Yoshinobu (996–1075), Michigana’s sons ( Oyamachō-shi 205; Fujiwara, Midō
kanpakuki zen chūshaku Kankō yonen 37). Shimotsuke no Kintoki seemed to
have a good reputation for his singing and dancing skills. on the entry for
the sixteenth day of the ninth month of the second year of Chōwa (1013),
Fujiwara no Sanesuke (957–1046) wrote in his diary, Shōyūki, that Kintoki
served as a dancer after winning a horserace (Fujiwara no Sanesuke, Shōyūki
1: 356). That is why, in the Suntory version of Shuten Dōji, Kintoki is
described as “a renowned dancer in the capital” whose voice and dancing
captivated Shuten Dōji to the point that he paid no attention to the song’s
intent of killing oni.
Shimotsuke no Kintoki was also good at horse riding. on the thir-
teenth day of the ninth month of the same year, that is, in 1013, when
Fujiwara no Michinaga privately held a horserace at his residence, Kintoki
won the race (Fujiwara no Sanesuke, Shōyūki 1: 352–53). This must have
been a famous topic in those days because Fujiwara no Tadazane (1078–
1162) talked about this matter (and it was written down by Nakahara no
Moromoto [1109–75] in Chūgaishō [Selection from What Tadazane Said,
twelfth century] Chūgaishō 352–53). Similarly, Minamoto no Akikane (1160–
1215) recounts this story in Kojidan (Tales of olden Times, ca. 1212–15)
(Minamoto, Kojidan 585).
On the first year of Kannin (1017), Fujiwara no Michinaga wrote in his
diary that he learned of the death of Kintoki, a recruiter for sumo wrestlers,
on the twenty-fourth day of the eighth month. As an annual court function,
a sumo match was performed in the seventh month in the presence of the
emperor, and it was one of the low-ranking Konoe s’ jobs to recruit sumo
wrestlers in various provinces for this court event (Wada and Tokoro 198).
Michinaga notes, “That man is my Escort, the best among the Left and
Right Imperial Guards ( Konoe), he is terribly missed by everyone” (Fujiwara,
Midō kanpakuki zen chūshaku Kannin gannen 156). Kintoki’s untimely death,
missed by everyone as Michinaga put it, may have paved the way for the
legendary figure of Kintoki.
While Kintoki was a contemporary of Raikō and Hōshō, working for
Michinaga, there is no record or evidence that he was Raikō’s subject.
So why is he known as Sakata no Kintoki? When one goes back to the
original text of “Yorimitsu’s Retainers Go Sightseeing at Murasakino” of
Konjaku monogatarishū, where Raikō’s three retainers are introduced, while
32
Part I: Samurai
Sadamichi and Suetake are given their surnames, the part where Kintoki’s
surname is supposed to be written is missing. It is described as “Taira no
Sadamichi, Taira no Suetake, and [ . . . ] Kintoki.” The annotation to this
lacuna in the various texts, however, states “this is Sakata no Kintoki.”34
Similarly, when one looks at “Minamoto no Raikō Kills Kidōmaru” of
Kokon chomonjū, where Tsuna’s name appears for the first time, Kintoki’s
name is written simply as Kintoki without a surname. The surname Sakata
does not appear anywhere. But again his name is annotated in a headnote as
Sakata no Kintoki (see Nishio and Kobayashi 410).
Torii Fumiko, the author of the book Kintarō no tanjō (Birth of Kintarō,
2002), writes that Kintoki’s birth, life, and other information are not pre-
cisely known because no record of his birth and biography remains. His
surname, Sakata, started to be used during the Edo period, and no one
knows how he acquired it (Torii 7). Torii writes that the surname Sakata
appears for the first time in the literature with Genji no yurai (origin of the
Genji clan, 1659), a jōruri (puppet theater) text; Kintoki is introduced as
Sakata no Minbu Kintoki (Torii 26). Zen-Taiheiki (Chronicle of Pre-Grand
Pacification, 1692?), a popular historical narrative widely read throughout
the Edo period, describes Kintoki as Sakata no Kintoki (Itagaki 1: 328),
and Chikamatsu Monzaemon’s (1653–1725) popular play Komochi Yamauba
(Mountain Ogress with a Child, first performed in 1712) also has Sakata
no Kintoki.35
medieval period. But because of the influence of Edo literature and perfor-
mances, Kintoki in earlier works from Konjaku monogatarishū through Shuten
Dōji is retrospectively called Sakata no Kintoki by modern audiences.
