著者

高橋 秀樹

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.100, no.9, pp.1568-1588,1669-, 1991

---

In differentiating the character of the term ie 家 (family; household) found in early medieval Japanese documents with the same term found in earlier records, two points should be taken into account: ie as a social entity and ie as inherited property. In the research done to date on the subject, the origin of the medieval ie has thought to have been related to such factors as the establishment of a family occupation, a permanent family plot of land, or the family name. In the present article the author approaches its, origins through an investigation of its successors. chakushi 嫡子, from the standpoint of when these inheritors first came into existence and what exactly it was that they inherited. The medieval chakushi institution, which was far different in social significance from the rules outlined in Japan's ancient ritsuryo legal codes, first came into existence among the bureaucratic classes during the 11th and early 12th centuries and was then adopted by the aristocracy in the mid-12th century. Among the aristocrats, chakushi inherited the political power, influence and privilege of their ancestors to a much greater extent that their fellow siblings. The fact that they were entitled almost exclusively to the ownership of family records, important related documents, and paraphrenalia symbolizing the family organization is proof enough that they were truly the inheritors of the ie structure. The chakushi system was adopted by locally-based land proprietors during the early 12th century and it is thought to have been brought about by the establishment of shiki 職 rights and their inheritability. The social position of these local proprietors was usually based on their shiki rights, indicating the passage of this rights from generation to generation was none other the process of ie inheritance. Furthermore, since this indivisible set of shiki rights, privileges and duties sufficiently constituted family wealth, the concept of ie among these local families took on the character of an economic enterprise that needed to be managed. The establishment of an inheritable ie and the chakushi institution for passing it on came into existence amongst such political and social changes as the ritualization of political affairs, the farming out of administrative duties, and the rigid systemization of shiki rights. Since these changes came in response to the needs of the state, the aristocracy and powerful religious institutions, the author is led to the conclusion that the medieval (inheritable) ie and the chakushi system of inheritance both were established as means for satisfying these needs in the best way possible.

著者

丸山 裕美子

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.105, no.8, pp.67-88, 1996

著者

平井 誠二

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.103, no.6, pp.1172-1173, 1994-06-20

著者

伊東 剛史

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.2, pp.213-245, 2009-02-20

---

The British Museum Act of 1753 appointed a Board of Trustees as the governing body of the museum. The board was formed by major donors to the institution and their heirs, prominent men of letters and science, aristocratic patrons, and senior government officials. The idea that such a mixed public body could be trusted to superintend a national collection of cultural properties came to be publicly debated during the 1830-70s, when the unceasing expansion of the museum called for the removal of its natural history department and eventually led to the foundation of the Natural History Museum in South Kensington. By examining the roles played by both the government and parliament in facilitating the transformation of the British Museum, this essay challenges the view that the British state was far less eager to promote art and science than its counterparts on the Continent. As parliamentary intervention increased during the 1830-40s, the Board of Trustees agreed to expand public access to the British Museum and to facilitate research being conducted by professional scholars and scientists. During the following decade, however, serious disagreements arose among the trustees concerning the proposed severance of the natural history collection from the museum, making it impossible for the Board of Trustees to act as an autonomous corporate body. It was Gladstone and his allies at the museum who finally rescued the lame-duck trustees and enabled the severance of the natural history collection. Although Gladstone's zealous political support of the severance excited criticism of excessive intervention by the government, it demonstrated that the Board of Trustees was an appropriate agent for monitoring the use of the national collection. On the whole, the British state was far from being a reluctant patron of the arts and sciences, taking a nuanced and open-to-negotiation approach to the development of public cultural institutions.

