GROWTH OF THE IMPERIAL POWER.
GRADUAL CENTRALISATION
It is a privilege of historians to look back. By looking back I do not
mean judging the past from the standpoint of the present. Though it is
quite obvious that past things should be valued first by the standards
of the age contemporaneous with the things to be valued, it would be a
great mistake, if we supposed that the duty of historians was fulfilled
when they could depict the past as it was seen by its contemporaries.
Historians are by no means bound to adhere to the opinions of the
ancients in judging of what happened in the past. How a past thing was
viewed and valued by its contemporary is in itself an important
historical fact, which must be subjected to the criticism of historians.
Not only to have a clear idea of the views held by the people of a
certain period as regards contemporaneous events, a task which is not
hopelessly difficult though not very easy, but also to know why such and
such views happened to be held by those people at that time, is a duty
far more important and difficult to discharge. Historians ought,
besides, to make clear the absolute value of such views and the effects
of them on the age in question as well as on the period that followed.
However necessary it may be to be acquainted with the thoughts and
beliefs of former generations, it is not indeed incumbent upon us to
believe blindly what was believed in the past and to think on the same
lines as was thought by the ancients. Who would not laugh at our folly,
for example, if we should consider the whale of old times to have been a
kind of fish, simply because the ancients did not know it to be a
species of mammalia, though by such a supposition we might perhaps be
very loyal to the old beliefs? As the result of investigations over long
years, many things that have been held to be totally different by
ancient peoples have been found to be similar to one another, nay,
sometimes just the same. On the other hand, there have not been wanting
examples in which essential differences, though considerable in reality,
have been overlooked or thought to be negligible, and first discerned
only after the researches of hundreds of years. In uncivilised times,
generally speaking, men were rather quick to observe outward and
superficial distinctions, while very slow to discover internal and
essential variations. There was a time in the far-off days of yore, both
in the East and in the West, when some people held themselves to be
unique and chosen, and regarded others, who were apparently not as they
were and spoke languages different from their own, to be decidedly
inferior in civilisation to themselves, or to be more akin to beasts
than to human beings. Were the Japanese then at the beginning of their
history different from other peoples at a similar stage of development,
or were they unique from the first? To give too definite an answer to
such a question is always a mistake. Our forefathers were certainly
different from other peoples in certain respects, but they had much in
common with others too. To be unique is very interesting to look at, but
it does not follow necessarily that what is unique is always worthy of
admiration. Uniqueness is an honour to the possessor of that quality
only when he is inimitably excellent on that account. On the other hand,
to possess much of what is common to many is far from being a disgrace.
Among things which are not unique at all may be found those which have
universal validity, and are by no means to be despised as commonplace.
Our forefathers had not a few precious things which were singular to
themselves, but at the same time they had much in common with outsiders
too, and by that possession of common valuables, the history of Japan
may rank among those of civilised nations, being not only interesting
but also instructive.
By the Japanese of later ages it was supposed that all people outside
historic Japan were radically different from themselves, thus forgetting
that their own ancestors had been of mixed blood. This proves, by the
way, how easily the process of amalgamation and assimilation of
different races was accomplished in ancient Japan. There was hardly a
tinge of racial antipathy among our forefathers of old. Parallel with
the sense of discrimination against other people, which must have been
founded on the perception of superficial differences and on that account
not deep-rooted, there prevailed among them an ardent love for all sorts
of things foreign, and they extended a hearty welcome to all the
successive immigrants into Japan, from whatever quarter of the world
they might come. Far from being maltreated, these immigrants were not
only allowed to pursue their favourite occupations of livelihood, but
were even entrusted with several important posts in the government and
in the Imperial Household. Our forefathers did not hesitate, too, to
import sundry foreign, especially Chinese, customs and institutions,
with or without alteration. Such spontaneous importation readily
accomplished, evidently implies that Japan was considered by the ancient
Japanese to have had much in common with China, so that the same ways of
living might be followed, and similar legislation might be put into
practice here as well as there. More than that. Our ancestors naively
believed themselves able to see the same effects produced by the same
legislation here as in China, like ignorant farmers, who sometimes
foolishly expect to be able to reap the same harvests by sowing the same
kinds of seed, forgetting the differences in the nature of the soil. So
eager were they to transplant everything foreign into Japan. At the
present time, there are similarly many who think that things foreign can
be planted in this country so as to bear the same fruit as in their
original homes, and who therefore would try to import as many as
possible. The only difference between them and the ancient Japanese lies
in the fact that their preferences are for things European instead of
things Chinese. Now-a-days the Japanese are frequently described as a
people who entertain an inveterate antagonism to foreigners. Can such an
opinion hold ground in the face of the indisputable evidence of Japan's
importation of so many foreign things, material as well as spiritual?
