著者

直江 直子

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.92, no.2, pp.137-171,278-27, 1983

---

The Northern Chen 北鎮 during the Northern Wei period has been by now studied from the view point of its military system. Accordingly the Chen-jen who were listed in the Chen's registration were regarded as the soldiers of the Northern Wei army. We suppose, however, that the Chen-jen means the people under the Chen's civil administration, and that there was no crucial difference between the soldiers and the people in the Northern Chen, unlike the obvious difference between the "Ch'eng-jen" 城人 and the "Chou-min" 州民 in the interior regions. If we compare the "Ch'eng-jen" and the "Chen-jen" in the Northern Chen, it can be understood that the fixed "Ch'eng-jen" were only the ones who were exiled to the Chen, and that the "Chen-jen" were originally the producers who settled in the "Hsiang-li" 郷里 or the "Pu-lo" 部落, and when necessary, were conscripted as soldiers. Their main occupations were agriculture and stock-farming. Concerning the revenue and the land-holding system, they seemed not soldier-farmers (屯田) but the land-hold farmers who were registered in the "Chun-t'ien" 均田 system. They were also independent stock farmers, though they must have differed from the agricultural Chen-jen as the social system. Therefore the "Hsiang-li" and the "Pu-lo" were the societies which the independent producers, that is, the Chen-jen formed spontaneously. In the end of the Northern Wei, there became created the differentiation between the powerful "Hao-ch'iang" 豪強 and the poor "Hsi-min" 細民 in the Northern Chen society. When the Chen-jen served as the soldiers, they were used to destroy their own society, for they were under the control of the Chen officials who tended to appreciate the Hao-ch'iang to dominate the Hsi-min. This was the circumstance of the Liu-Chen 六鎮 Rebellion. In this situation, the "Hao-chieh" 豪傑 and the "Hao-hsia" 豪侠, who became the political leaders of the Later Northern Dynasty, formed the core to unify the people in the Hsiang-li society.

著者

仲田 公輔

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.122, no.1, pp.111, 2013-01-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

著者

本位田 菊士

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.90, no.12, pp.1747-1784,1866-, 1981

---

<p>What kind of title a ruler (monarch) took is an important matter to show the characrer of a given state. The fact that the Ritsuryo-state of Japan in eighth century was based on the Chinese constitutional system and that the monarch at that time took a special title 'Tenno' (天皇, lit. ten=heaven, no=empror) should be remarked. By means of the inscription on the iron sword which was discovered recently in Sakitama-Inariyama, an old mound, we see that a monarch of Japan in fifth and sixth century was called 'Daio' 大王. The change from 'Daio' to 'Tenno' was made after seventh century according to the international negotiation with China. Therefore it seems to be sure that the name of 'Tenno' came from Chinese term. If it is true, from which Tenno of China Japanese governor took its name? And for what did he adopt the title 'Tenno'? To answer these questions, I tried to consider the thought background of the motive in this paper. Among the past studies on Tenno, Sokichi Tsuda's paper 'Tenno-ko' is a representative one. In this paper, he told that 'Tenno' had two meanings : one is the Divine Being from a point of astrological view, the other a fictitious character's name as an emperor from a view point of superhuman being with divine power. Each meaning is mainly based on the religious concept implying a metaphorical meaning of a monarch. There is a recent opinion, by Shigeru Watanabe and Haruyuki Tono, that Japanese usage is bound to that of 'T'ien-huang' 天皇 and 'T'ien-hou' 天后 used in the reign of Kao-tuung 高宗 in T'ang. There is also Yukihisa Yamao's opinion that a title of 'Tenno' which unified separated functions of T'ien-tzu 天子 and Huang-ti, 皇帝 was newly created in the reign of Tenji, but I cannot follow him. I make much of the siginificance of the establishment of 'Tenno' as a title of a monarch, but I cannot follow the view that a title of 'T'ien-huang' in the reign of Kao-tsung brought forth its adoption in Japan directly. Because T'ien-huang in the reign of Kao-tsung did not mean to strengthen the right of the monarch at all, but, on the contrary, to rationalize the direct imperial rule of Tse-t'ien-wu-hou 則天武后. And it may be said that a title of a monarch which was based on Huang 皇 as well as Tenno did not exist at all in China befofe T'ang. For example, T'ai-shang-huang 太上皇 was a dignified title for the monarch after his abdication or demise. In An-p'ing-hsien-wang Fu ch'uan 安平獻王誤孚伝 (Chin shu 晋書) 'T'ien-huang, T'ien-huang-chih-hou' 天皇・天皇之后 was used with a meaning of a dignified title for the past monarch. So I suppose that 'Tenno' at first had no clear meaning of a title of a monarch when the name came into Japan. Therefore I do not think the oldest date when the name was imported to Japan is bound to the first year of the Shang-yuan 上元 (674 A.D.) in the reign of Kao-tsung. In Suiko period when the first direct connection with Chinese title of a monach was made, the monarch called himself 'Tenshi (T'ien-tzu)' 天子 contrasting with a title 'Huang-ti' 皇帝 of China. This shows that Japanese side at that time accurately understood the title of a monarch of China. Taking these facts into consideration, I infer as follows : Till the end of seventh century a present ruler was called 'Tenshi 天子 '(Kotei 皇帝) as well as 'Daio' which was still used among the nation, and the past monarchs were called 'Tenno'. The name of 'Tenshi' means a very name of Chinese monarch, and at the same time, among the nations of Northeast Asia including the Japanese, the name means Ame-tarashi-hiko 阿毎多利思比弧 (Sui-shu 隋書), a noble man from the Heaven. While 'Tenno' in contrast with 'Tenshi', must be</p><p>(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)</p>

