persistent ancestor-worship, is that the welfare of the living
depends upon the welfare of the dead. Under the influence of this
idea, and of the cult based upon it, were developed the early
organization of the family, the laws regarding property and
succession, the whole structure, in short, of ancient
society,--whether in the Western or the Eastern world.
But before considering how the social structure in old Japan was
shaped by the ancestral cult, let me again remind the reader that
there were at first no other gods than the dead. Even when Japanese
ancestor-worship evolved a mythology, its gods were only transfigured
ghosts,--and this is the history of all mythology. The ideas of
heaven and hell did not exist among the primitive Japanese, nor any
notion of metempsychosis. The Buddhist doctrine of rebirth--a late
borrowing--was totally inconsistent with the archaic Japanese
beliefs, and required an elaborate metaphysical system to support it.
But we may suppose the early ideas of the Japanese about the dead to
have been much [56] like those of the Greeks of the pre-Homeric era.
There was an underground world to which spirits descended; but they
were supposed to haunt by preference their own graves, or their
"ghost-houses." Only by slow degrees did the notion of their power of
ubiquity become evolved. But even then they were thought to be
particularly attached to their tombs, shrines, and homesteads. Hirata
wrote, in the early part of the nineteenth century: "The spirits of
the dead continue to exist in the unseen world which is everywhere
about us; and they all become gods of varying character and degrees
of influence. Some reside in temples built in their honour; others
hover near their tombs; and they continue to render service to their
prince, parents, wives, and children, as when in the body." Evidently
"the unseen world" was thought to be in some sort a duplicate of the
visible world, and dependent upon the help of the living for its
prosperity. The dead and the living were mutually dependent. The
all-important necessity for the ghost was sacrificial worship; the
all-important necessity for the man was to provide for the future
cult of his own spirit; and to die without assurance of a cult was
the supreme calamity .... Remembering these facts we can understand
better the organization of the patriarchal family,--shaped to
maintain and to provide for the cult of its dead, any neglect of
which cult was believed to involve misfortune.
[57] The reader is doubtless aware that in the old Aryan family the
bond of union was not the bond of affection, but a bond of religion,
to which natural affection was altogether subordinate. This condition
characterizes the patriarchal family wherever ancestor-worship
exists. Now the Japanese family, like the ancient Greek or Roman
family, was a religious society in the strictest sense of the term;
and a religious society it yet remains. Its organization was
primarily shaped in accordance with the requirements of
ancestor-worship; its later imported doctrines of filial piety had
been already developed in China to meet the needs of an older and
similar religion. We might expect to find in the structure, the laws,
and the customs of the Japanese family many points of likeness to the
structure and the traditional laws of the old Aryan
household,--because the law of sociological evolution admits of only
minor exceptions. And many such points of likeness are obvious. The
materials for a serious comparative study have not yet been
collected: very much remains to be learned regarding the past history
of the Japanese family. But, along certain general lines, the
resemblances between domestic institutions in ancient Europe and
domestic institutions in the Far East can be clearly established.
Alike in the early European and in the old Japanese civilization it
was believed that the prosperity [58] of the family depended upon the
exact fulfilment of the duties of the ancestral cult; and, to a
considerable degree, this belief rules the life of the Japanese
family to-day. It is still thought that the good fortune of the
household depends on the observance of its cult, and that the
greatest possible calamity is to die without leaving a male heir to
perform the rites and to make the offerings. The paramount duty of
filial piety among the early Greeks and Romans was to provide for the
perpetuation of the family cult; and celibacy was therefore generally
forbidden,--the obligation to marry being enforced by opinion where
not enforced by legislation. Among the free classes of Old Japan,
marriage was also, as a general rule, obligatory in the case of a
male heir: otherwise, where celibacy was not condemned by law, it was
condemned by custom. To die without offspring was, in the case of a
younger son, chiefly a personal misfortune; to die without leaving a
male heir, in the case of an elder son and successor, was a crime
against the ancestors,--the cult being thereby threatened with
extinction. No excuse existed for remaining childless: the family law
in Japan, precisely as in ancient Europe, having amply provided
against such a contingency. In case that a wife proved barren, she
might be divorced. In case that there were reasons for not divorcing
her, a concubine might be taken for the purpose of obtaining an heir.
Furthermore, every family representative was privileged [59] to adopt
an heir. An unworthy son, again, might be disinherited, and another
young man adopted in his place. Finally, in case that a man had
daughters but no son, the succession and the continuance of the cult
could be assured by adopting a husband for the eldest daughter.
But, as in the antique European family, daughters could not inherit:
descent being in the male line, it was necessary to have a male heir.
