title cartouche


Can anyone assist by shedding light on the way that hiragana/kanji characters have been historically used in this 1850’s title cartouche? The catalogue raisonné for the artist simply records the work as: Rokuhara han Tōji kwaisen, and it is usually seen translated as The Fight at the Eastern Temple, Rokuhara in Kyōto, though there is no actual mention of the word Kyōto in the title.

Might the title translate as The Battle at Tōji in the Domain of Rokuhara? My best transcription of the Japanese characters is 六波羅坂東寺会戦, or 六はら坂とち[とぢ/とじ?]会戦. My inclusion of alternative hiragana in square brackets will be obvious in a moment (see point no.4).

In trying to make sense of the characters I have a few observations and questions.

  1. It is difficult for me to read because characters are written in a calligraphic form that is--as I would describe it--an ‘intermediate’ style between hiragana and kanji. For instance, the second character ha は is derived from 波, and the third character ra ら is derived from 羅, constituting part of the word “Rokuhara.” Likewise, I think the fifth character to と is derived from 東, written in an intermediate form, forming part of the word Tōji (東寺).

  2. The first three characters of the title can be read as “Rokuhara”; two of these are in sōsho, if my understanding of that word is correct. Rokuhara (六はら or 六波羅) was a south-eastern district in Kyōto that functioned as the Kyōto headquarters for deputies of the Kamakura shogunate.

  3. The fourth character appears to be a cursive form of the kanji han 坂. The usual kun reading of 坂 is saka, meaning a “hill” or “slope.” References seem to indicate that the Goon reading is ben べん or hon ほん; the Kan’on reading is han はん; the Kan’yōon reading is ban ばん; and the Kun reading is saka さか. The title does not appear to make sense if the meaning is “slope,” so I wonder if han 坂 is being used phonetically in substitution for the character han 藩, a Daimyo’s “domain” in the Edo Period; a precursor to current prefectures. This is why I questioned whether part of the title would be read as “the domain of Rokuhara.” Does anyone have observations on han being read phonetically (in the context of ateji or man'yōgana)? Is this far-fetched?

  4. My big question is in relation to the word Tōji (東寺). The fifth character to と is derived from 東, and is written in an intermediate form, however, it looks like the sixth character is a ち hiragana character, which would be pronounced chi. For it to be pronounced ji it should, I'd have thought, be written as ぢ or じ. The kanji 寺 can have a Goon reading ji じ, a Kan’on reading of shi し, and a Kun reading of tera てら; chiefly, a Buddhist temple. I have not been able to find an old cursive form of じ that looks anything similar to the form ち as written in this cartouche. Can anyone shed light on this? I’m confused by this, as Tōji (東寺, literally "East Temple", first known as Kyō-ō-gokoku-ji, 教王護国寺, “The Temple for the Defense of the Nation by Means of the King of Doctrines”) makes absolute sense in the context of the image, and being in Rokuhara.

  5. Finally, there are the characters 会戦, read as kaisen for “battle,” but also written in an older form as kwaisen. I assume I have these right?

Any observations appreciated.

Kuniyoshi print

  • drooozeさんの疑問あるいは指摘を受けて検討した結果、新しい回答を用意することができました。日本語での回答で申し訳ありません。 – mackygoo Dec 9 '17 at 13:41
  • 1
    I added the English translation to my second answer. – mackygoo Dec 10 '17 at 10:35

Speaking purely from the view from Chinese calligraphy, these are all valid ways to write Chinese characters, and thus the title indeed contains no hiragana as the other answer mentioned. I'll list some of the more difficult-to-comprehend ones:

  1. , example from Tang Dynasty 懷仁's《集王羲之聖教序》

enter image description here

  1. , two examples: First from Sui Dynasty 智永's《真草千字文》, second from Song Dynasty 黃庭堅's《李白憶舊遊詩卷》:

enter image description here

  1. と is not derived from , as this Gyosho/Sosho style of writing 東 has been around for centuries in East Asia. Simplified Chinese even made the Gyosho/Sosho version official:

