著者
平井 上総
出版者
青木書店
雑誌
歴史学研究 (ISSN:03869237)
巻号頁・発行日
no.955, pp.18-25,63, 2017-03
著者
平井 上総
出版者
北海道大学文学研究科
雑誌
北海道大学文学研究科紀要 (ISSN:13460277)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.144, pp.1-45, 2014-11-25
著者
平井 上総
出版者
公益財団法人史学会
雑誌
史學雜誌 (ISSN:00182478)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.118, no.4, pp.576-589, 2009-04-20

This article attempts a textual criticism of the Chosokabe Motochika Shikimoku (hereafter Keicho Shikimoku) purported to have been promulgated in Tosa Province during the Toyotomi Hideyoshi regime in the second year of Keicho (1597). The article begins with a comparison between Chosokabe family institutions and the content of the Keicho Shikimoku, by focusing on a set of provincial-wide bylaws (Chosokabe-shi Okitegaki) promulgated during that same time. The comparison reveals marked differences between the two documents in both wording and institutional arrangements. The author concludes that the content of the Keicho Shikimoku conflicts with Chosokabe family custom in many ways. Next, a comparison is made between the Keicho Shikimoku and the legal codes promulgated by the Yamauchi family for it Tosa Han fief during the Tokugawa Period, revealing similarities between the two documents in both content and form. The author concludes that the so-called "Keicho Shikimoku" was not a legal code of the Chosokabes, but must have been compiled after the formation of Tosa Han sometime during the 17^<th> century or after. In order to pinpoint the date of compilation, the author compares the Keicho Shikimoku with revisions made in the Tosa Han legal codes between Kan'ei 18 (1641) and Genroku 3 (1690), and discovers that the greatest similarity occurs with respect to the revisions made in Kanbun 3 (1663). Moreover, the fact that the Keicho Shikimoku prohibition on samurai attending dance performances and sumo wrestling tournaments reflects the actual situation during the several years following Kanbun 3 also suggests that the 1663 legal code for Tosa Han was its source. As to the reason why the Keicho Shikimoku was written, the author argues that it was an attempt by local samurai facing extinction in the midst of the political upheaval that occurred in Tosa during Kanbun 3 to reinforce their legitimacy by emphasizing historical ties to the Chosokabe family. The author concludes that the Keicho Shikimoku was a fictitious legal code modeled after legal codes in force in Tosa Han during the late 17^<th> century and shows that the Chosokabe family did not use the phrase "ichiryo gusoku" 一領具足 (allowing cultivators to arm themselves; later how local samurai-cultivators referred to themselves) in any of the legal codes it promulgated or any official document it issued, indicating that ichiryo gusoku was merely a popular phrase, not an official legal institution.
著者
平井上総編著
出版者
戎光祥出版
巻号頁・発行日
2014
著者
平井 上総
出版者
公益財団法人 史学会
雑誌
史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.118, no.4, pp.576-589, 2009-04-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

This article attempts a textual criticism of the Chosokabe Motochika Shikimoku (hereafter Keicho Shikimoku) purported to have been promulgated in Tosa Province during the Toyotomi Hideyoshi regime in the second year of Keicho (1597). The article begins with a comparison between Chosokabe family institutions and the content of the Keicho Shikimoku, by focusing on a set of provincial-wide bylaws (Chosokabe-shi Okitegaki) promulgated during that same time. The comparison reveals marked differences between the two documents in both wording and institutional arrangements. The author concludes that the content of the Keicho Shikimoku conflicts with Chosokabe family custom in many ways. Next, a comparison is made between the Keicho Shikimoku and the legal codes promulgated by the Yamauchi family for it Tosa Han fief during the Tokugawa Period, revealing similarities between the two documents in both content and form. The author concludes that the so-called "Keicho Shikimoku" was not a legal code of the Chosokabes, but must have been compiled after the formation of Tosa Han sometime during the 17^<th> century or after. In order to pinpoint the date of compilation, the author compares the Keicho Shikimoku with revisions made in the Tosa Han legal codes between Kan'ei 18 (1641) and Genroku 3 (1690), and discovers that the greatest similarity occurs with respect to the revisions made in Kanbun 3 (1663). Moreover, the fact that the Keicho Shikimoku prohibition on samurai attending dance performances and sumo wrestling tournaments reflects the actual situation during the several years following Kanbun 3 also suggests that the 1663 legal code for Tosa Han was its source. As to the reason why the Keicho Shikimoku was written, the author argues that it was an attempt by local samurai facing extinction in the midst of the political upheaval that occurred in Tosa during Kanbun 3 to reinforce their legitimacy by emphasizing historical ties to the Chosokabe family. The author concludes that the Keicho Shikimoku was a fictitious legal code modeled after legal codes in force in Tosa Han during the late 17^<th> century and shows that the Chosokabe family did not use the phrase "ichiryo gusoku" 一領具足 (allowing cultivators to arm themselves; later how local samurai-cultivators referred to themselves) in any of the legal codes it promulgated or any official document it issued, indicating that ichiryo gusoku was merely a popular phrase, not an official legal institution.
著者
平井 上総
出版者
大阪市立大学日本史学会
雑誌
市大日本史 (ISSN:13484508)
巻号頁・発行日
no.18, pp.169-171, 2015-05

1 0 0 0 一領具足考

著者
平井 上総
出版者
花園大学史学会
雑誌
花園史学 (ISSN:02853876)
巻号頁・発行日
no.36, pp.1-21, 2015-11
著者
平井 上総
出版者
公益財団法人史学会
雑誌
史學雜誌 (ISSN:00182478)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.115, no.1, pp.五四-七九, 2006-01-20

