Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1: 1–26
© 2015 Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture

Heather Blair and Kawasaki Tsuyoshi 川崎剛志

Editors’ Introduction
Engi: Forging Accounts of Sacred Origins

Within Japan’s immense corpus of religious literature, engi 縁起 constitute an enduring and vexed bodies of texts. According to the mostwidely accepted etymology, the word engi first entered Japaneseusage as a translation of the Buddhist term pratītyasaṃutpāda (dependent origination), which designates the doctrine that all phenomena come into existence
due to causes and are therefore devoid of permanence or essence.1 Anotherschool of thought maintains that the term engi originated as a translation ofnidāna, one of twelve recognized modes or “limbs” (aṅga) of classical Buddhist
discourse (see Abé’s essay in this issue). Within canonical and para-canonical
Buddhist literature, nidāna has a fundamentally narrative quality in that it“may be used to index where, when, why, and/or how a teaching is transmitted” (Nance 2012, 225, note 27). Of course, etymology need not govern subsequent uses of a word, yet the causal and narrative valences of pratītyasaṃutpāda
and nidāna do resonate with the ways in which Japanese engi tell stories about
how things came to be as they are. During the eighth century, the term engi wasappropriated as a descriptor for accounts of the founding of temples and theordinations of monks and nuns. Over time, the label came to be applied to a wide
range of textual and visual materials, especially those narrating the histories ofreligious institutions. In contemporary usage, such accounts are known by thescholarly neologism jisha engi 寺社縁起. Materials of this sort are the primary
Heather Blair is an Associate Professor in the Department of Religious Studies at Indiana University. Kawasaki Tsuyoshi is a Professor of medieval Japanese literature at Shujitsu University.
1. For an influential example of the pratītyasaṃutpāda etymology, see Sakurai et al. (1975,
445–46). For further reflections on engi as etiology, see Moerman’s article in this issue.

12 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
focus of this special issue. In order to delimit a manageable scope for the present
project, we have focused on premodern texts and images; this choice fits with
our own expertise and training. Nevertheless, early modern, modern, and contemporary materials form an important part of the engi corpus and are the subject of a growing body of Japanese-language research.2 We hope that this special
issue will help to encourage new research and reflection, for there is ample scopefor further work on engi.
Engi may be defined in a narrow sense as accounts of the origins of religious
institutions, but over the course of their long history, they developed into a capacious, porous category that not only contrasted but also overlapped with othertextual and visual types, such as property registers (ruki shizaichō 流記資財帳) or
illustrated biographies (eden 絵伝). In formal terms, engi in general and jisha engi
in particular vary significantly. Some are paintings, while others are unillustrated
texts. Although they tend strongly toward narrative forms of representation, theyalso embrace ritual instructions, lists of various kinds, or other components that,taken individually, are very unlike engi in the narrow sense.
This endemic diversity raises the question of how—and even whether—engi
should be defined. As a definitional strategy, we might seek to identify a single,
defining characteristic as a criterion for determining whether or not a particular
text or image belongs to the category of engi; to do so, however, would create
problematic exclusions. Precisely because monothetic (that is, single-criterion)
definitions are so rigid and limiting, they have been amply critiqued in the fieldof religious studies (for example, Smith 1982). It is more helpful to imagine engi
in terms of a plural set of characteristics, some but not all of which will be foundin any particular engi. One may thus expect that varying degrees of similarity(and divergence) will obtain among engi, after the fashion of Wittgensteinianfamily resemblances. Engi A (for instance, the Mino’odera engi 箕面寺縁起 examined by Kawasaki Tsuyoshi in this issue) may bear some resemblance to engi
B (for example, the Yūzū nenbutsu engi emaki 融通念仏縁起絵巻 analyzed by
Takagishi Akira), whereas engi C (the noh drama or sutra frontispiece considered by Ryūichi Abé) may seem very different indeed. We favor this more flexible approach to delimiting engi and assessing the relationships among thembecause it accommodates variation among the ways in which engi have been
composed and construed.3
Indeed, the reception of engi has ranged as widely as their formal characteristics. Whereas some engi served as offerings to the gods, others became
2. For recent work on engi from the Edo period onward, see Hisano (2009) and essays in
Tsutsumi and Tokuda (2005; 2010).
3. For inclusive approaches in current Japanese research, see for instance the introductionand essays in Tokuda (2013) and Sano et al. (2010).

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 3

objects of reverence themselves or were used as authoritative histories; atother times, engi (sometimes the very same engi) have been excoriated as rank
forgeries or specious fictions. In the positivist context of modern scholarship,a dismissive attitude toward engi became normative among academics. When
Gorai Shigeru, one of the most eminent folklorists working in the twentiethcentury, advocated the study of engi, his project was in part an apologetic.
In arguing for the potential of engi as sources for the fields of literature, history, and religious studies, Gorai pitted himself against longstanding scholarly bias: “Traditionally, jisha engi have been considered preposterous tales
or pictures, nothing more than the self-promotion of shrines and temples”(Gorai 2008, 3).
Even a cursory review of contemporary research indicates that prejudicesagainst engi as a form of degenerate history have by now abated dramatically. In
the field of literature, connections between engi and important medieval genres
such as setsuwa 説話 and honjimono 本地物 have become a topic of sustainedinterest (see for instance, Fukuda 1984 and Matsumoto 1996). Meanwhile,the study of engi has become a subfield in the Japanese academy, represented
by a scholarly association (Jisha Engi Kenkyūkai 寺社縁起研究会) and an evergrowing number of monographs and scholarly articles, within which advocacy of“engi studies” (縁起学) is of particular note. In this regard, Tsutsumi Kunihiko
has treated engi in a broad sense as embracing all forms of vernacular culturalexpression and has described his work as an attempt at systematic study along
the lines of systematic anatomy.4
The totalizing bent of work like Tsutsumi’s notwithstanding, the study of engi
continues to be marked by a persistent focus on individual texts and images, inlarge part because as a corpus engi are so complex. Research in English often
takes the form of a study paired with a translation, whether literary in orientation (for example, Tyler 1990) or focused on ritual and institutional history(for example, Andreeva 2010 or Quinter 2007a and 2007b). Meanwhile, asteady flow of studies on engi has yielded examinations of how engi are imbricated within pilgrimage practices (MacWilliams 1997; 2004; Tokuda 2013),
how they represent and operate within sacred landscapes (Roth 2014; see also
Kawasaki’s article in this issue), and how they articulate combinatory religious
systems (Grapard 1986; 1989; 1998; Sakurai 2000).
The aim of this volume is to facilitate the ongoing development of the studyof engi by reflecting upon what engi do, why they are important, and how wemight best study them. We advocate for work that takes a holistic view of theorganizational and practical aspects of textual culture at temples and shrines
4. See Tsutsumi’s introduction and the “Symposium” in Tsutsumi and Tokuda (2005, 7­–14
and 325–61).

4 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)(for example, Abe 2013) because it was this culture that formed the primarymatrix for the production of engi. It is also necessary to account for the social
contexts in which engi were put to use.5
An Episodic History
Although a comprehensive survey of the development of engi as a genre isbeyond the scope of this introduction, it is important to note several historical points at which engi underwent substantial transformation. Accordingly,
this section briefly treats the emergence of engi as a textual type in the Nara
period, a shift toward visuality as illustrated engi began to be produced during
the Heian period, and the adaptation of engi for use in fundraising (kanjin 勧進)
campaigns during the Muromachi period.
Annals compiled in the early eighth century suggest that the earliest engi
were produced in the context of government efforts to control Buddhist temples,
nuns, and monks during the formation of the ritsuryō 律令 polity. For their part,
temples and their associated communities produced engi as part of a broader
rhetorical effort to represent themselves and their interests to other groups.
According to the Nihon shoki, shortly after Suiko Tennō 推古天皇 appointed
men to posts in what would become the Office for Monastic Affairs (sōgō僧綱), government officials ordered a clerical census in 624 (Suiko 32): “In assessing the temples, monks, and nuns, they recorded in full the conditions (en 縁)
according to which the temples were created, the conditions under which themonks and nuns entered the Way, and the dates on which they crossed over [intoordained life]. At this time, there were 46 temples, 816 monks, and 569 nuns (1,385
people in all)” (Nihon shoki, Suiko 32 [624]/9/3 [heishi 丙子], snkbz 3: 586–87).6
Whether or not records of en were in fact subsequently produced and used
as clerical census registers, engi did come into use as a distinctive textual genre
composed by the communities within and around religious institutions for
consumption by government officials. Nara-period sources suggest that earlyengi, which were routinely paired with itemizations of institutional property (ruki shizaichō), were produced in a context in which government-temple
relationships were characterized by conflicts over property and questions of institutional legitimacy. According to the Shoku nihongi, in response to allegations
that temple communities were amassing property but neglecting the dharma,
Genshō Tennō 元正天皇 (680–745; r. 715–724) mandated the merger of “a number
5. Though the arguments are specific rather than general in scope, see “Chūsei shinwa nosōzō: Hasedera engi to nanto sekai” 中世神話の創造—長谷寺縁起と南都世界 in Uejima (2010,
528–75) and Chikamoto (2000) for examples of work in this vein.
6. See for example entries for Suiko 32 [624]/4/3 (boshin 戊申), 13 (bogo 戊午), and 17 (jinjutsu壬戌) (snkbz 3: 585–87).

