著者
高嶋 航 藤田 大誠 中嶋 哲也 金 誠 束原 文郎 浜田 幸絵 菅野 敦志 佐々木 浩雄 新 雅史
出版者
京都大学
雑誌
基盤研究(B)
巻号頁・発行日
2018-04-01

本研究は、20世紀前半の帝国日本におけるスポーツの全体像を実証的に解明することを最終目的とし、本年度は上記の課題を遂行する上でミッシングリンクとなっている満洲のスポーツについて、関連資料を調査収集しつつ、研究テーマを探ることを主たる活動目標とした。資料収集においてとりわけ重点を置いたのは、1907年から1943年まで刊行された『満洲日日新聞/満洲日報』である。満洲スポーツの全体像を窺うには、まずこの資料を十分に踏まえておかねばならない。しかしながら、『満洲日日新聞』は大連(のち奉天)に拠点を置いているため、満洲国の首都である新京や、いわゆる「北満」と呼ばれた地域に関する情報は決して多くない。そのため、新京で刊行されていた『新京日日新聞』(1933~1940年)の収集も並行して進め、収集した記事を年表の形に整理している。研究会は五月、八月、一二月と三回開催し、満洲や帝国日本のスポーツに関わる研究発表を行った。資料から明らかになった満洲スポーツのいくつかの側面について、日本や朝鮮の事例と比較しながら、考察を進め智識を共有した。海外調査は三月に大連、丹東、瀋陽で実施し、戦前のスポーツ関連施設の現状を調査した。繰越分については、中国での再調査に使用する予定であったが、中国での図書館利用が見込めなくなったため、IOCオリンピックセンター(スイス)での調査に変更した。この調査では、日本と満洲国のオリンピックおよび極東大会参加に関する資料を収集した。
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
[出版者不明]
巻号頁・発行日
2011-01

制度:新 ; 報告番号:甲3202号 ; 学位の種類:博士(スポーツ科学) ; 授与年月日:2011/1/18 ; 早大学位記番号:新5498
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
一般社団法人 日本体育・スポーツ・健康学会
雑誌
体育学研究 (ISSN:04846710)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.66, pp.573-590, 2021 (Released:2021-09-01)
参考文献数
71

The present study aimed to clarify the establishment of Judo etiquette during the wartime and postwar periods. Nakamura (2011) discussed Japanese martial arts etiquette in modern Japan. In his work, however, he dealt largely with Kendo etiquette, and inadequately addressed the history of Judo, as well as overlooking the period of Allied occupation (1945–1952). This article focuses on the reformation of Judo etiquette in that period and clarifies its historical background. It was revealed that, first, the enactment of etiquette in August 1940 was intended to be a criticism of Taro Inaba, who was excommunicated at the Kodokan. Inaba had criticized the Kodokan and the Dai Nippon Butokukwai, stating that when a judoka stands and bows with shizen hontai (natural posture) it reflects disrespect to the emperor. During the war, with the increasing influence of State Shinto, Inaba’s claim could have undermined Judo’s social credibility. Therefore, the Kodokan and Butokukwai abolished shizen hontai and in its place instituted the posture of attention, the basic Shinto posture, and this was also followed by the military and adopted in middle school games; thus, the current system of courtesy was established during this period. Furthermore, the practice of sitting on tatami mats with the left knee and standing up with the right foot was adopted in 1943 to match the postures stipulated in State Shinto. The etiquette established during the war was modified during the Occupation, when bowing to feudal seniors and the kamidana were abolished. In addition, the choice of bowing posture, whether at attention or a natural posture, was left to the practitioners. In this way, it can be said that Judo etiquette was democratized. However, college students’ conduct during Judo bouts was disturbed after the Tokyo Olympics in 1964. Consequently, wartime etiquette was revived. However, the Kodokan did not disclose that its etiquette was influenced by State Shinto and the military. The official line was that the etiquette was based on principles of Judo such as seiryoku-zenyo (maximum use of energy) and jita kyoei (mutual welfare and benefit).
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
鹿児島大学
雑誌
鹿児島大学教育学部研究紀要. 人文・社会科学編 (ISSN:03896684)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.66, pp.77-92, 2014

