1
Geographical Review of JapanVol. 62 (Ser. B), No. 1, 14-34, 1988
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan:
With Special Reference to Shirakawa-go
Tsunetoshi MIZOGUCHI*
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to present the importance of slash-and-burn fields in the development of agricultural land in Japan. Slash-and-burn cultivation was a common and important land use pattern in mountainous areas throughout Japan until the Second World War. It has been explained in
previous studies that slash-and-burn fields decreased with the passage of time, but the present study shows the opposite. That is to say, slash-and-burn fields in fact increased from the early Tokugawa
period (the 17th century) to the late Meiji period (the late 19th century). Only after the late Meiji period did they begin to decrease, becoming extinct in a fairly short time.
The main location of slash-and-burn fields changed from near residential sections to land farther away, and from gentler slopes to steeper slopes. When changes in agricultural land use took place , almost all the slash-and-burn fields were turned into forest, dry fields or wasteland, not into paddy fields.
As for the cultivators of slash-and-burn fields, it has been said that while the large-scale land owners engaged in cultivating paddy fields and dry fields, it was small-scale land owners or the "serf"
peasants who engaged in slash-and-burn cultivation. The author, however, wants to point out that both land owners and "serf" peasants were engaged in cultivating slash-and-burn fields. Every peasant had slash-and-burn fields at several different places, and when the burning season came, those who had slash-and-burn fields next to each other worked together. There were also many village-owned slash-and-burn fields in those days. The typical differentiation of social strata among peasants which appeared in paddy field villages, was not found in the slash-and-burn field villages.
Key words: slash-and-burn field, land check survey, land tenure, mountainous area, peasants.
I. INTRODUCTION
It is an indisputable fact that Japan has developed under a social and economic system based
on rice production. Most historical documents were prepared at the order of statesmen who were the leaders in the rice-producing society, and this fact has been directly reflected on our social and historical studies. Most discussion in those areas has been done unquestioningly from the rice-centered view of history. However, a number of notable studies have recently ap
peared in various fields of academic inquiry on such a rice-centered view. For example, MIYAMOTO (1964), in the field of folklore, pointed out the existence of sangaku-min (mountain
people) or hatasaku-min (dry-field people) in ad
dition to the heichi-min (flatland people) who de
pended on rice. SASAKI (1971), in cultural anthropology, demonstrated the existence of yakihata (slash-and-burn field) culture in the Jomon
period (before 300 B.C.), and in a later work (1972) showed a wide distribution of slash-and
- burn field areas in the early Showa period
(1926-50s). Historian AMINO (1980) investigated the life of commoners in the Medieval period whose livelihood was supported not only by rice but also by dry-field crops. HATAI's study (1981) revealed hayashida (dry rice fields in wooded areas) operated in the eighth to fifteenth century. KURODA (1984) published an epochal study of reclamation history in Medieval Japan. He ar
gued for the existence of various kind of dry field, and pointed out that they played a very im
portant role in peasant subsistence. In the field
* College of Liberal Arts, Toyama University, Toyama City, Japan 930 .
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 15
of geography, FUJITA (1981) and TANAKA (1979, 80, 81) studied forestry and mountain villages, and TABATA (1978) investigated kijishi (wood
- worker) villages. All of these studies give us instructive clues to the actual conditions of upland villages.
The present author came to have some doubts about the rice-centered view of history through two studies of his own, centered in Nagano Prefecture (1970) and in Yamanashi Prefecture
(1973). He found not a few villages developed with no rice field at all, particularly in the mountain areas. After that he focused his study on the development of the dry-field villages and reported his findings in two papers: one on peddling activities of the lower class peasants (1976), the other on wholesale functions of the upper class
peasants (1979).Among the various types of dry field, slash
- and-burn fields used to be of great significance for agricultural land utilization in Japan. Studies
of Tsubakiyama, Kochi Prefecture (FUKUI, 1974) and on Narada, Yamanashi Prefecture
(FUKAZAWA, 1975), vividly depict the actual operation of slash-and-burn agriculture. Slash
- and-burn fields in Japan died out in the 1960's, largely because of increasing opportunities for non-agricultural work. Many farmers stopped slash-and-burn agriculture to engage in road or dam construction. There are many other mono
graphs which describe the last days of slash-and- burn agriculture (AOGA, 1935; UENO, 1938;
SOMA, 1953, 56, 59; YOKOKAWA, 1952; UESHIMA, 1956; KODA, 1956; FUTAGAMI, 1958).
Apart from these individual case studies, some studies have been attempted from a country-wide
point of view. In the early Showa period YANAGIDA (1938) published Sanson seikatsu no kenkyu
(Research on life in mountain villages), in which information on regional names for slash-and
- burn fields and practices of slash-and-burn cul
tivation was collected from all over the country. Then in 1936, the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry published a report called "Investigation into Yakihata and Kirikaebata (a variation of slash-and-burn field)" which noted the area and ownership of slash-and-burn fields by village, town, city and prefecture and showed the distribution of major crops planted there. By using these data, YAMAGUCHI, S. (1938) and
YAMAGUCHI, Y. (1939, 40) reported on the distribution of slash-and-burn fields. The census of 1950 was the last to contain statistical data on slash-and-burn fields. Distribution and characteristics of the major slash-and-burn field areas around 1950 were studied in detail by
SAWAMURA (1948-49), SOMA (1962) and SASAKI
(1966, 1968 a, b). SOMA obtained the data through a questionnaire to agricultural settlements in Shikoku. SASAKI classified Japan's slash-and-burn field into five types (araki, kano, nagihata, koba and konsai) by considering the differences of agricultural management. Folklorist NOMOTO (1984) investigated in detail the oral tradition, arts, religious life and so on of slash-and-burn field cultivating people.
