Medieval Western, Byzantine, and Islamic Society Compared

Introduction: Shared Origins Across Three Civilizations

It is the habit of history to study several cultures as if they developed independently of one another and are entirely different from each other. The results of national and regional pride are evident in the manner in which history is retold: as each civilization builds the future of its own region and develops its own regional differences and standards, each is often studied as if it evolved in a vacuum. Within the primary sources of the foundational societies that encompass the history of today's world there are many differences to be found; yet there is also a clear indication that Early Medieval Western Society, Byzantine Society, and Islamic Society all developed within the context of Ancient Roman civilization, with all the resulting effects. Additionally, all three developed feudal and manorial institutions in response to internal and external pressures of encroachment. In short, all these societies were seeking a greater power than the individual—through faith, societal order, and protective means.

Within the primary sources of the region—Procopius's Secret History, Sebeos's Armenian History, Muhammad's Quran, Al-Tabari's History, Bede's A History of the English Church and People, the Lombard Laws (Rothair's Edict), Einhard's The Life of Charlemagne, Monastic Clamors, Curses and Excommunications, and The Wanderer: Anglo-Saxon Poetry—there is extensive evidence about the structure and character of these many peoples as reflected by the influence of early Roman culture. Each culture developed fortified cities and attempted to build strong armies to both defend and recapture lost land. Additionally, each culture followed, in some ways, the character of the early Romans as they began to challenge regional religions and embrace one universal faith, whether Christian or Islamic. As mentioned above, the development of feudal and manorial society in each case closely mirrored such development in early Roman culture.

Feudal and Manorial Institutions in the Primary Sources

The emergence of a feudal or manorial system is demonstrated in nearly all of the primary sources from this period. Examples of the redistribution of lands in the name of the greatest power—the Emperor—are present in Procopius's Secret History. Though Procopius did not agree with these tactics, the redistribution of wealth and property is clearly evident in Justinian's actions as Emperor:

"He gathered to himself the private estates of Roman citizens from all over the Empire: some by accusing their possessions of crimes of which they were innocent, others by juggling their owners' words into the semblance of a gift to him of their property. And many, caught in the act of murder and other crimes, turned their possessions over to him and thus escaped the penalty for their sins." (Procopius 322)

The importance of feudal associations is clearly visible in the Edict of Rothair as well:

"Any soldier who refuses to aid his Duke when that one is pursuing justice, shall pay twenty solidi as compensation to the king and to the duke." (Rothair's Edict 342)

This feudal standard is also evident in The Wanderer, which dramatizes the ideal as one man quests for a lord to follow and protect him: "He who is alone often lives to find favor, mildness of the Lord, even though he has long had to stir with his arms the frost-cold sea, troubled in heart over the water-way, had to tread the tracks of exile. Fully-fixed in his fate." (352) The man who is unconnected to a higher power—in this case a secular ruler—is lost to himself and the world, condemned to exile. The poem reinforces how deeply the feudal bond was embedded in the social imagination of the period.

Faith as a Unifying Political and Social Force

Without question, there is abundant evidence that many, if not all, of the cultures represented in these sources demonstrate the development of belief in a higher power as a means of salvation. In an increasingly violent and precarious world, many sought salvation in the afterlife as defined by the faith they chose to embrace. Within the power structure there was a clear expectation that those who followed a given liege must also follow his faith. This is seen clearly in the history of the Armenians, in the case of Christianity and in the early emergence of Islam:

"At that time a certain man from among those same sons of Ismael whose name was Mahmet, a merchant, as if by God's command appeared to them as a preacher [and] the path of truth. He taught them to recognize the God of Abraham, especially because he had learned and informed in the history of Moses. Now because the command was from on high, at a single order they all came together in unity of religion." (Sebeos 324)

The same dynamic is clearly developed through the words of Muhammad in the Quran, as it pertains to Islamic faith:

"Those who refuse to believe only follow what is false; but those who believe follow the truth of the Lord. That is how God gives men precepts of wisdom. So, when you clash with the unbelievers, smite their necks until you overpower them, then hold them in bondage. Then either free them graciously or after taking a ransom, until war shall have come to an end. If God had pleased He could have punished them (Himself), but He wills to test some of you through some others." (Muhammad 331)

The followers and fighters of the faith were simultaneously the followers of their leaders and of the God for whom those leaders professed love and protection: "When al-Faruq saw that the time [was right] for the conquest of Artabun's land, he brought forward God's soldiers to attack him." (Al-Tabari 338) The messages of God were heeded—both in actuality, to an undeterminable degree, and clearly in the posthumous record. Umar was acting on the word of a prophet, trusting not his own instinct but the message of the faithful:

"While Umar was camping in al-Jabiyah, the Muslims seized their weapons in alarm. Umar asked: 'What is it?,' and they replied: 'Do you not see the horsemen and the swords?' Umar looked and saw a detachment of horsemen brandishing their swords. He said: 'They are seeking an assurance of safety. Do not be afraid, but grant it to them.' They granted them an assurance of safety and [it became clear that] these were the people from Jerusalem." (Al-Tabari 334–335)

The cultures most profoundly changed underwent sweeping transformations in search of protection from the violent world around them. Like the Romans before them, they dismantled iconoclastic worship—destroying temples and icons that had upheld their cultures for centuries. The account from Bede is particularly striking:

"I have long realized that there is nothing in our way of worship: for the more diligently I sought after truth in our religion, the less I found. I now publicly confess that this teaching clearly reveals truths that will afford us the blessings of life, salvation, and eternal happiness. Therefore, Your Majesty, I submit that the temples and altars that we have dedicated to no advantage be immediately desecrated and burned." In short, the king granted blessed Paulinus full permission to preach, renounced idolatry, and professed his acceptance of the Faith of Christ. (Bede 339)

Bede's account demonstrates the thoroughgoing manner in which some leaders completely eradicated old standards of faith and worship in order to secure the spiritual protection of a higher power. Finally, the Monastic Clamors, Curses and Excommunications offers a last demonstration of just how powerful a motive belief was, and how important it was to embrace the promise of the afterlife when earthly life offered so little. This text clearly establishes the practice of seeking protection from God and repenting the inevitable sins of humanity, along with the afflictions that resulted from them (350–351).

Conclusion: Common Responses to a Post-Roman World

In a world of terror and lacking justice, all these cultures responded with sweeping changes of faith and allegiance, very much like their historical forefathers, the ancient Romans. Whether through the construction of feudal bonds, the building of fortified cities, the payment of tribute to hold back barbarian incursions, or the wholesale adoption of a universal faith, Early Medieval Western Society, Byzantine Society, and Islamic Society each followed structural paths already traced by Rome. The primary sources examined here make clear that, beneath the surface of their regional and religious differences, these civilizations shared a common inheritance and a common set of responses to the pressures of a violent, unstable world.