本研究は、明治期に柔術が文化として再発見されていく過程について考察するものである。研究対象として、明治12(1879)年8月5日と25日に行われた2つの演武に注目した。この2つの演武には元米国大統領であったユリシーズ・グラントが鑑賞しにきていたためである。本論では、グラントが武術のどこに興味関心を抱いたのかを検討した。結果として、次の3つの知見が得られた。一つ目に、グラントは武術に関して伝統的側面に興味を持つような発言をしなかったことである。二つ目に、8月25日の演武は天覧であったが、当演武の直後、新聞等で武術の価値を見直すことが主張された。天覧演武は武術総体が伝統・文化として再発見されるきっかけの一つになったといえよう。三つ目に、8月5日の演武においてグラントはあらゆる武術のうち、特に柔術に興味を示していた。このことは、柔術が西洋の人々の目に興味深く映る、とその場に居合わせた日本人に印象付けたものと考えられる。
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
一般社団法人 日本体育・スポーツ・健康学会
雑誌
体育学研究 (ISSN:04846710)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.59, no.2, pp.721-744, 2014 (Released:2014-12-20)
参考文献数
71

This study investigates the emergence of the concept of “sportification of judo” in Japan, focusing on the process of “student judo” in relation to the competition between the First Higher School (“Ichikoh”) and the Second Higher School (“Nikoh”) in 1918, up until formation of the Association of Judo by the Four Imperial Universities in 1928. Jigorō Kanō, the father of judo, was dissatisfied that Nikoh had overused ground techniques against Ichikoh in 1918, and in June 1924, Kodokan published a revised set of umpiring rules to control the use of ground techniques in student judo.   However, Tsunetane Oda, the manager of Nikoh judo club, criticized Kanō, and advocated that ground techniques were a valid combat method. Oda finally compromised, because Takeshi Sakuraba, one of Kanō's best pupils, refuted Oda's proposal. However, it was the first time that Kodokan had been publicly criticized by someone concerned with student judo, and this seems to have been a trigger for student judo to become independent from Kodokan.   In parallel with the emergence of the democracy movement after World War I, Judo came to be regarded as extremely outmoded, and judo practitioners began to place more emphasis on theory rather than actual competition. Kanō interceded with the Tokyo Gakusei Judo Rengōkai (Tokyo Student Judo Association, “TGJR”), and in 1924 persuaded the TGJR to let their umpire rules reflect the revised umpire rules. However, the Imperial University of Tokyo (IUT) rebelled against this movement, and left the TGJR. The IUT then appealed to each of the Imperial Universities, and held the Teidai Taikai (the Four Imperial Universities Competition, “FIUC”) to encourage nationwide spread of the Kosen Judo Taikai (National High School and Vocational School Judo Competition, which was hosted by Kyoto Imperial University, “KJT”). The Imperial University Judo Association, which hosted the FIUC, then abandoned the combat characteristics that were advocated by Kodokan, with the aim of representing judo as a “sport”.   One of the reasons why Kibisaburō Sasaki criticized Kodokan was that he had been treated coldly by Kanō and Kyūzō Mifune at the Shūki Kōhaku Shiai (a contest between two Kodokan groups) in November 1922, because he had used ground techniques frequently. Moreover, Sasaki as a member of the IUT judo club had experienced the withdrawal of the IUT from the TGJR, and the holding of the FIUC. Therefore, Sasaki criticized Kodokan while student judo was being organized. Sasaki claimed that “sportification” did not confer any new value on the principles of Kodokan judo. Kanō criticized the over-use of ground techniques by KJT and the FIUC, which lacked a combat system. However, Sasaki considered that Kanō's opinion was a long-established custom, and insisted that the FIUC was a sports competition. Thus, the claim made by Sasaki meant that the FIUC had become independent from Kodokan judo.
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
一般社団法人 日本体育・スポーツ・健康学会
雑誌
体育学研究 (ISSN:04846710)
巻号頁・発行日
pp.13097, (Released:2014-10-15)
参考文献数
70

