The Birth of Japanese Historiography

John R. Bentley

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2020
• ISBN:
  9781000295696
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Storia
• Subtopic: Storia giapponese

As the first book in English on the origins of Japanese historiography, using both archaeological and textual data, this book examines the connection between ancient Japan and the Korean kingdom of Paekche and how tutors from the kingdom of Paekche helped to lay the foundation for a literate culture in Japan.

Illustrating how tutors from the kingdom of Paekche taught Chinese writing to the Japanese court through the prism of this highly civilized culture, the book goes on to argue that Paekche tutors guided the early Japanese court through writing, recording family history, and ultimately an early history of the ruling family. As the Japanese began to create their own history, they relied on Paekche histories as a model. Triangulating textual data from Kojiki, Nihon shoki, and Sendai kuji hongi, the author here demonstrates that various aspects of early king genealogies and later events were manipulated. Offering new theories about the Japanese ruling family, it is posited that Emperor Jit? had her committee put Jing? in power, and Suiko on the throne in place of original male rulers to enhance images of strong, female rulers, as she envisioned herself.

The Birth of Japanese Historiography will be a valuable resource for students and scholars of Japanese history, historiography, and linguistics.

1 The medium

The mechanics of writing history

The term “historiography” naturally implies that some historical narrative is being written on some physical material through a specific linguistic medium. This is such a basic assumption that scholars generally gloss over it or provide little more than a sentence or two. However, as Lurie (2011:4) points out, there has been such an overzealous search for the origins of phonographic writing in Japan that other dominant forms of writing have been ignored or underappreciated, resulting in a skewed understanding of how writing sprouted and then grew in Japan. It is helpful to retrace these steps to examine how a small group of literate inhabitants on the Japanese archipelago wrote a century before the era when the work on Kojiki and Nihon shoki began. To do that, we need to go back several centuries earlier in time.

Kobayashi (2010:20–23) has argued that with the establishment of the four Han commanderies on the Korean peninsula by Emperor Wu around 108 BCE Chinese culture began to seep systematically into the cultures of the various native polities on the peninsula. One of these key components of Chinese culture was written communication, or the ability to read and write.¹ A number of scholars have previously suggested that Wa-speaking (or para-Japonic) people inhabited both the southern part of the Korean peninsula and the archipelago at a transitional time in history (cf. Unger 2005, Vovin 2007, Bentley 2008a), based on archaeological or linguistic evidence. The most fundamental data are tantalizing tidbits from Chinese records.² Thus, we are not required to see immigrants from other polities as the only catalyst for burgeoning literacy in Yamato.

Kwon (2013:82–85) has argued that Han China originally set up an “outer vassal” (外臣) system with Old Chosŏn during the reign of Emperor Hui (r. 195–188 BCE), where responsibilities of defense and security were entrusted by the Han Court to Old Chosŏn. When Old Chosŏn’s belligerence and insolence became too much to stomach, Emperor Wu (r. 156–87 BCE) invaded Old Chosŏn and destroyed it. Wu then established four commanderies (Chinese colonies) in the conquered territory: Zhenfan, Lintun, Xuantu, and Lelang. The precise locations of these are a matter of debate, but scholars agree that Lelang, the most important of the four commanderies, was located near modern Pyongyang. Excavations at T’osŏng-ni confirm that the Lelang administrative center was in that area (Eckert et al. 1990:14). Kim (2012:18) believes that the Zhenfan Commandery was located north of the Han River in Hwanghae; the center of Lintun was in South Hamgyong, and Xuantu was near the middle reaches of the Yalu River basin. Byington (2013:294) has provided a helpful map that has informed the map in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1 Commanderies on the Korean Peninsula. This map is based on “File: Atlas of South Korea.png.” Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Atlast_of_South_Korea (accessed June 28, 2017).

The cultural center of the Chinese-controlled peninsula was clearly Lelang, a large city at the time. Part two of the geographical section in Hanshu describes Lelang thus: “The Lelang Commandery has 62,812 households, with a population of 406,748 people” [樂浪郡，戶六萬二千八百一十二，口四十萬六千七百四十八]. In contrast, the Xuantu Commandery had 45,006 households and a population of 221,845. Nothing appears in Hanshu about the size of the commanderies at either Zhenfan or Lintun, suggesting that these were of relatively minor importance. Not many years after Emperor Wu’s passing, the Han Court reorganized these commanderies, abolishing Zhenfan and Lintun, and relocating Xuantu. The territory of Zhenfan was folded into the territory under the jurisdiction of Lelang. Sometime between 215 and 220 CE, the territory originally controlled by Zhenfan was reorganized and put under the jurisdiction of a newly established commandery called Daifang.

