In recent years, one of the major concerns in the study of Medieval Japan is to make clear the peculiarity of the Medieval Japanese State. Two ruling principles of this Medieval State were: (a) feudal, based on the lord vs. vassals' relationship; and (b) bureaucratic. Interest in the bureaucratic ruling principle is becoming deeper now.
KANTO or KANDO (_??__??_) occupied the core part of this bureaucratic ruling principle. KANTO means the appointing of an official position to the SAMURAI (_??_) class mainly under the RITSURYÔ (_??__??_) system in the Medieval times and EDO period.
In my study, paying special attention to the titles of ZURYÔ (_??__??_) among the KANTO, I try to reveal the actual effects of the KANTO by investigating the relationship between the BITCHÛ-NO-KAMI (_??__??__??_) and BITCHÛ-NO-KUNI (_??__??__??_) in the latter Medieval times. A précis of my demonstrative investigation is as follows.
(1) During the confrontation of the NANCHÔ (_??__??_) and HOKUCHÔ (_??__??_) with the MUROMACHI-BAKUFU (_??__??__??__??_), the side awarded the KANTO made the best use of it politically. The KOKUJIN (_??__??_) also made use of ZURYÔ-MEI-KANTO (_??__??__??__??__??_) as a means to spread their power. This means that the KANTO still had authority in the district, equivalent to the KUNI-NO-KAMI (_??__??_) during the ancient times.
(2) After the time of ÔEI (_??__??_ 1394-1428), KANTO became inherited rather than appointed, showing the social standing or position of the family. But in the case he (the SAMURAI) was in his district, KANTO still maintained elements of substantial authority.
(3) At the struggle between the lords or at the confrontation between the lord and vassals or to levy the land tax, the ZURYÔ-MEI-KANTO could be their legal right or their justification.
As demonstrated by my investigation above on the BITCHÛ-NO-KAMI, the traditional view with which we regarded KANTO during Medieval times, as being only an honorable title that did not involve actual authority, must be corrected. This misunderstanding has occured due to the change in KANTO from a position of appointment to a position attained through inheritance.
Yet, BITCHÛ-NO-KUNI was still a distinctive district. It had been SUKI-NO-KUNI (_??__??__??_) from ancient times to Medieval times, and was a necessary symbolic district for the ceremony of DAIJÔE (_??__??__??_) to confirm the ruling justification of the TENNÔ (_??__??_) system. At the same time, it was the key strategical district in western Japan.
These key features in BITCHÛ-NO-KUNI, and the manifestation that the ZURYÔ-MEI-KANTO still maintained elements of substantial authority in the district, constitutes the core part of the latter Medieval State. I think this conclusion, as demonstrased by my study, depicts the essence of KANTO during the latter Medieval Japan.
抄録全体を表示