INFORMATION TO USERS

This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI film* the text directly from the original or copy submitted Unis, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer primer.

Hie quality of this reproduction is dependent npon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, prim bleedthrough, substandard margin*, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note wiQ indicate the deletion.

Oversize materials (e.g^ maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back of the book.

Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order.

A Bell & Howell information Company 300 NorthZ«eb Road.Ann Arbor.Ml 48106-1346USA 3l3'761-4700 800.521-0600 CUSTOMARY PRACTICE AND LEGAL CODES OF SUCCESSION AND IN JAPAN

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

Nobuko Imai Thurn, B.A., M.A., M.A.

The Ohio State University 1995

Dissertation Committee: Approved by R .H. Moore E. Bourguignon AdvisoV C . Chen Department of UMI Number: 9534078

Copyright 1995 by Thurn, Nobuko Imai All rights reserved.

UMI Microfora 9534078 Copyright 1995# by UMI Conpany. All rights reserved.

This nicrofora edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17# United States Code.

UMI 300 North Seeb Road Ann Arbor# MI 48103 Copyright by Nobuko Imai Thurn 1995 To My Martin Thurn ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my deepest appreciation to Professor Richard Moore for his guidance during my years as a graduate student and for encouragement to finish my dissertation. His enthusiasm for scholarship and intellectual and warm friendly advice always helped and uplifted my spirit. I would also like to thank the other members of my advisory committee, especially Professor Erika Bourguignon for her many years of teaching, scholarly advice, editing, and providing useful suggestions for my dissertation; and Professor Chung-min Chen for broadening my perspectives and providing valuable suggestions. I thank my husband, Martin, for correcting and editing my English, and for making a computer program for drawing diagrams. Without his patience and help, I would not have been able to accomplish this difficult task as a graduate student and a of two little boys. I also thank God for making me decide to continue my study when I had all but given up, and for giving me a lot of inspiration to complete the dissertation. VITA

1981...... B.A. , Sociology, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan 1981-1985 ...... instructor for Japanese Language, Berlitz School, Tokyo, Japan 1985-1987 ...... GTA position: Teaching Japanese 1987 ...... M.A., East Asian Language and Literature, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1988 ...... M.A., Anthropology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1988-1989 ...... Coordinator, Japan Business Information Service, Institute for Japanese Study, The Ohio State University 1990-1993 ...... Research Specialist III, Computer- Accelerated Language Learning Educational Project, University Center for International Studies, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1993-1994 ...... GRA position: Assist Dr. Richard Moore in translating reduced version of Toyohara Mura: Hito to Tochi no Rekishi {Toyohara Village: History of people and land) from Japanese to English

FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Anthropology Anthropology of Kinship Ethnopsychiatry Anthropology of Business

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION ...... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... iii VITA ...... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS...... V LIST OF TABLES...... ix LIST OF FIGURES...... xi CHAPTER I : INTRODUCTION...... 1 Pertinent Issues...... 1 Aspects Necessary for the Study of Japanese Kinship 6 Theoretical Contribution to the Field of Anthropology . . 14 Chapter-by-Chapter Outline...... 15 CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY...... 18 Library Research ...... 18 Diagrams...... 20 Constructing Household Diagrams by Computer ...... 22 Household Registry...... 24 About the Case Studies...... 25 Field Interviews...... 29 As a Native Anthropologist ...... 39 CHAPTER III: KINSHIP THEORIES...... 42 History of Kinship Theory...... 42 Theories of inheritance and Succession ...... 47 Descent and Corporativity...... 54 Confusion Between Kinship and Descent ...... 57 Kindred ...... 59 Japanese Kinship System...... 60 l£ (Household)...... 61 Shinaoku and fi&zo&u...... 63

v Theory of ...... 70 Ddzoku Relationships...... 72 CHAPTER IV: NON-CORPORATE SUCCESSION...... 81 Confusion Over the Concepts of "Succession" and "inheritance* in Japan...... 81 History of Succession and Inheritance in Japan ...... 83 Ancient Japan (before 600 A.D.) ...... 83 Ritsury6 Period (600-1100) ...... 84 Feudal Period (1100-1600) ...... 87 Succession and Inheritance Under the Tokugawa Regime (1615-1868)...... 89 Regional Variations in Succession Patterns...... 94 Western vs. Eastern J a p a n ...... 99 Study of Regional Variation by Izumi et al...... 103 Timing of Succession and Inheritance, and inkvo ...108 Variations of Succession Patterns...... 113 Male Primogeniture...... 114 Male Primogeniture in the Civil Code 116 Succession of Worship...... 120 Last-born Succession...... 125 Ultimogeniture in Suwa District...... 131 Case Study 1. "Y* Household of Suwa District ...... 133 Ultimogeniture in Usuki District, Miyazaki Prefecture...... 136 Case Study 2. "H" Household in Minamikata Village...... 137 Case Study 3. "F* Household in Tomi Village...... 138 Case Study 4. Oni i/onba System in Morozuka Village...... 139 Case Study 5. *11* Household...... 141 Case Study 6. "12" Household...... 142 First-born Child Succession...... 145 Case Study 7. Anekatoku in "A" Household...... 150 Case Study 8. "M* Household...... 151 Case Study 9. "S* Electric Company...... 153 Selective Succession...... 155 Case Study 10. "M* Household Revisited...... 156 ...... 157 Fictive Kinship Created by Adoption ...... 157 History of Adoption in J a p a n ...... 162 Adoption (v6shi) in Late 20th Century Japan ...... 166 Adoption for Tax Purposes ...... 171 Case Study 11. *T" Construction Company...... 172

vi Case Study 12. “F2" Household...... 176 Mnkov6shi (Adopted -in-law) ...... 177 Case Study 13. *M' Clinic...... 181 Case Study 14. *M3" Household...... 185 CHAPTER V: CORPORATE SUCCESSION...... 188 Ideology in the -owned Business in Japan ...... 188 The Ideology and Corporativity of Ddzoku ...... 189 Merchant dSzoku ...... 192 D6zoku Companies (d6zoku gaisha) ...... 195 The Tax System of Ddzoku Companies ...... 199 Succession of a Business...... 201 Case Study 15. *T* Company...... 205 Non-successors to Extend Business...... 208 Case Study 16. *H" Clothing Store...... 208 Case Study 17. *0' Candy Store...... 210 Case Study 18. *1* Department S t o r e ...... 212 Strategies for Company Succession...... 219 The Successor Problem...... 221 CHAPTER VI: INHERITANCE...... 225 issues of Inheritance...... 225 Partible and Impartible Inheritance...... 226 Inheritance of Non-material Goods ...... 232 Regional Variations in Inheritance...... 233 Inheritance and Land Problems...... 237 Inheritance of Agricultural L a n d ...... 238 Refusal of Inheritance Rights...... 241 -Children Contracts (Qyako Keivaku) ...... 245 Legal Aspects of Inheritance...... 247 Succession and Inheritance Under Tokugawa L a w 248 Zenkoku Minii Kanrei Ruiifl...... 251 Meiji Civil C o d e ...... 255 Family L a w ...... 255 Household Registry (koseki) ...... 257 Accuracy of the Household Registry...... 259 Household System...... 261 Household Head (koshu) ...... 263 Family Council ...... 265 Inheritance and Succession Law (sfizoku li£) ...... 266 Changes in the Civil C o d e ...... 271 Changes in Family l a w ...... 271 Changes in Inheritance and SuccessionLa w ...... 274

vii Current 1995 Inheritance L a w ...... 275 Inheritance Rights of Adopted Children...... 285 inheritance T a x ...... 287 Inheritance vs. Gift Strategies ...... 292 Adoption tydshi) Strategies...... 295 Counter Strategies to Adoption (yfishi) Strategies .296 Tax on Unequal Inheritance...... 299 Inheritance Taxes in Case of Bequest by W i l l ...... 301 Property Value ...... 302 CHAPTER VII: CONCLUSION...... 304 APPENDIX A: MAP S...... 312 APPENDIX B: INTERACTION BETWEEN LEGAL CODES AND CUSTOMARY CODES ON SUCCESSION AND INHERITANCE 315 APPENDIX C: GLOSSARY OF JAPANESE WORDS...... 325 LIST OF REFERENCES...... 332 LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Major Ethnographies of Japan...... 3 Table 2. Major Ethnographies on Japanand Their Focus on the Effects of Legal Code on Kinship...... 5 Table 3. Major Ethnographies on Japanand Their Treatment of the Effects of Customary Practices on Kinship...... 13 Table 4. Succession Patterns by Region and Occupation, 1956-7 ...... 97 Table 5. Succession Patterns in Agricultural villages by Region, 1987 ...... 98 Table 6. Duration of honke-bunke Relationships by Region ..104 Table 7. Status Differentiation Between Honke and Bunke. by Region...... 105 Table 8. Status Difference Between Blood-Related bunke and Non-Blood-Related bunke, by Region...... 106 Table 9. Hierarchy Between Patrilineal Kin and Matrilineal Kin as Seen in Seating Arrangement, by Region...... 106 Table 10. Existence of Distinct Linguistic Terms for "eldest son' and/or 'eldest ,' by Region...... 107 Table 11. Genealogical Relationship of Successor to the Head of an i£, by Region...... 107 Table 12. Existence of inkyo. by Region...... 110 Table 13. Residence of inkvo. by Region...... 110 Table 14. Most Important Duty of an He i r...... 121 Table 15. Preference for Continuation of the Household by Non-relative Adoption...... 169 Table 16. Desire to Continue Passing on House andGrave Site to the Next Generation...... 170 Table 17. Inheritance by vs. Inheritance by Children...... 229 Table 18. Equal vs. Unequal Inheritance, ' vs. Children's Point of V i e w ...... 230 Table 19. Desired Heir...... 231

ix Table 20. Desired Proportion of Eldest Son's inheritance ..231 Table 21. Inheritance Patterns by Region andOccupation ...234 Table 22. Patterns of Farmland Inheritance...... 235 Table 23. Inheritance Patterns by Region...... 236 Table 24. The Nine Regions of Japan Described by the Zenkoku Minii Kanrei Ruiifl...... 252 Table 25. Court-Decided Division of Inherited Property Between and Children...... 276 Table 26. Inheritance Tax Rates 1951-1994 ...... 290 Table 27. Gift Tax Rates 1953-1989 ...... 292 Table 28. Some Extreme Cases of Adoption for Tax Reduction ...... 298

x LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Basic Elements of Household Diagrams...... 20 Figure 2. More Elements of Household Diagrams...... 21 Figure 3. shinzoku Diagram and Degree of Relationship from Ego's point of V i e w ...... 64 Figure 4. *Y" Household Diagram (for Case Study 1) Part 1 ...... 134 Figure 5. *Y" Household Diagram (for Case Study 1) Part 2 ...... 135 Figure 6. *H" Household Diagram (for Case Study 2) ...... 137 Figure 7. *F" Household Diagram (for Case Study 3) ...... 138 Figure 8. Onji/Onba System Example Household Diagram (for Case Study 4) ...... 139 Figure 9. "II* Household Diagram (for Case Study 5 ) ...... 141 Figure 10. “12* Household Diagram (for Case Study 6 ) ..... 142 Figure 11. *A* Household Diagram (for Case Study 7) Part 1 ...... 149 Figure 12. "A" Household Diagram (for Case Study 7) Part 2 ...... 150 Figure 13. "M" Household Diagram (for Case Studies 8 and 10) ...... 152 Figure 14. "S* Electric Company Household Diagram (for Case Study 9) ...... 154 Figure 15. Hosokawa-Yamana Alliance Household Diagram ....165 Figure 16. *T* Construction Company Household Diagram (for Case Study 11) ...... 173 Figure 17. *F2* Household Diagram (for Case Study 12) ....176 Figure 18. *M* Clinic Household Diagram (for Case Study 13) ...... 182 Figure 19. *M3* Household Diagram (for Case Study 1 4 ) .....186 Figure 20. "T* Company Household Diagram (for Case Study 15) ...... 205 Figure 21. *H* Clothing Store Household Diagram (for Case Study 16) ...... 209

xi Figure 22. *0" Candy Store Household Diagram (for Case Study 17) ...... 210 Figure 23. “I* Department Store Household Diagram Part 1 (for Case Study 18) ...... 212 Figure 24. "I* Department Store Household Diagram Part 2 (for Case Study 18) ...... 213 Figure 25. *1" Department Store Household Diagram Part 3 (for Case Study 18) ...... 214 Figure 26. Court Case of Inheritance Dispute...... 260 Figure 27. Legal Inheritance Proportion According to Number and Type of Heirs...... 281 Figure 28. The Six Geographical Regions of Japan...... 313 Figure 29. Geographical Locations of the 18 Case Studies ..314

xii CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Pertinent Issues In Japan, a variety of methods and types of succession and inheritance were practiced throughout history and are practiced in the present, and the separate concepts of succession and inheritance themselves can be clearly distinguished. Kinship relationships were not, and are not, fixed by biology alone, but based on dynamic realities of class, age, gender, and regional variation. The primary issues of this dissertation are to describe the range of variations in the practice of succession and inheritance, and to articulate the dynamic relationships upon which kinship is based. These relationships can be understood by analyzing both customary practice and formal legal codes. Legal codes are put in place to regulate a population's behavior. Therefore, when legal codes change, observable practices are expected to change as well. A preliminary question is: do people really behave as their governing legal codes dictate? Conversely, there are recorded cases where legal code has been implemented or modified based on customary practices. In this dissertation, I will discuss interactions between legal codes and the actual practices of

1 2 the people living under the codes. Appendix B contains a historical side-by-side comparison of legal codes and customary practices of Japan related to succession and inheritance. Henry Maine, who paid close attention to political systems in his book Ancient Law in 1861, is generally

credited with having founded the area of study which came to be known as legal anthropology. Maine argued that all human societies passed through three basic stages of development. In the first stage, the largest grouping of individuals was made up of a few kinsmen, presided over by a senior male agnate. In this stage, law had yet to emerge. In the second stage, numbers of these small groups of agnates became clustered together under chiefs. Law began to develop late in the second stage, as the rulers started to pronounce the same judgments in similar situations, thus providing their decision-making with an underlying set of rules (Maine 1861). Although Ancient Law was written under the assumption of a

unilineal developmental course, it is considered important with respect to the origins of law and the relationships between different forms of law and social organizations. L.H. Morgan also pursued the growth of law and legal systems in an evolutionary context. Morgan recognized the origin of inheritance in the context of the growth of the concept of property. He considered that as a society grew in complexity, it became common practice to give personal 3 belongings to agnatic kindred, and consequently, when land became a form of property, inheritance rules came to be dictated by law. Morgan distinguished society from state, where society is founded upon persons and personal relations, and state is founded upon territory and property. In addition, he interpreted political society as being organized upon territorial areas and as dealing with property as well as with persons through territorial relations (Morgan 1877). In the study of a stratified society like Japan, dynamic relationships among classes should be taken into consid­ eration. The legal system in general can be expected to affect different strata in different ways. Similarly, the legal system can be expected to affect different categories of kinship relations in different ways. Over the years, a number of ethnographies focusing on

Table 1. Major Ethnographies of Japan

title author year Suve Mura John Embree 1939 Takashima Edward Norbeck 1954 Two Japanese Villages John Cornell and 1956 Robert Smith Citv Life in TSky© R. P. Dore 1958 Village Japan Richard Beardsley et al. 1959 Three Decades in Shinwa Mitsuru Shimpo 1976 Toyohara Toyohara KenkyQkai 1978 Kurusu Robert Smith 1978 Shinohata Ronald Dore 1978 Shinjo Keith Brown 1979 The Women of Suye Mura Robert Smith & 1982 Ella Lurv Wiswell Japanese Women Takie Suaivama Lebra 1984 Neighborhood T©ky© Theodore C . Bestor 1989 4

Japan have been written. The major ethnographies are listed in Table 1 on the previous page. The impressiveness of the depth of these studies, and the significance of their contri­ butions to the field of anthropology is incontrovertible. But what about the breadth of their analyses? Table 2 on page 5 summarizes the major ethnographies on Japan and their explicit interest in legal codes. None of the ethnographies talk about inheritance tax nor gift tax laws. Embree, Norbeck, Bernstein, and Lebra do not appear to make any mention of legal codes. Some ethno­ graphies devote a sentence or two to the household and household head system stipulated in the Meiji Civil Code, and/or to the subsequent abolishment of that system in the postwar Civil Code. But it is important to note that in general, these ethnographies clearly show a lack of attention to legal codes. Many anthropologists' lack of interest in legal matters seems to have arisen after Boas adopted the notion of cultural relativism early in the twentieth century, and even more so in the 1920's when significant attention began to be placed on field work. Most anthropologists who have written about kinship have worked in non-literate societies, where they studied mainly customary law. On the other hand, countries like Japan and China have a long tradition of written law and indigenous legal institutions. Moreover, some of these institutions, such as family law, while having Table 2. Major Ethnographies on Japan and Their Treatment of the Effects of Legal Code on Kinship. Only laws which have a direct or indirect relation to kinship are liBted.

inheritance legal household succession inheritance / gift tax household registry pre-Meiji income land tax agricultural laws laws law system law laws tax law law land laws Embree Nor beck. Cornell fc ment ioned land reform Smith abolishment law Dore 195B discussed discussed equal inheritance, property law Beardsley mentioned ment ioned Zenkoku household Minj i head Kanrei Rui jO Shimpo mentioned mentioned farmland law abolishment its of primo­ abolishment geniture provision Toyohara Keio era, cultivated farmland law era land tax, registries land tax reform Smith mentioned mentioned ment ioned equal inheritance provision of postwar Code Dore 1976 mentioned its abolishment Brown discussed mentioned discussed Smith k mentioned mentioned Wiswell postwar Civil postwar Code Civil Code Lebra Bestor mentioned 6 been influenced by Western law, are still fundamentally different in theory and practice from Western law.

Aspects Necessary for the Study of Japanese Kinship We have just seen that major ethnographies of Japan have in general failed to consider the effects of legal code on kinship, focusing instead on customary practice. But do they even treat customary practices with sufficient breadth? In this dissertation I will argue that the following eight important aspects of customary practices are necessary for a comprehensive treatment of Japanese kinship. It is certainly not my claim that these eight aspects by themselves are sufficient for a study of Japanese kinship. In Table 3 on page 13 I have summarized to what degree the following eight points are explicitly mentioned or discussed in each of the ethnographies.

1. Descent includes non-kin individuals The concept of descent includes biological kin, or non- biological kin, or both. In Japan, the right to membership in a descent group depends on time (generation), gender, and successorship. Legal adoption of non-kin individuals into the descent group is practiced in order to maintain inter- generational continuity. Customary practices favor bio­ logical relatives over non-biological relatives. However, in cases where a biological successor is not available, adoption 7

of a non-biological individual was practiced for the purpose of succession. Adoption of biological relatives and in-laws was also used, as an inheritance strategy. In these cases, legal adoption (usually of adults) creates new kin relation­ ships which are different from biological relationships.

2. Adult adoption In Japan, adoption has often been central to kinship relations, regardless of age. Indeed, adoption can be an important method of creating kinship relations. More research should be focused on adult adoption and adoption of kin individuals. In Japan, adoption of children has always been much less common than adoption of adults; so much so that laws regarding the adoption of children were not enacted until the late 1980's. Legal adoption of kin and non-kin individuals was practiced for the purpose of inter- generational continuity and as a strategy for reducing inheritance taxes. For these purposes, adoption of kin such as one's grandchildren and step children could occur, creating genealogically altered kinship. In such cases it would be theoretically possible for a biological child to play the socio-legal role of ".*

3. Separation of the concepts of family and household in Japan, the household is not the same as . The household is viewed from a much wider scope than the 8 family, in terms of both time and space. Important criteria for determining the household include resources and corpor- ativity. The household includes and more than one family in temporal and spatial directions. Each household has a name, sometimes different from all of the family names that might be members of that household.

4. Separation of the concepts of succession and inheritance "Succession* designates the transfer of status, whereas "inheritance* designates the transfer of tangible or intangible property. There has been confusion over these two terms because the Japanese word sfizoku subsumes both "succession* and "inheritance.* sdzoku is defined collect­ ively as 1) succession to the position of responsibility for ancestor worship; 2) inheritance of property; and 3) succes­ sion to the headship of a family. The confusion and mixing of the two terms in the minds of many informants and most ethnographers stems from the fact that historically in Japan, property was often inherited by the same individual who succeeded to the headship. Under the Meiji Civil Code, taxes were legally levied separately on the occasions of succession and inheritance, and indeed the tax rates were significantly different for succession and inheritance. In the postwar Civil Code, tax was levied on inheritance but not on succes­ sion. The postwar legal code stipulates equal inheritance among children; but the majority of property is still customarily inherited by the single successor to the household headship, using strategies such as having non­ successors' refuse their inheritance rights, or compensating non-successors in the form of higher education or capital funds for business development.

5. Double residence In Japan, an individual can in effect have double residences. Legal domicile, as opposed to actual residence, is the established basis of the household registry system. An official registration record for each household (koseki}

is maintained by the Ministry of Justice and physically held in the office of the city which has jurisdiction over the legal domicile. The information in the koseki. legally

sealed from public inspection, is never erased or over­ written; the koseki can be a source of retrospective data on

intra-household kinship relations over time. Also, an official record for each individual (iumin torokuhvd) is maintained in the ward government office which has jurisdiction over the current actual residence. The iQmin tdrokuhvS establishes legal residence for purposes of voting, public school registration, and national pension benefits, and usually contains information only about current family members. 10 6. Sibling rank and differential inheritance There is a status-based hierarchy among . Often, the eldest male has higher status than his siblings, especially if he is the designated successor. His higher status is spatially reflected in seating arrangements at formal group events as well as casual family meals and get- togethers. The successor child is often referred to and addressed by a specific linguistic term, regardless of gender. A successor son's wife will usually be selected from a higher-class household than of non-successor children. With respect to inheritance as well, siblings are customarily not in an equal position. The law stipulates equal inheritance, but customary practice favors unequal inheritance, in which male children tend to receive more than female children, and the one (and only one) successor child receives significantly more than non-successor children. With respect to succession, at one time the legal code designated the eldest male child as the sole legal successor to the household. However, evidence shows that there were cases where children other than the eldest male actually succeeded to the headship even during that time. There is a discrepancy between the legal code and customary practice. In order to conceal illegal activities, there are documented cases where information such as switched kinship (especially birth order), household branching, and 11 secession of children was deliberately falsified in the official legal household records.

7. Intangible inheritance R. Lowie (1928) stated that the concept of property may be applied to any tangible or intangible reality: land, water, a mask, ritual knowledge, secret magical spells for fertility, rank, the name of the dead, and so on. Thus, inheritance of property should include the transfer of intangible materials, such as the value attached to objects, household customs and rules, and use rights. For example, artifacts used for ancestor worship have value which can increase the status of the individual who inherits them, and these artifacts can also have non-monetary and/or sentimental value. Another form of intangible inheritance includes household customs and taboos (karei) and household rules (kakun). These customs and rules are often unique to a household, and are practiced only by the members of that household, generation after generation. Use rights are also inheritable. For example, a tenant of agricultural land established after the 1920's but before 1960 had the legal right to inherit the tenant right and pass it on to the next generation (Moore 1990:52). It is of course difficult to determine the value attached to an object accurately, that is, in a legally 12 binding way. Inheritance tax is levied only on the material portion of an estate. Thus, disputes over who should inherit ancestor worship artifacts are not monetary problems, but are often brought to court.

8. Unborn and deceased are included in the kinship system Kinship includes non-living members of a household. In the case of "ghost * in China, a legal marriage can be established between a living individual and a deceased individual, thus creating kinship relationships based on a deceased member of the household (C. Chen 1992). The fact that ancestors are members of the household can be seen in various customs in Japan too. The ashes of the deceased and ancestral tablets are divided among of the household. Small symbolic portions such as rice and tea are offered every day as meals for the dead at the family altar. During the annual o-bon1 holiday, ancestors are welcomed to the house in an opening ceremony, and bade farewell at the end of the three-day festival. The fact that kinship membership is not limited to the living is evidenced in the legal code as well. In Japan's postwar legal code, inheritance and succession rights are

1 Q-bon is a Japanese national holiday celebrating a Buddhist All Souls' Day (August 15th). Table 3. Major Ethnographies on Japan and Their Treatment of the Effects of Customary Code on Kinship

explicitly mention succession non-kin in adult family vs. vs. double differential intangible unborn or descent adopt ion household inheritance residence inheritance inheritance deceased kin Embree ment ioned mukoydshi distinct mentioned servants Norbeck mukoySshi, distinct jun yoshi* Cornell L mukoyoshi distinct Smith Dore 1958 mukoySshi, concepts are mentioned mentioned household jun yoshi* distinct, household includes past, terminology customs present, and nonstandard future generations Beardsley ment ioned mukoyftshi discussed discussed ment ioned distinction distinction ancestors Shimpo mentioned implied distinct distinct mentioned Toyohara mentioned mukoy&shi, distinct ment ioned fQfu vdshi* Smith mukoy6shi distinct implied distinct Dore 1978 mukoySshi ancestors Brown mentioned Smith k mukoyfishi mentioned Wiswell sibling rank Lebra servants mukoyoshi distinct mentioned ancestors sibling rank Bestor mukoydshi distinct distinct discussed

* Jun v&shi is the adoption of a younger by a childless couple. ** Fflfu vftshi is the adoption of a married couple into a family. 14 granted even to the human fetus (Article 886). In this sense, even unborn individuals should be included in kinship relationships. Almost all of these ethnographies refer to adopted son- in-law, or mukovoshi. as adult adoption, but few or none

explain that this adult male is legally a "son* in the new family yet retains some legal rights in his natal family. Most of these authors were aware of the difference between the concepts of family and household. However, the dis­ tinction between succession and inheritance was definitely not a major concern, and in fact the two terms are not clearly differentiated in two-thirds of the ethnographies. In particular, Embree uses "inheritance" to refer to the passing on of headship as well as of material wealth; while Dore (1958) uses the two terms interchangeably. As can be seen in Table 3 on the previous page, various aspects were not even mentioned by a majority of ethnographies. Throughout this dissertation, I hope to show that serious discussion of the interaction of these legal facets with customary practice is necessary for a comprehensive treatment of Japanese kinship.

Theoretical Contribution to the Field of Anthropology In this dissertation, I do not present a concrete study of one time or place. Instead, I show a range of variation in the practice of Japanese kinship with case examples, and 15 underline the theoretical importance of these practices in order to lay a foundation for future studies. The theoretical significance of this dissertation to the field of anthropology is to recommend a new framework of analysis based on a description of the range of variation of the practice of inheritance and succession in Japan. In this dissertation I also present a framework by which future anthropologists can successfully study Japanese kinship and the dynamic relationships upon which it is based. These dynamic relationships include class, regional variation, age, and gender relationships. These relationships cannot be successfully studied without understanding both customary practice and formal legal code, and it would be misleading to undertake research based on either aspect alone.

Chaptar-by-Chapter Outline The following are the contents of each chapter.

Chapter I: Introduction.

Chapter II: Methodology. Research methods and kinds of data collected during field study are described.

Chapter III: Kinship Theory. The development of kinship theories is described, and serious omissions from the field 16

of kinship research are listed. A more effective research framework is proposed.

Chapter IV: Non-corporate Succession. The confusion between the terms •succession* and “inheritance" and the underlying reasons for this confusion are presented. A history of succession practices, and variety of succession rules in Japan, and some of their regional variations are described, supported by empirical data. Various succession patterns and unique characteristics I observed in my field work are explained via case studies.

Chapter V: Corporate Succession. Some ideologies and problems of family businesses and ddzoku companies are

explained. Case studies of succession in business are included with an emphasis on the problem of finding or choosing a successor. Ddzoku. ddzoku companies, and their

tax systems are described.

Chapter VI: Inheritance. The historical development of legal codes related to succession and inheritance is presented, with an emphasis on the differences between the Meiji Civil Code and the postwar Civil Code. A detailed description of Japan's postwar inheritance laws and inheritance tax system is also the main purpose of this chapter. Various strategies to avoid inheritance tax are described. 17

Chapter VII: Conclusions.

APPENDIX A: Maps.

APPENDIX B: Historical changes of Japan's legal codes regulating succession and inheritance, and corresponding customary practices and counter strategies to legal regulations, are listed side-by-side in a large chronological table summarizing the interaction between legal code and customary practice.

GLOSSARY: Because many Japanese words do not correspond neatly to an English word or phrase (indeed, some Japanese words almost defy translation!), I have tended to use the romanized Japanese words throughout this dissertation. These words are presented in alphabetical order by their romanized form along with their Japanese written form, with a brief definition and/or explanation. CHAPTER II

METHODOLOGY

Library Rasaarch The main purpose of this research is to investigate the ranges of variation exhibited by the practice of succession and inheritance in Japan, including mainly temporal and geographical. Scholarly and historical works, and legal documents in Japanese, were major resources. In field research, I focused on gathering qualitative data. It was practically impossible to gather statistical data about succession and inheritance in all regions of Japan. Therefore, for statistical information to supplement my arguments, I depended on various surveys conducted by Ministries and other research institutes as described in books, magazines, newspapers, and other academic reports. Unfortunately, very little of such data is current for the 1990's. It was necessary to use a lot of statistical data which were 20 to 30 years old. Information has also been obtained from Fuji Television's "Super Time" and other news broadcasts. A translation of the Meiji Civil Code by John H. Gubbins entitled The civil Code Japan published in two parts (1899), and Mei-ii *Kvuho" shQ (Meiji Civil Code) edited by

18 19 the Qendai Hosei Shirvo Hensan kai (1983) were invaluable for direct research on the Code. A copy of Meiii "Kyflhd" shfl was found at the Japanese Diet Library in Toky6. Researching at the Diet Library was very complicated and time consuming. Users of the library must fill out a form for each item requested, and librarians retrieve the items for the patrons. The line for waiting to be served is usually 30 to 60 minutes; as your research expands and you want more resources, you of course must wait in line again for any additional items. If the line is too long, each patron is assigned a number and asked to come back, as much as several hours later. Photocopying any material also required paperwork and a wait of several hours or overnight while the copying was performed by the librarians. The Diet Library does not have a complete English translation of the Meiji Civil Code. Fortunately, they did have a complete English translation of the postwar civil Code so that I did not need to translate it, which I felt I really needed for this dissertation and was afraid I would have to translate by myself. I searched Asahi and Yomiuri newspaper digests to find out about civil Code revisions from 1945 to 1994. Later, I found an English translation of the Meiji Civil Code by Gubbins. It was very surprising to me, yet strangely refreshing and of course a relief that such a historically important document was not available in the largest library 20

in Japan, but was found in the library of a small U.S. college close to where I was. The most useful resource about customary practices of the late Tokugawa Period (16th to 17th century) was Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei Ruiifl. compiled by the

Ministry of Justice in 1880.

Household Diagrams In discussing examples and case studies of Japanese kinship, it is necessary to illuminate the data with diagrams representing the relationships among individual members of the household in a graphic notation. My diagrams adhere to what has become the standard style for such charts. See Figure 1 for a brief guide to the basic elements of the household diagrams used in this dissertation. A male individual is represented by a triangle; a female individual is represented by a circle; a marriage between two

female married couple

married couple married couple with with one child three children, numbered in birth order

Figure 1. Basic Elements of Household Diagrams. 21 individuals is represented by 2 horizontal parallel lines connecting them. A couple's children are connected to their parents by a vertical line meeting the horizontal marriage lines; siblings all hang off one horizontal line. Siblings are presented in birth order from right to left; this is standard practice in Japan and I adhere to it in this dissertation because birth order is a vital in so many of my examples. I use shading on an individual's shape to indicate some special function in the household; this will be explained in each diagram where it is used. A dotted line between parent(s) and a child indicates an adoption. In many of the examples in this dissertation, the natal family as well as the adopted family happen to be shown in one diagram; when this is the case, the adopted child is shown in both the natal family and in the adopted family, and a dotted arrow points from the natal location to the adopted location. Examples of the representations of these advanced concepts are shown in Figure 2.

natal natal adoptive adoptive mother mother father

Figure 2. Nor* Blsmsnts of Household Diagrams 22

Existing household diagrams, prepared by other scholars or by the members of the household themselves, were useful

tools for my research. I was able to obtain much intriguing information from the diagrams such as , , and branching of the household (bunke). For example, *M* household in particular has a very detailed household diagram. (We will examine household in detail in Case Studies 8 and 10, Figure 13 in Chapter IV.) I obtained a copy of it from Mr. "M" himself, reorganized it slightly and reconstructed it on the computer. I augmented his diagram by referring to the diagrams of other households related to Mr. *M", which were constructed several years ago by myself, my advisor Dr. Richard Moore, and Mr. “M"'s daughter based on information in the official household registry (koseki) . In this dissertation, any household diagram which is not explicitly attributed to another source was constructed by me based on information directly from family members.

Constructing Household Diagrams by Computer I looked for a better way to draw household diagrams precisely and automatically using a computer, rather than by hand. I hoped that in the modern research environment of the mid 1990's someone had already created such a facility. Perhaps I was just unlucky, but I only found one reference to computerized household diagrams. White and Jorion criticized 23

the conventional approach to genealogical diagrams as representing marriage and parent/child relations between individuals, reinforcing an egocentric view of kinship. They rightly claimed that this solution was unworkable for a detailed statistical analysis of kinship data {White 1992:454). They invented what they called a "P graph" in which the married couple is the smallest element, straight lines parents and (couples involving) each of their children, and the line of succession is shown by a vertical line of connections. Their system is computerized, but requires the input of a non-intuitive chart of numbers. To be sure, the P graph indicates the line of succession more clearly than the basic form of the conventional diagram. However, the P graph would require major enhancements in order to clearly show other information such as multiple spouses and adoption, which are vital for this dissertation. My husband Martin Thurn developed a computer program and macro language for drawing household diagrams. The program reads a description of a household diagram written in an intuitive macro language, and draws a bitmap version of the diagram which can be displayed and previewed on the screen or copied into almost any word processing or graphics software in the PICT format. The user has full control over the labels put on each individual, and the size and spacing of the symbols. It runs in HyperCard on the Macintosh personal computer, and is only limited by the size of the screen. All 24 the diagrams in this dissertation were analyzed and organized by hand, then carefully written in the macro language, debugged, and computer-generated.

Household Registry Japanese household registries were another useful research material. These official documents contain detailed information about kin relationships. A researcher can utilize this information in order to construct accurate data which might not be obtainable from informants for various reasons. However, there are two problems regarding the use of household registries as a research tool. First, the household registries are not available to the public (except, of course, to members of that household). However, my advisor Dr. Richard Moore was fortunate enough to obtain copies of the “M" household registries when he visited Japan in the early 1980's, and was kind enough to lend them to me for my research. Even a dozen-odd years later, these are still valuable data. Secondly, I found evidence that even information as official as a household registry was sometimes forged for tax evasion purposes, for example. Thus, although official household registries and household diagrams provided by members of a household might be considered to provide accurate data, some erroneous information is unavoidable. Statistical data compiled by Izumi et al. (1984) were an invaluable source for obtaining information about regional 25 variation in various subjects related to kinship. The summaries they reported of their data were far from comprehensive, and did not directly discuss the kinship factors I wanted to study. Fortunately, they published along with their analysis all the raw data, which I scanned into the computer with optical character recognition (OCR) technology to generate a huge spreadsheet from which I derived many useful statistical summaries. Izumi et al.'s data were collected in 1960s; I am looking forward to updated data of the same kind.

About the Case Studies Eighteen case studies are presented in this dissertation. Seven cases were taken from the literature and ten cases were culled from the most interesting and appropriate of my field interviews; one case is used to illustrate two different phenomena. Six of the cases from the literature are examples of ultimogeniture and non­ primogeniture succession patterns. I used these cases from the literature because I was not personally able to locate living examples of ultimogeniture succession for field interviews. All family names and personal names in all case studies, and even most geographical place names, have been replaced with letter and/or number codes not only to protect the individuals' right to privacy, but also to ease their minds so that they might divulge household and business 26

information to me more freely. A map of Japan with the prefecture and town locations of all 18 case studies can be found in Figure 29 in Appendix A. Suwa District 'Y" household (Case Study 1, Figures 4 and 5) was described in Suwa Daimvoiin Gohonai (Legend

of Suwa Shrine). The family was discovered, studied, and written about in the year Tensho 13 (1588) by Z. Nakagawa. Suwa District is in Nagano Prefecture in central Japan, and is known to have practiced ultimogeniture succession until the early Meiji Period (late 19th century) (Nakagawa 1938a). Nakagawa found other ultimogeniture cases in official population registers (Shflmon aratame cho) of the Suwa

District. "H* household of Usuki District, Miyazaki Prefecture (Case Study 2, Figure 6) came from Zenkoku Minji Kanrei Rujju

(1880), which is a collection of records of customs in the late Tokugawa Period (16th to 17th century) compiled by the Ministry of Justice, and was studied by H. Ueno (1957). This is also an example of ultimogeniture succession, which was recorded to be practiced in the early Meiji Period (late 19th century) when male primogeniture succession was the legally required rule under article 970 of the Meiji Civil Code. I found the “H" household case particularly interesting because in order to conceal their practice of ultimogeniture succession, they recorded a false birth order of their 27 into the official household registry. It is a good example of countermeasures of customary practice against legal code. 'FI* household in Tomi village, Miyazaki Prefecture is another example of ultimogeniture succession (Case Study 3, Figure 7). This case was constructed based on the household registry of the year Meiji 5 (1873) presented by Ueno (1957). Qnii/onba case in Morozuka Village, northern Miyazaki

Prefecture, adjacent to the border with Oita Prefecture (Case Study 4, Figure 8) was also reported by Ueno (1957). I used this case because the succession is quite rare. Qnii and onba refer to unmarried non-successor men (onii) and women (onba) who were forced to remain in the household as laborers. Qni i/onba households practiced primogeniture suc­ cession. But interestingly, this primogeniture on~i i/onba household was located within the same area as the “H" household and *F1* household ultimogeniture cases at the same period in history. This in itself suggests that there could be variation of succession patterns even in a small area, and succession rules might be related to factors such as the economic and occupational situation of the household. Non-primogeniture cases in Izahaya city (Case Studies 5 and 6, Figures 9 and 10), Nagasaki Prefecture, were reported by H. Kikuchi (1953). I consider these to be examples of non-primogeniture but not of ultimogeniture. This is because in both cases, the oldest male child was recorded as the successor in the official household registry, but in reality. 28 the parents created a branch household to which the youngest male child later succeeded. In both cases it was difficult to determine which household should be considered the main household. These two were also good examples of the discrepancy between legal and customary practices. Anekatoku (first-born child succession) examples (Case

Study 7, Figures 11 and 12) came from A. Muto's research (1985) on first-born child succession in "K* Township in Miyagi Prefecture. I used Muto's case study because it was very comprehensive and showed many important features of first-born child succession. Miyagi Prefecture was the same prefecture in which I conducted interviews. However, unlike Muto's claim that first-born child succession had disappeared in the early Meiji Period, I found specific examples of first-born succession as late as the 1940's in the “M" household I interviewed. These cases from the literature were necessary to supplement and illustrate the variations of succession rules I describe in this dissertation. One difference between these literature cases and field cases is the time period of the cases. Ultimogeniture cases in the literature are based on the older records, from as long ago as the 16th century; on the other hand, data from field interviews are usually current and can normally be expected to extend only as far back as people's memory allows. There are of course exceptions in both cases; for example, I obtained from some 29

informants precious hand-drawn household diagrams dating back two or more centuries. One possible drawback of the cases from the literature is that we observe the case through someone else's eyes. We were not there to meet face-to-face and have a conversation with the informants. Thus, there is the possibility that different interpretations would be given to the same facts. In any case, I found these cases from the literature to be quite complete, and they provided me with interesting information such as techniques for concealing illegal succession practices under the Meiji law.

Field interviews The main site for interviews in the field was the T6hoku Region, the northern portion of Honshu, the main island of Japan, in Miyagi Prefecture where I had many acquaintances through my advisor, Dr. Richard Moore. I consider myself lucky to have been able to do field work in that area, because I could find examples of first-born succession which was generally considered to be a dead custom. Other informants resided in Yamagata Prefecture, Hokkaido island, and TSkyd. I established contact by corresponding by letter, explaining my research; everyone I contacted except two people agreed to be interviewed. Field research was mainly conducted during two trips to Japan. The first field trip was made in the summer of 1990 for a period of about 15 weeks. During this trip, I went to 30

Miyagi Prefecture where I interviewed eleven households, seven of which are used as case studies in this dissertation. During this trip, I also went to Yaraagata Prefecture to visit one household, and to T6ky6 to interview one family-owned company, both of which are used. The second field trip was made in the winter of 1994 in order to provide supplemental information to the initial data I gathered during the first trip, as well as to gather information about a family-owned company in Hokkaido. Prior to each interview, I obtained permission to use a tape recorder from each of the informants. I also promised not to use the real names of any individuals or families, in hopes that they would feel a little more free to provide me with personal information, tax information, and business information. Reciprocity is important in Japan, so I always gave some small, token gifts such as bath towels and candies to the informants. When interviewing an individual or a household running a small family business of 100 or fewer employees, I gathered the following information during interviews. Whenever possible, I interviewed the president, future presidents, and others close to the president, in order to determine the following kinds of data where applicable: a) Management job titles, positions, management responsibilities, ownership, and relatedness of kin members; 31

b) Kin members' rights of succession and inheritance; c) Kin members' association with other companies in terms of business relations, and plans for extension of the business; d) Processes of decision-making regarding succession and inheritance; e) Problems and conflicts between the president and his successor in terms of personal goals and management strategies; and f) Psychological and practical processes of becoming a successor. I also interviewed non-kin employees whenever possible, to determine their opinions on kin member succession, inheritance, and business management practices.

A majority of my informants lived in Tome County, Miyagi Prefecture, in the northeast area of Honshu island. During my trip to Miyagi Prefecture, I stayed with Mr. "M", the mayor of “N* township, and his family. *M* household used to be in the silk worm business, it is now the official rice distributor for the area. I came to know Mr. "M" through Dr. Moore, who stayed with the "M* family during field work in 1982-3, and through Mr. "M"'s daughter, who came to study at The Ohio State University from 1987 to 1990. We became good friends while she was in the United States; it was a nice reunion to visit her during my field work. She helped me 32 significantly while conducting my research in her hometown. While I was staying with family, I was able to use participant observation, talking to all the family members as well as guests who visited the family. Mr. *M*'s daughter took me to many interesting locations, including the family graveyard and the ruins of an old rice factory which was owned by *M* family. Talking with Mr. "M^'s daughter-in-law was interesting because she gave me an outsider's point of view with respect to the family. Mr. *'M,,'s wife also was very friendly and informative. She liked to talk about relatives and neighbors. She introduced me to many more informants and provided me with a lot of valuable information about the relationships among the informants, which was not always available from the informants directly. Mr. “M* was very conscious of his kin relationships, partly because he is a politician and uses kinship ties for his job. To my surprise, he had a very detailed household diagram of at least ten generations of his family which he graciously shared with me. In this dissertation I use *M* household (Case studies 8 and 10, Figure 13) as an example of both first-born succession and selective succession. It was advantageous to interview more than one member of the household because of the different points of view. interestingly, Mr. "M* and his wife had different views about the disqualification of one of their ancestors (labeled "J" in the household diagram) for 33 successorship. Mr. "M" claimed that the reason for "J^'s disqualification was his incapacity, while Mr. *M*'s wife considered the reason to be that ■J* was the child of a former wife. I also obtained information about two other households related to #M" household, which appear in this dissertation as “M3" household (Case Study 14, Figure 19) as an example of adopted son-in-law and “F2* household (Case Study 12, Figure 17) as an example of sibling adoption. Members of other households interviewed during that trip were owners of a clothing store and owners of a candy store, both of which were located in "M" township about twenty minutes by bus from Mr. *M*'s house. These two households were also introduced to me by my advisor, and happened to be family friends of my host *M* family. "O" candy shop (Case Study 17, Figure 22) was founded on the capital of ¥5 million and by the time of my interview had consolidated to thirteen employees from a peak of twenty. "O' candy shop was actually a warehouse of candies, food, and miscellaneous small household goods. I was able to interview the chairman, his wife who was president, and one of their . The daughter of the *0* candy shop's owner, whom I interviewed as Miss *K", runs a preparatory school for children. Visiting her school, we talked about how she used to help in the household business and how her older married a man who was also running a candy business. I found it interesting 34

that as a expansion of the warehouse business a younger son was placed in charge of an ice cream division. MH" clothing store {Case Study 16, Figure 21) was only a few blocks from *0* candy store. I talked to Mr. and Mrs. "D*, the second brother of the successor, who also ran a clothing store. The other brother of the successor to *H" clothing store ran a cotton shop. These three and their families used to live together in one house. At the time of my interviews, they lived separately and ran different but related businesses. Mr. *D* was facing a future successor problem because he did not have any sons. He felt that it would be difficult to find someone who was willing to marry his daughter (as an adopted son-in-law) and succeed to a business as small as his. *T* construction company (Case Study 11, Figure 16) was located about one and a half hours north of “N* township, in a quiet town famous for its hot springs. The owner of "T* construction company, Mr. *T*, was a relative of Mrs. *M*. I was accompanied by Mrs. "M* and her daughter during my visit to *T" company. Mrs. *T" ran a Japanese inn. We stayed there and had fascinating opportunities to talk to the aging mother of Mr. *T*. I was invited to take a bath at a famous onsen (natural hot spring with bathing facilities), and was

surprised that the springs were set up for mixed bathing. Men and women came into and out of the bath naturally without any hesitation, and chatted while bathing together in the hot 35 spring. It became clear to me that the communal bath served as a center of communication. Mr. "T* showed me around his side business, "Pony Farm", a kind of amusement park featuring miniature ponies imported from Brazil, which happens to be the country to where Mr. *t *'s younger brother emigrated. Mr. *T" remarked that his young brother was an outgoing, fearless man who chose to live abroad rather than in their conservative rural community. But later, Mrs. *M" told me that Mr. *T"'s younger brother was upset about not succeeding to the household headship and emigrated to Brazil out of brotherly jealously and envy. This is an obvious example of the value of interviewing as many people as possible, to get different points of view and to peek behind some interviewees' mental barricades. Mr. "T* taught me the ethics of the rural community, saying that it was "narrow but long," referring to the dominant pattern of single succession and inheritance in order to continue the household and retain the household property as long as possible. Other companies from which I was directly able to obtain information while I was staying at Mr. *M"'s house were "S" electric company, "U" supermarket, 'K* store, *H" concrete company, and "Y" soy sauce company. Of these, "U", "K", *H", and *Y" companies were all introduced to me by Mr. and Mrs. *M*. However, in this dissertation I did not use data from these companies except for "S* electric company (Case Study 9, Figure 14) because in my opinion they lacked 36 interesting relevant information about succession and inheritance. The owner of "S' company, a small limited partnership of 20 employees making electric circuits, was a relative of Mrs. "M*. The founder's grandfather was adopted into the family as a son-in-law, and succeeded his father-in- law temporarily until a younger biological child matured enough to succeed to the household headship. I used information about this household as an example of first-born child succession. I made a short trip to "T* city in Yamagata Prefecture to interview the family managing "M" clinic (Case Study 13, Figure 18). During my stay of about three days there, I interviewed Dr. “T* , the chairman of the clinic; his wife, who was a board member of the clinic; their son, who was a director the clinic; and an assistant director of the clinic. It was interesting that there are many clinics and individual specialists in various medical fields in the extended household of "M" clinic. I also found that many adoptions of sons-in-law (mukovSshi) occurred in this household.