Returning to the point, did Japan become a country resembling China, as
was wished by the Sinophil Japanese of old times? On the contrary, the
uniqueness, which lay at the foundation of the political and social life
of our country, was not thereby much impaired. Even now it is clear to
everybody that Japan is not behind any other country in possessing what
is unique. It must be borne in mind, however, that what the ancient
Japanese thought to be sufficient to distinguish themselves from other
people was not the same as that which makes the modern Japanese think
their country to be unique. At the same time it can be said that ancient
Japan, while unique in some respects, was in a similar condition, social
and political, as other countries were at a similar stage of their
civilisation. What, then, was the state of Japan in the beginning of her
history? It is this which I am going to describe.
In a foregoing chapter I stated that the Japanese, whatever ethnological
interpretation be given to them, can hardly be considered as
autochthons. Most probably the greater part of them was descended from
immigrants; in other words, their forefathers were the conquerors of the
land. What then was the chief occupation of these conquerors? To this
question various answers have been already given by different
historians. Some hold that agriculture was the main occupation to which
our ancestors looked for a living, while others maintain that they
chiefly depended for subsistence on more unsettled sorts of occupation,
that is, on hunting or fishing. All that can be ascertained is that the
forefathers of the Japanese did not lead, at least in this country, a
nomadic life, so that both cattle and horses were rare or almost unheard
of in very ancient times. It is very probable, too, that in whatever
occupation the original Japanese might have been chiefly engaged, they
must have been also acquainted with the elements of agriculture at the
same time. No reliable evidence, however, can be found to answer this
question. In this respect the certitude of the early history of Japan
falls far short of that of the German tribes, which, though not
civilised enough to have left records of their own, were yet fortunate
enough to be described by writers of more civilised races, especially
by the Romans. Early Japan seems not to have had as intimate an
intercourse with China as the early Germans had with Rome, so that we
have great difficulty in ascertaining any details about social and
political conditions as well as the modes of life of the ancient
Japanese, in the same way as that in which we are acquainted with the
early land-system of the Germans, their methods of fighting, and so
forth. As to the land-system of early Japan, almost nothing is known
about it until the introduction of the Chinese land-distribution
procedure in the first half of the seventh century. We cannot ascertain
whether there was anything which might be compared with the early
land-system of the Teutons. The introduction of the elaborate
organisation of the T'ang dynasty into our country may be interpreted in
two ways. It may be assumed that a land-distribution similar to that of
the Chinese had already existed in Japan, and that this facilitated the
introduction of the foreign methods, which were of the same type but
more highly developed, or we may deny the previous existence of any such
arrangement in our country, reasoning from the fact that the newly
introduced foreign system could not take deep root in our country on
account of its incompatibility with native traditions. What, however, we
can state with some degree of certainty concerning the early history of
Japan, prior to the introduction of Chinese institutions, is that the
people, or rather groups of people, figured in the social system as
objects of possession quite as much as did landed property.
The land of Japan, so far as it had been conquered and explored by our
forefathers up to the Revolution of the Taikwa era in the first half of
the seventh century, consisted of the imperial domains and the private
properties held by subjects by the same right as that by which the
emperor held his domains. In other words, the relation of the emperor
with his subjects was not through lands granted to the latter by the
former, but was a personal relation. The idea of vassalage due to the
holding of crown lands seems not to have been entertained by the early
Japanese. From the point of view of the free rights of the landholders,
ancient Japan resembles early German society. Only the way which the
tenant took possession of his land can not be ascertained so definitely
as in the case of allod-holding in Europe. There is no doubt, however,
that not only land but persons also formed the most important private
properties. Needless to say, people who dwelt on private land were _ipso
facto_ the property of the landowner. Without any regard to land a
seigneur of early Japan could own a certain number of persons, and in
that case the land inhabited by them naturally became the property of
their master.
