The aim of this theme is to find out a clue to the disclosure of the reclaimed land in the middle reaches of the Kino River, but its chief purpose is firstly to make a restorative research of the ancient land development or “jori chiwari” (land division) and secondly to restore the ancient landscape of the area. The area of this study is the middle reaches of the Kino River (Naga County) where the jori restoration still remains unrevealed.
The methods of study are;
1) drawing up of a map of the jori land division. 2) naming of the jori land division and finding out the possible location of Akinano-sho area. 3) jori land division and the topographical conditions. 4) its retation of irrigation. 5) the relation of “jori” with the Kokubunji Temple and with “go”.
(1) The distribution of jori in the middle reaches of the Kino River can be roughly parceled into 7 blocks. (Fig. 1, A∼G jori sections)
In the northern part of the river the main “jori” is made up of, the easy slope on the periphery of the composite fan which extends to the southern foot of the Izumi Mountains and the lower terrace. (Fig. 4)
In the southern part of the river, we also can find the remains of such jori in the flood plain of the Kishi River, a branch stream of the Kino River.
“jori” in the Kii Mountainous district extends as far as the Nogami Hachiman Shrine.
(2) In the north, the direction of “jori” way of land division adopts the Seihoi (ditches of land are in the direction of North, South, East, West) with the Kokubunji-Temple as its center.
In the upper reaches the maximan propencity is N14°W and in the lower reaches, N7°E. (Fig. 1)
But as a whole, the dircetion of the land division takes un-“seihoi” taking the shape of a fan.
This was influenced by the direction of the fan-shaped land on the northern bank.
But there are frequent occasions of each “jori” being in succession.
Each “jori” has the uniform characteristic in the north, while in the south “jori” is fragmentary.
It is clear that they divided the land by the unit of 1 “cho” (section) (Fig. 2) but in the inner part can we sea many indefinite and irregular shapes.
Only in the fan-shaped area, “haori”-shape variation and in the lower terraces “Nagaji”-shape variation are found.
(3) In the north, the upper reaches (Ito) and the lower reaches (Nagusa) have the same way of naming, that is, “jori” is divided into 25 “zu” (jo) from east to west, 7 “ri” from south to north.
The land belonging to the Kanshinji Temple and Akina-sho (a feudal manor) in the ninth century is presumably the “Shoiki”.
This investigation will disclose how the alluvial fan was reclaimed in Heian period, how “jori” was named in the Kahoku district, and provide basic material concerning archaeological views.
It is presumed that they adopted the way of naming based on “block”.
(4) As to the irrigation of “jori” paddy in the fan, in case of the basin of the Negoro River, the irrigation by the erosional valleys and ponds are thought to be old irrigation forms.
(5) The 2 square “cho” domain belonging to the Kiikokubunji Temple adapts the “seihoi”. And the boundary of the temple domain connects with the jori in the vicinity with the transitional type. (Fig. 6)
(6) The presumption of the location of 7 “go” of Naga county written in the “Wamyosho” will be submitted as a tentative plan (Fig. 2), taking the connection with the block “jori chiwari” into account.

抄録全体を表示

Many attempts have been made to classify ancient and medieval documents written in Japanese. The method which best reflects the essential nature of the documents is classification according to the document style (様式). In Japan, the following document styles have been generally adopted : (1)Kushikiyo-monjo (公式様文書), (2)Kugeyo-monjo (公家様文書) and (3)Bukeyo-monjo (武家様文書). This method of classification corresponds to the three major political systems from ancient to medieval times, namely, (1)the Ritsuryo state (律令国家), (2)the aristocratic (Ocho) state (王朝国家) and (3)the warrior (Buke) political regime (武家政権). However, if we think of a particular document style as consisting of a common writing style (書式) and overall form, for example, not only do we find many differences between Kansenji (官宣旨) / Senji (宣旨) and Inzen (院宣) / Rinji (綸旨), which have been classified as Kugeyo-monjo (公家様文書), but we also fail to find any common features among these documents. The same is also true of documents classified under Bukeyo-monjo (武家様文書). Therefore, the author proposes that the following classification may be more. suitable : (1)Kushikiyo-monjo (公式様文書), (2)Kudashibumiyo-monjo (下文様文書) and (3)Shosatsuyo-monjo (書札様文書). The author attempts to confirm this point by investigating such aspects of writing style as (1)the sentence structure (文体), (2)the identification of the sender (差出書), (3)the name of the addressee (宛名), (4)the identification of official ranks (位署書) and (5)the method of signing the document (署名の仕方) ; such aspects of form as (6)the calligraphy style (書体), (7)how the paper is ornamented (紙面の飾り方), (8)the choice of paper type (料紙の使い方) and (9)how the sheets are pieced together (紙継目の固定の仕方) ; as well as such procedural practices as (10)the transmission of orders (遵行手続) and (11)rules for drafting the documents (書式作成手続規定). The classification proposed here corresponds to the division of the ancient and medieval state into (1)the Ritsuryo state (律令国家), (2)the early oligarchic (kenmon) state (前期権門国家) and (3)the later oligarchic state (後期権門国家).