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 5of temples” in 716. The production and submission of documents was a central
element in Genshō’s initiative. Part of her royal edict reads: “The provincial governors must clearly inform the provincial teachers (kokushi 国師), monks, and lay
donors (dan’otsu 壇越) of the temples that are to be merged within their districts.
Furthermore, they are to itemize [temple] properties, convey [those records] to amessenger and submit them.” Later in the same edict, it emerges that some temples had been accused of being nothing more than tax and property shelters forlay donors. Thus, “As for properties and fields, the provincial teachers and monks,
the governors and lay donors must confer and make clear records of their assessments. On the appointed day, together they must vet and submit [the records]. In
accord with ancient usage, it is impermissible for the lay donors to monopolize this[process]” (Shoku nihongi, Reiki 霊亀 2 [716]/5/15, snkbt 13: 10–15, especially 13).
Although the Shoku nihongi does not use the term “engi” to describe the reports
mandated in 716, Genshō’s policy appears to have laid the matrix from which
early engi emerged. Temples and their associated constituencies, which included
lay supporters and government officials, were to submit documents proving thetemples’ legitimacy and substantiating their claims to property.
Among the best-known engi today are a set of texts bearing dates from theTenpyō 天平 era. According to their own testimony, these engi-plus-shizaichōfor Hōryūji 法隆寺, Daianji 大安寺, and Gangōji 元興寺 were created in responseto an order issued in 746 (Tenpyō 18) by the Office for Monastic Affairs.7 For our
purposes, there are two key points to be made regarding these texts and theirprecursors: first, the engi and their associated shizaichō are stylistically laconic
but rhetorically and historically complex. As Genshō’s edict and later Council ofState directives indicate, officials were keenly aware that temple accounts wereprone to falsification (Ruiju sandai kyaku, Council of State directive dated Jōgan
貞観 10 [868]/6/28, szkt 25: 121). Although the Gangōji engi in particular has
long been treated as an important early source for the history of Buddhism inJapan (for example, Stevenson 1999), as Yoshida Kazuhiko 吉田一彦 argues in
his article in this issue, the text is likely a later concatenation. Doubts have also
been raised about the dating of the Hōryūji engi and shizaichō (Okada 1989).
It is thus important to recognize that engi are often, even always, heavily mediated, and that their history should be open to ongoing criticism and reassessment. Furthermore, precisely because they were meant to build up a legitimate
history for religious institutions, engi often involved fabrication. In this respect,they were much like other documentary genres, as discussed by Goodwin andWilson in their article for this issue; certainly, the rhetorical investments of engi
are at least as important as other information they may convey.
7. The relevant passages occur at the end of these engi; see, for instance, dnbz 117: 25–26; 118:
140–41 and 144; Matsuda 2001, 140–42, 89–90, 46–47.

6 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
As the economic base for religious institutions began to shift toward theadministration of estates (shōen 荘園) and fundraising (kanjin) activities, thefunctions of jisha engi changed as well. From the Heian period onward, we begin
to see examples of engi being used as official documentation of property transfers(公験 kugen) in disputes over temple estates and other property (see “Kōyasan
goshuin engi to shōensei 高野山御手印縁起と荘園制” in Koyama 1998, 55–76),
or as resources in campaigns to raise funds for construction and repair (see“Chūsei shinwa no sōzō: Hasedera engi to nanto sekai” in Uejima 2010, 528–
75). Signs of these shifts can be detected even in engi about sacred mountains,though at first glance such materials may appear to extoll the power of mountain landscapes without any relation to economic concerns. For example, whena yamabushi 山伏 named Gyōshun 行俊 was involved in a dispute with Kōfukuji
興福寺 over Ishii no shō 石井庄, which was located near the Katsuragi Mountains
in Yamato Province, he based his claims to the land rights on his possession ofwhat he called “the Ōmine engi” 大峯縁起. According to Gyōshun, the transmission of the engi could be traced back to En no Gyōja 役行者, who had been born on
Ishii no shō; therefore, the land properly belonged to the owner of the engi (Kawasaki 2010, 407–11). Although the exact resolution of this conflict goes unrecorded
in extant sources, Gyōshun’s campaign against his powerful rival was successful
enough that it continued for several years. This indicates that the fact—or eventhe mere idea—of engi ownership could indeed confer authority upon a claimant.
In a contemporary development that involved changes in both use and form,
shrine and temple engi became increasingly pictorial, as the use of illustrations
drove a shift toward visuality and devotional ornamentation (shōgon 荘厳).
First, illustrated scrolls were produced beginning in the Heian period; examples
of such combinations of pictures and text include the Shigisan engi 信貴山縁起
and Kokawadera engi 粉河寺縁起.8 Then, illustrated hanging scrolls began to be
produced in great numbers from the late Kamakura period onward; here the
Kotobiki no miya engi 琴引宮縁起 , Taima mandara engi 当麻曼荼羅縁起, Seiganji engi 誓願寺縁起, and Shidoji engi 志度寺縁起 are representative works. Aseven this limited set of examples indicates, engi feature prominently among themost outstanding extant handscrolls and hanging scrolls.
With the shift toward visual media, new possibilities emerged for engi withrespect to function, content, and representation. Although handscrolls andhanging scrolls do converge in mutually illuminating ways, some basic differences derive from their formal qualities. For instance, in the sphere of appreciation and use, the intimacy of handscrolls contrasts with the public character
8. On Shigisan engi, see Brock 1992. For an overview of the development of illustrated handscrolls during the medieval period, see McCormick 2009, though note that the study focuseson small-format scrolls.

