Ch 18: Some examples of pre-capitalist class society
download pdf here
Terry Leahy 2025
This chapter will look at some examples of class society. To show how the definition given in chapter 17 applies to particular cases. Even though these class societies are widely separated in time and space, they are remarkably similar in how they work. Class society is a random invention at all its points of origin, and this random historical creation manifests in the remarkable differences between class societies. At the same time, the fundamental mechanism of class societies works on a universal substrate of human nature. The same in all these cases. Along with an invention, agriculture, also recreated across the globe.
Ancient Egypt
In ancient Egypt, the monarchs or pharaohs are supposedly incarnations of the falcon god Horus. Not an entirely arbitrary fiction, as falcons are birds of prey and hover in the air, surveying the world below. Their divine role is not limited to incarnating the falcon god Horus. They are also supposed to be the sons of the sun god Ra. Literally the offspring of the cosmic body that makes all growth and life happen. The pyramids were constructed with this mythology in mind. After death, the spirit of the pharaoh rises from the tomb and ascends out of the top of the pyramid to join his father Ra in the sky.
The ceremonies that the pharaoh conducts with their priests supposedly secures the regular flooding of the Nile. They make offerings to the gods to ensure their largesse. In other words, the action of the pharaoh is essential for the irrigation agriculture that feeds the population. A paradigmatic example of the way the ruling class portrays itself as the bringer of gifts more than equivalent to the tribute they extract. These ceremonies are also supposed to protect crops from diseases and wild animals. Continuing a theme here.
This role has a more grounded manifestation. The pharaohs conduct hunting parties to kill hippopotamuses. These animals can be a menace to crops. They organize their armies to fend off attacks from other states and to expand the kingdom.
Overall, their role is painted as containing chaos. The chaos that might come with an invasion, a popular rebellion, the failure of the agricultural system. A striking metaphor conveys the role of the pharaoh in containing chaos. He is pictured with a ceremonial crook. The tool used by the shepherd to herd sheep. A long hook for grabbing the legs of the sheep. The population at large portrayed as a flock of sheep while their king is the only human person, herding the sheep. Later eating them! As with the falcon, a dark analogy of predation and surveillance.
How is this rule manifested in the countryside and how is the surplus extracted? The clan of the pharaoh appoints representatives at the village level. An aristocratic elite, the ruling class for which the pharaoh is the peak representative. The subordinate class, the peasants, produce the staple crops which are wheat and barley, grown with the use of irrigation agriculture. The Nile floods every year and inundates the fields with fertile alluvial soil. Elaborate irrigation channels and systems of buckets (shadouf) irrigate the crops while they are growing. The surplus is extracted in two forms. A tax paid in kind with wheat or barley. And a labour service. Like working to construct the pyramids or irrigation works. The surplus of grain extracted through taxes feeds the ruling class. Made up of the pharaoh and his family, the local aristocracy and the priests. The priests of the temples are the bureaucracy that organizes the tax systems and the irrigation.
A third key class are the soldiers who maintain the enforcement necessary to keep the system of taxation going. Along with protecting the ruling class from rival states. We can also consider artisans of various kinds as part of this middle class. These are the workers who are producing the weapons and the luxury goods. They are organising the building of the temples and pyramids that glorify the power of the ruling class. Doing the more detailed artistic work necessary to portray the grand life of the elites in friezes on the walls of their tombs. This middle class of soldiers and artisans is also fed from the surplus produced by the peasantry.
An inequality in the satisfaction of basic human needs is the effect of these class mechanisms. For example, the peasantry starves in famines when the Nile does not flood. The ruling class survive on stored supplies during these years of shortage. The life expectancy of workers on the pyramids is between 18 and 40 years while the members of the aristocratic elite generally live to between 50 and 75. The bones of the common workers show the effects of over work in arthritis and back degeneration. All in all, a vampire death cult!
Sparta
I will now turn to a completely different society. Ancient Sparta, one of the key Greek city states. Operating between about 600 BC and 300 BC.
We can think of Sparta as a three-class system that functions slightly differently to the typical three class pattern of class society described above.