抄録全体を表示

Primarily Ryosei-gun _??__??__??_ had been established in the 7th century as a political administration unit in the Ritsuryo _??__??_ State or the Codes of Law and Ethics State of Ancient Japan. According to historical materials it is verified that about in the 10th century there had been brought on considerable change to this system. Having examinated its disintegrating transition on focus of the shiftinglocal aspects, the author tries to clarify the general rules of the features of the political administrative district as a historical region.
The conclusion is following:
1) Ryosei-Gun _??__??__??_ were often divided into two new smaller Gun _??_ in the 8th or 9th century. These newly born Gun consisted of the subordinate unit such as Go _??_.
2) In the 10th and 11th century, Ryosei-Gun _??__??__??_ were partitioned into several Gun _??_, Gô _??_, Jô _??_, In _??_, Agata _??_and so on. All of these local units similar to the Gun _??_unit were directly controlled by the Country Government (Kokuga _??__??_)and its subordinate unit, Go _??_itself also had been turned into small villages such as Go _??_, Mura _??_, Betsumyô _??__??_, Beppu _??__??_, Myô _??_ etc.
3) Thus it is explicable that, Ryosei-Gun _??__??__??_, separated from their administrative function, became only a local unit.

抄録全体を表示

This article is an attempt to reconsider the role, if any, played by acts to regulate the expansion of proprietary estates (shoen荘園) at the hands of aristocratic families and religious institutions in the formation of the medieval land system dominated by such proprietary estates. While the major purpose of such acts was to prevent the incursion of shoen onto public tax land (koryo公領) and separate the two, recent research has argued that the two were in fact not spatially separate under the medieval land system, in which koryo was enclosed and cultivated as a part of shoen under such pretenses as proximity and fallow. Upon his own reexamination, the author of this article concludes that the spatial separation argument is not valid, since the shoen control acts recognized such enclosures, based on publicly notarized deeds of sale, tenancy, etc. (kugen公験), only as exempt from public taxes, not as shoen property. Since the medieval shoen was also characterized by such arrangements, the author concludes that the shoen control acts of the late ancient period had a definite effect on the formation of medieval land institutions. Furthermore, these acts concerned only koryo enclosed and cultivated by shoen proprietors and thus assumed that all other such land would be subject to public taxation. On the other hand, it is also true that the shoen control acts influenced shoen proprietorship by speeding up the establishment of new estates. The research to date on the formation of the medieval shoen system has not considered the fact that there were choices to be made between restricting or approving shoen, since it is a fact that new shoen were set up in the process of executing the control acts. Although the establishment of new shoen came under strict regulation as the result of these acts, their expansion was promoted under the growing power and authority exercised by the retired emperor's household. This contradiction was finally resolvad by the Act of 1156, in which kugen documents were no longer taken as absolute, and new shoen and their tax exempt enclosures became the prerogative of kingship.

