'The Social Organization\r'

'The late prof Fiske, in his Outline of Cosmic Philosophy, made a very interesting remark about societies wish well those of China, antique Egypt, and ancient Assyria. â€Å"I am expressing,” he verbalise, â€Å"something much than an analogy, I am describing a unfeigned homology so far as concerns the process of development,â€when I say that these communities simulated modern European nations, oftentimes in the same way that a tree-fern of the carbonaceous stoppage simulated the exogenous trees of the enclose time. So far as this is authencetic of China, it is handlewise true of Japan. The constitution of the old Japanese decree was no more than than an amplification of the constitution of the family,â€the patriarchal family of bad-mannered times. All modern Western societies begin been highly-developed out of a like patriarchal spring: the early civilizations of Greece and Rome were similarly constructed, upon a lesser scale. scarce the patriarchal fam ily in Europe was disintegrated thousands of years agone; the gens and the curia dissolved and disappeargond; the furrow eachy distinct manikines became f used together; and a total reorganization of hostel was gradually [230] effected, everywhere resulting in the substitution of unbidden for compulsory cooperation. Industrial types of society developed; and a state-religion overshadowed the ancient and exclusive local hysterias. But society in Japan never, till within the present era, became one coherent form, never developed beyond the clan-stage.It remained a loose agglomerate of clan-groups, or tribes, apiece religiously and administratively independent of the rest; and this big agglomerate was kept together, not by spontaneous cooperation, provided by strong compulsion. Down to the period of Meiji, and even for some time afterward, it was liable to distinguish and fall asunder at any twinkling that the central coercive power showed signs of weakness. We may expect it a feudalism; wholly it resembled European feudalism only as a tree-fern resembles a tree.Let us first briefly consider the nature of the ancient Japanese society. Its original unit was not the household, except the patriarchal family,â€that is to say, the gens or clan, a body of hundreds or thousands of persons claiming descent from a vernacular ancestor, and so religiously united by a common ancestor-worship,â€the cult of the Ujigami. As I curb said before, in that location were two classes of these patriarchal families: the O-uji, or coarse Clans; and the Ko-uji, or Little Clans.The lesser were branches of the crackinger, and subordinate to [231] them,â€so that the group formed by an O-uji with its Ko-uji powerfulness be loosely comp atomic number 18d with the Roman curia or Greek phratry. vauntingly bodies of serfs or slaves appear to have been attached to the miscellaneous great Uji; and the number of these, even at a very early period, seems to have exc eeded that of the members of the clans proper. The different label given to these message-classes indicate different grades and kinds of servitude.One name was tomobe, signifying shrink to a place, or district; an new(prenominal) was yakabe, signifying marge to a family; a third was kakibe, signifying bound to a close, or estate; yet another and more general term was tami, which anciently signified â€Å"dependants,” but is now used in the meaning of the face word â€Å"folk. ” … There is little doubt that the bulk of the people were in a condition of servitude, and that at that place were many a(prenominal) forms of servitude. Mr.Spencer has pointed out that a general sign between slavery and serfdom, in the sense usually attached to each of those terms, is by no sum easy to establish; the real state of a checkmate-class, especially in early forms of society, depending much more upon the character of the master, and the actual conditions of social dev elopment, than upon matters of privilege and legislation. In speaking of early Japanese institutions, the distinction is especially hard to draw: we are still but little informed as to the condition of the subject [232] classes in ancient times.It is safe to assert, however, that there were then really but two great classes,â€a ruling oligarchy, divided into many grades; and a subject population, also divided into many grades. Slaves were tattooed, either on the face or some part of the body, with a mark indicating their ownership. Until within recent years this governing body of tattooing appears to have been maintained in the province of Satsuma,â€where the tag were put especially upon the hands; and in many other provinces the lower classes were generally marked by a tattoo on the face.Slaves were bought and sold like cattle in early times, or presented as tribute by their owners,â€a practice everlastingly referred to in the ancient records. Their unions were not recog nized: a fact which reminds us of the distinction among the Romans between connubium and contubernium; and the children of a slave-mother by a gratuitous father remained slaves. * In the seventh century, however, private slaves were declared state-property, and great metrical composition were [233] then emancipated,â€including nearly allâ€probably allâ€who were artizans or followed useful callings.Gradually a large class of clean-handeddmen came into existence; but until modern times the great mass of the common people appear to have remained in a condition analogous to serfdom. The great number certainly had no family names,â€which is considered evidence of a former slave-condition. Slaves proper were registered in the names of their owners: they do not seem to have had a cult of their own,â€in early times, at least. But, prior to Meiji, only the aristocracy, samurai, doctors, and teachersâ€with perhaps a few other exceptionsâ€could use a family name.Anothe r queer bit of evidence or, the subject, provide by the late Dr. Simmons, relates to the mode of corroding the hair among the subject-classes. Up to the time of the Ashikaga shogunate (1334 A. D. ), all classes excepting the nobility, samurai, Shinto priests, and doctors, shaved the greater part of the head, and wore queues; and this fashion of wearing the hair was called yakko-atama or dorei-atamaâ€terms signifying â€Å"slave-head,” and indicating that the fashion originated in a period of servitude. [*In the year 645, the emperor butterfly Kotoku issued the following lodge on the subject:†The truth of men and women shall be that the children born of a free man and a free woman shall kick the bucket to the father; if a free man takes to married woman a slave-woman, her children shall belong to the mother; if a free woman marries a slave-man, the children shall belong to the father; if they are slaves of two houses, the children shall belong to the mother. The children of temple-serfs shall follow the rule for freemen. But in regard to others who become slaves, they shall be do by according to the rule for slaves. â€Astons translation of the Nihongi, Vol. II, p. 202. ] About the origin of Japanese slavery, much carcass 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 penalty in early times; also, that debtors unable to present 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 intermit 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 master 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 merchandise his son into real slavery; but that debtors could be sold\r\n'