Violating Censorship: Humor and Virulence in
the Popular Writings of Baba Bunkoµ (1715-1759)
William J. Farge
Loyola University, New Orleans
http://web.aall.ufl.edu/SJS/Bunko.html
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Violating Censorship: Humor and Virulence in
the Popular Writings of Baba Bunkoµ (1715-1759)
William J. Farge
Loyola University, New Orleans
Economic confusion in the cities and social instability in the rural
areas of Japan was widespread in the closing decades of the
seventeenth century. By 1727-28, however, the Kyoµhoµ Reforms of
shogun Tokugawa Yoshimune (r.1716-1745) had had some success in
improving the fiscal condition of the bakufu.1 But the successes of
these reforms did not last and proved to be no more than a short
respite in the continuing economic downturn that characterized the
middle Edo period. When the ample harvests of 1729 caused the price
of rice in the urban areas to fall drastically, the samurai saw their
purchasing power drop to only about half of what it had been three
years earlier.2 Though the last fifteen years of Yoshimune's rule saw
a gradual strengthening of shogunal authority, the samurai themselves
were never to completely recover the economic well-being they had
experienced in the earlier decades of the Tokugawa period. There was
more hardship and unrest, both rural and urban, during YoshimuneÕs
reign than during the rule of any other shogun.3
In the long run, the Kyoµhoµ Reforms did no more to improve the lot
of peasants than that of the samurai. There was a continual increase
in the number and intensity of peasant uprisings. Although there had
been 426 occurrences of peasant protest between the years 1681 and
1715; there were 724 uprisings between 1716 and 1750.4A comparison of
these two thirty-four year periods shows an increase of almost 60% in
the number of peasant uprisings. What is even more significant than
the substantial rise in the number of violent incidents is the fact
that the scale of the uprisings became greater. A revolt in
Iwakitaira (in present-day southwest Fukushima prefecture) in 1738,
for example, involved 84,000 farmers.5
During the crop failure of 1721, protesting peasants denounced bakufu
officials:
You relentless thieves! Monstrous exploiters! From now on we shall do
as we please. If your punishments are severe, we wonÕt pay taxes...We
shall choose under whom we shall serve according to the severity of
his punishments.6
By the turn of the eighteenth century the control that the bakufu had
formerly exercised over the farming communities that sustained it
began to weaken, and tax revenues began to decline. In the 1730s the
bakufu's tax income began to decline.7 This was due to economic
stagnation and also to peasant protests and the demands for tax
relief. By the 1750s, however, the bakufu seemed to have successfully
navigated through the economic crises of the 20s and 30s, but
commoners had less and less respect for samurai, and the authorities
continued to fear a resurgence of popular unrest in both rural and
urban areas.
The writings of a well-known author of dangibon (popular Buddhist
sermons) known only by his pen name, Joµkanboµ Koµa (fl. 1740-1750),
give clear evidence of the samurai's continuing social decline in the
1740s, showing that, in addition to economic power, the respect that
the elite class had formerly commanded was quickly eroding.
[The commoners of Edo] do exactly what they want to do without any
fear of those above them...In fact, they act as arrogantly as any of
the great daimyo. Showing respect seems to be something shameful for
them. Some Edoites even make malicious remarks about samurai. "You
need not be afraid of samurai or of lice," they say.8
Satire in Early Modern Japan
The first half of the eighteenth century, precisely because it was a
socially, economically, and politically unsettled period, was ripe
for the production of satire. Satirical literature is usually not
produced in a society in which there are favorable economic and
social conditions. Rather, it is in a restrictive political
environment in which a government tries to strengthen its authority
that a popular writerÕs frustration tends to be expressed through
cynicism and satire rather than through dispassionate and
straightforward discourse.
It is not surprising, therefore, that there was sarcasm and invective
directed against the bakufu and its representatives during this time.
It appears that the government's show of determination to restore
moral order to society by means of the Kyoµhoµ Reforms only succeeded
in raising the level of sarcasm directed against it.9
Baba Bunkoµ (1718-1759), a poor masterless samurai, traveled to Edo
in 1750 from Iyo domain in Shikoku. Like many other roµnin who made
their living as professional storytellers, Bunkoµ told fortunes and
gave readings of military tales on the grounds of Asakusa Temple
(Sensoµji, in present-day Taito-ku). Gradually, the focus of his
readings and lectures changed from war tales and human interest
stories to reports of the latest rumors that he had heard about
public officials and about some of the more prominent samurai who
were living in Edo at the time.
When Bunkoµ came to Edo, Tokugawa Ieshige (r.1745-1760), sometimes
maligned as the least capable of all the shoguns,10 was at the helm
of the shogunal administration. In spite of the censorship laws of
1722 that forbade writing or speaking about the shogun, daimyoµ
families, or samurai, Bunkoµ began delivering stronger and stronger
denunciations against the corruption of some of the most highly
placed samurai officials and even made fun of the ruling shogun,
Tokugawa Ieshige, by name.
While Joµkanboµ Koµa and other writers of popular literature stayed
within the bounds of the bakufu's restrictions by never mentioning
actual government bureaucrats by name, Bunkoµ seemed to go out of his
way to expose and humiliate specific public officials. To add insult
to injury, Bunkoµ wrote anecdotes that praised the virtues of the
courtesans of the Yoshiwara prostitute district and contrasted "their
virtue" with "the immorality of the samurai," who were often
government officials. Bunkoµ was able to get away with this, for a
while at least, by taking advantage of the protection offered by
staying on the grounds of Asakusa temple, where the Edo city
magistrate had no jurisdiction.
Sekine Mokuan, scholar of koµdan and rakugo, has called Bunkoµ "the
most outstanding of the koµdanshi (professional storytellers). "11
Yamada Tadao has referred to him as "the first person to pierce the
iron curtain of Tokugawa secrecy."Like other koµdanshi, Bunkoµ
expressed his views orally, rather than in writing, perhaps thinking
that he could remain relatively safe from arrest and would not easily
be subjected to government censorship. Bunkoµ used this style of
recitation, which had its roots in the medieval-period when public
readings of the Taiheiki (Record of the great peace, 1372) and other
famous war stories were given on the grounds of temples or at public
places. The military heroes and great battles of the past were still
popular subjects for the oral storytellers in the Edo period. But the
heroes and anti-heroes of the anecdotes that Bunkoµ delivered were
contemporary politicians and cultural leaders, not past historic
figures. The entertaining teaching style of koµdan suited Bunkoµ's
flamboyant personality and unconventional ways of expression, and he
was a master at taking advantage of the power and attraction of this
oral style to expose the weaknesses and foibles of certain officials
of the Tokugawa regime.
Among Japanese satirists, Hiraga Gennai (1728-1779) is often
discussed and considered the most important of the early modern
period.13 However, the well-known critic of Edo literature, Nakamura
Yukihiko, has questioned Gennai's importance as a satirist and even
argues that his work is not really satire at all. Not realizing that
the extant texts of BunkoµÕs anecdotes are based on his oral
presentations, one might judge that Gennai is a better writer than
Bunkoµ. Nakamura asserts that BunkoµÕs koµdan is actually better
satirist than GennaiÕs writings. The spirit behind an author's drive
to create satirical literature, Nakamura writes, comes out of the
internal discord between oneself and society. When the author can no
longer bear to remain silent in the face of what he perceives to be
an unjust or immoral world and can no longer make compromises with
that society, satire is born. Nakamura questions whether Gennai
actually experienced this kind of passionate conflict within himself;
and even if he had, it is doubtful that any satirical sense in his
writings, hidden as it was behind a thick screen of oblique
metaphors, could have been understood by his readers.14
While it may not be necessary to be passionately convinced of one's
political position before one can write successful satire, as
Nakamura claims, Bunkoµ is clearly more emotionally involved with his
subject matter than Gennai is.
Both Gennai and Bunkoµ intended their readers to see clearly and
objectively the hypocrisy about which they wrote. GennaiÕs satire has
a major defect however. In order to protect himself, he had to
camouflage his writing with metaphors, thus making the text obscure
and weakening his attack on hypocrisy. GennaiÕs satire, according to
Nakamura, sometimes has the opposite effect of what is actually
intended.
Ihara Saikaku, another writer more familiar to modern readers than
Bunkoµ, wrote a guarded, carefully crafted style of satire. The
merchant class, perceived to be a safe target, is criticized in his
works; but the samurai in Saikaku's stories are immune from satirical
attack. In Nippon eitaigura (The Japanese family storehouse, 1688)
merchants are portrayed as moral weaklings who are led astray by
greed and by the carnal temptations of the pleasure quarters, but the
ruling class is not mentioned. In addition, Saikaku kept his stories
solely on the level of fiction and did not attempt political
commentary. The contemporary lack of filial piety and virtue among
the samurai, their vendettas, and the frequent violations of their
codes of conduct of which Bunkoµ spoke were only vaguely and
indirectly hinted at in Saikaku's works. His samurai were idealized
characters of his own creation and could never be recognized as real
individuals.
Saikaku writes from the perspective of the detached observer when
speaking about the samurai and daimyoµ, and this is what most clearly
contrasts him with Bunkoµ, who is deeply involved with questions of
the day and with morality in government and society. Bunkoµ is unable
to simply observe and report in an disinterested manner. It could be
argued that Saikaku did write in a satirical fashion, but his works
are confined to either literary or social satire, with his barbs
being reserved for the famous classics or for society in general
rather than for specific government officials or samurai. Bunkoµ, on
the other hand, attacked openly and with very little restraint bakufu
authority and the most powerful political, intellectual, and
religious institutions of the day.
BunkoµÕs lectures were characterized by the literary convention known
as shukoµ. This term literally means a design, scheme, or plot. The
technique of shukoµ allows a lecturer, author, or visual artist to
use a wide variety of classical or well-known motifs and stories from
literature, drama, or art and transform them for his or her own
purposes to give a familiar story or plot an entirely new meaning.
This device had been used in Japanese literature from ancient times
and can easily be found in the imperial waka anthologies, as well as
in kabuki drama, popular fiction, and ukiyoe painting of the Edo
period. Bunkoµ was a master of taking a familiar piece of literature
that had no political significance and transforming it into an
anecdote that was both delightfully humorous and mischievously
satirical.
BunkoµÕs technique was to first observe and point out how highly
placed samurai officials or other "respectable" persons wanted to be
admired for their talents and virtue. Bunkoµ noted that the desire
for respect determined a personÕs external behavior. He then
contrasts the virtuous persona with what is in reality immoral
behavior on the part of certain elite members of society, showing
that while the outside appears to be honorable, the inner character
is corrupt. Bunkoµ wants to shock his listeners by contrasting the
virtue that a person of noble or elite status is thought to possess
with what in reality is corruption and vice.
The traditional stories and plots that Bunkoµ uses to construct his
anecdotes are all based on a similar contrast between what is assumed
or expected and what is actual. This contrast is a literary device,
which is often used in Japanese literature, known as mitate
(displacement); that is, the substitution of an expected type of
character or behavior with a type that is unexpected. This artistic
device employs an incongruous comparison or contrast to make the
point that two seemingly unrelated or opposed traits can be joined in
the same person.
"The case of the Narukami nun."
An excellent example of the technique of literary transformation
(shukoµ) which employs a contrast of opposites (mitate) is BunkoµÕs
anecdote, "The case of the Narukami nun."15 This short piece (cf.
Appendix I) is filled with contradictions and incongruous parallels
that eventually come together to reveal a shocking truth. Bunkoµ
copies the plot of the one-act kyoµgen comedy "Onna Narukami" (The
female Narukami, 1743). This in itself is an altered version of
another play, the kabuki drama "Narukami" (The monk Narukami,
1684).16 It is important to know the plots of both plays in order to
appreciate BunkoµÕs literary transformation.
Both the kyoµgen comedy and the kabuki play have basically the same
plot, except that the gender roles are reversed. In the kabuki
drama "Narukami," a monk has prevented rain from falling on the earth
by holding hostage the Dragon-god, who produces the rain. In order to
save the farmers from the resulting drought, the emperor dispatches
an imperial princess, Princess Taema, to go to NarukamiÕs mountain
retreat, seduce him, and thereby allow the Dragon-god to escape. The
princess is successful; the Dragon-god is freed; the rain begins to
fall; and the country is saved. The dramatic climax occurs when
Narukami, realizing that the seduction has been a trick to allow the
Dragon-god to escape, becomes enraged. His anger transforms him into
a hideous monster, and the audience sees that, although externally
Narukami had appeared to be a holy man; in actuality, he is not a
monk at all but a demon. The Dragon-god, who had at first appeared to
be the monster is actually the savior of the nation who brings the
long-awaited rains.
In the later kyoµgen version, "Onna Narukami," the main character is
a nun, rather than a monk. She is seduced by a prince, Taemanosuke,
rather than a princess. The plot is the same as before; and in the
end it is the nun, Onna Narukami, who reveals herself to be
externally a holy nun, but in reality a she-demon.
The effect of mitate, the contrast of the opposites, comes from the
revelation that the monk and the nun are not holy and devout
ascetics, as would be expected, but actually are the total opposite:
demons. At the end of the performance two opposites, saint and demon,
converge through the theatrical transformation of a "saintly" man and
woman into personifications of evil.
Bunkoµ uses the shukoµ and mitate in the plays to create of his own
version of the story. The Narukami nun is transformed from a she-
demon in a play into an actual person with whom Bunkoµ's listeners
would have been familiar. The "holy woman / evil demon" character in
BunkoµÕs version of the story is the widow of a well-known
pediatrician of Tachibana-choµ, Kanemaki Genjun.17 This woman had
always been admired for her faithfulness to her husband while he was
alive, and she was respected as a virtuous widow after his demise.
On the death of one's husband, it was not uncommon for an older widow
to cut her hair as the normal prelude to becoming a nun. Even though
this faithful wife of the late physician, Genjun, was still a young
woman, she decided not to remarry and vowed to enter a monastery. A
woman of extraordinary virtue, as everyone thought her to be, this
young widow did not simply cut her hair; she pulled all of the "long,
raven-colored strands of hair out by the roots."18 Bunkoµ noted that
everyone looked on this act of extraordinary virtue with great
admiration. Having given the impression throughout her life of being
a devoted wife, she was now proving herself to be an exemplar of
womanly heroism. She would go every day to one of the temples in
Asakusa--Asakusa Emma Hall, Kayadera, or to the stone image of
Manjusri--to offer prayers. She always appeared to be intent on
listening to the sermons and edifying stories that the monks
presented at the temples.
If those who listened to BunkoµÕs description of this "saintly" woman
were familiar with the story of the Narukami nun, they would
certainly have realized that GenjunÕs widow was an evil woman who had
managed to deceive everyone and hide behind an edifying facade. Bunko
µ reveals that, far from being a faithful wife, she had been carrying
on a scandalous secret affair with the seventeen-year-old kabuki
actor, Segawa Kikunojoµ (1741-1793).19 After her husband died, she
was no devout nun, as everyone had thought her to be. The young widow
was going to the temples, but not to pray or listen to sermons. She
went only to "carry on adulterous affairs with other licentious men
in broad daylight."20 She is exposed in the end to be a monster, a
she-demon, just like the Narukami nun in the play.
Bunkoµ is creating a number of incongruous comparisons in which both
religious devotion and adultery converge in the person of Genjun's
widow. Bunkoµ succeeded in creating, what was for his listeners, an
even more shocking and surprising story than that of the
original "Narukami nun." The virtue of the extraordinarily faithful
wife who became a nun converges with the licentiousness of the she-
demon of "Onna Narukami;" and Bunkoµ has transformed a fictional play
into a shocking exposeE
Bunkoµ's intention is not to simply make a personal attack on
Genjun's widow. More significantly, he intends his anecdote to
illustrate what is, in his view, the real relationship between two
institutions that are supposedly totally unrelated. By showing that
the widow has carried on an affair with a famous actor of the kabuki
theater in the confines of the three most sacred shrines of Buddhist
devotion, Bunkoµ is inviting his listener to see the shocking
parallel between the "sacred institution" of Buddhism, on the one
hand, the "unsavory institution" of the kabuki theater.
The Courtesans
Yoshiwara, the other "unsavory institution" of the Tokugawa period,
was a well-spring of inspiration for new genres of literature, drama,
music and popular culture. The Yoshiwara colored much of Bunkoµ's
writing and speaking as well, but his presentations were quite unlike
the gesaku (popular stories) of the time about the sons of wealthy
merchants and their humorous adventures in the prostitute district.
Bunkoµ used the Yoshiwara as a motif with which to attack and
satirize the political, academic, and religious institutions of the
day. He was also counter-cultural in his passionate defense of the
courtesans whom he saw as the impoverished victims of a virtual slave
trade.21
In one of his lectures, Bunkoµ reproached the samurai for frequenting
the prostitute district and specifically named Comptroller of Finance
(kanjoµ ginmiyaku) Aoyama Nobunaga22 as one of those officials
who "was always in the Yoshiwara district." Because of his
preoccupation, Aoyama "was continually strapped for money.....He even
pawned his official dress to get the necessary funds to be able to go
to the Yoshiwara pleasures quarters."23 Bunkoµ reports that Aoyama
was not only a regular client of the Yoshiwara courtesans; he even
sent one of his own sisters as a prostitute to serve the needs of
Hotta Masasuke (1712-1761), a member of the shogunÕs council of state
(roµjuµ). He sent another sister to junior counselor (wakadoshiyori)
Itakura Katsukiyo (1706-1780). Aoyama had used his own sisters to
gain his position as Comptroller of Finance and to continue to gain
political influence.
Bunkoµ sees the conduct of such public officials as being
hypocritical and therefore immoral. He contrasts their behavior with
the respectability of some of the Yoshiwara prostitutes. In Buya
zokudan (Contemporary talks on worldly affairs in Musashi, 1756.4), a
collection of short essays and anecdotes, Bunkoµ points out the fact
that officials of the bakufu take full advantage of the courtesans
for their own pleasure and diversion while publicly denouncing the
Yoshiwara as a source of social and moral pollution. The women of the
Yoshiwara, on the other hand, are virtuous and worthy of our
admiration, Bunkoµ says, because of the hardships that they so
gracefully and bravely endure.24
Political figures were not the only ones who patronized the Yoshiwara
while publicly condemning it. Some Buddhist monks were also known to
hold the courtesans of the Yoshiwara in contempt and, at the same
time, avail themselves of the prostitutesÕ favors. The famous
Buddhist monk, Hyakuan (1695-1781), for example, was "a great playboy
with quite a reputation in Yoshiwara."25 In a short essay Bunkoµ
wrote in 1756, he contrasted the character of Hyakuan with that of
the renowned courtesan of the Matsubaya bordello in Yoshiwara, Echiya
Segawa.26 Born into an impoverished family in Shimoµsa domain, Segawa
was sold to the bordello by her parents. As part of her training, she
became proficient in the calligraphy school of Hosoi Koµtaku (1658-
1735). In his lectures, Bunkoµ praised her for becoming an
accomplished calligrapher. He presented the monk Hyakuan, on the
other hand, as a fraud who used the expensive calligraphy paper of
the Koµtaku school so that people would see it and think that he was
a master calligrapher.
Not only was Segawa proficient in calligraphy and other talents
expected of a courtesan, such as shamisen, poetry, the tea ceremony,
singing, dancing and playing the flute; she also mastered talents
that were commonly identified as the purview of men only. According
to Bunkoµ, she could hold her own when discussing philosophy with the
leading Confucianist scholars of the day and often embarrassed them
with her knowledge and quick wit.27
Another courtesan that Bunkoµ speaks about is Rizen. Sold to the
Oomiya brothel by her husband, a pharmacist by the name of Kuwanaya
Yasoµ, Rizen "had a kind heart, was deeply compassionate, and
professed a strong faith in Boddhisatva Samantabhadra (Fugen
bosatsu)."28 Bunkoµ presents her as being more devout than most of
the Buddhist monks.He reminds his listeners, who may have been
shocked at his associating a prostitute with a boddhisatva, that
Samantabhadra, while riding a white elephant, had actually revealed
himself to his devotees in the form of a prostitute. Bunkoµ also
spoke aboutr a Buddhist monk of the Heian period, Shoµkuµ (910-1007),
who taught that "if one wants to worship Samantabhadra, he should go
to Harima to see the singing and dancing of the courtesans."29 Bunko
µ's conjunction of boddhisatvas and courtesans was meant to shock his
listeners and also to satirically expose hypocritical Buddhist monks.
