Serf owners in Tibet were composed of local officials, aristocrats and high-level monks. Great is the power of the nobles and squires over their tenants, who are either farmers tilling the more fertile plains and valleys, or shepherds, clad in their sheepskins, roaming over the mountains." You see a nation still in the feudal age. Tanzen Lhundup: British diplomat Sir Charles Bell, who was regarded as "an expert on Tibet", wrote in his book "Portrait of a Dalai Lama: The Life and Times of the Great Thirteenth": "When you come from Europe or America to Tibet, you are carried back several hundred years. Zhang Yun: Before the democratic reform in 1959, Tibet was a society of feudal serfdom under the integration of religion and politics and the dictatorship of monks and aristocrats, one even darker and more backward than medieval Europe. In terms of history, what kind of system was the Tibetan serf system? Reporter: Jiang Yu's words revealed that the nature of the Dalai Lama's "middle way" is to restore serfdom. Jiang also said: "The 'middle way' approach that the Dalai Lama is pursuing is aimed at restoring his own 'paradise in the past', which will throw millions of liberated serfs back into a dark cage. Only serf owners could enjoy special privileges under such a system." Such a serf system, which harbors no democracy, freedom or human rights in any form, was the darkest slavery system in human history. The Tibetan feudal serfdom under theocracy was a combined dictatorship of monks and aristocratsĬhinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Jiang Yu said (at a press conference on April 8): "The Dalai Lama is the head representative of the serf system, which integrated religion with politics in old Tibet. Yuan Xiang and Xing Yuhao with the Guangming Daily The reporters who conducted the interviews: Meng Guanglin, professor and course convenor of world history of the Middle Ages at the School of History of Renmin University of China. Tanzen Lhundup, research professor and deputy-director of the Institute of Social Economy of the CTRC. Zhang Yun, research professor of the Institute of History of the China Tibetology Research Center (CTRC). The three experts who gave interviews were: For example, the peasants were forced to pay fees for use of the manor’s mill, bakery and wine-press along with other related charges, such as: the right to hunt or allow livestock to feed on the manor’s lands.BEIJING, April 17 (Xinhua) - The Guangming Daily on April 15 published an article based on interviews with three Chinese scholars concerning the Tibetan system of feudal serfdom under theocracy and Western European serfdom in the Middle Ages.įollowing is the full text of the article: The feudal lord of the manor made wealth by collecting taxes and fees from the peasants on his feudal land. For instance, the feudal lord of the manor was responsible for providing wealth and assistance to higher lords or the monarchy, while peasants (or serfs) were responsible for working on the land of the feudal lord. The purpose of the Manor System was to organize society and to create agricultural goods. The land was for the use of the lord of the manor with surrounding homes in the farmland and villages that contained spaces for serfs (villein) who were tenants to the lord of the manor. In general, Manorialism was a system of landholding common in Medieval Europe in which a feudal lord lived in and operated a country home (manor) with attached farm land, woodlands and villages.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |