Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T07:38:30.302Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Kataki-uchi: The Practice of Blood-Revenge in Pre-Modern Japan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

D. E. Mills
D. E. Mills
Affiliation:
University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Five years after the Meiji Restoration, on the seventh of the second month of 1873, the Japanese Government issued the following decree:

The taking of human life is strictly prohibited by the law of the land, and the right to punish a murderer lies with the Government. However, since ancient times it has been customarily regarded as the duty of a son or younger brother to avenge the murder of his father or elder brother. While this is a natural expression of the deepest human feelings, it is ultimately a serious breach of the law on account of private enmity, a usurpation for private purposes of public authority, and cannot be treated as other than the crime of wilful slaughter. Furthermore, in extreme cases the undesirable situation often arises that one person wantonly and deliberately kills anothe in the name of revenge without regard for the rights and wrongs of the case or the justification for his act. This is to be deplored, and it is therefore decreed that vengeance shall be strictly prohibited. In future, should some close relative unfortunately be killed, the facts should be set out clearly an a complaint be laid before the authorities. Let it be plainly understood that anyone who ignores this injunction and adheres to the old customs, taking the law into his own hands to kill for revenge, will be subject to a penalty appropriate to his offence.

Type
Articles
Information
Modern Asian Studies , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , October 1976 , pp. 525 - 542
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Japanese text of this decree can perhaps most conveniently be found in the section on revenge in Koji ruien (Tokyo, 1932), Vol. 46, p. 502.Google Scholar Some other places in which it can be found quoted are the invaluable study of blood-revenge in Japan by Hirade, Kōjirō, entitled Kataki-uchi (Tokyo, 1909), Pt I, pp. 158–9,Google Scholar a long article, ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku to shite no Soga monogatari’, Yamagishi, Tokuhei, in Nihon bungaku renkō: chūsei (Tokyo, 1931), pp. 240–1,Google Scholar and Nanjō, Norio, Kōshō Edo jiten, (Tokyo, 1964), p. 150.Google Scholar

2 This and the following documents relevant to the case are quoted in Hirade, Kataki-uchi, Pt II, pp. 34–7,Google Scholar and Koji ruien, Vol. 46, pp. 503–4.Google Scholar

3 The Zōjōji in Shiba and the Kan'eiji in Ueno, temples having special relationships with Tokugawa Ieyasu and Tokugawa Iemitsu respectively.Google Scholar

4 For the text of this letter, see Koji ruien, Vol. 46, pp. 505–6,Google Scholar and Hirade, Katakiuchi, Pt II, pp. 34–7. A version of it with the pseudo-Chinese rendered into a rather more Japanese form is given in Yamagishi, ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku’, p. 233.Google Scholar

5 Komusō were originally itinerant begging priests of a branch of the Zen sect who attracted attention by playing the flute, but by the end of the Tokugawa period many of them were little more than strolling entertainers. The fact that they wore a basket-like headgear which obscured much of their faces led many people who wished to conceal their identity to disguise themselves as komusō.

6 This account of the conclusion of the affair is based on that given at great length by Hirade, , Kataki-uchi, Pt II, pp. 109–27. He includes the report made by the two avengers to the authorities in their own home districts after their return (that by Tetsuzō running to thirteen pages!).Google Scholar

7 Nanjō, , in Kōshō Edo jiten, p. 150–1, mentions the cases of the Hagiwara brothers (1873), Kawakami Yukiyoshi (1878), Usui Rokurō (1880), Narita Tetsusaburō (1905) and Motoyama (1915). He also points out that in the original proposal in 1872 for the banning of kataki-uchi, the Minister of Justice recommended the death penalty for avengers. However, in the final decree this was toned down, and in fact no avenger was executed. The Hagiwara brothers were released as having acted in a fit of madness, and the others were sentenced to terms of penal servitude ranging from four years to life (though in the latter case the prisoner was released after nine years).Google Scholar