We can obtain ample figures for slash-and- burn agriculture after the Meiji period
(1868-1912) from these studies mentioned above. However, insufficient study has been made of slash-and-burn agriculture before the Meiji period. Unfortunately there were no
country-wide descriptions about slash-and-burn
period. The only historical documents in which country-wide, descriptions about slash-and-burn fields can be obtained are in Nihon Rinseishi
Shiryo (Documents of Forestry History in Japan). Here we can see that slash-and-burn fields were widely distributed from Tohoku to Kyushu except in big town areas, but information on acreage is lacking. At the village level, however, we can trace the development of slash
-and-burn fields from the early Tokugawa
(1600-1867) to Meiji period by analyzing the kenchi-cho1) or land check surveys and Meiji cadasters. The author has found kenchi-cho in which slash-and-burn fields were registered in Hayakawa, Yamanashi Prefecture (MIZOGUSHI 1982) and Shirakawa-go, Gifu Prefecture (1986): After that, he was able to obtain data from Meiji cadasters in both areas. In this paper the author has selected Shirakawa-go as the study area, and will extend the discussion to consider the following two points. The first one is to clarify the transformation of slash-and-burn fields in premodern days. The other is to investigate the change in the land tenure system at that time.
Table 1 gives some general information about the villages in Shirakawa-go. The large size of the household and duolocal residence in Nakagiri
16 T. MIZOGUCHI
Table 1 Villages in Shirakawa-go (1870)
Source: Hidago Fudoki
Note: 1se equals 0.0245 acre.
were discussed by EMA (1975) and BEFU (1968 a, b). Wet rice cultivation, the preferred form of agriculture, was possible only in negligibly small
portions of the valleys. In place of rice, hie and awa (species of millet), wheat, and beans provided the staples. These were grown on dry permanent upland fields and especially on slopes of hills cleared by the slash-and-burn technique. The acreage of slash-and-burn fields ranged from
98se (1se=0.0245 acre) in Koshirakawa to 1,629se in Iijima. Acreage per household ranged from 9se of Ogimachi to 216se of Ushikubi. Clearly, all these villages depended not a little
on slash-and-burn agriculture.
II. DEVELOPMENT OF
SLASH-AND-BURN FIELDS
It is generally believed in the agricultural his
tory of Japan that slash-and-burn fields have
decreased steadily with the passage of time
(ONO, 1942; KIMURA, 1980). Indeed, after the late Meiji period (1880s), slash-and-burn fields did decrease, and rapidly went out of existence
just after the Second World War. Figures 1, 2, 3 show the declining trend at that time. The author, however, believes that before the Meiji
period, as population grew, the area of slash- and-burn fields also grew. This hypothesis will
be discussed in the following sections.
1. Changes in the location of slash-and-burn
fields
It has been said that slash-and-burn fields were located far from residential areas, the land near
houses tending to be used for paddy fields or dry fields (ONO, 1942). The western slopes of Mt. Hakusan, Ishikawa Prefecture, are known to have been a dezukuri area where farmers had
seasonal or permanent cabins for slash-and-burn agriculture. These cabins were scattered over the slopes of the mountain (Oguchi-mura, 1979; Shiramine-mura,1962). On the other hand, some studies report that slash-and-burn agriculture was practiced nearer to settlements. SASAKI
showed that there were some slash-and-burn fields in places within 10-20 minutes' walk from houses in Itsuki village, Kumamoto Prefecture in the 1930s (SASAKI, 1972).
It is important to know where slash-and-burn fields were cultivated and how they changed over time. Therefore, special attention should be given to the location of slash-and-burn fields and changes therein. This can be done by checking the koaza (sub-units of a village) in Shirakawa-go.
The basic data are found in the Genroku kenchi-cho (1694), An'ei shinden-kenchi-cho
(check land surveys for new fields) (1774), and Meiji cadasters (1888), as well as drawings of mountains in the Kyoho era (1720s) and Tempo era (1830s) and cadastral maps of Meiji 21
(1888)2).The Genroku kenchi-cho and other surveys in
Shirakawa-go list the koaza in each village and
provide us with the classification of land, the grade of land fertility, the acreage and the hitsu (entry) registrants. The cadasters called Tochidaicho made in the Meiji period are still used for
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 17
Figure 1. Distribution of slash-and-burn fields (1889)Source: Noji-chosahyo
Figure 2. Distribution of slash-and-burn fields (1936)Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Foresty "Investigation into yakihata and kirikaebata" (1936)
Figure 3. Distribution of slash-and-burn fields (1950)Source: Agricultural Census of Japan, 1950
18 T. MIZOGUCHI
many administrative purposes. By comparing
these two source materials, we can trace changes in the area and location of some slash-and-burn fields. The Meiji cadasters generally list a greater number of koaza than the kenchi-cho, due to an expansion of cultivated land in the late Tokugawa and the early Meiji periods; there are also cases in which koaza ceased to exist because of name changes or mergers with other koaza3).
When we observe the changes in location and
scale of slash-and-burn fields from the early
Tokugawa period onward, we can divide the
whole era into four periods:
(1) First period (before 1690s): Comparatively small scale slash-and-burn fields located near and around houses. Among the 9 villages-Maki, Hogiwaki, Notani, Omaki, Shima, Iijima, Okubo, Uchigato and Ukegahara-where slash-and
- burn fields were registered in the kenchi-cho of 1694, Iijima had the most land in total (1,794 entries, 2,762se) and Notani had the smallest amount of land (61 entries, 99 se). Though all the villages had paddy fields, paddy as a percentage of the total cultivated land (paddy field/paddy field+dry field+slash-and-burn field) was extremely low. Only in Hogiwaki does it exceed 50%, with Omaki and Iijima 30-40%, Maki, Notani, Shima and Okubo 10-30%, and
Uchigato and Ukegahara less than 10%. The villages bordering the Sho River had comparatively higher percentages of paddy fields. The
percentage of slash-and-burn fields was particularly high in the villages of Ukegahara (56.5%), Uchigato (52.9%) and Maki (36.6%).
Considering location, slash-and-burn fields were generally located on the outer limits of the
paddy fields or dry fields, but in some villages (excepting Hogiwaki, Notani and Iijima) they were found in the same koaza where houses were located. Also, Maki and Uchigato had slash-and
- burn fields in the same koaza where paddy fields and non-paddy fields were located. Only Okubo and Ukegahara had slash-and-burn fields in different koaza from those of paddy fields or dry fields, but these slash-and-burn fields were not far from the residential area.
