I'm prepping research for a TTRPG set in the Sengoku Jidai. I was wondering whether the books I've been using for research are accurate? One of the research books (Sengoku Revised Edition, 2002) says it goes like this (in descending order):
Is this accurate enough to represent the social class? For the paragraphs, is it accurate that it works in descending order if you go from left to right too?
Another book (GURPS Japan 2E, 1999) doesn't exactly have a straightforward structure like the above, but from my reading, I think it suggests it goes like this:
Is this accurate as well?
A video on Youtube suggests that the structure goes like this:
Is this accurate? Some comments suggest that there was a mistake in the video, but I'm not too sure. What was the theoretical and actual structure they followed during the period? Any book recommendations would be great as well!
Thank you!
Well, the video apparently relies heavily on the Handbook to Life in Medieval and Early Modern Japan, which is one of the most shoddily researched works of print I had the pleasure to spend money on (the diagrams of political structure of the shogunates are taken directly from the book and are quite...interesting). This problem of source, in return, degrades the quality of the video.
Anyway, on the question of the nobility in medieval Japan, this post and its answers by me and u/ParallelPain might be useful to you to get a better grasp of the ruling classes, especially as it transitioned from the earlier medieval period into the Sengoku period. However, there's a bit of the problem with the entire concept of aristocracy and nobility at the time and the actual warrior hierarchy in the Sengoku period, and maybe you'd find reading on the problem of the daimyo term here interesting (same two guys provided answers).
Furthermore, commoner (e.g., village) society was stratified in itself:
We have evidence that villages were clearly divided into those households eligible for membership in the miyaza (the village council associated with the village shrine), and the remaining households who were not eligible. And you had a hierarchy within the miyaza itself: for one, by age—there were, simply put, an "old men" and a "young men" club and the old men club dictated village policy in all but the most pressing issues, which were discussed by both parties—and then also by economic resources (the most respected, and therefore influential, positions required donations, and therefore, wealth).
And then you had pariahs (which eventually came to mostly be referred to as eta). This included impure professions like tanners or executioners, but also other professions, such as low-ranked policemen, in some places.
I think it wouldn't be incorrect to consider these a part of the larger group of hinin, which is such a broad term that I still have problems fully comprehending it: sure, we know of hinin which were lepers, entertainers, courtisans, but also entire guilds who were directly subservient to large Shinto shrines or monasteries—and therefore did not pay taxes like everyone else.
There's several more terms pertaining to this broader social group (kawaramono, for example) floating around, and it becomes difficult isolating what they all mean at some point, since these terms overlap and change their meaning over time, so I'd, frankly, just stick to hinin and be done with it. (Unless you write an academic book on the very concept of hinin.)
However, one more group deserves mention: genin, who were in a personal relationship of subservitude to their master—for all intents and purposes, unfree, similar to serfs, or slaves.
And then, maybe we shouldn't forget all those shrine priests and Buddhist monks.
It's a huge mess, to be honest.
If there's anything that seems confusing after digesting this and the two linked posts, feel free to ask.