The citizen or landlord class
The ruling class of Sparta are its landowners. The men of this class are ‘citizens.’ They take part in its political decisions, having the power to vote. Their state represents them through this process. The state owns the estates on which people who are the subordinate class produce the surplus product. It also owns these subordinates as ‘helots’, the third element of the class structure. The state allocates land and helots to the citizens. The citizens are required to become soldiers and to participate in civic duties – running the state. They are not allowed to trade or use money. Only the very top layer of the citizen class, the top aristocrats, avoid service in the army.
I have described the typical structure of class societies as including a middle class of soldiers, artisans and traders, with a separate ruling class above them. Here in Sparta the most important part of this soldier class are also members of the ruling class. The class that extracts a surplus agricultural product from the subordinate class. As though a part of the middle class has fused with the ruling class.
The periokoi or middle class
There is a middle class of non-citizens who trade and carry out most manufacturing and craft work. Other than the menial work done by the helot class. For example, making weapons and other artefacts of bronze and iron. Pottery, weaving and tailoring. They are the ones responsible for the trade in agricultural products that is a key aspect of Spartan wealth. For example, grains, wine, olives, livestock, timber. In addition, they also serve in the Spartan army, recruited as periokoi contingents to that army. They would serve as the typical middle class of any class society – the soldiers and artisans. Except for the quirk that the strongest part of the army is drawn from the ruling class.
The helots or subordinate class
Most of the helot population are slaves working on the land owned by Spartan citizens and their state. They produce agricultural commodities such as barley, wine, cheese and figs. They surrender up to a half of what they produce. Some of this goes directly to their owners and some is passed on to the state. They are not allowed to be bought or sold and are instead allocated roles by the state. In addition to their role in agriculture, helots are recruited as domestic workers, sex workers, wet nurses. Also, for menial industrial tasks. In the mines that extract ores later turned into weapons. Building roads, cleaning the toilets. It is estimated that there were seven helots for every Spartan. It appears that after they had looked to their own needs and contributed to the State, they could sell any extra surplus.
The mythical history
In the mythical or real history of Sparta, Doric invaders came from the north and conquered the regions of Laconia (in which the city of Sparta was founded) and Messenia (a neighbouring region). The ruling landlord class of these regions fled. The middle class of the towns in Laconia became the periokoi. The rural peasantry of Messenia became the helot class.
Class relationships
As indicated above, the main subordinate class were the helots who produced the agricultural surplus on which the whole system rested. This was extracted by their Spartan citizen owners. The Spartan citizens were fearful of a slave revolt. In fact, several revolts were attempted and put down. As an ongoing means of terror, random killings of slaves were a part of the initiation rites of Spartan citizens. In a coming-of-age ceremony, the State would declare war on the helots, giving the young men the right to go and kill a helot to demonstrate martial vigour. In one of these ‘wars’, four thousand helots were killed. From a population close to 40,000 in total. Staged humiliations of the slave class included plays mocking the helots as idiots, along with regular beatings.
The mythology that backed up this Spartan class system treated the ruling class as superior by virtue of their courage and martial prowess. They were also regarded as civilized, in comparison to the uncivilized barbarians of other neighbouring societies. There is no mythology of benefit to the subordinate classes animating this ideology. The Spartans pioneered the fascist ideology of might is right. The rule of the best, defined in practice as those who have won battles. The key role of the Spartan army in fending off the Persian state is well known. One vampire death cult facing down another.
It is unclear how the periokoi related economically to the other two classes. The written sources come from writers who were from outside Sparta and not particularly interested in these details. It seems that the periokoi paid taxes to the Spartan state. This might have been in money or in kind. In either case, the Spartan state clearly had access to manufactured goods produced by the periokoi. Including the helmets, swords, cuirasses and greaves that sustained their military power. In addition to the goods imported from other parts of the Mediterranean. The Spartan ethos was that a Spartan citizen spurned luxury and indulgence. The periokoi were not expected to show such restraint. One possibility is that the periokoi bought agricultural supplies from the helots and in return the helots bought necessary manufactured goods from the periokoi. Alternatively, the Spartan state may have sold food to the periokoi and provided the helots with necessary manufactured goods that they had bought or taxed from the periokoi.