The cadastral surveys conducted between 1587 and 1598 by the Chosokabe Family of Tosa Province are contained in ledgers recording results from the whole province and entitled Chosokabe Chikencho長宗我部地検帳(hereafter, Chikencho); however, what they say about those who directly conducted the surveys has yet to be examined. The present article is an attempt to fill that gap by clarifying how these surveyors were organized in terms of power and authority. An investigation of the signatures affixed to the Chikencho by the surveyors reveals 1) The inclusion of the signer's official capacity above each signature. 2) Some included handwritten seals (kao花押) and some did not. 3) There were between scribes, accountants and police agents tended to appear somewhere between the first and third signatures, while those who did the actually measuring (tsueuchi杖打) mostly appeared toward the end of the signature order. 4) Each surveyor worked in a specific capacity, despite differences in group, region and time. 5) Surveyors tended to have little interest or relationship to the regions they were measuring. The research to date has been of the opinion that those who signed the ledgers were groups of supervisors; however, the activity of each signer was base on a specific duty, and there is nothing to indicate those duties were supervisory in nature. Concerning the order in which the signatures appear, members of the Chosokabe Family and their retainers tend to appear either at the very beginning or the very end. This seems to indicate that the Chosokabe regime was dispatching its high ranking personnel to survey areas under the control of former local proprietors of similar daimyo大名status, in order to minimize any disgruntlement on the part of the latter. When comparing the ledgers according to the three eras in which were created-Tensho天正, Bunroku文禄and Keicho慶長-from the Bunroku era (1592) on, the number of functionaries (bugyo奉行) in the Chosokabe government dispatched on surveys doubled. Those who did the actually measuring (tsueuchi) tended to be members of the Chosokabe family, other feudal lords, their retainers and members of influential religious institutions, which indicates that tsueuchi was a duty connected to vassalage. From the above investigation, the author concludes that towards the last decade of the sixteenth century, although the Chosokabe Family was making compromises to appease other feudal lords within Tosa Province, it seems to also have been tightening control over extended (branch) family members and their retainers in a move towards centralization.
著者
平井 上総
出版者
公益財団法人 史学会
雑誌
史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.115, no.1, pp.54-79, 2006

The cadastral surveys conducted between 1587 and 1598 by the Chosokabe Family of Tosa Province are contained in ledgers recording results from the whole province and entitled Chosokabe Chikencho長宗我部地検帳(hereafter, Chikencho); however, what they say about those who directly conducted the surveys has yet to be examined. The present article is an attempt to fill that gap by clarifying how these surveyors were organized in terms of power and authority. An investigation of the signatures affixed to the Chikencho by the surveyors reveals 1) The inclusion of the signer's official capacity above each signature. 2) Some included handwritten seals (kao花押) and some did not. 3) There were between scribes, accountants and police agents tended to appear somewhere between the first and third signatures, while those who did the actually measuring (tsueuchi杖打) mostly appeared toward the end of the signature order. 4) Each surveyor worked in a specific capacity, despite differences in group, region and time. 5) Surveyors tended to have little interest or relationship to the regions they were measuring. The research to date has been of the opinion that those who signed the ledgers were groups of supervisors; however, the activity of each signer was base on a specific duty, and there is nothing to indicate those duties were supervisory in nature. Concerning the order in which the signatures appear, members of the Chosokabe Family and their retainers tend to appear either at the very beginning or the very end. This seems to indicate that the Chosokabe regime was dispatching its high ranking personnel to survey areas under the control of former local proprietors of similar daimyo大名status, in order to minimize any disgruntlement on the part of the latter. When comparing the ledgers according to the three eras in which were created-Tensho天正, Bunroku文禄and Keicho慶長-from the Bunroku era (1592) on, the number of functionaries (bugyo奉行) in the Chosokabe government dispatched on surveys doubled. Those who did the actually measuring (tsueuchi) tended to be members of the Chosokabe family, other feudal lords, their retainers and members of influential religious institutions, which indicates that tsueuchi was a duty connected to vassalage. From the above investigation, the author concludes that towards the last decade of the sixteenth century, although the Chosokabe Family was making compromises to appease other feudal lords within Tosa Province, it seems to also have been tightening control over extended (branch) family members and their retainers in a move towards centralization.
著者
平井 上総
出版者
東京大学
雑誌
特別研究員奨励費
巻号頁・発行日
2009

本研究は、日本の中世と近世を分かつ兵農分離という概念について、社会の実態や政策理念などの多角的視野から再検討することによって、中世から近世への移行を捉え直すことを目的としている。本年度は、豊臣政権期に成立する大名権力の法が、上位権力との関係や在地との関係などにどれだけ規定されているのかを解明することを目的としていた。まずは太閤検地について、検地条目と呼ばれる法の条文・運用実態を、検地の負担構造解明という視点から検討し、豊臣政権によって取立てられた新規大名が統一政権の方法を真似る形で統治を行なっていたことをあらためて確認した。また、新規大名には統治にあたり統一政権を参考とする傾向があり、統一政権側も安定した統治のためにそれを望んでいたものとみた。新規大名の中には自身の家臣に対して同様に統治の基本方針を示す者もおり、そうした構造が近世的支配構造の展開を進めていったといえる。一方、従来からの大名は独自の支配を展開することが多く、それに対する統一政権側からの対応も一定しない。これは取次関係による指南の有無や、軍役勤仕の度合いによるものとみられる。以上から、統一政権が画一的支配構造を全国に強制する意図をもっていたとはいえず、近世諸藩にみられる支配の多様性は豊臣期の影響が大きかったものとみた。これらの点については、次年度に研究報告を行なう予定である。本年度は他に、織田権力期の和泉国の支配構造について、織田権力が現地勢力(守護代権力)にかなりの部分を委ねていたこと、天正八年の大坂本願寺との講和以後に支配構造の転換が図られたことなどを明らかにした。