The profound culture of the Japanese samurai.

From the establishment of the Kamakura Shogunate to the Meiji Restoration, the samurai class ruled Japan for 700 years. The samurai regime, or martial regime, was the longest-existing form of regime in Japanese history, and was directly linked to modern Japan, thus leaving a deep imprint on Japanese society and national character.In 1991, Jiyinsha published a series of books (History of Japan), of which Volume 7 (The World of the Warrior) was written on the history of the formation of the samurai class. It was written by Hideo Irimada, a professor at Tohoku University in Japan. In the conclusion of the book, he evaluates the historical role of the samurai regime. First, he quoted the description of Japan in the "Kunbi Wan Guo Quan Gui" drawn by Matteo Ricci in 1602: "still strong" and "the power is always in the strong ministers", and then commented: this comment is by no means a complimentary remark, which means that the Japanese people are warlike, and the one who is superior in force can hold the power. It means that the Japanese people are warlike, and the one who is superior in force can hold the power. Because of this barbaric custom, Japan cannot become an advanced civilized country, which is very sad. The author believes that Matteo Ricci was evaluating the medieval Japanese from an international or universal standpoint, and the international universal standpoint, for example, at that time, the Chinese believed that men should study literature and cultivate their studies as the highest goal, and regarded the martial artists as eagles and dogs, whereas in Japan it was just the opposite, "its people practiced martial arts more, and practiced literature less". According to the author, this is the dark side of the samurai regime, and this medieval legacy, namely the island's culture of emphasizing literature over the martial arts, has not been eliminated even in modern times, so should we not be wary of it? Prof. Irumata's assertion illustrates the profound influence of the samurai regime on modern Japan. From the point of view of understanding Japan, the study of the history of the formation of the samurai class is a topic of great practical significance. Japanese scholars have accumulated a great deal of research on the formation of the samurai class. Especially since the 1960s and 1970s, new progress has been made in the excavation of historical materials and the deepening of perspectives. In terms of the discovery of historical materials, works such as shoguns and military records, which used to be regarded as having little historical value, have been emphasized; picture scrolls, which used to be used only as historical materials for the history of art and customs, have also been regarded as visual historical materials for historical research; and diaries and archaeological data have been widely utilized. In terms of the deepening of perspectives, with the diversification of historical materials, new perspectives such as social history, military history, and regional history were introduced and replaced the old method of class analysis. Studying the emergence of the samurai from a class perspective is generally considered to be the result of the establishment of private armaments by the lords for self-defense, but this assertion lacks the support of historical sources. Social history, on the other hand, explains the emergence of the samurai from the perspective of social function, arguing that the samurai's social function was to practice martial arts and to fight wars, and that the samurai could be said to be the "killers of men" (killers of men), and that the requisitioning of military force was in line with the requisitioning system, which was the basic principle of the dynastic state's rule at that time. The history of the military system emphasizes the relationship between the samurai and the local community. The history of the military system emphasizes the significance of the combination of the samurai and the local government as part of the kokuga military system after the abolition of the legionary system, and the significance of the combination of the samurai and the public power for the formation of the samurai class. What were the reasons for the origin of the samurai and the establishment of the samurai regime in the eastern part of the country? Geographical history focuses on this question, pointing out that Tōkoku was a military base for the defense of the Shihoi, and that this led to the formation of a military aristocracy in Tōkoku, which was the predecessor of the samurai. Compared with the numerous research results of Japanese scholars, the research results of our scholars are very few. From the point of view, our scholars' discourse on the formation of the samurai class basically draws on the views of Japanese scholars, and they are the traditional views of the past. It is time to draw on the latest research results of Japanese scholars to clarify the formation of the samurai class from our point of view based on historical facts. This paper makes a preliminary attempt to throw a brick to attract jade. The term "samurai" was introduced to Japan from China. China first came out as: tang "tianbao eleven years (752) change the guards for the samurai". In Japan, it was first introduced in the second year of Bao Gui (771), when "the Prince was given the five upper silks, each with its own difference. Its Mingjing, articles, sound Dr., Mingfa, arithmetic, yin and yang, astronomy, calendar, cargo, scrupulous diligence, craftsmen, samurai, a total of fifteen people to give the silk ten gorgeous". The meaning of "samurai" here is of course different from that of the samurai mentioned in this article. The meaning of this article, "the samurai" term has appeared before the tenth century, but not fixed. There are other words with the same meaning, such as "soldier", "retainer" and "warrior". There is also a slight difference between these terms: "soldier", a person who takes war as his profession; "retainer", a guard of the nobility; and "warrior", a military man in the regime. Japanese scholars believe that these three terms reflected different aspects of the same entity, and by the twelfth century all three were united under the term "samurai". The above is the etymology of "samurai". As an object of scientific research, the samurai should be clearly defined. Among Japanese scholars, there are two ways of defining samurai. One is a functional definition, such as "a person who specializes in martial arts" (Manabu Encyclopedia) or "a person who engages in martial arts and combat" (World Encyclopedia). However, the samurai was not only a functional group, but also a political and social group. It is clear that this approach to functional definitions does not fully reflect the situation of the samurai, and therefore additional clarifications are needed for all of them. For example, "a person who exerted power as a dominant person in feudal times" (Wannabe Encyclopedia), and "a person who later became the name of an identity class or its members" (World Encyclopedia). However, it is not clear what dominant and what status. Another definition of class is, for example, "a local lord who possessed force and lived in the countryside" (Modern Encyclopedia), "a person who ruled a place by force and who served in the government" (Encyclopedia of the Primary School). Although these definitions point to the class nature of the samurai, they are limited to "local lords" and "local rulers", whereas after the Kamakura Shogunate, the samurai established their own power and became the rulers of the whole country. Therefore, these definitions are only applicable to the Heian Period, but not to the post Kamakura Shogunate period, especially the Edo Period. Obviously this definition lacks universality as a definition. The samurai appeared in the 10th century, the Kamakura Shogunate was established more than 200 years later, and then the samurai regime continued for nearly 700 years until the Meiji Restoration. The samurai did not remain unchanged for nearly 1,000 years. So what point in time should be used as a benchmark for the definition? The problem with both of these definitions is that they do not clarify the time frame for the definition of the samurai. In my opinion, the samurai should be defined as a class or stratum, and its formation should be used as the point in time for the definition. In turn, the formation of the samurai as a class or stratum should be marked by the establishment of the samurai regime. Based on the above considerations, I believe that the samurai should be defined in terms of the following four indicators. First, economically as a lord, either an estate lord or a feudal lord; second, socially as a profession of martial arts and warfare; third, politically as a goal of holding power; and fourth, ideologically as a moral code of master-slave relationship. The samurai class as a political and social group should have the above four indicators, especially the second and third points are the most basic. Such a definition distinguishes the samurai from ordinary professional soldiers and mercenaries, and applies to both the period of samurai formation and the period of samurai power. Of course these indicators were less typical in the Samurai Formative Period, but they already had these elements. The samurai regime, though it has changed over time, does not go beyond these basic points. In the following, we will examine the formation of the samurai as a class and the establishment of the samurai regime as a sign of its formation. Stages The formation of the samurai as a class and the establishment of the samurai regime was a tortuous process that lasted nearly three centuries. This process can be roughly divided into five stages: First, the stage of native expansion, before the Hirajomun Rebellion in 939; second, the stage of confrontation with the court, the Hirajomun Rebellion ----1028 Hira Tadacho Rebellion; third, the stage of acting as a hawk and a dog, the Hira Tadacho Rebellion ----1156 Bowen Rebellion, and the Hiraji Rebellion of 1159; fourth, the stage of forming a new nobility, the Bowen and Hiraji Rebellions ----1185 Fourth, the stage of forming a new nobility, the Hogen and Heiji