As Eckert et al. (1990:14) have argued, the commanderies exerted a profound influence on the surrounding indigenous population, as “neighboring territories coveted the fruits of the highly advanced Chinese culture.” This fact is demonstrated by chieftains in the Samhan (三韓 “Three Han”) areas willingly accepting Chinese office and rank, with its attending physical symbols, such as official seals, ribbons, and banners. Scholars have excavated these objects in burial areas, attesting to the stratification of the elite.

To underscore this pervasive Chinese cultural influence, Ri (2005:33–34) notes that the area under the control of the Lelang Commandery was divided into 25 districts, and the names of 23 of these districts have been discovered on fūdei “clay seal” inscriptions. Fūdei are balls of clay placed on twine used to tie up bamboo boxes or clay containers that hold important documents. An official then firmly presses an official stamp or seal into the clay, which then hardens, preventing unauthorized opening of the contents. These “documents” sealed by fūdei are concrete proof that written communication occurred between the commanderies and district offices in deeper locales on the peninsula.

Hou Hanshu includes the following report,

In the twentieth year of jian-wu (44 CE) an individual from *Liam-sie [which land] belongs to the Kara (Han) Territory, [named] *Sɑ-maɁ-de and others presented tribute at Lelang. (Emperor) Huang-Wu enfeoffed *Sɑ-maɁ-de and made him Lord of the *Liam-sie Settlement within Han China, Envoy attached to the Lelang Commandery, summoned to court at each of the four seasons [建武二十年，韓人廉斯人蘇馬諟等詣樂浪貢獻。光武封蘇馬諟為漢廉斯邑君，使屬樂浪郡，四時朝謁].

Scholars believe that the territory of *Liam-sie (廉斯) came to be part of Shinhan (K. Chinhan). The Kara Federation sprang from this territory, and Ri (2005:35) reports that from the Taho-ri excavation site in Ch’angwŏn, five different types of brushes have been excavated. These are peculiar brushes, with bristles on both ends. From this site, archaeologists also found a small iron dagger with a ring on the handle. Workers used this dagger to carefully carve off thin layers of wood on wooden tablets, thus removing written mistakes or erasing previous messages written in ink. This excavation site is dated around 100 BCE.³ As this site is not far from modern Pusan, it is easy to imagine this area being a crossing point for people going and coming from Kyūshū, suggesting that writing (or at least written artifacts) also had opportunities to cross.

Hanshu contains this terse report, “The people of Wa exist in the middle of the ocean from Lelang, divided and forming 100 small states. It is said they appear at [the Commandery] and present tribute at regular intervals” [樂浪海中有倭人，分為百餘國，以歲時來獻見云]. Kimura (1998:22–23) argues that this line is based on a report from about 50 BCE, because Lelang is mentioned, and not Daifang. He interprets the first line to mean that the people of Wa exist somewhere in the ocean, reached by passing through the governmental channels of Lelang and then traveling by ship. He then addresses the brief information about Wa found in Shanhaijing, noting that Wa is subsumed under the jurisdiction of Greater Yan, and not mentioned in relation to Lelang, demonstrating that this information predates the establishment of the commandery in 108 BCE (Kimura 1998:24). We know that around 275 BCE, Yan occupied an area approximately covering the modern districts of Hebei and Liaoning in China, with its capital in what is now Beijing. Thus, it appears from this description in Shanhaijing that the territory of *ɡɑp (鉅J. Kō, K. Kae) was located south of Yan, and south of that point was Wa. One is struck by the fact that the ocean is not mentioned in this description, giving the strong impression that Wa is south of Yan on the peninsula. I return to this issue later in relation to the Kwanggaet’o Stele.

Hou Hanshu further records that sometime after the commanderies were established, “Roughly 30 territories (of Wa) sent translators and envoys to Han (漢)” [使驛通於漢者三十許國]. Again, the underlying meaning is that Wa envoys went to the Han Court by passing through the proper channels at the commandery. It is difficult to ignore Wa as an ethnonym, describing an ethnic group occupying part of the peninsula and extending to the Japanese islands, at least as far as Kyūshū.

This idea that translators were members of the envoy’s party strongly suggests that there already were bilingual people in the area. It is clear from a number of accounts that the people of the various Han and Wa adopted Chinese titles and ranks. Consider that Hou Hanshu records that in 57 CE, an envoy from the Wa territory of Na appeared at court: “The envoy designated himself ‘grandee’ (大夫)” [建武中元二年，倭奴國奉貢朝賀，使人自稱大夫]. In addition, there are a few Chinese offices mentioned in the Wa section of Weizhi, such as grandee and grand general (大率). This demonstrates some familiarity with Chinese rank and prestige.

Kobayashi (2010:21–22) has also argued that there...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half-Title
• Series
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Abbreviations
• Illustrations
• Conventions
• Introduction
• 1 The medium: The mechanics of writing history
• 2 Words and their meanings
• 3 Mythical beginnings and the beginning of mythology
• 4 From kings to heavenly sovereigns
• 5 The beginnings of writing a history
• 6 The Tenmu-Jitō historiographical project
• Conclusion
• Index