The Satsuma Domain (Satsuma-han) invaded and controlled the Ryūkyū Kingdom in 1609, and after the fifteen rules (掟十五条) had been issued in 1611, by which the Satsuma dominated the Ryūkyū Kingdom, Buddhism was restricted. This made Buddhism stagnate and gradually decline. In 1910, Buddhism in the Ryūkyū Islands was unified with mainland Japanese Buddhism, and the five temples of the old royal domain of the Shō family, who ruled until 1879, were forced to become private temples. Accordingly, there was no danka (parishioner) system which needed to be abolished. Temple management met financial difficulties at that time. Here I give consideration to this process, consulting a wide variety of sources from the region itself, as well as diplomatic reports.

In 1959, with a passport issued by USCAR (United States Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands) , I went to Tokyo as a scholarship student. The nationality at that time was “Ryukyu,” and I sat in the front row alongside Southeast Asian students at the university’s entrance ceremony. Okinawa was part of Japan but was treated as a foreign country.

“The 60-year struggle for Japan-US security” became a trigger to think about the relationship between the return of Okinawa and Japan-US security. In 1963, I returned home. At that time Okinawa was under the situation of the Kokuba-kun issue. Mr. Kokuba was crossing with a green light when he was killed by a truck driven by a US soldier, who was found not guilty. The words of junior high school students who appealed at the protest rally are still remembered. “If we cannot cross with the blue, what color should we cross with?” I was made shockingly aware of the reality of Okinawa and the mission of the teacher. After that, in class, we tackled the theme of “How to teach Okinawa.”

Faced with the need to prevent the bill to restrict teachers’ rights (in Japan, it was called the issue of kyoko-niho), high school teacher members of the Okinawa Teachers’ Association formed a union. I devoted all my energy to the education and return movement as its full-time general secretary. The efforts of “Special Class” were later tackled in all prefectures. That is because Shuri High School conducted “thinking Okinawa to 4. 28,” “6. 23 the day of memorial” was born from the “unified homeroom.

The postwar history of Okinawa was the history of people who barely survived from the battlefield of Hell, and the history of struggle against the absurdity and unreasonableness of the US military occupation control. To protect lives and livelihoods and to realize peace and democracy, it is inevitable to learn “Okinawa in the base.” As the Constitution says, “constant effort” was necessary to preserve the freedom and rights guaranteed by the Constitution. “Return to Japan” was its important process as the “constant effort.”

景観に刻まれた過去の記憶をめぐる問題は，歴史と地理の２つの視点を必要とする論点であり，沖縄戦の舞台となった沖縄は，そうした議論の事例地の１つとして相応しいものである。ただし，これまでの研究のほとんどが激戦地のなかでも糸満市域を事例としたものであった。本稿はこうした状況をふまえ，糸満市と同じく激戦地として知られる八重瀬町を事例として選択し，1972年以前に建立された沖縄戦戦没者慰霊碑の建立経緯や変化をたどり，慰霊空間の形成された過程を論じることで，沖縄戦の死と追悼の景観のより多様な状況を提示することを目的とする。八重瀬町域には富盛地区と具志頭地区に慰霊空間が形成されているが，そうした慰霊空間の地理的偏差の生じた背景には，慰霊碑の建立や慰霊空間の整備に関わった地区住民，琉球政府や沖縄遺族連合会，また県外の遺族といった多様な主体の動きが重要であったことを明らかにした。また慰霊空間として明確に選択される場所には歴史的・地理的な要因があったことを指摘した。