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 7of hanging scrolls. Furthermore, whereas handscrolls tend to favor a temporalmode of representation that unfolds along a horizontal axis, hanging scrolls
evince an oppositional narrativity characterized by tensions between the overall composition and its constituent parts (Sano 2010). That is, in handscrolls,
events unfold in order as the reader rolls the scroll from right to left. Eschewing
this emphasis on temporal sequencing, hanging scrolls require a viewer to attend
simultaneously to individual scenes, which are rendered in considerable detail,as well as the overall composition of which they are a part. Here we wish to draw
attention to several results of pictorialization: the increased fluidity and functional diversification of engi, as well as the stimulation of joint religious activities
among temple communities and their lay supporters, two groups linked to eachother by engi.
Although particular circumstances varied significantly and we often lackclear indications of just how engi operated, it is possible to outline three main
scenarios for the operation of pictorialized and ornamented engi. In the first,
engi were produced for particular devotional reasons according to the wishesof lay patrons. In the second, engi were created and displayed in accord withthe hopes of religious professionals associated with a temple or shrine in order todemonstrate the legitimacy of that religious institution to lay patrons or outsiders. Finally, engi were initially created as pictorial tales (monogatari e 物語絵), andonly later converted into engi (Nara Kokuritsu Hakubutsukan 1975, 11–20).
Among illustrated engi produced from the Heian into the Kamakura period, thefirst scenario seems to have prevailed among handscrolls, whereas the second wascommon for hanging scrolls; however, this was not a fixed distinction. In pointof fact, there are many cases in which the reception and reproduction of engichanged over time due to shifts in their circumstances and surrounding environments. Interest in and positive assessments of this kind of diachronic change inthe operation of individual engi has become a significant trend in recent research(Trede 1999; 2010; see also Takagishi’s article in this issue).
Among extant engi in illustrated handscroll format (engi emaki 縁起絵巻),
the Kasuga gongen genki e 春日権現験記絵 represents an especially famous caseof production by lay sponsors for deposit within a religious institution. In thethird month of Engyō 延慶 2 (1309), the Minister of the Left, Saionji Kinhira
西園寺公衡, presented this set of handscrolls to his ancestral gods at the Kasuga
Shrine. According to the colophon for the table of contents, once Kinhira hadplanned the creation of the engi—a project that involved the best calligraphersand painters of his day—his house enjoyed continued good fortune. The Kasuga
gongen genki e can thus be considered a model of the devotional presentationand ornamentation of an engi in the form of an illustrated handscroll. Following its dedication, it was treated as a treasure and kept deep in the shrine’s
storehouses. During the Muromachi period, it was jealously guarded by the8 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
Tōbokuin 東北院, a Kōfukuji cloister with close ties to the Saionji house. Strict
limits were placed on access and viewing rights, although on several occasions
the scrolls were sent to Kyoto so that the emperor might view them (Furuya
1982; see also Tyler 1990, 18–19). In sum, on the one hand, pictorialization contributed to the ability of religious institutions to promote knowledge of theirengi among lay constituencies; on the other, it gave rise to a new kind of religious treasure, one that was presented by lay patrons and administered by religious institutions.
Of course, not all illustrated engi were produced in order to be deposited at
temples or shrines. One early example of an engi emaki created for use in kanjin
is the Kachiodera engi emaki 勝尾寺縁起絵巻, which dates to 1243 (Kangen 寛元1) (Nakanodō 2012, 169–82). In fact, we may infer that fundraising activities
provided a key opportunity for the production of engi.
The exact form of fundraising for construction and repair varied based on
the circumstances of individual religious institutions, but a well-known andearly example of a system for undertaking the completion of a restoration project is to be found in the activities of Chōgen 重源, who served as the first Tōdaiji
kanjin shiki 東大寺勧進職 following the razing of the southern capital in 1181
(Jishō 治承 4) (Nakanodō 2012; Goodwin 1994; Rosenfield 2011). The genesis of kanjin hijiri 勧進聖 was by no means universal, but in the late Kamakura
period, Ritsu monks became particularly conspicuous in this area (see “Kanjinno taiseika to chūsei ritsu sō 勧進の体制化と中世律僧” in Matsuo 1995, 8–24),
and during the Muromachi period, especially following the Ōnin war, the activities of “ten-grains hijiri” (jikkoku hijiri 十穀聖) became very pronounced (Ōta2008, 359–97). Ten-grains hijiri, who purposely refrained from eating ten different kinds of grain as a form of ascetic discipline, extended the scope of theiractivities by maintaining close ties to powerful aristocrats and warriors in thecapital. There are many instances in which such men created kanjin registers bycapitalizing upon the literary talents of the aristocracy, and these projects often
seem to be related to the creation of illustrated engi scrolls (see “Kanjin hijiri toshaji engi: Muromachi ki o chūshin to shite” in Tokuda 1988, 130–200; Shimosaka 2003). For example, the Bizen no kuni Saidaiji engi emaki 備前国西大寺縁起絵巻, an illustrated account of the origins of Saidaiji in present-day Okayama,
was produced in 1507 (Eishō 永正 4) in the midst of a rebuilding campaign following a fire in 1496 (Meiō 明応 5) . This handscroll was created in a wabun 和
文 idiom on the basis of a kanjin register that had been written in kanbun 漢文.
It is of particular value because it records the names of the ten-grains hijiri who
undertook the kanjin campaign. At the end of the scroll, the concluding passage
praises “the ten-grains hijiri” Chūa 忠阿, who had expended great effort in thereconstruction, as the greatest of the transformation-bodies (zuiichi no keshin
随一の化身) of Kannon (Kawasaki et al. 2013, 39–40).

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 9

During the Muromachi period, the degree of dependence on campaigns inwhich fundraisers asked commoners for “a scrap of paper or half a penny” (isshi
hansen 一紙半銭), that is, small-scale donations, in order to procure funds forrepairs increased more than ever (Ōta 2008). Meanwhile, the activities of the
kanjin hijiri who undertook these projects became more conspicuous. The engi
they used—whether handscrolls or hanging scrolls—were generally plain andcharacterized by content and styles of expression meant to appeal to one’s immediate emotions. (A striking example of this kind of development is the generation of multiple variants of the Kumano gongen engi emaki 熊野権現縁起絵巻;
see Matsumoto 1996, 19–87). Around the same time, practices of commenting
on such engi appear to have contributed to the development of etoki 絵解, which
joined the display of pictures with oral performance, into a distinctive art.9
As even this brief survey shows, engi changed substantially in both form andfunction between the seventh and sixteenth centuries. In some cases, shifts inthe production of engi responded to new circumstances; in others, new developments among engi helped to create new situations. These processes ensured
diversification along twin axes: engi not only changed over the course of thelongue durée but also varied substantially at any given point in time.
The Question of Genre
Although endemic diversity in style and form militate against consideration ofengi as a genre, in planning this special journal issue we have worked from a conviction that there is, in fact, an interpretive benefit to studying engi as a corpus.
Indeed, the notion of engi as a category has a long history of both habitual andstrategic use: people have been purposely composing engi or using that label tore-title preexisting materials for well over a thousand years. With this in mind,
we would like to argue that engi can be fruitfully considered a genre, provided
that we think carefully about what a genre is, can, and should be.10
One strategy for coping with the diversity of engi while also supporting theirconceptualization as a category has been to classify engi into different types. An
important example of this impulse appears in Jisha engi 寺社縁起, a landmark
volume published in 1975 as part of the Nihon shisō taikei 日本思想大系 series.
In addition to annotated transcriptions of thirteen premodern engi, Sakurai
Tokutarō, Hagiwara Tatsuo, and Miyata Noboru contributed essays to this volume that have exerted a pronounced influence on the study of engi. Sakurai’s essay
9. For important work on etoki in Japanese, see Hisano 2009; Hayashi 1982; and Akai 1989;
in English, see Carr 2011; Kaminishi 2006; and Ruch 1977.
10. This section has benefitted from the assistance of Shannon Gayk, who shared her work
for an introduction to an edited volume on early English literary genres with us (Nelson andGayk 2015).

10 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)

government

donors/patrons

religious
institutions

commoners

shōenresidents

figure 1. Production, reproduction, and use ofengi (represented by flares) among social groups.

laid out a typology that embraced historical, formal, and thematic categories; thejuxtapositions among these types draw attention to tensions between scholarly
desires for systematic classificatory models and the nature of engi themselves.11
Classification continues to be important to many research agendas because it
allows for structured comparisons; nevertheless, the outer boundaries of the engi
category have tended to remain conceptually vexed. Indeed, recent research has
begun to emphasize centrifugal rather than centripetal tendencies, focusing lesson what binds engi together than on how engi disseminate into other modes of
expression (see Tokuda 2013 and Tsutsumi and Tokuda 2005, especially 7–24,
as well as Abé’s article in this volume).
11. Sakurai organized his discussion around what he called ancient engi (古縁起), engi
focused on doctrinal exegesis (釈経縁起), engi focused on accounts of miracles (霊験縁起), engi
focused on deities’ suijaku manifestations (垂迹縁起), shrine engi (神社縁起), engi in the form of
illustrated handscrolls (絵巻縁起), and engi focused on sacred mountains (霊山縁起) (Sakurai
et al. 1975, 452–78).

