戰後日本天皇論的起點：丸山真男與津田左右吉的天皇戰爭責任論

The Starting Point of the Debate Over Tenno in Post-war Japan: On the Arguments of Tenno's War Responsibility by Masao Maruyama and Sokichi Tsuda

自從明治維新以來，日本採取君主立憲的現代國家模式， 此前沒有掌握政治實權的天皇，隨之成為日本國的元首，為維持 其政治權威，政府也嚴禁國民議論天皇。第二次世界大戰的戰敗 打破此禁忌，帶來天皇論的百花齊放現象，天皇的戰爭責任、天 皇與近代日本的關係、天皇的本質等成為學術界的熱門議題。日 本戰敗後，丸山真男與津田左右吉率先發表天皇論，但兩者的論 述呈現明顯的對比：丸山不僅主張昭和天皇該退位，也認為該廢 除天皇；津田則認為昭和天皇並無戰爭責任，天皇的存在也不阻 礙民主的發展。兩者討論天皇戰爭責任之際，也對天皇的本質進行深入的分析，形成戰後日本天皇論的雛形。本文以政體（法律責任）、國體（思想結構性責任）及變質（政治責任）為主軸，試圖分析丸山與津田的天皇戰爭責任論。透過本文的分析，期望提供理解天皇論的重要視角。

A constitutional monarchy was adopted as the political system after the Meiji Restoration in Japan. Tenno (the emperor of Japan), who had not taken actual political power before, became the sovereign of Japan, and the government prohibited people from criticizing Tenno in order to maintain his political authority. The defeat of Japan in World War II broke this taboo, resulting in a boom of academic arguments about Tenno's responsibility for the war, the relationship between Tenno and modern Japan, the essence of Tenno, etc. Masao Maruyama and Sokichi Tsuda presented papers about Tenno soon after the end of WWII, but their statements provided a striking contrast: Maruyama insisted on the abolition of the Tenno system as well as the abdication of Hirohito. On the contrary, Tsuda insisted that Tenno was not responsible for the war, and that the existence of Tenno would not hinder the development of democracy. When they debated over the war responsibility of Tenno, both analyzed the essence of Tenno, which have formed the models of Tenno studies in post-war Japan. This essay aims to analyze the arguments of Tenno's war responsibility by Maruyama and Tsuda with the three aspects of the constitution (legal liability), Kokutai (responsibility of intellectual structure) and degeneration (political responsibility). These analyses provide important viewpoints for appreciating Tenno theory.