治河能让所有人都安全吗？

Yasumura Toshifumi (安村俊史), “大和川つけかえに反対した人たち (9) 付け替え工事と新川筋の村々,” Kashiwara Historical Museum / Kashiwara City, 25 February 2022, paragraphs on survey markers, accommodation, and the Jōrenji harvest; the illustrated record is identified as Jōrenji-mura kiroku, Hasegawa family documents. The historical account, rather than an independent transcription of the original manuscript, supplies these details. Dates in the article are given by year; the source's early-eighteenth-century month-and-day dates have not been converted into Gregorian dates. https://www.city.kashiwara.lg.jp/docs/2021083100126/

Yasumura, “大和川つけかえに反対した人たち (1) 付け替え反対運動の始まり,” Kashiwara City, 11 October 2024, description of the former course and of the 1796 Shin-Yamatogawa horiwari yurai kakiagechō (新大和川堀割由来書上帳), Hasegawa family documents. The later account's position and date are retained; it is not treated as a contemporary transcript of all earlier opposition. https://www.city.kashiwara.lg.jp/docs/2021083100041/

Uji City, 史跡宇治川太閤堤跡パンフレット, historical explanation and archaeological illustrations, printed pp. 1–4. The brochure relates the 1594 works to Fushimi's development and describes excavated stone protection, stakes, and projecting structures. These are the excavating authority's synthesis and illustrated findings, not a reconstruction of every contemporary water level or a complete reading of the underlying excavation volumes. https://www.city.uji.kyoto.jp/uploaded/life/64110_144190_misc.pdf ; publication page: https://www.city.uji.kyoto.jp/site/bunkazai/45449.html

Yasumura, “大和川つけかえに反対した人たち (2) 最初の付け替え検分と反対運動,” Kashiwara City, 25 February 2022, the 1660 survey and the two principal objections. The survey discussion cites the Kashiwara family documents of Ōta village; the interruption of northward drainage and irrigation is presented as the villagers' stated objection. https://www.city.kashiwara.lg.jp/docs/2021083100058/

Yasumura, “大和川のつけかえ ほんとうの理由は？ (10) 通説を見直す,” Kashiwara City, 4 November 2022. Used for the historian's revision of an uninterrupted, single-campaign explanation and his dating of the last identified pro-diversion petition. The article does not adopt this source's rankings of individual contributors. https://www.city.kashiwara.lg.jp/docs/2022090800122/

Yasumura, “大和川つけかえに反対した人たち (8) 最後の付け替え検分と反対運動,” Kashiwara City, 25 February 2022, paragraphs on the 1703 inspections, objections about excavated earth, and the 1704 representatives. The account of the petitioners' changed presentation is retained at the level of the transmitted village history, without invented dialogue or independent claims about officials' private feelings. https://www.city.kashiwara.lg.jp/docs/2021083100119/

Yasumura, “大和川つけかえに反対した人たち (10) 付け替え後の新川筋の村々,” Kashiwara City, 25 February 2022, discussion of the 1743 Murakata seisuichō (村方盛衰帳), Hasegawa family documents, and the irrigation conduits. The assessment concerns recorded agricultural value, not a measured annual harvest. The selected village evidence is not a basin-wide balance sheet of project benefits and losses. https://www.city.kashiwara.lg.jp/docs/2021083100133/

Sakai City Library, “大和川付替えの頃,” digital exhibition 絵図にみる堺と大和川付替え300年, section on Sakai Yamatobashi ezu. The description supports the crossing's importance and repeated flood damage. The exhibited drawing dated 1806 represents the bridge at the time of the earlier diversion; it is not an eyewitness picture from 1704. https://www.lib-sakai.jp/kyoudo/kyo_digi/yamatogawa/yamatogawa_tukekae.htm

Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT), Kinki Regional Development Bureau, “淀川水系,” opening geographical description. Used only for the connection from Lake Biwa toward the Uji–Yodo system and Osaka Bay, not for current population, infrastructure, or land-use statistics. https://www.kkr.mlit.go.jp/river/kasen/yodogawa.html

MLIT, “瀬田川の歴史,” sections on the early-Meiji outlet dispute, the 1905 works, the different timing of lake and downstream floods, and the October 1917 dispute. This institutional retrospective supplies the historical sequence and stated hydraulic purpose; it is not a reconstruction of all petitions or a new calculation of flood losses. The early foundation legend and numerical inundation claims elsewhere on the page are not used. https://www.mlit.go.jp/river/toukei_chousa/kasen/jiten/nihon_kawa/0608_setagawa/0608_setagawa_01.html

MLIT, Yodo River Office, “淀川改良工事とは,” opening account and “宇治川の付替.” Supports the 1896–1910 program's connected works and the separation of the Uji from Ogura Pond. The institutional description of a coordinated program is distinguished from proof that all affected communities benefited equally. https://www.kkr.mlit.go.jp/yodogawa/know/history/now_and_then/kouji.html

MLIT, Biwako River Office, “洗堰の歴史,” historical introduction and the paragraph comparing the old and replacement sluices under “洗堰のしくみ.” Supports completion in 1905, timber operation, and the approximate one-day opening and two-day closing times of the old structure. Current observation systems and later mechanized operating speeds are not projected backward. https://www.kkr.mlit.go.jp/biwako/seta_sluice/araizeki.html

Ishikawa Tadaharu (石川忠晴), “江戸時代の治水思想が流域治水プロジェクトの計画と実践に与えるヒントについて,” 土木学会論文集D3（土木計画学） 78, no. 6 (2022): II_509–II_521, DOI 10.2208/jscejipm.78.6_II_509, published abstract. Used for the methodological difficulty of recovering the physical operation of historical works from incomplete descriptions, not for unexamined case calculations or the paper's present-day recommendations. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jscejipm/78/6/78_II_509/_article/-char/ja