THE JAPANESE RACE AND ITS LANGUAGE
There are, I have always thought, two ways in which any race should be
considered if it is desired to form a correct idea in regard to it,
viz., from an ethnological and philological standpoint. No race
deserves to be closer studied in these matters than the Japanese.
Indeed, I am of opinion that it is impossible to arrive at any clear
or correct opinion concerning it without having, however slightly,
investigated its racial descent and the language which, among Eastern
dialects, has so long been as great a puzzle to the philologist as has
Basque among the European languages. Respecting the origin of the
Japanese we know practically nothing--at any rate nothing authentic.
The native legends and histories afford us neither guide nor clue in
the matter. These legends and histories tell us that the Japanese are
descended from the gods, but I am quite certain that the modern
Japanese receives that fact (?) with something more than the
proverbial grain of salt. According to the old legend Ninigi-no-Nikoto
was a god despatched by his grandmother the Sun-goddess to take
possession of Japan, and the land was peopled by him and his
entourage. This god-man, it is stated, lived over 300,000 years; his
son, Hohoderni, attained to twice that period of longevity, while a
grandchild, Ugaya by name, reached the respectable old age of 836,042
years. Ugaya was, it is stated, the father of Jimmu, the first
Emperor. It is not necessary to seriously notice fables or legends or
poetic imagery, or whatever these tales may be deemed to be, although
I may remark that the divine descent of the sovereign of Japan has, so
far as I know, never been formally repudiated, and it is still
explicitly, if not implicitly, held.
Dr. Kaemfer, whose great work I have already referred to, propounded
therein the somewhat fanciful theory that the Japanese are really the
direct descendants of the ancient Babylonians, and that their language
"is one of those which Sacred Writ mentions the all-wise Providence
thought fit to infuse into the minds of the vain builders of the
Babylonian Tower." According to his theory, which to me seems
absolutely ludicrous, the Japanese came through Persia, then along the
shores of the Caspian Sea and by the bank of the Oxus to its source.
From there, he suggests, they crossed China, descended the Amoor,
proceeded southwards to Korea, and found their way across the
intervening sea to the Japanese islands. Another theory, which has
found many supporters, is that the Japanese are descended from the
Ainos, the hairy race still to be found in the island of Yesso. An
advocate of this view seeks to bolster up his faith by the evidences
of an aboriginal race still to be found in the relics of the Stone Age
in Japan. "Flint arrows and spear-heads," he remarks, "hammers,
chisels, scrapers, kitchen refuse, and various other trophies are
frequently excavated, or may be found in the museum or in homes of
private persons. Though covered with the soil for centuries, they seem
as though freshly brought from an Aino hut in Yesso. In scores of
striking instances the very peculiar ideas, customs, and superstitions
of both Japanese and Aino are the same, or but slightly modified."
[Illustration: THE SWEET SCENT OF THE CHERRY BLOSSOM
FROM A PRINT BY HIROSHIGE]
This seems to me to be no evidence at all. Flint arrows, spear-heads,
hammers, and so on are to be found in every part of the world. Mankind
all over the globe seems to have evolved its civilisation, or what
passes for it, in very much the same way, viz., by process of
experiment. Another authority has asserted that the short, round
skull, the oblique eyes, the prominent cheek-bones, the dark, black
hair, and the scanty beard all proclaim the Manchus and Koreans as the
nearest congeners of the Japanese. This authority considers it
positive that the latter are a Tungusic race, and that their own
traditions and the whole course of their history are incompatible with
any other conclusion than that Korea is the route by which the
immigrant tribes made their entry into Kiushiu from their original
Manchurian home. While accepting this theory with some reservations, I
may remark that I altogether fail to see what the "whole course" of
Japanese history has to do with the matter. Japanese history, as I
have previously observed, is almost altogether legendary, and proves
nothing except the credulity of those who have accepted it as
statements of fact. Ethnology, I admit, is a most interesting field
for speculation. It is one in which the mind can positively run riot
and the imagination revel. The wildest theories have been put forward
in regard to many of the world's races, and philological arguments of
the thinnest possible kind have been used to bolster them up. For
example, one very able writer on this matter has broached a theory
respecting the origin of the Japanese, and supported it by what seems
to be very plausible evidence. He assumes, on what grounds I know
not, that there was a white race earlier in the field of history than
the Aryans, and that the seat of this white race was in High Africa.
