Hist3.9: Late Yayoi Politics

As has been discussed over and over again, by the Late Yayoi, local powers were spread across the archipelago. We can look at archaeological sites to see the remains of these political units. Two History Review posts ago, I discussed Yoshinogari — one of such major, early powers. As Japan passed from BC to AD, more and more of these chiefdoms arose in northern Kyushu, the Japan Sea-side of Western Honshu, the Inland Sea-side of Honshu, in the Kinai, and in Chubu. If you look at a map with these place names on it, you can see that western Japan was very much explored territory. Eastern Japan, on the other hand, would remained a distant wilderness for the Yayoi immigrants for many centuries to come. Yes, there were chiefdoms over there, but they belonged to the Emishi and other groups. Because roughly the equivalent of the modern Japanese (a mixture of the Jomon natives and the Yayoi immigrants) wrote the 8th century histories, the far eastern chiefdoms are rarely mentioned and never in any detail.

We can look again at the Gishi Wajinden for information on the early chiefdoms. It is recorded that Japan was embroiled in warfare until the infamous Himiko was elected as leader. The extant and nature of Himiko’s rule is an intimidating debate that will no doubt never be agreed upon. She ruled the chiefdom of Yamatai 邪馬台国 that was either located in Kyushu or in the Kinai. There are several good books discussing the location of Himiko’s chiefdom. If you are interested in reading about the subject, I recommend checking out the following:

1. State Formation in Japan: Emergence of a 4th-century Ruling Elite

2. Himiko and Japan’s Elusive Chiefdom of Yamatai: Archaeology, History, and Mythology

3. Sacred Texts and Buried Treasures: Issues on the Historical Archaeology of Ancient Japan

There are several other good books, but I would read these first. The first book on the list (the one by Barnes) would need a good grounding in ancient Japanese history to understand, though, so I would read that one last).

Himiko ruled Yamatai until her death in the middle of the 3th century. During her rule, she established relations with Wei China, and gifts were sent from both parties. The ambassadors from Yamatai brought with them slaves and cloth, and Himiko received bronze mirrors, cloth, and other tribute items from Wei China in return. An excellent book that discusses this tribute relation between the two groups is:

Wang Zhenpin’s Ambassadors from the Island of Immortals: China-Japan Relations In The Han-Tang Period

To connect the earlier comment about the many various late Yayoi chiefdoms with the current topic of Himiko, let’s look to her domestic (rather than international) relations: “‘…[B]y the year 247, Himiko’s government was at odds with the “king” of the “country of Kunu,” which reportedly lay to the south of Wa, and Himiko solicited imperial support for her cause’” (48). The “imperial support” mentioned refers to help requested from Wei China. However, Himiko died in the midst of this altercation and a king took the reigns of leadership after her death. “‘Assassination and murder followed; more than one thousand were thus slain’” (48).

It was not until a “female relative” of Himiko took the throne did Japan quiet down again. We get the picture of a politically unstable Japan by reading the Chinese records. As Japan entered the Christian era, chiefdoms spread across Japan vied for power until the 4th and 5th centuries when it became clear that the Yamato polity would become dominant. However, signs of powerful expansion and increased control over the country does not mean that other chiefdoms did not hold local power nor try to take the power away from the growing Yamato polity. We will look at that in the next section (the Kofun Period).

The Yayoi Period ended in 250 AD. This dating schema is decided by the emergence of extremely large burial mounds (古墳, specifically Zenpoukouenfun 前方後円墳) which represent a greater level of political consolidation and expansion in local chieftains’ quest for power.

We can either look at Himiko as a major political figure or as one of many, many local chieftains that just got good publicity. Remember that she requested Wei Chinese help in her battle against the southern king of Kunu — she did not control all of Japan nor was she powerful enough to easily crush all of her adversaries. Because Himiko lived during a time when the only written evidence regarding Japan came from China, it is not surprising that we cannot read about the numerous other chieftains like Himiko who were spread across Japan.

Totman brings to our attention a very interesting possibility for the rise in Late Yayoi warfare:

“The late Yayoi warfare that spurred creation of fortified bastions and local polities occurred all across the country, and some archaeological evidence suggests that it was fostered or intensified by renewed climatic warming, which raised sea level enough to flood coastal paddy fields and settlements. That trend, it is argued, forced cultivators to open more upland, and it pitted magnates against one another as they struggled to seize territories for development or to control new areas of production” (48-49).

As has already been mentioned, the introduction of rice and metals to assist in the rice harvest led to population increase and social stratification. A system of have and have nots can be seen in the stratified system that then emerged, with chieftains at the top and farmers at the bottom.

Through expansion and warfare, villagers combined to create small regional groups. These groups expanded to form regional chiefdoms that were militarily, economically, and politically capable. Eventually, they grew into the famous chiefdoms of Izumo, Kibi, Yamato, Yamatai, Yoshinogari, etc…

These chiefdoms had capitals or central, important cities that were well-protected from military intrusion by moats and walls and watchtowers. Military technology evolved and many skeletons show signs of brutal warfare in the quest for power and for rice during times of famine. Himiko’s Yamatai is included in the list with Izumo, and Kibi, and Yamato because I want to challenge people to look at Yamatai in a different light.

We have reached the end of the Yayoi Period at 250 AD. As we leave Yayoi Japan, we see a highly fragmented country that is in no way unified. It is better to look at contemporary Japan as an archipelago filled with many, many countries at war. In a way, it is similar to the later Sengoku Period or the Chinese Warring States Period.

The leaders of each chiefdom or polity began to build for themselves massive graves. Instead of leaving their more glorified graves among the common cemeteries (集団墓地) with their people, they began at this time to segregate their tombs and place them on areas of higher elevation. The tombs of the Late Yayoi also increased in size and in quantity and wealth of buried grave goods. The Late Yayoi elite were buried in the characteristic Keyhole Tombs. These keyhole-shaped tombs are called Zenpoukouenfun 前方後円墳.

This is the kofun belonging to Emperor Nintoku:

History of Japanese Writing

I just got Habein’s “History of the Japanese Written Language” from my university library today.

There is reference on page 7 to “a Korean scholar named Wani” bringing “The Analects of Confucius” (“Rongo”) and “The Thousand-character Classic” (“senjimon”) to Japan “in the sixteenth year of Emperor Ojin’s reign”. Interested, I checked the online Sacred Texts version of the Kojiki because my books are several thousand miles away and the library is another long walk:

Again King Shō-ko, the Chieftain of the land of Kudara, sent as tribute by Achi-kishi one stallion and one mare. (This Achi-kishi was the ancestor of the Achiki Scribes. ) Again he sent as tribute a cross-sword, and likewise a large mirror. Again he was graciously bidden to send as tribute a wise man, if there were any such in the land of Kudara. Therefore receiving the [Imperial] commands, he sent as tribute a man named Wani-kishi, and likewise by this man he sent as tribute the Confucian Analects in ten volumes and the Thousand Character Essay in one volume,–altogether eleven volumes.

Kudara 百済 refers to the Japan-friendly Korean kingdom of Paekche. On the same page, Habein notes that the Nihon Shoki references Wani as well.

Habein expresses skepticism over the authenticity of these two chronicles’ accounts of Wani – both of the figure of Wani and the range of possible dates. Therefore, it is proposed that imported goods bore the first kanji 漢字 – the examples given in the book are mirrors and swords, gifts that were very common from both Korea and China to the Japanese court (7-8).

Even mirrors given to chieftains like Himiko in the 3rd century had Chinese characters inscribed on them and the Yayoi Japanese certainly weren’t blind. Even if they were, they could have felt the inscribed characters. There’s really no way around the fact that the 3rd century Japanese had some exposure to Chinese writing, even if they didn’t adopt it right away. Furthermore, there was nothing stopping curious artisans from copying the characters for design purposes or immigrant workers from teaching the local people, as seen on 2nd and 3rd century pottery fragments in Japan (J. Edward Kidder, Jr. “Himiko and Japan’s Elusive Chiefdom of Yamatai.” University of Hawaii Press, 2007. Page 113).

The importation of Chinese books was the greatest step towards the Japanese adopting the Chinese writing. “Chinese books on philosophy and Chinese translations of Sanskrit works on Buddhism must have been brought into Japan and studed by Japanese in the fifth and sixth centuries” (8). Habein digs deeper:

“The earliest known Buddhist temple, Houkouji, was erected at the end of the sixth century in the area of Yamato, where the emperors took their residence before 710. The Japanese court must have been involved in studying various aspects of Buddhism, including reading Buddhist literature in Chinese, for a long time before they built the temple, which was the embodiment of their faith in Buddhism” (8).

There were “writings” before the Kojiki 古事記 (712) and the Nihon Shoki 日本書紀 (720) (remember, the former is 記 and the latter is 紀):

1. Kinsekibun 金石文, which were inscriptions in metal or stone goods ( 8 )

2. Written documents of (a) genealogical, (b) historical, or (c) political value.

(a) Lineage was very important in early Japan. Keeping a record of “begats” helped determine relationships between political entities and positions in society. Genealogies also served a political purpose of legitimation: if one group could prove through a blood line that they were descended from the gods, then their power would be assured.

(b) In the 7th century (before the 8th century Kojiki and Nihon Shoki), no longer extant historical records were composed by Shotoku Taishi 聖徳太子 and the head of the Soga clan 蘇我氏.

(c) The 17 Article Constitution (Kenpou Juushichijou 憲法十七条) was supposedly written by Shotoku Taishi in 604 and can be found in the Nihon Shoki (8). The reason I use the word “supposedly” is that there has been recent scrutiny of not only the early date of 604 but of the authorship by Shotoku Taishi, himself. Interestingly, the identity of Shotoku Taishi has been convincingly called into question by some.

The late Yayoi aristocrats had decent exposure to items inscribed with Chinese characters. Like other continental designs, poorly or unskillfully copying the characters and applying them to art or crafts was a fascinating but largely unproductive (in my mind) step towards domestic literacy.

“Chinese books on philosophy and Chinese translations of Sanskrit works on Buddhism” brought to Japan in the 5th and 6th centuries are what really spurred the early Japanese to begin to learn the Chinese writing system.