Japan: An Attempt at InterpretationHearn, Lafcadio
Religion
Japan: An Attempt at Interpretation
Hearn, Lafcadio
Japan -- Civilization
About the origin of Japanese slavery, much remains to be learned.
There are evidences of successive immigrations; and it is possible
that some, at least, of the earlier Japanese settlers were reduced by
later invaders to the status of servitude. Again, [234] there was a
considerable immigration of Koreans and Chinese, some of whom might
have voluntarily sought servitude as a refuge from worse evils. But
the subject remains obscure. We know, however, that degradation to
slavery was a common punishment in early times; also, that debtors
unable to pay became the slaves of their creditors; also, that
thieves were sentenced to become the slaves of those whom they had
robbed.* Evidently there were great differences in the conditions of
servitude. The more unfortunate class of slaves were scarcely better
off than domestic animals; but there were serfs who could not be
bought or sold, nor employed at other than special work; these were
of kin to their lords, and may have entered voluntarily into
servitude for the sake of sustenance and protection. Their relation
to their masters reminds us of that of the Roman client to the Roman
patron.
[*An edict issued by the Empress Jito, in 690, enacted that a father
could sell his son into real slavery; but that debtors could be sold
only into a kind of serfdom. The edict ran thus: "If a younger
brother of the common people is sold by his elder brother, he should
be classed with freemen; if a child is sold by his parents, he should
be classed with slaves; persons confiscated into slavery, by way of
payment of interest on debts, are to be classed with freemen; and
their children, though born of a union with a slave, are to be all
classed with freemen."--Aston's Nihongi, Vol. II, p, 402.]
As yet it is difficult to establish any clear distinction between the
freedmen and the freemen of ancient Japanese society; but we know
that the free population, ranking below the ruling class, [235]
consisted of two great divisions: the kunitsuko and the tomonotsuko.
The first were farmers, descendants perhaps of the earliest Mongol
invaders, and were permitted to hold their own lands independently of
the central government: they were lords of their own soil, but not
nobles. The tomonotsuko were artizans,--probably of Korean or
Chinese descent, for the most part,--and numbered no less than 180
clans. They followed hereditary occupations; and their clans were
attached to the imperial clans, for which they were required to
furnish skilled labour.
Originally each of the O-uji and Ko-uji had its own territory,
chiefs, dependants, serfs, and slaves. The chieftainships were
hereditary,--descending from father to son in direct succession from
the original patriarch. The chief of a great clan was lord over the
chiefs of the subclans attached to it: his authority was both
religious and military. It must not be forgotten that religion and
government were considered identical.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account