As a system of unequal exchange, Sparta is somewhat unusual. The extraction of surplus products by the ruling class was achieved through their control of the agricultural surplus. At the same time, the citizens eschewed displays of luxury and wealth. In other words, it is hard to portray their extractions as motivated by ‘greed’ as we normally understand it. They certainly appropriated necessary manufactured goods and food. But these were the necessities needed for soldiers and for a ‘Spartan’ lifestyle. At the same time the exploitations of the Spartan citizen class included autonomy, sexual access and the status of the ruling class — at least in their own eyes. Complete control over all political decisions. Along with daily autonomy vis a vis the other two classes. We can see the system as set up to provide satisfactions related to toxic masculinity. An economy constructed to reassure the Spartan citizens that they were ‘men’ in relation to women, the helots, periokoi and foreign enemies.
The slaves produced the food on which the elite depended. A middle artisan class did the blacksmithing required to make the weapons they used. The citizens were released from the necessity to do agricultural work so they could spend time training as soldiers. A mechanism in which the slave class grows food and produces a surplus. They are kept in check by an army composed of a ruling class — feeding on the surplus they produce. A mechanism that pre-supposes a will to live and a need for food as key aspects of human nature. A mechanism that depends on the surplus of storable food produced by cereal agriculture. In addition, aggression as a capacity of human beings. Along with the competitive masculinity engendered by patriarchal socialisation.
The Incas
The parallel and independent creation of the American class societies and those of Eurasia is surely one of the most interesting riddles of history. As I will show in relation to the Incas, these American class societies were very much like the class societies of Eurasia. Even down to writing, cities and the use of money. Like other class societies, they depended on an agricultural surplus produced by the subordinate class. A surplus that could be accumulated, stored and distributed by the ruling class. The other aspect of this riddle is that these class societies arrived in history not too distant in time (several millennia later) from those in Eurasia. For 180,000 years, the human species had got along quite well with hunting and gathering. Then agriculture and not too long afterwards, class societies. Not that all agricultural societies developed class and the state. As we shall see in the next chapter.
It seems very unlikely, if not completely impossible, that the American class societies drew inspiration from what was going on in Eurasia. The coincidence in timing here remains a mystery. What we can say is that agriculture as an invention enabled class society to be invented. As well, that the class machine works with human nature and the nature of the earth to produce some typical outcomes. These accompany the extraction of an agricultural surplus. There is no other way to do class society once you have made that key move in arranging the social order.
The subordinate class in the Inca society farmed maize, cassava, quinoa, and potatoes as cereal crops. Along with companion crops such as squash, peanuts and beans. They also had llamas and alpacas, for carrying loads and for their wool. With guinea pigs to eat. The empire of the Incas was populated by 10 million people. It followed on from smaller states in the same region. The ruling aristocracy of the empire was only 40,000 people. They extracted a surplus product in the form of taxes in kind and labour service (mit’a). So, remarkably like the Egyptian state. Food, such as grains, meat, vegetables, fruits. Labour service in building roads, maintaining and constructing the irrigation terraces, mining for copper and precious metals.
In theory the Inca and his family own all the land in the empire. He allocates this land in parcels to aristocrats. Aristocrats live off the labour services and food produced by the subordinate class on their estates. Through this system the aristocratic ruling class has bureaucratic control over whole regions
There was no writing, so no written records to organize the extraction of the surplus and the provision of labour service. Instead, the bureaucracy used a system of records kept through knotting on cords. So, a symbolic system of accounting and counting, even if not in writing. How big was a family’s plot, what were their contributions, the calendar of seasons.
Again, not that different to the Egyptians. In other words, this kind of accounting and quantification is actually a necessary tool of any class society.
