{"created":"2023-05-15T14:45:41.699106+00:00","id":509,"links":{},"metadata":{"_buckets":{"deposit":"b67f59e4-7f72-46a6-9739-2250f356b749"},"_deposit":{"created_by":3,"id":"509","owners":[3],"pid":{"revision_id":0,"type":"depid","value":"509"},"status":"published"},"_oai":{"id":"oai:rekihaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000509","sets":["21:67"]},"author_link":["1703","1704"],"control_number":"509","item_10002_biblio_info_7":{"attribute_name":"書誌情報","attribute_value_mlt":[{"bibliographicIssueDates":{"bibliographicIssueDate":"1991-11-11","bibliographicIssueDateType":"Issued"},"bibliographicPageEnd":"209","bibliographicPageStart":"185","bibliographicVolumeNumber":"35","bibliographic_titles":[{"bibliographic_title":"国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告","bibliographic_titleLang":"ja"},{"bibliographic_title":"Bulletin of the National Museum of Japanese History","bibliographic_titleLang":"en"}]}]},"item_10002_description_19":{"attribute_name":"フォーマット","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"application/pdf","subitem_description_type":"Other"}]},"item_10002_description_5":{"attribute_name":"抄録","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_description":"考古学と民俗学は歴史研究の方法として登場してきた。そのため，歴史研究の中心に位置してきたいわゆる文献史学との関係で絶えず自己の存在を考えてきた。したがって，歴史学，考古学，民俗学の三者は歴史研究の方法として対等な存在であることが原理的には主張され，また文献史学との関係が論じられても，考古学と民俗学の相互の関係については必ずしも明確に議論されることがなかった。考古学と民俗学は近い関係にあるかのような印象を与えているが，その具体的な関係は必ずしも明らかではない。本稿は，一般的に主張されることが多い考古学と民俗学の協業関係の形成を目指して，両者の間についてどのように従来は考えられ，主張されてきたのかを整理して，その問題点を提示しようとするものである。\n柳田國男は民俗学と考古学の関係について大きな期待を抱いていた。しかし，その前提として考古学の問題点を指摘することに厳しかった。考古学の弱点あるいは欠点を指摘し，それを補って新しい研究を展開するのが民俗学であるという論法であった。したがって，柳田の主張は考古学の内容に踏み込んだものであり，彼以降の民俗学研究者の見解が表面的な対等性を言うのに比較して注目される点である。多くの民俗学研究者は，考古学と民俗学の対等な存在を言うばかりで，具体的な協業関係形成の試みはしてこなかった。その点で，柳田を除けば，民俗学研究者は考古学に対して冷淡であったと言える。それに対して，考古学研究者ははやくから考古学の研究にとって民俗学あるいは民俗資料が役に立つことを主張してきた。具体的な研究に裏付けられた民俗学との協業や民俗資料の利用の提言も少なくない。しかし，それは考古学が民俗学や民俗資料を参照することであり，考古学の内容を豊かにするための方策であった。その点で，両者の真の協業は，二つの学問を前提にしつつも，互いに参照する関係ではなく，二つの学問とは異なる第三の方法を形成しなければならない。","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"},{"subitem_description":"Archaeology and folklore have shown themselves to be methods of historical studies. Therefore, the fact of their existence has always been considered in their relationship with so-called philological history, which has been positioned at the center of historical studies. Therefore, it has been insisted, as a principle, that all philological history, archaeology and folklore are of equal importance as methods of historical studies, and that their relationship with philological history should be discussed. But the mutual relationship between archaeology and folklore has not always been discussed clearly. Archaeology and folklore give the impression of being in a close relationship, but the details of the relationship are not always clear. This paper aims at establishing a cooperative work relationship between archaeology and folklore. It also aims to rearrange the conventional opinions on the relationship between these two fields of study, and to present the related problems.\nYANAGITA Kunio had great expectations for the relationship between folklore and archaeology. As its premise, however, he strictly pointed out the problems of archaeology. He argued that, after having pointed out weak or defective points of archaeology, it was the folklore that developed a new study by compensating for these points. Therefore, the auguments of YANAGITA stepped into the field of archaeology, and his opinion should be noted when compared with the superficial evenness stated by folklorists coming after him. Many folklorists have only insisted on the equal existence of archaeology and folklore, but no efforts have been made to form a concrete cooperative relationship. In this respect, it can be said that folklorists, except YANAGITA, were indifferent to archaeology. On the other hand, archaeologists insisted, from an early stage, that folklore or folklore materials would be useful for archaeological study. Not a few proposals were made for cooperative work with folklorists, or the utilization of folklore materials supported by concrete research. However, these proposals meant that archaeology referred to the folklore and folklore materials, and these were measures to enrich the content of archaeology. In this respect, a really cooperative work of the above two studies is required to create a third method different from both of the above two studies, instead of a relationship referring to each other, even if they presuppose each other.","subitem_description_type":"Abstract"}]},"item_10002_heading_23":{"attribute_name":"見出し","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_heading_banner_headline":"創設10周年記念論文集","subitem_heading_language":"ja"},{"subitem_heading_banner_headline":"Special Issue for the 10th Anniversary of National Museum of Japanese History","subitem_heading_language":"en"}]},"item_10002_identifier_registration":{"attribute_name":"ID登録","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_identifier_reg_text":"10.15024/00000492","subitem_identifier_reg_type":"JaLC"}]},"item_10002_publisher_8":{"attribute_name":"出版者","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_publisher":"国立歴史民俗博物館","subitem_publisher_language":"ja"}]},"item_10002_relation_17":{"attribute_name":"関連サイト","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_relation_name":[{"subitem_relation_name_text":"第35集 収録論文 タイトルリスト"}],"subitem_relation_type_id":{"subitem_relation_type_id_text":"https://www.rekihaku.ac.jp/outline/publication/ronbun/ronbun2/index.html#no35","subitem_relation_type_select":"URI"}}]},"item_10002_source_id_11":{"attribute_name":"書誌レコードID","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"AN00377607","subitem_source_identifier_type":"NCID"}]},"item_10002_source_id_9":{"attribute_name":"ISSN","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_source_identifier":"0286-7400","subitem_source_identifier_type":"PISSN"}]},"item_10002_version_type_20":{"attribute_name":"著者版フラグ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_version_resource":"http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85","subitem_version_type":"VoR"}]},"item_creator":{"attribute_name":"著者","attribute_type":"creator","attribute_value_mlt":[{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"福田, アジオ","creatorNameLang":"ja"},{"creatorName":"フクタ, アジオ","creatorNameLang":"ja-Kana"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{}]},{"creatorNames":[{"creatorName":"Fukuta, Azio","creatorNameLang":"en"}],"nameIdentifiers":[{}]}]},"item_files":{"attribute_name":"ファイル情報","attribute_type":"file","attribute_value_mlt":[{"accessrole":"open_date","date":[{"dateType":"Available","dateValue":"2016-04-01"}],"displaytype":"detail","filename":"kenkyuhokoku_035_06.pdf","filesize":[{"value":"642.4 kB"}],"format":"application/pdf","licensetype":"license_note","mimetype":"application/pdf","url":{"label":"kenkyuhokoku_035_06.pdf","url":"https://rekihaku.repo.nii.ac.jp/record/509/files/kenkyuhokoku_035_06.pdf"},"version_id":"8e7a9127-8e59-4c82-aa39-1899364d3a54"}]},"item_language":{"attribute_name":"言語","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_language":"jpn"}]},"item_resource_type":{"attribute_name":"資源タイプ","attribute_value_mlt":[{"resourcetype":"departmental bulletin paper","resourceuri":"http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501"}]},"item_title":"考古学と民俗学 : 協業のための予備的考察（Ⅰ. 歴史研究方法の模索）","item_titles":{"attribute_name":"タイトル","attribute_value_mlt":[{"subitem_title":"考古学と民俗学 : 協業のための予備的考察（Ⅰ. 歴史研究方法の模索）","subitem_title_language":"ja"},{"subitem_title":"Archaeology and Folklore : Preparatory Study for Cooperative Work（I. APPROACH TO THE METHOD OF STUDY OF JAPANESE HISTORY）","subitem_title_language":"en"}]},"item_type_id":"10002","owner":"3","path":["67"],"pubdate":{"attribute_name":"PubDate","attribute_value":"2016-04-01"},"publish_date":"2016-04-01","publish_status":"0","recid":"509","relation_version_is_last":true,"title":["考古学と民俗学 : 協業のための予備的考察（Ⅰ. 歴史研究方法の模索）"],"weko_creator_id":"3","weko_shared_id":-1},"updated":"2023-07-31T04:33:39.851405+00:00"}