ASAKURA Toshio National Museum of Ethnology, Department of the Four, Assistant., 第4研究部, 助手 (40151021)
SEGAWA Masahisa University of Tohoku, Department of General Studies, Associate Professor., 教養部, 助教授 (00187832)
TSUZUKI Akiko University of Ryukyu, Department of Law & Literature, Associate Professor., 法文学部, 助教授 (00115601)
MEZAKI Shigekazu University of Mie, Department of Human & Social Sciences, Professor., 人文学部, 教授 (80101187)
YAMASHITA Kin ichi Kagoshima University of Economy, Department of Sociology, professor., 社会学部, 教授 (10166663)
We were able to get many results through our discussions held at 3 times, not only with our own members each other but with attending much audience. The first result of our discussions indicates that there are great many materials and books described about geomancy in China, Korea and Okinawa, but there were almost no result of study about it from now, because many scientists even now recognize it as a superstition, and there were many false books during periods of this area, then we couldn't distinguish the geomantic books correct or not. The second, we could understand that there was another thought on the meritorious land similar to geomancy especially in Korea. The third, we made clear the historical facts of Okinawan geomancy. In the period of Ryukyu kingdom governed, many officials went to Fukien, China to learn the geomancy. Then they applied learned geomantic knowledge to their domestic policy. After that, Okinawan culture was rapidly changed especially in 18th century. Therefore, we may say contemporary Okinawan culture was formed at 2-300 years ago by the policy of geomantic assessment. The last, we made clear that there were varied contemporary geomantic thoughts in East Asia in spite of same origin of thought, ie. Okinawan don't have the Feng-shui fighting custom such that Chinese and Korean have, etc.. During term of our project, we couldn't study about the mainland Japanese geomancy. This is the reason we must cotinue this project to the next year.