Ezo

Japanese: 蝦夷 - えぞ

In ancient Japanese history, the term refers to people who lived in northeastern Japan and resisted the rule of the unified nation, remaining outside that rule. They are also called "Emishi" or "Ebisu." Traditionally, research on this subject has been conducted by weaving together the history of the "Ezo Conquest" as the warp thread of the racial theory of "Ainu or Japanese (Wajin)." Currently, we have reached a stage in research where both the racial theory and the historical view of the conquest are being forced to make a major shift.

[Takahashi Tomio]

Racial Theory

In Japanese mythology, it is said that the so-called "Tenson Minzoku" (the descendants of the gods of heaven) came recently and unified the country. This was then reinterpreted in history, leading to the theory that the Tenson Minzoku were the Japanese and the indigenous people were the Ezo, i.e. the Ainu. In the Ruiju Kokushi, Ezo is included in the "Customs and Customs" section and is treated as a kind of "domestic customs" (domestic foreign people), i.e., "domestic foreign people." In light of the historical process, it is quite natural that the Ainu were the "domestic foreign people" based in northeastern Japan. Therefore, there is sufficient reason to consider Ezo to be Ainu. However, this was unconditionally correct from the mid-Heian period onwards, when Emishi came to be read as Ezo, but in ancient times, when Emishi were called Emishi (Ebisu), there was no sufficient reason to immediately replace this with Ainu. This is because the ancient idea of Ezo is not a racial idea. The mistake in this argument lies in the attempt to understand this, including ancient Ezo during the Emishi period, in terms of a binary racial theory of either Ainu or Japanese.

[Takahashi Tomio]

Historical notions of the Emishi

In the beginning, there was no name Ezo. They were called Emishi (Ebisu). There was a problem in thinking of them all as Ezo. Emishi originally meant "brave man." This is the meaning behind the use of Emishi in people's names. On the other hand, since the Jinmu song, this brave man has come to be thought of as "the brave man resisting in the East." It should be noted that the song about the Imperial Commander's Eastern Expedition goes, "Even if there are a hundred people, they will not turn away from one Emishi." Thus, Emishi became a derogatory name for "Azumabito." Their character is defined as "wild people" and "rebellious people." "I" could also be read as "Hina," but "Azuma" also meant "Hina," which means "remote." Emishi were Hina people. This is also why they were considered lawless and immoral during the Ritsuryo period. In other words, the historical idea of the Ezo was that of barbarians in political and cultural terms. It was not that they were a different ethnic group based on racial differences. Because they resisted the unification of the ancient nation and refused to accept its rule and culture, from the perspective of the establishment they were uncivilized and barbaric, and in that sense were a different ethnic group politically and culturally. Whether they were a different ethnic group in racial terms requires separate consideration.

[Takahashi Tomio]

Hidaka Ezo

The Nihon Shoki, in the 27th year of the reign of Emperor Keikō, states, "Among the eastern barbarians, there is a province called Hitakami no Kuni. The people of that province are called Emishi." This points out that, even though they are both Emishi, the Eastern Emishi and the Hitakami Emishi are different, and is noteworthy as showing that the Emishi are connected to Ezo in later times, that is, the unique concept of Ezo. It is thought that Hitakami no Kuni referred to "Michinoku." The fact that Emishi, who had previously been written simply as "Barbarians," were now written as "Ezo" to distinguish them, also shows that a special Emishi was considered. This entry in the Keikō Chronicle is thought to reflect the situation in Ezo around the time of the Taika Reforms, and can be seen as the establishment of the concept of Ezo in historical times. Therefore, as Ezo management spread to the Tohoku region, and Ezo people from around central Tohoku and further north, where they entered into particularly intense military rivalry, may have actually been a different race. From this point on, people and place names that could not be explained in Yamato language also began to appear, proving that these people were of Ainu descent. Later on, closer to Hokkaido, these people were called Ezo to distinguish them from Emishi, and it became clear that they were Ainu, but it seems that there had been considerable changes within this Ainu group before this happened. Around the 10th and 11th centuries, there was a fairly large "human transformation" among the northern Ainu people, which is thought to have led to the establishment of medieval Ezo = Ainu.

[Takahashi Tomio]

Historical view of the conquest of the Emishi

Up until now, the ancient Japanese state was established as the Yamato state in the 4th to 5th centuries, and after that, it was the state's job to organize this system, and the task of expanding the state outward was thought of as merely eliminating villains. This is the case with the conquest of the Kumaso and the Hayato. The most prominent example of this is the conquest of the Emishi. However, this "conquest view of history" is incorrect. The root of the error lies in the view of history of the founding of the state. The Yamato state of the 4th to 5th centuries only saw its first establishment as a western Japanese state centered on the Seto Inland Sea. Outside of that, a vast area amounting to half of the Japanese archipelago was in an independent or semi-independent state. The Japanese state will not be complete until the remaining independent Japanese states are unified, so the Japanese archipelago state will not be established until then. The wars of unification for the second and third unification of the nation included the conquest of the Kumaso and the conquest of the Hayato, but the conquest of Ezo in particular is related to the management of the entire eastern and northern Japan, so it must be considered as the largest unification project in the formation of the Japanese nation. Therefore, the way of understanding it must be changed from a historical perspective of defeating villains like the "conquest of the Emishi," to a historical perspective based on the East-West conflict that divides Japanese history, contrasting the "challenge of the West" with the "response of the East," and assuming that the Japanese nation was completed only when sovereignty was advanced from the eastern provinces to Oshu and further to Ezo. The history of management of Ezo is the history of the founding of the nation.

[Takahashi Tomio]

The future of the Ezo problem

The Ezo racial theory has believed that everything will be resolved if it is decided whether they are Ainu or Japanese. The fact that the Emishi became Ezo and then Ainu over hundreds of years, from the eastern part of Japan to Oshu, and then to Ezo, is ignored. Those who have discussed the "Ezo Conquest" have believed that the Ezo problem ended when the war ended. The purpose of Ezo management was to organize the Ezo, which was outside, into the Ezo world and realize a unified Japan within that world. The Ezo problem will end when we see how that goal is realized. This perspective has been missing from the historical view of the Ezo Conquest so far. It is necessary to send the ancient Ezo to medieval Ezo and see how they reach their history as Ainu, as well as how the Ezo organized within the state, that is, the prisoners of war, achieved "equality" as "internal citizens", or how they would continue to maintain their "internal independence" without achieving this. It is necessary to have a clear perspective on such "Ezo problems after that." Considering the fact that there are known villages called "fushukyo" (prison villages) and that they have not progressed in becoming "Choyo people," it is clear that the hidden history of these people is also linked to the problem of discrimination. This problem is connected to the dark side of Japanese history.

[Takahashi Tomio]

One Japan

Recently, there has been a strong opinion that the Ainu are people of southern origin, like the Okinawans, and not of northern origin. The view that the Ainu language was originally of the same family as Japanese is also gaining ground. Japan has changed greatly since new continental elements entered the central part of the country. Originally, there was "one Japan." Perhaps Ezo is the bearer of that original Japan. Such a view is being considered.

[Takahashi Tomio]

The ancient state's policy towards the Emishi

The ancient Emishi first appeared as people incorporated into the territory of the Yamato nation during the formation process. These include Ohiko no Mikoto Takenu-Nakawawake's inspection of Hokuriku and the eastern provinces in the "Sujinki," Takeuchi no Sukune's inspection of the east and subsequent management of the eastern provinces by Yamato Takeru no Mikoto in the "Keikoki," the feud between the Kenu clan and the Emishi, and Abe no Hirafu's journey north along the Sea of Japan coast in the "Saimeiki." All of these are stories and legends. After the Taika Reforms, the Nutarino-ki and Iwafune-no-ki forts were established in Koshi Province (Niigata Prefecture), and the national territory during this period extended to the northern part of Niigata Prefecture and Fukushima Prefecture. When Mutsu Province was established in the second half of the 7th century and Dewa Province in 712 (Wadō 5), the control and conflict of the Emishi in the northern borders of both provinces became major issues for the Ritsuryo state. According to the Yoro Code, both provinces were "distant provinces" and "important provinces," and were home to "miscellaneous barbarians." The duties of the kokushi included "provision of food, subjugation, and scouting," which were duties not held in other provinces.

In the early Nara period, Taga Castle, the provincial capital and naval base, was built in the Sendai Plain. As the construction of counties and fortifications progressed, farmers from the eastern and Hokuriku regions were conscripted and deployed there as barracks and garrisons. The Emishi were given surnames, some were incorporated into the family register and became farmers, while others were loosely controlled through trade relations. However, political instability arose constantly due to intensified state exploitation, confusion in trade relations, and internal conflicts in the local community. Incidents such as the Mutsu-Echigo Emishi Rebellion in 709 (Wadō 2), the murder of the Mutsu Emishi Azechi Kamitsukenuno Hirohito in 720 (Yorō 4), and the murder of the Mutsu Emishi Daijō (a third-class official in the kokushi rank) in 724 (Jinki 1), all of which led to the dispatch of expeditionary forces. In addition, in 737 (Tenpyo 9), Oono Azumahito implemented a pacification policy that made use of 1,000 Eastern cavalrymen, 5,000 soldiers from Mutsu Province, chinhei troops, and Emishi, as well as the development of a direct route to Dewa Fortress, and in 758 (Tenpyo Houji 2), the construction of Momonou Castle in Mutsu Province and Ogachi Castle in Dewa Province likely intensified the contradictions in local society. With the defection of Emishi Ukamenokimi Ukuhau in 770 (Hōki 1), the area from the northern part of the Sendai Plain to the Kitakami Basin entered a period of turmoil that would last for about 30 years. In particular, the rebellion of Iji no Kimi Azamaro, the chief of Kamihari (Iji) County, who led the "Fugun" (military force) in 780, was thought to have been caused by personal grudge, but it escalated into the murder of Michishima no Otate, the chief of Ojika County, and the inspector and councilor Ki no Hirozumi, and the fall of Taga Castle. Emperor Kanmu, believing that "the safety of Kanto depends on this one move," sent large forces into three campaigns. In 788 (Enryaku 7), the battle near Koromogawa led by the eastern commander Kinokosami resulted in a major defeat for the government forces, with 3,000 casualties. In 794, Sakanoue no Tamuramaro and others were appointed as deputy generals for the expeditionary force of 100,000 men led by Otomo no Otomaro, the Ambassador to the East, and the results of the expedition were 457 beheaded, 150 captured, and 75 burned sites. In 801, Tamuramaro led 40,000 men as Seii Taishogun, and the following year he built Isawa Castle and obtained the surrender of over 500 people, including Isawa Emishi Omune Aterui and Bagu no Kimimore, and even built Shiwa Castle. At this stage, the national territory had expanded to the northern part of Iwate Prefecture. Later, in 811 (Kōnin 2), the Seii Shogun, Funya no Watamaro, deployed 20,000 troops to Nisatate (on the border between Iwate and Aomori prefectures) and Hei (eastern Iwate prefecture), and in 815, a military reform was carried out in which soldiers and heroes (those with merits) were primarily deployed to castles and military corps such as Isawa and Taga.

Meanwhile, in Dewa Province, a rebellion (Gangyo Rebellion) broke out in 878 (Gangyo 2) by the "Ezo" (barbarians) of 12 villages, including Kazuno (Kazuno) and Noshiro (Noshiro), who rebelled against the harsh rule of the provincial governor. However, the rebellion was put to an end thanks to the successful mobilization of the "Yoshijuu fuju" (barbarians who had surrendered) and the appeasement measures of Dewa Gon no Kami Fujiwara no Yasunori and Chinjufu Shogun Ono no Harukaze. Military reforms were carried out, centering on Akita Castle, Ogatsu Castle, and the provincial capital. Thus, the Emishi problem in this important province for the Ritsuryo state ended without the northernmost border being clearly defined.

During this time, the Emishi who were dispersed and relocated all over the country were called Fushu, and some were registered in the Fushu Keicho and became Choyomin, some were exempt from Choyo and given a stipend but were put in charge of guarding fortresses in anticipation of their military prowess, and some were obligated to attend Imperial Court ceremonies until the end of the Heian period. According to the Engishiki, "Fushu rice" was recorded in 35 provinces, and in the Wamyōshō, the name "Ebi Fukyo" appears in six districts.

[Yumino Masatake]

"Ezo, edited by the Ancient History Discussion Group (1963, Asakura Publishing)" ▽ "Ezo, by Takahashi Tomio (1963, Yoshikawa Kobunkan)" ▽ "The Development of Ancient Tohoku, by Niino Naokichi (1969, Hanawa Shobo)" ▽ "The History of Tohoku, Volume 1, edited by Toyoda Takeshi (1967, Yoshikawa Kobunkan)" ▽ "Ezo, edited by Obayashi Taryo (1979, Shakai Shisosha)"

Map of Tohoku (7th to 9th century)
©Shogakukan ">

Map of Tohoku (7th to 9th century)

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

Japanese:

日本古代史上、北東日本に拠(よ)って、統一国家の支配に抵抗し、その支配の外に立ち続けた人たちの呼称。「えみし」「えびす」ともいう。従来、「アイヌか日本人（和人）か」という人種論を縦糸にし、これに横糸として「蝦夷征伐」の歴史を織り合わせる形で、研究が進められてきた。現在では、その人種論、征伐史観ともに、大きな転換を迫られる研究段階にきている。

［高橋富雄］

人種論

日本神話では、いわゆる「天孫民族(てんそんみんぞく)」が新しくきて、国土を統一したように伝えている。それを歴史に読み替えて、天孫民族が日本人、先住民族がエゾですなわちアイヌという理論に発展した。『類聚国史(るいじゅうこくし)』では、エゾを「風俗部」に数え、これを一種の「国内殊俗(しゅぞく)」すなわち「国内異民族」扱いしている。歴史的経過に照らせば、北東日本に拠った「国内異民族」にあたるものがアイヌであることは、まことに自然である。だから、エゾをアイヌと考えることは、十分理由のあることである。しかし、これは、蝦夷をエゾと読むようになった平安中期以降では無条件に正しいのであるが、蝦夷をエミシ（エビス）とよんでいた古代においては、これをすぐにアイヌと置き換えるだけの十分な理由がない。古代エゾ観念は人種観念でないからである。それを、エミシ時代の古代エゾをも含めて、通して、アイヌか日本人かという二者択一の人種論でとらえようとしてきたところに、この議論の誤りがあった。

［高橋富雄］

歴史上の蝦夷観念

初めエゾという呼称はなかった。エミシ（エビス）であった。それをすべてエゾと考えてきたところに問題があった。エミシはもともと「勇者」の意味である。人名にエミシがあるのはこの意味である。他方、この勇者は、神武(じんむ)歌謡以来、「東の抵抗する勇者」として意識されるに至っている。「エミシを一人(ひたり)、百(もも)な人　人はいへども　手向ひもせず」が、皇師東征の歌であることに注意すべきである。こうしてエミシは「あずまびと」への賤称(せんしょう)ということになる。「あらぶる人たち」「まつろわぬ者たち」というのがその性格規定である。「夷」はヒナとも読んだが、「あずま」もヒナ＝辺鄙(へんぴ)の意味であった。エミシはヒナ人である。律令(りつりょう)時代に彼らが無法、無道とされるのもこの意味である。すなわち歴史上のエゾ観念は、政治的、文化的な蛮族観念である。人種の違いに基づく異民族観念ではないのである。古代国家の統一に抵抗し、その支配と文化を受け入れないゆえに、体制側からすれば、未開、野蛮な人たち、その意味での政治的、文化的異民族であったのである。人種上の異民族であったかどうかは、別途の考察を要する。

［高橋富雄］

日高見蝦夷

『日本書紀』景行天皇(けいこうてんのう)27年条には「東夷の中、日高見国(ひたかみのくに)あり。その国の人、蝦夷という」とある。これは、同じエミシのなかでも、東国エミシと日高見エミシは異なることを指摘し、後世のエゾに連なるエミシ、すなわち固有の意味のエゾ観念を示すものとして注目される。日高見国はすなわち「道奥(みちのく)」をさしたと考えられる。これまで、ただ「夷」と書いていたエミシを「蝦夷」と書いて区別するようになった点でも、特別なエミシが意識されたことを物語る。この景行紀の記事は、大化改新前後のエゾ事情を反映しているものと考えられ、歴史時代のエゾ観念の成立とすることのできるものである。そこで、エゾ経営が東北に進み、とくに激しい軍事的対抗関係に入るようになった東北中部あたりから以北のエゾについては、実際に人種的にも別種の人たちではなかったかと考えられる。その人名、地名についても、このあたりからヤマト語では説明できないものが出てきて、この人たちが「アイヌ系」であることを物語っている。この人たちが、もう少し時代が下り、場所も北海道に近づいて、エミシとも区別してエゾとよばれ、アイヌであることをはっきりさせるが、そうなるまでには、この「アイヌ系」のなかでかなりの変化があったと思われる。10～11世紀ごろは、北方アイヌ系の人たちの間に、かなり大きな「ヒトの変革」があって、中世エゾ＝アイヌの成立になったものと思われる。

［高橋富雄］

蝦夷征伐史観

これまで、日本古代国家は4～5世紀のころヤマト国家として成立し、その後は、これを体制的に整えるのが国家の仕事で、国家を外に拡大する仕事は、国家悪者退治という程度に考えてきた。熊襲(くまそ)征伐、隼人(はやと)征伐、みなそうである。その最たるものに蝦夷征伐がくる。しかし、この「征伐史観」は正しくない。誤りの根本は、国家成立史観にある。4～5世紀のころのヤマト国家は、瀬戸内海中心の西日本国家として、第一次の成立をみただけである。その外側には、日本列島の半分にも上る広大な地域が、独立・半独立の状態に置かれていた。その残された独立諸日本を統一して初めて日本国家は完成するので、それまでは日本列島国家は成立しない。その第二次統一国家、第三次統一国家の統一戦争として、熊襲征伐も隼人征伐もあるのだが、とくにエゾ征伐とされているのは、東日本、北日本全体の経営にかかわるのであるから、これは日本国家形成の最大の統一事業のように考える必要がある。だから、そのとらえ方も「蝦夷征伐」のような悪者退治史観ではなしに、日本史を二分するような東西抗争史観を根底に置いて、「西の挑戦」に「東の応戦」を対置して、東国から奥羽へ、さらに蝦夷地に主権が進んで、初めて日本国家は完成するという史観に改まってこねばならない。エゾ経営史は国家成立史である。

［高橋富雄］

エゾ問題の行方

エゾ人種論は、それがアイヌであるか日本人であるかさえ決まれば、それですべては解決すると考えてきた。エミシがエゾになり、最後にアイヌになっていくのには、東国から奥羽へ、さらに蝦夷地へ、何百年にもわたって、何百里も移動する民族の流離の歴史のあったことは没却されている。「エゾ征伐」を論じてきた人たちは、戦争が終わってしまえば、それでエゾ問題は終了したと考えてきた。エゾ経営は、外にたつエゾを内に組織し、そのエゾ世界に統一日本を実現することを目的とした。エゾ問題は、その目的がどう実現したかを見届けて終了する。これまでのエゾ征伐史観には、この観点が欠落していた。それは、古代エゾを中世エゾに送り届け、アイヌとしての歴史に至り着くのを見届ける必要があるとともに、国家のなかに編成されたエゾたち、すなわち俘囚(ふしゅう)らが、どのように「内民」としての「同等」を成し遂げたか、もしくは成し遂げないで「内なる独立」を保持し続けることになるのか。そのような「それからのエゾ問題」にも、しっかりした見通しをたてておく必要がある。彼らについて「俘囚郷」というムラの存在が知られ、彼らの「調庸(ちょうよう)の民」化が進まなかったことからすれば、この人たちのうずもれた歴史が差別の問題にも連なっていることは明らかである。この問題は日本史の暗部に連なる。

［高橋富雄］

一つの日本

最近、アイヌも沖縄の人たちと同じ南方系のヒトで、北方系ではないのではないかという意見が強く出されている。アイヌ語についても、本来、日本語と同系ではなかったかという見解も有力になってきている。中央部に新しい大陸的要素が入って、日本は大きく変わった。もとは「一つの日本」であった。エゾはその原日本の担い手になるのでないか。そういうことも考えられてきている。

［高橋富雄］

古代国家の蝦夷政策

古代蝦夷は、大和国家(やまとこっか)形成過程において領域内に組み込まれる人々としてまず登場する。「崇神紀(すじんき)」における大彦命武渟川別(おおひこのみことたけぬなかわわけ)の北陸・東国視察、「景行紀(けいこうき)」における武内宿禰(たけしうちのすくね)の東方視察とそれに続く日本武尊(やまとたけるのみこと)の東国経営、毛野(けぬ)氏と蝦夷との確執、「斉明紀(さいめいき)」の阿倍比羅夫(あべのひらふ)の日本海側北行事業などにおいてである。いずれも説話的伝承的記事である。大化改新後、越国(こしのくに)（新潟県）に渟足柵(ぬたりのき)・磐舟柵(いわふねのき)の両柵(さく)が設置されるが、この時期の国家領域は新潟県・福島県北部に及んだことになる。7世紀後半に陸奥国(むつのくに)、712年（和銅5）には出羽国(でわのくに)が設置されると、両国北辺における蝦夷支配と対立とが律令(りつりょう)国家にとって大きな課題となった。養老令(ようろうりょう)によれば、両国は「辺遠国」「辺要国」であり、「夷人雑類」の居住地。国司の任務は「饗給(きょうきゅう)、征討、斥候(せっこう)」という他国にはない任務が付加されている。

