著者
谷口 雄太
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.122, no.12, pp.2019-2042, 2013-12-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

This article addresses a number of questions about the Ashikaga Clan that have remained unclarified in the research to date: namely, Who made up that Clan? What is meant by the Ashikagas being as a "clan" (ichimon 一門) ? What does "the Ashikagas becoming a clan" mean? By reexaming these questions, the author hopes to better understand how the Ashikaga period came to a destructive end. The author begins by showing that the heretofore vaguely used term Ashikaga-shi Goikka 足利氏御一家 has been used in the two different senses of Ashikaga Gosanke (Three Branches of the Ashikaga Family) and Ashikaga Ichimon. And about the comment by the Tokis of the Sengoku period--After the Goikka, I am the leader of the all the other families, the author shows that "Goikka" means Ashikaga Ichimon. Secondly, the author reexamines the similarly vague term "Ashikaga Ichimon" by identifying its members from the available medieval historiography. One characteristic feature that has not been noticed to date is that both the Nitta Branch of the Minamoto Clan and the Yoshimi Family were included among its members. In particular, 1) the Nittas regarded themselves as members from the very beginning, since the Ashikaga Clan was essentially part of "the Yoshikuni branch of the Minamoto Clan"; and 2) the perception that the Nittas did not consider themselves part of the Ashikaga Clan can be traced back to the exclusive self-identity "ware-ware 我々" consciousness described in the Taiheiki 太平記. Next, after stating that there is yet no piece of research that has tried to present the Ashikaga Clan in a holistic fashion, but should be, the author shows from the medieval historiography that the above-mentioned perception of the Tokis that the Ashikaga Clan surpassed in status and prestige all other warrior clans was universally widespread during the Ashikaga period. Finally, the author inquires as to why such families as the Miyoshis and Odas of the Sengoku Period tried to debunk and alter the above-mentioned perception of the Ashikaga Clan's superiority, concluding that it was necessary to first switch the prerequisite for "changing the system from above" from kinship (i.e., membership in the Ashikaga Clan) to actual organizational ability as one indispensable step in the destruction of the existing order.
著者
一ノ瀬 俊也
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.8, pp.1370-1385, 2003

The intent of the present article is to analyze "histories" compiled by each regiment in the Japanese army from the Russo through the Sino-Japanese wars, concluding that such works were nothing the Sino-Japanese wars, concluding that such works were nothing but attempts to praise "the heroic past" and provide a means to instill such a consciousness in both the troops and society in general.The historical remembrances of the Russo-Japanese conflict were more and more emphasized with the outbreak of the First World War and the anti-war and anti-militarization movement that accompanied it.The descriptions of those who had died in past conflict were intended to stir the emotions of the troops and provide a route by which to legitimized "dying forons's country".Even on the local level during that time, "memorials to veterans" of both wars were compiled with the similar intention of establishing a forum upon which to instill a common sentiment about the viewpoints and logic of the military within local society.After the outbreak of the Manchurian Incident, "regimental histories" took on two distinct forms.The first consisted of memoirs concerning the victorious history of the Russo-and Sino-Japanese Wars, which in addition to insisting upon Japan's legitimate claim to Manchuria, tried to prove that even the Japanese people, who had not really experienced a genuine war since the Russo-Japanese conflict and had become used to peace, could indeed win another full-scale war, thus playing a role in attempts to instill"definite behavior patterns" and encourage the country's fighting spirit.The second contained contemporary regiment-by-regiment accounts of the Manchurina Incident told from the personal views of individual combatants with the intention of verifying the regiment's consciousness concerning the Incident, encouraging further sacrifices for the cause, and appsaling to society at large.The veteran memorial literature published on the local level at that time were compiled with a similar intent in mind, attempting like during World War I to instill military ideals and persuasive logic into society at large.
著者
屋良 健一郎
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.121, no.11, pp.1839-1874, 2012-11-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

The island of Tanegashima, which is located south of the Osumi Pennisula of southern Kyushu is best known as the portal for the initial entry of firearms into Japan and the first manufacturer of Japanese-made firearms and has in the research to date been studied almost exclusively in that light, including studies of the Island's feudal lords, the Tanegashima Clan. Although there is some very specialized research on the Tanegashima Clan as locally based land proprietors (kokujin 国人) who went through a process of subjugation to the Shimazu Clan, the characteristic features of the Tanegashimas have yet to be sufficiently explored. The Tanegashimas, who occupied a territory between the ruling feudal lords of Satsuma Province, the Shimazu Clan, and the kingdom of the Ryukyu Islands, should be considered as having a unique character in the light of such geographical circumstances. The present article is an attempt to place the Tanegashima Clan within the context of the southern Kyushu maritime world as it existed during the late medieval period. By virtue of their military alliance with the Shimazu Clan which resulted in their consequent control of the islands to the south of Kyushu, the Tanegashimas were given the opportunity to engage with merchant ships and Chinese junks and participate in trade with the Ryukyu Kingdom. Consequently, the Tanegashimas were able to obtain foreign manufactures; and following their conversion during the latter half of the 15th century to the Nichiren Sect of Buddhism, came to enjoy personal contact and exchange with figures in the capital region, and in the process of fostering ties of mutual friendship, the leading aristocrats and samurai commanders residing in Kyoto found a new source of foreign goods. It should be specially noted that those who came to the islands from the capital region were enthusiastically recruited as vassals by the Tanegashima Clan. This "Kyoto connection" was invaluable in negotiating and securing Shimazu Takahisa's appointment to the prestigious post of Shuri Daibu (Minister of Public Works) in 1551. In the background to the Tanegashima Clan's intimate "Kyoto connection" and its knowledge and technical know-how regarding arms production lay its close relations to the Shimazu Clan, but such relations were by no mean exclusionary, as the Tanegashimas actively sought contact with other feudal lords. Regarding the Ryukyu Kingdom, it was during the reign of its second king, Shoshin (1477-1526), that the monarch assumed an attitude of superiority over the surrounding islands, but continued to trade with the Tanegashimas, despite their "inferiority". In the background of Tanegashima Tadatoki's trade relations with the Ryukyus probably lay the desire to obtain from that kingdom goods that the Hosokawa Clan was importing to the Ming Dynasty, as evidenced by the alliance formed with Hosokawa Takatoki, who was an important figure in the promotion of Sino-Japanese trade relations. The author is also of the opinion that the socalled attempt by Ouchi Yoshitaka to blockade Tanegashima's ships should rather be interpreted as an attempt to intercept the ships being sent to China by Hosokawa Harumoto. From the standpoint of the family as a force in maritime foreign trade due to its geographical location, the Tanegashima Clan should be considered in the light of its multilateral diplomatic ties to the other powerful players in Japan's southern maritime region.
著者
大井 知範
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.2, pp.177-209, 2015-02-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

This paper attempts to elicit the reality of the Hapsburg Empire's global seafaring prowess despite its reputation as a mainly continental power, in light of historical findings that an Imperial warship had been stationed in the seas of East Asia approximately 100 years ago. Research regarding Western navies stationed overseas has in the past focused largely on their use as a means of military competition or imperialistic ambitions toward the non-Western world. However, here the author points to another purpose with which warships were deployed overseas; namely, to serve as media for promoting international relations within the daily routine of peacetime conditions. After outlining the deployment system of warships outside of the region of Europe, and the reasons, circumstances and substance of the Hapsburg Empire's stationing of a warship in East Asian waters, the author turns to the specific duties of the ship, in particular, how it performed the very important duty of any Western navy in protecting its country's citizen and commercial interests in the region. However, since the Hapsburg Empire had no overseas interests or citizens to protect in East Asia, it was impossible for the Austro-Hungarians to set up a system of direct protection like that of the other major powers, due mainly to its unique position in having only a single warship to accommodate such needs. The author then addresses the subject of goodwill exchange, which he considers to be the most important daily routine of the Hapsburg warship, and looks there for the ultimate reason for stationing it in East Asian waters. Finally, he focuses on the military band on board the ship, in order to clarify the fact that the Hapsburg Empire was concerned in identifying with maritime coastal society in East Asia through the medium of music. The Hapsburg Empire thus intended to adapt to the imperial order as a major power in East Asia by carefully cultivating various daily peacetime routines.
著者
金子 龍司
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.25-46, 2016 (Released:2018-01-28)

本稿は、太平洋戦争末期の娯楽政策について考察する。具体的にはサイパンが陥落した一九四四年七月に発足した小磯国昭内閣期以降終戦までの政策に注目する。 小磯内閣期の思想・文化統制については、先行研究により、東條内閣期の言論弾圧が見直されて言論暢達政策が採用され、思想・言論統制の緩和によって戦意昂揚を目指したことが指摘されている。娯楽統制についてもこの枠組みで語られ、従来強化一方だった統制がサイパン陥落・同内閣の成立を契機として一転して緩和されたと整理され、その画期性が指摘されている。 しかし、この統制緩和は小磯内閣が娯楽に対して講じた措置のひとつに過ぎないし、画期といっても、この統制緩和に限らなければ、娯楽への積極的な措置は小磯内閣発足以前からすでに講じられていた。つまり先行研究は、統制緩和の画期性を重視するあまり、小磯内閣の娯楽政策の全容を明らかにしておらず、しかも従前の政策との連続性も見過ごしているきらいがある。 したがって本稿は、小磯内閣期の娯楽政策をできるだけ詳しく分析することで右の二点を明らかにし、同政策を歴史的に位置づける試みを行う。具体的には、当事者たちの問題認識や政策決定過程や政策の実効性を検討材料とする。 本稿が明らかにするのは以下の事柄である。第一に、娯楽統制史上、小磯内閣期の統制緩和は個別の措置としてはたしかに画期的であったが、娯楽に対する積極的な姿勢や問題認識に関してはむしろ前内閣との連続性が目立っていたこと。第二に、政策の実効性といった観点からは、個別具体的な措置については一定の成果が見られ、戦争末期にあっても興行の機会は確保され盛況も珍しくなかったこと。第三に、それにもかかわらず、政策全体の評価としては、絶望化する戦況下で観客や興行者たちが娯楽を供給・享受して戦意昂揚に結びつけるだけの精神的余裕を失っていたため、失敗に終わったと結論せざるを得ないことである。
著者
稲垣 春樹
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.127, no.1, pp.1-34, 2018 (Released:2019-01-20)

イギリス領インド植民地史研究においては、18世紀後半から19世紀前半にかけて、現地の商業文化への参入を前提とする多元的な海洋帝国から、植民地政府を頂点とする一元的な領土帝国への転換が起こり、それに伴って植民地統治がより専制的になったと指摘されている。とりわけ植民地法制史の研究者は、この領土拡張に伴う専制化の一因として、征服戦争という緊急事態における例外的措置が、戦後に規範化されて平時の体制に持ち越されるという現象が見られたことを指摘することで、この問題に新たな研究視角を与えている。しかし既存の研究は、抽象的な国家論に言及したり人種偏見が背景にあったと指摘したりするのみで、例外状態が平常化・制度化された具体的なメカニズムについて十分な地域史的検討を行っていない。本稿はこれについて、インド人によるイギリス司法制度の積極的な利用を背景とする1820年代ボンベイにおける政府と裁判所の管轄権対立と、それを契機とするボンベイ、カルカッタ、ロンドンにおける立法、行政、司法の三権に関する国制的な論争、そしてその帰結である1833年東インド会社特許法によるインド統治の集権化を事例として検討した。その結果、第三次マラータ戦争直後の1820年代ボンベイの情勢不安と、ボンベイ政府がこれに在地貴族を通じた間接統治政策によって対応しようとしていたという地域的な条件の下で、インド人の日常的な司法実践に起因する管轄権問題が政府の治安維持政策の根幹を揺るがすものとして解釈され、緊急事態における政府の裁量権を確保しようとする動きをボンベイ、カルカッタ、ロンドンにおいて生み出していたことが明らかになった。すなわち多元的な植民地法制に内在した管轄権問題は、特定の地域史的な条件において現地行政官に危機として解釈されることで統治制度の専制化に帰結したのである。
著者
紺谷 由紀
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.6, pp.1-36, 2016 (Released:2018-10-05)

紀元後四世紀以降の後期ローマ帝政期の皇帝たちは、発達した宮廷機構の内部に多くの宦官―去勢者―を有した。このような去勢者に関して本稿は、法史料、特にユスティニアヌス一世(在位五三七~五六五年)治世の法集成である所謂『ローマ法大全 Corpus Iuris Civilis』に収録された紀元後二―六世紀の法学者の見解や勅法を分析し、去勢者や生殖不能者の法的位置付け、起草者たる法学者、皇帝、中央行政の去勢認識の明確化を試みた。中でも、従来看過されてきた去勢者と奴隷・被解放自由人という法的身分との関連、並びにユスティニアヌスの法典編纂事業に伴う規定の変化に注目し、用語(一)、去勢奴隷に関する規定、帝国内の去勢を禁止する勅法(二)、そして被解放自由人に関しては婚姻や養子、相続をめぐる去勢者の法的能力(三)の問題を考察した。 結論は以下の二点に集約される。第一は、過去の規定の整理や新しい勅法の発布を伴う大規模な編纂事業が去勢の規定の変化に大きな影響を及ぼしたという点である。中でもユスティニアヌス治世には奴隷・解放奴隷の法的地位の向上が確認されるが、この傾向が同じ身分に属する去勢者の規定を左右する背景の一つであったと指摘した。二点目は、去勢に対する立法者の多様な認識である。去勢行為は、その死亡率の高さから殺人や傷害、隷属化の手段として認識される一方、去勢者は、生殖不能の一種として生殖器の損傷を受け、将来的に実子を持ち得ない者とみなされた。他方、法史料における去勢者の評価に関しては、叙述史料の非難、偏見にみられるような否定的なものではなく、むしろ一定の帝国内の去勢者の存在を許容する寛容なものであった。以上の法史料の分析は、去勢者が、先行研究で強調されるような宮廷宦官という社会的役割でなく、生殖器の損傷や生殖不能という根本的な身体の状態に第一に結び付けられていたことを明らかにし、結果としてより広範な帝国社会の去勢者研究を喚起する。