8 The translation is that of Aston, W. G., in his Nihongi (repr. London, 1956), Vol. I, p. 389.Google Scholar

9 The following two passages are given here in the translation of James, Legge, quoted from The Sacred Books of the East (Oxford, 1885), Vol. 27, p. 92 and p. 140 respectively.Google Scholar

10 The original text of the passages translated here can be found in Harvard Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series Supplement 17 (1937) Ch'un Ch'iu Ching Chuan Yin Tê, Vol. I, pp. 22, 443.Google Scholar

11 Note that though the boys undertook the revenge purely out of filial piety, it has been suggested by one Japanese scholar that their daring attack on one of Yoritomo's henchmen had been encouraged for political reasons by their Hōjō godfather, Tokimasa. See Tsukazaki, Susumu, ‘Soga monogatari no haikei’, in Nihon koten kanshō kōza, Vol. 12 (Tokyo, 1966), pp. 355–7.Google Scholar

12 Kōwaka-mai or kōwaka bukyoku. For an account of this genre, see Araki, J. T., The Ballad-Drama of Medieval Japan (Berkeley, California, 1964).Google Scholar

13 For a translation of the most famous play on the subject, see Keene, D. L., Chūshingura: The Treasury of Loyal Retainers (New York, 1971).Google Scholar

14 These statistics are quoted from Shioya, S., Chûshingura: An Exposition (Tokyo, 1940), p. 110. For a very detailed table of incidents of revenge in the Tokugawa period (though the author disclaims any attempt to be exhaustive),Google Scholar see Hirade, , Kataki-uchi, Pt I, pp. 129–36.Google Scholar

15 Several specific cases are mentioned by Hirade, , Kataki-uchi, Pt I, pp. 103–4.Google Scholar

16 A facsimile of this document appears in ibid., facing p. 128. See also Koji ruien, Vol. 46, p. 552.Google Scholar

17 Hirade, , Kataki-uchi, Pt I, p. 123.Google Scholar

18 See Koji ruien, Vol. 46, pp. 550–1, also Yamagishi, , ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku’, pp. 236–7.Google Scholar

19 A translation of this appears in Shioya, , Chûshingura, p. 92, as follows: ‘As regards avenging injury done to master or father, it is acknowledged even by Confucius that you and the injurer cannot live together under the same heaven. A person harbouring such vengeance shall give notice in writing to the district criminal court and carry out his design within the period stated in the notice. Secondary vengeance is strictly forbidden. Any avenging act done by those who have neglected to give preliminary notice of it shall be treated as a riot, and the offenders shall be punished according to the circumstances of the case.’Google Scholar

20 These two cases are mentioned in a most informative article by Haenisch, E., ‘Die Rachepflicht, ein Widerstreit zwischen konfuzianischer Ethik und chinesischem Staatsgefühl’, in Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft, Neue Folge X, 1931, pp. 78, 80.Google ScholarHaenisch actually says that insults were not a sufficient cause for blood-revenge, but Professor Eberhard, W., of the University of California at Berkeley, has kindly drawn my attention in a personal communication to the existence in Hou Han shu, chapter 74, 3b, of a legal provision according to which a son who takes revenge for insults against his father should not be punished. The period in question here is, of course, A.D. 25–220.Google Scholar

21 Note that there seem to be several varying versions of this historical incident. See Hirade, , Kataki-uchi, pp. 66ff.Google Scholar For a full summary of the only scene from the Kabuki play which is still performed, see Halford, G.A., The Kabuki Handbook (Tokyo, 1956).Google Scholar

22 Quoted in Koji ruien, Vol. 46, p. 507. A Japanese reading of the part here translated is given by Yamagishi, , ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku’, p. 215.Google Scholar

23 See Yamagishi, , ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku’, pp. 211–12. There is a translation of the Chou-li by Edouard, Biot (2 vols, Paris, 1851). The relevant passage is in Vol. I, pp. 303–4.Google Scholar

24 According to Ishii, Ryōsuke, Edo jidai mampitsu (Tokyo, 1959), p. 96.Google Scholar

25 For the two Chou-li passages, see Biot, , Le Tcheou-li, Vol. I, pp. 305–6, and Vol. II, p. 352.Google Scholar

26 Included in Kokuyaku kambun taisei (Tokyo, 1923), Series 2, Vol. 7. The memorial appears in its Chinese form on p. 12 of the last section of the book and in a Japanese reading on pp. 47–50 of the first section. Both this and the memorial by Liu Tsungyüan are discussed by Yamagishi, ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku’, pp. 212–13.Google Scholar

27 Included in the same volume as the Han, Yü memorial, pp. 70–1 of the Chinese section, and pp. 289–92 of the Japanese.Google Scholar

28 28th day of the 5th month of the 4th year of Kenkyū (1193).

