This paper demonstrates the following:
(1) In the Former Han _??__??_ Period the i _??_ which the common people engaged in as chêng-shuo _??__??_ consisted of the three kinds; kêng-shuo _??__??_ shu-pien _??__??_ and chêng_??_. Kêng-fu_??__??_ which is found in Han-shu Shih-huo-chi _??__??__??__??__??_ means the engagement in the three kinds of i _??_, the period of engagement in each of i _??_ being a month per annum. The people who did not engage in i _??_ paid the government san-pai-wên _??__??__??_ for each of i _??_.
(2) The i _??_ of shu-pien_??__??_ was actually imposed for a year in rotation, as the result of which many cheng-shuo _??__??_ paid san-pai-wen _??__??__??_ to the government without engaging in the i _??_. This i _??_ was also imposed upon male members of families of high-ranking officials.
(3) The chêng-shuo _??__??_ were supplied with living expenses by the government during the period of their engagement in i _??_.
(4) The i _??_ of chêng _??_ was imposed not only upon the common people but also upon low-ranking professional soldiers selected as such from among the common people, who engaged exclusively in the i _??_ of chêng_??_. The common people who engaged in this i _??_ were called wei-shuo _??__??_, while the low-ranking professional soldiers who engaged in this i _??_ were called wei-shih _??__??_, the duties of the latter i _??_ being a high-grade one in comparison with those of the former.
(5) The common people, upon completion of the period of the cheng-shuo's _??__??_ engagement, still engaged in easy i _??_ for some years as hsien-shuo _??__??_.
(6) Elimination of Shu-shuo-ling _??__??__??_ in 167 B. C., i.e. in the 13th year of Emperor Wên-ti _??__??_ in the Han _??_ Dynasty means the lessening of the i _??_ of shu-pien _??__??_ and Chêng_??_, which is related to the intention of moving the common people to the northern borders of territory of the Han _??_ Empire to make them take up garrison duties.

View full abstract

So far as we know, there is no society that has not any laws and customs of ‘the prohibited degrees of marriage’. There is no doubt that Chinese society has kept them. Some of them we can see in the Tanglü _??__??_ established under the T'ang dynasty. If we study them, we will find that they have much more various meanings than ‘incest’. In that Code, there are two articles concerning ‘the prohibited degrees of marriage’ - Art. 33 and Art. 34 of "Hu-hun _??__??_" chapter. In particular, Para. 3 of the former prohibits the marriage between a man and someone of his relatives of different surnames and different generation, although their relationship is more remote than the fifth degree.
To explain the matter in detail, a man is prohibited to marry a cousin of his mother or father, either parallel or cross, or his father's aunt (_??__??__??__??__??_), or his mother's aunt (_??__??__??__??__??_, _??__??__??__??__??_), or his paternal uncle's daughter's daughter, or his son-in law's sister. If he violates the prohibition, he will receive one hundred strokes and the marriage will be annulled.
According to "T'ung-tien _??__??_", "T'ang-hui-ya_??__??__??_"and" Ts'ê-fu yüan-kuei_??__??__??__??_", the Para. 3 of Art. 33 was enacted in 65/ A. D. by the memorial of Li Shên, _??__??_. But among those three historical materials is an important difference in ‘the prohibited degrees of marriage’.
In this paper that difference will be fully analyzed. And the author will conclude : of Para. 3, items of father's and mother's maternal parallel cousin (_??__??__??__??__??__??__??_) and of mother's great-grandfather's grandson's daughter (_??__??__??__??__??_) were not yet contained in the memorial of Li Shiên; and between 65/ A. D. and 737 A. D., some amendments were made, and Para. 3 of Art. 33 was codified as it stands now.

View full abstract

In den landesfürstlichen Gerichts-u. Urbarärnter in Grafschaft Tirol sind eine große Menge von den Rechnungsbücher (1288 - 1350) auf Rechnungsberichte der Abgabeeinnehmer (Landrichter, Urbarverwalter) zu der zentralen Kammer abgefasst. Unter jenen Benutzung zielt diese Arbeit also auf die Untersuchung eines Merkmales vom Steuerwesen in den entstehenden deutschen Territorien. Dann zieht man die Steuerausfälle (defectus) in Betracht, um eine Bedeutung der ordentlichen u. auBerordentlichen Steuern in der zentralen Finanzverwaltung festzustellen. Die Steuerausfalle sind eigentlich gehörig den ordentlichen Steuern. Denn sind diese der Fixierung des alljährlich zu leistenden Betrages erlegen (steura annua). Dieser gegenüber einerseits strebten die Landesfiirsten auch dann nach der Einhebung der willkürlichen u. außerordentlichen Steuern (steura precaria, stiura magna), wenn sie dem Glaubiger das Amt u. Gericht gegen Abschlagung der Einnahmen von der Pfandsumme his zur Tilgung derselben versetzt hatten, oder der Inhaber des Amts u. Gerichts ein Privileg der Befreiung von der ordentlichen Steuern erlangt hatte.
Anderseits, wahrend der Umlage der auBerordentlichen Steuern, haben die Landesfdrsten ordentliche Steuern als gewisse Einkünfte moglichst dauerrid aufrecht zu erhalten versucht, obgleich die Bedeutung der ordentlichen Steuern im ganzen Steuerwesen eines Territoriums verhältnismaßig gering blieb.
Im Lauf der Zeit assimilieren die außerordentlichen Steuern sich den ordentlichen Steuern and erlegen dem Anweisungssystem, damit haben sie zu Folge nicht zu entsprechen der jeweiligen and wirklichen Bedürfnisse der landesfürstlichen Finanzen. Und noch bleiben sie unbestimmt and unregelmäßig in Beziehung auf eine ganz territorialstaatliche Finanzverwaltung. Nun, um these schwachen Seiten der außerordentlichen Steuern zu uberwinden, tritt eine neue Steuer - landständische Steuer - seit den zweiten Hälfte des 14. Jahrhunderts auf.