The founder of "T" company (Case Study 15, Figure 20), located in Tokyo's ultra-rich Ginza district, was my maternal great-grandfather. I have been listening to stories and gossip about the company and its succession practices from my mother and relatives ever since I was a young child. For example, despite the fact that the company's main head­ quarters had been designated as a historical landmark, the 37

company renovated its office in order to accommodate more modern equipment such as air conditioning, according to what I heard, in order to appease younger employees to make them remain with the company. My main informant was a president- to-be of *T" company, who had just joined the company two years prior to my interview. It is often the case among family-run companies that the president-to-be did not officially enter employment with the company until only a few years before he was to succeed to the presidency. I was able to obtain valuable information from the point of view of a future president. I also met the owner and the several board members of the company. *1" department store (Case Study 18, Figures 23, 24, and 25 in Chapter VI) is located in Sapporo city in Hokkaido Prefecture. The founder of "I" department store was my paternal great-grandfather, and the fourth president (current at the time of my interview) is my first . The timing of my field work in Sapporo coincided with the funeral of my , the third president, in September 1990. This stroke of bittersweet luck brought many relatives together, enabling me to interview many relatives and visit the department store itself. It was fascinating to be able to directly observe how the hierarchy among relatives is played out during funeral ceremonies. It was an emotional moment when my uncle's hearse was driven past the department store building for the last time, where many employees lined the street 38 weeping and bowing as he passed. My uncle was president for over sixty years, a rare and impressive (and perhaps lucky) achievement for any company in Japan. For the department store and for many of the older employees, he must have been a person who shared a lot of hardship and memories, especially during and after World war II. Soon after this sorrowful occasion, an official company history was compiled to commemorate its 120th anniversary in 1993 (Marui-Imai 120 Year History Editing Committee 1992); this helped to supplement my data.

When conducting field interviews, the position of the particular interviewee in the family and/or business can definitely affect the quality, quantity, and basic nature of data that can be collected. For example, as I mentioned before, while Mr. "M" blamed a particular successor's disqualification on his own laziness, Mrs. *M* felt that it was due to his birth status as a son of a former wife. Mr. "T* did not think, or for whatever reason did not want to tell me, that his brother was unhappy about not succeeding to the headship of the business; but another relative told me that the brother was in fact very unhappy about the situation. Therefore, it is better to talk to as many members of the family as possible, to cross-check information and benefit from more than one perspective. 39

One of the difficulties in interviewing is to obtain accurate information about the actual relationships between kin individuals, as opposed to legal information which may or may not be accurate or sufficient. People did not always tell the facts about why someone could not succeed to the headship of the business, for example. Therefore, as I mentioned earlier, other individuals, such as relatives of the main interviewee, often helped to supplement the information I collected. For the same reason, existing documentation such as kinship diagrams and company histories

also helped to provide more detailed information.

Aa a Native Anthropologist A native anthropologist has certain advantages, as well as disadvantages, when conducting interviews. A native anthropologist may be more familiar with the particular language(s) and customs of the locales visited, and in general with the background of the situations being studied, than a non-native anthropologist. However, comparing my brief experiences to other Japanologists in similar field situations, I found that interviewees were more likely to disclose secretive information to non-native anthropologists than to native anthropologists; perhaps they were too embarrassed to tell secrets to "their own kind." I remember one anthropologist acquaintance who said that he went to the field in his native land every year for three years, until 40 finally one day the informant said he would tell his secrets because they had finally become close friends. Perhaps I should have spent more time with the informants in order to obtain more data. I also envied my advisor, a non-native anthropologist of Japan, because he was able to obtain copies of legally restricted household registries when he conducted his field work. I think this would have been impossible for a native anthropologist, whom the natives would fully expect to abide by all their laws and customs, and who might be more suspect of misuse, even subconsciously. Perhaps the natives thought that a foreigner could not possibly use their household registries for some malicious purpose. Other criteria such as the gender, age, ethnicity, religion, and family background of the anthropologist can definitely influence the outcome. I am not sure whether it was an advantage or a disadvantage for me, the interviewer, being a relatively young woman. I am sure that, being a woman, it was easier to interview women than men, because for example we had more common subjects to talk about to get the conversation started. The atmosphere of the interviews were more formal when I interviewed men than women, and the men tended to engage me in less discussion in general. Most middle-aged men I interviewed were shy and understandably did not seem to be accustomed to talking privately with a woman whom they did not know personally. It is a common fact that 41 when someone wants to talk about business in Japan, a male representative is preferred over a female, in general. With respect to my background as a researcher, I received anthropological training in the United States. At the time of the interviews and this dissertation, I had been living in the U.S. for ten years and was married to an American for five. Perhaps I had been influenced by American culture and an American way of living. In Japan, there is a bias against women married to foreigners, especially in rural areas. I used my Japanese maiden name whenever I interviewed to try to avoid this bias. On the other hand, perhaps I had a biased view about Japan, since I had lived in the foreign society so long and my values have been influenced by this. CHAPTER III

KINSHIP THEORIES

History of Kinship Theory Early study of kinship and came from the social evolutionary view of western society at that time. In 1861, Henry Maine described family with the point of view that ancient law reflects the basis of the family. He stated that the history of political ideas begins with the assumption that blood kinship is the only possible basis for community in political functions. According to Maine, the unit of ancient society was the family, not the individual as in modern society, and society evolved from the family. A collection of families formed the gens, or House; a collection of Houses created a Tribe; and a collection of Tribes constituted a Commonwealth (1861:124). Maine recog­ nized the important role of adoption, whereby a family is constantly enlarged by the absorption of strangers into its circle, and that neither law nor opinion can be a basis for distinction between a blood and an adoptive relation. After examining evidence derived from a comparative study of jurisprudence, Maine concluded that the Patriarchal theory actually provided an account of the history of society based on rational evidence of the social order. The origin of

42 43 society was in separate families, held together by the authority and protection of the eldest male ascendant (Maine 1861:133, 1886:192). His description of paternal authority having power over life and death, marriage, and adoption is strikingly similar to the role of the household head in the pre-modern period in Japan. It is also important to note that Maine rejected the possibility that the Patriarchal theory could be applied universally to all societies, maintaining that some societies had no characteristics of paternal authority and/or had never even passed through a stage of paternal authority (1886:204). Structural theory in the study of kinship and social organization was founded by Lewis Henry Morgan in the mid- 19th century. Morgan introduced the idea that kinship and the existence of linguistic kinship terminology were important indications of the level of a society. Working from empirical evidence, Morgan concluded that when considering the elements of a system of and marriage, the basis of family relationships lies in systems of consanguinity and . According to Morgan's theory, all family systems can be classified into two types, the descriptive and the classificatory systems; and these systems are the result of acts of intelligence and knowledge. in the classificatory system, consanguinei are classified into categories regardless of their distance from Ego, and the same linguistic term is applied to all persons in the same 44 category. In the descriptive system, consanguinei are referred to using either the primary terms for the relationships or a combination of these terms, thus making the relationship of each person specific {Morgan 1877). His unilineal scheme, however, came to be criticized by other scholars as other data were brought to light. W.H.R. Rivers was influenced by social evolutionary studies established by Morgan, and believed that kinship terminology was an important indicator of social relationships, and that social systems could be classified according to the nature of their kinship terminology system (Rivers 1910). A. Kroeber rejected the social evolutionary view of Morgan and Rivers, instead maintaining that the nature of the classificatory system was determined by social conditions, and that the usage of relation terminology was affected only by linguistic and psychological factors (Kroeber 1909). H. Maine was first to notice that a family is a corporation. The primary emphasis of the family as a corporate unit is its perpetuity; as Maine pointed out, a family "never dies* (Maine 1861:122). Maine explained the characteristics of a corporate group as follows: The moral elevation and moral debasement of the individual appear to be confounded with, or postponed to, the merits and offenses of the group to which the individual belongs. If the community sins, its guilt is much more than the sum of the offenses committed by its members; the crime is a corporate act, and extends in its consequences to 45 many more persons than have shared in its actual perpetration (ibid.). A corporate group is a social formation, having a chief authority to represent the group in various contexts, having ownership and control of property, and having periodic conjoint activity by its members (Buchler 1980). Radcliffe-Brown described the corporativity of descent groups as being essential for their collective solidarity. The criteria he emphasized were collective action in rituals, representative leadership such as a chief or council, and collective control of property (Fortes 1969:74). Fortes also emphasized that the corporativity in kinship policy was a function of the intersection of jural concepts and religious and metaphysical notions, not a function of control of material goods or productive resources (1969:119-121). More recent developments in the study of kinship have placed greater emphasis on the politico-jural domain. This domain denotes certain aspects of right and duty, privilege and responsibility, which are laid down in the rules that govern social relations (Fortes 1969). Worseley described kinship as the form taken by the essential relations arising from the need for agriculture and the inheritance of property. He pointed out that as these relations change, kinship relationships will also change (Worseley 1956). Thus, kinship relationships are largely determined by economic and historical forces. Kinship groups came to be 46 explained as group-entities whose members share some common interests -- economically, legally, and politically, for example. In this light, study of descent became more and more emphasized in kinship study. Kinship systems, according to Morgan, are a self- balancing, internally coherent, harmonious arrangement of recognized relationships centered on ego, based on fundamental conceptions common to all humanity {Fortes 1969:24). Morgan determined that the bond of kindred is a reassurance of the safety of one's rights. In civilized society, the protection of the law or of the state became a substitute for that of kinsmen. Therefore, the kindred bond was stronger in primitive societies (Morgan 1877).

Thus, it can be concluded that kinship is generally considered to be based on consanguinity and affinity. Murdock classified kinship into two groups: consanguineal kin groups and residential kin groups. A residential kin group always excludes some consanguineal relatives and includes some affinal ones (Murdock 1949:42). The family is a social group characterized by common residence, economic cooper­ ation, and reproduction (Murdock 1949:1).

Keesing pointed out that the term •kinship*' was used in anthropology in narrow as well as broad senses, leading to confusion. In the narrow sense, kinship referred to 47 connections between parents and children and to the networks of relationships built out of these parent-child links. In the broader, more inclusive sense, kinship referred to the whole conceptual and social field relating to kinship, marriage, and descent (Keesing 1975:22). Lowie discussed artificially created bonds of kinship as well as adoptive bonds, and pointed out that these are sociological kinship as opposed to biological kinship (Lowie 1948:57).

Theories of Inheritance and Succession In the field of , studies of succession and inheritance in primitive societies are relatively few in number, compared to studies of other issues such as marriage. There must be some reason for this. Radcliffe-Brown considered the fact that in many primitive societies, the property system was not yet developed. Pastoralists and hunting-gathering people often did not have personal property, and even if they did, most of the property was not a subject of inheritance (Radcliffe-Brown 1968). Radcliffe-Brown stated the following with regard to inheritance in primitive societies: With us one of the most important aspects of succession is the transmission of property by inheritance. Yet in some of the simplest societies this is a matter of almost no significance at all. In an Australian tribe, for example, a man possesses a few weapons, tools, utensils and personal ornaments, things of little value or permanence. On his death some of them may be destroyed, others may be distributed among his 48 relatives and friends. But their disposal is of so little importance, unless in relation to ritual, that it is often difficult to find any rules of customary procedure (Radcliffe-Brown 1968:32). In the first stage of his developmental scheme, L.H. Morgan also believed that the concepts of inheritance and succession were insignificant in primitive societies (Morgan 1877). Morgan (1877) recognized the origin of inheritance in the context of the growth of the concept of property. He pointed out that property hardly existed in hunting societies. But with the development of agriculture, property in the form of cultivated lands appeared. As society grew in complexity and organization, the common practice of giving personal belongings to the nearest relatives gradually became the custom of giving property to the agnatic kindred but not to other kin. Consequently, when land became a form of property, inheritance rules dictated that such property be given to the children of the deceased landowner, for example. Morgan distinguished inheritance and descent, stating that a growing amount of inheritable wealth caused a shift from tracing descent through females to tracing descent through males, but inheritance occurred independently of unilineal descent. That is, property remained hereditary in the gens (Morgan 1877). Thus, inheritance was generally not recognized as significant. However, the amount of personal belongings of the deceased that were either destroyed or 49 distributed among relatives, and the degree of significance of those items distributed, was not clear. According to G.D.H. Cole, inheritance is the "entry of living persons into the possession of dead person's property and exists in some form whenever the institution of private property is recognized as the basis of the social and economic system" (Cole 1935:35). In primitive societies, most property was considered group property, and in such a case, when one co-owner died, his ownership was replaced by someone else's, and inheritance did not occur. In modern society, inheritance is defined as transferring a deceased person's property rights to a relative (ishii 1978). In this sense, if property was owned by a group of relatives such as a , inheritance is not necessary. Thus, the advent of land as property, as Morgan mentioned, was not by itself enough reason for inheritance, unless there was private property owned or possessed by individuals. J. Goody argued that inheritance was an inclusive term for the entire process of intergenerational transmission of property. "We must consider transferring of property from holder to heir during the holder's lifetime as well as after his death (Goody 1962:311).' Moreover, Goody stated that transferring property also involved transactions from the heir to the holder. Since sacrifices to ancestors were intimately connected with the inheritance of property, this includes the transmission of property from household head to 50 heir. Goody also believed that even if property was jointly owned by a group or a family, the death of a member involved some readjustment of the distribution of rights and duties. Therefore, inheritance in primitive societies should be considered to be alteration of the distribution of rights and duties, whether or not they are jointly held (Goody 1962:312).

Rivers defined 'Inheritance* and “succession* respectively as “transmission of property* and “transmission of office* (Rivers 1924). R.H. Lowie argued that such a distinction is invalid. He believed that “property* denotes not only wealth, but title as well. Thus, “office" is simply one of the privileges potentially involved in inheritance (Lowie 1950:147). The definition of "property* is the key to understanding the difference between inheritance and succession. E.A. Hoebel defined property as “a web of social relations with respect to the utilization of some object (material or non-material) in which a person or group is tacitly or explicitly recognized to hold quasi exclusive and limiting connections* (Hoebel 1972:270). The two aspects of property are the object itself and a web of social relations that establish a limited, well-defined status relationship between persons and the object (ibid.). An object does not become property until the members of the society at large agree to bestow the property attribute upon it by regulating 51 their behavior in a self-limiting manner (ibid.:271). Property is related to exclusive rights of individuals and groups with respect to certain classes of objects that they have created or acquired. Office and status regulate these rights; in particular, the right to use and the right to limit others' use. Radcliffe-Brown concluded that "In general, though there are a few exceptions, transmission of property follows the same line as transmission of status. The reason is that transmission of property is transmission of status* (Radcliffe-Brown 1968). If most kinds of status are transmitted down a certain descent line, property status will follow the same line (Hoebel 1972:356). Therefore, like Lowie pointed out, office and property rights are inseparable concepts, resulting in a confusion between inheritance and succession.

Goody called an inheritance rule that gives preference to brothers before sons 'lateral inheritance," to be distinguished from "lineal inheritance* in which property and office are transmitted vertically (Goody 1976:88-89). According to Goody, lateral inheritance as well as lateral succession was quite common in Africa, whereas lineal inheritance and succession was widely practiced in Eurasia. Thus, differences in inheritance and succession rules should be considered to be regional rather than developmental. 52 Goody also pointed out a problem of vertical inheritance and succession, in that there exists the possibility that there is no living heir, or all eligible heirs are too young to be the successor. To cope with this problem, societies have evolved different means of selection and other alternatives within the spectrum available to the particular society. One alternative strategy is adding in the form of , , or and remarrying. The other strategy is to add children directly. In this strategy, many variations can be observed which relate to the topic of prime interest in this dissertation: variations in succession and inheritance rules. In the absence of male offspring, Goody stated that one alternative is the substitution of a daughter for a son. This strategy seems to be particularly preferred in farming societies where land is the most important property. Male siblings who were unable to inherit their own property are likely to marry heiresses in this kind of community (Goody 1976:93-94). This line of reasoning follows logically. However, in complex societies like Japan, the frequency of this kind of strategy might also be related to the significance of the inheritance of property other than farm land, as would have to be the case for families in other lines of business2. It might also be related to a decreasing birthrate, since having fewer

2 Adopting a son-in-law was practiced frequently by merchants in Japan. 53 children reduced the probability of having a natural-born male heir.

Descent, succession, and inheritance are related concepts. Indeed, confusion in the usage of these terms arises frequently, even among the most earnest academics. If a society is described as being patrilineal, matrilineal, or bilateral, for example, this might actually be referring to either the descent groups or the succession rules of the society. Goody pointed out a definite correspondence between rules of transmission and rules for kin group membership, between homogeneous (or monosexual) inheritance and unilineal descent groups, between diverging inheritance and bilateral systems, and (not so definitely) between cross-sexual inheritance and alternating kin groups. Homogeneous inheritance is the only method that ensures contiguousness between a unilineal descent group and a fixed estate (Goody 1962). Not only are descent and succession rules different in terms of , , or bilaterality, but one society may even practice two different rules of descent. The confusion between inheritance and succession may also in part stem from the fact that inheritance usually denotes an individual who is a successor. Under the single inheritance rule, this is definitely the case, because both inheritance and succession are practiced by the same individual. Rivers suggested distinguishing among 54 inheritance, succession, and descent, and confining descent to denoting the regulation of membership in unilateral groups (Rivers 1924)

Descent and Corporativity The study of descent has been given a lot of attention by anthropologists. Keesing stated that descent is a crucial development in the evolution of tribal societies. A descent group is a corporate group which is a group of people who together act as a single legal individual. Descent corporations provide an adaptive solution to the problems of maintaining political order and defining rights over land and other resources from generation to generation (1975:16-18). Fortes also emphasized the corporativity of descent groups with respect to jural, economic, and ritual aspects. Fortes explained the term "jural* as denoting certain elements of rights, duty, privilege, and responsibility, declared in the rules that govern social relations (Fortes 1969). In other words, "jural* aspects are concerned with all social relations, not only those that can be described as "legal" in the conventional sense. As a corporate group, a exhibits a structure of authority. The most important act of a corporate group is for the sake of its survival as a single entity; indeed, as Maine stated "the corporate never dies* (Maine 1877) . The perpetuity of the corporate is more important than the interests of any 55 individual. It is exactly this corporativity that helped to produce a variety of succession rules in Japan, for the sake of continuity of the corporate household group, or ie. Descent rules define membership in a corporate descent group. Three principle descent rules are conventionally used to categorize descent groups. Patrilineal descent refers to a lineage group that traces its descent through males only. Matrilineal descent refers to a lineage group that traces its descent through females only. Cognatic or refers to a lineage group that does not prefer one gender over the other, in any generation, but instead traces relatives through both sides of the family simultaneously. In addition, there exists an ambilineal descent rule, under which individual can choose to trace his relationships through either a male or a female ancestor. Once an individual chooses to affiliate with either his paternal or maternal descent group, he usually remains with it throughout his lifetime (Scupin 1992). Part of G. Murdock's definition of ambilineality stated that affiliation in each successive generation is acquired through either parent, and depends not on filiation links radiating outward from an individual as is the case in bilateral kindred, but instead depends on chains of filiation links converging upon a common ancestor, from whom land rights are derived and in whose name collective rituals are performed (Murdock 1965:191). 56 Moore (1990) argued that descent in Japan is ambilineal, and I support that argument throughout this dissertation. Unlike Scupin's ego-centered definition, in the Japanese descent system it is each household, not each individual, who decides descent membership, and it is often male biased. Ambilineal forms of descent groups might technically be called "non-unilineal, " because members of such a group are not all related to one another through a particular individual. R. Firth used the term "ambilaterality" to refer to patterns of descent which seemed to be some combination of unilineal and cognatic. According to Firth, in ambilateral descent, it is feasible for affiliation to go to either parent in any generation, but some selectivity is possible. Unlike bilateral descent, this process is not automatic, and it is possible but not necessary to trace descent through both parents (Firth 1957:5). An ambilineal descent system is economically and politically highly strategic because it frequently takes into account the relative economic resources or political power of the two family groups. For this flexibility, ambilineality perhaps is the descent pattern best adapted to the various socio-environmental niches in Japan. 57

Confusion Between Kinship and Descent Keesing pointed out that there is often confusion between “kinship* and “descent.* He considered that this confusion resulted from the fact that anthropologists use the term “kinship* in both narrow and broad senses.

In the narrow sense, “kinship* refers to connections between parents and children {i.e., connections of filiation) and to the networks of relationship built out of these parent-child links. In this narrow sense, then, 'kinship* contrasts with marriage and the relations of affinity (between in-laws) created by marriage; and it contrasts with descent. But anthropologists also use “kinship* in a broader, inclusive, sense to refer to the whole conceptual and social field relating to kinship, marriage, and descent (1975:22). In other words, “kinship* in a narrow sense describes genealogical relationships, whereas in a broad sense it includes more than just genealogically related individuals. This is an important point, because it is a key to understanding the question “what is kinship.* However, if kinship includes individuals who are not related genealogically or by legal affinity, then perhaps another term should be used. In the case of Japanese ddzoku. which is usually translated “corporate kin groups,* neither genealogical relation nor legal affinity is an absolute requisite for membership. Therefore, the definition of kinship is still not clarified. Keesing summarized the conceptual points regarding kinship and descent as follows (1975:21): 58

kinship 1. Defined with reference to an individual (ego) or pairs of individuals. 2. Universally important. 3. Normally bilateral, from the standpoint of ego. 4. Kinship relationships are relative.

descent 1. Defined with reference to an ancestor (or ancestress). 2. Culturally recognized only in some societies. 3. Connects (through relatedness to a common ancestor) only a limited class of ego's relatives. 4. Descent status is absolute.

Anthropologists have been categorizing societies simply as patrilineal, matrilineal, or bilateral. However, as Keesing pointed out, a society may practice two or more modes of descent, or exhibit no clear rules of descent. Two or more principles of descent can be used within a society for different or complementary purposes. For example, in Tallensi society, patrilineal descent plays an important role in individuals' property rights, group participation, and religious life, while bilateral descent can exercise some secondary secular rights in the corporation (Keesing 1975:20). The descent mode practiced by a society might change over time, for political or economic reasons, for example. Therefore, it can be difficult to decide to what descent category a particular society belongs. 59

K indr«d Rivers defined “kindred" as "all an individual's cognates or bilateral group... consisting of persons related to one another, other than by marriage, through both father and mother* (Rivers 1924:16). The Oxford English Dictionary defines "kindred" as "the being of kin, relationship by blood or descent (occasionally but incorrectly by marriage)" (Freeman 1961). Inclusion of adopted individual is mentioned in the definition of kindred in Notes and Queries (1929): "a group of persons who acknowledge their descent, genealogically or by adoption, from one family, whether through their or their * (ibid.). These definitions focus on genealogical relationships. The following definition is more inclusive. It does not limit the scope to genealogical relationships; rather, personal recognition is more important: kindred is overlapping relatives from both a mother's and a father's side of a family that an individual recognizes as having important kin relations (Keesing 1975, Scupin 1992). Because of its overlapping nature, bilateral descent does not result in corporate descent groupings. Thus, kindred can be used to mobilize relatives for economic, social, or political purposes. J.D. Freeman also mentioned the political importance of kindred among the Idan of Borneo: "the existence of a network of interlocking kindred was also of great importance in the political life* (Freeman 60 1961:213). Davenport argued that Japanese kindred does not own property and has no political function {Davenport 1959:565). One of my informants certainly used his network of kindred to acquire more votes for his election to village head. For him, kindred is very important not only for social reasons, but for political reasons. Thus, his recognition of kindred is broad, perhaps even broader than the average Japanese individual recognizes. Therefore, providing a definition of kindred is difficult, as Freeman pointed out, in that the extent to which kindred are recognized varies significantly from society to society, and an individual's recognition of kindred is situationally selective (Freeman 1961).

Japanese Kinship System The Japanese household has as a distinctive characteristic the fact that it is not only a unit of generation living together, but it is also a continuous entity across generations. Its structure shows genealogical variation. The relationships between ancestors and offspring are important. in order to understand these relationships, it is important to understand three concepts which we have discussed: descent, inheritance, and succession. Descent indirectly denotes the people who are considered to be one's ancestors, and it defines the set of people who comprise the 61 descent group. Inheritance is the method of transferring house, land, grave yard, household rules and customs, etc. Succession is the transfer of symbols such as status, role, name, and administrative rights of ancestral worship, etc.

Ie (Household)

The term "family" comprises a variety of relationships: a relation of consanguinity among siblings, a relation of affinity between spouses, and a relation of descent between parent and child, for example (Buchler 1980). Family is a relative concept rather than a constant form. The term is defined by its context, and is often relative to the residential situation. The inclusion or exclusion of kin in a family is not a matter of formal criteria such as genealogical distance, degree of consanguinity, or affinity. H. Kitaoji explicitly points out the problem of using the term "family" because it has variable meanings in English (KitaSji 1971). Some anthropologists use the term •household* rather than the term "family". (Embree 1939; Norbeck 19 54) Some scholars prefer to use is. to denote Japanese household. A. Shimizu warns that is. should not be understood simply as a family. Besides being a family, the is is a corporate group with a wide variety of functions covering the domestic, economic, political and religious lives of its members. Furthermore, an observation of its religious and ideational aspects reveals that the is has more than just living members who actually 62 perform the above mentioned functions, the dead are also essential to it. (Shimizu 1987:85) Thus the is a multidimensional sociocultural phenomenon. J. Bachnik (1981) takes a "positional approach" and describes the as an enterprise group which holds property in common, and he maintains that it is basically a production-oriented unit. A Japanese ie. possesses some characteristics of corporations or business enterprises; Japanese businesses typically operate in a kinship manner. C. Nakane argued that as well as its morphological alternative form uchi. simply signifies the building called the "house" (Nakane 1967:2). Furthermore, she contrasted ie and kazoku in that the ideals of linearity and "perpetuity* are important in an ia, but blood relationship is not as essential there as it is in kazoku (Nakane 1987). Shimizu also recognized this important aspect of when he called the successor an "ifi. perpetuator* (Shimizu 1987). Aruga also argued that ifi should not be considered to be the same as a consanguineous group, which is constructed based on a couple and their children (Aruga 1969:301). Aruga pointed out that ifi can legally or customarily exist even in the temporary absence of a couple (ibid.). 63

flhlnaoku and PfliQku

In Japan, there are two main kin groups: a patrilineal kin group called d6zoku3. and a bilateral kindred called shinseki. shinrui, or shinzoku. Both rules can be practiced

simultaneously in the same social setting by the same individual (Befu 1962; Nakane 1987). Shinzoku is a group of

people who are related through consanguinity, marriage, or adoption, where group membership is recognized by each individual. Limits of shinzoku relationships were defined as early as the eighth century, when the Taiho Ritsurvo stipulated it

as relatives by blood up to the fifth degree of relationships. This definition was used until the Meiji Civil Code was adopted in 1891 (Aruga 1971:29). In this older definition, while a husband's parents were considered to be the first degree relation, the wife's parents were considered to be the second degree relations (Tsubaki 1989:727). In the current definition, all parents of husband and wife are considered to be first degree relations. The reason why fewer degrees of relatives by affinity were included in shinzoku is that this definition was made based

on the point of view of husband or household head. As Aruga pointed out, relatives of the wife were often not close because they tended to be physically far away compared to

3 Nakane argued that dftzoku is not a patrilineal descent group. 64 husband's relatives (Aruga 1971:30). Therefore, although Figure 3 below is presented from ego's point of view, customary recognition of shinzoku relations are determined not by each individual, but by the household as a whole, and thus tend to exhibit a male bias.

lineal collateral collateral

ascendants

great J

J2 grandparent uncle &.

sibling

children nephew relatives by affinity and degree of rel*nsh relatives by blood grand ldren and degree of rel*nsh tQ \» no kin relationships . Igrandchi lpren | decendants

marriage relationships

Figure 3. ahingoku Diagram and Dagraa of Relationship from Ego's point of view 65 in the legal code, the following persons were regarded as kindred. The Meiji Civil Code and the postwar Civil Code define it in the same way. 1. Blood relatives within six degrees of relat ionships. 2. and wives. 3. Relatives by marriage within three degrees of relat ionships. (Meiji Civil Code Article 725, Civil Code Article 725) The determination of the degrees of relationship of collateral relatives depends on the number of generations working up from one relative, or his, or her, consort, to the common ancestor, and down from the common ancestor to the other relative. (Meiji Civil Code Article 726, Civil Code Article 726) Between an adopted person and the adoptive parents and the latter's blood relatives the same relationship as that between blood relatives is established from the date of the adoption. (Meiji Civil Code Article 727, civil Code Article 727) (Translated by Gubbins 1897) According to Zenkoku Minii Kanrei fiuliu4, shinzoku was customarily referred to “the relationships between a main household and branch households" or “household head's siblings and cousins and their parents who have duties and responsibilities to each other.“ Dozoku is considered a type of shinzoku in Zenkoku Minii Kanrei Ruiiu. There are some regional differences exhibited in Zenkoku Minii Kanrei Rui-ifl. In Suruga, shinrui was recognized as the main and the branch households, and other blood relatives

4 Zenkoku Mini 1 Kanrei Ruiifl is a collection of local customs of the late Tokugawa period, compiled by the Ministry of Justice in 1877. 66 were referred to as enrui. In Iwashiro, shinzoku was “main and branch households and ego's siblings as well as uncle, aunt, nephew, and niece." In Sado, the household head's consanguinities were called enia and ancestors' consanguinities were called shinzoku. and shinzoku took higher ranking seats than enia on the occasion of relative meetings. The boundaries of relatives in Sado's definition are ambiguous. We can see another difference between legal code and actual practice. In actual practice, kindred is situationally recognized. There is no limit to the extension of the kin relationship. The primary functions of kindred are economic assistance, participation in life crisis ceremonies, and visiting on special occasions. Economic assistance is one of the most important functions of kindred relationships. Economic assistance can be observed on the occasions of house construction and agricultural activities (Befu 1962), but in the cities, it is mostly practiced in the form of "incense money" and wedding gifts, and the amount of such gifts roughly corresponds to the closeness of the kin relationship between the giver and receiver. The members of kindred also help each other in life crisis occasions such as funerals, and visit each other at special occasions such as New Year's Day and o-bon. Thus, the primary function of kindred in Japan is cooperative, concern for the management 67 of everyday activities. This is in contrast with the mainly corporate function of patrilineal descent and its primary interest, ensuring the perpetuity of the household and transmission of household name, property and occupation. As I mentioned earlier, the two descent groups exist side-by- side in Japan. However, Befu as well as Izumi et al. pointed out that in areas where the patrilineal descent group assumes corporate characteristics, kindred assumes less functional significance {Befu 1962, Izumi et al. 1984). This implies that there exist regional differences in descent patterns in Japan. In northeastern Honshu, patrilineal descent or dozoku is important, while kindred or shinrui has less social significance. On the other hand, relatively well-developed kindred organization is found in the southwest, and an intermediate type is found in central Japan. Izumi et al. suggested that retarded economic factors in northeastern Japan contributed to the development of dozoku type structures, and therefore, once the economy improved after the introduction of modern technology and the finance and credit systems, this type of descent also diminished.

An individual can belong to more than one shinzoku group. Shinzoku groups overlap, whereas d6zoku creates a perpetual and isolated group (Nakane 1989) . It is entirely possible to have a situation where individuals "A" and *B* are shinzoku. and 'B' and *C* are shinzoku. but “A* and 'C* 68 are not shinzoku. Likewise, if "A* is adopted, "A" is a member of the shinzoku of his natal household side as well as that of his adopted household side. However, "A* belongs only to the dozoku group of his adopted household. Befu considered dozoku to be a patrilineal descent group, and distinguished it from the bilateral extensions of kinship commonly called shinrui, shinzoku. or shinseki.

Japanese society is conventionally recognized as a patrilineal society. A strong bias toward male lineage and the historical preference in premodern Japan that the successor to the household headship be the eldest male child might have created this confusion. H. Befu argued that Japanese society practices both patrilineal and bilateral rules of descent. He suggested not that these two rules follow regional variations, but that the two rules are practiced simultaneously in the same social setting by the same individual (Befu 1963). It is generally agreed that dozoku is a patrilineal descent group, while shinrui or shinseki are bilateral kindred. This bilateral kindred in Japan can be traced through blood, marriage, or adoption. This is notably different from Rivers' definition of kindred, which does not account for adopted persons and explicitly excludes affinals (Befu 1962) . 69 Nakane translated kinship as shinzoku. and descent as ketsuen. Dfizoku relationships are exhibited by several

households which recognize their relationships in terms of honke and bunke and which, on the basis of this relationship,

have developed a cooperative function as a group (Nakane 1967:90-91). Nakane argued that ddzoku is not a descent group because non-kin individuals can also be included in dfizoku (Nakane 19 87). Membership in dozoku is based on

economical, spatial, or residential factors, but not necessarily on blood relationships. On the other hand, membership in shinzoku is based on blood relations, marriage, and adoption. It is difficult to distinguish ddzoku and shinzoku. for these two types of kinship relations often overlap. Different interpretations are given to these terms. It is even more confusing if we try to translate these terms into English. Kenkvusha English-Japanese Dictionary translated all of shinzoku. shinseki. ketsuen, and dozoku as

"kindred."

One of the main arguments of this dissertation is that Japanese kinship is not always biologically based. A dozoku relationship is an example of a kinship relationship which involves fictive kin. Before describing ddzoku relation­ ships, the issue of just what is non-real kinship, or fictive 70 kinship, should be discussed; this is the strategy employed here.

Theory of Fictive Kinship Keesing considered fictive kinship to be a symbolic extension of kinship which similarly serves to broaden the range of social ties or to readjust local groups according to pressures of demography and ecology (Keesing 1975) . Fictive kinship is a way of binding people through changes in the moral and jural norms (Fortes 1969:251). Fortes (1969) paid attention to the fact that kinship groups do not exist as entities in themselves without regard to the rights and interests which center on them. Therefore, membership in a kinship group is not established by alone. He considered that two individuals can only be said to be of the same kinship group when they share some common interests -- economic, legal, political, religious, etc. "Kinship begins with the recognition of mere offspring as children* (Fortes 1969:252). This means that in the domain of familial and kinship institutions, an individual is given the status, attributes, and properties in order to be recognized as a kin member. From this point of view, the mere fact of being born to a particular parent is not enough justification to be able to be called a "kin member." For example, in Ashanti society, a ceremony is held eight days after a child's birth 71 by which the child becomes recognized as a human being and is incorporated into his family (Van Gennep 1980).5 Worseley (1956) described kinship as the form taken by the essential relations arising from the need of agriculture and the inheritance of property, and pointed out that as these relations changes, kinship relationships will also change. Thus, kinship relationships are largely determined by economic and historical forces. Kinship groups came to be explained as group-entities whose members share some common interests -- economic, legal, and political, for example. In this light, it is natural that a non-kin institution which exhibits common economic, legal, and/or political interests came to be referred to as a "kinship institution;* this may evolve into a “fictive kinship* institution. Fictive kinship connotes a relationship deliberately created by mutual agreement of the parties involved, not one imposed by the chance of birth. E. Pritchard described the relationship displayed by something common to a whole group but not by degree from a common ancestor as “blood-brotherhood.* He also mentioned *Zande blood-brotherhood* as a legal contract entered into by two persons without any act of their own (1933;399) .

5 In fictive kinship relationships, ceremony is important for formalizing various relationships. Company entrance ceremonies in Japan are an example, in the sense that a mere individual employee is incorporated into a institution and becomes a member of a ''family.' 72 Fictive kinship or artificial kinship relationships can in fact be established in various ways. The fictive kinship created by adoption carries most of the same legal rights as does the kinship created by blood relationships. Another kind of fictive kinship is that of blood-brotherhood and compadrazqo. This type of fictive kinship is fundamentally different from the fictive kinship created by adoption because being a kin member generally does not provide any legal rights. Another, unique kind of fictive kinship exists in Japan, called dozoku relationships. Dozoku are legally treated as kinship. However, ddzoku not only includes non­ relatives by adoption, but also incorporates servants as members. I will discuss adoption in detail in Chapter IV.

Dflzoku Relationships Ddzoku relationship is exhibited by several households which recognize their relationship in terms of a main household (honke) and branch households (bunke) and which, on the basis of this relationship, have developed a corporate function as a group (Nakane 1967:90-91). Befu distinguished the functions of bilateral ties (shinzoku) and patrilineal descent (ddzoku): bilateral ties provide a network of relationships which helps to resolve recurrent problems in terms of economic assistance, whereas patrilineal descent is more concerned with transmission of the family name, 73 property, and occupation (Befu 1962). Ddzoku is defined by

Harumi Befu (1962) as being: ...composed of a stem family headed ideally by the eldest son of the previous head, which represents the main line of descent, and a number of families which are established by junior sons branching out from the stem family from time to time. Unrelated servants of the stem family may also establish branches and be fictively incorporated in this lineage group. (1962:1329)

Corporativity and lineage relationships of dozoku were also emphasized in J. Cornell's definition, which describes dozoku as *a linkage of lineage relationships via mutual recognition of lineal descent and a corporate organization of ie* (Cornell 1964). S. Long considered ddzoku to be a corporate, patrilineal descent group. Economic dependence and the recognition of reciprocal asymmetric obligations determine dozoku relationships (Long 1987). A hierarchy exists between honke (main household) and bunke (branch household). There has been much debate over what constitutes the basis for ddzoku relationships. Nakane hypothesized that ddzok-l is a group of households which are based on economic relationships. Even if a household branches off from the main household, if there is no economic support (including house and/or land) , these two households are not in ddzoku relationships (Nakane 1989). ‘DSzoku is the general term used to describe two or more households established on the relations between honke and bunke on the basis of economy... 74 A necessary condition for honke and bunke is that the bunke became independent with economic assistance from the honke*

(Nakane 1987). Nakane argued that in the Meiji Civil Code, the term bunke was applied to all households of sons or

brothers regardless of the economic arrangement made by the parental household. Because of this Civil Code usage, the expression bunke has sometimes been used socially, but there

has been clear differentiation between households with and without economic arrangements at time of fission, particularly among the rural population (Nakane 1967). This is another example of discrepancy between the regulations of the Meiji Civil Code and actual practice based on traditional usage. K. Brown challenged this idea, maintaining that ddzoku

relationships have an ideological complement independent of such economic factors. He showed that branching can occur with no economic benefit to the main household, and therefore contended that ddzoku consists primarily of kinship

relationships (Brown 1968). Present Japanese law does not require official notification of the formation of a branch household. A branch household under the Meiji Civil Code referred to a person becoming the head of a household which branches off from the main household. In that era, official notification was required to be entered into the household registry in 75 order for a branch household to be formed. A branch household must obtain the consent of the head with regard to branching (Nakane 1989) 6. Dozoku relationships are not confined to persons related by kinship or marriage, but also may incorporate non-kin members. True kin may not be members of the same dozoku if they live in different localities, or if they have no economic relationship with one another. Physical proximity is an important factor for an is. to be recognized as dozoku

(Nakane 1987). On the contrary, ritual kin such as servants and tenants can validate their status in the dozoku by loyal work or participation in ritual activities. In the feudal period of Japan, retainers who served the dainty 6 (feudal lord) were regarded as followers of the daimvo* s clan. The dozoku or corporate household included others besides those of the hereditary lineage, and was kept intact by adoption when necessary. K. Aruga referred to the relationships on which ddzoku is based as "chi-en" or "territorial relations" as opposed to "ketsuen* or "blood relations* (1971:28). Thus, ddzoku can be formed without blood relations based on cooperation and sharing. However, it is also true that d6zoku relationships are more likely to be created between

6 The Meiji Civil Code Article 743 "A member of a family may, with the consent of the head of his family, succeed to the headship of another family, establish a fresh branch of his family, resuscitate the main branch or a cadet branch or a distant branch of his family which has died out, or resuscitate the family of a relative which has died out..." 76 blood relatives than between unrelated individuals (Aruga

1971:29). Aruga pointed out that servants were recognized as collateral members of the household, and servants and non­ heir children had almost the same status, as far as branching was concerned, in customary practice in pre-Meiji Japan. However, under the Meiji Civil Code, which was influenced by western law, only kin members were recognized as legal members of the household, while fictive members of the household like servants were excluded from household membership (Aruga 1970:40). Ddzoku is often referred to as a patrilineal descent group. Nakane argued that this is not the case at all (Nakane 1987:432). First, unlike patrilineal descent groups, d6zoku is not a consanguineous group. Membership in a patrilineal descent group is determined by birth, whereas membership in d6zoku is determined in relation to other households. Membership in ddzoku is based on economical, spatial, or residential factors (ibid.). Membership in a d8zoku could be denied by a main household if a member performed some dishonorable act. An example from Nakada township in Miyagi Prefecture illustrates this. Household “A* (branch household) recognized that household “B" (main household) was their dfizoku. but household *BW did not consider “A' as their d6zoku . 77

Households 'A" and 'B' have similar ancestor tablets with the identical household crest, indicating that the two households were related sometime in the past. According to the history of the two households, someone in household 'A* committed a crime, which is dishonorable to the whole d6zoku. As a

result, the main household 'B" no longer considered household "A* as their ddzoku, while household “A* still thinks the

relationship continues (Moore).

F. Hsu emphasized the corporate aspects of i e . and defined ddzoku as an organization of corporations (1975:41). According to Hsu, ddzoku is a voluntary association of human beings not found in the Chinese chia and tsu. in which the

basic kinship arrangement is primary, and the only possibility. This would bring us back to the basic and fundamental argument 'what is kinship?' In some societies such as China, kinship relationships can only be based on blood relationships. However, kinship relationships extend beyond the blood relationship in other societies, such as Japan. The Japanese view of kinship is more comprehensive, including non-relatives not only in the form of adoption but also through the process of incorporating servants into ddzoku. M. Suenari (1972) noted that ddzoku in the Chinese sense consists of compound fraternal units which share ancestor 78 worship equally, and that this is in contrast to the main household's heavy responsibility for ancestral ritual in the dozoku of northern Japan. The Japanese X& (household) is not the same as the Chinese lineage system. Xfi. as a unit of social organization and social morality in Japan is not based on blood relationships, but displays many of the characteristics of an artificially contrived social organization formed to preserve the household occupation rather than continue it directly through blood lineage (DeVos 1987:22). Thus, non-kin individuals can succeed to the continuation of the in order to maximize the functionality of the i£.; dfizoku breaks the tradition of automatic succession whereby an individual is given rights and obligations simply on the basis of birth. Hsu explained Japanese cultural characteristics of mutual dependence as a reason for the urge of pseudo-kinship. Fictive kinship is known to be established between a new immigrant to a village and a villager (Izumi et al. 1984). By summarizing Izumi et al.'s data, the following facts were found. The reasons for such fictive kinship relationships are mainly economic and moral assistance. Magico-religious reasons also account for such relationships. Fictive parents are usually chosen from among influential figures of the village. The duration of fictive kinship relationships is most likely the lifetime of the fictive parent. 79

Fictive kinship as a practice became institutionalized in Japan with the success of the ddzoku system. Adoption is seen as a device which gives greater room for maneuvering and dfizoku for the sake of prosperity and perpetuation. Moreover, residential proximity was an important consideration for ddzoku. since an individual who lives in the same residential area can be incorporated into dozoku more easily than a unknown relative from far away. Conversely, blood relatives who live in remote households are not as close as ritual relatives living together.7 According to Izumi et al.'s data (1984), about half of the subjects confirmed the existence of non-blood-relative bunke. The data also suggested that the frequency of non­ blood-relative bunke is greater in northeastern Japan than in southwestern Japan. The status of non-blood-relative bunke is generally lower than that of blood-relative bunke. Sixty percent of Izumi et al's data confirmed the higher status of the blood-related i£. of the bunke. More people replied that there was no difference in status between blood-relative bunke and non-blood-relative bunke in southwestern Japan than in northeastern Japan, suggesting the egalitarian nature of the southwestern region.

7 There is a Japanese proverb "tflku na shinseki yori chikaku xifi tanin.“ (Nearby strangers rather than distant relatives.) 80 Hsu remarked that despite the fact that heir recruitment in Japan showed greater flexibility than in China, the hierarchical nature of organizational relationships both within and among honke and bunke was strong in dSzoku (Hsu

1975). This is confirmed by Izumi et al's data (1984) which show that 84% of respondents recognized a hierarchy between honke and bunke. with honke being superior, and 83% recognized hierarchy among bunke. Nakane pointed out that dfizoku in Japan is fundamentally different from Chinese dfizoku. Chinese ddzoku is a patrilineal organization where

hierarchy among brothers does not seem to exist; it is definitely more egalitarian in nature than Japanese ddzoku.

