The main buildings of Toji (Kyo-o Gokokuji) was burnt down by the civil war in 1486. This was the first time the original Golden Hall of Toji had been burnt down, since Toji was built in 794 A. D as a national temple. About one hundred years later, the second Golden Hall of Toji was constructed in 1599 to 1603. The reconstructed Golden Hall in this time is the present Golden Hall of Toji. The purpose of this paper is to study concretely on the architecture of the original Golden Hall of Toji in Early Heian Era. The conclusion is as follows : The excavation, on the platform of the reconstructed Golden Hall in 1940 (Fig. 3), has proved that the plan of the original Golden Hall was a width of 7 bay and a depth of 5 bay. They consisted of central area (5×3) and a single bay surrounding. The original dais in central area was about a width of 5 bay and a depth of 2 bay. It has concluded therefore that the original Golden Hall was the same plan as the reconstructed Golden Hall (Fig.1). On the other hand, it has been vaguely suspected that the architecture of the original Golden Hall is almost the same as the architecture of the reconsturucted Golden Hall. It is impossible to infer the architecture of the original Golden Hall till now, however, there is an old document of official goverment in 1192 when a priest of Mongaku put the damaged buildings right on Toji in Early Kamakura Era. This document was the report on number of the damaged members, did not put all members of the original Golden Hall on record. The contents of this document, however, included main members which consist the parts of columns and eaves. According to this document and drawing of plan in 『Toubouki』 (Fig.2 : in the middle of the 14th century), in effect, it is able to presumed the outlook and construction of the original Golden Hall as follows. a) The original Golden Hall was double stories. b) The upper story was roofed over the central area (5×3). c) The lower story was the pent-house-aisle over the single bay surrounding the central area, and joined the central area directly. d) The pent-house-aisle of the single bay at the front was the open. It is considered therefore that the original Golden Hall was same in point of a), b), and c), was different in point of d) compared with the reconstructed Golden Hall. It is not able to presumed, however, the form of the upper story, and the form of the lower story at the front. It is concluded that the architecture of the original Golden Hall is almost the same as the architecture of the reconstructed Golden Hall. It is considered that the original Golden Hall was the magnificent outlook and vast inner space which is the same as the reconstructed Golden Hall. The original Golden Hall was the open at the front of the pent-house-aisle of the single bay, but the reconstructed Golden Hall was inner space the all pent-house-aisle of the single bay. It is imagined that the architecture of the original Golden Hall, in view of this difference, was more effective in the perspective of facade and vastness of inner space than the architecture of the reconstructed Golden Hall.
