{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_5979/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_5979","id":"gutenberg_5979","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/5979","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Archaeology & Anthropology","Category: Essays, Letters & Speeches","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Japan -- Civilization"],"text":"[Transcriber's Note: Page numbers are retained in square brackets.]\n\n\n\n\n\n\nJAPAN\nAN ATTEMPT AT INTERPRETATION\n\nBY LAFCADIO HEARN\n\n\n\n1904\n\n\n\nContents\n\nCHAPTER                                   PAGE\n\n\nI.     DIFFICULTIES.........................1\n\nII.    STRANGENESS AND CHARM................5\n\nIII.   THE ANCIENT CULT....................21\n\nIV.    THE RELIGION OF THE HOME............33\n\nV.     THE JAPANESE FAMILY.................55\n\nVI.    THE COMMUNAL CULT...................81\n\nVII.   DEVELOPMENTS OF SHINTO.............107\n\nVIII.  WORSHIP AND PURIFICATION...........133\n\nIX.    THE RULE OF THE DEAD...............157\n\nX.     THE INTRODUCTION OF BUDDHISM.......183\n\nXI.    THE HIGHER BUDDHISM................207\n\nXII.   THE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION............229\n\nXIII.  THE RISE OF THE MILITARY POWER.....259\n\nXIV.   THE RELIGION OF LOYALTY............283\n\nXV.    THE JESUIT PERIL...................303\n\nXVI.   FEUDAL INTEGRATION.................343\n\nXVII.  THE SHINTO REVIVAL.................367\n\nXVIII. SURVIVALS..........................381\n\nXIX.   MODERN RESTRAINTS..................395\n\nXX.    OFFICIAL EDUCATION.................419\n\nXXI.   INDUSTRIAL DANGER..................443\n\nXXII.  REFLECTIONS........................457\n\n       APPENDIX...........................481\n\n       BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES..............487\n\n       INDEX..............................489\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\"Perhaps all very marked national characters can be traced back\nto a time of rigid and pervading discipline\"--WALTER BAGEHOT.\n\n\n\n\n[1]\nDIFFICULTIES\n\nA thousand books have been written about Japan; but among\nthese,--setting aside artistic publications and works of a purely\nspecial character,--the really precious volumes will be found to\nnumber scarcely a score. This fact is due to the immense difficulty\nof perceiving and comprehending what underlies the surface of\nJapanese life. No work fully interpreting that life,--no work\npicturing Japan within and without, historically and socially,\npsychologically and ethically,--can be written for at least another\nfifty years. So vast and intricate the subject that the united labour\nof a generation of scholars could not exhaust it, and so difficult\nthat the number of scholars willing to devote their time to it must\nalways be small. Even among the Japanese themselves, no scientific\nknowledge of their own history is yet possible; because the means of\nobtaining that knowledge have not yet been prepared,--though\nmountains of material have been collected. The want of any good\nhistory upon a modern plan is but one of many discouraging wants.\nData for the study of sociology [2] are still inaccessible to the\nWestern investigator. The early state of the family and the clan; the\nhistory of the differentiation of classes; the history of the\ndifferentiation of political from religious law; the history of\nrestraints, and of their influence upon custom; the history of\nregulative and cooperative conditions in the development of industry;\nthe history of ethics and aesthetics,--all these and many other\nmatters remain obscure.\n\nThis essay of mine can serve in one direction only as a contribution\nto the Western knowledge of Japan. But this direction is not one of\nthe least important. Hitherto the subject of Japanese religion has\nbeen written of chiefly by the sworn enemies of that religion: by\nothers it has been almost entirely ignored. Yet while it continues to\nbe ignored and misrepresented, no real knowledge of Japan is\npossible. Any true comprehension of social conditions requires more\nthan a superficial acquaintance with religious conditions. Even the\nindustrial history of a people cannot be understood without some\nknowledge of those religious traditions and customs which regulate\nindustrial life during the earlier stages of its development .... Or\ntake the subject of art. Art in Japan is so intimately associated\nwith religion that any attempt to study it without extensive\nknowledge of the [3] beliefs which it reflects, were mere waste of\ntime. By art I do not mean only painting and sculpture, but every\nkind of decoration, and most kinds of pictorial representation,--the\nimage on a boy's kite or a girl's battledore, not less than the\ndesign upon a lacquered casket or enamelled vase,--the figures upon a\nworkman's towel not less than the pattern of the girdle of a\nprincess,--the shape of the paper-dog or the wooden rattle bought for\na baby, not less than the forms of those colossal Ni-O who guard the\ngateways of Buddhist temples .... And surely there can never be any\njust estimate made of Japanese literature, until a study of that\nliterature shall have been made by some scholar, not only able to\nunderstand Japanese beliefs, but able also to sympathize with them to\nat least the same extent that our great humanists can sympathize with\nthe religion of Euripides, of Pindar, and of Theocritus. Let us ask\nourselves how much of English or French or German or Italian\nliterature could be fully understood without the slightest knowledge\nof the ancient and modern religions of the Occident. I do not refer\nto distinctly religious creators,--to poets like Milton or\nDante,--but only to the fact that even one of Shakespeare's plays\nmust remain incomprehensible to a person knowing nothing either of\nChristian beliefs or of the beliefs which preceded them. The real\nmastery of any European tongue is impossible [4] without a knowledge\nof European religion. The language of even the unlettered is full of\nreligious meaning: the proverbs and household-phrases of the poor,\nthe songs of the street, the speech of the workshop,--all are infused\nwith significations unimaginable by any one ignorant of the faith of\nthe people. Nobody knows this better than a man who has passed many\nyears in trying to teach English in Japan, to pupils whose faith is\nutterly unlike our own, and whose ethics have been shaped by a\ntotally different social experience.\n\n\n\n[5]\n\nSTRANGENESS AND CHARM\n\nThe majority of the first impressions of Japan recorded by travellers\nare pleasurable impressions. Indeed, there must be something lacking,\nor something very harsh, in the nature to which Japan can make no\nemotional appeal. The appeal itself is the clue to a problem; and\nthat problem is the character of a race and of its civilization.\n\nMy own first impressions of Japan,--Japan as seen in the white\nsunshine of a perfect spring day,--had doubtless much in common with\nthe average of such experiences. I remember especially the wonder and\nthe delight of the vision. The wonder and the delight have never\npassed away: they are often revived for me even now, by some chance\nhappening, after fourteen years of sojourn. But the reason of these\nfeelings was difficult to learn,--or at least to guess; for I cannot\nyet claim to know much about Japan .... Long ago the best and dearest\nJapanese friend I ever had said to me, a little before his death:\n\"When you find, in four or five years more, that you cannot\nunderstand the Japanese at [6] all, then you will begin to know\nsomething about them.\" After having realized the truth of my friend's\nprediction,--after having discovered that I cannot understand the\nJapanese at all,--I feel better qualified to attempt this essay.\n\nAs first perceived, the outward strangeness of things in Japan\nproduces (in certain minds, at least) a queer thrill impossible to\ndescribe,--a feeling of weirdness which comes to us only with the\nperception of the totally unfamiliar. You find yourself moving\nthrough queer small streets full of odd small people, wearing robes\nand sandals of extraordinary shapes; and you can scarcely distinguish\nthe sexes at sight. The houses are constructed and furnished in ways\nalien to all your experience; and you are astonished to find that you\ncannot conceive the use or meaning of numberless things on display in\nthe shops. Food-stuffs of unimaginable derivation; utensils of\nenigmatic forms; emblems incomprehensible of some mysterious belief;\nstrange masks and toys that commemorate legends of gods or demons;\nodd figures, too, of the gods themselves, with monstrous ears and\nsmiling faces,--all these you may perceive as you wander about;\nthough you must also notice telegraph-poles and type-writers,\nelectric lamps and sewing machines. Everywhere on signs and hangings,\nand on the backs of people passing by, you will observe wonderful\nChinese [7] characters; and the wizardry of all these texts makes the\ndominant tone of the spectacle.\n\nFurther acquaintance with this fantastic world will in nowise\ndiminish the sense of strangeness evoked by the first vision of it.\nYou will soon observe that even the physical actions of the people\nare unfamiliar,--that their work is done in ways the opposite of\nWestern ways. Tools are of surprising shapes, and are handled after\nsurprising methods: the blacksmith squats at his anvil, wielding a\nhammer such as no Western smith could use without long practice; the\ncarpenter pulls, instead of pushing, his extraordinary plane and saw.\nAlways the left is the right side, and the right side the wrong; and\nkeys must be turned, to open or close a lock, in what we are\naccustomed to think the wrong direction. Mr. Percival Lowell has\ntruthfully observed that the Japanese speak backwards, read\nbackwards, write backwards,--and that this is \"only the abc of their\ncontrariety.\" For the habit of writing backwards there are obvious\nevolutional reasons; and the requirements of Japanese calligraphy\nsufficiently explain why the artist pushes his brush or pencil\ninstead of pulling it. But why, instead of putting the thread through\nthe eye of the needle, should the Japanese maiden slip the eye of the\nneedle over the point of the thread? Perhaps the most remarkable, out\nof a hundred possible examples of antipodal action, is furnished by\nthe Japanese art of fencing. The [8] swordsman, delivering his blow\nwith both hands, does not pull the blade towards him in the moment of\nstriking, but pushes it from him. He uses it, indeed, as other\nAsiatics do, not on the principle of the wedge, but of the saw; yet\nthere is a pushing motion where we should expect a pulling motion in\nthe stroke .... These and other forms of unfamiliar action are\nstrange enough to suggest the notion of a humanity even physically as\nlittle related to us as might be the population of another\nplanet,--the notion of some anatomical unlikeness. No such\nunlikeness, however, appears to exist; and all this oppositeness\nprobably implies, not so much the outcome of a human experience\nentirely independent of Aryan experience, as the outcome of an\nexperience evolutionally younger than our own.\n\nYet that experience has been one of no mean order.  Its\nmanifestations do not merely startle: they also delight. The delicate\nperfection of workmanship, the light strength and grace of objects,\nthe power manifest to obtain the best results with the least\nmaterial, the achieving of mechanical ends by the simplest possible\nmeans, the comprehension of irregularity as aesthetic value, the\nshapeliness and perfect taste of everything, the sense displayed of\nharmony in tints or colours,--all this must convince you at once that\nour Occident has much to learn from this remote civilization, not\nonly in matters of art and taste, but in matters likewise of [9]\neconomy and utility. It is no barbarian fancy that appeals to you in\nthose amazing porcelains, those astonishing embroideries, those\nwonders of lacquer and ivory and bronze, which educate imagination in\nunfamiliar ways. No: these are the products of a civilization which\nbecame, within its own limits, so exquisite that none but an artist\nis capable of judging its manufactures,--a civilization that can be\ntermed imperfect only by those who would also term imperfect the\nGreek civilization of three thousand years ago.\n\nBut the underlying strangeness of this world,--the psychological\nstrangeness,--is much more startling than the visible and\nsuperficial. You begin to suspect the range of it after having\ndiscovered that no adult Occidental can perfectly master the\nlanguage. East and West the fundamental parts of human nature--the\nemotional bases of it--are much the same: the mental difference\nbetween a Japanese and a European child is mainly potential. But with\ngrowth the difference rapidly develops and widens, till it becomes,\nin adult life, inexpressible. The whole of the Japanese mental\nsuperstructure evolves into forms having nothing in common with\nWestern psychological development: the expression of thought becomes\nregulated, and the expression of emotion inhibited in ways that\nbewilder and astound. The ideas of this people are not our [10]\nideas; their sentiments are not our sentiments their ethical life\nrepresents for us regions of thought and emotion yet unexplored, or\nperhaps long forgotten. Any one of their ordinary phrases, translated\ninto Western speech, makes hopeless nonsense; and the literal\nrendering into Japanese of the simplest English sentence would\nscarcely be comprehended by any Japanese who had never studied a\nEuropean tongue. Could you learn all the words in a Japanese\ndictionary, your acquisition would not help you in the least to make\nyourself understood in speaking, unless you had learned also to think\nlike a Japanese,--that is to say, to think backwards, to think\nupside-down and inside-out, to think in directions totally foreign to\nAryan habit. Experience in the acquisition of European languages can\nhelp you to learn Japanese about as much as it could help you to\nacquire the language spoken by the inhabitants of Mars. To be able to\nuse the Japanese tongue as a Japanese uses it, one would need to be\nborn again, and to have one's mind completely reconstructed, from the\nfoundation upwards. It is possible that a person of European\nparentage, born in Japan, and accustomed from infancy to use the\nvernacular, might retain in after-life that instinctive knowledge\nwhich could alone enable him to adapt his mental relations to the\nrelations of any Japanese environment. There is actually an\nEnglishman named Black, born in Japan, whose proficiency [11] in the\nlanguage is proved by the fact that he is able to earn a fair income\nas a professional storyteller (hanashika). But this is an\nextraordinary case .... As for the literary language, I need only\nobserve that to make acquaintance with it requires very much more\nthan a knowledge of several thousand Chinese characters. It is safe\nto say that no Occidental can undertake to render at sight any\nliterary text laid before him--indeed the number of native scholars\nable to do so is very small;--and although the learning displayed in\nthis direction by various Europeans may justly compel our admiration,\nthe work of none could have been given to the world without Japanese\nhelp.\n\nBut as the outward strangeness of Japan proves to be full of beauty,\nso the inward strangeness appears to have its charm,--an ethical\ncharm reflected in the common life of the people. The attractive\naspects of that life do not indeed imply, to the ordinary observer, a\npsychological differentiation measurable by scores of centuries: only\na scientific mind, like that of Mr. Percival Lowell, immediately\nperceives the problem presented. The less gifted stranger, if\nnaturally sympathetic, is merely pleased and puzzled, and tries to\nexplain, by his own experience of happy life on the other side of the\nworld, the social conditions that charm him. Let us suppose that he\nhas the good fortune of being able to [12] live for six months or a\nyear in some old-fashioned town of the interior. From the beginning\nof this sojourn he can scarcely fail to be impressed by the apparent\nkindliness and joyousness of the existence about him. In the\nrelations of the people to each other, as well as in all their\nrelations to himself, he will find a constant amenity, a tact, a\ngood-nature such as he will elsewhere have met with only in the\nfriendship of exclusive circles. Everybody greets everybody with\nhappy looks and pleasant words; faces are always smiling; the\ncommonest incidents of everyday life are transfigured by a courtesy\nat once so artless and so faultless that it appears to spring\ndirectly from the heart, without any teaching. Under all\ncircumstances a certain outward cheerfulness never falls: no matter\nwhat troubles may come,--storm or fire, flood or earthquake,--the\nlaughter of greeting voices, the bright smile and graceful bow, the\nkindly inquiry and the wish to please, continue to make existence\nbeautiful. Religion brings no gloom into this sunshine: before the\nBuddhas and the gods folk smile as they pray; the temple-courts are\nplaygrounds for the children; and within the enclosure of the great\npublic shrines--which are places of festivity rather than of\nsolemnity--dancing-platforms are erected. Family existence would seem\nto be everywhere characterized by gentleness: there is no visible\nquarrelling, no loud harshness, no tears and reproaches. Cruelty,\neven [13] to animals, appears to be unknown: one sees farmers, coming\nto town, trudging patiently beside their horses or oxen, aiding their\ndumb companions to bear the burden, and using no whips or goads.\nDrivers or pullers of carts will turn out of their way, under the\nmost provoking circumstances, rather than overrun a lazy dog or a\nstupid chicken .... For no inconsiderable time one may live in the\nmidst of appearances like these, and perceive nothing to spoil the\npleasure of the experience.\n\nOf course the conditions of which I speak are now passing away; but\nthey are still to be found in the remoter districts. I have lived in\ndistricts where no case of theft had occurred for hundreds of\nyears,--where the newly-built prisons of Meiji remained empty and\nuseless,--where the people left their doors unfastened by night as\nwell as by day. These facts are familiar to every Japanese. In such a\ndistrict, you might recognize that the kindness shown to you, as a\nstranger, is the consequence of official command; but how explain the\ngoodness of the people to each other? When you discover no harshness,\nno rudeness, no dishonesty, no breaking of laws, and learn that this\nsocial condition has been the same for centuries, you are tempted to\nbelieve that you have entered into the domain of a morally superior\nhumanity. All this soft urbanity, impeccable honesty, ingenuous\nkindliness of speech and act, you might naturally interpret [14] as\nconduct directed by perfect goodness of heart. And the simplicity\nthat delights you is no simplicity of barbarism. Here every one has\nbeen taught; every one knows how to write and speak beautifully, how\nto compose poetry, how to behave politely; there is everywhere\ncleanliness and good taste; interiors are bright and pure; the daily\nuse of the hot bath is universal. How refuse to be charmed by a\ncivilization in which every relation appears to be governed by\naltruism, every action directed by duty, and every object shaped by\nart? You cannot help being delighted by such conditions, or feeling\nindignant at hearing them denounced as \"heathen.\" And according to\nthe degree of altruism within yourself, these good folk will be able,\nwithout any apparent effort, to make you happy. The mere sensation of\nthe milieu is a placid happiness: it is like the sensation of a dream\nin which people greet us exactly as we like to be greeted, and say to\nus all that we like to hear, and do for us all that we wish to have\ndone,--people moving soundlessly through spaces of perfect repose,\nall bathed in vapoury light. Yes--for no little time these fairy-folk\ncan give you all the soft bliss of sleep. But sooner or later, if you\ndwell long with them, your contentment will prove to have much in\ncommon with the happiness of dreams. You will never forget the\ndream,--never; but it will lift at last, like those vapours of spring\nwhich lend preternatural [15] loveliness to a Japanese landscape in\nthe forenoon of radiant days. Really you are happy because you have\nentered bodily into Fairyland,--into a world that is not, and never\ncould be your own. You have been transported out of your own\ncentury--over spaces enormous of perished time--into an era\nforgotten, into a vanished age,--back to something ancient as Egypt\nor Nineveh. That is the secret of the strangeness and beauty of\nthings,--the secret of the thrill they give,--the secret of the\nelfish charm of the people and their ways. Fortunate mortal! the tide\nof Time has turned for you! But remember that here all is\nenchantment,--that you have fallen under the spell of the dead,--that\nthe lights and the colours and the voices must fade away at last into\nemptiness and silence.\n\n              *    *    *    *    *    *\n\nSome of us, at least, have often wished that it were possible to live\nfor a season in the beautiful vanished world of Greek culture.\nInspired by our first acquaintance with the charm of Greek art and\nthought, this wish comes to us even before we are capable of\nimagining the true conditions of the antique civilization. If the\nwish could be realized, we should certainly find it impossible to\naccommodate ourselves to those conditions,--not so much because of\nthe difficulty of learning the environment, as because of the much\ngreater difficulty of feeling just as people used to feel some thirty\ncenturies [16] ago. In spite of all that has been done for Greek\nstudies since the Renaissance, we are still unable to understand many\naspects of the old Greek life: no modern mind can really feel, for\nexample, those sentiments and emotions to which the great tragedy of\nOedipus made appeal. Nevertheless we are much in advance of our\nforefathers of the eighteenth century, as regards the knowledge of\nGreek civilization. In the time of the French revolution, it was\nthought possible to reestablish in France the conditions of a Greek\nrepublic, and to educate children according to the system of Sparta.\nTo-day we are well aware that no mind developed by modern\ncivilization could find happiness under any of those socialistic\ndespotisms which existed in all the cities of the ancient world\nbefore the Roman conquest. We could no more mingle with the old Greek\nlife, if it were resurrected for us,--no more become a part of\nit,--than we could change our mental identities. But how much would\nwe not give for the delight of beholding it,--for the joy of\nattending one festival in Corinth, or of witnessing the Pan-Hellenic\ngames? ... And yet, to witness the revival of some perished Greek\ncivilization,--to walk about the very Crotona of Pythagoras,--to\nwander through the Syracuse of Theocritus,--were not any more of a\nprivilege than is the opportunity actually afforded us to study\nJapanese life. Indeed, from the evolutional [17] point of view, it\nwere less of a privilege,--since Japan offers us the living spectacle\nof conditions older, and psychologically much farther away from us,\nthan those of any Greek period with which art and literature have\nmade us closely acquainted.\n\nThe reader scarcely needs to be reminded that a civilization less\nevolved than our own, and intellectually remote from us, is not on\nthat account to be regarded as necessarily inferior in all respects.\nHellenic civilization at its best represented an early stage of\nsociological evolution; yet the arts which it developed still furnish\nour supreme and unapproachable ideals of beauty. So, too, this much\nmore archaic civilization of Old Japan attained an average of\naesthetic and moral culture well worthy of our wonder and praise.\nOnly a shallow mind--a very shallow mind--will pronounce the best of\nthat culture inferior. But Japanese civilization is peculiar to a\ndegree for which there is perhaps no Western parallel, since it\noffers us the spectacle of many successive layers of alien culture\nsuperimposed above the simple indigenous basis, and forming a very\nbewilderment of complexity. Most of this alien culture is Chinese,\nand bears but an indirect relation to the real subject of these\nstudies. The peculiar and surprising fact is that, in spite of all\nsuperimposition, the original character of the people and of their\nsociety should still remain recognizable. [18] The wonder of Japan is\nnot to be sought in the countless borrowings with which she has\nclothed herself,--much as a princess of the olden time would don\ntwelve ceremonial robes, of divers colours and qualities, folded one\nupon the other so as to show their many-tinted edges at throat and\nsleeves and skirt;--no, the real wonder is the Wearer. For the\ninterest of the costume is much less in its beauty of form and tint\nthan in its significance as idea,--as representing something of the\nmind that devised or adopted it. And the supreme interest of the\nold--Japanese civilization lies in what it expresses of the\nrace-character,--that character which yet remains essentially\nunchanged by all the changes of Meiji.\n\n\"Suggests\" were perhaps a better word than \"expresses,\" for this\nrace-character is rather to be divined than recognized. Our\ncomprehension of it might be helped by some definite knowledge of\norigins; but such knowledge we do not yet possess. Ethnologists are\nagreed that the Japanese race has been formed by a mingling of\npeoples, and that the dominant element is Mongolian; but this\ndominant element is represented in two very different types,--one\nslender and almost feminine of aspect; the other, squat and powerful.\nChinese and Korean elements are known to exist in the populations of\ncertain districts; and, there appears to have been a large infusion\nof Aino blood. Whether there be [19] any Malay or Polynesian element\nalso has not been decided. Thus much only can be safely\naffirmed,--that the race, like all good races, is a mixed one; and\nthat the peoples who originally united to form it have been so\nblended together as to develop, under long social discipline, a\ntolerably uniform type of character. This character, though\nimmediately recognizable in some of Its aspects, presents us with\nmany enigmas that are very difficult to explain.\n\nNevertheless, to understand it better has become a matter of\nimportance. Japan has entered into the world's competitive struggle;\nand the worth of any people in that struggle depends upon character\nquite as much as upon force. We can learn something about Japanese\ncharacter if we are able to ascertain the nature of the conditions\nwhich shaped it,--the great general facts of the moral experience of\nthe race. And these facts we should find expressed or suggested in\nthe history of the national beliefs, and in the history of those\nsocial institutions derived from and developed by religion.\n\n\n\n[20]\n\n[21]\n\nTHE ANCIENT CULT\n\nThe real religion of Japan, the religion still professed in one form\nor other, by the entire nation, is that cult which has been the\nfoundation of all civilized religion, and of all civilized\nsociety,--Ancestor-worship. In the course of thousands of years this\noriginal cult has undergone modifications, and has assumed various\nshapes; but everywhere in Japan its fundamental character remains\nunchanged. Without including the different Buddhist forms of\nancestor-worship, we find three distinct rites of purely Japanese\norigin, subsequently modified to some degree by Chinese influence and\nceremonial. These Japanese forms of the cult are all classed together\nunder the name of \"Shinto,\" which signifies, \"The Way of the Gods.\"\nIt is not an ancient term; and it was first adopted only to\ndistinguish the native religion, or \"Way\" from the foreign religion\nof Buddhism called \"Butsudo,\" or \"The Way of the Buddha.\" The three\nforms of the Shinto worship of ancestors are the Domestic Cult, the\nCommunal Cult, and the State Cult;--or, in other words, the worship\nof family ancestors, the worship of clan or tribal ancestors, [22]\nand the worship of imperial ancestors. The first is the religion of\nthe home; the second is the religion of the local divinity, or\ntutelar god; the third is the national religion. There are various\nother forms of Shinto worship; but they need not be considered for\nthe present.\n\nOf the three forms of ancestor-worship above mentioned, the\nfamily-cult is the first in evolutional order,--the others being\nlater developments. But, in speaking of the family-cult as the\noldest, I do not mean the home-religion as it exists to-day;--neither\ndo I mean by \"family\" anything corresponding to the term \"household.\"\nThe Japanese family in early times meant very much more than\n\"household\": it might include a hundred or a thousand households: it\nwas something like the Greek (Greek genos); or the Roman gens,--the\npatriarchal family in the largest sense of the term. In prehistoric\nJapan the domestic cult of the house-ancestor probably did not\nexist;--the family-rites would appear to have been performed only at\nthe burial-place. But the later domestic cult, having been developed\nout of the primal family-rite, indirectly represents the most ancient\nform of the religion, and should therefore be considered first in any\nstudy of Japanese social evolution.\n\nThe evolutional history of ancestor-worship has been very much the\nsame in all countries; and that [23] of the Japanese cult offers\nremarkable evidence in support of Herbert Spencer's exposition of the\nlaw of religious development. To comprehend this general law, we\nmust, however, go back to the origin of religious beliefs. One should\nbear in mind that, from a sociological point of view, it is no more\ncorrect to speak of the existing ancestor-cult in Japan as\n\"primitive,\" than it would be to speak of the domestic cult of the\nAthenians in the time of Pericles as \"primitive.\" No persistent form\nof ancestor-worship is primitive; and every established domestic cult\nhas been developed out of some irregular and non-domestic\nfamily-cult, which, again, must have grown out of still more ancient\nfuneral-rites.\n\nOur knowledge of ancestor-worship, as regards the early European\ncivilizations, cannot be said to extend to the primitive form of the\ncult. In the case of the Greeks and the Romans, our knowledge of the\nsubject dates from a period at which a domestic religion had long\nbeen established; and we have documentary evidence as to the\ncharacter of that religion. But of the earlier cult that must have\npreceded the home-worship, we have little testimony; and we can\nsurmise its nature only by study of the natural history of\nancestor-worship among peoples not yet arrived at a state of\ncivilization. The true domestic cult begins with a settled\ncivilization. Now when the Japanese race first established itself in\nJapan, it does not appear to have [24] brought with it any\ncivilization of the kind which we would call settled, nor any\nwell-developed ancestor-cult. The cult certainly existed; but its\nceremonies would seem to have been irregularly performed at graves\nonly. The domestic cult proper may not have been established until\nabout the eighth century, when the spirit-tablet is supposed to have\nbeen introduced from China. The earliest ancestor-cult, as we shall\npresently see, was developed out of the primitive funeral-rites and\npropitiatory ceremonies.\n\nThe existing family religion is therefore a comparatively modern\ndevelopment; but it is at least as old as the true civilization of\nthe country, and it conserves beliefs and ideas which are indubitably\nprimitive, as well as ideas and beliefs derived from these. Before\ntreating further of the cult itself, it will be necessary to consider\nsome of these older beliefs.\n\nThe earliest ancestor-worship,--\"the root of all religions,\" as\nHerbert Spencer calls it,--was probably coeval with the earliest\ndefinite belief in ghosts. As soon as men were able to conceive the\nidea of a shadowy inner self, or double, so soon, doubtless, the\npropitiatory cult of spirits began. But this earliest ghost-worship\nmust have long preceded that period of mental development in which\nmen first became capable of forming abstract ideas. The [25]\nprimitive ancestor-worshippers could not have formed the notion of a\nsupreme deity; and all evidence existing as to the first forms of\ntheir worship tends to show that there primarily existed no\ndifference whatever between the conception of ghosts and the\nconception of gods. There were, consequently, no definite beliefs in\nany future state of reward or of punishment,--no ideas of any heaven\nor hell. Even the notion of a shadowy underworld, or Hades, was of\nmuch later evolution. At first the dead were thought of only as\ndwelling in the tombs provided for them,--whence they could issue,\nfrom time to time, to visit their former habitations, or to make\napparition in the dreams of the living. Their real world was the\nplace of burial,--the grave, the tumulus. Afterwards there slowly\ndeveloped the idea of an underworld, connected in some mysterious way\nwith the place of sepulture. Only at a much later time did this dim\nunderworld of imagination expand and divide into regions of ghostly\nbliss and woe .... It is a noteworthy fact that Japanese mythology\nnever evolved the ideas of an Elysium or a Tartarus,--never developed\nthe notion of a heaven or a hell. Even to this day Shinto belief\nrepresents the pre-Homeric stage of imagination as regards the\nsupernatural.\n\nAmong the Indo-European races likewise there appeared to have been at\nfirst no difference between gods and ghosts, nor any ranking of gods\nas greater [26] and lesser. These distinctions were gradually\ndeveloped. \"The spirits of the dead,\" says Mr. Spencer, \"forming, in\na primitive tribe, an ideal group the members of which are but little\ndistinguished from one another, will grow more and more\ndistinguished;--and as societies advance, and as traditions, local\nand general, accumulate and complicate, these once similar human\nsouls, acquiring in the popular mind differences of character and\nimportance, will diverge--until their original community of nature\nbecomes scarcely recognizable.\" So in antique Europe, and so in the\nFar East, were the greater gods of nations evolved from ghost-cults;\nbut those ethics of ancestor-worship which shaped alike the earliest\nsocieties of West and East, date from a period before the time of the\ngreater gods,--from the period when all the dead were supposed to\nbecome gods, with no distinction of rank.\n\nNo more than the primitive ancestor-worshippers of Aryan race did the\nearly Japanese think of their dead as ascending to some extra-mundane\nregion of light and bliss, or as descending into some realm of\ntorment. They thought of their dead as still inhabiting this world,\nor at least as maintaining with it a constant communication. Their\nearliest sacred records do, indeed, make mention of an underworld,\nwhere mysterious Thunder-gods and evil goblins dwelt in corruption;\nbut this vague world of the dead communicated with the world of the\nliving; [27] and the spirit there, though in some sort attached to\nits decaying envelope, could still receive upon earth the homage and\nthe offerings of men. Before the advent of Buddhism, there was no\nidea of a heaven or a hell. The ghosts of the departed were thought\nof as constant presences, needing propitiation, and able in some way\nto share the pleasures and the pains of the living. They required\nfood and drink and light; and in return for these; they could confer\nbenefits. Their bodies had melted into earth; but their spirit-power\nstill lingered in the upper world, thrilled its substance, moved in\nits winds and waters. By death they had acquired mysterious\nforce;--they had become \"superior ones,\" Kami, gods.\n\nThat is to say, gods in the oldest Greek and Roman sense.  Be it\nobserved that there were no moral distinctions, East or West, in this\ndeification. \"All the dead become gods,\" wrote the great Shinto\ncommentator, Hirata. So likewise, in the thought of the early Greeks\nand even of the late Romans, all the dead became gods. M. de\nCoulanges observes, in La Cite Antique: \"This kind of apotheosis was\nnot the privilege of the great alone. no distinction was made .... It\nwas not even necessary to have been a virtuous man: the wicked man\nbecame a god as well as the good man,--only that in this\nafter-existence, he retained the evil inclinations of his former\nlife.\" Such also [28] was the case in Shinto belief: the good man\nbecame a beneficent divinity, the bad man an evil deity,--but all\nalike became Kami. \"And since there are bad as well as good gods,\"\nwrote Motowori, \"it is necessary to propitiate them with offerings of\nagreeable food, playing the harp, blowing the flute, singing and\ndancing and whatever is likely to put them in a good humour.\" The\nLatins called the maleficent ghosts of the dead, Larvae, and called\nthe beneficent or harmless ghosts, Lares, or Manes, or Genii,\naccording to Apuleius. But all alike were gods,--dii-manes; and\nCicero admonished his readers to render to all dii-manes the rightful\nworship: \"They are men,\" he declared, \"who have departed from this\nlife;-consider them divine beings ....\"\n\nIn Shinto, as in old Greek belief, to die was to enter into the\npossession of superhuman power, to become capable of conferring\nbenefit or of inflicting misfortune by supernatural means .... But\nyesterday, such or such a man was a common toiler, a person of no\nimportance;--to-day, being dead, he becomes a divine power, and his\nchildren pray to him for the prosperity of their undertakings. Thus\nalso we find the personages of Greek tragedy, such as Alcestis,\nsuddenly transformed into divinities by death, and addressed in the\nlanguage of worship or prayer. But, in despite of their supernatural\n[29] power, the dead are still dependent upon the living for\nhappiness. Though viewless, save in dreams, they need earthly\nnourishment and homage,--food and drink, and the reverence of their\ndescendants. Each ghost must rely for such comfort upon its living\nkindred;--only through the devotion of that kindred can it ever find\nrepose. Each ghost must have shelter,--a fitting tomb;--each must\nhave offerings. While honourably sheltered and properly nourished the\nspirit is pleased, and will aid in maintaining the good-fortune of\nits propitiators. But if refused the sepulchral home, the funeral\nrites, the offerings of food and fire and drink, the spirit will\nsuffer from hunger and cold and thirst, and, becoming angered, will\nact malevolently and contrive misfortune for those by whom it has\nbeen neglected .... Such were the ideas of the old Greeks regarding\nthe dead; and such were the ideas of the old Japanese.\n\nAlthough the religion of ghosts was once the religion of our own\nforefathers--whether of Northern or Southern Europe,--and although\npractices derived from it, such as the custom of decorating graves\nwith flowers, persist to-day among our most advanced\ncommunities,--our modes of thought have so changed under the\ninfluences of modern civilization that it is difficult for us to\nimagine how people could ever have supposed that the happiness of the\ndead depended upon material food. But it [30] is probable that the\nreal belief in ancient European societies was much like the belief as\nit exists in modern Japan. The dead are not supposed to consume the\nsubstance of the food, but only to absorb the invisible essence of\nit. In the early period of ancestor-worship the food-offerings were\nlarge; later on they were made smaller and smaller as the idea grew\nup that the spirits required but little sustenance of even the most\nvapoury kind. But, however small the offerings, it was essential that\nthey should be made regularly. Upon these shadowy repasts depended\nthe well-being of the dead; and upon the well-being of the dead\ndepended the fortunes of the living. Neither could dispense with the\nhelp of the other. the visible and the invisible worlds were forever\nunited by bonds innumerable of mutual necessity; and no single\nrelation of that union could be broken without the direst\nconsequences.\n\nThe history of all religious sacrifices can be traced back to this\nancient custom of offerings made to ghosts; and the whole Indo-Aryan\nrace had at one time no other religion than this religion of spirits.\nIn fact, every advanced human society has, at some period of its\nhistory, passed through the stage of ancestor-worship; but it is to\nthe Far East that we must took to-day in order to find the cult\ncoexisting with an elaborate civilization. Now the Japanese\nancestor-cult--though representing the beliefs of a [31] non-Aryan\npeople, and offering in the history of its development various\ninteresting peculiarities--still embodies much that is characteristic\nof ancestor-worship in general. There survive in it especially these\nthree beliefs, which underlie all forms of persistent\nancestor-worship in all climes and countries:--\n\nI.--The dead remain in this world,--haunting their tombs, and also\ntheir former homes, and sharing invisibly in the life of their living\ndescendants;--\n\nII.--All the dead become gods, in the sense of acquiring supernatural\npower; but they retain the characters which distinguished them during\nlife;--\n\nIII.--The happiness of the dead depends upon the respectful service\nrendered them by the living; and the happiness of the living depends\nupon the fulfilment of pious duty to the dead.\n\nTo these very early beliefs may be added the following, probably of\nlater development, which at one time must have exercised immense\ninfluence:--\n\nIV.--Every event in the world, good or evil,--fair seasons or\nplentiful harvests,--flood and famine,--tempest and tidal-wave and\nearthquake,--is the work of the dead.\n\nV.--All human actions, good or bad, are controlled by the dead.\n\nThe first three beliefs survive from the dawn of civilization, or\nbefore it,--from the time in which [32] the dead were the only gods,\nwithout distinctions of power. The latter two would seem rather of\nthe period in which a true mythology--an enormous polytheism--had\nbeen developed out of the primitive ghost-worship. There is nothing\nsimple in these beliefs: they are awful, tremendous beliefs; and\nbefore Buddhism helped to dissipate them, their pressure upon the\nmind of a people dwelling in a land of cataclysms, must have been\nlike an endless weight of nightmare. But the elder beliefs, in\nsoftened form, are yet a fundamental part of the existing cult.\nThough Japanese ancestor-worship has undergone many modifications in\nthe past two thousand years, these modifications have not transformed\nits essential character in relation to conduct; and the whole\nframework of society rests upon it, as on a moral foundation. The\nhistory of Japan is really the history of her religion. No single\nfact in this connection is more significant than the fact that the\nancient Japanese term for government--matsuri-goto--signifies\nliberally \"matters of worship.\" Later on we shall find that not only\ngovernment, but almost everything in Japanese society, derives\ndirectly or indirectly from this ancestor-cult; and that in all\nmatters the dead, rather than the living, have been the rulers of the\nnation and--the shapers of its destinies.\n\n\n\n[33]\n\nTHE RELIGION OF THE HOME\n\nThree stages of ancestor-worship are to be distinguished in the\ngeneral course of religious and social evolution; and each of these\nfinds illustration in the history of Japanese society. The first\nstage is that which exists before the establishment of a settled\ncivilization, when there is yet no national ruler, and when the unit\nof society is the great patriarchal family, with its elders or\nwar-chiefs for lords. Under these conditions, the spirits of the\nfamily-ancestors only are worshipped;--each family propitiating its\nown dead, and recognizing no other form of worship. As the\npatriarchal families, later on, become grouped into tribal clans,\nthere grows up the custom of tribal sacrifice to the spirits of the\nclan-rulers;--this cult being superadded to the family-cult, and\nmarking the second stage of ancestor-worship. Finally, with the union\nof all the clans or tribes under one supreme head, there is developed\nthe custom of propitiating the spirits of national, rulers. This\nthird form of the cult becomes the obligatory religion [34] of the\ncountry; but it does not replace either of the preceding cults: the\nthree continue to exist together.\n\nThough, in the present state of our knowledge, the evolution in Japan\nof these three stages of ancestor-worship is but faintly traceable,\nwe can divine tolerably well, from various records, how the permanent\nforms of the cult were first developed out of the earlier\nfuneral-rites. Between the ancient Japanese funeral customs and those\nof antique Europe, there was a vast difference,--a difference\nindicating, as regards Japan, a far more primitive social condition.\nIn Greece and in Italy it was an early custom to bury the family dead\nwithin the limits of the family estate; and the Greek and Roman laws\nof property grew out of this practice. Sometimes the dead were buried\nclose to the house. The author of 'La Cite Antique' cites, among\nother ancient texts bearing upon the subject, an interesting\ninvocation from the tragedy of Helen, by Euripides:--\"All hail! my\nfather's tomb! I buried thee, Proteus, at the place where men pass\nout, that I might often greet thee; and so, even as I go out and in,\nI, thy son Theoclymenus, call upon thee, father! ...\" But in ancient\nJapan, men fled from the neighbourhood of death. It was long the\ncustom to abandon, either temporarily, or permanently, the house in\nwhich a death occurred; [35] and we can scarcely suppose that, at any\ntime, it was thought desirable to bury the dead close to the\nhabitation of the surviving members of the household. Some Japanese\nauthorities declare that in the very earliest ages there was no\nburial, and that corpses were merely conveyed to desolate places, and\nthere abandoned to wild creatures. Be this as it may, we have\ndocumentary evidence, of an unmistakable sort, concerning the early\nfuneral-rites as they existed when the custom of burying had become\nestablished,--rites weird and strange, and having nothing in common\nwith the practices of settled civilization. There is reason to\nbelieve that the family-dwelling was at first permanently, not\ntemporarily, abandoned to the dead; and in view of the fact that the\ndwelling was a wooden hut of very simple structure, there is nothing\nimprobable in the supposition. At all events the corpse was left for\na certain period, called the period of mourning, either in the\nabandoned house where the death occurred, or in a shelter especially\nbuilt for the purpose; and, during the mourning period, offerings of\nfood and drink were set before the dead, and ceremonies performed\nwithout the house. One of these ceremonies consisted in the recital\nof poems in praise of the dead,--which poems were called shinobigoto.\nThere was music also of flutes and drums, and dancing; and at night a\nfire was kept burning before the house. After all this had been [36]\ndone for the fixed period of mourning--eight days, according to some\nauthorities, fourteen according to others--the corpse was interred.\nIt is probable that the deserted house may thereafter have become an\nancestral temple, or ghost-house,--prototype of the Shinto miya.\n\nAt an early time,--though when we do not know,--it certainly became\nthe custom to erect a moya, or \"mourning-house\" in the event of a\ndeath; and the rites were performed at the mourning-house prior to\nthe interment. The manner of burial was very simple: there were yet\nno tombs in the literal meaning of the term, and no tombstones. Only\na mound was thrown up over the grave; and the size of the mound\nvaried according to the rank of the dead.\n\nThe custom of deserting the house in which a death took place would\naccord with the theory of a nomadic ancestry for the Japanese people:\nit was a practice totally incompatible with a settled civilization\nlike that of the early Greeks and Romans, whose customs in regard to\nburial presuppose small landholdings in permanent occupation. But\nthere may have been, even in early times, some exceptions to general\ncustom--exceptions made by necessity. To-day, in various parts of the\ncountry, and perhaps more particularly in districts remote from\ntemples, it is the custom for farmers to bury their dead upon their\nown lands.\n\n[37]--At regular intervals after burial, ceremonies were performed\nat the graves; and food and drink were then served to the spirits.\nWhen the spirit-tablet had been introduced from China, and a true\ndomestic cult established, the practice of making offerings at the\nplace of burial was not discontinued. It survives to the present\ntime,--both in the Shinto and the Buddhist rite; and every spring an\nImperial messenger presents at the tomb of the Emperor Jimmu, the\nsame offerings of birds and fish and seaweed, rice and rice-wine,\nwhich were made to the spirit of the Founder of the Empire\ntwenty-five hundred years ago. But before the period of Chinese\ninfluence the family would seem to have worshipped its dead only\nbefore the mortuary house, or at the grave; and the spirits were yet\nsupposed to dwell especially in their tombs, with access to some\nmysterious subterranean world. They were supposed to need other\nthings besides nourishment; and it was customary to place in the\ngrave various articles for their ghostly use,--a sword, for example,\nin the case of a warrior; a mirror in the case of a woman,--together\nwith certain objects, especially prized during life,--such as objects\nof precious metal, and polished stones or gems .... At this stage of\nancestor-worship, when the spirits are supposed to require shadowy\nservice of a sort corresponding to that exacted during their\nlife-time in the body, we should expect to hear of [38] human\nsacrifices as well as of animal sacrifices. At the funerals of great\npersonages such sacrifices were common. Owing to beliefs of which all\nknowledge has been lost, these sacrifices assumed a character much\nmore cruel than that of the immolations of the Greek Homeric epoch.\nThe human victims* were buried up to the neck in a circle about the\ngrave, and thus left to perish under the beaks of birds and the teeth\nof wild beasts. [*How the horses and other animals were sacrificed,\ndoes not clearly appear.] The term applied to this form of\nimmolation,--hitogaki, or \"human hedge,\"--implies a considerable\nnumber of victims in each case. This custom was abolished, by the\nEmperor Suinin, about nineteen hundred years ago; and the Nihongi\ndeclares that it was then an ancient custom. Being grieved by the\ncrying of the victims interred in the funeral mound erected over the\ngrave of his brother, Yamato-hiko-no-mikoto, the Emperor is recorded\nto have said: \"It is a very painful thing to force those whom one has\nloved in life to follow one in death. Though it be an ancient custom,\nwhy follow it, if it is bad? From this time forward take counsel to\nput a stop to the following of the dead.\" Nomi-no-Sukune, a\ncourt-noble--now apotheosized as the patron of wrestlers--then\nsuggested the substitution of earthen images of men and horses for\nthe living victims; and his suggestion was approved. The hitogaki,\nwas thus abolished; but compulsory as well as voluntary following of\nthe [39] dead certainly continued for many hundred years after, since\nwe find the Emperor Kotoku issuing an edict on the subject in the\nyear 646 A.D.:--\n\n\"When a man dies, there have been cases of people sacrificing\nthemselves by strangulation, or of strangling others by way of\nsacrifice, or of compelling the dead man's horse to be sacrificed, or\nof burying valuables in the grave in honour of the dead, or of\ncutting off the hair and stabbing the thighs and [in that condition]\npronouncing a eulogy on the dead. Let all such old customs be\nentirely discontinued.\"--Nihongi; Aston's translation.\n\nAs regarded compulsory sacrifice and popular custom, this edict may\nhave had the immediate effect desired; but voluntary human sacrifices\nwere not definitively suppressed. With the rise of the military power\nthere gradually came into existence another custom of junshi, or\nfollowing one's lord in death,--suicide by the sword. It is said to\nhave begun about 1333, when the last of the Hojo regents, Takatoki,\nperformed suicide, and a number of his retainers took their own lives\nby harakiri, in order to follow their master. It may be doubted\nwhether this incident really established the practice. But by the\nsixteenth century junshi had certainly become an honoured custom\namong the samurai. Loyal retainers esteemed it a duty to kill\nthemselves after the death of their lord, in order to attend upon him\nduring his ghostly journey. A thousand years [40] of Buddhist\nteaching had not therefore sufficed to eradicate all primitive\nnotions' of sacrificial duty. The practice continued into the time of\nthe Tokugawa shogunate, when Iyeyasu made laws to check it. These\nlaws were rigidly applied,--the entire family of the suicide being\nheld responsible for a case of junshi: yet the custom cannot be said\nto have become extinct until considerably after the beginning of the\nera of Meiji. Even during my own time there have been\nsurvivals,--some of a very touching kind: suicides performed in hope\nof being able to serve or aid the spirit of master or husband or\nparent in the invisible world. Perhaps the strangest case was that of\na boy fourteen years old, who killed himself in order to wait upon\nthe spirit of a child, his master's little son.\n\nThe peculiar character of the early human sacrifices at graves, the\ncharacter of the funeral-rites, the abandonment of the house in which\ndeath had occurred.--all prove that the early ancestor-worship was of\na decidedly primitive kind. This is suggested also by the peculiar\nShinto horror of death as pollution: even at this day to attend a\nfuneral,--unless the funeral be conducted after the Shinto rite,--is\nreligious defilement. The ancient legend of Izanagi's descent to the\nnether world, in search of his lost spouse, illustrates the terrible\nbeliefs that once existed as to goblin-powers presiding over decay.\n[41] Between the horror of death as corruption, and the apotheosis of\nthe ghost, there is nothing incongruous: we must understand the\napotheosis itself as a propitiation. This earliest Way of the Gods\nwas a religion of perpetual fear. Not ordinary homes only were\ndeserted after a death: even the Emperors, during many centuries,\nwere wont to change their capital after the death of a predecessor.\nBut, gradually, out of the primal funeral-rites, a higher cult was\nevolved. The mourning-house, or moya, became transformed into the\nShinto temple, which still retains the shape of the primitive hut.\nThen under Chinese influence, the ancestral cult became established\nin the home; and Buddhism at a later day maintained this domestic\ncult. By degrees the household religion became a religion of\ntenderness as well as of duty, and changed and softened the thoughts\nof men about their dead. As early as the eighth century,\nancestor-worship appears to have developed the three principal forms\nunder which it still exists; and thereafter the family-cult began to\nassume a character which offers many resemblances to the domestic\nreligion of the old European civilizations.\n\nLet us now glance at the existing forms of this domestic cult,--the\nuniversal religion of Japan. In every home there is a shrine devoted\nto it. If the family profess only the Shinto belief, this shrine,\n[42] or mitamaya* (\"august-spirit-dwelling\"),--tiny model of a Shinto\ntemple,--is placed upon a shelf fixed against the wall of some inner\nchamber, at a height of about six feet from the floor. Such a shelf\nis called Mitama-San-no-tana, or--\"Shelf of the august spirits.\" [*It\nis more popularly termed miya, \"august house,\"--a name given to the\nordinary Shinto temples.] In the shrine are placed thin tablets of\nwhite wood, inscribed with the names of the household dead. Such\ntablets are called by a name signifying \"spirit-substitutes\"\n(mitamashiro), or by a probably older name signifying\n\"spirit-sticks.\" ... If the family worships its ancestors according\nto the Buddhist rite, the mortuary tablets are placed in the Buddhist\nhousehold-shrine, or Butsudan, which usually occupies the upper shelf\nof an alcove in one of the inner apartments. Buddhist\nmortuary-tablets (with some exceptions) are called ihai,--a term\nsignifying \"soul-commemoration.\" They are lacquered and gilded,\nusually having a carved lotos-flower as pedestal; and they do not, as\na rule, bear the real, but only the religious and posthumous name of\nthe dead. Now it is important to observe that, in either cult, the\nmortuary tablet actually suggests a miniature tombstone--which is a\nfact of some evolutional interest, though the evolution itself should\nbe Chinese rather than Japanese. The plain gravestones in Shinto\ncemeteries resemble in form the simple [43] wooden ghost-sticks, or\nspirit-sticks; while the Buddhist monuments in the old-fashioned\nBuddhist graveyards are shaped like the ihai, of which the form is\nslightly varied to indicate sex and age, which is also the case with\nthe tombstone.\n\nThe number of mortuary tablets in a household shrine does not\ngenerally exceed five or six,--only grandparents and parents and the\nrecently dead being thus represented; but the name of remoter\nancestors are inscribed upon scrolls, which are kept in the Butsudan\nor the mitamaya.\n\nWhatever be the family rite, prayers are repeated and offerings are\nplaced before the ancestral tablets every day. The nature of the\nofferings and the character of the prayers depend upon the religion\nof the household; but the essential duties of the cult are everywhere\nthe same. These duties are not to be neglected under any\ncircumstances; their performance in these times is usually intrusted\nto the elders, or to the women of the household.*\n\n[*Not, however, upon any public occasion,--such as a gathering of\nrelatives at the home for a religious anniversary: at such times the\nrites are performed by the head of the household.]\n\nSpeaking of the ancient custom (once prevalent in every Japanese\nhousehold, and still observed in Shinto homes) of making offerings to\nthe deities of the cooking range and of food, Sir Ernest Satow\nobserves: \"The rites in honour of these gods were at first performed\nby the head of the household; but in after-times the duty came to he\ndelegated to the women of the family\" (Ancient Japanese Rituals). We\nmay infer that in regard to the ancestral rites likewise, the same\ntransfer of duties occurred at an early time, for obvious reasons of\nconvenience. When the duty devolves upon the elders of the\nfamily--grandfather and grandmother--it is usually the grandmother\nwho attends to the offerings. In the Greek and Roman household the\nperformance of the domestic rites appears to have been obligatory\nupon the head of the household; but we know that the women took part\nin them.\n\n[44] There is no long ceremony, no imperative rule about prayers,\nnothing solemn: the food-offerings are selected out of the family\ncooking; the murmured or whispered invocations are short and few.\nBut, trifling as the rites may seem, their performance must never be\noverlooked. Not to make the offerings is a possibility undreamed of:\nso long as the family exists they must be made.\n\nTo describe the details of the domestic rite would require much\nspace,--not because they are complicated in themselves, but because\nthey are of a sort unfamiliar to Western experience, and vary\naccording to the sect of the family. But to consider the details will\nnot be necessary: the important matter is to consider the religion\nand its beliefs in relation to conduct and character. It should be\nrecognized that no religion is more sincere, no faith more touching\nthan this domestic worship, which regards the dead as continuing to\nform a part of the household life, and needing still the affection\nand the respect of their children and kindred. Originating in those\ndim ages when fear was stronger than love,--when the wish to please\nthe ghosts of the departed must have been chiefly inspired by dread\nof their anger,--the cult at last developed into a religion of\naffection; and this it yet remains. The belief that the dead [45]\nneed affection, that to neglect them is a cruelty, that their\nhappiness depends upon duty, is a belief that has almost cast out the\nprimitive fear of their displeasure. They are not thought of as dead:\nthey are believed to remain among those who loved them. Unseen they\nguard the home, and watch over the welfare of its inmates: they hover\nnightly in the glow of the shrine-lamp; and the stirring of its flame\nis the motion of them. They dwell mostly within their lettered\ntablets;--sometimes they can animate a tablet,--change it into the\nsubstance of a human body, and return in that body to active life, in\norder to succour and console. From their shrine they observe and hear\nwhat happens in the house; they share the family joys and sorrows;\nthey delight in the voices and the warmth of the life about them.\nThey want affection; but the morning and the evening greetings of the\nfamily are enough to make them happy. They require nourishment; but\nthe vapour of food contents them. They are exacting only as regards\nthe daily fulfilment of duty. They were the givers of life, the\ngivers of wealth, the makers and teachers of the present: they\nrepresent the past of the race, and all its sacrifices;--whatever the\nliving possess is from them. Yet how little do they require in\nreturn! Scarcely more than to be thanked, as the founders and\nguardians of the home, in simple words like these:--\"For aid\nreceived, by day and by night, accept, August Ones, our reverential\ngratitude.\"... [46]\n\nTo forget or neglect them, to treat them with rude indifference, is\nthe proof of an evil heart; to cause them shame by ill-conduct, to\ndisgrace their name by bad actions, is the supreme crime. They\nrepresent the moral experience of the race: whosoever denies that\nexperience denies them also, and falls to the level of the beast, or\nbelow it. They represent the unwritten law, the traditions of the\ncommune, the duties of all to all: whosoever offends against these,\nsins against the dead. And, finally, they represent the mystery of\nthe invisible: to Shinto belief, at least, they are gods.\n\nIt is to be remembered, of course, that the Japanese word for gods,\nKami, does not imply, any more than did the old Latin term,\ndii-manes, ideas like those which have become associated with the\nmodern notion of divinity. The Japanese term might be more closely\nrendered by some such expression as \"the Superiors,\" \"the Higher\nOnes\"; and it was formerly applied to living rulers as well as to\ndeities and ghosts. But it implies considerably more than the idea of\na disembodied spirit; for, according to old Shinto teaching the dead\nbecame world-rulers. They were the cause of all natural events,--of\nwinds, rains, and tides, of buddings and ripenings, of growth and\ndecay, of everything desirable or dreadful. They formed a kind of\nsubtler element,--an ancestral aether,--universally extending and\n[47] unceasingly operating. Their powers, when united for any\npurpose, were resistless; and in time of national peril they were\ninvoked en masse for aid against the foe .... Thus, to the eyes of\nfaith, behind each family ghost there extended the measureless\nshadowy power of countless Kami; and the sense of duty to the\nancestor was deepened by dim awe of the forces controlling the\nworld,--the whole invisible Vast. To primitive Shinto conception the\nuniverse was filled with ghosts;--to later Shinto conception the\nghostly condition was not limited by place or time, even in the case\nof individual spirits. \"Although,\" wrote Hirata, \"the home of the\nspirits is in the Spirit-house, they are equally present wherever\nthey are worshipped,--being gods, and therefore ubiquitous.\"\n\nThe Buddhist dead are not called gods, but Buddhas (Hotoke),--which\nterm, of course, expresses a pious hope, rather than a faith. The\nbelief is that they are only on their way to some higher state of\nexistence; and they should not be invoked or worshipped after the\nmanner of the Shinto gods: prayers should be said FOR them, not, as a\nrule, TO them.* [*Certain Buddhist rituals prove exceptions to this\nteaching.] But the vast majority of Japanese Buddhists are also\nfollowers of Shinto; and the two faiths, though seemingly\nincongruous, have long been reconciled in the popular mind. The\nBuddhist doctrine has [48] therefore modified the ideas attaching to\nthe cult much less deeply than might be supposed.\n\nIn all patriarchal societies with a settled civilization, there is\nevolved, out of the worship of ancestors, a Religion of Filial Piety.\nFilial piety still remains the supreme virtue among civilized peoples\npossessing an ancestor-cult.... By filial piety must not be\nunderstood, however, what is commonly signified by the English\nterm,--the devotion of children to parents. We must understand the\nword \"piety\" rather in its classic meaning, as the pietas of the\nearly Romans,--that is to say, as the religious sense of household\nduty. Reverence for the dead, as well as the sentiment of duty\ntowards the living; the affection of children to parents, and the\naffection of parents to children; the mutual duties of husband and\nwife; the duties likewise of sons-in-law and daughters-in-law to the\nfamily as a body; the duties of servant to master, and of master to\ndependent,--all these were included under the term. The family itself\nwas a religion; the ancestral home a temple. And so we find the\nfamily and the home to be in Japan, even at the present day. Filial\npiety in Japan does not mean only the duty of children to parents and\ngrandparents: it means still more, the cult of the ancestors,\nreverential service to the dead, the gratitude of the present to the\npast, and the conduct of the individual in relation [49] to the\nentire household. Hirata therefore declared that all virtues derived\nfrom the worship of ancestors; and his words, as translated by Sir\nErnest Satow, deserve particular attention:--\n\n\"It is the duty of a subject to be diligent in worshipping his\nancestors, whose minister he should consider himself to be. The\ncustom of adoption arose from the natural desire of having some one\nto perform sacrifices; and this desire ought not to be rendered of no\navail by neglect. Devotion to the memory of ancestors is the\nmainspring of all virtues. No one who discharges his duty to them\nwill ever be disrespectful to the gods or to his living parents. Such\na man also will be faithful to his prince, loyal to his friends, and\nkind and gentle to his wife and children. For the essence of this\ndevotion is indeed filial piety.\"\n\nFrom the sociologist's point of view, Hirata is right: it is\nunquestionably true that the whole system of Far-Eastern ethics\nderives from the religion of the household. By aid of that cult have\nbeen evolved all ideas of duty to the living as well as to the\ndead,--the sentiment of reverence, the sentiment of loyalty, the\nspirit of self-sacrifice, and the spirit of patriotism. What filial\npiety signifies as a religious force can best be imagined from the\nfact that you can buy life in the East--that it has its price in the\nmarket. This religion is the religion of China, and of countries\nadjacent; and life is for sale in China. It was the filial piety of\nChina that rendered [50] possible the completion of the Panama\nrailroad, where to strike the soil was to liberate death,--where the\nland devoured labourers by the thousand, until white and black labour\ncould no more be procured in quantity sufficient for the work. But\nlabour could be obtained from China--any amount of labour--at the\ncost of life; and the cost was paid; and multitudes of men came from\nthe East to toil and die, in order that the price of their lives\nmight be sent to their families.... I have no doubt that, were the\nsacrifice imperatively demanded, life could be as readily bought in\nJapan,--though not, perhaps, so cheaply. Where this religion\nprevails, the individual is ready to give his life, in a majority of\ncases, for the family, the home, the ancestors. And the filial piety\nimpelling such sacrifice becomes, by extension, the loyalty that will\nsacrifice even the family itself for the sake of the lord,--or, by\nyet further extension, the loyalty that prays, like Kusunoki\nMasashige, for seven successive lives to lay down on behalf of the\nsovereign. Out of filial piety indeed has been developed the whole\nmoral power that protects the state,--the power also that has seldom\nfailed to impose the rightful restraints upon official despotism\nwhenever that despotism grew dangerous to the common weal.\n\nProbably the filial piety that centred about the domestic altars of\nthe ancient West differed in little [51] from that which yet rules\nthe most eastern East. But we miss in Japan the Aryan hearth, the\nfamily altar with its perpetual fire. The Japanese home-religion\nrepresents, apparently, a much earlier stage of the cult than that\nwhich existed within historic time among the Greeks and Romans. The\nhomestead in Old Japan was not a stable institution like the Greek or\nthe Roman home; the custom of burying the family dead upon the family\nestate never became general; the dwelling itself never assumed a\nsubstantial and lasting character. It could not be literally said of\nthe Japanese warrior, as of the Roman, that he fought pro aris et\nfocis. There was neither altar nor sacred fire: the place of these\nwas taken by the spirit-shelf or shrine, with its tiny lamp, kindled\nafresh each evening; and, in early times, there were no Japanese\nimages of divinities. For Lares and Penates there were only the\nmortuary-tablets of the ancestors, and certain little tablets bearing\nnames of other gods--tutelar gods .... The presence of these frail\nwooden objects still makes the home; and they may be, of course,\ntransported anywhere.\n\nTo apprehend the full meaning of ancestor-worship as a family\nreligion, a living faith, is now difficult for the Western mind. We\nare able to imagine only in the vaguest way how our Aryan forefathers\nfelt and thought about their dead. But in the [52] living beliefs of\nJapan we find much to suggest the nature of the old Greek piety. Each\nmember of the family supposes himself, or herself, under perpetual\nghostly surveillance. Spirit-eyes are watching every act; spirit-ears\nare listening to every word. Thoughts too, not less than deeds, are\nvisible to the gaze of the dead: the heart must be pure, the mind\nmust be under control, within the presence of the spirits. Probably\nthe influence of such beliefs, uninterruptedly exerted upon conduct\nduring thousands of years, did much to form the charming side of\nJapanese character. Yet there is nothing stern or solemn in this\nhome-religion to-day,--nothing of that rigid and unvarying discipline\nsupposed by Fustel de Coulanges to have especially characterized the\nRoman cult. It is a religion rather of gratitude and tenderness; the\ndead being served by the household as if they were actually present\nin the body .... I fancy that if we were able to enter for a moment\ninto the vanished life of some old Greek city, we should find the\ndomestic religion there not less cheerful than the Japanese home-cult\nremains to-day. I imagine that Greek children, three thousand years\nago, must have watched, like the Japanese children of to-day, for a\nchance to steal some of the good things offered to the ghosts of the\nancestors; and I fancy that Greek parents must have chidden quite as\ngently as Japanese parents [53] chide in this era of Meiji,--mingling\nreproof with instruction, and hinting of weird possibilities.*\n\n[*Food presented to the dead may afterwards be eaten by the elders of\nthe household, or given to pilgrims; but it is said that if children\neat of it, they will grow with feeble memories, and incapable of\nbecoming scholars.]\n\n\n\n[54]\n\n[55]\n\nTHE JAPANESE FAMILY\n\nThe great general idea, the fundamental idea, underlying every\npersistent ancestor-worship, is that the welfare of the living\ndepends upon the welfare of the dead. Under the influence of this\nidea, and of the cult based upon it, were developed the early\norganization of the family, the laws regarding property and\nsuccession, the whole structure, in short, of ancient\nsociety,--whether in the Western or the Eastern world.\n\nBut before considering how the social structure in old Japan was\nshaped by the ancestral cult, let me again remind the reader that\nthere were at first no other gods than the dead. Even when Japanese\nancestor-worship evolved a mythology, its gods were only transfigured\nghosts,--and this is the history of all mythology. The ideas of\nheaven and hell did not exist among the primitive Japanese, nor any\nnotion of metempsychosis. The Buddhist doctrine of rebirth--a late\nborrowing--was totally inconsistent with the archaic Japanese\nbeliefs, and required an elaborate metaphysical system to support it.\nBut we may suppose the early ideas of the Japanese about the dead to\nhave been much [56] like those of the Greeks of the pre-Homeric era.\nThere was an underground world to which spirits descended; but they\nwere supposed to haunt by preference their own graves, or their\n\"ghost-houses.\" Only by slow degrees did the notion of their power of\nubiquity become evolved. But even then they were thought to be\nparticularly attached to their tombs, shrines, and homesteads. Hirata\nwrote, in the early part of the nineteenth century: \"The spirits of\nthe dead continue to exist in the unseen world which is everywhere\nabout us; and they all become gods of varying character and degrees\nof influence. Some reside in temples built in their honour; others\nhover near their tombs; and they continue to render service to their\nprince, parents, wives, and children, as when in the body.\" Evidently\n\"the unseen world\" was thought to be in some sort a duplicate of the\nvisible world, and dependent upon the help of the living for its\nprosperity. The dead and the living were mutually dependent. The\nall-important necessity for the ghost was sacrificial worship; the\nall-important necessity for the man was to provide for the future\ncult of his own spirit; and to die without assurance of a cult was\nthe supreme calamity .... Remembering these facts we can understand\nbetter the organization of the patriarchal family,--shaped to\nmaintain and to provide for the cult of its dead, any neglect of\nwhich cult was believed to involve misfortune.\n\n[57] The reader is doubtless aware that in the old Aryan family the\nbond of union was not the bond of affection, but a bond of religion,\nto which natural affection was altogether subordinate. This condition\ncharacterizes the patriarchal family wherever ancestor-worship\nexists. Now the Japanese family, like the ancient Greek or Roman\nfamily, was a religious society in the strictest sense of the term;\nand a religious society it yet remains. Its organization was\nprimarily shaped in accordance with the requirements of\nancestor-worship; its later imported doctrines of filial piety had\nbeen already developed in China to meet the needs of an older and\nsimilar religion. We might expect to find in the structure, the laws,\nand the customs of the Japanese family many points of likeness to the\nstructure and the traditional laws of the old Aryan\nhousehold,--because the law of sociological evolution admits of only\nminor exceptions. And many such points of likeness are obvious. The\nmaterials for a serious comparative study have not yet been\ncollected: very much remains to be learned regarding the past history\nof the Japanese family. But, along certain general lines, the\nresemblances between domestic institutions in ancient Europe and\ndomestic institutions in the Far East can be clearly established.\n\nAlike in the early European and in the old Japanese civilization it\nwas believed that the prosperity [58] of the family depended upon the\nexact fulfilment of the duties of the ancestral cult; and, to a\nconsiderable degree, this belief rules the life of the Japanese\nfamily to-day. It is still thought that the good fortune of the\nhousehold depends on the observance of its cult, and that the\ngreatest possible calamity is to die without leaving a male heir to\nperform the rites and to make the offerings. The paramount duty of\nfilial piety among the early Greeks and Romans was to provide for the\nperpetuation of the family cult; and celibacy was therefore generally\nforbidden,--the obligation to marry being enforced by opinion where\nnot enforced by legislation. Among the free classes of Old Japan,\nmarriage was also, as a general rule, obligatory in the case of a\nmale heir: otherwise, where celibacy was not condemned by law, it was\ncondemned by custom. To die without offspring was, in the case of a\nyounger son, chiefly a personal misfortune; to die without leaving a\nmale heir, in the case of an elder son and successor, was a crime\nagainst the ancestors,--the cult being thereby threatened with\nextinction. No excuse existed for remaining childless: the family law\nin Japan, precisely as in ancient Europe, having amply provided\nagainst such a contingency. In case that a wife proved barren, she\nmight be divorced. In case that there were reasons for not divorcing\nher, a concubine might be taken for the purpose of obtaining an heir.\nFurthermore, every family representative was privileged [59] to adopt\nan heir. An unworthy son, again, might be disinherited, and another\nyoung man adopted in his place. Finally, in case that a man had\ndaughters but no son, the succession and the continuance of the cult\ncould be assured by adopting a husband for the eldest daughter.\n\nBut, as in the antique European family, daughters could not inherit:\ndescent being in the male line, it was necessary to have a male heir.\nIn old Japanese belief, as in old Greek and Roman belief, the father,\nnot the mother, was the life-giver; the creative principle was\nmasculine; the duty of maintaining the cult rested with the man, not\nwith the woman.*\n\n[*Wherever, among ancestor-worshipping races, descent is in the male\nline, the cult follows the male line. But the reader is doubtless\naware that a still more primitive form of society than the\npatriarchal--the matriarchal--is supposed to have had its\nancestor-worship. Mr. Spencer observes: \"What has happened when\ndescent in the female line obtains, is not clear. I have met with no\nstatement showing that, in societies characterized by this usage, the\nduty of administering to the double of the dead man devolved on one\nof his children rather than on others,\"--Principles of Sociology,\nVol. III, section 601.]\n\nThe woman shared the cult; but she could not maintain it. Besides,\nthe daughters of the family, being destined, as a general rule, to\nmarry into other households, could bear only a temporary relation to\nthe home-cult. It was necessary that the religion of the wife should\nbe the religion of the husband; and the Japanese, like the Greek\nwoman, on marrying into another household, necessarily became\nattached to the cult of her husband's family. For this reason\nespecially the females in the patriarchal [60] family are not equal\nto the males; the sister cannot rank with the brother. It is true\nthat the Japanese daughter, like the Greek daughter, could remain\nattached to her own family even after marriage, providing that a\nhusband were adopted for her,--that is to say, taken into the family\nas a son. But even in this case, she could only share in the cult,\nwhich it then became the duty of the adopted husband to maintain.\n\nThe constitution of the patriarchal family everywhere derives from\nits ancestral cult; and before considering the subjects of marriage\nand adoption in Japan, it will be necessary to say something about\nthe ancient family-organization. The ancient family was called\nuji,--a word said to have originally signified the same thing as the\nmodern term uchi,--\"interior,\" or \"household,\" but certainly used\nfrom very early times in the sense of \"name\"--clan-name especially.\nThere were two kinds of uji: the o-uji, or great families, and the\nko-uji, or lesser families,--either term signifying a large body of\npersons united by kinship, and by the cult of a common ancestor. The\no-uji corresponded in some degree to the Greek (Greek genos) or the\nRoman gens: the ko-uji were its branches, and subordinate to it. The\nunit of society was the uji. Each o-uji, with its dependent ko-uji,\nrepresented something like a phratry or curia; and all the larger\ngroups making [61] up the primitive Japanese society were but\nmultiplications of the uji,--whether we call them clans, tribes, or\nhordes. With the advent of a settled civilization, the greater groups\nnecessarily divided and subdivided; but the smallest subdivision\nstill retained its primal organization. Even the modern Japanese\nfamily partly retains that organization. It does not mean only a\nhousehold: it means rather what the Greek or Roman family became\nafter the dissolution of the gens. With ourselves the family has been\ndisintegrated: when we talk of a man's family, we mean his wife and\nchildren. But the Japanese family is still a large group. As\nmarriages take place early, it may consist, even as a household, of\ngreat-grandparents, grandparents, parents, and children--sons and\ndaughters of several generations; but it commonly extends much beyond\nthe limits of one household. In early times it might constitute the\nentire population of a village or town; and there are still in Japan\nlarge communities of persons all bearing the same family name. In\nsome districts it was formerly the custom to keep all the children,\nas far as possible, within the original family group--husbands being\nadopted for all the daughters. The group might thus consist of sixty\nor more persons, dwelling under the same roof; and the houses were of\ncourse constructed, by successive extension, so as to meet the\nrequirement. (I am mentioning these curious facts [62] only by way of\nillustration.) But the greater uji, after the race had settled down,\nrapidly multiplied; and although there are said to be\nhouse-communities still in some remote districts of the country, the\nprimal patriarchal groups must have been broken up almost everywhere\nat some very early period. Thereafter the main cult of the uji did\nnot cease to be the cult also of its sub-divisions: all members of\nthe original gens continued to worship the common ancestor, or\nuji-no-kami, \"the god of the uji.\" By degrees the ghost-house of the\nuji-no-kami became transformed into the modern Shinto parish-temple;\nand the ancestral spirit became the local tutelar god, whose modern\nappellation, ujigami, is but a shortened form of his ancient title,\nuji-no-kami. Meanwhile, after the general establishment of the\ndomestic cult, each separate household maintained the special cult of\nits own dead, in addition to the communal cult. This religious\ncondition still continues. The family may include several households;\nbut each household maintains the cult of its dead. And the\nfamily-group, whether large or small, preserves its ancient\nconstitution and character; it is still a religious society, exacting\nobedience, on the part of all its members, to traditional custom.\n\nSo much having been explained, the customs regarding marriage and\nadoption, in their relation [63] to the family hierarchy, can be\nclearly understood. But a word first regarding this hierarchy, as it\nexists to-day. Theoretically the power of the head of the family is\nstill supreme in the household. All must obey the head. Furthermore\nthe females must obey the males--the wives, the husbands; and the\nyounger members of the family are subject to the elder members. The\nchildren must not only obey the parents and grandparents, but must\nobserve among themselves the domestic law of seniority: thus the\nyounger brother should obey the elder brother, and the younger sister\nthe elder sister. The rule of precedence is enforced gently, and is\ncheerfully obeyed even in small matters: for example, at meal-time,\nthe elder boy is served first, the second son next, and so on,--an\nexception being made in the case of a very young child, who is not\nobliged to wait. This custom accounts for an amusing popular term\noften applied in jest to a second son, \"Master Cold-Rice\"\n(Hiameshi-San); as the second son, having to wait until both infants\nand elders have been served, is not likely to find his portion\ndesirably hot when it reaches him .... Legally, the family can have\nbut one responsible head. It may be the grandfather, the father, or\nthe eldest son; and it is generally the eldest son, because according\nto a custom of Chinese origin, the old folks usually resign their\nactive authority as soon as the eldest son is able to take charge of\naffairs. [64] The subordination of young to old, and of females to\nmales,--in fact the whole existing constitution of the\nfamily,--suggests a great deal in regard to the probably stricter\norganization of the patriarchal family, whose chief was at once ruler\nand priest, with almost unlimited powers. The organization was\nprimarily, and still remains, religious: the marital bond did not\nconstitute the family; and the relation of the parent to the\nhousehold depended upon his or her relation to the family as a\nreligious body. To-day also, the girl adopted into a household as\nwife ranks only as an adopted child: marriage signifies adoption. She\nis called \"flower-daughter\" (hana-yome). In like manner, and for the\nsame reasons, the young man received into a household as a husband of\none of the daughters, ranks merely as an adopted son. The adopted\nbride or bridegroom is necessarily subject to the elders, and may be\ndismissed by their decision. As for the adopted husband, his position\nis both delicate and difficult,--as an old Japanese proverb bears\nwitness: Konuka san-go areba, mukoyoshi to naruna (\"While you have\neven three go* of rice-bran left, do not become a son-in-law\"). [*A\ngo is something more than a pint.] Jacob does not have to wait for\nRachel: he is given to Rachel on demand; and his service then begins.\nAnd after twice seven years of service, Jacob may be sent away. In\nthat event his children do not any more belong to him. [65] but to\nthe family. His adoption may have had nothing to do with affection;\nand his dismissal may have nothing to do with misconduct. Such\nmatters, however they may be settled in law, are really decided by\nfamily interests--interests relating to the maintenance of the house\nand of its cult.**\n\n[**Recent legislation has been in favour of the mukoyoshi; but, as a\nrule, the law is seldom resorted to except by men dismissed from the\nfamily for misconduct, and anxious to make profit by the dismissal.]\n\nIt should not be forgotten that, although a daughter-in-law or a\nson-in-law could in former times be dismissed almost at will, the\nquestion of marriage in the old Japanese family was a matter of\nreligious importance,--marriage being one of the chief duties of\nfilial piety. This was also the case in the early Greek and Roman\nfamily; and the marriage ceremony was performed, as it is now\nperformed in Japan, not at a temple, but in the home. It was a rite\nof the family religion,--the rite by which the bride was adopted into\nthe cult in the supposed presence of the ancestral spirits. Among the\nprimitive Japanese there was probably no corresponding ceremony; but\nafter the establishment of the domestic cult, the marriage ceremony\nbecame a religious rite, and this it still remains. Ordinary\nmarriages are not, however, performed before the household shrine or\nin front of the ancestral tablets, except under certain\ncircumstances. The rule, as regards such ordinary marriages, seems to\nbe that [66] if the parents of the bridegroom are yet alive, this is\nnot done; but if they are dead, then the bridegroom leads his bride\nbefore their mortuary tablets, where she makes obeisance. Among the\nnobility, in former times at least, the marriage ceremony appears to\nhave been more distinctly religious,--judging from the following\ncurious relation in the book Shorei-Hikki, or \"Record of\nCeremonies\"*: \"At the weddings of the great, the bridal-chamber is\ncomposed of three rooms thrown into one [by removal of the\nsliding-screens ordinarily separating them], and newly decorated ....\nThe shrine for the image of the family-god is placed upon a shelf\nadjoining the sleeping-place.\" It is noteworthy also that Imperial\nmarriages are always officially announced to the ancestors; and that\nthe marriage of the heir-apparent, or other male offspring of the\nImperial house, is performed before the Kashiko-dokoro, or imperial\ntemple of the ancestors, which stands within the palace-grounds.