抄録全体を表示

Daidenbo-in (_??__??__??__??_) of Koyasan became a temple independent of Kongobu-ji (_??__??__??__??_) as Kongobu-ji developed. After its independence, it remained in a relationship known as kyoza (_??__??_) with Kongobu-ji. The nature of that relationship is not clearly known.
Kakuban (_??__??_, 1095-1043), the abbot of Daidenbo-in, determined that in the clerical rankings of monks with appointments to both temples, the monks of Daidenbo-in would be in a superior position. This invited the antagonism of Kongobu-ji monks, and disputes continued at both temples until the move to Negoro (_??__??_).
The nature of the disputes between the two temples has been often understood as constituting actual armed combat. However, by examining the personnel composition of both temples, it is possible to locate many instances of monks serving in official capacities in both temples. Because of these dual appointments to both temples (_??__??__??__??_), out-right fighting between the two seems unlikely.
Future studies must approach the bilateral relations of the temples in light of these dual appointments and kyoza. The purpose of the present paper is to attempt an analysis of the dual appointments to both temples as a preliminary stage to that study.

抄録全体を表示

If one were to analyze the previous research work done on provinces held in fief (chigyokoku 知行国), one could divide this work into studies on the changes which took place in that system over time and studies of the system's structural characteristics. As opposed to the former's tendency to limit itself merely to provinces held in fief by the Taira Family (Heishi 平氏), in this essay the author attempts to trace the development of provincial fiefdoms in general over the whole period of the retired emperor's house rule (Insei-ki 院政期) from 1086 to 1179. In concrete terms, the author will trace the changes which occurred in the provincial fiefdoms held not only by the Taira but also by the female members of the retired emperor's family (Nyoin 女院), house advisors (In-no-kin-shin 院近臣) and the Fujiwara Regents (Sekkanke 摂関家), and investigate the changes in relation to the political process of the time. In his investigations the author was able to discover some previously unnoticed historical materials which helped him to make the following points : 1)Provinces held in fief were established into a system in the form of allotments to house advisors ; however, this stage was only achieved after the 2nd year of the Kajo 嘉承 era (1107), when the house government of the ex-emperor Shirakawa 白河 got under way in earnest. 2)Provincial fiefdoms formed the material base of the lord/vassal relationship between the ex-emperor and fiefdom holders ; and the appointed numder of these fiefdoms was the numerical expression of the degree of intimacy between the two parties. And for that reason, all fiefdom holders went out in many ways to both maintain and increase their appaointed number. 3)The Taira Family, through the risings of the Hogen 保元 and Heiji 平治 eras (1156 and 1159), succeeded in expropriating the provincial fiefdoms held by house advisors and the Fujiwara Regents, and built the Taira hegemony upon them which lasted until 1185. 4)The fact that the infeudation of the top administrative office for Kyushu, Dazaifu 太宰府, was urged by both the Taira and the Fujiwara Regents, proves that the provincial fiefdom system also spread to various offices within the imperial court.

抄録全体を表示

事相・教相を両親とする空海教学が、日本的な環境のなかで、いかに歴史的に変遷してきたかを考察することが、本稿の目的である。空海が深く関わった東寺・金剛峯寺では、空海教学を体現する寺院として修学システムが整備されていくが、九世紀後半より建立された真言系の定額寺・御願寺では、顕教の影響を強く受け、学解重視の傾向が強い。しかし、一〇世紀後半の国家・社会の変化を背景に、真言系の定額寺・御願寺は、事相法流の拠点寺院となり、修法を重視することで発展する一方、東寺・金剛峯寺は衰退し、教相活動は停滞する。院政期には、顕教・密教の広範な交流のもと、仏教界全体が発展するが、真言宗の中心的な位置にあった仁和寺では、教相復興の気運が起こる。しかし、事相活動を重視する仁和寺は教相研究の拠点寺院にはなり得ず、教相活動は金剛峯寺で展開し、鎌倉後期に、金剛峯寺は教相研究の拠点寺院としての性格を明確にする。金剛峯寺での教学・法会のあり方が、東寺に移植され、東寺の教学復興も図られる。 平安後期以降、真言教相研究が復興・進展し、鎌倉後期には、真言教学は新たな段階を迎える。そのさい、教学研究方法として採用されたのが、談義・論義に基づく顕教的な修学システムであった点は重要である。学侶が顕教的な方法で研鑽を積むことで、彼ら共通の宗教的基盤が形成され、それが寺院構造に与えた影響も大きく、鎌倉後期以降、金剛峯寺・東寺は、南都権門寺院と類似の構造を持つようになる。 顕教も密教の影響を受けるとともに、密教も顕教の影響を受け、両者はその独自性を保持しつつも、均質なあり方を示すことになる。これが、日本における真言密教の変遷であり、顕密仏教の展開であったと考える。