In his strong defense and praise of Rizen, Bunkoµ argues that "Daruma
Buddha faced the wall sitting in meditation for nine years. But the
courtesan Rizen spent not nine, but ten years confined to her place
of business, facing the wall, season after season all day long."30
Bunkoµ admitted that his inspiration for this insight had come from
Hanabusa Itchoµ. The artist had employed the same type of contrast in
his paintings. He once painted the face of a courtesan on the body of
the Daruma. This painting of a female Daruma, holding a fan and
tobacco pouch and dressed like a courtesan, was a visual expression
of the incongruity and contrast of which Bunkoµ was so fond. On
HanabusaÕs painting were written the words: "What is nine years of
suffering compared with ten years of prostitution?"
The Yoshiwara was often romanticized in the popular fiction of the
time, but Bunkoµ reacted strongly against the sentimentalization of
this institution which he saw as demeaning. Rather than romanticize
the Yoshiwara courtesan, he shows that their life was "extremely
frightening," and he blames the bakufu for their plight.
The courtesans are women who have been taken away from their homes
under government sanction and made into slaves in Yoshiwara. This is
done forcibly and against their will. Some of the women do manage to
escape into the swamps, but no one knows what happens to them.31
The Head of the Confucian Academy
Bunkoµ directed his satirical barbs against dignitaries of the
Confucian establishment. Hayashi Nobumitsu (1681-1758), head of the
Confucian academy (daigaku no kami) and descendant of the illustrious
Hayashi Razan (1683-1657), was well known during the years that Bunko
µ was speaking and writing. Nobumitsu is the primary target of a
scathing satirical essay in Toµdai Edo hyaku bakemono.32 The essay
begins by praising Nobumitsu as "a great Confucian and a holder of
the prestige title, choµsantaifu,"33 but it quickly becomes evident
that the praise is actually sarcasm when Bunkoµ's caustically
remarks, "No one would suspect that Nobumitsu is actually a monster."
As head of the Confucian academy, Nobumitsu was the ultimate
authority on official, government-sanctioned Confucian teaching and
responsible for its correct interpretation. So for Bunkoµ, what was
particularly irksome was the incongruity between Nobumitsu's high
position as an important teacher of Confucian virtue and his private
diversions. In one of his anecdotes, Bunkoµ alleges that Nobumitsu
brought a small entourage of courtesans to his second-floor living
quarters for his private pleasure. "There was, on more than one
occasion, raucous laughter and the commotion of joµrui singing and
shamisen playing."34
BunkoµÕs accusation of frivolity directed against the daigaku no
kami, incriminated a high official of the Confucian academy in the
type of immorality that was officially banned. No one else had gone
so far in publically exposing the hypocrising that was prevalent in
this important bakufu institution.
The Shogun
Bunkoµ reports that in 1755, when the shogun, Tokugawa Ieshige, was
out on an excursion with a group of his retainers, he came to a small
shrine in the woods where there were verses of haiku written on
strips of paper. "The shogun had one of his retainers read the verses
for him and then asked, "Who wrote those verses?" One of the
retainers explained to him that they had been written by Somaru (?-
1795) and Choµsui (1685-1784), two well-known contemporary poets. The
shogun commented, "They write well. I have never heard of them
before."35
The shogunÕs retainers, unlike Ieshige himself, were quite familiar
with not only the poets but also with the verses. The retainers
explained to Ieshige, "These are two of the poets who are included in
Goshikizumi (The five primary colors, 1731)." One of the retainers
explained to the shogun, "The other poets in the collection are Soµ
zui [1684-1744],36 Renshi [1679-1742], and Shiseki [1677-1759]." In
this anecdote, Ieshige is presented by Bunkoµ as being culturally
backward. What makes the scene even more satirical is that the
retainers speak to the shogun in the most polite, formal language,
just as Ieshige is exposing more and more of his ignorance. The
satire in Bunkoµ's descriptions lies not only in the content but also
in this contrast between the very formal style of language used by
the retainers, with its honorific expressions and classical
grammatical constructions, and the actions of the shogun that were
presented as being base and foolish.
Another retainer explains to Ieshige that the two poets whose verses
they have just read are in fact two of his own samurai. "Somaru's
real name in Hasegawa Hanzaemon," one of them explains. "Yes, and Choµ
suiÕs real name," another adds, "is Sakuma Saburoµzaemon." Ieshige
exclaims in surprise, "Those are my men! I would expect them to use
their real names. 'Somaru' and 'Choµsui' are such low-class,
despicable names. The gods at this shrine will never answer their
prayers if they insist on using such names."37 At a time when reading
even among commoners was increasing dramatically, this
characterization of Ieshige as being functionally illiterate is
particularly sarcastic.
Bunkoµ makes an unrelenting stream of jokes out of what he considers
to be some of the consequences of IeshigeÕs illnesses and inability
to rule effectively. The shogun, Bunkoµ reports, had to go to the
toilet very often, so facilities for his use were installed all over
the city. Unfortunately, this did not seem to help. "It was not
unusual that he would have accidents inside the palanquin."38 On one
occasion, Bunkoµ reports, Ieshige had to leave in the middle of a noµ
play at New YearÕs in order to relieve himself. When he finally
returned to his place, he made the actors start the play over from
the beginning.
In another anecdote the famous artist, Hanabusa Itchoµ (1652-1724)
seems at first to bear the brunt of Bunkoµ's satire, but the reader
quickly realizes that it is Shogun Ieshige who is the intended
victim.39 In this anecdote, the owner of the Tomoeya bordello in
Yoshiwara commissions Hanabusa to paint portraits of the two most
beautiful women from the classical tale, Soga monogatari (Tale of the
Soga brothers. 14th century). This tale of two brothers, Juµroµ and
Goroµ, whose mother raises them to avenge the murder of their father,
was quite popular in the Edo period. The two portraits that Hanabusa
is commissioned to paint are to be of Juµroµ's mistress, the
courtesan Tora Gozen and Keiwazaka Shoµshoµ, the shamaness and
prostitute who preached to the brothers and to Tora as they traveled.