(2) Second period (1690s-1770s): After 1694, the villages in Shirakawa-go reclaimed many areas for slash-and-burn fields. The number of
koaza with slash-and-burn fields shown on the
Kyoho mountain drawing (1720s) is almost double that in the Genroku kenchi-cho (1690s). All
the villages except Hogiwaki reclaimed yakihata in different koaza from those of the Genroku period.
As concerns the change in acreage from the 1690s to the 1770s, though two of the eight villages surveyed-Ukegahara (from 15 entries, 197se to 4 entries, 110se) and Iijima (from 102 entries, 578se to 102 entries, 544se)-decreased their slash-and-burn fields, the six other villages increased them. The figures are: Omaki (from 9 entries, 25se to 10 entries, 200se), Maki (from 11 entries, 75se to 10 entries, 185se), Shima
(from 4 entries, 8se to 8 entries, 100se), Okubo (from 11 entries, 75se to 7 entries, 100se), Notani (from 4 entries, 27se to 5 entries, 50se) and Uchigato (from 13 entries, 89se to 13 entries, 92se). In the case of Omaki, slash-and-burn fields increased eightfold during this period. Furthermore, the acreage per entry of slash-and
-burn fields increased. The mean acreage per piece in the eight villages was 6se 12bu (1se=30bu) in the Genroku era, but was again enlarged to 8se 23bu in the An'ei era.
Next, the characteristics of the location of slash-and-burn fields are as follows: 1) New slash-and-burn fields were reclaimed in new koaza. Some of these koaza can be seen in the Kyoho mountain drawing, so it can be said that they had already been reclaimed before the Kyoho era
(1710s). 2) The location of new slash-and-burn fields was rather far from the residential area. While the Kyoho mountain drawings (e.g. Figure 4) were made by plane projection and this
showed ridges of mountains, valleys, roads, oaza
(larger sections of a village), koaza, and marked for slash-and-burn fields, the Tempo mountain drawings (e.g. Figure 5) were drawn from bird'seye view and did not convey as much information. Koaza with slash-and-burn fields which ap
peared on both maps might be taken as established places for slash-and-burn fields,
- for example, Ohira in Maki village; Shiushi in Notani; Tanosora in Omaki; Yamashita, Ozaki, Shimotazaka, Sotobatoge in Iijima; Iranoma in Okubo; Daikokudo in Uchigato; Okura in Ukegahara, etc.
(3) Third period (1777-1888); During the latter half of the Tokugawa period, many slash-
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 19
Figure 4. Kyoho mountain drawing for Omaki village (1720s)
Figure 5. Tempo mountain drawing for Omaki village (1830s)
20 T. MIZOGUCHI
and-burn fields were created as mentioned above. Furthermore, the cadasters for Meiji 21
(1888) reveal a drastic expansion of slash-and- burn fields during the late Tokugawa and early
Meiji periods. The gross areas of slash-and-burn fields in the 20 villages surveyed changed from 7,461se in 1777 to 57,359se in 1888. Kazura had the largest area (9,840se) in 1888, Ushikubi the second largest (8,320se), followed by Okubo
(8,090se), Iijima (5,800se) and so on. As Kazura had only 100se in 1777, this presents a 98-fold increase over the period.
Concerning the location of slash-and-burn
fields each village's total number of koaza where
there were slash-and-burn fields increased. Main
sites for slash-and-burn fields shifted from koa
za near houses or their surroundings to those in remote mountainous areas. No koaza where both
slash-and-burn fields and houses were located are
to be found.
In 1694, there were 9 entries (214se 18bu) of slash-and-burn field in the village of Omaki (30bu=1se, 1bu=3.3m2 or 1 tsubo). The koaza with slash-and-burn fields-Ueshima, Notani and Tanosora-were near the settlements. Then, in 1774, new slash-and-burn fields were
reclaimed in Kanaya (2 entries, 100se), Osuna
(1 entry, 250se) and Kohachiro (1 entry, 50se). Finally, by 1888, the area of slash-and-burn fields had expanded six times over that of 1774. While their acreage decreased in the koaza where they had been in 1694, in the new koaza with slash-and-burn fields like Osuna or Kohachiro the acreage grew significantly after 1774. In the koaza which did not appear in the An'ei shinden kenchi-cho but appeared in the Tempo mountain drawings, many slash-and-burn fields were reclaimed: 319se in Yokotochi, 292se in Konotani, and 195se in Kibishima. In the mountainous area near residential areas, slash-and
- burn fields were also reclaimed, but their acreage was small: 60se in Onoyama, 29se in
Hirakitani and 4se in Ogihara (Table 2 and Figure 6).
The characteristics of dry fields must also be
considered here. In eight villages-Maki, Nota
ni, Omaki, Okubo, Uchigato, Tsubakihara,
Ukegahara and Ashikura-the gross area of dry
fields grew from 2,779se in 1774 to 10,579se
in 1888. Most new dry fields were cultivated on
Figure 6. Transition of koaza where slash-and-burn
fields exsisted in Omaki village
mountain slopes. So it is assumed that these dry
fields were used for slash-and-burn agriculture
at first, and then changed to dry fields.
(4) Fourth period (after 1888): After the most prosperous time for slash-and-burn agriculture in the late Meiji period, acreage decreased, and
just after the Second World War it disappeared rapidly. These slash-and-burn fields turned not into paddy fields but to forests or dry fields. Table 3 shows the change in land-use pattern in Kitani village after 1888. All slash-and-burn fields changed to forests or dry fields. More than half of previous dry fields were transformed into forests. This illustrates the abandonment of cultivated land in the mountain area due to the sharp decline in population: from 161 in 1907 to 110 in 1937, 42 in 1965, and 21 in 1985. In the
Slas
h-an
d-B
urn
Fiel
d C
ultiv
atio
n in
Pre
-Mod
ern
Japa
n 21
Tab
le
2.
Cha
nge
in
land
-use
by
ko
aza
in
Om
aki
villa
ge
Not
e:
(#):
N
o,
of
hits
u (e
ntri
es)
22 T. MIZOGUCHI
Table 3 Change in land-use in Kitani after 1888
Note: 1se=30bu=0.025 acre
present day, only paddy fields or dry fields are to be seen near the residential areas.
2. Location and configuration of each slash
and-burn field in 1888
The location of slash-and-burn fields and
changes by koaza were outlined in the previous
section. In this section, an attempt is made to
show the location and shape of each separately
registered slash-and-burn field. Table 4 and
Figure 7 have been made from data in cadasters
and land maps.
(1) Acreage per field ; 630 slash-and-burn fields were registered in the 1888 cadasters of all the villages except Ogimachi in Shirakawa-go.
The acreage is 60,680se in total, so that the
average acreage of one slash-and-burn field is 96
s e. If the figures are compared across villages,
the highest average acreage of a slash-and-burn field is the 381se for Okubo and the lowest is
13se for Hatogaya.
The difference in average acreage was caused
not only by location but also by land tenure system. Some slash-and-burn fields were owned by villages, and others by individuals. Generally speaking, slash-and-burn fields in the mountains had larger acreage than those in the plains. Privately owned slash-and-burn fields tended to
have smaller acreage than those possessed collectively by villages. For example, among the four villages (Hirase, Ushikubi, Ashikura and Okubo) in which the average slash-and-burn field had more than 200se, the first three villages had no private slash-and-burn fields. In Okubo, while 14 of the 21 slash-and-burn fields were villageowned and their mean acreage was 550se, that of the other seven in private ownership was only 39se.
(2) Altitude: The Sho River flows from south to north. The altitude of Ogami, located in the southernmost part of Shirakawa-go, is 700m above sea level, and that of Koshirakawa in the northernmost part is 350m.
Among the 630 slash-and-burn fields, 343 were
located at 700-1,000m, 189 at 500-700m. The
highest was located at an altitude of 1,450m in
Iratani in Ushikubi village, and the lowest one
at 430m in Koshimae in Koshirakawa. Each vil
lage had its settlement in the lowest part of the
village area. The difference in altitude between
the settlement and its slash-and-burn fields varies
from 950m in Ashikura to 0m in Hatogaya.
(3) Distance from the settlement to slash-and- burn field: By measuring the distance on a
1/25,000 topographical map, it can be found that
all the villages had their slash-and-burn fields within a range of a 5km radius from their settlements. Furthermore, 90% of them were located within 3km, and 41% of them were within 1km. This result shows that slash-and-burn fields were located nearer to the settlements than had been assumed before.
(4) Topography: The topography of slash-and- burn fields can be classified into three types:
ridge, slope and valley-side. 437 slash-and-burn fields (69%) were on the slope, 133 (21%) were on the ridge and 60 (10%) were on the valley
-side. It is worthy of note that some slash-and- burn fields were in the woods on river banks or
dry river-beds.
(5) Gradient of the slope: Out of 630 slash-and- burn fields 528 (84%) were located on slopes of
over 15 degrees gradient, which is too steep for ordinary agriculture.
(6) Slope orientation: The two basic directions of the slopes in the region are east and west, as
Slas
h-an
d-B
urn
Fiel
d C
ultiv
atio
n in
Pre
-Mod
ern
Japa
n 23
Tab
le
4.
Loc
atio
n of
sl
ash-
and-
burn
fi
elds
in
Sh
irak
awa-
go
1888
Sour
ce:
Hid
ago
Fudo
ki
24 T. MIZOGUCHI
Figure 7. Location of slash-and-burn fields in Shirakawa-go (1888)
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 25
the Sho River runs south to north. The number of slash-and-burn fields on eastern slopes was 304 (48%) and that on western slopes was 138
(22%). There were also 59 (10%) slash-and-burn fields on slopes facing north. The location of
slash-and-burn fields was influenced primarily by topographical conditions, and secondly by ex
posure to sunshine.
III. TRANSITION OF LAND TENURE
FURUSHIMA (1974a) considered the problem of the historical characteristics of slash-and-burn
agriculture, and regarded it as subsistence
production for the peasants, though neither such subordinate peasants nor the slash-and-burn fields could be found in land surveys. This theory was verified by his own study in Ina-gun,
Shinshu (Nagano Prefecture) (1974b), by KINOSHITA'S work (1936) in Nanbu Province
(Iwate Prefecture), and by ITO's work (1931) in Nakatsu (Oita Prefecture) and Kokura Province
(Fukuoka Prefecture). However, as mentioned above, kenchi-cho or the cadasters of land surveys, where slash-and-burn fields were registered, were found, and subordinate peasants called kakae appeared in them.
1. Land-use in 1694
Table 5 shows the land-use of the villages in
Shirakawa-go in 1694. Land was classified into four categories in the Genroku kenchi-cho. These were suiden (paddy field), hata (dry field), yakihata (slash-and-burn field) and yashiki
(homestead). An outstanding characteristic of the land-use in this region was the existence of a few paddy fields in such a limited flat area along the Sho River.
Ogimachi, Hatogaya and Iijima were located
in an area suitable for paddy cultivation. Their kokumori (net yield, the estimated quantity of unhulled rice per tan [993m2, i.e., approximately 0.1 hectare]) for jo-den (paddy field of highest
grade) was 11, which was higher than that for other villages. Their kokumori for chu-den (second grade paddy field), ge-den (third grade paddy field) and gege-den (the lowest grade paddy field) were also higher than those of the other villages in Shirakawa-go.
The paddy field yields of Ushikubi, Kazura and
Uchigato were estimated to be lower than those of the other villages. While ordinarily rice was
produced in the villages' paddy fields, hie (a species of millet) was grown in the paddy fields of these three villages. Theer kenchi-cho gives chuhie-den instead of chu-den or ge-hie-den instead of ge-den. We can see that the quality of land in these three villages was extremely low in terms
of productivity.Dry field: Almost all of the villages had more
dry fields than paddy fields. The grade of fertility for dry fields was classified in five categories;
jo-bata, chu-bata, ge-bata, gege-bata and suna- bata (sandy dry field). The kokumori for dry
fields was estimated generally as being 0.2 koku lower than that for paddy fields (1 koku=180.4
e). For example, in Ogimachi,Hatogaya and Iijima the kokumori for jo-bata was 0.9 while that for jo-den was 1.1. An exception was that the kokumori for dry fields in the villages of low land productivity-Ushikubi, Uchigato and Kazura-was 0.2 koku for jo-bata and 0.1 koku for all the other grades of dry fields.
Yakihata (slash-and-burn fields): It has been said that slash-and-burn fields were cultivated mostly by reizoku-nomin (peasant-serfs) who were not registered in the kenchi-cho because tax was not imposed on slash-and-burn fields. However, in the kenchi-cho of the villages in Shirakawa-go, many slash-and-burn fields were registered as mitoribata (i.e. no kokumori was
assigned to them). That means people did not need to pay tax in ordinary years, but they had to pay it when the ruler ordered them.
2. Change of land tenure during the Tokugawa
period
The registrants in the Genroku kenchi-cho were classified into two types; 1) honbyakusho (independent peasant), and 2) kakae (subordinate
peasant). Among these peasants, those who lived in other villages were called iribyakusho.
(1) Villages composed only of honbyakusho: These were Maki, Okubo, Uchigato, Tsubakihara, Ukegahara and Ashikura. The number of registrants in each village was two or three persons. In the case of Maki, there was little difference in landholding between Sasuke (39 entries, 113se 8bu) and Magozaemon (31 entries, 99se 5bu). As for the area of slash-and-burn fields
26 T
. MIZ
OG
UC
HI
Tab
le
5.
Lan
d-us
e in
Shi
raka
wa-
go
(169
4)
Not
es:
Jo
is t
he
high
est
grad
e of
la
nd
fert
ility
of
pa
ddy
fiel
d/dr
y fi
eld
, ch
u is
sec
ond,
ga
is
thir
d an
d ge
ge
is t
he
low
est.
Suna
m
eans
sa
ndy
fiel
d an
d es
timat
ed
as t
he
low
est
grad
e.
[*]
koku
mor
i; th
e es
timat
ed
quan
tity
of
unhu
lled
rice
per
1t
an
(993
m2)
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 27
there was a greater difference between them; Sasuke (8 entries, 53se 8bu) and Magozaemon
(3 entries, 21se 22bu). However, the difference became smaller by 1774; Sasuke (5 entries, 99se) and Magozaemon (5 entries, 86se).
The two registrants in Okubo were Jirozaemon
(24 entries, 53se 11bu) and Tarozaemon (16 entries, 47se 24bu) in 1694. Both of them reclaimed much the same amount of new paddy field, dry field and slash-and-burn field. The two registrants of Uchigato were Hikouemon (33 entries, 94se 12bu), and Sukeichi (27 entries, 69se 16bu). In Tsubakihara, Chokichi (40 entries, 127se) and two others (29 entries, 79se 10bu for one and 80 entries, 67se 5bu for the other) were the three registrants.
The landholding of the two biggest of the three registrants in Ashikura was more than 100se, but that of the other one was 32 entries, 39se 22bu. The three registrants in Ukegahara were Kyuuemon (25 entries, 195se 28bu), Magosaku (17 entries, 86se 26bu) and Sakubei (17 entries, 20se 21bu). The order of acreage of the first two was reversed by 1774.
Thus, in small-scale villages where only two or
three households of independent farmers exist
ed, no great difference in landholding could be
found among the registrants.
(2) Villages composed of honbyakusho and kakae: In the case of Hogiwaki, there were two honbyakusho, Shirobei (39 entries, 58se 20bu) and Sozaemon (38 entries, 58se 9bu), and two kakae: Hikosaburo, subordinate peasant to Shirobei (20 entries, 11se 11bu) and Kansuke, subordinate peasant to Sozaemon (25 entries, 25se 21bu). It is worthy of note that though ka
kae were subordinated by honbyakusho in terms of social position, they were practically independent from honbyakusho in economic terms. We see that Kansuke had reclaimed more new farm land than his master, Sozaemon, in the Shinden
kenchi-cho of 1814.In Notani in 1694, there were one hon
byakusho, Shirozaemon (28 entries, 48se 19bu in his own village, and 24 entries, 73se 7bu in Omaki) and two kakae: Jirouemon (18 entries,
24se 1bu) and Kichibei (14 entries, 19se 7bu). At that time Shirozaemon's acreage stood out, but after he established a bunke (a branch family) headed by Shirobei, the difrerence in the land
holding of the four households became smaller.
Further, they reclaimed dry fields and slash-and- burn fields under joint proprietorship.
(3) A village with iribyakusho: In the case of Shima, there was one honbyakusho, Kyuzaemon
(25 entries, 92se 19bu) and five iribyakusho who owned one or two pieces of land which were less than 7se.
(4) The villages that had kakae and iribyakusho: In the case of Omaki (Table 6), the three honbyakusho who owned the largest amount of land had kakae. The difference in the landholding among the honbyakusho was not so
great. The iribyakusho, Shirozaemon, who lived in the neighboring village of Notani, had much land here as mentioned above. All farmers and
peasants, both honbyakusho and kakae, engaged in reclamation; 42se 19bu of paddy field and 946se 9bu of dry field was reclaimed as common land owned by the village.
Iijima had 42 registrants, with 27 honbyakusho, 7 kakae and 8 iribyakusho. The leading landowner, Yosuke, had 70 entries, 209se 3bu of land in total. 25 of the 27 honbyakusho had more than 50se, and even the one with the least amount of land had 26se. Thus, no great difference of landholding is to be seen among the honbyakusho there. All of the farmers excepting one reclaimed some farm land in the categories of gege-den, gege-bata or yakihata.
We can say that the difference in landholding,
which was not so great in 1694, became still
smaller during the latter half of the Tokugawa
period mainly because of land reclamation by subordinate peasants and large-scale reclamation of common farm land, and also the establish
ment of branch families by the higher class hon
byakusho. These dynamics of landholding show
a contrast with the general Tokugawa-period ten
dency for the difference in landholding among
farmers to increase.
