Lecture 9: Early Modern HistoryⅠ“Urban Osaka’s Segmental Structure”

Hero Image: ”The Map of Osaka’s Three District(Jōkyō-era)” owned by Osaka Museum of History
大坂三郷町絵図(貞享) 大阪歴史博物館所蔵

Introduction

 During the next four weeks, we will be discussing early modern or Edo-period Osaka.  Since the Meiji period, the second character in the place name Osaka has been written using the kozato radical.  However, during the Edo period, people used the tsuchi radical instead.  Accordingly, when you see the place name written using the tsuchi­ radical, please know that it refers to Edo-period Osaka.  During the four lectures, we will examine the unique features of early modern society through an examination of the various social organizations established by Osaka’s residents, such as the neighborhood association and occupational fraternity.  Accordingly, we will only deal in passing with the economic and cultural images commonly associated with Edo-era Osaka, including its role as “the Shogunate’s commercial center” and locus of “Genroku culture.” 

 During the first of our four lectures, we will begin by discussing the unique features of urban society and then confirm the geographic extent of the early modern Osaka city area.  Edo-era Osaka was partitioned into several distinct spatial segments, including Osaka Castle and the surrounding warrior lands, temple lands on the northern edge of Tenma district and on the southern tip of the Uemachi plateau, and commoner lands, which extended from Uemachi to the Senba, Nishi-senba, Shimanouchi, Horie, and Tenma districts (Use conceptual map). 

Using an Edo-era map of Osaka, let us examine the city’s segmental structure.  Adding complexity to our discussion is the fact that the official depots established in Osaka by Western Japanese domainal governments were located on commoner lands. 

1. The Characteristics of Early Modern Society

 From the late-sixteenth to the early-seventeenth centuries, during the era in which Oda Nobunaga, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Tokugawa Ieyasu were active, a major transformation occurred on the Japanese archipelago (Use an illustration while explaining the following section).  In rural Japan, a traditional society based on the household and village formed.  That society remained in place for centuries and was only fully dismantled during “the era of high-speed growth” in the 1960s.  At the same time, the Edo era was also characterized by dramatic urban development.    In addition to the three megacities of Edo, which boasted a population of 1,000,000, and Osaka and Kyoto, which had populations in the hundreds of thousands, it saw the formation of smaller castle towns across the Japanese archipelago.  Both megacities and smaller towns were partitioned into units known as chō or neighborhood associations.  Neighborhood associations were communal organizations of landholders who owned residential tracts on both sides of a shared street.  These associations served as the basic unit of urban life for early modern city residents.  Although we will examine the neighborhood association in detail during a later session, I would like to note that it was the urban counterpart of the rural village, serving as one of the two basic units of early modern society. 

 These villages and neighborhood associations were at once local units of Bakufu and domainal administration, and communal organizations which supported the lives and livelihoods of their constituents.  During the early modern period, they were not, however, the only publicly-sanctioned social organizations.  Occupational associations founded by merchants and artisans, as well as fraternal organizations established by performers, religious practitioners, and members of the eta and hinin status groups also received official recognition from the authorities and had a distinctly public character.  As this suggests, early modern Japanese society was one organized around the principle of status in which a vast array of self-regulating and internally stratified social groups was organized into a composite network.  Unlike contemporary society, therefore, it was a one in which there was no clear distinction between “public” and “private.”

 Namely, early modern rule was mediated by social organizations, such as the neighborhood association, village, and occupational association.  Accordingly, the regulation of the individual was entrusted to the social organization.  As a consequence of this arrangement, individual villages and neighborhood associations were called upon to produce and maintain official records.  In addition, as both the village and neighborhood were self-regulating associations intimately connected with the lives and livelihoods of their constituents, they had to produce their own by-laws and other internal documents.   This dual necessity ultimately compelled the production and preservation of a wide array of local records throughout the early modern period. 

 Throughout the Edo era, therefore, neighborhoods and villages produced and maintained a massive volume of local records.  Even though only a portion of those records survive today, the amount and array is truly astonishing.  Considered from a global perspective, the survival of local records produced by ordinary people on a such a vast scale is truly rare and an expression of the unique features of early modern Japanese society.  Entering the modern period, however, social organizations were stripped of their official character and, as a result, villages and neighborhoods stopped producing their own internal records.  In many rural villages, however, shrine associations, which formed during the early modern period and persisted after Meiji Restoration, continued to produce their own records until “the era of high-speed growth” (Show photograph of the Iamzaike Village Shrine Association Register, which includes successive entries from the Shōtoku period to the Taishō period).  As this suggests, when we consider the major political transformations that accompanied the Meiji Restoration, it is also essential to consider the enduring character of traditional society, which persisted in the individual’s sphere of everyday life.

 With the foregoing analysis in mind, I would like to discuss the character of the early modern records that have been preserved and the nature of urban social groups.  In order to foreground our discussion, I will first consider the geographic extent and segmental structure of early modern Osaka. 

 2. Urban Osaka’s Segmental Structure

This is a map of Osaka during the 1680s. Although the city area experienced some limited expansion after this period, the area shown in this map depicts the spatial extent of early modern Osaka. A comparison of this map with one depicting present-day Osaka’s boundaries reveals that the early modern city of Osaka overlapped with the area within the boundaries of the northern two-thirds of the JR Osaka Loop Line. The northern portion of Sonezaki-shinchi district is the site of present-day Osaka Station. The Loop Line then winds around the outer edge of Osaka Castle and continues southward along the eastern edge of the Uemachi Plateau to the Tamatsukuri area. It then continues as far south as the Dōtonbori area, ultimately traveling as far west as the Kizu River.

 Warrior Lands

In Bakufu-administered early modern Osaka, the Osaka Castellan, captains of the Castle Guard, and other lower ranking officials were appointed to handle all military- and security-related affairs. At the same time, the Osaka City Governor executed urban governmental and judicial affairs. The areas marked in pink, orange, and green in the vicinity of Osaka Castle indicate the location of the estates occupied by the Osaka Castellan and the captains of the Tamatsukuri-guchi and Kyōbashi-guchi Castle Guards. As the Osaka Castellan also commanded Western domainal lords, the Bakufu commonly appointed a hereditary vassal controlling a domain comprised of tens of thousands of koku to serve as Castellan. At the same time, domainal lords possessing holdings of between ten- and twenty-thousand koku were appointed to serve as captains of the castle guard. In addition, there were two guard units which rotated annually and four deputies who administered security affairs. However, because all of these individuals resided within Osaka Castle, their place of residence is not depicted on the map.      

The area in light blue marks the residences of the Osaka City Governor, the mid- and low-ranking officials under his authority, and a group of six officials known as the rokuyaku. There were two city governors and they maintained separate administrative offices northwest of Osaka Castle. The site located to the east was referred as the Eastern City Governor’s Office, while the site located to the west was referred to as the Western City Governor’s Office. Although the two city governors were referred to as the Eastern and Western City Governor, they did not divide the city into eastern and western jurisdictions. Rather, the terms “east” and “west” referred to their relative locations within the city. In actuality, Osaka’s two governor’s offices administered municipal affairs on a rotating basis, alternating from month to month. Also, it should be noted that the Western City Governor’s Office later relocated to a site along the Higashi-yokobori River. The yoriki and dōshin (mid- and low-level warrior officials) who worked at both City Governor’s Offices maintained estates a short distance away in northern Osaka’s Tenma district.

In Edo and other castle towns, it was commonly the case that the castle and surrounding warrior estates where the lord’s retainers lived occupied a majority of the city area. However, in the case of Bakufu-controlled Osaka, which had both a Castellan and City Governor, the area occupied by the castle and warrior estates was extremely limited. At the same time, however, there were more than 150 depots inside the city, which were maintained by domainal governments from across Western Japan. If you look closely at the map, you will notice the names of various Western domainal lords in the Nakanoshima area and along the southern bank of the Tosabori River. The names indicate the sites of the domainal depots inside Osaka. Unlike Edo, however, where domainal lords were granted parcels of land, in Osaka, domainal governments had to purchase tracts of land in the city’s commoner districts. In addition, when purchasing land, they had to appoint a commoner to serve as the official titleholder. Accordingly, when considering the history of warrior status in Osaka, it is important to keep in mind that the warrior administrators who managed these domainal depots lived in small numbers in Osaka’s commoner neighborhoods.

Shrine and Temple Lands

The light brown areas on the map indicate the location of temple lands. In the case of Osaka, temples were concentrated in two parts of the city. First, there was a row of temples extending east-west in the northern part of Tenma District. The eastern portion is sandwiched between yoriki and dōshin residences, which are shown in light blue. The second grouping of temples extends southward along the Uemachi Plateau to the northern edge of the massive Shitennōji Temple complex. During the Edo period, most of the city’s Buddhist temples were concentrated in these two areas. The only exception was temples affiliated with the sect of Pure Land Buddhism, which were scattered across the city area. If you look at the Senba area of the map, you will notice a square section shaded light brown. This is the site of the Namba Midō and Tsumura Midō, branch temples of the Eastern and Western Honganji Temples. Present-day Osaka’s main thoroughfare, Midō Boulevard, takes its name from these two branch temples and is a widened version of the street that ran in front of the temples during the Edo period. It should be noted that large shrine complexes, such as Tenma Tenjin Shrine, are also depicted on the map. Like temples affiliated with the Pure Land school, shrines were dispersed across the city area.    

A wide array of religious practitioners, including ascetic mountain priests (yamabushi), beggar monks (gannin bōzu), Buddhist performers (rokusai nenbutsu), and Shinto practitioners, also lived in the city of Osaka in back-alley tenements. They survived by wandering the city each day and begging for alms while praying, performing purification rituals, and distributing paper charms from temples and shrines.

Commoner Lands

The sections of the map arranged in a grid-like pattern indicate the location of Osaka’s commoner lands. Those lands were divided into three administrative units——Kita, Minami, and Tenma. Collectively, those units were referred to as “Osaka’s three districts.” In the mid-eighteenth century, there were 250 neighborhoods in Kita District, 261 in Minami District, and 109 in Tenma District. The neighborhoods affiliated with Kita District are marked with a circle, while those affiliated with Minami District are marked with a red triangle. In contrast, neighborhoods in Tenma District are unmarked.

This map was composed during the late-seventeenth century shortly after the construction of the Dōjima-shinchi and Ajigawa-shinchi. Dōjima-shinchi is the area shaded maroon. Several rivers were constructed during this period. One is referred to on the map as the Shin River. However, it later came to be called the Aji River. The areas on both sides of that river are also shaded maroon, indicating the site of the Ajigawa-shinchi.

In addition, the areas identified as Upper and Lower Namba were later transformed into the Horie-shinchi district. Entering the eighteenth century, development continued on the margins of the city with the addition of Sonezaki-shinchi to the north and Dōtonbori and Nishi-kōzu-shinchi to the south. During the next two sessions, we will examine in detail the mode of existence of the urban landowners who were the constituents of Osaka’s neighborhood associations.

Summary

During this session, while examining a seventeenth-century map, we confirmed the geographic extent of early modern Osaka and examined its spatial structure. As we noted, the city area was partitioned based on the principle of status into three broad segments: warrior lands, shrine and temple lands, and commoner lands.

Before concluding, I would like to mention two final points. First, although the city area was partitioned into three broad spatial segments, an examination of urban society reveals a complex social structure. For example, Osaka’s warrior estates and domainal depots commonly maintained client relationships with a wide array of merchants and artisans, who, of course, resided in the city’s commoner districts. Also, when the annually-rotating guard units that defended the castle and city area arrived in Osaka they spent the first few days in lodgings provided by residents of the city’s commoner neighborhoods. In addition, members of the hinin status group and guards who provided security at the city’s playhouses and performance tents also performed official police duties for the City Governor’s Office, while individual city neighborhoods and landholders employed hinin guards to perform a range of tasks. In the case of religious practitioners and performers, as well, we see the existence of complex social networks. As this suggests, conventional descriptions of the early modern status system as a vertically stratified system comprised of the warrior, peasant, artisan, merchant, eta, and hinin status groups fail to capture the actual character of Edo-era society.

Second, early modern Osaka’s spatial composition influenced the spatial structure of modern Osaka. According to a map of 1926 (omitted in this lecture), in the modern period, the area formerly occupied by Osaka Castle and surrounding warrior estates was under military control and served as the site of various military institutions, including a training ground and arms factory. In addition, Nakanoshima, which was the site of the large depots maintained by Western Japanese domainal governments, served as the site of public institutions, such as Osaka City Hall, The Bank of Japan, The Tax Office, The Post Office, school, hospital, and public meeting hall. At the same time, the area was also the location of a major newspaper, as well warehouses and other facilities controlled by large private companies, such as the Sumitomo and Mitsubishi. The comparatively large tracts of land occupied during the Edo period by Western domainal depots were transformed in this way. Temples and shrines, however, remained in place and the city’s commoner neighborhoods, which underwent minor internal changes, retained their overall spatial composition. In contrast, the rural villages surrounding the early modern city underwent a comparatively dramatic change, with the construction of prisons, schools, universities, and factories. During our next session, we will examine the inner workings of early modern Osaka.


第 9 回:近世史①「都市大坂の分節構造」

まえおき

 今回から、4回にわたって近世(ほぼ江戸時代に相当しますが)の都市大坂について、お話しします。明治以降、「大阪」の「阪」の字はコザト偏の「阪」を用いますが、それ以前は、土偏の「坂」を用いていました。大坂とあれば、江戸時代の大坂と考えてください。4回分で、都市大坂の町や仲間など社会集団のあり方を通して、日本近世社会の特質も示していきたいと思います。そのため、みなさんがすぐにイメージすると思われる“天下の台所”[経済]“元禄文化”などには部分的にしか触れないことをお断りしておきます。

 4回分の最初に当たる今回は、近世という時代の社会の特徴について、簡単に触れたうえで、江戸時代の大坂の空間的な広がりを確認します。江戸時代の大坂は、大坂城とその周辺の武家地、天満の北側と上町台地の南に位置する寺町、上町から船場、西船場、島之内、堀江、天満などに広がる町人地という具合に分節化されていました。江戸時代に作られた絵図を見ながら、その様子を見ておきましょう。なお、大坂に置かれた西国諸藩の蔵屋敷は、町人地に設置されていたので、少し複雑です。

1.近世社会の特質

 日本列島社会では、16世紀末から17世紀初頭にかけて、織田信長・豊臣秀吉・徳川家康が活躍した時代に大きな変化がありました。在方(農村部)では、家と村を基盤とする伝統社会が形成され、それは1960年代の高度経済成長の頃まで容易に解体することなく持続します。一方、人口100万の江戸や数十万の大坂・京都(これを合わせて三都と呼びますが)のような巨大都市や列島各地に多数の城下町を産み出した都市の時代でもありました。これらの都市の基礎には、いずれも「町」が存在していました。これは、道をはさんだ両側の街区の家持たちの共同組織であり、住民生活の基礎単位でした。「町」については、次々回に詳しく紹介しますが、在方における「村」に対応するもので、近世社会の基礎には、村と町があったのです。

 この村や町は、幕府や藩の支配の末端の行政単位であると同時に、住民の生活・生業を支え合う共同組織という性格を持っていました。近世という時代・社会は、村や町だけでなく、商人や職人の営業上の組織(株仲間)、宗教者や芸能者、かわた身分や非人身分などの多様な社会集団が幕藩領主(公儀)の下で公的な性格をもち、相互に重層・複合しあって全体社会を構成している身分社会だったのですが、その特徴は「公」と「私」の未分離にあります。

 つまり、近世の支配とは、村や町や株仲間といった集団ごとの掌握というかたちの支配であり、その集団内部に多数存在する個々人の掌握は、各集団に委ねられていたのです。それ故、一方では支配に関わる公的な書類も村や町で作られました。しかしそれだけではなく、自分たちの生業や生活に関わって結集している集団でもあるので、集団内の規約などの書類も同時に重要なものとして作成されました。こうした切実な必要性から、近世では、多数の書類が作成・保管されていったのです。

 こうして、村や町では、膨大な村方文書・町方文書が作成されました。もちろん現在まで残っているのはその一部にすぎませんが、それでも大量の史料が残されています。こうしたことは、世界的に見ても稀有なことであり、日本近世社会の特質を表現していると言えます。もっとも、明治以降の近代に入ると、そうした社会集団が公的な性格を失い、村や町で膨大な村政・町政に関わる文書が作成されることは無くなります。しかし、村方で行われている宮座の記録などは近世の早い時期から高度成長の時期まで書き継がれているところも多くあります。その意味では、明治維新という政治社会レベルの激変とともに、生活世界レベルでは伝統社会の強い持続性ということを考える必要があるでしょう。

 以上のような、近世社会の特質を踏まえて、史料の残り方と都市内の社会集団のあり方をこれから考えていくことにしたいと思います。その前提として、今回は都市大坂の空間の広がりと分節的なありようを確認しておきたいと思います。

2.都市大坂の分節構造

 この地図は、17世紀・1680年代中頃の大坂を描いたものです。この後、新地開発などで周辺への拡大が見られるものの、ほぼ江戸時代の大坂の広がりを示しています。これを現代の地図と重ねると、JR大阪環状線の北側3分の2ほどに当たります。曽根崎新地の北に大阪駅があります。大阪城の外側を廻って上町台地の東に沿って玉造周辺。南は道頓堀の周辺まで。西側は木津川辺りまでです。

武家地

 江戸幕府の直轄都市である大坂には、軍事や警備を担当する城代から定番以下の役職が置かれ、また行政・司法を担当する町奉行が置かれました。大坂城の周辺に、ピ ンク・オレンジ・緑が塗られたところは、大坂城代・玉造口と京橋口の2人の定番の屋敷です。城代は、西国大名を統帥する立場にもあり、数万石の譜代大名が就任するのが普通です。定番は1~2万石の小大名が就きます。これ以外に、1年交替の大番組2組と4人の加番が大坂城警備の任に当たりましたが、これらは大坂城内に居所があったため、この絵図には表現されていません。

 薄い青のところは、町奉行所やその与力・同心の屋敷、それ以外の六役と呼ばれた役人たちの屋敷です。町奉行は2人でしたが、その役所は大坂城北西の角のところに並んでいます。その屋敷のうち、東側にあるのが東町奉行所、西側にあるのが西町奉行所です。東西町奉行は、都市大坂を東西に2分して担当するということではありません。役所の位置関係から呼ばれたもので、両者が月番で大坂全体を支配していたのです。なお、その後、西町奉行所は、東横堀川沿いのところに移転します。町奉行所に付属した与力・同心らの屋敷は少し離れた天満の一画にありました。

 江戸や各地の城下町は、城郭と家臣団の居住する武家地が市域全体の過半を占めるのが一般的ですが、城代と町奉行が置かれた江戸幕府の直轄都市である大坂の場合は、きわめて限定的なのが特徴です。但し、大坂には西国諸藩をはじめとする150余の蔵屋敷がありました。絵図をよく見ると、中之島や土佐堀川の南岸に大名の名前が書きこまれているのが分かります。これは、蔵屋敷なのですが、大坂の場合、江戸の藩邸のように幕府から土地を拝領するのではなく、町人地を購入して、町人の名義人(名代)を置くことになっていました。そのため、大坂に居住する武士身分については、蔵屋敷詰めの藩役人もいたことを念頭に置く必要があります。それでも、部分的ですが・・・。

寺社地

 薄い茶色の部分は寺町なのですが、2か所に分かれてあります。一つは、天満の北側に 東西の横一列に見えるところです。東部分 は水色の与力・同心の屋敷にはさまれるようになっています。もう一か所は、武家地の南に面的に広がるところで、四天王寺の北側まで続いています。江戸時代には、寺院は基本的にこの天満と上町の寺町に集中させられました。しかし、浄土真宗の寺院は市中に散在していました。絵図中の船場の一画に薄茶色の四角形がありますが、これは東西本願寺の別院・難波御堂と津村御堂です。現在、大阪を代表するメインストリートの御堂筋は、この「御堂」の前の通りの名前で、これを拡張したものなのです。天満天神社などの大きな神社も絵図に描かれています。(浄土真宗の寺院と神社は、市中にありました。)

 大坂には、山伏(修験)や願人坊主、六斎念仏、神道者などの多様な宗教者が暮らしていましたが、彼らは市中の裏借屋に住み、寺社の札配りや祈祷・お祓いなどをしながら家々を回る勧進(乞食)を生業としていました。

 町人地

 絵図中の碁盤目状に道路が通っているところは、町人地です。大坂は、北組・南組・天満組に分かれていましたが、これを合わせて三郷と呼んでいます。18世紀半ばには、北組に250町、南組に261町、天満組に109町がありました。北組の町には○印、南組には赤▲印が記入されていますが、天満組の町は無印です。

 この絵図が描かれた17世紀末の段階は、堂島新地や安治川新地が開発された直後です。堂島のところは新開発を示すあずき色です。この時開削された新川は、後に安治川と呼ばれますが、その両岸も新地を示すあずき色です。また、下難波領・上難波領と表記された部分は、元禄11(1698)年に堀江新地として開発されました。18世紀に入ると、北の曽根崎新地、道頓堀の南に西高津新地、さらに難波新地が開発され、周辺に広がっていきます。

 三郷に展開した町々に町人身分がどのように暮らしていたかは、次回以降に具体的に見ていきます。

3.まとめ

 今回は、17世紀末の大坂絵図を見ながら、近世大坂の都市空間の広がりと武家地・寺社地・町人地という身分的に分節化された空間の特質を確認しました。

 ここで、2点ほど注意しておきたいことがあります。一つ目は、武家地・寺社地・町人地という形で空間的には分節化されているわけですが、社会の実態に分け入っていくと、複雑な社会構造が見えてきます。蔵屋敷を含む武家屋敷には多様な商人・職人などが出入りし、1年交替の大番や加番が大坂入りした当初は、数日間、町家は宿を提供させられました。非人身分や芝居の木戸番が町奉行所の警察関係の御用を勤めたり、町や町人が非人番(垣外番)を置いたりしています。宗教者や勧進者をめぐっても、複合的な社会関係が見られることはもちろんです。江戸時代は「士農工商えた非人」の身分制であったという理解では、社会の実態はとらえられません。

 もう一つは、近世大坂の空間のあり方は近代大阪の構造を規定していたことです。大正15(1926)年の近代施設の地図(本ページでは割愛)を確認しますと、近代には、大阪城や周辺の武家地は、軍の敷地や軍事工廠、練兵場など軍事施設になっています。中之島の周辺の蔵屋敷だった大規模敷地は、市役所・日本銀行・税務署・郵便局・学校・病院・公会堂のような公共施設や、新聞社の社屋や住友・三菱などの倉庫など企業の敷地に転用されています。敷地の広い武家地はこうした転換が見られたわけですが、寺町や神社はそのまま継続し、町人地部分は、個別的・散発的に徐々に変化を遂げていきますが、空間的には連続性が見てとれます。それは、周辺農村部だったところに、監獄や大学・学校、あるいは工場などが出現しているのと対照的です。

 次回からは、近世大坂の内部に入り込んでいくことにします。