That it was from Africa that migrations were made to North, Central,
and South America, as well as to Egypt, and subsequently to Babylonia
and, apparently, to India. In due course, according to this authority,
Syria and Babylonia were conquered by the Semites, while the Aryans
became masters of Europe, Asia Minor, and India. The suggestion is
that the conquerors of the Japanese islands and the founders of the
Japanese language and mythology were of the Turano-African type. That
these invaders intermarried with a mixed short race, and that the new
dominating Japanese race maintained and propagated their dialect of
the language and their sect of the religion, and displaced the pure
natives. The same authority suggests that when the Pacific route to
America was closed by the weakness of the Turano Africans and the
rising of cannibals and other savages (where did they rise from?) the
Japanese were isolated on the east. On their west the Turano-African
dynasties in China and Korea fell, and were replaced by natives, the
same series of events taking place as in Egypt, Peru, Mexico, &c. The
principal evidence in support of this somewhat startling theory is the
similarity between the words in use in Japanese and in certain African
languages. But if evidence of that nature is to be accepted in proof
of somewhat improbable theories, it will be possible to prove almost
anything in regard to the origin of races. I utterly reject all these
far-fetched theories. Any unprejudiced man looking at the Japanese,
the Chinaman, and the Korean will have no doubt whatever in his own
mind as to their racial affinity. Differences there most certainly
are, just as there are between the Frenchman and the Englishman, or
even the Englishman and the Scotchman, but what I may term the
pronounced characteristics are the same--the colour of the skin, the
oblique eyes, the dark hair, and the contour of the skull. These
people, whatever the present difference in their mental, moral, and
physical characteristics, have quite evidently all come from the same
stock. They are, in a word, Mongolians, and any attempt to prove that
one particular portion of this stock is Turano-African, or something
else equally absurd from an ethnological point of view, seems to me to
be positively childish. There was probably originally a mixture of
races, Malay as well as others, which has had its effect on the
peculiar temperament of the Japanese as he is to-day compared with the
Chinaman.
Of course language cannot be left out of account in the question of
the racial origin of any people, and the Japanese language has, as I
have said, long been a puzzle for the philologist. In the early times
we are told the Japanese had no written language. The language in use
before the opening up of communications with Korea and China stood
alone. Indeed there is only one language outside Japan which has any
affinity therewith, that is the language of the inhabitants of the
Loo-Choo Islands. Philologists have excluded the language from the
Aryan and Semitic tongues, and included it in the Turanian group. It
is said to possess all the characteristics of the Turanian family
being agglutinated, that is to say, maintaining its roots in their
integrity without formative prefixes, poor in conjunctions, and
copious in the use of participles. It is uncertain when alphabetical
characters were introduced into Japan, but it is believed to have
happened when intercourse with Korea was first opened about the
commencement of the Christian Era. The warrior Empress, Jungu-kogo,
is said to have carried away from Korea as many books as possible
after the successful invasion of that country. In the third century
the son of the Emperor Ojin learned to read Chinese works, and
henceforward the Chinese language and literature seem to have been
introduced into Japan. A great impetus was given to the spread of
Chinese literature by the introduction of Buddhism and Buddhist
writings in the sixth century, and the effect thereof is now apparent
in the number of Chinese words in the Japanese language. The question
as to the origin of the earliest written characters employed in Japan
is one that has produced, and probably will continue to produce, much
controversy. These are known as Shinji letters of the God Age, but
they have left no traces in the existing alphabet. There is a
remarkable difference between the written and spoken dialects of
Japan. The grammars of the two are entirely different, and it is
possible to speak the language colloquially and yet not be able to
read a newspaper, book, or letter; while, on the other hand, it is
possible to know the written language thoroughly, and yet be unable to
carry on a conversation with a Japanese. The spoken language, as a
matter of fact, is not difficult except in regard to the complicated
construction of the words. The difficulty is in reference to the
written language. There are really three modes or systems of writing:
the first consists of the use of the Chinese characters, the second
and third of two different alphabets. Although the Japanese have
adopted the Chinese characters and learned to attach to them the same
meaning as obtains in China, the construction of sentences is
sometimes so totally different that it is difficult for a Chinaman to
read a book written by a Japanese in the Chinese characters, while
the Japanese cannot read Chinese books unless he has specially studied
Chinese. It is evident from what I have said that it is difficult to
obtain a complete knowledge of the written language of Japan in its
Chinese form. There is a certain school of thought in Japan which is
enthusiastic for the replacement of the present complicated system by
the introduction of a Roman alphabet, but I feel bound to say that
this school has not made much progress, and it is not likely to be
successful. Although the present system has its disadvantages, it has
its advantages likewise. The written characters are those common to
about 450 millions of the world's people, and I think that the use of
the Chinese characters in Japan will be a factor of considerable
importance in the future history of the world, because I am convinced
that Japan is destined to exercise a preponderating influence in and
over China, and that the exercise of that influence will be greatly
facilitated by the written characters which both nations have in
common.