Hanabusa misunderstands the instructions that he is given because of
his confusion of homonyms. He mistakenly thinks that the bordello
owner had instructed him to paint a tiger (tora) rather than Juroµ's
mistress, whose name was Tora. Instead of a portrait of the courtesan
Keiwazaka Shoµshoµ, Hanabusa thinks he is supposed to paint a scene
of the Xiang River (read "Shoµshoµ" in Japanese).40
While the first part of the anecdote describes a bordello operatorÕs
commissioning of a painting by Hanabusa, the second half of the
anecdote decribes the shogunÕs commissioning of a painting. "The
shogun commissioned Hanabusa to do a scroll painting of the story of
Momotaroµ." Ieshige, Bunkoµ announces, hoped to present the scroll as
a gift to the Nishi Honganji temple, the headquarters of the Pure
Land sect (Joµdoshuµ) in Kyoto. Ieshige, realizing that this temple
was renowned for its beautiful Momoyama period art in the style of
the Kanoµ school in which Hanabusa had been trained, seems to have
confused "Momotaroµ" and "Momoyama." Thinking there may be a
connection between the two, the shogun is intent on presenting a
painting of Momotaroµ, the hero of a children's akabon (fairy tale),
to the Buddhist temple famous for its Momoyama art.
Bunkoµ is creating a number of contrasting parallels in this anecdote
(mitate). A bordello operator and the shogun make up one unlikely
twosome. Both are placed in the same role of assigning Hanabusa to do
paintings. Secondly, the bordello ownerÕs request for paintings from
classical literature contrasts with the shogunÕs order to paint a
character from a childrenÕs story book, making the bordello owner
appear to be cultured and Shogun Ieshige ignorant, or at best
childish. Thirdly, Bunkoµ associates the Tomoeya, one of the most
prosperous houses of prostitution in the middle Edo period, with a
completely different type of institution: the Nishi Honganji temple,
one of the most influential Buddhist temples of the period.
The use of mitate, the contrast of opposites, is evident in the last
book of Soga monogatari. The two courtesans, Tora and Shoµshoµ,
become Buddhist nuns and are on a religious pilgrimage to pray for
the Soga brothers. The prostitute-turned-nun, Shoµshoµ, delivers an
edifying sermon to the mother of the two brothers instructing her on
the meaning of suffering and giving her guidance into the way of the
Buddha. (Soga monogatari, of course, was not simply a literary tale
but a religious text used by the Pure Land sect to spread popular
Buddhism.41) Bunkoµ uses the shukoµ and mitate of Soga monogatari and
takes it a step further: to demean the shogun and to associate the
Nishi Honganji with the Tomoeya. The incongruous and even shocking
connections between pimp and shogun; temple and bordello in BunkoµÕs
anecdote about Hanabusa Itchoµ is typical of his satirical style.
The Daimyoµ
Bunkoµ ridiculed many of the daimyoµ, who were obligated to reside in
Edo under the provisions of the sankin koµtai system. In a short
piece about a summer fireworks display, Bunkoµ tells a story that
allows his audience to see the humor in the foolishness and
ineptitude of a well-known daimyo.
Bunkoµ sets the scene by having his audience imagine a crowd of
boisterous, excited people anticipating a fireworks display on a cool
summer evening on the banks of the Sumida River at Ryoµgoku Bridge.
As the sun sets, and people are waiting for the fireworks to begin. A
short time later there is an announcement that the fireworks display
to be sponsored by the "the great daimyo of Sendai"42 would have to
be postponed. Bunkoµ does not mention the daimyoµ by name, but it
clear in the context of the anecdote that "the great daimyoµ of
Sendai" is Date Yoshimura (r.1703-1743).
What Bunkoµ does not explicitly mention is that Yoshimura's reign was
distinctive for an unprecedented number of large fires in Sendai.
During his tenure in office, Sendai experienced the incredible number
of twenty major conflagrations in which thousands of residences and
businesses were destroyed and many lives lost.43 During the thirty-
seven year rule of Yoshimura's predecessor, Date Tsunamura (r.1660-
1703), there were no major fires recorded in the domain; and during
the rule of Yoshimura's successor, Date Munemura (r. 1743-1756),
there were only three major fires.
Whether or not Yoshimura actually had plans to sponsor a fireworks
display or whether there is any truth at all to the story is less
important than Bunkoµ's holding up an illustrious daimyoµ family as
an object of ridicule, derision, and laughter by implying that
Yoshimura's only real claim to fame was the number of fires his
domain suffered. The humorous incongruity of the name Date Yoshimura
and a summer fireworks display was typical of the kind of satire that
Bunkoµ wrote.
The City Magistrate
Much like his use of literary texts, Bunkoµ adapted the Shintoµ
teachings of Masuho Nokoguchi (a.k.a. Zankoµ, 1655-1742) for his own
purposes and turned them into political satire that was directed
against Edo city magistrate Tsuchiya Masasuke (d. 1764).44 It was
Tsuchiya who would later sign Bunkoµ's death warrant.
Nokoguchi had encouraged a revival of Shinto beliefs and saw Shinto
as the only suitable religion for the Japanese. He condemned
Confucianism and Buddhism for its foreign connections. Bunkoµ begins
his anecdote about the city magistrate with a statement that he
attributes to Nokoguchi: "Yao and Shun, as well as the Buddha, were
quite successful at convincing people that they were virtuous, but
deep down they were nothing of the kind."45 Bunkoµ then draws a
parallel between these three great religious figures and the city
magistrate. Tsuchiya, Bunkoµ tells his audience, just like Yao, Shun,
and Buddha, is perceived to be virtuous but he has only a virtuous
facade.
The city magistrate often came up for derision in Bunkoµ's lectures.
It is difficult to pick out the most caustic remark Bunkoµ made about
him, but perhaps it was the comment made just two months before his
arrest. Bunkoµ points out that Tsuchiya was quite inferior to his
predecessor, the greatly admired O÷oka Tadasuke (1677-1751), who
during his tenure as magistrate from 1717 to 1736, was legendary for
his wise and just rulings. Bunkoµ derides Tsuchiya for being capable
of nothing more than a poor imitation of Ooka. Referring to the
magistrate as "a Tsuchiya somebody" (Tsuchiya nanigashi) or simply
as "tsuchi" (dirt), Bunkoµ implies that he is nothing more than a
countrified, ignorant boor. Tsuchiya and Ooka "are as different as
heaven and earth,"46 he writes. This pithy contrast between Tsuchiya,
who is like dirt/earth and Ooka, whose tenure in office Bunkoµ
associated with heaven, is the most directly insulting commentary
Bunkoµ made on any public official.
It was Tsuchiya Masasuke who cajoled senior counselor Matsudaira
Takechika (1716-1779) to give the required approval for the death
penalty and then wrote out Bunkoµ's death warrant five months after
these insulting remarks. By law, the city magistrate could not have
imposed a penalty more severe than exile on his own authority.
