Pathway to Japanese Literature

1. Preface

In our ancient social structure, there existed a class known as *hashihito*.
It is read as *Hashihito* or *Mahito*.
Regarding this matter, I had previously addressed it briefly in an article titled “Kushi-be and Haji Clan” published in the inaugural issue (Vol. 1, No. 1; January 1919) of *Minzoku to Rekishi* (“Ethnicity and History”) when I launched the journal. Subsequently, Mr. Tadokoro Ichita of Awa Province reported excerpts from Tokugawa-era *munatsukechō* (land registries) concerning *hashihito* in Awa in Vol. 5, No. 3 of the same journal (March 1921), while Mr. Tani Kokeiroku of Suō Province published findings on *mon’otoko hyakushō* (gate-man peasants)—a term equivalent to *hashihito*—in Suō during the same period in Vol. 9, No. 5 (May 1923).
“Mon’otoko” (gate-man) is none other than “hashihito.”
At the time of Mr. Tani’s publication, I had announced my intention to eventually compile subsequent research linking *hashihito* and *hachiya* and present it in the same journal; however, due to the impact of the earthquake in September of that same year, the journal merged with this publication, and my research—much against my wishes—was left unattended, ultimately remaining incomplete until today.
That is, here under *A Study of Hashihito*, I wish to fulfill that promise.

*Hashihito*, as the characters indicated, signified “intermediate people” and generally denoted their position between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*). This term had existed since the pre-Taika era and continued into the Tokugawa period, persistently forming an essential class within Japan’s social structure. Nevertheless, it appeared that not only researchers of general Japanese history but even those claiming to specialize in social history had traditionally given scant attention to this matter, often tending to neglect it—a circumstance most regrettable for Taishō academia. That is to say, without regard for complexity, I aimed to compile as many historical materials scattered across various texts as possible, collect related matters—with one goal being to rouse public attention and thereby invite reports of similar materials, and the other being to provide historians with references to aspire toward advancing their research. I humbly asked for indulgence regarding any overlap between portions of this account and my previously published work. The essence lay in supplementing previous theories and aiming to further elaborate on them.

2. The Characters for “Hashihito” (間人) and Their Readings

The characters for *hashihito* (間人) first appeared in the Tenjin Hongi section of the Kujihongi. Among the thirty-two attendants who accompanied Ninigi-no-Mikoto during his heavenly descent, Amenotamakushihiko-no-Mikoto was recorded as the ancestor of the Hashihito Muraji clan—marking the earliest appearance of “Hashihito.” The text annotates this with the readings *Hashibito* and *Hajiudo*.

Next, in the *Kojiki*’s entry on Emperor Kinmei, there appears a royal figure named Princess Hashihito Anahobe no Ō. The Kan’ei printed edition annotates this “Hashihito” as “Mahito,” while the Nakatsomi no Muraji Tanemocho manuscript preserves the reading “Hashihito.” *Hōō Teisetsu* records this princess as Anahobe no Hashihito Ō, whereas the *Nihon Shoki* entry for the second year of the same emperor’s reign writes her as Hasebe no Anahobe no Ōjo, with “埿部” given the archaic reading “Hasetsukabe.”

This indicates that *hashihito* corresponded to the Hasebe clan and were occasionally called *Hasetsukabe*. The interchangeable use of “Hasebe” (埿部) with “Hashihito” (間人) becomes evident through entries in both Emperor Yōmei’s and Empress Suiko’s inaugural years, which refer to the same figure as Princess Anahobe no Hashihito. The *Nihon Shoki* further records a princess of Emperor Bidatsu—later Empress to Emperor Kōtoku—as Princess Hashihito, with the same archaic reading preserved.

Throughout the *Nihon Shoki*, those bearing the Hashihito surname were consistently annotated as *Hashihito*. This demonstrates that while originally read as *Hashihito*, the characters later acquired the reading *Mahito*. The *Wamyō Ruijusho* documents a village named Hashihito-go in Asakuchi District, Bitchū Province: printed editions annotate it as “Mamuto,” while the Kozanji manuscript uses “Hashinofuto.” Similarly, in Tango Province’s Takeno District, a village of the same name appears with “Hashūto” annotated on the right and “Mamuto” on the left.

These examples collectively attest to the coexistence of both readings since antiquity. *Hashūto* clearly derives from *Hashihito* through phonetic shift, just as *Mamuto* evolves from *Mahito*. The village of Hashihito in Yamaga District, Higo Province, likewise likely references *hashihito*. (The printed edition of the *Wamyō Ruijusho* writes this as *Hashiri*, though the Kozanji manuscript’s “箸人” should be considered authoritative.)

The surname *Hashihito* appears in the *Shinsen Shōjiroku*,

In the Left Capital’s Imperial Lineage (Upper): Hashihito no Sukune — descendants of Homuyawake no Mikoto, son of Emperor Chūai.

Yamashiro Province, Imperial Lineage: Hashihito clan — descendants of Homuyawake no Mikoto, same ancestor as Hashihito no Sukune.

Left Capital, Divine Lineage (Middle): Hashihito no Sukune — descendants of Tamakushihiko no Mikoto, fifth-generation descendant of Kamimusubi no Mikoto.

are recorded.
The last entry corresponded to what was previously cited in the Tenjin Hongi—that Amenotamakushihiko-no-Mikoto had been the ancestor of the Hashihito Muraji clan—and coincided with Emperor Tenmu’s thirteenth-year grant of the Sukune surname to fifty Hashihito Muraji clans.

Furthermore, there were not a few others bearing the Hashihito surname; in the Right Capital Imperial Lineage (Upper) section of the *Shinsen Shōjiroku*, there existed an entry for Abe no Hashihito Omi, who shared ancestry with the Iga Omi clan.
If it was stated that the Iga Omi clan descended from Hikoyashirodateōine no Mikoto—son of Ōhiko no Mikoto, son of Emperor Kōgen—then it followed that a branch of the Abe clan (also written as 阿閉) likely split off and came to bear the Hashihito surname.
Furthermore, an entry in the *Shoku Nihongi* for January of Taihō 2 (702 CE) recorded that Tanihashi no Hashihito no Sukune, holding the Senior Sixth Rank Upper Grade, had been bestowed with Junior Fifth Rank Lower Grade—appearing to involve a member of the Tanjihi clan who claimed descent from Homusubi no Mikoto.
Furthermore, an entry in the *Nihon Shoki* for the fifth year of Emperor Kōtoku’s Hakuchi era (654 CE) demonstrated that even among branch lineages of the Nakatomi clan there had been those bearing the Hashihito surname through its mention of Nakatomi no Hashihito no Muraji Oi serving as envoy judge.
In one instance from the *Man’yōshū*, there exists a poem presented by Hashihito no Muraji Oi at Empress Takara’s command during Emperor Jomei’s hunt—this “Oi” being likely identical with Nakatomi no Hashihito no Muraji Oi.
Furthermore, an entry from Jingo Keiun 1 (767 CE) in *Shoku Nihongi* showed families bearing Na surnames through its mention of Konoe Shōsō holding Junior Sixth Rank Lower Grade and Sixth Order Merit.
Additionally historical documents contained numerous cases of obscure-origin Hashihito surnames scattered throughout their records.

3. The Significance of Hashihito

Given the numerous instances in antiquity of those who took “Hashihito” as personal names or surnames, its persistence as place names, and even the existence of people referred to by this designation in certain regions as recently as the Tokugawa period, it becomes evident that the presence of a distinct class termed “Hashihito” had been recognized within our social structure since ancient times.

The characters 間人 are read as *Mahito*.
This is entirely its literal meaning—it signifies none other than people positioned intermediately.
In Korea, there originally existed an intermediate class called *chungin*, positioned between the *yangban*—that is, the aristocracy—and commoners—that is, ordinary people.
The significance of our *hashihito* is likewise similar to this, with the sole difference lying in their position being intermediate between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*).
However, in the pre-Taika era, the so-called distinction between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*) differed from that of the post-Taika period, and thus it cannot be uniformly characterized; I will revisit this with further explanation later.
Moreover, that it came to be called *Mamuto*, *Mauto*, *Mooto*, or *Mōto* (門男) is needless to say merely a matter of phonetic corruption of the term.

However, that this came to be called *Mahito* may have arisen from its characters, but the fact that it was likely called *Hashihito* in antiquity can be known from how it is predominantly read thus when used in surnames or personal names.

Regarding the term *Hashihito*, the venerable Motoori annotates in his *Kojiki-den* on the name of Hashihito Anahobe no Ō:

"The characters 間人 should be read as Hashihito.
("Hashūdo" is a later euphonic corruption engraved [in texts].) The character 間 is a phonetic loan—(there are many examples of using 'hashi' for 'the space between things')—and signifies the Hajibe people.
("The Hajibe [土師] were originally pronounced *Hanishi* [波爾志], but when omitting the *ni* [爾], *shi* [志] becomes voiced as *ji*, resulting in *Hashi* [波自]. Judging from how this royal name borrows the character 間 [*hashi*] to write it, they likely pronounced it with unvoiced *shi* as well.") Thus, the *Hashihito* [間人] in this royal name was the surname of [the princess’s] wet nurse.
(Omitted)"

states.
That is, he interpreted it as the designation for pottery-making clan members.
However, the late Professor Kurita Hiroshi did not adopt this theory; in his *Shinsen Shōjiroku Kōshō*, he wrote, “The meaning of *hashihito* has yet to be ascertained,” adopting a cautious attitude by omitting what he deemed questionable.

As for whether Hashihito were indeed Haji people, merely having the venerable Motoori assertively state “They are” remained insufficient to convince others.
Therefore, it was not unreasonable that the late Professor Kurita refused to accept this and maintained a cautious stance.
However, if one were to interpose the tribe known as the Kushibe (Drudgery Corps) between them and consider the linkage between both parties, only then would the venerable Motoori’s theory become worthy of credible acknowledgment.
I had already briefly discussed this matter in *Minzoku to Rekishi* (Volume 1, Number 1); however, here, to bring that theory to completion while supplementing deficiencies in my previous argument, I wished to reiterate a portion of it in the following section.

4. Intermediate People and the Kushi-be (Drudgery Corps)

The entry in the *Kojiki* referring to Princess Hashihito Anahobe no Ō—a royal daughter of Emperor Kinmei—was rendered in the *Nihon Shoki* as Princess Hasebe no Anahobe no Ōjo; as previously discussed, this "Hasebe" [埿部] carried the archaic reading "Hasetsukabe."
Hasetsukabe signified the Kushi-be (Drudgery Corps) and was commonly written as "杖部" or "丈部." In the Keichō-era old edition of *Nihon Shoki*, next to "埿部" on the right side appeared a marginal note reading "丈部," while on the left side had been added a phonetic gloss of "Hasetsukabe."
This was to be understood as demonstrating not only that *Hasebe* (埿部) equated to *Takebe* (丈部) but also indicating their identity as *Hashihito* (間人).
Among those bearing the Hasebe surname, the same text's entry for the sixth month of Emperor Tenmu's first year recorded a person named Hasebe Fuki who had joined the emperor's army under Prince Ōtsu; furthermore, its twelfth-year entry stated that Hasebe no Miyatsuko and others were granted the surname Muraji.
In all these instances of Hasebe, old texts annotated [the characters] as "Hasetsukabe."
This reading possessed considerable antiquity, and given its appearance in Urabe Kanekata's *Shaku Nihongi*, it likely originated from private annotations by Heian-period scholars.

However, traditional scholars of Japanese classics and historians had largely refused to acknowledge that *Hasebe* was read as *Hasetsukabe*. Even the venerable Motoori—who himself recognized *hashihito* as Hajibe people—rejected the phonetic glosses in the *Nihon Shoki* within his *Kojiki-den*, declaring: "The text annotates *Hasebe* [埿部], which should be *Hashihito* [波志毘登], as *Hasetsukabe* and writes 'Takebe' [丈部] beside it—this is an egregious error. How greatly [Hasebe] differs from Takebe! The Hasebe surname seen in Tenmu-era records and elsewhere is the same." Following this, even works like Iida Takego’s *Nihongi Tsūshaku* adopted his stance, condemning the *Hasetsukabe* reading as gravely mistaken while embracing *Hashihito*. Editions like the Shinpen Kokushi Taikei’s *Nihon Shoki* went further, erasing what should have been the *Hasetsukabe* gloss—a marginal annotation traceable to *Shaku Nihongi* from the Heian period—and arbitrarily revising it to *Hashihito*. Professor Kurita Hiroshi then proposed a novel theory in his *Shinsen Shōjiroku Kōshō* that 埿部 should instead be read as Hatsukashibe, which Mr. Ōta Akira’s *Sēshi Kakei Jisho* uncritically adopted.

There was a reason Professor Kurita read this as *Hatsukashibe*. This was based on a note in the Tsuchikuri-shi (Earthworks Bureau) section of the Kunai-shō (Ministry of the Imperial Household) within the Shokuin-ryō (Official Appointments Code) of the *Ryō no Shūge* (Commentaries on the Administrative Codes), which annotates “Dobe” (Mud Workers) as “*Kogen Hatsukashino Tomo no Miyatsuko*” (ancient reading: *Hatsukashibe*). The Tsuchikuri-shi oversaw tasks such as producing earthenware, tile clay, and burning lime. The *Gige* interprets this “tile clay” as akin to roof tiles, and twenty members of the Dobe were affiliated with this bureau. The *Shūkai* commentary’s theory states that “tile clay” [瓦埿] is akin to “tile mud” [瓦泥], with the characters 泥 (mud) and 埿 (clay) being mutually connected—thus confirming that the Dobe were none other than the Hasebe. Given that this was referred to in ancient terms as “Hatsukashino Tomo no Miyatsuko,” it must be said that Professor Kurita’s reading of this as *Hatsukashibe* was entirely appropriate.

However, upon further reflection, one cannot help but raise the question: why was Dobe read as *Hatsukashibe*?
The existence of tribal members written as *Hakushikibe* or *Hazukabe* in ancient times was beyond doubt.
During Emperor Tenmu’s reign, when the Hasebe no Miyatsuko were granted the Muraji surname, the Hazukabe clan also received the same surname at that time.
Professor Kurita interpreted that *Hatsukashi* was originally a place name: just as judicial officials stationed in Oshikabe led to the term *Osakabe* for the Ministry of Justice, so too did people engaged in earthen wall construction in Hakushikibe come to be called *Hatsukashibe*.
Regarding this, while I would seek to explain it here, I will omit doing so due to concerns that my arguments might become overly mired in tangential details; in any case, I hereby clearly state that I found myself unable to concur with this theory.
If one were to say that the Dobe were a faction among the Haji people and were broadly referred to as Hashihito, this would be plausible; however, I found it utterly inconceivable that they came to be called Hatsukashibe based on a place name.
How much more so when there existed clear evidence that *Hasetsukabe* had already been established in antiquity as the reading for the characters 埿部!

Upon consideration, the Hasetsukabe were low-ranking clan members who engaged in the menial tasks of the Kushi-be (Drudgery Corps). Moreover, since they were not outcasts to the extent of being classified as *senmin* but rather belonged to a class positioned intermediately between *ryōmin* and *senmin*, it is likely that they were also called *hashihito*—that is, *Mahito*. In the theory of Anahito cited in the *Ryō no Shūge*, where Dobe is written as “Hatsukashino Tomo no Miyatsuko” (波都加此之友造), this must undoubtedly be a transcription error for “Hasetsukahi no Tomo no Miyatsuko” (波世都加比之友造). It was not difficult to imagine that during transcription, the single character ‘世’ had been omitted and ‘比’ erroneously written as ‘此’. Not only were instances of using the character 「此」 as the kana 「シ」 rare, but this hypothesis gained significant accuracy through clear evidence that, by at least the Kamakura period—and likely in Heian-period private annotations—the characters 埿部 were definitively read as *Hasetsukabe*. The era of “Anahito” cited in the *Shūkai* remained unclear, but he was likely a Heian-period legal scholar; if during that same period, [the characters] were annotated as *Hasetsukabe* in one context, then we must acknowledge that the ancient term for Hasebe [埿部] was “Hase(tsu)kahi no Tomo no Miyatsuko” [波世都加比之友造]. Furthermore, even in the Tokugawa period, descendants of the ancient Kushi-be [駆使部]—referred to as occupational lineages—were frequently classified within the intermediate class [間人階級], a fact that may well corroborate this interpretation.

The designation “Kushi-be” was ancient.
Their distribution was also widespread.
The *Shinsen Shōjiroku* recorded one Takebe family and three Jōbe families, while the *Wamyōshō* documented Takebe or Jōbe villages in regions such as Asake District of Ise Province, Nagasa District of Awa Province, Fuwa District of Mino Province, Kawachi District of Shimotsuke Province, its neighboring Haga District, and Iwai District of Mutsu Province (?), with clan members appearing frequently in ancient historical documents.
In the entry for Emperor Bidatsu’s twelfth year in the *Nihon Shoki*, where “Kushi-be” (駆使奴) was written and annotated with the reading *Hasetsukaiyatsuko*, this undoubtedly corresponded to this interpretation.
This character indicated the lowliness of their status.
The reason for writing this as *Takebe* (杖部) arose from the common practice of using staffs when traveling on roads for their duties in the *Kushi-be*, with the character *jō* (丈) in *Jōbe* (丈部) being an abbreviated form of *tsue* (杖).
The Kushi-be formed a single administrative unit governed by chiefs such as the Takebe no Obito or officials like the Tsukabe no Miyatsuko.
The title *Obito* denoted an elder signifying their role as chieftain, while *Miyatsuko* referred to imperial servants indicating their duty to lead these units in service to the emperor.
Their subordinates were indeed members of the intermediate class.

Here, I must further consider the Hasebe.
The Hasebe were craftsmen engaged in earthwork and, as previously stated, should be regarded as a branch of the Hajibe clan.
While the reason they were called Hashihito (Hajibe people) can be readily understood, why would they also have been referred to as Hasetsukabe?

Riverside craftsmen hired by farming households to drive away birds damaging rice crops came to be called *torioi* (bird chasers), and even when these bird chasers became itinerant performers traveling door-to-door, they retained this designation.
The Inugami—lower-ranking shrine servants of Gion—crafted bowstrings, sold them while calling out "Purchase bowstrings!" and thus became known as Tsurumeso.

There are many other examples of this kind. The Hasebe Hajibe people were not always engaged solely in earthwork; thus, it comes as no surprise that they were also called Hasetsukabe when assigned to drudgery tasks on the side. The Hachi—who inherited the Haji name and will be discussed in detail later—were likewise called *gobō* (temple attendants), *banta* (watchmen), *chasen* (tea whisk makers) or *sasara* (bamboo rake craftsmen), and *sekkyōsha* (narrative performers) depending on their occupations, demonstrating that those engaged in menial tasks never rigidly adhered to a single profession. The gong-beaters belonging to the same class as Hachi engaged in various occupations as circumstances demanded; thus, they were sometimes called “the seven transformations of gong-beaters,” which should serve as corroborative evidence.

In short, both the Kushi-be and the Dobe belonged to the same class, having originated from offshoots of the Haji people who took up various occupations for survival, and were equally part of the Hashihito intermediate class. Therefore, it is certain that when written as 間人 they were called Hashihito, when written as 埿部 they were called Hasetsukabe, or that both terms were used interchangeably.

Regarding the characters for "Hashihito" (間人), the venerable Motoori interpreted them as a phonetic representation of "Hajibe people" (土師人)—that is, Hashihito—based on his assertion that hashi denotes "the space between things." However, this interpretation is rather inverted. The practice of referring to chūgen as "hashi" conversely derived from the fact that Hajibe people were Hashihito; I maintain that "hashi" is indeed an abbreviation of "hashita" (a corruption of Hashihito, i.e., Hashito). This can be inferred from how low-ranking servants assigned to drudgery roles were termed hashita or hashitamono. The matter of hashitamono will be discussed in detail in the following section.

5. Intermediate People and Hashitamono

During the warrior class period, female servants of low status were often called *hashitamono* or simply *hashita*. In writing, they were recorded as “half-lower” (半下), “half-thing” (半物), “half-person” (半人), and similar terms. In *Gorōjōshūki* (cited in the “Offices and Ranks” volume of *Kojiruien*), under the section detailing the statuses of women in the Ōoku:

1. Official rice stipend: 4 koku
2. Official assistance fund: 2 ryō
3. One-person stipend
4. Firewood: 3 bundles
5. Bath firewood: 2 bundles
6. Oil (half-night portion)
7. Vegetable allowance: 12 ryō

The above items pertained to Go-Hanshita.

No matter how those characters were written, referring to female servants as *hashita* in speech remained a practice that old-fashioned elders still frequently mentioned even today.

The term *hashita* was paired with *chūgen* as *chūgen-hashita*, and during the warrior class period, it became customary to designate men in low-ranking menial service roles as *chūgen* and women as *hashita*.
These terms likely did not originally distinguish by gender; however, from as early as the Heian period onward, *hashita* came to be predominantly applied to women and *chūgen* to men.
In *The Tale of Sagoromo*,

[He] plucked a single stalk of iris from beneath the eaves, hastily wrote [a message], and had the *hashitamono* (a female servant) deliver it with an air of charm.

In *A Collection of Tales from Past and Present*:

Ureshisa, a female servant who attended Uji no Nyūdō, was sent away when Lord Akinobusuke—who had conceived a longing for her—was met with coldness.

To call myself “I” brings bitterness—the joy resides in a name that follows another’s will.

In *The Pillow Book*,

When one did things personally, their voice naturally stood out; yet having hashitamono and servant children [around] was still acceptable.

In the Neai Volume of *The Tale of Flowering Fortunes*:

The hashitamono and ladies-in-waiting from the chambers were amusingly dressed and shuffled about in their clogs.

In *The Tale of the Hollow Tree*:

When there was a hashitawara (a low-ranking servant), [the master] had her change into formal attire... then scolded her and departed...

In *Hōmotsushū*:

He had grown deeply attached to the *hashitamono* from Miyabara, but……

In the entry for the fifteenth day of the eleventh month of Kōwa 5 in the *Donryaku*:

While the courtiers were at leisure, I (Fujiwara no Tadazane) was present inside the imperial curtain.
(Omitted) Three half-status individuals from the Sa’in’s attendants; robes were presented from the inner court.

Terms such as *hashitamono*, *hashitawarawa*, and half-status individuals are all examples pertaining to women.
However, in the Iyo Mishima Documents’ *Iyo Province Mendenki* (Tax-Exempt Fields Record),

Roadside Outsiders, Intermediate People, etc.: 52 chō 7 tan

Sutra scribes: 7 *tan*; Paper craftsmen: 2 *tan*; Puppeteers: 1 *chō* (the following lists fifteen miscellaneous artisans known as itinerant people).

The term “half-person” (半人) should be read as *hashitabito*, just as “half-thing” (半物) appears in *Donryaku*. *Myōmishō* annotates that “half-thing” with the phonetic gloss *hashitamono*, while *Gorōjōshūki* writes *hashita* as “half-lower” (半下)—through these instances, its reading becomes discernible. However, this term was not necessarily exclusive to women.
The word *hashita* itself originally did not distinguish between genders. However, it became customary to use the Sino-Japanese reading *chūgen* (intermediate or companion) for men, while applying the native Japanese reading *hashita*—with its softer auditory quality—to women, thus naturally establishing this distinction.
I will discuss Chūgen in a separate section.

Now, what does the term *Hashita* or *Hashitamono* signify?
The venerable Motoori stated, “There are many instances where the space between things is called *hashi*.”
In that case, *Hashita* is *Hashito*—that is, *Hashihito*—and is interpreted as meaning “intermediate people.”
Even today in places like Tokyo, things left half-finished are called *hashi*, and one often hears lazy individuals who overslept say things like, “Since I’ve turned into a *hashi* today, I’ll just keep playing until evening and start working tomorrow.”
However, this is likely a recent phenomenon, and to my limited knowledge, I am unaware of such usage of the term in ancient times.
In situations where something belonged to neither side or was deemed incomplete, the term *hashita* was conventionally used in ancient times.
In *The Tales of Yamato*:

Today, the day had reached its midpoint.
Beyond Nara Slope, there was no house where one could deign to lodge; please lodge here.
……

In *The Tale of the Bamboo Cutter*:

The noble child remained in an intermediate state whether standing or sitting.

In *Gosen Wakashū*:
Knowing life’s sorrows reduces one to an intermediate state; contemplating them leaves naught but a smoldering in the chest.

In *Sarashina Nikki*:

Now that it was time to secure lodging, as people dispersed in search of an inn, there stood—in that liminal space—a rather base-looking lowly official’s small dwelling, they said...

In *Genjinshū*:

Rather than these half-measure autumn fields where others gather their blooms, I would plant maidenflowers in my own dwelling to behold.

In *The Tale of Genji*:

"To return now would leave matters at an awkward half-measure," he thought with unresolved feelings as he prepared to depart...

Even today, one often hears people haggling over prices say things like, "Just lower it by a *hashita* and make it even."

This fundamentally signifies an intermediate status, corresponding to what the venerable Motoori described as "the space between things being called *hashi*." However, this *hashi* should rather be understood as an abbreviation of *hashita*, a term that likely originated from the aforementioned Intermediate People (*hashihito*)—those belonging to the same category as *hashita*.

There also exists an intermediate color called *hashita-iro*. *Wakun no Shiori* elucidates this through a reference to ceremonial trousers: "As noted in the *Kosōshō*, both warp and weft threads appear pale purple."

Furthermore, in addition to this term *hashita*, there exists another term *hashitana*.
In *Horikawa Gotohyakushu*:

"Truly, the storm upon the peak does not rage—ah, what an awkward hinoki plank door!"

In the Kiritsubo Volume of *The Tale of Genji*:

"Various parties attempted to align their intentions but acted awkwardly, and there were many occasions when they troubled him."

In the Handwriting Practice volume of the same work:
"As they were deemed improper for engaging in work other than reciting Buddhist prayers..."

In the Yūgao volume of the same work:
"Since [they] did not inquire about the neighbor’s affairs and such matters sounded awkwardly..."

In *The Kagero Diary*:

Though they exchanged formalities, there came no response; as matters lingered in awkwardness alone, they became restrained.

In *The Pillow Book*:

An awkward thing: when someone stepped forward upon hearing a stranger called—thinking it might concern themself—particularly when being compelled to hand something over; it became all the more so.

In the Hahakigi (Broom Tree) volume of *The Tale of Genji*:

[The noble’s] bearing was such that even demons would not dare grow fierce; thus, awkwardly, the people here did not revile [them].

In *The Tale of Utsuho*:

The general, observing that he had taken out an unsightly object, deemed it unseemly.

And so on—such examples were extremely numerous.
Its meaning varied depending on context—sometimes implying a lack of tact, admonishment, vulgarity, awkwardness, or officiousness—but there could be no doubt that *hashitana* derived from *hashita*. Moreover, its sense did not stem from the absence of *hashita* (i.e., not being intermediate), but rather from the notion of “being *hashita*” or “resembling *hashita*,” which had since diversified into various interpretations.
It was likely that the term came to be used in such varied ways due to the fact that Hashitamono—that is, gesu women—were considered vulgar.
Thus, *Hashitana*’s adoption of the *ku-shi-ki* conjugation pattern was likely a morphological shift that occurred after its original meaning had been forgotten.

In summary, *Hashita* signified intermediate people—that is, *Hashihito*—and came to be used as a designation for lower-class individuals. In contrast to *Chūgen*, its phonetically read counterpart with masculine connotations, the native Japanese reading *Hashita* acquired feminine associations through its linguistic form, thereby unquestionably becoming the term for gesu women—that is, maidservants.

This matter will be understood even more clearly by consulting the explanation of *Chūgen* in the following section.

6. Hashihito and Chūgen

In contrast to gesu women being called *Hashita* or *Hashitamono*, there were also ancient instances of gesu men being referred to as *Chūgen*.

In *Kokon Chomonjū (A Collection of Tales from Past and Present)*:

He was permitted and appointed as an honorable *chūgen*. At the time of the imperial procession, he lowered his eboshi hat and ran about with his hem raised high—a spectacle that struck the noble as amusing.

A middle-aged *chūgen* man called Chūdaikanshi had surplus hakama trousers; when made to take a portion and wear them according to regulation...

Even a lowly outcast named Chūgen Hōshi Jōzai—a *chūgen* monk—had been brought along as formality.

In the entry for the 22nd day of the 6th month of Jishō 3 (1179) in *San Kaiki*:

The sailors were called *chūgen*; thirty-six men boarded it.

In *The Tale of the Heike*:

The *chūgen* man took out [something] from the leather bag that had been hung around his neck...

Expressions such as “honorable *chūgen*,” “*chūgen*,” “*chūgen* men,” and “*chūgen* monks” are no different in meaning from “Hashita,” signifying Intermediate People—that is, those of an in-between or half-measured status.
It came to be used to signify vulgar things or *gesu* men (low-ranking male servants).
In the same *Kokon Chomonjū*, there is a comical tale of a *chūgen* monk who traveled from Tennōji to Kyoto and ended up lodging at a prostitute’s house alongside a *yamabushi* and an *imono-shi* (metal caster), but this *chūgen* monk was in fact what was then called a *gesu hōshi* (low-ranking monk).
In the Jōji 2 (1363) New Year entry of the *Tōji Shugō Nikki* (Diary of the Tōji Administrator), there is a passage that refers to *gesu hōshi* (low-ranking monks) affiliated with the temple as “Hashihito Sansho Hōshihara” (Intermediate People of the Scattered-Place Monks’ Plain).
This clearly demonstrates that these *gesu hōshi* were Intermediate People (*Hashihito*)—that is, *Hashita*—and if one writes this as “chūgen” (中間) and reads it phonetically, it would naturally become *chūgen hōshi* (チュウゲン法師).
In other words, though originally the same term, the *kun*-reading *Hashita* came to be used for *gesu* women (lower-class female servants), whereas the *on*-reading *Chūgen* was consistently applied to *gesu* men (lower-class male servants). This eventually led to *Chūgen* becoming exclusively established as the designation for lower-ranking male servants among samurai retainers.
Thus, although the meanings of both terms are entirely identical, it is merely that a distinction in their usage arose incidentally from the fact that their *on* and *kun* readings carry masculine and feminine connotations, respectively.
Furthermore, what should corroborate this is that the term *Chūgen* is frequently used in entirely identical contexts to the aforementioned term *Hashita*.

In *The Pillow Book*:

When it was a Chūgen occasion and there was to be an offering of a grand tribute, someone of high standing heard what people were reporting and…

They simply took what was present and devoured it all, so people must have regarded it as food meant for outcasts—for Chūgen.

In *The Sarashina Diary*:

The evening tide swelled and swelled; even tonight’s lodging would also fall to the Chūgen. Once the tide came in, they would not pass this place—and so they ran about in all directions as much as they could.

The aforementioned Chūgen should thereby serve to prove this.

When the characters for Chūgen (中間) are given a kun-reading, they are sometimes read as Nakama (written with characters such as 中間 [intermediate], 仲間 [companion], or 半間 [half-measure]).
In his essay “The Bowl-Tappers and Their Staves” published in the *Journal of Local Studies*, Mr. Yanagita Kunio cites the Hiroshima Prefecture Special Communities Survey and states:

In ○○ Village, Asa District, Hiroshima Prefecture, there are special communities such as ○○, ○, ○○, and ○○.
According to local oral tradition here, there were historically three Eta clans—the Chōri-ha, Hachiya, and Chūgen—but later a new clan called Kawada emerged, which came to specialize in handling animal hides, and so on.

The Chōshū Domain’s District Code of Conduct contained the term “半間” (Nakama), and Mr. Murakami Kōjirō’s contribution to the same *Journal of Local Studies* noted that this was also read as “Nakama.” Even in my hometown of Awa, people in former times had commonly called the Eta *Nakama*—a term we frequently heard about during our childhood.

On one occasion, members of the nearby ○○ community hosted an amateur play and invited commoners as well.
Customarily at curtain rise, wooden clappers would be struck while calling “Tōzai, tōzai” to demand silence. However, deeming such imperative language toward patrons discourteous, there’s a comical anecdote that they instead proclaimed: “Tōzai, tōzai! For our patrons: Honorable Tōzai; for the *chūgen*: Plain Tōzai.”
In recent times, *Nakama*’s meaning has completely transformed—its original sense forgotten—now used to denote peers or equivalent groups like *kazoku chūgen* (aristocratic intermediaries) or *yakunin chūgen* (bureaucratic intermediaries). Yet historically, it was exclusively applied to lowly individuals.
This refers to *chūgen*—that is, *Hashita* (Intermediate People)—and its application to special communities likely arose either through semantic descent to lower strata or through historical decline of intermediate classes into outcast status.
The “half-person” (Hashitabito) in the aforementioned Mishima documents—read as Hashitabito—unquestionably served as a common term for miscellaneous laborers considered outcasts at the time, denoting those of half-measure status.
This matter will be elaborated in a later section.

7. Hashihito and Hachiya

In the San’in region, there once existed a class of people called Hachi or Hachiya.
In the San'yōdō region they were called *Chasen*; in the Hokuriku area, *Tōnai*; along the Tōkaidō route, *sekkyō-sha* or *Sasara*; and in the Kinki region, *Onbo* (御坊) or *Shuku* (宿 or 夙)—all originally part of the same class. There are even ancient examples where *Chasen* and *Onbo* were referred to as *Hachiya*.
In essence, they were a type of *chūgen* monk—subsidiary to *gesu* monks (low-ranking monks)—known as *sanmai-hijiri* (funerary ascetics), who participated in funeral rites while also engaging in police duties, alms-begging, entertainment, and other menial or miscellaneous occupations.
The bowl-tappers appearing in Mr. Yanagita’s essay *The Bowl-Tappers and Their Staves* are precisely these individuals, and the “Hachiya” cited in the same text’s reference to the Hiroshima Prefecture Special Communities Survey are identical.
In the Sengoku period, they were also called Eta or Kama.
Kama is none other than the same term as what is called *Okomo* in the Kantō region.
Regarding these matters of *Hachiya* and *Chasen*, numerous insightful articles—such as Mr. Nagayama Genseki’s “Former Onbō Communities in Okayama Prefecture” and Mr. Kuramitsu Seiroku’s “Kūya Shōnin and the Hachiya Legend”—have been reported in *Minzoku to Rekishi* (Ethnicity and History). While I myself intend to eventually publish a consolidated study on this topic in due course, for now I particularly wish to examine the nomenclature of *Hachi* or *Hachiya* in connection with our main subject of “Intermediate People” (*Hashihito*).

The fact that Hachiya and Chasen followers continued to acknowledge themselves as disciples of Kūya Shōnin even in later generations was documented in the aforementioned writings of Messrs. Nagayama and Kuramitsu; they were in fact bowl-tappers who had deep ties to the saint.
At the time of Kūya Shōnin’s birth during the Engi era, local governance had become severely disordered, and the people could no longer endure the provincial governors’ oppressive taxation. Miyoshi Kiyoyuki stated that those who abandoned their status as registered citizens to evade labor taxes by becoming monks amounted to two-thirds of the population.
Having become what were called *gesu* monks and *chūgen* monks, the majority managed livelihoods while remaining at home, but some could not stay, drifting to cities like Kyoto or villages where they survived through menial work.
They became known as *hinin* monks and *sansho* monks.
Kūya Shōnin saved these lower-class dropouts by granting them occupations while sustaining them through alms-begging.
They were what people called bowl-tappers.
They often engaged in bamboo craftsmanship, distributing tea whisks and bamboo rakes to parishioners.
This practice gave their group the names Chasen or Sasara.
Bowl-tappers thrust deer-antlered staves and tapped gourds while chanting invocations.
The stave-thrusting could be interpreted as praying for animals sacrificed due to their former roles in slaughter—yet why were they called “bowl-tappers” when using gourds?

Upon reflection, ascetic monks who struck gongs and chanted Buddhist invocations while begging for alms had existed since ancient times. Later, with the emergence of Yugyō Shōnin (Wandering Holy Monks), this practice developed significantly and came to be called *kanetataki* or *kaneuchi*. The disciples of Kūya Shōnin merely substituted gourds for those gongs. Therefore, they were generally referred to as “tappers.” And since these “tappers” were also *Hachi*, is it not likely that they were called *Hachi no Tataki*—that is, bowl-tappers? *Hachi* refers to the Haji clan. The phonetic shift from *shi* to *chi* mirrors how *An-satsu-shi* (Provincial Inspector) became corrupted to *Azechi*. As sanmai-hijiri—funerary ascetics—they oversaw funeral rites and performed mortuary duties once conducted by the ancient Haji clan. This was likely why they acquired the name *Hachi*. The “-ya” in *Hachiya* corresponds to the suffix in “confectionery shop” or “brush shop,” thus interpreting *Hachiya* as “Haji shop” or funeral parlor. Of course, they were not direct descendants of the ancient Haji clan. According to their legends, they claimed to have been saved by Kūya Shōnin and descended from Kamigata. In other words, they were followers of the Hashihito scattered-place monks.

Intermediate People (*Hashihito*) were Hashihito—that is, people of the Haji clan—and because they were employed by the Drudgery Corps (*Kushibe*), they were also called *Hase-tsukabe*; moreover, the fact that they were written with characters such as *Nibe* (埿部) or *Doro-be* (泥部) had already been observed. And indeed, the Hachiya were Haji people who themselves engaged in the funeral duties overseen by the Haji clan, and they should rightly have been called Hashihito in the true sense.