Taira no Sadamichi (Usui no Sadamitsu)
At the beginning of the twelfth century, when Konjaku monogatarishū was
compiled, Taira no Sadamichi (Tadamichi, or Sadamitsu, also known as
Usui no Sadamitsu) was probably the leader of Raikō’s retainers because
the aforementioned episode “Yorimitsu’s Retainers Go Sightseeing at
Murasakino” lists Taira no Sadamichi first, followed by Taira no Suetake,
then [ . . . ] Kintoki. But as time passed, Sadamichi’s position was replaced
by Tsuna.
Sadamichi also appears in another story in Konjaku monogatarishū titled
“Yorinobu no koto ni yorite Taira no Sadamichi hito no kashira o kiru koto”
(Told by Yorinobu, Sadamichi Beheaded a Man).36 In the story Yorinobu,
Raikō’s younger brother, publicly orders Sadamichi to get some insolent
man’s head for him. Sadamichi thinks the request is odd because he is serving
Drunken Demon
33
Raikō, not his brother, and it is unusual to hear such a personal request in
public. Sadamichi is not going to pursue the matter, but the rude person
boasts that Sadamichi is not strong enough to kill him. Angered, Sadamichi
ends up killing him, realizing Yorinobu’s wish. The narrator’s major intent
was perhaps to describe Sadamichi’s swordsmanship and Yorinobu’s bold-
ness. But it is interesting to have Sadamichi specifically say he is Raikō’s
retainer while at the same time have him do a service for Raikō’s brother,
even though unintentionally.
Sadamichi was allegedly a son of Taira no Yoshifumi (mid-Heian period,
?–?). According to the Sonpi bunmyaku, Taira no Yoshifumi was a son of
Takamochi-ō, or Taira no Takamochi (?–?), a founder of the Kanmu Heishi
clan. Yoshifumi’s final official rank was junior fifth rank, upper grade. The
annotation to his name states he is also known as Muraoka no Gorō (Tōin
4: 12), and Nichūreki (Combination of Two History Books, early thirteenth
century) lists Muraoka no Gorō under musha (warriors) ( Nichūreki 3: 107).
Recent scholarly studies indicate that Taira no Sadamichi was an ancestor of
the Miura clan, a powerful military clique of the eastern province that was
loyal to Minamoto no Yoritomo. While Yoshifumi was called Muraoka no
Gorō, Sadamichi seemed to have been called Muraoka no Kogorō (Muraoka
Gorō minor) or simply also Muraoka no Gorō (Noguchi 19).
Yoshifumi may have been an influential warrior in the east province.
Number 3 of volume 25 of Konjaku monogatarishū tells a story of his duel
with Minamoto no Mitsuru. Titled “Minamoto no Mitsuru to Taira no
Yoshifumi no Kassen seru koto” (Minamoto no Mitsuru and Taira no
Yos
hifumi: The Duel),37 the tale describes the like-mindedness of two great
warriors, their recognition of each other’s excellent archery skills, and how
they fostered their friendship. Minamoto no Mitsuru was considered to have
been Watanabe no Tsuna’s father and Taira no Yoshifumi was Sadamichi’s
father; they were in the same generation, and according to setsuwa, both
sons became Raikō’s shitennō. It is ironic that Sadamichi, written as Raikō’s
retainer in a number of places in Heian literature and originally the first
among Raikō’s outstanding retainers, ceded his leading position to Tsuna,
whose name does not appear in any Heian literature.
There is a famous setsuwa story of Sadamichi, nicknamed Muraoka no
Gorō (Noguchi 19), in Konjaku monogatarishū titled “Hakamadare, Sekiyama
ni shite sorajini o shite hito o korosu koto” (Hakamadare, Pretending to
Be Dead, Kills People at Mt. osaka).38 In the story, Hakamadare (?–?) was
pretending to be dead on Mt. Ōsaka in his attempt to kill and rob samurai
of their belongings. When a fine-looking warrior accompanied by many of
his retainers saw Hakamadare, the warrior warned his men to be cautious in
34
Part I: Samurai
passing by the man who appeared to be dead. onlookers thought the war-
rior’s behavior unworthy of samurai, as the man was apparently dead. Later,
another warrior came near Hakamadare and pitied him, believing he was
dead, whereupon Hakamadare immediately killed the warrior and robbed
him of his clothes and armor. People later learned the warrior who was cau-
tious about Hakamadare was Muraoka no Gorō, officially named Taira no
Sadamichi, and they admired his alert behavior.
This Hakamadare is the notorious robber who tried to rob Fujiwara no
Hōshō and failed to do so. Hōshō in that episode instead gave Hakamadare
some clothes and advised him not to steal, as he could get in trouble. Various
characters in the Shuten Dōji story appear in earlier setsuwa; the scribes of
the Shuten Dōji stories used these setsuwa well.
Taira no Suetake (Urabe no Suetake)
Taira no Suetake (also known as Urabe no Suetake, 950?–1022?) is also
allegedly a descendant of the Kanmu Heishi clan, though it is not certain—
his name does not appear in the Sonpi bunmyaku.
While Raikō and the rest of his shitennō were engaged in varying degrees
with the supernatural in the world of setsuwa from the fourteenth century
on, Suetake had already encountered a female ghost in the early twelfth
century, Konjaku monogatarishū. The forty-third story of volume 27, titled
“Yorimitsu no rōtō Taira no Suetake ubume ni au koto” (Taira no Suetake,
Raikō’s Retainer, Meets an ubume, SNKBZ 38: 134–38), describes a test of
courage in which Suetake dares to meet an ubume, the ghost of a pregnant
woman or a woman who died in childbirth. While Raikō is governor of Mino
Province, his retainers gather at night talking about an ubume who appears
at a river; the ubume tries to give her baby to anyone crossing the river. She
is so frightening that no one can cross the river at night. Suetake then says
that he can easily do it. The warriors wage their armor on Suetake not being
able to make the crossing. Suetake leaves, and, as expected, an ubume appears
while he is crossing the river. She hands him her baby. Suetake receives it,
and now she wants the baby back. But Suetake ignores her plea and comes
back to the gathering place with what he thinks is a baby. The baby turns
out to be some leaves. The warriors are going to give their armor to Suetake,
who declines it by saying the task was simple. The story ends with praise for
Suetake for his bravery as well as his bigheartedness.
Again, there is no record that Suetake was serving Raikō, but he is cer-
tainly described as worthy of his shitennō—brave, generous, and undaunted
by ghastly supernatural creatures.
Drunken Demon
35
extra-Literary sOurCes: reLatiOn Between
the narrative anD histOriCaL events
In the picture scrolls of Ōeyama ekotoba, Shuten Dōji makes an interesting
statement that no other extant texts have: “When the king is wise, our power
thrives too. The reason is that when the imperial authority declines, the
power of his subjects also wanes; when divine protections become enfee-
bled, the land decays.” At a glance, this statement may sound odd because
when the imperial authority declines and divine protections are enfeebled, it
seems logical that evil would take advantage of the situation and overwhelm
the feeble forces. Shuten Dōji in this scroll brings calamities. According
to the Buddhist scripture Konkō myōkyō (Golden Light Sutra), one of the
three sutras for protecting the country, when the king does not rule with
correct law and lets evil go unharmed, the deities will abandon the king and
natural disasters such as famine and pandemics will occur (Mibu 267–76).39
Similarly, according to the Chinese concept of the Mandate of Heaven,
calamities are considered signs of the ruling emperor’s unjustness and can
be legitimate reasons for the ruler to be replaced. The Japanese emper-
ors were well aware of the Mandate of Heaven, though they were exempt
from such a concept because the lineage of the imperial family was what
counted. Perhaps Shuten Dōji’s logic is like that of a good competitor draw-
ing strength from a worthy opponent. As Ii Haruki writes, his statement
expresses admiration for the prosperity of Emperor Ichijō’s court (Ii 86).
Emperor Ichijō’s period was one of the ideal times for the nobil-
ity. Various medieval women’s instructional texts such as the jokunsho
“Menoto no sōshi” consider Empress Shōshi or Jōtōmon-in (988–1074)
to be the exemplar of court ladies (Hanawa, Gunsho ruijū 27: 240). She was
Emperor Ichijō’s empress, the mother of Emperors GoIchijō (1008–36)
and GoSuzaku (1009–45), and Fujiwara no Michinaga’s daughter. Empress
Shōshi’s time was at the peak of the Fujiwara Regency, politically and eco-
nomically the height of aristocratic power. Shuten Dōji’s statement there-
fore constitutes a narrator’s admiration for Emperor Ichijō rather than a
defense of the Ichijō court. This narrator or narrators represent established
noblemen and aspiring aristocrats. The narrator(s) may also be saluting
the contemporary imperial court that wishes to exercise strong imperial
authority. This could also be a reflection of the contemporary court’s desire
for managing political affairs directly—possibly during the time of the
Southern and Northern Courts (1336–92), simultaneously hailing Raikō as
an imperial subject.
While acknowledging that the Ōeyama ekotoba is a fictional story, Ii sur-
mises that there must have been some frightening events and occurrences
36
Part I: Samurai
during the Shōryaku era (990–94), as the narrator specifically notes the dates
(Ii 85). The text reads “From the early days of [ . . . ] through the Shōryaku
era (990–995).” I surmise that the lacuna indicated by the square brackets is
Eiso
(989–90), the time immediately preceding the Shōryaku era, because
disastrous events such as the disappearance of many people could not have
been left unattended without taking swift measures. When one looks at the
events of Eiso in Nihon kiryaku, in the eighth month of the first year of
Eiso (989) a devastating typhoon caused a flood, killing people and animals
and destroying paddy fields in the coastal areas of the provinces in the
vicinity of the capital. Nihon kiryaku describes it as “unprecedented deaths
and damages, devastating disaster” (2: 167). The event was so devastating
that “Typhoon of Eiso” was used later as a simile for natural disasters.
In the eighth month of 990, the first year of the Shōryaku era, there were
natural disasters, including typhoons and floods (Kuroita, Nihon kiryaku 2:
169). In 991, the second year of Shōryaku, there was famine in the sixth
month (ibid. 171). In the sixth month of the third year of Shōryaku (992),
thunder and lightning, earthquakes, and floods occurred (ibid. 173). In the
sixth and seven months of 993, diseases spread widely, and thunder and
lightning struck; in the eighth month there was a solar eclipse (ibid. 175–
76). In the fifth year of Shōryaku (994), an epidemic wiped out more than
half of Kyoto’s population, including sixty-seven courtiers with the fifth
rank and above, between the fourth and seventh months. In the twelfth
month there was another solar eclipse (ibid. 178).
The Shōryaku era is followed by the Chōtoku era (995–99). In the first
year of Chōtoku (995), a widespread epidemic that had started in the last
year of Shōryaku killed Fujiwara no Michitaka (953–95), the chief adviser to
the emperor, and his younger brother, Michikane (961–95). The atmosphere
of the court became tense, primarily because of the power struggle between
Fujiwara no Michinaga (Michitaka and Michikane’s younger brother) and
Fujiwara no Korechika, Michitaka’s eldest son and Michinaga’s nephew, for
the chief adviser position. The conflict ended with Michinaga’s victory. It is
intriguing to postulate that there is some relationship between the backdrop
of the story and historical events that led to Michinaga’s prosperity. In the
story, it is Michinaga who recommended that the emperor reward Raikō and