The Yamatai Kingdom is mentioned in the Han dynasty historical text Records of the Three Kingdoms, Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People, as an early state of Japan, though its exact location remains unknown.YamataiSome scholars believe the name is derived from the pronunciation of the Japanese character for Wa, やまと (yamato), which also closely resembles the modern Japanese word for "Yamato."
The Account of the Wa People from Records of the Three Kingdoms, Book of Wei has been given special attention in Japan, sparking intense scholarly research and debate over the centuries. Why has it garnered such high regard? Because it is the only historical source that documents Japan prior to the 4th century.
The Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People is fully titled Records of the Three Kingdoms, Book of Wei, Account of the Eastern Barbarians, Section on the Wa People (or Clause on the Wa People). The Records of the Three Kingdoms was compiled by the early Jin dynasty historian Chen Shou (233–297), who, referencing the largely lost Weilüe by Wei dynasty’s Yu Huan, wrote the Book of Wei. Chen Shou’s writing in the Records of the Three Kingdoms is known for its rigorous style and detailed records. Liu Xie praised him, saying “compared to Sima Qian and Ban Gu, this is no false compliment” (from “Historical Biographies” in Wenxin Diaolong). Among these, the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People is especially valued in Japan. It is the fundamental surviving historical source describing Japan in the 3rd century. The full text, consisting of over 2,000 characters, can be divided into three parts: (1) the overland and maritime routes from the Wei dynasty’s Daifang Commandery to the Yamatai Kingdom, where the Queen of Wa resided, including distances and the populations of various countries under her control; (2) the geography, production, and customs of the Wa people; (3) the political diplomacy of the Wa kingdom of Yamatai. For this reason, there have been many Japanese reprints of the Records of the Three Kingdoms over the ages, along with abundant annotations and research. Even today, research and debate on the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People in Japan remain very active. This is closely related to several key issues:.1. Historical Value: The Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People is the only surviving historical source detailing Japan’s basic conditions prior to the 4th century. Japan did not have a written language until around the 6th or 7th century. The main texts of ancient Japanese history, such as the Kojiki and Nihon Shoki, were compiled in the mid-Tang dynasty in China (8th century). These earliest historical works consist largely of myths, legends, later compilations, speculations, or oral traditions. Even the portions that may have been based on original sources have long been lost to fire. Today, all historical sources, along with archaeological finds, provide knowledge of Japanese history that still cannot be traced back earlier than the 4th or 5th century. Beyond that, we must rely on foreign sources.Before the Tang dynasty, among the earliest Chinese records mentioning Japan (referred to as “Wo” before the Tang), the Book of Han, Treatise on Geography contains a mere 19 characters: “In the sea off Lelang there are Wo people, divided into over a hundred states, who come to offer tribute at fixed times.” The Shanhaijing, Inner Chapters, North of the Sea contains 11 characters: “The Gai State lies south of Ju’yan and north of Wo; Wo belongs to Yan.” Wang Chong’s Lunheng, Confucians and Buddhists, has 16 characters: “In the time of peace in the Zhou dynasty, the Yue people presented white pheasants, and the Wo people offered fragrant grass.” The Book of the Later Han, Account of the Eastern Barbarians, Clause on Wo, is slightly longer, but its author, Fan Ye of the Liu Song dynasty (398–445), wrote more than a hundred years after Chen Shou, and most of his content is derived from the Weilüe and the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People, with only a few details from other sources. Thus, the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People is the sole written historical account from Japan’s period lacking native records. Chen Shou lived in the 3rd century, and Yu Huan, the author of the slightly earlier Weilüe, was also based in Luoyang, the capital of Wei. They had the opportunity to interact with envoys traveling between China and Japan at the time, and based on their accounts, with reference to official Wei documents, they recorded this investigative material in a realistic manner following the format of the “Account