The Emperor, who was the greatest seigneur as the owner of vast domains
and of a large number of persons, ruled at the same time over many
other seigneurs, the big freeholders of land and serf. It may be
supposed also that there might have been many minor freemen besides, who
were not rich enough to possess sufficient serfs to cultivate their
grounds for them and, therefore, were obliged to support themselves by
their own toil. Nothing positive is known, however, about them, if they
ever really existed. The right of a seigneur over his clients was almost
absolute, even the lives and chattels of his clients being at his
disposal, though the seigneur himself lay under the jurisdiction of the
Emperor. Some of the seigneurs were men of the same race as the imperial
family, their ancestors having helped in the conquest of the country.
Others were scions of the imperial family itself. It is very probable,
nevertheless, that no insignificant portion of this seigneur class was
of a blood different from that of the imperial family, having sprung
from the aboriginal race, or from immigrants other than the stock to
which the imperial family belonged.
The extent of the land over which a seigneur held sway, was in general
not very great, so that it cannot be fairly compared with any modern
Japanese province or _kuni_. Side by side with these seigneurs who were
lords of their lands, there was another class of seigneurs, who were
conspicuous, not, strictly speaking, on account of the land which they
_de facto_ possessed, but on account of their being chieftains of
certain groups of people. Some of these groups were formed by men
pursuing the same occupation. Groups thus formed were those of
fletchers, shield-makers, jewellers, mirror-makers, potters, and so
forth. Performers of religious rites, fighting-men, and scribes, too,
were grouped in this class. It must be especially noticed that groups of
men-at-arms and of scribes contained a good many foreign elements, far
more distinctly than other groups. Scribes, though their profession as a
craft was of a higher and more important nature than others, were, as
was explained in the last chapter, exclusively of foreign blood. On
account of this there was more than one set of such immigrants, and we
had in Japan several groups of scribes. As to soldiers or men-at-arms,
those who served in the first stage of the conquest of this country must
have been of the same stock as the conquering race. Later on, however,
quite a number of men who were not properly to be called Japanese, as,
for example, the Ainu and the Haito, began to be enlisted into the
service of the Emperor, and notwithstanding their difference in blood
from that of the predominant stock, their fidelity to the Emperor was
almost incomparable, and furnished many subjects for our old martial
poems.
All these were groups organised on the basis of the special professions
pursued by the members of each respective group, although many of the
groups might consist eventually of persons of homogeneous blood.
Besides these groups there was another kind based solely on identity of
blood, that is to say, on the principle of racial affinity. When we
examine the circumstances of the formation of such groups, we generally
find that a body of immigrants at a certain period was constituted as a
group by itself by way of facilitating the administration. Sometimes
several bodies of immigrants, differing as to the period of immigration,
were formed into one large corps. In the corps thus formed, there would
have naturally been people of various occupations, connected only by
blood relationship.
The third kind of group was quite unique in the motive of its formation.
It was customary in ancient times in Japan to organise a special group
of people in memory of a certain emperor or of some noted member of the
imperial family. This happened generally in the case of those personages
who died early and were much lamented by their nearest relations.
Sometimes, however, a similar group was formed in honour of a living
emperor. As it was natural that groups thus formed paid little attention
to the consanguinity of their members, it is presumable that they might
have consisted of persons of promiscuous racial origin. On the other
hand, it is also clear that there could be no necessity for
conglomerating intentionally men of heterogeneous racial origin in order
to effect a mixture of blood between them. Such a motive is hardly to be
considered as compatible with the spirit of the age in which the
scrutinising of genealogies was an important business. Added to this,
the organisation of a group out of people of different stocks would have
incurred the danger of making its administration exceedingly difficult.
As to the profession pursued by persons belonging to such a group, any
generalisation is difficult. Some groups might have been organised
mainly from the need of creating efficient agricultural labour, in order
to provide for the increasing necessity of food stuffs; in other words,
from the need for the exploration of new lands. Other memorial groups
might have been formed for the sake of providing for the need of various
kinds of manual labour, and must have contained men of divers
handicrafts and professions, so as to be able to provide for all the
daily necessities of some illustrious personage, to whom the group was
subject. When men of promiscuous professions formed a group and produced
sundry kinds of commodities, the custom of bartering must have naturally
arisen within it, but the stage of bartering in a market, periodically
opened at a certain spot, such as is described in the _San-kuo-chih_,
must have been the result of a gradual development. Moreover, it would
be a too hasty conclusion to say that such a group was a self-providing
economic community. On the other hand, to suppose that such a group was
a corporation something like the guilds of medieval Europe would be
absurd. Though the members of a guild suffered greatly under the
oppression of its master, still no relation of vassalage is recognisable
in the system. In old Japan, however, men grouped in the manner
described above belonged to the chieftain of that group, that is to say,
they were not only his subjects but his property, to be disposed of at
his free will. As to the groups which pursued a special craft, I do not
deny the existence of the practice of bartering between them. In a
society in the stage of civilisation of old Japan, no one could exist
without some sort of bartering, and the ruling hand was not so strong
and rigorous as to be able to prohibit an individual of the group from
exchanging the work of his hands with those of men of neighbouring
groups, even when the lord of the group wished contrariwise. And it must
be kept in mind that though a member of the group of a special
profession pursued that profession as his daily business, yet he must
have been engaged in agricultural work also, tilling the ground,
presumably in the midst of which his house stood. Agricultural products
thus raised could perhaps not cover all the demands of his family for
subsistence. But, on the other hand, that all the victuals they required
were supplied by barter or by distribution on the part of the chieftain
of the respective group is hardly to be imagined.
A group pursuing the same occupation was of course not the only one
allowed to pursue it, nor was their habitation limited to one special
locality. In other words, there were many groups which were engaged in
the same occupation, and those groups had their residence in different
provinces. It is not clear whether all the groups pursuing the same
craft were under the jurisdiction of a common chieftain. The fact is
certain, however, that many groups engaged in the same craft often had a
common chieftain, notwithstanding their occupying different localities.
The chieftain of a group was sometimes of the same blood as the members
of the group, as in the case where the group consisted of homogeneous
immigrants. The chieftains of immigrant craft-groups, the number of
which was very much limited in this country, belonged to this category.
Sometimes, however, the chieftain of such a craft-group was not of the
same stock as the members of the group under him, though the latter
might be of homogeneous blood. This was especially the case when a group
was that of arms-bearers composed of Ainu or Haito. These valiant people
were enlisted into a homogeneous company, but they were put under the
direction of some trustworthy leader, who was of the same racial origin
as the imperial family or who belonged to a race subjected to the
imperial rule long before. Lastly, in the case where a group was a
memorial institution, it is probable that the chieftain was nominated by
the emperor without regard to his blood relationship to the members of
the group under him.
Summing up what is stated above at length, there were two kinds of
seigneurs who were immediately under the sovereignty of the Emperor; the
one was the landlord, and the other was the group-chieftain. It is a
matter of course that the former was at the same time the chieftain of
the serfs who peopled the land of which he was the lord, while the
latter was the lord _de facto_ of the land inhabited by himself and his
clients, so that there was virtually very little difference between
them. As regards their rights over the land and the people under their
power it was equally absolute in both cases. The principal difference
was that the right of the former rested essentially on his being the
lord of the land, and that of the latter on his being the chieftain of
the people. How did such a difference come into existence?
The fact that there were many landlords who were not of the same stock
as the imperial family, might be regarded as a proof that they were
descendants of the chiefs who held their lands prior to the coming over
of the Japanese, or, more strictly, before the immigration of the
predominant stock. They acquiesced afterwards in, or were subjected to,
the rule of the Japanese, but the relation between the Emperor and these
landlords was of a personal nature, and the right of the latter over
their own land remained unchanged. Later on many members of the imperial
family were sent out to explore new lands at the expense of the Ainu,
and they generally installed themselves as masters of the land which
they had conquered. These new landlords assumed, as was natural, the
same power as that which was possessed by the older landlords mentioned
above. The power of the imperial family was thus extended into a wider
sphere by the increase in the number of the landlords of the blood
royal, but at the same time the power of the Emperor himself was in
danger of being weakened by the overgrowth of the branches of the
Imperial family.
As to the chieftains of groups, they must have been of later origin than
the landlords, for to be a virtual possessor of land only as the
consequence of being chieftain of the people who happened to occupy the
land shows that the relation between the people and the land inhabited
by them was the result of some historical development. Moreover, the
grouping of people according to their handicrafts must be a step far
advanced beyond the pristine crowding together of people of promiscuous
callings. It is also an important fact which should be taken into
consideration here again that the greater part of the craft-groups
consisted of immigrants. From all these data we may safely enough assume
that the chieftains who were at first placed at the head of a certain
group of people perhaps came over to this country simultaneously with
the predominant stock, or came from the same home at a time not very far
distant from that of the migration of the predominant stock itself, and
that they distinguished themselves by their fidelity to the emperor; in
short, these chieftains might have been mostly of the same racial origin
as the imperial family, except in the case of groups formed by
peninsular immigrants of later date. The increasing organisation of such
groups, therefore, must have led to the aggrandizement of the power of
the imperial family; but there was, of course, the same fear of a
relaxation of the blood-ties between the emperor and the chieftains akin
in blood to him.
Such are the general facts relating to the social and political life of
Japan before the seventh century. If its development had continued on
the lines described above, the ultimate result would have been the
division of the country among a large number of petty chieftains,
heterogeneous in blood and in the nature of the power which they
wielded, and with very relaxed ties between themselves and the emperor.
We can observe a similar state of things even today among several
uncivilised tribes, for example, among the natives of Formosa and in
many South Sea Islands. Japan, however, was not destined to the same
fate. How then did it come to be consolidated?
Centralisation presupposes a centre into which the surroundings may be
centralised. This centre or nucleus for centralisation may be an
individual or a corporate organism. As regards the latter, however, in
order to become a nucleus of centralisation, it must be solidly
organised, which is only possible in an advanced stage of civilisation.
For Japan in the period of which I am speaking, such a centre could
create only a very loose centralisation, which could be broken asunder
very easily. To have Japan strongly centralised, it was necessary for
her to have an individual, that is to say the Emperor, as a nucleus of
centralisation.
We have seen the process by which the predominant stock of the Japanese
grew in power and influence, as well by exploring new lands and
installing there men of their own stock as lords, as by organising more
and more new groups out of the immigrants who came over to this country,
and, perhaps, also out of a certain number of autochthons. Within the
predominant stock itself the imperial family was no doubt the most
influential. Most of the new landlords were recruited from the members
of that family, and many memorial groups were instituted in their honour
and for their sakes. Stretches of land which were exploited by these
clients and on that account stood under the rule of the family increased
gradually. Such an estate was called _miyake_, which meant a royal
granary, a royal domain. The number of these domains constantly grew as
time went on. Not only in the neighbourhood of the province of Yamato,
in which the emperors of old time used to have their residence, but also
in several distant provinces new _miyake_ were organised. It is no
wonder that they were more generally instituted in the western
provinces, especially in the coastal provinces of the Inland Sea and in
the island of Kyushu rather than in other directions, because it was
natural that the imperial house, which is said to have had its first
foothold in the west, should have had a stronger influence in those
parts than in provinces close to lands still retained by the Ainu and
not yet occupied by the Japanese. Still it is a credit to the power of
the imperial house that in the first half of the seventh century, we can
already find such royal domains in the far eastern provinces of Suruga
and Kotsuke.
The method of increasing the _miyake_ was not limited to the
exploitation only of new ground previously uncultivated. Some of the
chieftains were loyal enough to present to the emperor a part of their
own dominions or a portion of their clients, with or without the lands
inhabited by them. Confiscation, too, was a method often resorted to,
when the crimes of some of the landlords, such as complicity in
rebellion, insult to high personages of the imperial family, and so
forth, merited forfeiture. Sometimes there were penitents who made
presents of their lands or people, in order either not to lose or to
regain the royal favour. In these sundry ways the imperial family was
enabled to increase its domains to a very large extent, domains which,
it should be noted, were cultivated mostly by groups of immigrant
people, generally superintended by capable men of the same groups who
knew how to read, write and make up the accounts of the revenue.
