![]() ![]() Considering that many of the poorer people in a society were unable to read or write, those who could were automatically given respect and power. Something related to this topic which I find interesting is the status that the first scribes in any culture have. Naturally, there were far more Shudras than Brahmins - in fact, there were less Brahmins than any other caste, and that basically made them rulers by the power of their knowledge. I think it's fascinating how each caste's power and their access to literacy seemed to grow at the same time. Vaishyas, the next caste down, were only allowed to study the texts, not to teach or write them.įinally, the bottom rung, Shudras, were not allowed to study the texts at all - no teaching them, learning to write them, or even learning to read them, because the Shudras' roles in society were to serve the other three castes. The next-highest, the Kshatriyas, could read and scribe the religious texts but not to teach them. The highest caste, Brahmins, were allowed to read, scribe and teach the religious texts. ![]() My point about social control is perhaps most clearly illustrated by looking at the Hindu caste system during ancient times: I didn't know about the Chinese language the women invented with Nushu - that's very interesting! In the medieval era, people who could read and write held considerable power over those who could not. ![]() June 15, - You've got it absolutely right - literacy was in fact used as a form of social control back before education was mainstream. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |