<論説>豊臣政権の訴訟対応 : 畿内・近国の村落出訴を中心に

Abstract

本稿では、豊臣政権の訴訟処理体制について考察した。その意図は、訴訟対応の様相の解明が、研究史上で等閑視されてきた政権の内部構造に迫ることを可能にし、この時期の「公儀」の正当性を支えた基盤を提示することにつながるところにある。当時、政権の直接支配下にあった畿内・近国社会では、給人や代官の百姓に対する非分や、村落間の用益相論が権力の相対すべき主要な課題であった。近隣の村や代官らによる仲裁では事態が収まらない場合、その解決は中央の政権に求められた。政権側は増田長盛を中心とする奉行が対応する体制を徐々に形成し、天正十六年(一五八八) 前後からは二名、文禄三年(一五九四) 前後からは三名の奉行によって訴訟を処理した。社会の望んだ保証力と唯一性を有した裁定を奉行が行うことで、政権の統治方式は社会に浸透したと評価できよう。

This article examines the system of the disposition of legal proceedings during the regime of Toyotomi Hideyoshi. The reason for this examination is that by clarifying how the Toyotomi regime dealt with legal proceedings, it is possible to approach an understanding of the internal structure of the regime, which has not previously been examined, and at the same time we will be able to discern the foundation of the legitimacy of its kogi (official public) character. Moreover, in making this examination, I also bear in mind there is an intimate relationship between political authority's response in legal proceedings and warfare, and that in certain respects social demands and customs regulated this response. In the first section, I examine the response to legal proceeding in the earlier period of the regime. In legal proceedings involving the immediate environs of Kyoto, there were many cases of estate holders appealing directly to Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Hideyoshi himself passing judgment on them. On the other hand, in the Kinai and neighboring areas, kyunin (landed retainers of the Toyotomi regime) and deputies conducted the arbitration. It is thought that the response of these kyunin and deputies continued thereafter, but in most cases the procedures for the legal proceedings was in a simplified form, and it appears that their efficacy was weakened. In the second section, I examine the response in legal proceeding in the middle period of the regime. At this time, the indivisibility of the villages of the kyunin and deputies and disputes between villages over their products were the chief issues that the authorities needed to deal with. When the arbitration provided by a neighboring village or a deputy of the regime could not solve an issue, a solution was sought from the central Toyotomi authorities. As a result, from circa Tensho 16 (1588) a system dealing with legal proceedings led by Mashita Nagamori and another commissioner (one of either Natsuka Masaie, Ishida Mitsunari, or Asano Nagayoshi) was created. However, as the commissioners were saddled with many responsibilities, they were unable to concentrate on legal proceedings. In addition, as they did not prepare procedures to coordinate their collective opinions, they had not yet formed a group and were a stage swayed by individual circumstances. In the third section, I examine the response to legal proceedings in the latter stage of the regime. It is thought that the internal structure of the regime changed under the influence of the invasion of Korea and the Hidetsugtu incident. Within this changed structure, one can see changes from circa Bunroku 3 (1593) at Fushimi, which the regime had made its new headquarters, and a system of responding to legal proceedings headed by three commissioners, including Mashita Nagamori, Natsuka Masaie and either Ishida Mitsunari or Gen'i, was begun. Furthermore, meetings began to be held within the main castle and collective operation as a group was established. Summarizing the results of the above examination, one cannot discern a deliberate policy from Toyotomi regime's methods of dealing with legal proceedings. In the Kinai region (during the Sengoku period, the populace sought judgments that were guaranteed and absolute. The Toyotomi regime acquired legitimacy as a public institution by dealing with legal proceedings in response to these demands, and its method of rule thus spread throughout society. It can be concluded that the Toyotomi regime's handling of legal proceedings occurred as the system of rule was being organized under the influence of social and political circumstances.