　奈良時代前期、仙台平野に国府兼鎮守府(ちんじゅふ)の多賀城(たがじょう)ができ、漸次、建郡、城柵建設が進むと、ここに柵戸(きのへ)・鎮兵として東国・北陸の農民が徴発・配備された。蝦夷は姓(せい)を与えられ、戸籍に編入されて班田農民化する者、交易関係を通じて緩やかな支配を受ける者とがあった。しかし国家収奪の強化、交易関係の混乱、現地社会の内部対立などから絶えず政情不安が生じた。709年（和銅2）陸奥・越後(えちご)蝦夷の乱、720年（養老4）陸奥蝦夷の按察使(あぜち)上毛野広人(かみつけぬのひろひと)殺害、724年（神亀1）陸奥蝦夷の大掾(だいじょう)（国司三等官）殺害事件などが起こり、いずれも征討軍の派遣をみる。また737年（天平9）大野東人(おおののあずまひと)による東国騎兵1000人、陸奥国兵5000人、鎮兵、蝦夷らを駆使した鎮撫(ちんぶ)政策と出羽柵への直通路開発事業や、758年（天平宝字2）の陸奥国桃生城(もものうじょう)、出羽国雄勝城(おがちじょう)建設などは現地社会の矛盾を激化させたのであろう。770年（宝亀1）蝦夷宇漢米公宇屈波宇(うかめのきみうくはう)の離反を契機に、仙台平野北部から北上(きたかみ)盆地にかけての地域は以後約30年に及ぶ動乱期を迎えることになる。なかでも780年「俘軍(ふぐん)」を率いた上治(かみはり)（伊治(これはる)）郡大領伊治公呰麻呂(いじのきみあざまろ)の乱は、私怨(しえん)に起因するとみられたが、牡鹿(おじか)郡大領道島大楯(みちしまのおおたて)・按察使参議紀広純(きのひろずみ)殺害と多賀城の陥落という事態に発展した。桓武天皇(かんむてんのう)は「坂東の安危は此(こ)の一挙に在り」という認識で3回にわたる征討戦に大軍を投入する。788年（延暦7）征東将軍紀古佐美(きのこさみ)による衣川(ころもがわ)付近の戦闘は官軍の損亡3000人に及ぶ大敗。794年征東大使大伴弟麻呂(おおとものおとまろ)による10万人の征軍には坂上田村麻呂(さかのうえのたむらまろ)らが副将軍に起用され、斬首(ざんしゅ)457、捕虜150、焼亡75か所という戦果。801年は田村麻呂が征夷大将軍として4万人を率い、翌年胆沢城(いさわじょう)築城と胆沢蝦夷大墓公阿弖流為(たものきみあてるい)、盤具公母礼(ばぐのきみもれ)ら500余人の降人を得、さらに志波城(しわじょう)築城までも行った。この段階で国家領域は岩手県北部に伸長したことになる。その後811年（弘仁2）征夷将軍文室綿麻呂(ふんやのわたまろ)が爾薩体(にさて)（岩手・青森県境）、閉伊(へい)（岩手県東部）に2万人の兵を展開、815年に至って胆沢、多賀(たが)などの諸城柵および軍団に兵士・健士（有勲者）を重点的に配備する軍制改革が行われた。

　他方、出羽国では、878年（元慶2）国司苛政(かせい)に反発した上津野(かづの)（鹿角）、野代(のしろ)（能代）など12か村の「夷俘」の反乱（元慶(がんぎょう)の乱）が勃発(ぼっぱつ)するが、帰順した「義従俘囚」動員の成功や、出羽権守(でわごんのかみ)藤原保則(ふじわらのやすのり)、鎮守府将軍小野春風(おののはるかぜ)の懐柔策により動乱は終息。秋田城、雄勝城、国府を中心とする軍制改革をみた。こうして律令国家にとっての辺要国での蝦夷問題は、最北辺の国境線を明確にせぬまま終わった。

　この間、全国各地に分散移住させられた蝦夷は俘囚とよばれ、「俘囚計帳」に登録されるようになって調庸民化する者、調庸は免除され禄物(ろくもつ)が与えられるが、軍事力を期待されて要害警備の任につく者、平安末期に至るまで、朝廷儀式に参集することを義務づけられた者などの姿があった。『延喜式(えんぎしき)』によれば35か国に「俘囚料稲」が計上され、『和名抄(わみょうしょう)』では6郡に「夷俘郷」の名がみられる。

［弓野正武］

『古代史談話会編『蝦夷』（1963・朝倉書店）』▽『高橋富雄著『蝦夷』（1963・吉川弘文館）』▽『新野直吉著『古代東北の開拓』（1969・塙書房）』▽『豊田武編『東北の歴史　上巻』（1967・吉川弘文館）』▽『大林太良編『蝦夷』（1979・社会思想社）』

東北要図（7～9世紀）

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

<<: Formica yessensis

>>: Gangrene - Gangrene