4 ms·
Because before recently, the world was divided up into "royalty" and "people who mostly didn't matter." Maybe add a caste for soldiers or for farmers or for mer
by ktRolster 11y ago
Because before recently, the world was divided up into "royalty" and "people who mostly didn't matter." Maybe add a caste for soldiers or for farmers or for merchants, depending on how enlightened the society was.
- clock_tower 11y agoThe article's about statistical averages, and their implications for the modern social sciences, not about historical classes and castes. Indo-European society probably had three castes: medicine men (responsible for law and justice, good relations with the gods, and magic; "wizard-priests" would also work as a description of their role, but feels too flattering for such an early, primitive society); warriors; and commoners. India split commoners into two classes (artisans etc., and laborers); Europe and Persia grouped skilled and unskilled commoners together. Europe and India both saw intense competition between the two top estates -- roughly speaking, magi and knights -- to determine who would rule society; in Persia, the magi more or less won without a fight (and sacralized the knights), thanks to Zoroaster. In short, it wasn't nearly as simple as royal versus non-royal, at least not in the Indo-European world -- and the high-ranking estates had obligations as well as privileges.