**\n[**That was the case at the marriage of the present Crown-Prince.] As\na general rule it would appear that the evolution of the\nmarriage-ceremony in Japan chiefly followed Chinese precedent; and in\nthe Chinese patriarchal family the ceremony is in its own way quite\nas much of a religious rite as the early Greek or Roman marriage. And\nthough the relation of the Japanese [67] rite to the family cult is\nless marked, it becomes sufficiently clear upon investigation. The\nalternate drinking of rice-wine, by bridegroom and bride, from the\nsame vessels, corresponds in a sort to the Roman confarreatio. By the\nwedding-rite the bride is adopted into the family religion. She is\nadopted not only by the living but by the dead; she must thereafter\nrevere the ancestors of her husband as her own ancestors; and should\nthere be no elders in the household, it will become her duty to make\nthe offerings, as representative of her husband. With the cult of her\nown family she has nothing more to do; and the funeral ceremonies\nperformed upon her departure from the parental roof,--the solemn\nsweeping-out of the house-rooms, the lighting of the death-fire\nbefore the gate,--are significant of this religious separation.\n\n[*The translation is Mr. Mitford's.  There are no \"images\" of the\nfamily-god, and I suppose that the family's Shinto-shrine is meant,\nwith its ancestral tablets.]\n\nSpeaking of the Greek and Roman marriage, M. de Coulanges\nobserves:--\"Une telle religion ne pouvait pas admettre la polygamie.\"\nAs relating to the highly developed domestic cult of those\ncommunities considered by the author of La Cite Antique, his\nstatement will scarcely be called in question. But as regards\nancestor-worship in general, it would be incorrect; since polygamy or\npolygyny, and polyandry may coexist with ruder forms of\nancestor-worship. The Western-Aryan societies, in the epoch studied\nby M. de Coulanges, were practically [68] monogamic. The ancient\nJapanese society was polygynous; and polygyny persisted, after the\nestablishment of the domestic cult. In early times, the marital\nrelation itself would seem to have been indefinite. No distinction\nwas made between the wife and the concubines: \"they were classed\ntogether as 'women.'\"* [*Satow: The Revival of Pure Shintau] Probably\nunder Chinese influence the distinction was afterwards sharply drawn;\nand with the progress of civilization, the general tendency was\ntowards monogamy, although the ruling classes remained polygynous. In\nthe 54th article of Iyeyasu's legacy, this phase of the social\ncondition is clearly expressed,--a condition which prevailed down to\nthe present era:--\n\n\"The position a wife holds towards a concubine is the same as that of\na lord to his vassal. The Emperor has twelve imperial concubines. The\nprinces may have eight concubines. Officers of the highest class may\nhave five mistresses. A Samurai may have two handmaids. All below\nthis are ordinary married men.\"\n\nThis would suggest that concubinage had long been (with some possible\nexceptions) an exclusive privilege; and that it should have persisted\ndown to the period of the abolition of the daimiates and of the\nmilitary class, is sufficiently explained by the militant character\nof the ancient society.* Though [69] it is untrue that domestic\nancestor-worship cannot coexist with polygamy or polygyny (Mr.\nSpencer's term is the most inclusive), it is at least true that such\nworship is favoured by the monogamic relation, and tends therefore to\nestablish it,--since monogamy insures to the family succession a\nstability that no other relation can offer. We may say that, although\nthe old Japanese society was not monogamic, the natural tendency was\ntowards monogamy, as the condition best according with the religion\nof the family, and with the moral feeling of the masses.\n\n[*See especially Herbert Spencer's chapter, \"The Family,\" in Vol. I,\nPrinciples of Sociology, section 315.]\n\nOnce that the domestic ancestor-cult had become universally\nestablished, the question of marriage, as a duty of filial pity,\ncould not be judiciously left to the will of the young people\nthemselves. It was a matter to be decided by the family, not by the\nchildren; for mutual inclination could not be suffered to interfere\nwith the requirements of the household religion. It was not a\nquestion of affection, but of religious duty; and to think otherwise\nwas impious. Affection might and ought to spring up from the\nrelation. But any affection powerful enough to endanger the cohesion\nof the family would be condemned. A wife might therefore be divorced\nbecause her husband had become too much attached to her; an adopted\nhusband might be divorced because of his power to exercise, through\naffection, too [70] great an influence upon the daughter of the\nhouse. Other causes would probably he found for the divorce in either\ncase--but they would not be difficult to find.\n\nFor the same reason that connubial affection could be tolerated only\nwithin limits, the natural rights of parenthood (as we understand\nthem) were necessarily restricted in the old Japanese household.\nMarriage being for the purpose of obtaining heirs to perpetuate the\ncult, the children were regarded as belonging to the family rather\nthan to the father and mother. Hence, in case of divorcing the son's\nwife, or the adopted son-in-law,--or of disinheriting the married\nson,--the children would be retained by the family. For the natural\nright of the young parents was considered subordinate to the\nreligious rights of the house. In opposition to those rights, no\nother rights could be tolerated. Practically, of course, according to\nmore or less fortunate circumstances, the individual might enjoy\nfreedom under the paternal roof; but theoretically and legally there\nwas no freedom in the old Japanese family for any member of it,--not\nexcepting even its acknowledged chief, whose responsibilities were\ngreat. Every person, from the youngest child up to the grandfather,\nwas subject to somebody else; and every act of domestic life was\nregulated by traditional custom.\n\nLike the Greek or Roman father, the patriarch of the Japanese family\nappears to have had in early [71] times powers of life and death over\nall the members of the household. In the ruder ages the father might\neither kill or sell his children; and afterwards, among the ruling\nclasses his powers remained almost unlimited until modern times.\nAllowing for certain local exceptions, explicable by tradition, or\nclass-exceptions, explicable by conditions of servitude, it may be\nsaid that originally the Japanese paterfamilias was at once ruler,\npriest, and magistrate within the family. He could compel his\nchildren to marry or forbid them to marry; he could disinherit or\nrepudiate them; he could ordain the profession or calling which they\nwere to follow; and his power extended to all members of the family,\nand to the household dependents. At different epochs limits were\nplaced to the exercise of this power, in the case of the ordinary\npeople; but in the military class, the patria potestas was almost\nunrestricted. In its extreme form, the paternal power controlled\neverything,--the right to life and liberty,--the right to marry, or\nto keep the wife or husband already espoused,--the right to one's own\nchildren,--the right to hold property,--the right to hold\noffice,--the right to choose or follow an occupation. The family was\na despotism.\n\nIt should not be forgotten, however, that the absolutism prevailing\nin the patriarchal family has its justification in a religious\nbelief,--in the conviction that everything should be sacrificed for\nthe sake [72] of the cult, and every member of the family should be\nready to give up even life, if necessary, to assure the perpetuity of\nthe succession. Remembering this, it becomes easy to understand why,\neven in communities otherwise advanced in civilization, it should\nhave seemed right that a father could kill or sell his children. The\ncrime of a son might result in the extinction of a cult through the\nruin of the family,--especially in a militant society like that of\nJapan, where the entire family was held responsible for the acts of\neach of its members, so that a capital offence would involve the\npenalty of death on the whole of the household, including the\nchildren. Again, the sale of a daughter, in time of extreme need,\nmight save a house from ruin; and filial piety exacted submission to\nsuch sacrifice for the sake of the cult.\n\nAs in the Aryan family,* property descended by right of primogeniture\nfrom father to son; the eldest-born, even in cases where the other\nproperty was to be divided among the children, always inheriting the\nhomestead. The homestead property was, however, family property; and\nit passed to the eldest son as representative, not as individual.\nGenerally speaking, sons could not hold property, without the\nfather's consent, during such time as he retained his [73] headship.\nAs a rule,--to which there were various exceptions,--a daughter could\nnot inherit; and in the case of an only daughter, for whom a husband\nhad been adopted, the homestead property would pass to the adopted\nhusband, because (until within recent times) a woman could not become\nthe head of a family. This was the case also in the Western Aryan\nhousehold, in ancestor-worshipping times.\n\n[*The laws of succession in Old Japan differed considerably according\nto class, place, and era; the entire subject has not yet been fully\ntreated; and only a few safe general statements can be ventured at\nthe present time.]\n\nTo modern thinking, the position of woman in the old Japanese family\nappears to have been the reverse of happy. As a child she was\nsubject, not only to the elders, but to all the male adults of the\nhousehold. Adopted into another household as wife, she merely passed\ninto a similar state of subjection, unalleviated by the affection\nwhich parental and fraternal ties assured her in the ancestral home.\nHer retention in the family of her husband did not depend upon his\naffection, but upon the will of the majority, and especially of the\nelders. Divorced, she could not claim her children: they belonged to\nthe family of the husband. In any event her duties as wife were more\ntrying than those of a hired servant. Only in old age could she hope\nto exercise some authority; but even in old age she was under\ntutelage--throughout her entire life she was in tutelage. \"A woman\ncan have no house of her own in the Three Universes,\" declared an old\nJapanese proverb. Neither could she have a cult of her own: there was\nno special cult for the women of a family [74]--no ancestral rite\ndistinct from that of the husband. And the higher the rank of the\nfamily into which she entered by marriage, the more difficult would\nbe her position. For a woman of the aristocratic class no freedom\nexisted: she could not even pass beyond her own gate except in a\npalanquin (kago) or under escort; and her existence as a wife was\nlikely to be embittered by the presence of concubines in the house.\n\nSuch was the patriarchal family in old times; yet it is probable that\nconditions were really better than the laws and the customs would\nsuggest. The race is a joyous and kindly one; and it discovered, long\ncenturies ago, many ways of smoothing the difficulties of life, and\nof modifying the harsher exactions of law and custom. The great\npowers of the family-head were probably but seldom exercised in cruel\ndirections. He might have legal rights of the most formidable\ncharacter; but these were required by reason of his responsibilities,\nand were not likely to be used against communal judgment. It must be\nremembered that the individual was not legally considered in former\ntimes: the family only was recognized; and the head of it legally\nexisted only as representative. If he erred, the whole family was\nliable to suffer the penalty of his error. Furthermore, every extreme\nexercise of his authority involved proportionate responsibilities. He\ncould [75] divorce his wife, or compel his son to divorce the adopted\ndaughter-in-law; but in either case he would have to account for this\naction to the family of the divorced; and the divorce-right,\nespecially in the samurai class, was greatly restrained by the fear\nof family resentment; the unjust dismissal of a wife being counted as\nan insult to her kindred. He might disinherit an only son; but in\nthat event he would be obliged to adopt a kinsman. He might kill or\nsell either son or daughter; but unless he belonged to some abject\nclass, he would have to justify his action to the community.* He\nmight be reckless in his management of the family property; but in\nthat case an appeal to communal authority was possible, and the\nappeal might result in his deposition. So far as we are able to judge\nfrom the remains of old Japanese law which have been studied, it\nwould seem to have been the general rule that the family-head could\nnot sell or alienate the estate. Though the family-rule was despotic,\nit was the rule of a body rather than of a chief; the family-head\nreally exercising authority in the name of the rest .... In this\nsense, the family still remains a despotism; but the powers of its\nlegal head are now checked, from within as well as from without, [76]\nby later custom. The acts of adoption, disinheritance, marriage, or\ndivorce, are decided usually by general consent; and the decision of\nthe household and kindred is required in the taking of any important\nstep to the disadvantage of the individual.\n\n[*Samurai fathers might kill a daughter convicted of unchastity, or\nkill a son guilty of any action calculated to disgrace the family\nname. But they would not sell a child. The sale of daughters was\npractised only by the abject classes, or by families of other castes\nreduced to desperate extremities. A girl might, however, sell herself\nfor the sake of her family.]\n\nOf course the old family-organization had certain advantages which\ncompensated the individual for his state of subjection. It was a\nsociety of mutual help; and it was not less powerful to give aid,\nthan to enforce obedience. Every member could do something to assist\nanother member in case of need: each had a right to the protection of\nall. This remains true of the family to-day. In a well-conducted\nhousehold, where every act is performed according to the old forms of\ncourtesy and kindness,--where no harsh word is ever spoken, where the\nyoung look up to the aged with affectionate respect,--where those\nwhom years have incapacitated for more active duty, take upon\nthemselves the care of the children, and render priceless service in\nteaching and training,--an ideal condition has been realized. The\ndaily life of such a home,--in which the endeavour of each is to make\nexistence as pleasant as possible for all.,--in which the bond of\nunion is really love and gratitude,--represents religion in the best\nand purest sense; and the place is holy ....\n\nIt remains to speak of the dependants in the [77] ancient family.\nThough the fact has not yet been fully established, it is probable\nthat the first domestics were slaves or serfs; and the condition of\nservants in later times,--especially of those in families of the\nruling classes,--was much like that of slaves in the early Greek and\nRoman families. Though necessarily treated as inferiors, they were\nregarded as members of the household: they were trusted familiars,\npermitted to share in the pleasures of the family, and to be present\nat most of its reunions. They could legally be dealt with harshly;\nbut there is little doubt that, as a rule, they were treated\nkindly,--absolute loyalty being expected from them. The best\nindication of their status in past times is furnished by yet\nsurviving customs. Though the power of the family over the servant no\nlonger exists in law or in fact, the pleasant features of the old\nrelation continue; and they are of no little interest. The family\ntakes a sincere interest in the welfare of its domestics,--almost\nsuch interest as would be shown in the case of poorer kindred.\nFormerly the family furnishing servants to a household of higher\nrank, stood to the latter in the relation of vassal to liege-lord;\nand between the two there existed a real bond of loyalty and\nkindliness. The occupation of servant was then hereditary; children\nwere trained for the duty from an early age. After the man-servant or\nmaidservant had arrived at a certain age, permission to [78] marry\nwas accorded; and the relation of service then ceased, but not the\nbond of loyalty. The children of the married servants would be sent,\nwhen old enough, to work in the house of the master, and would leave\nit only when the time also came for them to marry. Relations of this\nkind still exist between certain aristocratic families and former\nvassal-families, and conserve some charming traditions and customs of\nhereditary service, unchanged for hundreds of years.\n\nIn feudal times, of course, the bond between master and servant was\nof the most serious kind; the latter being expected, in case of need,\nto sacrifice life and all else for the sake of the master or of the\nmaster's household. This also was the loyalty demanded of the Greek\nand Roman domestic,--before there had yet come into existence that\ninhuman form of servitude which reduced the toiler to the condition\nof a beast of burden; and the relation was partly a religious one.\nThere does not seem to have been in ancient Japan any custom\ncorresponding to that, described by M. de Coulanges, of adopting the\nGreek or Roman servant into the household cult. But as the Japanese\nvassal-families furnishing domestics were, as vassals, necessarily\nattached to the clan-cult of their lord, the relation of the servant\nto the family was to some extent a religious bond.\n\n[79] The reader will be able to understand, from the facts of this\nchapter, to what extent the individual was sacrificed to the family,\nas a religious body. From servant to master--up through all degrees\nof the household hierarchy--the law of duty was the same: obedience\nabsolute to custom and tradition. The ancestral cult permitted no\nindividual freedom: nobody could live according to his or her\npleasure; every one had to live according to rule. The individual did\nnot even have a legal existence;--the family was the unit of society.\nEven its patriarch existed in law as representative only, responsible\nboth to the living and the dead. His public responsibility, however,\nwas not determined merely by civil law. It was determined by another\nreligious bond,--that of the ancestral cult of the clan or tribe; and\nthis public form of ancestor-worship was even more exacting than the\nreligion of the home.\n\n\n\n[80]\n\n[81]\n\nTHE COMMUNAL CULT\n\nAs by the religion of the household each individual was ruled in\nevery action of domestic life, so, by the religion of the village or\ndistrict the family was ruled in all its relations to the outer\nworld. Like the religion of the home, the religion of the commune was\nancestor-worship. What the household shrine represented to the\nfamily, the Shinto parish-temple represented to the community; and\nthe deity there worshipped as tutelar god was called Ujigami, the god\nof the Uji, which term originally signified the patriarchal family or\ngens, as well as the family name.\n\nSome obscurity still attaches to the question of the original\nrelation of the community to the Uji-god. Hirata declares the god of\nthe Uji to have been the common ancestor of the clan-family,--the\nghost of the first patriarch; and this opinion (allowing for sundry\nexceptions) is almost certainly correct. But it is difficult to\ndecide whether the Uji-ko, or \"children of the family\" (as Shinto\nparishioners are still termed) at first included only the descendants\nof the clan-ancestor, or also the whole of the inhabitants [82] of\nthe district ruled by the clan. It is certainly not true at the\npresent time that the tutelar deity of each Japanese district\nrepresents the common ancestor of its inhabitants,--though, to this\ngeneral rule, there might be found exception in some of the remoter\nprovinces. Most probably the god of the Uji was first worshipped by\nthe people of the district rather as the spirit of a former ruler, or\nthe patron-god of a ruling family, than as the spirit of a common\nancestor. It has been tolerably well proved that the bulk of the\nJapanese people were in a state of servitude from before the\nbeginning of the historic period, and so remained until within\ncomparatively recent times. The subject-classes may not have had at\nfirst a cult of their own: their religion would most likely have been\nthat of their masters. In later times the vassal was certainly\nattached to the cult of the lord. But it is difficult as yet to\nventure any general statement as to the earliest phase of the\ncommunal cult in Japan; for the history of the Japanese nation is not\nthat of a single people of one blood, but a history of many\nclan-groups, of different origin, gradually brought together to form\none huge patriarchal society.\n\nHowever, it is quite safe to assume, with the best native\nauthorities, that the Ujigami were originally clan-deities, and that\nthey were usually, though not invariably, worshipped as\nclan-ancestors. [83] Some Ujigami belong to the historic period. The\nwar god Hachiman, for example,--to whom parish-temples are dedicated\nin almost every large city,--is the apotheosized spirit of the\nEmperor Ojin, patron of the famed Minamoto clan. This is an example\nof Ujigami worship in which the clan-god is not an ancestor. But in\nmany instances the Ujigami is really the ancestor of an Uji; as in\nthe case of the great deity of Kasuga, from whom the Fujiwara clan\nclaimed descent. Altogether there were in ancient Japan, after the\nbeginning of the historic era, 1182 clans, great and small; and these\nappear to have established the same number of cults. We find, as\nmight be expected, that the temples now called Ujigami--which is to\nsay, Shinto parish-temples in general--are always dedicated to a\nparticular class of divinities, and never dedicated to certain other\ngods. Also, it is significant that in every large town there are\nShinto temples dedicated to the same Uji-gods,--proving the transfer\nof communal worship from its place of origin. Thus the Izumo\nworshipper of Kasuga-Sama can find in Osaka, Kyoto, Tokyo,\nparish-temples dedicated to his patron: the Kyushu worshipper of\nHachiman-Sama can place himself under the protection of the same\ndeity in Musashi quite as well as in Higo or Bungo. Another fact\nworth observing is that the Ujigami temple is not necessarily the\nmost important Shinto temple in the parish: it is the parish-temple,\n[84] and important to the communal worship; but it may be outranked\nand overshadowed by some adjacent temple dedicated to higher Shinto\ngods. Thus in Kitzuki of Izumo, for example, the great Izumo temple\nis not the Ujigami,--not the parish-temple; the local cult is\nmaintained at a much smaller temple .... Of the higher cults I shall\nspeak further on; for the present let us consider only the communal\ncult, in its relation to communal life. From the social conditions\nrepresented by the worship of the Ujigami to-day, much can be\ninferred as to its influence in past times.\n\nAlmost every Japanese village has its Ujigami; and each district of\nevery large town or city also has its Ujigami. The worship of the\ntutelar deity is maintained by the whole body of parishioners, the\nUjiko, or children of the tutelar god. Every such parish-temple has\nits holy days, when all Ujiko are expected to visit the temple, and\nwhen, as a matter of fact, every household sends at least one\nrepresentative to the Ujigami. There are great festival-days and\nordinary festival-days; there are processions, music, dancing, and\nwhatever in the way of popular amusement can serve to make the\noccasion attractive. The people of adjacent districts vie with each\nother in rendering their respective temple-festivals (matsuri)\nenjoyable: every household contributes according to its means. [85]\nThe Shinto parish-temple has an intimate relation to the life of the\ncommunity as a body, and also to the individual existence of every\nUjiko. As a baby he or she is taken to the Ujigami--(at the\nexpiration of thirty-one days after birth if a boy, or thirty-three\ndays after birth if a girl)--and placed under the protection of the\ngod, in whose supposed presence the little one's name is recorded.\nThereafter the child is regularly taken to the temple on holy days,\nand of course to all the big festivals, which are made delightful to\nyoung fancy by the display of toys on sale in temporary booths, and\nby the amusing spectacles to be witnessed in the temple\ngrounds,--artists forming pictures on the pavement with coloured\nsands,--sweetmeat-sellers moulding animals and monsters out of\nsugar-paste,--conjurors and tumblers exhibiting their skill....\nLater, when the child becomes strong enough to run about, the temple\ngardens and groves serve for a playground. School-life does not\nseparate the Ujiko from the Ujigami (unless the family should\npermanently leave the district); the visits to the temple are still\ncontinued as a duty. Grown-up and married, the Ujiko regularly visits\nthe guardian-god, accompanied by wife or husband, and brings the\nchildren to pay obeisance. If obliged to make a long journey, or to\nquit the district forever, the Ujiko pays a farewell visit to the\nUjigami, as well as to the tombs of the family ancestors; and on\nreturning to one's native place after prolonged [86] absence, the\nfirst visit is to the god .... I have more than once been touched by\nthe spectacle of soldiers at prayer before lonesome little temples in\ncountry places,--soldiers but just returned from Korea, China, or\nFormosa: their first thought on reaching home was to utter their\nthanks to the god of their childhood, whom they believed to have\nguarded them in the hour of battle and the season of pestilence.\n\nThe best authority on the local customs and laws of Old Japan, John\nHenry Wigmore, remarks that the Shinto cult had few relations with\nlocal administration. In his opinion the Ujigami were the deified\nancestors of certain noble families of early times; and their temples\ncontinued to be in the patronage of those families. The office of the\nShinto priest, or \"god-master\" (kannushi) was, and still is,\nhereditary; and, as a rule, any kannushi can trace back his descent\nfrom the family of which the Ujigami was originally the patron-god.\nBut the Shinto priests, with some few exceptions, were neither\nmagistrates nor administrators; and Professor Wigmore thinks that\nthis may have been \"due to the lack of administrative organization\nwithin the cult itself.\"* [87] This would be an adequate explanation.\nBut in spite of the fact that they exercised no civil function, I\nbelieve it can be shown that Shinto priests had, and still have,\npowers above the law. Their relation to the community was of an\nextremely important kind: their authority was only religious but it\nwas heavy and irresistible.\n\n[*The vague character of the Shinto hierarchy is probably best\nexplained by Mr. Spencer in Chapter VIII of the third volume of\nPrinciples of Sociology: \"The establishment of an ecclesiastical\norganization separate from the political organization, but akin to it\nin its structure, appears to be largely determined by the rise of a\ndecided distinction in thought between the affairs of this world and\nthose of a supposed other world. Where the two are conceived as\nexisting in continuity, or as intimately related, the organizations\nappropriate to their respective administrations remain either\nidentical or imperfectly distinguished .... if the Chinese are\nremarkable for the complete absence of a priestly caste, it is\nbecause, along with their universal and active ancestor-worship, they\nhave preserved that inclusion of the duties of priest in the duties\nof ruler, which ancestor-worship in its simple form shows us.\" Mr.\nSpencer remarks in the same paragraph on the fact that in ancient\nJapan \"religion and government were the same.\" A distinct Shinto\nhierarchy was therefore never evolved.]\n\nTo understand this, we must remember that the Shinto priest\nrepresented the religious sentiment of his district. The social bond\nof each community was identical with the religious bond,--the cult of\nthe local tutelar god. It was to the Ujigami that prayers were made\nfor success in all communal undertakings, for protection against\nsickness, for the triumph of the lord in time of war, for succour in\nthe season of famine or epidemic. The Ujigami was the giver of all\ngood things,--the special helper and guardian of the people. That\nthis belief still prevails may be verified by any one who studies the\npeasant-life of Japan. It is not to the Buddhas that the farmer prays\nfor bountiful harvests, or for rain in time of drought; it is not to\nthe Buddhas [88] that thanks are rendered for a plentiful\nrice-crop--but to the ancient local god. And the cult of the Ujigami\nembodies the moral experience of the community,--represents all its\ncherished traditions and customs, its unwritten laws of conduct, its\nsentiment of duty .... Now just as an offence against the ethics of\nthe family must, in such a society, be regarded as an impiety towards\nthe family-ancestor, so any breach of custom in the village or\ndistrict must be considered as an act of disrespect to its Ujigami.\nThe prosperity of the family depends, it is thought, upon the\nobservance of filial piety, which is identified with obedience to the\ntraditional rules of household conduct; and, in like manner, the\nprosperity of the commune is supposed to depend upon the observance\nof ancestral custom,--upon obedience to those unwritten laws of the\ndistrict, which are taught to all from the time of their childhood.\nCustoms are identified with morals. Any offence against the customs\nof the settlement is an offence against the gods who protect it, and\ntherefore a menace to the public weal. The existence of the community\nis endangered by the crime of any of its members: every member is\ntherefore held accountable by the community for his conduct. Every\naction must conform to the traditional usages of the Ujiko:\nindependent exceptional conduct is a public offence.\n\nWhat the obligations of the individual to the [89] community\nsignified in ancient times may therefore be imagined. He had\ncertainly no more right to himself than had the Greek citizen three\nthousand years ago,--probably not so much. To-day, though laws have\nbeen greatly changed, he is practically in much the same condition.\nThe mere idea of the right to do as one pleases (within such limits\nas are imposed on conduct by English and American societies, for\nexample) could not enter into his mind. Such freedom, if explained to\nhim, he would probably consider as a condition morally comparable to\nthat of birds and beasts. Among ourselves, the social regulations for\nordinary people chiefly settle what must not be done. But what one\nmust not do in Japan--though representing a very wide range of\nprohibition means much less than half of the common obligation: what\none must do, is still more necessary to learn .... Let us briefly\nconsider the restraints which custom places upon the liberty of the\nindividual.\n\nFirst of all, be it observed that the communal will reinforces the\nwill of the household,--compels the observance of filial piety. Even\nthe conduct of a boy, who has passed the age of childhood, is\nregulated not only by the family, but by the public. He must obey the\nhousehold; and he must also obey public opinion in regard to his\ndomestic relations. Any marked act of disrespect, inconsistent [90]\nwith filial piety, would be judged and rebuked by, all. When old\nenough to begin work or study, a lad's daily conduct is observed and\ncriticised; and at the age when the household law first tightens\nabout him, he also commences to feel the pressure of common opinion.\nOn coming of age, he has to marry; and the idea of permitting him to\nchoose a wife for himself is quite out of the question: he is\nexpected to accept the companion selected for him. But should reasons\nbe found for humouring him in the event of an irresistible aversion,\nthen he must wait until another choice has been made by the family.\nThe community would not tolerate insubordination in such matters: one\nexample of filial revolt would constitute too dangerous a precedent.\nWhen the young man at last becomes the head of a household, and\nresponsible for the conduct of its members, he is still constrained\nby public sentiment to accept advice in his direction of domestic\naffairs. He is not free to follow his own judgment, in certain\ncontingencies. For example, he is bound by custom to furnish help to\nrelatives; and he is obliged to accept arbitration in the event of\ntrouble with them. He is not permitted to think of his own wife and\nchildren only,--such conduct would be deemed intolerably selfish: he\nmust be able to act, to outward seeming at least, as if uninfluenced\nby paternal or marital affection in his public conduct. Even\nsupposing that, later in life, he should be [91] appointed to the\nposition of village or district headman, his right of action and\njudgment would be under just as much restriction as before. Indeed,\nthe range of his personal freedom actually decreases in proportion to\nhis ascent in the social scale. Nominally he may rule as headman:\npractically his authority is only lent to him by the commune, and it\nwill remain to him just so long as the commune pleases. For he is\nelected to enforce the public will, not to impose his own,--to serve\nthe common interests, not to serve his own,--to maintain and confirm\ncustom, not to break with it. Thus, though appointed chief, he is\nonly the public servant, and the least free man in his native place.\nVarious documents translated and published by Professor Wigmore, in\nhis \"Notes on Land Tenure and Local Institutions in Old Japan,\" give\na startling idea of the minute regulation of communal life in\ncountry-districts during the period of the Tokujawa Shoguns. Much of\nthe regulation was certainly imposed by higher authority; but it is\nlikely that a considerable portion of the rules represented old local\ncustom. Such documents were called Kumi-cho or \"Kumi*-enactments\":\nthey established the rules of conduct to be observed by all the\nmembers of a village-community, and their social interest is very\ngreat. By personal inquiry I have learned that in various parts of\nthe country, rules much like those recorded in the Kumi-cho, are\nstill enforced by village custom. I select a few examples from\nProfessor Wigmore's translation:--\n\n[*Down to the close of the feudal period, the mass of the population\nthroughout the country, in the great cities as well as in the\nvillages, was administratively ordered by groups of families, or\nrather of households, called Kumi, or \"companies.\" The general number\nof households in a Kumi was five; but there were in some provinces\nKumi consisting of six, and of ten, households. The heads of the\nhouseholds composing a Kumi elected one of their number as\nchief,--who became the responsible representative of all the members\nof the Kumi. The origin and history of the Kumi-system is obscure: a\nsimilar system exists in China and in Korea. (Professor Wigmore's\nreasons for doubting that the Japanese Kumi-system had a military\norigin, appear to be cogent.) Certainly the system greatly\nfacilitated administration. To superior authority the Kumi was\nresponsible, not the single household.]\n\n[92] \"If there be any of our number who are unkind to parents, or\nneglectful or disobedient, we will not conceal it or condone it, but\nwill report it ....\"\n\n\"We shall require children to respect their parents, servants to obey\ntheir masters, husbands and wives and brothers and sisters to live\ntogether in harmony, and the younger people to revere and to cherish\ntheir elders .... Each kumi [group of five households] shall\ncarefully watch over the conduct of its members, so as to prevent\nwrongdoing.\"\n\n\"If any member of a kumi, whether farmer, merchant, or artizan, is\nlazy, and does not attend properly to his business, the ban-gashira\n[chief officer] will advise him, warn him, and lead him into better\nways. If the person does not listen to this advice, and becomes angry\nand obstinate, he is to be reported to the toshiyori [village elder]\n....\"\n\n\"When men who are quarrelsome and who like to [93] indulge in late\nhours away from home will not listen to admonition, we will report\nthem. If any other kumi neglects to do this, it will be part of our\nduty to do it for them ....\"\n\n\"All those who quarrel with their relatives, and refuse to listen to\ntheir good advice, or disobey their parents, or are unkind to their\nfellow-villagers, shall be reported [to the village officers] ....\"\n\n\"Dancing, wrestling, and other public shows shall be forbidden.\nSinging and dancing-girls and prostitutes shall not be allowed to\nremain a single night in the mura [village].\"\n\n\"Quarrels among the people shall be forbidden.  In case of dispute\nthe matter shall be reported. If this is not done, all parties shall\nbe indiscriminately punished ....\"\n\n\"Speaking disgraceful things of another man, or publicly posting him\nas a bad man, even if he is so, is forbidden.\"\n\n\"Filial piety and faithful service to a master should be a matter of\ncourse; but when there is any one who is especially faithful and\ndiligent in these things, we promise to report him ... for\nrecommendation to the government ....\"\n\n\"As members of a kumi we will cultivate friendly feeling even more\nthan with our relatives, and will promote each other's happiness, as\nwell as share each other's griefs. If there is an unprincipled or\nlawless person in a kumi, we will all share the responsibility for\nhim.\"*\n\n[*\"Notes on Land Tenure and Local Institutions in Old Japan\"\n(Transactions Asiatic Society of Japan, Vol. XIX, Part I) I have\nchosen the quotations from different kumi-cho, and arranged them\nillustratively.]\n\n[94] The above are samples of the moral regulations only: there were\neven more minute regulations about other duties.--for instance:--\n\n\"When a fire occurs, the people shall immediately hasten to the spot,\neach bringing a bucketful of water, and shall endeavour, under\ndirection of the officers, to put the fire out .... Those who absent\nthemselves shall be deemed culpable.\n\n\"When a stranger comes to reside here, enquiries shall be made as to\nthe mura whence he came, and a surety shall be furnished by him ....\nNo traveller shall lodge, even for a single night, in a house other\nthan a public inn.\n\n\"News of robberies and night attacks shall be given by the ringing of\nbells or otherwise; and all who hear shall join in pursuit, until the\noffender is taken. Any one wilfully refraining, shall, on\ninvestigation, be punished.\"\n\nFrom these same Kumi-cho, it appears that no one could leave his\nvillage even for a single night, without permission,--or take service\nelsewhere, or marry in another province, or settle in another place.\nPunishments were severe,--a terrible flogging being the common mode\nof chastisement by the higher authority.... To-day, there are no such\npunishments; and, legally, a man can go where he pleases. But as a\nmatter of fact he can nowhere do as he pleases; for individual\nliberty is still largely restricted by the survival of communal\nsentiment and old-fashioned custom. In any country community it would\nbe unwise to proclaim such a doctrine as that [95] a man has the\nright to employ his leisure and his means as he may think proper. No\nman's time or money or effort can be considered exclusively his\nown,--nor even the body that his ghost inhabits. His right to live in\nthe community rests solely upon his willingness to serve the\ncommunity; and whoever may need his help or sympathy has the\nprivilege of demanding it. That \"a man's house is his castle\" cannot\nbe asserted in Japan--except in the case of some high potentate. No\nordinary person can shut his door to lock out the rest of the world.\nEverybody's house must be open to visitors: to close its gates by day\nwould be regarded as an insult to the community,--sickness affording\nno excuse. Only persons in very great authority have the right of\nmaking themselves inaccessible. And to displease the community in\nwhich one lives,--especially if the community be a rural one,--is a\nserious matter. When a community is displeased, if acts as an\nindividual. It may consist of five hundred, a thousand, or several\nthousand persons; but the thinking of all is the thinking of one. By\na single serious mistake a man may find himself suddenly placed in\nsolitary opposition to the common will,--isolated, and most\neffectively ostracized. The silence and the softness of the hostility\nonly render it all the more alarming. This is the ordinary form of\npunishment for a grave offence against custom: violence is rare, and\nwhen resorted to is intended (except in [96] some extraordinary cases\npresently to be noticed) as a mere correction, the punishment of a\nblunder. In certain rough communities, blunders endangering life are\nimmediately punished by physical chastisement,--not in anger, but on\ntraditional principle. Once I witnessed at a fishing-settlement, a\nchastisement of this kind. Men were killing tunny in the surf; the\nwork was bloody and dangerous; and in the midst of the excitement,\none of the fishermen struck his killing-spike into the head of a boy.\nEverybody knew that it was a pure accident; but accidents involving\ndanger to life are rudely dealt with, and this blunderer was\ninstantly knocked senseless by the men nearest him,--then dragged out\nof the surf and flung down on the sand to recover himself as best he\nmight. No word was said about the matter; and the killing went on as\nbefore. Young fishermen, I am told, are roughly handled by their\nfellows on board a ship, in the case of any error involving risk to\nthe vessel. But, as I have already observed, only stupidity is\npunished in this fashion; and ostracism is much more dreaded than\nviolence. There is, indeed, only one yet heavier punishment than\nostracism--namely, banishment, either for a term of years or for\nlife.\n\nBanishment must in old feudal times have been a very serious penalty;\nit is a serious penalty even to-day, under the new order of things.\nIn former years the man expelled from his native place by the [97]\ncommunal will--cast out from his home, his clan, his occupation\n--found himself face to face with misery absolute. In another\ncommunity there would be no place for him, unless he happened to have\nrelatives there; and these would be obliged to consult with the local\nauthorities, and also with the officials of the fugitive's native\nplace, before venturing to harbour him. No stranger was suffered to\nsettle in another district than his own without official permission.\nOld documents are extant which record the punishments inflicted upon\nhouseholds for having given shelter to a stranger under pretence of\nrelationship. A banished man was homeless and friendless. He might be\na skilled craftsman; but the right to exercise his craft depended\nupon the consent of the guild representing that craft in the place to\nwhich he might go; and banished men were not received by the guilds.\nHe might try to become a servant; but the commune in which he sought\nrefuge would question the right of any master to employ a fugitive\nand a stranger. His religious connexions could not serve him in the\nleast: the code of communal life was decided not by Buddhist, but by\nShinto ethics. Since the gods of his birthplace had cast him out, and\nthe gods of any other locality had nothing to do with his original\ncult, there was no religious help for him. Besides, the mere fact of\nhis being a refugee was itself proof that he must have offended\nagainst his own cult. [98] In any event no stranger could look for\nsympathy among strangers. Even now to take a wife from another\nprovince is condemned by local opinion (it was forbidden in feudal\ntimes): one is still expected to live, work, and marry in the place\nwhere one has been born,--though, in certain cases, and with the\npublic approval of one's own people, adoption into another community\nis tolerated. Under the feudal system there was incomparably less\nlikelihood of sympathy for the stranger; and banishment signified\nhunger, solitude, and privation unspeakable. For be it remembered\nthat the legal existence of the individual, at that period, ceased\nentirely outside of his relation to the family and to the commune.\nEverybody lived and worked for some household; every household for\nsome clan; outside of the household, and the related aggregate of\nhouseholds, there was no life to be lived--except the life of\ncriminals, beggars, and pariahs. Save with official permission, one\ncould not even become a Buddhist monk. The very outcasts--such as the\nEta classes--formed self-governing communities, with traditions of\ntheir own, and would not voluntarily accept strangers. So the\nbanished man was most often doomed to become a hinin,--one of that\nwretched class of wandering pariahs who were officially termed\n\"not-men,\" and lived by beggary, or by the exercise of some vulgar\nprofession, such as that of ambulant musician or [99] mountebank. In\nmore ancient days a banished man could have sold himself into\nslavery; but even this poor privilege seems to have been withdrawn\nduring the Tokugawa era.\n\nWe can scarcely imagine to-day the conditions of such banishment: to\nfind a Western parallel we must go back to ancient Greek and Roman\ntimes long preceding the Empire. Banishment then signified religious\nexcommunication, and practically expulsion from all civilized\nsociety,--since there yet existed no idea of human brotherhood, no\nconception of any claim upon kindness except the claim of kinship.\nThe stranger was everywhere the enemy. Now in Japan, as in the Greek\ncity of old time, the religion of the tutelar god has always been the\nreligion of a group only, the cult of a community: it never became\neven the religion of a province. The higher cults, on the other hand,\ndid not concern themselves with the individual: his religion was only\nof the household and of the village or district; the cults of other\nhouseholds and districts were entirely distinct; one could belong to\nthem only by adoption, and strangers, as a rule, were not adopted.\nWithout a household or a clan-cult, the individual was morally and\nsocially dead; for other cults and clans excluded him. When cast out\nby the domestic cult that regulated his private life, and by the\nlocal cult that ordered his life in relation to the community, he\nsimply ceased to exist in relation to human society.\n\n[100] How small were the chances in past times for personality to\ndevelop and assert itself may be imagined from the foregoing facts.\nThe individual was completely and pitilessly sacrificed to the\ncommunity. Even now the only safe rule of conduct in a Japanese\nsettlement is to act in all things according to local custom; for the\nslightest divergence from rule will be observed with disfavour.\nPrivacy does not exist; nothing can be hidden; everybody's vices or\nvirtues are known to everybody else. Unusual behaviour is judged as a\ndeparture from the traditional standard of conduct; all oddities are\ncondemned as departures from custom; and tradition and custom still\nhave the force of religious obligations. Indeed, they really are\nreligious and obligatory, not only by reason of their origin, but by\nreason of their relation also to the public cult, which signifies the\nworship of the past.\n\nIt is therefore easy to understand why Shinto never had a written\ncode of morals, and why its greatest scholars have declared that a\nmoral code is unnecessary. In that stage of religious evolution which\nancestor-worship represents, there can be no distinction between\nreligion and ethics, nor between ethics and custom. Government and\nreligion are the same; custom and law are identified. The ethics of\nShinto were all included in conformity to custom. The traditional\nrules of the household, the traditional laws of the commune--these\nwere [101] the morals of Shinto: to obey them was religion; to\ndisobey them, impiety .... And, after all, the true significance of\nany religious code, written or unwritten, lies in its expression of\nsocial duty, its doctrine of the right and wrong of conduct, its\nembodiment of a people's moral experience. Really the difference\nbetween any modern ideal of conduct, such as the English, and the\npatriarchal ideal, such as that of the early Greeks or of the\nJapanese, would be found on examination to consist mainly in the\nminute extension of the older conception to all details of individual\nlife. Assuredly the religion of Shinto needed no written commandment:\nit was taught to everybody from childhood by precept and example, and\nany person of ordinary intelligence could learn it. When a religion\nis capable of rendering it dangerous for anybody to act outside of\nrules, the framing of a code would be obviously superfluous. We\nourselves have no written code of conduct as regards the higher\nsocial life, the exclusive circles of civilized existence, which are\nnot ruled merely by the Ten Commandments. The knowledge of what to do\nin those zones, and of how to do it, can come only by training, by\nexperience, by observation, and by the intuitive recognition of the\nreason of things.\n\nAnd now to return to the question of the authority of the Shinto\npriest as representative of communal [102] sentiment,--an authority\nwhich I believe to have been always very great .... Striking proof\nthat the punishments inflicted by a community upon its erring members\nwere originally inflicted in the name of the tutelar god is furnished\nby the fact that manifestations of communal displeasure still assume,\nin various country districts, a religious character. I have witnessed\nsuch manifestations, and I am assured that they still occur in most\nof the provinces. But it is in remote country-towns or isolated\nvillages, where traditions have remained almost unchanged, that one\ncan best observe these survivals of antique custom. In such places\nthe conduct of every resident is closely watched and rigidly judged\nby all the rest. Little, however, is said about misdemeanours of a\nminor sort until the time of the great local Shinto festival,--the\nannual festival of the tutelar god. It is then that the community\ngives its warnings or inflicts its penalties: this at least in the\ncase of conduct offensive to local ethics. The god, on the occasion\nof this festival, is supposed to visit the dwellings of his Ujiko;\nand his portable shrine,--a weighty structure borne by thirty or\nforty men,--is carried through the principal streets. The bearers are\nsupposed to act according to the will of the god,--to go\nwhithersoever his divine spirit directs them .... I may describe the\nincidents of the procession as I saw it in a seacoast village, not\nonce, but several times.\n\n[103] Before the procession a band of young men advance, leaping and\nwildly dancing in circles: these young men clear the way; and it is\nunsafe to pass near them, for they whirl about as if moved by frenzy\n.... When I first saw such a band of dancers, I could imagine myself\nwatching some old Dionysiac revel;--their furious gyrations certainly\nrealized Greek accounts of the antique sacred frenzy. There were,\nindeed, no Greek heads; but the bronzed lithe figures, naked save for\nloin-cloth and sandals, and most sculpturesquely muscled, might well\nhave inspired some vase-design of dancing fauns. After these\ngod-possessed dancers--whose passage swept the streets clear,\nscattering the crowd to right and left--came the virgin priestess,\nwhite-robed and veiled, riding upon a horse, and followed by several\nmounted priests in white garments and high black caps of ceremony.\nBehind them advanced the ponderous shrine, swaying above: the heads\nof its bearers like a junk in a storm. Scores of brawny arms were\npushing it to the right; other scores were pushing it to the left:\nbehind and before, also, there was furious pulling and pushing; and\nthe roar of voices uttering invocations made it impossible to hear\nanything else. By immemorial custom the upper stories of all the\ndwellings had been tightly closed: woe to the Peeping Tom who should\nbe detected, on such a day, in the impious act of looking down upon\nthe god!...\n\n[104] Now the shrine-bearers, as I have said, are supposed to be\nmoved by the spirit of the god--(probably by his Rough Spirit; for\nthe Shinto god is multiple); and all this pushing and pulling and\nswaying signifies only the deity's inspection of the dwellings on\neither hand. He is looking about to see whether the hearts of his\nworshippers are pure, and is deciding whether it will be necessary to\ngive a warning, or to inflict a penalty. His bearers will carry him\nwhithersoever he chooses to go--through solid walls if necessary. If\nthe shrine strikes against any house,--even against an awning\nonly,--that is a sign that the god is not pleased with the dwellers\nin that house. If the shrine breaks part of the house, that is a\nserious warning. But it may happen that the god wills to enter a\nhouse,--breaking his way. Then woe to the inmates, unless they flee\nat once through the back-door; and the wild procession, thundering\nin, will wreck and rend and smash and splinter everything on the\npremises before the god consents to proceed upon his round.\n\nUpon enquiring into the reasons of two wreckings of which I witnessed\nthe results, I learned enough to assure me that from the communal\npoint of view, both aggressions were morally justifiable. In one case\na fraud had been practised; in the other, help had been refused to\nthe family of a drowned resident. Thus one offence had been legal;\nthe other only moral. A country community [105] will not hand over\nits delinquents to the police except in case of incendiarism, murder,\ntheft, or other serious crime. It has a horror of law, and never\ninvokes it when the matter can be settled by any other means. This\nwas the rule also in ancient times, and the feudal government\nencouraged its maintenance. But when the tutelar deity has been\ndispleased, he insists upon the punishment or disgrace of the\noffender; and the offender's entire family, as by feudal custom, is\nheld responsible. The victim can invoke the new law, if he dares, and\nbring the wreckers of his home into court, and recover damages, for\nthe modern police-courts are not ruled by Shinto. But only a very\nrash man will invoke the new law against the communal judgment, for\nthat action in itself would be condemned as a gross breach of custom.\nThe community is always ready, through its council, to do justice in\ncases where innocence can be proved. But if a man really guilty of\nthe faults charged to his account should try to avenge himself by\nappeal to a non-religious law, then it were well for him to remove\nhimself and his family, as soon as possible thereafter, to some\nfar-away place.\n\nWe have seen that, in Old Japan, the life of the individual was under\ntwo kinds of religious control. All his acts were regulated according\nto the traditions either of the domestic or of the communal [106]\ncult; and these conditions probably began with the establishment of a\nsettled civilization. We have also seen that the communal religion\ntook upon itself to enforce the observance of the household religion.\nThe fact will not seem strange if we remember that the underlying\nidea in either cult was the same,--the idea that the welfare of the\nliving depended upon the welfare of the dead. Neglect of the\nhousehold rite would provoke, it was believed, the malevolence of the\nspirits; and their malevolence might bring about some public\nmisfortune. The ghosts of the ancestors controlled nature;--fire and\nflood, pestilence and famine were at their disposal as means of\nvengeance. One act of impiety in a village might, therefore, bring\nabout misfortune to all. And the community considered itself\nresponsible to the dead for the maintenance of filial piety in every\nhome.\n\n\n\n[107]\n\nDEVELOPMENTS OF SHINTO\n\nThe teaching of Herbert Spencer that the greater gods of a\npeople--those figuring in popular imagination as creators, or as\nparticularly directing certain elemental forces--represent a later\ndevelopment of ancestor-worship, is generally accepted to-day.\nAncestral ghosts, considered as more or less alike in the time when\nprimitive society had not yet developed class distinctions of any\nimportant character, subsequently become differentiated, as the\nsociety itself differentiates, into greater and lesser. Eventually\nthe worship of some one ancestral spirit, or group of spirits,\novershadows that of all the rest; and a supreme deity, or group of\nsupreme deities, becomes evolved. But the differentiations of the\nancestor-cult must be understood to proceed in a great variety of\ndirections. Particular ancestors of families engaged in hereditary\noccupations may develop into tutelar deities presiding over those\noccupations--patron gods of crafts and guilds. Out of other ancestral\ncults, through various processes of mental association, may be\nevolved the worship of deities of strength, of health, of long life,\nof particular products, of particular localities. [108] When more\nlight shall have been thrown upon the question of Japanese origins,\nit will probably be found that many of the lesser tutelar or patron\ngods now worshipped in the country were originally the gods of\nChinese or Korean craftsmen; but I think that Japanese mythology, as\na whole, will prove to offer few important exceptions to the\nevolutional law. Indeed, Shinto presents us with a mythological\nhierarchy of which the development can be satisfactorily explained by\nthat law alone. Besides the Ujigami, there are myriads of superior\nand of inferior deities. There are the primal deities, of whom only\nthe names are mentioned,--apparitions of the period of chaos; and\nthere are the gods of creation, who gave shape to the land. There are\nthe gods of earth, and, sky, and the gods of the sun and moon. Also\nthere are gods, beyond counting, supposed to preside over all things\ngood or evil in human life,--birth and marriage and death, riches and\npoverty, strength and disease .... It can scarcely be supposed that\nall this mythology was developed out of the old ancestor-cult in\nJapan itself: more probably its evolution began on the Asiatic\ncontinent. But the evolution of the national cult--that form of\nShinto which became the state religion--seems to have been Japanese,\nin the strict meaning of the word. This cult is the worship of the\ngods from whom the emperors claim descent,--the worship of the\n\"imperial ancestors.\" [109] It appears that the early emperors of\nJapan--the \"heavenly sovereigns,\" as they are called in the old\nrecords--were not emperors at all in the true meaning of the term,\nand did not even exercise universal authority. They were only the\nchiefs of the most powerful clan, or Uji, and their special\nancestor-cult had probably in that time no dominant influence. But\neventually, when the chiefs of this great clan really became supreme\nrulers of the land, their clan-cult spread everywhere, and\novershadowed, without abolishing, all the other cults. Then arose the\nnational mythology.\n\nWe therefore see that the course of Japanese ancestor-worship, like\nthat of Aryan ancestor-worship, exhibits those three successive\nstages of development before mentioned. It may be assumed that on\ncoming from the continent to their present island home, the race\nbrought with them a rude form of ancestor-worship, consisting of\nlittle more than rites and sacrifices performed at the graves of the\ndead. When the land had been portioned out among the various clans,\neach of which had its own ancestor cult, all the people of the\ndistrict belonging to any particular clan would eventually adopt the\nreligion of the clan ancestor; and thus arose the thousand cults of\nthe Ujigami. Still later, the special cult of the most powerful clan\ndeveloped into a national religion,--the worship of the goddess of\nthe sun, [110] from whom the supreme ruler claimed descent. Then,\nunder Chinese influence, the domestic form of ancestor-worship was\nestablished in lieu of the primitive family-cult: thereafter\nofferings and prayers were made regularly in the home, where the\nancestral tablets represented the tombs of the family dead. But\nofferings were still made, on special occasions, at the graves; and\nthe three Shinto forms of the cult, together with later forms of\nBuddhist introduction, continued to exist; and they rule the life of\nthe nation to-day.\n\nIt was the cult of the supreme ruler that first gave to the people a\nwritten account of traditional beliefs. The mythology of the reigning\nhouse furnished the scriptures of Shinto, and established ideas\nlinking together all the existing forms of ancestor-worship. All\nShinto traditions were by these writings blended into one\nmythological history,--explained upon the basis of one legend. The\nwhole mythology is contained in two books, of which English\ntranslations have been made. The oldest is entitled Ko-ji-ki, or\n\"Records of Ancient Matters\"; and it is supposed to have been\ncompiled in the year 712 A.D. The other and much larger work is\ncalled Nihongi, \"Chronicles of Nihon [Japan],\" and dates from about\n720 A.D. Both works profess to be histories; but a large portion of\nthem is mythological, and either begins with a story of creation.\n[111] They were compiled, mostly, from oral tradition we are told, by\nimperial order. It is said that a yet earlier work, dating from the\nseventh century, may have been drawn upon; but this has been lost. No\ngreat antiquity can, therefore, be claimed for the texts as they\nstand; but they contain traditions which must be very much\nolder,--possibly thousands of years older. The Ko-ji-ki is said to\nhave been written from the dictation of an old man of marvellous\nmemory; and the Shinto theologian Hirata would have us believe that\ntraditions thus preserved are especially trustworthy. \"It is\nprobable,\" he wrote, \"that those ancient traditions, preserved for us\nby exercise of memory, have for that very reason come down to us in\ngreater detail than if they had been recorded in documents. Besides,\nmen must have had much stronger memories in the days before they\nacquired the habit of trusting to written characters for facts which\nthey wished to remember,--as is shown at the present time in the case\nof the illiterate, who have to depend on memory alone.\" We must smile\nat Hirata's good faith in the changelessness of oral tradition; but I\nbelieve that folk-lorists would discover in the character of the\nolder myths, intrinsic evidence of immense antiquity.--Chinese\ninfluence is discernible in both works; yet certain parts have a\nparticular quality not to be found, I imagine, in anything\nChinese,--a primeval artlessness, a weirdness, and a strangeness\n[112] having nothing in common with other mythical literature. For\nexample, we have, in the story of Izanagi, the world-maker, visiting\nthe shades to recall his dead spouse, a myth that seems to be purely\nJapanese. The archaic naivete of the recital must impress anybody who\nstudies the literal translation. I shall present only the substance\nof the legend, which has been recorded in a number of different\nversions:*--\n\n[*See for these different versions Aston's translation of the\nNihongi, Vol I.]\n\nWhen the time came for the Fire-god, Kagu-Tsuchi, to be born, his\nmother, Izanami-no-Mikoto, was burnt, and suffered change, and\ndeparted. Then Izanagi-no-Mikoto, was wroth and said, \"Oh! that I\nshould have given my loved younger sister in exchange for a single\nchild!\" He crawled at her head and he crawled at her feet, weeping\nand lamenting; and the tears which he shed fell down and became a\ndeity .... Thereafter Izanagi-no-Mikoto went after Izanami-no-Mikoto\ninto the Land of Yomi, the world of the dead. Then Izanami-no-Mikoto,\nappearing still as she was when alive, lifted the curtain of the\npalace (of the dead), and came forth to meet him; and they talked\ntogether. And Izanagi-no-Mikoto said to her: \"I have come because I\nsorrowed for thee, my lovely younger sister. O my lovely younger\nsister, the lands that I and thou were making together are not [113]\nyet finished; therefore come back!\" Then Izanami-no-Mikoto made\nanswer, saying, \"My august lord and husband, lamentable it is that\nthou didst not come sooner,--for now I have eaten of the\ncooking-range of Yomi. Nevertheless, as I am thus delightfully\nhonoured by thine entry here, my lovely elder brother, I wish to\nreturn with thee to the living world. Now I go to discuss the matter\nwith the gods of Yomi. Wait thou here, and look not upon me.\" So\nhaving spoken, she went back; and Izanagi waited for her. But she\ntarried so long within that he became impatient. Then, taking the\nwooden comb that he wore in the left bunch of his hair, he broke off\na tooth from one end of the comb and lighted it, and went in to look\nfor Izanami-no-Mikoto. But he saw her lying swollen and festering\namong worms; and eight kinds of Thunder-Gods sat upon her .... And\nIzanagi, being overawed by that sight, would have fled away; but\nIzanami rose up, crying: \"Thou hast put me to shame! Why didst thou\nnot observe that which I charged thee?... Thou hast seen my\nnakedness; now I will see thine!\" And she bade the Ugly Females of\nYomi to follow after him, and slay him; and the eight Thunders also\npursued him, and Izanami herself pursued him .... Then\nIzanagi-no-Mikoto drew his sword, and flourished it behind him as he\nran. But they followed close upon him. He took off his black\nheaddress and flung it down; [114] and it became changed into grapes;\nand while the Ugly Ones were eating the grapes, he gained upon them.\nBut they followed quickly; and he then took his comb and cast it\ndown, and it became changed into bamboo sprouts; and while the Ugly\nOnes were devouring the sprouts, he fled on until he reached the\nmouth of Yomi. Then taking a rock which it would have required the\nstrength of a thousand men to lift, he blocked therewith the entrance\nas Izanami came up. And standing behind the rock, he began to\npronounce the words of divorce. Then, from the other side of the\nrock, Izanami cried out to him, \"My dear lord and master, if thou\ndost so, in one day will I strangle to death a thousand of thy\npeople!\" And Izanagi-no-Mikoto answered her, saying, \"My beloved\nyounger sister, if thou dost so, I will cause in one day to be born\nfifteen hundred ....\" But the deity Kukuri-hime-no-Kami then came,\nand spake to Izanami some word which she seemed to approve, and\nthereafter she vanished away ....\n\nThe strange mingling of pathos with nightmare-terror in this myth, of\nwhich I have not ventured to present all the startling naiveti,\nsufficiently proves its primitive character. It is a dream that some\none really dreamed,--one of those bad dreams in which the figure of a\nperson beloved becomes horribly transformed; and it has a particular\ninterest as [115] expressing that fear of death and of the dead\ninforming all primitive ancestor-worship. The whole pathos and\nweirdness of the myth, the vague monstrosity of the fancies, the\nformal use of terms of endearment in the moment of uttermost loathing\nand fear,--all impress one as unmistakably Japanese. Several other\nmyths scarcely less remarkable are to be found in the Ko-ji-ki and\nNihongi; but they are mingled with legends of so light and graceful a\nkind that it is scarcely possible to believe these latter to have\nbeen imagined by the same race. The story of the magical jewels and\nthe visit to the sea-god's palace, for example, in the second book of\nthe Nihongi, sounds oddly like an Indian fairy-tale; and it is not\nunlikely that the Ko-ji-ki and Nihongi both contain myths derived\nfrom various alien sources. At all events their mythical chapters\npresent us with some curious problems which yet remain unsolved.\nOtherwise the books are dull reading, in spite of the light which\nthey shed upon ancient customs and beliefs; and, generally speaking,\nJapanese mythology is unattractive. But to dwell here upon the\nmythology, at any length, is unnecessary; for its relation to Shinto\ncan be summed up in the space of a single brief paragraph--\n\nIn the beginning neither force nor form was manifest; and the world\nwas a shapeless mass that floated [116] like a jelly-fish upon water.\nThen, in some way--we are not told how--earth and heaven became\nseparated; dim gods appeared and disappeared; and at last there came\ninto existence a male and a female deity, who gave birth and shape to\nthings. By this pair, Izanagi and Izanami, were produced the islands\nof Japan, and the generations of the gods, and the deities of the Sun\nand Moon. The descendants of these creating deities, and of the gods\nwhom they brought into being, were the eight thousand (or eighty\nthousand) myriads of gods worshipped by Shinto. Some went to dwell in\nthe blue Plain of High Heaven; others remained on earth and became\nthe ancestors of the Japanese race.\n\nSuch is the mythology of the Ko-ji-ki and the Nihongi, stated in the\nbriefest possible way. At first it appears that there were two\nclasses of gods recognized: Celestial and Terrestrial; and the old\nShinto rituals (norito) maintain this distinction. But it is a\ncurious fact that the celestial gods of this mythology do not\nrepresent celestial forces; and that the gods who are really\nidentified with celestial phenomena are classed as terrestrial\ngods,--having been born or \"produced\" upon earth. The Sun and Moon,\nfor example, are said to have been born in Japan,--though afterwards\nplaced in heaven; the Sun-goddess, Ama-terasu-no-oho-Kami, having\nbeen produced from the left eye of Izanagi, and the [117] Moon-god,\nTsuki-yomi-no-Mikoto, having been produced from the right eye of\nIzanagi when, after his visit to the under-world, he washed himself\nat the mouth of a river in the island of Tsukushi. The Shinto\nscholars of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries established some\norder in this chaos of fancies by denying all distinction between the\nCelestial and Terrestrial gods, except as regarded the accident of\nbirth. They also denied the old distinction between the so-called Age\nof the Gods (Kami-yo), and the subsequent period of the Emperors. It\nwas true, they said, that the early rulers of Japan were gods; but so\nwere also the later rulers. The whole Imperial line, the \"Sun's\nSuccession,\" represented one unbroken descent from the Goddess of the\nSun. Hirata wrote: \"There exists no hard and fast line between the\nAge of the Gods and the present age--and there exists no\njustification whatever for drawing one, as the Nihongi does.\" Of\ncourse this position involved the doctrine of a divine descent for\nthe whole race,--inasmuch as, according to the old mythology, the\nfirst Japanese were all descendants of gods,--and that doctrine\nHirata boldly accepted. All the Japanese, he averred, were of divine\norigin, and for that reason superior to the people of all other\ncountries. He even held that their divine descent could be proved\nwithout difficulty. These are his words: \"The descendants of the gods\nwho accompanied Ninigi-no-Mikoto [grandson of the Sun-goddess, [118]\nand supposed founder of the Imperial house,]--as well as the\noffspring of the successive Mikados, who entered the ranks of the\nsubjects of the Mikados, with the names of Taira, Minamoto, and so\nforth,--have gradually increased and multiplied. Although numbers of\nJapanese cannot state with certainty from what gods they are\ndescended, all of them have tribal names (kabane), which were\noriginally bestowed on them by the Mikados; and those who make it\ntheir province to study genealogies can tell from a man's ordinary\nsurname, who his remotest ancestor must have been.\" All the Japanese\nwere gods in this sense; and their country was properly called the\nLand of the Gods,--Shinkoku or Kami-no-kuni. Are we to understand\nHirata literally? I think so--but we must remember that there existed\nin feudal times large classes of people, outside of the classes\nofficially recognized as forming the nation, who were not counted as\nJapanese, nor even as human beings: these were pariahs, and reckoned\nas little better than animals. Hirata probably referred to the four\ngreat classes only--samurai, farmers, artizans, and merchants. But\neven in that case what are we to think of his ascription of divinity\nto the race, in view of the moral and physical feebleness of human\nnature? The moral side of the question is answered by the Shinto\ntheory of evil deities, \"gods of crookedness,\" who were alleged to\nhave \"originated from the impurities contracted by [119] Izanagi\nduring his visit to the under-world.\" As for the physical weakness of\nmen, that is explained by a legend of Ninigi-no-Mikoto, divine\nfounder of the imperial house. The Goddess of Long Life,\nIha-naga-hime (Rock-long-princess), was sent to him for wife; but he\nrejected her because of her ugliness; and that unwise proceeding\nbrought about \"the present shortness of the lives of men.\" Most\nmythologies ascribe vast duration to the lives of early patriarchs or\nrulers: the farther we go back into mythological history, the\nlonger-lived are the sovereigns. To this general rule Japanese\nmythology presents no exception. The son of Ninigi-no-Mikoto is said\nto have lived five hundred and eighty years at his palace of\nTakachiho; but that, remarks Hirata, \"was a short life compared with\nthe lives of those who lived before him.\" Thereafter men's bodies\ndeclined in force; life gradually became shorter and shorter; yet in\nspite of all degeneration the Japanese still show traces of their\ndivine origin. After death they enter into a higher divine condition,\nwithout, however, abandoning this world .... Such were Hirata's\nviews. Accepting the Shinto theory of origins, this ascription of\ndivinity to human nature proves less inconsistent than it appears at\nfirst sight; and the modern Shintoist may discover a germ of\nscientific truth in the doctrine which traces back the beginnings of\nlife to the Sun.\n\n[120] More than any other Japanese writer, Hirata has enabled us to\nunderstand the hierarchy of Shinto mythology,--corresponding closely,\nas we might have expected, to the ancient ordination of Japanese\nsociety. In the lowermost ranks are the spirits of common people,\nworshipped only at the household shrine or at graves. Above these are\nthe gentile gods or Ujigami,--ghosts of old rulers now worshipped as\ntutelar gods. All Ujigami, Hirata tells us, are under the control of\nthe Great God of Izumo,--Oho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami,--and, \"acting as his\nagents, they rule the fortunes of human beings before their birth,\nduring their life, and after their death.\" This means that the\nordinary ghosts obey, in the world invisible, the commands of the\nclan-gods or tutelar deities; that the conditions of communal worship\nduring life continue after death. The following extract from Hirata\nwill be found of interest,--not only as showing the supposed relation\nof the individual to the Ujigami, but also as suggesting how the act\nof abandoning one's birthplace was formerly judged by common\nopinion:--\n\n\"When a person removes his residence, his original Ujigami has to\nmake arrangements with the Ujigami of the place whither he transfers\nhis abode. On such occasions it is proper to take leave of the old\ngod, and to pay a visit to the temple of the new god as soon as\npossible after coming within his jurisdiction. The apparent reasons\nwhich a man imagines to have induced him to change his [121] abode\nmay be many; but the real reasons cannot be otherwise than that\neither he has offended his Ujigami, and is therefore expelled, or\nthat the Ujigami of another place has negotiated his transfer ....\"*\n[*Translated by Satow. The italics are mine.]\n\nIt would thus appear that every person was supposed to be the\nsubject, servant, or retainer of some Ujigami, both during life and\nafter death. There were, of course, various grades of these\nclan-gods, just as there were various grades of living rulers, lords\nof the soil. Above ordinary Ujigami ranked the deities worshipped in\nthe chief Shinto temples of the various provinces, which temples were\ntermed Ichi-no-miya, or temples of the first grade. These deities\nappear to have been in many cases spirits of princes or greater\ndaimyo, formerly, ruling extensive districts; but all were not of\nthis category. Among them were deities of elements or elemental\nforces,--Wind, Fire, and Sea,--deities also of longevity, of destiny,\nand of harvests,--clan-gods, perhaps, originally, though their real\nhistory had been long forgotten. But above all other Shinto\ndivinities ranked the gods of the Imperial Cult,--the supposed\nancestors of the Mikados.\n\nOf the higher forms of Shinto worship, that of the imperial ancestors\nproper is the most important, being the State cult; but it is not the\noldest. There are two supreme cults: that of the Sun-goddess, [122]\nrepresented by the famous shrines of Ise; and the Izumo cult,\nrepresented by the great temple of Kitzuki. This Izumo temple is the\ncentre of the more ancient cult. It is dedicated to\nOho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami, first ruler of the Province of the Gods, and\noffspring of the brother of the Sun-goddess. Dispossessed of his\nrealm in favour of the founder of the imperial dynasty,\nOho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami became the ruler of the Unseen World,--that is\nto say the World of Ghosts. Unto his shadowy dominion the spirits of\nall men proceed after death; and he rules over all of the Ujigami. We\nmay therefore term him the Emperor of the Dead. \"You cannot hope,\"\nHirata says, \"to live more than a hundred years, under the most\nfavourable circumstances; but as you will go to the Unseen Realm of\nOho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami after death, and be subject to him, learn\nbetimes to bow down before him.\" ... That weird fancy expressed in\nthe wonderful fragment by Coleridge, \"The Wanderings of Cain,\" would\ntherefore seem to have actually formed an article of ancient Shinto\nfaith: \"The Lord is God of the living only: the dead have another\nGod.\" ...\n\nThe God of the Living in Old Japan was, of course, the Mikado,--the\ndeity incarnate, Arahito-gami,--and his palace was the national\nsanctuary, the Holy of Holies. Within the precincts of that [123]\npalace was the Kashiko-Dokoro (\"Place of Awe\"), the private shrine of\nthe Imperial Ancestors, where only the court could worship,--the\npublic form of the same cult being maintained at Ise. But the\nImperial House worshipped also by deputy (and still so worships) both\nat Kitzuki and Ise, and likewise at various other great sanctuaries.\nFormerly a great number of temples were maintained, or partly\nmaintained, from the imperial revenues. All Shinto temples of\nimportance used to be classed as greater and lesser shrines. There\nwere 304 of the first rank, and 2828 of the second rank. But\nmultitudes of temples were not included in this official\nclassification, and depended upon local support. The recorded total\nof Shinto shrines to-day is upwards of 195,000.\n\nWe have thus--without counting the great Izumo cult of\nOho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami--four classes of ancestor-worship: the\ndomestic religion, the religion of the Ujigami, the worship at the\nchief shrines [Ichi-no-miya] of the several provinces, and the\nnational cult at Ise. All these cults are now linked together by\ntradition; and the devout Shintoist worships the divinities of all,\ncollectively, in his daily morning prayer. Occasionally he visits the\nchief shrine of his province; and he makes a pilgrimage to Ise if he\ncan. Every Japanese is expected to visit the shrines of Ise once in\nhis lifetime, [124] or to send thither a deputy. Inhabitants of\nremote districts are not all able, of course, to make the pilgrimage;\nbut there is no village which does not, at certain intervals, send\npilgrims either to Kitzuki or to Ise on behalf of the community, the\nexpense of such representation being defrayed by local subscription.\nAnd, furthermore, every Japanese can worship the supreme divinities\nof Shinto in his own house, where upon a \"god-shelf\" (Kamidana) are\ntablets inscribed with the assurance of their divine\nprotection,--holy charms obtained from the priests of Ise or of\nKitzuki. In the case of the Ise cult, such tablets are commonly made\nfrom the wood of the holy shrines themselves, which, according to\nprimal custom, must be rebuilt every twenty years,--the timber of the\ndemolished structures being then cut into tablets for distribution\nthroughout the country.\n\nAnother development of ancestor-worship--the cult of gods presiding\nover crafts and callings--deserves special study. Unfortunately we\nare as yet little informed upon the subject. Anciently this worship\nmust have been more definitely ordered and maintained than it is now.\nOccupations were hereditary; artizans were grouped into\nguilds--perhaps we might even say castes;--and each guild or caste\nthen probably had in patron-deity. In some cases the craft-gods may\nhave been ancestors [125] of Japanese craftsmen; in other cases they\nwere perhaps of Korean or Chinese origin,--ancestral gods of\nimmigrant artizans, who brought their cults with them to Japan. Not\nmuch is known about them. But it is tolerably safe to assume that\nmost, if not all of the guilds, were at one time religiously\norganized, and that apprentices were adopted not only in a craft, but\ninto a cult. There were corporations of weavers, potters, carpenters,\narrow-makers, bow-makers, smiths, boat-builders, and other tradesmen;\nand the past religious organization of these is suggested by the fact\nthat certain occupations assume a religious character even to-day.\nFor example, the carpenter still builds according to Shinto\ntradition: he dons a priestly costume at a certain stage of the work,\nperforms rites, and chants invocations, and places the new house\nunder the protection of the gods. But the occupation of the\nswordsmith was in old days the most sacred of crafts: he worked in\npriestly garb, and practised Shinto) rites of purification while\nengaged in the making of a good blade. Before his smithy was then\nsuspended the sacred rope of rice-straw (shime-nawa), which is the\noldest symbol of Shinto: none even of his family might enter there,\nor speak to him; and he ate only of food cooked with holy fire.\n\nThe 195,000 shrines of Shinto represent, however, more than\nclan-cults or guild-cults or national-cults .... [126] Many are\ndedicated to different spirits of the same god; for Shinto holds that\nthe spirit of either a man or a god may divide itself into several\nspirits, each with a different character. Such separated spirits are\ncalled waka-mi-tama (\"august-divided-spirits\"). Thus the spirit of\nthe Goddess of Food, Toyo-uke-bime, separated itself into the God of\nTrees, Kukunochi-no-Kami, and into the Goddess of Grasses,\nKayanu-hime-no-Kami. Gods and men were supposed to have also a Rough\nSpirit and a Gentle Spirit; and Hirata remarks that the Rough Spirit\nof Oho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami was worshipped at one temple, and his\nGentle Spirit at another.*... Also we have to remember that great\nnumbers of Ujigami temples are dedicated to the same divinity. These\nduplications or multiplications are again offset by the fact that in\nsome of the principal temples a multitude of different deities are\nenshrined. Thus the number of Shinto temples in actual existence\naffords no indication whatever of the actual number of gods\nworshipped, nor of the variety of their cults. Almost every deity\nmentioned in the Ko-ji-ki or Nihongi has a shrine somewhere; and\nhundreds of others--including many later apotheoses--have their\ntemples. Numbers of temples have been dedicated, for example, to\n[127] historical personages,--to spirits of great ministers,\ncaptains, rulers, scholars, heroes, and statesmen. The famous\nminister of the Empress Jingo, Takeno-uji-no-Sukune,--who served\nunder six successive sovereigns, and lived to the age of three\nhundred years,--is now invoked in many a temple as a giver of long\nlife and great wisdom. The spirit of Sugiwara-no-Michizane, once\nminister to the Emperor Daigo, is worshipped as the god of\ncalligraphy, under the name of Tenjin, or Temmangu: children\neverywhere offer to him the first examples of their handwriting, and\ndeposit in receptacles, placed before his shrine, their worn-out\nwriting-brushes. The Soga brothers, victims and heroes of a famous\ntwelfth-century tragedy, have become gods to whom people pray for the\nmaintenance of fraternal harmony. Kato Kiyomasa, the determined enemy\nof Jesuit Christianity, and Hideyoshi's greatest captain, has been\napotheosized both by Buddhism and by Shinto. Iyeyasu is worshipped\nunder the appellation of Toshogu. In fact most of the great men of\nJapanese history have had temples erected to them; and the spirits of\nthe daimyo were, in former years, regularly worshipped by the\nsubjects of their descendants and successors.\n\n[*Even men had the Rough and the Gentle Spirit; but a god had three\ndistinct spirits,--the Rough, the Gentle, and the\nBestowing,--respectively termed Ara-mi-tama, Nigi-mi-tama, and\nSaki-mi-tama.--[See SATOW's Revival of Pure Shintau.]\n\nBesides temples to deities presiding over industries and\nagriculture,--or deities especially invoked by the peasants, such as\nthe goddess of silkworms, [128] the goddess of rice, the gods of wind\nand weather,--there are to be found in almost every part of the\ncountry what I may call propitiatory temples. These latter Shinto\nshrines have been erected by way of compensation to spirits of\npersons who suffered great injustice or misfortune. In these cases\nthe worship assumes a very curious character, the worshipper always\nappealing for protection against the same kind of calamity or trouble\nas that from which the apotheosized person suffered during life. In\nIzumo, for example, I found a temple dedicated to the spirit of a\nwoman, once a prince's favourite. She had been driven to suicide by\nthe intrigues of jealous rivals. The story is that she had very\nbeautiful hair; but it was not quite black, and her enemies used to\nreproach her with its color. Now mothers having children with\nbrownish hair pray to her that the brown may be changed to black; and\nofferings are made to her of tresses of hair and Tokyo coloured\nprints, for it is still remembered that she was fond of such prints.\nIn the same province there is a shrine erected to the spirit of a\nyoung wife, who pined away for grief at the absence of her lord. She\nused to climb a hill to watch for his return, and the shrine was\nbuilt upon the place where she waited; and wives pray there to her\nfor the safe return of absent husbands .... An almost similar kind of\npropitiatory worship is practised in cemeteries. Public pity seeks to\napotheosize those [129] urged to suicide by cruelty, or those\nexecuted for offences which, although legally criminal, were inspired\nby patriotic or other motives commanding sympathy. Before their\ngraves offerings are laid and prayers are murmured. Spirits of\nunhappy lovers are commonly invoked by young people who suffer from\nthe same cause .... And, among other forms of propitiatory worship I\nmust mention the old custom of erecting small shrines to spirits of\nanimals,--chiefly domestic animals,--either in recognition of dumb\nservice rendered and ill-rewarded, or as a compensation for pain\nunjustly inflicted.\n\nYet another class of tutelar divinities remains to be noticed,--those\nwho dwell within or about the houses of men. Some are mentioned in\nthe old mythology, and are probably developments of Japanese\nancestor-worship; some are of alien origin; some do not appear to\nhave any temples; and some represent little more than what is called\nAnimism. This class of divinities corresponds rather to the Roman dii\ngenitales than to the Greek (Greek daemones). Suijin-Sarna, the God\nof Wells; Kojin, the God of the Cooking-range (in almost every\nkitchen there is either a tiny shrine for him, or a written charm\nbearing his name); the gods of the Cauldron and Saucepan,\nKudo-no-Kami and Kobe-no-Kami (anciently called Okitsuhiko and\nOkitsuhime); the Master of Ponds, Ike-no-Nushi, [130] supposed to\nmake apparition in the form of a serpent; the Goddess of the\nRice-pot, O-Kama-Sama; the Gods of the Latrina, who first taught men\nhow to fertilize their fields (these are commonly represented by\nlittle figures of paper, having the forms of a man and a woman, but\nfaceless); the Gods of Wood and Fire and Metal; the Gods likewise of\nGardens, Fields, Scarecrows, Bridges, Hills, Woods, and Streams; and\nalso the Spirits of Trees (for Japanese mythology has its dryads):\nmost of these are undoubtedly of Shinto. On the other hand, we find\nthe roads under the protection of Buddhist deities chiefly. I have\nnot been able to learn anything regarding gods of\nboundaries,--termes, as the Latins called them; and one sees only\nimages of the Buddhas at the limits of village territories. But in\nalmost every garden, on the north side, there is a little Shinto\nshrine, facing what is called the Ki-Mon, or \"Demon-Gate,\"--that is\nto say, the direction from which, according to Chinese teaching, all\nevils come; and these little shrines, dedicated to various Shinto\ndeities, are supposed to protect the home from evil spirits. The\nbelief in the Ki-Mon is obviously a Chinese importation. One may\ndoubt, however, if Chinese influence alone developed the belief that\nevery part of a house,--every beam of it,--and every domestic utensil\nhas its invisible guardian. Considering this belief, it is not\nsurprising that the building of a [131] house--unless the house be in\nforeign style--is still a religious act, and that the functions of a\nmaster-builder include those of a priest.\n\nThis brings us to the subject of Animism.  (I doubt whether any\nevolutionist of the contemporary school holds to the old-fashioned\nnotion that animism preceded ancestor-worship,--a theory involving\nthe assumption that belief in the spirits of inanimate objects was\nevolved before the idea of a human ghost had yet been developed.) In\nJapan it is now as difficult to draw the line between animistic\nbeliefs and the lowest forms of Shinto, as to establish a demarcation\nbetween the vegetable and the animal worlds; but the earliest Shinto\nliterature gives no evidence of such a developed animism as that now\nexisting. Probably the development was gradual, and largely\ninfluenced by Chinese beliefs. Still, we read in the Ko-ji-ki of\n\"evil gods who glittered like fireflies or were disorderly as\nmayflies,\" and of \"demons who made rocks, and stumps of trees, and\nthe foam of the green waters to speak,\"--showing that animistic or\nfetichistic notions were prevalent to some extent before the period\nof Chinese influence. And it is significant that where animism is\nassociated with persistent worship (as in the matter of the reverence\npaid to strangely shaped stones or trees), the form of the worship\nis, in most cases, Shinto. Before such objects there is usually [132]\nto be seen the model of a Shinto gateway,--torii.... With the\ndevelopment of animism, under Chinese and Korean influence, the man\nof Old Japan found himself truly in a world of spirits and demons.\nThey spoke to him in the sound of tides and of cataracts in the\nmoaning of wind and the whispers of leafage, in the crying of birds,\nand the trilling of insects, in all the voices of nature. For him all\nvisible motion--whether of waves or grasses or shifting mist or\ndrifting cloud--was ghostly; and the never moving rocks--nay, the\nvery stones by the wayside--were informed with viewless and awful\nbeing.\n\n\n\n[133]\n\nWORSHIP AND PURIFICATION\n\nWe have seen that, in Old Japan, the world of the living was\neverywhere ruled by the world of the dead,--that the individual, at\nevery moment of his existence, was under ghostly supervision. In his\nhome he was watched by the spirits of his fathers; without it, he was\nruled by the god of his district. All about him, and above him, and\nbeneath him were invisible powers of life and death. In his\nconception of nature all things were ordered by the dead,--light and\ndarkness, weather and season, winds and tides, mist and rain, growth\nand decay, sickness and health. The viewless atmosphere was a\nphantom-sea, an ocean of ghost; the soil that he tilled was pervaded\nby spirit-essence; the trees were haunted and holy; even the rocks\nand the stones were infused with conscious life .... How might he\ndischarge his duty to the infinite concourse of the invisible?\n\nFew scholars could remember the names of all the greater gods, not to\nspeak of the lesser; and no mortal could have found time to address\nthose greater gods by their respective names in his daily [134]\nprayer. The later Shinto teachers proposed to simplify the duties of\nthe faith by prescribing one brief daily prayer to the gods in\ngeneral, and special prayers to a few gods in particular; and in thus\ndoing they were most likely confirming a custom already established\nby necessity. Hirata wrote: \"As the number of the gods who possess\ndifferent functions is very great, it will be convenient to worship\nby name the most important only, and to include the rest in a general\npetition.\" He prescribed ten prayers for persons having time to\nrepeat them, but lightened the duty for busy folk,--observing:\n\"Persons whose daily affairs are so multitudinous that they have not\ntime to go through all the prayers, may content themselves with\nadoring (1) the residence of the Emperor, (2) the domestic\ngod-shelf,--kamidana, (3) the spirits of their ancestors, (4) their\nlocal patron-god, Ujigami, (5) the deity of their particular\ncalling.\" He advised that the following prayer should be daily\nrepeated before the \"god-shelf\":--\n\n\"Reverently adoring the great god of the two palaces of Ise in the\nfirst, place,--the eight hundred myriads of celestial gods,--the\neight hundred myriads of terrestrial gods,--the fifteen hundred\nmyriads of gods to whom are consecrated the great and small temples\nin all provinces, all islands, and all places of the Great Land of\nEight Islands,--the fifteen hundred myriads of gods whom they cause\nto serve them, and the gods of branch-palaces and branch-temples,\n[135]--and Sohodo-no-Kami* whom I have invited to the shrine set up\non this divine shelf, and to whom I offer praises day by day,--I pray\nwith awe that they will deign to correct the unwilling faults which,\nheard and seen by them, I have committed; and that, blessing and\nfavouring me according to the powers which they severally wield, they\nwill cause me to follow the divine example, and to perform good works\nin the Way.\"**\n\n[*Sohodo-no-Kami is the god of scarecrows,--protector of the fields.]\n[**Translated by Satow.]\n\nThis text is interesting as an example of what Shinto's greatest\nexpounder thought a Shinto prayer should be; and, excepting the\nreference to So-ho-do-no-Kami, the substance of it is that of the\nmorning prayer still repeated in Japanese households. But the modern\nprayer is very much shorter.... In Izumo, the oldest Shinto province,\nthe customary morning worship offers perhaps the best example of the\nancient rules of devotion. Immediately upon rising, the worshipper\nperforms his ablutions; and after having washed his face and rinsed\nhis mouth, he turns to the sun, claps his hands, and with bowed head\nreverently utters the simple greeting: \"Hail to thee this day, August\nOne!\" In thus adoring the sun he is also fulfilling his duty as a\nsubject, paying obeisance to the Imperial Ancestor .... The act is\nperformed out of doors, not kneeling, but standing; and the spectacle\nof this simple worship is impressive. I can now see in memory,--\n[136] just as plainly as I saw with my eyes many years ago, off the\nwild Oki coast,--the naked figure of a young fisherman erect at the\nprow of his boat, clapping his hands in salutation to the rising sun,\nwhose ruddy glow transformed him into a statue of bronze. Also I\nretain a vivid memory of pilgrim-figures poised upon the topmost\ncrags of the summit of Fuji, clapping their hands in prayer, with\nfaces to the East .... Perhaps ten thousand--twenty thousand-years\nago all humanity so worshipped the Lord of Day ....\n\nAfter having saluted the sun, the worshipper returns to his house, to\npray before the Kamidana and before the tablets of the ancestors.\nKneeling, he invokes the great gods of Ise or of Izumo, the gods of\nthe chief temples of his province, the god of his parish-temple also\n(Ujigami), and finally all the myriads of the deities of Shinto.\nThese prayers are not said aloud. The ancestors are thanked for the\nfoundation of the home; the higher deities are invoked for aid and\nprotection .... As for the custom of bowing in the direction of the\nEmperor's palace, I am not able to say to what extent it survives in\nthe remoter districts; but I have often seen the reverence performed.\nOnce, too, I saw reverence done immediately in front of the gates of\nthe palace in Tokyo by country-folk on a visit to the capital. They\nknew me, because I had often sojourned in their village; and on\nreaching Tokyo [137] they sought me out, and found me, I took them to\nthe palace; and before the main entrance they removed their hats, and\nbowed, and clapped their hands, just as they would have done when\nsaluting the gods or the rising sun,--and this with a simple and\ndignified reverence that touched me not a little.\n\nThe duties of morning worship, which include the placing of offerings\nbefore the tablets, are not the only duties of the domestic cult. In\na Shinto household, where the ancestors and the higher gods are\nseparately worshipped, the ancestral shrine may be said to correspond\nwith the Roman lararium; while the \"god-shelf,\" with its taima or\no-nusa (symbols of those higher gods especially revered by the\nfamily), may be compared with the place accorded by Latin custom to\nthe worship of the Penates. Both Shinto cults have their particular\nfeast-days; and, in the case of the ancestor-cult, the feast-days are\noccasions of religious assembly,--when the relatives of the family\nshould gather to celebrate the domestic rite .... The Shintoist must\nalso take part in the celebration of the festivals of the Ujigami,\nand must at least aid in the celebration of the nine great national\nholidays related to the national cult; these nine, out of a total\neleven, being occasions of imperial ancestor-worship.\n\nThe nature of the public rites varied according to [138] the rank of\nthe gods. Offerings and prayers were made to all; but the greater\ndeities were worshipped with exceeding ceremony. To-day the offerings\nusually consist of food and rice-wine, together with symbolic\narticles representing the costlier gifts of woven stuffs presented by\nancient custom. The ceremonies include processions, music, singing,\nand dancing. At the very small shrines there are few\nceremonies,--only offerings of food are presented. But at the great\ntemples there are hierarchies of priests and priestesses\n(miko)--usually daughters of priests; and the ceremonies are\nelaborate and solemn. It is particularly at the temples of Ise\n(where, down to the fourteenth century the high-priestess was a\ndaughter of emperors), or at the great temple of Izumo, that the\narchaic character of the ceremonial can be studied to most advantage.\nThere, in spite of the passage of that huge wave of Buddhism, which\nfor a period almost submerged the more ancient faith, all things\nremain as they were a score of centuries ago;--Time, in those haunted\nprecincts, would seem to have slept, as in the enchanted palaces of\nfairy-tale. The mere shapes of the buildings, weird and tall, startle\nby their unfamiliarity. Within, all is severely plain and pure: there\nare no images, no ornaments, no symbols visible--except those strange\npaper-cuttings (gohei), suspended to upright rods, which are symbols\nof offerings and also tokens of the [139] viewless. By the number of\nthem in the sanctuary, you know the number of the deities to whom the\nplace is consecrate. There is nothing imposing but the space, the\nsilence, and the suggestion of the past. The innermost shrine is\nveiled: it contains, perhaps, a mirror of bronze, an ancient sword,\nor other object enclosed in multiple wrappings: that is all. For this\nfaith, older than icons, needs no images: its gods are ghosts; and\nthe void stillness of its shrines compels more awe than tangible\nrepresentation could inspire. Very strange, to Western eyes at least,\nare the rites, the forms of the worship, the shapes of sacred\nobjects. Not by any modern method must the sacred fire be\nlighted,--the fire that cooks the food of the gods: it can be kindled\nonly in the most ancient of ways, with a wooden fire-drill. The chief\npriests are robed in the sacred colour,--white,--and wear headdresses\nof a shape no longer seen elsewhere: high caps of the kind formerly\nworn by lords and princes. Their assistants wear various colours,\naccording to grade; and the faces of none are completely\nshaven;--some wear full beards, others the mustache only. The actions\nand attitudes of these hierophants are dignified, yet archaic, in a\ndegree difficult to describe. Each movement is regulated by\ntradition; and to perform well the functions of a Kannushi, a long\ndisciplinary preparation is necessary. The office is hereditary; the\ntraining begins in boyhood; and [140] the impassive deportment\neventually acquired is really a wonderful thing. Officiating, the\nKannushi seems rather a statue than a man,--an image moved by\ninvisible strings;--and, like the gods, he never winks. Not at least\nobservably.... Once, during a great Shinto procession, several\nJapanese friends, and I myself, undertook to watch a young priest on\nhorseback, in order to see how long he could keep from winking; and\nnone of us were able to detect the slightest movement of eyes or\neyelids, notwithstanding that the priest's horse became restive\nduring the time that we were watching.\n\nThe principal incidents of the festival ceremonies within the great\ntemples are the presentation of the offerings, the repetition of the\nritual, and the dancing of the priestesses. Each of these\nperformances retains a special character rigidly fixed by tradition.\nThe food-offerings are served upon archaic vessels of unglazed\npottery (red earthenware mostly): boiled rice pressed into cones of\nthe form of a sugar-loaf, various preparations of fish and of edible\nsea-weed, fruits and fowls, rice-wine presented in jars of immemorial\nshape. These offerings are carried into the temple upon white wooden\ntrays of curious form, and laid upon white wooden tables of equally\ncurious form;--the faces of the bearers being covered, below the\neyes, with sheets of white paper, in order that their breath may\n[141] not contaminate the food of the gods; and the trays, for like\nreason, must be borne at arms' length .... In ancient times the\nofferings would seem to have included things much more costly than\nfood,--if we may credit the testimony of what are probably the oldest\ndocuments extant in the Japanese tongue, the Shinto rituals, or\nnorito.* The following excerpt from Satow's translation of the ritual\nprayer to the Wind-gods of Tatsuta is interesting, not only as a fine\nexample of the language of the norito, but also as indicating the\ncharacter of the great ceremonies in early ages, and the nature of\nthe offerings:--\n\n[*Several have been translated by Satow, whose opinion of their\nantiquity is here cited; and translations have also been made into\nGerman.]\n\n\"As the great offerings set up for the Youth-god, I set up various\nsorts of offerings: for Clothes, bright cloth, glittering cloth, soft\ncloth, and coarse cloth,--and the five kinds of things, a mantlet, a\nspear, a horse furnished with a saddle;--for the Maiden-god I set up\nvarious sorts of offerings--providing Clothes, a golden thread-box, a\ngolden tatari, a golden skein-holder, bright cloth, glittering cloth,\nsoft cloth, and coarse cloth, and the five kinds of things, a horse\nfurnished with a saddle;--as to Liquor, I raise high the beer-jars,\nfill and range-in-a-row the bellies of the beer-jars; soft grain and\ncoarse grain;--as to things which dwell in the hills, things soft of\nhair and things coarse of hair;--as to things which grow in the great\nfield--plain, sweet herbs and bitter herbs;--as to things which dwell\nin the blue sea-plain, things broad of fin and things narrow of\nfin--down to the weeds of the offing and weeds of the [142] shore.\nAnd if the sovran gods will take these great offerings which I set\nup,--piling them up like a range of hills,--peacefully in their\nhearts, as peaceful offerings and satisfactory offerings; and if the\nsovran gods, deigning not to visit the things produced by, the great\nPeople of the region under heaven with bad winds and rough waters,\nwill open and bless them,--I will at the autumn service set up the\nfirst fruits, raising high the beer-jars, filling and ranging-in-rows\nthe bellies of the beer-jars,--and drawing them hither in juice and\nin ear, in many hundred rice-plants and a thousand rice-plants. And\nfor this purpose the princes and councillors and all the\nfunctionaries, the servants of the six farms of the country of\nYamato--even to the males and females of them--have all come and\nassembled in the fourth month of this year, and, plunging down the\nroot of the neck cormorant-wise in the presence of the sovran gods,\nfulfil their praise as the Sun of to-day rises in glory.\"...\n\nThe offerings are no longer piled up \"like a range of hills,\" nor do\nthey include all things dwelling in the mountains and in the sea; but\nthe imposing ritual remains, and the ceremony is always impressive.\nNot the least interesting part of it is the sacred dance. While the\ngods are supposed to be partaking of the food and wine set out before\ntheir shrines, the girl-priestesses, robed in crimson and white, move\ngracefully to the sound of drums and flutes,--waving fans, or shaking\nbunches of tiny bells as they circle about the sanctuary. According\nto our Western notions. the performance of the [143] miko could\nscarcely be called dancing; but it is a graceful spectacle, and very\ncurious,--for every step and attitude is regulated by traditions of\nunknown antiquity. As for the plaintive music, no Western ear can\ndiscern in it anything resembling a real melody; but the gods should\nfind delight in it, because it is certainly performed for them to-day\nexactly as it used to be performed twenty centuries ago.\n\nI speak of the ceremonies especially as I have witnessed them in\nIzumo: they vary somewhat according to cult and province. At the\nshrines of Ise, Kasuga, Kompira, and several others which I visited,\nthe ordinary priestesses are children; and when they have reached the\nnubile age, they retire from the service. At Kitzuki the priestesses\nare grown-up women: their office is hereditary; and they are\npermitted to retain it even after marriage.\n\nFormerly the Miko was more than a mere officiant: the songs which she\nis still obliged to learn indicate that she was originally offered to\nthe gods as a bride. Even yet her touch is holy; the grain sown by\nher hand is blessed. At some time in the past she seems to have been\nalso a pythoness: the spirits of the gods possessed her and spoke\nthrough her lips. All the poetry of this most ancient of religions\ncentres in the figure of its little Vestal,--child-bride of\nghosts,--as she flutters, [144] like some wonderful white-and-crimson\nbutterfly, before the shrine of the Invisible. Even in these years of\nchange, when she must go to the public school, she continues to\nrepresent all that is delightful in Japanese girlhood; for her\nspecial home-training keeps her reverent, innocent, dainty in all her\nlittle ways, and worthy to remain the pet of the gods.\n\nThe history of the higher forms of ancestor-worship in other\ncountries would lead us to suppose that the public ceremonies of the\nShinto-cult must include some rite of purification. As a matter of\nfact, the most important of all Shinto ceremonies is the ceremony of\npurification,--o-harai, as it is called, which term signifies the\ncasting-out or expulsion of evils .... In ancient Athens a\ncorresponding ceremony took place every year; in Rome, every four\nyears. The o-harai is performed twice every year,--in the sixth month\nand the twelfth month by the ancient calendar. It used to be not less\nobligatory than the Roman lustration; and the idea behind the\nobligation was the same as that which inspired the Roman laws on the\nsubject .... So long as men believe that the welfare of the living\ndepends upon the will of the dead,--that all happenings in the world\nare ordered by spirits of different characters, evil as well as\ngood,--that every bad action lends additional power to the viewless\n[145] forces of destruction, and therefore endangers the public\nprosperity,--so long will the necessity of a public purification\nremain an article of common faith. The presence in any community of\neven one person who has offended the gods, consciously or\nunwillingly, is a public misfortune, a public peril. Yet it is not\npossible for all men to live so well as never to vex the gods by\nthought, word, or deed,--through passion or ignorance or\ncarelessness. \"Every one,\" declares Hirata, \"is certain to commit\naccidental offences, however careful he may be... Evil acts and words\nare of two kinds: those of which we are conscious, and those of which\nwe are not conscious .... It is better to assume that we have\ncommitted such unconscious offences.\" Now it should be remembered\nthat for the man of Old Japan,--as for the Greek or the Roman citizen\nof early times,--religion consisted chiefly in the exact observance\nof multitudinous custom; and that it was therefore difficult to know\nwhether, in performing the duties of the several cults, one had not\ninadvertently displeased the Unseen. As a means of maintaining and\nassuring the religious purity of the people periodical lustration was\nconsequently deemed indispensable.\n\nFrom the earliest period Shinto exacted scrupulous cleanliness\n--indeed, we might say that it regarded physical impurity as\nidentical with moral impurity, and intolerable to the gods. It has\n[146] always been, and still remains, a religion of ablutions. The\nJapanese love of cleanliness--indicated by the universal practice of\ndaily bathing, and by the irreproachable condition of their homes has\nbeen maintained, and was probably initiated, by their religion.\nSpotless cleanliness being required by the rites of\nancestor-worship,--in the temple, in the person of the officiant, and\nin the home,--this rule of purity was naturally extended by degrees\nto all the conditions of existence. And besides the great periodical\nceremonies of purification, a multitude of minor lustrations were\nexacted by the cult. This was the case also, it will be remembered in\nthe early Greek and Roman civilizations--the citizen had to submit\nto purification upon almost every important occasion of existence.\nThere were lustrations indispensable at birth, marriage, and death;\nlustrations on the eve of battle; lustrations at regular periods, of\nthe dwelling, estate, district, or city. And, as in Japan, no one\ncould approach a temple without a preliminary washing of hands. But\nancient Shinto exacted more than the Greek or the Roman cult: it\nrequired the erection of special houses for birth,\n--\"parturition-houses\"; special houses for the consummation of\nmarriage,--\"nuptial-huts\"; and special buildings for the\ndead,--\"mourning-houses.\" Formerly women were obliged during the\nperiod of menstruation, as well as during the time of confinement, to\nlive apart. These harsher archaic customs [147] have almost\ndisappeared, except in one or two remote districts, and in the case\nof certain priestly families; but the general rules as to\npurification, and as to the times and circumstances forbidding\napproach to holy places, are still everywhere obeyed. Purity of heart\nis not less insisted upon than physical purity; and the great rite of\nlustration, performed every six months, is of course a moral\npurification. It is performed not only at the great temples, and at\nall the Ujigami, but likewise in every home\n\n_________________________________________________________________\n\n[*On the kamidana, \"or god-shelf,\" there is usually placed a kind\nof oblong paper-box containing fragments of the wands used by the\npriests of Ise at the great national purification-ceremony, or\no-harai.  This box is commonly called by the name of the\nceremony, o-harai, or \"august purification,\" and is inscribed\nwith the names of the great gods of Ise.  The presence of this\nobject is supposed to protect the home; but it should be replaced\nby a new o-harai at the expiration of six months; for the virtue\nof the charm is supposed to last only during the interval between\ntwo official purifications.  This distribution to thousands of\nhomes of fragments of the wands, used to \"drive away evils\" at\nthe time of the Ise lustration, represents of course the supposed\nextension of the high-priest's protection to those homes until\nthe time of the next o-harai.\n\nThe modern domestic form of the harai is very simple.  Each\nShinto parish-temple furnishes to all its Ujiko, or parishioners,\nsmall paper-cuttings called hitogata (\"mankind-shapes\"),\nrepresenting figures of men, women, and children as in\nsilhouette,--only that the paper is white, and folded curiously.\nEach household receives a number of hitogata corresponding to the\nnumber of its members,--\"men-shapes\" for the men and boys,\n\"women-shapes\"]\n_________________________________________________________________\n\n[148] for the women and girls.  Each person in the house touches his\nhead, face, limbs, and body with one of these hitogata; repeating the\nwhile a Shinto invocation, and praying that any misfortune or\nsickness incurred by reason of offences involuntarily committed\nagainst the gods (for in Shinto belief sickness and misfortune are\ndivine punishments) may be mercifully taken away. Upon each hitogata\nis then written the age and sex (not the name) of the person for whom\nit was furnished; and when this has been done, all are returned to\nthe parish-temple, and there burnt, with rites of purification. Thus\nthe community is \"lustrated\" every six Months.\n\nIn the old Greek and Latin cities lustration was accompanied with\nregistration. The attendance of every citizen at the ceremony was\nheld to be so necessary that one who wilfully failed to attend might\nbe whipped and sold as a slave. Non-attendance involved loss of civic\nrights. It would seem that in Old Japan also every member of a\ncommunity was obliged to be present at the rite; but I have not been\nable to learn whether any registration was made upon such occasions.\nProbably it would have been superfluous: the Japanese individual was\nnot officially recognized; the family-group alone was responsible,\nand the attendance of the several members would have been assured by\nthe responsibility of the group. The use of the hitogata, on which\nthe name is not written, but only the sex and age [149] of the\nworshipper, is probably modern, and of Chinese origin. Official\nregistration existed, even in early times; but it appears to have had\nno particular relation to the o-harai; and the registers were kept,\nit seems, not by the Shinto, but by the Buddhist parish-priests ....\nIn concluding these remarks about the o-harai, I need scarcely add\nthat special rites were performed in cases of accidental religious\ndefilement, and that any person judged to have sinned against the\nrules of the public cult had to submit to ceremonial purification.\n\nClosely related by origin to the rites of purification are sundry\nascetic practices of Shinto. It is not an essentially ascetic\nreligion: it offers flesh and wine to its gods; and it prescribes\nonly such forms of self-denial as ancient custom and decency require.\nNevertheless, some of its votaries perform extraordinary austerities\non special occasions,--austerities which always include much\ncold-water bathing. It is not uncommon for the very fervent\nworshipper to invoke the gods as he stands naked under the ice-cold\nrush of a cataract in midwinter .... But the most curious phase of\nthis Shinto asceticism is represented by a custom still prevalent in\nremote districts. According to this custom a community yearly\nappoints one of its citizens to devote himself wholly to the gods on\nbehalf of the rest. During the term of his consecration, this\ncommunal representative [150] must separate from his family, must not\napproach women, must avoid all places of amusement, must eat only\nfood cooked with sacred fire, must abstain from wine, must bathe in\nfresh cold water several times a day, must repeat particular prayers\nat certain hours, and must keep vigil upon certain nights. When he\nhas performed these duties of abstinence and purification for the\nspecified time, he becomes religiously free; and another man is then\nelected to take his place. The prosperity of the settlement is\nsupposed to depend upon the exact observance by its representative of\nthe duties prescribed: should any public misfortune occur, he would\nbe suspected of having broken his vows. Anciently, in the case of a\ncommon misfortune, the representative was put to death. In the little\ntown of Mionoseki, where I first learned of this custom, the communal\nrepresentative is called ichi-nen-gannushi (\"one-year god-master\");\nand his full term of vicarious atonement is twelve months. I was told\nthat elders are usually appointed for this duty,--young men very\nseldom. In ancient times such a communal representative was called by\na name signifying \"abstainer.\" References to the custom have been\nfound in Chinese notices of Japan dating from a time before the\nbeginning of Japanese authentic history.\n\nEvery persistent form of ancestor-worship has its [151] system or\nsystems of divination; and Shinto exemplifies the general law.\nWhether divination ever obtained in ancient Japan the official\nimportance which it assumed among the Greeks and the Romans is at\npresent doubtful. But long before the introduction of Chinese\nastrology, magic, and fortune-telling, the Japanese practised various\nkinds of divination, as is proved by their ancient poetry, their\nrecords, and their rituals. We find mention also of official\ndiviners, attached to the great cults. There was divination by bones,\nby birds, by rice, by barley-gruel, by footprints, by rods planted in\nthe ground, and by listening in public ways to the speech of people\npassing by. Nearly all--probably all--of these old methods of\ndivination are still in popular use. But the earliest form of\nofficial divination was performed by scorching the shoulder-blade of\na deer, or other animal, and observing the cracks produced by the\nheat.* Tortoise-shells were afterwards used for the same purpose.\nDiviners were especially attached, it appears, to the imperial\npalace; and Motowori, writing in the latter half of the eighteenth\ncentury, speaks of divination as still being, in that epoch, a part\nof the imperial function. \"To the end of time,\" he said, \"the Mikado\nis the child of the Sun-goddess. His mind is in perfect harmony of\nthought and feeling with hers. He does not seek out new inventions;\nbut he rules in accordance with precedents which date from the Age of\nthe Gods; and if he is ever in doubt, he has recourse to divination,\nwhich reveals to him the mind of the great goddess.\"\n\n[*Concerning this form of divination, Satow remarks that it was\npractised by the Mongols in the time of Genghis Khan, and is still\npractised by the Khirghiz Tartars,--facts of strong interest in view\nof the probable origin of the early Japanese tribes. For instances of\nancient official divination see Aston's translation of the Nihongi,\nVol. I, pp. 157, 189, 227, 299, 237.]\n\n[152] Within historic times at least, divination would not seem to\nhave been much used in warfare,--certainly not to the extent that it\nwas used by the Greek and Roman armies. The greatest Japanese\ncaptains,--such as Hideyoshi and Nobunaga--were decidedly irreverent\nas to omens. Probably the Japanese, at an early period of their long\nmilitary history, learned by experience that the general who conducts\nhis campaign according to omens must always be at a hopeless\ndisadvantage in dealing with a skilful enemy who cares nothing about\nomens.\n\nAmong the ancient popular forms of divination which still survive,\nthe most commonly practised in households is divination by dry rice.\nFor the public, Chinese divination is still in great favour; but it\nis interesting to observe that the Japanese fortune-teller invariably\ninvokes the Shinto gods before consulting his Chinese books, and\nmaintains a Shinto shrine in his reception-room.\n\n[153] We have seen that the developments of ancestor-worship in Japan\npresent remarkable analogies with the developments of\nancestor-worship in ancient Europe,--especially in regard to the\npublic cult, with its obligatory rites of purification.\n\nBut Shinto seems nevertheless to represent conditions of\nancestor-worship less developed than those which we are accustomed to\nassociate with early Greek and Roman life; and the coercion which it\nexercised appears to have been proportionally more rigid. The\nexistence of the individual worshipper was ordered not merely in\nrelation to the family and the community, but even in relation to\ninanimate things. Whatever his occupation might be, some god presided\nover it; whatever tools he might use, they had to be used in such\nmanner as tradition prescribed for all admitted to the craft-cult. It\nwas necessary that the carpenter should so perform his work as to\nhonour the deity of carpenters,--that the smith should fulfil his\ndaily task so as to honour the god of the bellows,--that the farmer\nshould never fail in respect to the earth-god, and the food-god, and\nthe scare-crow god, and the spirits of the trees--about his\nhabitation. Even the domestic utensils were sacred: the servant could\nnot dare to forget the presence of the deities of the cooking-range,\nthe hearth, the cauldron, the brazier,--or the supreme necessity of\nkeeping the fire pure. The professions, not less [154] than the\ntrades, were under divine patronage: the physician, the teacher, the\nartist--each had his religious duties to observe, his special\ntraditions to obey. The scholar, for example, could not dare to treat\nhis writing-implements with disrespect, or put written paper to\nvulgar uses: such conduct would offend the god of calligraphy. Nor\nwere women ruled less religiously than men in their various\noccupations: the spinners and weaving-maidens were bound to revere\nthe Weaving-goddess and the Goddess of Silkworms; the sewing-girl was\ntaught to respect her needles; and in all homes there was observed a\ncertain holiday upon which offerings were made to the Spirits of\nNeedles. In Samurai families the warrior was commanded to consider\nhis armour and his weapons as holy things: to keep them in beautiful\norder was an obligation of which the neglect might bring misfortune\nin the time of combat; and on certain days offerings were set before\nthe bows and spears, arrows and swords, and other war-implements, in\nthe alcove of the family guest-room. Gardens, too, were holy; and\nthere were rules to be observed in their management, lest offence\nshould be given to the gods of trees and flowers. Carefulness,\ncleanliness, dustlessness, were everywhere enforced as religious\nobligations.\n\n... It has often been remarked in these latter days that the Japanese\ndo not keep their public offices, their railway stations, their new\nfactory-buildings, [155] thus scrupulously clean. But edifices built\nforeign style, with foreign material, under foreign supervision, and\ncontrary to every local tradition, must seem to old-fashioned\nthinking God-forsaken places; and servants amid such unhallowed\nsurroundings do not feel the invisible about them, the weight of\npious custom, the silent claim of beautiful and simple things to\nhuman respect.\n\n\n\n[156]\n\n[157]\n\nTHE RULE OF THE DEAD\n\nIt should now be evident to the reader that the ethics of Shinto were\nall comprised in the doctrine of unqualified obedience to customs\noriginating, for the most part, in the family cult. Ethics were not\ndifferent from religion; religion was not different from government;\nand the very word for government signified \"matters-of-religion.\" All\ngovernment ceremonies were preceded by prayer and sacrifice; and from\nthe highest rank of society to the lowest every person was subject to\nthe law of tradition. To obey was piety; to disobey was impious; and\nthe rule of obedience was enforced upon each individual by the will\nof the community to which he belonged. Ancient morality consisted in\nthe minute observance of rules of conduct regarding the household,\nthe community, and the higher authority.\n\nBut these rules of behaviour mostly represented the outcome of social\nexperience; and it was scarcely possible to obey them faithfully, and\nyet to remain a bad man. They commanded reverence toward the Unseen,\nrespect for authority, affection to parents, [158] tenderness to wife\nand children, kindness to neighbours, kindness to dependants,\ndiligence and exactitude in labour, thrift and cleanliness in habit.\nThough at first morality signified no more than obedience to\ntradition, tradition itself gradually became identified with true\nmorality. To imagine the consequent social condition is, of course,\nsomewhat difficult for the modern mind. Among ourselves, religious\nethics and social ethics have long been practically dissociated; and\nthe latter have become, with the gradual weakening of faith, more\nimperative and important than the former. Most of us learn, sooner or\nlater in life, that it is not enough to keep the ten commandments,\nand that it is much less dangerous to break most of the commandments\nin a quiet way than to violate social custom. But in Old Japan there\nwas no distinction tolerated between ethics and custom--between moral\nrequirements and social obligations: convention identified both, and\nto conceal a breach of either was impossible,--as privacy did not\nexist. Moreover the unwritten commandments were not limited to ten;\nthey were numbered by hundreds, and the least infringement was\npunishable, not merely as a blunder, but as a sin. Neither in his own\nhome nor anywhere else could the ordinary person do as he pleased;\nand the extraordinary person was under the surveillance of zealous\ndependants whose constant duty was to reprove any breach of usage.\nThe religion capable [159] of regulating every act of existence by\nthe force of common opinion requires no catechism.\n\nEarly moral custom must be coercive custom.  But as many habits, at\nfirst painfully formed under compulsion only, become easy through\nconstant repetition, and at last automatic, so the conduct compelled\nthrough many generations by religious and civil authority, tends\neventually to become almost instinctive. Much depends, no doubt, upon\nthe degree to which religious compulsion is hindered by exterior\ncauses,--by long-protracted war, for example,--and in Old Japan there\nwas interference extraordinary. Nevertheless, the influence of Shinto\naccomplished wonderful things,--evolved a national type of character\nworthy, in many ways, of earnest admiration. The ethical sentiment\ndeveloped in that character differed widely from our own; but it was\nexactly adapted to the social requirements. For this national type of\nmoral character was invented the name Yamato-damashi (or\nYamato-gokoro),--the Soul of Yamato (or Heart of Yamato),--the\nappellation of the old province of Yamato, seat of the early\nemperors, being figuratively used for the entire country. We might\ncorrectly, though less literally, interpret the expression\nYamato-damashi as \"The Soul of Old Japan.\"\n\nIt was in reference to this \"Soul of Old Japan\" that the great Shinto\nscholars of the eighteenth [160] and nineteenth centuries put forth\ntheir bold assertion that conscience alone was a sufficient ethical\nguide. They declared the high quality of the Japanese conscience a\nproof of the divine origin of the race. \"Human beings,\" wrote\nMotowori, \"having been produced by the spirits of the two Creative\nDeities, are naturally endowed with the knowledge of what they ought\nto do, and of what they ought to refrain from doing. It is\nunnecessary for them to trouble their minds with systems of morality.\nIf a system of morals were necessary, men would be inferior to\nanimals,--all of whom are endowed with the knowledge of what they\nought to do, only in an inferior degree to men.\"*... [*All of these\nextracts are quoted from Satow's great essay on the Shinto revival.]\nMabuchi, at an earlier day, had made a comparison between Japanese\nand Chinese morality, greatly to the disadvantage of the latter. \"In\nancient times,\" said Mabuchi, \"when men's dispositions were\nstraightforward, a complicated system of morals was unnecessary. It\nwould naturally happen that bad actions might be occasionally\ncommitted; but the straightforwardness of men's dispositions would\nprevent the evil from being concealed and so growing in extent. So in\nthose days it was unnecessary to have a doctrine of right and wrong.\nBut the Chinese, being bad at heart, in spite of the teaching which\nthey got, were good [161] only on the outside; so their bad acts\nbecame of such magnitude that society was thrown into disorder. The\nJapanese, being straightforward, could do without teaching.\" Motowori\nrepeated these ideas in a slightly different way: \"It is because the\nJapanese were truly moral in their practice, that, they required no\ntheory of morals; and the fuss made by the Chinese about theoretical\nmorals is owing to their laxity, in practice.... To have learned that\nthere is no Way [ethical system] to be learned and practised, is\nreally to have learned to practise the Way of the Gods.\" At a later\nday Hirata wrote \"Learn to stand in awe of the Unseen, and that will\nprevent you from doing wrong. Cultivate the conscience implanted in\nyou then you will never wander from the Way.\"\n\nThough the sociologist may smile at these declarations of moral\nsuperiority (especially as based on the assumption that the race had\nbeen better in primeval times, when yet fresh from the hands of the\ngods), there was in them a grain of truth. When Mabuchi and Motowori\nwrote, the nation had been long subjected to a discipline of almost\nincredible minuteness in detail, and of extraordinary rigour in\napplication. And this discipline had actually brought into existence\na wonderful average of character,--a character of surprising\npatience, unselfishness, honesty, kindliness, and docility combined\nwith high courage. But only the evolutionist [162] can imagine what\nthe cost of developing that character must have been.\n\nIt is necessary here to observe that the discipline to which the\nnation had been subjected up to the age of the great Shinto writers,\nseems to have had a curious evolutional history of its own. In\nprimitive times it had been much less uniform, less complex, less\nminutely organized, though not less implacable; and it had continued\nto develop and elaborate more and more with the growth and\nconsolidation of society, until, under the Tokugawa Shogunate the\npossible maximum of regulation was reached. In other words, the yoke\nhad been made heavier and heavier in proportion to the growth of the\nnational strength,--in proportion to the power of the people to bear\nit.... We have seen that, from the beginning of this civilization,\nthe whole life of the citizen was ordered for him: his occupation,\nhis marriage, his rights of fatherhood, his rights to hold or to\ndispose of property,--all these matters were settled by religious\ncustom. We have also seen that outside as well as inside of his home,\nhis actions were under supervision, and that a single grave breach of\nusage might cause his social ruin,--in which case he would be given\nto understand that he was not merely a social, but also a religious\noffender; that the communal god was angry with him; and that to\npardon his fault might [163] provoke the divine vengeance against the\nentire settlement. But it yet remains to be seen what rights were\nleft him by the central authority ruling his district,--which\nauthority represented a third form of religious despotism from which\nthere was no appeal in ordinary cases.\n\nMaterial for the study of the old laws and customs have not yet been\ncollected in sufficient quantity to yield us full information as to\nthe conditions of all classes before Meiji. But a great deal of\nprecious work has been accomplished in this direction by American\nscholars; and the labours of Professor Wigmore and of the late Dr.\nSimmons have furnished documentary evidence from which much can be\nlearned about the legal status of the masses during the Tokugawa\nperiod. This, as I have said, was the period of the most elaborated\nregulation. The extent to which the people were controlled can be\nbest inferred from the nature and number of the sumptuary laws to\nwhich they were subjected. Sumptuary laws in Old Japan probably\nexceeded in multitude and minuteness anything of which Western legal\nhistory yields record. Rigidly as the family-cult dictated behaviour\nin the home, strictly as the commune enforced its standards of\ncommunal duty,--just so rigidly and strictly did the rulers of the\nnation dictate how the individual--man, woman, or child--should\ndress, walk, sit, [164] speak, work, eat, drink. Amusements were not\nless unmercifully regulated than were labours.\n\nEvery class of Japanese society was under sumptuary regulation,--the\ndegree of regulation varying in different centuries; and this kind of\nlegislation appears to have been established at an early period. It\nis recorded that, in the year 681 A.D., the Emperor Temmu regulated\nthe costumes of all classes,--\"from the Princes of the Blood down to\nthe common people,--and the wearing of headdresses and girdles, as\nwell as of all kinds of coloured stuffs,--according to a scale.\"* [*\nSee Nihongi Aston's translation, Vol. II, pp. 343, 349, 350.] The\ncostumes and the colours to be worn by priests and nuns had been\nalready fixed, by an edict issued in 679 A.D. Afterwards these\nregulations were greatly multiplied and detailed. But it was under\nthe Tokugawa rulers, a thousand years later, that sumptuary laws\nobtained their most remarkable development; and the nature of them is\nbest: indicated by the regulations applying to the peasantry. Every\ndetail of the farmer's existence was prescribed for by law,--from the\nsize, form, and cost of his dwelling, down even to such trifling\nmatters as the number and the quality of the dishes to be served to\nhim at meal-times. A farmer with an income of 100 koku of rice--(let\nus say 90 to 100 pounds per annum)--might build a house 60 feet long,\nbut no longer: he was forbidden to construct it with a room\ncontaining an alcove; and he was not [165] allowed--except by special\npermission--to roof it with tiles. None of his family were permitted\nto wear silk; and in case of the marriage of his daughter to a person\nlegally entitled to wear silk, the bridegroom was to be requested not\nto wear silk at the wedding. Three kinds of viands only were to be\nserved at the wedding of such a farmer's daughter or son; and the\nquality as well as the quantity of the soup, fish, or sweetmeats\noffered to the wedding-guests, were legally fixed. So likewise the\nnumber of the wedding-gifts: even the cost of the presents, of\nrice-wine and dried fish was prescribed, and the quality of the\nsingle fan which it was permissible to offer the bride. At no time\nwas a farmer allowed to make any valuable presents to his friends. At\na funeral he might serve the guests with certain kinds of plain food;\nbut if rice-wine were served it was not to be served in\nwine-cups,--only in soup-cups! (The latter regulation probably\nreferred to Shinto funerals in especial.) On the occasion of a\nchild's birth, the grandparents were allowed to make only four\npresents (according to custom),--including \"one cotton baby-dress\";\nand the values of the presents were fixed. On the occasion of the\nBoy's Festival, the presents to be given to the child by the whole\nfamily, including grandparents, were limited by law to \"one\npaper-flag,\" and \"two toy-spears.\" ... A farmer whose, property was\nassessed at 50 koku was forbidden to [166] build a house more than 45\nfeet long. At the wedding of his daughter the gift-girdle was not to\nexceed 50 sen in value; and it was forbidden to serve more than one\nkind of soup at the wedding-feast.... A farmer with a property\nassessed at 20 koku was not allowed to build a house more than 36\nfeet long, or to use in building it such superior qualities of wood\nas keyaki or hinoki. The roof of his house was to be made of\nbamboo-thatch or straw; and he was strictly forbidden the comfort of\nfloor-mats. On the occasion of the wedding of his daughter he was\nforbidden to have fish or any roasted food served at the\nwedding-feast. The women of his family were not allowed to wear\nleather sandals: they might wear only straw-sandals or wooden clogs;\nand the thongs of the sandals or the clogs were to be made of cotton.\nThe women were further forbidden to wear hair-bindings of silk, or\nhair-ornaments of tortoise-shells; but they might wear wooden combs\nand combs of bone--not ivory. The men were forbidden to wear\nstockings, and their sandals were to be made of bamboo.* [*There are\nsandals or clogs made of bamboo-wood, but the meaning here is\nbamboo-grass.] They were also forbidden to use sun-shades\n--hi-gasa--or paper-umbrellas.... A farmer assessed at 10 koku was\nforbidden to build a house more than 30 feet long. The women of his\nfamily were required to wear sandals with thongs of [167]\nbamboo-grass. At the wedding of his son or daughter one present only\nwas allowed,--a quilt-chest. At the birth of his child one present\nonly was to be made: namely, one toy-spear, in the case of a boy; or\none paper-doll, or one \"mud-doll,\" in the case of a girl... As for\nthe more unfortunate class of farmers, having no land of their own,\nand officially termed mizunomi, or \"water-drinkers,\" it is scarcely\nnecessary to remark that these were still more severely restricted in\nregard to food, apparel, etc. They were not even allowed, for\nexample, to have a quilt-chest as a wedding-present. But a fair idea\nof the complexity of these humiliating restrictions can only be\nobtained by reading the documents published by Professor Wigmore,\nwhich chiefly consist of paragraphs like these:--\n\n\"The collar and the sleeve-ends of the clothes may be ornamented with\nsilk, and an obi (soft girdle) of silk or crepe-silk may be worn--but\nnot in public.\" ...\n\n\"A family ranking less than 20 koku must use the Takeda-wan (Takeda\nrice-bowl), and the Nikko-zen (Nikko tray).\".. (These were utensils\nof the cheapest kind of lacquer-ware.)\n\n\"Large farmers or chiefs of Kumi may use umbrellas; but small farmers\nand farm-labourers must use only mino (straw-raincoats), and broad\nstraw-hats.\" ...\n\nThese documents published by Professor Wigmore contain only the\nregulations issued for the daimiate of Maizuru; but regulations\nequally [168] minute and vexatious appear to have been enforced\nthroughout the whole country. In Izumo I found that, prior to Meiji,\nthere were sumptuary laws prescribing not only the material of the\ndresses to be worn by the various classes, but even the colours of\nthem, and the designs of the patterns. The size of rooms, as well as\nthe size of houses, was fixed there by law,--also the height of\nbuildings and of fences, the number of windows, the material of\nconstruction.... It is difficult for the Western mind to understand\nhow human beings could patiently submit to laws that regulated not\nonly the size of one's dwelling, and the cost of its furniture, but\neven the substance and character of clothing,--not only the expense\nof a wedding outfit, but the quality of the marriage-feast, and the\nquality of the vessels in which the food was to be served,--not only\nthe kind of ornaments to be worn in a woman's hair, but the material\nof the thongs of her sandals,--not only the price of presents to be\nmade to friends, but the character and the cost of the cheapest toy\nto be given to a child. And the peculiar constitution of society made\nit possible to enforce this sumptuary legislation by communal will;\nthe people were obliged to coerce themselves! Each community, as we\nhave seen, had been organized in groups of five or more households,\ncalled kumi; and the heads of the households forming a kumi elected\none of their number as kumi-gashira, or group-chief, directly [169]\nresponsible to the higher authority. The kumi was accountable for the\nconduct of each and all of its members; and each member was in some\nsort responsible for the rest. \"Every member of a kumi,\" declares one\nof the documents above mentioned, \"must carefully watch the conduct\nof his fellow-members. If any one violates these regulations, without\ndue excuse, he is to be punished; and his kumi will also be held\nresponsible.\" Responsible even for the serious offence of giving more\nthan one paper-doll to a child! ... But we should remember that in\nearly Greek and Roman societies there was much legislation of a\nsimilar kind. The laws of Sparta regulated the way in which a woman\nshould dress her hair; the laws of Athens fixed the number of her\nrobes. At Rome, in early times, women were forbidden to drink wine;\nand a similar law existed in the Greek cities of Miletus and\nMassilia. In Rhodes and Byzantium the citizen was forbidden to shave;\nin Sparta he was forbidden to wear a moustache. (I need scarcely\nrefer to the later Roman laws regulating the cost of marriage-feasts,\nand the number of guests that might be invited to a banquet; for this\nlegislation was directed chiefly against luxury.) The astonishment\nevoked by Japanese sumptuary laws, particularly as inflicted upon the\npeasantry, is justified less by their general character than by their\nimplacable minuteness,--their ferocity of detail.... [170] Where a\nman's life was legally ordered even to the least particulars,--even\nto the quality of his foot-gear and head-gear, the cost of his wife's\nhairpins, and the price of his child's doll,--one could hardly\nsuppose that freedom of speech would have been tolerated. It did not\nexist; and the degree to which speech became regulated can be\nimagined only by those who have studied the spoken tongue. The\nhierarchical organization of society was faithfully reflected in the\nconventional organization of language,--in the ordination of\npronouns, nouns, and verbs,--in the grades conferred upon adjectives\nby prefixes or suffixes. With the same merciless exactitude which\nprescribed rules for dress, diet, and manner of life, all utterance\nwas regulated both negatively and positively,--but positively much\nmore than negatively. There was little insistence upon what was not\nto be said; but rules innumerable decided exactly what should be\nsaid,--the word to be chosen, the phrase to be used. Early training\nenforced caution in this regard: everybody had to learn that only\ncertain verbs and nouns and pronouns were lawful when addressing\nsuperiors, and other words permissible only when speaking to equals\nor to inferiors. Even the uneducated were obliged to learn something\nabout this. But education cultivated a system of verbal etiquette so\nmultiform that only the training of years could enable any one to\nmaster it. Among the [171] higher classes this etiquette developed\nalmost inconceivable complexity. Grammatical modifications of\nlanguage, which, by implication, exalted the person addressed or\nhumbly depreciated the person addressing, must have come into general\nuse at some very early period; but under subsequent Chinese influence\nthese forms of propitiatory speech multiplied exceedingly. From the\nMikado himself--who still makes use of personal pronouns, or at least\npronominal expressions, forbidden to any other mortal--down through\nall the grades of society, each class had an \"I\" peculiarly its own.\nOf terms corresponding to \"you\" or \"thou\" there are still sixteen in\nuse; but formerly there were many more. There are yet eight different\nforms of the second person singular used only in addressing children,\npupils, or servants.* Honorific or humble forms of nouns indicating\nrelationship were similarly multiplied and graded: there are still in\nuse nine terms signifying \"father,\" nine terms signifying \"mother,\"\neleven terms for \"wife,\" eleven terms for \"son,\" nine terms for\n\"daughter,\" and seven terms for \"husband.\" The rules of the verb,\nabove all, were complicated by the exigencies of etiquette to a [172]\ndegree of which no idea can be given in any brief statement.... At\nnineteen or twenty years of age a person carefully trained from\nchildhood might have learned all the necessary verbal usages of\nrespectable society; but for a mastery of the etiquette of superior\nconverse many more years of study and experience were required. With\nthe unceasing multiplication of ranks and classes there came into\nexistence a corresponding variety of forms of language: it was\npossible to ascertain to what class a man or a woman belonged by\nlistening to his or to her conversation. The written, like the spoken\ntongue, was regulated by strict convention: the forms used by women\nwere not those used by men; and those differences in verbal etiquette\narising from the different training of the sexes resulted in the\ncreation of a special epistolary style,--a \"woman's language,\" which\nremains in use. And this sex-differentiation of language was not\nconfined to letter-writing: there was a woman's language also of\nconverse, varying according to class. Even to-day, in ordinary\nconversation, an educated woman makes use of words and phrases not\nemployed by men. Samurai women especially had their particular forms\nof expression in feudal times; and it is still possible to decide,\nfrom the speech of any woman brought up according to the old\nhome-training, whether she belongs to a Samurai family.\n\n[*The sociologist will of course understand that these facts are not\nby any means inconsistent with that very sparing use of pronouns so\namusingly discussed in Percival Lowell's \"Soul of the Far East.\" In\nsocieties where subjection is extreme \"there is an avoidance of the\nuse of personal pronouns,\" though, as Herbert Spencer points out in\nillustrating this law, it is just among such societies that the most\nelaborate distinctions in pronominal forms of address are to be\nfound.]\n\n[173] Of course the matter as well as the manner of converse was\nrestricted; and the nature of the restraints upon free speech can be\ninferred from the nature of the restraints upon freedom of demeanour.\nDemeanour was most elaborately and mercilessly regulated, not merely\nas to obeisances, of which there were countless grades, varying\naccording to sex as well as class,--but even in regard to facial\nexpression, the manner of smiling, the conduct of the breath, the way\nof sitting, standing, walking, rising. Everybody was trained from\ninfancy in this etiquette of expression and deportment. At what\nperiod it first became a mark of disrespect to betray, by look or\ngesture, any feeling of grief or pain in the presence of a superior,\nwe cannot know; there is reason to believe that the most perfect\nself-control in this regard was enforced from prehistoric times. But\nthere was gradually developed--partly, perhaps, under Chinese\nteaching--a most elaborate code of deportment which exacted very much\nmore than impassiveness. It required not only that any sense of anger\nor pain should be denied all outward expression, but that the\nsufferer's face and manner should indicate the contrary feeling.\nSullen submission was an offence; mere impassive obedience\ninadequate: the proper degree of submission should manifest itself by\na pleasant smile, and by a soft and happy tone of voice. The smile,\nhowever, was also regulated. [174] One had to be careful about the\nquality of the smile: it was a mortal offence, for example, so to\nsmile in addressing a superior, that the back teeth could be seen. In\nthe military class especially this code of demeanour was ruthlessly\nenforced. Samurai women were required, like the women of Sparta, to\nshow signs of joy on hearing that their husbands or sons had fallen\nin battle: to betray any natural feeling under the circumstances was\na grave breach of decorum. And in all classes demeanour was regulated\nso severely that even to-day the manners of the people everywhere\nstill reveal the nature of the old discipline. The strangest fact is\nthat the old-fashioned manners appear natural rather than acquired,\ninstinctive rather than made by training. The bow,--the sibilant in\ndrawing of the breath which accompanies the prostration, and is\npractised also in praying to the gods,--the position of the hands\nupon the floor in the moment of greeting or of farewell,--the way of\nsitting or rising or walking in presence of a guest,--the manner of\nreceiving or presenting anything,--all these ordinary actions have a\ncharm of seeming naturalness that mere teaching seems incapable of\nproducing. And this is still more true of the higher etiquette,--the\nexquisite etiquette of the old-time training in cultivated classes,\n--particularly as displayed by women. We must suppose that the\ncapacity to acquire such manners depends considerably upon\ninheritance,--that it could only have [175] been formed by the past\nexperience of the race under discipline.\n\nWhat such discipline, as regards politeness, must have signified for\nthe mass of the people, may be inferred from the enactment of Iyeyasu\nauthorizing a Samurai to kill any person of the three inferior\nclasses guilty of rudeness. Be it observed that Iyeyasu was careful\nto qualify the meaning of \"rude\": he said that the Japanese term for\na rude fellow signified \"an other-than-expected person\"--so that to\ncommit an offence worthy of death it was only necessary to act in an\n\"unexpected manner\"; that is to say, contrary to prescribed\netiquette:--\n\n\"The Samurai are the masters of the four classes. Agriculturists,\nartizans, and merchants may not behave in a rude manner towards\nSamurai. The term for a rude man is an 'other-than-expected fellow';\nand a Samurai is not to be interfered with in cutting down a fellow\nwho has behaved to him in a manner other than is expected. The\nSamurai are grouped into direct retainers, secondary retainers, and\nnobles and retainers of high and low grade; but the same line of\nconduct is equally allowable to them all towards an\nother-than-expected fellow.\"--[Art. 45.]\n\nBut there is little reason to suppose that Iyeyasu created any new\nprivilege of slaughter: he probably did no more than confirm by\nenactment certain long established military rights. Stern rules about\nthe conduct of inferiors to superiors would seem to have been\npitilessly enforced long before the rise of the [176] military power.\nWe read that the Emperor Yuriaku, in the latter part of the fifth\ncentury, killed a steward for the misdemeanour of remaining silent,\nthrough fear, when spoken to: we also find it recorded that he struck\ndown a maid-of-honour who had brought him a cup of wine, and that he\nwould have cut off her head but for the extraordinary presence of\nmind which enabled her to improvise a poetical appeal for mercy. Her\nonly fault had been that, in carrying the wine-cup, she failed to\nnotice that a leaf had fallen into it,--probably because court-custom\nobliged her to carry the cup in such a way as not to breathe upon it;\nfor emperors and high nobles were served after the manner of gods. It\nis true that Yuriaku was in the habit of killing people for little\nmistakes; but it is evident that, in the cases cited, such mistakes\nwere regarded as breaches of long-established decorum.\n\nProbably before as well as after the introduction of the Chinese\npenal codes,--the so-called Ming and Tsing codes, by which the\ncountry was ruled under the Shoguns,--the bulk of the nation was\nliterally under the rod. Common folk were punished by cruel whippings\nfor the most trifling offences. For serious offences, death by\ntorture was an ordinary penalty; and there were extraordinary\npenalties as savage, or almost as savage, as those established during\nour own medieval period,--[177] burnings and crucifixions and\nquarterings and boiling alive in oil. The documents regulating the\nlife of village-folk do not contain any indication of the severity of\nlegal discipline: the Kumi-cho declarations that such and such\nconduct \"shall be punished\" suggest nothing terrible to the reader\nwho has not made himself familiar with the ancient codes. As a matter\nof fact the term \"punishment\" in a Japanese legal document might,\nsignify anything from a trifling fine up to burning alive.... Some\nevidence of the severity used to repress quarrelling even as late as\nthe time of Iyeyasu, may be found in a curious letter of Captain\nSaris, who visited Japan in 1613. \"The first of July,\" wrote the\nCaptain, \"two of our Company happened to quarrell the one with the\nother, and were very likely to haue gone into the field [i.e. to have\nfought a duel] to the endangering of vs all. For it is a custome here\nthat whosoever drawes a weapon in anger, although he do noe harme\ntherewith, hee is presently cut in peeces; and, doing but small hurt,\nnot only themselues are so executed, but their whole generation.\" ...\nThe literal meaning of \"cut in peeces\" he explains later on, when\nrecounting in the same letter an execution that came under his\nobservation:--\n\n\"The eighth, three Iaponians were executed, viz., two men and one\nwoman: the cause this,--the woman, none of the honestest (her husband\nbeing trauelled from home) [178] had appointed these two their\nseveral hours to repair vnto her. The latter man, not knowing of the\nformer, and comming in before the houre appointed, found the first\nman, and enraged thereat, he whipped out his cattan [katana] and\nwounded both of them very sorely,--hauing very neere hewn the chine\nof the mans back in two. But as well as hee might he cleared\nhimselfe, and recouering his cattan, wounded the other. The street,\ntaking notice of the fray, forthwith seased vpon them, led them\naside, and acquainted King Foyne therewith, and sent to know his\npleasure, (for according to his will, the partie is executed), who\npresently gaue order that they should cut off their heads: which\ndone, euery man that listed (as very many did) came to try the\nsharpness of their cattans vpon the corps, so that, before they left\noff, they had hewne them all three into peeces as small as a mans\nhand,--and yet notwithstanding, did not then giue over, but, placing\nthe peeces one vpon another, would try how many of them they could\nstrike through at a blow; and the peeces are left to the fowles to\ndeuoure.\" ....\n\nEvidently the execution was in this case ordered for cause more\nserious than the offence of fighting; but it is true that quarrels\nwere strictly forbidden and rigorously punished.\n\nThough privileged to cut down \"other-than-expected\" people of\ninferior rank, the military class itself had to endure a discipline\neven more severe than that which it maintained. The penalty for a\nword or a look that displeased, or for a trifling mistake in\nperformance of duty, might be death. In [179] most cases the Samurai\nwas permitted to be his own executioner; and the right of\nself-destruction was deemed a privilege; but the obligation to thrust\na dagger deeply into one's belly on the left side, and then draw the\nblade slowly and steadily across to the right side, so as to sever\nall the entrails, was certainly not less cruel than the vulgar\npunishment of crucifixion, or rather, double-transfixion.\n\nJust as all matters relating to the manner of the individual's life\nwere regulated by law, so were all matters relating to his\ndeath,--the quality of his coffin, the expenses of his interment, the\norder of his funeral, the form of his tomb. In the seventh century\nlaws were passed to the effect that no one should be buried with\nunseemly expense; and these laws fixed the cost of funerals according\nto rank and grade. Subsequent edicts decided the dimensions and\nmaterial of coffins, and the size of graves. In the eighth century\nevery detail of funerals, for all classes of persons from prince to\npeasant, was fixed by decree. Other laws, and modifications of laws,\nwere made upon the subject in later centuries; but there appears to\nhave always been a general tendency to extravagance in the matter of\nfunerals,--a tendency so strong that, in spite of centuries of\nsumptuary legislation, it remains to-day a social danger. This can\neasily be understood if we remember the beliefs regarding duty to the\ndead, and the consequent [180] desire to honour and to please the\nspirit even at the risk of family impoverishment.\n\nMost of the legislation to which reference has already been made must\nappear to modern minds tyrannical; and some of the regulations seem\nto us strangely cruel. There was, moreover, no way of evading or\nshirking these obligations of law and custom: whoever failed to\nfulfil them was doomed to perish or to become an outcast; implicit\nobedience was the condition of survival. The tendency of such\nregulation was necessarily to suppress all mental and moral\ndifferentiation, to numb personality, to establish one uniform and\nunchanging type of character; and such was the actual result. To this\nday every Japanese mind reveals the lines of that antique mould by\nwhich the ancestral mind was compressed and limited. It is impossible\nto understand Japanese psychology without knowing something of the\nlaws that helped to form it,--or, rather, to crystallize it under\npressure.\n\nYet, on the other hand, the ethical effects of this iron discipline\nwere unquestionably excellent. It compelled each succeeding\ngeneration to practise the frugality of the forefathers; and\nthat--compulsion was partly justified by the great poverty of the\nnation. It reduced the cost of living to a figure far below our\nWestern comprehension of the necessary; it cultivated sobriety,\nsimplicity, economy; it enforced [181] cleanliness, courtesy, and\nhardihood. And--strange as the fact may seem--it did not make the\npeople miserable: they found the world beautiful in spite of all\ntheir trouble; and the happiness of the old life was reflected in the\nold Japanese art, much as the joyousness of Greek life yet laughs to\nus from the vase-designs of forgotten painters.\n\nAnd the explanation is not difficult.  We must remember that the\ncoercion was not exercised only from without: it was really\nmaintained from within. The discipline of the race was self-imposed.\nThe people had gradually created their own social conditions, and\ntherefore the legislation conserving those conditions; and they\nbelieved that legislation the best possible. They believed it to be\nthe best possible for the excellent reason that it had been founded\nupon their own moral experience; and they could greatly endure\nbecause they had great faith. Only religion could have enabled any\npeople to bear such discipline without degenerating into mopes and\ncowards; and the Japanese never so degenerated: the traditions that\ncompelled self-denial and obedience, also cultivated courage, and\ninsisted upon cheerfulness. The power of the ruler was unlimited\nbecause the power of all the dead supported him. \"Laws,\" says Herbert\nSpencer, \"whether written or unwritten, formulate the rule of the\ndead over the living. In addition to that power which past\ngenerations exercise over present generations, by transmitting [182]\ntheir natures,--bodily and mental,--and in addition to the power they\nexercise over them by bequeathed habits and modes of life, there is\nthe power they exercise through their regulations for public conduct,\nhanded down orally, or in writing.... I emphasize these truths,\"--he\nadds,--\"for the purpose of showing that they imply a tacit\nancestor-worship.\" ... Of no other laws in the history of human\ncivilization are these observations more true than of the laws of Old\nJapan. Most strikingly did they \"formulate the rule of the dead over\nthe living.\" And the hand of the dead was heavy: it is heavy upon the\nliving even to-day.\n\n\n\n[183]\n\nTHE INTRODUCTION OF BUDDHISM\n\nThe nature of the opposition which the ancient religion of Japan\ncould offer to the introduction of any hostile alien creed, should\nnow be obvious. The family being founded upon ancestor-worship, the\ncommune being regulated by ancestor-worship, the clan-group or tribe\nbeing governed by ancestor-worship, and the Supreme Ruler being at\nonce the high-priest and deity of an ancestral cult which united all\nthe other cults in one common tradition, it must be evident that the\npromulgation of any religion essentially opposed to Shinto would have\nsignified nothing less than an attack upon the whole system of\nsociety. Considering these circumstances, it may well seem strange\nthat Buddhism should have succeeded, after some preliminary struggles\n(which included one bloody battle), in getting itself accepted as a\nsecond national faith. But although the original Buddhist doctrine\nwas essentially in disaccord with Shinto beliefs, Buddhism had\nlearned in India, in China, in Korea, and in divers adjacent\ncountries, how to meet the spiritual needs of peoples maintaining a\npersistent ancestor-worship. [184] Intolerance of ancestor-worship\nwould have long, ago resulted in the extinction of Buddhism; for its\nvast conquests have all been made among ancestor-worshipping races.\nNeither in India nor in China nor in Korea,--neither in Siam nor\nBurmah nor Annam,--did it attempt to extinguish ancestor-worship,\nEverywhere it made itself accepted as an ally, nowhere as an enemy,\nof social custom. In Japan it adopted the same policy which had\nsecured its progress on the continent; and in order to form any clear\nconception of Japanese religious conditions, this fact must be kept\nin mind.\n\nAs the oldest extant Japanese texts--with the probable exception of\nsome Shinto rituals--date from the eighth century, it is only\npossible to surmise the social conditions of that earlier epoch in\nwhich there was no form of religion but ancestor-worship. Only by\nimagining the absence of all Chinese and Korean influences, can we\nform some vague idea of the state of things which existed during the\nso-called Age of the Gods,--and it is difficult to decide at what\nperiod these influences began to operate. Confucianism appears to\nhave preceded Buddhism by a considerable interval; and its progress,\nas an organizing power, was much more rapid. Buddhism was first\nintroduced from Korea, about 552 A.D.; but the mission accomplished\nlittle. By the end of the eighth century [185] the whole fabric of\nJapanese administration had been reorganized upon the Chinese plan,\nunder Confucian influence; but it was not until well into the ninth\ncentury that Buddhism really began to spread throughout the country.\nEventually it over-shadowed the national life, and coloured all the\nnational thought. Yet the extraordinary conservatism of the ancient\nancestor-cult--its inherent power of resisting fusion--was\nexemplified by the readiness with which the two religions fell apart\non the disestablishment of Buddhism in 1871. After having been\nliterally overlaid by Buddhism for nearly a thousand years, Shinto\nimmediately reassumed its archaic simplicity, and reestablished the\nunaltered forms of its earliest rites.\n\nBut the attempt of Buddhism to absorb Shinto seemed at one period to\nhave almost succeeded. The method of the absorption is said to have\nbeen devised, about the year 800, by the famous founder of the\nShingon sect, Kukai or \"Kobodaishi\" (as he is popularly called), who\nfirst declared the higher Shinto gods to be incarnations of various\nBuddhas. But in this matter, of course, Kobodaishi was merely\nfollowing precedents of Buddhist policy. Under the name of\nRyobu-Shinto,* the new compound of Shinto and Buddhism obtained\nimperial approval and support. [*The term \"Ryobu\" signifies\n\"two-departments\" or \"two religions.\"] Thereafter, in hundreds of\n[186] places, the two religions were domiciled within the same\nprecinct--sometimes even within the same building: they seemed to\nhave been veritably amalgamated. And nevertheless there was no real\nfusion;--after ten centuries of such contact they separated again, as\nlightly as if they had never touched. It was only in the domestic\nform of the ancestor-cult that Buddhism really affected permanent\nmodifications; yet even these were neither fundamental nor universal.\nIn certain provinces they were not made; and almost everywhere a\nconsiderable part of the population preferred to follow the Shinto\nform of the ancestor-cult. Yet another large class of persons,\nconverts to Buddhism, continued to profess the older creed as well;\nand, while practising their ancestor-worship according to the\nBuddhist rite, maintained separately also the domestic worship of the\nelder gods. In most Japanese houses to-day, the \"god-shelf\" and the\nBuddhist shrine can both be found; both cults being maintained under\nthe same roof.* ... But I am mentioning these facts only as\nillustrating the conservative vitality of Shinto, not as indicating\nany weakness in the Buddhist propaganda. Unquestionably the influence\nwhich Buddhism exerted upon Japanese [187] civilization was immense,\nprofound, multiform, incalculable; and the only wonder is that it\nshould not have been able to stifle Shinto forever. To state, as\nvarious writers have carelessly stated, that Buddhism became the\npopular religion, while Shinto remained the official religion, is\naltogether misleading. As a matter of fact Buddhism became as much an\nofficial religion as Shinto itself, and influenced the lives of the\nhighest classes not less than the lives of the poor. It made monks of\nEmperors, and nuns of their daughters; it decided the conduct of\nrulers, the nature of decrees, and the administration of laws. In\nevery community the Buddhist parish-priest was a public official as\nwell as a spiritual teacher: he kept the parish register, and made\nreport to the authorities upon local matters of importance.\n\n[*The ancestor-worship and the funeral rites are Buddhist, as a\ngeneral rule, if the family be Buddhist; but the Shinto gods are also\nworshipped in most Buddhist households, except those attached to the\nShin sect. Many followers of even the Shin sect, however, appear to\nfollow the ancient religion likewise; and they have their Ujigami.]\n\nBy introducing the love of learning, Confucianism had partly prepared\nthe way for Buddhism. As early even as the first century there were\nsome Chinese scholars in Japan; but it was toward the close of the\nthird century that the study of Chinese literature first really\nbecame fashionable among the ruling classes. Confucianism, however,\ndid not represent a new religion: it was a system of ethical\nteachings founded upon an ancestor-worship much like that of Japan.\nWhat it had to offer was a kind of social philosophy,--an explanation\nof the [188] eternal reason of things. It reinforced and expanded the\ndoctrine of filial piety; it regulated and elaborated preexisting\nceremonial; and it systematized all the ethics of government. In the\neducation of the ruling classes it became a great power, and has so\nremained down to the present day. Its doctrines were humane, in the\nbest meaning of the word; and striking evidence of its humanizing\neffect on government policy may be found in the laws and the maxims\nof that wisest of Japanese rulers--Iyeyasu.\n\nBut the religion of the Buddha brought to Japan another and a wider\nhumanizing influence,--a new gospel of tenderness,--together with a\nmultitude of new beliefs that were able to accommodate themselves to\nthe old, in spite of fundamental dissimilarity. In the highest\nmeaning of the term, it was a civilizing power. Besides teaching new\nrespect for life, the duty of kindness to animals as well as to all\nhuman beings, the consequence of present acts upon the conditions of\na future existence, the duty of resignation to pain as the inevitable\nresult of forgotten error, it actually gave to Japan the arts and the\nindustries of China. Architecture, painting, sculpture, engraving,\nprinting, gardening--in short, every art and industry that helped to\nmake life beautiful--developed first in Japan under Buddhist\nteaching.\n\nThere are many forms of Buddhism; and in [189] modern Japan there are\ntwelve principal Buddhist sects; but, for present purposes, it will\nbe enough to speak, in the most general way, of popular Buddhism\nonly, as distinguished from philosophical Buddhism, which I shall\ntouch upon in a subsequent chapter. The higher Buddhism could not, at\nany time or in any country, have had a large popular following; and\nit is a mistake to suppose that its particular doctrines--such as the\ndoctrine of Nirvana--were taught to the common people. Only such\nforms of doctrine were preached as could be made intelligible and\nattractive to very simple minds. There is a Buddhist proverb: \"First\nobserve the person; then preach the Law,\"--that is to say, Adapt your\ninstruction to the capacity of the listener. In Japan, as in China,\nBuddhism had to adapt its instruction to the mental capacity of large\nclasses of people yet unaccustomed to abstract ideas. Even to this\nday the masses do not know so much as the meaning of the word\n\"Nirvana\" (Nehan): they have been taught only the simpler forms of\nthe religion; and in dwelling upon these, it will be needless to\nconsider differences of sect and dogma.\n\nTo appreciate the direct influence of Buddhist teaching upon the\nminds of the common people, we must remember that in Shinto there was\nno doctrine of metempsychosis. As I have said before, the spirits of\nthe dead, according to ancient Japanese thinking, continued to exist\nin the world: they [190] mingled somehow with the viewless forces of\nnature, and acted through them. Everything happened by the agency of\nthese spirits--evil or good. Those who had been wicked in life\nremained wicked after death; those who had been good in life became\ngood gods after death; but all were to be propitiated. No idea of\nfuture reward or punishment existed before the coming of Buddhism:\nthere was no notion of any heaven or hell. The happiness of ghosts\nand gods alike was supposed to depend upon the worship and the\nofferings of the living.\n\nWith these ancient beliefs Buddhism attempted to interfere only by\nexpanding and expounding them,--by interpreting them in a totally new\nlight. Modifications were effected, but no suppressions: we might\neven say that Buddhism accepted the whole body of the old beliefs. It\nwas true, the new teaching declared, that the dead continued to exist\ninvisibly; and it was not wrong to suppose that they became\ndivinities, since all of them were destined, sooner or later, to\nenter upon the way to Buddhahood--the divine condition. Buddhism\nacknowledged likewise the greater gods of Shinto, with all their\nattributes and dignities,--declaring them incarnations of Buddhas or\nBodhisattvas: thus the goddess of the sun was identified with\nDai-Nichi-Nyorai (the Tathagata Mahavairokana); the deity Hachiman\nwas identified with Amida (Amitabha). Nor did Buddhism deny the\nexistence of goblins [191] and evil gods: these were identified with\nthe Pretas and the Merakayikas; and the Japanese popular term for\ngoblin, Ma, to-day reminds us of this identification. As for wicked\nghosts, they were to be thought of as Pretas\nonly,--Gaki,--self-doomed by the errors of former lives to the Circle\nof Perpetual Hunger. The ancient sacrifices to the various gods of\ndisease and pestilence--gods of fever, small-pox, dysentery,\nconsumption, coughs, and colds--were continued with Buddhist\napproval; but converts were bidden to consider such maleficent beings\nas Pretas, and to present them with only such food-offerings as are\nbestowed upon Pretas--not for propitiation, but for the purpose of\nrelieving ghostly pain. In this case, as in the case of the ancestral\nspirits, Buddhism prescribed that the prayers to be repeated were to\nbe said for the sake of the haunters, rather than to them.... The\nreader may be reminded of the fact that Roman Catholicism, by making\na similar provision, still practically tolerates a continuance of the\nancient European ancestor-worship. And we cannot consider that\nworship extinct in any of those Western countries where the peasants\nstill feast their dead upon the Night of All Souls.\n\nBuddhism, however, did more than tolerate the old rites.  It\ncultivated and elaborated them. Under its teaching a new and\nbeautiful form of the domestic cult came into existence; and all the\n[192] touching poetry of ancestor-worship in modern Japan can be\ntraced to the teaching of the Buddhist missionaries. Though ceasing\nto regard their dead as gods in the ancient sense, the Japanese\nconverts were encouraged to believe in their presence, and to address\nthem in terms of reverence and affection. It is worthy of remark that\nthe doctrine of Pretas gave new force to the ancient fear of\nneglecting the domestic rites. Ghosts unloved might not become \"evil\ngods\" in the Shinto meaning of the term; but the malevolent Gaki was\neven more to be dreaded than the malevolent Kami,--for Buddhism\ndefined in appalling ways the nature of the Gaki's power to harm. In\nvarious Buddhist funeral-rites, the dead are actually addressed as\nGaki,--beings to be pitied but also to be feared,--much needing human\nsympathy and succour, but able to recompense the food-giver by\nghostly help.\n\nOne particular attraction of Buddhist teaching was its simple and\ningenious interpretation of nature. Countless matters which Shinto\nhad never attempted to explain, and could not have explained,\nBuddhism expounded in detail, with much apparent consistency. Its\nexplanations of the mysteries of birth, life, and death were at once\nconsoling to pure minds, and wholesomely discomforting to bad\nconsciences. It taught that the dead were happy or unhappy not\ndirectly because of the attention or the [193] neglect shown them by\nthe living, but because of their past conduct while in the body.* It\ndid not attempt to teach the higher doctrine of successive\nrebirths,--which the people could not possibly have understood,--but\nthe merely symbolic doctrine of transmigration, which everybody could\nunderstand. To die was not to melt back into nature, but to be\nreincarnated; and the character of the new body, as well as the\nconditions of the new existence, would depend upon the quality of\none's deeds and thoughts in the present body. All states and\nconditions of being were the consequence of past actions. Such a man\nwas now rich and powerful, because in previous lives he had been\ngenerous and kindly; such another man was now sickly and poor,\nbecause in some previous existence he had been sensual and selfish.\nThis woman was happy in her husband and her children, because in the\ntime of a former birth she had proved herself a loving daughter and a\nfaithful spouse; this other was wretched and childless, because in\nsome anterior existence she had been a jealous wife and a cruel\nmother. \"To hate your enemy,\" the Buddhist preacher would proclaim,\n\"is [194] foolish as well as wrong: he is now your enemy only because\nof some treachery that you practised upon him in a previous life,\nwhen he desired to be your friend. Resign yourself to the injury\nwhich he now does you accept it as the expiation of your forgotten\nfault... The girl whom you hoped to marry has been refused you by her\nparents,--given away to another. But once, in another existence, she\nwas yours by promise; and you broke the pledge then given.... Painful\nindeed the loss of your child; but this loss is the consequence of\nhaving, in some former life, refused affection where affection was\ndue.... Maimed by mishap, you can no longer earn your living as\nbefore. Yet this mishap is really due to the fact that in some\nprevious existence you wantonly inflicted bodily injury. Now the evil\nof your own act has returned upon you: repent of your crime, and pray\nthat its Karma may be exhausted by this present suffering.\" ... All\nthe sorrows of men were thus explained and consoled. Life was\nexpounded as representing but one stage of a measureless journey,\nwhose way stretched back through all the night of the past, and\nforward through all the mystery of the future,--out of eternities\nforgotten into the eternities to be; and the world itself was to be\nthought of only as a traveller's resting-place, an inn by the\nroadside.\n\n[*The reader will doubtless wonder how Buddhism could reconcile its\ndoctrine of successive rebirths with the ideas of ancestor-worship,\nIf one died only to be born again, what could be the use of offering\nfood or addressing any kind of prayer to the reincarnated spirit?\nThis difficulty was met by the teaching that the dead were not\nimmediately reborn in most cases, but entered into a particular\ncondition called Chu-U. They might remain in this disembodied\ncondition for the time of one hundred years, after which they were\nreincarnated. The Buddhist services for the dead are consequently\nlimited to the time of one hundred years.]\n\nInstead of preaching to the people about Nirvana, [195] Buddhism\ndiscoursed to them of blisses to be won and pains to be avoided: the\nParadise of Amida, Lord of Immeasurable Light; the eight hot hells\ncalled To-kwatsu, and the eight icy hells called Abuda. On the\nsubject of future punishment the teaching was very horrible: I should\nadvise no one of delicate nerves to read the Japanese, or rather the\nChinese accounts of hell. But hell was the penalty for supreme\nwickedness only: it was not eternal; and the demons themselves would\nat last be saved.... Heaven was to be the reward of good deeds: the\nreward might indeed be delayed, through many successive rebirths, by\nreason of lingering Karma; but, on the other hand, it might be\nattained by virtue of a single holy act in this present life.\nBesides, prior to the period of supreme reward, each succeeding\nrebirth could be made happier than the preceding one by persistent\neffort in the holy Way. Even as regarded conditions in this\ntransitory world, the results of virtuous conduct were not to be\ndespised. The beggar of to-day might to-morrow be reborn in the\npalace of a daimyo; the blind shampooer might become, in his very\nnext life, an imperial minister. Always the recompense would be\nproportionate to the sum of merit. In this lower world to practise\nthe highest virtue was difficult; and the great rewards were hard to\nwin. But for all good deeds a recompense was sure; and there was no\none who could not acquire merit. [196] Even the Shinto doctrine of\nconscience--the god-given sense of right and wrong--was not denied by\nBuddhism. But this conscience was interpreted as the essential wisdom\nof the Buddha dormant in every human creature,--wisdom darkened by\nignorance, clogged by desire, fettered by Karma, but destined sooner\nor later to fully awaken, and to flood the mind with light.\n\nIt would seem that the Buddhist teaching of the duty of kindness to\nall living creatures, and of pity for all suffering, had a powerful\neffect upon national habit and custom, long before the new religion\nfound general acceptance. As early as the year 675, a decree was\nissued by the Emperor Temmu forbidding the people to eat \"the flesh\nof kine, horses, dogs, monkeys, or barn-door fowls,\" and prohibiting\nthe use of traps or the making of pitfalls in catching game.* [*See\nAston's translation of the Nihongi, Vol. II, p. 329.] The fact that\nall kinds of flesh-meat were not forbidden is probably explained by\nthis Emperor's zeal for the maintenance of both creeds;--an absolute\nprohibition might have interfered with Shinto usages, and would\ncertainly have been incompatible with Shinto traditions. But,\nalthough fish never ceased to be an article of food for the laity, we\nmay say that from about this time the mass of the nation abandoned\nits habits of diet, and forswore the eating of meat, in accordance\nwith [197] Buddhist teaching.... This teaching was based upon the\ndoctrine of the unity of all sentient existence. Buddhism explained\nthe whole visible world by its doctrine of Karma,--simplifying that\ndoctrine so as to adapt it to popular comprehension. The forms of all\ncreatures,--bird, reptile, or mammal; insect or fish,--represented\nonly different results of Karma: the ghostly life in each was one and\nthe same; and, in even the lowest, some spark of the divine existed.\nThe frog or the serpent, the bird or the bat, the ox or the\nhorse,--all had had, at some past time, the privilege of human\n(perhaps even superhuman) shape: their present conditions represented\nonly the consequence of ancient faults. Any human being also, by\nreason of like faults, might hereafter be reduced to the same dumb\nstate,--might be reborn as a reptile, a fish, a bird, or a beast of\nburden. The consequence of wanton cruelty to any animal might cause\nthe perpetrator of that cruelty to be reborn as an animal of the same\nkind, destined to suffer the same cruel treatment. Who could even be\nsure that the goaded ox, the over-driven horse, or the slaughtered\nbird, had not formerly been a human being of closest kin,--ancestor,\nparent, brother, sister, or child? ...\n\nNot by words only were all these things taught.  It should be\nremembered that Shinto had no art: its ghost-houses, silent and void,\nwere not even [198] decorated. But Buddhism brought in its train all\nthe arts of carving, painting, and decoration. The images of its\nBodhisattvas, smiling in gold,--the figures of its heavenly guardians\nand infernal judges, its feminine angels and monstrous demons,--must\nhave startled and amazed imaginations yet unaccustomed to any kind of\nart. Great paintings hung in the temples, and frescoes limned upon\ntheir walls or ceilings, explained better than words the doctrine of\nthe Six States of Existence, and the dogma of future rewards and\npunishments. In rows of kakemono, suspended side by side, were\ndisplayed the incidents of a Soul's journey to the realm of judgment,\nand all the horrors of the various hells. One pictured the ghosts of\nfaithless wives, for ages doomed to pluck, with bleeding fingers, the\nrasping bamboo-grass that grows by the Springs of Death; another\nshowed the torment of the slanderer, whose tongue was torn by\ndemon-pincers; in a third appeared the spectres of lustful men,\nvainly seeking to flee the embraces of women of fire, or climbing, in\nfrenzied terror, the slopes of the Mountain of Swords. Pictured also\nwere the circles of the Preta-world, and the pangs of the Hungry\nGhosts, and likewise the pains of rebirth in the form of reptiles and\nof beasts. And the art of these early representations--many of which\nhave been preserved--was an art of no mean order. We can hardly\nconceive the effect upon inexperienced imagination of the crimson\nfrown of Emma [199] (Yama), Judge of the dead,--or the vision of that\nweird Mirror which reflected, to every spirit the misdeeds of its\nlife in the body,--or the monstrous fancy of that double-faced Head\nbefore the judgment seat, representing the visage of the woman\nMirume, whose eyes behold all secret sin; and the vision of the man\nKaguhana, who smells all odours of evil-doing.... Parental affection\nmust have been deeply touched by the painted legend of the world of\nchildren's ghosts,--the little ghosts that must toil, under\ndemon-surveillance, in the Dry Bed of the River of Souls.... But\npictured terrors were offset by pictured consolations,--by the\nbeautiful figure of Kwannon, white Goddess of Mercy,--by the\ncompassionate smile of Jizo, the playmate of infant-ghosts,--by the\ncharm also of celestial nymphs, floating on iridescent wings in light\nof azure. The Buddhist painter opened to simple fancy the palaces of\nheaven, and guided hope, through gardens of jewel-trees, even to the\nshores of that lake where the souls of the blessed are reborn in\nlotos-blossoms, and tended by angel-nurses.\n\nMoreover, for people accustomed only to such simple architecture as\nthat of the Shinto miya, the new temples erected by the Buddhist\npriests must have been astonishments. The colossal Chinese gates,\nguarded by giant statues; the lions and lanterns of bronze and stone;\nthe enormous suspended [200] bells, sounded by swinging-beams; the\nswarming of dragon-shapes under the caves of the vast roofs; the\nglimmering splendour of the altars; the ceremonial likewise, with its\nchanting and its incense-burning and its weird Chinese music,--cannot\nhave failed to inspire the wonder-loving with delight and awe. It is\na noteworthy fact that the earliest Buddhist temples in Japan still\nremain, even to Western eyes, the most impressive. The Temple of the\nFour Deva Kings at Osaka--which, though more than once rebuilt,\npreserves the original plan--dates from 600 A.D.; the yet more\nremarkable temple called Horyuji, near Nara, dates from about the\nyear 607.\n\nOf course the famous paintings and the great statues could be seen at\nthe temples only; but the Buddhist image-makers soon began to people\neven the most desolate places with stone images of Buddhas and of\nBodhisattvas. Then first were made those icons of Jizo, which still\nsmile upon the traveller from every roadside,--and the images of\nKoshin, protector of highways, with his three symbolic Apes,--and the\nfigure of that Bato-Kwannon, who protects the horses of the\npeasant,--with other figures in whose rude but impressive art\nsuggestions of Indian origin are yet recognizable. Gradually the\ngraveyards became thronged with dreaming Buddhas or\nBodhisattvas,--holy guardians of the dead, throned upon lotos-flowers\nof [201] stone, and smiling with closed eyes the smile of the Calm\nSupreme. In the cities everywhere Buddhist sculptors opened shops, to\nfurnish pious households with images of the chief divinities\nworshipped by the various Buddhist sects; and the makers of ihai, or\nBuddhist mortuary tablets, as well as the makers of household\nshrines, multiplied and prospered.\n\nMeanwhile the people were left free to worship their ancestors\naccording to either creed; and if a majority eventually gave\npreference to the Buddhist rite, this preference was due in large\nmeasure to the peculiar emotional charm which Buddhism had infused\ninto the cult. Except in minor details, the two rites differed\nscarcely at all; and there was no conflict whatever between the old\nideas of filial piety and the Buddhist ideas attaching to the new\nancestor-worship, Buddhism taught that the dead might be helped and\nmade happier by prayer, and that much ghostly comfort could be given\nthem by food-offerings. They were not to be offered flesh or wine;\nbut it was proper to gratify them with fruits and rice and cakes and\nflowers and the smoke of incense. Besides, even the simplest\nfood-offerings might be transmuted, by force of prayer, into\ncelestial nectar and ambrosia. But what especially helped the new\nancestor-cult to popular favour, was the fact that it included many\nbeautiful and touching customs not known to the old. Everywhere [202]\nthe people soon learned to kindle the hundred and eight fires of\nwelcome for the annual visit of their dead,--to supply the spirits\nwith little figures made of straw, or made out of vegetables,\nto-serve for oxen or horses,*--also to prepare the ghost-ships\n(shoryobune), in which the souls of the ancestors were to return,\nover the sea, to their under-world. Then too were instituted the\nBon-odori, or Dances of the Festival of the Dead,** and the custom of\nsuspending white lanterns at graves, and coloured lanterns at\nhouse-gates, to light the coining and the going of the visiting dead.\n\n[*An eggplant, with four pegs of wood stuck into it, to represent\nlegs, usually stands for an ox; and a cucumber, with four pegs,\nserves for a horse.... One is reminded of the fact that, at some of\nthe ancient Greek sacrifices, similar substitutes for real animals\nwere used. In the worship of Apollo, at Thebes, apples with wooden\npegs stuck into them, to represent feet and horns, were offered as\nsubstitutes for sheep.\n\n**The dances themselves--very curious and very attractive to\nwitness--are much older than Buddhism; but Buddhism made them a\nfeature of the festival referred to, which lasts for three days. No\nperson who has not witnessed a Bon-odori can form the least idea of\nwhat Japanese dancing means: it is something utterly different from\nwhat usually goes by the name,--something indescribably archaic,\nweird, and nevertheless fascinating. I have repeatedly sat up all\nnight to watch the peasants dancing. Japanese dancing girls, be it\nobserved, do not dance: they pose. The peasants dance.]\n\nBut perhaps the greatest value of Buddhism to the nation was\neducational. The Shinto priests were not teachers. In early times\nthey were mostly aristocrats, religious representatives of the clans;\nand the idea of educating the common people could not even have\noccurred to them. Buddhism, on [203] the other hand, offered the boon\nof education to all,--not merely a religious education, but an\neducation in the arts and the learning of China. The Buddhist temples\neventually became common schools, or had schools attached to them;\nand at each parish temple the children of the community were taught,\nat a merely nominal cost, the doctrines of the faith, the wisdom of\nthe Chinese classics, calligraphy, drawing, and much besides. By\ndegrees the education of almost the whole nation came under Buddhist\ncontrol; and the moral effect was of the best. For the military class\nindeed there was another and special system of education; but Samurai\nscholars sought to perfect their knowledge under Buddhist teachers of\nrenown; and the imperial household itself employed Buddhist\ninstructors. For the common people everywhere the Buddhist priest was\nthe schoolmaster; and by virtue of his occupation as teacher, not\nless than by reason of his religious office, he ranked with the\nsamurai. Much of what remains most attractive, in Japanese\ncharacter--the winning and graceful aspects of it--seems to have been\ndeveloped under Buddhist training.\n\nIt was natural enough that to his functions of public instructor, the\nBuddhist priest should have added those of a public registrar. Until\nthe period of disendowment, the Buddhist clergy remained, throughout\nthe country, public as well as religious officials. They kept the\nparish records, and furnished [204] at need certificates of birth,\ndeath, or family descent.\n\nTo give any just conception of the immense civilizing influence which\nBuddhism exerted in Japan would require many volumes. Even to\nsummarize the results of that influence by stating only the most\ngeneral facts, is scarcely possible,--for no general statement can\nembody the whole truth of the work accomplished. As a moral force,\nBuddhism strengthened authority and cultivated submission, by its\ncapacity to inspire larger hopes and fears than the more ancient\nreligion could create. As teacher, it educated the race, from the\nhighest to the humblest, both in ethics and in esthetics. All that\ncan be classed under the name of art in Japan was either introduced\nor developed by Buddhism; and the same may be said regarding nearly\nall Japanese literature possessing real literary quality,--excepting\nsome Shinto rituals, and some fragments of archaic poetry. Buddhism\nintroduced drama, the higher forms of poetical composition, and\nfiction, and history, and philosophy. All the refinements of Japanese\nlife were of Buddhist introduction, and at least a majority of its\ndiversions and pleasures. There is even to-day scarcely one\ninteresting or beautiful thing, produced in the country, for which\nthe nation is not in some sort indebted to Buddhism. Perhaps the best\nand briefest way of [205] stating the range of such indebtedness, is\nsimply to, say that Buddhism brought the whole of Chinese\ncivilization into Japan, and thereafter patiently modified and\nreshaped it to Japanese requirements. The elder civilization was not\nmerely superimposed upon the social structure, but fitted carefully\ninto it, combined with it so perfectly that the marks of the welding,\nthe lines of the juncture, almost totally disappeared.\n\n\n\n[207]\n\nTHE HIGHER BUDDHISM\n\nPhilosphical Buddhism requires some brief consideration in this\nplace,--for two reasons. The first is that misapprehension or\nignorance of the subject has rendered possible the charge of atheism\nagainst the intellectual classes of Japan. The second reason is that\nsome persons imagine the Japanese common people--that is to say, the\ngreater part of the nation--believers in the doctrine of Nirvana as\nextinction (though, as a matter of fact, even the meaning of the word\nis unknown to the masses), and quite resigned to vanish from the face\nof the earth, because of that incapacity for struggle which the\ndoctrine is supposed to create. A little serious thinking ought to\nconvince any intelligent man that no such creed could ever have been\nthe religion of either a savage or a civilized people. But myriads of\nWestern minds are ready at all times to accept statements of\nimpossibility without taking the trouble to think about them; and if\nI can show some of my readers how far beyond popular comprehension\nthe doctrines of the higher Buddhism really are, something will have\nbeen accomplished for the cause of truth and [208] common-sense. And\nbesides the reasons already given for dwelling upon the subject,\nthere is this third and special reason,--that it is one of\nextraordinary interest to the student of modern philosophy.\n\nBefore going further, I must remind you that the metaphysics of\nBuddhism can be studied anywhere else quite as well as in Japan,\nsince the more important sutras have been translated into various\nEuropean languages, and most of the untranslated texts edited and\npublished. The texts of Japanese Buddhism are Chinese; and only\nChinese scholars are competent to throw light upon the minor special\nphases of the subject. Even to read the Chinese Buddhist canon of\n7000 volumes is commonly regarded as an impossible feat,--though it\nhas certainly been accomplished in Japan. Then there are the\ncommentaries, the varied interpretations of different sects, the\nmultiplications of later doctrine, to heap confusion upon confusion.\nThe complexities of Japanese Buddhism are incalculable; and those who\ntry to unravel them soon become, as a general rule, hopelessly lost\nin the maze of detail. All this has nothing to do with my present\npurpose, I shall have very little to say about Japanese Buddhism as\ndistinguished from other Buddhism, and nothing at all to say about\nsect-differences. I shall keep to general facts as regards the higher\ndoctrine,--selecting from among such facts only those most suitable\n[209] for the illustration of that doctrine. And I shall not take up\nthe subject of Nirvana, in spite of its great importance,--having\ntreated it as fully as I was able in my _Gleanings in Buddha-Fields_,\n--but confine myself to the topic of certain analogies between the\nconclusions of Buddhist metaphysics and the conclusions of\ncontemporary Western thought.\n\nIn the best single volume yet produced in English on the subject of\nBuddhism,* the late Mr. Henry Clarke Warren observed: \"A large part\nof the pleasure that I have experienced in the study of Buddhism has\narisen from what I may call the strangeness of the intellectual\nlandscape. [*Buddhism in Translations, by Henry Clarke Warren\n(Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1896). Published by Harvard University.]\nAll the ideas, the modes of argument, even the postulates assumed and\nnot argued about, have always seemed so strange, so different from\nanything to which I have been accustomed, that I felt all the time as\nthough walking in Fairyland. Much of the charm that the Oriental\nthoughts and ideas have for me appears to be because they so seldom\nfit into Western categories.\" ... The serious attraction of Buddhist\nphilosophy could not be better suggested: it is indeed \"the\nstrangeness of the intellectual landscape,\" as of a world inside-out\nand upside-down, that has chiefly interested Western [210] thinkers\nheretofore. Yet after all, there is a class of Buddhist concepts\nwhich can be fitted, or very nearly fitted, into Western categories.\nThe higher Buddhism is a kind of Monism; and it includes doctrines\nthat accord, in the most surprising manner, with the scientific\ntheories of the German and the English monists. To my thinking, the\nmost curious part of the subject, and its main interest, is\nrepresented just by these accordances,--particularly in view of the\nfact that the Buddhist conclusions have been reached through mental\nprocesses unknown to Western thinking, and unaided by any knowledge\nof science.... I venture to call myself a student of Herbert Spencer;\nand it was because of my acquaintance with the Synthetic Philosophy\nthat I came to find in Buddhist philosophy a more than romantic\ninterest. For Buddhism is also a theory of evolution, though the\ngreat central idea of our scientific evolution (the law of progress\nfrom homogeneity to heterogeneity) is not correspondingly implied by\nBuddhist doctrine as regards the life of this world. The course of\nevolution as we conceive it, according to Professor Huxley, \"must\ndescribe a trajectory like that of a ball fired from a mortar; and\nthe sinking half of that course is as much a part of the general\nprocess of evolution as the rising.\" The highest point of the\ntrajectory would represent what Mr. Spencer calls Equilibration,--the\nsupreme point of development preceding the period [211] of decline;\nbut, in Buddhist evolution, this supreme point vanishes into Nirvana.\nI can best illustrate the Buddhist position by asking you to imagine\nthe trajectory line upside-down,--a course descending out of the\ninfinite, touching ground, and ascending again to mystery....\nNevertheless, some Buddhist ideas do offer the most startling analogy\nwith the evolutional ideas of our own time; and even those Buddhist\nconcepts most remote from Western thought can be best interpreted by\nthe help of illustrations and of language borrowed from modern\nscience.\n\nI think that we may consider the most remarkable teachings of the\nhigher Buddhism,--excluding the doctrine of Nirvana, for the reason\nalready given,--to be the following:--\n\nThat there is but one Reality;--\n\nThat the Consciousness is not the real Self;--\n\nThat Matter is an aggregate of phenomena created by the force of acts\nand thoughts;--\n\nThat all objective and subjective existence is made by Karma,-- the\npresent being the creation of the Past, and the actions of the\npresent and the past, in combination, determining the conditions of\nthe future.... (Or, in other words, that the universe of Matter, and\nthe universe of [conditioned] Mind, represent in their evolution a\nstrictly moral order.)\n\nIt will he worth while now to briefly consider [212] these doctrines\nin their relation to modern thought, beginning with the first, which\nis Monism:--\n\nAll things having form or name,--Buddhas, gods, men, and all living\ncreatures,--suns, worlds, moons, the whole visible cosmos,--are\ntransitory phenomena.... Assuming, with Herbert Spencer, that the\ntest of reality is permanence, one can scarcely question this\nposition; it differs little from the statement with which the closing\nchapter of the First Principles concludes:--\n\n\"Though the relation of subject and object renders necessary to us\nthese antithetical conceptions of Spirit and Matter, the one is no\nless than the other to be regarded as but a sign of the Unknown\nReality which underlies both.\"--Edition of 1894.\n\nFor Buddhism the sole reality is the Absolute,--Buddha as\nunconditioned and Infinite Being. There is no other veritable\nexistence, whether of Matter or of Mind; there is no real\nindividuality or personality; the \"I\" and the \"Not-I\" are essentially\nnowise different. We are reminded of Mr. Spencer's position, that \"it\nis one and the same Reality which is manifested to us both\nsubjectively and objectively.\" Mr. Spencer goes on to say: \"Subject\nand Object, as actually existing, can never be contained in the\nconsciousness produced by the cooperation of the two, though they are\nnecessarily [213] implied by it; and the antithesis of Subject and\nObject, never to be transcended while consciousness lasts, renders\nimpossible all knowledge of that Ultimate Reality in which Subject\nand Object are united.\"... I do not think that a master of the higher\nBuddhism would dispute Mr. Spencer's doctrine of Transfigured\nRealism. Buddhism does not deny the actuality of phenomena as\nphenomena, but denies their permanence, and the truth of the\nappearances which they present to our imperfect senses. Being\ntransitory, and not what they seem, they are to be considered in the\nnature of illusions,--impermanent manifestations of the only\npermanent Reality. But the Buddhist position is not agnosticism: it\nis astonishingly different, as we shall presently see. Mr. Spencer\nstates that we cannot know the Reality so long as consciousness\nlasts,--because while consciousness lasts we cannot transcend the\nantithesis of Object and Subject, and it is this very antithesis\nwhich makes consciousness possible. \"Very true,\" the Buddhist\nmetaphysician would reply; \"we cannot know the sole Reality while\nconsciousness lasts. But destroy consciousness, and the Reality\nbecomes cognizable. Annihilate the illusion of Mind, and the light\nwill come.\" This destruction of consciousness signifies Nirvana,--the\nextinction of all that we call Self. Self is blindness: destroy it,\nand the Reality will be revealed as infinite vision and infinite\npeace.\n\n[214] We have now to ask what, according to Buddhist philosophy, is\nthe meaning of the visible universe as phenomenon, and the nature of\nthe consciousness that perceives. However transitory, the phenomenon\nmakes an impression upon consciousness; and consciousness itself,\nthough transitory, has existence; and its perceptions, however\ndelusive, are perceptions of actual relation. Buddhism answers that\nboth the universe and the consciousness are merely aggregates of\nKarma--complexities incalculable of conditions shaped by acts and\nthoughts through some enormous past. All substance and all\nconditioned mind (as distinguished from unconditioned mind) are\nproducts of acts and thoughts: by acts and thoughts the atoms of\nbodies have been integrated; and the affinities of those atoms--the\npolarities of them, as a scientist might say--represent tendencies\nshaped in countless vanished lives. I may quote here from a modern\nJapanese treatise on the subject:--\n\n\"The aggregate actions of all sentient beings give birth to the\nvarieties of mountains, rivers, countries, etc. They are caused by\naggregate actions, and so are called aggregate fruits. Our present\nlife is the reflection of past actions. Men consider these\nreflections as their real selves. Their eyes, noses, ears, tongues,\nand bodies--as well as their gardens, woods, farms, residences,\nservants, and maids--men imagine to be their own possessions; but, in\nfact, they are only results endlessly produced by innumerable [215]\nactions. In tracing every thing back to the ultimate limits of the\npast, we cannot find a beginning: hence it is said that death and\nbirth have no beginning. Again, when seeking the ultimate limit of\nthe future, we cannot find the end.\"* [*Outlines of the Maheyena\nPhilosophy, by S. Kuroda.]\n\nThis teaching that all things are formed by Karma--whatever is good\nin the universe representing the results of meritorious acts or\nthoughts; and what ever is evil, the results of evil acts or\nthoughts--has the approval of five of the great sects; and we may\naccept it as a leading doctrine of Japanese Buddhism.... The cosmos\nis, then, an aggregate of Karma; and the mind of man is an aggregate\nof Karma; and the beginnings thereof are unknown, and the end cannot\nbe imagined. There is a spiritual evolution, of which the goal is\nNirvana; but we have no declaration as to a final state of universal\nrest, when the shaping of substance and of mind will have ceased\nforever.... Now the Synthetic Philosophy assumes a very similar\nposition as regards the evolution of Phenomena: there is no beginning\nto evolution, nor any conceivable end. I quote from Mr. Spencer's\nreply to a critic in the North American Review:\n\n\"That 'absolute commencement of organic life upon the globe,' which\nthe reviewer says I 'cannot evade the admission of,' I distinctly\ndeny. The affirmation of [216] universal evolution is in itself the\nnegation of an absolute commencement of anything. Construed in terms\nof evolution, every kind of being is conceived as a product of\nmodification wrought by insensible gradations upon a preexisting kind\nof being; and this holds as fully of the supposed 'commencement of\norganic life' as of all subsequent developments of organic life....\nThat organic matter was not produced all at once, but was reached\nthrough steps, we are well warranted in believing by the experiences\nof chemists.\"* ... [*Principles of Biology, Vol. I, p. 482.]\n\nOf course it should be understood that the Buddhist silence, as to a\nbeginning and an end, concerns only the production of phenomena, not\nany particular existence of groups of phenomena. That of which no\nbeginning or end can be predicated is simply the Eternal Becoming.\nAnd, like the older Indian philosophy from which it sprang, Buddhism\nteaches the alternate apparition and disparition of universes. At\ncertain prodigious periods of time, the whole cosmos of \"one hundred\nthousand times ten millions of worlds\" vanishes away,--consumed by\nfire or otherwise destroyed,--but only to be reformed again. These\nperiods are called \"World-Cycles,\" and each World-Cycle is divided\ninto four \"Immensities,\"--but we need not here consider the details\nof the doctrine. It is only the fundamental idea of a evolutional\nrhythm that is really interesting. I need scarcely remind the reader\nthat [217] the alternate disintegration and reintegration of the\ncosmos is also a scientific conception, and a commonly accepted\narticle of evolutional belief. I may quote, however, for other\nreasons, the paragraph expressing Herbert Spencer's views upon the\nsubject:--\n\n\"Apparently the universally coexistent forces of attraction and\nrepulsion, which, as we have seen, necessitate rhythm in all minor\nchanges throughout the Universe, also necessitate rhythm in the\ntotality of changes,--produce now an immeasurable period during which\nthe attractive forces, predominating, cause universal concentration;\nand then an immeasurable period during which the repulsive forces,\npredominating, cause diffusion,--alternate eras of Evolution and\nDissolution. And thus there is suggested to us the conception of a\npast during which there have been successive Evolutions analogous to\nthat which is now going on; and a future during which successive\nother such Evolutions may go on-ever the same in principle, but never\nthe same in concrete result.\"--First Principles, Section 183*\n\n[*This paragraph, from the fourth edition, has been considerably\nqualified in the definitive edition of 1900.]\n\nFurther on, Mr. Spencer has pointed out the vast logical consequence\ninvolved by this hypothesis:--\n\n\"If, as we saw reason to think, there is an alternation of Evolution\nand Dissolution in the totality of things,--if, as we are obliged to\ninfer from the Persistence of Force, the arrival at either limit of\nthis vast rhythm brings about the conditions under which a\ncounter-movement commences, [218]--if we are hence compelled to\nentertain the conception of Evolutions that have filled an\nimmeasurable past, and Evolutions that will fill an immeasurable\nfuture,--we can no longer contemplate the visible creation as having\na definite beginning or end, or as being isolated. It becomes unified\nwith all existence before and after; and the Force which the Universe\npresents falls into the same category with its Space and Time as\nadmitting of no limitation in thought.\"*--First Principles, Section\n190.\n\n[*Condensed and somewhat modified in the definitive edition of 1900;\nbut, for present purposes of illustration, the text of the fourth\nedition has been preferred.]\n\nThe foregoing Buddhist positions sufficiently imply that the human\nconsciousness is but a temporary aggregate,--not an eternal entity.\nThere is no permanent self: there is but one eternal principle in all\nlife,--the supreme Buddha. Modern Japanese call this Absolute the\n\"Essence of Mind.\" \"The fire fed by faggots,\" writes one of these,\n\"dies when the faggots have been consumed; but the essence of fire is\nnever destroyed.... All things in the Universe are Mind.\" So stated,\nthe position is unscientific; but as for the conclusion reached, we\nmay remember that Mr. Wallace has stated almost exactly the same\nthing, and that there are not a few modern preachers of the doctrine\nof a \"universe of mind-stuff.\" The hypothesis is \"unthinkable.\" But\nthe most serious thinker will agree with the Buddhist assertion that\nthe relation of all phenomena to the unknowable is merely that of\nwaves to sea. \"Every [219] feeling and thought being but transitory,\"\nsays Mr. Spencer, \"an entire life made up of such feelings and\nthoughts being but transitory,--nay, the objects amid which life is\npassed, though less transitory, being severally in course of losing\ntheir individualities quickly or slowly,--we learn that the one thing\npermanent is the Unknown Reality hidden under all these changing\nshapes.\" Here the English and the Buddhist philosophers are in\naccord; but thereafter they suddenly part company. For Buddhism is\nnot agnosticism, but gnosticism, and professes to know the\nunknowable. The thinker of Mr. Spencer's school cannot make\nassumptions as to the nature of the sole Reality, nor as to the\nreason of its manifestations. He must confess himself intellectually\nincapable of comprehending the nature of force, matter, or motion. He\nfeels justified in accepting the hypothesis that all known elements\nhave been evolved from one primordial undifferentiated\nsubstance,--the chemical evidence for this hypothesis being very\nstrong. But he certainly would not call that primordial substance a\nsubstance of mind, nor attempt to explain the character of the forces\nthat effected its integration. Again, though Mr. Spencer would\nprobably acknowledge that we know of matter only as an aggregate of\nforces, and of atoms only as force-centres, or knots of force, he\nwould not declare that an atom is a force-centre, and nothing\nelse.... But we find evolutionists [220] of the German school taking\na position very similar to the Buddhist position,--which implies a\nuniversal sentiency, or, more strictly speaking, a universal\npotential-sentiency. Haeckel and other German monists assume such a\ncondition for all substance. They are not agnostics, therefore, but\ngnostics; and their gnosticism very much resembles that of the higher\nBuddhism.\n\nAccording to Buddhism there is no reality save Buddha: all things\nelse are but Karma. There is but one Life, one Self: human\nindividuality and personality are but phenomenal conditions of that\nSelf, Matter is Karma; Mind is Karma--that is to say, mind as we know\nit: Karma, as visibility, represents to us mass and quality; Karma,\nas mentality, signifies character and tendency. The primordial\nsubstance--corresponding to the \"protyle\" of our Monists--is composed\nof Five Elements, which are mystically identified with Five Buddhas,\nall of whom are really but different modes of the One. With this idea\nof a primordial substance there is necessarily associated the idea of\na universal sentiency. Matter is alive.\n\nNow to the German monists also matter is alive.  On the phenomena of\ncell-physiology, Haeckel claims to base his conviction that \"even the\natom is not without rudimentary form of sensation and will,--or, as\nit is better expressed, of feeling (aesthesis), and of inclination\n(tropesis),--that is to [221] say, a universal soul of the simplest\nkind.\" I may quote also from Haeckel's Riddle of the Universe the\nfollowing paragraph expressing the monistic notion of substance as\nheld by Vogt and others:--\n\n\"The two fundamental forms of substance, ponderable matter and ether,\nare not dead and only moved by extrinsic force; but they are endowed\nwith sensation and will (though, naturally, of the lowest grade);\nthey experience an inclination for condensation, a dislike of strain;\nthey strive after the one, and struggle against the other.\"\n\nLess like a revival of the dreams of the Alchemists is the very\nprobable hypothesis of Schneider, that sentiency begins with the\nformation of certain combinations,--that feeling is evolved from the\nnon-feeling just as organic being has been evolved from inorganic\nsubstance. But all these monist ideas enter into surprising\ncombination with the Buddhist teaching about matter as integrated\nKarma; and for that reason they are well worth citing in this\nrelation. To Buddhist conception all matter is sentient,--the\nsentiency varying according to condition: \"even rocks and stones,\" a\nJapanese Buddhist text declares, \"can worship Buddha.\" In the German\nmonism of Professor Haeckel's school, the particular qualities and\naffinities of the atom represent feeling and inclination, \"a soul of\nthe simplest kind\"; in Buddhism these qualities are made by [222]\nKarma,--that is to say, they represent tendencies formed in previous\nstates of existence. The hypotheses appear to be very similar. But\nthere is only immense, all-important difference, between the\nOccidental and the Oriental monism. The former would attribute the\nqualities of the atom merely to a sort of heredity,--to the\npersistency of tendencies developed under chance--influences\noperating throughout an incalculable past. The latter declares the\nhistory of the atom to be purely moral! All matter, according to\nBuddhism, represents aggregated sentiency, making, by its inherent\ntendencies, toward conditions of pain or pleasure, evil or good.\n\"Pure actions,\" writes the author of Outlines of the Maheyena\nPhilosophy, \"bring forth the Pure Lands of all the quarters of the\nuniverse; while impure deeds produce the Impure Lands.\" That is to\nsay, the matter integrated by the force of moral acts goes to the\nmaking of blissful worlds; and the matter formed by the force of\nimmoral acts goes to the making of miserable worlds. All substance,\nlike all mind, has its Karma; planets, like men, are shaped by the\ncreative power of acts and thoughts; and every atom goes to its\nappointed place, sooner or later, according to the moral or immoral\nquality of the tendencies that inform it. Your good or bad thought or\ndeed will not only affect your next rebirth, but will likewise affect\nin some sort the nature of worlds yet unevolved, wherein, after\ninnumerable cycles, [223] you may have to live again. Of course, this\ntremendous idea has no counterpart in modern evolutional philosophy.\nMr. Spencer's position is well known; but I must quote him for the\npurpose of emphasizing the contrast between Buddhist and scientific\nthought:--\n\n\"...We have no ethics of nebular condensation, or of sidereal\nmovement, or of planetary evolution; the conception is not relevant\nto inorganic matter. Nor, when we turn to organized things, do we\nfind that it has any relation to the phenomena of plant-life; though\nwe ascribe to plants superiorities and inferiorities, leading to\nsuccesses and failures in the struggle for existence, we do not\nassociate with them praise or blame. It is only with the rise of\nsentiency in the animal world that the subject-matter of ethics\noriginates.\"--Principles of Ethics, Vol. II, Section 326.\n\nOn the contrary, it will be seen, Buddhism actually teaches what we\nmay call, to borrow Mr. Spencer's phrase, \"the ethics of nebular\ncondensation,\"--though to Buddhist astronomy, the scientific meaning\nof the term \"nebular condensation\" was never known. Of course the\nhypothesis is beyond the power of human intelligence to prove or to\ndisprove. But it is interesting, for it proclaims a purely moral\norder of the cosmos, and attaches almost infinite consequence to the\nleast of human acts. Had the old Buddhist metaphysicians been\nacquainted with the facts of modern chemistry, they [224] might have\napplied their doctrine, with appalling success, to the interpretation\nof those facts. They might have explained the dance of atoms, the\naffinities of molecules, the vibrations of ether, in the most\nfascinating and terrifying way by their theory of Karma.... Here is a\nuniverse of suggestion,--most weird suggestion--for anybody able and\nwilling to dare the experiment of making a new religion, or at least\na new and tremendous system of Alchemy, based upon the notion of a\nmoral order in the inorganic world!\n\nBut the metaphysics of Karma in the higher Buddhism include much that\nis harder to understand than any alchemical hypothesis of\natom-combinations. As taught by popular Buddhism, the doctrine of\nrebirth is simple enough,--signifying no more than transmigration:\nyou have lived millions of times in the past, and you are likely to\nlive again millions of times in the future,--all the conditions of\neach rebirth depending upon past conduct. The common notion is that\nafter a certain period of bodiless sojourn in this world, the spirit\nis guided somehow to the place of its next incarnation. The people,\nof course, believe in souls. But there is nothing of all this in the\nhigher doctrine, which denies transmigration, denies the existence of\nthe soul, denies personality. There is no Self to be reborn; there is\nno transmigration--and yet there [225] is rebirth! There is no real\n\"I\" that suffers or is glad--and yet there is new suffering to be\nborne or new happiness to be gained! What we call the Self,--the\npersonal consciousness,--dissolves at the death of the body; but the\nKarma, formed during life, then brings about the integration of a new\nbody and a new consciousness. You suffer in this existence because of\nacts done in a previous existence---yet the author of those acts was\nnot identical with your present self! Are you, then, responsible for\nthe faults of another person?\n\nThe Buddhist metaphysician would answer thus: \"The form of your\nquestion is wrong, because it assumes the existence of\npersonality,--and there is no personality. There is really no such\nindividual as the 'you' of the inquiry. The suffering is indeed the\nresult of errors committed in some anterior existence or existences;\nbut there is no responsibility for the acts of another person, since\nthere is no personality. The 'I' that was and the 'I' that is\nrepresent in the chain of transitory being aggregations momentarily\ncreated by acts and thoughts; and the pain belongs to the aggregates\nas condition resulting from quality.\" All this sounds extremely\nobscure: to understand the real theory we must put away the notion of\npersonality, which is a very difficult thing to do. Successive births\ndo not mean transmigration in the common sense of that word, but only\nthe self-propagation of [226] Karma: the perpetual multiplying of\ncertain conditions by a kind of ghostly gemmation,--if I may borrow a\nbiological term. The Buddhist illustration, however, is that of flame\ncommunicated from one lamp-wick to another: a hundred lamps may thus\nbe lighted from one flame, and the hundred flames will all be\ndifferent, though the origin of all was the same. Within the hollow\nflame of each transitory life is enclosed a part of the only Reality;\nbut this is not a soul that transmigrates. Nothing passes from birth\nto birth but Karma,--character or condition.\n\nOne will naturally ask how can such a doctrine exert any moral\ninfluence whatever? If the future being shaped by my Karma is to be\nin nowise identical with my present self,--if the future\nconsciousness evolved by my Karma is to be essentially another\nconsciousness,--how can I force myself to feel anxious about the\nsufferings of that unborn person? \"Again your question is wrong,\" a\nBuddhist would answer: \"to understand the doctrine you must get rid\nof the notion of individuality, and think, not of persons, but of\nsuccessive states of feeling and consciousness, each of which buds\nout of the other,--a chain of existences interdependently united.\"\n... I may attempt another illustration. Every individual, as we\nunderstand the term, is continually changing. All the structures of\nthe body are constantly undergoing waste and repair; and the [227]\nbody that you have at this hour is not, as to substance, the same\nbody that you had ten years ago. Physically you are not the same\nperson: yet you suffer the same pains, and feel the same pleasures,\nand find your powers limited by the same conditions. Whatever\ndisintegrations and reconstructions of tissue have taken place within\nyou, you have the same physical and mental peculiarities that you had\nten years ago. Doubtless the cells of your brain have been decomposed\nand recomposed: yet you experience the same emotions, recall the same\nmemories, and think the same thoughts. Everywhere the fresh substance\nhas assumed the qualities and tendencies of the substance replaced.\nThis persistence of condition is like Karma. The transmission of\ntendency remains, though the aggregate is changed....\n\nThese few glimpses into the fantastic world, of Buddhist metaphysics\nwill suffice, I trust, to convince any intelligent reader that the\nhigher Buddhism (to which belongs the much-discussed and\nlittle-comprehended doctrine of Nirvana) could never have been the\nreligion of millions almost incapable of forming abstract ideas,--the\nreligion of a population even yet in a comparatively early stage of\nreligious evolution. It was never understood by the people at all,\nnor is it ever taught to them to-day. It is a religion of\nmetaphysicians, a [228] religion of scholars, a religion so difficult\nto be understood, even by persons of some philosophical training,\nthat it might well be mistaken for a system of universal negation.\nYet the reader should now be able to perceive that, because a man\ndisbelieves in a personal God, in an immortal soul, and in any\ncontinuation of personality after death, it does not follow that we\nare justified in declaring him an irreligious Person,--especially if\nhe happen to be an Oriental. The Japanese scholar who believes in the\nmoral order of the universe, the ethical responsibility of the\npresent to all the future, the immeasurable consequence of every\nthought and deed, the ultimate disparition of evil, and the power of\nattainment to conditions of infinite memory and infinite\nvision,--cannot be termed either an atheist or a materialist, except\nby bigotry and ignorance. Profound as may be the difference between\nhis religion and our own, in respect of symbols and modes of thought,\nthe moral conclusions reached in either case are very much the same.\n\n\n\n[229]\n\nTHE SOCIAL ORGANIZATION\n\nThe late Professor Fiske, in his Outline of Cosmic Philosophy, made a\nvery interesting remark about societies like those of China, ancient\nEgypt, and ancient Assyria. \"I am expressing,\" he said, \"something\nmore than an analogy, I am describing a real homology so far as\nconcerns the process of development,--when I say that these\ncommunities simulated modern European nations, much in the same way\nthat a tree-fern of the carboniferous period simulated the exogenous\ntrees of the present time.\" So far as this is true of China, it is\nlikewise true of Japan. The constitution of the old Japanese society\nwas no more than an amplification of the constitution of the\nfamily,--the patriarchal family of primitive times. All modern\nWestern societies have been developed out of a like patriarchal\ncondition: the early civilizations of Greece and Rome were similarly\nconstructed, upon a lesser scale. But the patriarchal family in\nEurope was disintegrated thousands of years ago; the gens and the\ncuria dissolved and disappeared; the originally distinct classes\nbecame fused together; and a total reorganization of society was\ngradually [230] effected, everywhere resulting in the substitution of\nvoluntary for compulsory cooperation. Industrial types of society\ndeveloped; and a state-religion overshadowed the ancient and\nexclusive local cults. But society in Japan never, till within the\npresent era, became one coherent body, never developed beyond the\nclan-stage. It remained a loose agglomerate of clan-groups, or\ntribes, each religiously and administratively independent of the\nrest; and this huge agglomerate was kept together, not by voluntary\ncooperation, but by strong compulsion. Down to the period of Meiji,\nand even for some time afterward, it was liable to split and fall\nasunder at any moment that the central coercive power showed signs of\nweakness. We may call it a feudalism; but it resembled European\nfeudalism only as a tree-fern resembles a tree.\n\nLet us first briefly consider the nature of the ancient Japanese\nsociety. Its original unit was not the household, but the patriarchal\nfamily,--that is to say, the gens or clan, a body of hundreds or\nthousands of persons claiming descent from a common ancestor, and so\nreligiously united by a common ancestor-worship,--the cult of the\nUjigami. As I have said before, there were two classes of these\npatriarchal families: the O-uji, or Great Clans; and the Ko-uji, or\nLittle Clans. The lesser were branches of the greater, and\nsubordinate to [231] them,--so that the group formed by an O-uji with\nits Ko-uji might be loosely compared with the Roman curia or Greek\nphratry. Large bodies of serfs or slaves appear to have been attached\nto the various great Uji; and the number of these, even at a very\nearly period, seems to have exceeded that of the members of the clans\nproper. The different names given to these subject-classes indicate\ndifferent grades and kinds of servitude. One name was tomobe,\nsignifying bound to a place, or district; another was yakabe,\nsignifying bound to a family; a third was kakibe, signifying bound to\na close, or estate; yet another and more general term was tami, which\nanciently signified \"dependants,\" but is now used in the meaning of\nthe English word \"folk.\" ... There is little doubt that the bulk of\nthe people were in a condition of servitude, and that there were many\nforms of servitude. Mr. Spencer has pointed out that a general\ndistinction between slavery and serfdom, in the sense commonly\nattached to each of those terms, is by no means easy to establish;\nthe real state of a subject-class, especially in early forms of\nsociety, depending much more upon the character of the master, and\nthe actual conditions of social development, than upon matters of\nprivilege and legislation. In speaking of early Japanese\ninstitutions, the distinction is particularly hard to draw: we are\nstill but little informed as to the condition of the subject [232]\nclasses in ancient times. It is safe to assert, however, that there\nwere then really but two great classes,--a ruling oligarchy, divided\ninto many grades; and a subject population, also divided into many\ngrades. Slaves were tattooed, either on the face or some part of the\nbody, with a mark indicating their ownership. Until within recent\nyears this system of tattooing appears to have been maintained in the\nprovince of Satsuma,--where the marks were put especially upon the\nhands; and in many other provinces the lower classes were generally\nmarked by a tattoo on the face. Slaves were bought and sold like\ncattle in early times, or presented as tribute by their owners,--a\npractice constantly referred to in the ancient records. Their unions\nwere not recognized: a fact which reminds us of the distinction among\nthe Romans between connubium and contubernium; and the children of a\nslave-mother by a free father remained slaves.* In the seventh\ncentury, however, private slaves were declared state-property, and\ngreat numbers were [233] then emancipated,--including nearly\nall--probably all--who were artizans or followed useful callings.\nGradually a large class of freedmen came into existence; but until\nmodern times the great mass of the common people appear to have\nremained in a condition analogous to serfdom. The greater number\ncertainly had no family names,--which is considered evidence of a\nformer slave-condition. Slaves proper were registered in the names of\ntheir owners: they do not seem to have had a cult of their own,--in\nearly times, at least. But, prior to Meiji, only the aristocracy,\nsamurai, doctors, and teachers--with perhaps a few other\nexceptions--could use a family name. Another queer bit of evidence\nor, the subject, furnished by the late Dr. Simmons, relates to the\nmode of wearing the hair among the subject-classes. Up to the time of\nthe Ashikaga shogunate (1334 A.D.), all classes excepting the\nnobility, samurai, Shinto priests, and doctors, shaved the greater\npart of the head, and wore queues; and this fashion of wearing the\nhair was called yakko-atama or dorei-atama--terms signifying\n\"slave-head,\" and indicating that the fashion originated in a period\nof servitude.\n\n[*In the year 645, the Emperor Kotoku issued the following edict on\nthe subject:--\n\n\"The law of men and women shall be that the children born of a free\nman and a free woman shall belong to the father; if a free man takes\nto wife a slave-woman, her children shall belong to the mother; if a\nfree woman marries a slave-man, the children shall belong to the\nfather; if they are slaves of two houses, the children shall belong\nto the mother. The children of temple-serfs shall follow the rule for\nfreemen. But in regard to others who become slaves, they shall be\ntreated according to the rule for slaves.--Aston's translation of the\nNihongi, Vol. II, p. 202.]\n\nAbout the origin of Japanese slavery, much remains to be learned.\nThere are evidences of successive immigrations; and it is possible\nthat some, at least, of the earlier Japanese settlers were reduced by\nlater invaders to the status of servitude. Again, [234] there was a\nconsiderable immigration of Koreans and Chinese, some of whom might\nhave voluntarily sought servitude as a refuge from worse evils. But\nthe subject remains obscure. We know, however, that degradation to\nslavery was a common punishment in early times; also, that debtors\nunable to pay became the slaves of their creditors; also, that\nthieves were sentenced to become the slaves of those whom they had\nrobbed.* Evidently there were great differences in the conditions of\nservitude. The more unfortunate class of slaves were scarcely better\noff than domestic animals; but there were serfs who could not be\nbought or sold, nor employed at other than special work; these were\nof kin to their lords, and may have entered voluntarily into\nservitude for the sake of sustenance and protection. Their relation\nto their masters reminds us of that of the Roman client to the Roman\npatron.\n\n[*An edict issued by the Empress Jito, in 690, enacted that a father\ncould sell his son into real slavery; but that debtors could be sold\nonly into a kind of serfdom. The edict ran thus: \"If a younger\nbrother of the common people is sold by his elder brother, he should\nbe classed with freemen; if a child is sold by his parents, he should\nbe classed with slaves; persons confiscated into slavery, by way of\npayment of interest on debts, are to be classed with freemen; and\ntheir children, though born of a union with a slave, are to be all\nclassed with freemen.\"--Aston's Nihongi, Vol. II, p, 402.]\n\nAs yet it is difficult to establish any clear distinction between the\nfreedmen and the freemen of ancient Japanese society; but we know\nthat the free population, ranking below the ruling class, [235]\nconsisted of two great divisions: the kunitsuko and the tomonotsuko.\nThe first were farmers, descendants perhaps of the earliest Mongol\ninvaders, and were permitted to hold their own lands independently of\nthe central government: they were lords of their own soil, but not\nnobles. The tomonotsuko were artizans,--probably of Korean or\nChinese descent, for the most part,--and numbered no less than 180\nclans. They followed hereditary occupations; and their clans were\nattached to the imperial clans, for which they were required to\nfurnish skilled labour.\n\nOriginally each of the O-uji and Ko-uji had its own territory,\nchiefs, dependants, serfs, and slaves. The chieftainships were\nhereditary,--descending from father to son in direct succession from\nthe original patriarch. The chief of a great clan was lord over the\nchiefs of the subclans attached to it: his authority was both\nreligious and military. It must not be forgotten that religion and\ngovernment were considered identical.\n\nAll Japanese clan-families were classed under three heads,--Kobetsu,\nShinbetsu, and Bambetsu. The Kobetsu (\"Imperial Branch\") represented\nthe so-called imperial families, claiming descent from the\nSun-goddess; the Shinbetsu (\"Divine Branch\") were clans claiming\ndescent from other deities, terrestrial or celestial; the Bambetsu\n(\"Foreign Branch\") represented the mass of the people. [236] Thus it\nwould seem that, by the ruling classes, the common people were\noriginally considered strangers,--Japanese only by adoption. Some\nscholars think that the term Bambetsu was at first given to serfs or\nfreedmen of Chinese or Korean descent. But this has not been proved.\nIt is only certain that all society was divided into three classes,\naccording to ancestry; that two of these classes constituted a ruling\noligarchy;* and that the third, or \"foreign\" class represented the\nbulk of the nation,--the plebs.\n\n[*Dr. Florenz accounts for the distinction between Kobetsu and\nShinbetsu as due to the existence of two military ruling\nclasses,--resulting from two successive waves of invasion or\nimmigration. The Kobetsu were the followers of Jimmu Tenno; the\nShinbetsu were earlier conquerors who had settled in Yamato prior to\nthe advent of Jimmu. These first conquerors, he thinks, were not\ndispossessed.]\n\nThere was a division also into castes--kabane or sei.  (I use the\nterm \"castes,\" following Dr. Florenz, a leading authority on ancient\nJapanese civilization, who gives the meaning of sei as equivalent to\nthat of the Sanscrit varna, signifying \"caste\" or \"colour.\") Every\nfamily in the three great divisions of Japanese society belonged to\nsome caste; and each caste represented at first some occupation or\ncalling. Caste would not seem to have developed any very rigid\nstructure in Japan; and there were early tendencies to a confusion of\nthe kabane. In the seventh century the confusion became so great that\nthe Emperor Temmu thought it necessary to reorganize the sei; and by\nhim all the clan-families were regrouped into eight new castes.\n\n[237] Such was the primal constitution of Japanese society; and that\nsociety was, therefore, in no true sense of the term, a fully formed\nnation. Nor can the title of Emperor be correctly applied to its\nearly rulers. The German scholar, Dr. Florenz, was the first to\nestablish these facts, contrary to the assumption of Japanese\nhistorians. He has shown that the \"heavenly sovereign\" of the early\nages was the hereditary chief of one Uji only,--which Uji, being the\nmost powerful of all, exercised influence over many of the others.\nThe authority of the \"heavenly sovereign\" did not extend over the\ncountry. But though not even a king,--outside of his own large group\nof patriarchal families,--he enjoyed three immense prerogatives. The\nfirst was the right of representing the different Uji before the\ncommon ancestral deity,--which implies the privileges and powers of a\nhigh priest. The second was the right of representing the different\nUji in foreign relations: that is to say, he could make peace or\ndeclare war in the name of all the clans, and therefore exercised the\nsupreme military authority. His third prerogative included the right\nto settle disputes between clans; the right to nominate a\nclan-patriarch, in case that the line of direct succession to the\nchieftainship of any Uji came to an end; the right to establish new\nUji; and the right to abolish an Uji guilty of so acting as to\nendanger the welfare of the rest. He was, therefore, Supreme Pontiff,\nSupreme Military Commander, [238] Supreme Arbitrator, and Supreme\nMagistrate. But he was not yet supreme king: his powers were\nexercised only by consent of the clans. Later he was to become the\nGreat Khan in very fact, and even much more,--the Priest-Ruler, the\nGod-King, the Deity-Incarnate. But with the growth of his dominion,\nit became more and more difficult for him to exercise all the\nfunctions originally combined in his authority; and, as a consequence\nof deputing those functions, his temporal sway was doomed to decline,\neven while his religious power continued to augment.\n\nThe earliest Japanese society was not, therefore, even a feudalism in\nthe meaning which we commonly attach to that word: it was a union of\nclans at first combined for defence and offence,--each clan having a\nreligion of its own. Gradually one clan-group, by power of wealth and\nnumbers, obtained such domination that it was able to impose its cult\nupon all the rest, and to make its hereditary chief Supreme High\nPontiff. The worship of the Sun-goddess so became a race-cult; but\nthis worship did not diminish the relative importance of the other\nclan-cults,--it only furnished them with a common tradition.\nEventually a nation formed; but the clan remained the real unit of\nsociety; and not until the present era of Meiji was its\ndisintegration effected--at least in so far as legislation could\naccomplish. [239] We may call that period during which the clans\nbecame really united under one head, and the national cult was\nestablished, the First Period of Japanese Social Evolution. However,\nthe social organism did not develop to the limit of its type until\nthe era of the Tokugawa shoguns,--so that, in order to study it as a\ncompleted structure, we must turn to modern times. Yet it had taken\non the vague outline of its destined form as early as the reign of\nthe Emperor Temmu, whose accession is generally dated 673 A.D. During\nthat reign Buddhism appears to have become a powerful influence at\ncourt; for the Emperor practically imposed a vegetarian diet upon the\npeople--proof positive of supreme power in fact as well as in theory.\nEven before this time society had been arranged into ranks and\ngrades,--each of the upper grades being distinguished by the form and\nquality of the official head-dresses worn; but the Emperor Temmu\nestablished many new grades, and reorganized the whole\nadministration, after the Chinese manner, in one hundred and eight\ndepartments. Japanese society then assumed, as to its upper ranks,\nnearly all the hierarchical forms which it presented down to the era\nof the Tokugawa shoguns, who consolidated the system without\nseriously changing its fundamental structure. We may say that from\nthe close of the First Period of its social evolution, the nation\nremained practically separated into two classes: the [240] governing\nclass, including all orders of the nobility and military; and the\nproducing class, comprising all the rest. The chief event of the\nSecond Period of the social evolution was the rise of the military\npower, which left the imperial religious authority intact, but\nusurped all the administrative functions (this subject will be\nconsidered in a later chapter). The society eventually crystallized\nby this military power was a very complex structure--outwardly\nresembling a huge feudalism, as we understand the term, but\nintrinsically different from any European feudalism that ever\nexisted. The difference lay especially in the religious organization\nof the Japanese communities, each of which, retaining its particular\ncult and patriarchal administration, remained essentially separate\nfrom every other. The national cult was a bond of tradition, not of\ncohesion: there was no religious unity. Buddhism, though widely\naccepted, brought no real change into this order of things; for,\nwhatever Buddhist creed a commune might profess, the real social bond\nremained the bond of the Ujigami. So that, even as fully developed\nunder the Tokugawa rule, Japanese society was still but a great\naggregate of clans and subclans, kept together by military coercion.\n\nAt the head of this vast aggregate was the Heavenly Sovereign, the\nLiving God of the race,--Priest-Emperor and Pontiff Supreme,\n--representing the oldest dynasty in the world. [241] Next to him\nstood the Kuge, or ancient nobility,--descendants of emperors and of\ngods. There were, in the time of the Tokugawa, 155 families of this\nhigh nobility. One of these, the Nakatomi, held, and still holds, the\nhighest hereditary priesthood: the Nakatomi were, under the Emperor,\nthe chiefs of the ancestral cult. All the great clans of early\nJapanese history--such as the Fujiwara, the Taira, the Minamoto--were\nKuge; and most of the great regents and shoguns of later history were\neither Kuge or descendants of Kuge.\n\nNext to the Kuge ranked the Buke, or military class,--also called\nMonofufu, Wasarau, or Samurahi (according to the ancient writing of\nthese names),--with an extensive hierarchy of its own. But the\ndifference, in most cases, between the lords and the warriors of the\nBuke was a difference of rank based upon income and title: all alike\nwere samurai, and nearly all were of Kobetsu or Shinbetsu descent. In\nearly times the head of the military class was appointed by the\nEmperor, only as a temporary commander-in-chief: afterwards, these\ncommanders-in-chief, by usurpation of power, made their office\nhereditary, and became veritable imperatores, in the Roman sense.\nTheir title of shogun is well known to Western readers. The shogun\nruled over between two and three hundred lords of provinces or\ndistricts, whose powers and privileges varied according to income and\ngrade. Under the Tokugawa [242] shogunate there were 292 of these\nlords, or daimyo. Before that time each lord exercised supreme rule\nover his own domain; and it is not surprising that the Jesuit\nmissionaries, as well as the early Dutch and English traders should\nhave called the daimyo \"kings.\" The despotism of the daimyo was first\nchecked by the founders of the Tokugawa dynasty, Iyeyasu, who so\nrestricted their powers that they became, with some exceptions,\nliable to lose their estates if proved guilty of oppression and\ncruelty. He ranked them all in four great classes: (1) Sanke, or\nGo-Sanke, the \"Three Exalted Families\" (those from whom a successor\nto the shogunate might be chosen, in case of need); (2) Kokushu,\n\"Lords of Provinces\"; (3) Tozama, \"Outside-Lords\"; (4) Fudai,\n\"Successful Families\": a name given to those families promoted to\nlordship or otherwise rewarded for fealty to Iyeyasu. Of the Sanke,\nthere were three clans, or families: of the Kokushu, eighteen; of the\nTozama, eighty-six; and of the Fudai, one hundred and seventy-six.\nThe income of the least of these daimyo was 10,000 koku of rice (we\nmay say about 10,000 pounds, though the value of the koku differed\ngreatly at different periods); and the income of the greatest, the\nLord of Kaga, was estimated at 1,027,000 koku.\n\nThe great daimyo had their greater and lesser vassals; and each of\nthese, again, had his force of trained samurai, or fighting gentry.\nThere was [243] also a particular class of soldier-farmers, called\ngoshi, some of whom possessed privileges and powers exceeding those\nof the lesser daimyo. These goshi, who were independent landowners,\nfor the most part, formed a kind of yeomanry; but there were many\npoints of difference between the social position of the goshi and\nthat of the English yeomen.\n\nBesides reorganizing the military class, Iyeyasu created several new\nsubclasses. The more important of these were the hatamoto and the\ngokenin. The hatamoto, whose appellation signifies\n\"banner-supporters,\" numbered about 2000, and the gokenin about 5000.\nThese two bodies of samurai formed the special military force of the\nshogun; the hatamoto being greater vassals, with large incomes; and\nthe gokenin lesser vassals, with small incomes, who ranked above\nother common samurai only because of being directly attached to the\nshogun's service.... The total number of samurai of all grades was\nabout 2,000,000. They were exempted from taxation, and privileged to\nwear two swords.\n\nSuch, in brief outline, was the general ordination of those noble and\nmilitary classes by whom the nation was ruled with great severity.\nThe bulk of the common people were divided into three classes (we\nmight even say castes, but for Indian ideas long associated with the\nterm): Farmers, Artizans, and Merchants.\n\n[244] Of these three classes, the farmers (hyakusho) were the\nhighest; ranking immediately after the samurai. Indeed, it is hard to\ndraw a line between the samurai class and the farming-class,--because\nmany samurai were farmers also, and because some farmers held a rank\nconsiderably above that of ordinary samurai. Perhaps we should limit\nthe term hyakusho (farmers, or peasantry) to those tillers of the\nsoil who lived only by agriculture, and were neither of Kobetsu nor\nShinbetsu descent.... At all events, the occupation of the peasant\nwas considered honourable: a farmer's daughter might become a servant\nin the imperial household itself--though she could occupy only an\nhumble position in the service. Certain farmers were privileged to\nwear swords. It appears that in the early ages of Japanese society\nthere was no distinction between farmers and warriors: all\nable-bodied farmers were then trained fighting-men, ready for war at\nany moment,--a condition paralleled in old Scandinavian society.\nAfter a special military class had been evolved, the distinction\nbetween farmer and samurai still remained vague in certain parts of\nthe country. In Satsuma and in Tosa, for example, the samurai\ncontinued to farm down to the present era: the best of the Kyushu\nsamurai were nearly all farmers; and their superior stature and\nstrength were commonly attributed to their rustic occupations. In\nother parts of the country, as in Izumo, farming was forbidden to\nsamurai: [245] they were not even allowed to hold rice-land, though\nthey might own forest-land. But in various provinces they were\npermitted to farm, even while strictly forbidden to follow any other\noccupation,--any trade or craft.... At no time did any degradation\nattach to the pursuit of agriculture. Some of the early emperors took\na personal interest in farming; and in the grounds of the Imperial\nPalace at Akasaka may even now be seen a little rice-field. By\nreligious tradition, immemorially old, the first sheaf of rice grown\nwithin the imperial grounds should be reaped and offered by the\nimperial hand to the divine ancestors as a harvest offering, on the\noccasion of the Ninth Festival,--Shin-Sho-Sai.*\n\n[*At this festival the first new silk of the year, as well as the\nfirst of the new rice-crop, is still offered to the Sun-goddess by\nthe Emperor in person.]\n\nBelow the peasantry ranked the artizan-class (Shokunin), including\nsmiths, carpenters, weavers, potters,--all crafts, in short. Highest\namong these were reckoned, as we might expect, the sword-smiths.\nSword-smiths not infrequently rose to dignities far beyond their\nclass: some had conferred upon them the high title of Kami, written\nwith the same character used in the title of a daimyo, who was\nusually termed the Kami of his province or district. Naturally they\nenjoyed the patronage of the highest,--emperors and Kuge. The Emperor\nGo-Toba is known to have worked at sword-making in a smithy [246] of\nhis own. Religious rites were practised during the forging of a blade\ndown to modern times....\n\nAll the principal crafts had guilds; and, as a general rule, trades\nwere hereditary. There are good historical grounds for supposing that\nthe ancestors of the Shokunin were mostly Koreans and Chinese.\n\nThe commercial class (Akindo), including bankers, merchants,\nshopkeepers, and traders of all kinds, was the lowest officially\nrecognized. The business of money-making was held in contempt by the\nsuperior classes; and all methods of profiting by the purchase and\nre-sale of the produce of labour were regarded as dishonourable. A\nmilitary aristocracy would naturally look down upon the\ntrading-classes; and there is generally, in militant societies, small\nrespect for the common forms of labour. But in Old Japan the\noccupations of the farmer and the artizan were not despised: trade\nalone appears to have been considered degrading,--and the\ndiscrimination may have been partly a moral one. The relegation of\nthe mercantile class to the lowest place in the social scale must\nhave produced some curious results. However rich, for example, a\nrice-dealer might be, he ranked below the carpenters or potters or\nboat-builders whom he might employ,--unless it happened that his\nfamily originally belonged to another class. In later times [247] the\nAkindo included many persons of other than Akindo descent; and the\nclass thus virtually retrieved itself.\n\nOf the four great classes of the nation--Samurai, Farmers, Artizans,\nand Merchants (the Shi-No-Ko-Sho, as they were briefly called, after\nthe initial characters of the Chinese terms used to designate\nthem)--the last three were counted together under the general\nappellation of Heimin, \"common folk.\" ll heimin were subject to the\nsamurai; any samurai being privileged to kill the heimin showing him\ndisrespect. But the heimin were actually the nation: they alone\ncreated the wealth of the country, produced the revenues, paid the\ntaxes, supported the nobility and military and clergy. As for the\nclergy, the Buddhist (like the Shinto) priests, though forming a\nclass apart, ranked with the samurai, not with the heimin.\n\nOutside of the three classes of commoners, and hopelessly below the\nlowest of them, large classes of persons existed who were not\nreckoned as Japanese, and scarcely accounted human beings. Officially\nthey were mentioned generically as chori, and were counted with the\npeculiar numerals used in counting animals: ippiki, nihiki, sambiki,\netc. Even to-day they are commonly referred to, not as persons\n(hito), but as \"things\" (mono). To English readers (chiefly through\nMr. Mitford's yet unrivalled Tales of Old [248] Japan) they are known\nas Eta; but their appellations varied according to their callings.\nThey were pariah-people: Japanese writers have denied, upon\napparently good grounds, that the chori belong to the Japanese race.\nVarious tribes of these outcasts followed occupations in the monopoly\nof which they were legally confirmed: they were well-diggers,\ngarden-sweepers, straw-workers, sandal-makers, according to local\nprivileges. One class was employed officially in the capacity of\ntorturers and executioners; another was employed as night-watchmen; a\nthird as grave-makers. But most of the Eta followed the business of\ntanners and leather-dressers. They alone had the right to slaughter\nand flay animals, to prepare various kinds of leather, and to\nmanufacture leather sandals, stirrup-straps, and drumheads,--the\nmaking of drumheads being a lucrative occupation in a country where\ndrums were used in a hundred thousand temples. The Eta had their own\nlaws, and their own chiefs, who exercised powers of life and death.\nThey lived always in the suburbs or immediate neighbourhood of towns,\nbut only in separate settlements of their own. They could enter the\ntown to sell their wares, or to make purchases; but they could not\nenter any shop, except the shop of a dealer in footgear.* [*This is\nstill the rule in certain parts of the country.] As professional\nsingers they were tolerated; but they were forbidden to enter any\nhouse--so they could perform their music or sing [249] their songs\nonly in the street, or in a garden. Any occupations other than their\nhereditary callings were strictly forbidden to them. Between the\nlowest of the commercial classes and the Eta, the barrier was\nimpassable as any created by caste-tradition in India; and never was\nGhetto more separated from the rest of a European city by walls and\ngates, than an Eta settlement from the rest of a Japanese town by\nsocial prejudice. No Japanese would dream of entering an Eta\nsettlement unless obliged to do so in some official capacity.... At\nthe pretty little seaport of Mionoseki, I saw an Eta settlement,\nforming one termination of the crescent of streets extending round\nthe bay. Mionoseki is certainly one of the most ancient towns in\nJapan; and the Eta village attached to it must be very old. Even\nto-day, no Japanese habitant of Mionoseki would think of walking\nthrough that settlement, though its streets are continuations of the\nother streets: children never pass the unmarked boundary; and the\nvery dogs will not cross the prejudice-line. For all that the\nsettlement is clean, well built,--with gardens, baths, and temples of\nits own. It looks like any well-kept Japanese village. But for\nperhaps a thousand years there has been no fellowship between the\npeople of those contiguous communities.... Nobody can now tell the\nhistory of these outcast folk: the cause of their social\nexcommunication has long been forgotten.\n\n[250] Besides the Eta proper, there were pariahs called hinin,--a\nname signifying \"not-human-beings.\" Under this appellation were\nincluded professional mendicants, wandering minstrels, actors,\ncertain classes of prostitutes, and persons outlawed by society. The\nhinin had their own chiefs, and their own laws. Any person expelled\nfrom a Japanese community might join the hinin; but that signified\ngood-by to the rest of humanity. The Government was too shrewd to\npersecute the hinin. Their gipsy-existence saved a world of trouble.\nIt was unnecessary to keep petty offenders in jail, or to provide for\npeople incapable of earning an honest living, so long as these could\nbe driven into the hinin class. There the incorrigible, the vagrant,\nthe beggar, would be kept under discipline of a sort, and would\npractically disappear from official cognizance. The killing of a\nhinin was not considered murder, and was punished only by a fine.\n\nThe reader should now be able to form an approximately correct idea\nof the character of the old Japanese society. But the ordination of\nthat society was much more complex than I have been able to\nindicate,--so complex that volumes would be required to treat the\nsubject in detail. Once fully evolved, what we may still call Feudal\nJapan, for want of a better name, presented most of the features of a\ndoubly-compound society of the militant type, with [251] certain\nmarked approaches toward the trebly-compound type. A striking\npeculiarity, of course, is the absence of a true ecclesiastical\nhierarchy,--due to the fact that Government never became dissociated\nfrom religion. There was at one time a tendency on the part of\nBuddhism to establish a religious hierarchy independent of central\nauthority; but there were two fatal obstacles in the way of such a\ndevelopment. The first was the condition of Buddhism itself,--divided\ninto a number of sects, some bitterly opposed to others. The second\nobstacle was the implacable hostility of the military clans, jealous\nof any religious power capable of interfering, either directly or\nindirectly, with their policy. So soon as the foreign religion began\nto prove itself formidable in the world of action, ruthless measures\nwere decided; and the frightful massacres of priests by Nobunaga, in\nthe sixteenth century, ended the political aspirations of Buddhism in\nJapan.\n\nOtherwise the regimentation of society resembled that of all antique\ncivilizations of the militant type,--all action being both positively\nand negatively regulated. The household ruled the person; the\nfive-family group; the household; the community, the group; the lord\nof the soil, the community; the Shogun, the lord. Over the whole body\nof the producing classes, two million samurai had power of life and\ndeath; over these samurai the daimyo held a like power; and the\ndaimyo were subject to the Shogun. [252] Nominally the Shogun was\nsubject to the Emperor, but not in fact: military usurpation\ndisturbed and shifted the natural order of the higher responsibility.\nHowever, from the nobility downwards, the regulative discipline was\nmuch reinforced by this change in government. Among the producing\nclasses there were countless combinations--guilds of all sorts; but\nthese were only despotisms within despotisms--despotisms of the\ncommunistic order; each member being governed by the will of the\nrest; and enterprise, whether commercial or industrial, being\nimpossible outside of some corporation.... We have already seen that\nthe individual was bound to the commune--could not leave it without a\npermit, could not marry out of it. We have seen also that the\nstranger was a stranger in the old Greek and Roman sense,--that is to\nsay an enemy, a hostis,--and could enter another community only by\nbeing religiously adopted into it. As regards exclusiveness,\ntherefore, the social conditions were like those of the early\nEuropean communities; but the militant conditions resembled rather\nthose of the great Asiatic empires.\n\nOf course such a society had nothing in common with any modern form\nof Occidental civilization. It was a huge mass of clan-groups,\nloosely united under a duarchy, in which the military head was\nomnipotent, and the religious head only an object of [253]\nworship,--the living symbol of a cult. However this organization\nmight outwardly resemble what we are accustomed to call feudalism,\nits structure was rather like that of ancient Egyptian or Peruvian\nsociety,--minus the priestly hierarchy. The supreme figure is not an\nEmperor in our meaning of the word,--not a king of kings and\nviceregent of heaven,--but a God incarnate, a race-divinity, an Inca\ndescended from the Sun. About his sacred person, we see the tribes\nranged in obeisance,--each tribe, nevertheless, maintaining its own\nancestral cult; and the clans forming these tribes, and the\ncommunities forming these clans, and the households forming these\ncommunities, have all their separate cults; and out of the mass of\nthese cults have been derived the customs and the laws. Yet\neverywhere the customs and the laws differ more or less, because of\nthe variety of their origins: they have this only in common,--that\nthey exact the most humble and implicit obedience, and regulate every\ndetail of private and public life. Personality is wholly suppressed\nby coercion; and the coercion is chiefly from within, not from\nwithout,--the life of every individual being so ordered by the will\nof the rest as to render free action, free speaking, or free\nthinking, out of the question. This means something incomparably\nharsher than the socialistic tyranny of early Greek society: it means\nreligious communism doubled with a military despotism of [254] the\nmost terrible kind. The individual did not legally exist,--except\nfor punishment; and from the whole of the producing-classes, whether\nserfs or freemen, the most servile submission was ruthlessly exacted.\n\nIt is difficult to believe that any intelligent man of modern times\ncould endure such conditions and live (except under the protection of\nsome powerful ruler, as in the case of the English pilot Will Adams,\ncreated a samurai by Iyeyasu): the incessant and multiform constraint\nupon mental and moral life would of itself be enough to kill....\nThose who write to-day about the extraordinary capacity of the\nJapanese for organization, and about the \"democratic spirit\" of the\npeople as natural proof of their fitness for representative\ngovernment in the Western sense, mistake appearances for realities.\nThe truth is that the extraordinary capacity of the Japanese for\ncommunal organization, is the strongest possible evidence of their\nunfitness for any modern democratic form of government. Superficially\nthe difference between Japanese social organization, and local\nself-government in the modern American, or the English colonial\nmeaning of the term, appears slight; and we may justly admire the\nperfect self-discipline of a Japanese community. But the real\ndifference between the two is fundamental, prodigious,--measurable\nonly by thousands of years. It is the difference between compulsory\nand free [255] cooperation,--the difference between the most despotic\nform of communism, founded upon the most ancient form of religion,\nand the most highly evolved form of industrial union, with unlimited\nindividual right of competition.\n\nThere exists a popular error to the effect that what we call\ncommunism and socialism in Western civilization are modern growths,\nrepresenting aspiration toward some perfect form of democracy. As a\nmatter of fact these movements represent reversion,--reversion toward\nthe primitive conditions of human society. Under every form of\nancient despotism we find exactly the same capacity of\nself-government among the people: it was manifested by the old\nEgyptians and Peruvians as well as by the early Greeks and Romans; it\nis exhibited to-day by Hindoo and Chinese communities; it may be\nstudied in Siamese or Annamese villages quite as well as in Japan. It\nmeans a religious communistic despotism,--a supreme social tyranny\nsuppressing personality, forbidding enterprise, and making\ncompetition a public offence. Such self-government also has its\nadvantages: it was perfectly adapted to the requirements of Japanese\nlife so long as the nation could remain isolated from the rest of the\nworld. Yet it must be obvious that any society whose ethical\ntraditions forbid the individual to profit at the cost of his\nfellow-men will be placed at an enormous disadvantage when forced\ninto the [256] industrial struggle for existence against communities\nwhose self-government permits of the greatest possible personal\nfreedom, and the widest range of competitive enterprise.\n\nWe might suppose that perpetual and universal coercion, moral and\nphysical, would have brought about a state of universal sameness,--a\ndismal uniformity and monotony in all life's manifestations. But such\nmonotony existed only as to the life of the commune, not as to that\nof the race. The most wonderful variety characterized this quaint\ncivilization, as it also characterized the old Greek civilization,\nand for precisely the same reasons. In every patriarchal civilization\nruled by ancestor-worship, all tendency to absolute sameness, to\ngeneral uniformity, is prevented by the character of the aggregate\nitself, which never becomes homogeneous and plastic. Every unit of\nthat aggregate, each one of the multitude of petty despotisms\ncomposing it, most jealously guards its own particular traditions and\ncustoms, and remains self-sufficing. Hence results, sooner or later,\nincomparable variety of detail, small detail, artistic, industrial,\narchitectural, mechanical. In Japan such differentiation and\nspecialization was thus maintained, that you will hardly find in the\nwhole country even two villages where the customs, industries, and\nmethods of production are exactly the same.... The customs [257] of\nthe fishing-villages will, perhaps, best illustrate what I mean. In\nevery coast district the various fishing-settlements have their own\ntraditional ways of constructing nets and boats, and their own\nparticular methods of handling them. Now, in the time of the great\ntidal-wave of 1896, when thirty thousand people perished, and scores\nof coast-villages were wrecked, large sums of money were collected in\nKobe and elsewhere for the benefit of the survivors; and well-meaning\nforeigners attempted to supply the want of boats and fishing\nimplements by purchasing quantities of locally made nets and boats,\nand sending them to the afflicted districts. But it was found that\nthese presents were of no use to the men of the northern provinces,\nwho had been accustomed to boats and nets of a totally different\nkind; and it was further discovered that every fishing-hamlet had\nspecial requirements of its own in this regard.... Now the\ndifferentiations of habit and custom, thus exhibited in the life of\nthe fishing-communities, is paralleled in many crafts and callings.\nThe way of building houses, and of roofing them, differs in almost\nevery province, also the methods of agriculture and of horticulture,\nthe manner of making wells, the methods of weaving and lacquering and\npottery-making and tile-baking. Nearly every town and village of\nimportance boasts of some special production, bearing the name of the\nplace, and unlike anything made elsewhere.... [258] No doubt the\nancestral cults helped to conserve and to develop such local\nspecialization of industries: the craft-ancestors, the patron-gods of\nthe guild, were supposed to desire that the work of their descendants\nand worshippers should maintain a particular character of its own.\nThough individual enterprise was checked by communal regulation, the\nspecialization of local production was encouraged by difference of\ncults. Family-conservatism or guild-conservatism would tolerate small\nimprovements or modifications suggested by local experience, but\nwould be wary, perhaps superstitious likewise, about accepting the\nresults of strange experience.\n\nStill, for the Japanese themselves, not the least pleasure of travel\nin Japan is the pleasure of studying the curious variety in local\nproduction,--the pleasure of finding the novel, the unexpected, the\nunimagined. Even those arts or industries of Old Japan, primarily\nborrowed from Korea or from China, appear to have developed and\nconserved innumerable queer forms under the influence of the\nnumberless local cults.\n\n\n\n[259]\n\nTHE RISE OF THE MILITARY POWER\n\nAlmost the whole of authentic Japanese history is comprised in one\nvast episode: the rise and fall of the military power.... It has been\ncustomary to speak of Japanese history as beginning with the\naccession of Jimmu Tenno, alleged to have reigned from 660 to 585\nB.C., and to have lived for one hundred and twenty-seven years.\nBefore the time of the Emperor Jimmu was the Age of the Gods,--the\nperiod of mythology. But trustworthy history does not begin for a\nthousand years after the accession of Jimmu Tenno; and the chronicles\nof those thousand years must be regarded as little better than\nfairy-tales. They contain records of fact; but fact and myth are so\ninterwoven that it is difficult to distinguish the one from the\nother. We have legends, for example, of an alleged conquest of Korea\nin the year 202 A.D., by the Empress Jingo; and it has been tolerably\nwell proved that no such conquest took place.* [*See Aston's paper,\nEarly Japanese History, in the translations of the Asiatic Society of\nJapan.] The later records are somewhat less mythical than the\nearlier. We have traditions apparently founded on [260] fact, of\nKorean immigration in the time of the fifteenth ruler, the Emperor\nOjin; then later traditions, also founded on fact, of early Chinese\nstudies in Japan; then some vague accounts of a disturbed state of\nsociety, which appears to have continued through the whole of the\nfifth century. Buddhism was introduced in the middle of the century\nfollowing; and we have record of the fierce opposition offered to the\nnew creed by a Shinto faction, and of a miraculous victory won by the\nhelp of the Four Deva Kings, at the prayer of Shotoku Taishi,--the\ngreat founder of Buddhism, and regent of the Empress Suiko. With the\nfirm establishment of Buddhism in the reign of that Empress (593-628\nA.D.), we reach the period of authentic history, and of the\nthirty-third Japanese sovereign counting from Jimmu Tenno.