Local head - Jito

Japanese: 地頭 - じとう

It refers to a type of local lord in medieval Japan, or a low-level office of the Kamakura shogunate that was placed in each manor or public territory.

[Akio Yoshie]

The origins of Jito

Since the Meiji period, the original meaning of the word "jito" has been considered to refer to the local area, but in recent years, the view has been growing that it goes beyond the local area and includes the meaning of the site where conflicts occur. Therefore, the derived word "jito," which refers to a person or occupation, has come to be understood as referring to a special type of local lord who was equipped to use force to resolve the frequent conflicts that arose under the complex territorial relationships of the late Heian period, instead of the classical view that it referred to local lords in general.

Jito were originally called jitonin, and first appeared in the first half of the 12th century in special places like those mentioned above, as people who met the unique conditions mentioned above. Eventually, in the manors and imperial lands that made up such places, they were organized into officials in charge of collection and other duties, taking advantage of these conditions, and became a single post called shiki. During the latter half of the 12th century, at the height of their power, the Taira clan actively established jito in response to the increase in territories that required jito. However, their method of appointing jito as a single post in manors and imperial lands is thought to have been no better than the previous method of appointing jito as a single post in manors and imperial lands. Eventually, under the rule of the Taira clan, territorial disputes and public disturbances reached a critical point nationwide, and resistance from the general peasants linked to them became active.

[Akio Yoshie]

The Jito System of the Kamakura Shogunate

The Kamakura shogunate's land steward system was based on the Taira clan system, and was established in the context of a need to transform land stewards into a national system in light of the trend of local lords becoming land stewards in general. First, Minamoto no Yoritomo placed importance on the land steward position among the district governors, subordinate officials, and official officials as a form of pension for the samurai family, immediately after the uprising in 1180 (Jisho 4), and appointed and granted them assurances of land stewardship and the obligation to investigate and collect taxes. Based on this, in November 1185 (Bun'ji 1), after the fall of the Taira clan, Hojo Tokimasa was sent to Kyoto to pursue Minamoto no Yoshitsune, and he was tasked with negotiating with Emperor Go-Shirakawa as his representative. As part of the so-called Bunji imperial charter, the shogunate was allowed to organize the Jito as a system officially recognized by the Imperial Court, along with Sotsuibushi (shugo), Hyouroumai, and other officials.

There has been a long history of debate since the Meiji period regarding the contents of this Bunji Jito Imperial Charter, with conflicting theories over a number of points, including whether the scope of the establishment should be nationwide or only the western provinces, whether the territories established should be only those confiscated by the Taira clan or more broadly, whether it should be a permanent system or a system that lasted until the pursuit of Yoshitsune, whether the type of Jito granted by the Imperial Charter should be a manor Jito or a provincial Jito, and whether the scope of authority should be general territorial control or limited to investigation and collection, etc. However, through these debates, it is now at least accepted as an indisputable fact that the Bunji Imperial Charter made Jito a national system, and that the shogunate, through those in charge of each province, created a system in which Jito with the aforementioned authority of investigation and collection was organized. Regarding the scope of establishment, the type of land holdings, and the permanence of the system, considering that all of these developed into permanent systems covering all manor lords throughout the country during the history of the Kamakura shogunate up until the beginning of the 13th century, these issues can be treated as issues on the way to that stage.

The land steward system, which emerged in the form described above in the early days of the shogunate, expanded gradually with twists and turns up until the beginning of the 13th century, before expanding dramatically with the victory of the shogunate in the Jokyu War in 1221. Land stewards were uniformly appointed to the vast amount of confiscated territories belonging to the retired emperor, and these were called shinpo (newly added) land stewards, and either inherited the rights and interests of the positions of the samurai on the retired emperor's side that had been denied, or, at the very least, were guaranteed rights, albeit with restrictions, such as a minimum of one cho of supplied land for every 11 cho, an additional 5 sho of rice per tan, sharing half of the produce from the mountains, fields, rivers, and seas with the kokushi ryoke, and the right to acquire one-third of the territories formerly owned by criminals. As can be seen from the criteria set for newly appointed jito, the shogunate actively affirmed and sought to expand the existence and functions of jito, but at the same time consistently tried to confine them within a certain framework and prevent unlimited growth. This is interpreted as the result of the Kamakura shogunate being a military public authority that compromised with the imperial court and manorial lords, and of the fact that it was judged that unlimited growth of jito would threaten the existence of the shogunate.

[Akio Yoshie]

The development of local lords

However, the jito did not fit within the above framework, and throughout the Kamakura period, they overcame the restraints of the shogunate and aimed for unified control over the manors under their jurisdiction, creating an institutional foothold for unified control over land through the jito-uke system and the Shitajichubun system. Thus, during the Nanboku-cho period, the jito increasingly went beyond the role of local shogunate officials, so the Muromachi shogunate no longer organized the jito as low-level officials in the local shogunate administration. In that sense, the period from the Nanboku-cho period to the early Muromachi period can be said to be the period when the jito as a shogunate institution disappeared, but the character of the jito as a de facto military lord since its emergence at the end of the Heian period should rather be considered to have developed during this period. Even during the Sengoku and Edo periods, lords who followed the lineage of traditional development lords, who controlled their territories territorially with the backing of their censorship power, and who were connected to the daimyo's stipends and military servants, continued to be called jito in various places.

Regarding the position of the land within Medieval society, there are those who view it as merely an immature and restricted entity existing within the framework of manors, public lands, and shogunate offices, and those who view it as a typical example of medieval feudal lords, emphasizing its actual condition. However, these views differ depending on whether one looks at it from the perspective of the system or the reality, and in reality it should be seen as having both aspects.

[Akio Yoshie]

"Continued Study of Legal History" by Miura Shuko (1924, Iwanami Shoten)" ▽ "History of the Establishment of the Feudal System in Japan" by Maki Kenji (1935, Kobundo)" ▽ "Collection of Essays on Legal History, Vol. 2" by Nakata Kaoru (1938, Iwanami Shoten) ▽ "The Establishment of the Land Steward Position in the Kamakura Shogunate" by Ishimoda Tadashi (included in Medieval Law and the State edited by Ishimoda Tadashi and Sato Shinichi, 1960, University of Tokyo Press)" ▽ "Study of Medieval Japanese Political History" by Ueyokote Masayoshi (1970, Hanawa Shobo) ▽ "History of Japan 9: The Kamakura Shogunate" by Oyama Kyohei (1974, Shogakukan) ▽ "Study of the History of the Establishment of the Land Steward Position in the Kamakura Shogunate" by Yoshie Akio (1978, University of Tokyo Press) "Research on Jito and Jito-lordship Systems" by Yasuda Motohisa (1985, Yamakawa Publishing)

[Reference] | Newly appointed land steward | Minamoto no Yoritomo

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

日本中世の在地領主の一類型、または荘園(しょうえん)・公領(こうりょう)ごとに置かれた鎌倉幕府の末端の所職(しょしき)をいう。

［義江彰夫］

地頭の源流

地頭の原義は明治以来現地をさす語とされてきたが、近年では単なる現地にとどまらず、とくに紛争の生じる現場という意味を含むとの見方が強くなってきている。したがって、派生語としての人や職をさす地頭の語も、開発(かいほつ)在地領主一般をさすとする古典的見解にかわって、平安末期に複雑な領有関係の下で頻発する紛争を武力で解決する条件を備えた特殊な在地領主をさす語と解されるようになってきた。

　地頭は元来地頭人ともよばれ、12世紀前半ごろまず前記のような特殊な場で、前述のように独特な条件を備えた者として登場するが、やがてそのような場からなる荘園や公領で、この条件を生かして収取その他の職務を担う役人に組織されて地頭職(しき)という一所職となった。平家はその全盛時代の12世紀後半に、地頭を必要とする所領の増加に対応して積極的に地頭の設置を行った。しかしその方法は、荘園や公領の一所職として任命する従来のやり方を超えるものではなかったと考えられる。やがて平家支配の下で所領紛争、治安の紊乱(びんらん)が全国的に極限状態に達し、その下でそれらと結び付いた百姓一般の抵抗が活性化してゆく。

［義江彰夫］

鎌倉幕府の地頭制度

鎌倉幕府の地頭制度は、平家の制度を前提とし、このような在地領主一般の地頭化の動きを踏まえて地頭を国家的制度に転化させる必要が生じてきたという状況下で成立した。すなわち、源頼朝(よりとも)は、まず1180年（治承4）の挙兵直後から武門の家人(けにん)への恩給として郡郷司(ぐんごうじ)、下司(げし)、公文(くもん)などのなかから地頭職を重視し、これを荘園・国衙(こくが)とは別個の次元から安堵(あんど)・補任(ぶにん)し、権益の保証と検察・収取の義務を与えた。これを基礎として平家滅亡後の1185年（文治1）11月源義経(よしつね)追討のために上洛(じょうらく)させた北条時政(ときまさ)を代理人として後白河(ごしらかわ)院と交渉させ、いわゆる文治(ぶんじ)勅許の一環として総追捕使(そうついぶし)（守護）、兵粮米(ひょうろうまい)などとあわせて地頭を朝廷公認の制度として幕府が組織することを認めさせた。

　この文治地頭勅許の内容については、明治以来長い論争の歴史があり、設置範囲を全国とみるか西国のみとみるか、設置された所領を平家没官領(もっかんりょう)のみとみるかより広く荘公一般とみるか、恒久的制度とみるか義経追捕までの制度とみるか、勅許された地頭のタイプを荘郷地頭とみるか国地頭(くにじとう)とみるか、権限内容を所領支配全般とみるか検察・収取など限定的にとらえるか、などの諸点について諸説が対立し、解決をみていない。しかし、これらの論争を経て、現在少なくとも、文治勅許によって地頭が国家的制度となり、幕府が国ごとに統轄する者を通して、前述の検察・収取の職権をもつ地頭を組織する体制をつくりだしたことは、疑いない事実として認められるようになった。設置範囲、所領類型、制度の恒久性などについては、13世紀初頭までの鎌倉幕府の歴史のなかでいずれも全国荘公一般を対象とする恒久的制度に発展したことを考えれば、そこへ至る段階の問題として処理できる。

　幕府草創期に前記のような形で登場した地頭制度は、13世紀初頭までの曲折を伴う漸次的拡大を踏まえて、1221年（承久3）の承久(じょうきゅう)の乱の幕府方の勝利によって飛躍的に設置範囲を広げる。すなわち上皇方の膨大な没官領に一律に地頭が設置され、これらは新補(しんぽ)地頭とよばれ、否定された上皇方の武士の所職の権益を受け継ぐか、それがなくとも最低限11町ごとに1町の給田(きゅうでん)、反別(たんべつ)5升の加徴米、山野河海所出物(さんやかがいしょしゅつぶつ)の国司領家(こくしりょうけ)との折半、犯罪人跡所領3分の1の収得など制限付きながら権益が保証された。この新補地頭に対する規準設定にうかがえるように、幕府は地頭の存在や機能を積極的に肯定・拡大しようとした反面、一貫して一定の枠内に封じ込め無制限な成長を抑止しようとした。それは、鎌倉幕府が朝廷や荘園領主勢力と妥協した武家公権であり、かつ地頭の無制限な成長が幕府の存立を揺るがすと判断された結果と解されている。

［義江彰夫］

地頭の発展

しかし地頭は前記の枠内に収まる存在ではなく、幕府の抑制を踏み越えて鎌倉時代を通して一貫して所管荘公所領の全一的支配を志向し、地頭請(うけ)、下地中分(したじちゅうぶん)などを通して、全一的所領支配の制度的な足掛りをつくりだすようになった。こうして地頭は南北朝時代にはますます幕府の地方職員としての枠を超える者になっていったので、室町幕府は地頭を地方幕府行政の末端の役人として組織しないようになった。その意味で南北朝から室町初期に至る時代は幕府制度としての地頭の消滅期といってよいが、平安末期の発生以来の実態上の武力領主としての性格は、この間むしろ発展したとみるべきである。戦国・江戸時代においても、伝統的な開発領主の系譜を引き、検察力を背景として在地を領域的に支配しつつ大名の給人や軍役衆に連なる領主は、各地で地頭とよばれ続けた。

　地頭の中世社会のなかにおける位置については、荘園・公領や幕府の職の枠内の未成熟で制約された存在にすぎないという見方と、実態面を重視して中世領主の典型とする見解とがあるが、それらは制度と実態のいずれの側からみるかによって生ずるずれで、実際には両面をもっていたものとみるべきであろう。

［義江彰夫］

『三浦周行著『続法制史の研究』（1924・岩波書店）』▽『牧健二著『日本封建制度成立史』（1935・弘文堂）』▽『中田薫著『法制史論集　第2巻』（1938・岩波書店）』▽『石母田正著『鎌倉幕府一国地頭職の成立』（石母田正・佐藤進一編『中世の法と国家』所収・1960・東京大学出版会）』▽『上横手雅敬著『日本中世政治史研究』（1970・塙書房）』▽『大山喬平著『日本の歴史9　鎌倉幕府』（1974・小学館）』▽『義江彰夫著『鎌倉幕府地頭職成立史の研究』（1978・東京大学出版会）』▽『安田元久著『地頭及び地頭領主制の研究』（1985・山川出版社）』

[参照項目] | 新補地頭 | 源頼朝

出典　小学館　日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)について　情報 | 凡例

<<: Self-portrait - jigazou (English spelling) selfportrait

>>: Self-pollination - Jikajufun (English spelling)