In old Japanese belief, as in old Greek and Roman belief, the father,
not the mother, was the life-giver; the creative principle was
masculine; the duty of maintaining the cult rested with the man, not
with the woman.*
[*Wherever, among ancestor-worshipping races, descent is in the male
line, the cult follows the male line. But the reader is doubtless
aware that a still more primitive form of society than the
patriarchal--the matriarchal--is supposed to have had its
ancestor-worship. Mr. Spencer observes: "What has happened when
descent in the female line obtains, is not clear. I have met with no
statement showing that, in societies characterized by this usage, the
duty of administering to the double of the dead man devolved on one
of his children rather than on others,"--Principles of Sociology,
Vol. III, section 601.]
The woman shared the cult; but she could not maintain it. Besides,
the daughters of the family, being destined, as a general rule, to
marry into other households, could bear only a temporary relation to
the home-cult. It was necessary that the religion of the wife should
be the religion of the husband; and the Japanese, like the Greek
woman, on marrying into another household, necessarily became
attached to the cult of her husband's family. For this reason
especially the females in the patriarchal [60] family are not equal
to the males; the sister cannot rank with the brother. It is true
that the Japanese daughter, like the Greek daughter, could remain
attached to her own family even after marriage, providing that a
husband were adopted for her,--that is to say, taken into the family
as a son. But even in this case, she could only share in the cult,
which it then became the duty of the adopted husband to maintain.
The constitution of the patriarchal family everywhere derives from
its ancestral cult; and before considering the subjects of marriage
and adoption in Japan, it will be necessary to say something about
the ancient family-organization. The ancient family was called
uji,--a word said to have originally signified the same thing as the
modern term uchi,--"interior," or "household," but certainly used
from very early times in the sense of "name"--clan-name especially.
There were two kinds of uji: the o-uji, or great families, and the
ko-uji, or lesser families,--either term signifying a large body of
persons united by kinship, and by the cult of a common ancestor. The
o-uji corresponded in some degree to the Greek (Greek genos) or the
Roman gens: the ko-uji were its branches, and subordinate to it. The
unit of society was the uji. Each o-uji, with its dependent ko-uji,
represented something like a phratry or curia; and all the larger
groups making [61] up the primitive Japanese society were but
multiplications of the uji,--whether we call them clans, tribes, or
hordes. With the advent of a settled civilization, the greater groups
necessarily divided and subdivided; but the smallest subdivision
still retained its primal organization. Even the modern Japanese
family partly retains that organization. It does not mean only a
household: it means rather what the Greek or Roman family became
after the dissolution of the gens. With ourselves the family has been
disintegrated: when we talk of a man's family, we mean his wife and
children. But the Japanese family is still a large group. As
marriages take place early, it may consist, even as a household, of
great-grandparents, grandparents, parents, and children--sons and
daughters of several generations; but it commonly extends much beyond
the limits of one household. In early times it might constitute the
entire population of a village or town; and there are still in Japan
large communities of persons all bearing the same family name. In
some districts it was formerly the custom to keep all the children,
as far as possible, within the original family group--husbands being
adopted for all the daughters. The group might thus consist of sixty
or more persons, dwelling under the same roof; and the houses were of
course constructed, by successive extension, so as to meet the
requirement. (I am mentioning these curious facts [62] only by way of
illustration.) But the greater uji, after the race had settled down,
rapidly multiplied; and although there are said to be
house-communities still in some remote districts of the country, the
primal patriarchal groups must have been broken up almost everywhere
at some very early period. Thereafter the main cult of the uji did
not cease to be the cult also of its sub-divisions: all members of
the original gens continued to worship the common ancestor, or
uji-no-kami, "the god of the uji." By degrees the ghost-house of the
uji-no-kami became transformed into the modern Shinto parish-temple;
and the ancestral spirit became the local tutelar god, whose modern
appellation, ujigami, is but a shortened form of his ancient title,
uji-no-kami. Meanwhile, after the general establishment of the
domestic cult, each separate household maintained the special cult of
its own dead, in addition to the communal cult. This religious
condition still continues. The family may include several households;
but each household maintains the cult of its dead. And the
family-group, whether large or small, preserves its ancient
constitution and character; it is still a religious society, exacting
obedience, on the part of all its members, to traditional custom.
