Monograph No. 18
Study on Works of Kobori Enshū
Resume
This study is intended to trace up the works of Kobori Enshu, a famous Magistrate of construction in the early Edo period, and grasp the style of Enshu who was an all-around artist including architecture and garden.
Enshu is popularly believed to be the designer of the Imperial Villa of Katsura. But from years of study on the Villa, the author came to think the opinion that Enshu himself directed the construction has gradually lost its validity. What are, then, really his merited works? What characteristic does the style of his art have? What significance do the remains of his works have in the history of Japanese culture? These questions still remain to be answered.
Chapter Ⅰ.
This chapter begins with the birth of Sakusuke (Enshu’s name in his childhood) in 1579 at Kobori village, Sakata county in Omi province (now Nagahama City, Shiga Prefecture. Fig. 1-4), and touches upon his ancestry and his father, Shinsuke Masatsugu Kobori, who had built up young Sakusuke with a unique discipline. Examples of his childhood enable us to get the glimpse of the incomparable gift of the artist. In course of time, Sakusuke learned tea ceremony under Furuta Oribe, and zen under Shunnoku Soen in Daitokuji monastery. The author, however, holds a view that, under the social system of that time, however gifted Sakusuke had been, he would not have achieved such brilliant works of art and immortalized his name, without the trust of the imperial court and the auspices of Shogun (Generalissimo). From this point of view, several incidents are referred to as the chances for him to have been affiliated to the office of Shogun. Todo Izuminokami Takatora, Ishin Suden of Konchi-in and Konoe Nobuhiro, the chief adviser to the emperor, are inferred as highly probable recommenders of Enshu to the imperial court and the Shogunate, and the relation among these three is explained. The author, then, mentions about Enshu's freindly relations with Nakanuma Sakyo; Shokado; Sakata Kiroku; Kubo Gondayu (Choando); Kogetsu, the priest; and Matsuya Hisayoshi and Hisashige, father and son; these people were all good consultants or advisers. After all, Enshu was not merely a man of skill, but an unusual man who could thoroughly adapt himself to the Nature's providence.
Chapter II.
As was written in official records such as Kansei-jyushu-shokafu (Family Trees revised in Kansei times); Tokugawa-jikki (Pedigree of the Tokugawas); and Kobori-kafu (Pedigree of the Koboris), Enshu served as one of Bugyo’s (Magistrates) on the occasions of several official constructions (Fig. 6): the residential palace for Ex-emperor Goyozei in 1606 (Fig. 7); the Castle of Sunpu in 1608 (His services here promoted him to the Totominokami with the Junior Fifth Court Rank.); the Castle of Nagoya in 1612; and the Imperial Palace in 1613 (P1. 2).
In those early works, however, he was not yet assigned an important section of the construction. In 1618 Enshu jumped up to the position of Sobugyo (Chief Magistrate), probably because this daimyo of refined taste, who had the distinguished ability in architecture and garden, came to be well known and besides the death of Nakai Yamatonokami Masakiyo, and the Chief Architect in Kyoto, might quicken his promotion. From then on, he had dealt with a number of important works, beginning with the residential palace for the empress within the precinct of the Imperial Palace of Keicho years (which was provided for the marriadge of Tokugawa Kazuko to the emperor in 1620), and a pavilion and a pond added to the east pond garden of Kogosho (Small Palace, Fig. 8).
He had built successively the Imperial Palace of Kan-ei years (P1. 3 5); the Ex-emperor’s residential palace of Kan-ei years (P1. 6, 7. Fig. 9, 28, 29, 29); and the palace for Shin-in (Ex-emperor Meisho. P1. 8). In the layout of these buildings, Enshu had struck a note of novelty, allocating ample spaces for gardens. He also designed unique gardens as follows: the small pond garden in the south of Kogosho in the Imperial Palace of Kan-ei years; a Karesensui garden (a dry landscape garden) in the sonth of the emperor’s living quaters; a garden with a square pond and bridges in the ex-emperor’s palace; and a formal garden in the south of the living quaters in the palace of Shin-in.
Furthermore he repaired castles which were used as the residence of Shogun when he came up to Kyoto or Osaka from Edo. They were Fushimi Castle in 1601 and 1617; Ninomaru Fort of Nijo Castle in 1625 and 1628; Honmaru Fort of Nijo Castle in 1634; and Osaka Castle in 1621 and 1626. Among the repair works, most excellently done was the palace which was provided for receiving Emperor Gomino-o in Ninomaru Fort of Nijo Castle (P1. 18, 19), where there had already existed a pond garden. Enshu did not change the layout of this garden at all, but he only changed the direction of garden rocks so that their most beautiful faces could be seen from the newly built palace on the southern shore of the pond (P1. 21). This building was later moved to the Ex-emperor’s palace.