This study investigates the emergence of the concept of “sportification of judo” in Japan, focusing on the process of “student judo” in relation to the competition between the First Higher School (“Ichikoh”) and the Second Higher School (“Nikoh”) in 1918, up until formation of the Association of Judo by the Four Imperial Universities in 1928. Jigorō Kanō, the father of judo, was dissatisfied that Nikoh had overused ground techniques against Ichikoh in 1918, and in June 1924, Kodokan published a revised set of umpiring rules to control the use of ground techniques in student judo.   However, Tsunetane Oda, the manager of Nikoh judo club, criticized Kanō, and advocated that ground techniques were a valid combat method. Oda finally compromised, because Takeshi Sakuraba, one of Kanō's best pupils, refuted Oda's proposal. However, it was the first time that Kodokan had been publicly criticized by someone concerned with student judo, and this seems to have been a trigger for student judo to become independent from Kodokan.   In parallel with the emergence of the democracy movement after World War I, Judo came to be regarded as extremely outmoded, and judo practitioners began to place more emphasis on theory rather than actual competition. Kanō interceded with the Tokyo Gakusei Judo Rengōkai (Tokyo Student Judo Association, “TGJR”), and in 1924 persuaded the TGJR to let their umpire rules reflect the revised umpire rules. However, the Imperial University of Tokyo (IUT) rebelled against this movement, and left the TGJR. The IUT then appealed to each of the Imperial Universities, and held the Teidai Taikai (the Four Imperial Universities Competition, “FIUC”) to encourage nationwide spread of the Kosen Judo Taikai (National High School and Vocational School Judo Competition, which was hosted by Kyoto Imperial University, “KJT”). The Imperial University Judo Association, which hosted the FIUC, then abandoned the combat characteristics that were advocated by Kodokan, with the aim of representing judo as a “sport”.   One of the reasons why Kibisaburō Sasaki criticized Kodokan was that he had been treated coldly by Kanō and Kyūzō Mifune at the Shūki Kōhaku Shiai (a contest between two Kodokan groups) in November 1922, because he had used ground techniques frequently. Moreover, Sasaki as a member of the IUT judo club had experienced the withdrawal of the IUT from the TGJR, and the holding of the FIUC. Therefore, Sasaki criticized Kodokan while student judo was being organized. Sasaki claimed that “sportification” did not confer any new value on the principles of Kodokan judo. Kanō criticized the over-use of ground techniques by KJT and the FIUC, which lacked a combat system. However, Sasaki considered that Kanō's opinion was a long-established custom, and insisted that the FIUC was a sports competition. Thus, the claim made by Sasaki meant that the FIUC had become independent from Kodokan judo.
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
スポーツ史学会
雑誌
スポーツ史研究 (ISSN:09151273)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.24, pp.27-40, 2011-03-31 (Released:2017-03-18)
被引用文献数
1

The purpose of this paper is to clarify how the ideology of Budo was changed after the Japan-China War in 1937. Specifically the discussion is focused on both Taro Inaba and Yasutaro Fujio's criticisms of Jigoro Kano's opinion of Kodokan. At the "Kodokan Excommunication" case in 1937, Kodokan judo was rejected due to the criticism Inaba, and Fujio was a member of the punishment council. The concept of Kodokan advocated by Kano, "Seiryokuzenyo (the way to use most efficiently the body and spirit of human being)" and "Jitakyoei (the way to live together in mutual prosperity)", aimed to contribute to the international society after World War I. But the concept was criticized by Fujio and Inaba from the standpoint of "Nihon-Seishin (Japanese spirit)". "Nihon-Seishin" as proposed by Fujio and Inaba, emerged in the background of the National Spiritual Mobilization just after the Japan-China War. Kano originally disliked "Nihon-Seishin", but the situation changed in1938 such that Kano held a meeting on "Nihon-Seishin" and was obliged to say in public that he was trying to encourage "Nihon-Seishin". It may be said that the event marked the beginning of a rejection of the character of internationalism in Kodokan as "Jitakyoei" due to the xenophobia nature of "Nihon-Seishin". In conclusion, we comment on how the ideology surrounding Kodokan was henceforth changed.
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
日本武道学会
雑誌
武道学研究 (ISSN:02879700)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.43, no.1, pp.1_9-1_17, 2010-08-31 (Released:2012-08-28)
参考文献数
24

