The purpose of this paper is to unveil the implicit thinking making up images of a rural landscape. For this purpose, the author tried to clarify how the villagers classify their lands, by analyzing the meaning of place names they themselves have given to their lands, relating to land utilization and the constitution of social groups.<br>The author chose two mountain villages, Hirao and Sei in Nishiyoshino-mura, Nara Prefecture, as a case study. Hirao is a village of dry field farming. The houses are scattered on slopes facing south. They are classified into three territorial groups. On the other hand, Sei is a village of forestry. The houses are located on the slope near the valley bottom. They are classified into two territorial groups.<br>This paper makes use of Koaza (Small place names) as materials for analysis, which are written in the land register book made in the 1880's. Hirao has 438 Koaza. Sei has 164. The author studied the frequency of the use of Koaza in the villagers' livelihood. The results obtained here are as follows: Most of Koaza are not independent of livelihood. Especially, when Koaza were recorded in land registers, it was presumed that Koaza had been closely connected with livelihood.<br>Furthermore, in order to draw out the villagers' recognition of their lands, the author examined the suffix of Koaza from the view point of three groups: suffixes of social significance such as -kaito (settlement); suffixes of natural significance such as -tani (valley), -sako (small valley), -taira (flat place), -yama (mountain), -mine (ridge); and suffixes of situational significance such as -kami (upper), -shimo (below), and -mukai (opposite). The results are summarized as follows:<br>It is found that landform environments such as steep mountains influence greatly the classification of lands, because there are many suffixes signifying landforms in the two villages. In Hirao, there are various kinds of suffixes. Fields around houses are subdivided and given place names by many suffixes signifying their situations. This shows that the villagers identify the lands in detail and have a great stock of such knowledge. In Sei, the areas of Koaza are larger, and there are fewer kinds of suffixes. These differences between Hirao and Sei in the classification of lands are caused by the differences in their land utilization and spatial organization.<br>In the process of the classification of lands, it is possible to consider that, at the first stage, the large landforms such as ridge (-mine) or valley (-tani) are clearly classified, and the small landforms such as rock wall (-kura) or rock (-iwa) are distinguished as different landmarks. And then, if the villagers continue to utilize the same fields, they give the new place names like -kaito showing their occupancy. If need be, their surrounding lands are furthermore subdivided by other suffixes signifying a direction such as upper (-kami). We can consider that such classification of lands is created by the villagers' intention to utilize their lands.