The feudal system of the Middle Ages was, I think, established, when Yoritomo Mi-namoto was appointed sôshugoshiki and sôjitoshiki, and therefore became able to appoint jitô and shugo throughout the whole country.
The Gyokuyô, one of the most important records concerning the aforesaid jitô, that is Bunji-jitô, presents no account of the shugo. In my opinion, this is due to the fact that Kanezane Fujiwara, the author of the Gyokuyô, was so much surprised at the request of Yoritomo to be appointed sôjitôshiki that he failed to note it down in his diary, the Gyokuyô. He wrote in the Gyokuyô, as if Yoritomo were allowed to appoint jitô only in Kinai, San'indô, San'yodô, Nankaidô and Saikaidô. But I think that Yoritomo was permi-tted to appoint jitô in the whole country. Previously in 1183 Yoritomo asked the Imperial court to promulgate an edict prescribing that lands occupied by his warriors and Yoshinaka Minamoto's in Tôkaidô, Tôsandô and Hokurokudô should be returned to the owners, among whom were court nobles. When Yoritomo asked the Throne to appoint him sô-jitôshiki, his deputy, Tokimasa Hôjô, must have been asked whether jitô would be appointed only in the abovementioned three districts and Tokimasa must have answered that jitô would be appointed also in other districts, that is, in Kinai and so on. This dialogue must have been falsely reported to Kanezane, which fact, according to my view, accounts for the abovesaid description of the Gyokuyô. There is another view by Prof. Ishimoda to the effect that Bunji-jito was ikkokujito (_??__??__??__??_), whose income was hyôrômai (_??__??__??_) only. This view is, however unmaintainable, as Bunji-jitô clearly had the seizin of land.
I think the formation of the Kamakura Bakufu was completed in 1224, if we consider the growth of its jurisdiction. At first the Bakufu stood on an equal footing with other honjo, owners of shôen, Therefore, if vassals of the bakufu acted lawfully against honjo, the honjo complained to the Imperial court, which ordered the bakufu to prevent the vassals from doing such acts. Afterwards a judicial court, Kirokujo by name, was established at the request of Yoritomo by the Imperial court in order to judge these sorts of law suits. In 1224, when Yoshitoki Hôjô became shikken, deputy shogun, he deprived the Imperial court of its abovesaid jurisdiction. The bakufu's exclusive jurisdiction over a jitô-shiki suit was also established at the same time, I think.
Thus the formation of the feudal system as well as the jitô system was, in my opinion, completed in 1224, so far as the matter of jurisdiction was concerned.

View full abstract

The Edo-Bakufu took measures on assessment and collection of Nengu on the principle of "without a surplus and without want of necessaries for peasant's Life". Measuring of the area and investigation of the productivity of peasants' lands by Kenchi and the inspection of harvest by Kemi were reallly availed for such assessment.
But, in so far as such an intention was implied in Kenchi and Kemi, peasants must have necessarily resisted them. Disturbed by this resistance and some other obstacles inevitably accompanied by the execution of them, it seems that both Kenchi and Kemi were not performed so successfully as they had been expected at the beginning. Consequently, the adequate assessment "without a surplus and without want" seems also to have been not so easily realized.
This treatise intends to explain these circumstances in detail, and to inquire into the doctrine of the assessment of "without a surplus and without want" in its actual process of realization.
1) The Shogunate, the supreme feudal government, of the Edo age.
2) A staple rent in material form levied by feudal lords on peasant's lands at that time.
3) A famous doctrine stated by Masanobu Honda, one of the chief ministers of the Edo-Bakufu.
4) A kind of land survey enforced by feudal lords of the early Edo age and their predecessors.
5) An annual tour by lord's officer "Daikan", a chief bailiff, to examine the year's harvest.

