Groemer Gerald - A Short History of Gannin

8/2/2019 Groemer Gerald - A Short History of Gannin

1/32

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 2000 27/12

A Short History of the GanninPopular Religious Performers in Tokugawa Japan

Gerald GROEMER

This paper traces the emergence and development of the gannin or gannin

bzu, a group of religious performer-practitioners. The gannin, who were

active in Kyoto, Osaka, Edo, as well as many rural areas, had their head-

quarters at the Kurama temple. Throughout the Tokugawa period, gannin

engaged in proxy pilgrimages and provided the public with rites, exor-

cisms, and entertaining performances. Although the gannin are often por-

trayed in contemporaneous documents as disorderly, the gannin

maintained a nationwide administrative apparatus supported by the

bakufu. To the rank-and-le gannin, this hierarchical organization,

which at rst may have served the interests of the gannin themselves,appears to have become something of a burden. As a result, gannin con-

tinued to seek independence in order to better their lot, thereby irritating

their social superiors.

Keywords: gannin religious itinerants Kurama temple Sumiyoshi odori ahodara-ky popular performing arts

ALTHOUGH ONLYa small minority of commoners during the Tokugawa

period (16001868) could have provided a reasonably detailed exposi-tion of the highly syncretic doctrines that guided and justied religiouspractice of this age, almost every Japanese, from the most pious to themost skeptical, was familiar with performances of religious street per-formers. In Tokugawa Japan, such itinerants, usually claiming afliation

with some established religious order, offered incantations, recitations,exorcism, music, and dance wherever audiences appeared: beforedoorsteps, near major bridges, on temple and shrine grounds, or at theintersection of well-traversed thoroughfares.1 Religious performers

1 Among other benets, religious afliation allowed street performers to avoid beingarrested and turned over to the outcastes known as hinin^ (literally non-humans),many of whom also engaged in popular performing arts.


2/32

catered to the belief that fate could be inuenced by a proper combi-nation of magic amulets, prayer, and ritual; simultaneously, theyappealed to the publics insatiable appetite for amusement and diver-

sion. If the efcacy of their practices was dubious, and if the talismansthey peddled included no warranty, religious street performers couldbe counted on with certainty to provide both the pedestrian and thestay-at-home with a healthy dose of lively entertainment. Even themost incredulous bystanders could enjoy the sights and sounds ofmen and women of godly purpose parading around town withportable shrines, banging on hand gongs while intoning sutras, prac-ticing divination, or dancing vigorously while singing popular tunes.

And when it came time to collect the alms, the populace was unlikely

to deny funding to anyone who might be able to issue an effectivecurse upon a home.Mendicants of pious pretensions existed in chameleon-like variety:

Tokugawa governmental records regularly listshukkemB (priests andnuns), onmyji (yin-yang diviners), yamabushi[N or shugenja@ (mountain ascetics), dshinja (Buddhist ritualists), gynin^ (wandering ascetics), komus ([R, shakuhachi-playing Zenmonks), kotobure6 (prognosticators), mikoB (female shamans),and others. Also appearing in ofcial inventories, usually in nal posi-

tion, are gannin bzuX^, more succinctly known as gannin-b, oreven simply gannin, a name that may be translated either as peti-tioned monks or petitioning monks.2 The term ganninitself, in thesense of a religious or quasi-religious practitioner or performer, rstappears in records during the mid-seventeenth century, an era ofrapid and radical change in the administrative structure of Japanesereligious institutions.3 During the early years of the Tokugawa period,ganninwere widely known as monkish gures who executed proxy pil-grimages, engaged in midwinter cold-water ablutions, produced and

distributed riddle prints and talismans, and marched around townwith small shrines or monstrances of Enma- %, the Buddhist god-

42 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 27/12

2 The most detailed study of the ganninto date is SUZUKI Akikos unpublished mastersthesis Gannin no kenky (1994, Ty University). Though suffering from incomplete andconfused documentation, this volume has provided me with many useful leads. More infor-mation on gannincan be found in HORI 1953, vol. 2, pp. 64650; MINAMI 1978, pp. 15160;NAKAO 1992, pp. 44179, and YOSHIDA1994. Inadequately documented but valuable data isalso included in TAKAYANAGI 1981 and 1982. ISHII 1968 and 1988 discuss legal issues andbakufupolicy.

3 An entry in the Japanese-Portuguese dictionary published by the Jesuits in 1603 still

denes ganninas simply individuals who pray to camis & fotoques (kami, hotoke), or whocollect alms for constructing temples and shrines. This explanation seems to refer only toBuddhist or Shinto petitioners in general, not specically to gannin bzu. See Nippo jisho, p.124.


3/32

king of the underworld, or Awashima Daimyjin ,SgP, a Shintodeity reputedly efcacious in preventing womens diseases. In the spir-it of asceticism, ganninregularly wore only a loincloth, offending the

sensibilities of Confucian moralists and government authorities. By theeighteenth century, ganninoften abandoned their Buddhist pursuitsand turned to street performances of the Sumiyoshi dance(Sumiyoshi odori W), a largely secular genre vaguely associated

with the Osaka Sumiyoshi shrine (though ganninshowed little allegianceto this institution). Dancing vigorously beneath a large, sometimesdouble-tiered parasol, Sumiyoshi dancers accompanied themselves

with cheerful song (often versions of Ise ondo) and raucous shamisenmusic. Later yet, ganninearned renown for their sing-song renditions

of satirical ballads (chongarehR and chobokurehU) andparodical mock sutras (ahodara-ky%).4

In this study I shall sketch the history of the ganninand theirorganization, starting with the legends surrounding gannin originsand then moving to the ganninadministration and the bakufusattempt to regulate ganninbehavior. High-minded edicts and recon-dite scholarly Tokugawa-period disquisitions commonly describe gan-ninas disorderly, unlawful, idlers, even once as pests that feedon the public.5 Such derogatory portrayals require us to question

what it was about the gannin, and, indeed, other religious mendicants,that earned them such contempt. A study of the gannincan thus serveas a starting point for understanding the social position and activitiesof popular religious performers in Tokugawa society in general.

Gannin Origins: Mythical and Real

Though the emergence of the ganninremains shrouded in mystery,their ancestry no doubt traces back to that amorphous mass of itiner-

ants that had been touring the land, chanting sutras, singing hymns,and spreading the word of the Buddha since time immemorial. During

GROEMER: A Short History of the Gannin 43

4 Ganninarts are a complex subject requiring a separate study; see GROEMER1999. UsefulJapanese-language accounts ofganninarts include NAKAYAMA1933; MISUMI 1968, pp. 12635;NISHITSUNOI 1975; TAKAYANAGI 1981; NAKAMURA 1983. The mock sutras are also sometimes

written ahdara-ky.5 See, for example, the descriptions of Yamaga Sok (16221685) and Tanaka Kygu

(16631729) cited in MORIMOTO 1985, pp. 106107. Ganninare characterized as midari(dis-orderly),furachi(unlawful), or busah(unruly) in records such as Shis zasshiki, fascicle

3, p. 68; Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2398, p. 1140; STRSSB, p. 19, and STRNDB (ge,1842/11/25). In all fairness it should be mentioned that in 1839 at least one bakufuofcialnoted that ganninwere less disorderly than other types of priests and nuns (Oshioki-reiruish, vol. 11, p. 421).


4/32

the tumultuous years of the late medieval period, government ofcialsonly rarely treated religious beggars kindly, leading such religious itiner-ants to congregate and organize under the umbrella of major temples

or shrines. Oda Nobunaga, for example, was said to have rounded upand summarily executed no fewer than 1,383 Kya hijiri (mendi-cant monks of Mt. Kya), whose practices in some ways resembledthose of the seventeenth-centurygannin(TAKANO 1989, p. 103). Laterheads of state, though not always so demonstrative of their distaste forunproductive labor, continued to do what they could to discouragethe populace from abandoning agriculture and other taxable occupa-tions in favor of beggarly religious pursuits.

To support their claims of legitimacy with institutional might, the

ganninturned to the Kurama temple N+, a major Tendai-sect com-pound near Kyoto, supposedly founded by the Fujiwara family in 796.

According to an oft-repeated but highly implausible legend, theappellation gannin derived from an incident involving the defeatedMinamoto no Yoshitsune (11591189), who stopped at the Kuramatemple before eeing northward.6At the temple, Yoshitsune was sup-posedly instructed in swordsmanship; a few resident monks also peti-tioned the god Tamonten (or Bishamonten; Skt., Vairavaa) on hisbehalf. In gratitude, Yoshitsune referred to the petitioners as gannin.

Only in later years, the legend insists, did ganninmove around the land,providing the public with prayers, invocations, and protective talismans.

The Tokugawa-period intelligentsia, little more convinced of theveracity of this fable than scholars are today, devised more believableexplanations ofgannin origins. According to one popular theory,some time after Tokugawa Ieyasu arrived in Edo (1590), Kuramamonks came to the city to tender a lawsuit. Though claiming to knowa thing or two about auspicious amulets and lucky charms, the ganninproved to be thoroughly unsuccessful in harnessing fortune for their

own purposes: they lost their case, ran out of funds, and, with nowhereelse to turn, took to begging on the streets.7 This explication may takeits cue from the fact that the term gannincan also refer to appellants

6 Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi. Yoshitsune did, in fact, spend some time at theKurama temple on several occasions, but these stays probably had no relation to the appear-ance of the gannin. Versions of this tale and much other information on gannincan befound in Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, pp. 6774; Bokkai sanpitsu, vol. 92; Mikikigusa, vol. 10(zoku 2-sh no 10), pp. 35253 (reprinted in Koji ruien, Seijibu, vol. 3, pp. 95760); Kasshiyawa, vol. 4, pp. 32023; and Sunkoku zasshi, vol. 1, p. 289. To avoid excessive repetition in

documentation below, I have usually indicated only one source and added the words andelsewhere to cover identical or nearly identical versions found in other sources.

7 See Hyakugi jutsuryaku, p. 237; and Kiyshran, vol. 2, p. 637. Morisada mank, vol. 1, p.219, identies the petitioners as priests from Mt. Taigaku (i.e., Hiei-zan) in Kyoto.



5/32

in legal proceedings. Tokugawa-period writers knew that early Edogannincommonly lived at Bakuro-ch +V, a famous quarter of innscatering to litigants arriving from the countryside to press their claims

before the magistrates.Yet another theory cites testimony of the headman of Hashimoto-

ch, the ward of Edo harboring the majority of ganninduring theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries. According to an apparently lostdocument from the Jingo-ji P (a Shingon-sect temple at Mt.Takao in Yamashiro Province), during the bakufus 1615 SummerCampaign, the high-ranking priest Takinob u served as a roadguide for the victors. After being granted an ofcial certicate for his

valiant efforts, he headed to the capital to petition for the construc-

tion of a branch temple. He died before a decision was made, but hissuccessor also traveled to Edo to sustain the appeal. As usual, the bakufuwas in no hurry to respond. During the early 1640s, after spendingsome ve fruitless years in the city, Takinobs successor nally turnedfor help to the Kanei-ji (also known as Tei-zan X[), aTendai-sect temple utilized by the bakufuto transmit edicts to Tendaiinstitutions throughout the land. While waiting for the priests of theKanei-ji to make up their minds, the successor and some thirty of hisliegemen made themselves at home on the grounds of the Shan-jiH

at Hashimoto-ch

, from where they worked the townbegging and praying. Although the request to build a temple waseventually denied, Takinobs descendants continued to dwell atHashimoto-ch until the late nineteenth century. Here they evenenshrined the god Fud in an edice adorned with the insignia of theKanei-ji (Hyakugi jutsuryaku, pp. 23738). Whatever the merits of thistale may be, it does appear that Edo ganninwere placed under theguardianship of the Kanei-ji (though probably at a later date, andprobably because of a bakufuorder rather than a ganninappeal), sincethe Kurama temple could hardly be expected to control directly theactivities ofganninresiding hundreds of miles away (Wasure nokori, p.124; Tankai, p. 474;Fken gki, pp. 101102).

The Kurama Temple and the Gannin Furegashira

Until the Meiji period, the Kurama compound comprised some nine-teen sub-temples.8At rst, only one of these, the Taiz-in (also


8 HASHIKAWA 1926, pp. 16062. An unpublished map entitled Nihon yochi (Shinby

bussetsu no bu, Yamashiro no kuni, Kurama-zan no zu, Atagi-gun) shows the Kurama multi-plex as it stood in 1755. The Enk-in, Taiz-b, and Kichij-in are indicated immediately tothe inside right of the main entrance gate (nimon), long before one arrives at the maintemple buildings up the mountain.


6/32

known as Taiz-b ), functioned as the ganninheadquarters.Taiz-in administrators maintained that from the 1570s their templehad fallen on hard times, inspiring gannin to seek protection from

shugensects and elsewhere. Around 1674, the Taiz-in apparently trans-ferred some of its ganninto the Shsen-in , another Kurama sub-temple (later it was apparently renamed Kichij-in ). In 1690,for reasons unknown, the latter entrusted its gannin to the Enk-inM, which, together with the Taiz-in, administered the ganninforthe remainder of the Tokugawa period (Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi, and elsewhere).

This chronology suggests that from the late sixteenth century, aheterogeneous group of religious itinerants had been seeking protec-

tion from Kurama-based sub-temples and had begun to form loose-knit confraternities. The bakufuappears to have acknowledged thisafliation during the Kanbun period (16611673), when a magistrateof temples and shrines, Ogasawara Yamashiro no kami [!,commissioned an investigation into all unregistered religious itiner-ants. As a result of this inquiry, the ganninwere recorded as ofcial

wards of the Kurama temple, specically the Taiz-in.9 References to agannin guild (gannin nakamaX^`) are found as early as 1672(HASHIKAWA1926, p. 221; see also Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2398, p.

1140 [1692]).Ganninofcials at the Kurama temple were granted specic rightsand powers by the bakufu in return for keeping underlings in line.

Who exactly was included in the Kurama-based hierarchy continuedto be a subject of debate for much of the Tokugawa period. Kuramaadministrators asserted the right to control not just gannin, but alsocertain penurious Zen monks, non-gannin Tendai-sect priests, and

yamabushiwho refused to afliate themselves with either of the twoshugen sects the bakufuhad ofcially approved in 1613. Friction

between gannin types, and Zen beggar-monks, sometimes said to bepredecessor of the gannin themselves, continued for much of theTokugawa period.10 Other gannin-like itinerants close to the Kurama,known as bjin^, also retained much independence. In an answerto an ofcial inquiry (probably from 1744) regarding the existence ofganninat Atago and Taga near Kyoto, ganninheads replied that they

9 Chishi oshirabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch. This document presents the history of the gan-ninas recorded by the ganninofcial Hsenb in 1813/9.

10 Specically, the gannincomplained that such zenmon bzu7 had no authorized

temple afliation; that they rented houses in townsman quarters or lived in outcaste huts(hinin-goya^); that they went around begging in a fraudulent manner (nise kanjinbZ); and that they wore surplices and acted just like gannin. See Shis zasshiki, fascicle41, pp. 94647.



7/32

knew only of individuals known as bjin: men who, much like the gan-nin, offered prayers, healing rites, and magic amulets to the public.11

Even though some claimed the Kurama ganninhad themselves once

been called bjin(Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 71, and elsewhere), noth-ing is said about Kurama rule over bjintypes. Kurama authority overindependent or self-styled shugen remained even more problematic,since some ganninalso afliated themselves in dual fashion with shugentemples when this seemed a useful strategy. The Kurama temple wasaware of such disorder and prohibited gannin from becoming disci-ples ofshugensects in a temporary or concurrent manner (Shis zasshiki,fascicle 3, p. 71).12

Although the bakufu and the gannin frequently stood at cross-

purposes, by the latter decades of the seventeenth century the corner-stones of a hierarchical system designed to allow the Kurama templeto oversee the ganninthroughout the land had been set in place. Attop stood high-ranking ofcials of the Kurama temple, specically theTaiz-in and Enk-in. From the early 1680s, bosses known as fure-gashira(6w proclamation chiefs) were appointed in the city of Edoin order to transmit edicts from the magistrates of temples andshrines and to relay petitions from the ganninto the bakufu. Usuallytwo men, one associated with the Taiz-in, the other with the Enk-in,

were selected, largely on the basis of seniority.13 In other parts of theland, kumigashira (Lw group chiefs) were appointed to managelocal gannin. Beneath the furegashiraand kumigashirastood a histori-cally and geographically variable hierarchy of gannin functionaries:daiyaku (deputy); metsukeyaku$ (great overseer), gonin-gumi2^L (ve-man group [head]), toshiyorib (elder), and thelike.14 In the Kant area, Edo furegashirawere charged with touringthe eight provinces to check on local kumigashiraand other bosses who


11 Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi; and Bokkai sanpitsu, vol. 92. Many other ver-sions of this document omit the reference to Atago and Taga. Perhaps the bakufuwas think-ing of the Bishamon emissaries (Bishamon shishaq) at Atago. For a discussion andillustration of these beggars, who came around on the third day of the new year, see Ichiwaichigon, vol. 6 (fascicle 42), pp. 11416. For another reference to Atago see the 1696 descrip-tion of Osaka ganninactivities below.

12 This rule was spelled out in 1744, but evidently refers to a long-standing practice. Seealso Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 68 and elsewhere for an admission thatganninhad long beendeserting to shugentemples.

13YOSHIDA1994, p. 91 gives a table of Edo furegashirabased on newly-discovered, unpub-lished records at the Kurama temple. Another furegashirawas stationed in Suruga, but it is

unclear from when this position existed. See Sunkoku zasshi, vol. 1, p. 288.14A convenient chart can be found in SUZUKI 1994, p. 109. Explanations of each rank of

the Edo ganninafliated with the Taiz-in are given in YOSHIDA1994, pp. 99102. Titles dif-fered for the Enk-in gannin(see Bokkai sanpitsu, vol. 92).


8/32

ruled over the ganninin one province (Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 68).Every three years, senior ganninofcers traveled to the Kurama temple toreport on the situation in their area (Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 73). Fund-

ing for the ganninorganization came both from ganninmembers andfrom daimyo and rich merchant houses (YOSHIDA1994, pp. 9294, 98).

One of the furegashiras chief sources of power derived from theright to conduct in-house juridical proceedings against gannincharged with a crime. Records probably dating from 1744 explain that

when an Edo ganninhad broken a rule of the association, a generalmeeting was held at the home of thefuregashira. An inquiry was made,and if it was determined that the accused behaved in a manner con-travening ganninlaw, he was expelled. Aganninconvicted of a crime

was also prohibited from becoming a yamabushior gynin. After beingsentenced, he was led to a post station (Shinagawa, Senju, or Itabashi,depending on the culprits request) and told not to return to the city.The incident was then duly reported to the magistrates of temples andshrines (Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 70).

Before being judged by his superiors, however, gannin suspectswere apparently rst subject to justice meted out by the bakufu.15 Inone case from 1791, for example, a ganninpupil was caught pickpock-eting in Edo. For this misdeed, bakufuofcials sentenced him to fty

days in jail; after serving his sentence he was handed over to his mas-ter, who presumably reported the incident to thefuregashirafor anotherround of proceedings (Oshioki-rei ruish, vol. 4, no. 1918, p. 261). In1823, yet another ganninacolyte was caught pickpocketing and steal-ing. His crime was more serious than that of the 1791 offender, for hehad brazenly entered warrior residences and walked off with severalpairs of shoes. Once caught, the hapless lawbreaker was also turnedover to his superiors, but only after being ogged and tattooed by theauthorities (Oshioki-rei ruish, vol. 8, no. 356, p. 131).

When ganninbecame the victims of crimes, the furegashira alsowielded much discretionary power. In the eighth month of 1849, forexample, a gannin had gone to beg at a major Edo sake shop. Theoccupants evidently did not donate enough; in a t of rage, the ganninkicked a nearby sake barrel, provoking a shop apprentice to deliver alethal blow to the irascible gannins head. Normally such an act of vio-lence required a coroners inquest, but the owner of the shop, proba-bly frightened of the consequences, opted for a softer approach. Afterrounding up a squadron of local carpenter-reman toughs, he set outfor Hashimoto-ch, where the incident was disclosed to the gannin

15 Procedure was not always clear. See Hennen sabetsu shi shiry shsei, vol. 11, p. 358(1792/10) for discussions on what procedure to follow in capital offenses committed bygannin.



9/32

furegashira. Thefuregashira, however, knew nothing of the victim. Theshop head then sent a messenger to Shiba Shinami-ch G},another notorious ganninslum, where the furegashiraresponsible for

the victim was eventually located. After much debate, the case was set-tled by the payment of 25 ry (large gold pieces) to the furegashira.Though thefuregashiramay have been satised by this payoff, the spir-it of the murdered ganninwas not so easily appeased. The incident, it

was rumored, resulted in a curse being placed on the shop, whichwent to ruin a decade later (Fujiokaya nikki, vol. 9, p. 273).

Gannin throughout the Land

RURAL GANNIN

The majority of gannin resided in Edo and Osaka, but signicantnumbers also made their homes in rural areas. Even in the remotenorthern Morioka domain, enough ganninexisted in 1702/2 thatdomainal authorities, always on the lookout for potential trouble-makers, demanded that bona de ganninappear and obtain a woodenlicense. Any unlicensed ganninor other suspicious beggar was hence-forth to be arrested (Hennen sabetsu shi shiry shsei, vol. 7, p. 593). In1777/6, authorities in the Yonezawa domain (today Yamagata Prefec-ture) also stipulated that all gannin, itinerant performers, blind menand women, medicine vendors, beggars, outcastes, actors, and yama-bushi lodge only at specially designated inns.16 In the province of Kai(today Yamanashi Prefecture), gannin guarded mountains for thepeasantry, engaged in cold weather austerities, and performed jruriw8 or saimonk recitation (Urami kanwa, p. 416). In nearby Suruga(today Shizuoka Prefecture), ganninliving in row houses (nagaya%)measuring fteen by eighteen feet were controlled by the furegashiraMykb U afliated with the Enk-in. These ganninworshipedthe god Seimen Kshin (scM), for whom they held all-night vigilsevery other month (Sunkoku zasshi, vol. 1, p. 288). Some 100 gannin

with no specic temple afliation resided in the province of Owari(today Aichi Prefecture) (Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi, andelsewhere). During the nineteenth century these ganninearned a rep-utation as providers of secular entertainment, for they often exhibitedtheir talents on stages set up at temple grounds. In the fall of 1826, forexample, ganninplayed at the Nagoya Seiju-in 3 (Kouta no chimata,


16 Hennen sabetsu shi shiry shsei, vol. 10, pp. 44344; see also vol. 12, pp. 12930 of thissource for an 1807/8 law from the same domain banning unauthorized lodging of ganninand hinin.


10/32

p. 431; and Misemono zasshi, p. 59).17 Their show featured theSumiyoshi dance, performed by six dancers, one jruri reciter, oneshinnaiG reciter, and two shamisenaccompanists. Later both this

troupe and copycat versions gave many encore performances to adelighted public (Misemono zasshi, pp. 59, 67, 7273, 79, 88, 108, 114,14849).

KANSAI GANNIN

Ganninmay also have been active in eighteenth-century Kyoto, for asone chronicler notes, in 1731, on the occasion of an eclipse, Kyoto

vendors took a rest, the theaters closed, and even gannin bzuwerenowhere to be seen (Getsud kenbunsh, ge, p. 196). Later, however, the

number of Kyoto gannindwindled so drastically that in 1842 even theKyoto town magistrate did not know who ganninwere or what they did.18

Most Kyoto ganninprobably stemmed from nearby Osaka,19 wherea hierarchical organization must have been in place by 1672, when agannin named Nishinob ordered prospective members toreceive clearance from the two kumigashirabefore joining the guild.Nobody suspicious, and nobody without a guarantor was to be accepted.Becoming a ganninmust have spelled considerable advantages, forganninwere being impersonated by others. Nishinob thus demanded

that impostors be arrested (HASHIKAWA1926, pp. 21920).Judging from the limited extant sources, early eighteenth-century

Osaka was home to some 100 gannin, many of whom lived at NagachMakihonb , an area known for its cheap inns and op-houses.20 Such ganninare vividly described in a volume published in1696.

They look likeyamabushibut are notshugenja, and are not con-trolled by the Tzan or Honzan [shugen] orders. They live in

17 Misemono zasshilists the show as running from 8/6 to 12/2.18 See STRSSB, p. 64. According to Kitagawa Morisada, a nineteenth-century encyclope-

dist, Kyoto and Osaka gannin made pilgrimages to Konpira shrines (Konpira gynin^), held proxy vigils on kshincM days and performed the Sumiyoshi dance.Unlike their Edo counterparts, they did not give satirical or humorous performances. Inthe old days, other gannin-like gures such as the suta-suta bzu`f`f (shufingmonks) could also be found in Kyoto. See Morisada mank, vol. 1, p. 219.

19 Settsu meisho zue(vol. 1, p. 106), written in 1794, notes that Sumiyoshi dancers (proba-bly gannin), came from Sumiyoshi Village (near Osaka) and circulated throughout Kyotoand Osaka.

20 Kokkei zdan, vol. 1, fascicle 9, p. 442. This record (from 1713) refers to beggarly

Sumiyoshi dancers, who are described as performing exorcisms while wearing straw hatswith strips of red cloth attached, and dancing to invoke the gods. Such people were proba-blygannin. The presence of 100 Osaka ganninis also noted in Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi and elsewhere.



11/32

isolation, perhaps because they were expelled by lowly, bad-tempered yamabushi. Sometimes they walk around in highclogs; at times they engage in cold-water ablutions; or else they

perform all-night vigils for the god Kshin on the seventeenthand twenty-third days of the third month. They also go onproxy pilgrimages to Atago and Karasaki, or costume them-selves to look like ermines or badgers, changing what they doevery day of the month. All of them are itinerants. Puzzledabout all of this, someone called in a so-called Kshin vigilpractitioner [kshin machicM, i.e., gannin] and asked him:From morning to night you wander around in all directions;arent you exhausted in the evening? Thats right, the man

answered. When I return to my inn, I am extremely fatigued.I just wish to sleep soundly for a night; I dont even bother totake off my sandals before going to bed. The next day, whenthe others notice it, we all laugh!

(Jinrin chhki, vol. 5, section 3)

The population of Osaka-based ganninprobably increased thereafter.Census gures that are difcult to date, but perhaps from the eighteenthcentury, mention the presence of 208 Kurama gannin in the region.21

GANNININ THE CITY OF EDO

By far the best records of gannin are available for the city of Edo.According to nineteenth-centur y documents, certain priests in Edowere selected to become gannin furegashiraas early as the Keich period(15961615) (Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi, and elsewhere),but this is unlikely: the earliest documented furegashira appeared inthe 1680s (YOSHIDA 1994, p. 91). Slightly more credible records statethat during the Kanei period (16241644) ganninsupposedly came to

Edo from all provinces, lodged at temples and diligently distributedtalismans, amulets, and petitions [sic] to parishioners (Chishi oshi-rabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch). A document dated 1646 lists daisan, proxypilgrims who may well have been gannin, along with yamabushi, beg-gars, and other individuals not permitted within the Edo castle outerenclosure (Tenp fsetsu kenbun hiroku, p. 234). A law from 1649/7/12dictates that during the obonseason monks were permitted to performsegaki, a rite in which religious practitioners, often gannin, carried a


21 Hennen sabetsu shi shiry shsei, vol. 6, p. 197. This document includes gures from asearly as 1626 but was revised several times thereafter. It also catalogues 48 Kumano bikunih, 97 Honzan-sectyamabushi, 36 Tzan-sectyamabushi, 4 Rokusai nenbutsu[,30 yin-yang diviners, and numberless unregistered beggars and hininfrom other areas.


12/32

litter of food offerings around town while sounding gongs and cym-bals (Shh jiroku, vol. 1, p.12 [no. 37]). Such hints remain tantalizing,

but the earliest reliable reference to Edo gannin(in the sense of anitinerant religious performer) is found in a law from 1652/2/3 thatnotes the existence of only 13 ganninin the capital (Kiyshran, vol. 2,p. 637). Thereafter, ganninare mentioned in numerous governmentordinances and other records, often in conjunction with other reli-gious mendicants. Available population statistics are presented inTable 1.

Though numbers varied considerably, probably rising when timeswere bad and dropping when good, during the latter half of the Toku-

gawa period, between 400 and 900 Edo ganninmust have been activeat any given time. In addition, many Edo gannin lived together with

wives and children, probably not included in statistics.Edo ganninwere organized into groups (kumiL) afliated with

either the Taiz-in or Enk-in. Late Tokugawa-period records namefour kumi, each headed by a boss (tbanc or sdair): the Kanda-gumiP,L at Hashimoto-ch and Egawa-ch s; the Shitaya-gumi 4L at the second block of Shitaya Yamazaki-ch 4[2;the Yotsuya-gumi vL at Yotsuya Tenry-ji Monzen vO2;

and the Shiba-gumi L at Shiba Shinami-ch (YOSHIDA 1994, p.103). Each kumiorganized its own hierarchy of ofcials. Populationstatistics for 1862 indicate that one out of ve or six ganninheld some


Table 1. The Edo GanninPopulation

YEAR NUMBER SOURCE

1652 13 Kiyshran, vol. 2, p. 637

1672 21 HASHIKAWA1926, p. 221

1759 250 Kurama gannin yuraikaki-utsushi

1781 105 Enk-in-based ofce holders YOSHIDA1994, p. 92

1843 800900 lodgers atgannininns STRGTK,vol. 1

1860s? 400500 Hyakugi jutsuryaku, p. 237

1862 500600 Taiz-in-afliated gannin YOSHIDA1994, p. 102(includes 100 ofce-holders)

1869 550 at Kanda Hashimoto-ch Shiry-sh: Meiji shoki hisabetsuburaku, p. 70


13/32

rank or ofce in the Edo ganninorganization.22

Annually on 3/20 and 7/20, Edo-based Taiz-in gannin ofcialsheld a general meeting at which a registry of gannin ofcials was

drawn up and sent to the Kurama temple. This ledger included docu-mentation of new positions, changes in rank, and retirement of mem-bers. When a ganninwas promoted to a new position, the Taiz-inreceived a fee of fty coppers. Moreover, all ganninofcials offered asemiannual donation of 300 coppers.23 Enk-in gannin functionariespresumably scheduled similar meetings.

Like most Tokugawa-period citizens, Edo gannin dwelled in closequarters, fostering the exchange of information and the protection ofcommunal interests. The main locations of Edo gannin domiciles

mentioned in contemporaneous records are given in Table 2.24As this table shows, during the nineteenth century the principal

gannin quarters were located roughly in the north, south, east, andwest of the city (see also STRNDB, j [1842/10/26]). Of these fourlocations, the Kanda area functioned as the gannins base (bnai).Though most of the Kanda gannin lived at Hashimoto-ch, havingmoved here from Bakuro-ch some time in the late seventeenth cen-tury, some perhaps remained at their old location at Bakuro-ch.

According to a volume published in 1735, Bakuro-ch Tsukegi was

populated with what is known in Kamigata area as iwaudoor-to-door performers of celebratory religious arts (Zoku Edo sunago, p.347). Such artists were probably simplyganninby another name.

The Gannin as Hostlers and Spies

Hashimoto-ch, the Shinami-ch section of Shiba, the second blockof Yamazaki-ch, and Samegahashi, were all known as haunts of beg-

gars, unlicensed prostitutes, and assorted riff-raff that made cityadministrators nervous (STRGTK,vol. 1 [1843/1]; Tankai, p. 474; Ten-gen hikki, p. 217). In each of these neighborhoods ganninran op-houses, ofcially catering exclusively to sacred itinerants, but in fact


22 More detailed statistics can be found in YOSHIDA 1994, p. 97. From 1847 to 1872 thenumber of ofce-holders ranged from 147 (1855) to 60 (1871 and 1872).

23 Relations of Edo ganninofcials to their superiors at the Kurama temple are discussedin detail in YOSHIDA1994, pp. 9499. According to the Kasshi yawa, vol. 4, pp. 32223, a reg-

ular gannintraditionally paid a fee to the main temple (i.e., the Taiz-in or Enk-in) and tothe Edofuregashiraunder whose control he was, but not to lower-ranking members.24 Dates in quotation marks are mentioned in at least one of the sources indicated; other

dates refer to the date of writing or publication of the source.


14/32

Table 2. Edo GanninDomicile Locations

LOCATION DATES SOURCE(S)

Kanda

Bakuro-ch from 16611673 Chishi oshirabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch

ca. 1676 Sabishiki za no nagusami, p. 136.

Hashimoto-ch from 16881704 Gofunai bik, vol. 1, p. 454;Edomasago rokujutch, p. 156;Edomachikata kakiage(Shitaya/Yanaka),p. 218; Wasure nokori, p. 124;STRSSB, pp. 5, 30.

Toshima-ch ca. 1796 Tankai, p. 474.

Yanagiwara-ch 1780s Mimi-bukuro, vol. 1, p. 319.

Egawa-ch ca. 1826 Gofunai bik, vol. 1, p. 454;Edomachikata kakiage(Shitaya/Yanaka),p. 218; STRSSB, pp. 5, 30.*

Yamato-ch ca. 1826 Gofunai bik, vol. 1, p. 454;Edomachikata kakiage(Shitaya/Yanaka),p. 218.

Shiba

Shinami-ch from 17161736 STRSSB, pp. 5, 30; Chishioshirabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch;MITAMURA1958, p. 274.

Kanesugi-ch ca. 1796 Tankai, p. 474.

Shitaya

Yamazaki-ch from ca. 1717 Edo machikata kakiage(Shitaya/Yanaka) p. 218; Gofunai bik, vol.1, p. 454; STRGTK, vol. 1.

Toyosumi-ch 1873 Shiry-sh: Meiji shoki hisabetsuburaku, p. 416.

Yotsuya

Tenry-ji Monzen ca. 1759 Bokkai sanpitsu, vol. 92.Samegahashi ca. 1796 Tankai, p. 474; Hyakugi jutsuryaku,p. 237.

Fukagawa

Umibe Daiku-ch from 17641772 Tky-shi saimin enkaku kiy, p. 641;STRGTK, vol. 1.

*Around 1842, the bakufuproposed to drive the ganninout from Egawa-ch butwhether this relocation took place remains unclear (STRSSB, p. 30)

See also the license reproduced inFzoku gah, vol. 47 (1892), p. 22. For an almostidentical inscription on a license from the 1790s see Mikikigusa, vol. 2, p. 52 (5-shno 9).


15/32

admitting nearly anybody who paid the requisite fee.25 According toone source, the rstganninophouse was created during the Meiwaperiod (17641772) by a ganninnamed Shry P from Fukagawa

Umibe Daiku-ch (Tky-shi saimin enkaku kiy, p. 641). This inn mayhave been modeled on hostels of wandering ascetics (gynin), whichcatered to taka-ashida, an occupation of religious itinerants (often gan-nin) who paraded around on stilt-like footwear. Such inns are alreadymentioned in an Edo law of 1672/2/6 (Shh jiroku, vol. 1, p. 166 [no.496]). In any case, by 1843 even gannin ophouse operators them-selves admitted knowing nothing about the origins or early history oftheir boardinghouses. They could only recall that a quarter century orso earlier, the prices of regular townsman inns at Bakuro-ch had sky-

rocketed, forcing beggars and itinerants to turn to ophouses forroom and board (STRGTK, vol. 1). By 1843/1, a total of 83 ganninophouses, catering to some 800900 people, ourished at ve Edolocations (see Table 3).26

When spending the night at a ophouse, a boarder paid some 24mon(coppers) for a space of one tatamimat (approx. 3' x 6'); childrenlodged for free. Innkeepers, known as dormitory priests (ry bzuZ), provided pots and pans with which guests cooked the rice col-


Table 3. GanninFlophouses

LOCATION NUMBER MANAGER AFFILIATION

Hashimoto-ch 28 Enky Taiz-in

" 18 Taninob Enk-in

Shiba Shinami-ch 4 Kyd Taiz-in

" 21 Mykai Enk-in

Shitaya Yamazaki-ch 2-chme 7 Ritsuen Taiz-in

Yotsuya Tenry-ji Monzen 2 Nenshin Taiz-in

" 1 Kangen Enk-in

Moto Samegahashi Kita-ch 2 Ganzan Enk-in

* Based on STRGTK, vol. 1 (1843/1); and Tky-shi saimin enkaku kiy, p. 650. Mapsof the various areas in which the ganninlived can be found in TAKAYANAGI 1981,pp. 14, 15, 17, and 2931. See also YOSHIDA1994, pp. 11920 for a discussion.

25 STRGTK, vol. 1. This document, from 1842/11, is useful in assessing the discrepancybetween ofcial rules and real conditions.

26 Nearly identical ophouses were run by the gmuneF, townspeople consideredhininon the basis of their occupation as street performers.


16/32

lected on their daily rounds. At night, one oil lamp was dispensed toeach room; bedding was rented at the rate of 1016 mon, dependingon the quality. In the morning, innkeepers brewed tea for anyone who

wanted it. Some ganninstayed for just a night; anyone who lingeredneeded to provide the name of a guarantor (STRGTK, vol. 1).

Ganninophouses provided a convenient rst stop in Edo for pen-niless or stealthy new arrivals from the countryside. The bakufu, pre-sumably operating on the principle that one should set a thief tocatch a thief, enlisted gannin to keep track of suspicious or undesir-able elements entering or leaving the city. Edo gannin furegashirawerenotied of wanted suspects; the former then sent a message to theircounterparts throughout the eight Kant provinces. On occasion,

they even dispatched members to the provinces for ofcial purposes,presumably to track down criminals. As a result, ganninearned notorietyfor spying.27 We serve in an ofcial capacity and have been grantedofcial rewards, one ganninhead boasted.28 Perhaps he had reason tobe proud. In 1721, gannin succeeded in capturing a fugitive as farnorth as Sendai and had been amply rewarded by the magistrates oftemples and shrines (Chishi oshirabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch). The gan-ninadmitted, however, that recently [ca. 1744?] things have becomedisorderly and such requests are often put off (Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3,

p. 68, and elsewhere). Nevertheless, well into the nineteenth century,some gannincontinued to function as petty law ofcers.

Controlling the Gannin: The Bakufus Efforts

Besides supporting the administrative system headed by the Kuramatemple, the bakufu issued a large number of edicts and directivesdesigned to keep the ganninand other mendicant religious perform-ers in line. Promulgations of regulatory legislation peaked during

times of social and economic reform: between the 1660s and the1690s, when the city of Edo was being rebuilt after the disastrous Mei-reki re of 1657; during the Kyh reforms of the 1720s; duringthe Kansei reforms of the 1780s; and in the decades surroundingthe Tenp reforms of the 1840s.


27 See NHK 1992, 241. MITAMURA1958, p. 274 offers the theory that the Kurama ganninwere originally called to Edo by the bakufuto act as spies.

28Another ofcial link to the Tokugawa is recorded by a gannin furegashiraof the Shibaarea during the early nineteenth century, who claims that during the time of Tokugawa

Ieyasus Osaka campaign, the priest Myhb U of the Kurama temple presented thearmy with a talisman for luck in battle. Even during the nineteenth century, this priests suc-cessor still offered a talisman annually to Edo castle. Whether this was true or not remainsobscure. See Chishi oshirabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch.


17/32

THE LATE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

In the decades following the great Meireki re, city administratorsseized the opportunity to reorganize the sprawling metropolis Edo

had become. Religious mendicants and street performers were alsotargeted for reordering, but in this regard they were not alone: in1665, day laborers were cast into guilds and subject to increasinglystringent control; in 1674, hininbecame targets of an ofcial investiga-tion, though for the time being they were still allowed to live wherethey wished (Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, nos. 2389, 2390, p. 1138).29

The rst new regulations concerning ganninappeared on 1658/8/15,almost before the last embers of the Meireki re had cooled. Gannin(along with other religious practitioners) living in the townsman quar-

ters were ordered to fashion a register of names for submission to thetown elders (Shh jiroku, vol. 1, p. 70 [no. 208]). On 1661/9/17, cityadministrators told the ganninnot to operate on or near bridges, oneof the prime sites for drawing crowds (Shh jiroku, vol. 1, p. 99 [no.296]; repeated on 1661/11/15, see ibid., vol. 1, p. 101 [no. 302]). Thefollowing year, on 1662/9/18, the location and appearance of resi-dences occupied by many types of religious mendicants, includinggannin, were subject to detailed guidelines that provided the back-bone ofbakufupolicy for the centuries to come. Rented domiciles in

the city proper were henceforth restricted to back-street dwellings,which were not to be remodeled as temples or inns. When renting ahouse, religious practitioners and performers rst needed to obtaincertication from their main temple and provide the name of a guar-antor. Anybody lacking ofcial afliation to an acknowledged reli-gious institution was prohibited from leasing a home. To make surethat religious itinerants did not congregate within the city, Buddhisttemples were disallowed from harboring religious mendicants for onlya night (STRSSB, p. 67; and Shh jiroku, vol. 1, p. 108 [no. 324]; for a

translation see WIGMORE 1983, part 8B, p. 120).Laws also attempted to curb extravagant ganninactivities, particu-larly ones that might compete with the pursuits of members of morepowerful religious institutions. Edo ganninand other religious mendi-cants had evidently been displaying signboards and sacred standards(bonten) announcing their willingness to provide services. Bud-dhist altars had been set in place; houses were adorned with paintingsof religious import (STRSSB, pp. 6869). A 1684/7/16 edict complainsthat ganninand others, including even townspeople, were parading


29 In 1680/8 Edo hininand beggars were told they could no longer live in the city proper,supposedly because their numbers had increased, and because they were suspected of thiev-ery (Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2391, p. 1138).


18/32

around town in groups with images of buddhas and tall lamps. Noisilychanting the Lotus Sutraor invocations to the Amida Buddha, they

went wherever they pleased.30 During the late seventeenth century all

such activities were banned. The bakufumust have judged that a front-street abode outtted with standards, signboards, altars, iconography,and artwork could easily turn into an unauthorized temple or shrine.Interdicted activities in the streets, such as preaching, loud praying,chanting, music, dancing, and parading around with lavish propsmight function as missionary work for such unofcial religious institu-tions.

THE KYH REFORMS

In 1723, the authorities again attempted to crack down on disorderlyganninby requiring ganninto carry on their person a wooden licenseat all times.31 Additional regulations apparently drafted in 1728 butlost, suggest that trouble continued (Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 73); a

year later, on 1729/4/26, the bakufu outlawed the ganninactivity ofpassing out riddle-prints, which had evidently turned into a form ofgambling.32 Perhaps because gannin law and order still remained atbest a distant ideal, on 1744/10/25, oka Echizen no kami 2!(16771751), a magistrate of temple and shrines and one of the main

architects of the Kyh reforms, demanded an in-depth probe of theganninorder.33 oka, evidently puzzled about the nature of the grouphe was investigating, rst demanded an explanation ofganninoriginsand an outline of the gannin organization. The gannin respondedalmost immediately, providing oka with the tale about Yoshitsunesstay at the Kurama temple. After presenting some facts about theirrelation to Kurama temple, the ganninemphasized that they worked


30 Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2392, p. 1139. A law regulating ganninbehavior and regis-

tration was apparently issued by the magistrates of temples and shrines in 1692, but seemsnot to have survived. See Shis zasshiki, fascicle 3, p. 72; and Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2398,p. 1140. In 1694/10 another law again dictated that religious meetings such as nenbutsu-k[ and daimoku-k not be held in front houses. Priests were not to bang on bells ordrums while reciting nenbutsu, an act that caused crowds to form. Renting a front-street cityhouse was again banned. Anybody who wished to collect proceeds for temple fairs orexhibits of holy treasures was to rst receive clearance from the magistrates of temples andshrines. See STRSSB, p. 69.

31 Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2398, p. 1140 (1723/6). Pictures of licenses can be foundin Mikikigusa, vol. 2, p. 53 (5-sh no 9);Fzoku gah, vol. 47, p. 22; STRSSB, p. 60; and Tky-shi shik, sangy-hen, vol. 29, p. 146.

32 Seny eikyroku, cited in Tky-shi shik, sangy-hen, vol. 13, p. 50; Ruish seny, vol.14, cited in NAKAO 1992, p. 449; and Shh jiroku, vol. 2, pp. 39192 (no. 2120).

33 Bokkai sanpitsu, vol. 92. okas initial query was answered three days later, and thelegitimacy of Taiz-in control reafrmed.


19/32

for the bakufu as petty law enforcement ofcials. Shortly thereafter,gannin bosses spelled out the rules and regulations governing theirguild. It was noted that fees were collected from underlings, that

precedent was followed in providing services to parishioners, thatbakufu laws were properly obeyed, and that nobody was allowed tosupport unorthodox beliefs (such as Christianity). Begging was notpermitted in bizarre costumes or tattered clothing; nor was medicine

vending allowed. Ganninwere not to mingle with yamabushi, nor takea leave of absence from their organization to become a yamabushipupil. They were also prohibited from competing with each other inthe acquisition of pupils or parishioners. Apparently satised withthese assurances, oka ordered the Kant furegashiraand kumigashira

to tighten control over their charges. He seems not to have taken upthe issue again (Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushi).

THE KANSEI REFORMS

Social instability in Edo and elsewhere increased greatly during thefamine years of the 1780s. Rural hardship had caused an explosion inthe population of urban vagrants, not a few of whom joined the ranksof the gannin. After experiencing large-scale riots in 1787, Edo cityadministrators keenly felt the necessity of keeping the urban popula-

tion, in particular the lowest classes, under control. On the last day of1788/10, the bakufu mandated that gannin conform to the earlier-issued ordinances, in particular ones concerning the renting of prop-erty (Ruish seny, vol. 14, cited in NAKAO 1992, p. 446). In 1789,the jurisdiction of the furegashiraHsenb was broadened to includeganninwives and children, to whom he issued licenses and beggingsatchels.34 Ganninwere not alone in being targeted for renewedrestrictions. Laws also applied to vagrant Buddhist priests and nuns(1791/5), Shinto priests, yin-yang diviners, and others (Ofuregaki

Tenp shseivol. 2, no. 4283, p. 17, translated in WIGMORE 1983, part8B, pp. 12324; TAKANO 1989, pp. 107, 110).

THE TENP REFORMS

After the demise of the Kansei reforms, urban Japan saw severaldecades of relatively light-handed governance. From the 1830s, howev-er, as a string of bad harvests again spawned much social unrest, bakufuofcials once more turned to zoning laws, property rental requirements,and census registration as a means of securing stability and order. In

Edo, domicile and status registration requirements frequently differed


34 STRSSB, pp. 5961. An illustration of these licenses and satchels can be found on p. 60.


20/32

slightly from ward to ward. Though ganninhad traditionally beenplaced under the rule of the ofce of the magistrates of temples andshrines, from at least the early nineteenth century, they were some-

times recorded in townsman registries. As a result, gannin statusremained highly ambiguous.35 This state of affairs was the by-product,if the volumeFken gkiis to be believed, of an 1807 lawsuit by towns-people wishing to stop the gannins minatory behavior toward thestingy (Fken gki, p. 102 [18041810]). In any case, by the 1820s gan-ninwere in fact often recorded in town census registries, though theyotherwise maintained no role in townsman quarter administration.36

Another thorny problem resulted when ganninor other religiousmendicants from rural areas lodged in Edo for extended periods of

time. Legally speaking, such visitors were not considered residents,since they remained registered in their area of origin. Their Edoabodes, often conveniently named town preaching stations (machidj), supposedly functioned as temporary ofces used forspreading the word of Buddha and for soliciting contributions. Yetsuch people had often resided in the city so long that even ward head-men could no longer ascertain whether their stay was legal or not(WIGMORE 1983, part 8B, p. 122).

In 1842, as the Tenp reforms proceeded in earnest, domicile loca-

tion, registration requirements, and activities of religious performersand practitioners once again became a topic of concern.37 On1842/6/25 (26?), the government issued a series of commands thatconsolidated and reinforced provisions that had been in effect, thoughrarely heeded, for almost two centuries.38 Gannin, yin-yang diviners,


35 Such double afliation was not unique to the gannin. In 1835/2/25 Edo city authori-ties required Shinto priests, shugen, and yin-yang diviners also to register with ward heads ifthey lived in the townsman quarters. Tokugawa kinrei-k, vol. 5, zensh, no. 2570, p. 17.Gmune, too, were registered both as townspeople and as hinin.

36Edo machikata kakiage(Shitaya/Yanaka), p. 217. According to a document from 1826,the temple/shrine registry ofganninwas rst handled by the gannin furegashira, who thenturned it over to the ofce of the magistrates of temples and shrines. In discussions duringthe 1830s concerning how best to treatganninregistration, opinions among the town magis-trates at rst differed. Eventually, on 1835/4/9, ganninwere ordered to register in the samemanner as Shinto priests, who were also permitted to live within the city while registering

with the magistrates of temple and shrines. In a proposal of 1842/11/25, one magistratesuggested that the town registry of a new ganninbe submitted to the ward head (nanushi),and that the head be informed ofgannindeaths or abscondences. See STRNDB, ge.

37 Osaka ganninhad apparently been subject to new laws already during the Bunsei period(181830). See Ukiyo no arisama, p. 774.

38 Tokugawa kinrei-k, vol. 5, zensh, no. 3107 (pp. 33435); Tenp shinseiroku, pp. 5455.Various drafts of the law are reprinted in STRSSB, pp. 416, 2731. For discussions seeMINAMI 1978, pp. 15152; SAKAMOTO 1992, pp. 6264. The same edict was issued in Kyoto in1842/11 and in Osaka in 1845/4. See SAKAMOTO 1992, p. 66.


21/32

shakuhachi-playing mendicant priests (komus), Buddhist beggars andascetics (dshinjaor gynin), and female shamans (miko) controlled byTamura Hachiday were again instructed to obtain documents certify-

ing their temple or shrine afliations. Ganninwere to supply thename of a guarantor and remain housed in back-street abodes that

were not to resemble temples. The authorities also demanded thatlaws should be properly transmitted to gannin, and that the ganninobey such laws and behave in an orderly fashion (STRNDB, ge). The

wearing of only a loincloth was banned, apparently effectively for a fewyears.39 By 1843/2/9 the pertinent edicts were sent to Osaka, wheresimilar reforms were enacted (Ukiyo no arisama, pp. 77374).

The bakufuwas hardest on those who had taken the tonsure on

their own accord, resembling priests or nuns but remaining unregis-tered with any approved temple or shrine. These types were now toldto join a state-sanctioned religious institution and provide evidence ofthis relation. Anyone who could not do so was to return to secular life,moving back to a home village, or, if Edo-born, become an apprenticeand register in the townsman registry. But since many self-styledmonks and nuns, including pseudo-gannin, had spouses and childrenfor whom they provided, the magistrates knew that simply banningtraditional activities would lead only to an increase in the number of

penurious, homeless beggars. At a loss for what to do, ofcials merelydemanded thatgannininns be put in order, and thatgannintake nodisciples without ofcial authorization.40 Expanding gannincontrolover other indigent religious practitioners was again briey consid-ered, since some bakufuofcials believed that if ailing, kinless reli-gious practitioners were placed under the Kurama ganninand movedto ganninquarters at Hashimoto-ch, Egawa-ch, or Shiba Shinami-ch, they might earn a more secure living.41 This plan, however, raninto difculty because of a lack of empty dwellings at suitable loca-

tions.Perhaps the most signicant anti-gannin legislation of the Tenpreforms concerned gannin arts and practices. Sentiments that lay


39 Hyakugi jutsuryaku, p. 237. Contemporaneous writers often note that after the Tenpreforms, ganningarb became more priestly. See Edo fzoku smakuri, p. 33; Wasure nokori,p. 124; Kanten kenbunki, p. 333. Yet by 1848 the ganninhad reverted to their traditional near-naked appearance (Tengen hikki, p. 255).

40 See the 1842/10/26 missive from the town magistrates to the bakufuelders inSTRNDB,j.

41 STRSSB, p. 6 (1842/5). Ironically, in 1858 Edo ganninpetitioned to leave Hashimoto-ch and three other areas (which had become dilapidated) to move to the precincts of theKanei-ji. This appeal, however, was turned down by the Taiz-in. See YOSHIDA1994, p. 125,note 50.


22/32

behind such measures can be felt in a missive from a magistrate oftemples and shrines sent to the gannin furegashiraof the Taiz-in.

In recent years ganninbehavior has become disorderly. Ganninparade through the city, dancing in groups. They do not even

wear priestly robes. [Instead], they cover [only] their heads,and stand naked [i.e., wearing only a loincloth] in front ofdoors and forcefully beg for alms, obstructing trafc. In addi-tion, they chant lascivious, satirical verses, or pass out riddleprints, thinking only of how to curry favor with little boys andgirls. This manner of collecting donations is most unbecom-ing, not worthy of a Buddhist. Because of this situation, manytorpid, prodigal individuals who despise labor become disci-

ples [ofgannin], thereby resembling gmune or hinin. This isoutrageous. In particular, the gestures of those who engage inrecent fads such as proxy pilgrimages to Handa Inari and inSumiyoshi celebrations [sic, probably Sumiyoshi dancing]have lost all semblance to Buddhist priests, and merely try tobe modish. (STRSSB, p. 19)

To counteract such baneful trends, ganninwere ordered to dressproperly, to refrain from acting like hininor gmune, and to carrytheir licenses at all times.42

Like earlier attempts at reform, the Tenp reforms proved to beunrealistic and ineffective. By the late 1840s, their impact had almostentirely worn off. Thereafter, the bakufu had its hands full with thearrival of Perry, rampant ination, the earthquake of 1855, and nallythe events that led to the Meiji restoration. Yet even as the bakufuwasnearing its collapse, attempts to regulate ganninwere not simply aban-doned. As late as 1868/1/12, immediately after the battles at Fushimiand Toba, the bakufu still found time to tell gannin that suspiciousindividuals were not to be harbored at ophouses (Fujiokaya nikki, vol.15, p. 402).

Ganninfaced their own problems during the last few decades of theTokugawa period. Bosses complained that many of their pupils wereleaving the fold, becoming day laborers to make ends meet (YOSHIDA1994, p. 121). Ganninhostels at Hashimoto-ch and Shiba Shinami-ch remained protable mainly thanks to the patronage of secular

vagrants and beggars (NAKAO 1992, pp. 24041). A few short yearslater, on August 23, 1873, the Meiji government abolished the ganninorganization and the gannins special status. All ganninwere now to


42 STRGTK, vol. 1; MINAMI 1969, p.161; and Fujiokaya nikki, vol. 2, p. 302; see also thedocument of 1842/11/25 in STRNDB.


23/32

enter their names into commoner registries (Shiry-sh: Meiji shoki his-abetsu buraku, p. 416), effectively putting an end to their long history.

Resisting Order: Gannin Responses to Control

The bakufu, through the ofces of the Kurama temple, intended to keepa tight rein on the gannin, but many rank-and-le ganninmust havesensed that the hierarchical administration set in place during the sev-enteenth century produced tangible rewards mainly for the upperechelon of the institution; for lower-ranking members it held little butdrawbacks. That bakufu laws met with resistance is suggested by fre-quent repromulgations: much of what was included in the 1662 law

regulating domiciles, for example, was repeated in edicts of 1665/10/14and 1665/11/4 (STRSSB, p. 68). A 1723 edict notes that governmen-tal directives were still not being properly conveyed to gannin, some of

whom remained indistinguishable from vagrants (mushuku[f)(Ofuregaki Kanp shsei, no. 2398, p. 1140 [1723/6]). That the situationhardly changed in later years cannot be attributed to accident. Didgannin challenge the system? And if so, how? Several telltale casesrecorded by Tokugawa bureaucrats provide a eeting glimpse behindthe scenes.

From 1781, the ganninwere involved in a long-running disputewith the hinin, with whom they shared the streets of Edo. Troublestarted when ganninwives and children whose husbands or fathers

were ill or missing, or who at any rate claimed as much, were discov-ered begging in city areas the hininconsidered their own turf. Thisnding led Kuruma Zenshichi 3, the head of the Edo hinin, tocontact the gannin furegashiraIchimeib sg and discuss barringgannindependents from such activities. Zenshichi, who clearly rankedhigher in the ofcial hierarchy than Ichimeib, wished to put such

women and children under his own rule, but the ganninbalked at thissuggestion. Since an all-out ban would have deprived the most needygannindependents of their only viable source of income, a compro-mise needed to be reached. It was decided that ganninwomen andchildren should henceforth obtain a license from Ichimeib to testifyto their non-hinin status. On the surface, this agreement appears tosignal Ichimeibs victory, but Ichimeib may well have secretly prom-ised Zenshichi that no such licenses would be granted, or that a por-tion of the payment for licenses would be handed to Zenshichi. The

latter, in any case, did not trust the gannins word; he demanded (andapparently received) written assurances that the offending practices

would cease. His apprehensions turned out to be well founded. On



24/32

1785/3/17, at Asakusa Tawara-ch ,, ganninwomen were onceagain spotted illegally tailing warriors and other passers-by. Outraged,two hininofcials lodged a complaint with Ichimeib the following

day. This time it was agreed that the offending gannindependentsshould obtain a license from the head of the gmune. What happenednext remains unclear, but during the fourth month Ichimeibs assis-tant Kansh ; pledged again that disorderly behavior would notreoccur. A written agreement was again promised but never delivered.

When hininofcials returned to exact the document, Kansh turnedthem down, claiming to be ill. Zenshichi was promised a visit by Kan-sh once the latter recovered, but nothing was heard of him there-after (Anei seny ruish, vol. 29 [j,furoku]).

The manner in which the gannin reactedor failed to reacttohinincomplaints suggests that ganninwives and children, and eventheir bosses, saw little benet in putting an end to disorderly behav-ior. Gannindid not, however, overtly refuse to obey laws or precedent.Instead, they utilized more subtle forms of resistance: interminablenegotiation leading nowhere, vague promises, ambiguous compro-mise, feigned illness, and endless procrastination. Ganninknew thatrules and regulations did not favor their side of a dispute. As a result,they turned to more devious, though no less effective, modes of resist-

ance.Conscious duplicity and subterfuge continued to irritate ofcialsduring the sunset years of the Tenp reforms. In 1847, a bakufudocu-ment explains one case in some detail:

The [Tenp] reforms have put a stop to ganninwho wanderedthe streets performing the Sumiyoshi dance. This practiceonce died out, but recently has recommenced. We have beenrequested to nd out whether the individuals listed below are

working as gannin, or as hininor gmunestreet performers. We

have discovered the following:Under the control of Niday, the head of the gmune, livingat Asakusa, outside the gate of the Ryk-jiPM2:

The following individuals are ex-ganninwho have becomegmune:

Jirkichi, Ginz, Kinu (shamisen)Below, Torakichi and Kaneyoshi are ex-ganninwho havebecome gmune:

Torakichi, Kanekichi, Sadakichi, Kane (shamisen)The following individuals work as assistants when [theabove performers] do not sufce:

Tjir, Masakichi, Kisabur, Yasu



25/32

[The following] reside with Kumajir at Yonezs houseon the fourth block of South Shinagawa. These individu-als have been issued licenses by Niday, the head of the

gmune:Mankichi, Denjir, Denkichi, Kane

The above four groups walk around the city performing theSumiyoshi dance. The gmune do not, however, call thisdance the Sumiyoshi dance but rather, mendaciously, theMando hnen odori(E, bounteous harvest dance).Besides the above, we have not heard of any other ganninor hininwho appear in the same way.

11th day of the seventh month, [1847]

Circulating spies

(STRGTK, vol. 4)

Rather than giving up the arts that had been deemed immoral anddisorderly, ganninevidently simply rechristened them, much as thegmunehad changed the name of their begging activities from tsujikanjinZ to tsuji gmuneF some three decades earlier, whenthe gannincomplained to the magistrates of temples and shrines thatthe term kanjincarried religious associations inappropriate for the

practices of the gmune (Ruish seny, vol. 15). In the 1847 inci-dent, gannindiscovered that by renaming their art and by purchasinga gmune license, arrest could be avoided. Their activities therebybecame fully legal, tying the hands of stymied bakufuadministrators,

who could only suggest that the trend of switching occupational statusshould be checked. Niday _&, the head of the gmune, was calledto the town magistrates ofce on 1847/7/22 and counseled gentlythat performers under his control should not masquerade as gannin.Niday promised compliance in a deposition endorsed by his boss,

Kuruma Zenshichi, and by a deputy of Danzaemon = (Zen-shichis boss, and the head of Edo outcastes). With this bureaucratic

whimper the incident came to a close (STRGTK, vol. 4). We can besure, however, that gannincontinued to present their attractions onthe streets, outwitting city administrators whenever established rulesproved to be more trouble than they were worth.

Conclusion: Whose Order?

After the end of the period of civil wars, the futility of isolated andindividually enacted attempts to counter the increasingly heavy-handedrule of centralized governmental authority must have been painfully



26/32

clear to most popular religious performers and other types of beggars.Scattered and nearly powerless religious mendicants thus turned toinuential temples and shrines for protection, realizing that organiza-

tion and afliation strengthened their cause and might even lead tomonopoly privileges over certain arts. The movement to organizeturned out, however, to play directly into the hands of the Tokugawabakufu, which sought to designate major temples as intermediariesresponsible for law and order among the gannin. It did not take longfor those on the bottom rung of the ofcially approved ganninhierar-chy to discern that proper organization and registration served mainlytheir social betters.

Once the ofcial ganninorder had been set in place, however, no

penurious itinerant could hope to dismantle it singlehandedly. Indeed,resistance easily became counterproductive, giving the bakufuanopportunity to display its power in quasi-theatrical shows of force, orto demonstrate its legitimacy through the use of legal proceedingsstacked in favor of the status quo. Instead of risking a dangerous con-frontation, gannin turned to guerrilla-like, ad hoc strategies such asdeliberate procrastination, intentional ambiguity, conscious mendacity,or irreverent chicanery to ght oppressive measures of control. By theeighteenth century, the disadvantages of order must have been as

obvious as its advantages had been a century earlier. The impoverishedstreet preacher or religious singer-dancer now knew that ordermeant chiey paying fees, obeying reactionary laws, and fulllingpointless duties. By contrast, disorder did not simply imply destruc-tive chaos and discord, despite the efforts of warrior ofcials to por-tray it as such, but rather an antidote to an inequitable system, atemporary and expedient means to circumvent what stood in the wayof business.

Though outsmarting the authorities may well have occasioned feel-

ings of sardonic glee, disorder per se was never touted as a ganninvalue to be upheld and defended. In fact, order was always present inganninsociety, though the average gannins vision of it must have dif-fered radically from what was praised as peace and harmony bybakufuideologues. Order for the low-ranking gannin implied a exible net-

work of relations and afliations that allowed one to learn an art froma teacher or even a non-gannin, to accept ones own disciples orboarders when the possibility arose, and to send ones wife or childrenout to work the streets when illness, old age, or other hardships turned

life into hell. This type of order included options such as afliating one-self with ayamabushitemple when making the rounds in the country-side, maintaining a domicile in the city, utilizing the money-making



27/32

potential of new fads or trends, or renaming oneself bjinor boun-teous harvest dancer to avoid burdensome regulations. Thoughlargely unacknowledged by Tokugawa-period intellectuals and bureau-

crats, this informal, pragmatic order was certainly no less just, ration-al, or humane than the static scheme the bakufu deemed good andright. It did not, of course, easily lend itself to the transmission ofofcial edicts and the prompt arrest and punishment ofganninwrong-doers. But this hardly justies the view, common enough among eye-

witness chroniclers and still echoed in much scholarship today, thatganninand other religious street performers became increasingly cor-rupt and disorderly throughout the Tokugawa period. So it may haveseemed to members of the ruling class at the time, but we should not

uncritically accept their judgment.

REFERENCES

SOURCESCITED BYTITLE

Anei seny ruishH{TUnpublished. In Ky bakufu hikitsugi-sho1,, series 1, microlm

reel 24. In the possession of the National Diet Library.

Bokkai sanpitsu}[

Unpublished. In the possession of the Kokuritsu Kbunshokan (Nai-kaku Bunko).

Chishi oshirabe ni tsuki kakiage-ch G:$yUnpublished. In Machikata kakiage, Shiba machikata kakiage 4

!v. In Ky bakufu hikitsugi-sho1,, series 4,microlm reel 82. In the possession of the National Diet Library.

Edo fzoku smakurisKrU1917 In Edo sshosU , vol. 8, pp. 155. Tokyo: Edo Ssho

Kankkai.Edo machikata kakiage(Shitaya/Yanaka)s (4%_)

1988 Hayashi Rokurn@, et. al. eds. Tokyo: Shin Jinbutsu raisha.

Edo masago rokujutchsOYx

1979 InEnseki jisshuY), vol. 1, pp. 13158. Tokyo: Ch Kron-sha.

Fujiokaya nikkin%z

19871995 15 vols. Vol. 2 (1988); vol. 9 (1991); vol 15 (1995). Tokyo:Sanichi Shob.

Fken gkiJXz

1975 In Nihon zuihitsu taisei, series 2, vol. 19, pp. 1232.Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kbunkan.



28/32

Fzoku gahKc

1892 Vol. 47. Tokyo: Tyd.

Getsud kenbunsh}lT

1982 3 vols. (j/ch/ge). In Zoku Nihon zuititsu taisei, bek-kan (Kensei fzoku kenbunshCKlT, vols. 24).Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kbunkan.

Gofunai bik:,

1958 6 vols. Tokyo: Yzankaku.

Hennen sabetsu shi shiry shseit[T

19831995 21 vols. Vol. 6 (1986); vol. 7 (1987); vols. 1012 (1988).Tokyo: Sanichi Shob.

Hyakugi jutsuryakuoF

1981 In Shin enseki jisshuGY), vol. 4, pp. 209328. Tokyo: ChKronsha.

Ichiwa ichigonss

1978 In Nihon zuihitsu taisei(bekkan) (). Tokyo: Yoshi-kawa Kbunkan.

Jinrin chhki ^lbz1696 5 vols., bound together. Unpublished. In the possession of the

National Diet Library.

Kanten kenbunkilz1980 InEnseki jisshuY), vol. 5, pp. 31734. Tokyo: Ch Kron-

sha.

Kasshi yawax{

1978 6 vols. Tokyo: Heibonsha.

Kiyshran]1

1974 2 vols. Tokyo: Meicho Kankkai.

Koji ruien{

1970 SeijibuH

, vol. 3. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kbunkan.Kokkei zdanP

1978 2 vols. Tokyo: Yumani Shob.

Kouta no chimatauhf

1912 In Kinsei bungei sshoCkU, vol. 11, pp. 43160. Tokyo:Kokusho Kankkai.

Kurama gannin yurai kaki-utsushiN+X^Unpublished. In Machikata kakiage, Shiba machikata kakiage 4

!v. In Ky bakufu hikitsugi-sho1,, series 4,

microlm reel 82. In the possession of the National Diet Library.Mikikigusau

19851986 16 vols. Vol. 2, (1984); vol. 10, (1985). In Naikaku bunko shoz



29/32

shiseki skan(tokkan dai-2) ktU(?). Tokyo:Kyko Shoin.

Mimi-bukuro

1991 3 vols. Tokyo: Iwanami Bunko.Misemono zasshi]P

1991 Gunji Masakatsu us and Sekiyama Kazuo F[&, eds.Tokyo: Sanichi Shob.

Morisada mank!G{

1992 5 vols. Tokyo: Tkyd.

Nihon yochi GUnpublished. (Shinby bussetsu no bu, Yamashiro no kuni, Kurama-zan

no zu, Atagi-gunP[H

,[N+[o

,(Ru

). In the pos-session of the Kokuritsu Kobunshokan (Naikaku Bunko).

Nippo jishoF(Vocabulario da Lingoa de Iapam)1973 Tokyo: Benseisha. (Originally published in Nagasaki, 1603.)

Ofuregaki Kanp shsei:6T

1976 Takayanagi Shinz OX and Ishii Rysuke md, eds.Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Ofuregaki Tenp shsei:6T

1977 2 vols. Takayanagi Shinz and Ishii Rysuke, eds. Tokyo: Iwana-

mi Shoten.Oshioki-rei ruish:nN{T

19711973 Ishii Rysuke, ed. Vol. 4 (1971); vol. 8 (1972); vol. 11(1973). Tokyo: Meicho Shuppan.

Ruish seny{TUnpublished. In Ky bakufu hikitsugi-sho1,, series 3, microlm

reels 118124. In the possession of the National Diet Library.

Sabishiki za no nagusamio1]

1928 In Nihon kay shseiHT

, vol. 6, pp.12370. Tokyo: Shun-jsha.

Settsu meisho zueeol

1919 2 vols. Tokyo: Dai-Nihon Meisho Zue Kankkai.

Shiry-sh: Meiji shoki hisabetsu burakut[TgkH%

1986 Buraku Kaih Kenkyjo H%m, ed. Osaka: Kaih Shup-pansha.

Shis zasshikigP4

1981 In Naikaku bunko shoz shiseki skanktU, vols. 79.

Tokyo: Kyko Shoin.Shh jiroku

19641966 3 vols. Tokyo: Nihon Gakujutsu Shinkkai.



30/32

STRGTK (Shich torishimari ruish, gmune torishimari, kgu te-odori no bu)}_{T!F!S#H

Unpublished. In Ky bakufu hikitsugi-sho1,, series 1, microlm

reels 13738. In the possession of the National Diet Library.STRNDB (Shich torishimari ruish, ninbetsu dekasegi no bu) }_{T!^mNH

Unpublished. In Ky bakufu hikitsugi-sho1,, series 1, microlmreel 131. In the possession of the National Diet Library.

STRSSB (Shich torishimari ruish, shukke shajin no bu) }_{T!mB^H

1984 In Dai Nihon kinsei shiryCt[, vol. 16. Tokyo: TkyDaigaku Shuppankai.

Sunkoku zasshivP1907 8 vols., 3 supplements. Shizuoka: Yoshimi Shoten.

TankaiE}

1917 Tokyo: Kokusho Kankkai.

Tengen hikkiz

1980 In Shin enseki jisshuGY), vol. 1, pp. 155268. Tokyo: ChKronsha.

Tenp fsetsu kenbun hirokuKl1977 In Mikan zuihitsu hyakushuJ), vol. 5, pp. 145268.

Tokyo: Ch Kronsha.

Tenp shinseirokuG1978 In Mikan zuihitsu hyakushuJ) , vol. 12, pp. 2130.

Tokyo: Ch Kronsha.

Tokugawa kinrei-k8|[1959 Vol. 5, zensh. Ishii Rysuke, ed. Tokyo: Sbunsha.

Tky-shi saimin enkaku kiyX}Ww

1980 In Nihon shomin seikatsu shiry shseiWt[T, vol. 25,

pp. 63565. Tokyo: Sanichi Shob.Tky-shi shik, sangy-henX}t{!c%

1969 Vol. 13 (1969); vol. 29 (1989). Tokyo: Tky-to.

Ukiyo no arisama4u1970 Nihon shomin seikatsu shiry shseiWt[T, vol. 11

(seso, 1). Tokyo: Sanichi Shob.

Urami kanwa:1970 In Mikan zuihitsu hyakushuJ), vol. 9, pp. 320468.

Tokyo: Ch Kronsha.

Wasure nokori`uY1980 In Zoku enseki jisshuY), vol. 2, pp. 11350. Tokyo: Ch

Kronsha.



31/32

Zoku Edo sunagos{

1976 InEdo sunagos{, pp. 315511. Tokyo: Tkyd.

SOURCES

CITED BY

AUTHOR

S

NAME

GROEMER, Gerald1999 The arts of the gannin. Asian Folklore Studies58: 275320.

HASHIKAWATadashi1926 Kurama-dera shiN+t. Kyoto: Kurama-zan Kaihi Jimu-kyoku

Shuppan-bu.

HORI Ichirb s1953 Waga kuni minkan shink-shi no kenkyaRW=tu. 2

vols. Tokyo: Sgensha.ISHII Rysukemd

1968 Edo machikata no seidosuE. Tokyo: Shin Jinbutsuraisha.

1988 Edo no senminsutW. Tokyo: Akashi Shoten.

MINAMI Kazuo C1969 Edo no shakai kzsulr. Tokyo: Hanawa Shob.

1978 Bakumatsu Edo shakai no kenky1=slu . Tokyo:Yoshikawa Kbunkan.

MISUMI HaruoX[1968 Nihon buy-shi no kenkyEtu. Tokyo: Tkyd.

MITAMURAEngyo X,1958 Shisei no fzoku}muK. Tokyo: Seiab.

MORIMOTOJunichirIs1985 Tokugawa jidai no yminronuW. Tokyo: Miraisha.

NAKAMURAYukihiko _a1983 Chongare chobokure k hR, hU. In Nakamura

Yukihiko chojutsu-sh_aqoT, vol. 10, pp. 27288. Tokyo:Ch Kronsha.

NAKAO Kenji _1992 Edo shakai to Danzaemonslo=. Osaka: Kaih Shup-

pansha.

NAKAYAMATar _[1933 Sumiyoshi odori k W. Tabi to densetsu3: 2130.

NHK (Nihon hs kykai |l)

1992 (Fukkoku) Nihon miny taikan, chbu-hen (hokuriku chih)(P)W?!_H(@G). Tokyo: Nihon Hs ShuppanKykai.



32/32

NISHITSUNOI Masahirom1975 Gannin bzu no gein X^u. Nihon kay kenky15:

3442.

SAKAMOTO Tadahisa*b1992 Kinsei kki no Edo ni okeru shkysha tsei to toshi mondai

C9kusrPW;jo@}. Historia137: 5270.

SUZUKIAkikog{1994 Gannin no kenkyX^u. Masters thesis, Ty Daigaku.

TAKANO Toshihiko21989 Kinsei Nihon no kokka kenryoku to shkyCuBjo;.

Tokyo: Tky Daigaku Shuppankai.

TAKAYANAGI Kaneyoshi 1981 Gmune to Edo no daidgeiFosu. Tokyo: Kashiwa

Shob.1982 Edo no daidgeisu. Tokyo: Kashiwa Shob.

WIGMORE, John Henry, ed.1983 Law and Justice in Tokugawa Japan. Tokyo: University of Tokyo

Press.

YOSHIDANobuyuki ,;1994 Gannin bzu X^. In Mibun-teki shenX_:, Tsukamoto

Takashi [, ed. et. al., pp. 83126. Kyoto: Buraku MondaiKenkyjo Shuppanbu.


Documents

Groemer Gerald - A Short History of Gannin