Nakane emphasized that hierarchy is the main characteristic of Japanese d6zoku which consists of hierarchical relations

between main and branch households (Nakane 1989). CHAPTER IV

NON-CORPORATE SUCCESSION

Confusion Over the Concepts of ''Succession'' and "inheritance1* in Japan "inheritance* and "succession" are defined by western scholars respectively as "the transmission of property" and "the transmission of office" (Rivers 1910, Buchler 1980, Goody 1976). In Japan, however, there is confusion regarding the two concepts. Conventionally, the terms sdzoku is used to denote both "succession" and "inheritance". The same term sozoku is used in the compound words zaisan sozoku to denote "property inheritance", and katoku sozoku to denote

"succession to headship". This confusion can also be seen in the definition of sozoku by J. Miyamoto as collectively 1) succession to ancestor worship, 2) inheritance of property, and 3) succession to the headship of a family (Takeda 1974b). Notice that in this definition, sdzoku denotes both succession and inheritance. Even in the dictionary of ethnology compiled by the National Ethnological Society, the term sozoku is defined as 1) inheritance of property; 2) succession to status; 3) succession to the family name; 4) transmission of ancestor worship rights; and 5) succession to housewife's rights (ibid.). Likewise, sociologists in Japan do not separate the two concepts of inheritance and 81 82 succession, but they recognize sozoku as concerning property and status in the case of non-, and as property inheritance in the case of nuclear family.

Takeda criticized this problem and argued that the scope of the terms 'succession* and “inheritance* should be clearly separated. 'Succession* should only designate status and occupation, succession to the household headship, and succession to the family name. 'inheritance* should only designate transfer of property, especially in the terms 'property inheritance" and 'estate inheritance." Takeda recommended that the term keisho be used specifically to denote 'succession* {Takeda 1974b), but this classification has not been fully accepted. Indeed, the dictionary of ethnology does not even contain the word keishQ.

Nakane pointed out some specific evidence in support of separating inheritance and succession into two distinct concepts. In Mongolia, succession is carried out by one son, but this son may or may not inherit property. In the case of adoption in China and India, a patrilineal male kin can be adopted as a successor, but an adopted son has no inheritance rights to his wife's father's property {Nakane 1989). The main reason for this confusion in the study of Japan stems from the fact that in Japan, succession and inheritance are often carried out by a single person. 83

Bistory of Succession and Inheritance in Japan In this section I discuss the history of succession and inheritance in Japan, and establish that the i ur e relationships between the inheritance and succession rules as set by the authorities, be they feudal lords or democratic lawmakers, have contrasted with iie. facto customary practice of the people in modern and premodern Japan.

Ancient Japan (before 600 A .D.) The only formal record of succession in ancient Japan is the record of emperor succession. The beginning of this process can be seen in the Jodai Period (5th-6th century) in the form of the succession of the sacred fire, which evolved into the succession to the ritual rights. The symbols of the ritual rights were the Three Sacred Treasures (sanshu -j inai) : the mirror, the sword, and the jewel. These three precious artifacts are still recognized as the three divine symbols of the Japanese Imperial Throne in the late 20th century. From Emperor Jimmu (660-585 B.C.) to Emperor Kaika (158-98 B.C.), most succession was granted to a non-eldest child, and after Emperor Richu (400-405 A.D.), it was often a brother of the emperor, rather than the emperor's children, who succeeded to the throne. One hypothesis suggests that the succession pattern of this period was youngest child succession, as is recorded in the case of Emperors Jimmu (600-585 B.C.), Suizei (581-549 B.C.), Koan (392-291 B.C.), 84 and Kaika (158-98 B.C.). The pattern later progressed to brother succession (Takigawa 1938). However, there were also times when the eldest child, cousins, nephews, and others, including an heir designated by divination, succeeded to the throne (Otake 197 4) . It is more natural to assume that selective succession was more likely to be practiced throughout these periods. Selective succession is flexible because household members determine who is the best candidate. The idea of succession to the household name was already established by this time, as evidenced in the poetry of the ManySshu8. Property was divided by wife and children

(Takigawa 1938).

Hitaurvfl Period (600-1100)

In the sixth century, succession to an occupation began as well as succession to the clan name (Yoshikawa 1989). The emperor's position could be and was succeeded to not only by sons, but also by daughters, grandsons and brothers, as records show from the time of emperor Tenmu (684-689) until the late . The status of government officials was also succeeded to. This succession is different from the succession of i£., which included the succession to the headship and the ritual rights. The statutes established in the eighth century called Ritsurv6 set the rules of lineal

8 The oldest anthology compiled during the Nara period (646-794) by Otomo no Yakamochi. 85 succession. Ritsuryo was the first legal code in Japan to replace clan-based regulations, and established a gun-sato- kvddo hierarchical organization. One theory suggests that the lowest level of this hierarchy, kyodo. was the basis of the later Japanese household called Xs. (Otake 1974). In both TaihS RitsurvS (702) and Y6r3 Ritsurvd (757), succession to

the household name and its main property, and inheritance of estate were regulated differently. Taiho Ritsurvo stipulated that the legal successor of aristocrats higher than 6th rank be the eldest male child of the legal wife. In the case of the loss of an heir by death or crime, TaihS Ritsurvd stated the order of succession to be

(1) the eldest male child of the legal wife; (2) the successor of (1); (3) younger male child of the legal wife; (4) other children; (5) the successor of (3); (6) the successor of (4). Later, Y6ro Ritsurvd extended the regulation of the order of succession to the common people. This rule was officially announced in the year 720 before Y6r6 Ritsuryfi was actually compounded, suggesting that the common people had already begun practicing eldest male succession as a custom (Otake 1974). We can see some interaction between legal code and customary practice in this example. 86 Taih6 Ritsurv6 regulated inheritance, dictating that

half of the property including the house, servants, and slaves be inherited by an heir, and the rest be inherited by others, excluding secondary wives and other female members. Interestingly, the legal wife's inheritance right was not clearly stated, because she was always under the care of an heir (Otake 1974). Nevertheless, women also had inheritance right as well as the right to bequeath property to the next generation. Just several decades later, Y6r6 RitsurvS changed the regulations, putting less emphasis on an heir's inheritance right. Y5r6 RitsuryS stated that all the property be inherited according to the legal proportions of 4:4:2:1:1 for heir : legal wife9 : non-heir child : secondary wife : female children, respectively. Common people's practices during this period can be derived by studying the household registries. in the registries of Mino country of the year Taiho 2 (702) , the legal wife and secondary wives were distinct and an heir was specified to be the eldest male child of the legal wife. We can assume that these household registries had an impact on customary practice because they required that an heir be officially recorded, and they set a basis for the household headship system.

9 A man could have more than one legal wife, in addition to secondary wives. The highest rank wife was called seisai or chakusai. and her children had priority over other wives' children to be successors. 87

Feudal Period (1100-1600) It is often assumed that succession and inheritance in the warrior class was regulated by the legal code of the time (Kamakura bakufu h6). whereas common people, mostly farmers, practiced succession and inheritance more customarily. This tendency for the upper class to use the legal code has also been hypothesized and studied by James Scott (1990) in other cultural settings. In the (794-1185), relatives began to form a military group consisting of main and branch households. Accordingly, the succession to this clan headship (katoku) started. A son succeeded to katoku. but if there was no son, an appropriate male was adopted to become the successor. If an heir was too young to serve as the successor, or incapable of serving as the head, the widow served as a temporary head

(Ishii 1978). The proportion of inheritance among his sons was decided by the head of the clan. In general, the heir received the most property, in particular, ancestral land was always inherited by the heir and the remaining land was divided among the other sons. Property was more commonly transferred before the death of the head rather than being inherited (Nakagawa 1938b). In the (1185-1333), strong authority was held by the Shogunate government (bakufu), and warriors were 88 organized under ddzoku type groups, each headed by katoku.

The principle that succession be practiced by a natural-born child was a custom seldom violated. However, since leadership ability was critical during the Warring Period, a capable katoku was carefully selected, and even adoption was practiced to fulfill this position. Succession was determined only at the time of death of katoku in the beginning of the Kamakura Period, but a Shikimoku Law of the year 2 (1241) stipulated the inkvo system (retirement from the position of household head) to be the binding principle (Otake 1974). Property was divided according to a will. In practice, the majority of property was bequeathed to an heir. If there was no will, or if an heir was deliberately excluded from inheritance, Goseibai Shikimoku10 Article 22 determined that the heir could receive 1/5 of the estate. The sorvo system was established based on such partible inheritance. Under the s6ry6 system, to prevent minimizing a clan's power by dividing up the land, sorvo had the right to control all the land (Tezuka 1977). Sorvo customarily succeeded to katoku.

These practices were finally legalized in the year Kange 2 (1244) (Otake 1974). Here, the role of s6rv6 and katoku were carried out by one person, leading to confusion of the two

10 The first legal code for the warrior class; compiled by H6j6 Yasutoki in 1232. 89 terms. However, theoretically soryd was based on property while katoku was related to succession to the headship. In the (1392-1578), Japanese society became even more unstable, and maintaining land ownership became even more critical for the power and solidarity of the clan. Land inheritance became limited by custom to a single person who succeeded to the clan's headship11. with this background, The word katoku came to be written with the Chinese characters ka (meaning “to get*) and t o k u {“property*). "Katoku“ was considered synonymous with

“property* (Takeda 1974b). Even in the 20th century, land which belonged to the main household and was supposed to be inherited from generation to generation was called katoku in some areas of the Kinki, Shikoku, and Kyushfl Regions of Japan (Yanagita 1943). An interesting area of research would be to determine regional differences of this terminology and to what degree katoku land inheritance is still practiced.

Succession and Inheritance under the Tokugrawa Regime

(1615-1868) The feudal government became concerned with its warrior class's succession and inheritance. Therefore, a warriors' law was written, which was different from common people's

11 Kondo (1949) argued that in the common classes, women were previously able to become successors or heirs. But in the warrior class, women were deprived of both inheritance and succession rights by the late Muromachi period. 90 law. Seroku system was established in the year Kanei 19

(1642) and all land was recognized as belonging to the government. Warriors were given a stipend (roku) from the government. The Edo government established a principle of single heir inheritance. An heir had to request the government to re-allocate the land for him. The government also stipulated that the oldest male child of the legal wife was the sole legal heir. Children by concubines had low priority to be heir even though they might be older than the children of the legal wife. If there was no heir when the household head died, the i£. was abandoned (Hayashi 1989) . The term katoku sozoku denoted headship succession upon the retirement of the head, to be distinguished from succession forced by the death of the head, called iseki sozoku (Ishii 1978). The concept of katoku included the name of the household, ritual rights, and most importantly the occupation of the head. Katoku succession was closely regulated by the

Tokugawa government, by requiring official permission be obtained. In other words, for an heir, katoku succession was a re-establishment of a contract with the Tokugawa government that the heir will receive the same amount of roku that his father before him received. After the Muromachi Period, the landlord system developed, and small farmers became peasants who did not own any land to pass on to their heirs. In the (1600- 1868) , more small farmers became independent and the 91 honbvakush612 system was founded. The Tokugawa government stipulated that succession and inheritance of the farming class be basically self-determined, but the government made clear their preference for heirs to be near lineal relatives, resulting in a principle of eldest male succession. However, in actual practice, distant relatives and adopted persons often succeeded to the headship (Otake 1974). Since agricultural land was subject to taxation, the Shogunate government asserted its hegemony over the inheritance of farm land {Yoshie 1989). In 1673, The government prohibited landlords who owned less than 20 koku of land (an area capable of producing 3600 liters of rice per harvest13) and farmers who owned less than 10 koku (land producing 1800 liters of rice) to practice partible inheritance. This law practically enforced a impartible inheritance. However, in actual practice, partible inheritance and temporary inheritance by wife were also seen (Hayashi 1989). Hayami examined the population registries called shflmon aratame ch614 covering the village of Nishijo from 1773 to 1869. Hayami came to the conclusion that patterns of succession and

12 Honbvakusho refers to peasants with registered proprietary rights and tax duties to arable land. 13 1 koku s 44.8 gallons = 180 liters. Koku is a unit used to measure dry volume as well as area, where 1 koku is an area of land capable of producing 180 liters of rice in one harvest. The area corresponding to 1 koku was not fixed, but depended heavily on the yield of the land, and could easily vary by an order of magnitude. 14 ShQmon aratame ch6 are registers of religious investigation which listed the name, age, and relationship to head of household for individuals in villages and towns throughout Japan (Cornell 1986) . 92 inheritance in the Tokugawa Period were not fixed, but reveal many divergent customs including last-born succession and first-born child inheritance (Hayami 1983:4). The landlord class tended to be more conservative, preserving the rule of single heir inheritance out of necessity of maintaining the authority of the main household. On the other hand, the last-born heir was more common among lower class farmers or mi zunomibyakusho15. The main reason for this was that older children tended to leave home to work elsewhere, and only the last-born child was left behind to be the heir. This is also why the last-born child practice was seen among smaller scale farming households in economically deteriorated areas like the Yatsugatake mountains of the Shinshu region (Otake 1974). Partible inheritance was associated with a branching of the household (bunke refers to the branched-off sub-household) of the honbvakusho16 class. Partible inheritance was made possible by the increased production which resulted from extending the farmable area by decreasing the fallow cycle, and reclaiming more land for cultivation. However, these were mainly practiced by relatively wealthy farmers who had enough resources to implement such methods. So we find on the one hand, the single inheritance practices of the warrior

15 Mizunomibvakusho were peasants without rights and duties to arable land but who nonetheless maintained themselves as separate residential households and worked land holdings through various tenancy and sharecropping arrangements. 16 Honbvakusho refers to those peasants with registered proprietary rights and tax duties to arable land. 93 class followed from legal enforcement by the government, while on the other hand, the continued partible inheritance practices of the honbyakushd farmer class who sought enlarged reproduction in order to create dozoku type cooperative organizations, in spite of the law. At the same time, in bad economic times, single heir inheritance was observed in the farmer classes as well {Otake 1974). Therefore, we conclude that there was a difference between the legal code and actual practice, and that this difference was more prominent among some farmer classes who practiced inheritance more freely than the warriors. In the case of merchants, the government left the decision of inheritance and succession up to the merchants themselves in the 1651 law17. This is an interesting contrast to the farmer classes which were officially regulated by the government more strictly. Perhaps this is partly because the property of the merchant class, who in fact ranked lowest during the Edo Period, was not so important to the government compared to that of the farmers. Conventionally, the name of the merchant's business was succeeded to by a single heir, and the money and estate were inherited by other children as well. In part in order to ensure successful businesses, non- eldest sons and even adopted child could also succeed the business if an eldest son was incapable (Hayashi 1989).

17 ChoiQ atoshiki flfi sadame (Arichi 1974:33) 94 As we have discussed, the history of succession and inheritance in Japan is actually twofold, that is, the two concepts took different courses through history. It seems to be unique to Japan, that succession to the household name and occupation was generally more important than inheritance of property in the concept of sozoku. The histories of succession and inheritance can be seen as the conflict and compromise of two ideologies: single-heir succession and the prosperity of the ie. as a whole on one hand, and partible inheritance and the benefit of children on the other. Therefore, the concepts of succession and inheritance are inseparable when we discuss sdzoku in Japan, and that is why confusion over the two terms tends to occur.

Regional variations in Succession Patterns The term “Japanese kinship system* has been used by ethnologists to indicate their ultimate objective. But as we will see, that term is no more than a convenient label, as it is an elusive objective indeed to singly categorize the widely varying kinship systems observed in Japan. Traditional ethnologists generalized cultural characteristics under this term even though they conducted research in limited geographical areas. M. Tamanoi (1986) criticized western-born and -educated Japan specialists for ignoring regional variations. Tamanoi questioned J. Bachnik's treatment of succession rules as part 95 of the Japanese “culture,* arguing that regional variations of succession rules could not be explained if the rules are part of Japan's underlying culture. in the last few decades of the 20th century, many ethnographies describing kinship systems in different parts of Japan have been produced. various types of succession rules were already known to exist, but no systematic study had proven the existence of regional characteristics except the landmark work by Izumi et al. in the early 1960s (Izumi 1984). Primogeniture succession was reported to have been practiced in a wide range of locales. There have been attempts to distinguish these regional differences. Sdrifu

K o k u r i t s u Yoron Ch6sa~io (National Public Opinion Research

Institute) obtained opinions about primogeniture succession from urban, rural, and agricultural households in 1952. According to the results, 60% of urban, 71% of rural, and 77% of agricultural households responded in the affirmative favoring the practice of primogeniture succession. Although these data are by now rather old, and the urban and rural distinctions may no longer be the same, it also demonstrates a range of preferences regarding primogeniture succession. Fukutake and Tsukamoto (1954) compared a village in Akita Prefecture as representative of the Tdhoku Region, with its traditional ties, and another village in Okayama typifying the southwestern section of Japan, where 96 ties of co-operative groups seem to receive greater emphasis than do family and kin ties. Both rural communities indicated a predominant approval of primogeniture. However, the survey clearly shows a stronger preference by the Akita village (81%) as compared with the Okayama group (59%) (Matsumoto 1962). Another survey on succession was conducted on four different types of communities in the Kantd area in 1956-57. This survey highlights occupational differences rather than regional differences. Table 4 summarizes the responses to the question: “Which child do you prefer for continuity of your household?* Over 60% of the mountain villagers specifically acknowledged preference for the eldest son. About half of the city apartment dwellers (51%) gave such answers as “any child will do, “ “I've never thought about it,“ or “continuity is not necessary." However, one out of four urban apartment respondents stated preference for the eldest son (Matsumoto 1962). 97

Table 4. Succession Patterns by Region and Occupation, 1956-7 mountain suburban suburban village10 village19 village urban20 (forestry) (agriculture) (non-aqri) apartment eldest son 63% 63% 33% 28% younger sons 11% 11% 10% 6% daughters 9% 9% 9% 2% other 1% 4% 7% 51% no answer 16% 14% 42% 13%

(source: Matsumoto 1962)

Again, these are not current data, and indeed the locales studied have seen dramatic changes in landscape, economy, and urbanization in the 45 years since the interviews. Nevertheless, the data serve to indicate the preference for eldest son succession by the people engaged in forestry and agricultural business.

A more recent survey was conducted by Ndson Kaihatsu Kikaku Iinkai (Agricultural Village Development Planning

Committee) on agricultural households in various regions in Japan (1987). Table 5 on the next page shows the successor's relation to the household head in the different regions;

10 Otaba was a traditional mountain village buried deep in a forest with a stable economy based on forestry combined with some agriculture (Matsumoto 1962). 19 Komae was a rural community on the outskirts of Tokyo with about half of the inhabitants engaged exclusively in agriculture and the remaining half commuting to Tokyo (Matsumoto 1962). 20 Toyama, in the Shinjuku district of Tokyo, was composed of four-story apartment houses whose residents were young, highly educated white- collar wage-earners, few with children or aging parents to care for (Matsumoto 1962). 98 locations (a) through (g) are in order of geographic location from northeast to southwest. An interesting indication of these data is the existence of rather fewer occurrences of eldest male succession, and a higher frequency of non-eldest succession, in Kagoshima Prefecture. The other five cities indicate a clear preference for eldest male succession. However, succession by a daughter's husband is preferred significantly over non-eldest sons in Tsuruoka city, Yamagata Prefecture, most likely a result of anekatoku (first child

succession) which was practiced there.

Table 5. Succaaaion Pattarna in Agricultural Villagaa by Region, 1987 eldest non-eldest grand­ daughter's male male* child husband (a) 62.8% 2.8% (0.0%) 5.7% 25.7% (b) 53 .8% 23 .0% (12.8%) 10.3% 10.3% (c) 43 .5% 30.4% (23.9%) NA 13 .0% (d) 47.8% 26.1% (NA) NA 21.7% (e) 58.5% 15.1% (5.7%) 1.9% 11.3% (f) 36.7% 18.4% (4.1%) 2.0% 4.1% (g) 37.5% 52.1% (NA) NA NA

(Agricultural Village Development Planning Committee 1987)

(a) Tsuruoka City, Yamagata Prefecture (b) A community City, Funabashi, Chiba Prefecture (c) B community City, Funabashi, Chiba Prefecture (d) Suwa City, Toyama Prefecture (e) Kuritoh City, Shiga Prefecture (f) Asahi City, Shimane Prefecture (g) Chiran City, Kagoshima Prefecture

•The numbers in parentheses under non-eldest male indicate succession by non-eldest male in case of death of the eldest male child. These numbers probably should be included in the eldest male succession data. 99

Western vs. Eastern Japan Based on the data of succession rules from various regions of Japan, analysis of regional differences of succession rules have generally indicated a polarity of two distinct types: a northeastern type and a southwestern type. It was assumed that a hierarchical social structure predominates in the northeast while an egalitarian type is more common in the southwest, though there are cases where both exist within a fairly close distance (Fukutake 1967). In western Japan, there are even cases where the wife of the head became successor when there were no sons, when all the sons were too young, or when all the sons were away working in the city21, all helping to indicate the egalitarian nature of the region. Fukutake (1967) attributed the development of a more hierarchical social structure to the adverse conditions imposed by the environment of northeastern Japan. He argued that a corporate group structure was more necessary in order to survive the severe climate. However, Fukutake's argument cannot explain why both types exist within a fairly short distance. Moreover, Moore found an example of egalitarian approaches to economic depravity in Maki Agri­ cultural Cooperation in a rural community in northeastern Japan (Moore 1990:137-169). Some customary practices show overt statistical polarization, but others defy such clear-

21 Asahi City in Shimane prefecture, studied in Table 5, had many occurrences of wife succession. 100 cut regional categorization. The theory of northeast vs. southwest doesn't seem to make sense logically. It seems more feasible that there exists some middle ground, or that the variation is like a spectrum, showing gradually changes from region to region. And of course, the documented existence of different types of succession and inheritance practices within the same region cannot be explained by this often-proposed polarity of regional variations. Kazuo Ueno (1986) questioned the polarization of regional variation studies in just these ways. Ueno argued that comparison of types depends on the criteria used to compare them, and that it is not accurate to categorize them into simply a northeastern type and a southwestern type. Rather, she considered that the type of kinship is a “cline" or spectrum changing from east to west. Regional variation can be observed in patrilineal descent groups in Japan. Befu noticed that two rules of descent operated simultaneously in all parts of Japan, ddzoku and kindred, but were inversely related. In areas where the patrilineal descent group assumed the dozoku characteristics, that is, where patrilineally related families were organized into a corporate group, the personal kindred had less functional significance than where the corporate character of the ddzoku was weak or nonexistent. In the ddzoku system of northeastern Honshu, kindred could be recognized, but it has little social significance. When the corporate character of 101 the dfizoku was not so strong, kindred assumed greater importance. The patrilineal corporate ddzoku with weak kindred organization was found in the northeast, whereas patrilineal descent without the ddzoku structure but with relatively well-developed kindred organization was prominent in the southwest, and an intermediate type could be found in central Japan (Befu 1962).

Fukutake attributed ddzoku- and kindred-type community organizations to the local economic situation. He noted that the ideal type of d6zoku was rarely found, and when it was, it was in the least economically developed areas. On the other hand, as dozoku declined in importance in community organization, kindred relations increased in importance. He thus developed a dual typology of 1) villages hierarchically structured by dozoku and 2) villages without ddzoku in which land holdings were more equally distributed and in which kindred ties were more important as a mechanism for community integration. This dichotomy corresponded roughly to a geographical division of Japan, with strong ddzoku found primarily in the northeast and weak or no ddzoku in the southwest. However, Fukutake's community study failed to explain what type of kinship structure was predominant in southwestern Japan (T. Fukutake 1967). 102 John Cornell argued that three types of patrilineal kinship structures developed by Gamo, namely maki22. ~i irui23, and it to24. all of which fall under the definition of the ddzoku concept, were primarily regional types. Cornell posited kin relationships within village society in an evolutionary scheme. He noticed that ancient Japan had two major types of kinship, one hierarchical as epitomized in the classic ddzoku type, and another more or less egalitarian, based on the age-graded itto model. Cornell excluded the ittd model from the ddzoku designation because individual relationships, not ie., were its prime components, and personal status was derived not from the line of descent but from generation and age. He hypothesized that the ittd model may have been a transitional stage. One type of kinship structure may become transformed into another in response to changes in the underlying socio-economic conditions, presumably to emergent surpluses in the local economy and penetration of some aspects of market economy (Cornell 1964).

22 Maki is the traditional form of dflzoku of the Tflhoku region, characterized by patrilineal descent, generational permanence, intra- ie permanence, stratification of ia, and no inter-strata marriage. 23 Jirui evolved from maki in the ChQbu region, and is characterized by stronger kin solidarity, dispersed dflzoku activities, and substitution of fictive kin ties for some group functions. 24 Ittfl is another derivation of dflzoku in Shikoku and southeast HonshQ, characterized by independent individual status; individual stratification by age; bilaterality; and weak lineality. 103

Study of Regional Variation by Xxumi et al. The analysis of regional kinship types by Izumi et al. (1984) is recognized as a landmark study on Japanese kinship. It systematically plotted regional differences of culture throughout Japan, and studied Japanese linguistic elements used to designate a group of presumable consisting of a honke and its bunke. These terms are numerous, and the

geographic distribution of their usage overlaps. Distributions of these terms show considerable regional characteristics, both by their presence and by their absence, and thus offer clues for establishing correlation with other cultural properties. This study shows us valuable concrete data regarding patterns of inheritance and geography. In Izumi et al's interpretation, not all the data were directly summarized by different regions. I wanted to analyze each question in detail, especially to obtain the total number and percentage of each reply in each region. Thus, I scanned the data into the computer to facilitate my statistical analysis. I collated the data according to the following five regions25. See Figure 28 in Appendix A for a map of these regions. 1. Tdhoku Region (northeastern Japan): Aomori, Yamagata, Akita, Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima Prefectures

25 Conventionally, Japan is considered in six regions {see the map in Figure 28 in Appendix A); Izumi et al. did not use any data from the Hokkaidd region. 104 2. Kanto/Koshin'etsu Region (eastern Japan) Niigata, Nagano, Gunma, Yamanashi, Tochigi, Ibaragi, Tokyd, Chiba, Kanagawa, and Shizuoka Prefectures 3. Chubu/Hokuriku/Kinki Region (central Japan) Toyama, Ishikawa, Fukui, Gifu, Nara, Wakayama, Aichi, Shiga, Mie, Ky6to, Osaka, and Hyogo Prefectures 4. ChOgoku/Shikoku Region (western Honshu & Shikoku) Tottori, Okayama, Shimane, Yamaguchi, Hiroshima, Kochi, Kagawa, Ehime, and Tokushima Prefectures 5. KyOshu Region Saga, Fukuoka, Nagasaki, Miyazaki, Kumamoto, and Kagoshima Prefectures This analysis helps to identify the fact that some ddzoku are hierarchical while others are egalitarian. The analysis shows the existence of honke-bunke relationships characterized by the honke being superior to the bunke. In the northeast, we see that the relationship between the honke and bunke tended to be permanent, with the honke superior.

In the southwest, however, the relationship was not as permanent. Table 6 summarizes the responses to the question 'How long did the social intercourse between the honke and bunke usually last?,' 80% of respondents in the Tdhoku Region replied that the relationship was eternal; similarly 76% of the Kantd Region, and 65% of the Chubu Region; but only 42%

Table 6. Duration of honke-bunke Relationships by Region (percent of respondents) Tdhoku Kantd ChObu Shikoku KvushQ no relations______0%______0%______0%______0%______0% eternal______80% 76% 65%_____ 55%_____50% terminal (3 15% 20% 30% 42% 45% generations) 105

Table 7. Status Differentiation Between Honke and Bunke, by Region (percent of respondents)

Tdhoku Kantd Chubu Shikoku Kyushu no difference______0%_____0%_____0%______0%_____ 0% honke > bunke; hierarchy among 87% 79% 68% 63% 55% bunke honke > bunke; no hierarchy 9% 11% 15% 16% 15% amona bunke honke = bunke; hierarchy among 1% 1% 1% 1% 2% bunke honke = bunke: no hierarchy 3% 7% 11% 17% 26% among bunke summarized from Izumi et al. (1984) ‘honke > bunke" indicates "honke is superior to bunke."

in the Shikoku Region and 45% of the KyushQ Region. There was more status differentiation between honke and bunke in the northeast than in the southwest. In the Tdhoku Region, 96% replied that honke was superior to bunke. and the majority of them recognized a hierarchy among bunke. as summarized in Table 7 above. On the other hand, in the KyfLshd Region, as many as 28% recognized no status differentiation between honke and bunke, compared to 4% in the Tdhoku Region. Table 8 on the next page demonstrates the general trend for blood-related bunke to assume higher status than non­ blood-related bunke. This tendency is stronger in the northeast regions than the southwest regions. 106

Table 8. Statue Difference Between Blood-Related bunke (B) and Non-Blood-Related bunke (NB), by Region (percent of respondents) Tdhoku Kantd Chubu Shikoku Kyushu no bunke______2% 13% 11%______9%_____ 17% B > NB 79% 69% 56%______58%_____ 50% B = NB 13% 15% 21% 22% 25%

summarized from Izumi et al. (1984) 'B > NB" indicates "blood-related bunke are superior to non-blood- related bunke."

A hierarchy also existed among relatives, and was called shinrui or shinzoku. As Table 9 below shows, it was observed

that patrilineal kin took more honored seats than matrilineal kin in the northeast than in the southwest regions, indicating the more egalitarian nature of the southwest regions. Izumi et al.'s data also indicate that eldest son succession was the preferred succession scheme in general. This generality is supported by the existence of a distinct

Tabic 9. Hlararchy Between Patrilineal Kin and Matrilineal Kin ae Seen in Seating Arrangement, by Region (percent of reapondente) Tdhoku Kantd Chubu Shikoku Kvushu patrilineal kin take 70% 59% 65% 48% 39% better seats______matrilineal kin take 2% 2% 2% 1% better seats no difference 26% 34% 43% 49% 59% other 3% 2% 1% 2% summarized from Izumi et al (1984) 107

Table 10. Existence of Distinct Linguistic Terms for "eldest son" and/or "eldest daughter," by Region (percent of respondents) Tdhoku Kantd Chflbu Shikoku Kyushu no terms 21% 30% 42% 66% 65% both 68% 63% 44% 28% 19% son onlv 10% 5% 11% 5% 14% daughter only 1% 1% 1% summarized from Izumi et a l . (1984)

linguistic element denoting the "eldest son"; however, as summarized in Table 10 above, it was very likely for a region who had a specific term for "eldest son" to also have a term for "eldest daughter, " and the terms were less likely to by used in the southwest regions. There are also regional characteristics in succession patterns, as summarized in Table 11 below. Eldest daughter succession appears more likely to be practiced in the Tdhoku Region, while youngest child succession is more common in Kyushu, and selective succession in the southwest regions.

Tabic 11. Qanaaloglcal Relationship of Successor to the Head of an ia. by Region (percent of respondents)

Tdhoku Kantd Chubu Shikoku Kvushu eldest son 81% 87% 94% 91% 92% eldest 18% 12% 2% 3% 1% daughter youngest 2% child any chosen 3% 5% 6% child summarized from Izumi et al. (1984) 108 The question still remains as to what factors cause some dozoku to be egalitarian while others are hierarchical. The distributional analysis of Izumi et al. helps to resolve this question by hypothesizing some causative relationships between local environments and the egalitarianism of dozoku.

Based on the assumptions of regional differences between northeastern and southwestern Japan made by Befu and Izumi et al., one might hypothesize that types of succession rules of family-owned business and degrees of participation by kin members in business should also be observed as differing according to the same regions. If ddzoku structure is more corporate and predominant in northeast Japan, the assumption could logically be made that succession to the position of business head is more likely to follow male primogeniture rules in this region than in the southwest, and that there would be more cases of non-eldest son succession in southwestern Japan. Since Izumi et al. did not gather data on succession, this is an area for ambitious but valuable future study.

Timing of Succession and Inheritance, and inkvo

There is a major characteristic (indeed the adjective •universal* is commonly applied to it) which different regions of Japan do share in common. inkvosei ('retirement from the position of household head') has been observed in 109 all regions of Japan (Izumi et al. 1984). Using Hayami's data, L. Cornell studied inheritance in pre-industrial Japanese villages from 1671 to 1871, and came to the conclusion that the heir's inheritance was not precipitated by the death of the household head, but by his retirement, and that the time at which inheritance actually occurred is significant, for it had demographic, economic, and even political consequences (Cornell 1983). inkvosei was formally recognized by the Meiji Civil Code

(in Article 964), along with death and loss of nationality, as an event precipitating the process of inheritance (Cornell 1983). Based on population registers between 1671 and 1871, among men who became household heads after 1671 and left the headship either by retiring or by dying, about 2/3 retired

from the headship (66%) and 1/3 died in office (34%) while they were still heads of households. Sixty percent of them retired within the six years from age 58 through 64. The mean age at retirement was 59 years (ibid.). In modern Japan, the postwar Civil Code dictates inheritance to take place at the time of death of the person to be inherited from. Thus, inkvosei in modern Japan actually focuses on succession rather than on inheritance. The practice of inkvo varied regionally. It has been observed that there were fewer cases of inkvo in northeastern

Japan, and that the age of retirement there is lower than in western Japan. More inkvo. especially bekkvo inkvo 110

Table 12. Bxletence of Inkvo. by Region (percent of respondents) Tdhoku Kantd Chftbu Shikoku Kvflshu inkyo 15% 10% 16% 6% 2% non-existent______inkyo only in 51% 54% 45% 55% 52% special cases______inkyo common 32% 36% 38% 39% 45% summarized from Izumi et al (1984)

(retirement in which the old household head and spouse lived in a separate house from that of the new household head) were practiced in southwestern Japan (Oshima et al. 1971). The tendency away from inkvo in the northeastern Japan was confirmed by the Izumi et al.'s data; this is summarized in Table 12 above. However, contrary to previous observational studies, Izumi et al.'s data (summarized in Table 13 below) indicate that the frequency of bekkvo inkvo was not particularly large in southwestern Japan.

Tabla 13. Residence of inkvo. by Region (percent of raapondanta) Tdhoku Kantd ChQbu Shikoku Kyushu no inkvo 15% 10%_____ 16%______6%_____ 2% with successor______48%__ 46%_____ 49%______47%____ 48% special building (inkvo-hut) in 24% 16% 16% 31% 35% the same house______separate house 9% 10% 10% 11% 14% (bekkvo jnkYO) summarized from Izumi et al (1984) Ill The timing of retirement in modern Japan was studied by

N6son Kaihatsu Kikaku linkai (Agricultural Village Devel­ opment Planning Committee) (1987). According to the survey on the same seven agricultural villages from Tsuruoka, Yamagata to Chiran, Kagoshima of an earlier study (see Table 5), 46.5% of respondents took succession to be the time when the previous head died. Other ways of determining the timing of succession were illness of the previous head (13.7%) and transference of the business right to the heir (16.9%). Rights and duties of a household head were gradually transferred to a successor over the years. In general, agriculture management and the duty to attend agricultural meetings were transferred to a successor first. Then, the new household head's name was entered on the household registry, and a successor took charge of the domestic budget. However, ownership of the agricultural land was not transferred until much later, sometimes even until the death of the previous head. Regional differences can also be seen with respect to when various rights and privileges were transferred to a successor. N6son Kaihatsu Kikaku Iinkai (Agricultural

Development Planning Committee) (1987) reported that in Yamagata and Kagoshima Prefectures, most rights and duties were transferred together at the time of succession of the headship, whereas in Chiba and Shiga they were transferred over a long period of time before and after the succession of 112 the headship. One conclusion is that rights and duties of headship in Yamagata and Kagoshima were more clearly defined than those of Chiba and Shiga. The committee attributed the less clear distinction of rights and duties in Chiba and Shiga to urbanization. Urbanization caused diversification of the lifestyle of agricultural household members, so that the members tended to share rights and duties (ibid.). However, Ni-iu-isseiki Murazukuri Juku (21st century

Village Creating Committee) (1993) reported differently, claiming that in Yamagata, the right of agricultural management was transferred first, with the right to attend agricultural meetings transferred about ten years later and property ownership not transferred until the death of the head. in Saga, a similar pattern was seen except property ownership was transferred before the death of the head or, in 1/3 of the cases, upon the head's illness or aging. On the other hand, in Ibaragi, all the rights, sometimes including property ownership, were transferred together. In this prefecture, the right to control the household budget was transferred through the female line from a wife to her daughter-in-law. Ni-iu-isseiki Murazukuri Juku further found

that in Ibaragi, where most of household members had side jobs (kengy6 n6ka), more generational separation and clearer right distinction between generations existed. They also attributed the extended period of right and duty transfer seen in Yamagata to side jobs. If the younger generation 113 took side jobs, the parents' generation had to continue practicing agricultural related rights and duties, thus delaying the transfer of the rights and duties (Ni-ifl-isseiki Murazukuri Juku 1993). Therefore, succession to an agricultural household was complicated due to the fact that the timing of succession was recognized differently in different regions or that individual households and individuals transferred rights, duty, and property at different times according to influencing factors such as side jobs and urbanization.

Variations of Succession Patterns Careful analysis of alternative succession rules and their bases leads to an important topic: theoretical interpretations of Japanese kinship organizations. In interpreting the Japanese kinship system, we notice that it emphasizes the corporate aspects of name and occupation rather than genealogical continuity. As Befu pointed out, "a blood line may be continued even after the family name and occupation have been changed,' however the family name and occupation may be continued by someone other than the eldest son (Befu 1962:34). Therefore, corporativity is essential when analyzing succession rules in Japan.

The zenkoku Minii Kanrei Ruishfl (1880) stated that male primogeniture was the conventional succession rule, but other 114 succession rules were also mentioned, such as anekatoku

(first-born child succession, regardless of whether the first-born is a son or daughter) and last-born male succession (masshi sdzoku). A. Omachi (1958) categorized inheritance and succession rules in Japan into four categories: first-born male, last-born male, first-born child, and selective male child (Omachi 1958). Other types have also been reported, such as succession by anyone other than eldest male (hi-chdshi sozoku); and an aunt-to-niece succession and land inheritance among female shamans (miko) in Okinawa (Oshima et al. 1971).

Male Primogeniture According to Hoebel (1972), primogeniture arises due to conditions which necessitate continuity and maintenance of the production size and productivity in the societies of growing populations given to gardening or agriculture on limited land resources. In such societies, there is always the problem of dispersal of the family holding through inheritance by too many heirs. Primogeniture is the solution hit upon by some peoples. All property devolves upon the eldest son, who then has the duty to support the other members of the family in exchange for their labor (Hoebel 1972:359) . G.D.H. Cole also mentioned that primogeniture has been upheld mainly on the ground that it keeps estates and agricultural holdings together, thereby making possible their 115 more efficient development for the production of wealth (Cole 1935). Many scholars have argued that primogeniture is an essential inheritance rule for agricultural societies because the estate can remain intact as an economically stable unit (Hoebel 1972, Cole 1935, Lowie 1948). However, there does not seem to be a sufficient explanation why inheritance has to go to the eldest child. If the purpose is to maintain productivity, any one person among the siblings can inherit to fulfill this task. Moreover, when property comes to consist largely of company stock, the arguments of preventing division have far less force (Cole 1935). Thus, the reasons for the existence of primogeniture inheritance in the modern non-agricultural society have not been explained. In order to provide such an explanation, my aim has been to distinguish primogeniture inheritance and primogeniture succession. At least one case exists where inheritance was practiced according to non-primogeniture rules while succession followed the rule of primogeniture. In Maori society, succession to the position of priest-chief went to the eldest son, but the inheritance of land through primogeniture was tempered with collateral privileges (Lowie 1920:250). This is also the case of Raymond Kelly's re-study of Nuer. Primogeniture can be a force in an expansionist movement. "Power and glory are available to second-born sons who sally forth to gain new land, wealth, and rank and who 116 found new lineages by leading a group of colonists to unsettled territory* {Hoebel 1972:359). In primogeniture institutions, the eldest child often has special privileges, is often viewed and treated differently from others. For example, I heard from my father who is a third of four male children that his eldest brother usually ate dinner separately from other brothers, and on occasions when they ate together, only the eldest brother had the privilege to use a special higher tray standing on legs, which is traditionally used to serve higher status people in Japan. The other children used lower trays without legs. For Lowie, primogeniture and ultimogeniture were not merely a difference of sibling order. instead, primogeniture reflected a natural agricultural strategy and included values, economic circumstances, and ideological circumstances, while ultimogeniture was more closely related to economically deprived situations {Lowie 1948).

Male Primogeniture in the Neiji Civil Code The reasons why the succession rule in Japan has conventionally been recognized as male primogeniture can be traced back to the Meiji constitution. Four kinds of successors to household headship were recognized by the Meiji Civil Code: the legal heir (hotei katoku sSzokunin) 26. the

26 Article #970: The legal heir, who comes first in the order of succession, is the lineal descendant of a house-head, who is at the 117 appointed heir fshitei katoku s6zokunin)27, the chosen heir

fsentei katoku s62okunin)2e. and the ascendant heir (chokkei hizoku katoku sozokunin)29. The legal heir, who came first in the order of succession, is a lineal descendant of the house- head, who is at the same time a member of his house. Article 970 dictated that the legal successor be decided by the following factors among lineal descendants (chokkei hizoku): age (older over younger) , genealogical distance, gender (male over female), and legitimacy (legal child over illegitimate child). Above all, birth order was the most important factor to be considered (Takeuchi 1974). Thus, the first-born male was the most appropriate heir, although there were cases where hai chaku (disinheritance) of the elder son was

same time a member of his house. Among lineal descendants, the nearer kinsman is preferred to the remote, the male to the female, and the legitimate child to the illegitimate, seniors in age being always accorded priority when they are equal in other respects (Gubbins 1899). 27 Article #979: In case there is no legal presumptive heir to a house- head, the latter may appoint an heir, either in his lifetime or by his will. But this appointment ceases to be valid, when he obtains a child in the course of nature or by adoption, for the latter will become his legal presumptive heir (Gubbins 1899). 28 Article #982: If, at the time of the death of a house-head, there is neither a legal heir, nor an appointed heir, the father of the deceased, or, if there is no father, or if he is unable to express his intention, the mother, or, if there are no parents or both are unable to express their intention, the family council, chooses an heir from among the members of the house according to the following order: (1) the surviving wife, if she is a house-daughter; (2) the brothers; (3) the ; (4) the surviving wife, who is not a house-daughter; and finally (5) the lineal descendants of brothers and sisters (Gubbins 1899) . 29 Article #984: If there is neither a legal, nor an appointed, nor a chosen heir, then the nearest lineal ascendant of the last house-head succeeds, the male being always preferred to the female in the case of persons standing in the same degree of relationship (Gubbins 1899) . 118 officially and legally performed. In some cases, eldest son succession was officially reported to the authorities while in reality someone other than eldest son was the true successor (Takeda 1974b). At any rate, with the existence of such a law, it is natural that Japan's customary practice of succession was recognized by social scientists as being male primogeniture. However, it is also true that the code itself did not directly state that primogeniture or any other method was the 'rule' of succession. The code presented the possible choices and preferences among features, but it did not stipulate how the choice was to be made. Moreover, Hamabata pointed out that in the Meiji Law, adopted persons were given the same status as legitimate children, thus these individuals could be included in the same ranking of features (Hamabata 1990). Under the Meiji Law, the importance focused on the perpetuation of the if», and that is why at least three selection processes for an heir (legal heir, appointed heir, and chosen heir) were listed, to virtually guarantee the continuation of the household. The Meiji Civil Code set a principle that inheritance of property by the successor was limited to property which logically went with the position of being successor. Thus, personal property of the head was not included in the heir's inheritance right. Such property was inherited by other individuals in addition to the heir, and was called isan 119 sdzoku (inheritance of real estate), to be distinguished from katoku sSzoku (inheritance and succession to headship). According to the rule, katoku sozoku was limited to the eldest male child according to the principles of birth order and gender, while isan sozoku was equal with respect to birth order and gender. Hozumi (1973) also pointed out that the Meiji Civil Code recognized these two kinds of succession: succession to house-headship or katoku s6zoku and succession to property or isan sozoku. and thus succession to status and succession to property existed side by side. However, in practice most property was considered to belong to the head, and thus it was inherited only by the heir, regardless of the law (Takeuchi 1974). Facts such as these have only fed the fire of confusion of the concepts of succession and inheritance in modern Japan. Moreover, Hozumi stated that the meaning of the term katoku itself has changed. In the original meaning of the term katoku. the personal element of house-headship dominated; however, along with economic progress, the material element began to grow in importance, and the term came to connote inheritance (Hozumi 1973) . Male primogeniture is, in fact, the dominant succession rule in various parts of Japan, even though the postwar constitution officially abolished the legal status of the family headship. In some situations, however, male primogeniture succession could not function, thanks to the 120 smaller family size and consequently, the lack of male children.