Now let’s look at the ideology. The ruling family are descended from the sun god. A remarkable parallel with Egypt. Human sacrifice is part of the rituals of the Inca empire. These rituals were designed to maintain the seasons. In other words, the ruling class presents itself as having an essential role in the agricultural system and its earthly requirements. Rituals with human sacrifice also celebrate victories and elite burials. Men of the aristocratic elite were commonly buried with two young women. At one funeral for an Inca, they killed and buried four thousand people.
Pictorially, in sculptures and paintings, the ruling elites were portrayed as pumas or birds of prey. Including vultures that feed on corpses. A common theme of class societies. Predators. Death from above. A panopticon of surveillance.
I have suggested that the army is generally a middle class of class societies. It rules over the peasant classes but is ruled in turn by the ruling class. In Inca society, this role is achieved through a system that selects one peasant in fifty from each village to do labour service by joining the army. The aristocracy leads the army. The most well-armed part of the army is the aristocratic elite, but the peasantry contributes through their numbers. For a total population of between six and ten million, the army was about 200,000 people. Within the armed forces a special royal guard of 10,000 were members of the aristocracy. The elaborate system of roads enabled deployment of the army to trouble spots. It allowed the extraction of the surplus and the siphoning of this surplus to urban centres.
As with other class societies, the surplus provided by the subordinate class provided the food necessary to maintain the army and the craft workers and builders. These conscripted workers constructed the monuments to ruling class power. Huge temples of stepped pyramids. Elaborate costumes for rituals. Lavish burials with weapons, luxury goods and slaves.
Typical of class societies, war is not just defensive but an element of the structure of the regime. At the death of the Inca, only one of the sons could become the next Inca. The siblings would inherit the taxes that were coming from the current Inca realm at this time. To provide for his own needs, his army and his bureaucracy, the new Inca would have to conquer new lands and people and expand the empire through that. At a first glance, a ridiculous and impossible system. But maybe a system built to ensure that no rival state got established on the border to challenge the Inca empire. Not that different in many respects to the constant expansion of the Roman empire out of Italy and beyond.
The Inca empire was founded on irrigation agriculture. Common for early states as we shall see in the next chapter. Tests done recently show that the Incas could get four times the yield of potatoes on their irrigated fields, compared to fields without that. These irrigated lands were surrounded by deserts. Once the class regime established itself it was difficult for the subordinate class to escape. The population gets to a size allowed by the irrigation technology, and it is impossible to live without it. The irrigation infrastructure was maintained by the labour service of peasants organized by the aristocratic bureaucracy. Backed up by the army. Archaeological evidence shows that the peasantry of Inca society was in much worse health than neighbouring tribal people at the same time. Basically, a diet made up of staples with minimal protein. Add to that overwork and the concentration of the population in towns, allowing the spread of diseases.
Feudal Europe
Most people have some idea of what Feudal Europe was like as a class system. Indeed, the mythology of capitalism still references feudalism as the yoke which modernity has broken. Popular references abound, from Monty Python’s ‘Holy Grail’ to endless re-makes of the Robin Hood story.
So let us take feudalism in Europe as the period roughly between 700 and 1500. A typical feudal kingdom works like this. The king supposedly owns the whole of the land in the kingdom. He is appointed by God, no less. His authority is absolute, based on his ‘divine right’ to rule. So, the king in turn appoints the aristocracy to rule over the land on his behalf. A patchwork of landed estates or ‘manors.’ Land is also allocated to the church for monasteries and landed estates. There is no private ownership of land as a commodity, as in capitalist societies. The lord of the manor must pass on their estate to their son, usually the eldest son. You cannot sell your manor. You’ve been granted the right to use that manor on behalf of the king, because you’re a loyal subject of the king. What is your obligation in return? You provide a tribute in armed knights and foot soldiers to fight the King’s wars. This overall structure also ranks and arranges the aristocracy. More powerful lords have dependent knights who supply them with armed support. There is always a possibility that these armed grandees will rebel against the king instead of supporting him, attempting to take the crown.
