@article{oai:nagoya.repo.nii.ac.jp:02002365, author = {伊藤, 大輔 and Ito, Daisuke}, journal = {名古屋大学人文学研究論集, The Journal of Humanities, Nagoya University}, month = {Mar}, note = {In the study of Japanese art history, animism has been vaguely understood to mean “familiarity with nature”. In modern anthropology, however, the definition of animism is relatively clear. It was the French anthropologist Philippe Descola who set the standard. In his book Par-delà la nature et la culture, he classified the worldviews into four categories: totemism, animism, analogism, and naturalism. According to this definition of animism, the anthropomorphic animals in “Chojū-giga” are not animistic. This is because the animals in this work are a fusion of animals and humans in their bodies, which does not fit the definition of animism that each being has a unique body. So, going back to Descola’s four schemes, it turns out that it is the worldview of analogism that has the possibility of forming a body in which different beings are fused together, as in the case of the animals in “Chojū-giga”. For this reason, this essay is revised to say that the idea behind the “Chojū-giga” is not animism as previously thought, but analogism., 図版は著作権上の都合により掲載しておりません}, pages = {269--290}, title = {「鳥獣戯画」とアニミズム : あるいはアナロジズム的裂け目についての考察}, volume = {5}, year = {2022} }