古ゲルマン社会研究の問題点
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
Recently, two articles on the ancient German society were translated into Japanese: Max Weber, "Der Streit um den Charakter der altgermanischen Sozialverfassung in der deutschen Literatur des letzen Jahrzehnts," (1905) and H.Dannenbouer, "Adel, Burg und Herrschaft bei den Germanen," (1941). It is the purpose of this paper to state my view on the ancient German society through the comparison of above articles. At the present stage of controversy over the basic social structure of the ancient Germans, it is not important to argue whether we should accept the "Gemeinfreie" theory or the "Grundherr" theory. On this point, a pertinent conclusion was already given by Weber in the aforementioned article. It is, therefore, not correct to assume, though asserted by some scholars, that Dannenbauer tried to restore the simple "Grundherr" theory by laying stress on the aristocratic rule. What he did was to go back to the ancient German society in order to emphasize the origin of aristocracy which, until the French Revolution, existed throughout the European history. However, Dannenbauer did not mention the points emphasized by Weber: the actual operation of the egalitarian principle which had strong influence upon the ancient German society, and, accordingly, the system of field distribution among them. As a result, Dannenbauer's article tells us nothing about the basis of the common people's life. While agreeing with Dannenbauer on the emphasis upon the aristocratic rule, I think it is equally important to analyze the pattern of life among common people which substantiated the ruling. According to Weber, "It was not the position of Grundherr which brought power during the period when there was an abundance of land. On the contrary, it was the nobility of lineage which brought the control over land." Along with the recognition of Weber's statement, it seems necessary to clarify the reason why "Grundherrschaft" was established at a certain period in history-arround the 7th or 8th century, I assume. Considering that the analysis of the above process will put an end to the long controversy, I tried to appraise the meaning of my own study on the Frankish society in the 7th and 8th century.
- 1970-03-20
著者
関連論文
- 古ゲルマン社会研究の問題点
- 高村象平氏をしのぶ
- 三浦弘万著, 『ゲルマン経済・社会・文化の史的研究』, 杉山書店、一九八〇年四月、本文三六〇頁、五、五〇〇円
- 渡辺金一著, 『ビザンツ社会経済史研究』A5版・本文五五一頁, 岩波書店刊・二、〇〇〇円
- 林毅著, 『ドイツ中世都市法の研究』, (創文社刊、 本文四〇八頁、 索引一六頁、 三、二〇〇円)
- 社会経済史における十六・十七世紀 : 共通論題報告のはじめに (社会経済史における16・17世紀)
- ヨーロッパ封建社会の諸問題
- クルト・ボェーナー著 『トリアー地方におけるフランク時代の遺跡・遺物』, K.Bohner: Die frankischen Altertumer des Trierer Landes. 2 Bde. Berlin 1958. 366 S+196 S.+75 Tafeln+3 Karten., (全二冊、邦貨約七、五〇〇円)
- フランク王國のシュワーベン統治について
- 西ヨーロッパ古代末期・中世前期經濟史の研究状況 (西洋 2)
- 騎兵制と封建制起源の問題
- 宮下孝吉著, 「ヨーロッパにおける都市の成立」
- 宮下孝吉著 『經濟史學』, (三和書房・昭和二七年四月刊A5、 一一七頁・一五〇円)
- 戰後ミュヘンを中心とする歴史家の活動
- 十二世紀におけるフランドル地方の經濟變革
- The Oxford Classical Dictionary Oxford 1949, reprinted 1950, p. xx+971.
- 西洋中世都市の系譜
- アルフォンス・ドープシュ
- 高村象平著, 『一般經濟史』 : 古代・中世篇, A5版, 一九七頁, 昭和二三年, 慶應出版社刊, 定價二〇〇圓
- 鈴木成高著 『封建社會の研究』, (弘文堂発行・昭和二十三年三月・A五版・六七三頁・定價三〇〇圓)
- 九世紀に於けるフランク商業
- オストロゴルスキー 『ビザンツ史の諸期』, Georg Ostrogorsky : Die Perioden der byzantinischen Geschichte. Hist. Zeitschr. Bd. 163, 1941, S. 229-254.
- 商人ギルドと都市領主 : 中世都市及び都市法成立史の一研究 (近世初期の商工業)
- 中世都市
- 上田貞次郎先生を憶ふ
- 鶴見左吉雄著 『日本貿易史綱』
- 古ゲルマン文化連續性の問題
- 中世北歐商業の展開(下)
- 中世北歐商業の展開(上)