8. Hashihito Peasants

The term Hashihito originally signified intermediate people between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*), and because it was applied primarily to classes of people possessing the social standing of the Haji clan or Kushi-be (Drudgery Corps), they were referred to as Hashihito or Hasetsukabe. By the medieval period, this shifted to Hashita, which was later phonetically read as Chūgen, or alternatively came to be called Hachi or Hachiya as a designation for funerary ascetics—a matter we have already observed.
Moreover, it is another profoundly significant fact that cannot be overlooked—the name Mau-to (Mōto), derived from Hashihito, persisted in various regions until the Tokugawa period as a designation for certain low-class farmers.

I once discussed the relationship between the *Kushibe* (Drudgery Corps) and *Hajibe* (Haji clan) in *Minzoku to Rekishi* (Ethnicity and History), Volume 1, Issue 1, wherein I introduced—based on Awa Province’s land and household registers from Meireki 4 (1658) and Kanbun 10 (1670)—the existence of a class of people termed “Hashihito” (Intermediate People). Subsequently, Mr. Tadokoro Ichita of the same province reported that numerous additional records pertaining to Hashihito could be found scattered throughout its ancient ledgers (*Minzoku to Rekishi*, Volume 5, Issue 3). According to what was introduced by the same gentleman, it is clear that among the Hashihito of the same province, there were already those who owned fields during the Manji era. In the land and household register of Kamiyama Village, Nishigori District, dated October 3, Manji 1 (1658),

High-grade 1 koku 2 to 9 sho 7 gō Hashihito

One household: Tadazaemon 38

There is an entry that reads:
Hashihito (Intermediate People) were originally so-called “water-drinking peasants” who did not own fields and lived merely by cultivating others’ land—a designation that must have been applied to such individuals.
During the Heian period, when regional governance was severely disordered, those who privately became monks to evade taxes and corvée labor—thereby abandoning their status as registered citizens—and who, while engaging in what Miyoshi Kiyoyuki described as “keeping wives and children at home and meat in their mouths,” continued farming others’ fields ought to be recognized as Hashihito peasants.
They once left home to become monks and lost their status as registered citizens.
Therefore, they possessed no surnames.
If farmers during the samurai period were called solely by their given names and had not received permission from their lords for surnames and sword-bearing rights, then the reason they could not publicly claim surnames is understood to lie primarily there.
They had no need to retain their status as Buddhist monks indefinitely.
This was because the household registration system had become completely disordered since the late Heian period.
Instead, they had nearly fallen into the circumstances of serfs.
Almost all arable land across the nation had become manors under the control of imperial institutions, temples, shrines, and powerful families, and they were nothing more than serfs who cultivated it.
And even after those manors had changed hands and become samurai domains, the peasants continued to be trampled underfoot.
Of course, among them there were many who reclaimed wasteland themselves to own so-called myōkechi (name-bearing lands)—that is, myōden (registered fields)—or acquired them through purchase or embezzlement, becoming landowners (myōshu) and thus escaping the status of Hashihito.
While it is likely that not a few of these powerful individuals annexed neighboring lands by force and even posed as samurai—earning titles like “lord of a castle” during the Sengoku period—the majority remained subordinate to other samurai, unable to escape their status as the so-called exploited class.
In the Tokugawa period, these individuals were called hon-byakushō or hyakushō, while those who owned no fields at all were referred to as Hashihito hyakushō.
According to Mr. Tani Kokeiroku’s report (“Ethnicity and History,” Volume 9, Issue 5), in the Bōchō region they referred to them as “Mon’otoko” peasants or sometimes wrote the term using the characters for “Mōto” (亡土).
Both are merely phonetic kanji substitutions derived from their spoken forms, but “Mōto” (亡土, “perished land”) was an apt substitution for those who owned no land.
Among these Hashihito peasants there were of course those who were so-called migrants from other regions, and it is likely that individuals tenant-farming others’ fields were also intermingled.
The reason they wrote it as “Mon’otoko” might have been to imply menial men akin to gatekeepers.

The era when qualifications were established for landowning peasants (*hon-byakushō*) or peasants (*byakushō*) versus Hashihito peasants remains unclear. However, once these statuses became fixed, changes were rarely permitted. Even when Hashihito acquired fields through their efforts and became so-called landowners, they remained classified as Hashihito—as shown in the previously cited land registers. Though living in the same villages, they held minimal rights regarding shrine festivals, village assemblies, and other communal matters. Conversely, their obligatory burdens were lighter. In Awa Province, they bore precisely half the corvée labor obligations compared to landowning peasants or regular peasants. According to Mr. Tadokoro's report on Kanei 11 (1634) corvée records from Kamiyake Village, Itano District, Awa Province:

1. 6 bu: Landowning peasant Sakudayū (bu: corvée units)

1. 2 bu: Right-hand servant Kichishirō

1. 2 bu: Right-hand serf Shōsaburō

1. 3 bu: Hashihito Fujiemon

1. 2 bu: Right-hand elder Zendayū

and so on were recorded.
Servants (*shimobe*) and serfs (*nago*), being subordinate to others and equivalent to the household servants (*kenin*) and slaves (*nuhi*) under the Taihō Code, were recognized as having an even lower social status than Hashihito; consequently, their corvée obligations were limited to one-third that of landowning peasants (*hon-byakushō*) or peasants (*byakushō*), just as Hashihito families were. However, Hashihito—while maintaining independent households—only had to bear half the obligations of landowning peasants or peasants.

According to Mr. Tani’s report, in the Bōchō region as well, peasants were divided into categories such as full-household, half-household, and quarter-household based on their landholdings; each bore a household-specific tax called the gate tax and were subjected to a supplementary levy termed the floating tax, which imposed a bracken-rope obligation. However, Mon’otoko peasants were said to lack these duties.
Mr. Tani has provided an example wherein those once registered as Mon’otoko—even if they had acquired assets equivalent to a 150-koku cargo ship—were still unable to shed their Mon’otoko status by the Tenpō era.
Of course, Mon’otoko peasants could become peasants if they obtained the villagers’ consent and underwent certain procedures.
For this, authorities bestowed 3 koku of base rice to full-households and 1 koku 5 to to half-households, and they were exempted from all duties for three years—so states Mr. Tani.
The distinctions between full-household, half-household, and other categories were originally made based on the amount of landholding,

The peasants' household-specific landholdings were divided into five classes: those holding 10 koku or more were classified as full-household; those with between 9 koku 9 to and 7 koku 5 to as 7-bu 5-shu households (later abolishing this distinction); those from 7 koku 4 to 9 shō down to 5 koku as half-household; those between 4 koku 9 to 9 shō and 2 koku 5 to as 2-bu 5-shu households (quarter-household); and those with less than 2 koku 4 to 9 shō as Mon’otoko.

This is said to be recorded in old documents; however, these regulations appear to have been established after the meaning of Hashihito had shifted somewhat to be understood simply as "poor people."

Nevertheless, once status was thus fixed, changes were scarcely permitted—as previously noted, Mr. Tani has furnished examples of individuals retaining the Mon’otoko designation despite owning 150 koku and a ship, or maintaining the quarter-household landowning peasant title while holding 179 koku.

In Bōchō, not only was there a path for Mon’otoko to be promoted to peasants, but it is said that Mon’otoko peasants could also assume roles such as village headman, dike supervisor, or town elder. In Awa as well, the intermediate people were gradually liberated. According to Mr. Tadokoro’s report, in the land and household register of Kuroji Village, Naga District from Bunka 6 (1809),

1. 1 household: Wanosuke, age 53

This person’s great-grandfather Genjirō was registered as Hashihito in the land and household register of the Dog Year of Kyōhō [1718]; however, they were now ordered to be promoted to peasant status this time.

There is an entry stating as follows. There were many other such examples, and by the Bakumatsu period, all Hashihito peasants in Awa had been emancipated, with none remaining. Even when inquiring of elderly individuals renowned as present-day authorities, none knew such a class had ever existed, nor were there any families still recognized as Hashihito descendants. Not only that—even the reading of the characters for “Hashihito” had been forgotten. Mr. Tadokoro once heard from an elder who had served as village headman that Awa formerly had a status called “Manin,” leading him to suggest that Hashihito were conventionally referred to as “Manin” in that region. If we analogize from cases where they were called *genin* (servants) or *kitarinin* (newcomers), this interpretation seems plausible. However, in Tosa, they were clearly termed *Mauto*, and their status reportedly persisted until the Bakumatsu period. That said, this remains hearsay—I have yet to encounter detailed documentary evidence. I earnestly hope to obtain reports from knowledgeable individuals in that region.

I recently received a report from Mr. Yokochi Mitsuharu of Oki Province regarding similar cases within that region. It appeared highly valuable and had yet to be introduced to academia; therefore, I decided to excerpt its main points below.

(Omitted) In Oki, there were no special classes such as *eta* or *Hachiya* in the past; the few [individuals] currently scattered in certain villages are all migrants from the opposite shore who relocated in the recent past and are by no means indigenous people.
In Oki Province, there existed only a class called Mawaki, which ranked below peasants.
The *Onshūki*, a text compiling statistics from every village in Oki Island during the fourth year of Jōkyō [1687], records that on Dōgo Island there were forty-nine villages comprising 2,262 households, among which 729 belonged to the Mawaki class. When broken down by village, Yao Village had the highest number at seventy-four households; every other village had between three and thirty such households—except Ichinomiya Village, which had none at all.
The statistics for the three islands of Dōzen are incomplete, making it difficult to ascertain the details.
Looking at examples of these records, for instance, under the entry for Motoya Village,

1. Total households: 36 (26 peasants, 10 Mawaki)

and it was recorded that there clearly existed those distinguished from peasants.
Now, regarding what sort of individuals were termed Mawaki—that is, where lay the distinction between peasants and Mawaki—they examined the register of land productivity, minor levies, livestock, boats, and household numbers for Motoya Village dated the 2nd day of the 10th month in the second year of Kanbun (1662), Year of the Rat.

1. Total households: 26

Of which: 15 households – duty-bound households; 4 households – Mawaki

3 households – temple; 1 household – Shintō priest

1 household – official; 1 household – elder

1 household – administrator

Total: 26 households

there is an entry that reads.
Upon separately examining this, they found that those termed “15 duty-bound households”—regardless of quantity—all owned fields and paddies; that is to say, they were peasants.
Those bearing the title of Mawaki were all individuals without fields or paddies.
“The reading of ‘Mawaki’ for 間脇 can be ascertained from the fact that it is clearly written as ‘mawaki’ in hiragana in the same register.”
And upon investigating what kind of treatment those of the Mawaki class received,

1. They attended the village headman’s meetings (akin to modern village councils) but had no right to speak.

1. They attended the same meeting but sat in a separate room—that is, seats one rank below those of the peasants.

1. They had no right to assume positions as village officials such as headmen and elders.

However, even Mawaki could openly purchase peasant shares to join the peasant class. The matter of peasant shares was termed *Myau* (“name?”), and there were Mawaki who held two or three such *Myau*, wielding considerable influence—a fact still recounted among elders today.
(Omitted)

According to Mr. Yokochi’s report, while Hashihito and Mawaki differed in name, there could be no doubt they referred to the same class.
One may reasonably consider that the character 間 (*ma*) in “Hashihito” originally denoted their intermediate position between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*). Having lost this original meaning, it came to be interpreted as “room” (*ma*), such that “Mawaki” likely derived from their seating in side chambers during village meetings.
Even within the shogunate’s court, daimyo and samurai were spatially arranged by class during assemblies.
“The ‘waki’ here mirrors sumo’s Sekiwake rank; there were also positions called Wakimonzeki among monastic lineages.”
Among people, *waki* refers to left and right sides—a term likely meaning “next” or “beside.”
That Mawaki in Oki still owned no fields during Jōkyō era raises questions: Did remote islands strictly preserve old protocols forbidding Hashihito land ownership, or was their status defined shortly before Jōkyō?
In any case, this distinction relied on asset ownership; in an era when tax burdens determined social standing, it proved unavoidable.
Thus in Bōchō region, distinctions existed among land-owning peasants from Honken to Shihanken households, while Awa recognized two classes—land-owning and ordinary peasants.
Once established, this status could not be easily altered in Tokugawa period’s conservative climate—a practical necessity.
Yet prosperity’s tides spare none: land-owning peasants might grow poor over time, while propertyless Hashihito peasants could amass wealth.
This necessitated status renegotiation—likely involving regional customs—but Oki’s requirement to purchase Myau shares merits particular attention.
Myau—the “name” in *daimyo* and *shōmyō*—originally meant name-bearing land (*myōden*).
Only those owning myōden and bearing corresponding taxes qualified as peasants; others became Hashihito.
Oki apparently restricted Myau numbers to prevent proliferation, forcing Mawaki to purchase shares for peasant status.
No such limits seemingly existed in Bōchō, Awa or Tosa—though Bōchō required rice offerings to existing peasants, while Awa/Tosa likely had customs.
In Awa, liberated servants joining peasants reportedly hosted multi-day banquets.
Similar practices likely occurred when Hashihito became peasants.

The aforementioned groups referred to as Hashihito, Maotoko, Mawaki, and so on were not necessarily descendants of the ancient Hashihito; however, having fallen into the propertyless class as those who had temporarily fallen behind, they were ultimately assigned this undesirable status and designation. And yet they were indeed comparable to the Hashihito class of antiquity.

The examples cited above pertain solely to the five provinces of Awa, Tosa, Suō, Nagato, and Oki—a scope that appears extremely limited at first glance. This limitation stems from these regions' remoteness preserving many old customs and their lack of feudal lord succession changes. There can be no doubt that similar cases once existed in other regions as well and were frequently recognized even into the Tokugawa period.
I earnestly await reports and insights from fellow researchers.

(The above section was originally intended for inclusion in the *Peasant History* feature of this journal’s September issue; however, as I was unable to complete it in time at that point, I chose to include it here specifically.)
It is my hope that this may serve to supplement the shortcomings of the aforementioned special issue.)

9. Hashihito and Hajibe

Regarding the significance and nature of Hashihito, through the accumulation of the preceding sections, I believe we have nearly clarified this.
If one were to read it simply as *Mahito* in accordance with what the characters indicate and what their meaning conveys, the issue would be nearly settled; however, given that in practice it was observed that reading this as *Hashihito* was actually more common than *Mahito* in ancient times, I recognize here the necessity of adding a new section to explain the relationship between Hashihito and Hajibe.

It stood to reason that *Hashihito* signified the Haji people—a conclusion drawn by the venerable Motoori that admitted no doubt.
The Hajibe were written as “Tsuchibe” (土部) in the *Kojiki* and corresponded to the “Hase-tsukabe” (埿部) in the name of Empress Anahobe’s daughter, Princess Hasetsukabe no Anahobe no Himemiko.
Moreover, given that the name of Princess Hase-tsukabe no Anahobe was written as *Hashihito Anahobe no Ō* in the *Kojiki* and as *Anahobe Hashihito no Ō* in the *Hōō Teisetsu*, I had already stated that *Hase-tsukabe* should be considered identical to *Hashihito*.
As I had previously noted—given that this Hase-tsukabe was read as *Hasetsukabe* in ancient glosses and that the *Hatsukashibe* (which should equate to Hase-tsukabe) in the Earthworks Bureau clause of the Taihō Code was annotated in the *Shūkai* commentary as “Hatsukakashinotomozō,” an error for “Hasetsukahishinotomozō”—it became evident that the Kushibe were also Hashihito and had been conflated with the Hajibe.

Those assigned to drudgery were invariably societal dropouts; even among the dependent people termed *bukyoku*, the Kushi-be—that is, the Takebe (also called Tsuebe)—naturally occupied a lower status and were undoubtedly disparaged by others.
Even during the Tokugawa period, those who were assigned to drudgery and called “Yukisuji” were placed below Hashihito peasants in village hierarchies.
When considering the status of the Hajibe clan on another front, while ancient histories transmitted plausible accounts of their origins, these should be interpreted as having little value as credible historical facts—no different from how later outcasts had often fabricated various origin myths to defend themselves against societal contempt. Moreover, even if their purported lineage were genuine, the reality remained that their occupation of manipulating clay was hardly esteemed in antiquity. Particularly in a country where customs abhorred the defilement of corpses, and given that they typically handled funeral duties—tasks people would naturally shun—it was inevitable they would be socially avoided. Thus, even without being labeled outright outcasts, it was easy to imagine why their status came to be recognized as lower than that of other dependent people.
The fact that during the era of the Taihō Code—when ideologies of ritual impurity avoidance had gradually intensified—tomb-keeping households (*ryōko*), which by formal classification ought to have been categorized among the miscellaneous households (*zakkō*) of the Bureau of Mausoleums (*Shoryōryō*), were instead specifically downgraded to the outcast class alongside slaves (*nuhi*) served to thoroughly illustrate this point.
There, these degraded Hajibe people naturally came to engage in other menial tasks deemed lowly and came to be written as “Hase-tsukabe” or “Hatsukashibe” while being read as Kushi-be (Drudgery Corps).
And thus, only the Hajibe people and Kushi-be—groups that had originally been distinct—came to be recognized as belonging to the Hashihito class, making it no longer seem strange that “Hashihito” (written as *Mahito*) would be read directly as *Hashihito* (Hajibe people) or Kushi-be.
This was analogous to how in ancient language, *Emishi*—that is, *Ebisu*—served as a general designation for foreign ethnic groups, not strictly limited to what we now call the Ainu people (i.e., *Kai*/*Emishi*). Later in the nation’s history, when *Emishi* came to refer almost exclusively to these northern peoples, it ultimately reached the point where the characters 蝦夷 were written yet read directly as *Emishi* or *Ebisu*—a process here occurring in reverse.

10. Conclusion

Hashihito refers to people intermediate between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*). However, just as what are termed commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*) cannot remain uniform across eras—whether in societal perceptions or national legal definitions—so too does the substance of those recognized as Hashihito vary significantly throughout history. The evolution of the distinction between commoners (*ryōmin*) and outcasts (*senmin*) is an intriguing issue that warrants separate discussion; thus, I will omit that theory here. To briefly outline its essence: in ancient times, what should be termed commoners (*ryōmin*) were, strictly speaking, peasants—that is, all those with surnames belonging to retainers (*omi*), clan leaders (*muraji*), guild masters (*tomo no miyatsuko*), and provincial governors (*kuni no miyatsuko*)—who were directly subordinate to the Emperor. Outcasts (*senmin*) referred to slaves (*nuhi*)—those who did not form independent households but instead belonged to others. As for those who belonged to commoners (*ryōmin*), i.e., peasants, yet formed their own households—the dependent people (*bukyoku no tami*)—they must naturally have been Hashihito. Of course, there must have been no small number of unregistered people beyond the reach of state authority outside this framework; they would have been hinin—those not recognized as members of the nation’s citizenry.

However, as society progressed, perceptions regarding this class gradually shifted toward greater respect for dependent people (*bukyoku*), culminating in their principled emancipation during the Taika Reforms, when they were permitted to adopt surnames and join the ranks of commoners (*ryōmin*).
However, in reality, some among them remained classified as miscellaneous households (*zōko*) or occupational clans (*tomobe*), with tomb-keeping households (*ryōko*)—those stigmatized through contact with ritual impurity—being relegated to outcast (*senmin*) status.
In compensation, even among those who had traditionally been outcasts—the Yakko slaves—those relatively privileged individuals who formed households were elevated within the same outcast class as household retainers (*kejin*).
This evolving paradigm meant that even before the Taika Reforms' formal emancipation of dependent people (*bukyoku*), most individuals were seldom referred to as Hashihito (*Mahito*), with only those belonging specifically to the Hajibe and Kushibe retaining recognition within that class—ultimately resulting in "Hashihito" being written but read directly as "Hajibe people," while Hase-tsukabe (Hatsukashibe), which should have denoted a Hajibe subtype, came to be read instead as Kushibe.

Under the post-Taika system, all dependent people were in principle emancipated, registered as citizens, granted *kubunden* allotments, and should have entirely become peasants—that is, members of the landowning peasant class. However, in reality, certain occupational clans and miscellaneous households were left behind, and the outcast class continued to be recognized. These occupational clans and miscellaneous households, though their names may not have been transmitted, should naturally belong to the Hashihito class. Moreover, these miscellaneous households (*zakkō*) were emancipated under national law in Tenpyō 16 (744 CE), becoming equal to commoners, and it was presumed that those termed occupational clans (*tomobe*) received the same treatment. Yet due to entrenched customs, some among them still could not escape societal disdain and were likely occasionally referred to by the designation “intermediates” (*chūgen*). The existence of terms such as *chūgen men* (intermediate males) and *chūgen hōshi* (intermediate monks) during the Heian period attests to this. Of course, even household retainers among the upper ranks of outcasts also came to be regarded as intermediates (*chūgen*). Later read as *ie no ko* and collectively referred to as household children and retainers, these were the “samurai” that corresponded to former intermediate males (*chūgen men*) and fell under this household retainer class in national law. And from among these groups, the distinct class termed “intermediates” (*chūgen*) came to be recognized during the samurai era, while women corresponding to this status came to be called *Hashita*—a phenomenon resulting from the separate inheritance of the terms *Mahito* (written as 間人) and *Hashihito*.

Intermediate monks (*chūgen hōshi*) were privately ordained monks who had renounced secular life to evade taxes and corvée duties; they constituted a subtype of non-human monks (*hinin hōshi*)—lay clerics who maintained households with wives and children while consuming meat.
Undoubtedly, these designations of *Hachi* or *Hachiya* for those among their ranks—samādhi practitioners overseeing funerals and performing security duties, entertainment, and miscellaneous tasks—originated from the Hajibe, that is *Hashihito* (intermediates).

Among these intermediate monks, those who—even after becoming privately ordained monks and leaving the citizen registry—continued to engage in agriculture and fell into a serf-like class were called Hashihito peasants.
Later, the term came to signify propertyless individuals, collectively referring to those without land as *Mauto*; ultimately, this was none other than an inheritance of the term *Hashihito*—that is, intermediates.

Thus, the so-called *Hashihito* underwent various transformations across eras—their referents shifting and their designations diversifying—but ultimately signified those intermediate between commoners and outcasts; in our country, they consistently constituted the majority of the populace in every age.
Of course, this was not an ethnic distinction but rather a status division arising from circumstance; thus, they underwent constant renewal across eras. However, in periods like the Tokugawa peace, where maintaining the status quo served as the overarching governance principle, there were indeed cases where escaping this stratum proved exceedingly difficult.

In summary, the *Hashihito*—a single class—has been the most crucial element in the study of our past social organization; however, it has long been neglected by researchers.
Unless this is clarified, our social history cannot possibly be completed.
Whether termed dependent people, miscellaneous households, outcasts, or peasants—many have had connections with this.
All modern people have, for the most part, passed through this class.