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 11

In working to conceptualize engi as a genre, the position articulated by Carolyn Miller, a specialist of rhetoric, offers a useful perspective: “genre study isvaluable not because it might permit the creation of some kind of taxonomy, but
because it emphasizes some social and historical aspects of rhetoric that otherperspectives do not” (Miller 1984, 151). For Miller, who memorably characterized genre as a form of social action, genres provide “typified rhetorical waysof interacting within recurring situations.” We would like to add that genres,and by extension engi, shape the situations in which they operate: literary andartistic production is not only an effect but also a cause for social situations. In
other words, our concern is not only to look at engi in context, but also to consider how engi have maintained existing social contexts or created new ones. In
the following discussion, we first address the recurring situations in which engi
operated, and then turn to the question of typified rhetoric.
The production of engi has been driven by the need to represent temples andshrines in authoritative and attractive ways. Generally speaking, this situation
has been structured by interlocking relationships among a range of constituencies, most notably religious institutions, government agents or agencies, elite lay
donors, commoners, and residents of shrine or temple estates (see figure 1).
Although the internal structure of religious institutions is not represented in the
figure, it should also be noted that shrines and temples have never been internallyhomogenous. At a shrine, for instance, priestly lineages might compete for prestige and administrative rights, while at a temple, lower-class monks might vie
for economic resources with their elite, learned brethren. Further complicating
the picture, the boundaries between religious institutions, government agencies,
and so on, were porous. For example, scions of noble or gentry families mighttake orders and yet retain strong ties to their natal families; accordingly, elitemonks bridged the nominal divide between lay donors and ordained monastics.
To give visual representation to this kind of porosity, the lines between groups infigure 1 are marked with dotted rather than solid lines.
Because engi tended to be produced along the seams between constituencies,
they can be considered products of both friction and congress. This is an important point. Engi were not solely a medium through which religious institutions
addressed exterior audiences. Rather, lay donors, government agents, and othergroups often participated or even directed their production. This dynamic is
especially vivid in illustrated engi such as the Yūzu nenbutsu engi emaki, whichdrew together monastics, local elites, trained painters, and members of aristocratic and warrior circles from the capital (see Takagishi’s article in this issue).
We also need to recognize that over time the position of engi vis-à-vis theircreators and audiences was open to change. An engi that had been produced asa deluxe illustrated handscroll, commissioned by elite donors and donated toa shrine might later be reproduced using cheaper materials for use by itinerant

12 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
preacher-entertainers bent on proselytizing and raising funds. The arrow in figure 1 is meant to represent this type of mobility. Engi, then, arose from a set ofinteractions and constituencies rather than a fixed and stable situation. In thisrespect, their etymological resonance with the concept of dependent origination is especially telling: engi were embedded within complex socio-historicalcircumstances and were themselves subject to ongoing change. In sum, then, we
can indeed understand engi in light of Miller’s stipulation that a genre be locatedwithin a recurring situation provided that we are willing to acknowledge that thatsituation had multiple participants and was itself constantly shifting and evolving.
It remains to consider whether engi can also be said to constitute a “typified rhetorical type.” Certainly engi do not appear to cohere as a generic typeif our standard is set by theorization of classical Greco-Roman and modern
Euro-American genres, which has tended to focus on aesthetics and to maintaina systematic bent (for example, Frye 2006). On the other hand, more recent
reconceptualizations of genre help us to think of typification in more expansive
terms. Reader response theory has provided a seminal reconceptualization byframing genre as a “horizon of expectations” that generations of texts successively cultivate in their audiences (see “Theory of genres and medieval literature”
in Jauss 1982, 79–109). This and other revisionist projects have raised importantquestions about the locus of genre: do we privilege the concerns of the author, theaudience, or the bibliographer? The form, the title, the content, or the purpose(s)of a text? And on which specific genres do we base our general definitions? Not
surprisingly, responses to these questions have varied, and in some cases they
have sought to chart genre along multiple axes in order to account for its complexity. For instance, writing of Middle English literature, Julie Orlemanski proffers the following definition: “Genres are varieties of writing characterized bywhat they discuss, how they discuss it, and for what purpose or audience they doso” (Orlemanski 2013, 211). This approach has the virtue of combining flexibility
with comprehensive scope, though it must also be admitted that the answers toOrlemanski’s questions on the what, why, and how of engi would proliferate anddiverge as much as they would resemble each other.
Research by medievalists supports the conceptualization of engi as a meaningful if protean textual-cum-visual type with its own recognizable rhetoric. In
this respect, it makes sense to acknowledge the deeply contingent organizationof premodern genres, an aspect of literary and visual production highlighted
by a number of Europeanists. In a now-classic essay, Alfred Hiatt maintains
that an “un-system” prevailed among Middle English genres, such that “whatexisted was more organic, decentered, and unpredictable, than the idea of a system demands.” This does not, Hiatt insists, “mean that there were no establishedliterary practices, modes of composition, or associations attached to particular
terms; it does not mean that there were no genres, nor that there was no means

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 13

of ordering and categorizing literary production” (Hiatt 2007, 291). Medieval
genres, in other words, need not have looked like modern (or classical) genres
to have been recognizable. Genres might be porous enough to overlap with eachother, and they might borrow conventions in order to fulfill particular purposes,
but it does not follow that they were ill conceived or ill executed. Engi, then, do
indeed form a genre, provided that by genre we mean something far more contingent and less systematic than Athenian tragedy or modern murder mysteries.
In addition to endemic diversity, several other factors require consideration
if we are to conceptualize engi as a genre. First, engi tend to be formal hybrids.
They may combine materials from multiple genres, make abrupt stylistic shifts,
and/or overlap with other modes of textual and visual production. Second,
they are decidedly shifty in terms of their self-presentation and reception.
Not only do many engi contain as much fabrication as fact, but they have also
proven singularly flexible in terms of how they have been interpreted and used.
Third, engi tend to be deeply performative in character. Not only do they seek
to enact a desirable past and future but they have also long been bound up withtraditions of storytelling and display, whether didactic, entertaining, or both.
Far from being unique, these traits may fairly be said to characterize medieval literature more generally; nevertheless, they are integral to the historicaloperation of engi.
Here we treat these characteristics in order, using Shitennōji goshuin engi as an
example. This text is especially apropos because it deals with a site of foundational
importance in the real-and-imagined history of Japanese Buddhism and is narrated in the voice of the inimitable Prince Shōtoku 聖徳太子, a culture hero anddivine persona: it is all about origins. Though specious, the engi’s attribution to
Shōtoku is rendered visually compelling through a line of vermillion handprints(now faded) that were placed over the written engi as “Shōtoku’s” imprimatur.12
Both the original manuscript, known as the konpon-bon 根本本, and a 1335 copy
executed by Emperor Go-Daigo 後醍醐 (1288–1339) are designated nationaltreasures. In addition to these two manuscripts, the engi is extant in twenty-one
other copies, which were produced between 1145 and 1929 (Sakakibara 2013,
43–45). Clearly, the Shitennōji engi has had a long history of appreciation and use.
By calling attention to the formal hybridity of engi, we want to make the case thatengi may fairly be considered a composite genre. Many engi recycle and combine
textual or visual units of different types; as a consequence, they are often inconsistent, even miscellaneous. In an influential article addressing the “possibility ofsome medieval works being both complex (complexly produced and received) and12. The engi has been treated as a Heian- rather than an Asuka-period creation ever since
Kariya Ekisai 狩谷棭斎 (1775–1835) argued against the attribution to Shōtoku Taishi. For a review
of research on the engi, see Sakakibara (2013, 2–6).