This increase in number of _miyake_ was in itself the increase of the
wealth of the imperial family, and the increase of its power at the same
time. It is a matter of course that such growth of the imperial family
contributed largely to the increase of the imperial power itself, and
was therefore a step toward centralisation. With a family as centre,
however, a strong centralisation was impossible at a time when there was
no definite regulation concerning the succession. The law of
primogeniture had not yet been enacted. Princesses were not excluded
from the order of succession. In such an age too strong a centralisation
with the family as its nucleus, if it had been possible, could only have
been a cause of constant internal feuds. The interests of certain
members of the imperial family might have come into collision with those
of the reigning Emperor, and indeed such clashes were not rare.
Besides this weakness which was like a running sore in the process of
centralisation, there was another great drawback to the growth of the
imperial power. This was the increase in power and influence of certain
chieftains. At first there were many chieftains of nearly equal power,
and as none among them was influential enough to lord it over all the
others, it was not very difficult for the imperial family to avail
itself of the rivalry that prevailed among them and to control them
accordingly. Some families among the chieftains, however, began to grow
rich and powerful like the imperial family itself, while the greater
part of them remained more or less stationary, so that a wide gap
between the selected few and the rest as regards their influence became
perceptible. Thus five conspicuous families, those of Ohtomo, Mononobe,
Nakatomi, Abe, and Wani, first emerged from the numerous members of the
chieftain class. The family of the Soga, which was descended from
Takeshiuchi, the minister of the Empress Jingu, became afterwards very
prominent, so that only two of the former five, namely, the Ohtomo and
the Mononobe, could cope with it. Among the three which became prominent
in place of the former five, the older two continued to be engaged
exclusively in warlike business, while the third provided both ministers
and generals. The magnitude of their influence in the latter half of the
fifth century can be well imagined from the fact that the Emperor
Yuryaku complained on his death bed that his vassals' private domains
had become too extensive.
Such was the result which, it was natural to anticipate, was likely to
accompany the growth of Japan under the rule of a predominant stock. It
could not be said, however, to be very beneficial to the real
consolidation of a coherent Empire. For a sovereign, even if he had had
strength enough to exercise absolute rule, it must have been far more
difficult to govern a few powerful chieftains than to rule over many of
lesser influence. It is needless to say that such must have been the
case in an age when the relations of the reigning emperor and of the
imperial family were not well organised in favour of the former. Many
like examples may be cited from the early history of the Germans,
especially from that of the Merovingian and the Carlovingian dynasties.
Among the few prominent chieftains, a certain one family, _primus inter
pares_, might become exceedingly powerful and then overshadow the rest.
In Japan, too, there was not lacking a majordomo who was growing great
at the cost of the imperial prerogative.
This tendency was too apparent not to be perceived by the sagacious
emperors of succeeding ages. Increasing their material resources,
therefore, was thought by them the best means of strengthening
themselves and of guarding against the usurpation of their power by
ambitious vassals. Long before the Korean expedition of the Empress
Jingu, accordingly, the increase of the royal domains was assiduously
aimed at. The Korean expedition itself may be considered as one of the
evidences of the endeavour to develop the imperial power. For to lead an
expedition oversea necessarily connotes a consolidated empire. War,
however uncivilised the age in which it is carried on, must be, more
than any other undertaking, a one man business. So we can not err much
in supposing that, at the time of the expedition, the centralisation of
the country with the emperor as its nucleus was already in course of
progress. Without being socially organised and consolidated, it would
have been very hard to muster a people not yet sufficiently organised in
a political sense. It was enacted just about this time, that all the
royal granaries or domains which were situated in the province of
Yamato, where successive royal residences had been established, should
be the inalienable property of the reigning emperor himself, and that
even the heir to the throne should not be allowed to own any of them.
This enactment may be said to have been the beginning of the separation
of the interests of the reigning emperor himself from those of the
imperial family, and it has a great historical importance in the sense
that the process of centralisation with an individual, and not a family,
as its centre, was already in course of development.
To recapitulate my previous argument, in order to have a strongly
organised Empire, first of all it was necessary at that time to put an
end to the still growing power of the prominent chieftains, for the
decrease in the number of chieftains only helped to make the remaining
few stronger and more threatening. Secondly, not the imperial family but
the reigning emperor himself must be made the nucleus of centralisation.
