Sakaue Y., with K.L. Reeves
Japan borrowed its provincial administrative structure from Korean models, concluding that the
Taihō regulations compiled by Fujiwara Fuhito and his peers were the first to be derived directly
from Tang codes.^22
Ōsumi Kiyoharu, moreover, draws attention to the striking resemblance of the Yōrō codes
(thought to be nearly identical in form to their Taihō predecessors) to the reconstructed Tang
codes, and to the widely held consensus that Tenmu’s kabane system for ranking families in
accordance with their proximity to the throne was modeled on Silla’s kolp’um (“bone rank”)
system.^23 He contends that clause- by-clause examination of Tang legal codes began with the
compilation of the Taihō codes, and that the Kiyomihara codes were nothing more than an amal-
gamation of separate earlier statutes and procedures.^24
Inasmuch as neither the Ōmi codes nor the Kiyomihara codes survive, even in fragments,
there will always be questions about how complete these legal codes really were. Even so, with
regard to the systems for managing subjects and taxation, we do know that the practice of divid-
ing the agricultural population into groups of fifty households was in place from very early on,
that a hierarchical division of households into classes (kotō) and a system of corvée labor and taxes
in kind (chō and eki) was imposed during Tenmu’s reign, and that Jitō’s reign saw the institution
of household registers, revised at six- year intervals. The possibility that these practices might
have been somewhat geographically limited in scope notwithstanding, the widespread enact-
ment during this period of systems of land allotment and military organization remains an incon-
testable fact.^25
The Tang ling regulations begin with provisions concerning households, followed by those
concerning universities, selection of personnel, inheritance, official promotion, and remunera-
tion. The Yōrō (and most likely the Taihō) regulations likewise begin with provisions concern-
ing the organization and categorization of households, although these are followed instead by
regulations concerning land allotment and corvée labor, a sequence reflecting that found in the
Taika Reform edicts, which call for the establishment of laws relating to household registers,
records for determining taxes, and land allotment. Clearly it was the systematic administration of
these three economic spheres that, above all else, demanded the most attention during the initial
establishment of the Japanese ritsuryō state.^26
Establishment of the ritsuryo ̄ state
As may be understood from the foregoing discussion, the final product of this lengthy evolution
of the Japanese ritsuryō codes represented an attempt to adopt Chinese legal codes formulated
during the Sui and Tang dynasties. The Japanese ritsuryō state was founded upon these models.
The impetus behind this project was rooted in a growing sense of tension spreading through-
out East Asia. It seems reasonable, therefore, to suppose that in order to achieve this goal, leaders
of the emerging ritsuryō state worked toward a more effective concentration of national resources,
as well as the construction of a military system. And, indeed, the military was developed in
tandem with the system for organizing and overseeing Japanese subjects. Regiments (gundan)
were established throughout the country, their ranks filled with soldiers conscripted from the
tax- paying population, one man from each household.^27 All this was done in order to ensure the
stability of internal government, as well as to strengthen Japan’s military power and enable it to
interact with the surrounding kingdoms of East Asia, as an imperium in its own right.^28 Further
evidence in support of this view may be found in the abolition of the provincial regiment system
shortly after the sense of international tension subsided.
Motivation notwithstanding, it is clear at even a glance that while the Japanese ritsuryō codes
may have been modeled on Chinese archetypes, they were introduced into a society that was