著者

和歌森 太郎

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.85, no.1, pp.57-64, 1976-01-20

著者

佐治 奈通子 山内 直人 園田 眞理子

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.122, no.1, pp.105-106, 2013-01-20

著者

樋口 真魚

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.123, no.6, pp.1097-1132, 2014-06-20

---

This article investigates Japanese attempts to reset its political relations with the League of Nations (hereafter, the LN) after the former's withdrawal from the League, focusing on the Japanese stance at the Montreux Conference of 1936, which was held three years after Japan's withdrawal for the purpose of revising articles concerning the demilitarization of the Dardanelles and Bosporus Straits, first declared in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. Close examination of Japanese diplomacy during the Montreux Conference indicates that its decision makers were seeking some ideal means by which to reset the country's political relations with the League throughout the mid-1930s. They were particularly sensitive towards the LN Covenant, which in their opinion appeared to offer a legal basis for imposing sanctions on any country of the world, including Japan. Such sensitivity sharped from 1934 on after the Soviet Union joined the LN, due to the perception that the outbreak of Soviet-Japanese hostilities was highly imminent, leading to fears that the Soviets might call for the LN to impose sanctions on Japan if war did break out. These concerns are the reason why the Japanese government was very active during the Montreux Conference, in addition to regarding the Conference, which was marked by a fierce debate regarding the legal relationship between the revised treaty and the LN Covenant, as the touchstone leading to the future of Japan's diplomatic policy toward the LN. There were two constrasting opinions within the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Gaimusho 外務省) over the stance to be taken towards the revised treaty. One line, advocated by Foreign Minister Arita Hachiro, was to attempt to block LN intervention altogether. The other, advocated by Sato Naotake, the Japanese delegate to the Montreux Conference, argued that Japan should seek means of coexisting with the LN. In more concrete terms, Arita intended to block intervention by calling for a treaty signing congress (teiyaku kokukaigi 締約国会議) as a diplomatic platform opposing the LN and asserting that the text of the revised treaty should seek to avoid LN interference by separating the new convention from the LN Covenant. In opposition to Arita's assertions, Sato was prepared to partially accept "a treaty supplementary to the LN Covenant", which European members, such as the Soviet Union and France, aspired to conclude. By doing so, Sato intended to create a legal setting which would enable LN member countries and "contracting parties" (the latter including Japan) to enjoy equal standing vis-a-vis each other. Although Sato succeeded in persuading Arita that it was necessary to reset Japan as "a state withdrawing from the LN that could coexist with the LN", the outbreak of the 2nd Sino-Japanese war about a year after the Conference resulted in sanctions being imposed on Japan by the LN, which left Japanese decision-makers with no other option but to abandon any hope of coexistence.

著者

樋口 真魚

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.6, pp.1097-1132, 2014

---

This article investigates Japanese attempts to reset its political relations with the League of Nations (hereafter, the LN) after the former's withdrawal from the League, focusing on the Japanese stance at the Montreux Conference of 1936, which was held three years after Japan's withdrawal for the purpose of revising articles concerning the demilitarization of the Dardanelles and Bosporus Straits, first declared in the 1923 Treaty of Lausanne. Close examination of Japanese diplomacy during the Montreux Conference indicates that its decision makers were seeking some ideal means by which to reset the country's political relations with the League throughout the mid-1930s. They were particularly sensitive towards the LN Covenant, which in their opinion appeared to offer a legal basis for imposing sanctions on any country of the world, including Japan. Such sensitivity sharped from 1934 on after the Soviet Union joined the LN, due to the perception that the outbreak of Soviet-Japanese hostilities was highly imminent, leading to fears that the Soviets might call for the LN to impose sanctions on Japan if war did break out. These concerns are the reason why the Japanese government was very active during the Montreux Conference, in addition to regarding the Conference, which was marked by a fierce debate regarding the legal relationship between the revised treaty and the LN Covenant, as the touchstone leading to the future of Japan's diplomatic policy toward the LN. There were two constrasting opinions within the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Gaimusho 外務省) over the stance to be taken towards the revised treaty. One line, advocated by Foreign Minister Arita Hachiro, was to attempt to block LN intervention altogether. The other, advocated by Sato Naotake, the Japanese delegate to the Montreux Conference, argued that Japan should seek means of coexisting with the LN. In more concrete terms, Arita intended to block intervention by calling for a treaty signing congress (teiyaku kokukaigi 締約国会議) as a diplomatic platform opposing the LN and asserting that the text of the revised treaty should seek to avoid LN interference by separating the new convention from the LN Covenant. In opposition to Arita's assertions, Sato was prepared to partially accept "a treaty supplementary to the LN Covenant", which European members, such as the Soviet Union and France, aspired to conclude. By doing so, Sato intended to create a legal setting which would enable LN member countries and "contracting parties" (the latter including Japan) to enjoy equal standing vis-a-vis each other. Although Sato succeeded in persuading Arita that it was necessary to reset Japan as "a state withdrawing from the LN that could coexist with the LN", the outbreak of the 2nd Sino-Japanese war about a year after the Conference resulted in sanctions being imposed on Japan by the LN, which left Japanese decision-makers with no other option but to abandon any hope of coexistence.

