著者

上田 純子

出版者

The Historical Society of Japan

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.109, no.11, pp.2014-2042, 2000-11-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

---

This paper explores the decision-making process of the Hagi Domain government during their Bunkyu era reforms, which began in March 1863 and were brought to an end in September 1869 after the bombardment of Shimonoseki and the outbreak of violence in Kyoto. Before the reforms, policy-making functions were carried out by two members of the Karo家老 class, called Ryoshoku両職, who were supported by a small group of lower level officials, the Goyogatachu御用方中. After the reforms, policy-making activities and appeals to the daimyo were both carried out at a newly established Seijido(政事堂;Hall of governance). The officials of the Seijido routinely conducted policy meetings in the presence of the daimyo. These measures aimed at involving a larger range of the warrior class in the consultative process give that process more authority, or potency. The abolition of the Ryoshoku system also aimed at better preparing the domain for war, by emphasising the military role of Karo members and moving the former Goyogatachu officers into military administrative roles.

著者

神田 千里

出版者

The Historical Society of Japan

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.110, no.3, pp.410-435, 2001-03-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

---

Regarding the debate over whether tsuchi-ikki (土一揆) was part of the peasants' class struggle, Y. Inagaki criticized the researches regarded it as such a struggle, arguing that it was carried out by warriors, agents of landlords, or wealthy peasants and thus could not be looked upon as a political struggle. Inagaki's argument has been opposed by not a few scholars to date. At present, the balance of evidence seems to support the argument that tsuchi-ikki was part of the peasants' class struggle. Especially strong support has been provided by the researches on tokusei (徳政, annulling loan contracts) by K. Seta, H. Kasamatsu, and S. Katsumata, which has proved that tokusei demanded by tsuchi-ikki were based on the idea of the land possession common to the residents of villages at that time. On the other hand, it has come to be known that both the unity of peasants based on the village and the idea of the land possession common to villagers in the medieval Japan still prevailed in later premodern times. This brings the author to think that tsuchi-ikki cannot be completely explained only by the two elements in the previous debate, because the term disappears from the documentations by the end of the sixteenth century. The author, therfore, rexamines whether the unity of peasants based on the village is the definitive element of tsuchi-ikki, looking at the connection between daimyo, landlords, warriors and tsuchi-ikki, in order to throw some light upon the aspects that still remain unexplained.

著者

ピジョー ジョーン

出版者

The Historical Society of Japan

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.98, no.6, pp.1128-1141, 1989-06-20 (Released:2017-11-29)

著者

加納 修

出版者

The Historical Society of Japan

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.110, no.3, pp.390-410, 2001-03-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

---

The fictitious suit (Scheinprozess), that is, court procedure through which a private legal action was confirmed, was held only at the royal tribunal during the period from the late seventh to the early eighth century. In examining this procedure, the author tries to shed light on the role of the royal tribunal in the late Merovingian period. The fictitious suit has been seen as an affirmation of property ownership, or as a means of conveyancing, but it was in reality a confirmation of warranty against eviction (Eviktionshaftung). Therefore it was based on a private legal action following Roman law. Roman private law was practiced until about the middle of the eighth century in the north of the Frankish kingdom called Neustria, but in this region disputes were settled predominantly by unwritten Frankish customs. Although the covenant of warranty against eviction was made on the occasion of conveyance, it had no effect as an objective rule. The use of the fictitious suit by the royal tribunal shows that kingship in the late Merovingian period was trying to cover deficiencies in objective norms. The fictitious suit of the Frankish period could thus be used only at the royal tribunal, and only when and where private legal action was practiced according to Roman law, but disputes were settled by Frankish customs, in Neustria in the late Merovingian period. It is generally acknowledged that the legal life in the Merovingian state is characterized by plurality of law. However, the research has not questioned what role the royal tribunal played in this context. The fictitious suit, which is only one part of the activities of the royal tribunal, shows that Merovingian kingship played an important role as public power, though partially and rudimentarily, whenever and wherever Roman law as the objective norm and Roman administration declined. It also suggests that the royal tribunal was able to cope with juristic situations which varied in different regions.

著者

黒嶋 敏

出版者

The Historical Society of Japan

雑誌

史学雑誌 (ISSN:00182478)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.109, no.11, pp.1992-2014, 2000-11-20 (Released:2017-11-30)

---

The research done to date on the relations between Japan and the Ryukyu Islands has tended focus its discussion on the Shimazu family of the Satsuma region in Kyushu. The Shimazu family was not only granted various rights over the Ryukyus, but also carried out a direct invasion of its territory. It is true that many of the historical sources related to the subject come from the Shimazu family, and it cannot be denied that the two regions were closely related geographically. However, it is the opinion of the author of the present paper that the focus of the research to date has placed to much emphasis on the history of the Shimazu family rather than the history of international relations between two countries. He sets out to reexamine the research and offer a broader point of view, while criticizing the conventional interpretation of the Shimazu family documents. As the result of this examination, the author divides the relations between medieval Japan and the Ryukyu Kingdom into four different periods. The first period, spanning the first half of the fifteenth century, involved mainly the Muromachi Bakufu on the Japan side, which dispatched emissaries to the Ryukyus on a yearly basis. During the second period, from 1470 to 1520, the Hosokawa family issued sealed orders permitting such parties as pirates on the Inland Sea and the Shimazu family to conduct maritime trade with the Ryukyus. The focus of the third period, 1520 to 1560, shifted to the Ouchi family, as internal division spread among the Shimazu resulting in a loss of their political influence in Ryukyu affairs. The final period, from 1560 on, centered around the Shimazu family, now unified as a powerful sengoku daimyo and assuming a position to demand exclusive rights to deal with the Ryukyus. It was also a time that the Ryukyu Kingdom attempted to free itself from international relations in which it was subordinated to Japan. According to this periodization scheme, it is clear that the Shimazu family played the role of a mere intermediary during most of the medieval period. Throughout the period, the Ryukyus were placed by Japan within subordinate relationships to political forces centered on the Muromachi shogunate.