Tsuchiya seemed to have gone out of his way to convince the senior
counselor that a death sentence was warranted.47
The Arrest
Sekine Shichibei (pen name: Shisei, 1825-1893) gives a full account
of BunkoµÕs arrest on the evening 1758. 9.16, just as he had finished
the last lecture of a series that had begun six days earlier.48
Outside the shop of a certain Yasuemon, a seller of dry goods in
Kuremasa-choµ (present-day Chuµoµ-ku, Nihonbashi, 3-choµme), Bunkoµ
had put up a placard that read: "'Little known facts: Raindrops in
the forest.' Each evening at 6:00 p.m. Speaker: Baba Bunkoµ." A crowd
of about two hundred people had gathered on that fateful evening. As
Bunkoµ lectured, a constable from the office of north city
magistrate, Yoda Masatsugu (r.1753-1768), was making his usual rounds
patrolling the neighborhood. As the constable entered the shop,
Yasuemon called to one of BunkoµÕs companions, a man by the name of
Bunchoµ, and told him there was a constable present. Bunkoµ was
coming to the end of his lecture, and the crowd of two hundred was
being worked up into a state of heightened anger and indignation as
Bunkoµ was describing the unjust treatment of the peasants in Gujoµ
under daimyo Kanamori Yorikane (1713-1763). Bunchoµ tried to signal
to his friend by gesturing and pointing to the constable who had just
walked into the shop. Bunkoµ, however, either did not see the signal
or did not want to stop speaking just as he was coming to the climax
of his lecture.
On completion of the lecture, Bunkoµ began distributing a six-page
abbreviated transcript of his talk, Hiragana mori no shizuku
(Raindrops in the forest in hiragana),49 for 300 mon. This was
approximately the equivalent of three days wages for a common
laborer. This was a phenomenal price for such a short, unpublished
pamphlet. Perhaps because of its unusual subject matter, a peasant
uprising and a call for a daimyoµ to relinquish power, it was very
popular. This document is no longer extant, but it is the opinion of
Yamada Tadao that the Tokugawa jikki citation that bears the
title "Mori no shizuku"50 is, at least in part, material that was
actually taken from Hiragana mori no shizuku and then rewritten by a
bakufu official to be used as evidence to incriminate Bunkoµ.51
After he had finished speaking at about 10:00 p.m. and the crowd was
beginning to file out of the shop, the constable approached Bunkoµ
and said, "You must be crazy to give a lecture like that." Having a
cup of tea, Bunkoµ laughed scornfully at the constable and replied, "I
Õm not the one whoÕs crazy. We are all sane here. ItÕs you people who
are the crazy ones." Bunkoµ was immediately placed under arrest.52
Held by the Edo city magistrate and interrogated for three months,
Bunkoµ remained adamant during his long detainment, refusing to
recant his mockery of the shogun, his denunciations of various
daimyo, his insults of the city magistrate Tsuchiya Masasuke, or his
alleged interference in the affairs of the bakufu. Three months
later, at the end of his questioning, Tsuchiya was the city
magistrate on duty.53
The Execution
At the end of the year (Hoµreki 8), the Supreme Judicial Council (hyoµ
joµsho) cited reasons why it had determined that Bunkoµ was guilty of
serious capital offenses. Tsuchiya Masasuke wrote the document (moµ
shiwatashisho)54 that the high court used as evidence to condemn Bunko
µ to death.
Baba Bunkoµ, lecturer of Matsushima-choµ, age 41.
The above-mentioned earned his living as a raconteur of old war
stories. He was very poor and, not having enough money to buy
clothes, he begged from those who gathered at his lectures. It was
unusual for a lecturer to behave in this manner.
Putting out a placard, he passed out written materials about a
certain government investigation [the case of Kanamori Yorikane] and
spoke about it. Some of these materials were distributed by lot. What
is worse, he composed writings dealing with this very serious topic
and distributed them to book dealers.
In addition, a number of people who attended his evening lectures
heard his various theories and wrote down every word he said. They
carried these notes outside of Edo. This was a dishonorable act that
spread heterodox ideas.
Although he was ordered to stop spreading rumors about current
problems, he continued lecturing; thus holding the shogunate in
contempt. His nightly lectures were hearsay and heterodox opinion.
Moreover, he put frivolous matters into print and then distributed
them.
The penalty prescribed for this crime is exile. However, as he has
been critical of the administration, and as he has slandered
officials, he is to be first imprisoned and then executed. He will be
beheaded at Asakusa after having been paraded around town.
By order of:
Tsuchiya Echizen [no kami Masasuke]
Matsudaira ukon no shoµgen [lieutenant of the inner palace guards,
Takechika]
Hoµreki 8. 12.25 [23 January 1759]
Although there were many other executions during the Edo period for
specific capital crimes and for political intrigue, Bunkoµ was the
only person to be executed for lectures and anecdotes about specific
government figures.55
Accused and convicted of "holding the shogunate in contempt" and
spreading "heterodox opinions,"56 Bunkoµ was beheaded at Kozukappara
(present-day Minami-senju, Arakawa-ku) on 23 January 1759.
Epilogue
Even though he may have been eccentric, there is no evidence that
Bunkoµ purposely exposed himself to being charged with crimes that
would demand the death penalty. In fact, there had been somewhat of a
relaxation of the strict enforcement of the censorship laws of 1722
during the years that Bunkoµ was speaking and writing. In 1752,
shortly before Bunkoµ began lecturing in Edo, the proscription
against Joµkanboµ Koµa's Imayo heta dangi (A clumsy homily on the
present age, 1752) had been lifted. Though the names of samurai
families were not mentioned in this book, it did criticize the elite
of the bushi class, calling them "a plague on society."57 The
permission given for the publication of this book may have encouraged
Bunkoµ to attempt to go even further in exposing the foibles of
government officials by mentioning samurai and even the shogun by
name.
Another possible reason why Bunkoµ did not worry about being arrested
is that he was unaware of the specific punishment that would be meted
out under the provisions of the censorship laws; and consequently, he
wrote and spoke without any fear of reprisal. Law in the Tokugawa
period and the precise repercussions that one would have to face if
proven to have violated the law were, in fact, not common
knowledge.58 Most people were kept ignorant of the penal code and
simply knew that if they did certain things, they would be punished;
but they did not actually know what their punishment would be. The
Osadamegaki hyakkajoµ (Edict in one hundred articles, 1742),59 which
was promulgated by Matsudaira Norimura (1686-1746), was "not allowed
to be seen by anyone but the magistrates."60 It was not addressed to
the people subject to its provisions and, in fact, was deliberately
kept from them. Only the court nobility at Kyoto, the daimyoµ, and
some samurai had access to the documents which promulgated the penal
code; and that access was partial and restricted. Even if Bunkoµ had
known the law, he would not have suspected that he was in danger of
capital punishment. The death penalty was reserved for those who had
committed murder, adultery, arson, counterfeit, or theft of more than
ten ryoµ, or were guilty of having sold medicines that were
poisonous.61
Regardless of how much he knew of the law, Bunkoµ must have been
convinced that he could get away with insulting the bakufu and its
officials. The laws governing publication had never been very
effective in controlling privately circulated manuscripts.62 So Bunko
µ was probably not worried about the government taking notice of his
writings and even less concerned that a constable would appear at his
lectures. His only audience, as far as he was aware, was made up of
townspeople, peasants, and roµnin like himself. These are all
plausible factors in Bunkoµ's carelessness in writing such scathing
critical satire, speaking openly about public officials, and being
apparently caught unawares when arrested.
