Page:Kojiki by Chamberlain.djvu/48

xxxviii younger brother. It was also the custom among brothers and sisters to use the words iro-se for se, iro-ne for ane, and iro-do for oto, and analogy forces us to conclude that iro-mo was used for imo.” (Motowori elsewhere explains iro as a term of endearment indentical [sic] with the word iro, “love ;” but we may hesitate to accept this view.) It will be observed that the foundation of this system of nomenclature was a subordination of the younger to the elder-born modified by a subordination of the females to the males. In the East, especially in primitive times, it is not “place aux dames,” but “place aux messieurs”.

Another important point to notice is that, though in a few passages of the “Records” we find a distinction drawn between the chief and the secondary wives,—perhaps nothing more than the favorite or better-born, and the less well-born, are meant to be thus designated,—yet not only is this distinction not drawn throughout, but the wife is constantly spoken of as imo, i.e. “younger sister.” In fact sister and wife were convertible terms and ideas ; and what in a later stage of Japanese, as of Western, civilization is abhorred as incest was in Archaic Japanese times the common practice. We also hear of marriages with half-sisters, with stepmothers, and with aunts ; and to wed two or three sisters at the same time was a recognized usage. Most such unions were naturally so contrary to Chinese ethical ideas, that one of the first traces of the influence of the latter in Japan was the stigmatizing of them as incest ; and the conflict between the old native custom and the imported moral code is seen to have resulted in political troubles. Marriage with sisters was naturally the first to disappear, and indeed it is only mentioned in the legends of the gods ; but unions with half-sisters, aunts, etc., lasted on into the historic epoch. Of exogamy, such as obtains in China, there is no trace in any Japanese document, nor do any other artificial impediments seem to have stood in the way of the free choice of the Early Japanese man, who also (in some cases at least) received a dowry with his bride or brides.

If, taking as our guides the incidental notices which are scattered