Under the canonization system of the Imperial Funeral in ancient China, the term Da-xing 大行 was generally recognized, according to the maxim "大行受大名 (Great deeds deserve a great title)" in the book Yi-Zhoushu 逸周書 (Shifa 諡法), as a title given to an Emperor Huang-di 皇帝 who had passed away. In Japan, too, there exists such a system for an Emperor Tenno 天皇, which has been recognized as being adopted from China. This means that Da-xing can replace the posthumous title (諡) which corresponds to the 'great title'. In other words, Da-xing was a temporary name during the period from an Emperor's death to the confirmation of his posthumous title. In this case, the word Da-xing means 'great deeds'. At least since the Qin 秦 dynasty, however, Da-xing has meant 'a great journey', which implies 'going to Heaven', though, this interpretation had no direct relation with canonization at that time. Focusing upon the historical literature (白虎通, 風俗通, 独断, 史記, 漢書 etc.), it can be seen that the doctrine of interpreting Da-xing as 'a great journey' was established at the time of the first Emperor Qin-Shihuang 秦始皇, along with the Emperor's unification schemes and inspectional journey system, under the patrimonial nation idea. On the other hand, the doctrine interpreting Da-xing as 'great deeds' in order to canonize the Emperor with a temporary title was established by the Confucian officials known as the Archaic (Gu-wen 古文) scholars, who strongly maintained the Emperor's divinity and absoluteness. These two interpretations advanced and affected the canonization process during the later dynasties. According to the author's analysis of the funeral orations 誄, 諡, 諡冊, 哀策, etc. up to the Tang dynasty, there are four cases of its interpretation and enforcement. (I)'Great journey', meaning the Emperor's honorable death, is the title given to the deceased Emperor from his death to his burial, but under a non-canonization system (秦). (II)'Great deeds', meaning the Emperor's honorable actions during his lifetime, is a temporary name equivalent to a posthumous title from his death until the conferment of his posthumous title, under the canonization system (漢・晋). (III)A name to differentiate the newly enthroned Emperor from the dead Emperor before the latter was buried (魏・宋・梁・陳・唐初). Though this interpretation implies 'Great journey, honorable death', in fact Da-xing substitutes for his posthumous title. Thus it is an advanced form drawing a compromise between (I) and (II). (IV) A name to differentiate the new Emperor from the dead Emperor until his burial. This interpretation was the same as 'Great journey, honorable death', but in this case Da-xing co-occurs with his posthumous title and other titles (尊号・廓号) to form a name. Therefore, it did not substitute for a posthumous title at all. This is an even more advanced form (). In general recognition, Da-xing means 'Great deeds' and indicates a name before the conferment of an Emperor's posthumous title. In actual usage, however, it was interpreted as 'Great journey' and was a name given before his burial in many dynasties. Furthermore during the Tang dynasty the naming process became more flexible and the combination with other titles was allowed, and then Da-xing merely meant 'the deceased / the last'. In Japan, some scholars have noticed the difference between the canonizations of the Chinese Emperor Huang-di and the Japanese Emperor Tenno. But they have not considered those changes of the canonization system in China itself. Thus the Japanese usage demands further investigation.

抄録全体を表示

割股が開始され、人肉愛好者を多く輩出した唐宋時代における、憎悪・復讐による人肉食・人肉嗜好・割股などの人肉食に関する考察を通じて、第一に、憎悪による人肉食は唐代には比較的容認されたものの、宋代では史書から姿を消していくのに対して、復讐殺人やその人肉食は、唐宋代を問わず、国初こそ積極的に容認されるものの、国家の安定化に伴って禁止され衰退したこと、第二に、～北宋初期の人肉愛好者は、当時の社会においても異質な存在として忌避されるべき存在であったが、混乱期においては彼らを許容する社会意識も存在していたこと、第三に、「孝」の発現である割股は、則天朝にはすでに実施され、唐後半期から宋代に至っても、国家は支配体制強化のために割股を利用した。そうした国家の思惑に対して現実的打算によって割股を行う民衆も次第に増加したが、孝子の人肉を食する親の行為は社会的に容認されるに至った点などを明らかにした。

