Fujita H., translated by D. Eason
early modern cartographic history, particularly the work on the cadastral maps produced coun-
trywide at the start of the Meiji era.
In place of a conclusion—historical geography and reconstruction after
the Great East Japan Earthquake
As related in the preceding pages, cadastral maps attached to land registries produced almost
simultaneously across the country during the opening years of the Meiji period provide sources
unique to the study of historical geography in Japan. Scholars have used these maps to recon-
struct landscapes from the classical to early modern periods, under the assumption that the land-
scape has remained unchanged throughout this long span. But this assumption is problematic,
and yet almost entirely unexamined by any research to date. Addressing this issue necessitates
positioning cadastral maps within the overall history of map production stretching back to the
classical age. Henceforth, scholars must also engage in more rigorous and more extensive source
criticism of pictorial works.
In the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake of 2011, as I considered the matter of reconstruc-
tion from the position of historical geography, I became aware of the potential of the early Meiji
cadastral maps as historical sources for examining subsequent micro- level changes. That is, while
we historical geographers had hitherto seen cadastral maps as a way to move backward in time, to
earlier eras, we are now also beginning to see them as tools for achieving just the opposite—for
tracing the changes that have brought us from the Meiji period to the present.^32
Notes
1 Nihon chishi kenkyūjo, Chirigaku jiten, 190.
2 The format used for addresses in these registers (for example, “Ashiya City, ward, 5 banchi”) dates
back to the Meiji era, in contrast to the system now employed for residential addresses (for example,
“Ashiya City, ward, 2–3”), which is based on a law governing residential nomenclature enacted
in 1962.
3 See Kinda Akihiro, Jōri to sonraku no rekishi chirigaku kenkyū.
4 See Fujita Hirotsugu, “Chirigaku kara mita tōshiteki na ba: Kaiga shiryō ni ‘Tōshi’ keikan o saguru”; or
“Chisekizu o mochiita keikan fukugen to saigai fukko.”
5 Fujioka Kenjirō, Kōza Nihon chirigaku 1: Sōron to kenkyūhō; Kōza Nihon chirigaku 2: Kodai toshi Kōza;
Kōza Nihon chirigaku 3: Rekishiteki tōshi; Kōza Nihon chirigaku 4: Sonraku to kaihatsu; Kōza Nihon chirigaku
5: Seisan to ryūtsū.
6 Yasuda Yoshinori, Kankyō kōkogaku koto- hajime.
7 Kusaka Masayoshi, Heiya no chikei kankyō, and Rekishi jidai no chikei kankyō. Takahashi Manabu, Heiya no
kankyō kōkogaku.
8 For more on this, see Chapter 6 of this volume.
9 Senda Minoru, Kodai Nihon no rekishi chirigaku- teki kenkyū.
10 Kishi Toshio, Kodai kyuto no tankyū and Nihon kodai kyuto no kenkyū. See also Hayashibe Hitoshi,
“Fujiwara- kyō no jōbōsei: Sono jitsuzō to igi.”
11 Since 2005, excavations of remains at Shimomitsuhashi have advanced, revealing that the jōbō system
extended southward beyond Kujō. As a result of this “Jūjō theory,” new issues have arisen with regard
to the movement of the capital to Heian (Kyoto). Scholars continue to monitor the progress of this
discussion.
12 Inoue Kazuto, Nihon kodai tojosei no kenkyū: Furjiwarakyo Heijō-kyō no shiteki igi.
13 Asada Makiko, “Heijō-kyo gekyō no keikaku- shaku ni kansuru ichikōsatsu.”
14 Koaza in the Nara Basin can be verified by maps on a scale of 1:5000. See Nara kenritsu Kashihara
kokogaku kenkyūsho, Yamato no kuni jōri fukugenzu: Yamato no kuni Jōri no sōgōteki kenkyū chizu hen.
15 Two types of approach have been utilized for counting the rows of lots in each individual ri. The first,
the chidori method, required reaching the end of a column, moving over to an adjacent lot, and then
doubling back in the opposite direction, as with the blocks in city grids. The competing heikō style, in