Seven Kingdoms completely lacks a manorial system as far as we know. maybe the peasants are taxed/have to give up a portion of their crops, I assume but who knows, but they don't seem to be bound to the land or a manor. nor is there any distinction between peasants who are bound to the land and freedmen. those aren't the only things that differ (like the structure of the nobility, for starters), but lacking the literal foundation of the so-called feudal system is probably explanation enough.

like a lot of fantasy series, it resembles a European "feudal" society on the outside but lacks the internal mechanisms of one.

>>3304365
Actualy there are mentions where the peasents are yes locked to their lands in the ASOIAF lore. Tho many of them seen to just run away when the next armed comes to raid their village.
And one of the Tully lords actualy bring his serfs inside his walls for fear of enemy armys attacking his peasantry.
The lowest class just runs away when things get too ugly, but other then that, they dont leave their lands.

>>3304399
oh okay, it's been awhile since I've read the books. i'd still say that it's too underdeveloped/not well thought out to be a true manorial system, though.

i always assumed that the noble houses were the counts/barons/dukes and so forth of Westeros, and as far as I know the peasants weren't directly tied to their count but usually to a minor lord (or even bishop or knight, which is the case in one of the Dunk & Egg novellas I think) who owned their manor. but maybe there's enough noble houses in Westeros for them to roughly take their place.

i don't know if there's an actual answer to this, due to the highly contested definition of a "feudal system", but like I said, it always seemed underdeveloped to non-existent to me.

>>3301289
It worked better than the unsustainable imperial system.

File: Red-Cliff-let-the-battle-begin-CEMS360.jpg (240KB, 2362x1260px) Image search: [Google]

240KB, 2362x1260px

>>3301249
Feudalism in China didn't end before the Empire began. More of an overlap.

Following Qin Shi Huang's conquests, a lot of fiefdoms lost their feudal lords. In addition to which The First Emperor's centralization efforts removed further feudal lords from power, especially enemy feudal lords. These now empty fiefdoms transformed into imperial provinces to whom a civil governor is appointed who answers directly to the Emperor.

Some of the Feudal Lords wrested their territories back from the Qin after the death of Qin Shi Huang and during the rebellion that toppled his dynasty. Xiang Yu, the rebel leader, even created new fiefdoms to reward the people who fought in the rebellion to topple the Qin.

This was followed by the Chu-Han contention, in which the two greatest lords of that rebellion: Xiang Yu and his erstwhile sworn brother the ex-bandit Liu Bang, fought each other for dominion over China. Unfortunately for the feudal lords, Liu Bang won out, establishing the Han dynasty. Liu Bang pretty much agreed with Qin's centralization, but he thought a mix of centralized provinces and the surviving feudal lords would be best for the harmony of everyone in the Empire. Since both the Qin Dynasty and Chu-Han contention created plently lordless fiefdoms, those who didn't have feudal lords were directly controlled by he Empire. So appointed provincial governors shared the same level of standing as with the surviving nobility: the Dukes, the Marquises, and the Kings (a sub-rank beneath the Emperor).

Feudalism in China truly ended due to the Three Kingdoms Period and the Nanbeichao Period, where the Feudal Nobility pretty much mauled each other or got mauled in the great civil wars of the 2 periods. By the Sui and T'ang Dynasty, the meme Chinese Scholar-Bureaucrat Class started to emerge and full centralization truly began.