Succession of Ancestor worship Conventionally, the eldest male child has a special status which is evidenced by various linguistic terms designating an heir. For example, atotori musuko (heir son), atotsuai. soryo as well as dialects such as katoku. uchitori. atose. yotori. and ihaimochi. Ancestor worship was one of the most important duties of the eldest male child. Hozumi pointed out that Article 987 of the Meiji Civil Code contained the following provision: 'The ownership of the genealogical records of the house, of the utensils of house- worship, and of the family tombs, belongs to the special rights of succession to the headship of a house" (Translated by Gubbins 1899). Thus, the foundation for succession to house-headship was tied to continuing the worship of ancestors (Hozumi 1973). In the postwar Civil Code of 1947, Article 897 stipulates the succession to the property of religious rites as follows: 1) ... the ownership of genealogical records, of utensils of religious rites and of tombs and burial grounds is succeeded [sic] to the person who is, according to custom, to hold as a president the worship to the memory of the ancestors. If, however, the person succeeded to [sic] has designated the person who is to hold as a president the worship to the memory of the ancestors, such person shall succeed to that ownership. 121 2) In cases the custom mentioned in the preceding paragraph is unknown, the person who is to succeed to the right mentioned in the preceding paragraph shall be determined by the Family Court. (translated by Ministry of Justice & The Codes of Translation Committee 1992) The fact that ancestor worship was one of the important tasks of an heir is also confirmed by the statistics summarized in Table 14 below. The Office of Prime Minister (Sdrifu) survey in 1986 asked the question "What is the most important duty of an heir?" Even though the question did not ask about the duty of the eldest male child, maintaining the ancestral grave site was the number one duty attributed to the heir. People customarily believed that keeping and maintaining the ancestral grave site, which often included taking care of ancestral tablets and conducting memorial services, was the leading duty of the heir. This is why the eldest male child was sometimes called ihaimochi ("holding ancestral tablets"). In any case, as Takeuchi pointed out, all these terms designated the person who succeeded to the right or position (Takeuchi 1974), and thus implied that male primogeniture was the prevailing custom. Otsubo quoted a survey conducted by the Toky6

Table 14. Moat Important Duty of an Hair Succeed the name of a household...... 13% Keep and maintain ancestor grave site...... 31% Succeed to the household occupation...... 4% Inherit land and house...... 14% Take care of parents...... 28%

(source: Office of Prime Minister (Sdrifu) 1986 survey) 122 Metropolitan authorities on the successors to family graves in the T6ky6 public cemetery in 1986. According to the survey, among the five hundred families investigated, 50% of the successors were the eldest sons, 20% were spouses, 9% were non-eldest sons, 9% were daughters, 3% were siblings, 3% were grandchildren, 1% were nephews or nieces, and 5% were some other person (Otsubo 1991). There are, however, cases where the Family Court ruled that the successor to ancestor worship must be the non-blood relative who was the closest relation to the person to be inherited from. For example, a common-law wife was chosen in 1962 by the Nagoya High Court to be a successor to the utensils used in religious rites. In another case, rather than the eldest male who had branched off, or the second son who was not living with the family, the second daughter was chosen to be the successor to worship because she was physically helping the household in farming (Izumi 1989).

Male primogeniture was also stated as a widely practiced custom before the Meiji Civil Code, in Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei Ruishfl (1880). However, as I mentioned earlier, the Meiji

Civil Code, which specified the household as a basic social unit, is commonly taken to be the direct cause of the widely known practice of male primogeniture through the 20th century. In other words, male primogeniture was the practice enforced and supported by the legal premise. 123 At the same time, other types of succession practices were hindered by complicated legal procedures under the Meiji Civil Code. For example, the only way a household head could prevent the eldest male from succeeding to his position was to bring suit against him in the family council. This council would render their decision in accordance with Meiji Civil Code Article 975 which limited the conditions of refusal of succession to four specific cases: (1) ill-treatment or gross insult to the house-head; (2) unfitness for house-headship on account of bodily or mental infirmities; (3) having been sentenced to punishment for an offense of such a nature as to defile the name of the house; and (4) interdiction as a spend-thrift (Hozumi 1973).

In a survey by the Sorifu, Kokuritsu YQron Chosaio

(National Public Opinion Research Institute) in 1952, 66% of the respondents replied in the affirmative to the question *Do you think it is better for the eldest son to become the successor to the ie, as in the past?* This demonstrates that at that time people continued to support and approve succession by primogeniture. in that same year, the Jiji Press reported that 60% favored the parents' residing with the eldest son and his wife, while only 21% stated that a separate residence was desirable (Jiji Tsflshinsha 1952). The data on this question show regional and occupational 124 variations. Restricting attention to agricultural house­ holds, the percentage who favored primogeniture rose to 77% in 1952. After comparing the data from Akita Prefecture in the Tohoku Region, where traditional extended family ties were highly valued, and the data from Okayama Prefecture, which typified southwestern Japan where ties of co-operative groups were emphasized, it was found that Akita village clearly showed a much stronger approval for primogeniture (Fukutake and Tsukamoto 1954). Moreover, Matsumoto noted the age differences in the respondents supporting primogeniture. He pointed out that one fourth of those in their twenties favored the first-born son's remaining with the parents, whereas over half of respondents sixty years and over felt this to be imperative. Therefore, he concluded that rigid primogeniture was not a deeply embedded tradition among the younger generations at that time. It would be interesting if we could obtain current data for comparison, since those young people in 1950's have by now gained valuable wisdom and experiences. Recent data indicate declining support for male primogeniture. For example, the 1986 survey shows that only 48.2% of the people thought that the eldest male child had a special role. In a 1990 survey, although about three-fourths of the people thought that it was necessary for someone to succeed to the household headship and the ancestral grave site, only 32% thought that the eldest male child had a duty 125 to support his parents (Prime Minister Secretariat, Public Relation Room). Therefore, it may be concluded that male primogeniture was a declining succession rule in the late 20th century and other options for succession were being taken instead. Recent studies have proved that there were other options for succession in Japan. J. Bachnik showed that there were many options for succession, including succession by adopted members, although she concluded that the most preferred method was still succession by the eldest son (Bachnik 1983).

Last-born Child Succession The last-born child succession rule stated that a previous successor's "status and whole or part of his property is succeeded and inherited by the last-born male child" (Naito 1974). Unlike first-born male succession, property was often divided among other male children in addition to the eldest son. Specific property, such as the house and extra money necessary to take care of the retired parents, was inherited only by the last-born male. Last-born succession was practiced in several different ways. For example, one way was to have all the older children form branch households while the youngest child remained in the with the parents to become the successor. Another way was to have the last-born child form a branch household, then eventually returning to succeed to the headship. A unique 126 method was to have the eldest child succeed to the headship of the original household, while the parents retired and formed a branch household (bunke) with all the remaining children, and repeating this process with the eldest child in each bunke until finally the youngest child and parents were alone in a bunke. and the youngest child directly succeeded the parents. Last-born child succession rules could also be seen in various other parts of the world such as England, Germany, Russia, and Hungary. In Asia, it was practiced among the Turkic and Mongolic tribes; in India, Indo-China, Sumatra, Yukagir, and by the Chukchi and the Koryak, and even by the ancient Hebrews as suggested in the Old Testament of the Bible (Lowie 1948:151). Lowie reported a form of ultimogeniture practiced among the Badaga of India, where "sons of a family leave the parental roof on marriage and set up households of their own; only the youngest remains with his parents, supports them in their old age, and automatically acquires possession of their home when they die* (Lowie 1920:251). In Sumatra, the Gajo provided each marrying son with a section of a rice field, one or more buffalo, and part of the communal house. Among the Skolte Lapps, the youngest received the best of his father's houses, but had to remain at home and take care of his parents. The Khasi of Assam, a strongly matrilineal people, practiced both primogeniture and ultimogeniture, where the youngest daughter inherited the 127 house and taking charge of performing the rituals of the ancestral cult. In this case, the chief's heirs were the eldest sister's sons in order of seniority (ibid:153). In Japan, the male ultimogeniture succession rule is said to have been mainly distributed in the southwestern part of Japan. The reason why this was so is related to the household structure in this area. First, a smaller family size was preferred in this area due to smaller scale farming. As older children formed branch households, the family size gradually became smaller. These families never became large until the youngest child married and had a family much later in the cycle. Second, since the property tended not to be inherited exclusively by one child , perpetuity of the household was not considered the most important concept. Unlike the unilineal household structures seen in northeast Japan, in the structure of the household in southwest Japan which practices last-born child succession, a hierarchy among main and branch households was not so clear, and the right of ancestor worship was not strictly held by the main household (Ueno 1989). It was inevitable that the Meiji Civil Law did not allow last-born child succession, because the practice did not follow the principle of a strict household headship system. Hayami found statements like 'the eldest son is established in a branch household* to be very common in the population registers or shflmon-aratame-ch6 during the 128 Tokugawa Period, and concluded that ultimogeniture was practiced in many parts of Shikoku and KyGshfl. On the other hand, ultimogeniture was not found in eastern and northeastern Japan, where Tokugawa government laws limited and sometimes prohibited the division of land into small parcels because of inheritance {Naito 1973:75-77).

The actual reasons for ultimogeniture practice are not clear. According to Lowie's observations, ultimogeniture was practiced in , hunting, herding, and farming societies. Ultimogeniture was also found in the farming class in Japan30 which seems to contradict the general assumption that primogeniture is associated with agriculture. Lowie suggested that may be the reason for ultimogeniture (Lowie 1920:152). Arichi derived several necessary conditions for ultimogeniture succession to occur. First, the older siblings must be in an economic state allowing them to leave the house, for example, the availability of uncultivated land near the house, or already being self-supporting. Second, the household must have partible property such as livestock or crop (Arichi 1974). Ultimogeniture delays the age at which the household headship was transferred to the next generation. Hayami explained the occurrence of ultimogeniture from a different point of view.

30 I.e. in Suwa district, as Nakagawa pointed out. 129 Considering the household labor force, ultimogeniture was a most effective succession rule in areas where the economic environment was good and acquisition of land was easy. This contrasts with primogeniture, which was best suited to areas where economic conditions were harsh {Hayami 1983:2). From a demographic standpoint, ultimogeniture provided the possibility of establishing more than one household in the subsequent generation, and by extension, served as a force for population increase. Primogeniture, on the other hand, because it did not authorize the formation of families by any sons other than the eldest, acted to suppress population growth. Looking at the family cycle, the length of the average family cycle was longer where ultimogeniture was practiced and shorter with primogeniture (Hayami 1983:4). Thus, Hayami concluded that the two systems of succession affected regional populations during the Tokugawa Period: population increased in southwestern Japan and decreased in northeastern Japan. Nakagawa attributed ultimogeniture in Suwa to harsh or unsuitable conditions for agriculture. According to Nakagawa, ultimogeniture was likely to be practiced in places with the potential for cultivation in the surrounding area. Thus, when agriculture became too intensive or industry or commerce developed, the population lost its mobility, and ultimogeniture shifted to a primogeniture pattern. Nakagawa 130 (1938a) claimed that Suwa ultimogeniture disappeared due to the development of the silk-reeling industry. Economic status seems to have been the underlying condition for the different succession rules. However, it is difficult to accurately determine the economic status of particular places in particular times in history. Fukutake argued that economically poor communities necessitated strong cooperation among households, thus requiring a strong hierarchical dozoku type structure (Fukutake 1949). This is the widely-believed reason for northeastern Japan to exhibit ddzoku type structures. However, in the northeast region it had once been common for children of farming families to venture out to the cities to find jobs to support their families (dekaseoi) because of poor economic situation at home. If last-born succession was practiced as Naito explained, that is, older children being away forces the last-born to be the successor, why does northeastern region show a higher primogenitive tendency than southwest region? Since the economic situation all over Japan, both in the northeast and southwest, has greatly improved throughout the 20th century, this issue is no longer easy to solve. Nevertheless, established patterns of succession are not likely to change in a short period of time even if the economic status shifts, as one might expect from regional patterns. 131 Naito argued that in reality, no region or village, perhaps not even any household, was reported to practice last-born child succession exclusively; for example middle children were also known to be chosen as successor at one time or another. Thus, last-born child succession should actually be considered to be 'selective succession' (Naito 1974). However, while there tended to be a large age difference between the ultimogeniture successor and the older siblings, the successor in a case of selective succession tended to be one of the older children (Ueno 1989). True last-born succession was often highly situational. For example, if all the older children were working away from home, or if the parents were still too young to retire when the older children reached maturity, only then did the last- born child tend to be selected as a successor.

Ultimogeniture in Suwa District The practice of ultimogeniture was recorded in Suwa Daimvoi in Gohon-i i Enoi (Legends of Suwa Shrine) written around the year Tensho 13 (1588) (Nakagawa 1938a). Nakagawa also found many cases of ultimogeniture in the population registers31 of Suwa district. It is interesting that ultimogeniture was found only among farming households, not among the warrior class. This is comparable to the

31 Population registers (shOmon aratame ch&> were recorded from year Kanbun 12 (1673) until they were destroyed in Meiji 4 (1890). 132 observations of first-born child succession (anekatoku) in the Tdhoku Region, which was also practiced exclusively among the farming class. Oikawa (1938) observed the practice of ultimogeniture and the formation of branch households in Tsukahara village in Suwa district as follows: (1) There was a higher incidence of branch household formation in the past than the present; (2) Branch households were created by older children as they left the household, and as a result, the main household headship was succeeded to by the last-born child; (3) The number of branch households decreased with time, and so did the practice of ultimogeniture; (4) Instead, the number of eldest child and middle children successions increased with time; (5) The number of ydshi (adoptions) taken when there were

one or no natural children increased with time. Ultimogeniture practice in Suwa district declined rapidly after Meiji Period from 70% (1661 to 1871) to 45% (1871 to 1896), perhaps because of the Civil Code which dictated primogeniture (Nakagawa 1938a). Although the numbers declined, 45% is still a high occurrence assuming that people continued to practice ultimogeniture by using their own tactics in disregard of the law. For example, some 133 households pretended to practice primogeniture by doctoring their official registry, but actually practiced ultimo­ geniture. Others declared that the youngest son was adopted while in reality the eldest had been adopted. Still others abandoned the eldest son from their household registry by claiming family opposition to his marriage. Obviously, there was a potentially wide discrepancy between what was written in the household registry and people's practice. Suwa district court sent an official request to the Ministry of Justice in Meiji 9 (1875), asking for official blanket permission to practice ultimogeniture in that area, but it was denied (ibid.).

Case Study 1. "Y" Household of Suwa District. in the records of six generations of the "Y" household and its branches in Tsukahara village as described by Oikawa (1938), a vdshi was adopted and succeeded to the headship because there was only one or no sons in 75% of all succession events. The next most common succession pattern, occurring in 16% of the cases, was last-born child succession with the elder brothers forming branch households. Succession by the eldest son occurred only 3% of the time, and succession by the middle children occurred 1% of the time. Empirical data show that last-born child succession was practiced quite frequently in other households in Suwa 134 district as well. Last-born child succession was practiced in 24% of Ogawa households, middle child succession in 1.4%, and eldest son succession in 8%. In addition, most branch households were headed by older brothers of the successor to the main household. Among the previous example of *Y" households, 77% of all branch household heads were older brothers of the main household head (Oikawa 1938) . With respect to inheritance, household property was partibly inherited among the male children. Ancestor worship

older sibling in Figure 5

(i) Cl) (£)(•) (i)

(«) /K—A (») (I*) ____ yoshi| ______|

/k\ /iK (w ) /£k /Q\ /k\ («) I _ ] |y6shi ______

AAA6A yftshi

Pigure 4. "Y" Household Diagram

younger sibling in Figure 4 1 / 3

{based on Oikawa 1938)

Figure 5. "Y" Household Diagram (for Case Study 1) Part 2. Spouses are not shown. (continued from Figure 4) was practiced mainly by the household head and his wife even after they retired (inkyo) as long as they were alive. After the death of the head, the successor to the household practiced ancestor worship. However, memorial services for the deceased parents were conducted by the eldest male child regardless of whether he succeeded to the main household headship or to that of a branch household (ibid.). Notice 136 that there is no eldest male succession in the *Y" household diagram (Figures 4 and 5 on the preceding pages).

Ultimogeniture in Uauki District, Miyazaki Prefecture Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei RuiiQ (1880) recorded ultimo­ geniture customs in Usuki district, Miyazaki Prefecture as follows: "In many cases in villages (of Usuki-district), the eldest male branched off, and the second or third son succeeded* to the main household headship (Ueno 1957). Like the Suwa case, the authorities in Miyazaki Prefecture requested official permission for this custom to the Ministry of Domestic Affairs in 1879. However, the request was denied when the Ministry replied that the eldest male had the right to succeed, and it was not acceptable to have him branched off no matter what the reasons were (ibid.). Usuki district is located in Kyushu in northern Miyazaki Prefecture, adjacent to the border with Oita Prefecture. Within Usuki district, there are Minamikata, Tomi, and Morozuka Villages. Minamikata Village is devoted to farming, Tomi Village is a farming village with a commercial port and some fishing, and Morozuka Village is a remote mountain village. In the Meiji Period, ultimogeniture was practiced in Minamikata and Tomi Villages, whereas primogeniture was practiced in Morozuka village. The fact that different types of succession were practiced in the same district suggests 137 that the practice of ultimogeniture was related to the household's economic situation (ibid.).

Case Study 2. "H* Household in Minamikata Village The household diagram of the "H* household (Figure 6 below) was constructed based on the household registry of the years Meiji 10 (1878) and Meiji 15 (1883). The *H" family is an example of non-primogeniture succession. All the household members practice farming. A mukoyoshi (adopted son-in-law) #11 was brought in to marry the first daughter #10, and they branched off in Meiji 5 (1873). The eldest son #18 was sent out to another family as a mukovdshi. so the household was succeeded by the second son #6 when the head #2 retired in Meiji 13 (1881). Because of the primogeniture

bunke

mukoyoshi mukoyfishi

A Successor to the main household (based on Ueno 1957}

Figure 6. “H* Household Diagram (for Case Study 2) 138 regulation of the Meiji Civil Code, *H* household tried to conceal their non-primogenitural succession by reversing the birth order of the first two sons (#18 and #6) in the registry (ibid.).

Case Study 3. "P" Household in Tomi Village The household diagram of *F* farming household (Figure 7 below) was constructed based on the household registry of the year Meiji 5 (1873). Household head #2's third daughter #5 married a mukovoshi #6, and her eldest son #15 formed a bunke. Her third son #10 also branched off, so her second son #13 finally succeeded (ibid.).

mukoySshi

bunke bunke Zik © d k

▲ successor to the main household (based on Ueno 1957)

Figure 7. “F" Household Diagram (for Case Study 3) 139

Case Study 4. Qn-i 1/onba System In Morozuka Village

Unlike the preceding two examples, this household in Morozuka Village practiced primogeniture early in the Meiji Period (Figure 8 below) . A noticeable fact is that so many members of this household never married, including Gorobe's second and third sons, his first daughter, Goheji's three daughters, and Naru's illegitimate children. These bachelor non-eldest sons were called onii. and “old maid" daughters were called onba. interestingly, most collateral relatives

mukoy6shi

successor to the main household

died young

onji (bachelor non-eldest son)

onba (unmarried daughter) {based on Ueno 19S7)

Figure 8. Onji/Onba System Bxample Household Diagram (for Case Study 4) 140 in this entire village ended up staying single all their lives. This extreme onii/onba system in Morozuka village is

attributed to the poor economic situation at the time. Based on the occurrence of non-primogeniture and the oni i/onba

system, Ueno concluded that unproductive farming households were unable to keep many children at home, and as a result older children branched off in order to extend farming capabilities or to explore other job opportunities. However, in extremely poor communities with almost no possibility of extending farming operations, what amounted to population restriction methods were practiced, such as oni i/onba in

order to preserve the labor force for the household (Ueno 1957) .

H. Kikuchi (1953) studied non-primogeniture in Izahaya city, in Nagasaki Prefecture north of Nagasaki city, on Ariake Bay. Two-thirds of the population practiced farming while the rest practiced a variety of occupations. Characteristically, more than two-thirds of this area was created by repeated land reclamations through the drainage of Ariake Bay starting around the year Tenmon 14 (1545). In other words, this area extended its resources availability by land reclamation, which enabled branching off of the household, which is sufficient condition for non­ primogeniture . 141

Case Study 5. "II" Household “II" farming household of izahaya City, whose household diagram is shown in Figure 9 below, practiced non­ primogeniture succession. All of the older sons "E", *H", * K“, and “L" branched off. When the heir “H* succeeded at the death of the previous head “B", *M“ was still young so his uncle “A* became his guardian. Half of the household property was given to the older sons at the time “M* officially succeeded. In their household registry, the eldest son "E* is recorded as the successor. The parents are listed as having branched off with the youngest son “M" and created a new household registry, and later *M“ succeeded to this branch household headship. The other fact is that “M"

iik

i k (a) Cl )

created branch household

'A died as a child (based on Kikuchi 1953)

Figure 9. *11" Household Diagram {for Case Study 5) . Spouses are not shown. 142 is a child of the second wife of "B", while the rest of the older children “D" through "L" are the first wife's children (Kikuchi 1953).

Case Study 6. " 12 " Household Figure 10 below shows the household diagram of another family in Izahaya city which also practiced some form of non­ primogeniture. Sometime in the past, the household head "A" gave succession to his eldest son "B* (who had already branched off much earlier) , while "A" branched off with his youngest son *D". After "A* died, "D* succeeded his father "A" . Therefore in reality, the main household occupied by "A" was succeeded to by “D*. However, no entry in the household registry had been made for *D*, so as a result the

As. 0 (s)

created branch household

A died as a child (based on Kikuchi 1953)

Figure 10. " 12 " Household Diagram (for Case Study 6). Spouses are not shown. 143 bunke created by *B* officially looked like the main household (ibid.). It is not clear which household should be considered the main household, the household which was succeeded to by the younger son “D*, or that by the older son "B* . From a legal standpoint, that is, according to the official explanation of the household registry, we would have to say that the elder son "B* succeeded to the headship of a branch household, and the main household was discontinued.

As I mentioned before, the Meiji Civil Code did not accept any exceptions to the rule of primogeniture. However, non-primogeniture succession was practiced in certain areas, and people used various techniques to conceal this custom on the household registry. Here are just a few strategies known to have been employed. (1) The eldest male child is listed in the household registry as having succeeded to the headship, but in reality a non-eldest son took the position. This is seen in Case Study 6 (*I2* household in Figure 10) above. In other words, people did not bother altering the registry, and their customary non­ primogeniture practice remained hidden because it did not appear in writing in the household registry. (2) According to the household registry, the head retired and was succeeded by the eldest son, the head 144 branched off with the child to whom he would like to give succession, the head died, and this chosen child succeeded to head the branch32. However, in reality, the eldest son never succeeded the household head, nor did the head create a branch household. The head and his chosen heir continued living in the main house. This is seen in Case Study 5 ("II* household in Figure 9) above. Such practice was actually forging official documents, but people were more afraid of violating primogeniture regulations of the Meiji Civil Code than of being caught falsifying the household registry. (3) The household registry was falsified to indicate that the eldest son had seceded from the household because he married someone against his parents' wishes. (4) The household registry was falsified to indicate that the eldest son was illegitimate. Recall that a natural-born child has dominant right to be an heir. (5) False birth order was recorded on the household registry. (6) The household registry was falsified to indicate that the youngest son was sent out for adoption, when in reality it was the oldest son who was sent out for adoption.

32 In case the head died, the oldest son officially succeeded, and the chosen son created a bunke with his mother and became an heir. 145

First-born Child Succsssion First-born child succession, or anekatoku. is a succession pattern in which the first-born child succeeds and/or inherits, regardless of the child's gender. Suenari (1972) pointed out that anekatoku practice was contradictory to the unilineal principle usually imputed to Japan, and further that the traditionally presumed patrilineal pattern of descent in Japan was inappropriate. One social condition often associated with anekatoku was the necessity of securing agricultural labor. Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei Ruishfl (1880) stated that "in an agricultural household, if there is a first-born female, she should become an heir and take a husband in order to be helpful as labor." Therefore, contrary to the social structure of southwest Japan where small household size was preferred, a large family was desirable in northeast Japan in order to maintain a sufficient pool of labor. It has therefore been hypothesized that first-born child succession is desirable succession pattern for agricultural societies that were labor-intensive. However, this does not preclude other forms of succession from being useful in agricultural societies, such as the example of last-born child succession in Southeast Asia mentioned before. Nevertheless, it helps to explain why first-born child succession was practiced so commonly in agricultural communities in northeastern Japan. 146 In this type of succession rule, birth order played a more important role than gender, in that even if the first­ born was female, she was expected to assume her right even if there were younger male children. Birth order is an important issue for succession not only by male children but also by female children. However, other factors sometimes dominate the birth order. For example, I found in the research that children of a deceased or divorced first wife were not likely to be selected as successor. Instead, the children of the present wife were the stronger candidates for successor even if they were born after the children of the first wife. As a result, the children of the first wife who could not become a successor were allowed to form bunke. apparently as a form of compensation. The Agricultural Development Planning Committee (Noson Kaihatsu Kikaku linkai) (ADPC) reported frequent occurrence of anekatoku in Anrakujo and Nakahirata villages in Yamagata

Prefecture in the year Meiji 10 (1877) based on a survey of the household register (koseki) survey. In that region, anekatoku succession gradually declined and has rarely been seen after World War II (NSson Kaihatsu Kikaku linkai 1982). The practice of anekatoku was known to be distributed mainly in northeast Japan, such as Akita, Iwate, Miyagi, Fukushima, as well as in northern Kant6 Region, such as Tochigi, Ibaragi, and Chiba Prefectures. In each case, the rate of anekatoku among households exceeded 21% (Izumi et al. 1984). 147 Other parts of Japan also were reported to have practiced anekatoku. For example, Zenkoku Minii kanrei Ruishfl (1880) mentions the existence of anekatoku in Rikuchfl, Izu, Hitachi, and Uzen. There are two types of anekatoku: one is truly succes­ sion by the first-born child, regardless of gender; another is a temporary succession by the first-born female, until the eldest male matures enough to accept the responsibilities. AD PC explained that temporary succession by the first-born female is a transitional stage of succession pattern, between true anekatoku system and true male primogeniture patterns. True anekatoku. however, represents a major departure from commonly presumed cultural patterns of inheritance and descent in Japan, and stands out as an important variant in the study of Japanese social organization (Suenari 1972). Suenari interpreted this custom as a direct function of economic necessity. It allowed a smooth recruitment of labor which was essential for the successful management of the family estate (ibid.). However, some cases of inheritance by a first-born daughter cannot be explained by a necessity for labor, for example when there was a brother only a few years younger than the eldest sister. Suenari concluded that first child inheritance is a norm which was so strong in its own right that it was not dependent on economic or legal require­ ments (ibid.). 148 Anekatoku started to vanish after the promulgation of the Meiji Civil Code. Muto divided the process of the disappearance of anekatoku into four stages.

Stage I: the ane (the eldest female child who likely had younger brothers and whose husband was called muko) succeeded the is's property (until the 1870's). Stage II: the ane' s husband was adopted into the ifi. and succeeded the ifi's property (1870's to 1890's). Stage III: the ane's husband was adopted into the but before he would have legally succeeded the ifi's property, the family waited for the eldest son to grow up and succeed the i£'s property (1880's to 1900's). Stage IV: the ane married out of the and the eldest son succeeded the ifi's property (1890's on) (Muto 1985). Muto attributed the disappearance of anekatoku to extension of household headship rights and male dominant ideologies in the Meiji Civil Code (Muto 1985). Further, she analyzed this phenomenon from public (watakushi) vs. private (6vake) realms. l£ in the Edo Period was thought of as belonging not only to the individual, but to ddzoku as well as to the village as a whole. In other words, Xs. was in the public realm. As the household headship rights were extended, ie became a subject of property and right, and came to be included in the private realm. Likewise, the meaning of katoku or household differed in the private realm and the public realm. Muto reported that in household registries, katoku was someone who inherited the ifi/s property even if he was not born in the ±£. Contrary to this, Muto's informants thought that katoku were those who were born in the ifi. even 149 if the spouse (or more often mukovoshi) succeeded the property (Muto 1985). The disappearance of anekatoku can be considered as actually occurring during either stage II or stage III of Muto's timeline, depending on how the meaning of

Q t^ A 3 Kazu©A 5 Mi zue

Yor le Y o s h i e < 6 3

younger siblings AA 3 4 A 3 A 3in Figure 12

A successor to the household ^G>A anekatoku

(based on Muto 1985)

Figure 11. "A" Household Diagram (for Case Study 7) Part 1 (continued in Figure 12) 150 katoku is interpreted. This is an interesting point, which also demonstrates the discrepancy among legal expectations, official evidence, and reality. Thus, interviewing becomes an even more important means of research.

Case Study 7. Anekatoku in "A" Household Muto interviewed a household whose headship was often succeeded to by a first-born female child, regardless of the presence of any male children. “A" household was in "K" township, Miyagi Prefecture in the Tdhoku Region, and was

A60A0

omonc o o

older sibling in Figure 11 AAo successor to the household

anekatoku

(based on Muto 1985)

Figure 12. "A* Household Diagram (for Case Study 7) Part 2 (continued from Figure 11) 151 primarily a farming household. Three generations of women (Mizue, Fumie, and Yoshie in the center of Figure 11) were all anekatoku. Yoshie and her step sister Yorie married the

same man. Tomono (center of Figure 12) married her husband's younger brother after her husband died. This phenomenon, called the levirate, was common after world War II as a means of maintaining household alliances.

Case Study 8. NMW Household *M" household was in Nakada township, Miyagi Prefecture in the Tdhoku Region. The household diagram is shown in Figure 13 on the next page. "H*'s eldest daughter (*A* at the right side of the diagram) and eldest son *G* were twenty years apart because three male children and three female children between them all died in childhood. Thus, *H* adopted a mukovdshi for the eldest daughter 'A* and had her succeed to the household (anekatoku) until "G' was mature enough to assume that position. *G* told me that anekatoku was often practiced in the past because of the high infant mortality rate; it was uncertain whether a would survive long enough to succeed to the headship at all. Inter­ estingly, "A* and her husband formed a bunke after giving up her status as a successor. I assume that the formation of bunke was used as compensation for not becoming a successor to the main household. (Text continues on page 154, after Figure 13). anekatoku

bunke

mkoyoshi anekatokuF:^:

anekatoku

anekatoku lukoyoshi bunke

illegit. child

successor to the main household

successor to a household other than the main household

Figure 13. "H" Household Diagram (for Case Studies 8 and 10) 153 Other occurrences of anekatoku can be seen in persons

*E* (at the top of Figure 13) and *F* (just left of center). Both are first-born children, both are eldest daughters, and both succeeded to their household's headship. A variation is seen with branch-successor *S* (at top left), who was the eldest daughter but not the first child. It is interesting that she formed a bunke. Anekatoku succession was said to be disappearing rapidly and replaced by the male primogeniture during the Meiji Period (1868-1911) (Moore 1990, Muto 1985). However, from the example of *M" household, it is clear that anekatoku and variations of it were still practiced as late as 1936. In fact, the custom of celebrating the birth of the first child in a formal ceremony called "grandchild celebration* (maaoburumai) . regardless of gender, was reported to be still practiced in Nakada township at the end of the 20th century. This ceremony is seldom held for subsequent children (Moore 1990).

Case Study 9. "S* Blactric Company *S* electric company is a small limited partnership of 20 employees founded by person #13 (at the lower right of Figure 14) which makes electric circuits. #13's grandfather, #7, was a mukovSshi married to the eldest daughter of #1, the first president of Tdhoku Electric Co., Ltd. #1 had four children but only one son, his youngest (#3). #l's eldest 154

A t© temporary 1 I I anekatoku

A O Q o Am t t l t n u n c mukoyoshi (5 2 ^©

© © A

successor

Figure 14. "S" Electric Company Household Diagram (for Case Study 9)

daughter, #6, is an example of anekatoku. She succeeded the

household first, but later branched off as her younger brother #3 reached maturity and succeeded the household. Mukovdshi #7 started a paper factory; his son #9 did not

succeed the factory because of the rapid decline of the raw silk industry which was a raw material for producing paper. Instead, #9 took up farming and the paper factory was closed. #13's eldest son, #19, succeeded “S* electric company. 155

Selective Succession Selective succession is a rule whereby one or both of succession and inheritance is conferred to a male child chosen by the family. It can be argued that this has been practiced all over Japan, depending on various factors. Unlike fist-born child or last-born child succession rules, in which succession rights are determined by birth status, the decision of the heir is not made until the time of selection {Takeda 1974b). As might be expected, the most important factor in the selection is the capability and appropriateness of the individual. However, it is not always clear what criteria were actually involved in the selection process. For example, if a candidate child was married, his spouse and children could be factors. Whether the candidate had any children at all, and the gender of the candidate's children (viewed as potential future successors) could affect the selection process. It was certainly possible for a most congenial daughter-in-law to influence the selection of her husband over his brothers. On the other hand, the candidate's wife's family background could also be taken into consideration; for example, a daughter-in-law who would have the responsibility of taking care of her own parents might disqualify her husband just because of that fact. Economic factors can also be important. For instance, male children absent by dekaseoi 156 (working away from home) may force the selection to be made from among the remaining brothers.

Case Study 10. "M" Household Revisited “M" household (Figure 13 on page 153), in which we have already looked at examples of anekatoku, is also a source for examples of selective succession. *K* (just above the center) was a second son. His older brother “J" was officially disqualified as a heir because he was not considered to be a hard working man, while “K" was said to have a talent for business. This is an example where the successor's capability is considered more important than the birth order. "K* started a silk worm business, but abandoned it due to shortage of labor. Instead, he started growing rice, which was less labor-intensive. *K" had only one child, a daughter who married a mukovoshi "D*. Their eldest son

*H* succeeded to the headship of the rice farm. “H" started a rice mill and became the government's official rice distributor for the region. I heard a little different story about *K"'s succession from my informant. According to that story, “J* was disqualified as a successor not because he was incapable, but because he was the child of a former wife. After the former wife died, the second wife wanted her own child to be a 157 successor. In any case, it demonstrates how circumstantial the selective succession process can be.

When selective succession was an available option, there could be conflicts as to who becomes a successor. Hamabata reported a case where a company president preferred a younger son to be his successor. The president assigned his eldest son to become president of a branch company. This eldest son was glad at first, feeling that his father trusted him with this important position. But, he later noticed that his father had effectively eliminate him from the possibility of becoming president of the main company. This caused much consternation among the brothers and other relatives (Hamabata 1990) .

A d o p t ion

Fictivs Kinship Created by Adoption The relationship created by adoption can be considered to be a kind of fictive kinship. Maine considered adoption to be a legal fiction. He defined adoption as any assumption which conceals, or affects to conceal the fact that a rule of law has undergone alteration, its letter remaining unchanged, its operation being modified (Maine 19315 . Maine also saw the fiction of adoption as the first step towards civilization, because it permitted the incorporation of 158 strangers as kin and thus enabled the progress from an emphasis on the bonds of kinship to the ties of contiguity as a basis for common political action (Maine 1931). For Goody, adoption had three main purposes: (1) to provide homes for orphans, bastards, foundlings and the children of impaired families; (2) to provide childless couples with social progeny; (3) to provide an individual or couple with an heir to their property (Goody 1976:68). In Western societies, the main purpose of adoption has been Goody's first function above. It was not until 1926 that an adoption law was established in England. It was established and then repealed in some countries like Holland and Russia. In the United States, adoption was an important social practice because of the multitude of immigrants from Europe in the 19th century. Many of these immigrants were poor and found it difficult to keep their children. These children were raised by other families. In 1851, Massachusetts' adoption law was enacted to create a legal parent-child relationship between an adopted child and her adopting parents, so that the biological parents could not claim their children later. In terms of pure numbers, the United States is the country in which adoption is practiced most frequently. Adoption laws began to be used seriously in Europe because of the many orphans created by World War I . By 1967, all European countries came to have adoption laws. 159 Based on the social background of adoption laws, which were enacted for the benefit of the children, the main purpose of adoption in the West was the welfare of the child rather than to secure a successor for the family, as was the case in Japan. Thus, unlike Japan, where adoption of adults and sometimes even married couples are fairly common, adoption in the U.S. and England is legally possible only for non-adults. Adoption of the spouses' children from a previous marriage accounts for about half of the total number of adoptions in the United Sates and England (Yamabatake 1989).

The act of adoption involved the transfer of an individual from one filial relationship to another, from a 'natural'' relationship to a 'fictional' one, but one which was in most respects legally equivalent {ibid. 1976:69). Goody states that the adopted individual did not have all the rights that a natural-born child had. For example, in Rome an adopted child was required to observe the prohibited degrees of marriage attached to his earlier status (ibid. 1976:69). This is not true in 20th century Japan, where the legal rights of an adopted individual were the same as that of a natural-born child, although it may be true that the social status of an adopted person may not be the same as a natural-born child.33

33 For example, in the Imai household, the adopted oldest son and his wife took seats in a lower-status position than all the blood- 160 Fortes considered the concept of filiation to be a modal mechanism and a crucial relationship of inter-generational continuity and social reproduction. In this sense, filiation was the intersection of synchronic order and diachronic extension, at the core of social structure. "For it is by virtue of filiation that each generation of offspring replaces and at the same time perpetuates each generation of parent in diachronic sequence* (Fortes 1969:256). If natural reproduction fails to provide this sequence, artificial or substitute replacement could be practiced. Fortes characterized the artificial kinship created by adoption as a situation in which one party must have parental status and authority; this differs from the equal status of both parties in the case of blood-brotherhood34 Adopted children must behave with the same respect toward their adoptive parents as do the natural offspring of those parents. They could not marry siblings, but they could inherit property like natural children. This was not true in Japan, however, since there are many cases where an adopted individual, married a sibling and became an heir. In the case of mukov6shi. a man became a child of the family at the same time he married a daughter of

relatives at formal occasions such as funerals and weddings, regardless of his senior age. 34 Some of the characteristics presented by Fortes may not be true in the fictive kinship relationships of Japan. For example, some blood- brotherhood relationships in Japan, such as ovabun-kobun and anibun- otfltohun relationships, exhibit clearly unequal status and authority between parties. 161 the family. Legally, husband and wife alike were children of the same parents, and in practice the husband would refer to his adoptive parents as his "parents* rather than as his in­ laws. In some cases, a male was adopted at a young age and married one of his female siblings when they both reached a suitable age for marriage. The important notion behind these patterns of marriage is the perpetuation of the household.

In many societies, the target individual for adoption for the purpose of providing an heir was often selected from among relatives. In Greece, mainly close kin were adopted, and sometimes affines. Adoption involved a continuation of the worship of the family shrines. Adoption was connected with continuity of both property and worship in the direct line of descent {Goody 1976:71). Adoption was often practiced among relatives in patrilineal societies. The perpetuation of the lineage, referring specifically to a man's personal line of descent, was the main objective of adoption under Hindu law (ibid. 1976:73). In other patrilineal societies like Korea and China before its revolution, if there were no children, adoption was practiced within a clan sharing the same , in order to have a successor for the household. The adopted child was preferred to be as close as possible to the adopter, for example a brother's son was the most preferred relative for adoption. The difference of a generation was 162 considered important. For example, a child to be adopted had to be in the same generation as the adopting parents' children. China was unlike Japan in this respect, since adoption of one's brother was a definite possibility in Japan. In modern China, adoption for the purpose of succession to the house is not permitted (Goody 1976, Heibonsha 1989) . Adoptions of this kind appear to be connected with vertical systems of inheritance, to be distinguished from horizontal systems; this kind of adoption provided a descendant, not a collateral (Goody 1976). The difference between adoption in patrilineal societies and adoption in Japan is that in patrilineal societies, adoption was carried out in order to continue a lineage, whereas in Japan, it was to continue a household name. Thus, from an analysis of adoption practices, Japan was not a typical patrilineal society. Selection of the adoptee in Japan was made not only from patrilineal kin but from a variety of sources including non-relatives.

History of Adoption in Japan In ancient Japan, Ritsuryd prescribed that if there were no children, adoption of the appropriate generation could take place. At that time, the concept of ifi. was not yet established. Therefore, among high ranking people, adoption was practiced in order to carry forward one's status in society rather than to inherit the property of the family. 163 Adoption was also practiced among common people. In this case, adoption of a man or woman was for the purpose of taking care of the adopting parents. In the beginning of the Heian Period, adoption was practiced more often, even by people who already had children, and by single women. As patrilineality became more established, adoption came to be used to provide a worthy successor to the house headship. In the Edo Period, adoption was practiced mainly to fill the position of successor to the jja. Rules for adoption were

strictly spelled out by the central government. There were many kinds of adoption. MukoySshi* himaySshi35. kokoroatari y6shi36, kvuyoshi37 were all forms of adoption for the purpose

of succeeding the household, all distinct from forms of adoption such as chichibakari (hahabakari) np. voshi38 or chakubo keibo up. v6shi 39 .which were not for succession

(Takigawa 1938). The warrior law of 1663, called bukeshohatto. set the rules of adoption as follows: The

3^ Himavflshi refers to an adoption made by a household head of the warrior class who had no heir, when he had to leave home for a long period of time due to official duty, such as alternative residence duty (sankin-kfltai) in Edo. 36 Kokoroatari vflshi was an adopted heir designated by a household head of the warrior class prior to his death. 37 Kyflyflshi was an adoption made by a household head of the warrior class over 50 years old who was about to die. Also called matsugo vflshi ("deathbed adoption"). 38 Chichibakari (hahabakari) flfi vflshi was an adoption made by a single household head (or by a single woman) for the purpose of inheritance. 39 Chakubo keibo jja vftshi was the adoption of a child of an secondary wife by a legal wife, or an adoption of a child of a former wife by a present wife. 164 adopted child must be a relative. The order of preference for adoption was dictated to be 1) younger brother, nephew, cousin, second nephew, or second cousin; 2) son-in-law, daughter's child, sister's child, or step brother. If there was no candidate in these categories, non-relative adoption was permitted as a rare exception, and only if the child was not the eldest son. Perpetuation of the was recognized as very important. Adoption of an alternative successor-to-be (kari y6shi) was permitted in order to secure a successor whenever the real successor was away from home for an extended period of time. Adoption was used to enhance political alliances between households. During the Age of Civil Wars in the 15th and 16th centuries, marriage was a typical way to secure amicable relationships between households; even multiple marriage exchanges were practiced. Figure 15 on the next page contains a household diagram of a famous historical example. The Yamana and Hosokawa households were two powerful households who assisted the 8th Muromachi Shogun Ashikaga Yoshimasa in the 15th century. The daughter {#3 in the diagram) of Yamana S6zen (*Y*) married the successor son (#5) of Hosokawa Katsumoto (•H*). However, Yamana thought that one marriage was not enough to secure the relationship of the two households, so he offered his youngest son {#4) to be adopted by Hosokawa's successor (#5, Yamana's own new son-in- law) . This adoption created a paradoxical kinship 165

Figure 15. Hosokawa-Yamana Alliance Household Diagram relationship in which sister and brother became mother and adopted child. This also serves as an example that Japanese kinship was not biologically based. Women were adopted not to become successors, but to marry an adopted son-in-law who might himself become a successor. In order to preserve the blood line, adoption of relative women was preferred to non-relatives. oftentimes, a woman was adopted and given away as a bride, in order to establish kinship relationships with a powerful family. In the strict shi-no-k6-sho ("warrior-farmer-artisan-merchant*) class system of the Edo Period, sometimes a woman in a lower class family was adopted by a higher class family, in order to balance out the groom's social class (Ueno 1989). This is an example of hypergamy. Specifically, marriage was not allowed between individual of the lowest (merchant) class and 166 an individual of the highest (warrior) class. Marriage was allowed, however, between a merchant and a farmer, the second-highest class. Thus, for example, a farming household could look as far down as the merchant class for adopting daughters (a relatively cheap proposition), and those adopted daughters officially became farmer class and were eligible for marriage to the highest warrior class. It was not necessary to seek female candidates for adoption from the higher classes, which could be a relatively expensive undertaking for both the natal and the adopting households. Until the Meiji Period in Japan, adoption was practiced mainly for the purpose of continuing a household. This attitude on adoption was still reflected in the Meiji Civil Code, in which regulations on adoption were made on the condition that adoption was for acquiring a successor to a household. For example, if a household head already had a successor (katoku sozokunin) determined by law, he could not adopt a male child. Adoption by will was also permitted under Meiji Civil Code (Yoshimi 1990). It was not until 1987 that adoption for the welfare of a child became constitutionalized under the term "special adoption* (tokubetsu voshi).

Adoption (vflahi) in Late 20th Cantury Japan

Before World War II, the status of illegitimate children was officially recognized as being a true relative 167 relationship to the parents. under the postwar civil code, however, illegitimate children could only enter into legal kinship relationships by adoption {Civil Code 792-817). Several conditions were necessary for adoption in Japan under the postwar civil code: 1) The adopting parent must be an adult, and must be older than the adopted person. 2) If the adopted child was younger than fifteen years old, his sponsor's consent was necessary. 3) If the adopting parent had a spouse, both husband and wife had to become adopting parents. 4) Adoption of children always required the court's permission, except for adoption of one's own descendants or one's spouse's descendants. The court decided whether an adoption was against the child's welfare by reviewing various factors, focusing on the prospective parents, such as their reasons, purpose, parental ability, and their own relationship as a couple. The court typically tried to disqualify adoptions which appeared to be desired for the purpose of changing a child's legal residency in order to enter a certain school, or for the purpose of acquiring a child to take care of the adopting parents when they grew old, or for the purpose of creating a successor to the household name. After an adoption was established, the adopted child was required to take the adopting parents' surname. Kinship relations between an adopted child and the 168 relatives of the adopting parents were considered to be established upon adoption. However, the children of an adopted person were not recognized as entering any kinship relations with the adopting parents nor any relatives of the adopting parents. Therefore, these 'adopted grandchildren" could not inherit their parents' inheritance right. In another words, alternative inheritance (daishfl s6zoku) did not occur. These children of the adopted person could however inherit their parent's natal family's property, because adoption did not remove any legal kinship relations between natal relatives and a child who was adopted into another family (Yamabatake 1989) . There were over 180,000 applications for registration of adoption made in 1952, and of these, approximately 150,000 were cases of adoptions of adults, which were rare in other countries (Matsumoto 1962). The average number of adoptions in Japan per year was about 90,000 from 1960 to 1980. However, adoption of children is decreasing, to only 3522 cases in 1980 (ibid. 1989). The majority of adoptions in Japan have always been adult adoption for the purpose of securing an heir. The most common reason for adoption has been for succession to the i£., rather than for the welfare of the child. Adoption of minors has decreased from 31% to only 8% of all adoptions, primarily because of an overall reduction in the number of children available for adoption, which in 169 Japan has resulted from decreased fertility and fewer orphans, single-parent families, and illegitimate children. However, adoption of son-in-laws (mukovoshi) remained at about the same level from 1952 to 1975 (Long 1987). One's brother or sister could legally be adopted Hun v6shi), and a married couple could be adopted (fufu y6shi). As I mentioned earlier, the evidence of adopted couples and adopted sons-in- law clearly indicates that adoption in Japan emphasizes the continuity of the household but not lineage, since the adopted person(s) in these types of adoption is not necessarily a relative. Adult heirs (y6shi) may be adopted without court permission. Matsumoto (1962) and Long (1987) reported the attitudes of Japanese people toward adoption of non-relatives for the purpose of succession. The responses are summarized in Table 15 below. The questions asked were "Do you think that when there are no children, an ie. should be continued by

Table 15. Preference for Continuation of the Household by Non-relative Adoption (percent of respondents) should should not ^ e a ^ con^nue^^^^^continue 1953 73% 16% 1953 69% 18% 1958 63% 21% 1963 51% 32% 1968 43% 41% 1986 25% 62% 1990 7% 79%

{survey by Prime Minister's Secretariat) 170 adopting a vdshi. even if that person is unrelated by blood?

