著者
岡田 俊裕
出版者
The Human Geographical Society of Japan
雑誌
人文地理 (ISSN:00187216)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.39, no.5, pp.445-460, 1987-10-28 (Released:2009-04-28)
参考文献数
64
被引用文献数
4 2

The concepts of landscape (Landschaft, paysage) spread through the geographic world in Japan since the latter half of 1920's. The discipline of geography in Japan before the war's end was characterized by studies based on these concepts, the theory of man-land relationships, and geopolitics. This paper is the first historical review of studies of geographical landscape in Japan.Japanese geographers had tried to translate landscape (Landschaft, paysage) into Japanese since 1925, using such terms as“fukei (風景)”,“fudo (風土)”,“keiso (景相)”, “chiriteki keikan (地理的景観)”,“fukei keitai (風景形態)”,“keiiki (景域)”,“chisokei (地相景)”,“kansho (環象)”,“keikan (景観)”and others. Keikan was by far the most popularly used term. It is thought that Tsujimura Taro had a great influence on this state of affairs.The concepts of landscape can be classified into three major interpretations: (1) the synthetic contents of a (unit) region, (2) common regions as a type, (3) the visible and morphologic objects in a region. On the basis of this classification, the writer puts interpretations of these concepts before the war's end in the order stated above, number (1) being the most frequent interpretation. Other Japanese equivalents besides“keikan” were used frequently in interpretation number (1). However, it is said that interpretation number (3) came into wider use than number (1) in field studies.“Keikan”was used frequently in this case. Therefore, many theoretical studies were conducted on the basis of interpretation number (1), while most field studies were conducted on the basis of interpretation number (3). Interpretation number (2) appeared in a few cases, but it is not thought to have been used frequently.In the 1910's in Germany, the concept of landscape (Landschaft) was introduced to the system of geography, and the form or shape of landscape was treated as the object of landscape study. Studies which had some resemblance to those in Germany were seen before and after the 1930's in Japan. The studies of relations between landscape and social, economic and cultural conditions were deepened and developed later in Germany. However, research on form of landscape were, in Japan, still being carried out, and the function and phylogeny of landscape were not developed enough in Japan. But theoretical studies did develop some what. The development of landscapes was studied, and some researchers began to point out that it was necessary in landscape study to clarify the development mechanisms of human societies. Moreover the landscape was grasped from a view-point of social science, in that the landscape is thought to be determined by the mode of production.A problem that was little discussed throughout the pre-war and post-war days is the role of subjectivity in human societies in the formation of the cultural landscape. This is the main reason for the criticism that early studies of geographical landscape were not really connected to the contemporary world. In the first half of 1930's in Germany, O. Maull and H. Hassinger proposed that the nation state was the builder of landscape. Their propositions were soon introduced to Japan, but have not yet been really discussed. How are human societies including nation states related to the formation of the cultural landscape? The writer concludes that this discussion remains as an unsolved problem.
著者
岡田 俊裕
出版者
地理科学学会
雑誌
地理科学 (ISSN:02864886)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.49, no.4, pp.197-212, 1994

牧口常三郎『人生地理学』(1903年初版,1908年訂正増補8版)は,当時の非アカデミズム地理学徒に歓迎され高い評価を受けたが,アカデミズム地理学の形成者たちには1970年代前半ごろまで無視ないし軽視されてきた。しかし本書は,環境論的な立場からの地人関係の考察が優れているだけでなく,分布論・立地論による経済地理学的・社会地理学的・政治地理学的な分析に先駆的かつ現代的な意義が認められる。なかでも,チューネン圏を最も早く地理学研究に導入した点が注目される。ただし牧口は,それを原典に忠実に導入することはせず,現実社会への適用および有効性を考慮しつつ吸収しようとした。この応用や実践への志向,および実学的な傾向が彼の学風の特徴であった。アカデミズム地理学者のなかで牧口に最も近い存在は,在野的な人文地理学者で,しかも「郷土会」の活動を共に行った小田内通敏であったと考えられる。しかし小田内でさえ,なぜか牧口とその著書について論及することがなかった。それは,前アカデミズム地理学の成果がアカデミズム地理学にあまり継承されなかったということを示唆していると考えられる。
著者
岡田 俊裕
出版者
公益社団法人 日本地理学会
雑誌
地理学評論 Ser. A (ISSN:00167444)
巻号頁・発行日
vol.70, no.4, pp.193-215, 1997-04-01 (Released:2008-12-25)
参考文献数
129
被引用文献数
2

小川琢治は中国への並々ならぬ関心を終生持ち続けた.その契機は『台湾諸島誌』 (1896) の執筆にあり,その際重用した中国の古地誌・史料への興味が歴史地理研究へと向かわせた.彼は,儒家によって異端邪教視された史料を重用し,中国の地理的知識の拡大過程および古代の東アジア世界と地中海世界との地域交流などを考究した.以後,歴史地理学ないし地理学史研究が京都(帝国)大学における地理学研究の伝統となった.また彼は,情況に対応した中国経営論を展開した.その視点は植民地経営者のものであったが,研究者としての見識も示した.しかし,反日・抗日運動が活発化した蘆溝橋事件以後は一変し,中国との連携志向を失った.このような論策の背景には,自らが先鞭をつけた戦争地理学研究があった.それは当初政治学の分科ゲオポリティクとは区別されたが, 1930年代にはゲオポリティクを政治地理学の分科と規定し,同じ政治地理学の分科である戦争地理学がゲオポリティク的要素を含むことを理論づけた.それを踏まえて中国経営論も変容したと考えられる.

1 0 0 0 志賀重昴

著者
岡田俊裕編・解説
出版者
クレス出版
巻号頁・発行日
2007