14 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
powerfully generic,” Ardis Butterfield writes of what she calls “inset genres” (Butterfield 1990, 190). Among the materials Butterfield studies, an inset might be asong inserted into a romance; with respect to engi, it might be a list of annual rites
appended to a chronologically ordered history. Whereas Butterfield describes theprocess of embedding formally and stylistically distinctive passages within a larger
text as a kind of generic mixing (Butterfield 1990, 188), juxtaposition might be amore apt term for present purposes. The macro-genre (the setting) and the microgenre (the inset) retain their differences, resulting in a work that takes on the quality of an assemblage or aggregate.
The Shitennōji goshuin engi illustrates this kind of internal embedding, as well
as external overlaps into other generic types.13 The first of its several distinctive
sections begins with a laconic rehearsal of the name of the temple and the locations of four associated cloisters (Kyōden’in 敬田院, Seyakuin 施薬院, Ryōbyōin
療病院, and Hiden’in 悲田院) in a style recalling that of official documents. By
contrast, the ensuing passage, which is quite dramatic, combines a stereotypically engi-like account of Shitennōji’s founding with a hagiography that draws
on heroic depictions of Prince Shōtoku first adumbrated in the Nihon shoki andthen elaborated in texts such as the Shōtoku Taishi denryaku 聖徳太子伝暦. In
recounting Prince Shōtoku’s fight against Mononobe no Moriya 物部守屋, theinfamous anti-Buddhist villain of classical narrative, the engi adds mythic depth
by explaining that Moriya had been the narrator’s “shadow and echo” throughhundreds of lives. Then, in an abrupt shift, the text moves into an itemizationof temple properties, subdivided into categories of halls, treasures, sustenancegrants, and fields.14 This itemization hews to the conventions of property registers, which had been produced from the Nara into the Heian periods. 15 By
the time the Shitennōji engi was completed, however, itemizations had ceased
to be necessary complements to engi. In this particular case, mid-Heian writers appear to have produced the list in order to make their composition seemarchaic enough to have been written by Shōtoku. The next passage returns to
Shōtoku’s (auto)biography, recounting his previous incarnations and predicting his career as a defender of Buddhism in a range of future births. This section operates as a prophetic record (miraiki 未来記), a type of text that came into
comparatively broad use during the middle ages while retaining a close association with Shōtoku (Komine 2007; see also Wada 1921). Finally, the most con13. The following discussion is based on typeset versions of the text in Tanahashi (1996, 5–12)
and Sakakibara (2013, 16–25); note that the latter edition divides the text into sections.
14. For a discussion of the properties listed, including a review of previous research, see
Sakakibara (2013, 85–99).
15. On use and change among shizaichō during the early Heian period, see Kawajiri (2003,
223–77).

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 15

spicuous material aspect of the manuscript, the vermillion handprints, link theengi to documentary genres centered on authentication. From the early Heianperiod, handprints had been used in lieu of seals on documents, and the practice
was adapted into religious culture by at least the tenth century.16 The use of handprints gained popularity among the emperors of the insei and Kamakura periods,
some of whom made pilgrimages to Shitennōji and saw the temple’s engi; thesemen sealed oaths (kishōmon 起請文) and other documents with their handprints(Kyōto Kokuritsu Hakubutsukan 2012, plate 16, 20, 31). In turn, this habit laid
the groundwork for medieval forgeries purporting to be royal decrees (Tonomura
1985). Thus, the Shitennōji engi was not “just” or “only” an engi; it also contained
and therefore was a document, a property list, a biography, and a prophecy. And
that was not all: as we shall see, it was also a ritually potent material object.
The second issue to be emphasized regarding engi is that they may be considered a shifty, mobile genre in that embroidery, invention, and even forgery
have been integral to their production from the start. As discussed in the preceding section, although the ritsuryō government required temples to submit
accounts of both their history and their property holdings as a means to copewith economic fraud, falsification was clearly an issue in the composition andsubmission of these records. With the decline of the ritsuryō order in the earlyto-mid-Heian period, government patronage of religious institutions lessened
dramatically. In the context of pressing economic and social needs, engi becamea key venue through which religious institutions sought to attract new support
by representing themselves as sources for authoritative traditions and blessings.
Thus, whereas engi cannot be taken as reliable reports of “fact,” they do provide
evidence for relations between religious institutions and other constituencies,
most notably governmental organs and potential adherents.
Importantly, engi were also shifty in a second respect: their status and reception, and in some cases their form and content, changed substantially over time. As
Yoshida Kazuhiko argues in this issue, the text known today as the Gangōji garan
engi narabini ruki shizaichō 元興寺伽藍縁起幷流記資財帳 has its roots in the history of one temple but was later redacted and reconfigured to represent the storyof another. According to Yoshida, the text probably assumed its present form during a campaign to improve Gangōji’s financial situation during the ninth century,
when it was backdated to “prove” new historical and economic claims.
As a forgery purporting to be the work of Shōtoku Taishi, the Shitennōji
goshuin engi embodies the fabricated aspects of its genre: it was most likely
16. See Kodai Gakkai and Kodai Kenkyūjo (1994, 1: 158). In one early and spectacular
example, the monks Chōnen 奝然 and Gizō 義蔵 sealed a vow they wrote in 972 with their handprints; this text was later enclosed within the Seiryōji 清涼寺 Shaka 釈迦 image (see, for instance,
Henderson and Hurvitz 1956, 25–26, 45–47, and plate 8).

16 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
produced by a Shitennōji monk named Jiun 慈運 (n.d.) or one of his circle
shortly before its discovery in 1004.17 Like other temples in the post-ritsuryō
economic milieu, Shitennōji monks faced a dearth of support from the government and plenty of competition over land rights. They also had pressing fiscal
needs. The temple had suffered a devastating fire in 960, and the rebuilding
process appears to have extended over most of the next century. Although the
only evidence is circumstantial, it appears that the Shitennōji goshuin engi wascomposed to amplify the cult of Shōtoku Taishi, to attract pilgrims and patrons,
and to assert claims to the properties listed in its shizaichō section (“Shitennōji
goshuin engi ni tsuite 四天王寺御手印縁起について,” in Hiraoka 1981, 43­–81). In
all of these respects, the authenticating handprints would have vividly asserted
the text’s pseudo-documentary authority.18
Whether or not the engi immediately attracted aristocratic patrons, elite pilgrimage to Shitennōji did begin around the time it was composed.19 Although
it is unclear what, if any, interaction pilgrims had with the engi during the ensuing hundred-odd years, by the twelfth century the text had definitely been integrated into devotional practices at the temple. Fujiwara no Yorinaga 藤原頼長
(1120–1156), a scion of the regents’ family, remarked on one of several Shitennōjipilgrimages that on the third day after his arrival, he “entered the hall” and had
the provisional steward (gonbettō 権別当) bring out relics, which he venerated.
According to Yorinaga, “Then we read the engi with handprints from the edge
to its inner portions” (Taiki, Kōji 康治 2 [1143]/10/23]). Like relics and painted or
sculpted images of Shōtoku, the engi had become part of the material and ritual
culture of Shitennōji pilgrimage. Its ability to span evidentiary and devotionalmodes of representation ensured its ongoing relevance, a circumstance that
became an important factor in the social lives of many other premodern engi.
In turning to the last aspect of engi mentioned above, we would like toemphasize that engi were often performative in terms of their facture, ownership, transmission, display, and/or ritual use. As Kawasaki Tsuyoshi’s article in
17. A manuscript of the engi copied by the Tōdaiji monk Sōshō 宗性 (1202–1278) is now heldby Yōmei Bunko 陽明文庫. This version of the text includes a copy of a colophon from anothermanuscript (now lost) that credits Jiun with discovering the engi inside a six-story pagoda inside
the Shitennōji Golden Hall. Transcriptions derived from this textual family are reproduced inzgr 27.2 (fascicle 802): 326–33, where the text appears under the title Arahakadera goshuin engi
荒陵寺御手印縁起, and dnbz 118: 58–64; refer to Sakakibara (2013, 49 and 74–76).
18. The Kōya goshuin engi 高野御手印縁起, which bears handprints spuriously attributed toKōbō Daishi, provides a useful comparison, especially because its use in property disputes is better documented (Sakurai 2000, 47–69; Koyama 1998, 55–76; Frölich 2007, 69–118).
19. When Fujiwara no Senshi 藤原詮子 (961–1001, a.k.a. Higashi Sanjōin 東三條院) visited thetemple (Midō kanpakuki, Chōhō 2 [1000]/3/20–25), she inaugurated a steep increase in pilgrimage
to Shitennōji. For a concise overview of pilgrimage to Shitennōji, see Sakakibara (2013, 66–73).