of Foreign Nations” from the standard histories like the Book of Han. It can be said to be a contemporary historical record about Japan, making it of extremely high historical value.2. The Origins of the Japanese State: Due to the abundance of mythology and imperial ideology in ancient Japanese history, it was not until Emperor Hirohito issued the Humanity Declaration in 1946, denying the “divinity of the emperor,” that scientifically grounded national history was permitted to exist officially in Japan. However, the simple and truthful description of the formation of the Japanese state in the 3rd century provided by the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People allowed materialist historiography to critique the distortions of traditional Japanese founding myths and laid the foundation for establishing a scientific system of ancient Japanese history.3. The Geographic Location of Japan’s Earliest State: The location of the earliest state of Japan (Wa)—the Yamatai Kingdom—mentioned in the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People, and whether it was in present-day Nara or northern Kyushu, has been a focal point of academic debate in Japan for hundreds of years. The origins of this debate stem both from purely historical-geographical research perspectives and from interpretations influenced by imperial historiography. Among newer historians, there is also a methodological issue regarding how to determine the location of Yamatai Kingdom based on the determining factors of state formation (see below).According to the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People, the Wa people “originally had over a hundred states. In the Han dynasty, some sent envoys, and now thirty states are accessible through interpreters.” This means that in the Han dynasty, Japan had over a hundred tribal states, which gradually consolidated into thirty states by the Three Kingdoms period, ruled by Queen Himiko of the Yamatai Kingdom. The Book of the Later Han, Account of the Eastern Barbarians, Clause on Wa, states: “In the second year of the Jianwu Zhongyuan era (57 AD), the Na state of Wa offered tribute and congratulations… Emperor Guangwu granted them seals and ribbons.” (In 1784, a gold seal inscribed with “Seal of the King of Na of Wa, vassal of Han” was discovered on Shika Island in Hakata Bay, northern Kyushu; “Na” refers to “Wa”). Japanese scholars have verified that this “Na state of Wa” should be read as the “Na State” of “Wa,” which is one of the approximately thirty states under the rule of the queen described in the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People, located near present-day Fukuoka City in northern Kyushu. However, aside from Emperor Guangwu granting a seal to the King of the Na state of Wa, and the event in the first year of Yongchu (107 AD) when the King of Wa, Suishō, and others offered 160 live people and requested an audience—both not mentioned in the Book of Wei—the Book of the Later Han provides almost no additional information about the Na state of Wa. During the Three Kingdoms period, through the Book of Wei, we learn many details: at that time, Japan’s level of production was still in the transitional phase from fishing, hunting, and gathering economies to rice cultivation. The Book of Wei states: “Now the Wa people are fond of diving to catch fish and shellfish,” “they plant rice, ramie, mulberry, and engage in sericulture, producing fine ramie, silk, and cotton... Weapons include spears, shields, and wooden bows... Arrows are made of bamboo, sometimes with iron or bone tips.” Due to the introduction of rice cultivation and iron tools from Korea and China, Japan was able to enter the Metal and Stone Age concurrently with the Yayoi period of the Neolithic era.The social structure of Japan in the 3rd century, as seen from the fact that both Queen Himiko and her successor Toyo were “jointly enthroned,” and that Himiko “practiced shamanism and could bewitch the people,” “their customs involve divining the future by burning bones to predict good or bad fortune whenever decisions or actions are to be taken...” clearly indicates a matriarchal, chieftain-witchcraft ruled society. Additionally, from general family practices such as “no distinction between father and son, men and women when sitting together,” and the custom of having someone abstain from contact with women and eat plain food while traveling by sea, as if in mourning—referred to as “carrying decline” (meaning fasting)—it appears that the society had not yet moved beyond the late stages of clan society. However, in more developed production areas, “each state had markets for trading goods,” and there were “tax collections and state