抄録全体を表示

Insei 院政 politics, domnation by the retired emperor In 院 was actually established during the latter part of Shirakawa-In 白河院 retirement after Emperor Toba 鳥羽天皇, grandson of Shirakawa, ascended to the throne in 1107. After that, benkan and shikiji 弁官・職事, the imperial secretaries, began reporting to the In, and imperial decrees (senji 宣旨) began to be promulugated according to the emperor's (tenno 天皇) will, but by the In's direction. When Fujiwara-no-Tsunefusa 藤原経房, whose diary is called the Kitsuki (吉記) was benkan, he went to Goshirakawa-In's chancellery (Goshirakawa-In-no-cho 後白河院庁) almost everday. But in the entry of the Kitsuki dated 1183/7/9 (寿永二年七月九日), we are told that the special court of justice called Inchusata was held at Goshirakawa-In-no-cho, and that all the judges of the Inchusata except himself and Minamoto-no-Masayori 源雅頼, who also sevred as benkan, were Goshirakawa's private advisers. Tsunefusa felt highly honored in being called to this Inchusata. Same of the cases appearing before this Inshusata were cases pending in the regular court handled by benkan and shikiji. From these facts, the author concludes that Inshusata was operated by the In's private advisers apart from the regular court and that the origin of Inchusata was the custom of petitions filed through the In's private advisers were permitted to be reviewed by the In without trial. Then why were non-political officials like Tsunefusa called to this Inchusata on 9/7/1183? About that time, the rebel army under Minamoto-no-Yoshinaka 源義仲 was approaching the capital. In June, Goshirakawa-In consurted with various aristocrats about counter-measures against the enemy. Fujiwara-no-Kanezane 藤原兼実, the Udaijin 右大臣, the third highest seat of the imperial cabinet, and not on intimate terms with Goshirakawa-In proposed a political reform called Tokusei 徳政. He emphasized that fair judgement in political affairs would make temples, shrines and others entities confide in the government. The author concludes that Goshirakawa-In assented to Kanezane's proposal and invited non-political officials to the Inchusata on 9/7/1183. Kanezane's idea was derived from Shinzei's 信西 reform, which was executed from 1156 to 1159 and exerted influence on political reform in Kamakura 鎌倉 period.

抄録全体を表示

The goal of this article is to clarify the conflict which occurred between the court and individual powers-holders over the imposition and the exemption of kokuyaku 国役 and the influenced this had on the whole system of the state finance during the Kamakura period. The results of the investigation is as follows. Observing the tax known as yakubukumai 役夫工米, a representative type of the medieval state tax, imposed equally on each province, the author confirms that its payment backed up by the general imposition policy barring any exceptions was basically maintained during the early Kamakura period. However as the result of the struggle by the religious ruling elites (jisha-kemmon 寺社権門) asking for individual exemptions, the policy began to waver during the Bun-ei 文永〜Koan 弘安 eras. Then the court established a new exemption policy consisting of a standard as to whether an estate had been exempted from kokuyaku 国役 by special imperial order or not and whether it was classified as a religious donation under sandai-gokishofuchi 三代御起請符地 or sanjaryo 三社領 (Ise 伊勢・Kamo 賀茂・Iwashimizu 石清水 shrines). This situation gave rise to the intensification of the individual centripetal forces aganist imperial power and exacerbated the conflict between the two principles concerning the imposition and exemption of the kokuyaku 国役. What are these two principles? One is the principle that tax imposition and exemption are carried out for each estate through the provincial administrative system. The other is the principle that the court would approach urban-base proprietors of estates directly. In the Koan 弘安 period confusion of the two principles took place. This situation made it difficult to solve the problem of cultivated lands under kokuyaku 国役. As a result the Kamakura Bakufu came to take charge of the imposition and exemption of lands and the court gave direct operation to the urban-based lords of estates. This division of labor ended in the reconstruction of the yakubukumai 役夫工米 collection system during the reign of Emperor Godaigo.

抄録全体を表示