京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(人間・環境学) / 甲第21847号 / 人博第876号 / 新制||人||210(附属図書館) / 2018||人博||876(吉田南総合図書館) / 京都大学大学院人間・環境学研究科共生文明学専攻 / (主査)准教授 吉江 崇, 教授 元木 泰雄, 准教授 馬場 基 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Human and Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(人間・環境学) / 甲第21430号 / 人博第868号 / 2018||人博||868(吉田南総合図書館) / 京都大学大学院人間・環境学研究科共生文明学専攻 / (主査)教授 玉田 芳英, 准教授 馬場 基, 教授 増井 正哉, 教授 小野 健吉 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Human and Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DFAM

國家舉辦的儀式以及紀念日活動即象徵著國家本身。國家透過這些活動，呈現、宣傳國家的安定以及正統性等。除了政治權力本身的政策之外，對於這些儀式所具有的力量，則是近年以來不問地域，皆是許多研究者討論的課題。 　　反覆舉行的紀念日是對過去的回顧。紀念日連結了過去的故事性與記憶，透過將國家歷史與現在國家的努力連結，國家將國家認同明確化。果真如此，那麼儀式以及相關的紀念性活動之影響力就不能被忽略。 　　日本統治時代，作為殖民地的台灣，與母國內地一樣展開如祝祭日等官方節日，以及如天皇即位式等皇室儀式活動，甚至皇太子等皇室來台灣訪察時，也盛大舉辦儀式和慶祝、紀念活動。也就是說，即使是在殖民地也展開了種種「帝國儀式活動」。 　　然而，除此以外，尚有殖民地台灣才有的儀式活動。特別是始政紀念日此一紀念日及其相關儀式活動，是所有節日中相當被重視的，甚於某些祝祭日。自日本開始統治台灣的1895年6月17日始，到日本戰敗為止，持續舉辦紀念及慶祝活動。 　　一個是與內地同樣展開地，以天皇為中心，呼喊「天皇子民」、「一視同仁」等等，期待國民統合的祝祭日以及皇室儀式。另一個則是只有殖民地台灣才被展開地，紀念「日本統治台灣」此一充滿殖民統治意識的紀念日。就被殖民者而言，這是象徵日本統治開始的紀念日。這兩種不同意涵的官方節日在台灣怎麼展開？兩者如何互相影響？是加乘效果或是矛盾抵銷呢？本文基於上述問題意識，針對日治時期在台灣的國家節日及儀式活動進行了研究與討論。

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(文学) / 甲第19426号 / 文博第704号 / 新制||文||628(附属図書館) / 32462 / 京都大学大学院文学研究科歴史文化学専攻 / (主査)教授 吉川 真司, 准教授 上島 享, 准教授 谷川 穣 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Letters / Kyoto University / DGAM

自古以來，八咫鏡、草薙劍、八坂瓊勾玉之三種神器被視為日本王權的象徵。在日本文學中，關於三種神器的描述也不少。其實，關於鏡、劍、玉的記載在中國文學中早已出現，鏡、劍、玉各自背後皆有其涵義。另根據儒教與道教經典，可瞭解中國王權思想與「天」的思想有所關連，而天的思想也對中國的王權造成莫大影響。因此在論及日本王權思想之時，必須追溯至中國古代天的思想。 　　日本王權應如何以神道的觀點解釋呢？眾所周知，日本天皇思想中蘊含著「萬世一系」的思想，身為天照大神子孫的天皇因而世世代代可統治這個國家。事實上，在《古事記》與《日本書紀》中，對此「天壤無窮的神諭」已有著墨，而三種神器也成為遵守此神諭之象徵。 　　本論文以古代及中世日本文學闡明三種神器的起源與意義，再從比較思想的觀點，探討三種神器與日本王權思想及中國思想三者間之關聯。最後再從日本神道之觀點，論述以三種神器為象徵之日本王權思想。期藉以上研究方法，釐清中日兩國思想之異同，進而理解日本固有的神道思想。 / The Imperial Regalia of Japan consists of the sword Kusanagi no Tsurugi, the mirror Yata no Kagami, and the jewel Yasakani no Magatama. From ancient times, they have been regarded as the symbol of power, which belongs to Emperors of Japan. There are quite a few descriptions about the Imperial Regalia of Japan in Japanese literature as well. Actually, the thought of mirror, sword and jewel has already been described in Chinese literature, and each of them has their own meanings. In addition, according to the books of Confucianism and Daoism, the ideology of the emperor of China is relative to the thought of “sky,” and the thought of sky also greatly influenced the power of Chinese emperors. Therefore, it is necessary to trace back to the thought of sky in ancient China while mentioning the ideology of the Emperor of Japan. How should the power of the Emperor of Japan be explained by means of Shinto? As everyone knows, emperors of Japan rule the country as descendants of Amaterasu due to the ideology of the emperors’ unbroken line. Actually, the proof of it is called “Tenjo Mukyu no Shinchoku”, which has already shown in “Kojiki” and “Nihon Shoki.” It means the oracle, which is as eternal as heaven and earth, and the Imperial Regalia of Japan just became the symbol of the oracle. In this thesis, literatures of ancient Japan and medieval Japan will be used to describe the origins and meanings of the Imperial Regalia of Japan. Next, I will manage to explore the connection between the Imperial Regalia of Japan, ideology of Japanese emperor and Chinese ideology from a comparative point of view, and expound the ideology of the emperor of Japan symbolized by Imperial Regalia of Japan. By means of the above research method, the ideology of Japan and China is expected to be clarified in order to know more about the innate ideology of Japan — Shinto.