\n\nBut although everything prior to the seventh century remains obscured\nfor us by the mists of fable, much can be inferred, even from the\nhalf-mythical records, concerning social conditions during the reigns\nof the first thirty-three Emperors and Empresses. It appears that the\nearly Mikado lived very simply--scarcely better, indeed, than their\nsubjects. The Shinto scholar Mabuchi tells us that they dwelt in huts\nwith mud walls and roofs of shingle; that they wore hempen clothes;\nthat they carried their swords in simple wooden scabbards, bound\nround with the tendrils of a wild [261] vine; that they walked about\nfreely among the people; that they carried their own bows and arrows\nwhen they went to hunt. But as society developed wealth and power,\nthis early simplicity disappeared, and the gradual introduction of\nChinese customs and etiquette effected great changes. The Empress\nSuiko introduced Chinese court-ceremonies, and first established\namong the nobility the Chinese grades of rank. Chinese luxury, as\nwell as Chinese learning, soon made its appearance at court; and\nthereafter the imperial authority appears to have been less and less\ndirectly exerted. The new ceremonialism must have rendered the\npersonal exercise of the multiform imperial functions more difficult\nthan before; and it is probable that the temptation to act more or\nless by deputy would have been strong even in the case of an\nenergetic ruler. At all events we find that the real administration\nof government began about this time to pass into the hands of\ndeputies,--all of whom were members of the great Kuge clan of the\nFujiwara.\n\nThis clan, which included the highest hereditary priesthood,\nrepresented a majority of the ancient nobility, claiming divine\ndescent. Ninety-five out of the total one hundred and fifty-five\nfamilies of Kuge belonged to it,--including the five families,\nGo-Sekke, from which alone the Emperor was by tradition allowed to\nchoose his Empress. Its historic name dates only from the reign of\nthe Emperor [262] Kwammu (782-806 A.D.), who bestowed it as an honour\nupon Nakatomi no Kamatari; but the clan had long previously held the\nhighest positions at Court. By the close of the seventh century most\nof the executive power had passed into its hands. Later the office of\nKwambaku, or Regent, was established, and remained hereditary in the\nhouse down to modern times--ages after all real power had been taken\nfrom the descendants of Nakatomi no Kamatari. But during almost five\ncenturies the Fujiwara remained the veritable regents of the country,\nand took every possible advantage of their position. All the civil\noffices were in the hands of Fujiwara men; all the wives and\nfavourites of the Emperors were Fujiwara women. The whole power of\ngovernment was thus kept in the hands of the clan; and the political\nauthority of the Emperor ceased to exist. Moreover the succession was\nregulated entirely by the Fujiwara; and even the duration of each\nreign was made to depend upon their policy. It was deemed advisable\nto compel Emperors to abdicate at an early age, and after abdicating\nto become Buddhist monks,--the successor chosen being often a mere\nchild. There is record of an Emperor ascending the throne at the age\nof two, and abdicating at the age of four; another Mikado was\nappointed at the age of five; several at the age of ten. Yet the\nreligious dignity of the throne remained undiminished, or, rather,\ncontinued [263] to grow. The more the Mikado was withdrawn from\npublic view by policy and by ceremonial, the more did his seclusion\nand inaccessibility serve to deepen the awe of the divine legend.\nLike the Lama of Thibet the living deity was made invisible to the\nmultitude; and gradually the belief arose that to look upon his face\nwas death.... It is said that the Fujiwara were not satisfied even\nwith these despotic means of assuring their own domination, and that\nluxurious forms of corruption were maintained within the palace for\nthe purpose of weakening the character of young emperors who might\notherwise have found the energy to assert the ancient rights of the\nthrone.\n\nPerhaps this usurpation--which prepared the way for the rise of the\nmilitary power--has never been rightly interpreted. The history of\nall the patriarchal societies of ancient Europe will be found to\nillustrate the same phase of social evolution. At a certain period in\nthe development of each we find the same thing happening,--the\nwithdrawal of all political authority from the Priest-King, who is\nsuffered, nevertheless, to retain the religious dignity. It may be a\nmistake to judge the policy of the Fujiwara as a policy of mere\nambition and usurpation. The Fujiwara were a religious aristocracy,\nclaiming divine origin,--clan-chiefs of a society in which religion\nand government were identical, and holding to that society much the\nsame relation as that of the [264] Eupatridae to the ancient Attic\nsociety. The Mikado had originally become supreme magistrate,\nmilitary commander, and religious head by consent of a majority of\nthe clan-chiefs,--each of whom represented to his own following what\nthe \"Heavenly Sovereign\" represented to the social aggregate. But as\nthe power of the ruler extended with the growth of the nation, those\nwho had formerly united to maintain that power began to find it\ndangerous. They decided to deprive the Heavenly Sovereign of all\npolitical and legal authority, without disturbing in any way his\nreligious supremacy. At Athens, at Sparta, at Rome, and elsewhere in\nancient Europe, the same policy was carried out, for the same\nreasons, by religious senates. The history of the early kings of\nRome, as interpreted by M. de Coulanges, best illustrates the nature\nof the antagonism developed between the priest-ruler and the\nreligious aristocracy; but the same thing took place in all the Greek\ncommunities, with about the same result. Everywhere political power\nwas taken away from the early kings; but they were mostly left in\npossession of their religious dignities and privileges: they remained\nsupreme priests after having ceased to be rulers. This was the case\nalso in Japan; and I imagine that future Japanese historians will be\nable to give us an entirely new interpretation of the Fujiwara\nepisode, as reviewed in the light of modern sociology. At all events,\nthere can be little doubt [265] that, in curtailing the powers of the\nHeavenly Sovereign, the religious aristocracy must have been actuated\nby conservative precaution as well as by ambition. There had been\nvarious Emperors who made changes in the laws and customs--changes\nwhich could scarcely have been viewed with favour by many of the\nancient nobility; there had been an Emperor whose diversions can\nto-day be written of only in Latin; there had even been an\nEmperor--Kotoku--who, though \"God Incarnate,\" and chief of the\nancient faith, \"despised the Way of the Gods,\" and cut down the holy\ngrove of the shrine of Iku-kuni-dama. Kotoku, for all his Buddhist\npiety (perhaps, indeed, because of it), was one of the wisest and\nbest of rulers; but the example of a heavenly sovereign \"despising\nthe Way of the Gods,\" must have given the priestly clan matter for\nserious reflection.... Besides, there is another important fact to be\nnoticed. The Imperial household proper had become, in the course of\ncenturies, entirely detached from the Uji; and the omnipotence of\nthis unit, independent of all other units, constituted in itself a\ngrave danger to aristocratic privileges and established institutions.\nToo much might depend upon the personal character and will of an\nomnipotent God-King, capable of breaking with all clan-custom, and of\nabrogating clan-privileges. On the other hand, there was safety for\nall alike under the patriarchal rule of the clan, which [266] could\ncheek every tendency on the part of any of its members to exert\npredominant influence at the expense of the rest. But for obvious\nreasons the Imperial cult--traditional source of all authority and\nprivilege--could not be touched: it was only by maintaining and\nreinforcing it that the religious nobility could expect to keep the\nreal power in their hands. They actually kept it for nearly five\ncenturies.\n\nThe history of all the Japanese regencies, however, amply illustrates\nthe general rule that inherited authority is ever and everywhere\nliable to find itself supplanted by deputed authority. The Fujiwara\nappear to have eventually become the victims of that luxury which\nthey had themselves, for reasons of policy, introduced and\nmaintained. Degenerating into a mere court-nobility, they made little\neffort to exert any direct authority in other than civil directions,\nentrusting military matters almost wholly to the Buke. In the eighth\ncentury the distinction between military and civil organization had\nbeen made upon the Chinese plan; the great military class then came\ninto existence, and began to extend its power rapidly. Of the\nmilitary clans proper, the most powerful were the Minamoto and the\nTaira. By deputing to these clans the conduct of all important\nmatters relating to war, the Fujiwara eventually lost their high\nposition and influence. As soon [267] as the Buke found themselves\nstrong enough to lay hands upon the reins of government,--which\nhappened about the middle of the eleventh century,--the Fujiwara\nsupremacy became a thing of the past, although members of the clan\ncontinued for centuries to occupy positions of importance under\nvarious regents.\n\nBut the Buke could not realize their ambition without a bitter\nstruggle among themselves,--the longest and the fiercest war in\nJapanese history. The Minamoto and the Taira were both Kuge; both\nclaimed imperial descent. In the early part of the contest the Taira\ncarried all before them; and it seemed that no power could hinder\nthem from exterminating the rival clan. But fortune turned at last in\nfavour of the Minamoto; and at the famous sea-fight of Dan-no-ura, in\n1185, the Taira were themselves exterminated.\n\nThen began the reign of the Minamoto regents, or rather shogun. I\nhave elsewhere said that the title \"shogun\" originally signified, as\ndid the Roman military term Imperator, only a commander-in-chief: it\nnow became the title of the supreme ruler de facto, in his double\ncapacity of civil and military sovereign,--the King of kings. From\nthe accession of the Minamoto to power the history of the\nshogunate--the long history of the military supremacy--really begins;\nJapan thereafter, down to the present era of Meiji, having really two\nEmperors: [268] the Heavenly Sovereign, or Deity Incarnate,\nrepresenting the religion of the race; and the veritable Imperator,\nwho wielded all the powers of the administration. No one sought to\noccupy by force the throne of the Sun's Succession, whence all\nauthority was at least supposed to be derived. Regent or shogun bowed\ndown before it: divinity could not be usurped.\n\nYet peace did not follow upon the battle of Dan-no-ura: the clan-wars\ninitiated by the great struggle of the Minamoto and the Taira,\ncontinued, at irregular intervals, for five centuries more; and the\nnation remained disintegrated. Nor did the Minamoto long keep the\nsupremacy which they had so dearly won. Deputing their powers to the\nHojo family, they were supplanted by the Hojo, just as the Fujiwara\nhad been supplanted by the Taira. Three only of the Minamoto shogun\nreally exercised rule. During the whole of the thirteenth century,\nand for some time afterwards, the Hojo continued to govern the\ncountry; and it is noteworthy that these regents never assumed the\ntitle of shogun, but professed to be merely shogunal deputies. Thus a\ntriple-headed government appeared to exist; for the Minamoto kept up\na kind of court at Kamakura. But they faded into mere shadows, and\nare yet remembered by the significant appellation of \"Shadow-Shogun,\"\nor \"Puppet Shogun.\" There was nothing shadowy, however, about the\nadministration of the Hojo, [269]--men of immense energy and\nability. By them Emperor or shogun could be deposed and banished\nwithout scruple; and the helplessness of the shogunate can be\ninferred from the fact, that the seventh Hojo regent, before deposing\nthe seventh shogun, sent him home in a palanquin, head downwards and\nheels upwards. Nevertheless the Hojo suffered the phantom-shogunate\nto linger on, until 1333. Though unscrupulous in their methods, these\nregents were capable rulers; and proved themselves able to save the\ncountry in a great emergency,--the famous invasion attempted by\nKublai Khan in 1281. Aided by a fortunate typhoon, which is said to\nhave destroyed the hostile fleet in answer to prayer offered up at\nthe national shrines, the Hojo could repel this invasion. They were\nless successful in dealing with certain domestic\ndisorders,--especially those fomented by the turbulent Buddhist\npriesthood. During the thirteenth century, Buddhism had developed\ninto a great military power,--strangely like that church-militant of\nthe European middle ages: the period of soldier-priests and\nfighting-bishops. The Buddhist monasteries had been converted into\nfortresses filled with men-at arms; Buddhist menace had more than\nonce carried terror into the sacred seclusion of the imperial court.\nAt an early day, Yoritomo, the far-seeing founder of the Minamoto\ndynasty, had observed a militant tendency in Buddhism, and had\nattempted to check [270] it by forbidding all priests and monks\neither to bear arms, or to maintain armed retainers. But his\nsuccessors had been careless about enforcing these prohibitions; and\nthe Buddhist military power developed in consequence so rapidly that\nthe shrewdest Hojo were doubtful of their ability to cope with it.\nEventually this power proved capable of giving them serious trouble.\nThe ninety-sixth Mikado, Go-Daigo, found courage to revolt against\nthe tyranny of the Hojo; and the Buddhist soldiery took part with\nhim. He was promptly defeated, and banished to the islands of Oki;\nbut his cause was soon espoused by powerful lords, who had long\nchafed under the despotism of the regency. These assembled their\nforces, restored the banished Emperor, and combined in a desperate\nattack upon the regent's capital, Kamakura. The city was stormed and\nburned; and the last of the Hojo rulers, after a brave but vain\ndefence, performed harakiri. Thus shogunate and regency vanished\ntogether, in 1333.\n\nFor the moment the whole power of administration had been restored to\nthe Mikado. Unfortunately for himself and for the country, Go-Daigo\nwas too feeble of character to avail himself of this great\nopportunity. He revived the dead shogunate by appointing his own son\nshogun; he weakly ignored the services of those whose loyalty and\ncourage had restored him; and he foolishly strengthened [271] the\nhands of those whom he had every reason to fear. As a consequence\nthere happened the most serious political catastrophe in the history\nof Japan, a division of the imperial house against itself.\n\nThe unscrupulous despotism of the Hojo regents had prepared the\npossibility of such an event. During the last years of the thirteenth\ncentury, there were living at the same time in Kyoto, besides the\nreigning Mikado, no less than three deposed emperors. To bring about\na contest for the succession was, therefore, an easy matter; and this\nwas soon accomplished by the treacherous general Ashikaga Takeuji, to\nwhom Go-Daigo had unwisely shown especial favour. Ashikaga had\nbetrayed the Hojo in order to help the restoration of Go-Daigo: he\nsubsequently would have betrayed the trust of Go-Daigo, in order to\nseize the administrative power. The Emperor discovered this\ntreasonable purpose when too late, and sent against Ashikaga an army\nwhich was defeated. After some further contest Ashikaga mastered the\ncapital, drove Go-Daigo a second time into exile, set up a rival\nEmperor, and established a new shogunate. Now for the first time, two\nbranches of the Imperial family, each supported by powerful lords,\ncontended for the right of succession. That of which Go-Daigo\nremained the acting representative, is known in history as the\nSouthern Branch (Nancho), and by Japanese historians is held to be\nthe only legitimate branch. [272]\n\nThe other was called the Northern Branch (Hokucho), and was\nmaintained at Kyoto by the power of the Ashikaga clan; while\nGo-Daigo, finding refuge in a Buddhist monastery, retained the\ninsignia of empire. Thereafter, for a period of fifty-six years Japan\ncontinued to have two Mikado; and the resulting disorder was such as\nto imperil the national integrity. It would have been no easy matter\nfor the people to decide which Emperor possessed the better claim.\nHitherto the imperial presence had represented the national divinity;\nand the imperial palace had been regarded as the temple of the\nnational religion: the division maintained by the Ashikaga usurpers\ntherefore signified nothing less than the breaking up of the whole\ntradition upon which existing society had been built. The confusion\nbecame greater and greater, the danger increased more and more, until\nthe Ashikaga themselves took alarm. They managed then to end the\ntrouble by persuading the fifth Mikado of the Southern Dynasty, Go\nKameyama, to surrender his insignia to the reigning Mikado of the\nNorthern Dynasty, Go-Komatsu. This having been done, in 1392,\nGo-Kameyama was honoured with the title of retired Emperor, and\nGo-Komatsu was nationally acknowledged as legitimate Emperor. But the\nnames of the other four Emperors of the Northern Dynasty are still\nexcluded from the official list. The Ashikaga shogunate thus averted\nthe supreme [273] peril; but the period of this military domination,\nwhich endured until 1573, was destined to remain the darkest in\nJapanese history. The Ashikaga gave the country fifteen rulers,\nseveral of whom were men of great ability: they tried to encourage\nindustry; they cultivated literature and the arts; but they could not\ngive peace. Fresh disputes arose; and lords whom the shogunate could\nnot subdue made war upon each other. To such a condition of terror\nwas the capital reduced that the court nobility fled from it to take\nrefuge with daimyo powerful enough to afford them protection. Robbery\nbecame rife throughout the land; and piracy terrorized the seas. The\nshogunate itself was reduced to the humiliation of paying tribute to\nChina. Agriculture and industry at last ceased to exist outside of\nthe domains of certain powerful lords. Provinces became waste; and\nfamine, earthquake, and pestilence added their horror to the misery\nof ceaseless war. The poverty prevailing may be best imagined from\nthe fact that when the Emperor known to history as\nGo-Tsuchi-mikado--one hundred and second of the Sun's Succession\n--died in the year 1500, his corpse had to be kept at the gates of\nthe palace forty days, because the expenses of the funeral could not\nbe defrayed. Until 1573 the misery continued; and the shogunate\nmeanwhile degenerated into insignificance. Then a strong captain\narose and ended the house of Ashikaga, and seized the reins of power.\n[274] This usurper was Oda Nobunaga; and the usurpation was amply\nprovoked. Had it not occurred, Japan might never have entered upon an\nera of peace.\n\nFor there had been no peace since the fifth century.  No emperor or\nregent or shogun had ever been able to impose his rule firmly upon\nthe whole country. Somewhere or other, there were always wars of clan\nwith clan. By the time of the sixteenth century personal safety could\nbe found only under the protection of some military leader, able to\nexact his own terms for the favour of such protection. The question\nof the imperial succession,--which had almost wrecked the empire\nduring the fourteenth century,--might be raised again at any time by\nsome reckless faction, with the probable result of ruining\ncivilization, and forcing the nation back to its primitive state of\nbarbarism. Never did the future of Japan appear so dark as at the\nmoment when Oda Nobunaga suddenly found himself the strongest man in\nthe empire, and leader of the most formidable Japanese army that had\never obeyed a single head. This man, a descendant of Shinto priests,\nwas above all things a patriot. He did not seek the title of shogun,\nand never received it. His hope was to save the country; and he saw\nthat this could be done only by centralizing all feudal power under\none control, and strenuously enforcing law. Looking about him for the\nways and means of effecting [275] this centralization, he perceived\nthat one of the very first obstacles to be removed was that created\nby the power of Buddhism militant,--the feudal Buddhism developed\nunder the Hojo regency, and especially represented by the great Shin\nand Tendai sects. As both had already given aid to his enemies, it\nwas easy to find a cause for quarrel; and he first proceeded against\nthe Tendai. The campaign was conducted with ferocious vigour; the\nmonastery-fortresses of Hiyei-san were stormed and razed, and all the\npriests, with all their adherents, put to the sword--no mercy being\nshown even to women and children. By nature Nobunaga was not cruel;\nbut his policy was ruthless, and he knew when and why to strike hard.\nThe power of the Tendai sect before this massacre may be imagined\nfrom the fact that three thousand monastery buildings were burnt at\nHiyei-san. The Shin sect of the Hongwanji, with headquarters at\nOsaka, was scarcely less powerful; and its monastery, occupying the\nsite of the present Osaka castle, was one of the strongest fortresses\nin the country. Nobunaga waited several years, merely to prepare for\nthe attack. The soldier-priests defended themselves well; upwards of\nfifty thousand lives are said to have been lost in the siege; yet\nonly the personal intervention of the Emperor prevented the storming\nof the stronghold, and the slaughter of every being within its walls.\nThrough respect for the Emperor, Nobunaga agreed [276] to spare the\nlives of the Shin priests: they were only dispossessed and scattered,\nand their power forever broken. Buddhism having been thus effectually\ncrippled, Nobunaga was able to turn his attention to the warring\nclans. Supported by the greatest generals that the nation ever\nproduced,--Hideyoshi and Iyeyasu,--he proceeded to enforce\npacification and order; and his grand purpose would probably have\nbeen soon accomplished, but for the revengeful treachery of a\nsubordinate, who brought about his death in 1583.\n\nNobunaga, with Taira blood in his veins, had been essentially an\naristocrat, inheriting all the aptitudes of his great race for\nadministration, and versed in all the traditions of diplomacy. His\navenger and successor, Hideyoshi, was a totally different type of\nsoldier: a son of peasants, an untrained genius who had won his way\nto high command by shrewdness and courage, natural skill of arms, and\nimmense inborn capacity for all the chess-play of war. With the great\npurpose of Nobunaga he had always been in sympathy; and he actually\ncarried it out,--subduing the entire country, from north to south, in\nthe name of the Emperor, by whom he was appointed Regent (Kwambaku).\nThus universal peace was temporarily established. But the vast\nmilitary powers which Hideyoshi had collected and disciplined,\nthreatened to become refractory. He found employment for them by\ndeclaring unprovoked [277] war against Korea, whence he hoped to\neffect the conquest of China. The war with Korea opened in 1592, and\ndragged on unsatisfactorily until 1598, when Hideyoshi died. He had\nproved himself one of the greatest soldiers ever born, but not one of\nthe best among rulers. Perhaps the issue of the war in Korea would\nhave been more fortunate, if he could have ventured to conduct it\nhimself. As a matter of fact, it merely exhausted the force of both\ncountries; and Japan had little to show for her dearly bought\nvictories abroad except the Mimidzuka or \"Ear-Monument\" at\nNara,--marking the spot where thirty thousand pairs of foreign ears,\ncut from the pickled heads of slain, were buried in the grounds of\nthe temple of Daibutsu....\n\nInto the vacant place of power then stepped the most remarkable man\nthat Japan ever produced,--Tokugawa Iyeyasu. Iyeyasu was of Minamoto\ndescent, and an aristocrat to the marrow of his bones. As a soldier\nhe was scarcely inferior to Hideyoshi, whom he once defeated,--but he\nwas much more than a soldier, a far-sighted statesman, an\nincomparable diplomat, and something of a scholar. Cool, cautious,\nsecretive,--distrustful, yet generous,--stern, yet humane,--by the\nrange and the versatility of his genius he might be not unfavourably\ncontrasted with Julius Caesar. All that Nobunaga and Hideyoshi had\nwished to do, and failed to [278] do, Iyeyasu speedily accomplished.\nAfter fulfilling Hideyoshi's dying injunction, not to leave the\ntroops in Korea \"to become ghosts haunting a foreign land,\"--that is\nto say, in the condition of spirits without a cult,--Iyeyasu had to\nface a formidable league of lords resolved to dispute his claim to\nrule. The terrific battle of Sekigahara left him master of the\ncountry; and he at once took measures to consolidate his power, and\nto perfect, even to the least detail, all the machinery of military\ngovernment. As shogun, he reorganized the daimiates, redistributed a\nmajority of fiefs; among those whom he could trust, created new\nmilitary grades, and ordered and so balanced the powers of the\ngreater daimyo as to make it next to impossible for them to dare a\nrevolt. Later on the daimyo were even required to furnish security\nfor their good behaviour: they were obliged to pass a certain time of\nthe year* in the shogun's capital, leaving their families as hostages\nduring the rest of the year. The entire administration was readjusted\nupon a simple and sagacious plan; and the Laws of Iyeyasu prove him\nto have been an excellent legislator. For the first time in Japanese\nhistory the nation was integrated,--integrated, at least, in so far\nas the peculiar nature of the social unit rendered possible. The\ncounsels [279] of the founder of Yedo were followed by his\nsuccessors; and the Tokugawa shogunate, which lasted until 1867, gave\nthe country fifteen military sovereigns. Under these, Japan enjoyed\nboth peace and prosperity for the time of two hundred and fifty\nyears; and her society was thus enabled to evolve to the full limit\nof its peculiar type. Industries and arts developed in new and\nwonderful ways; literature found august patronage. The national cult\nwas carefully maintained; and all precautions were taken to prevent\nthe occurrence of another such contest for the imperial succession as\nhad nearly ruined the country in the fourteenth century.\n\n[*The period of obligatory residence in Yedo was not the same for all\ndaimyo. In some cases the obligation seems to have extended to six\nmonths; in others, the requirement was to pass every alternate year\nin the capital.]\n\nWe have seen that the history of military rule in Japan embraces\nnearly the whole period of authentic history, down to modern times,\nand closes with the second period of national integration. The first\nperiod had been reached when the clans first accepted the leadership\nof the chief of the greatest clan,--thereafter revered as the\nHeavenly Sovereign, Supreme Pontiff, Supreme Arbiter, Supreme\nCommander, and Supreme Magistrate. How long a time was required for\nthis primal integration, under a patriarchal monarchy, we cannot\nknow; but we have learned that the later integration, under a\nduarchy, occupied considerably more than a thousand years.... Now the\nextraordinary fact to note is that, during all those centuries, the\nimperial [280] cult was carefully maintained by even the enemies of\nthe Mikado; the only legitimate ruler being, in national belief, the\nTenshi, \"Son of Heaven,\"--the Tenno, \"Heavenly King.\" Through every\nperiod of disorder the Offspring of the Sun was the object of\nnational worship, and his palace the temple of the national faith.\nGreat captains might coerce the imperial will; but they styled\nthemselves, none the less, the worshippers and slaves of the\nincarnate deity; and they would no more have thought of trying to\noccupy his throne, than they would have thought of trying to abolish\nall religion by decree. Once only, by the arbitrary folly of the\nAshikaga shogun, the imperial cult had been seriously interfered\nwith; and the social earthquake consequent upon that division of the\nimperial house, apprised the usurpers of the enormity of their\nblunder.... Only the integrity of the imperial succession, the\nuninterrupted maintenance of the imperial worship, made it possible\neven for Iyeyasu to clamp together the indissoluble units of society.\n\nHerbert Spencer has taught the student of sociology to recognize that\nreligious dynasties have extraordinary powers of longevity, because\nthey possess extraordinary power to resist change; whereas military\ndynasties, depending for their perpetuity upon the individual\ncharacter of their sovereigns, are particularly liable to\ndisintegration. The immense duration of the Japanese imperial\ndynasty, as contrasted [281] with the history of the various\nshogunates and regencies representing a merely military domination,\nillustrates this teaching in a most remarkable way. Back through\ntwenty-five hundred years we can follow the line of the imperial\nsuccession, till it vanishes out of sight into the mystery of the\npast. Here we have evidence of that extreme power of resisting all\nchanges which is inherently characteristic of religious conservatism;\non the other hand, the history of shogunates and regencies proves the\ntendency to disintegration of institutions having no religious\nfoundation, and therefore no religious power of cohesion. The\nremarkable duration of the Fujiwara rule, as compared with others,\nmay perhaps be accounted for by the fact that the Fujiwara\nrepresented a religious, rather than a military, aristocracy. Even\nthe marvellous military structure devised by Iyeyasu had begun to\ndecay before alien aggression precipitated its inevitable collapse.\n\n\n\n[283]\n\nTHE RELIGION OF LOYALTY\n\n\"Militant societies,\" says the author of the Principles of Sociology,\n\"must have a patriotism which regards the triumph of their society as\nthe supreme end of action; they must possess the loyalty whence flows\nobedience to authority,--and, that they may be obedient, they must\nhave abundant faith.\" The history of the Japanese people strongly\nexemplifies these truths. Among no other people has loyalty ever\nassumed more impressive and extraordinary forms; and among no other\npeople has obedience ever been nourished by a more abundant\nfaith,--that faith derived from the cult of the ancestors.\n\nThe reader will understand how filial piety--the domestic religion of\nobedience--widens in range with social evolution, and eventually\ndifferentiates both into that political obedience required by the\ncommunity, and that military obedience exacted by the\nwar-lord,--obedience implying not only submission, but affectionate\nsubmission,--not merely the sense of obligation, but the sentiment of\nduty. In its origin such dutiful obedience is essentially religious;\nand, as expressed in loyalty, it retains the [284] religious\ncharacter,--becomes the constant manifestation of a religion of\nself-sacrifice. Loyalty is developed early in the history of a\nmilitant people; and we find touching examples of it in the earliest\nJapanese chronicles. We find also terrible ones,--stories of\nself-immolation.\n\nTo his divinely descended lord, the retainer owed everything--in\nfact, not less than in theory: goods, household, liberty, and life.\nAny or all of these he was expected to yield up without a murmur, on\ndemand, for the sake of the lord. And duty to the lord, like the duty\nto the family ancestor, did not cease with death. As the ghosts of\nparents were to be supplied with food by their living children, so\nthe spirit of the lord was to be worshipfully served by those who,\nduring his lifetime, owed him direct obedience. It could not be\npermitted that the spirit of--the ruler should enter unattended into\nthe world of shadows: some, at least, of those who served him living\nwere bound to follow him in death. Thus in early societies arose the\ncustom of human sacrifices,--sacrifices at first obligatory,\nafterwards voluntary. In Japan, as stated in a former chapter, they\nremained an indispensable feature of great funerals, up to the first\ncentury, when images of baked clay were first substituted for the\nofficial victims. I have already mentioned how, after this abolition\nof obligatory [285] junshi, or following of one's lord in death, the\npractice of voluntary junshi continued up to the sixteenth century,\nwhen it actually became a military fashion. At the death of a daimyo\nit was then common for fifteen or twenty of his retainers to\ndisembowel themselves. Iyeyasu determined to put an end to this\ncustom of suicide, which is thus considered in the 76th article of\nhis celebrated Legacy:--\n\n\"Although it is undoubtedly the ancient custom for a vassal to follow\nhis Lord in death, there is not the slightest reason in the practice.\nConfucius has ridiculed the making of Yo [effigies buried with the\ndead]. These practices are strictly forbidden, more especially to\nprimary retainers, but to secondary retainers likewise, even of the\nlowest rank. He is the reverse of a faithful servant who disregards\nthis prohibition. His posterity shall be impoverished by the\nconfiscation of his property, as a warning for those who disobey the\nlaws.\"\n\nIyeyasu's command ended the practice of junshi among his own vassals;\nbut it continued, or revived again, after his death. In 1664 the\nshogunate issued an edict proclaiming that the family of any person\nperforming junshi should be punished; and the shogunate was in\nearnest. When this edict was disobeyed by one Uyemon no Hyoge, who\ndisembowelled himself at the death of his lord, Okudaira Tadamasa,\nthe government promptly confiscated the lands of the family of the\nsuicide, executed two of [286] his sons, and sent the rest of the\nhousehold into exile. Though cases of junshi have occurred even\nwithin this present era of Meiji, the determined attitude of the\nTokugawa government so far checked the practice that even the most\nfervid loyalty latterly made its sacrifices through religion, as a\nrule. Instead of performing harakiri, the retainer shaved his head at\nthe death of his lord, and became a Buddhist monk.\n\nThe custom of junshi represents but one aspect of Japanese loyalty:\nthere were other customs equally, if not even more, significant,--for\nexample, the custom of military suicide, not as junshi, but as a\nself-inflicted penalty exacted by the traditions of samurai\ndiscipline. Against harakiri, as punitive suicide, there was no\nlegislative enactment, for obvious reasons. It would seem that this\nform of self-destruction was not known to the Japanese in early ages;\nit may have been introduced from China, with other military customs.\nThe ancient Japanese usually performed suicide by strangulation, as\nthe Nihongi bears witness. It was the military class that established\nthe harakiri as a custom and privilege. Previously, the chiefs of a\nrouted army, or the defenders of a castle taken by storm, would thus\nend themselves to avoid falling into the enemy's hands,--a custom\nwhich continued into the present era. About the close of the\nfifteenth century, the [287] military custom of permitting any\nsamurai to perform harakiri, instead of subjecting him to the shame\nof execution, appears to have been generally established. Afterwards\nit became the recognized duty of a samurai to kill himself at the\nword of command. All samurai were subject to this disciplinary law,\neven lords of provinces; and in samurai families, children of both\nsexes were trained how to perform suicide whenever personal honour or\nthe will of a liege-lord, might require it.... Women, I should\nobserve, did not perform harakiri, but jigai,--that is to say,\npiercing the throat with a dagger so as to sever the arteries by a\nsingle thrust-and-cut movement.... The particulars of the harakiri\nceremony have become so well known through Mitford's translation of\nJapanese texts on the subject, that I need not touch upon them. The\nimportant fact to remember is that honour and loyalty required the\nsamurai man or woman to be ready at any moment to perform\nself-destruction by the sword. As for the warrior, any breach of\ntrust (voluntary or involuntary), failure to execute a difficult\nmission, a clumsy mistake, and even a look of displeasure from one's\nliege, were sufficient reasons for harakiri, or, as the aristocrats\npreferred to call it, by the Chinese term, seppuku. Among the highest\nclass of retainers, it was also a duty to make protest against\nmisconduct on the part of their lord by performing seppuku, when all\nother means of bringing him to reason had [288] failed,--which heroic\ncustom has been made the subject of several popular dramas founded\nupon fact. In the case of married women of the samurai\nclass,--directly responsible to their husbands, not to the\nlord,--jigai was resorted to most often as a means of preserving\nhonour in time of war, though it was sometimes performed merely as a\nsacrifice of loyalty to the spirit of the husband, after his untimely\ndeath.* [*The Japanese moralist Yekken wrote 'A woman has no feudal\nlord: she must reverence and obey her husband.'] In the case of girls\nit was not uncommon for other reasons,--samurai maidens often\nentering into the service of noble households, where the cruelty of\nintrigue might easily bring about a suicide, or where loyalty to the\nwife of the lord might exact it. For the samurai maiden in service\nwas bound by loyalty to her mistress not less closely than the\nwarrior to the lord; and the heroines of Japanese feudalism were\nmany.\n\nIn the early ages it appears to have been the custom for the wives of\nofficials condemned to death to kill themselves the ancient\nchronicles are full of examples. But this custom is perhaps to be\npartly accounted for by the ancient law, which held the household of\nthe offender equally responsible with him for the offence,\nindependently of the facts in the case. However, it was certainly\nalso common enough for a bereaved wife to perform suicide, not\nthrough despair, but through the wish to follow her [289] husband\ninto the other world, and there to wait upon him as in life.\nInstances of female suicide, representing the old ideal of duty to a\ndead husband, have occurred in recent times. Such suicides are\nusually performed according to the feudal rules,--the woman robing\nherself in white for the occasion. At the time of the late war with\nChina there occurred in Tokyo one remarkable suicide of this kind;\nthe victim being the wife of Lieutenant Asada, who had fallen in\nbattle. She was only twenty-one. On hearing of her husband's death,\nshe at once began to make preparations for her own,--writing letters\nof farewell to her relatives, putting her affairs in order, and\ncarefully cleaning the house, according to old-time rule. Thereafter\nshe donned her death-robe; laid mattings down opposite to the alcove\nin the guest-room; placed her husband's portrait in the alcove, and\nset offerings before it. When everything had been arranged, she\nseated herself before the portrait, took up her dagger, and with a\nsingle skilful thrust divided the arteries of her throat.\n\nBesides the duty of suicide for the sake of preserving honour, there\nwas also, for the samurai woman, the duty of suicide as a moral\nprotest. I have already said that among the highest class of\nretainers it was thought a moral duty to perform harakiri as a\nremonstrance against shameless conduct on the part of one's lord,\nwhen all other means of persuasion [290] had been tried in vain.\nAmong samurai women--taught to consider their husbands as their\nlords, in the feudal meaning of the term--it was held a moral\nobligation to perform jigai, by way of protest, against disgraceful\nbehaviour upon the part of a husband who would not listen to advice\nor reproof. The ideal of wifely duty which impelled such sacrifice\nstill survives; and more than one recent example might be cited of a\ngenerous life thus laid down in rebuke of some moral wrong. Perhaps\nthe most touching instance occurred in 1892, at the time of the\ndistrict elections in Nagano prefecture. A rich voter named Ishijima,\nafter having publicly pledged himself to aid in the election of a\ncertain candidate, transferred his support to the rival candidate. On\nlearning of this breach of promise, the wife of Ishijima, robed\nherself in white, and performed jigai after the old samurai manner.\nThe grave of this brave woman is still decorated with flowers by the\npeople of the district; and incense is burned before her tomb.\n\nTo kill oneself at command--a duty which no loyal samurai would have\ndreamed of calling in question--appears to us much less difficult\nthan another duty, also fully accepted: the sacrifice of children,\nwife, and household for the sake of the lord. Much of Japanese\npopular tragedy is devoted to incidents of such sacrifice made by\nretainers or [291] dependents of daimyo,--men or women who gave their\nchildren to death in order to save the children of their masters.*\n[*See, for a good example, the translation of the drama Terakoya,\npublished, with admirable illustrations, by T. Hasegawa (Tokyo).] Nor\nhave we any reason to suppose that the facts have been exaggerated in\nthese dramatic compositions, most of which are based upon feudal\nhistory. The incidents, of course, have been rearranged and expanded\nto meet theatrical requirements; but the general pictures thus given\nof the ancient society are probably even less grim than the vanished\nreality. The people still love these tragedies; and the foreign\ncritic of their dramatic literature is wont to point out only the\nblood-spots, and to comment upon them as evidence of a public taste\nfor gory spectacles,--as proof of some innate ferocity in the race.\nRather, I think, is this love of the old tragedy proof of what\nforeign critics try always to ignore as--much as possible,--the\ndeeply religious character of the people. These plays continue to\ngive delight,--not because of their horror, but because of their\nmoral teaching,--because of their exposition of the duty of sacrifice\nand courage, the religion of loyalty. They represent the martyrdoms\nof feudal society for its noblest ideals.\n\nAll down through that society, in varying forms, the same spirit--of\nloyalty had its manifestations. As the samurai to his liege-lord, so\nthe apprentice was bound to the patron, and the clerk to the [292]\nmerchant. Everywhere there was trust, because everywhere there\nexisted the like sentiment of mutual duty between servant and master.\nEach industry and occupation had its religion of loyalty,--requiring,\non the one side, absolute obedience and sacrifice at need; and on the\nother, kindliness and aid. And the rule of the dead was over all.\n\nNot less ancient than the duty of dying for parent or lord was the\nsocial obligation to avenge the killing of either. Even before the\nbeginnings of settled society, this duty is recognized. The oldest\nchronicles of Japan teem with instances of obligatory vengeance.\nConfucian ethics more than affirmed the obligation,--forbidding a man\nto live \"under the same heaven\" with the slayer of his lord, or\nparent, or brother; and fixing all the degrees of kinship, or other\nrelationship, within which the duty of vengeance was to be considered\nimperative. Confucian ethics, it will be remembered, became at an\nearly date the ethics of the Japanese ruling-classes, and so remained\ndown to recent times. The whole Confucian system, as I have remarked\nelsewhere, was founded upon ancestor-worship, and represented\nscarcely more than an amplification and elaboration of filial piety:\nit was therefore in complete accord with Japanese moral experience.\nAs the military power developed in Japan, the Chinese code of\nvengeance became universally accepted; and it was sustained [293] by\nlaw as well as by custom in later ages. Iyeyasu himself maintained\nit--exacting only that preliminary notice of an intended vendetta\nshould be given in writing to the district criminal court. The text\nof his article on the subject is interesting:--\n\n\"In respect to avenging injury done to master or father, it is\nacknowledged by the Wise and Virtuous [Confucius] that you and the\ninjurer cannot live together under the canopy of heaven. A person\nharbouring such vengeance shall give notice in writing to the\ncriminal court; and although no check or hindrance may be offered to\nthe carrying out of his design within the period allowed for that\npurpose, it is forbidden that the chastisement of an enemy be\nattended with riot. Fellows who neglect to give notice of their\nintended revenge are like wolves of pretext:* their punishment or\npardon should depend upon the circumstances of the case.\"\n\n[*Or \"hypocritical wolves.\"--that is to say brutal murderers seeking\nto excuse their crime on the pretext justifiable vengeance. (The\ntranslation is by Lowder.)]\n\nKindred, as well as parents; teachers, as well as lords, were to be\nrevenged. A considerable proportion of popular romance and drama is\ndevoted to the subject of vengeance taken by women; and, as a matter\nof fact, women, and even children, sometimes became avengers when\nthere were no men of a wronged family left to perform the duty.\nApprentices avenged their masters; and even sworn friends were bound\nto avenge each other.\n\n[294] Why the duty of vengeance was not confined to the circle of\nnatural kinship is explicable, of course, by the peculiar\norganization of society. We have seen that the patriarchal family was\na religious corporation; and that the family-bond was not the bond of\nnatural affection, but the bond of the cult. We have also seen that\nthe relation of the household to the community, and of the community\nto the clan, and of the clan to the tribe, was equally a religious\nrelation. As a necessary consequence, the earlier customs of\nvengeance were regulated by the bond of the family, communal, or\ntribal cult, as well as by the bond of blood; and with the\nintroduction of Chinese ethics, and the development of militant\nconditions, the idea of revenge as duty took a wider range. The son\nor the brother by adoption was in respect of obligation the same as\nthe son or brother by blood; and the teacher stood to his pupil in\nthe relation of father to child. To strike one's natural parent was a\ncrime punishable by death: to strike one's teacher was, before the\nlaw, an equal offence. This notion of the teacher's claim to filial\nreverence was of Chinese importation: an extension of the duty of\nfilial piety to \"the father of the mind.\" There were other such\nextensions; and the origin of all, Chinese or Japanese, may be traced\nalike to ancestor-worship.\n\nNow, what has never been properly insisted upon, in any of the books\ntreating of ancient [295] Japanese customs, is the originally\nreligious significance of the kataki-uchi. That a religious origin\ncan be found for all customs of vendetta established in early\nsocieties is, of course, well known; but a peculiar interest attaches\nto the Japanese vendetta in view of the fact that it conserved its\nreligious character unchanged down to the present era. The\nkataki-uchi was essentially an act of propitiation, as is proved by\nthe rite with which it terminated,--the placing of the enemy's head\nupon the tomb of the person avenged, as an offering of atonement. And\none of the most impressive features of this rite, as formerly\npractised, was the delivery of an address to the ghost of the person\navenged. Sometimes the address was only spoken; sometimes it was also\nwritten, and the manuscript left upon the tomb.\n\nThere is probably none of my readers unacquainted with Mitford's\never-delightful Tales of Old Japan, and his translation of the true\nstory of the \"Forty-Seven Ronins.\" But I doubt whether many persons\nhave noticed the significance of the washing of Kira\nKotsuke-no-Suke's severed head, or the significance of the address\ninscribed to their dead lord by the brave men who had so long waited\nand watched for the chance to avenge him. This address, of which I\nquote Mitford's translation, was laid upon the tomb of the Lord\nAsano. It is still preserved at the temple called Sengakuji:--\n\n[296] \"The fifteenth year of Genroku [17031, the twelfth month, the\nfifteenth day.--We have come this day to do homage here: forty-seven\nmen in all, from Oishi Kuranosuke down to the foot-soldier Terasaka\nKichiyemon,--all cheerfully about to lay down our lives on your\nbehalf. We reverently announce this to the honoured spirit of our\ndead master. On the fourteenth day of the third month of last year,\nour honoured master was pleased to attack Kira Kotsuke-no-Suke, for\nwhat reason we know not. Our honoured master put an end to his own\nlife; but Kira Kotsuke-no-Suke lived. Although we fear that after the\ndecree issued by the Government, this plot of ours will be\ndispleasing to our honoured master, still we, who have eaten of your\nfood, could not without blushing repeat the verse, \"Thou shalt not\nlive under the same heaven, nor tread the same earth with the enemy\nof thy father or lord,\" nor could we have dared to leave hell [Hades]\nand present ourselves before you in Paradise, unless we had carried\nout the vengeance which you began. Every day that we waited seemed as\nthree autumns to us. Verily we have trodden the snow for one day,\nnay, for two days, and have tasted food but once. The old and\ndecrepit, the sick and the ailing, have come forth gladly to lay down\ntheir lives. Men might laugh at us, as at grasshoppers trusting in\nthe strength of their arms, and thus shame our honoured lord; but we\ncould not halt in our deed of vengeance. Having taken counsel\ntogether last night, we have escorted my Lord Kotsuke-no-Suke hither\nto your tomb. This dirk, by which our honoured lord set great store\nlast year, and entrusted to our care, we now bring back. If your\nnoble spirit be now present before this tomb, we pray you, as a [297]\nsign, to take the dirk, and, striking the head of your enemy with it\na second time, to dispel your hatred forever. This is the respectful\nstatement of forty-seven men.\"\n\nIt will be observed that the Lord Asano is addressed as if he were\npresent and visible. The head of the enemy has been carefully washed,\naccording to the rule concerning the presentation of heads to a\nliving superior. It is laid upon the tomb together with the nine-inch\nsword, or dagger, originally used by the Lord Asano in performing\nharakiri at Government command, and afterwards used by Oishi\nKuranosuke in cutting off the head of Kira Kotsuke-no-Suke;--and the\nspirit of the Lord Asano is requested to take up the weapon and to\nstrike the head, so that the pain of ghostly anger may be dissipated\nforever. Then, having been themselves all sentenced to perform\nharakiri, the forty-seven retainers join their lord in death, and are\nburied in front of his tomb. Before their graves the smoke of\nincense, offered by admiring visitors, has been ascending daily for\ntwo hundred years.*\n\n[*It has been long the custom also for visitors to leave their cards\nupon the tombs of the Forty-seven Ronin. When I last visited\nSengakuji, the ground about the tombs was white with visiting-cards.]\n\nOne must have lived in Japan, and have been able to feel the true\nspirit of the old Japanese life, in order to comprehend the whole of\nthis romance of loyalty; but I think that whoever carefully reads Mr.\nMitford's version of it, and his translation of the [298] authentic\ndocuments relating to it, will confess himself moved. That address\nespecially touches,--because of the affection and the faith to which\nit testifies, and the sense of duty beyond this life. However much\nrevenge must be condemned by our modern ethics, there is a noble side\nto many of the old Japanese stories of loyal vengeance; and these\nstories affect us by the expression of what has nothing to do with\nvulgar revenge,--by their exposition of gratitude, self-denial,\ncourage in facing death, and faith in the unseen. And this means, of\ncourse, that we are, consciously or unconsciously, impressed by their\nreligious quality. Mere individual revenge--the postponed retaliation\nfor some personal injury--repels our moral feeling: we have learned\nto regard the emotion inspiring such revenge as simply brutal\n--something shared by man with lower forms of animal life. But in the\nstory of a homicide exacted by the sentiment of duty or gratitude to\na dead master, there may be circumstances which can make appeal to\nour higher moral sympathies,--to our sense of the force and beauty of\nunselfishness, unswerving fidelity, unchanging affection. And the\nstory of the Forty-Seven Ronin is one of this class....\n\nYet it must be borne in mind that the old Japanese religion of\nloyalty, which found its supreme manifestation in those three\nterrible customs of [299] junshi, harakiri, and kataki-uchi, was\nnarrow in its range. It was limited by the very constitution of\nsociety. Though the nation was ruled, through all its groups, by\nnotions of duty everywhere similar in character, the circle of that\nduty, for each individual, did not extend beyond the clan-group to\nwhich he belonged. For his own lord the retainer was always ready to\ndie; but he did not feel equally bound to sacrifice himself for the\nmilitary government, unless he happened to belong to the special\nmilitary following of the Shogun. His fatherland, his country, his\nworld, extended only to the boundary of his chief's domain. Outside\nof that domain he could be only a wanderer,--a ronin, or \"wave-man,\"\nas the masterless samurai was termed. Under such conditions that\nlarger loyalty which identifies itself with love of king and\ncountry,--which is patriotism in the modern, not in the narrower\nantique sense,--could not fully evolve. Some common peril, some\ndanger to the whole race--such as the attempted Tartar conquest of\nJapan--might temporarily arouse the true sentiment of patriotism; but\notherwise that sentiment had little opportunity for development. The\nIse cult represented, indeed, the religion of the nation, as\ndistinguished from the clan or tribal worship; but each man had been\ntaught to believe that his first duty was to his lord. One cannot\nefficiently serve two masters; and feudal government practically\n[300] suppressed any tendencies in that direction. The lordship so\ncompletely owned the individual, body and soul, that the idea of any\nduty to the nation, outside of the duty to the chief, had neither\ntime nor chance to define itself in the mind of the vassal. To the\nordinary samurai, for example, an imperial order would not have been\nlaw: he recognized no law above the law of his daimyo. As for the\ndaimyo, he might either disobey or obey an imperial command according\nto circumstances: his direct superior was the shogun; and he was\nobliged to make for himself a politic distinction between the\nHeavenly Sovereign as deity, and the Heavenly Sovereign as a human\npersonality. Before the ultimate centralization of the military\npower, there were many instances of lords sacrificing themselves for\ntheir emperor; but there were even more cases of open rebellion by\nlords against the imperial will. Under the Tokugawa rule, the\nquestion of obeying or resisting an imperial command would have\ndepended upon the attitude of the shogun; and no daimyo would have\nrisked such obedience to the court at Kyoto as might have signified\ndisobedience to the court at Yedo. Not at least until the shogunate\nhad fallen into decay. In Iyemitsu's time the daimyo were strictly\nforbidden to approach the imperial palace on their way to Yedo,--even\nin response to an imperial command; and they were also forbidden to\nmake any direct appeal to the [301] Mikado. The policy of the\nshogunate was to prevent all direct communication between the Kyoto\ncourt and the daimyo. This policy paralyzed intrigue for two hundred\nyears; but it prevented the development of patriotism.\n\nAnd for that very reason, when Japan at last found herself face to\nface with the unexpected peril of Western aggression, the abolition\nof the dairmates was felt to be a matter of paramount importance. The\nsupreme danger required that the social units should be fused into\none coherent mass, capable of uniform action,--that the clan and\ntribal groupings should be permanently dissolved,--that all authority\nshould immediately be centred in the representative of the national\nreligion,--that the duty of obedience to the Heavenly Sovereign\nshould replace, at once and forever, the feudal duty of obedience to\nthe territorial lord. The religion of loyalty, evolved by a thousand\nyears of war, could not be cast away--properly utilized, it would\nprove a national heritage of incalculable worth,--a moral power\ncapable of miracles if directed by one wise will to a single wise\nend. Destroyed by reconstruction it could not be; but it could be\ndiverted and transformed. Diverted, therefore, to nobler ends\n--expanded to larger needs,--it became the new national sentiment of\ntrust and duty: the modern sense of patriotism. What wonders it has\nwrought, within the space of thirty years, the world is now obliged\nto confess: what [302] more it may be able to accomplish remains to\nbe seen. One thing at least is certain,---that the future of Japan\nmust depend upon the maintenance of this new religion of loyalty,\nevolved, through the old, from the ancient religion of the dead.\n\n\n\n[303]\n\nTHE JESUIT PERIL\n\nThe second half of the sixteenth century is the most interesting\nperiod in Japanese history--for three reasons. First, because it\nwitnessed the apparition of those mighty captains, Nobunaga,\nHideyoshi, and Iyeyasu,--types of men that a race seems to evolve for\nsupreme emergencies only,--types requiring for their production not\nmerely the highest aptitudes of numberless generations, but likewise\nan extraordinary combination of circumstances. Secondly, this period\nis all-important because it saw the first complete integration of the\nancient social system,--the definitive union of all the\nclan-lordships under a central military government. And lastly, the\nperiod is of special interest because the incident of the first\nattempt to christianize Japan--the story of the rise and fall of the\nJesuit power--properly belongs to it.\n\nThe sociological significance of this episode is instructive.\nExcepting, perhaps, the division of the imperial house against itself\nin the twelfth century, the greatest danger that ever threatened\nJapanese national integrity was the introduction of Christianity\n[304] by the Portuguese Jesuits. The nation saved itself only by\nruthless measures, at the cost of incalculable suffering and of\nmyriads of lives.\n\nIt was during the period of great disorder preceding Nobunaga's\neffort to centralize authority, that this unfamiliar disturbing\nfactor was introduced by Xavier and his followers. Xavier landed at\nKagoshima in 1549; and by 1581 the Jesuits had upwards of two hundred\nchurches in the country. This fact alone sufficiently indicates the\nrapidity with which the new religion spread; and it seemed destined\nto extend over the entire empire. In 1585 a Japanese religious\nembassy was received at Rome; and by that date no less than eleven\ndaimyo,--or \"kings,\" as the Jesuits not inaptly termed them--had\nbecome converted. Among these were several very powerful lords. The\nnew creed had made rapid way among the common people also: it was\nbecoming \"popular,\" in the strict meaning of the word.\n\nWhen Nobunaga rose to power, he favoured the Jesuits in many\nways--not because of any sympathy with their creed, for he never\ndreamed of becoming a Christian, but because he thought that their\ninfluence would be of service to him in his campaign against\nBuddhism. Like the Jesuits themselves, Nobunaga had no scruple about\nmeans in his pursuit of ends. More ruthless than William the\nConqueror, he did not hesitate to put to death [305] his own brother\nand his own father-in-law, when they dared to oppose his will. The\naid and protection which he extended to the foreign priests, for\nmerely political reasons, enabled them to develop their power to a\ndegree which soon gave him cause for repentance. Mr. Gubbins, in his\n\"Review of the Introduction of Christianity into China and Japan,\"\nquotes from a Japanese work, called Ibuki Mogusa, an interesting\nextract on the subject:--\n\n\"Nobunaga now began to regret his previous policy in permitting the\nintroduction of Christianity. He accordingly assembled his retainers,\nand said to them:--'The conduct of these missionaries in persuading\npeople to join them by giving money, does not please me. How would it\nbe, think you, if we were to demolish Nambanji [The \"Temple of the\nSouthern Savages\"--so the Portuguese church was called]?' To this\nMayeda Tokuzenin replied. 'It is now too late to demolish the Temple\nof the Namban. To endeavour to arrest the power of this religion now\nis like trying to arrest the current of the ocean. Nobles, both great\nand small, have become adherents of it. If you would exterminate this\nreligion now, there is fear that disturbance should be created among\nyour own retainers. I am therefore of opinion that you should abandon\nyour intention of destroying Nambanji.' Nobunaga in consequence\nregretted exceedingly his previous action in regard to the Christian\nreligion, and set about thinking how he could root it out.\"\n\nThe assassination of Nobunaga in 1586 may have prolonged the period\nof toleration. His successor [306] Hideyoshi, who judged the\ninfluence of the foreign priests dangerous, was for the moment\noccupied with the great problem of centralizing the military power,\nso as to give peace to the country. But the furious intolerance of\nthe Jesuits in the southern provinces had already made them many\nenemies, eager to avenge the cruelties of the new creed. We read in\nthe histories of the missions about converted daimyo burning\nthousands of Buddhist temples, destroying countless works of art, and\nslaughtering Buddhist priests;--and we find the Jesuit writers\npraising these crusades as evidence of holy zeal. At first the\nforeign faith had been only persuasive; afterwards, gathering power\nunder Nobunaga's encouragement, it became coercive and ferocious. A\nreaction against it set in about a year after Nobunaga's death. In\n1587 Hideyoshi destroyed the mission churches in Kyoto, Osaka, and\nSakai, and drove the Jesuits from the capital; and in the following\nyear he ordered them to assemble at the port of Hirado, and prepare\nto leave the country. They felt themselves strong enough to disobey:\ninstead of leaving Japan, they scattered through the country, placing\nthemselves under the protection of various Christian daimyo.\nHideyoshi probably thought it impolitic to push matters further: the\npriests kept quiet, and ceased to preach publicly; and their\nself-effacement served them well until 1591. In that year the advent\nof [307] certain Spanish Franciscans changed the state of affairs.\nThese Franciscans arrived in the train of an embassy from the\nPhilippines, and obtained leave to stay in the country on condition\nthat they were not to preach Christianity. They broke their pledge,\nabandoned all prudence, and aroused the wrath of Hideyoshi. He\nresolved to make an example; and in 1597 he had six Franciscans,\nthree Jesuits, and several other Christians taken to Nagasaki and\nthere crucified. The attitude of the great Taiko toward the foreign\ncreed had the effect of quickening the reaction against it,--a\nreaction which had already begun to show itself in various provinces.\nBut Hideyoshi's death in 1598 enabled the Jesuits to hope for better\nfortune. His successor, the cold and cautious Iyeyasu, allowed them\nto hope, and even to reestablish themselves in Kyoto, Osaka, and\nelsewhere. He was preparing for the great contest which was to be\ndecided by the battle of Sekigahara;--he knew that the Christian\nelement was divided,--some of its leaders being on his own side, and\nsome on the side of his enemies;--and the time would have been ill\nchosen for any repressive policy. But in 1606, after having solidly\nestablished his power, Iyeyasu for the first time showed himself\ndecidedly opposed to Christianity by issuing an edict forbidding\nfurther mission work, and proclaiming that those who had adopted the\nforeign religion must abandon it. Nevertheless the propaganda [308]\nwent on--conducted no longer by Jesuits only, but also by Dominicans\nand Franciscans. The number of Christians then in the empire is said,\nwith gross exaggeration, to have been nearly two millions. But\nIyeyasu neither took, nor caused to be taken, any severe measures of\nrepression until 1614,--from which date the great persecution may be\nsaid to have begun. Previously there had been local persecutions\nonly, conducted by independent daimyo,--not by the central\ngovernment. The local persecutions in Kyushu, for example, would seem\nto have been natural consequences of the intolerance of the Jesuits\nin the days of their power, when converted daimyo burned Buddhist\ntemples and massacred Buddhist priests; and these persecutions were\nmost pitiless in those very districts such as Bungo, Omura, and Higo\n--where the native religion had been most fiercely persecuted at\nJesuit instigation. But from 1614--at which date there remained only\neight, out of the total sixty-four provinces of Japan, into which\nChristianity had not been introduced--the suppression of the foreign\ncreed became a government matter; and the persecution was conducted\nsystematically and uninterruptedly until every outward trace of\nChristianity had disappeared.\n\nThe fate of the missions, therefore, was really settled by Iyeyasu\nand his immediate successors; [309] and it is the part taken by\nIyeyasu that especially demands attention. Of the three great\ncaptains, all had, sooner or later, become suspicious of the foreign\npropaganda; but only Iyeyasu could find both the time and the ability\nto deal with the social problem which it had aroused. Even Hideyoshi\nhad been afraid to complicate existing political troubles by any\nrigorous measures of an extensive character. Iyeyasu long hesitated.\nThe reasons for his hesitation were doubtless complex, and chiefly\ndiplomatic. He was the last of men to act hastily, or suffer himself\nto be influenced by prejudice of any sort; and to suppose him timid\nwould be contrary to all that we know of his character. He must have\nrecognized, of course, that to extirpate a religion which could\nclaim, even in exaggeration, more than a million of adherents, was no\nlight undertaking, and would involve an immense amount of suffering.\nTo cause needless misery was not in his nature: he had always proved\nhimself humane, and a friend of the common people. But he was first\nof all a statesman and patriot; and the main question for him must\nhave been the probable relation of the foreign creed to political and\nsocial conditions in Japan. This question required long and patient\ninvestigation; and he appears to have given it all possible\nattention. At last he decided that Roman Christianity constituted a\ngrave political danger and that its extirpation would be an\nunavoidable necessity. [310] The fact that the severe measures which\nhe and his successors enforced against Christianity--measures\nsteadily maintained for upwards of two hundred years--failed to\ncompletely eradicate the creed, proves how deeply the roots had\nstruck. Superficially, all trace of Christianity vanished to Japanese\neyes; but in 1865 there were discovered near Nagasaki some\ncommunities which had secretly preserved among themselves traditions\nof the Roman forms of worship, and still made use of Portuguese and\nLatin words relating to religious matters.\n\nTo rightly estimate the decision of Iyeyasu--one of the shrewdest,\nand also one of the most humane statesmen that ever lived,--it is\nnecessary to consider, from a Japanese point of view, the nature of\nthe evidence upon which he was impelled to act. Of Jesuit intrigues\nin Japan he must have had ample knowledge--several of them having\nbeen directed against himself;--but he would have been more likely\nto consider the ultimate object and probable result of such\nintrigues, than the mere fact of their occurrence. Religious\nintrigues were common among the Buddhists, and would scarcely attract\nthe notice of the military government except when they interfered\nwith state policy or public order. But religious intrigues having for\ntheir object the overthrow of government, and a sectarian domination\nof the country, would be gravely considered. [311] Nobunaga had\ntaught Buddhism a severe lesson about the danger of such intriguing.\nIyeyasu decided that the Jesuit intrigues had a political object of\nthe most ambitious kind; but he was more patient than Nobunaga. By\n1603 he, had every district of Japan under his yoke; but he did not\nissue his final edict until eleven years later. It plainly declared\nthat the foreign priests were plotting to get control of the\ngovernment, and to obtain possession of the country:--\n\n\"The Kirishitan band have come to Japan, not only sending their\nmerchant-vessels to exchange commodities, but also longing to\ndisseminate an evil law, to overthrow right doctrine, so that they\nmay change the government of the country, and obtain possession of\nthe land. This is the germ of great disaster, and must be\ncrushed.....\n\n\"Japan is the country of the gods and of the Buddha: it honours the\ngods, and reveres the Buddha.... The faction of the Bateren*\ndisbelieve in the Way of the Gods, and blaspheme the true Law,\n--violate right-doing, and injure the good.... They truly are the\nenemies of the gods and of the Buddha.... If this be not speedily\nprohibited, the safety of the state will, assuredly hereafter be\nimperilled; and if those who are charged with ordering its affairs do\nnot put a stop to the evil, they will expose themselves to Heaven's\nrebuke.\n\n[*Bateren, a corruption of the Portuguese padre, is still the term\nused for Roman Catholic priests, of any denomination.]\n\n\"These [missionaries] must be instantly swept out, so that not an\ninch of soil remains to them in Japan on which [312] to plant their\nfeet; and if they refuse to obey this command, they shall suffer the\npenalty.... Let Heaven and the Four Seas hear this. Obey!\"*\n\n[*The entire proclamation, which is of considerable length, has been\ntranslated by Satow, and may be found in Vol. VI, part I, of the\nTransactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan.]\n\nIt will be observed that there are two distinct charges made against\nthe Bateren in this document,--that of political conspiracy under the\nguise of religion, with a view to getting possession of the\ngovernment; and that of intolerance, towards both the Shinto and the\nBuddhist forms of native worship. The intolerance is sufficiently\nproved by the writings of the Jesuits themselves. The charge of\nconspiracy was less easy to prove; but who could reasonably have\ndoubted that, were opportunity offered, the Roman Catholic orders\nwould attempt to control the general government precisely as they had\nbeen able to control local government already in the lordships of\nconverted daimyo. Besides, we may be sure that by the time at which\nthe edict was issued, Iyeyasu must have heard of many matters likely\nto give him a most evil opinion of Roman Catholicism:--the story of\nthe Spanish conquests in America, and the extermination of the West\nIndian races; the story of the persecutions in the Netherlands, and\nof the work of the Inquisition elsewhere; the story of the attempt of\nPhilip II to conquer England, and of the loss of the two great [313]\nArmadas. The edict was issued in 1614, and Iyeyasu had found\nopportunity to inform himself about some of these matters as early as\n1600. In that year the English pilot Will Adams had arrived at Japan\nin charge of a Dutch ship, Adams had started on this eventful voyage\nin the year 1598,--that is to say, just ten years after the defeat of\nthe first Spanish Armada, and one year after the ruin of the second.\nHe had seen the spacious times of great Elizabeth--who was yet\nalive;--he had very probably seen Howard and Seymour and Drake and\nHawkins and Frobisher and Sir Richard Grenville, the hero of 1591.\nFor this Will Adams was a Kentish man, who had \"serued for Master and\nPilott in her Majesties ships ...\" The Dutch vessel was seized\nimmediately upon her arrival at Kyushu; and Adams and his shipmates\nwere taken into custody by the daimyo of Bungo, who reported the fact\nto Iyeyasu. The advent of these Protestant sailors was considered an\nimportant event by the Portuguese Jesuits, who had their own reasons\nfor dreading the results of an interview between such heretics and\nthe ruler of Japan. But Iyeyasu also happened to think the event an\nimportant one; and he ordered that Adams should be sent to him at\nOsaka. The malevolent anxiety of the Jesuits about the matter had not\nescaped Iyeyasu's penetrating observation. They endeavoured again and\nagain to have the sailors killed, according to the [314] written\nstatement of Adams himself, who was certainly no liar; and they had\nbeen able--in Bungo to frighten two scoundrels of the ship's company\ninto giving false testimony.* \"The Iesuites and the Portingalls,\"\nwrote Adams, \"gaue many euidences against me and the rest to the\nEmperour [Iyeyasu], that we were theeues and robbers of all\nnations,--and [that] were we suffered to liue,--it should be against\nthe profit of his Highnes, and the land.\" But Iyeyasu was perhaps all\nthe more favourably inclined towards Adams by the eagerness of the\nJesuits to have him killed--\"crossed [crucified],\" as Adams called\nit,--\"the custome of iustice in Japan, as hanging is in our land.\" He\ngave them answer, says Adams, \"that we had as yet not doen to him nor\nto none of his lande any harme or dammage: therefore against Reason\nand Iustice to put vs to death.\" ... And there came to pass precisely\nwhat the Jesuits had most feared,--what they had vainly endeavoured\nby intimidation, by slander, by all possible intrigue to prevent,--an\ninterview between Iyeyasu and the heretic Adams. [315] \"Soe that as\nsoon as I came before him,\" wrote Adams, \"he demanded of me of what\ncountrey we were: so I answered him in all points; for there was\nnothing that he demanded not, both concerning warre and peace between\ncountrey and countrey: so that the particulars here to wryte would be\ntoo tedious. And for that time I was commanded to prison, being well\nvsed, with one of our mariners that cam with me to serue me.\" From\nanother letter of Adams it would seem that this interview lasted far\ninto the night, and that Iyeyasu's questions referred especially to\npolitics and religion. \"He asked,\" says Adams, \"whether our countrey\nhad warres? I answered him yea, with the Spaniards and\nPortugals--beeing in peace with all other nations. Further he asked\nme in what I did beleeue? I said, in God, that made heauen and earth.\nHe asked me diverse other questions of things of religion, and many\nother things: As, what way we came to the country? Having a chart of\nthe whole world, I shewed him through the Straight of Magellan. At\nwhich he wondred, and thought me to lie. Thus, from one thing to\nanother, I abode with him till midnight.\" ... The two men liked each\nother at sight, it appears. Of Iyeyasu, Adams significantly observes:\n\"He viewed me well, and seemed to be wonderful favourable.\" Two days\nlater Iyeyasu again sent for Adams, and cross-questioned him just\nabout those matters which the [316] Jesuits wanted to remain in the\ndark. \"He demaunded also as conserning the warres between the\nSpaniard or Portingall and our countrey, and the reasons: the which I\ngaue him to vnderstand of all things, which he was glad to heare, as\nit seemed to me. In the end I was commaunded to prisson agein, but my\nlodging was bettered.\" Adams did not see Iyeyasu again for nearly six\nweeks: then he was sent for, and cross-questioned a third time. The\nresult was liberty and favour. Thereafter, at intervals, Iyeyasu used\nto send for him; and presently we hear of him teaching the great\nstatesman \"some points of jeometry, and understanding of the art of\nmathematickes, with other things.\" ... Iyeyasu gave him many\npresents, as well as a good living, and commissioned him to build\nsome ships for deep-sea sailing. Eventually, the poor pilot was\ncreated a samurai, and given an estate. \"Being employed in the\nEmperour's seruice,\" he wrote, \"he hath given me a liuing, like vnto\na lordship in England, with eightie or ninetie husbandmen that be as\nmy slaues or seruents: the which, or the like president [precedent],\nwas neuer here before geven to any stranger.\" ... Witness to the\ninfluence of Adams with Iyeyasu is furnished by the correspondence of\nCaptain Cock, of the English factory, who thus wrote home about him\nin 1614: \"The truth is the Emperour esteemeth hym much, and he may\ngoe in and speake with hym at all times, when [317] kynges and\nprinces are kept ovt.\"** It was through this influence that the\nEnglish were allowed to establish their factory at Hirado. There is\nno stranger seventeenth-century romance than that of this plain\nEnglish pilot,--with only his simple honesty and common-sense to help\nhim,--rising to such extraordinary favour with the greatest and\nshrewdest of all Japanese rulers. Adams was never allowed, however,\nto return to England,--perhaps because his services were deemed too\nprecious to lose. He says himself in his letters that Iyeyasu never\nrefused him anything that he asked for,*** except the privilege of\nrevisiting England: when he asked that, once too often, the \"ould\nEmperour\" remained silent.\n\n[*\"Daily more and more the Portugalls incensed the justices and the\npeople against vs. And two of our men, as traytors, gaue themselves\nin seruice to the king [daimyo], beeing all in all with the\nPortugals, hauing by them their liues warranted. The one was called\nGilbert de Conning, whose mother dwelleth at Middleborough, who gaue\nhimself out to be marchant of all the goods in the shippe. The other\nwas called Iobn Abelson Van Owater. These traitours sought all manner\nof wayes to get the goods into their hands, and made known vnto them\nall things that had passed in our voyage. Nine dayes after our\narriuall, the great king of the land [Iyeyasu] sent for me to come\nvnto him. \"--Letter of Will Adams to his wife.]\n\n**\"It has plessed God to bring things to pass, so as in ye eyes of ye\nworld [must seem] strange; for the Spaynnard and Portingall hath bin\nmy bitter enemies to death; and now theay must seek to me, an\nunworthy wretch; for the Spaynard as well as the Portingall must haue\nall their negosshes [negotiations] go thorough my hand.--\" Letter of\nAdams dated January 12, 1613.\n\n***Even favours for the people who had sought to bring about his\ndeath. \"I pleased him so,\" wrote Adams, \"that what I said he would\nnot contrarie. At which my former enemies did wonder; and at this\ntime must entreat me to do them a friendship, which to both Spaniards\nand Portingals have I doen: recompencing them good for euill. So, to\npasse my time to get my liuing, it hath cost mee great labour and\ntrouble at the first, but God hath blessed my labour.\"]\n\nThe correspondence of Adams proves that Iyeyasu disdained no means of\nobtaining direct information about foreign affairs in regard to\nreligion and politics. As for affairs in Japan, he had at his\ndisposal the most perfect system of espionage ever [318] established;\nand he knew all that was going on. Yet he waited, as we have seen,\nfourteen years before he issued his edict. Hideyoshi's edict was,\nindeed, renewed by him in 1606; but that referred particularly to the\npublic preaching of Christianity; and while the missionaries\noutwardly conformed to the law, he continued to suffer them within\nhis own dominions. Persecutions were being carried on elsewhere; but\nthe secret propaganda was also being carried on, and the missionaries\ncould still hope. Yet there was menace in the air, like the heaviness\npreceding storms. Captain Saris, writing from Japan in 1613, records\na pathetic incident which is very suggestive. \"I gaue leaue,\" he\nsays, \"to divers women of the better sort to come into my Cabbin,\nwhere the picture of Venus, with her sonne Cupid, did hang somewhat\nwantonly set out in a large frame. They, thinking it to bee Our Ladie\nand her sonne, fell downe and worshipped it, with shewes of great\ndeuotion, telling me in a whispering manner (that some of their own\ncompanions, which were not so, might not heare), that they were\nChristianos: whereby we perceived them to be Christians, conuerted by\nthe Portugall Iesuits.\" ... When Iyeyasu first took strong measures,\nthey were directed, not against the Jesuits, but against a more\nimprudent order,--as we know from Adams's correspondence. \"In the\nyeer 1612,\" he says, \"is put downe all the sects of the\nFranciscannes. The Jesouets hau [319] what priuiledge ... theare\nbeinge in Nangasaki, in which place only may be so manny as will of\nall sectes: in other places not so many permitted....\" Roman\nCatholicism was given two more years' grace after the Franciscan\nepisode.\n\nWhy Iyeyasu should have termed it a \"false and corrupt religion,\"\nboth in his Legacy and elsewhere, remains to be considered. From the\nFar-Eastern point of view he could scarcely have judged it otherwise,\nafter an impartial investigation. It was essentially opposed to all\nthe beliefs and traditions upon which Japanese society had been\nfounded. The Japanese State was an aggregate of religious\ncommunities, with a God-King at its head;--the customs of all these\ncommunities had the force of religious laws, and ethics were\nidentified with obedience to custom; filial piety was the basis of\nsocial order, and loyalty itself was derived from filial piety. But\nthis Western creed, which taught that a husband should leave his\nparents and cleave to his wife, held filial piety to be at best an\ninferior virtue. It proclaimed that duty to parents, lords, and\nrulers remained duty only when obedience involved no action opposed\nto Roman teaching, and that the supreme duty of obedience was not to\nthe Heavenly Sovereign at Kyoto, but to the Pope at Rome. Had not the\nGods and the Buddhas been called devils by these missionaries from\nPortugal and Spain? Assuredly such doctrines were subversive, [320]\nno matter how astutely they might be interpreted by their apologists.\nBesides, the worth of a creed as a social force might be judged from\nits fruits. This creed in Europe had been a ceaseless cause of\ndisorders, wars, persecutions, atrocious cruelties. This creed, in\nJapan, had fomented great disturbances, had instigated political\nintrigues, had wrought almost immeasurable mischief. In the event of\nfuture political trouble, it would justify the disobedience of\nchildren to parents, of wives to husbands, of subjects to lords, of\nlords to shogun. The paramount duty of government was now to compel\nsocial order, and to maintain those conditions of peace and security\nwithout which the nation could never recover from the exhaustion of a\nthousand years of strife. But so long as this foreign religion was\nsuffered to attack and to sap the foundations of order, there never\ncould be peace.... Convictions like these must have been well\nestablished in the mind of Iyeyasu when he issued his famous edict.\nThe only wonder is that he should have waited so long.\n\nVery possibly Iyeyasu, who never did anything by halves, was waiting\nuntil Christianity should find itself without one Japanese leader of\nability. In 1611 he had information of a Christian conspiracy in the\nisland of Sado (a convict mining-district) whose governor, Okubo, had\nbeen induced to adopt Christianity, and was to be made ruler of the\ncountry if [321] the plot proved successful. But still Iyeyasu\nwaited. By 1614 Christianity had scarcely even an Okubo to lead the\nforlorn hope. The daimyo converted in the sixteenth century were dead\nor dispossessed or in banishment; the great Christian generals had\nbeen executed; the few remaining converts of importance had been\nplaced under surveillance, and were practically helpless.\n\nThe foreign priests and native catechists were not cruelly treated\nimmediately after the proclamation of 1614. Some three hundred of\nthem were put into ships and sent out of the country,--together with\nvarious Japanese suspected of religious political intrigues, such as\nTakayama, former daimyo of Akashi, who was called \"Justo Ucondono\" by\nthe Jesuit writers, and who had been dispossessed and degraded by\nHideyoshi for the same reasons. Iyeyasu set no example of unnecessary\nseverity. But harsher measures followed upon an event which took\nplace in 1615,--the very year after the issuing of the edict.\nHideyori, the son of Hideyoshi, had been supplanted--fortunately for\nJapan--by Iyeyasu, to whose tutelage the young man had been confided.\nIyeyasu took all care of him, but had no intention of suffering him\nto direct the government of the country,--a task scarcely within the\ncapacity of a lad of twenty-three. In spite of various political\nintrigues in which Hideyori was known to have taken part, Iyeyasu had\nleft him in possession [322] of large revenues, and of the strongest\nfortress in Japan,--that mighty castle of Osaka, which Hideyoshi's\ngenius had rendered almost impregnable. Hideyori, unlike his father,\nfavoured the Jesuits: and he made the castle a refuge for adherents\nof the \"false and corrupt sect.\" Informed by government spies of a\ndangerous intrigue there preparing, Iyeyasu resolved to strike; and\nhe struck hard. In spite of a desperate defence, the great fortress\nwas stormed and burnt--Hideyori perishing in the conflagration. One\nhundred thousand lives are said to have been lost in this siege.\nAdams wrote thus quaintly of Hideyori's fate, and the results of his\nconspiracy:--\n\n\"Hee mad warres with the Emperour ...  allso by the Jessvits and\nFfriers, which mad belleeue he should be fauord with mirrackles and\nwounders; but in fyne it proued the contrari. For the ould Emperour\nagainst him pressentlly maketh his forces reddy by sea and land, and\ncompasseth his castell that he was in; although with loss of\nmultitudes on both sides, yet in the end rasseth the castell walles,\nsetteth it on fyre, and burneth hym in it. Thus ended the warres. Now\nthe Emperour heering of thees Jessvets and friers being in the\ncastell with his ennemis, and still from tym to tym agaynst hym,\ncoumandeth all romische sorte of men to depart ovt of his\ncountri--thear churches pulld dooun, and burned. This folowed in the\nould Emperour's [323] daies. Now this yeear, 1616, the old Emperour\nhe died. His son raigneth in his place, and hee is more hot agaynste\nthe romish relligion then his ffather wass: for he hath forbidden\nthorough all his domynions, on paine of deth, none of his subjects to\nbe romish christiane; which romish seckt to prevent eueri wayes that\nhe maye, he hath forbidden that no stranger merchant shall abid in\nany of the great citties.\" ...\n\nThe son here referred to was Hidetada, who, in 1617, issued an\nordinance sentencing to death every Roman priest or friar discovered\nin Japan,--an ordinance provoked by the fact that many priests\nexpelled from the country had secretly returned, and that others had\nremained to carry on their propaganda under various disguises.\nMeanwhile, in every city, town, village, and hamlet throughout the\nempire, measures had been taken for the extirpation of Roman\nChristianity. Every community was made responsible for the existence\nin it of any person belonging to the foreign creed; and special\nmagistrates, or inquisitors, were appointed, called Kirishitan-bugyo,\nto seek out and punish members of the prohibited religion.*\nChristians [324] who freely recanted were not punished, but only kept\nunder surveillance: those who refused to recant, even after torture,\nwere degraded to the condition of slaves, or else put to death. In\nsome parts of the country, extraordinary cruelty was practised, and\nevery form of torture used to compel recantation. But it is tolerably\ncertain that the more atrocious episodes of the persecution were due\nto the individual ferocity of local governors or magistrates--as in\nthe case of Takenaka Uneme-no-Kami, who was compelled by the\ngovernment to perform harakiri for abusing his powers at Nagasaki,\nand making persecution a means of extorting money. Be that as it may,\nthe persecution at last either provoked, or helped to bring about a\nChristian rebellion in the daimiate of Arima,--historically\nremembered as the Shimabara Revolt. In 1636 a host of peasants,\ndriven to desperation by the tyranny of their lords--the daimyo of\nArima and the daimyo of Karatsu (convert-districts)--rose in arms,\nburnt all the Japanese temples in their vicinity, and proclaimed\nreligious war. Their banner bore a cross; their leaders were\nconverted samurai. They were soon [325] joined by Christian refugees\nfrom every part of the country, until their numbers swelled to thirty\nor forty thousand. On the coast of the Shimabara peninsula they\nseized an abandoned castle, at a place called Hara, and there\nfortified themselves. The local authorities could not cope with the\nuprising; and the rebels more than held their own until government\nforces, aggregating over 160,000 men, were despatched against them.\nAfter a brave defence of one hundred and two days, the castle was\nstormed in 1638, and its defenders, together with their women and\nchildren, put to the sword. Officially the occurrence was treated as\na peasant revolt; and the persons considered responsible for it were\nseverely punished;--the lord of Shimabara (Arima) was further\nsentenced to perform harakiri. Japanese historians state that the\nrising was first planned and led by Christians, who designed to seize\nNagasaki, subdue Kyushu, invite foreign military help, and compel a\nchange of government;--the Jesuit writers would have us believe there\nwas no plot. One thing certain is that a revolutionary appeal was\nmade to the Christian element, and was largely responded to with\nalarming consequences. A strong castle on the Kyushu coast, held by\nthirty or forty thousand Christians, constituted a serious danger,--a\npoint of vantage from which a Spanish invasion of the country might\nhave been attempted with some [326] chance of success. The government\nseems to have recognized this danger, and to have despatched in\nconsequence an overwhelming force to Shimabara. If foreign help could\nhave been sent to the rebels, the result might have been a prolonged\ncivil war. As for the wholesale slaughter, it represented no more\nthan the enforcement of Japanese law: the punishment of the peasant\nrevolting against his lord, under any circumstances whatever, being\ndeath. So far as concerns the policy of such massacre, it may be\nremembered that, with less provocation, Nobunaga exterminated the\nTendai Buddhists at Hiyei-san. We have every reason to pity the brave\nmen who perished at Shimabara, and to sympathize with their revolt\nagainst the atrocious cruelty of their rulers. But it is necessary,\nas a simple matter of justice, to consider the whole event from the\nJapanese political point of view.\n\n[*It should be borne in mind that none of these edicts were directed\nagainst Protestant Christianity: the Dutch were not considered\nChristians in the sense of the ordinances, nor were the English. The\nfollowing extract from a typical village, Kumicho, or code of\ncommunal regulations, shows the responsibility imposed upon all\ncommunities regarding the presence in their midst of Roman Catholic\nconverts or believers:--\n\n\"Every year, between the first and the third month, we will renew our\nShumon-cho If we know of any person who belongs to a prohibited sect,\nwe will immediately inform the Daikwan.... Servants and labourers\nshall give to their masters a certificate declaring that they are not\nChristians. In regard to persons who have been Christians, but have\nrecanted,--if such persons come to or leave the village, we promise\nto report it.\"--See Professor Wigmore's Notes on Land-Tenure and\nLocal Institutions in Old Japan.]\n\nThe Dutch have been denounced for helping to crush the rebellion with\nships and cannon: they fired, by their own acknowledgment, 426 shot\ninto the castle. However, the extant correspondence of the Dutch\nfactory at Hirado proves beyond question that they were forced, under\nmenace, to thus act. In any event, it would be difficult to discover\na good reason for the merely religious denunciations of their\nconduct,--although that conduct would be open to criticism from the\nhumane [327] point of view. Dutchmen could not reasonably have\nrefused to assist the Japanese authorities in suppressing a revolt,\nmerely because a large proportion of the rebels happened to profess\nthe religion which had been burning alive as heretics the men and\nwomen of the Netherlands. Very possibly, not a few persons of kin to\nthose very Dutch had suffered in the days of Alva. What would have\nhappened to all the English and Dutch in Japan, if the Portuguese and\nSpanish clergy could have got full control of government, ought to be\nobvious.\n\nWith the massacre of Shimabara ends the real history of the\nPortuguese and Spanish missions. After that event, Christianity was\nslowly, steadily, implacably stamped out of visible existence. It had\nbeen tolerated, or half-tolerated, for only sixty-five years: the\nentire history of its propagation and destruction occupies a period\nof scarcely ninety years. People of nearly every rank, from prince to\npauper, suffered for it; thousands endured tortures for its\nsake--tortures so frightful that even three of those Jesuits who sent\nmultitudes to useless martyrdom were forced to deny their faith under\nthe infliction;* and tender women, sentenced to, the stake, carried\n[328] their little ones with them into the fire, rather than utter\nthe words that would have saved both mother and child. Yet this\nreligion, for which thousands vainly died, had brought to Japan\nnothing but evil disorders, persecutions, revolts, political\ntroubles, and war. Even those virtues of the people which had been\nevolved at unutterable cost for the protection and conservation of\nsociety,--their self-denial, their faith, their loyalty, their\nconstancy and courage,--were by this black creed distorted, diverted,\nand transformed into forces directed to the destruction of that\nsociety. Could that destruction have been accomplished, and a new\nRoman Catholic empire have been founded upon the ruins, the forces of\nthat empire would have been used for the further extension of\npriestly tyranny, the spread of the Inquisition, the perpetual Jesuit\nwarfare against freedom of conscience and human progress. Well may we\npity the victims of this pitiless faith, and justly admire their\nuseless courage: yet who can regret that their cause was lost? ...\nViewed from another standpoint than that of religious bias, and\nsimply judged by its results, the Jesuit effort to Christianize Japan\nmust be regarded as a crime against humanity, a labour of\ndevastation, a calamity comparable only,--by reason of the misery and\ndestruction which it wrought,--to an earthquake, a tidal-wave, a\nvolcanic eruption.\n\n[*Francisco Cassola, Pedro Marquez, and Giuseppe Chiara.  Two of\nthese--probably under compulsion--married Japanese women. For their\nafter-history, see a paper by Satow in the Transactions of the\nAsiatic Society of Japan, Vol. VI, Part I.]\n\n[329] The policy of isolation,--of shutting off Japan from the rest\nof the world,--as adopted by Hidetada and maintained by his\nsuccessors, sufficiently indicates the fear that religious intrigues\nhad inspired. Not only were all foreigners, excepting the Dutch\ntraders, expelled from the country; all half-breed children of\nPortuguese or Spanish blood were also expatriated, Japanese families\nbeing forbidden to adopt or conceal any of them, under penalties to\nbe visited upon all the members of the household disobeying. In 1636\ntwo hundred and eighty-seven half-breed children were shipped to\nMacao. It is possible that the capacity of half-breed children to act\nas interpreters was particularly dreaded; but there can be little\ndoubt that, at the time when this ordinance was issued, race-hatred\nhad been fully aroused by religious antagonism. After the Shimabara\nepisode all Western foreigners, without exception, were regarded with\nunconcealed distrust.* [*The Chinese traders, however, were allowed\nmuch more liberty than the Dutch.] The Portuguese and Spanish traders\nwere replaced by the Dutch (the English factory having been closed\nsome years previously); but even in the case of these, extraordinary\nprecautions were taken. They were compelled to abandon their good\nquarters at Hirado, and transfer their factory to Deshima,--a tiny\nisland only six hundred feet long, by two hundred and forty feet\nwide. There they were kept under constant guard, like prisoners; they\nwere not [330] permitted to go among the people; no man could visit\nthem without permission, and no woman, except a prostitute, was\nallowed to enter their reservation under any circumstances. But they\nhad a monopoly of the trade of the country; and Dutch patience\nendured these conditions, for the profit's sake, during more than two\nhundred years. Other commerce with foreign countries than that\nmaintained by the Dutch factory, and by the Chinese, was entirely\nsuppressed. For any Japanese to leave Japan was a capital offence;\nand any one who might succeed in leaving the country by stealth, was\nto be put to death upon his return. The purpose of this law was to\nprevent Japanese, sent abroad by the Jesuits for missionary training,\nfrom returning to Japan in the disguise of laymen. It was forbidden\nalso to construct ships capable of long voyages; and all ships\nexceeding a dimension fixed by the government were broken up,\nLookouts were established along the coast to watch for strange\nvessels; and any European ships entering a Japanese port, excepting\nthe ships of the Dutch company, were to be attacked and destroyed.\n\nThe great success at first achieved by the Portuguese missions\nremains to be considered. In our present comparative ignorance of\nJapanese social history, it is not easy to understand the whole of\nthe Christian episode. There are plenty of Jesuit-missionary [331]\nrecords; but the Japanese contemporary chronicles yield us scanty\ninformation about the missions--probably for the reason that an edict\nwas issued in the seventeenth century interdicting, not only all\nbooks on the subject of Christianity, but any book containing the\nwords Christian or Foreign. What the Jesuit books do not explain, and\nwhat we should rather have expected Japanese historians to explain,\nhad they been allowed, is how a society founded on ancestor-worship,\nand apparently possessing immense capacity for resistance to outward\nassault, could have been so quickly penetrated and partly dissolved\nby Jesuit energy. The question of all questions that I should like to\nsee answered, by Japanese evidence, is this: To what extent did the\nmissionaries interfere with the ancestor-cult? It is an important\nquestion. In China, the Jesuits were quick to perceive that the power\nof resistance to proselytism lay in ancestor-worship; and they\nshrewdly endeavoured to tolerate it, somewhat as Buddhism before them\nhad been obliged to do. Had the Papacy supported their policy, the\nJesuits might have changed the history of China; but other religious\norders fiercely opposed the compromise, and the chance was lost. How\nfar the ancestor-cult was tolerated by the Portuguese missionaries in\nJapan is a matter of much sociological interest for investigation.\nThe supreme cult was, of course, left alone, for obvious reasons. It\nis difficult to suppose that the [332] domestic cult was attacked\nthen as implacably as it is attacked now by Protestant and Roman\nCatholic missionaries alike;--is difficult to suppose, for example,\nthat Converts were compelled to cast away or to destroy their\nancestral tablets. On the other hand, we are yet in doubt as to\nwhether many of the poorer converts--servants and other common\nfolk--possessed a domestic ancestor-cult. The outcast classes, among\nwhom many converts were made, need not be considered, of course, in\nthis relation. Before the matter can be fairly judged, much remains\nto be learned about the religious condition of the heimin during the\nsixteenth century. Anyhow, whatever methods were followed, the early\nsuccess of the missions was astonishing. Their work, owing to the\nparticular character of the social organization, necessarily began\nfrom the top: the subject could change his creed only by permission\nof his lord. From the outset this permission was freely granted. In\nsome cases the people were officially notified that they were at\nliberty to adopt the new religion; in other cases, converted lords\nordered them to do so. It would seem that the foreign faith was at\nfirst mistaken for a new kind of Buddhism; and in the extant official\ngrant of land at Yamaguchi to the Portuguese mission, in 1552, the\nJapanese text plainly states that the grant (which appears to have\nincluded a temple called Daidoji) was made to the strangers that they\nmight preach [333] the Law of Buddha \"--Buppo shoryo no tame. The\noriginal document is thus translated by Sir Ernest Satow, who\nreproduced it in facsimile:--\n\n\"With respect to Daidoji in Yamaguchi Agata, Yoshiki department,\nprovince of Suwo. This deed witnesses that I have given permission to\nthe priests who have come to this country from the Western regions,\nin accordance with their request and desire, that they may found and\nerect a monastery and house in order to develope the Law of Buddha.\n\n\"The 28th day of the 8th month of the 21st year of Tembun.\n\n                                                 \"SUWO NO SUKE.\n\n[August Seal]\"*\n\n[*In the Latin and Portuguese translations, or rather pretended\ntranslations of this document, there is nothing about preaching the\nLaw of Buddha; and there are many things added which do not exist in\nthe Japanese text at all. See Transactions of the Asiatic Society of\nJapan (Vol. VIII, Part II) for Satow's comment on this document and\nthe false translation made of it.]\n\nIf this error [or deception?] could have occurred at Yamaguchi, it is\nreasonable to suppose that it also occurred in other places.\nExteriorly the Roman rites resembled those of popular Buddhism: the\npeople would have observed but little that was unfamiliar to them in\nthe forms of the service, the vestments, the beads, the prostrations,\nthe images, the bells, and the incense. The virgins and the saints\nwould have been found to resemble the aureoled Boddhisattvas and\nBuddhas; the angels and the demons would have been at once identified\nwith the Tennin [334] and the Oni. All that pleased popular\nimagination in the Buddhist ceremonial could be witnessed, under\nslightly different form, in those temples which had been handed over\nto the Jesuits, and consecrated by them as churches or chapels. The\nfathomless abyss really separating the two faiths could not have been\nperceived by the common mind; but the outward resemblances were\nimmediately observable. There were furthermore some attractive\nnovelties. It appears, for example, that the Jesuits used to have\nmiracle-plays performed in their churches for the purpose of\nattracting popular attention.... But outward attractions of whatever\nsort, or outward resemblances to Buddhism, could only assist the\nspread of the new religion; they could not explain the rapid progress\nof the propaganda.\n\nCoercion might partly explain it,--coercion exercised by converted\ndaimyo upon their subjects. Populations of provinces are known to\nhave followed, under strong compulsion, the religion of their\nconverted lords; and hundreds--perhaps thousands--of persons must\nhave done the same thing through mere habit of loyalty. In these\ncases it is worth while to consider what sort of persuasion was used\nupon the daimyo. We know that one great help to the missionary work\nwas found in Portuguese commerce,--especially the trade in firearms\nand ammunition. In the disturbed state of the country [335] preceding\nthe advent to power of Hideyoshi, this trade was a powerful bribe in\nreligious negotiation with provincial lords. The daimyo able to use\nfirearms would necessarily possess some advantage over a rival lord\nhaving no such weapons; and those lords able to monopolize the trade\ncould increase their power at the expense of their neighbours. Now\nthis trade was actually offered for the privilege of preaching; and\nsometimes much more than that privilege was demanded and obtained. In\n1572 the Portuguese presumed to ask for the whole town of Nagasaki,\nas a gift to their church,--with power of jurisdiction over the same;\nthreatening, in case of refusal, to establish themselves elsewhere.\nThe daimyo, Omura, at first demurred, but eventually yielded; and\nNagasaki then became Christian territory, directly governed by the\nChurch. Very soon the fathers began to prove the character of their\ncreed by furious attacks upon the local religion. They set fire to\nthe great Buddhist temple, Jinguji, and attributed the fire to the\n\"wrath of God,\"--after which act, by the zeal of their converts, some\neighty other temples, in or about Nagasaki, were burnt. Within\nNagasaki territory Buddhism was totally suppressed,--its priests\nbeing persecuted and driven away. In the province of Bungo the Jesuit\npersecution of Buddhism was far more violent, and conducted upon an\nextensive scale. Otomo Sorin Munechika, the reigning daimyo, not\n[336] only destroyed all the Buddhist temples in his dominion (to the\nnumber, it is said, of three thousand), but had many of the Buddhist\npriests put to death. For the destruction of the great temple of\nHikozan, whose priests were reported to have prayed for the tyrant's\ndeath, he is said to have maliciously chosen the sixth day of the\nfifth month (1576),--the festival of the Birthday of the Buddha!\n\nCoercion, exercised by their lords upon a docile people trained to\nimplicit obedience, would explain something of the initial success of\nthe missions; but it would leave many other matters unexplained: the\nlater success of the secret propaganda, the fervour and courage of\nthe converts under persecution, the long-continued indifference of\nthe chiefs of the ancestor-cult to the progress of the hostile\nfaith.... When Christianity first began to spread through the Roman\nempire, the ancestral religion had fallen into decay, the structure\nof society had lost its original form, and there was no religious\nconservatism really capable of successful resistance. But in the\nJapan of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the religion of the\nancestors was very much alive; and society was only entering upon the\nsecond period of its yet imperfect integration. The Jesuit\nconversions were not made among a people already losing their ancient\nfaith, but in one of the most intensely religious and conservative\nsocieties that ever existed. Christianity of any sort could not [337]\nhave been introduced into such a society without effecting structural\ndisintegrations,--disintegrations, at least, of a local character.\nHow far these disintegrations extended and penetrated we do not know;\nand we have yet no adequate explanation of the long inertia of the\nnative religious instinct in the face of danger.\n\nBut there are certain historical facts which appear to throw at least\na side-light upon the subject. The early Jesuit policy in China, as\nestablished by Ricci, had been to leave converts free to practise the\nancestral rites. So long as this policy was followed, the missions\nprospered. When, in consequence of this compromise, dissensions\narose, the matter was referred to Rome. Pope Innocent X decided for\nintolerance by a bull issued in 1645; and the Jesuit missions were\nthereby practically ruined in China. Pope Innocent's decision was\nindeed reversed the very next year by a bull of Pope Alexander VIII;\nbut again and again contests were raised by the religious bodies over\nthis question of ancestor-worship, until in 1693 Pope Clement XI\ndefinitively prohibited converts from practising the ancestral rites\nunder any form whatsoever.... All the efforts of all the missions in\nthe Far East have ever since then failed to advance the cause of\nChristianity. The sociological reason is plain.\n\nWe have seen, then, that up to the year 1645 the ancestor-cult had\nbeen tolerated by the Jesuits [338] in China, with promising results;\nand it is probable that an identical policy of tolerance was\nmaintained in Japan during the second half of the sixteenth century.\nThe Japanese missions began in 1549, and their history ends with the\nShimabara slaughter in 1638,--about seven years before the first\nPapal decision against the tolerance of ancestor-worship. The Jesuit\nmission-work seems to have prospered steadily, in spite of all\nopposition, until it was interfered with by less cautious and more\nuncompromising zealots. By a bull issued in 1585 by Gregory XIII, and\nconfirmed in 1600 by Clement III, the Jesuits alone were authorized\nto do missionary-work in Japan; and it was not until after their\nprivileges had been ignored by Franciscan zeal that trouble with the\ngovernment began. We have seen that in 1593 Hideyoshi had six\nFranciscans executed. Then the issue of a new Papal bull in 1608, by\nPaul V, allowing Roman Catholic missionaries of all orders to work in\nJapan, probably ruined the Jesuit interests. It will be remembered\nthat Iyeyasu suppressed the Franciscans in 1612,--a proof that their\nexperience with Hideyoshi had profited them little. On the whole, it\nappears more than likely that both Dominicans and Franciscans\nrecklessly meddled with matters which the Jesuits (whom they accused\nof timidity) had been wise enough to leave alone, and that this\ninterference hastened the inevitable ruin of the missions.\n\n[339] We may reasonably doubt whether there were a million Christians\nin Japan at the beginning of the seventeenth century: the more\nprobable claim of six hundred thousand can be accepted. In this era\nof toleration the efforts of all the foreign missionary bodies\ncombined, and the yearly expenditure of immense sums in support of\ntheir work, have enabled them to achieve barely one-fifth f the\nsuccess attributed to their Portuguese predecessors, upon a not\nincredible estimate. The sixteenth-century Jesuits were indeed able\nto exercise, through various lords, the most forcible sort of\ncoercion upon whole populations of provinces; but the modern missions\ncertainly enjoy advantages educational, financial, and legislative,\nmuch outweighing the doubtful value of the power to coerce; and the\nsmallness of the results which they have achieved seems to require\nexplanation. The explanation is not difficult. Needless attacks upon\nthe ancestor-cult are necessarily attacks upon the constitution of\nsociety; and Japanese society instinctively resists these assaults\nupon its ethical basis. For it is an error to suppose that this\nJapanese society has yet arrived even at such a condition as Roman\nsociety presented in the second or third century of our era. Rather\nit remains at a stage resembling that of a Greek or Latin society\nmany centuries before Christ. The introduction of railroads,\ntelegraphs, modern arms of precision, modern applied science of all\nkinds, has not yet [340] sufficed to change the fundamental order of\nthings, Superficial disintegrations are rapidly proceeding; new\nstructures are forming; but the social condition still remains much\nlike that which, in southern Europe, long preceded the introduction\nof Christianity.\n\nThough every form of religion holds something of undying truth, the\nevolutionist must classify religions. He must regard a monotheistic\nfaith as representing, in the progress of human thought, a very\nconsiderable advance upon any polytheistic creed; monotheism\nsignifying the fusion and expansion of countless ghostly beliefs into\none vast concept of unseen omnipotent power. And, from the standpoint\nof psychological evolution, he must of course consider pantheism as\nan advance upon monotheism, and must further regard agnosticism as an\nadvance upon both. But the value of a creed is necessarily relative,\nand the question of its worth is to be decided, not by its\nadaptability to the intellectual developments of a single cultured\nclass, but by its larger emotional relation to the whole society of\nwhich it embodies the moral experience. Its value to any other\nsociety must depend upon its power of self-adaptation to the ethical\nexperience of that society. We may grant that Roman Catholicism was,\nby sole virtue of its monotheistic conception, a stage in advance of\nthe primitive ancestor-worship. But it was adapted only to a form of\nsociety at [341] which neither Chinese nor Japanese civilization had\narrived,--a form of society in which the ancient family had been\ndissolved, and the religion of filial piety forgotten. Unlike that\nsubtler and incomparably more humane creed of India, which had\nlearned the secret of missionary-success a thousand years before\nLoyola, the religion of the Jesuits could never have adapted itself\nto the social conditions of Japan; and by the fact of this incapacity\nthe fate of the missions was really decided in advance. The\nintolerance, the intrigues, the savage persecutions carried on,--all\nthe treacheries and cruelties of the Jesuits,--may simply be\nconsidered as the manifestations of such incapacity; while the\nrepressive measures taken by Iyeyasu and his successors signify\nsociologically no more than the national perception of supreme\ndanger. It was recognized that the triumph of the foreign religion\nwould involve the total disintegration of society, and the subjection\nof the empire to foreign domination.\n\nNeither the artist nor the sociologist, at least, can regret the\nfailure of the missions. Their extirpation, which enabled Japanese\nsociety to evolve to its type-limit, preserved for modern eyes the\nmarvellous world of Japanese art, and the yet more marvellous world\nof its traditions, beliefs, and customs. Roman Catholicism,\ntriumphant, would have swept all this out of existence. The natural\nantagonism [342] of the artist to the missionary may be found in the\nfact that the latter is always, and must be, an unsparing destroyer.\nEverywhere the developments of art are associated in some sort with\nreligion; and by so much as the art of a people reflects their\nbeliefs, that art will be hateful to the enemies of those beliefs.\nJapanese art, of Buddhist origin, is especially an art of religious\nsuggestion,--not merely as regards painting and sculpture, but\nlikewise as regards decoration, and almost every product of aesthetic\ntaste. There is something of religious feeling associated even with\nthe Japanese delight in trees and flowers, the charm of gardens, the\nlove of nature and of nature's voices,--with all the poetry of\nexistence, in short. Most assuredly the Jesuits and their allies\nwould have ended all this, every detail of it, without the slightest\nqualm. Even could they have understood and felt the meaning of that\nworld of strange beauty,--result of a race-experience never to be\nrepeated or replaced,--they would not have hesitated a moment in the\nwork of obliteration and effacement. To-day, indeed, that wonderful\nart-world is being surely and irretrievably destroyed by Western\nindustrialism. But industrial influence, though pitiless, is not\nfanatic; and the destruction is not being carried on with such\nferocious rapidity but that the fading story of beauty can be\nrecorded for the future benefit of human civilization.\n\n\n\n[343]\n\nFEUDAL INTEGRATION\n\nIt was under the later Tokugawa Shogun--during the period immediately\npreceding the modern regime--that Japanese civilization reached the\nlimit of its development. No further evolution was possible, except\nthrough social reconstruction. The conditions of this integration\nchiefly represented the reinforcement and definition of conditions\npreexisting,--scarcely anything in the way of fundamental change.\nMore than ever before the old compulsory systems of cooperation were\nstrengthened; more than ever before all details of ceremonial\nconvention were insisted upon with merciless exactitude. In preceding\nages there had been more harshness; but at no previous period had\nthere been less liberty. Nevertheless, the results of this increased\nrestriction were not without ethical value: the time was yet far off\nat which personal liberty could prove a personal advantage; and the\npaternal coercion of the Tokugawa rule helped to develop and to\naccentuate much of what is most attractive in the national character.\nCenturies of warfare had previously allowed small opportunity for the\ncultivation of the more delicate qualities of that character: the\nrefinements, the [344] ingenuous kindliness, the joy in life that\nafterward lent so rare a charm to Japanese existence. But during two\nhundred years of peace, prosperity, and national isolation, the\ngraceful and winning side of this human nature found chance to bloom;\nand the multiform restraints of law and custom then quickened and\ncuriously shaped the blossoming,--as the gardener's untiring art\nevolves the flowers of the chrysanthemum into a hundred forms of\nfantastic beauty.... Though the general social tendency under\npressure was toward rigidity, constraint left room, in special\ndirections, for moral and aesthetic cultivation.\n\nIn order to understand the social condition, it will be necessary to\nconsider the nature of the paternal rule in its legal aspects. To\nmodern imagination the old Japanese laws may well seem intolerable;\nbut their administration was really less uncompromising than that of\nour Western laws. Besides, although weighing heavily upon all\nclasses, from the highest to the lowest, the legal burden was\nproportioned to the respective strength of the bearers; the\napplication of law being made less and less rigid as the social scale\ndescended. In theory at least, from the earliest times, the poor and\nunfortunate had been considered as entitled to pity; and the duty of\nshowing them all possible mercy was insisted upon in the oldest\nextant moral code of Japan,--the Laws of Shotoku Taishi. [345] But\nthe most striking example of such discrimination appears in the\nLegacy of Iyeyasu, which represents the conception of justice in a\ntime when society had become much more developed, its institutions\nmore firmly fixed, and all its bonds tightened. This stern and wise\nruler, who declared that \"the people are the foundation of the\nEmpire,\" commanded leniency in dealing with the humble. He ordained\nthat any lord, no matter what his rank, convicted of breaking laws\n\"to the injury of the people,\" should be punished by the confiscation\nof his estates. Perhaps the humane spirit of the legislator is most\nstrongly shown in his enactments regarding crime, as, for example,\nwhere he deals with the question of adultery--necessarily a crime of\nthe first magnitude in any society based on ancestor-worship. By the\n50th article of the Legacy, the injured husband is confirmed in his\nancient right to kill,--but with this important provision, that\nshould he kill but one of the guilty parties, he must himself be held\nas guilty as either of them. Should the offenders be brought up for\ntrial, Iyeyasu advises that, in the case of common people, particular\ndeliberation be given to the matter: he remarks upon the weakness of\nhuman nature, and suggests that, among the young and simple-minded,\nsome momentary impulse of passion may lead to folly even when the\nparties are not naturally depraved. But in the next article, [346]\nNo. 51, he orders that no mercy whatever be shown to men and women of\nthe upper classes when convicted of the same crime. \"These,\" he\ndeclares, \"are expected to know better than to occasion disturbance\nby violating existing regulations; and such persons, breaking the\nlaws by lewd trifling or illicit intercourse, shall at once be\npunished without deliberation or consultation.* [*That is to say,\nimmediately put to death.] It is not the same in this case as in the\ncase of farmers, artizans, and traders.\" ... Throughout the entire\ncode, this tendency to tighten the bonds of law in the case of the\nmilitary classes, and to loosen them mercifully for the lower\nclasses, is equally visible. Iyeyasu strongly disapproved of\nunnecessary punishments; and held that the frequency of punishments\nwas proof, not of the ill-conduct of subjects, but of the ill-conduct\nof officials. The 91st article of his code puts the matter thus\nplainly, even as regarded the Shogunate: \"When punishments and\nexecutions abound in the Empire, it is a proof that the military\nruler is without virtue and degenerate.\" He devised particular\nenactments to protect the peasantry and the poor from the cruelty or\nthe rapacity of powerful lords. The great daimyo were strictly\nforbidden, when making their obligatory journeys to Yedo, \"to disturb\nor harass the people at the post-houses,\" or suffer themselves \"to be\npuffed up with military pride.\" [347] The private, not less than the\npublic conduct of these great lords, was under Government\nsurveillance; and they were actually liable to punishment for\nimmorality! Concerning debauchery among them, the legislator remarked\nthat \"even though this can hardly be pronounced insubordination,\" it\nshould be judged and punished according to the degree in which it\nconstitutes a bad example for the lower classes (Art. 88).* As to\nveritable insubordination there was no pardon: the severity of the\nlaw on this subject allowed of no exception or mitigation. The 53rd\nsection of the Legacy proves this to have been regarded as the\nsupreme crime: \"The guilt of a vassal murdering his suzerain is in\nprinciple the same as that of an arch-traitor to the Emperor. His\nimmediate companions, his relations,--all even to his most distant\nconnexions,--shall be cut off, hewn to atoms, root and fibre. The\nguilt of a vassal only lifting his hand against his master, even\nthough he does not assassinate him, is the same.\" In strong contrast\nto this grim ordinance is the spirit of all the regulations touching\nthe administration of law among the lower classes. Forgery,\nincendiarism, and poisoning were indeed crimes justifying the penalty\nof burning or crucifixion; but judges were instructed to act with as\nmuch leniency as circumstances permitted in the case of ordinary\noffences. \"With regard to minute details affecting individuals of the\ninferior classes,\" says the 73d article of the code, \"learn the wide\nbenevolence of Koso of the Han [Chinese] dynasty.\" It was further\nordered that magistrates of the criminal and civil courts should be\nchosen only from \"a class of men who are upright and pure,\ndistinguished for charity and benevolence.\" All magistrates were kept\nunder close supervision, and their conduct regularly reported by\ngovernment spies.\n\n[*Though even daimyo were liable to suffer for debauchery, Iyeyasu\ndid not believe in the expediency of attempting to suppress all vice\nby law. There is a strangely modern ring in his remarks upon this\nsubject, in the 73d section of the Legacy: \"Virtuous men have said,\nboth in poetry and in classic works, that houses of debauch, for\nwomen of pleasure and for street-walkers, are the worm-eaten spots of\ncities and towns. But these are necessary evils, and if they be\nforcibly abolished, men of unrighteous principles will become like\nravelled thread, and there will be no end to daily punishments and\nfloggings.\" In many castle-towns, however, such houses were never\nallowed--probably in view of the large military force, assembled in\nsuch towns, which had to be maintained under iron discipline.]\n\n[348] Another humane aspect of Tokugawa legislation is furnished by\nits dictates in regard to the relations of the sexes. Although\nconcubinage was tolerated in the Samurai class, for reasons relating\nto the continuance of the family-cult, Iyeyasu denounces the\nindulgence of the privilege for merely selfish reasons: \"Silly and\nignorant men neglect their true wives for the sake of a loved\nmistress, and thus disturb the most important relation.... Men so far\nsunk as this may always be known as Samurai without fidelity or\nsincerity.\" Celibacy, condemned by public [349] opinion,--except in\nthe case of Buddhist priests,--was equally condemned by the code.\n\"One should not live alone after sixteen years of age,\" declares the\nlegislator; \"all mankind recognize marriage as the first law of\nnature.\" The childless man was obliged to adopt a son; and the 47th\narticle of the Legacy ordained that the family estate of a person\ndying without male issue, and without having adopted a son, should be\n\"forfeited without any regard to his relatives or connexions.\" This\nlaw, of course, was made in support of the ancestor-cult, the\ncontinuance of which it was deemed the paramount duty of each man to\nprovide for; but the government regulations concerning adoption\nenabled everybody to fulfil the legal requirement, without\ndifficulty.\n\nConsidering that this code which inculcated humanity, repressed moral\nlaxity, prohibited celibacy, and rigorously maintained the\nfamily-cult, was drawn up in the time of the extirpation of the\nJesuit missions, the position assumed in regard to religious freedom\nappears to us one of singular liberality. \"High and low alike,\"\nproclaims the 31st article, \"may follow their own inclinations with\nrespect to religious tenets which have obtained down to the present\ntime, except as regards the false and corrupt school [Roman\nCatholicism]. Religious disputes have ever proved the bane and\nmisfortune of this Empire, and must be firmly, suppressed.\" ... But\nthe seeming liberality of this article must not be misinterpreted:\n[350] the legislator who made so rigid an enactment in regard to the\nreligion of the family was not the man to proclaim that any Japanese\nwas free to abandon the faith of his race for an alien creed. One\nmust carefully read the entire Legacy in order to understand\nIyeyasu's real position,--which was simply this: that any man was\nfree to adopt any religion tolerated by the State, in addition to his\nancestor-cult. Iyeyasu was himself a member of the Jodo sect of\nBuddhism, and a friend of Buddhism in general. But he was first of\nall a Shintoist; and the third article of his code commands devotion\nto the Kami as the first of duties:--\"Keep your heart pure; and so\nlong as your body shall exist, be diligent in paying honour and\nveneration to the Gods.\" That he placed the ancient cult above\nBuddhism should be evident from the text of the 52d article of the\nLegacy, in which he declares that no one should suffer himself to\nneglect the national faith because of a belief in any other form of\nreligion. This text is of particular interest:\n\n\"My body, and the bodies of others, being born in the Empire of the\nGods, to accept unreservedly the teachings of other countries,--such\nas Confucian, Buddhist, or Taoist doctrines,--and to apply one's\nwhole and undivided attention to them, would be, in short, to desert\none's own master, and transfer one's loyalty to another. Is not this\nto forget the origin of one's being?\"\n\n[351] Of course the Shogun, professing to derive his authority from\nthe descendant of the elder gods, could not with consistency have\nproclaimed the right of freedom to doubt those gods: his official\nreligious duty permitted of no compromise. But the interest attaching\nto his opinions, as expressed in the Legacy, rests upon the fact that\nthe Legacy was not a public, but a strictly private document,\nintended for the perusal and guidance of his successors only.\nAltogether his religious position was much like that of the liberal\nJapanese statesman of to-day,--respect for whatever is good in\nBuddhism, qualified by the patriotic conviction that the first\nreligious duty is to the cult of the ancestors, the ancient creed of\nthe race.... Iyeyasu had preferences regarding Buddhism; but even in\nthis he showed no narrowness. Though he wrote in his Legacy, \"Let my\nposterity ever be of the honoured sect of Jodo,\" he greatly\nreverenced the high-priest of the Tendai temple, Yeizan, who had been\none of his instructors, and obtained for him the highest court-office\npossible for a Buddhist priest to obtain, as well as the headship of\nthe Tendai sect. Moreover the Shogun visited Yeizan to make there\nofficial prayer for the prosperity of the country.\n\nThere is every reason to believe that within the territories of the\nShogunate proper, comprising the greater part of the Empire, the\nadministration of [352] ordinary criminal law was humane, and that\nthe infliction of punishment was made, in the case of the common\npeople, to depend largely upon circumstances. Needless severity was a\ncrime before the higher military law, which, in such cases, made no\ndistinctions of rank. Although the ring-leaders of a peasant-revolt,\nfor example, would be sentenced to death, the lord through whose\noppression the uprising was provoked, would be deprived of a part or\nthe whole of his estates, or degraded in rank, or perhaps even\nsentenced to perform harakiri. Professor Wigmore, whose studies of\nJapanese law first shed light upon the subject, has given us an\nexcellent review of the spirit of the ancient legal methods. He\npoints out that the administration of law was never made impersonal\nin the modern sense; that unbending law did not, for the people at\nleast, exist in relation to minor offences. The Anglo-Saxon idea of\ninflexible law is the idea of a justice impartial and pitiless as\nfire: whoever breaks the law must suffer the consequence, just as\nsurely as the person who puts his hand into fire must experience\npain. But in the administration of the old Japanese law, everything\nwas taken into consideration: the condition of the offender, his\nintelligence, his degree of education, his previous conduct, his\nmotives, suffering endured, provocation received, and so forth; and\nfinal judgment was decided by moral common sense rather than by legal\nenactment [353] or precedent. Friends and relatives were allowed to\nmake plea for the offender, and to help him in whatever honest way\nthey could. If a man were falsely accused, and proved innocent upon\ntrial, he would not only be consoled by kind words, but, would\nprobably receive substantial compensation; and it appears that judges\nwere accustomed, at the end of important trials, to reward good\nconduct as well as to punish crime.* ... On the other hand,\nlitigation was officially discouraged. Everything possible was done\nto prevent any cases from being taken into court, which could be\nsettled or compromised by communal arbitration; and the people were\ntaught to consider the court only as the last possible resort.\n\n[*The following extracts from a sentence said to have been passed by\nthe famous judge, Ooka Tadasuke, at the close of a celebrated\ncriminal trial, are illustrative: \"Musashiya Chobei and Goto\nHanshiro, these actions of yours are worthy of the highest praise: as\na remuneration I award ten silver ryo to each of you.... Tami, you,\nfor maintaining your brother, are to be commended: for this you are\nto receive the amount of five kwammon. Ko, daughter of Chohachi, you\nare obedient to your parents: in consideration of this, the sum of\nfive silver ryo is awarded to you.\"--(See Dening's Japan in Days of\nYore.) The good old custom of rewarding notable cases of filial\npiety, courage, generosity, etc., though not now practised in the\ncourts, is still maintained by the local governments. The rewards are\nsmall; but the public honour which they confer upon the recipient is\nvery great.]\n\nThe general character of the Tokugawa rule can be to some degree\ninferred from the foregoing facts. It was in no sense a reign of\nterror that compelled peace and encouraged industry for two hundred\nand [354] fifty years. Though the national civilization was\nrestrained, pruned, clipped in a thousand ways, it was at the same\ntime cultivated, refined, and strengthened. The long peace\nestablished throughout the Empire what had never before existed,--a\nuniversal feeling of security. The individual was bound more than\never by law and custom; but he was also protected: he could move\nwithout anxiety to the length of his chains. Though coerced by his\nfellows, they helped him to bear the coercion cheerfully: everybody\naided everybody else to fulfil the obligations and to support the\nburdens of communal life. Conditions tended, therefore, toward the\ngeneral happiness as well as toward the general prosperity. There was\nnot, in those years, any struggle for existence,--not at least in our\nmodern meaning of the phrase. The requirements of life were easily\nsatisfied; every man had a master to provide for him or to protect\nhim; competition was repressed or discouraged; there was no need for\nsupreme effort of any sort,--no need for the straining of any\nfaculty. Moreover, there was little or nothing to strive after: for\nthe vast majority of the people, there were no prizes to win. Ranks\nand incomes were fixed; occupations were hereditary; and the desire\nto accumulate wealth must have been checked or numbed by those\nregulations which limited the rich man's right to use his money as he\nmight please. Even a great lord--even the Shogun himself [355]\n--could not do what he pleased. As for any common person,--farmer,\ncraftsman, or shopkeeper,--he could not build a house as he liked, or\nfurnish it as he liked, or procure for himself such articles of\nluxury as his taste might incline him to buy. The richest heimin, who\nattempted to indulge himself in any of these ways, would at once have\nbeen forcibly reminded that he must not attempt to imitate the\nhabits, or to assume the privileges, of his betters. He could not\neven order certain kinds of things to be made for him. The artizans\nor artists who created objects of luxury, to gratify aesthetic taste,\nwere little disposed to accept commissions from people of low rank:\nthey worked for princes, or great lords, and could scarcely afford to\ntake the risk of displeasing their patrons. Every man's pleasures\nwere more or less regulated by his place in society, and to pass from\na lower into a higher rank was no easy matter. Extraordinary men were\nsometimes able to do this, by attracting the favour of the great. But\nmany perils attended upon such distinction; and the wisest policy for\nthe heimin was to remain satisfied with his position, and try to find\nas much happiness in life as the law allowed.\n\nPersonal ambition being thus restrained, and the cost of existence\nreduced to a minimum much below our Western ideas of the necessary,\nthere were really established conditions highly favourable to certain\nforms of culture, in despite of sumptuary [356] regulations. The\nnational mind was obliged to seek solace for the monotony of\nexistence, either in amusement or study. Tokugawa policy had left\nimagination partly free in the directions of literature and art--the\ncheaper art; and within those two directions repressed personality\nfound means to utter itself, and fancy became creative. There was a\ncertain amount of danger attendant upon even such intellectual\nindulgences; and much was dared. Aesthetic taste, however, mostly\nfollowed the line of least resistance. Observation concentrated\nitself upon the interest of everyday life,--upon incidents which\nmight be watched from a window, or studied in a garden,--upon\nfamiliar aspects of nature in various seasons,--upon trees, flowers,\nbirds, fishes, or reptiles,--upon insects and the ways of them,\n--upon all kinds of small details, delicate trifles, amusing\ncuriosities. Then it was that the race-genius produced most of that\nqueer bric-a-brac which still forms the delight of Western\ncollectors. The painter, the ivory-carver, the decorator, were left\nalmost untroubled in their production of fairy-pictures, exquisite\ngrotesqueries, miracles of liliputian art in metal and enamel and\nlacquer-of-gold. In all such small matters they could feel free; and\nthe results of that freedom are now treasured in the museums of\nEurope and America. It is true that most of the arts (nearly all of\nChinese origin) were considerably developed before the Tokugawa era;\nbut it was then that they [357] began to assume those inexpensive\nforms which placed aesthetic gratification within reach of the common\npeople. Sumptuary legislation or rule might yet apply to the use and\npossession of costly production, but not to the enjoyment of form;\nand the beautiful, whether shaped in paper or in ivory, in clay or\ngold, is always a power for culture. It has been said that in a Greek\ncity of the fourth century before Christ, every household utensil,\neven the most trifling object, was in respect of design an object of\nart; and the same fact is true, though in another and a stranger way,\nof all things in a Japanese home: even such articles of common use as\na bronze candlestick, a brass lamp, an iron kettle, a paper lantern,\na bamboo curtain, a wooden pillow, a wooden tray, will reveal to\neducated eyes a sense of beauty and fitness entirely unknown to\nWestern cheap production. And it was especially during the Tokugawa\nperiod that this sense of beauty began to inform everything in common\nlife. Then also was developed the art of illustration; then came into\nexistence those wonderful colour-prints (the most beautiful made in\nany age or country) which are now so eagerly collected by wealthy\ndilettanti. Literature also ceased, like art, to be the enjoyment of\nthe upper classes only: it developed a multitude of popular forms.\nThis was the age of popular fiction, of cheap books, of popular\ndrama, of storytelling for young and old.... We may certainly [358]\ncall the Tokugawa period the happiest in the long life of the nation.\nThe mere increase of population and of wealth would prove the fact,\nirrespective of the general interest awakened in matters literary and\naesthetic. It was an age of popular enjoyment, also of general\nculture and social refinement.\n\nCustoms spread downward from the top of society.  During the Tokugawa\nperiod, various diversions or accomplishments, formerly fashionable\nin upper circles only, became common property. Three of these were of\na sort indicating a high degree of refinement: poetical contests,\ntea-ceremonies, and the complex art of flower-arrangement. All were\nintroduced into Japanese society long before the Tokugawa\nregime;--the fashion of poetical competitions must be as old as\nJapanese authentic history. But it was under the Tokugawa Shogunate\nthat such amusements and accomplishments became national. Then the\ntea-ceremonies were made a feature of female education throughout the\ncountry. Their elaborate character could be explained only by the\nhelp of many pictures; and it requires years of training and practice\nto graduate in the art of them. Yet the whole of this art, as to\ndetail, signifies no more than the making and serving of a cup of\ntea. However, it is a real art--a most exquisite art. The actual\nmaking of the infusion is a matter of no consequence in itself: the\nsupremely important matter is that the act be performed in the most\nperfect, [359] most polite, most graceful, most charming manner\npossible. Everything done--from the kindling of the charcoal fire to\nthe presentation of the tea--must be done according to rules of\nsupreme etiquette: rules requiring natural grace as well as great\npatience to fully master. Therefore a training in the tea-ceremonies\nis still held to be a training in politeness, in self-control, in\ndelicacy,--a discipline in deportment.... Quite as elaborate is the\nart of arranging flowers. There are many different schools; but the\nobject of each system is simply to display sprays of leaves and\nflowers in the most beautiful manner possible, and according to the\nirregular graces of Nature herself. This art also requires years to\nlearn; and the teaching of it has a moral as well as an aesthetic\nvalue.\n\nIt was in this period also that etiquette was cultivated to its\nuttermost,--that politeness became diffused throughout all ranks, not\nmerely as a fashion, but as an art. In all civilized societies of the\nmilitant type politeness becomes a national characteristic at an\nearly period; and it must have been a common obligation among the\nJapanese, as their archaic tongue bears witness, before the\nhistorical epoch. Public enactments on the subject were made as early\nas the seventh century by the founder of Japanese Buddhism, the\nprince-regent, Shotoku Taishi. \"Ministers and functionaries,\" he\nproclaimed, [360] \"should make decorous behaviour* their leading\nprinciple; for their leading principle of the government of the\npeople consists in decorous behaviour. If the superiors do not behave\nwith decorum, the inferiors are disorderly: if inferiors are wanting\nin proper behaviour, there must necessarily be offences. Therefore it\nis that when lord and vassal behave with propriety, the distinctions\nof rank are not confused when the people behave with propriety, the\ngovernment of the Commonwealth proceeds of itself.\" Something of the\nsame old Chinese teaching we find reechoed, a thousand years later,\nin the Legacy of Iyeyasu: \"The art of governing a country consists in\nthe manifestation of due deference on the part of a suzerain to his\nvassals. Know that if you turn your back upon this, you will be\nassassinated; and the Empire will be lost.\" We have already seen that\netiquette was rigidly enforced upon all classes by the military rule:\nfor at least ten centuries before Iyeyasu, the nation had been\ndisciplined in politeness, under the edge of the sword. But under the\nTokugawa Shogunate politeness became particularly a popular\ncharacteristic,--a rule of conduct maintained by even the lowest\nclasses in their daily relations. Among the higher classes it became\nthe art of beauty in life. All the taste, the grace, the [361] nicety\nwhich then informed artistic production in precious material, equally\ninformed every detail of speech and action. Courtesy was a moral and\naesthetic study, carried to such incomparable perfection that every\ntrace of the artificial disappeared. Grace and charm seemed to have\nbecome habit,--inherent qualities of the human fibre,--and\ndoubtless, in the case of one sex at least, did so become.\n\n[*Or, \"ceremony\": the Chinese term used signifying everything\nrelating to gentlemanly and upright conduct. The translation is Mr.\nAston's (see Vol. II, p, 130, of his translation of the Nihongi).]\n\nFor it has well been said that the most wonderful aesthetic products\nof Japan are not its ivories, nor its bronzes, nor its porcelains,\nnor its swords, nor any of its marvels in metal or lacquer--but its\nwomen. Accepting as partly true the statement that woman everywhere\nis what man has made her, we might say that this statement is more\ntrue of the Japanese woman than of any other. Of course it required\nthousands and thousands of years to make her; but the period of which\nI am speaking beheld the work completed and perfected. Before this\nethical creation, criticism should hold its breath; for there is here\nno single fault save the fault of a moral charm unsuited to any world\nof selfishness and struggle. It is the moral artist that now commands\nour praise,--the realizer of an ideal beyond Occidental reach. How\nfrequently has it been asserted that, as a moral being, the Japanese\nwoman does not seem to belong to the same race as the Japanese man!\nConsidering that heredity is limited by sex, there is reason in the\nassertion: the Japanese woman is an ethically different [362] being\nfrom the Japanese man. Perhaps no such type of woman will appear\nagain in this world for a hundred thousand years: the conditions of\nindustrial civilization will not admit of her existence. The type\ncould not have been created in any society shaped on modern lines,\nnor in any society where the competitive struggle takes those unmoral\nforms with which we have become too familiar. Only a society under\nextraordinary regulation and regimentation,--a society in which all\nself-assertion was repressed, and self-sacrifice made a universal\nobligation,--a society in which personality was clipped like a hedge,\npermitted to bud and bloom from within, never from without,--in\nshort, only a society founded upon ancestor-worship, could have\nproduced it. It has no more in common with the humanity of this\ntwentieth century of ours--perhaps very much less--than has the life\ndepicted upon old Greek vases. Its charm is the charm of a vanished\nworld--a charm strange, alluring, indescribable as the perfume of\nsome flower of which the species became extinct in our Occident\nbefore the modern languages were born. Transplanted successfully it\ncannot be: under a foreign sun its forms revert to something\naltogether different, its colours fade, its perfume passes away. The\nJapanese woman can be known only in her own country,--the Japanese\nwoman as prepared and perfected by the old-time education for that\nstrange society in which the charm [363] of her moral being,--her\ndelicacy, her supreme unselfishness, her child-like piety and trust,\nher exquisite tactful perception of all ways and means to make\nhappiness about her,--can be comprehended and valued.\n\nI have spoken only of her moral charm: it requires time for the\nunaccustomed foreign eye to discern the physical charm. Beauty,\naccording to our Western standards, can scarcely be said to exist in\nthis race,--or, shall we say that it has never yet been developed?\nOne seeks in vain for a facial angle satisfying Western aesthetic\ncanons. It is seldom that one meets even with a fine example of that\nphysical elegance,--that manifestation of the economy of\nforce,--which we call grace, in the Greek meaning of the word. Yet\nthere is charm--great charm--both of face and form: the charm of\nchildhood--childhood with its every feature yet softly and vaguely\noutlined (efface, as a French artist would call it),--childhood\nbefore the limbs have fully lengthened,--slight and, dainty, with\nadmirable little hands and feet. The eyes at first surprise us, by\nthe strangeness of their lids, so unlike Aryan eyelids, and folding\nupon another plan. Yet they are often very charming; and a Western\nartist would not fail to appreciate the graceful terms, invented by\nJapanese or Chinese art, to designate particular beauties in the\nlines of the eyelids. Even if she cannot be called handsome,\naccording to Western [364] standards, the Japanese woman must be\nconfessed pretty,--pretty like a comely child; and if she be seldom\ngraceful in the Occidental sense, she is at least in all her ways\nincomparably graceful: her every motion, gesture, or expression\nbeing, in its own Oriental manner, a perfect thing,--an act\nperformed, or a look conferred, in the most easy, the most graceful,\nthe most modest way possible. By ancient custom, she is not permitted\nto display her grace in the street: she must walk in a particular\nshrinking manner, turning her feet inward as she patters along upon\nher wooden sandals. But to watch her at home, where she is free to be\ncomely,--merely to see her performing any household duty, or waiting\nupon guests, or arranging flowers, or playing with her children,--is\nan education in Far Eastern aesthetics for whoever has the head and\nthe heart to learn.... But is she not, then, one may ask, an\nartificial product,--a forced growth of Oriental civilization? I\nwould answer both \"Yes\" and \"No.\" She is an artificial product in\nonly the same evolutional sense that all character is an artificial\nproduct; and it required tens of centuries to mould her. She is not,\non the other hand, an artificial type, because she has been\nparticularly trained to be her true self at all times when\ncircumstances allow,--or, in other words, to be delightfully natural.\nThe old-fashioned education of her sex was directed to the\ndevelopment [365] of every quality essentially feminine, and to the\nsuppression of the opposite quality. Kindliness, docility, sympathy,\ntenderness, daintiness--these and other attributes were cultivated\ninto incomparable blossoming. \"Be good, sweet maid, and let who will\nbe clever: do noble things, not dream them, all day long\"--those\nwords of Kingsley really embody the central idea in her training. Of\ncourse the being, formed by such training only, must be protected by\nsociety; and by the old Japanese society she was protected.\nExceptions did not affect the rule. What I mean is that she was able\nto be purely herself, within certain limits of emotional etiquette,\nin all security. Her success in life was made to depend on her power\nto win affection by gentleness, obedience, kindliness;--not the\naffection merely of a husband, but of the husband's parents and\ngrandparents, and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law,--in short of\nall the members of a strange household. Thus to succeed required\nangelic goodness and patience; and the Japanese woman realized at\nleast the ideal of a Buddhist angel. A being working only for others,\nthinking only for others, happy only in making pleasure for\nothers,--a being incapable of unkindness, incapable of selfishness,\nincapable of acting contrary to her own inherited sense of\nright,--and in spite of this softness and gentleness ready, at any\nmoment, to lay down her life, to [366] sacrifice everything at the\ncall of duty: such was the character of the Japanese woman. Most\nstrange may seem the combination, in this child-soul, of gentleness\nand force, tenderness and courage,--yet the explanation is not far to\nseek. Stronger within her than wifely affection or parental affection\nor even maternal affection,--stronger than any womanly emotion, was\nthe moral conviction born of her great faith. This religious quality\nof character can be found among ourselves only within the shadow of\ncloisters, where it is cultivated at the expense of all else; and the\nJapanese woman has been therefore compared to a Sister of Charity.\nBut she had to be very much more than a Sister of\nCharity,--daughter-in-law and wife and mother, and to fulfil without\nreproach the multiform duties of her triple part. Rather might she be\ncompared to the Greek type of noble woman,--to Antigone, to Alcestis.\nWith the Japanese woman, as formed by the ancient training, each act\nof life was an act of faith: her existence was a religion, her home a\ntemple, her every word and thought ordered by the law of the cult of\nthe dead.... This wonderful type is not extinct--though surely doomed\nto disappear. A human creature so shaped for the service of gods and\nmen that every beat of her heart is duty, that every drop of her\nblood is moral feeling, were not less out of place in the future\nworld of competitive selfishness, than an angel in hell.\n\n\n\n[367]\n\nTHE SHINTO REVIVAL\n\nThe slow weakening of the Tokugawa Shogunate was due to causes not\nunlike those which had brought about the decline of previous\nregencies: the race degenerated during that long period of peace\nwhich its rule had inaugurated; the strong builders were succeeded by\nfeebler and feebler men. Nevertheless the machinery of\nadministration, astutely devised by Iyeyasu, and further perfected by\nIyemitsu, worked so well that the enemies of the Shogunate could find\nno opportunity for a successful attack until foreign aggression\nunexpectedly came to their aid. The most dangerous enemies of the\ngovernment were the great clans of Satsuma and Choshu. Iyeyasu had\nnot ventured to weaken them beyond a certain point: the risks of the\nundertaking would have been great; and, on the other hand, the\nalliance of those clans was for the time being a matter of vast\npolitical importance. He only took measures to preserve a safe\nbalance of power, placing between those formidable allies new\nlordships in whose rulers he could put trust,--a trust based first\nupon interest, secondly upon kinship. But he always felt that danger\nto the Shogunate [368] might come from Satsuma and Choshu; and he\nleft to his successors careful instructions about the policy to be\nfollowed in dealing with such possible enemies. He felt that his work\nwas not perfect,--that certain outlying blocks of the structure had\nnot been properly clamped to the rest. He could not do more in the\ndirection of consolidation, simply because the material of society\nhad not yet sufficiently evolved, had not yet become plastic enough,\nto permit of perfect and permanent cohesion. In order to effect that,\nit would have been necessary to dissolve the clans. But Iyeyasu did\nall that human foresight could have safely attempted under the\ncircumstances; and no one was more keenly conscious than himself of\nthe weak points in his wonderful organization.\n\nFor more than two hundred years the Satsuma and Choshu clans, and\nseveral others ready to league with them, submitted to the discipline\nof the Tokugawa rule. But they chafed under it, and watched for a\nchance to break the yoke. All the while this chance was being slowly\ncreated for them--not by any political changes, but by the patient\ntoil of Japanese men of letters. Three among these--the greatest\nscholars that Japan ever produced--especially prepared the way, by\ntheir intellectual labours, for the abolition of the Shogunate. They\nwere Shinto scholars; and they represented the not unnatural reaction\nof native conservatism against the [309] long tyranny of alien ideas\nand alien beliefs,--against the literature and philosophy and\nbureaucracy of China,--against the preponderant influence upon\neducation of the foreign religion of Buddhism. To all this they\nopposed the old native literature of Japan, the ancient poetry, the\nancient cult, the early traditions and rites of Shinto. The names of\nthese three remarkable men were Mabuchi (1697-1769), Motowori\n(1730-1801), and Hirata (1776-1843). Their efforts actually resulted\nin the disestablishment of Buddhism, and in the great Shinto revival\nof 1871.\n\nThe intellectual revolution made by these scholars could have been\nprepared only during a long era of peace, and by men enjoying the\nprotection and patronage of members of the ruling class. By a strange\nchance, it was the house of Tokugawa itself which first gave to\nliterature such encouragement and aid as made possible the labours of\nthe Shinto scholars. Iyeyasu had been a lover of learning; and had\ndevoted the later years of his life--passed in retirement at\nShidzuoka--to the collection of ancient books and manuscripts. He\nbequeathed his Japanese books to his eighth son, the Prince of Owari;\nand his Chinese books to another son, the Prince of Kishu. The Prince\nof Owari himself composed several works upon Japanese early\nliterature. Other descendants of Iyeyasu, inherited the great [370]\nShogun's love of letters: one of his grandsons, Mitsukuni, the second\nPrince of Mito (1622-1700), compiled, with the aid of various\nscholars, the first, important history of Japan,--the Dai-Nihon-Shi,\nin 240 books. Also he compiled a work of 500 volumes upon the\nceremonies and the etiquette of the Imperial Court, and set aside\nfrom his revenues a sum equal to about 30,000 pounds per annum, to\ncover the cost of publishing the splendid productions.... Under the\npatronage of great lords like these--collectors of libraries--there\ngradually developed a new school of men-of-letters: men who turned\naway from Chinese literature to the study of the Japanese classics.\nThey reedited the ancient poetry and chronicles; they republished the\nsacred records, with ample commentaries. They produced whole\nlibraries of works upon religious, historical, and philological\nsubjects; they made grammars and dictionaries; they wrote treatises\non the art of poetry, on popular errors, on the nature of the gods,\non government, on the manners and customs of ancient days.... The\nfoundations of this new scholarship were laid by two Shinto\npriests,--Kada and Mabuchi.\n\nThe high patrons of learning never suspected the possible results of\nthose researches which they had encouraged and aided. The study of\nthe ancient records, the study of Japanese literature, the study of\nthe early political and religious conditions, [371] naturally led men\nto consider the history of those foreign literary influences which\nhad well-nigh stifled native learning, and to consider also the\nhistory of the foreign creed which had overwhelmed the religion of\nthe ancestral gods. Chinese ethics, Chinese ceremonial, and Chinese\nBuddhism had reduced the ancient faith to the state of a minor\nbelief--almost to the state of a superstition. \"The Shinto gods,\"\nexclaimed one of the scholars of the new school, \"have become the\nservants of the Buddhas!\" But those Shinto gods were the ancestors of\nthe race,--the fathers of its emperors and princes,--and their\ndegradation could not but involve the degradation of the imperial\ntradition. Already, indeed, the emperors had been deprived not only\nof their immemorial rights and privileges, but of their revenues:\nmany had been deposed and banished and insulted. Just as the gods had\nbeen admitted only as inferior personages to the Buddhist pantheon,\nso their living descendants were now permitted to reign only as the\ndependants of military usurpers. By sacred law the whole soil of the\nempire belonged to the Heavenly Sovereign: yet there had been great\npoverty at times in the imperial palace; and the revenues, allotted\nfor the maintenance of the Mikado, had often been insufficient to\nrelieve his family from want. Assuredly all this was wrong. The\nShogunate had indeed established peace and inaugurated prosperity;\nbut who could forget that [372] it had originated in a military\nusurpation of imperial rights? Only by the restoration of the Son of\nHeaven to his ancient position of power, and by the relegation of the\nmilitary chiefs to their proper state of subordination, could the\nbest interests of the nation be really served....\n\nAll this was thought and felt and strongly suggested; but not all of\nit was openly proclaimed. To have publicly preached against the\nmilitary government as a usurpation would have been to invite\ndestruction. The Shinto scholars dared only so much as the politics\nand the temper of their time seemed to permit,--though they closely\napproached the danger-line. By the end of the eighteenth century,\nhowever, their teaching had created a strong party in favour of the\nofficial revival of the ancient religion, the restoration of the\nMikado to supreme power, and the repression, if not suppression, of\nthe military power. Yet it was not until the year 1841 that the\nShogunate took alarm, and proclaimed its disquiet by banishing from\nthe capital the great scholar Hirata, and forbidding him to write\nanything more. Not long afterwards he died. But he had been able to\nteach for forty years; he had written and published several hundred\nvolumes; and the school of which he was the last and greatest\ntheologian already exerted far-reaching influence. The restive lords\nof Choshu, Satsuma, Tosa, and Hizen were watching and waiting. They\nperceived [373] the worth of the new ideas to their own policy; they\nencouraged the new Shintoism; they felt that a time was coming when\nthey could hope to shake off the domination of the Tokugawa. And\ntheir opportunity came at last with the advent to Japan of Commodore\nPerry's fleet.\n\nThe events of that time are well known, and need not here be dwelt\nupon at any length. Suffice to say that after the Shogunate had been\nterrified into making commercial treaties with the United States and\nother powers, and practically compelled to open sundry ports to\nforeign trade, great discontent arose and was fomented as much as\npossible by the enemies of the military government. Meanwhile the\nShogunate had ascertained for itself the impossibility of resisting\nforeign aggression: it was fairly well informed as to the strength of\nWestern countries. The imperial court was nowise informed; and the\nShogunate naturally dreaded to furnish the information. To\nacknowledge incapacity to resist Occidental aggression would be to\ninvite the ruin of the Tokugawa house; to resist, on the other hand,\nwould be to invite the destruction of the Empire. The enemies of the\nShogunate then persuaded the imperial court to order the expulsion of\nthe foreigners; and this order--which, it must be remembered, was\nessentially a religious order, emanating from the source of all\nacknowledged authority--placed the military government in a serious\ndilemma. [374] It tried to effect by diplomacy what it could not\naccomplish by force; but while it was negotiating for the withdrawal\nof the foreign' settlers, matters were suddenly forced to a crisis by\nthe Prince of Choshu, who fired upon various ships belonging to the\nforeign powers. This action provoked the bombardment of Shimonoseki,\nand the demand of an indemnity of three million dollars. The Shogun\nIyemochi attempted to chastise the daimyo of Choshu for this act of\nhostility; but the attempt only proved the weakness of the military\ngovernment. Iyemochi died soon after this defeat; and his successor\nHitotsubashi had no chance to do anything,--for the now evident\nfeebleness of the Shogunate gave its enemies courage to strike a\nfatal blow. Pressure was brought upon the imperial court to proclaim\nthe abolition of the Shogunate; and the Shogunate was abolished by\ndecree. Hitotsubashi submitted; and the Tokugawa regime thus came to\nan end,--although its more devoted followers warred for two years\nafterwards, against hopeless odds, to reestablish it. In 1867 the\nentire administration was reorganized; the supreme power, both\nmilitary and civil, being restored to the Mikado. Soon afterward the\nShinto cult, officially revived in its primal simplicity, was\ndeclared the Religion of State; and Buddhism was disendowed. Thus the\nEmpire was reestablished upon the ancient lines; and all that the\nliterary party had [375] hoped for seemed to be realized--except one\nthing....\n\nBe it here observed that the adherents of the literary party wanted\nto go much further than the great founders of the new Shintoism had\ndreamed of going. These later enthusiasts were not satisfied with the\nabolition of the Shogunate, the restoration of imperial power, and\nthe revival of the ancient cult: they wanted a return of all society\nto the simplicity of primitive times; they desired that all foreign\ninfluence should be got rid of, and that the official ceremonies, the\nfuture education, the future literature, the ethics, the laws, should\nbe purely Japanese. They were not even satisfied with the\ndisendowment of Buddhism: there was a vigorous proposal made for its\ntotal suppression! And all this would have signified, in more ways\nthan one, a social retrogression towards barbarism. The great\nscholars had never proposed to cast away Buddhism and all Chinese\nlearning; they had only insisted that the native religion and culture\nshould have precedence. But the new literary party desired what would\nhave been equivalent to the destruction of a thousand years'\nexperience. Happily the clansmen who had broken down the Shogunate\nsaw both past and future in another light. They understood that the\nnational existence was in peril, and that resistance to foreign\npressure would be hopeless. Satsuma had witnessed the bombardment of\nKagoshima in [376] 1863; Choshu, the bombardment of Shimonoseki in\n1864. Evidently the only chance of being able to face Western power\nwould be through the patient study of Western science; and the\nsurvival of the Empire depended upon the Europeanization of society.\nBy 1871 the daimiates were abolished; in 1873 the edicts against\nChristianity were withdrawn; in 1876 the wearing of swords was\nprohibited. The samurai, as a military body, were suppressed; and all\nclasses were declared thenceforward equal before the law. New codes\nwere compiled; a new army and navy organized; a new police system\nestablished; a new system of education introduced at Government\nexpense; and a new constitution promised. Finally, in 1891, the first\nJapanese parliament (strictly speaking) was convoked. By that time\nthe entire framework of society had been remodelled, so far as laws\ncould remodel it, upon a European pattern. The nation had fairly\nentered upon its third period of integration. The clan had been\nlegally dissolved; the family was no longer the legal unit of\nsociety: by the new constitution the individual had been recognized.\n\nWhen we consider the history of some vast and sudden political change\nin its details only,--the factors of the movement, the combinations\nof immediate cause and effect, the influences of strong personality,\nthe conditions impelling individual action, [377]--then the\ntransformation is apt to appear to us the work and the triumph of a\nfew superior minds. We forget, perhaps, that those minds themselves\nwere the product of their epoch, and that every such rapid change\nmust represent the working of a national or race-instinct quite as\nmuch as the operation of individual intelligence. The events of the\nMeiji reconstruction strangely illustrate the action of such instinct\nin the face of peril,--the readjustment of internal relations to\nsudden changes of environment. The nation had found its old political\nsystem powerless before the new conditions; and it transformed that\nsystem. It had found its military organization incapable of defending\nit; and it reconstructed that organization. It had found its\neducational system useless in the presence of unforeseen necessities;\nand it replaced that system,--simultaneously crippling the power of\nBuddhism, which might otherwise have offered serious opposition to\nthe new developments required. And in that hour of greatest danger\nthe national instinct turned back at once to the moral experience\nupon which it could best rely,--the experience embodied in its\nancient cult, the religion of unquestioning obedience. Relying upon\nShinto tradition, the people rallied about their ruler, descendant of\nthe ancient gods, and awaited his will with unconquerable zeal of\nfaith. By strict obedience to his commands the peril might be\naverted,--never otherwise: this was [378] the national conviction.\nAnd the imperial order was simply that the nation should strive by\nstudy to make itself, as far as possible, the intellectual equal of\nits enemies. How faithfully that command was obeyed,--how well the\nold moral discipline of the race served it in the period of that\nsupreme emergency,--I need scarcely say. Japan, by right of\nself-acquired strength, has entered into the circle of the modern\ncivilized powers,--formidable by her new military organization,\nrespectable through her achievements in the domain of practical\nscience. And the force to effect this astonishing self-improvement,\nwithin the time of thirty years, she owes assuredly to the moral\nhabit derived from her ancient cult,--the religion of the ancestors.\nTo fairly measure the feat, we should remember that Japan was\nevolutionally younger than any modern European nation, by at least\ntwenty-seven hundred years, when she went to school! ...\n\nHerbert Spencer has shown that the great value to society of\necclesiastical institutions lies in their power to give cohesion to\nthe mass,--to strengthen rule by enforcing obedience to custom, and\nby opposing innovations likely to supply any element of\ndisintegration. In other words, the value of a religion, from the\nsociological standpoint, lies in its conservatism. Various writers\nhave alleged that the [379] Japanese national religion proved itself\nweak by incapacity to resist the overwhelming influence of Buddhism.\nI cannot help thinking that the entire social history of Japan yields\nproof to the contrary. Though Buddhism did for a long period appear\nto have almost entirely absorbed Shinto, by the acknowledgment of the\nShinto scholars themselves; though Buddhist emperors reigned who\nneglected or despised the cult of their ancestors; though Buddhism\ndirected, during ten centuries, the education of the nation, Shinto\nremained all the while so very much alive that it was able not only\nto dispossess its rival at last, but to save the country from foreign\ndomination. To assert that the Shinto revival signified no more than\na stroke of policy imagined by a group of statesmen, is to ignore all\nthe antecedents of the event. No such change could have been wrought\nby mere decree had not the national sentiment welcomed it....\nMoreover, there are three important facts to be remembered in regard\nto the former Buddhist predomination: (1) Buddhism conserved the\nfamily-cult, modifying the forms of the rite; (2) Buddhism never\nreally supplanted the Ujigami cults, but maintained them; (3)\nBuddhism never interfered with the imperial cult. Now these three\nforms of ancestor-worship,--the domestic, the communal, and the\nnational,--constitute all that is vital in Shinto. No single\nessential of the ancient faith had ever been weakened, [380] much\nless abolished, under the long pressure of Buddhism.\n\nThe Supreme Cult is not now the State Religion by request of the\nchiefs of Shinto, it is not even officially classed as a\nreligion.  Obvious reasons of state policy decided this course.\nHaving fulfilled its grand task, Shinto abdicated.  But as\nrepresenting all those traditions which appeal to race-feeling,\nto the sentiment of duty, to the passion of loyalty, and the love\nof country, it yet remains an immense force, a power to which\nappeal will not be vainly made in another hour of national peril.\n\n\n\n[381]\n\nSURVIVALS\n\nIn the gardens of certain Buddhist temples there are trees which have\nbeen famous for centuries,--trees trained and clipped into\nextraordinary shapes. Some have the form of dragons; others have the\nform of pagodas, ships, umbrellas. Supposing that one of these trees\nwere abandoned to its own natural tendencies, it would eventually\nlose the queer shape so long imposed upon it; but the outline would\nnot be altered for a considerable time, as the new leafage would at\nfirst unfold only in the direction of least resistance: that is to\nsay, within limits originally established by the shears and the\npruning-knife. By sword and law the old Japanese society had been\npruned and clipped, bent and bound, just like such a tree; and after\nthe reconstructions of the Meiji period,--after the abolition of the\ndaimiates, and the suppression of the military class, it still\nmaintained its former shape, just as the tree would continue to do\nwhen first abandoned by the gardener. Though delivered from the bonds\nof feudal law, released from the shears of military rule, the great\nbulk of the social structure preserved its ancient [382] aspect; and\nthe rare spectacle bewildered and delighted and deluded the Western\nobserver. Here indeed was Elf-land,--the strange, the beautiful, the\ngrotesque, the very mysterious,--totally unlike aught of strange and\nattractive ever beheld elsewhere. It was not a world of the\nnineteenth century after Christ, but a world of many centuries before\nChrist: yet this fact--the wonder of wonders--remained unrecognized;\nand it remains unrecognized by most people even to this day.\n\nFortunate indeed were those privileged to enter this astonishing\nfairyland thirty odd years ago, before the period of superficial\nchange, and to observe the unfamiliar aspects of its life: the\nuniversal urbanity, the smiling silence of crowds, the patient\ndeliberation of toil, the absence of misery and struggle. Even yet,\nin those remoter districts where alien influence has wrought but\nlittle change, the charm of the old existence lingers and amazes; and\nthe ordinary traveller can little understand what it means. That all\nare polite, that nobody quarrels, that everybody smiles, that pain\nand sorrow remain invisible, that the new police have nothing to do,\nwould seem to prove a morally superior humanity. But for the trained\nsociologist it would prove something different, and suggest something\nvery terrible. It would prove to him that this society had been\nmoulded under immense coercion, and that the coercion must have been\nexerted uninterruptedly [383] for thousands of years. He would\nimmediately perceive that ethics and custom had not yet become\ndissociated, and that the conduct of each person was regulated by the\nwill of the rest. He would know that personality could not develop in\nsuch a social medium,--that no individual superiority dare assert\nitself, that no competition would be tolerated. He would understand\nthat the outward charm of this life--its softness, its smiling\nsilence as of dreams--signified the rule of the dead. He would\nrecognize that between those minds and the minds of his own epoch no\nkinship of thought, no community of sentiment, no sympathy whatever\ncould exist,--that the separating gulf was not to be measured by\nthousands of leagues, but only by thousands of years,--that the\npsychological interval was hopeless as the distance from planet to\nplanet. Yet this knowledge probably would not--certainly should\nnot--blind him to the intrinsic charm of things. Not to feel the\nbeauty of this archaic life is to prove oneself insensible to all\nbeauty. Even that Greek world, for which our scholars and poets\nprofess such loving admiration, must have been in many ways a world\nof the same kind, whose daily mental existence no modern mind could\nshare.\n\nNow that the great social tree, so wonderfully clipped and cared for\nduring many centuries, [384] is losing its fantastic shape, let us\ntry to see how much of the original design can still be traced.\n\nUnder all the outward aspects of individual activity that modern\nJapan presents to the visitor's gaze, the ancient conditions really\npersist to an extent that no observation could reveal. Still the\nimmemorial cult rules all the land. Still the family-law, the\ncommunal law, and (though in a more irregular manner) the clan-law,\ncontrol every action of existence. I do not refer to any written law,\nbut only to the old unwritten religious law, with its host of\nobligations deriving from ancestor-worship. It is true that many\nchanges--and, in the opinion of the wise, too many changes--have been\nmade in civil legislation; but the ancient proverb, \"Government-laws\nare only seven-day laws,\" still represents popular sentiment in\nregard to hasty reforms. The old law, the law of the dead, is that by\nwhich the millions prefer to act and think. Though ancient social\ngroupings have been officially abolished, re-groupings of a\ncorresponding sort have been formed, instinctively, throughout the\ncountry districts. In theory the individual is free; in practice he\nis scarcely more free than were his forefathers. Old penalties for\nbreach of custom have been abrogated; yet communal opinion is able to\ncompel the ancient obedience. Legal enactments can nowhere effect\nimmediate [385] change of sentiment and long-established\nusage,--least of all among a people of such fixity of character as\nthe Japanese. Young persons are no more at liberty now, than were\ntheir fathers and mothers under the Shogunate, to marry at will, to\ninvest their means and efforts in undertakings not sanctioned by\nfamily approval, to consider themselves in any way enfranchised from\nfamily authority; and it is probably better for the present that they\nare not. No man is yet complete master of his activities, his time,\nor his means.\n\nThough the individual is now registered, and made directly\naccountable to the law, while the household has been relieved from\nits ancient responsibility for the acts of its members, still the\nfamily practically remains the social unit, retaining its patriarchal\norganization and its particular cult. Not unwisely, the modern\nlegislators have protected this domestic religion: to weaken its bond\nat this time were to weaken the foundations of the national moral\nlife,--to introduce disintegrations into the most deeply seated\nstructures of the social organism. The new codes forbid the man who\nbecomes by succession the head of a house to abolish that house: he\nis not permitted to suppress a cult. No legal presumptive heir to the\nheadship of a family can enter into another family as adopted son or\nhusband; nor can he abandon the paternal house to establish an\nindependent [386] family of his own.* Provision has been made to meet\nextraordinary cases; but no individual is allowed, without good and\nsufficient reason, to free himself from those traditional obligations\nwhich the family-cult imposes. As regards adoption, the new law\nmaintains the spirit of the old, with fresh provision for the\nconservation of the family religion,--permitting any person of legal\nage to adopt a son, on the simple condition that the person adopted\nshall be younger than the adopter. The new divorce-laws do not permit\nthe dismissal of a wife for sterility alone (and divorce for such\ncause had long been condemned by Japanese sentiment); but, in view of\nthe facilities given for adoption, this reform does not endanger the\ncontinuance of the cult. An interesting example of the manner in\nwhich the law still protects ancestor-worship is furnished by the\nfact that an aged and childless widow, last representative of her\nfamily, is not permitted to remain without an heir. She must adopt a\nson if she can: if she cannot, because of poverty, or for other\nreasons, [387] the local authorities will provide a son for\nher,--that is to say, a male heir to maintain the family-worship.\nSuch official interference would seem to us tyrannical: it is simply\npaternal, and represents the continuance of an ancient regulation\nintended to protect the bereaved against what Eastern faith still\ndeems the supreme misfortune,--the extinction of the home-cult.... In\nother respects the later codes allow of individual liberty unknown in\nprevious generations. But the ordinary person would not dream of\nattempting to claim a legal right opposed to common opinion. Family\nand public sentiment are still more potent than law. The Japanese\nnewspapers frequently record tragedies resulting from the prevention\nor dissolution of unions; and these tragedies afford strong proof\nthat most young people would prefer even suicide to the probable\nconsequence of a successful appeal to law against family decision.\n\n[*That is to say, he cannot separate himself from the family in law;\nbut he is free to live in a separate house. The tendency to further\ndisintegration of the family is shown by a custom which has been\ngrowing of late years,--especially in Tokyo: the custom of demanding,\nas a condition of marriage, that the bride shall not be obliged to\nlive in the same house with the parents of the bridegroom. This\ncustom is yet confined to certain classes, and has been adversely\ncriticised. Many young men, on marrying, leave the parental home to\nbegin independent housekeeping,--though remaining legally attached\nto their parents' families, of course.... It will perhaps be asked,\nWhat becomes of the cult in such cases? The cult remains in the\nparental home. When the parents die, then the ancestral tablets are\ntransferred to the home of the married son.]\n\nThe communal form of coercion is less apparent in the large cities;\nbut everywhere it endures to some extent, and in the agricultural\ndistricts it remains supreme. Between the new conditions and the old\nthere is this difference, that the man who finds the yoke of his\ndistrict hard to bear can flee from it: he could not do so fifty\nyears ago. But he can flee from it only to enter into another state\nof subordination of nearly the same kind. Full [388] advantage,\nnevertheless, has been taken of this modern liberty of movement:\nthousands yearly throng to the cities; other thousands travel over\nthe country, from province to province; working for a year or a\nseason in one place, then going to another, with little more to hope\nfor than experience of change. Emigration also has been taking place\nupon an extensive scale; but for the common class of emigrants, at\nleast, the advantage of emigration is chiefly represented by the\nchance of earning larger wages. A Japanese emigrant community abroad\norganizes itself upon the home-plan;* and the individual emigrant\nprobably finds himself as much under communal coercion in Canada,\nHawaii, or the Philippine Islands, as he could ever have been in his\nnative province. Needless to say that in foreign countries such\ncoercion is more than compensated by the aid and protection which the\ncommunal organization insures. But with the constantly increasing\nnumber of restless spirits at home, and the ever widening experience\nof Japanese emigrants abroad, it would seem likely that the power of\nthe commune for compulsory cooperation must become considerably\nweakened in the near future.\n\n[*Except as regards the communal cult, perhaps.  The domestic cult is\ntransplanted; emigrants who go abroad, accompanied by their families,\ntake the ancestral tablets with them. To what extent the communal\ncult may have been established in emigrant communities, I have not\nyet been able to learn. It would appear, however, that the absence of\nUjigami in certain emigrant settlements is to be accounted for solely\nby the pecuniary difficulty of constructing such temples and\nmaintaining competent officials. In Formosa, for example, though the\ndomestic ancestor-cult is maintained in the homes of the Japanese\nsettlers, Ujigami have not yet been established. The government,\nhowever, has erected several important Shinto temples; and I am told\nthat some of these will probably be converted into Ujigami when the\nJapanese population has increased enough to justify the measure.]\n\n[389] As for the tribal or clan law, it survives to the degree of\nremaining almost omnipotent in administrative circles, and in all\npolitics. Voters, officials, legislators, do not follow principles in\nour sense of the word: they follow men, and obey commands. In these\nspheres of action the penalties of disobedience to orders are endless\nas well as serious: by a single such offence one may array against\noneself powers that will continue their hostile operation for years\nand years,--unreasoningly, implacably, blindly, with the weight and\npersistence of natural forces,--of winds or tides. Any comprehension\nof the history of Japanese politics during the last fifteen years is\nnot possible without some knowledge of clan-history. A political\nleader, fully acquainted with the history of clan-parties, and their\noffshoots, can accomplish marvellous things; and even foreign\nresidents, with long experience of Japanese life, have been able, by\npressing upon clan-interests, to exercise a very real power in\ngovernment circles. But to the ordinary foreigner, Japanese\ncontemporary politics must appear a chaos, a disintegration, a\nhopeless flux. The truth is that most things remain, under varying\noutward forms, \"as all were ordered, ages since,\"--though the [390]\nshiftings have become more rapid, and the results less obvious, in\nthe haste of an era of steam and electricity.\n\nThe greatest of living Japanese statesmen, the Marquis Ito, long ago\nperceived that the tendency of political life to agglomerations, to\nclan-groupings, presented the most serious obstacle to the successful\nworking of constitutional government. He understood that this\ntendency could be opposed only by considerations weightier than\nclan-interests, considerations worthy of supreme sacrifice. He\ntherefore formed a party of which every member was pledged to pass\nover clan-interests, clique-interests, personal and every other kind\nof interests, for the sake of national interests. Brought into\ncollision with a hostile cabinet in 1903, this party achieved the\nfeat of controlling its animosities even to the extent of maintaining\nits foes in power; but large fragments broke off in the process. So\nprofoundly is the grouping-tendency, the clan-sentiment, identified\nwith national character, that the ultimate success of Marquis Ito's\npolicy must still be considered doubtful. Only a national danger--the\ndanger of war,--has yet been able to weld all parties together, to\nmake all wills work as one.\n\nNot only politics, but nearly all phases of modern life, yield\nevidence that the disintegration of the old society has been\nsuperficial rather than fundamental. Structures dissolved have\nrecrystallized, taking forms [391] dissimilar in aspect to the\noriginal forms, but inwardly built upon the same plan. For the\ndissolutions really effected represented only a separation of masses,\nnot a breaking up of substance into independent units; and these\nmasses, again cohering, continue to act only as masses. Independence\nof personal action, in the Western sense, is still almost\ninconceivable. The individual of every class above the lowest must\ncontinue to be at once coercer and coerced. Like an atom within a\nsolid body, he can vibrate; but the orbit of his vibration is fixed.\nHe must act and be acted upon in ways differing little from those of\nancient time.\n\nAs for being acted upon, the average man is under three kinds of\npressure: pressure from above, exemplified in the will of his\nsuperiors; pressure about him, represented by the common will of his\nfellows and equals; pressure from below, represented by the general\nsentiment of his inferiors. And this last sort of coercion is not the\nleast formidable.\n\nIndividual resistance to the first kind of pressure--that represented\nby authority--is not even to be thought of; because the superior\nrepresents a clan, a class, an exceedingly multiple power of some\ndescription; and no solitary individual, in the present order of\nthings, can strive against a combination. To resist injustice he must\nfind ample support, in [392] which case his resistance does not\nrepresent individual action.\n\nResistance to the second kind of pressure--communal coercion\n--signifies ruin, loss of the right to form a part of the social\nbody.\n\nResistance to the third sort of pressure, embodied in the common\nsentiment of inferiors, may result in almost anything,--from\nmomentary annoyance to sudden death,--according to circumstances.\n\nIn all forms of society these three kinds of pressure are exerted to\nsome degree; but in Japanese society, owing to inherited tendency,\nand traditional sentiment, their power is tremendous.\n\nThus, in every direction, the individual finds himself confronted by\nthe despotism of collective opinion: it is impossible for him to act\nwith safety except as one unit of a combination. The first kind of\npressure deprives him of moral freedom, exacting unlimited obedience\nto orders; the second kind of pressure denies him the right to use\nhis best faculties in the best way for his own advantage (that is to\nsay, denies him the right of free competition); the third kind of\npressure compels him, in directing the actions of others, to follow\ntradition, to forbear innovations, to avoid making any changes,\nhowever beneficial, which do not find willing acceptance on the part\nof his inferiors.\n\nThese are the social conditions which, under [393] normal\ncircumstances, make for stability, for conservation; and they\nrepresent the will of the dead. They are inevitable to a militant\nstate; they make the strength of that state; they render facile the\ncreation and maintenance of formidable armies. But they are not\nconditions favourable to success in the future international\ncompetition,--in the industrial struggle for existence against\nsocieties incomparably more plastic, and of higher mental energy.\n\n\n\n[394]\n\n[395]\n\nMODERN RESTRAINTS\n\nFor even a vague understanding of modern Japan, it will be necessary\nto consider the effect of the three forms of social coercion,\nmentioned in the preceding chapter, as restraints upon individual\nenergy and capacity. All three represent survivals of the ancient\nreligious responsibility. I shall treat of them in order inverse,\nbeginning with the under-pressure.\n\nIt has often been asserted by foreign observers that the real power\nin Japan is exercised not from above, but from below. There is some\ntruth in this assertion, but not all the truth: the conditions are\nmuch too complex to be covered by any general statement. What cannot\nbe gainsaid is that superior authority has always been more or less\nrestrained by tendencies to resistance from below.... At no time in\nJapanese history, for example, do the peasants appear to have been\nleft without recourse against excessive oppression,--notwithstanding\nall the humiliating regulations imposed on their existence. They were\nsuffered to frame their own village-laws, to estimate the possible\namount of [396] their tax-payments,--and to make protest--through\nofficial channels--against unmerciful exaction. They were made to pay\nas much as they could; but they were not reduced to bankruptcy or\nstarvation; and their holdings were mostly secured to them by laws\nforbidding the sale or alienation of family property. Such was at\nleast the general rule. There were, however, wicked daimyo, who\ntreated their farmers with extreme cruelty, and found ways to prevent\ncomplaints or protests from reaching the higher authorities. The\nalmost invariable result of such tyranny was revolt; and the tyrant\nwas then made responsible for the disorder, and punished. Though\ndenied in theory, the right of the peasant to rebel against\noppression was respected in practice; the revolt was punished, but\nthe oppressor was likewise punished. Daimyo were obliged to reckon\nwith their farmers in regard to any fresh imposition of taxes or\nforced labour. We also find that although heimin were made subject to\nthe military class, it was possible for artizans and commercial folk\nto form, in the great cities, strong associations by which military\ntyranny was kept in check. Everywhere the reverential deference of\nthe common people to authority, as exercised in usual directions,\nseems to have been accompanied by an extraordinary readiness to defy\nauthority exercised in other directions.\n\nIt may seem strange that a society in which religion [397] and\ngovernment, ethics and custom, were practically identical, should\nfurnish striking examples of resistance to authority. But the\nreligious fact itself supplies the explanation. From the earliest\nperiod there was firmly established, in the popular mind, the\nconviction that implicit obedience to authority was the universal\nduty under all ordinary circumstances. But with this conviction there\nwas united another,--that resistance to authority (excepting the\nsacred authority of the Supreme Ruler) was equally a duty under\nextraordinary circumstances. And these seemingly opposed convictions\nwere not really inconsistent. So long as rule followed precedent,--so\nlong as its commands, however harsh, did not conflict with sentiment\nand tradition,--that rule was regarded as religious, and there was\nabsolute submission. But when rulers presumed to break with ethical\nusage,--in a spirit of reckless cruelty or greed,--then the people\nmight feel it a religious obligation to resist with all the zeal of\nvoluntary martyrdom. The danger-line for every form of local tyranny\nwas departure from precedent. Even the conduct of regents and princes\nwas much restrained by the common opinion of their retainers, and by\nthe knowledge that certain kinds of arbitrary conduct were likely to\nprovoke assassination.\n\nDeference to the sentiment of vassals and retainers was from ancient\ntime a necessary policy with Japanese rulers,--not merely because of\nthe peril involved [398] by needless oppression, but much more\nbecause of the recognition that duties are well performed only when\nsubordinates feel assured that their efforts will be fairly\nconsidered, and that sudden needless changes will not be made to\ntheir disadvantage. This old policy still characterizes Japanese\nadministration; and the deference of high authority to collective\nopinion astonishes and puzzles the foreign observer. He perceives\nonly that the conservative power of sentiment, as exercised by groups\nof subordinates, remains successfully opposed to those conditions of\ndiscipline which we think indispensable to social progress. Just as\nin Old Japan the ruler of a district was held, responsible for the\nbehaviour of his subjects, so to-day, in New Japan, every official in\ncharge of a department is held responsible for the smooth working of\nits routine. But this does not mean that he is responsible only for\nthe efficiency of a service: it means that he is held responsible\nlikewise for failure to satisfy the wishes of his subordinates, or at\nleast the majority of his subordinates. If this majority be\ndispleased with their minister, governor, president, manager, chief,\nor director, the fact is considered proof of administrative\nincompetency.... Perhaps educational circles afford the most curious\nexamples of this old idea of responsibility. A student-revolt is\ncommonly supposed to mean, not that the students are intractable, but\nthat the superintendent or teacher does not know [399] his business.\nThus the principal of a college, the director of a school, holds his\noffice only on the condition that his rule gives satisfaction to a\nmajority of the students. In the higher government institutions, each\nprofessor or lecturer is made responsible for the success of his\nlectures. No matter how great may be his ability in other directions,\nthe official instructor, unable to make himself liked by his pupils,\nwill be got rid of in short order--unless some powerful protectors\ninterfere on his behalf. The efforts of the man will never be judged\n(officially) by any accepted standard of excellence,--never estimated\nby their intrinsic worth; they will be considered only according to\ntheir direct effect upon the average of minds.* Almost everywhere\nthis antique system of responsibility is maintained. A minister of\nstate is by public sentiment made responsible not only for the\nresults of his administration, but likewise for any scandals or\ntroubles that may occur in his department, independently of the\nquestion whether he could or could not have prevented them. To a\nconsiderable degree, therefore, it is true that the ultimate [400]\npower is below. The highest official is not able with impunity to\nimpose his personal will in certain directions; and, for the time\nbeing, it is probably better that his powers are thus restrained.\n\n[*Unjust as this policy must appear to the Western reader (a policy\nwhich certainly presupposes ethical conditions very different from\nour own), it was probably at one time the best possible under the new\norder. Considering the extraordinary changes suddenly made in the\neducational system, it will be obvious that a teacher's immediate\nvalue was likely---twenty years ago--to depend on his ability to make\nhis teaching attractive. If he attempted to teach either above or\nbelow the average capacity of his pupils, or if he made his\ninstruction unpalatable to minds greedy for new knowledge, but\ninnocent as to method, his inexperience could be corrected by the\nwill of his class.]\n\nFrom above downwards through all the grades of society, the same\nsystem of responsibility, and the same restraints upon individual\nexercise of will, persist under varying forms. The conditions within\nthe household differ but little in this regard from the conditions in\na government department: no householder, for example, can impose his\nwill, beyond certain fixed limits, even upon his own servants or\ndependents. Neither for love nor money can a good servant be induced\nto break with traditional custom; and the old opinion, that the value\nof a servant is proved by such inflexibility, has been justified by\nthe experience of centuries. Popular sentiment remains conservative;\nand the apparent zeal for superficial innovation affords no\nindication of the real order of existence. Fashions and formalities,\nhouse-interiors and street-vistas, habits and methods, and all the\nouter aspects of life are changed; but the old regimentation of\nsociety persists under all these surface-shiftings; and the national\ncharacter remains little affected by all the transformations of\nMeiji.\n\nThe second kind of coercion to which the individual is subjected\n--the communal, or communistic--[401] seems likely to prove\nmischievous in the near future, as it signifies practical suppression\nof the right to compete.... The everyday life of any Japanese city\noffers numberless suggestions of the manner in which the masses\ncontinue to think and to act by groups. But no more familiar and\nforcible illustration of the fact can be cited than that which is\nfurnished by the code of the kurumaya or jinrikisha-men. According to\nits terms, one runner must not attempt to pass by another going in\nthe same direction. Exceptions have been made, grudgingly, in favour\nof runners in private employ,--men selected for strength and speed,\nwho are expected to use their physical powers to the utmost. But\namong the tens of thousands of public kurumaya, it is the rule that a\nyoung and active man must not pass by an old and feeble man, nor even\nby a needlessly slow and lazy man. To take advantage of one's own\nsuperior energy, so as to force competition, is an offence against\nthe calling, and certain to be resented. You engage a good runner,\nwhom you order to make all speed: he springs away splendidly, and\nkeeps up the pace until he happens to overtake some weak or lazy\npuller, who seems to be moving as slowly as the gait permits.\nTherewith, instead of bounding by, your man drops immediately behind\nthe slow-going vehicle, and slackens his pace almost to a walk. For\nhalf an hour, or more, you may be thus delayed by the regulation\nwhich obliges the strong and [402] swift to wait for the weak and\nslow. An angry appeal is made to the runner who dares to pass\nanother; and the idea behind the words might be thus expressed:--\"You\nknow that you are breaking the rule,--that you are acting to the\ndisadvantage of your comrades! This is a hard calling; and our lives\nwould be made harder than they are, if there were no rules to prevent\nselfish competition!\" Of course there is no thought of the\nconsequences of such rules to business interests at large.... Now it\nis not unjust to say that this moral code of the kurumaya exemplifies\nan unwritten law which has been always imposed, in varying forms,\nupon every class of workers in Japan: \"You must not try, without\nspecial authorization, to pass your fellows.\" ... La carriere est\nouverte aux talents--mais la concurrence est defendue!\n\nOf course the modern communal restraint upon free competition\nrepresents the survival and extension of that altruistic spirit which\nruled the ancient society,--not the mere continuance of any fixed\ncustom. In feudal times there were no kurumaya; but all craftsmen and\nall labourers formed guilds or companies; and the discipline\nmaintained by those guilds or companies prohibited competition as\nundertaken for merely personal advantage. Similar or nearly similar\nforms of organization are maintained by artizans and labourers\nto-day; and the relation [403] of any outside employer to skilled\nlabour is regulated, by the guild or company, in the old communistic\nmanner.... Let us suppose, for instance, that you wish to have a good\nhouse built. For that undertaking, you will have to deal with a very\nintelligent class of skilled labour; for the Japanese house-carpenter\nmay be ranked with the artist almost as much as with the artizan. You\nmay apply to a building-company; but, as a general rule, you will do\nbetter by applying to a master-carpenter, who combines in himself the\nfunctions of architect, contractor, and builder. In any event you\ncannot select and hire workmen: guild-regulations forbid. You can\nonly make your contract; and the master-carpenter, when his plans\nhave been approved, will undertake all the rest,--purchase and\ntransport of material,--hire of carpenters, plasterers, tilers,\nmat-makers, screen-fitters, brass-workers, stone-cutters, locksmiths,\nand glaziers. For each master-carpenter represents much more than his\nown craft-guild: he has his clients in every trade related to\nhouse-building and house-furnishing; and you must not dream of trying\nto interfere with his claims and privileges. He builds your house\naccording to contract; but that is only the beginning of the\nrelation. You have really made with him an agreement which you must\nnot break, without good and sufficient reason, for the rest of your\nlife. Whatever afterwards may happen to any part [404] of your\nhouse,--walls, floor, ceiling, roof, foundation,--you must arrange\nfor repairs with him, never with anybody else. Should the roof leak,\nfor instance, you must not send for the nearest tiler or tinsmith; if\nthe plaster cracks, you must not send for a plasterer. The man who\nbuilt your house holds himself responsible for its condition; and he\nis jealous of that responsibility: none but he has the right to send\nfor the plasterer, the roofer, the tinsmith. If you interfere with\nthat right, you may have some unpleasant surprises. If you make\nappeal to the law against that right, you will find that you can get\nno carpenter, tiler, or plasterer to work for you at any terms.\nCompromise is always possible; but the guilds will resent a needless\nappeal to the law. And after all, these craft-guilds are usually\nfaithful performers, and well worth conciliating.\n\nOr take the occupation of landscape-gardening.  You want a pretty\ngarden; and you hire a professional gardener who comes to you well\nrecommended. He makes the garden; and you pay his price. But your\ngardener really represents a company; and by engaging him it is\nunderstood that either he, or some other member of the gardeners'\ncorporation to which he belongs, will continue to take care of your\ngarden as long as you own it. At each season he will pay your garden\na visit, and put everything to rights--he will clip the hedges, prune\nthe fruit trees, [405] repair the fences, train the climbing-plants,\nlook after the flowers,--putting up paper awnings to protect delicate\nshrubs from the sun during the hot season, or making little tents of\nstraw to shelter them in time of frost;--he will do a hundred useful\nand ingenious things for a very small remuneration. You cannot\ndismiss him, however, without good reason, and hire another gardener\nto take his place. No other gardener would serve you at any price,\nunless assured that the original relation had been dissolved by\nmutual consent. If you have just cause for complaint, the matter can\nbe settled through arbitration; and the guild will see that you have\nno further trouble. But you cannot dismiss your gardener without\ncause, merely to engage another.\n\nThe above examples will suffice to show the character of the old\ncommunistic organization which is yet maintained in a hundred forms.\nThis communism suppressed competition, except as between groups; but\nit insured good work, and secured easy conditions for the workman. It\nwas the best system possible in those ages of isolation when there\nwas no such thing as want, and when the population, for yet\nundetermined causes, appears to have remained always below the\nnumerical level at which serious pressure begins.... Another\ninteresting survival is represented by existing conditions of\napprenticeship [406] and service,--conditions which also originated\nin the patriarchal organization, and imposed other kinds of restraint\nupon competition. Under the old regime service was, for the most\npart, unsalaried. Boys taken into a commercial house to learn the\nbusiness, or apprentices bound to a master-workman, were boarded,\nlodged, clothed, and even educated by their patron, with whom they\nmight hope to pass the rest of their lives. But they were not paid\nwages until they had learned the business or the trade of their\nemployer, and were fully capable of managing a business or a workshop\nof their own. To a considerable degree these conditions still prevail\nin commercial centres,--though the merchant or patron seldom now\nfinds it necessary to send his clerk or apprentice to school. Many of\nthe great commercial houses pay salaries only to men of great\nexperience: other employes are only trained and cared for until their\nterm of service ends, when the most clever among them will be\nreengaged as experts, and the others helped to start in business for\nthemselves. In like manner the apprentice to a trade, when his term\nexpires, may be reengaged by his master as a hired journeyman, or\nhelped to find permanent employ elsewhere. These paternal and filial\nrelations between employer and employed have helped to make life\npleasant and labour cheerful; and the quality of all industrial\nproduction must suffer much when they disappear.\n\n[407] Even in private domestic service the patriarchal system still\nprevails to a degree that is little imagined; and this subject\ndeserves more than a passing mention. I refer especially to female\nservice. The maid-servant, according to the old custom, is not\nprimarily responsible to her employers, but to her own family; and\nthe terms of her service must be arranged with her family, who pledge\nthemselves for their daughter's good behaviour. As a general rule, a\nnice girl does not seek domestic service for the sake of the wages\n(which it is now the custom to pay), nor for the sake of a living,\nbut chiefly to prepare herself for marriage; and this preparation is\ndesired as much in the hope of doing credit to her own family, as in\nthe hope of better fitting herself for membership in the family of\nher future husband. The best servants are country girls; and they are\nsometimes put out to service very young. Parents are careful about\nchoosing the family into which their daughter thus enters: they\nparticularly desire that the house be one in which a girl can learn\nnice ways,--therefore a house in which things are ordered according\nto the old etiquette. A good girl expects to be treated rather as a\nhelper than as a hireling,--to be kindly considered, and trusted, and\nliked. In an old-fashioned household the maid is indeed so treated;\nand the relation is not a brief one--from three to five years being\nthe term of service usually agreed upon. But when a girl is [408]\ntaken into service at the age of eleven or twelve, she will probably\nremain for eight or ten years. Besides wages, she is entitled to\nreceive from her employers the gift of a dress, twice every year,\nbesides other necessary articles of clothing; and she is entitled\nalso to a certain number of holidays. Such wages, or presents in\nmoney, as she receives, should enable her to provide herself, by\ndegrees, with a good wardrobe. Except in the event of some\nextraordinary misfortune, her parents will make no claim upon her\nwages; but she remains subject to them; and when she is called home\nto be married, she must go. During the period of her service, the\nservices of her family are also at the disposal of her employers.\nEven if the mistress or master desire no recognition of the interest\ntaken in the girl, some recognition will certainly be made. If the\nservant be a farmer's daughter, it is probable that gifts of\nvegetables, fruits, or fruit trees, garden-plants or other country\nproducts, will be sent to the house at intervals fixed by custom;--if\nthe parents belong to the artizan-class, it is likely that some\ncreditable example of handicraft will be presented as a token of\ngratitude. The gratitude of the parents is not for the wages or the\ndresses given to their daughter, but for the practical education she\nreceives, and for the moral and material care taken of her, as a\ntemporarily adopted child of the house. The employers may reciprocate\nsuch attentions [409] on the part of the parents by contributing to\nthe girl's wedding outfit. The relation, it will be observed, is\nentirely between families, not between individuals; and it is a\npermanent relation. Such a relation, in feudal ages, might continue\nthrough many generations.\n\nThe patriarchal conditions which these survivals exemplify helped to\nmake existence easy and happy. Only from a modern point of view is it\npossible to criticise them. The worst that can be said about them is\nthat their moral value was chiefly conservative, and that they tended\nto repress effort in new directions. But where they still endure,\nJapanese life keeps something of its ancient charm; and where they\nhave disappeared, that charm has vanished forever.\n\nThere remains to be considered a third form of restraint,--that\nexercised upon the individual by official authority. This also\npresents us with various survivals, which have their bright as well\nas their dark aspects.\n\nWe have seen that the individual has been legally freed from most of\nthe obligations imposed by the ancient law. He is no longer obliged\nto follow a particular occupation; he is able to travel; he is at\nliberty to marry into a higher or a lower class than his own; he is\nnot even forbidden to change his religion; he can do a great many\nthings--at his own [410] risk. But where the law leaves him free, the\nfamily and the community do not; and the persistence of old sentiment\nand custom nullifies many of the rights legally conferred. Precisely\nin the same way, his relations to higher authority are still\ncontrolled by traditions which maintain, in despite of constitutional\nlaw, many of the ancient restraints, and not a little of the ancient\ncoercion. In theory any man of great talent and energy may rise, from\nrank to rank, up to the highest positions. But as private life is\nstill controlled to no small degree by the old communism, so public\nlife is yet controlled by survivals of class or clan despotism. The\nchances for ability to rise without assistance, to win its way to\nrank and power, are extraordinarily small; since to contend alone\nagainst an opposition that thinks by groups, and acts by masses, must\nbe almost hopeless. Only commercial or industrial life now offers\nreally fair opportunities to capable men. The few talented persons of\nhumble origin who do succeed in official directions owe their success\nchiefly to party-help or clan-patronage: in order to force any\nrecognition of personal ability, group must be opposed to group.\nAlone, no man is likely to accomplish anything by mere force of\ncompetition, outside of trade or commerce.... It is true, of course,\nthat individual talent must in every country encounter many forms of\nopposition. It is likewise true that the malevolence of envy and the\nbrutalities of class-prejudice [411] have their sociological worth:\nthey help to make it impossible for any but the most gifted to win\nand to keep success. But in Japan the peculiar constitution of\nsociety lends excessive power to social intrigues directed against\nobscure ability, and makes them highly injurious to the interests of\nthe nation;--for at no previous time in her history has Japan needed,\nso much as now, the best capacities of her best men, irrespective of\nclass or condition.\n\nBut all this was inevitable in the period of reconstruction. More\nsignificant is the fact that in no single department of its\nmultitudinous service does the Government yet offer substantial\nreward to rising merit. No matter how well a man may strive to win\nGovernment approbation, he must strive for little more than honour\nand the bare means of existence. The costliest efforts are no more\nhighly paid in proportion to their worth than the cheapest; the most\ninvaluable services are scarcely better recognized than those most\neasily dispensed with or replaced. (There have been some remarkable\nexceptions: I am stating only the general rule.) By extraordinary\nenergy, patience, and cleverness, one may reach, with class-help,\nsome position which in Europe would assure comfort as well as honour;\nbut the emoluments of such a position in Japan will scarcely cover\nthe actual cost of living. Whether in the army or in the navy, in the\ndepartments of justice, of education, of communications, or of [412]\nhome affairs,--the differences in remuneration nowhere represent the\ndifferences in capacity and responsibility. To rise from grade to\ngrade signifies pecuniarily almost nothing,--for the expenses of each\nhigher position augment out of all proportion to the salaries fixed\nby law. The general rule has been to exact everywhere the greatest\npossible amount of service for the least possible amount of pay.* Any\none unacquainted with the social history [413] of the country might\nsuppose that the policy of the Government toward its employes\nconsisted in substituting empty honours for material advantages. But\nthe truth is that the Government has simply maintained, under modern\nforms, the ancient feudal condition of service,--service in exchange\nfor the means of simple but honourable living. In feudal times the\nfarmer was expected to pay all that he could pay for the right to\nexist; the artist or artizan was expected to content himself with the\ngood fortune of having a distinguished patron; even the ordinary\nsamurai were supplied with barely more than the necessary by their\nliege-lords. To receive considerably more than the necessary\nsignified extraordinary favour; and the gift was usually accompanied\nby promotion. But although the same policy is yet successfully\nmaintained by Government, under the modern system of money-payments,\nthe conditions everywhere, outside of commercial life, are\nincomparably harder than in feudal times. Then the poorest samurai\nwas secured against want, and not liable to be dismissed from his\npost without fault. Then the teacher received no salary; but the\nrespect of the community and the gratitude of his pupils assured him\nof the means to live [414] respectably. Then the artizans were\npatronized by great lords who vied with each other in the\nencouragement of humble genius. They might expect the genius to be\nsatisfied with merely nominal payment, so far as money was concerned;\nbut they secured him against want or discomfort, allowed him ample\nleisure to perfect his work, made him happy in the certainty that his\nbest would be prized and praised. But now that the cost of living has\ntripled or quadrupled, even the artist and the artizan have small\nencouragement to do their best: cheap rapid work is replacing the\nbeautiful leisurely work of the old days; and the best traditions of\nthe crafts are doomed to perish. It cannot even be said that the\nstate of the agricultural classes to-day is happier or better than in\nthe time when a farmer's land could not legally be taken from him.\nAnd as the cost of life continues always to increase, it is evident\nthat at no distant time, the present patient order of things will\nbecome impossible.\n\n[*Salaries of judges range from 70 pounds to 500 pounds per\nannum,--the latter figure representing the highest possible\nemolument. The highest salary allowed to a Japanese professor in the\nimperial universities has been fixed at 120 pounds. The wages of\nemployees in the postal departments is barely sufficient to meet the\ncost of living. The police are paid from 1 pound to 1 pound 10s. per\nmonth, according to locality; and the average pay of school-teachers\nis yet lower (being 9 yen 50 sen, or about 19s. per month),--many\nreceiving less than 7s. a month.\n\nReaders may be interested in the following table of army-payments\n(1904):--\n\n                           MONTHLY PAY   ALLOWANCE FOR    TOTAL\n                                          HOUSE-RENT\n                               yen             yen         yen\n\nGeneral                  500 (50 pounds)      25:00      525:00\nLieutenant-General            333             18:75      351:75\nMajor-General                 263             12:50      275:50\nColonel                       179             10:00      189:00\nLieutenant-Colonel            146              8:75      154:75\nMajor                         102              7:50      109:50\nCaptain (1st grade)            70              4:75       74:75\n        (2nd grade)            60              4:75       64:75\nLieutenant (1st grade)         45              4:00       49:00\n           (2nd grade)         34              4:00       38:00\nSecond Lieutenant              30              3:50       33:50\n\nWhen these rates of pay were fixed, about twenty years ago,\nhouse-rent was cheap: a good house could be rented anywhere at 3 Yen\nor 4 Yen per month. To-day in Tokyo an officer can scarcely rent even\na very small house at less than 19 yen or 20 yen; and prices of\nfood-stuffs have tripled. Yet there have been very few complaints.\nOfficers whose pay will not allow them to rent houses hire rooms\nwherever they can. Many suffer hardship; but all are proud of the\nprivilege of serving, and no one dreams of resigning.]\n\nTo many it would seem that a wise government must recognize the\nimpracticability of indefinitely maintaining its present demand for\nself-sacrifice, must perceive the necessity of encouraging talent,\ninviting fair competition, and making the prizes of life large enough\nto stimulate healthy egoism. But it is possible that the Government\nhas been acting more wisely than outward appearances would indicate.\nSeveral years ago a Japanese official made in [415] my presence this\ncurious observation: \"Our Government does not wish to encourage\ncompetition beyond the necessary. The people are not prepared for it;\nand if it were strongly encouraged, the worst side of character would\ncame to the surface.\" How far this statement really expressed any\npolicy I do not know. But every one is aware that free competition\ncan be made as cruel and as pitiless as war,--though we are apt to\nforget what experience must have been undergone before Occidental\nfree competition could become as comparatively merciful, as it is.\nAmong a people trained for centuries to regard all selfish\ncompetition as criminal, and all profit-seeking despicable, any\nsudden stimulation of effort for purely personal advantage might well\nbe impolitic. Evidence as to how little the nation was prepared,\ntwelve or thirteen years ago, for Western forms of free government,\nhas been furnished by the history of the earlier district-elections\nand of the first parliamentary sessions. There was really no personal\nenmity in those furious election-contests, which cost so many lives;\nthere was scarcely any personal antagonism in those parliamentary\ndebates of which the violence astonished strangers. The political\nstruggles were not really between individuals, but between\nclan-interests, or party-interests; and the devoted followers of each\nclan or party understood the new politics only as a new kind of\nwar,--a war of loyalty to be fought for the leader's sake, [416]--a\nwar not to be interfered with by any abstract notions of right or\njustice. Suppose that a people have been always accustomed to think\nof loyalty in relation to persons rather than to principles,--loyalty\nas involving the duty of self-sacrifice regardless of\nconsequence,--it is obvious that the first experiments of such a\npeople with parliamentary government will not reveal any\ncomprehension of fair play in the Western sense. Eventually that\ncomprehension may come; but it will not come quickly. And if you can\npersuade such a people that in other matters every man has a right to\nact according to his own convictions, and for his own advantage,\nindependently of any group to which he may belong, the immediate\nresult will not be fortunate,--because the sense of individual moral\nresponsibility has not yet been sufficiently cultivated outside of\nthe group-relation.\n\nThe probable truth is that the strength of the government up to the\npresent time has been chiefly due to the conservation of ancient\nmethods, and to the survival of the ancient spirit of reverential\nsubmission. Later on, no doubt, great changes will have to be made;\nmeanwhile, much must be bravely endured. Perhaps the future history\nof modern civilization will hold record of nothing more touching than\nthe patient heroism of those myriads of Japanese patriots, content to\naccept, under legal [417] conditions of freedom, the official\nservitude of feudal days,--satisfied to give their talent, their\nstrength, their utmost effort, their lives, for the simple privilege\nof obeying a government that still accepts all sacrifices in the\nfeudal spirit--as a matter of course,--as a national duty. And as a\nnational duty, indeed, the sacrifices are made. All know that Japan\nis in danger, between the terrible friendship of England and the\nterrible enmity of Russia,--that she is poor,--that the cost of\nmaintaining her armaments is straining her resources,--that it is\neverybody's duty to be content with as little as possible. So the\ncomplaints are not many.... Nor has the simple obedience of the\nnation at large been less touching,--especially, perhaps, as regards\nthe imperial order to acquire Western knowledge, to learn Western\nlanguages, to imitate Western ways. Only those who have lived in\nJapan during or before the early nineties are qualified to speak of\nthe loyal eagerness that made self-destruction by over-study a common\nform of death,--the passionate obedience that impelled even children\nto ruin their health in the effort to master tasks too difficult for\ntheir little minds (tasks devised by well-meaning advisers with no\nknowledge of Far-Eastern psychology),--and the strange courage of\npersistence in periods of earthquake and conflagration, when boys and\ngirls used the tiles of their ruined homes for school-slates, and\nbits of fallen plaster for pencils. What [418] tragedies I might\nrelate even of the higher educational life of universities!--of fine\nbrains giving way under pressure of work beyond the capacity of the\naverage European student,--of triumphs won in the teeth of death,--of\nstrange farewells from pupils in the time of the dreaded\nexaminations, as when one said to me: \"Sir, I am very much afraid\nthat my paper is bad, because I came out of the hospital to make\nit--there is something the matter with my heart.\" (His diploma was\nplaced in his hands scarcely an hour before he died.) ... And all\nthis striving--striving not only against difficulties of study, but\nin most cases against difficulties of poverty, and underfeeding, and\ndiscomfort--has been only for duty, and the means to live. To\nestimate the Japanese student by his errors, his failures, his\nincapacity to comprehend sentiments and ideas alien to the experience\nof his race, is the mistake of the shallow: to judge him rightly one\nmust have learned to know the silent moral heroism of which he is\ncapable.\n\n\n\n[419]\n\nOFFICIAL EDUCATION\n\nThe extent to which national character has been fixed by the\ndiscipline of centuries, and the extent or its extraordinary capacity\nto resist change, is perhaps most strikingly indicated by certain\nresults of State education. The whole nation is being educated, with\nGovernment help, upon a European plan; and the full programme\nincludes the chief subjects of Western study, excepting Greek and\nLatin classics. From Kindergarten to University the entire system is\nmodern in outward seeming; yet the effect of the new education is\nmuch less marked in thought and sentiment than might be supposed.\nThis fact is not to be explained merely by the large place which old\nChinese study still occupies in the obligatory programme, nor by\ndifferences of belief--it is much more due to the fundamental\ndifference in the Japanese and the European conceptions of education\nas means to an end. In spite of new system and programme the whole of\nJapanese education is still conducted upon a traditional plan almost\nthe exact opposite of the Western plan. With us, the repressive part\nof moral training begins in early childhood--the European or American\nteacher is strict with the little [420] ones; we think that it is\nimportant to inculcate the duties of behaviour,--the \"must\" and the\n\"must not\" of individual obligation,--as soon as possible. Later on,\nmore liberty is allowed. The well-grown boy is made to understand\nthat his future will depend upon his personal effort and capacity;\nand he is thereafter left, in a great measure, to take care of\nhimself, being occasionally admonished or warned, as seems needful.\nFinally, the adult student of promise and character may become the\nintimate, or, under happy circumstances, even the friend of his\ntutor, to whom he can look for counsel in all difficult situations.\nAnd throughout the whole course of mental and moral training\ncompetition is not only expected, but required. But it is more and\nmore required as discipline is more and more relaxed, with the\npassing of boyhood into manhood. The aim of Western education is the\ncultivation of individual ability and personal character,--the\ncreation of an independent and forceful being.\n\nNow Japanese education has always been conducted, and, in spite of\nsuperficial appearances, is still being conducted, mostly upon the\nreverse plan. Its object never has been to train the individual for\nindependent action, but to train him for cooperative action,--to fit\nhim to occupy an exact place in the mechanism of a rigid society.\nConstraint among ourselves begins with childhood, and gradually\nrelaxes; constraint in Far-Eastern training begins later, [421] and\nthereafter gradually tightens; and it is not a constraint imposed\ndirectly by parents or teachers--which fact, as we shall presently\nsee, makes an enormous difference in results. Not merely up to the\nage of school-life,--supposed to begin at six years,--but\nconsiderably beyond it, a Japanese child enjoys a degree of liberty\nfar greater than is allowed to Occidental children. Exceptional cases\nare common, of course; but the general rule is that the child be\npermitted to do as he pleases, providing that his conduct can cause\nno injury to himself or to others. He is guarded, but not\nconstrained; admonished, but rarely compelled. In short, he is\nallowed to be so mischievous that, as a Japanese proverb says, \"even\nthe holes by the roadside hate a boy of seven or eight years old\"*\n[*By former custom a newly-born child was said to be one year old;\nand in this case the words \"seven or eight years old\" mean \"six or\nseven years old.\"] (Nanatsu, yatsu--michibata no ana desaimon\nnikumu). Punishment is administered only when absolutely necessary;\nand on such occasions, by ancient custom, the entire\nhousehold--servants and all--intercede for the offender; the little\nbrothers and sisters, if any there be, begging in turn to bear the\npenalty instead. Whipping is not a common punishment, except among\nthe roughest classes; the moxa is preferred as a deterrent; and it is\na severe one. To frighten a child by loud harsh words, or angry\nlooks, is condemned by general opinion: all punishment ought [422] to\nbe inflicted as quietly as possible, the punisher calmly admonishing\nthe while. To slap a child about the head, for any reason, is a proof\nof vulgarity and ignorance. It is not customary to punish by\nrestraining from play, or by a change of diet, or by any denial of\naccustomed pleasures. To be perfectly patient with children is the\nethical law. At school the discipline begins; but it is at first so\nvery light that it can hardly be called discipline: the teacher does\nnot act as a master, but rather as an elder brother; and there is no\npunishment beyond a public admonition. Whatever restraint exists is\nchiefly exerted on the child by the common opinion of his class; and\na skilful teacher is able to direct that opinion. Also each class is\nnominally governed by one or two little captains, selected for\ncharacter and intelligence; and when a disagreeable order has to be\ngiven, it is the child-captain, the kyucho, who is commissioned with\nthe duty of giving it. (These little details are worthy of note: I\ncite them only to show how early in school-life begins the discipline\nof opinion, the pressure of the common will, and how perfectly this\npolicy accords with the ethical traditions of the race.) In higher\nclasses the pressure slightly increases; and in higher schools it is\nvery much stronger; the ruling power always being class-sentiment,\nnot the individual will of the teacher. In middle schools the pupils\nbecome serious: class-opinion there attains a force to which the\nteacher [423] himself must bend, as it is quite capable of expelling\nhim for any attempt to override it. Each middle-school class has its\nelected officers, who represent and enforce the moral code of the\nmajority,--the traditional standard of conduct. (This moral standard\nis deteriorating; but it survives everywhere to some degree.)\nFighting or bullying are yet unknown in Japanese schools of this\ngrade for obvious reasons: there can be little indulgence of personal\nanger, and no attempt at personal domination, under a discipline\nenforcing a uniform manner of behaviour. It is never the domination\nof the one over the many that regulates class-life: it is always the\nrule of the many over the one,--and the power is formidable. The\nstudent who consciously or unconsciously offends class-sentiment will\nsuddenly find himself isolated,--condemned to absolute solitude. No\none will speak to him or notice him even outside of the school, until\nsuch time as he decides to make a public apology, when his pardon\nwill depend upon a majority-vote.\n\nSuch temporary ostracism is not unreasonably feared, because it is\nregarded even outside of student-circles as a disgrace; and the\nmemory of it will cling to the offender during the rest of his\ncareer. However high he may rise in official or professional life in\nafter years, the fact that he was once condemned by the general\nopinion of his schoolmates will not be forgotten,--though\ncircumstances may occur [424] which will turn the fact to his\ncredit.... In the great Government schools--to one of which the\nstudent may proceed after graduating from a\nmiddle-school--class-discipline is still more severe. The instructors\nare mostly officials looking for promotion: the students are grown\nmen, preparing for the University, and destined, with few exceptions,\nfor public office. In this quietly and coldly ordered world there is\nlittle place for the joy of youth, and small opportunity for\nsympathetic expansion. There are gatherings and societies; but these\nare arranged or established for practical purposes--chiefly in\nrelation to particular branches of study; there is little time for\nmerry-making, and less inclination. Under all circumstances, a\ncertain formal demeanour is exacted by tradition,--a tradition older\nby far than any public school. Everybody watches everybody:\neccentricities or singularities are quickly marked and quietly\nsuppressed. The results of this class-discipline, as maintained in\nsome institutions, must seem to the foreign observer discomforting.\nWhat most impressed me about these higher official schools was the\nsinister silence of them. In one where I taught for several\nyears--the most conservative school in the country--there were more\nthan a thousand young men, full of life and energy; yet during the\nintervals between classes, or during recreation-hours in the\nplayground, the garden, and the gymnastic hall, the general hush gave\none a strange sense of [425] oppression. One might watch a game of\nfoot-ball being played, and hear nothing but the thud of the kicking;\nor one might watch wrestling-contests in the jiujutsu-room, and hear\nno word spoken for half an hour at a time. (The rules of jiujutsu, it\nis true, require not only silence, but the total suppression of all\nvisible emotional interest on the part of the spectators.) All this\nrepression at first seemed to me very strange--though I knew that\nthirty years previously, the training at samurai-schools compelled\nthe same impassiveness and reticence.\n\nAt last the University is reached,--the great gate of ceremony to\npublic office. Here the student finds himself released from the\nrestraints previously imposed upon his private life,* though the\nclass-will continues to rule him in certain directions. As a rule,\nthe student passes into official life after having graduated,\nmarries, and becomes the head, or the [426] prospective head, of a\nhousehold. How sudden the transformation of the man at this epoch of\nhis career, only those who have observed the transformation can\nimagine. It is then that the full significance of Japanese education\nreveals itself.\n\n[*This release is of recent date; and the results, by the\nacknowledgment of the students themselves, have not been good.\nTwenty-five years ago, University study was so seriously thought\nabout that a scholar who failed, through his own fault, would have\nbeen considered a criminal. There was then a Chinese poem in vogue,\nwhich used to be sung at the departure of youths for the University\nof that time (Daigaku Nanko) by their friends and relations:--\n\n        Danji kokorozashi wo tatete, kyokwan wo idzu;\n        Gaku moshi narazunba, shisudomo kaeradzu,\n\n[The young man, having made a firm resolve, leaves his native home.\nIf he fail to acquire learning, then, even though he die, he must\nnever return.]\n\nIn those years also it was obligatory upon students to live and dress\nsimply, and to abstain from all self-indulgence.]\n\nFew incidents of Japanese life are more surprising than the\nmetamorphosis of the gawky student into the dignified, impassive,\neasy-mannered official. But a little time ago he was respectfully\nasking, cap in hand, the explanation of some text, the meaning of\nsome foreign idiom; to-day, perhaps, he is judging cases in some\ncourt, or managing diplomatic correspondence under ministerial\nsupervision, or directing the management of some public school.\nWhatever you may have thought of his particular capacity as a\nstudent, you will scarcely doubt his particular fitness for the\nposition to which he has been called. Success in study was at best a\nsecondary consideration in the matter of his appointment,--though he\nhad to succeed. He was put through some special course, under high\nprotection, after having been selected for certain qualities of\ncharacter,--or at least for the promise of such qualities. There may\nhave been favouritism in his case; but, generally speaking, capable\nmen are appointed to positions of trust: the Government seldom makes\nserious mistakes. This man has value beyond what mere study could\nmake for him,--some capacity in the direction of management or of\norganization, [427]--some natural force or talent which his training\nhas served to cultivate. According to the quality of his worth, his\nposition was chosen for him in advance. His long, hard schooling has\ntaught him more than books can teach, and more than a stupid person\ncan ever learn: how to read minds and motives,--how to remain\nimpassive under all circumstances,--how to reach a truth quickly by\nsimple questioning,--how to live upon his guard (even against the\nmost intimate of old acquaintances),--how to remain, even when most\namiable, secretive and inscrutable. He has graduated in the art of\nworldly wisdom. He is really a wonderful person, a highly developed\ntype of his race; and no inexperienced Occidental is capable of\njudging him, because his visible acquirements count for very little\nin the measure of his relative value. His University study--his\nEnglish or French or German knowledge--serves him only as so much oil\nto make easy the working of certain official machinery: he esteems\nthis learning only as means to some administrative end; his real\nlearning, considerably deeper, represents the development of the\nJapanese soul of him. Between that mind and any Western mind the\ndistance has become immeasurable. And now, less than ever before,\ndoes he belong to himself. He belongs to a family, to a party, to a\ngovernment: privately he is bound by custom; publicly he must act\naccording to order only, and never dream of yielding to [428] any\nimpulses at variance with order, however generous or sensible such\nimpulses may be. A word might ruin him: he has learned to use no\nwords unnecessarily. By silent submission and tireless observance of\nduty he may rise, and rise quickly: he may become Governor, Chief\njustice, Minister of State, Minister Plenipotentiary; but the higher\nhe rises, the heavier will his bonds become.\n\nLong training in caution and self-control is indeed an indispensable\npreparation for official existence; the ability either to keep a\nposition won, or to resign it with honour, depending much upon such\ntraining. The most sinister circumstance of official life is the\nabsence of moral freedom,--the absence of the right to act according\nto one's own convictions of justice. The subordinate, who desires\nabove all things to keep his place, is not supposed to have personal\nconvictions or sympathies--save by permission. He is not the slave of\na man, but of a system--a system as old as China. Were human nature\nperfect, that system would be perfect; but so long as human nature\nremains what it is now, the system leaves much to be desired.\nEverything may depend upon the personal character of those\ntemporarily intrusted with higher power; and the only choice left for\nthe most capable servant under a bad master may be to resign or to do\nwrong. The strong man faces the problem bravely and resigns; but for\none strong man there are fifty timid ones. [429] Probably the\nprospect of a broken career is much less terrifying than the ancient\nidea of crime attaching to any form of insubordination. As the forms\nof a religion survive after the faith in doctrine has passed away, so\nthe power of Government to coerce even conscience still remains,\nthough religion is no longer identified with Government. The system\nof secrecy, implacably enforced, helps to maintain the vague awe that\nhas always attached to the idea of administrative authority; and such\nauthority is practically omnipotent within those limits which I have\nalready indicated. To be favoured by authority means to experience\nall the illusive pleasure of a suddenly created popularity: an entire\ncommunity, a whole city, is made by a word to turn all the amiable\nside of its human nature toward the favourite,--to charm him into the\nbelief that he is worthy of the best that the world can give him. But\nsuppose that the moving powers happen, latter on, to find the\nfavoured man in the way of some policy--lo! at another whispered word\nhe finds himself, without knowing why, the public enemy. None speak\nto him or salute him or smile upon him--save ironically:\nlong-esteemed friends pass him by without recognition, or, if\npursued, reply to his most earnest questions with all possible\nbrevity and caution. Most likely they do not know the \"why\" of the\nmatter: they only know that orders have been given, and that into the\n[430] reason of orders it is not good to enquire. Even the\nstreet-children know this much, and mock the despondent victim of\nfortune; even the dogs seem instinctively to divine the change and\nbark at him as he passes by.... Such is the power of official\ndispleasure; and the penalty of a blunder or a breach of discipline\nmay extend considerably further--but in feudal times the offender\nwould have been simply told to perform harakiri. Sometimes, when the\nwrong men get into power, the force of authority may be used for\nmalevolent ends; and in such event it requires not a little courage\nto disobey an order to act against conscience. What saved Japanese\nsociety in former ages from the worst results of this form of\ntyranny, was the moral sentiment of the mass,--the common feeling\nthat underlay all submission to authority, and remained always\ncapable, if pressed upon too brutally, of compelling a reaction.\nConditions to-day are more favourable to justice; but it requires\nmuch tact, steadiness, and resolution on the part of a rising\nofficial to steer himself safely among the reefs and the whirlpools\nof the new political life.\n\n                    *    *    *    *    *    *\n\nThe reader will now be able to understand the general character, aim,\nand results of official education as a system. It will be also worth\nwhile to consider in detail certain phases of student-life, which\nequally prove the survival of old conditions and old [431]\ntraditions. I can speak about these matters from personal experience\nas a teacher,--an experience extending over nearly thirteen years.\n\nReaders of Goethe will remember the trustful docility of the student\nreceived by Doctor Mephistopheles in the First Part of Faust, and the\nvery different demeanour of the same student when he reappears, in\nthe Second Part, as Baccalaureus. More than one foreign professor in\nJapan must have been reminded of that contrast by personal\nexperience, and must have wondered whether some one of the early\neducational advisers to the Japanese Government did not play, without\nmalice prepense, the very role of Mephistopheles.... The gentle boy\nwho, with innocent reverence, makes his visit of courtesy to the\nforeign teacher, bringing for gift a cluster of iris-flowers or\nodorous spray of plum-blossoms,--the boy who does whatever he is\ntold, and charms by an earnestness, a trustfulness, a grace of manner\nrarely met with among Western lads of the same age,--is destined to\nundergo the strangest of transformations long before becoming a\nbaccalaureus. You may meet with him a few years later, in the uniform\nof some Higher School, and find it difficult to recognize your former\npupil,--now graceless, taciturn, secretive, and inclined to demand as\na right what could scarcely, with propriety, be requested as a\nfavour. You may find [432] him patronizing,--possibly something\nworse. Later on, at the University, he becomes more formally correct,\nbut also more far away,--so very far away from his boyhood that the\nremoteness is a pain to one who remembers that boyhood. The Pacific\nis less wide and deep than the invisible gulf now extending between\nthe mind of the stranger and the mind of the student. The foreign\nprofessor is now regarded merely as a teaching-machine; and he is\nmore than likely to regret any effort made to maintain an intimate\nrelation with his pupils. Indeed the whole formal system of official\neducation is opposed to the development of any such relation. I am\nspeaking of general facts in this connexion, not of merely personal\nexperiences. No matter what the foreigner may do in the hope of\nfinding his way into touch with the emotional life of his students,\nor in the hope of evoking that interest in certain studies which\nrenders possible an intellectual tie, he must toil in vain. Perhaps\nin two or three cases out of a thousand he may obtain something\nprecious,--a lasting and kindly esteem, based upon moral\ncomprehension; but should he wish for more he must remain in the\nstate of the Antarctic explorer, seeking, month after month, to no\npurpose, some inlet through endless cliffs of everlasting ice. Now\nthe case of the Japanese professor proves the barrier natural, to a\nlarge extent. The Japanese professor can ask for extraordinary\nefforts and, [433] obtain them; he can afford to be easily familiar\nwith his students outside of class; and he can get what no stranger\ncan obtain,--their devotion. The difference has been attributed to\nrace-feeling; but it cannot be so easily and vaguely explained.\n\nSomething of race-sentiment there certainly is; it were impossible\nthat there should not be. No inexperienced foreigner can converse for\none half hour with any Japanese--at least with any Japanese who has\nnot sojourned abroad---and avoid saying something that jars upon\nJapanese good taste or sentiment; and few--perhaps, none--among\nuntravelled Japanese can maintain a brief conversation in any\nEuropean tongue without making some startling impression upon the\nforeign listener. Sympathethic understanding, between minds so\ndifferently constructed, is next to impossible. But the foreign\nprofessor who looks for the impossible--who expects from Japanese\nstudents the same quality of intelligent comprehension that he might\nreasonably expect from Western students--is naturally disturbed. \"Why\nmust there always, remain the width of a world between us?\" is a\nquestion often asked and rarely answered.\n\nSome of the reasons should by this time be obvious to my reader; but\none among them and the most, curious--will not. Before stating it I\nmust observe that while the relation between foreign [434] instructor\nand the Japanese student is artificial, that between the Japanese\nteacher and the student is traditionally one of sacrifice and\nobligation. The inertia encountered by the stranger, the indifference\nwhich chills him at all times, are due in great part to the\nmisapprehension arising from totally opposite conceptions of duty.\nOld sentiment lingers long after old forms have passed away; and how\nmuch of feudal Japan survives in modern Japan, no stranger can\nreadily divine. Probably the bulk of existing sentiment is hereditary\nsentiment: the ancient ideals have not yet been replaced by fresh\nones.... In feudal times the teacher taught without salary: he was\nexpected to devote all his time, thought, and strength to his\nprofession. High honour was attached to that profession; and the\nmatter of remuneration was not discussed,--the instructor trusting\nwholly to the gratitude of parents and pupils. Public sentiment bound\nthem to him with a bond that could not be broken. Therefore a\ngeneral, upon the eve of an assault, would take care that his former\nteacher should have an opportunity to escape from the place\nbeleaguered. The tie between teacher and pupil was in force second\nonly to the tie between parent and child. The teacher sacrificed\neverything for his pupil: the pupil was ready at all times to die for\nhis teacher. Now, indeed, the hard and selfish aspects of Japanese\ncharacter are coming to the surface. But a [435] single fact will\nsufficiently indicate how much of the old ethical sentiment persists\nunder the new and rougher surface: Nearly all the higher educational\nwork accomplished in Japan represents, though aided by Government,\nthe results of personal sacrifice.\n\nFrom the summit of society to the base, this sacrificial spirit\nrules. That a large part of the private income of their Imperial\nMajesties has, for many years, been devoted to public education is\nwell known; but that every person of rank or wealth or high position\neducates students at his private expense, is not generally known. In\nthe majority of cases this help is entirely gratuitous; in a minority\nof cases, the expenses of the student are advanced only, to be repaid\nby instalments at some future time. The reader is doubtless aware\nthat the daimyo in former times used to dispose of the bulk of their\nincomes in supporting and helping their retainers; supplying\nhundreds, in some cases thousands, and in some few cases, even tens\nof thousands, of persons with the necessaries of life; and exacting\nin return military service, loyalty, and obedience. Those former\ndaimyo or their successors--particularly those who are still large\nlandholders--now vie with each other in assisting education. All who\ncan afford it are educating sons or grandsons or descendants of\nformer retainers; the subjects of this patronage being annually\nselected from among the students of [436] schools established in the\nformer daimiates. It is only the rich noble who can now support a\nnumber of students gratuitously, year after year; the poorer men of\nrank cannot care for many. But all, or very nearly all, maintain\nsome,--and this even in cases where the patron's income is so small\nthat the expense could not be borne unless the student were pledged\nto repay it after graduation. In some instances, half of the cost is\nborne by the patron; the student being required to repay the rest.\n\nNow these aristocratic examples are extensively followed through\nother grades of society. Merchants, bankers, and manufacturers--all\nrich men of the commercial and industrial classes--are educating\nstudents. Military officers, civil service officials, physicians,\nlawyers, men of every profession, in short, are doing the same thing.\nPersons whose incomes are too small to permit of much generosity are\nable to help students by employing them as door-keepers, messengers,\ntutors,--giving them board and lodging, and a little pocket-money at\ntimes, in return, for light services. In Tokyo, and in most of the\nlarge cities, almost every large house is guarded by students who are\nbeing thus assisted. As for what the teachers do--that requires\nspecial mention.\n\nThe majority of teachers in the public schools do not receive\nsalaries enabling them to help students with money; but all teachers\nearning more than the [437] bare necessary give aid of some sort.\nAmong the instructors and professors of the higher educational\nestablishments, the helping of students seems to be thought of as a\nmatter of course,--so much a matter of course that we might suspect a\nnew \"tyranny of custom,\" especially in view of the smallness of\nofficial salaries. But no tyranny of custom would explain the\npleasure of sacrifice and the strange persistence of feudal idealism\nwhich are revealed by some extraordinary facts. For example: A\ncertain University professor is known to have supported and educated\na large number of students by dividing among them, during many years,\nnearly the whole of his salary. He lodged, clothed, boarded, and\neducated them, bought their books, and paid their fees,--reserving\nfor himself only the cost of his living, and reducing even that cost\nby living upon hot sweet potatoes. (Fancy a foreign professor in\nJapan putting himself upon a diet of bread and water for the purpose\nof educating gratuitously a number of poor young men!) I know of two\nother cases nearly as remarkable; the helper, in one instance, being\nan old man of more than seventy, who still devotes all his means,\ntime, and knowledge to his ancient ideal of duty. How much obscure\nsacrifice of this kind has been performed by those least able to\nafford it never will be known: indeed, the publication of the facts\nwould only give pain. I am guilty of some indiscretion in mentioning\n[418] even the cases brought to my attention--though human nature is\nhonoured by the mention.... Now it should be evident that while\nJapanese students are accustomed to witness self-denial of this sort\non the part of native professors, they cannot be much impressed by\nany manifestation of interest or sympathy on the part of the foreign\nprofessor, who, though receiving a higher salary than his Japanese\ncolleagues, has no reason and small inclination to imitate their\nexample.\n\nSurely this heroic fact of education sustained by personal\nsacrifices, in the face of unimaginable difficulties, is enough to\nredeem much humbug and wrong. In spite of the corruption which has\nbeen of late years rife in educational circles,--in spite of official\nscandals, intrigues, and shams,--all needed reforms can be hoped for\nwhile the spirit of generous self-denial continues to rule the world\nof teachers and students. I can venture also the opinion that most of\nthe official scandals and failures have resulted from the\ninterference of politics with modern education, or from attempting to\nimitate foreign conventional methods totally at variance with\nnational moral experience. Where Japan has remained true to her old\nmoral ideals she has done nobly and well: where she has needlessly\ndeparted from them, sorrow and trouble have been the natural\nconsequences.\n\nThere are yet other facts in modern education [439] suggesting even\nmore forcibly how much of the old life remains hidden under the new\nconditions, and how rigidly race-character has become fixed in the\nhigher types of mind. I refer chiefly to the results of Japanese\neducation abroad,--a higher special training in German, English,\nFrench, or American Universities. In some directions these results,\nto foreign observation at least, appear to be almost negative.\nConsidering the immense psychological differentiation,--the total\noppositeness of mental structure and habit,--it is astonishing that\nJapanese students have been able to do what they actually have done\nat foreign Universities. To graduate at any European or American\nUniversity of mark, with a mind shaped by Japanese culture, filled\nwith Chinese learning, crammed with ideographs,--is a prodigious\nfeat: scarcely less of a feat than it would be for an American\nstudent to graduate at a Chinese University. Certainly the men sent\nabroad to study are carefully selected for ability; and one\nindispensable requisite for the mission is a power of memory\nincomparably superior to the average Occidental memory, and different\naltogether as to quality,--a memory for details;--nevertheless, the\nfeat is amazing. But with the return to Japan of these young\nscholars, there is commonly an end of effort in the direction of the\nspeciality studied,--unless it happens to have been a purely\npractical subject. Does this signify incapacity for independent work\n[440] upon Occidental lines? incapacity for creative thought? lack of\nconstructive imagination? disinclination or indifference? The history\nof that terrible mental and moral discipline to which the race was so\nlong subjected would certainly suggest such limitations in the modern\nJapanese mind. Perhaps these questions cannot yet be\nanswered,--except, I imagine, as regards the indifference, which is\nself-evident and undisguised. But, independently of any question of\ncapacity or inclination, there is this fact to be considered,--that\nproper encouragement has not yet been given to home-scholarship. The\nplain truth is that young men are sent to foreign seats of learning\nfor other ends than to learn how to devote the rest of their lives to\nthe study of psychology, philology, literature, or modern philosophy.\nThey are sent abroad to fit them for higher posts in\nGovernment-service; and their foreign study is but one obligatory\nepisode in their official career. Each has to qualify himself for\nspecial duty by learning how Western people study and think and feel\nin certain directions, and by ascertaining the range of educational\nprogress in those directions; but he is not ordered to think or to\nfeel like Western people--which would, in any event, be impossible\nfor him. He has not, and probably could not have, any deep personal\ninterest in Western learning outside of the domain of applied\nscience. His business is to learn how to understand such matters from\nthe [441] Japanese, not from the Occidental, point of view. But he\nperforms his part well, does exactly what he has been told to do, and\nrarely anything more. His value to his Government is doubled or\nquadrupled by his allotted experience; but at home--except during a\nfew years of expected duty as professor or lecturer--he will probably\nuse that experience only as a psychological costume of ceremony,--a\nmental uniform to be donned when official occasion may require.\n\nIt is otherwise in the case of men sent abroad for scientific studies\nrequiring, not only intelligence and memory, but natural quickness of\nhand and eye,--surgery, medicine, military specialities. I doubt\nwhether the average efficiency of Japanese surgeons can be surpassed.\nThe study of war, I need hardly say, is one for which the national\nmind and character have inherited aptitude. But men sent abroad\nmerely to win a foreign University-degree, and destined, after a term\nof educational duty, to higher official life, appear to set small\nvalue upon their foreign acquirements. However, even if they could\nwin distinction in Europe by further effort at home, that effort\nwould have to be made at a serious pecuniary sacrifice, and its\nresults could not as yet be fairly appreciated by their own\ncountrymen.\n\nSome of us have wondered at times what the old Egyptians or the old\nGreeks would have done if [442] suddenly brought into dangerous\ncontact with a civilization like our own,--a civilization of applied\nmathematics, with sciences and branch-sciences of which the mere\nnames would fill a dictionary. I think that the history of modern\nJapan suggests very clearly what any wise people, with a civilization\nbased upon ancestor-worship, would have done. They would have\nspeedily reconstructed their patriarchal society to meet the sudden\nperil; they would have adopted, with astonishing success, all the\nscientific machinery that they could use; they would have created a\nformidable army and a highly efficient navy; they would have sent\ntheir young aristocrats abroad to study alien convention, and to\nqualify for diplomatic duty; they would have established a new system\nof education, and obliged all their children to study many new\nthings;--but toward the higher emotional and intellectual life of\nthat alien civilization, they would naturally exhibit indifference:\nits best literature, its philosophy, its broader forms of tolerant\nreligion could make no profound appeal to their moral and social\nexperience.\n\n\n\n[443]\n\nINDUSTRIAL DANGER\n\nEverywhere the course of human civilization has been shaped by the\nsame evolutional law; and as the earlier history of the ancient\nEuropean communities can help us to understand the social conditions\nof Old Japan, so a later period of the same history can help us to\ndivine something of the probable future of the New Japan. It has been\nshown by the author of La Cite Antique that the history of all the\nancient Greek and Latin communities included four revolutionary\nperiods.* The first revolution had everywhere for its issue the\nwithdrawal of political power from the priest-king; who was\nnevertheless allowed to retain the religious authority. The second\nrevolutionary period witnessed the breaking up of the gens or (Greek\ngenos). the enfranchisement of the client from the authority of the\npatron, and several important changes in [444] the legal constitution\nof the family. The third revolutionary period saw the weakening of\nthe religious and military aristocracy, the entrance of the common\npeople into the rights of citizenship, and the rise of a democracy of\nwealth,--presently to be opposed by a democracy of poverty. The\nfourth revolutionary period witnessed the first bitter struggles\nbetween rich and poor, the final triumph of anarchy, and the\nconsequent establishment of a new and horrible form of\ndespotism,--the despotism of the popular Tyrant.\n\n[*Not excepting Sparta.  The Spartan society was evolutionally much\nin advance of the Ionian societies; the Dorian patriarchal clan\nhaving been dissolved at some very early period. Sparta kept its\nKings; but affairs of civil justice were regulated by the Senate, and\naffairs of criminal justice by the ephors, who also had the power to\ndeclare war and to make treaties of peace. After the first great\nrevolution of Spartan history the King was deprived of power in civil\nmatters, in criminal matters, and in military matters: he retained\nhis sacerdotal office. See for details. La Cite Antique, pp,\n285-287.]\n\nTo these four revolutionary periods, the social history of Old Japan\npresents but two correspondences. The first Japanese revolutionary\nperiod was represented by the Fujiwara usurpation of the imperial\ncivil and military authority,--after which event the aristocracy,\nreligious and military, really governed Japan down to our own time.\nAll the events of the rise of the military power and the\nconcentration of authority under the Tokugawa Shogunate properly\nbelong to the first revolutionary period. At the time of the opening\nof Japan, society had not evolutionally advanced beyond a stage\ncorresponding to that of the antique Western societies in the seventh\nor eighth century before Christ. The second revolutionary period\nreally began only with the reconstruction of society in 1871. But\nwithin the space of a single generation thereafter, Japan entered\nupon her third revolutionary [445] period. Already the influence of\nthe elder aristocracy is threatened by the sudden rise of a new\noligarchy of wealth,--a new industrial power probably destined to\nbecome omnipotent in politics. The disintegration (now proceeding) of\nthe clan, the changes in the legal constitution of the family, the\nentrance of the people into the enjoyment of political rights, must\nall tend to hasten the coming transfer of power. There is every\nindication that, in the present order of things, the third\nrevolutionary period will run its course rapidly; and then a fourth\nrevolutionary period, fraught with serious danger, would be in\nimmediate prospect.\n\nConsider the bewildering rapidity of recent changes,--from the\nreconstruction of society in 1871 to the opening of the first\nnational parliament in 1891. Down to the middle of the nineteenth\ncentury the nation had remained in the condition common to European\npatriarchal communities twenty-six hundred years ago: society had\nindeed entered upon a second period of integration, but had traversed\nonly one great revolution. And then the country was suddenly hurried\nthrough two more social revolutions of the most extraordinary\nkind,--signalized by the abolition of the daimiates, the suppression\nof the military class, the substitution of a plebeian for an\naristocratic army, popular enfranchisement, the rapid formalism of a\nnew commonalty. industrial [446] expansion, the rise of a new\naristocracy of wealth, and popular representation in government! Old\nJapan had never developed a wealthy and powerful middle class: she\nhad not even approached that stage of industrial development which,\nin the ancient European societies, naturally brought about the first\npolitical struggles between rich and poor. Her social organization\nmade industrial oppression impossible: the commercial classes were\nkept at the bottom of society,--under the feet even of those who, in\nmore highly evolved communities, are most at the mercy of\nmoney-power. But now those commercial classes, set free and highly\nprivileged, are silently and swiftly ousting the aristocratic\nruling-class from power,--are becoming supremely important. And under\nthe new order of things, forms of social misery, never before known\nin the history of the race, are being developed. Some idea of this\nmisery may be obtained from the fact that the number of poor people\nin Tokyo unable to pay their annual resident-tax is upwards of\n50,000; yet the amount of the tax is only about 20 sen, or 5 pence\nEnglish money. Prior to the accumulation of wealth in the hands of a\nminority there was never any such want in any part of Japan,--except,\nof course, as a temporary consequence of war.\n\nThe early history of European civilization supplies analogies. In the\nGreek and Latin communities, up to the time of the dissolution of the\ngens, there [447] was no poverty in the modern meaning of that word.\nSlavery. with some few exceptions, existed only in the mild domestic\nform; there were yet no commercial oligarchies, and no industrial\noppressions; and the various cities and states were ruled, after\npolitical power had been taken from the early kings, by military\naristocracies which also exercised religious functions. There was yet\nlittle trade in the modern signification of the term; and money, as\ncurrent coinage, came into circulation only in the seventh century\nbefore Christ. Misery did not exist. Under any patriarchal system,\nbased upon ancestor-worship, there is no misery, as a consequence of\npoverty, except such as may be temporarily created by devastation or\nfamine. If want thus comes, it comes to all alike. In such a state of\nsociety everybody is in the service of somebody, and receives in\nexchange for service all the necessaries of life: there is no need\nfor any one to trouble himself about the question of living. Also, in\nsuch a patriarchal community, which is self-sufficing, there is\nlittle need of money: barter takes the place of trade.... In all\nthese respects, the condition of Old Japan offered a close parallel\nto the conditions of patriarchal society in ancient Europe. While the\nuji or clan existed, there was no misery except as a result of war,\nfamine, or pestilence. Throughout society--excepting the small\ncommercial class--the need of money was rare; and such coinage as\nexisted [448] was little suited to general circulation. Taxes were\npaid in rice and other produce. As the lord nourished his retainers,\nso the samurai cared for his dependants, the farmer for his\nlabourers, the artizan for his apprentices and journeymen, the\nmerchant for his clerks. Everybody was fed; and there was no need, in\nordinary times at least, for any one to go hungry. It was only with\nthe breaking-up of the clan-system in Japan that the possibilities of\nstarvation for the worker first came into existence. And as, in\nantique Europe, the enfranchised client-class and plebeian-class\ndeveloped, under like conditions, into a democracy clamouring for\nsuffrage and all political rights, so in Japan have the common people\ndeveloped the political instinct, in self-protection.\n\nIt will be remembered how, in Greek and Roman society, the\naristocracy founded upon religious tradition and military power had\nto give way to an oligarchy of wealth, and how there subsequently\ncame into existence a democratic form of government,--democratic, not\nin the modern, but in the old Greek meaning. At a yet later day the\nresults of popular suffrage were the breaking-up of this democratic\ngovernment, and the initiation of an atrocious struggle between rich\nand poor. After that strife had begun there was no more security for\nlife or property until the Roman conquest enforced order.... Now it\nseems not unlikely that there will he witnessed in Japan, at no very\n[449] distant day, a strong tendency to repeat the history of the old\nGreek anarchies. With the constant increase of poverty and pressure\nof population, and the concomitant accumulation of wealth in the\nhands of a new industrial class, the peril is obvious. Thus far the\nnation has patiently borne all changes. relying upon the experience\nof its past, and trusting implicitly to its rulers. But should\nwretchedness be so permitted to augment that the question of how to\nkeep from starving becomes imperative for the millions, the long\npatience and the long trust may fail. And then, to repeat a figure\neffectively used by Professor Huxley, the Primitive Man, finding that\nthe Moral Man has landed him in the valley of the shadow of death,\nmay rise up to take the management of affairs into his own hands, and\nfight savagely for the right of existence. As popular instinct is not\ntoo dull to divine the first cause of this misery in the introduction\nof Western industrial methods, it is unpleasant to reflect what such\nan upheaval might signify. But nothing of moment has yet been done to\nameliorate the condition of the wretched class of operatives, now\nestimated to exceed half a million.\n\nM. de Coulanges has pointed out* that the absence of individual\nliberty was the real cause of the disorders and the final ruin of the\nGreek societies.\n\n[*La Cite Antique.  pp, 400-401.]\n\n[450] Rome suffered less, and survived, and dominated,--because\nwithin her boundaries the rights of the individual had been more\nrespected.... Now the absence of individual freedom in modern Japan\nwould certainly appear to be nothing less than a national danger. For\nthose very habits of unquestioning obedience, and loyalty, and\nrespect for authority, which made feudal society possible, are likely\nto render a true democratic regime impossible, and would tend to\nbring about a state of anarchy. Only races long accustomed to\npersonal liberty,--liberty to think about matters of ethics apart\nfrom matters of government,--liberty to consider questions of right\nand wrong, justice and injustice, independently of political\nauthority,--are able to face without risk the peril now menacing\nJapan. For should social disintegration take in Japan the same course\nwhich it followed in the old European societies,--unchecked by any\nprecautionary legislation,--and so bring about another social\nrevolution, the consequence could scarcely be less than utter ruin.\nIn the antique world of Europe, the total disintegration of the\npatriarchal system occupied centuries: it was slow, and it was\nnormal--not having been brought about by external forces. In Japan,\non the contrary, this disintegration is taking place under enormous\noutside pressure, operating with the rapidity of electricity and\nsteam. In Greek societies the changes were effected in about three\n[451] hundred years; in Japan it is hardly more than thirty years\nsince the patriarchal system was legally dissolved and the industrial\nsystem reshaped; yet already the danger of anarchy is in sight, and\nthe population--astonishingly augmented by more than ten\nmillions--already begins to experience all the forms of misery\ndeveloped by want under industrial conditions.\n\nIt was perhaps inevitable that the greatest freedom accorded under\nthe new order of things should have been given in the direction of\ngreatest danger. Though the Government cannot be said to have done\nmuch for any form of competition within the sphere of its own direct\ncontrol, it has done even more than could have been reasonably\nexpected on behalf of national industrial competition. Loans have\nbeen lavishly advanced. subsidies generously allowed; and, in spite\nof various panics and failures, the results have been prodigious.\nWithin thirty years the value of articles manufactured for export has\nrisen from half a million to five hundred million yen. But this\nimmense development has been effected at serious cost in other\ndirections. The old methods of family production--and therefore most\nof the beautiful industries and arts, for which Japan has been so\nlong famed--now seem doomed beyond hope; and instead of the ancient\nkindly relations between master and workers, there have been brought\ninto existence--with no legislation to restrain [452] inhumanity--all\nthe horrors of factory-life at its worst. The new combinations of\ncapital have actually reestablished servitude, under harsher forms\nthan ever were imagined under the feudal era; the misery of the women\nand children subjected to that servitude is a public scandal, and\nproves strange possibilities of cruelty on the part of a people once\nrenowned for kindness,--kindness even to animals.\n\nThere is now a humane outcry for reform; and earnest efforts have\nbeen made, and will be made, to secure legislation for the protection\nof operatives. But, as might be expected, these efforts have been\nhitherto strongly opposed by manufacturing companies and syndicates\nwith the declaration that any Government interference with factory\nmanagement will greatly hamper, if not cripple, enterprise, and\nhinder competition with foreign industry. Less than twenty years ago\nthe very same arguments were used in England to oppose the efforts\nthen being made to improve the condition of the industrial classes;\nand that opposition was challenged by Professor Huxley in a noble\naddress, which every Japanese legislator would do well to read\nto-day. Speaking of the reforms in progress during 1888. the\nprofessor said:\n\n\"If it is said that the carrying out of such arrangements as those\nindicated must enhance the cost of production, and thus handicap the\nproducer in the race of competition. I venture, in the first place.\nto doubt the fact; but, if it be [453] so, it results that industrial\nsociety has to face a dilemma, either alternative of which threatens\ndestruction.\n\n\"On the one hand, a population, the labour of which is sufficiently\nremunerated, may be physically and morally healthy, and socially\nstable, but may fail in industrial competition by reason of the\ndearness of its produce. On the other hand, a population, the labour\nof which is insufficiently remunerated, must become physically and\nmorally unhealthy, and socially unstable; and though it may succeed\nfor a while in competition, by reason of the cheapness of its\nproduce, it must in the end fall, through hideous misery and\ndegradation, to utter ruin.\n\n\"Well, if these be the only alternatives, let us for ourselves and\nour children choose the former, and, if need be, starve like men. But\nI do not believe that a stable society, made up of healthy, vigorous,\ninstructed, and self-ruling people would ever incur serious risk of\nthat fate. They are not likely to be troubled with many competitors\nof the same character just yet; and they may be safely trusted to\nfind ways of holding their own.\"*\n\n[*The Struggle for Existence in Human Society.  \"Collected Essays,\"\nVol. IX. pp, 113--219.]\n\nIf the future of Japan could depend upon her army and her navy, upon\nthe high courage of her people and their readiness to die by the\nhundred thousand for ideals of honour and of duty, there would be\nsmall cause for alarm in the present state of affairs. Unfortunately\nher future must depend upon other qualities than courage, other\nabilities than those of [454] sacrifice; and her struggle hereafter\nmust be one in which her social traditions will place her at an\nimmense disadvantage. The capacity for industrial competition cannot\nbe made to depend upon the misery of women and children; it must\ndepend upon the intelligent freedom of the individual; and the\nsociety which suppresses this freedom, or suffers it to be\nsuppressed, must remain too rigid for competition with societies in\nwhich the liberties of the individual are strictly maintained. While\nJapan continues to think and to act by groups, even by groups of\nindustrial companies, so long she must always continue incapable of\nher best. Her ancient social experience is not sufficient to avail\nher for the future international struggle,--rather it must sometimes\nimpede her as so much dead weight. Dead, in the ghostliest sense of\nthe word,--the viewless pressure upon her life of numberless vanished\ngenerations. She will have not only to strive against colossal odds\nin her rivalry with more plastic and more forceful societies; she\nwill have to strive much more against the power of her phantom past.\n\nYet it were a grievous error to imagine that she has nothing further\nto gain from her ancestral faith. All her modern successes have been\naided by it; and all her modern failures have been marked by needless\nbreaking with its ethical custom. She could compel her people, by a\nsimple fiat, to adopt the [455] civilization of the West, with all\nits pain and struggle, only because that people had been trained for\nages in submission and loyalty and sacrifice; and the time has not\nyet come in which she can afford to cast away the whole of her moral\npast. More freedom indeed she requires,--but freedom restrained by\nwisdom; freedom to think and act and strive for self as well as for\nothers,--not freedom to oppress the weak, or to exploit the simple.\nAnd the new cruelties of her industrial life can find no\njustification in the traditions of her ancient faith, which exacted\nabsolute obedience from the dependant, but equally required the duty\nof kindness from the master. In so far as she has permitted her\npeople to depart from the way of kindness, she herself has surely\ndeparted from the Way of the Gods....\n\nAnd the domestic future appears dark.  Born of that darkness, an evil\ndream comes oftentimes to those who love Japan: the fear that all her\nefforts are being directed, with desperate heroism, only to prepare\nthe land for the sojourn of peoples older by centuries in commercial\nexperience; that her thousands of miles of railroads and telegraphs,\nher mines and forges, her arsenals and factories, her docks and\nfleets, are being put in order for the use of foreign capital; that\nher admirable army and her heroic navy may be doomed to make their\nlast sacrifices in hopeless contest against some combination of\ngreedy states. provoked or encouraged to aggression [456] by\ncircumstances beyond the power of Government to control.... But the\nstatesmanship that has already guided Japan through many storms\nshould prove able to cope with this gathering peril.\n\n\n\n[457]\n\nREFLECTIONS\n\nIn the preceding pages I have endeavoured to suggest a general idea\nof the social history of Japan, and a general idea of the nature of\nthose forces which shaped and tempered the character of her people.\nCertainly this attempt leaves much to be desired: the time is yet far\naway at which a satisfactory work upon the subject can be prepared.\nBut the fact that Japan can be understood only through the study of\nher religious and social evolution has been, I trust, sufficiently\nindicated. She affords us the amazing spectacle of an Eastern society\nmaintaining all the outward forms of Western civilization; using,\nwith unquestionable efficiency, the applied science of the Occident;\naccomplishing, by prodigious effort, the work of centuries within the\ntime of three decades,--yet sociologically remaining at a stage\ncorresponding to that which, in ancient Europe, preceded the\nChristian era by hundreds of years.\n\nBut no suggestion of origins and causes should diminish the pleasure\nof contemplating this curious world, psychologically still so far\naway from us in the course of human evolution. The wonder and [458]\nthe beauty of what remains of the Old Japan cannot be lessened by any\nknowledge of the conditions that produced them. The old kindliness\nand grace of manners need not cease to charm us because we know that\nsuch manners were cultivated, for a thousand years, under the edge of\nthe sword. The common politeness which appeared, but a few years ago,\nto be almost universal, and the rarity of quarrels, should not prove\nless agreeable because we have learned that, for generations and\ngenerations, all quarrels among the people were punished with\nextraordinary rigour; and that the custom of the vendetta, which\nrendered necessary such repression, also made everybody cautious of\nword and deed. The popular smile should not seem less winning because\nwe have been told of a period, in the past of the subject-classes,\nwhen not to smile in the teeth of pain might cost life itself. And\nthe Japanese woman, as cultivated by the old home-training, is not\nless sweet a being because she represents the moral ideal of a\nvanishing world, and because we can faintly surmise the cost,--the\nincalculable cost in pain,--of producing her.\n\nNo: what remains of this elder civilization is full of charm,--charm\nunspeakable,--and to witness its gradual destruction must be a grief\nfor whomsoever has felt that charm. However intolerable may seem, to\nthe mind of the artist or poet, those countless restrictions which\nonce ruled all this fairy-world [459] and shaped the soul of it, he\ncannot but admire and love their best results: the simplicity of old\ncustom,--the amiability of manners,--the daintiness of habits,--the\ndelicate tact displayed in pleasure-giving,--the strange power of\npresenting outwardly, under any circumstances, only the best and\nbrightest aspects of character. What emotional poetry, for even the\nleast believing, in the ancient home-religion,--in the lamplet\nnightly kindled before the names of the dead, the tiny offerings of\nfood and drink, the welcome-fires lighted to guide the visiting\nghosts, the little ships prepared to bear--them back to their rest!\nAnd this immemorial doctrine of filial piety,--exacting all that is\nnoble, not less than all that is terrible, in duty, in gratitude, in\nself-denial,--what strange appeal does it make to our lingering\nreligious instincts; and how close to the divine appear to us the\nfiner natures forged by it! What queer weird attraction in those\nparish-temple festivals, with their happy mingling of merriment and\ndevotion in the presence of the gods! What a universe of romance in\nthat Buddhist art which has left its impress upon almost every\nproduct of industry, from the toy of a child to the heirloom of a\nprince;--which has peopled the solitudes with statues, and chiselled\nthe wayside rocks with texts of sutras! Who can forget the soft\nenchantment of this Buddhist atmosphere?--the deep music of the great\nbells?--the [460] green peace of gardens haunted by fearless things,\ndoves that flutter down at call, fishes rising to be fed? ... Despite\nour incapacity to enter into the soul-life of this ancient East,\n--despite the certainty that one might as well hope to remount the\nRiver of Time and share the vanished existence of some old Greek\ncity, as to share the thoughts and the emotions of Old Japan,--we\nfind ourselves bewitched forever by the vision, like those wanderers\nof folk-tale who rashly visited Elf-land.\n\nWe know that there is illusion,--not as to the reality of the\nvisible, but as to its meanings,--very much illusion. Yet why should\nthis illusion attract us, like some glimpse of Paradise?--why should\nwe feel obliged to confess the ethical glamour of a civilization as\nfar away from us in thought as the Egypt of Ramses? Are we really\ncharmed by the results of a social discipline that refused to\nrecognize the individual?--enamoured of a cult that exacted the\nsuppression of personality?\n\nNo: the charm is made by the fact that this vision of the past\nrepresents to us much more than past or present,--that it foreshadows\nthe possibilities of some higher future, in a world of Perfect\nsympathy. After many a thousand years there may be developed a\nhumanity able to achieve, with never a shadow of illusion, those\nethical conditions prefigured by the ideals of Old Japan: instinctive\nunselfishness, [461] a common desire to find the joy of life in\nmaking happiness for others, a universal sense of moral beauty. And\nwhenever men shall have so far gained upon the present as to need no\nother code than the teaching of their own hearts, then indeed the\nancient ideal of Shinto will find its supreme realization.\n\nMoreover, it should be remembered that the social state, whose\nresults thus attract us, really produced much more than a beautiful\nmirage. Simple characters of great charm, though necessarily of great\nfixity, were developed by it in multitude. Old Japan came nearer to\nthe achievement of the highest moral ideal than our far more evolved\nsocieties can hope to do for many a hundred years. And but for those\nten centuries of war which followed upon the rise of the military\npower, the ethical end to which all social discipline tended might\nhave been much more closely approached. Yet if the better side of\nthis human nature had been further developed at the cost of darker\nand sterner qualities, the consequence might have proved unfortunate\nfor the nation. No people so ruled by altruism as to lose its\ncapacities for aggression and cunning could hold their own, in the\npresent state of the world, against races hardened by the discipline\nof competition as well as by the discipline of war. The future Japan\nmust rely upon the least [462] amiable qualities of her character for\nsuccess in the universal struggle; and she will need to develop them\nstrongly.\n\n\n                              *\n                             * *\n\nHow strongly she has been able to develop them in one direction, the\npresent war with Russia bears startling witness. But it is certainly\nto the long discipline of the past that she owes the moral strength\nbehind this unexpected display of aggressive power. No superficial\nobservation could discern the silent energies masked by the\nresignation of the people to change,--the unconscious heroism\ninforming this mass of forty million souls, the compressed force\nready to expand at Imperial bidding either for construction or\ndestruction. From the leaders of a nation with such a military and\npolitical history, one might expect the manifestation of all those\nabilities of supreme importance in diplomacy and war. But such\ncapacities could prove of little worth were it not for the character\nof the masses,--the quality of the material that moves to command\nwith the power of winds and tides. The veritable strength of Japan\nstill lies in the moral nature of her common people,--her farmers and\nfishers, artizans and labourers,--the patient quiet folk one sees\ntoiling in the rice-fields, or occupied with the humblest of crafts\nand callings in city by-ways. All the unconscious heroism of the race\nis in these, and all its splendid courage,--a [463] courage that does\nnot mean indifference to life, but the desire to sacrifice life at\nthe bidding of the Imperial Master who raises the rank of the dead.\nFrom the thousands of young men now being summoned to the war, one\nhears no expression of hope to return to their homes with glory;--the\ncommon wish uttered is only to win remembrance at the Shokonsha--that\n\"Spirit-Invoking Temple,\" where the souls of all who die for Emperor\nand fatherland are believed to gather. At no time was the ancient\nfaith stronger than in this hour of struggle; and Russian power will\nhave very much more to fear from that faith than from repeating\nrifles or Whitehead torpedoes.* Shinto, as a religion of patriotism,\nis a force that should suffice, if permitted fair-play, to affect not\nonly the destinies of the whole Far East, but the future of\ncivilization. No more irrational assertion was ever made about the\nJapanese than the statement of their indifference to religion.\nReligion is still, as it has [464] ever been, the very life of the\npeople,--the motive and the directing power of their every action: a\nreligion of doing and suffering, a religion without cant and\nhypocrisy. And the qualities especially developed by it are just\nthose qualities which have startled Russia, and may yet cause her\nmany a painful surprise. She has discovered alarming force where she\nimagined childish weakness; she has encountered heroism where she\nexpected to find timidity and helplessness.**\n\n[*The following reply, made by Admiral Togo Commander-in-Chief of the\nJapanese fleet, to an Imperial message of commendation received after\nthe second attempt to block the entrance to Port Arthur, is\ncharacteristically Shinto:--\n\n\"The warm message which Your imperial Majesty condescended to grant\nus with regard to the second attempt to seal Port Arthur, has not\nonly overwhelmed us with gratitude, but may also influence the\npatriotic manes of the departed heroes to hover long over the\nbattle-field and give unseen protection to the Imperial forces.\"...\n[Translated in the JAPAN TIMES of March 31st, 1904.]\n\n--Such thoughts and hopes about the brave dead might have been\nuttered by a Greek warrior before the battle of Salamis. The faith\nand courage which helped the Greeks to repel the Persian invasion\nwere of precisely the same quality as that religious heroism which\nnow helps the Japanese to challenge the power of Russia.]\n\n[**The case of the Japanese officers and men on the transport Kinshu\nMaru, sank by the Russian warships on the 26th of last April, should\nhave given the enemy matter for reflection. Although allowed an\nhour's time for consideration, the soldiers refused to surrender, and\nopened fire with their rifles on the battleships. Then, before the\nKinshu Maru was blown in two by a torpedo, a number of the Japanese\nofficers and men performed harakiri.... This strong display of the\nfierce old feudal spirit suggests how dearly a Russian success would\nbe bought.]\n\n                              *\n                             * *\n\nFor countless reasons this terrible war (of which no man can yet see\nthe end) is unspeakably to be regretted; and of these reasons not the\nleast are industrial. War must temporarily check all tendencies\ntowards the development of that healthy individualism without which\nno modern nation can become prosperous and wealthy. Enterprise is\nnumbed, markets paralyzed, manufactures stopped. Yet, in the\nextraordinary case of this extraordinary people, it is possible that\nthe social effects of the contest will prove to some degree\nbeneficial. Prior to hostilities, there had been a visible tendency\nto [465] the premature dissolution of institutions founded upon\ncenturies of experience,--a serious likelihood of moral\ndisintegration. That great changes must hereafter be made,--that the\nfuture well-being of the country requires them,--would seem to admit\nof no argument. But it is necessary that such changes be effected by\ndegrees,--not with such inopportune haste as to imperil the moral\nconstitution of the nation. A war for independence,--a war that\nobliges the race to stake its all upon the issue,--must bring about a\ntightening of the old social bonds, a strong quickening of the\nancient sentiments of loyalty and duty, a reinforcement of\nconservatism. This will signify retrogression in some directions; but\nit will also mean invigoration in others. Before the Russian menace,\nthe Soul of Yamato revives again. Out of the contest Japan will come,\nif successful, morally stronger than before; and a new sense of\nself-confidence, a new spirit of independence, might then reveal\nitself in the national attitude toward foreign policy and foreign\npressure.\n\n--There would be, of course, the danger of overconfidence.  A people\nable to defeat Russian power on land and sea might be tempted to\nbelieve themselves equally able to cope with foreign capital upon\ntheir own territory; and every means would certainly be tried of\npersuading or bullying the government [466] into some fatal\ncompromise on the question of the right of foreigners to hold land.\nEfforts in this direction have been carried on persistently and\nsystematically for years; and these efforts seem to have received\nsome support from a class of Japanese politicians, apparently\nincapable of understanding what enormous tyranny a single privileged\nsyndicate of foreign capital would be capable of exercising in such a\ncountry. It appears to me that any person comprehending, even in the\nvaguest way, the nature of money-power and the average conditions of\nlife throughout Japan, must recognize the certainty that foreign\ncapital, with right of land-tenure, would find means to control\nlegislation, to control government, and to bring about a state of\naffairs that would result in the practical domination of the empire\nby alien interests. I cannot resist the conviction that when Japan\nyields to foreign industry the right to purchase land, she is lost\nbeyond hope. The self-confidence that might tempt to such yielding,\nin view of immediate advantages, would be fatal. Japan has\nincomparably more to fear from English or American capital than from\nRussian battleships and bayonets. Behind her military capacity is the\ndisciplined experience of a thousand years; behind her industrial and\ncommercial power, the experience of half-a-century. But she has been\nfully warned; and if she chooses hereafter to invite her own ruin, it\nwill not have [467] been for lack of counsel,--since she had the\nwisest man in the world to advise her.* [*Herbert Spencer.]\n\nTo the reader of these pages, at least, the strength and the weakness\nof the new social organization--its great capacities for offensive or\ndefensive action in military directions, and its comparative\nfeebleness in other directions--should now be evident. All things\nconsidered, the marvel is that Japan should have been so well able to\nhold her own; and it was assuredly no common wisdom that guided her\nfirst unsteady efforts in new and perilous ways. Certainly her power\nto accomplish what she has accomplished was derived from her old\nreligious and social training: she was able to keep strong because,\nunder the new forms of rule and the new conditions of social\nactivity, she could still maintain a great deal of the ancient\ndiscipline. But even thus it was only by the firmest and shrewdest\npolicy that she could avert disaster,--could prevent the disruption\nof her whole social structure under the weight of alien pressure. It\nwas imperative that vast changes should be made, but equally\nimperative that they should not be of a character to endanger the\nfoundations; and it was above all things necessary, while preparing\nfor immediate necessities, to provide against future perils. Never\nbefore, perhaps, in the history of human civilization, did any rulers\nfind themselves [468] obliged to cope with problems so tremendous, so\ncomplicated, and so inexorable. And of these problems the most\ninexorable remains to be solved. It is furnished by the fact that\nalthough all the successes of Japan have been so far due to unselfish\ncollective action, sustained by the old Shinto ideals of duty and\nobedience, her industrial future must depend upon egoistic individual\naction of a totally opposite kind! * * *\n\nWhat then will become of the ancient morality?--the ancient cult?\n\n--In this moment the conditions are abnormal.  But it seems certain\nthat there will be, under normal conditions, a further gradual\nloosening of the old family-bonds; and this would bring about a\nfurther disintegration. By the testimony of the Japanese themselves,\nsuch disintegration was spreading rapidly among the upper and middle\nclasses of the great cities, prior to the present war. Among the\npeople of the agricultural districts, and even in the country towns,\nthe old ethical order of things has yet been little affected. And\nthere are other influences than legislative change or social\nnecessity which are working for disintegration. Old beliefs have been\nrudely shaken by the introduction of larger knowledge: a new\ngeneration is being taught, in twenty-seven thousand primary schools,\nthe rudiments of science and the modern conception of the universe.\nThe [460] Buddhist cosmology, with its fantastic pictures of Mount\nMeru, has become a nursery-tale; the old Chinese nature-philosophy\nfinds believers only among the little educated, or the survivors of\nthe feudal era; and the youngest schoolboy has learned that the\nconstellations are neither gods nor Buddhas, but far-off groups of\nsuns. No longer can popular fancy picture the Milky Way as the River\nof Heaven; the legend of the Weaving-Maiden, and her waiting lover,\nand the Bridge of Birds, is now told only to children; and the young\nfisherman, though steering, like his fathers, by the light of stars,\nno longer discerns in the northern sky the form of Mioken Bosatsu.\n\nYet it were easy to misinterpret the weakening of a certain class of\nold beliefs, or the visible tendency to social change. Under any\ncircumstances a religion decays slowly; and the most conservative\nforms of religion are the last to yield to disintegration. It were a\ngrave mistake to suppose that the ancestor-cult has yet been\nappreciably affected by exterior influences of any kind, or to\nimagine that it continues to exist merely by force of hallowed\ncustom, and not because the majority still believe. No religion--and\nleast of all the religion of the dead--could thus suddenly lose its\nhold upon the affections of the race that evolved it. Even in other\ndirections the new scepticism is superficial: it has not spread\ndownwards into the core of things. There is indeed [470] a growing\nclass of young men with whom scepticism of a certain sort is the\nfashion, and scorn of the past an affectation,--but even among these\nno word of disrespect concerning the religion of the home is ever\nheard. Protests against the old obligations of filial piety,\ncomplaints of the growing weight of the family yoke, are sometimes\nuttered; but the domestic cult is never spoken of lightly. As for the\ncommunal and other public forms of Shinto, the vigour of the old\nreligion is sufficiently indicated by the continually increasing\nnumber of temples. In 1897 there were 191,962 Shinto temples; in 1901\nthere were 195,256.\n\nIt seems probable that such changes as must occur in the near future\nwill be social rather than religious; and there is little reason to\nbelieve that these changes--however they may tend to weaken filial\npiety in sundry directions--will seriously affect the ancestor-cult\nitself. The weight of the family-bond, aggravated by the increasing\ndifficulty and cost of life, may be more and more lightened for the\nindividual; but no legislation can abolish the sentiment of duty to\nthe dead. When that sentiment utterly fails, the heart of a nation\nwill have ceased to beat. Belief in the old gods, as gods, may slowly\npass; but Shinto may live on as the Religion of the Fatherland, a\nreligion of heroes and patriots; and the likelihood of such future\nmodification is indicated by the memorial character of many new\ntemples.\n\n[471]--It has been much asserted of late years (chiefly because of\nthe profound impression made by Mr. Percival Lowell's Soul of the Far\nEast) that Japan is desperately in need of a Gospel of Individualism;\nand many pious persons assume that the conversion of the country to\nChristianity would suffice to produce the Individualism. This\nassumption has nothing to rest on except the old superstition that\nnational customs and habits and modes of feeling, slowly shaped in\nthe course of thousands of years, can be suddenly transformed by a\nmere act of faith. Those further dissolutions of the old order which\nwould render possible, under normal conditions, a higher social\nenergy, can be safely brought about through industrialism\nonly,--through the working of necessities that enforce competitive\nenterprise and commercial expansion. A long peace will be required\nfor such healthy transformation; and it is not impossible that an\nindependent and progressive Japan would then consider questions of\nreligious change from the standpoint of political expediency.\nObservation and study abroad may have unduly impressed Japanese\nstatesmen with the half-truth so forcibly uttered by Michelet,--that\n\"money has a religion,\"--that \"capital is Protestant,\"--that the\npower and wealth and intellectual energy of the world belong to the\nraces who cast off the yoke of Rome, and freed themselves from the\ncreed of the Middle [472] Ages.* A Japanese statesman is said to have\nlately declared that his countrymen were \"rapidly drifting towards\nChristianity\"! Newspaper reports of eminent utterances are not often\ntrustworthy; but the report in this case is probably accurate, and\nthe utterance intended to suggest possibilities. Since the\ndeclaration of the Anglo-Japanese alliance, there has been a\nremarkable softening in the attitude of safe conservatism which the\ngovernment formerly maintained toward Western religion.... But as for\nthe question whether the Japanese nation will ever adopt an alien\ncreed under official encouragement, I think that the sociological\nanswer is evident. Any understanding of the fundamental structure of\nsociety should make equally obvious the imprudence of attempting\nhasty transformations, and the impossibility of effecting them. For\nthe present, at least, the religious question in Japan is a question\nof social integrity; and any efforts to precipitate the natural\ncourse of change can result only in provoking reaction and disorder.\nI believe that the time is far away at which Japan can venture to\nabandon the policy of [473] caution that has served her so well. I\nbelieve that the day on which she adopts a Western creed, her\nimmemorial dynasty is doomed; and I cannot help fearing that whenever\nshe yields to foreign capital the right to hold so much as one rood\nof her soil, she signs away her birthright beyond hope of recovery.\n\n[*No inferences can be safely drawn from the apparent attitude of the\ngovernment towards religious bodies in Japan. Of late years the\nseeming policy has been to encourage the less tolerant forms of\nWestern religion. In curious contrast to this attitude is the\nnon-toleration of Freemasonry. Strictly speaking, Freemasonry is not\nallowed in Japan--although, since the abolition of exterritoriality,\nthe foreign lodges at the open ports have been permitted (or rather,\nsuffered) to exist upon certain conditions. A Japanese in Europe or\nAmerica is free to become a Mason; but he cannot become a Mason in\nJapan, where the proceedings of all societies must remain open to\nofficial surveillance.]\n\n                              *\n                            *   *\n\nWith a few general remarks upon the religion of the Far East, in its\nrelation to Occidental aggressions, this attempt at interpretation\nmay fitly conclude.\n\n--All the societies of the Far East are founded, like that of Japan,\nupon ancestor-worship. This ancient religion, in various forms,\nrepresents their moral experience; and it offers everywhere to the\nintroduction of Christianity, as now intolerantly preached, obstacles\nof the most serious kind. Attacks upon it must seem, to those whose\nlives are directed by it, the greatest of outrages and the most\nunpardonable of crimes. A religion for which every member of a\ncommunity believes it his duty to die at call, is a religion for\nwhich he will fight. His patience with attacks upon it will depend\nupon the degree of his intelligence and the nature of his training.\nAll the races of the Far East have not the intelligence of the\nJapanese, nor have they been equally well trained, under ages of\nmilitary discipline, to adapt their conduct to circumstances. For\n[474] the Chinese peasant, in especial, attacks upon his religion are\nintolerable. His cult remains the most precious of his possessions,\nand his supreme guide in all matters of social right and wrong. The\nEast has been tolerant of all creeds which do not assault the\nfoundations of its societies; and if Western missions had been wise\nenough to leave those foundations alone,--to deal with the\nancestor-cult as Buddhism did, and to show the same spirit of\ntolerance in other directions,--the introduction of Christianity upon\na very extensive scale should have proved a matter of no difficulty.\nThat the result would have been a Christianity differing considerably\nfrom Western Christianity is obvious,--the structure of Far-Eastern\nsociety not admitting of sudden transformations;--but the essentials\nof doctrine might have been widely propagated, without exciting\nsocial antagonism, much less race-hatred. To-day it is probably\nimpossible to undo what the sterile labour of intolerance has already\ndone. The hatred of Western religion in China and adjacent countries\nis undoubtedly due to the needless and implacable attacks which have\nbeen made upon the ancestor-cult. To demand of a Chinese or an\nAnnamese that he cast away or destroy his ancestral tablets is not\nless irrational and inhuman than it would be to demand of an\nEnglishman or a Frenchman that he destroy his mother's tombstone in\nproof of his devotion to Christianity. [475] Nay, it is much more\ninhuman,--for the European attaches to the funeral monument no such\nidea of sacredness as that which attaches, in Eastern belief, to the\nsimple tablet inscribed with the name of the dead parent. From old\ntime these attacks upon the domestic faith of docile and peaceful\ncommunities have provoked massacres; and, if persisted in, they will\ncontinue to provoke massacres while the people have strength left to\nstrike. How foreign religious aggression is answered by native\nreligious aggression; and how Christian military power avenges the\nforeign victims with tenfold slaughter and strong robbery, need not\nhere be recorded. It has not been in these years only that\nancestor-worshipping peoples have been slaughtered, impoverished, or\nsubjugated in revenge for the uprisings that missionary intolerance\nprovokes. But while Western trade and commerce directly gain by these\nrevenges, Western public opinion will suffer no discussion of the\nright of provocation or the justice of retaliation. The less tolerant\nreligious bodies call it a wickedness even to raise the question of\nmoral right; and against the impartial observer, who dares to lift\nhis voice in protest, fanaticism turns as ferociously as if he were\nproved an enemy of the human race.\n\nFrom the sociological point of view the whole missionary system,\nirrespective of sect and creed, represents the skirmishing-force of\nWestern civilization in its general attack upon all civilizations of\nthe [476] ancient type,--the first line in the forward movement of\nthe strongest and most highly evolved societies upon the weaker and\nless evolved. The conscious work of these fighters is that of\npreachers and teachers; their unconscious work is that of sappers and\ndestroyers. The subjugation of weak races has been aided by their\nwork to a degree little imagined; and by no other conceivable means\ncould it have been accomplished so quickly and so surely. For\ndestruction they labour unknowingly, like a force of nature. Yet\nChristianity does not appreciably expand. They perish; and they\nreally lay down their lives, with more than the courage of soldiers,\nnot, as they hope, to assist the spread of that doctrine which the\nEast must still of necessity refuse, but to help industrial\nenterprise and Occidental aggrandizement. The real and avowed object\nof missions is defeated by persistent indifference to sociological\ntruths; and the martyrdoms and sacrifices are utilized by Christian\nnations for ends essentially opposed to the spirit of Christianity.\n\nNeedless to say that the aggressions of race upon race are fully in\naccord with the universal law of struggle,--that perpetual struggle\nin which only the more capable survive. Inferior races must become\nsubservient to higher races, or disappear before them; and ancient\ntypes of civilization, too rigid for progress, must yield to the\npressure of more efficient and [477] more complex civilizations. The\nlaw is pitiless and plain: its operations may be mercifully modified,\nbut never prevented, by humane consideration.\n\nYet for no generous thinker can the ethical questions involved be\nthus easily settled. We are not justified in holding that the\ninevitable is morally ordained,--much less that, because the higher\nraces happen to be on the winning side in the world-struggle, might\ncan ever constitute right. Human progress has been achieved by\ndenying the law of the stronger,--by battling against those impulses\nto crush the weak, to prey upon the helpless, which rule in the world\nof the brute, and are no less in accord with the natural order than\nare the courses of the stars. All virtues and restraints making\ncivilization possible have been developed in the teeth of natural\nlaw. Those races which lead are the races who first learned that the\nhighest power is acquired by the exercise of forbearance, and that\nliberty is best maintained by the protection of the weak, and by the\nstrong repression of injustice. Unless we be ready to deny the whole\nof the moral experience thus gained,--unless we are willing to assert\nthat the religion in which it has been expressed is only the creed of\na particular civilization, and not a religion of humanity,--it were\ndifficult to imagine any ethical justification for the aggressions\nmade upon alien peoples in the name of Christianity and\nenlightenment. Certainly the results in China of such aggression\n[478] have not been Christianity nor enlightenment, but revolts,\nmassacres, detestable cruelties,--the destruction of cities, the\ndevastation of provinces, the loss of tens of thousands of lives, the\nextortion of hundreds of millions of money. If all this be right,\nthen might is might indeed; and our professed religion of humanity\nand justice is proved to be as exclusive as any primitive cult, and\nintended to regulate conduct only as between members of the same\nsociety.\n\nBut to the evolutionist, at least, the matter appears in a very\ndifferent light. The plain teaching of sociology is that the higher\nraces cannot with impunity cast aside their moral experience in\ndealing with feebler races, and that Western civilization will have\nto pay, sooner or later, the full penalty of its deeds of oppression.\nNations that, while refusing to endure religious intolerance at home,\nsteadily maintain religious intolerance abroad, must eventually lose\nthose rights of intellectual freedom which cost so many centuries of\natrocious struggle to win. Perhaps the period of the penalty is not\nvery far away. With the return of all Europe to militant conditions,\nthere has set in a vast ecclesiastical revival of which the menace to\nhuman liberty is unmistakable; the spirit of the Middle Ages\nthreatens to prevail again; and anti-semitism has actually become a\nfactor in the politics of three Continental powers....\n\n[479]--It has been well said that no man can estimate the force of a\nreligious conviction until he has tried to oppose it. Probably no man\ncan imagine the wicked side of convention upon the subject of\nmissions until the masked batteries of its malevolence have been\ntrained against him. Yet the question of mission-policy cannot be\nanswered either by secret slander or by public abuse of the person\nraising it. To-day it has become a question that concerns the peace\nof the world, the future of commerce, and the interests of\ncivilization. The integrity of China depends upon it; and the present\nwar is not foreign to it. Perhaps this book, in spite of many\nshortcomings, will not fail to convince some thoughtful persons that\nthe constitution of Far-Eastern society presents insuperable\nobstacles to the propaganda of Western religion, as hitherto\nconducted; that these obstacles now demand, more than at any previous\nepoch, the most careful and humane consideration; and that the\nfurther needless maintenance of an uncompromising attitude towards\nthem can result in nothing but evil. Whatever the religion of\nancestors may have been thousands of years ago, to-day throughout the\nFar East it is the religion of family affection and duty; and by\ninhumanly ignoring this fact, Western zealots can scarcely fail to\nprovoke a few more \"Boxer\" uprisings. The real power to force upon\nthe world a peril from China (now that the chance seems lost for\nRussia) should [480] not be suffered to rest with those who demand\nreligious tolerance for the purpose of preaching intolerance. Never\nwill the East turn Christian while dogmatism requires the convert to\ndeny his ancient obligation to the family, the community, and the\ngovernment,--and further insists that he prove his zeal for an alien\ncreed by destroying the tablets of his ancestors, and outraging the\nmemory of those who gave him life.\n\n\n\n[481]\n\nAPPENDIX\n\nHERBERT SPENCER'S ADVICE TO JAPAN\n\nSome five years ago I was told by an American professor, then\nresiding in Tokyo, that after Herbert Spencer's death there would be\npublished a letter of advice, which the philosopher had addressed to\na Japanese statesman, concerning the policy by which the Empire might\nbe able to preserve its independence. I was not able to obtain any\nfurther information; but I felt tolerably sure, remembering the\nstatement regarding Japanese social disintegration in \"First\nPrinciples\" (section 178), that the advice would prove to have been\nof the most conservative kind. As a matter of fact it was even more\nconservative than I had imagined.\n\nHerbert Spencer died on the morning of December 8th, 1903 (while this\nbook was in course of preparation); and the letter, addressed to\nBaron Kaneko Kentaro, under circumstances with which the public have\nalready been made familiar, was published in the London Times of\nJanuary 18th, 1904.\n\n                                     FAIRFIELD, PEWSEY, WILTS,\n                                           Aug.  26, 1892.\n\nMY DEAR SIR,--Your proposal to send translations of my two\nletters* to Count Ito, the newly-appointed Prime Minister,\nis quite satisfactory.  I very willingly give my assent.\n\n[*These letters have not as yet been made public.]\n\nRespecting the further questions you ask, let me, in the first\nplace, answer generally that the Japanese policy should, I think,\nbe that of keeping Americans and Europeans as much as possible at\narm's length.  In presence of the more powerful races your\nposition is one of chronic danger, and you should take every\nprecaution to give as little foothold as possible to foreigners.\n\n[482] It seems to me that the only forms of intercourse which you may\nwith advantage permit are those which are indispensable for the\nexchange of commodities--importation and exportation of physical and\nmental products. No further privileges should be allowed to people of\nother races, and especially to people of the more powerful races,\nthan is absolutely needful for the achievement of these ends.\nApparently you are proposing by revision of the treaty with the\nPowers of Europe and America \"to open the whole Empire to foreigners\nand foreign capital.\" I regret this as a fatal policy. If you wish to\nsee what is likely to happen, study the history of India. Once let\none of the more powerful races gain a point d'appui and there will\ninevitably in course of time grow up an aggressive policy which will\nlead to collisions with the Japanese; these collisions will be\nrepresented as attacks by the Japanese which must be avenged, as the\ncase may be; a portion of territory will be seized and required to be\nmade over as a foreign settlement; and from this there will grow\neventually subjugation of the entire Japanese Empire. I believe that\nyou will have great difficulty in avoiding this fate in any case, but\nyou will make the process easy if you allow of any privileges to\nforeigners beyond those which I have indicated.\n\nIn pursuance of the advice thus generally indicated, I should say, in\nanswer to your first question, that there should be, not only a\nprohibition of foreign persons to hold property in land, but also a\nrefusal to give them leases, and a permission only to reside as\nannual tenants.\n\nTo the second question I should say decidedly prohibit to foreigners\nthe working of the mines owned or worked by Government. Here there\nwould be obviously liable to arise grounds of difference between the\nEuropeans or Americans who worked them and the Government, and these\ngrounds of quarrel would be followed by invocations to the English or\nAmerican Governments or other Powers to send forces to insist on\nwhatever the European workers claimed, for always the habit here and\nelsewhere among the civilized peoples is to believe what their agents\nor sellers abroad represent to them.\n\nIn the third place, in pursuance of the policy I have indicated, you\nought also to keep the coasting trade in your own hands and forbid\nforeigners to engage in it. This coasting trade is clearly not\nincluded in the requirement I have indicated as the sole one to be\nrecognized--a requirement to facilitate exportation and importation\n[483] of commodities. The distribution of commodities brought to\nJapan from other places may be properly left to the Japanese\nthemselves, and should be denied to foreigners, for the reason that\nagain the various transactions involved would become so many doors\nopen to quarrels and resulting aggressions.\n\nTo your remaining question respecting the intermarriage of foreigners\nand Japanese, which you say is \"now very much agitated among our\nscholars and politicians\" and which you say is \"one of the most\ndifficult problems,\" my reply is that, as rationally answered, there\nis no difficulty at all. It should be positively forbidden. It is not\nat root a question of social philosophy. It is at root a question of\nbiology. There is abundant proof, alike furnished by the\nintermarriages of human races and by the interbreeding of animals,\nthat when the varieties mingled diverge beyond a certain slight\ndegree the result is inevitably a bad one in the long run. I have\nmyself been in the habit of looking at the evidence bearing on this\nmatter for many years past, and my conviction is based on numerous\nfacts derived from numerous sources. This conviction I have within\nthe last half-hour verified, for I happen to be staying in the\ncountry with a gentleman who is well known and has had much\nexperience respecting the interbreeding of cattle; and he has just,\non inquiry, fully confirmed my belief that when, say of the different\nvarieties of sheep, there is an interbreeding of those which are\nwidely unlike, the result, especially in the second generation, is a\nbad one--there arise an incalculable mixture of traits, and what may\nbe called a chaotic constitution. And the same thing happens among\nhuman beings--the Eurasians in India, the half-breeds in America,\nshow this. The physiological basis of this experience appears to be\nthat any one variety of creature in course of many generations\nacquires a certain constitutional adaptation to its particular form\nof life, and every other variety similarly acquires its own special\nadaptation. The consequence is that, if you mix the constitution of\ntwo widely divergent varieties which have severally become adapted to\nwidely divergent modes of life, you get a constitution which is\nadapted to the mode of life of neither--a constitution which will not\nwork properly, because it is not fitted for any set of conditions\nwhatever. By all means, therefore, peremptorily interdict marriages\nof Japanese with foreigners.\n\nI have for the reasons indicated entirely approved of the regulations\nwhich have been established in America for restraining the Chinese\nimmigration, and had I the power I would restrict them [484] to the\nsmallest possible amount, my reasons for this decision being that one\nof two things must happen. If the Chinese are allowed to settle\nextensively in America, they must either, if they remain unmixed,\nform a subject race standing in the position, if not of slaves, yet\nof a class approaching to slaves; or if they mix they must form a bad\nhybrid. In either case, supposing the immigration to be large,\nimmense social mischief must arise, and eventually social\ndisorganization. The same thing will happen if there should be any\nconsiderable mixture of European or American races with the Japanese.\n\nYou see, therefore, that my advice is strongly conservative in all\ndirections, and I end by saying as I began--keep other races at arm's\nlength as much as possible.\n\nI give this advice in confidence.  I wish that it should not\ntranspire publicly, at any rate during my life, for I do not\ndesire to rouse the animosity of my fellow-countrymen.\n\n        I am sincerely yours,              HERBERT SPENCER.\n\nP.S.--Of course, when I say I wish this advice to be in confidence,\nI do not interdict the communication of it to Count Ito, but rather\nwish that he should have the opportunity of taking it into\nconsideration.\n\nHow fairly Herbert Spencer understood the prejudices of his\ncountrymen has been shown by the comments of the Times upon this\nletter,--comments chiefly characterized by that unreasoning quality\nof abuse with which the English conventional mind commonly resents\nthe pain of a new idea opposed to immediate interests. Yet some\nknowledge of the real facts in the case should serve to convince even\nthe Times that if Japan is able in this moment to fight for the cause\nof civilization in general, and for English interests in particular,\nit is precisely because the Japanese statesmen of a wiser generation\nmaintained a sound conservative policy upon the very lines indicated\nin that letter--so unjustly called a proof of \"colossal egotism.\"\n\nWhether the advice itself directly served at any time to influence\ngovernment policy, I do not know. But that it fully accorded with the\nnational instinct of self-preservation, is shown by the history [485]\nof that fierce opposition which the advocates of the abolition of\nextra-territoriality had to encounter, and by the nature of the\nprecautionary legislation enacted in regard to those very matters\ndwelt upon in Herbert Spencer's letter, Though extra-territoriality\nhas been (unavoidably, perhaps) abolished, foreign capital has not\nbeen left free to exploit the resources of the country; and\nforeigners are not allowed to own land. Though marriages between\nJapanese and foreigners have never been forbidden,* they have never\nbeen encouraged, and can take place only under special legal\nrestrictions. If foreigners could have acquired, through marriage,\nthe right to hold Japanese real estate, a considerable amount of such\nestate would soon have passed into alien hands. But the law has\nwisely provided that the Japanese woman marrying a foreigner thereby\nbecomes a foreigner, and that the children by such a marriage remain\nforeigners. On the other hand, any foreigner adopted by marriage into\na Japanese family becomes a Japanese; and the children in such event\nremain Japanese. But they also remain under certain disabilities:\nthey are precluded from holding high offices of state; and they\ncannot even become officers of the army or navy except by special\npermission. (This permission appears to have been accorded in one or\ntwo cases.) Finally, it is to be observed that Japan has kept her\ncoasting-trade in her own hands.\n\n[*The number of families in Tokyo representing such unions is said to\nbe over one hundred.]\n\nOn the whole, then, it may be said that Japanese policy followed, to\na considerable extent, the course suggested in Herbert Spencer's\nletter of advice; and it is much to be regretted, in my humble\nopinion, that the advice could not have been followed more closely.\nCould the philosopher have lived to hear of the recent Japanese\nvictories,--the defeat of a powerful Russian fleet without the loss\nof a single Japanese vessel, and the rout of thirty thousand Russian\ntroops on the Yalu,--I do not think that he would have changed his\ncounsel by a hair's-breadth. Perhaps he would have commended, [486]\nso far as his humanitarian conscience permitted, the thoroughness of\nthe Japanese study of the new science of war: he might have praised\nthe high courage displayed, and the triumph of the ancient\ndiscipline;--his sympathies would have been on the side of the\ncountry compelled to choose between the necessities of inviting a\nprotectorate or fighting Russia. But had he been questioned again as\nto the policy of the future, in case of victory, he would probably\nhave reminded the questioner that military efficiency is a very\ndifferent thing from industrial power, and have vigorously repeated\nhis warning. Understanding the structure and the history of Japanese\nsociety, he could clearly perceive the dangers of foreign contact,\nand the directions from which attempts to take advantage of the\nindustrial weakness of the country were likely to be made.... In\nanother generation Japan will be able, without peril, to abandon much\nof her conservatism; but, for the time being, her conservatism is her\nsalvation.\n\n\n\n[487]\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES\n\nIn the preparation of this essay, I have been much indebted to\nthe \"Transactions of the Asiatic Society of Japan\", and\nespecially to the following contributions:--\n\n                 (ON THE SUBJECT OF SHINTO)\n\n\"The Revival of Pure Shinto,\" by Sir Ernest Satow,--Appendix to\nVol. III.\n\n\"The Shinto Temples of Ise,\" by Satow,--Vol. II.\n\n\"Ancient Japanese Rituals,\" by Satow,--Vols. VII and IX.\n\n\"Japanese Funeral Rites,\" by A. H. Lay,--Vol. XIX.\n\n             (ON THE SUBJECT OF LAW AND CUSTOM)\n\n\"Notes on Land Tenure and Local Institutions in Old Japan,\" by\nDr. D. B. Simmons.  Edited by Professor J. H. Wigmore,--Vol. XIX.\n\n\"Materials for the Study of Private Law in Old Japan,\" by\nProfessor J. H. Wigmore,--Vol. XX, Supplements 1, 2, 3, 5.\n\n\n\n(ON THE CHRISTIAN EPISODE OF THE SIXTEENTH AND SEVENTEENTH\n                CENTURIES)\n\n\"The Church at Yamaguchi from 1550 to 1586,\" by Satow,--Vol. VII.\n\n\"Review of the Introduction of Christianity into China and\nJapan,\" by J. H. Gubbins,--Vol. VI.\n\n\"Historical Notes on Nagasaki,\" by W. A. Wooley,--Vol. IX.\n\n\"The Arima Rebellion,\" by Dr. Geertz,--Vol. IX.\n\n\n\n[488]\n          (ON JAPANESE HISTORY AND SOCIOLOGY)\n\n\"Early Japanese History,\" by W. G. Aston,--Vol. XVI.\n\n\"The Feudal System of Japan under the Tokugawa Shoguns,\" by J. H.\nGubbins,--Vol. XV.\n\n--The extracts quoted from \"The Legacy of Iyeyasu\" have been\ntaken from the translation made by J. F. Lowder.\n\n--I regret not having been able, in preparing this essay, to\navail myself of the very remarkable \"History of Japan during the\nCentury of Early Foreign Intercourse (1542-1651),\"--by James\nMurdoch and Isoh Yamagata,--which was published at Kobe last\nwinter.  This important work contains much documentary material\nnever before printed, and throws new light upon the religious\nhistory of the period.  The authors are inclined to believe that,\nallowing for numerous apostasies, the total number of Christians\nin Japan at no time much exceeded 300,000; and the reasons given\nfor this opinion, if not conclusive, are at least very strong.\nPerhaps the most interesting chapters are those dealing with the\nMachiavellian policy of Hideyoshi in his attitude to the foreign\nreligion and its preachers, but there are few dull pages in the\nbook.  Help to a correct understanding of the history of the time\nis furnished by an excellent set of maps, showing the\ndistribution of the great fiefs and the political partition of\nthe country before and after the establishment of the Tokugawa\nShogunate.  Not the least merit of the work is its absolute\nfreedom from religious bias of any sort.\n\n\n\nINDEX\n\nAbility, slight opportunity for, to rise, 410-411.\n\nAdams, Will, 254, 313; interviewed by Iyeyasu, 314-316, favoured\n    by the Emperor, 316-317; quoted concerning Hideyori's intrigues\n    and fate.  322-323.\n\nAdoption, custom of, in patriarchal family, 59, 64-65; marriage\n    signified merely, 64; modern practices regarding, 386.\n\nAdultery, enactments of Iyeyasu regarding, 345-346.\n\nAffection, limitations placed on, 69 ff.\n\nAge of the Gods, period called the, 259.\n\nAgnosticism, Buddhism is not.  213, 220.\n\nAgriculture, gods of, 126, 153-154; no degradation attached to\n    pursuit of, 245.\n\nAkindo, the commercial class, 246-247.  See Commerce.\n\nAlcestis, the Japanese woman might be compared to, 366.\n\nAncestors, imperial, worship of the, 108-123, 279-280.\n\nAncestor-worship, introduction to religion of, 21-32; the real\n    religion of Japan, 21; summary of the three forms of, 21-22;\n    the family-cult of, 21-22, 25-26; characteristics of earliest,\n    24 ff.; stability of, in Japan for two thousand years, 32;\n    summary of beliefs surviving from, 31; three stages of, 33-34;\n    evolution of permanent form from funeral-rites, 34-51:\n    characteristics of religion of, to-day, 51-53; bearing of, on\n    family-organization of, 55 ff. ; marriage under the religion\n    of, 107 ff. ; four classes of, to-day, 123-124; accommodation\n    of Buddhism to, 183-184; toleration of ancient European, by\n    Roman Catholicism, 191; Buddhist theory of rebirths reconciled\n    to, 195 n.; Confucian system founded on, 177-178, 292; needless\n    attacks on, account for smallness of result, of modern missions,\n    339, 473-475; protection of, by modern laws, 385-388; obstacles\n    presented to Christianity by, 473-475.\n\n\"Ancient Japanese Rituals\", 43 n. See Satow.\n\nAnimals, absence of cruelty to, 12-13; kindness to, taught by\n    Buddhism, 196-197.\n\nAnimism, development of, 131-132.\n\nAntigone, comparison of the Japanese woman to, 366.\n\nApes, images of Koshin's symbolic, 200.\n\nApprentices, obligation of, to avenge masters, 293; past and\n    present position of, 406.\n\nArchitecture, displayed in Buddhist temples, 199-200.\n\nArima, lord of Shimabara, 324, 325.\n\nArmy, birth of modern, 376: pay of officers in, 412.\n\nArt, knowledge of Japanese religion necessary to understanding\n    of, 2-3; introduction by Buddhism, 197-198, 204, 459; forms of,\n    in Buddhist temples, 198-199; expulsion of Jesuits, a fortunate\n    thing for, 341-342; causes which tended to production of a\n    multitude of objects of, 356; effect of modern industrial\n    conditions on, 451.\n\nArtizans, gods of, 124-125; clans of, 235; position of, under\n    quasi-feudal system, 245-246; organizations of, see Guilds.\n\nArts, developed in Japan under Buddhist teaching, 188; progress\n    of the, under Iyeyasu, 279.\n\nAsada, Lieutenant, suicide of widow of, 289.\n\nAsceticism, Shinto, 149-150.\n\nAshikaga shogunate, 271-273.  Sec undo Iyeyasu.\n\nAston, W.G., translation of the Nihongi by, cited, 38, 39, 112 n.,\n    151 n., 164 n., 232 n., 234 n.; \"Early Japanese History\"\n    by, cited, 259 n.\n\nBambetsu, \"Foreign Branch\", the mass of people, 235-236.\n\nBanishment, punishment by, 96-99.\n\nBanner-supporters (hatamoto), 243.\n\nBateren, Roman Catholic priests, 311 n.\n\nBato-Kwannon, images of, 200.\n\nBehaviour, sumptuary regulations as to, 173-174; proclamation of\n    Shotoku Taishi regarding, 359-360.\n\nBirths, regulations as to presents on occasions of, 165;\n    registration of, by Buddhist priests, 203-204.\n\nBlack, an Englishman, as a Japanese story-teller, 10-11.\n\nBon-odori, dances of the festival of the dead, 202.\n\nBoundaries, gods of, 130.\n\nBow, etiquette of the, 174.\n\nBoys, conduct of, regulated by the community, 89-90; proverb\n    regarding mischievousness of, 421.\n\nBuddhism, Japanese name for (Butsudo), 21; mortuary tablets of,\n    42-43, 201; the dead according to, and Shinto, 47-48; entry of,\n    into Japan, 183-184; disestablishment of (1871), 107-109; charm\n    of, to Western thinkers, 209-210; summary of teachings of,\n    under Emperor Temmu, 239; obstacles to establishment of\n    religious hierarchy by, 251; military development of, 269-270;\n    violent end to militant, 275-276; jesuitism mistaken for a new\n    kind of, 332-334; no essential of Shinto weakened by, 379-380.\n\nBuke, the military class, 241.\n\nButsudan, household-shrine, 42.\n\nButsudo, \"The Way of the Buddha\", 21.\n\nCapital, danger to Japan from foreign, 465-466, 473.\n\nCarpenters, religious rites preformed by, 125; organizations of,\n    403-404.\n\nCastes, division of society into, 236.\n\nCauldron and saucepan, god of the, 129.\n\nCelibacy, forbidden by early religion, 58; condemned by code of\n    Iyeyasu, 349.\n\nCharms, to protect houses, 147 n.\n\nChastisement, punishment by, 95-96, 421.\n\nChiara, Giuseppe, 327 n.\n\nChieftainship, hereditary, 235.\n\nChina, date of introduction of spirit-tablet from, 24; religion\n    of filial piety in, 49-50; belief as to the Demon-Gate imported\n    from, 130; penal codes imported from, 176; arts and learning\n    of, taught by Buddhism, 201; civilization of, brought to Japan\n    by Buddhism, 203; harakiri, perhaps introduced from, 286;\n    Jesuit policy in, 331; cause for hatred of Western religion in,\n    474; integrity of, depends on mission-policy, 479-480.\n\nChori, pariahs, 247-250.\n\nChosku, clan of, 367, 368, 372, 374.\n\n\"Chronicles of Nihon\", see Nihongi.\n\nChristianity, assumption that individualism would be produced by,\n    471; obstacles to, presented by religion of ancestor-worship,\n    479-481.  See Jesuits and Missions.\n\nChi-U, the condition of, 191 n.\n\nCircle of Perpetual Hunger for wicked ghosts, 191.\n\nClan, cult of the, 81-83.\n\nClans, number of, in ancient Japan, 83; three great classes of,\n    235-236; early society an aggregation of, 236-237, 252-253;\n    wars between the military, for supremacy, 267 ff.; misery one\n    result of break-up of, 447-449.\n\nCleanliness exacted by Shinto, 145-146.\n\nCoffins, size regulated by law, 179.\n\nColour-prints, production of, 357.\n\nCommerce, contempt for, 246; Portuguese, a help to Jesuit\n    missionary work, 334-335; rise to power, 446; dangers resulting\n    from the rise of, 447-452.\n\nCommunism not a modern growth, 255.\n\nCompetition, undesirability of, 414-416; Government aid to\n    national industrial, 451-452.\n\nConcubines, under patriarchal system, 58, 68-69, 74; remarks of\n    Iyeyasu regarding, 68, 348.\n\nConfucianism, influence of, in Japan, 187-188, 292 ff.\n\nConscience, doctrine of, admitted by Buddhism, 196.\n\nCoulanges, Fustel de, 52, 264, 449; quoted, 27, 67.\n\nCourtesy, legal regulation of, 173-176.\n\nCraft-gods, 124, 153-154.\n\nCrafts, effect of Buddhism on, 188; guilds connected with, 246,\n    252, 402-405.\n\nCrucifixion of Christians at Nagasaki, 307.\n\nCruelty to animals, apparent absence of, 12-13; punishment of,\n    after death, 197.\n\nDaimyo, lords of provinces, 242; conversion of, to Jesuitism,\n    304; Jesuits work with aid of, 304, 306,308, 339; protection of\n    peasantry against, 396.\n\nDai-Nihon-Shi, compilation of, 370.\n\nDances, sacred, 142-143; of the festival of the dead, 202.\n\nDancing, Japanese, 202 n. 2.\n\nDan-no-ura, sea-fight of, 267.\n\nDaughter, gradation of terms signifying, 171.\n\nDaughters, sale of, 72, 75 n.\n\nDaughters-in-law, custom as to, 64-65.\n\nDead, early conceptions of fate of, 25-28; rites in honour of,\n    34-46; poems in praise of, 35; Buddhist doctrine of, 47;\n    effects of Buddhism on worship of, 191-192.\n\nDeath, penalty of, inflicted for slight offences, 178-179;\nmatters relating to, regulated by law, 179.\n\nDebtors, reduction of, to slavery, 234.\n\nDeities, punishments by tutelar, 102-105; lesser Shinto, 108.\n    See Gods and Ujigami.\n\nDemeanour, regulation of, 173-176; cultivation of, as an art,\n    359-361.\n\nDemon-Gate, the, 130.\n\nDependants, under the patriarchal system, 76-78, 231-234;\n    conservative attitude of, 400; position of employes in\n    commercial houses, 406; position of maid-servants, 407-409.\n\nDeportment, code of, 173.\n\nDiscipline, strength of, in Old Japan, 159-182.\n\nDivination, systems of, 150-152; not used in warfare, 152.\n\nDivorce, in ancient family system, 58, 69-70, 73, 75; the new\n    laws about, 386.\n\nDominicans in Japan, 307; reckless zeal of, 338.\n\nDrama, introduction by Buddhism, 204; the age of popular, 357;\nincidents of real tragedy reproduced in, 290-291.\n\nDress, restrictions as to, 166-168.\n\nDutch, assistance of, in putting down Shimabara Revolt, 326-327;\n    effect on status of, of Shimabara Revolt, 329-330.\n\nEar-Monument, the, 277.\n\nEducation, effect of Buddhism on, 202-203; introduction of modern\n    system of, 376; of the State, 419-441; the sustaining of, by\n    personal sacrifices, 435-436; of students abroad, 439-441.\n\nEmma (Yama), judge of the dead, 199.\n\nEmperor, application of term, to early rulers, incorrect, 237.\n\nEnactments of the Kumi, 91-94.\n\nEta, people, the, 98, 247-250.\n\nEtiquette, cultivation of, in Tokugawa period, 359-361.\n\nEvolution, Buddhism a theory of, 210.\n\nExecution, account of an early, 177-178.\n\nExports, rise in value of, 451.\n\nExpression, etiquette of, 173.\n\nFactory-life, horrors of modern, 452.\n\nFamilies of the nobility, number of, 241.\n\nFamily, definition of Japanese term, 22; basis of the ancient,\n    55-57; obligation to perpetuate the, 58-59; constitution of the\n    patriarchal, 60-79.\n\nFarmers, the rank of, 244-245; secured against undue oppression,\n    396-397.  See Agriculture.\n\nFather, gradation of terms signifying,  171.\n\nFeast-days, Shinto, 103, 137:\n\nFencing, Japanese, an example of antipodal action, 7-8.\n\nFestival of the dead, dances of the, 202.\n\nFestival-processions, Shinto, 103.\n\nFestivals of the Ujigami, 84, 137, 140-142; laws as to presents\n    at boys', 165: Shin-Sho-Sai, 245; temple, 84, 459.\n\nFeudalism, Japanese so-called, 230-238, 253.\n\nFlower-arrangement, art of, 358-359.\n\nFlower-daughter, the, 64.\n\nFood, the use by ghosts of, 29-30; offerings of, to the dead, 29-30,\n    45; offerings to the gods, 53 n., 138, 140, 141; for the dead\n    might not be eaten by children, 51 n.: laws as to, at weddings\n    and funerals, 165; offerings of, to Pretas, 191; decree\n    forbidding use of flesh for, 196; Buddhist offerings of, 201;\nrecent increase in price of, 412 n.\n\n\"Forty-seven Ronin\", story of the, 295-296: tombs of the, 297 n.\n\nFour Deva Kings, the, 260; temple of, 200.\n\nFranciscans in Japan, 307 ff.\n\nFreedmen, class of, 233, 234-235.\n\nFreemasonry in Japan, 472 n.\n\nFujiwara clan, rise of the, 260-261; duration of rule of, 260,\n    266, 281; final degeneration of, 266-267.\n\nFuneral-rites, ancient, 34-46.\n\nFunerals, laws as to food at, 165; laws governing.  179.\n\nGardening, first development of, under Buddhism, 188; modern, 404.\n\nGardens, holiness of, 154.\n\nGhost-house, 36, 56; transformation of, into Shinto temples, 62.\n\nGhosts, ancestor-worship coeval with belief in, 24; identified in\n    early beliefs with gods, 25, 46-48, 55.\n\nGhost-ships, Buddhist, 202.\n\nGirl-priestesses in Shinto temples, 142-143.\n\nGirls in service, position of, 407-409.\n\nGo, definition of, 64 n.\n\nGoblins, admitted to exist by Buddhism, 190-191.\n\nGo-Daigo, Mikado, revolt of, against Hojo, 270; later\n    vicissitudes of, 270-271.\n\nGods, no early difference between ghosts and, 25, 55; development\n    of distinction, between greater and lesser, 25-26; early\n    conceptions of, compared with Greek and Roman, 27-28: the dead\n    and, 46-48; the minor, 108; all Japanese considered as, in one\n    sense, 118: of crookedness, 118-119; of crafts and callings,\n    118-119; number of Shinto, worshipped, 127-128; of the house,\n    130-131; the great number of, 133-134; of industry, 153-154;\n    identity of Shinto and Buddhist evil, 190-191.\n\nGod-shelves, 124; daily prayers before, 134-136; religious charms\n    on, 147 n.\n\nGo-Kameyama, Emperor, 272.\n\nGo-Komatsu, Emperor, 272.\n\nGoshi yeomanry, 243.\n\nGo-Toba, Emperor, works at sword.  making, 245.\n\nGo-Tsuchi-mikado, Emperor, 273.\n\nGovernment, identity of, with religion, 90-91.\n\nGraves, legal dimensions of, 179; white lanterns at, 202.\n\nGreeks, parallels drawn between Japanese and, 15-16, 27-28, 34,\n    36, 57, 59, 65, 67, 70, 78, 89, 99, 148, 169, 202 n., 229, 264,\n    443-444, 446.\n\nGuilds, 246, 252; religious organization of, 124-125; modern\nworkings of, 402-403.\n\nHachiman, the war god, 83; acknowledgment of, in Buddhism, 190.\n\nHades, development of belief in, 25.\n\nHair, class indicated by method of wearing, 233.\n\nHarakiri, custom of, 285-286; instance of, in Russian war, 464.\n\nHarmony, Japanese sense of, in tints and colors.  8.\n\nHeavenly sovereigns, worship of the, 108-109; maintained through\n    years of revolt, 279-280.\n\nHeimin, \"common folk\", 247.\n\nHell, according to Buddhism, 195.\n\nHidetada, son of Iyeyasu, 321-322.\n\nHideyoshi, career of, 276-277; attitude of, toward Jesuits,\n    306-307.\n\nHinin, a wandering pariah, 98; \"not-human-beings\", 250.\n\nHirata, great Shinto commentator, 27, 369; quoted, 47, 49, 56,\n    111, 116, 117, 119, 120-121, 122, 134-135, 145, 161; banishment\n    and death of, 372.\n\nHistory, scientific knowledge of Japanese, impossible, 1;\nlegendary, 259-260; beginning of authentic, 260.\n\nHitagaki, the \"human hedge\", 34.\n\nHitogata, \"mankind-shapes\", 147-148.\n\nHitotsubashi, Shogun, 374.\n\nHiyei-san, monastery buildings burnt at, 275.\n\nHizen, clan of, 372.\n\nHojo, supremacy of the, 268; defeat of and extinction, 270.\n\nHome, gods of the, 129-130.\n\nHonesty, Japanese, 13.\n\nHongwanji, Shin sect of, 275.\n\nHoryfuji, the temple called, 200.\n\nHouse, building of, a religious act, 125, 130-131; gods of the, 129.\n\nHouses, size of, prescribed by law, 164, 165, 166; of prostitution,\n enactment of Iyeyasu regarding, 347; operation of labour-unions\nwhen building, 403-404.\n\nHusband, seven terms for, 171.\n\nHusbands, position of adopted, 64-65.\n\nHuxley, T. H., quoted concerning industrial reform, 452-453.\n\n\"I\", gradations of the pronoun.  171.\n\nIbuku Mogusa, extract from, 305.\n\nIhai, \"soul-commemoration\", Buddhist mortuary tablets, 42, 201.\n\nImages, Buddhist, 459; setting up of, 200-201.\n\nImperial ancestors, worship of the, 108-109; duration of,\n    279-280.\n\nIndividual, obligations of the, under patriarchal system, 88-99;\n    relation of, to the Ujigami, 120-121; freedom of, did not\n    exist, 158, 253-254; modern recognition of, 376; now free in\n    theory, in practice like his forefathers, 384-387, 391-392;\n    Government official authority over the, 409-416.\n\nIndividualism, assumption that Christianity would produce, 471.\n\nIndustry, developed in Japan under Buddhist teachings, 188;\n    development of, under Iyeyasu, 279.\n\nIndustry, gods of, 124-125, 153-154.\n\nIrregularity, the aesthetie value of, 8.\n\nIse, shrines of, 122.123-124; every Japanese expected to visit,\n    123-124; worship at shrines of, 138-139.\n\nIshijima, suicide of wife of, 290.\n\nIsolation, causes for policy of, 329.\n\nIto, Marquis, policy of, 390.\n\nIyemochi, Shogun, 374.\n\nIyeyasu, Tokugawa, apotheosis of, 127; enactment of, concerning\n    rudeness, 175; powers of daimyo restricted by, 242; Will Adams\n    created a samurai by, 254; sketch of career of, 277-278; decree\n    of, concerning suicide, 285; decree concerning code of\n    vengeance, 293; persecution of Christians by, 307, 308, 320-321;\n    interviews with Will Adams, 314-315; castle of Osaka\n    stormed and burnt by, 322; Legacy of, 68, 319, 345-351, 360.\n\nIzanagi, the legend concerning, 40, 112-117.\n\nIzumo, farming forbidden to samurai in, 244-245.\n\nIzumo temple, the, 122; worship at, 138, 139, 142-143.\n\nJesuitism, effect of, on Japan, 328: causes of early success of,\n    330-337; policy of, in China, 331, 337; inability of, to adapt\n    itself to Japanese social conditions, 341.\n\nJesuits, arrival of, in Japan, 304; favoured by Nobunaga, 304-305;\n    persecutions of, 304-305, 307-308; partial expulsion of, 321;\n    revolt of peasantry managed by, 324-325; final crushing of, 327.\n\nJigai, method of suicide for women, 287.\n\nJimmu, Emperor, 259; offerings at tomb of, 37.\n\nJingo, Emperor, legend of Korean conquest by, 259.\n\nJinrikisha-men, code of, 401-402.\n\nJito, Empress, edict of, concerning slavery, 234 n.\n\nJizo, playmate of infant ghosts, 199; first production of icons\n    of, 200.\n\nJoyousness of existence, Japanese, 12-13.\n\nJunshi, voluntary self-sacrifice, 39-40; decree of Iyeyasu puts\n    stop to, 285-286.\n\nKami, \"gods\", 27; significance of, 46-47; devotion to, the first\n    of duties according to Iyeyasu, 350.\n\nKannushi, office of, 138-140.\n\nKarma, metaphysics of, 220, 221, 222, 224.\n\nKasuga, the deity of, 83.\n\nKataki-uchi, custom of, 294-295.\n\nKiyomasa, Kato, apotheosis of, 127.\n\nKobetsu, imperial families, 235.\n\nKobodaishi, 185.\n\nKo-ji-ki, \"Record of Ancient Matters\", 110-111, 126, 131;\n    extracts from, 112-114.\n\nKorea, Buddhism brought into Japan from (552 A.D.), 184;\n    Hideyoshi's war against, 277.\n\nKoshin, protector of highways, 200.\n\nKotoku, Emperor, 39, 265; edict of, concerning slaves, 232 n.\n\nKo-uji, \"lesser families\", 60, 230.\n\nKublai Khan, invasion by, 269.\n\nKuge, noble families, 241.\n\nKukai, founder of Shingon sect, 185.\n\nKumi-enactment's of, 91-92.\n\nKumi-system, the, 91-94, 168-169.\n\nKwambaku, \"regent\", office of the, established, 262.\n\nKwannon, Goddess of Mercy, 199.\n\n\"La Cite Antique\", de Coulanges', cited, 27, 34, 67, 443, 449.\n\nLandscape-gardeners, union of the, 404-405.\n\nLanguage, impossibility of mastering, by adult Occidental, 9;\n    conventional organization of, 170-172; rules governing use of,\n    171-172.\n\nLaw, method and manner of administration, 351-353.\n\nLaws, sumptuary, 164-180.\n\nLaws of Iyeyasu, the, 278.\n\nLaws of Shotoku Taishi, 344-345.\n\nLegacy of Iyeyasu, 68, 319, 345-351, 360.\n\nLibraries under the Tokugawa regime, 357, 370.\n\nLiterature, qualifications essential for an understanding of\n    Japanese, 2-3; introduction of Chinese, 187-188; introduction\n    or development by Buddhism, 204; under the patronage of\n    Iyeyasu, 279; development of, in Tokugawa period, 357; the\n    party of, 370-372, 375-376.\n\nMabuchi, Shinto commentator, 159-160, 260, 369.\n\nMaid-servants, position of, 407-409.\n\nManners, laws as to, 173-176.\n\nMarriage, obligatory in ancient Japan, 58; in patriarchal family,\n    58-60, 64-67; signified adoption only, 64; a chief duty of\n    filial piety, 65; ceremony of, 65-67; of servants, 77-78;\n    modern innovations in, 385-386; service by girls merely a\n    preparation for, 407-408.\n\nMasashige, Kusunoki, 50.\n\nMassacre of Shimabara, 325-327.\n\nMassacres, of priests by Nobunaga, 251; caused by Christian\n    attacks on domestic faiths, 475, 479.\n\nMatsuri-goto, \"matters of worship\", 32.\n\nMatsuri, temple-festivals, 84.\n\nMeat, forbidden for food, 196-197; forbidden as offerings by\n    Buddhism, 201.\n\nMerchants, place of, in social ranking, 246; modern rise of, to\n    power, 446.\n\nMetempsychosis, no doctrine of, in Shinto, 55 ff., 189-190.\n\nMikado, God of the Living, 122-125; usurpation of powers of, 260-266.\n\nMiko, girl-priestesses, 142-143.\n\nMimidzuka, \"Ear-monument\", 277.\n\nMinamoto, regency of the, 267-268.\n\nMionoseki, Eta settlement at, 249.\n\nMiracle-plays performed by Jesuits, 334.\n\nMissions, Christian, causes of small results of modern, 339, 473-476;\n   consideration of work of foreign 476-478; importance of policy of,\n   in Far East, 479-480.  See Jesuits.\n\nMitama-San-no-tana, \"shelf of the august spirits\", 42.\n\nMitama-shiro, \"spirit-substitutes\", 42.\n\nMitamaya, \"august-spirit-dwelling.\" 42.\n\nMitsukuni, Prince of Mito, 370.\n\nMiya, \"august house\", 36, 42.\n\nMoney, first appearance of, 447.\n\nMonism, higher Buddhism a species of, 210, 220-222.\n\nMother, nine terms signifying, 171.\n\nMotowori, Shinto commentator, 368.\n\nMourning-houses, 36; Shinto temple, evolve from, 41-42.\n\nMythology, of the reigning house, 119; summary of the Japanese,\n    115-116.\n\nNakatomi, noble family of, 241.\n\nNature, controlled by ghosts of ancestors, according to Shinto,\n    106; Buddhist interpretation of, 192-194.\n\nNihongi, \"Chronicles of Nihon\", 110, 111, 115-116, 126; cited,\n    38-39, 112 n., 164 n., 196 n., 232 n., 234 n., 360 n.\n\nNirvana, not preached to common Japanese people, 189, 194-195.\n\nNobility, origin of the, 241-242.  See Daimyo.\n\nNobunaga, Oda, massacres of priests by, 251; career of, 274-276;\n    Jesuits favored by, 304-305.\n\nObedience, rules of, 48-49, 63, 157, (see Filial Piety); modern\n    reversion to law of, 63, 377-378; of individual to the\n    community, 89-99.\n\nOfferings, to the dead, 37; meat forbidden as, 201.\n\nOfficers, army pay of, 412.\n\nO-harai, ceremony of purification, 144-147.\n\nOho-kuni-nushi-no-Kami, 120, 122; Rough and Gentle Spirits of, 126.\n\nOjin, Emperor, 83; Korean immigration in reign of, 260.\n\nOsaka, Temple of the Four Deva Kings at, 200; military headquarters\n    of the Shin sect at, 275; Iyeyasu storms castle of, 322.\n\nOstracism, the punishment by, 95-96; student, 423-424.\n\nO-uji, \"great families\", 60-62, 252.\n\nOutcasts, the class of, 98, 247, 250.\n\n\"Outlines of the Mahayana Philosophy\", Kuroda's, 214-215, 222.\n\nPainting, effect of Buddhism on, 188; examples of, in temples,\n    198-199.\n\nPanama railroad, debt of, to religion of filial piety, 50.\n\nPapacy, interference of, in Jesuit missionary system, 337-338.\n\nParents, rights of, in patriarchal system, 70-72.\n\nPariahs, class of, 98, 247-250.\n\nParliament, convocation of, first, 377\n\nPeasants, revolt of, 324-325; security of, against oppression,\n    395-396; in the quasi-feudal system, 244-245.  See Farmers.\n\nPerry, Commodore, advent of, 374.\n\nPoems in praise of the dead, 35.\n\nPoetry, contests in, during Tokugawa period, 358.\n\nPoliteness as an art, 359-361.\n\nPolitics, modern Japanese, 389.\n\nPollution, death regarded as, 40-41.\n\nPolygyny, in ancient society, 67-69.\n\nPopulation, alien elements in, 16-17.\n\nPorcelains, Japanese, 9, 356-357.\n\nPoverty, resulting from modern industrial revolution, 446-451.\n\nPrayer, prescribed by Hirata.  134; daily, 134-137.\n\nPresents, sumptuary laws concerning, 165, 168.\n\nPretas, wicked ghosts, 191.\n\nPriests, Shinto, office and powers of, 86-87, 101-105, 139-140;\n    Buddhist, as teachers, 203-204; ranked with the samurai, 247;\n    massacres of, in the sixteenth century, 251; Buddhist, as\n    warriors, 269, 275-276.  See Jesuits.\n\nPrivacy, lack of, in Japan ancient and modern, 100.\n\nProfessions, under divine patronage, 153-154.\n\nPronouns, rules as to use of, 171.\n\nProperty, laws of succession to, in Old Japan, 72-73.\n\nPsychology, difference between Eastern and Western, 9.\n\nPunishment of school-children, 421-422.\n\nPunishment, severity of, under ancient system, 94-95, 176-177; by\n    communities, 94-99; by tutelar deities, 102-105; laws as to,\n    175-177.\n\nPurification, ceremonies of, 144-115; by ascetic practices, 148-150.\n\nRebirth, doctrine of, inconsistent with early Japanese beliefs, 55;\n the Buddhist idea of, and ancestor-worship, 193 n.\n\nReform, agitation for industrial.  452-454.\n\nRegency, growth of the, 262-264; usurpation of power by the, 264-267.\n\nRegistrars, Buddhist priests become public, 203-204.\n\nRelationship, gradation of nouns indicating, 171.\n\nReligion, summary of three forms of Shinto, 21-22; of final piety,\n    48-51, 57, 65, 188, 459; the basis of organization of patriarchal\n    family, 57, 64; marriage a rite of, 65-67: identity of government\n    with, 100, 101; metaphysics of Buddhist, 207-228; origin in, of\n    customs of the vendetta, 295; tolerance of, by  Iyeyasu (except\n    Roman Catholicism), 349-350; the life of the Japanese people,\n    463-464; obstacles to propagation of the Western, in the Far East,\n    479.  See Ancestor-worship and Missions.\n\nResponsibility from above downward, 395-400.\n\n\"Review of the Introduction of Christianty into China and Japan\",\n    quoted from, 305.\n\nRevolution, modern industrial, 445-449; dangers of a social,\n    448-451.\n\nRice-pot, goddess of the, 130.\n\n\"Riddle of the Universe\", Haeckel's cited, 221.\n\nRoads, under the protection of Buddhist deities, 130.\n\nRomans, ancient, parallels between Japanese and, 27, 29, 34, 57,\n    65, 67, 70, 78, 99, 148, 169, 229, 234, 264, 443, 444, 446.\n\nRudeness, Japanese definition of, 175.\n\nRussia, the war with, 462-463.\n\nRyobu-Shinto, establishment of; 185-186.\n\nSacrifices, history of all religious, traceable to offerings to\n    ghosts, 30; ancient funeral, 37-38; origin of human, 284; of\n    one's family, 290-291.  See Junshi.\n\nSamurai, class of the, 243, 251; obligation of, to perform\n    harakiri, 287; suppression of, 376.\n\nSaris, Captain, account by, of an execution, 177-178; quoted, 318.\n\nSatow, Sir Earnest, quoted, 43 n., 49, 68, 126 n., 141, 142,\n    160-161, 312 n., 333.\n\nSatsuma, clan of the, 367, 372.\n\nScarecrows, god of, 130, 135, 153.\n\nScholarship, advance of, in Tokugawa period, 369-370.\n\nSchool, training of children in, 421-425.\n\nSchools, connected with Buddhist temples, 203; Government, 424-425.\n\nSculpture, developed in Japan under Buddhist teachings, 188;\n    displayed in roadside images, 200, 459.\n\nSekigahara, battle of, 278.\n\nSelf-control, legal enforcement of, 173-174.\n\nSeppuku, Chinese term for harakiri, 287.\n\nServants, in Old Japan, 76-78; conservative attitude of, 400;\n    position of maid, 407-408.  See Apprentices and Dependants.\n\n\"Shadow-Shogun\", the, 268; deposition of, 267.\n\nShelf of the august spirits, 42.\n\nShimabara Revolt, the, 324-325.\n\nShimonoseki, Bombardment of, 374.\n\nShin, sect of, defeated by Nobunaga, 275-276.\n\nShinbetsu, \"divine branch\" of families, 235.\n\nShin-Shir-Sai, the Ninth Festival, 245.\n\nShinto, signification, 21; forms of worship, 21-22; the morals\n    of, 100-101; relation to Japanese mythology to, summarized,\n    115-134; origin of gods of the house in, 129-130; greater gods\n    of, acknowledged by Buddhism, 190; restoration of, 374; no\n    essential of Buddhism weakened by, 379-380.  See Ancestor-worship.\n\nShogun, authority of the, 241, 251-252: significance of term, 267;\n    extension of power of the, 267-268.\n\nShogunate, beginning of the history of, 267; abolition of the, 374.\n\nShorei-Hikki, \"Record of Ceremonies\", 66.\n\nShoryobune, \"ghost-ships;\" 202.\n\nShrines, worship at, 121, 123, 138-139.\n\nSickness, charms against, 147-148.\n\nSisters of Charity, comparison of Japanese women to, 366.\n\nSmile, rules and regulations about the, 173-174.\n\nSocialism, not a modern growth, 255.\n\nSocieties, secret, 472 n.\n\nSociety, organization of Old Japanese, 229-258.\n\nSociology, difficulties in studying Japanese, 1-2.\n\nSoga brothers, the, apotheosis of, 127.\n\nSohodo-no-kami, god of scarecrows.  130, 135, 153.\n\nSon, eleven graded terms signifying, 171.\n\nSons-in-law, significant motto concerning, 64; customs as to,\n    64-65.\n\nSpeech, non-existence of freedom of, 170; regulations of forms\n    of, 171-173.\n\nSpirits, Rough and Gentle, 126.\n\nStory-teller, an Englishman who is a professional Japanese,\n    10-11.\n\nStrangulation, suicide by, 286.\n\nStudent-revolts, significance and results of, 398-399.\n\nStudents, private means furnished for education of, 435-436;\n    education of abroad, 437-438.  See Education.\n\nSubsidies, Government, to industries, 451.\n\nSuccession laws, in Old Japan, 72-73.\n\nSugiwara-no-Michizane, spirit of, 127.\n\nSuicide, by the sword, 39-40; customs as to, 286-290; modern\n    instances of female, 289; instances of, in Russian war, 464 n.\n    See Harakiri and Junshi.\n\nSulko, Empress, 260, 261.\n\nSuinin, Emperor, abolishes the \"human hedge\", 38.\n\nSun, daily greeting to the, 135-136.\n\nSun-goddess, worship of, 109-110, 116-117; acknowledged by\n    Buddhism, 190; offerings of first fruits to, by Emperor, 245 n.\n\nSurgeons, efficiency of Japanese, 441.\n\nSword-making, most sacred of crafts, 125, 154, 245-246.\n\nSwords, wearing of, prohibited, 376.\n\nTables, mortuary, 42-43; Buddhist mortuary (ihai), 201.\n\nTaira, rise and fall of the, 266-267.\n\nTaishi, Shotoku, proclamation of, regarding politeness, 359-360.\n\nTakatoki, sacrifical suicide by the sword originated by, 39.\n\nTakayama, a Japanese Jesuit, 321.\n\nTake-no-uji-no-Sukune, apotheosis of, 127.\n\n\"Tales of Old Japan\", Mitford's, 247, 295.\n\nTattooing of slaves, 232.\n\nTea-ceremony, in Tokugawa period, 358-359.\n\nTeachers, Buddhist priests as, 202-203; duties to, same as to\n    fathers, 294; salaries of, 412; relation of, to pupils, 422;\n    transformation stages in attitude of, pupils toward, 431-433.\n\nTemmu, Emperor, decree of, forbidding use of meat, 196;\n    reorganization of castes by, 236; reign of, 237.\n\nTemple of the Four Deva Kings at Osaka, 200.\n\nTemples, Shinto, evolved from mourning-houses, 41; Shinto parish\n    dedicated to Uji-gods (Ujigami), 82-84; Shinto, of the first\n    grade, 121; Shinto, classification of, 123; forms of art in\n    Buddhist, 198-199; notable examples of, 200; schools connected\n    with, 203; Buddhist, burned by Jesuits, 306, 308; Shinto, in\n    Formosa, 388; number of Shinto, at present, 470; memorial\n    character of new, 470.\n\nTerakoya, drama of, 291.\n\nThieves sentenced to slavery, 234.\n\nTogo, Vice-Admiral, reply of, to Imperial message, 463.\n\nTokugawa, shogunate of,  Japanese civilization reaches limit of\n    development under, 343.  See Iyeyasu.\n\nTokyo, widespread poverty in, resulting from industrial\nrevolution, 446.\n\nTools, surprising shapes of, 7; sacredness of, 153.\n\nToshogu, Iyeyasu worshipped under name of, 127.\n\nTrade, mean rank of those engaged in, 246.  See Commerce.\n\nTragedy, Japanese, founded on fact, 290-291.\n\nUjigami, original relation of community to, 81-82; as clan-deities,\n    82-84; offences against, 88; relation of the individual to,\n    120-121; cults of, maintained, and not supplanted, by\n    Buddhism, 379.\n\nUneme-no-kami, Takenaka, 324.\n\nUniversity, students at the, 425-426.\n\nUtensils, domestic, sacredness of, 153; art displayed in, 357.\n\nUyernon no Hyoge, decree concerning junshi disobeyed by, 285.\n\nVariety to be found in Japanese form of civilization, 256-257.\n\nVendetta, religious origin for customs of, 295.\n\nVengeance, the duty of, 292-293; Iyeyasu's decree concerning code\n    of, 293.\n\nVerb, etiquette governing uses of the, 171-172.\n\nVice, Iyeyasu on suppression of, 346-347.\n\nVillage-laws, peasants' 395-396.\n\nWages of maid-servants, 408.\n\n\"Wanderings of Cain\", Coleridge's, 122.\n\nWar, ten centuries of, following rise of military power, 259-267;\n   against Korea, 277; with peasantry, 324-325; with Russia, 462-463.\n\nWarfare, divination in, 152.\n\nWay of the Buddha, the (Butsudo), 21.\n\nWay of the Gods, the (Shinto), 21, 41.\n\nWeddings, customs as to, 65-67; laws as to food at, 73; presents\n at, 165-166.\n\nWhipping, infrequency of now, as punishment, 421.  See Punishments.\n\nWife, gradation of terms signifying, 171.\n\nWine, Buddhist forbids offerings of, 201.\n\nWoman, tribute paid to the Japanese, 361-362.\n\nWomen, mourning rites intrusted to, 43; position of, in old\n    Japanese family, 73-74; as priestesses, 143; forms of speech\n    for use of, 172; methods of suicide for, 287; modern instances\n    of suicide by, 289, 290; duty of vengeance performed by, 293.\n\nWorship, three forms of Shinto, 21-22 (See Ancestor-worship); of\n    Imperial ancestors, 108-109; of Sun-goddess, 109-110; at\n    shrines, 119; phallic, 132.\n\nYama, judge of the dead, 198-199.\n\nYamaguchi, land granted to Jesuits at.  332-333.\n\nYamato-damashi, \"The Soul of Yamato\", 159.\n\nYedo, obligatory residence of daimyo in, 278; Iyeyasu, the\nfounder of, 279.\n\nYeizan, Buddhist high priest, 351.\n\nYuriaku, Emperor, deaths inflicted by, for rudeness, 176.","title":"Japan: An Attempt at Interpretation","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":115463}