Episode 14: The Japanese Chronicles

Izanagi and Izanami churn the waters with the Spear of Heaven and created the

Izanagi and Izanami churn the waters with the Spear of Heaven and created the

We finally made it! The Chronicles of Japan is finally getting into the Japanese Chronicles! And by that I primarily mean the Kojiki and the Nihon Shoki, but there are a few others, so here in this blog post, let’s talk about some of them:

Kokki

The National History submitted by the legendary Shotoku Taishi was originally presented in 620 CE, during the reign of Suiko. It was rescued from fire in 645, but its whereabouts after that are uncertain. It was possibly used in the formulation of the narrative that became the Kojiki as well as the Nihon Shoki. This may be a large part of the Kujiki (below), but most believe the original is actually lost.

Kojiki

The Kojiki is the account recorded by O no Yasumaro from the history memorized by Hieda no Are. This is from the period of Temmu (d. 686) but wsan’t written down until 711-712. It covers up to the period of Suiko (d. 628), but really doesn’t have much other than genalogical information after Buretsu (d. 507).

Nihon Shoki

Sometimes referred to as the Nihongi. This is the most comprehensive of the early histories. It was presented to the court in 720 under the direction of Prince Toneri. O no Yasumaro likely had a hand it, along with many other court scholars. This may be the culmination of a project started as early as 681. It is the first record to actually label the years, though the years given are clearly preposterous until the latter reigns. The earliest year claims to be about 660 BCE, and it continues up until the reign of Jito Tenno, ending in 697. Although there is a main narrative thread throughout, it also includes alternate versions of many stories—especially those from the Age of the Gods. These usually start with something like “In one writing it is said:” These may have been added afterwards, and demonstrate some of the different versions.

Fudoki

The fudoki, or gazetteers, were commissioned in 713 from the various provinces. Only a few of the fudoki (whole or in part) survive. These include the fudoki from Izumo, Harima, Hizen, Hitachi, and Bungo. There are also scattered references in other works that quoted from them before they were lost. The fudoki cover many things, and occasionally include local history, myths, and legends that can be used to help fill in the blanks around some of what we see in other works.

Kogo Shūi

Submitted to the court in 807, compiled by Imbe no HIronari, this is another collection of stories, thought to be for the purpose of defending the Imbe family’s traditional rights against the rise of the Fujiwara, a branch of the Nakatomi.

Kujiki (aka Kyujiki or Kiujiki)

This is a history of Japan up through Suiko’s reign. Early Japanese scholars believed it to be the history that Shotoku Taishi was supposed to have compiled in 620, but later scholarship placed it as late as the 10th century. Some scholars believe that it may be more of an 8th century document, sharing material with the Nihon Shoki and Kojiki, but differing slightly in places.

References

  • Ō, Yasumaro, & Heldt, G. (2014). The Kojiki: An account of ancient matters. ISBN978-0-231-16389-7

  • Ooms, Herman (2009). Imperial Politics and Symbolics in Ancient Japan: The Tenmu Dynasty, 650-800.  ISBN978-0-8248-3235-3

  • Tonomura, Hitomi (July 1994). Positioning Amaterasu: A Reading of the Kojiki. The Japan Foundation Newsletter, 22(2), 12-17.

  • Taro, Sakamoto. Brownlee, John S., tr. (1991).  The Six National Histories of Japan. UBC Press, Vancouver. ISBN4-13-027026-5

  • Murakami, F. (1988). Incest and Rebirth in Kojiki. Monumenta Nipponica, 43(4), 455-463. doi:10.2307/2384797

  • Chamberlain, B. H. (1981). The Kojiki: Records of ancient matters. Rutland, Vt: C.E. Tuttle Co.  ISBN4-8053-0794-3

  • Aston, W. G. (1972). Nihongi, chronicles of Japan from the earliest times to A.D. 697. London: Allen & Unwin. ISBN0-80480984-4

  • Philippi, D. L. (1968). Kojiki. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. ISBN4-13-087004-1

Episode 13: Queen Himiko

Haniwa statue from the Tokyo National Museum. While not Himiko herself, the various patterned cloths and outfit demonstrate the type of clothing in the archipelago prior to the introduction of Chinese fashion. Like the statue, Himiko likely used som…

Haniwa statue from the Tokyo National Museum. While not Himiko herself, the various patterned cloths and outfit demonstrate the type of clothing in the archipelago prior to the introduction of Chinese fashion. Like the statue, Himiko likely used some form of make-up, possibly cinnabar, with a necklace of magatama comma shaped jewels.

So this episode we finally get to Himiko, an intriguing and elusive figure in Japanese history. One the one hand, she is the first named person in Japanese history—or at least proto-history, since the account is written by the Chinese. And she is a woman—since the majority of history is dominated by a patriarchal narrative, to find a woman in a position of power and authority is a rarity. Being a rarity, it is easy to invest the narrative with our hopes, fears, and biases.

The truth is that there is little we know, and everyone will have a different take on Himiko’s life. To some she is a non-entity—she’s not part of the official lineage, and the historical accident of her presence in the Wei Chronicles means that we know about her, but that’s it. Besides, it isn’t even a name—it is probably just a title. Others point to the description of her as a secluded shamaness and suggest that maybe she wasn’t the actual power. In that narrative, she was a figurehead, performing the rites, but it was her younger brother who was “helping” her that actually ran things. These are certainly all possibilities, but look at the evidence.

First off, why would the Chinese account address her, instead of her brother or some other official? There certainly is plenty of circumstantial evidence to suggest that co-rulers (hiko-hime pairs) were not uncommon. Certainly it seems intriguing that one of, if not the, largest kofun from around this time is said to be the tomb of a woman—and a shamaness, at that.

Oh, and on the whole thing about the keyhole-shaped tombs. The keyhole tomb shape starts near Makimuku in the 3rd century, and then spreads to the rest of Yamato and then the rest of Japan. There are even some keyhole-shaped tombs in the southern Korean peninsula. Of course, these aren’t the only shapes for these mounded tumuli, but it is distinctive and the shape of the largest tombs—those considered to be part of the imperial line. There are some shapes that are more regional. Others that may have been reserved for officers of a particular grade, but the keyhole tombs have a particular correlation to the apparent spread of Yamato influence and authority.

Various bronze mirrors from the Rekihaku Museum in Sakura

The other bit of evidence we have have are the mirrors, mentioned in the episode. In particular are a type of mirrors known as triangular rimmed mirrors—so-called because they have a triangular cross-section to their rim. These mirrors are quite distinctive, with different motifs. These aren’t random—different motifs appear to have been popular at different times. For instance, there is some thought that the “gods and beats” mirrors may have been attached to a belief in the Queen Mother of the West and the King Father of the East, which may have influenced the concept of Wa rulership in Japan.

Chinese Han period bas relief of a liubo game,where you can see the distinctive “T-L'-V” markings also found on mirrors. Photo by author at the Tokyo National Museum.

Another popular feature of these mirrors are the “TLV” style mirrors. These ones were based on a kind of board game, found in some tombs. We don’t have a clear indication of just what this game was or how it was played, but many people assume that it had some kind of astrological, fortune-telling, or other cosmological significance.

Han dynasty funeral statuary of two people playing liubo. Photo by author at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.

It is known as liubo, and whether it was even a game or if it was some sort of divination device is not known, though I can’t help but notice that there is no clear differentiation between the two people on either side of the board.

That it likely has some cosmological significance, at least in China, is bolstered by some of the other images on various mirrors. Another common theme are the four directional guardian animals:

  • Genbu - the black tortoise of the North

  • Seiryu - the blue dragon of the East

  • Suzaku - the red bird of the South

  • Byakko - the white tiger of the West

These guardian animals, and other such concepts, start to show up more and more often over the next few centuries. Himiko may have gone to the Wei for legitimacy, but this would be a trend that would continue over the next few centuries, and early on that is wrapped around a Chinese cosmological worldview.

Pair of clay haniwa ships. They demonstrate they early oaring stations. Photo by author at the Osaka National Museum.

Haniwa ship. Photo by author at the Tokyo National Museum.

Haniwa ship. Photo by author at the Tokyo National Museum.

For all that, there were still areas where the Wa excelled, and needed no assistance, and one of those was in the area of seamanship. As an island nation, the people of Japan have always had a close relationship with the sea, and their early shipbuilding techniques were geared towards boats that would travel on the ocean. In China, on the other hand, most people traveled overland. The ships tended towards flat-bottomed vessels used to ply the waters of the rivers and canals that criss-crossed the empire. They wouldn’t truly have seaworthy ships of their own until the Song dynasty, and even then they would often continue to build ships in the old mold, using them as floating platforms and then constructing buildings on top. This created very impressive but not exactly effective ships.

Early ships plied the water using oars. Sails may not have been available when Himiko sent her missions. They definitely show up in later models, but the earliest ships would have been pulled through the water with teams of sailors on the oars. These would have been the ships that carried the Wa to the continent for trade, diplomacy, and the occasional raid.

All that aside, there are a few things that we want to make sure to clear up, in case there are questions. The first issue is one of dates.