View full abstract

In this essay, I consider “Munakatashi-Kotogaki” which was the written laws of the Munakata manor enacted on January 9, 1313 by its lord, Ujimori Munakata(_??__??__??__??_), the 49th Daiguji(_??__??__??_, the highest Shinto priest) of the Munakatasha(_??__??__??_, the Munakata Shrine) in Munakata-gun, Chikuzen-no-kuni(_??__??__??__??__??__??_), through ascertaining the historical character of the lordship of the Munakatashake(_??__??__??__??_, the family of Munakata-Daiguji). In the Kamakura period, the Munakatashake held two sorts of estates, their shiryos(_??__??_)and the Munakata-sharyo(_??__??__??__??_).The former were the alienable private estates of the Munakatashake, the latter was the territory administered by the Munakatashake under the political authority of the Munakatasha. In order to ascertain the character of their lordship, I examine the way how the Munakatashake managed their own shiryos and dominated the Munakata-sharyo.
First, as regards their shiryos. The Munakatashake spread their patriarchal rule over the land around their takuchi (_??__??_, messuage) and there excercised ryoshu-keiei (_??__??__??__??_, lord's management of the demesne) through the service of genins or shojus (_??__??_·_??__??_, a sort of villeinage). Thus, so far as their shiryos were concerned, they were, in a sense, zaichi-ryoshus (_??__??__??__??_, dwelling lords).
Then, I consider the relation between the Munakatashake and the Munakata-sharyo, dividing the Kamakura period into two epochs, namely, before and after the wayo (_??__??_, compromise) which they had made with the honjo (_??__??_, the highest overlord) in June, 1257 in order to lessen the influence of the honjo. Before the wayo, the Munakatashake had succeeded to strengthen their firm held on the Munakata-sharyo as a result of their endeavors to establish firmly their sharyos, to bring a commerce under their power and to complete the system of their branch shrines, though the honjo continued to have a certain influence over them. Then, after freed from fetters of the honjo by the wayo, the Munakatashake intended to establish a territorial rule over the Munakata-sharyo for the purpose of controlling hyakushos (_??__??_, free peasants) and succeeded in it in the way of having appointed the zaichi-ryoshus shinkans (_??__??_, Shinto priests) of the Munakatasha. Thus, notwithstanding they were strongly restricted by the zaichi-ryoshus as a group, the Munakatashake became to have the character of shoen-ryoshu (_??__??__??__??_, aristocratic and citified lord) and were higher in position than the zaichi-ryoshus, because they were not only the chiefs of the territorial rule over the Munakata-sharyo, but had patrimonial administrative organizations and the religious authority.
From these investigations, my conclusion is that “Munakatashi-Kotogaki” was the laws of the Munakatashake as zaichi-ryoshus who had also the character of shoen-ryoshu and that their aim was to maintain the territorial rule based on the zaichi-ryoshus.

View full abstract

For Chinese people land was the most important property. So, documents related to land traffic provide a useful clue for understanding the Chinese family.
So called encyclopaedias of everyday's use in the Ching dynasty contain models for how to draft land traffic documents. The models consist of the type drafted solely by the head of the household and of the type drafted by him, but only after his sons, brothers and other members of the family had been consulted with and had given him an approval.
Chi Chien Tsu, a collection of land traffic documents in the village of Sha Ching in Ho-pei Province contains two hundred thirteen documents drafted during Ching and the Republic of China. It is true that in this collection there are documents drafted by heads of the household alone. But even in such cases it is evident that the consent of" the other members of the family was necessary with regard to the final decision to sell or purchase land and with regard to the price. There were also many documents drafted and signed not only by heads of the household but also by their children, brothers, and brothers, children, a fact which demonstrates that properties in a Chinese household were regarded as being communal properties. Also, if the wife did not agree with the sale of land, the contract lost its effect.
I have fifty-seven sets of land traffic documents drafted during Ching and the Republic of China in Liu Yiian in Ho-nang Province, each of which is composed of three documents. Here again, even in the case of the documents drafted by the head of the family alone one can tell that consultation and agreement between the father and the son and between the husband and the wife were imperative and that the principle of communal ownership of household properties was adhered to.
Thus, unlike what the models in the encyclopaedias indicate, actual land traffic documents show that the wife and the children in the Chinese family had a strong say with regard to the family properties. The fact that in some aspects head of the household held absolute rights concerning the ownership of the household properties and in others he was only a member of a community called a family which communally owned the properties reflects the nature of Asiatic agriculture and in turn that of the Asiatic Society.

View full abstract

Yu. G. Vinogradov, U. S. S. R. epigraphist, joined the Berezan arch-aeological expedition in 1970, and found one of the most ancient Greek letter of a private hand. It is inscribed on the lead tablet and rolled up in scroll. In this paper he has tried palaeographic, linguistic and archaeological analysis on the tablet and assigned it to the second half of the sixth century B. C. This tablet is very interesting from the point of the ancient Greek slavery as well as the ancient law of property.
This present paper is trying to introduce the above paper of Vino-gradov in detail as possible as I can. The archaeological study on the North Black Sea coast is being done only by the hands of U. S. S. R. scholars and made a great deal of remarkable results, which are giving great influences on the academic world of Greek and Roman history in general.

View full abstract