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 17

this issue shows, engi played a key role in constructing new founder figures andactualizing new sacred landscapes during the insei period (see also Roth 2014
on the relationship between engi and spatial imaginaire). Similarly, medieval
engi that valorize religious practice in the Ōmine range, a mountainous area on
the Kii Peninsula known as a hotbed of Shugendo, represent the transmissionof engi as an action conferring religious authority and community membershipupon recipients (Blair 2015, 246–53; Roth 2014). Engi, then, helped to bringreligious communities and landscapes into being on an ongoing basis. In a different vein, display was integral to etoki, in which monastics, and later itinerant performers, used narrative paintings, including engi, in performances thatcombined didactic instruction with entertainment.20 Periodic public displays(kaichō 開帳) of treasures became a means for temples to raise funds and proselytize, and during the early modern period, engi were among the materials usedin such exhibitions (see, for instance, Hisano 2005).
Because the Shitennōji engi made Shōtoku ritually present by means of what it
figures as the “traces of his hands” (the calligraphy and handprints attributed tohim), it may be considered a kind of visual, material performance. Notably, thetext itself sought to limit access to, and thereby heighten the charisma of, thesetraces by warning that they should not be viewed needlessly lest they become“disordered.” Its most famous reproduction recapitulated these gestures of revelation and occlusion. When Go-Daigo copied the engi in 1335, he acknowledgedin his colophon that Shōtoku’s “sacred traces” should not be examined, but also
explained that he had ordered the engi brought to him in order that he mightsettle unspecified “doubts” surrounding it (Tanahashi 1996, 11). After remarking
upon correspondences between the date on which he copied the engi and that on
which Shōtoku supposedly first wrote it, Go-Daigo reenacted “Shōtoku’s” gesture
by sealing his copy of the engi with his handprints and henceforth prohibiting
the circulation of the text. Kuroda Toshio has argued that Go-Daigo’s assertionof control of the Shitennōji engi was part of a broader project to legitimate himself and bring religious institutions, together with their symbolic and material
resources, under his own control (see “Ōbō buppō sōi ron no kiseki 王法仏法相依論の軌跡” in Kuroda 1994, 2: 197–231, especially 214). In this respect, Go-Daigo
was very much performing sovereignty. He may even have viewed himself as areincarnation of Shōtoku, in many ways the ideal Buddhist ruler (Takeda 1993,
94–97).
Importantly, the Shitennōji engi was also connected to etoki. The earliest
known reference to this kind of verbal exegesis of painted pictures stems from thesame Shitennōji pilgrimage in which Yorinaga read the “engi with handprints.”
The day before he viewed the engi, Yorinaga entered the Shitennōji Picture Hall
20. See note 9.

18 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)(gadō 畫堂), where a priest expounded upon paintings that contemporary scholars believe to have been images narrating Shōtoku’s life (Taiki, Kōji 2 [1143]/10/22;
Kaminishi 2006, 23–26). Although pictorial and narrative depictions of Shōtoku’slife differed radically in terms of form, they nonetheless appear to have shared an
iconic function. As Kevin Carr (2011, 36) has pointed out, paintings used in etoki“may function less as a means for transmitting specific narratives, and more as
objects of ritualized veneration.” In other words, both the paintings and the engi
were ritually potent tools for making the prince present. Other engi also took on
this kind of liturgical, devotional function during the Middle Ages.
In using the Shitennōji goshuin engi as an example of the hybrid, shifty, andperformative qualities of premodern engi, we do not mean to imply that any single engi can or should be taken to represent the genre as a whole. The Shitennōji(or any other) engi is representative only insofar as it manifests some of the characteristics of its genre writ large.
The protean, flexible quality of engi has surely contributed to their longevity:
collectively, engi have been able to adapt and change to a remarkable extent, as
witnessed by the fact that they continue to be produced and circulated today.
This points to a dynamism stemming from their relational positioning: engi not
only occur along the seams between social and institutional groups (see figure1) but also exemplify generic interaction. Whether they operate as inset genres
themselves (for instance, as engi passages in a longer drama), or as the setting forother insets, they engage with, even fade into, other textual and visual modes of
expression.
Summary of Articles
As this introduction has shown, the motivations for this special issue lie in partwith definitional concerns. In his article, Ryūichi Abé advocates for an expansive
understanding of engi as a mode of discourse that narrates the past causes ofpresent circumstances. By rereading the Lotus Sutra’s Dragon Princess episodein light of medieval Japanese literary production and the work of Chinese exegetes, Abé argues forcefully against interpretations of this passage as a statementthat women must transform by becoming male (henjō nanshi 変成男子) before
they can attain enlightenment. In addition to modeling a hermeneutic strategy
in which the interpretation of scripture is guided more by vernacular literaturethan scholastic doctrine, this article focuses on cross-genre insets and resonances: here textual passages from noh and honjimono 本地物, as well as visual
representation in a sutra frontispiece, are treated as and with engi.
Max Moerman’s article works against stereotypes of engi as bound up with theparticularity of specific sites by treating the Arima onsen engi 有馬温泉縁起 as avariation on an oft-told tale that is extant in many other forms. Methodologically,blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 19

this means that comparison of sources leads not to deductions about the historyof a given institution or text but rather to a broad view of how narrative tropes
migrate through time and across genres and sites. By examining the confluencesamong the Arima engi and its cognates, this study focuses on the etiological functions of engi within the broader framework of religious narrative.
Despite early and persistent doubts about its date, the Gangōji garan engi narabini ruki shizaichō has often been treated as one of the earliest extant engi andtherefore a model of—and for—the genre. It has also become a classic source forthe dating of the transmission of Buddhism to Japan. In this respect, it is widely
cited in textbooks, lending it an aura of truth and reliability in many circles.
Yoshida Kazuhiko’s article, however, argues that the Gangōji engi is a complex
product of textual combination, redaction, and elaboration that occurred during the early Heian period, not the Tenpyō era. In this respect, the engi may bedeemed a forgery that was likely motivated by a desire to control Gangōji and its
assets. In addition to upending conventional treatment of this text in the Englishlanguage field, Yoshida’s article also stands as an example of how we might assessmany engi as the work of unreliable narrators. Careful reading often illuminates
the conditions of an engi’s production and reception, but will not necessarily provide dependable information about the past the text claims to represent.
With an eye to the rhetorical investments of engi, Janet Goodwin and Kevin
Wilson examine an engi associated with Jōdoji, a temple founded by Chōgen on
Tōdaiji’s Ōbe estate 大部庄 in Harima Province (contemporary Hyōgo Prefecture).
By putting the Jōdoji engi 浄土寺縁起 into dialogue with other historical sources,
this article highlights the editorial choices that shape a particular account of a temple’s history. Framing the engi as an effort to produce and maintain cultural capital,
Goodwin and Wilson, like Yoshida, point to a conflict that is never mentioned in
the engi as a likely motivating factor in the text’s composition. In this case, theengi’s creators seem to have been set on erasing memories of a late thirteenthcentury struggle between local monastic constituencies and Tōdaiji over control ofthe Ōbe estate. This example, then, serves as a reminder that we need to attend asmuch to what engi do not say as to what they do.
Usually when we consider the ramifications of jisha engi, we look to theeffects they exerted upon the institutions they describe. Although Kawasaki
Tsuyoshi’s article on the Mino’odera engi does assess the text’s influence on how
Mino’o itself was imagined during the insei period, this study of an engi’s reception also attends to how the text more broadly reconfigured the imagined history
of Buddhism in Japan. Kawasaki argues that the Mino’odera engi was successful in establishing En no Gyōja as a founder figure for increasingly organizedcommunities of yamabushi. Furthermore, as it was adapted at other sites, it contributed to a new spatial and temporal imaginaire, not only at Mino’o but also
at mountains surrounding the Nara basin. By focusing attention on reception

20 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
rather than production, this study opens up questions of how engi contribute to
the formation of social constituencies and religious landscapes.
Similarly, in his analysis of the Yūzu nenbutsu engi emaki, Takagishi Akira
focuses not on the initial production but rather the ongoing reproduction of thisillustrated engi during the Muromachi period, demonstrating that it was serially
recreated in the context of memorial rites for generations of Ashikaga shoguns.
Although there is little evidence for the structure and content of the memorialrites themselves, it is clear that the engi scrolls, which were produced in bothprint and manuscript form by mobilizing diverse networks of contributors,
were deposited at Seiryōji and other temples as offerings to generate merit forthe deceased (tsuizen 追善). This article thus points to the multiple lives of engi.
From the perspective of monastics, this particular engi was used to promoteyūzū nenbutsu practice and to raise funds; for lay donors, it produced social
cohesion and ritual continuity; and as time wore on, it transformed into a temple treasure. The proliferation of multiple versions and copies of the engi clearly
indicate its importance for the history of religious practice and visual culture.
Conclusion
In this introduction, we have argued that it makes sense to consider engi as agenre because, as Miller (1984) suggests, doing so enables us to focus on rhetorical confluences among these texts and images. We are not, however, advocating for the establishment of a distinct field of engi studies. That kind ofdelimitation threatens to distract attention from entanglements between engi
and other domains of cultural production and activity. In our view, it is the tension between the centripetal pull of engi construed as a genre (or at the very
least, as comparable texts and images) and the centrifugal force of their diverse
engagements that most animates and invigorates the study of engi.
It is our hope that this special issue will encourage others to take up engi as
rich, if sometimes recalcitrant, sources for all kinds of historical projects, fromthe institutional or economic, to the artistic or literary, to the social or cultural.
At the same time, the complexity of the genre warrants rigorous comparative
research, as well as ongoing investigations into the lives of individual engi. The
fundamental condition supporting the social value of engi is that they exist (orare assumed, accurately or otherwise, to have existed) as real objects in a given
temporal and spatial imaginaire. Thus, the contexts in which engi are produced,
reproduced, circulated, and interpreted—as well as the contexts that they create—are of crucial importance. Finally, engi deserve further theorization,
whether in light of what Miller (1984, 153) might call their “social action,” theirmodes of representation, or other terms that we have yet to imagine.