  2. , example from Ming Dynasty 韓道亨's《草訣百韻歌》:

enter image description here

  1. As the other answer mentioned, you should interpret the 7th character as . is actually already a Gyosho/Sosho form codified into Kaisho, and was actually properly written as the Kyujitai form before the Japanese promulgation of the Toyo Kanji list in 1946. Note that the bottom portion of the 7th character doesn't look like anyway; a calligraphic example of 会/會 would look more like example on the left, taken from Ming Dynasty 祝允明's《行草牡丹賦》, while 合 looks more like something on the right, taken again from Tang Dynasty 懷仁's《集王羲之聖教序》:

enter image description here

As a final note, comes from a cursive version of , and comes from a cursive version of ; see this.

  • Thanks @droooze. Highly informative, and humbling. I have obviously gone down a rabbit hole where my novice status shows. You make note that と is not derived from 東, rather, from a cursive version of 止, and ち comes from a cursive version of 知. I am interested in late Edo musha-e, and often find myself trying to make sense of titles that have calligraphic/cursive elements (when titles may not be provided, or the translations are overly interpretative), and I am trying to learn from a plethora of references, largely online. ...[cont.] – musha Nov 28 '17 at 16:24
  • One of those sites, in the context of these cursive versions, has been (www10.plala.or.jp/koin/koinhentaigana.html#si)... so all my original questions and confusions aside, it's how I managed to 'deduce' that the characters were/might be 波羅坂東寺会戦, even if the 会 should have been 合. The site shows hiragana characters and the kanji connected to them, including と and 東. Going on my earlier correspondence, have I incorrectly understood how to refer to this table? Can you recommend a book in English on this area that will be informative, with the many such varieties illustrated? best... – musha Nov 28 '17 at 16:27
  • 1
    No, you haven't misunderstood. The forms in these tables are called Hentaigana (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hentaigana); the modern form of hiragana is due to a spelling reform instituted around 1900, which made all of the hiragana variants you see in the table, bar the ones used in modern spelling, obsolete. This means, for example, that one historical hentaigana variant representing the syllable 'to' looks like 东 and is derived from 東, but と is the 'official' hiragana variant used nowadays, and is not derived from 東. – dROOOze Nov 28 '17 at 16:57
  • Hiragana pre-1900 may appear as one of the Hentaigana variants instead of the current official kana. When reading Japanese calligraphy, you should expect short sequences of characters (e.g. titles) to be very Kanji-heavy, with hiragana scarcely appearing at all. Indeed, even particles like の may not even appear, or be replaced by 之, which is the Classical Chinese equivalent. In longer Japanese calligraphic texts, there will be hiragana, but as with Chinese cursive calligraphy, to correctly read such pieces you have to (perhaps ironically) already know what the piece says beforehand. – dROOOze Nov 28 '17 at 17:03
  • 1
    The standard Japanese practice for transcribing classical Japanese texts converts hentaigana into the modern kana forms. Only manyogana-type texts are transcripted with kanji. As for 坂, I don't think it is phonetically replaceable by 藩; such replacements normally have historical precedence and will actually be listed in dictionaries. I'm going to offer a potentially disagreeable opinion, which is that the artist miswrote 坂 but meant 攻 (attack) instead; their Gyosho/Sosho forms actually look very similar, with only a slightly different left hand side component. – dROOOze Nov 29 '17 at 21:31


