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.
Fascinating article…is it true that there were no indigenous form of writing or written communication before the 3rd century in Japan? Just the spoken word?
Comment by Ninja sword — October 25, 2009 @ 9:57 am |