{"@context":{"@vocab":"https://cir.nii.ac.jp/schema/1.0/","rdfs":"http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#","dc":"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/","dcterms":"http://purl.org/dc/terms/","foaf":"http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/","prism":"http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.0/","cinii":"http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ns/1.0/","datacite":"https://schema.datacite.org/meta/kernel-4/","ndl":"http://ndl.go.jp/dcndl/terms/","jpcoar":"https://github.com/JPCOAR/schema/blob/master/2.0/"},"@id":"https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1390282763070658176.json","@type":"Article","productIdentifier":[{"identifier":{"@type":"DOI","@value":"10.24471/shigaku.126.11_1"}},{"identifier":{"@type":"NAID","@value":"130007520003"}}],"dc:title":[{"@language":"ja","@value":"律令官衙財政の基本構造"},{"@language":"en","@value":"The fiscal structure of Ritsuryo administrative offices"}],"dcterms:alternative":[{"@language":"ja","@value":"民部省・主計寮の職掌を中心に"},{"@language":"en","@value":"The case of the Civil Affairs Bureau Tax Revenue  Accounting Office"}],"dc:language":"ja","description":[{"type":"abstract","notation":[{"@language":"en","@value":"In order to clarify further the fiscal structure and historical characteristics of central administrative offices in ancient Japan governed under the Ritsuryo律令 legal codes introduced from Tang China, the author of the present article focuses on discourse conducted to date on the aspects of budgeting and fiscal management, in particular comparing the duties of the Tax Revenue Accounting Office (Shukeiryo 主計寮) of the Civil Affairs Bureau (Minbusho民部省) with the fiscal management agencies of the Tang Dynasty’s central government.<br>\nThe funds necessary to operate the Ritsuryo state’s administrative apparatus were allotted on a project-by-project basis through a process of application and approval deliberated by the Shukeiryo. In contrast to the Tang emperors formally receiving annual budget reports from their fiscal management office, the Takushi 度支, the emperors of Japan did not participate in state fiscal operations. Moreover, in Japan the project funding applications submitted by administrative agencies gradually became predetermined, thus formalizing the Shukeiryo’s budgeting function.<br>\nIn terms of the procurement of administrative funding, the Tang Dynasty Takushi not only relied on the general taxation system, but also a system of trade that utilized local fiscal resources. At the initial stages of the Japanese Ritsuryo system, provisions allowed only for institutions procuring the wherewithal for rites and ceremonies from exclusively within the capital (Kinai畿内) region, in stark contrast to the revenue procurement function of Tang Dynasty fiscal managers, revealing institutions continued from pre-Ritsuryo times. With the increased need for funding as the central bureaucracy expanded, the demand was met by the expansion of a system of trade in-kind procuring revenue sources from outside the capital region to fund the central government.<br>\nWith respect to budgeting, it was the Tang Dynasty Office of Auditing (Hibu 比部) that kept accounts of the whole country’s annual fiscal situation. Also in Tang China each administrative office possessed its own independent source of funds called <i>gongxie</i> 公廨, the use of which the Hibu auditors also prepared an accounting settlement. The duties of the Hibu were assumed in Japan by the Shukeiryo, which dealt less with annual budgeting than confirming the conditions of each administrative office's store supplies, revealing that at the early stages of the Ritsuryo system in Japan each administrative office did not possess its own independent sources of revenue, thus reducing the significance of accounting settlement procedures.<br>\nThe author concludes that in all fiscal functions---budgeting, procurement and settlement of accounts---the Japanese Ritsuryo institutions differed markedly from those of the Tang Dynasty, indicating the dominance of the pre-Ritsuryo custom of ruling elites at the center redistributing tribute submitted from the provincial regions."},{"@language":"ja","@value":"本稿は律令国家の中央官衙財政の基本構造およびその歴史的特質の解明を目指すものである。検討にあたっては予算会計論・財政官司論の視覚を継承しつつ、日本古代の財政担当官司である民部省・主計寮の職掌を、唐の財政官司と比較するという手法をとった。<br>\n律令国家の各官衙の必要経費は、事業ごとに必要経費をそのつど申請・受給するものであり、主計寮が審査にかかわった。唐の皇帝は予算担当官司である度支が作成する年度予算の報告を受けていたのに対し、日本の天皇は国家財政の運用に関与しない。また官司ごとの請求も次第に固定化し、財政担当官司である主計寮の予算機能は意味をなさなくなる。<br>\n官衙必要経費の調達方法としては、一般税制のほか、地方財源を使用して調達する交易制がある。律令制当初は、畿内から祭祀必要物を調達する制度のみが規定され、これは唐の財政官司による経費調達機能とは全く異なる、律令制以前の慣行を継承するものであった。しかし律令官僚制の進展により必要経費が増大すると、畿外の地方財源を官衙必要経費に充てる交易雑物制の拡大がその需要を満たした。<br>\n決算制度については、唐では比部という官司が中国全土の年間財政状況を把握し決算を掌握した。また唐では各官司が公廨という独立財源を有しており、これの運用を監査するのも比部の決算制度に含まれていた。日本は比部の職掌を民部省・主計寮の職掌に継承したが、日本では各官衙の備品状況を確認するだけで年間予算との関係は薄く、律令制当初は官衙独立財源も存在しなかったため、決算制度の意義は小さかった。<br>\nこのようなシステムで日本の律令官衙財政は運営されていた。予算・調達・決算のいずれも唐のそれとは異質なもので、地方からの貢納物の支配層による再分配という、律令制以前のあり方に規定される部分が大きいと言える。"}],"abstractLicenseFlag":"disallow"}],"creator":[{"@id":"https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1030285133880470529","@type":"Researcher","personIdentifier":[{"@type":"NRID","@value":"9000019156252"},{"@type":"NRID","@value":"9000411842292"},{"@type":"NRID","@value":"9000410001571"},{"@type":"NRID","@value":"9000411659911"},{"@type":"RESEARCHMAP","@value":"https://researchmap.jp/sgs-kanbe"}],"foaf:name":[{"@language":"ja","@value":"神戸 航介"},{"@language":"en","@value":"KANBE Kosuke"}]}],"publication":{"publicationIdentifier":[{"@type":"PISSN","@value":"00182478"},{"@type":"EISSN","@value":"24242616"}],"prism:publicationName":[{"@language":"ja","@value":"史学雑誌"},{"@language":"en","@value":"SHIGAKU ZASSHI"}],"dc:publisher":[{"@language":"en","@value":"The Historical Society of Japan"},{"@language":"ja","@value":"公益財団法人 史学会"}],"prism:publicationDate":"2017","prism:volume":"126","prism:number":"11","prism:startingPage":"1","prism:endingPage":"37"},"availableAt":"2017","dataSourceIdentifier":[{"@type":"JALC","@value":"oai:japanlinkcenter.org:2005676607"},{"@type":"CIA","@value":"130007520003"}]}