  • 全て草書行書に近い行書草書の漢字で書かれており、平仮名はありません。
  • 「六波羅」は京都の鴨川東岸の五条大路から七条大路一帯の地名。現在の京都市東山区松原通り付近の地名です。
  • 「六波羅坂東寺合戦」は「六波羅合戦」と言われているもので、平安時代末期の平治元年12月9日(1160年1月19日)に発生した後に平治の乱(へいじのらん)と呼ばれる政変の中の代表的な合戦です。
  • 「東寺」が「教王護国寺」を指すかどうか定かではありませんが、「坂」は、松原通りを東に進んで東山通りを横切ると清水寺辺りに向かうことになり、結局東山の裾野{すその}として坂になっておりますので、その辺りの地形を指しているのかも知れません。

enter image description here

  • 1
    Terrific chart you have uploaded/put together! Is it from a particular publication, or did you write these and composite yourself? It has reminded me of the gyōsho/sōsho references (which I had forgotten about) in James Self and Nobuko Hirose's Japanese Art Signatures: A Handbook and Practical Guide, Floating World Editions, 2003 (2005). Quite a useful publication re deciphering names and common adjuncts to signatures... that said, your chart with progressively cursive examples is 天の恵み. – musha Nov 29 '17 at 3:27
  • 1
    @musha: 上記のchartは三省堂「きれいな字を書く 筆順・書き文字字典」(江守賢治著)から一文字ずつ引用して見やすいように編集しました。「六波羅坂東寺合戦」は明らかにすべて漢字だと思います。 – mackygoo Nov 29 '17 at 4:45
  • 2
    Best resource I can find on the web, at least in English, is (archive.org/details/elementsofsosho00pigg). The Elements of Sōsho: Piggott, F. S. G. (Francis Stewart Gilderoy), 1883-1966: Publication date 1913: Publisher Yokohama, Kelly & Walsh. It can be downloaded as a PDF, which is quite handy. – musha Nov 29 '17 at 5:41
  • 1
    @musha: The Elements of Sōsho拝見しました。部首ごとに丁寧に説明した本は初めて見ました。私は書道をしますが、大変役立つように思いました。あ‌​りがとうございます。 – mackygoo Nov 29 '17 at 6:56


What is the character at the part of "?" in "六波羅?東寺合戦" written in a cursive or semi-cursive style that is considered to be the title of the battle picture placed on the upper right of the picture presented by the questioner?
And, what is the meaning of the entire title, if the character becomes obvious?

Since droooze's comment as "there is the remaining problem that the right side of the character looks more like「攵」 than 「反」. Have another look at all the calligraphic examples of 「坂」 given on this page; in all cases, the component 「厂」 is clearly written" became a valid inspiration, I challenged to solve the above two questions again.

As a result of my investigation, I obtained certain results, so I'm going to post a new answer here.

In the result of examination by those people participating in this question including "me", "?" has been supposed to be a kanji "坂 slope or hill" or "攻 attack" so far.

In order to clarify the character of "?" I did the work of the procedure shown below.
(1) At first, I collected kanjis having the same "偏 (へん) the part of the left side of a kanji" as that 坂 or 攻 has.
Next I collected kanjis having the same "旁 (つくり) the part of the right side of a kanji" as that they have.
The 偏 of them are "土" and "工", and the 旁 of them are "反" and "攵".

The kanjis collected as a result of the above work are as follows.
「工」:攻、巧、功、項、恐 (Note: Though "工" in "恐" is not 偏 of the kanji, I collected it because there are few kanjis that have "工" as 偏.)

I examined the shape in a cursive or semi-cursive style of each collected kanji.
I used "Stroke Order / Writing Character Dictionary for Writing Beautiful Characters" written by Kenji Emori, Published by Sanseido in order to examine the shapes.

The summarizing result of shapes in a cursive or semi-cursive style of the collected kanjis is shown in the figure below.
Looking at the figure, I could see the following things about the character expressed by "?"

  • Judging about "土" and "工" as 偏 (へん) or the part of the left side of a kanji, it is "土". The reasons for this judgment are as follows.
    Basically, the first stroke (horizontal line), the second stroke (vertical line) and the third stroke (horizontal line) of "工" are continued in a cursive or semi-cursive style, which makes the shape like "乙 (おつ)" in kanji or "Z" in English. In this case, there is no protrusion on the first stroke (horizontal line), while when you see 偏 or the part of the left side of the character shown by "? ", the first and second strokes are separated, and the tip of the second stroke is popping out on the first stroke as you can see well.