So much having been explained, the customs regarding marriage and
adoption, in their relation [63] to the family hierarchy, can be
clearly understood. But a word first regarding this hierarchy, as it
exists to-day. Theoretically the power of the head of the family is
still supreme in the household. All must obey the head. Furthermore
the females must obey the males--the wives, the husbands; and the
younger members of the family are subject to the elder members. The
children must not only obey the parents and grandparents, but must
observe among themselves the domestic law of seniority: thus the
younger brother should obey the elder brother, and the younger sister
the elder sister. The rule of precedence is enforced gently, and is
cheerfully obeyed even in small matters: for example, at meal-time,
the elder boy is served first, the second son next, and so on,--an
exception being made in the case of a very young child, who is not
obliged to wait. This custom accounts for an amusing popular term
often applied in jest to a second son, "Master Cold-Rice"
(Hiameshi-San); as the second son, having to wait until both infants
and elders have been served, is not likely to find his portion
desirably hot when it reaches him .... Legally, the family can have
but one responsible head. It may be the grandfather, the father, or
the eldest son; and it is generally the eldest son, because according
to a custom of Chinese origin, the old folks usually resign their
active authority as soon as the eldest son is able to take charge of
affairs. [64] The subordination of young to old, and of females to
males,--in fact the whole existing constitution of the
family,--suggests a great deal in regard to the probably stricter
organization of the patriarchal family, whose chief was at once ruler
and priest, with almost unlimited powers. The organization was
primarily, and still remains, religious: the marital bond did not
constitute the family; and the relation of the parent to the
household depended upon his or her relation to the family as a
religious body. To-day also, the girl adopted into a household as
wife ranks only as an adopted child: marriage signifies adoption. She
is called "flower-daughter" (hana-yome). In like manner, and for the
same reasons, the young man received into a household as a husband of
one of the daughters, ranks merely as an adopted son. The adopted
bride or bridegroom is necessarily subject to the elders, and may be
dismissed by their decision. As for the adopted husband, his position
is both delicate and difficult,--as an old Japanese proverb bears
witness: Konuka san-go areba, mukoyoshi to naruna ("While you have
even three go* of rice-bran left, do not become a son-in-law"). [*A
go is something more than a pint.] Jacob does not have to wait for
Rachel: he is given to Rachel on demand; and his service then begins.
And after twice seven years of service, Jacob may be sent away. In
that event his children do not any more belong to him. [65] but to
the family. His adoption may have had nothing to do with affection;
and his dismissal may have nothing to do with misconduct. Such
matters, however they may be settled in law, are really decided by
family interests--interests relating to the maintenance of the house
and of its cult.**
[**Recent legislation has been in favour of the mukoyoshi; but, as a
rule, the law is seldom resorted to except by men dismissed from the
family for misconduct, and anxious to make profit by the dismissal.]
It should not be forgotten that, although a daughter-in-law or a
son-in-law could in former times be dismissed almost at will, the
question of marriage in the old Japanese family was a matter of
religious importance,--marriage being one of the chief duties of
filial piety. This was also the case in the early Greek and Roman
family; and the marriage ceremony was performed, as it is now
performed in Japan, not at a temple, but in the home. It was a rite
of the family religion,--the rite by which the bride was adopted into
the cult in the supposed presence of the ancestral spirits. Among the
primitive Japanese there was probably no corresponding ceremony; but
after the establishment of the domestic cult, the marriage ceremony
became a religious rite, and this it still remains. Ordinary
marriages are not, however, performed before the household shrine or
in front of the ancestral tablets, except under certain
circumstances. The rule, as regards such ordinary marriages, seems to
be that [66] if the parents of the bridegroom are yet alive, this is
not done; but if they are dead, then the bridegroom leads his bride
before their mortuary tablets, where she makes obeisance. Among the
nobility, in former times at least, the marriage ceremony appears to
have been more distinctly religious,--judging from the following
curious relation in the book Shorei-Hikki, or "Record of
Ceremonies"*: "At the weddings of the great, the bridal-chamber is
composed of three rooms thrown into one [by removal of the
sliding-screens ordinarily separating them], and newly decorated ....
The shrine for the image of the family-god is placed upon a shelf
adjoining the sleeping-place." It is noteworthy also that Imperial
marriages are always officially announced to the ancestors; and that
the marriage of the heir-apparent, or other male offspring of the
Imperial house, is performed before the Kashiko-dokoro, or imperial
temple of the ancestors, which stands within the palace-grounds.**
[**That was the case at the marriage of the present Crown-Prince.] As
a general rule it would appear that the evolution of the
marriage-ceremony in Japan chiefly followed Chinese precedent; and in
the Chinese patriarchal family the ceremony is in its own way quite
as much of a religious rite as the early Greek or Roman marriage. And
though the relation of the Japanese [67] rite to the family cult is
less marked, it becomes sufficiently clear upon investigation. The
alternate drinking of rice-wine, by bridegroom and bride, from the
same vessels, corresponds in a sort to the Roman confarreatio. By the
wedding-rite the bride is adopted into the family religion. She is
adopted not only by the living but by the dead; she must thereafter
revere the ancestors of her husband as her own ancestors; and should
there be no elders in the household, it will become her duty to make
the offerings, as representative of her husband. With the cult of her
own family she has nothing more to do; and the funeral ceremonies
performed upon her departure from the parental roof,--the solemn
sweeping-out of the house-rooms, the lighting of the death-fire
before the gate,--are significant of this religious separation.
[*The translation is Mr. Mitford's. There are no "images" of the
family-god, and I suppose that the family's Shinto-shrine is meant,
with its ancestral tablets.]
Speaking of the Greek and Roman marriage, M. de Coulanges
observes:--"Une telle religion ne pouvait pas admettre la polygamie."
As relating to the highly developed domestic cult of those
communities considered by the author of La Cite Antique, his
statement will scarcely be called in question. But as regards
ancestor-worship in general, it would be incorrect; since polygamy or
polygyny, and polyandry may coexist with ruder forms of
ancestor-worship. The Western-Aryan societies, in the epoch studied
by M. de Coulanges, were practically [68] monogamic. The ancient
Japanese society was polygynous; and polygyny persisted, after the
establishment of the domestic cult. In early times, the marital
relation itself would seem to have been indefinite. No distinction
was made between the wife and the concubines: "they were classed
together as 'women.'"* [*Satow: The Revival of Pure Shintau] Probably
under Chinese influence the distinction was afterwards sharply drawn;
and with the progress of civilization, the general tendency was
towards monogamy, although the ruling classes remained polygynous. In
the 54th article of Iyeyasu's legacy, this phase of the social
condition is clearly expressed,--a condition which prevailed down to
the present era:--
"The position a wife holds towards a concubine is the same as that of
a lord to his vassal. The Emperor has twelve imperial concubines. The
princes may have eight concubines. Officers of the highest class may
have five mistresses. A Samurai may have two handmaids. All below
this are ordinary married men."
This would suggest that concubinage had long been (with some possible
exceptions) an exclusive privilege; and that it should have persisted
down to the period of the abolition of the daimiates and of the
military class, is sufficiently explained by the militant character
of the ancient society.* Though [69] it is untrue that domestic
ancestor-worship cannot coexist with polygamy or polygyny (Mr.
Spencer's term is the most inclusive), it is at least true that such
worship is favoured by the monogamic relation, and tends therefore to
establish it,--since monogamy insures to the family succession a
stability that no other relation can offer. We may say that, although
the old Japanese society was not monogamic, the natural tendency was
towards monogamy, as the condition best according with the religion
of the family, and with the moral feeling of the masses.
[*See especially Herbert Spencer's chapter, "The Family," in Vol. I,
Principles of Sociology, section 315.]
Once that the domestic ancestor-cult had become universally
established, the question of marriage, as a duty of filial pity,
could not be judiciously left to the will of the young people
themselves. It was a matter to be decided by the family, not by the
children; for mutual inclination could not be suffered to interfere
with the requirements of the household religion. It was not a
question of affection, but of religious duty; and to think otherwise
was impious. Affection might and ought to spring up from the
relation. But any affection powerful enough to endanger the cohesion
of the family would be condemned. A wife might therefore be divorced
because her husband had become too much attached to her; an adopted
husband might be divorced because of his power to exercise, through
affection, too [70] great an influence upon the daughter of the
house. Other causes would probably he found for the divorce in either
case--but they would not be difficult to find.
For the same reason that connubial affection could be tolerated only
within limits, the natural rights of parenthood (as we understand
them) were necessarily restricted in the old Japanese household.
Marriage being for the purpose of obtaining heirs to perpetuate the
cult, the children were regarded as belonging to the family rather
than to the father and mother. Hence, in case of divorcing the son's
wife, or the adopted son-in-law,--or of disinheriting the married
son,--the children would be retained by the family. For the natural
right of the young parents was considered subordinate to the
religious rights of the house. In opposition to those rights, no
other rights could be tolerated. Practically, of course, according to
more or less fortunate circumstances, the individual might enjoy
freedom under the paternal roof; but theoretically and legally there
was no freedom in the old Japanese family for any member of it,--not
excepting even its acknowledged chief, whose responsibilities were
great. Every person, from the youngest child up to the grandfather,
was subject to somebody else; and every act of domestic life was
regulated by traditional custom.