著者

青木 然

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.123, no.11, pp.1929-1968, 2014-11-20

---

This article studies the perceptions of Korea and China among the people in Japan during the latter part of the 19th century. The antecedent research has explained that the people had become to transfer their own sense of inferiority to their East Asian neighbors, whose Westernization had been stagnant, and disdained them because the people's opposition to Westernization had been crushed by means of the suppression of the revolt. This interpretation ignores the contradictory situation of a nation of people unable to internally resolve their own opposition to Western culture, while looking down on other nations based on those same Western standards. In order to show the way such a contradiction was dealt with in the Japanese mass consciousness, this article takes up the popular entertainment, especially kodan (講談), the Japanese traditional storytelling, to extract the Japanese people's understanding of Western culture and their hopes represented by the images of Korea and China on a deeper level than what was expressed in rebellion. In presenting the evidence, the author attempts to clarify the features of narrative of the popular entertainment in order to interpret its depiction of Korea and China in terms of popular understanding by focusing on the mentality of popular entertainment, as well as the changes of national entertainment policy, trends and social contexts. In concrete terms, the author identifies two conflicting types of narration in popular entertainment at the time: the satirical style that originated on the urban scene during the late Edo period and the oratorical style, which first appeared during the 1880s, against a backdrop of increasing migration from the countryside into the cities. In the performances taking up such events of the early 1880s as the Imo Incident (July 1882) in Seoul, Korea and the Sino-French War (1884-85), we find satirical narrative showed its twisted sympathies with "obstinateness" of the forces of resistance in both countries and ridiculing the shallow Westernized behavior of the Japanese people. On the other hand, when dealing with the 1st Sino-Japanese War, the oratorical style pours invective and abuse upon the Chinese, while the satirical performances objectified them and counteract with words of sympathy for the Koreans and Chinese. In the presence of such conflicting narrative styles, the Japanese people became aware of Korea and China not only as scapegoats for its own oppression, but also as a means of escaping from the constant anxiety of being confined within the limits of the Western code of civilized behavior. However, the difficulty in confronting the fallacy of its civilized self-image became expressed in the Japanese people's hesitation to empathize with its Korean and Chinese counterparts. Such a way of adopting Western civilization, which skillfully grants dispensation from self-denial, can be called, in the opinion of the author, one of the "privileges" accorded the masses living under imperial rule.

著者

長谷川 順二

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.123, no.3, pp.333-371, 2014-03-20

