The court and its provincesstable rights over the land they were tilling. It is highly interesting to discuss what role land in the
hands of a majority of self- reliant peasants running their small- scale farms on their own account
may have played, not only in socioeconomic structure but also in the mentality of the whole
society.
Notes
1 Various economic, political, and cultural aspects of the relations between centers and regions during the
ancient history of the Japanese archipelago are related in Joan R. Piggott, Capital and Countryside in Japan,
300–1180: Japanese Historians in English, giving an original presentation of the scholarship of fourteen Jap-
anese historians on the epoch from state formation until to the end of Heian era, written by eight Japanese
specialists, as interpreted by eight Western scholars. Mikael Adolphson, Edward Kamens, and Stacie Mat-
sumoto, Heian Japan, Centers and Peripheries, a compilation of articles based on an international conference
in 2002, represents an even wider range of themes on centers and peripheries in the Heian era. Further
useful readings on our field in English language are presented in volumes 1 and 2 of The Cambridge History
of Japan. Torao Toshiya, “Nara Economic and Social Institutions”; Cornelius J. Kiley, “Provincial Admin-
istration and Land Tenure in Early Heian,” and Dana Morris, “Land and Society” are of special interest to
our topic here. In the end, most research on our subject focuses on the economic institutions of central
elites. See, for example, Bruce L. Batten, “Provincial Administration in Early Japan: From Ritsuryō kokka
to Ōchō kokka.” For readers of German, Detlev Taranczewski, “Der frühe Feudalismus” introduces our
subject, and includes a list of basic references (most of them in English).
2 Yoshimura Takehiko, “Kodai shakai to doreisei” gives an overlook of the social stratification and
explains the theoretical implications of research approaches. On the crucial function and the continuity
of this local or regional chiefdom Ishimoda Shō’s scholarship was pioneering and laid the fundaments of
research until today (see, for example, Nihon no kodai kokka). Arguments for differentiating between
ruling class and bureaucracy are discussed by Kotani Hiroyuki, Rekishi no hōhō ni tsuite, especially
pp. 108–144.
3 The question of the extent to which premodern Japanese society can be perceived as agrarian, and espe-
cially what role wet rice culture played in it, has been much discussed in Japanese historiography, but no
realistic alternative to an agrarian- centered view seems to be in sight. Much interesting criticism of this
view has been developed by Amino Yoshihiko. For a lively discussion, see Amino Yoshihiko and Ishii
Susumu, Kome, hyakushō, tennō: Nihonshi no kyozō no yukue.
4 The importance of slaves in classical Japanese society has been debated for a long time, in both factual
and theoretical terms. As a result, we may conclude the overall quantitative and structural impact on
society was not decisive. For a discussion of slavery, see Yoshimura Takehiko, “Kodai shakai to dorei-
sei.” One feature of these debates was a historical comparison between ancient societies in Europe and
in Japan. Ishimoda Shō was among the most important advocates of the slavery argument. His “Kodai
ni okeru dorei no ichi- kōsatsu: Sono shinka no katei ni tsuite” refers also to Karl August Wittfogel’s
theories on slavery in China (“the Orient”) and in ancient Rome.
5 Kishi Toshio, Nihon kodai sekichō no kenkyū offers a comprehensive study of household registers.
6 Tax system is a crucial and nonetheless intricate matter in the research of ritsuryō state. A classic intro-
ductory reading is Hayakawa Shōhachi, Ritsuryō kokka, especially pp. 433–447. Also very useful is
Sakaehara Towao, “Ritsuryō kokka no keizai kōzō.” Takei Naoko’s recent “Ritsuryō zaisei to kōnōsei”
offers another fine introduction. For a comprehensive presentation in English, see Batten, “Provincial
Administration in Early Japan.”
7 In the classical and medieval periods, the homesteads of free people were respected, even by state
authorities, as a kind of sacrosanct space. Toda Yoshimi, Nihon ryōshusei seiritsu shi no kenkyū, cites this as
one product of the establishment of individual rights over lands. Matsumoto Keiji, “Kodai shūraku to
zaichi shakai,” presents concrete insight into the spatial aspects of homesteads and settlements.
8 For an archaeological approach to the question what kind of settlements and rural communities, and
what developments, may be discovered beneath the surface of legal and bureaucratic regulations, see
Hirose Kazuo, “Kōkogaku kara mita kodai no shūraku.” For a discussion of rural social inequality and
chieftainship (zaichi shuchō), and their integration into the ruling system, see Yoshida Akira, Nihon kodai
sonraku shi josetsu.
9 There is rich accumulation of research on gunji and the classical local or regional political structure.
Ishimoda, “Kodai ni okeru dorei”; Hirose, “Kōkogaku”; Niino Naoyoshi, Nihon kodai chihō seido no