著者

本郷 和人

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.112, no.12, pp.1899-1935, 2003

---

The present article offers a new view of the important political disturbance within the Kamakura Bakufu that occurred during the eleventh month (shimotsuki霜月) of 1285 in an attempt to clarify the political situation within the Bakufu during its later years.The conventional political history of the incident is based on the assumption that the warrior class was unconditionally one composed of natural administrators.However,the author is not convinced that they were all that knowledgeable about the art of governance at the time the Bakufu was founded.At that time,the local land proprietors of the Kanto region formed a political mechanism known as a "bakufu" to protect their rights,which led to start their carrers as administrators.They learned how to govern only through experience over time.An analysis of the amendments and revisions made to the Seibaishikimoku成敗式目 code shows that the Bakufu only became serious about politics and governance after the civil war of 1221.An excellent example of this is the "welfare" measures to nurture the people (bumin撫民) adopted during the Kencho建長 era (early 1250s).On the other hand,the order issued during the Einin永仁 era concerning debt remission was aimed solely at Bakufu vassals (gokenin御家人) and can hardly be looked upon as an act of governing the country.In this sence,the Bakufu should be looked upon as having two different aspects : people forming the mechanism for the Bakufu to govern the country,and those forming an organization to protect the interests of gokenin.Focussing on the remission of debt issue,we can observe political conflict arising within the Bakufu at the time of the Mongol invasion,which can be interpreted in terms of opposition between the above "administrator" and "gokenin interest" groups,the former being represented by Adachi Yasumori安達泰盛,the latter by Taira Yoritsuna平頼綱.The clash that occurred between them known as the Shimotuski incident resulted in the defeat and decline in influence of the "administrator" group who felt the Bakufu should be involved in governing the whole country.The resulting Bakufu organization,which became over-concerned with protecting the interests of its gokenin constituency,would sooner or later lose the support if the other elements of society,resulting in its eventual fall.

著者

小松 久男

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.108, no.3, pp.341-343, 1999

著者

立石 博高

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.88, no.7, pp.1134-1154,1208-, 1979

