Who were Taira and Minamoto?

Answer 1

The capital was perhaps not an exceedingly dangerous place for those notables of non-Fujiwara blood, but it could be a decided dead end. It is tempting, and not implausible, to imagine frustrated nobles departing for the wilds of the east, determined to make a name for themselves in the provinces. Those who left Heian-Kyo did so in the knowledge that they would never again be able to move casually in the 'world of the shining price'. As the Heian Period wore on, the divide in culture between those in the capital and those in the provinces would grow into a gulf. The most famous of these clans (and by extension many later families) owed their existence to a bit of foresight on the part of the Emperor Temmu. Concerned that in time the Imperial house would grow to an unmanageable size and cost, Temmu declared that descendants of the emperors in the sixth generation were to be deprived of the rank of prince and instead receive a family name. This began to be observed in the time of Kammu (r.782-805) and provided the genesis of the Taira and Minamoto. The Taira (or Heike, or Heishi) were descended from Prince Katsurabara (the emperor Kammu's son), whose eldest son Takamune first took the name Taira. Katsurabara's second son, Takami, received permission to give the Taira name to his own son, Takamochi. Takamochi received the name in 889 on the authority of the emperor Uda and his son Kunika (d.935) settled in Hitachi province. It is primarily the line established by Takami's descendants that we will be encountering from this point onward. The Minamoto (or Genji) were founded in a similar way but in their case, a total of four branches were established, each of which was named after the emperor from it was descended: the Saga-Genji, Murakami-Genji, Uda-Genji, and Seiwa-Genji. Of these four, the last could be considered the most important historically. Founded by the son of Prince Sadazumi (and therefore grandson of the emperor Seiwa), Tsunemoto (894-961), this branch took the name Minamoto in 961. At this point, a common misconception should be noted. Contrary to what one might think, there was little unity of purpose amongst the various branches of the Taira and Minamoto. This is relevant in that the rise of the warrior house is sometimes attributed to the formation and growth of these two clans, which while true to some extent, is misleading. The names Taira and Minamoto were practically generic by the 11th Century, and numerous members of the two families formed their own offshoot families, often taking the name of the district in which they lived (the Ashikaga of Shimotsuke are a nice example). Furthermore, the court enjoyed a greater influence in the provinces then might be expected. One of the ways in which it affected this was the appointment of trusted men who became career governors. Most commonly drawn from the Minamoto and Taira families, these men were given successive appointments in various provinces, sometimes where a questionable element was thought to exist. As well as providing strong governors where needed, this strategy also assured that no Minamoto or Taira chieftain would be in one place long enough to form dangerously strong ties with his vassals there. As Jeffery Mass has pointed out, the various heads of the Minamoto and Taira were military-nobles, leaders whose ties were strong in both capital and province. Later events (those leading up to and following the Gempei War) do not weaken this view - rather, they substantiate them. The Heiji Distrubance of 1156, for instance, saw Minamoto and Taira allied on either side of the contest, and very much a part of Kyoto politics in general. Taira Kiyomori and Minamoto Yoritomo were able to achieve what they did largely as a result of the familiarity of their houses and the court, a point we will touch on again somewhat later. The court had at one time moved to limit the potential power of the clans by decreeing that weapons were to be restricted to the Imperial military or otherwise regulated by the Ministry of Military Affairs (the Hyôbûsho). As conscription was abandoned in the early Heian Period, so was this decidedly half-hearted law. Just when one could really begin to refer to 'warrior houses', however, is a matter of great debate. The truth is that much of the development of the samurai is a matter of conjecture. We do see the term applied to palace guards in the 10th Century, but little can be drawn from that example beyond an affirmation of the 'one who serves' translation of the word. That the clans maintained some form of private army can be safely assumed, but to the extent that these were professional is most unclear, and likely the archetypal samurai of the 10th-13th Century was much like the later jizamurai - men of the land who counted military service as but one of their duties. Nonetheless, that a plentiful basis for the warrior tradition in Japan would be provided in the Heian Period goes without saying.