Or do you think continuation would be unnecessary?" Those who stated "It is better to adopt a voshi and continue the ifi" were then further asked: "Would you feel the same way if your household was very well-off economically?" Among the 69% who supported the adoption of ydshi for the continuity of 59% still responded that they would adopt a yoshi despite having no real economic justification. These data also indicate that adoption was important for the perpetuation of the household, rather than for security in old age (Matsumoto 1962). More recent data collected in 1987 and 1990 suggest that a majority of people did not support the idea of adoption for the purpose of the succession to the household. However, in the same year 1987, as shown in Table 16 below, more than three-fourths of the respondents felt that it was important to pass on their house and grave site which had been transferred through many generations. This indicates that the ideal of the continuation of the household is still supported by many Japanese people.

Table 16. Desire to Continue Passing on House and Grave Site to the Next Generation (percent of respondents)

1986 77.8% 14.7% 1990 71.3% 16.3%

(survey by Prime Minister's Secretariat) 171

Adoption for Tax Purposes Throughout the 20th century, inheritance taxes were extremely high in Japan. Although the rate was reduced in 1988, it still peaks 70%, compared to 55% in the U.S., and 40% in England. Rather than paying the high inheritance tax, heirs would prefer to receive their inheritance before the owner dies, in which case they need only pay a transfer tax at a lower rate. Unless the owner of a small- to medium-size company had already transferred property to the next successor, the successor could not afford to pay inheritance tax all at once when the owner died. Recent land price hikes made the succession of small companies even more difficult, especially in large cities such as T6ky6 and Osaka, since the inheritance tax is based in part on the appraised value of real estate being inherited. Between January and September 1989, there were 95 cases of bankruptcy attributed to insufficient employees; among these, 37 cases resulted from lack of successors (President 1989:11). Many adoptions entered in Japan were for the purpose of reducing inheritance taxes. Increasing of the number of children could increase the standard deduction for calculating inheritance tax. It also increased the tax- exempt amount of life insurance and retirement money. Since adoption of one's own lineal descendants or those of one's spouse did not require permission of the court (Article 798), relative adoption was often used for tax evasion purposes. I 172 will discuss in some detail the calculation of inheritance taxes in the presence of adopted children in Chapter VI. Japanese law strictly limited the number of adopted children who could become a legal heir. If there were any natural-born children, only one adopted child could become a legal heir. If there were no natural-born children, up to two adopted children could become legal heirs. This limit was not applicable to adopted children younger than 6 years old (tokubetsu vdshi) nor to the adoption of natural-born or previously-adopted children of the spouse (Ndzei Ky6kai Rengdkai 1989). The household in the next case study used adoption to reduce inheritance tax in yet a different way.

Case Study 11. Construction Company Data for *T* construction company were obtained from my interviews. A household diagram is shown in Figure 16 on the next page. *T" construction company was founded by "K"'s father "Y*. *K*'s grandfather *T*'s wife '1* started *S* Inn in Narugo, a locale famous for kokeshi wooden dolls. "K"'s wife *7* succeeded to the management of the inn. “7" was also listed as a senior executive director of *T* company for tax purposes, but she did not really participate in the business of 'T' company. 173

©pi"5)

Figure 16. Construction Company Household Diagram (for Case Study 11)

For tax purposes, "K*'s eldest son *A" was adopted by his grandfather *Y" . This type of adoption is called maaovdshi (grandchildren adoption) , and was commonly practiced in Japan. Legally, “K* and his son became brothers. By doing so, when *Y* died, property would be inherited by "K* as well as by his natal son 'A*. The inheritance tax would be reduced because the standard deduction is greater when there are more legal heirs. Another side effect would be the reduction of *K*'s portion of the inheritance from "Ym; but of course that portion will in time be inherited again by *K"'s son *A". 'K"'s younger brother “M* went to live in Brazil. "M*'s father *Y' had always encouraged "M' to go to Brazil to start a business; *K" believed that *M" succeeded the dream of his 174 father. As a second son, "M* had no possibility of succeeding the business, which almost certainly affected his decision to leave the household and seek his fortune in Brazil. "K* too had a slightly unusual personal history. He went to Tdkyd when he was younger, in part because he did not want to accept the predetermined succession pattern in his family. However, when his grandfather *T" died, the responsibility to his family weighed heavily on "K", so he decided to return home and succeed the business. "K* was in favor of impartible inheritance for construction businesses like *T* company which had to maintain land and forest interests. As compensation to non­ successors, "K" planned to sell some forest and use the money to send them to a university in Tdkyd, while the successor attended the farming college in the local town. "K* described the ethics of the rural Japan as "narrow but long." "T" company was actively managed by senior employees. Capital was inherited through relatives, but they did not actively participate in management. The people who ran the business were different from those who owned the capital. "K* himself seriously did not care who would succeed the business. He believed that the choice of a successor depended heavily on the practical, material necessities rather than on the ideals of succession. 175 "K" had no intention of extending *T" company or employing his second and the third sons *9' and “10" in the business. At the time they gain their independence, "K* expected that non-successors would probably be given money, some land, and a house, and give up their inheritance right. The choice of an heir to succeed to the parents' company was based on the ideology of . *K" did not want to succeed to his parents' company, but when his mother died, he felt the responsibility to return home and take care of the business. However, he also emphasized that his decision to accept the succession was heavily dependent on the material resources to be gained or at least retained, rather than on the ideal or custom of succession. He believed that unless the business was lucrative and attractive to his children, they would not want to succeed to it. Thus, the succession to the business seems not only based on the Confucian ideologies of filial piety and loyalty, but also on resources.

On the other hand, the owner of a company might question his heir's capability to be a successor. He may decide to prevent an incapable heir from succeeding, and instead choose someone else to succeed to the business, such as a younger sibling or a mukovSshi. or even a capable employee, for the good of the organization. In this case, corporate benefit surpasses the ideology of order and benevolence. However, I 176 assume that there are many cases in which the owner of a company failed to make the decision to disqualify his natal son from being successor purely out of benevolence to his son. Such a decision must be a difficult one for a father; no doubt pressure from other members of the company could be a very strong influence.

Case Study 12. "F2" Household "F2" household, whose diagram is in Figure 17 below, contains an example of sibling adoption. *T"'s daughter "E" married out but later divorced and returned to her natal

AO mukoycfehi AAAono child died early cc 6bunke 6 A A AA died as a child successor of main household

Figure 17. "F2" Household Diagram (for Case Study 12) 177

household. She ended up becoming a successor while her eldest brother *S* was in Manchuria during the war. when 'S* came back after the war, he was given a rice paddy and formed a bunke. The second son "H" went to Tdkyd. The third son

"M* was adopted by his sister *E" who had no children, and later became a successor to the main household. The first son *S" was not happy about becoming a bunke. since the only

reason he did not become a successor to the main household was because he was away at war.

Mukovflahl (Adopted Son-in-law) Mukovdshi is a unique type of adoption. It has not been

observed in societies where patrilineality was strong and adoption was most often practiced among relatives. The ultimate purpose of mukovdshi adoption was the perpetuation of the i£. Mukoydshi was a kind of matrilocal marriage, but

the male spouse was legally adopted by his parents-in-law. Mukoydshi was adopted when there were no male children, or when none of the male children were capable of being the successor. If there were no children at all, a daughter was often adopted rather than a son, because a was considered to be easier to raise. Then, a mukovdshi was chosen later to marry her. Mukovdshi succeeded the name and property of his wife's family, and thus characterizes lack of strong patrilineality in Japan. 178 Kawaguchi compared the age difference between fathers and natural-born sons versus fathers and adopted sons-in-law in Toyohara village between 1800 and the 1950s (Kawaguchi 1978). Eldest son succession in this hamlet occurred in 79 out of 110 farming families, or over 70%. On the other hand, adoption of a son-in-law for succession occurred in the other 31 families, almost 30%. Moreover, there is even more evidence of adopted sons-in-law further back in the historical records. The percentage of farm households succeeded to by an adopted son-in-law was about 21% (39 incidents) in the period from 1901 to 1950, 33% (36 incidents) from 1851 to 1900, and 50% (12 incidents) before 1850. One reason for such a high frequency of mukovdshi is that male children often simply did not survive to maturity in those days. However, we can not ignore the fact that there were seven families where an adopted son-in- law succeeded to the household headship despite the existence of a natural-born son. In the case of succession by the eldest son (60 cases), the average age difference between father and son was about 27 years. When a mukoydshi was taken in the presence of natural-born sons, the average age difference between father and natural-born son was 36 years, and between father and adopted son-in-law was 21 years. In comparison, in families who adopted a son-in-law when there were no natural-born sons, the average age difference between father and son-in-law was 26 years. These data highlight a 179 rather wide age gap between father and natural-born sons, and it can be derived that adopting a son-in-law was a way of complementing a family with insufficient labor due to the changing of the generation (ibid.).

in Japan, sons-in-law were adopted more often than in China. Hsu attributes the reason for the frequent adoption of sons-in-law in Japan to the practice of single inheritance. Throughout China, the inheritance was distributed equally among all the sons, whereas in Japan, a non-heir son did not even have the legal right to continue living in the ancestral home. Therefore, Japanese non-heir sons were typically required to seek their fame elsewhere, often ending up in other families (Hsu 1975:61).

In the Kinki Region, merchant businesses were well known for preferring succession by mukoydshi. A mukovoshi of such a merchant business typically married into his wife's family for the purpose of carrying on the business of the wife's family. The individual chosen to become a mukoydshi was often a capable employee, and he was chosen by the master to become his adopted son. It was said that if a company was succeeded to by a capable mukovdshi. then they would not go out of business, and the master need not worry about his own son's qualities for becoming the master. 180 Eitai Nichivd Kiroku (Record of Customs in the Eitai

Era) written in the Meiji Period stated: If you have a son, give him a branch household or give him up for adoption. Treat your son like a servant. Male succession will never succeed. Adopting a mukovdshi is the only way to find a successor. (Kurobane ed. 1930) Before the Edo Period, it was common for daughters to remain in the ifi, with their husbands being adopted as sons- in-law. Even at the end of the 20th century, although rare, there are documented cases where even a daughter became a successor. If the designated successor seemed to lack adequate skills or temperament to assume the role, the position may also be made available to a mukovoshi. If there were no children in the family, a girl might be brought in as a foster child, then married, and her husband brought in through adoption, or both a husband and a wife might be brought in through adoption. Hamabata stated: The i£ is not locked into the biogenetic reality of birth, descent, and lineage. Its social organizational and structural principles operate in stark contrast to its ideology of biology, of patrilineal descent and primogeniture. The tragic story, therefore, of the spoiled chfinan who is pushed aside to make way for his sister's mukovdshi for reasons of superior talent and/or political/economic alliances is grounded in the facts of organizational behavior within the i£ (Hamabata 1990). 181

A mukoydshi assumed the succession and inheritance right of the household to which he was adopted40. Conventionally, a mukoydshi was adopted in order to continue the "name of the business." However, by the end of the 20th century some mukoydshi insisted on using their natal family name even in the business to which they succeeded. As a result, the business itself could continue, but the name of the business could not. This undesirable situation result in fewer candidates being recognized as possible mukoydshi. It was more difficult to find an individual who could become mukoydshi in part due to decreasing average family size. This situation caused the status of mukovdshi to improve.

Our next case study is an example of exactly such a case.

Case Study 13. "N " Clinic

*M" clinic is an Ob/Gyn clinic with about 50 employees located in Tsuruoka city, Yamagata Prefecture. The household diagram for *M* clinic is in Figure 18 on the next page, individual #28 was the founder and chief director friiichd) of "M* clinic. He had married the eldest daughter (#15) of a scholar in German literature (#9), and was adopted into that family as a mukoydshi. #9's father (#1) was a rich landlord.

40 Toshitani disagreed with the inheritance right of the mukovdshi . Before WWII, mukovdshi were legally adopted, and thus inherited as the oldest male child. However, mukovdshi in the 1990's took the wife's surname but were not legally adopted and did not always have inheritance right {Toshitani 1993). 182

#28 was supposed to succeed to #l's position on behalf of his adopting father-in-law (#9), but one of #9's step brothers (#3) ended up succeeding to #l's position. This left #28 free to pursue his primary interest, to open a medical clinic like several of his natal relatives before him. #28 came from a household of many doctors. His father (#22) was a doctor and ran "O* clinic in Tsuruoka. #28's grandfather on his mother's side (#16) was also a doctor with his own *T" clinic in the nearby town of Toge. #28's uncle on his mother's side (#18) opened *G* clinic located between Tsuruoka and Toge. #18's daughter (#19) married a mukovoshi

(#20) who succeeded as the head of “G" clinic, but the name of the clinic was discontinued. The name of "G* clinic was

^^^^mukoy 6 b h i

Figure 18. UK" Clinic Household Diagram (for Case Study 13) 183 changed to the family name of the mukovdshi (#20) (labeled

"K" clinic in the diagram). #28's older natal brother (#23) had three daughters, the youngest of whom married a mukovdshi who succeeded as the head of "O' clinic. In this case, too, the name of the clinic was changed to the mukovdshi * s surname

(*P* clinic). #28's brother-in-law (#14) is also a German Literature scholar like his father (#9). #28's youngest brother-in-law (#13) ran *M* farm. #28's wife (#15) managed a dairy shop, buying dairy products from "M* farm. #28 had two male children and one daughter, the daughter (#34) being the middle child. The older son (#36) succeeded as the head of *M* clinic. His wife (#39) was a nutritionist. They had two sons in medical school, and another who wanted to study medicine. #28's dream was to extend *M" clinic and let these three grandsons take charge of three different divisions. At the time of the interview to acquire these data, #28 was the chief director, and was in charge of accounting, administration, and planning of clinic. His wife (#15), son (#38), and son's wife (#39) were all directors. His son- in-law (#35) served as an auditor, and his grandson (#36) was also a director of the clinic. Another non-relative doctor was an assistant director. clinic was officially classified as a medical corporation (iryd h6~iin) . #28 wanted 184 to extend *M* clinic, but he did not want it to become so large that it would become a foundation (zaidan hd~iin) , which would be subject to corporation tax which was heavier than income tax.

Kinship ideology played an important role in the business setting. Creating branch offices certainly could not be done without resources, but if such a venture was successful, it would bring new resources back to the family. However, the motivation for creating branch offices in the case of *M" clinic case may be the parents' benevolence to the children, and to ensure that they have status and position.

The status of mukovoshi was improving in the late 20th century, as evidenced in the *M" clinic example above. More mukovoshi insist on preserving their natal surname, even though Article 810 of the postwar Civil Code stipulates that the 'adopted child assumes the surname of the parent by adoption.* In the "M* clinic example, a mukoydshi (#20 at the right of Figure 18) succeeded as the head of “G" clinic, but the name of the clinic was changed to *K", which was the mukovdshi (#20)'s own surname. Likewise, mukovdshi #25 succeeded as the head of *0* clinic, but the name of the clinic was changed to his natal surname *P". However, Hamabata also reported the unstable position of a mukoydshi 185

who did not change his name. It could be said that by not doing so he had not yet completed the full process of adoption. And no one need assume that his position in the adoptive household was permanent (Hamabata 1990) . Hamabata also reported that a woman who married a mukovdshi was not necessarily as happy as others might have

assumed. He stated in particular that ...she inherits the burden of a man. ...if one brings in a mukoydshi. one is actually assuming the household headship in the guise of the household wifeship, ...denying the essence of femininity, ...a position often considered kazoku h q giseisha. sacrificial victims of their household (Hamabata 1990:45).

We have seen examples where the property (including the name of the business) was inherited and even controlled by a mukovdshi. Let us now examine a case in which the property was not transferred to the mukovdshi. but rather remained the property of the mukovdshi's wife (the head's daughter).

Cass Study 14. "N3" Household The household diagram for “M3* household is shown in Figure 19 on the next page. Individuals “S* and *T* were brothers with no other siblings. When *S* died, his wife was abandoned by the family, and their two sons, *C“ and *J*, were raised by their father's brother “T* and his wife. *J* married, but died of cancer leaving two daughters. His 186 (>a A66AA

mukoyoshi £A£) Figure 19. MM3" Household Diagram (for Case Study 14) younger brother “C* then married “J^'s wife “B“ . It was common for a younger brother to marry his deceased brother's wife, especially in the case of “war widows". At the time of succession to “S" and *T*'s father's position, there was quite a dispute in the family as to which of *S“'s or "T“'s lineage should be considered to be the main household. “T“'s children opposed to their first cousin “C “'s son becoming a successor to a household. But “J “'s widow, “C*'s wife (“B“), was a very strong woman. She argued and fought against “T*'s descendants, and won. *T* and his family became a bunke. while *S"s descendants kept the main householdship. “J* and *B“ took a mukovoshi for their second daughter to succeed as the household head, but did not let that mukov6shi own any property or land of their household. 187

The property and the land remained the property of their daughter.

In many cases, the succession to a family-owned business was temporarily carried on by a capable mukoyoshi. that is, a son-in-law marrying the first-born daughter and being adopted into the family. However, since there was also the desire on the part of the owner of the company for his natal son to be a successor to the company, a branch company could be created so that both the mukovoshi and the natal son could be in charge of a company (field data and Hamabata 1990). In such a case, however, there could easily arise the problem of deciding who will be in charge of the main branch and who would take the inferior position in the bunke (Hamabata

1990). It was not always easy to find a suitable and capable mukovfishi. Several informants who had only daughters mentioned that it was very difficult to find mukovfishi for small family businesses like theirs. Therefore, it can be assumed that adopting a mukoydshi was not always the easiest solution for the succession of small companies in late 20th century Japanese society. CHAPTER V

CORPORATE SUCCESSION

Ideology in the Family-owned Business in Japan Ideology and resources are both essential aspects of Japanese businesses. From the viewpoint of corporate aspects, expansion of Japanese family-owned companies is based on resources. Because there was a decline in the number of d6zoku during the recession of the 1920s and 1930s, it has been hypothesized that business expansion tends to decline with a weak economy. On the other hand, business expansion can be expected in times of economic growth. Even potential resource advantages brought on by economic growth can change management ideology. For example, "I* department store (which we will examine later in Case Study 18, Figures 23 through 25) at one time strictly adhered to a policy of not incorporating non-heir children into its management ranks. The expansion of the business in the late 1970s, however, created branches of "I* department store which are now managed not only by the single heir, but also by non-heir children of the successor. There are documented instances where the family and/or business hierarchy based on wealth comes into direct opposition with the hierarchy based on the ddzoku genealogy.

188 189 One example is Seiko, famous for its watches. Its branch company Seiko Epson (computers and printers) now far overshadows the parent company. Resources are important for the expansion of a family- owned business. However, the importance of ideology, especially Confucian ideologies such as loyalty, benevolence, and filial piety, cannot be ignored.

The Ideology and Corporativity of Dflioku

In order to discuss the ideology of the Japanese family- owned business, it is necessary to examine the roles of ideology and resources in the formation of the i£, because they have certain characteristics in common, especially with respect to expansion. For many years, major academic debate concerning the i£. centered around its fundamental nature, focusing on factors which affect the formation of the i£. Is there necessarily a economic relationship within the d6zoku. or is a ddzoku basically kinship oriented? Are there factors other than these which can cause branching to occur? Many scholars support the theory that the d6zoku is purely economically based. A necessary condition for being a honke (main or stem household) or a bunke (branch household) is that a bunke becomes independent only with economic assistance from the honke. The basic ddzoku relationships between honke and bunke are vertical alliances, and there are 190 no horizontal links between bunke. The honke is always in the center (Fukutake 1949, Aruga 1962, Nakane 1987). The economic superiority of the stem family is the basis for its dominant political status, which manifests itself in various ways, for example in decisions regarding marriages and funerals. Particularistic and functionally diffuse behavior patterns and feudalistic ideologies bind the stem and branch households. Befu attributed the decline of ddzoku in the 1920s and 1930s to the removal of political and economic superiority of stem households by central government policies {Befu 1962). The is seen as a perpetual social organization, like a corporation (Kitadji 1978). It is a corporate group / kinship structure which holds property in common (Bachnik 1983). Primary emphasis is placed on the perpetuity of the ie as a corporate unit; continuity of the blood line is of only secondary importance {Befu 1962, Cornell 1964). K. Brown challenged this idea, maintaining that ddzoku relationships have an ideological component independent of economic factors. He showed that branching can occur with no economic benefit to the main household, and that branch households can be economically superior to their main households. Therefore he contended that d6zoku consists primarily of kinship relationships. Kinship should 191 analytically be separated from other types of social relations (Brown 1968). Dfizoku relationships seem to have both economic and ideological aspects. From the point of view of individual relationships, a dozoku is mainly a descent group, while from the point of view of ifi relationships, a dozoku is mainly an economic/functional group (Befu 1962). Kitano considered that for maintaining dozoku relationships, both economic/political superiority and ideological superiority of the honke is important (Kitano 197 6). Many marriages and adoptions are registered within dozoku (Izumi et al. 1984).

However, it is also known that individuals are often adopted from honke to bunke. indicating the superiority of honke.

Kitano recognized that there are different words used to describe bunke which receive different degrees of economic assistance from their honke. Further, he noticed that even if a bunke no longer needed economic aid from its honke. its bunke status is maintained. Thus, ideological factors are as important as economic reasons for ddzoku relationship. Kitano emphasized the importance of seikatsu kanren (•relationship in living"), in which both honke and bunke cooperate in ceremonies of and response to childbirth, funeral, natural disaster, illness, as well as in dfizoku god worship and ancestor worship (Kitano 197 6). 192

Merchant dftaoku Nakano's study of merchant dfizoku is one of the pioneering studies of ddzoku in business. His work is also important because it was a pioneer study of business applications of anthropology. Nakano (1978) followed one merchant family in Kyoto from the Meiji Period (1868-1912) to the early Showa Period (1925-). Nakano described the "merchant ifi" as a corporate unit "managing the store' as an ie enterprise. Its non-kin members, together with the kin members (the master, his wife, his offspring, and sometimes collateral or other relatives), were jointly dedicated to maintaining and increasing the economic resources of the jjg (Nakano 1978:6). In fact, non-kin members in the merchant i£ played an important role in the operation of the i£. They held positions such as apprentice and resident clerk, and they made up one third to one half of the JLfi. membership on average. These non-kin members were not merely employees, but generally entered the ifi. when they were young, spent their whole life as members, and could even become descendants if they were successful. Kin members and non-kin members lived together. They did not work collectively, but they did constitute a cooperative unit for social activities such as ancestor worships. A non-kin member was a full member of the merchant i£, but had slightly different status from that of kin members 193 who were not successors. A branch could be established either for a non-inheriting kin member or for a non-kin member. A branch for a non-inheriting kin was called bunke. and for non-kin, bekke. Both were linked to the honke and to each other, but the status of the bunke was higher than that of the bekke. Honke and bunke. or honke and bekke. shared the same store symbol fnoren). The relationship among them was highly hierarchical, and they sometimes appeared to act like father and children. For example, a honke might rescue its bunke or bekke from failure in a business transaction. On the other hand, the bunke and bekke together may help reconstruct their honke if it was in financial decline. But a honke would not allow its bunke or bekke to do business which might adversely affect the honke * s business. Often, bunke and/or bekke were asked by their honke to work as subcontractors. A honke could take away the bunke or bekke1s right to use the honke symbol if they failed to prove their trustworthiness {Nakano 1978:85). K. Park (1989) studied the Mitsui merchant ddzoku in the

Edo Period. Nakano did not recognize the Mitsui merchant family as dozoku because in the Mitsui case, bekke were branched off not from the main household, but from each store. Because of this, relationships among main and branch stores were not the same as those of the Mitsui households themselves (Nakano 1978). 194 One of the main characteristics of the Mitsui ddzoku was

that brothers shared the household property and controlled it cooperatively. All nine households, that is, the households headed by the founder's six brothers, the household headed by the mukovSshi of the founder's daughter, the household headed by the mukovdshi of his granddaughter, and one other related household, were called by a 'common name' which referred to the Mitsui family. Each household had a certain percentage of ownership of Mitsui property and received a stipend according to that percentage. The succession principle observed by all nine households was primogeniture. Bunke created by non-successor sons were not considered to be a part of this 'common name' group (Park 1989). The households in the 'common name' group were interrelated by fictive kinship relationships. There was a hierarchy among the sdrvo (successor to the headship) household, the five other main households, and the remaining three households. The non-successor sons of each household were encouraged to be adopted by other households which had no successor. But, children of the sdryd household had priority to being adopted. It is reported that at one point in time in the eighteenth century, five out of eleven household heads were from soryo household (ibid.). Bekke were created by order of a master. In this process, an employee became independent, was given a noren 195 and became a bekke. Bekke were allowed to be succeeded to by a child, or equivalently a child was allowed to create his own bekke with a permission of the honke. There was a mutual financing association for bekke (s6zoku ££) in order to help maintain financially weak bekke facing bankruptcy (ibid.).

Dflioltu Companies (dOzoku oaiaha)

It is this hierarchy and corporativity that allowed Japanese companies to evolve into ddzoku type relationships. According to the Corporate Tax Code, a ddzoku company is defined as a company more than half of whose stock is owned by three or fewer stockholders, where an individual's family, including common-law spouse(s) and in-laws, employees and their families, and financial dependents as a group are considered to be a single stock holder. Thus the stock holders of a dozoku company can be a group of relatives of stockholders or even a company (Corporate Tax Code Article 2 No.10). Strictly according to this definition, a dozoku company must be a relatively small company. However, in common usage of the term, ddzoku gaisha can refer to a company which is owned and managed by relatives, regardless of the stock ownership situation. Toshitani explained the formation of dSzoku type management as having as a first step the separation of management of the business from management of the household 196 (Toshitani 1991:146). In other words, in this first step toward dozoku type management, household members are separated from employees and the household, and create a unit physically separate from the business. The business becomes established as a administrative body which is represented by a store symbol. Dozoku management is completed by a second step in which a bunke or bekke store is branched off from the main store (ibid.). Toshitani also studied and described the evolution of company business from dozoku type management to non-d6zoku type management. In case of the Mitsui d6zoku. instead of creating bekke. loyal employees were allowed to own company stock. Also, a lump-sum retirement benefit system was adopted in order to secure the employees' living after they retire (Toshitani 1991:164). In fact, do zoku companies, which are often small in scale, could become non-d6zoku companies in this way, especially because of the expansion of the business and the number of employees.

In the late 1980's, more than 97% of Japanese companies were officially recognized as dSzoku companies (Fujimoto & Maeda 1989:253). Dfizoku companies often behaved like real dfizoku. with some exceptions for economic reasons, for example. In d6zoku relationships, honke and bunke are in hierarchical relationships, with honke always superior to bunke. Hsu (1975) considered that this hierarchy never 197 changes. However, if the honke faces a crisis which may lead to its eradication, it can trade places with a bunke. or bunke will take over a honke * s position, for the sake of the perpetuation of the ddzoku.41 Hierarchical relationships are not absolute over a long period of time. Background situations, such as the economic condition of the honke and bunke and their geographical proximity, can affect the relationship between a honke and bunke. This is evidenced in the business context, when new ventures are often carried out by branch companies like bunke branching off from the honke.

In some cases, such as that of Seiko (watches) and its branch company Seiko Epson (computers and printers), the branch company has overshadowed the parent company.

An individual often started a company with his own money, by himself or with the help of his family's labor. In this case, the owner of the company also became an administrator. In general, as the company became large, the founder/owner tended to become separated from the

41 In the battle of Sekigahara in 1615, the Sanada honke fought for Toyotomi and a Sanada bunke fought for Tokugawa. When Tokugawa defeated Toyotomi, the Sanada honke was demolished by the Tokugawa government, and the Sanada bunke officially became the honke. It is said that these elements of the Sanada dftzoku fought each other for the sake of its own perpetuation: no matter which of Tokugawa or Toyotomi won, either the honke or the b u n k e would have remained and continue the clan. Another example of dflzoku hierarchical flexibility is the fact that if the tie between honke and bunke became weak, further branching of the clan could happen only between a bunke and its bunke. without consultation with the honke. 198 administration. This is because a large organization necessitated special techniques to be administered, and an administrative specialist was required. Also, selling stock publicly was more advantageous for collecting capital. This was especially beneficial to the founder because of "founder profit* (sdcrvdsha ri-iun) , which was the profit gained in the difference between the original price of the stock (or the original capital invested) and the current value of the stock when sold. Thus, the founder of a company may have preferred to make a public offering of his company's stock. In these ways, dozoku characteristics tended to disappear as the company grew. In some cases, however, family members showed talent in administrative skills and remained in administrative positions regardless of how large the company became. Examples of large dozoku companies in Japan are

Suntory (beverages), Yoshida Kdgyo, and Takenaka Komuten (construction). Many ddzoku companies remain medium- to small-sized. We would like to explore other aspects of ddzoku companies, but the scope of this research will not necessarily lead us to satisfactory answers in all cases. For example, what are some other characteristics of ddzoku companies? Were there ddzoku companies which only allowed patrilineal kin members to be stockholders, which would be in line with Long's description of ddzoku as a patrilineal kin group? Equivalently, were there cases where a ddzoku 199 company's stock was owned by non-patrilineal kin members? If a honke was in a superior position only when certain political and economical conditions were met, as Nakane mentions, (as opposed to the honke remaining superior in all circumstances), could there possibly have been some cases in ddzoku companies where a branch company succeeded to the business and replaced the honke? Another important aspect of dozoku was the acceptance and inclusion of non-kin individuals into its membership. Likewise, branch companies could be controlled by non-kin members. J. Cornell mentions that the “Japanese have a habit of extending and inventing kin ties in order to include wider and wider circles, of true and fictitious relatives, for purposes of organizing activities and spreading economic risk* (J. Cornell 1964:455). Inheritance by non-kin individuals is rare in the world. In patrilineal societies such as India, China, and Korea, adoption is possible only from patrilineal kin (Nakane 1989).

The Tax System of Ddsoku Companies Recall that ddzoku company refers to a company more than half of whose stock is owned by three or fewer stockholders, where an individual's extended family, employees, et al. as a group are counted as a single stock holder, so that the stock holders of a ddzoku company can be a group of relatives of stockholders or even a company (Corporate Tax Code Article 2 200

No.10). Since more than 97% of Japanese companies are officially recognized as ddzoku companies, one might conclude that inheritance of ddzoku companies must be a very important issue in Japanese business. Indeed this is the case.

Since a ddzoku company can be run by a small number of people, certain restrictions in the form of taxes are imposed. If the profit is pooled in the company, a special tax is levied on it. Let Y = net profits - {corporate tax + corporate resident tax) - 35% of the profit or 15,000,000 yen A special tax is levied on Y. Thus, a ddzoku company has to pay both regular corporate tax and this special tax The rate of this special tax is: 10% of the portion up to ¥30,000,000 15% of the portion over ¥30,000,000 up to ¥100,000,000 20% of the portion over ¥100,000,000 Certain possible tax-evasion strategies are specifically addressed in the tax laws. They are not illegal in and of themselves, but if they are practiced with the purpose of reducing taxes, such calculation of tax rate is invalid. 1. the company buys the asset of its executives. 2. executives buy company assets at very low cost. 3. the company pays excessive salaries to executives' relatives. The location of the offices of a family-owned business is also an important factor from the point of view of resources, for it can affect taxes. Taxes levied on non­ public family-owned small companies are income tax, resident 201 tax, business tax, and if profits exceed ¥30 million, consumer tax. The rate of business tax depends on the kind of business and its location; tax rates differ by prefecture. Resident tax is based on income and location. with respect to location, different tax rates apply in cities of population over 500,000, in those of less than 50,000 population, and in those lying in between. If a family's residence and office are in different locations, the resident tax is levied cumulatively according to both locations (Tax Administration 1989).

Succession of a Business There are many questions to be addressed in regard to inheritance, succession, and descent rules of Japanese businesses. Is the successor the first-born male child, or another selected child? What conditions are necessary for not selecting a natal son to be a successor? If intra-kin adoption occurs, will the adopted son be chosen over all members of the matrilineal kin group, or is successor recruitment more flexible, allowing candidates to be sought from bilateral kin groups? How is company ownership divided and inherited among kin-members? What is the relationship between company ownership and management rights? Economic changes influenced many family-owned businesses in terms of their inheritance and succession patterns. Many companies which were founded after World War II were facing 202 turnover to the next generation in the 1980's. There were often problems finding successors. Many owners of small companies prefer to choose a successor from among their relatives. There are some merits for choosing relatives over non-relatives: 1) Relatives are more loyal. They are not likely to transfer to another company, even if they are scouted and/or recruited. 2) Relatives tend to be more responsible and maintain a feeling of solidarity with the company. 3) Relatives tend to consider their job as a life-long commitment. They have a strong desire for the company to succeed. For similar reasons, a dozoku company can have difficulty finding new personnel from outside the company. There tends to be competition and conflict among the dozoku members over matters of succession decisions. If a successor is not clearly designated, competition and conflicts among possible candidates for the presidency among dozoku are even more intense. However, this competition remains covert, overridden by the strive for harmony within the dfizoku

(Shimizu 1977). In addition, there tends to be a lack of educators capable of raising relatives to become capable successors, because of the limited number of employees. On the other hand, there are some disadvantages in selecting a relative as successor. For example, the company’s benefits and the individual's desires may not 203 necessarily coincide. There may not be very many relatives to choose from for a successor. Furthermore, it has been observed that in reality, there are often tendencies toward nepotism and other unfair personnel management policies. Relative members tend to have more important jobs than non-relative employees, which discourages the non-relative employees. Another unfair practice is that company capital tends to be personalized. It is very common for personal expenditures such as using a company car for personal matters, dining out in private at the company's expense, taking the family along on overseas business trips, to be paid for with company money under the guise of necessary expenses (Shflkan Toy6 Keizai 1988:11). The main reason why relative succession is in general accepted by the employees is that in Japanese companies, harmony is the most important factor for successful administration. Harmony (&£.) within the company is maintained on the surface and promoted through benevolent ideology (Moore 1988). Hierarchy and order are maintained in family-owned businesses. For example, I found that there are obvious hierarchical differences between the positions of the first son and the second son in the same company. It would destroy the harmony of the company if the second son takes a higher position in the company, or if he comes to own more stock in the company than his older brother. Likewise, there are significant differences in terms of promotion opportunity 204 between relative and non-relative members of a family owned company. Their mutual desire to maintain harmony forces the non-relative employees to accept this differences. If there is competition for the company presidency, for example, candidate employees may of course become hostile toward each other. However, if the presidency has already been decided to fall on the son of the current president, others realize that they have no chance, and there is no competition. This type of ideology is rooted in the tradition of the feudal lords (daimvd) and their warriors. At that time, the daimvo's son was automatically chosen to be the next daimvd. and servant warriors unceasingly supported their master daimvd as long as he performs his respectable role as a leader. This feudal ideology is still the basis for succession rules in many Japanese companies today. The relationship of individual members to the group is the prime consideration in organizational structure in Japan. In addition, the basis of kinship morality lies in the performance of one's designated role within the group. The system of group loyalty is directed toward the company president in Japanese companies. The patterns of occupational morality based on loyalty are extended beyond direct kinship.

Case Study 15. *T* Company 205 "T* company was a small company of about 100 employees which sold electrical equipment, pumps, scales, and agricultural machinery. Their household diagram is shown in Figure 20 below. The company was located in Ginza in central Tokyo, where land values were typically the most expensive in all of Japan. *T" company was founded in 1920 as a limited partnership by *Y* , *Y"'s younger brother "K", and their friend *T" . Since 'K* had no children, he adopted “Y^'s younger son "H* and joined the company. However, *Y*'s eldest son "9" did not succeed to the business after *Y* died. Among the original three founders, only the positions

founder 2

founder 3

next, president

Figure 20. "T" Company Household Diagram (for Caee Study 15) 206 held by "K* and *T" were succeeded to thereafter. In 1964, a new stock company was established with the same name. This new "T2* company bought out all capital and debts from the original *T* company, but the original *T* company continued to exist as a company. The official business of the continuing "T* company was renting the building and land to the new "T2" company. *K* and "T" became the presidents of *T* company. Unlike an ordinary stock company, all the stock of *T2" company was owned by *T* company. There were no individual stock owners. Even the president of “T* company did not own any stock. In other words, the actual management of the business was done by *T2" company, while its resources were owned by *T* company. *T*'s portion of the capital of "T2" company was divided and inherited by his older son (2/3 of the capital) and younger son “N* (1/3). *M" was the president of *T2* company at the time of my interview. “N* did not participate in the business, but he owned a share of the capital. At the time of my interview, it was not decided whether the capital would be further divided among all the children of *M* and •N', or if only certain few children or one child would inherit it. *H"'s portion of *T2* company's capital was divided equally and inherited by his wife #4 and his only son mZ". The wife's portion would probably be inherited by “Zm, and later by mZm,s son *S*. Neither *Z* nor "S" participated in 207 the business of *T2" company; they were both working in an academic field. The presidency of *T2* company after "M" would be succeeded to by *H"'s favorite grandson “A*, who was *Z"s oldest sister #6's son. 'A* would be in charge of the business, but would not inherit company capital. I interviewed "A*, who used to work at a car dealership, was then working in the accounting division of *T2' company. This followed a tradition of having kin members of the two founders work in the accounting division. *A" was the chosen future president, and he definitely felt pressure because his co-workers saw him as the next president. But, he sensed no jealousy or similar feelings against him. As mentioned earlier, employees tended to accept the fact that the presidency will be succeeded to by a relative member. "A* told me that the employees would follow him as long as he had a clear policy of management and others agreed with it. He also felt that 100 was the maximum number of employees in a company which practiced family line succession like *'T2"' company. He hoped to double the annual sales of ¥5 billion to ¥10 billion in the future.

Non-successor* to Bxtsnd Business

A non-successor of a company often could acquire a position in the company as a means of extending business. Recalling the example of *M" clinic in the previous chapter (see Figure 18), the chief director of "M* clinic, “T", had 208 three grandsons. The successor to the clinic was determined to be the eldest grandson. Although it might not actually be achieved, “T* hoped to extend “M“ clinic, which specialized in obstetrics/gynecology, so that non-successor grandsons could be put in charge of new divisions such as pediatrics. * T " ' s philosophy emphasized “total medical care,* which was made possible by the cooperation among related medical fields. In this way, “T“ did not feel guilty toward the non­ successor grandsons.

Case Study 16. "H" Clothing Store Another example of extending a business through non­ successors is “H* clothing store, whose household diagram is shown in Figure 21 on the next page. “A" founded “H* clothing store, and had nine children. The eldest son *B* succeeded to head the store. The second son *C* ran a cotton shop. The third son “D“ worked at *H* clothing store, but later became independent and ran a clothing store in a nearby town. Not only were these three sons' businesses related to each other, but these three sons and their families enjoyed a 209

f o u n d e r

clothing cotton store______shop ©

expectedexpectedAc*) successor ▲in clothing-related business Figure 21. "H" Clothing Store Household Diagram (for Case Study 16) . Spouses are not shown; lines of succession are shown by direct vertical alignment of individuals. close relationship. Even after these sons married, their three families lived together for a while. “B"'s daughter “K* helped in her father's business until she got married. She married a baker who happened to be a distant relative whom she had met at a relative's funeral. They lived in the large city 5 miles from the town where "H" clothing store was located. *B*'s son *l * was the third generation successor to the store. "L* expected his son *Q' to be the fourth generation successor. "C's second son succeeded to head "C*'s cotton shop, because "C'''s older son *M* was already a pharmacist. *D*'s only child was a daughter, and he wanted to adopt a mukov6shi to succeed to his clothing store. 210 However, *D* was afraid it would be difficult to find someone who would be willing to succeed to the head of such a small business as his.

Case Study 17. "O" Candy Store "O* candy store is a small family company with about ¥5 million capital (see Figure 22 below for its household diagram). The founder, owner, and president “B" was the second son of a government official. *B* established “O" candy store after he was released from a prisoner-of-war camp in the Soviet Union. *B"s older brother *A* was killed in World War II, and his younger brother *C" succeeded to head the household while *B* was out of the country. "B*'s first son "S' succeeded *0“ candy store. *B*'s second son "K" also

candy business

people in related business

Figure 22. M 0" Candy Store Household Diagram (for Case Study 17) 211 participated in the company by being in charge of its ice cream division. The president's wife was traditionally in charge of accounting. "B"s eldest daughter "D" helped in the family store until she married a man who was running another candy store. "S" had three children, but no sons. "S' had no intention of taking a mukovdshi or other family member to succeed him in his business. "S' said "it's not worth it for such a small business." A majority of the company's stock was held by the owner and his wife. As part of the inventory process every year, the company stocks were gradually transferred from the current owner to his children. In July 1990, a transition to the next generation occurred. The President became chairman fkaichd), "S' moved from Senior Executive Director (senmu) to

President, and "K" moved from Junior Executive Director f-i6mu) to Senior Executive Director.

As seen in these examples, non-successor children were used as resources to extend the business. At the same time, however, the owner also showed the benevolence of a parent in giving non-successor children positions in the company, as compensation for not being successors. This is an example of kinship and kinship ideology reflected in a family-owned business. 212

Case Study 18. *1* Department 8 tore The founder of “I* department store, Tokichi (indi­ vidual #7 in Figure 24 on the next page), was born in 1849, the third son of a rice trader in Niigata Prefecture. At the age of sixteen, Tokichi (#7) crossed over by boat to Hokkaido, which was at that time still an unexplored land, to

older s i b l ings in Figures 24 &■ 2S

RySshichi

natal parents in Figure 24 (**) (5) (2) ^

(2) As.(*) 2^ ®

works for "I" department store or subsidiary company

* mukoyoshi (some relations shown with dotted line)

Figure 23. *1* Department Store Household Diagram Part 1 (for Case Study 18) (continued in Figure 24) 213 establish a new business. He opened a store in Sapporo in 1872, and had great success. However, during the economic crisis of the late 1870's, the store was closed and Tokichi (#7) resorted to the life of a peddler, traveling as far as Sendai city back on Honshu island. The Meiji government's efforts to develop Hokkaido

younger sibling Son tei honke older siblings

Takeshichi

Yushichi

(adopted)

Kunio Haruo works for “1“ department store or subsidiary company

* mukoyoshi (some relations shown with dotted line)

Figure 24. "I" Department Store Household Diagram Fart 2 (for Case Study 18) (continued from Figure 23, continued in Figure 25) 214 island brought a great influx of people there, and Tdkichi's (#7) business was re-established as a clothing store under the name of *Marui." Tdkichi's {#7) two younger brothers Takeshichi (#5) and Rydshichi (#3 in Figure 23) also came along to Hokkaido this time, and one of his older brothers Eishichi (#9) was living in Aomori Prefecture, at the far northern end of Honshu island just across the strait from Hokkaido. The two younger brothers helped in Tokichi's (#7) business. Each of these younger brothers established a branch household. Tdkichi (#7) married a woman (#8) from his home town in Niigata, and she stayed there in Niigata taking care of her mother-in-law. Although Tokichi (#7) and his

younger siblings

works for "I" department store or subsidiary company

* mukoyftshi (some relations shown with dotted line)

Figure 25. "I" Department Store Household Diagram Part 3 (for Case Study 18) (continued from Figure 24) 215 family lived in Hokkaido, his son's wife (#55) and even his grandsons' wives (#68, #70, #73) were from his home town, like his wife. Tokichi (#7) received orders from the government to open more branch stores in other areas of Hokkaido, in order to serve people who were sent there to cultivate land, many of them former criminals. Takeshichi (#5) took charge of a branch store in Otaru in 1892, and RySshichi (#3) took charge of one in Hakodate in 1893. These two branch households became known as Son tei (meaning simply “the household in Otaru“) and Kan tei (“the household in Hakodate*). In 1990

“I* household still consisted of the main household called Dai-hon-tei (meaning “great main household-), the two branch households Dai-Son-tei (“great Son-tei") and Dai-Kan-tei (“great Kan-tei“). and their maaobunke42.

In 1898, an “I* unlimited partnership was established. Its president was Toshichi (#7) and its vice president was Takeshichi (#5). Rydshichi (#3) and another relative, their eldest brother Eishichi's (#9) mukoy6shi son (#79) was also on the board. Many employees were recruited from the brothers' home prefecture, Niigata. A successor to Tfishichi (#7) was Takeshichi (#5)'s eldest son YGshichi (#54). Yushichi (#54) was adopted by his uncle TSshichi (#7) and received “successor-to-be education"

42 maaobunke refers to a household which is branched off from a branch household. 216 from an early age. He even visited the United States in 1899 to study business. During its early years, the •I" department store made significant contributions to the development of the region. The store created a private fire fighting team. During the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), “I* store was an official supplier of goods to the military. In the Taishd era (1915- 1926), *1" department store embarked on operating a large farm. By the end of the Meiji era (1912), all the major department stores still operating in 1990 had been established. By that time, “I" department store had become a stock company, and more kin members were employed. Yflshichi (#54) became a senior executive director alongside his natal father and adopted uncle Takeshichi (#5). Rydshichi (#3) became executive director. Takeshichi (#5)'s second son Seishichi (#51) became an auditor. Takeshichi (#5)'s mukoydshi (#53), Eishichi (#9)'s son-in-law (#83) and his mukovdshi (#87), Rydshichi (#3)'s mukoydshi (#19) who was a capable employee, and another mukovdshi (#12) who was

Takeshichi (#5)'s third son, all took important positions in the “I* department store and its subsidiary companies. Tdshichi (#7) died in 1926, and Yflshichi (#55) succeeded to the presidency of "I* department store. Tamotsu (#72) was recognized for his capable leadership qualities and was adopted by Yflshichi (#55) even though Yflshichi (#55) had four 217 sons of his own. Tamotsu (#72) became an employee when YOshichi (#55) was still president, and assisted during Michio (#71)'s 60 years of presidency, and in 1990 still worked for the current president Haruo (#76). Tamotsu (#72) was a very important person in “I* department store's history; but in the domestic situation, he and his wife (#73) have lower status than his younger step brothers (#66, #67, #69, #70) and their families. At all family funerals, incense was offered by relatives in order of status. According to the record of a 1982 special memorial service for all the ancestors who contributed to “I" department store, the traditional small offering of incense was made by each surviving relative in the following order; 1. Michio (#71) (Yflshichi (#55)'s eldest son) 2. Sona (#55) (Michio (#71)'s mother) 3. Ritsu (#70) (Michio (#71)'s wife) 4. Haruo (#76) (Michio (#71)'s eldest son) 5. Chikako (Haruo (#76)'s wife) 6. Kunio (#75) (Michio (#71)'s second son) 7. Noriko (Kunio (#75)'s wife) 8. Tamotsu (#72) (Yflshichi (#55)'s adopted son) 9. Kari (#73) (Tamotsu (#72)'s wife) 10. Tashichi (#58) (successor to Son tei. Takeshichi (#5)'s grandson) 11. Tamako (Tashichi (#58)'s wife) 12. Kdshichi (#57) (Tashichi (#58)'s younger brother) 13. Yoshio (#23) (successor to Kan tei. Rydshichi (#3)'s grandson) 14. Keiko (#24) (Yoshio (#23)'s wife) 15. Tamio (#22) (Yoshio (#23)'s brother-in-law, mukovdshi to Otoshichi (#12)) 16. Tomoko (#21) (Yoshio (#23)'s younger sister, Tamio (#22)'s wife) 17. 14 non-relative employees 218 According to this record, Tamotsu (#72) offered incense after his younger brother (#71) and his wife (#70) and children (#75, #76, #77) and their wives, but before the successors to both of the branch households. In addition, at a family get-together, Tamotsu (#72) and his wife were seated at lower-status positions than all the other main household members. His status would have been better if he was a mukovdshi rather than an adopted son. This memorial record also indicates the hierarchical relationship between the two branch households43. Michio (#71) succeeded to the company at the age of 3 0 when Yushichi (#55) died in 1944 during World War II. This period immediately after the war was a struggle for *1" department store as well as for defeated Japan. Later, Hokkaidd continued to be developed, and so did “I* department store. Regular airline connection was established between Tokyd and Sapporo. The 1972 Winter Olympics were held in Sapporo. The controversial yet celebrated Seikan Tunnel connected the main island and Hokkaidd belatedly in 1988. Michio (#71) died in 1990, and his eldest son Haruo (#76) became the fourth president of *1" department store. At the time of his death, Michio (#71) held 146 distinct titles, awarded throughout his life and throughout the

43 Data from Izumi et al's survey also indicates that the status differentiation between honke and bunke was often visible in seating arrangements (Izumi et al. 1984). 219 region, including president of All Hokkaido Chamber of Commerce, vice president of Japan Chamber of Commerce. He was awarded the Second Order of Merit as well as the Prize for Hokkaido Development. In 1994, "I* department store had four branch stores in Hokkaido, two in Kyoto, and one in Tdkyo, as well as seven international business offices including Paris and Los Angeles. There were 18 subsidiary companies in industries as varied as construction materials, real estate, insurance, building rental, clothing, food, travel, sporting goods, restaurants, hotels, and financial institutions. The president overseeing all the subsidiary companies was Haruo (#76). Haruo (#76)'s younger brother Kunio (#75) was a vice president of one of the subsidiary companies. However, unlike earlier in the history of "I* department store when many relatives worked for the company, none of the other relatives are included in the *1* department store group. It is as if *1" department store deliberately chose not to become a ddzoku company.

Stratagias for Company Succession One effect of Japan's economic change in the 1980's was skyrocketing land prices. Such land price hikes made the succession of small companies very difficult because of high local inheritance taxes, especially in large cities such as T6ky6 and Osaka (President 1989:11). Avoiding high 220 inheritance tax had become a serious issue in considering the continuation of a business. One strategy for reducing inheritance taxes on a business takes advantage of the lower evaluated inheritance tax value of the company stock of an unlisted company. The calculation of transfer tax is done according to the following methods. The transfer tax of a stock company is based on the actual value of all stock of the time of transfer:

transfer tax = (V-D)xK where V = evaluated inheritance tax value of the stock D = basic deduction = ¥600,000 R = transfer tax rate The calculation of transfer tax on a non-stock company is based on the size of the company. The size of the company is determined by its capital, assets, and total annual sales. For a large company, the value of the stock of similar companies is used. For a medium-sized company, the same method is used as for a large company, but based on the pure value of similar stock. For a small company, the calculation is based on the pure value of stock. A successor is assessed a tax if he pays for assets less than the amount of money evaluated. Thus:

transfer tax = ((V-PJ-Djx/? where V = evaluated transfer tax P = payments D = ¥600,000 R = transfer tax rate 221

In the strategy to reduce these taxes, an owner / president of a listed stock company could create an unlisted dSzoku

company with his heir and transfer his company stocks to this d6zoku company. Of course this new ddzoku company would have

some restrictions with regard to business taxes, but they would be offset by the savings of the avoided transfer tax.

The Successor Problem The successor problem was a problem not only for small companies. The successor to a medium-sized company might not want to succeed to head the business, for example if he was already working for a famous larger corporation. His salary, if he took the presidency of the medium company, would be much higher, but he realized that if he did so, it might be hard to find a spouse. Most Japanese women in the 1990's would not like to become the wife of a medium-sized company president, because it is the president's wife who has the responsibilities of "taking care of" the employees and entertaining her peers. Most women would prefer to be a simple, lowly, yet relatively free and relaxed white-collar wife. Despite this fact, successors in many cases do indeed quit their jobs in their 40's in order to succeed to head their parents' medium-sized companies, perhaps foreseeing dreary futures as perpetually low-ranking administrators. Conflict can arise between parents who want their son to be a successor, and a son who doesn't want to. One of my 222 informants who owns a small company told me that he would not designate his eldest son to be his successor. He would not force his son to succeed; instead, he would let his son choose whether he wants to succeed or not. If the son comes back to succeed, this informant would consider himself lucky, nothing more. Another informant who owns a small shop and had two daughters but no sons said that he had no intention of adopting a mukoydshi to succeed him in his business. He argued that becoming a mukovdshi of such a small business is not attractive to most young men, so there is very little chance that he could find a mukovdshi anyway.

In 1991, the successors-to-be's generation had a somewhat different background than their fathers/owners of the company. They have the advantages of the previous generation's economic and social standing in establishing business relationships. It can be said that there are two types of successor generations: people who consider themselves fortunate to become a successor, and people who just feel pressured. According to research conducted by S. Murata (President 1989:11), there are three main courses of action for successors-to-be after graduating from college. One-third go on to work for and study related companies. They study how the intricate network of these companies functions. This course is especially common for successors to trading companies, banks, and stock companies. Another one-third of 223 successors-to-be go to graduate school or study abroad. The rest go directly to work for their father's company. These are often successors to small or medium-sized companies, which need employees as soon as possible. But even these people may study abroad for a short time before starting work at the company, or after working for a while. Some owners of companies lamented that their sons never came back to succeed them in their company, and that their son-in-laws are incapable of becoming president. Many sold their company to a large corporation in desperation. On the other hand, some company owners do not retire until they are near death, and this may not leave enough time for training a new president. The rapid modernization of Japan has caused many changes in the social and familial sectors. It is clear that many small businesses suffered from lack of successors for various reasons. Heirs were not strongly motivated to succeed their fathers, due in large part to other choices made available by economic growth and development. Ethics changed, so that not succeeding a parent was not seen as demonstrating lack of filial piety as it used to be. High inheritance taxes due to land price hikes sometimes prevented a son from succeeding his father in his business. As a result, small businesses were absorbed by larger corporations with purchasing power. 224 Bachnik suggested that the legitimacy of a position necessitates adequate performance in that position. Thus, if a natal son was unable to perform as a successor, adoption would likely be attempted in order to acquire a more capable successor. Rebellion was likely to occur among employees if a successor failed to show competence in leading the company. Radcliffe-Brown and Forde reported an example of this in Teutonic societies, where daughters were known to have inherited land due to the incompetence of their brothers in a patrilineal background (Radcliffe-Brown and Forde 1967). In some cases, the successor son was too young to conduct business when the household head in the previous generation died. One wonders whether is was possible to apply to business irregular types of succession such as "skip generation,' "discontinue and then restore / re-establish' (fukk6 or saiken. saikd). (Bachnik 1983). There is evidence that restoration of a household could be done by non­ relatives of that particular household. This leads one to conclude that the continuation of the household, especially in the case of households with family-run businesses, is more important than that of the lineage, unlike China and other patrilineal societies. CHAPTER VI

INHERITANCE

Isauts of inheritance In the conventional study of kinship systems, prescriptive and proscriptive kinship rules have been studied from the point of view of customs. Kinship rules should also studied from a legal point of view. The fact that there is interaction between legal code and actual practice is often ignored. when legal codes change, people's practice is expected to change. The inverse relationship also holds: people's customary practices can affect the legal code. For example, there are cases where legal codes have been enacted in order to legalize customary practices. As described in chapter IV, there has historically existed significant confusion between the concepts of inheritance and succession. In fact, the Japanese term sdzoku is defined not only as the inheritance of property, but also as the succession to status, family name, and ancestor worship rights. The main reason for this confusion is that succession and inheritance were often both practiced by a single individual. Both succession and inheritance were regulated by Japan's legal codes throughout history until the current Civil Code. Succession rules are not regulated by

225 226 the current Civil Code. On the other hand, regulations related to inheritance, especially with respect to taxes, are a major part of "inheritance and succession law* (s6zoku Jia) sections of the current Civil Code. Therefore, it behooves scholars of inheritance in particular to articulate relevant aspects of legal codes. Before describing Japan's legal codes, I present some important issues regarding inheritance.

Partible and Impartible Inheritance The transfer of property rights and duties can be classified into two categories: partible inheritance and impartible inheritance. Partible inheritance is the division of property among several heirs upon the death or retirement of the property holder. Impartible inheritance refers to the transmission of property more or less intact to a single heir. Partibility can also be distinguished by such factors as whether or not the shares of property are equal, whether all children are heirs or inheritance is limited to sons, and whether daughters are given a at the time of their marriage to compensate for their not sharing in the property inheritance {Thompson, Arichi 1974). Likewise, factors such as whether eldest or non-eldest, and/or male or female child inherit can be distinguishing factors for impartible inheritance. Partible inheritance is often practiced among societies with abundant resources. The Vedda of Ceylon distribute 227

property fairly among all adult children, with the daughters' shares often nominally given to their husbands (Lowie 1920:248). The Kandh of Orissa practice equal division of land among sons, though the office of headman descends to the eldest (ibid:248). Among the Masai, it is the eldest son of the principal wife who inherits the largest portion of his father's stock and assumes control of a share of the in the family (ibid:248). In case of impartible inheritance, one child inherits a major portion of the assets. Non-heir children can either leave the main household and become independent, or provide labor for the main household while receiving care and protection in return (Arichi 1974). Because children who leave the household often receive money to assist them in the process of becoming independent, for example in the form of tuition or dowry, impartible inheritance in Japan is not truly single inheritance. It can be said that the purpose of impartible inheritance is to maintain control of property, which is an objective condition for the continuation and preservation of the unity of the household in Japan (Arichi 1974). Fukutake compared the equal inheritance practice of China and single inheritance practice of Japan. He concluded that equal inheritance can actually prevent the maintenance of family status, because status tends to spread and change from generation to generation. On the other hand, single 228 inheritance serves to perpetuate the main household, and thereby has acquired traditional authority (Fukutake 1967). It has been debated whether single heir inheritance is really practiced in Japan. Hayami questioned the uniformity of the Japanese is. system, and emphasized its diversity, saying "inheritance was not a matter of choosing between the two alternatives, partible and impartible, but rather, a system flexibly fitting the distribution of property to a given situation" (Hayami 1983). He suggested that there existed local differences as well as class differences in succession and inheritance patterns (ibid.). Inheritance rules in the legal code shifted from enforcing single heir inheritance in the Meiji Civil Code, to stipulating equal inheritance in the postwar Civil Code of 1946. The question remains whether people really practice what the legal code dictates.

According to the Prime Minister Secretariat's Public Opinion Almanac of 1984, the question "What would you think of a legal code which states that half of the property should be inherited by household head's wife and the rest of the property should be equally inherited by his children?" was asked of 3000 people. Affirmation and negation replies for five related statements were obtained. The responses are summarized in Table 17 on the next page. 229

In addition, the participants were asked to choose from among (a) to (e) the one most desirable method. Nearly half preferred (e) , reflecting people's disagreement with high inheritance and transfer taxes levied at the time of both the husband's death and the wife's death. About one-fifth of the respondents preferred (a), and the same number preferred Cb), while (c) was supported by only 3% of the participants. This indicates that the majority of people disagreed with unequal inheritance for the sake of household occupation, but they accepted it in case one child took care of the parents.

Table 17. Inheritance by Wife vs. Inheritance by Children (a) I agree with the present law, which states that half of the property be inherited by the wife and the rest be divided equally among the children. (b) I think that a child who takes care of the parents should inherit more than other children. (c) I think that a child who succeeds to head a household business or farming business should inherit more than other children. (d) I think that the law should be changed so that the wife inherits all the property first and then divides it up among the children later. (e) I think that the law should be changed to eliminate inheritance taxes and transfer taxes, because property should be considered to be jointly owned by a husband and wife. statement:____ (a) (b) (c)_____£dj_____(e) agree:______68% 74% 62% 39% 81% disagree:______27% 23% 33% 55% 15%

most desirable 19% 20% 3% 8% 48% method:

{source: Prime Minister Secretariat's Public Opinion Almanac 1984) 230

Ironically, single heir inheritance was widely practiced in order to succeed to a household business, especially in the farming and forestry businesses where dividing up land jeopardizes the continuation of the business. Another question asked whether property should be inherited equally regardless of whether one child took care of the parents. The results are shown in Table 18. The results show that there was very little or no difference in opinion between parents and children. Parents generally supported equal inheritance more than children did, and children hoped to receive more if they took care of the parents.

Table 18. Bqual va. Unequal Inheritance, Parents' vs. Children's Point of View (a) Regardless of taking care of the parents, property should be inherited equally among children. parents' point of view...... 49% children's point of view...... 39% (b) More property should be inherited by the child who takes care of parents. parents' point of view...... 35% children's point of view...... 39%

(source: Prime Minister Secretariat's Public Opinion Almanac 1984)

Another recent survey (1990) also indicated that people generally supported the idea of inheritance as compensation for taking care of parents, rather than following customary 231

Table 19. Desired Heir family member who took care of m e ...... 48% equally to all the children...... 25% eldest male c^uld ...... a..*.*..*...***.*...... 12% whoever took care of me (even if not a relative) . . 11% hospital or institution who took care of me ...... 1%

(source: Prime Minister Secretariat's Public Opinion Almanac 1990)

practice. For the question “To whom would you like to give your property?" the replies are summarized in Table 19 above. These results can be compared to a national survey conducted in 1952 by SOrifu Kokuritsu Yoron Ch6sa-io {National Public

Opinions Research Institute) about eldest son inheritance. Those results are summarized in Table 20 below. Although the use of the words "eldest son or heir" in the question blurs the critical point of interest in the study of primogeniture, we can assume that at the time of the survey eldest male inheritance was no longer standard practice as far as people's opinion was concerned. We can also see the diminishing is. ideology in the fact that many people supported inheritance by non-family members, even by hospitals or institutions.

Table 20. Desired Proportion of Eldest Son'a Inheritance The eldest son or heir should receive more than his brothers 59% It is not necessary to give the eldest son or heir more...... 3 6%

(source: SSrifu Kokuritsu Yoron Chfisaio 1952) 232

Inheritance of Non-material Good* The idea of inheritance generally focuses on the transfer of tangible material such as property, money, building, and physical objects. In reality, inheritance was not limited to tangible material. Value, rules, customs, and use rights were also inheritable, but these are often neglected in the study of inheritance. Value was associated with material which was inherited. For example, a quilt made by one's grandmother has more value to family members than to non-family members. Artifacts used in ancestor worship ceremonies were also more important than their actual monetary value because they were associated with status. Ancestor worship was often carried out by a member of a household other than a successor. Disputes over who would inherit this right was often solved only by legal court decision. Of course, it was difficult to obtain a legal binding determination of the value attached to such objects. Household rules fkakun) and household customs and taboos (karei) are other examples of intangible . These rules and customs were passed on to one generation after another. A cooking recipe is another example of non-material transfer. Use rights is another example of non-material inheritance. A tenant of agricultural land had the right to inherit the tenant use rights (kosakuken) and pass them on to the next generation (Moore 1990:51-53). Moore pointed out 233 that both foreign and domestic scholars have failed to describe tenant rights adequately (ibid.). A complicating factor is a disparity between land tenancy versus land ownership. Article 20 of the Agricultural Land Law (Nochihd) required compensation (risakuhoshd) be given to tenants who relinquished their tenant rights. The monetary value of the tenant rights was equal to about one-half the value of the paddy land itself. Instead of monetary compensation, a tenant could receive land ownership rights equal to approximately the value of one-half of the tenanted acreage (ibid.). Moore also reported that compensation to a relative tenant tended to be less than to other tenants, and landlords generally tried to relinquish tenant rights because raising rent was morally unethical, especially for close relatives who were tenants (ibid.:61).

Regional Variations in Inheritance Some surveys indicated that regional variations exist in inheritance patterns. Matsumoto reported the results of a survey on inheritance which was conducted on four different types of communities in the Kantd (Tdkyd and environs) area in 1956-57. This survey does not indicate differences according to specific regions. Nevertheless, it shows interesting contrasts between forestry and farming households versus non­ farming households. It indicates the tendency of eldest son 234 single inheritance by families engaged in forestry and farming business. When the question *In inheriting property upon the death of parents, do you think that the eldest son as heir should receive more than his siblings, or do you think this is unnecessary?* was asked to the same people, about 3/4 of mountain villagers indicated that they would pass household property to the eldest son. On the other hand, 40% of urban apartment residents thought it unnecessary to give special consideration to the eldest son, although a practically identical number (40%) said that they would favor the eldest son over other children (ibid.). The exact results are shown in Table 21 below.

Table 21. Inheritance Patterns by Region and Occupat ion Mountain Suburban Suburban village village village Urban (forestry) (farming) (non-farm) apartment (a) 74% 84% 49% 40% (b) 16% 11% 38% 40% (c) 2% 4% 7% 4% (d) 1% 2% (e) 3% 1% 6% 11% (a) Give most to eldest son (b) Not necessary to give most to eldest son (c) Give most to eldest son, depending on circumstances (d) Give to all children equally, depending on the c ircumstances (e) Some other method

(source: Matsumoto 1962) 235

A more recent survey was conducted by Ndson Kaihatsu Kikaku linkai (Agricultural Village Development Planning Committee) on farming households in 6 cities in various regions in Japan (1987). Inheritance of farming land after 1950 was practiced in these cities, as summarized in Table 22. According to these data, impartible inheritance pattern dominated by a margin of three-to-one over the next most common pattern. The percentage of impartible inheritance was very high in rural locales such as Tsuruoka city, Yamagata Prefecture (88%) followed by Suwa City, Toyama Prefecture (85%) and Asahi City, Shimane Prefecture (81%). On the other hand, modernized larger cities such as the Funabashi communities showed a tendency toward partible inheritance. Noticeably, the ratio of partible and impartible inheritance was reversed in Chiran city, Kagoshima

Table 22. Patterns of Farmland Inheritance (percent of respondents)

impartible partible

X 9 U 1 U w / \ O l i A m W O W l C L « "A* community, Funabashi, Chiba pref. 52% 28% "B* community, Funabashi, Chiba pref. 70% 25% Suwa Citv, Tovama pref. 85% 8% Kuritoh Citv, Shiga pref. 71% 19% Asahi Citv, Shimane pref. 81% 11% Chiran, Kagoshima pref. 45% 51%

(source: fcjfififia Kaihatsu Kikaku linkai 1987) 236

Prefecture. Unlike other regions, partible inheritance was practiced more than impartible inheritance in this city.

Data based on the original survey of Izumi et al. (1984) give insight into patterns of perpetuation of i£. related to inheritance. As summarized in Table 23 below, fully 90% of the participants replied that the successor to the inherited all the property as well as the household headship. Equal inheritance was seen three times more frequently in southwest Japan, indicating the egalitarian nature of that region. The five regions are the same as those used in Tables 6 through 8. In general, these data show that divided inheritance of land was practiced more in western Japan. Inheritance of land by a daughter was very rare in all regions. Division of land is considered to have been an unusual exception in farming households, occurring only in the following

Table 23. Inheritance Patterns by Region (percent of respondents) TShoku Kant6 Chflbu Shikoku KvflshO Successor inherits all 96% 99% 90% 89% 63% property & headship______Successor inherits more 3% 1% 5% property than others______Successor inherits the same amount of property 9% 11% 31% as others

(summarized from Izumi et al. 1984) 237 conditions: 1) failure to transfer the holdings before the family head died, or failure to officially register the transfer, or delaying the transfer because the heir was away from home (working in the city, for example); or 2) to avoid the heavy taxes of single inheritance. In western Japan, typically a larger portion of the holdings were distributed to non-heirs than in eastern Japan (Oshima 1971).

As in the case of regional differences in succession patterns, the tendency toward partible inheritance of land in southwestern Japan indicates that a hierarchical social structure predominates in the northeast while an egalitarian type is more common in the southwest.

Inheritance and Land Problems In the 1980's, the price of land in Japan increased faster than personal income. Thus, average people could only afford a small house, if they can afford any at all. On the other hand, people who already owned land could acquire huge amounts of money by selling it. The difference between the rich and poor became more significant than ever. The land price hikes in cities was well above the average due to the scarcity of land near the cities. Agricultural land near cities was sold by farmers and converted to residential zones. However, as land came to be viewed as a serious investment, farmers became reluctant to sell their land, 238

which further accelerated the problem of shortage of land near cities. In Japan, income tax, sales tax, and property tax are levied on individuals. The tax levied on income from the sale of real estate is called ~i6to shotoku zei ("sales income

tax") . The sales tax levied on the purchase of land is called fudosan shutoku zei ("real estate acquisition tax") and toroku menkyo zfii ("registration tax"). The property tax are koteishisan zei ("fixed property tax"), toshi keikaku zei ("city planning tax"), tokubetsu tochi hovQ zei ("special land maintenance tax"), sSzoku zei ("inheritance tax"), and zoyo zei {"transfer tax"). When property taxes increased,

land owners were forced to sell their land or utilize it more effectively. From the point of view of city planners, heavy property taxes were effective in increasing the availability of land. However, because of high property taxes, heirs of the small businesses struggling with paying taxes ended up selling the whole business.

Inheritance of Agricultural Land In the prewar period under the household system of the Meiji Civil Code, a household head legally inherited all the household property, and thus there was no reduction in the size of holdings as a consequence of inheritance. After World War II, however, under the principle of equal inheritance in the Civil Code, inheritance could lead to a 239

reduction in the size of a farming operation through fragmentation of the holdings. In 1947 and again in 1949, Bills of Exceptions for Succession to Agricultural Assets (n6ov6 isan sozoku tokurei h S a n ) were proposed to the Diet by the Ministry of

Agriculture and Forestry. The major features of the first bill were as follows: ...agricultural lands, were to be transferred in their entirety to a single heir. Moreover, the heir to agricultural assets was to be given on a preferential basis one half of the total property as his special share with the remaining half being divided among all the heirs, including himself, as their regular legal shares as prescribed by the Civil Code (Toshitani 1979). In other words, an heir to agricultural assets would inherit one-half of the total property plus one-half of the amount he would have inherited if there had been an equal division of the property among all possible heirs. This bill was submitted for review to the General Headquarters of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers (GHQ-SCAP), but it was rejected. The second bill removed the provision that a special share of the inheritance be set aside for an heir succeeding to agricultural assets and thus reduced his preferential treatment. In other words, "the property was to be equally divided among all the heirs in terms of value, although the agricultural assets were to be inherited in their entirety by only one heir, and were to be evaluated on the basis of their 240

profits* (ibid.). Despite the improvements in the second version of the bill, the proposal never become law due mainly to criticisms that such a law would lead to the revival of house headship (katoku), contrary to the popular principle of

equal inheritance. Immediately after the enactment of the Civil Code in 1951, the Japan Association of Private Law conducted a nationwide survey on the inheritance of agricultural assets in the three year period 1948-1950. According to the results, only four farm households out of 241 surveyed (less than 2%) had divided their farmland plots through inheritance. In 1962, Kawashima undertook a survey of 622 farm households in the three-year period starting 1959. This study revealed that 14.5% of the households divided their farmland through inheritance. However, many of these cases of land division did not involve splitting the farm management. It was further revealed that as many as 17.8% of the households had been divided while the head of household was still alive (Toshitani 1979). These results indicate that regardless of equal inheritance and succession laws, farmland did not end up being fragmented very much. There are two main strategies which allowed this apparent skirting of the law to happen. First, a written last will and testament (vuiaon) enabled property to be bequeathed to a designated heir or to be divided among designated persons. Second, either a “conciliatory agreement on the division of 241 inheritance' (isan bunkatsu kvdai) or an 'abandonment of inheritance' (sdzoku h6ki) could be legally entered (Moore

1990). Therefore, one reality of inheritance in Japanese farming households exhibited by these surveys is that co­ heirs other than the successor often received various benefits, possibly prior to the death of the household head, such as expenses for education beyond compulsory education, and marriage expenses, capital funds for starting a business, a house and/or a lot for a house, or a household vegetable garden. These gifts were of a size that did not threaten the continued maintenance of the family farm operation (Toshitani 1979). In order to make such arrangements legal, documents such as a statement of refusal of inheritance, or a statement attesting to the receipt of special benefits during the deceased's lifetime could be officially registered (Toshitani 1979) . In reality, however, such statements were too often simply verbal agreements (Moore 1990). In case there were significant discrepancies in the benefits previously received by possible heirs, an adjustment of benefits at the time of inheritance could be rendered (Toshitani 1979) .

Refusal of Inheritance Rights Heirs can renounce their inheritance rights within three months from the time of becoming aware that the inheritance 242 had been executed (Article 915, 938). The reasons for refusal of inheritance rights were various. Heirs, of course, can avoid inheriting debt by giving up this right. In Japan, however, inheritance rights are often refused for other reasons. For example, in the case of agriculture or forestry business, heirs might recognize the importance of not splitting up the family's land. Inheritance rights were refused in order to avoid the responsibilities of taking care of and/or paying medical and living expenses for the surviving spouse of the deceased. Inheritance rights were refused even simply to remove oneself from the jL£ group in terms of ritual duties and rights (Takahashi 1978) . It is also assumed that the inheritance rights were refused in order to avoid high inheritance taxes which might require selling their property to pay them off. Kamiya researched the statistics of court decisions in the Okazaki branch of Nagoya Domestic Court in 1951. The Okazaki branch had jurisdiction over mainly rural farming villages, without characteristics of cities at that time. According to the records, 72% of all court decisions dealt with refusal of inheritance rights. Nearly 90% of those were farming families. Interestingly, there were no eldest sons among those who refused their inheritance rights. Most of the reasons for refusal declared in court were things like "I want the eldest brother to maintain the household" or "there is so little property that partible inheritance would make 243 the continuation of our farming business impossible* (Kamiya 1953) . A scholar of law, Nishimura, supported the rationale of Article 1043 which stipulated that the refusal of inheritance right was beneficial not only for the eldest son, but for non-heir children as well, because they could receive some property in advance although the amount could be less than the legal portion they could inherit if they had not refused their inheritance rights. Kamiya disagreed with Nishimura's perspective, arguing that non-heir children were forced by their parents to give up their inheritance rights and often did not actually receive any property at all. He questioned the rationale of Article 1043, claiming that the refusal of inheritance rights was an illegal act against the law of equal inheritance (Kamiya 1953).

One of my informants in the forestry business pointed out that his business was like farming: dividing and distributing land would ruin his business. He believed that single inheritance is necessary, but as compensation to non­ heir children, he will sell a little bit of his forest and spend the money for their education. In fact, while his eldest son went to local school, his younger son received better education in T6ky6. The younger son's tuition and living expenses in Toky6 were raised by selling some forest land. 244

At the time of their independence upon reaching adulthood, non-successors would most likely receive money, a house, and some land. To daughters, compensation was given in the form of a dowry, but it was often much less than the value of the amount of property received by an heir. This is a clear example that in certain businesses, single inheritance was preferred, but non-heirs also received part of the property in a different form. My informant, who himself had received a majority of the property when he was heir, supported single inheritance as a necessity. However, later, I was also informed by one of his relatives that his younger brother was very unhappy about this treatment, and as a result, severed the relationship with his family and emigrated to Brazil. My mother often grumbled that she did not inherit any property. But, she thinks that it is not at all appropriate to argue about this matter with her successor brother. In actual practice, single inheritance tends to create problems for the family.

More recently than these surveys, gift transfer of farmland has been encouraged by the “tax grace' (n6zei vflvo) law of 1975, whereby taxes on the receipt of farmland as a gift are deferred until the death of either the household head or the heir. Thus, despite of the principle of equal inheritance in the Civil Code, farmland has not been affected by disadvantageous fragmentation. 245

Due to the high land prices in the 1990's, however, the ideal of equality has become an important issue in inheritance in Japan. The heir typically must either sell a portion of his newly-acquired land or borrow money in order to pay other heirs to meet the requirements of the equal inheritance law. If the money was borrowed, the heir to the land would have to pay it back out of the family's agricultural profits. However, because of the high land prices and the high taxes on land, paying back the resulting large debts became almost impossible. It was also common that a farmer would not have enough money or bond at all to give to his children who do not receive land. It was common for small-scale farmers in Japan to go into debt just to acquire large expensive agricultural machinery (Kayama 1989). As a result, farmers often were forced to sell pieces of their land and establish mixed inheritance and gift strategies (Moore 1990). It was also necessary on occasion to infringe on the rights of co-heirs just to be able to continue the agriculture business.

Parent-Children Contracte (Qvako Kelvaku)

Agriculture was of course not usually accomplished by a single practitioner, but the cooperation of many family members was essential. For example, an administrator would buy raw materials and tools, sell finished / harvested products, and pay taxes in his own name. The administrator's 246 wife and a successor and his wife would provide labor. The father of the administrator would provide the land. Parent- children contracts documented these domestic contributions clearly. while such contracts preserved the customs and traditions of cooperation of agricultural family members, they also fit into the Japanese legal system. Although Japanese law did not officially recognize inheritance carried out before the death of the household head, nor inheritance by contract, parent-children contracts were accepted by local agricultural committees, local administrators, and agricultural improvement organizations. The types and names of parent-children contracts vary. According to the family agreement guidelines set by the National Chamber of Agriculture in 1967, there are four functions of parent- children contracts. 1) Compensation Agreement for Labor. This is an agreement between a father (administrator) and his child (successor) whereby the father pays wages to the child. 2) Department Assignment Agreement. This assigns the administration of a particular department (e.g. gardening, livestock) to the successor to be handled independently of the parents' work. 3) Family Cooperation Agreement. Family members agree to provide property, money, labor, and techniques for the good of the family business. 247

4) Transfer Agreement. This is an agreement between an administrator and his successor whereby the administrator agrees to one day transfer the agricultural land to his successor (Miyazaki 1989).

Legal Aspects of Inheritance As we have pointed out, the legal side of kinship has traditionally been neglected by anthropologists. This is perhaps because kinship is regulated strongly by informal social phenomena such as morals and values. Anthropologists' primary purpose has been to understand kinship from the point of view of what people perceive and how they behave, for example, which people are recognized as kindred from one specific individual's point of view, or who belong to which lineage, etc. The study of the taboo of is another example. Legal codes are a formal sanction. Legal sanctioning can be defined as "made for the sake of political authority which is the strong enforcement of organized political power, and conducted systematically based on the plan. It regulates and systematizes human behavior in the form of language' (Kawashima 1977). Since the 19th century, legal sanctions on the family have diminished as the family changed from an 'institutional family' to a 'companionate family* in western societies (ibid.). in other words, kinship morals and legal sanctions have become separated. This is perhaps the reason why 248

western scholars are not so interested in the legal aspects of kinship. In Japan, on the other hand, from the Meiji Civil Code through to the postwar Civil Code, kinship morals were enforced by law. Moreover, unlike western societies, Japan's kinship system has gone through a great deal of change in its treatment by the legal code since the 19th century, especially from the Edo Period to the to the postwar Civil Code. Therefore, it is important to study changes of the legal code in terms of the kinship system. It is especially interesting to study the way the legal code and customary practice complement and/or contradict the kinship system.

Succession and Inheritance Under Tokugawa Law In the Edo Period under the Tokugawa regime (1603-1867), jurisdictions and legal procedures were quite complex. The Japanese population at that time was divided into the court nobility (kuae>, the military gentry (buke), the religious (sfirvo and shinkan), the common people (hyakushd and ch6nin) and outsiders (eta and hinin) . Each of these groups had a distinct social and legal status, and was ruled under a different jurisdiction. The common people comprised the bulk of the nation in population and economic activity, while the military gentry, though much fewer in number, monopolized the 249 feudal government's power over the entire nation (wigmore ed. 1982). With respect to succession and inheritance in the common people's law, succession to household headship was required to be proclaimed in advance in the form of a special "living will* (vuiaon). The Taisei Rei {Legal Code of Taisei) in

1648 regulated proclamations of succession as follows: I, Rat, 12 (1648) [year 1 of Keian Period, year of the Rat, 12th month] The regulations for each ward concerning succession to the headship of the family are as proclaimed in a prior year. Each head of the family should, while he is still living, make a will, and in the presence of the relatives, headman, and monthly manager (tsuki gyoii) of the five-man company (aonin-gumi), it should be at once recorded in the register-book of the three Town Elders (machi-doshivori cho). If a person living in the ward becomes seriously ill but shows no intention of making a will, the relatives, company men, and manager for the month should make..[this space is torn and words are missing] without fail after consulting those..[this space is torn and words are missing]. Since a will made in a lifetime is to be held binding after death, the relatives, headman, company men, and other word people should execute its provisions without the least bias or selfish purpose. One made in haste on a deathbed without reasonable reflection is not recognized by the law of the Shogunate. (Translation in Wigmore ed. 1982:93) In case a person failed to follow the above orders, the law dictates the following. If a person died without appointing a successor, the one nearest to the deceased in blood relationship would succeed him. If a person died without making a will, and the relatives quarreled 250 shamefully, the right of succession was forfeited ftoriaae) to the government (k6gi) (Wigmore ed. 1982:97).

The eldest son was the official successor under the common people's law. Jikata Kosairoku (Record of Commoners'

Relationships) stated the following about a will which disinherited the eldest son and took away his legal portion of the inheritance: A will that, disinheriting without sound reason the eldest son who has the natural right of succession, appoints another son to be the successor is not valid. However, if such succession is truly necessary, the eldest son should be given seven-tenths of the moneys in possession of the family and the successor be given three-tenths, while the household goods and family land should all go to the successor. (Translation in Wigmore ed. 1982:97) Adoption for the purpose of succession was very common in the Edo Period. Surprisingly, the succession rights of an adopted person were protected by law, even in the presence of natural-born heirs. An adopted successor could not be divorced from the family unless he was guilty of some serious misconduct or became gravely ill. This is another example showing that historically, succession to the household is more important than genealogical continuity in the Japanese kinship system. Also surprisingly, even *if a natural son is born after the settlement of an adoption, this natural son has no right of succession* (ibid.). In the case of the adopted son being divorced from the family, the law stipulated the following: 251

If an adoptive parent the adopted son, his natural son born after the adoption is prohibited the right of succession, son that petition must be made for the adoption of another son. However, if the cause of divorce is the adopted son's faults of conduct or his ill health being such that he is not able to perform a vassal's duties, the head of the bureau should thoroughly investigate the matter, even inquiring of the divorcee;'s original family; and if he finds the stated reason for the divorce to be true, the divorcer may petition for the succession of his natural son. If the divorce was resorted to for such a light reason as the adopted son's being slightly defective in health or not being acceptable to the adoptive father, the natural son is not allowed the right of succession (ibid.).

Z«nkoku Mini i Kanrai R alJJJI Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei Rui-ifl44 is an official record of local customs of the late Tokugawa Period, compiled by the Ministry of Justice in 1877 and 1880. The purpose of the compilation was to collect customs to be used as a reference while compiling the Meiji Civil Code. However, as it turned out this was not appreciated by the legislators who compiled the Meiji Civil Code. For example, according to Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei Ruiiu. partible inheritance was customarily practiced among non-warrior classes. However, the legis­ lators decided that impartible inheritance would be universal in the Meiji Civil Code. In other words, as mentioned before, the Meiji Civil Code was based on the warrior class

44 A translation of Zenkoku Mini i Kanrei RuiiQ is published in Law and Justice in Tokugawa Japan, edited by John H. Wigmore. 252 rules rather than on the common practice of the people of the time. Nevertheless, from its very inception, the legal code was based on customary practice. Customs were collected under the headings of nine regions, detailed in Table 24 on the previous page, with the

Table 24. The Nine Regions of Japan Described by the atnfcofcu Klai-l Kanrei RulJQ Recj^i^^^^^^^ancien^Jcun^^moderr^grefecture^ 1) Kinai Yamashiro (Kydto), Yamato (Nara), Kawachi (Osaka), Izumi (Osaka), Settsu (Hydqo) 2) Tdkaidd Iga (Mie), Ise (Mie), Shima (Mie), Owari (Aichi), Mikawa (Aichi), Totdmi (Shizuoka), Suruga (Shizuoka), Izu (Shizuoka), Kai (Yamanashi), Sagami (Kanagawa), Musashi (Saitama, Tdkyd), Awa (Chiba), Kazusa (Chiba), Shimofusa (Chiba), Hitachi (Ibaraki) 3) Tozandd 6mi (Shiga), Mino (Gifu), Hida (Gifu), Shinano (Nagano), Kdzuke (Gunma), Shimotsuke (Tochigi), Iwashiro (Fukushima), Iwaki (Fukushima), Rikuzen (Miyagi), RicchO (Iwate), Uzen (Yamaqata), Uqo (Akita), Mutsu (Aomori) 4) Hokkaido Hokkaidd (Hokkaidd) 5) Hokurikudo Wakasa (Fukui), Echizen (Fukui), Kaga (Ishikawa), Noto (Ishikawa), Ecchti (Toyama), Echiqo (Niigata), Sado (Niiqata-Sado) 6) San'ind6 Tanba (Kydto), Tango (Kydto), Tajima (Hydgo), Inaba (Tottori), Hdki (Tottori), Izumo (Shimane), Oki (Shimane-Oki), Iwami (Shimane) 7) San'yodd Harima (Hydgo), Mimasaka (Okayama), Bizen (Okayama), Bicchti (Okayama), Bingo (Hiroshima), Aki (Hiroshima), Sud (Yamaguchi), Naqato (Yamaguchi) 8) Nankaidd Kii (Wakayama), Awaji (Hydgo), Awa (Tokushima), Sanuki (Kagawa), Tosa (Kdchi), Ivo (Ehime) 9) Seikaidd Buzen (Fukuoka), Bungo (Oita), Hiyflga (Miyazaki), Chikuzen (Fukuoka), Chikugo (Saga), Hizen (Nagasaki), Higo (Kumamoto), Satsuma (Kagoshima), dsumi (Kagoshima), Iki (Iki island), Tsushima (Tsushima island), Rvilkvfl (Okinawa) (sources: Meijikai K&go Jiten 1967, Japanese-English Character Dictionary 1986) 253 ancient kuni (state) names and modern-day prefecture locations. According to Zenkoku Minii Kanrei Ruiifl. some succession procedures were universal, practiced in all regions. For example, at the time of succession the successor rewrote his name as the official household head name on the official meeting register (yoriai-ch6). In almost all regions, succession had to be reported to the village offices. One exception was Uzen, where there was no need to officially announce any succession unless the successor was adopted. Succession of common people was not reported at all in Higo. In the Kai and Kaga Regions, the successor was supposed to be the eldest son, but if he was ill or mentally incapable, the second or third son could be the successor. In Noto Region, without the will of the household head, a non-eldest son could not succeed even if the eldest son was gravely ill. In order to give the eldest son away to be adopted, official permission was required. In the EcchG Region, among common people, the household head designated a successor in his will. But if the eldest son claimed succession between 17 to 27 days after the death of the head and the relatives consented, the will was ignored. If the relatives did not agree with the eldest son's claim, the will was read and the designated person became the successor. In RikuchG and Iwashiro Regions, it 254 was reported that there was no custom of retirement finkyo) among common people. Compared to succession, inheritance was slightly more flexible, and its practice was regionally more widely varied. Zenkoku Minii Kanrei Ruiiu reported that in many regions it was common for the eldest son to branched off from the family, and non-eldest sons became heirs. Female heirs were seen in many regions. First-born child inheritance was reported in Izu, Hitachi and Uzen. In the Rikuzen Region, on the other hand, daughters had no inheritance rights even if they were sorvo. in case of farming households, if the first-born was a female, she could take a mukovSshi and become heir (Uzen, Rikuchu Regions). If the principal male heir was not mature enough at the time of inheritance, his older sister would take a mukovdshi husband, adopt her younger brother to be her child, and give the inheritance right to this adopted child even if she had natural children of her own (Ugo Region). Zenkoku Minii Kanrei RuiiH is a great resource for researching people's customs and regional variations of the practice in the late Tokugawa Period. 255

Meiji Civil Code

Family Law Starting at the time of the Meiji restoration (1868) and continuing at least until the promulgation of the Meiji Civil Code (1891), every aspect of Japanese society experienced change. The Meiji Civil Code was created amidst a changing political system, but was still based on the traditions and customs of the former warriors of the Edo Period. The process of creating the Meiji Civil Code was known as The Civil Code Dispute (minpdten ronsd). A conservative group lead by Yatsuka Hozumi asserted that the civil Code should follow the customs of the warrior class rather than the farmers; at the same time, Kenjird Ume and his followers wanted to use the common people's customs. The conservative group won out, and the Meiji Civil Code was drawn up based on the customs of warriors and aristocrats (Muto 1985). The stipend system of the central government finally came to an end nine years after the restoration. The four class system (shi-n6-k6-sho) was officially discontinued and three classes consisting of nobility (kazoku), descendants of samurai (shi z oku) , and common people (heimin) were established instead. Freed from the four classes, people seemed to become equal regardless of occupation, but in reality, another class system came to be imposed on them. In the same way, households became free from the old feudal 256 political system; however, new political functionality was added to the kinship system. Property could no longer legally belong to the household collectively. The concept of private property was a new concept installed in the Meiji Civil Code. Under the new law, household property (kasan) was officially placed under the name of the household head. However, in customary practice, the property did not entirely belong to its legal owner. Although property was managed by the household head, other members of the household could also utilize it, and usually they were expected to branch off and received their share at the time of branching (Aruga 1970:34). One of the most significant changes in the Meiji law regarded marriage. Thanks to westernization, Japanese found themselves pressured to do away with the practice of having secondary wives. An official system of was written into the Meiji Family Law. All children except for the legal wife's were called shoshi45 to be distinguished from chakushi. who were the children of the legal wife. A wife's legal right to divorce her husband was recognized for the first time. However, a husband and wife were not yet equal in status; for example, a husband would not be punished for killing his wife who committed adultery (Takayanagi 1977) .

45 Shoshi is defined as an illegitimate child recognized by the father but not legally registered (Article 827 and 829). 257

In sum, the Meiji Civil Code had two important ramifications for succession and inheritance. First, primogenitural impartible inheritance and succession were enforced for the purpose of continuity of the household. Second, a household head (koshu) had significant authority.

The household head had the duty to take care of and give education to his household members. In addition, the household head had the right to control his household members, under such conditions, the property of an became separated from the ig. itself, and became the personal property of the household head (Toshitani 1971) .

Household Registry (koaaki)

Prior to the Meiji Civil Code, a household registry law (koseki ho) had been established in 1872. Using the technique of shfimon aratame cho46. household registry came to be used by the government in an attempt to understand the size and distribution of the population, mainly for political and military purposes. The social status of the household; the rank and birth and death dates of all individuals who moved into or out of the local district; and the rank and parentage of all individuals of the household are examples of

46 registers of religious investigation which list the name, age and relationship to head of household for individuals in villages and towns throughout Japan (Cornell 1986). 258 the kind of information which was recorded in every household's official registry (Moore 1990). The origin of household registry was in China, and it was introduced to Japan in the 7th century47. Under the ritsurvS system, it was employed at one time for the purpose of analyzing and controlling the periodical redistribution of land leased by the government to cultivators (Gubbins 1899) . The household registry had three parts: household registration, residential registration, and status registration. The following household registration information was entered: 1. Head of the household . 2. Head's lineal ascendants. 3. Head's consort. 4. Head's lineal descendants, and their consorts. 5. Head's collateral relatives and their consorts. 6. Persons not relatives. All ascendants and descendants were listed in order of degree, with furthest ascendants first and furthest descendants last. Under status registration, the following information were entered: births, recognition of illegitimate children, adoptions, dissolution of adoptions, marriages, divorces, guardianship, abdication, disappearances, deaths, succession to headship, disinheritance of presumptive heirs to headship, appointment of heirs to the headship, entrances into the

47 Official, written household registry in Japan dates back to 645 A.D., the first year of the Era, when great reforms were made in the system of government. 259

household, expulsions from the household, establishment of branch households, resuscitation of a household which had died out, acquisition and loss of nationality, change of name or class, and any alteration of entries regarding status information (Gubbins 1899). Household registry was a means by which the national authority could regulate households through the household head based on certain political purposes. It was also a regulatory means for household property. The Meiji Civil Code gave a household head sole property rights, presumably in order to prevent dispersal of property and to ensure continuity of the household management (Toshitani 1971). All households were equal in the sense that they were allowed to have a surname and that they were listed in the same way in the household registry. Nevertheless, secondary wives and illegitimate children, which were still common in the Meiji Period, were not listed in the koseki (Takayanagi 1977), and

thus not all people considered themselves to be treated equally under this system. This household registry system was important because it officially created the household head system which became one of the main characteristics of the Meiji Civil Code.

Accuracy of the Household Registry There is a question as to whether the household registry accurately reflected reality. As described in Chapter IV, 260 there have been documented cases where people officially registered false birth order to conceal their practice of non-primogenitural succession under the Meiji Civil Code. Unlike the birth records used in western countries, which are created and maintained by the authorities, Japan's household registry was maintained by the people's verbal report to the registry office. In other words, whatever people reported would be entered in the registry as the permanent record of the individuals involved as well as the household. There is at least one interesting example where a court decision was made in favor of records in the household registry, despite the conflicting reality. A diagram of the relevant family relationships is shown in Figure 26 below. The plaintiff “X" was a mukovoshi of *K", who was a sister of

"S". When "S*'s son "Y" died, “y ' s legal son on the household registry *Z* inherited the estate. "X" claimed

bunke

mukoydshi person plaintiff inherited f rom

heir

Figure 26. Court Case of Inheritance Dispute 261 that the estate which "Z* inherited had already been given to "X* by "K", and that "X* himself had been living on it and lending the money out to make a profit on the interest charged. Moreover, "X" claimed that "Z" was not a legal heir. *Z*'s biological parents were *Y*'s wife *v*'s brother *M* and " M " ' s concubine *W* . *V* and *M"'s father "C" officially entered *Z* into the household registry as the child of * Y" and "V* without "Y* and *V" acknowledging this fact. The judgment of the court was made based on two legal facts. First, the transfer of the estate to *X* was not binding, because *S" neglected to officially register the transfer, and as a result the estate was inherited by *Y" when "S* died. Secondly, "Z* had inheritance right because he was legally and officially entered in the household register as the son of "Y" and *V" (Taniguchi 1981). This case is confusing not only because "Z" was a non- biological and non-adopted child of the person to be inherited from, but also because *Z" was not even recognized by his legal parents "Y" and "V", since someone else entered false information into the household registry.

Household System At the core of family law in the Meiji Civil Code was the household system, which was reorganized after the Meiji Restoration and was firmly established by the Meiji Civil Code. The concept of the "household* in the Meiji Civil Code 262 as a substantive law was established through the accumulation of family-related regulations, which had been functioning as procedural laws in the family registration system (Toshitani 1979). The institutionalization of the household was a projection of the house as the family registration system was turned into substantive laws (ibid.). Before that, ifi. was officially included as part of the clan, but it did not yet exist as a separate entity according to the law. As the clan gradually disintegrated, the ±£. began to form the unit of society (Hozumi 1973). Xfi. in the Meiji Civil Code was a group led by household head f koshu) described in the household registry. It was at this time that individualism came to be more respected. Formerly, it was only the household head who could fill an official position, serve in the army, and possess property. But as a result of reforms in the system of government, household members were permitted to hold public positions; with reform of the military conscription laws, both the household head and household members became liable to military duties; with the progress of commerce and industry, household members came to be entitled to hold public bonds, stocks, and shares, which the law now recognized as their separate property (ibid.). was defined in the Meiji Civil Code as "a group of people who are a wife of household head and his relatives and in-laws residing in the house' (Article 243). Whether the members lived together was actually not a concern for the strict 263

legality of an jj». For example, bunke or branching of the household recorded on the household registry does not require the members of one bunke to all live separately. ifi. must have a household head. If there is no household head, the i£ was discontinued (haika48 or zekka49) . However, continuation of the household was heavily emphasized by the Meiji Civil Code, which contains many strict rules against the discontinuation of the (Hozumi 1973).

Household Head (koahu)

Under the household system, the household head had the right to control his family. Household head's rights refers specifically to the following eleven rights. 1) The right to designate the physical site of residence. (Article 749) 2) The right to accept or deny the entry of new household members or re-entry of former household members (Article 735, 737(1), 738(1),(2)) 3) Right to accept or deny the secession of household members succeeding to the headship of another family, establishing a fresh branch of the family, resuscitating the main branch or a cadet branch or a distant branch of the family which had died out, or

40 Haika refers to discontinuation of based on household head's wish. 49 Zekka refers to discontinuation of ifi. caused by unavoidable circumstances rather than household head's wish. 264

resuscitating the family of a relative which had died out {Article 373 (1), 728 (1)(2), 743(1) (2)). 4) Veto power over the marriage and divorce decisions of household members (Article 750(2), 776, 849(2)). 5) veto power over annulment and adoption of household members (Articles 780(1), 854). 6) Veto power over the dissolution of adoption after the death of the adoptive parents.(Article 862(2)) 7) The right to issue an order interdicting a person who is of unsound mind from the management of his property (Articles 7, 10, 13). 8) The right and duty to become a guardian of a member of a family (Articles 903, 907, 909). 9) The rights to call a meeting of a family council (Article 944), express his opinion before the family council (948), appeal to a court of law against a decision of the family council (951), apply to a court of law to choose a member to fill a vacancy in the family council (950), and apply to a court of law for a judgment to override a decision of the family council (952). 10) The duty to support a family member (Article 749) 11) The right to assume ownership of property of which legal ownership is not clear or disputed between the head of the family and one of its members (Article 748). (Nakagawa 1938b:20) 265

Family Council Under the Meiji Civil Code, a family council undertook many functions which were normally associated with courts of law. It had the authority to watch over the interests of both the family and its individuals. A family council was convened in order to give determination in a particular matter, or to take charge of the affairs of a person without legal capacity. In the former case, the council could be summoned only by a court of law, but in the latter case the intervention of the court was not required for subsequent meetings. The functions of the family council also included the granting of consent under certain circumstances to marriages and adoptions; the granting of consent to acts performed by a mother on behalf of a minor child over whom she exercises parental rights, or the approval of consent granted by her for the performance of such acts by the child; the protection of the interests of a minor child in case the child's interests conflict with those of the parents; the supervision of the affairs of persons without legal capacity, including minors; the choice in certain cases of an heir to the headship of a family; and the appointment and control of guardians and superintendents of guardianship (Gubbins 1899). 266 inheritance and Succession Law (aflzoku h 6 )

Article 964 of the Meiji Civil Code officially stated the timing of succession to be the following: (1) death of the household head. (2) retirement of the household head (inkyo).

(3) household head loses his Japanese nationality. (4) secession of an adopted household head due to divorce. (5) marriage of a female household head if her husband becomes household head. Four kinds of successors to house-headship are recognized by the Meiji Civil Code: the legal heir (h6tei katoku sozokunin) , the appointed heir ( shi tei katoku sQzokunin), the chosen heir (sentei katoku sdzokunin), and the ascendant heir (chokkei hizoku katoku sdzokunin). The legal heir, who came first in the order of succession, was a lineal descendant of the household head, and who was at the same time a member of his house. Article 970 dictated that the legal successor be decided by four factors among lineal descendants (chokkei hizoku): age, genealogical distance, sex, and legitimacy. Above all, birth order is the most important factor to be considered, with older children preferred over younger (Takeuchi 1974). Among lineal descendants, near kin is preferred over remote relatives, male over female, and legitimate children 267 over illegitimate, seniors in age being accorded priority when they are equal in other respects (Article 970). in case there is no legal presumptive heir to a household head, the head may appoint an heir (shitei katoku sdzokunin) himself, either making the announcement during his lifetime or by stating it in his will (Article 979) . But this appointment is voided if he subsequently obtains a child by nature or by adoption, for the child will become his legal presumptive heir. If, at the time of the death of a household head, there is neither a legal heir nor an appointed heir, the order of succession is as follows: (1) father of the deceased, or, if there is no father or if he is unable to express his intention, (2) mother of the deceased, or, if there are no parents or both are unable to express their intention, (3) the family council chooses an heir from among the members of the household according to the following order (sentei katoku sSzokunin):

(1) the surviving wife, if she is a house-daughter; (2) brothers of the deceased; (3) sisters of the deceased; (4) the surviving wife, if she is not a house-daughter; and finally (5) lineal descendants of the brothers and sisters

(Article 984). 268

If there is neither a legal heir, nor an appointed heir, nor an heir available to be chosen according to this list, then the nearest lineal ascendant of the last household head succeeds (chokkei hizoku katoku s62okunin), with males always preferred over females. A legal heir (h6tei s6zokunin) did not have the right to reject his succession (Article 1020), but a household head could renounce a legal heir's right. In order for a household head to deprive a legal heir of the right of succession, he must bring action against him with the consent of the family council, for the following causes mentioned in the Article 975.

(1 ) ill-treatment or gross insult to the household head;

(2 ) unfitness for household headship on account of bodily or mental infirmity; (3) having been sentenced and punished for an offense of such a nature as to defile the name of the house; and (4) interdiction as a spend-thrift (Hozumi 1973).

Unlike succession, inheritance occurred only at the death of household members (Article 992). Also unlike succession, loss of nationality was not grounds to initiate the inheritance process, because property rights were attached to a specific person. However, loss of nationality did lead to the loss of other rights such as stockholdership of certain banks or companies. A foreigner land law 269

(aaikokuiin tochi hS) established in TaishS 14 (1926) allowed land to be owned by people with certain nationalities. Thus, since 1926 a Japanese person can continue to own land uninterrupted after the loss of his nationality if he obtained one of certain nationalities. Unlike a successor, an heir does not need to be a member of the household. The order of preference for choosing an heir is (1) lineal descendant; {2) spouse; (3) lineal ascendant; and finally (4) household head (Article 994, 995). Among lineal descendants, the nearest relative was preferred. Persons of the same degree of relationship ranked together; heirs who ranked together shared equally in the inheritance. But the share of inheritance given to a shoshi or an illegitimate child was fixed at half the share of a legitimate child. The conditions surrounding the disqualification of an heir were the same as that of a successor. Since an heir did not need to be a member of the household, a lineal descendant who married out of the family retained inheritance rights. This was an important change from pre-Meiji laws. Illegitimate children could inherit, but their legal portion was half of legitimate children (Article 1040). MukovSshi 270 had inheritance rights. A spouse could only inherit if there was no lineal descendant, regardless of legitimacy. This was different from the postwar Civil Code in which the spouse was a legal heir along with the children. Nevertheless, unlike succession rights, the spouse was a legal heir equal to the lineal descendants. Among the four kinds of legal heirs listed just above, only the household head had no legal claim to the inheritance. In other words, if a household head left a will bequeathing his entire property to a third party, the new household head could not inherit anything at all, while the other family member heirs had a legal claim to their lawful portion. A dying household head could allocate his inheritance (shitei s6zokubun) by will (Article 1006(1)), as long as the willed proportions did not preclude the legal portions (h3tei sdzokubun) . in case there were gift inheritances (zoyo) prior to the settling of the estate, the portions granted as gifts were added to the total amount to be inherited, and then legal portion was calculated. This is the same process as dictated by the postwar Civil Code. 271

Changes in tha Civil Coda

Changes in Family law Family law based on the household system went through significant changes due to the mounting social contradictions that accompanied the capitalist development of Japan early in the 20th century (Toshitani 1979). As the rapid development of capitalism took place during World War I, population mobility made it necessary for the government to obtain more information about its population. The household as officially described in the household registry system was an abstraction; it did not necessarily correspond to the reality of the family-community. The government found it necessary to gather information on the actual family households and to bring this unit under direct control. The Family Registration Act was amended and the Temporary Residence Act was instituted in 1914 in order to accomplish these goals. The most direct result of this new system was identifying people who were living physically separate from their honseki or legal domicile. In addition,

the first national census was taken in 1920 (ibid.). Japanese capitalism was in a deep crisis due to a series of economic catastrophes after World war I. Japan was plunged into a full-fledged wartime nationalist structure, and family law was incorporated into this structure with the main purpose of collecting data on human resources. Special 272 orders were enacted to collect data about people with special skills such as medical. The government began to gather full information on actual physical family households, and used this as the basic source of data about activities such as elections, education, sanitation projects, tax collection, relief for the needy, and issuance of official certificates (ibid.). Japan's household ideology was reinforced and propagated by the government for the purpose of rationalization of all sorts of other policies. As the war spread, it was broadly applied to create a nation-as-one-family ideology. Moreover, the ideology was increasingly used to stress the importance of harmony and self-effacement, thus enabling the state to directly manipulate individuals for the war effort (ibid.). Japan's defeat in World War II and occupation thereafter brought about sweeping reforms in order to dissolve and reorganize the prewar emperor system as well as the family system. Dissolution of the household was undertaken mainly through revisions of the constitution and the Civil Code. Two new provisions of the 1947 Constitution were equality before the law (Article 14) and equality of the sexes (Article 24), which were also principles in the Civil Code. The following are the main changes in the family law of the Civil Code. (1) Abolishment of the household head system. Even language such as "household head", "household", 273

"retirement", and "discontinuation of household' (haika) were no longer used. The household system

was effectively abolished. (2) Equality of the sexes. For example, a husband and wife were free to choose either the husband's or wife's surname (Article 750), unlike Article 788 of the Meiji Civil Code which stated 'wife enters the husband's household upon marriage.' However, the vast majority of couples use the husband's surname regardless of this law. (3) The meaning of "adoption" was changed from adoption for the succession to the to adoption for the purpose of taking care of the parents. However, note that adoption was still not legally specified for the benefit for the children. The postwar Civil Code did not stipulate an upper limit on the age of an individual to be adopted, suggesting that there were many adult adoptions for the purpose of succeeding the ifi or taking care of adopting parents. In addition, the Domestic Court was established in 1948 to resolve family disputes. Divorce by mutual consent, which had been established in the Meiji Civil Code, was maintained in the postwar Civil Code (Shimazu 1993a). 274

Changes in Inharitanca and Succassion Law As the concept of personal property grew, the importance of property which was traditionally maintained for the sake of the ie. beyond the death of individuals and beyond the scope of succession and inheritance, began to lose its meaning. Property inheritance became a simple and mechanical transfer of personal property. A court decision made in 1950 under the postwar Civil Code recognized the freedom of transferring an estate en masse to someone other than the heir (Taniguchi 1081). In the amendments of Sh6wa 23 (1948), the Meiji Civil Code's regulations for succession were eliminated from sozoku h6 altogether. Since then, sSzoku Jap was only concerned with inheritance. The concept of household head status was abandoned. The inheritance rights of a spouse were established. The spouse's inheritance rights had its origin in the communal property system of European societies where the wife was required to contribute labor as well (Shimazu 1993b). In feudal Japan, it was expected that a widow would be taken care of by her children, usually by an heir. Thus, the wife's inheritance right was considered unnecessary. The amendments of Sh6wa 37 (1962) established two kinds of legal heirs: spouse heir (haigdsha sfizokunin) and kin heir (ketsuzoku s8zokunin). The legal priority among kin heir was

(1) lineal descendants, (2) lineal ascendants, and 275

(3) siblings of the person to be inherited from. In the amendments of Sh6wa 55 (1977), the legal portion of spouse's inheritance was increased (Article 900). The system of "special contributions* (kivo bun) was established

(Article 904-2). Also, the law was changed so that in the case of inheritance by representation (daishu sdzoku), limits were placed on the children of siblings when the siblings of the deceased household head were the heirs.

Current 1995 Inheritance Law Inheritance commences upon the death of an individual50 (Article 882). There are two kinds of inheritance, legally established inheritance (hStei sozoku), and inheritance by will (vuigon s5zoku). Unlike will inheritance in England, vuiaon sozoku of Japan is limited to a particular portion of the assets. For example, if the heirs are the spouse and children, a maximum of half of the property can be willed to non-heirs (Ishii 1978). In other words, legally designated heirs are guaranteed a portion of the inheritance (iryiibun).

Under the current inheritance system in Japan as of 1995, a spouse is in a position equal to other relatives51. According to the 1991 Annual Report pi Judicial Statistics.

50 In the Meiji Civil Code, inheritance could also occur when an individual retired and gave up his headship of the house (inkvo). 51 In the Meiji Civil Code, the spouse was ranked below the children, so that when there were any children heirs, the spouse would inherit nothing. 276

court decisions were made on a total of 1682 cases of partible inheritance between spouse and children. Table 25 summarizes these cases according to how the property was divided between the spouse and children.

Table 25. Court-Decided Division of Inherited Property Between Spouse and Children (percent of cases) land: spouse received all 19% divided between spouse and children 52% children received all 29% house: spouse received all 30% divided between spouse and children 36% children received all 34% cash: spouse received all 30% divided between spouse and children 52% children received all 18% other: spouse received all 33% divided between spouse and children 40% children received all 27%

< source; Saikft Saibansho Jimu Sdkvoku 1991)

It can be generalized from these data that land and cash were more likely to be divided up than was the house, interestingly, it was more common for land to be given to the children than to the spouse, whereas the opposite was true for cash. Under this new law, the order of priority of inheritor among relatives is (1) offspring, (2) parents, then (3) siblings. 277

The spouse had the right to inherit regardless of which potential heirs are present. Notice that the inheritance right of is stronger than that of siblings. This system is called dreilinien system, which is the system used in countries with a strong ideology of honoring lineal ascendants, such as Spain. On the other hand, the system called parentelen practiced in Germany and France places the inheritance right of siblings above that of grandparents (Ishii 1978). If an heir dies before the actual inheritance occurs, the right of inheritance can be transferred to the deceased heir's children, or to his grandchildren if there are no children (daishfl sSzoku). Under the equal inheritance law, female children and male children have equal right to inherit. However, in actual practice, female children are not likely to receive an amount equal to their brothers, almost certainly not as much as the eldest male child.

The inheritance right of illegitimate children was recognized early in Japan. Even if an heir had no legitimate children, the heir's lineal ascendants could not inherit if the heir had any illegitimate children. However, ille­ gitimate children had the right to inherit only one-half the 278 quantity that legitimate children did52. For example, if the heirs are two legitimate children and one illegitimate child, the illegitimate child would receive 1/5 of the assets. If the heirs were siblings of the deceased, those with only one parent in common with the deceased receive half as much as siblings whose parents were the same as the deceased's. For example, consider a situation where A, B, C, and D are siblings, and C and D are children of the second wife. If A dies and his siblings B, C, and D are the heirs, C and D would receive half as much as B. The successor's and had no right of inheritance under any circumstances. A child who were married out also had inheritance right. A child who was adopted by another family (y6shi) can assume the right of inheritance both in his natal family and the family to which he was adopted (Ayabe 1978, Inemoto 1989). However, Toshitani argues that an adopted son-in-law (mukoydshi) cannot assume his wife's inheritance right (Niifl- isseiki Murazukuri Juku 1993). It was considered that the spouse of a legal heir could not even claim inheritance by representation fdaishfl sQzoku). It has been argued that a spouse should have been able to assume the inheritance right of her husband if she contributed to the property of the household into which she married. For example, contributions

52 However, on November 29, 1994, Japan’s Supreme Court decided that it is illegal to differentiate the legal portion of inheritance between natural born children and illegitimate children. 279

of labor by a wife of a legal heir of a farming family, or contributions of medical care by a wife to her ill parents - in-law, arguably deserve inheritance right even if her husband died before inheritance occur. Since the 1977 amendment of special contribution (Article 904-2), domestic courts have approved several cases of special contribution. In one case, legal heirs were deceased A's second wife X, and two children of A by his first wife, Y and Z. X had a dowry when she married A. Soon after they married, A became ill, and X had to work to support the family. When they managed to buy a house, over 90% of the expense was paid by X. In court, X was granted rights by special contribution (Iwai 1988). In another case, four legal heirs were the second wife, the first wife's eldest daughter, the mukovfishi husband of the eldest

daughter, and the deceased's daughter by his second wife. All four were engaged in the family's pig farming business, and all four declared their special contribution. However, special contribution rights were granted only to the second wife and the mukovdshi (ibid.). The second wife worked for 30 years, and the mukovdshi helped her for 8 years. In a

third case, the youngest daughter took care of her mother for 10 years while she suffered from senile dementia. The daughter was granted special contribution of an amount equal to 60% of expenses that would have been incurred had the family hired a nurse to take care of the sick mother (ibid.). 280

The inheritance right of spouses increased in the 1977 Civil Code amendment. The proportion of inheritance of spouse versus children was set at 1:1 (it had previously been 1:2), spouse versus parents at 2:1 (previously 1:1), and spouse versus siblings at 3:1 (2:1). In the case of daishu sozoku. grandchildren, nieces, and nephews of the heir shared the proportion of inheritance which their parents would have received if they were alive. Even unborn children had inheritance rights, as specified in Article 886. (Text continues on page 287, after Figure 27) 281

1/2

1/2

Figure 27.1. Wife and child

Figure 27.2. Wife and children. Note that the sum of the children's proportions is 1/2.

1/2

1/4 1/4

Figure 27.3. Previous wife's child, current wife, and current wife's child. Note that the previous wife gets nothing, and the sum of the children's proportions is 1/2.

person to be inherited from

heirs

Figure 27. Legal Inheritance Proportion According to Number and Type of Heirs. In all diagrams, the person to be inherited from is the shaded triangle. 282

Figure 27.4. Wife, natal children, and illegitimate child. Note that the sum of the children's proportions is 1/2, with illegitimate child receiving 1/2 as much as a legal child.53

Figure 27.5. Wife, natal child, and adopted child. Note that the sum of the children's proportions is 1/2.

Figure 27.6. wife, natal child, and child from a previous marriage (tsureko). The child from the previous marriage was not adopted into the new family.

Figure 27 (continued): Legal Inheritance Proportion According to Number and Type of Heirs. In all diagrams, the person to be inherited from is the shaded triangle.

53 On November 29, 1994, Japan's Supreme Court ruled that the proportions inherited by a natal child and by an illegitimate child shall be equal. 283

1/2

1/6 itc

1/12 1/12

Figure 27.7. Succession by representation. One child is deceased, and grandchildren share their deceased parent's portion. The sum of the children's proportions is 1/2.

Figure 27.8. Wife and parent.

Figure 27.9. Wife and parents. Note that the sum of the parents' proportions is 1/3.

Figure 27 (continued): Legal Inheritance Proportion According to Number and Type of Heirs. In all diagrams, the person to be inherited from is the shaded triangle. 284

Figure 27.10. Wife, natal parents, and adoptive parents. Note that the sum of all the parents' proportions is 1/3.

Figure 27.11. wife and sibling.

Figure 27.12. Wife and siblings. Note that the sum of the siblings' proportions is 1/4.

Figure 27.13. Wife, sibling, and step-sibling. Note that the sum of the siblings' proportions is 1/4, with the step- sibling receiving one-half as much as the natal sibling.

Figure 27 (concluded): Legal Inheritance Proportion According to Number and Type of Heirs. In all diagrams, the person to be inherited from is the shaded triangle. 285

Inheritance Righte of Adopted Children An adopted child legally acquired, from the day of adoption, the status of a legitimate child of the parent (Article 809). Therefore, an adopted child assumed dual inheritance rights: as a legitimate child of the adoptive parents54 and as the natural child of the natal parents. This was not a case of special adoptive relations (tokubetsu yoshi) . Unlike ordinary adoption for the purpose of

succession and inheritance, special adoption was limited to young children under the age of five, unless the child was under the care of the same parents, in which case adoption could be made anytime before the child turned eight. Article 817-2, "Formation of special adoptive relations," states in part "adoption terminates the relationship with relatives of blood on the side of a child's original family upon the application of a person to become an adopter." Since adoption preserved the relationships with the natal parents legally, an adoptee could assume double inheritance rights. For example, if a grandchild of the deceased had been adopted by the deceased when the grandchild was a young child, the grandchild could assume the inheritance right as a child (i.e. as the adopted child of the deceased household head) , as well as the right of

54 Only one adopted child could be a legal heir if there were natural- born children beside him/her. If there were no natural-born children, up to two adopted children could become legal heirs. 286

representation (daishfi sflzoku) as a child of a deceased potential heir {his biological parent). Such was the case in "T"' construction company (Case Study 11, Figure 16) as we have seen in Chapter IV. Another example of double inheritance rights is mukovdshi. who could assume inheritance rights as a spouse (Article 890) as well as as a child. An adopted child could assume inheritance rights by representation (daishfi sdzoku) even if he was adopted after the adoptive parent's death or after the adoptive parent's loss of inheritance right (Article 729, amended in 1959). In other words, if •A* adopted a child *X" after "A" had lost inheritance right by misconduct, "X" and his offspring had inheritance right by representation to their adoptive parents. However, if the adopted child X's children were not born at the time *X' was adopted, they did not have inheritance right by representation to "X*.

It was often difficult to determine the amount of actual inheritance. Children often received money at the time of their marriage or when they established their own business, and it would be unfair for those who did not receive such gifts to inherit the same amount. Therefore, by convention, the actual amount of property to be inherited was decided by the following formula: 287

Let T = value of total amount to be inherited Let P = current value of the amount received in the past (or, the amount specifically willed to this heir) Let F = proportion of this heir's right of inheritance Let A = actual amount received in the past (or, the amount specifically willed to this heir) Then the amount inherited by this heir = (T+ P)x F-A

However, if the amount received in the past (or the amount specifically willed to the particular heir) was greater than the amount calculated by the legal proportion of inheritance right, that heir did not need to return any money unless the other heirs would have ended up receiving less than their legally secured portion (irvdbun) . It was of course difficult to decide which money received by heirs prior to inheritance could be officially considered pre-paid inheritance. Money given to children to open a business or buy a house was almost always considered to be pre-paid inheritance. However, educational expenses were decided on a case-by-case basis, and medical expenses were not usually recognized as such money.

inheritance Tax Inheritance tax is defined as "a levy made on the occasion of the transfer of property at or in connection with the death of the owner' (Shultz 1935). All transfers of property at the time of the death of the property owner were subject to property transfer taxes in ancient Egypt and Greece. However, the first true inheritance tax was the 288

Roman vicesima hereditatium instituted in 6 A.D., a 5% tax on collateral inheritance and bequest (ibid.). inheritance tax is relatively new in Japan, not enacted until the year Meiji 38 (1906). At that time, an inheritance tax was levied both on succession to headship and inheritance of property, and not only at the time of death. Thus, Japan's inheritance tax was somewhat different from Shultz's definition. To say that inheritance tax was levied on succession really means that it was levied on the property which was transferred with headship55. The taxation rate was higher on inheritance than on succession, and in addition it varied depending on the relationship of the heir to the person to be inherited from. For example, in the case of succession, the following three groups are listed in order of increasing tax rate: (1) lineal descendants; (2) appointed successors, lineal ascendants, and adopted husbands; (3) selected successors. In case of inheritance, increasing taxation rates were levied on heirs who were: (1) lineal descendants; (2) spouse or lineal ascendants; and

55 At least 1/2 of the property had to be designated as the legally secured portion which accompanied household headship succession (Moore 1990). 289

(3) any other relation. Succession valued at less than ¥1000 was exempt from taxes, while inheritance was taxed starting at ¥500 (Fukushima ed. 1977) . Taxation rate of succession was successively reduced in a series of Civil Code amendments, and was finally abolished in the year Sh6wa 22 (1947). A new gift tax (z6vo zei) was established in an amendment of 1953. This enabled the government to levy taxes on the transfer of property prior to heir's death. The specific taxation method was as follows: Let E = the net value of the estate, obtained by taking the total value of all property (real estate, buildings, cash, bonds, etc.) and subtracting unpaid taxes, unpaid funeral expenses, the value of tax-exempt property (e.g. religious items, grave site, and tomb stone) , the value of property to be spent on welfare, the value of life insurance (up to some maximum), and retirement money (up to some maximum). Let S = a standard deduction, calculated in 1989 as ¥40 million56 + (¥8 million57 x number of heirs) Let T = the value of the taxable portion of the estate, calculated by the formula T-E-S. Let ^ = the legal portion inherited by each heir. Let H = the tax rate on the amount (rxlt) obtained from a tax table (such as shown in Table 26). Let D = deduction for the amount T obtained from a table.58 (Calculation continues on page 293, after Table 26.)

56 This amount was increased to ¥48 million in 1993, and to ¥50 million in 1994. 57 This amount was increased to ¥9.5 million in 1993, and to ¥10 million in 1994. 58 This deduction is mentioned, but not named or described in any tax reference that I could find, not even the Civil Code itself. Table 26. inheritance Tax Rates 1951-1994, as a Function of the Amount of Inheritance

tax rate 1951 1952 1953 1965 1968 1989 1993 1994 10% up to 0.3 up to 0.6 up to 4 up to 7 up to 8 15% up to 0.2 0.7 1.5 8 14 16 20% up to 0.2 0.5 1.5 3 14 25 30 25% up to 0.2 0.5 1 3 5 23 40 50 30% 0.5 1 2 5 8 35 65 100 35% 1 2 4 7 12 50 100 40% 1500 3 7 10 18 70 150 200 45% 2 5 12 20 30 100 200 50% 3 10 20 30 50 150 270 400 55% 4 20 30 50 75 200 350 60% 5 50 50 70 100 250 450 2000 65% 7 100 100 100 150 500 1000 70% 10 over 100 over 100 over 100 over 150 over 500 over 1000 over 2000 75%______15 80%______25 85%______50 90% over 50

(in million yen) (sources: Takeda 1978, Iwanami Kihon R o p p o 1968, Nozei Kvokai Renaokai 1989, Asahi Newspaper 9 Feb. 1994, Asahi Nenkan 1951-1993) 290 291

Let - individual inheritance tax on each heir based on their legal portion, calculated as Xi=TxLixRt-D. Then the total inheritance tax levied was , the sum of the individual inheritance taxes on all the heirs. As shown in Table 26, inheritance tax rates were modified very often over the years in order to keep up with rising values of estates. Notice the significant difference of tax rate between 1989 and 1994, especially for higher values of property. For example, consider an estate valued at ¥400 million in 1993 (about $4 million at that time) . The inheritance tax on the estate would have been 70%, or ¥280 million (about $2.8 million at that time). However, in 1994, the tax on the same estate would have been only 60%, or ¥240 million ($2.4 million). By settling the inheritance one year later, the family could have "saved" ¥40 million ($400,000). In other words, the rate of inheritance tax on the same amount of inheritance was reduced significantly within a one-year period. Gift tax was calculated by the following method: Let T = the value of the taxable portion of the gift. Let S - the standard deduction, equal to ¥600,000 in 1989. Let R = the tax rate on the amount (T-S) obtained from a tax table (such as shown in Table 27). Let D = deduction for the amount (T-S)xR obtained from a table.59 Then the total gift tax levied was (T-S)x R- D .

59 This deduction is mentioned, but not named or described in any tax reference that I could find, not even the Civil Code itself. 292

A moderate amount of educational expenses or living expenses was not considered a gift. Thus, as mentioned before, many non-heirs received property in this form without being subject to taxation. However, it was difficult to determine just how much was considered a moderate amount, and how much would end up being subject to gift tax. Table 27 below shows the gift tax rates.

inheritance vs. Gift Strategies The tax rates on inheritance and gift property have affected people's strategies of transferring their property. Actual amounts of inherited property began to decrease in the early 1970's, partly because of land values

Table 27. Gift Tax Rates 1953-1989, as a Function of the Amount of Gift (in million yen) gift tax ______rate______1953______1968______1989 10% up to 0.3 up to 1 15% 0.5 1.2 20% up to 0.2 0.7 1.5 25% 0.5 1 2 30% 1 1.4 3 35% 2 2 4 40% 4 3 6 45% 7 4 8 50% 12 7 12 55% 20 10 20 60% 30 15 30 65% 30 over 70 70% over 30 over 7 0

(sources: Iwanami Kihon Ro p d S 1968, NSz&i KvSkai Renadkai 1989, Asahi Nenkan 19S3) 293

(Moore 1990:67). increasing land values and capital assets caused the household's total estate value to exceed the inheritance deduction, which in turn was raised in 1964, 1968, 1975, and 1988. It became advantageous for a household to transfer land to the next generation as soon as possible to take advantage of the lower value upon which the tax was assessed (ibid.). Another reason for the decline in inheritance and increase of gift transfers was a 1975 revision in the gift tax law which provided a "tax grace* (nozei yuyo> to living individuals who gave “lump-sum* gifts of undivided farmland (ikkatsu z6vo) to an heir over the age of eighteen and having three years of farming experience (ibid.). in other words, tax on farmland transferred as a gift was not levied until either the owner or the heir died. If the land was used for farming for at least twenty years after it was officially registered under the ndzei vuvo system, the land became tax exempt. This system encouraged gift transfer. However, tax was levied on such farmland if any of the following facts arose: 1. The land was no longer used for farming; 2. 20% or more of the land was sold; or 3. The triennial official registration was not renewed (Ndzei Kvdkai Rengdkai 1989, Hanrei Times 1989).

When farmers said they cannot quit farming because of taxes, it was usually because of these special provisions. People 294 have tried to take advantage of this law by pretending that their land is used for farming. It was not uncommon to find a small tract of land in the middle of a city which had just a few vegetables planted on it. It could in general be assumed that the owner of this land was not really farming, but was just making the land look like farmland in order to reduce his taxes. The tendency toward gift transfer could be reduced or come to an end due to the 1994 revision of the inheritance tax rate, which was significantly lowered for large estates as pointed out above. People have also used other techniques to avoid high taxes on their gift property. For example, parents have tried lending money to their children, withdrawing joint ownership from property with their children, and selling property to children at an artificially low price. However, the tax administration tried to counteract these tactics by creating various new regulations. For example, a tax was introduced and levied on the lending of money from parents to children in any of three specific conditions fNfizei Kvdkai Renookai 1989): 1) when no interest was charged; 2) when the payback was expected only after the child became rich or successful; and 3) when the term was extremely long, such as 100 years. Likewise, a tax was created on the profits gained by buying property from the parents at a low price. However, these regulations still did not make clear what is taxable gift property and what is not. 295

Adoption (vflahi) Strategies

Another popular strategy to reduce inheritance tax was to adopt children. Increasing the number of children is beneficial for the following reasons. (1) Having more heirs increased the basic deduction. Since the basic deduction was obtained by adding ¥40,000,000 + (¥8,000,000 times the number of legal heirs)60, increasing the number of heirs increases the total amount of the deduction, which in turn reduced the amount of the estate which was taxable . (2) Having more beneficiaries increased the tax-exempt amount of life insurance and retirement money. Since the upper limits of tax exempt amount of life insurance and retirement money were obtained by multiplying ¥5,000,000 times number of legal heirs61, increasing the number of heirs increased the net amount of tax-exempt property. (3) Having more children can decrease the total amount of tax. For example, if ¥600 million was inherited by the spouse and children, then the children's portion of property would be ¥300 million (1/2 of the total property). The total amount of tax on children

60 based on 19B9 tax rate 61 based on 19B9 tax rate 296

portion based on 1989 tax rate is calculated as follows: A) If there were 3 children, one child's portion would be ¥100 million. The inheritance tax on ¥100 million was ¥34.8 million { ¥100 million x 50% tax-¥15.2 million deduct ion) . Thus, the

total amount of tax on the children's portion was ¥34.8 million x 3 = ¥ 104.4 million .

B) If there were 4 children {i.e. 3 natural children and one vdshi). one child's portion would be ¥75 million.

The inheritance tax on ¥75 million yen was ¥23.55 mi 11 i on { ¥75 million x 45%tax - ¥10.2 million deduc t ion) . Thus,

the total amount of tax of the children's portion was ¥23.55million x 3 = ¥94.2million .

Therefore, the total amount of tax levied on the estate could have been less if there were four children than if there were three children.

Counter Strategies to Adoption (vfishi) Strategies

As a result of the combination of tax laws and adoption laws, adoption strategies escalated to nearly ridiculous levels: it was reported that as many as ten adoptions in one family were made for the purpose of tax reduction. Most adoptees were relatives, rather than strangers, in order to keep the property within the household. The adopted were grandchildren, great grandchildren, spouses of children, or 297 spouses of grandchildren, all of whom are lineal descendants62. One benefit of adopting relatives is that it did not require changing their surname. Table 28 summarizes several extreme cases of apparent adoption for tax reduction. The table shows the number of adopted children, their original relation to the person to be inherited from, and how many days prior to inheritance the adoption took place. Case L shows that six adoptions were made five days before the occurrence of inheritance, three more the next day, and another only three days before the inheritance. Case I shows that five of the deceased's children's spouses were officially adopted the day before inheritance occurred. It is almost as if some people got greedy in the last moments before their household's head died, and kept adding adoptions in the last few days while he managed to survive. To prevent such extreme cases of adoption for the purpose of tax reduction, a law was created in 1988 which placed a limit on how many adoptees could become legal heirs. If there were any natural-born children, only one ydshi could become a legal heir. If there were no natural-born children, up to two vdshi could become legal heirs. These limits did not apply when children were adopted before the age of six (tokubetsu y6shi), nor to natural-born or adopted children of

62 Civil Code Article 793 specifically states 'Neither an ascendant nor one who is senior in age can be adopted.* 298 the spouse from a previous marriage ftsureko) (M6zei Kvokai Reno6kai 1989). The strategies of yfishi may have served to decrease the total amount of inheritance tax to be paid. But of course

Table 28. Soma Extrema Cases of Adoption for Tax Reduction case number number of original relationship of number of days of adopted v&shi to person to be before inheritance heirs children inherited from adoption was made A 13 10 spouse of children 30 months grandchildren B 16 8 spouse of children 5 months grandchildren spouse of arandchildren C 18 8 spouse of children 9 months (4 y&shi) grandchildren 7 months (4) spouse of grandchildren D 10 6 spouse of children 6 years 4 months grandchildren 1 month spouse of grandchildren great grandchildren E 10 7 spouse of children 4 months grandchildren F 12 6 spouse of children 1 month grandchildren G 7 4 spouse of children 1 month spouse of grandchildren great grandchildren H 12 8 spouse of children 2 days grandchildren spouse of grandchildren 1 11 5 spouse of children 1 day J 9 5 spouse of children 9 months (2) grandchildren 6 months (1) 3 months (1) 2 months (1) K 10 3 grandchildren 4 days L 16 10 spouse of children 5 days (6) grandchildren 4 days (3) 3 days (1 )

^adoptions in these data occurred between 1982 and 1985 (source: Sawauchi 1989) 299 having so many heirs decreased the amount that each one received. Therefore, it is a natural assumption that v6shi brought in for the purpose of tax strategy did not really receive their legal portion of inheritance.

Tax on Unequal Inheritance The total amount of inheritance tax of which we described the calculation above was supposed to be divided among the heirs according to the legal proportion of actually received amount. in many cases, however, property was inherited unequally among children, including cases where an individual refused inheritance rights altogether. Take as an example an estate valued at ¥162 million divided among the heirs as follows: wife received ¥81 million eldest son received ¥54 million eldest daughter refused her inheritance right second son received ¥27 million If the total amount of tax was already calculated to be ¥18.9 million, each individual's inheritance tax would be calculated as follows:

wif e: VW.9millionx (¥&l million +¥162 million) = ¥9.45million . eldest son: ¥ 18.9million x (¥54million + ¥\62 million) = ¥6.3million . eldest daughter = no tax due. second son: ¥18.9 million x (¥27million* ¥162million) - ¥3.15million . 300

Then, another standard deduction was subtracted from the individual's taxable amount. A deduction of ¥80 million63 or the entire legal portion, whichever is greater, is applied to the amount of the spouse's inheritance. Thus, the wife in this example would not need to pay tax at all since her inheritance of ¥81 million is equal to her legal portion (1/2) of the entire property to be inherited (¥162 million). Other final deductions were a deduction for legal minors (miseinensha k6-io) , a handicap deduction (shSaaisha k6io) , a consecutive inheritance deduction (sdii sdzoku k6io), and a gift tax deduction (z6yo zeiaaku k6~io) .

The deduction for minors up to age 20 was calculated by multiplying ¥60,000 times the individual's age in years.64 For example, if an heir was 18 years old, his minor deduction would be ¥60,000x 18 = ¥1,080,000 . If this minor deduction was greater than the minor's inheritance amount, the difference could be deducted from the inheritance tax of his/her spouse if they also were an heir. The handicap deduction was calculated at the same rate as the legal minor deduction for slight handicaps, double for severe handicaps. If this handicap reduction was greater than the inheritance amount, the difference could be deducted from the inheritance tax of individual who took care of the handicapped heir, if they also were an heir.

63 This amount was increased to ¥160 million in 1994. 64 based on 1989 tax rate 301

The consecutive inheritance deduction applied when an heir participated in one inheritance within 10 years after a previous inheritance. For each year less than 10 years the second inheritance occurred after the first inheritance, the inheritance tax levied on an heir in the second inheritance would be reduced by 10%. For example, if the second inheritance occurred 2-1/2 years after the first inheritance, the heir would only be liable for 20% of the calculated inheritance tax in the second inheritance. Gift tax deduction refers to the reduction of inheritance tax by the amount of previously paid gift tax. This occurred because gift property (z6yo) transferred within three years of death was considered to be part of the inheritance, and the value of the gift was added to the taxable inheritance amount. Thus, the gift tax which was paid at the time of z6vo was deducted from the inheritance tax. Since gifts in amounts below the minimum taxable amount were also subject to inheritance tax, gift strategies taken hurriedly after a person to be inherited from became seriously ill often failed to reduce taxes.

Inheritance Taxes in Case of Bequeat by will If a bequeathed individual is either the spouse or a first degree relative such as a parent or child, the inheritance tax levied on them was determined by calculating the total inheritance tax (sum of all heirs' taxes) based on 302 the legal portions, and taking the same proportion of the total tax as the proportion of the bequeathed amount to the total value of the estate. If a bequeathed individual was not a first degree relative, their inheritance tax was determined by taking the same calculation as above and increasing the result by 20%. If a bequeathed child was deceased, grandchildren (daishu sozoku) were considered to be first degree relatives. The will had the greatest authority to determine the proportion of inheritance amounts among heirs. However, if an heir's legal portion (iryiibun) was infringed upon as a result of the will, that individual had the right to claim his legal portion from bequeathed individuals who received more than their legal portion, within one year of the inheritance proceedings.

Property Value property value was important for the calculation of the amount of taxable inheritance property. The value was determined according to appraisals called rosenka which were revised every year by the Ministry of Taxation. After the skyrocketing land prices of the late 1980's, the government started to reduce rosenka in the mid 1990's. For example, rosenka value of one square meter area in Den'enchfifu, one of the most prestigious residential area of Tdkyd, was lowered from ¥1,210,000 (about $12,000) in 1993 to ¥980,000 (about $9800) in 1994 (as reported by Fuji Television's "Supertime* 303 news on Aug. 8, 1994). As a result, together with the lower inheritance tax rate, the inheritance tax on 100 tsubo (330 square meters) area of the same residence area would be significantly reduced, from ¥22 million in 1993 (about $200,000 at that time) to ¥9.4 million in 1994 ($94,000). Within one year, the inheritance tax was reduced to less than half. The simple matter of the time of inheritance, and the difference of only one year, could determine the fate of a hefty ¥11 million (over $100,000) for this family. There was a special deduction for evaluated residential property. If a house was used as a residence, a 50% deduction in the inheritance tax was applied to property up to 200 square meters in size65. If part of the property was used for business, a 40% deduction applied for the residential portion and a 60% deduction applied for the non- residential portion. in other words, reduction amount was greater for the non-residential property. Property used neither for residence nor for business was most tax costly, because no special tax reduction could be applied. Therefore, as a tax reduction strategy, apartment or condominium businesses were often carried out on non- residential property66.

65 This special deduction was not applied to property which was transferred as a gift. The 200 square meters could be any portion of the individual's property. 66 Renting rooms of a residence was not considered business for tax reduction purposes. CHAPTER VII

CONCLUSION

in this dissertation, I have tried to construct a framework for more concrete studies of Japanese kinship; the foundation of this framework is the dual analysis of customary practice and legal code. A written legal code may or may not correspond to customary practice directly, but I have shown that the two aspects interact. Any particular customary practice is often used not only by the lower class but also by upper class, for example as a resistance strategy to the legal code. From the observations of various kinship relationships in Japan, I found the following facts: Kinship can be manipulated to alter the process of inheritance, and I have documented cases where this has occurred. In order to reduce inheritance taxes, one's own close relatives can be adopted. Adult adoption was practiced in Japan quite commonly for this purpose; adoption of one's children's spouses, one's grandchildren, and spouses of one's grandchildren seemed to be the most common. Kinship can also be manipulated to alter the process of succession to the household. Under the Meiji Civil Code, primogeniture was the only official pattern of succession, but a variety of succession rules were and are actually 304 305 practiced. Birth order could be falsified in the household registry. The eldest son could be falsely claimed to be illegitimate to deny him his right of succession (an illegitimate child had no succession rights). The eldest son could be disowned simply by the family claiming that he married someone against the household head's wishes. The eldest son could be forced to switch places with a younger brother who succeeded to the head of a branch household. In order to gain benefit from the system of deferring taxes on the receipt of farmland as a gift, non-farmland could be disguised to look like it was being farmed. Gift or inheritance strategies of transferring one's property could be chosen depending on the tax rate on gifts compared to that on inheritance at the time of the transfer. The important issue here is the interaction between legal code and actual practice. Of course, people's behavior is affected by their compulsion to obey the law, but at the same time the legal code can be affected by the people's customary practice. For example, ancient legal codes officially regulated succession of the higher class; the practice spread to the common people and eventually was incorporated into the laws for the common people. As a more modern example, when Japan's inheritance taxes increased, people started transferring their estates as gifts before they died, rather than leaving everything in the estate to be inherited. Adoptions increased, especially 306 adoptions of relatives, to create more legal heirs and increase the total amount of tax deductions. In response to this, a law was created to limit the number of adoptees eligible to inherit.