直心流柔術の系譜に関する主な研究として 1990年に発表された論文,「直信流柔道について 一流名・術技及びその思想一」(以下,当該論文と表記)をあげることができる。当該論文では『直心流柔序』という伝書を使用し,直心流柔術から直信流柔道へ至る系譜について明らかにしようとしている。しかしながら,当該論文では『直心流柔序』の読解が不十分であり,特に直心流柔術の系譜に関する部分については十分な整理がなされていない。したがって,本研究では『直心流柔序』を通して直心流柔術の系譜を検証した。具体的には当時,寺田満英が直心流柔術の流祖とみなされていたかどうかという点について考察した。結果として,直心流柔術では寺田満英が流祖であるとみなされていなかったことが明らかとなった。
著者
中嶋 哲也
出版者
日本武道学会
雑誌
武道学研究 (ISSN:02879700)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.2, pp.95-107, 2016-11-30 (Released:2018-03-12)
参考文献数
15

Only a few historical studies have examined Japan’s martial arts during the Second Sino-Japanese War of 1937-1945. Those studies that do exist tend to focus on the controversy surrounding “sengika,” or the militarization of martial arts. Extant research has documented that sengika was recommended by the Martial Arts Promotion Committee (MAPC), which was instituted by the government as an advisory body in December 1939. Previous research indicates that the commissioners of the MAPC were not universally enthusiastic about sengika. The purpose of this study is to delineate the process by which internal opposition to sengika was transformed into support on the committee.This research has yielded the following results: the commissioners originally critical of the sengika came to concur that martial arts could have useful military applications. They emphasized the combative effectiveness of martial arts that is not evident in sport-oriented practices, and aimed to distinguish between the martial arts and sports with the intention of protecting the uniqueness of Japanese martial arts. This stance, however, prevented them from offering a protest against sengika.One area for further investigation is why those officials intent on preventing the Westernization of martial arts (making them into sports) chose to make the combative effectiveness of martial arts their central issue. Subsequent research on the role of martial arts during wartime will need to address in greater detail this effort to prevent the treatment of martial arts as sport.
著者
菱田 慶文 中嶋 哲也 細谷 洋子
出版者
四日市看護医療大学
雑誌
基盤研究(C)
巻号頁・発行日
2016-04-01

今年度の調査は、8月にタイで行われたアマチュアムエタイの世界ユース大会と12月末ブラジルのリオデジャネイロにある4つのブラジリアン柔術の道場に調査に行くことができた。タイ国のアマチュアムエタイ世界大会では、ブラジルチームにインタビューした結果、選手は、自ら渡航費を捻出するほどの金銭を所持しておらず、チームは、寄付金や企業にスポンサーとなってもらい世界大会に参加している状況であることが分かった。大会事務局発行のアマチュアムエタイの機関誌において、リオデジャネイロやサンゴンサロなどの都市では、ムエタイの普及が、教会や公民館などを借り,ボランティアて行われていることが分かった。ファベイラ(スラム街)では、特に、犯罪組織や麻薬の密売者に関わらせないためにも活動が重要であると記されている。ムエタイのボランティア指導は、週に2、3回行われており、参加者の中には、いじめ被害者や不登校児の報告もあった。12月に行ったブラジル、リオデジャネイロでの調査は、観光客でにぎわうコパカーナビーチにあるブラジリアン柔術道場やカンタガーロのファベイラにある柔術場の調査に成功した。コパカーナビーチの柔術道場は、ミドルクラス以上の白人が多く、フィットネスでもブラジリアン柔術は、行われていた。これらの道場の教育観は、少年少女に礼儀作法や身体訓練など健全育成のために、ブラジリアン柔術を教えるという理念のもと行われている。一方、ファベイラのジムでは、健全育成の側面に加えて、前述のムエタイと同様に、犯罪組織や麻薬の密売から遠ざけたい、という目的が第一であり、柔術をやっていれば、将来にファベイラ以外での生活ができるように、目標を持たせたい、等という、教育観を垣間見ることができた。これらの道場もボランティアでムエタイやブラジリアン柔術を教える人々の教育観や格闘技観を知ることができた。