ブックタイトルRILAS 早稲田大学総合人文科学研究センター研究誌

ページ
500/542

このページは RILAS 早稲田大学総合人文科学研究センター研究誌 の電子ブックに掲載されている500ページの概要です。
秒後に電子ブックの対象ページへ移動します。
「ブックを開く」ボタンをクリックすると今すぐブックを開きます。

ActiBookアプリアイコンActiBookアプリをダウンロード(無償)

  • Available on the Appstore
  • Available on the Google play
  • Available on the Windows Store

概要

RILAS 早稲田大学総合人文科学研究センター研究誌

『葵巻古注』と『水原抄』の関係―鎌倉時代の『源氏物語』古注釈の利用―和文タイトル・和文タイトルThe Relationship Between Aoi no Maki Koch? and Suigensh? :The Usage of the Tale of Genji Commentary in 12 th -14 th CenturyTarin CLANUWATAbstractSuigensh?, written by Minamoto no Mitsuyuki and Chikayuki in 13 th century, is one of the earliest Genjicommentaries in Genji history. Even though Suigensh? was a very famous Genji commentary that was citedby many scholars, there are no known surviving copies. Researchers believe that it was lost in the early 15 thcentury.However in 1930, Ikeda Kikan, a famous Genji scholar, discovered Aoi no Maki Koch? : a rare, scroll-typeGenji commentary. After he found this book, he claimed that it was a part of Suigensh?. Later, ShigematsuNobuhiro published a declaration contrary to Ikeda’s idea because the details in Aoi no Maki Koch? did notmatch of those in Gench?saihish?, which is a secret book associated with Suigensh?. The research did notadvance any further until half a century later when Teramoto Naohiko concluded that becauseGench?saihish? contained“secrets”that were not included in Suigensh?, Aoi no Maki Koch? could still bepart of Suigensh? even though some details did not match Gench?saihish?. Finally, Tasaka Kenji mentionedin his paper that if there are no further opposing views, we should conclude that Aoi no Maki Koch? isSuigensh?.Although many researchers believe that Aoi no Maki Koch? is Suigensh?, the previous research stillcontain many critical problems. For instance, beside the first paper by Ikeda Kikan, no other researcherjustifies why Suigensh? would be in a scroll format. Researchers only concentrated on details written in thescroll, but not why it was made into a scroll. Another critical problem is that Aoi no Maki Koch? does notcontain commentaries in the question and answer format that was very common in the Kamakura period andfound in many excerpts of Suigensh? remaining in other commentaries. In this paper, I will discuss thesecritical problems and prove why I think Aoi no Maki Koch? is not Suigensh?.(37)498