storehouses (state warehouses).” Due to the development of private ownership, wealth disparity grew, and social class distinctions became significant. For example, “when lower-status people met nobles on the road, they would hesitate and retreat into the grass, speaking humbly, either squatting or kneeling, hands on the ground, showing great respect.” Social order was strict: “there was little theft or litigation; for minor offenses, violators would lose their wives and children; for serious crimes, their entire household or clan would be exterminated. There was a clear hierarchy of respect and submission.” Therefore, Inoue Mitsusada believed that the various petty kings of the Yamatai Kingdom were merely “chiefs of chiefs,” a type of priest-king combining religion and politics (The Origins of the Japanese State, p. 21, 1960). Later, he also stated, “The Wa kingdom seems to have already developed into a state form that collected grain tributes from various states, making it Japan’s earliest tribute state” (From Myth to State, included in Volume 1 of Japanese History, p. 211). I recently met Professor Ueda Masaaki of Kyoto University, who, based on the Book of Wei, argued that the Yamatai Kingdom had legal status distinctions such as “nobles,” “lower-status people,” “slaves,” “captives,” as well as “households” and “clans,” and thus proposed that Japanese society at the time was no longer a simple primitive commune but had evolved into a class society with identity-based organization. The kings of the various states were not leaders of primitive communes but chiefs based on communities with private ownership and class divisions, and the Queen of Yamatai was an Eastern-style autocratic ruler governing these kings (see his work Studies on the Formation of Ancient Japanese States). He pointed out the true nature of the Japanese state at the time. At the 1981 Tianjin conference on the Asiatic mode of production, in response to questions about the nature of ancient Japanese states, I expressed views close to the above opinions (Chinese Historical Studies, 1981, No. 3). In summary, the Yamatai Kingdom was an early state formed during Japan’s patrilineal slave society stage (the transitional period from the end of clan society to the emergence of class society).It is unclear when the Book of Wei, Account of the Wa People was transmitted to Japan. However, the compilers of the Nihon Shoki, in volumes twelve and thirteen under the 39th, 40th, and 43rd years of Empress Jingū’s reign, already cited events of Sino-Japanese envoys' exchanges recorded in the Book of Wei. They regarded Himiko as the legendary figure of the 3rd century in Japan, Empress Jingū (reigning 201–269), and because the names Himiko (himiko) and the honorific title of Jingū, “Himegami” (himemikoto), sound similar, later scholars often proposed that Himiko was Jingū. The prominent Edo-period Japanese historian Arai Hakuseki (1657–1725) firmly asserted that Yamatai was located in the ancient capital region of Japan, i.e., Yamato (Nara) (though he later supported the Kyushu theory). However, later nativist scholars like Motoori Norinaga (1730–1801), driven by nationalist ideology, argued that the “divine nation” of Japan’s imperial family would never pay tribute to or accept titles from foreign states. Therefore, the envoys to the Wei court could not have been sent by the Yamato court but must have been chieftains of local barbarians (such as the Kumaso) in Kyushu who falsely used the Queen’s name to conduct unauthorized relations with Wei. Motoori pointed out discrepancies in the geographical names, routes, directions, and travel times between China and Japan as described in the Book of Wei, leading him to conclude that the Yamatai Kingdom was certainly not in Yamato but in Kyushu. After the Meiji Restoration, Japanese scholars increasingly used modern scientific methods to study the location of the Yamatai Kingdom. The most influential debate began in 1910, when Tokyo University professor Shiratori Kurakichi and Kyoto University professor Naitō Torajirō simultaneously published their research papers on the Yamatai Kingdom, forming two long-standing opposing schools of thought in Japanese historiography: the Kyushu theory and the Yamato theory. The debate was intense and repeated. Even after World War II, the Tokyo and Kyoto schools continued to hold opposing views without resolution. In 1948, Tokyo University professor Kawai Kiyoshi proposed the so-called “radial theory” (aligned with the Kyushu theory), which initially gained majority acceptance.
This page is published by HowToTrip. Sharing and reposting are welcome — please credit the source.
Page URL: https://www.howtotrip.net/artgk94214