You see, as we note in the episode, the first mission departs either in 238 or 239. The truth is that the text claims it is in 238. If that is true, then it means that the Wa mission left during a time of major disruption. They would have hit Daifang either during the conflict or only shortly thereafter, and one cannot expect that they would have been intending, then, to contact the Wei. It is possible that they were going to the court of the Yan kingdom, which had declared its own dynasty only a year previously, and were then diverted. If they had then arrived at Luoyang later that year, they would have been there just before Cao Rui’s death. Still, they may have dealt with a regent, then—they certainly would have in the following year.

Later Chinese chronicles actually assume that 239 is the correct date. If that’s the case, then they likely arrived in Luoyang shortly after the mourning period for Cao Rui had passed, though it is possible that the mission was considered special enough that it warranted action despite the year-long mourning that should be required. In this instance we went with 239, but just realize that it could be 238.

The other main issue is one of names. For instance, “Nasome” could also be “Natome” depending on your interpretation—and it was probably something else, altogether. Proto-Japanese actually had more vowels and even consonants than modern Japanese, and so even these are approximations, but they work for our purposes to try to keep track of the story. For Chinese names we are using the modern Putonghua pronunciation (as best as I can manage), though even those would have sounded different in the spoken dialects of the time.

For a more complete understanding of things, I recommend reading through some of the references.

References

·         Barnes, G. (2015). Archaeology of East Asia: The Rise of Civilization in China, Korea and Japan. Oxbow Books. Retrieved March 12, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt19893vd

·         BARNES, G. (2014). A Hypothesis for Early Kofun Rulership. Japan Review, (27), 3-29. Retrieved March 12, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/23849568

·         Yoshie, A., Tonomura, H., & Takata, A. (2013). Gendered Interpretations of Female Rule: The Case of Himiko, Ruler of Yamatai. U.S.-Japan Women's Journal, (44), 3-23. Retrieved March 12, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/42771843

·         Barnes, G. (2012). Japan and Korea: Early States of Japan and Korea. Oxford Companion to Archaeology, 2nd Ed.

·         Bentley, J. (2008). The Search for the Language of Yamatai. Japanese Language and Literature, 42(1), 1-43. Retrieved March 12, 2020, from www.jstor.org/stable/30198053

·         - (2008), “Atlas of Korean History”, Department of History Education, Korea National University of Education

·         Soumaré, Massimo (2007), Japan in Five Ancient Chinese Chronicles: Wo, the Land of Yamatai, and Queen Himiko. ISBN: 978-4-902075-22-9

·         Kidder, J. Edward (2007), Himiko and Japan's Elusive Chiefdom of Yamatai: Archaeology, History, and Mythology. ISBN: 978-0824830359

·         Wang, Zhenping. (2005) “Ambassadors from the Islands of Immortals”

·         Lee, Ki-baik (1984) “A New History of Korea”. Shultz, Edward J., tr.

Episode 9: The Language of Wa

So this is a bit of a different episode. This time around we are taking a look at the language of the people of the Japanese archipelago—the Wa. It could be taken that the language of the people is of little consequence. After all, it isn’t something we can easily find in a museum. However, I think it will help clarify some of the history here.

From here on out, you may want to first listen to the podcast episode.

A guardian statue at Horyuji, one of the oldest temples in Japan. His mouth is open as he utters one of the two sacred syllables: “A” and “UN”.

A guardian statue at Horyuji, one of the oldest temples in Japan. His mouth is open as he utters one of the two sacred syllables: “A” and “UN”.

So about the language. What I really take from all of this research is that if the Yayoi people—the Wa—brought Japonic with them, then by tracing the path of Japonic we have a better idea of where they came from. From the Shandong peninsula to the Korean peninsula and then to the archipelago would appear to be the path of migration, though over the course of hundreds of years. This seems to match what we see in the archaeological record as well.

It is also fascinating that we see Japonic on the Korean peninsula as well. It is easy to assume that all of the people of the Korean peninsula must have been speaking ancient Korean. But that is us assuming that the nations of today are the same as the people who were there thousands of years ago.

A rough map of the Korean peninsula in the first century CE. The Shandong peninsula is in the lower left, and northern Kyushu can be seen in the lower right corner. By Historiographer at the English Wikipedia, CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=6606974

On the Korean peninsula, we see several different polities over the years. We are currently talking about the Samhan—Chin-han, Pyon-han, and Ma-han. Eventually these give way to Baekje (Paekche), Silla, and Goguryeo (Koguryeo), as well as the Gaya Confederacy. It is unsurprising that there are some material similarities between all of them, since they were in such close proximity. Comparatively speaking, if we looked at Medieval France, Spain, Italy, and Germany, you would also see plenty of similarities there, as well. After all, they are all in proximity to one another. But they are not the same, something you don’t really see unless you look at all of them. In particular, Baekje and Goguryeo both claimed descent from the Buyeo (Puyo) people for the Manchurian Basin, making them relatively latecomers to the peninsula. Silla is thought to have grown up out of one of the three Han, the Chin-han. However, the languages of the people up in the northern parts of the Korean peninsula are likely still related to these more northern groups that came in. I suspect even Silla may have been influenced by some of these immigrants, and it is hard to know if the language we know as the Sillan language was even there to begin with, or if it was something that was brought in and then became dominant among some of the Chin-han people.