---

The changes that have occurred in the course of the Yellow River over the ages has been considered to be an important theme in the historical geography of China, and many researchers have conducted studies of the subject using various methods. The various explanations in the extant bibliographic sources about river course change in dynastic China were first summarized during the early Qing period by Hu Wei in his Yugong Zhuizhi 禹貢錐指 (Brief Study of "Tribute of Yu"), which proposed that major changes had occurred in the River's course. Hu's argument then formed the basis of various opinions that six or seven significant changes had occurred leading up to the existing course as of 1855, in such works as Zhongguo Lishi Ditu Ji 中国歴史地図集 (Collected Historical Maps of China) and Huanghe Zhi 黄河志 (Gazetteer of the Yellow River). In particular, as to the pre-Eastern Han era, all argued that the river's course had changed twice: one being observed during the Warring States period in the fifth year of the reign of Eastern Zhou King Ding (602 BC), the other occurring between the third year Wang Mang's Xin Dynasty (11 CE) and the 13 year of the reign of Later Han Emperor Ming (70 CE), in The flood control works of Wangjing 王景. However, as observed in Yugong Shanchuan Dilitu 禹貢山川地理図 (Geographical Maps of "Tribute of Yu") by Cheng Dachang 程大昌 of the Southern Song Dynasty, there was in pre-Ming Dynasty times a great deal of emphasis placed on the river course change project named after Provincial Governor Donqui 頓丘 in the third year of the reign of Former Han Emperor Wu (132 BC), while no mention is given to the Wangjing Project. The author has elsewhere reconstructed via remote sensing data the old course of the Yellow River between the Warring States and Former Han Periods and has shown, based on that reconstruction and micro upland topography, the changes that occurred in the river near Liaocheng, Shandong Province in 132 BC. In the present article, the author reexamines the traditional discourse concerning the changes that occurred up through the Latter Han Period, based on his previous findings. In addition, there is also information in the Hanshu's 漢書 "Gouzu Zhi" (Treatise on Canals and Rivers) section about the first Yellow River levee of the Warring States period, which Kimura Masao argues signifies the existence of state-operated irrigation projects in the lower reaches of the Yellow River, indicating one basic condition of ancient Chinese despotism. However, the author's reconstruction of the ancient river course and the present topographical data concerning the region shows these levies to have been formed by the Yellow River naturally, making it very difficult to concur with the conventional discourse that large scale irrigation projects were already underway in the lower Yellow River basin as early as the Warring States period.

著者

邉見 統

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.123, no.7, pp.1307-1331, 2014-07-20

---

After pacifying the Chinese world during the 5th year of his reign (202 BCE), Former Han Dynasty Emperor Liu Bang (also referred to as Gaozu 高祖) duly rewarded his loyal followers with titles of ranked status, the highest of which was Liehou 列侯. We find items in such ancient chronicles as Shiji 史記, and Hanshu 漢書 describing the institution of such ranks at the beginning of the period, describing them as the "Liehou hierarchy"; and the research to date on the subject has shown that 1) eighteen such rankings were instituted during the Liu Bang's reign and 2) in the 2nd year of the Gaohou 高后 era (186 BCE), the Empress Dowager's Lu 呂 Family regime instituted what is known as the "Gaozu System of Leihou Rankings" (Gaozuxi Liehou Weici 高祖系列侯位次). However, as the result of an analysis of descriptions concerning ranked status in the ancient historiography, the author of the present article adds that the Gaozuxi System was revised during the reign of Emperor Wen 文. As to the political significance of the establishment of the Gaozuxi System in 186 BCE, first, there was the intention to preserve the 18 ranks set up by Liu Bang and respect his authority, in addition to recognizing the achievements of those who were so honored during his reign. It was in this way that the Lu Family regime planned to obtain the support of Liu Bang's retainers, implying that such actions as granting feudal estates to the princes of the politically powerful Lu Family was initially met with strong resistance, which needed to be appeased. As to the revisions made to the Gaozuxi System during the reign of Emperor Wen, motivation similar to the Lu Family may also be cited, in addition to political necessities specific to the Wen regime.That is to say, the Wen imperial regime was formed after the Dynasty's ministers of state overthrew the Lu Family regime and enthroned Liu Heng, the fourth son of Liu Bang and monarch of the kingdom of Dai 代; therefore, the revisions were also intended to strip members of the Lu Family of their Gaozuxi rankings, thus legitimizing the authority of Emperor Wen over the defeated Lu Family regime.

