41 research outputs found
<Articles>Policy Change Concerning Fishing Rights in the Edo Period
No full text個人情報保護のため削除部分あり丹後宮津城下には、旧領主によって地先漁場における「特権漁業」の権利を下付されたという由緒をもつ漁師(宮津町漁師) が存在した。本稿は、一九世紀における宮津藩の漁政と、「特権漁業」後退との関係を明らかにしている。当該期宮津藩による在方漁師間の地先漁場争論の解決方法の特質は、地先漁場を「家前」とそれ以外に区分し、地元村に「備前」漁場での優先権を保障することである。また、宮津町漁師と在方漁師との争論に際しては、前者に対しては「本業」、後者に対しては「家前」を理由に、漁場利用関係の秩序付けを行っている。宮津町漁師は藩による「本業」という自町漁業の位置づけを利用し、在方漁師の漁業を「余業」と位置づけることによって、自町に有利となる要求を行うが、郡奉行によって却下される。幕藩領主による漁業の位置づけと、漁師間の漁場利用関係とは、密接に関係していたといえる。It is known that there were certain fishermen who enjoyed the prerogative to fish in the Miyazu domain during the Edo period. The old Lord in the early Edo period had granted them wide fishing rights at sea extending to the domain. This territory was called ''Jisaki-Gyojo" . They lived in Miyazu City, but many other fishermen lived in villages. From the middle of the 18th century, fishing arguments had increased. Then in the 19th century, the Miyazu Lord made a rule for the village fishermen, so that each village had to make sure of their fishing rights in "Iemae-Gyojo" which was part of "Jisaki-Gyojo". This word referred to the fishing grounds right in front of their houses. On the other hand, the Lord settled an argument about fishing territories between city and village fishermen by setting the standard whether or not a person was a professional fisherman. The Lord regarded city fishermen as professional. But ultimately, the city fishermen could fish in smaller territories. When the city fishermen were denied their fishing rights, they tried to supress village fishermen's rights. They argued that the main occupation of the village fishermen was farming. But the administrators (Kori-Bugyos) refused their cry, because they insisted that fishing should be "Hongyo" for not only the city fishermen but the village fishermen as well. Thus the utilization of fishing territories changed
<Book reviews>SUGIE Susumu, A Study of the History of Water Transport in Early Modern Biwako
No full text<Articles>On Whales and Domainal Lords in Early Modern Times, Employing the Whaling of Ine in Tango as a Key to Interpretation (Special Issue : SEA)
No full text日本近世の海と幕藩領主層との関係を考える素材として鯨・捕鯨をとりあげる。大規模捕鯨業地域では、領主にとっての捕鯨業の経済的、軍事的意義が解明されているが、全国的にみると鯨をめぐる漁村や幕藩領主の動向には不明な点が多い。本稿では、捕鯨の経済的意義が高いとはいえない小規模捕鯨浦を対象に、漁獲鯨と捕鯨漁場への領主の関与について検討した。領主には、貸付金や漁獲後の注進方式、微税方式等を整えるものの流通には関与しないなど、際立った積極性は認められない。また、捕鯨漁場についても、漁村間の慣行を追認するという態度をとっていた。こうした状況は幕末に至ると変化し、捕鯨権に対する積極的関与がみられるようになる。新規操業村の認可、および個別領主の領地前海にとどまらない漁場の拡大が認可されるが、その根底には殖産政策があった。こうした領主の動向は、幕末期には全国的に展開していた可能性がある。Studies of whaling in early-modern Japan have proceeded chiefly from the viewpoint of economic history on localities associated with the large-scale whaling industry. On the other hand, small-scale whaling in coastal communities, which could hardly be called an industry, was recognized as a historical reality, but little progress has been made in clarifying various aspects of this reality. In this article I clarify the circumstances of whaling in small coastal communities in order to consider the meaning of whaling for the class of domainal lords and the significance of whales and examine the relationship between these lords in terms of whales and whaling. The Ine coast in the Miyazu domain in the province of Tango (present-day Ine-cho in Yosa-gun, Kyoto prefecture) was selected as the geographic object of this study. The coastal area was composed of three villages, but Kameshima (one of the three villages) alone monopolized the rights of whaling and distributing of profits from it. Furthermore, the number of whales that were caught averaged approximately one a year in a small-scale operation, but this type of whaling brought profits to Kameshima. Moreover, in handling the whaling the Miyazu domain did not aim to expand domainal profit or to rely on it financially, although the presence at the bidding and the collection of operating expenses were fixed. And as regards operating funds also, loans and their repayment were based on the demands of Kameshima. I was unable to confirm the lord's positive stance on involvement in whaling including the fact that no limit was placed on the distribution of whale meat or oil and until the final stage of Edo period. This can be understood as a continuation of operations on the part of fishing villages. Thereafter until the close of the Edo period, the lord showed a positive attitude toward securing whaling grounds as seen in new whaling operations and the recognition of the expansion of fishing grounds, and this was for the benefit of the state, in other words this was an intervention premised on a policy of enhancing production If the basis of whaling rights was their protection by the lord of the domain, the relationship between domainal lords regarding whaling is a key to a consideration of the state of whaling rights. Behind the increased size of Kameshima's whaling grounds at the end of the Edo period was damaged to the operations by other fishermen within the domain's territory, and the Miyazu domain did not recognize their advocacy of the "principle that local waters, i.e. fishing grounds, should be monopolized by local communities." Moreover, Kameshima was cautious, anticipating that fishing villages under direct jurisdiction of the shogunate in Edo would similarly argue the principle local fishing grounds for local communities, but in regard to those fishing villages, this was not a premised on unconditional transfer of whales. Instead, villages under shogunal control recognized Karneshima conducting operations off its own shores together with fishing villages of the Tanabe (Maizuru) domains. The shogunate and fishing villages under their jurisdiction thus did not directly interfere in the whaling rights of Kameshima. Moreover, it was possible for the Miyazu domain itself to confer whaling rights on villages in its own territory, but it left it to fishermen to manage among themselves use of fishing grounds with those of other territories. Here, neither the conception of the ocean as public property nor that of the whales as public property can be confirmed As is seen in the above, it was clear that in the case of the Miyazu domain, it had to recognize that the extended area of operations of Kameshima was not limited to its own territory but also the territory of other fishing villages on the basis of the policy of promoting production for national benefit (kokueki.) However, in other domains at the end of the Edo period we can confirm the movement to become involved in whaling with the goal of maritime defense. In current circumstances, the moves of the Miyazu domain can only be explained as a part of the policy of promoting production, but considering the frequent appearance of foreign ships in its ports and the circumstances that Japan found itself at the time with each domain strongly conscious of maritime defense, it can be hypothesized that the problem of maritime defense motivated various domains and enticed them to initiate new whaling operations. Furthermore, whaling initially began as a part of the promotion of industry, but it can reasonably be hypothesized at the time that there was also a switch in purpose to the goal of maritime defense, Further investigation including the movement of other domains on the Japan Sea side of the main island is a task for the future
The land-use and Disaster Management of Minamikomatsu from the Edo to Early Meiji Eras Based on Ezu maps from Minamikomatsu, Otsu City, Shiga Prefecture, Japan
No full textIn this study, we conducted a survey using the old pictorial maps of Minamikomatsu, in order to identify the land-use, vegetation change, and disaster history situation of the satoyama from the Edo to early Meiji eras. As a research object resource, we used 56 old pictorial maps created from the Edo to early Meiji eras that are stored in Minamikomatsu, Otsu City, Shiga Prefecture. As a result of the analysis, we were able to see it became clear trend showing that wilderness conditions spread around various rivers, lakes, and the lagoon from the Edo to early Meiji eras. These areas also showed evidence of historical flooding, and that they were flooded. In addition, people at the time were taking measures against flood damage by building embankments. Furthermore, since pine trees were distributed along the lakeside and rivers, it was thought that these areas had a natural wilderness environment at that time where pine forests spread out, despite being disturbed by flood damage
ニホン キンセイ ニ オケル ギョセイ ギョソンシ ノ ケンキュウ
No full text京都大学0048新制・課程博士博士(文学)甲第9849号文博第235号新制||文||393(附属図書館)UT51-2003-C617京都大学大学院文学研究科歴史文化学専攻(主査)教授 藤井 讓治, 教授 鎌田 元一, 助教授 高橋 秀直学位規則第4条第1項該当Doctor of LettersKyoto UniversityDA
Life and Cultural Landscape of Early Modern Lake Biwa (<Special Issue 1>Occupation, Lifestyle, and Cultual Landscape in Early Modern Japan)
No full textdepartmental bulletin pape
彦根藩「御鷹場」と近江国の鳥猟
No full text本稿は、彦根藩の御鷹場研究の進展のために、近江国における鳥猟の支配について検討するものである。彦根藩は、近江一国を御鷹場と認識してきた。しかし、彦根藩が鳥猟を許可できた範囲は、自領内にとどまっており、他領内の鳥猟には関与できない状態であった。また、彦根藩は留場の設定などを進めるが、その範囲はあくまでも自領内の一円知行地的な空間であり、他領に及ぶものではなかった。彦根藩が御鷹場の実質化を試みようとした際、いずれの領主もその主張に異を唱えた一因は、このような鳥猟支配のあり方が実際に展開していたためであった。18世紀半ばになると、彦根藩は、幕府との交渉を通して、「京都守護」の拝命を理由に御鷹場の実質化を進める。その結果、彦根藩が、他領猟師に対しても鳥札を発給するようになる。しかし、全ての領主が納得していたわけではなかった。This paper examines the domination of bird hunting in Ohmi in order to advance the research on the Shogunate hawking ground of Hikone han. Hikone han recognized Ohmi as the Shogunate hawking ground. However, the extent to which the Hikone han could permit bird hunting remained within its own territory, and could not be involved in bird hunting in other territories. Hikone han also worked on the construction of a bird sanctuary, but the scope was not limited to other territories. When the Hikone han tried to become practical the Shogunate hawking ground, other lords disagreed with that claim. One of the reasons was that such a rule of bird hunting was actually developed. In the middle of the 18th century, Hikone han, through negotiations with the Shogunate, promoted the realization of the Shogunate hawking ground on the grounds of worship of "Kyoto Guardian". As a result, Hikone han would issue bird tags to other hunters. However, not all lords were convinced.はじめに / 1 「御鷹場」拝領以前の鳥猟 / 2 「御鷹場」拝領と井伊直孝 / 3 他領における鳥猟 / 4 『松平大和守日記』にみる動物と生息環境 / 5 他領主との「御鷹場」認識の相違 / おわり
