Resisting Repression at the Domain Level, 1856

The most famous instance of defiance took place in Okayama domain in 1856.^[41] The context here also concerns a "reform." As a result of the political and economic repercussions following Commodore Perry's opening of Japan in 1853, Okayama domain in 1855/11 initiated a series of social reforms that included a decree on frugality. The last five of this decree's twenty-nine articles came to be known as a special decree (betsudan ofuregaki ) because they applied only to kawata. Among the stipulations were the following: Clothing must be plain, without designs or crests, and either yellowish-brown, persimmon, or indigo blue in color. Kawata had to remove their wooden clogs whenever they met peasants, and they could not wear them at all when they went to other villages. These regulations were typical of discrim-

[40] See Harada Tomohiko's remarks in Kobayashi Shigeru et al., "Zadankai," 494.

[41] KDJ 11:912, s.v. "Bizen no kuni Okayama hanryo^[*] Ansei sannen shibuzome ikki"; Teraki, Kinsei buraku , 67-69. The current name, Shibuzome ikki (Persimmon Dye Riot), was given at the occasion of its centennial anniversary, in 1956 (see also Cornell, "Caste Patron," 60-62).

inatory laws against kawata, but they also applied to genin and small landholders (in Hozu) and even new titled peasants (in Tanoguchi) (see chapter 3). This "reform" was to be enforced by the beginning of 1856. On 1855/12/27-28 the village headmen informed the respective kawata heads of the new regulations and requested their seals of approval.

Shocked by the stepped-up discrimination, the kawata heads insisted on postponing ratification to allow time for prior discussion in their communities. The hamlet assemblies all opposed ratification, which led to a number of regional meetings of kawata heads. First the leaders of five urban hamlets convened at the Jofukuji^[*] (in Shimo-Ifuku village, Mino district), the head temple for all the kawata of Bizen province, under the pretext of paying the customary New Year's visit to their temple. There they decided to mobilize all the kawata communities of the domain at a general meeting in order to press for the repeal of the discriminatory laws. Seventeen heads of rural hamlets, however, had already agreed at a separate meeting to first ratify the laws and then press for a repeal. On 1856/1/15 the heads of fifty-three communities held a stormy meeting at the Jofukuji^[*] in which the leaders from the countryside resisted the more radical plan of their urban colleagues. After several sessions the radicals prevailed and drafted a formal petition to withdraw the laws.

The kawata's arguments against the discriminatory regulations were clearly spelled out: (1) kawata were cultivators, paid tribute, and were thus "honorable," that is, titled peasants who should be treated like other peasants and not singled out for separate treatment in a time of crisis;^[42] (2) many of their fields were of low quality, increased discrimination would squelch the incentive for young people to work them, and therefore the fields would lie fallow and produce no tribute; and (3)

[42] In other incidents also the kawata expressed their self-image as onbyakusho^[*] , that is, honorable, or titled, peasants (see Mae Kei'ichi, "Kinsei chu-koki^[*] ni okeru 'kawata' no keizai seikatsu," m Burakushi no kenkyu^[*] : Zenkindai-hen , ed. Buraku mondai kenkyujo^[*] [Kyoto: Buraku mondai kenkyujo^[*] , 1984], 266-70). We saw in chapter z how a whole new community of exclusively peasant kawata was created in Umaji in 1808 (Igeta, "Kuchi-Tanba," 97); Kisaki village, in Tanba, counted twenty landholding kawata, some of them extremely wealthy (owning thirty-six koku, some of it in neighboring villages) (see Igeta Ryoji^[*] , "Iriai sabetsu to buraku mondai," Kindai Kyoto no burakushi , ed. Buraku mondai kenkyujo^[*] , Kyoto no buraku mondai, 2 [Kyoto: Buraku mondai kenkyujo^[*] , 1986], 171).

when they could not meet the tax quota, many kawata obtained the remaining cash by pawning clothes, which would now become impossible if the proposed restrictions on the kinds of clothes they could wear were imposed. This also would negatively affect their ability to pay tribute. It should be noted that this last point implies that peasants were engaged in economic exchange with the kawata and accepted kawata clothing for pawn without much fear of pollution.

The domain denied the petition on 4/6. The intendant (gundai) charged with seeing that the regulations were ratified pressured the village group headmen to secure the signatures of all the kawata heads. One by one the kawata heads capitulated (some under torture) and signed the documents. On 4/15, however, another general assembly (the fifteenth) was convened. In the tense atmosphere something unexpected happened. The kawata leadership had thus far remained within the law by taking the petition route, but now they were criticized by the rank and file, who raised the possibility of making an illegal, direct appeal (goso^[*] ). In subsequent strategy deliberations it was decided not to surprise the domain lord by going to him directly but instead to approach a certain elder who had a "liberal" reputation. The elder headed a rural office in Mushiage, in Oku district (some twenty kilometers from Okayama castle), which geographically was perhaps a safer place to stage a mass protest.

The domain officials, aware of what was brewing, on 6/9 ordered a village group headman to "investigate" the Konoshita^[*] hamlet, which had taken the lead in recommending the direct appeal. This immediately triggered the decision to proceed with the illegal protest. Mobilization instructions were hurried to all males between the ages of fifteen and sixty of all fifty-three kawata communities. In the early morning of 6/13, disregarding pleas and threats from the village group headmen and village headmen, some fifteen hundred to two thousand kawata gathered in a dry riverbed in Yokaichi^[*] village (Oku district). The next afternoon they started their march in the direction of Mushiage. By night they had arrived at Sayama village, where they put up camp and made preparations for the next day's trek to their destination.

The elder, of course, had been informed about this small army on the march and had prepared troops armed with cannon to welcome the protesters. He met them at Sayama the following day, however, and participated in negotiations that ended in a promise that he would forward their petition to the domain's council of elder retainers, who

would then review the discriminatory laws. When they had received this promise, the kawata disbanded. The domain council, while appreciative of the compassion shown to the protesters, felt that the honor and authority of the village headmen were at stake and ordered the immediate ratification by the kawata leadership, which now had no choice but to comply.

Punishments followed betrayal. Twelve of the ringleaders were arrested and jailed; by the time they were sentenced, three years later (in 1859/6), half of them had died. The entire populations of the communities that had participated in the protest were sentenced to one to two weeks' domiciliary confinement. A few of the officials—the village group headmen, the village headmen, and the Oku district commissioner and inspector—were held responsible for the mismanagement of the situation, and they also were punished with domiciliary confinement. This incident of protest, resistance, and reprisal has inspired the struggles of burakumin against continued discrimination in the twentieth century.^[43]