魏晉南北朝の客と部曲

Abstract

This is a translation into Japanese from the first half of the Chinese text written by Prof. Tang Chang-ru of Wuhan 武漢 University who presented briefly its contents and those of the second part on March 11, 1981 at the Research Institute for Humanistic Studies of Kyoto University. The author states at first that in the period of the Three Kingdoms a great many bankrupt peasants had been drawn under the control of the landlords (haoqiang 豪強) as their dependents called ke 客 or dianke (佃客), and that such a social situation persisted and developed further in South China until the end of the Southern Dynasties, as well as in North China until at least 485 A.D. On the other hand, the government of the Jin dynasty specified by legislation the number of dependents the landlords could have, and it made an effort to bring them back under its direct control. The result was not very succesful, but we should pay attention to the fact that the succeeding dynasties never stopped enforcing the law. In 485, the government of the Northern Wei 北魏 Dynasty established two systems of law called the Sanzhangzhi 三長制 and the Juntianzhi 均田制, which enabled it to get back a great many tenants under its control and to levy taxes on them in exchange for giving them a fixed field. It is difficult, indeed, to find the existence of ke in the historical materials at that time, but if we call to mind the fact that the Juntianzhi alowed the landlords to have some fields under the name of their slaves, it would seem certain that the slaves were mixed in reality with the tenants called at that time tongli 僮隷. The meaning of tongli is equal to puli 僕隷 who were allowed to receive their fields by the law established at the beginning of the Sui 隋 period. The title of puli contained surely the buqu, the lowly class who had been emancipated from slavery by the edict promulgated in 577 by the Emperor Wu 武帝 of the Zhou 周 dynasty. Therefore, in North China there were many feudal dependents called tongli, puli, or buqu even after 485, and we find again the numerous ke in the historical texts of the Sui period. But it is necessary to keep in mind that the bonds between the landlords and their dependents were not always clearly specified in the legislation of the Six Dynasties and that this was a characteristic of Chinese feudalism. The second part of the author's text will be translated and published in the Tohogaku 東方學, No. 63.