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(文学) / 甲第19944号 / 文博第722号 / 新制||文||638(附属図書館) / 33040 / 京都大学大学院文学研究科文献文化学専攻 / (主査)教授 平田 昌司, 教授 木津 祐子, 准教授 緑川 英樹 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Letters / Kyoto University / DFAM

文久二年（1862）閏八月，幕府為因應惡化的京都治安以及幕權低落的窘境，於原本負責京都事務的京都所司代之上，新設京都守護職一職，任命親藩中俸祿二十五萬石的會津藩藩主松平容保（1835～1893）担任。松平容保於該年底進入京都，他不僅必須維持當地的治安，還扮演著擔任幕府與朝廷間的中間人，促進雙方友好的角色。 文久三年（1863）五月十日，主張立刻攘夷的長州藩砲擊經過馬關海峽的外國船隻，開始攘夷行動，而與外國陷入交戰狀態，但是幕府與其他諸藩卻坐視不顧，長州藩為擺脫孤立的窘境，轉而致力實現天皇親征，欲藉此促進全國各地起而響應。八月十三日，朝廷發布了天皇移駕大和（今奈良），準備親征的敕命，然而，以孝明天皇（1831～1866）為首，前關白近衛忠熙、右大臣二條齊敬等高層公卿皆主張將攘夷事務委任幕府，不願親征，並想除去與長州藩聯手，提倡親征的三條實美（1837～1891）等少壯貴族。另一方面，天皇親征的敕命會毀壞幕府受朝廷委任掌理國政的正當性，身為幕府在京都的代表，京都守護職當然不能坐視，故而決定一併剷除握有朝權的三條實美等人及敗壞治安的浪士。結果，高層公卿與會津藩聯手發動八月十八日的政變，三條實美等人則與敗走的長州兵一同返回長州。 本稿主要分析政變的實行者於政變前所做的準備，以及其於政變當天的動向。由於政變計畫案僅存與會津結盟的薩摩藩藩士的獻計文書，故先行研究皆以薩摩藩為主謀論之，認為會津藩只是兵力遭到利用的一方。然而，本論根據文獻發現，薩摩藩原本計畫八月十六日起事，卻因天皇反對而失敗。失望的薩摩藩士於是藉酒消愁，直到翌日天皇又再傳手諭，指將藉會津藩的兵力起事，才又重新振作，投入十八日的政變準備工作。由於薩摩藩的計畫於八月十六日以失敗告終，該藩在十八日政變時僅被分派守衛皇宮出入口之任務，失去掌握主導權的機會。八月十八日政變之後，孝明天皇等人取回了朝中的發言權，會津藩所代表的幕府勢力則掌握了中央政局的主導權。對此結果感到不滿的薩摩藩，因而與長州藩聯手，走上倒幕一途。如此看來，八月十八日政變的成功反而促成了薩長同盟的成立，亦成為明治維新的遠因。 / Kyoto Shugoshoku(京都守護職; the Military Commissioner of Kyoto) was created as the higher commander of Kyoto Shoshidai(京都所司代; the ambassador of Bakuhu in Kyoto), for keeping the peace in the city of Kyoto and recovering the authority of Bakuhu(幕府; shogunate). Matudaira Katamori(松平容保), the lord of the Aizu clan(会津藩), was installed as Kyoto Shugoshoku on September 24 1862, and deployed massive amounts of troops to Kyoto by the end of the year. He was not only responsible for policing the city of Kyoto, but was also expected to unify Chotei(朝廷; the imperal court) with Bakuhu. From June 25, 1863, the Choshu clan(長州藩), which insisted on expelling aliens immediately, shelled foreign ships that crossed the Kanmon Cclannel(関門海峡) and was at war with western countries. However, Bakuhu and the other clans didn’t want to open hostilities, the Choshu clan therefore became isolated. In order to cclange the miserable condition, the Choshu clan proposed that the emperor should defeat the enemy by himself, and forced Emperor Komei(孝明天皇) to announce it on August 13. Because of this, Emperor Komei and the other nobles who opposed this announcement, for example, Udaijin(右大臣; the second prime minister of Chotei) Nijyo Nariyuki（二条斉敬） and Zen-Kanpaku(前関白; previous superior regent) Konoe Tadahiro（近衛忠熙）, decided to exclude the Choshu clan and young nobels like Sanjyo Sanetomi(三条実美) who took its side. On the other side, as