農村社会の空間構造とその変容に関する一考察 : 甲斐国を事例として
スポンサーリンク
概要
- 論文の詳細を見る
In order to explain the interrelationships between the substantive region and formal region in rural society, the author selected Kai Province (now Yamanashi Prefecture) as a typical example for study.First of all, the spatial relations between the hanseison (administrative village) and the mura (natural village) in the Edo era were investigated. At that point, the question was how to identify the mura. The author suggested adopting shinto shrines as an operational analytical measure, because they seem to fulfill the function as the center of the rural community. Consequently, several village types can be found on the basis of shinto shrines. Among these types, the suye mura type is frequent in which there are several muras in the hanseison and such mura are smaller than the hanseison in the size of community and area. This suye mura type was dominant in Tsuru county, Nishigori suji, Higashi-Kawauchiryo of the Yatsushiro county, and Henmi suji of the Koma county in the mountainous region. And by contrast with the suye mura type, the hyojun type, equivalent to the hanseison in the size of the community and area, is distinguished in the central part of Kofu basin. Moreover, when the suye mura type is defined in the stricter sense, it refers to the village type in the mountainous, whereas the village type in the plain area is referred to as the Kemuyama mura type.In order to find out the factors leading to the formation of the large-scale hanseison, the author analyzed the Kita-koma district and Kita-Tsuru district. Generally, hanseison in Kai Province up on the basis of topographical conditions.It is clear through examination of the Kita-Koma district and Kita-Tsuru district that the large-scale hanseison in the Kai Province consist of hamlets. Especially, it seems that the large-scale hanseison in Tsuru district coincide with the Kona-shuraku theory.Second, the subject of the spatial reorganization of the mura was examined. This subject offers a valuable topic in analyzing the interrelationships between rural system and administration in the Meiji era and after. On the whole, the major part of Kai Province did not show any spatial reorganization of the mura. Where it did occur, it was mostly the spatial reorganization of the mura, or its breaking up into two or several smaller muras, which can be found in the Manriki, Kuribara, and Henmi suji. The village types in the Manriki and Henmi sujis changed from the kemuyama mura type to the suye mura type. On the other hand, in the spatial reorganization of the mura, a tendency towards expansion and amalgamation occured in many small-scale hanseison, Yet, the amalgamation of towns and villages that was promoted in the early years of the Meiji era seems to have contributed little to the spatial reorganization of the region concerned. This is because the amalgamation did not include material bases (eg, communal land, forest land, etc, ) in the spatial reorganization of the region.Third, the spatial relations between the hanseison and the mura is explained by investigating the village organization, irrigation system, forest land and religious organization for the shinto shrines in the Kita-Koma district. First of all the Kayagatake villages in the late Edo era show the characteristics of the suye mura type and the mura consists of several hamlet units (kumi) in reality. Entering the modern period, the small-territory groups such as hamlets progressed into the mura units. Whereas the village type of Amari Go in the late Edo era approaches the kemuyama mura type.
- 人文地理学会の論文