Page:TASJ-1-3.djvu/148

 overlooked the insolent pretensions of the Chinese sovereigns, but now being no longer in a position to gain by the interchange of courtesies, she rejected all further overtures of friendship.”

The failure of the expeditions sent against Japan by Kublai Khan and the Taikô’s conquest of Corea of course afford much matter for reflections of a gratifying nature, which are only clouded by the disgraceful conduct of the Shôgun Ashikaga Yoshimitsu, who in writing to the Ming sovereign addresses him as Your Majesty (heika), and in one of his letters uses the title ‘King’ (kokuô) in speaking of himself, of the Shôgun Ashikaga Yoshihisa, in sending envoys to ask for money (such sums as 50,000 and 100,000 strings of cash at a time), and by the unfortunately obsequious language used by the Taikô and some of his generals in writing to the Chinese officials about the negotiations for peace. But the responsibility in these last cases lay with the priests, who being the only men in those days with the slightest tincture of learning, had charge of the correspondence.

The most remarkable point about this long tirade against China is that Japan was indebted to her for all the arts and sciences that make life better than nonentity, for a complete system of government and laws, and even for the very system of writing which enabled the writer to record his arrogant and spiteful feelings.

Of Motoöri’s other works relating to Shintô the most important are his commentaries on the Oho-barui no kotoba (1795) and the Idzumo Kuni-no-miyatsuko Kamuyogoto (1798) the Jindai Udzu no Yamakage, which is a development of his criticisms on the first two books of the Nihongi called the Jindai no maki, and the Jindai Shôgo (1789). This last is a compilation from those parts of the Kojiki and Nihongi which describe the age of the gods and certain other ancient books, written in the mixture of Chinese characters and Hiragana called Kana-majiri, with a few explanatory notes.