I may at once candidly confess that I have no theory to broach in
respect of the origin of the Japanese people or the language that they
speak. In such matters theorising appears to me to be a pure waste of
time. One has only to look round the world as it is to-day, or for the
matter of that within the confines of one's own country, to see how
rapidly the people living for long periods in a certain part of the
country develop distinct characteristics not only in physiognomy but
in dialect. It is only the existence of the printing press which has,
so to speak, stereotyped the languages of nations and prevented
variations becoming fixed, variations and dialects which in days prior
to the existence of printing presses were evolved into distinct
languages. Take the British Isles for example, any part of them,
Yorkshire, Scotland, Ireland, London, and note the difference between
the spoken language of certain classes and the language as printed in
newspapers and books. Given a nation isolated, or comparatively
isolated, for many hundreds of years, it is difficult to say to what
extent its language might be evolved or in what degree the few chance
visitors thereto may introduce words which are readily adapted to or
adopted in the language and influence it for all time. Take, for
example, a word which any visitor to China or Japan must have heard
over and over again, viz., "Joss," as applied to God. This is, as most
people know, simply a corruption of the Portuguese name for the deity.
I hope some philologist a few thousand years hence who may trace that
word to its original source will not adduce therefrom that either the
Chinese or the Japanese sprang from a Latin race.
The most ancient Japanese writings date from the eighth century. These
are Japanese written in Chinese characters, but the Chinese written
language as also its literature and the teachings of the great Chinese
philosopher, Confucius, are believed to have been introduced several
hundreds of years previously. This contact with and importation from
China undoubtedly had a marked effect in inducing what I may term
atrophy in the development of the Japanese language as also the growth
of its own literature, that is a literature entirely devoid of Chinese
influences. Indeed it is impossible to speculate on what might have
been the development of Japan and in what direction that development
would have proceeded had she never come under the influence of the
Chinese language, literature, religion, and artistic principles.
I have not the slightest doubt myself, as I have said before, that the
Japanese are of the same stock as the Chinese and Koreans. I have no
theory in regard to the origin of the Ainos, who are most likely the
aboriginal inhabitants. They are quite evidently a distinct race from
the Japanese proper, although of course there has been some
interbreeding between them.
The language of Japan naturally suggests some reference to its
literature, of which there is no lack, either ancient or modern. I
have dealt with this matter in some detail in a subsequent chapter.
The old literature of Japan is but little known to Europeans, and
probably most Europeans would be incapable of appreciating or
understanding it. It abounds in verbal artifices, and the whole habits
of life and modes of thought and conception of things, material and
spiritual, of the Japanese of those days were so totally different to
those of the European as to render it almost unintelligible to the
latter. There are, however, scholars who have waded through this
literature as also through the poetry of Japan and have found great
delight therein. In the process of translating an Oriental language,
full of depths of subtlety of thought and expressing Oriental ideas in
an Oriental manner, much, if not most, of its beauty and charm must be
lost. That is, I think, why the Japanese prose and poetry when
translated into English seem so bald and lifeless. We know by
experience that even a European language loses in the process of
translation which is, except in very rare instances, a purely
mechanical art. How much more so must be the case in regard to an
Oriental language with its depths of hyperbole and replete with
imagery, idealism, and flowery illustrations.
I have referred to the literature of modern Japan, the ephemeral
literature, in a chapter on its newspaper press. The modern
literature, whether ephemeral or otherwise, is distinctly not on
Oriental lines. The influence of the West permeates it. Distinctive
Japanese literature is, I imagine, a thing of the past, and I fear it
will be less and less studied as time goes on. Young Japan is a
"hustler," to use a modern word, and it has no time and mayhap not
much inclination for what it perhaps regards as somewhat effete
matter. It thinks hurriedly and acts rapidly, and it, accordingly,
aspires to express its thoughts and ideas through a medium which shall
do so concisely and effectively.
Whatever the origin of the Japanese race or the Japanese language,
whether the former came from the plains of Babylon, the heights of
Africa, or from some part of the American Continent, or was evolved on
the spot, one thing is certain--that the Japanese race and the
Japanese language have been indelibly stamped on the world's history.
The ethnologist may still puzzle himself as to the origin of these
forty-seven millions of people and feel annoyed because he cannot
classify them to his own satisfaction. The philologist may feel an
equal or even a greater puzzle in reference to their language. These
are merely speculative matters which may interest or amuse the man who
has the time for such pursuits, but they are, after all, of no great
practical importance. The future of a race is of more concern than its
past, and, whatever the origin of a language may have been, if that
language serves in the processes of development to give expression to
noble thoughts, whether in prose or poetry, to voice the wisdom of the
people, to preach the gospel of human brotherhood, it matters little
how it was evolved or whence it came. It is because I believe that the
Japanese race and the Japanese language have a great future before
them in the directions I have indicated that I have dealt but lightly,
I hope none of my readers will think contemptuously, with the theories
that have been put forward in reference to the origin of both.