3. Land Tenure in 1888
(1) How did the patterns of land tenure change from the early Tokugawa period to Meiji? The land tenure of Jirozaemon and that of Tarozaemon in Okubo were approximately the same in 1694. Both of them reclaimed roughly the same
acreage of paddy field, dry field and slash-and- burn field. OYA Shinmatsu, descendant of
28 T
. MIZ
OG
UC
HI
Tab
le
6.
Lan
dow
ners
in
O
mak
i vi
llage
Not
e:
The
na
tive
villa
ge
of
No.
5
was
N
otan
i an
d th
at
of
No.
22
w
as
Tak
ayam
a.
No.
17
m
eans
th
e co
mm
on
land
of
th
e vi
llage
.
No.
9
was
th
e su
bord
inat
e pe
asan
t of
N
o.
3,
No.
10
w
as
that
of
N
o.
1,
and
No.
11
an
d N
o.
12
wer
e th
ose
of
No
. 2
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 29
Table 7 Landowners in Kitani village
Note: No. 8 means common land of the village.
The native village of No. 9 was Tsubakihara, that of No. 10, 11, 12 was Nagase and that of No. 13 was Ishiki.
Jirozaemon, had 22se 15bu of paddy field (12 entries), 69se 28bu of dry field (18 entries) and 150se 20bu of slash-and-burn field (3 entries) in the cadaster of Meiji 21 (1888). OSUGI Tarozaemon, descendant of Tarozaemon, had 15se 17bu of paddy field (12 entries), 56se 9bu of dry field (12 entries) and 126se 18bu of slash
- and-burn field (4 entries). Their total land tenure was 243se 18bu and 198se 14bu, respectively. They also had 7,813se of dry field under joint ownership. Thus we can say that their land tenure remained roughly the same throughout the Tokugawa and Meiji period.
Table 7 shows the case of Kitani village, where there were seven registrants in the An'ei kenchi
-cho (1774). Shichirozaemon (SAKUKURA Matsuemon in Meiji) and Jirouemon (SHINTANI Sakugoro) had more than 1 hectare of slash-and
-burn field. Though Youemon (TANAKA Sahei) had the smallest slash-and-burn field (35se) among them in 1774, he had reclaimed more than 20 hectares of slash-and-burn field by 1888.
(2) Joint proprietorshipIt is remarkable that the land tenure of farm
ers in the villages of Shirakawa-go did not vary significantly in either the Tokugawa or the Mei
ji period. The other prominent aspect of the land tenure system in 1888 is that slash-and-burn fields were mostly owned by all the farmers joint
ly. All slash-and-burn fields in Fukushima, Hirase, Shima, Ushikubi, Ukegahara and Ashikura villages and more than 50% of them in Hogiwaki, Notani, Omaki, Hatogaya, Magari, Uchigato, Tsubakihara and Koshirakawa villages were owned by the respective villages. Everyone in the village had the right to use these
slash-and-burn fields freely. EMA, who investigated the family system in Kitani village, reported that members of big joint families went to these slash-and-burn fields to work for their own livelihood whenever they had free time (EMA 1975).
It should be added that according to cadasters these common lands were divided equally and
given to the individual farmers in the later Meiji period.
IV. CONCLUDING REMARKS
Slash-and-burn field cultivation is a special
type of dry field cultivation. It was widely spread
through the mountains of Japan until the Second
World War. This study aimed at analyzing the
changing mode of location and land tenure in
Shirakawa-go from the 1690s to the present. It
was made clear that enormous slash-and-burn
fields were cultivated from the 1690s to the
1880s. This tendency is also confirmed in the case
30 T. MIZOGUCHI
of Yushima village in Yamanashi Prefecture (Table 8). In almost all koaza, acreage of slash-and
- burn fields increased considerably from 1671 to 1888. Those which decreased their acreage of slash-and-burn fields were situated near the settlement. We cannot correspond the registrants in 1671 with those in 1888, but it is easy to understand that at each time people reclaimed too much land, especially slash-and-burn fields (Tables 9, 10). After the Meiji period, however, as was seen in Sirakawa-go, those slash-and-burn field were turned into forests, dry fields or wastelands, not to paddy fields.
Table 8 Acreage of slash-and-burn fields by
koaza in Yushima in 1671 and 1888
Note: Only the koaza which were registered in both cadasters of 1671 and
1888 are shown in this table.
Table 9 Acreage of slash-and-burn fields by
registrant in Yushima in 1671
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 31
Table 10 Acreage of slash-and-burn fields by registrant in Yushimain 1888
Peasants both large and small scale had slash-and-burn fields in the early Tokugawa period, and both classes continued to reclaime slash-and
- burn fields up to the Meiji period. Every peasant had many entries for slash-and-burn fields scattered over different places. This means peasants who had their land next to each other had to work together when burning their fields. Thus, it can be said that there were no social strata among the peasants in the villages which engaged to a great extent in slash-and-burn agriculture.
The next step in this research will be to con
sider the significance of dry fields even in paddydominant areas. The author is collecting data from the Owari region (Aichi Prefecture), one of the famous rice producing areas in Japan. In the middle of the 17th century, more than 60% of arable land there was used as paddy fields, but a large share of paddy produce was collected as tax. Therefore the staple food for the area's agrarian population was not rice but dry field crops like wheat,millet and potatoes. Interestingly, there were some mitori (tax exempt place). They were located in hilly areas, river beds, or
32 T. MIZOGUCHI
mountainous areas, and were predominantly used as dry fields. It is easy to guess that these mitori played an important supplementary role for subsistence.
Study of the reclamation of dry fields in Japan has just begun. The author would like to con
tinue this study from the historico-geographical
point of view adopted in this paper.(Received Oct. 14, 1988)(Accepted Apr. 25, 1989)
Notes
1) Kenchi (Check land surveys) were carried out several times prior to the Tokugawa period for the purpose of calculating the area of farmland. The amount of production required for tax collection purposes was determined by these surveys. One famous example is the series of Imperial Surveys ordered by TOYOTOMI Hideyoshi between 1582-1598. During the Tokugawa period in particular, many check land surveys were carried out in order to identify newly reclaimed land (GIL, L., 1986).
2) Those historical documents are owned by Shirakawa village office.
3) The author identifies these koaza which are listed on both the Tokugawa kenchi-cho and the Meiji cadasters. There were five such koaza in Maki village, which had a total of seven koaza in the kenchicho. The cases of the other villages are as follows: Hogiwaki (7 in kenchi-cho; 2 of the 7 are found in the Meiji cadaster), Notani (9-6), Omaki (16-12), Ogimachi (44-22), Shima (4-4), Iijima (19-11), Okubo (3-2), Uchigato (6-6), Tsubakihara (10-7), Ukegahara (10-10), Ashikura (15-14).
References
AOGA, S. (1935): Nogyo keizai chiri (Agricultural economic geography), Sobunkaku. (J)
AMINO, Y. (1980): Nihon chusei no minshuzo-heimin to shokunin (Image of people in Medieval Japan-Ordinary men and artisans), Iwanami Shinsho. (J).
BEFU, H. (1968a): "Ecology, residence, and authority: The corporate household in Central Japan." Ethnology 7-2, 25-42.-
(1968b): "Origin of large households and duolocal residence in Central Japan." American Anthropologist, 70-1, 309-319.
EMA, M. (1975): Hida Shirakawa-mura (Shirakawa village in Hida Province), Miraisha. (J).
FUKAZAWA, M. (1975): "Kieyuku noko-Narada minzoku o saguru-(Vanishing agricultural cultivation-
investigating the folk customs in Narada village-)". Yamanashi nichinichi shinbun, 24.4-21.5, 1975. (J).
FUKUI, K. (1974): Yakihata no mura (Slash-and-burn field villages), Asahi Shinbunsha. (J).
FUJITA, Y. (1981): Nihon no sanson (Japan's mountain villages), Chijin Shobo. (J).
FURUSHIMA, T. (1974a): "Kinsei nihon nogyo no kozo
(Structure of agriculture in Tokugawa Japan)", in FURUSHIMA Toshio chosakushu 3, Tokyo Univ. Press, pp. 238-272. (J).
FURUSHIMA, T. (1974b): "Yoeki-rodo-sei no hokai katei-Ina hikan no kenkyu-(Collapsing process of slave
labor system-A study on slave-labor in Ina Province)", in FURUSHIMA Toshio chosakushu 1, Tokyo Univ. Press, pp. 97 123. (J)
FUTAGAMI, H. (1958): "Economic structure of Gokanosho village in the Kyushu mountains". Geographical Review of Japan, 31-3, pp. 22-30. (JE)
GIL, R. (1968): "Contemporary and Historical irrigation in Japan-Selected Terminology and Illustrations-". Toyota Zaidan Josei Kenkyu Hokokusho 1-15. (J)
HATAI, H. (1981): Ritsuryo shoen taisei to nomin no kenkyu (Study on the statutory and manorial system and farmers), Yoshikawa Kobunkan. (J)
ITO, C. (1931): "Nakatsu-ryo, Kokura-ryo oyobi Hitabakuryo chiikitai ni okeru reino-teki seido (Slave-labor system in Nakatsu, Kokura and Hita Provinces)".
Nogyo Keizai Kenkyu 7-4, 59-97. (J)KIMURA, M. (1980): Kinsei no mura (Villages in Tokuga
wa period), Kyoikusha. (J).KINOSHITA, A. (1936): "Nihon nogyo ni okeru yoeki
-rodo no zanzon, sono gendai-teki igi (Remnants of slave-labor in agriculture of Japan, and its significance in present-day Japan)". Shakai Seisaku Jiho. (J).
KODA, K. (1956): "Shiramine no dezukuri (Cultivation with shifting settlement in Shiramine)", in Gendai chirigaku koza (2), pp. 270-289. (J).
KURODA, H. (1984): Nihon chusei kaihatsushi no kenkyu (The study on the history of reclamation in Medieval Japan), Azekura Shobo. (J)
MIYAMOTO, T. (1964): Yama ni ikiru hitobito (People living in mountainous areas), Miraisha. (J)
MIZOGUCHI, T. (1970): "Omachi-shi Kashima shuraku ni okeru ringyo keiei (Forestry in Kashima, Omachi city). Nagoya Daigaku Chirigaku Kyoshitsu Jisshuhokoku, pp. 49-65. (J)
MIZOGUCHI, T. (1973): "Structure of mountain village based on dry field agriculture; a case study on Yanagidaira in Yamanashi Prefecture". The Human Geography, 25-6, 68-86. (JE)-
(1976): "Peddling activities in the non-paddy field villages on the Midai-gawa alluvial fan." The Human Geography, 28-2, 27 56. (JE)
-(1979): "Socio-economic Structure of non paddy field villages in Tokugawa period-Focused on a landowner's behavior in Nishino, Yamanashi Prefecture-." The Human Geography, 31-2, 1-20. (JE)
-(1982): "Koshu ni okeru knsei yakihata sonraku no kenkyu (A study on shifting cultivation villages in Kai Province during the Tokugawa period)."
Nagoya University Faculty of Literature LXXXIII,
Slash-and-Burn Field Cultivation in Pre-Modern Japan 33
History, 28, 75-108. (J),T. (1986): "An Historico-geographical study
of the changing yakihata villages in Shirakawa-go, Gifu Prefecture." The Human Geography, 38-2, 1-26.
