The theory of the Japanese government during the greater part of its long career has been that of an absolute monarchy. The emperor was supposed to hold in his hands the supreme authority, and to dispose, as he saw fit, of honors and emoluments, offices and administrative duties. There was no fundamental law of succession, by which the order of accession to the throne was regulated. The reigning emperor usually selected during his lifetime some one of his sons, or, if he had no sons, some other prince of the imperial family, who became the crown prince during the life of the emperor, and on his death succeeded to the throne.(95) The selection was usually made with the concurrence of the officers of the court, and very often must be credited entirely to the preference of these officers. Sometimes the emperor died before the appointment of a crown prince had taken place. In this case the selection lay in the hands of the court officers, and many cases are recorded in the history of the empire where serious disturbances arose between the partisans of different aspirants to the throne. These disturbances usually account for the _interregna_ which are so often found between the reigns of successive sovereigns. To the freedom which has prevailed, not only in the imperial house but also in all the families of the empire, in regard to the rights of succession, must be attributed the long and unbroken line which the imperial house of Japan is able to show. That a line of sovereigns should continue from the time of Jimmu down to the present without break by reason of the failure of children, is of course impossible. But the difficulty disappears when it is remembered, that in case of the failure of a son to succeed, the father provided for the want by adopting as his son some prince of the imperial family, and appointing him as his heir. With this principle of adoption must be mentioned the practice of abdication(96) which produced a marked and constantly recurring influence in the history of Japan. Especially was this the case in the middle ages of Japanese history. The practice spread from the imperial house downwards into all departments of Japanese life. Although the principle of abdication and adoption was probably brought from China and was adopted by the Japanese as a mark of superior culture, yet these practices were carried to a much greater extent in Japan than was ever thought of in their original home. We shall see in the story of Japanese times the amazing and ludicrous extent to which the abdication of reigning sovereigns was carried. We shall witness even the great and sagacious Ieyasu himself, after holding the office of shōgun for only two years, retiring in favor of his son Hidetada, and yet from his retirement practically exercising the authority of the office for many years.