<論説>古墳時代甲冑の系統と授受

Abstract

古墳時代の主要な武具である短甲・頸甲・冑について、生産時の系統差に基づいて組み合わせの変遷と分布を検討し、その社会的意義の一端を論じた。鉄製甲冑の導入当初は生産と流通は独占的に掌握されており、その配布は各地の有力者の一元的な格差づけに寄与していたが、やがて新来工人集団の掌握と組織化を経て複数工房における生産とそれぞれの工房を掌握する上位集団による各地への配布体制が構築される。それは結果として甲冑の配布を差配した各集団の自己論理による独立的な生産・配布体制の成立へとつながり、甲冑を用いた一元的な格差づけの論理と社会的機能はその役割を終えていく。これまで倭王権による一元的な生産と配布が論じられていた鉄製甲冑について、王権内における複数勢力による生産とそれらと結びついた各地への配布の実態を論じ、多元的な甲冑の授受の様相を明らかにした。

It has been thought that almost all of the iron armor (cuirasses, pauldrons and helmets) produced during the Kofun period, which spans the 350 years from the middle of 3rd century to the end of the 6th century, was exclusively manufactured and distributed by the Yamato government and this played an important socialrol e in reinforcing the power of the Yamato regime. I make clear in this article that in the early stage of the manufacture of iron plate armor in the Japanese archipelago (from 4th century to the early in the 5th century), the Yamato government made and distributed iron armor monopolistically to distinguish statuses among the elites, but in the later stage of the manufacture of iron plate armor (from the middle 5th century to the end of 5th century) several groups produced and distributed armor for their own interests. With the formation of the systems in which several groups made and distributed iron armor for their own purposes iron armor gradually lost its earlier social role, and in the 6th century its role in distinguishing social statuses among the elites disappeared. First, I elucidate the changes in iron plate armor based on a typological analysis and establish 5 phases. On the basis of the typological analysis, it is clear that there were several systems of production for iron cuirasses during phase 4 and phase 5. Second, by considering the size of the parts and the number of rivets used in one cuirass from each production system, I clarify that in the early stage of manufacturing the cuirasses production in these systems was similar in each, but gradually individual characterist of each production system appeared and they finally grew different from one another. Third, considering the distribution of armor from each production system, I reveal that although armor from each production system has been excavated from throughout the main areas controlled by the Yamato government and southern part of Korean peninsula, armor from a particular production system is often discovered in one specific region. This indicates that the production and distribution of iron armor was carried out on the basis of a production system. Through this analysis, I reached the conclusion that the difference in production systems of iron armor means that a different workshop produced them, and that the elite groups that operated workshops produced and distributed iron armor for their own purposes. Based on the above, transitions of iron armor into 5 phases can be summarized in the following manner. Phase 1 (from the early half of 4th century to the late in the 4th century): iron armor was made exclusively and a limited, small number of the elite obtained iron armor and used it as funerary goods their own tumuli. Phase 2 (from the end of 4th century to the beginning of 5th century): a new type of cuirass, called sankakuban kawatoji tankō, which signified lower status than the pre-existing type of cuirass known as chōhōban kawatoji tankō, appeared, and a status distinction among the elites based on the combination of iron armor (cuirass, pauldron and helmet) began. Phase 3 (early 5th century): the production of chōhōban kawatoji tankō ceased, and the combination of cuirass (sankakuban kawatoji tankō) and accompanying helmet alone differentiated the elites. Phase 4 (the middle 5th century): severalgroups independently began to produce and distribute iron armor for their own purposes. Phase 5 (the late 5th century): independent production and distribution systems conducted by several groups were reorganized and the expression of status differences based on different combinations of iron armor also ended.

The independent production and distribution systems conducted by severalgroups in phases 4 and 5 indicated the preliminary situation in the 6th century when severalcl ans served the Yamato government in various capacities. The results of this research demonstrate trends of the powerful groups that constituted the Yamato government, and they are important in considering this aspect of state formation in Japan.