In my field work, I discovered a contradiction between the official ideal and what was actually practiced in the legal sense. The legal code clearly dictated the distance between consanguineal and affinal relationships that constituted kindred. In reality, however, the concept of kindred was not confined by this definition. Kin relations are customary and subjective by definition. The interaction of customary kin rules with the legal codes resulted in new strategies, such as revoking kin membership at the family's whim based on some misconduct of the individual, for example. I also found conflict between ideal and reality in terms of succession and inheritance. The Meiji Civil Code strictly regulated succession to be by primogeniture. In reality, however, a variety of succession rules were practiced, and in order to conceal illegal succession practices, people found ways to misrepresent reality in the official household registries. This conflict between the ideal and reality still exists in Japan of the late 20th century. Despite current laws of equal inheritance, it is more often than not carried out in an unequal manner. It is common, not only in rural farm 307 households but also in family-owned businesses, for a majority of the property to be inherited by the single successor. Non-successor children often receive compensation in the form of education, housing, or special business funds. In Japan, the status of siblings did not always display a egalitarian nature: the successor had higher status than non­ successors, older siblings had higher status than younger siblings, and brothers had higher status than sisters. Recent research on kinship of the Japanese family has focused on the fact that eldest-son succession is only a preferred strategy among many practiced succession strategies. In the kinship systems of Japan, especially in family-owned businesses, the continuation of the household is of utmost importance. Family businesses often struggle against small family size and rising land values to find the most capable successor from among their children. It is my conclusion, based on the facts and ideals presented throughout this dissertation, that the portions of the existing major ethnographies on Japan dealing with kinship should be re-analyzed to take into consideration legal code as well as customary practice. In particular, it is necessary to consider the following aspects in order to carry out a comprehensive study of Japanese kinship: 1) Japanese kin relationships can easily go beyond biological relationships. The right to membership in a Japanese descent group depends not only on 308 biological relationship, but also on time (i.e. generation), gender, and successorship. 2) The extent of what is considered 'household* is determined by resources and corporativity. 'Household* must be viewed from a wider scope than 'family.* 3) The terms 'succession* and 'inheritance* are clearly distinct in Japanese society. 4) An individual can have double residence customarily, officially, and legally. 5) Sibling relationships are clearly hierarchical, based on age, successorship, and inheritance right. 6) Household customs and taboos, household rules, land use rights, and status attached to objects all can be inherited in Japan. 7) Kinship relationships can exist with deceased ancestors and with the unborn, customarily and legally. 8) Adoption of adults is abundant, even of kin adults, and is often central to kinship relations.

Adoptions in Japan have always been made primarily for the purpose of providing an heir to the household. Adults and sometimes even couples were adopted. Adopted successors had the right to succeed even if there were natal children. Japanese ddzoku kinship often included non-kin individuals 309 such as servants. various forms of fictive kinship played important roles throughout Japanese society, from traditional artist families to major industries. The household as a kinship unit emphasized biological continuity, while its corporativity emphasized the perpetuity of the household name and occupation. The primary criteria in defining the Japanese household (i£.) were corporativity and availability of resources. The household was viewed from a rather wide scope of generational time and physical space, well beyond the scope of what could be called one family. The household almost always included ancestors, and more than one family in temporal and spatial dimensions. The household name rather than the family name was officially passed on to the successor. The household registry included much more data than just the direct descendants' vital statistics. Double residence was an important characteristic of the household registry; members of a household could share legal domicile even though they lived in physically separate places.

Kinship relationships have been used, manipulated, and created for political purposes. Historically, kinship ties were created through marriage and adoption. Often, more than one connection was made between two households, in order to strengthen their alliance. Adoptions could be made among kin individuals regardless of genealogical relationship; a 310 household might recommend that a sister adopt her natural brother, for example. The concepts of "succession* and 'inheritance* became critical in Japanese kinship for continuation of a household. 'Descent,' 'succession,' and 'inheritance" are distinct concepts, but are closely related, and confusion of the usage of these terms often arises. For example, descent rules such as 'patrilineal* and 'matrilineal' are commonly used to define membership in a corporate descent group, but these two terms are properly used only in the context of inheritance and succession. Moreover, there is some confusion of the terms 'inheritance* and 'succession" themselves. The confusion comes mainly from the fact that the successor is typically one of the people who receives part of the inheritance. In the case of Japan's single inheritance practice, these two concepts are even more confusing, because both acts are practiced by a single individual. To avoid this confusion, the term 'succession' should only be used in connection with the passing of status, occupation, control of a business, household headship, household name, ancestor worship duties, and the like. 'Inheritance* should only be used in connection with the passing of tangible or intangible material, physical goods, household rules (kakun), household customs and taboos (karei). valuable memories, land use rights, tenant rights (kosakuken). and the like. 311 Japanese kinship was based on the household rather than the individual. D6zoku was not a patrilineal descent group, as it is conventionally referred to, because neither genealogical relationship nor legal affinity was an absolute prerequisite for membership. Membership in dozoku was based on economic, spatial, and residential factors. The conventional view that the Japanese succession rule was patrilineal comes from a narrow view of time which focuses only on the present. If the Japanese succession rule is observed from a wide temporal scope, it can clearly be seen as ambilineal. APPENDIX A

HAPS

312 313

HokkaidS region

Tdhoku region

Kant6/K0shinetsu region

ChGbu/Hokuriku/Kinki region

ChGgoku/Shikoku region

KyGshO region

Figure 28. The Six Geographical Regions of Japan. 314

HokkaidS 18

Yamagata 13 12,14,16,17 11 Miyagi

Nagano

Nagasaki

15

Miyazaki

Figure 29. Geographical Locations of the 18 Case Studies and Prefectures in Which they Are Located. APPENDIX B

INTERACTION BETWEEN LEGAL CODES AND CUSTOMARY CODES ON SUCCESSION AND INHERITANCE

LEGAL CODES______CUSTOMARY CODES

Ancient Times (before year 723) (emperor) • youngest child succession; brother succession; selective succession Nara-Heian Period (724-1191) 701 • Taih6 Ritsuryd set rules of lineal succession to status for government officials 702 • Taihd RitsuryS set rules of • common people practice oldest legal male oldest male succession succession for aristocrats • partible inheritance: 1/2 of property to heir; unlawful wife and her children excluded 754 ♦ Y 6 r 6 Ritsuryd extended the • Oldest male child of legal oldest male child succes­ heir was specified as heir sion rule to common people • partible inheritance: legal proportions: heir & legal wife 2, non-heir children 1, unlawful wife & daught. 0.5 • household registry system • Distinction of legal wife established vs. unlawful wife on the registry

315 316

LB GAL CODBS______CUSTOMARY CODBS

______Kamakura-Nanbokuchd Period (1192-1392) • Goseibaishikimoku Law • capable person was selected • inkyo (retirement) system to be katoku • inheritance by will • partible inheritance: legal • More property was inherited heir portion 1/5 by single heir • soryo system (inheritance) • katoku system (succession) • sorvo became katoku as well • ..pr o p e r ty ______1244 ( 2) • sorvS rights belonged to ta-Vfffru______Muromachi-Azuchimomovama Period (1393-1600)______• Inheritance and succession were practiced by a single clan head (katoku) in the warrior class It is assumed that farmers practiced partible inheritance Edo Period (1603-1868) • warriors' law stipulated single inheritance • inkvo system 1642 • seroku system (government stipend) started • common people's succession distant relative and and inheritance was to be adopted heir succession was decided by each household, practiced by farmers with the preferred heir capable child or adopted being a near relative, child succession was oldest male child practiced by merchant class partible inheritance was practiced among merchant class 1673 • Government prohibited • Farmers continued to partible inheritance for practice partible landlords owning more than inheritance, first-born 20 koku. farmers less than child succession, and non- 10 kolfru______oldest male succession 317

LEGAL CODE 8______CUSTOMARY CODBS

Meiii-Taish6 Period (1868-1926 • Meiji Civil Code was drawn up, mainly following warrior customs • shi-n6-k6-sho class system officially abandoned • concept of household property legally belonged property fkasan) no longer to the household head, but valid; household property other members could utilize became private property of it the household head______• household registry law Actual residence not established necessarily the same as household registry (countered by 1914 Temporary Residence Act) • koshu (household head) system • divorce by consent, but husband could punish a wife who committed adultery • the terms shoshi (non-heir) and chakushi (heir) were distinct 318

LBQAL CODBS______• Article 970: primogeniture • variety of succession succession and impartible practices were seen, inheritance including first-born succession and non-oldest son succession strategies for falsifying oldest male succession on household registry: • oldest male son succession officially registered, but in reality he branched off and someone else succeeded • abandoned oldest male for reasons such as inappropriate marriage, etc. • oldest male succeeded and branched off, head created new registry and non-oldest male child succeeded • officially register oldest male as illegitimate child • officially register false birth order 1906 • inheritance tax established; inheritance tax higher than succession tax______1914 • Temporary Residence Act established to record people who do not reside in legal domicile______

_____ Shdwa period (1927-1988), postwar Civil Code 1947_____ • abolishment of household head system______• equal rights to husband and wife • married couple can use • vast majority use husband's either husband or wife's surname maiden name______• *s6zoku* denotes only inheritance of property______319

LKQAL CODBS CUSTOMARY CODBS Article 7: katoku single • refusal of inheritance heir inheritance abolished right Equal inheritance • will/bequeath unequal inheritance right of spouse inheritance established: spouse 1/3 vs. • Compensations for non-heir children 2/3 children such as education, venture capital, house, etc. • children who married out • children who married out had inheritance right often refused inheritance right or received less than the legal proportion • Article 810: adoptee should • mukovoshi retained his assume the surname of the surname even after being adoptive parents______adopted.______1950 • Article 1:inheritance tax is calculated individually based on everything each individual received throughout his/her life, including gift and inheritance1 • Article 12: Spouse deduction = 1/2 of what she received • Minority deduction = ¥10,000 times (18-aqe)_____ 1952 • basic deduction = ¥300,000 (previously ¥150,000) • life insurance deduction = ¥200,000 (previously ¥ 100,000) • retirement money deduction = ¥ 200,000 • inheritance tax rates revised ____

1 Previously, inheritance tax was levied on the total amount of property at the time of inheritance only. 320

LBQAL CODBS______CUSTOMARY CODBS 1953 • transfer gifts little by • gift tax (i^yq-zei,) was little over the years to separated from inheritance take advantage of basic tax gift reduction • standard deduction = ¥500,000 (previously ¥300,000) • standard gift deduction = ¥100,000 • life insurance deduction and retirement money deduction = ¥3 00,000 (previously ¥200,000) * inheritance tax rate revised: gift tax exceeds inheritance tax by 5% 1954 • life insurance deduction raised to ¥500,000, retirement money deduction raised to ¥300,000 1960 * standard deduction = ¥2 million + (¥500,000 times number of heirs) (previously ¥1.5 million + ¥300,000 times number of heirs) 1963 • life insurance deduction = ¥1 million 1967 • standard deduction is ¥1 million times number of heirs (previously ¥1 million + ¥1 million times number of heirs) 1970 • spouse deduction ¥4 million if married over 20 years (previously ¥2 million if married over 25 years) ♦ spouse deduction of gift tax = ¥200,000/year over 15 years of marriage 321

^^^^^LBQAI^CODHS^^^^^^^^^^CUSTOlIJJJlY^CODgS 1971 • spouse deduction of gift tax = ¥400,000/year over 15 years of marriage • life insurance deduction = ¥1.5 million times number of heirs • retirement money deduction = ¥800,000______1972 • standard deduction = ¥18 million (previously ¥12 million) in case of spouse and 5 legal heirs • spouse deduction = ¥6 million (previously ¥2.5 million) 322

LBQAL CODBS CUSTOMARY CODBS 1974 * Ndzei vilvo (tax grace) for gift transfer of farmland farmland gift transfer; increased void if more than 20% of land is sold, or quit farming • long term farming pretend the land is used inheritance tax exemption for farming system (choki eino keizoku seido2) was established; if cannot sell farmland heir continues farming, inheritance tax on land have to continue farming costing more than regular farmland was exempt until the next inheritance. If heir continued farming more than 20 years, inheritance tax was exempt * standard deduction = ¥20 million + ¥4 million times number of heirs (previously ¥6 million + ¥1.2 million times number of heirs) • Spouse's legal portion (1/3) becomes tax exempt with no limit (previously maximum ¥30 million if married 20 years or more) • maximum tax rate 75% for more than ¥500 million * standard gift deduction = ¥600,000 (previously ¥400,000) • spouse exemption for gift of resident land = ¥10 million (previously ¥6 million) * gifts to the disabled are tax exempt______

2 Chftki einfl keizoku seido (Long term farming inheritance tax exemption system) was established in 1974 and exempted farmland on which farming had been conducted continuously for more than 20 years. 323

^ ______CUSTOMARY CODBfl 1977 • Article 900: spouse's inheritance legal portion increased to 1/2 (previously 1/3) • special contribution system (kivo bun) • (counter strategies for tax ♦ (tax evasion strategies) evasion strategies) (1) tax on parent-child (1) Parent lend money to contract such as 100 year children. term, repay only if successful, etc. (2) gift tax on parent-owned (2) withdraw co-ownership of property property. (3) tax on profits yielded by (3) sell property to child in buying in low price extremely lower price (4) 1988 amendment: limit the (4) adopt ydshi to increase number of vdshi to become deduction to reduce total legal heir______tax 1985 • new tax exemption for donation of inheritance property to national trust for the protection of natural environment and cultural heritage______324

LBgAI^^ODBS CUSTOMARY CODHS

______Heisei Period (1989-)______1990 • abolishment of long-term farming inheritance tax exemption system (chdki ein6 keizoku seido). • Farmland in certain areas of Tokyo, Osaka, and Nagoya are taxed at the same rates as residential land (previously, farm land was a lower rate) • national tax revenue from inheritance tax increased 16.8% from the previous year: ¥9.6 trillion______• tax deduction for non- • conduct business on residential property property to reduce tax, ______e.g. apartment business 1992 • interest on taxes paid in installments decreased to 4.2% (previously 4.8%) • all-time record ¥48 billion inheritance tax evasion estimated • all-time record ¥14.5 trillion revenue from inheritance tax, thanks to land price hikes • increasing numbers of people pay taxes by real estate and securities; 3871 cases are 3 times the previous year______1994 • inheritance tax lowered • inheritance strategies may • basic deduction = ¥50 become favored over gift million + ¥10 million times strategies number of heirs (previously ¥48 million + ¥9.5 million times number of heirs) • spouse deduction doubled to ¥160 million______APPENDIX C

GLOSSARY OF JAPANESE WORDS

r6maji a ? definition anekatoku *** first child succession atotori m m ? heir son musuko bakufu XM Shogunate government bekke mm branch household formed by non-kin bekkyo inkyo m m m retirement in which the old household head and spouse live in a separate house from that of the new head buke military gentry bukeshohatto warrior's law of 1615 bunke branch household chakubo keibo m m m * ? adoption of a child of an no ydshi unlawful wife by a legal wife; or adoption of a child of a former wife by a present wife chakushi m* children of the legal wife chichibakari ^cat o adoption made by a bachelor (hahabakari) » household head (single woman) no y6shi «>«-? for the purpose of inheritance (archaic) ch6ki einfi Long term farming inheritance keizoku AttlM# tax exemption system seido chokkei AM lineal kin chokkei AM«* lineal descendants hizoku chokkei AM4MI lineal ascendants sonzoku chfinan eldest male child chfinin *TA merchant daimyS A45 feudal lord 325 326 daishQ sdzoku mm alternative inheritance; succession by representation dekasegi m* come to the city to find jobs to support one's families ddzoku m corporate kin group ddzoku gaisha mt&m a company owned and managed by relatives enrui m relatives fuddsan real estate acquisition tax shutoku zei fQfu ydshi adoption of a married couple gonin-gumi EAffi five-man company (archaic) Goseibai WfiMfciSS The first legal code for the Shikimoku warrior class, compiled by Hdjd Yasutoki in 1232 haichaku JAM disinheritance haigQsha BftfffilltA spouse heir sdzokunin haika AM discontinuation of household based on head's wish heimin ME common people hi-chdshi mi-m succession by anyone other sdzoku than eldest male himaydshi mm* adoption made by an heirless household head of the warrior class when he had to be away from home for a long period of time for official duty such as sankin-kdtai (archaic) hinin # a outcasts hd a law honbyakushd peasants with registered proprietary rights and tax duties to arable land. honke MM main household honseki MM legal domicile hdtei katoku &ttM«ffi«A legal heir sdzokunin hdtei sdzoku mm legally established inheritance hyakushd m farmer 327 r6maj i m* definition ie m household ikkatsu z6yo lump-sum gift inheritance inkyo mm retirement from the position of household head inkyosei RSJBM system in which the household head retires iry6 hdjin Eft&A medical corporation iryQbun legally guaranteed portion of inheritance isan bunkatsu m $ m * conciliatory agreement on the kydgi division of inheritance isan hdki m m abandonment of inheritance isan sdzoku inheritance of real estate jikata * £ £ £ » Record of Commoners' k6sairoku Relationships j inan second male child jdto shotoku tax levied on income from the zei sale of real estate jQmin tdroku official record for each hyd individual jun ydshi mm* adoption of one's own siblings kaichd company chairman kakun mm household rules karei household customs kari ydshi m * adoption of the alternative successor-to-be (archaic) kasan mm household property katoku mm household headship katoku mnmmA inheritance and succession of sdzokunin household headship kazoku mn nobility kazoku mm family kazoku no mrnmmm sacrificial victims of the giseisha household (expression) keishd *** succession kengyd ndka mmmm farming household with other side jobs ketsuen mm blood relatives ketsuzoku m&mA kin heir sdzokunin 328 r6maj i definition kiyo bun special contributions kdgi government (archaic) kokoroatari adopted heir designated by a y6shi household head of the warrior class prior to his death (archaic) koku 3600 liters; area of land needed to produce 3600 liters of rice in one harvest kosakuken 'J'fWI tenant use rights koseki PH household koshu household head koteishisan fixed property tax zei kuge m nobility kuni a (■) state, country (archaic) mm* adoption made by a household head of the warrior class over 50 years old who is about to die (archaic)___ machi register book of the three doshiyori town elders (archaic) ch6 magobunke m m a household which is branched off from a branch household. magoy6shi adoption of one's own grandchildren masshi s6zoku last-born male succession matsugoySshi m m m * deathbed adoption miko female shaman minasama- a group of people with whom zukiai we as a group associate minpfiten m m ** The Civil Code Dispute ronsd miseinensha tax deduction for legal k6jo minors 329 rdmaji definition mizunomi- peasants without rights and byakushd duties to arable land but who nonetheless maintained themselves as separate residential households and worked land holdings through various tenancy and sharecropping arrangements muko son-in-law mukoydshi adopted son-in-law Ndchihd A*& Agricultural Land Law ndgyd isan A*il« Bills of Exceptions for sdzoku Succession to Agricultural tokurei h6an Assets noren mm store symbol ndzei yQyo 1975 system of deferring taxes on the receipt of farmland as a gift until the death of either the giver or the heir onba m female child who remains unmarried because of poor economic situation onj i m non-eldest male children who remain unmarried because of poor economic situation onsen ifi* hot spring; natural bath oyako keiyaku parent-children contract risakuhoshd mmit compensation given to tenants who relinquish their tenant rights Ritsuryd W4t statute established in the eighth century roku m stipend given by the feudal government rosenka KSttti real estate value determined according to appraisals by the Ministry of Taxation sankin-kdtai *vsm alternative residence duty seikatsu relationship in living kanren senmu mm senior executive director 330 rdmaj i definition sentei katoku *£**««*A chosen heir sdzokunin seroku m stipend given by the feudal government shi-nd-kd-shd ±*i» The four class system (warrior, fanner, artisan, and merchant) shinkan n t monk, religious authority shinrui mm bilateral kindred shinseki mm bilateral kindred shinzoku mm bilateral kindred shitei katoku appointed heir >m sdzokunin a S shdgaisha tax deduction for disabled kdjo shoshi children other than legal wife's shGmon mnwR registers of religious aratame chd investigation which list the name, age, and relationship to household head for individuals in villages and towns throughout Japan_____ sdji sdzoku consecutive inheritance kdjo deduction Sdrifu Office of the Prime Minister sdryd mm household head, clan head sdryo ftffS monk, religious authority sdzoku m household registry sdzoku hdki m m abandonment of inheritance Taihd statute established in 702 Ritsuryd tokubetsu special land maintenance tax tochi hoyQ zei tokubetsu mm? adoption of a child for the ydshi welfare of the child (rare in Japan) toriage forfeiture (archaic) tdroku menkyo registration tax zei 331 rdmaji definition toshi keikaku ± m m # city planning tax zei tsuki gydji monthly manager (archaic) tsureko Mti? child from a previous marriage uchi m house yoriai-chd *** official meeting register Ydrd Ritsuryd statute established in 757 ydshi ** adoption; adopted person yuigon *ts will yuigon sdzoku m m inheritance by will zaidan hdjin wa&A foundation zaisan w* property zekka *e* discontinuation of household caused by unavoidable circumstances Zenkoku Minji local customs of the late Kanrei RuijO mam* Tokugawa period, compiled by the Ministry of Justice in 1880 zdyo w* gift inheritance zdyo zei transfer tax LIST OF RBFBRBNCBS

Arichi, Toru 1974 Genshi Shakai Ni Okeru Sdzoku To Keishd (Succession and Inheritance in Ancient Society). In Kdza Kazoku volume 5. Edited by Aoyama et al. Tokyo: Kobundo. 1977 Kindai Nihon No Kazokukan - Meiji (Family ideology of Pre-modern Japan - Meiji Period). Tokyo: Kobundo. Aruga, Kizaemon 1969 Aruga Kizaemon Chosakushu VII: Shakaishi No Shomondai (Collected Works of Aruga Kizaemon Volume VII: Issues of Social History). Tokyo: Miraisha. 1970 Aruga Kizaemon Chosakushu IX: Ie To Oyabun Kobun (Collected Works of Aruga Kizaemon Volume IX: Household, Oyabun, and Kobun). Tokyo: Miraisha. 1971 Aruga Kizaemon Chosakushu X: Ddzoku To Sonraku (Collected Works of Aruga Kizaemon Volume X: Ddzoku and Village). Tokyo: Miraisha. Ayabe, Tsuneo 1978 Nihon No Genzai No Sdzoku Seido (Current Inheritance System of Japan). In Dainippon Hyakka Jiten (Dainippon Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Shdgakkan. pp.148-149. Bachnik, Jane 1983 Recruitment Strategies for Household Succession; Rethinking Japanese Household Organization. Man. 18:169. Balandier, Georges 1970 Political Anthropology. New York: Pantheon Books. Beardsley, Richard et al 1959 Village Japan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

332 333

Befu, Harumi 1962 Corporate Emphasis and Patterns of Descent in the Japanese Family. In Japanese Culture: Its Development and Characteristics. Edited by R.J. Smith and R.K. Beardsley. New York: Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. 1963 Patrilineal Descent and Personal Kindred in Japan. American Anthropologist. 65:1328-1341. Bestor, Theodore C. 1989 Neighborhood Tokyo. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Brown, Keith 1968 The Content of Ddzoku Relationship in Japan. Ethnology. 7 (2) : 113-138. 1979 Shinjo: The Chronicle of a Japanese Village. Pittsburgh: University Center for International Studies in cooperation with the Department of Anthropology, University of Pittsburgh. Buchler, Ira 1980 The Organization of Social Life: The Perspective of Kinship Studies. In People in Culture. Edited by Ino Rossi, pp. 313-398. New York: Praeger. Chen, Chung-min 1992 Ghost Marriage, Dowry and Daughter's Status in Chinese Family, in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Chinese Culture and Modernization; The Hong Kong Chinese University. Cole, G.D.H. 1935 Inheritance. In Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. Volume VIII. New York; Macmillan Company, pp 35-43. Cornell, John 1964 Ddzoku: An Example of Evolution and Transition in Japanese Village Society. In Comparative Studies in Society and History. (6)449-480. Cornell, John and Robert Smith 1956 Two Japanese Villages. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press. 334

Cornell, Laurel 1983 Retirement, Inheritance, and intergenerational Conflict in Preindustrial Japan. Journal of Family History. Spring:55-69. 1986 The ShQmon Aratame Ch6: Japan's Population Registers. Journal oi Family History. 11(4)311- 328. 1987 Hajnal and the Household in Asia: A Comparative in Preindustrial Japan, 1600- 1870. Journal of Family History. 12(1)-(3)143-62. Davenport, William 1959 Nonunilinear Descent and Descent Groups. American Anthropologist 61: 557-572 Devos, George A. and Takao Sofue ed. 1984 Religion and the Family in East Asia. Berkeley: University of California Press. Dore, Ronald 1978 Shinohata: A Portrait of a Japanese village. New York: Pantheon Books. Embree, John 1939 Suye Mura. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 1958 City Life in Japan: A Study of Tokyo Ward. Berkeley: University of California Press. Evans-Pritchard,E.E. 1933 Zande Blood-brotherhood. Quoted in Meyer Fortes, Kinship and the Social Structure,. p. 241. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Evans-Pritchard, E.E 1940 The Nuer of the Southern Sudan. In African Political Systems. Edited by E.E. Evans-Pritchard and M. Fortes. London: Oxford University Press, pp. 272-296. Firth, Raymond 1957 A Note on Descent Groups in Polynesia. Man 57(2):4-8. Fortes, Meyer 1953 The Structure of Unilineal Descent Groups. American Anthropologist. 55:25-39. 335

1969 Kinship and the Social Order. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company. Freeman, J.D. 1961 On the Concept of Kindred. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 91:192-220. Fujimoto, Hideyuki and Kensaku Maeda ed. 1989 S6zokuzei, Zoyozei Toriatsukai No Tebiki (Guide of Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax). Tokyo: Tax Administration. Fukushima, Masao ed. 1977 Sengo Nihon Kazoku No Ddko (Trend of the Japanese Family After WWII). In Kazoku: seisaku to h6 (Family: Politics and Law)., Volume 3. Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. Fukutake, Takashi and T. Tsukamoto 1954 Nihon N6min No Shakaiteki Seikaku (Social Characteristics of Japanese Peasantry). Tokyo: Yuhikaku. Gendai Hosei Shiryd Hensan kai ed. 1983 Meiji "Kyuhd" ShG (Meiji Civil Code.) Goody, Jack ed. 1962 Death, Property and the Ancestors: A Study of the Mortuary Customs of the Lodagaa of West Africa. California: Standford University Press. 1973 The Character of Kinship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1976 Production and Reproduction: A Comparative Study of the Domestic Domain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gubbins, John Harrington 1897 Civil Code of Japan. Tokyo: Maruya & Co. 1899 Civil Code of Japan Part II. Tokyo: Maruya & Co. Hamabata, Matthews M. 1990 Crested Kimono. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Hanrei Times 1989 Isan Bunkatsu, Yuigon 215 Dai (215 Examples of Property Division and Will. Tokyo: Hanreitaimuzusha. 336

Hakusuisha 1932 Nihon Minji Kanrei RuijG (Japan Record of Customs). Tokyo: Hakusuisha. Hayami, Akira 1983 The Myth of Primogeniture and Impartible Inheritance in Tokugawa Japan. Journal of Family History. Spring 1983:3-23. Hayashi, Yukiko 1989 S6zoku No Rekishi: Kinsei (History of Inheritance: Premodern Period). Sekai Daihyakka Jiten (World Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Heibonsha. pp. 303-304.

Heibonsha ed. 1989 Sekai Daihyakka Jiten. (World Encyclopedia) Hoebel, Adamson E . 1972 Anthropology: The Study of Man. 4th Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Hogbin, Harvard Ian 1934 Law and Order in Polynesia. New York: Harcourt Brace and Company. Hozumi, Nobushige 1973 Ancestor-worship and Japanese Law. 2nd and revised edition. New York: Books for Libraries Press. Hsu, Francis L.K. 1975 lemoto: The Heart of Japan. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. inemoto, Yonosuke 1 1989 S6zoku (Inheritance). In Sekai Daihyakka Jiten (World Encylopedia). Tokyo: Heibonsha. pp.297- 303. Ishii, Rydsuke 1978 Sdzoku (Inheritance and Succession). Jn Dainippon Hyakka Jiten (Dainippon Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Shdgakkan. pp. 147-148. Iwai, Shun 1988 Kiyobun (Special Contribution). Jurisuto. 99:154- 155. Izumi, Hisao 1989 Saigi Zaisan No Keishd (Succession of Religious Properties). KihonhS Konmentar 92:897-898. 337

Izumi, S.; C. Ogyu; H. Sugiyama; and N. Nagashima. 1984 Regional Types in Japanese Culture. In Regional Differences in Japanese Culture. Edited by N. Nagashima and T. Tomoeda. Senri Ethnological Studies. 14:187-213. Jiji TsGshinsha (Jiji News Agency) 1952 Jiji Nenkan, Shdwa 28-nen (Jiji Almanac, 1953) . Tokyo. Kamiya, Chikara 1953 Nogyo Kazoku Ni Okeru Kinbun Sdzoku No Mondai Ni Tsuite (Problems of Equal Inheritance Among Farming Households). Hoshakaigaku 3:98-115. Kawaguchi, Akira 1978 Toyohara Mura No Kazoku Keitai To Jinko Ido (Household Structure and Population Movement in Toyohara Village). In Toyohara Mura: Hito To Tochi No Rekishi (Toyohara Village: A History of its People and Land). Edited by Toyohara Kenkyukai. pp. 209-252. Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. Kawashima, Takeyoshi 1957 lemoto-seido (lemoto System) Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten. 1977 Kadai (Issues). In Kazoku: kazoku Mondai To Kazoku h 6 (Household: Household Problems and Family Law). Edited by Nakagawa et al. Tokyo: Sakai Shoten. pp.7-11. Kayama, Yuzuru 1989 Tochimondai (land issue). in Sekai Daihyakka Jiten (World Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Heibonsha. pp.343- 345. Keesing, Roger M. 1975 Kin Groups and Social Structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc. Kikuchi, Hiroshi 1953 Nagasaki-ken Isahaya-shi Ono Ni Okeru Masshi Oyobi Hi-chdshi Sdzokusei Ni Tsuite (Primogeniture and Non-primogeniture Systems of inheritance in Ono, Isahaya City, Nagasaki Prefecture). H6 Shakaigaku 4:111-126. Kitano, Seiichi 1976 Ie To Ddzoku No Kiso Riron (The Basic Theory of le and Dfizoku). Tokyo: Miraisha. 338

Kitaoji, Hironobu 1971 The Structure of the Japanese Family. American Anthropologist. 73 (5): 1036-1057 Kroeber, A. L. 1909 Classificatory Systems of Relationship. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute. 39:77-84. Kurobane, Heijiro ed. 1930 Osaka Shdgyd Shiry6 Shflsei. Volume 5: Eitai Kiroku (Collection of Resources Regarding the Osaka Merchant Class. Volume 5: Eitai record). Osaka: Osaka Shokadaigaku Keizai Kenkyujo. Lebra, Takie Sugiyama 1984 Japanese Women: Constraint and Fulfillment. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Long, Susan 1987 Family Change and Life Course in Japan. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University East Asia Papers., Number 44. Lowie, Robert, H. 1915 and the Classificatory Systems of Relationship. American Anthropologist. 17:223- 239. 1916 Historical and Sociological Interpretations of Kinship Terminologies. In Holmes Anniversary Volume, pp. 293- 300. Washington D.C.: J. W. Bryan Press. 1921 Primitive Society. New York: Boni and Liveright. 1928 Incorporeal Property in Primitive Society. Yale Law Journal 37:551-563. 1948 Social Organization. New York: Rinehart & Company. Maine, Henry S. 1861 Ancient Law. New York: Henry Holt and Company. 1886 Dissertations on Early Law and Custom. New York: Henry Holt and Company. Marui-Imai 120th Year History Editing Committee 1992 Marui-Imai, Isseiki To Nijussai No Ayumi (Marui- Imai: History of One Century and 20 years). Sapporo: Marui-Imai Co., Ltd. 339

Matsumoto, Scott Y. 1962 Notes on Primogeniture in Postwar Japan. In Japanese Culture: Its Development and Characteristics. Edited by Robert Smith and Richard Beardsley, pp. 55-69. New York: Wenner- Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research, inc. Ministry of Justice: The Codes of Translation Committee 1992 The Civil Code of Japan. EHS Law Bulletin Series. Tokyo: Eibun H6rei Sha Inc.

Miyazaki, Shunichi 1989 Oyako-keiyaku (Parent-Child Contract) In Sekai daihyakka jiten (World Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Heibonsha. Moore, Richard H. 1988 Diagram of Harmony. In Socio-cultural Dimensions of Japanese Business. Course material used for Anthropology 520. pl27. 1990 Japanese Agriculture: Patterns of Rural Development. Boulder, San Francisco: Westview Press. Morgan, Lewis H. 1870 The Comparative Study of Family Systems. In Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity in the Human Family, pp. 2- 15. Washington D.C.: Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge No. 17. 1877 Ancient Society, Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company. Murdock, George Peter 1947 Statistical Comparisons of Kinship Systems. American Anthropologist. 49:56-63. 1949 Social Structure. New York: The Macmillan Company 1965 Culture and Society. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Mutd, Atsuko 1985 Miyagi-ken M-gun K-chd Ni Okeru 'Anekatoku" Ni Tsuite (Anekatoku in K Town, M County, Miyagi Prefecture). Minzokugaku Kenkyu 50(1):27-51.

Nait6, 340

1973 Masshi s6zoku No KenkyO (Research on Ultimogeniture). Tokyo: Kobundo. 1974 Masshi Sdzoku To Sono Igi (Practice and Meaning of Ultimogeniture in Japan). In Kdza Kazoku., Volume 5. Edited by M. Aoyama et. al, pp. 336-3 48 Tokyo: Kobundo. Nakagawa, Takao 1989 Y6shi No Sdzokuken (Inheritance Rights of Adopted Children). Hanrei Times. 688:26-27. Nakagawa, Zennosuke 1938a Masshi Sdzoku (Ultimogeniture). Jn Kazoku Seido Zenshu Shironhen. Volume V. Sdzoku. Tokyo: Kawade Shobo. pp. 63-98. 1938b Kazokuho Gaisetsu (Family Law Abstract). In Kazoku Seido Zenshu Hdritsuhen. Volume IV. le. Tokyo: Kawade Shobo. pp. 1-50 . Nakane, Chie 1967 Kinship and Economic Organization in Rural Japan. New York: Humanity Press. 1987 Kazoku No Kdzd (Structure of the Family). Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. 1989 Shakai Jinruigaku: Ajia Shoshakai No Kosatsu (: Study of Asian Societies). Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. Nakano, Takashi 1974 Shdka Dozokudan (Merchant Ddzoku). In Kdza Kazoku. Edited by M. Aoyama et. al, pp. 282-297. Tokyo: Kobundo. 1978 Shdka Dozokudan No Kenkyfl (The Study of Merchant Ddzoku). Tokyo: Miraisha. Nelson, Andrew N. 1986 The Modern Reader's Japanese-English Character Dictionary. Second Revised Edition. Vermont: Charles Tuttle Company. Nijfl-isseiki Murazukuri Juku ed. 341

1993 Murazukuri KoryCi KenkyGkai Hdkokusho: Nihon Ni Okeru Suiden Ndson No Kasseika O Meguru Shomondai (Report of Research Institute for Village Construction and Communication: Issues of Revitalization of Paddy Agricultural villages in Japan). Norbeck, Edward 1954 Takashima. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. N6son Kaihatsu Kikaku Iinkai (Agricultural Development Planning Committee) 1982 Movement of Succession and Extension of Kin Relationships in Agricultural Families. Tokyo: Sdgd kenkyfl kaihatsu kikS 1987 Ndson No Kazoku No Kozo Kind No Henbd (Transition of Structure and Function of Agricultural Families). Tokyo: Sdgd kenkyu kaihatsu kikd Ndzei Kydkai Rengdkai 1989 Kurashi No Zeikin Hyakka (Tax encycopedia of living). Tokyo: Seibunsha. Oikawa, Hiroshi 1938 Shinshu Suwa Tsukaharamura Ni Okeru Bunke Ni Oite: Iwayuru Masshi Sdzoku No Ichirei Toshite (Bunke in Tsukahara Village, Suwa City, Shinshu District: An Example of Ultimogeniture). Minzokugakukenkyfi 4(3):421-444. Omachi, Atsuzo 1958 Kazoku (Family). In Nihon Minzokugaku Taikei., volume 3, pp. 207-214. Tokyo: Heibonsha. Sshima, Takehiko et al. 1971 Nihon Wo Shiru Jiten (Dictionary of Knowing Japan). Tokyo: Shakaishisosha. Stake, Hideo 1974 Sdzokuhd No Rekishi (History of Inheritance Law) . In Kdza Kazoku. Edited by Michio Aoyama et a l . Tokyo: Kdbundd. pp.17-4 0. otsubo, Sumiko 1991 Japan's Urbanization Seen from Today's Grave Issues. Unpublished paper submitted to Dr. Richard Moore, The Ohio State University. Park, Kyung-soo 342

1989 Sh6ka Ddzokudan No Soshiki To Rinen: Edo-jidai Mitsui-ke Wo Jirei To Shite (Structure and Idea of Merchant Ddzoku: An Example of Mitsui Household in the Edo Period). Minzokugaku Kenkyti 54(3):351-359. President Magazine 1988 Kogaisha Senryaku Ni Miru Shitataka Na Keisan (Clever Calculation Seen in ChiId-Company Tactics). 10:210-217. Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. 1924 On Rules of Descent and Interkin Behavior. South African Journal of Science. XXI:542-555. 1933 Primitive Law. In Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. Volume 9. New York: Macmillan, pp. 202-206. 1968 Structure and Function in Primitive Society. First Free Press Paperback Edition. New York: The Free Press. Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. and Daryll Forde, ed. 1967 African Systems of Kinship and Marriage. London: Oxford University Press. Richards, Audrey I. 1978 The Political System of the Bemba Tribe -- North- Eastern Rhodesia. In African Political Systems. Edited by M. Fortes and E.E. Evans-Pritchard. Third Paper back edition. London: Oxford University Press, pp. 83-120 Rivers, W. H. R. 1910 The Genealogical Method. Sociological Review. 3:1-11. 1924 Social Organization. Edited by W.J.Perry. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. Ltd. Saik6 Saibansho, Jimu S6kyoku (Supreme Court, General Secretariat) 1991 Shihd Tokei Nenpyo (Annual Report of Judical Statistics). Sawauchi, Hiromichi 1989 Zei Futan Kaihi Mondai Ni Taisuru Han'n6 (Response to tax evasion problem). Hanrei Times Rinji Zokan. 688:463-464. 343

Schneider, David M. 1968 American Kinship: A Cultural Account. N.J.: Prentice- Hall, inc. 1984 A Critique of the Study of Kinship. Ann Arbor, Michigan: Michigan University Press. Scott, James 1990 Domination and the Art of Resistance: Hidden Transcript. London: Yale University Press. Scupin, Raymond 1992 Cultural Anthopology. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Shimazu, Ichird 1993a Shinzokuhd Gaisetsu (Introduction.to Family Law.) in Kihonhd Konmentaaru Bessatsu Hdgaku seminar No.94. 5th edition, pp.1-9. 1993b Sdzokuhd Gaisetsu (Introduction to Inheritance Law.) Introduction.) in Kihonhd Konmentaaru Bessatsu Hdgaku Seminar No.92. 5th edition, pp.l- 10. Shimizu, Akitoshi 1987 Ie and Ddzoku: Family and Descent in Japan. Current Anthropology. 28(4)S85-S90. Shimizu, Ikkoo 1977 Ddzokugaisha (Ddzoku company). Tokyo: Kobunsha. Shimpo, Mitsuru 1976 Three Decades in Shiwa. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. Shultz, William J. 1935 Inheritance Taxation. In Encylopaedia of the Social Sciences. Volume VIII. pp.43-48. Smith, Robert 1978 Kurusu: The Price of Progress in a Japanese Village, 1951-1975. Stanford, Stanford University Press. Smith, Robert and Ella wiswell 1982 The Women of Suye Mura. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sdrifu Kohoshitsu (Office of the Prime Minister, Public Relations Office) 344

1982 Yoron Ch&sa Nenkan (Public Opinion Almanac). 1984 Yoron Chdsa Nenkan (Public Opinion Almanac). 1986 Yoron Chdsa Nenkan (Public Opinion Almanac). 1987 Nihon-jin No Kan (The Japanese View of Family). Tokyo: Okurashd Insatsushitsu. 1990 Yoron Chdsa Nenkan (Public Opinion Almanac). Sdrifu Kokuritsu Yoron Chdsajo (Office of the Prime Minister, National Public Opinion Research Institute) 1952 Shakai Kyoiku Ni Tsuite No Yoron Chdsa (Public Opinion on Social Education). (Survey No. 51). Suenari, Michio 1972 First Child Inheritance in Japan. Ethnology. 11:122-126. Takahashi, Yasuyuki 1978 Sdzoku (Inheritance). Jn Dainippon hyakka jiten (Dainippon Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Shdgakkan. pp.147-149. Takayanagi, Shinzd 1977 Meiji Minpd Izen No Kazokuho (Family Law Before the Meiji Civil Code). Jn Kazoku Mondai To Kazoku Hd. Volume 1. Edited by Zennosuke Nakagawa et al. Tokyo: Sakai Shoten. pp. 316-331. Takeda, Akira 1974a Mihon Ni Okeru Sdzoku Keisho No Kankd (Customs of Succession and inheritance in Japan), In Kdza Kazoku., Volume 5. Edited by M. Aoyama et. al, pp. 303-319. Tokyo: Kobundo. 1974b Sentei Sdzoku Kankd (Custom of Selective Inheritance). In Kdza Kazoku., Volume 5. Edited by M. Aoyama et. al, pp. 336-348. Tokyo: Kobundo. 1974c Meiji Minpd Ka No Sdzoku Kankd (Succession Rule in Meiji Civil Law). In Kdza Kazoku. Volume 5. Edited by M. Aoyama et. al, pp. 349-363. Tokyo: Kobundo. Takeuchi, Toshimi 1974 Chdshisdzoku Kankd To Sono Igi (Customs and Meaning of Primogeniture). Jn Kdza Kazoku., Volume 5. Edited by M. Aoyama et. al, pp. 320-335. Tokyo: Kobundo. 345

Takigawa, Seijiro 1938 Nihon Kazokushi (History of Family in Japan). In Kazoku Seido Zenshu Shironhen Volume 4. Edited by Takao Kawade. Tokyo: Kawade Shobo. pp.161-195. Tamano i, Mariko 1986 Oubei Ni Okeru le No Rikai (Understanding Ie in the West). Minzokugaku Kenkyu. 50(4):424-436. Taniguchi, Tomohei 1981 KazokuhS Hanrei Kenkyu (Study of Judical Precedents Related to Family Law). Tokyo: Yuhikaku. Tax Administration 1989 Kurashi No Zeikin Hyakka (Encyclopedia of Tax for Living). Toshitani, Nobuyoshi 1976 Japan's Modern Legal System: Its Formation and Structure. Annals of the Institute of Social Science. 17:1-50. 1979 Family Policy and Family Law in Modern Japan, I. Annals of the Institute of Social Science. 20:95- 125. 1980 Family Policy and Family Law in Modern Japan, II. Annals of the Institute of Social Science. 21:129- 176. 1987 Noka Seisaku No Tenkai Katei (Development Process of Agricultural Policy). In Noson Kazoku No Kozo To Kino No Henbo (Change of Structure and Function of Farming Family). Entrusted research of General Research Development Organization. Edited by N6son Kaihatsu Kikaku Iinkai. pp. 423-448. 1991 Kindai Nihon No Kigy6 Chitsujo. (Corporation System of Modern Japan.) Gendai Nihon Shakai 4:141-175. Toyohara Kenkyukai 1978 Toyohara Mura: Hito To Tochi No Rekishi (Toyohara Village: History of People and Land). Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. Tezuka, Yutaka 346

1977 Meiji Minpd Shikko Izen (Before Meiji Civil Code). In Kazoku Mondai To Kazoku H6. Volume 4. Edited by Zennosuke Nakagawa et al. Tokyo: Sakai Shoten. pp. 130-166. Tsubaki, Toshio 1989 Shinzoku No Han'i (Limit of Relatives). In Kihonhd Konmentaaru Bessatsu Hdgaku Seminar No.94. 5th edition, pp.13-18. Ueno, Hirohisa 1957 Miyazaki-ken Usuki-gun Ni Okeru Sdzoku Keitai To Keizaiteki Kiso (Patterns of Succession in Usuki Village, Miyazaki Prefecture in the Early Meiji Period). Ho Shakaigaku 10:153-174. Ueno, Kazuo 1989 Sdzoku Keishd No Nihonteki Tokuchd (Japanese Characteristics of Inheritance and Succession). In Sekai Daihyakka Jiten (World Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Heibonsha. pp.305. Van Gennep, Arnold 1960 The Rites of Passage. Quoted in Meyer Fortes, Kinship and the Social Order, p. 252. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1969. White, Douglas R. and Paul Jorion 1992 Representing and Computing Kinship: A New Approach. Current Anthropology. 33:454-463. Wigmore, John Henry ed. 1971 Law and Justice in Tokugawa Japan. Part V Property: Civil Customary Law. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. 1972 Law and Justice in Tokugawa Japan. Part VII Persons: Civil Customary Law. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. 1982 Law and Justice in Tokugawa Japan. Part VIII-A Persons: Legal Precedents. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. 1983 Law and Justice in Tokugawa Japan. Part VIII-B Persons: Legal Precedents. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press. Worseley, P. M. 347

1956 The Kinship System of the Tallensi: A Revaluation. Quoted in Meyer Fortes, Kinship and the Social Order, p. 220. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1969. Yamabatake, Masao 1989 Ydshi H6 To Ydshi Kan No Hensen (Adoption and the Transition of the View of Adoption). In Sekai Daihyakka Jiten. Tokyo: Heibonsha. Yanagita, Kunio 1943 Zokuseigoshu (Glossary of Ethnographic Terms). Tokyo: Nihon Hori Kenkyukai. Yoshie, Akiko 1989 Sozoku No Rekishi: Kodai (History of Inheritance: Ancient Period). Sekai Daihyakka Jiten (World Encyclopedia). Tokyo: Heibonsha. pp.303-304. Yoshimi, Seikoh et al ed. 1990 MinpS Dokuhon 3 (Guide to Civil Code 3). Tokyo: Yuhikaku. Zenkoku Minjikanrei Ruishu (National Customs Record.) 1880 Meiji Zenshu Hdritsuhen (Meiji Culture -- Legal Code). 13:161-374.