|
Hokkaido University Collection of Scholarly and Academic Papers >
Center for Ainu and Indigenous Studies >
アイヌ・先住民研究 Aynu Teetawanoankur Kanpinuye = Journal of Ainu and Indigenous Studies >
第1号 >
「アイヌ側から見たアイヌ史」はいかに不／可能か : 貝沢正資料からみる各アイヌ史の編纂について
| Title: | 「アイヌ側から見たアイヌ史」はいかに不／可能か : 貝沢正資料からみる各アイヌ史の編纂について |
| Other Titles: | How might "Ainu history from an Ainu perspective" be (im)possible? : Examining the editing of Ainu history using the resources of Kaizawa Tadashi |
| Authors: | 新井, かおり1 Browse this author |
| Authors(alt): | Arai, Kaori1 |
| Keywords: | アイヌ史 | | 貝沢正 | | 二風谷 | | Ainu history | | Kaizawa Tadashi | | Nibutani |
| Issue Date: | 1-Mar-2021 |
| Publisher: | 北海道大学アイヌ・先住民研究センター |
| Journal Title: | アイヌ・先住民研究 |
| Journal Title(alt): | Journal of Ainu and Indigenous Studies | | Aynu Teetawanoankur Kanpinuye |
| Volume: | 1 |
| Start Page: | 173 |
| End Page: | 200 |
| Abstract: | 昨年二〇〇九年、通称「アイヌ施策推進法」が成立し、「アイヌの人々が主体となった研究」をすることが、官民挙げての課題となった。しかしアイヌが研究の主体になることは、当時主流であった戦後史学の目的論的な、発展法則的な歴史観とはあいいれないことや、アイヌ側からの資料に乏しいなどの理由があって、特にアイヌ史研究では立ち遅れてきた。本論では90年代までアイヌの諸運動のけん引者として著名だった貝沢正のアイヌ史編さん事業について、まず本論の筆者である“私”と貝沢の関係に由来する視座と資料について述べる。そして、他に例がないほど、「アイヌ側から見たアイヌ史」に固執し、三度ものアイヌ史の執筆・編さんにとりくんだ貝沢正のかかわった、ウタリ協会（名称当時）発行の『アイヌ史』（全五巻）をその失敗例と見て、同じく貝沢が執筆・編纂の責任者であった『二風谷』をその成功例と見て、「アイヌ側から見たアイヌ史」の可能性を探る。 | | Alongside the passing of the Ainu Policy Promotion Act in 2019, “research in which Ainu are the (initiating) subjects” became a government assigned task of national policy. However, Ainu becoming the (initiating) subjects of research has always been inconsistent with the teleology of postwar history writing in Japan and its developmentalist view of history. There has also been a lack of available materials from the Ainu themselves and Ainu historical research has fallen behind other fields. This paper describes the perspective and resources that originate from the relationship between the author of this paper – “me” – and Kaizawa Tadashi, a driving force behind Ainu movements up until the 1990s. It examines Kaizawa’s efforts to edit an Ainu history project. The paper looks at Kaizawa’s persistence in trying to create an “Ainu history as seen by the Ainu” – of which there are almost no other examples. It investigates his three attempts at writing and editing an Ainu history. The paper, in its exploration of the possibility of “Ainu history as seen by the Ainu”, concludes that the Ainu History (5 volumes) published by the Ainu Association of Hokkaido was an example of failure, and Nibutani an example of success. |
| Type: | bulletin (article) |
| URI: | http://hdl.handle.net/2115/80893 |
| Appears in Collections: | アイヌ・先住民研究 Aynu Teetawanoankur Kanpinuye = Journal of Ainu and Indigenous Studies > 第1号
|
|
