Categories
Articles

From the Megalithic to Feudalism

From the Megalithic to Feudalism

Written by Alfonso Elizondo

 

Perhaps the only major difference between the evolution of carnivorous animals and homo sapiens was that humans had a language that allowed them to create narratives. And narratives were what established a different evolutionary process in animals and humans, especially in the Neolithic period, when humans created the concept of landownership about 9000 years before Christ, for the purpose of feeding the animals that they originally hunted in groups. In the meantime, the species of carnivorous animals continued with the domination of the strongest, leading to a period of much more rapid extinction of the animal species than of humans.

 

This process of transition from Megalithic man to the first monarchies took place during the High Middle Ages, when the great monarchs who ruled in Europe decided to turn to the feudal lords and the monastic clergy to control the middle and lower classes. This entire process took place between the 8th and 13th centuries, after the decline of the empire of Charlemagne and the beginning of a new form of coexistence among the inhabitants of the West, where for the first time, military technologies came into play that were able to cause problems for the cavalry. An important bourgeois class emerged, involving people without work and some primitive forms of international trade.

 

Within this complex and new form of social coexistence emerged the convent and monastic monks who would control the lower social classes and the lackeys, as well as the medieval knights who were trained to serve as the monarch’s military, in the context of a society without the slightest interest in the needy, the sick, and even less in the lackeys,  a society which nevertheless presented itself as a Catholic, apostolic Roman society.

 

The great monarchs bought armies of mercenaries to defend them, while they settled with their families into the main tower of their Castles with walls as thick as nine meters. This led to a growing distance between the monarchs and their subjects, which was increased by the use of so called “Christian” punishments, involving a heavy dose of torture, especially after the Church took control of the legal powers of the State.

 

Perhaps the most serious event at the level of ‘crimes against humanity’ was the launching of the Crusades, which allegedly sought to rescue the symbols of Christianity that had remained in Jerusalem and in some other small states in the Middle East. However, the whole web of lies and myths created by the new monarchy after the Roman Empire have made up excuses and lies to sustain an empire of blood and torture to this day.

 

Another sinister element that has survived the integration of the New Empire of the West was the creation of the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition which was undoubtedly the clearest expression that behind the New Western Monarchy, vengeance, violence and torture were, and still are, the main foundations of the strength of the powerful throughout history, even though there are international organizations of a political or religious nature that insist on preserving this evil vision of the world.

 

As I do not know about the evolution of political power in the East, I could not confirm that their way of seeing the moral conscience of humans is different. The only thing I notice is that there is greater respect for those with low incomes and somehow they find a way to give them basic education and jobs in order to allow them to live with dignity.

 

Addendum: There is no doubt that this historical analysis of the evolution of humans versus carnivorous animals during the Neolithic era can be interpreted in very different ways by experts from Universities all over the Western world, but what cannot be questioned is the imminent decline of the animal species and the tendency of the new elite of the powerful to continue controling the world without the slightest concern for the lower classes. In fact, the transnational agencies that allocate aid quotas from rich countries to the poor believe that they are giving too much. According to the UN, in this year (2017), the Organization for Cooperation and Development (OECD) has given more aid to poor countries than in previous years.