Akutō and Rural Conflict in Medieval Japan by Oxenboell Morten;

Author:Oxenboell, Morten;
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: University of Hawaii Press
Published: 2018-12-15T00:00:00+00:00

“He Is Our Crook”—The Estate System and the Protection of Criminals

Proprietary concerns could put a local strongman fellow under increasing pressure, eventually resulting in violent encounters. However, the relationship between known akutō and absentee estate proprietors was not always one of antagonism, mutual accusations, and violent attacks, and there are numerous examples of accused akutō who operated from within monastic estates and targeted surrounding estates, markets, and other properties. Often these akutō received some degree of protection within their estates of residence, and such cases are quite informative of the complex nature of the provincial estates and the power hierarchies within them. Before we return to the conflicts between proprietors and local armed groups, we will look at a few cases in which a proprietor, otherwise extremely vulnerable to attacks from akutō or other armed bands, apparently supported or protected such bands against prosecution by shogunate officials.

The early development of the prolonged conflict in Kuroda-no-shō illustrates well how accused criminals at times found protection within the borders of an estate where the provincial authorities would have a difficult time apprehending them. From early on, the estate had been involved in conflicts with neighboring estates and provincial authorities, and in the eleventh century Tōdaiji actively encouraged the estate residents to expand the borders of the estate into the adjoining public land (kōryō). Residents in the public land also readily joined this movement, since the estate, and thereby its residents, had been granted dispensations for certain taxes.32

The governor in charge of the public land tried to halt this development, but Tōdaiji does not seem to have budged. When the governor complained about the residents’ unpaid taxes, the temple seems not to have responded. Subsequently, the governor led military forces into the estate, burnt down sixteen houses, and expropriated more than forty-six chō (one chō was approximately one hectare) of arable land. In a court decision a couple of years later the border between the estate and the public lands under the governor’s jurisdiction was settled, and at the same time the estate was granted the privilege of noninterference from provincial authorities (fuyufunyū).33

A dispute in 1265 illustrates the often antagonistic relationship between provincial authorities and estate proprietors, which at times even led to the direct or indirect protection of known outlaws and murderers. This case is also a good example of how the concept of noninterference (fuyufunyū) worked in practice when shogunate officials were denied access to apprehend alleged criminals in private, monastic estates. When the shugodai (deputy military governor) in 1265 accused people from the area of committing night raids and robbery, Tōdaiji does not seem to have been very cooperative in apprehending the accused residents. The shugodai, whose name was Masauji, wrote several official letters to the temple administrators and to their local estate managers in which he complained about violent raids committed by a number of people residing on the temple’s property, but neither the temple nor its local representatives took heed of the requests. In fact the shugodai suspected

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.