Sillan royal tombs in Gyeongju, South Korea.

And then there are the lack of historical sources on the peninsula. Besides the Gwanggaeto Stele, from 414 CE, we have the Samguk Yusa and the Samguk Sagi to tell us the history, both of which were written well after the fact. Much of the early written works on the peninsular are in some form of Chinese, and so mostly we are assuming languages based on various placenames. We have only a few fragments of writings in Sillan, and we believe that language is similar to the language of Baekje, and Goguryeo. It is thus easy to assume that all of the lands used the same language, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. For instance, the Gwanggaeto stele specifically mentions renaming many places, indicating the original names may have been in another language. And we have a specific note of a word from the Gaya, which is all we really have to go on.

Whether Japonic comes from Koreanic, or Korean borrows from Japonic, are not only linguistic discussions, but are also enmeshed in more recent relations between the two modern nations, as well as nationalist ideas and identities. In fact, one of the things we have to be careful of in studies of this period are nationalist bias, which may be geared to serve a specific modern political narrative, rather than just objectively looking at the facts.

This will be especially important to remember when we get into the Japanese chronicles, where we’ll talk about the Japanese “colonies” on the peninsula as well as the sovereign Jingu’s invasion. From the standard Japanese viewpoint, Jingu must have crossed from Japan and into Korea. However, some Korean scholars suggest that Jingu and her husband, Chuai, were actually from the peninsula, and worked their way across the strait to conquer Japan. Whether or not the “Wa” were simply on the islands or if the “Land of Wa” included the peninsula and thus was involved in peninsular politics is all tied up in this. That narrative is potentially strengthened if Japonic was spoken on the peninsula, and to what extent.

Oh, and as a bit of a postscript, I know we only touched on Ryukyuan. Ryukyuan seems to have branched off from what became modern Japanese somewhere in the first millennium. That means that some time between the time we are discussing and the early to mid-Heian period, people moved south from Kyushu into the Ryukyuan island chain, likely bringing aspects of their life and culture with them and mingling with the life of the islanders.

References

  • 2019; Miyamoto, Kazuo. “The Spread of rice agriculture during the Yayoi Period: From the Shandong Peninsula to the Japanese Archipelago via the Korean Peninsula”, The Japanese Journal of Archaeology, http://www.jjarchaeology.jp/

  • 2017; Robbeets, Martine. “Austronesian influence and Transeurasian ancestry in Japanese, Language Dynamics and Change, 7(2), 210-251.” doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00702005

  • 2017; Shinoda, K., & Adachi, N. “Ancient DNA Analysis of Palaeolithic Ryukyu Islanders”. In Piper P., Matsumura H., & Bulbeck D. (Eds.), New Perspectives in Southeast Asian and Pacific Prehistory (pp. 51-60). Acton ACT, Australia: ANU Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1pwtd26.10

  • 2015; Barnes, Gina L. Achaeology of East Asia: The Rise of Civilization in China, Korea and Japan

  • 2013; Vovin, Alexander. “From Koguryo to T’amna: Slowly riding to the South with speakers of Proto-Korean”, Korean Linguistics 15:2, University of Hawai’i at Mānoa

  • 2011; Lee, Sean and Hasegawa, Toshikazu. Bayesian phylogenetic analysis supports an agricultural origin of Japonic languages 278 Proc. R. Soc. B http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.0518

  • 2011; Crawford, G. “Advances in Understanding Early Agriculture in Japan.” Current Anthropology, 52(S4), S331-S345. doi:10.1086/658369

  • 2008; Bentley, John R. “The Search for the Language of Yamatai”. Japanese Language and Literature (42-1). 1-43.  Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/30198053

  • 2007; Palmer, Edwina. “Out of Sunda?  Provenance of the Jōmon Japanese.”  Japan Review, (19), 47-75.  Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25791309

  • 2005; Hong, W. “Yayoi Wave, Kofun Wave, and Timing: The Formation of the Japanese People and Japanese Language.” Korean Studies 29, 1-29. doi:10.1353/ks.2006.0007.

  • 2000; Kumar, Ann and Rose, Phil. “Lexical Evidence for Early Contact between Indonesian Languages and Japanese”.  Oceanic Linguistics. 219-155.  Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stables/3623422