戦争の遺物とその移動がもたらしたもの : 日本軍特殊潜航艇シドニー湾攻撃のその後

Abstract

戦争での兵士の死は一般人の死とは違った形で扱われ, さらに戦死者にまつわる「モノ」も, 通常の死を迎えた者たちが残していったいわゆる「形見」とは違う扱いや意味づけがなされる場合が多い。戦死者が残していったモノは, 「遺品」や「遺物」と呼ばれ, 肉体が存在していた証拠の骨や灰も遺物に含まれる。本稿では太平洋戦争中の1942年にオーストラリアのシドニー湾を攻撃した日本軍特殊潜航艇にまつわる3点の日本軍人の遺物乗員の遺灰, 携えていたと思われる軍刀, そして身につけていた千人針の胴巻に注目して, これらのモノが戦争中から戦後にかけての二国間をどう動いたかを記述し, それらの動きが日本とオーストラリアの両国ででどのように意味づけられてきたかを考察する。遺物には歴史的・文化的な意味を日豪それぞれが付与したが, 二国間の移動とそれにともなう反応は, モノに付与された意味の対比性を明らかにする。また, 意味付けが日本の中で国家レベルと個人や地域社会のレベルでどう違うのかも考察する。最後に, 千人針というモノの持つジェンダー的特徴に焦点をあてて, 女性と戦争のかかわりについても考察を加える。遺物が移動した結果, 集団の問には関係が成立するが, この関係を精査することで, 「モノを贈与する」という互酬性を持った行為に対しての解釈と意味づけがが両方の集団で同一であるとは限らず, その行為は多義性を持っていることを指摘する。しかし同時に, その多義性がゆえに, 発生したつながりは, 直接の当事者や組織あるいは関係の性格が変化しても, 継続し完全に途絶することがなかったことをこの事例をとおして論じたい。

The war dead are often treated differently from others who died in normal circumstances, and objects which had some association with the war dead are given different meaning. The objects which were left by the war dead are often called relics. Human remains, such as bones and ashes, are included in that category. This paper deals with three relics which were left in Australia after the Japanese midget submarine attack in Sydney Harbour in 1942, and traces their movements during and after the Pacific War between Australia and Japan. The objects were the ashes of the crew, a military sword which was thought to have been brought by a crew member, and a thousand stitches body belt worn by him. How the movements of those objects were interpreted historically and culturally in each country will be examined. The movements of the relics highlight the differences and similarities in the meanings and interpretations each country had attached to the objects. The significance of Japanese thousand stitches belts will be discussed in relation to war and gender as well. The transfer of relics from one group (nation) to the other was regarded as gift-giving and created relationships between them. Through examining the acts of "gift giving" which are supposed to trigger reciprocity, the paper argues that acts of giving and receiving were interpreted differently in each group and generated multiple meanings. At the same time, due to this multiplicity, the relationship between the groups continued even though the personnel and organizations, and their characteristics, had shifted over time.