著者

佐伯 有清

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.103, no.1, pp.122-123, 1994-01-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

著者

佐藤 博信

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.85, no.7, pp.1049-1066,1124-, 1976-07-20 (Released:2017-10-05)

---

The chief aim of this article is to analyze the old letters (monjo) which are kept in the possession of Banna Temple (Bannaji) in Shimotsuke province and to further studies about the Kanto Ashikaga families. The contents of the Bannaji monjo are so complicated that very few students have ever made use of them. In this paper, therefore, the author was obliged to take as his chief subject the general framework and meaning of the letters. Furthermore, in this research the materials were carefully selected and limited to the later Middle Ages. But, even then the sources are of quite a considerable number. In the past it has been thought that these letters had been filed into two groups : undated letters (a sort of hosho) dating mainly from the Sengoku period and those letters connected with the Koga-Kubo Ashikaga families. But, after careful examination, it became apparent that the latter consisted of two different groups of letters, the Kogasama monjo and the Shakesama monjo. Most of the Kogasama monjo date from the later Muromachi and Sengoku periods (mid-15th to 16th cent.). The author tried to prove this by checking and investigating each of the successive generations of the Kogasama and Shakesama families and their attendants. Thus, the so-called Bannaji monjo in the latter period of the Middle Ages were made up of two massive groups of letters related to the Kogasama and Shakesama families. And, in addition, they had a three group connection -Bannaji-Shakesama-Kogasama -as was publicly manifest by the right of recommendation belonging to the Shakesama family and the right of appointment belonging to the Kogasama family. In the start of the 16th century these relations came to an end with the decline of the Shakesama family's power. Thus, there emerged a direct link between Bannaji and the Kogasama family. But, in the latter half of the 16th century, in the era of Yoshiuji Ashikaga, a new three group connection was set up among Bannaji, Hoshuin, and Kurihashisama.

著者

巽 由樹子

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.118, no.9, pp.1585-1616, 2009

---

In this paper, I examine the royal articles that were published in the Russian illustrated journals of the late nineteenth century. There have been few studies on representations of the Tsar in modern Russian society, primarily because Soviet historiography has, so far, focused on only two elements of the Russian society-the intellectual high society and the world of the "people." In this paper, I analyze the representations of the Tsar in the illustrated journals of the late nineteenth century in order to fill the gap between the two aforementioned elements. Illustrated journals such as Niva, Vsemirnaia Illiustratsiia, and Rodina, which were entirely new variants of the Russian print media, became highly popular during this period. As most publishers were of Western origin and were familiar with the European tradition of entertaining visual magazines, they imitated the style of the European media when they started their own journals in Russia. The readers of these journals consisted of the urban dwellers in European Russia, who began to form a new social group after the Great Reforms of the 1860s. The images of Russian monarchs that were published in these European-style illustrated journals were quite different from the traditional representations of the saintly Tsar. First, royal portraits in these journals were influenced by the carte de visite style of taking celebrities' pictures, which was fashionable in Western Europe in the 1860s. Second, these journals juxtaposed the articles on the Tsar and his family with those on other European royal houses. Third, these royal articles focused on the private life and the body natural of the Tsar. Good examples of articles that combined all these three elements are the ones on the assassination of Tsar Alexander II in 1881. Russian illustrated journals featured secularized, relative, and humanized images of the Tsar for the purpose of entertaining their readers. This tendency was in contravention to the strategy of representation pursued by Nicholas II, who intended to portray himself as a saintly Tsar and gave much importance to traditional rituals. Nicholas II planned to unite the Russian Empire on the basis of the age-old practice of worshipping the Tsar. In modern Russian society, however, the images of the Tsar had already been secularized through their circulation in these illustrated journals. This gap in the representation of the Tsar may have contributed to the difficulties that Tsarism had to face after the 1905 revolution.

著者

林 友里江

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.11, pp.37-60, 2015

---

古代日本の文書行政の進展は、読申公文から申文刺文へという政務体系の移行に表れる。本稿では、太政官の政務における弁官局の関与の仕方の変容から文書行政の進展過程を検討した。<br> 弁官から議政官への行政案件の上申である弁官申政は、本来は一連の太政官の日常政務の一環として行われていたが、(延長 923-31・承平931-35年間に成立した陣申文は、申政とその前提となる結文のみを独立=孤立=疎外させたものであった。そのため申政者は結文の責任者である大弁に限られたが、それに伴い弁官局の秩序に変化が生じ、大弁は弁官本来の業務に携わらなくなり局の代表者となった。また、陣申文の成立は読申公文と完全に分離した純粋な申文刺文の政務の成立であり、文書行政の進展の到達点として評価できる。<br>また、弁官は本来狭義の太政官からの独立性を有したため、弁・史は少納言・外記に取り次がれて申政を行っていた。しかし南所申文・陣申文には少納言・外記は関与せず、弁官が太政官を訪れ申政するという構造は失われた.さらに、これに対応する変化が太政官奏に起きており、狭義の太政官たる議政官・少納言・外記によって行われた太政官奏に代わり、議政官と弁官によって行われる官奏が主となった。弁官申政における申政事項は申政後も弁官の手から完全には離れず奏にも弁官が関与するようになり、政務全体から弁官の独立性が失われた。<br> 弁官の独立性は、口頭行政を含む直接的・具体的な把握方法で諸司管隷を行ったことに根ざしているが、それらが失われたことで弁官は独立性を喪失した。これが文書行政の進展による政務の変化と同期していることは、文書行政の進展が文書への習熟のみによって実現するのではなく、太政官の秩序の変化、律令制下に残存していた伝統的かつ素朴な作法の放棄をも伴わなければならなかったことを示す。以上のように、文書行政の進展は政務の方法や意識の抜本的変革を必要とし、十世紀前半まで徐々に進行したのである。

著者

石見 清裕

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.10, pp.1586-1609,1646-, 1982

---

Raising an army and founding T'ang Dynasty by Li Yuan (李淵) have been understood from the viewpoint of the group of Kuan-lung (関隴) rulers since Hsi-wei (西魏) period, through the analysis of the leading members of Li Yuan group by now. However, I should like to pay attention to the Pi-yeh-t'ou of Hsiung-nu in Ordus for the following reasons. (1)Preceeding the raise of his army, Li Yuan appointed his three sons as feudal lords of the far wesl lands, they are Lung-hsi (隴西), Tun-huang (敦煌), and Ku-tsang (姑臧). Soon after he entered Ch'ang-an (長安), he drew back these appointments, So these seemed to have been his strategic preparations to aim Ch'ang-an from Tai-yuan (太原). The clue to understand this relationship between Li Yuan and these three lands, is found in the genealogy of Tou (竇), Li Yuan's empress reported in "Genealogical Tree of Prime Ministers (宰相世系表)" in "Hsin T'anbg-shu (新唐書)". (2)Tou's original family name was He-tou-ling (〓豆陵), in "Genealogical Tree". This Tou was connected with famous Tou family in Han (漢) period, accordig to the legend of the founder of the T'o-pa tribe (拓抜部) known in the preface to "Wei-shu (魏書)". At this occasion, they invented the story that the father of Tou family of Han period came from the land of Lung-hsi, Tun-huang and Ku-tsang. As a result, we can assume the intervention by He-tou-ling family behind Li Yuan's feudal appointments of his three sons in these lands. (3)He-tou-ling family originated from the Pi-yeh-t'ou tribe of Hsiungnu and belonged to He-lien Hsia Dynasty (赫連夏国) originally. They lived nomadic life in the province of Pei-he (北河) even after the downfall of Hsia (夏) Dynasty and possessed enough power to revolt against Pei-wei (北魏) in the reign of Emperor Hsiao-wen (孝文). As the influence of Pei-wei decreased after the disturbance of Liu-chen (六鎮之乱), they spread widely over Ordus and He-hsi-t'ung-lang (河西通廊). Because of their great power, Kao Huan (高歓) and Yu-wen T'ai (宇文泰) even quarrelled over Pi-yeh-t'ou in the province of Ordus. (4)In the meantime, it is evident from many examples that the strategic point of North China in order to take possession of Ch'ang-an lies in Tai-yuan and Ling-chou (霊州). Therefore, Li Yuan obtained Ling-chou under control through the alliance with the Pi-yeh-t'ou, and He-hsi (河西) route by feudal appointments of his three sons in Lung-hsi, Tun-huang and Ku-tsang. He also controled Turk (突厥), the menacing power in the north, and Hsueh Chu (薛拳), the most powerful warlord in the west, and managed to build up a scheme to enter Ch'ang-an. During T'an period, Tou family's fame had no equal, because they had not only a genealogical relation to Kao-Tsu (高祖), but also they played important parts to found the dynasty. In the result of this discusson, it can be said that Hsiung-nu did not disappear simply after the downfall of He-lien Hsia Dynasty (赫連氏夏国) in the history, but they actually parti cipated in founding T'an Dynasty.

著者

洪 性珉

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.126, no.11, pp.41-65, 2017

---

本研究は、遼宋増幣交渉(1042年)の歴史的意義について考察したものである。興宗親政期の遼の政治的状況をみる際、欽哀皇后一族や耶律重元の動向を顧慮しなければならない。欽哀皇后の一族蕭孝穆は、その一族と興宗両方を配慮しなければならない立場にいた。欽哀皇后は、耶律重元を次期皇位継承者として支持していたため、興宗は彼を政治的な配慮のうえで厚遇し、多くの権力を与えていた。<br>重熙12年(1041)12月に、興宗は南枢密使蕭孝穆と北枢密使蕭恵と協議し、「関南の地」を取るために宋と戦争することを決めた。その際、蕭孝穆による宋との戦争への反対は確認されるが、欽哀皇后の一族による反対は確認されない。興宗は、戦争準備をすると同時に蕭英と劉六符を宋に遣わした。劉六符によって作成された遼の国書は、梁済世という人物によって盗まれて、宋に事前に報告される。遼の国書を入手した宋は、増幣でその問題を解決すると決め、富弼を遼に遣わして交渉を行った。<br>増幣交渉における各人物の立場は異なっていた。遼の興宗は、当初から「関南の地」の割譲を宋に強く求めていた。それに対して、富弼は一貫して増幣による利を説き、最終的には「増幣」で交渉を妥結することに成功した。一方、遼側の交渉担当者劉六符は、領土の割譲に拘っていなかったので、興宗の立場と異なる。これは、興宗皇帝への忠誠と同時に、一族の基盤となる南京地域への配慮も必要であった彼の個人的背景に起因する。<br>増幣で戦争局面がおさまると、遼の内部の諸部族が財物を得られる機会を失って、不満が高まる様子が確認される。これは遊牧国家における掠奪・分配行為と深く関わるものであり、遼の皇帝と諸部族の関係は、以前の遊牧君主と諸部族の関係との類似性が認められる。また、増幣交渉以降は、遼の対宋外交戦略として「威嚇行動」の駆使が見て取れる。その点で、劉六符にとって増幣交渉とは、遼の戦争準備を巧みに「威嚇行動」に転換させて増幣を導くことであった。

著者

吉田 金一

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.89, no.11, pp.1677-1711,1773-, 1980

---

Although it is well-known that Russian ambassador Spathary who had been sent to China in 1676 left a detailed official report, it is not very well-known that the Manchu Memorials on his mission to China was preserved in Petersburg University. In the present article I have reconsidered Spathary's mission to China by using this important Manchu Memorials. The reason why Spathary was sent to Peking in 1676 was because in 1670 the Emperor of China had sent to the Tsar an imperial letter. In this letter China demanded a fugitive, Gantimur, should be sent back, while the answer carried with Spathary stated that the Chinese Imperial letter written in Manchu was not able to be read and Spathary insisted that the Tsar knew nothing about Gantimur. But according to the Manchu Memorials it comes out that Chinese anthorities didn't place trust in what Spathary had said. Nevertheless Chinese authorities took care to hush up this matter. On June 5 China received a letter of the Tsar and gifts from Spathary in the palace and on June 8 received the twelve articles of petition from Spathary. The full text of this twelve articles of petition is recorded only in the Manchu Memorials, while missing in the Spathary's official report. In the sixth item of the petition Spathary desired the exchange of Russian captives and fugitives who have been stayed in China for Chinese in Russia. Therefore, on July 6 Chinese authorities made a proposition to Spathary to exchange Russian captives for Gantimur, in regard to which Spathary answered that the Tsar wouldn't allow. Relating to other items nothing was discussed. On July 30 the Chinese emperor commanded, "On the twelve articles of petition each item should be replied verbally and a letter and presents should be sent to the Tsar." This decision is also recorded in the Manchu Memorials, and omitted in Shih-lu (実録). As a matter of fact, on August 13 Spathary refused to fall on his knee to receive gift for the Tsar, so the imperial decree of July 30 was amended. On August 29 Ko-lao (閣老) conveyed the following new orders to Spathary and his suites. "Gifts should be sent to the Tsar, but a written letter should not be sent to him because Nikolai (Spathary) is discourteous and obstinate. And unless Russia carries out the three demands such as repatriation of Gantimur, Russian should be refused to enter into China." But, as Spathary firmly demanded an imperial letter written on equal terms, on the next August 30 Ko-lao explained to him that China would not able to give any other imperial letter except one written with Russia considered as a tributary state. Therefore Spathary gave up receiving the Imperial letter and left Peking on September I without hearing replies to the above twelve articles of petition. After all Russia couldn't open diplomatic relations with China. China paid its regard to Spathary and dealt leniently with him as much as possible. I suppose this would be due to that Russia had been a great country and China had been troubled with the Rebellion of the Three Feudatories (三藩の乱) at home. Nevertheless China was not able to get rid of its own tributary system.

著者

中立 悠紀

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.128, no.7, pp.1-26, 2019

---

本稿は、BC級戦犯が靖国神社に合祀されるまでの経緯を、戦犯釈放運動の旗振り役でもあった復員(ふくいん)官署(かんしょ)法務(ほうむ)調査(ちょうさ)部門(ぶもん)、及びその周辺政治勢力(戦争(せんそう)受刑者(じゅけいしゃ)世話会(せわかい)、白菊(しらぎく)遺族会(いぞくかい))の動向から明らかにする。<br>復員官署法務調査部門(以下「法調(ほうちょう)」と略記)とは、旧軍の後継機関である復員官署内で戦犯裁判業務を担当した部署である。多数の旧軍人事務官から構成され、法調は戦犯家族の世話も行い、戦犯を合祀する際に必要であった戦犯の名簿も所持していた。<br>講和条約発効直前の一九五二年二月に、法調は戦犯合祀を企図し始め、密接な協力関係下にあった戦争受刑者世話会とともに合祀を推進した。そして援護法と恩給法の対象に戦犯・戦犯遺家族が組み込まれると、一九五四年に靖国神社は世話会に対して、「適当の時機に個人詮議」という留保付きで戦犯を将来合祀する姿勢を示した。ただし、一九五七年秋の段階でも、靖国は世論に配慮して合祀の時期は慎重を期していた。<br>ところがそのような状況にもかかわらず、一部新聞がこれを報道してしまい、世論を警戒した靖国は戦犯合祀そのものに消極的になってしまった。厚生省引揚援護局・法調側は靖国に配慮し、新聞報道で特に問題となっていた東條英機らA級戦犯とBC級戦犯を分離させ、BC級戦犯の先行合祀を要望した。しかし一九五八年の段階で、世論の反発を気にするあまりにBC級の合祀すらも慎重になってしまった靖国を、援護局側は説得するのに約一年を要した。<br>しかし、最後に靖国側は合祀要請を受け入れ、法調が調製した祭神名標に基づき、一九五九年にBC級戦犯の大部分を合祀したのである。<br>本稿を通じて、ポツダム宣言受諾後に解体された旧帝国陸海軍の佐官級官僚が、靖国への戦犯合祀において担った役割を明らかにする。

著者

塚田 孝 松迫 寿代 山口 佳代子 幡鎌 一弘 守屋 正彦 仁木 宏 村田 路人 熊谷 光子 渡辺 恒一 八木 滋 藤田 加代子 渡辺 祥子 町田 哲

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.107, no.5, pp.800-802, 1998

著者

上里 隆史

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.114, no.7, pp.1179-1211, 2005

---

This article investigates the migration of Japanese in the China Sea region, especially in and around Naha, the capital of the Kingdom of Ryukyu, between the 16th and 17th centuries. Previous research on the Japan-Ryukyu relations during medieval times has chiefly focused on the diplomatic relations between the Muromachi government, the Shimazu family of Satsuma, and the Ryukyus. It goes without saying, however, that the focus on state trade alone does not fully explain the historical relations between the two states. It is also necessary for us to consider such private aspects of trade as the activities of people who participated as well as recent findings on medieval maritime trade for a proper understanding of the relationship between medieval Japan and the Ryukyus. The migration of people from Japan to the Ryukyu Islands dates back to the 15th century. The "Ryukyu Kokuzu 琉球国図", a map of the Kingdom in those days depicts Japanese and Ryukyuans living together in Naha. According to the genealogical data on the Ryukyus, Japanese who had emigrated there during the 16th and 17th centuries through the transportation mode which had evolved at that time, can be divided into three groups, based on their places of origin: Kinai, Hokuriku, Kyushu groups. Those people were probably maritime merchants who commuted between the Ryukyus and Japan, but resided permanently in the Ryukyus and engaged in certain occupations, such as the administration of Naha, foreign affairs, medicine, and the tea ceremony. As for the structure of the port city of Naha, Naha-Yomachi 那覇四町, literally, the four townships of Naha, had developed on the fringe of the Chinese settlement of Kumemura 久米村, which was the core of Naha. The fact that Japanese institutions, such as a Shinto shrine, were located on the periphery of Naha-Yomachi shows that, like the goddess Mazu 媽祖 for the Chinese people, Naha was one of the overseas territories of Japanese merchants. Japanese immigrants resided together with Ryukyuans in Naha-Yomachi. During the 16th century, wajin (倭人), or armed Japanese merchants would throng into Naha in quest of the Chinese goods when ever Chinese envoys visited the Ryukyus. The Ryukyu royal government tried to restrict armaments, but failed. Japanese trading facilities called Nihon Kan 日本館 were set up in Naha. During the latter half of the 16th century, Kumemura, the center of Naha and the Chinese settlement, declined, while Naha-Yomachi prospered. During this period, the trade route between Japan and Fujian via Manila was established based on the active circulation of Japanese and new continental silver and Chinese raw silk. The Ryukyus functioned in it as an entrepot between Japan and Manila. It has been thought that the route from the Ryukyus to Southeast Asia was completely abolished in 1570, however, this is not true, for the Ryukyus changed its form of trade from state-sponsored trade to private trade carried out by wajin maritime merchants. The Ryukyus thus become a node connecting East to Southeast Asia.

著者

中島 楽章

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.8, pp.1423-1458, 2009-08-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

---

This article reexamines, with the help of contemporary Chinese and European sources, the plan by Kato Kiyomasa, the lord of Northern Higo Domain, to initiate trade with Luzon during Toyotomi Hideyoshi's invasion of Korea, which Kiyomasa led in 1592. In a letter written to his retainers at home in late 1593, Kiyomasa ordered a Chinese junk loaded with wheat and silver to be dispatched to what the author argues was Luzon, since 1) junks were maritime, rather than coastal, trading vessels, and 2) wheat, the major cargo on board, was the main commodity in Japan's trade with the Philippines at that time. The author argues that Kiyomasa, fearing a long campaign in Korea, planned to used the profits from the Luzon venture to procure sorely needed arms and ammunition. For Japan during the last years of the 16^<th> century, its supply of munitions, like lead and saltpeter, were supplied by three routes, all terminating in Kyushu: 1) the Macao-Nagasaki route, 2) the Chinese route linking Fukien with Kyushu and 3) the entrepot trade from China and Southeast Asia through such points as Luzon. However, given the fact that around the time of Hideyoshi's invasion, the Philippines was suffering from a lack of munitions due to decreasing Chinese imports, Kiyomasa planned to trade for such highly sought after commodities as gold, for the purpose of procuring munitions within Japan. Furthermore, it is a fact that Kiyomasa ordered another junk to sail to Luzon in 1576, which succeeded in arriving at Manila in the summer of the following year, despite worsening diplomatic relations between Japan and the Philippines. Finally, the author confirms that during the 1590s, Japanese vessels began to venture out on the high seas, to not only Luzon, but such Southeast Asian continental locations as Cochin China, Siam, Cambodia and Malacca. The activities of the vermillion seal ship's voyages to the region, which began at the beginning of the 17^<th> century, were hardly spontaneous events, since their routes and trade activities had already been pioneered during last decades of the previous century.

著者

加島 潤

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.113, no.3, pp.377-378, 2004

著者

山室 恭子

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.95, no.1, pp.89-96, 1986

著者

黒田 達也

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.97, no.2, pp.228-235, 1988

著者

伊藤 滋夫

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.109, no.3, pp.459-460, 2000-03-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

著者

島田 誠

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.97, no.7, pp.1201-1220,1319-, 1988-07-20 (Released:2017-11-29)

---

From the late Republic to the early Empire there lived some people called provinciales in the Mediterranean World. And sometimes they were juxtaposed to Italici, who had originated from Italy or still dwelled in there. Most scholars think that they were peregrini (foreigners), who dwelled in the provinces. But a few scholars oppose them and assert that provinciales were the Roman citizens who resided in the provinces, and that Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy were called Italici. This paper is concerned with the following three problems : I.What was the status of provinciales? II.Were the Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy called Italici? And what is the nature of privilege called ius Italicum? III.Under what conditions could both provinciales and Italici exist? I.The author examines the usage of provinciales in the Latin literature and finds that some Roman citizens were called provinciales, but no foreigners were called provinciales. In turn the author scrutinizes the usage of the designations of foreigners, and concludes that in the Latin literature provinciales is carefully distinguished from the terms for the foreigners. This confirms that the term provinciales designates those Roman citizens who dwelled in the provinces. II.In the Latin literature, there are some Italici juxtaposed to provinciales, and they seem to be Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy. But under the Republic, some negotiatores doing business in provinces were also called Italici. So they might be thought of as men of Italian origin who resided in the provinces. The author investigates the designation of the Italian negotiatores in provinces using Latin inscriptions. He finds that they referred to themselves in two ways, 'Italici' and 'cives Romani (Roman citizens)'. Also he finds that the former designation was used before the 60's B.C. and the latter appeared after the 30's B.C. Hence, the author concludes that Italici from the late Republic were not men of Italian origin in provinces, but Roman citizens who dwelled in Italy. Next, the author attempts to reconsider the nature of ius Italicum. It usually is considered as (1)a communal privilege granted to communities whose status was identified with that of Italian municipalities, (2)communities, on which the privilege was conferred, which were regarded as the highest in the provinces, and which enjoyed autonomy, immunity, and the special right that their land could be held ex iure Quiritium by Roman citizens, (3)a privilege which was devised in the age of Augustus, in order to compensate the inhabitants of some communities for their loss of Italian status. However, the privilege appeared first in the middle of the 1st century A.D. And a Greek inscription records a Roman citizen woman as a person of Italian right without any mention of her community. Hence the author makes the following assumptions : i)The privilege granted to the groups of Roman citizens whose status was identified with that of those who dwelled in Italy ; ii)The privilege was devised in the middle of 1st century A.D., in order to reconcile the conflict between provinciales and Italici ; iii)From the 2nd century the discrimination between them became obsolete, so the ius Italicum began to be thought of as a communal privilege. III.Finally, the author considers the historical and social conditions on which both provinciales and Italici could exist. The distinction between them requires certain conditions ; i.e., that almost all inhabitants in Italy were Roman citizens but in provinces Roman citizens dwelled among foreigners. Under these conditions the idea that Roman citizens had to dwell in Italy became fixed, and Italici began to discriminate against provinciales. This discrimination soon disappeared, and in A.D.212 almost all the inhabitants of the Roman Empire became Roman citizens. After that, provinciales came to mean the inhabitants in provinces.

著者

石田 尚豊

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.107, no.12, pp.2139-2142, 1998-12-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

著者

相澤 隆

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.106, no.10, pp.1866-1868, 1997

著者

吉田 伸之

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.7, pp.1305-1307, 2013-07-20 (Released:2017-12-01)

著者

根津 由喜夫

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.111, no.5, pp.922-925, 2002