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 21references
abbreviations
dnbz
snkbt
snkbz
szkt
zgr

Dai Nihon Bukkyō zensho 大日本仏教全書. 161 vols. Ed. Bussho Kankōkai
仏書刊行会. On demand edition. Tokyo: Daihōrinkaku, 2007.
Shin Nihon koten bungaku taikei 新日本古典文学大系. 100 vols., plus indices. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1989–2005.
Shinpen Nihon koten bungaku zenshū 新編日本古典文学全集 . 88 vols.
Tokyo: Shōgakukan, 1994–2002.
Shintei zōho kokushi taikei 新訂増補国史大系. 60 vols., plus indices. On
demand edition. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kōbunkan, 2007.
Zoku gunsho ruijū 続群書類従 . 37 vols., plus supplements. Ed. Hanawa
Hokiichi 塙保己一. Tokyo: Zoku Gunsho Ruijū Kanseikai, 1923.

primary sources
Midō kanpakuki 御堂関白記. 3 vols. Dai Nihon kokiroku 大日本古記録, ed. Shiryō
Hensanjo 史料編纂所. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1952–1954.
Nihon shoki 日本書紀. 3 vols. snkbz 2–4.
Shitennōji goshuin engi 四天王寺御手印縁起. Shitennōji komonjo 四天王寺古文書,
ed. Tanahashi Toshimitsu 棚橋利光, 5–12. Osaka: Seibundō Shuppan, 1996.
Shoku nihongi 続日本紀. 5 vols. snkbt 12–16.
Ruijū sandai kyaku 類聚三代格. szkt 22.
Taiki 台記. Zōhō shiryō taisei 増補史料大成, 23­–25. Kyoto: Rinsen Shoten, 1965.

secondary sources
Abe Yasurō 阿部泰郎
2013 Chūsei Nihon no shūkyō tekusuto taikei 中世日本の宗教テクスト体系 .
Nagoya: Nagoya Daigaku Shuppankai.
Akai Tatsurō 赤井達郎
1989 Etoki no keifu 絵解きの系譜. Tokyo: Kyōikusha.
Andreeva, Anna
2010 The karmic origins of the Great Bright Miwa Deity: A transformation of
the sacred mountain in premodern Japan. Monumenta Nipponica 65: 245–
96.
Blair, Heather
2015 Real and Imagined: The Peak of Gold in Heian Japan. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Asia Center.
Brock, Karen L.
1992 The making and remaking of Miraculous Origins of Mt. Shigi. Archives ofAsian Art 45: 42–71.

22 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
Butterfield, Ardis
1990 Medieval genres and modern genre theory. Paragraph: A Journal of Modern Critical Theory 13: 184–201.
Carr, Kevin Gray2011 The material facts of ritual: Revisioning medieval viewing through material analysis, ethnographic analogy, and architectural history. In A Companion to Asian Art and Architecture, Rebecca M. Brown and Deborah S.
Hutton, eds., 23–47. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Chikamoto Kensuke 近本謙介
2000 Haimetsu kara no saisei: Nanto ni okeru chūsei no tōrai 廃滅からの再生—
南都における中世の到来. Nihon bungaku 49: 29–38.
Frölich, Judith
2007 Rulers, Peasants, and the Use of the Written Word in Medieval Japan:
Ategawa no shō, 1004–1304. Vienna: Peter Lang.
Frye, Northrop
2006 Fourth essay. Rhetorical criticism: Theory of genres. In Anatomy of Criticism: Four Essays, 241–337. Collected Works of Northrop Frye, vol. 22.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Originally published 1956)
Fukuda Akira 福田 晃
1984 Shintōshū setsuwa no seiritsu 神道集説話の成立. Tokyo: Miyai Shoten.
Furuya Minoru 古谷 稔
1982 “Kasuga gongen genki e” no kenkyū「春日権現験記絵」の研究 . In Zoku
Nihon emaki taisei 続日本絵巻大成, vol. 15, Kasuga gongen genki e 2: 52–94.
Tokyo: Chūō Kōronsha.
Goodwin, Janet
1994 Alms and Vagabonds: Buddhist Temples and Popular Patronage in Medieval Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Gorai Shigeru 五来 重2008 Jisha engi to denshō bunka 寺社縁起と伝承文化. Gorai Shigeru chosakushū
五来重著作集, vol. 4. Kyoto: Hōzōkan.
Grapard, Allan G.
1986 Lotus in the mountain, mountain in the Lotus: Rokugō kaizan nimmon
daibosatsu hongi. Monumenta Nipponica 41: 21–50.
1989 The textualized mountain, enmountained text: The Lotus Sutra in Kunisaki. In The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture, George J. Tanabe, Jr. andWilla Jane Tanabe, eds., 159–89. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
1998 Geotyping sacred space: The case of Mt. Hiko in Japan. In Sacred Space:
Shrine, City, Land, Benjamin Z. Kedar and R. J. Zwi Werblowsky, eds.,
215–49. New York: New York University Press.

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 23

Hayashi Masahiko 林 雅彦
1982

Nihon no etoki: Shiryō to kenkyū 日本の絵解き—資料と研究. Tokyo: Miyai
Shoten.

Henderson, Gregory, and Leon Hurvitz
1956 The Buddha of Seiryōji: New finds and new theory. Artibus Asiae 19: 4–55.
Hiatt, Alfred
2007 Genre without system. In Oxford Twenty-First Century Approaches to Literature: Middle English, ed. Paul Strohm, 277–94. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hiraoka Jōkai 平岡定海
1981 Nihon jiinshi no kenkyū 日本寺院史の研究. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kōbunkan.
(Originally published 1964)
Hisano Toshihiko 久野俊彦
2005 Engi no media: Kaichō ni okeru engi 縁起のメディア—開帳における縁起. In
Tsutsumi and Tokuda, eds., 305–22.
2009 Etoki to engi no fōkuroa 絵解きと縁起のフォークロア. Tokyo: Shinwasha.
Jauss, Hans Robert (trans. Timothy Bahti)
1982 Toward an Aesthetic of Reception. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press.
Kaminishi, Ikumi
2006 Explaining Pictures: Buddhist Propaganda and Etoki Storytelling in Japan.
Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.
Kawajiri Akio 川尻秋生
2003 Nihon kodai no kyaku to shizaichō 日本 古代の格と資財帳 . Tokyo:
Yoshikawa Kōbunkan.
Kawasaki Tsuyoshi 川崎剛志
2010 Inseiki ni okeru Yamato no kuni no reizan kōryū jigyō to engi 院政期における大和国の霊山興隆事業と縁起 . In Chūsei bungaku to jiin shiryō,
shōgyō 中世文学寺院史料・聖教, ed. Abe Yasurō 阿部泰郎, 401–25. Tokyo:
Chikurinsha.
Kawasaki Tsuyoshi, Karikome Hitoshi 苅米一志, and Doi Michihiro 土井通弘
2013 Bizen no kuni Saidaiji engi emaki 備前国西大寺縁起絵巻. Okayama:
Shūjitsu Daigaku Kibi Chihō Bunka Kenkyūjo.
Kodai Gakkai 古代学会 and Kodai Kenkyūjo 古代研究所, eds.
1994 Heian jidaishi jiten 平安時代史事典. 3 vols. Tokyo: Kadokawa Shoten.
Komine Kazuaki 小峯和明
2007 Chūsei Nihon no yogensho: “Miraiki” o yomu 中世日本の予言書—＜未来記＞
を読む. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Koyama Yasunori 小山靖憲
1998 Chūsei jisha to shōensei 中世寺社と荘園制. Tokyo: Hanawa Shobō.

24 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
Kuroda Toshio 黒田俊雄
1994 Kuroda Toshio chosakushū 黒田俊雄著作集 2. Kyoto: Hōzōkan.
Kyōto Kokuritsu Hakubutsukan 京都国立博物館
2012 Shinkan tennō no sho: Ote ga orinasu shikō no bi 宸翰天皇の書—御手が織りなす至高の美. Kyoto: Kyoto Kokuritsu Hakubutsukan.
MacWilliams, Mark1997 Temple myths and the popularization of Kannon pilgrimage in Japan:
A case study of Ōya-ji on the Bandō route. Japanese Journal of Religious
Studies 24: 375–411.
2004 Living icons: Reizō myths of the Saikoku Kannon pilgrimage. Monumenta
Nipponica 59: 35–82.
Matsuda Kazuaki 松田和晃
2001 Sakuin taishō kodai shizaichō shūsei: Naraki 索引対照古代資財帳集成—
奈良期. Tokyo: Suzusawa Shoten.
Matsumoto Ryūshin 松本隆信
1996 Chūsei ni okeru honjimono no kenkyū 中世における本地物の研究．Tokyo:
Kyūko Shoin.
Matsuo Kenji 松尾剛次
1995 Kanjin to hakai no chūseishi: Chūsei bukkyō no jissō 勧進と破戒の中世史—
中世仏教の実相. Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kōbunkan.
McCormick, Melissa
2009 Tosa Mitsunobu and the Small Scroll in Medieval Japan. Seattle: Universityof Washington Press.
Miller, Carolyn R.
1984 Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 151–67.
Nakanodō Kazunobu 中ノ堂一信2012 Chūsei kanjin no kenkyū: Sono keisei to tenkai 中世勧進の研究—その形成と展開. Kyoto: Hōzōkan.
Nance, Richard F.
2012 Speaking for Buddhas: Scriptural Commentary in Indian Buddhism. New
York: Columbia University Press.
Nara Kokuritsu Hakubutsukan 奈良国立博物館, ed.
1975 Shaji engi-e 社寺縁起絵. Tokyo: Kadokawa Shoten.
Nelson, Ingrid, and Shannon Gayk
2015 Introduction: Genre as form-of-life. Exemplaria 27/1–2 (special issue:“Medieval genre”): 3–17.
Okada Yoshirō 岡田芳朗
1989 “Hōryūji garan engi narabini shizaichō” ni tsuite「法隆寺伽籃縁起并流記資財帳」について. In Kodai jiin to bukkyō 古代寺院と仏教, ed. Tsuruoka
Shizuo 鶴岡静夫, 73–89. Tokyo: Meichō Shuppan.

blair and kawasaki: editors’ introduction | 25

Orlemanski, Julie
2013 Genre. In A Handbook of Middle English Studies, ed. Marion Turner, 207–
21. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Ōta Naoyuki 太田直之
2008 Chūsei no shaji to shinkō: Kanjin to kanjin hijiri no jidai 中世の社寺と信仰—勧進と勧進聖の時代. Tokyo: Kōbundō.
Quinter, David
2007a Creating bodhisattvas: Eison, “Hinin,” and the “Living Mañjuśrī.” Monumenta Nipponica 62: 437–58.
2007b Account of the origin of the Hannyaji Mañjuśrī: A translation of Hannyaji
Monju engi. Monumenta Nipponica 62: 459–68.
Rosenfield, John M.
2011 Portraits of Chōgen: The Transformation of Buddhist Art in Early Medieval
Japan. Leiden and Boston: Brill.
Roth, Carina
2014 Un etude de l’imaginaire religieux dans le Japon medieval à travers le Shozan engi (fin XIIe siècle). PhD dissertation, Université de Genève.
Ruch, Barbara
1977 Medieval jongleurs and the making of a national literature. In Japan in the
Muromachi Age, John W. Hall and Toyoda Takeshi, eds., 279–309. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Sakakibara Fumiko 榊原史子
2013 “Shitennōji engi” no kenkyū: Shōtoku Taishi no engi to sono shūhen『四天王寺縁起』の研究—聖徳太子の縁起とその周辺. Tokyo: Bensei Shuppan.
Sakurai Tokutarō 桜井徳太郎, Hagiwara Tatsuo 萩原龍夫,
and Miyata Noboru 宮田 登, eds.
1975 Jisha engi 寺社縁起. Nihon Shisō Taikei 20. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.
Sakurai Yoshirō 桜井好朗
2000 Kamigami no henbō 神々の変貌. Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō. (Originally published 1976)
Sano Midori 佐野みどり
2010 Chūsei kakefuku engi-e josetsu 中世掛幅縁起絵序説. In Sano, Shinkawa,and Fujiwara, eds., 3–41.
Sano Midori, Shinkawa Tetsuo 新川哲雄, and Fujiwara Shigeo 藤原重雄, eds.
2010 Chūsei kaiga no matorikkusu 中世絵画のマトリックス 1. Tokyo: Seikansha.
Shimosaka Mamoru下坂 守
2003 Chūseiteki “kanjin” no henshitsu katei: Kiyomizudera ni okeru “hongan”
shutsugen no keiki o megutte 中世的「勧進」の変質過程—清水寺における「本願」出現の契機をめぐって. In Egakareta Nihon no chūsei: Ezu bun-26 | Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 42/1 (2015)
sekiron 描かれた日本の中世—絵図分析論, ed. Shimosaka Mamoru, 189–
223. Kyoto: Hōzōkan. (Originally published 1991)

Smith, Jonathan Z.
1982 Fences and neighbors: Some contours of early Judaism. In Imagining Religion: From Babylon to Jonestown, 1–18. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Stevenson, Miwa
1999 The founding of the monastery Gangōji and a list of its treasures. In Religions of Japan in Practice, ed. George J. Tanabe, Jr., 299–315. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Takeda Sachiko 武田佐知子
1993 Shinkō no ōken Shōtoku Taishi 信仰の王権 聖徳太子. Tokyo: Chūō
Kōronsha.
Tanahashi Toshimitsu 棚橋利光, ed.
1996 Shitennōji komonjo 四天王寺古文書. Vol. 1. Osaka: Seibundō Shuppan.
Tokuda Kazuo 徳田和夫
1988 Otogi zōshi kenkyū お伽草子研究. Tokyo: Miyai Shoten.
Tokuda Kazuo, ed.
2013 Chūsei no jisha engi to sankei 中世の寺社縁起と参詣. Tokyo: Chikurinsha.
Tonomura, Hitomi
1985 Forging the past: Medieval counterfeit documents. Monumenta Nipponica
40: 69–96.
Trede, Melanie
1999 Image, Text and Audience: The Taishokan Narrative in Visual Representations of the Early Modern Period in Japan. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
2010 Eikyō go-nen Hachiman engi emaki no shōgai to sono yosei 永享五年八幡縁起絵巻の生涯とその余生. In Sano, Shinkawa, and Fujiwara, eds.,
220–47.
Tsutsumi Kunihiko 堤 邦彦 and Tokuda Kazuo, eds.
2005 Jisha engi no bunkagaku 寺社縁起の文化学. Tokyo: Shinwasha.
2010 Yūraku to shinkō no bunkagaku 遊楽と信仰の文化学. Tokyo: Shinwasha.
Tyler, Royall
1990 The Miracles of the Kasuga Deity. New York: Columbia University Press.
Uejima Susumu 上島 享
2010 Nihon chūsei shakai no keisei to ōken 日本中世社会の形成と王権. Nagoya:
Nagoya Daigaku Shuppankai.
Wada Hisamatsu 和田英松
1921 Shōtoku Taishi miraiki no kenkyū 聖徳太子未来記の研究. Shigaku zasshi
32: 169–212.