  • Judging about "反" and "攵" as 旁 (つくり) or the part of the right side of a kanji, it is "攵" judging from the collected shapes shown in the figure below.

enter image description here

If you deduce the character of "?" based on the above survey results, it will be neither "坂" nor "攻" which had originally been thought, but "" composed of "土" as 偏 (へん) and "攵" as 旁 (つくり).

Here, many Japanese including me are in great trouble. That's because the word "坆" is a simple character at the first sight but we have never seen it before so we don't even know how to read it.
Therefore, I looked up the character of "坆" on the Internet. As a result, the following facts were found out.

Dictionary 1:ウイキまとめ


Dictionary 2:【辞典・用語】[漢字林]「土部」

土3+4=総画数7 U+5746 [フン、ブン、ホン、ボン/] 【墳𡏶坟𡼝】[土ノ一𠂉メ又攵坆]

Dictionary 3:漢典

◎ 古同“梅”。

◎ 古同“坟(⇐墳)”。
a grave, tomb

Comprehensively looking at the definitions of three dictionaries, we can see the following things about "坆".

  • Although there is a possibility that it is used in Japanese, it is basically a Chinese character.
  • It has two kinds of meanings: an old character representing "梅 plum" and an old character representing "墳 mound".
  • The meaning of 墳 is a grave or a tomb in English, but it is not a tomb in the plain graveyard but a grave with mound. It may be good to image the old tumulus or 古墳 (こふん).
  • There is a difference in pronunciation depending on meanings: the pronunciation in the case of "梅" is バイ (méi), and the pronunciation in case of "墳" is フン (fén).
  • In Chinese there are only two meanings of "坆" written above, but in Japan there is a case where it is wrongly used by making a mistake in writing "土" in place of "工" when writing "攻" meaning "to attack".
    Moreover, having a clear description like what is written in Dictionary 1 can be inferred that there have been quite a few mistakes of this kind in Japanese.

Let's go back to the original subject of "六波羅?東寺合戦". If you apply "坆" to the part of "?", the title becomes "六波羅東寺合戦".
Based on the meanings of the Dictionaries on "坆", there seems to be no interpretation of "梅 plum" here, so the following two interpretations are possible.

(A) 六波羅東寺合戦
(B) 六波羅東寺合戦

For (A), there are three possible interpretations:
(A-1) A battle where The Rokuhara Army (= Kamakura Shogunate Army) attacked Toji-temple
(A-2) A battle, the battlefield was the area around Toji-temple, where The anti-Shogunate Army was attacked by The Rokuhara Army (= Kamakura Shogunate Army)
(A-3) A battle, the battlefield was the area around Toji-temple, where The Rokuhara Army (= Kamakura Shogunate Army) was attacked by The anti-Shogunate Army

We can easily understand that (A-1) is not a correct interpretation, because Toji-temple was one of the bases of Rokuhara-Tandai or 六波羅探題 that was the administrative agency established in Kyoto by the Kamakura Shogunate.
The next, we have to select the correct interpretation from (A-2) and (A-3). If this battle was the part of decisive ones of The Genkō War (元弘の乱 Genkō no Ran) that was a civil war in Japan which marked the fall of the Kamakura Shogunate, the answer is definitely (A-3).

As the result, "六波羅攻東寺合戦" is read as "六波羅[攻]{ぜ}(め)東寺(之)合戦{かっせん}" meaning "A battle at Toji-temple attacking The Rokuhara Army (by The anti-Shogunate Army)".

As for (B), I would conclude that it is not the title of the picture of the battle presented by the questioner.
Apart from the conclusion for (B), the location of Rokuhara had been very closely related to "墳 grave or tomb" before the "Rokuhara-Tandai 六波羅探題" was established by Kamakura Shogunate there.
I'll omit the further explanation here, but if you are interested in the information about it, I recommend you to read the answer in Japanese.




