A Re-Examination of the Kamakura Bakufu's Rokuhara Tandai

Abstract

The present article is an attempt to open a new line of discussion about the Kamakura Bakufu's functionary in Kyoto, the Rokuhara Tandai 六波羅探題, beginning with an examination of the term itself and a clarification of the context in which the position was placed.The term "tandai" indicated the highest ranking jurist in Kamakura, Rokuhara and Hakata ; however, it was by no means widely used during the period. At the time, the Kyoto functionary's post was described using such terms as shugo 守護 (protector, military governor) and kanrei 管領 (overseer, administrator). It was only during the Edo period that we find the term "Rokuhara Tandai" in a reference work entitled Buke Myomoku-Sho 武家名目抄 compiled by Hanawa Hokiichi 塙保己一. Given the above facts, the history of the Rokuhara Tandai may be laid out as follows. The post of "Rokuhara Tandai" was established in 1221 as the shugo of Kyoto, the imperial capital. Later, as the actual administrative structure of the office was set up, its executive officer came to occupy the position of kanrei. It was the judicial aspect of this administration that the Rokuhara functionary took on role of a tandai. Furthermore, the research to date has considered Rokuhara as a place secondary to the shogun's main residence in Kamakura. However, there is plenty of room for considering Rokuhara as the shogun's main or original residence. For example, the Lord of Kamakura (kamakura-dono 鎌倉殿) was originally dispatched by the emperor from Kyoto to Kamakura in the capacity of Shogun (seiitaishogun 征夷大将軍), and during the Kamakura period the term "buke" 武家 (the shogun and his entourage) referred geographically to Rokuhara, not Kamakura, thus making it impossible to consider "Rokuhara Tandai" on the same level as "Chinzei Tandai 鎮西探題, the Bakufu-appointed functionary in Hakata. During the late Kamakura period, when the Bakufu's control over western Japan became part of the pluralistic system of elites, including the aristocracy and religious institutions (kenmontaisei 権門体制), it was Rokuhara that represented the Bakufu in that system. In this sense, one could very well argue that Rokuhara existed as the headquarters of the Bakufu. The possibilities offered by the above discussion rest for the most part on the place and influence that Buke Myomoku-Sho has and will have in the historical study of the Kamakura period.