抄録全体を表示

This paper is part of my recent comparative research on the Xu Gaoseng zhuan and inscriptions. I discuss the relationship between the “Monument Extolling the Vinaya Master and Eminent Monk Zhishou” 智首律師高徳頌碑 (Zhishou monument) and the Xu Gaoseng zhuan’s biography of Zhishou. The Zhishou monument was built in the twelfth month of Xianqing 1 (656), over twenty years after his death in Zhenguan 9 (635). One of the reasons for its construction was that a plot was in the works to isolate Xuanzang, who was reigning over the Chang’an Buddhist world after returning to China and receiving the patronage of Taizong; he was seen by Gaozong and Wu Hou (later Wu Zetian) as part of a faction of Taizong’s former senior statesmen. The Zhishou monument was built at the gate of the Hongfu-si, where Zhishou had last resided. It became a place that highlighted the returning power of Zhishou’s disciples. This probably led to Zhishou’s top disciple, Daoxuan, becoming the senior monk at the Ximing-si in Xianqing 3 (658). Judging from the Zhishou monument text’s sequential composition and use of similar words and phrases, it is highly likely that it drew from the Xu Gaoseng zhuan (first version: ca. Zhenguan 19). However, the Xu Gaoseng zhuan mentions this monument. It appears that this was added when this collection of biographies was revised after Daoxuan became the senior monk at the Ximing-si.

抄録全体を表示

This article attempts not only to determine the institutional transition of the Northern Command (Beiya 北衙) system but also elucidate the interrelation between its development and coups d'etat that occurred during the early Tang period. The early Beiya, which also denominated the Four Imperial Armies of the North Gates (Beimen Sijun 北門四軍), can be divided into two regiments according to their role: the Garrison and the Imperial Guard. The Garrison, called the Flying Cavalry (Feiqi 飛騎), larger sized regiment of the Beiya, was established as the Seven Encampments of the Northern Command (Beiya Qiying 北衙七営), later transformed into the Left and Right Encampments (Zuoyou Zhunying 左右屯営) during the Taizong 太宗 era, then expanded and renamed the Left and Right Forest of Plumes Armies (Zuoyou Youlin Jun 左右羽林軍) during the Gaozong era. They were permanently stationed at the North Gate, the Gate of the Black Tortoise (Xuanwu Men 玄武門), in order to defend the northern section of Chang'an Palace. Whereas the Garrison generally protected the palace and the Emperor within it, the Imperial Guards accompanied the Emperor whenever he left the palace for hunting or progresses. The Guards of the Yulin Jun developed from the Hundred Cavaliers (Baiqi 百騎) during the Taizong era, through the Thousand Cavaliers (Qianqi 千騎) during the reign of the Empress Wu, then the Left and Right Myriad Cavaliers (Zuoyou Wanqi 左右万騎) during the Zhongzong 中宗 era, and finally were promoted to the Left and Right Militant-as-Dragons Armies (Zuoyou Longwu jun 左右龍武軍) during the Xuanzong 玄宗 era. It should especially be noted that the development of the early Beiya virtually coincides with the rapid rise of the Imperial Guards, and ultimately the military strength of the Garrison and the Guards was completely reversed by the end of the early Tang period. Comparing the developmental stages of the Beiya mentioned above with the dates in which coups occurred, we can discern a close correlation between the military growth of the Beiya and these acts of rebellion. Whenever a coups d'etat was attempted, the Beiya was always made full use of in eliminating political opponents, and consequently, within the Beiya, the Garrison and the Guards gradually began to compete with each other. Although the Guards were little more than a small group within the Yulin Jun at the beginning, their utilization during coups triggered the regiment's expansion repeatedly, such that the more coups occurred, the more increases in personnel and military growth occurred only in the Guards. Therefore, during the early Tang period, to win a decisive victory in any coup d'etat, it became necessary for claimants to the throne not only to take control of the Beiya itself, but also to ally themselves with whatever was then the stronger of the two regiments inside the Beiya, the Garrison or the Guards.