著者

邉見 統

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.7, pp.1307-1331, 2014

---

After pacifying the Chinese world during the 5th year of his reign (202 BCE), Former Han Dynasty Emperor Liu Bang (also referred to as Gaozu 高祖) duly rewarded his loyal followers with titles of ranked status, the highest of which was Liehou 列侯. We find items in such ancient chronicles as Shiji 史記, and Hanshu 漢書 describing the institution of such ranks at the beginning of the period, describing them as the "Liehou hierarchy"; and the research to date on the subject has shown that 1) eighteen such rankings were instituted during the Liu Bang's reign and 2) in the 2nd year of the Gaohou 高后 era (186 BCE), the Empress Dowager's Lu 呂 Family regime instituted what is known as the "Gaozu System of Leihou Rankings" (Gaozuxi Liehou Weici 高祖系列侯位次). However, as the result of an analysis of descriptions concerning ranked status in the ancient historiography, the author of the present article adds that the Gaozuxi System was revised during the reign of Emperor Wen 文. As to the political significance of the establishment of the Gaozuxi System in 186 BCE, first, there was the intention to preserve the 18 ranks set up by Liu Bang and respect his authority, in addition to recognizing the achievements of those who were so honored during his reign. It was in this way that the Lu Family regime planned to obtain the support of Liu Bang's retainers, implying that such actions as granting feudal estates to the princes of the politically powerful Lu Family was initially met with strong resistance, which needed to be appeased. As to the revisions made to the Gaozuxi System during the reign of Emperor Wen, motivation similar to the Lu Family may also be cited, in addition to political necessities specific to the Wen regime.That is to say, the Wen imperial regime was formed after the Dynasty's ministers of state overthrew the Lu Family regime and enthroned Liu Heng, the fourth son of Liu Bang and monarch of the kingdom of Dai 代; therefore, the revisions were also intended to strip members of the Lu Family of their Gaozuxi rankings, thus legitimizing the authority of Emperor Wen over the defeated Lu Family regime.

著者

山本 英史

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.123, no.9, pp.1641-1643, 2014-09-20

著者

山本 英史

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.123, no.9, pp.1641-1643, 2014

著者

石橋 崇雄

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.91, no.12, pp.1847-1856, 1982-12-20

著者

近藤 和彦

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.111, no.12, pp.1986-1988, 2002-12-20

著者

小田中 直樹

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.114, no.5, pp.五八四-五八八, 2005-05-20

著者

芦部 彰

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.123, no.4, pp.569-593, 2014-04-20

---

Explaining the features and historical developments of social policy in the Federal Republic of Germany, focusing on Catholicism during the 1950s, is indispensable due to the influence of Catholicism on various aspects of politics and society at that time. That influence is also evident in the housing policy implemented at the time. Within the framework of social housing, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) gave priority in the second Housing Act of 1956 to the construction of privately owned single family dwellings, each with an adjacent garden and barn. To explain the conceptual foundations of this policy, the author focuses on politician Paul Lucke, the CDU's chief housing policy-maker, and the Catholic intellectuals around him. First, Lucke and his colleagues designed the housing policy based on the idea of enabling the private ownership of land and houses among a broad strata of the population, based on the Catholic social teaching that private ownership is regarded as the basis of an autonomous personality. Through this policy, they aimed at resisting the collectivism of East Germany that created, in their words, the "impersonal masses". Secondly, Lucke's group conceptualized the houses they envisioned as "Familienheim", thereby incorporating Catholic views of family into their housing policy; to wit, private property enables the patriarch to rule his family and protect them against the threat of intervention by the state. Finally, Lucke's group emphasized the value of self-help in the process of housing construction. That is to say, they regarded the construction of one's own home as practicing the kind of self-help promoted in Catholic social teaching. Considering these policy features, the author concludes that the CDU's housing policy was based on principles derived from Catholic social doctrine. Relative to other housing reform concepts, the CDU opposed reformers who sought to create new social ties in urban areas through the promotion of new types of collective dwelling plans; and garnering support from reformers critical of metropolises, it promoted housing rooted in the soil. From the above urban reform perspective, the CDU's housing policy could be assessed as conservative; however, given the characteristics of those Catholic social teachings that reject socialist or collectivist avenues to social reform and attempt to find a path guided by the Catholic concept of personality, the CDU's housing policy should rather be viewed as pursuing social reform through Catholic perspectives.

