The Gates of Power: Monks, Courtiers, and Warriors in Premodern Japan

Notes

361 NOTES Chapter 1 Introduction 1. Most notably, the works of pioneering scholars such as John Whitney Hall, Jeffrey P. Mass, H. Paul Varley, and Conrad Totman come to mind, but several excellent works from the next generation now also provide new and valuable insights. See, for example, recent monographs by Karl Friday, Bruce Batten, Eiko Ikegami, and others. 2. G. Cameron Hurst III was one of the first Western scholars to note the continuing vitality of the imperial court in the Kamakura era in his article “The Kòbu Polity: Court-Bakufu Relations in Kamakura Japan,” in Court and Bakufu in Japan: Essays in Kamakura History, edited by Jeffrey P. Mass (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1982), 3–28. However, the logical conclusion that the age of the warrior thus began later has not been expressed until quite recently. 3. The consensus regarding this interpretation seems overwhelming today among scholars. See The Origins of Medieval Japan, edited by Jeffrey P. Mass (Stanford : Stanford University Press, 1997), which is based on a conference featuring Western and Japanese scholars from a variety of fields held at Hertford College, Oxford, England, in August of 1994. 4. “Kamogawa no mizu, sugoroku no sai, yama hosshi, sorezore chin ga kokoro ni shitagawanu mono.” Genpei seisuiki, volume 1 (Tokyo: Miyai shoten, 1994), 124; Heike monogatari, volume 1, in Shinkò nihon koten shûsei, edited by Mizuhara Hajime, (Tokyo: Shinkòsha, 1979), 93; Helen McCullough, The Tale of the Heike (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1990), 50. 5. Missing character. 6. Chûyûki, in Zòho shiryò taisei, volumes 9–14 (Kyoto: Rinsen shoten, 1965), Tennin 1 (1108)/3/23; Dainihon shiryò (hereafter cited as DNS), edited by Shiryò hensan kakari (Tokyo: Tokyo daigaku zòhan, 1926–), series 3, volume 10 (3:10), p. 113. 7. George Sansom, A History of Japan to 1334 (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1958), 223. It should be noted, in Sansom’s defense, that he relied on the interpretations of Japanese scholars and could hardly have been expected to view the influence of religious institutions in premodern Japan any differently. 8. For example, the secular power of the leading monastic centers and their 362 Notes to Pages 4–7 political role are completely neglected in volume three of the prestigious Cambridge History of Japan in deference to Zen and the populist Buddhist sects (Kozo Yamamura, ed., The Cambridge History of Japan, volume 3, Medieval Japan [Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1990]). Such an interpretation unquestionably misrepresents the political and ideological configurations of the premodern era. In fact, temples like Enryakuji, Onjòji, Tòdaiji, Tòji, Kòfukuji, and Kòyasan managed to maintain and, in several instances, even to improve their judicial and economic privileges, and their role as providers of religious rituals and spiritual protection continued throughout the period. 9. Neil McMullin, “Historical and Historiographical Issues in the Study of Pre-Modern Japanese Religions,” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 16:1 (1989), 26, 30. 10. Martin Collcutt, Five Mountains: The Rinzai Zen Monastic Institution in Medieval Japan (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1981); Neil McMullin, Buddhism and the State in Sixteenth-Century Japan (Princeton University Press: Princeton, 1984); Joan Piggott, “Tòdaiji and the Nara Imperium” (Ph.D. dissertation , Stanford University, 1987); Janet R. Goodwin, Alms and Vagabonds: Buddhist Temples and Popular Patronage in Medieval Japan (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1994); Allan G. Grapard, The Protocol of the Gods: A Study of the Kasuga Cult in Japanese History (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992). 11. Narratives of Enryakuji’s protests are available in Katsuno Ryûshin’s Sòhei (Tokyo: Shibundò, 1966), Hioki Shòichi’s Nihon sòhei kenkyû (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1934), Tsuji Zennosuke’s “Sòhei no gen’yû” and “Akusò jinnin no katsudò” in his Nihon bukkyò shi: jòsei hen (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1944), Hirata Toshiharu’s Sòhei to bushi (Tokyo: Nihon kyòbunsha, 1965), and his “Nanto hokurei no akusò ni tsuite,” in volume 3 of Ronshû Nihon bukkyò shi: Heian jidai, edited by Hiraoka Jòkai (Tokyo: Yûzankaku shuppan, 1986), 261–295. Though informative, these works do not relate religious conflicts to the shifts of power and factionalism among the secular elites. For a general history of Enryakuji, see Kageyama Haruki, Hieizan (Tokyo: Kadokawa shoten, 1975); idem, Hieizanji: sono kòsei to sho mondai (Tokyo: Kadokawa shoten, 1979); Murayama Shûichi, Shinbutsu shugo shichò (Kyoto: Heirakuji shoten, 1957); and idem, Hieizan shi: tatakai to inori no seichi (Tokyo: Tokyo bijutsu, 1994); idem...