抄録全体を表示

唐の芙蓉園と曲江池における従来の先行研究では、芙蓉園の芙蓉池と曲江池を同一と見なし、曲江池が芙蓉園の園内に位置していたという理解が主流になっている。だが、唐の当時の史料を中心とした一部の先行研究では、芙蓉池と曲江池は別物であり、芙蓉池は芙蓉園の園内、曲江池は園外にあったことを明らかにしている。本稿は唐・長安城の芙蓉園と曲江池の全盛期であった8世紀前半に焦点を当て、先行研究を踏まえた上で、唐代に著された関連の詩賦と書籍を中心とし、信憑性の高い後世の関連記録と詳細に対照して史資料批判を行い、・長安城の芙蓉園と曲江池における具体的な形状と造園手法が窺える記述を引き出して整理した。更に、それらの記述を関連の考古調査成果および現地の地形と統合し、造園学の視点から唐・長安城の芙蓉園と曲江池の実像に迫ることを試みた。その結果、1）芙蓉池は南北長が1700mあまり、東西の最大幅が600mの南北に長い不整形の園池で、芙蓉園内の西部に位置していたこと、2）曲江池は芙蓉園の北西にあり、東西長が2773m、南北長が556.5mを超えない東西に長く曲折した護岸を持つ不整形な形状で、その水域は標高の異なる数段になっており、通善坊・修政坊・敦化坊の北土塀、修政坊・通善坊・曲池坊の西土塀、通善坊・曲池坊・無名の坊の南土塀、敦化坊・無名の坊の東土塀に囲まれた区域内に収まっていたことが明らかになった。

抄録全体を表示

The Emishi 蝦夷, who resided in the northeast portion of the Jap-anese archipelago, appear in the Chinese sources both as "Emishi" and as "Mojin" 毛人. The description of the former includes their geographical location, customs and year of arrival in China, while the latter merely mentions them as living in northeastern Japan. All of this information was amassed from interviews with foreign emissaries to the Tang Dynasty. Regarding the Emishi, there are both Chinese and Japanese records of them accompanying an envoy from the land of Wa 倭 (Japan) in the year AD 659 and also an account of the Chinese inquiring about them from a Japanese envoy in AD 702 ; however, the latter account, which appears in Shin-Tojo 新唐書, cannot be verified, so 659 is the only time that Emishi became part of a Japanese envoy to China. The information concerning Emishi customs in the Chinese sources matches the content of the report submitted by the 659 Wa envoy to China ; and all of it is characterized by them being introduced through Japan. In particular, the inclusion of Emishi in the 659 envoy was politically motivated to create the image of Wa/Japan as a great empire, but the Tang Dynasty was not impressed. As a result, the Japanese were unable to realize their diplomatic goals, and a gap appeared in the international relations between the two countries. While the Japanese expressed the term "Emishi" with the characters 蝦夷, there is also the strong opinion that the characters 蝦〓 were originally used. However, the source for such an argument being the historically spurious Shin-Tojo, there is no other source to prove that ; and the manuscript of the Nihon Shoki 日本書紀 expresses the term with different characters. The expression 蝦夷 appeared during the late seventh century, together with the creation of a Wa/Japanese ideology concerning its frontiers, leading to the move to take Emishi to China. However, the existence of the Emishi in Tang-Wa diplomacy following the Japan defeat at the Hakuson 白村 River in Korea, had to be covered up, as the term Mojin came into use at the time of the Taiho era Japanese envoys to China. After that time, no new information about the people of northeastern Japan surfaced in Tang China.

抄録全体を表示