3

The reason why I ask this question, is, because there are many non Japanese who would like to say ( For example ) Takeda Clan, instead of Takeda Family.

We Japanese do not hold a huge meeting like Gathering 2009. today. ( Since through Sengoku Era many families perished and flourished. )

Now according to the explanation of the Scottish clan, ,

Many clans have their own clan chief; those that do not are known as armigerous clans.. Japan had not such a armigerous clan, which which should be registered to Court of the Lord Lyon,

Now let's see the entry to the armigerous clan, it says

An armigerous clan is a Scottish clan, family or name which is registered with the Court of the Lord Lyon and once had a chief who bore undifferenced arms, but does not have a chief currently recognized as such by Lyon Court.

And as I made a comment to Mark C Wallace, English speakers don't distinguish correctly between the name of "clan" and "family" at all.

In reference to Takeda clan ( in my sense it should be Takeda family ),

it says,

The Takeda clan (武田氏 Takeda-shi) was a Japanese clan active from the late Heian period until the late 16th century.

and it also says

In this Japanese name, the family name is Takeda.

I am getting totally perplexed. Do native speakers or historians fully understand the difference of these 2 terms?

Side note : Japanese families were or did just perish if they lost their "chief" and Japanese Samurai system had no armigerous clan system like the above mentioned Wiki and were not regulated by the Court Lyon, the public body, the Samurai families in Japan made their pledge to a family, the Biggest and Mightiest family among them ( If it was Hojo the de facto Shognate, or Ashikaga Shogunate or Tokugawa Shogunate ( they were all family too. They had a chief, even though how old they they were ( even the "chief" was 4 r 5 years old. ) and together with the members of the biggest family made their laws and regulations and economic and religious policy. The family without its chief was unthinkable. I think it would be completely different from the Scottish clan. ( But yer some choose to use the word "clan". )

Can anybody clarify furthermore the difference between these 2 terms so that later on they are going to be used properly?

Thank you for your assistance in advance.

closed as off-topic by Spencer, Pieter Geerkens, José Carlos Santos, Bregalad, John Dallman Feb 10 at 12:14

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

  • "Questions on social sciences other than History are off-topic here, unless they also involve history in some fashion. While ethics, archaeology, etc. are all connected to history, each field has their own experts who are better equipped to answer such questions." – Spencer, José Carlos Santos
If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. – Mark C. Wallace Feb 10 at 22:07
  • @Daniel Thank you for the new info. If as you say, a new chief is elected when the former died, then the term clan and family becomes much closer. To mods, I am sorry I don't know I can't make a comment in chat... – Kentaro Tomono Feb 12 at 12:41

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.