In those days, along the road from Edo to Kyoto, there were a series of lodging mansions for Shogun’s exclusive use. Most of them were provided by Daimyos, feudal lords, who were in blood relation with, or in hereditary vassalage to the Tokugawas, the Shogun family. Toward the west of Nagoya, however, the mansion in Minakuchi Castle and Iba-onchaya Mansion had to be newly erected upon the designs of Enshu. A plan and a specification of the mansion in Minakuchi Castle remain to this day in the possession of the Nakai family (Fig. 19), and it is inferred that Enshu specially elaborated the design for a two storied pavilion. An old plan and other records of Iba-onchaya have been handed down to the same Nakai family (Fig. 20).
Enshu’s works were not limited in Kyoto or in Kinki district. In 1629 he was invited to Edo (now Tokyo) to direct the constructions of a tea house and its garden in the West Fort of Edo Castle, and received a prize from Shogun for his excellent design ideas such as the borrowing of Mt. Fuji as a background of gardens. In 1636 he completed Shinagawa Palace and a thatched tea house in the wood of the palace, where he served tea for Shogun and was given a calligraphy in Chinese characters by Saisetsu, which had two big letters “Hei Shin” (Serene Mind) (P1. 63, Fig. 23). At the construction of Tokaiji Temple in Shinagawa which started in 1638, he left the famous episode that one of garden rocks in the pond was named by him “Mannenseki” (Rock of ten thousand years) (Fig. 24, 25). He studied on the system of construction office in Kyoto and introduced a scientific approach to the construction process, under the improved system and a new method of making a plan.
Chapter III.
This chapter covers the study on the remains of architecture, garden, and lodging mansion which Enshu erected in the official construction works. Among the remains of the Imperial Palace of Kan-ei years, for the extension of which he worked as Sobugyo in Genna periods, one of the pavilion in the east garden of Kogosho was removed to become Kasuganotsubone Otamaya (mausoleum for Court-Lady Kasuga) in Rinsho-in sub-monastery in Myoshinji monastery in Kyoto (P1. 9-14, Fig. 27), and another one was temporarily moved to Konoeden and then removed to become the front hall of worship in Himuro Shrine at Takagamine (Fig. 28). The main building of the Empress’ palace was moved to Daikakuji Temple in Saga, Kyoto (PI. 15) and the main building of Enman-in sub-monastery in Onjoji monastery is the remains of the quatersfor Court lady Gon-Dainagon who served for Tofukumon-in, the Ex-empress (P1.16. 17).
As for the remains of gardens, there have been left an arrangement of rocks along the shore line of a spit on the south pond of Sentogosho (Ex-emperor’s palace), and also an embankment with cut stones just to the east of the rock arrangement (P1. 22, 23, Fig. 29-31). The most evident of the remains of lodging mansions is Iba-onchaya in Shiga Prefecture, which is 500m south of Notogawa Station along the Tokaido Line. When the author made a survey of the site, there were detected stone walls, a remnant of pond, a well, garden stones, and so on. And this survey map of the existing features corresponds exactly with the old plan owned by Mr. Nakai Tadashige, when the two maps are adjusted to the same scale (Fig. 20, 21, 33-36).
Chapter IV.
The author defines works which had not been listed in official records as quasi-official works. Complying with the request of Suden, the priest, Enshu took works in Konchi-in in sub-monastery Nanzenji monastery (P1. 24,25,Fig. 36), which were: the Sanctuary of Toshogu Shrine (P1. 26, 27, Fig. 37); a Sukiya house (PI. 30-32, Fig. 38); Hojo (Fukinoma, a main building of the temple. P1. 30, 31); the garden in the south of Hojo, popularly called “The Garden of Crane and Turtle” (P1. 33-36, Fig. 36). He had carried through these works from design to execution, and besides, he supervised the construction of the garden in the south of Nanzenji Hojo after Suden’s request (P1. 37, 38, Fig. 39). The Guest Hall (P1. 41), the Main Flail (P1. 39, 40), and Shisokumon (Four-legged gate. Fig. 41) in Kombu-in Nunnery (Fig. 40), which were removed 300 years ago from the original temple site near Amagatsuji to the present place, Horen in Nara City, are also seemed to have been associated with Enshu.
