Samurai - Bushi

Japanese: 武士 - ぶし

Those who existed from the mid-Heian period to the end of the Edo period, ruled the regions through military force, and served public authority.

Meaning

The word 'bushi' was already used in the Nara period to mean military officer or warrior, but it was only from the 10th century onwards, in the middle of the Heian period, that it began to take on the unique meaning mentioned above. That is, from around the 10th century, those whose occupation was fighting were called 'tsuwamono' (soldiers), those who served government officials and aristocrats and were in charge of household affairs and guarding were called 'saburai' (samurai), and those who served the public with military force were called 'mononofu' (warriors), and these began to appear in each field. Around the time these appeared, the word 'bushi' came to be used to describe each of these beings as beings related to military force. Later, from the end of the Heian period to the beginning of the Kamakura period, as described below, these three merged into the same entity, and as the three words transformed into words describing different aspects of the same entity, the word 'bushi' came to be used generally as a unified term for this entity.

[Akio Yoshie]

Emergence of the Samurai

The origin and development of samurai has traditionally been thought to have begun when newly wealthy local farmers and feudal lords armed themselves for self-defense under the laxity of local administration under the Ritsuryo Code, and then gradually developed through the steps of aristocrats' "saburai" and the Imperial Court's "mononofu". However, this classical view has been criticized in various ways in recent years because it does not fit the facts in many ways, such as the lack of historical documents that show wealthy farmers and feudal lords directly becoming samurai, and the fact that the ancestors of those known as medieval samurai all came from specific aristocrats in family trees and other sources. From these, various new views have emerged, and now at last a comprehensive outlook has been made that is consistent with the origin and changes in the meaning of the word mentioned above.

Let us first focus on the issue of their origin. The original samurai who appeared in Kyoto and other provinces from around the first half of the 10th century were by no means wealthy local farmers or feudal lords in a social historical sense, but rather were people whose occupation was fighting in battles themselves, in a world separate from agricultural management. Specifically, the organizers were military aristocrats such as the Chinjufu Shogun, who was in charge of suppressing the Emishi and maintaining peace in Kyoto, Konoe and Emonfu officials, and Kebiishi office officials, and under them were hunters and fishermen who made a living by killing, and groups of outlaws who had been banished from the system, such as murderers and arsonists, who acted as agents armed with bows and horses, ships, and armor in private fights between aristocrats, disputes between local lords, disputes between local lords/manor lords and the kokuga, and the transport of goods to pursue their respective interests. This aspect can be clearly seen in the actions of Taira no Masakado and Fujiwara no Sumitomo during the Rebellion (Johei-Tengyo Rebellion) and in the activities of the armed supply transport group known as the Shuba Party. In the mid-Heian period, with the development of patrimonial control by powerful aristocrats, temples and shrines, and the differentiation and competition between court nobles and official lords (the secular world) and temple and shrine lords (the sacred world), social structures and human relationships became more diverse and complicated, and a high level of military force beyond the reach of administration and religion was needed to resolve these issues. This created the conditions for the need for "warriors" in all sectors of society who were specialized in archery and horseback riding and who specialized in battle, as mentioned above.

Meanwhile, around the same 10th century, the government officials and aristocrats who had begun to control their own property began to actively organize their own retainers to maintain their own property and household affairs. These were the samurai of the various households at the time, and some of them became stewards in charge of household affairs and served their masters with their literary and managerial skills, while others were selected from the aforementioned "warriors" and used their martial arts skills to resolve or eliminate disputes or personal dangers that befell their masters. Taira no Masakado, who served Fujiwara no Tadahira, and Minamoto no Yorimitsu, who served Fujiwara no Michinaga, are two examples.

However, as government officials and aristocrats all began to turn their "tsuwamono (soldiers)" into "saburai (samurai)," the Imperial Court, which had taken on a strong patrimonial character, was forced to organize its own warriors from among the soldiers and samurai to match the samurai of the various families. The Takiguchi warriors, which began in the mid-Heian period, and the Innohokumen warriors, which appeared with the establishment of cloistered rule, were formed out of this necessity. As a result, these warriors who served the public authorities, along with the kokushu and mokudai who had been sent down to the provincial government offices during this time, and the kuni no tsuwamono and tachi saburai who had been organized under the pretext of guarding the provincial government offices, came to be widely known as "mononofu" (warriors serving the public).

[Akio Yoshie]

The development of the samurai

As described above, when the 'tsuwamono', 'saburai' and 'mononofu' first emerged as separate entities, they underwent a complex process from the end of the Heian period through to the Kamakura period, but gradually merged into the same entity worthy of being called 'samurai', and at the same time, their social and political status rose. In other words, if we look at this process from the perspective of the 'tsuwamono', firstly, in the first half of the 10th century when the samurai first emerged, the 'tsuwamono' who caused the Masakado Rebellion and the Sumitomo Rebellion included some who became 'saburai' (substitutes) of government officials and aristocrats, and 'mononofu' (feudal lords) of the Imperial Court and provincial government, but most of them still retained the characteristics of an unorganized, spontaneously arising group. However, just as both rebellions were started by aristocrats' saburai and provincial government servants such as Masakado and Sumitomo, and put down by Fujiwara no Hidesato and Ono no Yoshifuru, who were given the status of punitive emissaries (tsuitoshi) = servants by the imperial court, the direction of growth for the "tsuwamono" from the very beginning was already one of saburai and servants.

The Taira Tadatsune Rebellion, which broke out in the eastern provinces in the early 11th century, was a rebellion in which Tadatsune, who had become a saburi (subservient) to the military aristocrat Minamoto no Yorinobu, rebelled against the Imperial Court and the provincial government, relying on his power to achieve local independence. However, Yorinobu, the lord of the rebellion, was appointed by the Imperial Court as a punitive emissary, and thus the rebellion was quelled without a fight, and Yorinobu's prestige as a samurai was enhanced. As the times progressed, the samurai created a relationship of master and samurai within themselves, and the lord gained an official position in the Imperial Court, solidifying his status as a samurai, quelling the rebellious samurai, and absorbing them as saburi. In other words, many samurai were organized as saburi (subservient) to the samurai, and through this they themselves gradually came to take on a samurai-like character, and thus the samurai gradually became a combination of these three.

The two wars of Zenkunen and Gosannen, which occurred in succession in the latter half of the 11th century, were both caused by Minamoto no Yorinobu's son Minamoto no Yoriyoshi and his son Minamoto no Yoshiie, who were growing as military leaders, provoking the Abe clan and the Kiyohara clan, the heads of the Oshu prisoners of war. For the growing samurai class, both rebellions were fought openly, on a quality and scale far beyond anything they had experienced before, for the noble cause of suppressing the rebellions of the unofficial people who were prisoners of war, and thus strengthening the samurai's position as the backbone of the imperial court in Japanese society as a whole. The frequent incidents that occurred after this, such as the repeated battles between the Genji and Heike clans, each of which portrayed the other as an enemy of the court, the active efforts of the Heike to suppress piracy, the spearheading of the Genji and Heike clans' suppression of the protests of the warrior monks, and the Hogen and Heiji Rebellions, in which the two clans intervened in divisions within the court and fought as their respective representatives, show various stages in which the samurai's bond of lord and vassal and their public voice were further strengthened. Through these events, the samurai finally reached the position of national authority under the Heike government, and succeeded in establishing military national power unique to the samurai with the establishment of the Kamakura Shogunate. The samurai, who arose in the first half of the 10th century, gradually combined the various aspects of "fighter," "saburai," and "mononofu," and by the end of the 12th century, led by military leaders, had grown to the point of creating a unique national authority.

The fundamental question of why the samurai, who appeared in the first half of the 10th century, grew to the point of establishing national public authority by the end of the 12th century, and why the way in which they grew led to many "warriors" becoming "saburi" (servants) to the heads of military families while also gaining the status of "mononofu" (warriors) who supported the Imperial Court, has not yet been fully elucidated. However, the points that have been clarified so far can be summarized as follows. Regarding the former, the proliferation of patrimonial control by powerful families (i.e., manorial control), which had already emerged in the 10th century, and the differentiation of government officials and aristocrats (lords of the secular world) and temple and shrine lords (lords of the sacred world), etc., progressed more fully by the end of the Heian period, and this pushed the diversification and confusion of various fields of society to the limit, so that the general low-ranking local lords, in order to pursue their own interests under this situation, had to become samurai themselves to deal with this situation and to build their own public authority through the organization of the heads of military families. Regarding the latter, it can be pointed out that because the underlying ancient society was centrally ruled by a state of central government officials and aristocrats who had absorbed the advanced systems and culture that had been introduced from China, the ruling class of the new era (the samurai) that emerged during the structural changes to the Middle Ages could not have grown politically and socially without the aid of a centripetal structure and recognition within the imperial court and the world of the aristocracy.

[Akio Yoshie]

Structure of the samurai clan

What kind of organization, or warrior corps, did the warriors who had developed in this way form up until the Edo period? The structure of the warrior corps is thought to have changed considerably through the various stages of the Heian, Kamakura, Muromachi, Sengoku, Azuchi-Momoyama, and Edo periods, so we will consider each period below.

First, in the mid-Heian period, when samurai first emerged, they were composed of military aristocrats and hunters, and thus already possessed the basic form of medieval samurai, that is, mounted troops armed with bows and swords, but at the same time, as mentioned above, they were a complex gathering of various forces, and so, although there were hierarchical relationships between master and servant and horizontal alliances called banrui, both of which were subject to frequent comings and goings, and no clear principles for class definition or group cohesion had been formed. This characteristic can be clearly seen in the vassals and banrui seen in the Masakado Rebellion, the Sumitomo Rebellion, and the Tadatsune Rebellion.

However, as the samurai grew in the late Heian period as mentioned above, and a wide range of local lords became samurai, their organization gradually became more clearly defined. In other words, the leaders of military families that grew on a national scale, such as the Minamoto and Taira clans, who were tasked with guarding the Imperial Court, organized a core of hereditary retainers (family members) from among local lords throughout the country to serve them through repeated battles and pursuits, but in times of war, they also led a large number of samurai from various provinces who were gathered together by the authority of the Imperial Court. Even in each province, those who became local military families through the position of provincial government official organized general samurai within the country (national soldiers) as necessary, using the authority of the provincial government as a core of hereditary retainers (family members). In the samurai groups of this period, there was almost no development of organizational connections between the lower-ranking samurai, and the development of hierarchical organizations was prominent.Furthermore, within this hierarchical organization, master-vassal relationships and national bureaucratic organizations coexisted, with the former not completely dominating the latter.This reflects the unique samurai capabilities of this era, namely the social and political underdevelopment of individual local samurai, and the lack of control over national public authority by the entire samurai force, including these.

However, the Kamakura period's military organization system, with the Kamakura shogunate and the shogun at the apex, was based on the hierarchical, master-vassal relationship-driven samurai organization of the late Heian period, but had a new characteristic in that it was organized in a national form, resolving the discrepancy between the old lord-vassal system and the national organization. In other words, many of the local samurai, who were bound together by family ties and had hereditary retainers, household members, and retainers, were represented by a head of the family, who was in a position to unite the clan, and in terms of social status became the Shogun's vassal, and in terms of official position became the Jito (land steward) of the relevant territory. They were subordinate to the Shogun through the Shugo (= family magistrates) who led them in each province, and in return for the pensions given to them by the Shogun (the status of Gokenin, the offices of Shugo and Jito), they carried out military missions (Kanto official affairs) such as serving as guards in Kyoto and Kamakura, and searching for traitors and murderers (the Three Articles of Great Crimes). However, the organization of the Kamakura shogunate's warrior groups, which did not necessarily unite all samurai through clan ties and imperial court-like positions (shugo and jito), began to waver and disintegrate from the late Kamakura period onwards when local communities began to seek to resolve their own local problems autonomously through the collective will of the feudal lords involved, rather than within the framework of positions or clan ties.

During the Nanboku-cho period, regional alliances of local samurai, known as ikki (such as the Matsuura-to Ikki in Hizen and the Shirahata Ikki in Bushu), were formed in various regions, indicating that the aforementioned movement had become a clearly defined organization. These ikki, which were bound together by written contracts that included non-interference in internal affairs, the resolution of border disputes and conflicts by gathering together, and military cooperation, were noted as indicating that samurai had created an autonomous horizontal organization instead of a hierarchical one. As a result, the Muromachi Shogunate's samurai organization, which had been based on the lord-vassal relationship since the Kamakura Shogunate, was shaken, and the shugo of each province became independent from the shogunate and aimed to reorganize the samurai into a national organization based on ikki in each region. The organization of vassals by the Sengoku daimyo achieved this goal that the shugo of the Muromachi period had sought but failed to achieve. This is well illustrated by the fact that many examples of Sengoku-ho, which legally regulated the relationship between sengoku daimyo and their vassals, discuss the enactment of laws, administration, and military mobilization of daimyo based on mutual consultation between representative samurai from each region of the country. This allowed them to organize almost all of the samurai in the country into horse-riding units in various forms, such as fudai and tozama, and to mobilize the general peasants under each lord into large numbers of infantry, calling them ashigaru, thereby building a strong lord-vassal relationship that allowed them to organize the samurai's initiative. However, although the general samurai organized by the sengoku daimyo were ordered to live in the daimyo's castle town on the one hand, they were also deeply rooted in their territories to manage them as local lords since the Heian period, so no matter how powerful and well-organized the military organizations of the sengoku daimyo were, in this respect they still had elements that made them insufficient to become everyday fighting groups freed from the land.

The unified power of the shogunate and feudal domains in the early modern period, which began with Oda Nobunaga, passed through Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and was established by Tokugawa Ieyasu, realized the above-mentioned task that the Sengoku daimyo had not been able to accomplish, in the form of separation of soldiers and farmers through the Taiko Land Survey and Sword Hunt, against the backdrop of a developing monetary economy and the introduction of firearms. In other words, as a result, samurai finally abandoned the form they had had since the Heian period of staying in villages and leading agricultural management, and became people who lived permanently in castle towns and lived off the stipends of the shogunate and feudal lords, and therefore could engage in long-term battles at the will of the shogunate and feudal lords. The Bunroku-Keicho Invasion, the Siege of Osaka, the Shimabara Rebellion, and other wars waged by the Azuchi-Momoyama government and the Edo Shogunate from the end of the 16th century to the beginning of the 17th century were the result of long-term mobilization of large numbers of samurai in the form of wars by various feudal lords. However, the denial of land management that made this samurai organization possible and the shift to a salary lifestyle negated the independence of the samurai, who were known for their hard work, and so the fighting ability of the samurai was inevitably weakened. Under the Shogunate's power of isolationism and prohibition of private fighting, the samurai had almost no experience of actual fighting, and while they only retained the function of guarding the Shogunate and domains, they continued to lose more and more power until the end of the Edo period. With the defeat of the shogunate in the Boshin War and the establishment of the Meiji Restoration government, the samurai class suddenly fell from its dominant position in society, and eventually disappeared as a social class through the Meiji government's sword ban and policy of equality for all four classes.

[Akio Yoshie]

Lifestyle and values

The lifestyles and values of samurai were not uniform throughout the ages. First, in the mid-Heian period, when samurai first emerged, they were not lords of land, as mentioned above, but rather comprised hunters, fishermen, and outlaws organized by military aristocrats, and lived unique daily lives influenced by these factors. For example, in volume 19-4 of the Konjaku Monogatarishu, it is described how Minamoto no Mitsunaka usually led his attendants on hunting expeditions in the mountains and fields, and how he set up nets in the rivers and seas. This well conveys the situation, and it is known that this was how they constantly honed their abilities as a cavalry fighting group. In addition, the legend that the attendants of Minamoto no Tameyoshi's son Tametomo were a group of outlaws who usually lived as vagrants also conveys another side of the story. The samurai's way of life in these early days was called the "Way of the Soldier," and there was a strong tendency to value the integrity and humaneness of the individual samurai, whose profession was fighting, rather than strong lord-vassal relationships or the advancement of family names. Battle tales from the Heian period, such as the Konjaku Monogatarishu, praise the fighting abilities of samurai and the emotional bond between enemies, and depict bitter battles between fathers and sons as a matter of course, well illustrating the values held by samurai of the time.

From the end of the Heian period to the Kamakura period, the early samurai integrated with local feudal lords and established the prototype of the samurai that would endure through the Middle Ages. The Shigisan Engi Emaki, compiled in the early 12th century, depicts a local tycoon unarmed, while the Kokawadera Engi Emaki, compiled at the end of the 12th century, depicts the mansion of a similar local tycoon with a moat, turret, and armed attendants, clearly illustrating this transition. From then until the Sengoku period, except for battles and guards, ordinary samurai usually spent their days leading farm management, from irrigation and sowing to harvesting, based in their armed residences as mentioned above, using the power of their clan and attendants to repel external enemies.

As samurai became firmly tied to their estates and inherited them in a fixed manner, their values also underwent a major change, and they began to value the relationship with the lord who protected their estates and status, that is, the strong bond between lord and servant, and also to place importance on the survival and development of the hereditary "family." Words emphasizing these points frequently appeared in the succession documents created by many samurai families from the Kamakura period onwards, but the values of respecting lord and servant and the "family" at this stage were concrete and materialistic, born out of actual needs, and had not crystallized into a systematic ethics or aesthetics.

From the Sengoku period to the beginning of the Edo period, samurai began to live in castle towns and were paid salaries. This led to the transformation of samurai from rural to urban dwellers, and instead of independent agricultural management, they began to live as government officials in charge of the administration of the shogunate and feudal domains. However, samurai, who originally lived in the countryside and lived a life far removed from commerce, were unable to transform into those who controlled the commodity economy in the new urban life, and in real life they became parasites on city merchants and fell into conditions that hindered the development of commerce. As samurai lives became separated from the management of their territories, the values that respected lord and servant and "family" were purified and glorified, as elements that undermined them were hidden in urban life, and this gave rise to bushido books such as "Hagakure," which emphasized that repaying one's lord with death and striving for the survival of the "family" were the greatest good and beauty for a samurai. However, as mentioned above, this value system did not go beyond a reaction against the commercial urban life and values that upset master and servant relationships and "family" structures, so it was completely transformed from the mid-Edo period onwards when the commodity economy developed, and values that respected rationality and science emerged from within the samurai class, bringing the social life of this system to an end at the end of the Edo period and the beginning of the Meiji period.

[Akio Yoshie]

"The History of the Establishment of the Feudal System in Japan" by Maki Kenji (1935, Kobundo)" ▽ "Samurai Groups and Shinto" by Okuda Masahiro (1937, Hakuyosha)" ▽ "Bushido in Japan" by Fuji Naoki (1956, Sogensha)" ▽ "Samurai Groups and Villages" by Toyoda Takeshi (1963, Yoshikawa Kobunkan)" ▽ "Samurai Groups" by Yasuda Motohisa (1964, Hanawa Shobo)" ▽ "The Formation of the Kokuga Military System" by Toda Yoshimi (included in "Power and the People in the Middle Ages" 1970, Sogensha)" ▽ "Japanese History 12: Medieval Samurai Groups" by Ishii Susumu (1974, Shogakukan)" ▽ "The Progress of Samurai Group Research" by Seki Yukihiko, 2 volumes (1988, Shinjinbutsu Oraisha)" ▽ "Encyclopedia of Japanese History edited by Shimomura Isao "Samurai" (1993, Tokyodo Publishing)" ▽ "The Establishment of the Samurai, New Edition, by Motoki Yasuo (1994, Yoshikawa Kobunkan)" ▽ "Medieval Cities and Samurai" by Takahashi Shinichiro (1996, Yoshikawa Kobunkan)" ▽ "Samurai and Manor Control" by Hattori Hideo (2004, Yamakawa Publishing)" ▽ "Hagakure - Samurai and Servants" by Koike Yoshiaki (Kodansha Academic Library)

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

平安時代中期から江戸時代末期まで存在した、武力をもって地方を支配し、公権力に仕える者。

語義

武士ということばは、すでに奈良時代に武官・武人という意味で用いられているが、前述のような独特の意味を担うようになるのは、平安時代中期の10世紀以降のことである。すなわち、10世紀のころから、合戦をもって業とする者が「つわもの（兵）」、官人貴族に仕えて家政や警固をあずかる者が「さぶらい（侍）」、そしてまた武力をもって公(おおやけ)に奉仕する者が「もののふ（武者）」とそれぞれよばれて、各分野に登場するようになった。武士ということばは、これらが登場するころから、そのおのおのを武力にかかわる存在として表現するときに用いられるようになってきた。その後平安時代末期から鎌倉時代初期にかけて、後述のようにこれら三者が融合して同一実体となり、三つのことばが同一実体の異なる側面を語る語に変貌(へんぼう)するに伴い、武士ということばは、この実体を統一的に表現する語として一般に用いられるようになった。

［義江彰夫］

武士の発生

武士の発生や発展については、従来、律令(りつりょう)地方行政の弛緩(しかん)の下で自衛のために地方の新興富農や領主が武装したことに始まり、貴人の「さぶらい」や朝廷の「もののふ」などをステップとして漸次発展したと考えられてきた。しかし、この古典的見解は、富農や領主が直接武士化したことを語る史料の欠如、中世武士とよばれる者の先祖が系図その他でいずれも特定の貴族から出ている事実など、多くの点で事実に適合しないため、近年さまざまの形で批判されてきた。そしてそのなかから多様な新見解が現れ、現在ようやく、前述の語義の起源と変化とが合致するような形で総合的な見通しがたてられるようになった。

　まず発生の問題に限ってみてみよう。10世紀の前半のころから京都と地方に登場する原初の武士は、社会史的にみてけっして地方の富農・領主そのものではなく、むしろ農業経営とは別の世界で合戦そのものを業とする者＝「つわもの」（兵）であった。具体的には蝦夷(えぞ)鎮圧や京都治安などをつかさどる鎮守府(ちんじゅふ)将軍、近衛(このえ)・衛門府(えもんふ)官人、検非違使(けびいし)庁官人など軍事貴族を組織者とし、その下に、殺生を生業(なりわい)とする狩猟・漁労民や、殺害・放火犯といった体制外に放逐された非法者の集団などが、手足として組み込まれて存在し、貴族間の私闘、地方領主間の紛争、地方領主・荘園(しょうえん)領主と国衙(こくが)の紛争、あるいはおのおのの利害遂行のための物資輸送などに際し、弓馬や船や甲冑(かっちゅう)で武装した代理人として働いていた。平将門(まさかど)の乱や藤原純友(すみとも)の乱（承平(じょうへい)・天慶(てんぎょう)の乱）における将門・純友らの行動や、僦馬(しゅうば)の党とよばれる武装物資輸送集団などの活動には、このような側面がよくうかがわれる。平安時代中期に入って、権門(けんもん)貴族・寺社の家産支配、公家(くげ)・官人領主（俗界）と寺社家領主（聖界）の分化・競合などが展開するに伴い、社会構造・人間関係が多元化・錯綜(さくそう)化し、それを解決するために行政と宗教を超えた高度の武力が必要となってきたことが、前述のように専業的に弓馬で武装し、合戦を事とする「つわもの」を社会各分野で必要とする条件を生み出したのである。

　ところで同じ10世紀のころ、前記の権門的家産支配を展開するようになってきた官人貴族は、自己の家産と家政を維持するために独自の従者を積極的に組織するようになる。諸家の侍（さぶらい）と当時よばれた者がそれであり、彼らの一部は家政をつかさどる家司(けいし)らになって文筆と経営能力をもって仕えたが、他の一部は前述の「つわもの」のなかから抜擢(ばってき)され、その武芸をもって、主人に降りかかる紛争や身の危険を解決・排除することを仕事とした。藤原忠平(ただひら)に仕えた平将門や藤原道長(みちなが)に仕えた源頼光(よりみつ)などはその一例である。

　しかし、官人貴族がこぞって「つわもの（兵）」を「さぶらい（侍）」にするようになれば、家産制的性格を強く帯びるようになった朝廷も、諸家の侍(さぶらい)に見合う独自の武士を兵や侍のなかから組織せざるをえない。平安中期に始まる滝口(たきぐち)の武者、院政とともに登場する院北面(ほくめん)の武者などはこの必要から成立したものである。この結果これら公権力に勤仕する武士は、この間地方の国衙において下向した国守(こくしゅ)・目代(もくだい)や国衙庁舎を警固するという名目で組織されるようになった国兵(くにのつわもの)・館侍(たちさぶらい)とともに、公に仕える武士として「もののふ」と広くよばれるようになった。

［義江彰夫］

武士発達の過程

発生の時期に以上のようにおのおの別個の存在であった「つわもの」「さぶらい」「もののふ」は、以後平安時代末期から鎌倉時代へかけて複雑なプロセスをたどりながらも、しだいに武士とよばれるにふさわしい同一実体として融合し、それとともに社会的・政治的地位を高めていった。すなわち、このプロセスを「つわもの」に視点を据えて見通すと、まず武士発生の10世紀前半のころ、将門の乱や純友の乱を起こした「つわもの」たちは、一部に官人貴族の「さぶらい」や朝廷・国衙の「もののふ」となった者を含んでいたが、多くは依然未組織の自然発生的集団としての面を強くもっていた。しかし、両乱が貴族の「さぶらい」や国衙の「もののふ」でもある将門や純友らによって起こされ、朝廷から追討使(ついとうし)＝「もののふ」の地位を与えられた藤原秀郷(ひでさと)や小野好古(おののよしふる)らによって鎮定されたように、「つわもの」は当初からすでに「さぶらい」「もののふ」化することによって成長するという方向性をもっていた。

　11世紀前期に東国に起こった平忠常(ただつね)の乱は、軍事貴族源頼信(よりのぶ)の「さぶらい」となった忠常が、その力を頼んで朝廷・国衙に背き地方的自立を遂げようとした反乱であるが、主人である頼信が朝廷から追討使に任ぜられ、それによって戦わずして鎮定され、頼信の武士としての威信が高められたように、時代の進展とともに「つわもの」は内部に主人―侍の関係をつくりだし、主人が朝廷の公的所職(しょしき)を得て「もののふ」としての地位を固め、反乱する「つわもの」を鎮定し、「さぶらい」として吸収してゆくという方向を顕著にとるようになっていった。すなわち、多くの「つわもの」は、「もののふ」の「さぶらい」となって組織され、それを通してしだいに自らも「もののふ」的な性格のものとなっていったのであり、こうして武士は徐々にこの三者を合体したものとなっていった。

　11世紀後半に相次いで起こった前九年・後三年の役は、いずれも武門の棟梁(とうりょう)として成長しつつあった源頼信の子源頼義(よりよし)やその子源義家(よしいえ)らが奥州俘囚(ふしゅう)の長安倍(あべ)氏や清原(きよはら)氏を挑発して引き起こした乱である。両乱は、成長途上の武士にとって、化外(けがい)の民俘囚の反乱鎮圧という大義名分ゆえに、従来をはるかにしのぐ質と規模の戦闘を公然と行い、それによって朝家の固めとしての武士の地位を日本社会全体のなかで確固不抜のものに高めるという意味をもっていた。これ以降頻発する諸事件、すなわち源平相互が相手を朝敵に仕立てて繰り返した闘争、平家が積極的に行った海賊鎮定、源平二氏が先鋒(せんぽう)を切って行った僧兵強訴(ごうそ)の鎮圧、朝廷内部の分裂に介入しておのおのの代理人となって戦われた保元(ほうげん)・平治(へいじ)の乱などなどは、武士の主従結合と公的発言力の強化をさらに推し進めた諸段階を示すものであり、これらを通してついに武士は平氏政権をもって国家公権の座に到達し、鎌倉幕府の成立をもって武士固有の軍事的国家権力を樹立することに成功したのである。10世紀前半に発生した武士は、「つわもの」「さぶらい」「もののふ」の諸側面をしだいに融合させながら、武門の棟梁に統率されて12世紀末には一個の独自な国家公権を生み出すまでに成長した。

　10世紀前半に発生した武士がなぜ12世紀末に国家公権を樹立するまで成長したか、またその成長の仕方が、なぜ多くの「つわもの」が武門の棟梁の「さぶらい」となりつつ、朝廷の固めとしての「もののふ」の地位を得るという方向をたどったのかという根本問題はまだ十分に解明されていない。しかし、現在までに明らかにされている点を最小限要約すれば次のごとくである。前者については、10世紀にすでに現れていた権門諸家の家産支配＝荘園制的支配の乱立、官人貴族領主（俗界領主）と寺社領主（聖界領主）の分化などが平安末期までにいっそう本格的に進み、それが社会各分野の多元化・錯綜化を極限にまで推し進めたので、底辺の地方領主一般がその下で自己の利害を貫くためには、自ら武士化してこのような事態に対処するとともに、武門の棟梁の組織を通して独自の公権力を構築することが必要になってきたことを指摘できる。また後者については、前提となる古代社会が中国渡来の高度な制度・文化を摂取した中央官人貴族の国家によって集権的に支配されていたために、中世への構造変化のなかで生じてきた新しい時代の支配層＝武士も、求心的構造と朝廷・貴族世界のなかでの承認を媒介としなければ政治的・社会的に成長しえなかったことを指摘できる。

［義江彰夫］

武士団の構造

このようにして成長した武士は、以後江戸時代に至るまでどのような組織すなわち武士団を構成していたのであろうか。武士団の構造は、平安時代・鎌倉時代・室町戦国時代・安土(あづち)桃山時代・江戸時代の諸段階を通して相当変化したと考えられるので、以下時期を追って検討しよう。

　まず発生の時代、平安時代中期のころの武士は、軍事貴族と狩猟民を構成要素としていたことにうかがわれるように、弓箭(きゅうせん)・刀剣を武器とする騎馬部隊という中世武士の基本形をすでに備えていたが、同時に彼らは前述のように複雑な諸勢力の寄合い集団であるところから、それなりに主人と従者の上下関係や伴類(ばんるい)とよばれる横の連合関係をもってはいたが、ともに離合集散が激しく、身分規定や集団結合の原理は明確に形成されていなかった。将門の乱・純友の乱・忠常の乱にみえる従類・伴類にはこのような性格が顕著にうかがわれる。

　しかしながら、以後平安時代後期に前述のように武士が成長し、広範な在地領主が武士化してゆくに伴い、その組織はしだいに明確なものになってゆく。すなわち源氏・平氏など朝廷警固の任を得て全国的規模で成長した武門の棟梁は、繰り返される合戦や追捕を通して世襲的に仕える中核的な従者＝家人を全国各地の地方領主のなかから組織するようになったが、戦時にあたっては、そのほかに朝廷の権限で駆り集められた諸国の武士多数を統率した。諸国においても、国衙在庁官人の地位を介して地方的な武門となった者は、世襲化された従者＝家人を中核に、必要に応じて国内の武士一般（国の兵(つわもの)）を国衙の権威を通して組織した。この時代の武士団では、このように底辺の武士相互の連係組織がほとんど発達せず、もっぱら上下の組織の発達が顕著であり、またその上下組織は主従関係と国家官職的組織とが併存し、前者が後者を覆い尽くしていないが、それは、個々の地方武士の社会的・政治的未成長と、それを含む全武士勢力の国家公権未掌握というこの時代独特の武士の力量の反映である。

　しかし、鎌倉時代の鎌倉幕府＝将軍を頂点とする軍事編成の体系は、平安時代後期の上下＝主従関係に主導された武士団編成を基礎としつつ、それをそのまま国家的形態で編成して旧来の主従制と国家的編成のずれを解決したところに、新しい特徴をもっていた。すなわち、同族結合で結ばれ世襲化された所従(しょじゅう)・家子(いえのこ)・郎党(ろうとう)らを抱えた各地方武士の多くは、同族をまとめる地位の惣領(そうりょう)が代表して身分上は将軍の御家人(ごけにん)となり、官職上は当該所領の地頭(じとう)などになって、国ごとに彼らを統率する守護(しゅご)（＝家人奉行人）を通して将軍に服属し、将軍から与えられる恩給（御家人の地位、守護・地頭などの所職(しょしき)）にこたえて京都・鎌倉大番役(おおばんやく)、謀叛(むほん)人や殺害人の捜索（大犯(だいぼん)三箇条）をはじめとする軍事的任務（関東御公事(みくうじ)）を遂行したのである。しかし、同族結合と朝廷官職的な所職（守護・地頭職）を媒介として、かならずしも全武士を糾合していなかった鎌倉幕府の武士団の組織は、鎌倉時代後期以降、各地域社会が地域固有の問題を所職や同族の枠よりも、関係する領主全体の意志で自律的に解決しようとする方向をとるようになると、動揺し解体し始める。

　南北朝時代になると、各地に一揆(いっき)とよばれる地方武士の地域的連合組織（たとえば肥前(ひぜん)松浦(まつら)党一揆、武州(ぶしゅう)白旗(しらはた)一揆など）が生まれてくるが、これは前述の動きが明確な組織となったことを示すものである。内政不干渉、境界相論や紛争の寄合(よりあい)による解決、軍事的協力などを内容とする契約状によって結ばれたこの一揆は、武士が、上下にかわる自律的な横の組織を創出したことを示すものとして注目され、したがってそのなかで鎌倉幕府以来の主従関係を核とする室町幕府の武士団編成は動揺し、各国の守護は幕府から自立して各地の一揆を土台とする武士の一国的再編成を志向することとなる。戦国大名の家臣団編成は、室町時代の守護が求めて果たせなかったこの課題を実現したものである。戦国大名と家臣の関係を法的に規定した戦国家法の多くの例が、国内各地域代表格の武士相互の談合を土台として大名の法の制定、行政、軍事動員を語っていることは、これをよく示している。そしてそれゆえに国内の武士一般を譜代(ふだい)・外様(とざま)などなど多様な形態で騎馬の部隊としてほぼくまなく組織するとともに、各領主配下の農民一般をも足軽(あしがる)と称して大量な歩兵に動員し、武士の自発性を組織できる強力な主従関係を構築することができたのである。しかし、戦国大名に組織された一般武士は、一面で大名城下への集住を命ぜられるものの、他面平安時代以来の在地の領主として、所領の経営のために所領内に深く根をおろす存在であったから、戦国大名の軍団組織はいかに強大で組織されたものになったとはいっても、この点で、土地から解放された日常的戦闘集団には十分になりきれない要素を残していた。

　織田信長に始まり豊臣(とよとみ)秀吉を経て徳川家康に至って成立する近世の幕藩統一権力は、進展する貨幣経済や鉄砲の導入などを背景として、戦国大名のなしえなかった前述の課題を太閤検地(たいこうけんち)・刀狩(かたながり)などを通して兵農分離という形で実現する。すなわちこれによって武士は、最終的に、在村して農業経営を領導するという平安時代以来の形態を捨てて、城下町に常時集住し、幕府・藩主の扶持(ふち)によって生活する者となったため、幕府・藩主の意のままに長期の戦闘に従事しうる存在となった。文禄(ぶんろく)・慶長(けいちょう)の役、大坂の陣、島原の乱など、16世紀末から17世紀前期にかけて、織豊(しょくほう)政権や江戸幕府の行った戦役が、諸大名の役という形で大量の武士を長期にわたって動員する形でできたのは、以上の結果にほかならない。しかし、この武士編成方式を可能にした所領経営の否定、俸給生活者化は、一所懸命といわれる武士の自立性を奪うことにほかならなかったから、武士団の戦闘能力は逆に衰退せざるをえず、鎖国と私闘を禁止する幕府権力の下でほとんど実戦の経験のないまま、幕府・藩の警固の機能だけを残しつつ、ますます実力を失って幕末にまで至った。戊辰(ぼしん)戦争における幕府の敗北、明治維新政府の樹立によって、武士身分は社会の支配的地位から一挙に滑り落ち、やがて明治政府の打ち出した廃刀令や四民平等政策などを通して、社会的身分としても消滅した。

［義江彰夫］

生活様式と価値観

武士の生活様式や価値観も時代によって一様ではない。まず平安時代中期の武士発生の時代、彼らは前述のように土地の領主というより、狩猟・漁労民や非法者を軍事貴族が組織するという形で構成されていたから、これらの要素に左右された独特の日常生活を送っていた。たとえば『今昔(こんじゃく)物語集』巻19―4話には、源満仲(みつなか)が通常従者たちを指揮して山野に狩りを催し、また河海に網を張っていたさまが描かれているが、これはそのありさまをよく伝えており、騎馬戦闘集団としての能力がこれによって常時磨かれていたことが知られる。また、源為義(ためよし)の子為朝(ためとも)の従者たちが非法者の集団であり、通常無頼の徒として生活していたという伝承も、他の一面をよく伝えている。この草創の時代における武士の生き方は当時「兵(つわもの)の道」とよばれ、強固な主従関係や家名の発揚よりも、合戦を業とする者としての武士個人の潔さや人間的度量を尊ぶ気風が強かった。『今昔物語集』をはじめ平安時代の合戦譚(たん)に、武士の戦闘能力や敵対関係にある武士相互の心の交わりを褒めたたえ、父子骨肉の死闘を当然のこととして描いているのは、この時代の武士の価値観をよく示している。

　平安時代末期から鎌倉時代にかけては、草創期の武士が在地領主と一体化して中世を貫く武士の原型が成立する段階であり、12世紀初頭成立の『信貴山縁起絵巻(しぎさんえんぎえまき)』に地方の長者が武装のない形で描かれ、12世紀末成立の『粉河寺(こかわでら)縁起絵巻』に同類の地方長者の館(やかた)が堀と櫓(やぐら)と武装した従者を伴って描かれているのは、この転回のあとを鮮やかに示している。以後戦国時代に至るまで一般の武士は、合戦・警固などを除く通常は、一族と従者の力で前述のように武装された居館に拠(よ)って外敵を排除しつつ、用水・播種(はしゅ)から収穫に至る農村経営を領導する日々を送っていたのである。

　武士がこのように所領と固く結び付いてそれを固定的に世襲するようになってくると、価値観にも大きな変化が生じ、自己の所領と身分を保護する主君との関係すなわち主従の固い絆(きずな)を尊び、また世襲される「家」の存続と発揚を重視する考え方が現れてくる。鎌倉時代以来多くの武士の家でつくられた譲状(ゆずりじょう)には、これらを強調する文言が頻繁に登場するようになるが、この段階における主従と「家」を尊ぶ価値観は、現実の必要に応じて生まれたものだけに具体的・即物的であり、体系化された倫理や美学に結晶してはいなかった。

　戦国時代から江戸時代初頭にかけては、武士の城下町集住と俸給生活者化の進められた時期であるから、これによって武士は農村生活者から都市生活者に変貌(へんぼう)し、自立した農業経営のかわりに、幕府や藩の行政を担う役人としての生活を営むこととなった。しかし、元来農村にあって商業からかけ離れた生活を送ってきた武士は、新しい都市生活のなかで商品経済を統御する者に転化できず、実生活のうえでは都市商人に寄生し、商業の発展を阻害する条件に転落していったのである。武士の生活がこのように所領経営から切り離されるにしたがって、主従と「家」を尊ぶ価値観は、都市生活にそれを掘り崩す要素が潜んでいただけに、かえって純化・美化され、『葉隠(はがくれ)』に代表されるような武士道書を生み、死をもって主君に報い、「家」の存続を図ることが武士最高の善と美であると強調されるようになった。しかし、この価値観は、前述のように、主従と「家」を動揺させる商業的都市生活と価値観に対する反動を超えるものではなかったから、商品経済の発展する江戸時代中期以降は換骨奪胎し、武士内部から合理性と科学性を尊ぶ価値観が台頭して、幕末・明治初年を最後に社会的生命を閉じた。

［義江彰夫］

『牧健二著『日本封建制度成立史』（1935・弘文堂）』▽『奥田真啓著『武士団と神道』（1937・白楊社）』▽『藤直幹著『日本の武士道』（1956・創元社）』▽『豊田武著『武士団と村落』（1963・吉川弘文館）』▽『安田元久著『武士団』（1964・塙書房）』▽『戸田芳実著『国衙軍制の形成過程』（『中世の権力と民衆』所収・1970・創元社）』▽『石井進著『日本の歴史12　中世武士団』（1974・小学館）』▽『関幸彦著『武士団研究の歩み』全2冊（1988・新人物往来社）』▽『下村効編『日本史小百科　武士』（1993・東京堂出版）』▽『元木泰雄著『武士の成立』新装版（1994・吉川弘文館）』▽『高橋慎一朗著『中世の都市と武士』（1996・吉川弘文館）』▽『服部英雄著『武士と荘園支配』（2004・山川出版社）』▽『小池喜明著『葉隠――武士と「奉公」』（講談社学術文庫）』

[参照項目] | 足軽 | 家子郎党 | 一揆 | 江戸幕府 | 大坂の陣 | 大番役 | 織田信長 | 小野好古 | 刀狩 | 鎌倉幕府 | 御家人 | 侍 | 地頭 | 島原・天草一揆 | 僦馬の党 | 守護 | 承平・天慶の乱 | 織豊政権 | 前九年・後三年の役 | 戦国大名 | 惣領制 | 太閤検地 | 平忠常 | 平忠常の乱 | 平将門 | 滝口 | 棟梁 | 徳川家康 | 外様大名 | 豊臣秀吉 | 葉隠 | 武士道 | 藤原純友 | 藤原秀郷 | 譜代大名 | 文禄・慶長の役 | 兵農分離 | 保元・平治の乱 | 北面武士 | 源為朝 | 源満仲 | 源義家 | 源頼信 | 源頼光 | 源頼義 | 室町幕府 | 目代 | 譲状

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

<<: Fuji Asama Mono - Fujiasama Mono

>>: Fuji [town] - Fuji