著者

藤原 翔太

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.123, no.12, pp.2149-2177, 2014-12-20

---

On 17 February 1800, the Consulat enacted a law concerning the districting and administration of the entire territory of France, and embarked on fundamental reforms that would lead to the encouragement and reinforcement of the centralization of local administrative institutions. However, the law also reintroduced the commune system, thus reviving local autonomy, a fact which has long been neglected. Once noticed, this fact leads to the question of why the regime of Napoleon, which has been considered to be a centralized one, needed to reorganize certain structural features of local autonomous institutions. In order to answer this question, the author of this article examines the structure of local governance under Napoleon by focusing on the town mayors who represented both the communes and central state authority in the prefectures of the Hautes-Pyrenees. The mayors of rural towns and cities who served under Napoleon have long been criticized for being "incompetent" and in league with their constituents, problems that were fully recognized by contemporary governors of prefectures and arrondissements (prefects and vice-prefects), as well as by the central government. Therefore, the prefectures proposed that any canton larger in area than a commune should have one paid mayor; however, the central government ignored this proposal and persisted in maintaining the commune system. This means that the government regarded the appointment of mayors based on the commune system as the best way to rule at the local level. Such a conclusion leads to the question of how the mayors, who were so important in terms of local rule, were actually chosen. To answer this question, the author first turns to an examination of the available mayoral prosopography and finds that there were definite differences in social status between the mayors of canton administrative centers (chef-lieu) and those of ordinary communes. Moreover, regarding the actual administration of local authorities, we find unique solutions adopted by prefecture-level bureaus to deal with problems caused by the mayors of rural towns and cities. Despite obvious regional differences, in the economic and cultural periphery of the Pyrenees, administrative affairs of the greatest import were carried on at the canton level. Rather than this fact indicating that the commune system was being treated as a mere formality, we find mayors of chef-lieu, who were selected from the ranks of local dignitaries, utilizing their political influence to guide politicians of inferior status and power in their duties as mayors of ordinary communes. In this sense, the commune system should be considered as having been introduced into a highly centralized, socially stratified political order for the purpose of integrating political power and influence at the regional level.

著者

藤原 翔太

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.12, pp.2149-2177, 2014

---

On 17 February 1800, the Consulat enacted a law concerning the districting and administration of the entire territory of France, and embarked on fundamental reforms that would lead to the encouragement and reinforcement of the centralization of local administrative institutions. However, the law also reintroduced the commune system, thus reviving local autonomy, a fact which has long been neglected. Once noticed, this fact leads to the question of why the regime of Napoleon, which has been considered to be a centralized one, needed to reorganize certain structural features of local autonomous institutions. In order to answer this question, the author of this article examines the structure of local governance under Napoleon by focusing on the town mayors who represented both the communes and central state authority in the prefectures of the Hautes-Pyrenees. The mayors of rural towns and cities who served under Napoleon have long been criticized for being "incompetent" and in league with their constituents, problems that were fully recognized by contemporary governors of prefectures and arrondissements (prefects and vice-prefects), as well as by the central government. Therefore, the prefectures proposed that any canton larger in area than a commune should have one paid mayor; however, the central government ignored this proposal and persisted in maintaining the commune system. This means that the government regarded the appointment of mayors based on the commune system as the best way to rule at the local level. Such a conclusion leads to the question of how the mayors, who were so important in terms of local rule, were actually chosen. To answer this question, the author first turns to an examination of the available mayoral prosopography and finds that there were definite differences in social status between the mayors of canton administrative centers (chef-lieu) and those of ordinary communes. Moreover, regarding the actual administration of local authorities, we find unique solutions adopted by prefecture-level bureaus to deal with problems caused by the mayors of rural towns and cities. Despite obvious regional differences, in the economic and cultural periphery of the Pyrenees, administrative affairs of the greatest import were carried on at the canton level. Rather than this fact indicating that the commune system was being treated as a mere formality, we find mayors of chef-lieu, who were selected from the ranks of local dignitaries, utilizing their political influence to guide politicians of inferior status and power in their duties as mayors of ordinary communes. In this sense, the commune system should be considered as having been introduced into a highly centralized, socially stratified political order for the purpose of integrating political power and influence at the regional level.