The same structure of obligation and dependency applies between aristocrats and their serfs. The serfs are obligated to obey and pay tribute to a particular lord, who theoretically owns the land which they farm. The tribute is usually in kind. For example, grains or some kind of labour service. Even making the lord’s bed, feeding his hounds. Military service when required. This is the surplus that the peasant class produces and that the ruling aristocratic class appropriates. In later feudalism, tribute might be in the form of monetary rent or monetary payment to use a mill to grind your flour. A move in the direction of capitalism. This system is maintained by armed force. The armed knights on horseback can almost always defeat a rebellion staged by peasants with hoes and pitchforks. As of course happened during the later feudal period.
What myths animate all of this? What does the aristocracy and the king give back to reward their dependents? Peasants are rewarded in heaven for their obedience. They are informed that they will go to hell if they disobey the king and the aristocracy. Clearly the Church works as the key ideological apparatus to sustain this mythology. Leading to another possible point of conflict — secular authorities versus the church. So, this mythology returns an unreal product to the peasantry. A life after death. In God’s grace and surrounded by angels. Not provided directly by the ruling class but by God — who must be a close friend of that ruling class! Clearly this interpretation of Christianity is somewhat implausible, and more egalitarian interpretations seeded the rebellions of the late feudal period.
An aspect of this ruling class ideology is the theory of the ‘great chain of being.’ Just as God gave dominion over the wild animals to Adam and Eve, God is supposed to have created the whole cosmos as a hierarchical arrangement. There is God at the top, then the angels, then the king, then the aristocrats, then the serfs, the animals and plants down to the humble snail in the garden. To question this hierarchy is to question God’s plan for the cosmos. A nested hierarchy of authority.
Finally, the king and the aristocracy promise protection from rival ruling class factions, other claimants to the throne, other nations, Vikings and north African pirates. These claims are somewhat hard to believe in the light of the constant warfare and destruction that characterizes the feudal period. In any case, this is a protection racket, with the threat of another ruling class always backing up the power of the ruling class at home. Without kings, lords and knights on horseback there could not be any of these problems. These problems come out of a system in which the ruling class extracts a surplus product and uses that surplus to fund their armed force. To dig the ores, feed the horses and so on.
An interesting and depressing confirmation of the machine advantage conferred on class society is the fate of the Vikings. In the first instance, Viking society was run by chiefs who consulted their warriors to make decisions. A relatively egalitarian arrangement. In conflicts with more feudal societies the Vikings gradually adopted the full package of feudal class relationships, especially in the areas they conquered in Europe and Russia. In Britain, Normandy, Kiev. But also in Scandinavia itself. They converted to Christianity and took on the hypocrisy of the feudal version of that religion. I am not sure how to interpret this, but one explanation could be in relation to armament. The early Viking armies fought on foot with shields and swords. By the middle of the mediaeval period a feudal army included a cohort of knights on heavy warhorses with fully covering steel armour. To supply one such figure the work of a whole village of peasants would be required. Stratifying the social order between the foot soldiers and the knights. To develop an army of this type, the Vikings adapted to this social order. Their early victories preceded these developments, taking over land as warrior chiefs and becoming feudal as time went on. It may be that Viking bands appropriated the peasantry of the lands they conquered, making them the subordinate class while they became the aristocrats. Their original raids were to take slaves to sell, as well as luxury goods. We know that in the areas they conquered, older DNA markers from the original population combine with the Scandinavian DNA. It makes sense that leading Viking chieftains coveted the power of the feudal aristocracy. They were in thrall to the requirements of toxic masculinity, as much as their feudal enemies, and one thing led to another.
Conclusions
It’s remarkable how similar these class structures are from different periods of history and different places around the world. Places that in some cases had no relationship to each other. Like ancient Egypt and Peru.
What does that tell us? Social class is an invention of the human species. It is a mechanism that sets up typical structures and cultures of social life. A mechanism that works because it fits in with aspects of human nature. Even if the overall impact is to deny the satisfaction of most people’s human needs. It works on people’s fear of death and their desire to eat. As I have explained in part B it also depends on patriarchy, the socialisation into toxic masculinity. Clearly, it cannot exist without cereal agriculture.