---

La revuelta de las ciudades castellanas, que comenzo en Toledo en abril de 1520, y termino en la batalla de Villalar en abril de 1521, es conocida con el nombre de las "Cmunidades". Suponemos que la tarea aclaratoria de esta revuelta constituye la premisa fundamental para la comprension de las caracteristicas estructurales de la sociedad moderna castellana. Porque despues del fracaso de esta, Castilla se subordino a la politica exterior de la monarquia absoluta de los Austrias que sacrificaba el pais considerandolo como mero arsenal de hombres y materiales, y no acontecio ningun alzamiento grave durante el Antiguo Regimen. En el capitulo primero estudiamos, para conocer las aportaciones historiograficas anteriores sobre el tema, las interpretaciones de las Comunidades segun las diferentes etapas hasta nuestfos dias. En la primera mitad del siglo XIX, predomino la interpretacion liberal, la cual valoraba la revuelta como un movimiento precursor de la libertad y al mismo tiempo, nacional contra el absolutismo "foraneo". Sin embargo, desde mediados de ese siglo, aparecen criticas contra esta interpretacion, cuyas corrientes se cristalizaron en la tesis de G.Maranon caracterizada como el "culto al Imperio". El considero la revuelta como medieval y feudal contra el poder absoluto moderno y unificador del pais. La revaloracion de la revuelta de las Comunidades comenzo a finales de la decada de 1950 por J.Vicens Vives, E.Tierno Galvan, etc. Y en la del '60, J.A.Maravall presento una valoracion completamente opuesta a la de Maranon. Segun el, las Comunidades fue la primera "revolucion moderna". Los aspectos economicos de la revuelta fueron analizados por J.Perez, historiador frances, que vio en el fondo de la revuelta, los conflictos economicos existentes entre los productores de panos y los exportadores de lanas. J.I.Gutierrez Nieto presto atencion al movimiento antisenorial acaecido en el mismo periodo y lo considero como el factor determinante, tanto en el desarrollo de la revuelta como en la formacion del bando realista. Ademas, el insistio en que el enfrentamiento basico se dio entre la nobleza territorial y las ciudades en torno al regimen senorial. En el capitulo segundo, examinamos las interpretaciones recientes y presentamos varias dudas sobre estas. Estamos de acuerdo con J.Perez en considerar la revuelta como la crisis economica y social de la epoca, pero no podemos aceptar los intereses opuestos en el conflicto de las lanas como la causa fundamental del movimiento. Tampoco aceptamos la interpretacion de Gutierrez Nieto, porque no suponemos que las ciudades eran tan marcadamente antisenoriales, aunque reconocemos que hay que profundizar bien el aspecto antisenorial en los senorios y su influencia en el movimiento. Pensamos que las causas sociales de la revuelta habria que encontrarlas, ante todo, en la transformacion sufrida por las ciudades castellanas situadas entre el Duero y el Tajo, despues de la Baja Edad Media, y por eso, se presento como un movimiento de "le caractere communautaire" (P.Chaunu). En cuanto al caracter ideologico de la revuelta, aceptamos que fue un movimiento progresivo, constitucional y democratico, pero no admitimos que fuera esa "revolucion moderna" de que hablan algunos historiadores, puesto que la idea politica de los sublevados no sobrepaso las restricciones de la sociedad estamental. Creo que se impone, ante todo, una aclaracion detallada y concreta de lo acontecido en las ciudades, desde antes de la revuelta.

著者

森田 安一

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.91, no.4, pp.528-529, 1982

著者

森田 安一

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.88, no.9, pp.1455-1456, 1979

著者

森田 安一

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.86, no.6, pp.977-984, 1977

著者

野田 仁

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.116, no.3, pp.403-404, 2007-03-20

著者

橋本 雄

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.10, pp.1833-1842, 2009-10-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

著者

渡辺 千尋

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.122, no.3, pp.366-389, 2013

---

The present article is an attempt to clarify the actual situation involving Japan's legal authority within Japanese settlements in China and characteristic features of the Japanese government's policies regarding them through a description of the actual processes involved in the construction of Japanese settlements in China and the formation of institutions regarding them. The establishment of Japanese settlements and related institutions in China following the 1st Sino-Japanese War marked the start of involvement by the Japanese government in their administration. Although the research to date on the subject has regarded Japanese settlements in China and Korea as basically similar, in terms of their international environments, the process of transforming Korea into a Japanese protectorate following the conclusion of the 1904 Japan-Korea Protocol lies in stark contrast to China, which was under unequal treaties signed with several world powers. Here the author focuses on the Settlement Corporations Law (居留民団法) of 1905, which laid the legal basis for the administration system in Japanese settlements in China and Korea, in an attempt to compare how the Law was implemented in each country. The analysis shows that in the case of China, the belated establishment of Japanese settlements had to be implemented by adjusting to the existing interrelationships involving other foreign governments, foreign concessions and local residents.

著者

畑山 周平

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.123, no.1, 2014

著者

寺尾 美保

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.124, no.12, pp.37-61, 2015

---

本稿は、個別華族の実証研究を通じ、華族の側から華族資本の生成と展開についての研究をすすめようとするものである。その際に、華族資本を総体として扱うのではなく、他の華族と区別して大名華族資本として検討を行った。具体的には島津家を検討対象として、島津家が資本家となるまでの段階を追究することを通じて、大名華族資本の誕生の画期を探ることを目指したものである。<br>明治十年に金禄公債を受給した華族は、岩倉具視の熱心な説得によって十五銀行の株主となった。これは、華族資本の生成のために政府が作った道筋である。しかし、島津家の帳簿の詳細な分析からは、十五銀行の配当が、大名華族としての基本的な生活を支えた反面、それだけでは次なる投資を行うための資金を持ち得なかったことが明らかとなった。このことは、十五銀行の配当が各家でどのように管理運用されたかを検証することなくしては、資本の誕生をここにおくことができないことを意味している。また、大名華族には、華族として求められる支出の他に、旧藩の発展に寄与することも求められており、後者の支出をいかに制限するかが該期の重要な課題であった。この点の克服期も大名華族資本の誕生を知るための視角となるであろう。<br>島津家では、旧藩関係者への直接的な貸付を行わない代わりに、旧藩との関わりが深い第五国立銀行株を長期保有することで資産の保護に努め、会計管理体制の再編を行い、二四年に所有していた日本鉄道株を全て売却して資金を得たことを画期として、その後の積極的な株式投資を可能にしていた。本稿では、この時点を大名華族資本の誕生と捉え、次なる画期を株主に高額の配当をもたらした十五銀行満期の時であったと位置づけた。<br>金禄公債(十五銀行株)は、大名華族資本を誕生させるまでの大名華族を支え、彼らが資本家となる体制を整えるための猶予を与えたと評価されよう。

