SHIGAKU ZASSHI
Online ISSN : 2424-2616
Print ISSN : 0018-2478
ISSN-L : 0018-2478
Volume 99 , Issue 11
Showing 1-21 articles out of 21 articles from the selected issue
  • Type: Cover
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages Cover1-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (24K)
  • Type: Cover
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages Cover2-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (24K)
  • Kai-yuan Li
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1823-1854,1971-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    "The Imperial Edict in the 5th year of Emperor Gao-di "(「高帝五年詔」) was a very important decree in the early Former Han Period (前漢). The author has done textual research of the Edict in detail. As a result, this paper has shown that the Former Han government gave military officials and soldiers many titles of nobility in accordance with the Edict, and at the same time gave cultivated land and curtilage land according to the stipulation for records in the Han Military Code (漢軍法) in the early Former Han Period. The Han Military Code was set up by Han Xin (韓信), a famous general of Liu Bang (劉邦). In the district of Hanzhong (漢中), in the period from April to August of the first year of the Han Dynasty he issued the Military Code based on the Qin Military Code (秦軍法). The author estimates that Liu Bang's army totaled about 600 thousand persons at the time "the Imperial Edict in the 5th year of Emperor Gao-di" was issued. In accordance with the Edict, all military officials and soldiers were given the 5th grade noble status, at the same time a military person with such status could obtain 500 mu (畝) of cultivated land and 25 mu of curtilage land in accordance with the Military Code. Given 600 thousand military personel, 300 million mu of cultivated land and 15 million mu of curtilage land were granted. This amount of land equaled 40 percent of the total amount of cultivated land in the Former Han Period. Furthermore, the 600 thousand military officials and soldiers made up about 4 percent of the total population at the time. However, including family members the military accordance for 3 million people, or 20 percent of the total population. In conclusion, because of the "Imperial Edict in the 5th year of Emperor Gao-di" and aseries of other relevant laws and regulation a new social stratum would have been formed in the early Former Han Period, if all these laws were thoroughly implemented. This stratum, based on military meritocracy, had decisive political strength, strong economic power and high social status. It created the Former Han Dynasty and supported the dynasty for a long period of time.
    Download PDF (2251K)
  • Kazuhiko Uesugi
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1855-1877,1970-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    The Kamakura Bakufu from its inception carried out and tried to maintain three fundamental policies concerning its house vassals (gokenin): 1)the prohibition on unlimited official appointments; 2)an emphasis on the jogo 成功 insitution of selling official appointments; and 3)a commitment to continued service in the capital after appointments were made. However, the above three measures should not be regarded as a policy inherent only to the Bakufu, but rather as common to all the bureaucratic institutions urider the ruling elite (kenmon 権門) during those times. However, while these three measures continued to form the Bakufu's basic policy concerning its bureaucracy, amendment no.96 to its Joei Shikimoku 貞永式目 law code, which was promulgated in 1243 by Shogun Minamoto-no-Yoritsune while visiting the capital, contains language that significantly alters the existing customs governing the operation of the jogo institution. This amendment was epoch-making in the sense that efforts were now being made to follow the spirit of the traditional bureaucratic system more strictly than what the Bakufu had done up to that point. The jogo custom as practiced by the Bakufu increased in importance as a means of garnering revenues for the support of the court at Kyoto. However, on the other hand, due to the self-seeking attitudes of the functionaries in charge of selling official appointments, the actual fees paid were often reduced below the officially established rates. This in turn was causing a very unstable flow of funds into the royal treasury. While amendment no.96 quite correctly assesses the actual situation, in the background of its successful promulgation stood the royal court led by Kujono-Michie, who was closely connected to the Kamakura Shoguns. And so in this sense we can see the move to correct jogo practices as part of an overall effort in the movement for mutual cooperation between the aristocracy and the warrior class in controlling the capital bureaucracy. With respect to a bureaucratic polity centering around the jogo institution from this time on, we can observe quite contrasting approaches adopted by the court and the Bakufu. On the one hand, the court showed little initiative in preventing the reduction of fees paid for appointments, while the Bakufu took far more positive steps to insure that such fees were maintained at their official rates. In the background of this positive attitude taken by the Bakufu was the deepening involvement by the Hojo regents in appointing Kamakura house vassals to official positions, a practice that had traditionally been the sole perogative of the Shogun himself.
    Download PDF (2166K)
  • Keizo Asaji
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1878-1903,1968-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Baronial reform and rebellion, which started in 1258, reached its last stage at Evesham in August 1265, when many of the baronial leaders, including Simon de Montfort, his son Henry and Hugh Despenser, fought to their deaths there. Soon those who adhered to the king during the war rushed to take the lands of the rebels. King Henry III ordered those lands seized into his hands and then granted them to his adherents lavishly. On September 17, 1265, an ordinance was made to disinherit the rebels and to put all their lands into the king's hands. Former rebels, discontent with the policy of disinheritance, resumed their resistance against the king, and soon Kenilworth, Ely and some other regions became centres of resistance. The king sent Prince Edward and Roger Leyburn to Chesterfield and Axholme to punish the rebels with arms. But later, advised by the Legate, the king changed the policy towards the disinherited, resulting in the Dictum of Kenilworth which was published in November 1266 in order to settle the matter peacefully. In clause 12 the Dictum clearly established the basic principle of redemption, not disinheritance. After some skirmishies in the spring and summer in 1267, special justices in eyre went around the country in four circuits to enforce the Dictum. During the eyre between 1268 and 1272 the disinhrited were accepted into the king's peace, paid the redemption fine and regained their lands as well as status. The records of the eyre carried out in Cambridgeshire gives us some interesting details of the local society there. When the disinherited tried to regain their lands or deny their involvement in the trespass during the rebellion, there were two types of judicial process observed in the record. In one, there were disinherited who either produced royal letters or called for the assistance of their lords or patrons in order to be exempted from accusation. In the other the disinhereted who did not get such exemptions were found innocent of rebellious deeds by a jury of a hundred. The Cambridgeshire gentry in the second group seems to have had a kind of distrust concerning the government or discontent over the king's policy and magnates' attitude of excessively interfering in local affairs. The readers of the record can see some groups of local gentry accused of having attacked the royal favourites in this county during the rebellion. The record therefore shows us that there were two types of gentry, hostile to each other, in Cambridgeshire. The judges of the eyre usually confirmed the verdicts of the local jury and sometimes ignored the influence of feudal lords or the interference by the magnates. Through the special eyre, the status of the gentry, whether they were royal favourites or not, was confirmed less in the feudal context than in the court of royal commission.
    Download PDF (2495K)
  • Yasutami Suzuki, Hideo Suzuki, Jun-ichi Yamazato, Hideo Kawahara
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1904-1914
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (1121K)
  • Masayuki Suzuki
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1914-1923
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (1038K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1924-1926
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (372K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1926-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (159K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1926-1928
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (373K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1928-1929
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (273K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1929-1930
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (285K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1930-1931
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (271K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1931-1932
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (252K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1932-1933
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (235K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1934-1935
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (199K)
  • [in Japanese]
    Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1934-1935
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (199K)
  • Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1936-1967
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (2328K)
  • Type: Article
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages 1968-1972
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (263K)
  • Type: Cover
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages Cover3-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (37K)
  • Type: Cover
    1990 Volume 99 Issue 11 Pages Cover4-
    Published: November 20, 1990
    Released: November 29, 2017
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (37K)
feedback
Top