In thus describing the Japanese sentiment in regard to “seppuku,” there is, however, some danger of misrepresenting it.  “Seppuku” itself was not honored, for in the vast majority of cases those who performed it were guilty of some crime or breach of etiquette.  And not infrequently those who were condemned to commit “seppuku” were deficient in physical courage; in such cases, some friend took hold of the victim’s hand and forced him to cut himself.  Such cowards were always despised.  To be condemned to commit “seppuku” was a disgrace, but it was much less of a disgrace than to be beheaded as a common man, for it permitted the samurai to show of what stuff he was made.  It should be stated further that in the case of “seppuku,” as soon as the act of cutting the abdomen had been completed, always by a single rapid stroke, someone from behind would, with a single blow, behead the victim.  The physical agony of “seppuku” was, therefore, very brief, lasting but a few seconds.

I can do no better than quote in this connection a paragraph from the “Religions of Japan” by W.E.  Griffis: 

“From the prehistoric days when the custom of ‘Junshi,’ or dying with the master, required the interment of living retainers with their dead lord, down through all the ages to the Revolution of 1868, when at Sendai and Aidzu scores of men and boys opened their bowels, and mothers slew their infant sons and cut their own throats, there has been flowing a river of suicides’ blood having its springs in devotion of retainers to masters, and of soldiers to a lost cause....  Not only a thousand, but thousands of thousands of soldiers hated their parents, wife, child, friend, in order to be disciples to the supreme loyalty.  They sealed their creed by emptying their own veins....  The common Japanese novels read like records of slaughter-houses.  No Molech or Shivas won more victims to his shrine than has this idea of Japanese loyalty, which is so beautiful in theory but so hideous in practice ...  Could the statistics of the suicides during this long period be collected, their publication would excite in Christendom the utmost incredulity."[T]

I well remember the pride, which almost amounted to glee, with which a young blood gave me the account of a mere boy, perhaps ten or twelve years old, who cut his bowels in such a way that the deed was not quite complete, and then tying his “obi” or girdle over it, walked into the presence of his mother, explained the circumstances which made it a point of honor that he should commit “seppuku,” and forthwith untied his “obi” and died in her presence.

These are the ideals of courage and loyalty that have been held up before Japanese youth for centuries.  Little comment is needful.  From the evolutionary standpoint, it is relatively easy to understand the rise of these ideas and practices.  It is clear that they depend entirely on the social order.  With the coming in of the Western social order, feudal lords and local loyalty and the carrying of swords were abolished.  Are the Japanese any less courageous now than they were thirty years ago?  The social order has changed and the ways of showing courage have likewise changed.  That is all that need be said.