「坂」または「攻」の「偏(へん:漢字の左側の部分)」と「旁(つくり:漢字の右側の部分)」の内、「土(つちへん)」と「工(たくみへん)」を「偏(へん)」として持っている漢字を調べる。次に「反(部首としての名称はない)」と「攵(のぼく / ぼくづくり)」を「旁(つくり)」として持っている漢字を調べる。

  • 「土」:増、地、壇、均、坑、坪、塚、埋、坂
  • 「工」:攻、巧、功、項、恐(なお「恐」の「工」は「たくみつくり」ではないが「工(たくみつくり)」の漢字が少ないので加えた)
  • 「反」:飯、版、板、阪、販、坂
  • 「攵」:攻、放、枚、教、牧、数、敷

書体の字形には「きれいな字を書く 筆順・書き文字字典」江守賢治著(三省堂)を用いる。

  • 「へん」の「土」と「工」については「土」である。
  • 「つくり」の「反」と「攵」については「攵」である。 これについては、列記した書体の「つくり(漢字の右側の部分)」を見ると明白である。

enter image description here

以上の調査結果に基づいて「?」の文字を推論すると、当初思っていた「坂」でも「攻」でもなく「土(つちへん)」に「攵(のぼく / ぼくづくり)」で構成された「」という文字であることが分かる






土3+4=総画数7 U+5746 [フン、ブン、ホン、ボン/] 【墳𡏶坟𡼝】[土ノ一𠂉メ又攵坆]


◎ 古同“梅”。

◎ 古同“坟(⇐墳)”。
a grave, tomb


  • 一部日本語で使われている可能性はあるが基本的に中国の文字である。
  • 「梅」を表わす古い文字と「墳」を表わす古い文字の2種類の意味がある。
  • 「墳」の意味は墓(英語ではgrave あるいは tomb)だが、平地の墓ではなく、土を盛った墓である。古墳をイメージすると良いのかも知れない。
  • 発音に違いがあり、「梅」の場合の発音はバイ(méi)、「墳」を場合の発音はフン(fén)。
  • 中国では「坆」の意味は以上の2つしかないが、日本では「攻める」の意味の漢字「攻」の「工(たくみへん)」の部分を誤って「土(つちへん)」にしてこの字になった例があるように読み取れる。しかも文献1のような明確な記述があるということは、この誤字が結構あるものと推察できる。



(A) 六波羅東寺合戦
(B) 六波羅東寺合戦





天暦5年(951年)空也がこの地に西光寺を創建し、後に中信がこの寺を六波羅蜜寺(ろくはらみつじ)と改名したことから「六波羅」と呼ばれるようになったという。 この地は洛中(京都の市街地の意味。東は高野川・鴨川から、西は西大路通までの地域)から京都の住民の 葬地であった鳥辺野(とりべの) に入る際の入口にあたる事から、この他にも六道珍皇寺など沢山の寺院が建てられ、信仰の地として栄えた。







 六波羅蜜寺に向かう角(西福寺の角)に「六道之辻」という石塔が立っている。六道とは、生前の善悪の行いによって導かれる冥界で、天上、人間、修羅、 鬼畜(畜生)、餓鬼、地獄のこと。




