Severed From Nature by Occam’s Razor
Let's do a thought experiment, using basic, natural logic: Put yourself into the mindset of a group seeking as much power and wealth as possible...
You survey the knowable lands you wish to dominate and you find them full of tribes living close to nature. You see that the folk have such a bond-with and knowledge-of their natural environment that you could never uproot them by force. Over the course of millennia, these tribes have developed a simple, harmonious system of law; it allows them all of their gods-given freedom and customs, and only intervenes to prevent disharmony or activities harmful to the natural order.
Realistic so far?
You think long and hard, considering every tactic of war. You might defeat one or two of the smaller tribes in open battle, but you know that most of them have honed their skills of war over centuries, so even if you succeeded, there’d be another tribe over the hill who’d come to threaten you before long. Besides, your idea of control is that as few of you as possible gain mastery over as many of these ‘wild men’ as possible.
You consider non-violent options: You must somehow implore the indigenous tribes to change their customs, or accept new ones. But again, how? Their ways are deeply embedded and they have no interest in surrendering them. In fact, they consider ways other than theirs to be an affront to natural order, and thus deeply suspicious.
Still accurate?
Then it hits you. Incentives! The ‘wild men’ are deeply conservative in many ways, but they have the streak of adventure and competition within them; such is the price of mankind’s genius. Their customs may be written in blood but technology fascinates them: advances in weaponry, methods of hunting, farming, efficiency of labour. These can be justified as ‘for the good of the tribe’.
Of course, these technological developments arise mostly from within the folk targeted for enslavement, but not universally and simultaneously. Different technologies, ideas and systems spring up distantly and only through centres of power and trade routes are they shared. Each tribe has its own lord, ordained to liaise with other tribes and receive the trade of new ideas and technologies. So as aspiring overlords, you know that to control incentives you must first control the leaders. To control leaders you control trade and communication routes between them.
To cast first glance over the latest news affords immense influence over decision-making within the network, for obvious reasons, and is a privilege that could be won by the mere persuasiveness of an agile tongue. Without overriding the daily customs of the folk you wish to subjugate, and without meeting them in battle, you have thus succeeded in gaining influence over both the communal wealth and technological advancements offered to the wider community.
But the problem remains; how to remove the innate freedoms and customs of the folk. You might now have influence over instances of policy-making, but that doesn’t equate to a redefining of the fixed, timeless laws and customs of the folk.
Here’s where those incentives come in. Those ‘wild men’s’ community and agricultural land comes under the protection of the Crown; roads are built to make droving cattle easier; access to trade with far-off producers, weapon-makers and craftsmen opens up; an invitation to participate in more decision-making processes is extended (though always controlled); loans become possible; safe travel guaranteed. Few of the ‘wild men’ could reject such trinkets and conveniences, especially given the competitive edge they offer when life is hard. There’s only one catch: To enjoy all of these benefits you require that they become ‘citizens’, and as citizens—you guessed it—they must adhere to a new set of laws and customs. It’s only fair isn’t it? The new society you’re offering them is safer, more convenient, and offers a competitive edge. The new social contract is only made possible by an agreement to play by new rules. Those rules involve a plethora of new contract laws, to ensure that everyone gets equal treatment, and some new taxes—call it the price of entry.
And what of the old spiritual ways, which were so perfectly suited to the simple system of law held to in the old society? Never mind, here’s a new one. Christ’s law is universal, the natural realm is something to be shunned anyhow. Why do they need to retain inter-dependency with their landscapes, gods and ancestors anyway when you have just offered them all the provisions they need as reward for becoming citizens?
At this point you stand back and admire your inter-generational handiwork. With barely a sword drawn, and with minimal effort and risk, you have torn those ‘wild men’ out from their soil, plucked them from their trees, and overridden a way of life immemorial. You did it all by offering gifts which your newfound thralls were too innocent to identify as bribes. You presented a new social contract and whether through naivety or in a desperate attempt to ‘keep up’, those once-free-men signed it and took on their new cloak of citizenship.
Of course, there are plenty of details missing from this exploration. Each step in the chain of logic would require its own elaborative essay; ideally an entire volume of written exposition. Nevertheless, I hope I’ve managed to clinically describe a chain of logic representing a likely process, all from a detached position of neutrality.