In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

5 The Many Faces of the Machishu I t was possible for an artist such as Matabei to bridge the court and commoner traditions of art because in his time there existed a powerful social group composed of aristocrats and commoners intermingled. That group was called the machishu. The machishu whom Matabei knew were an elite. By his time, which was late in the history of the machishu, they counted among their number some of the most prominent individuals of their day. Yet one of their most outstanding features as a group was their egalitarianism, for the machishu cut across class lines to embrace all levels of society. Before we look at Matabei’s relationship to the machishu, we must ¤rst look at the evidence for this group’s egalitarianism, for it is the fact that they were a true mix of aristocrats and commoners that makes them so perfect a context in which to place a court/commoner artist like Matabei. We shall examine the machishu in a very Japanese fashion here through a consideration of language. We de¤ne this group by investigating the term “machishu.” This approach best meets the needs of this study, which is not meant as the ¤nal word on this group, but only as a preamble to our subsequent examination of Matabei and a correction of certain shortcomings of a current, common de¤nition of the machishu. Challenging a De¤nition The word “machishu” is often de¤ned as “townsmen, artisan, or merchant.” The popularity of this de¤nition is clear from the fact that George Elison uses it in his entry on machishu 141 in the Encyclopedia of Japan, where he begins by calling them “townsmen.” So too Mizuo Hiroshi speaks of the machishu as rich merchants in his popular book on Sôtatsu and Kôrin, referring to them as townsmen as well.1 The dictionary Kojien states that machishu are “merchants and artisans who established autonomous organizations in the cities [emphasis added] of the medieval period (chûsei),” and it is with the meaning of “townsmen, artisan, and merchant” that the term appears in numerous art historical studies. This de¤nition is a useful one and certainly not erroneous. The people who made up the group called the machishu were often townsmen, artisans, and merchants. However , that is not all they were.2 For example, Yamane, Mizuo, Tsuji, Minamoto Toyomune, Kôno Motoaki, and many other art historians employ this word in speaking of Tôhaku, Sôtatsu, and Kôetsu. These people were townsmen and, in addition, insofar as they were shop owners or otherwise lived on the sales of things, merchants. But to call them artisans seems an injustice, for surely they were artists. So too, what of Kôetsu, after he withdrew from Kyoto and moved to his art village of Takagamine? No longer a townsman, was he still a machishu? And how about Takuan? He, like many other priests, played an important role in machishu culture. Should he be relegated to secondary status in this group, or worse, his contribution go unrecognized? One of the most distinctive features of the world of arts of the machishu was the aristocrats in it, such as Mitsuhiro, Nobutada, and Sonjun. Indeed, the world of machishu art included even the emperor Gomizuno-o. What should we do with them?3 Even more important is the date that many historians give for the end of the machishu era. Hayashiya Tatsusaburô, for example, states: “I think the era of the true machishu began in the Meio period (1492–1501) and peaked around 1532–1537, and, considering the rapid changes that they underwent, I would like to place their end at 1568, the year that Nobunaga marched into Kyoto.”4 George Elison concurs, he and Hayashiya noting in their joint article that although the new order came about only gradually, “Kyoto stood at yet another crossroads when Oda Nobunaga made his triumphal entry into the city in 1568.”5 So too Mary Elizabeth Berry, while careful to specify no ending date for the machishu world in Kyoto that she examines, does refuse to “cross the divide of 1568.”6 However, in that year Tôhaku was twenty-nine years old and had yet to gain the fame he would subsequently achieve. In 1568 Soan was aged three, Kôetsu was ten, and Sôtatsu must have been quite young as well, for though his birth date is not known, he is thought to...

Share