  • 1
    Very thorough analysis, and you've confirmed what I suspected. Given that「坆」is not really a Japanese character in the sense of a variant of 「梅」or「墳」, wouldn't you say that 「《日本語での特別な意味》せめる。▽攻の誤字」is the most likely explanation? There is otherwise no reason to put a Chinese-only character in a piece of Japanese art. In any case, interpreting「坆」as「攻」fits in perfectly with why the English translation didn't include a reference to「坂」or something else in the position of that character. My only quibble is that「文献1:ウイキまとめ」doesn't include literature examples of where「坆」as「攻の誤字」has appeared. – dROOOze Dec 9 '17 at 9:14
  • 1
    @droooze: 疑問を放置しないdrooozeさんの熱心な探求心のお陰で「坆」という文字を見つけることができました。ありがとうございます。ところで、「文献1:ウイキまとめ」で「攻の誤字」の例としてOPの提示した「六波羅?東寺合戦」が使われないのは特に疑問(quibble)ではないと思います。理由として、この絵と遭遇しなかった。また、もし遭遇していても、草書体の解読がうまく出来ず私と同じように「坂」と読んだからだと思います。 – mackygoo Dec 9 '17 at 13:35
  • 2
    In this regard—and without wanting to sound too full of hubris—this conversation thread, and yours and droooze's contributions on the Japanese characters have added something significant to scholarship in this area. It should not be underestimated... nor under appreciated from my perspective. – musha Dec 12 '17 at 13:12
  • 2
    @musha: Through the comments of yours with abundant content, I understand that I could make a little contribution to the historical truth with droooze's serious attitude not allowing compromise and my little knowledge about Japanese characters. I want to show my respect to your attitude of serious quest for fact and also I am glad that I could study 六波羅探題 together with you. – mackygoo Dec 12 '17 at 14:53
  • 3
    @musha and mackygoo, I found the examples of the usage of 坆 as 攻. The GlyphWiki entry for (en.glyphwiki.org/wiki/u5746) notes several Japanese dictionaries which list it as an entry, among them 大漢和辭典 and 和製漢字の辭典. I had a look at the entry for 坆 in 和製漢字の辭典 (ksbookshelf.com/nozomu-oohara/WaseikanjiJiten/…), and this is what it says: 「せめる」は、国訓。〔読み〕 せめらる せめる。『寛元本字鏡集』に「攻歟 セメラル」、『篇目次第』に「セメラル 无玉」、『音訓篇立』に「セメラル セメラク」とある。。『寛元本字鏡集』・『篇目次第』・『音訓篇立』のものは「攻」の誤字であると考えられ、 「せめる」は、国訓といえる。I don't have access to these resources, so I cannot check further. – dROOOze Dec 12 '17 at 16:34

Sōsho-tai examples of semeru versus saka, per @droooze comments:

enter image description here enter image description here enter image description here

  • 1
    Unable to post image in comments, but see this: shufazidian.com/shufa6/4ac514813ea7f39b47662d455480220c3.jpg – dROOOze Nov 30 '17 at 19:30
  • I'm thinking of the examples in the first column, second- and third-to-last characters. The first character in the first column even made the same "mistake" of protruding the vertical stroke in the left hand component! Also, I think mackygoo's analysis of what 坂 means is the reasonable given that 坂 is the intended character. – dROOOze Nov 30 '17 at 19:32
  • 1
    確かに「攻める」の「攻」と「坂」とは草書で書くと似ています。特に、文字の右側はほとんど同じになります。しかし文字の左側の「工」と「土」は絶対に違います。たとえ草書でも、「工」と「土」を区別して書かない人はいません。「六波羅攻東寺合戦」は意味がありそうで好都合に見えますが、このケースはありません。今私が考える「六波羅坂東寺合戦」の解釈は、「幕府軍東寺 之{の} 合戦」という意味で、英語で表現すると 'The Battle of Shogunate Army, called the Army of Rokuhara Hill/Slope, at Tōji' となります。 – mackygoo Dec 6 '17 at 13:59
  • 1
    @mackygoo While I agree that your explanation is very likely, there is the remaining problem that the right side of the character looks more like「攵」than「反」. Have another look at all the calligraphic examples of 「坂」given on this page; in all cases, the component「厂」is clearly written. This is not the case in「六波羅X東寺合戦」; the last stroke of the left side joins to the top of the right side, and you can actually see the gap between the last stroke of the left side and the first stroke of the right side, indicating that the last stroke of the left side does not in fact double as the left of 反. – dROOOze Dec 8 '17 at 0:09

Thanks @mackygoo. (Couldn't fit a reply into the comments section.) From what you have said (and my Japanese is really poor, my apologies), I need to change 会戦 to 合戦. It is interesting that you write "there is no hiragana" in the cartouche... Perhaps you or another poster might be able to shed light on the use of these cursive forms. Perhaps I misunderstand how these cursive forms are best described, and if they are closer to kanji or to hiragana, etc.