29 The passage is quoted in Koji ruien, Vol. 46, p. 501 and Hirade, Kataki-uchi, Pt I, p. 24. Ishii, Edo jidai mampitsu, p. 96, interprets it as meaning that it was prohibited to carry out vengeance on an enemy before his legal conviction, but that subsequently it was allowable.Google Scholar

30 See Koji ruien, Vol. 46, pp. 501–2, and Hirade, Kataki-uchi, Pt I, p. 25.Google Scholar

31 These cases can be easily identified in Koji ruien, where the accounts are classified according to the avenger's relationship with the person he is avenging. Haenisch, ‘Die Rachepflicht’, p. 79, mentions a case in which a father avenged his son; also, I am indebted to Professor W. Eberhard for the information that cases of revenge for a younger brother or for a daughter by her father can be found in the Hou Han shu, 45, 2b, and 83, 4b respectively.

32 Though Sansom calls this ‘the first recorded case of kataki-uchi in the Yedo period’, it occupies only sixth place in Hirade's table. For accounts of the story, see Koji ruien, Vol. 46, p. 540 and Hirade, Kataki-uchi, Pt II, pp. 4ff.Google Scholar

33 For the rival arguments, see the introduction to Keene, D., Chūshingura.Google Scholar

34 See Koji ruien, Vol. 46, p. 502. According to Hirade, Kataki-uchi, Pt I, pp. 30–1, the first revenge for which there is evidence of formal permission having been given by a public authority was one in 1639, sanctioned by the second of these Itakura shoshidai.Google Scholar

35 Murder of a chance passer-by in the street simply for the purpose of testing the sharpness of a new sword.

36 See Mozume, Takami, Kōbunko, under Kataki-uchi, Vol. 5 (Tokyo, 1917), pp. 33–4.Google Scholar

37 It is this historical incident in 1723 which was developed into the celebrated Kabuki play Go- Taiheiki shiraishi-banashi. Of this originally very long play, only one scene is now performed, that of the ‘Soga passes’.

38 See Hirade, Kataki-uchi, Pt II, pp. 75–9. According to Nanjō, in Kōshō Edo jiten, p. 145, such contests were typical of the provinces, as opposed to the city of Edo. For one more case of a public contest, again involving a woman, see Koji ruien, Vol. 46, pp. 522–4.Google Scholar

39 According to Professor Eberhard, W. (personal communication), the continuing blood-revenge is reported for the Miao tribes of South China, who practise it through nine generations (Chung-hua ch'üan kuo feng-su chih, Pt 2, Ch. 10, p. 58). The figure‘nine’ occurs in relation to a ruling house in a passage from Kung-yang's commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals (Concerning the extinction of Ts'e by Duke Seang taking vengeance for a remote ancestor): ‘How many generations removed from him was the remote ancestor?’ ‘Nine’ ‘May an injury be avenged after nine generations?’ ‘Yes; even after a hundred.’ ‘May [the head of] a clan take such vengeance?’ ‘No …’Google Scholar (translation by Legge, , The Chinese Classics, Vol. V, Pt I (Repr. Hong Kong, 1966), Prolegomena, p. 60).Google Scholar

40 See Hirade, , Kataki-uchi, Pt II, pp. 17–30.Google Scholar

41 Ibid., 54–8.

42 For somewhat more detail, particularly on the Muromachi and Edo periods, see Yamagishi, , ‘Kataki-uchi bungaku’, pp. 222ff.Google Scholar