Rebellions ----1185; fifth, the stage of establishing the Shogunate, the Hiraki Rebellion ----1192 and the appointment of Minamoto Yoritomo as the Shogun. The following two clans to Ping, the source of the power of the growth and development and related major events as a clue to describe the basic conditions and characteristics of each stage. Expansion of the native Huanwu Ping's ancestor, King Gao Wang, gave the surname of Ping in 889, was appointed as the upper general mediator, decentralized Sakado (Kanto). Sakado is the forward base for the suppression of shrimp and barbarians, a backward frontier land. "Fierce people formed gangs, and groups of thieves filled the mountains." King Takamaru's decentralization of Sakatao was a deployment taken by the court to strengthen its border security, but it provided an opportunity for the Taira clan to settle (settle, put down roots) in Kanto and expand its power. Because of the remoteness of the frontier, the court was unable to reach it and its control was weak. There were four classes of state officials: shou, jie, rafter, and mei, with a four-year term of office. When the term of office of the king expired, he did not return to Kyoto, but settled in Sakado in order to expand his power. By the time of his son's generation, his power had reached Kaminoso, Shimoso, and Tsunariku. Of the eight sons of King Takamitsu, three of them were shoguns (the eldest son, Kunika, the third son, Ryojo, and the fourth son, Ryosun). In addition, Kunikuka was the chief rafter of Changlu, his second son Ryokan was the chief rafter of Shimosha, Ryosun was the chief rafter of Kaminosha, his seventh son Ryosho was the chief rafter of Kaminosha, and his eighth son Ryo-mo was the chief rafter of Changlu. In his grandchildren's generation, his power expanded to Shimono (Ryomo son Ryo-masa served as shosuke), Sagami (Ryosho son Sho-fumi served as shogun), Musashi (Ryokan son Konya served as shogun), and Rikuo (Kunika sons Sadamori and Shige-mori served as shogun). Before the outbreak of the Taira Shogunate Rebellion, the Taira Clan had dominated Sakado for three generations. The means of expanding the power of the Taira Clan was through marriage with local powerful clans, such as Kunika's marriage with Genpou, a rafter in Hitachinaka. Minamoto was a member of the Contemplative Minamoto clan, which was also a royal family name given to him. This was a peaceful means. Non-peaceful means are private fights, for example, in 931, Ryo Shogun's son, Shogun, and his uncle, Ryo Kan, fought over the "female argument" (the latter's daughter was Shogun's wife). Four years later (935), Shogun fought with Genpou, a rafter from Hitachiku, and his uncle Kunikuka, killing Genpou's son and Kunikuka, and then with Sadamori, Kunikuka's son, and so on. Both sides appealed to the court. First, the court issued an official token to pursue Shogun, and Shogun went to the court and then issued a token to pursue Ryokan, Jeongseong, and Minamoto. Jeongseong also appealed to the court, and the court again sent a magistrate's warrant to the shogun. Both sides attempted to use their connections with the court to make the fight work in their favor. By the middle of the tenth century, the Taira clan had built up enough power in Sakado to start a rebellion. In the case of the Taira Shogun, he established a stronghold in Toyotasho, Shimoushoguni, and his sphere of influence extended to Soma and Sarushima Counties. He also had a camp in Ishii-gogo, Sarushima-gun. The camp was used as a resting place for the Shogun's patrols, as a residence for the people from all directions, and as a storehouse and fortress for storing weapons. The shogun had his own army of about 1,000 men, who were called "koujou" (probably his own soldiers) and "shoujo" (subordinate soldiers). In addition, he was able to mobilize and command the forces of other local nobles called "companions", which numbered about 8,000 men. As mentioned above, he also had his own backing among the central nobles. Shogun not only engaged in secret fights among his own clan, but also interfered in the fights between other local clans and the Kokushi. For example, in 939, when a dispute arose between King Kosei, the guardian of Musashi, and Musashi Musashi, the head of Ashikaga Prefecture, in which King Kosei violated the customary rules by forcibly entering Ashikaga Prefecture with his troops and confiscating and sealing people's property and houses, "Shogun heard of the reason for this and told his followers, "Though I am not a close relative of Musashi, I would like to pacify each other's turmoil," so he led his troops "toward Musashi, who is not a close relative of mine, to the central government. He then led his troops "to Musashino," and together with Takeshiba, he blamed the state government. In short, after three generations and forty to fifty years of expansion, the Taira clan had built up enough power to dominate Sakado and start a rebellion. It is clear that once the time is ripe and their energy is released, a great rebellion that will shake the whole country is bound to take place, and its conductor is the oppression of the state government.