(JE)NOMOTO, K. (1984): Yakihata minzoku bunka ron (Folk
culture theories on slash-and-burn field cultivation), Yuzankaku. (J)
Oguchi-mura (1979): Ishikawa-ken Oguchi sonshi 2
(Historical gazetteers of Oguchi village 2). (J)ONO, T. (1942): "Kakoshiko (Consideration of slash
and-burn field cultivation)," in Nihon nogyo kigen ron,
pp. 247-393. (J)SASAKI, K. (1966): "The distribution of shifting cultiva
tion in Japan [1]". The Ritsumeikan Bungaku 253, 1-48. (JE)-
(1968a): "Regional types of swidden cultivation in Japan [1]." The Shirin (The Journal of History), 51-4, 91-138. (JE)-
(1968b): Regional types of swidden cultivation in Japan [2], The Shirin (The Journal of History), 51-5, 78-129. (JE)-
(1971): Inasaku izen (Days before rice agriculture), NHK Books. (J)-
(1972): Nihon no yakihata (Slash-and-burn field cultivation in Japan), Kokon Shoin. (J)
SAWAMURA, T. (1948 -1949): "Yakihata nogyo keiei hoshiki (1)-(7)" (Methods of shifting cultivation management)." Kaitaku Kenkyu, 2, 1-4, (Nogyo
Gijutsu Kenkyu Hokoku 2). (J)Shiramine-mura (1962): Shiramine sonshi (Historical
Gazetteer of Shiramine village). (J)SOMA, M. (1953): Shikoku-sanmyaku seibu ni okeru
yakihata kosaku no ten'i-Ehime-ken Yodo kyoiki yonson ni tsuite-(Transition of shifting cultivation in the western part of the Shikoku mountains-on
four villages in the Yodo region, Ehime Prefecture)," Ehime Daigaku Kiyo 4, Shakai Kagaku, 1-4, 377-396. (J)-
(1956): "Shifting cultivation and land owner ship in a mountain village, Nakakubo, Ehime Prefec
ture, Geographical Review of Japan, 29-8, 1-14. (JE)-
(1959): "The structure of shifting cultivation of Terakawa-Buraku (village), Kochi prefecture." Geographical Review of Japan, 32-5, 1-18. (JE)-
(1962): "The regional structure of shifting cultivation areas in Shikoku mountains," Ehime Daigaku Kiyo 4, Shakai Kagaku, 4-1, 1-79. (J)
TABATA, H. (1978): "Ujiko kakari-cho yori mita kijiya syuraku no henbo" (Transformation of the woodworker villages). The Historical Geography 95, 21-26. (J)
TANAKA, T. (1979): Okinoshima no rekishi-chirigakuteki kenkyu (A historical geographical study on Oki island), Kokon Shoin. (JE)-
(1980): "Development of yakihata, maki, makihata and Japanese upland fields." The Historical Geographic Review, 23, 85-106. (JE)-
(1981): "Historical geography of land rotation systems in Japan." The Historical Geography, 114. 13-27. (JE)
UENO, F. (1938): Burning cultivation of the mountain forest in Gokanosho. Geographical Review of Japan, 14-2, 1-27. (JE)
UESHIMA, M. (1956): "Hind-sanchi ni okeru yakihata" (Shifting cultivation in Hino mountains), in Gendai chirigaku koza (2), pp. 290-304. (J)
YAMAGUCHI, S. (1938): Distribution of the shifting cultivation,Geographical Review of Japan, 14-1, pp. 1-23. (JE)
YAMAGUCHI, Y. (1939): "Shifting cultivation of 'Hackbau' in northeastern Japan." Journal of Geography, 51, 561-571. (JE)-
(1940): "Shifting cultivation of 'Hackbau' in northeastern Japan," Journal of Geography , 52,
pp. 612-668. (JE)YANAGIDA, K., ed. (1938): Sanson seikatsu no kenkyu
(A study on life in mountain villages), Kokusho Kankokai, pp. 154 159. (J)
YOKOGAWA, S. (1952): "Burning cultivation fields in Kochi prefecture." The Human Geography, 4-4, 59-67. (J)
34 T. MIZOGUCHI
近 世 日 本 に お け る 焼 畑 耕 作
溝 口 常 俊*
焼畑村落 の変 容過 程を江戸時代初 期か ら現在 にわた っ
て明 らかにす ることが本稿の 目的であ る。従来 の研究に
おいて,焼 畑は時代が下 ると少な くな ると信 じられ てい
た。 しかし,白 川郷 を対象 とした本研究においては反対
の結果 が得 られた。すなわち,焼 畑は江戸時 代初期か ら
明治後半 にかけてむ しろ増えて きたのである。生産性 の
乏 しい地域 に もかかわ らず,こ の時期 に人 口が増 えてい
るのは膨大 な焼畑開墾に よるもの と考 えられ る。焼畑 が
減 り始 めたのは明治後半以降の ことである。
焼畑主要地 は居住 地周辺か ら遠 ざか り,山 地 の緩やか
な斜面 か ら急 な斜面 へ と移 ってい った。 農業的 な土地利
用 の変 容過程 として,仮 説の一つ として唱え られ ていた
焼 畑か ら水 田 とい う変化は白川郷 では認め られず,ほ と
ん どの焼 畑が森林 もし くは畑地に変 ってい った。 明治後
半,白 川郷 には630筆 の焼畑があ った。1筆 の平均面積
は約1haで あ った。焼 畑は700-1,000m,居 住地か ら1-2
km,傾 斜20-30度 の東斜面に最 も多 く分布 していた。
土地保有 の変化に関 して,以 下 の結果が得 られた。本
百姓 と本百姓に従属す る抱か らな っていた元禄時 代の村
におい て,本 百姓の間では土地保有上顕著 な差 はなか っ
たが,抱 は本百姓 よ り少 ししか保有 していなか った。 し
か し,江 戸時代後期にな ると,両 者 と もに新 しい土地 を
開墾 し始め,と もに焼畑を開いた。安永時 代までに,抱
はかな りの土地を保有す るようにな り,本 百姓か ら独立
してい った。同時期に,多 くの村有 の焼畑 が開か れ,そ
の共有 の焼畑は村のいかな る農民 もいつで も自分 の利益
のために使 うことが認め られていた。 それ ゆえに,こ の
地域 では,他 の一般の近世村落 とは異な り,農 民 層の顕
著な分解はみ られなか った。
近世におけ る広大な焼畑の開墾,焼 畑耕地 の分散 と共
同作業,農 民層の未分解,焼 畑の森林 ・畑地へ の転換 な
どの事象は,山 梨県湯島村で も追跡で き,焼 畑村落 の共
通 した性格 と考え られ る。
* 〒930富 山市 富 山大学教養部
