Aboriginal people in the Yirrkala community organised a campaign against a boxcite mine project at Gove Peninsula in the 1960s by claiming that the mine would destroy their sacred sites. The movement encouraged nation-wide Aboriginal land rights movements and led to the introduction of the Aboriginal Land Right (Northern Territory) Act 1976. The Aboriginal way of land ownership was translated into the European-based legal system, and the existence of sacred sites became important to claim land rights under the legislation. It was also the case for native title claims under the Native Title Act 1993. Furthermore various laws were introduced to legalise the protection of sacred sites.
Since the 1990s, Mirrar-Gundjehmi Aborigines have been cooperating with various environmental organisations against the uranium mine project in Jabilka. They also argued that the land was a source of their culture and living tradition, and urged the campaign as a fight for cultural survival. Campaigning for inscription of the Kakadu National Park on ‘the List of World Heritage in Danger’ became a crucial strategy in order to stop the project. The campaign at the World Heritage Committee brought out the concept of ‘cultural landscape’ as ‘combined works of nature and of man’, and Mirrar people were recoginised as legitimate ‘actors’ for intervening and maintaining the landscape. The committee requested the Australian government to promote dialogue with the Mirrar people.
The paper argues that discourse on protecting Aboriginal sacred sites against mine projects has been the catalyst for political dialogues in Australian society. Every sacred site has a very local and specific nature in maintaining the tradition and culture of the Aboriginal groups responsible for the site. But the discourse could forge pan-Aboriginal movements by mobilising even ‘non-traditional’ Aborigines, because the concept of ‘sacred site’ is uniquely Aboriginal and symbolises genuineness of Aboriginality. Accommodating the concept of sacred sites and Aboriginal culture in Australian political and legal institutions has provided a basis for Aboriginal people to claim indigenous rights and political power. It also implies that land has not only economic but cultural values. Claims for protecting sacred sites should be understood, therefore, as the pursuance of Aboriginal rights for political, economic, social, and cultural self-determination.
The recognition of sacred sites in non-Aboriginal institutions has raised problems as well. The secretiveness of authentic sacred sites sometimes contradicts the recognition because it requires scientific evidence of the sites for the public. The feeling of unfairness has been growing among ‘non-traditional’ Aborigines who cannot claim land. Furthermore, due to the political power of Australian Aboriginal people, their claims for self-determination tend to be internalised and separated from the international movements for ensuring indigenous rights.

抄録全体を表示

 1560年代ペルーアンデス高地のワマンガ地方においてタキ・オンコイ（Taki Onqoy. ケチュア語で「踊り病」を意味する）と呼ばれる、土着の神々を復活させるための「踊り」を伴う祭祀・儀礼が自然発生的に拡大し、植民地支配体制を揺るがす状況となった。先住民群衆によるこの騒動で日常生活が麻痺した。それは1564年8月もしくは9月ごろから数年間にわたって、クスコ司教区ワマンガ地方南東部のパリナコチャス地区を中心に広がった。およそ8000人の先住民がこれに関与したとして告発され、キリスト教への集団改宗を強いられたといわれている。
 タキ・オンコイを水銀汚染問題と関連付けた最近の研究について述べておく。2015年に日本の真鍋周三が「16世紀ペルーにおけるタキ・オンコイの政治・社会的背景をめぐる試論」、『ラテンアメリカ・カリブ研究』第22号、39-54頁とそのスペイン語版［Manabe 2015］を発表し、水銀汚染問題との関係からタキ・オンコイを捉える視点を提起した。
 2016年にペルーのサンタ・マリア（公衆衛生学者・人類学者）が、「タキ・オンコイ─16世紀ペルーにおける水銀中毒症」なるテーマで、タキ・オンコイと水銀中毒を関連付けた博士論文を著した。また2017年には「16世紀ペルーにおける水銀とタキ・オンコイ」なるテーマで修士論文を執筆した。
 本稿では、タキ・オンコイと、ワンカベリカ水銀鉱山に由来する水銀汚染問題との関係の一端を明らかにするべく、歴史学の立場に立って新たな解釈を試みる。本稿の内容は10分の1税徴収問題がタキ・オンコイの鎮圧とどう関係したのかを検討・考察する。

抄録全体を表示