View full abstract

In this article "Bukki-sho" (a book on mourning) is a commentary or the collections of practical cases of the Bukki-ryô (_??__??__??_ the regulation of mourning). Bukki-ryô is a law that regulates how long a man must go into mourning when his relative such as his parent, grandparent, or first cousin dies. The Tokugawa Shogunate, that enacted the Bukki-ryô and put it in force, ordered that the questions on Bukki-ryô should be addressed to the Bukki-gakaris (_??__??__??_ the officials in charge of mouning) in Ometsuke (_??__??__??_Great Inspectors) and Metsuke (_??__??_ Inspectors) of the Shogunate. After that, many private compilations which collected those questions and answers were edited, and thus we can now find a lot of Bukki-shos.
These Bukki-shos were one of the most important sources of law in the Edo era ; nevertheless, they have only remained the materials for the study of family law and they have not been regarded as an independent subject of study. The chief points of this essay are how the Bukki-shos in the Edo era were compiled, how many classes and genealogies they were assorted into, how they were circulated, and how questions and answers on the Bukki-ryô, which were the core of the Bukki-shos, were asked and given.
Most of the existing Bukki-shos are manuscpripts and derivatives of the "Bukki-ryô senchû" _??__??__??__??__??_ or the "Bukki-ryô-shôkai" _??__??__??__??__??_ Accordingly we can regard these two genealogies as two main currents of the Bukki-shos. While the Bukki-ryô-shô-kai was compiled by Kagemichi Toyama _??__??__??__??_, the Bukki-gakari Metsuke (_??__??__??__??__??_ Inspector in charge of mourning), who was in a position to answer the questions on the mourning, edited for the convenience of performance of his official duty, the Bukki-ry ô-senchû was compiled by Shoemon Nagayama _??__??__??__??__??__??_, the Rusui (_??__??__??_ Deputy during Absence) of the Yamagata clan _??__??__??_, who was in a position to ask questions on the mourning on behalf of his clan, in 1781. And this was the oldest of the real Bukki-shos that were not only the collection of questions and answers but also commentaries. It came to circulate through a lot of clans, and many derivatives of it were made up. Sesaemon Katô, the Rusui of the Oshi clan _??__??_, edited the "Bukki-ryô-senchûbunshaku" _??__??__??__??__??__??__??_, in which he revised and enlarged the Bukki-ryô-senchû completely, in cooperation with Dan-emon Yagi _??__??__??__??__??__??_, the Rusui of the Takasaki clan _??__??__??_, and the book also became popular.
It may be said to be a most interesting fact that the real Bukki-sho was made by the clan earlier than by the Shogunate and was developed. And the fact that the Rusuis of clans made, improved and circulated these Bukki-syos show that Rusuis played an important role in making the law of the Shogunate permeate in clans.

View full abstract

Men from 21 to 59 years old (_??__??_) were imposed upon millet (_??_) and silk or hemp cloth (_??_) as taxes in the T'ang period. Besides, they were in duty bound to go to work for 20 days a year for the Central Government (_??_) and 40 days for the prefectural governments where they lived (_??__??_). Men from 18 to 20 (_??__??_) were in obligation to work for 50 days a year for the prefectural government (_??__??_).
In Chinese Confucianism "filial piety" was the foundation of national morals and it was held in high esteem. As people older than 80 years were generally thought to need attendants, _??__??_ or _??__??_ of their family or of their close relatives were exempted from _??_ and _??__??_ to take care of them. This exemption system (called Jitei System) was kept from the beginning to the middle of the Tang Dynasty, and through this period it was improved in the treatment of the old people.

View full abstract

In 1956, Inst. Pong Tuck Chun (_??__??__??_) released the process how Ritsuryô of Silla Dynasty was formulated. (‘Study on Written Law of Shilla Dynasty’ Univ. Soeulensis Collectio Theseon, humanitas scientia socialis vol. 4)
The present author aims at solving the reason why this Ritsuryo was established and the essence of Silla Ritsuryo system (_??__??__??__??__??__??_), under the stark influence of the above-mentioned Inst. Pong's treatise.
Samkuk-saki (_??__??__??__??_) says that King Popxu_??_ (_??__??_) enacted Ritsu and Ryo as the first written law in Silla Dynasty (AD 520). But according to some epigraph (_??__??__??__??__??__??__??__??__??__??__??_), it can be recognized that King Popxun only enacted Ritsu code, which was composed of regulations concerning the administration and the justice as well as the punishment. The motive of the establishment of this Rituryo lies, on the one hand, in rivaling Kokurio-Dynasty (_??__??__??_), the advanced nation in three kigdoms at that time, in the culture, and on the other hand, in satisfying Silla noblemen's consciousness of yearning for Chinese culture.
It was King Murior (_??__??_) that enacted Ritsu and Ryo together. (AD 654) As a result of restoring the regulations of this Ritsuryo, the author concludes that the purpose of this Ritsuryo was to transform Silla noblemen into bureaucrats and to set up a powerful enough, centralized and despotic government to endure Chinese pressure.
In the middle of the 8th century, established was Silla Ritsuryo system in which Silla people were govened as Kômin (_??__??_) through a taxation system to levy duties on each village by the state organ. In Tang (_??_), however, the governed were taxed individually by census registers. Namely, Silla Ritsuryo system was so different from T'ang's.
It was because Silla monarchs were so weak without Silla noblemen's support that Ritsuryo was not enforced in Silla so strong as in Tang, in spite of its adopting T'ang Ritsuryo under T'ang's authority.

View full abstract

Among the recent studies on the ancient Roman history in USSR the studies by Miss E. M. Staerman are prominent. This article summarizes her recent six articles.
At the end of the Roman Republic (about B. C. 200-100) there were slave disturbances on a large scale, but slave proprietors and ideological leaders did not consider them as severe matters.
On the contrary, there were even human concerns for slaves at the early Imperial period, but the confrontation of slaves against slave proprietors became acute at that period and they were forced to think of slavery system seriously, she persists. Her studies based on many materials, especially on the comparison of the thoughts of Cicero and Seneca, are very persuasive.

View full abstract