Abstract
The creation of new periodic markets and the reinstatement of interrupted periodic markets are critical issues in any discussion of changes made in the market system. The main problem with these issues, however, is that we have little knowledge of how the market system was maintained during the Edo era. The purpose of this paper is to help increase our knowledge and understanding of this problem.
Historical sources show that the creation of new periodic markets was not allowed, on principle, during the Edo era. The Tokugawa government give documents to market towns, specifically on awards for disputes, which record this ban on new periodic markets.
The creation of new periodic markets was much more complicated than the reinstatement of markets. Because of the level of difficulty, the creation of new periodic markets was rare, although two provisions permitted it. The first provision was a consensus by the market towns around the new periodic market or government. The second was a promise to continue the periodic market over a lengthy period of time, with no disputes concerning its creation. The government directed it to close if there was a dispute. However, if there was no dispute, the government did not become involved.
The reinstatement of interrupted periodic markets was only allowed if two provisions were met. The first provision was documentary evidence that a periodic market had been held in the past. The second was that there must be a consensus between the town where a periodic market would reopen and neighboring market towns. There is evidence that disputes occurred when nearby market towns did not agree to the reopening of an interrupted periodic market.
