@article{oai:rekihaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00000681,
 author = {藤尾, 慎一郎 and Fujio, Shinichiro},
 journal = {国立歴史民俗博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Japanese History},
 month = {Nov},
 note = {application/pdf, 考古学の基礎作業である分類をおこなう際の基準の１つに「かたち」がある。かたちは土器の輪郭や石器の平面形などで認識できるが，たとえば私達は壺のかたち，剣のかたちといえば一般に感覚的なイメージをもっているので，この程度の識別なら感覚的に処理する場合が多い。しかし壺というグループに属する各個体のかたちの違いを言葉で説明することは容易ではなく，どうしても主観的な部分が入る余地が多かった。また，壺は属する時期や地域によって意味のある形態的な共通性をもっているので，個体差ではない意味のあるかたちのまとまりを型式として認識する必要がある。
つまり，考古学におけるかたちの認識には１個１個のかたちの違いを識別する個体差の識別という作業と，時間的・空間的に意味のあるまとまりとしてのかたちを抽出する型式分類の２つがあるといえよう。
個体差の識別も型式の設定も従来は知識と経験にもとづいた感覚的な方法でおこなわれることが多かった。土器を例にとると胴部が丸いとか，やや肩が張っているという区別は，絶対的な基準がもとになっているのではなく，見た目で判断される場合が多いものの，法量を基準に指数化することで丸いかたちの範囲を数字で示したりすることはこれまでもおこなわれてきた。また型式設定は，考古資料のもつ複数の属性の中から，もっとも変化の早い少数の属性を選んで分類し，それをもとに層位学的な知見をふまえながら設定されることが多かったが，最近は複数の属性の相関関係を基準に数学的に認識する，いわゆる多変量解析を用いた型式設定もみられるようになってきている。
本稿は感覚的認識と数学的認識の流れをおさえたうえで弥生土器と青銅器を素材に個体識別と型式設定の実際を見ながら，これまでかたちの認識がどのようにおこなわれてきたのか，感覚的認識と数学的認識はどこに違いがあるのかなど紹介することを目的としている。, One of the standards for classification, a basic task in archaeology, is the “form”. The form can be recognized as the contours of an pottery, or the plane figure of stone tools. In general, as we have a sensuous image for the shape of, for example, a jar or a dagger, recognition to this extent is often processed sensuously. However, it is not easy to explain verbally differences in the shapes of individual pieces belonging to the group of ‘jars’, and there has been considerable margin for the acceptance of some subjectivity in this field. Furthermore, since jars have a significant commonness of form according to the period and area to which they belong, it is necessary to identify type-categories of significant forms that are not the differences of individual pieces.
In other words, there are two means of recognition of form in archaeology: one is work to identify the differences between individual pieces, by identifying the difference in form of each piece; the other is classification of type-groups by picking out forms that are temporally and spatially significant.
Conventionally, the identification of differences in individual pieces and the establishment of types, have been carried out mostly through a sensuous method based on knowledge and experi-ence. Taking the example of earthenware, such differentiation as “This piece has a round body,” or “That piece has wide shoul-ders,” is not based on an absolute standard, but often judged by visual appearances. However, the range covered by “round shape” has also been expressed by figures, by indexing dimensions on a standard. As for the establishment of types, archaeological materials have in many cases been classified according to a small number of rapidly-changing attributes chosen from the many attributes of archaeological materials, and types have been established based on this classification and graphical knowledge. Recently, however, type-establishment using so-called multivariate analysis, a method of mathematical recognition based on the correlational relationship of various attributes, is also seen.
With a finger placed firmly on the trends of sensuous and mathematical recognition, the author of this paper aims to show how form has been recognized and what differences there are between sensuous recognition and mathematical recognition, through an examination of actual cases of piece identification and type-establishment, using Yayoi pottery and bronze implements.},
 pages = {49--75},
 title = {考古学における「かたち」の認識},
 volume = {53},
 year = {1993},
 yomi = {フジオ, シンイチロウ}
}