@article{oai:minpaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00003919,
 author = {佐々木, 高明 and Sasaki, Komei},
 issue = {2},
 journal = {国立民族学博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology},
 month = {Dec},
 note = {本稿は岡正雄・柳田国男の所説に始まり，民博の「日本民族文化の源流の比
較研究」をへて，日文研を中心とした「日本人及び日本文化の起源の研究」に
至る，戦後の日本民族文化起源論の展開の大要とその間にみられた諸学説の変
遷を大観し，あわせてこの種の起源論の直面するいくつかの問題点を指摘した
ものである。結論として次の4 点を摘記することができる。
　1．日本文化を単一・同質の稲作文化だとするのではなく，それは起源を異
にするいくつかの文化化が複合した多元的で多重な構造をもつものだという認
識が一連の研究を通じて共有されるようになった。
　2．考古学・人類学・遺伝学その他の隣諸科学の発達とそれらとの協業の成
果が起源論の研究に格段の発展をもたらした。その傾向は今後も一層顕著にな
ると思われるが，この種の学際的総合的研究を推進するには，すぐれた研究プ
ロデューサーとそれを支える大型の研究組織が必要である。
　3．日本民族文化起源論の展開は，わが国では日本人のアイデンティティを
問うという問題意識に支えられて展開してきたが，最近の国際化の進展などの
状況のもとで，この種の問題意識とその理解を求める社会的要請は一層拡大し
てきている。それに応じることが学界としても必要である。
　4．だが，現下の最大の問題は，組織の問題ではなく人の問題である。大林
太良が指摘した如く「最近の若い世代の民族学者に日本民族文化形成論の研究
が低調なこと」が今日の難問である。日本民族文化起源論を含め，歴史民族学
的課題の克服に，日本の民族学界は，今後どのように対応するのだろうか。, This paper outlines the development of post-war era research concerning
the ethnogenesis of the Japanese people, beginning with theories advocated
by Masao Oka and Kunio Yanagita, the “Comparative Analyses of Japanese
Ethnogenesis,” undertaken by the National Museum of Ethnology, up to the
“Interdisciplinary Study on the Origins of Japanese Peoples and Cultures,”
led by the International Research Center for Japanese Studies. This paper also
summarizes how theories concerning ethnogenesis have changed over the
years and points to some problems pertaining to research on this theme. In
conclusion, this paper presents the following four observations:
1. Through continued research on this topic, we have come to share the
recognition that Japanese culture cannot simply be defined as a single, homogeneous,
rice-growing one. Instead, it is a combination of several cultures
with different origins and is multi-dimensional and multi-layered in nature.
2. The evolution of archaeology, anthropology, genetics, and other relevant
sciences, as well as cooperation with researchers specializing in these
fields, has contributed to remarkable progress in ethnogenetic research. While
such a cooperative approach will take on greater importance in the future, successful
implementation of comprehensive multi-disciplinary research of this
kind requires high-caliber personnel capable of coordinating research efforts,
as well as large-scale research organizations that can support such activities.
3. In Japan, the efforts of researchers committed to exploring the identity
of the Japanese people have been the driving force behind the development
of research on the ethnogenesis of this group. Against the backdrop of
recent globalization, there has been growing demand for this type of ethnogenetic
research within society, and it is the responsibility of the academic community
to address this demand.
4. However, what makes us most anxious at the moment is not the problem
of organization, but the problem of personnel. As Taryo Obayashi has
already remarked, the decreasing interest among younger ethnologists in the
formation of Japanese culture is a serious problem. In what manner will Japanese
ethnologists address the subject of ethnogenesis and other historical,
anthropological issues in the future?, Article},
 pages = {211--228},
 title = {戦後の日本民族文化起源論 : その回顧と展望},
 volume = {34},
 year = {2009},
 yomi = {ササキ, コウメイ}
}