Changes

Imperial Mausolea Slaves 陵戸

*陵戸

From The Cambridge History of Japan, Volume One:

From The Cambridge History of Japan, Volume One:

The slave class was divided by law into five subgroups according to types of ownership and degrees of freedom. The first subgroup was state slaves (kanko) owned by the central government. They could have families and could use a portion of their labor for themselves. The second subgroup was private slaves (ke'nin) owned by commoners. They had as mch freedom as did state slaves. The third was state chattel slaves (kunuhi) owned by the central government. They were treated as property that could be bought and sold. The fourth subgroup was private chattel slaves (shinuhi) owned by commoners. They were otherwise treated like state chattel slaves. And the fifth was the imperial-mausolea slaves (ryouko) owned by officials. They were used to protect and maintain the tombs of deceased emperors and empresses.

The slave class was divided by law into five subgroups according to types of ownership and degrees of freedom. The first subgroup was state slaves (kanko) owned by the central government. They could have families and could use a portion of their labor for themselves. The second subgroup was private slaves (ke'nin) owned by commoners. They had as mch freedom as did state slaves. The third was state chattel slaves (kunuhi) owned by the central government. They were treated as property that could be bought and sold. The fourth subgroup was private chattel slaves (shinuhi) owned by commoners. They were otherwise treated like state chattel slaves. And the fifth was the imperial-mausolea slaves (ryouko) owned by officials. They were used to protect and maintain the tombs of deceased emperors and empresses.

Private slaves (ke'nin) are not mentioned in extant household registers or other records of the eighth century, and we find only scattered references to them in legal provisions of that and the following centuries. We therefore assume that private slaves were not numerous and that imperial-mausolea slaves were ranked about as high as commoners were, as they were despised only because of the work they did. Commoners, on the other hand, included artisan groups (shinabe) that were much like slaves. The largest slave subgroup was private chattel slaves, who were owned mainly by temples, shrines, public officials, and wealthy farmers. One private chattel slave, according to contemporary sources, had roughly the value of a strong horse or cow."

Private slaves (ke'nin) are not mentioned in extant household registers or other records of the eighth century, and we find only scattered references to them in legal provisions of that and the following centuries. We therefore assume that private slaves were not numerous and that imperial-mausolea slaves were ranked about as high as commoners were, as they were despised only because of the work they did. Commoners, on the other hand, included artisan groups (shinabe) that were much like slaves. The largest slave subgroup was private chattel slaves, who were owned mainly by temples, shrines, public officials, and wealthy farmers. One private chattel slave, according to contemporary sources, had roughly the value of a strong horse or cow."

http://www.sol.dti.ne.jp/~hiromi/kansei/e_taihoyoro.html says:

http://www.sol.dti.ne.jp/~hiromi/kansei/e_taihoyoro.html says:

良民と同じだけの口分田を班給されていますが、諸陵司の管轄下にあって世襲を強制されており、他の賎や良民との婚姻は禁じられています。

良民と同じだけの口分田を班給されていますが、諸陵司の管轄下にあって世襲を強制されており、他の賎や良民との婚姻は禁じられています。

Does anyone have a good, applicable English translation of the Taiho and Yoro codes? My Japanese is only slowly coming around, but from what I can understand: The Imperial Mausoleum Slaves were in a hereditery class system that was (along with the other 4 types of slaves) in contrast with the free, common man (ryoumin). This was in imitation with Tang Chinese law codes. From this website, there is a chart that explains the relationship that is outlined below in this post. Below that is some Japanese that I am having difficulty reading. I believe it's something along the lines of "government owned slaves" v.s. "personally owned slaves," but I cannot be sure.

The Imperial Mausoleum Slaves were in a hereditery class system that was (along with the other 4 types of slaves) in contrast with the free, common man (ryoumin). This was in imitation with Tang Chinese law codes. From the above website, there is a chart that explains the relationship that is outlined below in this post.  

http://tokyo.cool.ne.jp/human_lights/sources/history/acient-002-j.html says:

http://tokyo.cool.ne.jp/human_lights/sources/history/acient-002-j.html says:

　大宝律令後の日本の身分制度は＜良民｛諸臣・百官人・天下公民（公戸・封戸・品部（ともべ）・雑戸（ざっこ））－賤民（官戸・陵戸・家人・官奴婢・私奴婢）＞という感じで，特に，下層身分である賤民（官戸・陵戸・家人・官奴婢・私奴婢）の５つのを「五色の賤」と言われています。この五色の賤は後に身分解放令（実際は良民が賤民と結婚すると賤民身分となり、税が免除されるなど様々な不都合が生じたためこうした制度をとりやめたと言われる）などで崩壊します。わずかに官奴婢などが「今良」とよばれる身分として形態をかえていきます。

　大宝律令後の日本の身分制度は＜良民｛諸臣・百官人・天下公民（公戸・封戸・品部（ともべ）・雑戸（ざっこ））－賤民（官戸・陵戸・家人・官奴婢・私奴婢）＞という感じで，特に，下層身分である賤民（官戸・陵戸・家人・官奴婢・私奴婢）の５つのを「五色の賤」と言われています。この五色の賤は後に身分解放令（実際は良民が賤民と結婚すると賤民身分となり、税が免除されるなど様々な不都合が生じたためこうした制度をとりやめたと言われる）などで崩壊します。わずかに官奴婢などが「今良」とよばれる身分として形態をかえていきます。

Semmin (slaves), as shown above, were broken down into five categories (五色の賤). 賤民（官戸・陵戸・家人・官奴婢・私奴婢). If I am reading these correctly, then the five are as follows: Kanko, Ryouko, Ke'nin, Kunuhi, and Shinuhi, respectively. I couldn't do this without the Cambridge mentions on page 425.

Semmin (slaves), as shown above, were broken down into five categories (五色の賤). 賤民（官戸・陵戸・家人・官奴婢・私奴婢), read: Kanko, Ryouko, Ke'nin, Kunuhi, and Shinuhi, respectively.