From old writings which say that the Office of Shrine and Temple or the Office of Construction of those times had exerted an influence upon the constructions of the Sukiya in Konchi-in and the Guest Hall in Kombu-in, the author presumes that these works of him would have never been carried out, without the notice of the Tokugawa Government. This is why the author adopts the term ‘quasi-official work’.
Chapter V.
The author discusses the relation between Enshu and Matsuyama Castle in Bitchu province (now Takahashi city, Okayama Prefecture), which was his residential castle. His father, Shinsuke, was once charged with protection of this castle in December 1600 (Fig. 42, 43). And the author mentions about Komuro Castle in Omi province, where he was transferred from Bitchu province in 1619, and illustrates the locations and the plans of the residential houses of the daimyo and the principal retainers and other retainers, and the locations and the appearances of Tengo-an and Yoho-an, the tea houses, by reference to an old map of the country of Komuro (Fig. 46) and two sheets of plans of house for the lord of Komuro (Fig. 47-49).
As regards the residences of Enshu, the author proves the credibility of a record in Hokodensho, an old document, which says he lived in “Rokujizo (Fig. 50-52), Osaka-Temma, Bungo-Hashizume, and Sanjo in Kyoto”. The location of Rokujizo is confirmed mainly through an old map of the castle town of Fushimi and the actual survey of the present situations. The author explains in detail the layout of buildings in the site of the magistrate’s office of Fushimi in Bungo-Hashizume, by referring to an old plan owned by the Saji family in Torahime-cho, Shiga prefecture (Fig. 50-52). “Osaka-Temma” in the document above is accurately Temma-Minamikowada-cho (Fig. 53), “Sanjo in Kyoto” according to a street map of the old city of Kyoto published in Kan-ei years (1624-1644. Fig. 54-57).
Chapter VI.
The architectural plans and functions of a Sukiya in Enshu’s own house as well as three tea houses called Shosui-tei (Fig. 60-63), Josyu-an (Fig. 64), Tengo-an (Fig. 65,66) are investigated in corroboration with old records on the parties of tea ceremony and their illustrations, and it is inferred that a plan of a Sukiya owned by Mr. Kobori Sokei might be that of Enshu’s residence in Edo (Fig. 68).
Chapter VII.
Here are discussed the circumstances under which Koho-an was erected in 1609 on the site of Ryoko-in sub-monastery in Daitokuji monastery (which was connected to Shunnoku Soen from whom Enshu had learnt zen since his childhood) and then it was removed to the present place in 1643. Also discussed are the definition of “Koho” and the significance of Bosen (the name of a tea room in Koho-an. P1. 48-52) from the spiritual as well as the formative points of view. Mittan (Mi-an), a tea room in Ryoko-in sub-monastery, along with Kabuto-mon, a gate in the same sub-monastery, is of Enshu’s liking, and is full of the creative spirit that might not be infused into by other person than Kobori Enshu himself (P1. 55-57, Fig. 71-74).
Chapter VIII.
Enshu, as mentioned before, was a very able magistrate of official construction, and moreover he was at home in Sukiya architecture (Sukiya means either a tea room or an architecture like a tea house). Therefore the characteristic of Enshu’s liking in Sukiya is examined here from all angles. First of all, the auther makes a comparison between ways that tea-things of Enshu’s liking should be and ways to handle the utensils, in order to understand the term, Enshu-gonomi (Enshu’s liking), which sounds beautifully in association with tea utensils and tea houses. The author points out where Sukiya houses of Enshu’s liking existed, and how the plan of them were, with reference to old records of tea ceremonies. Then, actual measures of a Sukiya in Konchi-in submonastery are compared with standard measures for Sukiya constructions which have been written, as concrete conditions of Sukiya, in Tencha-mujinzo in the property of Koho-an (Omi province).
As the characteristic of Enshu’s Sukiya is seen in his treatment of windows, the author measured the lightness inside tea rooms and tried to find out what Enshu aimed at in designing windows. A hint on the apportionment of a lattice for a paper screen comes from equal parts of a length which can be found in the rule of setting tea utensils. This unit of length, conversely speaking, can decide the size of a paper screen and in its turn, help to calculate back the size and form of a window. Lastly, it is considered that Enshu’s liking is reflected in the location and the meaning of a tablet for Sukiya.
Chapter IX.
This chapter deals with Enshu’s liking in gardens and tea gardens. An architectural technique is emphasized in many of his gardens. Above all, the part of the garden in Shin-in Gosho, which was rigidly composed of lawn, flower beds, and water channels, was the first example of a formal garden in Japan, and this might have been influenced by European culture. As for the natural landscape garden, Enshu insisted the use of a borrowed landscape. But in regard to ‘Onari-no-niwa’ (The garden for receiving Shogun), in which symbols of good omen (Crane and Turtle) was used to cater to the wish of the Shogun family, his merits and demerits seem to be balanced against each other, for this type of timeserving garden came into fashion after his model.
The characteristic of Enshu’s liking in tea gardens is exemplified in his elaboration on stone materials and his success in the utilization of waste materials.
Then a correlation between art forms and data of tea ceremony is discussed as a key to understand Enshu's liking in gardens and tea gardens. He used a stone cut into the shape of a comb, or a square stone which a comb shape or a plectrum shape were cut off, combined long slabs exquisitely with natural stones, and found out inductivity from space to space by the use of those materials as well as beauty of complex forms due to the intersections of curved surfaces. These are all new ideas of his own.
Chapter X.
Authenticity of the gardens, which are said to have been designed by Enshu, is examined in this chapter. There are a number of so-called Enshu’s gardens in Kyoto and in other districts, including the Imperial Villa of Katsura. It might not be entirely out of the bound of possibility that the following places or districts could have a genuine garden of Enshu: Horai-en in Edo (destroyed in 1936. Fig. 90); Ninomaru Fort in Nagoya Castle (Fig. 91); Kanazawa in the former Kaga clan (Fig. 92); Omi province (Fig. 93); Yamato province (Fig. 94); Bitchu province. But, even though Enshu once lived in those places, the author thinks the possibility is so small that actually there might be none of such a genuine garden, except the garden for Hojo (reception hall) in Daitoku-ji monastery in Kyoto.
Even the Imperial Villa of Katsura (P1. 58 62, Fig. 95), which is popularly best known as Enshu’s masterpiece, has only diminutive possibility of his actual participation in the construction, because at that time he was very busily occupied with official works, and on the other hand he refrained from having close contacts with nobles of the imperial court, avoiding publicity to the Shogunate at Edo. Assuming that he secretly let someone of his school make the plan for the villa, entrusted some skilled people with actual supervision on the site, and thus exercised his influences mainly through the remote control, maybe we can say the Katsura Villa is the work of Enshu's school, not of himself.
Chapter XI.
The people, who helped Enshu achieved his outstanding works at inside and from outside, were: his younger brother, Kobori Samanosuke Masaharu; his principal retainer, Kobori Gonzaemon ; his retainers, Murase Sasuke, Suzuki Tsugudayu, Taniguchi Kyuzaemon; a craftman, Kentei; Gyokuenbo a priest of Myorenji monastery, and so forth. In addition to these, there were people, who supported him willingly, such as Nakai Yamatonokami Masakiyo and Masazumi, father and son; and Yamamoto Doshaku, a gardener in Edo.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Enshu, who was a Chief Magistrate of Official Construction as well as an individual artist, always as a central figure, led the creative designs in architecture and garden, and supervised the construction leading to good results at all times.
As are clearly shown in the old plans of palaces such as the Imperial Palace of Keicho period; the palace for receiving the emperor in Ninomaru Fort at Nijo Castle; Sento Palace; and Shin-in Palace, those buildings were all very convenient for the life of the court people, and at the same time, were beautifully related to the gardens. The garden of Sento Gosho, which was the Ex-emperor’s palace, or temples and Sukiyas and tea gardens in Kyoto and its vicinity, make us appreciate the characteristic of Enshu’s art, which is severe and bright.
It is important for the future administration of cultural properties to decide how to conserve the precious remains of Enshu's works. There are many remains that are not yet designated as Cultural Property. These are: Front Hall of Himuro Shrine (Takagamine, Kyoto); Kombu-in Nunnery (Horen-cho, Nara); Soji-ji Temple (Kobori-cho, Nagahama); the old site of Kobori Shinsuke’s house (Nagahama, Shiga Prefecture); Rokujizo (Fushimi-ku, Kyoto); Matsuyama Castle (Takahashi, Okayama Pref.); the old site of Komuro Castle (Asai-cho, Shiga Pref.); the remains of Minakuchi Castle (Minakuchi-cho,Shiga Pref.); Iba-onchaya (Notogawa-cho, Shiga Pref.) and so forth. Most of them are well preserved at present, but some are just before the falling down.
The author closes the discussion by saying that a consistant policy is urgently needed today for the conservation of these remains, since they will be lost forever without the national effort to preserve them, or to keep the records of them when the direct preservation is impossible.
昭和四十一年三月三十一日発行
奈良国立文化財研究所学報第十八冊
小堀遠州の作事
