From classical to medieval?surrounding or supporting him—but rather the chieftain of the imperial family. This is the
meaning of rule by retired emperors (insei), an era that has in general been seen to last from 1086
to 1185. It was characterized not just by the resurgence of the imperial family, but in fact by a
new type of rule, one that can be best described as cooperative rulership between numerous
powerful blocs. This is the essence of the kenmon theory, to which we will now turn.
Kenmon taisei: a theory of collaborative rule
In the 1960s, the Japanese historian Kuroda Toshio (1926–1993) began advocating that Japan’s
ruling structures from the late eleventh through the fifteenth centuries were characterized by a
sharing of power among several elite groups known as kenmon (“gates of power”). Originally
consisting of the imperial family, the Fujiwara, and the elite temples, Kuroda saw these various
powers as developing into three distinct groups by the late twelfth century: court nobles (kōke or
kuge, merging the imperial family with influential courtiers), temples and shrines (jisha or sōke),
and the warrior aristocracy (buke). While occasionally in competition, these blocs shared the
responsibilities of governance in three spheres—court, religious, and military matters—but also
operated collaboratively in an interdependent manner under the auspices of the imperial state.^38
One of the main characteristics of a kenmon was, according to Kuroda, that they used private
assets to perform the functions of government, issuing orders in matters of governance from
their own administrative headquarters. The kenmon’s headquarters, then, took on a quasi- official
role, as orders were issued to deal with matters of state as well. The first institutions to develop
such organs were the major temples and the Fujiwara, followed eventually by retired emperors
who established the in- no-chō (the retired emperor’s administrative headquarters). By the late
twelfth century, elite warriors also followed suit culminating with the establishment of the
Kamakura Bakufu. By the same token, these elites also maintained their own military retainers,
who were used both for personal protection of assets and to maintain the peace in a more official
capacity. Finally, the kenmon had substantial judicial rights over their own lineage as well over
their various assets. Accordingly, succession within a kenmon temple, although theoretically the
prerogative of the emperor or its main patron, was decided by its members, just as the Northern
Fujiwara handled its own succession to the chieftainship.^39 For example, the appointment of the
head abbot of the Fujiwara family temple, Kōfukuji, was made by the Fujiwara chieftain, though
the successful appointee was commonly recommended by the clergy. If a different monk was
appointed, it would invariably result in protests from the temple. In 1100, perhaps already
sensing the weakening of the Fujiwara regent line following the death of Morozane the previous
year, Shirakawa appointed the monk Hanshun assistant head abbot at Kōfukuji even though he
had been trained primarily in the school of Shingon. The clergy was clearly dissatisfied, and the
tensions only increased when Hanshun was given the honor of leading the important Yuima
ceremony the following year. Shortly thereafter, some retainers of Shirakawa were accused of
having encroached on Kōfukuji property, which resulted in outright brawls between factions
within the temple as well as divine protests that lasted into 1103. In the end, Shirakawa could not
impose his will or replace Fujiwara sons as abbots at Kōfukuji, but his attempts to extend his
influence reflects the two most important trends in the early twelfth century: the increasing
power of the retired emperor and the co- dependence of the courtly, religious, and military
spheres.^40
The impact of such events on the bureaucratic hierarchy was substantial, since the Fujiwara
chieftain normally served as regent, and the abbot of a major monastery would serve as the cer-
emonial master at rituals for the court, the emperor, or the state. But this all played out based on
private assets and supporters, and not by virtue of hierarchical titles at court. The retired emperor