興福寺大乗院領大和国横田荘について : 安田次郎氏の均等名論によせて

抄録

In his article which appeared in Shigaku Zasshi (Vol. LXXXVIII No.1), Mr.Yasuda, after having examining four basic land registers for Yokota-no-sho (namely the Tori-cho, Do-cho, Mokuroku, and Myo-yose-cho), made the following observations : 1)The cadastral survey of Yokota-no-sho was carried out under the kinto-myo system, in this case, a ten myo system. This system was organized on the basis of the Tori-cho, which with some alteration was then transformed into the Myo-yose-cho in 1306. 2)It was intended that kinto-myo should be carried out by joining together the de facto private landholdings of 43 different peasants. 3)This kinto-myo system was merely a fictitious tax system instituted for the purpose of imposing on the peasants corvee carrying labor between Nara and Kyoto. 4)Consequently, together with clarifying when and why kinto-myo were established, the Yokota-no-sho registers make clear the realities of medieval peasant land ownership and management under the myo system. However, Mr.Yasuda's interpretation that Yokota-no-sho's Myo-yose-cho was drawn up from the Tori-cho is, I believe, mistaken for the following reasons : 1)From the available records, we can see that an overwhelmingly large number of Kofukuji kinto-myo shoen (including Ikeda, Izumo and Yanagimoto manors) were created between the end of the Heian Period and the beginning of the Kamakura Period. 2)Kinto-myo can be seen in the Do-cho for Wakatsuki-no-sho, which was drawn up in 1307, the same year as the Do-cho for Yokota-no-sho ; however, it is clear that the system was already in decline. 3)The Myo-yose-cho was not drawn up based on the Tori-cho but, on the contrary, existed before the latter. 4)If the kinto-myo of Yokota-no-sho did exist at all, it must have been in existence from the late Heian or early Kamakura eras. However, this fact is impossible to confirm. 5)If the existence of kinto-myo cannot be thus ascertained, and if there is no evidence that the system was actually established in 1306, Mr.Yasuda is certainly in no position to "lay bare the realities of peasant land ownership and management lying beneath the surface of the myo system." 6)Finally, the fact is that corvee labor was equally imposed on each kinto-yashiki (equally portioned houses and lots) of the ten-myo, not on the myo themselves.