Appendix: I
Anecdotes by Baba Bunkoµ from Toµdai Edo hyaku bakemono,.
1. The case of the Narukami Nun1
In the environs of Hama-choµ2 there lived a woman who is called the
Narukami nun. She was the wife of the physician, Kanemaki Genjun3 of
Tachibana-choµ.4 After Genjun died from an illness, Takane Genryuµ
took the name of this deceased physician and then he became known as
Kanemaki Genjun. The wife of the previous Genjun was then taken in by
the new Genjun, the former Takane Genryuµ.
When her husband died, "the Narukami nun" pulled all of her raven-
black hair out by the roots to become a nun. Everyone thought it was
much too soon to do this since she was still very young. To decide to
do such a thing is going to extremes, but she may have done it
because of an excessively impulsive temper. Everyone said right away
that she had done it in defense of her womanly chastity and that it
was admirable and praiseworthy.
But this woman is a monstrous fraud. She is exceedingly fond of the
comic interludes (kyoµgen) at the theater and never misses the change
of the program at the kabuki. She is a woman of easy virtue and
conducts her life in every way as if it were theater. Recently she
had an illicit affair with an unknown man of low class.
Not long ago, she was advised to leave the present Genjun and remarry
with a virtuous man from Kanagawa Hongo.5 She was distressed over the
fact that if she went to Kanagawa Hongo, it would not be possible to
meet the aforementioned low-class rogue.
She went to the ballad drama Kanadehon Chushingura (The treasury of
loyal retainers)6 and saw how Osono, the wife of Amakawaya Gihei, was
pressed by her father to remarry. But in the trick devised by O÷boshi
Yuranosuke, Osono, had her hair cut off and the proposal of marriage
to another man had to be canceled.
Just as she had seen in this drama, Genjun's wife became a nun and
gave up remarrying. It was only for outward appearance that she
shaved her black hair for her deceased husband and became a nun. It
was all to show herself off as a praiseworthy woman. She is a great
monster. Since last year at the Festival of the Dead when she
attended the drama in which Segawa Kikunojoµ7 performed the role of
the Narukami nun in "Onna Narukami,"8 she has had the appearance of a
nun but is really filled with sexual passion. She is called Rokoµ's
nun and is quite shameless.
At the performance she was wearing beautiful jewelry and had on a
sheer black kimono with a matching black satin obi and black velvet
waist sash. Her head was almost completely covered in black crepe.
Accompanying her were two very beautiful servant girls, whom she
dressed in plain kimonos with a flower pattern showing the foot of a
mountain. On the shoulder of one of the girls she had dyed the
characters for "white cloud," and on the other girl's shoulder the
characters for "black cloud."9 They were dressed like Narukami's
disciples, Hakuun (white cloud) and Kokuun (black cloud). Every
single day this fickle woman went, attended by these maidservants, to
such places as Asakusa Emma Hall, Kayadera,10 and to the stone image
of Manjusri where she heard sermons and edifying stories. She
committed adultery there with licentious men in broad daylight.
In appearance, she showed herself as one who had once set out on the
path of the Buddha and was living according to the Buddhist law. It
must be said, however, that in licentiousness this monster has no
equal.
2. The case of Hanabusa Itchoµ11
When Itchoµ was a student, he was only one of a hundred foolish
masters. All of them are strange monsters who often change their
appearance, but Itchoµ is the one who is the celebrated old fox.
He was asked to do paintings of Tora and Shoµshoµ12 that would be
displayed in the New Yoshiwara district. In the room where he was
supposed to paint Tora he painted instead a tiger in a bamboo grove.
In the room where he was supposed to paint Shoµshoµ he painted a
scene of the evening rain on Xi Hu.13
While doing these paintings at the Tomoeya, Itchoµ munches on
dumplings. On one occasion he ate a plate of eighty-one dumplings in
about a minute--a monster of great accomplishments. Now it is said
that everyone in Yoshiwara died of laughter over this.
Not long ago, when the shogun was traveling to the capital to the Jodo
µ sect temple, Nishihonganji,14 he commissioned Itchoµ to do a
painting on a scroll so that he could present it to Honganji. The
painting was to be a biographical scroll of Momotaroµ. The Honganji
was extremely pleased with the painting.
As a reward for his effort, Itchoµ received a request for an audience
before the shogun where he was given one serving of soba which he ate
in the shogun's presence. It is said that the food lay very heavy on
his stomach, and he complained about it. There were a lot of people
in attendance including the son-in-law of Nakamura Ribei of Sakai and
Yamagataya Soµemon15 of Shinmuragi-choµ.16 These fellows are also a
couple of the great monsters of Edo.
NOTES
1. "Narukami" was a kabuki play first performed at the Nakamuraza in
1684. It is one of the "Eighteen Favorites," written by Ichikawa
Danjiroµ I (1660-1704).
2. An area in present-day Chuµoµ-ku, Nihonbashi 1-3 choµme where,
during the Edo period, there was a high concentration of daimyo
mansions.
3. According to Imayo ika jinmei roku (List of contemporary
physicians) in National Diet Library, Tokyo, Kanemaki was a
pediatrician of Ryoµgoku, Muramatsu-choµ.
4. Present-day Chuµoµ-ku-ku, Higashi Nihonbashi 3 choµme.
5. Present-day Yokohama, Totsuka-ku.
6. Kanadehon chushingura, Act X.
7. This must be Segawa Kikunojoµ II (1741-1793) since Bunkoµ a few
lines later calls her "Rokoµ's nun." Kikunojoµ I (1693-1749) had also
been famous for performing "Onna Narukami" roles.
8. This is a genre of kyoµgen first performed in 1696.12 at the
Nakamuraza. The play referred to here is "Onna Narukami omoi no
takitsuse," written by Tsuuchi Kuheiji (dates unknown) and first
performed at Ichimuraza in 1743.3.
9. These are two comic priests who stand guard over Narukami as he
prays.
10. This is a temple in Asakusa, Kurobune-choµ.
11. The title in Edo hyaku bakemono is "The monster of painting."
Itchoµ (1652-1724) was born in Osaka and came to Edo at the age of
fifteen to receive painting lessons from Kanoµ Yasunobu (1613-1685)
and took the name Kanoµ Shinkoµ. Having published a collection of
satirical designs which offended the shogunal government, he was
banished to Miyakejima, one of the seven Izu Islands, in 1698 where
he lived for twelve years. It was after his exile that he took the
name Hanabusa Itchoµ.