This then was the necessity of our country and the goal of the
endeavours of succeeding emperors. What most accelerated this process of
centralisation, however, was the introduction of Buddhism and the
systematic adoption of Chinese civilisation, imported, not through the
intermediation of the peninsular states, but directly from China
herself. The former contributed by changing the spirit of the age, so
that innovation could be undertaken without risking the total
dissolution of the not yet sufficiently consolidated Empire, while the
latter facilitated the organisation of the material resources already
acquired, and paved the way for their further increase.
It is commonly stated that in 552 A.D., the thirteenth year of the reign
of the Emperor Kimmei, Buddhism was first introduced into Japan, for
that is the date of the first record of Buddhism in the imperial court.
Owing to the researches of modern historians, however, that date is no
longer accepted as the beginning of Buddhism in Japan. Buddhism, which
is said to have been first introduced into China in the middle of the
first century after Christ, began to flow into the Korean peninsula some
three hundred years later. Among the three peninsular states, the first
which received the new religion was Korea or Kokuri, which was the
nearest to China. The Korean chronicle says that in 364 A.D. Fu-Chien, a
powerful potentate of the Chin dynasty, which existed in northern China
at that time, sent an ambassador to Korea, accompanied by a Buddhist
priest. Twelve years later than Korea, Kutara received Buddhism from
southern China. Shiragi was the latest of the three to accept the new
religion, for it was not until 527 A.D. that Buddhism was recognized in
that state. Perhaps, however, the people of Shiragi had been acquainted
with it at an earlier epoch, though it would not be surprising if this
had not been the case. The geographical position of Shiragi obliged it
for long to be the last state in the peninsula to receive Chinese
civilisation. It is not the Buddhism of Shiragi, therefore, but that of
Korea and Kutara which had to do with the history of our country.
At that time, in the southern part of the peninsula, there were many
minor semi-independent communities under the tutelage of Japan. A
resident-general was sent from Japan to whom the affairs of the
protectorate were entrusted. Though the existence in the peninsula of a
region subject directly to the Emperor of Japan, that is to say, the
extension oversea of the Japanese dominion, is not certified to by any
written evidence, the history of the early relations between Japan and
the peninsula cannot be adequately explained, unless we assume that this
imperial domain on the continent was the stronghold of Japanese
influence over the peninsula, around which the minor states clustered as
their centre. Kutara, which divided the sphere of Japanese influence
from Korea, had been suffering much from the encroachment of the
Koreans on the north. To counteract Korea, which allied herself with the
successive dynasties in northern China, Kutara tried to court the favour
of the states which came successively into existence in southern China.
That Buddhism in Kutara was propagated by priests from China meridional
may account for the intercourse which grew up between the peninsular
state and the south of China. Still, however much Kutara might have
desired assistance from that quarter, the distance was too great for it
to have obtained any efficient relief, even if the southern Chinese had
wished to afford it, so that Kutara was at last compelled to apply for
help to Japan, which was the real master of the land bordering it on the
south. This is the reason why soon after the expedition of the Empress
Jingu, Kutara initiated a very intimate intercourse with our country.
From that state princes of the blood were sent as hostages to Japan one
after another, an unruly minister of that state was summoned to justify
himself before an Emperor of Japan, a topographical survey of Kutara was
undertaken by Japanese officials, and reinforcements were despatched
thither several times from our country. After all, Japan was not the
losing party in her peninsular relations. The knowledge of the Chinese
classics was the most important boon the intercourse conferred on our
country. Not less important was the introduction of Buddhism.
The doubt, however, remains whether Buddhism, which began to flow into
Kutara in 376 A.D., could have remained so long confined in that state
as not to have been introduced into Japan till 552 A.D., notwithstanding
the intimate relations between the two countries. The worship of Buddha
must have been practised at an earlier period, most probably in private,
by immigrants from the peninsular state, who had already imbibed the
rudiments of the new religion in their original home. Moreover, in
speaking of the propagation of Buddhism in Japan, we must look back into
the history of our intercourse with southern China.
In the preceding chapter I mentioned the description of our country
given in the _San-kuo-chih_. There we are told that intercourse was
carried on between Japan and northern China through the Chinese
provinces in the peninsula. It was the two peninsular states arising out
of the ruin of these Chinese provinces which paved the way for the
intercourse of Japan with southern China. Not only did we obtain through
Kutara knowledge about southern China under the dynasty of the East
Chin, but the first Japanese ambassadors sent thither at the beginning
of the fifth century could reach their destination only through the
intermediation of Korea or Kokuri, which furnished our ambassadors with
guides. After that there were frequent goings to and fro of the people
of China and Japan, notwithstanding the rapidly succeeding changes of
dynasty in southern China. It was through the intercourse thus
initiated that several kinds of industry, more especially weaving, were
introduced into Japan from southern China, and had a very deep and
enduring effect on the history of our country. There were immigrants,
too, from southern China into Japan, and among them, some were so pious
as to build temples in the districts in which they settled, and to
practise the cult of Buddha, which they had brought with them from their
homes. Ssuma-Tateng of the Liang dynasty, who came over to Japan in 522
A.D., is one of the outstanding examples. Such was the history of
Buddhism in Japan before the memorable thirteenth year of the Emperor
Kimmei. The event which happened in that year, therefore, has an
importance only on account of the pompous presentation by Kutara of
Buddhist images and sutras to our imperial court.
Who, then, first countenanced, patronised, and was converted to the
newly imported religion? Naturally the progressives of that age, among
whom the Soga were the foremost. Unlike the two other conspicuous
families of Ohtomo and Mononobe, who served exclusively as military
lords, the family of Soga supplied not only the military, but the civil
and diplomatic services also. This naturally gave them very frequent
access to the imported civilisation in contrast to the simple soldiers,
who are generally prone to be more conservative than civil officials. As
the chief administrator and chief treasurer, the Soga family could not
dispense with the employment of secretaries, whose posts were
monopolised at that time by groups of immigrant scribes. In this way the
immigrants from the peninsula, afterwards reinforced by those coming
direct from southern China, flocked to the palace of the Soga family,
and they worked naturally for the increase of the power of their patron.
In short, a large number of men, furnished with more literary education
than the ordinary Japanese of the time, became the clients of the
family.
Of the two rivals of the Soga family, that which was the first to
decline in power was the Ohtomo. The next to decay was the family of the
Mononobe. The fall of the rivals of the Soga must be attributed to the
growth of the latter family, which owed much to the help given by the
immigrants mentioned above. And as the introducers of Buddhism were to
be found among these immigrants, it was very natural that the family of
Soga should be among the first to be converted to the new religion. Thus
the aggrandisement of the Soga family, the propagation of Buddhism which
it patronised, and the progress of civilisation in general went on hand
in hand. In the middle of the sixth century, that is to say, in the
reign of the Emperor Kimmei, Iname was the head of the Soga family. In
his time the Mononobe family could still hold its own against him,
though at some disadvantage. When, however, Umako, the son of Iname,
succeeded his father, he was at last able to overthrow the power of his
antagonist Moriya of the Mononobe, after defeating and killing him in
battle, with the aid of the prince Shotoku, who was also a devotee of
the new religion.
Thus in the course of several hundred years the gradual process of
centralisation had been slowly drawing to its goal. In the beginning of
the seventh century at last, the noted families of old were all eclipsed
by the single family of the Soga, which towered alone in wealth and
power above the others. At the same time instead of having the imperial
house as the nucleus of centralisation, the Emperor began to tower high
above the other members of his family. He was the owner of a very vast
domain and of a multitude of people of various classes. He was the head
of the ancestral cult. The sacred emblem of his divine origin, which had
formerly been kept in the imperial camp, was now removed from the palace
for fear of profanation, and taken to its present resting-place in the
province of Ise. Yet the removal did more to increase than to lessen the
sanctity of his person. On the other hand, his authority was in danger
of being usurped by the all-powerful mayor of the palace, the family of
Soga, which had become too strong for the emperor easily to manage. The
times became very critical. In order to push still further the process
of centralisation which had been going on, and to make the empire
better consolidated, some decisive stroke was necessary. And the
revolutionary change was at last accelerated by the overgrown power of
the Soga family, the opening of regular intercourse with China, and
above all the strong necessity within and without to consolidate the
empire more and more.