著者

鈴木 蒼

出版者

史学研究会 (京都大学大学院文学研究科内)

雑誌

史林 = The Journal of history (ISSN:03869369)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.103, no.4, pp.457-492, 2020-07

---

平安時代においては、京内の学習施設「大学」で学識を身につけ、官人として朝廷に仕えた人々が多数存在していた。通説的には、彼らは人材主義的・反貴族的な存在とされ、世襲的な貴族層との対立や自身の質的変容により、九世紀中には姿を消していったと考えられている。しかし、そうした所説には疑うべき点が少なくない。本稿では、彼らを「文人官僚」として定義し、官歴・政治的行動の面から網羅的に検討することで、九・十世紀の官人社会における基礎的な性質を確認し、併せて従来の理解について再検討を行った。その結果、九・十世紀において文人官僚に顕著な没落や変質の形跡は見出せず、彼らが反貴族的な行動を取った形跡も何ら見出せないことが判明した。文人官僚は、その学識による能力と、学問を通じて権力者との人格的関係を構築しやすい点にその特徴を求められるのであり、むしろ親貴族的な存在として理解すべきなのである。During the Heian period many who served the court as bureaucrats had received an education at the Daigaku, the official academy in the capital. The prevailing scholarly consensus has explained that these officials were men of talent produced by the bureaucracy to serve the system, that they opposed the hereditary nobility, and that due to decline in their quality, they disappeared in the 9th century. However, as this interpretation places too much emphasis on the opposition of those who studied at the Daigaku to the nobility and positions them on a predetermined course in opposition to the nobility, there are several points in this interpretation that must be reconsidered. Furthermore, because this view has been short-term and the results of studies of the Daigaku system have not been fully incorporated within it, various issues remain to be addressed. In this article I thus make an exhaustive examination of those whom I define as bunjin kanryō, which includes the relatively large number of bureaucrats who had studied at the Daigaku and rose to high-ranking positions who were students of the Kidendō (the curriculum devoted to history and letters) and those who attended the Daigaku but did not follow a fixed course of study, by focusing on their bureaucratic careers and political activities. Based on the results of this examination, I ascertained the fundamental character of the bunjin kanryō within the bureaucracy of the 9th and 10th century and then reexamined the scholarly consensus in light of these findings. As a result I was first able to confirm that in fact the number of bunjin kanryō increased from the middle of the 9th century and accompanying this shift was the establishment of a special route for advancement of the bunjin kanryō within the bureaucracy. The bunjin kanryō had established by that time a certain fixed presence within the bureaucracy. I also determined that from that point onward until the end of the 10th century conspicuous signs of the decline of bunjin kanryō were not apparent. Furthermore, examining the actions they took in political disputes, I was unable to find any sign of opposition to the nobility and instead recognized that these officials behaved extremely submissively toward those in power with whom they maintained a subservient relationship. Judging from these findings, I concluded that special characteristics of the bunjin kanryō were to be found in their capabilities based on their scholarship and the ease in which they could build personal relationships with those in power through their learning, and they should be understood as allies rather than opponents of the nobility. From the 11th century onward when the bureaucracy experienced a great upheaval, these special characteristics of the bunjin kanryō were to face new changes.