著者

堀川 康史

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.125, no.12, pp.1-24, 2016

---

応永2年(1395)閏7月、九州探題今川了俊は京都に召還され、翌年2月までに解任された。室町幕府の九州政策の大きな転換点となったこの解任劇は、足利義満期の政治史や地域支配を論じるうえで不可欠の事件として知られているが、その政治過程、とりわけ解任に至った理由・経緯については不明な点が少なくない。本稿は、1390年代前半の九州情勢との関わりを重視する立場から、これらの点について検討を加えるものである。検討の結果、解任の理由は了俊と九州大名との協力関係の断絶とそれにともなう九州経営の崩壊に求められることが明らかになった。その経緯は以下の通りである。まず両島津氏との関係について見ると、長く対立関係にあった了俊と両島津氏は、明徳2年(1391)に和平を結んだものの、探題派国人の権益保護と両島津氏との和平は両立せず、和平の成立後まもない時期から南九州では局地的紛争が発生した。了俊は反島津氏を掲げる南九州国人一揆の意向もあって和平の破棄を決断し、明徳5年(1394)2月以降、再び両島津氏との戦いに突入していった。ついで大友氏との関係に目を転じると、応永初年に大友親世と有力庶家の田原・吉弘両氏の間で内訌が生じた際、了俊は反親世派を支援したことで親世と断交した。親世は大内義弘・両島津氏と結ぶことで了俊に対抗し、結果として応永2年までに了俊は大友・大内・両島津の三者と敵対関係に陥った。この九州大名との協力関係の断絶が、了俊の九州経営を崩壊に導いていくことになった。最後に足利義満はというと、通説とは異なり京都召還の直前まで了俊を支援していた様子が読みとれる。しかし、有力大名が揃って了俊に敵対し、九州経営の崩壊が徐々に明らかになったことにより、最終的に義満は了俊の解任を決断したと考えられる。応永3年(1396)2月、渋川満頼の探題就任が九州諸氏に報じられ、20年以上に及んだ了俊の九州経営はここに終わりを迎えることになったのである。

著者

阿部 武司

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.93, no.6, 1984-06-20

著者

高杉 洋平

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.122, no.1, pp.36-60, 2013

---

Following the Armistice which concluded the First World War, there occurred a strong international trend toward anti-militarism, and in Japan, as well, public opinion toward military downsizing gained traction. On the other hand, since Japan had not participated significantly in the actual fighting during the War, the Army's equipment was now utterly outdated in comparison with the armies of Europe and the United States, and a call arose for the modernization of the Armed Forces. Given these conditions, in 1925 Minister of War Ugaki Kazushige reduced the Army's strength by four infantry divisions and used the budget funding so released to modernize its equipment, thus accomplishing disarmament and modernization in one stroke. His political position was strengthened through this so-called "Ugaki Drawdown", and he was touted to be a promising candidate for Prime Minister. In 1925, returning to the post of minister of war in Hamaguchi Osachi's cabinet, Ugaki embarked on a second round of military reforms, which like his first arms reduction plan, aimed at disarmament combined with modernization. However, the plan ran aground after meeting fierce opposition from the General Staff, causing Ugaki to resign his position in the Cabinet. As to the question of why Ugaki's reform concept succeeded in the first arms reduction plan, but failed in the second, while the two plans have received considerable time and attention from researchers to date, they have focused mainly on each reform plan separately, and thus have had little success in clarifying the various factors which led to the success of one and the failure of the other. From this perspective, the author of the present paper compares the two reform plans on the basis of a sequential interrelationship, and attempts to clarify the various factors within and without the Army that destined each plan to success or failure, while examining the extent to which Ugaki and the General Staff were aware of those factors.

著者

及川 英二郎

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.108, no.5, pp.795-799, 1999-05-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

著者

高尾 千津子

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.122, no.1, pp.85-89, 2013

著者

中北 浩爾

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.110, no.11, pp.2007-2015, 2001