翻刻
之御師之役にて御座候甚五郎は其家にてハ無御座候
虚言申候事
一 御遷宮之砌氏人中内陣にて種々之役相勤候事
一 社司之子ニテモ祢宜不抱候間は何れも氏人と申候氏人モ祢宜
祝拘候へは社司と申候社司氏人之差別無御座候事
《割書：本ノマヽ彼歟》
右氏人より祢宜祝ニ成申候証文上申候然は後
方え氏人社司ニ不成旧記有之は上候得と被仰出候ニ其
証文は不出して不謂条々申上候所詮氏人社司ニ被成
証文不出上は任先規之旨氏人申状のことく被
仰付候は忝可奉存候此等之趣宜預御披露候以上
寛永四年十一月十五日 氏人中
一 氏人方ヨリ上ル留《割書：十二月三日伝奏え持参則光廣卿ヨリ｜方々へ此一帋ヲミセサセラルヽノ由伝聞》
謹言上
一 今度氏人祢宜職申上候儀最前掛御目申候ことく氏人
古今之差別無御座候ニより近代は氏人大蔵少輔重説
と申候者権祝ニなし被下口 宣頂戴仕候事
一 氏人は自往古祢宜職断絶仕候得は其闕之処相続仕り
祢宜職勤め申身ニ而御座候故五位より四品まて申上
現代語訳
（前ページより続く）
御師（おんし）の役にて御座候。甚五郎はその家柄にてはなく御座候。虚言を申し候こと。
一 御遷宮の折、氏人中（うじびとじゅう）が内陣にて種々の役を相勤め候こと。
一 社司の子であっても祢宜を抱えていない場合は、皆「氏人」と申し候。氏人も祢宜・祝を抱えれば「社司」と申し候。社司と氏人の間に差別（区別）は御座なく候こと。
《割書：本ノマヽ彼歟（原文のまま。これが該当文書か）》
右（みぎ）、氏人より祢宜・祝に就任申し候証文を上申し候。しかるに、「後方（のちのかた）へ、氏人が社司にならないという旧記があれば上申せよ」とお申し出（おおせいだされ）候につき、その証文は提出されず（出されずして）、謂われなき条々を申し上げ候。詮するに（つまるところ）、氏人を社司に任ずる証文が提出されない以上は、先規（せんき）の旨の通り、氏人申状のごとく仰せ付けられ候は、忝（かたじけな）く奉り存じ候。これらの趣（おもむき）、宜しく御披露（ごひろう）の程預かり候。以上。
寛永四年（1627）十一月十五日 氏人中
一 氏人方より提出する控え。
《割書：十二月三日、伝奏へ持参。則ち光廣卿より方々へ、この一紙（いっし）をご覧あそばされる由、伝え聞く。》
謹んで言上（げんじょう）仕り候。
一 今度、氏人が祢宜職を申し上げ候儀（ぎ）、最前（さいぜん）御目（おめ）に掛け申し候ごとく、氏人・（社司の）古今の差別（区別）は御座なく候により、近代は氏人・大蔵少輔（おおくらのしょうふ）重説（しげとき）と申し候者を権祝（ごんのはふり）になし下され、口宣（くぜん）を頂戴仕り候こと。
一 氏人は往古より、祢宜職が断絶仕り候えば、その闕（けつ、欠員）の処（ところ）を相続仕り、祢宜職を勤め申す身にて御座候故、五位より四品（しほん）まで申し上げ——
英語訳
(Continued from previous page)
[This role] is that of the御師 (onshi, a shrine ritualist/guide). Jingorō does not belong to that family lineage. [The shrine administrators'] claim is a falsehood.
Entry: At the time of the御遷宮 (divine transfer ceremony / shrine relocation ritual), the ujibito collectively performed various duties within the inner sanctuary (内陣).
Entry: Even the children of shrine administrators (社司), if they do not hold Negi appointments, are referred to as "ujibito." Conversely, if ujibito hold Negi or Hafuri appointments, they are referred to as "shrine administrators" (社司). There is no distinction (差別) between shrine administrators and ujibito.
《Marginal note: "As in the original text — is this the relevant document?"》
Regarding the above: documentary evidence (証文) has been submitted showing that ujibito have been appointed to the positions of Negi and Hafuri. In response, an order was issued stating that if there are any old records (旧記) indicating that ujibito do not become shrine administrators, those should be submitted. However, no such records were produced, and yet unfounded articles continue to be raised. In sum, given that no documents have been submitted to counter the appointment of ujibito as shrine administrators, it would be most gratefully received if a ruling were issued in accordance with precedent (先規), as requested in the ujibito petition. We respectfully request that the content of the above be duly conveyed [to the relevant authorities]. Respectfully submitted.
Kan'ei 4 (1627), Eleventh Month, Fifteenth Day The Ujibito (氏人中)
Entry: A retained copy submitted by the ujibito side.
《Marginal note: Brought to the Court Liaison (伝奏) on the Third Day of the Twelfth Month. It is reported by word of mouth that Lord Mitsuhiro (光廣卿) showed this single document to various parties.》
Respectfully submitted.
Entry: Regarding the matter of the ujibito's petition for the office of Negi on this occasion — as previously presented for your review, there is no distinction, either in ancient or recent times, between ujibito and shrine administrators. In recent times, a man among the ujibito named Ōkura no Shōyū Shigeto was appointed as Gon-Hafuri and duly received his formal imperial appointment decree (口宣, kuzen).
Entry: Because the ujibito have, from ancient times, succeeded to and filled vacancies (闕) whenever the Negi office fell into abeyance, thereby taking on the duties of Negi, [their members have held court ranks] from Fifth Rank up through the Fourth Grade (四品)——