@article{oai:rekihaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00001273,
 author = {後藤, 雅知 and Goto, Masatomo},
 journal = {国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Japanese History},
 month = {Feb},
 note = {application/pdf, 本稿では、東総地域における漁業社会構造の一端を明らかにするために、下利根川中流域で起きた正徳・享保期の漁場争論を取り上げて検討を加えた。正徳四〜五年にかけて、下総国香取郡佐原・篠原・津宮三か村と、三か村より上流の漁場を運上金上納の対価として請け負った「運上川」請負人との争論が起き、三か村は村前漁場を川ではなく入海とすることで、「運上川」から分離することに成功したが、漁場範囲は狭められた。この争論において、「運上川」請負人は下流域では川魚の遡上路を確保することが第一であり、これを阻害する新規漁業は中止されるべきであると主張したが、幕府の判断では認められず、三か村前での地引網漁操業が優先された。下利根川中流域では、村前漁場での地引網漁は川魚の遡上を阻害する漁業とは認定されず、下流域の村々の意向によって、以後も自由に操業されることが許容された。また享保期には、流域の百姓が、より高額の運上金を上納する代わりに、新たに他村の村前に地引網の網代を設定しようとする動向が強まり、三か村は倍額の網代役永や海役米を上納するとともに、旧来から一貫して村前漁場を利用してきた由緒を強調して、自村の漁場占有を堅持せざるをえなくなった。この過程で、新規に網代を設定しようとする百姓との差異を強調するべく、三か村は網代役永の上納は地引網代利用の対価に過ぎず、これよりも海役米上納こそが、漁業のほか、村前漁場範囲内での砂洲の開発・肥料採取などを行いうる根拠、すなわち漁場占有の中核的論拠であると主張するようになった。こうして三か村は村前漁場を確保したが、正徳期争論の結果、三か村より下流の村々が新規に地引網の網代を設定することに対しては干渉できず、享保期以降は、不漁に直面せざるをえなくなるのである。, This paper is an examination of a dispute over fishing grounds that occurred in the middle reaches of the Lower Tone River during the Shotoku (1711-1716) and Kyoho (1716-1736) periods for the purpose of shedding light on one aspect of the structure of fishing society in the Toso region. During 1714 and 1715, a dispute arose between the three villages of Sawara, Shinohara and Tsunomiya in Katori-gun, Shimousa Province and collectors of a river transportation tax who received tax payments for compensation for fishing grounds upstream from the three villages. By claiming that the fishing grounds by their villages were not part of the river but were a sea inlet, the three villages succeeded in their bid to avoid having to pay this river transportation tax, though the scope of their fishing grounds was reduced as a result. In this dispute, the primary concern of the river transportation tax collectors was to maintain a channel in the lower reaches of the river for fresh water fish to swim upstream, and to this end they stressed that any new fishing operation that impeded this should be stopped. However, this was not recognized in the decision handed down by the Bakufu authorities as priority was given to fishing using dragnets in the river beside the three villages. In the middle reaches of the Lower Tone River fishing using dragnets in the fishing grounds of the villages was not recognized as a fishing operation that impeded the running of fresh water fish and from that time on permission to operate freely was granted in accordance with the wishes of the villages along the lower reaches of the river. Then, later in Kyoho period, farmers in the river basin increased their activities centered on attempts to set new net taxes on dragnets in the river alongside other villages as a substitute for paying even higher river transportation taxes. The three villages paid double the amount of net taxes and sea taxes, and stressing that they had a history extending back many centuries of using the fishing grounds alongside the villages they ended up having to maintain exclusive possession of their own villages' fishing grounds. In this process, they emphasized the differences they had with the farmers who were attempting to set a new net tax, and the three villages claimed that payment of the net tax was nothing more than compensation for use of the dragnet tax and that rather it was the payment of sea taxes that enabled not only fishing operations but also the development of sand banks and fertilizer extraction in the area around the villages' fishing grounds. In this way, the three villages secured the fishing grounds, although the effect of the dispute in Shotoku period was that three villages were not able to intervene in the establishment of new net taxes for dragnets by villages further down the river, with the result that from the Kyoho period onwards these villages had to cope with poor catches.},
 pages = {161--176},
 title = {正徳・享保期における下利根川中流域の漁業と村々（東総村落社会史）},
 volume = {115},
 year = {2004},
 yomi = {ゴトウ, マサトモ}
}