12. Tora Gozen and Kewaizaka Shoµshoµ are two characters in Soga
monogatari (Tale of the Soga brothers, 1361-1388).
13. Xi Hu , a lake in Chekiang, is one of the eight views of the
Xiang (Shoµshoµ) River, which flows through eastern and southern
Hunan province. It is an area famous for its beautiful scenes and
many historic sites.
14. The headquarters of the Pure Land sect in Kyoto.
15. Two merchants of the Edo period.
16. In present-day Shibuya, Tokyo.
Appendix II
I. The Writings of Baba Bunkoµ (in chronological order).
1. Seken o-hatamoto katagi ¢Ōäų{eC (Sketches of worldly
bannermen, 1754.7) National Diet Library MS. Okuda Satoshi Etrade;"c
"N, ed., Baba Bunkoµ shuµ "nź¦kW(Collection of writings by Baba
Bunkoµ). Soµshoµ Edo Bunkoµ `p`]Ė¦É (The library of Edo
literature) 12. Tokyo: Kokusho kankoµkai ``§sļ (National
Publishing Association), 1987. pp. 5-86.
2. Kindai koµjitsu genpiroku §`ćöĄµ"é^ (A record of contemporary
public secrets, 1754.?). Okuda Satoshi. pp. 87-176.
3. Kinsei koµjitsu genpiroku §¢öĄµ"é (A record of recent public
secrets, 1755). (The content of this work is the same as Kindai koµ
jitsu genpiroku.)
4. Toµji chinsetsu yoµhiroku "'æąv"é^ (A confidential record of
current, little-known facts, 1756.1-3?). Okada Satoshi, ed. Baba Bunko
µ shuµ. pp. 177-253.
5.Toµsei buya zokudan "¢ģ`Š'k (Contemporary talks on worldly
affairs in Musashi, 1756.4). National Diet Library MS. Tsukamoto
Tetsuzoµ 'Ė{"NO, ed. Mado no susami zen, Buya zokudan zen, Edo
chomonshuµ zen `ĢįEŻ`S,@ģ `Š'k`S,]Ė'įW`S. Yuµhoµdoµ
bunkoµ L"”¦É, vol. 86. Toµkyoµ: Yuµhoµdoµ shoten `"X, 1932.
6. Hoµhei mitsu ga hitotsu óü§"é"o'Ģ (Collected records of
detailedsecrets of Hoµreki 6 [1756]), 1757.3). National Diet Library
MS. Mitamura Engyo O"c`¼"Ī, ed. Mikan zuihitsu hyakushu ¢§MS
ķ (Collection of unpublished essays). vol. 6.Tokyo: Chuµoµ koµronsha
'ö_Ń 1977. pp. 13-31.
7. Kinsei Edo chomonshuµ §¢]Ė'įW (A collection of tales of
contemporary Edo,1757.9), in Tsukamoto Tetsuzoµ. Mado no susami zen,
Buya zokudan zen, Edo chomonshuµ zen, vol. 86. Tokyo: Yuµhoµdoµ
shoten, 1932.
8. Morioka mitsugimonogatari XEtrade;vØź (The tale of a tribute
from Morioka, 1757). National Diet Library MS. Kondoµ Heijoµ §"”r
é, ed. Kaitei shiseki shuµran 'čjŃW (Collection of historical
writings, revised). Tokyo:Rinsen shoten Õģ`"X, 1984 reprint of
1902 edition.
9. Sarayashiki bengiroku M®Ü^^ (A record of doubts and
questions about the legend of the haunted mansion, 1758.1). National
Diet Library MS. Waseda daigaku shuppanbu `ī"c`åwo"", eds.
Kinsei jitsuroku zensho §¢Ą^`S` (Compendium of authentic records
of earlymodern times). Tsubouchi Shoµyoµ kansen 'Ų"ąēź”E`I. Tokyo:
Waseda University, 1929. pp. 1-22.
10. Yamato kaidan keijitsu zensho `åaö'k "`S` (A recent complete
collection of Japanese ghost stories, 1758.1). Tokyo University MS.
11. Toµsei shoka hyakunin isshu "¢"®Slźń (A collection of one
hundred poems about contemporary families, 1758.4). National Diet
Library MS.
12. Hoµreki toµdai Edo hyaku bakemono óŻ"`ć]ĖS»Ø (Edo Today:
an album of one hundred monsters in the Hoµreki period, 1758.7).
National Diet Library MS. Hayakawa Junzaburoµ`ģOY, Sekine
Masanao ÖEtrade;E'¼, et al., eds. Toµdai Edo hyaku bakemono. Nihon
zuihitsu taisei "{M`å¬ (Compendium of Japanese essays) Series
2, vol. 1. Tokyo: Yoshikawa koµbunkan gģO¦Ł, 1928. pp. 787-806.
Edo hyaku bakemono ]ĖS»Ø (One hundred monsters of Edo).Mori Senzo
µ X`LO, et al.,eds. Zoku enseki jisshu, vol. 3 `±Ī„ķ,`ęOE
trade; (A second collection of essays from the early modern period).
Tokyo: Chuµoµ koµronsha, 1980.
13. Meikun Kyoµhoµ roku ¾NE^ (The record of a wise lord in the
Kyoµhoµ period [1716-1736], 1758.7). National Diet Library MS. Okada
Satoshi, pp. 255- 302. [This work is also known as Kyoµhoµ roku E
^ (Record of the Kyoµhoµ period) and Kyoµhoµ hiroku E"é^ (Secret
record of the Kyoµhoµ period)].
14. Genmitsu keijitsu uwasa µ§ "„. (An investigation of recent
rumors, 1758.7), also known as: Keijitsu zensho "`S` (Complete
writings of recent times). Mitamura Engyo, ed. Mikan zuihitsu
hyakushu , vol. 9. 1977. pp. 13-31.
15. Guchi shuµi monogatari Ż'sEāØź (Gleanings from idle
complaints, 1758.8?). National Diet Library MS. Mitamura Engyo, ed.
Mikan zuihitsu hyakushu , vol. 9. 1977. pp. 11-25.
16. Akita Suginao monogatari H"c'¼Øź (Tale of Akita Suginao,
1758). National Diet Library MS. Hayakawa Junzaburoµ, ed. Rekkoµ
shimpi roku zen ńó["é^`S (Complete record of the secrets of the
daimyo). Tokyo: Kokusho kankoµkai `§sļ, 1914.
17. Akita chiranki jitsuroku H"c”LĄ^ (A true record of war and
peace in Akita, 1758), in Hayakawa Junzaburoµ, ed. Rekkoµ shimpi roku
zen.
http://web.aall.ufl.edu/SJS/Bunko.html
Offline 
Send Email