日本如何维持疫苗的活性？

Sources consulted 16 September 2026. This essay concerns nineteenth-century smallpox vaccination and its organization, not present-day medical practice. Historical Japanese month-and-day entries are represented by years unless a calendar conversion is independently established.

1. [1]

   Fukui Prefectural Archives, “笠原良策を以て魁とす—白翁、種痘への挑戦—,” 2025 exhibition, section 3, “除痘館誓約,” Kunieda family documents A0211-00001. See the archive's explanation and listed provisions, including the thirty-one additional signatories. No independent transcription of the complete handwritten pledge is claimed. https://www.library-archives.pref.fukui.lg.jp/bunsho/category/tenji/32825.html

   返回引用 ↑
2. [2]

   National Diet Library, “Smallpox,” Kaleidoscope of Books, entry 11, section on cowpox vaccination and Narabayashi's book. Used for the disease's historical impact and the 1849 Mohnike–Narabayashi connection, not a claim that no earlier vaccination attempt had occurred anywhere in Japan. https://www.ndl.go.jp/kaleido/e/entry/11/1.html

   返回引用 ↑
3. [3]

   Sakura City, Sakura Juntendō Memorial Museum, “2、泰然が実践した医療と手術,” subsection “（1）佐倉での種痘接種と泰然,” particularly “泰然の貢献” and “佐倉藩種痘諭文.” Read the translation description and the summaries of the two notices. Claims made in the notices about safety and physician preparation remain historical claims, not independent certification. https://www.city.sakura.lg.jp/soshiki/bunkaka/bunkazai/sisetsu/juntendou/juntendounokiseki/11325.html

   返回引用 ↑
4. [4]

   National Diet Library, Gyūtō shōkō (牛痘小考), Narabayashi Sōken, catalogue 000007282579, call number 847-184; preface dated Kaei 2 (1849). The bibliographic record was read, not the complete medical manual. https://ndlsearch.ndl.go.jp/books/R100000002-I000007282579

   返回引用 ↑
5. [5]

   Fukui Prefectural Archives, 2025 exhibition cited in note 1, section 2, “ヒトからヒトへ植え継ぐ種痘.” Used for repeated attendance, person-to-person maintenance, assessment, and historical risks. The account here deliberately omits procedural instructions and does not equate this early practice with contemporary vaccine manufacture. https://www.library-archives.pref.fukui.lg.jp/bunsho/category/tenji/32825.html

   返回引用 ↑
6. [6]

   University of Osaka, Tekijuku historical resource, “三、洪庵の業績,” subsection “除痘館の設立.” Used for the 1849 joint establishment in Dōshōmachi, distribution centers, and the 1860 relocation. The page's inaccurate 1979 dating of the WHO eradication declaration is not used. https://www.osaka-u.ac.jp/ja/guide/about/tekijuku/achievements.html

   返回引用 ↑
7. [7]

   Fukui Prefectural Archives, “幕末ふくい 天然痘との闘い,” 2023 exhibition, section 1, entries (1) “笠原良策の種痘記録” and (2-3) “『博済録』や『養生書』などの印刷.” These identify Kasahara's correspondence collection, its 1849–1859 range, and the printed records, return tickets, and guidance. The originals are held by Fukui City History Museum; the exhibition explanations, not the complete manuscript volumes, were read. https://www.library-archives.pref.fukui.lg.jp/bunsho/category/tenji/30251.html

   返回引用 ↑
8. [8]

   Saga Castle History Museum, “佐賀で始まった種痘,” historical explanation. Used for the 1849 vaccination of Naomasa's son and the museum's account of its promotional role. The associated painting was made in 1927 and is not used here as an eyewitness record or a source for the room's appearance. https://saga-museum.jp/sagajou/navi/ja/25.html

   返回引用 ↑
9. [9]

   Yanagisawa Fumiko (柳沢芙美子), “越前大野藩における種痘の展開—遠隔地への出張と経費負担を中心に—,” 福井県文書館研究紀要 21 (March 2024), pp. 51–72, specifically pp. 53–54 on interruptions, fee removal, the survey of children, and the 1852 town schedule. See these substantive passages and their transcribed notices in the PDF's accessible text. Page-image retrieval failed; no table, illustration, or original handwriting is analyzed. The entire article and underlying administrative archive were not independently audited. https://www.library-archives.pref.fukui.lg.jp/bunsho/file/616963.pdf

   返回引用 ↑
10. [10]

    Yanagisawa Fumiko, “藩医土屋家文書から見た鯖江藩の種痘—医業者統制・種痘掛り・出張種痘—,” 福井県文書館研究紀要 18 (March 2021), pp. 63–76, specifically pp. 70–72 and the conclusion on pp. 73–74. Read the accessible text concerning the 1857 outreach, consultation, venue expenses, and the proposed reasons for the failed continuation. The author's reconstruction is attributed; no complete narrative of the aftermath survives in the immediate case record. Page images could not be retrieved, so maps and tables are not used as evidence. https://www.library-archives.pref.fukui.lg.jp/bunsho/file/615613.pdf

    返回引用 ↑
11. [11]

    University of Tokyo, Faculty of Medicine, “沿革,” entries for 1858–1861; and the university's Digital Archive Portal, “東京大学医学部の歩み 江戸〜明治,” corresponding entries. See the short institutional chronologies for the eighty-three contributors, fire, temporary operations, rebuilding, and later government control. Their shared institutional origin is not treated as two independent contemporary witnesses. https://www.m.u-tokyo.ac.jp/information/history.html ; https://da.dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/portal/node/470189

    返回引用 ↑