In terms of the actual battle and reference to Tōji, the image does not represent a skirmish at Rokuhara as part of the 1160 Heiji Rebellion that began with the siege of Sanjō Palace and concluded with Minamoto Yoshitomo's failed attack on the Rokuhara mansion, rather, the image I am looking at alludes to the Battle of Rokuhara on the twentieth day of June 1333—which was one of the decisive battles of the Genkō War—where Ashikaga Takauji turned on his former allies, sided with the Emperor Go-Daigo and drove the forces of the Shogunate out of their headquarters in Rokuhara. The print shows Mega Magosaburō Nagamune, Banshi Norisuke, and Ashikaga Takauji amongst others, so I know it is definitely the 1333 battle. The Taiheiki (太平記) makes specific reference to the battle of Rokuhara and Akamatsu Novice Enshin advancing on Tōji Temple with 3,000 horsemen. The army reached the the two-storied gate... The temple was protected by a solid wall made of excellent timbers five to nine inches square in size [...] extending from the Rashōmon foundation on the west to the hachijō riverbed on the east... etc. So I am confident that Tōji should be part of the title, only that I don't understand how to read the 'ji'. I am still a little confused about the 'saka'/slope reference, since most sources indicate that 'Han' should be part of the title. That said, your notes made me do some more checking and I note that the British Museum indicates the title should be written as 'Rokuhara-zaka Toji gosen'.

  • 「六波羅坂東寺合戦」がすべて漢字である映像を作成します。少々お待ちください。 – mackygoo Nov 28 '17 at 13:16
  • 1
    「六波羅坂東寺合戦」の読み方は「ろくはら-ざか とうじ かっせん」だと思います。合戦は「がっせん」とも「かっせん」とも読みますが、歴史上の戦いは「かっせん」と呼ばれているように思います。例えば「川中島の合戦」は「かわなかじまのかっせん」です。但し、「合戦」の直前の発音が「[寺]{じ}」と濁音ですので「がっせん」かもしれません。なお、British Museum の「ごうせん」という読み方は間違いだと思います。 – mackygoo Nov 28 '17 at 13:46
  • ところで、「六波羅坂東寺合戦」が1160年の平治の乱ではなく、鎌倉幕府の滅亡につながる1333年の合戦であると納得した上での質問です。最初の質問の最後に提示された3枚の絵の「六波羅坂東寺合戦」は、実際にどこで戦われたのだと思いますか。京都東区五条から七条にかけての「六波羅」と呼ばれている辺りかそれとも京都南区九条にある東寺の辺りのいずれですか。 – mackygoo Nov 29 '17 at 6:45
  • As you know「六波羅」には東に行くと坂がありますが、東寺の辺りには坂がない。私は「坂」を次の「東」と組み合わせて「[坂東]{ばんどう}」すなわち「関東 Kanto area」、更には、京都から見て関東にある鎌倉幕府を指している可能性を考えています。1160年の六波羅の合戦を「六波羅合戦」と呼んでいますが、それと区別するために、鎌倉幕府との合戦と言う意味の「坂東」を挿入して「六波羅坂東合戦」と呼んだ。しかし、この場合の「寺」の処理が困りますのでやはり間違った解釈かもしれません。 – mackygoo Nov 29 '17 at 6:53
  • Before uploading my question, I also asked myself if ‘坂東寺’ might be 'bandō' (坂東) followed by 'ji' (寺), instead of 'han/saka' (坂) and 'tōji' (東寺). As you indicate, Bandō (坂東) is the old name of the Kantō region including Kamakura in Kanagawa prefecture. Could the title 六波羅坂東寺合戦 be read as ‘Rokuhara Bandō ji kaisen’ instead of ‘Rokuhara han Tōji kaisen’? My Japanese is not good enough to know if this works: you seem to indicate that the 'ji' is problematic. How would it translate into English: The battle at the temple in Rokuhara against the Bandō forces? I think it definitely reads 'tōji' (東寺). – musha Nov 29 '17 at 11:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.