In the Hindu caste, there was a whole varna dedicated to trade and merchants called the Vaishya. India was a hot-bed for trade and commerce. The Indian Ocean with its powerful monsoon waves gifted India a prim trade location. It is only natural that the caste system would adopt this trade and mold it into its being. India built large cosmopolitan cities where jewels and spices and dyes and livestock were sold by the Vaishya and bought by the upper-class Brahman and Kshatriya. And with the Shudra plowing and harvesting the fields, there was much food and wealth. The caste system, with its inherent division of labor, led to a very connected economy. European feudalism, while also possessing class divisions, generally lacked a trading class early on. Serfs were not allowed to leave the manor on which they worked, and because manors were extremely self-sufficient, trade was not considered a necessity. Europe’s economy was primarily agricultural. The serfs did all the farming, and the upper echelons of society (knights, nobles, kings), benefited. People worked to support the upper class. In Bantu culture, agriculture was also the base of economic activities, along with hunting and gathering. Because the Bantu people spread themselves out so vastly, they never really engaged in much trade until Islam entered Africa. And because the social structure of the Bantu …show more content…
Both medieval Europe and the Hindu caste had strict social classes, contrasting with the kinship communities of the Bantu. All three had agricultures, but they differed on trade and how religion fit in with class. Society structures are an essential part of any civilization—in order to understand civilization, with its governments and rituals and money, one must understand social