The court and its provincesor long- term socioeconomic developments—that are missing from, or only very fragmentarily reflected
in, written documents. The agrarian historian Furushima Toshio is a pioneer in this field; see Tochi ni
kizamareta rekishi. Asaka Katsusuke et al., Rekishi ga tsukutta keikan surveys a geographically broader
scope. The changes to landscapes in historical eras are traced by the historical geographer Ono Tadahiro,
in Nihon kōko chirigaku (especially pp. 113–158) and by the environmental archaeologist Yasuda Yoshi-
nori, in Kankō kōkogaku koto- hajime (on paddy field agriculture, see especially pp. 181–220). Kinda
Akihiro and his study group impart precious insights on the jōri system; see Jōri to sonraku no rekishi chiri-
gaku kenkyū and A Landscape History of Japan. See also Jōrisei·kodai toshi kenkyūkai, Kodai no toshi to jōri.
An overview of data about the land allotments appears in Miyamoto Sukuu, “Ritsuryōsei-teki tochi
seido.” For all aspects of systematical research in historical geography we have Arizono Shōichirō et al.’s
very useful handbook, Rekishi chiri chōsa handobukku.
24 See Hayakawa Shōhachi, Ritsuryō kokka, 33.
25 In particular, the decrees of 723 and 743 were from time to time perceived like a dawn of private prop-
erty system on the archipelago. But “private” as well as “property” are notions with strong connota-
tions for our modern capitalist society, and we have to take care not to fall into anachronism. Overall, a
majority of scholars agree that control of the fundamental means of production in the agrarian society
of the archipelago—land and water—by central administration by no means showed a tendency to ease
up during the era in question. The characteristics of land policy during the era are discussed in Hay-
akawa Shōhachi, Ritsuryō kokka (see especially pp. 288–291); Oguchi Masashi, “Kodai 1,” 35–48; and,
in a broader social context, in Yoshida Takashi, Ritsuryō kokka to kodai no shakai. Another point worthy
of discussion in this context is the problem of so- called state- ownership of land or territory. Takahashi
Kazuki, “Shōensei to toshi·sonraku,” for example, uses this construct to describe ritsuryō land regula-
tions (polemizing against the concept of private landed property), while Kotani Hiroyuki, Rekishi no
hōhō, contends that the notion of state ownership is misleading, in that common property rights over
land were held by the ruling elite as a whole, with the state and its bureaucracy merely acting in a mana-
gerial capacity.
26 For the problem of continuities in agrarian land use see Murai Yasuhiko, Kodai kokka kaitai katei no
kenkyū, especially pp. 339–342.
27 Classic, and still fundamental, studies of the changing tax system (and the relations people of various
social layers held to the land being transformed together with the tax system) include Murai Yasuhiko,
Kodai kokka, which outlines future research, and Sakamoto Shōzō, Nihon ōchō kokka taisei ron, which laid
the basis for research on the ōchō state’s fiscal system. Sakamoto gives also a comprehensive introduction
to the post- ritsuryō era in Sekkan jidai.
28 An overview of this process appears in Detlev Taranczewski, “Einige Aspekte der Entstehung des pri-
vaten Grundeigentums im mittelalterlichen Japan.”
29 Murai Yasuhiko, Kodai kokka, 129–145 researched these so- called Gangyō kanden (public fields estab-
lished during the Gangyō era [877–885]).
30 Murai Yasuhiko’s classic Kodai kokka, 351–372 offers a clear and useful description of zōeki-/zōyakumen-
kei shōen.
31 A useful and vivid introduction into the history of shōen appears in Kudō Keiichi, Shōen no hitobito; for
an abridged English version, see “Shōen.”
32 The studies of Amino Yoshihiko, Nihon chūsei tochi seido shi no kenkyū are still the most comprehensive
introduction into the field of shōen and kōryō/kokugaryō, notwithstanding the recent critique of the
shōen–kōryō–sei approach raised by Takahashi Kazuki, “ ‘Shōen kōryō sei’ kara ‘chūsei shōensei’ e”;
Chūsei shōen sei to Kamakura bakufu, especially pp. 3–36; and “Shōensei.”
33 For a systematic understanding of shōen seiri rei, the classic studies by Sakamoto Shōzō (Sekkan jidai,
321–350) and Murai Yasuhiko (Kodai kokka, 224–236) are still highly recommended.
34 Zuryō is a phenomenon fundamentally important for explanation of the changes in power relations and
revenue system of the post- ritsuryō society. For the former, see Morita Tei, Zuryō; for the latter, Sakamoto
Shōzō, Nihon ōchō kokka, and Katsuyama Seiji, “Shūshu taikei no tenkan” are useful introductions. Con-
cerning the problems of agriculture and irrigation Hōgetsu Keigo, Chūsei kangaishi no kenkyū and Toda
Yoshimi, Nihon ryōshusei are essential essays. Okuno Nakahiko, “Kodai- teki kannō yori chūsei-teki kannō
e no tenkai” gives an overall view of agricultural policy in the center and its realization in the peripheries.
Insights into the relations between capital and provinces in the post- ritsuryō era can be found in Furuse
Natsuko, “Sekkan seiji,” especially pp. 107–156, and Terauchi Hiroshi, “Kizoku seiken to chihō shihai.”
35 On fugō and rōnin see Toda Yoshimi, Nihon ryōshusei, especially pp. 14–113. Okamoto Kenji, Furō to
tōzoku discusses aspects of furō-mobility and social deviance in the eighth and ninth centuries.