the representative of Bakuhu in Kyoto, Matudaira Katamori had to prevent the announcement becoming true. Because he was afraid that Bakuhu shell lose the the legitimacy to reign over Japan from Chotei. That is the reason why he decided to exclude the Choshu clan and Sanjyo Sanetomi’s party. He leagued together with emperor Komei, Nijyo Nariyuki and Konoe Tadahiro, and mounted a coup on August 18. Finally, Sanjyo Sanetomi’s party ran away with the troops of the Choshu clan to Choshu domain. This study attempts to explore the position of Kyoto shugoshoku in the coup by analysis of the preparation and the movement of the administers of the coup. Because the schedule of the coup in existence was proposed by the samurais of the Satsuma clan(薩摩藩), who was associated with the Aizu clan, in prior studies, the coup was led by the Satsuma clan, and successed by using the troops of the Aizu clan. But according to the literature, the plan made by the samurais of the Satsuma clan was intending to mount a coup on August 16 and was repealed by Emperor Komei on that day. Those samurais of the Satsuma clan were frustrated and so they drunk together until the next morning. On August 18, they just ordered to guard the gate of the palace, and to forbid Sanjyo Sanetomi’s party get into the palace and let the other nobles get through the gate with using the black list of nobles which delivered by the Aizu clan. In the mean time, the Aizu clan, which recalled the troops going back to the domain and so doubled the force before August 17, was the commander for the all gates control of the palace. Moreover, Matsudaira Katamori attended the royal court for the exclusion of the Choshu clan and Sanjyo Sanetomi’s party. By these evidences I should make the assertion that the Satsuma-lead coup was ended up on August 16, and the Aizu clan was the one which having great effect in the coup on August 18. As the result, the Aizu clan had taken the leadership in the political scene for Bakuhu, so as Emporer Komei and the others retrieved their voice in Chotei.

第1章，第2章，第3章，第6章は著作権者の規定により非公開 / はじめに / 第Ⅰ部 昭和天皇戦後巡幸にみる象徴天皇制の形成過程 / 第Ⅱ部 皇太子明仁と象徴天皇制の形成過程 / 結論 / 博士（社会学） / 甲第601号 / 205p / Hitotsubashi University(一橋大学)

京都大学 / 0048 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(人間・環境学) / 甲第18378号 / 人博第691号 / 新制||人||165(附属図書館) / 25||人博||691(吉田南総合図書館) / 31236 / 京都大学大学院人間・環境学研究科共生文明学専攻 / (主査)教授 元木 泰雄, 教授 西山 良平, 教授 川島 昭夫, 教授 美川 圭 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Human and Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM